Softpanorama

May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
(slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and  bastardization of classic Unix

Russophobia bulletin, 2018

Home 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2011

For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section

Top Visited
 Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Feb 07, 2020] How They Sold the Iraq War by Jeffrey St. Clair

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Americans were the victims of an elaborate con job, pelted with a daily barrage of threat inflation, distortions, deceptions and lies, not about tactics or strategy or war plans, but about justifications for war. The lies were aimed not at confusing Saddam's regime, but the American people. By the start of the war, 66 per cent of Americans thought Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11 and 79 per cent thought he was close to having a nuclear weapon. ..."
"... This charade wouldn't have worked without a gullible or a complicit press corps. Victoria Clarke, who developed the Pentagon plan for embedded reports, put it succinctly a few weeks before the war began: "Media coverage of any future operation will to a large extent shape public perception." ..."
"... During the Vietnam War, TV images of maimed GIs and napalmed villages suburbanized opposition to the war and helped hasten the U.S. withdrawal. The Bush gang meant to turn the Vietnam phenomenon on its head by using TV as a force to propel the U.S.A. into a war that no one really wanted. ..."
"... When the Pentagon needed a heroic story, the press obliged. Jessica Lynch became the war's first instant celebrity. Here was a neo-gothic tale of a steely young woman wounded in a fierce battle, captured and tortured by ruthless enemies, and dramatically saved from certain death by a team of selfless rescuers, knights in camo and night-vision goggles. ..."
"... Back in 1988, the Post felt much differently about Saddam and his weapons of mass destruction. When reports trickled out about the gassing of Iranian troops, the Washington Post's editorial page shrugged off the massacres, calling the mass poisonings "a quirk of war." ..."
"... The Bush team displayed a similar amnesia. When Iraq used chemical weapons in grisly attacks on Iran, the U.S. government not only didn't object, it encouraged Saddam. ..."
"... Nothing sums up this unctuous approach more brazenly than MSNBC's firing of liberal talk show host Phil Donahue on the eve of the war. The network replaced the Donahue Show with a running segment called Countdown: Iraq, featuring the usual nightly coterie of retired generals, security flacks, and other cheerleaders for invasion. ..."
Mar 20, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

The war on Iraq won't be remembered for how it was waged so much as for how it was sold. It was a propaganda war, a war of perception management, where loaded phrases, such as "weapons of mass destruction" and "rogue state" were hurled like precision weapons at the target audience: us.

To understand the Iraq war you don't need to consult generals, but the spin doctors and PR flacks who stage-managed the countdown to war from the murky corridors of Washington where politics, corporate spin and psy-ops spooks cohabit.

Consider the picaresque journey of Tony Blair's plagiarized dossier on Iraq, from a grad student's website to a cut-and-paste job in the prime minister's bombastic speech to the House of Commons. Blair, stubborn and verbose, paid a price for his grandiose puffery. Bush, who looted whole passages from Blair's speech for his own clumsy presentations, has skated freely through the tempest. Why?

Unlike Blair, the Bush team never wanted to present a legal case for war. They had no interest in making any of their allegations about Iraq hold up to a standard of proof. The real effort was aimed at amping up the mood for war by using the psychology of fear.

Facts were never important to the Bush team. They were disposable nuggets that could be discarded at will and replaced by whatever new rationale that played favorably with their polls and focus groups. The war was about weapons of mass destruction one week, al-Qaeda the next. When neither allegation could be substantiated on the ground, the fall back position became the mass graves (many from the Iran/Iraq war where the U.S.A. backed Iraq) proving that Saddam was an evil thug who deserved to be toppled. The motto of the Bush PR machine was: Move on. Don't explain. Say anything to conceal the perfidy behind the real motives for war. Never look back. Accuse the questioners of harboring unpatriotic sensibilities. Eventually, even the cagey Wolfowitz admitted that the official case for war was made mainly to make the invasion palatable, not to justify it.

The Bush claque of neocon hawks viewed the Iraq war as a product and, just like a new pair of Nikes, it required a roll-out campaign to soften up the consumers. The same techniques (and often the same PR gurus) that have been used to hawk cigarettes, SUVs and nuclear waste dumps were deployed to retail the Iraq war. To peddle the invasion, Donald Rumsfeld and Colin Powell and company recruited public relations gurus into top-level jobs at the Pentagon and the State Department. These spinmeisters soon had more say over how the rationale for war on Iraq should be presented than intelligence agencies and career diplomats. If the intelligence didn't fit the script, it was shaded, retooled or junked.

Take Charlotte Beers whom Powell picked as undersecretary of state in the post-9/11 world. Beers wasn't a diplomat. She wasn't even a politician. She was a grand diva of spin, known on the business and gossip pages as "the queen of Madison Avenue." On the strength of two advertising campaigns, one for Uncle Ben's Rice and another for Head and Shoulder's dandruff shampoo, Beers rocketed to the top of the heap in the PR world, heading two giant PR houses: Ogilvy and Mathers as well as J. Walter Thompson.

At the State Department Beers, who had met Powell in 1995 when they both served on the board of Gulf Airstream, worked at, in Powell's words, "the branding of U.S. foreign policy." She extracted more than $500 million from Congress for her Brand America campaign, which largely focused on beaming U.S. propaganda into the Muslim world, much of it directed at teens.

"Public diplomacy is a vital new arm in what will combat terrorism over time," said Beers. "All of a sudden we are in this position of redefining who America is, not only for ourselves, but for the outside world." Note the rapt attention Beers pays to the manipulation of perception, as opposed, say, to alterations of U.S. policy.

Old-fashioned diplomacy involves direct communication between representatives of nations, a conversational give and take, often fraught with deception (see April Glaspie), but an exchange nonetheless. Public diplomacy, as defined by Beers, is something else entirely. It's a one-way street, a unilateral broadcast of American propaganda directly to the public, domestic and international, a kind of informational carpet-bombing.

The themes of her campaigns were as simplistic and flimsy as a Bush press conference. The American incursions into Afghanistan and Iraq were all about bringing the balm of "freedom" to oppressed peoples. Hence, the title of the U.S. war: Operation Iraqi Freedom, where cruise missiles were depicted as instruments of liberation. Bush himself distilled the Beers equation to its bizarre essence: "This war is about peace."

Beers quietly resigned her post a few weeks before the first volley of tomahawk missiles battered Baghdad. From her point of view, the war itself was already won, the fireworks of shock and awe were all after play.

Over at the Pentagon, Donald Rumsfeld drafted Victoria "Torie" Clarke as his director of public affairs. Clarke knew the ropes inside the Beltway. Before becoming Rumsfeld's mouthpiece, she had commanded one of the world's great parlors for powerbrokers: Hill and Knowlton's D.C. office.

Almost immediately upon taking up her new gig, Clarke convened regular meetings with a select group of Washington's top private PR specialists and lobbyists to develop a marketing plan for the Pentagon's forthcoming terror wars. The group was filled with heavy-hitters and was strikingly bipartisan in composition. She called it the Rumsfeld Group and it included PR executive Sheila Tate, columnist Rich Lowry, and Republican political consultant Rich Galen.

The brain trust also boasted top Democratic fixer Tommy Boggs, brother of NPR's Cokie Roberts and son of the late Congressman Hale Boggs of Louisiana. At the very time Boggs was conferring with top Pentagon brass on how to frame the war on terror, he was also working feverishly for the royal family of Saudi Arabia. In 2002 alone, the Saudis paid his Qorvis PR firm $20.2 million to protect its interests in Washington. In the wake of hostile press coverage following the exposure of Saudi links to the 9/11 hijackers, the royal family needed all the well-placed help it could buy. They seem to have gotten their money's worth. Boggs' felicitous influence-peddling may help to explain why the references to Saudi funding of al-Qaeda were dropped from the recent congressional report on the investigation into intelligence failures and 9/11.

According to the trade publication PR Week, the Rumsfeld Group sent "messaging advice" to the Pentagon. The group told Clarke and Rumsfeld that in order to get the American public to buy into the war on terrorism, they needed to suggest a link to nation states, not just nebulous groups such as al-Qaeda. In other words, there needed to be a fixed target for the military campaigns, some distant place to drop cruise missiles and cluster bombs. They suggested the notion (already embedded in Rumsfeld's mind) of playing up the notion of so-called rogue states as the real masters of terrorism. Thus was born the Axis of Evil, which, of course, wasn't an "axis" at all, since two of the states, Iran and Iraq, hated each other, and neither had anything at all to do with the third, North Korea.

Tens of millions in federal money were poured into private public relations and media firms working to craft and broadcast the Bush dictat that Saddam had to be taken out before the Iraqi dictator blew up the world by dropping chemical and nuclear bombs from long-range drones. Many of these PR executives and image consultants were old friends of the high priests in the Bush inner sanctum. Indeed, they were veterans, like Cheney and Powell, of the previous war against Iraq, another engagement that was more spin than combat .

At the top of the list was John Rendon, head of the D.C. firm, the Rendon Group. Rendon is one of Washington's heaviest hitters, a Beltway fixer who never let political affiliation stand in the way of an assignment. Rendon served as a media consultant for Michael Dukakis and Jimmy Carter, as well as Reagan and George H.W. Bush. Whenever the Pentagon wanted to go to war, he offered his services at a price. During Desert Storm, Rendon pulled in $100,000 a month from the Kuwaiti royal family. He followed this up with a $23 million contract from the CIA to produce anti-Saddam propaganda in the region.

As part of this CIA project, Rendon created and named the Iraqi National Congress and tapped his friend Ahmed Chalabi, the shady financier, to head the organization.

Shortly after 9/11, the Pentagon handed the Rendon Group another big assignment: public relations for the U.S. bombing of Afghanistan. Rendon was also deeply involved in the planning and public relations for the pre-emptive war on Iraq, though both Rendon and the Pentagon refuse to disclose the details of the group's work there.

But it's not hard to detect the manipulative hand of Rendon behind many of the Iraq war's signature events, including the toppling of the Saddam statue (by U.S. troops and Chalabi associates) and videotape of jubilant Iraqis waving American flags as the Third Infantry rolled by them. Rendon had pulled off the same stunt in the first Gulf War, handing out American flags to Kuwaitis and herding the media to the orchestrated demonstration. "Where do you think they got those American flags?" clucked Rendon in 1991. "That was my assignment."

The Rendon Group may also have had played a role in pushing the phony intelligence that has now come back to haunt the Bush administration. In December of 2002, Robert Dreyfuss reported that the inner circle of the Bush White House preferred the intelligence coming from Chalabi and his associates to that being proffered by analysts at the CIA.

So Rendon and his circle represented a new kind of off-the-shelf PSYOPs , the privatization of official propaganda. "I am not a national security strategist or a military tactician," said Rendon. "I am a politician, and a person who uses communication to meet public policy or corporate policy objectives. In fact, I am an information warrior and a perception manager."

What exactly, is perception management? The Pentagon defines it this way: "actions to convey and/or deny selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives and objective reasoning." In other words, lying about the intentions of the U.S. government. In a rare display of public frankness, the Pentagon actually let slip its plan (developed by Rendon) to establish a high-level den inside the Department Defense for perception management. They called it the Office of Strategic Influence and among its many missions was to plant false stories in the press.

Nothing stirs the corporate media into outbursts of pious outrage like an official government memo bragging about how the media are manipulated for political objectives. So the New York Times and Washington Post threw indignant fits about the Office of Strategic Influence; the Pentagon shut down the operation, and the press gloated with satisfaction on its victory. Yet, Rumsfeld told the Pentagon press corps that while he was killing the office, the same devious work would continue. "You can have the corpse," said Rumsfeld. "You can have the name. But I'm going to keep doing every single thing that needs to be done. And I have."

At a diplomatic level, despite the hired guns and the planted stories, this image war was lost. It failed to convince even America's most fervent allies and dependent client states that Iraq posed much of a threat. It failed to win the blessing of the U.N. and even NATO, a wholly owned subsidiary of Washington. At the end of the day, the vaunted coalition of the willing consisted of Britain, Spain, Italy, Australia, and a cohort of former Soviet bloc nations. Even so, the citizens of the nations that cast their lot with the U.S.A. overwhelmingly opposed the war.

Domestically, it was a different story. A population traumatized by terror threats and shattered economy became easy prey for the saturation bombing of the Bush message that Iraq was a terrorist state linked to al-Qaeda that was only minutes away from launching attacks on America with weapons of mass destruction.

Americans were the victims of an elaborate con job, pelted with a daily barrage of threat inflation, distortions, deceptions and lies, not about tactics or strategy or war plans, but about justifications for war. The lies were aimed not at confusing Saddam's regime, but the American people. By the start of the war, 66 per cent of Americans thought Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11 and 79 per cent thought he was close to having a nuclear weapon.

Of course, the closest Saddam came to possessing a nuke was a rusting gas centrifuge buried for 13 years in the garden of Mahdi Obeidi, a retired Iraqi scientist. Iraq didn't have any functional chemical or biological weapons. In fact, it didn't even possess any SCUD missiles, despite erroneous reports fed by Pentagon PR flacks alleging that it had fired SCUDs into Kuwait.

This charade wouldn't have worked without a gullible or a complicit press corps. Victoria Clarke, who developed the Pentagon plan for embedded reports, put it succinctly a few weeks before the war began: "Media coverage of any future operation will to a large extent shape public perception."

During the Vietnam War, TV images of maimed GIs and napalmed villages suburbanized opposition to the war and helped hasten the U.S. withdrawal. The Bush gang meant to turn the Vietnam phenomenon on its head by using TV as a force to propel the U.S.A. into a war that no one really wanted.

What the Pentagon sought was a new kind of living room war, where instead of photos of mangled soldiers and dead Iraqi kids, they could control the images Americans viewed and to a large extent the content of the stories. By embedding reporters inside selected divisions, Clarke believed the Pentagon could count on the reporters to build relationships with the troops and to feel dependent on them for their own safety. It worked, naturally. One reporter for a national network trembled on camera that the U.S. Army functioned as "our protectors." The late David Bloom of NBC confessed on the air that he was willing to do "anything and everything they can ask of us."

When the Pentagon needed a heroic story, the press obliged. Jessica Lynch became the war's first instant celebrity. Here was a neo-gothic tale of a steely young woman wounded in a fierce battle, captured and tortured by ruthless enemies, and dramatically saved from certain death by a team of selfless rescuers, knights in camo and night-vision goggles. Of course, nearly every detail of her heroic adventure proved to be as fictive and maudlin as any made-for-TV-movie. But the ordeal of Private Lynch, which dominated the news for more than a week, served its purpose: to distract attention from a stalled campaign that was beginning to look at lot riskier than the American public had been hoodwinked into believing.

The Lynch story was fed to the eager press by a Pentagon operation called Combat Camera, the Army network of photographers, videographers and editors that sends 800 photos and 25 video clips a day to the media. The editors at Combat Camera carefully culled the footage to present the Pentagon's montage of the war, eliding such unsettling images as collateral damage, cluster bombs, dead children and U.S. soldiers, napalm strikes and disgruntled troops.

"A lot of our imagery will have a big impact on world opinion," predicted Lt. Jane Larogue, director of Combat Camera in Iraq. She was right. But as the hot war turned into an even hotter occupation, the Pentagon, despite airy rhetoric from occupation supremo Paul Bremer about installing democratic institutions such as a free press, moved to tighten its monopoly on the flow images out of Iraq. First, it tried to shut down Al Jazeera, the Arab news channel. Then the Pentagon intimated that it would like to see all foreign TV news crews banished from Baghdad.

Few newspapers fanned the hysteria about the threat posed by Saddam's weapons of mass destruction as sedulously as did the Washington Post. In the months leading up to the war, the Post's pro-war op-eds outnumbered the anti-war columns by a 3-to-1 margin.

Back in 1988, the Post felt much differently about Saddam and his weapons of mass destruction. When reports trickled out about the gassing of Iranian troops, the Washington Post's editorial page shrugged off the massacres, calling the mass poisonings "a quirk of war."

The Bush team displayed a similar amnesia. When Iraq used chemical weapons in grisly attacks on Iran, the U.S. government not only didn't object, it encouraged Saddam. Anything to punish Iran was the message coming from the White House. Donald Rumsfeld himself was sent as President Ronald Reagan's personal envoy to Baghdad. Rumsfeld conveyed the bold message than an Iraq defeat would be viewed as a "strategic setback for the United States." This sleazy alliance was sealed with a handshake caught on videotape. When CNN reporter Jamie McIntyre replayed the footage for Rumsfeld in the spring of 2003, the secretary of defense snapped, "Where'd you get that? Iraqi television?"

The current crop of Iraq hawks also saw Saddam much differently then. Take the writer Laura Mylroie, sometime colleague of the New York Times' Judy Miller, who persists in peddling the ludicrous conspiracy that Iraq was behind the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.

How times have changed! In 1987, Mylroie felt downright cuddly toward Saddam. She wrote an article for the New Republic titled "Back Iraq: Time for a U.S. Tilt in the Mideast," arguing that the U.S. should publicly embrace Saddam's secular regime as a bulwark against the Islamic fundamentalists in Iran. The co-author of this mesmerizing weave of wonkery was none other than Daniel Pipes, perhaps the nation's most bellicose Islamophobe. "The American weapons that Iraq could make good use of include remotely scatterable and anti-personnel mines and counterartillery radar," wrote Mylroie and Pipes. "The United States might also consider upgrading intelligence it is supplying Baghdad."

In the rollout for the war, Mylroie seemed to be everywhere hawking the invasion of Iraq. She would often appear on two or three different networks in the same day. How did the reporter manage this feat? She had help in the form of Eleana Benador, the media placement guru who runs Benador Associates. Born in Peru, Benador parlayed her skills as a linguist into a lucrative career as media relations whiz for the Washington foreign policy elite. She also oversees the Middle East Forum, a fanatically pro-Zionist white paper mill. Her clients include some of the nation's most fervid hawks, including Michael Ledeen, Charles Krauthammer, Al Haig, Max Boot, Daniel Pipes, Richard Perle, and Judy Miller. During the Iraq war, Benador's assignment was to embed this squadron of pro-war zealots into the national media, on talk shows, and op-ed pages.

Benador not only got them the gigs, she also crafted the theme and made sure they all stayed on message. "There are some things, you just have to state them in a different way, in a slightly different way," said Benador. "If not, people get scared." Scared of intentions of their own government.

It could have been different. All of the holes in the Bush administration's gossamer case for war were right there for the mainstream press to expose. Instead, the U.S. press, just like the oil companies, sought to commercialize the Iraq war and profit from the invasions. They didn't want to deal with uncomfortable facts or present voices of dissent.

Nothing sums up this unctuous approach more brazenly than MSNBC's firing of liberal talk show host Phil Donahue on the eve of the war. The network replaced the Donahue Show with a running segment called Countdown: Iraq, featuring the usual nightly coterie of retired generals, security flacks, and other cheerleaders for invasion. The network's executives blamed the cancellation on sagging ratings. In fact, during its run Donahue's show attracted more viewers than any other program on the network. The real reason for the pre-emptive strike on Donahue was spelled out in an internal memo from anxious executives at NBC. Donahue, the memo said, offered "a difficult face for NBC in a time of war. He seems to delight in presenting guests who are anti-war, anti-Bush and skeptical of the administration's motives."

The memo warned that Donahue's show risked tarring MSNBC as an unpatriotic network, "a home for liberal anti-war agenda at the same time that our competitors are waving the flag at every opportunity." So, with scarcely a second thought, the honchos at MSNBC gave Donahue the boot and hoisted the battle flag.

It's war that sells.

There's a helluva caveat, of course. Once you buy it, the merchants of war accept no returns.

This essay is adapted from Grand Theft Pentagon.

[Dec 23, 2019] The Latest Globalist Accusations Against Russia are Preposterous, They Now Include 'Racism'

Notable quotes:
"... As summed up by Jodi Jacobson of Rewire.News (" Putin, Trump, and Kavanaugh: A Triad of White Supremacy and Oligarchy "): ..."
"... 'Putin is a dictator. His interests are in amassing wealth and power at any cost, both in Russia and globally. He is an ethnic nationalist , a white supremacist , and an Islamophobe . He aligns himself with radical right-wing religious and political groups to marginalize and attack the rights of women, LGBTQ communities, and religious and ethnic groups outside his power base.' ..."
Aug 18, 2018 | russia-insider.com

It is debatable how much of the US government Trump actually controls. The baseless CW finding by the State Department (with heavy pressure from Congress) is the work of Trump's globalist enemies in the bureaucracy and in Congress ( all of the Democrats, and almost all of the Republicans ), with the complicity of his own appointees, to undermine his overtures to Moscow and further erode his Executive authority. Besides blocking every possible path to détente with Russia, this is another step to setting Trump up for removal from office.

Regarding the timing of a second set of sanctions set to kick in November, it's hard to see how that will be avoided. Russia will not submit to inspections, which the US is arrogantly demanding of Russia, as if she were some pipsqueak country like Libya. Given that the OPCW certified in 2017 that the Russians had completed destruction of 100% of their CW stockpile (cf., the US still has almost 10% of our stocks, which are not expected to be completely gone until 2023), the demand is the equivalent of proving that you have stopped beating your wife (to the satisfaction of someone who admittedly continues to beat his own wife).

In the absence of capitulating to the US demand, which Russia will not do, legally Trump can waive the sanctions. But that option is no doubt part of the political trap being laid for him, presenting him a Hobson's choice.

On the one hand, he can waive the sanctions, further hyping the charges of treason against him (and, if the waiver is before the elections, giving the Democrats another red flag to wave), as well as inviting new legislation passed by a margin "Putin's puppet" cannot veto;

or he can let them go into effect.

If, as seems likely, the harsher measures are applied it is hard to overstate the danger created. These are the kind of things that countries do just one step from totally breaking relations in advance of war: cutting off access to American banks, barring Aeroflot from the US (in context, the least of our concerns, though symbolic), effectively blocking all exports and imports, and downgrading or suspending diplomatic ties. With respect to the last – a direct assault on Trump's presidential authority to send and receive ambassadors under Article II of the Constitution (oddly, no one in Congress seems to care that presidents routinely usurp their authority to make war) – this likely would mean withdrawing the US ambassador from Moscow and expelling the Russian ambassador in Washington, while maintaining relations if at all at the chargé d'affaires level.

In word, this is insanity. What's perhaps worse is that this political warfare is being conducted with total disregard for the truth, much less an honest attempt to find it. It's worse than a presumption of guilt; it's a positive, unambiguous verdict of culpability under circumstances where the accusers in Washington and London (I would guess but cannot prove) know perfectly well that the CW finger pointing is false.

It has been clear from the beginning of Trump's meteoric rise on the American political scene that he and his American First agenda were perceived by the beneficiaries of the globalist, neoliberal order as a mortal danger to the system which has enriched them. Maintaining and intensifying hostility toward Russia, even at the risk of a catastrophic, uncontainable conflict, lies at the center of their efforts . This political war to save globalism at all hazards is intensifying.

It would be a mistake, however, to understand hostility to Russia as just a cold calculation of pecuniary and social advantage by a corrupt mandarin class. It is all that of course, but it is also deeply ideological, reflecting the agenda of the entrenched pseudo-elites to dismantle the traditional national identities and Christian moral values of the West – and impose their godless agenda on the East as well .

But there is something else too, something that touches the emotional heart of both Russophobia in a global context and anti-Trumpism domestically. That is the accusation of racism .

Unsurprisingly one of the first to give voice to this concept was Hillary Clinton, who in her August 2016 "tinfoil hat speech" sought to portray Trump as a creature of the "Alt-Right " because, among other things, he once complimented Infowars ' Alex Jones: "Your reputation is amazing. I will not let you down." But in Hillary's estimation, who is "the grand godfather" of the worldwide Alt-Right? You guessed it: "Russian President Vladimir Putin." A month later she doubled down in her infamous " basket of deplorables " speech, branding Trump's tens of millions of supporters "racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic – you name it." (In an evident oversight, she omitted mention of Putin.)

Give the warmongering old girl credit for her doggedness. Hillary has stuck to this theme even as she sinks into irrelevance (while still reportedly harboring ambitions of a 2020 presidential run !), in June 2018 calling Putin the leader of the worldwide "authoritarian, white-supremacist, and xenophobic movement" who is "emboldening right-wing nationalists, separatists, racists, and even neo-Nazis."

Hillary is not alone. As summed up by Jodi Jacobson of Rewire.News (" Putin, Trump, and Kavanaugh: A Triad of White Supremacy and Oligarchy "):

'Putin is a dictator. His interests are in amassing wealth and power at any cost, both in Russia and globally. He is an ethnic nationalist , a white supremacist , and an Islamophobe . He aligns himself with radical right-wing religious and political groups to marginalize and attack the rights of women, LGBTQ communities, and religious and ethnic groups outside his power base.'

But perhaps the most revealing description comes from putative comedian Bill Maher on a recent episode of his HBO program, explaining that "Race Explains Shift From Party Of Reagan To Party Of Putin" and excoriating not just Putin but Russians as such for their genetic characteristics:

[Dec 21, 2019] If America Wasn't America, the United States Would Be Bombing It by Darius Shahtahmasebi

Notable quotes:
"... Reprinted with permission from The Anti-Media . ..."
Feb 13, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

February 13, 2018

On January 8, 2018, former government advisor Edward Luttwak wrote an opinion piece for Foreign Policy titled "It's Time to Bomb North Korea."

Luttwak's thesis is relatively straightforward. There is a government out there that may very soon acquire nuclear-weapons capabilities, and this country cannot be trusted to responsibly handle such a stockpile. The responsibility to protect the world from a rogue nation cannot be argued with, and we understandably have a duty to ensure the future of humanity.

However, there is one rogue nation that continues to hold the world ransom with its nuclear weapons supply. It is decimating non-compliant states left, right, and center. This country must be stopped dead in its tracks before anyone turns to the issue of North Korea.

In August of 1945, this rogue nation dropped two atomic bombs on civilian targets, not military targets, completely obliterating between 135,000 and 300,000 Japanese civilians in just these two acts alone. Prior to this event, this country killed even more civilians in the infamous firebombing of Tokyo and other areas of Japan, dropping close to 500,000 cylinders of napalm and petroleum jelly on some of Japan's most densely populated areas.

Recently, historians have become more open to the possibility that dropping the atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not actually necessary to end World War II. This has also been confirmed by those who actually took part in it. As the Nation explained:

Fleet Adm. Chester Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet, stated in a public address at the Washington Monument two months after the bombings that 'the atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military standpoint, in the defeat of Japan ' Adm. William "Bull" Halsey Jr., Commander of the US Third Fleet, stated publicly in 1946 that 'the first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment . It was a mistake to ever drop it . [the scientists] had this toy and they wanted to try it out, so they dropped it
A few months' prior, this rogue country's invasion of the Japanese island of Okinawa also claimed at least one quarter of Okinawa's population. The Okinawan people have been protesting this country's military presence ever since. The most recent ongoing protest has lasted well over 5,000 days in a row.

This nation's bloodlust continued well after the end of World War II. Barely half a decade later, this country bombed North Korea into complete oblivion, destroying over 8,700 factories, 5,000 schools, 1,000 hospitals, 600,000 homes, and eventually killing off as much as 20 percent of the country's population. As the Asia Pacific Journal has noted, the assaulting country dropped so many bombs that they eventually ran out of targets to hit, turning to bomb the irrigation systems, instead:

By the fall of 1952, there were no effective targets left for US planes to hit. Every significant town, city and industrial area in North Korea had already been bombed. In the spring of 1953, the Air Force targeted irrigation dams on the Yalu River, both to destroy the North Korean rice crop and to pressure the Chinese, who would have to supply more food aid to the North. Five reservoirs were hit, flooding thousands of acres of farmland, inundating whole towns and laying waste to the essential food source for millions of North Koreans."
This was just the beginning. Having successfully destroyed the future North Korean state, this country moved on to the rest of East Asia and Indo-China, too. As Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi has explained :
We [this loose cannon of a nation] dumped 20 million gallons of toxic herbicide on Vietnam from the air, just to make the shooting easier without all those trees, an insane plan to win 'hearts and minds' that has left about a million still disabled from defects and disease – including about 100,000 children, even decades later, little kids with misshapen heads, webbed hands and fused eyelids writhing on cots, our real American legacy, well out of view, of course.
This mass murder led to the deaths of between 1.5 million and 3.8 million people, according to the Washington Post. More bombs were dropped on Vietnam than were unleashed during the entire conflict in World War II . While this was going on, this same country was also secretly bombing Laos and Cambodia, too, where there are over 80 million unexploded bombs still killing people to this day.

This country also decided to bomb Yugoslavia , Panama , and Grenada before invading Iraq in the early 1990s. Having successfully bombed Iraqi infrastructure, this country then punished Iraq's entire civilian population with brutal sanctions. At the time, the U.N. estimated that approximately 1.7 million Iraqis had died as a result, including 500,000 to 600,000 children . Some years later, a prominent medical journal attempted to absolve the cause of this infamous history by refuting the statistics involved despite the fact that, when interviewed during the sanctions-era, Bill Clinton's secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, intimated that to this rogue government, the deaths of half a million children were "worth it" as the "price" Iraq needed to pay. In other words, whether half a million children died or not was irrelevant to this bloodthirsty nation, which barely blinked while carrying out this murderous policy.

This almighty superpower then invaded Iraq again in 2003 and plunged the entire region into chaos . At the end of May 2017, the Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR) released a study concluding that the death toll from this violent nation's 2003 invasion of Iraq had led to over one million deaths and that at least one-third of them were caused directly by the invading force.

Not to mention this country also invaded Afghanistan prior to the invasion of Iraq (even though the militants plaguing Afghanistan were originally trained and financed by this warmongering nation). It then went on to bomb Yemen, Syria, Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, and the Philippines .

Libya famously had one of the highest standards of living in the region. It had state-assisted healthcare, education, transport, and affordable housing. It is now a lawless war-zone rife with extremism where slaves are openly traded like commodities amid the power vacuum created as a direct result of the 2011 invasion.

In 2017, the commander-in-chief of this violent nation took the monumental death and destruction to a new a level by removing the restrictions on delivering airstrikes, which resulted in thousands upon thousands of civilian deaths. Before that, in the first six months of 2017, this country dropped over 20,650 bombs , a monumental increase from the year that preceded it.

Despite these statistics, all of the above conquests are mere child's play to this nation. The real prize lies in some of the more defiant and more powerful states, which this country has already unleashed a containment strategy upon. This country has deployed its own troops all across the border with Russia even though it promised in the early 1990s it would do no such thing. It also has a specific policy of containing Russia's close ally, China, all the while threatening China's borders with talks of direct strikes on North Korea (again, remember it already did so in the 1950s).

This country also elected a president who not only believes it is okay to embrace this rampantly violent militarism but who openly calls other countries "shitholes" – the very same term that aptly describes the way this country has treated the rest of the world for decades on end. This same president also reportedly once asked three times in a meeting , "If we have nuclear weapons, why don't we use them?" and shortly after proposed a policy to remove the constraints protecting the world from his dangerous supply of advanced nuclear weaponry.

When it isn't directly bombing a country, it is also arming radical insurgent groups , creating instability, and directly overthrowing governments through its covert operatives on the ground.

If we have any empathy for humanity, it is clear that this country must be stopped. It cannot continue to act like this to the detriment of the rest of the planet and the safety and security of the rest of us. This country openly talks about using its nuclear weapons, has used them before, and has continued to use all manner of weapons unabated in the years since while threatening to expand the use of these weapons to other countries.

Seriously, if North Korea seems like a threat, imagine how the rest of the world feels while watching one country violently take on the rest of the planet single-handedly, leaving nothing but destruction in its wake and promising nothing less than a nuclear holocaust in the years to come.

There is only one country that has done and that continues to do the very things North Korea is being accused of doing.

Take as much time as you need for that to resonate.

Reprinted with permission from The Anti-Media .

[Dec 21, 2019] Trump comes clean from world s policeman to thug running a global protection racket by Finian Cunningham

Highly recommended!
In any case withdrawal from Syria was a surprising and bold move on the Part of the Trump. You can criticizes Trump for not doing more but before that he bahvaves as a typical neocon, or a typical Republican presidents (which are the same things). And he started on this path just two month after inauguration bombing Syria under false pretences. So this is something
I think the reason of change is that Trump intuitively realized the voters are abandoning him in droves and the sizable faction of his voters who voted for him because of his promises to end foreign wars iether already defected or is ready to defect. So this is a move designed to keep them.
Notable quotes:
"... "America shouldn't be doing the fighting for every nation on earth, not being reimbursed in many cases at all. If they want us to do the fighting, they also have to pay a price," Trump said. ..."
Dec 27, 2018 | www.rt.com

President Trump's big announcement to pull US troops out of Syria and Afghanistan is now emerging less as a peace move, and more a rationalization of American military power in the Middle East. In a surprise visit to US forces in Iraq this week, Trump said he had no intention of withdrawing the troops in that country, who have been there for nearly 15 years since GW Bush invaded back in 2003.

Hinting at private discussions with commanders in Iraq, Trump boasted that US forces would in the future launch attacks from there into Syria if and when needed. Presumably that rapid force deployment would apply to other countries in the region, including Afghanistan.

In other words, in typical business-style transactional thinking, Trump sees the pullout from Syria and Afghanistan as a cost-cutting exercise for US imperialism. Regarding Syria, he has bragged about Turkey being assigned, purportedly, to "finish off" terror groups. That's Trump subcontracting out US interests.

Critics and supporters of Trump are confounded. After his Syria and Afghanistan pullout call, domestic critics and NATO allies have accused him of walking from the alleged "fight against terrorism" and of ceding strategic ground to US adversaries Russia and Iran.

'We're no longer suckers of the world!' Trump says US is respected as nation AGAIN (VIDEO)

Meanwhile, Trump's supporters have viewed his decision in more benign light, cheering the president for "sticking it to" the deep state and military establishment, assuming he's delivering on electoral promises to end overseas wars.

However, neither view gets what is going on. Trump is not scaling back US military power; he is rationalizing it like a cost-benefit analysis, as perhaps only a real-estate-wheeler-dealer-turned president would appreciate. Trump is not snubbing US militarism or NATO allies, nor is he letting loose an inner peace spirit. He is as committed to projecting American military as ruthlessly and as recklessly as any other past occupant of the White House. The difference is Trump wants to do it on the cheap.

Here's what he said to reporters on Air Force One before touching down in Iraq:

"The United States cannot continue to be the policeman of the world. It's not fair when the burden is all on us, the United States We are spread out all over the world. We are in countries most people haven't even heard about. Frankly, it's ridiculous." He added: "We're no longer the suckers, folks."

Laughably, Trump's griping about US forces "spread all over the world" unwittingly demonstrates the insatiable, monstrous nature of American militarism. But Trump paints this vice as a virtue, which, he complains, Washington gets no thanks for from the 150-plus countries around the globe that its forces are present in.

As US troops greeted him in Iraq, the president made explicit how the new American militarism would henceforth operate.

"America shouldn't be doing the fighting for every nation on earth, not being reimbursed in many cases at all. If they want us to do the fighting, they also have to pay a price," Trump said.

'We give them $4.5bn a year': Israel will still be 'good' after US withdrawal from Syria – Trump

This reiterates a big bugbear for this president in which he views US allies and client regimes as "not pulling their weight" in terms of military deployment. Trump has been browbeating European NATO members to cough up more on military budgets, and he has berated the Saudis and other Gulf Arab regimes to pay more for American interventions.

Notably, however, Trump has never questioned the largesse that US taxpayers fork out every year to Israel in the form of nearly $4 billion in military aid. To be sure, that money is not a gift because much of it goes back to the Pentagon from sales of fighter jets and missile systems.

The long-held notion that the US has served as the "world's policeman" is, of course, a travesty.

Since WWII, all presidents and the Washington establishment have constantly harped on, with self-righteousness, about America's mythical role as guarantor of global security.

Dozens of illegal wars on almost every continent and millions of civilian deaths attest to the real, heinous conduct of American militarism as a weapon to secure US corporate capitalism.

But with US economic power in historic decline amid a national debt now over $22 trillion, Washington can no longer afford its imperialist conduct in the traditional mode of direct US military invasions and occupations.

Perhaps, it takes a cost-cutting, raw-toothed capitalist like Trump to best understand the historic predicament, even if only superficially.

This gives away the real calculation behind his troop pullout from Syria and Afghanistan. Iraq is going to serve as a new regional hub for force projection on a demand-and-supply basis. In addition, more of the dirty work can be contracted out to Washington's clients like Turkey, Israel and Saudi Arabia, who will be buying even more US weaponry to prop the military-industrial complex.

'With almost $22 trillion of debt, the US is in no position to attack Iran'

This would explain why Trump made his hurried, unexpected visit to Iraq this week. Significantly, he said : "A lot of people are going to come around to my way of thinking", regarding his decision on withdrawing forces from Syria and Afghanistan.

Since his troop pullout plan announced on December 19, there has been serious pushback from senior Pentagon figures, hawkish Republicans and Democrats, and the anti-Trump media. The atmosphere is almost seditious against the president. Trump flying off to Iraq on Christmas night was reportedly his first visit to troops in an overseas combat zone since becoming president two years ago.

What Trump seemed to be doing was reassuring the Pentagon and corporate America that he is not going all soft and dovish. Not at all. He is letting them know that he is aiming for a leaner, meaner US military power, which can save money on the number of foreign bases by using rapid reaction forces out of places like Iraq, as well as by subcontracting operations out to regional clients.

Thus, Trump is not coming clean out of any supposed principle when he cuts back US forces overseas. He is merely applying his knack for screwing down costs and doing things on the cheap as a capitalist tycoon overseeing US militarism.

During past decades when American capitalism was relatively robust, US politicians and media could indulge in the fantasy of their military forces going around the world in large-scale formations to selflessly "defend freedom and democracy."

Today, US capitalism is broke. It simply can't sustain its global military empire. Enter Donald Trump with his "business solutions."

But in doing so, this president, with his cheap utilitarianism and transactional exploitative mindset, lets the cat out of the bag. As he says, the US cannot be the world's policeman. Countries are henceforth going to have to pay for "our protection."

Inadvertently, Trump is showing up US power for what it really is: a global thug running a protection racket.

It's always been the case. Except now it's in your face. Trump is no Smedley Butler, the former Marine general who in the 1930s condemned US militarism as a Mafia operation. This president is stupidly revealing the racket, while still thinking it is something virtuous.

Finian Cunningham (born 1963) has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. Originally from Belfast, Northern Ireland, he is a Master's graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. For over 20 years he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organizations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent. Now a freelance journalist based in East Africa, his columns appear on RT, Sputnik, Strategic Culture Foundation and Press TV.

dnm1136

Once again, Cunningham has hit the nail on the head. Trump mistakenly conflates fear with respect. In reality, around the world, the US is feared but generally not respected.

My guess is that the same was true about Trump as a businessman, i.e., he was not respected, only feared due to his willingness to pursue his "deals" by any means that "worked" for him, legal or illegal, moral or immoral, seemingly gracious or mean-spirited.

William Smith

Complaining how the US gets no thanks for its foreign intervention. Kind of like a rapist claiming he should be thanked for "pleasuring" his victim. Precisely the same sentiment expressed by those who believe the American Indians should thank the Whites for "civilising" them.

Phoebe S,

"Washington gets no thanks for from the 150-plus countries around the globe that its forces are present in."

That might mean they don't want you there. Just saying.

ProRussiaPole

None of these wars are working out for the US strategically. All they do is sow chaos. They seem to not be gaining anything, and are just preventing others from gaining anything as well.

Ernie For -> ProRussiaPole

i am a huge Putin fan, so is big Don. Please change your source of info Jerome, Trump is one man against Billions of people and dollars in corruption. He has achieved more in the USA in 2 years than all 5 previous parasites together.

Truthbetold69

It could be a change for a better direction. Time will tell. 'If you do what you've always been doing, you'll get what you've always been getting.'

[Dec 04, 2019] American Pravda the Nature of Anti-Semitism by Ron Unz

Notable quotes:
"... Now consider the notion of "anti-Semitism." Google searches for that word and its close variants reveal over 24 million hits, and over the years I'm sure I've seen that term tens of thousands of times in my books and newspapers, and heard it endlessly reported in my electronic media and entertainment. But thinking it over, I'm not sure that I can ever recall a single real-life instance I've personally encountered, nor have I heard of almost any such cases from my friends or acquaintances. Indeed, the only persons I've ever come across making such claims were individuals who bore unmistakable signs of serious psychological imbalance. When the daily newspapers are brimming with lurid tales of hideous demons walking among us and attacking people on every street corner, but you yourself have never actually seen one, you may gradually grow suspicious. ..."
"... It has also become apparent that a considerable fraction of what passes for "anti-Semitism" these days seems to stretch that term beyond all recognition. A few weeks ago an unknown 28-year-old Democratic Socialist named Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez scored a stunning upset primary victory over a top House Democrat in New York City, and naturally received a blizzard of media coverage as a result. However, when it came out that she had denounced the Israeli government for its recent massacre of over 140 unarmed Palestinian protesters in Gaza, cries of "anti-Semite" soon appeared, and according to Google there are now over 180,000 such hits combining her name and that harsh accusatory term. Similarly, just a few days ago the New York Times ran a major story reporting that all of Britain's Jewish newspapers had issued an "unprecedented" denunciation of Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party, describing it as an "existential threat" to the Jewish community for the anti-Semitism it was fostering; but this apparently amounted to nothing more than its willingness to sharply criticize the Israeli government for its long mistreatment of the Palestinians. ..."
Aug 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

I recently published a couple of long essays, and although they primarily focused on other matters, the subject of anti-Semitism was a strong secondary theme. In that regard, I mentioned my shock at discovering a dozen or more years ago that several of the most self-evidently absurd elements of anti-Semitic lunacy, which I had always dismissed without consideration, were probably correct. It does seem likely that a significant number of traditionally-religious Jews did indeed occasionally commit the ritual murder of Christian children in order to use their blood in certain religious ceremonies, and also that powerful Jewish international bankers did play a large role in financing the establishment of Bolshevik Russia .

When one discovers that matters of such enormous moment not only apparently occurred but that they had been successfully excluded from nearly all of our histories and media coverage for most of the last one hundred years, the implications take some time to properly digest. If the most extreme "anti-Semitic canards" were probably true, then surely the whole notion of anti-Semitism warrants a careful reexamination.

All of us obtain our knowledge of the world by two different channels. Some things we discover from our own personal experiences and the direct evidence of our senses, but most information comes to us via external sources such as books and the media, and a crisis may develop when we discover that these two pathways are in sharp conflict. The official media of the old USSR used to endlessly trumpet the tremendous achievements of its collectivized agricultural system, but when citizens noticed that there was never any meat in their shops, "Pravda" became a watchword for "Lies" rather than "Truth."

Now consider the notion of "anti-Semitism." Google searches for that word and its close variants reveal over 24 million hits, and over the years I'm sure I've seen that term tens of thousands of times in my books and newspapers, and heard it endlessly reported in my electronic media and entertainment. But thinking it over, I'm not sure that I can ever recall a single real-life instance I've personally encountered, nor have I heard of almost any such cases from my friends or acquaintances. Indeed, the only persons I've ever come across making such claims were individuals who bore unmistakable signs of serious psychological imbalance. When the daily newspapers are brimming with lurid tales of hideous demons walking among us and attacking people on every street corner, but you yourself have never actually seen one, you may gradually grow suspicious.

Indeed, over the years some of my own research has uncovered a sharp contrast between image and reality. As recently as the late 1990s, leading mainstream media outlets such as The New York Times were still denouncing a top Ivy League school such as Princeton for the supposed anti-Semitism of its college admissions policy, but a few years ago when I carefully investigated that issue in quantitative terms for my lengthy Meritocracy analysis I was very surprised to reach a polar-opposite conclusion. According to the best available evidence, white Gentiles were over 90% less likely to be enrolled at Harvard and the other Ivies than were Jews of similar academic performance, a truly remarkable finding. If the situation had been reversed and Jews were 90% less likely to be found at Harvard than seemed warranted by their test scores, surely that fact would be endlessly cited as the absolute smoking-gun proof of horrendous anti-Semitism in present-day America.

It has also become apparent that a considerable fraction of what passes for "anti-Semitism" these days seems to stretch that term beyond all recognition. A few weeks ago an unknown 28-year-old Democratic Socialist named Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez scored a stunning upset primary victory over a top House Democrat in New York City, and naturally received a blizzard of media coverage as a result. However, when it came out that she had denounced the Israeli government for its recent massacre of over 140 unarmed Palestinian protesters in Gaza, cries of "anti-Semite" soon appeared, and according to Google there are now over 180,000 such hits combining her name and that harsh accusatory term. Similarly, just a few days ago the New York Times ran a major story reporting that all of Britain's Jewish newspapers had issued an "unprecedented" denunciation of Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party, describing it as an "existential threat" to the Jewish community for the anti-Semitism it was fostering; but this apparently amounted to nothing more than its willingness to sharply criticize the Israeli government for its long mistreatment of the Palestinians.

One plausible explanation of the strange contrast between media coverage and reality might be that anti-Semitism once did loom very large in real life, but dissipated many decades ago, while the organizations and activists focused on detecting and combating that pernicious problem have remained in place, generating public attention based on smaller and smaller issues, with the zealous Jewish activists of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) representing a perfect example of this situation. As an even more striking illustration, the Second World War ended over seventy years ago, but what historian Norman Finkelstein has so aptly labeled "the Holocaust Industry" has grown ever larger and more entrenched in our academic and media worlds so that scarcely a day passes without one or more articles relating to that topic appearing in my major morning newspapers. Given this situation, a serious exploration of the true nature of anti-Semitism should probably avoid the mere media phantoms of today and focus on the past, when the condition might still have been widespread in daily life.

Many observers have pointed to the aftermath of the Second World War as marking a huge watershed in the public acceptability of anti-Semitism both in America and Europe, so perhaps a proper appraisal of that cultural phenomenon should focus on the years before that global conflict. However, the overwhelming role of Jews in the Bolshevik Revolution and other bloody Communist seizures of power quite naturally made them objects of considerable fear and hatred throughout the inter-war years, so the safest course might be to push that boundary back a little further and confine our attention to the period prior to the outbreak of the First World War. The pogroms in Czarist Russia, the Dreyfus Affair in France, and the lynching of Leo Frank in the American South come to mind as some of the most famous examples from that period.

Lindemann's discussion of the often difficult relations between Russia's restive Jewish minority and its huge Slavic majority is also quite interesting, and he provides numerous instances in which major incidents, supposedly demonstrating the enormously strong appeal of vicious anti-Semitism, were quite different than has been suggested by the legend. The famous Kishinev Pogrom of 1903 was obviously the result of severe ethnic tension in that city, but contrary to the regular accusations of later writers, there seems absolutely no evidence of high-level government involvement, and the widespread claims of 700 dead that so horrified the entire world were grossly exaggerated, with only 45 killed in the urban rioting. Chaim Weizmann, the future president of Israel, later promoted the story that he himself and some other brave Jewish souls had personally defended their people with revolvers in hand even as they saw the mutilated bodies of 80 Jewish victims. This account was totally fictional since Weizmann happened to have been be hundreds of miles away when the riots occurred.

Although a tendency to lie and exaggerate was hardly unique to the political partisans of Russian Jewry, the existence of a powerful international network of Jewish journalists and Jewish-influenced media outlets ensured that such concocted propaganda stories might receive enormous worldwide distribution, while the truth followed far behind, if at all.

For related reasons, international outrage was often focused on the legal confinement of most of Russia's Jews to the "Pale of Settlement," suggesting some sort of tight imprisonment; but that area was the traditional home of the Jewish population and encompassed a landmass almost as large as France and Spain combined. The growing impoverishment of Eastern European Jews during that era was often assumed to be a consequence of hostile government policy, but the obvious explanation was extraordinary Jewish fecundity, which far outstripped that of their Slavic fellow countrymen, and quickly led them to outgrow the available spots in any of their traditional "middleman" occupations, a situation worsened by their total disinclination to engage in agriculture or other primary-producer activities. Jewish communities expressed horror at the risk of losing their sons to the Czarist military draft, but this was simply the flip-side of the full Russian citizenship they had been granted, and no different from what was faced by their non-Jewish neighbors.

Certainly the Jews of Russia suffered greatly from widespread riots and mob attacks in the generation prior to World War I, and these did sometimes have substantial government encouragement, especially in the aftermath of the very heavy Jewish role in the 1905 Revolution. But we should keep in mind that a Jewish plotter had been implicated in the killing of Czar Alexander II, and Jewish assassins had also struck down several top Russian ministers and numerous other government officials. If the last decade or two had seen American Muslims assassinate a sitting U.S. President, various leading Cabinet members, and a host of our other elected and appointed officials, surely the position of Muslims in this country would have become a very uncomfortable one.

As Lindemann candidly describes the tension between Russia's very rapidly growing Jewish population and its governing authorities, he cannot avoid mentioning the notorious Jewish reputation for bribery, corruption, and general dishonesty, with numerous figures of all political backgrounds noting that the remarkable Jewish propensity to commit perjury in the courtroom led to severe problems in the effective administration of justice. The eminent American sociologist E.A. Ross, writing in 1913, characterized the regular behavior of Eastern European Jews in very similar terms .

Lindemann also allocates a short chapter to discussing the 1911 Beilis Affair, in which a Ukrainian Jew was accused of the ritual murder of a young Gentile boy, an incident that generated a great deal of international attention and controversy. Based on the evidence presented, the defendant seems likely to have been innocent, although the obvious lies he repeatedly told police interrogators hardly helped foster that impression, and "the system worked" in that he was ultimately found innocent by the jurors at his trial. However, a few pages are also given to a much less well-known ritual murder case in late 19th century Hungary, in which the evidence of Jewish guilt seemed far stronger, though the author hardly accepted the possible reality of such an outlandish crime. Such reticence was quite understandable since the publication of Ariel Toaff's remarkable volume on the subject was still a dozen years in the future.

Lindemann subsequently expanded his examination of historical anti-Semitism into a much broader treatment, Esau's Tears , which appeared in 1997. In this volume, he added comparative studies of the social landscape in Germany, Britain, Italy, and several other European countries, and demonstrated that the relationship between Jews and non-Jews varied greatly across different locations and time periods. But although I found his analysis quite useful and interesting, the extraordinarily harsh attacks his text provoked from some outraged Jewish academics seemed even more intriguing.

For example, Judith Laikin Elkin opened her discussion in The American Historical Review by describing the book as a "545-page polemic" a strange characterization of a book so remarkably even-handed and factually-based in its scholarship. Writing in Commentary , Robert Wistrich was even harsher, stating that merely reading the book had been a painful experience for him, and his review seemed filled with spittle-flecked rage. Unless these individuals had somehow gotten copies of a different book, I found their attitudes simply astonishing.

I was not alone in such a reaction. Richard S. Levy of the University of Illinois, a noted scholar of anti-Semitism, expressed amazement at Wistrich's seemingly irrational outburst, while Paul Gottfried, writing in Chronicles , mildly suggested that Lindemann had "touched raw nerves." Indeed, Gottfried's own evaluation quite reasonably criticized Lindemann for perhaps being a little too even-handed, sometimes presenting numerous conflicting analyzes without choosing between them. For those interested, a good discussion of the book by Alan Steinweis, a younger scholar specializing in the same topic, is conveniently available online .

The remarkable ferocity with which some Jewish writers attacked Lindemann's meticulous attempt to provide an accurate history of anti-Semitism may carry more significance than merely an exchange of angry words in low-circulation academic publications. If our mainstream media shapes our reality, scholarly books and articles based upon them tend to set the contours of that media coverage. And the ability of a relatively small number of agitated and energetic Jews to police the acceptable boundaries of historical narratives may have enormous consequences for our larger society, deterring scholars from objectively reporting historical facts and preventing students from discovering them.

The undeniable truth is that for many centuries Jews usually constituted a wealthy and privileged segment of the population in nearly all the European countries in which they resided, and quite frequently they based their livelihood upon the heavy exploitation of a downtrodden peasantry. Even without any differences in ethnicity, language, or religion, such conditions almost invariably provoke hostility. The victory of Mao's Communist forces in China was quickly followed by the brutal massacre of a million or more Han Chinese landlords by the Han Chinese poor peasants who regarded them as cruel oppressors, with William Hinton's classic Fanshen describing the unfortunate history that unfolded in one particular village. When similar circumstances led to violent clashes in Eastern Europe between Slavs and Jews, does it really make logical sense to employ a specialized term such as "anti-Semitism" to describe that situation?

Furthermore, some of the material presented in Lindemann's rather innocuous text might also lead to potentially threatening ideas. Consider, for example, the notorious Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion , almost certainly fictional, but hugely popular and influential during the years following World War I and the Bolshevik Revolution. The fall of so many longstanding Gentile dynasties and their replacement by new regimes such as Soviet Russia and Weimar Germany, which were heavily dominated by their tiny Jewish minorities, quite naturally fed suspicions of a worldwide Jewish plot, as did the widely discussed role of Jewish international bankers in producing those political outcomes.

Over the decades, there has been much speculation about the possible inspiration for the Protocols , but although Lindemann makes absolutely no reference to that document, he does provide a very intriguing possible candidate. Jewish-born British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli certainly ranked as one of the most influential figures of the late 19th century, and in his novel Coningsby , he has the character representing Lord Lionel Rothschild boast about the existence of a vast and secret network of powerful international Jews , who stand near the head of almost every major nation, quietly controlling their governments from behind the scenes. If one of the world's most politically well-connected Jews eagerly promoted such notions, was Henry Ford really so unreasonable in doing the same?

Lindemann also notes Disraeli's focus on the extreme importance of race and racial origins, a central aspect of traditional Jewish religious doctrine. He reasonably suggests that this must surely have had a huge influence upon the rise of those political ideas, given that Disraeli's public profile and stature were so much greater than the mere writers or activists whom our history books usually place at center stage. In fact, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, a leading racial theorist, actually cited Disraeli as a key source for his ideas. Jewish intellectuals such as Max Nordau and Cesare Lombroso are already widely recognized as leading figures in the rise of the racial science of that era, but Disraeli's under-appreciated role may have actually been far greater. The deep Jewish roots of European racialist movements are hardly something that many present-day Jews would want widely known.

One of the harsh Jewish critics of Esau's Tears denounced Cambridge University Press for even allowing the book to appear in print, and although that major work is easily available in English, there are numerous other cases where an important but discordant version of historical reality has been successfully blocked from publication. For decades most Americans would have ranked Nobel Laureate Alexander Solzhenitsyn as among the world's greatest literary figures, and his Gulag Archipelago alone sold over 10 million copies. But his last work was a massive two-volume account of the tragic 200 years of shared history between Russians and Jews, and despite its 2002 release in Russian and numerous other world languages, there has yet to be an authorized English translation, though various partial editions have circulated on the Internet in samizdat form.

ORDER IT NOW

At one point, a full English version was briefly available for sale at Amazon.com and I purchased it. Glancing through a few sections, the work seemed quite even-handed and innocuous to me, but it seemed to provide a far more detailed and uncensored account than anything else previously available, which obviously was the problem. The Bolshevik Revolution resulted in the deaths of many tens of millions of people worldwide, and the overwhelming Jewish role in its leadership would become more difficult to erase from historical memory if Solzhenitsyn's work were easily available. Also, his candid discussion of the economic and political behavior of Russian Jewry in pre-revolutionary times directly conflicted with the hagiography widely promoted by Hollywood and the popular media. Historian Yuri Slezkine's award-winning 2004 book The Jewish Century provided many similar facts, but his treatment was far more cursory and his public stature not remotely the same.

Near the end of his life, Solzhenitsyn gave his political blessing to Russian President Vladimir Putin, and Russia's leaders honored him upon his death, while his Gulag volumes are now enshrined as mandatory reading in the standard high school curriculum of today's overwhelmingly Christian Russia. But even as his star rose again in his own homeland, it seems to have sharply fallen in our own country, and his trajectory may eventually relegate him to nearly un-person status.

A couple of years after the release of Solzhenitsyn's controversial final book, an American writer named Anne Applebaum published a thick history bearing the same title Gulag , and her work received enormously favorable media coverage and won her a Pulitzer Prize; I have even heard claims that her book has been steadily replacing that earlier Gulag on many college reading lists. But although Jews constituted a huge fraction of the top leadership of the Soviet Gulag system during its early decades, as well as that of the dreaded NKVD which supplied the inmates, nearly her entire focus on her own ethnic group during Soviet times is that of victims rather than victimizers. And by a remarkable irony of fate, she shares a last name with one of the top Bolshevik leaders, Hirsch Apfelbaum, who concealed his own ethnic identity by calling himself Grigory Zinoviev.

ORDER IT NOW

The striking decline in Solzhenitsyn's literary status in the West came just a decade or two after an even more precipitous collapse in the reputation of David Irving , and for much the same reason. Irving probably ranked as the most internationally successful British historian of the last one hundred years and a renowned scholar of World War II, but his extensive reliance on primary source documentary evidence posed an obvious threat to the official narrative promoted by Hollywood and wartime propaganda. When he published his magisterial Hitler's War , this conflict between myth and reality came into the open, and an enormous wave of attacks and vilification was unleashed, gradually leading to his purge from respectability and eventually even his imprisonment.

These important examples may help to explain the puzzling contrast between the behavior of Jews in the aggregate and Jews as individuals. Observers have noticed that even fairly small Jewish minorities may often have a major impact upon the far larger societies that host them. But on the other hand, in my experience at least, a large majority of individual Jews do not seem all that different in their personalities or behavior than their non-Jewish counterparts. So how does a community whose individual mean is not so unusual generate what seems to be such a striking difference in collective behavior? I think the answer may involve the existence of information choke-points, and the ability of relatively small numbers of particularly zealous and agitated Jews in influencing and controlling these.

We live our lives constantly immersed in media narratives, and these allow us to decide the rights and wrongs of a situation. The vast majority of people, Jew and Gentile alike, are far more likely to take strong action if they are convinced that their cause is a just one. This is obviously the basis for war-time propaganda.

Now suppose that a relatively small number of zealous Jewish partisans are known to always attack and denounce journalists or authors who accurately describe Jewish misbehavior. Over time, this ongoing campaign of intimidation may cause many important facts to be left on the cutting-room floor, or even gradually expel from mainstream respectability those writers who refuse to conform to such pressures. Meanwhile, similar small numbers of Jewish partisans frequently exaggerate the misdeeds committed against Jews, sometimes piling their exaggerations upon past exaggerations already produced by a previous round of such zealots.

Eventually, these two combined trends may take a complex and possibly very mixed historical record and transform it into a simple morality-play, with innocent Jews tremendously injured by vicious Jew-haters. And as this morality-play becomes established it deepens the subsequent intensity of other Jewish-activists, who redouble their demands that the media "stop vilifying Jews" and covering up the supposed evils inflicted upon them. An unfortunate circle of distortion following exaggeration following distortion can eventually produce a widely accepted historical account that bears little resemblance to the reality of what actually happened.

So as a result, the vast majority of quite ordinary Jews, who would normally behave in quite ordinary ways, are misled by this largely fictional history, and rather understandably become greatly outraged at all the horrible things that had been done to their suffering people, some of which are true and some of which are not, while remaining completely ignorant of the other side of the ledger.

Furthermore, this situation is exacerbated by the common tendency of Jews to "cluster" together, perhaps respresenting just one or two percent of the total population, but often constituting 20% or 40% or 60% of their immediate peer-group, especially in certain professions. Under such conditions, the ideas or emotional agitation of some Jews probably permeates others around them, often provoking additional waves of indignation.

As a rough analogy, a small quantity of uranium is relatively inert and harmless, and entirely so if distributed within low-density ore. But if a significant quantity of weapons-grade uranium is sufficiently compressed, then the neutrons released by fissioning atoms will quickly cause additional atoms to undergo fission, with the ultimate result of that critical chain-reaction being a nuclear explosion. In similar fashion, even a highly agitated Jew may have no negative impact, but if the collection of such agitated Jews becomes too numerous and clusters together too closely, they may work each other into a terrible frenzy, perhaps with disastrous consequences both for themselves and for their larger society. This is especially true if those agitated Jews begin to dominate certain key nodes of top-level control, such as the central political or media organs of a society.

Whereas most living organizations exist solely in physical reality, human beings also occupy an ideational space, with the interaction of human consciousness and perceived reality playing a major role in shaping behavior. Just as the pheromones released by mammals or insects can drastically affect the reactions of their family members or nest-mates, the ideas secreted by individuals or the media-emitters of a society can have an enormous impact upon their fellows.

A cohesive, organized group generally possesses huge advantages over a teeming mass of atomized individuals, just as a Macedonian Phalanx could easily defeat a vastly larger body of disorganized infantry. Many years ago, on some website somewhere I came across a very insightful comment regarding the obvious connection between "anti-Semitism" and "racism," which our mainstream media organs identify as two of the world's greatest evils. Under this analysis, "anti-Semitism" represents the tendency to criticize or resist Jewish social cohesion, while "racism" represents the attempt of white Gentiles to maintain a similar social cohesion of their own. To the extent that the ideological emanations from our centralized media organs serve to strengthen and protect Jewish cohesion while attacking and dissolving any similar cohesion on the part of their Gentile counterparts, the former will obviously gain enormous advantages in resource-competition against the latter.

Religion obviously constitutes an important unifying factor in human social groups and we cannot ignore the role of Judaism in this regard. Traditional Jewish religious doctrine seems to consider Jews as being in a state of permanent hostility with all non-Jews , and the use of dishonest propaganda is an almost inevitable aspect of such conflict. Furthermore, since Jews have invariably been a small political minority, maintaining such controversial tenets required the employment of a massive framework of subterfuge and dissimulation in order to conceal their nature from the larger society surrounding them. It has often been said that truth is the first casualty in war, and surely the cultural influences of over a thousand years of such intense religious hostility may continue to quietly influence the thinking of many modern Jews, even those who have largely abandoned their religious beliefs.

The notorious Jewish tendency to shamelessly lie or wildly exaggerate has sometimes had horrifying human consequences. I very recently discovered a fascinating passage in Peter Moreira's 2014 book The Jew Who Defeated Hitler: Henry Morgenthau Jr., FDR, and How We Won the War , focused on the important political role of that powerful Secretary of the Treasury.

A turning point in Henry Morgenthau Jr.'s relationship with the Jewish community came in November 1942, when Rabbi Stephen Wise came to the corner office to tell the secretary what was happening in Europe. Morgenthau knew of the millions of deaths and the lampshades made from victims' skin, and he asked Wise not to go into excessive details. But Wise went on to tell of the barbarity of the Nazis, how they were making soap out of Jewish flesh. Morgenthau, turning paler, implored him, "Please, Stephen, don't give me the gory details." Wise went on with his list of horrors and Morgenthau repeated his plea over and over again. Henrietta Klotz was afraid her boss would keel over. Morgenthau later said the meeting changed his life.

It is easy to imagine that Morgenthau's gullible acceptance of such obviously ridiculous war-time atrocity stories played a major role when he later lent his name and support to remarkably brutal American occupation policies that probably led to the postwar deaths of many millions of innocent German civilians .

[Jun 05, 2019] Neoliberal mantra: Blessed are the job creators

Notable quotes:
"... You know we can't touch the corporations - they are sacrosanct because they are the supposed "job creators" - this one title gives them carte blanche to act however they like, to make spurious claims about economies faltering, businesses going offshore and unemployment. They also donate heavily to the political parties. ..."
Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Anomander64 -> Davesnothereman , 3 Jun 2018 16:44

Shhhh... whatever you do, don't ever let them hear you criticizing the "job creators" or there will be trouble.

You know we can't touch the corporations - they are sacrosanct because they are the supposed "job creators" - this one title gives them carte blanche to act however they like, to make spurious claims about economies faltering, businesses going offshore and unemployment. They also donate heavily to the political parties.

Repeat after me:

"Blessed are the job creators"
"Blessed are the job creators"
"Blessed are the job creators"
"For THEY shall inherit the wealth"

[May 11, 2019] Why Crowdstrike's Russian Hacking Story Fell Apart -- Say Hello to Fancy Bear

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Ukraine has been screaming for the US to start a war with Russia for the past 2 1/2 years. ..."
"... Is Ukrainian Intelligence trying to invent a reason for the US to take a hard-line stance against Russia? Are they using Crowdstrike to carry this out? ..."
"... Meet the real Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear, part of the groups that are targeting Ukrainian positions for the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics. These people were so tech savvy they didn't know the Ukrainian SBU (Ukrainian CIA/internal security) records every phone call and most internet use in Ukraine and Donbass. Donbass still uses Ukrainian phone and internet services. ..."
"... This is a civil war and people supporting either side are on both sides of the contact line. The SBU is awestruck because there are hundreds if not thousands of people helping to target the private volunteer armies supported by Ukrainian-Americans. ..."
"... If she was that close to the investigation Crowdstrike did how credible is she? Her sister Alexandra was named one of 16 people that shaped the election by Yahoo news. The DNC hacking investigation done by Crowdstrike concluded hacking was done by Russian actors based on the work done by Alexandra Chalupa? That is the conclusion of her sister Andrea Chalupa and obviously enough for Crowdstrike to make the Russian government connection. These words mirror Dimitri Alperovitch's identification process in his interview with PBS Judy Woodruff. ..."
"... How close is Dimitri Alperovitch to DNC officials? Close enough professionally he should have stepped down from an investigation that had the chance of throwing a presidential election in a new direction. ..."
"... According to Esquire.com , Alperovitch has vetted speeches for Hillary Clinton about cyber security issues in the past. Because of his work on the Sony hack, President Barrack Obama personally called and said the measures taken were directly because of his work. ..."
"... Still, this is not enough to show a conflict of interest. Alperovitch's relationships with the Chalupas, radical groups, think tanks, Ukrainian propagandists, and Ukrainian state supported hackers do. When it all adds up and you see it together, we have found a Russian that tried hard to influence the outcome of the US presidential election in 2016. ..."
"... According to Robert Parry's article At the forefront of people that would have taken senior positions in a Clinton administration and especially in foreign policy are the Atlantic Council. Their main goal is still a major confrontation with nuclear-armed Russia. ..."
"... The Atlantic Council is the think tank associated and supported by the CEEC (Central and Eastern European Coalition). The CEEC has only one goal which is war with Russia. Their question to candidates looking for their support in the election was "Are you willing to go to war with Russia?" Hillary Clinton has received their unqualified support throughout the campaign. ..."
"... What does any of this have to do with Dimitri Alperovitch and Crowdstrike? Since the Atlantic Council would have taken senior cabinet and policy positions, his own fellowship status at the Atlantic Council and relationship with Irene Chalupa creates a definite conflict of interest for Crowdstrike's investigation. Trump's campaign was gaining ground and Clinton needed a boost. Had she won, would he have been in charge of the CIA, NSA, or Homeland Security? ..."
"... Alperovitch's relationship with Andrea Chalupa's efforts and Ukrainian intelligence groups is where things really heat up. Noted above she works with Euromaidanpress.com and Informnapalm.org which is the outlet for Ukrainian state-sponsored hackers. ..."
"... When you look at Dimitri Alperovitch's twitter relationships, you have to ask why the CEO of a $150 million dollar company like Crowdstrike follows Ukrainian InformNapalm and its hackers individually . There is a mutual relationship. When you add up his work for the OUNb, Ukraine, support for Ukraine's Intelligence, and to the hackers it needs to be investigated to see if Ukraine is conspiring against the US government. ..."
"... Alperovitch and Fancy Bear tweet each other? ..."
"... Crowdstrike is part of Ukrainian nationalist hacker network ..."
"... In an interview with Euromaidanpress these hackers say they have no need for the CIA. They consider the CIA amateurish. They also say they are not part of the Ukrainian military Cyberalliance is a quasi-organization with the participation of several groups – RUH8, Trinity, Falcon Flames, Cyberhunta. There are structures affiliated to the hackers – the Myrotvorets site, Informnapalm analytical agency." ..."
"... Although OSINT Academy sounds fairly innocuous, it's the official twitter account for Ukraine's Ministry of Information head Dimitri Zolotukin. It is also Ukrainian Intelligence. The Ministry of Information started the Peacekeeper or Myrotvorets website that geolocates journalists and other people for assassination. If you disagree with OUNb politics, you could be on the list. ..."
"... This single tweet on a network chart shows that out of all the Ukrainian Ministry of Information Minister's following, he only wanted the 3 hacking groups associated with both him and Alperovitch to get the tweet. Alperovitch's story was received and not retweeted or shared. If this was just Alperovitch's victory, it was a victory for Ukraine. It would be shared heavily. If it was a victory for the hacking squad, it would be smart to keep it to themselves and not draw unwanted attention. ..."
"... Pravy Sektor Hackers and Crowdstrike? ..."
"... What sharp movements in international politics have been made lately? Let me spell it out for the 17 US Intelligence Agencies so there is no confusion. These state sponsored, Russian language hackers in Eastern European time zones have shown with the Surkov hack they have the tools and experience to hack states that are looking out for it. They are also laughing at US intel efforts. ..."
"... The hackers also made it clear that they will do anything to serve Ukraine. Starting a war between Russia and the USA is the one way they could serve Ukraine best, and hurt Russia worst. Given those facts, if the DNC hack was according to the criteria given by Alperovitch, both he and these hackers need to be investigated. ..."
"... According to the Esquire interview "Alperovitch was deeply frustrated: He thought the government should tell the world what it knew. There is, of course, an element of the personal in his battle cry. "A lot of people who are born here don't appreciate the freedoms we have, the opportunities we have, because they've never had it any other way," he told me. "I have." ..."
"... While I agree patriotism is a great thing, confusing it with this kind of nationalism is not. Alperovitch seems to think by serving OUNb Ukraine's interests and delivering a conflict with Russia that is against American interests, he's a patriot. He isn't serving US interests. He's definitely a Ukrainian patriot. Maybe he should move to Ukraine. ..."
Dec 29, 2017 | www.washingtonsblog.com

In the wake of the JAR-16-20296 dated December 29, 2016 about hacking and influencing the 2016 election, the need for real evidence is clear. The joint report adds nothing substantial to the October 7th report. It relies on proofs provided by the cyber security firm Crowdstrike that is clearly not on par with intelligence findings or evidence. At the top of the report is an "as is" statement showing this.

The difference between Dmitri Alperovitch's claims which are reflected in JAR-1620296 and this article is that enough evidence is provided to warrant an investigation of specific parties for the DNC hacks. The real story involves specific anti-American actors that need to be investigated for real crimes.

For instance, the malware used was an out-dated version just waiting to be found. The one other interesting point is that the Russian malware called Grizzly Steppe is from Ukraine . How did Crowdstrike miss this when it is their business to know?

Later in this article you'll meet and know a little more about the real "Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear." The bar for identification set by Crowdstrike has never been able to get beyond words like probably, maybe, could be, or should be, in their attribution.

The article is lengthy because the facts need to be in one place. The bar Dimitri Alperovitch set for identifying the hackers involved is that low. Other than asking America to trust them, how many solid facts has Alperovitch provided to back his claim of Russian involvement?

The December 29th JAR adds a flowchart that shows how a basic phishing hack is performed. It doesn't add anything significant beyond that. Noticeably, they use both their designation APT 28 and APT 29 as well as the Crowdstrike labels of Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear separately.

This is important because information from outside intelligence agencies has the value of rumor or unsubstantiated information at best according to policy. Usable intelligence needs to be free from partisan politics and verifiable. Intel agencies noted back in the early 90's that every private actor in the information game was radically political.

The Hill.com article about Russia hacking the electric grid is a perfect example of why this intelligence is political and not taken seriously. If any proof of Russian involvement existed, the US would be at war. Under current laws of war, there would be no difference between an attack on the power grid or a missile strike.

According to the Hill "Private security firms provided more detailed forensic analysis, which the FBI and DHS said Thursday correlated with the IC's findings.

"The Joint Analysis Report recognizes the excellent work undertaken by
security companies and private sector network owners and operators, and provides new indicators of compromise and malicious infrastructure
identified during the course of investigations and incident response," read a statement. The report identities two Russian intelligence groups already named by CrowdStrike and other private security firms."

In an interview with Washingtonsblog , William Binney, the creator of the NSA global surveillance system said "I expected to see the IP's or other signatures of APT's 28/29 [the entities which the U.S. claims hacked the Democratic emails] and where they were located and how/when the data got transferred to them from DNC/HRC [i.e. Hillary Rodham Clinton]/etc. They seem to have been following APT 28/29 since at least 2015, so, where are they?"

According to the latest Washington Post story, Crowdstrike's CEO tied a group his company dubbed "Fancy Bear" to targeting Ukrainian artillery positions in Debaltsevo as well as across the Ukrainian civil war front for the past 2 years.

Alperovitch states in many articles the Ukrainians were using an Android app to target the self-proclaimed Republics positions and that hacking this app was what gave targeting data to the armies in Donbass instead.

Alperovitch first gained notice when he was the VP in charge of threat research with McAfee. Asked to comment on Alperovitch's discovery of Russian hacks on Larry King, John McAfee had this to say. "Based on all of his experience, McAfee does not believe that Russians were behind the hacks on the Democratic National Committee (DNC), John Podesta's emails, and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign. As he told RT, "if it looks like the Russians did it, then I can guarantee you it was not the Russians."

How does Crowdstrike's story part with reality? First is the admission that it is probably, maybe, could be Russia hacking the DNC. " Intelligence agencies do not have specific intelligence showing officials in the Kremlin 'directing' the identified individuals to pass the Democratic emails to Wiki Leaks."

The public evidence never goes beyond the word possibility. While never going beyond that or using facts, Crowdstrike insists that it's Russia behind both Clinton's and the Ukrainian losses. NBC carried the story because one of the partners in Crowdstrike is also a consultant for NBC.

According to NBC the story reads like this." The company, Crowdstrike, was hired by the DNC to investigate the hack and issued a report publicly attributing it to Russian intelligence. One of Crowdstrike's senior executives is Shawn Henry, a former senior FBI official who consults for NBC News.

"But the Russians used the app to turn the tables on their foes, Crowdstrike says. Once a Ukrainian soldier downloaded it on his Android phone, the Russians were able to eavesdrop on his communications and determine his position through geo-location.

In June, Crowdstrike went public with its findings that two separate Russian intelligence agencies had hacked the DNC. One, which Crowdstrike and other researchers call Cozy Bear, is believed to be linked to Russia's CIA, known as the FSB. The other, known as Fancy Bear, is believed to be tied to the military intelligence agency, called the GRU."

The information is so certain the level of proof never rises above "believed to be." According to the December 12th Intercept article "Most importantly, the Post adds that "intelligence agencies do not have specific intelligence showing officials in the Kremlin 'directing' the identified individuals to pass the Democratic emails to WikiLeaks."

Because Ukrainian soldiers are using a smartphone app they activate their geolocation to use it. Targeting is from location to location. The app would need the current user location to make it work.

In 2015 I wrote an article that showed many of the available open source tools that geolocate, and track people. They even show street view. This means that using simple means, someone with freeware or an online website, and not a military budget can look at what you are seeing at any given moment.

Where Crowdstrike fails is insisting people believe that the code they see is (a) an advanced way to geolocate and (b) it was how a state with large resources would do it. Would you leave a calling card where you would get caught and fined through sanctions or worse? If you use an anonymous online resource at least Crowdstrike won't believe you are Russian and possibly up to something.

" Using open source tools this has been going on for years in the private sector. For geolocation purposes, your smartphone is one of the greatest tools to use. Finding and following you has never been easier . Let's face it if you are going to stalk someone, "street view" on a map is the next best thing to being there. In the following video, the software hacks your modem. It's only one step from your phone or computer."

If you read that article and watch the video you'll see that using "geo-stalker" is a better choice if you are on a low budget or no budget. Should someone tell the Russians they overpaid?

According to Alperovitch, the smartphone app plotted targets in about 15 seconds . This means that there is only a small window to get information this way.

Using the open source tools I wrote about previously, you could track your targets all-day. In 2014, most Ukrainian forces were using social media regularly. It would be easy to maintain a map of their locations and track them individually.

From my research into those tools, someone using Python scripts would find it easy to take photos, listen to conversations, turn on GPS, or even turn the phone on when they chose to. Going a step further than Alperovitch, without the help of the Russian government, GRU, or FSB, anyone could take control of the drones Ukraine is fond of flying and land them. Or they could download the footage the drones are taking. It's copy and paste at that point. Would you bother the FSB, GRU, or Vladimir Putin with the details or just do it?

In the WaPo article Alperovitch states "The Fancy Bear crew evidently hacked the app, allowing the GRU to use the phone's GPS coordinates to track the Ukrainian troops' position.

In that way, the Russian military could then target the Ukrainian army with artillery and other weaponry. Ukrainian brigades operating in eastern Ukraine were on the front lines of the conflict with Russian-backed separatist forces during the early stages of the conflict in late 2014, CrowdStrike noted. By late 2014, Russian forces in the region numbered about 10,000. The Android app was useful in helping the Russian troops locate Ukrainian artillery positions."

In late 2014, I personally did the only invasive passport and weapons checks that I know of during the Ukrainian civil war. I spent days looking for the Russian army every major publication said were attacking Ukraine. The keyword Cyber Security industry leader Alperovitch used is "evidently." Crowdstrike noted that in late 2014, there were 10,000 Russian forces in the region.

When I did the passport and weapons check, it was under the condition there would be no telephone calls. We went where I wanted to go. We stopped when I said to stop. I checked the documents and the weapons with no obstacles. The weapons check was important because Ukraine was stating that Russia was giving Donbass modern weapons at the time. Each weapon is stamped with a manufacture date. The results are in the articles above.

The government in Kiev agreed with my findings throughout 2014 and 2015. There were and are no Russian troops fighting in Donbass regardless of what Mr. Alperovitch asserts. There are some Russian volunteers which I have covered in detail.

Based on my findings which the CIA would call hard evidence, almost all the fighters had Ukrainian passports. There are volunteers from other countries. In Debaltsevo today, I would question Alperovitch's assertion of Russian troops based on the fact the passports will be Ukrainian and reflect my earlier findings. There is no possibly, could be, might be, about it.

The SBU, Olexander Turchinov, and the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense all agree that Crowdstrike is dead wrong in this assessment . Although subtitles aren't on it, the former Commandant of Ukrainian Army Headquarters thanks God Russia never invaded or Ukraine would have been in deep trouble.

How could Dimitri Alperovitch and Crowdstrike be this wrong on easily checked detail and still get this much media attention? Could the investment made by Google and some very large players have anything to do with the media Crowdstrike is causing?

In an interview with PBS newshour on December 22nd 2016, Dmitri Alperovitch finally produced the hard evidence he has for Russian involvement clearly. To be fair, he did state it several times before. It just didn't resonate or the media and US intelligence agencies weren't listening.

According to Alperovitch, the CEO of a $150 million dollar cyber security company "And when you think about, well, who would be interested in targeting Ukraine artillerymen in eastern Ukraine who has interest in hacking the Democratic Party, Russia government comes to mind, but specifically, Russian military that would have operational over forces in the Ukraine and would target these artillerymen."

That statement is most of the proof of Russian involvement he has. That's it, that's all the CIA, FBI have to go on. It's why they can't certify the intelligence. It's why they can't get beyond the threshold of maybe.

Woodruff then asked two important questions. She asked if Crowdstrike was still working for the DNC. Alperovitch responded "We're protecting them going forward. The investigation is closed in terms of what happened there. But certainly, we've seen the campaigns, political organizations are continued to be targeted, and they continue to hire us and use our technology to protect themselves."

Based on the evidence he presented Woodruff, there is no need to investigate further? Obviously, there is no need, the money is rolling in.

Second and most important Judy Woodruff asked if there were any questions about conflicts of interest, how he would answer? This is where Dmitri Alperovitch's story starts to unwind.

His response was "Well, this report was not about the DNC. This report was about information we uncovered about what these Russian actors were doing in eastern Ukraine in terms of locating these artillery units of the Ukrainian army and then targeting them. So, what we just did is said that it looks exactly as the same to the evidence we've already uncovered from the DNC, linking the two together."

Why is this reasonable statement going to take his story off the rails? First, let's look at the facts surrounding his evidence and then look at the real conflicts of interest involved. While carefully evading the question, he neglects to state his conflicts of interest are worthy of a DOJ investigation. Can you mislead the federal government about national security issues and not get investigated yourself?

If Alperovitch's evidence is all there is, then the US government owes some large apologies to Russia.

After showing who is targeting Ukrainian artillerymen, we'll look at what might be a criminal conspiracy.

Crowdstrike CEO Dmitri Alperovitch story about Russian hacks that cost Hillary Clinton the election was broadsided by the SBU (Ukrainian Intelligence and Security) in Ukraine. If Dimitri Alperovitch is working for Ukrainian Intelligence and is providing intelligence to 17 US Intelligence Agencies is it a conflict of interest?

Ukraine has been screaming for the US to start a war with Russia for the past 2 1/2 years. Using facts accepted by leaders on both sides of the conflict, the main proof Crowdstrike shows for evidence doesn't just unravel, it falls apart. Is Ukrainian Intelligence trying to invent a reason for the US to take a hard-line stance against Russia? Are they using Crowdstrike to carry this out?

Real Fancy Bear?

Real Fancy Bear?

Meet the real Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear, part of the groups that are targeting Ukrainian positions for the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics. These people were so tech savvy they didn't know the Ukrainian SBU (Ukrainian CIA/internal security) records every phone call and most internet use in Ukraine and Donbass. Donbass still uses Ukrainian phone and internet services.

These are normal people fighting back against private volunteer armies that target their homes, schools, and hospitals. The private volunteer armies like Pravy Sektor, Donbas Battalion, Azov, and Aidar have been cited for atrocities like child rape, torture, murder, and kidnapping. That just gets the ball rolling. These are a large swath of the Ukrainian servicemen Crowdstrike hopes to protect.

This story which just aired on Ukrainian news channel TCN shows the SBU questioning and arresting some of what they call an army of people in the Ukrainian-controlled areas. This news video shows people in Toretsk that provided targeting information to Donbass and people probably caught up in the net accidentally.

This is a civil war and people supporting either side are on both sides of the contact line. The SBU is awestruck because there are hundreds if not thousands of people helping to target the private volunteer armies supported by Ukrainian-Americans.

The first person they show on the video is a woman named Olga Lubochka. On the video her voice is heard from a recorded call saying " In the field, on the left about 130 degrees. Aim and you'll get it." and then " Oh, you hit it so hard you leveled it to the ground.""Am I going to get a medal for this?"

Other people caught up in the raid claim and probably were only calling friends they know. It's common for people to call and tell their family about what is going on around them. This has been a staple in the war especially in outlying villages for people aligned with both sides of the conflict. A neighbor calls his friend and says "you won't believe what I just saw."

Another "fancy bear," Alexander Schevchenko was caught calling friends and telling them that armored personnel carriers had just driven by.

Anatoli Prima, father of a DNR(Donetsk People's Republic) soldier was asked to find out what unit was there and how many artillery pieces.

One woman providing information about fuel and incoming equipment has a husband fighting on the opposite side in Gorlovka. Gorlovka is a major city that's been under artillery attack since 2014. For the past 2 1/2 years, she has remained in their home in Toretsk. According to the video, he's vowed to take no prisoners when they rescue the area.

When asked why they hate Ukraine so much, one responded that they just wanted things to go back to what they were like before the coup in February 2014.

Another said they were born in the Soviet Union and didn't like what was going on in Kiev. At the heart of this statement is the anti- OUN, antinationalist sentiment that most people living in Ukraine feel. The OUNb Bandera killed millions of people in Ukraine, including starving 3 million Soviet soldiers to death. The new Ukraine was founded in 1991 by OUN nationalists outside the fledgling country.

Is giving misleading or false information to 17 US Intelligence Agencies a crime? If it's done by a cyber security industry leader like Crowdstrike should that be investigated? If unwinding the story from the "targeting of Ukrainian volunteers" side isn't enough, we should look at this from the American perspective. How did the Russia influencing the election and DNC hack story evolve? Who's involved? Does this pose conflicts of interest for Dmitri Alperovitch and Crowdstrike? And let's face it, a hacking story isn't complete until real hackers with the skills, motivation, and reason are exposed.

In the last article exploring the DNC hacks the focus was on the Chalupas . The article focused on Alexandra, Andrea, and Irene Chalupa. Their participation in the DNC hack story is what brought it to international attention in the first place.

According to journalist and DNC activist Andrea Chalupa on her Facebook page " After Chalupa sent the email to Miranda (which mentions that she had invited this reporter to a meeting with Ukrainian journalists in Washington), it triggered high-level concerns within the DNC, given the sensitive nature of her work. "That's when we knew it was the Russians," said a Democratic Party source who has been directly involved in the internal probe into the hacked emails. In order to stem the damage, the source said, "we told her to stop her research."" July 25, 2016

If she was that close to the investigation Crowdstrike did how credible is she? Her sister Alexandra was named one of 16 people that shaped the election by Yahoo news. The DNC hacking investigation done by Crowdstrike concluded hacking was done by Russian actors based on the work done by Alexandra Chalupa? That is the conclusion of her sister Andrea Chalupa and obviously enough for Crowdstrike to make the Russian government connection. These words mirror Dimitri Alperovitch's identification process in his interview with PBS Judy Woodruff.

How close is Dimitri Alperovitch to DNC officials? Close enough professionally he should have stepped down from an investigation that had the chance of throwing a presidential election in a new direction.

According to Esquire.com , Alperovitch has vetted speeches for Hillary Clinton about cyber security issues in the past. Because of his work on the Sony hack, President Barrack Obama personally called and said the measures taken were directly because of his work.

Still, this is not enough to show a conflict of interest. Alperovitch's relationships with the Chalupas, radical groups, think tanks, Ukrainian propagandists, and Ukrainian state supported hackers do. When it all adds up and you see it together, we have found a Russian that tried hard to influence the outcome of the US presidential election in 2016.

In my previous article I showed in detail how the Chalupas fit into this. A brief bullet point review looks like this.

In January, 2014 when he showed up at the Maidan protests he was 17 years old. He became the foreign language media representative for Vitali Klitschko, Arseni Yatsenyuk, and Oleh Tyahnybok. All press enquiries went through Yurash. To meet Dimitri Yurash you had to go through Sviatoslav Yurash as a Macleans reporter found out.

At 18 years old, Sviatoslav Yurash became the spokesman for Ministry of Defense of Ukraine under Andrei Paruby. He was Dimitri Yarosh's spokesman and can be seen either behind Yarosh on videos at press conferences or speaking ahead of him to reporters. From January 2014 onward, to speak to Dimitri Yarosh, you set up an appointment with Yurash.

Andrea Chalupa has worked with Yurash's Euromaidan Press which is associated with Informnapalm.org and supplies the state level hackers for Ukraine.

According to Robert Parry's article At the forefront of people that would have taken senior positions in a Clinton administration and especially in foreign policy are the Atlantic Council. Their main goal is still a major confrontation with nuclear-armed Russia.

The Atlantic Council is the think tank associated and supported by the CEEC (Central and Eastern European Coalition). The CEEC has only one goal which is war with Russia. Their question to candidates looking for their support in the election was "Are you willing to go to war with Russia?" Hillary Clinton has received their unqualified support throughout the campaign.

What does any of this have to do with Dimitri Alperovitch and Crowdstrike? Since the Atlantic Council would have taken senior cabinet and policy positions, his own fellowship status at the Atlantic Council and relationship with Irene Chalupa creates a definite conflict of interest for Crowdstrike's investigation. Trump's campaign was gaining ground and Clinton needed a boost. Had she won, would he have been in charge of the CIA, NSA, or Homeland Security?

When you put someone that has so much to gain in charge of an investigation that could change an election, that is a conflict of interest. If the think tank is linked heavily to groups that want war with Russia like the Atlantic Council and the CEEC, it opens up criminal conspiracy.

If the person in charge of the investigation is a fellow at the think tank that wants a major conflict with Russia it is a definite conflict of interest. Both the Atlantic Council and clients stood to gain Cabinet and Policy positions based on how the result of his work affects the election. It clouds the results of the investigation. In Dmitri Alperovitch's case, he found the perpetrator before he was positive there was a crime.

Alperovitch's relationship with Andrea Chalupa's efforts and Ukrainian intelligence groups is where things really heat up. Noted above she works with Euromaidanpress.com and Informnapalm.org which is the outlet for Ukrainian state-sponsored hackers.

When you look at Dimitri Alperovitch's twitter relationships, you have to ask why the CEO of a $150 million dollar company like Crowdstrike follows Ukrainian InformNapalm and its hackers individually . There is a mutual relationship. When you add up his work for the OUNb, Ukraine, support for Ukraine's Intelligence, and to the hackers it needs to be investigated to see if Ukraine is conspiring against the US government.

Alperovitch and Fancy Bear tweet each other?

Alperovitch and Fancy Bear tweet each other?

Crowdstrike is also following their hack of a Russian government official after the DNC hack. It closely resembles the same method used with the DNC because it was an email hack.

ff-twitter-com-2016-12-30-02-24-54

Crowdstrike's product line includes Falcon Host, Falcon Intelligence, Falcon Overwatch and Falcon DNS. Is it possible the hackers in Falcons Flame are another service Crowdstrike offers? Although this profile says Virginia, tweets are from the Sofia, Bulgaria time zone and he writes in Russian. Another curiosity considering the Fancy Bear source code is in Russian. This image shows Crowdstrike in their network.

Crowdstrike is part of Ukrainian nationalist hacker network

In an interview with Euromaidanpress these hackers say they have no need for the CIA. They consider the CIA amateurish. They also say they are not part of the Ukrainian military Cyberalliance is a quasi-organization with the participation of several groups – RUH8, Trinity, Falcon Flames, Cyberhunta. There are structures affiliated to the hackers – the Myrotvorets site, Informnapalm analytical agency."

In the image it shows a network diagram of Crowdstrike following the Surkov leaks. The network communication goes through a secondary source. This is something you do when you don't want to be too obvious. Here is another example of that.

Ukrainian Intelligence and the real Fancy Bear?

Ukrainian Intelligence and the real Fancy Bear?

Although OSINT Academy sounds fairly innocuous, it's the official twitter account for Ukraine's Ministry of Information head Dimitri Zolotukin. It is also Ukrainian Intelligence. The Ministry of Information started the Peacekeeper or Myrotvorets website that geolocates journalists and other people for assassination. If you disagree with OUNb politics, you could be on the list.

Should someone tell Dimitri Alperovitch that Gerashchenko, who is now in charge of Peacekeeper recently threatened president-elect Donald Trump that he would put him on his "Peacemaker" site as a target? The same has been done with Silvio Berscaloni in the past.

Trying not to be obvious, the Head of Ukraine's Information Ministry (UA Intelligence) tweeted something interesting that ties Alperovitch and Crowdstrike to the Ukrainian Intelligence hackers and the Information Ministry even tighter.

Trying to keep it hush hush?

Trying to keep it hush hush?

This single tweet on a network chart shows that out of all the Ukrainian Ministry of Information Minister's following, he only wanted the 3 hacking groups associated with both him and Alperovitch to get the tweet. Alperovitch's story was received and not retweeted or shared. If this was just Alperovitch's victory, it was a victory for Ukraine. It would be shared heavily. If it was a victory for the hacking squad, it would be smart to keep it to themselves and not draw unwanted attention.

These same hackers are associated with Alexandra, Andrea, and Irene Chalupa through the portals and organizations they work with through their OUNb. The hackers are funded and directed by or through the same OUNb channels that Alperovitch is working for and with to promote the story of Russian hacking.

Pravy Sektor Hackers and Crowdstrike?

Pravy Sektor Hackers and Crowdstrike?

When you look at the image for the hacking group in the euromaidanpress article, one of the hackers identifies themselves as one of Dimitri Yarosh's Pravy Sektor members by the Pravy Sektor sweatshirt they have on. Noted above, Pravy Sektor admitted to killing the people at the Maidan protest and sparked the coup.

Going further with the linked Euromaidanpress article the hackers say" Let's understand that Ukrainian hackers and Russian hackers once constituted a single very powerful group. Ukrainian hackers have a rather high level of work. So the help of the USA I don't know, why would we need it? We have all the talent and special means for this. And I don't think that the USA or any NATO country would make such sharp movements in international politics."

What sharp movements in international politics have been made lately? Let me spell it out for the 17 US Intelligence Agencies so there is no confusion. These state sponsored, Russian language hackers in Eastern European time zones have shown with the Surkov hack they have the tools and experience to hack states that are looking out for it. They are also laughing at US intel efforts.

The hackers also made it clear that they will do anything to serve Ukraine. Starting a war between Russia and the USA is the one way they could serve Ukraine best, and hurt Russia worst. Given those facts, if the DNC hack was according to the criteria given by Alperovitch, both he and these hackers need to be investigated.

According to the Esquire interview "Alperovitch was deeply frustrated: He thought the government should tell the world what it knew. There is, of course, an element of the personal in his battle cry. "A lot of people who are born here don't appreciate the freedoms we have, the opportunities we have, because they've never had it any other way," he told me. "I have."

While I agree patriotism is a great thing, confusing it with this kind of nationalism is not. Alperovitch seems to think by serving OUNb Ukraine's interests and delivering a conflict with Russia that is against American interests, he's a patriot. He isn't serving US interests. He's definitely a Ukrainian patriot. Maybe he should move to Ukraine.

The evidence presented deserves investigation because it looks like the case for conflict of interest is the least Dimitri Alperovitch should look forward to. If these hackers are the real Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear, they really did make sharp movements in international politics.

By pawning it off on Russia, they made a worldwide embarrassment of an outgoing President of the United States and made the President Elect the suspect of rumor.

From the Observer.com , " Andrea Chalupa -- the sister of DNC research staffer Alexandra Chalupa -- claimed on social media, without any evidence, that despite Clinton conceding the election to Trump, the voting results need to be audited to because Clinton couldn't have lost -- it must have been Russia. Chalupa hysterically tweeted to every politician on Twitter to audit the vote because of Russia and claimed the TV show The Americans , about two KGB spies living in America, is real."

Quite possibly now the former UK Ambassador Craig Murry's admission of being the involved party to "leaks" should be looked at. " Now both Julian Assange and I have stated definitively the leak does not come from Russia . Do we credibly have access? Yes, very obviously. Very, very few people can be said to definitely have access to the source of the leak. The people saying it is not Russia are those who do have access. After access, you consider truthfulness. Do Julian Assange and I have a reputation for truthfulness? Well in 10 years not one of the tens of thousands of documents WikiLeaks has released has had its authenticity successfully challenged. As for me, I have a reputation for inconvenient truth telling."

[Apr 17, 2019] Never underestimate the CIA by Nancy O'Brien Simpson

"Many in the USA have come to realize this stealth organization does not work on the behalf of the USA but rather to its own ends."
CIA probably was involved in Skripals false flag operation as well. Because the behaviour of Theresa May suggest that she from the very beginning was sure about the USA full and unconditional support and putting pressure on EU allies. Then now we know that Gina Haspel, who was also involved in Steele dossier and handled most oversees assets involved in entrapment of Trump, misled Trump and pervaded him to expel 80 Russian diplomats.
Notable quotes:
"... Then there is 9/11. This one also has a USA government narrative that defies logic. This time it is so blatant and egregious that an organization called "Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth" was founded by Richard Gage, an architect with vast experience in steel structured buildings and fire. The organization demands on official investigation by Congress into exactly how the buildings came down. ..."
"... According to a statement reported by the BBC , Loose Change film producer Dylan Avery thinks the destruction of the building was suspicious because it housed some unusual tenants, including a clandestine CIA office on the 25th floor, an outpost of the U.S. Secret Service, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and New York City's emergency command center." Wikipedia ..."
"... So now we have Prime Minister, Teresa May, accusing Putin and Russia of the May 4 nerve agent attack of Sergei V. Skripal (66) and his daughter, Yulia (33), in Salibury, England. Both are in critical condition after being found unconscious on a bench outside The Maltings Shopping Center in Salibury. As we all know Russia is the new Antichrist. The harbinger of all evil. The enemy we all must view with the utmost fear and loathing. Daily, the MSM in USA recoils as they report story after story of Russia meddling in our elections, shaking the very foundations of our democracy. ..."
"... Let's get this straight. Mr. Skripal was convicted of high treason in Russia in 2004. He was not tortured, killed or murdered, rather he was allowed to settle in Britain after a spy swap in 2010. Sounds pretty friendly to me, considering that Putin is portrayed as a sadistic monster out to settle scores with those who cross him, by the Western media. ..."
"... So, why now? Why this attempted assassination now? This is the question, dear reader. Why attempt to assassinate Mr. Skripal now? He was convicted of high treason 14 years ago. He has been in England for eight years. Russia knew at this point he was no threat to them with no new secrets to betray. What would be gained at this point by assassinating the man? ..."
"... None. However, if the CIA took him out, or paid unscrupulous foreign mercenaries to take him out, much could be gained. The narrative of big bad Putin, in his big bad Russia, would be reinforced. Now, not only is he meddling in elections, getting the dastardly Trump elected, he is using nerve gas to take out enemies on foreign soil. My god, what will be next? ..."
"... "If we don't take immediate concrete measures to address this now, Salisbury will not be the last place we see chemical weapons used," said Haley. "They could be used here in New York or in cities of any country that sits on this council." CNN Politics ..."
Mar 18, 2018 | www.veteranstoday.com

Many in the USA have come to realize this stealth organization does not work on the behalf of the USA but rather to its own ends. And, in this realization, comes a jaded view of both the CIA and the government it represents.

This realization may have begun with the assassination of John F. Kennedy. The Warren Commission, a congressional investigation was convened. The commission concluded there was a single lone shooter, a fringe outcast, Lee Harvey Oswald who acted alone in the assassination of the president. Many felt, in light of the facts, that the Warren Commission was a cover up of what really went down on November 22, 1963, in Houston, Texas.

In 1976, the Congress reopened the Kennedy investigation. They created The United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) to investigate the assassination of John F. Kennedy (and Martin Luther King Jr.).

The HSCA completed its investigation in 1978 and determined the Warren Commission was faulty and there was more than one shooter and there was indeed a conspiracy to kill the president. So much for the official narrative of the Warren Commission.

Why the Warren Commission cover up back then that even the Congress in 1976 (HSCA) reported was bogus? One theory April 25, 1966, The New York Times wrote, "And, President Kennedy, as the enormity of the Bay of Pigs disaster came home to him, said to one of the highest officials of his Administration, that he wanted to splinter the C.I.A. in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds."

Kennedy was no fan of the Director of the C.I.A. Allen Dulles or his agency, and in the autumn of 1961 he purged the C.I.A. of Dulles and his entourage. This included Deputy Director for Plans Richard M. Bissell Jr. and and Deputy Director Charles Cabell. You do not mess with Allen Dulles and the C.I A. Let's leave it at that. Kennedy was dead within two years.

Then there is 9/11. This one also has a USA government narrative that defies logic. This time it is so blatant and egregious that an organization called "Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth" was founded by Richard Gage, an architect with vast experience in steel structured buildings and fire. The organization demands on official investigation by Congress into exactly how the buildings came down.

By December 2014, over 2,300 architectural and engineering professionals had signed a petition for this investigation. If one looks at controlled demolitions and how the buildings actually came down it is obvious the collapse was not due to an airplane flying into the buildings, but rather a controlled demolition. 2,300 architects and engineers with verified credentials all testify that the narrative of the government is patently false and scientifically implausible if not impossible.

At about nine a.m. the Twin Towers are crashed into and collapse. At about five twenty p.m. that same day, Building Seven collapses. No planes fly into Building 7, it just collapses. Again, the videos show a controlled demolition.

There are various theories as to why 7 WTC was taken down. Theories range from 7 WTC being the operation center for the demolition of the Twin Towers to more nefarious motives. "

According to a statement reported by the BBC , Loose Change film producer Dylan Avery thinks the destruction of the building was suspicious because it housed some unusual tenants, including a clandestine CIA office on the 25th floor, an outpost of the U.S. Secret Service, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and New York City's emergency command center." Wikipedia

What is important to remember is that NO STEEL FRAME HIGH RISE HAS EVER TOTALLY COLLAPSED DUE TO FIRE.

These are but two examples of hundreds where we have been mislead by the official narrative of the government and its MSM news. Remember the Trump Dossier that was leaked and printed as fact? Or, the death of Seth Rich, a "botched" robbery? Or, the list of 200 news outlets in the USA that were Russian Propaganda fronts? All reported as fact by the New York Times and Washington Post. All fake news by the MSM fed to an unsuspecting American people.

So now we have Prime Minister, Teresa May, accusing Putin and Russia of the May 4 nerve agent attack of Sergei V. Skripal (66) and his daughter, Yulia (33), in Salibury, England. Both are in critical condition after being found unconscious on a bench outside The Maltings Shopping Center in Salibury. As we all know Russia is the new Antichrist. The harbinger of all evil. The enemy we all must view with the utmost fear and loathing. Daily, the MSM in USA recoils as they report story after story of Russia meddling in our elections, shaking the very foundations of our democracy.

Let's get this straight. Mr. Skripal was convicted of high treason in Russia in 2004. He was not tortured, killed or murdered, rather he was allowed to settle in Britain after a spy swap in 2010. Sounds pretty friendly to me, considering that Putin is portrayed as a sadistic monster out to settle scores with those who cross him, by the Western media.

Teresa May called the act "reckless" and "indiscriminate", and basically said Putin put innocent English bystanders at risk. She upped the ante by dismissing 23 Russian diplomats, the largest such expulsion in thirty years.

On Thursday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov accused May of grandstanding in her response to the incident. Russian news agency Interfax reported that The Kremlin denies involvement in the nerve agent poisoning, insisting one motive was to complicate Russia's hosting of the World Cup this summer. Ah, dear Kremin, the motive was much deeper than the World Cup games, which were only a bonus to the attack.

So, why now? Why this attempted assassination now? This is the question, dear reader. Why attempt to assassinate Mr. Skripal now? He was convicted of high treason 14 years ago. He has been in England for eight years. Russia knew at this point he was no threat to them with no new secrets to betray. What would be gained at this point by assassinating the man?

None. However, if the CIA took him out, or paid unscrupulous foreign mercenaries to take him out, much could be gained. The narrative of big bad Putin, in his big bad Russia, would be reinforced. Now, not only is he meddling in elections, getting the dastardly Trump elected, he is using nerve gas to take out enemies on foreign soil. My god, what will be next?

Nikki Haley, Ambassador to the UN tells us, "The United States of America believes that Russia is responsible for the attack on two people in the United Kingdom using a military-grade nerve agent," Haley said in her remarks at a UN Security Council emergency session, blasting the Russian government for flouting international law.

"If we don't take immediate concrete measures to address this now, Salisbury will not be the last place we see chemical weapons used," said Haley. "They could be used here in New York or in cities of any country that sits on this council." CNN Politics

The USA needs an enemy to foment fear to justify it's astronomical defense budget. It just loves a good cold war. However, now that Russia is no longer a pinko commie nation to be demonized, and is indeed a capitalist democracy, we have to resurrect a new straw man to hate.

It is remarkable the degree to which the liberal left has bought into this industrial-military-complex narrative. The USA always has to be bombing someone, droning someone or napalming someone to keep the monies flowing into the defense budget. Take a look at our spending compared to Russia or other nations.

Alas, it is certainly not out of the question that the CIA was behind the attack. After this amount of time Mr. Putin had nothing to gain in assassinating Mr. Skripal and his daughter. In fact, he had a lot to lose. The CIA? They had a lot to gain, and nothing to lose. Never underestimate the CIA and its brilliance in setting the narrative for its agenda. And, never underestimate Mr. Putin in his resolve not to become their lapdog.

Ms. Simpson was a radio personality in New York. She was a staff writer for The Liberty Report. A PBS documentary was done on her activism for human rights. She is a psychotherapist and political commentator.

[Apr 14, 2019] Commentary of Trump decision to move embassy to Jerusalem as implicit recognition of as the capital of Israel

Jul 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

renfro , July 4, 2018 at 7:23 pm GMT

@jilles dykstra

You could help yourself by learning the real history ..I suggest the foremost historian on the subject Thomas Thompson and his ' History of Arabia'. Jerusalem was not founded by Jews, i.e. adherents of the Jewish religion. It was founded between 3000 BCE and 2600 BCE by a West Semitic people or possibly the Canaanites, the common ancestors of Palestinians, Lebanese, many Syrians and Jordanians, and many Jews. But when it was founded Jews did not exist.

Jerusalem was founded in honor of the ancient god Shalem. It does not mean City of Peace but rather 'built-up place of Shalem." The "Jewish people" were not building Jerusalem 3000 years ago, i.e. 1000 BCE. First of all, it is not clear when exactly Judaism as a religion centered on the worship of the one God took firm form. It appears to have been a late development since no evidence of worship of anything but ordinary Canaanite deities has been found in archeological sites through 1000 BCE. There was no invasion of geographical Palestine from Egypt by former slaves in the 1200s BCE. The pyramids had been built much earlier and had not used slave labor. The chronicle of the events of the reign of Ramses II on the wall in Luxor does not know about any major slave revolts or flights by same into the Sinai peninsula. Egyptian sources never heard of Moses or the 10 plagues & etc. Jews and Judaism emerged from a certain social class of Canaanites over a period of centuries inside Palestine. Jerusalem not only was not being built by the likely then non-existent "Jewish people" in 1000 BCE, but Jerusalem probably was not even inhabited at that point in history. Jerusalem appears to have been abandoned between 1000 BCE and 900 BCE, the traditional dates for the united kingdom under David and Solomon. So Jerusalem was not 'the city of David,' since there was no city when he is said to have lived. No sign of magnificent palaces or great states has been found in the archeology of this period, and the Assyrian tablets, which recorded even minor events throughout the Middle East, such as the actions of Arab queens, don't know about any great kingdom of David and Solomon in geographical Palestine. Since archeology does not show the existence of a Jewish kingdom or kingdoms in the so-called First Temple Period, it is not clear when exactly the Jewish people would have ruled Jerusalem except for the Hasmonean Kingdom. The Assyrians conquered Jerusalem in 722. The Babylonians took it in 597 and ruled it until they were themselves conquered in 539 BCE by the Achaemenids of ancient Iran, who ruled Jerusalem until Alexander the Great took the Levant in the 330s BCE. Alexander's descendants, the Ptolemies ruled Jerusalem until 198 when Alexander's other descendants, the Seleucids, took the city. With the Maccabean Revolt in 168 BCE, the Jewish Hasmonean kingdom did rule Jerusalem until 37 BCE, though Antigonus II Mattathias, the last Hasmonean, only took over Jerusalem with the help of the Parthian dynasty in 40 BCE. Herod ruled 37 BCE until the Romans conquered what they called Palestine in 6 CE (CE= 'Common Era' or what Christians call AD). The Romans and then the Eastern Roman Empire of Byzantium ruled Jerusalem from 6 CE until 614 CE when the Iranian Sasanian Empire Conquered it, ruling until 629 CE when the Byzantines took it back.

A. The Muslims, who ruled it and built it over 1191 years.
B. The Egyptians, who ruled it as a vassal state for several hundred years in the second millennium BCE.
C. The Italians, who ruled it about 444 years until the fall of the Roman Empire in 450 CE.
D. The Iranians, who ruled it for 205 years under the Achaemenids, for three years under the Parthians (insofar as the last Hasmonean was actually their vassal), and for 15 years under the Sasanids.
E. The Greeks, who ruled it for over 160 years if we count the Ptolemys and Seleucids as Greek. If we count them as Egyptians and Syrians, that would increase the Egyptian claim and introduce a Syrian one.
F. The successor states to the Byzantines, which could be either Greece or Turkey, who ruled it 188 years, though if we consider the heir to be Greece and add in the time the Hellenistic Greek dynasties ruled it, that would give Greece nearly 350 years as ruler of Jerusalem.
G. There is an Iraqi claim to Jerusalem based on the Assyrian and Babylonian conquests, as well as perhaps the rule of the Ayyubids (Saladin's dynasty), who were Kurds from Iraq.

L.K , July 4, 2018 at 9:24 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

I understand what you are saying, Jilles, but let's be accurate, shall we?

The Jews have ZERO right to "return" to Palestine one cannot go back to a place one never left in the first place.

The story that the Romans expelled the Jews from Palestine 2000 years ago is FALSE.
See Israeli historian Shlomo Sand( the invention of the Jewish people).

At any rate, even had the story been true – and it is NOT – the notion of modern Jews laying claim to the land 2000 years later is truly bizarre.

L.K , July 4, 2018 at 9:28 pm GMT
@renfro

In short, today's Palestinians and their ancestors have been living continuously between the River and the Sea for about 9,000 years."

Exactly.
In the preface of his book "Ten myths about Israel", Israeli historian Ilan Pappe, writes:

Were the Jews indeed the original inhabitants of Palestine who deserved to be supported in every way possible in their "return" to their "homeland"? The myth insists that the Jews who arrived in 1882 were the descendants of the Jews expelled by the Romans around 70 CE. The counterargument questions this genealogical connection. Quite a hefty scholarly effort has shown that the Jews of Roman Palestine remained on the land and were first converted to Christianity and then to Islam. Who these Jews were is still an open question -- maybe the Khazars who converted to Judaism in the ninth century; or maybe the mixture of races across a millennium precludes any answer to such a question.

[Feb 16, 2019] "Semi-intelligence agences" is a very sad joke: When I watched the US rep. who supposedly investigated this Magnitzky affair for the US gov. state under oath that he never verified any of the info that Browder gave him, I kept thinking "Is this guy serious ?"

Jul 27, 2018 | thesaker.is

Alex on October 09, 2017 , · at 3:08 pm EST/EDT

Something tells me he doesn't want to push this too much as money for this film came from French and German sources. It is nice to see him sticking his neck out to uphold the Truth.

When I watched the US rep. who supposedly investigated this Magnitzky affair for the US gov. state under oath that he never verified any of the info that Browder gave him, I kept thinking "Is this guy serious ?" But when you realize that they never did any investigation then it all seems logical.

[Dec 31, 2018] Trump s Trade Czar, The Latest Architect of Imperial Disaster by Alfred McCoy

Notable quotes:
"... San Diego Confidential, ..."
"... now, playing catch-up, the US is employing the crudest of methods: tariffs & military bullying (& God help us all, kidnapping). ..."
"... Copley implies that cohesive societies that seek victory over all other societies can't have it, because a cohesive society must have enemies, invented or carefully preserved if necessary. Perhaps that's what the Russia affair is about. If so, its not working. ..."
"... Poor General Kelly, one of the generals who let 911 happen, is probably going to be promoted to Bechtel. I say poor because he's only worth about $5 Million, which is a low figure for the super rich who own the military industrial complex. ..."
"... my take is that we are in the end game of imperialism. the western empire is in terminal decline and there will be more empires. from the evidence Russia and China, having learned the lessons of a few thousand years of experience are not seeking for empires. ..."
"... War is Good for Business and Organized Crime. Afghanistan's Multibillion Dollar Opium Trade. Rising Heroin Addiction in the US Afghanistan's opium economy is a multibillion dollar operation which has a direct impact on the surge of heroin addiction in the US. ..."
"... Place this against the U.S. – NSA – on record for what seems to be global surveillance having tapped the phones of U.S. European allies heads of states like Angela Merkel -among other things- with it's budget of $80 billion per year. Similar amount to the total Russian defense budget. Then there is the CIA and other "three letter organizations" in the U.S. and similar operations in the U.K. I think this is David against Goliath struggle and the latter is doing most of the beating. ..."
"... This madness is driving Russia into coalition with China and creating all sorts of totally unnecessary tensions. Forcing them to avoid the US dollar and so forth. How any of this supports western interests, or the interests of U.S. or U.K. citizens is a great misery. One thing is certain – this is self-destruction policy for the U.S. in the long run. This is what happens when the lunatics take over the asylum. ..."
"... Thankfully Vladimir Putin seems to be extremely capable and stable person – not likely to fall into temptation of hitting back with horrible consequences for world peace. ..."
"... Navarro appears to have the full support of Silicon Valley, Boeing and our other high tech exporters. On the other side is Wall Street and possibly British interests. For all of the hullabaloo about Trump violating the law against private citizens conducting foreign diplomacy when he was President-elect, the Wall Street crowd appears to have transgressed much further: ..."
Dec 31, 2018 | www.unz.com

The Geopolitics of Trump's Trade War

Most recently, a dissident economist and failed California politician named Peter Navarro has parlayed his hostility toward China into the role of key architect of Donald Trump's "trade war" against Beijing. Like his Russian counterpart Alexander Dugin, Navarro is another in a long line of intellectuals whose embrace of geopolitics changed the trajectory of his career.

Raised by a single mom who worked secretarial jobs to rent one-bedroomapartments where he slept on the couch, Navarro went to college at Tufts on a scholarship and earned a doctorate in economics from Harvard. Despite that Ivy League degree, he remained an angry outsider, denouncing the special interests "stealing America" in his first book and later, as a business professor at the University of California-Irvine, branding San Diego developers "punks in pinstripes." A passionate environmentalist, in 1992 Navarro plunged into politics as a Democratic candidate for the mayor of San Diego, denouncing his opponent's husband as a convicted drug-money launderer and losing when he smirked as she wept during their televised debate.

For the next 10 years, Navarro fought losing campaigns for everything from city council to Congress. He detailed his crushing defeat for a seat in the House of Representatives in a tell-all book , San Diego Confidential, that dished out disdain for that duplicitous "sell out" Bill Clinton, dumb "blue-collar detritus" voters, and just about everybody else as well.

Following his last losing campaign for city council, Navarro spent a decade churning out books attacking a new enemy: China. His first "shock and awe" jeremiad in 2006 told horror stories about that country's foreign trade; five years later, Death By China was filled with torrid tales of "bone-crushing, cancer-causing, flammable, poisonous, and otherwise lethal products" from that land. In 2015, a third book turned to geopolitics, complete with carefully drawn maps and respectful references to Captain Mahan, to offer an analysis of how China's military was pursuing a relentless strategy of "anti-access, area denial" to challenge the U.S. Navy's control over the Western Pacific.

To check China, the Pentagon then had two competing strategies -- "Air-Sea Battle," in which China's satellites were to be blinded, knocking out its missiles, and "Offshore Control," in which China's entire coastline was to be blockaded by mining six maritime choke points from Japan to Singapore. Both, Navarro claimed, were fatally flawed. Given that, Navarro's third book and a companion film ( endorsed by one Donald Trump) asked: What should the United States do to check Beijing's aggression and its rise as a global power? Since all U.S. imports from China, Navarro suggested, were "helping to finance a Chinese military buildup," the only realistic solution was "the imposition of countervailing tariffs to offset China's unfair trade practices."

Just a year after reaching that controversial conclusion, Navarro joined the Trump election campaign as a policy adviser and then, after the November victory, became a junior member of the White House economic team. As a protectionist in an administration initially dominated by globalists, he would be excluded from high-level meetings and, according to Time Magazine , "required to copy chief economic adviser Gary Cohn on all his emails." By February 2018, however, Cohn was on his way out and Navarro had become assistant to the president, with his new trade office now the co-equal of the National Economic Council.

As the chief defender of Trump's belief that "trade wars are good and easy to win," Navarro has finally realized his own geopolitical dream of attempting to check China with tariffs. In March, the president slapped heavy ones on Chinese steel imports and, just a few weeks later, promised to impose more of them on $50 billion of imports. When those started in July, China's leaders retaliated against what they called "typical trade bullying," imposing similar duties on American goods. Despite a warning from the Federal Reserve chairman that "trade tensions could pose serious risks to the U.S. and global economy," with Navarro at his elbow, Trump escalated in September, adding tariffs on an additional $200 billion in Chinese goods and threatening another $267 billion worth if China dared retaliate. Nonetheless, Beijing hit back, this time on just $60 billion in goods since 95% of all U.S. imports had already been covered.

Then something truly surprising happened. In September, the U.S. trade deficit with China ballooned to $305 billion for the year, driven by an 8% surge in Chinese imports -- a clear sign that Navarro's bold geopolitical vision of beating Beijing into submission with tariffs had collided big time with the complexities of world trade. Whether this tariff dispute will fizzle out inconsequentially or escalate into a full-blown trade war, wreaking havoc on global supply chains and the world economy, none of us can yet know, particularly that would-be geopolitical grandmaster Peter Navarro.

The Desire to be Grandmaster of the Universe

Though such experts usually dazzle the public and the powerful alike with erudition and boldness of vision, their geopolitical moves often have troubling long-term consequences. Mahan's plans for Pacific dominion through offshore bases created a strategic conundrum that plagued American defense policy for a half-century. Brzezinski's geopolitical lunge at the Soviet Union's soft Central Asian underbelly helped unleash radical Islam. Today, Alexander Dugin's use of geopolitics to revive Russia's dominion over Eurasia has placed Moscow on a volatile collision course with Europe and the United States. Simultaneously, Peter Navarro's bold gambit to contain China's military and economic push into the Pacific with a trade war could, if it persists, produce untold complications for our globalized economy.

No matter how deeply flawed such geopolitical visions may ultimately prove to be, their brief moments as official policy have regularly shaped the destiny of nations and of empires in unpredictable, unplanned, and often dangerous ways. And no matter how this current round of geopolitical gambits plays out, we can be reasonably certain that, in the not-too-distant future, another would-be grandmaster will embrace this seductive concept to guide his bold bid for global power.

Alfred W. McCoy, a TomDispatch regular , is the Harrington professor of history at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He is the author of The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade , the now-classic book which probed the conjuncture of illicit narcotics and covert operations over 50 years, and the recently published In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of U.S. Global Power ( Dispatch Books).

joun , says: December 3, 2018 at 1:56 am GMT

Dugin, regardless of what minor success he had ten years ago, is not influential in the Kremlin. He did not orchestrate Russia's absorption of Crimea. Simple strategic needs demanded that Crimea be absorbed, and a flawless Russian execution of an ambitious plan won the day.

Peter Navarro is correct w/r/t China. Our trading relationship with China has been a disaster for our economy (to which I mean our ability to have an economy absent financial shenanigans) and USG has effectively funded China's rise. There is no strategic benefit to offshoring productive capacity. I don't really care if Navarro has failed at other tasks in his life. He is correct on this one.

Si1ver1ock , says: December 3, 2018 at 2:03 am GMT

we can be reasonably certain that, in the not-too-distant future, another would-be grandmaster will embrace this seductive concept to guide his bold bid for global power.

Damn! Sounds just like me. Anyway, the US has made a lot of mistakes. It transferred much of its manufacturing base to China and much of its technology. The Chinese see a chance to break away from the US economically and in technology.

The US invested in China's future. China invested in its future. Which is why China has a future.

China 2025:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2018/05/03/what-is-made-in-china-2025-and-why-is-it-a-threat-to-trumps-trade-goals/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.79ef31c78b0d

Sean , says: December 9, 2018 at 12:57 pm GMT

https://www.waterstones.com/book/prisoners-of-geography/tim-marshall/9781783962433

Seeing geography as a decisive factor in the course of human history can be construed as a bleak view of the world, which is why it is disliked in some intellectual circles. It suggests that nature is more powerful than man, and that we can only go so far in determining our own fate.

Splitting the globe into ten distinct regions, former Sky News Diplomatic Editor Tim Marshall redresses our techno-centric view of the world and suggests that our key political driver continues to be our physical geography. Beginning with Russia (and its bewildering eleven time-zones), we are treated to an illuminating, border-by-border disassembly of what makes the world what it is; why, for instance, China and India will never fall into conflict (the Himalayas), or why the Ukraine is such a tactical jewel in the crown. With its panoptic view over our circumstance, Prisoners of Geography makes a compelling case around how the physical framework of the world itself has defined our history. It's one of those books that prompts real reflection and one that on publication absolutely grasped the imagination of our customers, ensuring it as a guaranteed entrant to our 2016 Paperbacks of the Year.

'One of the best books about geopolitics you could imagine: reading it is like having a light shone on your understanding.' – Nicholas Lezard,

animalogic , says: December 16, 2018 at 11:12 am GMT
@joun

"There is no strategic benefit to offshoring productive capacity. "

Quite right. However – that horse has long bolted. And now, playing catch-up, the US is employing the crudest of methods: tariffs & military bullying (& God help us all, kidnapping).

Unfortunately, circumstances demand a radical & imaginative response & even harder, a realisation that the horse has bolted.

Anon [275] Disclaimer , says: December 31, 2018 at 5:24 am GMT

Dear Mr. McCoy:

Now that you're here, you should read the Saker more. I'll pose this question though, If Russia and China are hell bent on imperial expansion, why don't they show any interest in Mongolia? Fertile land, rich mineral resources, a tiny population incapable of resistance it would be a no brainier. The reason they don't is because they are not imperial powers. Also, is empire a good thing? In every historical example it has followed the same pattern and failed. Civilisations however endure through the ages.

Puzzled , says: December 31, 2018 at 6:33 am GMT

" Vladimir Putin seeks to shatter the Western alliance with cyberwar " was where I noted this essayist is a fool and stopped reading. Russians! Russians! Russians everywhere!

*vomit*

Anon [275] Disclaimer , says: December 31, 2018 at 6:49 am GMT
@Puzzled ire is failing and wrote this insightful essay on why. http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/176007/tomgram%3A_alfred_mccoy%2C_washington%27s_great_game_and_why_it%27s_failing_

But since then has gone on to muse how it might be extended. My argument is that the Empire does not serve the American people and is leading to the destruction of the republic and the American people. The sooner it ends the better, and if Trump can speed up its demise, then he is our guy.

jilles dykstra , says: December 31, 2018 at 7:05 am GMT

A very interesting article, for me, but, I suppose, for quite other reasons than most here expect. The essence of interest is in the last two paragraphs.
In the first of these two those men are mentioned who by geopolitical ideas caused world wide disasters. If they did, I do not know. The question 'did Napoleon make history or did history make Napoleon' still is a difficult one among historians, and will remain difficult, is my idea. The man not mentioned in this paragraph is Hitler.

Then we get the ominous last paragraph, someone grabbing world wide power for geopolitical reasons, a great menace.

The essence of good propaganda is not telling lies, but telling just half truths. Not mentioned is that the area that now is Germany for maybe hundreds of years could not feed the population, had to import food. In order to be able to import one must export, a country with not enough agricultural production naturally must export industrial products, to fabricate these one needs raw materials.

Not for nothing both WWI and WWII had geopolitical causes, German economic expansion to the SW and E, economic expansion that threatened, in the British view, the autarcic British empire.

The implication of the last paragraph for me is clear, beware of the next Hitler. If the author has someone in mind who will unleash the last world war is not clear to me.

Counterinsurgency , says: December 31, 2018 at 10:25 am GMT
@Puzzled y_, section on "managing enemies".

Copley implies that cohesive societies that seek victory over all other societies can't have it, because a cohesive society must have enemies, invented or carefully preserved if necessary. Perhaps that's what the Russia affair is about. If so, its not working.

It's like the Federal German republic trying 90 year old people who were drafted as teenagers to be concentration camp guards in late WW II, when the Reich was scraping through the bottom of the manpower barrel, or like the British digging up Cromwell's bones (see Wikipedia, "Oliver Cromwell", section: "Death and posthumous execution"). Not convincing.

Counterinsurgency

Biff , says: December 31, 2018 at 11:08 am GMT

Alfred McCoy isn't the exact polar opposite of Bill Kristol who is wrong about everything , but McCoy does have a pretty good track record of being mostly correct about the issues he covers, nevertheless, he still reads like an opinion column. He also seems bonded by how he sees the American empire being some sort of force of benevolence when it acts and reacts in the same manner as any other empire that's come and gone – and of course he loathes the idea of the next empire simply by default(they'll brag about freedom too Alfred). And of course, in the realm of geopolitics, he never really mentions the bastard child; which leaves a gaping hole in his analysis.

My guess is McCoy's basically on the right track. Not exactly, but he'll get you out of the woods.

Herald , says: December 31, 2018 at 11:33 am GMT

Spot on. The reference to Russia waging cyberwar was an early warning that reading this long article would be a waste of time.

Alfred , says: December 31, 2018 at 12:41 pm GMT

For the past decade, he has been a forceful advocate for Russian expansionism

It gets a bit boring reading about how aggressive Putin is and how he wants to reconquer all the territories that were voluntarily given up by his predecessors. How exactly would Russia benefit by reaquiring the Baltic States or Poland? These countries are on life-support. Poland get $20bn annually in direct and indirect subsidies from the EU. As for Ukraine, what possible benefit to Russia would it be to have an extra 35 million people who are broke. Ukrainians today spend half their income on food and that other half on heat – and that in a country with a very cold winter.

Let's not forget that there would not have been a "Berlin Crisis" if Stalin had not given parts of Berlin to the USA, the UK and France. Can you imagine the USA doing something similar? This whole article is a real let down. I am disappointed. I guess every barrel has to have a rotten apple or two.

Jayzerbee , says: December 31, 2018 at 12:41 pm GMT

I would add that in my life, Henry Kissinger was the other supreme geopolitical theorist who attempted to establish a multipolar geopolitics over a bipolar one. Keep in mind that it was he who essentially argued that China must be recognized in order to blunt the USSR. Nixon thus became the one who opened China to the US, so that in theory the world was to be divided into the Russia pole; the China pole; the American/NATO pole, and the "Third World" pole. With a dash of Mahan added to the mix, all would be balanced and stable, or so Kissinger argued. Hmmmm, maybe not!

onebornfree , says: Website December 31, 2018 at 12:48 pm GMT

"Chain chain chain, chain of fools"

Also, perhaps read "Hormegeddon" by the great Bill Bonner:

https://bonnerandpartners.com/prepare-for-hormegeddon/

Regards, onebornfree

http://onebornfree-mythbusters.blogspot.com/

Anonymous [349] Disclaimer , says: December 31, 2018 at 1:01 pm GMT
@Miggle ext">

Are you for real? Have you looked at where these two respective areas are geographically? Hell, their borders aren't even adjacent.

As for China's interest in Tibet: what was once's part of the Empire will always be part of the Empire. Tibets been part of the empire twice now, first under Genghis' Yuan Dynasty and again during under the Qing. That simple fact means from now until the sun goes supernova, for China to be considered unified, Tibet must be a part of it. No ifs or buts.

That's not to mention the strategic considerations of occupying the high ground vis a vis the sub-continentals as well as the area being the source of several great rivers. You'd have to be a madman to give that kind of advantage up.

jilles dykstra , says: December 31, 2018 at 1:25 pm GMT
@Anon Ghandi was of the opinion that the people of India, forgot the number, 100 million or more ?, served 400.000 rich Britons.
The Roman empire, I'd say 1% rich, 99% poor.
The tsarist empire, not much better.
The German empire again the exception, nowhere else at the end of the 19th century were common people in comparable living conditions.
The EU empire, EP members tax free incomes of some € 200.000 a year, plus an extravagant pension system.
Verhofstadt, additional income, not tax free, of at least € 450.000 a year.
Declarations, Schulz has been accused of spending € 700.000 in a year, among other things he liked a glass of wine.
ThreeCranes , says: December 31, 2018 at 1:41 pm GMT

When it suits their purpose, writers on economics–I won't call them Economists–praise the tiger-like speed and agility with which Capitalism responds to the vagaries of pressures and demands that arise in world markets. But when they're engaging in public relations we get this:

"Despite a warning from the Federal Reserve chairman that " trade tensions could pose serious risks to the U.S. and global economy ," .. Whether this tariff dispute will fizzle out inconsequentially or escalate into a full-blown trade war, wreaking havoc on global supply chains and the world economy

which throw a protective cloak over a poor, picked-upon capitalism which is, apparently, incapable of getting out of its own way.

Patrick Armstrong , says: Website December 31, 2018 at 1:43 pm GMT

Disappointing read. No, there is nothing to suggest that Dugin has any influence on Putin. No, there is no Russian cyberwar. Putin's aims are Russia's recovery from the disasters of communism (a road to a blind alley as he has called it) and defending Russia against NATO's expansion, colour revolutions and numerous false accusations.

Beijing is the place to look today for big strategic thinking.

SteveM , says: December 31, 2018 at 2:19 pm GMT
@Puzzled reasons would be the last. Because the Europeans would find of other sources and shut out Russia as being an unreliable business partner. Moreover, Russia is now the largest exporter of wheat and is developing export levels of production in soybeans and pork. You can't sell to countries that you have wrecked militarily.

It's the U.S., not Russia that is playing the 800 pound Global Cop Gorilla with its war-mongering, economic warfare and global subversion.

Like Puzzled, when I read that stupid, irrational line by Alfred McCoy, I simply stopped reading. Because nobody that dense about obvious geo-political reality deserves to be read.

Digital Samizdat , says: December 31, 2018 at 2:24 pm GMT

Disappointing read. No, there is nothing to suggest that Dugin has any influence on Putin.

No kidding. This is what happens when you get your Russian news from the Times and the Beeb. I mean, if Dugin were such a Kremlin favorite, how could he have lost his job at Moscow State University? You'd think he could just pick up the phone, call 'Uncle Vova', and get his job back!

Of course Putin is a Eurasianist, but that's not because Dugin told him to be one. It's because every Russian ruler has been a Eurasianist for centuries now. Why? Just look at a map: Russia is located in Eurasia. Would we therefore expect the Russians to be Pan-Africanists or something else? Naturally they're going to be Eurasianists. They learned long ago that if they don't dominate Eurasia, somebody else will -- and that will cause security problems for Russia. I can't say I hold that against them. It's not as though the US would take kindly to some foreign empire coming on over to the Western Hemisphere and setting up shop, say, in Latin America. In fact, just consider how Washington reacted when the Soviets concluded an alliance with Cuba. There was no talk about the 'sovereignty of small nations' coming from the wallscreen then!

therevolutionwas , says: December 31, 2018 at 2:39 pm GMT
@joun

What financial shenanigans? And how has the US effectively funded China's rise? And how do tariffs destroy China ? (tariffs are like shooting yourself in the foot)

Reuben Kaspate , says: December 31, 2018 at 2:47 pm GMT
@Anonymous

Tibet is the Achilles Heel of China it's there where the over confident Middle Kingdom will die the death of a thousand paper cuts!

Reuben Kaspate , says: December 31, 2018 at 2:52 pm GMT
@Anon

Fertile land? Are you out of your freaking wits, Anon [275]? You can't grow shit in Mongolia!

Reuben Kaspate , says: December 31, 2018 at 2:55 pm GMT

My prediction for 2019: America will remain the hyperpower for the next 81 years; thereafter, I couldn't give a schitt!

Ilyana_Rozumova , says: December 31, 2018 at 3:04 pm GMT
@therevolutionwas

Analysis of US investment in China would explain a lot. It is zero? I do not think so!!!!!!!!!

Unrepentant Conservative , says: December 31, 2018 at 3:04 pm GMT

Beware of self-styled strategic thinkers attempting to revive flagging careers and gain influence.

Agent76 , says: December 31, 2018 at 3:14 pm GMT

The cause for poverty is located at the Pentagon because they own the national debt! When if ever will the Joint Chiefs be put on trial for these treasonous Wars and lost trillions?

December 24, 2013 The Worldwide Network of US Military Bases

The US Military has bases in 63 countries. Adding to the bases inside U.S. territory, the total land area occupied by US military bases domestically within the US and internationally is of the order of 2,202,735 hectares, which makes the *Pentagon* one of the *largest* landowners worldwide.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-worldwide-network-of-us-military-bases/5564

Dec 21, 2013 Black Budget: US govt clueless about missing Pentagon $trillions

The Pentagon has secured a 630 billion dollar budget for next year, even though it's failed to even account for the money it's received since 1996. A whopping 8.5 trillion dollars of taxpayer cash have gone to defence programmes – none of which has been audited.

Sean , says: December 31, 2018 at 4:37 pm GMT
@Ilyana_Rozumova between other countries and with its own colonies. As the Dutch comparative advantage was frozen out, their military aggression declined with it. America sitting on its hands while China becomes a giant Hong Kong and countries all over Eurasia fall under its sway would by likely to lead to a very nasty war that America would loose and loose badly. It is better to try now to stop China growing that big and dangerous by declining to trade with them under conditions that will inevitably make them grow too large to fight. Will trade barriers to China work well enough? Probably not because they are past the lift off stage now (Carter did too good a job), but it is worth a try.
wayfarer , says: December 31, 2018 at 4:39 pm GMT

There is opportunity for an American renaissance and really the only practical solution for its people – that is to swiftly and decidedly push its pathetic government aside – and begin rapidly re-educating, re-training, re-tooling, and re-building a next-generation manufacturing base.

The Next Manufacturing Revolution is Here

never-anonymous , says: December 31, 2018 at 5:50 pm GMT

Everything about this CIA agent's history lesson sounds fake. The blood sucking military runs the White House. ISIS or ISIL or whatever the CIA calls itself today poses no threat. Poor General Kelly, one of the generals who let 911 happen, is probably going to be promoted to Bechtel. I say poor because he's only worth about $5 Million, which is a low figure for the super rich who own the military industrial complex.

jilles dykstra , says: December 31, 2018 at 6:02 pm GMT
@Sean ised an efficient military staff, efficient in planning. The Prussian army was the first to make extensive use of railways, first time after the French 1870 attack. Very capable people, Germans. Red Army use of railways even in 1941 was a mess.
The GB preparations for the occupation of neutral Norway in April 1940, also a mess.
Pity quoted book is in German and with gothic letters, Ludendorff shows with extensive map material how the Germans in WWI fought a two front, sometimes even three front war. Just possible through detailed transport planning.
Erich Ludendorff, 'Meine Kriegserinnerungen 1914 = 1918′, Berlin, 1918
Lin , says: December 31, 2018 at 6:25 pm GMT
@joun

As I said before, rhetorics such as 'USG has effectively funded China's rise' are just over-exaggeration if not BS. Facts:
–Foreign investments only constitute a small % of Chinese domestic investment,
–The majority of foreign Investment in china are NOT from US.
–Total investment in China in recent years amount to $trillions per year

If one cares to examine the major industrial sectors in China , like hi-speed rail, steel, photovoltaic panels, electricity, energy,.. automobiles Only in the auto sector the americans have a sizable role because the yanks want market access.

5371 , says: December 31, 2018 at 6:52 pm GMT

Numerous historical howlers in this piece.

Ben Sampson , says: December 31, 2018 at 8:05 pm GMT

we can be reasonably certain that, in the not-too-distant future, another would-be grandmaster will embrace this seductive concept to guide his bold bid for global power.

my take is that we are in the end game of imperialism. the western empire is in terminal decline and there will be more empires. from the evidence Russia and China, having learned the lessons of a few thousand years of experience are not seeking for empires.

empires, traditional ones, are now altogether too costly, especially approaching their end. the world wont tolerate that anymore. the credit empire is working so far but the people have cottoned on to that. to end global banking power simply take over the banks, and recuse all debt for they were fraudulently accrued.

all banking will then by need be worker co-ops able to deal with all the financial services required by society..no conglomerates required

the capitalists will probably try a desperate military gambit to try maintain their empire but that wont work. they are already outgunned unless they decide to take the world down with them.

but I don't think we will have to worry about such trade 'grandmasters' farting around with the world for too much longer. the end of imperialism will make such work redundant

and if the democracy does not replace capitalism and the elite wins, it's a Brave New World we looking at. Brilliant geneticist bent on engineering humans. brilliant mind controllers, psychiatrists and such would be useful job qualifications to have, not trade specialist.

Brave New World also makes the trade 'genius' redundant

Agent76 , says: December 31, 2018 at 8:51 pm GMT

December 31, 2018 War is Good for Business and Organized Crime. Afghanistan's Multibillion Dollar Opium Trade. Rising Heroin Addiction in the US Afghanistan's opium economy is a multibillion dollar operation which has a direct impact on the surge of heroin addiction in the US.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/war-is-good-for-business-and-organized-crime-afghanistans-multibillion-dollar-opium-trade-rising-heroin-addiction-in-the-us/5664319

June 10, 2014 Drug War?

American Troops Are Protecting Afghan Opium. U.S. Occupation Leads to All-Time High Heroin Production

http://www.globalresearch.ca/drug-war-american-troops-are-protecting-afghan-opium-u-s-occupation-leads-to-all-time-high-heroin-production/5358053

niceland , says: December 31, 2018 at 9:34 pm GMT

It's always fun to read articles and history. This article was fun and perhaps thought provoking. But at least some parts of it make no sense to me.

Take for example the "heartland" theory. Yes it probably made sense over a century ago when strategist -always looking in the rear view mirror- judged the situation based on the Roman empire or Napoleons conquest. And their thoughts grounded in traditional territorial wars.

Today with nuclear weapons, fast long range missiles and in very different economic reality, I don't think the "Heartland" is the key to control the world, Eurasia, Europe or indeed anything else than possibly the "Heartland" it self. Control from the Heartland over nuclear France or the U.K?

Annexing small part of land on your own borders whose inhabitants overwhelmingly welcome you with open arms, like Russians did in Crimea, is totally different from conquering unwilling, hostile neighbors. The latter is extremely costly and difficult exercise with just about zero upside but gaping black hole on the downside. Remember Afghanistan or Iraq or Vietnam? So the former isn't indication of the latter!

I dont't see anything that supports the theory the Russians are playing by the book of the Heartland theory. In current political situation it's outlandish idea. Perhaps the idea is to paint Russia's leaders as lunatics?

Yes the Russians are probably engaged in cyber-war. They seem to have the Russian troll farm in St. Petersburg – as reported by European media it's amateur operation costing perhaps few million dollars per year with 80 people from the unemployment list's hammering on laptops working shifts creating and nurturing social media accounts. No experts in politics or advanced computing in sight, no supercomputers, artificial intelligence. Like I said, amateur operation hardly indicating state-sponsored efforts.

Place this against the U.S. – NSA – on record for what seems to be global surveillance having tapped the phones of U.S. European allies heads of states like Angela Merkel -among other things- with it's budget of $80 billion per year. Similar amount to the total Russian defense budget. Then there is the CIA and other "three letter organizations" in the U.S. and similar operations in the U.K. I think this is David against Goliath struggle and the latter is doing most of the beating.

The press? R.T and few other outlets versus the western MSM who has in recent years acted like a pack of rabid dogs against Russia. Investigative journalism into international affairs is replaced by publishing official statements and "analysis" from "experts". This is war propaganda – nothing less. And the Russians are playing desperate defense most days.

This madness is driving Russia into coalition with China and creating all sorts of totally unnecessary tensions. Forcing them to avoid the US dollar and so forth. How any of this supports western interests, or the interests of U.S. or U.K. citizens is a great misery. One thing is certain – this is self-destruction policy for the U.S. in the long run. This is what happens when the lunatics take over the asylum.

Thankfully Vladimir Putin seems to be extremely capable and stable person – not likely to fall into temptation of hitting back with horrible consequences for world peace.

Happy new year everyone!

JLK , says: December 31, 2018 at 9:54 pm GMT

It was a nice history essay, but there isn't much of a logical relationship between Mahan, Haushofer, et al. and the present trade confrontation.

Navarro appears to have the full support of Silicon Valley, Boeing and our other high tech exporters. On the other side is Wall Street and possibly British interests. For all of the hullabaloo about Trump violating the law against private citizens conducting foreign diplomacy when he was President-elect, the Wall Street crowd appears to have transgressed much further:

Navarro tells Wall Street 'globalist billionaires' to end 'shuttle diplomacy' in U.S.-China trade war

It seems the New York banks would gladly trade the SV engineering jobs for a bigger share of the China banking business, a la the Cleveland and Detroit auto industry jobs of the past.

A possible break with Britain is something even bigger to watch, as their involvement in China is even more finance-related.

JLK , says: December 31, 2018 at 11:11 pm GMT
@Anon ng, which far exceeded direct investments into China by any other country.

If we take a look at the Santander report on Hong Kong FDI, most of it seems to come from the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands (both offshore banking locations, with the funds coming from who knows where) and the UK.

https://en.portal.santandertrade.com/establish-overseas/hong-kong/foreign-investment

[Dec 31, 2018] Academic bottomfeeders at service of financial oligarchy by George Monbiot

Notable quotes:
"... By abetting the ad industry, universities are leading us into temptation, when they should be enlightening us ..."
Dec 31, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Originally from: Advertising and academia are controlling our thoughts. Didn't you know- - George Monbiot - Opinion - The Guardian

By abetting the ad industry, universities are leading us into temptation, when they should be enlightening us

... ... ...

I ask because, while considering the frenzy of consumerism that rises beyond its usual planet-trashing levels at this time of year, I recently stumbled across a paper that astonished me . It was written by academics at public universities in the Netherlands and the US. Their purpose seemed to me starkly at odds with the public interest. They sought to identify "the different ways in which consumers resist advertising, and the tactics that can be used to counter or avoid such resistance".

Advertisement

me title=

Among the "neutralising" techniques it highlighted were "disguising the persuasive intent of the message"; distracting our attention by using confusing phrases that make it harder to focus on the advertiser's intentions; and "using cognitive depletion as a tactic for reducing consumers' ability to contest messages". This means hitting us with enough advertisements to exhaust our mental resources, breaking down our capacity to think.

Intrigued, I started looking for other academic papers on the same theme, and found an entire literature. There were articles on every imaginable aspect of resistance, and helpful tips on overcoming it. For example, I came across a paper that counsels advertisers on how to rebuild public trust when the celebrity they work with gets into trouble. Rather than dumping this lucrative asset, the researchers advised that the best means to enhance "the authentic persuasive appeal of a celebrity endorser" whose standing has slipped is to get them to display "a Duchenne smile", otherwise known as "a genuine smile". It precisely anatomised such smiles, showed how to spot them, and discussed the "construction" of sincerity and "genuineness": a magnificent exercise in inauthentic authenticity.

ss="rich-link tone-news--item rich-link--pillar-news"> Facebook told advertisers it can identify teens feeling 'insecure' and 'worthless' Read more

Another paper considered how to persuade sceptical people to accept a company's corporate social responsibility claims, especially when these claims conflict with the company's overall objectives. (An obvious example is ExxonMobil's attempts to convince people that it is environmentally responsible, because it is researching algal fuels that could one day reduce CO2 – even as it continues to pump millions of barrels of fossil oil a day ). I hoped the paper would recommend that the best means of persuading people is for a company to change its practices. Instead, the authors' research showed how images and statements could be cleverly combined to "minimise stakeholder scepticism".

A further paper discussed advertisements that work by stimulating Fomo – fear of missing out . It noted that such ads work through "controlled motivation", which is "anathema to wellbeing". Fomo ads, the paper explained, tend to cause significant discomfort to those who notice them. It then went on to show how an improved understanding of people's responses "provides the opportunity to enhance the effectiveness of Fomo as a purchase trigger". One tactic it proposed is to keep stimulating the fear of missing out, during and after the decision to buy. This, it suggested, will make people more susceptible to further ads on the same lines.

Advertisement

me title=

Yes, I know: I work in an industry that receives most of its income from advertising, so I am complicit in this too. But so are we all. Advertising – with its destructive impacts on the living planet, our peace of mind and our free will – sits at the heart of our growth-based economy. This gives us all the more reason to challenge it. Among the places in which the challenge should begin are universities, and the academic societies that are supposed to set and uphold ethical standards. If they cannot swim against the currents of constructed desire and constructed thought, who can?

• George Monbiot is a Guardian columnist

[Dec 31, 2018] Britain fell for a neoliberal con trick even the IMF says so by Aditya Chakrabortty

Looks like Guardian start turning away from neoliberalism.
Notable quotes:
"... What price is paid when a promise is broken? Because for much of my life, and probably yours, the political class has made this pledge: that the best way to run an economy is to hack back the public realm as far as possible and let the private sector run free. That way, services operate better, businesses get the resources they need, and our national finances are healthier. ..."
"... I don't wish to write about the everyday failings of neoliberalism – that piece would be filed before you could say "east coast mainline". Instead, I want to address the most stubborn belief of all: that running a small state is the soundest financial arrangement for governments and voters alike. Because 40 years on from the Thatcher revolution, more and more evidence is coming in to the contrary. ..."
"... The other big reason for the UK's financial precarity is its privatisation programme, described by the IMF as no less than a "fiscal illusion". British governments have flogged nearly everything in the cupboard, from airports to the Royal Mail – often at giveaway prices – to friends in the City. Such privatisations, judge the fund, "increase revenues and lower deficits but also reduce the government's asset holdings". ..."
"... IMF research shows is that the Westminster classes have been asset-stripping Britain for decades – and storing up financial trouble for future generations ..."
Oct 17, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

The fund reports that Britain's finances are weaker than all other nations except Portugal, and says privatisation is to blame

Columnists usually proffer answers, but today I want to ask a question, a big one. What price is paid when a promise is broken? Because for much of my life, and probably yours, the political class has made this pledge: that the best way to run an economy is to hack back the public realm as far as possible and let the private sector run free. That way, services operate better, businesses get the resources they need, and our national finances are healthier.

It's why your tax credits keep dropping , and your mum has to wait half a year to see a hospital consultant – because David Cameron slashed public spending, to stop it "crowding out" private money. It's why water bills are so high and train services can never be counted on – because both industries have been privatised.

We let finance rip and flogged our assets. Austerity was bound to follow Will Hutton

From the debacle of universal credit to the forced conversion of state schools into corporate-run academies, the ideology of the small state – defined by no less a body than the International Monetary Fund as neoliberalism – is all pervasive. It decides how much money you have left at the end of the week and what kind of future your children will enjoy, and it explains why your elderly relatives can't get a decent carer.

I don't wish to write about the everyday failings of neoliberalism – that piece would be filed before you could say "east coast mainline". Instead, I want to address the most stubborn belief of all: that running a small state is the soundest financial arrangement for governments and voters alike. Because 40 years on from the Thatcher revolution, more and more evidence is coming in to the contrary.

Let's start with the IMF itself. Last week it published a report that barely got a mention from the BBC or in Westminster, yet helps reframe the entire debate over austerity. The fund totted up both the public debt and the publicly owned assets of 31 countries, from the US to Australia, Finland to France, and found that the UK had among the weakest public finances of the lot. With less than £3 trillion of assets against £5tn in pensions and other liabilities, the UK is more than £2tn in the red . Of all the other countries examined by researchers, including the Gambia and Kenya, only Portugal's finances look worse over the long run. So much for fixing the roof.

'British governments have flogged nearly everything in the cupboard from airports to the Royal Mail – often at giveaway prices – to friends in the City.' Photograph: Amer Ghazzal/Rex/Shutterstock

Almost as startling are the IMF's reasons for why Britain is in such a state: one way or another they all come back to neoliberalism. Thatcher loosed finance from its shackles and used our North Sea oil money to pay for swingeing tax cuts. The result is an overfinancialised economy and a government that is £1tn worse off since the banking crash. Norway has similar North Sea wealth and a far smaller population, but also a sovereign wealth fund. Its net worth has soared over the past decade.

The other big reason for the UK's financial precarity is its privatisation programme, described by the IMF as no less than a "fiscal illusion". British governments have flogged nearly everything in the cupboard, from airports to the Royal Mail – often at giveaway prices – to friends in the City. Such privatisations, judge the fund, "increase revenues and lower deficits but also reduce the government's asset holdings".

Throughout the austerity decade, ministers and economists have pushed for spending cuts by pointing to the size of the government's annual overdraft, or budget deficit. Yet there are two sides to a balance sheet, as all accountants know and this IMF work recognises. The same goes for our public realm: if Labour's John McDonnell gets into No 11 and renationalises the railways, that would cost tens of billions – but it would also leave the country with assets worth tens of billions that provided a regular income.

Instead, what this IMF research shows is that the Westminster classes have been asset-stripping Britain for decades – and storing up financial trouble for future generations.

Just look at housing to see the true cost of privatisation Dawn Foster

Privatisation and austerity have not only weakened the country's financial position – they have also handed unearned wealth to a select few. Just look at a new report from the University of Greenwich finding that water companies could have funded all their day-to-day running and their long-term investments out of the bills paid by customers. Instead of which, managers have lumbered the firms with £51bn of debt to pay for shareholders' dividends. Those borrowed billions, and the millions in interest, will be paid by you and me in our water bills. We might as well stuff the cash directly into the pockets of shareholders.

Instead of competitively run utilities, record investment by the private sector and sounder public finances, we have natural monopolies handed over to the wealthy, banks that can dump their liabilities on the public when things get tough, and an outsourcing industry that feasts upon the carcass of the public sector. As if all this weren't enough, neoliberal voices complain that we need to cut taxes and red tape, and further starve our public services.

This is a genuine scandal, but it requires us to recognise what neoliberalism promised and what it has failed to deliver. Some of the loudest critics of the ideology have completely misidentified it. Academics will daub the term "neoliberal" on any passing phenomenon. Fitbits are apparently neoliberal, as is Ben & Jerry's ice-cream and Kanye West. Pundits will say that neoliberalism is about markets and choice – tell that to any commuter wedged on a Southern rail train. And centrist politicians claim that the great failing of neoliberalism is its carelessness about identity and place, which is akin to complaining that the boy on a moped who snatched your smartphone is going too fast.

Let us get it straight. Neoliberalism has ripped you off and robbed you blind. The evidence of that is mounting up – in your bills, in your services and in the finances of your country.

• Aditya Chakrabortty is a Guardian columnist and senior economics commentator

[Dec 30, 2018] RussiaGate In Review with Aaron Mate - Unreasoned Fear is Neoliberalism's Response to the Credibility Gap

Highly recommended!
Dec 30, 2018 | jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com

At the inception of this entire RussiaGate spectacle I suggested that it was a political distraction to take the attention away from the rejection by the people of neoliberalism which has been embraced by the establishments of both political parties.

And that the result of the investigation would be indictments for perjury in the covering up of illicit business deals and money laundering. But that 'collusion to sway the election' was without substance, if not a joke.

Everything that has been revealed to date tends to support that.

One thing that Aaron overlooks is the evidence compiled by William Binney and associates that strongly suggests the DNC hack was no hack at all, but a leak by an insider who was appalled by the lies and double dealing at the DNC.

In general, RussiaGate is a farcical distraction from other issues as they say in the video. And this highlights the utterly Machiavellian streak in the corporate Democrats and the Liberal establishment under the Clintons and their ilk who care more about money and power than the basic principles that historically sustained their party. I have lost all respect for them.

But unfortunately this does open the door for those who use this to approve of the Republican establishment, which is 'at least honest' about being substantially corrupt servants to Big Money who care nothing about democracy, the Constitution, or the public. The best of them are leaving or have already left, and their party is ruined beyond repair.

This all underscores the paucity of the Red v. Blue, monopoly of two parties, 'lesser of two evils' model of political thought which has come to dominate the discussion in the US.

We are heavily propagandized by the owners of the corporate media and influencers of the narrative, and a professional class that has sold its soul for economic advantage and access to money and power.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/2HBA3Zm3dGM

And here is a bit more from Nate Silver --

https://www.youtube.com/embed/SETw5GLF8mU

[Dec 30, 2018] Soros 'person of the year' indeed -- In 2018 globalists pushed peoples' patience to the edge

Notable quotes:
"... stateless superpowers ..."
"... an old-school Christian democracy, rooted in European traditions ..."
"... Beggar-thy-neighbor migration policies, such as building border fences, will not only further fragment the union; they also seriously damage European economies and subvert global human rights standards. ..."
"... at least 300,000 refugees each year ..."
"... surge funding, ..."
"... raising a substantial amount of debt backed by the EU's relatively small budget. ..."
"... To finance it, new European taxes will have to be levied sooner or later, ..."
Dec 30, 2018 | www.rt.com

It is no secret that neoliberalism relentlessly pursues a globalized, borderless world where labor, products, and services obey the hidden hand of the free market. What is less often mentioned, however, is that this system is far more concerned with promoting the well-being of corporations and cowboy capitalists than assisting the average person on the street. Indeed, many of the world's most powerful companies today have mutated into " stateless superpowers ," while consumers are forced to endure crippling austerity measures amid plummeting standards of living. The year 2018 could be seen as the tipping point when the grass-roots movement against these dire conditions took off.

Since 2015, when German Chancellor Angela Merkel allowed hundreds of thousands of undocumented migrants into Germany and the EU, a groundswell of animosity has been steadily building against the European Union, perhaps best exemplified by the Brexit movement. Quite simply, many people are growing weary of the globalist argument that Europe needs migrants and austerity measures to keep the wheels of the economy spinning. At the very least, luring migrants with cash incentives to move to Germany and elsewhere in the EU appears incredibly shortsighted.

Indeed, if the globalist George Soros wants to lend his Midas touch to ameliorating the migrant's plight, why does he think that relocating them to European countries is the solution? As is becoming increasingly apparent in places like Sweden and France, efforts to assimilate people from vastly different cultures, religions and backgrounds is an extremely tricky venture, the success of which is far from guaranteed.

Tear gas fired as Yellow Vests and police clash in French city of Rouen (VIDEOS)

One worrying consequence of Europe's season of open borders has been the rise of far-right political movements. In fact, some of the harshest criticism of the 'Merkel plan' originated in Hungary , where its gutsy president, Viktor Orban, hopes to build " an old-school Christian democracy, rooted in European traditions ." Orban is simply responding to the democratic will of his people, who are fiercely conservative, yet the EU parliament voted to punish him regardless. The move shows that Brussels, aside from being adverse to democratic principles, has very few tools for addressing the rise of far-right sentiment that its own misguided policies created.

Here it is necessary to mention once again that bugbear of the political right, Mr. Soros, who has received no political mandate from European voters, yet who campaigns relentlessly on behalf of globalist initiatives through his Open Society Foundations (OSF) (That campaign just got some serious clout after Soros injected $18bn dollars of his own money into OSF, making it one of the most influential NGOs in the world).

With no small amount of impudence, Soros has condemned EU countries – namely his native Hungary – for attempting to protect their territories by constructing border barriers and fences, which he believes violate the human rights of migrants (rarely if ever does the philanthropist speak about the "human rights" of the native population). In the words of the maestro of mayhem himself: " Beggar-thy-neighbor migration policies, such as building border fences, will not only further fragment the union; they also seriously damage European economies and subvert global human rights standards. "

Through a leaked network of compromised EU parliamentarians who do his bidding, Soros says the EU should spend $30 billion euros ($33bln) to accommodate " at least 300,000 refugees each year ." How will the EU pay for the resettling of migrants from the Middle East? Soros has an answer for that as well. He calls it " surge funding, " which entails " raising a substantial amount of debt backed by the EU's relatively small budget. "

Nigel Farage ✔ @Nigel_Farage

George Soros has spent billions in the EU to undermine the nation state. This is where the real international political collusion is.

28.8K 4:35 AM - Nov 14, 2017

Any guesses who will be forced to pay down the debt on this high-risk venture? If you guessed George Soros, guess again. The already heavily taxed people of Europe will be forced to shoulder that heavy burden. " To finance it, new European taxes will have to be levied sooner or later, " Soros admits. That comment is very interesting in light of the recent French protests, which were triggered by Emmanuel Macron's plan to impose a new fuel tax. Was the French leader, a former investment banker, attempting to get back some of the funds being used to support the influx of new arrivals into his country? The question seems like a valid one, and goes far at explaining the ongoing unrest.

Soros & the Ł400k Question: What constitutes 'foreign interference' in democracy?

At this point, it is worth remembering what triggered the exodus of migrants into Europe in the first place. A large part of the answer comes down to unlawful NATO operations on the ground of sovereign states. Since 2003, the 29-member military bloc, under the direct command of Washington, has conducted illicit military operations in various places around the globe, including in Iraq, Libya and Syria. These actions, which could be best described as globalism on steroids, have opened a Pandora's Box of global scourges, including famine, terrorism and grinding poverty. Is this what the Western states mean by 'humanitarian activism'? If the major EU countries really want to flout their humanitarian credentials, they could have started by demanding the cessation of regime-change operations throughout the Middle East and North Africa, which created such inhumane conditions for millions of innocent people.

This failure on the part of Western capitals to speak out against belligerent US foreign policy helps to explain why a number of other European governments are experiencing major shakeups. Sebastian Kurz, 32, won over the hearts of Austrian voters by promising to tackle unchecked immigration. In super-tolerant Sweden, which has accepted more migrants per capita than any other EU state, the anti-immigrant Sweden Democrats party garnered 17.6 percent of the vote in September elections – up from 12.9 percent in the previous election. And even Angela Merkel, who is seen by many people as the de facto leader of the European Union, is watching her political star crash and burn mostly due to her bungling of the migrant crisis. In October, after her Christian Democratic Union (CDU) suffered a stinging setback in Bavaria elections, which saw CDU voters abandon ship for the anti-immigrant AfD and the Greens, Merkel announced she would resign in 2021 after her current term expires.

Meanwhile, back in the US, the government of President Donald Trump has been shut down as the Democrats refuse to grant the American leader the funds to build a wall on the Mexican border – despite the fact that he essentially made it to the White House on precisely that promise. Personally, I find it very hard to believe that any political party that does not support a strong and viable border can continue to be taken seriously at the polls for very long. Yet that is the very strategy that the Democrats have chosen. But I digress.

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump

I am all alone (poor me) in the White House waiting for the Democrats to come back and make a deal on desperately needed Border Security. At some point the Democrats not wanting to make a deal will cost our Country more money than the Border Wall we are all talking about. Crazy!

181K 12:32 PM - Dec 24, 2018 Twitter Ads info and privacy

The lesson that Western governments should have learned over the last year from these developments is that there exists a definite red line that the globalists cross at risk not only to the social order, but to their own political fortunes. Eventually the people will demand solutions to their problems – many of which were caused by reckless neoliberal programs and austerity measures. This collective sense of desperation may open the door to any number of right-wing politicians only too happy to meet the demand.

Better to provide fair working conditions for the people while maintaining strong borders than have to face the wrath of the street or some political charlatan later. Whether or not Western leaders will change their neoliberal ways as a populist storm front approaches remains to be seen, but I for one am not betting on it.

[Dec 29, 2018] There are three ideologies in contemporary (i.e. post-1991)

Dec 29, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
somebody , Dec 27, 2018 9:43:48 PM | link

vk , Dec 27, 2018 7:09:56 PM | link

@ Posted by: Zanon | Dec 27, 2018 4:41:19 PM | 166

There are three ideologies in contemporary (i.e. post-1991) Russia: the Ocidentalists (who believe Russia is an European country and should always mold its foreign policy in the direction to being absorbed by Europe geopolitically), the Slavophiles (who believe Russia is neither European nor Eurasian/Asian, but a unique kind of State which arose from the fusion between the Mongol system and the European system, i.e. a Slavic State, nothing more, nothing less) and the Eurasianists (who believe Russia is an Eurasian country and should have an Eurasian foreign policy).

It is not secret among the people who study the subject that Putin is, personally, an Ocidentalist with a touch for the Slavophile element of liking the idea of the Orthodox Church dominating the ideological landscape. He probably hates the Bolsheviks, communism, and the fact that the Russian Revolution happened. Put it simply, he hates the USSR.

But in the real world, it is not about what you hate and you don't hate personally. That may work in your private life, where you can subjugate your wife and kids and mold them to your image. But, in the public life, things get serious, and you're nothing.

Putin compreends that -- that's why he unwillingly accepts the fall of the USSR was the worst disaster of the 20th Century history; that's why he doesn't throw away the toys the Soviets left as inheritance to the Russian Federation; that's why he behaves like an Eurasianist when doing his job.

Because, at the end of the day, it was the Bolsheviks who crushed the Wehrmacht, made the Red Army the most powerful war machine in Europe and turned Russia into a global superpower; at the end of the day, Russia is still in Eurasia.

It wasn't the Orthodox pope, it wasn't the czar, it wasn't the capitalists who did it. It is what it is, it was what it was.

Welcome to the real world.

Posted by: ben | Dec 26, 2018 11:32:24 PM | 106

As I understand it "the West" resents that Russian oligarchs nowadays are controlled by Russian security services.

And Putin is the architect of the renewed security centralization .

I would say that after the Western model failed spectacularly in Russia in the Jelzin years, the Russian leadership (and that is not just Putin) is looking for something that works for Russia. And they have not found it yet.

Critique from German progressive circles is that Putin (the Russian leadership) suppresses the entrepreneurial spirit of small and medium enterprises intentionally as economic independence would bring political independence. Behind this is a model of decentralisation that might be intended to weaken and destabilize.

Russia more or less has weathered the economic wars.

My guess is that with Trump's withdrawal from Syria and Afghanistan the "new cold war" is over. This will not just have an effect in the Middle East but in Europe, too.


[Dec 29, 2018] -Election Meddling- Enters Bizarro World As MSM Ignores Democrat-Linked -Russian Bot- Scheme -

Highly recommended!
Is this shadow of Integrity Initiative in the USA ? This false flag open the possibility that other similar events like DNC (with very questionable investigation by Crowdstrike, which was a perfect venue to implement a false flag; cybersecurity area is the perfect environment for planting false flags), MH17 (might be an incident but later it definitely was played as a false flag), Skripals (Was Skripals poisoning a false flag decided to hide the fact that Sergey Skripal was involved in writing Steele dossier?) and Litvinenko (probably connected with lack of safety measures in the process of smuggling of Plutonium by Litvinenko himself, but later played a a false flag). All of those now should be re-assessed from the their potential of being yet another flag flag operation against Russia. While Browder was a MI6 operation from the very beginning (and that explains why he abdicated the US citizenship more convincingly that the desire to avoid taxes) .
Notable quotes:
"... Democratic operative Jonathon Morgan - bankrolled by LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman, pulled a Russian bot "false flag" operation against GOP candidate Roy Moore in the Alabama special election last year - creating thousands of fake social media accounts designed to influence voters . Hoffman has since apologized, while Morgan was suspended by Facebook for "coordinated inauthentic" behavior. ..."
"... Really the bigger story is here is that these guys convincingly pretended to be Russian Bots in order to influence an election (not with the message being put forth by the bots, but by their sheer existence as apparent supporters of the Moore campaign). ..."
"... By all appearances, they were Russian bots trying to influence the election. Now we know it was DNC operatives. Yet we are supposed to believe without any proof that the "Russian bots" that supposedly influenced the 2016 Presidential election were, actually, Russian bots, and worthy of a two year long probe about "Russian collusion" and "Russian meddling." ..."
"... The whole thing is probably a farce, not only in the sense that there is no evidence that Russia had any influence at all on a single voter, but also in the sense that there is no evidence that Russia even tried (just claims and allegations by people who have a vested interest in convincing us its true). ..."
Dec 29, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

For over two years now, the concepts of "Russian collusion" and "Russian election meddling" have been shoved down our throats by the mainstream media (MSM) under the guise of legitimate concern that the Kremlin may have installed a puppet president in Donald Trump.

Having no evidence of collusion aside from a largely unverified opposition-research dossier fabricated by a former British spy, the focus shifted from "collusion" to "meddling" and "influence." In other words, maybe Trump didn't actually collude with Putin, but the Kremlin used Russian tricks to influence the election in Trump's favor. To some, this looked like nothing more than an establishment scheme to cast a permanent spectre of doubt over the legitimacy of President Donald J. Trump.

Election meddling "Russian bots" and "troll farms" became the central focus - as claims were levied of social media operations conducted by Kremlin-linked organizations which sought to influence and divide certain segments of America.

And while scant evidence of a Russian influence operation exists outside of a handful of indictments connected to a St. Petersburg "Troll farm" (which a liberal journalist cast serious doubt ov er), the MSM - with all of their proselytizing over the "threat to democracy" that election meddling poses, has largely decided to ignore actual evidence of "Russian bots" created by Democrat IT experts, used against a GOP candidate in the Alabama special election, and amplified through the Russian bot-detecting "Hamilton 68" dashboard developed by the same IT experts.

Jonathon Morgan ✔ @jonathonmorgan

Russian trolls tracked by # Hamilton68 are taking an interest in the AL Senate race. What a surprise.

298 4:02 PM - Nov 10, 2017

Democratic operative Jonathon Morgan - bankrolled by LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman, pulled a Russian bot "false flag" operation against GOP candidate Roy Moore in the Alabama special election last year - creating thousands of fake social media accounts designed to influence voters . Hoffman has since apologized, while Morgan was suspended by Facebook for "coordinated inauthentic" behavior.

As Russian state-owned RT puts it - and who could blame them for being a bit pissed over the whole thing, "it turns out there really was meddling in American democracy by "Russian bots." Except they weren't run from Moscow or St. Petersburg, but from the offices of Democrat operatives chiefly responsible for creating and amplifying the "Russiagate" hysteria over the past two years in a textbook case of psychological projection. "

A week before Christmas, the Senate Intelligence Committee released a report accusing Russia of depressing Democrat voter turnout by targeting African-Americans on social media. Its authors, New Knowledge, quickly became a household name.

Described by the New York Times as a group of "tech specialists who lean Democratic," New Knowledge has ties to both the US military and intelligence agencies. Its CEO and co-founder Jonathon Morgan previously worked for DARPA, the US military's advanced research agenc y. His partner, Ryan Fox, is a 15-year veteran of the National Security Agency who also worked as a computer analyst for the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC). Their unique skill sets have managed to attract the eye of investors, who pumped $11 million into the company in 2018 alone.

...

On December 19, a New York Times story revealed that Morgan and his crew had created a fake army of Russian bots, as well as fake Facebook groups, in order to discredit Republican candidate Roy Moore in Alabama's 2017 special election for the US Senate.

Working on behalf of the Democrats, Morgan and his crew created an estimated 1,000 fake Twitter accounts with Russian names, and had them follow Moore. They also operated several Facebook pages where they posed as Alabama conservatives who wanted like-minded voters to support a write-in candidate instead.

In an internal memo, New Knowledge boasted that it had "orchestrated an elaborate 'false flag' operation that planted the idea that the Moore campaign was amplified on social media by a Russian botnet."

It worked. The botnet claim made a splash on social media and was further amplified by Mother Jones, which based its story on expert opinion from Morgan's other dubious creation, Hamilton 68. - RT

Moore ended up losing the Alabama special election by a slim margin of just

In other words: In November 2017 – when Moore and his Democratic opponent were in a bitter fight to win over voters – Morgan openly promoted the theory that Russian bots were supporting Moore's campaign . A year later – after being caught red-handed orchestrating a self-described "false flag" operation – Morgan now says that his team never thought that the bots were Russian and have no idea what their purpose was . Did he think no one would notice? - RT

Dan Cohen ✔ @dancohen3000 Replying to @dancohen3000

Disinformation warrior @ jonathonmorgan attempts to control damage by lying. He now claims the "false flag operation" never took place and the botnet he promoted as Russian-linked (based on phony Hamilton68 Russian troll tracker he developed) wasn't Russian https://www. newknowledge.com/blog/about-ala bama

89 2:23 AM - Dec 29, 2018

Even more strange is that Scott Shane - the journalist who wrote the New York Times piece exposing the Alabama "Russian bot" scheme, knew about it for months after speaking at an event where the organizers bragged about the false flag on Moore .

Shane was one of the speakers at a meeting in September, organized by American Engagement Technologies, a group run by Mikey Dickerson, President Barack Obama's former tech czar. Dickerson explained how AET spent $100,000 on New Knowledge's campaign to suppress Republican votes, " enrage" Democrats to boost turnout, and execute a "false flag" to hrt Moore. He dubbed it "Project Birmingham." - RT

Dan Cohen ✔ @dancohen3000 · Dec 28, 2018 Replying to @dancohen3000

This gets even weirder: NYT reporter @ ScottShaneNYT , who broke the Alabama disinfo op story, learned of it in early September when he spoke at an off-the-record event organized by one of the firms that perpetrated the deception https://www. buzzfeednews.com/article/craigs ilverman/alabama-dirty-tricksters-invited-a-new-york-times-reporter

NY Times Reporter Briefed Alabama Special Election Dirty Tricksters

New York Times reporter Scott Shane spoke at an event organized by the group who ran a disinformation op aimed at helping defeat Roy Moore in Alabama.

A lightly-redacted copy of the internal @ NewKnowledgeAI report has been leaked and claims at least partial credit for Doug Jones' victory. Details follow https:// medium.com/@jeffgiesea/br eaking-heres-the-after-action-report-from-the-alabama-senate-disinformation

10 12:09 PM - Dec 28, 2018 Twitter Ads info and privacy

Shane told BuzzFeed that he was "shocked" by the revelations, though hid behind a nondisclosure agreement at the request of American Engagement Technologies (AET). He instead chose to spin the New Knowledge "false flag" operation on Moore as "limited Russian tactics" which were part of an "experiment" that had a budget of "only" $100,000 - and which had no effect on the election.

New Knowledge suggested that the false flag operation was simply a "research project," which Morgan suggested was designed "to better understand and report on the tactics and effects of social media disinformation."

View image on Twitter
Jonathon Morgan ✔ @jonathonmorgan

My statement on this evening's NYT article.

94 9:17 PM - Dec 19, 2018
465 people are talking about this Twitter Ads info and privacy

While the New York Times seemed satisfied with his explanation, others pointed out that Morgan had used the Hamilton 68 dashboard to give his "false flag" more credibility – misleading the public about a "Russian" influence campaign that he knew was fake.

New Knowledge's protestations apparently didn't convince Facebook, which announced last week that five accounts linked to New Knowledge – including Morgan's – had been suspended for engaging in "coordinated inauthentic behavior." - RT

They knew exactly what they were doing

While Morgan and New Knowledge sought to frame the "Project Birmingham" as a simple research project, a leaked copy of the operation's after-action report reveals that they knew exactly what they were doing .

"We targeted 650,000 like AL voters, with a combination of persona accounts, astroturfing, automated social media amplification and targeted advertising," reads the report published by entrepreneur and executive coach Jeff Giesea.

Jeff Giesea ✔ @jeffgiesea

BREAKING: Here's the after-action report from the AL Senate disinfo campaign.

**an exclusive release by @ JeffGiesea https:// medium.com/@jeffgiesea/br eaking-heres-the-after-action-report-from-the-alabama-senate-disinformation-campaign-e3edd854f17d

1,658 8:49 PM - Dec 27, 2018 Twitter Ads info and privacy BREAKING: Here's The After-Action Report From the Alabama Senate Disinformation Campaign

EXCLUSIVE RELEASE FROM JEFF GIESEA

medium.com
1,381 people are talking about this Twitter Ads info and privacy

The rhetorical question remains, why did the MSM drop this election meddling story like a hot rock after the initial headlines faded away?

criminal election meddling, but then who the **** is going to click on some morons tactic and switch votes?

anyone basing any funding, whether it is number of facebook hits or attempted mind games by egotistical cuck soyboys needs a serious psychological examination. fake news is fake BECAUSE IT ISNT REAL AND DOES NOT MATTER TO ANYONE but those living in the excited misery of their tiny bubble world safe spaces. SOCIAL MEDIA IS A CON AND IS NOT IMPORTANT OR RELEVANT TO ANYONE.

far more serious is destroying ballots, writing in ballots without consent, bussing voters around to vote multiple times in different districts, registering dead voters and imperosnating the corpses, withholding votes until deadlines pass - making them invalid.

Herdee , 10 minutes ago

NATO on behalf of the Washington politicians uses the same bullsh*t propaganda for continual war.

Mugabe , 20 minutes ago

Yup "PROJECTION"...

Yippie21 , 21 minutes ago

None of this even touches on the 501c3 or whatever that was set up , concerned Alabama voters or somesuch, and was funneled a **** load of money to be found to be in violation of the law AFTER the election and then it all just disappeared. Nothing to see here folks, Democrat won, let's move on. There was a LOT of " tests " for the smart-set in that election and it all worked. We saw a bunch of it used in 2018, especially in Texas with Beto and down-ballot races. Democrats cleaned up like crazy in Texas, especially in Houston.

2020 is going to be a hot mess. And the press is in on it, and even if illegal or unseemly things are done, as long as Democrats win, all good... let's move on. Crazy.

LetThemEatRand , 21 minutes ago

The fact that MSM is not covering this story -- which is so big it truly raises major questions about the entire Russiagate conspiracy including why Mueller was appointed in the first place -- is proof that they have no interest in journalism or the truth and that they are 100% agenda driven liars. Not that we needed more proof, but there it is anyway.

Oldguy05 , 19 minutes ago

Dimz corruption is a nogo. Now if it were conservatives.......

CosineCosineCosine , 23 minutes ago

I'm not a huge fan, but Jimmy Dore has a cathartic and entertaining 30 minutes on this farce. Well worth the watch:

h https://youtu.be/hqLIJznUNVw

LetThemEatRand , 27 minutes ago

Really the bigger story is here is that these guys convincingly pretended to be Russian Bots in order to influence an election (not with the message being put forth by the bots, but by their sheer existence as apparent supporters of the Moore campaign).

By all appearances, they were Russian bots trying to influence the election. Now we know it was DNC operatives. Yet we are supposed to believe without any proof that the "Russian bots" that supposedly influenced the 2016 Presidential election were, actually, Russian bots, and worthy of a two year long probe about "Russian collusion" and "Russian meddling."

The whole thing is probably a farce, not only in the sense that there is no evidence that Russia had any influence at all on a single voter, but also in the sense that there is no evidence that Russia even tried (just claims and allegations by people who have a vested interest in convincing us its true).

dead hobo , 30 minutes ago

I've been watching Scandal on Netflix. Still only in season 2. Amazing how nothing changes.They nailed it and memorialized it. The MSM are useful idiots who are happy to make money publicizing what will sell the best.

chunga , 30 minutes ago

The media is biased and sucks, yup.

The reason the reds lost the house is because they went along with this nonsense and did nothing about it, like frightened baby chipmunks.

JRobby , 33 minutes ago

Only when "the opposition" does it is it illegal. Total totalitarian state wannabe stuff.

divingengineer , 22 minutes ago

Amazing how people can contort reality to justify their own righteous cause, but decry their opposition for the EXACT same thing. See trump visit to troops signing hats as most recent proof. If DJT takes a piss and sprinkles the seat, it's a crime.

DarkPurpleHaze , 33 minutes ago

They're afraid to expose themselves...unlike Kevin Spacey. Trump or Whitaker will expose this with one signature. It's coming.

divingengineer , 20 minutes ago

Spacey has totally lost it. See his latest video, it will be a powerful piece of evidence for an insanity plea.

CosineCosineCosine , 10 minutes ago

Disagree strongly. I think it was excellent - perhaps you misunderstood the point? 6 minutes Diana Davidson look at it clarifies

https://youtu.be/_il_NBq0Ec8

[Dec 29, 2018] Why Russia Isn't Worried About Lower Oil Prices

The big unknown is whether the USA entering the recession or not?
Dec 29, 2018 | oilprice.com

Russia is not as desperate for higher oil prices as is Saudi Arabia. There are a few reasons for this. One of the key reasons is that the Russian currency is flexible, so it weakens when oil prices fall. That cushions the blow during a downturn, allowing Russian oil companies to pay expenses in weaker rubles while still taking in U.S. dollars for oil sales. Second, tax payments for Russian oil companies are structured in such a way that their tax burden is lighter with lower oil prices.

Saudi Arabia needs oil prices at roughly $84 per barrel for its budget to breakeven.

... ... ...

Igor Sechin, the head of Russia's state-owned Rosneft, said that oil prices "should have stabilized, because everyone was supposed to be scared" by the enormous OPEC+ production cuts. "But nobody was scared," he said, according to Bloomberg. He blamed the Federal Reserve's rate tightening for injecting volatility into the oil market, because traders have sold off speculative positions in the face of higher interest rates.

...

Novak offered the market some assurances that the OPEC+ coalition would step in to stabilize the market if the situation deteriorates, suggesting that OPEC+ has the ability to call an extraordinary meeting. He told reporters on Thursday that the market still faces a lot of unknowns. "All these uncertainties, which are now on the market: how China will behave, how India will behave... trade wars and unpredictability on the part of the U.S. administration... those are defining factors for price volatility," Novak said.

Nevertheless, Novak predicted the 1.2 mb/d cuts announced in Vienna would be sufficient.

Some analysts echo Novak's sentiment that, despite the current panic in the market, the cuts should be sufficient. "We are looking at oil prices heading towards $70 to $80 quite a recovery in 2019. That's really predicated on the thought that first of all, OPEC still is here. And I think that the market is underestimating that they are going to cut supply by 1.2 mb/d," Dominic Schnider of UBS Wealth Management told CNBC . "And demand looks healthy so we might find ourselves into 2019 in a situation where the market is actually tight."

[Dec 29, 2018] Why western neoliberal hape neolinel Putin: they want the return to the looting that took place under the Empire's anointed, Boris Yeltsin.

Dec 29, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
Montreal , Dec 27, 2018 2:01:23 PM | link

bevin , Dec 27, 2018 10:21:32 AM | link

" ....The oligarchs have been destroyed in the early 00s: Gusinsky (the media oligarch), Berezovsky (the political broker oligarch), Khodorkovsky (the oil oligarch). These people were real oligarchs, i.e. they were using their wealth to control political processes through black media propaganda, having their own MPs/Ministers/Governors, etc..." @85

I'm inclined to agree. And this is why there is so much anger against Putin, in particular, in the 'west': the Russian oligarchs wield enormous power through the media which is at the service of anyone with money. Bill Browder being a prime example.
The oligarchs were the tools that the City of London and Wall St employed to plunder Russia's socialised wealth and resources.
The hate campaign against Putin, who is in many ways a very conservative economist pursuing the sort of neo-liberal policies that capitalist financiers approve of, is inexplicable unless we understand that the end game is a return to the looting that took place under the Empire's anointed, Boris Yeltsin.

I don't understand the people here who write that VVPutin is in thrall to the Zionists, the Oligarchs, or that he's lining his own pocket etc etc. IMHO his strategy has always been clear and direct, since the beginning. He values first of all stability - time for Russia to rebuild herself. Secondly, he performs a clever balancing act between the competing centres of power in Russia.

His mistake, however, when he became president, was to believe quite sincerely that the West - and particularly Washington (the important one) - shared a desire for peaceful partnership with Russia. Doubts emerged in 2011 - he realised that he was being played - and the doubts became certainties in 2014, since when some fairly radical reorganisations has been taking place. Russia is - again, IMHO - now ready to take its real place in the international order.

I take great pleasure in reading and listening to his - and Sergei Lavrov's - words, at the same time regretting the low standard of our own representatives.

Many thanks to b and all of you who continue always to inform me and sometimes enchant me.

[Dec 29, 2018] Throughout its existence the Soviet Union was hobbled by the sanctions imposed on it by the capitalist world

Dec 29, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

bevin , Dec 27, 2018 5:01:47 PM | link

Throughout its existence the Soviet Union was hobbled by the sanctions imposed on it by the capitalist world. Despite being uniquely qualified, by virtue of its geography and culture, to survive without being part of the international economy, it had to pay much more, by being forced to rely on its own resources, than other countries for every advance that it made economically.
And then it was constantly under threat of coordinated military attack by the richest and most technically advanced powers, led by the anglo-US empire. Twice it was invaded by massive international coalitions, in 1918 and 1041. Twice its industrial base and its infrastructure were reduced to smoking ruins.Twice it had to rebuild, from the ground up without the assistance of foreign capital.
By contrast the imperial powers, bent on crushing it by economic or military means, throughout its existence came through the period virtually unscathed-its great rival the US actually thrived from threw two world wars.
It was this fate which China, under imperial pressure after the 1949 Revolution, was determined to escape. And so far, since it changed course and played the US and the Soviet Union off against each other, it has made great strides forward-advances complementing the enormous gains made after 1949, during which period all the basic indicators of well being, life expectancy included, rose and a firm base was established for future improvement. And this at a time when the US used every means in its power, including biological warfare, to weaken China and reduce its people to starvation.
For example China-well known for its polluted air-is well in advance of North America in its development of renewable energy sources and seems genuinely committed to replacing fossil fuels.
Nor is it using its growing strength to engage in military adventures and impose its rule on others.
It is important when considering China not to repeat the mistakes of some of the neo-Trotskyist factions whose theory that the Soviet Union was just another capitalist society (something that most Russians disagree with) was an important part of the Empire's ideological struggle against the Soviet Union in the world and socialism everywhere. China is not a communist country but it serves its people much better than, for example, India. And it certainly plays a vital role, together with Russia in resisting the Imperial ruling class's campaigns to reduce the globe to accepting the diktats of Washington, Wall St and Hollywood.

[Dec 29, 2018] So Russian twits were a false flag operation

LinkedIn co-founder 'sorry' for funding fake Russian tweets for Democrats (RT video). Admiited producing 200 fake Russian twits.
Notable quotes:
"... Reid Hoffman is a Billionaire, who is a member of the Bilderburg Group, & is on the Council of Foreign Relations. Obviously 'above the law'. His sorry apology will be good enough. ..."
"... Oh he is only sorry after he got caught. ..."
Dec 29, 2018 | www.youtube.com

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54IcPmfqHlo

sneekie pete , 1 day ago

Imagine that ?...we knew... They owe Putin and the Russian people a apology....hmmm...would rather send all demoncrats to Putin for their punishments...

NowisEvollovetion , 1 day ago

Everything is FAKE about the democrats. They are as dishonest as the day is long.

Annie , 1 day ago

SCUMBAG!!! 🤮🤢😬🐷👿

TheKeithvidz , 1 day ago

Huh. Blame everyone but America's leaders for the country's sorry state.

Main Character , 1 day ago

Are you kidding me?! Man and here I was starting to think democrats weren't as bad. As an American I feel bad for how bad many of my countrymen have tried to make Russia look bad...

tyronebiggums3 , 1 day ago

Democrats = Pure Evil

James Bruno , 1 day ago

why doesn't anyone boycott CNN?

2MauiAngels , 1 day ago

Reid Hoffman is a Billionaire, who is a member of the Bilderburg Group, & is on the Council of Foreign Relations. Obviously 'above the law'. His sorry apology will be good enough.

Nothing will happen to him, & RT is probably the only media outlet that will even tell Americans about this. THX RT. How about reposting 'Who owns the Media in less than 30 seconds'?

Are you updating the info because Rupert Murdoch sold his media corps to Bob Iger?? THAT was your BEST video Ever!! PLEASE REPOST IT!!

Jim NORRIS , 1 day ago

Oh he is only sorry after he got caught.

Star Dust , 1 day ago

how can saying sorry undo all the damages they have done ?

Olive Locutions , 1 day ago (edited)

Oy vey! They know it's not Russian bots now. I hope we are able to deflect this one onto the goy!

Robbi rob , 1 day ago

Honestly, who even believes in democracy anymore? It's just bullshit, and pandering.

Susan Gamble , 1 day ago

Everyone involved need to go to jail!!!!

TectonicTsunami , 1 day ago

LinkedIn needs to be linked-OUT.

James Rockford , 1 day ago

Let me guess, not one single MSM outlet, will discuss this?

Brian , 1 day ago

Seditious Conspiracy is the charge!

Barbara King , 1 day ago

Cheating is the only way Democrats won this election! Results should be vacated. New Election!

Burt Reynolds Corpse , 1 day ago

Correction, a joo is pretending to be sorry, only because he was caught misleading the nation ..

Reji Bae , 1 day ago

You can't trust anything coming out of the mouth of US politicians or organizations. The biggest troublemakers on this planet. Bunch of psychopaths.

An American , 1 day ago

Treason has death for a consequence. Fu... your apology.

Леди Неизвестность , 1 day ago

They create fakes themselves, investigate them themselves, and after finding the sources themselves they apologize. And we are "guilty" of everything ... You look and wonder!

J. Baker , 1 day ago

What do you expect from Motherless son's Fooling good human beings Burn is hell Bastards

Radhika Technical , 1 day ago

Russia is great nation...

Simi822 , 1 day ago

if that is fluent Russian then I am fluent in Chinese...

Alvaro Dussan , 1 day ago

This is collusion between Democrats and social media

Joanne Mercader , 1 day ago

Brought to you by the Democratic Party founder of the KKK and slavery.

High Tech Hillbilly , 1 day ago

Real News ... Thank you RT

Diji D , 1 day ago

Hillary Clinton recently tweeted "Actions have consequences.." I am excited to see the consequences for this failure. i know, there wont be any.

Jack Booted Hug , 1 day ago

I haven't been getting my russian bot payments. ruble up pute

clash man , 1 day ago

Marxist playbook 101, exactly what the democrats have been using on the American people. Accuse those of the very thing that they themselves are guilty of!👍

Willy Wonka , 1 day ago (edited)

That (((commie))) should be incarcerated...and he keeps peoples resumes safe and secure...how is he not charged with fraud....? (((Untrustworthy)))

Jens Bröcher , 1 day ago

He has to go to jail!

pasta noodle , 1 day ago

will cnn, MSNBC, and the whole trump hating media apologize and admit the real Russian collusion was with the democrats

dev0n james , 1 day ago

democrats always lie and always double down. never let them gaslight you.

Pete fromtheIsland , 1 day ago

Didn't Putin do it? Oh no!

Albert Einstein , 1 day ago

Haha this is the old way to accuse Russia BRITISH STYLE PROPAGANDA!!!! LOL

I love The USA , 1 day ago

Another FAKE democommunist trying to get attention

b b , 1 day ago

TREASON hang them all

saul romero , 1 day ago

the irony, when democrats blame republicans for working with russia

RIP Arthur Morgan , 1 day ago

Does Russia welcome American immigrants? Asking for a friend

Divergent Evolution , 1 day ago

So by attacking other nations for interfering in other nations elections, the USA is promising to stop doing it themselves?

eagle-6 , 1 day ago

the fake media has no shame at all

Ed Robbins , 1 day ago

There's no low too low for the Democratic Socialist Extortion Party. P O S libtards.

Francois Egregyi , 1 day ago

More (((Demo-commie))) anti-Russian propaganda!

Michel de Nostredame , 1 day ago

Should arrest the CEO and send to Russia litigation...

Derek Hajos , 1 day ago

Many criminals are sorry AFTER they get exposed.

Chris Edward , 1 day ago

When will CNN and MSNBC apologize?

Silver4Life 1230 , 1 day ago

Demorats are garbage

SOPHIA FILMS , 1 day ago

Is he one of ((them))?

Clint Chapman , 1 day ago (edited)

This comes as no surprise of course. But, when you apologise for meddling/interfering in a state and or a federal election, this is all one has to do, to not be charged for a possible crime, just apologise? Oh, and be a Democrat of course. Im an American. But why has no other country came out and stated, that the US meddled in their elections? At least have come out in the last 3 years and stated that? Most know, every country spies on and meddles in one anothers elections. It's not ok but, we know and it happens.

Flyingcrocodile46 , 1 day ago

Make this news viral

starlord , 1 day ago

Where is Mueller?

Bertin Bahaya , 1 day ago

WOW ! The Demon-rats are simply genius ! And The Republicans are simply stupid. Reps keep being Rhinos for Dems !

AJ Khan , 1 day ago

Hahaha, "SORRY"........

John Grytbakk , 1 day ago

The "liberal" Left can do whatever they want. ....no worries. All others do not get away with anything. If ever there was a double standard, there you have it.

avenging angel , 1 day ago

Dirty Democrats hardcore leftist are to blame for the division in America

avenging angel , 1 day ago

I'm not surprised by this story Democrats are the founders of slavery KKK and we're also against civil rights in the sixties

beo wulf , 13 hours ago

TREASON/SEDITION, TRIAL, CONVICTION, THE DITCH, '.22CAL CURE' ... 'NEXT!'

Edin , 1 day ago

Murad Gazdiev speaks with such conviction every time lol...power

Gary Thompson , 1 day ago

Dems are a very sorry excuse for people. I believe they are so brain damaged and brainwashed, they will never recover.

Paul Rexs , 1 day ago

Will he be arrested for tampering with elections?

Roger Jennings , 1 day ago

"Fake Russian Tweets" is gonna be the name of my next band.

Sea Bass , 1 day ago

"Funding for tweets" Wow I didn't know it costs money to write something on Twitter

squidly1117 , 1 day ago

This is election fraud and the FEC needs to take action!

tracycolorado , 1 day ago

Only sorry that He got caught

paula conley , 1 day ago

You left out that New Knowledge gave a report product to the dem's senate committee to prove there was Russia interference during election.

Shane Brbich , 1 day ago

LinkedIn The hardest social media program to get out of

Darko Fius , 1 day ago

Linkedin is also biassed, there is no middle ground...one can establish highly sophisticated network linking each individual and finding the most influentials...data is worth billions upon billions...and people, mainly highly educated and skilled do have Linkedin account...so there is no "honest business", the co-founder of LinkedIn, Reid Hoffman, is among ones that are not "honest"...big money, bigger lies...once one tells a lie, he, or she is alway liar...

2532robh1 , 1 day ago

Another tech CEO A-hole.

Haasenpad , 18 hours ago

well Reid Hoffman is a BILDERBERGER!!!

Nancy G , 1 day ago

Dump Linkin !!! Never use it.

Dowlphwin , 1 day ago

Well, false flagging IS a specialty of the Clinton Intel Agency. (Among others, but lately it's a trend and people need to wake up to that.)

Chickennugget , 1 day ago

Wow haven't even heard this on our MSM

Daniel Bell , 1 day ago

Bet this won't be on CNN.

Just happened to walk by , 1 day ago

As usual, just another something -man/Klein/Smith affiliated to AIPAC.

Jeremy Chase , 1 day ago

Lots of complete morons in the comments who believe in the fake two party paradigm. Both parties believe you should suffer at the dictates of multinational corporations and the banking industry.

carl westernut , 1 day ago

Arrest and gulag the bastards

SIGNALacquired , 19 hours ago

False-flag attack

Wilcox Wilcox , 1 day ago

Omg.... He sold his soul to the devil.

Pat Hacker , 1 day ago

Are we supposed to believe that?

Peter Panino , 1 day ago

I am getting a lot of SPAM from somebody who disguises himself as "RUSSIAN BOT" including Cyrillic characters in the message and also in the metadata (!). Does anybody know who this could be?

eloundainfo , 1 day ago (edited)

What a disgrace, the left has totally lost the plot! A world leader (Putin) should receive a groveling apology!

S B , 1 day ago

Good job.

MrMnmn911 , 1 day ago

"Sorry"? That's it?? MUELLER MUST INVESTIGATE!

Infidel Atheist , 1 day ago

Give him the Ceausescu quick trial and fill him full of lead.

VERBODE KENNIS , 1 day ago

YEP.....DONT FORGET THE GOLDEN SHOWERS.........EH??

Jacob Diaz , 1 day ago

Lmaoo you idiots in the comments didnt even listen to the video.

EveryCrazyDay , 1 day ago

Defending Roy Moore....lol also anyone see a conflict of interest when the Russian government funds this news program. And basically is putting a story saying that Russian bots are fake and paid by dems.

TotoNut , 19 hours ago

Cyber security companies create fake news, can be trusted with making accusations against Russia, China? Lol.

1990cwa81625 , 1 day ago

Seriously considering shutting down my Linked In account.

Charles McCarron , 1 day ago (edited)

When are arrests going to me made? We ALL know that the DNC is a criminal organisation and that the USA is on borrowed time. The farce of American Democracy is getting more obvious by the day. There just aren't anywhere near enough people, among the overall pool of American voters, that even know how their government is theoretically supposed to work to have a functional self-governing nation state. Morons don't pick good government!

Millenial Sunshine , 1 day ago

Roy Moore should have won...they use the same tactics every time. Sex bots and Russian bots...

Jessica Lubien , 1 day ago

I would watch this if it wasn't for the coked up guy!!! PLEASE FIRE HIM!!

Floyd Zepplin , 1 day ago

Where is Mueller?

Roland James , 1 day ago

If you want to know what your enemies are like, just listen to what they are accusing you of.

Tron Carter , 20 hours ago

Jimmy Dore goes in depth on this very story. Well worth a look.

Juniper lane , 1 day ago

This is nothing new. Democrats are using Russian propaganda and Republicans like to use China propaganda. Both parties are rothschild puppets and love to use propaganda for political agendas.

MaryMag & Martha , 1 day ago

I can not remember the guy's name, but the guest that was speaking on the MSNBC panel at the 2:11 mark was pro -Trump earlier this year. I remember him saying that he was former Secret Service or something to that effect on Youtube. Now, we see him on a panel alledging Russian speculation moving it's way to the White House. I guess he couldn't become famous as pro-Trump, so he's went to the dark side

Conrad Angel , 1 day ago

...or sorry he got caught! Just saying!

Terry Bonnell , 1 day ago

Alexandra Orcasio Cortez 2020 this woman has a higher IQ than most of the Democratic Party's combined

Angry Shamrock , 1 day ago

They're not sorry. They will do it again.

Shawn Hennessey , 19 hours ago

sorry for creating false evidence in a federal investigation is a huge crime and makes him a conspirator in coup to the takedown of the presidency of the US.

Terrell Riley , 1 day ago

He isn't a Democrat. But I know that Americans were using fake bots before, during, and after 2016. All Dems aren't Dems. All GOP aren't GOP. There are a lot of coming out the closet for politicians going on in this day and age. Why now are we hearing this? 2020. You are not dealing with dummy's just deviants.

Donald Ganley , 19 hours ago (edited)

What Hoffman did is totally understandable. I myself frequently donate $100,000 amounts to causes about which I know nothing. Especially when I know that a minuscule amount like that won't really have any real impact on a Congressional election. Kidding aside, may we look forward to indictments of Hoffman, New Knowledge, Morgan, and Fox in this matter -- a case of real tampering and collusion? Glad I dumped Facebook AND LinkedIn on the same day last year.

Yellow Bhee , 1 day ago

Another American doing , full of amusement, Hollywood ! Not to worry they also robbing their owned citizens.

nucdn , 1 day ago

A new low for Demorats? No such thing Murad - they live in the low.

Antony bro , 1 day ago

Criminal America ... nothing but Scoundrels ...

Dimash_Lilliana Corredor , 1 hour ago

Thanks RT. We can count on you and trust your news! 👍👏❤

Scott Ewing , 1 day ago

Won't be able to look at linkedin in the same light again.

Yammel Heylel , 1 day ago

Like anyone really thought it was true, well actually as if anyone who doesn't get the bulk of their news from CNN, MSNBC, and the like, really thought it was true. Funny part is those idiots (CNN ect. veiwers) were screaming about how Russia was tearing apart American society, and as though out the history of mankind, you only have yourselves to blame.

Line upon Line Precept upon Precept , 1 day ago

"Sorry I got caught" hahaha. What a looser.

x13x Monkeys , 21 hours ago

This is not new- how many other projects like this are going on.

LJ B , 13 hours ago

Another day, another false flag in the USSA

kii Kale , 21 hours ago

The only truly verifiable fake news is from centrist. But I am not shedding tear for judge MooKKKre.

Andrew S , 7 hours ago (edited)

Our situation is TRULY DIRE... when it is indeed necessary to switch to RT for an honest appraisal of what is happening in American politics!

Barry Soetorro , 1 day ago

Dem should hand the office to the republicans

Asma , 1 day ago

😱😱😱and still they blame RUS for meddling the US elections

Cannibal Shark , 22 hours ago

Well one thing is for sure they know how to drag out a story, even the UK give up with the skripal crap after a year.

Douglas Baer , 1 day ago

Roy must sue the dem party.

Daniel Bonner , 1 day ago

Proof Russia is on the side of right 👊🏿👊🏿👊🏿

True Tech , 1 day ago

No Moore being within 1000 ft of people under the age of 18 years old.

Backpack PePelon , 23 hours ago

Their effort backfired in more the one way. Now real people took pride in becoming a russian bot aka supporting russian.

Sampson X , 10 hours ago

"By way of deception, thou shalt do war." - ZioCons

Brennen Nelson , 1 day ago

Time to boycott Linkdin.......

Herr Wahnsinn , 1 day ago

When the Van Allen radiation belt starts to end, let the current carry me

Jim C , 1 day ago

Nothing new here.

avenging angel , 1 day ago

Lockup CNN fake news

Stable Genius , 1 day ago

TRUMP was right....lol🤣

Caesar , 1 day ago

Good job on coming forward

Uber Steve , 1 day ago

Corruption- Q is coming for you

Jeffness Stuff , 1 day ago

Linkedin BAN

Daniel Bonner , 1 day ago

Can't be wrong and strong 🔥🔥🔥

John Hadleigh , 1 day ago

We all fail, that makes Us human.

Randy Hartono , 1 day ago

New Knowledge again???

Gina Kay , 1 day ago

Total vindication.

Bike Stream , 1 day ago

Bye LinkedIn!

Leonard Carr , 1 day ago

Linkedin ✡️🙀👍

7seven7 , 1 day ago

Dang it where's Bob Mueller? Wonder why the special council couldn't find this out.

Visteo Bman , 1 day ago

FAKE NEWS!!!

Daniel Paul , 1 day ago

This is fake news

Hendrik Van der Merwe , 9 hours ago

No surprise, this is how Liberals "roll"!

Los Time , 1 day ago

Good reporting.

Viator Nadeak , 1 day ago

Idiot idiot

Willemijn Heukels , 1 day ago

RT is funded by the Russian government btw so of course they're saying this I hope you all stop letting hate anger anger control your life when it should be dragging your nuts across broken glass only to fart in a walkie talkie to have a spiritual enlightenment experience and see all that is true thank you

Asaresa M , 1 day ago

This report is not the whole truth of what happened. You should look up the facts of this case before you get all partisan happy. Or you can just be a traitor and take Russia's (RT) word on election tampering.

Hiram Rosa Jr , 1 day ago

This comming from a russian news channel lololol

shinobi 30 , 1 day ago

Putin is a little midget pub not a bear,

Tutty Masala , 1 day ago

RT is a Russia state sponsored channel. This is pure propaganda.

Everett Mccurdy , 1 day ago

This is fake of course you fools!

Joe Black , 1 day ago

It's just like that Ukrainian journalist who faked his assassination so the world would blame Russia.

2wheelvloggers , 1 day ago

Americans are a sick bunch, so sad...

Jefe Hoptosh , 1 day ago

Even Gazdiev is fake. RT PLEASE STOP THE INFOTAINMENT. Gazdiev wants to be in theatre. Don't hold him back. Get a journalist who can deliver the news without all the fake pauses and arm waving.

Lee Haiko , 15 hours ago

Ok I would ask for a Muller investigation here, but it would be a waste of money, just like another investigation...

JJ Says , 1 day ago

He's sorry??? Sorry doesn't get it. He financed the ruin of a man's career! Fry him for election fraud, lying leftist POS.

EBobby Sing , 1 day ago

Even Mueller Probe is based on FAKE NEWS PROPAGANDA.

Four Toes , 1 day ago

Disgusting! I will never use LinkedIn

Mr Timmy , 1 day ago

If you want to destroy the worlds SuperPower and know you can't do it military, then infiltration into the minds of its people is a perfect way to destroy them when clearly America has a dumbed down population.

Dra O , 1 day ago (edited)

"I'm sorry I attempted to rig the US elections (but I sure wish hilary would've won!)." What an idiot, along with Suckerberg. Shameful.

gord oland , 1 day ago

Disgusting but no surprising.

dmob d , 10 hours ago

No one believes your BS RT not outside Rusky land anyway you are the typical example of propaganda news.

Frederick Rhodes , 1 day ago

Kushner is responsible for setting up fake proTrump republican twitter accounts to help Trump get elected. Why would democrats want to help Trump? That's another republican lie to fool the sheeple.

[Dec 29, 2018] Reporting on the Integrity Initiative is spotty yet but I did come across the link below of an article by Max Blumenthal

Dec 29, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

psychohistorian , Dec 26, 2018 9:32:36 PM | link

Reporting on the Integrity Initiative is spotty yet but I did come across the link below of an article by Max Blumenthal....and promises of more.

Inside the Temple of Covert Propaganda: The Integrity Initiative and the UK's Scandalous Information War

[Dec 29, 2018] Why Mattis' Exit Is A Defining Moment In US Foreign Policy

Dec 29, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

William Bowles , Dec 27, 2018 4:52:43 AM | link

Why Mattis' Exit Is A Defining Moment In US Foreign Policy

by M. K. BHADRAKUMAR

An important analysis!

https://orientalreview.org/2018/12/27/why-mattis-exit-is-a-defining-moment-in-us-foreign-policy/

[Dec 28, 2018] Angela Merkel- Nation States Must -Give Up Sovereignty- To New World Order -

Dec 28, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Submitted by Tapainfo.com

" Nation states must today be prepared to give up their sovereignty ", according to German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who told an audience in Berlin that sovereign nation states must not listen to the will of their citizens when it comes to questions of immigration, borders, or even sovereignty.

No this wasn't something Adolf Hitler said many decades ago, this is what German Chancellor Angela Merkel told attendants at an event by the Konrad Adenauer Foundation in Berlin. Merkel has announced she won't seek re-election in 2021 and it is clear she is attempting to push the globalist agenda to its disturbing conclusion before she stands down.

" In an orderly fashion of course, " Merkel joked, attempting to lighten the mood. But Merkel has always had a tin ear for comedy and she soon launched into a dark speech condemning those in her own party who think Germany should have listened to the will of its citizens and refused to sign the controversial UN migration pact:

" There were [politicians] who believed that they could decide when these agreements are no longer valid because they are representing The People ".

" [But] the people are individuals who are living in a country, they are not a group who define themselves as the [German] people ," she stressed.

Merkel has previously accused critics of the UN Global Compact for Safe and Orderly Migration of not being patriotic, saying " That is not patriotism, because patriotism is when you include others in German interests and accept win-win situations ".

Her words echo recent comments by the deeply unpopular French President Emmanuel Macron who stated in a Remembrance Day speech that " patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism [because] nationalism is treason ."

The French president's words were deeply unpopular with the French population and his approval rating nosedived even further after the comments.

Macron, whose lack of leadership is proving unable to deal with growing protests in France, told the Bundestag that France and Germany should be at the center of the emerging New World Order.

" The Franco-German couple [has]the obligation not to let the world slip into chaos and to guide it on the road to peace" .

" Europe must be stronger and win more sovereignty ," he went on to demand, just like Merkel, that EU member states surrender national sovereignty to Brussels over " foreign affairs, migration, and development " as well as giving " an increasing part of our budgets and even fiscal resources".

[Dec 28, 2018] Western propaganda turn: from sucking to alcoholic Yeltsin to the rabit hate of sober Putin in just 20 years

Looks like Western attempts to weaken Russia will never stop.
Dec 28, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

localsavage, 18 minutes ago

Notice that there is no time given. The story would then fall apart in minutes.

Pussy Biscuit , 20 minutes ago

This Russia **** is a never ending nightmare.

I remember when the libtards were constantly sucking Russia's **** in the early 1990s.

[Dec 28, 2018] Send Mad Dog James Mattis to the Corporate Kennel

Notable quotes:
"... Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. He was an Army Infantry/Intelligence officer before working as a CIA analyst for the next 27 years. Ray admits to a modicum of bias against Marine officers, but not those with whom he worked back in the day. He is co-creator of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, which includes Marines who remember what Semper Fi means. ..."
"... A case in point is when you hear members of congress criticize Trump decision to withdraw the US army personals from Syria and Afganistan. These members forget that the US army in Syria is in violation of international laws and US laws as well. ..."
Dec 28, 2018 | www.mintpressnews.com

utgoing Defense Secretary Gen. James "Mad Dog" Mattis was famous for quipping , "It's fun to shoot some people." It remains a supreme irony that Mattis was widely considered the only "adult in the room" in the Trump administration. Compared to whom? John Bolton, the rabid neocon serving as national security adviser? That would be the epitome of "condemning with faint praise."

With his ramrod-straight image, not to mention his warrior/scholar reputation extolled in the media, Mattis was able to disguise the reality that he was, as Col. Andrew Bacevich put it on Democracy Now! this morning, "totally unimaginative." Meaning that Mattis was simply incapable of acknowledging the self-destructive, mindless nature of U.S. "endless war" in the Middle East, which candidate-Trump had correctly called "stupid." In his resignation letter, Mattis also peddled the usual cant about the indispensable nation's aggression being good for the world.

Mattis was an obstacle to Trump's desire to pull troops out of Syria and Afghanistan (and remains in position to spike Trump's orders). Granted, the abrupt way Trump announced his apparently one-man decision was equally stupid. But the withdrawal of ground troops is supremely sane, and Mattis was and is a large problem. And, for good or ill, Trump -- not Mattis -- was elected president.

Marine Wisdom

Historically, Marines are the last place to turn for sound advice. Marine Gen. Smedley Butler (1881-1940), twice winner of the Medal of Honor, was brutally candid about this after he paused long enough to realize, and write, "War is a Racket":

I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all members of the military profession I never had an original thought until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of the higher- ups. "

Shortly after another Marine general, former CENTCOM commander Anthony Zinni, retired, he stood by silently as he personally watched then-Vice President Dick Cheney give his most important speech ever (on August 26, 2002). Cheney blatantly lied about Iraq's (non-existent) WMD, in order to grease the skids for the war of aggression against Iraq. Zinni had kept his clearances and was "back on contract." He was well read-in on Iraq, and knew immediately that Cheney was lying.

A few years later, Zinni admitted that he decided that his lips would be sealed. Far be it for a Marine to play skunk at the picnic. And, after all, he was being honored that day at the same Veterans of Foreign Wars convention where Cheney spoke. As seems clear now, Zinni was also lusting after the lucrative spoils of war given to erstwhile generals who offer themselves for membership on the corporate Boards of the arms makers/merchants that profiteer on war.

(For an earlier critique of senior Marines, see: "Attacking Syria: Thumbing Noses at Constitution and Law." )

Marine officer, now Sen. Pat Roberts, R, Kansas, merits "dishonorable mention" in this connection. He never rose to general but did become Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee at an auspicious time for Cheney and Bush. Roberts kowtowed, like a "good Marine," to their crass deceit, when a dollop of honesty on his part could have prevented the 2003 attack on Iraq and the killing, maiming, destruction, and chaos that continues to this day. Roberts knew all about the fraudulent intelligence and covered it up -- together with other lies -- for as long as he remained Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman

Scott Ritter on Pat Roberts

Roberts's unconscionable dereliction of duty enraged one honest Marine, Maj. Scott Ritter, who believes "Semper Fi" includes an obligation to tell the truth on matters of war and peace. Ritter, former UN chief weapons inspector for Iraq, who in April 2005 wrote, "Semper Fraud, Senator Roberts," based partly on his own experience with that complicit Marine.

Needless to say, higher ranking, more malleable Marines aped Zinni in impersonating Uncle Remus's Tar Baby -- not saying nuttin'.

It is conceivable that yet another sharply-saluting Marine, departing Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joseph Dunford, may be tapped by Trump to take Mattis's job. If that happens, it will add to President Trump's bizarre penchant for picking advisers hell-bent on frustrating the objectives he espoused when he was running for office, some of which -- it is becoming quite clear -- he genuinely wants to achieve.

Trump ought to unleash Mattis now, and make sure Mattis keeps his distance from the Pentagon and the Military-Industrial Complex before he is asked to lead an insurrection against a highly vulnerable president -- as Gen. Smedley Butler was asked to do back in the day. Butler said no.

Top Photo | U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis, sits on stage during a change of command ceremony at the U.S. Southern Command headquarters on Nov. 26, 2018, in Doral, Fla. Brynn Anderson | AP

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. He was an Army Infantry/Intelligence officer before working as a CIA analyst for the next 27 years. Ray admits to a modicum of bias against Marine officers, but not those with whom he worked back in the day. He is co-creator of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, which includes Marines who remember what Semper Fi means.

Mahmoud HAm • 4 days ago ,

I am not so much surprised that military generals keep their mouths shot rather than tell the truth when the truth is needed to avoid wars. But worse is that the US congress which are supposed to overlook over the government misbehavior to make the government abide by the laws and protect the interests of the people against government wrongs.

A case in point is when you hear members of congress criticize Trump decision to withdraw the US army personals from Syria and Afganistan. These members forget that the US army in Syria is in violation of international laws and US laws as well.

The congress are supposed the authority to declare war but the US is engaged in multiple wars without US Congress authorization. Worse off these idiots want to force the Trump administration to keep its illegal wars going on? What is the role of the congress??? To correct and force the Administration to abide by the rule of laws of the force them to keep violating international laws and US laws as well????

Felix Hoenikker • 5 days ago ,

Trump's bizarre penchant for picking advisers hell-bent on frustrating the objectives he espoused when he was running for office

It's bizarre that he's hired so many Bill Kristol approved neocons when they abandoned him for Hillary in 2016. Or not so bizarre when one remembers what Russ Tice said about Cheney using the NSA to get blackmail dirt. Now they've lost control, so it will be interesting to see how they try to regain it.

[Dec 27, 2018] There is a lot of silly hostile talk against Russia and China, but have you noticed how the US military always makes sure that there are no direct confrontations with countries that can turn the US into radioactive dust?

Notable quotes:
"... Maybe I am overestimating the intelligence of MIC profiteers, but my impression is that those thieves know that their loot is only useful as long as they are alive. There is a lot of silly hostile talk against Russia and China, but have you noticed how the US military always makes sure that there are no direct confrontations with countries that can turn the US into radioactive dust? The profiteers want huge Pentagon budget to steal from, but not the war where they lose along with everyone else. ..."
Dec 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

AnonFromTN , says: December 26, 2018 at 10:37 pm GMT

@Harold Smith

Maybe I am overestimating the intelligence of MIC profiteers, but my impression is that those thieves know that their loot is only useful as long as they are alive. There is a lot of silly hostile talk against Russia and China, but have you noticed how the US military always makes sure that there are no direct confrontations with countries that can turn the US into radioactive dust? The profiteers want huge Pentagon budget to steal from, but not the war where they lose along with everyone else.

As to the wall, it is one of the silliest projects ever suggested. Maybe that's why it was so easy to sell it to the intellectually disadvantaged electorate. There are two things that can stop illegal immigration.

First, go for the employers, enact a law that fines them to the tune of $50,000 or more per every illegal they employ. Second, enact the law that anyone caught residing in the US illegally has no right to enter the US legally, to obtain asylum, permanent residency, or citizenship for life, and include a provision that marriage to a US citizen does not nullify this ban.

Then enforce both laws. After that illegals would run out of the country, and greedy employers won't hire any more. Naturally, the wall, even if built, won't change anything: as long as there are employers trying to save on salaries, immigration fees, and Social Security tax, and people willing to live and work illegally risking nothing, no wall would stem the flow.

Unfortunately, no side is even thinking about real measures, both are just posturing.

[Dec 27, 2018] In which prosperous US Zionist "career" field has John Yoo landed? He is now a distinguished professor at Berkley Law

Dec 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

geokat62 , says: December 26, 2018 at 10:44 pm GMT

@ChuckOrloski

Am wondering in which prosperous U.S. Zionist "career" field has John Yoo landed?

He is a distinguished professor at Berkley Law, UC. Here's his bio:

Professor Yoo is the Emanuel Heller Professor of Law and director of the Korea Law Center, the California Constitution Center, and the Law School's Program in Public Law and Policy. His most recent books are Striking Power: How Cyber, Robots, and Space Weapons Change the Rules for War (Encounter 2017) (with Jeremy Rabkin) and Point of Attack: Preventive War, International Law, and Global Welfare (Oxford University Press, 2014). Professor Yoo is a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution

From 2001 to 2003, he served as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legal Counsel at the U.S. Department of Justice, where he worked on issues involving foreign affairs, national security and the separation of powers.

https://www.law.berkeley.edu/our-faculty/faculty-profiles/john-yoo/

Notice how they gloss over his diabolical activities as deputy AG for the Bush II Adminstration "where he worked on issues involving foreign affairs, national security and the separation of powers."

And, oh, yeah, he cobbled together legal statements that gave the Bush Admin carte blanche to engage in "enhanced interrogation techniques," more commonly known as "torture." He was about to be in big dodo for his crimes. but just like the 5 dancing Israelis were rescued by Chertoff, a guy named David Margolis managed to get Yoo off the hook:

The Office of Professional Responsibilty (OPR) report concluded that Yoo had "committed 'intentional professional misconduct' when he advised the CIA it could proceed with waterboarding and other aggressive interrogation techniques against Al Qaeda suspects," although the recommendation that he be referred to his state bar association for possible disciplinary proceedings was overruled by David Margolis, another senior Justice department lawyer.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Yoo

Anyone familiar with David Margolis? Is he a MOT?

[Dec 27, 2018] The Rehabilitation of Robert Mueller by Kit Knightly

off-guardian.org

The "Resistance" -- the loose affiliation of liberals, progressives and neo-conservatives dedicated to opposing Donald Trump -- is NOT a grass-roots movement. They don't speak for the everyman or the poor or the oppressed. They are a distraction, nothing more. A parlor game. The face to Trump's heel .

The Resistance is the voice of the Deep State -- Pro-war, pro-globalisation, pro-Imperialism. It just hides its true face behind a mask of "progressive values". They prove this with their own actions -- opposing Trump's moves toward peace with North Korea and finding common ground with Russia.

In fact, though the resistance lives to criticize the Trump administration, they have been notably quiet -- even in favour of -- three key issues: The bombing of Syria, the tearing up of the INF treaty and the prosecution of Julian Assange.

They tell us, in clear voices, who they are and what they want and millions of people refuse to listen. So totally brain-washed by the "Orange Man Bad" hysteria, that they will side with anyone hitting the same talking points, spouting the right buzzwords, using the same hashtags.

This process has contrived to turn hard-line, inveterate warmongers into a pantheon of "liberal" heroes . John "bomb bomb Iran" McCain was mourned across the media as if he were a champion of civil rights, while Bill Kristol and his ilk are suddenly regular guests on notionally "liberal" channels .

and Robert Mueller receives a glowing write-up in the Guardian, being praised as "America's straightest arrow" .

The painful prose paints a blurry picture of Mueller. Slapping ounces of vaseline onto the lens of reality. It praises his hair and his clothes and his 35 dollar watch. It declares him a soldier "forged in combat", regaling us with tales of the bravery of Mueller's marine regiment -- "The Magnificent Bastards".

Vietnam is reduced to a movie set -- nothing but a backdrop for Mueller's courage under fire. He won a bronze star, you know. Apparently while "The Magnificent Bastards" strode around the Vietnamese jungle, burning villages down and watching the napalm fall from the sky, a couple of angry farmers shot back and Mueller was wounded.

Taking a bullet in the leg from a terrified peasant who just wants you to sod off out of his country will always win you medals, but it shouldn't.

Voluntarily signing on to enforce Imperial foreign policy in a war of conquest will always have the media paint you as a hero, but it shouldn't.

What flaws the author does ascribe to Mueller are those we all happily admit to having ourselves. He's a "micromanager" and he's "too tough".

Yes, and I'm sure he works himself too hard and doesn't suffer fools gladly and always speaks his mind aswell.

Read the column if you want, but I'd suggest not eating for a few hours first. A more nauseating panegyric I have not witnessed, at least since Barack Obama left office .

Far more telling than what it does say is what it does not say. It mentions Mueller's role as head of the FBI during the launch of the "war on terror", but doesn't go into any of the abuse of human rights that accompanied (and still accompanies) the increasingly authoritarian powers granted to US intelligence agencies by the Patriot Act.

Let's be clear: Mueller's FBI was complicit in rendition, torture, Gitmo. All of it.

Given that, it's rather unsurprising that the article doesn't mention the word "Iraq" once. A breath-taking omission, considering Mueller's testimony in front of congress played a key role in spreading the lie of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction":

https://www.youtube.com/embed/x0CfAh2PJ6k?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

It doesn't matter how many Vietnamese peasants took pot-shots at him, it doesn't matter how tidy his hair is, or how cheap his watch. It doesn't matter if he looks like Cooper or speaks like Eastwood or walks like Wayne. He is a proven liar -- a man culpable in the greatest crime of the 21st century. He is, and always will be, a servant of the Deep State.

A proven liar. A proven killer. An Imperialist. A criminal.

Is this the stuff of which political heroes should be made?

Only in "the Resistance".

Obviously, Trump's administration is dangerous -- it still stokes warlike approaches to Iran and Russia. It has directly threatened Venezuela and Cuba. But you can't fight the right-hand of the Deep State by clasping the left. They all join in the middle. They're the same monster.

Anti-Trumpers, all over the world, need to take a good look at WHO they're fighting alongside, and ask themselves WHAT they are fighting for.

Kit Knightly is co-editor of OffGuardian. The Guardian banned him from commenting. Twice. He used to write for fun, but now he's forced to out of a near-permanent sense of outrage.

systemicfraud Nov, 26, 2018

Mueller's FBI named their 9/11 investigation PENTTBOM=Pentagon Twin Towers Bombing
There were also numerous media accounts of explosives being used on 9/11–even ABC's John Miller
stated initial FBI feedback was that there were additional explosives used at WTC on 9/11.

Did FBI test for explosives?
What were the results?
If no tests were done–why the F not?
Why didn't media or Congress ever follow up and ask FBI about the explosions which were reported?

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

Yarkob Nov, 25, 2018

i was reading that puff-piece yesterday, thinking "i wonder how long off-g's response to this journalistic offal will be in coming" you haven't disappointed! Kit..sorry, i sound like a gushing fanboi. most people outside of america don't realise how deep statey Mueller really is. he's the Harvey Keitel character from pulp fiction. the mob cleanup guy

the Graun is particularly odious at the moment. today's leader is a blatant opinion piece where the "writer" is practically rubbing their hand on their thighs with glee, telling us how trump is facing a subpoena cannon from the dems. good too see they're using their newly re-minted political capital on the important business of running the country resistance my arse

Antonym Nov, 25, 2018

The same Mueller went after Iranians instead of Saudis for the Khobar bombing despite contrary evidence, and ignored Russia's warnings about future Boston bomber Tsarneav. He was also the biggest obstacle for Sept. 11 families who wanted to sue Saudi Arabia. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/robert-mueller-was-the-biggest-obstacle-for-sept-11-families-who-wanted-to-sue-saudi-arabia
A "good ol boy" in rogue CIA speak.

homeslicez Nov, 25, 2018

And with the anthrax investigation (which of course the Guardian doesn't mention), he's also a proven incompetent.

Have to say though–I'm looking forward to the day when this investigation is wrapped, the report comes out, and it's not at all what the Maddows wanted to hear. At that point Mueller will suddenly be a Russian agent himself; incompetent; compromised, and any/all other smears to explain why his investigation didn't find their irrational hysteria to be true.

Then maybe a few months later Trump will fire him and he'll be a hero again and get a Gofund to help this poor unemployed honorable soul.

Einstein Nov, 24, 2018

Wonder how the Grauniad will explain away the Skripal case when it's revealed that Mueller's Steele dossier was written by Skripal.
No wonder the British Deep State are panicking to prevent the publication of the documents ordered by the Orange One.

https://widgets.wp.com/likes/#blog_id=89387340&comment_id=138778&origin=off-guardian.org&obj_id=89387340-138778-5c256efa22ddd

Paul Nov, 24, 2018

What documents has he ordered?

https://widgets.wp.com/likes/#blog_id=89387340&comment_id=138780&origin=off-guardian.org&obj_id=89387340-138780-5c256efa2400a

Roberto Nov, 24, 2018

The ones specified in late September 2018.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-11-23/mi6-scrambling-stop-trump-releasing-classified-docs-russia-probe

USAma Bin Laden Nov, 24, 2018

The so-called anti-Trump Resistance(TM) plays the role of Good Cop to the Trump Regime's Bad Cop. Nothing more.

This is the nature of the political shell game that passes for American democracy, which in reality is an imperial plutocracy.

In all these Anglo imperialist nations in general like America, Britain, or Australia, there is only one true party: the party of Anglo American imperialism.

The anti-Trump "Resistance" is merely one faction of the Anglo-American Empire, which is in conflict with another faction of the Anglo-American Empire.

The supposed differences between them are similar to the differences between Coke and Pepsi, or McDonald's and Burger King.

Distinctions without a difference.

A pox on all their houses.

Gary Weglarz Nov, 24, 2018

("A proven liar. A proven killer. An Imperialist. A criminal.

Is this the stuff of which political heroes should be made?

Only in "the Resistance").

-- - ah, there you go again bringing in reason, a rational argument, the historical record, common sense, and in short objective – "reality" – into the equation. Of course if you are using these sort of criteria Mueller isn't going to look so good. You have to understand that the "Resistance" is, well, more of a "feeling" than anything rational or intellectually defensible.and valorizing Muller certainly isn't based on his "real-world" behavior. Simply put, Muller stands in opposition to Trump and that "feels" right to the "resistance." You know, just like it "feels right" to this same segment of the U.S. population not to let themselves think about the fact that Obama was illegally and immorally bombing 8 Muslim countries as he left office.

Of course in the end Mueller as "hero" of the "resistance" is simply the deep state's slight of hand PR campaign to oppose Trump as the impossibly and unacceptably "bad face" for U.S. empire that he is.
I mean how are Merkel or Macron or May supposed to rally their even half-awake citizenry into dutifully following our tweet crazed endlessly offensive "Orange One" into the next all important battle against the newest deep state defined "Hitler" in Iran, or Syria, or . . . while maintaining any credibility with their own populations?

Paul Nov, 24, 2018

It's astonishing how many self professed 'Progressives' swallow the Resistance line. There certainly is a war within the Administration, Dark State v the President. The latest episode seems to have centred around cutting off the legs of Trump's big partner in the ME and his son in law's close friend, Crown Prince bin Salman. What promoted Turkey to release the information they had on the murder in Istanbul? We can be satisfied it wasn't borne out of humanitarianism! Were they acting in lock step with the American Agencies like the CIA that now tells Turkey it has intercepts 'proving' the Crown Prince ordered the killing? The 'bloodless' Regime Change that is underway aims to remove an arrogant and reckless not to say bloodthirsty man from Absolute Power, a position he might have held for 50 years or more. No wonder Erdoghan would like to see him sidelined. 50 years of Absolute Power in one of the richest countries on earth is an awful lot of time! For the Americans it is a case of seizing control of Foreign Policy in the ME from Trump who keeps talking about 'getting out' of Syria: the Military and the Agencies regard that as not in American interests; they intend to stay and control the vast oil wells in the NE. But it requires agreement with Turkey so who knows what the Agencies promise Turkey in return? It sounds like a deal dividing northern Syria between the Turks and the Americans; no room for the Kurds (again). It's the most serious blow to Trump's authority akin to the time the American military disobeyed Obama over the cease fire with Russia in Syria when instead they 'accidently' bombed Syrian soldiers, killing 80 of them. President's it seems are not allowed their own Foreign Policy and in reality that has been the case since the CIA was founded. Only Kennedy seriously tried to break away

[Dec 27, 2018] My impression is, ISIS is a mossad-Jewish lobby creation to win the PR war against Muslims and to keep the US attacking and containing Israel's geopolitical adversaries and eternally occupying Arab lands, and well, to Make Israel Safe Again

Notable quotes:
"... . Wouldnt it be nice if that Satanic 'fellow' was harrased at home like, unfortunatley, Tucker Carlson was. (Instead of Carlson) ..."
Dec 27, 2018 | www.unz.com
MAGAnotMISA , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:21 am GMT
My impression is, ISIS is a mossad-Jewish lobby creation to win the PR war against Muslims and to keep the US attacking and "containing" Israel's geopolitical adversaries and eternally occupying Arab lands, and well, to Make Israel Safe Again ™

Apart from the questions raised by some from the alternative media:

https://www.globalresearch.ca/isis-is-a-us-israeli-creation-top-ten-indications/5518627

The fact is the mossad could easily pull this off, having so many Israelis from Northern-African and Middle Eastern extraction, fluent in Arab and looking exactly like well, Arabs. They could infiltrate and recruit Arab salafist patsies and easily organize terrorist attacks without executing the hits themselves. And it is actually a genius move:

1) Create a terrorist thread in Europe, making Westerners wary of Arabs, ie more likely to understand Israel policies towards Palestinians and side with Israel (message being: apartheid State? what else can we Israelis do? Palestinians are all gropers, misogynists, homophobes and potential terrorists FYI)

2) Hit the countries with the most Jews (France, Germany and UK) so they are more likely to start packing up to make Aliyah, so Israel's demographic problem is at least temporarily solved, retaining a majority population of Jews.

3) Make the US, through the Jewish lobby in the US, attack strategic countries such as Libya, Iraq and Syria, creating a migrant tsunami to flood Europe, making Europeans even more wary of Arabs and understanding of Israeli's treatment of Palestinians (Arabs) and also making European Jews even more likely to make Aliyah. I even have heard of Israeli NGOs funded by the Israeli Ministry of FA operating in Lesbos and helping "refugees" to flood Europe. After a public outcry the Ministry logo vanished from the NGOs sponsors page.

Even the Cologne issue with the gropings, and I am getting too conspiratorial here, could have been a group of Israeli provocateurs kickstarting the whole assaults wave. Let's say, a group of mossad operatives, composed of Israelis from Northern-African and/or Middle Eastern extraction, with false documentation and fluent in Arab, start groping and assaulting German women, taking advantage of the total chaos offered and facilitated by moronic Merkel. They get caught? no problem, false passports or even no passports at all, just give false names and disappear. Not that Arabs need that much help to make themselves look bad, after all some American reporter was assaulted *live* and for what I have read the lecherous groping of women walking alone is a well documented problem in all the ME. But maybe thanks to a little push by provocateurs, an incident big enough was engineered and the image of Arabs in the West reached historic lows thanks to the Cologne affair.

And creating phoney terrorist groups to use them for false flags is not something new at all for the mossad, let's all remember what the FLLF was and how almost executed an US Ambassador.

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

I'd like to hear Mr Giraldi's take on the matter, though I don't think he will ever write about it.

Merry Christmas to all.

Anonymous [386] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:22 am GMT
@Durruti Kucinich is far from being a real American. Where are the the people that do not want to take?
Art , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:58 am GMT
Filmmaker Rob Reiner tweeted on Thursday that the president is a "childish moronic mentally unstable malignant narcissist" who is "committing Treason" against the United States.

Oh my – the Jew "meathead" is a "childish moronic mentally unstable malignant narcissist" who is "committing Treason" against the United States.

Some things never change.

anon [202] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 11:10 am GMT
"Filmmaker Rob Reiner tweeted on Thursday that the president is a "childish moronic mentally unstable malignant narcissist" who is "committing Treason" against the United States."

He and fellow tribesmen are welcome to sign up and go fight Israel's wars themselves, just not with white male republican blood. The guy is good at border skirmishes, too. He led an effort to keep poor Mexicans out of his rich Malibu neighborhood back in 2014 by refusing Whole Foods a building location. Like most of his kind, he's a sociopathic hypocrite and a liar.

Moi , says: December 25, 2018 at 11:52 am GMT
Further proof that we are nuts.
jilles dykstra , says: December 25, 2018 at 12:06 pm GMT
@MAGAnotMISA What I miss is destroying white cultures through mass immigration.
Though what I miss in this theory what exactly is the objective, is it whites and Muslims annihilating each other, or just divide and rule ?
But maybe thinking in this way has not gone far enough.

Bernard Baruch's world domination plan failed miserably, but he even failed to understand that it had failed, otherwise he had not in 1946 pleaded for a world government. One must not underestimate the enemy, but also not overestimate him.

Jewish policies for the last 2000 years can hardly be seen as a success. Judaism lost the battle with christianity, bolsjewism failed in Russia, getting equal rights in W Europe led to the WWII deportations, with or without gas chambers, Israel succeeded in surrounding itself with enemies, as neighbours, and all over the world, and jewish puppet Hillary was not elected. The latest statements by Netanyahu confirm my idea of a complete idiot.

Montefrío , says: December 25, 2018 at 12:08 pm GMT
I continue to be amazed that anyone gives any credibility whatsoever who claims US Mideast military involvement is in the best interest of the nation. The above-mentioned commenters must almost inevitably more about self-interest than anything patriotic. As for appearing profound, well, there's Rob Reiner!
jilles dykstra , says: December 25, 2018 at 12:19 pm GMT
@anon In the idea that the USA is the new zion Trump indeed commits treason.
Before Israel was established many USA rabbis were against zionism, because in their view the USA already was zion.
As to

childish moronic mentally unstable malignant narcissist

, the use of such words for me means utter confusion, rational analysis no longer possible.
Arthur Koestler was of the opinion that yiddish precluded sensible discussion.
The mentioned words show that he was wrong about the cause.

RVBlake , says: December 25, 2018 at 12:21 pm GMT
If there were any group that deserved rebuffing and blindsiding, it is most assuredly Trump's advisers and military commanders.
APilgrim , says: December 25, 2018 at 12:43 pm GMT
President Trump has ERASED the terrorists supported by Obama & McCain.

His 'deconfliction' with Russia was instrumental in the Daesh Extermination.

If Congress passes an AUMF, we shall stay. Otherwise, Adios!

APilgrim , says: December 25, 2018 at 12:51 pm GMT
Today's Jerusalem Post had a link to this Kamala Harris political fund-raising ad.

https://action.kamalaharris.org/sign/181206-evergreen-ob/?source=ads_outbrain_181212_dint_all_desktop_000395c6d552e1c60c57e8e03fadb17b09

The cvnt.

Sarah Toga , says: December 25, 2018 at 12:59 pm GMT
As I sat in Christmas Eve service last night, an adorable little boy played quietly with his father in the seat next to us. The little boy was probably just under 2 years of age.

In the middle of one of the Christmas Carols the thought struck me,

"I wonder if we will still be in ___________ war 17 years from now, when this little boy becomes enlistment age . . ."

That thought alone makes me favor Trump for re-election. I think (I could be wrong, I'm no expert) we have less war and a lesser risk of war with Trump. The "establishment" policies of: invade the world – invite the world – in hoc with the world; are horrifically deadly and destructive.

Heros , says: December 25, 2018 at 1:01 pm GMT
What great Christmas presents from Trump.

1. US withdrawal from Syria, and apparently all non-nato committed US troops from Afghanistan.
2. Willingness to shutdown Government in order to force funding for the wall
3. Rumors of subpoena's being handed out at G.H.W Bush's funeral
4. Senate investigations into Clinton Foundation with auditors claiming jaw dropping corruption
5. Grand Jury empaneled to investigate into 9/11

I don't know if Q is a psyop, but a lot of the things he has been saying appear to be coming closer to reality. We can be certain that none of this would have happened had Clinton been elected.

Meanwhile the deep state is not taking this lying down.

1. Netanyahu is threatening to increase operations in Syria. Perhaps he warned Trump to get out because he is going to go nuclear or bio.
2. The global warming panic propaganda is being turned up to "broil" as weather warfare has been unleashed across the planet.
3. Ukraine attempting to drag Nato into a war for the Kerch straight.
4. Stockmarkets tanking as the Fed keeps tightening while Mnuchin performs the "plunge protection team rag"
5. Iran war threats and Persian gulf sabre rattling
6. Heeb financial war against Russia, Iran and China.
7. Heeb technology war against China (Huawei arrest)

Even if the US leaves Syria as Trump claims, they certainly will not just hand everything over to Assad. The Damascus/Baghdad hiway re-opening through Al Tanf and the hand over of all Euphrates river crossings to Syria would be indication of a true change of policy.

FelicityRules , says: December 25, 2018 at 1:18 pm GMT
As usual, Giraldi is spot on with his observations. I wish him a Merry Christmas and hope to see a lot more of his articles in the coming year.

I find Rob Reiner amusing, if not occasionally annoying. After having spent decades up to my nose with his tribe while working in LA in the entertainment industry I can guarantee Hollywood Jews go completely apoplectic anytime they perceive their government, the Jewish-occupied government that rules over us all, is not following their commands.

Come to think of it, apoplexy's first definition is a stroke, its second definition is: a state of intense and almost uncontrollable anger. One can only hope that jerks like Reiner who indulge so heavily in the second definition will end up experiencing the first, and good riddance.

Cortes , says: December 25, 2018 at 1:33 pm GMT
@FB Well said.

I'd just add that few things would please me more than to have DJT draft the human chickenhawks due to their indispensable expertise and place their backsides in-country to dole out their words of wisdom there.

ChuckOrloski , says: December 25, 2018 at 1:37 pm GMT
The honorable & courageous American Man endowed with precision scientific/political wisdom wrote, with special appeal to me: "Withdrawing from Syria is the right thing to do, though one has to be concerned that there might be some secret side deals with Israel , that could actually result in more attacks upon Syria."

Christos Razdajetsja, Philip!

Johnny Walker Read , says: December 25, 2018 at 1:43 pm GMT
Call me crazy, but I'm still a bit leery, cautiously hopping this is not just another charade. Is this just another way to allow the dissection of Syria to take another path?

Always remember if Trump is in opposition to his globalist master's he will be removed, one way or the other.

Hunsdon , says: December 25, 2018 at 1:53 pm GMT
@FB FB:

Thank you for that! I now realize that the appellation chickenhawk used in reference to the "let's you and him" fight gang is a slur on a fine little raptor. You have educated me.

Anon [257] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 2:03 pm GMT
@anon What's the battle cry of the Israeli army?
Onward Christian Soldiers

Merry Christmas every one

Tim K , says: December 25, 2018 at 2:10 pm GMT
US out of Syria? Why were "we" ever in there?
anon [122] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 2:20 pm GMT
boot, nuland, shapiro, stephens, reiner, etc etc – one (((chickenhawk))) after another
Sparkon , says: December 25, 2018 at 2:27 pm GMT
A mong hawks in N. America, Cooper's Hawk ( Accipiter cooperii ), Red-shouldered Hawk ( Buteo lineatus ), and Red-tailed Hawk ( Buteo jamaicensis ) are the three species most likely to take domestic chickens, or yardbirds as they are sometimes called, and it is these three species that are or have been commonly called Chickenhawks in the United States, at least among non-birders, who are people with neither binoculars nor field guide.

But I think most here know that Philip Giraldi is referring to the craven human variety of warmonger known in some circles as the Yellow-tailed Chickenhawk, or its close relative the Yellow-bellied Chickenhawk.

President Trump's announcement is a very nice Christmas present, which I choose to take a face value pending unwrapping. As always, actions speak louder than words. Let's hope that there isn't a booby prize or two lurking beneath the Christmas tree and hidden by the big surprise package, or that there isn't a lump of coal at the bottom of our holiday stockings.

Peace on Earth to all men of Good Will.

Johnny Walker Read , says: December 25, 2018 at 2:34 pm GMT
@wayfarer Not sure if the opening word's in the first video are spoken by Sheikh Imran N Hosein. It sounds like him. I just wanted to say I have listened to a lot of his messages and find him very enlightening. For those who believe in end time prophecy, I think you will find well versed and extremely intelligent, as compared to many of the so called "Christian" huckster's out there selling religion for dollars.

https://www.youtube.com/user/khalid5288/featured

The Alarmist , says: December 25, 2018 at 2:39 pm GMT
@Tim K

"US out of Syria? Why were "we" ever in there?"

Pipelines to Europe for KSA and fresh water sources for Israel? Destabilising a local rival of both? Who knows?

What we do know is that "we" have allowed our "leaders" to pimp out our military to the rogue special interests of the world. We have the best government foreign interests can buy.

DESERT FOX , says: December 25, 2018 at 2:39 pm GMT
The Zionist MSM and MIC and the Zionist AIPAC and company are the hounds of Hell baying for war as warmongers always want war as long as they do not have to fight it and can reap the profits from the wars!

Zionists have instigated every war that the U.S. has been in since WWI and right on down through the Mideast slaughter house that Israel and her Zionists patrons have sent Americans to fight and die in and by crippled for life in and the millions of civilians, men, women and children that have been murdered in the wars fought for Zionist Israel!

The most incredible thing was that the Zionists and the Zionist controlled deep state did 911 which was the precursor to the latest Mideast wars and the war on terror where the Zionists killed some 3000 Americans and blamed the Arabs and got away with it , when every thinking American knows that Israel and the Zionist controlled deep state did 911!

Finally Trump has done the right thing by getting out of Syria and now should get the hell out of the Mideast and Afghanistan and close the slaughter houses!

God bless Putin and Russia and Assad and Syria for saving the people of Syria and defeating ISIS aka Al CIADA ie a creation of the U.S. and Israel and Britain!

Zionists and Israel will be the death of America unless we wake up and smell the coffee!

Johnny Walker Read , says: December 25, 2018 at 2:47 pm GMT
@wayfarer Should have watched the video a little longer before I commented. It is indeed Sheikh Imran N Hosein in the video. LOL and Merry Christmas !
follyofwar , says: December 25, 2018 at 2:57 pm GMT
@renfro One hopes that Russia will have stationed its advanced air defense systems throughout Syria. And they should not be afraid to shoot down the Israeli aggressors.

Jilles sounds like he is Max Boot in disguise.

follyofwar , says: December 25, 2018 at 3:12 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra Jilles,
Haven't you completely contradicted your prior response to @renfro about Trump? You called him a "complete idiot, leading a country to destruction," now you are claiming he is a "reasonable man, who understands that warfare is just a destruction of wealth." He can't be both, can he?
Parsnipitous , says: December 25, 2018 at 3:31 pm GMT
@follyofwar I think he meant Nutandyahoo
ChuckOrloski , says: December 25, 2018 at 3:33 pm GMT
@DESERT FOX Of extreme importance, Desert Fox of"The most incredible thing was that the Zionists and the Zionist controlled deep state did 911 which was the precursor to the latest Mideast wars and the war on terror where the Zionists killed some 3000 Americans and blamed the Arabs and got away with it ,"

Christmas Day greetings, Desert Fox!

Re; above sentence, a cordial question.

Is there anything you know & which you have not said (to date) that might signal that the American-Israeli Empire's mighty military is prepped to allow the Assad and Rouhani anti-Zionist governments to stand?

Uh perhaps, either delay or junk establishment of Greater Israel?

Am convinced Trump would only slow down international Jewry's plan. Or else no unguarded JFK convertible limo trips for him on reelection-campaign road.

Thanks, Desert, you always stand on solid ground.

follyofwar , says: December 25, 2018 at 3:35 pm GMT
@chris Let's think about this. The USA has not been able to defeat the Afghan Taliban forces in 17 years. It brought down Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq, but, with that unfortunate country totally destroyed, how could you call that a win (I doubt if the Iraqi's consider the US to be liberators). Now the crack pot Obama/Hillary campaign has lost in Syria, and Trump wants to pull out. All three countries were much smaller and weaker than Iran, and the US is much weaker, morally and militarily, than it was after the 9/11 hoax. And, after Russia has expended much blood and treasure in ensuring victory for Assad and the Syrian people, will it now sit on its hands as the US Air Force dismantles Teheran? Plus there is a resurgent China, dependent on Iranian oil, to consider.

I'm not saying that Trump will not start a war against Iran (for Israel's benefit). But, he'd better be prepared for the consequences, which will all be devastating to the American Empire. Be careful what you wish for.

wayfarer , says: December 25, 2018 at 3:39 pm GMT
@Johnny Walker Read Sheikh Imran N. Hosein sure presented some compelling facts.

By the way, there're lots of colorful Christmas lights sparkling here in Yuma, Arizona.

On my beater trailer, I keep mine up and burning brightly all year round. It's a trashy Americana thing, LOL!

Have a dark hunch 2019 is going to be a rough one, but hey, no pain no gain.

Best of luck Johnny Walker Read, in this approaching new year.

Z-man , says: December 25, 2018 at 3:42 pm GMT

But Israel supported by Saudi Arabia does not like Iran and has induced Washington to follow its lead. Withdrawing from Syria recognizes that Iran is no threat in reality. Positioning American military forces to "counter" Iran does not reduce the threat against the United States because there was no threat there to begin with.

Yes of course, I would just add that Israel hates Iran.
Rand Paul and others have been pushing back hard against the NEOCON narrative here, good news. The initial anti Trump tide has turned in this matter.
I briefly saw Bill Krysrol's smug mug on TV the other day. Wouldnt it be nice if that Satanic 'fellow' was harrased at home like, unfortunatley, Tucker Carlson was. (Instead of Carlson)

follyofwar , says: December 25, 2018 at 4:02 pm GMT
Trump telling General Mattis to pack his bags and begone is the work of a good CEO. Mad Dog could have done a lot of damage to Mr. Trump's agenda if he had been allowed to stay on until the end of February, as he had said he would. In corporate America, if an underling is disloyal to the CEO, he will be told to vacate the premises for good by the end of the workday, and escorted out of the building by armed security. His keys will be taken, all locks will be changed, and his passwords expunged. No doubt Trump, as CEO, has had to employ such tactics many times before. He obviously relishes saying "You're Fired!"

Any competent Trump loyalist can be found to replace this worn out old soldier. I hope he won't be yet another general. MacArthur said that "old soldier never die, they just fade away." Time for Mattis to do just that, and never be heard from again.

Z-man , says: December 25, 2018 at 4:02 pm GMT
@Z-man Arrggh, that would be that serpent Bill Kristol of course!

Merry Christmas to all.

follyofwar , says: December 25, 2018 at 4:20 pm GMT
@Parsnipitous Reading my comment again, I can see where I might have misinterpreted Jilles intent. If so, I apologize. However, if he had identified, by name, who he was referring to, perhaps I wouldn't have been confused.
never-anonymous , says: December 25, 2018 at 4:24 pm GMT
Syria is a money pit for the taxpayers and giant profit source for the super rich. 'The United States military should only be deployed anywhere to defend the U.S. itself or vital interests' says Trump, Obama or Bush. But war is too important to be left to politicians. They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought. Trump was appointed by rich people only so they could have someone to blame. 100% of the voters believe they personally have the right to kill women and children overseas with their hired mercenaries to defend the U.S. itself or vital interests. Americans shell out taxes to pay for US troops to guard mining operations and poppy fields in Afghanistan, oil fields in Iraq, online propaganda and so much more. Why deploy the United States Military when there's more profit in hiring private mercenaries? Plus you don't have to say that "vital interests" crap anymore.
Durruti , says: December 25, 2018 at 4:36 pm GMT
@Ronald Thomas West Good thinking:

opening the door to NATO's Turkey to go after the Kurd units there

Must look to the North:

On Turkey's Northwest front, tensions are high between the Greek Military & some foreign controllers of Greece, and the Turkish Military, and their leaders.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/27/tensions-flare-greece-turkey-answer-provocation-erdogan

There are many other informational links.

Turkey (Erdogan), might face a 2 Front War if it seizes further portions of Syria (regardless of excuse).

The Zionist imperialists (and puppet USA, NATO, EU), face difficult choices of who to trigger, and who to restrain.

Russia and the Arab Nations may come out of this Hellish conundrum – in good shape. And that bodes well for all of us, from America, to Novorossiya.

JoaoAlfaiate , says: December 25, 2018 at 4:37 pm GMT
This article is an excellent summary of msm and neocon reaction to the planned US withdrawal from Syria and a good survey of why getting Uncle Sam out of Syria makes sense. I would also add that allying with the Kurds was at best a short term solution. Not only would a Kurdish state in eastern Syria be unacceptable to Turkey but the Sunni Arabs of the Euphrates Valley would be certain to resist Kurdish rule. Merry Christmas to all!
Reuben Kaspate , says: December 25, 2018 at 4:41 pm GMT
For once, let all nuclear arsenal be directed at the Middle East and when the smoke clears after a thousand years, there will be no God, Jews or Arabs to deal with any of remaining humans will be welcomed!
DESERT FOX , says: December 25, 2018 at 4:43 pm GMT
@ChuckOrloski In my opinion, Zionist Israel will never stop being the agent provocateur in the Mideast and elsewhere ie the Ukraine etc., and since the Zionists control the U.S. government I think their satanic NWO plans are still in place, and think the U.S. military is just going to be placed in Iraq and Jordan ie just across the border to Syria and will continue with their proxy mercenaries aka AL CIADA aka ISIS.

Some good sites to follow are Southfront.org and Henrymakow.com and Stevequayle.com and Thetruthseeker.co.uk etc., all things considered even Putin said that Russia will wait and see if the U.S. really leaves the Mideast, I wish all our troops would be brought home, but with the Zionist control of our government it will never happen.

It is snowing here in Montana so we have a white Christmas, which we could do without, but have a Merry Christmas!

jilles dykstra , says: December 25, 2018 at 4:45 pm GMT
@follyofwar Here we agree.
But in a comment below I read that I sowed confusion.
Possible, I see no need to find out what went wrong.
Boris M Garsky , says: December 25, 2018 at 4:54 pm GMT
A brilliant move and timed perfectly.
Renoman , says: December 25, 2018 at 4:58 pm GMT
Yes to Trump and withdrawal from Mid East Wars, down with MSM, The Neocons, the 1% , the deep state and Israel, the whole World hates these assholes. Go Donny Daddy!
wayfarer , says: December 25, 2018 at 5:05 pm GMT

There is nothing good or evil save in the will.
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epictetus

Rand Paul backs Trump on Withdrawing from Syria: Good!

Bragadocious , says: December 25, 2018 at 5:23 pm GMT
If you want to know who's agitating for war, look no further than our "friends," the Brits.

This is what they do every single time a U.S. President doesn't commit troops to some war they've approved of, or started. They terror bait, or mock, or a combination of the two. And since a lot of people in Washington take them seriously, it has appreciable impact on our policies.

Charlie , says: December 25, 2018 at 5:30 pm GMT
God bless you Ron Unz for providing this forum. Chickenhawks. Who would have thought.
jilles dykstra , says: December 25, 2018 at 5:31 pm GMT
@Z-man Israel fears Iran, is my idea.
Norman Finkelstein once stated that Israeli jews do not see how there ever can be peace with the Palestinians 'after all we did to them'.

Not all jews are idiots.
Forgot in which book I read that in the thirties a zionist reached Palestine, and saw that this was not the 'land without people for people without land'.
He stated 'this is a crime'.

The destruction and destabilisation of the ME, an Israeli plan, as far as I know.

In 1921 and later years there was the enormous population exchange, without any financial compensation, between Turkey and Greece.
To this day tensions exist between the two countries.

Iran is one of the oldest civilisations.
Twice, one might say even three time, the west overthrew Iranian democracy.
Iran knows of course quite well that the VS brought Saddam to power so that he could subjugate Iran, that had rid itself of the USA puppet shah.
Iran also of course knows quite well jewish power in the USA, Bush' s promise to AIPAC to destroy Iraq.
Will those leading Iran now ever trust the USA or Israel ?

So that Netanyahu and USA jewry now are in complete panic, who had expected it to be otherwise ?
Uri Avnery wrote 'the only language zionists understand is power. Is there a problem, use power, if it does not help, use more power, if that also fails, use even more power'.

There has never been any serious negotiation between Israel and its neighbours, or with the Palestinians.
About the Oslo negotiations a book appeared in Israel with the title 'how we fooled the Palestinians'?
Sharon answered any Arab League peace proposal with force, Jenin, one of them, if my recollection is correct.
There always was the idea of overwhelming more military power, and of USA support.

Kissinger saved Israel in the 1973 Yom Kippur war by flying over hundreds of the newest USA anti tank weapons, wire guided, TOW.
What will the USA do in case Israel is attacked ?
Is Netanyahu crazy enough to provoke an attack ?

jilles dykstra , says: December 25, 2018 at 5:49 pm GMT
@Durruti EU

https://www.bfmtv.com/politique/vacances-d-hiver-a-huis-clos-pour-emmanuel-macron-1597858.html

Macron is not skiing between Christmas and New Year.
French is my worst language, but 'huis clos' is curtains closed, the expression is used often for court proceedings without an audience, closed doors.
If my idea is correct that he stays indoors because his security cannot be guaranteed, maybe someone whose first language is French can enlighten me.

Whatever the case, the man who wants an EU army now has trouble keeping peace in his own country.
NATO, Stoltenberg's face during the dinner with Trump, disbelief.
Trigger and restrain, at the moment the Yellow Vests have caused the impossibility for Brussels to do anything, survival is what concerns them.

ChuckOrloski , says: December 25, 2018 at 5:50 pm GMT
@DESERT FOX Desert Fox with a Montana-attitude, soft side, said: "It is snowing here in Montana so we have a white Christmas, which we could do without, but have a Merry Christmas!'

Greetings from snowless Scranton, Desert Fox!

Over decades, have reflected upon Charles Schulz's great (1965) "Charlie Brown Christmas." Prior to it's release, I have scant memory that Mr. Schulz had to battle those who wanted the traditional Nativity of Christ and spiritual meaning out of the way. Fyi, Charles's opponents lost!

As Christ-trashing Hollywood "Christmas" films dominate & mis-educate our popular culture, please, please, please look (below) at the beautiful narration of "Charlie Brown Christmas."

jilles dykstra , says: December 25, 2018 at 6:07 pm GMT
@Bragadocious

This is what they do every single time a U.S. President doesn't commit troops to some war they've approved of, or started.

Who is they, and do what ?
Even the Dutch army could withstand the weapons shown here.

AnonFromTN , says: December 25, 2018 at 6:11 pm GMT
This is the first sane thing Trump did in two years. Also, this is the first action he promised his supporters in 2016. Naturally, Israel-firsters, who in 2016 backed the corrupt mad witch to a man, are unhappy. Their unhappiness is a good sign that this action is actually in American interests. If Trump folds and reverses, this would expose him as a 100% fraud. If he sticks to his guns, maybe there is hope for him yet. Stay tuned.
Johnny Walker Read , says: December 25, 2018 at 6:13 pm GMT
@wayfarer No snow here in Albuquerque, NM, but the skies are loaded with chemtrails. I guess the sky spider's never get a day off. Here's hoping you and your's have a merry Christmas.
Virgile , says: December 25, 2018 at 6:18 pm GMT
Trump wants Turkey to stop harassing Saudi Arabia about Kashoogi's murder and be more complacent with Israel. He also wants Israel to become more anxious abiut its security so it agrees on the Palestinian peace plan elaborated by Jared Kuchner and MBS.
Turkey has now promised to fight ISIS which it never did. Saudi Arabia as well as Syria wants Turkey humiliated, defeated and out of Syria. It may well happen when the Turkish army will be confronted with a renewedc ISIS manipulated by Saudi Arabia and Syria.
It seems that the withdrawal of the US forces from Syria may trigger the end of Erdogan's hegemonic dreams in the region and the victorious return of Syria among the Arabs.
chris , says: December 25, 2018 at 6:31 pm GMT
@follyofwar Oh, no; I don't mean Trump will start some major ground offensive to win anything! No, they'll just try to destroy Iran in order to give jihadist a chance to kill as many people as possible. This will be a Libyan-style war and "victory."
Bragadocious , says: December 25, 2018 at 6:39 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra Yeah, not sure about the Dutch, with their history at Srebrenica.

But I was referring to the Brits trying to push Trump back into the Middle East war grinder.

Harold Smith , says: December 25, 2018 at 6:44 pm GMT
"President Donald Trump's order to withdraw from Syria has been greeted, predictably, with an avalanche of condemnation culminating in last Thursday's resignation by Defense Secretary James Mattis. The Mattis resignation letter focused on the betrayal of allies "

Call me cynical but I think you cannot take ANYTHING our masters say or do, e.g. this, at face value.

Orange clown's alleged disengagement from Syria may be (and probably is) nothing more that a tactical retreat/change in plans for which the Mattis resignation is merely a fig leaf; that is, it's just more of the same disingenuous dialectics that we've been bombarded with since the beginning of the "Trump" administration.

Apparently we're urged to conclude that Trump has finally had enough of the people he knowingly and willingly surrounded himself with, and their agenda, and now all of a sudden (because of some kind of a spiritual epiphany, pro-American New Year's resolution, etc.) he wants to do right by (some of) his supporters by doing what he should've done a long time ago. (And the hint of a military drawdown in Afghanistan adds a nice touch).

Sorry but I can't buy what they're selling.

If in addition to withdrawing from Syria orange clown were to stop arming the "government" of "Ukraine" and agree to negotiations with Russia on the issue of intermediate range nuclear armed missiles in Europe – with a goal to support/strengthen the INF treaty rather than withdraw from it – I might be willing to entertain the idea that something's changed.

As it is now it'll take a lot more than the obligatory "avalanche of condemnation" i.e., cheap words, to convince me that the perfidious orange clown and his jewish-supremacist handlers are doing anything other than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic with one hand while steering it into the iceberg with the other hand.

anon [231] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 6:59 pm GMT
@Harold Smith

Call me cynical but I think you cannot take ANYTHING our masters say or do, e.g. this, at face value.

agree

just watch their behaviour – the wall never gets built even though they are now talking about increasing the "defense" budget from $700 billion to $750 billion next year – the increase alone is the cost of two walls

annamaria , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:01 pm GMT
@Puzzled "I have never been able to discern a strategy, other than to keep the region in turmoil"
– Agree.

Here is a tepid and academically deeply dishonest oeuvre by Richard Haass, who simply cannot help himself but to keep his day job of presstituting: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2018-12-11/how-world-order-ends

Sampling:

Although Russia has avoided any direct military challenge to NATO, it has nonetheless shown a growing willingness to disrupt the status quo: through its use of force in Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine since 2014, its often indiscriminate military intervention in Syria, and its aggressive use of cyberwarfare to attempt to affect political outcomes in the United States and Europe.

Haass is a Cheney's choice of opportunist and Goebbelsian kind of criminal:

Haass was born to a Jewish family in Brooklyn From 1989 to 1993, he was Special Assistant to United States President George H. W. Bush and National Security Council Senior Director for Near East and South Asian Affairs. In 1991, Haass received the Presidential Citizens Medal for helping to develop and explain U.S. policy during Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm. Haass argued that the leaders of the United States should adopt "an imperial foreign policy" to construct and manage an informal American empire (Haass 2000)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_N._Haass

A123 , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:01 pm GMT
The U.S. has 2,000 soldiers in a kill-sack if Erdogan decides to cut off their supply lines. And, calling Erdogan "unreliable" is something of an understatement. The U.S. can say very little about Erdogan's behaviour while he can take reprisals on U.S. troops.

-- Turkey and Saudi are feuding, and the U.S. needs Saudi more than Turkey to maintain sanctions and other pressure on Iran.

-- Turkey is becoming dangerously deranged in its statements about Israel (1). And the U.S. / Israeli relationship is vital for many reasons.

-- Turkey has been a threat to Christian Cyprus for decades. The Leviathan-Cyprus-Greece pipeline is important to help free Christian Populist EU nations, such as Italy, from tyrannical rule under Soros-servitors Merkel and Macron.

Do not over over read the withdrawal as a change in regional strategy. There are no major policy changes. This is about opening the door to push out Erdogan, if that becomes necessary to support the existing U.S. regional strategy. And, the U.S. can still hope that Erdogan is saying demented things solely for domestic consumption and doesn't intend to actually follow thru on the crazy.

__________

(1) https://www.breitbart.com/middle-east/2018/12/16/erdogan-unhinged-compares-israel-to-nazi-germany-claims-cultural-genocide-against-palestinians/

Tony H. , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:06 pm GMT
"Containment" was a U.S. policy devised by George Kennan in 1947 to inhibit the expansion of a powerful and sometimes aggressive soon-to-be nuclear armed Soviet Union, which was rightly seen as a serious threat.

"which was rightly seen as a serious threat."
So it was, was it? That's really the beginning of the bullshit in American policy. There were a few naysayers back then, since largely vindicated by the opening of former Soviet archives, who claimed that Stalin's postwar moves were largely defensive in nature and intended to protect the USSR from the talked about US preemptive attack on the Soviet Union. Stalin was well aware of all the loose talk on the American side and his country had just endured the same attempt on the part of Nazi Germany.

EugeneGur , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:08 pm GMT

"Containment" was a U.S. policy devised by George Kennan in 1947 to inhibit the expansion of a powerful and sometimes aggressive soon-to-be nuclear armed Soviet Union, which was rightly seen as a serious threat.

Could someone explain to me how exactly was the Soviet Union a serious threat to the US, particularly in 1947? The country was devastated by the war; some regions suffered from hunger, for goodness' sake; tens of millions were dead or maimed; the worked force was depleted as million of young men were killed, so the economic burden fell on the shoulders of women and teenagers; the cost of housing of people left homeless by the war was staggering; the cost of caring for orphan children, wounded and invalids – ditto. In contrast, the United States was getting fatter by the minutes having benefited enormously from the war in Europe.

The Soviet Union "sometimes aggressive"? I am not aware of any Soviet plans to attack the US but we all know about the American and British plant to attack the USSR formulated as early as in 1945. No doubts the Soviet leadership was aware of such plans. The Soviets, having witnessed a demonstration staged for their benefits in Japans of the power of nuclear weapons, did everything with one purpose in mind: to prevent an attack, which they were in no position to withstand. Needless to say, the USSR didn't have nuclear weapons at that time but even after it had acquired them, it didn't quite catch up with the US in terms on number until the very end.

It's fair to say that the Soviet Union was never ever a thereat to the US. On the contrary, the US was a threat to the Soviet Union from the fist till the last day of its existence, as it remains a treat to Russia today. The problems with the Americans, even the most reasonable of them (not at all difficult to appear on today's insane background), is that they don't question the entire narrative they are fed but only the bits of it.

annamaria , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:10 pm GMT
@MAGAnotMISA "ISIS is a mossad-Jewish lobby creation to win the PR war against Muslims and to keep the US attacking and "containing" Israel's geopolitical adversaries and eternally occupying Arab lands, and well, to Make Israel Safe Again "

– Hard to disagree with your statement. And who could forget the amazing care of the Jewish State for the White Helmets known for their cooperation with other "moderate" terrorists: https://gellerreport.com/2018/07/israel-syria-jordan.html/

Israel Evacuates 800 of Syria's White Helmets and Their Families to Jordan

The Israel Defense Forces said it engaged in the "out of the ordinary" gesture due to the "immediate risk" to the lives of the civilians, as Russian-backed regime forces closed in on the area. It stressed that it was not intervening in the ongoing fighting in Syria.

The Jordanian government, which has consistently refused to accept Syrian refugees in recent years, said an exception was made in this case as the United Kingdom, Canada and Germany agreed to take the 800 White Helmet rescuers and their families.

Germany's Bild newspaper reported that a convoy of dozens of buses crossed the Syrian border into Israel late Saturday, and were escorted to the Jordanian border by Israeli police and UN forces.

Michael Kenny , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:18 pm GMT
A lot of the rejoicing in the pro-Putin camp seems to be based on the idea that this somehow benefits Putin but I don't think it does. He is still irreversibly bogged down in Syria.
Alfred , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:29 pm GMT
@renfro Netanyahu is telling the idiotic Israeli public what they want to hear. Let's not forget that there are elections due on 9 April.

You can hardly expect a politician to tell the public that if they so much as launch a missile against Damascus airport, the airport of Tel Aviv will be bombed in return. The days when the Israelis could do as they wished in Syria and Lebanon are gone.

2stateshmustate , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:31 pm GMT
@DESERT FOX You took the words right out of my mouth.
annamaria , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:32 pm GMT
@MAGAnotMISA More on the Jewish State's beloved protege White Helmets and the profoundly zionized presstituting MSM: https://www.rt.com/op-ed/447385-white-helmets-un-panel/

"Organ theft, staged attacks: UN panel details White Helmets' criminal activities, media yawns," by Eva Bartlett.

"[During] a more than one-hour-long panel on the White Helmets at the United Nations on December 20 the irrefutable documentation was presented on the faux-rescue group's involvement in criminal activities, which include organ theft, working with terrorists -- including as snipers -- staging fake rescues, thieving from civilians, and other non-rescuer behaviour.

a Syrian civilian, Omar al-Mustafa, is cited as stating: "I saw them (White Helmets) bring children who were alive, put them on the floor as if they had died in a chemical attack."

In my own visits to eastern Ghouta towns last April and May, residents likewise spoke of organ theft, staged rescues, the White Helmets working with Jaysh al-Islam, while an Aleppo man likewise described them as thieves who steal from civilians, not rescuers.

Four days after the UN panel, to my knowledge, not a single corporate media outlet has covered the event and its critical contents.

This is in spite of the fact that the Western corporate media has been happy to propagandize about the White Helmets for years, and to attack those of us who dare to present testimonies and evidence from on the ground in Syria which contradicts the official narrative.

wayfarer , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:36 pm GMT
@Johnny Walker Read Merry Christmas, to you and the world, as well.

Any ideas as to why Albuquerque New Mexico is being targeted?

I've been following some theories surrounding the Paradise California fires.

It seems as if the "elite's" end-game is now at our door-step.

I don't know about you, but I can sure feel my soldier DNA starting to activate.

Not really looking forward to what's coming down humanity's dark road.

wayfarer , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:46 pm GMT

There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil, to one who is striking at the root.

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_David_Thoreau

New World Order Reveals Their Plans for U.S. in 2019

Alfred , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:49 pm GMT
@DESERT FOX "The most incredible thing was that the Zionists and the Zionist controlled deep state did 911 which was the precursor to the latest Mideast wars and the war on terror where the Zionists killed some 3000 Americans and blamed the Arabs and got away with it , when every thinking American knows that Israel and the Zionist controlled deep state did 911!"

The number of victims of 9/11 in NYC are way above 3000. Cancers and so on just don't get counted. BTW, it is not from the dust. It is from the small nuclear bombs in the 2 buildings. The 3rd building was only explosives.

https://nypost.com/2018/08/11/nearly-10k-people-have-gotten-cancer-from-toxic-9-11-dust/

Here is a useful link:

""9-11/Israel did it""

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/9-11/Israel_did_it

annamaria , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:51 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra "Is Netanyahu crazy enough to provoke an attack ?"

– He is certainly endangering himself and his parasitic state by the silly ideas of mythological choseness.
Let's hope that the more intelligent Soviet Jews (as compared to the mediocre pool of the pre-Soviet Israelis) take pains to explain the former salesman the stupidity of military confrontation with Iran/Russia.

As for the US-dwelling zionists' stupidity it is irredeemable.

anon [231] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:57 pm GMT
@EugeneGur

The Soviet Union "sometimes aggressive"? I am not aware of any Soviet plans to attack the US but we all know about the American and British plant to attack the USSR formulated as early as in 1945.

obtuse

follyofwar , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:14 pm GMT
@Bragadocious What the hell is up with these dysfunctional Brits anyway? With their empire thankfully long gone, their society in tatters, and a Muslim mayor running majority-minority London, they think they can get the US to take on Iran for them? Spare me! This "special relationship" has got to end. The Brits must be under the thumb of the Zionists even more than is the USA. And their sad monarchy belongs in the dustbin of history.
annamaria , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:14 pm GMT
@Tony H. George Kennan's attitude towards Russia had evolved throughout the 70s-90s, but this evolution has been carefully obscured by the ziocon warriors and other war-profiteers using the ZUSA resources for their personal enrichment:

With the end of the Cold War, Kennan continued to emphasize the limits of American power and the need for restraint in the exercise of it.

He lived to see the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold war and characteristically aimed to influence the role that the United States should play in the new world circumstances.

He objected to plans for North Atlantic Treaty Organization expansion and to what he saw as exploitation of Russian weakness.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/people/history/us-history-biographies/george-kennan

Realist , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:26 pm GMT

And he might want to think of a Christmas present for 2019. One might suggest a complete withdrawal from Afghanistan.

And in addition Syria, Iraq, Guam, Germany, Britain, Philippines, Japan, South Korea, Turkey, Norway and on and on. Give the present 11 months early.

anon [228] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:26 pm GMT
@annamaria THis is that GELLER who has been riling up ant Muslim hysteria in US She has been co hosting the islamophobes and has been renting spaces for add against Jihad

OMG
WTF

wake up America

Or is there 2 Gellers?

Simply Simon , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:31 pm GMT
@FB Wow, great picture! Incredible detail. More than an iPhone I suspect.
anon [228] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:32 pm GMT
@Michael Kenny Like you are irreversibly bogged down in between your legs looking for Bush's WMD, Obama's gas, Netanyhu's water source , Rothschild's oil,Bolton's nooses around himself,Weekly Standard's lost child FDD and confused Sheldon's diaper.
!
DESERT FOX , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:39 pm GMT
@Alfred Agree that many have died and are dying from cancer caused by the asbestos and other materials in the dust, in my opinion the WTC towers were destroyed by direct energy weapons plus micro nukes and WTC buildings 3,4,5,and 6 were destroyed by direct energy weapons and WTC 7 was destroyed by conventional explosives, and there were 7 WTC buildings destroyed in total.

Check the site Drjudywood.com and read her book Where Did The Towers Go and watch her videos on youtube, she is a scientist and very credible and it is from her that I got the directed energy weapons theory. There were no planes used and the planes that were seen were holograms and for an explanation of this see John Lears videos on youtube, John Lear is the son of William Lear the designer of the Lear Jet and John was a commercial pilot and his videos on 911 explain why no planes were used.

Zionist Israel and the zionist controlled deep state did 911.

Realist , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:42 pm GMT
@Ronald Thomas West

Is Putin ready for Erdogan to back-stab Russia again? (recalling Erdogan's military had shot down a Russian jet.)

The biggest problem Putin has with Erogan is the control of the Russian navy's exit from the Black sea through the Bosporus.

Anon [257] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:45 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra It's just what you said, he's keeping a low profile and staying inside on advice of his security. They're probably worried about snipers in ahigh rise somewhere.
Svigor , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:53 pm GMT
It's been fun listening to (((NPR))) try to spin military withdrawal as a bad thing without actually saying as much. "Trump's facing critics in his own party," "here are some Kurds bitching," "General McProcurer is really pissed," "Chikkenhauk Epsteinbergwitzbaum sez it's the end of the world," etc.

LOL.

m___ , says: December 25, 2018 at 9:09 pm GMT
No rationality, no credibility decision (Syria withdrawal).

Most variables are missing. Trump is insignificant but as a figurehead. At least a few layers, the correlations and "secret" deals with Israel, Turkey, IS, Kurds, France, the UK, let's not forget Russia are missing. The commoner, deplorable, are lead by the nose, our middle class bread scribes are doing the herding by shifting the attention, and building an exit of face saving on what they omit to pull in the open.

No value in this "News" and "Christmas present" at all, but more of deceit of a global ruling class in the shadows. It is called smarts, to deceive the rest of the dumb (in the eyes of the elites) masses, it is relevant to call out our elites on not smart enough to think over the long term.

Who of a building presence of outliers can they still deceive?

chris , says: December 25, 2018 at 9:18 pm GMT
@Sarah Toga "Death and taxes" for countries translates to "war and bankruptcy." Maybe we'll get lucky and hit the latter before we kill everyone in the former.
AnonFromTN , says: December 25, 2018 at 9:20 pm GMT
@Realist That's more like Erdogan's problem with Russia. Russian coastal defense system K-300P Bastion-P in Crimea is perfectly capable of making Bosporus and Dardanelles straits much wider. However crazy Erdogan is, he is well aware of that.
RobinG , says: December 25, 2018 at 9:21 pm GMT
.local sources told Al Jazeera and Turkey's state-run Anadolu Agency --

Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said on Tuesday that Ankara and Washington agreed to complete withdrawal of the YPG forces from Manbij before the US pulls out of Syria.

He added the US agreed to take back weapons given to the YPG.

Syrian government forces 'enter' Kurdish-controlled Manbij region
Trucks carrying regime forces and equipment, and armoured vehicles have arrived in the region, sources say.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/12/syrian-government-forces-enter-kurdish-controlled-manbij-region-181225153526422.html

chris , says: December 25, 2018 at 9:27 pm GMT
@Svigor Very funny, Svigor, still, you couldn't pay me enough to listen to NPR.

The smug, self-confidence of diletantnts combined with crass dishonesty is hard to beat when it comes to annoying!

Bragadocious , says: December 25, 2018 at 9:31 pm GMT
@follyofwar Actually Brits think their country is doing just great. But yeah, the "special relationship" should be scuttled. We face a bigger threat from British jihadis than any Iranians anywhere. Richard Reid is sitting in a federal Supermax but I don't think any Iranians are.

Brits simply love using the U.S. military for their own venal objectives. And if anything goes wrong, the Brits can distance themselves and blame it on "the Yanks." A win-win.

annamaria , says: December 25, 2018 at 9:36 pm GMT
Merry Christmas, dear Friends:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=217&v=qJ_MGWio-vc

AnonFromTN , says: December 25, 2018 at 9:42 pm GMT
@Svigor It is really funny to see "peace-loving" liberals trying not to look like warmongers that they are. NPR is not alone in attempting this sleight of hand: NYT, CNN, WaPo, and others of their ilk are desperately trying to appear peace-loving while promoting wars that benefit MIC and Israel. Hypocrisy at its most awkward. The only good thing is, they are forced to show their true colors.
peterAUS , says: December 25, 2018 at 9:59 pm GMT
@m___ Well you know, that perception of yours re how the real world really works is, actually, positive and optimistic.

If if I get you correct, you believe/feel/think there IS the "overclass" (for a lack of better word) which rules the world. They are hidden, all powerful, competent, on the same page and malevolent re us , the common folks.

I am afraid that's not the case.

I believe/feel/think there is no such overclass.
My take is there are warring factions of mostly incompetent little people with a lot of power who fight among themselves who's going to get more power and related material wealth. The malevolent part re all those they see as below them is given, of course.

And, gets worse, actually.
In this particular case I think the decision was made in a spur of a moment. Pure Emperor whim ,if you will.
On top of it, we still haven't seen any actual move on the ground.
And, even if those up to 2000 men do pull out, what about CIA/special forces/contractors bunch?
And, even better, those 2000 and more can return in 48 hours if the Emperor decides otherwise. In a spur of a moment too.

Anyone so happy here commenting this .thing has been following what's really been happening with North Korea?
What exactly changed from that fateful meeting between the Emperor and the .Cult Leader?
Let's summarize: the very point of all that was stopping and rolling back NK capability for long range nuclear strike.
So .any "rolling" happened? Anything?
I don't think so, but, more than happy to be proven wrong. Proven, mind you.

The only important, and sad actually, is how we all got into the stage when a tweet by that fellow can agitate us so much.
Mice and just a whiff of cheese over the cage.

They really got us where they wanted. And those "they" aren't even that smart.
Just great.

nickels , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:12 pm GMT
All wars are jews wars:

"Trump is retreating from Syria – and from his pro-Israel Jewish conservative voters. If that decision is a harbinger of other strategic moves distancing him from Israel's security, much of his remaining Jewish support will fall off a cliff"

https://www.haaretz.com/amp/us-news/.premium-syria-trump-just-gave-the-finger-to-his-pro-israel-jewish-voters-1.6770414

annamaria , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:19 pm GMT
A wonderfully conciliatory and hopeful article by Thierry Meyssan: http://www.voltairenet.org/article204453.html

"The United States refuse to fight for the transnational financiers"

As soon as he entered the White House, Donald Trump was careful to surround himself with three senior military officers with enough authority to reposition the armed forces. Michael Flynn, John Kelly and especially James Mattis, have since left or are in the process of leaving. All three men are great soldiers who together had opposed their hierarchy during Obama's presidency. They did not accept the strategy implemented by ambassador John Negroponte for the creation of terrorist groups tasked with stirring up a civil war in Iraq. All three stood with President Trump to annul Washington's support for the jihadists.

The Pentagon project for the last seventeen years in the "Greater Middle East" will not happen. Conceived by Admiral Arthur Cebrowski, it was aimed at destroying all the state structures in the region, with the exception of Israël, Jordan and Lebanon. This plan, which began in Afghanistan, spread as far as Libya, and is still under way, will come to an end on Syrian territory.

It is no longer acceptable that US armies fight with taxpayers' funds for the sole financial interests of global financiers, even if they are US citizens.

The Bush Jr. and Obama administrations shoulder the entire responsibility for this war [in Syria]. They were the ones who planned it and realised it within the framework of a unipolar world .

Afghanistan's misery began during the Carter presidency. National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzeziński, called on the Muslim Brotherhood and Israël to launch a campaign of terrorism against the Communist government. Terrified, the government appealed to the Soviets to maintain order. The result was a fourteen-year war, followed by a civil war, and then followed by the Anglo-US invasion.

After forty years of uninterrupted destruction, President Trump states that US military presence is not the solution for Afghanistan, it's the problem.

AnonFromTN , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:20 pm GMT
@peterAUS

My take is there are warring factions of mostly incompetent little people with a lot of power who fight among themselves who's going to get more power and related material wealth. The malevolent part re all those they see as below them is given, of course.

And those "they" aren't even that smart.

My goodness! I agree with you on this.

Ronald Thomas West , says: Website December 25, 2018 at 10:24 pm GMT
@Realist When Erdogan's military had shot down the Russian jet, Turkey paid for it rapidly with an economic squeeze. Russian tourism to Turkey was shut down and green grocer exports to Russia were subjected to intense scrutiny/inspection and nearly halted. One could say the Turks are still feeling the effect, the impact was immediate and probably there hasn't been a full recovery to some of the businesses that had been damaged. Erdogan tucked his tail and played nice with Putin after all but he is no dependable ally of anyone, he's screwed everyone he'd ever done business with insofar as the M.E. regional game. The main problem with Turkey for Russia is the Erdogan regime's Salafi outlook (to say the leadership is sympathetic to al-Qaida would be an understatement.) Erdogan may have promised to 'neutralize' the Idlib extremists but he won't, he can't, in fact he doesn't dare, it is estimated there are upwards of 1,000 cells established in Turkey. How that plays out is anyone's guess but my money is on the idea he'll shove the the Idlib extremists off on the Kurds as a Turkish military proxy and cross Putin in the process (the USA won't mind this at all and in fact CIA Ops division might reward it.)
Anon [149] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:36 pm GMT

LOCKERBIE

http://aanirfan.blogspot.com/2018/12/lockerbie.html

anon [376] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:43 pm GMT
@Bragadocious

Brits simply love using the U.S. military for their own venal objectives.

yeah, those dirty "Brits"

next thing you know they'll try to send the US Navy up the Yangtze River to force opium on the Chinese, lol

RobinG , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:50 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN "The only good thing is, they are forced to show their true colors."
Exactly. The liars, frauds, gatekeepers, Hillary-bots, and every brand of stupid in between have been flushed into the open. For example, anyone who still admires Chomsky should take note:

Aaron Maté‏Verified account @aaronjmate · Dec 24

Update: Chomsky was sent my Q & this is his response. He favors keeping US troops in Syria as a holding operation until a final settlement w/ Russia-Assad that could guarantee Kurds' safety. With US pulling out now, he argues that all leverage is lost to avoid a Turkish assault:

"What deal with the Russians (who right now are making cozy deals with Turkey)? And a deal with Assad, the main mass murderer in Syria – – who can in any event do nothing to deter Turkey.

In fact, in the longer term there should be a deal crucially involving Russia and with Assad, with some kind of guarantees (for what they are worth) to preserve at least some limited protection for the Kurds. But that's the longer term. This is now. For now, the sole deterrent to a Turkish assault is a small US contingent confined to Kurdish areas, as a holding operation for a possible longer term settlement along the lines just indicated."

Digital Samizdat , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:54 pm GMT
Everybody say a prayer for Lindsay Graham this Christmas. I hear he's in distress
Anon [149] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:36 pm GMT

LOCKERBIE

http://aanirfan.blogspot.com/2018/12/lockerbie.html

anon [376] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:43 pm GMT
@Bragadocious

Brits simply love using the U.S. military for their own venal objectives.

yeah, those dirty "Brits"

next thing you know they'll try to send the US Navy up the Yangtze River to force opium on the Chinese, lol

RobinG , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:50 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN "The only good thing is, they are forced to show their true colors."
Exactly. The liars, frauds, gatekeepers, Hillary-bots, and every brand of stupid in between have been flushed into the open. For example, anyone who still admires Chomsky should take note:

Aaron Maté‏Verified account @aaronjmate · Dec 24

Update: Chomsky was sent my Q & this is his response. He favors keeping US troops in Syria as a holding operation until a final settlement w/ Russia-Assad that could guarantee Kurds' safety. With US pulling out now, he argues that all leverage is lost to avoid a Turkish assault:

"What deal with the Russians (who right now are making cozy deals with Turkey)? And a deal with Assad, the main mass murderer in Syria – – who can in any event do nothing to deter Turkey.

In fact, in the longer term there should be a deal crucially involving Russia and with Assad, with some kind of guarantees (for what they are worth) to preserve at least some limited protection for the Kurds. But that's the longer term. This is now. For now, the sole deterrent to a Turkish assault is a small US contingent confined to Kurdish areas, as a holding operation for a possible longer term settlement along the lines just indicated."

Digital Samizdat , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:54 pm GMT
Everybody say a prayer for Lindsay Graham this Christmas. I hear he's in distress
Svigor , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:57 pm GMT
I find it interesting that Drudge has had almost nothing about the Syria withdrawal, or the fallout Giraldi describes. I heard far more about it by tuning in to NPR.
Haxo Angmark , says: Website December 25, 2018 at 11:07 pm GMT
just in case no one above has mentioned it:

(((Reuters))) is a

(((Rothschild)))-owned fake news racket. And, incidentally,

(((Reuters))) is where the BBC got its 15-minutes premature bulletin

on the collapse of WT-7.

FB , says: December 25, 2018 at 11:08 pm GMT
@Michael Kenny If Putin is 'bogged' down in Syria, one shudders to think of what kind of bog your tiny brain is stuck in
Realist , says: December 25, 2018 at 11:17 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

That's more like Erdogan's problem with Russia. Russian coastal defense system K-300P Bastion-P in Crimea is perfectly capable of making Bosporus and Dardanelles straits much wider.

It's not that simple. Any attempt to take control of the of the Bosporus would make it at least temporarily impassable.

NoseytheDuke , says: December 25, 2018 at 11:25 pm GMT
@follyofwar The real change will come should ever US military personnel realise that true patriotism would compel them not to serve, to sabotage equipment and even resort to fragging. Perhaps Incitatus could give instructions on how some could pull off a "Corporal Klinger" in order to evade service.
geokat62 , says: December 25, 2018 at 11:27 pm GMT
Well, that didn't take long:
Svigor , says: December 25, 2018 at 11:37 pm GMT
@Carlton Meyer Good clip. High points for LULZ were "if we're fighting Assad doesn't that help ISIS? And if we're fighting ISIS doesn't that help Assad?" and "now you know why people get their news from Youtube."
NoseytheDuke , says: December 25, 2018 at 11:39 pm GMT
@Bragadocious It is business as usual. I remember when GWB was having some difficulty selling the war on Iraq prior to the invasion. War criminal Tony Blair very eloquently addressed both houses in the US and closed the sale. I watched it live with a tough old former Marine friend who was actually moved to tears when he realised that the war would be going ahead. What hope is there for nations that have yet to hold to account such vermin as Blair, GWB, Howard etc?
Digital Samizdat , says: December 25, 2018 at 11:43 pm GMT
@follyofwar The Brits were the original Rothschild ass-muppets. Before there was the Fed, there was the Bank of England. Before there was the Senate, there was Parliament. And before there was Wall Street, there was the City of London. Hell, without Britain, Israel wouldn't even exist!

I'm not putting down ordinary British people, who tend to be very nice. I'm talking about their horrible ruling class, which is just rotten to the core.

Wally , says: December 25, 2018 at 11:51 pm GMT
@Anon What's the battle cry of the US army?
Wally , says: Website December 25, 2018 at 11:56 pm GMT
@anon LOL

Also how Kenny is "irreversibly bogged down in" trying to find proof of his fantasized '6,000,000 Jews & gas chambers'.

AnonFromTN , says: December 26, 2018 at 12:01 am GMT
@Realist Taking into account long-range missiles, impassability of those straits is not such a great military problem. But the disappearance of a large chunk if Istanbul (the US would call it "collateral damage") would be a serious problem for Turkey.

I don't think it would ever come to that: Erdogan is a cautious bastard. His whole stint with buying Russian C-400 was undertaken to make sure he is not "democratically" bombed by those who bring democracy on the heads of aborigines in half-a-ton TNT installments and then bitterly complain that those aborigines are ungrateful.

Wally , says: December 26, 2018 at 12:01 am GMT
@Svigor Indeed, the once 'pro-peace left' is quite the opposite.

I always laugh when I see peace sign bumper stickers next to Obama and / or Hillary stickers.

NoseytheDuke , says: December 26, 2018 at 12:09 am GMT
@Bragadocious To be fair, the "Brits", as in the British people, bear the same responsibility as do the "Americans", as in the American people. Granted, a great many voters in both nations are quite utterly stupid but it might be more accurate to refer to The City and to Wall St as being the guilty ones.
RobinG , says: December 26, 2018 at 12:17 am GMT
@geokat62 Could be Maram was a little quick off the mark with the "raining down." But definitely, Israel may try anything in desperation.

SYRIANA ANALYSIS -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYj2WWh7Pgw&feature=youtu.be

Syrian air defences responding to hostile targets in Damascus

obwandiyag , says: December 26, 2018 at 12:38 am GMT
The US is ISIS. It's like stopping hitting yourself in the face.
anon [246] Disclaimer , says: December 26, 2018 at 12:42 am GMT
Ill believe it when they are gone.

Trump now has a new acting Secretary of Defense [Shannahan]. Turkey is already dithering about needing more time.

Military will never stop slow walking this.

Although new alliances are being formed.

ChuckOrloski , says: December 26, 2018 at 1:02 am GMT
@wayfarer Christmas greetings, Wayfarer!

Thanks so much for the video examination of The Economist magazine cover. Oh, man! What s gift you gave U.R. commenters.

The stork carrying the baby delivery bag with bar code markings especially astonished me!

Thanks, again!

wayfarer , says: December 26, 2018 at 1:10 am GMT
@FB Just a thought.

Grunts, the ones actually doing the fighting and dying, will typically refer to one who speaks out in support of war, yet has avoided active military service, as a chickenshit and not a chickenhawk.

So it's probably safe to say, wikiquote needs to be updated.

source: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Chickenhawk_(politics)

ChuckOrloski , says: December 26, 2018 at 1:13 am GMT
@geokat62 Hey geokat!

(Zigh)

As drudgereport features today, Pope proclaims love is needed, Israel gave neighboring Syria some backward-love, uh, "evol," today, Christmas day!

Anon [512] Disclaimer , says: December 26, 2018 at 1:20 am GMT
Chickenhawk ought to become the term for warmongers too cowardly actually join the military themselves.
Anon [512] Disclaimer , says: December 26, 2018 at 1:30 am GMT
@never-anonymous Your average American general isn't interested in America's welfare. He's interested in the defensive industry because he plans to retire early from the US army and get rich lobbying for defensive companies. People like this tend to be good at climbing the rank ladder because they are completely self-serving, and they are a genuine problem for the the US when they get to the top and claim the ear of a US president. All they do is promote more war to make their future employers rich, who then provide a quid pro quo by hiring these disgusting generals afterwards.
Pft , says: December 26, 2018 at 1:39 am GMT
"though one has to be concerned that there might be some secret side deals with Israel or Turkey that could actually result in more attacks on Syria and on the Kurds. "

Lol, yup, thats the plan

wayfarer , says: December 26, 2018 at 2:04 am GMT
@ChuckOrloski

The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_Jackson

That is you, Chuck Orloski.

You're an American patriot, one who's proven to be a "reliable soldier" in the good fight.

Hope you've had a Merry Christmas.

Now standby for heavy rolls, in 2019.

RobinG , says: December 26, 2018 at 2:35 am GMT
@RobinG Or not.

@Partisangirl
#Israel murdered this Syrian soldier on #christmas. First lieutenant Gabriel Ali Raya won't be going home to his family. Yet fools keep believing Israeli lie that they are targeting Iran while it's bombing #Syria.

https://twitter.com/Partisangirl

redmudhooch , says: December 26, 2018 at 2:49 am GMT
This is most certainly good news if true, but lets not forget they're still poking at Russia, poking at China, still all over Africa, still stirring trouble in Latin America.
Who knows if they may be about to send in private mercenaries from Blackwater into Syria. Not to mention all the money and weapons we give the Israelis-Saudis so they'll still be stirring shit in Syria and elsewhere, all that American money could buy Israel lots of mercenaries to do the same thing in Syria.

The entire MIC has gotten out of control, money buys congress, they have lots of money. Assuming Trump has any real power or actually cares, he should be trying to get the "defense" industries into doing something other than building weapons of war, maybe put them to work in technology or health or something that benefits humanity, gets America back to competing with Asia, instead of just killing folks.
As long as these "people" are making tons of money building weapons to kill, that is what they will do, wherever it may be. War shouldn't a business.
I guess we just have to wait and see, I'll believe it when I see it.

Agent76 , says: December 26, 2018 at 3:30 am GMT
April 07, 2017 Pentagon Trained Syria's Al Qaeda "Rebels" in the Use of Chemical Weapons

The Western media refutes their own lies.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/pentagon-trained-syrias-al-qaeda-rebels-in-the-use-of-chemical-weapons/5583784

Apr 9, 2017 No More

DECEMBER 21, 2018 It's About Time for the U.S. to Exit Syria and Afghanistan

The final resolution of the U.S.-led war in Syria must be determined by Syrians themselves. All foreign forces must recognize and respect the sovereignty of the Syrian people and their legal representatives.

https://blackallianceforpeace.com/bapstatements/usoutofsyria

A123 , says: December 26, 2018 at 3:31 am GMT
@RobinG 100% of the planes sent by Israel have returned to base damage free.

After Action Review [AAR]:
-- Assad' s forces definitely expended a significant number of very expensive interceptors.
-- They may, or may not, have shot down one or more less expensive standoff weapons launched by Israel.
-- Iranian forces in Syria were hit and damaged (TBD on repairable vs. destroyed).

All objective analysts will score today's engagement as at least a minor win for the IDF.
Stand by for the non-objective, histrionic, Pallywood, Taqiyya artists' inevitable attempts to misrepresent the events.
_____

The most critical question is, "What AA systems were active?"

The S-300 system, slated for eventual turnover to Syrian forces, has significant training requirements. There are still months of training to be done. So, odds are the S-300 and S-400 systems in theatre, under exclusive Russian control, stayed off.

Much more limited systems such as S-200, Pantsir, and earlier generations are beatable if they are accurately located during planning and shown the respect they deserve. These systems have one shootdown of an F-16 variant that was too low and may have had a serious mechanical failure in countermeasures.

The true decision points are still months away.
-- Will Russia ever turn an S-300 system over to Syrian control?
-- If so, will Assad pay the cash burn rate of ~$0.5 to $1.0 million per S-300 class interceptor?

It is hard to believe that Assad will further bankrupt his nation and starve his children to defend the Iranian, al-Hezbollah rocket forces being targeted by Israel.

Agent76 , says: December 26, 2018 at 3:31 am GMT
May 5, 2017 Syrian War And The Battle For Golan Heights – Genie Oil & Gas Exposed!

The battle for Golan Heights in Syria will soon be under way and in this video Dan Dicks of Press For Truth exposes the Genie Oil and Gas Company and everyone on their advisory board.

JLK , says: December 26, 2018 at 3:51 am GMT
@AnonFromTN

Stay tuned.

I'm as happy with the withdrawal from Syria as anyone here, but "stay tuned" is probably good advice so we don't get our hopes up too much. They may have moved them out of harm's way in preparation for initiating more mischief somewhere else.

RobinG , says: December 26, 2018 at 3:59 am GMT
@A123 Troll #A123 confirms,
ISRAEL KILLS ON CHRISTMAS

Following ancient pattern of Jews attacking on Holy Days.

Pantsir-S2 SAM system of #Syria Arab Air Defense Force launched eight 57E6-E surface to air missiles at Delilah cruise missiles launched by F-16Is of 107sq "Knights of the Orange Tail Squadron" flying from #Hatzerim AB.

niceland , says: December 26, 2018 at 4:10 am GMT
@JLK Or perhaps a bargaining chip. Trump: "pay for my wall and I consider keeping the army in Syria"
Anonymous [209] Disclaimer , says: December 26, 2018 at 4:55 am GMT
@AnonFromTN "If Trump folds and reverses, this would expose him as a 100% fraud."

So far, I presume that Trump is 75% fraud ? or is he only 27,5% fraud ?

If by now you don't know that Trump is 100% fraud, I doubt you know what fraud is.

Since JFK, you can't be President w/o being 100% fraud.

Miro23 , says: December 26, 2018 at 5:16 am GMT

Donald Trump is already under extreme pressure coming from all directions to reverse his decision to leave Syria and it is quite possible that he will either fold completely or bend at least a bit.

Trump is dealing with the lethal crowd who orchestrated 9/11, so keeping this in mind, the Syria withdrawal decision could conceivably be taken out of his hands using (another) False Flag,this time targeting Iran (and sacrificing a few thousand American servicemen in the Middle East) or alternatively, using covert action in the US, aimed directly at substituting Trump for Pence.

In an ethics free zone, combined with the enormous hubris of the maniacs running the Empire, possibilities have to extend this far.

annamaria , says: December 26, 2018 at 5:32 am GMT
@A123 "100% of the planes sent by Israel have returned to base damage free."

– does this mean that you are ready to abandon the annoying quetching about "Jewish eternal victimhood" and "Jewish incomparable suffering?"

And how is the Jewish State cooperation with Ukrainian neo-Nazi going on?

The first ever Jewish prime-minister of Ukraine Mr. Groysman has been quite effective in keeping with the ongoing restoration of Nazism and banderism in the Kaganat of Nuland (former Ukraine). Guess the main local financier of the neo-Nazi, an Israeli/Ukrainian citizen Kolomojsky, is preparing for a special award from Knesset and AIPAC for his selfless service to the ideas of zionism/nazism.

A123 , says: December 26, 2018 at 6:23 am GMT
@RobinG Please observe . as predicted, . the Taqiyya Trolls are now attempting to deploy histrionics to distract from The Truth.

Serious questions:

-- Do violent Iranian al-Hezbollah forces in Syria take off for Christian holidays? No?
-- Do violent Iranian al-Hamas forces in Gaza disrespect their own religion by launching offensive, border assaults every Friday? Yes?
-- What militarily sound reason is there to give a free pass to violent Iranian forces that do not respect any religious traditions or holidays? None?

The bottom line is pretty simple.

If Iran was not violent, there would be no military action against them on Christmas or any other day. As long as Iran is violent, their Taqiyya supporters cannot credibly whinge about countries defending themselves against Iranian violence.

byrresheim , says: December 26, 2018 at 6:33 am GMT
@jilles dykstra You would do well to read up on the late Shah's stance towards western exploitation of the rest of the world. It's an eye opener.

Even then I wondered how the horrible events of '79 came to pass against the wishes of the Free West™.

Wizard of Oz , says: December 26, 2018 at 6:47 am GMT
@Digital Samizdat What "ruling class". As ruling classes go, especially in a powerful country, the British ruling class wasn't too bad till about 1900. Now the pseudomeritocracy scrambling to make sense in a much less powerful and important country hardly deserves the description "ruling class" at all. Indeed universal suffrage and the devastation of WW1 and the Great Depression may have predictably doomed it years ago.
Wizard of Oz , says: December 26, 2018 at 6:54 am GMT
@NoseytheDuke What do you make of the excuse for Howard (though Malcolm Fraser wouldn't have conceded it!!) that he wasn't critical to the war happening and that only one Australian soldier was killed (by his own hand, presumably accidentally)? 2003 was, after all, a bit early to be looking to China for Australia's comfortable place in the world.
anon [365] Disclaimer , says: December 26, 2018 at 7:02 am GMT
@renfro Israel is attacking Lebanon and Syria . it is threatening other countries as well in between for lending voices to issues like nuclear treaties with Iran. It has earlier stolen passports, it has forged passports, it has assassinated leaders who were at that time in third country. Now criticizing these activities will be nothing but expression of anti semitism.

WTF wrong with these snake charmers of enormous linguistic variability ? That what it is. They have tongues and they know how to coin new words .

Realist , says: December 26, 2018 at 8:58 am GMT
@AnonFromTN

But the disappearance of a large chunk if Istanbul (the US would call it "collateral damage") would be a serious problem for Turkey.

The US would call it war .Turkey is a NATO member.

Erebus , says: December 26, 2018 at 9:12 am GMT
@JLK

"stay tuned" is probably good advice

Indeed it is, but the cacophony Trump's announcement raised seems genuine enough.

There's something about this whole affair that instills (at least in me) a vague sense that Trump, having given up on a 2nd term, is going to get whatever he can via surprise Presidential Policy Announcements as long as he lasts in office. It's how he ran his campaign and almost certainly the only way he can get anything he said he wanted to do done.

Keep his detractors off-balance with a sufficiently constant stream of announcements that their heads haven't quite stopped spinning before the next one comes out.

To that end, keeping the barking mad ideologues around him on the payroll makes sense. They add to the noise that serves to make the announcement appear reasonable, whereas nuanced argument would undermine his policies even when they're fundamentally right.

So, I'm staying tuned. We may see lots more coming from the same place.

jilles dykstra , says: December 26, 2018 at 9:45 am GMT
@Bragadocious No more than military and political stupidity.
It had been pointed out that defending Srebreniza needed 80.000 troops and heavy weapons.
jilles dykstra , says: December 26, 2018 at 10:02 am GMT
Macron not on skis this year.
My idea is not fear of snipers, but fear of Macron being surrounded by Yellow Vest skiers.
Honnecker's vacations were staying on a government estate, of course completely closed to the public.
Even there, when he went for a walk, a guard a hundred metres before him and another behind him.
Advertising his impopularity by completely closing a piste temporarily for just Macron and some guards probably was seen as not a smart move.
jilles dykstra , says: December 26, 2018 at 10:14 am GMT
@NoseytheDuke Well, after, if I remember well, a seven year investigation a devastating report was published about B-liars' war in GB.
In the Netherlands a somewhat similar report was published about Dutch complicity, the David's report, blaming prime minister Balkenende at the time, and his minister of foreign affairs then, De Hoop Scheffer, later Secretary of NATO.
None of the three is behind bars, true.
Nevertheless, they were exposed as war criminals.
I wonder if it is realistic to expect more, the crimes were political.
If Blair and the two Dutch could have refused, I wonder.
jilles dykstra , says: December 26, 2018 at 11:00 am GMT
@byrresheim If it was horrible is a matter of opinion, I see it as liberation.
Horrible regime, the shah's
It was possible because the USA had been driven out of Vietnam, could not afford another war.
annamaria , says: December 26, 2018 at 12:33 pm GMT
@anon "Israel is attacking Lebanon and Syria."

The Jewish State and rabid Israel-firsters are attacking western civilization: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-12-25/inside-temple-covert-propaganda-integrity-initiative-uks-scandalous-information-war

The Smith Richardson Foundation was founded by billionaire heir to the Vicks fortune, H. Smith Richardson In 1973, the founder's son, Randolph Richardson – a free market fundamentalist and long-time patron of neoconservative ideologue Irving Kristol – inherited the organization.

Recipients of funding from the Smith Richardson Foundation include a who's who of neoconservative and militaristic right-wing institutions.

The Fusion GPS' bunch and Chris Steele are not the only people subverting the democratic process in the US:

Recent hacked documents have revealed an international network of politicians, journalists, academics, researchers and military officers, all engaged in highly deceptive covert propaganda campaigns funded by the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), NATO, Facebook and hardline national security institutions.

This "network of networks", as one document refers to them, centers around an ironically named outfit called the Integrity Initiative. And it is all overseen by the Institute for Statecraft, which has operated under a veil of secrecy.

Where is the US Intelligence Community when the foreign nationals infiltrate election complain in the US?

Bracey-Lane is a 20-something British citizen He appeared out of nowhere to work in Iowa as a field organizer for the Bernie Sanders campaign for president.

"I spent a year working, saving all my money, just thought I was gonna go on a two month road trip from Seattle to New York and I thought, you know what? I'm gonna stay and work for the Bernie Sanders campaign," Bracey-Lane told a reporter for AFP on January 27, 2016.

However An Institute for Statecraft document on "roles and relevant experience" of the outfit's "expert team" notes that Bracey-Lane conducted a "special study of Russian interference in the US electoral process." The document does not make clear when that study was conducted, however, it is listed directly next to its author's history of work with the Bernie campaign.

The Integrity Initiative (oh, irony!) has been also busy with subverting the democratic process in Spain and the UK:

The Integrity Initiative waged a successful covert campaign to destroy the appointment of Pedro Baños to Director of Spain's National Security Department by carry[ing] out the hit job through a hand-picked "cluster" of Spanish politicians and operatives to flood social media and sympathetic outlets with messages demonizing Baños.

The Integrity Initiative appears to have employed the same tactics to smear left-wing journalists and political figures across the West, including the leader of the UK's Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn.

According to David Miller, professor of political sociology in the school of policy studies at the University of Bristol and the director of the Organization for Propaganda Studies, the Integrity Initiative "appears to be a military directed push."

Johnny Walker Read , says: December 26, 2018 at 1:20 pm GMT
@wayfarer Not sure, but we are home to Kirtland Air Force Base and Sandia National Labs so I guess anything is possible. I just know it has been brutal all fall and winter. Starts out with massive chemtrailing and ends up with sky completely darkened.

My spidy sense is also tingling, but I am in awe that no one seem's to notice, no one seem's to care. Like you, I feel the curtain is about to be pulled on the final act. God help us all.

follyofwar , says: December 26, 2018 at 1:59 pm GMT
@Realist I've read that Mr. Trump abrupted decided to pull out of Syria after a phone call with Erdogan. He wasn't about to confer with Mattis, Pompeo, or Bolton as they would have all objected. Trump cannot afford to be the president who allowed Turkey to leave NATO and align with Russia. It's all about geo-politics.

Too bad that crybaby Netanyahu doesn't like it. Israel has nowhere else to go and needs US support to even exist. The Kurds will be sacrificed, but Turkey is much more important. Trump must pull out the US troops ASAP as they nothing but sitting ducks – like those 400 or so Marines who were blown up during the Lebanese civil war during the Reagan Admin. My biggest concern is that they will be attacked with many casualties while in country, forcing Trump to stay.

Fran Macadam , says: December 26, 2018 at 2:07 pm GMT
"Filmmaker Rob Reiner tweeted on Thursday that the president is a 'childish moronic mentally unstable malignant narcissist' who is 'committing Treason' against the United States."

He didn't just play a meathead on TV, he became one in real life.

geokat62 , says: December 26, 2018 at 2:42 pm GMT
@Fran Macadam

He didn't just play a meathead on TV, he became one in real life.

Welcome to the dark side, Fran.

jilles dykstra , says: December 26, 2018 at 2:48 pm GMT
@follyofwar " Trump cannot afford to be the president who allowed Turkey to leave NATO and align with Russia. It's all about geo-politics. "

What makes you think Turkey is still in NATO ?
And what is NATO ?
Both Merkel and Macron say they want an EU army.
An army for what, many here in Europe wonder.
Attacking the country that keeps the Germans warm in winter and German industry going ?

AnonFromTN , says: December 26, 2018 at 3:13 pm GMT
@Realist Did you read Article V of NATO treaty?
Here it is:

Article V
The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.

To translate it into plain English, if one member is attacked and another member decides to send the victim pampers, that other member would be perfectly within its rights. The US made 100% sure it has no obligations whatsoever under that treaty. Not to mention that when the US does have obligations, it simply breaks the treaty (the deal with Iran being the latest glaring example).

APilgrim , says: December 26, 2018 at 3:41 pm GMT
@Johnny Walker Read I call Bull SH1T

New Mexico has little Snowpack, so far. https://wcc.sc.egov.usda.gov/reports/UpdateReport.html?report=New+Mexico&format=SNOTEL+Snowpack+Update+Report – https://www.onthesnow.com/new-mexico/ski-apache/skireport.html

NoseytheDuke , says: December 26, 2018 at 3:46 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz A great legal mind such as your own would surely know that under US law any person involved in any way in a crime resulting in the deaths of victims is held to be equally responsible. Just being a wheelman or a lookout is enough to be found to be as equally guilty as the triggerman. All forces involved in the war crimes of the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, other than the US, were token forces whose role was as much to legitimise the US invasions as to have much material impact. Howard's (and Blair's) excuse that it was due to faulty intel is an insult to those who serve honourably and legitimately in ASIO.

String them up, I say, and you Sir would demean yourself should you attempt to defend them.

AnonFromTN , says: December 26, 2018 at 3:49 pm GMT
@Anonymous You are seeing the world in black and white, whereas in reality it has various shades of gray. The Deep State is not monolithic. Every snake in that pit wants to control not only us "deplorables", but the other snakes, as well. While all those greedy rothschilds, soroses, and adelsons beat even Devil himself in their lack of morals, some placed their bets on the corrupt mad witch, while others on the orange clown. Some snakes are smart enough to understand that to keep their loot they need the protection of a strong US state. Otherwise other thieves would gladly steal their ill-gotten riches.

The presidents are frauds in a sense that they are puppets, but not in a sense that they all have the same puppet master. Say, Nixon put the country ahead of the Empire and extricated us from the Vietnam quagmire. There is a chance that Trump (i.e., the faction of the Deep State that betted on him) also wants to save America as a country by acknowledging the losses of the Empire and acting accordingly. We'll see soon enough.

foolisholdman , says: December 26, 2018 at 3:55 pm GMT
@anon Care to give us some examples of 'Soviet Aggression'?
anon [994] Disclaimer , says: December 26, 2018 at 4:07 pm GMT
@annamaria WHAT IS ANTISEMITISM !

Israel behind civilian planes ( this time in Lebanon)attacked Syria.

criticizing this piece of Israeli behavior is known as anti semitism according to Jew and the jew slave Congress Senate , Diet , Parliament , ( USA Germany UK )
. If Saddam were Jewish , his pals were Likud and the citizen worshipped in synagogue , criticism against 1990 invasion of Kuwait would have been called anti semitism punishable by jail .

AnonFromTN , says: December 26, 2018 at 4:10 pm GMT
@foolisholdman There were cases of real Soviet aggression, although, contrary to the assertion of Western propaganda, much fewer than there were cases of the US aggression. To give you an example, invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 was Soviet aggression at its stupidest. The US invasion of the same Afghanistan in 2001 was equally stupid. One can argue that it was even more stupid, given that Soviet example preceded it. Only a hopeless moron steps into a trap knowing that it is a trap.

However disgusting the US foreign policy was and still is, the USSR was no knight in shining armor, either.

Svigor , says: December 26, 2018 at 4:34 pm GMT
@foolisholdman Sure Finland Czechoslovakia Hungary Romania Ukraine Poland Germany Belarus Armenia Azerbaijan Estonia Latvia Bulgaria Georgia Yugoslavia Lithuania Moldova Chechnia etc.
Agent76 , says: December 26, 2018 at 4:35 pm GMT
@DESERT FOX September 11, 2016 Al Qaeda: The Data Base

Shortly before his untimely death, former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook told the House of Commons that "Al Qaeda" is not really a terrorist group but a database of international mujaheddin and arms smugglers used by the CIA and Saudis to funnel guerrillas, arms, and money into Soviet-occupied Afghanistan.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/al-qaeda-the-database-2/24738

RobinG , says: December 26, 2018 at 4:42 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN Try again. Maybe 1979 was foolish, since "invasion" was manufactured.

As Zbig Brzezinski admitted, the Soviet action was produced by the CIA support to anti-Russian Jihadi terrorism, not the other way round. Basically CIA funded terrorism to "give USSR its own Vietnam." His interview is online.

MacNucc11 , says: December 26, 2018 at 4:57 pm GMT
@wayfarer An argument could be made that even chickenshit is being improperly associated since it most likely has some use as opposed to none at all.
ChuckOrloski , says: December 26, 2018 at 4:59 pm GMT
@geokat62 geo warmly offered Fran: 'Welcome to the dark side, Fran."

Hey G.D.L.-robed Brother geokat!

As you likely are aware, the Syrian ballistic missile system gave 14 of 16 Israeli F-16 (dark) missiles aimed at Damascus outskirt a bright & shiny welcome.

But nonetheless, please refer to Haaretz article below, and Russian knowledge of Israel's endangering two civilian airplane flight trajectories.

https://www.haaretz.com/whdcMobileSite/israel-news/russia-israel-s-syria-strike-directly-endangered-two-civilian-flights-1.6784562

A123 , says: December 26, 2018 at 5:01 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN The Iran/JOCPA deal was not a Treaty.

Article II, Section 2, Clause 2, of the United States Constitution:

[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur .

No such Treaty as approval was ever given by the Senate. Soros sock-puppet Obama lied when he claimed to have extra-constitutional powers to bind future administrations. Remember Obama's promise, "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor"? There were plenty of warning signs that Obama was a liar, so no one should be surprised that he lied about JOCPA.

Trump did not violate or break anything , because the non-ratified, non-treaty did not meet Constitutional minimums.
__________

Putin supporters should understand this as Russia has an identical issue in play. The 1950′s transfer of Crimea to Ukraine did not meet Russian constitutional standards.

Thus, identical to Trump's treatment of JOCPA, Putin is free to ignore the unconstitutional acts of the prior Krushchev / Vorashilov administration.

DESERT FOX , says: December 26, 2018 at 5:15 pm GMT
@Agent76 Agree, and would add that AL CIADA ie ISIS is a creation of the CIA and the MOSSAD and MI6 and NATO and Robin Cook was killed shortly after he made those statements, who benefits?
Harold Smith , says: December 26, 2018 at 5:26 pm GMT
@Miro23 "Trump is dealing with the lethal crowd who orchestrated 9/11 "

Well this line of thought raises some serious question: (1) Why did Trump run for president in the first place? (2) Why did he run on a platform of open defiance to the "deep state" only to occupy a position of intimidating powerlessness? (3) Why does he not fight back by investigating 9/11 or merely threatening to do so? (4) Why does he not use the power of the "presidential bully pulpit" against the "deep state"? (5) If he was sincere during the campaign, why did the "lethal crowd" not deploy a "lone nut" against him before the election? (With so much at stake, why would they risk letting a sincere person anywhere near the levers of power in the first place?) (6) How could a reasonable person be coerced into a course of action (in the realm of "foreign policy") that seems to be leading to nuclear war/planetary extinction? (7) If he was sincere about putting America first, then failing everything else, why doesn't he simply resign?

foolisholdman , says: December 26, 2018 at 5:31 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra From what I heard, Tony Blair was more enthusiastic about the Iraq war before it started, than was Bush.
Dessert Bunny , says: December 26, 2018 at 5:37 pm GMT
@MacNucc11 Chicken shit makes excellent fertilizer. So it promotes life.
AnonFromTN , says: December 26, 2018 at 5:47 pm GMT
@RobinG Well, it did give the USSR its own Vietnam. Now Afghanistan is Vietnam 2.0 for the US (Iraq being Vietnam 3.0; Syria being Vietnam 4.0).
AnonFromTN , says: December 26, 2018 at 5:50 pm GMT
@A123 Legally speaking, you are right. Not to mention that Obama was proven to be a liar in many other things. But withdrawing from the Iran deal damaged the US credibility even among its European vassals.
anonymoys , says: December 26, 2018 at 6:26 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN I've got good news for you. Sometimes the world/truth is really black and white. And in this case, certainly is: Trump is a fraud , has always been and will always be.

And as far as I know , "American" presidents all have the same master, which by the way,is the same master that Putin and his bunch of corrupt oligarchs serve.. Of course there are exceptions Nixon did try to fight against his master but I presume you know what happened to the poor man. Poor but lucky. He died in his bed.

You got something right: "We'll see soon enough.".

But let me tell you the future: there will be no withdraw from Syria UNLESS the king of Israel agrees.
And if the King agrees, it is because, he has other objectives which his puppets, Trump, Putin, Macron will certainly try to implement.

But don't worry, the deep state and the "experts" will always give you "arguments" so you can keep seeing the world in "various shades of gray".

AnonFromTN , says: December 26, 2018 at 7:21 pm GMT
@anonymoys Agree with two things. First, Nixon was luckier than Kennedy, he was only forced to resign, whereas Kennedy was murdered. Second, the same forces were responsible for both events.

But these dark forces are not all-powerful. The world is more complicated than you paint it. There are different factions at work in the US and Russian politics, and these factions are doing their best to cut each others' throats, which is a good thing. We should sincerely wish success to both teams.

Say, many Russian oligarchs (BTW, oligarchs everywhere are criminals, in Russia, in the US, in Europe, etc.) are likely Zionists, but there are other forces supporting Putin's throne. That's why Russia screwed up the Israeli plan to break up Syria into a bunch of warring impotent Bantustans, using Islamic bandits, some paid scum, some just incredibly stupid "true believers". In this Russia teamed up with the Israeli arch-enemy Iran. Judging by the Imperial tantrums in the US, which reached a hysterical pitch lately, Zionists are unhappy with Russian and Chinese stances. So, there is hope for humanity yet.

geokat62 , says: December 26, 2018 at 7:54 pm GMT
@ChuckOrloski

Israel's endangering two civilian airplane flight trajectories.

Cynthia McKinney's reaction:

ChuckOrloski , says: December 26, 2018 at 8:22 pm GMT
@geokat62 Peace, joy, and The Protection be upon Cynthia, geokat! Thanks!!

Below, fyi, Israel is withdrawing/ (confiscating?), hee-hee, funds allocated to German Holocaust museums.

https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2018/12/26/583970/Holocaust-Missing-Funds

Anyone here at U.R. surprised? Including Wally?

ChuckOrloski , says: December 26, 2018 at 8:29 pm GMT
@ChuckOrloski Hey geo!

My apology, a misfire, should be Holocaust "survivor" allocated money and not for German Holocaust "museums.'

Cloak And Dagger , says: December 26, 2018 at 8:37 pm GMT
@ChuckOrloski

Israel's endangering two civilian airplane flight trajectories

The same rules of morality and International law regarding the use of human shields do not apply to Israel. Perhaps you remember this from the past:

During war there are no civilians

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2010/09/201098123618465366.html

"During war there are no civilians," that's what "Yossi," an Israeli military (IDF) training unit leader simply stated during a round of questioning on day two of the Rachel Corrie trials, held in Haifa's District Court earlier this week. "When you write a [protocol] manual, that manual is for war," he added.

Wizard of Oz , says: December 26, 2018 at 8:51 pm GMT
@NoseytheDuke I bow to your superior knowledge of American law(s) but do recall the distasteful way in which one reads of not completely innocent defendants being swept up for plea bargains by such devices as conspiracy charges. But yes, I'm afraid Howard was at least an accessory before the fact and I have no doubt it was Howard that JMF had in mind when he looked at me at an anti Howard government affair in October 2004 and spoke of war criminals who ought to be tried though I recall thinking at the time that it went a bit far to include Howard, the hanger on. As one who came to give Howard amoral admiration just for the sustained determination needed to become a truly successful politician (Cf. F.S. Oliver "The Endless Adventure" and "In Defence of Politics" by Bernard Crick) I am more critical of him for what he did and didn't do with his surprise control of the Senate (not so surprising to him actually by August 2004 polling) including election giveaways that did much to prevent Keating's superannuation schemes ever leading to relief of the burden of old age pensions or, worse, the rise of industry funds to, effectively, be a funding arm for (often private school educated) Labor careerists who will give us 25 years of reduced productivity and unnecessary retail penalty rates and (at least for a while) reduced shopping hours and availability of path and radiology .. just e.g. Then maybe the drag from China no longer making our coal and iron ore super valuable will force changes that recognise we 99 per cent of us are lucky drones (pending a Merkel influx of a million incompatible refugees anyway, but that I would not expect from Shorten).
A123 , says: December 26, 2018 at 8:58 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN I will suggest that a blanket statement on credibility does not work as a logical construct. To be accurate, one must define the perspective via the question:
-- Credibility in the eyes of whom?

I observed a significant increase in U.S. credibility among the citizens and governments of practicing Christian nations of the EU. For example: Poland, Hungary, Austria, and Italy.

Nations such as China that laughed at and casually rolled "Barak Hussein Obama the Submissive" also upped their respect for the U.S. when Trump took over. Though, I do concede that getting over a bar set at 0% (less than Rodney Dangerfield) is pretty easy.

Yes, U.S. National Socialist Democrats [DNC] lost credibility among Establishment Elites of the NWO/UN Circle of Arrogance. After all, they failed to deliver Hillary Clinton to the White House. However, DNC credibility among unelected elites at the debauched UN has nothing to do with U.S. credibility among the civilized people of the world.

A123 , says: December 26, 2018 at 9:11 pm GMT
@Cloak And Dagger More Taqiyya deliberate deception.

Israel did not fire any weapon system at any civilian airplane. It is a lie to say that they did. Given the air space congestion in the area it is functionally impossible to fly a combat mission without overlapping a flight route.

The only force that endangered civilian airliners were those firing anti-aircraft missiles that could hit those planes.

This is why it is highly likely that Russia will never turn over S-300 systems to Syrian control. Russia wants to sell these systems. Interest will drop to zero if Syrian forces use the S-300 to shoot down a civilian airliner over another nation such as Lebanon or Turkey.

Harold Smith , says: December 26, 2018 at 9:37 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN "There are different factions at work in the US and these factions are doing their best to cut each others' throats, which is a good thing. We should sincerely wish success to both teams."

Seriously? With the exception of perhaps "the wall" and a few other relatively minor distractive issues (which won't matter very much when the U.S. is a pile of nuclear ash), I don't see any kind of "faction" offering any serious political opposition whatsoever to anything of significance that orange clown does. All I see is cheap talk/posturing.

Cloak And Dagger , says: December 26, 2018 at 9:44 pm GMT
@A123

Israel did not fire any weapon system at any civilian airplane.

Strawman.

Nobody said your people fired missiles at a civilian airline. You used civilian airplanes to hide behind. It is called using human shields – a war crime.

As for Russia handing over control of S-300′s to Syria, I would advise you to continue to believe that. I look forward to your hubris and arrogance causing you to vanish in a puff of smoke one day.

In any case, leave the US out of your squabbles.

AnonFromTN , says: December 26, 2018 at 9:44 pm GMT
@A123

blanket statement on credibility does not work as a logical construct

Agree. But you appear to think that a blanket statement on "civilized people of the world" works as a logical construct. Sorry to disappoint, it does not work, either.

After Trump announced that the US withdraws, every one of the other signatories of JCPOA (Iran nuclear deal), namely China, France, Germany, EU, Russia, UK, and Iran said that they will abide by the deal, with Iranian stipulation that if the US attempts any hostile action, it would consider itself no longer bound by it. To wit, France, Germany, UK, and EU are subservient pawns of the Empire in most cases.

Iranians explicitly said that the US unilateral withdrawal from this deal shows that it is useless to negotiate with the US and come to any agreements with it, as the US will likely break its word any time it finds it convenient. This did a huge damage to the credibility of the country, no matter how you slice or dice it.

I agree regarding DNC credibility. After they falsified the results of their primaries (as Wasserman-Schultz resignation right before the convention affirmed), DNC cannot claim any credibility. Not that they even needed this trick: Sanders proved to be just as much of a fraud and a piece of shit as the mad witch. However, DNC has nothing to do with it. Obama administration was supposed to represent the country, not DNC. If the ability of Trump to act as President depended on the credibility of RNC (which is as low as that of DNC, although they did not falsify primaries, to the dismay of Deep State), our country is done for.

The President is supposed to be the leader of the country, not just his party. The actions of both Obama and Trump in the international affairs that are meant for internal consumption undermine the US more than any act of its avowed enemies.

AnonFromTN , says: December 26, 2018 at 9:46 pm GMT
@A123

The only force that endangered civilian airliners were those firing anti-aircraft missiles that could hit those planes.

Are you saying that when Israeli rockets see a civilian aircraft, they turn away from it? LOL.

ChuckOrloski , says: December 26, 2018 at 9:52 pm GMT
@Cloak And Dagger Yes, C&D. Agree.

Fyi, I particularly despise the Zionist GWOT designations, "collateral damage," and the demonic branding of wartime Prisoners of War as "non-combatants," and exempt from internationally recognized Geneva Convention treatment while in ZUSA military captivity.

As a veteran who took an August 1970 solemn oath to honor humane treatment of war prisoners, & post-9/11, am wondering if taking such noble vow was being done throughout Basic Training posts, stationed across our (argh!) "Homeland."

Really made me sick to see how Sergeant Charles Garner and P.F.C. Lyndi England were held accountable for their barbaric Abu Ghraib acts, and shortly afterward, the freak-intellectual, John Yoo, became the distorted administration's Prisoner-Torture High Priest. (Zigh)

Am wondering in which prosperous U.S. Zionist "career" field has John Yoo landed?
Hm. Perhaps U.R. Comment-Research Specialist can help me here?

Thanks a lot, C&D!

anon [265] Disclaimer , says: December 26, 2018 at 11:05 pm GMT
@A123

-- Do violent Iranian al-Hezbollah forces in Syria take off for Christian holidays? No?
-- Do violent Iranian al-Hamas forces in Gaza disrespect their own religion by launching offensive, border assaults every Friday? Yes?

everyone is violent except israel – yes? no?

anon [265] Disclaimer , says: December 26, 2018 at 11:08 pm GMT
@anonymoys

I've got good news for you. Sometimes the world/truth is really black and white. And in this case, certainly is: Trump is a fraud , has always been and will always be.

we can't be 100% sure yet but it's looking that way

unless that wall starts getting built pronto i don't see any reason to suport him 2020

anon [265] Disclaimer , says: December 26, 2018 at 11:11 pm GMT
@RobinG

As Zbig Brzezinski admitted .

this creep should be written out of history

same with kissinger

Winston1984 , says: December 26, 2018 at 11:46 pm GMT
All right and clear
Pity, that the lot is stained by the dropping-like sterotype about Goebels' "big lie"
Never mind it's of Hitler's labour, not Goebels', but, more important, in Mein Kampf it is clearly expressed as a warning (beware..) against the chosen-tribe techniques.. The autor should be learned enough to know better: superficiality or malice?
anon [228] Disclaimer , says: December 27, 2018 at 12:16 am GMT
@A123 You are so desperate that you are looking under the mattress to find your last penny. Why don't you ask your grandmother to ( Ben Guiron or Gold mare or some WaPo Rubin or KKK- Krathamer Kristol Kagan ) to find it for you ?
jacques sheete , says: December 27, 2018 at 12:44 am GMT
@anon

Your article names the supporters

He does that consistently and it's exactly what needs to be done. It's also what makes him one of the few people I bother to read any more.

We 'Merkins would be a lot better off with a few more PGs around and I hope he had a fine Christmas was a very Happy Nw Year!

[Dec 27, 2018] Private Eye has reported that the #IntegrityInitiative anti-propoaganda unit is taking tips from the security masterminds who tried to sell the wisdom of going to war in Iraq!

Dec 27, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Blooming Barricade , Dec 26, 2018 12:18:48 PM | link

@2

My jaw dropped to the floor when I read that... the fact that they're reverting to the old name is the final step in the rehabilitation of the Iraq War criminals without liberals and pseudo left none of which would be possible

New podcast by Max Blumenthal and Ben Norton on Integrity Initiative https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=doip79-pYn0

And tying this together.....

Chris Williamson: Private Eye has reported that the #IntegrityInitiative anti-propoaganda unit is taking tips from the security masterminds who tried to sell the wisdom of going to war in Iraq!
And this outfit was set up by the Institute for Statecraft that's received £millions from HM Govt!!! https://mobile.twitter.com/DerbyChrisW/status/1076983080131416066

psychohistorian , Dec 26, 2018 9:32:36 PM | link

Reporting on the Integrity Initiative is spotty yet but I did come across the link below of an article by Max Blumenthal....and promises of more.

Inside the Temple of Covert Propaganda: The Integrity Initiative and the UK's Scandalous Information War

[Dec 27, 2018] Trump Pulls Troops Out of Syria in Desperate Attempt to Save His Presidency, Causing Geopolitical Earthquake

Notable quotes:
"... On December 19, Donald Trump announced in a Twitter message: "Our boys, our young women, our men, they're all coming back and they're coming back now. We won". Shortly thereafter, Pentagon spokeswoman Dana White said in a statement: "We have started the process of returning US troops home from Syria as we transition to the next phase of the campaign". ..."
"... The temperature is heating up for Trump following the midterms, as the Democrats prepare to take command of the House of Representatives in January, something that Trump had always hoped to avert. He surrounded himself with generals, in the forlorn hope that this would somehow protect him. If the last two years of his presidency were constantly under the cloud of Mueller's investigation, or insinuations of being an agent of Putin, from January 2019 the situation is going to get much more complicated. The Democratic electoral base is baying for the President's impeachment, the party already in full pre-primary mode, with more than 20 candidates competing, with the incumbent of the White House offering the rallying cry. ..."
"... Given that 70% of Americans think that the war in Afghanistan was a mistake, the more that the mainstream media attacks Trump for his decision to withdraw, the more they direct votes to Trump. In this sense, Trump's move seems to be directed at a domestic rather than an international audience. ..."
"... The decision to get out of Syria is timed to coincide with another move that will also very much please Trump's base. The government shutdown is a result of the Democrats refusing to fund Trump's campaign promise to build a wall on the Mexican border. ..."
"... The choice to announce to his base, via Twitter, a victory against ISIS and the immediate withdrawal of US troops was a smart election move with an eye on the 2020 election. ..."
"... Macron has for now reacted angrily at Trump's decision, intensifying the division between the two, and is adamant that the French military presence in Syria will continue. ..."
"... The military-industrial-intelligence-media complex considers Trump's decision the worst of of all possible moves. Mattis even resigned on account of this. ..."
"... For Israel, it is a double disaster, with Netanyahu desperate to survive, seeking to factor in expected elections in a now-or-never political move. Trump probably understands that Bibi is done for, and that at this point, the withdrawal of troops, fulfilling a fundamental electoral promise, counts more than Israeli money and his friendship to Bibi. ..."
Dec 27, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

On December 19, Donald Trump announced in a Twitter message: "Our boys, our young women, our men, they're all coming back and they're coming back now. We won". Shortly thereafter, Pentagon spokeswoman Dana White said in a statement: "We have started the process of returning US troops home from Syria as we transition to the next phase of the campaign".

The reasons for Donald Trump's move are many, but they are mainly driven by US domestic concerns. The temperature is heating up for Trump following the midterms, as the Democrats prepare to take command of the House of Representatives in January, something that Trump had always hoped to avert. He surrounded himself with generals, in the forlorn hope that this would somehow protect him. If the last two years of his presidency were constantly under the cloud of Mueller's investigation, or insinuations of being an agent of Putin, from January 2019 the situation is going to get much more complicated. The Democratic electoral base is baying for the President's impeachment, the party already in full pre-primary mode, with more than 20 candidates competing, with the incumbent of the White House offering the rallying cry.

The combination of these factors has forced Trump to change gears, considering that the military-industrial-intelligence-media-complex has always been ready to get rid of Trump, even in favor of a President Pence. The only option available for Trump in order to have a chance of reelection in 2020 is to undertake a self-promotion tour, a practice in which he has few peers, and which will involve him repeating his mantra of "Promises Made, Promises Kept". He will list how he has fought against the fake-news media, suffered internal sabotage, as well as other efforts (from the Fed, the FBI, and Mueller himself) to hamper his efforts to "Make America Great Again".

Trump has perhaps understood that in order to be re-elected, he must pursue a simple media strategy that will have a direct impact on his base. Withdrawing US troops from Syria, and partly from Afghanistan, serves this purpose. It is an easy way to win with his constituents, while it is a heavy blow to his fiercest critics in Washington who are against this decision. Given that 70% of Americans think that the war in Afghanistan was a mistake, the more that the mainstream media attacks Trump for his decision to withdraw, the more they direct votes to Trump. In this sense, Trump's move seems to be directed at a domestic rather than an international audience.

The decision to get out of Syria is timed to coincide with another move that will also very much please Trump's base. The government shutdown is a result of the Democrats refusing to fund Trump's campaign promise to build a wall on the Mexican border. It is not difficult to understand that the average citizen is fed up with the useless wars in the Middle East, and Trump's words on immigration resonate with his voters. The more the media, the Democrats and the deep state criticize Trump on the wall, on the Syria pull out and on shutting down the government, the more they are campaigning for him.

This is why in order to understand the withdrawal of the United States from Syria it is necessary to see things from Trump's perspective, even as frustrating, confusing and incomprehensible that may seem at times.

The difference this time around was that the decision to withdraw US troops from Syria was Trump's alone, not something imposed on him by the generals that surround him. The choice to announce to his base, via Twitter, a victory against ISIS and the immediate withdrawal of US troops was a smart election move with an eye on the 2020 election.

It is possible that Trump, as is his wont, also wanted to send a message to his alleged French and British allies present in the northeast of Syria alongside the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and US soldiers. Trump may be now taunting: "Let's see what you can do without the US!"

It is as if Trump is admonishing these countries in a more concrete way for not lifting their weight in terms of military spending. Trump is vindictive and is not averse, after taking advantage of his opponent, to kicking him once he is down. Trump could be correct in this regard, and maybe French and British forces will be forced to withdraw their small group of 400 to 500 illegal occupiers of Syrian territory. Macron has for now reacted angrily at Trump's decision, intensifying the division between the two, and is adamant that the French military presence in Syria will continue.

There is also a more refined reason to justify the US withdrawal, even if Trump is probably unaware of it. The problem in these cases is always trying to peer through the fog of war and propaganda in order to discern the clear, unadulterated truth.

We should begin by listing the winners and losers of the Syrian conflict. Damascus, Moscow, Tehran and Hezbollah have won the war against aggression. Riyadh, Doha, Paris, London, Tel Aviv and Washington, with their al Qaeda, Daesh and Jabhat al-Nusra terrorist proxies, failed to destroy Syria, and following seven years of effort, are forced to scurry away in defeat.

Those who are walking a tightrope between war and defeat are Ankara and the so-called SDF. The withdrawal of the United States has confirmed the balance on the ledger of winners and losers, with the clock counting down for Erdogan and the SDF to make their next determinative move.

The enemies of Syria survive thanks to repeated bluffs. The Americans of the military-industrial-intelligence apparatus maintain the pretence that they still have an influence in Syria, what with troops on the ground, attacking Trump for withdrawing. In fact, since the Russians have imposed a no-fly-zone across the country, with the S-300 systems and other sophisticated equipment that integrate the Syrian air-defenses into the Russian air defenses, US coalition planes are for all intents and purposes grounded, and the same goes for the Israelis.

Of course the French and British in Syria are infected with the same delusional disease, choosing to believe that they can count for something without the US presence. We will see in the near future whether they also withdraw their illegal presence from Syria.

The biggest bluff of all probably comes from Erdogan, who for months threatened to invade Syria to fight ISIS, the Kurds, or any other plausible excuse to invade a sovereign country for the purposes of advancing his dreams of expanding Turkish territory as far as Idlib (which Erdogan considers a province of Turkey). Such an invasion, however, is unlikely to happen, as it would unite the SDF, Damascus and her allies to reject the Turkish advance on Syrian territory.

The Kurds in turn seem to have only one option left, namely, a forced negotiation with Damascus to give back to the Syrian people, in exchange for protection, the control of their territory that is rich in oil and gas.

Erdogan wants to eliminate the SDF, and until now, the only thing that stood in his way was the US military presence. He even threatened to attack several times, even in spite of the presence of US troops. Ankara has long been on a collision course with NATO countries on account of this. By removing US troops, Trump imagines, relations between Turkey and the US may also improve. This of course is of little interest to the US deep state, since Erdogan, like Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), is considered unsuitable, and is accordingly branded a "dictator".

Trump probably believes that with this move, as with his defense of MBS concerning Khashoggi, that he can try and establish a strong personal friendship with Erdogan. There are even talks about the sale of Patriot systems to the Turks and the extradition of Gulen.

When Will They Leave, and Cui Prodest?

It remains to be confirmed when and to what extent US troops will leave Syria. If the US had no voice in the future in Syria, with 2,000 men on the ground, now it has even less. Leaving behind 200 to 300 special forces and CIA operatives, together with another 400 to 500 French and British personnel, will, once they are captured with their Daesh and al Qaeda friends, be an excellent bargaining chip for Damascus, as they were in Aleppo.

The military-industrial-intelligence-media complex considers Trump's decision the worst of of all possible moves. Mattis even resigned on account of this. The presence of US troops in Syria allowed the foreign-policy establishment to continue to formulate plans (and spend money to pay a lot of people in Washington) based on the delusion that they are doing something in Syria to change the course of events. For Israel, it is a double disaster, with Netanyahu desperate to survive, seeking to factor in expected elections in a now-or-never political move. Trump probably understands that Bibi is done for, and that at this point, the withdrawal of troops, fulfilling a fundamental electoral promise, counts more than Israeli money and his friendship to Bibi.

Erdogan has two options before him. On the one hand, he can act against the Kurds. On the other hand, he can sit down at the negotiating table with Damascus and the SDF, in an Astana format, guided by Iran and Russia. Putin and Rouhani are certainly pushing for this solution. Trump, on the other hand, would like to see Turkey enter Syria in the place of US forces, to demonstrate he concluded a win-win deal for everyone, beating the deep-state at their own game.

Erdogan does not really have the military force necessary to enter Syria, which is the big secret. He would be against both the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and the SDF, though the two not necessarily in an alliance.

There is a triple bluff going on, and this is what is complicating the situation so much. On the one hand, the SDF is bluffing in not wanting help from Damascus in case Erdogan sends in his forces; on the other hand, Erdogan is bluffing in suggesting he is able to conquer the territory held by the SDF; and finally, the French and British are bluffing by telling the SDF they will be able to help them against both Erdogan and/or Assad.

Iran, Russia, Syria are the only ones who do not need to bluff, because they occupy the best position – the commanding heights. They view Trump's decisions and his allies with distrust. They know very well that these are mostly moves for internal consumption by the enemies of Syria.

If the US withdraws, there is so much to be gained. The priority then becomes the west of Syria, sealing the borders with Jordan, removing the pockets of terrorists from the east, and securing the al-Tanf crossing. If the SDF will request protection from Damascus and will be willing to participate in the liberation of the country and its reconstruction, Erdogan will be done for, and this could lead to the total liberation of Idlib. It would be the best possible outcome, an important national reconciliation between two important parts of the population. It would give Damascus new economic impetus and prepare the Syrian people to expel the remaining invaders (ISIS and the FSA/ Turkish Armed Forces) from the country, both in Idlib and in the northeast in Afrin.

Russia is aware of the risk that Erdogan is running with the choices he will take in the coming days. Perhaps the reason why Putin chose diplomacy over war with Turkey after the downing of a Russian Su-24 in 2015 was in order to arrive at this precise moment, with as many elements as possible present to convince Erdogan to stick with Russia and Iran instead of embracing Trump's strategy and putting himself on an open collision course with Damascus, Moscow and Tehran.

Putin has always been five moves ahead. He is aware that the US could not stay long in Syria. He knows that France and the UK cannot support the SDF, and that the SDF cannot hold territory it holds in Syria without an agreement with Damascus. He is also conscious that Turkey does not have the strength to enter Syria and hold the territory if it did. It would only be able justify an advance on Idlib with the support of the Russian Air Force.

Putin has certainly made it clear to Erdogan that if he made such a move to attack the SDF and enter Syria, Russia in turn would militarily support the SAA with its air force to free Idlib; and in case of incidents with Turkey, the Russian armed forces would respond with all the interest earned from the unrequited downing of the Su-24 in 2015.

Erdogan has no choice. He must find an agreement with Damascus, and this is why he found himself commenting on Trump's words the following day, criticizing US sanctions on Iran in the presence of Iranian president Rouhani. The SDF know that they are between a rock and a hard place, and have already sent a delegation to start negotiations with Damascus.

Trump's move was driven by US domestic politics and aimed at the 2020 elections. But in doing so, Trump inevitably called out once and for all the bluffs built by Syria's enemies, infuriating in the process the neoliberal imperialist establishment, revealing how each of these factions has no more cards to play and is in actual fact destined for defeat.

[Dec 27, 2018] 'Trickle down effect' and pub test

Dec 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Phoroneus57 , 3 Jun 2018 23:03

'Trickle down effect' - the favourite buzzword of neoliberal supporters. I'd like to see trickle down effect tried at the local pub on the taps by the local mp. Imagine what would happen. Definitely doesn't pass the pub test.

[Dec 27, 2018] Could someone explain to me how exactly was the Soviet Union a serious threat to the US, particularly in 1947?

Dec 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

james charles , says: December 25, 2018 at 9:27 am GMT

"So we go to fallback argument B, which is "containing Iran." "Containment" was a U.S. policy devised by George Kennan in 1947 to inhibit the expansion of a powerful and sometimes aggressive soon-to-be nuclear armed Soviet Union, which was rightly seen as a serious threat."

Seen as a serious threat by some?

"Taken together, these four volumes constitute an extraordinary commentary on a basic weakness in the Soviet system. The Soviets are heavily dependent on Western technology and innovation not only in their civilian industries, but also in their military programs. An inevitable conclusion from the evidence in this book is that we have totally ignored a policy that would enable us to neutralize Soviet global ambitions while simultaneously reducing the defense budget and the tax load on American citizens."

http://www.crowhealingnetwork.net/pdf/Antony%20Sutton%20-%20The%20Best%20Enemy%20Money%20Can%20Buy.pdf

Tony H. , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:06 pm GMT
"Containment" was a U.S. policy devised by George Kennan in 1947 to inhibit the expansion of a powerful and sometimes aggressive soon-to-be nuclear armed Soviet Union, which was rightly seen as a serious threat.

"which was rightly seen as a serious threat." So it was, was it? That's really the beginning of the bullshit in American policy. There were a few naysayers back then, since largely vindicated by the opening of former Soviet archives, who claimed that Stalin's postwar moves were largely defensive in nature and intended to protect the USSR from the talked about US preemptive attack on the Soviet Union. Stalin was well aware of all the loose talk on the American side and his country had just endured the same attempt on the part of Nazi Germany.

EugeneGur , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:08 pm GMT

"Containment" was a U.S. policy devised by George Kennan in 1947 to inhibit the expansion of a powerful and sometimes aggressive soon-to-be nuclear armed Soviet Union, which was rightly seen as a serious threat.

Could someone explain to me how exactly was the Soviet Union a serious threat to the US, particularly in 1947? The country was devastated by the war; some regions suffered from hunger, for goodness' sake; tens of millions were dead or maimed; the worked force was depleted as million of young men were killed, so the economic burden fell on the shoulders of women and teenagers; the cost of housing of people left homeless by the war was staggering; the cost of caring for orphan children, wounded and invalids -- ditto. In contrast, the United States was getting fatter by the minutes having benefited enormously from the war in Europe.

The Soviet Union "sometimes aggressive"? I am not aware of any Soviet plans to attack the US but we all know about the American and British plant to attack the USSR formulated as early as in 1945. No doubts the Soviet leadership was aware of such plans. The Soviets, having witnessed a demonstration staged for their benefits in Japans of the power of nuclear weapons, did everything with one purpose in mind: to prevent an attack, which they were in no position to withstand. Needless to say, the USSR didn't have nuclear weapons at that time but even after it had acquired them, it didn't quite catch up with the US in terms on number until the very end.

It's fair to say that the Soviet Union was never ever a thereat to the US. On the contrary, the US was a threat to the Soviet Union from the fist till the last day of its existence, as it remains a treat to Russia today. The problems with the Americans, even the most reasonable of them (not at all difficult to appear on today's insane background), is that they don't question the entire narrative they are fed but only the bits of it.

annamaria , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:14 pm GMT
@Tony H. George Kennan's attitude towards Russia had evolved throughout the 70s-90s, but this evolution has been carefully obscured by the ziocon warriors and other war-profiteers using the ZUSA resources for their personal enrichment:

With the end of the Cold War, Kennan continued to emphasize the limits of American power and the need for restraint in the exercise of it.

He lived to see the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold war and characteristically aimed to influence the role that the United States should play in the new world circumstances.

He objected to plans for North Atlantic Treaty Organization expansion and to what he saw as exploitation of Russian weakness.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/people/history/us-history-biographies/george-kennan

[Dec 27, 2018] There is a lot of silly hostile talk against Russia and China, but have you noticed how the US military always makes sure that there are no direct confrontations with countries that can turn the US into radioactive dust?

Notable quotes:
"... Maybe I am overestimating the intelligence of MIC profiteers, but my impression is that those thieves know that their loot is only useful as long as they are alive. There is a lot of silly hostile talk against Russia and China, but have you noticed how the US military always makes sure that there are no direct confrontations with countries that can turn the US into radioactive dust? The profiteers want huge Pentagon budget to steal from, but not the war where they lose along with everyone else. ..."
Dec 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

AnonFromTN , says: December 26, 2018 at 10:37 pm GMT

@Harold Smith

Maybe I am overestimating the intelligence of MIC profiteers, but my impression is that those thieves know that their loot is only useful as long as they are alive. There is a lot of silly hostile talk against Russia and China, but have you noticed how the US military always makes sure that there are no direct confrontations with countries that can turn the US into radioactive dust? The profiteers want huge Pentagon budget to steal from, but not the war where they lose along with everyone else.

As to the wall, it is one of the silliest projects ever suggested. Maybe that's why it was so easy to sell it to the intellectually disadvantaged electorate. There are two things that can stop illegal immigration.

First, go for the employers, enact a law that fines them to the tune of $50,000 or more per every illegal they employ. Second, enact the law that anyone caught residing in the US illegally has no right to enter the US legally, to obtain asylum, permanent residency, or citizenship for life, and include a provision that marriage to a US citizen does not nullify this ban.

Then enforce both laws. After that illegals would run out of the country, and greedy employers won't hire any more. Naturally, the wall, even if built, won't change anything: as long as there are employers trying to save on salaries, immigration fees, and Social Security tax, and people willing to live and work illegally risking nothing, no wall would stem the flow.

Unfortunately, no side is even thinking about real measures, both are just posturing.

[Dec 27, 2018] Syria Withdrawal Enrages the Chickenhawks by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... The New York Times ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... The Washington Post ..."
"... Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] . ..."
"... My impression is, ISIS is a mossad-Jewish lobby creation to win the PR war against Muslims and to keep the US attacking and "containing" Israel's geopolitical adversaries and eternally occupying Arab lands, and well, to Make Israel Safe Again ™ ..."
"... Today's Jerusalem Post had a link to this Kamala Harris political fund-raising ad. ..."
"... Boot, Nuland, Shapiro, Stephens, Reiner, etc etc – one (((chickenhawk))) after another ..."
"... This is the first sane thing Trump did in two years. Also, this is the first action he promised his supporters in 2016. Naturally, Israel-firsters, who in 2016 backed the corrupt mad witch to a man, are unhappy. ..."
"... Brits simply love using the U.S. military for their own venal objectives. And if anything goes wrong, the Brits can distance themselves and blame it on "the Yanks." A win-win ..."
"... NYT, CNN, WaPo, and others of their ilk are desperately trying to appear peace-loving while promoting wars that benefit MIC and Israel. Hypocrisy at its most awkward. The only good thing is, they are forced to show their true colors. ..."
Dec 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

President Donald Trump's order to withdraw from Syria has been greeted, predictably, with an avalanche of condemnation culminating in last Thursday's resignation by Defense Secretary James Mattis. The Mattis resignation letter focused on the betrayal of allies, though it was inevitably light on details, suggesting that the Marine Corps General was having some difficulty in discerning that American interests might be somewhat different than those of feckless and faux allies like Israel and Saudi Arabia that are adept at manipulating the levers of power in Washington and in the media. Mattis clearly appreciates that having allies is a force multiplier in wartime but fails to understand that it is a liability otherwise as the allies create an obligation to go to war on their behalf rather than in response to any actual national interest.

The media was quick to line up behind Mattis. On Friday, The New York Times featured a lead editorial entitled "Jim Mattis was right" while neocon twitter accounts blazed with indignation. Prominent chickenhawk mouthpieces David Frum and Bill Kristol, among many others, tweeted that the end is nigh.

During the day preceding Mattis's dramatic announcement, the press went to war against the Administration over Syria and also regarding other reports that there would be troop reductions in Afghanistan. The following headline actually appeared on a Reuters online article the day after the announcement by the president: "In Syria retreat, Trump rebuffs top advisers and blindsides U.S. commanders." It would be difficult to imagine stuffing more bullshit into one relatively short sentence. "Retreat," "rebuffs" and "blindsides" are not words that are intended to convey any sort of even-handed assessment of what is occurring in U.S. policy towards the Middle East. They are instead meant to imply that "Hey, that moron in the White House has screwed up again!"

Consider for a moment the agenda that Reuters is apparently pushing. It is supporting an illegal and unconstitutional invasion of Syria by the United States that has a stated primary objective of removing a terrorist organization which is already mostly gone and a less frequently acknowledged goal of regime change for the legitimate government in Damascus and the expulsion of that government's principal allies. Reuters is asserting that staying in Syria would be a good thing for the United States and also for its "allies" in the region even though there is no way to "win" and no exit strategy.

Reuters is presumably basing its assessment on the collective judgments of a group of "top advisers" who are warmongers that the rest of the world as well as many Americans consider to be psychopaths or possibly even insane. And then there are the preferences of the "blindsided" generals, like Mattis, who have a personal interest in career terms for maintaining a constant state of warfare. If you want to really know how what the military thinks about an ongoing war ask a sergeant or a private, never a general. They will tell you that they are sick of endless deployments that accomplish nothing.

The New York Times lead story headline on Thursday also let you know that its Editors were not please by Trump's move. It read "U.S. ExitSeen as a Betrayal of the Kurds, and a Boon for ISIS." They also editorialized "Trump's Decision to Withdraw From Syria Is Alarming. Just Ask His Advisers."

The Washington Post was not far behind. It immediately ran an op-ed by the redoubtable neocon chickenhawk Max Boot, whom Caitlin Johnstone has dubbed The Man Who Has Been Wrong About Everything. The piece was entitled Trump's surprise Syria pullout is a giant Christmas gift to our enemies making a twofer with an incredible "Fuck the EU" Victoria Nuland's piece entitled "In a single tweet Trump destroys U.S. policy in the Middle East," which appeared simultaneously. That anyone would regard Boot and Nuland as objective authorities on the Middle East given their ultimate and prevailing loyalty to Israel has to be wondered at, but then again Fred Hiatt is the editorial/opinion page editor and he is of the same persuasion, both ethnically and philosophically. They are all, of course, devoted Zionists and the big lie about what is going on in the region is apparently always worth repeating. As Joseph Goebbels put it in 1941 " when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it even at the risk of looking ridiculous."

Comments relating to the articles, op-eds and editorials in the Post and Times bordered on the hysterical, sometimes suggesting that readers actually believe that Trump was following orders from Russian President Vladimir Putin. And what was stirring at Reuters, The Times , and the Post was only the tip of the iceberg. The mainstream television news providers united in condemning the audacity of a president who might actually try to end a war while the only favorable commentary on Trump's having taken a step that is long overdue came from the alternative media.

One might profitably recall how Trump has only been praised as "presidential" by the Establishment twice – when he staged cruise missile attacks on Syria based on faulty intelligence. The Deep State wants blood, make no mistake about it and it is not interested in "retreat." And Trump will also get almost no support from Congress, with only longtime critics of Syrian policy Senators Rand Paul and Mike Lee as well as Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard praising the move initially.

The arguments being made to criticize the Trump initiative were essentially cookie cutter neocon soundbites. The Reuters piece in its first few lines of text asserts that the reversal of policy "stunned lawmakers and allies with his order for U.S. troops to leave Syria, a decision that upends American policy in the Middle East. The result, said current and former officials and people briefed on the decision, will empower Russia and Iran and leave unfinished the goal of erasing the risk that Islamic State, or ISIS, which has lost all but a sliver territory, could rebuild." The article goes on to quote an anonymous Pentagon source who opined that " Trump's decision was widely seen in the Pentagon as benefiting Russia as well as Iran, both of which have used their support for the Syrian government to bolster their regional influence. Iran also has improved its ability to ship arms to Lebanese Hezbollah for use against Israel. Asked who gained from the withdrawal, the defense official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, replied: 'Geopolitically Russia, regionally Iran.'"

Another so-called expert Charles Lister of the Middle East Institute was also cited in the article, saying "It completely takes apart America's broader strategy in Syria, but perhaps more importantly, the centerpiece of the Trump administration policy, which is containing Iran."

Israel is also turning up the heat on Trump, claiming that the move will make it more insecure. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pledged to increase air attacks on Iranian targets in Syria as an added security measure to make up for the American betrayal. Normally liberal American Jews have joined the hue and cry against Trump on behalf of Israel. Filmmaker Rob Reiner tweeted on Thursday that the president is a "childish moronic mentally unstable malignant narcissist" who is "committing Treason" against the United States.

The real story, lost in the wailing and gnashing to teeth, is that even after conceding that Donald Trump's hyperbolic claim that the United States had defeated ISIS as the motive for the withdrawal is nonsense, there is still no good reason for Washington to continue to keep troops in Syria. The U.S. in reality did far less in the war against the terrorist groups infesting the region than did the Russians, Iranians or the Syrians themselves and, as a result, it will have less say in what kind of Syria emerges from the carnage. That is almost certainly a good thing for the Syrian people.

But let's assume for sake of argument that the U.S. invasion really was about ISIS. Well, ISIS continues to hold on to a small bit of territory near the Euphrates River and is reported to have between one and two thousand remaining fighters. There are other estimates suggesting that between 10,000 and 20,000 followers have dispersed and gone underground awaiting a possible resurgence by the group. The argument that ISIS will reorganize and re-emerge as a result of the American withdrawal assumes that it is the 2,000 strong U.S. armed forces that are keeping it down, which is ridiculous. The best remedy against an ISIS recovery is to support a restored and re-unified Syria, which will have more than enough resources available to eliminate the last bits of the terrorist groups remaining in its territory.

So we go to fallback argument B, which is "containing Iran." "Containment" was a U.S. policy devised by George Kennan in 1947 to inhibit the expansion of a powerful and sometimes aggressive soon-to-be nuclear armed Soviet Union, which was rightly seen as a serious threat. Iran is a second world country with a small military and economy with no nuclear arsenal and it neither threatens the United States nor any of its neighbors. But Israel supported by Saudi Arabia does not like Iran and has induced Washington to follow its lead. Withdrawing from Syria recognizes that Iran is no threat in reality. Positioning American military forces to "counter" Iran does not reduce the threat against the United States because there was no threat there to begin with.

And then there is the argument that the U.S. departure empowers Iran and Russia. Staying in Syria is, on the contrary, a drain on both those countries' limited resources. The more money and manpower they have to commit to Syria the less they have to become engaged elsewhere and it is hard to imagine how either country would exploit the "victory" in Syria to leverage their involvement in other parts of the world. Both would be delighted if a final settlement of the Syrian problem could be arrived at so they can get out.

And as for the United States, the military should only be deployed anywhere to defend the U.S. itself or vital interests. There is nothing like that at stake in Syria. So, is American national security better or worse if the U.S. leaves? As Russian and American soldiers only confront each other directly in Syria, U.S. national security would in fact be greatly improved because the danger of igniting an accidental war with Russia would be dramatically reduced. There have reportedly already been a dozen incidents between U.S. and Russian troops, including some involving shooting. That has been a dozen too many. Even the possibility of starting an unintended war with Iran would potentially be disastrous for the United States as well as for everyone else in the region, so it is far better to put some distance between the two sides.

And finally, it is necessary to go to the argument for disengagement from Syria that is too little heard in the western media or from the usual bonehead politicians named Graham and Rubio who pronounce on foreign policy. How has American intervention in the Middle East and south and central Asia benefited the people in the countries that have been invaded or bombed? Not at all. By some estimates four million Muslims have been killed as a consequence of the wars since 2001 and millions more displaced. More than eight thousand U.S. military have died in the process in wars that had no purpose and no exit strategy. And the wars have been expensive – $6 trillion and counting, much of it borrowed. War without end means killing without end and it has to stop Syria Withdrawal Enrages the Chickenhawks, by Philip Giraldi - The Unz Review

Withdrawing from Syria is the right thing to do, though one has to be concerned that there might be some secret side deals with Israel or Turkey that could actually result in more attacks on Syria and on the Kurds. Donald Trump is already under extreme pressure coming from all directions to reverse his decision to leave Syria and it is quite possible that he will either fold completely or bend at least a bit. It is to be hoped that he will not do so as a Christmas present to the American people. And he might want to think of a Christmas present for 2019. One might suggest a complete withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] . Syria Withdrawal Enrages the Chickenhawks, by Philip Giraldi - The Unz Review

Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist , says: Website December 25, 2018 at 8:19 am GMT
The very fact that Hollywood twits who couldn't find Syria on the outline map of the world to save their lives have been roped in to get all outraged about Trump withdrawing troops from Syria proves that the military industrial complex is worried that it will lose sales if the Amerikastani Empire steps back from actively looking for war.

The military industrial complex, after all, runs Hollywood ...

anon [243] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:24 am GMT
4,000,000 Muslims have been killed as a consequence of the wars since 2001, millions more displaced. More than 8,000 U.S. military have died

....

jilles dykstra , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:25 am GMT
Again I have the idea that my, not just mine, theory about Trump is confirmed, he understands that the USA will destroy itself economically and politically by continuing to try to control the world. Of course, USA Deep State is furious, through its mouth pieces CNN, Washpost and NYT.

Of course Netanyahu is more than furious, Sharon's 'we control America' seems to be over. If Putin and Trump agree explicitly or implicitly, I do not know, and, if they indeed agree, it does not matter. The essential thing for me is that both in Washington and in Moscow we now have reasonable men, who understand that warfare is just destruction of wealth. Interesting is what the consequences for EU and NATO will be. They must be in utter confusion.

chris , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:08 am GMT
What a great present, unexpectedly getting a Phil Giraldi column on Christmas day! Merry Christmas, Phil and everyone !

I'm little more pessimistic about Trump's withdrawal from Syria; it seems to me all the more proof that he's getting ready to attack Iran !

If you wanted to do that, you'd first clear it with the Israelis and they'd be quiet (check) – actually, this would be their plan; then you would get US troops out of Syria to protect them from Iranian troops in Syria (invited by Assad), (check). then you would move one or two aircraft carriers into the Persian gulf (check)!

Then you would hit Iran on New Year's Day (open), and then you would take Trump down for starting an illegal war (open).

All birds down with Stalin-esque (criminal) elegance!

Realist , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:15 am GMT
@Puzzled

Let us hope he keeps with his campaign promise on this one.

Good luck.

MAGAnotMISA , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:21 am GMT
My impression is, ISIS is a mossad-Jewish lobby creation to win the PR war against Muslims and to keep the US attacking and "containing" Israel's geopolitical adversaries and eternally occupying Arab lands, and well, to Make Israel Safe Again ™

Apart from the questions raised by some from the alternative media: https://www.globalresearch.ca/isis-is-a-us-israeli-creation-top-ten-indications/5518627

The fact is the mossad could easily pull this off, having so many Israelis from Northern-African and Middle Eastern extraction, fluent in Arab and looking exactly like well, Arabs. They could infiltrate and recruit Arab salafist patsies and easily organize terrorist attacks without executing the hits themselves. And it is actually a genius move:

1) Create a terrorist thread in Europe, making Westerners wary of Arabs, ie more likely to understand Israel policies towards Palestinians and side with Israel (message being: apartheid State? what else can we Israelis do? Palestinians are all gropers, misogynists, homophobes and potential terrorists FYI)

2) Hit the countries with the most Jews (France, Germany and UK) so they are more likely to start packing up to make Aliyah, so Israel's demographic problem is at least temporarily solved, retaining a majority population of Jews.

3) Make the US, through the Jewish lobby in the US, attack strategic countries such as Libya, Iraq and Syria, creating a migrant tsunami to flood Europe, making Europeans even more wary of Arabs and understanding of Israeli's treatment of Palestinians (Arabs) and also making European Jews even more likely to make Aliyah. I even have heard of Israeli NGOs funded by the Israeli Ministry of FA operating in Lesbos and helping "refugees" to flood Europe. After a public outcry the Ministry logo vanished from the NGOs sponsors page.

Even the Cologne issue with the gropings, and I am getting too conspiratorial here, could have been a group of Israeli provocateurs kickstarting the whole assaults wave. Let's say, a group of mossad operatives, composed of Israelis from Northern-African and/or Middle Eastern extraction, with false documentation and fluent in Arab, start groping and assaulting German women, taking advantage of the total chaos offered and facilitated by moronic Merkel. They get caught? no problem, false passports or even no passports at all, just give false names and disappear. Not that Arabs need that much help to make themselves look bad, after all some American reporter was assaulted *live* and for what I have read the lecherous groping of women walking alone is a well documented problem in all the ME. But maybe thanks to a little push by provocateurs, an incident big enough was engineered and the image of Arabs in the West reached historic lows thanks to the Cologne affair.

And creating phoney terrorist groups to use them for false flags is not something new at all for the mossad, let's all remember what the FLLF was and how almost executed an US Ambassador.

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

I'd like to hear Mr Giraldi's take on the matter, though I don't think he will ever write about it.

Merry Christmas to all.

anon [202] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 11:10 am GMT
"Filmmaker Rob Reiner tweeted on Thursday that the president is a "childish moronic mentally unstable malignant narcissist" who is "committing Treason" against the United States."

He and fellow tribesmen are welcome to sign up and go fight Israel's wars themselves, just not with white male republican blood. The guy is good at border skirmishes, too. He led an effort to keep poor Mexicans out of his rich Malibu neighborhood back in 2014 by refusing Whole Foods a building location. Like most of his kind, he's a sociopathic hypocrite and a liar.

Moi , says: December 25, 2018 at 11:52 am GMT
Further proof that we are nuts.
jilles dykstra , says: December 25, 2018 at 12:06 pm GMT
@MAGAnotMISA What I miss is destroying white cultures through mass immigration. Though what I miss in this theory what exactly is the objective, is it whites and Muslims annihilating each other, or just divide and rule ? But maybe thinking in this way has not gone far enough.

Bernard Baruch's world domination plan failed miserably, but he even failed to understand that it had failed, otherwise he had not in 1946 pleaded for a world government. One must not underestimate the enemy, but also not overestimate him.

Jewish policies for the last 2000 years can hardly be seen as a success. Judaism lost the battle with Christianity, Bolshevism failed in Russia, getting equal rights in W Europe led to the WWII deportations, with or without gas chambers, Israel succeeded in surrounding itself with enemies, as neighbors, and all over the world, and Jewish puppet Hillary was not elected.

The latest statements by Netanyahu confirm my idea of a complete idiot.

Montefrío , says: December 25, 2018 at 12:08 pm GMT
I continue to be amazed that anyone gives any credibility whatsoever who claims US Mideast military involvement is in the best interest of the nation. The above-mentioned commenters must almost inevitably more about self-interest than anything patriotic. As for appearing profound, well, there's Rob Reiner!
APilgrim , says: December 25, 2018 at 12:51 pm GMT
Today's Jerusalem Post had a link to this Kamala Harris political fund-raising ad.

https://action.kamalaharris.org/sign/181206-evergreen-ob/?source=ads_outbrain_181212_dint_all_desktop_000395c6d552e1c60c57e8e03fadb17b09

The cvnt.

Sarah Toga , says: December 25, 2018 at 12:59 pm GMT
As I sat in Christmas Eve service last night, an adorable little boy played quietly with his father in the seat next to us. The little boy was probably just under 2 years of age.

In the middle of one of the Christmas Carols the thought struck me,

"I wonder if we will still be in ___________ war 17 years from now, when this little boy becomes enlistment age . . ."

That thought alone makes me favor Trump for re-election. I think (I could be wrong, I'm no expert) we have less war and a lesser risk of war with Trump. The "establishment" policies of: invade the world – invite the world – in hoc with the world; are horrifically deadly and destructive.

FelicityRules , says: December 25, 2018 at 1:18 pm GMT
As usual, Giraldi is spot on with his observations. I wish him a Merry Christmas and hope to see a lot more of his articles in the coming year.

I find Rob Reiner amusing, if not occasionally annoying. After having spent decades up to my nose with his tribe while working in LA in the entertainment industry I can guarantee Hollywood Jews go completely apoplectic anytime they perceive their government, the Jewish-occupied government that rules over us all, is not following their commands.

Come to think of it, apoplexy's first definition is a stroke, its second definition is: a state of intense and almost uncontrollable anger. One can only hope that jerks like Reiner who indulge so heavily in the second definition will end up experiencing the first, and good riddance.

Tim K , says: December 25, 2018 at 2:10 pm GMT
US out of Syria? Why were "we" ever in there?
anon [122] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 2:20 pm GMT
Boot, Nuland, Shapiro, Stephens, Reiner, etc etc – one (((chickenhawk))) after another
Sparkon , says: December 25, 2018 at 2:27 pm GMT
A mong hawks in N. America, Cooper's Hawk ( Accipiter cooperii ), Red-shouldered Hawk ( Buteo lineatus ), and Red-tailed Hawk ( Buteo jamaicensis ) are the three species most likely to take domestic chickens, or yardbirds as they are sometimes called, and it is these three species that are or have been commonly called Chickenhawks in the United States, at least among non-birders, who are people with neither binoculars nor field guide.

But I think most here know that Philip Giraldi is referring to the craven human variety of warmonger known in some circles as the Yellow-tailed Chickenhawk, or its close relative the Yellow-bellied Chickenhawk.

President Trump's announcement is a very nice Christmas present, which I choose to take a face value pending unwrapping. As always, actions speak louder than words. Let's hope that there isn't a booby prize or two lurking beneath the Christmas tree and hidden by the big surprise package, or that there isn't a lump of coal at the bottom of our holiday stockings.

Peace on Earth to all men of Good Will.

The Alarmist , says: December 25, 2018 at 2:39 pm GMT
@Tim K

"US out of Syria? Why were "we" ever in there?"

Pipelines to Europe for KSA and fresh water sources for Israel? Destabilizing a local rival of both? Who knows?

What we do know is that "we" have allowed our "leaders" to pimp out our military to the rogue special interests of the world. We have the best government foreign interests can buy.

DESERT FOX , says: December 25, 2018 at 2:39 pm GMT
The Zionist MSM and MIC and the Zionist AIPAC and company are the hounds of Hell baying for war as warmongers always want war as long as they do not have to fight it and can reap the profits from the wars! ...
follyofwar , says: December 25, 2018 at 3:35 pm GMT
@chris Let's think about this. The USA has not been able to defeat the Afghan Taliban forces in 17 years. It brought down Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq, but, with that unfortunate country totally destroyed, how could you call that a win (I doubt if the Iraqi's consider the US to be liberators).

Now the crack pot Obama/Hillary campaign has lost in Syria, and Trump wants to pull out. All three countries were much smaller and weaker than Iran...

Z-man , says: December 25, 2018 at 3:42 pm GMT

But Israel supported by Saudi Arabia does not like Iran and has induced Washington to follow its lead. Withdrawing from Syria recognizes that Iran is no threat in reality. Positioning American military forces to "counter" Iran does not reduce the threat against the United States because there was no threat there to begin with.

Yes of course, I would just add that Israel hates Iran. Rand Paul and others have been pushing back hard against the NEOCON narrative here, good news. The initial anti Trump tide has turned in this matter. I briefly saw Bill Krysrol's smug mug on TV the other day....

follyofwar , says: December 25, 2018 at 4:02 pm GMT
Trump telling General Mattis to pack his bags and begone is the work of a good CEO. Mad Dog could have done a lot of damage to Mr. Trump's agenda if he had been allowed to stay on until the end of February, as he had said he would. In corporate America, if an underling is disloyal to the CEO, he will be told to vacate the premises for good by the end of the workday, and escorted out of the building by armed security. His keys will be taken, all locks will be changed, and his passwords expunged. No doubt Trump, as CEO, has had to employ such tactics many times before. He obviously relishes saying "You're Fired!"

Any competent Trump loyalist can be found to replace this worn out old soldier. I hope he won't be yet another general. MacArthur said that "old soldier never die, they just fade away." Time for Mattis to do just that, and never be heard from again.

never-anonymous , says: December 25, 2018 at 4:24 pm GMT
Syria is a money pit for the taxpayers and giant profit source for the super rich. 'The United States military should only be deployed anywhere to defend the U.S. itself or vital interests' says Trump, Obama or Bush. But war is too important to be left to politicians. They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought.

Trump was appointed by rich people only so they could have someone to blame. 100% of the voters believe they personally have the right to kill women and children overseas with their hired mercenaries to defend the U.S. itself or vital interests. Americans shell out taxes to pay for US troops to guard mining operations and poppy fields in Afghanistan, oil fields in Iraq, online propaganda and so much more. Why deploy the United States Military when there's more profit in hiring private mercenaries? Plus you don't have to say that "vital interests" crap anymore.

JoaoAlfaiate , says: December 25, 2018 at 4:37 pm GMT
This article is an excellent summary of msm and neocon reaction to the planned US withdrawal from Syria and a good survey of why getting Uncle Sam out of Syria makes sense. I would also add that allying with the Kurds was at best a short term solution. Not only would a Kurdish state in eastern Syria be unacceptable to Turkey but the Sunni Arabs of the Euphrates Valley would be certain to resist Kurdish rule. Merry Christmas to all!
DESERT FOX , says: December 25, 2018 at 4:43 pm GMT
@ChuckOrloski In my opinion, Zionist Israel will never stop being the agent provocateur in the Mideast and elsewhere ie the Ukraine etc., and since the Zionists control the U.S. government I think their satanic NWO plans are still in place, and think the U.S. military is just going to be placed in Iraq and Jordan ie just across the border to Syria and will continue with their proxy mercenaries aka AL CIADA aka ISIS.

Some good sites to follow are Southfront.org and Henrymakow.com and Stevequayle.com and Thetruthseeker.co.uk etc., all things considered even Putin said that Russia will wait and see if the U.S. really leaves the Mideast, I wish all our troops would be brought home, but with the Zionist control of our government it will never happen.

It is snowing here in Montana so we have a white Christmas, which we could do without, but have a Merry Christmas!

Renoman , says: December 25, 2018 at 4:58 pm GMT
Yes to Trump and withdrawal from Mid East Wars, down with MSM, The Neocons, the 1% , the deep state and Israel...
Bragadocious , says: December 25, 2018 at 5:23 pm GMT
If you want to know who's agitating for war, look no further than our "friends," the Brits. This is what they do every single time a U.S. President doesn't commit troops to some war they've approved of, or started. They terror bait, or mock, or a combination of the two. And since a lot of people in Washington take them seriously, it has appreciable impact on our policies.
AnonFromTN , says: December 25, 2018 at 6:11 pm GMT
This is the first sane thing Trump did in two years. Also, this is the first action he promised his supporters in 2016. Naturally, Israel-firsters, who in 2016 backed the corrupt mad witch to a man, are unhappy. Their unhappiness is a good sign that this action is actually in American interests. If Trump folds and reverses, this would expose him as a 100% fraud. If he sticks to his guns, maybe there is hope for him yet. Stay tuned.
chris , says: December 25, 2018 at 6:31 pm GMT
@follyofwar Oh, no; I don't mean Trump will start some major ground offensive to win anything! No, they'll just try to destroy Iran in order to give jihadist a chance to kill as many people as possible. This will be a Libyan-style war and "victory."
Bragadocious , says: December 25, 2018 at 6:39 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra Yeah, not sure about the Dutch, with their history at Srebrenica.

But I was referring to the Brits trying to push Trump back into the Middle East war grinder.

A123 , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:01 pm GMT
The U.S. has 2,000 soldiers in a kill-sack if Erdogan decides to cut off their supply lines. And, calling Erdogan "unreliable" is something of an understatement. The U.S. can say very little about Erdogan's behaviour while he can take reprisals on U.S. troops.

-- Turkey and Saudi are feuding, and the U.S. needs Saudi more than Turkey to maintain sanctions and other pressure on Iran.

-- Turkey is becoming dangerously deranged in its statements about Israel (1). And the U.S. / Israeli relationship is vital for many reasons.

-- Turkey has been a threat to Christian Cyprus for decades. The Leviathan-Cyprus-Greece pipeline is important to help free Christian Populist EU nations, such as Italy, from tyrannical rule under Soros-servitors Merkel and Macron.

Do not over over read the withdrawal as a change in regional strategy. There are no major policy changes. This is about opening the door to push out Erdogan, if that becomes necessary to support the existing U.S. regional strategy. And, the U.S. can still hope that Erdogan is saying demented things solely for domestic consumption and doesn't intend to actually follow thru on the crazy.

__________

(1) https://www.breitbart.com/middle-east/2018/12/16/erdogan-unhinged-compares-israel-to-nazi-germany-claims-cultural-genocide-against-palestinians/

annamaria , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:10 pm GMT
@MAGAnotMISA "ISIS is a mossad-Jewish lobby creation to win the PR war against Muslims and to keep the US attacking and "containing" Israel's geopolitical adversaries and eternally occupying Arab lands, and well, to Make Israel Safe Again "

– Hard to disagree with your statement. And who could forget the amazing care of the Jewish State for the White Helmets known for their cooperation with other "moderate" terrorists: https://gellerreport.com/2018/07/israel-syria-jordan.html/

Israel Evacuates 800 of Syria's White Helmets and Their Families to Jordan

The Israel Defense Forces said it engaged in the "out of the ordinary" gesture due to the "immediate risk" to the lives of the civilians, as Russian-backed regime forces closed in on the area. It stressed that it was not intervening in the ongoing fighting in Syria.

The Jordanian government, which has consistently refused to accept Syrian refugees in recent years, said an exception was made in this case as the United Kingdom, Canada and Germany agreed to take the 800 White Helmet rescuers and their families.

Germany's Bild newspaper reported that a convoy of dozens of buses crossed the Syrian border into Israel late Saturday, and were escorted to the Jordanian border by Israeli police and UN forces.

Michael Kenny , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:18 pm GMT
A lot of the rejoicing in the pro-Putin camp seems to be based on the idea that this somehow benefits Putin but I don't think it does. He is still irreversibly bogged down in Syria.
Alfred , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:29 pm GMT
@renfro Netanyahu is telling the idiotic Israeli public what they want to hear. Let's not forget that there are elections due on 9 April.

You can hardly expect a politician to tell the public that if they so much as launch a missile against Damascus airport, the airport of Tel Aviv will be bombed in return. The days when the Israelis could do as they wished in Syria and Lebanon are gone.

2stateshmustate , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:31 pm GMT
@DESERT FOX You took the words right out of my mouth.
annamaria , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:32 pm GMT
@MAGAnotMISA More on the Jewish State's beloved protege White Helmets and the profoundly zionized presstituting MSM: https://www.rt.com/op-ed/447385-white-helmets-un-panel/

"Organ theft, staged attacks: UN panel details White Helmets' criminal activities, media yawns," by Eva Bartlett.

"[During] a more than one-hour-long panel on the White Helmets at the United Nations on December 20 the irrefutable documentation was presented on the faux-rescue group's involvement in criminal activities, which include organ theft, working with terrorists -- including as snipers -- staging fake rescues, thieving from civilians, and other non-rescuer behaviour.

a Syrian civilian, Omar al-Mustafa, is cited as stating: "I saw them (White Helmets) bring children who were alive, put them on the floor as if they had died in a chemical attack."

In my own visits to eastern Ghouta towns last April and May, residents likewise spoke of organ theft, staged rescues, the White Helmets working with Jaysh al-Islam, while an Aleppo man likewise described them as thieves who steal from civilians, not rescuers.

Four days after the UN panel, to my knowledge, not a single corporate media outlet has covered the event and its critical contents.

This is in spite of the fact that the Western corporate media has been happy to propagandize about the White Helmets for years, and to attack those of us who dare to present testimonies and evidence from on the ground in Syria which contradicts the official narrative.

Alfred , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:49 pm GMT
@DESERT FOX "The most incredible thing was that the Zionists and the Zionist controlled deep state did 911 which was the precursor to the latest Mideast wars and the war on terror where the Zionists killed some 3000 Americans and blamed the Arabs and got away with it , when every thinking American knows that Israel and the Zionist controlled deep state did 911!"

The number of victims of 9/11 in NYC are way above 3000. Cancers and so on just don't get counted. BTW, it is not from the dust. It is from the small nuclear bombs in the 2 buildings. The 3rd building was only explosives.

https://nypost.com/2018/08/11/nearly-10k-people-have-gotten-cancer-from-toxic-9-11-dust/

Here is a useful link: ""9-11/Israel did it"" https://wikispooks.com/wiki/9-11/Israel_did_it

annamaria , says: December 25, 2018 at 7:51 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra "Is Netanyahu crazy enough to provoke an attack ?"

– He is certainly endangering himself and his parasitic state by the silly ideas of mythological choseness. Let's hope that the more intelligent Soviet Jews (as compared to the mediocre pool of the pre-Soviet Israelis) take pains to explain the former salesman the stupidity of military confrontation with Iran/Russia. As for the US-dwelling zionists' stupidity it is irredeemable.

follyofwar , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:14 pm GMT
@Bragadocious What the hell is up with these dysfunctional Brits anyway? With their empire thankfully long gone, their society in tatters, and a Muslim mayor running majority-minority London, they think they can get the US to take on Iran for them? Spare me! This "special relationship" has got to end. The Brits must be under the thumb of the Zionists even more than is the USA. And their sad monarchy belongs in the dustbin of history.
Realist , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:26 pm GMT

And he might want to think of a Christmas present for 2019. One might suggest a complete withdrawal from Afghanistan.

And in addition Syria, Iraq, Guam, Germany, Britain, Philippines, Japan, South Korea, Turkey, Norway and on and on. Give the present 11 months early.

Realist , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:42 pm GMT
@Ronald Thomas West

Is Putin ready for Erdogan to back-stab Russia again? (recalling Erdogan's military had shot down a Russian jet.)

The biggest problem Putin has with Erogan is the control of the Russian navy's exit from the Black sea through the Bosporus.

Anon [257] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:45 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra It's just what you said, he's keeping a low profile and staying inside on advice of his security. They're probably worried about snipers in ahigh rise somewhere.
Svigor , says: December 25, 2018 at 8:53 pm GMT
It's been fun listening to (((NPR))) try to spin military withdrawal as a bad thing without actually saying as much. "Trump's facing critics in his own party," "here are some Kurds bitching," "General McProcurer is really pissed," "Chikkenhauk Epsteinbergwitzbaum sez it's the end of the world," etc.

LOL.

m___ , says: December 25, 2018 at 9:09 pm GMT
No rationality, no credibility decision (Syria withdrawal).

Most variables are missing. Trump is insignificant but as a figurehead. At least a few layers, the correlations and "secret" deals with Israel, Turkey, IS, Kurds, France, the UK, let's not forget Russia are missing. The commoner, deplorable, are lead by the nose, our middle class bread scribes are doing the herding by shifting the attention, and building an exit of face saving on what they omit to pull in the open.

No value in this "News" and "Christmas present" at all, but more of deceit of a global ruling class in the shadows. It is called smarts, to deceive the rest of the dumb (in the eyes of the elites) masses, it is relevant to call out our elites on not smart enough to think over the long term.

Who of a building presence of outliers can they still deceive?

chris , says: December 25, 2018 at 9:18 pm GMT
@Sarah Toga "Death and taxes" for countries translates to "war and bankruptcy." Maybe we'll get lucky and hit the latter before we kill everyone in the former.
AnonFromTN , says: December 25, 2018 at 9:20 pm GMT
@Realist That's more like Erdogan's problem with Russia. Russian coastal defense system K-300P Bastion-P in Crimea is perfectly capable of making Bosporus and Dardanelles straits much wider. However crazy Erdogan is, he is well aware of that.
Bragadocious , says: December 25, 2018 at 9:31 pm GMT
@follyofwar Actually Brits think their country is doing just great. But yeah, the "special relationship" should be scuttled. We face a bigger threat from British jihadis than any Iranians anywhere. Richard Reid is sitting in a federal Supermax, but I don't think any Iranians are.

Brits simply love using the U.S. military for their own venal objectives. And if anything goes wrong, the Brits can distance themselves and blame it on "the Yanks." A win-win.

AnonFromTN , says: December 25, 2018 at 9:42 pm GMT
@Svigor It is really funny to see "peace-loving" liberals trying not to look like warmongers that they are. NPR is not alone in attempting this sleight of hand: NYT, CNN, WaPo, and others of their ilk are desperately trying to appear peace-loving while promoting wars that benefit MIC and Israel. Hypocrisy at its most awkward. The only good thing is, they are forced to show their true colors.
peterAUS , says: December 25, 2018 at 9:59 pm GMT
@m___ Well you know, that perception of yours re how the real world really works is, actually, positive and optimistic.

If if I get you correct, you believe/feel/think there IS the "overclass" (for a lack of better word) which rules the world. They are hidden, all powerful, competent, on the same page and malevolent re us , the common folks.

I am afraid that's not the case.

I believe/feel/think there is no such overclass. My take is there are warring factions of mostly incompetent little people with a lot of power who fight among themselves who's going to get more power and related material wealth. The malevolent part re all those they see as below them is given, of course.

And, gets worse, actually. In this particular case I think the decision was made in a spur of a moment. Pure Emperor whim,if you will. On top of it, we still haven't seen any actual move on the ground. And, even if those up to 2000 men do pull out, what about CIA/special forces/contractors bunch? And, even better, those 2000 and more can return in 48 hours if the Emperor decides otherwise. In a spur of a moment too.

Anyone so happy here commenting this .thing has been following what's really been happening with North Korea? What exactly changed from that fateful meeting between the Emperor and the Cult Leader? Let's summarize: the very point of all that was stopping and rolling back NK capability for long range nuclear strike. So .any "rolling" happened? Anything? I don't think so, but, more than happy to be proven wrong. Proven, mind you.

The only important, and sad actually, is how we all got into the stage when a tweet by that fellow can agitate us so much. Mice and just a whiff of cheese over the cage.

They really got us where they wanted. And those "they" aren't even that smart. Just great.

nickels , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:12 pm GMT
All wars are jews wars: "Trump is retreating from Syria – and from his pro-Israel Jewish conservative voters. If that decision is a harbinger of other strategic moves distancing him from Israel's security, much of his remaining Jewish support will fall off a cliff"

https://www.haaretz.com/amp/us-news/.premium-syria-trump-just-gave-the-finger-to-his-pro-israel-jewish-voters-1.6770414

annamaria , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:19 pm GMT
A wonderfully conciliatory and hopeful article by Thierry Meyssan: http://www.voltairenet.org/article204453.html

"The United States refuse to fight for the transnational financiers"

As soon as he entered the White House, Donald Trump was careful to surround himself with three senior military officers with enough authority to reposition the armed forces. Michael Flynn, John Kelly and especially James Mattis, have since left or are in the process of leaving. All three men are great soldiers who together had opposed their hierarchy during Obama's presidency. They did not accept the strategy implemented by ambassador John Negroponte for the creation of terrorist groups tasked with stirring up a civil war in Iraq. All three stood with President Trump to annul Washington's support for the jihadists.

The Pentagon project for the last seventeen years in the "Greater Middle East" will not happen. Conceived by Admiral Arthur Cebrowski, it was aimed at destroying all the state structures in the region, with the exception of Israël, Jordan and Lebanon. This plan, which began in Afghanistan, spread as far as Libya, and is still under way, will come to an end on Syrian territory.

It is no longer acceptable that US armies fight with taxpayers' funds for the sole financial interests of global financiers, even if they are US citizens.

The Bush Jr. and Obama administrations shoulder the entire responsibility for this war [in Syria]. They were the ones who planned it and realised it within the framework of a unipolar world .

Afghanistan's misery began during the Carter presidency. National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzeziński, called on the Muslim Brotherhood and Israël to launch a campaign of terrorism against the Communist government. Terrified, the government appealed to the Soviets to maintain order. The result was a fourteen-year war, followed by a civil war, and then followed by the Anglo-US invasion.

After forty years of uninterrupted destruction, President Trump states that US military presence is not the solution for Afghanistan, it's the problem.

AnonFromTN , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:20 pm GMT
@peterAUS

My take is there are warring factions of mostly incompetent little people with a lot of power who fight among themselves who's going to get more power and related material wealth. The malevolent part re all those they see as below them is given, of course.

And those "they" aren't even that smart.

My goodness! I agree with you on this.

Ronald Thomas West , says: Website December 25, 2018 at 10:24 pm GMT
@Realist When Erdogan's military had shot down the Russian jet, Turkey paid for it rapidly with an economic squeeze. Russian tourism to Turkey was shut down and green grocer exports to Russia were subjected to intense scrutiny/inspection and nearly halted. One could say the Turks are still feeling the effect, the impact was immediate and probably there hasn't been a full recovery to some of the businesses that had been damaged. Erdogan tucked his tail and played nice with Putin after all but he is no dependable ally of anyone, he's screwed everyone he'd ever done business with insofar as the M.E. regional game. The main problem with Turkey for Russia is the Erdogan regime's Salafi outlook (to say the leadership is sympathetic to al-Qaida would be an understatement.) Erdogan may have promised to 'neutralize' the Idlib extremists but he won't, he can't, in fact he doesn't dare, it is estimated there are upwards of 1,000 cells established in Turkey. How that plays out is anyone's guess but my money is on the idea he'll shove the the Idlib extremists off on the Kurds as a Turkish military proxy and cross Putin in the process (the USA won't mind this at all and in fact CIA Ops division might reward it.)
Anon [149] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:36 pm GMT

LOCKERBIE http://aanirfan.blogspot.com/2018/12/lockerbie.html

anon [376] Disclaimer , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:43 pm GMT
@Bragadocious

Brits simply love using the U.S. military for their own venal objectives.

yeah, those dirty "Brits" next thing you know they'll try to send the US Navy up the Yangtze River to force opium on the Chinese, lol

RobinG , says: December 25, 2018 at 10:50 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN "The only good thing is, they are forced to show their true colors."

Exactly. The liars, frauds, gatekeepers, Hillary-bots, and every brand of stupid in between have been flushed into the open. For example, anyone who still admires Chomsky should take note:

Aaron Maté‏Verified account @aaronjmate · Dec 24

Update: Chomsky was sent my Q & this is his response. He favors keeping US troops in Syria as a holding operation until a final settlement w/ Russia-Assad that could guarantee Kurds' safety. With US pulling out now, he argues that all leverage is lost to avoid a Turkish assault:

"What deal with the Russians (who right now are making cozy deals with Turkey)? And a deal with Assad, the main mass murderer in Syria – – who can in any event do nothing to deter Turkey.

In fact, in the longer term there should be a deal crucially involving Russia and with Assad, with some kind of guarantees (for what they are worth) to preserve at least some limited protection for the Kurds. But that's the longer term. This is now. For now, the sole deterrent to a Turkish assault is a small US contingent confined to Kurdish areas, as a holding operation for a possible longer term settlement along the lines just indicated."

[Dec 27, 2018] Dumping On The Donald

Dec 27, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Dumping On The Donald

by Tyler Durden Tue, 12/25/2018 - 15:00 41 SHARES Authored by Raul Ilargi Meijer via The Automatic Earth,

I still had some things I didn't talk about in Sunday's Trump Derangement International , about how the European press have found out that they, like the US MSM, can get lots of viewers and readers simply by publishing negative stories about Donald Trump. The US president is an attention magnet, as long as you only write things about him designed to make him look bad.

The Guardian is only too happy to comply. They ran a whole series of articles on Sunday to do juts that: try to make Trump look bad. Note that the Guardian editorial team that okayed the articles is the same as the one that allowed the fake Assange/Manafort one , so their credibility is already shot to pieces. It's the magic triangle of today's media profits: spout non-stop allegations against Russia, Trump and Julian Assange, and link them when and where you can. It doesn't matter if what you say is true or not.

Anyway, all the following is from the Guardian, all on December 23. First off, Adam Gabbatt in New York, who has painstakingly researched how Trump's businesses, like Trump Tower and the Trump store, don't appear to have sufficiently (as per him) switched from Happy Holidays to Merry Christmas. Sherlock Holmes would have been proud. A smash hit there Adam, bring out the handcuffs.

Trump's 'Merry Christmas' Pledge Fails To Manifest

During Donald Trump's presidential campaign he talked often about his determination to win one particular war. A war that had been raging for years, he said. Specifically: the war on Christmas. But despite Trump's repeated claims that "people are saying Merry Christmas again" instead of the more inclusive "happy holidays", there are several places where the Christmas greeting is absent: Trump's own businesses.

The Trump Store, for example. Instead of a Christmas gift guide – which surely would be more in keeping with the president's stated desire for the phrase to be used – the store offers a holiday gift guide. "Shop our Holiday Gift Guide and find the perfect present for the enthusiast on your list," the online store urges. "Carefully curated to celebrate the most wonderful time of year with truly unique gifts found only at Trump Store. Add a bow on top with our custom gift wrapping. Happy Holiday's!"

The use of the phrase "Happy Holiday's" [sic] in Trump marketing would seem particularly egregious. The long-standing "War-on-Christmas" complaint from the political right is that stores use the phrase "Happy Holidays", rather than specifically mentioning the Christian celebration. It is offered as both an example of political correctness gone mad, and as an effort to erase Christianity from the US.

It's just, I think that if Trump had personally interfered to make sure there were Merry Christmas messages all around, you would have remarked that as president, he's not allowed to be personally involved in his businesses. But yeah, you know, just to keep the negativity going, it works, no matter how fluffy and hollow.

Second, still on December 23, is Tom McCarthy for the Guardian in New York, who talks about Robert Mueller's phenomenal successes. Mueller charged 34 people so far. In a case that involves "this complexity which has international implications, aspects relying on the intelligence community, complicated cyber components". It really says that.

And yes, that's how many people view this. What do they care that Mueller's original mandate was to prove collusion between the Trump campaign and 'Russians', and that he has not proven any collusion at all so far, not even with 34 people charged? What do they care? It looks like Trump is guilty of something, anything, after all, and that's all the circus wants.

Robert Mueller Has Enjoyed A Year Of Successes 2019 Could Be Even Stronger

One measure of special counsel Robert Mueller's prosecutorial success in 2018 is the list of former top Donald Trump aides brought to justice: Michael Cohen pleaded guilty, a jury convicted Paul Manafort, a judge berated Michael Flynn. Another measure is the tally of new defendants that Mueller's team charged (34), the number of new guilty pleas he netted (five) and the amount of money he clawed back through tax fraud cases ($48m).

Yet another measure might judge Mueller's pace compared with previous independent prosecutors. "I would refer to it as a lightning pace," said Barb McQuade, a University of Michigan law professor and former US attorney. "In a case of this complexity which has international implications, aspects relying on the intelligence community, complicated cyber components – to indict that many people that quickly is really impressive work."

But there's perhaps a more powerful way to measure Mueller's progress in his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 US election and links between Moscow and the Trump campaign; that's by noticing how the targets of his investigation have changed their postures over the course of 2018, from defiance to docility – or in the case of Trump himself, from defiance to extreme, hyperventilating defiance.

In reality, you would be at least as correct if you would claim that Robert Mueller's investigation has been an abject failure. Not one iota of collusion has been proven after 20 months and $20 million in funds have been used. And any serious investigation of Washington's culture of fixers and lobbyists would land at least 34 people who have committed acts that border on or over illegality. And in a matter of weeks, for a few hundred bucks.

Third, still on December 23, is Julian Borger in Washington, who's been elected to convey the image of chaos. Trump Unleashed, says our modern day Shakespeare. With Jim Mad Dog Mattis characterized as ".. the last independently minded, globally respected, major figure left in the administration".. . Again, it really says that.

Because woe the man who tries to bring US troops home, or even promises to do so a few days before Christmas. For pulling out America's finest, Donald Trump is being portrayed as something eerily close to the antichrist. That truly is the world on its head. Bringing troops home to their families equals chaos.

Look, guys, if Trump has been guilty of criminal behavior, the US justice system should be able to find that out and convict him for it. But that's not what this is about anymore. A million articles have been written, like these ones in the Guardian, with the sole intention, evidence being scarce to non-existent, of smearing him to the extent that people see every subsequent article in the light of a man having previously been smeared.

Chaos At Home, Fear Abroad: Trump Unleashed Puts Western World On Edge

The US stumbled into the holiday season with a sense of unravelling, as a large chunk of the federal government ground to a halt, the stock market crashed and the last independently minded, globally respected, major figure left in the administration announced he could no longer work with the president. The defense secretary, James Mattis, handed in his resignation on Thursday, over Donald Trump's abrupt decision to pull US troops out of Syria.

On Saturday another senior official joined the White House exodus. Brett McGurk, the special envoy for the global coalition to defeat Isis and the US official closest to America's Kurdish allies in the region, was reported to have handed in his resignation on Friday. That night, senators flew back to Washington from as far away as Hawaii for emergency talks aimed at finding a compromise on Trump's demand for nearly $6bn for a wall on the southern border, a campaign promise which has become an obsession.

Now look at the next headline, December 23, Graeme Wearden, Guardian, and ask yourself if it's really Trump saying he doesn't agree with the rate hikes that fuels the fears, or whether it's the hikes themselves. And also ask yourself: when Trump and Mnuchin both deny reports of Trump firing Powell, why do journalists keep saying the opposite? Because they want to fuel some fears?

From where I'm sitting, it looks perfectly logical that Trump says he doesn't think Powell's decisions are good for the US economy. And it doesn't matter which one of the two turns out to be right: Trump isn't the only person who disagrees with the Fed hikes.

The main suspect for 2019 market turmoil is the inevitable fallout from the Fed's QE under Bernanke and Yellen. And there is something to be said for Powell trying to normalize rates, but there's no doubt that may hasten, if not cause, turmoil. Blaming it on Trump not agreeing with Jay Powell is pretty much as left field as it gets.

White House Attacks On Fed Chair Fuel Fears Of Market Turmoil In 2019

Over the weekend, a flurry of reports claimed Donald Trump had discussed the possibility of firing the Federal Reserve chairman, Jerome Powell. Such an unprecedented move would trigger further instability in the markets, which have already had their worst year since the 2008 crisis. US officials scrambled to deny Trump had suggested ousting Powell, who was appointed by the president barely a year ago.

The Treasury secretary, Steven Mnuchin, tweeted that he had spoken to the president, who insisted he "never suggested firing" Powell, and did not believe he had the right to do this . However, Trump also declared – via Mnuchin – that he "totally disagrees" with the Fed's "absolutely terrible" policy of raising interest rates and unwinding its bond-buying stimulus programme, piling further pressure on the US's independent central bank.

And now, in the only article in the Guardian series that's December 24, not 23, by Victoria Bekiempis and agencies, the plunging numbers in the stock markets are Trump's fault, too.

Trump 'Plunging Us Into Chaos', Democrats Say, As Markets Tank And Shutdown Persists

Top Democrats have accused Donald Trump of "plunging the country into chaos" as top officials met to discuss a growing rout in stock markets caused in part by the president's persistent attacks on the Federal Reserve and a government shutdown. "It's Christmas Eve and President Trump is plunging the country into chaos," the two top Democrats in Congress, House speaker nominee Nancy Pelosi and Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer, wrote in a joint statement on Monday. "The stock market is tanking and the president is waging a personal war on the Federal Reserve – after he just fired the Secretary of Defense."

Trump criticized the Federal Reserve on Monday, describing it as the "only problem" for the US economy, even as top officials convened the "plunge protection team" forged after the 1987 crash to discuss the growing rout in stock markets. The crisis call on Monday between US financial regulators and the US treasury department failed to assure markets, and stocks fell again amid concern about slowing economic growth, the continuing government shutdown, and reports that Trump had discussed firing Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell.

The last one is from one Jonathan Jones, again December 23, again for the Guardian. And it takes the top award in the narrative building contest.

Again, the Guardian editorial team that okayed this article is still the same as the one that allowed the fake Assange/Manafort one, an editorial team that sees no problem in making things up in order to smear people. To portray Trump, Assange and anyone who's had the misfortune of being born in Russia as suspicious if not outright criminal.

But look at what Jones has to say, and what Guardian editor-in-chief Kathy Viner and her ilk allowed and pressured him to say. He wants to have a say in how Trump should dress (seasonal knitwear), he evokes the image of Nazi architect Albert Speer for no reason at all, and then it's a matter of mere inches until you arrive at Trump as a king, an emperor, an inner tyrant.

"He's in a tuxedo!", Like that's a bad thing for Christmas. "She's in white!". Oh dear, call the pope. If both Trumps would have put on Christmas sweaters in front of a fire, the writer would have found something negative in that.

Trump Portrait: You Couldn't Create A Creepier Yuletide Scene If You Tried

The absence of intimacy in the Trumps' official Christmas portrait freezes the heart. Can it be that hard to create a cosy image of the presidential couple, perhaps in front of a roaring hearth, maybe in seasonal knitwear? Or is this quasi-dictatorial image exactly what the president wants to project? Look on my Christmas trees, ye mighty, and despair! If so, it fuels suspicions that it is only the checks and balances of a 230-year-old constitution that are keeping America from the darkest of political fates. You couldn't create a creepier Yuletide scene if you tried. Multiple Christmas trees are currently a status symbol for the wealthy, but this picture shows the risks.

Instead of a homely symbol of midwinter cheer, these disciplined arboreal ranks with their uniform decorations are arrayed like massed soldiers or colossal columns designed by Albert Speer. The setting is the Cross Hall in the White House and, while the incumbent president cannot be held responsible for its architecture, why heighten its severity with such rigid, heartless seasonal trappings? Everything here communicates cold, empty magnificence. Tree lights that are as frigid as icicles are mirrored in a cold polished floor. Equally frosty illuminations are projected on the ceiling. Instead of twinkling fairy magic, this lifeless lighting creates a sterile, inhuman atmosphere.

You can't imagine kids playing among these trees or any conceivable fun being had by anyone. It suggests the micromanaged, corporate Christmas of a Citizen Kane who has long since lost touch with the ordinary, warm pleasures of real life. In the centre of this disturbing piece of conceptual art stand Donald and Melania Trump. He's in a tuxedo, she's wearing white – and not a woolly hat in sight. Their formal smartness adds to the emotional numbness of the scene. Trump's shark-like grin has nothing generous or friendly about it. He seems to want to show off his beautiful wife and his fantastic home rather than any of the cuddly holiday spirit a conventional politician might strive to share at this time.

It begs a question: how can a man who so glaringly lacks anything like a common touch be such a successful "populist"? What can a midwestern voter find in this image to connect with? Perhaps that's the point. After more than two centuries of democracy, Trump is offering the US people a king, or emperor. In this picture, he gives full vent to his inner tyrant. If this portrait contains any truth about the state of America and the world, may Santa help us all.

I realize that you may be tired of the whole story. I realize you may have been caught in the anti-Trump narrative. And I am by no means a Trump fan. But I will keep on dragging you back to this. Because the discussion should not be based on a handful of media moguls not liking Trump. It should not be based on innuendo and smear. If Trump is to be convicted, it must be on evidence.

And there is no such evidence. Robert Mueller has charged 34 people, but none with what his mandate was based on, none with Russia collusion. This means that the American political system, and democracy itself, is under severe threat by the very media that are supposed to be its gate keepers.

None of this is about Trump, or about whether you like him or not, or even if he's a shady character or not. Instead, it's about the influence the media have on how our opinions and ideas about people and events are being shaped on a daily basis.

And once you acknowledge that your opinions of Trump, Putin et al, even without any proof of a connection between them, are actively being molded by the press you expect to inform you about the truth behind what goes on, you will have to acknowledge, too, that you are a captive of forces that use your gullibility to make a profit off you.

If our media need to make up things all the time about who's guilty of what, because our justice systems are incapable of that, then we have a problem so enormous we may not be able to overcome it in our present settings.

Alternatively, if we trust our justice systems to deliver true justice, we don't need a hundred articles a day to tell us how Trump or Putin are such terrible threats to our world. Our judges will tell us, not our journalists or media who are only in it for a profit.

I can say: "let's start off 2019 trying to leave prejudice behind", and as much as that is needed and you may agree with me, it's no use if you don't realize to what extent your views of the world have been shaped by prejudice.

I see people reacting to the star writer at Der Spiegel who wrote a lot about Trump, being exposed as a fraud. I also see people trying to defend Julian Assange from the Guardian article about his alleged meetings with Paul Manafort, that was an obvious big fat lie (the truth is Manafort talked to Ecuador to help them 'sell' Assange to the US).

But reacting to the very obvious stuff is not enough . The echo chamber distorts the truth about Trump every single day, and at least six times on Sunda y, as this essay of mine shows. It's just that after two years of this going on 24/7, it is perceived as the normal.

Everyone makes money dumping on the Donald, it's a proven success formula, so why would the Guardian and Der Spiegel stay behind? They'd only hurt their own bottom line.

It has nothing to do with journalism, though, or news. It's smear and dirt, the business model of the National Enquirer. That's how far our once truthful media have fallen.

dcmbuffy , 18 minutes ago link

"Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown." Shakespeare Henry IV

like trump said- "no-one said it would be easy."

uhland62 , 54 minutes ago link

All these journalists are influenced and manipulated by 'Australian-American Leadership Dialogue', 'Atlantikbrücke', Open Society Foundation money etc. Wars boost the NYSE because many weapons manufacturers are listed there.

If the journalists weren't manipulated all 2018 compilations would not have omitted the World Cup in Russia.

[Dec 27, 2018] The MSM are hardly going to publish this article, nor are they going to reference it, why should they? It goes against everything they have been fighting for and the tin ear of their readership are unwilling to change teir views. The only thing that they understand is money and they work for to further the concentration of wealth.

Notable quotes:
"... Friends of mine who make a living out of dealing both in stock and wealth creating schemes have no loyalty to this country, they are self motivated and libertarian in persuasion. "Government should get out of the way!" This is nothing short of scandalous. ..."
"... Unless we stand up for our rights and a civil society that provides adequate provision for fair and balanced policy making,xwe will continue until we will see an implosion. History is littered with examples of revolution based on the kind of inequality we are seeing happen in this country. Let's hope it doesn't come to that. ..."
Dec 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

PossumBilly , 3 Jun 2018 23:25

This message is clear and concise. It is however never going to be heard beyond the 'Guardian'.

The MSM are hardly going to publish this article, nor are they going to reference it, why should they? It goes against everything they have been fighting for and the tin ear of their readership are unwilling to change teir views.

The only thing that they understand is money and the concentration of wealth. This misonception as Dennis So far this has been handed to them on a plate, the taxation system has enabled them to manipulate an multiply their earnings. So much of money the has nothing to do with adding value to this countries economy but is speculative in nature based on financial and overseas instruments.

No is the time for our government to take the lead and start as the Victorian ALP have done and invest in people and jobs on the back of strategic investment. It is a fallacy that governments don't create jobs they, through their policies do just that.

Friends of mine who make a living out of dealing both in stock and wealth creating schemes have no loyalty to this country, they are self motivated and libertarian in persuasion. "Government should get out of the way!" This is nothing short of scandalous.

Unless we stand up for our rights and a civil society that provides adequate provision for fair and balanced policy making,xwe will continue until we will see an implosion. History is littered with examples of revolution based on the kind of inequality we are seeing happen in this country. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

[Dec 27, 2018] All talk about "small government" and "slashing red tape" it is NeeSpeak for small government and NO red tape for the rich

Dec 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

MajorMalaise , 3 Jun 2018 23:44

A couple of thoughts - in no particular order.

When governments like the LNP (driven as it is by its ideology of greed, the IPA manifesto and Gina Rinehart's idea of what Australia should look like [and how little she should pay to pillage "communally owned" assets to enrich herself beyond imagination - she has no greater claim over the Pilbara than any other Australian, but like all who live by the ethos of greed, she thinks she should get it all for nothing]).

When the LNP talk about "small government" and "slashing red tape" it is politician-speak for small government and NO red tape for the rich. What it also means is much more government and red tape for the poor and vulnerable - as we would expect, the rich and powerful, who really dictate economic and social policy in this country enlist willing governments to enact measures that suppress the lower classes. It is not quite calling out the military (as Hawke did during the pilot's strike at the insistence of the corpulent Ables - one act for which I will always despise Hawke), but it has the same result by more surreptitious, lasting and egregious means.

And one of the lasting legacies of the philosophies of neo-liberalism, from which the Hanson's of the world "suck their oxygen" is that the political and corporate dialogue of the last 30 or so years has pushed the notion of self-entitlement and vilification of the poor and vulnerable further down the economic ladder. So now, we have countless Australians on reasonable incomes who, like the rich, are convinced that all of our social and economic ills can be rectified if we stop giving handouts to the bludgers, the malingerers, the disabled and the indigenous - the neo-liberal rhetoric is now so widespread that it is easier than ever for the vulnerable to be attacked and for many, that is seen as absolutely necessary. It is the false US-sourced notion that if you are poor, it is because you deserve to be and if I am rich - it isn't luck or inheritance - it is because I deserve it. This world-view makes it so much easier to attack the vulnerable as receiving way to much to sit at home and bludge.

Want to forget the now disgraced CEO of Australia Post who bought a Sydney mansion for $22 million and now wants to sell it for $40 million - tax free I might add. He is entitled to that wealth enhancement. But someone on the dole smokes a spliff now and then and we think they should lose their entitlements to an income that doesn't even get them up to the poverty line (but they should be grateful for that pittance). Want to forget the CEO's who pretentiously do their "sleeping rough" for a night and proclaim their empathy for the homeless who would shriek at paying more tax to genuinely fund programmes to help the down and outs. No problem - just embrace the selfish and greedy neo-liberalism philosophy.

[Dec 27, 2018] Is it possible to wrench control of MSM out of hand on large corporations and intelligence agencies?

Dec 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

RatioDecidend , 4 Jun 2018 01:33

This article is excellent and well overdue. All we need to do now is to wrench control of our mainstream media out of the hands of Corporate (foreign) control. We are being told to vote against ourselves in order for the few corporate elite to accrue massive wealth and power over us.

MEDIA laws need to be very strict with very, very severe financial penalties for bias and propaganda. Certainly remove this concept of self regulation whereby they sit on their own disciplinary boards. Raise the standards of our media and allow us to retrieve some semblance of our democracy.

Without media control, how would corporations be able to manipulate and propagandise the populace with their own vested interests.

That is why governments are doing corporate bidding and getting fascist style surveillance of its people, in order to counteract the ability of the people to gain knowledge through the internet and vote against corporate control of our democracy.... nothing to do with terrorism which was caused mostly by corporate foreign extraction of wealth through weapon sales; resource acquisition, etc.

Oops, got to go, hope that makes sense.

RatioDecidend -> Lawrie Griffith , 4 Jun 2018 00:51
It is back to control of our mainstream media by the very (foreign) corporations that are sucking out our wealth and putting nothing back.

Corporate media ia all powerful. They insidiously permeate the populace with corporate views of Australia's financial and economy; infrastructure and every aspect of social life from birth to euthanasia with racism and religion thrown in for good measure.

Should a politician have the audacity to act against their corporate interests, they do not last long, without exclusions - PMs Whitlam and Rudd being prime examples.

This current mob of gutless underachieving dinosaur neo con nutters in govt, are completely turning over Australia to these Corporate (foreign) parasites and our prospect is not looking good.

Within no time we will be a Corporatocracy (as is the USA) and along with that comes 1% owning 99% of the wealth; third world poverty; crime through the roof; drugs out of control; public health and education a joke; public services non existent; legal system in disarray and entrenched with bias and inequity.

[Dec 27, 2018] The big con how neoliberals convinced us there wasn't enough to go around by Richard Denniss

Notable quotes:
"... The political strategy behind these contradictions is simple: it is difficult to criticise government spending on health and education, or popular regulations like consumer protection and limits on executive pay. So why not just criticise all government spending and all ..."
Jun 03, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

After the mining boom and decades of economic growth, how can Australia be broke?

Gina Rinehart was becoming the world's richest woman those on the minimum wage were falling further and further behind

Australia just experienced one of the biggest mining booms in world history. But even at the peak of that boom, there was no talk of the wonderful opportunity we finally had to invest in world-class mental health or domestic violence crisis services.

Nor was there much talk from either major party about how the wealth of the mining boom gave us a once-in-a-generation opportunity to invest in remote Indigenous communities. Nope, the peak of the mining boom was not the time to help those who had missed out in decades past, but the Howard government thought it was a great time to introduce permanent tax cuts for high-income earners. These, of course, are the tax cuts that caused the budget deficits we have today.

Millions of tonnes of explosives were used during the mining boom to build more than 100 new mines, but it wasn't just prime farmland that was blasted away in the boom, it was access to the middle class. At the same time that Gina Rinehart was becoming the world's richest woman on the back of rising iron ore prices, those on the minimum wage were falling further and further behind their fellow Australians.

https://www.theguardian.com/email/form/plaintone/4148

Like Joe Hockey, Rinehart saw the problem of inequality as having more to do with the character of the poor than with the rules of the game: "If you're jealous of those with more money, don't just sit there and complain. Do something to make more money yourself – spend less time drinking or smoking and socialising, and more time working."

Privatisation is deeply unpopular with voters. Here's how to end it | John Quiggin

Australia isn't poor; it is rich beyond the imagining of anyone living in the 1970s or 80s. But so much of that new wealth has been vacuumed up by a few, and so little of that new wealth has been paid in tax, that the public has been convinced that ours is a country struggling to pay its bills.

Convincing Australians that our nation is poor and that our governments "can't afford" to provide the level of services they provided in the past has not just helped to lower our expectations of our public services and infrastructure, it has helped to lower our expectations of democracy itself. A public school in Sydney has had to ban kids from running in the playground because it was so overcrowded. Trains have become so crowded at peak hours that many people, especially the frail and the disabled, are reluctant to use them. And those who have lost their jobs now wait for hours on the phone when they reach out to Centrelink for help.

Although people with low expectations are easier to con, fomenting cynicism about democracy comes at a long-term cost. Indeed, as the current crop of politicians is beginning to discover, people with low expectations feel they have nothing to lose.

As more and more people live with the poverty and job insecurity that flow directly from neoliberal welfare and industrial relations policies, the scare campaigns run so successfully by the likes of the Business Council of Australia have lost their sting. Scary stories about the economy become like car alarms: once they attracted attention, but now they simply annoy those forced to listen.

'If governments can't make a difference and all politicians are corrupt, why not vote for outsiders?

After decades of hearing conservative politicians say that government is the problem, a growing number of conservative voters no longer care which major party forms government. If governments can't make a difference and all politicians are corrupt, why not vote for outsiders like Jacqui Lambie or Clive Palmer? There is perhaps no clearer evidence of the short-termism of the Liberal and National parties today than their willingness to fan the flames of anti-politician rhetoric without considering that it is their own voters who are most likely to heed the message.

Back when he was leading the campaign against Australia becoming a republic, Tony Abbott famously argued that you couldn't trust politicians to choose our head of state. And more recently, in campaigning against marriage equality, Minister Matt Canavan was featured in a television advertisement laughing at the thought that we could trust politicians.

Neoliberalism: the idea that swallowed the world

Convincing Australians that the country was broke also helped convince us that we have no choice but to sell the family silver. But of course we have a choice. Just as there is no right answer as to whether it's better to rent a home or buy one, there is no right answer to whether it's better for governments to own the electricity supply, the postal service or the water supply, or none of these things.

Different governments in different countries make different decisions at different points in time. While much of neoliberalism's rhetorical power comes from the assertion that "there is no alternative," the simple fact is that the world is full of alternatives. Indeed, even the so-called free marketeers in Australia can see alternatives.

Consider stadiums, for example. The NSW Liberal government has a long track record of being pro-privatisation. It has sold off billions of dollars' worth of electricity, water and health infrastructure. But when it comes to football stadiums, it has no ideological problem with public ownership, nor any fiscal inhibition about spending billions of taxpayers' dollars.

In 2016 the NSW Liberal government spent $220m buying back ANZ Stadium, built in the 1990s with taxpayer funds at a cost of $690m and subsequently sold to Stadium Australia Group. Having bought back the stadium, the NSW government plans to spend hundreds of millions of dollars refurbishing it. That same money could build a lot of school science labs, domestic violence crisis centres or skate parks for the bored kids the shopping malls don't want scratching up their marble stairs. For the past 30 years, Australians have been told that we can't afford high-quality public services, that public ownership of assets is inefficient, and that the pursuit of free markets through deregulation would create wealth and prosperity for all. But none of this is true.

While the policy agenda of neoliberalism has never been broadly applied in Australia, for 30 years the language of neoliberalism has been applied to everything from environmental protection to care of the disabled. The result of the partial application of policy and the broad application of language is not just a yawning gap between those with the greatest wealth and those with the greatest need, but a country that is now riven by demographic, geographic and racial divides.

Cutting the budget deficit is very important – except when it isn't

Australian politics isn't about ideology, it's about interests. The clearest proof of that claim is that neoliberal ideas such as deregulation were never aimed at powerful interest groups like the pharmacists or the gambling industry. And savage spending cuts were never aimed at subsidies for the fossil-fuel industry or private health insurers.

Tony Abbott, who claimed to have a philosophical problem with carbon taxing, once proposed a 20% increase in the tobacco excise

Just as conservative Christian theology provides an excuse for sexism and homophobia, neoliberal language allows powerful groups to package their personal preferences as national interests – systematically cutting spending on their enemies and giving money to their friends. Here are some examples:

John Howard said he was obsessed with deregulating the labour market, but introduced 762 pages of labour-market regulation, which he entitled WorkChoices. He didn't deregulate the labour market; he re-regulated it in his preferred form. He knew that government decisions matter. Similarly, the Abbott government declared it was waging a war on red tape, yet the Turnbull government is determined to pass new laws restricting unions and NGOs. If there is one thing that neoliberals really seem to believe, it is that reducing the budget deficit is very, very important. Except when it isn't. The political and business leaders who said we needed to slash welfare spending because we had a "budget emergency" are currently advocating a $65bn tax cut for business – even though the deficit is bigger now than it was at the time of the alleged emergency. The Productivity Commission and state treasuries spent years advocating the deregulation and privatisation of the electricity industry – and succeeded in creating a "free market" system governed by 5,000 pages of electricity market rules. Electricity is too dangerous and too important to be deregulated, and those pushing for deregulation always knew that. They didn't want a free market; they simply wanted a market, one in which the government played a smaller role and the private sector made large profits selling an essential service for much higher prices than the government ever charged. The NSW government requires NGOs and disability service providers to compete with each other but, when it sold Port Botany and the Port of Newcastle, it structured the sales to ensure that Newcastle could not compete with Port Botany for the landing of the millions of containers that arrive by ship each year. While "competition policy" is applied to the vulnerable, those buying billion-dollar assets are protected from those same forces of competition.

To be clear, there has been no obsession among the political elite with the neoliberal goals of reducing government spending, regulation or tax collection in Australia over the past three decades. None. They didn't mean a word of it. While there may have been economists, commentators and even business leaders who sincerely believed in those goals, it is clear from their actions, as distinct from their words, that John Howard, Tony Abbott and even the former head of the Business Council of Australia Tony Shepherd, the man tasked with running Abbott's National Commission of Audit, had no principled objection to spending large amounts of public money on things they liked spending large amounts of public money on. Indeed, in his speakers' agency profile, Tony Shepherd brags about his ability to get public money for private ventures:

It is no mean feat to convince governments to support private sector proposals, but as former prime minister, the honourable Paul Keating, said, "Tony managed to get more money out of my government than any other person I can recall."

Hundreds of new pages of regulation now govern the conduct of charities. Billions of taxpayers' dollars have been spent by "small government" politicians on everything from television ads for innovation to subsidies for marriage counselling. And Tony Abbott, who claimed to have a philosophical problem with carbon taxing, once proposed a 20% increase in the tobacco excise.

The political strategy behind these contradictions is simple: it is difficult to criticise government spending on health and education, or popular regulations like consumer protection and limits on executive pay. So why not just criticise all government spending and all red tape in general? Once you have convinced the public that all government spending is inefficient, you can set about cutting spending on your enemies and retaining it for your friends. And once you convince people that all regulation is bad, you can set about removing consumer protections while retaining the laws that protect the TV industry, the gambling industry, the pharmaceutical industry and all your other friends.

Cover of Dead Right by Richard Denniss, Quarterly Essay.

When powerful groups want subsidies, we are told they will create jobs. When powerless groups want better funding for domestic violence shelters or after-school reading groups, they are told of the need to reduce the budget deficit. When powerful groups demand new regulations, we are told it will provide business with certainty, but when powerless groups demand new regulations, they are told it will create sovereign risk.

Ideology has a bad name these days, but it simply means a "system of ideas and ideals." By that definition, it is possible to think of neoliberalism as an ideology focused on the idea that market forces are superior to government decision-making. But while large segments of Australian politics and business have draped themselves, and their policy preferences, in the cloak of neoliberal ideas and ideals, in reality to call them "ideologues" is to flatter them. They lack the consistency and strength of principle to warrant the title.

This is an edited extract of Richard Denniss's Quarterly Essay 70, Dead Right: How Neoliberalism Ate Itself and What Comes Next , $22.99

[Dec 27, 2018] Neoliberalism has caused 'misery and division', Bernie Fraser says

Dec 27, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Former RBA governor says Coalition pursues low-tax road to jobs and growth despite lack of evidence to support it

Paul Karp and Gareth Hutchens

Tue 16 Oct 2018 13.00 EDT Last modified on Tue 16 Oct 2018 19.11 EDT Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via Email This article is over 2 months old Australian economic growth has been a 'standout' says Bernie Fraser, but too many have missed the benefits. Photograph: Tracey Nearmy/EPA Neoliberalism has caused "misery and social polarisation" yet remains in vogue with the Coalition government, according to the economist Bernie Fraser.

The former Treasury secretary and Reserve Bank governor has made the comments in a presentation circulated to participants of the Australia Institute's revenue summit to be held in Canberra on Wednesday.

Michael Keating, a former secretary to the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, will also use the summit to raise doubts about the Morrison government's budget forecasts.

Australia's housing boom is not heading for a soft landing. How did we get here? | Greg Jericho Read more

In the background notes for Fraser's speech, seen by Guardian Australia, he says that Australia's 27 consecutive years of economic growth is a "standout", "Winx-like" performance.

But the record deserves only "qualified applause" because "too many Australians remain unemployed, under-employed, underskilled, underpaid and lack job security".

Fraser warns that society has become "less fair, less compassionate and more divided" and "more devoid of trust in almost every field of human activity" in the past 20 years.

"As a disinterested player in climate change negotiations and a miserable foreign aid donor, we have slipped well down the list of good global citizens."

Political ideologies appear to have contributed to inequality and disadvantage in Australia in that time, he argues.

Fraser in large part blames "neoliberalism" and its influence on policymaking for the "disconnect between Australia's impressive economic growth story and its failure on so many markers to show progress towards a better, fairer society".

"Favouring the market system ahead of the state system, and individual interests ahead of community interests, can lead to profoundly unfair social outcomes.

More than three million Australians living in poverty, Acoss report reveals Read more

"Those unable to afford access to decent standards of housing, healthcare, and other essential services have to settle for inferior arrangements, or go without."

Fraser says charitable organisations see the effects of "real poverty" that result in "misery, anxiety and loss of self-esteem of mothers unable to put food on the table for their kids, of old and young homeless people, and the victims of domestic violence and drug overdoses".

Fraser summarises the key thrusts of neoliberalism as "the pursuit of the lowest possible rates of income and most other taxes and the maximum restraint on government interventions and spending programs".

Evidence in Australia and overseas shows the influence of neoliberalism on fiscal policy "and the misery and social polarisation that has come with it", he says.

The global financial crisis "should have" marked a tipping point, when the "idealised view of financial markets being self-regulating" was shattered. While Australia "avoided the worst traumas of the GFC" with prompt fiscal and monetary policy responses, in Europe "taxes were increased and spending programs slashed", resulting in a further five or six years of severe recession.

Fraser says that all political ideologies – taken to extremes – can be divisive and cause damage, including an ideology "based on a state system".

But the former Reserve Bank governor focuses on neoliberalism because it "remains in vogue". The Morrison government "continues to reaffirm its over-riding commitment to lower taxation, and to assert that this is the best way to increase investment, jobs and economic growth" - despite the lack of evidence to support the theory .

Although Fraser recognises that politics never can or should be taken out of policymaking, he suggests the best course is to "hammer away" at flaws of particular approaches.

For example, Fraser praises "the avoidance of costly tax cuts accruing to large corporations" as a positive development – referring to the Turnbull government abandoning the big business component of its $50bn 10-year company tax cut plan.

He suggests the "quick done-deal" of Labor signing up to the Coalition's proposed acceleration of the cut to taxes on small and medium business was an example that "political interests are always lurking nearby".

In a separate presentation Keating – who headed PM&C from 1991 to 1996 – warns the government's promise to cap expenditure while simultaneously cutting taxes and returning the budget to surplus is based on overly optimistic assumptions of growth in GDP, wages and productivity.

Why are stock markets falling and how far will they go? Read more

According to Keating, the government must stop assuming there have been no structural changes in the relationship between unemployment and the rate of wage increases.

He notes that predictions of a tightening labour market leading to higher wages are predicated on assumptions of growth averaging 3% or as much as 3.5%.

He will also say a sustained return to past rates of economic growth will be impossible unless we can ensure a reasonably equitable distribution of income, involving a faster rate of wage increases, especially for the low-paid.

[Dec 27, 2018] Nationalism can be a good thing. We have to make the case for it Discussion The Guardian

Dec 27, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Eric Kaufmann, professor of politics at Birkbeck, has a forthcoming book, Whiteshift: Populism, Immigration and the Future of White Majorities . He argues that what I would call "bad nationalism" – the global surge in rightwing populism – is driven by large-scale immigration, and the threat it poses to the cultural identity of the ethnic majority. Some people fear change; they prefer the monocultural landscape in which they grew up, and visible changes to it threaten their sense of belonging and security. Certain attitudes are, if not hereditary, baked in to the point where they may as well be.

He supports this view with plentiful survey data, a favourite nugget being that the way you answer the question, "Would you prefer your children to be well-mannered, or to be considerate?" is a major predictor of whether you'd vote for or against Trump and Brexit .

The question is a proxy for what the cognitive linguist George Lakoff calls the strict father (well-mannered) versus the nurturant family (considerate) model. These frames are the timeless and elemental organising principles for our political divisions – authoritarian versus pluralist, right versus left – all the way back to Christ the Warrior versus Christ the Saviour.

I believe people respond to authoritarian and pluralist arguments according to who's making them, how trenchantly they are made, and the economic, media and political environment around them. Austerity soil has always been notoriously fertile for authoritarian ideas. Yet Kaufmann dismisses any economic factor, saying that had there been one, 2008 would have seen an upturn in rightwing nationalism, not 2017. My view is that depressions take years, not months, to grind people down.

UnstableGenius -> KingOfNothing , 9 May 2018 15:20

To me the key questions are how are the key decisions made and by whom are they made?

Globalism (not globalization, mind you) is a process whereby decisionmaking gets shifted farther and farther from the people and democratic accountability is continually weakened - ironically often with the rationale that we need this to "compete with China".

As a result, national borders (and therefore cultures) become less and less important and institutions like central banks, the EU, the WTO, etc. become ever more powerful. What you call neoliberalism is an effect - not the cause - of this phenomenon, in my opinion.

By the way, I agree with you that there is hope - in fact I am more optimistic today than I have been for many years - although probably for very different reasons than you.

DavidPavett -> formerlefty , 9 May 2018 15:16
I am quite sure that for the time being the nation state is an essential form of political and economic organisation. So I accept the necessity of nations. I reject nationalist ideologies which at best are confused, like ZW's argument, and at worst are very nasty things indeed.

I was stunned by the modernity of Renan's speech when I read it. Glad to see that it is available online. Hope you read it.

KingOfNothing -> UnstableGenius , 9 May 2018 15:01
No, thats not the case.

Globalisation is the ability to move goods/finance/ideas/culture around the global at speeds unheard of - there is no way to alter this, so your definition is inexact by quite a margin.

What is happening is neoliberalism - the economic sytem which has hijacked Globalisation - is playing havoc across the world.

These are not one and the same thing. Nationalism is a reaction to neoliberailsm, and the way it is concentrating wealth in the hands of the few.

Take a look at places like Finland, Norway and other parts of Europe, where they have restrained neoliberalism and do not have the same levels of inequality as in the USA or the UK. Japan is the most equal developed nation in the world. We need to marry strong democratic structures (at national and global level) with globalisation at the expense of neo-liberalism, not in support of it.

In short, your view is depressing and misguided. There is hope.

UnstableGenius -> KingOfNothing , 9 May 2018 14:15
Globalism is a system where a cosmopolitan class of technocratic elites makes all the decisions after talking among themselves in well-appointed conference rooms to which common people are not given access (think of what goes on in Brussels or in the ECB tower every day).
Democracy is something else.
In my opinion the two are mutually incompatible.
TheVixen -> hflashman , 9 May 2018 09:32
Yes, I'm talking about both British and non-British Muslims. Here's the clarification you're looking for: ICM Research for Channel 4 found that more than 100,000 British Muslims sympathize with suicide bombers and people who commit other terrorist acts. Moreover, only one in three British Muslims (34%) would contact the police if they believed that somebody close to them had become involved with jihadists.

In addition, 23% of British Muslims said Islamic Sharia law should replace British law in areas with large Muslim populations.

On social issues, 52% of the Muslims surveyed said they believe homosexuality should be illegal, compared to 22% of non-Muslim Britons.

39% of Muslims surveyed believe women should always obey their husbands, compared to 5% for non-Muslims. One in three British Muslims refuse completely to condemn the stoning of women accused of adultery.

Admittedly, this ICM survey is from 2016 so the picture may have improved, but I think you'll agree, these attitudes are quite a long way from the enlightenment values mentioned.

DavidPavett -> brexitman , 9 May 2018 07:21
Open borders and nationalism are really different issues. One can recognise the need for borders and border controls without convincing oneself that the people within a given border line are therefore endowed with some common essence about which they can feel pride or shame.

The pity about this is that liberal writers like ZW nearly always start from zero on this issue as if there wasn't a whole mass of discussion of a very detailed kind that has already taken place. Thus I would say that Ernest Renan's speech to the Surbonne in the 1880s published as What is a Nation? (reprinted in Shloma Sand's book On the Nation and the 'Jewish People' ) is well in advance of ZW's musings.

DavidPavett , 9 May 2018 03:37
I am with Einstein on this. He was once asked if he regarded himself as a German or a Jew. He replied: "I look upon myself as a man. Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind".
DavidPavett -> DrDeYoung , 9 May 2018 03:26
I found ZW's suggestion that "you do not need to be proud of Oliver Cromwell in order to be proud of Jessica Ennis-Hill" both revealing and ridiculous. If one is going to pick a figure from English history not to be proud of why on earth would one choose Cromwell? And on what grounds exactly does ZW feel proud of JE-H?

The Cromwell reference leads to a further point. Can the English, on ZW's argument, take pride in the actions of Scots prior to the Act of Union? And can they take pride in the actions of the Irish from Northern but not Southern Ireland?

I would nuance what you say just a little. Our actions contribute to producing not only things but also people. A parent can feel justified pride in the actions of his/her children as can a teacher in the actions of his/her pupils. There can also be a justified sense of collective pride for people who have contributed to that collective. ZW is right about that. She gets into a muddle when she tries to project this collective pride backwards in time to things we could have had no part in.

ponkala , 9 May 2018 02:13
People can be proud of their country , there is nothing wrong with it ,but when a country consists of many ethnic groups and religions, identifying the country only with majority ethno linguistic or religious group can lead to discrimination , alienation and resentment . This has led to civil wars in many regions. Canada and Switzerland are some of the exceptions where federal system and equalities of ethno linguistic groups have strengthened their countries .I would call this good nationalism.
On the other hand, many countries in Asia and Africa are suffering from the conflicts due to persecution or discrimination inflicted upon minorities from the majoritarian governments.
Modi in India is using the nationalistic card, trying to give an impression that the country only belongs to Hindus and Hindi speakers. In reality, India is not even a country , it is a collection of nation states with many ethnic groups , languages and religions which were united during the British rule. It is more diverse than the whole of Europe .However Modi is keen to perpetuate the myth India is homogenous , this natinalistic ideology might risk formenting divisions and conflicts in the future.I would call it 'bad nationalism '
joylessnortherner , 9 May 2018 00:50
Aren't we looking for the word patriotism as opposed to nationalism here Mz. Williams? I've always cleaved to Orwell's definitions of patriotism and nationalism. Predictably, nationalism gets short shrift.....largely because nationalism is dim, divisive and utterly undigestible for the vast majority of a nation at ease with itself. This is why Moggo, Bojo, Foxy and Gove prefer nationalism.

[Dec 27, 2018] Neoliberalism mantra: The dog eat dog economy simply represents our nature, it's who we are, we thrive under libertarianism.

Dec 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Jas636 -> Friarbird , 4 Jun 2018 01:38

Why would I refute points that I agree with?

I'm not the one who has a problem with neo-liberalism, it's provided for me more than adequately. Having spent a lot of time living overseas, it's provided ALL Australians with a far better deal than a few billion others.

If you are too naive to see this, then maybe you need to try an alternative for a while. It's quite ok, i'll be waiting for when the alternative fails (they always do) and I can come back and pick off the assets from the carcus of that little experiment for less than a cent in the dollar.

The dog eat dog economy simply represents our nature, it's who we are, we thrive under libertarianism.

internationalist07 07 -> Jas636 , 4 Jun 2018 01:34
I think you mean Neo liberal utopia
Friarbird -> GoronwyPrice , 4 Jun 2018 01:31
Po-faced, Libertarian BOLLOCKS.
Privatisation is sucker-farming.
Milking the punters, like ants milk aphids.
Farming them, like bellbirds do with leaf-bugs.
And even THAT is only part of the equation.
The fondest goal, the one which gives the management class hard-ons ?
Privatisation de-unionises their workforces.
GreyBags -> Shiner01 , 4 Jun 2018 01:29
It is quite strange that the biggest supporters of neo-liberal economics with its belief that giving money to the rich will solve all our problems call themselves 'Christians'.

I can't remember when Jesus preached trickle down. I don't remember the bit where Jesus said to treat those seeking asylum and fleeing violence like they are the scum of the earth. I don't remember when Jesus said the poor needed a good kick in the guts while they are down to motivate them to work harder. I don't remember when Jesus said we should cut funds from the sick to balance the budget. I don't remember Jesus saying that if you bear false witness often enough then you will fool enough of the people enough to keep power so you can look after your corporate buddy buddies.

In fact, almost all of the politicians in the Coalition who proclaim to be 'Christian' must have their own secret bible because nothing I have heard from the New Testament justifies their actions.

Me, I'm an atheist and I have more care, consideration, ethics and compassion than the entire collection of right wing bible bashers sitting in parliament today.

Friarbird -> RobertJREYNOLDS , 4 Jun 2018 01:20
"......the scam that is neo-liberalism."

No throwaway line.
A 'farming the suckers' scam is all it ever was.
With a view to massive wealth transfer.

Hasn't it worked well ?

Ozponerised , 4 Jun 2018 01:19
Thanks for this. We need more of these articles pointing out the bullshit behind this story that the Coalition has been feeding the gullible peasantry with for over 30 years, sneering, smirking and sniggering as truckloads of public money goes to private corporations. The money received from selling off public assets has been shoved into private businesses who then feel very free to charge like bulls.
It's a shame so many folk still fall for this bullshit meaning that their own families, work colleagues and community get shafted through diminishing public services.
Mal_Function , 4 Jun 2018 01:16
Brother Can You Spare a Dime

They used to tell me I was building a dream
And so I followed the mob
When there was earth to plow or guns to bear
I was always there right on the job

They used to tell me I was building a dream
With peace and glory ahead
Why should I be standing in line
Just waiting for bread?

Once I built a railroad, I made it run
Made it race against time
Once I built a railroad, now it's done
Brother, can you spare a dime?

Once I built a tower up to the sun
Brick and rivet and lime
Once I built a tower, now it's done
Brother, can you spare a dime?

Once in khaki suits, gee we looked swell
Full of that yankee doodle de dum
Half a million boots went sloggin' through hell
And I was the kid with the drum

Say, don't you remember, they called me Al
It was Al all the time
Say, don't you remember, I'm your pal
Buddy, can you spare a dime?

Songwriters: E. Y. Harburg / Jay Gorney
Brother Can You Spare a Dime lyrics © Warner/Chappell Music, Inc, Next Decade Entertainment, Inc, Shapiro Bernstein & Co. Inc.

prettygoody -> GoronwyPrice , 4 Jun 2018 01:11
'This is more or less the definition of increased productivity and it is what ultimately leads to improved living standards for everyone'

Lazy, neoliberal, supply-side economic guff. Neoliberals undermine government and democracy and then scavenge on the wreckage. When does 'ultimately' begin for 'everyone'? Never.

'Private companies provide the same service with much less labour'

Firing people is the answer? What a hardened realist you are. Must be great to be so certain in your neoliberal convictions. Are you really telling us that every privatisation has been a success?

These pieces of infrastructure have been built through generations of work and wise investment - they are not any one government's to sell. It's just easier for a corrupt, rudderless, feckless neoliberal shill to sell it than it is for them to to run it.

Friarbird -> ADamnSmith2016 , 4 Jun 2018 01:05
Can't even begin to address the characteristic Libertarian slyness in all that.
But I'll try.
"What you call neoliberalism was a set of responses to the failure of socialism or as Tony Blair said 'what matters is what works'."
Incorrect.
What I--what the world--calls "Neoliberalism', is the corpse of Classical economics, resurrected post-WW2 by Friedman and Hayek's 'Mont Pelerin Society. '
Why was it buried ?
Because during the Great Depression, its dogmatic insistence on continued austerity and wage cuts only made things worse.
After all, in an economic slump, whats the worst thing you can do ?
Deprive people of whatever little purchasing power they have.
So, goodbye Classical economics.
After which, govts SPENT their societies out of slump, putting people to work.
(O, the horror ! O, the heresy !)
The public works of that era include Germany's autobahns and the US New Deal projects, including the Tennessee Valley system and similar in Western States.
( O the horror ! O the heresy !)
Friedman, Hayek and the gang looked at those and post-WW2 programs of public benefit, such as the UK's NHS and shat themselves. Typical fear-driven conservatives, they were convinced such programs represented the thin end of the wedge which MUST end in imposition of Soviet-style conditions.
What utter paranoid crap.
Their resurrected corpse of Classical economics ?.
THAT is what is 'Neoliberalism'.
Whether or not I call it so is immaterial.
Then, this lofty bit of finger-wagging assertion;
"This process of economic evolution is necessarily imperfect and incomplete...."
Your Lordship's overview is appreciated...
"....but currently leaves you free to own a computer, read news on-line, communicate using the internet (maybe using NBN?) and express your views freely. "
Sez who ?
You ?
Besides, the only one talking about that old bogey, "socialism" is you.
Because its a conveniently perjorative label, eh ?
Pretty infantile, though.

"Anybody who doesn't agree with EVERYTHING I say, must be a 'socialist.' And they can't play with my toys."

PS 'Adam', why do LIbertarians always project a Superiority Complex ?
Why are the buggers always so PLEASED WITH THEMSELVES ?

Tasmanian Cryptik -> 20thCenturyFox , 4 Jun 2018 00:58
Socialise the losses, privatise the gains.
RatioDecidend -> Elizabeth Connor , 4 Jun 2018 00:55
intelligent comment. Due to corporate media indoctrinating propaganda it will take sometime for others to understand where the problem lies.
20thCenturyFox , 4 Jun 2018 00:41
Neoliberalism = Socialism for the Rich - Capitalism for the Poor.

Politics needs reform, plain & simple. Fed ICAC and Integrity Commission is a good start but it's not enough. The rules have to change too. Major decisions like privatising services or tax handouts to the rich, shouldn't by law be allowed to get through parliament or the senate unless the claims being made to justify them are quantifiable & demonstrated to be in the National Interest. Currently politicians have no obligation to do either.

e.g. claiming that jobs will be created if Penalty rates are cut = there's no way to quantify such a BS claim and Doug Cameron got them to admit that in Senate Estimates. Even so they were allowed to lie through their teeth and impose it anyway with no requirement to prove their BS claims. This corporate tax handout = once again they claim it will lead to more wealth to average Australians and more jobs but it can't be quantified or guaranteed via regulation so it's all bullshit. The rich will hoard the wealth & kick Australians in the guts as usual. That's what they've always done and always will do. Privatisation of electricity..what a crock of shit. They claimed it would create competition and drive down prices. What's happened? The complete opposite but politicians KNOW they're not accountable and therein 'lies' the problem. The shortsheeting of the original NBN, = yet another lie. They've totally crippled Australia's ability to compete in a digital age and completely screwed regional 2nd tier cities and towns in terms of growth. As far as the National interest is concerned the shortsheeting of the NBN is the complete opposite. Even so they were allowed to bastardise that too without any accountability whatsoever. Australians need to start demanding political reform so these bastards are accountable to the people.

grumpyom -> Fred1 , 4 Jun 2018 00:28
Neoliberalism is just the academic name for the political ideology of greed, corruption, self interest, self entitlement, corporate welfare, inequality, user pays, and poverty is your fault.

George Monbiot does it well too.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-problem-george-monbiot

grumpyom , 4 Jun 2018 00:18
Do you see any contradiction between privatised electricity and socialised stadiums?

Neoliberalism explains it all. Corruption in politics means that only profitable assets are privatised. Stadiums lose money, so are kept in private hands as corporate welfare for the various billionaire team owners and TV networks.

Elizabeth Connor , 4 Jun 2018 00:10
I love Richard Denniss! What a brilliantly concise and yet well supported argument. Now we just need someone who can say it in terms that will persuade unwilling voters to think carefully about their vote. If they do think carefully they simply cannot return this government to power, now that they're all revealed as nothing but crony capitalists.

I must admit that like many people I also thought neoliberalism was an ideology, but then I couldn't understand why they were so inconsistent in their spending of 'tax-payers' funds'.

From now on I'll be pointing out those inconsistencies with more confidence - armed with Richard's incontrovertible points, and also by a closer reading of Canadian Kean Birch's article:

https://theconversation.com/what-exactly-is-neoliberalism-84755.

Here's Birch's definition of neoliberalism:

[The term neoliberalism ] is used to refer to an economic system in which the "free" market is extended to every part of our public and personal worlds.

And here's wikipedia's definition of crony capitalism:

Crony capitalism is an economy in which businesses thrive not as a result of risks they take, but rather as a return on money amassed through a nexus between a business class and the political class.

NB But there's a more explicit definition here, which I like much better:

Crony capitalism is a term describing an economy in which success in business depends on close relationships between business people and government officials. It may be exhibited by favoritism in the distribution of legal permits, government grants, special tax breaks, or other forms of state interventionism.

https://www.quora.com/What-does-the-term-crony-capitalism-mean-What-are-the-long-term-economic-costs-of-crony-capitalism-for-a-country

And from where I sit, crony capitalism cannot be defended by anyone with any kind of integrity.

sierrasierra -> telbraithwaite , 4 Jun 2018 00:04
Yes, we have a spot of bother, and I think that their name - Institute of Public Affairs - is quite a misnomer.

The way these people operate is more akin to Opus Dei and many other 'secret societies' that have another public face altogether.

Given that IPA's agenda is a private members wish list which has a huge impact on matters of a broad public nature, it's rather akin to incest, and we know where the confusion between Church and State takes us regarding separation of powers, exactly where we are right now .two Royal Commissions that are joined at the hip, Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (2013 – 2017) and our current horror show Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation, and Financial Services Industry which could for all intents and purposes be as long as aforementioned.

Stay with me, as these are issues that relate to other 'energy' systems, namely money, sex and power, and if we have any doubts as to how far this cancer has spread, a quick purview of the following members ought to resolve it for you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Public_Affairs#Political_links

https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/1bz7et/ipas_75_point_list_for_abbott /

For the 70th Birthday big bash, we know that guests to the party were:
• Gina Rinehart
• Rupert Murdoch
• Tony Abbott
• George Pell - Australian Cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church
• Michael Kroger - President of the Victorian division of the Liberal Party of Australia and former director of the IPA
• Mitch Fifield - Communications Minister

Think horizontal and vertical industries/associations and you begin to get the picture, and that's before thinking about BCA and VECCI.

Billyswagg , 4 Jun 2018 00:03
First, elect the other mob next time around. They're in the pockets of the multinationals and the US alliance as well, but they're not quite as bad, yet. The next thing is a full-on assault on mainstream media. The frontline of the revolution, if there is to be one, is the media. No more guns or territorial claims, it's a battle for the mind. Education is the key. The "Neolibs" attack education at every opportunity - teachers, curriculum, funding etc. etc. but there's nothing wrong with education - the real problem is that the mainstream media relentlessly, all day every day works to an agenda of dis-education, deliberately undermining and destroying the work of our schools. They preach doubt and mistrust - of learning, facts, truth, intelligence, pure science, art, music, culture, thoughtfulness, forbearance, empathy and altruism. They teach us to monetise and gamble on everything. Their aim is to dumb everyone down to the point where not only can't they read an analog clock or drive their own car but become entirely dependent on the word of authority (of which they are the mouthpiece) for a continued existence. Today, with our vast social platforms we can target their lies and threats, one by one. Pick each one, attack it, viciously, loudly, risibly, with facts, comedy, derision and invitations to dance. Spread it wide. Call them out at every opportunity. Sneer them into oblivion. Mainstream media is the primary problem. That's what must be destroyed.
Dunkey2830 -> Dave Bradley , 3 Jun 2018 23:53

Maybe the ALP have learnt from their mistakes


No, regrettably they have not.
The neoliberalist 'mistake' has been going on for around 40 yrs now - it has proved a relentless descent into inequality and austerity.

Chris Bowen at the National Press Club :
"...Labor will go to the next election:
Achieving budget balance in the same year as the government;
Delivering bigger cumulative budget surpluses over forward estimates as well as substantially bigger surpluses over the ten year medium term; and
That the majority of savings raised from our revenue measures over the medium term will go towards budget repair and paying down debt...."

Pure neoliberal economic poison that will create further hardship for our citizens, worsen inequality and recess the economy yet further.

People have got to come to understand that the bigger surpluses Bowen speaks of are federal tax collection surpluses; i.e. he intends to withdraw further spending capacity from the private sector, all while the current account deficit already draws 3.5% GDP (~$30bn) a yr from that same heavily indebted private sector.

This Bowen statement report from the SMH :
"The whiff of a surplus, not reaching at least 1 per cent of GDP until 2026-27, does not adequately protect Australia against the potential roiling seas of international uncertainty," he will say.
"Australia needs bigger surpluses, sooner than the government is scheduling.
"We can't afford to let the next four years go to waste in the efforts for a healthier, safer budget surplus."

Absolute macroeconomic stupidity, arrogant, vandalous ideological madness.
When will the people come to their senses and stop supporting such socially destructive errant neoliberal economic alchemy?

BiggerPictureCait -> Stopthelibs , 3 Jun 2018 23:53
Just look at the Citizens Assembly overseeing the law change in the recent Irish referendum. Worked a treat, cause those involved wanted to find the bvest alternative, rather than feather their own nest.

[Dec 27, 2018] Neoliberal ideology is free market, neoliberal practice is crony capitalism

Dec 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

jclucas , 3 Jun 2018 23:25

It is indeed important to make the distinction between the ideology of neoliberalism - the ideology of private enterprise is good, and public spending is bad - and the operational system of crony capitalism - the game of mates played by government and the special interests.

And it is certainly equally important to call out the monumental hypocrisy involved in the government's application of the ideology's set of rules to the powerless and public and the government's application of corrupt practice rules to the special interests.

The system is destroying the egalitarian character of Australia and fanning the flames of nativist authoritarianism here.

But what's even more dangerous is the fundamental dishonesty that the system necessitates, and the alienating influence it has - on top of the growing economic inequality.

The system has destroyed the economic and environmental viability and sustainability of the planet on which human civilization depends.

What is becoming increasingly clear to more and more of the public is that - simple put- the system cannot be allowed to go on as it has been proceeding because it threatens the future of civilization on earth.

Change is imperative now. However, how that will unfold is unclear, as well as, the toll the destruc5turing system will take.

What is clear is that a great restructuring must happen - and soon.

[Dec 27, 2018] The destruction and destabilisation of the ME, an Israeli plan, as far as I know.

Notable quotes:
"... Israel fears Iran, is my idea. Norman Finkelstein once stated that Israeli Jews do not see how there ever can be peace with the Palestinians 'after all we did to them'. Not all Jews are idiots. Forgot in which book I read that in the thirties a Zionist reached Palestine, and saw that this was not the 'land without people for people without land'. He stated 'this is a crime'. ..."
Dec 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

jilles dykstra , says: December 25, 2018 at 5:31 pm GMT

@Z-man

Israel fears Iran, is my idea. Norman Finkelstein once stated that Israeli Jews do not see how there ever can be peace with the Palestinians 'after all we did to them'. Not all Jews are idiots. Forgot in which book I read that in the thirties a Zionist reached Palestine, and saw that this was not the 'land without people for people without land'. He stated 'this is a crime'.

The destruction and destabilization of the ME, an Israeli plan, as far as I know.

In 1921 and later years there was the enormous population exchange, without any financial compensation, between Turkey and Greece. To this day tensions exist between the two countries.

Iran is one of the oldest civilizations. Twice, one might say even three time, the west overthrew Iranian democracy. Iran knows of course quite well that the VS brought Saddam to power so that he could subjugate Iran, that had rid itself of the USA puppet shah. Iran also of course knows quite well Jewish power in the USA, Bush' s promise to AIPAC to destroy Iraq. Will those leading Iran now ever trust the USA or Israel ?

So that Netanyahu and USA Jewry now are in complete panic, who had expected it to be otherwise ? Uri Avnery wrote 'the only language zionists understand is power. Is there a problem, use power, if it does not help, use more power, if that also fails, use even more power'.

There has never been any serious negotiation between Israel and its neighbors, or with the Palestinians. About the Oslo negotiations a book appeared in Israel with the title 'How we fooled the Palestinians'? Sharon answered any Arab League peace proposal with force, Jenin, one of them, if my recollection is correct. There always was the idea of overwhelming more military power, and of USA support.

Kissinger saved Israel in the 1973 Yom Kippur war by flying over hundreds of the newest USA anti tank weapons, wire guided, TOW. What will the USA do in case Israel is attacked ? Is Netanyahu crazy enough to provoke an attack ?

[Dec 25, 2018] The problem with neoliberalism

Guardian readers responces
Notable quotes:
"... Winchester, Hampshire ..."
"... Wallington, Surrey ..."
Dec 25, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Michael Greenwood , Geoff Naylor and David Murray on the failures of economic policy

While agreeing with the thrust of Paul Mason's article ( A new politics of emotion is needed to beat the far right , Journal, 26 November), it is surely necessary to employ economics if we are to defeat neoliberalism. We have lived under this regime, with increasing severity, for 25 years or so. The result has been the stagnation of real incomes for the large majority, with the benefits of GDP growth accruing to those at the top of income and wealth distributions. This has suppressed growth, as those with less money tend to spend it and those with more hide it and avoid tax. Lower UK growth is clearly shown in comparative data.

So if neoliberalism is a school of economics, it is a failure if the aim of economic policy is to encourage growth and the reinvestment of the benefits. Of course, neoliberalism is not economics, it is political dogma, supported by its beneficiaries. We need economics undergraduates to demand to be taught real economics and not the propaganda of power that is neoliberalism.
Michael Greenwood
Manchester

• In his search for a political narrative of economic hope to counteract the rise of rightwing populism, Paul Mason overlooks the sense of belonging that exists in faith communities. Here, a selfless collaboration for the inclusive good of one another has never required disruption of the free-market economy. It is just that this ethos has not been introduced at the national economic and political levels.
Geoff Naylor
Winchester, Hampshire

• All suffered the same 2007-08 financial crash, but the "UK has weakest wage growth of wealthy nations" ( Report , 27 November). Anything to do with Tory-led government economic policy?
David Murray
Wallington, Surrey

[Dec 25, 2018] Seven signs of the neoliberal apocalypse by Van Badham

Dec 25, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

For 40 years, the ideology popularly known as "neoliberalism" has dominated political decision-making in the English-speaking west.

People hate it . Neoliberalism's sale of state assets, offshored jobs, stripped services, poorly-invested infrastructure and armies of the forcibly unemployed have delivered, not promised "efficiency" and "flexibility" to communities, but discomfort and misery. The wealth of a few has now swelled to a level of conspicuousness that must politely be considered vulgar yet the philosophy's entrenched itself so deeply in how governments make decisions and allocate resources that one of its megaphones once declared its triumph "the end of history".

... ... ...

Paul Keating's rejection

It was a year ago that a third sign first appeared, when the dark horse of Australian prime ministers, Paul Keating, made public an on-balance rejection of neoliberal economics. Although Liberal PM Malcolm Fraser instigated Australia's first neoliberal policies, it was Keating's architecture of privatisation and deregulation as a Labor treasurer and prime minister that's most well remembered.

Now, "we have a comatose world economy held together by debt and central bank money," Keating has said, "Liberal economics has run into a dead end and has had no answer to the contemporary malaise." What does the disavowal mean? In terms of his Labor heir Bill Shorten's growing appetite for redistributive taxation and close relationship to the union movement, it means "if Bill Shorten becomes PM, the rule of engagement between labour and capital will be rewritten," according to The Australian this week. Can't wait!

Tony Abbott becomes a fan of nationalising assets

Or maybe's Sukkar's right about the socialists termiting his beloved Liberal party. How else to explain the earthquake-like paradigm shift represented by the sixth sign? Since when do neoliberal conservatives argue for the renationalisation of infrastructure, as is the push of Tony Abbott's gang to nationalise the coal-fired Liddell power station? It may be a cynical stunt to take an unscientific stand against climate action, but seizing the means of production remains seizing the means of production, um, comrade. "You know, nationalising assets is what the Liberal party was founded to stop governments doing," said Turnbull, even as he hid in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains to weather – strange coincidence – yet another Newspoll loss.

• Van Badham is a Guardian Australia columnist

uhurhi , 27 Apr 2018 05:43

"new introduction to a re-released Marx and Engels' Communist Manifesto. Collective, democratic political action is our only chance for freedom and enjoyment."

Might be true. But frightening that people should naively still think that democracy is to be found in the 'Dictatorship of the Proletariat' [ ie those who know what's good for you even if you don't like it ] of the Communist Manifesto after the revelations of what that leads to in the Gulag Archipelago , Mao's China , Pol Pot , Kim John - un .

How quickly the world forgets. - you might just as well advocate Mein Kampf it's the same thing in the end !

fleax -> internationalist07 07 , 27 Apr 2018 05:43
most "isms" kill off their rivals and the unbelievers when they usurp power
charleyb23 -> RedmondM , 27 Apr 2018 05:37
That's what you claim and it might be so but I'm not interested in keeping a score on the matter. The point you failed to get is that the people you mentioned where totalitarian thugs. They used the banner of communism to achieve their ends. They would have used what ever ideology that was in fashion to achieve the same results.
daily_phil , 27 Apr 2018 05:35
Does present day neo-liberalism actually qualify as a political movement?

Vested interests and the dollar seem to have all the power. Lies and deception are so common the truth is seen as the enemy. The voting public are merely fools for manipulation. Nah, neo-liberalism is not government, it is something far nastier, and clearly not what the public vote for, presuming a vote actually counts for anything anymore.

[Dec 24, 2018] Jewish neocons and the romance of nationalist armageddon

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The Pity of It All : A Portrait of the German-Jewish Epoch, 1743-1933 ..."
"... Perhaps you are making too much of the so called decline of the neocons. At the strategic level, there is little difference between the neocon "Project for a the New American Century" and Brzezinski's "The Grand Chessboard," both of which are consistent with US policy and actions in the Ukraine. ..."
"... The most significant difference seems to me to be the neocon emphasis on American unilateral militarism versus Obama's emphasis on multilateralism, covert operations and financial warfare to achieve the desired results. ..."
"... Perhaps another significant difference is the neocon emphasis on the primacy of the American nation-state versus the neoliberal emphasis on an American dominated global empire. ..."
"... Interesting to juxtapose Brzezinski and the neocons. In a Venn diagram they would over-lap 90%. ..."
"... Right now, their interests have diverged over the Ukraine crisis. Though many of the American neocons do support subverting Ukraine as does Brzezinski it looks like Israel itself is leaning towards supporting Russia. ..."
"... Right Sector militias are the fighting force that led the coup against the legally elected Yanukovich government and were almost certainly involved in the recent massacre in Odessa. And you support them for their fight for freedom? You should be ashamed. Zionism is sinking to new lows that they feel the need to identify with open neo-Nazis. ..."
"... Well, the point is that Zionists in Israel do not identify with that particular set of open neo-Nazis. I suspect that this is simply a matter of the headcount of Jewish business tycoons that are politically aligned with (western) Ukraine and Russia. Or you can count their billions. ..."
"... The problem with your reasoning, Yonah, is that you are espousing the Neocon line while not apparently recognizing that embarrassing fact. You lament that the US is no longer playing the role of the world's superpower, and acting as the world's cop, confronting militarily Russia, China, Iran and anyone else. It is precisely that mentality that got us into Iraq, could yet have us in a war with Iran, would like to see us defending Ukraine, and thinks we should confront China militarily over bits of rock it and its neighbors are quibbling over. That is a neocon, American supremacy mentality. ..."
"... Zionism under Likud has played a major role in promoting the neocon approach to foreign policy in the US. It was heavily involved in the birth of that approach, and has helped fund and promote the policy and its supporters and advocates in this country. They (Likud Zionists and Neocons) played a major role in getting us into the Iraq war and are playing a major role in trying to get us involved in a war with Iran, a war in Syria, and even potential wars in Eastern Europe. That is a very dangerous trend and one folks as intelligent as you are, should be focusing on. ..."
"... "nationalist Armageddon that is nowhere found in the article by Sleeper" ..."
"... "The misadventure in Iraq has cost the US and the world a lot. The US a loss in humans and money and willingness to play the role of superpower, and the world has lost its cop. " ..."
"... Tough. Meanwhile hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi lives don't rate a mention. ..."
"... " (let the Russians have their sphere of influence, let the Iranians have their bomb, let the Chinese do whatever they want to do in their part of the world, for after all they hold a trillion dollars in US government debt and so let them act like the boss, for in fact they have been put in that role by feckless and destructive and wasteful US policy). But Sleeper does not say that." ..."
"... But even if we do focus on neocons, neocons don't have opinions about foreign policy and USA dominance that are much distinct from what most Republican interventionists have. How much difference is there between David Frum and Mitt Romney or between Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeld? ..."
"... Don't look to the US to get any justice in the ME, nor to regain US good reputation in the world. This will situation will not change because US political campaign fiancé system won't change–it just gets worse, enhanced by SCOTUS. ..."
"... But neoocns have the confidence that if they could impose the neocon's theology on the rest of the world, they can do it here as well on American street . They call it education, motivation, duty, responsibility, moral burden, and above all the essence of the manifest destiny. ..."
May 06, 2014 | mondoweiss.net

At the Huffington Post, Jim Sleeper addresses "A Foreign-Policy Problem No One Speaks About," and it turns out to Jewish identity, the need to belong to the powerful nation on the part of Jewish neoconservatives. Sleeper says this is an insecurity born of European exclusion that he understands as a Jew, even if he's not a warmongering neocon himself. The Yale lecturer's jumping-off point are recent statements by Leon Wieseltier and David Brooks lamenting the decline of American power.

In addition to Wieseltier and Brooks, the "blame the feckless liberals" chorus has included Donald Kagan, Robert Kagan, David Frum, William Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and many other American neoconservatives. Some of them have been chastened, or at least been made more cautious, by their grand-strategic blunders of a few years ago ..

I'm saying that they've been fatuous as warmongers again and again and that there's something pathetic in their attempts to emulate Winston Churchill, who warned darkly of Hitler's intentions in the 1930s. Their blind spot is their willful ignorance of their own complicity in American deterioration and their over-compensatory, almost pre-adolescent faith in the benevolence of a statist and militarist power they still hope to mobilize against the seductions and terrors rising all around them.

At bottom, the chorus members' recurrent nightmares of 1938 doom them to reenact other nightmares, prompted by very similar writers in 1914, on the eve of World War I. Those writers are depicted chillingly, unforgettably, in Chapter 9, "War Fever," of Amos Elon's The Pity of It All: A Portrait of the German-Jewish Epoch, 1743-1933. Elon's account of Germany's stampede into World War I chronicles painfully the warmongering hysterics of some Jewish would-be patriots of the Kaiserreich who exerted themselves blindly, romantically, to maneuver their state into the Armageddon that would produce Hitler himself.

This is the place to emphasize that few of Wilhelmine German's warmongers were Jews and that few Jews were or are warmongers. (Me, for example, although my extended-family history isn't much different from Brooks' or Wieseltier's.) My point is simply that, driven by what I recognize as understandable if almost preternatural insecurities and cravings for full liberal-nationalist belonging that was denied to Jews for centuries in Europe, some of today's American super-patriotic neo-conservatives hurled themselves into the Iraq War, and they have continued, again and again, to employ modes of public discourse and politics that echo with eerie fidelity that of the people described in Elon's book. The Americans lionized George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and many others as their predecessors lionized Kaiser Wilhelm, von Bethmann-Hollweg, and far-right nationalist associates who hated the neo-cons of that time but let them play their roles .

Instead of acknowledging their deepest feelings openly, or even to themselves, the writers I've mentioned who've brought so much folly and destruction upon their republic, are doubling down, more nervous and desperate than ever, looking for someone else to blame. Hence their whirling columns and rhythmic incantations. After Germany lost World War I, many Germans unfairly blamed their national folly on Jews, many of whom had served in it loyally but only a few of whom had been provocateurs and cheerleaders like the signatories of [Project for New American Century's] letter to Bush. Now neo-cons, from Wieseltier and Brooks to [Charles] Hill, are blaming Obama and all other feckless liberals. Some of them really need to take a look in Amos Elon's mirror.

Interesting. Though I think Sleeper diminishes Jewish agency here (Sheldon Adelson and Haim Saban are no one's proxy) and can't touch the Israel angle. The motivation is not simply romantic identification with power, it's an ideology of religious nationalism in the Middle East, attachment to the needs of a militarist Sparta in the Arab world. That's another foreign policy problem no one speaks about.

Krauss, May 6, 2014, 2:11 pm

"Democracy in in the Middle East" was always just a weasel-word saying of "let's try to improve Israel's strategic position by changing their neighbours".

The neocons basically took a hardline position on foreign interventionism based out of dual loyalty. This is the honest truth. For anti-Semites, a handful of neocons will always represent "The Jews" as a collective. For many Jews, the refusal to come to grips with the rise of the neocons and how the Jewish community (and really by "community" I mean the establishment) failed to prevent them in their own midst, is also a blemish.

Of course, Jim Sleeper is doing these things now. He should have done them 15-20 years ago or so. But better late than never, I guess.

Krauss, May 6, 2014, 2:16 pm

P.S. While we talk a lot about neocons as a Jewish issue, it's also important to put them in perspective. The only war that I can truly think of that they influenced was the Iraq war, which was a disaster, but it also couldn't have happened without 9/11, which was a very rare event in the history of America. You have to go back to Pearl Harbor to find something similar, and that wasn't technically a terrorist attack but rather a military attack by Japan.

Leading up to the early 2000s, they were mostly ignored during the 1990s. They did take over the GOP media in the early 90s, using the same tactics used against Hagel, use social norms as a cover but in actuality the real reason is Israel.

Before the 90s, in the 70s and 80s, the cold war took up all the oxygen.
So yeah, the neocons need to be talked about. But comparing what they are trying to do with a World War is a bit of a stretch.

Finally, talking about Israel – which Sleeper ignored – and the hardline positions that the political class in America have adopted, if you want to look who have ensured the greatest slavishness to Israel, liberal/centrist groups like ADL, AJC and AIPAC(yes, they are mostly democrats!) have played a far greater role than the neocons.

But I guess, Sleeper wasn't dealing with that, because it would ruin his view of the neocons as the bogeymen.

Just like "liberal" Zionists want to blame Likud for everything, overlooking the fact that Labor/Mapai has had a far greater role in settling/colonizing the Palestinian land than the right has, and not to speak about the ethnic cleansing campaigns of '48 and '67 which was only done by the "left", so too the neocons often pose as a convenient catch-all target for the collective Jewish failure leading up to Iraq.

And I'm using the words "collective Jewish failure" because I actually don't believe, unlike Mearsheimer/Walt, that the war would not have gone ahead unless there was massive support by the Israel/Jewish lobby. If Jews had decided no, it would still have gone ahead. This is also contrary to Tom Friedman's famous saying of "50 people in DC are responsible for this war".
I also think that's an oversimplification.

But I focus more on the Jewish side because that's my side. And I want my community to do better, and just blaming the neocons is something I'm tired of hearing in Jewish circles. The inability to look at liberal Jewish journalists and their role in promoting the war to either gentile or Jewish audiences.

Kathleen, May 6, 2014, 6:53 pm

There was talk about this last night (Monday/5th) on Chris Matthew's Hardball segment on Condi "mushroom cloud" Rice pulling out of the graduation ceremonies at Rutger's. David Corn did not say much but Eugene Robinson and Chris Matthews were basically talking about Israel and the neocons desires to rearrange the middle east "the road to Jerusalem runs through Baghdad" conversation.

Bumblebye, May 6, 2014, 2:33 pm

"some of today's American super-patriotic neo-conservatives hurled themselves into the Iraq War"

Have to take issue with that – the neo-cons hurled young American (and foreign) servicemen and women into that war, many to their deaths, along with throwing as much taxpayer money as possible. They stayed ultra safe and grew richer for their efforts.

Citizen, May 7, 2014, 9:03 am

@ Bumblebye

Good point. During WW1, as I read the history, the Jewish Germans provided their fair share of combat troops. If memory serves, despite Weimar Germany's later "stab in the back" theory, e.g., Hitler himself was given a combat medal thanks to his Jewish senior officer. In comparison to the build-up to Shrub Jr's war on Iraq, the Jewish neocons provided very few Jewish American combat troops.

It's hard to get reliable stats on Jewish American participation in the US combat arms during the Iraq war. For all I've been able to ascertain, more have joined the IDF over the years. At any rate, it's common knowledge that Shrub's war on Iraq was instigated and supported by chicken hawks (Jew or Gentile) at a time bereft of conscription. They built their sale by ignoring key facts, and embellishing misleading and fake facts, as illustrated by the Downing Street memo.

Keith, May 6, 2014, 7:47 pm

PHIL- Perhaps you are making too much of the so called decline of the neocons. At the strategic level, there is little difference between the neocon "Project for a the New American Century" and Brzezinski's "The Grand Chessboard," both of which are consistent with US policy and actions in the Ukraine.

The most significant difference seems to me to be the neocon emphasis on American unilateral militarism versus Obama's emphasis on multilateralism, covert operations and financial warfare to achieve the desired results.

Perhaps another significant difference is the neocon emphasis on the primacy of the American nation-state versus the neoliberal emphasis on an American dominated global empire.

So yes, the nationalistic emphasis is an anachronism, however, the decline of the US in conjunction with the extension of a system of globalized domination should hardly be of concern to elite power-seekers who will benefit. In fact, the new system of corporate/financial control will be beyond the political control of any nation, even the US. If they can pull it off. An interesting topic no doubt, but one which I doubt is suitable for extended discussion on Mondoweiss. As for power-seeking as a consequence of a uniquely Jewish experience, perhaps the less said the better.

ToivoS, May 7, 2014, 8:10 pm
Interesting to juxtapose Brzezinski and the neocons. In a Venn diagram they would over-lap 90%. The Ukraine crisis exposes that 10% difference. Brzezinski I very much doubt has any emotional attachment to Israel though he is happy to work in coalition with them to further his one true goal which is to isolate and defeat Russian influence in the world. In the 1980s both were on the same page in the "let my people go" campaign against the Soviet Union. Brzezinski saw it as a propaganda opportunity to attack Russia and the neocons saw it has a source of more Jews to settle Palestine.

Right now, their interests have diverged over the Ukraine crisis. Though many of the American neocons do support subverting Ukraine as does Brzezinski it looks like Israel itself is leaning towards supporting Russia. When it comes down to it it is hard for many Jews, right wing or not, to support the political movement inside Ukraine that identifies with Bandera. Now that was one nasty antisemite whose followers killed many thousands of Ukrainian Jews during the holocaust. My wife's family immigrated from Galicia and the Odessa region and those left behind perished during the holocaust. The extended family includes anti-zionists and WB settlers. There is no way that any of them would identify with Ukrainian fascist movements now active there.

In any case, there does seem to be a potential split among the neocons over Ukraine. It would be the ultimate in hypocrisy for all of those eastern European Jews who became successful in the US in the last few generations to enter into coalition with the Bandera brigades.

RudyM, May 7, 2014, 9:36 pm
Interesting, meaty analysis here of the various players in Ukraine. This is unequivocally from a Russian perspective, incidentally:

link to wikispooks.com

(I know I'm always grabbing OT threads of discussion, but when it comes down to it, I know much less about Zionism and Israel/Palestine than many, if not most of the regular commenters here.)

I also am going to drift further off-topic by saying there is strong evidence that the slaughter in Odessa last Friday was highly orchestrated and not solely the result of spontaneous mob violence. Very graphic and disturbing images in all of these links:

I have only glanced at these:

American, May 6, 2014, 9:23 pm
" and it turns out to Jewish identity, the need to belong to the powerful nation on the part of Jewish neoconservatives. Sleeper says this is an insecurity born of European exclusion that he understands as a Jew, ..>>

Stop it Sleeper. Do not continue to use the victim card ' to explain' the trauma, the insecurities, the nightmares, the angst, the feelings, the sensitivities, blah blah, blah of Zionist or Israel.

That is not what they are about. These are power mad psychos like most neocons, period.

And even if it were, and even if all the Jews in the world felt the same way, the bottom line would still be they do not have the right to make others pay in treasure and blood for their nightmares and mental sickness.

Citizen May 7, 2014, 9:46 am
@ yonah fredman

"The freedom of Ukraine is a worthy goal."

As near as I can tell (correct me if I'm wrong), the Ukrainians themselves are about half and half pro Russia and Pro NATO. Your glance at the history of the region as to why this is so, and your text on historical Ukranian suffering and POTV on MW commentary on this –did not help your analysis and its conclusion.

There's a difference between isolationism and defensive intervention, and even more so, re isolationism v. pro-active interventionism "in the name of pursuing the democratic ideal". See Ron Paul v. PNAC-style neocons and liberal Zionists.

Also, if you were Putin, how would you see the push of NATO & US force posts ever creeping towards Russia and its local environment? Look at the US military postings nearing Russia per se & those surrounding Iran. Compare Russia's.

And note the intent to wean EU from Russian oil, and as well, the draconian sanctions on Iran, and Obama's latest partnering sanctions on Russia.

Imagine yourself in Putin's shoes, and Iran's.

Don't abuse your imagination only by imagining yourself in Netanyahu's shoes, which is the preoccupation of AIPAC and its whores in the US Congress.

ToivoS, May 7, 2014, 8:49 pm

Interesting to juxtapose Brzezinski and the neocons. In a Venn diagram they would over-lap 90%. The Ukraine crisis exposes that 10% difference. Brzezinski I very much doubt has any emotional attachment to Israel though he is happy to work in coalition with them to further his one true goal which is to isolate and defeat Russian influence in the world. In the 1980s both were on the same page in the "let my people go" campaign against the Soviet Union. Brzezinski saw it as a propaganda opportunity to attack Russia and the neocons saw it has a source of more Jews to settle Palestine.

Right now, their interests have diverged over the Ukraine crisis. Though many of the American neocons do support subverting Ukraine as does Brzezinski it looks like Israel itself is leaning towards supporting Russia. When it comes down to it it is hard for many Jews, right wing or not, to support the political movement inside Ukraine that identifies with Bandera. Now that was one nasty anti-Semite whose followers killed many thousands of Ukrainian Jews during the holocaust. My wife's family immigrated from Galicia and the Odessa region and those left behind perished during the holocaust. The extended family includes anti-Zionists and WB settlers. There is no way that any of them would identify with Ukrainian fascist movements now active there.

In any case, there does seem to be a potential split among the neocons over Ukraine. It would be the ultimate in hypocrisy for all of those eastern European Jews who became successful in the US in the last few generations to enter into coalition with the Bandera brigades.

ToivoSMay 7, 2014, 9:39 pm
Yonah writes The freedom of Ukraine is a worthy goal. If the US is not able to back up our attempt to help them gain their freedom it is not something to celebrate, but something to lament.

What are you saying? Ukraine has been an independent nation for 22 years. What freedom is this? What we have witnessed is that one half of Ukraine has gotten tired that the other half keeps on electing candidates that represent those Ukrainians that identify with Russian culture. They (the western half) successfully staged a coup and purged the other (eastern half) from the government. You call that "freedom". Doesn't it embarrass you, Yonah, that the armed militias that conducted that coup are descendants of the Bandera organization.

Does that ring a bell? These are the Ukrainians that were involved in the holocaust. Does Babi Yar stir any memories Yohan? It was a massacre of 40,000 Jews just outside of Kiev in 1942. It was the single largest massacre of Jews during WWII. The massacre was led by the Germans ( Einsatzgruppe C officers) but was carried out with the aid of 400 Ukrainian Auxillary Police. These were later incorporated into the 14th SS-Volunteer Division "Galician" made up mostly Ukrainians. The division flags are to this day displayed at Right Sector rallies in western Ukraine.

Right Sector militias are the fighting force that led the coup against the legally elected Yanukovich government and were almost certainly involved in the recent massacre in Odessa. And you support them for their fight for freedom? You should be ashamed. Zionism is sinking to new lows that they feel the need to identify with open neo-Nazis.

piotrMay 7, 2014, 10:18 pm
Well, the point is that Zionists in Israel do not identify with that particular set of open neo-Nazis. I suspect that this is simply a matter of the headcount of Jewish business tycoons that are politically aligned with (western) Ukraine and Russia. Or you can count their billions. In any case, the neutral posture is sensible for Israel here. Which is highly uncharacteristic for that government.

yonah fredman, May 7, 2014, 10:38 pm

Toivo S- The history of Jew hatred by certain anti Russian elements in the Ukraine is not encouraging and nothing that I celebrate. Maybe I have been swayed by headlines and a superficial reading of the situation.

If indeed I am wrong regarding the will of the Ukrainian people, I can only be glad that my opinion is just that, my opinion and not US or Israel or anyone's policy but my own. I assume that a majority of Ukrainians want to maintain independence of Russia and that the expressions of rebellion are in that vein.

My people were murdered by the einsatzgruppen in that part of the world and so maybe I have overcompensated by trying not to allow my personal history to interfere with what I think would be the will of the majority of the Ukraine.

But Toivo S. please skip the "doesn't it embarrass you" line of thought. Just put a sock in it and skip it.

ToivoSMay 8, 2014, 12:51 am

Well thanks for that Yonah. My wife's family descended from Jewish communities in Odessa and Galicia. They emigrated to the US between 1900 and 1940. After WWII none of their relatives left behind were ever heard from again. Perhaps you have family that experienced similar stories. What caused me to react to your post above is that you are describing the current situation in Ukraine as a "freedom" movement by the Ukrainians when the political forces there descended from the same people that killed my inlaws family (and apparently yours to). Why do you support them?

yonah fredmanMay 8, 2014, 1:30 am

ToivoS- I support them because I trust/don't trust Putin. I trust him to impose his brand of leadership on Ukraine, I don't trust him to care a whit about freedom. It is natural that the nationalist elements of Ukraine would descend from the elements that expressed themselves the last time they had freedom from the Soviet Union, that is those forces that were willing to join with the Nazis to express their hatred for the communist Soviet Union's rule over their freedom. That's how history works. The nationalists today descend from the nationalists of yesterday.

But it's been 70 years since WWII and the Ukrainians ought to be able to have freedom even if the parties that advocate for freedom are descended from those that supported the Nazis. (I know once i include the Nazi part of history any analogies are toxic, but if I am willing to grant Hamas its rights as an expression of the Palestinian desire for freedom, why would I deny the Ukrainian foul nationalist parties their rights to express their people's desire for freedom.)

Political parties are not made in a sterile laboratory, they evolve over history and most specifically they emerge from the past. I accept that Ukrainian nationalism has not evolved much, but nonetheless not having read any polls I assume that the nationalists are the representatives of the people's desire for freedom. And because Putin strikes me as something primitive, I accept the Ukrainian desire for freedom.

CitizenMay 8, 2014, 9:18 am

@ yonah f

What are you supporting? Let me refresh your historic memory: Black's Transfer Agreement. Now apply analogy, responding to ToivoS. Might help us all to understand, explore more skillfully, Israel's current stance on the Putin-Ukranian matter .?

(I think Nuland's intervention caught on tape, combined with who she is married to, already explores with great clarification what the US is doing.

irishmosesMay 8, 2014, 12:32 pm

Yonah said:

"The misadventure in Iraq has cost the US and the world a lot. The US a loss in humans and money and willingness to play the role of superpower, and the world has lost its cop. Most people here would probably disagree with Sleeper, because he does not deny that the world needs a cop, nor that the US would play a positive role, if it only had the means and the desire to do so. People here (overwhelmingly) see the US role as a negative one (let the Russians have their sphere of influence, let the Iranians have their bomb, let the Chinese do whatever they want to do in their part of the world,"

The problem with your reasoning, Yonah, is that you are espousing the Neocon line while not apparently recognizing that embarrassing fact. You lament that the US is no longer playing the role of the world's superpower, and acting as the world's cop, confronting militarily Russia, China, Iran and anyone else. It is precisely that mentality that got us into Iraq, could yet have us in a war with Iran, would like to see us defending Ukraine, and thinks we should confront China militarily over bits of rock it and its neighbors are quibbling over. That is a neocon, American supremacy mentality.

Contrast that with the realist or realism approach recommended by George Kennan, and followed by this country successfully through the end of the Cold War. That approach is conservative and contends we should stay out of wars unless the vital national security interests of the US are at stake, like protecting WESTERN Europe, Japan, Australia, and the Western Hemisphere. This meant we could sympathize with the plight of all the eastern Europeans oppressed by the Soviets, but would not defend militarily the Hungarians (1956) or the Czechs (1968). It also meant we wouldn't send US troops into North Vietnam because we didn't want to go to war with the Chinese over a country that was at best tangential to US interests. When we varied from that policy (Vietnam and Iraq wars, Somalia) we paid a very heavy price while doing nothing to advance or protect our vital national security interests.

The sooner this country can return to our traditional realism-based foreign policy the better. Part of that policy would be to disassociate the US from its entangling alliance with Likud Israel and its US Jewish supporters that espouse the Likud Greater Israel line.

Zionism under Likud has played a major role in promoting the neocon approach to foreign policy in the US. It was heavily involved in the birth of that approach, and has helped fund and promote the policy and its supporters and advocates in this country. They (Likud Zionists and Neocons) played a major role in getting us into the Iraq war and are playing a major role in trying to get us involved in a war with Iran, a war in Syria, and even potential wars in Eastern Europe. That is a very dangerous trend and one folks as intelligent as you are, should be focusing on.

Please note, my criticism is directed neither at all Jews in general, Jews in the US, nor or all Israeli Jews. It is directed at a particular subset of Zionists who support Likud policies, and their supporters, many of whom are not Jews. It is also directed at Neoconservative foreign policy advocates, comprised of Jews and non-Jews, and overlap between the two groups. Please also note my use of the term "major role", and that I am not saying the Neocons and their supporters (Jewish or non) were solely responsible for our involvement in the Iraq war. I am offering these caveats in the hope that the usual changes of antisemitism can be avoided in your or anyone else's response to my arguments.

The influence of Neocons on US foreign policy has been very harmful to this country and poses a grave danger to its future. It would be wise for you to reflect on that harm and those dangers and decide whether you belong in the realist camp or want to continue running with the Neocons.

seanmcbride, May 8, 2014, 1:01 pm

irishmoses,

Please note, my criticism is directed neither at all Jews in general, Jews in the US, nor or all Israeli Jews. It is directed at a particular subset of Zionists who support Likud policies, and their supporters, many of whom are not Jews.

What about the role of *liberal Zionists*, like Hillary Clinton, in supporting and promoting the Iraq War? Clinton still hasn't offered an apology for helping to drive the United States in a multi-trillion dollar foreign policy disaster - and she has threatened to "totally obliterate" Iran.

What about Harry Reid's lavish praise of Sheldon Adelson?

"Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has for some time billed the Koch brothers as public enemy No.1 .

But billionaire Republican donor Sheldon Adelson? He's just fine, Reid says.

"I know Sheldon Adelson. He's not in this for money," the Nevada Democrat said of Adelson, the Vegas casino magnate who reportedly spent close to $150 million to support Republicans in the 2012 presidential election."

link to politico.com

Are there really any meaningful distinctions between neoconservatives in the Republican Party and liberal Zionists in the Democratic Party?

talknic, May 7, 2014, 3:24 am

@ yonah fredman "nationalist Armageddon that is nowhere found in the article by Sleeper"

Strange

"state into the Armageddon .. "

"The misadventure in Iraq has cost the US and the world a lot. The US a loss in humans and money and willingness to play the role of superpower, and the world has lost its cop. "

Tough. Meanwhile hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi lives don't rate a mention.

" (let the Russians have their sphere of influence, let the Iranians have their bomb, let the Chinese do whatever they want to do in their part of the world, for after all they hold a trillion dollars in US government debt and so let them act like the boss, for in fact they have been put in that role by feckless and destructive and wasteful US policy). But Sleeper does not say that."

You do tho, without quoting anyone "here".

BTW Pajero, strawmen no matter how lengthy and seemingly erudite, rarely walk anywhere

JeffB, May 7, 2014, 9:06 am

I'm going to put this down as Jewish navel gazing.

Jews are disproportionately liberal. Jews make up a huge chunk of the peace movement. Jews are relative to their numbers on the left of most foreign policy positions.

Iraq was unusual in that Jews were not overwhelming opposed to the invasion, but it is worth noting the invasion at the time was overwhelming popular. Frankly given the fact that Jews are now considered white people and the fact that Jews are almost all middle class they should be biased conservative. There certainly is no reason they should be more liberal than Catholics. Yet they are. It is the degree of Jewish liberalism not the degree of Jewish conservatism that is striking.

But even if we do focus on neocons, neocons don't have opinions about foreign policy and USA dominance that are much distinct from what most Republican interventionists have. How much difference is there between David Frum and Mitt Romney or between Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeld?

lysias, May 7, 2014, 10:55 am

The neocons lost one last night: Antiwar Rep. Walter Jones Beats Neocon-Backed GOP Rival:

Strongly antiwar incumbent Rep. Walter Jones (R – NC) has won a hotly contested primary tonight, defeating a challenge from hawkish challenger and former Treasury Dept. official Taylor Griffin 51% to 45%.

American, May 7, 2014, 11:24 am

Yep.

Voter turn out was light .. tea party types did a lot of lobbying for Griffin here .but Jones prevailed. Considering the onslaught of organized activity against him by ECI and the tea partiers for the past month he did well.

Citizen, May 8, 2014, 9:24 am

@ lysias
Let's refresh our look at what Ron Paul had to say about foreign policy and foreign aid. Then, let's compare what his son has said, and take a look of his latest bill in congress to cut off aid to Palestine. Yes, you read that right; it's not a bill to cut off any aid to Israel.

Don't look to the US to get any justice in the ME, nor to regain US good reputation in the world. This will situation will not change because US political campaign fiancé system won't change–it just gets worse, enhanced by SCOTUS.

traintosiberia, May 8, 2014, 9:12 am

Stockman's Corner

Bravo, Rep. Walter Jones -- Primary Win Sends Neocons Packing

by David Stockman • May 7, 2014 link to davidstockmanscontracorner.com

The heavy artillery included the detestable Karl Rove, former Governor and RNC Chair Haley Barber and the War Party's highly paid chief PR flack, Ari Fleischer.

But it was Neocon central that hauled out the big guns. Bill Kristol was so desperate to thwart the slowly rising anti-interventionist tide within the GOP that he even trotted out Sarah Palin to endorse Jones's opponent"

But neoocns have the confidence that if they could impose the neocon's theology on the rest of the world, they can do it here as well on American street . They call it education, motivation, duty, responsibility, moral burden, and above all the essence of the manifest destiny.

[Dec 24, 2018] Income inequality happens by design. We cant fix it by tweaking capitalism

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Stocks have always been "a legal form of gambling". What is happening now however, is that a pair of treys can beat out your straight flush. Companies that have never turned a profit fetch huge prices on the stock market. ..."
"... The stock market suckered millions in before 2008 and then prices plummeted. Where did the money from grandpa's pension fund go? ..."
"... Abraham Lincoln said that the purpose of government is to do for people what they cannot do for themselves. Government also should serve to keep people from hurting themselves and to restrain man's greed, which otherwise cannot be self-controlled. Anyone who seeks to own productive power that they cannot or won't use for consumption are beggaring their neighbor––the equivalency of mass murder––the impact of concentrated capital ownership. ..."
"... family wealth" predicts outcomes for 10 to 15 generations. Those with extreme wealth owe it to events going back "300 to 450" years ago, according to research published by the New Republic – an era when it wasn't unusual for white Americans to benefit from an economy dependent upon widespread, unpaid black labor in the form of slavery. ..."
"... Correction: The average person in poverty in the U.S. does not live in the same abject, third world poverty as you might find in Honduras, Central African Republic, Cambodia, or the barrios of Sao Paulo. ..."
"... Since our poor don't live in abject poverty, I invite you to live as a family of four on less than $11,000 a year anywhere in the United States. If you qualify and can obtain subsidized housing you may have some of the accoutrements in your home that you seem to equate with living the high life. You know, running water, a fridge, a toilet, a stove. You would also likely have a phone (subsidized at that) so you might be able to participate (or attempt to participate) in the job market in an honest attempt to better your family's economic prospects and as is required to qualify for most assistance programs. ..."
"... So many dutiful neoliberals on here rushing to the defense of poor Capitalism. Clearly, these commentators are among those who are in the privileged position of reaping the true benefits of Capitalism - And, of course, there are many benefits to reap if you are lucky enough to be born into the right racial-socioeconomic context. ..."
"... Please walk us through how non-capitalist systems create wealth and allow their lowest class people propel themselves to the top in one generation. You will note that most socialist systems derive their technology and advancements from the more capitalistic systems. Pharmaceuticals, software, and robotics are a great example of this. I shutter to think of what the welfare of the average citizen of the world would be like without the advancements made via the capitalist countries. ..."
Dec 05, 2015 | The Guardian

The poorest Americans have no realistic hope of achieving anything that approaches income equality. They still struggle for access to the basics

... ... ...

The disparities in wealth that we term "income inequality" are no accident, and they can't be fixed by fiddling at the edges of our current economic system. These disparities happened by design, and the system structurally disadvantages those at the bottom. The poorest Americans have no realistic hope of achieving anything that approaches income equality; even their very chances for access to the most basic tools of life are almost nil.

... ... ...

Too often, the answer by those who have hoarded everything is they will choose to "give back" in a manner of their choosing – just look at Mark Zuckerberg and his much-derided plan to "give away" 99% of his Facebook stock. He is unlikely to help change inequality or poverty any more than "giving away" of $100m helped children in Newark schools.

Allowing any of the 100 richest Americans to choose how they fix "income inequality" will not make the country more equal or even guarantee more access to life. You can't take down the master's house with the master's tools, even when you're the master; but more to the point, who would tear down his own house to distribute the bricks among so very many others?

mkenney63 5 Dec 2015 20:37

Excellent article. The problems we face are structural and can only be solved by making fundamental changes. We must bring an end to "Citizens United", modern day "Jim Crow" and the military industrial complex in order to restore our democracy. Then maybe, just maybe, we can have an economic system that will treat all with fairness and respect. Crony capitalism has had its day, it has mutated into criminality.

Kencathedrus -> Marcedward 5 Dec 2015 20:23

In the pre-capitalist system people learnt crafts to keep themselves afloat. The Industrial Revolution changed all that. Now we have the church of Education promising a better life if we get into debt to buy (sorry, earn) degrees.

The whole system is messed up and now we have millions of people on this planet who can't function even those with degrees. Barbarians are howling at the gates of Europe. The USA is rotting from within. As Marx predicted the Capitalists are merely paying their own grave diggers.

mkenney63 -> Bobishere 5 Dec 2015 20:17

I would suggest you read the economic and political history of the past 30 years. To help you in your study let me recommend a couple of recent books: "Winner Take all Politics" by Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson and "The Age of Acquiescence" by Steve Fraser. It always amazes me that one can be so blind the facts of recent American history; it's not just "a statistical inequality", it's been a well thought-out strategy over time to rig the system, a strategy engaged in by politicians and capitalists. Shine some light on this issue by acquainting yourself with the facts.


Maharaja Brovinda -> Singh Jill Harrison 5 Dec 2015 19:42

We play out the prisoner's dilemma in life, in general, over and over in different circumstances, every day. And we always choose the dominant - rational - solution. But the best solution is not based on rationality, but rather on trust and faith in each other - rather ironically for our current, evidence based society!


Steven Palmer 5 Dec 2015 19:19

Like crack addicts the philanthropricks only seek to extend their individual glory, social image their primary goal, and yet given the context they will burn in history. Philanthroptits should at least offset the immeasurable damage they have done through their medieval wealth accumulation. Collaborative philanthropy for basic income is a good idea, but ye, masters tools.


BlairM -> Iconoclastick 5 Dec 2015 19:10

Well, to paraphrase Winston Churchill, capitalism is the worst possible economic system, except for all those other economic systems that have been tried from time to time.

I'd rather just have the freedom to earn money as I please, and if that means inequality, it's a small price to pay for not having some feudal lord or some party bureaucrat stomping on my humanity.

brusuz 5 Dec 2015 18:52

As long as wealth can be created by shuffling money from one place to another in the giant crap shoot we call our economy, nothing will change. Until something takes place to make it advantageous for the investor capitalists to put that money to work doing something that actually produces some benefit to the society as a whole, they will continue their extractive machinations. I see nothing on the horizon that is going to change any of that, and to cast this as some sort of a racial issue is quite superficial. We have all gotten the shaft, since there is no upward mobility available to anyone. Since the Bush crowd of neocons took power, we have all been shackled with "individual solutions to societal created problems."

Jimi Del Duca 5 Dec 2015 18:31

Friends, Capitalism is structural exploitation of ALL WORKERS. Thinking about it as solely a race issue is divisive. What we need is CLASS SOLIDARITY and ORGANIZATION. See iww.org We are the fighting union with no use for capitalists!

slightlynumb -> AmyInNH 5 Dec 2015 18:04

You'd be better off reading Marx if you want to understand capitalism. I think you are ascribing the word to what you think it should be rather than what it is.

It is essentially a class structure rather than any defined economic system. Neoliberal is essentially laissez faire capitalism. It is designed to suborn nation states to corporate benefit.

AmyInNH -> tommydog

They make $40 a month. Working 7 days a week. At least 12 hour days. Who's fed you that "we're doing them a favor" BS?

And I've news for you regarding "Those whose skills are less adaptable to doing so are seeing their earnings decline." We have many people who have 3 masters degrees making less than minimum wage. We have top notch STEM students shunned so corporations can hire captive/cheaper foreign labor, called H1-Bs, who then wait 10 years working for them waiting for their employment based green card. Or "visiting" students here on J1 visas, so the employers can get out of paying: social security, federal unemployment insurance, etc.

Wake up and smell the coffee tommydog. They've more than a thumb on the scale.

seamanbodine,
I am a socialist. I decided to read this piece to see if Mr. Thrasher could write about market savagery without propounding the fiction that whites are somehow exempt from the effects of it.

No, he could not. I clicked on the link accompanying his assertion that whites who are high school dropouts earn more than blacks with college degrees, and I read the linked piece in full. The linked piece does not in fact compare income (i.e., yearly earnings) of white high school dropouts with those of black college graduates, but it does compare family wealth across racial cohorts (though not educational ones), and the gap there is indeed stark, with average white family wealth in the six figures (full disclosure, I am white, and my personal wealth is below zero, as I owe more in student loans than I own, so perhaps I am not really white, or I do not fully partake of "whiteness," or whatever), and average black family wealth in the four figures.

The reason for this likely has a lot to do with home ownership disparities, which in turn are linked in significant part to racist redlining practices. So white dropouts often live in homes their parents or grandparents bought, while many black college graduates whose parents were locked out of home ownership by institutional racism and, possibly, the withering of manufacturing jobs just as the northward migration was beginning to bear some economic fruit for black families, are still struggling to become homeowners. Thus, the higher average wealth for the dropout who lives in a family owned home.

But this is not what Mr. Thrasher wrote. He specifically used the words "earn more," creating the impression that some white ignoramus is simply going to stumble his way into a higher salary than a cultivated, college educated black person. That is simply not the case, and the difference does matter.

Why does it matter? Because I regularly see middle aged whites who are broken and homeless on the streets of the town where I live, and I know they are simply the tip of a growing mountain of privation. Yeah, go ahead, call it white tears if you want, but if you cannot see that millions (including, of course, not simply folks who are out and out homeless, but folks who are struggling to get enough to eat and routinely go without needed medication and medical care) of people who have "white privilege" are indeed oppressed by global capitalism then I would say that you are, at the end of the day, NO BETTER THAN THE WHITES YOU DISDAIN.

If you have read this far, then you realize that I am in no way denying the reality of structural racism. But an account of economic savagery that entirely subsumes it into non-economic categories (race, gender, age), that refuses to acknowledge that blacks can be exploiters and whites can be exploited, is simply conservatism by other means. One gets the sense that if we have enough black millionaires and enough whites dying of things like a lack of medical care, then this might bring just a little bit of warmth to the hearts of people like Mr. Thrasher.

Call it what you want, but don't call it progressive. Maybe it is historical karma. Which is understandable, as there is no reason why globally privileged blacks in places like the U.S. or Great Britain should bear the burden of being any more selfless or humane than globally privileged whites are or have been. The Steven Thrashers of humanity are certainly no worse than many of the whites they cannot seem to recognize as fully human are.

But nor are they any better.
JohnLG 5 Dec 2015 17:23

I agree that the term "income inequality" is so vague that falls between useless and diversionary, but so too is most use of the word "capitalism", or so it seems to me. Typically missing is a penetrating analysis of where the problem lies, a comprehensibly supported remedy, or large-scale examples of anything except what's not working. "Income inequality" is pretty abstract until we look specifically at the consequences for individuals and society, and take a comprehensive look at all that is unequal. What does "capitalism" mean? Is capitalism the root of all this? Is capitalism any activity undertaken for profit, or substantial monopolization of markets and power?

Power tends to corrupt. Money is a form of power, but there are others. The use of power to essentially cheat, oppress or kill others is corrupt, whether that power is in the form of a weapon, wealth, the powers of the state, or all of the above. Power is seductive and addictive. Even those with good intensions can be corrupted by an excess of power and insufficient accountability, while predators are drawn to power like sharks to blood. Democracy involves dispersion of power, ideally throughout a whole society. A constitutional democracy may offer protection even to minorities against a "tyranny of the majority" so long as a love of justice prevails. Selective "liberty and justice" is not liberty and justice at all, but rather a tyranny of the many against the few, as in racism, or of the few against the many, as by despots. Both forms reinforce each other in the same society, both are corrupt, and any "ism" can be corrupted by narcissism. To what degree is any society a shining example of government of, for, and by the people, and to what degree can one discover empirical evidence of corruption? What do we do about it?

AmyInNH -> CaptainGrey 5 Dec 2015 17:15

You're too funny. It's not "lifting billions out of poverty". It's moving malicious manufacturing practices to the other side of the planet. To the lands of no labor laws. To hide it from consumers. To hide profits.

And it is dying. Legislatively they choke off their natural competition, which is an essential element of capitalism. Monopoly isn't capitalism. And when they bribe legislators, we don't have democracy any more either.

Jeremiah2000 -> Teresa Trujillo 5 Dec 2015 16:53

Stocks have always been "a legal form of gambling". What is happening now however, is that a pair of treys can beat out your straight flush. Companies that have never turned a profit fetch huge prices on the stock market.

The stock market suckered millions in before 2008 and then prices plummeted. Where did the money from grandpa's pension fund go?

Gary Reber 5 Dec 2015 16:45

Abraham Lincoln said that the purpose of government is to do for people what they cannot do for themselves. Government also should serve to keep people from hurting themselves and to restrain man's greed, which otherwise cannot be self-controlled. Anyone who seeks to own productive power that they cannot or won't use for consumption are beggaring their neighbor––the equivalency of mass murder––the impact of concentrated capital ownership.

The words "OWN" and "ASSETS" are the key descriptors of the definition of wealth. But these words are not well understood by the vast majority of Americans or for that matter, global citizens. They are limited to the vocabulary used by the wealthy ownership class and financial publications, which are not widely read, and not even taught in our colleges and universities.

The wealthy ownership class did not become wealthy because they are "three times as smart." Still there is a valid argument that the vast majority of Americans do not pay particular attention to the financial world and educate themselves on wealth building within the current system's limited past-savings paradigm. Significantly, the wealthy OWNERSHIP class use their political power (power always follows property OWNERSHIP) to write the system rules to benefit and enhance their wealth. As such they have benefited from forging trade policy agreements which further concentrate OWNERSHIP on a global scale, military-industrial complex subsidies and government contracts, tax code provisions and loopholes and collective-bargaining rules – policy changes they've used their wealth to champion.

Gary Reber 5 Dec 2015 16:44

Unfortunately, when it comes to recommendations for solutions to economic inequality, virtually every commentator, politician and economist is stuck in viewing the world in one factor terms – human labor, in spite of their implied understanding that the rich are rich because they OWN the non-human means of production – physical capital. The proposed variety of wealth-building programs, like "universal savings accounts that might be subsidized for low-income savers," are not practical solutions because they rely on savings (a denial of consumption which lessens demand in the economy), which the vast majority of Americans do not have, and for those who can save their savings are modest and insignificant. Though, millions of Americans own diluted stock value through the "stock market exchanges," purchased with their earnings as labor workers (savings), their stock holdings are relatively minuscule, as are their dividend payments compared to the top 10 percent of capital owners. Pew Research found that 53 percent of Americans own no stock at all, and out of the 47 percent who do, the richest 5 percent own two-thirds of that stock. And only 10 percent of Americans have pensions, so stock market gains or losses don't affect the incomes of most retirees.

As for taxpayer-supported saving subsidies or other wage-boosting measures, those who have only their labor power and its precarious value held up by coercive rigging and who desperately need capital ownership to enable them to be capital workers (their productive assets applied in the economy) as well as labor workers to have a way to earn more income, cannot satisfy their unsatisfied needs and wants and sufficiently provide for themselves and their families. With only access to labor wages, the 99 percenters will continue, in desperation, to demand more and more pay for the same or less work, as their input is exponentially replaced by productive capital.

As such, the vast majority of American consumers will continue to be strapped to mounting consumer debt bills, stagnant wages and inflationary price pressures. As their ONLY source of income is through wage employment, economic insecurity for the 99 percent majority of people means they cannot survive more than a week or two without a paycheck. Thus, the production side of the economy is under-nourished and hobbled as a result, because there are fewer and fewer "customers with money." We thus need to free economic growth from the slavery of past savings.

I mentioned that political power follows property OWNERSHIP because with concentrated capital asset OWNERSHIP our elected representatives are far too often bought with the expectation that they protect and enhance the interests of the wealthiest Americans, the OWNERSHIP class they too overwhelmingly belong to.

Many, including the author of this article, have concluded that with such a concentrated OWNERSHIP stronghold the wealthy have on our politics, "it's hard to see where this cycle ends." The ONLY way to reverse this cycle and broaden capital asset OWNERSHIP universally is a political revolution. (Bernie Sanders, are you listening?)

The political revolution must address the problem of lack of demand. To create demand, the FUTURE economy must be financed in ways that create new capital OWNERS, who will benefit from the full earnings of the FUTURE productive capability of the American economy, and without taking from those who already OWN. This means significantly slowing the further concentration of capital asset wealth among those who are already wealthy and ensuring that the system is reformed to promote inclusive prosperity, inclusive opportunity, and inclusive economic justice.

yamialwaysright 5 Dec 2015 16:13

I was interested and in agreement until I read about structured racism. Many black kidsin the US grow up without a father in the house. They turn to anti-social behaviour and crime. Once you are poor it is hard to get out of being poor but Journalists are not doing justice to a critique of US Society if they ignore the fact that some people behave in a self-destructive way. I would imagine that if some black men in the US and the UK stuck with one woman and played a positive role in the life of their kids, those kids would have a better chance at life. People of different racial and ethnic origin do this also but there does seem to be a disproportionate problem with some black US men and some black UK men. Poverty is one problem but growing up in poverty and without a father figure adds to the problem.

What the author writes applies to other countries not just the US in relation to the super wealthy being a small proportion of the population yet having the same wealth as a high percentage of the population. This in not a black or latino issue but a wealth distribution issue that affects everyone irrespective of race or ethnic origin. The top 1%, 5% or 10% having most of the wealth is well-known in many countries.

nuthermerican4u 5 Dec 2015 15:59

Capitalism, especially the current vulture capitalism, is dog eat dog. Always was, always will be. My advice is that if you are a capitalist that values your heirs, invest in getting off this soon-to-be slag heap and find other planets to pillage and rape. Either go all out for capitalism or reign in this beast before it kills all of us.

soundofthesuburbs 5 Dec 2015 15:32

Our antiquated class structure demonstrates the trickle up of Capitalism and the need to counterbalance it with progressive taxation.

In the 1960s/1970s we used high taxes on the wealthy to counter balance the trickle up of Capitalism and achieved much greater equality.

Today we have low taxes on the wealthy and Capitalism's trickle up is widening the inequality gap.

We are cutting benefits for the disabled, poor and elderly so inequality can get wider and the idle rich can remain idle.

They have issued enough propaganda to make people think it's those at the bottom that don't work.

Every society since the dawn of civilization has had a Leisure Class at the top, in the UK we call them the Aristocracy and they have been doing nothing for centuries.

The UK's aristocracy has seen social systems come and go, but they all provide a life of luxury and leisure and with someone else doing all the work.

Feudalism - exploit the masses through land ownership
Capitalism - exploit the masses through wealth (Capital)

Today this is done through the parasitic, rentier trickle up of Capitalism:

a) Those with excess capital invest it and collect interest, dividends and rent.
b) Those with insufficient capital borrow money and pay interest and rent.

The system itself provides for the idle rich and always has done from the first civilisations right up to the 21st Century.

The rich taking from the poor is always built into the system, taxes and benefits are the counterbalance that needs to be applied externally.

Iconoclastick 5 Dec 2015 15:31

I often chuckle when I read some of the right wing comments on articles such as this. Firstly, I question if readers actually read the article references I've highlighted, before rushing to comment.

Secondly, the comments are generated by cifers who probably haven't set the world alight, haven't made a difference in their local community, they'll have never created thousands of jobs in order to reward themselves with huge dividends having and as a consequence enjoy spectacular asset/investment growth, at best they'll be chugging along, just about keeping their shit together and yet they support a system that's broken, other than for the one percent, of the one percent.

A new report from the Institute for Policy Studies issued this week analyzed the Forbes list of the 400 richest Americans and found that "the wealthiest 100 households now own about as much wealth as the entire African American population in the United States". That means that 100 families – most of whom are white – have as much wealth as the 41,000,000 black folks walking around the country (and the million or so locked up) combined.

Similarly, the report also stated that "the wealthiest 186 members of the Forbes 400 own as much wealth as the entire Latino population" of the nation. Here again, the breakdown in actual humans is broke down: 186 overwhelmingly white folks have more money than that an astounding 55,000,000 Latino people.

family wealth" predicts outcomes for 10 to 15 generations. Those with extreme wealth owe it to events going back "300 to 450" years ago, according to research published by the New Republic – an era when it wasn't unusual for white Americans to benefit from an economy dependent upon widespread, unpaid black labor in the form of slavery.

soundofthesuburbs -> soundofthesuburbs 5 Dec 2015 15:26

It is the 21st Century and most of the land in the UK is still owned by the descendants of feudal warlords that killed people and stole their land and wealth.

When there is no land to build houses for generation rent, land ownership becomes an issue.

David Cameron is married into the aristocracy and George Osborne is a member of the aristocracy, they must both be well acquainted with the Leisure Class.

I can't find any hard work going on looking at the Wikipedia page for David Cameron's father-in-law. His family have been on their estate since the sixteenth century and judging by today's thinking, expect to be on it until the end of time.

George Osborne's aristocratic pedigree goes back to the Tudor era:

"he is an aristocrat with a pedigree stretching back to early in the Tudor era. His father, Sir Peter Osborne, is the 17th holder of a hereditary baronetcy that has been passed from father to son for 10 generations, and of which George is next in line."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/george-osborne-a-silver-spoon-for-the-golden-boy-2004814.html

soundofthesuburbs 5 Dec 2015 15:24

The working and middle classes toil to keep the upper class in luxury and leisure.

In the UK nothing has changed.

We call our Leisure Class the Aristocracy.

For the first time in five millennia of human civilisation some people at the bottom of society aren't working.

We can't have that; idleness is only for the rich.

It's the way it's always been and the way it must be again.

Did you think the upper; leisure class, social calendar disappeared in the 19th Century?
No it's alive and kicking in the 21st Century ....

Peer into the lives of today's Leisure Class with Tatler. http://www.tatler.com/the-season

If we have people at the bottom who are not working the whole of civilisation will be turned on its head.

"The modern industrial society developed from the barbarian tribal society, which featured a leisure class supported by subordinated working classes employed in economically productive occupations. The leisure class is composed of people exempted from manual work and from practicing economically productive occupations, because they belong to the leisure class."

The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study of Institutions, by Thorstein Veblen. It was written a long time ago but much of it is as true today as it was then. The Wikipedia entry gives a good insight.

DBChas 5 Dec 2015 15:13
"income inequality" is best viewed as structural capitalism. It's not as if, did black and brown people and female people somehow (miraculously) attain the economic status of the lower-paid, white, male person, the problem would be solved--simply by adjusting pay scales. The problem is inherent to capitalism, which doesn't mean certain "types" of people aren't more disadvantaged for their "type." No one is saying that. For capitalists, it's easier to rationalize the obscene unfairness (only rich people say, "life's not fair") when their "type" is regarded as superior to a different "type," whether that be with respect to color or gender or both.

Over time--a long time--the dominant party (white males since the Dark Ages, also the life-span of capitalism coincidentally enough) came to dominance by various means, too many to try to list, or even know of. Why white males? BTW, just because most in power and in money are white males does not mean ALL white males are in positions of power and wealth. Most are not, and these facts help to fog the issue.

Indeed, "income inequality," is not an accident, nor can it be fixed, as the author notes, by tweaking (presumably he means capitalism). And he's quite right too in saying, "You can't take down the master's house with the master's tools..." I take that ALSO to mean, the problem can't be fixed by way of what Hedges has called a collapsing liberal establishment with its various institutions, officially speaking. That is, it's not institutional racism that's collapsing, but that institution is not officially recognized as such.

HOWEVER, it IS possible, even when burdened with an economics that is capitalism, to redistribute wealth, and I don't just mean Mark Zuckerberg's. I mean all wealth in whatever form can be redistributed if/when government decides it can. And THIS TIME, unlike the 1950s-60s, not only would taxes on the wealthy be the same as then but the wealth redistributed would be redistributed to ALL, not just to white families, and perhaps in particular to red families, the oft forgotten ones.

This is a matter of political will. But, of course, if that means whites as the largest voting block insist on electing to office those without the political will, nothing will change. In that case, other means have to be considered, and just a reminder: If the government fails to serve the people, the Constitution gives to the people the right to depose that government. But again, if whites as the largest voting block AND as the largest sub-group in the nation (and women are the largest part of that block, often voting as their men vote--just the facts, please, however unpleasant) have little interest in seeing to making necessary changes at least in voting booths, then...what? Bolshevism or what? No one seems to know and it's practically taboo even to talk about possibilities. Americans did it once, but not inclusively and not even paid in many instances. When it happens again, it has to happen with and for the participation of ALL. And it's worth noting that it will have to happen again, because capitalism by its very nature cannot survive itself. That is, as Marx rightly noted, capitalism will eventually collapse by dint of its internal contradictions.


mbidding Jeremiah2000 5 Dec 2015 15:08

Correction: The average person in poverty in the U.S. does not live in the same abject, third world poverty as you might find in Honduras, Central African Republic, Cambodia, or the barrios of Sao Paulo.

Since our poor don't live in abject poverty, I invite you to live as a family of four on less than $11,000 a year anywhere in the United States. If you qualify and can obtain subsidized housing you may have some of the accoutrements in your home that you seem to equate with living the high life. You know, running water, a fridge, a toilet, a stove. You would also likely have a phone (subsidized at that) so you might be able to participate (or attempt to participate) in the job market in an honest attempt to better your family's economic prospects and as is required to qualify for most assistance programs.

Consider as well that you don't have transportation to get a job that would improve your circumstances. You earn too much to qualify for meaningful levels of food support programs and fall into the insurance gap for subsidies because you live in a state that for ideological reasons refuses to expand Medicaid coverage. Your local schools are a disgrace but you can't take advantage of so-called school choice programs (vouchers, charters, and the like) as you don't have transportation or the time (given your employer's refusal to set fixed working hours for minimum wage part time work) to get your kids to that fine choice school.

You may have a fridge and a stove, but you have no food to cook. You may have access to running water and electricity, but you can't afford to pay the bills for such on account of having to choose between putting food in that fridge or flushing that toilet. You can't be there reliably for your kids to help with school, etc, because you work constantly shifting hours for crap pay.

Get back to me after six months to a year after living in such circumstances and then tell me again how Americans don't really live in poverty simply because they have access to appliances.


Earl Shelton 5 Dec 2015 15:08

The Earned Income Tax Credit seems to me a good starting point for reform. It has been around since the 70s -- conceived by Nixon/Moynihan -- and signed by socialist (kidding) Gerald Ford -- it already *redistributes* income (don't choke on the term, O'Reilly) directly from tax revenue (which is still largely progressive) to the working poor, with kids.

That program should be massively expanded to tax the 1% -- and especially the top 1/10 of 1% (including a wealth tax) -- and distribute the money to the bottom half of society, mostly in the form of work training, child care and other things that help put them in and keep them in the middle class. It is a mechanism already in existence to correct the worst ravages of Capitalism. Use it to build shared prosperity.


oKWJNRo 5 Dec 2015 14:40

So many dutiful neoliberals on here rushing to the defense of poor Capitalism. Clearly, these commentators are among those who are in the privileged position of reaping the true benefits of Capitalism - And, of course, there are many benefits to reap if you are lucky enough to be born into the right racial-socioeconomic context.

We can probably all agree that Capitalism has brought about widespread improvements in healthcare, education, living conditions, for example, compared to the feudal system that preceded it... But it also disproportionately benefits the upper echelons of Capitalist societies and is wholly unequal by design.

Capitalism depends upon the existence of a large underclass that can be exploited. This is part of the process of how surplus value is created and wealth is extracted from labour. This much is indisputable. It is therefore obvious that capitalism isn't an ideal system for most of us living on this planet.

As for the improvements in healthcare, education, living conditions etc that Capitalism has fostered... Most of these were won through long struggles against the Capitalist hegemony by the masses. We would have certainly chosen to make these improvements to our landscape sooner if Capitalism hadn't made every effort to stop us. The problem today is that Capitalism and its powerful beneficiaries have successfully convinced us that there is no possible alternative. It won't give us the chance to try or even permit us to believe there could be another, better way.

Martin Joseph -> realdoge 5 Dec 2015 14:33

Please walk us through how non-capitalist systems create wealth and allow their lowest class people propel themselves to the top in one generation. You will note that most socialist systems derive their technology and advancements from the more capitalistic systems. Pharmaceuticals, software, and robotics are a great example of this.

I shutter to think of what the welfare of the average citizen of the world would be like without the advancements made via the capitalist countries.

VWFeature 5 Dec 2015 14:29

Markets, economies and tax systems are created by people, and based on rules they agree on. Those rules can favor general prosperity or concentration of wealth. Destruction and predation are easier than creation and cooperation, so our rules have to favor cooperation if we want to avoid predation and destructive conflicts.

In the 1930's the US changed many of those rules to favor general prosperity. Since then they've been gradually changed to favor wealth concentration and predation. They can be changed back.

The trick is creating a system that encourages innovation while putting a safety net under the population so failure doesn't end in starvation.

A large part of our current problems is the natural tendency for large companies to get larger and larger until their failure would adversely affect too many others, so they're not allowed to fail. Tax law, not antitrust law, has to work against this. If a company can reduce its tax rate by breaking into 20 smaller (still huge) companies, then competition is preserved and no one company can dominate and control markets.

Robert Goldschmidt -> Jake321 5 Dec 2015 14:27

Bernie Sanders has it right on -- we can only heal our system by first having millions rise up and demand an end to the corruption of the corporations controlling our elected representatives. Corporations are not people and money is not speech.

moonwrap02 5 Dec 2015 14:26

The effects of wealth distribution has far reaching consequences. It is not just about money, but creating a fair society - one that is co-operative and cohesive. The present system has allowed an ever divide between the rich and poor, creating a two tier society where neither the twain shall meet. The rich and poor are almost different species on the planet and no longer belong to the same community. Commonality of interest is lost and so it's difficult to form community and to have good, friendly relationships across class differences that are that large.

"If capitalism is to be seen to be fair, the same rules are to apply to the big guy as to the little guy,"

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/2-charts-that-show-what-the-world-really-thinks-about-capitalism-a6719851.html


Jeremiah2000 -> bifess 5 Dec 2015 14:17

Sorry. I get it now. You actually think that because the Washington elite has repealed Glass-Steagel that we live in a unregulated capitalistic system.

This is so far from the truth that I wasn't comprehending that anyone could think that. You can see the graph of pages published in the Federal Register here. Unregulated capitalism? Wow.

Dodd Frank was passed in 2010 (without a single Republican vote). Originally it was 2,300 pages. It is STILL being written by nameless bureaucrats and is over 20,000 pages. Unregulated capitalism? Really?

But the reality is that Goliath is conspiring with the government to regulate what size sling David can use and how many stones and how many ounces.

So we need more government regulations? They will disallow David from anything but spitwads and only two of those.


neuronmaker -> AmyInNH 5 Dec 2015 14:16

Do you understand the concept of corporations which are products of capitalism?

The legal institutions within each capitalist corporations and nations are just that, they are capitalist and all about making profits.

The law is made by the rich capitalists and for the rich capitalists. Each Legislation is a link in the chain of economic slavery by capitalists.

Capitalism and the concept of money is a construction of the human mind, as it does not exist in the natural world. This construction is all about using other human beings like blood suckers to sustain a cruel and evil life style - with blood and brutality as the core ideology.


Marcedward -> MarjaE 5 Dec 2015 14:12

I would agree that our system of help for the less-well-off could be more accessible and more generous, but that doesn't negate that point that there is a lot of help out there - the most important help being that totally free educational system. Think about it, a free education, and to get the most out of it a student merely has to show up, obey the rules, do the homework and study for tests. It's all laid out there for the kids like a helicopter mom laying out her kids clothes. How much easier can we make it? If people can't be bothered to show up and put in effort, how is their failure based on racism


tommydog -> martinusher 5 Dec 2015 14:12

As you are referring to Carlos Slim, interestingly while he is Mexican by birth his parents were both Lebanese.

slightlynumb -> AmyInNH 5 Dec 2015 14:12

Why isn't that capitalism? It's raw capitalism on steroids.

Zara Von Fritz -> Toughspike 5 Dec 2015 14:12

It's an equal opportunity plantation now.

Robert Goldschmidt 5 Dec 2015 14:11

The key to repairing the system is to identify the causes of our problems.

Here is my list:

The information technology revolution which continues to destroy wages by enabling automation and outsourcing.

The reformation of monopolies which price gouge and block innovation.

Hitting ecological limits such as climate change, water shortages, unsustainable farming.

Then we can make meaningful changes such as regulation of the portion of corporate profit that are pay, enforcement of national and regional antitrust laws and an escalating carbon tax.

Zara Von Fritz -> PostCorbyn 5 Dec 2015 14:11

If you can believe these quality of life or happiness indexes they put out so often, the winners tend to be places that have nice environments and a higher socialist mix in their economy. Of course there are examples of poor countries that practice the same but its not clear that their choice is causal rather than reactive.

We created this mess and we can fix it.

Zara Von Fritz -> dig4victory 5 Dec 2015 14:03

Yes Basic Income is possibly the mythical third way. It socialises wealth to a point but at the same time frees markets from their obligation to perpetually grow and create jobs for the sake of jobs and also hereford reduces the subsequent need for governments to attempt to control them beyond maintaining their health.

Zara Von Fritz 5 Dec 2015 13:48

As I understand it, you don't just fiddle with capitalism, you counteract it, or counterweight it. A level of capitalism, or credit accumulation, and a level of socialism has always existed, including democracy which is a manifestation of socialism (1 vote each). So the project of capital accumulation seems to be out of control because larger accumulations become more powerful and meanwhile the power of labour in the marketplace has become less so due to forces driving unemployment. The danger is that capital's power to control the democratic system reaches a point of no return.


Jeremiah2000 -> bifess 5 Dec 2015 13:42

"I do not have the economic freedom to grow my own food because i do not have access to enough land to grow it and i do not have the economic clout to buy a piece of land."

Economic freedom does NOT mean you get money for free. It means that means that if you grow food for personal use, the federal government doesn't trash the Constitution by using the insterstate commerce clause to say that it can regulate how much you grow on your own personal land.

Economic freedom means that if you have a widget, you can choose to set the price for $10 or $100 and that a buyer is free to buy it from you or not buy it from you. It does NOT mean that you are entitled to "free" widgets.

"If capitalism has not managed to eradicate poverty in rich first world countries then just what chance if there of capitalism eradicating poverty on a global scale?"

The average person in poverty in the U.S. doesn't live in poverty:

In fact, 80.9 percent of households below the poverty level have cell phones, and a healthy majority-58.2 percent-have computers.

Fully 96.1 percent of American households in "poverty" have a television to watch, and 83.2 percent of them have a video-recording device in case they cannot get home in time to watch the football game or their favorite television show and they want to record it for watching later.

Refrigerators (97.8 percent), gas or electric stoves (96.6 percent) and microwaves (93.2 percent) are standard equipment in the homes of Americans in "poverty."

More than 83 percent have air-conditioning.

Interestingly, the appliances surveyed by the Census Bureau that households in poverty are least likely to own are dish washers (44.9 percent) and food freezers (26.2 percent).

However, most Americans in "poverty" do not need to go to a laundromat. According to the Census Bureau, 68.7 percent of households in poverty have a clothes washer and 65.3 percent have a clothes dryer.

(Data from the U.S. census.)

[Dec 24, 2018] Chuck Schumer, feckless hack

Notable quotes:
"... Senate Democrats have once again selected Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) as their minority leader without so much as a whisper of a debate or contest. This is galling. The man is incompetent, has abysmal politics, and as we were reminded in a huge New York Times investigation into Facebook, is extremely corrupt. ..."
"... Schumer definitely succeeded in the latter objective. In keeping with his long career as a Wall Street stooge (and in sharp contrast with his predecessor Harry Reid ), he quietly shepherded financial deregulation through. And because he has an almost neoconservative foreign policy, he largely stood aside as Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Iran nuclear deal for no reason. He also attacked Trump from the right for not being belligerent enough towards North Korea. ..."
"... Where does Schumer come in? Well, in 2017, Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) opened an investigation into Facebook over Russiagate and misinformation generally. (Far from being some fire-breathing populist, Warner is among the most milquetoast, business-friendly Democrats who has ever held high office.) But Schumer has raised more money from Facebook than any other member of Congress, his daughter works there , and he helped get his former staffer appointed to the Federal Trade Commission (which oversees Facebook). In concert with Facebook brass, he told Warner to lay off the company, reported the Times : "Mr. Warner should be looking for ways to work with Facebook, Mr. Schumer advised, not harm it." ..."
"... So when it comes to sellout Democrats voting to make another financial crisis more likely, Schumer wrings his hands and hectors progressives not to criticize them too much (after which most of the sellouts lose anyway). But when those same sellouts start criticizing one of his favored sources of campaign cash, suddenly he discovers a knack for backroom arm-twisting and hardball tactics. ..."
Dec 24, 2018 | theweek.com
Senate Democrats have once again selected Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) as their minority leader without so much as a whisper of a debate or contest. This is galling. The man is incompetent, has abysmal politics, and as we were reminded in a huge New York Times investigation into Facebook, is extremely corrupt.

In his first two years as Senate minority leader, Schumer had two main priorities. First, preserve his vulnerable moderates running in deeply Trumpy states, like Claire McCaskill in Missouri, Heidi Heitkamp in North Dakota, and Joe Donnelly in Indiana. Second, use the Trump presidency to sneak through some odious stuff that most liberals hate.

Schumer definitely succeeded in the latter objective. In keeping with his long career as a Wall Street stooge (and in sharp contrast with his predecessor Harry Reid ), he quietly shepherded financial deregulation through. And because he has an almost neoconservative foreign policy, he largely stood aside as Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Iran nuclear deal for no reason. He also attacked Trump from the right for not being belligerent enough towards North Korea.

And how about that first goal? Schumer failed spectacularly in preserving most of these seats. Nearly all of his moderates -- to whom he had granted significant leeway to vote for President Trump's judicial nominees and bills -- lost. Only Joe Manchin in West Virginia managed to hang on. The Democratic Senate margin is being somewhat bolstered only by other candidates knocking off Republican senators in Arizona and Nevada, which Schumer had little to do with. (Indeed, Harry Reid, who is still helping run a well-oiled labor turnout machine in Nevada, was the key figure behind the Nevada win.)

This brings me to Facebook. Sheera Frenkel, Nicholas Confessore, Cecilia Kang, Matthew Rosenberg, and Jack Nicas wrote a jaw-dropping piece of reporting for the Times about Facebook's lobbying operation. They focused on how the company has defended itself from evidence that Russian intelligence used the platform to help Trump win in 2016, and that political extremists have been using the platform to organize atrocities , including genocide .

Basically, the strategy conducted by Facebook's top executives, including CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg, was the filthiest sludge out of the bottom of the lobbying barrel. (Facebook has defended itself and calls the report "grossly unfair.") The story is very long, but probably the most explosive revelation was that Facebook hired a soulless Republican propaganda shop to attack its critics -- notably the Open Markets Institute , which Anne-Marie Slaughter shoved out of the New America Foundation on instructions from her Google paymasters -- with anti-Semitic smears, casting it as the tool of wealthy Jewish philanthropist George Soros. Remarkably, at the very same time they convinced the Anti-Defamation League to cast criticism of Facebook as anti-Semitic, as both Zuckerberg and Sandberg are Jewish.

It's worth stopping for a moment to take this in. Just a couple weeks ago a right-wing terrorist hopped up on anti-Soros propaganda massacred 11 Jews at a synagogue in Pittsburgh. Another sent a mail bomb to Soros' home. A third person in D.C. was recently arrested on suspicion of plotting another synagogue shooting.

Where does Schumer come in? Well, in 2017, Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) opened an investigation into Facebook over Russiagate and misinformation generally. (Far from being some fire-breathing populist, Warner is among the most milquetoast, business-friendly Democrats who has ever held high office.) But Schumer has raised more money from Facebook than any other member of Congress, his daughter works there , and he helped get his former staffer appointed to the Federal Trade Commission (which oversees Facebook). In concert with Facebook brass, he told Warner to lay off the company, reported the Times : "Mr. Warner should be looking for ways to work with Facebook, Mr. Schumer advised, not harm it."

So when it comes to sellout Democrats voting to make another financial crisis more likely, Schumer wrings his hands and hectors progressives not to criticize them too much (after which most of the sellouts lose anyway). But when those same sellouts start criticizing one of his favored sources of campaign cash, suddenly he discovers a knack for backroom arm-twisting and hardball tactics.

[Dec 24, 2018] Don't ,forget John Bolton's late October visit to Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia where he pragmatically refined US priorities for each country including the indication for sanction waving in respect of South Stream energy.

Dec 24, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Lincolnite , a day ago

Don't ,forget John Bolton's late October visit to Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia where he pragmatically refined US priorities for each country including the indication for sanction waving in respect of South Stream energy. Bolton's tour followed on from a visit to Moscow. DJT had a 50 minute private meeting with Erdogan at the G20 followed by a further extended phone call on the 14th December and the final call on the 21st immediately prior to the Policy announcement. This marks considered policy and unfortunately for the Rojave Kurds their interest were found wanting in the balance. There will be complementary side deals involving Iran, Assad, Putin and Netanyahu. There then remains Idlib.
https://www.dailysabah.com/...
https://www.tccb.gov.tr/en/...
https://www.tccb.gov.tr/en/...

[Dec 24, 2018] The Guardian's Bush obituary plumbs new depths of sycophantic hypocrisy by Kit Knightly

Dec 24, 2018 | off-guardian.org

The strong man with the dagger is followed by the weak man with the sponge." Lord Acton

George Herbert Walker Bush died on Saturday. He was 94 years old. Thanks to decisions he made throughout his career, thousands – perhaps millions – of people never got near 94. He invaded Iraq in 1991, instituted sanctions that destroyed the country. He pardoned those involved in the Iran-Contra affair and was head of the CIA when Operation Condor launched the military coup in Argentina in 1976 .

None of that makes it into The Guardian 's obituary , of course.

Instead, Simon Tisdall – a mindless servant to the status quo, always happy to weave invective about our designated enemies – treats us to paragraph after paragraph of inane anecdotes.

Good old Georgie once gave him a lift in Air Force One.

Barbara gave him useful advice about raising Springer Spaniels.

The following words and phrases are not found anywhere in this article: CIA, Iraq, Iran-Contra, Argentinian coup, Iran Air Flight 655, NAZI, Panama.

Rather, Tisdall refers Bush's term as "before the era of fake news". Which makes him either a complete a liar or profoundly under-qualified to write on the subject – as the Bush-era spawned the original fake news: The Nayirah testimony . A pack of lies told before the Senate, and used to justify a war in the middle-east.

A Bush family tradition.

Tisdall talks of Bush's family – "he enjoyed a privileged upbringing in a monied east coast family" – but doesn't say that his father, Prescott Bush, was a known Nazi sympathiser and was even implicated in an alleged plot to overthrow the government of Franklin Delano Roosevelt .

Bush started two wars as President. Planned and enabled countless crimes as director of the CIA. pardoned all those implicated in the Iran-Contra affair. Refused to apologise when the US Navy "accidentally" shot down an Iranian airliner, killing over 200 civilians, including 60 children.

He was the original neocon – his administration brought us Cheney and Powell and Rumsfeld. Gave birth to the ideology that stage-managed 9/11, launched the "War on Terror", and cut a blood-stained swath across North Africa and the Middle East.

We don't hear about that.

What we DO hear about is Bush's "deep sense of public duty and service" and that "Bush was a patriot who did not need cheap slogans to express his belief in enduring American greatness". No space is given over to analysis, to examine the fact that "belief in enduring American greatness" is quasi-fascism, and responsible for more violent deaths this century than any other cause you can name.

In hundreds of words, a notionally left-wing paper has nothing but praise for a highly unpopular right-wing president. No space is given over even to the gentlest of rebukes.

The whole article is an exercise in talking without saying anything. Pleasantries replacing truth. Platitudes where facts should be. A nothing burger, with a void on the side and an extra order of beige.

It's an obituary of Harold Shipman that eschews murder talk and rhapsodises about his love of gardening.

A eulogy to Pinochet that praises his economic reforms but neglects all the soccer stadiums full of corpses.

An epitaph to Hitler that focuses, not on his "controversial political career", but on his painting and his vegetarianism.

Did you know Genghis Khan once lent me a pencil? He was a swell guy. The world will miss him.

We're no longer supposed to examine the lives, characters or morals of our leaders. Only "honour their memory" and be "grateful for their service". History is presented to us, not as a series of choices made by people in power, but as a collection of inevitabilities. Consequences are tragic but unavoidable. Like long-dead family squabbles – To dwell on them is unseemly, and to assign blame unfair.

Just as with John McCain, apologism and revisionism are sold to us as manners and good taste. Attempts to redress the balance and tell the truth are met with stern glares and declarations that it is "too soon".

It's never "too soon" to tell the truth.

John McCain was a dangerous war-mongering lunatic. George Bush Sr was a sociopath from a family of corrupt sociopaths. The world would be a far better, and much safer place if just one major newspaper was willing to say that.

Really, there are two obituaries to write here:

First – George HW Bush, corrupt patriarch of an old and malign family, passing out of this world to face whatever eternal punishment (hopefully) awaits those who sell their immortal soul in exchange for a brief taste of power.

Second – The Guardian, perhaps a decent newspaper once-upon-a-time, now a dried out husk. A zombified slave to the state, mindless and brainless and lifeless. No questions, no reservations, no hesitation. Obediently licking up the mess their masters leave behind.

It's sickening.

Kit Knightly is co-editor of OffGuardian. The Guardian banned him from commenting. Twice. He used to write for fun, but now he's forced to out of a near-permanent sense of outrage.

Michael McNulty says Dec, 9, 2018

My mother believed it was only Bush Senior's longevity that prevented some of the neo-cons from bumping off Bush Junior. He was President in name only and has long since fulfilled his usefulness in committing the US to endless war. He is prone to verbal gaffes and that must make him a liability, and when powerful evil people get nervous they often turn deadly.
vexarb says Dec, 5, 2018
Like son, like father -- Bush War Crimes in Iraq:

https://youtu.be/cqiq8P8dRtY

vexarb says Dec, 4, 2018
Cut&Pasted from Lavrov interview in today's Saker Vineyard:

Question: When the death of President George H.W. Bush was announced, President Putin expressed his condolences in a very emotional message. George Bush Sr. believed that one of the worst mistakes of his presidency was failure to prevent the Soviet Union's dissolution. Did you meet with him? What are your impressions of him?

Sergey Lavrov: I believe that George Bush Sr greatly contributed to the development of the United States and ensured that his country responsibly played its role in the world, considering its weight in international affairs.

I remember very well how President George H.W. Bush visited Moscow, and then he went to Ukraine where he encouraged the Soviet republics' political forces to do their duty by preserving the country rather than create huge, tragic problems for millions of people who became citizens of different states the morning after the Soviet Union collapsed.

Mr Bush was a great politician. I believe that every word that will be said about his achievements reflect the people's true attitude to this man. However, one comment about the link between President Bush and the demise of the Soviet Union. I heard a commentator say that George Bush Sr made history by helping Mikhail Gorbachev soft-land the Soviet Union. In fact, George Bush Sr never did that; he simply wanted to protect millions of people from political games. This is what we can say confidently about him.

https://thesaker.is/lavrovs-interview-and-answers-to-questions-for-the-programme-moscow-kremlin-putin/

Loading...
different frank says Dec, 4, 2018
The Webster tarpley book about him is interesting
Also regarding the "gulf war". The then US ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie gave saddam the nod to invade Kuwait.
He was set up.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/ARTICLE5/april.html
Francis Lee says Dec, 4, 2018
It was German journalist, Udo Ulfkotte actually spilled the beans regarding the western media in his best seller, Journalisten Gekaufte, (Bought Journalists). Ulfkotte described the degree to which the CIA has penetrated the western media and corrupted, or bribed ( including himself) the system which has become a PR organization for the intelligence services, and MIC. On publication it immediately sold 120,000.00 copies and then strangely became unavailable in English. He was described as a 'conspiracy theorist' (but of course) and died at the relatively young age of a heart attack at 56. There are some salient issues surrounding his death raised by Jonas Schneider in his book 'The Mysterious Death of Udo Ulfkotte: Evidence for a Murder.

[Dec 24, 2018] Mattis Resigns

Notable quotes:
"... The Defense Department under Mattis became more opaque and less accountable to the public and Congress. He presided over two years of shameful support for the Saudi coalition war on Yemen, and he went out of his way to offer absurd justifications for continued U.S. support for the war to the end of his tenure. ..."
"... No less than Secretary Pompeo, Mattis discredited himself in the desperate, unsuccessful effort to derail S.J.Res. 54. An administration that fights as hard as this has to keep the war on Yemen going is definitely not one interested in peace and restraint no matter what else happens. ..."
Dec 24, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Secretary Mattis has resigned :

Officials said Mr. Mattis went to the White House on Thursday afternoon with his resignation letter already written, but nonetheless made a last attempt at persuading Mr. Trump to reverse his decision about Syria, which the president announced on Wednesday over the objections of his senior advisers.

Mr. Mattis, a retired four-star Marine general, was rebuffed. Returning to the Pentagon, he asked aides to print out 50 copies of his resignation letter and distribute them around the building.

Mattis' departure from the administration after the midterms had been floated as a possibility for months, but I don't think anyone seriously expected him to resign suddenly over a policy disagreement with the president. It is telling and not to Mattis' credit that ending an illegal war in Syria was the one policy disagreement with Trump that Mattis couldn't stomach. The Defense Secretary had repeatedly disagreed with Trump on a range of issues, and he usually lost the internal debate. The only times that he prevailed with Trump were when he advised him to escalate ongoing U.S. wars, and his influence had waned enough that he couldn't get his way on that, either. I was extremely skeptical that a Syria withdrawal would actually happen. Now that Mattis has tried and failed to reverse that decision, I have to acknowledge that I overestimated the ability of Trump's advisers to change his mind.

The Defense Department under Mattis became more opaque and less accountable to the public and Congress. He presided over two years of shameful support for the Saudi coalition war on Yemen, and he went out of his way to offer absurd justifications for continued U.S. support for the war to the end of his tenure. The disagreement over Syria will dominate coverage of Mattis' resignation, but it is important to remember that when it came to the most indefensible U.S.-backed war he and Trump were always on the same page. No less than Secretary Pompeo, Mattis discredited himself in the desperate, unsuccessful effort to derail S.J.Res. 54. An administration that fights as hard as this has to keep the war on Yemen going is definitely not one interested in peace and restraint no matter what else happens.

As wrong as Mattis was on a number of foreign policy issues, there is a real danger that his successor could be far worse. Even if Trump doesn't nominate a Tom Cotton or Lindsey Graham, the next Defense Secretary is very likely to be a yes-man in the mold of Mike Pompeo. Almost every time that Trump has replaced his top national security officials, he has chosen someone who will flatter and praise him instead of telling him the truth and giving him the best advice.

The next Defense Secretary is less likely to resist Trump's belligerent tendencies, and he is more likely to indulge the president's worst impulses. Just as Pompeo has proven to be a worse Secretary of State than Tillerson, Mattis' successor will very likely prove to be an inferior Secretary of Defense.

about:blank

Robert December 20, 2018 at 11:53 pm

How about Rand Paul as SecDef?
Farewells , says: December 21, 2018 at 12:46 am
You're right to fear what may replace him, especially after the disgusting Pompeo replaced the decent but ineffectual Tillerson, but I'm glad Mattis is gone, especially if he quit over the Syria decision, a no-brainer which should have been made two years ago.

It's hard to imagine anyone being worse than he was. Sadly, we may not have to imagine it.

another take , says: December 21, 2018 at 1:54 am
There's also the danger that the elites and establishment will now escalate their efforts to remove him from office.

I've disagreed with Trump about many things, and I don't like the man, but I still trust him more than the corrupt incompetents and foreign agents who dragged us into these Middle East hellholes.

That is the terrible and ongoing damage that must be stopped.

But now that Trump has made a move in the direction of winding it down, you will almost certainly see the fury and resentment of the elites and establishment redoubled. From their point of view, the only thing worse than a Trump who doesn't keep his campaign promises is one who does.

prodigalson , says: December 21, 2018 at 8:55 am
I'm still happy to see him go. Someone with the handle of "Mad Dog" is perhaps not the best fit for national defense issues.

Agree his replacement will likely be worse but such seems to be the case for hardening our pharoah's hearts.

Christian Chuba , says: December 21, 2018 at 9:09 am
His next appointee will be no better and more than likely worse, a crafty Neocon who will bite their tongue when they disagree with Trump in order to remain so that he can encourage his worst tendencies. Bolton is a stellar example of this.

If he appoints someone like Cotton or Gen Jack Keane then Trump will be the last adult in the room.

Alex (the one that likes Ike) , says: December 21, 2018 at 1:49 pm

what this withdrawal means to the Kurds? Leaving them once again in the lurch?

Perhaps ceasing to deceive them with impossible promises given by both the previous Democratic and the current Republican administrations?

Sid Finster , says: December 21, 2018 at 1:51 pm
My SWAG, and this is merely SWAG, is that, since his election, Trump has given the neocons everything they wanted or asked for, but he still is allowed any freedom of action.

In spite of governing much like a garden variety Republican, his enemies are still looking for any excuse to remove him.

This is Trump reminding his enemies that he can do lots of things to upset the apple cart, so cut him some slack, already.

[Dec 24, 2018] People like you must count as a great success for the obedience training that keeps capitalist society running smoothly, with the few dissidents casually dismissed as "a bunch of tin foil hat wearing fruitcakes".

Dec 24, 2018 | off-guardian.org

Peter Bolton says Dec, 6, 2018

You know already what I will respond to this. And I know already what you will say in return. So, instead of getting into a back and forth about it, I will simply leave you with something to consider.

The fact that each successive report that comes out that refutes the claims of the truther movement is automatically dismissed by people like you shows how conspiracy theory thinking works. The final 9/11 report comes out in 2004 and, of course, the truthers dismiss it because it was written by a branch of the federal government who you believe perpetrated 9/11 in the first place. Then Popular Mechanics publishes a 5,500 word report in 2005 extensively answering and debunking the movement claims.

Here, you people can't claim that it was a government cover-up -- at least not directly -- because Popular Mechanics is a privately owned publication. Therefore, new sub-conspiracy theories are invented to "prove" how Popular Mechanics is part of the cover-up. To give just one example Christopher Bollyn "claimed to have discovered why the 100-year-old engineering magazine would take part in a government cover-up of the crime of the century: A young researcher on the magazine's staff named Benjamin Chertoff was a cousin of then-Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, and the magazine was seeking to whitewash the criminal conspiracy with its coverage." (Slate 2011) Here we are seeing the kind of incredible mental contortion that truthers are willing to engage in to continue believing their theories.

Then in 2008 the National Institute of Standards and Technology released the final installment of its study into the causes behind the collapse of the buildings -- $16 million was invested into the investigation. And, as I well know, you and other truthers will have a smart Alec come-back as to why the NIST report is wrong, its authors are part of the vast conspiracy and so on. On and on it goes no matter how many reports are published by however many experts.

Again, I am not interested in getting dragged into a back-and-forth about the merits and demerits of these reports. Rather, I wish to point out the flawed reasoning inherent to 9/11 trutherism: that it has its own internal mechanisms for discounting any evidence that contradicts its central tenets. It therefore constitutes a closed system of thought because there is nothing that would ever count as a refutation. In other words, for all contradictory evidence another explanation is made to retroactively fit the latest gap in the theory that is exposed.

Now, I know full well that this is probably not going to change your mind either. And I'm sure that there will be plenty of responses to this comment and thumbs down from Off-Guardian readers. But I hope that you at least consider whether you are wrong about this subject. For my part, I worry that 9/11 trutherism obscures what are indeed important subjects -- US imperialism, US govt. corruption, the nefarious influence of the CIA, the legitimate grievance that people in the Middle East have against the US, Israel, the Saudi dictatorship and so on. Above all, I worry that 9/11 trutherism makes it open season for the real enemies -- the US foreign policy establishment, et cetera -- to portray the resistance to them and their agenda as a bunch of tin foil hat wearing fruitcakes. I feel strongly that the left needs to jettison this in-group, conspiracy theory-type stuff really become a major force and overturn the status quo.

milosevic says Dec, 9, 2018
People like you must count as a great success for the obedience training that keeps capitalist society running smoothly, with the few dissidents casually dismissed as "a bunch of tin foil hat wearing fruitcakes".

Even NIST eventually admitted that WTC-7 free-fell for 2.5 seconds. That can only happen if all the support columns fail at exactly the same time; otherwise it would topple over sideways. Only controlled explosives can make that happen.

Your touching faith in the word of ruling-class "experts", over the evidence of your own eyes, and basic physics, is a credit to the Middle Ages. It would warm the hearts of the Catholic theologians who refused to look through Galileo's telescope because they knew, as a matter of revealed truth, that what he said couldn't possibly be true.

What do the claims of a bunch of tinfoil-hat-wearing fruitcakes count for, against not just ruling class dogma, but the entire weight of respectable middle-class opinion? The social status and careers of millions of right-thinking professionals, like you, depend on believing, or at least pretending to believe, not just the 9/11 Official Story, but all the other Official Stories as well. How could all those comfy middle-class people, with their comfy middle-class careers and high-status friends, be wrong? That would throw the entire plan for next weekend's dinner party into question.

Do you believe the Offical Skripal Story? The Official ISIS story? The Official Syrian Chemical Weapons Story? The Official JFK Assassination Story? The Official USS Liberty Story? The Official Tonkin Gulf Story? How do you decide which Official Stories to believe, except on the basis of careerism and status-seeking?

https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/free-fall-acceleration

https://www.youtube.com/embed/SBmyPW6gGGI?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

Peter Bolton says Dec, 16, 2018
Again, I am not interested in getting drawn into a back-and-forth about the various claims of 9/11 truthers like yourself. I would just like to make one comment and then leave two things for yourself and other truthers on here to consider.

First, I would like to comment upon the fact that I have been subjected to some rather nasty personalized abuse on this thread simply for challenging the claims of trutherism. I'm not pointing this out to feel aggrieved or to search for sympathy or to make myself out as some kind of victim. Rather I do so to illustrate how it is indicative of the negative and mind-closing effects of the group-think and the conspiracy theorist mind-set. It goes something like this: "everyone who questions the tenets of the great truther theory is the enemy, not just a skeptic but rather a collaborator in the evil system that suppresses the "truth"."

Second, I want to provide a link to an excellent article that addresses the claims of truthers head-on: https://www.skeptical-science.com/critical-thinking/911-conspiracy-theories-debunked/

The people it discusses were truthers and many of them reexamined their beliefs after being confronted by actual specialists on the subjects basing their truther beliefs on. If you are open-minded as you claim to be, then have the decency to at least read the article and consider its points, rather than just reflexively rejecting the source as part of the great cover-up.

Finally, I would like to leave you with a quote from Noam Chomsky. Now, I am well aware that you think Chomsky is a sell-out for not getting on board with trutherism and that you have all kinds of fancy come-backs as to why he is wrong. But he raises a very important issue of priorities for people on the anti-imperialist left to consider. Is this obsession with this issue really helping us to fight against imperialism and all of the other iniquities of the world? I think not:

"One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work." Noam Chomsky

Makropulos says Dec, 3, 2018
Ah "truther", that neologism which serves the same purpose as the recasting of the term "conspiracy" to designate foolishness, gullibilty etc.

And as for Chomsky, well here's what he had to say about the 9/11 "inside job" theory:

"And even if it were true, which is extremely unlikely, who cares? It doesn't have any significance. It's a little bit like the huge energy that's put out on trying to figure out who killed John Kennedy. Who knows? Who cares? Plenty of people get killed all the time, why does it matter that one of them happened to be John F. Kennedy?"

Let's just consider that for a moment. Chomsky is considering the possibilty -- however remote in his view -- that 9/11 may indeed have been an inside job. And he's saying it doesn't have any significance that the US goverment carried out an attack on its own population! It doesn't have any significance that the "war on terror" was launched on the basis of a lie!

This is the moment when Chomsky truly stood revealed. He was like the kid with his hand in the cookie jar who instantly concocts any number of excuses all of which contradict each other. And yet even when caught out like this, he has his supporters who say he "dispels 9/11 theories with sheer logic"!

milosevic says Dec, 3, 2018

https://www.youtube.com/embed/TwZ-vIaW6Bc?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

Makropulos says Dec, 3, 2018
That's the one. I mean – who knows and who cares? It's not as if a terrorist attack on mainland America that altered the face of New York and launched a war across the world is actually important.
Peter Bolton says Dec, 4, 2018
Well, I think the fact that Noam Chomsky has said this demonstrates how few people accept these 9/11 truther ideas -- even amongst people who generally agree with your (and my) kind of politics. George Galloway, who like Chomsky is about as far politically from the neocons as you can get, has also spoken very eloquently against trutherism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_A5ToK6g0m8

Ironically, the only remotely public figure who does that I've heard mentioned on this thread is some Reaganite crank that I had never heard of until now. That really does not bode well for you, does it?

Makropulos says Dec, 4, 2018
Au contraire Peter, it does not bode well for the entire realm of mainstream discourse. Logically what Chomsky said is simply monstrous. As is this:

"I think the fact that Noam Chomsky has said this demonstrates how few people accept these 9/11 truther ideas"

What is the hold that this man has that he only has to say something to "demonstrate" what most think?

Makropulos says Dec, 4, 2018
And having now listened to Mr Galloway and once again having to put up with his portentous stretching out ..of the ..sentence to -- quite frankly pad the time out, I see that his "points" come down to the following:

Two planes flew into the twin towers. Yes -- there's no disputing that one.

GW Bush could not possibly have planned the thing himself. Yes again -- no dispute. At this point I must express my gratitude to Reagan for finally proving that the guy in front is just a puppet.

If the US did it themselves and it "got out" it would be the end of America's credibility. Yes indeed. Which is why, all across the mainstream press, it will only ever be presented as a "nutty conspiracy theory"

milosevic says Dec, 4, 2018
Galloway: "I saw, myself, the airplanes hitting the twin towers."

-- which is supposed to constitute proof of the official Evil-Terrorists-In-A-Cave-In-Afghanistan story.

attention, "flaxgirl": your grand unified theory of 9/11 now needs to incorporate George Galloway as a fake witness for the US government, which seems strange, given his decades of opposition, both before and after, to the imperial warfare for which 9/11 served as a pretext.

The political function of the No-Planes-At-WTC claims could not be more clear; it's so that people who dispute other aspects of the Official Story can all be dismissed as deranged idiots.

flaxgirl says Dec, 4, 2018
But Peter you need to look at the evidence for yourself and not take others' word for it. And be guided by those who know how buildings collapse -- Chomsky certainly doesn't.
This is a wonderful tutorial by Richard Gage, founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

The story of 9/11 is utterly preposterous. The only reason people believe it is to do with psychology of how we relate to power nothing to do with the actuality of the story -- because it's utterly ludicrous.

flaxgirl says Dec, 4, 2018
Forgot link to tutorial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ged-FIf46dc

This is my article on Chomsky's sophistry on 9/11:
https://off-guardian.org/2016/10/11/analysis-of-the-sophistry-of-noam-chomsky-on-911/

Jay-Q says Dec, 4, 2018
Wut? " less violent ones like England, the US or France " From here on it just gets worse until Chomsky has no credible position left to argue from.

Heightened sense of cognitive dissonance by old Noam.

' even if it were true, which is extremely unlikely, then who cares? It doesn't have any significance."

Wow, for someone with such intellect this is some low-level thinking. I almost feel sorry for Chomsky for holding such an immoral position. Would he feel the same way if his wife was murdered? "Ah, there's other things to worry about, anything else is a diversion of energy." Very sad.

flaxgirl says Dec, 4, 2018
Where basic physics is concerned we should not speak of theory. The only possible explanation for the collapse of the buildings is controlled demolition. There is no doubt whatsoever that 9/11 was an inside conspiracy. There is also no doubt that death and injury were staged – at least, there is zero evidence of its reality in the visual record and one would think that for the 3,000 dead and 6,000 injured claimed there would be at least one piece of evidence for their reality, rather than every piece (anomalously small in number) in the visual record perfectly fitting "staged". Not to mention other anomalies unrelated to the visual record and that actual killing and injuring of people by the perpetrators would take a highly-problematic form in the shape of a great number of loved ones (as opposed to the tiny number presented) and the injured themselves when controlled demolition was so obvious.
kevin morris says Dec, 4, 2018
When you say that there is no doubt whatsoever that 9/11 was an inside conspiracy, I feel you are being overconfident unless what you are saying is that there is some evidence that some figures at the World Trade Centres seemed to have foreknowledge.

Frankly, although we all have our theories as to who was responsible, I remain in full agreement with Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth who state simply that the official account conflicts with physics. All else is suspicion and supposition. It may well be well grounded supposition, but until we discover who planned and executed the event and who definitely had foreknowledge, what we are dealing with is speculation.

The problem with that is that the great many people who refuse to believe anything other than the official account of 9/11 dismiss our views as those of cranks

milosevic says Dec, 4, 2018
there is some evidence that some figures at the World Trade Centres seemed to have foreknowledge

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Wq-0JIR38V0?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

flaxgirl says Dec, 7, 2018
Kevin,

The buildings came down by controlled demolition. The evidence for that is incontrovertible and the rationale presented by NIST for fire being the cause is demonstrably not based on a skerrick of evidence and is obviously fraudulent and false. There is not a single reason to suspect that the cause of collapse of all the buildings wasn't controlled demolition. If you believe there is a single reason to suspect another cause can you please provide it.

Since waking up to 9/11, I find that people either decide something is something with too little evidence or refrain from deciding on what something is when the evidence is so overwhelming you're practically drowning in it. Being conservative in judgement in the face of overwhelming evidence is no virtue in my opinion.

I have engaged in conversation with Mick West who runs the metabunk.org website that allegedly debunks all the conspiracy theories. We have gone back and forth a number of times over the cause of WTC-7's collapse and I have invited him to respond to an Occam's Razor challenge to provide 10 points that favour "fire" over "controlled demolition". He did not respond to the challenge, nor could he provide a single point that favours fire over controlled demolition. Not a single point -- didn't change his mind though.
https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/5000-challenge.html

Nor has anyone responded to my other Occam's Razor challenges. I judge when I see that there is a reasonable amount of evidence and that evidence points all one way and there is no evidence pointing any other way. If you disagree with this method fair enough.

flaxgirl says Dec, 7, 2018
And just to add, that, of course, it must be an inside job in the case of controlled demolition. As Graeme MacQueen says, there is no room in the official story for controlled demolition.

The big secret is though that death and injury were staged. That's the real secret.

flaxgirl says Dec, 4, 2018
It was a totally excellent piece. No reservations.

"Theory"? Are you serious? If you believe that 9/11 was the work of 19 barely-trained terrorists (one of whom cried when asked to do steep turns and stalls according to his alleged flying instructor but was tasked with the most impossibly-expert manoeuvre of doing a 330 degree turn into the Pentagon), armed with boxcutters who managed to hijack 4 planes, navigate them into 3 iconic buildings without being molested by a single fighter interceptor through the most defended airspace on earth, which subsequently caused the 10-second collapses (displaying all the characteristics of controlled demolition and none of fire-caused collapses) of three high-rise steel frame buildings, here's a $5,000 challenge for you. All you have to do is provide 10 points that support the "fire" hypothesis over the "controlled demolition" hypothesis for the collapse of WTC-7 and you can choose your own structural engineer to validate your points. There's so very much material on the collapse it shouldn't be very difficult. In fact, all you have to do is come up with one point to support WTC-7's collapse by fire and I'll give you $5,000. One point -- validated by a structural engineer of your choice. https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/5000-challenge.html

9/11 is probably the biggest hoax in history and includes the very clever subhoax of 3,000 dead and 6,000 injured. Not only was it a hoax but they did not aim for realism in any shape or form and gave us extra clues in addition to their preposterous against-physical-and-administrative-reality story.

This is what Paul Craig Roberts, chairman of The Institute for Political Economy, who has had careers in scholarship and academia, journalism, public service, and business, has to say about 9/11.
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/pages/about-paul-craig-roberts/

According to the official story, on September 11, 2001, the vaunted National Security State of the World's Only Superpower was defeated by a few young Saudi Arabians armed only with box cutters. The American National Security State proved to be totally helpless and was dealt the greatest humiliation ever inflicted on any country claiming to be a power.

That day no aspect of the National Security State worked. Everything failed.

The US Air Force for the first time in its history could not get intercepter jet fighters into the air.

The National Security Council failed.

All sixteen US intelligence agencies failed as did those of America's NATO and Israeli allies.

Air Traffic Control failed.

Airport Security failed four times at the same moment on the same day. The probability of such a failure is zero.

If such a thing had actually happened, there would have been demands from the White House, from Congress, and from the media for an investigation. Officials would have been held accountable for their failures. Heads would have rolled.

Instead, the White House resisted for one year the 9/11 families' demands for an investigation. Finally, a collection of politicians was assembled to listen to the government's account and to write it down. The chairman, vice chairman, and legal counsel of the 9/11 Commission have said that information was withheld from the commission, lies were told to the commission, and that the commission "was set up to fail." The worst security failure in history resulted in not a single firing. No one was held responsible.

Washington concluded that 9/11 was possible because America lacked a police state.
The PATRIOT Act, which was awaiting the event was quickly passed by the congressional idiots. The Act established executive branch independence of law and the Constitution. The Act and follow-up measures have institutionalized a police state in "the land of the free."

Osama bin Laden, a CIA asset dying of renal failure, was blamed despite his explicit denial. For the next ten years Osama bin Laden was the bogyman that provided the excuse for Washington to kill countless numbers of Muslims. Then suddenly on May 2, 2011, Obama claimed that US Navy SEALs had killed bin Laden in Pakistan. Eyewitnesses on the scene contradicted the White House's story. Osama bin Laden became the only human in history to survive renal failure for ten years. There was no dialysis machine in what was said to be bin Laden's hideaway. The numerous obituaries of bin Laden's death in December 2001 went down the memory hole. And the SEAL team died a few weeks later in a mysterious helicopter crash in Afghanistan. The thousands of sailors on the aircraft carrier from which bin Laden was said to have been dumped into the Indian Ocean wrote home that no such burial took place.

The fairy tale story of bin Laden's murder by Seal Team Six served to end the challenge by disappointed Democrats to Obama's nomination for a second term. It also freed the "war on terror" from the bin Laden constraint. Washington wanted to attack Libya, Syria, and Iran, countries in which bin Laden was known not to have organizations, and the succession of faked bin Laden videos, in which bin Laden grew progressively younger as the fake bin Laden claimed credit for each successive attack, had lost credibility among experts.

Watching the twin towers and WTC 7 come down, it was obvious to me that the buildings were not falling down as a result of structural damage. When it became clear that the White House had blocked an independent investigation of the only three steel skyscrapers in world history to collapse as a result of low temperature office fires, it was apparent that there was a coverup.

After 13 years people at home and abroad find the government's story less believable.
The case made by independent experts is now so compelling that mainstream media has opened to it. Here is Richard Gage of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth on C-SPAN: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Zbv2SvBEec#t=23

Anticitizen one says Dec, 4, 2018
The only thing that surprises me about 9/11 these days is that new evidence linking Russia to the event hasn't been fabricated, sorry, discovered yet.

[Dec 24, 2018] How Russia Would Strike Back if America Launches "Dollar" Sanctions by Josh Cohen

The author is a typical rabid neocon, but some paragraphs deserver you attention. Hi accidentally predicted provocation at Kerch bridge...
Notable quotes:
"... Josh Cohen contributes to a number of media outlets including National Interest, Foreign Policy, Reuters, Washington Post and others. ..."
Sep 01, 2018 | nationalinterest.org

In response to proposed Senate legislation that would target Russia's state-controlled banks by freezing their access to dollars -- a step which could genuinely damage the Russian economy -- Moscow issued a new threat. "If we end up we end up with something like a ban on banking activities or the use of certain currencies, we can clearly call this a declaration of economic war," Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev stated , emphasizing that Moscow would "respond to this war. By economic means, by political means and if necessary by other means."

... ... ...

Putin doesn't even need to rely on his military to harm American interests either. He could choose to openly increase economic and political support for North Korea, thereby weakening Washington's ability to pressure North Korea to curtail its nuclear program. Given that North Korea remains on the cusp of being able to reach the continental United States with a ballistic missile this would constitute a significant setback for American interests.

... ... ...

To be clear, Medvedev's threats may be mere bluster, and Moscow could respond to dollar sanctions by hunkering down even further and try to ride out the economic and political storm. However, if harsh sanctions were on the verge of causing the Russian economy to collapse -- especially if this resulted in unrest which threatened the stability of the Putin regime -- Moscow might well end up lashing out in unpredictable ways. American policymakers should be forewarned and prepared.

Josh Cohen contributes to a number of media outlets including National Interest, Foreign Policy, Reuters, Washington Post and others.

Craig • 3 months ago ,

There are so many painful places in the US foreign politics: North Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Latin America, North Africa, Yemen. All this weaknesses could be used by the US foes and Russia knows it. I won't be surprised if Russia pushes this weakspots. Yes, the US politicians have to be ready to aggresive and success reaction of Russia. And they have to make an informed decisions. Very cautiously.

Strod • 4 months ago ,

Have you seen this Josh? See how Russia retaliates

https://www.americanbanker....

Сергей Александров • 4 months ago ,

Can someone cite just one instance of American government imposing "sanctions" on a foreign government where it actually worked to USA interests? Don't cite Iran, Trump scrapped that deal - so much for negotiation with USA - think Boeing happy about all those lost airplane orders?

Vladdy • 4 months ago ,

"Russia provoking an armed confrontation in the Sea of Azov" - really? Why the author did not mention that Ukraine made 2(!) acts of piracy against Russian vessels before Russia answered? Vessels "Nord" and "Mehanik Pogodin" are still seized by Ukraine against of law, while Russia inspects vessels in INTERNAL waters of Azov according to law.

Zashel Vladdy • 4 months ago ,

Because it is not popular opinion in US massmedia. Ukraine is always right, Russia is always evil. Nobody want to pay you if you defend Russians. But if you will blame them in all sins - you have a chance to recive few dollars from Dems or from military corporations.
If you have another opinion - you are russian troll.

Александр Субботин • 4 months ago ,

Inspection of ships in the Azov Sea is carried out in accordance with the agreement on economic activities in the Sea of Azov, Russia and Ukraine signed in 2012, Russia did not inspect Ukrainian ships until 2018, but after threats to blow up the Crimean Bridge, Russia began using the right to inspect all vessels in the Azov Sea seas

Andrey Vladimirovich • 4 months ago ,

silly nonsense. The author has a primitive view of Russia

Alex Kuznetsoff • 4 months ago ,

In the Ukraine there is a civil war, Russia's involvement in the poisoning of the "former Russian spy" has not been proven by anyone, and the holy belief in "election meddling" looks like a sign of idiocy.

Vorpal Blade • 4 months ago ,

Lying and primitive propaganda and not an article ..

Zashel Vorpal Blade • 4 months ago ,

I agree with you, too much lie. These american authors live in their own cloud castle which has no relations with reality. Only money from military corporations who need enemy.

R. Arandas • 4 months ago ,

You hit me, I hit you...when will this back-and-forth slapping game end? We are all supposed to be grown adults here.

Drinas • 4 months ago ,

Many inconsistencies and blatant lies on this article, but I wish to focus on this particular one.
The author claims "Russia provoking an armed confrontation in the Sea of Azov that could serve as a pretext for a significant Russian military escalation in the region -- a step right out of Moscow's 2008 playbook for its war in Georgia."
The 2008 South Ossetia war has been internationally recognized to be instigated by Georgia itself (even the official EU report on the subject admitted this clearly). In what way did Russia provoke the Georgian attack according to the author?
What evidence can he present to support this thesis? Or is he merely lying out of his teeth?

covertbabo Drinas • 4 months ago ,

Russia has attacked many countries, including Afghanistan in 1979 and Ukraine in 2014.
Luckily your terrorist colleague Zakharchenko has been dealt with.

Drinas covertbabo • 4 months ago ,

Wut?

Vladdy covertbabo • 4 months ago ,

Russia never attacked Ukraine. This propaganda bullshit lives only in someones damaged brains and on papers of some mass media.
Zakharcheko never made any terror act. He defended his people from Ukraine nazis, who shelled civil homes, kindergardens and schools from all possible guns. He never harmed any civil human being. Vice versa - Kiev's bandits shell civil citizens of Donbass every day. There is "Alley of angels" in Donetsk - the cemetry of kids killed by Kiev's terrorists.
In 1979 USSR entered Afghanistan by REQUEST OF LEGAL GOVERNEMENT of Afganistan. Because US sponsored and supplied with weapons antigovernment bandits in Afgahnistan. CIA never hided this. And waht do US do today in Syria? Who asked them to kill people and government forces in Syria? And why did US sponsored putch in Kiev in 2014?

Andrey Vladimirovich Drinas • 4 months ago ,

The author is a fool by vocation or for money ))

[Dec 24, 2018] Zapadniki in Russia

Dec 24, 2018 | nationalinterest.org

which is loosely translated as 'western oriented' always have been a minority.

After Ukraine and sanctions of 2014 they are like albinos

Колян Реалов • 10 days ago ,

Who from Russian elite look west? Can you tell names? Who in Russian elite speak English except for Minister of foreign affair? Putin doesn't speak English. Some rich Russians have houses in foreign countries though it is 6th or 7th houses after few houses in Russia. If you speak about modern European culture than it has nothing similar with Russian culture. I have seen that Americans don't know Russia at all again.

R. Arandas Колян Реалов • 8 days ago ,

Russia is meant to be part of the greater European nation though...it is its destiny.

dorotea R. Arandas • 8 days ago ,

Not really. Google up the eternal 'zapadniki' vs 'slavophiles' split among Russian cultural elites. This argument is about 2 centuries old, if you start counting from Pushkin times - i.e. early 1800's. It never gets resolved, but the 'zapadniki' which is loosely translated as 'western oriented' always have been a minority. And with China's geopolitical star rising as quickly as it is, I see no reason for our 'zapadniki' not to become 'vostochniki'.

franciscoalmeida_br Колян Реалов • 9 days ago ,

google "russian atlanticists".

Колян Реалов franciscoalmeida_br • 9 days ago ,

Russian atlanticists are something like African albinos.

Vic Колян Реалов • 9 days ago ,

Yes, if african albinois owned media, had access to billions upon billions of dollars and the full support of the entire NATO propaganda apparatus and used to rule Russia with an iron fist driving it into the mud.

Колян Реалов Vic • 9 days ago ,

Pro-western parties have no 5% supporting for being in Russian parliament. Moreover they have no 3%. Russian media regularly show western russophobs. Then more disgusting their lie about Russia in western media than less Russians like west. They can spend any money while westerners lie about Russia, Russian atlantists are like albinos.

I had an account in a Russian bank (MosOblBank). The owner of the bank ran to UK with money of depositors. He has announced that he was under political pressure and UK don't give him to Russia though he is a just thief. I returned my money because it was insured by the government. What could I and few dozen of thousands depositors think about UK after it? A guy like this one is not Russian elite. It is Russian garbage. Majority of Russians consider that Russians living in London are thieves or LGBT.

[Dec 24, 2018] Revealed: the dark past of Outcast , MI6 s top wartime double agent

Notable quotes:
"... It is also a nice illustration of how "Westminster Style" democracy works. Any chance that the electorate might elect a left wing government and you get a Zinoviev letter or a Bologna railway station bombing. ..."
"... In other words "Elect whom you like". ("Provided we like them too!") It's really a bit like herding sheep. ..."
Oct 11, 2015 | The Guardian

The documents reveal him as Alexis Bellegarde, one of four White Russian aristocrats believed to have been behind an infamous forgery 15 years before the war began. The revelations of Bellegarde's importance to MI6 will increase suspicions that British agents had a hand in the production of the "Zinoviev letter"; its leak to the Daily Mail many believe cost Labour the 1924 general election.

foolisholdman -> Brian Milne 11 Oct 2015 05:55

Brian Milne

It is also a nice illustration of how "Westminster Style" democracy works. Any chance that the electorate might elect a left wing government and you get a Zinoviev letter or a Bologna railway station bombing.

In other words "Elect whom you like". ("Provided we like them too!") It's really a bit like herding sheep.

AlbertTatlock53 -> LordUpminster 11 Oct 2015 08:35

Despite the blandness of the OH volumes on Ultra, some facts did leak out, like having a month's notice of the Italian declaration of war and useful tactical and operational details like the positions of wolf packs. It also reminded me of a couple of anecdotes about Ultra information by unwitting sources in memoirs. I wouldn't deprecate Ultra or the British war effort that far. The British army that went to Normandy was the most mechanised and armoured army in history and pulled rather more than its own weight in the coalition. The principal offensive weapon of the British empire was Bomber Command, which in the spring-summer of 1943 began to devastate the German war economy.

The Soviet and then the US contributions to the war dwarfed the British empire but only relatively, it was still a superpower in 1945, though by the Suez crime it had become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Murder Inc.

LordUpminster ID7678903 11 Oct 2015 04:04

And no doubt the establishment will continue to play such dirty tricks to undermine our so called democracy

Not the slightest: according to our friend jamesforysthe below that's essentially what they're for.

Re. the Zinoviev letter, I did see one theory many years ago that the man behind it was the then-Polish Army Minister Władysław Sikorski, the one who later headed the Polish exile government in London and was killed in an air crash. Certainly in October 1924 he was bragging to people in governmental circles in Warsaw that it was his agents who had arranged it - though why exactly is not easy to see, given that Poland had no particular political interest in Britain at the time. I suspect that it was empty boasting, and that it was Russian emigrés who were responsible.

Coming up soon: conclusive proof that Jeremy Corbyn was once an agent of the Tsarist Okhrana.

Brian Milne 11 Oct 2015 04:00

Had Labour won, thus Baldwin, MacDonald, Baldwin, Chamberlain probably not have been the course of politics, would the UK necessarily have moved further left? The question remains to be seen, but unless somebody more genuinely socialist had replaced MacDonald probably not. However, the outcome may well have been a far more amicable relationship with the Soviet Union, the Versailles Treaty and League of Nations possibly better conformed to and the rise of Hitler less likely. The Zinoviev letter may well have been as much a contributory denominator in that than is implied. Of course, we hall never know really, only historians expounding their own theories and interpretations of history.

samuel glover -> jamesforsythe 11 Oct 2015 01:43

"Some brilliant espionage across the Middle-east and Israel is precisely what's needed to bring these politically infantile areas into western like democratic administrations, this century, not next. And with fewer wars. "

First, you think western intelligence agencies **haven't** been prominent in the history of that region?!?!?

Second, you think these same agencies are capable of just whipping up entire social and political structures and cultures on demand? Do you read newspapers?

Remember that these agencies -- in America, in Britain, in every NATO country -- spent decades and billions of dollars and billions of man-hours staring obsessively at the USSR. EVERY ONE of them was completely blindsided when the Soviet Union folded up.

error418 -> jamesforsythe 10 Oct 2015 23:21

"Our" best interests or that intelligence service´s best interests? ISI in Pakistan is a good example of such a service gone rogue. Experts in election rigging.

Frisco27 10 Oct 2015 19:06

"Sexing up" documents? What a scumbag... That would never happen these days.

[Dec 23, 2018] Good riddance to James Mattis, Trump's last general

Notable quotes:
"... You want to know what those casualty numbers tell us? American forces in Syria, Afghanistan, or Iraq aren't going outside the wire – off American bases – very often. That's how you stay alive in places like Syria and Afghanistan. You stay away from places where things like IEDs can kill you. And even then, in the comparative safety of American bases, you're not safe, because there are enemy soldiers posing as "friendly" Afghan soldiers who will kill you. ..."
"... This is the nature of the conflicts we're engaged in. You take thousands of American soldiers and send them thousands of miles away from home into combat zones in foreign lands, and you have them do as little as possible so not too many of them get killed. ..."
"... It pains me to say this, but Trump pulling 2,000 soldiers out of Syria and 7,000 soldiers out of Afghanistan is the right thing to do. It might be getting done by a certifiable loon with an orange muskrat on his head, but it's the right thing to do and it should have been done a long time ago. ..."
Dec 23, 2018 | www.salon.com

... ... ...

The arm-waving and hand-flapping and pearl-clutching in the foreign affairs and national security "communities," not to mention in the Congress and among prominent Democrats, is something to behold. Significant portions of all those communities have long thought we didn't have any business being in Syria in the first place. Not to mention fighting our 17th year of the so-called "war" in Afghanistan, from which Trump intends to remove some 7,000 American troops...

More than 2,400 American soldiers dead in Afghanistan so far. More than 30,000 Afghan civilians killed. Sixty percent of Afghan districts under control of the Taliban. Opium production at an "all-time high." Dozens, sometimes hundreds of Afghan soldiers killed every single week. You thought Vietnam was a misbegotten military misadventure? How about 17 years in Afghanistan with no end in sight? Hell, opium production was said to be at an "all-time high" when I was in the Kunar River Valley in Afghanistan in 2004. That's 14 years ago, 14 years of record-setting opium crops!

And what are the pundits saying about our military foray into the morass called Syria? Listen to what I heard from one "expert" on MSNBC yesterday.

"Syria is a very winnable proposition," this numbskull said, looking gravely at the other "experts" at the table. "The U.S. presence is actually very small numbers." Two thousand is the "very small number" this blazer-and-tie wearing "expert" was talking about as he reached for his "I'm a Pundit on the Katy Tur Show" cup and went on to blather about how "winnable" Syria is.

Let me tell you what 2,000 soldiers is. It's about the size of a brigade, commanded by a full colonel. A brigade is typically three to five battalions of 500 to 1,000 soldiers, commanded by lieutenant colonels. Battalions are made up of three to five companies with around 200 soldiers, commanded by captains. Companies comprise three to four platoons of 40 to 100 soldiers, commanded by second lieutenants. So 2,000 soldiers is about 30 to 40 platoons of soldiers. I used to command a platoon. I was 22 years old. There were about 40 soldiers in my platoon. Let me tell you, taking care of 40 soldiers was a big fucking job, and we weren't even in combat.

Taking care of 2,000 soldiers in a place like Syria with bullets flying and IEDs going off is a huge fucking job. Taking care of 14,000 soldiers, like we currently have in Afghanistan, or 7,000 which we'll have when Trump gets finished with his draw-down, is a massive fucking job.

... ... ...

And now Trump's Last General's feelings are all hurt, because he wasn't consulted about pulling 2,000 troops out of Syria or 7,000 troops out of Afghanistan. What were those troops doing in Syria? We don't know, and I don't think Mattis had much of an idea what they were doing, either.

We can get some idea what they're doing by the number of casualties American forces have suffered in both places. An American soldier was killed in Manbij, Syria, by a roadside bomb in March of this year. He was the fourth American killed in Syria since our forces entered the country in 2014. There have been 18 Americans killed in Afghanistan this year. Eleven were killed there last year. About half of those killed in Afghanistan have been so-called "green-on-green" killings, incidents where "friendly" Afghans killed American soldiers, usually on American bases.

You want to know what those casualty numbers tell us? American forces in Syria, Afghanistan, or Iraq aren't going outside the wire – off American bases – very often. That's how you stay alive in places like Syria and Afghanistan. You stay away from places where things like IEDs can kill you. And even then, in the comparative safety of American bases, you're not safe, because there are enemy soldiers posing as "friendly" Afghan soldiers who will kill you.

This is the nature of the conflicts we're engaged in. You take thousands of American soldiers and send them thousands of miles away from home into combat zones in foreign lands, and you have them do as little as possible so not too many of them get killed.

It pains me to say this, but Trump pulling 2,000 soldiers out of Syria and 7,000 soldiers out of Afghanistan is the right thing to do. It might be getting done by a certifiable loon with an orange muskrat on his head, but it's the right thing to do and it should have been done a long time ago.

Advertisement:

All the talk you're hearing about how we've got to have American forces in this desert or that mountainous no-man's land as a "counterbalance" to countries like Russia and Iran is lip-flapping twaddle from the kind of "experts" who got us involved in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan in the first place. They are the same "experts" you didn't hear a peep from when Mattis stood loyally by Trump as he virtually capitulated to Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, trashed NATO every chance he got, and sat down for Nuclear Kimchi with Kim Jong Un. Now Mattis is all "maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies" in his resignation letter. Talk about a day late and a dollar short, he should call Angela Merkel and ask her how much "respect" she's felt from the United States lately.

You want to know who can stop the resident of the adult day care center in the White House? It wasn't Adult in the Room General McMaster. It wasn't Adult in the Room General Kelly. It wasn't Adult in the Room General Mattis. And it's sure as hell not going to be somebody like Secretary of Defense Kushner, or whoever the hell Trump decides he's going to sentence to a padded cell on the E-Ring in the Pentagon next.

Trump can be stopped by Congress. The Congress can cut the funding for our misbegotten misadventures in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan. It can refuse to fund the laughable wall along our 1,900 mile border with Mexico that Trump apparently thinks 6,000 soldiers can guard in the meantime. And Congress can impeach and convict Trump's insane clown ass for conspiring with a foreign nation to defraud the United States of America. Congress can do all of this if Republicans will stop bowing down before the Orange Hair Helmet and start looking out for the United States of America.

I told you before that Trump's generals wouldn't save us , and they sure as hell haven't, not even Mad Dog Mattis, who's now being lauded as the only thing standing between us and the total collapse of the Western World.

Just between you and me, we'll wake up tomorrow morning, and even with The Last Adult in the Room on his way out the door, the Western World will still be here, and so will Trump. Trust me.


Lucian K. Truscott IV

Lucian K. Truscott IV, a graduate of West Point, has had a 50-year career as a journalist, novelist and screenwriter. He has covered stories such as Watergate, the Stonewall riots and wars in Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan. He is also the author of five bestselling novels and several unsuccessful motion pictures. He has three children, lives on the East End of Long Island and spends his time Worrying About the State of Our Nation and madly scribbling in a so-far fruitless attempt to Make Things Better. He can be followed on Facebook at The Rabbit Hole and on Twitter @LucianKTruscott.

[Dec 22, 2018] British Security Service Infiltration, the Integrity Initiative and the Institute for Statecraft by Craig Murray

Highly recommended!
Craig Murray is right that "As the Establishment feels its grip slipping, as people wake up to the appalling economic exploitation by the few that underlies the very foundations of modern western society, expect the methods used by the security services to become even dirtier." Collapse of neoliberal ideology and rise of tentions in neoliberal sociarties resulted in unprecedented increase of covert and false flag operations by British intelligence services, especially against Russia, which had been chosen as a convenient scapegoat. With Steele dossier and Skripal affair as two most well known.
New Lady Macbeth (Theresa May) Russophobia is so extreme that her cabinet derailed the election of a Russian to head Interpol.
Looks like neoliberalism cannot be defeated by and faction of the existing elite. Only when shepp oil end mant people will have a chance. The US , GB and EU are part of the wider hegemonic neoliberal system. In fact rejection of neoliberal globalization probably will lead to "national neoliberals" regime which would be a flavor of neo-fascism, no more no less.
Notable quotes:
"... The British state can maintain its spies' cover stories for centuries. ..."
"... I learnt how highly improbable left wing firebrand Simon Bracey-Lane just happened to be on holiday in the United States with available cash to fund himself, when he stumbled into the Bernie Sanders campaign. ..."
"... It is, to say the least, very interesting indeed that just a year later the left wing, "Corbyn and Sanders supporting" Bracey-Lane is hosting a very right wing event, "Cold War Then and Now", for the shadowy neo-con Institute for Statecraft, at which an entirely unbalanced panel of British military, NATO and Ukrainian nationalists extolled the virtues of re-arming against Russia. ..."
"... the MOD-sponsored Institute for Statecraft has been given millions of pounds of taxpayers' money by the FCO to spread covert disinformation and propaganda, particularly against Russia and the anti-war movement. Activities include twitter and facebook trolling and secretly paying journalists in "clusters of influence" around Europe. Anonymous helpfully leaked the Institute's internal documents. Some of the Integrity Initiative's thus exposed alleged covert agents, like David Aaronovitch, have denied any involvement despite their appearance in the documents, and others like Dan Kaszeta the US "novichok expert", have cheerfully admitted it. ..."
"... By sleuthing the company records of this "Scottish charity", and a couple of phone calls, I discovered that the actual location of the Institute for Statecraft is the basement of 2 Temple Place, London. This is not just any basement – it is the basement of the former London mansion of William Waldorf Astor, an astonishing building . It is, in short, possibly the most expensive basement in London. ..."
"... Which is interesting because the accounts of the Institute for Statecraft claim it has no permanent staff and show nothing for rent, utilities or office expenses. In fact, I understand the rent is paid by the Ministry of Defence. ..."
"... I have a great deal more to tell you about Mr Edney and his organisation next week, and the extraordinary covert disinformation war the British government wages online, attacking British citizens using British taxpayers' money. Please note in the interim I am not even a smidgeon suicidal, and going to be very, very careful crossing the road and am not intending any walks in the hills. ..."
"... I am not alleging Mr Bracey-Lane is an intelligence service operative who previously infiltrated the Labour Party and the Sanders campaign. He may just be a young man of unusually heterodox and vacillating political opinions. He may be an undercover reporter for the Canary infiltrating the Institute for Statecraft. All these things are possible, and I have no firm information. ..."
"... one of the activities the Integrity Initiative sponsors happens to be the use of online trolls to ridicule the idea that the British security services ever carry out any kind of infiltration, false flag or agent provocateur operations, despite the fact that we even have repeated court judgements against undercover infiltration officers getting female activists pregnant. The Integrity Initiative offers us a glimpse into the very dirty world of surveillance and official disinformation. If we actually had a free media, it would be the biggest story of the day ..."
"... As the Establishment feels its grip slipping, as people wake up to the appalling economic exploitation by the few that underlies the very foundations of modern western society, expect the methods used by the security services to become even dirtier. ..."
"... You can bank on continued ramping up of Russophobia to supply "the enemy". ..."
Dec 13, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

in Uncategorized by craig

The British state can maintain its spies' cover stories for centuries. Look up Eldred Pottinger, who for 180 years appears in scores of British history books – right up to and including William Dalrymple's Return of the King – as a British officer who chanced to be passing Herat on holiday when it came under siege from a partly Russian-officered Persian army, and helped to organise the defences. In researching Sikunder Burnes, I discovered and published from the British Library incontrovertible and detailed documentary evidence that Pottinger's entire journey was under the direct instructions of, and reporting to, British spymaster Alexander Burnes. The first historian to publish the untrue "holiday" cover story, Sir John Kaye, knew both Burnes and Pottinger and undoubtedly knew he was publishing lying propaganda. Every other British historian of the First Afghan War (except me and latterly Farrukh Husain) has just followed Kaye's official propaganda.

Some things don't change. I was irresistibly reminded of Eldred Pottinger just passing Herat on holiday, when I learnt how highly improbable left wing firebrand Simon Bracey-Lane just happened to be on holiday in the United States with available cash to fund himself, when he stumbled into the Bernie Sanders campaign.

Recent university graduate Simon Bracey-Lane took it even further. Originally from Wimbledon in London, he was inspired to rejoin the Labour party in September when Corbyn was elected leader. But by that point, he was already in the US on holiday. So he joined the Sanders campaign, and never left.
"I had two weeks left and some money left, so I thought, Fuck it, I'll make some calls for Bernie Sanders," he explains. "I just sort of knew Des Moines was the place, so I just turned up at their HQ, started making phone calls, and then became a fully fledged field organiser."

It is, to say the least, very interesting indeed that just a year later the left wing, "Corbyn and Sanders supporting" Bracey-Lane is hosting a very right wing event, "Cold War Then and Now", for the shadowy neo-con Institute for Statecraft, at which an entirely unbalanced panel of British military, NATO and Ukrainian nationalists extolled the virtues of re-arming against Russia.

Nor would it seem likely that Bracey-Lane would be involved with the Integrity Initiative. Even the mainstream media has been forced to give a few paragraphs to the outrageous Integrity Initiative, under which the MOD-sponsored Institute for Statecraft has been given millions of pounds of taxpayers' money by the FCO to spread covert disinformation and propaganda, particularly against Russia and the anti-war movement. Activities include twitter and facebook trolling and secretly paying journalists in "clusters of influence" around Europe. Anonymous helpfully leaked the Institute's internal documents. Some of the Integrity Initiative's thus exposed alleged covert agents, like David Aaronovitch, have denied any involvement despite their appearance in the documents, and others like Dan Kaszeta the US "novichok expert", have cheerfully admitted it.

The mainstream media have tracked down the HQ of the "Institute for Statecraft" to a derelict mill near Auchtermuchty. It is owned by one of the company directors, Daniel Lafayeedney, formerly of D Squadron 23rd SAS Regiment and later of Military Intelligence (and incidentally born the rather more prosaic Daniel Edney).

By sleuthing the company records of this "Scottish charity", and a couple of phone calls, I discovered that the actual location of the Institute for Statecraft is the basement of 2 Temple Place, London. This is not just any basement – it is the basement of the former London mansion of William Waldorf Astor, an astonishing building. It is, in short, possibly the most expensive basement in London.

Which is interesting because the accounts of the Institute for Statecraft claim it has no permanent staff and show nothing for rent, utilities or office expenses. In fact, I understand the rent is paid by the Ministry of Defence.

Having been told where the Institute for Statecraft skulk, I tipped off journalist Kit Klarenberg of Sputnik Radio to go and physically check it out. Kit did so and was aggressively ejected by that well-known Corbyn and Sanders supporter, Simon Bracey-Lane. It does seem somewhat strange that our left wing hero is deeply embedded in an organisation that launches troll attacks on Jeremy Corbyn.

I have a great deal more to tell you about Mr Edney and his organisation next week, and the extraordinary covert disinformation war the British government wages online, attacking British citizens using British taxpayers' money. Please note in the interim I am not even a smidgeon suicidal, and going to be very, very careful crossing the road and am not intending any walks in the hills.

I am not alleging Mr Bracey-Lane is an intelligence service operative who previously infiltrated the Labour Party and the Sanders campaign. He may just be a young man of unusually heterodox and vacillating political opinions. He may be an undercover reporter for the Canary infiltrating the Institute for Statecraft. All these things are possible, and I have no firm information.

But one of the activities the Integrity Initiative sponsors happens to be the use of online trolls to ridicule the idea that the British security services ever carry out any kind of infiltration, false flag or agent provocateur operations, despite the fact that we even have repeated court judgements against undercover infiltration officers getting female activists pregnant. The Integrity Initiative offers us a glimpse into the very dirty world of surveillance and official disinformation. If we actually had a free media, it would be the biggest story of the day.

As the Establishment feels its grip slipping, as people wake up to the appalling economic exploitation by the few that underlies the very foundations of modern western society, expect the methods used by the security services to become even dirtier.

You can bank on continued ramping up of Russophobia to supply "the enemy".

As both Scottish Independence and Jeremy Corbyn are viewed as real threats by the British Establishment, you can anticipate every possible kind of dirty trick in the next couple of years, with increasing frequency and audacity

[Dec 22, 2018] If Truth Cannot Prevail Over Material Agendas We Are Doomed by Paul Craig Roberts

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... In his just published book, War With Russia? ..."
"... To paraphrase Putin: "You are making Russia a threat by declaring us to be one, by discarding facts and substituting orchestrated opinions that your propagandistic media establish as fact via endless repetition." ..."
"... Cohen is correct that during the Cold War every US president worked to defuse tensions, especially Republican ones. Since the Clinton regime every US president has worked to create tensions. What explains this dangerous change in approach? The end of the Cold War was disadvantageous to the military/security complex whose budget and power had waxed from decades of cold war. Suddenly the enemy that had bestowed such wealth and prestige on the military/security complex disappeared. ..."
"... The New Cold War is the result of the military/security complex's resurrection of the enemy. In a democracy with independent media and scholars, this would not have been possible. But the Clinton regime permitted in violation of anti-trust laws 90% of the US media to be concentrated in the hands of six mega-corporations, thus destroying an independence already undermined by the CIA's successful use of the CIA's media assets to control explanations. Many books have been written about the CIA's use of the media, including Udo Ulfkotte's "Bought Journalism," the English edition of which was quickly withdrawn and burned. ..."
www.theamericanconservative.com
Dec 22, 2018 |

Throughout the long Cold War Stephen Cohen, professor of Russian studies at Princeton University and New York University was a voice of reason. He refused to allow his patriotism to blind him to Washington's contribution to the conflict and to criticize only the Soviet contribution. Cohen's interest was not to blame the enemy but to work toward a mutual understanding that would remove the threat of nuclear war. Although a Democrat and left-leaning, Cohen would have been at home in the Reagan administration, as Reagan's first priority was to end the Cold War. I know this because I was part of the effort. Pat Buchanan will tell you the same thing.

In 1974 a notorious cold warrior, Albert Wohlstetter, absurdly accused the CIA of underestimating the Soviet threat. As the CIA had every incentive for reasons of budget and power to overestimate the Soviet threat, and today the "Russian threat," Wohlstetter's accusation made no sense on its face. However he succeeded in stirring up enough concern that CIA director George H.W. Bush, later Vice President and President, agreed to a Team B to investigate the CIA's assessment, headed by the Russiaphobic Harvard professor Richard Pipes. Team B concluded that the Soviets thought they could win a nuclear war and were building the forces with which to attack the US.

The report was mainly nonsense, and it must have have troubled Stephen Cohen to experience the setback to negotiations that Team B caused.

Today Cohen is stressed that it is the United States that thinks it can win a nuclear war. Washington speaks openly of using "low yield" nuclear weapons, and intentionally forecloses any peace negotiations with Russia with a propaganda campaign against Russia of demonization, vilification, and transparent lies, while installing missile bases on Russia's borders and while talking of incorporating former parts of Russia into NATO. In his just published book, War With Russia? , which I highly recommend, Cohen makes a convincing case that Washington is asking for war.

I agree with Cohen that if Russia is a threat it is only because the US is threatening Russia. The stupidity of the policy toward Russia is creating a Russian threat. Putin keeps emphasizing this. To paraphrase Putin: "You are making Russia a threat by declaring us to be one, by discarding facts and substituting orchestrated opinions that your propagandistic media establish as fact via endless repetition."

Cohen is correct that during the Cold War every US president worked to defuse tensions, especially Republican ones. Since the Clinton regime every US president has worked to create tensions. What explains this dangerous change in approach? The end of the Cold War was disadvantageous to the military/security complex whose budget and power had waxed from decades of cold war. Suddenly the enemy that had bestowed such wealth and prestige on the military/security complex disappeared.

The New Cold War is the result of the military/security complex's resurrection of the enemy. In a democracy with independent media and scholars, this would not have been possible. But the Clinton regime permitted in violation of anti-trust laws 90% of the US media to be concentrated in the hands of six mega-corporations, thus destroying an independence already undermined by the CIA's successful use of the CIA's media assets to control explanations. Many books have been written about the CIA's use of the media, including Udo Ulfkotte's "Bought Journalism," the English edition of which was quickly withdrawn and burned.

The demonization of Russia is also aided and abetted by the Democrats' hatred of Trump and anger from Hillary's loss of the presidential election to the "Trump deplorables." The Democrats purport to believe that Trump was installed by Putin's interference in the presidential election. This false belief is emotionally important to Democrats, and they can't let go of it.

Although Cohen as a professor at Princeton and NYU never lacked research opportunities, in the US Russian studies, strategic studies, and the like are funded by the military/security complex whose agenda Cohen's scholarship does not serve. At the Center for Strategic and International Studies, where I held an independently financed chair for a dozen years, most of my colleagues were dependent on grants from the military/security complex. At the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, where I was a Senior Fellow for three decades, the anti-Soviet stance of the Institution reflected the agenda of those who funded the institution.

I am not saying that my colleagues were whores on a payroll. I am saying that the people who got the appointments were people who were inclined to see the Soviet Union the way the military/security complex thought it should be seen.

As Stephen Cohen is aware, in the original Cold War there was some balance as all explanations were not controlled. There were independent scholars who could point out that the Soviets, decimated by World War 2, had an interest in peace, and that accommodation could be achieved, thus avoiding the possibility of nuclear war.

Stephen Cohen must have been in the younger ranks of those sensible people, as he and President Reagan's ambassador to the Soviet Union, Jack Matloff, seem to be the remaining voices of expert reason on the American scene.

If you care to understand the dire threat under which you live, a threat that only a few people, such as Stephen Cohen, are trying to lift, read his book.

If you want to understand the dire threat that a bought-and-paid-for American media poses to your existence, read Cohen's accounts of their despicable lies. America has a media that is synonymous with lies.

If you want to understand how corrupt American universities are as organizations on the take for money, organizations to whom truth is inconsequential, read Cohen's book.

If you want to understand why you could be dead before Global Warming can get you, read Cohen's book.

Enough said.

[Dec 22, 2018] Briefing note on the Integrity Initiative

Dec 22, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Sasha , Dec 22, 2018 10:38:52 AM | link

I do not know if this was included in "b"´s reports on Integrity Initiative, but worth the hour of reading ( without linking the hyeprlinks )

Briefing note on the Integrity Initiative

From what I have understood ( and as well you will, by extensive reading ) this, and other till now seeminlgy unknown initiatives, is the source

[Dec 22, 2018] It seems that the British government was prepared well in advance for the sudden attack on Skripal.

Notable quotes:
"... We can be actually confident not just that the journalists in the MSM are on the payroll but that the invoices and accounts for their bribes are carefully preserved. Murray's blog is almost always worth following, just as 'b's is. Yesterday more news about the Skripal case emerged: it seems that the British government was prepared well in advance for the sudden attack on Skripal. ..."
Dec 22, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

bevin , Dec 22, 2018 9:33:42 AM | link

The journalism scandals are just beginning.

Craig Murray today publishes accounts from the "Integrity Initiative" showing that journalists in Scotland are receiving retainers of 2500 a month Sterling, plus expenses and payment for actual articles published.

And if this is going on in Scotland we can be quite sure that it is actually happening in North America and Europe, generally, and, of course, in the less prosperous parts of the world where standards of integrity are just as low as they are hereabouts.

We can be actually confident not just that the journalists in the MSM are on the payroll but that the invoices and accounts for their bribes are carefully preserved. Murray's blog is almost always worth following, just as 'b's is. Yesterday more news about the Skripal case emerged: it seems that the British government was prepared well in advance for the sudden attack on Skripal.

What we are witnessing is the complete incompetence of those running the Empire. While malicious, indeed deadly, they simply cannot keep up with the critics of imperialism. Their power rests entirely on their ability to use force, both physical and financial. Their attempts to use social medias to their advantage are lame and ineffective. It seems clear to me that they will soon be reduced to using their power not just to hobble but to cripple critics- net neutrality is already finished.

BM , Dec 22, 2018 9:43:31 AM | link

it seems that the British government was prepared well in advance for the sudden attack on Skripal.
Posted by: bevin | Dec 22, 2018 9:33:42 AM | 12

That is a development. Can you give us a link, Bevin?

spudski , Dec 22, 2018 10:03:23 AM | link

BM, I think bevin was referring to the last two articles at https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/

Sasha , Dec 22, 2018 10:38:52 AM | link

I do not know if this was included in "b"´s reports on Integrity Initiative, but worth the hour of reading ( without linking the hyeprlinks )

Briefing note on the Integrity Initiative

From what I have understood ( and as well you will, by extensive reading ) this, and other till now seeminlgy unknown initiatives, is the source of the whole Russian meddling campaign, and Skripal and other "poisonings" issue, the rise of neonazis in Ukraine and the rest of Europe, the provocations in the Kerch Strait, various "colour revolutions" along European history, "independentist movements" and last wars in Europe and the Middle East, or money laundering schemes for unconfessable activities, with special chapter dedicated to the recruiting, conditioning and military trainning of Muslim youth from disadvantaged outcomes/neighborhoods to alleged "increase of opportunities", which has all the look of the formation of our well know "proxy" army to use in the Middle East and various "terrorist attacks" in European soil, where the perpetrators always resulted having a close relation, or were "well known" with the intelligence services.

[Dec 22, 2018] Craig Murray s latest provides convincing evidence that whatever happened to the Skripals in Salisbury was part of the Integrity Initiative s propaganda campaign against Russia.

Notable quotes:
"... The list is headed CND gen list 2. CND is Christopher Nigel Donnelly, Director of the Institute for Statecraft and the Integrity Initiative and a very senior career Military Intelligence Officer. ..."
"... Murder in Samarkand ..."
"... Now let us tie that in with the notorious name further down the list; Pablo Miller, the long-term MI6 handler of Sergei Skripal, who lived in Salisbury with Skripal. Miller is the man who was, within 24 hours of the Skripal attack, protected by a D(SMA) notice banning the media from mentioning him. Here Pablo Miller is actively involved, alongside serving FCO and MOD staff, in a government funded organisation whose avowed intention is to spread disinformation about Russia. The story that Miller is in an inactive retirement is immediately and spectacularly exploded. ..."
"... Now look at another name on this list. Howard Body. Assistant Head of Science Support at Porton Down chemical weapon research laboratory, just six miles away from Salisbury and the Skripal attack, a role he took up in December 2017. He combines this role with Assistant Head of Strategic Analysis at MOD London. "Science Support" at Porton Down is a euphemism for political direction to the scientists – Body has no scientific qualifications. ..."
"... Zachary Harkenrider is the Political Counsellor at the US Embassy in London. There are normally at least two Political Counsellors at an Embassy this size, one of whom will normally be the CIA Head of Station. I do not know if Harkenrider is CIA but it seems highly likely. ..."
"... So what do we have here? We have a programme, the Integrity Initiative, whose entire purpose is to pump out covert disinformation against Russia, through social media and news stories secretly paid for by the British government. And we have the Skripals' MI6 handler, the BBC, Porton Down, the FCO, the MOD and the US Embassy, working together in a group under the auspices of the Integrity Initiative. The Skripal Case happened to occur shortly after a massive increase in the Integrity Initiative's budget and activity, which itself was a small part of a British Government decision to ramp up a major information war against Russia. ..."
"... Working Group on Syria, Media, and the Propaganda ..."
Dec 22, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

lysias , Dec 21, 2018 1:58:07 PM | link

Craig Murray's latest provides convincing evidence that whatever happened to the Skripals in Salisbury was part of the Integrity Initiative's propaganda campaign against Russia.

British Government Covert Anti-Russian Propaganda and the Skripal Case - Craig Murray

It is worth starting by noting that a high percentage of the Integrity Initiative archive has been authenticated. The scheme has been admitted by the FCO and defended as legitimate government activity. Individual items like the minutes of the meeting with David Leask are authenticated. Not one of the documents has so far been disproven, or even denied.

Which tends to obscure some of the difficulties with the material. There is no metadata showing when each document was created, as opposed to when Anonymous made it into a PDF. Anonymous have released it in tranches and made plain there is more to come. The reason for this methodology is left obscure.

Most frustratingly, Anonymous' comments on the releases indicate that they have vital information which is not, so far, revealed. The most important document of all appears to be a simple contact list, of a particular group within the hundreds of contacts revealed in the papers overall. This is it in full:

Tantalisingly, Anonymous describe this as a list of people who attended a meeting with the White Helmets. But there is no evidence of that in the document itself, nor does any other document released so far refer to this meeting. There is very little in the documents released so far about the White Helmets at all. But there is a huge amount about the Skripal case. With the greatest of respect to Anonymous and pending any release of further evidence, I want you to consider whether this might be a document related to the Skripal incident.

The list is headed CND gen list 2. CND is Christopher Nigel Donnelly, Director of the Institute for Statecraft and the Integrity Initiative and a very senior career Military Intelligence Officer.

The first name on the list caught my eye. Duncan Allan was the young FCO Research Analyst who, as detailed in Murder in Samarkand, appears in my Ambassadorial office in Tashkent, telling me of the FCO staff who had been left in tears by the pressure put on them to sign up to Blair's dodgy dossier on Iraqi WMD. During the process of clearing the manuscript with the FCO, I was told (though not by him) that he denied having ever said it. It was one of a very few instances where I refused to make the changes requested to the text, because I had no doubt whatsoever of what had been said.

If Duncan did lie about having told me, it did his career no harm as he is now Deputy Head of FCO Research Analysts and, most importantly, the FCO's lead analyst on Russia and the Former Soviet Union.

Now let us tie that in with the notorious name further down the list; Pablo Miller, the long-term MI6 handler of Sergei Skripal, who lived in Salisbury with Skripal. Miller is the man who was, within 24 hours of the Skripal attack, protected by a D(SMA) notice banning the media from mentioning him. Here Pablo Miller is actively involved, alongside serving FCO and MOD staff, in a government funded organisation whose avowed intention is to spread disinformation about Russia. The story that Miller is in an inactive retirement is immediately and spectacularly exploded.

Now look at another name on this list. Howard Body. Assistant Head of Science Support at Porton Down chemical weapon research laboratory, just six miles away from Salisbury and the Skripal attack, a role he took up in December 2017. He combines this role with Assistant Head of Strategic Analysis at MOD London. "Science Support" at Porton Down is a euphemism for political direction to the scientists – Body has no scientific qualifications.

Another element brought into this group is the state broadcaster, through Helen Boaden, the former Head of BBC News and Current Affairs.

In all there are six serving MOD staff on the list, all either in Intelligence or in PR. Intriguingly one of them, Ian Cohen, has email addresses both at the MOD and at the notoriously corrupt HSBC bank. The other FCO name besides Duncan Allan, Adam Rutland, is also on the PR side.

Zachary Harkenrider is the Political Counsellor at the US Embassy in London. There are normally at least two Political Counsellors at an Embassy this size, one of whom will normally be the CIA Head of Station. I do not know if Harkenrider is CIA but it seems highly likely.

So what do we have here? We have a programme, the Integrity Initiative, whose entire purpose is to pump out covert disinformation against Russia, through social media and news stories secretly paid for by the British government. And we have the Skripals' MI6 handler, the BBC, Porton Down, the FCO, the MOD and the US Embassy, working together in a group under the auspices of the Integrity Initiative. The Skripal Case happened to occur shortly after a massive increase in the Integrity Initiative's budget and activity, which itself was a small part of a British Government decision to ramp up a major information war against Russia.

I find that very interesting indeed.

With a hat-tip to members of the Working Group on Syria, Media, and the Propaganda, who are preparing a major and important publication which is imminent. UPDATE Their extremely important briefing note on the Integrity Initiative is now online, prepared to the highest standards of academic discipline. I shall be drawing on and extrapolating from it further next week.

[Dec 22, 2018] Fallout Of Trump's Syria Withdrawal - Why Erdogan Does Not Want To Invade

Notable quotes:
"... Defense Secretary James "Mad Dog" Mattis resigned from his position effective February 28. He disagreed with the president's decision. It was the second time in five years that an elected commander in chief had a serious conflict with Mattis' hawkishness. President Obama fired him as Central Command chief for urging a more aggressive Iran policy. Mattis is also extremely hawkish towards Russia and China. ..."
"... Mattis is an ingrained imperialist. He always asked for more money for the military and for more meddling abroad. One of Mattis' little notice acts as Defense Secretary was a unannounced change in the mission of the Pentagon : ..."
"... The Pentagon no longer "deters war" but provides "lethal force" to "sustain American influence abroad." There was no public nor congressional debate about the change. I doubt that President Trump agreed to it. Trump will now try to recruit a defense secretary that is more aligned with his own position. ..."
"... Associated Press ..."
"... Trump did not "capitulate". He always wanted to pull the U.S. troops out of Syria. He said so many times. When he was finally given a chance to do so, he grabbed the opportunity. Erdogan though, was not ready for that: ..."
"... Erdogan had planned to only occupy a 10 miles deep strip along the Syrian-Turkish border. Some 15,000 Turkish controlled 'Syrian rebels' stand ready for that. He would need some 50-100,000 troops to occupy all of east Syria northward of the Euphrates. It would be a hostile occupation among well armed Kurds who would oppose it and an Arab population that is not exactly friendly towards a neo-Ottoman Turkey. ..."
"... Any larger occupation of northeast Syria would create a serious mess for Turkey. Its army can do it, but it would cost a lot of casualties and financial resources. Turkey will hold local government election in March and Erdogan does not want any negative headlines. He will invade, but only if Syria and Russia fail to get the Kurds under control. ..."
"... 'The Pentagon's official website now defines its mission this way: "The mission of the Department of Defense is to provide a lethal Joint Force to defend the security of our country and sustain American influence abroad."' ..."
"... '"We had decided last week to launch a military incursion... east of the Euphrates river," he said in a speech in Istanbul'. So much for the UN Charter, then. Anyone who wants to can invade any other country and take over as much of its territory as he wants to - as long as Washington agrees. But, as Saddam Hussein could testify if he were still alive, it would be sensible to get such consent in writing. ..."
"... Macron's forces are illegally present too. Assad would have to request their presence, but I really doubt he will given the harm France has done to Syria over the past 7 years. Word is SAA's Tiger Forces will get sent East of Euphrates; when is now the question. ..."
"... One's got to worry about who will replace Mad Dog Mattis after February 28 next year. It would seem that whoever succeeds Mattis will be another former general, likely to share his views on maintaining and increasing US forces in Syria, Iraq and other parts of western Asia ..."
"... Compared to Mattis, Pompeo and Bolton, and now Nauert at the UN, are raving jingos. Thank Gord they have no ties to the US military. ..."
"... "there also a contingent of 1,100 French troops"... You can hear me laughing after reading this. The French empire was over a long long time ago and they still think that Syria is their colony. France has been sending French Jihadists for regime change in Syria since 2011 and their mission has failed since Russia intervened in 2015. France cannot even send troops to Mali - destabilized by Jihadists created by France in Libya to topple Kadhafi, without the help of the US!!! France is a de-facto vassal state of the US since they decided to joined the NATO central command under Sarkozy who was bribed by the zionist neocons. ..."
"... I personally distinguish between Trump's decision to withdraw from Syria and his move to withdraw partially from Afghanistan. The latter is a step towards ending a brutal, illegal NATO occupation war of over 17 years. The former is also illegal but the Syrian Kurds (left wing and largely communist) are likely to be supplanted as counters to "Iran" by fascists Turkey and Israel (this has been confirmed in reports), so we're moving from tactical NATO proxies to actual NATO governments seizing Syrian land. ..."
Dec 22, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Fallout Of Trump's Syria Withdrawal - Why Erdogan Does Not Want To Invade uuu , Dec 21, 2018 1:37:31 PM | link

President Trump's strategic decision to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria creates some significant fallout. The U.S. and international borg is enraged that Trump ends an occupation that is illegal under international as well as U.S. domestic law. "That's un-American!"

Defense Secretary James "Mad Dog" Mattis resigned from his position effective February 28. He disagreed with the president's decision. It was the second time in five years that an elected commander in chief had a serious conflict with Mattis' hawkishness. President Obama fired him as Central Command chief for urging a more aggressive Iran policy. Mattis is also extremely hawkish towards Russia and China.

President Trump campaigned on lessening U.S. involvement in wars abroad. He wants to get reelected. He does not need a Secretary of Defense that involves him in more wars that have little to none defined purpose.

Mattis is an ingrained imperialist. He always asked for more money for the military and for more meddling abroad. One of Mattis' little notice acts as Defense Secretary was a unannounced change in the mission of the Pentagon :

For at least two decades, the Department of Defense has explicitly defined its mission on its website as providing "the military forces needed to deter war and to protect the security of our country." But earlier this year, it quietly changed that statement, perhaps suggesting a more ominous approach to national security.
...
The Pentagon's official website now defines its mission this way: "The mission of the Department of Defense is to provide a lethal Joint Force to defend the security of our country and sustain American influence abroad."

The Pentagon no longer "deters war" but provides "lethal force" to "sustain American influence abroad." There was no public nor congressional debate about the change. I doubt that President Trump agreed to it. Trump will now try to recruit a defense secretary that is more aligned with his own position.

The White House also announced that 7,000 of the 14,000 soldier the U.S. has in Afghanistan will withdraw over the next few months. The war in Afghanistan is lost with the Taliban ruling over more than half of the country and the U.S. supported government forces losing more personal than they can recruit. It was Mattis who had urged Trump to increase the troop numbers in Afghanistan from 10,000 to 14,000 at the beginning of his term. There are also 8,000 NATO and allied troops in Afghanistan which will likely see a proportional withdrawal.

The Associated Press has a new tic toc of Trump's decision to withdraw from Syria:

Trump stunned his Cabinet, lawmakers and much of the world with the move by rejecting the advice of his top aides and agreeing to a withdrawal in a phone call with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan last week, two officials briefed on the matter said.
...
"The talking points were very firm," said one of the officials, explaining that Trump was advised to clearly oppose a Turkish incursion into northern Syria and suggest the U.S. and Turkey work together to address security concerns. "Everybody said push back and try to offer (Turkey) something that's a small win, possibly holding territory on the border, something like that."

Erdogan, though, quickly put Trump on the defensive, reminding him that he had repeatedly said the only reason for U.S. troops to be in Syria was to defeat the Islamic State and that the group had been 99 percent defeated. "Why are you still there?" the second official said Erdogan asked Trump, telling him that the Turks could deal with the remaining IS militants.
...
Erdogan's point, Bolton was forced to admit, had been backed up by Mattis, Pompeo, U.S. special envoy for Syria Jim Jeffrey and special envoy for the anti-ISIS coalition Brett McGurk, who have said that IS retains only 1 percent of its territory, the officials said.
...
Bolton stressed, however, that the entire national security team agreed that victory over IS had to be enduring, which means more than taking away its territory.

Trump was not dissuaded, according to the officials, who said the president quickly capitulated by pledging to withdraw, shocking both Bolton and Erdogan.

Trump did not "capitulate". He always wanted to pull the U.S. troops out of Syria. He said so many times. When he was finally given a chance to do so, he grabbed the opportunity. Erdogan though, was not ready for that:

Caught off guard, Erdogan cautioned Trump against a hasty withdrawal , according to one official. While Turkey has made incursions into Syria in the past, it does not have the necessary forces mobilized on the border to move in and hold the large swaths of northeastern Syria where U.S. troops are positioned , the official said.

The call ended with Trump repeating to Erdogan that the U.S. would pull out , but offering no specifics on how it would be done, the officials said.


bigger

Erdogan had planned to only occupy a 10 miles deep strip along the Syrian-Turkish border. Some 15,000 Turkish controlled 'Syrian rebels' stand ready for that. He would need some 50-100,000 troops to occupy all of east Syria northward of the Euphrates. It would be a hostile occupation among well armed Kurds who would oppose it and an Arab population that is not exactly friendly towards a neo-Ottoman Turkey.

Erdogan knows this well. Today he announced to delay the planned invasion :

"We had decided last week to launch a military incursion... east of the Euphrates river," he said in a speech in Istanbul. "Our phone call with President Trump, along with contacts between our diplomats and security officials and statements by the United States, have led us to wait a little longer.

"We have postponed our military operation against the east of the Euphrates river until we see on the ground the result of America's decision to withdraw from Syria."

The Turkish president said, however, that this was not an "open-ended waiting period".

Any larger occupation of northeast Syria would create a serious mess for Turkey. Its army can do it, but it would cost a lot of casualties and financial resources. Turkey will hold local government election in March and Erdogan does not want any negative headlines. He will invade, but only if Syria and Russia fail to get the Kurds under control.

Unfortunately the leaders of the anarcho-marxist PKK/YPK in Syria have still not learned their lesson. They make the same demands to Damascus that were already rejected when similar demands were made for Afrin canton before Turkey invaded and destroyed it.

agitpapa @agitpapa 11:14 utc - 21 Dec 2018
YPG delegation was flown in to Mezzeh yday. Negos were inconclusive because they just repeated their usual line of "SAA protects the border, we control the rest." No army allows someone else allied with an enemy to control its rear and its supply lines. +
+ The YPG leadership is still stuck in its pro-Western rut. It needs to be purged before any deal can be made with Damascus. Their present track will just lead to another Afrin, then another, then another. Thousands of brave YPG/YPJ fighters will have died for nothing.
Elijah J. Magnier @ejmalrai - 16:31 utc - 21 Dec 2018
#Breakingnews: Private sources : President Bashar al Assad has rejected the Kurdish proposal while Turkey is gathering forces (Euphrates Shield et al) to attack the Kurdish controlled area north of #Syria. #Russia seems holding back president Erdogan for a while. A lot of pressure

It is not (only) Russia that is holding Erdogan back. As seen above he has serious concerns about such an operation. Moreover, he does not have enough troops yet and the U.S. troops have not yet changed their pattern. As of today they still patrolled on the Turkish border and yesterday new U.S. war material was still coming in from Iraq. Erdogan does not dare to attack U.S. troops.

He will most likely want to avoid any additional military involvement in Syria. If Damascus and Moscow can get the PKK under control, Ankara will be satisfied.

Besides the presence of 4,000 to 5,000 U.S. troops and contractors in northeast Syria there also a contingent of 1,100 French troops and an unknown number of British forces. France for now says it wants to stay to finish the fight against the Islamic State enclave along the Euphrates.

But France does not have the capability to sustain those forces without U.S. support. Syria and Russia could ask Macron to put them under their command to finish the fight against ISIS, but it is doubtful that President Macron would agree to that. It is more likely that he will agree to a handover of their position to Russian, Syrian or even Iraqi or Iranian forces. Those forces can then finish the fight.

Posted by b on December 21, 2018 at 01:09 PM | Permalink

Comments next page " Some of the conclusions toward the end of this article don't entirely make sense to me. Trump is withdrawing 2000-4000 US troops. Why does it follow that their absence would create a space requiring 50000 Turkish troops to fill? I don't see how occupation of the entire eastern would be under consideration at all.

As far as IS is concerned, their defeat will be "enduring" when their sponsors stop paying them, first of all.

Guy Thornton , Dec 21, 2018 1:38:25 PM | link

Mattis comes across to me as a psycho case of a suppressed faggot who has spent his life trying to disprove and conceal the blatantly obvious. There we go...fairly succinct analysis.
Tobin Paz , Dec 21, 2018 1:44:44 PM | link
The neo-liberal meltdown is astonishing, it's like the Iraq war never happened: James Mattis Is a War Criminal: I Experienced His Attack on Fallujah Firsthand
More importantly, Mattis, known to some by the nickname of "Mad Dog," has shown a callous disregard for human life, particularly civilians, as evidenced by his behavior leading marines in Iraq, comments he made about enjoying fighting in Afghanistan because "it's fun to shoot some people. You know, it's a hell of a hoot," and myriad other problems.
...
While reporting from inside Fallujah during that siege, I personally witnessed women, children, elderly people and ambulances being targeted by US snipers under Mattis' command. Needless to say, all of these are war crimes.
Russ , Dec 21, 2018 1:46:37 PM | link
For at least two decades, the Department of Defense has explicitly defined its mission on its website as providing "the military forces needed to deter war and to protect the security of our country." But earlier this year, it quietly changed that statement, perhaps suggesting a more ominous approach to national security.
...
The Pentagon's official website now defines its mission this way: "The mission of the Department of Defense is to provide a lethal Joint Force to defend the security of our country and sustain American influence abroad."

At least Mattis is more honest than most of his fellow psychopath war criminals.

If the AP account is factually accurate (i.e. leaving aside the tendentious pro-imperial, pro-war editorializing), then it's funny how fast Erdogan goes from "What are you doing here? Why don't you leave?" to "I didn't mean now!" He was probably angling for something else and didn't really want US withdrawal.

As for the French, what a contemptible squeak from a government on the ropes trying to look tough.

Never Mind the Bollocks , Dec 21, 2018 1:48:37 PM | link
It's the US imperialism that has been defeated in Syria, but it's now gathering forces to go after Iran
Sally Snyder , Dec 21, 2018 1:49:03 PM | link
Here is a look at how the United States is putting a mechanism in place that will increase its ability to sell arms around the world:

https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/11/american-international-arms-sales-and.html

The hawks in Washington need not worry, there will be plenty of war to go around.

Tom Welsh , Dec 21, 2018 1:52:40 PM | link
'The Pentagon's official website now defines its mission this way: "The mission of the Department of Defense is to provide a lethal Joint Force to defend the security of our country and sustain American influence abroad."'

I wonder whether, perchance, the Chief Executive and Commander in Chief should have been consulted about that. Traditionally, US Presidents have had some considerable say in defining the country's foreign policy.

Although one could interpret the change as being wholly in tune with Mr Trump's overriding policy of transparent honesty. After all, as long ago as 1900 - on the evidence of Marin Major-General Smedley Butler - we know that the US armed forces were used almost exclusively to promote American interests abroad. Maybe it's just refreshingly open to admit it at last.

Tom Welsh , Dec 21, 2018 1:54:45 PM | link
"Trump stunned his Cabinet, lawmakers and much of the world with the move by rejecting the advice of his top aides..." Please remind me: who was elected in 2016 - Mr Trump, or "his top aides"?
lysias , Dec 21, 2018 1:54:56 PM | link
When David Ignatius reported that Mattis's bedtime reading was Marcus Aurelius in the original Latin, who was responsible for the mistake? (Marcus Aurelius wrote in Greek.) Ignatius, an aide of Mattis's, or Mattis himself?
Tom Welsh , Dec 21, 2018 1:57:50 PM | link
"While Turkey has made incursions into Syria in the past, it does not have the necessary forces mobilized on the border to move in and hold the large swaths of northeastern Syria where U.S. troops are positioned, the official said".

Splendid! Let them hand it back to the lawfully elected democratic government of Syria, then.

Tom Welsh , Dec 21, 2018 2:00:51 PM | link
'"We had decided last week to launch a military incursion... east of the Euphrates river," he said in a speech in Istanbul'. So much for the UN Charter, then. Anyone who wants to can invade any other country and take over as much of its territory as he wants to - as long as Washington agrees. But, as Saddam Hussein could testify if he were still alive, it would be sensible to get such consent in writing.
james , Dec 21, 2018 2:14:27 PM | link
thanks b... who replaces the war criminal mattis? and when does any american get charged in the hague for the countless wars they start? how long do we have to wait for this to happen? the fact he changed the wording is at least more honest, so i give him credit for that... he could have said 'we are the worlds policeman, and we will continue to be the worlds policeman too' which would have been equally appropriate...

one thing i do like about trump is his ability to surprise... he could have done this earlier in his term - pull out of syria - but i guess he was waiting to see how things went... as it stands i think the knifes are out for trump big time now, and i suspect he is not going to last as president.. someone else mentioned this on the previous thread, and i agree with that assessment..

at some point in the next month, it is going to look different if USA follows thru with the commanders new position... meanwhile Russia has to continue to keep turkey on a leash and Syria, Russia and Iran have to continue to work at regaining the area east of the Euphrates as this unfolds... the leadership in France at this point are loony... the smart thing for them would be to leave or hand it over to syria/ russia...

karlof1 , Dec 21, 2018 2:21:14 PM | link
Macron's forces are illegally present too. Assad would have to request their presence, but I really doubt he will given the harm France has done to Syria over the past 7 years. Word is SAA's Tiger Forces will get sent East of Euphrates; when is now the question.

Rolling-back the Outlaw US Empire's overseas troop deployments and shuttering their bases is something I've argued for since I was honorably discharged in 1985, with the monies turned to desperate domestic needs -- the financial statement may declare the USA the world's richest nation, but reality tells a very different story. That reality got Trump elected. The haphazard, laissez-faire, unplanned structural nature of the USA's economy is in no way prepared for the rising technological revolution, which is in stark contrast to China and Russia's plans. The most important message Putin delivered in his annual meeting yesterday was about the whys and hows of changing the structure of Russia's economy:

"I have said it on numerous occasions, and I will repeat it today. We need a breakthrough. We need to transition to a new technological paradigm. Without it, the country has no future . This is a matter of principle, and we have to be clear on this....

" Healthcare, education, research and human capital come first, since without them there is no way a breakthrough can be achieved . The second vector deals with manufacturing and the economy. Of course, everything is related to the economy, including the first part. But the second part is directly linked to the economy, since it deals with the digital economy, robotics, etc. I have already mentioned infrastructure....

"But we will not be able to achieve the GDP growth rates necessary for this breakthrough unless the structure of the economy is changed. This is what the national projects are aimed at, and why such enormous funds will be invested, which I have already said – to change the structure and build an innovation-based economy . The Government is counting on this, because if this happens, and we should all work towards this, then the growth rates will increase and there will be other opportunities for development." [My Emphasis]

200 million residents of the USA--2/3s of the populous--also need a breakthrough, which is why the Green New Deal has such widespread support : "The survey results show overwhelming support for the Green New Deal, with 81% of registered voters saying they either 'strongly support' (40%) or 'somewhat support' (41%) this plan." IMO, domestic political pressure generally supports Trump's MAGA, but the monies need to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is from the Outlaw US Empire part of the USA.

lysias , Dec 21, 2018 2:25:14 PM | link
It was only a couple of years after de Gaulle returned to power in 1958 that it became clear that he was going to pull out of Algeria.
Jen , Dec 21, 2018 2:36:37 PM | link
One's got to worry about who will replace Mad Dog Mattis after February 28 next year. It would seem that whoever succeeds Mattis will be another former general, likely to share his views on maintaining and increasing US forces in Syria, Iraq and other parts of western Asia where they're despised by the local people, and perhaps not averse to sounding out good ol' Erik Prince to fill the vacancies left when US troops start leaving.

Krishnadev Calamur, "Four People Who Could Be the Next Defense Secretary" https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/578809/ Good God, not David Petraeus!

CD Waller , Dec 21, 2018 2:51:41 PM | link
Tom Welsh. It's my understanding that the Constitution states that foreign policy IS the job of the President. This Congress doesn't seem to have gotten the memo and though strictly a legislative body, have engaged in some pretty spectacular over reach.

The Constitution also puts an elected civilian (the President) in charge of the armed forces but put the power to declare war firmly in the hands of Congress.

The 1973 War Powers act has obscured this division of power. The President can order troops anywhere for a short time but must get an Authorization for Military Force from Congress. However, this is supposed to only in the case of attack or imminent danger, hardly the case in the ME.
Time limits on AFMF are often ignored and Congressional! purse strings almost never limit (exception: at the end of Viet Nam Congress was about to cut funding) any and all military adventurism.

Don Bacon , Dec 21, 2018 2:52:31 PM | link
@ karlof1 14
Healthcare, education, research and human capital come first, since without them there is no way a breakthrough can be achieved.

It would seem to me that if US politicians really cared about their job performance they would be working more on your "human capital" and less on warfare and Russian collusion. But there's no money in that, so they don't. So much for "democracy." Here's a recent article on a US achieved "breakthrough," in a negative sense that is.

WaPo, Nov 29

Life expectancy in the United States declined again in 2017, the government said Thursday in a bleak series of reports that showed a nation still in the grip of escalating drug and suicide crises.

The data continued the longest sustained decline in expected life span at birth in a century, an appalling performance not seen in the United States since 1915 through 1918. That four-year period included World War I and a flu pandemic that killed 675,000 people in the United States and perhaps 50 million worldwide.

Public health and demographic experts reacted with alarm to the release of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's annual statistics, which are considered a reliable barometer of a society's health. In most developed nations, life expectancy has marched steadily upward for decades. . . here

Kevin J Quinn , Dec 21, 2018 2:53:40 PM | link
Compared to Mattis, Pompeo and Bolton, and now Nauert at the UN, are raving jingos. Thank Gord they have no ties to the US military.
uncle tungsten , Dec 21, 2018 3:02:58 PM | link
Mattis could not, would not accept responsibility for the misappropriated 21 trillion dollars at HIS defence department. Kick him out. He was always a moron and demonstrated his arrogant dismissal of the elected president almost every day. $21 trillion buys a lot of MAGA.
ConfusedPundit , Dec 21, 2018 3:05:43 PM | link
Kurdish population in Syria is only 5% whereas the land they now control is 30% of the country thanks to the democratic EUSA nations?

They can no longer feed the ISIS inmates (they'll end up in France or Germany or elsewhere undertaking new projects?) since Khashoggi case (or Mr. Erdogan who caught the Saudis by their balls) made Saudis quit financing the YPG. Almost all ISIS inmates left in Syria are from abroad (they had been released from Libyan, Afghan, Iraqi prisons en mass at the beginning of the war and are ready for relocation?

Will the globalists controlled China arrive to rebuild what the US demolitionmen destroyed in Syria?

Who founded (USrael?) ISIS and made them lose water and oil rich territories in Syria to the PKK/YPG/SDF and what are they planning to do now?

Hoarsewhisperer , Dec 21, 2018 3:09:39 PM | link
It'd be funny if Trump appointed Tulsi Gabbard to the post of DefSec. I don't know much about her except that she's definitely very cute and probably isn't a pushover. If the glowing praise of her MoA fans is any guide then she'd do a better job than any recent appointment to the role and would then become a shoe-in for POTUS. If that came to pass then 'Hillary Who?' would become part of America's Permanent Lexicon.
karlof1 , Dec 21, 2018 3:26:44 PM | link
Don Bacon @18--

Thanks for your reply! Yes, the financialization and industrial hollowing-out of the USA's economy renders following the path being broken by Russia/China very difficult, but the projected outcome will be dire if the economy isn't radically restructured and the fake economists and their financial predators aren't driven from the Temple by modern Tribunes.

Meanwhile, shrouded by the Trump/Mattis circus, Turkey & Iran held an "historic summit" that likely had an impact on Trump's decision as everywhere he looks his previous foreign policy choices driven by his neocon advisors are mostly backfiring.

Robert Snefjella , Dec 21, 2018 3:35:04 PM | link
Re US president and foreign policy:

The language of the US Constitution gives the President the power to make treaties and choose Ambassadors, in consultation with and with the consent (2/3 majority) of the Senate. Also, President is Commander-in-Chief of the military. This includes state militias if formed. He also receives political figures from abroad.

Like so much else in the US Constitution, there has been creepy or 'necessary' or when it's handy mission creep in regard to these delineated functions.

But more to the point, the US is and has long been a serial de facto repudiator of the US Constitution and of International law. 'Let us discuss the fine points of law pertaining to the repeated launching of wars of aggression on the basis of lies.'

karlof1 , Dec 21, 2018 3:37:58 PM | link
CD Waller @17 and others never having taken a US Civics course--

This essay details how the separation of powers construct works in the formulation of US foreign policy.

Hoarsewhisperer , Dec 21, 2018 3:39:00 PM | link
Forgive the levity but here's Hillary's theme song.

Oh yes I'm the great pretender (ooh ooh)
Pretending that I'm doing well (ooh ooh)
My need is such I pretend too much
I'm lonely but no one can tell.

Oh yes I'm the great pretender (ooh ooh)
Adrift in a world of my own (ooh ooh)
I play the game but to my real shame
You've left me to dream all alone.

Too real is this feeling of make believe
Too real when I feel what my heart can't conceal

Ooh ooh yes I'm the great pretender (ooh ooh)
Just laughing and gay like a clown (ooh ooh)
I seem to be what I'm not (you see)
I'm wearing my heart like a crown
Pretending that I'm still around.
(stiill a rounnd)

michael smith , Dec 21, 2018 3:49:49 PM | link
If the U.S. withdraws its forces from NE Syria who will control the air space. That will likely determine who controls the territory in the future. I don't think the Kurds have an airforce.

mls

financial matters , Dec 21, 2018 4:13:46 PM | link
karlof1 @ 14

"""But we will not be able to achieve the GDP growth rates necessary for this breakthrough unless the structure of the economy is changed. This is what the national projects are aimed at, and why such enormous funds will be invested, which I have already said – to change the structure and build an innovation-based economy. The Government is counting on this, because if this happens, and we should all work towards this, then the growth rates will increase and there will be other opportunities for development."""

Similar sentiments are expressed by Rhiana Gunn-Wright.

After Sanders lost the Democratic primary in 2016 a group called 'Brand New Congress' formed to carry on his ideas. This morphed into 'Justice Democrats' which helped Ocasio-Cortez get elected. She is serving as a lightning rod giving the Green New Deal popularity.

Rhiana Gunn-Wright is a young energetic and talented policy wonk working for 'New Consensus' which is a spin off of the 'Justice Democrats'.

She is being tasked with forming policy for the Green New Deal.

'Again, the GND is not just climate policy. It's about transforming the economy, lifting up the poor and middle class, and creating a more muscular, active public sector.

The GND "opens an opportunity to renegotiate power relationships between the public sector, the private sector, and the people," says Gunn-Wright. "We are interested in solutions that create more democratic structures in our economy.'

green new deal explained

slit , Dec 21, 2018 4:16:39 PM | link
Thanks to b for stellar continued coverage!

$21 Trillion + "interests abroad" DoD mission creep
>>
Silicon Valley hot air equity ($150,000 starting salaries for fresh graduates) on cash flow only digital assetts
+ offshore oligarch accounts (kkr et al)

I found it helpful to take stock of reported conditions surrounding the troops out move:

* ksa reportedly going bankrupt
* ksa reneges on golden glow globe sword dance MIC mou-s
* failed israeli missile attempt to start wwiii & ensuing s300 reinforcements
* kashoggi and related muslim brotherhood entanglements
* clinton foundation in DC "hearings" censored by msm
* continued censorship of Awan bros Blackberry scandal (espionage?)
* Cricket hero Khan batting for Pakistan
* Huawei affair
* Bibi & family corruption scandal

Trump has a keen eye for ratings, and surely knows giving the deplorables (private contractors, self employeds etc) trying to rub two pennies together gasoline under $3/gallon in the holiday season will mean much more to the public than Cnn Russiagate drivel working people have no time for anyway. Keeping armed forces rank and file happy and re purposing for disaster relief would be a good move.

Karlof1 is correct to make the most of the narrative. Glad b is on it. Hope troops arent cleared for nuclear Armeggedon!

Josh , Dec 21, 2018 4:23:57 PM | link
@mls The US currently does not control Syrian airspace. The Russians do, ever since they switched from using the existing old Syrian S200 to the current advanced model S300, after the downing of their plane by the Israeli interference.
This was probably another factor that made operating in Syria increasingly problematic and handicapped: options of 'punishing Assad' or bombing mobile Iranian units were limited if they didn't want to coordinate with the Russians.
The Syrians now have to amass a large contingent to 'control' the Kurdish area; likely the Russians will be go-between to lower Kurdish demands as well as placate the SAA and achieve some kind of tense co-existence which can keep Turkey satisfied.
Interesting to see how Syria will handle both wanting to mop up Idlib as well as re-establish control over the North-East and its oil wells.
Noirette , Dec 21, 2018 4:29:57 PM | link
I read that Trump did not inform Netanyahu of the USA's Syria 'withdrawal' until about an hour before it was made public via tweet. Five mins! according to another article. Also, that Trump did discuss it with B.N. several days before (Haaretz), that sounded like a smoothing over. Another article claimed that it was Pompeo who clued in Israel a short while before. So who knows?

Right from the first time they met, Bibi was terrified of Trump, though I could not find one telling vid. I saw.

Feb. 15 2017.

Trump today said that he is keeping his options open about how best to reach a peaceful solution to the Israeli-Palestinian situation but urged Israel to hold back on settlement building in occupied territories.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmfseeZt5fA

President Trump veered from years of U.S. policy in the Middle East by backing off the "two-state solution," as the only path to peace between Palestinians and Israelis.

https://youtu.be/Wf-3916zpGA

One article stated that Macron and Merkel learnt of the 'withdrawal' from the media! I have noted that Macron is always very 'late' and 'behind the times' as far as the US is concerned, obviously the F 'info' services have no clue, or he isn't kept informed, etc.

Not that there will be consequent 'fall-out' from either, for the moment. (Israel can only go along, and the EU has more serious stuff on its plate.)

Pnyx , Dec 21, 2018 4:39:59 PM | link
"If Damascus and Moscow can get the PKK under control, Ankara will be satisfied."
Well - let's hope Allah (or whoever) will enlighten Erdo...
steve , Dec 21, 2018 4:42:14 PM | link
First President since JFK to say no to the CIA. Lets see that SITRAP
Kadath , Dec 21, 2018 4:42:18 PM | link
Re: #3 Tobin Pa,


Yes, it's dispiriting, but not surprising that the anti-war "Left" movement has almost totally dissolved following their failure to prevent the Iraq war. As a deeply cynical person I'm certain that Hillary and the Clintonites worked behind the scenes in the DNC to undermine the Anti-war movement in expectation of her eventual 2008 & 2016 runs, since she and Bill supported the Iraq war and were no shrinking violets when it came to the use of military force in furtherance of their foreign policy goals. The consequence of destroying the Anti-war movement with the Democratic Party is that they have become a defacto Pro-war party even in situations where the use of the military is blatantly illegal, futile and against the National interest (since there is no organized Anti-war movement articulating why they should not go to war/use military force to stand against the Military Industrial Complex that is constantly advocating for more war). Hilariously, by becoming a Pro-war Party when the American people are increasingly tired of constant warfare the Democratic Party lost the 2016 election to a mildly anti-war Trump, who will most likely be re-elected (unless he is impeached or assassinated). In the long-term, unless the DNC faces up to the 30 years of disastrous Clinton mismanagement and corruption and cleans house, I could certainty see the Democratic Party collapsing over the next 15 years just like how the Labour Party in the UK is still struggling with the legacy of Tony Blair.

What's really galling to me though is watching all these so called "liberals" (Cher, Beth Midler, Rachael "Mad Cow" Maddow & Mia Farrow) whine about how the US should never leave Syria and stay there indefinitely; Are they or their children going to be fighting this war? Who gave the US such authority take seize parts of Syria? What exactly is the benefit to the US & her people in doing all of this? How many hundreds of thousands people (mostly Syrians) need to die for this ill-defined goal of spiting Syria & Russia? Just like the destruction of the Anti-war left in the Democratic Party had long term consequences, people will remember how Hollywood liberals behaved like jabbering, ignorant, warmongering ideologues during this period of US decline and it will cause profound damage to them and their professed causes.

stonebird , Dec 21, 2018 4:48:40 PM | link
KarlofI@14 and Fin Matters @33

Nice thoughts, but I don't think you have the time.
"Worst December since the great depression"
Just look at the pictures (charts), and scroll down.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-12-21/fear-reaches-most-extreme-ever-traders-see-panic-air
....
Trump has a tactic of "giving people what they ask for" (eg Jerusalem). Just to break a deadlock. This Syria gambit seems to be something of the same as Erdogan now gets what he has been asking for - and finds he doesn't want it yet.

I still think that there will be a continued US presence in Syria, concentrated around the Oil sources. The Agricultural lands further north were owned by "Arabic", Christian, Yadizi and other various tribes and ethnies. The Kurds only made up a small portion.
One reason that Trump may have decided to throw the Kurds to the wolves, is that they were overstretched, and not motivated enough to continue to be cannon fodder for Uncle Sam. The SDF (Which incorporates some turncoat ISIS members, which partly explains why there has only been slow "progress" against the last ISIS enclave in Eastern Syria, brother against ex-brother), also contains foreign mercenaries from various sources. What they will "demand" is open to question. The tribal forces in the SAA who are directly opposite contain members of the Shaitah, who saw 700 of their women and children massacred by ISIS. They may want their own land back too, as well as "payback".

The other reason for Trump to act now is that Flynn has been given three months in which to change his guilty "plea". After which, Mueller will HAVE TO provide proof, and not just accusations and people that have been blackmailed into "plea deals". Trump doesn't have too much time left for subtle tweet-tweets before the Dems arrive. etc (big topic by itself)

.... By the way, OT; Butina was really "brain-washed". 67 days in solitary confinement with all the recognised means of brainwashing used on her. Assault (including sexual) sleep deprivation, continued stress (including randomly timed "strip searches") probably lighting either permanently on or randomly used to destroy time awareness. There are other methods to be included, and at a "key" break point, a "counsellor/handler will whisper sweet nothings in hear ear to control her way of thinking ( I am NOT a specialist in Brainwashing, but the outline of what she suffered, means that she will always repeat what she has been told to say.) Real Brainwashing from the cold war era .

Red Ryder , Dec 21, 2018 5:09:03 PM | link
b's statement regarding Turkey: "Its army can do it, but it would cost a lot of casualties and financial resources."

During the entire war, Turkey's army has done not so much and not so well. Manbij, Afrin, and where else? Well before the US presence with bases, the Turks could not hold their border region from the Kurds.

They cannot impact deep anywhere. Their AF is not even as effective as Syria's, yet it is a much better, more advanced arm of the military. It's special forces?

They are used to doing what NATO and US troops do. They murder civilians and massacre opposition. They did little against ISIS which was a very fierce, mobile and effective military.

They do have logistical advantage and can move heavy weapons for a siege. But they are a set piece land force.

The Kurds also are quite overrated.

Erdogan knows that the notion of him holding the East is a pipedream. His FSA allies are the weakest lot in Syria.
His real fighters are those in Idlib, al Nusra and the Uyghurs.

If he intends to hold land the US has marked out in the North-east and East, he will have to move the headchoppers.
The Russians will annihilate them if they cross the zones in Idlib.

With the US vacuum the Syrians, Hezbollah, Quds, Iranian militias and the Russians will complete the war.

The French and Brits say they are staying. They should write their Last Will letters. They will be shot out of the sky and incinerated on the ground. Folly.

The pullouts from Syria and Afghanistan are severe blows to NATO as hegemonic shock troops.
This time next year we will hear and see how Russia won and NATO is gone from Eurasia.

This is also an object lesson to those nations on Russia's periphery who are flirting with the US, EU and NATO. Belarus, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan will have to recalculate.


Grieved , Dec 21, 2018 5:14:15 PM | link
@b

I think we will see many more updates such as this one, showing us who's pushing back, who's wavering, and who's simply blowing hot air. I could wish for better sources of the back story than AP and Reuters, but we must wait for better analysis I think. I'm sure I'll see it here first - thanks for your continued vigilance.

Meanwhile my guesses are that Trump holds the longest knife and will prevail in this course. And that Erdogan is not faltering as the Reuters report implies, but is simply letting players and forces adjust to the new situation. And that, regardless of the details on the ground, the US flag has been struck in Syria, irreversibly. This is a geopolitical milestone, and everything now changes from this.

mls , Dec 21, 2018 5:17:11 PM | link
@35 It has been my understanding that while the Russian forces have stepped up their air defense systems the Americans still fly freely to the north-east of the Euphrates and have not hesitated to attack SAA forces who came close to their proxies on the ground, as well as attacking the SAA when they moved toward the U.S. base at al-Tanf. If the U.S. really does evacuate their troops it will be interesting to see if they discontinue their air movements over the eastern bank of the Euphrates. mls
Sasha , Dec 21, 2018 5:19:12 PM | link
Almost all ISIS inmates left in Syria are from abroad (they had been released from Libyan, Afghan, Iraqi prisons en mass at the beginning of the war and are ready for relocation?

Who founded (USrael?) ISIS and made them lose water and oil rich territories in Syria to the PKK/YPG/SDF and what are they planning to do now?

Posted by: ConfusedPundit | Dec 21, 2018 3:05:43 PM | 23

Terrorice Europe?

Two Scandinavian backpackers hacked to death in Morocco, mother spammed with gruesome images

Sasha , Dec 21, 2018 5:35:59 PM | link
But how this "withdrawal" holds when new equipment is arriving to US bases in Syria?

US reinforces new base in Syria despite announcement of withdrawal

Schmoe , Dec 21, 2018 5:40:34 PM | link
@ Kadath 39
As respects Rachel Mad Cow,MSNBC has been reading from the neo-con playbook for several years now. Pre-Iraq War,Chris Matthews was vehemently against it, but in my limited recent viewership they are silent on Syria in general. They did however have a one hour special by Richard Engle which was essentially an hour of showing the carnage and saying "look what Assad did". It was even more absurd than Fox's islamaphobic specials they ran a few times. Truly pathetic and it feels like MSNBC is hewing to the HRC model "of no one can criticize me fro the right on "national security".
james , Dec 21, 2018 5:41:33 PM | link
emptywheel is suggesting tom cotton as a replacement for mattis.. this is the first time i can recall ew
james , Dec 21, 2018 5:43:43 PM | link
my comment was chopped off... first time i can recall ew writing on foreign policy! at any rate, skip the ew comment section, as the folks at ew can completely in denial about the role the democrats have played in bringing the usa to this point in time... read @35 kadath post for greater clarity on that...
BRF , Dec 21, 2018 5:50:37 PM | link
Too many "old men who think in terms of nation states and peoples. There are no nations. There are no peoples. There is only the Federal Reserve, the BIS, IMF, WB, WTO and an entourage of multinational corporations all inextricably inter associated." as redux of Ned Beatty's soliloquy from the film Network.

These pesky wars, as one front of many fronts, are getting in the way of NWO timing. The world's major central banks are now involved in quantitative tightening and much of the liquidity that was handed out as loans will now disappear and the debt trap will now be sprung on many 'nation states' as it was in Greece. Turkey's major industries owe about 300 Billion. This while the Lira drops ever lower in relation to the Fed Reserve Note, euphemistically the USD, and will be hard pressed to pay back the less abundant, higher valued amounts at the higher interest rates of the FRN's borrowed. War, with very real deaths, continues but on another front and Trump as the front figure is the main conductor of this coming war.

Piotr Berman , Dec 21, 2018 5:51:32 PM | link
When David Ignatius reported that Mattis's bedtime reading was Marcus Aurelius in the original Latin, who was responsible for the mistake? (Marcus Aurelius wrote in Greek.) Ignatius, an aide of Mattis's, or Mattis himself?

Posted by: lysias | Dec 21, 2018 1:54:56 PM | 9

Explanation from an aide of Mattis: the General purchased the volume while visiting Latin America, so he always assumed that it is in Latin.

Sasha , Dec 21, 2018 5:55:53 PM | link
What theis "withdrawal" is about....To continue causing turmoil in Syria so as to impede its rebuilt and return to peaceful normal life...This is why Israel has not said a word....

US pullout from Syria result of secret deal with Turkey, says expert

Lochearn , Dec 21, 2018 6:03:22 PM | link
I have been away in the Scottish wilderness for a while, cut off from everything, so it with somewhat jaded joy that I come back to stunning news from this unfailingly brilliant place to hear the latest (US getting out of Syria, Mattis out, Macron on fire, Britain in an existential crisis the like of which I have neither seen nor read about).

Like a schoolkid who has absented themselves I venture back into the classroom to take my little seat, all the while carrying with me audio of howling winds and the low whistle of a friend who came to visit, an Irish instrument that so resembles native American flutes. In this Highland cabin I filled the stove with ash and oak and beech, listened to the haunting sound of the low whistle and drank whisky as I watched the snow drift down.

Sasha , Dec 21, 2018 6:12:53 PM | link
The SDF (Which incorporates some turncoat ISIS members, which partly explains why there has only been slow "progress" against the last ISIS enclave in Eastern Syria, brother against ex-brother), also contains foreign mercenaries from various sources.

Posted by: stonebird | Dec 21, 2018 4:48:40 PM | 40

This is why they wear masks/balaclavas....the same way they used to do on Iraq....

US-supported militias in eastern Syria take Hayin

Peter Grafström , Dec 21, 2018 6:14:19 PM | link
Josh on #35 hints at an explanation for Trumps action which is confirmed by a romanian military expert in the article http://www.voltairenet.org/article204433.html
Assuming that analysis is correct, Trumps military associates like Mattis must have known but was apparently more willing to risk american casualties.
Pft , Dec 21, 2018 6:49:31 PM | link
So the past 2 years of bombing and support for bombing and special forces operations in Syria, Yemen, Africa, Afghanistan and of course the ongoing genocide of the Palestinians in Israel is blamed on Trumps aids, all of whom he hired.

Whenever something positive comes out (and Trump has said he was done in Syria before only to be followed later by a barrage of missiles due to outrage over the poor babies killed in the CW attack blamed on Assad) its presented as Trump heroically goes against his aids advice and does right.

This is a common theme in MSM and almost all of the alt media now. Trumps swamp included Bolton, Barr, Devos, Pompeo, Mnuchkin, Acosta, Haspel, Ross, Mulvaney, Kushner, Pruit, Mattis. Blame them instead of the guy who hired them and has authority over them. Right.

Piotr Berman , Dec 21, 2018 6:55:08 PM | link
I have been away in the Scottish wilderness for a while, cut off from everything,
Posted by: Lochearn | Dec 21, 2018 6:03:22 PM | 51

I once spent a week in Glen Lyon which is not cut off from anything, there is a paved road (one-lane for two way traffic, only in Scotland!) and Royal Mail operated, but these days young people complain when there is no cell phone reception, there was a land line but our niece was could not send any pics and texts to her boyfriend. Thus she very eagerly joined me for a hike and after ascending 1000 m and getting the view of Loch Tay she immediately texted etc. But something is brewing outside quiet glens: [video of parliamentary session] The defence secretary, Gavin Williamson, says the UK will have 3,500 service personnel on standby 'to support any government department on any contingencies they may need'

Watch the situation, Lochearn, and if needed, run back to the hills.

karlof1 , Dec 21, 2018 7:03:00 PM | link
financial matters @33--

Thanks for your reply with its post-2016 info! I returned to following domestic happenings a few months prior to the 2018 election and was surprised by the gumption of the new Freshman class. There was lots of negative speculation about how AOC would become a sellout, but I'm impressed and added her twitter to my ever lengthening list. The first 2020 polls have appeared with the narrative being Biden over washed up Sanders, but the reality is the opposite. Wife and I had a dinner table discussion about that and related matters last night from the frame of Media Truth from Putin's meeting I posted. There's an ideological divide within the USA; but as AOC notes in this very informative* twitter thread :

"People are starting to realize our issues aren't left and right, but top and bottom.

"And the just solutions will come from the bottom-up."

*--Informative due to the immoral hatred revealed, which unfortunately validates my references to Monopoly philosophy and Zerosumism. Scrooge was tame in comparison.

hopehely , Dec 21, 2018 7:11:55 PM | link
Posted by: Piotr Berman | Dec 21, 2018 5:51:32 PM | 49

Explanation from an aide of Mattis: the General purchased the volume while visiting Latin America, so he always assumed that it is in Latin.
Or in Latin American...
And it wasn't bedtime reading but bathroom reading.

karlof1 , Dec 21, 2018 7:37:52 PM | link
stonebird @40--

Fortunately, the stock markets are not the economy. Trump campaigned on MAGA; the Green New Deal makes MAGA possible and as the polling I linked to shows is popular across political lines--the people know something must be done. Currently, it's the D Party Old Guard standing in the way doing R Party work. When it comes to the traditional definitions of national security and national interest, Trump was correct to say MAGA is a matter of national security. Too many Trillions have already been wasted, and we within the USA cannot afford any more of those mistakes from the past as the margin for success gets thinner daily. When I compare the directions of China, Russia and USA, the former two are rising by attaining their planned national goals, while the USA drops downward thanks to directionless policy that only supports the greed of the greedy. I know its much better for an individual to be a poor worker in China than a poor worker in the state of Georgia and too many other places--very few opportunities and almost no social support very similar to the Great Depression; but nowadays, you can't even hop a freight to go somewhere else as was possible in the '30s.

Red Ryder , Dec 21, 2018 7:38:55 PM | link
Apparently, Mattis bought the book for the illustrations.

Latin America speaks Spanish and Portuguese not Latin American, which is not a language.
Plus, there are secondary languages of indigenous people, and tertiary languages like German and Italian, Japanese and Chinese as well as English.

From the "story" about Mattis, I think it is laughable. He pretended his whole life to be a Patton.
Read their career stories and it is a joke that Mattis had four-stars, as did Patton.

bjd , Dec 21, 2018 7:42:17 PM | link
The only reading generals do is Macchhiavelli, Von Clausewitz and Superman
O yeah -- and the bible, these days.
karlof1 , Dec 21, 2018 8:25:24 PM | link
Comic Relief courtesy of the UK government :

"UK government refuses to release the documents on its 'counter-disinformation' programme linked to the Integrity Initiative. Because (don't laugh now), it could 'undermine the programme's effectiveness'."

Craig Murray has an update on the affair--all the documents provided by Anonymous have proven genuine.

Jen , Dec 21, 2018 8:45:15 PM | link
Lysias, Piotr B, Hopehely, Red Ryder & others:

Maybe Mattis bought the book for interior decoration. It makes his coffee table look good. What language it's in is irrelevant.

snedly arkus , Dec 21, 2018 8:49:46 PM | link
Where is the evidence of widespread support for a green new deal as pushed by a couple of people here. A poll of 966 people sorted by whether or not they are voters does not mean there is widespread support. As in most polls claiming whatever we do not know the questions that were asked or how they were framed. Thus they could have said "would you be for a new green deal if it energized the economy bringing riches to all and extremely cheap rates on power would you be for it." Until we know the full extent of this poll it's a nothing burger pushing an agenda.
psychohistorian , Dec 21, 2018 9:00:16 PM | link
@ financial matters # 33 with the link to the Green New Deal....thanks

The problem with the GND is that it does not seem to address the underlying fact that private finance makes all investment decisions. If they evolve to understand that, they can do all they want if it is within the public government plans for investment.

If the government controlled finance instead of the private folk I would expect there to be public input to/(control over) investment decisions.....just like the GND folks are pushing for but in a more comprehensive context and manner.

Piotr Berman , Dec 21, 2018 9:02:39 PM | link
The only reading generals do is Macchhiavelli, Von Clausewitz and Superman
O yeah -- and the bible, these days.
Posted by: bjd | Dec 21, 2018 7:42:17 PM | 60

A general slurps macchiato while reading The Prince of Niccolò Machiavelli.

In the history of my country there is a nice episode when one of the main generals was rousing the units before the critical battle that actually went well "In loco, spes in virtute, salus in victoria" - Here, the (only) hope (lies) in bravery, salvation in victory, which quotes Ceasar's De Bello Gallico. . Sadly, while the battle was brilliant, the war was not. Nevertheless, I would recommend Ceasar.

Ceasar was victorious, so he should be balanced with History of the Peloponnesian War of Thucidites. A terrible was in which one side lost terribly, while the other succumbed to hubris, imposed painful domination on all and sundry to be irreversibly defeated one generation after. Woe to the defeated, but the victors should be careful too.

The story of "Woe to the defeated", Vae victis , is interested too. Romans were treated mercilessly by victorious (unmitigated?) Gauls, but then see De Bello Gallico above.

Don Bacon , Dec 21, 2018 9:04:06 PM | link
Five unforgettable quotes by the killer, James Mattis (He will be missed?):
>1. 'It's quite fun to shoot them, you know. It's a hell of a hoot. It's fun to shoot some people.'
>2. 'There are some assholes in the world that just need to be shot.'
>3. 'I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you fuck with me, I'll kill you all.'
>4. 'Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.'
>5. 'There are some people who think you have to hate them in order to shoot them. I don't think you do.'. . . here

Don't let the door hit ya, Jimbo.
karlof1 , Dec 21, 2018 9:07:15 PM | link
63--

You sound just like an D Party hack doing the work of the R Party. Must pay good.

psychohistorian , Dec 21, 2018 9:10:22 PM | link
I am sure getting tired of entering my personal info each time I post a comment because the remember doesn't work...

@ karlof1 with
"
"UK government refuses to release the documents on its 'counter-disinformation' programme linked to the Integrity Initiative. Because (don't laugh now), it could 'undermine the programme's effectiveness'."
"

They are lying through there teeth. The real problem for them is that some could end up in jail, and rightfully so. We can only hope that they take the City of London down with them.

What is their long term plan for containing the IntegrityNOTInitiative scandal? The house of cards seems to be falling and now is when we hope that the losers love their children enough to not takes us to extinction with their pride.

karlof1 , Dec 21, 2018 9:12:46 PM | link
psychohistorian @64--

It appears more people are aware of such a threat as this article notes . Pelosi's unfortunately a whore of the sort needing pasteurization, along with Feinstein.

karlof1 , Dec 21, 2018 9:17:58 PM | link
Don Bacon @66--

Mattis makes the fictional Hannibal Lecter a Prince of Peace by comparison. The end of February can't come soon enough.

hopehely , Dec 21, 2018 9:31:18 PM | link
Posted by: Don Bacon | Dec 21, 2018 9:04:06 PM | 66
Five unforgettable quotes by the killer, James Mattis ...
Yep, the influence of Marcus Aurelius is all over him. Through and through.
True philosopher general indeed.
Pft , Dec 21, 2018 9:35:07 PM | link
The problem with the GND being discussed here is in the Green. Any New Deal that starts with a false premise and bad science is a bad idea IMO.

That said, a New Deal that incorporates Ellen Browns and Edison/Fords ideas on public financing I am all for. Goals should be universal health care, guaranteed income and housing, vast infrastructure projects and alternative energy development. The latter two should be green in the sense of nonpolluting (Co2 is not a pollutant). Jobs are fine but with automation, AI, and robotics lets face it, a world where most people dont work except as a hobby or to live better than others is coming, as my old science teacher predicted with envy over 50 years ago. The neomalthusians and transhumanists have other ideas.

I would also devote massive resources for researching the safety of GMO , vaccines and medicines as well as upgrading climate monitoring and climate research since climate does change and we have so little understanding of it. Climate measurements are indadequate (number of weather stations in US have dropped by a factor of 3 since climate became a thing and quality is a key concern. This research needs to be free of influence from parties having an agenda (political and financial). Good luck with that.

Kooshy , Dec 21, 2018 9:54:32 PM | link
Mattis is a coward, he knows the American efforts in Syria has failed, and will go nowhere. So for him this was a great excuse and a good uportunity to resign and not share the blame for failure of his past advise and insistence to continue a lost effort. Now all the blames for loosing in Syria will go to Trump. The blame game has already started coming out of MSM and the DC swamp (you read sewer).
ben , Dec 21, 2018 9:56:02 PM | link
Seems as though we've heard this "withdrawal" meme before. We'll see.

IMO, the key to ME peace is STILL based on liberty and justice for the Palestinian people.

Heard some noise about "The green new deal". This from The Nation magazine;

https://www.thenation.com/article/democrats-green-new-deal/

psychohistorian , Dec 21, 2018 10:00:12 PM | link
@ pft will the great follow on the the GND proposal

I want to add a data point to the universal health care initiative.

Because we are a society wedded to the profit motive we put it between the client and the health care provider and worse only promote "therapies" that make a profit. Let me provide my personal proof of that statement.

This week, after a 12 year journey, I can state that I have healed myself (with help) from a traumatic brain injury using neurofeedback. Neurofeedback in a non-drug, non-invasive EEG based therapy based on the mental health brain paradigm of dis-regulated neural networks. The world of Big Pharma does not want to see neurofeedback advance because it will eliminate most of them.

Some on MoA have read me writing about this before and I will do so more in some future Open Thread.....when the dust settles a bit.

Yeah, Right , Dec 21, 2018 10:01:41 PM | link
@1 Isn't it obvious? US forces are there to support the Kurdish forces. Training, supplying, and a little moral "stiffening".

But Turkisk forces would go in with the aim of defeating those Kurds, and then suppressing the local pop in. That requires an order of magnitude more troops.

Don Bacon , Dec 21, 2018 10:17:15 PM | link
One think-tanker expects problems with troop morale, which by the way was the killer that ended the stupid Vietnam War.
Trump's sudden decisions to drawdown troops in Syria and Afghanistan that sparked Mattis' resignation marked for perhaps the first time in American history the departure of a defense secretary in protest and adds to the overall unease that remains, experts said.
"I think it adds to a feeling that in some sense the wheels are beginning to come off of American foreign policy and national security policy," said John Hannah, a senior counselor at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a nonprofit, nonpartisan research institute on foreign policy and national security in Washington.
Hannah said he thinks the Mattis resignation will inevitably affect troop morale . . . . here

That's a good thing.
Circe , Dec 21, 2018 11:01:47 PM | link
@47

Tom Cotton is a rabid hawk especially on Iran. If Trump choses him then this will signal what Trump meant by the next phase of the campaign after he announced a withdrawal from Syria.

I read General Jack Keane was in the running but he doesn't want the job.

That leaves Lindsey Graham and David Petraeus. Both of these might be willing to take the job, but I see Trump picking Petraeus over Graham, although Graham just visited the troops in Afghanistan; maybe he's sending a subtle hint to Trump.

If it's Cotton, we should brace ourselves for escalation with Iran.

Pft , Dec 21, 2018 11:19:21 PM | link
Yeah Right@76

Well there are 50K Al Nusra fighters in Idlib that Russia and Syria want out of there and Turkey is protecting. Maybe they will be on the move soon to deal with the Kurds in the NE once the US pulls out. US can pretend ignorance and then step back in again under the cover of stabilizing the region with replacement for the kurds to use against Assad and protect assets in the NE. Everyone except the Kurds is happy, almost.

Kadath , Dec 21, 2018 11:24:12 PM | link
@46, Schmoe

Further to your point about MSNBC, I just watched Michael Moore on MSNBC being interviewed by Ali Velshi and Moore was actually advocating that the troops stay in Syria and blamed Putin for ordering Trump to do this ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0SP7puk8f8) - words fail..... Michael Moore, the Anti-Iraq war activist, the Occupy Wall Street advocate, the Anti-Imperialist, has reached the terminal phase of his Trump Derangement Syndrome. His irrational hatred of Trump has just driven him to torch all of his prior Anti-War work; to betray every speech, every millimeter of film he's ever made all because he hates Trump that much and everything he has previously done can be jettisoned if it furthers this new goal.

Ugh... Is he doing this all for the money he can glean from the mainstream Media by being even more extreme than them, was he always this shallow and empty? This is what I just cant get over, do these jackanapes not understand that their words and behaviours are being recorded and people will remember it, it will haunt their futures and taint their legacies. Hating Trump is one thing (there is certainly no shortage of reasons to hate him), but I'm rethinking my entire interpretation of Moore and his career because of these constant, irrationally hateful and extreme statements. Michael Moore, Anderson Cooper, Don Lemon, Rachal Maddow and Stephen Colbert can play to the crowd for now, but once Trump's term ends people will never be able to take them seriously as public figures again because of all of their delusional tirades while Trump was in office.

Pft , Dec 21, 2018 11:30:32 PM | link
Don Bacon@77

Troop moral today is far different than Vietnam. Reason in no order of importance

1. Well paid volunteer army, well trained with skills transferrable to private sector
2. Limited tour length, long paid breaks between tours
3. Skype/internet access on tours to stay in touch with family firiends
4. Contractors to do much of the dirty work
5. Military glorification at home treats them as heros and plenty of discounts
6. Far fewer casualties
7. Great benefits once the leave miliitary (loans, paid university transferrable)
8. Tax benfits for companies hiring vets helps them in job market

The main negative with fewer troops in Syria or Afghanistan means there are fewer tours which means less money.

I expect they will be deployed elsewhere. Where is the big question. Like you say, moral not an issue


flayer , Dec 21, 2018 11:34:45 PM | link
RE: Posted by: Pft | Dec 21, 2018 11:30:32 PM | 81

This is why you should never "thank them for their service." They're selfish and/or deluded pricks. Not heroes. It's a scam from start to finish.

Peter AU 1 , Dec 21, 2018 11:48:20 PM | link
Kadath 80 "do these jackanapes not understand that their words and behaviours are being recorded and people will remember it"
The average person that watches MSM have the memory of a goldfish when it comes to politics.

"His irrational hatred of Trump has just driven him to torch all of his prior Anti-War work"
Most that make it in politics or entertainment go with the flow - whatever will further their career. Empty people. I don't know this Michael Moor, but sounds lie he is one of this type.

telescope , Dec 21, 2018 11:48:22 PM | link
People like Lindsey Graham simply cannot comprehend that USA is in fact a demolished country, with its last leg - the stock market - getting cut off in real time, as we speak. The implications of American equity markets collapse are momentous. The relentless year-end selling means that government revenues will be drastically reduced, by at least couple hundred billion dollars, driving US budget deficit to well in excess of $1.2T in current fiscal year. And that's in a benign case. If America slips in a recession, and has to resort to fiscal stimulus, we are talking about $1.5-2T budget shortfall. Add quickly deteriorating demographics, and "japanisation" of the USA is all but inevitable (and yes, US financial system is a dead man walking)
Trump, although not the brightest bulb, is infinitely smarter than Grahams, Rubios and Cottons of the world. He knows that it's much better to withdraw on what looks like own accord now, than being kicked out in the most disgraceful fashion upon the passage of time. Or even worse, having your troops marooned in the troubled region without any prospect of being extricated, unless on the most humiliating terms.
Whether Trump succeeds or fails in returning the troops home is irrelevant at this point. They are coming home anyway. The only question remaining is not if but when, and how.
Pft , Dec 21, 2018 11:57:14 PM | link
Bolton announces Trumps Africa strategy

https://thehill.com/policy/international/421179-bolton-warns-russia-china-threaten-us-in-africa

The Cebrowski plan for Latin America

http://www.voltairenet.org/article204400.html

Maybe Trump is diversyfing, scaling down in the The Middle East (a lots been accomplished already) and ramp up efforts in Africa and Latin America to counter BRICS

Pft , Dec 22, 2018 12:00:04 AM | link
Meant "diversifying". Spell check hasnt been working well here since i upgraded to ios12
once and future , Dec 22, 2018 12:20:01 AM | link
Thanks, b.

stonebird @40
OT (apologies) Can you help with the evidence that Maria Butina was subjected to these abuses while in solitary?

ben , Dec 22, 2018 12:45:15 AM | link
@ 80: Yes, agreed, my impressions on MM will change. Too bad really, that people sacrifice their credibility, based on blind hatred.

I'm speaking only of MM, the rest lost their credibility, IMO, long ago..

james , Dec 22, 2018 12:50:40 AM | link
@87 once and future... first off i want to thank stonebird for there comments on this topic.. solitary confinement is inhumane.. that the usa is keen to use it in all sorts of circumstances, is a reflection of their abu ghraib, guantanemo mentality... solitary confinement is more of the same.. in a civilized world it would never be allowed to be done... but this is more exceptional nation stuff from the exceptional nation and what the world has come to expect from a country that preaches one thing while practicing something completely different..

80 kadath... michael moore has really fallen... i was unaware of this and am not tapped into the usa msm to be able to follow.. in fact, it is so depressing i have no interest in following much of anything coming out of the usa at this point...

@78 circe.. another name mentioned was this tulsi gabbard from hawaii.. i doubt it very much... the usa continues to fly way off the rails...

what is especially telling is the response from the usa on trumps decision here... caitin johnstone has a good overview on this..
Endless War Has Been Normalized And Everyone Is Crazy

karlof1 , Dec 22, 2018 1:10:40 AM | link
james @89 and others--

Michael Moore destroyed his credibility when he failed to denounce Obama for not jailing the Banksters and it's been downhill from there as it's been with so many of his ilk. Another case of money ruining youthful idealism. Caitlin's on a roll and deserves a much larger audience. The propagandizers have deluded themselves via their own machinations and are now going mad.

Albert Pike , Dec 22, 2018 1:11:24 AM | link
"there also a contingent of 1,100 French troops"... You can hear me laughing after reading this. The French empire was over a long long time ago and they still think that Syria is their colony. France has been sending French Jihadists for regime change in Syria since 2011 and their mission has failed since Russia intervened in 2015. France cannot even send troops to Mali - destabilized by Jihadists created by France in Libya to topple Kadhafi, without the help of the US!!! France is a de-facto vassal state of the US since they decided to joined the NATO central command under Sarkozy who was bribed by the zionist neocons.
Hoarsewhisperer , Dec 22, 2018 1:44:00 AM | link
...
US can pretend ignorance and then step back in again under the cover of stabilizing the region with replacement for the kurds to use against Assad and protect assets in the NE. Everyone except the Kurds is happy, almost.
Posted by: Pft | Dec 21, 2018 11:19:21 PM | 79

I think you're right. And I hope so, too...
The Yanks should be counting their blessings. I thought it was extraordinarily generous of Putin to agree with Donald that "the US beat ISIS in Syria" considering how half-assed/limp-wristed their anti-ISIS actions were in comparison with Russia's 100+ sorties per day 24/7 for many months.
Imo, if the Yanks dream up another excuse to go back into Syria, Putin will caution against it and then make sure that none of them get out alive.

Blooming Barricade , Dec 22, 2018 2:07:30 AM | link
I personally distinguish between Trump's decision to withdraw from Syria and his move to withdraw partially from Afghanistan. The latter is a step towards ending a brutal, illegal NATO occupation war of over 17 years. The former is also illegal but the Syrian Kurds (left wing and largely communist) are likely to be supplanted as counters to "Iran" by fascists Turkey and Israel (this has been confirmed in reports), so we're moving from tactical NATO proxies to actual NATO governments seizing Syrian land.

All of that being said, both are policy decisions that should be able to be debated freely. I can totally see why many on the anti-imperialist left welcome the decision to withdraw from Syria, I'm not entirely unsympathetic to them. It the US and international media response has been horrific.

The New York Times and Guardian are basically now neconservative papers indistinguishable from the Wall Steet Journal and Daily Telegraph. Not a word of dissent is even remotely allowed or involved. The Blob has totally taken over the entirety of the liberal global establishment which sees Trump's move as "treasonous." Not looking forward to 2020 when Democrats will run on identical foreign policy platforms to Mitt Romney.

Circe , Dec 22, 2018 2:15:25 AM | link
@80

Not sure if you watched when Michael Moore received the Oscar for Farenheit 9/11. Let's remember he was addressing the top elite Liberal crowd and got booed. What is it they say about prophets in their own land? Oh yeah, Jesus said: A prophet is without honor in his own country.

I actually have some sympathy for Michael Moore. Aside from being a major critic of the Bush Administration, Michael Moore was also very critical of Obama, and Hillary and was lambasted by liberal centrists and neolibs. He was considered part of the radical left and despite the success of his documentaries, he continued to be marginalized and never received the respect he deserved. In 2015, Moore was supporting Bernie Sanders, but when Bernie was railroaded, Moore who couldn't see himself voting for a Republican ever, especially a depraved billionaire whom he rightly viewed as Chaos personified felt that Hillary was the lesser evil, and from there found the respect that had been denied to him by his own side and especially after he predicted Hillary was about to lose despite the polls and Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania would deny her the Presidency. From the day his prediction materialized Democrats were in awe of his perception. Since then he exchanged integrity for their respect. The Michael Moore of 2003 would never criticize military de-escalation.

However, Moore recently released a new documentary Farenheit 11/9 wherein apparently he's critical of Democrats whom he blames for the rise of Trump.

So don't be too hard on Moore who was an outcast in liberal country for too long. Once you've earned the respect of your own and the mainstream it's not so easy to speak your truth anymore. Thanks to Trump and the Dems, Moore has been temporarily altered. But you're right, he'll look back with regret on this Syria opinion.

I can't stand Trump either, but I agree that getting out of Syria and de-escalating is a good thing...IF in fact that's what he's really up to.

Circe , Dec 22, 2018 2:20:02 AM | link
JR might be interested to know that Michael Moore believes that Hillary handed Trump the Presidency.
b , Dec 22, 2018 2:23:14 AM | link
Bolton's Hawkish Syria Plan Backfired, Pushing Trump to Get Out

The national security adviser expanded U.S. goals in Syria to challenge Iran. But Trump wasn't on board, senior officials say, and Turkey took an opportunity to push the U.S. out.

Hoarsewhisperer , Dec 22, 2018 2:26:43 AM | link
...
Most that make it in politics or entertainment go with the flow - whatever will further their career. Empty people. I don't know this Michael Moor, but sounds lie he is one of this type.
Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Dec 21, 2018 11:48:20 PM | 83

Michael Moore has produced some brilliant anti-establishment docos focusing on gun-control (Bowling for Columbine), the US healthcare rort, the sub-prime scam, and the absence of socio-economic well-being in AmeriKKKa (Where To Invade Next?).
I'm hoping that Kadath @ #80 is kidding, but he's right about Moore being rabidly anti-Trump from the get-go.

Peter AU 1 , Dec 22, 2018 2:37:58 AM | link
Geo-political chess. Russia, Turkey, Iran have called check and Trump is moving his pieces accordingly. I think he will pull the US out of Syria. Seems he is not as blinded by his hatred of Iran as his appointees.
psychohistorian , Dec 22, 2018 2:47:28 AM | link
@ b with the link about Bolton

So, does this mean that Bolton should or will resign?

I thought the update of the linked article with the statement about the Kurds from the White House official was interesting: ""They've done the majority of the fighting against ISIS in Syria," one U.S. official said. "How do you treat a partner like this?""

[Dec 22, 2018] RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP 20 DECEMBER 2018 by Patrick Armstrong)

Dec 22, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

SYRIA. The US is leaving . Here's Trump (his saying ISIS is defeated is flim flam; he would remember the saying about Vietnam: "declare victory and leave"). Lots of speculation why and what: here's the best I've seen so far . Everyone who hates Trump hates it: I look forward to pink pussy hat protesters. Will we have a sudden "Assad gases children" false flag? Will the borg just disobey him? Wait and see. But this is one of the reasons people voted for him: these wars do not "make America great".

PUTIN PRESSER. Quick summary . I'll cover it next Sitrep if I think he's said anything new.

TODAY'S AMUSEMENT. " US Coast Guard Turns Down Arctic Exercise Because 40-year-old Icebreaker Might Break Down And Would Require Russian Help ". "The country that doesn't make anything" has the two most powerful icebreakers in existence . You can cruise on one of them .

SOLZHENITSYN. Putin attended the unveiling of a statue on the centenary of his birth and met with his widow in the Kremlin . I repeat, for those who think Putin worships Stalin or something , that excerpts from the Gulag Archipelago are required reading in Russian schools . ( The NYT has a poor memory .)

STUNT OR REMINDER? Two White Swans visited Venezuela. Prompting this nugget from the stupidity mine: " The Russian and Venezuelan people should see this for what it is: two corrupt governments squandering public funds, and squelching liberty and freedom while their people suffer ."

GUNS. SIPRI reports that Russia is the second biggest arms exporter in 2017 (USA first at five times as much). Of course, apart from other things, Syria has proved to be a great showcase and test bed .

SANCTIONS. The US Treasury has announced that it has dropped its sanctions against RusAl (the second largest aluminum company) but will keep them against its – what now? former owner? absentee owner? Meanwhile more sanctions against some other Russian entities for some imagined involvement in some imagined crime .

WESTERN VALUES™. Months of solitary confinement, threats and emptied wallet and Maria Butina takes a plea deal . As Beria is said to have said "give me the man and I will give you the crime".

THE EMPTINESS OF FORMER FLAPS. Murdered by Kremlin !!!! Oops, natural causes . Reminiscent of the death of Badri Patarkatsishvili in 2008: another enemy of Putin dies ; oops, Saakashvili's enemy. ( Meanwhile, in Georgia, a recording has appeared of Saakashvili ordering his death ).

EUROPEANS ARE REVOLTING. There's a plan to strengthen the Euro's international role . Merkel criticised Trump for "populism" and similar doubleplusungood things . The EU foreign policy chief says shortcomings of the IMF Treaty are no reason to scrap it . But, obediently the European Parliament praises Ukraine, condemns Russia and calls for stopping Nord Stream . (Germany will ignore the last). And it extended sanctions on Russia because of " zero progress in implementation of Minsk agreements ". Moscow has no obligations under the agreement but that fact has never stopped them before. So baby steps away from Daddy, big steps back.

AMERICA-HYSTERICA. Some developments. The reporter who first spread the Dossier story now doubts it . Google CEA says "Russians" spent less than $5000 . Nate Silver doubts there was much effect . The so called influence campaign was really a click-bait scheme to sucker advertisers . But it rolls on . For your amusement, a mash-up of how Trump is finished !!!!

PUTIN DERANGEMENT SYNDROME. MoA lists all the things Putin has "weaponised" . But don't dare laugh: the BBC solemnly informs us he's weaponised humour . A US comic book has him as villain and a super hero whose sister was gassed "by Assad, the Russians' puppet" . London Times: " Russian accounts fuel French outrage online ". Paris is investigating . And why not blame Russia? Everybody in the EU is as happy as happy can be, only the malign efforts of wicked Moscow could make them think they weren't. McCarthyism wasn't as crackbrained as this.

POLAND. The LNG deal is signed. 20 years FOB at Texas . This can't be cheaper than Russian gas.

UKRAINE. " Israel's ambassador to Kiev 'shocked' after seeing that a region in Ukraine honors Nazi collaborator Bandera ". He just noticed? Not just a region . A parliamentarian says the EU cheated them . It is not inconceivable that the election, if Poroshenko can't finagle his way out of it, may bring some change. The new president can blame the old and it will be a re-arrangement of the deckchairs and who knows what will happen in such an unhappy and unstable country? If Poroshenko orders an attack the certain defeat will stir more up. But change is more likely worse than better.

© Patrick Armstrong Analysis, Canada Russia Observer

[Dec 21, 2018] Vadim Rogovin and the sociology of Stalinism by Andrea Peters

Notable quotes:
"... The State and the Opposition ..."
"... Social Development and Societal Morals ..."
"... Social Development and Societal Morals ..."
"... Was There an Alternative? ..."
"... Political Education ..."
"... Economic Sciences ..."
"... Sociological Research ..."
"... The Revolution Betrayed ..."
"... Was There an Alternative? ..."
Sep 25, 2018 | www.wsws.org

... In the introduction to the second volume in his series, The State and the Opposition , Rogovin noted:

A peculiarity of the counter-revolution realized by Stalin and his accomplices was that it took place under the ideological cover of Marxist phraseology and never-ending attestations of loyalty to the October Revolution Naturally, such a counter-revolution demanded historically unprecedented conglomerations of lies and falsifications, the fabrication of ever-newer myths

Similar to the Stalinists, modern anti-communists use two kinds of myths: namely, ideological and historical. Under ideological myths we have in mind false ideas, oriented to the future -- that is, illusory prognoses and promises. These sorts of products of false consciousness reveal their mythological character by way of their practical realization.

Myths that appeal not to the future but to the past are another matter.

In principle, it is easier to expose these myths than anti-scientific prognoses and reactionary projects.

Like ideological ones, historical myths are a product of immediate class interests products of historical ignorance or deliberate falsification -- that is, the concealment of some historical facts, the tendentious exaggeration, and the distorted interpretation of others.

Refuting these myths is only possible by rehabilitating historical truth -- the honest portrayal of actual facts and tendencies of the past.

In this work, Rogovin argued that the fundamental problem facing the USSR was "a deepening of socially unjustified differentiation of incomes and the comforts of life." "Workers regularly encounter instances of unearned enrichment through the deceit and the ripping-off of the state and the people. [ ] Certain groups of the population have the means to meet their needs at a scale beyond any reasonable norms and outside of their relationship to social production. [ ] There does not exist any systematic control of sources of income and the acquisition of valuable goods," he wrote.

In a remarkable statement, inequality, he insisted, not wage-leveling, expressed "in essence, the social structure of [Soviet] society."

Rogovin called for the implementation of income declarations, whereby people would be required to report the size of their total income, not just their official wages, so that the government and researchers might actually know the real distribution of earnings. He advocated for the establishment of a "socially-guaranteed maximum income" to combat "unjustified inequality."

Vadim Rogovin and Nina Naumova's 1984 Social Development and Societal Morals

Elsewhere, Rogovin further argued that inequality lay at the center of the USSR's falling labor productivity. In a work co-authored with Nina Naumova, Social Development and Societal Morals , he maintained that the socio-economic crisis facing the USSR stemmed from the fact that inequality was growing in Soviet society; people worked poorly in the Soviet Union not because their work was inadequately remunerated relative to others, but because their commitment to social production had been eroded by intensifying social stratification that was unrecorded in official statistics.

In 1983, the very same year that Rogovin authored his critical report on the state of inequality in the USSR that ended up in the hands of the Moscow authorities, another sociologist, Tatyana Zaslavskaya, would issue a report, kept secret at first but later leaked to the Western press, advocating a transition to "economic methods of management," -- in other words, market-based reforms. A central aspect of this was policy centered around increasing inequality in workers' compensation in order to stimulate production. Zaslavskaya noted at the time that such reforms would be opposed by what she described as "the more apathetic, the more elderly, and the less qualified groups of workers."

In a few years, Zaslavskaya would become a leading advisor to Mikhail Gorbachev and one of the main architects of the pro-market, perestroika reforms. In 1986, she was appointed the head of the Soviet Sociological Association. Her positions were widely embraced by the discipline.

Tatiana Zaslavskaya and Mikhail Gorbachev 1989 at Congress of People's Deputies. [Copyright RIA Novosti]

In contrast, Rogovin's views were frequently, and ever more so, the object of sharp criticism. In 1985, a discussion occurred at the Institute of Sociology regarding a report produced by Rogovin and his research team about Soviet lifestyles. In it, Rogovin made openly critical comments about the anti-egalitarian impact of the shadow economy and the transfer of wealth through inheritance. It was sharply criticized by some of the Institute's top scholars, who both disagreed with its content and were nervous about the response it might get from the authorities. At the discussion, one such individual remarked:

The report by the author presented here has two basic failings: 1) it is inadequately self-critical; 2) the authors, and in particular, Rogovin himself, aren't appropriately thinking of the addressee to whom this report is directed. The report is going to the highest levels [of the Communist Party] and superfluous emotion is not necessary. The next criticism [I have] is about "unjustified inequality." In principle, there can be no such thing.

[ ] in the note to the TsK KPSS [Central Committee of the Communist Party] [ ] the recommendations [that you make] demand the utmost care in how you approach them, particularly those that relate to the "third economy" and taxes on inheritance. [There should be] a minimum of categoricalness and a maximum of conciliatoriness.

As the decade wore on, Rogovin began to adopt an ever more critical stance on perestroika , whose devastating economic consequences were increasingly showing themselves. Rather than bringing prosperity to the masses, Gorbachev's reforms created a total crisis in the state sector of the economy, exacerbating widespread shortages in food, clothing and other basic necessities. Economic growth declined from 1986 onwards. In 1989, inflation reached 19 percent, eroding the gains the population had made in income over the preceding years. As the scholar John Elliot noted, "When account is taken of additional costs, real per capita income and real wages probably decreased, particularly for the bottom half of the population. These costs included: deteriorating quality and unavailability of goods; proliferation of special distribution channels; longer and more time-consuming lines; extended rationing; higher prices and higher inflation-rates in non-state stores (e.g., collective farm market prices were nearly three times those in state stores in 1989); virtual stagnation in the provision of health and education; and the growth of barter, regional autarky, and local protectionism."

Newly established private enterprises had great leeway to set prices because they faced little to no competition from the state sector. They charged whatever the market would bear, which led to substantial increases in income inequality and poverty, with the most vulnerable layers of the population hardest hit. The changes were so severe that Elliot insists that "income inequalities had actually become greater in the USSR than in the USA." In the late 1980s, fully two-thirds of the Soviet population had an income that fell below the officially-recommended "decent level" of 100 to 150 rubles a month. At the same time, the shadow economy alone is estimated to have produced 100,000–150,000 millionaires in the late 1980s. By the early 1990s, one-quarter of the population or 70 million people were destitute according to official Soviet estimates. Miners' strikes and other signs of social discontent erupted across the country.

Sociologists were intimately aware of the growing popular discontent. The Communist Party bureaucracy called upon them to help manage the situation. In 1989, the director of the Institute of Sociology received a request from the highest layers of the Communist Party. He was asked to respond to a letter from a rank-and-file party member that expressed extreme hostility towards the country's "elites." The letter writer described the party as dominated by an "opportunist nucleus" and called for the waging of a "class war" by the working masses against their policies. The ideology division of the Central Committee of the Communist Party wanted the Institute's director to respond to the letter because the sentiments expressed in it were "widespread (representative) [sic] among the working class."

Soviet economist and sociologist Genady Lisichkin

In the midst of these circumstances, Rogovin came under fire in one of the country's media outlets for articles he was writing against the promotion of social inequality. Since the mid-1980s, he had been championing the implementation of income declarations that would require people to report their full earnings, progressive taxes, and a socially-declared maximum income. Based on the amount of positive correspondence he was receiving from readers, it was clear that his views resonated with the population, a fact noted by Western scholars at the time. In a public press debate with the economist Gennady Lisichkin, the latter accused Rogovin of wanting to strengthen the hand of the bureaucracy and implied that he was a Stalinist. He was allegedly guilty of "Luddism," religious-like preaching, misquoting Marx to find support for his arguments, wanting the state to have the power to move people around "like cattle," defending a deficit-system of distribution based on "ration cards," suffering from "left-wing" infantilism, and being a "demagogue" and a "war communist." He attempted to link Rogovin to the very force to which he was most hostile -- Stalinism. The head of the Soviet Sociological Association, Tatiana Zaslavskaya, openly endorsed Lisichkin's positions.

The disagreements between Rogovin and other scholars over perestroika evolved into a fierce dispute about Soviet history and the nature of Stalinism. Rogovin identified a relationship between cheerleading for pro-market reforms and historical falsification. There was an increasingly widespread effort to link egalitarianism with Stalinism, the struggle for equality with political repression. In Was There an Alternative? , Rogovin frequently talked about the fact that the move towards a market economy was accompanied by the propagation of myths about Soviet history. This was one of those myths.

In 1991, Zaslavskaya co-authored a book that claimed that the Soviet Union's problems lay in the fact that in the late 1920s it abandoned the New Economic Policy (NEP), during which the government had loosened state control of the economy and restored market relations to an extent, in an effort to revitalize the economy under conditions of isolation, backwardness, and near economic collapse due to years of war. A one-sided and historically dishonest account of the NEP, this work did not contain any discussion of the political struggle that occurred during the NEP between Stalin and the Left Opposition over the malignant growth of inequality, the bureaucratization of the state and economy, and the crushing of inner-party democracy. The book skipped over this history because it would have cut across one of the central arguments made at the time in favor of perestroika -- that market relations were inherently at odds with the interests of the Communist Party bureaucracy. The book's account of labor policy under Stalin was also false. It insisted that during the 1930s revolutionary enthusiasm was the primary method used to stimulate people to work, ignoring the fact that income inequality rose substantially at this time. As the scholar Murray Yanowitch has pointed out, under Stalin "equality mongering" was labeled the brainchild of "Trotskyites, Zinovievites, Bukharinites and other enemies of the people."

In the 1980s, sociologists and other scholars promoting perestroika sought to imbue these policies with a humanitarian mission, insisting that market reforms would allow "the human factor," which had been crushed under the weight of bureaucratic stagnation, to rise again. The "human factor" was defined as man's desire for personal recognition through differentiated, material reward. It was supposedly the primary driver of human activity. To the degree that official wage policy in the USSR led to a relatively egalitarian distribution of social resources with wages leveled-out between skilled and unskilled labor, it flew in the face of man's desire for recognition of his own individual contribution. Rising inequality in income -- necessitated by the demands of socio-economic development -- was part of the process of "humanizing socialism." The argument was made that increasing social stratification would ultimately provide real "socialist justice."

As Tatiana Zaslavskaya claimed in 1990, "Despite all its limitations, the 'classical' market is, in fact, a democratic (and therefore anti-bureaucratic) economic institution. Within the framework of its exchange relationships, all participants are at least formally equal; no-one is subordinated to anyone else. Buyers and sellers act in their own interests and nobody can make them conclude deals they do not want to conclude. The buyers are free to select sellers who will let them have goods on the most advantageous terms, but the sellers too can chose buyers offering the best price."

In making this argument, scholars relied upon the official Soviet definition of socialism -- "from each according to his ability, to each according to his labor" -- that was enshrined in the country's 1936 constitution. This was also known as the Stalin constitution.

In 1988, Rogovin used the concept of the "human factor" to make a very different argument. In a piece entitled, "The Human Factor and the Lessons of the Past," he insisted that the defense of social inequality by the Soviet elite was one of the key reasons why the "human factor" had degenerated in the USSR. The very best elements of "the human factor" had been crushed by Stalin during the Terror. Corruption, disillusionment, parasitism, careerism and individual self-promotion -- the most distinctive features of the Brezhnev era -- were the "human factor" created by Stalinism. In promoting inequality and the market, Rogovin insisted, perestroika did not mark a break with Stalinism or the legacy of the Brezhnev era, as was so often claimed, but rather their further realization.

One year later he wrote, "The adherents of the new elitist conceptions want to see Soviet society with such a level of social differentiation that existed under Stalin but having gotten rid of Stalinist repression. It is forgotten that the debauched character of these repressions [ ] flowed from the effort to not simply restrain, but rather physically annihilate above all those forces in the party and in the country that, though silenced, rejected the social foundations of Stalinism."

After years of studying these questions in near-total isolation, Rogovin was finally able to write openly about this subject. He tested the waters by first publishing "L.D. Trotsky on Art" in August 1989 in the journal Theater . It was followed shortly thereafter by an article entitled "The Internal Party Struggles of the 1920s: Reasons and Lessons," also published in a journal outside of his discipline, Political Education . Moving closer to a forum likely to be followed by his colleagues in sociology, in early 1990 Rogovin published "L.D. Trotsky on NEP" in Economic Sciences . And finally, a few months later, "L.D. Trotsky on Social Relations in the USSR" came out in the flagship journal of his discipline, Sociological Research .

Rogovin's first article on the subject within his discipline reviewed Trotsky's role in Soviet history during the 1920s and summarized his seminal work, The Revolution Betrayed . It made clear to whom Rogovin fundamentally owed the views he had been advancing over the course of the previous decade.

Trotsky, however, continued to be vilified by Soviet officialdom. In 1987, on the 70th anniversary of the Russian Revolution, Gorbachev described Trotsky as "the arch-heretic of Soviet history, an 'excessively self-assured politician who always vacillated and cheated."

As a result of Rogovin's profound sympathies for Trotskyism and efforts to place his work in the tradition of the Left Opposition's critique of Stalinism, he was increasingly isolated from his colleagues, several of whom entered the Yeltsin administration and helped facilitate the eventual implementation of shock therapy, a key component of capitalist restoration in Russia. His discipline never forgave him for his intransigence and principles. One will find almost no mention of Rogovin or his contributions in the numerous monographs and other publications that have come out over the last 20 years about sociology in the USSR.

But Rogovin's isolation from Soviet sociology did not undermine his capacity to work. Rather, it coincided with the start of the publication of Was There an Alternative? In 1992, Rogovin met the International Committee of the Fourth International, and established a close political and intellectual relationship with the world Trotskyist movement that would intensify over the course of the next several years. This relationship was the basis upon which Rogovin made his immense contribution to the fight to defend Trotsky and historical truth. Two recently republished tributes to Rogovin by David North review this history.

Despite his death twenty years ago, through his work Rogovin continues his struggle to arm the working class with historical consciousness.

[Dec 21, 2018] Looks like an o ld, sick neocon Hillarty still tries to influence events, continuing her warmongring

The trouble with CIA democrats is not that they are stupid, but that that are evil.
Hillary proved to be really destructive witch during her Obama stunt as the Secretary of State. Destroyed Libya and Ukraine, which is no small feat.
Notable quotes:
"... The policy of the Obama administration, and particularly Hillary Clinton's State Department, was – and still is – regime change in Syria. This overrode all other considerations. We armed, trained, and "vetted" the Syrian rebels, even as we looked the other way while the Saudis and the Gulf sheikdoms funded groups like al-Nusra and al-Qaeda affiliates who wouldn't pass muster. And our "moderates" quickly passed into the ranks of the outfront terrorists, complete with the weapons we'd provided. ..."
"... She is truly an idiot. Thanks again, Ivy League. ..."
Dec 21, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Pavel , December 21, 2018 at 10:47 am

The Grauniad just quoted a tweet from a predictably OUTRAGED @HillaryClinton:

Actions have consequences, and whether we're in Syria or not, the people who want to harm us are there & at war. Isolationism is weakness. Empowering ISIS is dangerous. Playing into Russia & Iran's hands is foolish. This President is putting our national security at grave risk.

This from the woman who almost singlehandedly (i.e. along with David Cameron and Sarkovy) destroyed Libya and allowed -- if not encouraged -- the flow of US weapons to go into the hands of ISIS allies in the US-Saudi-Israeli obsession with toppling Assad regardless of the consequences. As Justin Raimondo wrote in Antiwar.com in 2015:

The policy of the Obama administration, and particularly Hillary Clinton's State Department, was – and still is – regime change in Syria. This overrode all other considerations. We armed, trained, and "vetted" the Syrian rebels, even as we looked the other way while the Saudis and the Gulf sheikdoms funded groups like al-Nusra and al-Qaeda affiliates who wouldn't pass muster. And our "moderates" quickly passed into the ranks of the outfront terrorists, complete with the weapons we'd provided.

This crazy policy was an extension of our regime change operation in Libya, a.k.a. "Hillary's War," where the US – "leading from behind" – and a coalition of our Western allies and the Gulf protectorates overthrew Muammar Qaddafi. There, too, we empowered radical Islamists with links to al-Qaeda affiliates – and then used them to ship weapons to their Syrian brothers, as another document uncovered by Judicial Watch shows.

After HRC's multiple foreign policy fiascos she is the last person who should be commenting on this matter.

a different chris, December 21, 2018 at 11:50 am

> the people who want to harm us are there & at war

Sounds like then they are too busy to harm us? She is truly an idiot. Thanks again, Ivy League.

[Dec 21, 2018] Similarities between neo-McCarthyism and anti-Semitism

Dec 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Theo , Dec 20, 2018 11:16:04 AM | link

As I wrote a comment on the German magazine"Die Zeit"praising Trump's decision to retreat from Syria my comment was deleted.I denounced the European whining and letting do the Americans their dirty work.Now the Europeans show their true colors.In Germany's MSM it doesn't seem to be allowed to take Trump's side.By the way -it's very good and well researched article.Thank you.

bevin , Dec 20, 2018 11:16:15 AM | 22 ">link

". If you want to blame "the Jews" for all the problems in the world, just remember that your doing so in this language actually strengthens the position of the Zionists. And you may want to consider that at least *some* of these Jew-bashing critiques of Israel on sites like Unz and others are most certainly written by paid propagandists of the state of Israel." WJ@ 14

Absolutely right. The routine way in which, all over the internet, the tired and discredited themes of the anti-Semites and, their soul sisters, the anti-Communists infect every serious discussion or sensible discourse is maddening.

There is not the tiniest doubt who benefits from this idiocy and it isn't the people of Palestine or the working people.

[Dec 20, 2018] Manufacturing Truth by CJ Hopkins

Dec 04, 2018 | off-guardian.org
you're one of the millions of human beings who, despite a preponderance of evidence to the contrary, still believe there is such a thing as "the truth," you might not want to read this essay. Seriously, it can be extremely upsetting when you discover that there is no "truth" or rather, that what we're all conditioned to regard as "truth" from the time we are children is just the product of a technology of power, and not an empirical state of being. Humans, upon first encountering this fact, have been known to freak completely out and start jabbering about the "Word of God," or "the immutable laws of quantum physics," and run around burning other people at the stake or locking them up and injecting them with Thorazine. I don't want to be responsible for anything like that, so consider this your trigger warning.

OK, now that that's out of the way, let's take a look at how "truth" is manufactured. It's actually not that complicated. See, the "truth" is well, it's a story, essentially. It's whatever story we are telling ourselves at any given point in history ("we" being the majority of people, those conforming to the rules of whatever system wields enough power to dictate the story it wants everyone to be telling themselves). Everyone understands this intuitively, but the majority of people pretend they don't in order to be able to get by in the system, which punishes anyone who does not conform to its rules, or who contradicts its story. So, basically, to manufacture the truth, all you really need is (a) a story, and (b) enough power to coerce a majority of people in your society to pretend to believe it.

I'll return to this point a little later. First, let's look at a concrete example of our system manufacturing "truth." I'm going to use The Guardian's most recent blatantly fabricated article ( "Manafort held secret talks with Assange in Ecuadorian embassy" ) as an example, but I could just as well have chosen any of a host of other fabricated stories disseminated by "respectable" outlets over the course of the last two years. The "Russian Propaganda Peddlers" story. The "Russia Might Have Poisoned Hillary Clinton" story. The "Russians Hacked the Vermont Power Grid" story. The "Golden Showers Russian Pee-Tape" story. The "Novichok Assassins" story. The "Bana Alabed Speaks Out" story. The "Trump's Secret Russian Server" story. The "Labour Anti-Semitism Crisis" story. The "Russians Orchestrated Brexit" story. The "Russia is Going to Hack the Midterms" story. The "Twitter Bots" story. And the list goes on.

I'm not going to debunk the Guardian article here. It has been debunked by better debunkers than I (e.g., Jonathan Cook , Craig Murray , Glenn Greenwald , Moon of Alabama, and many others). [ ed. including us ]

The short version is, The Guardian's Luke Harding, a shameless hack who will affix his name to any propaganda an intelligence agency feeds him, alleged that Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign manager, secretly met with Julian Assange (and unnamed "Russians") on numerous occasions from 2013 to 2016, presumably to conspire to collude to brainwash Americans into not voting for Clinton. Harding's earth-shaking allegations, which The Guardian prominently featured and flogged, were based on well, absolutely nothing, except the usual anonymous "intelligence sources." After actual journalists pointed this out, The Guardian quietly revised the piece (employing the subjunctive mood rather liberally), buried it in the back pages of its website, and otherwise pretended like they had never published it.

[Dec 20, 2018] Opinion The Guardian's Desperate Attempt To Connect Assange To Russiagate Backfires

Dec 20, 2018 | disobedientmedia.com

The Guardian's latest attack on Julian Assange was not only a fallacious smear, it represented a desperate attempt on behalf of the British intelligence community to conflate the pending US charges against the journalist with Russiagate. The Guardian's article seeks to deflect from the reality that the prosecution of Assange will focus on Chelsea Manning-Era releases and Vault 7, not the DNC or Podesta emails.

We assert this claim based on the timing of the publication, the Guardian's history of subservience to British intelligence agencies, animosity between The Guardian and WikiLeaks, and the longstanding personal feud between Guardian journalist Luke Harding and Assange. This conclusion is also supported by Harding's financial and career interest in propping up the Russiagate narrative

[Dec 20, 2018] The Guardian's Reputation In Tatters After Forger Revealed To Have Co-Authored Assange Smear

Notable quotes:
"... " The information in this post alone should make everyone question why in the world the Guardian would continue to use a source like Villavicencio who is obviously tied to the U.S. government, the CIA, individuals like Thor Halvorssen and Bill Browder, and opponents of both Julian Assange and former President Rafael Correa." ..."
"... 2014 Ecuador's Foreign Ministry accused the Guardian of publishing a story based on a document it says was fabricated by Fernando Villavicencio, pictured below with the authors of the fake Manafort-Assange 'secret meeting' story, Harding and Collyns." ..."
"... "There is also evidence that the author of this falsified document is Fernando Villavicencio, a convicted slanderer and opponent of Ecuador's current government. This can be seen from the file properties of the document that the Guardian had originally posted (but which it has since taken down and replaced with a version with this evidence removed)." ..."
"... " This video from the news wire Andes alleges that Villavicencio's name appeared in the metadata of the document originally uploaded alongside The Guardian's story." ..."
"... One of my greatest journalistic experiences was working for months on Assange's research with colleagues from the British newspaper the Guardian, Luke Harding, Dan Collins and the young journalist Cristina Solórzano from @ somos_lafuente " ..."
"... The tweet suggests, but does not specifically state, that Villavicencio worked with the disastrous duo on the Assange-Manafort piece. Given the history and associations of all involved, this statement alone should cause extreme skepticism in any unsubstantiated claims, or 'anonymously sourced' claims, the Guardian makes concerning Julian Assange and Ecuador. ..."
"... The two photographs of Villavicencio with Harding and Collyns as well as the evidence showing he co-authored the piece doesn't just capture a trio of terrible journalists, it documents the involvement of multiple actors associated with intelligence agencies and fabricated stories. ..."
"... Collusion: Secret Meetings, Dirty Money, and How Russia Helped Donald Trump Win." ..."
"... That Harding and Collyns worked intensively with Villavicencio for "months" on the "Assange story," the fact that Villavicencio was initially listed as a co-author on the original version of the Guardian's article, and the recent denial by Fidel Narvaez , raises the likelihood that Harding and the Guardian were not simply the victims of bad sources who duped them, as claimed by some. ..."
Dec 20, 2018 | disobedientmedia.com

Regular followers of WikiLeaks-related news are at this point familiar with the multiple serious infractions of journalistic ethics by Luke Harding and the Guardian, especially (though not exclusively) when it comes to Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. However, another individual at the heart of this matter is far less familiar to the public. That man is Fernando Villavicencio, a prominent Ecuadorian political activist and journalist, director of the USAID-funded NGO Fundamedios and editor of online publication FocusEcuador .

Most readers are also aware of the Guardian's recent publication of claims that Julian Assange met with former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort on three occasions. This has now been definitively debunked by Fidel Narvaez, the former Consul at Ecuador's London embassy between 2010 and 2018, who says Paul Manafort has never visited the embassy during the time he was in charge there. But this was hardly the first time the outlet published a dishonest smear authored by Luke Harding against Assange. The paper is also no stranger to publishing stories based on fabricated documents.

In May, Disobedient Media reported on the Guardian's hatchet-job relating to 'Operation Hotel,' or rather, the normal security operations of the embassy under former Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa. That hit-piece , co-authored by Harding and Dan Collyns, asserted among other things that (according to an anonymous source) Assange hacked the embassy's security system. The allegation was promptly refuted by Correa as "absurd" in an interview with The Intercept , and also by WikiLeaks as an "anonymous libel" with which the Guardian had "gone too far this time. We're suing."

A shared element of The Guardian's 'Operation Hotel' fabrications and the latest libel attempting to link Julian Assange to Paul Manafort is none other than Fernando Villavicencio of FocusEcuador. In 2014 Villavicencio was caught passing a forged document to the Guardian , which published it without verifying it. When the forgery was revealed, the Guardian hurriedly took the document down but then tried to cover up that it had been tampered with by Villavicencio when it re-posted it a few days later.

How is Villavicencio tied to The Guardian's latest smear of Assange? Intimately, it turns out.

Who is Fernando Villavicencio?

Earlier this year, an independent journalist writing under the pseudonym Jimmyslama penned a comprehensive report detailing Villavicencio's relationships with pro-US actors within Ecuador and the US. She sums up her findings, which are worth reading in full :

" The information in this post alone should make everyone question why in the world the Guardian would continue to use a source like Villavicencio who is obviously tied to the U.S. government, the CIA, individuals like Thor Halvorssen and Bill Browder, and opponents of both Julian Assange and former President Rafael Correa."

As most readers recall, it was Correa who granted Assange asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Villavicencio was so vehemently opposed to Rafael Correa's socialist government that during the failed 2010 coup against Correa he falsely accused the President of "crimes against humanity" by ordering police to fire on the crowds (it was actually Correa who was being shot at). Correa sued him for libel, and won, but pardoned Villavicencio for the damages awarded by the court.

Assange legal analyst Hanna Jonasson recently made the link between the Ecuadorian forger Villavicencio and Luke Harding's Guardian stories based on dubious documents explicit. She Tweeted : 2014 Ecuador's Foreign Ministry accused the Guardian of publishing a story based on a document it says was fabricated by Fernando Villavicencio, pictured below with the authors of the fake Manafort-Assange 'secret meeting' story, Harding and Collyns."

Jonasson included a link to a 2014 official Ecuadorian government statement which reads in part:

"There is also evidence that the author of this falsified document is Fernando Villavicencio, a convicted slanderer and opponent of Ecuador's current government. This can be seen from the file properties of the document that the Guardian had originally posted (but which it has since taken down and replaced with a version with this evidence removed)."

The statement also notes that Villavicencio had fled the country after his conviction for libeling Correa during the 2010 coup and was at that time living as a fugitive in the United States.

It is incredibly significant, as Jonasson argues, that the authors of the Guardian's latest libelous article were photographed with Villavicencio in Ecuador shortly before publication of the Guardian's claim that Assange had conducted meetings with Manafort.

Jonasson's Twitter thread also states: " This video from the news wire Andes alleges that Villavicencio's name appeared in the metadata of the document originally uploaded alongside The Guardian's story." The 2014 Guardian piece, which aimed a falsified shot at then-President Rafael Correa, would not be the last time Villavicencio's name would appear on a controversial Guardian story before being scrubbed from existence.

Just days after the backlash against the Guardian reached fever-pitch, Villavicencio had the gall to publish another image of himself with Harding and Collyns, gloating : "

One of my greatest journalistic experiences was working for months on Assange's research with colleagues from the British newspaper the Guardian, Luke Harding, Dan Collins and the young journalist Cristina Solórzano from @ somos_lafuente " [Translated from Spanish]

The tweet suggests, but does not specifically state, that Villavicencio worked with the disastrous duo on the Assange-Manafort piece. Given the history and associations of all involved, this statement alone should cause extreme skepticism in any unsubstantiated claims, or 'anonymously sourced' claims, the Guardian makes concerning Julian Assange and Ecuador.

Astoundingly, and counter to Villavicencio's uncharacteristic coyness, a recent video posted by WikiLeaks via Twitter does show that Villavicencio was originally listed as a co-author of the Guardian's Manafort-Assange allegations, before his name was edited out of the online article. The original version can be viewed, however, thanks to archive services.

The two photographs of Villavicencio with Harding and Collyns as well as the evidence showing he co-authored the piece doesn't just capture a trio of terrible journalists, it documents the involvement of multiple actors associated with intelligence agencies and fabricated stories.

All of this provoke the question: did Villavicencio provide more bogus documents to Harding and Collyns – Harding said he'd seen a document, though he didn't publish one (or even quote from it) so readers might judge its veracity for themselves – or perhaps these three invented the accusations out of whole-cloth?

Either way, to quote WikiLeaks, the Guardian has "gone too far this time" and its already-tattered reputation is in total shambles.

Successful Propaganda, Failed Journalism

Craig Murray calls Harding an " MI6 tool ", but to this writer, Harding seems worse than an MI6 stooge: He's a wannabe-spook, hanging from the coat-tails of anonymous intelligence officers and publishing their drivel as fact without so much as a skeptical blink. His lack of self-awareness and conflation of anecdote with evidence sets him apart as either one of the most blatant, fumbling propagandists of our era, or the most hapless hack journalist to stain the pages of printed news.

To provide important context on Harding's previous journalistic irresponsibility, we again recall that he co-authored the infamous book containing the encryption password of the entire Cablegate archive, leading to a leak of the unredacted State Department Cables across the internet. Although the guilty Guardian journalists tried to blame Assange for the debacle, it was they themselves who ended up on the receiving end of some well-deserved scorn.

In addition to continuing the Guardian's and Villavicencio's vendetta against Assange and WikiLeaks, it is clearly in Harding's financial interests to conflate the pending prosecution of Assange with Russiagate. As this writer previously noted , Harding penned a book on the subject, titled: " Collusion: Secret Meetings, Dirty Money, and How Russia Helped Donald Trump Win." Tying Assange to Russiagate is good for business, as it stokes public interest in the self-evidently faulty narrative his book supports.

Even more concerning is the claim amongst publishing circles, fueled by recent events, that Harding may be writing another book on Assange, with publication presumably timed for his pending arrest and extradition and designed to cash in on the trial. If that is in fact the case, the specter arises that Harding is working to push for Assange's arrest, not just on behalf of US, UK or Ecuadorian intelligence interests, but also to increase his own book sales.

That Harding and Collyns worked intensively with Villavicencio for "months" on the "Assange story," the fact that Villavicencio was initially listed as a co-author on the original version of the Guardian's article, and the recent denial by Fidel Narvaez , raises the likelihood that Harding and the Guardian were not simply the victims of bad sources who duped them, as claimed by some.

It indicates that the fake story was constructed deliberately on behalf of the very same intelligence establishment that the Guardian is nowadays only too happy to take the knee for.

In summary, one of the most visible establishment media outlets published a fake story on its front page, in an attempt to manufacture a crucial cross-over between the pending prosecution of Assange and the Russiagate saga. This represents the latest example in an onslaught of fake news directed at Julian Assange and WikiLeaks ever since they published the largest CIA leak in history in the form of Vault 7, an onslaught which appears to be building in both intensity and absurdity as time goes on.

The Guardian has destroyed its reputation, and in the process, revealed the desperation of the establishment when it comes to Assange.

[Dec 20, 2018] Everything that falls short of fawning praise of Jews is anti-Semitic.

Dec 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

Johnny Rottenborough , says: Website December 19, 2018 at 8:49 pm GMT

With accusations of anti-Semitism flying thick and fast, goyim should bear in mind Gilad Atzmon's definition:

Everything that falls short of fawning praise of Jews is anti-Semitic.

[Dec 19, 2018] Can America Fight Two Cold Wars at Once

Notable quotes:
"... As always, Mr Buchanan's problem is that what he wants is to maintain US global hegemony indefinitely into the future. That isn't going to happen, not because of any fault on the part of the US but quite simply because that's march of human history. ..."
"... So to initiate and inflate the New Cold War, the Nitwits in DC have militarized every economic development initiative fronted by Russia and China. Under that pathological rubric, all economic activity by Russia and China is a "threat to U.S. national security". Once those economic threats have been miraculously transformed into military threats, they can only be addressed by U.S. military "Power Projection". Taxpayers, hold onto your wallets. ..."
"... "So, for the sake of this country and our children, stop listening to anti-China propaganda like this article." ..."
Dec 19, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

about:blank

Michael Kenny December 18, 2018 at 11:48 am

As always, Mr Buchanan's problem is that what he wants is to maintain US global hegemony indefinitely into the future. That isn't going to happen, not because of any fault on the part of the US but quite simply because that's march of human history.

An interesting detail is how those Russian bombers got to Venezuela. Military aircraft cannot overfly countries without their permission and flying only through international airspace would impose a rather roundabout journey.

SteveM , says: December 18, 2018 at 12:26 pm
The question should be: "Can the Global Cop Gorilla, (the U.S.) instigate two Cold Wars? And the answer is yes.

The Washington Wrecking Crew has started a new Cold War with Russia and is dragging the Europeans along. Even though Russia's obvious strategic objectives involve economic growth, not a return to Soviet hegemony over Central/Eastern Europe.

China is insisting on regional hegemony but has not demonstrated any inclination to invade its neighbors. Because it would be bad for business. And like Russia, China is focused on business, not military conquest.

So to initiate and inflate the New Cold War, the Nitwits in DC have militarized every economic development initiative fronted by Russia and China. Under that pathological rubric, all economic activity by Russia and China is a "threat to U.S. national security". Once those economic threats have been miraculously transformed into military threats, they can only be addressed by U.S. military "Power Projection". Taxpayers, hold onto your wallets.

Pat Buchanan, if you read these comments to your TAC entries, you should note that the American Exceptionalism Monster is still roaring and the continuation of the great taxpayer fleecing to pay for the incoherent cacophony will continue unabated.

As as usual the Washington Elites will always walk away rich from their wreckage.

BTW, I see that General Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. What a Warrior-Hero Dope. Anybody who talks to a cop is nuts.

david , says: December 18, 2018 at 12:46 pm
A typical anti-Chinese laundry list of hypocritical or unsubstantiated charges. I will just counter several random points:

1. China conducted cyber attack: so do US, and many nations.

2. China sends students allegedly engaged in espionage: Majority of those students are legitimate students. Further US also sends spy to China for espionage.

3. China keeps her currency below market value to maintain her trade advantage: False, China is more interested in keeping her currency STABLE than below market value. And talking about currency manipulation, please take a look at Federal Reserve. What did QE1, QE2, and below-inflation short-term rate do to the exchange rate?

4. China established internment camps for the Uighur minority: unsubstantiated charge. No Muslim countries seem to agree with this western-sourced charge.

and so on.

The foundation of China's rise is a peaceful world, and Chinese are smart to understand that. Their country is also not kidnapped by the military-industrial complex, like us. For example, even though they regard Taiwan as part of China, they are willing to withhold military solution for over 80 years, and even 100 years if necessary. Same for the South China Sea – despite all the charges against China, not a SINGLE bullet was fired in South China Sea for decades, unlike US, where thousands of bombs are dropped on several countries every year.

So, for the sake of this country and our children, stop listening to anti-China propaganda like this article.

SteveM , says: December 18, 2018 at 2:51 pm
Re: david, "So, for the sake of this country and our children, stop listening to anti-China propaganda like this article."

David, I have a more nuanced take on the Manichean model of China. I see Xi serving 2 masters. One is the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The other is the technocratic state.

Since communism has been effectively abandoned in China, Xi has turned over economic governance to the technocrats, many educated in the West with Western sensibilities. However, Xi recognizes that the CCP Nomenklatura wants two things – social stability and their cut of the action.

So the current socio-economic mixed model. I.e., regularized indoctrination and repression applied selectively to minimize dissent running in parallel with the massive economic engine managed using a mostly Western business and technical development regime. Xi will allow cronyism, graft and corruption within that market-based regime sufficient to keep the Nomenklatura happy.

The subtext then is that the Chinese are probably not going to invade anybody but they are not exactly nice guys either when it comes to managing the civilian population.

Should the U.S. actively engage in trying to coercively change domestic political conditions in China? President George Washington would no doubt have said no.

The current DC leadership composed of arrogant numbskulls and half-wits would probably beg to differ with the Founding Fathers.

Mark Thomason , says: December 18, 2018 at 3:54 pm
Look at Google maps. Those Chinese ports are in each case small container ship docks. They have a narrow channel, and berths for just a couple of container ships alongside cranes and parking areas for containers.

There is no "port" nor room for a port in the military sense. There is no space for military ships to dock or anchor, no support for military ships to re-supply or repair.

The Chinese are no doing what this fears. They are not creating what the Americans created, naval bases ringing the world.

What they are doing is what they say they are doing, the belt and road linking their trade to the world. More exactly, opening the Western less developed regions of China to markets so that can develop too. Right now, those regions must ship East to that coast, before ships take thing all the way around back again the long way. This opens a short cut to development.

This is not good news for those fearing China's rise. China is already very big, and this would enable it to become very much bigger as an economy.

However, American fears as phrased in this article are looking in the wrong direction to see the danger.

[Dec 19, 2018] The highest priority should be SEIZING the ASSETS of EVERY individual who LIED us into WAR.

Dec 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

alexander , says: December 18, 2018 at 10:17 am GMT

Dear Mr. Giraldi,

Why boycott something when you can OWN it !?!

"No taxation without representation" is the cornerstone to the founding of the nation. Is it not ?

Every Neocon Oligarch who Conspired to Defraud us into "war of aggression" should have ALL their assets seized to pay for the costs of the wars they lied us into.

No more, no less.

Choosing to "Boycott Israel "may help the suffering Palestinians to some small degree, but if anyone is serious about helping The UNITED STATES ..The highest priority should be SEIZING the ASSETS of EVERY individual who LIED us into WAR.

The law is crystal clear on this ..and its on YOUR SIDE.

The people just need a referendum like "THE WAR FRAUD ACCOUNTABILITY ACT of 2020″ (retroactive to 2002.)

They just need to sign it and push it through .By "majority" mandate.

Why waste time boycotting Israel .When 300 million Americans are one step away from rightfully taking back ALL their MONEY from every Neocon Oligarch who "conspired to defraud" us into war ?

Think about how hard Americans have worked to build our country in 200 years we created the most powerful and wealthy nation on the face of the earth.

Yet all that wealth has been Squandered, in a mere 17 years, because we were defrauded into illegal wars of aggression.

Its not right.

Make THEM pay for the wars they lied us into.

Every penny.

Take back you solvency . Americans.

This is the smart play .its legal its just and its right there for you.

"CARPE DIEM"

"PECUNIA CORRIPIUNT"

It belongs to YOU !

[Dec 18, 2018] Looks like AP joined Integrity Intiative

Dec 18, 2018 | news.yahoo.com

Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines

Matt o'Brien and Barbara Ortutay, AP Technology Writers , Associated Press December 17, 2018

<img alt="Key takeaways from new reports on Russian disinformation" src="https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/9VGA29inJ83dPeqC.cvqTg--~A/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9ODAwO2lsPXBsYW5l/http://globalfinance.zenfs.com/images/US_AHTTP_AP_HEADLINES_BUSINESS/e66de17c8e1a4cecaf1da81f2bf87093_original.jpg" itemprop="url"/>
Some suspected Russian-backed fake social media accounts on Facebook.

Russians seeking to influence U.S. elections through social media had their eyes on Instagram and the black community.

These were among the findings in two reports released Monday by the Senate intelligence committee. Separate studies from University of Oxford researchers and the cybersecurity firm New Knowledge reveal insights into how Russian agents sought to influence Americans by saturating their favorite online services and apps with hidden propaganda.

Here are the highlights:

INSTAGRAM'S "MEME WARFARE"

Both reports show that misinformation on Facebook's Instagram may have had broader reach than the interference on Facebook itself.

The New Knowledge study says that since 2015, the Instagram posts generated 187 million engagements, such as comments or likes, compared with 77 million on Facebook.

And the barrage of image-centric Instagram "memes" has only grown since the 2016 election. Russian agents shifted their focus to Instagram after the public last year became aware of the widespread manipulation on Facebook and Twitter.

NOT JUST ADS

Revelations last year that Russian agents used rubles to pay for some of their propaganda ads drew attention to how gullible tech companies were in allowing their services to be manipulated.

But neither ads nor automated "bots" were as effective as unpaid posts hand-crafted by human agents pretending to be Americans. Such posts were more likely to be shared and commented on, and they rose in volume during key dates in U.S. politics such as during the presidential debates in 2016 or after the Obama administration's post-election announcement that it would investigate Russian hacking.

"These personalized messages exposed U.S. users to a wide range of disinformation and junk news linked to on external websites, including content designed to elicit outrage and cynicism," says the report by Oxford researchers, who worked with social media analysis firm Graphika.

DEMOGRAPHIC TARGETING

Both reports found that Russian agents tried to polarize Americans in part by targeting African-American communities extensively. They did so by campaigning for black voters to boycott elections or follow the wrong voting procedures in 2016, according to the Oxford report.

The New Knowledge report added that agents were "developing Black audiences and recruiting Black Americans as assets" beyond how they were targeting either left- or right-leaning voters.

The reports also support previous findings that the influence operations sought to polarize Americans by sowing political divisions on issues such as immigration and cultural and religious identities. The goal, according to the New Knowledge report, was to "create and reinforce tribalism within each targeted community."

Such efforts extended to Google-owned YouTube, despite Google's earlier assertion to Congress that Russian-made videos didn't target specific segments of the population.

PINTEREST TO POKEMON

The New Knowledge report says the Russian troll operation worked in many ways like a conventional corporate branding campaign, using a variety of different technology services to deliver the same messages to different groups of people.

Among the sites infiltrated with propaganda were popular image-heavy services like Pinterest and Tumblr, chatty forums like Reddit, and a wonky geopolitics blog promoted from Russian-run accounts on Facebook and YouTube.

Even the silly smartphone game "Pokemon Go" wasn't immune. A Tumblr post encouraged players to name their Pokemon character after a victim of police brutality.

WHAT NOW?

Both reports warn that some of these influence campaigns are ongoing.

The Oxford researchers note that 2016 and 2017 saw "significant efforts" to disrupt elections around the world not just by Russia, but by domestic political parties spreading disinformation.

They warn that online propaganda represents a threat to democracies and public life. They urge social media companies to share data with the public far more broadly than they have so far.

"Protecting our democracies now means setting the rules of fair play before voting day, not after," the Oxford report says.

[Dec 17, 2018] Tale of two uprisings: Ukraine's Maidan got Nyland, McCain, a lot of cash, and even cookies; French Yellow Vests get shunned

Dec 17, 2018 | www.rt.com

Unlike the 2014 Ukraine uprising, which witnessed invasive meddling on the part of US politicians and diplomats, Western support for the French Yellow Vest protests has been conspicuously missing in action ;-)

'Paris agreement isn't working out so well for Paris!': Trump taunts Macron over Yellow Vests fires...

Macron's European army has arrived. It goes by the name Gilets Jaunes

[Dec 17, 2018] One of the things we have learnt in the post-Skripal world, is that there are now seen to be only two kinds of Russian: the spies and ... oh no actually just one type of Russian

Notable quotes:
"... 75,000 Russian expats spying in London? Their handlers' workload must be a nightmare! The true scale of the workload facing British counterintelligences has been recently revealed by a London based think tank, which estimates half of all Russian expats in the British capital are spies or informants. ..."
Dec 17, 2018 | www.rt.com

Britain spent part of the spring chucking out Russian diplomats it accused of being spies, of course that means all the known alleged spooks are no longer around, so the UK needs to find some more. One of the things we have learnt in the post-Skripal world, is that there are now seen to be only two kinds of Russian: the spies and ... oh no actually just one type of Russian.

75,000 Russian expats spying in London? Their handlers' workload must be a nightmare! The true scale of the workload facing British counterintelligences has been recently revealed by a London based think tank, which estimates half of all Russian expats in the British capital are spies or informants.

[Dec 17, 2018] One at a time, please! Trump inauguration committee reportedly under criminal investigation

Notable quotes:
"... Giving money in exchange for political favors could run afoul of federal corruption laws ..."
Dec 17, 2018 | www.rt.com

" Giving money in exchange for political favors could run afoul of federal corruption laws ," the report explains, seemingly unfamiliar with business as usual in Washington.

[Dec 17, 2018] The destruction of Convoy PQ.17'

Dec 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

jilles dykstra , says: December 17, 2018 at 9:14 pm GMT

@EugeneGur " that almost no aid came in 1941 when it would've been the most helpful "
How could it ?
USA war production began in fact just in 1943.
Read Lindbergh about the difficulties in organising the Ford factories into producing bombers.
The first plane that was shown to the public could not even fly.
In order to appease Stalin Churchill sent a whole convoy to an almost certain death.
Charles A. Lindbergh, ´The Wartime Journals of Charles A. Lindbergh', New York, 1970
David Irving, 'The destruction of Convoy PQ.17', London, 1968, 1980
likbez , says: December 18, 2018 at 2:31 am GMT
@jilles dykstra

In order to appease Stalin Churchill sent a whole convoy to an almost certain death.

Destruction of PQ17 might well be the result of double dealing on the part of Churchill. He did wanted that the convoy was destroyed and Russians bleed in the fight with Their Reich.

It is the same policy as in Harry Truman quote:

"If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible, although I don't want to see Hitler victorious under any circumstances."

― Harry S. Truman

Actions of the British navy was an act of betrayal:

On July 4, with the convoy well into the Barents Sea and out of range of the carrier Victorious, and because ULTRA intelligence intercepts caused him to believe an attack by the Tirpitz and the other capital ships was imminent, Adm. Sir Dudley Pound lost his nerve. At 9:11 p.m., the Admiralty issued the first of three messages to Hamilton. With the prefix most immediate, it read: "Cruiser Force withdraw to the westward at high speed." Then at 9:23 p.m.: "Owing to threat from surface ships, convoy is to disperse and proceed to Russian ports." Finally, at 9:36 p.m.: "Convoy is to scatter." With a heavy heart, Hamilton passed on the orders. Reaction was universally one of horror and fury.

https://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/the-destruction-of-convoy-pq-17/

[Dec 17, 2018] Hitler was defeated by soviet armies. They had thousands of Russian made T34, patriotic soldiers (more than 10 millions died, against around 0.1 million from US), and smart generals

Dec 15, 2018 | www.unz.com

Parisian Guy, December 15, 2018 at 9:11 pm GMT

@apollonian

Hitler was defeated by soviet armies. They had thousands of Russian made T34, patriotic soldiers (more than 10 millions died, against around 0.1 million from US), and smart generals.

The lend-lease, the trucks and jeeps, and blahblah . Their effect is a myth. That's a meme which has been propagated as soon as the USSR went down around 1990 (thus, there was no more powerful voice to contradict the lies).

Americans can't stand the truth: they did almost nothing, waiting comfortably for Europe to be completely devasted, then coming near the end to reap the bounty of the winner. This disgusting behavior had to be hidden by myths such as the truck/jeep meme.

The truth was known by everybody in Europe after the war. Of course the British gave more responsibility to UK for defeating Hitler, as Russians were doing for their side. But almost nobody thought that America was the one who defeated Hitler.

Then gradually, the American (hollywood) propaganda rewrote the history, and the American made myth became the believed truth. Alain Soral: "Marx ****s Hitler"

JLK , December 16, 2018 at 12:47 am GMT

@John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

There is no doubt that Germans, particularly from certain regions of Germany, looked down upon Slavs.

I'm sure some Germans looked down on Poles, Ukrainians and Russians, like Americans who used to tell Polish jokes, but that's different from considering them racially inferior.

There were reasons to feel culturally superior. Germany was far wealthier and the people better educated than in Poland or Ukraine. Their houses were nicer, with indoor toilets, and their farms neater and better managed. The Red Army soldiers were astounded by how well Germans lived when they finally reached German soil.

There has to be some explanation for why Russian deserters who volunteered for German forces were hardly used.

They probably didn't trust Vlasov and his crew until they were forced to out of desperation. He ended up turning on them anyway, proving it was a bad idea.

As for German regional bias against Slavs, Austria, for one example, in the 1800s treated the Serbs almost as poorly as the Ottomans did.

It was the same throughout Eastern Europe until modern times. Poland occupied parts of the Ukraine after the brief war with the Red Army and immediately started Polonizing the areas. Ethnic Germans were expelled from East Prussia, Silesia and the Sudetenland in 1945.

Christo , says: December 16, 2018 at 4:52 am GMT
@Parisian Guy No, I use rounded figures from what I recall. The USSR built about 50,000 T-34′s in WWII. They could do this because the USA sent them over 500,000 trucks. The USSR was able to build 50,000 T-34′s becuase they did not have to build alot of the trucks they used . A tank aint worth anything without support ammo fuel, which all is delivered by truck. Now for your theory to hold any water , we could say simply the USSR could have built half the number of tanks 25,000 T-34 's to build 250,000 of those trucks themselves instead . Stiil alot of tanks . The only problem is the USSR lost 45000 of those 50000 T-34′s , so they never would have made it with half the T-34′s along with half the truck's of which most truck were used to support other forces beside tanks.

Then you aslos have to add the USSR recieved 20000 tanks (afv's) and 20000 aircraft from the USA UK as well. Do you thinjk the Soviet army could have fought barefoot? Becuase the USA send them over 5 million pairs of boots IIRC. Lend lease overall amounted at least half of all Soviet equipment and supplies

No the USSR would simply have lost WWII without lend -lease equipment supplies, handy figures

https://ww2-weapons.com/lend-lease-tanks-and-aircrafts/

Parisian Guy , says: December 16, 2018 at 6:03 am GMT
@Fidelios Automata I know that controversy about who wanted war. There is the same about the start of WW2. I have no opinion. For instance, i've also read that US/UK were very actively trying to convince Stalin that Hitler was secretly wanting to attack USSR as soon as he could. So Stalin planned for a preemptive attack. My guess is we will never be able to know the truth with certainty.
Franz , says: December 16, 2018 at 10:58 am GMT
@Parisian Guy

The lend-lease, the trucks and jeeps, and blahblah . Their effect is a myth. That's a meme which has been propagated as soon as the USSR went down around 1990 (thus, there was no more powerful voice to contradict the lies).

Part true, but you're overshooting just a bit.

In 1962, East minus West = zero by Werner Keller was published by Putnam in the USA. There were previous non-US editions.

As I heard it, the big complaint in 1962 (one of) was Foreign Aid. Keller's book gave JFK's opponents another brick to lob at him, because Keller detailed the extent of that particular aid that American industrial workers and military had been quiet about due to secrecy laws.

Since Keller's book had a non-USA roots, it was okay. Might seem idiotic to blame JFK for FDR's sins, but politics in this asylum works that way.

Because Keller never claimed Lend Lease "won" the war, his volume is rarely cited which is too bad because he got the details fresh, less than 20 years after the war from sources close to the factory gate and battleground.

I have not heard of any major errors in the book. Copies are still floating around, but it's over 350 pages and not light reading.

If anyone cares to critique Keller, I have no quarrel. But so far as I know his book was the first "reveal" that considered Lend Lease to be any more than a case of a few shiploads of ammunition and tinned food. Much earlier than the 90s.

apollonian , says: December 16, 2018 at 1:05 pm GMT
@Parisian Guy Jews Leading Subjectivists, Satanists, Controlling Establishment Christianity

Parisian Jew; regarding lend-lease, the facts speak–it doesn't matter what "polls" say, which argument of urs is mere version of fallacy of argument-fm-authority. I'm "proof," u say?–I stick to the obvious facts, and draw the clear, indicated conclusion soviets were beaten till resuscitated, rejuvenated, and actually primed by American aid and supply, especially of simple, basic food, and then the transportation.

Stalin and Russkies themselves URGENTLY asked for tanks and planes when Harry Hopkins first talked to them, so deficient they'd become, such losses they'd suffered. By end 1941 Russkies had already gotten 200,000 tons of American-produced supplies through the Brits (before Jew S A even officially got into the war)–Jewwy Wikipedia says they got 360,000 tons.

Jew "power"?–all u have to do is look at Israel, the "tail" wagging American (and everyone else) "dog." Jews obviously control finances and the world fiat-money and central-banking systems. But then HOW do Jew exercise that control? Note psychologically Jews control an extremely powerful segment of "Christian" population in Jew S A, called "Judeo-Christians" (JCs–see Whtt.org and TruthTellers.org for expo), or "Christian-Zionists," about half of all evangelicals, perhaps numbering up to 40 million here who strongly support Israeli terror-state. Jews heavily influence and intimidate ALL establishment Christian churches throughout the world beginning w. "vatican" satanists and child-molesters.

But most of all, Jews are Talmudists (see Talmudical.blogspot.com), by definition, hence satanists, Jews being extreme subjectivists ("midrash"), which subjectivism holds reality is mere creation of mentality/consciousness, making themselves God, the creator–satanists. Further Jews are most COLLECTIVIST subjectivists, leading group-think practitioners, Jews most dedicated, most organized, most committed, most cohesive such subjectivists and group-think artists. Thus Jews control, lead, and manipulate practically all the other subjectivistic and satanists among the goyim who vastly out-number Jews–this satanism is crux of their psychologic power. And note satanism is also secular philosophy–extreme subjectivism–parallel to "religious" Talmudism–it doesn't matter if a Jew says he's "atheist." Thus Jews are most organized CRIMINALS and psychopaths, as we see in Israeli terror-state. Q.E.D.

Digital Samizdat , says: December 16, 2018 at 1:53 pm GMT
@Parisian Guy It's probably true that the lend-lease act played only a minor role in the Soviet Union's victory. Many people don't realize this, but the principal beneficiary of the lend-lease act was not the USSR, but rather the UK. In fact, Britain, whose population then was then about one-quarter of what the Soviet Union's was, received more than three times as much aid as the Soviets did. Per capita, that means they got twelve times more aid than the USSR.

But some people are destined to go on believing that surplus US jeeps turned the tide on the Eastern Front. So be it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease#Scale

Digital Samizdat , says: December 16, 2018 at 1:54 pm GMT
@llloyd Hitler admitted that he was Jewish? Really? I'm sorry, but I seem to be having trouble finding your source citation here!
apollonian , says: December 16, 2018 at 2:01 pm GMT
@llloyd Llloyd, u disappoint me once again, my boy: unc' Adolf was NOT descended fm any Jew, get a clue. We see u're very poor historian, gullible and un-informed, merely retailing Jew lies: get the real story; see https://carolynyeager.net/fake-legends-adolf-hitler%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cjewish-grandfather%E2%80%9D .

The lies about unc' Adolf's parentage are mere concoction of Jews, beginning w. a couple of them, named Langer, a common Jew name, and his brother, a psychologist, the first one having been appointed head of the Research and Analysis Section of the OSS, no less. The lies center upon the un-founded assertion that Hitler's grandmother was a domestic servant who worked for Jews. On contrary, it's known Maria Schickelgruber didn't need such employment as she was not poor, her parents having retired rather well-off, she inheriting significant funds:

"2. Maria Anna Schicklgruber was not a poor housemaid who worked for wealthy Jewish families. The daughter of Johann Schicklgruber, a prosperous farmer in possession of a well-appointed farm in the village of Strones, and Theresia Pfseisinger, she was born in 1795 and is described by Maser as a thrifty, reserved and exceptionally shrewd peasant woman. She gives every appearance of having been strong-minded, a trait that was passed down to her son Alois and her grandson, Adolf.

"3. Maria Anna Schicklgruber's brother, Jakob, purchased the family farm from his father for 3000 gulden when the father was only 53 years old. Maria's mother, Theresia, had just inherited 210 gulden from her father's total estate of 1054 gulden, so the parents felt prosperous enough to retire. To put the value of 3000 gulden in perspective: a cow at that time could be purchased for 10 to 12 gulden; a brood sow cost 4 gulden; a bed w/bedding was 2 gulden; an inn with stabling could be had for 450 to 500 gulden. As you can see, 3000 gulden was a substantial amount.

"4. Maria Anna, at the age of 26, inherited 74.25 gulden at the death of her mother in 1821. She kept this sum in the Orphans' Fund until 1838, earning 5% interest. By then, it had increased to 165 gulden, over double the original amount. Her son was not born until June 1837 when she was 42 yrs. old."

And there were no Jews in the vicinity:

"A) From the end of the 15th Century until a decade after Maria Anna died, no Jews lived in Graz. They had been expelled by Emperor Maximilian I in 1496 from the province of Styria, which included Graz. In 1781, under Joseph II, they were allowed to re-enter, but only for a few weeks at a time, during Lent and at the Feast of St. Giles to the annual Fairs, after paying a fixed sum. Two years later, these rights were again curtailed, and it remained enforced until 1860 that no Jews whatsoever could even enter the province."

"12. The Rothschild in Vienna story: This is debunked for the same reasons. Maria Anna Schicklgruber did not visit or live in Vienna, and there is no record of who these Rothschilds were, their address or other necessary information."

Parisian Guy , says: December 16, 2018 at 2:28 pm GMT
@Christo Not sure what the reliability of your source is. For instance, it pretend that USSR used lot of US made planes, and went upto copy without permission the design of the Boeing B-29. But the B29 was not operational before the summer of 1944
One cannot say this american source is unbiased.

My point is: all this story did not went public before the demise of USSR. If it was true, it would have not wait for so long. It looks like that story was not to sustainable before the USSR voice went mute.
There are other cases where USSR story has been rewritten after its death.

Parisian Guy , says: December 16, 2018 at 2:35 pm GMT
@Franz Thanks for these cautiously weighted informations.
Parisian Guy , says: December 16, 2018 at 4:09 pm GMT
@apollonian Stalin and Russkies themselves URGENTLY asked for tanks and planes

What they actually asked for was what had been promised: intervene in Europe far before 1944.

JLK , says: December 16, 2018 at 4:16 pm GMT
@llloyd

He apparently admitted to his staff he was Jewish descent himself.

Journalists determined Hitler's Y-DNA (paternal line) to be haplogroup E-M35 ("E1b1b1″) by testing some of his male relatives back around 2010. It led to a few typically deprecatory articles around that time that he might be of Jewish or African origin. E-M35 was also Albert Einstein's haplogroup. However, there are subgroups under E-M35 that can be detected by a slightly more comprehensive deep clade test.

I find it hard to believe that the journalists didn't spring for the extra hundred dollars or so needed for a deep clade test. The results have probably been kept out of the news for some reason. There may be good humanitarian reasons, such as to shield innocent secret descendants. But complete results could settle the longstanding question of his illegitimate father's paternity. The most common rumor is that Alois Hitler's mother worked in the Jewish Frankenberger household of Graz and was impregnated by the 19 year old son Leopold Frankenberger. However, there is a declassified US Government report on the CIA website that states that Schuschnigg's pre-Anschluss Austrian government researched Hitler's genealogy and determined that she actually worked for the Vienna Rothschilds. It notes that Hitler's sister worked for the Jewish Mensa society in Vienna and that Hitler's ability level was more consistent with a Rothschild than with his putative Austrian peasant background.

Of course Schuschnigg's government was looking for dirt on Hitler, and connecting him with the Rothschilds would be even juicier than assigning him incidental Jewish ancestry. The Rothschild paternal line is reported on the Internet to be an entirely different haplogroup. However, there may be good security reasons to mislead the public on that point. Interesting, nonetheless.

As I read somewhere, so were about a quarter of the German populaton including many of his generals, his favourite little girl and his chaffeur.

25% is probably little high, but the rate of intermarriage is Germany was higher than it had ever been anywhere else in diaspora history, and there were a lot of children. The liberal reform Judaism movement originated in Germany. The evidence suggests that Jews were more comfortable among the Germans in many ways than they had ever been in Eastern Europe, at least until the Balfour Declaration and the associated recrimination in the aftermath of WWI.

The Daily Mirror ran a unusually flattering article on Hitler and his "favorite little girl" (who was only 1/4th Jewish) a few months ago. She used to call him "Uncle Hitler."

His chauffeur's name was Emil Maurice, who asked permission to date Hitler's niece, Geli Raubal. Hitler refused and she shot herself. Hitler thought Maurice was a loyal Nazi and stood by him, even when his partial Jewish ancestry was revealed.

Parisian Guy , says: December 16, 2018 at 4:37 pm GMT
@Digital Samizdat the principal beneficiary of the lend-lease act was not the USSR, but rather the UK

Thanks for getting the point with comparative datas.
That's so true that lend-lease for UK was regular teaching at schools in France, but Lend-lease for USSR was never mentionned.
France was allways neutral or pro-US, depending the time or the matter. Thus France had no motive to teach an History which would hide the USSR lend-lease, if it had been material.

phil , says: December 16, 2018 at 5:37 pm GMT
Guilliaume,

You are a great guy to read, but your economic model is a little defective. You make it sound like Venezuela would have been OK, but that pesky Amerindian admixture dragged its average IQ down to 85; so socialism is claimed to be viable if we have the "right" people.

China has a much higher average IQ, perhaps higher than the US, but as of 1978, its average living standards were comparable to Kenya, Nigeria, and Mozambique. East Germany was well below the level of West Germany. North Korea is way below South Korea.

On a scale of 0 to 10, where 10 is pure capitalism (private ownership) and 0 is complete government control, a country is in trouble economically, regardless of IQ, if it falls below 5. A Nazi government was able to bring about an impressive cyclical recovery during the 1930s, but its longer-term prospects would have depended on whether it allowed market forces to operate to a reasonable degree.

dfordoom , says: Website December 17, 2018 at 3:51 am GMT
@Parisian Guy

Hitler was defeated by soviet armies. They had thousands of russian made T34, patriotic soldiers (more than 10 millions died, against around 0.1 million from US), and smart generals.

The lend-lease, the trucks and jeeps, and blahblah . Their effect is a myth.

The Soviets were capable of stopping the Germans with their own resources.

They may have been capable of reconquering some lost territory but it would have been a hard slog with no guarantees of success.

The Lend-Lease equipment, especially the trucks, made it possible for the reconquest to be complete and for eastern Europe to be overrun, giving the Soviet Union a buffer zone against any future aggression from the west.

The Soviet achievement was certainly impressive. They went from being lousy at mobile warfare to being very very good at it. But you can't wage mobile warfare without lots and lots of trucks and there was no way they could have produced those trucks themselves. The American trucks allowed the Soviets to concentrate on producing tanks and aircraft.

The Americans were certainly happy to let the Soviets do the hard fighting. Stalingrad, Kursk, Operation Bagration – these were the battles that won the war.

Alain Soral: "Marx ****s Hitler", by Guillaume Durocher - The Unz Review
jilles dykstra , says: December 17, 2018 at 10:03 am GMT
@dfordoom Richard Overy, 'Why the allies won', New York, London, 1995
USA technical military support of Russia already began in 1933:
Franz Kurowski, 'Balkenkreuz und Roter Stern, Der Luftkrieg über Russland 1941 – 1944′, 1984, Friedberg
jilles dykstra , says: December 17, 2018 at 10:06 am GMT
@apollonian An unknown book describing how GB steered towards war in the thirties is
Lawrence R. Pratt, 'East of Malta, West of Suez', London, 1975
GB guarantees began at the north side of the Med
jilles dykstra , says: December 17, 2018 at 10:14 am GMT
@Parisian Guy Without USA economic support GB could not have fought WWI, nor WWII.
But even with USA economic support the USA had to intervene militarily.
It is hardly ever mentioned anywhere, but by November 1917 Germany would have won the war in Europe:
Donald McCormick, 'The mask of Merlin, A Critical Study of David Lloyd George', London, 1963
jilles dykstra , says: December 17, 2018 at 10:22 am GMT
@Andy " ´Als die Deutschen weg waren, Was nach der Vertreibung geschah: Ostpreussen, Schlesien, Sudetenland', 2005, 2007, Reinbek, Adrian von Arburg, Wlodzimierz Borodziej, Jurij Kostjaschow, Ulla Lachauer, Hand-Dieter Rutsch, Beate Schlanstein, Christian Schulz "

Trans: After the Geermans had left, what happened after the expulsion.
A quite interesting book about German superiority.
The expulsion of the Germans led to collapse of industries.

[Dec 17, 2018] Visualizing The West's Domination Of The Global Arms Market

Dec 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Overall, arms sales increased in 2017, with total global sales nearing 400 billion dollars, marking a 2.5 percent increase from last year and the third year of continued growth for the industry.

But, as Statista's Sarah Feldman points out, U.S. arms companies still produce the most weapons worldwide.

You will find more infographics at Statista

About 57 percent of weapons produced last year came from the United States , according to the Stockholm Peace Research Institute SIPRI .

Russia comes in second, with year-over-year growth in arms production. In 2017, Russia provided the world with 10 percent of arms sales, closely followed by The UK.

Only major arms companies were included in this study. China was excluded due to insufficient data.

Beans , 43 minutes ago link

Problem with this is that the buyers of all that American weaponry are definitely not got any 'bang for the proverbial buck' (pun intended). Horrendously overpriced weaponry which in most instances render less value and effectiveness than similarly available Russian analogues.

Justin Case , 17 minutes ago link

They know, the arms are inferior garbage, it's just like mafioso protection money or better known as extortion. The charge a fortune for substandard weapons and MIC folks keep the change. Same as murican tax payers. If there were no boogie men created then what would be the justification for all the spending on military hardware?

There is no return on investment here. It's money laundering.

Atlana99 , 1 hour ago link

Why spend your money to help the poor people in your own country when you can use that money to build weapons to kill poor people in other countries?

https://cointrader21.wordpress.com/2018/12/03/americas-ongoing-holocaust-of-the-poor/

khnum , 4 hours ago link

Purchasers Saudi Arabia 110 billion with 240 billion more to come,Israel 38 billion=35 percent

CosineCosineCosine , 4 hours ago link

Letter of intent only. They have literally purchased none of those orders, despite repeated US harassment for the 15 Billion for the THAADS to get the ball rolling. All bluster and boasting and smoke and mirrors.

My suspicion is that SA under MBS is considering switching sides slowly and will purchase Russian and Chinese instead. If the US had foreknowledge of this, hence the switch in tone re butchering journalists and Yemenis ... hence why MBS isn't Time Magazine poster boy at the moment.

khnum , 4 hours ago link

Your correct I went back and checked it was order book not delivery,MBS situation is very interesting with the recent high five with Putin there was some backstory that it was celebration of a certain US admirals demise that was causing them problems whether true or not I dont know but it would not surprise me if S400's end up in Saudi Arabia

Ace006 , 5 hours ago link

Remember that old stuff about Krupp being the "Merchant of Death"? Aren't we, like, edging into that territory? Is this what the Founders and Ratifiers had in mind? Could this enormous arms trade and our military expenditures and adventures be a clue that we're on the wrong track?

Front Store

US vs Russian arms sales since 1950:

http://thesoundingline.com/map-of-the-day-visualizing-us-and-russian-arms-sales-since-1950/

[Dec 17, 2018] Withouth the USSR as a countervailing force the level of inequality in Western societies will always rise to the level on which riots will start and then will fluctuates around this level.

Dec 17, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

AmyInNH -> Riever , 23 Aug 2016 10:00

Swing between extremes, however, consistent in US history, economic predatory dependence on free/ultra cheap labor with no legal rights. Current instantiation, offshored and illegal and "temporary" immigrant labor. Note neither party in the US is proposing "immigration reform" is green card upon hire. Ds merely propose green card for time served for those over X number of years donated as captive/cheap.
The entitled to cheap/captive now want it in law, national laws and trade agreements.
All privilege/no responsibilities, including taxes.
Doesn't scale. 1929 says so, 2008 says so.
CivilDiscussion , 23 Aug 2016 10:25
Liberals, the Left, Progressives -- whatever you want to call them suffer from a basic problem. They don't work together and have no common goals. As the article stated they complain but offer no real solutions that they can agree on. Should we emphasize gay pride or should we emphasize good-paying jobs and benefits with good social welfare benefits? Until they can agree at least on priorities they will never reform the current corrupt system -- it is too entrenched. Even if the Capitalist Monstrosity we have now self-destructs as the writer indicates -- nothing good will replace it until the Left get their act together.
AmyInNH -> Juillette , 23 Aug 2016 10:16
"Lesser of two evils" needs to go on the burn pile.
Encumbent congress needs a turn over.
Not showing up to vote is not okay. If people can't think of someone they want to write-in, "none of the above" is a protest vote. Not voting is silence, which equals consent.
Local elections, beat back Koch/ALEC, hiding on ballots as "Libertarian". "Privatize everything" is their mantra, so they can further profitize via inescapeable taxes, while gutting "regulation" - safety and market integrity, with no accountability.
Corporation 101: limited liability. While means we are left holding the bag. As in bailout - $125 billion in 1990, up to $7.7 trillion in 2008.
Dave_P -> Isiodore , 23 Aug 2016 09:59
Anything the Economist presents as the overriding choice is probably best relegated to one factor among many. I respect Milanovic's work, but he's seeing things from where we are now. Remember we've seen populist surges come and go from the witch-burnings and religious panics of the 17th century to 1890s Bryanism and the 1930s far right, and each time they've yielded to a more articulate vision, though the last time it cost sixty million dead - not something we want to see repeated. This time it's hard because dissent still clings to a "post-ideological" delusion that those on top never succumbed to. But change will come as what I'd term "post-rational" alternatives fail to deliver. Let's hope it's sooner rather than later.
willpodmore , 23 Aug 2016 09:53
"Brexit, too, was primarily a working-class revolt." Thank you Martin, at least someone writing in the Guardian has got the point!
We voted against the EU's unelected European Central Bank, its unelected European Commission, its European Court of Justice, its Common Agricultural Policy and its Common Fisheries Policy.
We voted against the EU's treaty-enshrined 'austerity' (= depression) policies, which have impoverished Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy.
We voted against the EU/US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, which would privatise all our public services, which threatens all our rights, and which discriminates against the countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America.
We voted against the EU's tariffs against African farmers' cheaper produce.
We opposed the City of London Corporation, the Institute of Directors, the CBI, the IMF, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Citigroup and Morgan Stanley, which all wanted us to stay in the EU.
We voted against the EU's undemocratic trilogue procedure and its pro-austerity Semester programme. We voted to leave this undemocratic, privatisation-enforcing, austerity-enforcing body.
AmyInNH -> ciaofornow , 23 Aug 2016 10:39
Bailout was because that was public savings, pensions, 401ks, etc. the banks were playing with, and lost. Bailout is billing all of us for it. Bad, letting the banks/financial "services" not only survive but continue the exact same practices.
Bailout: $7.2 to $7.7 trillion. Current derivative holdings: $500 trillion.
Not just moral hazard but economic hazard when capitalism basic rule is broken, allow bad businesses to die of their own accord. Subversion currently called "too big to fail", rather than tell the public "we lost all your savings, pensions, ...".
AmyInNH -> Dave_P , 23 Aug 2016 09:40
Relocating poverty from the East into the West isn't improvement.
Creating sweatshops in the East isn't raising their standard of living.
Creating economies so economically unstable that population declines isn't improvement.
Trying to bury that fact with immigration isn't improvement.
Configuring all of the above for record profit for the benefit of a tiny percentage of the population isn't improvement.
Gaming tax law to avoid paying into/for extensive business use of federal services and tax base isn't improvement.
Game over. Time for a reboot.
marxistelf -> Tobyrob , 23 Aug 2016 09:24
I am glad you finally concede a point on neo-liberalism. The moral hazard argument is extremely poor and typical in this era of runaway CEO pay, of a tendency to substitute self-help fables (a la "The monk who sold his Ferrari) and pop psychology ( a la Moral Hazard) for credible economic analysis.
The economic crisis is rooted in the profit motive just as capitalist economic growth is. Lowering of Tarrif barriers, outsourcing, changes in value capture (added value), new financial instruments, were attempts to restore the falling rate of profit. They did for a while, but, as always happens with Capitalism, the seeds of the new crisis were in the solution to the old.
And all the while the state continues growing in an attempt to keep capitalism afloat. Neoliberalism failed ( or should I say "small state" ) and here is the graph to prove it:
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/include/usgs_chartSp03t.png
Homer32 , 23 Aug 2016 07:32
Interesting, and I believe accurate, analysis of the economic and political forces afoot. However it is ludicrous to state that Donald trump, who is a serial corpratist, out-sourcer, tax avoider and scam artist, actually believes any of those populist principles that you ascribe so firmly to him. The best and safest outcome of our election, in my opinion, would be to have a Clinton administration tempered by the influences from the populist wings of both parties.
Juillette , 23 Aug 2016 06:42
Great article, however the elite globalists are in complete denial in the US. Our only choice is to vote them out of power because the are owned by Wall Street. Both Bernie and Trump supporters should unite to vote establishment out of Washington.
Dave_P -> ShaunNewman , 23 Aug 2016 06:38
The opiate of the masses. As the churches empty, the stadiums fill.
Dave_P -> ciaofornow , 23 Aug 2016 06:36
There were similar observations in the immediate aftermath of 2008, and doubtless before. Many of us thought the crisis would trigger a rethink of the whole direction of the previous three decades, but instead we got austerity and a further lurch to the right, or at best Obama-style stimulus and modest tweaks which were better than the former but still rather missed the point. I still find it flabbergasting and depressing, but on reflection the 1930s should have been a warning of not just the economic hazards but also the political fallout, at least in Europe. The difference was that this time left ideology had all but vacated the field in the 1980s and was in no position to lead a fightback: all we can hope for is better late than never.
idontreadtheguardian -> thisisafact , 23 Aug 2016 05:16
Yes it is, it's an extremely bad thing destroying the fabric of society. Social science has documented that even the better off are more happy, satisfied with life and feel safer in societies (i.e. the Scandinavian) where there is a relatively high degree of economic equality. Yes, economic inequality is a BAD thing in itself.

Oh, give me a break. Social science will document anything it can publish, no matter how spurious. If Scandanavia is so great, why are they such pissheads? There has always been inequality, including in workers' paradises like the Soviet Union and Communist China. Inequality is what got us where we are today, through natural selection. Phenotype is largely dependent on genotype, so why shouldn't we pass on material wealth as well as our genes? Surely it is a parent's right to afford their offspring advantages if they can do so?

SaulGe -> John Black , 23 Aug 2016 03:30
Have you got any numbers? Or references for your allegations. I say the average or median wealth, opportunity, economic circumstance and health measures are substantially better than a generation (lets say 30 years) ago.

Heres this years data. Note the top 25 or so are almost all liberal western type democracies with mixed economies. http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/country_price_rankings?itemId=105

And here is the graph showing growth in wages whilst it slowed for a variety of complex reasons has been overall strong for 25 of the last 30 years http://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2015/jun/pdf/bu-0615-2.pdf

Again I don't think our system is perfect. I don't deny that some in our societies struggle and don't benefit, particularly the poorly educated, disabled, mentally ill and drug addicted. I actually agree that we could better target our social redistribution from those that have to those that need help. I disagree that we need higher taxes, protectionism, socialism, more public servants, more legislation. Indeed I disagree with proposition that other systems are better.

shastakath -> TimWorstall , 23 Aug 2016 03:17
George Orwell said, in the 30s, that the price of social justice would include a lowering of living standards for the working- & middle-classes, at least temporarily, so I follow your line of thought. However, the outrageous tilt toward the upper .1% has no "adjustment" fluff to shield it from the harsh despotism it represents. So, do put that in your statistical pipe and smoke it.

[Dec 17, 2018] 'Unregistered foreign agent' Clinton Foundation oversight panel hears explosive testimony

Notable quotes:
"... early in its life and throughout its existence ..."
"... The foundation began acting as an agent of foreign governments early in its life and continued doing so throughout its existence, as such, the foundation should have registered under FARA. ..."
"... good foundation for truth and transparency ..."
"... "These are not our facts. They are not your facts. They are the facts of the Clinton Foundation," ..."
"... misuse of donated public funds ..."
"... falsely attested that it received funds and used them for charitable purposes which was, in fact, not the case. Rather the foundation pursued in an array of activities both domestically and abroad ..."
"... properly characterized as profit-oriented and taxable undertakings of private enterprise, again failing the operational tests of philanthropy referenced above ..."
"... it was hard to tell where the Clinton State Department ended and the Clinton Foundation began ..."
"... Alice in Wonderland ..."
"... We have a ruling saying there is sufficient grounds to go forward with a criminal investigation of the Trump Foundation, not the Clinton Foundation ..."
Dec 15, 2018 | www.rt.com
Fraud investigators have exposed the Clinton Foundation's alleged misdeeds in a Congressional hearing, describing it as a de facto "foreign agent" devoted not to charity but to "advancing the personal interests of its principals." The Clinton Foundation acted as an agent of foreign governments " early in its life and throughout its existence ," according to testimony by former government forensic investigator John Moynihan, which, if true, would not only render it in violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act but also would violate its nonprofit charter, putting it on the hook for a massive quantity of unpaid taxes.

The foundation began acting as an agent of foreign governments early in its life and continued doing so throughout its existence, as such, the foundation should have registered under FARA.

https://www.c-span.org/video/standalone/?455872-1/hearing-clinton-foundation

Moynihan and fellow ex-government investigator Lawrence Doyle shared 6,000 pages of evidence with the IRS over 18 months ago, only to be met with silence. They shared them with the FBI multiple times – ditto. Yet when the pair testified before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, they refused to turn over the documents, stating they did not want to interfere with any ongoing investigations.

Read more A Uranium One milling facility in Utah © George Frey FBI documents detail Clinton and Mueller's own 'Russiagate' – but they're classified

The committee chairman Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) said witnesses' reluctance to share all the documents was hardly a " good foundation for truth and transparency ," while Rep. Jody Hice (R-GA) said he felt the duo was " using " the panel for their own benefit.

"These are not our facts. They are not your facts. They are the facts of the Clinton Foundation," said Moynihan, maintaining his interest in the case is purely financial – not political.

Testifying on their findings, Doyle highlighted the Foundation's alleged " misuse of donated public funds ," explaining that it " falsely attested that it received funds and used them for charitable purposes which was, in fact, not the case. Rather the foundation pursued in an array of activities both domestically and abroad ," which included activities " properly characterized as profit-oriented and taxable undertakings of private enterprise, again failing the operational tests of philanthropy referenced above ," referring to the equally non-charitable pursuit of funding the Clinton Presidential Library.

John Huber, appointed by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions to investigate the Clinton Foundation after Sessions recused himself from doing so, was conspicuously absent from the hearing, even though his job is to probe Clinton's approval of the sale of US uranium assets to Russia.

Judicial Watch's Tom Fitton also gave testimony, outlining how " it was hard to tell where the Clinton State Department ended and the Clinton Foundation began " – so much so that the King of Bahrain, unable to meet with Clinton as Secretary of State, secured a meeting with the Foundation instead.

Also on rt.com FBI raids home of whistleblower who had 'dirt' on Clinton Foundation, Mueller

Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA) likened the testimony to " Alice in Wonderland ," claiming yet another investigation of the Clintons was an attempt to distract from the ongoing investigations of Trump. " We have a ruling saying there is sufficient grounds to go forward with a criminal investigation of the Trump Foundation, not the Clinton Foundation ," he said, adding that the committee had an informant in the Uranium One deal-making process who was unable to present any evidence of wrongdoing.

Meanwhile, the FBI has missed a deadline to turn over information on why they raided the home of another Clinton Foundation whistleblower, Nathan Cain, earlier this week. Cain's lawyer says his client – who reportedly gave the Justice Department documents showing federal officials failed to investigate criminal activity related to the Uranium One deal – was accused of possessing stolen federal property.

[Dec 17, 2018] Blackmailed to lie Roger Stone associate sues Mueller, intel agencies for $350mn -- RT USA News

Notable quotes:
"... "at the direction of Mueller." ..."
Dec 17, 2018 | www.rt.com

Conspiracy theory buff Jerome Corsi has sued Robert Mueller and a handful of federal agencies for allegedly attempting to blackmail him into lying about being a middle man between Wikileaks and the Trump campaign. Read more Former Trump campaign adviser targeted by Mueller for his appearances on RT

Corsi, the former Washington bureau chief of Alex Jones' controversial site, InfoWars, filed a lawsuit on Sunday which claims that special counsel Robert Mueller threatened him with prison unless he agreed to falsely confess to being a liaison between WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and Republican political strategist Roger Stone, who was an adviser to Trump's presidential campaign.

The suit, which seeks $100 million in actual damages and $250 million in punitive damages, also accuses the FBI, CIA and NSA of having placed Corsi under illegal surveillance "at the direction of Mueller."

[Dec 17, 2018] The only problem with the slogan "make America great again" is that the USA is not America

Add to this that Trump changed his election slogan from "make America [ "working class"] great again" to "make Amerca [financial oligarchy] great again"
Dec 17, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

ShaunNewman -> TyroneBHorneigh , 23 Aug 2016 00:29

The only problem is that 'America' does not exist. America is a part description of a continent and I think we are talking about the USA (only one country on North American soil) Why do the yanks always have to exaggerate their own importance like the Olympics bloke who claimed he was robbed at gunpoint lol! Do the USAians actually have an inferiority complex?

[Dec 17, 2018] One at a time, please! Trump inauguration committee reportedly under criminal investigation

Notable quotes:
"... Giving money in exchange for political favors could run afoul of federal corruption laws ..."
Dec 17, 2018 | www.rt.com

" Giving money in exchange for political favors could run afoul of federal corruption laws ," the report explains, seemingly unfamiliar with business as usual in Washington.

[Dec 17, 2018] One of the things we have learnt in the post-Skripal world, is that there are now seen to be only two kinds of Russian: the spies and ... oh no actually just one type of Russian

Notable quotes:
"... 75,000 Russian expats spying in London? Their handlers' workload must be a nightmare! The true scale of the workload facing British counterintelligences has been recently revealed by a London based think tank, which estimates half of all Russian expats in the British capital are spies or informants. ..."
Dec 17, 2018 | www.rt.com

Britain spent part of the spring chucking out Russian diplomats it accused of being spies, of course that means all the known alleged spooks are no longer around, so the UK needs to find some more. One of the things we have learnt in the post-Skripal world, is that there are now seen to be only two kinds of Russian: the spies and ... oh no actually just one type of Russian.

75,000 Russian expats spying in London? Their handlers' workload must be a nightmare! The true scale of the workload facing British counterintelligences has been recently revealed by a London based think tank, which estimates half of all Russian expats in the British capital are spies or informants.

[Dec 16, 2018] The 'Integrity Initiative' - A Military Intelligence Operation, Disguised As Charity, To Create The Russian Threat

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Sounds to me like that Integrity initiative dude needs to go on a 'de-radicalisation program !!! ..."
"... the powerbrokers have always been in London and now its hypercentralized endgame in Brussels. You can say that it is the US through and through, but ask yourself who has more to gain from US FP abroad: average Americans or the global elites? ..."
"... Those former-Eastern Bloc countries, i.e. Poland and Ukraine, do not count as power brokers. They have and will always be pawns in the game. So what if they still worship Icons of Americanism which is a remnant culture of their F*ed up narrative where they still believe they are fighting the commies. ..."
"... Integrity Initiative ..."
"... From his curriculum vitae (pdf) we learn that Donnelly was a long time soldier in the British Army Intelligence Corps where he established and led the Soviet Studies Research Centre at RMA Sandhurst. He later was involved in creating the US Army's Foreign Military Studies Office (FMSO) at Ft. Leavenworth. ..."
"... He worked at the British Ministry of Defence and as an advisor to several Secretaries General of NATO. He is a director of the Statecraft Institute since 2010. Donnelly also advises the Foreign Minister of Lithuania. He is a "Security and Justice Senior Mentor" of the UK's Stabilisation Unit which is tasked with destabilizing various countries. He serves as a Honorary Colonel of the Specialist Group Military Intelligence (SGMI). ..."
"... This was an order from the core of the British thinking to Donnelly to get even deeper into the inner-British influence business. Hype Russia as a threat so more money can be taken from the 'vested interests' of the people and dumped into the military machine. ..."
"... That particular advise of General Barrons was accepted. In 2017 the Integrity Initiative bid for funding from the Ministry of Defence (pdf) for various projects to influence the public, the parliament and the government as well as foreign forces. The bid lists "performance indicators" that are supposed to measure the success of its activities. The top indicator for the Initiative's proposed work is a "Tougher stance in government policy towards Russia" ..."
"... In March 2014, shortly after Crimea split from the Ukraine, Donnelly suggested Military measures (pdf) to be taken by the Ukraine with regards to Crimea: ..."
"... Think for a moment how Russia would have responded to a mining of Sevastopol harbor, the frying of its satellites or the destruction of its fighter jets in Crimea. Those "guestures" would have been illegal acts of war against the forces of a nuclear power which were legally stationed in Crimea. And how was the west to immediately supply gas to Ukraine and Ukraine's pipeline network is designed to unidirectionally receive gas from Russia? ..."
"... Yes, Putin really believes his own propaganda ..."
"... Putin's paranoia is driving his foreign adventures ..."
"... Russian information warfare - airbrushing reality ..."
"... Distract, deceive, destroy: Putin at war in Syria ..."
"... Russian penetration in Germany ..."
"... Russian conspiracy theory and foreign policy ..."
"... Mapping Russia's whole influence machine ..."
"... Military Review ..."
"... BBC Newsnight ..."
"... The most recent release of Integrity Initiative documents includes lots of in-depth reports (pdf) about foreign media reactions to the Skripal affair. One wonders why the Initiative commissioned such research (pdf) and paid for it. ..."
"... Here is an interesting look at how little the Russia-linked entities spent on advertising on Google during the 2016 election: https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/12/google-russia-and-4700-in-advertising.html Slowly but surely, the Russian meddling narrative is falling apart. ..."
"... McCarthyesque smear campaigns to discredit opponents and squash dissent has become normal practice. Integrity Initiative tweets against Corbyn is a stark example, but there have been MANY other people and groups that have been tarred with claims of being sponsored/led/influenced by Russia, including Catalonian independence activists and Yellow vest protesters. ..."
"... Dear god, what has gotten into the minds of the military and political "elite" within the UK! Mining Sevastopol would have been an obvious act of war against Russia and Russia would have responded with force. ..."
"... It looks like one of the decision was to get closer to France (after getting very close friends in Homs and Aleppo?) See the list of people in the French II cluster dumped yesterday by Anonymous: half the names work at the fr Min of F Affairs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancaster_House_Treaties and http://www.gmfus.org/publications/frances-defense-partnerships-and-dilemmas-brexit ..."
"... This group may have officially formed in 2015, but its work is no different from the British propaganda that swamped the MSM when MH17 was downed. Tied into the Steel dossier and Russian collusion in the US. This is the anglosphere or five eyes permanent state. ..."
"... it is apparent that this "Integrity Initiative" was engaged in to ensure that the regime was in the safe hands of the harpy. ..."
"... It is interesting that Trudeau, the Canadian figurehead, clothes his country's kidnapping of the Chinese business figure as "in defence of the rule of law." All in all, it is now apparent we would be far better off if the Kaiserreich, with all of its militaristic and bombastic flaws, had triumphed in the Great War. No Hitler, no Stalin, no five eyes fascism. ..."
"... Rules of the game are made up as the game is played to suit the players. There you have it real life imitates art. ..."
"... Better yet, can anyone name an NGO, any NGO ever, that's not closely if not directly linked to "a secret military intelligence operation." Anyone? Mueller? ..."
"... Thank you very much for this terrific analysis. Donnelly: "... it is we who must either generate the debate or wait for something dreadful to happen to shock us into action. " Numerous American publications featured very similar language in the years ahead of 9/11, with "Islamic terrorist threat" substituted for the Russians. ..."
"... Vesti News has published an excellent documentary on how "clusters" work....not only to spread Russophobia...but also on continuous intends to overthrown Russian legitimate government... https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=7&v=E8-Stfrl5aM ..."
"... The last two periods of the US FP could be understood thusly: (1) Pre-Soviet collapse which was marked by a horrifically tragic and misplaced ideal of defending against communism (Good guys v. Bad Guys); and (2) Post-Soviet collapse which has been a period of coup d'etats where our hijacked military has been used for a Globalist Agenda for increasingly opaque (less defensible) reasons and missions. ..."
"... right after 2016 US elections there was a facade of split between military and intelligence differentiation. Seems that veil has been dispensed with ..."
"... Yeah, they hijacked a few other countries too, including Russia. Or if not hijacking, setting the mood right for some shenanigans in the near future... I think you're quite right about the cheif host of the globalist neolib parasite. Hijacked near fully. Being bled dry. That unaccounted for 21 Trillion at the pentagon is a bit of a giveaway. All under the guise of free markets and democracy. ..."
"... 'Integrity Initiative' - A Military Intelligence Operation Designed To Create A New Enemy ..."
Dec 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
uncle tungsten , Dec 15, 2018 6:28:07 PM | 41

Labour is not "silent". Apart from Thornberry's questioning already mentioned in another post here, the party's newspaper published a news about it:

Government admits that Institute of Statecraft was funded through CSSF , by Lamiat Sabin, 14th December 2018.

Mark2 , Dec 15, 2018 7:12:28 PM | link
Sounds to me like that Integrity initiative dude needs to go on a 'de-radicalisation program !!! How many billions is that guna save us all ! not to mention lives saved.
NemesisCalling , Dec 15, 2018 7:42:22 PM | link
@45 jr

Wrong JR. It seems quite the obvious that the big boy in the west, the US, would seem to be the one spearheading the whole globalist agenda.

But this is a retarded proposition.

The US is nothing more than a Golem. It has been reduced to somnambulism and hijacked, utilized for the ends of these Non-National elites. Sure, like many posters here, it feels good to blame the US for everything. But the powerbrokers have always been in London and now its hypercentralized endgame in Brussels. You can say that it is the US through and through, but ask yourself who has more to gain from US FP abroad: average Americans or the global elites?

Or are we just arguing semantics?

NemesisCalling , Dec 15, 2018 7:44:57 PM | link
Those former-Eastern Bloc countries, i.e. Poland and Ukraine, do not count as power brokers. They have and will always be pawns in the game. So what if they still worship Icons of Americanism which is a remnant culture of their F*ed up narrative where they still believe they are fighting the commies.
Uncle $cam , Dec 15, 2018 8:06:15 PM | link
Yesterday marked the 10th anniversary of the decider aka Bush Jr. having had a shoe thrown at him.

'For the sake of Iraq': Bush shoe-thrower running for parliament refuses to exploit 'hero image'

Muntadhar al-Zaidi was arrested and tortured for it...

"They broke my teeth, my nose, my leg, they electrocuted me, lashed me, they would beat me, they even broke a table or a chair over my back. I don't know, they had my eyes covered," al-Zaidi recalled. "This was one thing I never experienced before. Torture by the authorities, by the rule of law."

I wish it had been a hand grenade.

The British government financed Integrity Initiative is tasked with spreading anti-Russian propaganda and with influencing the public, military and governments of a number of countries. What follows is an incomplete analysis of the third batch of the Initiative's papers which was dumped yesterday.

Christopher Nigel Donnelly (CND) is the co-director of The Institute for Statecraft and founder of its offshoot Integrity Initiative . The Initiative claims to "Defend Democracy Against Disinformation".

The Integrity Initiative does this by planting disinformation about alleged Russian influence through journalists 'clusters' throughout Europe and the United States.

Both, the Institute as well as the Initiative, claim to be independent Non-Government Organizations. Both are financed by the British government, NATO and other state donors.

Among the documents lifted by some anonymous person from the servers of the Institute we find several papers about Donnelly as well as some memos written by him. They show a russophobe mind with a lack of realistic strategic thought.

There is also a file (pdf) with a copy of his passport:


bigger

From his curriculum vitae (pdf) we learn that Donnelly was a long time soldier in the British Army Intelligence Corps where he established and led the Soviet Studies Research Centre at RMA Sandhurst. He later was involved in creating the US Army's Foreign Military Studies Office (FMSO) at Ft. Leavenworth.

He worked at the British Ministry of Defence and as an advisor to several Secretaries General of NATO. He is a director of the Statecraft Institute since 2010. Donnelly also advises the Foreign Minister of Lithuania. He is a "Security and Justice Senior Mentor" of the UK's Stabilisation Unit which is tasked with destabilizing various countries. He serves as a Honorary Colonel of the Specialist Group Military Intelligence (SGMI).

During his time as military intelligence analyst in the 1980s Donnelly wrote several books and papers about the Soviet Union and its military.

Donnelly seems to be obsessed with the 'Russian threat' and is determined to fight it by all means. His paranoia is obvious in a "private - confidential" report by the Statecraft Institute on The Challenge of Brexit to the UK: Case study – The Foreign and Commonwealth Offices (pdf):

Our problem is that, for the last 70 years or so, we in the UK and Europe have been living in a safe, secure rules-based system which has allowed us to enjoy a holiday from history.

... ... ...

Unfortunately, this state of affairs is now being challenged. A new paradigm of conflict is replacing the 19th & 20th Century paradigm.

... ... ...

In this new paradigm, the clear distinction which most people have been able to draw between war and peace, their expectation of stability and a degree of predictability in life, are being replaced by a volatile unpredictability, a permanent state of instability in which war and peace become ever more difficult to disentangle . The "classic" understanding of conflict being between two distinct players or groups of players is giving way to a world of Darwinian competition where all the players – nation states, sub-state actors, big corporations, ethnic or religious groups, and so on – are constantly striving with each other in a "war of all against all". The Western rules-based system, which most westerners take for granted and have come to believe is "normal", is under attack from countries and organisations which wish to replace our system with theirs. This is not a crisis which faces us; it is a strategic challenge, and from several directions simultaneously.

In reality the "Western rules-based system", fully implemented after the demise of the Soviet Union, is a concept under which 'the west' arbitrarily makes up rules and threatens to kill anyone who does not follow them. Witness the wars against Serbia, the war on Iraq, the destruction of Libya, the western led coup in Ukraine and the war by Jihadi proxies against the people of Syria and Iraq. None of these actions were legal under international law. Demanding a return to strict adherence to the rule of international law, as Russia, China and others now do, it is not an attempt to replace "our system with theirs". It is a return to the normal state of global diplomacy. It is certainly not a "Darwinian competition".

In October 2016 Donnelly had a Private Discussion with Gen Sir Richard Barrons (pdf), marked as personal and confidential. Barrons is a former commander of the British Joint Forces Command. The nonsensical top line is: "The UK defence model is failing. UK is at real risk."

Some interesting nuggets again reveal a paranoid mindset. The talk also includes some realistic truthiness about the British military posture Barrons and others created:

There has been a progressive, systemic demobilisation of NATO militarily capability and a run down of all its members' defences
...
We are seeing new / reinvented ways of warfare – hybrid , plus the reassertion of hard power in warfare
...
Aircraft Carriers can be useful for lots of things, but not for war v China or Russia, so we should equip them accordingly. ...
The West no longer has a military edge on Russia. ...
Our Nuclear programme drains resources from conventional forces and hollows them out. ...
The UK Brigade in Germany is no good as a deterrent against Russia. ...
Our battalion in Estonia are hostages, not a deterrent. ...

The general laments the lack of influence the military has on the British government and its people. He argues for more government financed think tank research that can be fed back into the government:

So, if no catastrophe happens to wake people up and demand a response, then we need to find a way to get the core of government to realise the problem and take it out of the political space. We will need to impose changes over the heads of vested interests. NB We did this in the 1930s

My conclusion is that it is we who must either generate the debate or wait for something dreadful to happen to shock us into action. We must generate an independent debate outside government .

...

We need to ask when and how do we start to put all this right? Do we have the national capabilities / capacities to fix it? If so, how do we improve our harnessing of resources to do it? We need this debate NOW. There is not a moment to be lost.

This was an order from the core of the British thinking to Donnelly to get even deeper into the inner-British influence business. Hype Russia as a threat so more money can be taken from the 'vested interests' of the people and dumped into the military machine.

That particular advise of General Barrons was accepted. In 2017 the Integrity Initiative bid for funding from the Ministry of Defence (pdf) for various projects to influence the public, the parliament and the government as well as foreign forces. The bid lists "performance indicators" that are supposed to measure the success of its activities. The top indicator for the Initiative's proposed work is a "Tougher stance in government policy towards Russia" .


bigger

Asking for government finance to influence the government to take a "tougher stand towards Russia" seems a bit circular. But this is consistent with the operation of other Anglo-American think tanks and policy initiatives in which one part of the government, usually the hawkish one, secretly uses NGO's and think-tanks to lobby other parts of the government to support their specific hobbyhorse and budget.

Here is how it is done. The 'experts' of the 'charity' Institute for Statecraft and Integrity Initiative testified in the British parliament. While they were effectively paid by the government they lobbied parliament under the cover of their NGO. This circularity also allows to use international intermediates. Members of the Spanish cluster (pdf) of the Initiative testified in the British Parliament about the Catalan referendum and related allegations against Wikileaks publisher Julian Assange. (It is likely that this testimony led to the change in the position of the Ecuadorian government towards Assange.)


Unfortunately, or luckily, such lobbying operations are mostly run by people who are incompetent in the specific field they are lobbying for. Chris Donnelly, despite a life long experience in military intelligence, has obviously zero competence as a military strategist or planner.

In March 2014, shortly after Crimea split from the Ukraine, Donnelly suggested Military measures (pdf) to be taken by the Ukraine with regards to Crimea:

If I were in charge I would get the following implemented asp
  1. Set up a cordon sanitaire across the Crimean Isthmus and on the coast N. of Crimea with troops and mines
  2. Mine Sevastopol harbour/bay. Can be done easily using a car ferry if they have no minelayers. Doesn't need a lot of mines to be effective. They could easily buy some mines.
  3. Get their air force into the air and activate all their air defences. If they can't fly the Migs on the airfield in Crimea those should be destroyed as a gesture that they are serious. Going "live" electronically will worry the Russians as the Ukrainians have the same electronic kit. If the Russians jam it they jam their own kit as well.
  4. Ukraine used to have some seriously important weapons, such as a big microwave anti-satellite weapon. If they still have this, they should use it.
  5. The government needs a Strategic communication campaign-so far everything is coming from Moscow. They need to articulate a long-term vision that will inspire the people, however hard that is to do. Without it, what have people to fight for?
  6. They should ask the west now to start supplying Oil and gas. There is plenty available due to the mild winter.

I am trying to get this message across

Think for a moment how Russia would have responded to a mining of Sevastopol harbor, the frying of its satellites or the destruction of its fighter jets in Crimea. Those "guestures" would have been illegal acts of war against the forces of a nuclear power which were legally stationed in Crimea. And how was the west to immediately supply gas to Ukraine and Ukraine's pipeline network is designed to unidirectionally receive gas from Russia?

Such half-assed thinking is typical for the Institute and its creation of propaganda. One of its employees/contractors is Hugh Benedict Nimmo who the Initiative paid to produce anti-Russian propaganda that was then disseminated through various western publications.

According to the (still very incomplete) Initiative files Ben Nimmo received a monthly consultancy fee of £2.500 between December 2015 and March 2016. In August 2016 he sent an invoice (pdf) of £5,000 for his "August work on Integrity Initiative". A Production Timetable (pdf) for March to June 2016 lists the following Nimmo outputs and activities:

One wonders how often Ben Nimmo double billed his various sponsors for these copy-paste fantasy pamphlets.

In late 2017 Ben Nimmo and Guardian 'journalist' Carole Cadwalladr disseminated allegations that Russia used Facebook ads to influence the Brexit decision. Cadwalladr even received a price for her work. Unfortunately the price was not revoked when Facebook revealed that "Russia linked" accounts had spend a total of 97 cents on Brexit ads. It is unexplained how that was enough to achieve their alleged aim.

Cadwalladr is listed as a speaker (pdf) at a "skill sharing" conference the Institute organized for November 1-2 under the headline: "Tackling Tools of Malign Influence - Supporting 21st Century Journalism".

This year Ben Nimmo became notorious for claiming that several real persons with individual opinions were "Russian trolls". As we noted :

Nimmo, and several other dimwits quoted in the piece, came to the conclusion that Ian56 is a Kremlin paid troll, not a real person. Next to Ian56 Nimmo 'identified' other 'Russian troll' accounts:

Ben Nimmo @benimmo - 10:50 UTC - 24 Mar 2018

One particularly influential retweeter (judging by the number of accounts which then retweeted it) was @ValLisitsa, which posts in English and Russian. Last year, this account joined the troll-factory #StopMorganLie campaign.

Had Nimmo, a former NATO spokesperson, had some decent education he would have know that @ValLisitsa, aka Valentina Lisitsa , is a famous American- Ukrainian pianist. Yes, she sometimes tweets in Russian language to her many fans in Russia and the Ukraine. Is that now a crime? The videos of her world wide performances on Youtube have more than 170 million views. It is absurd to claim that she is a 'Russian troll' and to insinuate that she is taking Kremlin money to push 'Russian troll' opinions.

The Institute for Statecraft Expert Team (pdf) list several people with military intelligence backgrounds as well as many 'journalists'. One of them is:

Mark Galeotti
Specialist in Russian strategic thinking; the application of Russian disinformation and hybrid warfare; the use of organised crime as a weapon of hybrid warfare. Educational and mentoring skills, including in a US and E European environment, and the corporate world.
Russian linguist

Galeotti is the infamous inventor of the 'Gerasimov doctrine' and of the propaganda about Russia's alleged 'hybrid' warfare. In February 2013 the Russian General Valery Gerasimov, then Russia's chief of the General Staff, published a paper that analysed the way the 'west' is waging a new type of war by mixing propaganda, proxy armies and military force into one unified operation.

Galeotti claimed that Gerasimov's analysis of 'western' operations was a new Russian doctrine of 'hybrid war'. He invented the term 'Gerasimov doctrine' which then took off in the propaganda realm. In February 2016 the U.S. Army Military Review published a longer analysis of Gerasimov's paper that debunked the nonsense (pdf). It concluded:

Gerasimov's article is not proposing a new Russian way of warfare or a hybrid war, as has been stated in the West.

But anti-Russian propagandist repeated Galeotti's nonsense over and over. Only in March 2018, five years after Galeotti invented the 'Germasimov doctrine' and two years after he was thoroughly debunked, he finally recanted :

Everywhere, you'll find scholars, pundits, and policymakers talking about the threat the "Gerasimov doctrine" -- named after Russia's chief of the general staff -- poses to the West. It's a new way of war, "an expanded theory of modern warfare," or even "a vision of total warfare."

There's one small problem. It doesn't exist. And the longer we pretend it does, the longer we misunderstand the -- real, but different -- challenge Russia poses.

I feel I can say that because, to my immense chagrin, I created this term, which has since acquired a destructive life of its own, lumbering clumsily into the world to spread fear and loathing in its wake.

The Institute for Statecraft's "Specialist in Russian strategic thinking", an expert of disinformation and hybrid warfare, created a non-existing Russian doctrine out of hot air and used it to press for anti-Russian measures. Like Ben Nimmo he is an aptly example of the quality of the Institute's experts and work.


One of the newly released documents headlined CND Gen list 2 (pdf) (CND= Chris Nigel Donnelly) includes the names and email addresses of a number of military, government and think tank people. The anonymous releaser of the documents claims that the list is "of employees who attended a closed-door meeting with the white helmets". (No document has been published yet that confirms this.) One name on the list is of special interest:


bigger

Pablo Miller was the handler and friend of Sergej Skripal, the British double agent who was "novichoked" in Salisbury. When Miller's name was mentioned in the press the British government issued a D-Notice to suppress its further publishing,


bigger

As we wrote in April:

Pablo Miller, a British MI6 agent, had recruited Sergej Skripal. The former MI6 agent in Moscow, Christopher Steele, was also involved in the case. Skripal was caught by the Russian security services and went to jail. Pablo Miller, the MI6 recruiter, was also the handler of Sergej Skripal after he was released by Russia in a spy swap. He reportedly also lives in Salisbury. Both Christopher Steele and Pablo Miller work for Orbis Business Intelligence which created the "Dirty Dossier" about Donald Trump.

In 1979, before becoming a spy, Pablo Miller served at the 4th Royal Tank Regiment . ( BBC Newsnight 'journalist' Mark Urban, who later published a book based on interviews with Skripal , served together with Miller in the same regiment.) The 4th regiment's motto was "Fear Naught". Pablo Miller's email address given in the Chris Donnelly list is [email protected].

At the very beginning of the Skripal affair, before there was any talk of 'Novichok', we asked if Skripal was involved in creating the now debunked "Dirty Dossier" and if that was a reason for certain British insiders to move him out of the way:

Here are some question: If there is a connection between the dossier and Skripal, which seems very likely to me, then there are a number of people and organizations with potential motives to kill him. Lots of shady folks and officials on both sides of the Atlantic were involved in creating and running the anti-Trump/anti-Russia campaign. There are several investigations and some very dirty laundry might one day come to light. Removing Skripal while putting the blame on Russia looks like a convenient way to get rid of a potential witness.

The most recent release of Integrity Initiative documents includes lots of in-depth reports (pdf) about foreign media reactions to the Skripal affair. One wonders why the Initiative commissioned such research (pdf) and paid for it.

After two years the Muller investigation found zero evidence for the 'collusion' between Russia and the Trump campaign that the fake Steele dossier suggested. The whole collusion claim is a creation by 'former' British intelligence operatives who likely acted on request of U.S. intelligence leaders Clapper and Brennan. How deep was the Russia specialist Chris Donnelly and his Institute for Statecraft involved in this endeavor?


Checking through all the released Initiative papers and lists one gets the impression of a secret military intelligence operation, disguised as a public NGO. Financed by millions of government money the Institute for Statecraft and the Integrity Initiative work under a charity label to create and disseminate disinformation to the global public and back into the government and military itself.

The paranoia about Russia, which does way less harm than the 'western' "rules based system" constantly creates, is illogical and not based on factual analysis. It creates Russia as an "enemy" when it is none. It hypes a "threat" out of hot air. The only people who profit from this are the propagandists and the companies and people who back them.

The Initiatives motto "Defend Democracy Against Disinformation" is a truly Orwellian construct. By disseminating propaganda and using it to influence the public, parliament, the military and governments, the Institute actively undermines the democratic process that depends on the free availability of truthful information.

It should be shut down immediately.

---
Note: There have already been attempts to delete the released files from the Internet. A complete archive of all Integrity Initiative files published so far is here . Should the public links cease to work, you can contact the author of this blog for access to private backups.

flayer , Dec 15, 2018 11:49:39 AM | link

Aside from the fact that the government itself funds this organization, the creepiest thing about it is that the "non-governmental individuals" that help fund it are the same people that run the think tanks: a bunch of Rhodesians.

Russ , Dec 15, 2018 11:59:03 AM | link

"Such half-assed thinking...Think for a moment how Russia would have responded to a mining of Sevastopol harbor, the frying of its satellites or the destruction of its fighter jets in Crimea. Those "gestures" would have been illegal acts of war against the forces of a nuclear power which were legally stationed in Crimea."

It sure seems like this half-assed thinking isn't just the domain of a fringe element, but is increasingly mainstream among the elites. Doesn't bode well.

Roy G , Dec 15, 2018 12:10:11 PM | link
Thank you B. It is truly amazing to watch the UK elites unravel as they have become truly unhinged by their own connivances. It is a bad joke at the commoner's expense that they propagandize and demonize in the name of the 'Western rules based system' even as they are busy shooting themselves in both feet by committing Brexit. Although there are legitimate grievances with the EU, it is clear that Brexit is a Tory power play that is all politics and zero governance. Alas, Perfidious Albion has succumbed to Mad Cow disease.
Sally Snyder , Dec 15, 2018 12:10:23 PM | link
Here is an interesting look at how little the Russia-linked entities spent on advertising on Google during the 2016 election: https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/12/google-russia-and-4700-in-advertising.html Slowly but surely, the Russian meddling narrative is falling apart.
bjd , Dec 15, 2018 12:46:08 PM | link
Thanks, b.

What remains mysterious (not really) is why --if these initiatives are truly meant to save and strengthen democracy-- they aren't proudly proclaimed and advertised, in the open, transparent, for everyone one to see and judge, like an adult democracy that they claim to stand for might want to debate and form an opinion on.

The fact that it isn't, is testimony to the nefarious anti-democratic, authoritarian and totalitarian streak that runs in between every two lines that they put on paper.

Jackrabbit , Dec 15, 2018 12:58:35 PM | link
McCarthyesque smear campaigns to discredit opponents and squash dissent has become normal practice. Integrity Initiative tweets against Corbyn is a stark example, but there have been MANY other people and groups that have been tarred with claims of being sponsored/led/influenced by Russia, including Catalonian independence activists and Yellow vest protesters.

Every time one scratches the surface of such smears, it seems there is a connection to US/British MIC, Ukraine, or Israel - essentially, those who benefit (financially or otherwise) from greater tensions with Russia.

At what point does neocon doubling-down on failed foreign policy become more than just picking our pockets and warping our minds? At what point do they start killing our kids in another unnecessary war?

Clueless Joe , Dec 15, 2018 1:01:40 PM | link
Cold War has been over for nearly 30 years. It's time enough for Western countries to send into real retirement every single cold-warrior, their time is over, their mindset is quaint and useless, if not downright dangerous and counter-productive.
Mark2 , Dec 15, 2018 1:11:36 PM | link
Thank you 'b'
I'll just say -- - there is safety in numbers ! Already valuable information, important to the public good and democracy has been spread wide enough to be certain, this gene won't go back in the bottle ! D notice or no ! And by doing that, has made the fearless journalists and investigators lives all the safer ! Safety in numbers, spread this wide everyone?

Are these people above the law ? ...

psychohistorian , Dec 15, 2018 1:12:59 PM | link
Thanks for the continued exposition of this story b.....may it go viral

I want to comment on some of the wording you quote Donnelly as writing

" .....is giving way to a world of Darwinian competition where all the players – nation states, sub-state actors, big corporations, ethnic or religious groups, and so on – are constantly striving with each other in a "war of all against all". "

This is Donnelly's characterization of a world in which finance is a public utility instead of the private jackboot that it currently is. This is the delusion these people have been led to believe.

So instead of his "war of all against all" that some might call human cooperation on the basis of merit we have a mythical God of Mammon religion that continues to instantiate the private finance led world of the West with it parasitic elite and fawning acolytes.

Kadath , Dec 15, 2018 1:34:30 PM | link
Dear god, what has gotten into the minds of the military and political "elite" within the UK! Mining Sevastopol would have been an obvious act of war against Russia and Russia would have responded with force.

Thankfully it wasn't done but the fact this was even discussed by senior figures confirms that there was at least a sizable minority pushing for it. 30 years after the fall of the Soviet Union, the Western elite have truly abandoned all sense of reality and embraced a consequence free view of the use of force. After Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya they haven't learned a thing! I'm becoming more and more certain that a peaceful transition to the multipolar world is impossible and that it will only happen after the US or one of its' vassal states blunder into a proxy war and get utterly and comprehensively defeated, forcing a radical world realignment, but with nuts like John Bolton and the neocons in the Whitehouse it could easily lead to a nuclear war

Mina , Dec 15, 2018 1:45:39 PM | link
It looks like one of the decision was to get closer to France (after getting very close friends in Homs and Aleppo?) See the list of people in the French II cluster dumped yesterday by Anonymous: half the names work at the fr Min of F Affairs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancaster_House_Treaties and http://www.gmfus.org/publications/frances-defense-partnerships-and-dilemmas-brexit

The grumpy general at Turcopolier has skept the II topic entirely.

TJ , Dec 15, 2018 1:53:44 PM | link
@13 psychohistorian

" we have a mythical God of Mammon religion" I hope you're not here in dear old Blighty, as you'll probably get arrested for antisemitism

Peter AU 1 , Dec 15, 2018 2:13:14 PM | link
This group may have officially formed in 2015, but its work is no different from the British propaganda that swamped the MSM when MH17 was downed. Tied into the Steel dossier and Russian collusion in the US. This is the anglosphere or five eyes permanent state.
exiled off mainstreet , Dec 15, 2018 2:22:39 PM | link
As an aside this happens to be "Bill of Rights Day", the anniversary of the passage of the Bill of Rights as amendments to the yankee constitution. This reveals again how far from the rule of law the yankee imperium, now the key element of the British Empire they supposedly seceded from, has strayed, since it is apparent that this "Integrity Initiative" was engaged in to ensure that the regime was in the safe hands of the harpy.

It has also ensured that the victorious candidate has been neutered and faithfully follows the world control line put forward by the five eyes spy-masters making up the empire in its present iteration. This also shows what a farce the regime, based on the rule of law, now presents.

It is interesting that Trudeau, the Canadian figurehead, clothes his country's kidnapping of the Chinese business figure as "in defence of the rule of law." All in all, it is now apparent we would be far better off if the Kaiserreich, with all of its militaristic and bombastic flaws, had triumphed in the Great War. No Hitler, no Stalin, no five eyes fascism.

GeorgeV , Dec 15, 2018 2:27:49 PM | link
The "Western-based rules system" described in this article reminds me of a game called "Calvin Ball" which appeared in the former comic strip "Calvin and Hobbes." In the strip Calvin a wildly imaginative adolescent boy who plays a free-form of football with his imaginary pet toy tiger (Hobbes). Rules of the game are made up as the game is played to suit the players. There you have it real life imitates art.
bjd , Dec 15, 2018 2:38:50 PM | link
b, I downloaded the zip file, and had also downloaded all the PDF's from pdf-archive yesterday. There are more files in the zip, but the following were on pdf-archive and are NOT in the zip:
sejomoje , Dec 15, 2018 3:06:48 PM | link
Better yet, can anyone name an NGO, any NGO ever, that's not closely if not directly linked to "a secret military intelligence operation." Anyone? Mueller?
jayc , Dec 15, 2018 4:05:08 PM | link
Thank you very much for this terrific analysis. Donnelly: "... it is we who must either generate the debate or wait for something dreadful to happen to shock us into action. " Numerous American publications featured very similar language in the years ahead of 9/11, with "Islamic terrorist threat" substituted for the Russians.
Emmanuel Goldstein , Dec 15, 2018 4:21:51 PM | link
The transcript of his conversation with the general shows very starkly that we would last about two minutes in a nuclear exchange, but about half a day in a conventional one. No reserves, no equipment stockpiles, a navy consisting of two fat targets, neither of which has any aircraft and some destroyers which have propulsion problems, a smallish air force and very small numbers of troops. The tripwire force in Estonia is wholly sacrificial. In fact he lays bare the whole fallacy of biting the bear. With the armed forces in the state he describes, and with the recruitment and retention problems, wouldn't it be better, as one defense minister said, 'to go away and shut up'...
uncle tungsten , Dec 15, 2018 4:27:59 PM | link
Thanks b and especially the link to Valentina Lisitsa who I had tinkling in the background as I read your grand expose. These people are seditious morons, parasites infesting the state apparatus. Shut these fools down. Nice touch publishing the passport image. I can just imagine the frenzied aftermath of Kit's visit to the basement. Big thanks to anonymous and Craig Murray too. Their IT personel are probably visiting Devil's Island or Diego Garcia as we read.
Sasha , Dec 15, 2018 5:00:51 PM | link
Vesti News has published an excellent documentary on how "clusters" work....not only to spread Russophobia...but also on continuous intends to overthrown Russian legitimate government... https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=7&v=E8-Stfrl5aM

The British and US connections to loot and evade Russian riches and funds are exposed, as well as the origin of sanctions, supposed "alt-media" "truth-seakers" like Meduza...or supposed "pro-Russian" US intelligence operatives married to Russian women....

Sasha , Dec 15, 2018 5:32:32 PM | link
@Posted by: Mina | Dec 15, 2018 1:45:39 PM | 18

Amongst the many issues he usually passes over trying to make himself the fool, while at the same time trying to convince us of the oustanding intellectual capacities, honesty and classy stance of him and his "comittee"...

https://www.stalkerzone.org/an-american-military-attache-held-a-closed-meeting-with-uaf-commanders-in-mariupol/

For that travel, to end bluntly and in such public view siding with the nazis of the "Azov Regiment" and other criminals of war, there was no need of so many saddlebags, so as pretending that the people who supported Trump as if there was no tomorrow, were enlightened people who only wanted to rescue "America" for the "Americans", as if there would not be a sign of blatant exceptionalism in appropriating of the term "Americans" for themselves in such a huge continent....

NemesisCalling , Dec 15, 2018 5:44:31 PM | link
In my view, the USA's FP has been undermined by EURO elites which is forcing a game of chicken with Russia.

The FP pre-Soviet collapse consisted of one MO: GET THE COMMIES!

Since then, Neocons and Neolibs which are frontmen for this Non-National Globalized Elite, have hijacked our country's military and have steered it to a Global agenda where dominance in the ME means either superiority for these EURO elites or Vassal-hood.

The last two periods of the US FP could be understood thusly: (1) Pre-Soviet collapse which was marked by a horrifically tragic and misplaced ideal of defending against communism (Good guys v. Bad Guys); and (2) Post-Soviet collapse which has been a period of coup d'etats where our hijacked military has been used for a Globalist Agenda for increasingly opaque (less defensible) reasons and missions.

The average American could care less about the ME and the US would be 1000x better-off reverting to an isolationist stance.

But this will not happen so long as Nationalism in the US and UK is repeatedly put-down. It seems as though there is going to be another Brexit vote. Does anyone doubt that miraculously the people by then will have second-guessed their will to Brexit and so will vote against it given another crack at a vote?

Sickening.

slit , Dec 15, 2018 6:04:29 PM | link
"Unfortunately, or luckily, such lobbying operations are mostly run by people who are incompetent in the specific field they are lobbying for. "

Incompetence in general and IT and data analysis, physics 101, etc.:

Cry boo hoo hoo to wake up with indigenous capacity decades behind world players like Russia, China, India, etc who operate on fractional budgets...

But this drama also exposes ashura/emigods intra necine warfare: right after 2016 US elections there was a facade of split between military and intelligence differentiation. Seems that veil has been dispensed with , but it invites other questions, insofar as UK is Her Majesty's Service, so are we to read this with Prince Harry or Philip's culture, or a "consent by silence") in mind? Defending crown or EU "Saturnus Sattelitus"?

MadMax2 , Dec 15, 2018 6:28:58 PM | link
@Nemisis

Yeah, they hijacked a few other countries too, including Russia. Or if not hijacking, setting the mood right for some shenanigans in the near future... I think you're quite right about the cheif host of the globalist neolib parasite. Hijacked near fully. Being bled dry. That unaccounted for 21 Trillion at the pentagon is a bit of a giveaway. All under the guise of free markets and democracy.

Good to see Trump finally give it a face... 'you need freedom and security now pay up bitches'

Jackrabbit , Dec 15, 2018 6:38:00 PM | link
NemesisCalling | Dec 15, 2018 5:44:31 PM | 37
In my view, the USA's FP has been undermined by EURO elites which is forcing a game of chicken with Russia.... Globalist Agenda
I think the opposite is true.

The US-led Empire and their globalist sycophants seek to weaken Europe so that it can not act independently in its own best interests. They will do what ever they can to ensure that the vassals never join with Russia/China and the SCO.

Russian scare-mongering and immigration have been effective in furthering this agenda. Also note: what USA has termed "new Europe" - eastern European states like Poland and Ukraine - are solidly pro-American.

John2o2o , Dec 15, 2018 6:56:17 PM | link
'Integrity Initiative' - A Military Intelligence Operation Designed To Create A New Enemy

Perfect description.

Why has this ageing nutjob been allowed to secretly dictate British foreign policy? He's clearly insane.

vk , Dec 15, 2018 6:58:49 PM | link
@

[Dec 16, 2018] Neoliberalism has had its day. So what happens next (The death of neoliberalism and the crisis in western politics) by Martin Jacques

Highly recommended!
It is very interesting and educational to read this pre-election article two years later and see where the author is right and where he is wrong. The death of neoliberalism was greatly exaggerated. It simply mutated in the USA into "national neoliberalism" under Trump. As no clear alternative exists it remain the dominant ideology and universities still brainwash students with neoclassical economics. And in way catchy slogan "Make America great again" under Trump means "Make American working and lower middle class great again"
It is also clear that Trump betrayed or was forced to betray most of his election promises. Standrd of living of common americans did not improve under his watch. most of hi benefits of his tax cuts went to large corporations and financial oligarch. He continued the policy of financial deregulation, which is tantamount of playing with open fire trying to warm up the house
What we see under Trump is tremendous growth of political role of intelligence agencies which now are real kingmakers and can sink any candidate which does not support their agenda. And USA intelligence agencies operated in 2016 in close cooperation with the UK intelligence agencies to the extent that it is not clear who has the lead in creating Steele dossier. They are definitely out of control of executive branch and play their own game. We also see a rise of CIA democrats as a desperate attempt to preserve the power of Clinton wing of the Democratic Party ('soft neoliberals" turned under Hillary into into warmongers and neocons) . Hillary and Bill themselves clearly belong to CIA democrats too, not only to Wall Street democrats, despite the fact that they sold Democratic Party to Wall Street in the past. New Labor in UK did the same.
But if it is more or less clear now what happened in the USa in 2016-2018, it is completely unclear what will happen next. I think in no way neoliberalism will start to be dismantled. there is no social forces powerful enough to start this job, We probably need another financial crisi of the scale of 2008 for this work to be reluctantly started by ruling elite. And we better not to have this repetition of 2008 as it will be really devastating for common people.
Notable quotes:
"... the causes of this political crisis, glaringly evident on both sides of the Atlantic, are much deeper than simply the financial crisis and the virtually stillborn recovery of the last decade. They go to the heart of the neoliberal project that dates from the late 70s and the political rise of Reagan and Thatcher, and embraced at its core the idea of a global free market in goods, services and capital. The depression-era system of bank regulation was dismantled, in the US in the 1990s and in Britain in 1986, thereby creating the conditions for the 2008 crisis. Equality was scorned, the idea of trickle-down economics lauded, government condemned as a fetter on the market and duly downsized, immigration encouraged, regulation cut to a minimum, taxes reduced and a blind eye turned to corporate evasion. ..."
"... It should be noted that, by historical standards, the neoliberal era has not had a particularly good track record. The most dynamic period of postwar western growth was that between the end of the war and the early 70s, the era of welfare capitalism and Keynesianism, when the growth rate was double that of the neoliberal period from 1980 to the present. ..."
"... In the period 1948-1972, every section of the American population experienced very similar and sizable increases in their standard of living; between 1972-2013, the bottom 10% experienced falling real income while the top 10% did far better than everyone else. In the US, the median real income for full-time male workers is now lower than it was four decades ago: the income of the bottom 90% of the population has stagnated for over 30 years . ..."
"... On average, between 65-70% of households in 25 high-income economies experienced stagnant or falling real incomes between 2005 and 2014. ..."
"... As Thomas Piketty has shown, in the absence of countervailing pressures, capitalism naturally gravitates towards increasing inequality. In the period between 1945 and the late 70s, Cold War competition was arguably the biggest such constraint. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, there have been none. As the popular backlash grows increasingly irresistible, however, such a winner-takes-all regime becomes politically unsustainable. ..."
"... Foreign Affairs ..."
"... "'Populism' is the label that political elites attach to policies supported by ordinary citizens that they don't like." Populism is a movement against the status quo. It represents the beginnings of something new, though it is generally much clearer about what it is against than what it is for. It can be progressive or reactionary, but more usually both. ..."
"... According to a Gallup poll, in 2000 only 33% of Americans called themselves working class; by 2015 the figure was 48%, almost half the population. ..."
"... The re-emergence of the working class as a political voice in Britain, most notably in the Brexit vote, can best be described as an inchoate expression of resentment and protest, with only a very weak sense of belonging to the labour movement. ..."
"... Economists such as Larry Summers believe that the prospect for the future is most likely one of secular stagnation . ..."
"... those who have lost out in the neoliberal era are no longer prepared to acquiesce in their fate – they are increasingly in open revolt. We are witnessing the end of the neoliberal era. It is not dead, but it is in its early death throes, just as the social-democratic era was during the 1970s. ..."
"... Capital in the Twenty-First Century ..."
"... Financial Times ..."
Aug 21, 2016 | www.theguardian.com

In the early 1980s the author was one of the first to herald the emerging dominance of neoliberalism in the west. Here he argues that this doctrine is now faltering. But what happens next?

The western financial crisis of 2007-8 was the worst since 1931, yet its immediate repercussions were surprisingly modest. The crisis challenged the foundation stones of the long-dominant neoliberal ideology but it seemed to emerge largely unscathed. The banks were bailed out; hardly any bankers on either side of the Atlantic were prosecuted for their crimes; and the price of their behaviour was duly paid by the taxpayer. Subsequent economic policy, especially in the Anglo-Saxon world, has relied overwhelmingly on monetary policy, especially quantitative easing. It has failed. The western economy has stagnated and is now approaching its lost decade, with no end in sight.

After almost nine years, we are finally beginning to reap the political whirlwind of the financial crisis. But how did neoliberalism manage to survive virtually unscathed for so long? Although it failed the test of the real world, bequeathing the worst economic disaster for seven decades, politically and intellectually it remained the only show in town. Parties of the right, centre and left had all bought into its philosophy, New Labour a classic in point. They knew no other way of thinking or doing: it had become the common sense. It was, as Antonio Gramsci put it, hegemonic. But that hegemony cannot and will not survive the test of the real world.

The first inkling of the wider political consequences was evident in the turn in public opinion against the banks, bankers and business leaders. For decades, they could do no wrong: they were feted as the role models of our age, the default troubleshooters of choice in education, health and seemingly everything else. Now, though, their star was in steep descent, along with that of the political class. The effect of the financial crisis was to undermine faith and trust in the competence of the governing elites. It marked the beginnings of a wider political crisis.

But the causes of this political crisis, glaringly evident on both sides of the Atlantic, are much deeper than simply the financial crisis and the virtually stillborn recovery of the last decade. They go to the heart of the neoliberal project that dates from the late 70s and the political rise of Reagan and Thatcher, and embraced at its core the idea of a global free market in goods, services and capital. The depression-era system of bank regulation was dismantled, in the US in the 1990s and in Britain in 1986, thereby creating the conditions for the 2008 crisis. Equality was scorned, the idea of trickle-down economics lauded, government condemned as a fetter on the market and duly downsized, immigration encouraged, regulation cut to a minimum, taxes reduced and a blind eye turned to corporate evasion.

It should be noted that, by historical standards, the neoliberal era has not had a particularly good track record. The most dynamic period of postwar western growth was that between the end of the war and the early 70s, the era of welfare capitalism and Keynesianism, when the growth rate was double that of the neoliberal period from 1980 to the present.

But by far the most disastrous feature of the neoliberal period has been the huge growth in inequality. Until very recently, this had been virtually ignored. With extraordinary speed, however, it has emerged as one of, if not the most important political issue on both sides of the Atlantic, most dramatically in the US. It is, bar none, the issue that is driving the political discontent that is now engulfing the west. Given the statistical evidence, it is puzzling, shocking even, that it has been disregarded for so long; the explanation can only lie in the sheer extent of the hegemony of neoliberalism and its values.

But now reality has upset the doctrinal apple cart. In the period 1948-1972, every section of the American population experienced very similar and sizable increases in their standard of living; between 1972-2013, the bottom 10% experienced falling real income while the top 10% did far better than everyone else. In the US, the median real income for full-time male workers is now lower than it was four decades ago: the income of the bottom 90% of the population has stagnated for over 30 years .

A not so dissimilar picture is true of the UK. And the problem has grown more serious since the financial crisis. On average, between 65-70% of households in 25 high-income economies experienced stagnant or falling real incomes between 2005 and 2014.

Large sections of the population in both the US and the UK are now in revolt against their lot

The reasons are not difficult to explain. The hyper-globalisation era has been systematically stacked in favour of capital against labour: international trading agreements, drawn up in great secrecy, with business on the inside and the unions and citizens excluded, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) being but the latest examples; the politico-legal attack on the unions; the encouragement of large-scale immigration in both the US and Europe that helped to undermine the bargaining power of the domestic workforce; and the failure to retrain displaced workers in any meaningful way.

As Thomas Piketty has shown, in the absence of countervailing pressures, capitalism naturally gravitates towards increasing inequality. In the period between 1945 and the late 70s, Cold War competition was arguably the biggest such constraint. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, there have been none. As the popular backlash grows increasingly irresistible, however, such a winner-takes-all regime becomes politically unsustainable.

Large sections of the population in both the US and the UK are now in revolt against their lot, as graphically illustrated by the support for Trump and Sanders in the US and the Brexit vote in the UK. This popular revolt is often described, in a somewhat denigratory and dismissive fashion, as populism. Or, as Francis Fukuyama writes in a recent excellent essay in Foreign Affairs : "'Populism' is the label that political elites attach to policies supported by ordinary citizens that they don't like." Populism is a movement against the status quo. It represents the beginnings of something new, though it is generally much clearer about what it is against than what it is for. It can be progressive or reactionary, but more usually both.

Brexit is a classic example of such populism. It has overturned a fundamental cornerstone of UK policy since the early 1970s. Though ostensibly about Europe, it was in fact about much more: a cri de coeur from those who feel they have lost out and been left behind, whose living standards have stagnated or worse since the 1980s, who feel dislocated by large-scale immigration over which they have no control and who face an increasingly insecure and casualised labour market. Their revolt has paralysed the governing elite, already claimed one prime minister, and left the latest one fumbling around in the dark looking for divine inspiration.

The wave of populism marks the return of class as a central agency in politics, both in the UK and the US. This is particularly remarkable in the US. For many decades, the idea of the "working class" was marginal to American political discourse. Most Americans described themselves as middle class, a reflection of the aspirational pulse at the heart of American society. According to a Gallup poll, in 2000 only 33% of Americans called themselves working class; by 2015 the figure was 48%, almost half the population.

Brexit, too, was primarily a working-class revolt. Hitherto, on both sides of the Atlantic, the agency of class has been in retreat in the face of the emergence of a new range of identities and issues from gender and race to sexual orientation and the environment. The return of class, because of its sheer reach, has the potential, like no other issue, to redefine the political landscape.

The working class belongs to no one: its orientation, far from predetermined, is a function of politics

The re-emergence of class should not be confused with the labor movement. They are not synonymous: this is obvious in the US and increasingly the case in the UK. Indeed, over the last half-century, there has been a growing separation between the two in Britain. The re-emergence of the working class as a political voice in Britain, most notably in the Brexit vote, can best be described as an inchoate expression of resentment and protest, with only a very weak sense of belonging to the labour movement.

Indeed, Ukip has been as important – in the form of immigration and Europe – in shaping its current attitudes as the Labour party. In the United States, both Trump and Sanders have given expression to the working-class revolt, the latter almost as much as the former. The working class belongs to no one: its orientation, far from predetermined, as the left liked to think, is a function of politics.

The neoliberal era is being undermined from two directions. First, if its record of economic growth has never been particularly strong, it is now dismal. Europe is barely larger than it was on the eve of the financial crisis in 2007; the United States has done better but even its growth has been anaemic. Economists such as Larry Summers believe that the prospect for the future is most likely one of secular stagnation .

Worse, because the recovery has been so weak and fragile, there is a widespread belief that another financial crisis may well beckon. In other words, the neoliberal era has delivered the west back into the kind of crisis-ridden world that we last experienced in the 1930s. With this background, it is hardly surprising that a majority in the west now believe their children will be worse off than they were. Second, those who have lost out in the neoliberal era are no longer prepared to acquiesce in their fate – they are increasingly in open revolt. We are witnessing the end of the neoliberal era. It is not dead, but it is in its early death throes, just as the social-democratic era was during the 1970s.

A sure sign of the declining influence of neoliberalism is the rising chorus of intellectual voices raised against it. From the mid-70s through the 80s, the economic debate was increasingly dominated by monetarists and free marketeers. But since the western financial crisis, the centre of gravity of the intellectual debate has shifted profoundly. This is most obvious in the United States, with economists such as Joseph Stiglitz, Paul Krugman, Dani Rodrik and Jeffrey Sachs becoming increasingly influential. Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century has been a massive seller. His work and that of Tony Atkinson and Angus Deaton have pushed the question of the inequality to the top of the political agenda. In the UK, Ha-Joon Chang , for long isolated within the economics profession, has gained a following far greater than those who think economics is a branch of mathematics.

Meanwhile, some of those who were previously strong advocates of a neoliberal approach, such as Larry Summers and the Financial Times 's Martin Wolf, have become extremely critical. The wind is in the sails of the critics of neoliberalism; the neoliberals and monetarists are in retreat. In the UK, the media and political worlds are well behind the curve. Few recognize that we are at the end of an era. Old attitudes and assumptions still predominate, whether on the BBC's Today programme, in the rightwing press or the parliamentary Labor party.

Following Ed Miliband's resignation as Labour leader, virtually no one foresaw the triumph of Jeremy Corbyn in the subsequent leadership election. The assumption had been more of the same, a Blairite or a halfway house like Miliband, certainly not anyone like Corbyn. But the zeitgeist had changed. The membership, especially the young who had joined the party on an unprecedented scale, wanted a complete break with New Labour. One of the reasons why the left has failed to emerge as the leader of the new mood of working-class disillusionment is that most social democratic parties became, in varying degrees, disciples of neoliberalism and uber-globalisation. The most extreme forms of this phenomenon were New Labour and the Democrats, who in the late 90s and 00s became its advance guard, personified by Tony Blair and Bill Clinton, triangulation and the third way.

But as David Marquand observed in a review for the New Statesman , what is the point of a social democratic party if it doesn't represent the less fortunate, the underprivileged and the losers? New Labour deserted those who needed them, who historically they were supposed to represent. Is it surprising that large sections have now deserted the party who deserted them? Blair, in his reincarnation as a money-obsessed consultant to a shady bunch of presidents and dictators, is a fitting testament to the demise of New Labour.

The rival contenders – Burnham, Cooper and Kendall – represented continuity. They were swept away by Corbyn, who won nearly 60% of the votes. New Labour was over, as dead as Monty Python's parrot. Few grasped the meaning of what had happened. A Guardian leader welcomed the surge in membership and then, lo and behold, urged support for Yvette Cooper, the very antithesis of the reason for the enthusiasm. The PLP refused to accept the result and ever since has tried with might and main to remove Corbyn.

Just as the Labour party took far too long to come to terms with the rise of Thatcherism and the birth of a new era at the end of the 70s, now it could not grasp that the Thatcherite paradigm, which they eventually came to embrace in the form of New Labour, had finally run its course. Labour, like everyone else, is obliged to think anew. The membership in their antipathy to New Labour turned to someone who had never accepted the latter, who was the polar opposite in almost every respect of Blair, and embodying an authenticity and decency which Blair patently did not.

Labour may be in intensive care, but the condition of the Conservatives is not a great deal better

Corbyn is not a product of the new times, he is a throwback to the late 70s and early 80s. That is both his strength and also his weakness. He is uncontaminated by the New Labour legacy because he has never accepted it. But nor, it would seem, does he understand the nature of the new era. The danger is that he is possessed of feet of clay in what is a highly fluid and unpredictable political environment, devoid of any certainties of almost any kind, in which Labour finds itself dangerously divided and weakened.

Labour may be in intensive care, but the condition of the Conservatives is not a great deal better. David Cameron was guilty of a huge and irresponsible miscalculation over Brexit. He was forced to resign in the most ignominious of circumstances. The party is hopelessly divided. It has no idea in which direction to move after Brexit. The Brexiters painted an optimistic picture of turning away from the declining European market and embracing the expanding markets of the world, albeit barely mentioning by name which countries it had in mind. It looks as if the new prime minister may have an anachronistic hostility towards China and a willingness to undo the good work of George Osborne. If the government turns its back on China, by far the fastest growing market in the world, where are they going to turn?

Brexit has left the country fragmented and deeply divided, with the very real prospect that Scotland might choose independence. Meanwhile, the Conservatives seem to have little understanding that the neoliberal era is in its death throes.

Dramatic as events have been in the UK, they cannot compare with those in the United States. Almost from nowhere, Donald Trump rose to capture the Republican nomination and confound virtually all the pundits and not least his own party. His message was straightforwardly anti-globalisation. He believes that the interests of the working class have been sacrificed in favour of the big corporations that have been encouraged to invest around the world and thereby deprive American workers of their jobs. Further, he argues that large-scale immigration has weakened the bargaining power of American workers and served to lower their wages.

He proposes that US corporations should be required to invest their cash reserves in the US. He believes that the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) has had the effect of exporting American jobs to Mexico. On similar grounds, he is opposed to the TPP and the TTIP. And he also accuses China of stealing American jobs, threatening to impose a 45% tariff on Chinese imports.

To globalisation Trump counterposes economic nationalism: "Put America first". His appeal, above all, is to the white working class who, until Trump's (and Bernie Sander's) arrival on the political scene, had been ignored and largely unrepresented since the 1980s. Given that their wages have been falling for most of the last 40 years, it is extraordinary how their interests have been neglected by the political class. Increasingly, they have voted Republican, but the Republicans have long been captured by the super-rich and Wall Street, whose interests, as hyper-globalisers, have run directly counter to those of the white working class. With the arrival of Trump they finally found a representative: they won Trump the Republican nomination.

Trump believes that America's pursuit of great power status has squandered the nation's resources

The economic nationalist argument has also been vigorously pursued by Bernie Sanders , who ran Hillary Clinton extremely close for the Democratic nomination and would probably have won but for more than 700 so-called super-delegates, who were effectively chosen by the Democratic machine and overwhelmingly supported Clinton. As in the case of the Republicans, the Democrats have long supported a neoliberal, pro-globalisation strategy, notwithstanding the concerns of its trade union base. Both the Republicans and the Democrats now find themselves deeply polarised between the pro- and anti-globalisers, an entirely new development not witnessed since the shift towards neoliberalism under Reagan almost 40 years ago.

Another plank of Trump's nationalist appeal – "Make America great again" – is his position on foreign policy. He believes that America's pursuit of great power status has squandered the nation's resources. He argues that the country's alliance system is unfair, with America bearing most of the cost and its allies contributing far too little. He points to Japan and South Korea, and NATO's European members as prime examples. He seeks to rebalance these relationships and, failing that, to exit from them.

As a country in decline, he argues that America can no longer afford to carry this kind of financial burden. Rather than putting the world to rights, he believes the money should be invested at home, pointing to the dilapidated state of America's infrastructure. Trump's position represents a major critique of America as the world's hegemon. His arguments mark a radical break with the neoliberal, hyper-globalisation ideology that has reigned since the early 1980s and with the foreign policy orthodoxy of most of the postwar period. These arguments must be taken seriously. They should not be lightly dismissed just because of their authorship. But Trump is no man of the left. He is a populist of the right. He has launched a racist and xenophobic attack on Muslims and on Mexicans. Trump's appeal is to a white working class that feels it has been cheated by the big corporations, undermined by Hispanic immigration, and often resentful towards African-Americans who for long too many have viewed as their inferior.

A Trump America would mark a descent into authoritarianism characterised by abuse, scapegoating, discrimination, racism, arbitrariness and violence; America would become a deeply polarised and divided society. His threat to impose 45% tariffs on China , if implemented, would certainly provoke retaliation by the Chinese and herald the beginnings of a new era of protectionism.

Trump may well lose the presidential election just as Sanders failed in his bid for the Democrat nomination. But this does not mean that the forces opposed to hyper-globalisation – unrestricted immigration, TPP and TTIP, the free movement of capital and much else – will have lost the argument and are set to decline. In little more than 12 months, Trump and Sanders have transformed the nature and terms of the argument. Far from being on the wane, the arguments of the critics of hyper-globalisation are steadily gaining ground. Roughly two-thirds of Americans agree that "we should not think so much in international terms but concentrate more on our own national problems". And, above all else, what will continue to drive opposition to the hyper-globalisers is inequality.

[Dec 16, 2018] The 'Integrity Initiative' - A Military Intelligence Operation, Disguised As Charity, To Create The Russian Threat

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Sounds to me like that Integrity initiative dude needs to go on a 'de-radicalisation program !!! ..."
"... the powerbrokers have always been in London and now its hypercentralized endgame in Brussels. You can say that it is the US through and through, but ask yourself who has more to gain from US FP abroad: average Americans or the global elites? ..."
"... Those former-Eastern Bloc countries, i.e. Poland and Ukraine, do not count as power brokers. They have and will always be pawns in the game. So what if they still worship Icons of Americanism which is a remnant culture of their F*ed up narrative where they still believe they are fighting the commies. ..."
"... Integrity Initiative ..."
"... From his curriculum vitae (pdf) we learn that Donnelly was a long time soldier in the British Army Intelligence Corps where he established and led the Soviet Studies Research Centre at RMA Sandhurst. He later was involved in creating the US Army's Foreign Military Studies Office (FMSO) at Ft. Leavenworth. ..."
"... He worked at the British Ministry of Defence and as an advisor to several Secretaries General of NATO. He is a director of the Statecraft Institute since 2010. Donnelly also advises the Foreign Minister of Lithuania. He is a "Security and Justice Senior Mentor" of the UK's Stabilisation Unit which is tasked with destabilizing various countries. He serves as a Honorary Colonel of the Specialist Group Military Intelligence (SGMI). ..."
"... This was an order from the core of the British thinking to Donnelly to get even deeper into the inner-British influence business. Hype Russia as a threat so more money can be taken from the 'vested interests' of the people and dumped into the military machine. ..."
"... That particular advise of General Barrons was accepted. In 2017 the Integrity Initiative bid for funding from the Ministry of Defence (pdf) for various projects to influence the public, the parliament and the government as well as foreign forces. The bid lists "performance indicators" that are supposed to measure the success of its activities. The top indicator for the Initiative's proposed work is a "Tougher stance in government policy towards Russia" ..."
"... In March 2014, shortly after Crimea split from the Ukraine, Donnelly suggested Military measures (pdf) to be taken by the Ukraine with regards to Crimea: ..."
"... Think for a moment how Russia would have responded to a mining of Sevastopol harbor, the frying of its satellites or the destruction of its fighter jets in Crimea. Those "guestures" would have been illegal acts of war against the forces of a nuclear power which were legally stationed in Crimea. And how was the west to immediately supply gas to Ukraine and Ukraine's pipeline network is designed to unidirectionally receive gas from Russia? ..."
"... Yes, Putin really believes his own propaganda ..."
"... Putin's paranoia is driving his foreign adventures ..."
"... Russian information warfare - airbrushing reality ..."
"... Distract, deceive, destroy: Putin at war in Syria ..."
"... Russian penetration in Germany ..."
"... Russian conspiracy theory and foreign policy ..."
"... Mapping Russia's whole influence machine ..."
"... Military Review ..."
"... BBC Newsnight ..."
"... The most recent release of Integrity Initiative documents includes lots of in-depth reports (pdf) about foreign media reactions to the Skripal affair. One wonders why the Initiative commissioned such research (pdf) and paid for it. ..."
"... Here is an interesting look at how little the Russia-linked entities spent on advertising on Google during the 2016 election: https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/12/google-russia-and-4700-in-advertising.html Slowly but surely, the Russian meddling narrative is falling apart. ..."
"... McCarthyesque smear campaigns to discredit opponents and squash dissent has become normal practice. Integrity Initiative tweets against Corbyn is a stark example, but there have been MANY other people and groups that have been tarred with claims of being sponsored/led/influenced by Russia, including Catalonian independence activists and Yellow vest protesters. ..."
"... Dear god, what has gotten into the minds of the military and political "elite" within the UK! Mining Sevastopol would have been an obvious act of war against Russia and Russia would have responded with force. ..."
"... It looks like one of the decision was to get closer to France (after getting very close friends in Homs and Aleppo?) See the list of people in the French II cluster dumped yesterday by Anonymous: half the names work at the fr Min of F Affairs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancaster_House_Treaties and http://www.gmfus.org/publications/frances-defense-partnerships-and-dilemmas-brexit ..."
"... This group may have officially formed in 2015, but its work is no different from the British propaganda that swamped the MSM when MH17 was downed. Tied into the Steel dossier and Russian collusion in the US. This is the anglosphere or five eyes permanent state. ..."
"... it is apparent that this "Integrity Initiative" was engaged in to ensure that the regime was in the safe hands of the harpy. ..."
"... It is interesting that Trudeau, the Canadian figurehead, clothes his country's kidnapping of the Chinese business figure as "in defence of the rule of law." All in all, it is now apparent we would be far better off if the Kaiserreich, with all of its militaristic and bombastic flaws, had triumphed in the Great War. No Hitler, no Stalin, no five eyes fascism. ..."
"... Rules of the game are made up as the game is played to suit the players. There you have it real life imitates art. ..."
"... Better yet, can anyone name an NGO, any NGO ever, that's not closely if not directly linked to "a secret military intelligence operation." Anyone? Mueller? ..."
"... Thank you very much for this terrific analysis. Donnelly: "... it is we who must either generate the debate or wait for something dreadful to happen to shock us into action. " Numerous American publications featured very similar language in the years ahead of 9/11, with "Islamic terrorist threat" substituted for the Russians. ..."
"... Vesti News has published an excellent documentary on how "clusters" work....not only to spread Russophobia...but also on continuous intends to overthrown Russian legitimate government... https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=7&v=E8-Stfrl5aM ..."
"... The last two periods of the US FP could be understood thusly: (1) Pre-Soviet collapse which was marked by a horrifically tragic and misplaced ideal of defending against communism (Good guys v. Bad Guys); and (2) Post-Soviet collapse which has been a period of coup d'etats where our hijacked military has been used for a Globalist Agenda for increasingly opaque (less defensible) reasons and missions. ..."
"... right after 2016 US elections there was a facade of split between military and intelligence differentiation. Seems that veil has been dispensed with ..."
"... Yeah, they hijacked a few other countries too, including Russia. Or if not hijacking, setting the mood right for some shenanigans in the near future... I think you're quite right about the cheif host of the globalist neolib parasite. Hijacked near fully. Being bled dry. That unaccounted for 21 Trillion at the pentagon is a bit of a giveaway. All under the guise of free markets and democracy. ..."
"... 'Integrity Initiative' - A Military Intelligence Operation Designed To Create A New Enemy ..."
Dec 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
uncle tungsten , Dec 15, 2018 6:28:07 PM | 41

Labour is not "silent". Apart from Thornberry's questioning already mentioned in another post here, the party's newspaper published a news about it:

Government admits that Institute of Statecraft was funded through CSSF , by Lamiat Sabin, 14th December 2018.

Mark2 , Dec 15, 2018 7:12:28 PM | link
Sounds to me like that Integrity initiative dude needs to go on a 'de-radicalisation program !!! How many billions is that guna save us all ! not to mention lives saved.
NemesisCalling , Dec 15, 2018 7:42:22 PM | link
@45 jr

Wrong JR. It seems quite the obvious that the big boy in the west, the US, would seem to be the one spearheading the whole globalist agenda.

But this is a retarded proposition.

The US is nothing more than a Golem. It has been reduced to somnambulism and hijacked, utilized for the ends of these Non-National elites. Sure, like many posters here, it feels good to blame the US for everything. But the powerbrokers have always been in London and now its hypercentralized endgame in Brussels. You can say that it is the US through and through, but ask yourself who has more to gain from US FP abroad: average Americans or the global elites?

Or are we just arguing semantics?

NemesisCalling , Dec 15, 2018 7:44:57 PM | link
Those former-Eastern Bloc countries, i.e. Poland and Ukraine, do not count as power brokers. They have and will always be pawns in the game. So what if they still worship Icons of Americanism which is a remnant culture of their F*ed up narrative where they still believe they are fighting the commies.
Uncle $cam , Dec 15, 2018 8:06:15 PM | link
Yesterday marked the 10th anniversary of the decider aka Bush Jr. having had a shoe thrown at him.

'For the sake of Iraq': Bush shoe-thrower running for parliament refuses to exploit 'hero image'

Muntadhar al-Zaidi was arrested and tortured for it...

"They broke my teeth, my nose, my leg, they electrocuted me, lashed me, they would beat me, they even broke a table or a chair over my back. I don't know, they had my eyes covered," al-Zaidi recalled. "This was one thing I never experienced before. Torture by the authorities, by the rule of law."

I wish it had been a hand grenade.

The British government financed Integrity Initiative is tasked with spreading anti-Russian propaganda and with influencing the public, military and governments of a number of countries. What follows is an incomplete analysis of the third batch of the Initiative's papers which was dumped yesterday.

Christopher Nigel Donnelly (CND) is the co-director of The Institute for Statecraft and founder of its offshoot Integrity Initiative . The Initiative claims to "Defend Democracy Against Disinformation".

The Integrity Initiative does this by planting disinformation about alleged Russian influence through journalists 'clusters' throughout Europe and the United States.

Both, the Institute as well as the Initiative, claim to be independent Non-Government Organizations. Both are financed by the British government, NATO and other state donors.

Among the documents lifted by some anonymous person from the servers of the Institute we find several papers about Donnelly as well as some memos written by him. They show a russophobe mind with a lack of realistic strategic thought.

There is also a file (pdf) with a copy of his passport:


bigger

From his curriculum vitae (pdf) we learn that Donnelly was a long time soldier in the British Army Intelligence Corps where he established and led the Soviet Studies Research Centre at RMA Sandhurst. He later was involved in creating the US Army's Foreign Military Studies Office (FMSO) at Ft. Leavenworth.

He worked at the British Ministry of Defence and as an advisor to several Secretaries General of NATO. He is a director of the Statecraft Institute since 2010. Donnelly also advises the Foreign Minister of Lithuania. He is a "Security and Justice Senior Mentor" of the UK's Stabilisation Unit which is tasked with destabilizing various countries. He serves as a Honorary Colonel of the Specialist Group Military Intelligence (SGMI).

During his time as military intelligence analyst in the 1980s Donnelly wrote several books and papers about the Soviet Union and its military.

Donnelly seems to be obsessed with the 'Russian threat' and is determined to fight it by all means. His paranoia is obvious in a "private - confidential" report by the Statecraft Institute on The Challenge of Brexit to the UK: Case study – The Foreign and Commonwealth Offices (pdf):

Our problem is that, for the last 70 years or so, we in the UK and Europe have been living in a safe, secure rules-based system which has allowed us to enjoy a holiday from history.

... ... ...

Unfortunately, this state of affairs is now being challenged. A new paradigm of conflict is replacing the 19th & 20th Century paradigm.

... ... ...

In this new paradigm, the clear distinction which most people have been able to draw between war and peace, their expectation of stability and a degree of predictability in life, are being replaced by a volatile unpredictability, a permanent state of instability in which war and peace become ever more difficult to disentangle . The "classic" understanding of conflict being between two distinct players or groups of players is giving way to a world of Darwinian competition where all the players – nation states, sub-state actors, big corporations, ethnic or religious groups, and so on – are constantly striving with each other in a "war of all against all". The Western rules-based system, which most westerners take for granted and have come to believe is "normal", is under attack from countries and organisations which wish to replace our system with theirs. This is not a crisis which faces us; it is a strategic challenge, and from several directions simultaneously.

In reality the "Western rules-based system", fully implemented after the demise of the Soviet Union, is a concept under which 'the west' arbitrarily makes up rules and threatens to kill anyone who does not follow them. Witness the wars against Serbia, the war on Iraq, the destruction of Libya, the western led coup in Ukraine and the war by Jihadi proxies against the people of Syria and Iraq. None of these actions were legal under international law. Demanding a return to strict adherence to the rule of international law, as Russia, China and others now do, it is not an attempt to replace "our system with theirs". It is a return to the normal state of global diplomacy. It is certainly not a "Darwinian competition".

In October 2016 Donnelly had a Private Discussion with Gen Sir Richard Barrons (pdf), marked as personal and confidential. Barrons is a former commander of the British Joint Forces Command. The nonsensical top line is: "The UK defence model is failing. UK is at real risk."

Some interesting nuggets again reveal a paranoid mindset. The talk also includes some realistic truthiness about the British military posture Barrons and others created:

There has been a progressive, systemic demobilisation of NATO militarily capability and a run down of all its members' defences
...
We are seeing new / reinvented ways of warfare – hybrid , plus the reassertion of hard power in warfare
...
Aircraft Carriers can be useful for lots of things, but not for war v China or Russia, so we should equip them accordingly. ...
The West no longer has a military edge on Russia. ...
Our Nuclear programme drains resources from conventional forces and hollows them out. ...
The UK Brigade in Germany is no good as a deterrent against Russia. ...
Our battalion in Estonia are hostages, not a deterrent. ...

The general laments the lack of influence the military has on the British government and its people. He argues for more government financed think tank research that can be fed back into the government:

So, if no catastrophe happens to wake people up and demand a response, then we need to find a way to get the core of government to realise the problem and take it out of the political space. We will need to impose changes over the heads of vested interests. NB We did this in the 1930s

My conclusion is that it is we who must either generate the debate or wait for something dreadful to happen to shock us into action. We must generate an independent debate outside government .

...

We need to ask when and how do we start to put all this right? Do we have the national capabilities / capacities to fix it? If so, how do we improve our harnessing of resources to do it? We need this debate NOW. There is not a moment to be lost.

This was an order from the core of the British thinking to Donnelly to get even deeper into the inner-British influence business. Hype Russia as a threat so more money can be taken from the 'vested interests' of the people and dumped into the military machine.

That particular advise of General Barrons was accepted. In 2017 the Integrity Initiative bid for funding from the Ministry of Defence (pdf) for various projects to influence the public, the parliament and the government as well as foreign forces. The bid lists "performance indicators" that are supposed to measure the success of its activities. The top indicator for the Initiative's proposed work is a "Tougher stance in government policy towards Russia" .


bigger

Asking for government finance to influence the government to take a "tougher stand towards Russia" seems a bit circular. But this is consistent with the operation of other Anglo-American think tanks and policy initiatives in which one part of the government, usually the hawkish one, secretly uses NGO's and think-tanks to lobby other parts of the government to support their specific hobbyhorse and budget.

Here is how it is done. The 'experts' of the 'charity' Institute for Statecraft and Integrity Initiative testified in the British parliament. While they were effectively paid by the government they lobbied parliament under the cover of their NGO. This circularity also allows to use international intermediates. Members of the Spanish cluster (pdf) of the Initiative testified in the British Parliament about the Catalan referendum and related allegations against Wikileaks publisher Julian Assange. (It is likely that this testimony led to the change in the position of the Ecuadorian government towards Assange.)


Unfortunately, or luckily, such lobbying operations are mostly run by people who are incompetent in the specific field they are lobbying for. Chris Donnelly, despite a life long experience in military intelligence, has obviously zero competence as a military strategist or planner.

In March 2014, shortly after Crimea split from the Ukraine, Donnelly suggested Military measures (pdf) to be taken by the Ukraine with regards to Crimea:

If I were in charge I would get the following implemented asp
  1. Set up a cordon sanitaire across the Crimean Isthmus and on the coast N. of Crimea with troops and mines
  2. Mine Sevastopol harbour/bay. Can be done easily using a car ferry if they have no minelayers. Doesn't need a lot of mines to be effective. They could easily buy some mines.
  3. Get their air force into the air and activate all their air defences. If they can't fly the Migs on the airfield in Crimea those should be destroyed as a gesture that they are serious. Going "live" electronically will worry the Russians as the Ukrainians have the same electronic kit. If the Russians jam it they jam their own kit as well.
  4. Ukraine used to have some seriously important weapons, such as a big microwave anti-satellite weapon. If they still have this, they should use it.
  5. The government needs a Strategic communication campaign-so far everything is coming from Moscow. They need to articulate a long-term vision that will inspire the people, however hard that is to do. Without it, what have people to fight for?
  6. They should ask the west now to start supplying Oil and gas. There is plenty available due to the mild winter.

I am trying to get this message across

Think for a moment how Russia would have responded to a mining of Sevastopol harbor, the frying of its satellites or the destruction of its fighter jets in Crimea. Those "guestures" would have been illegal acts of war against the forces of a nuclear power which were legally stationed in Crimea. And how was the west to immediately supply gas to Ukraine and Ukraine's pipeline network is designed to unidirectionally receive gas from Russia?

Such half-assed thinking is typical for the Institute and its creation of propaganda. One of its employees/contractors is Hugh Benedict Nimmo who the Initiative paid to produce anti-Russian propaganda that was then disseminated through various western publications.

According to the (still very incomplete) Initiative files Ben Nimmo received a monthly consultancy fee of £2.500 between December 2015 and March 2016. In August 2016 he sent an invoice (pdf) of £5,000 for his "August work on Integrity Initiative". A Production Timetable (pdf) for March to June 2016 lists the following Nimmo outputs and activities:

One wonders how often Ben Nimmo double billed his various sponsors for these copy-paste fantasy pamphlets.

In late 2017 Ben Nimmo and Guardian 'journalist' Carole Cadwalladr disseminated allegations that Russia used Facebook ads to influence the Brexit decision. Cadwalladr even received a price for her work. Unfortunately the price was not revoked when Facebook revealed that "Russia linked" accounts had spend a total of 97 cents on Brexit ads. It is unexplained how that was enough to achieve their alleged aim.

Cadwalladr is listed as a speaker (pdf) at a "skill sharing" conference the Institute organized for November 1-2 under the headline: "Tackling Tools of Malign Influence - Supporting 21st Century Journalism".

This year Ben Nimmo became notorious for claiming that several real persons with individual opinions were "Russian trolls". As we noted :

Nimmo, and several other dimwits quoted in the piece, came to the conclusion that Ian56 is a Kremlin paid troll, not a real person. Next to Ian56 Nimmo 'identified' other 'Russian troll' accounts:

Ben Nimmo @benimmo - 10:50 UTC - 24 Mar 2018

One particularly influential retweeter (judging by the number of accounts which then retweeted it) was @ValLisitsa, which posts in English and Russian. Last year, this account joined the troll-factory #StopMorganLie campaign.

Had Nimmo, a former NATO spokesperson, had some decent education he would have know that @ValLisitsa, aka Valentina Lisitsa , is a famous American- Ukrainian pianist. Yes, she sometimes tweets in Russian language to her many fans in Russia and the Ukraine. Is that now a crime? The videos of her world wide performances on Youtube have more than 170 million views. It is absurd to claim that she is a 'Russian troll' and to insinuate that she is taking Kremlin money to push 'Russian troll' opinions.

The Institute for Statecraft Expert Team (pdf) list several people with military intelligence backgrounds as well as many 'journalists'. One of them is:

Mark Galeotti
Specialist in Russian strategic thinking; the application of Russian disinformation and hybrid warfare; the use of organised crime as a weapon of hybrid warfare. Educational and mentoring skills, including in a US and E European environment, and the corporate world.
Russian linguist

Galeotti is the infamous inventor of the 'Gerasimov doctrine' and of the propaganda about Russia's alleged 'hybrid' warfare. In February 2013 the Russian General Valery Gerasimov, then Russia's chief of the General Staff, published a paper that analysed the way the 'west' is waging a new type of war by mixing propaganda, proxy armies and military force into one unified operation.

Galeotti claimed that Gerasimov's analysis of 'western' operations was a new Russian doctrine of 'hybrid war'. He invented the term 'Gerasimov doctrine' which then took off in the propaganda realm. In February 2016 the U.S. Army Military Review published a longer analysis of Gerasimov's paper that debunked the nonsense (pdf). It concluded:

Gerasimov's article is not proposing a new Russian way of warfare or a hybrid war, as has been stated in the West.

But anti-Russian propagandist repeated Galeotti's nonsense over and over. Only in March 2018, five years after Galeotti invented the 'Germasimov doctrine' and two years after he was thoroughly debunked, he finally recanted :

Everywhere, you'll find scholars, pundits, and policymakers talking about the threat the "Gerasimov doctrine" -- named after Russia's chief of the general staff -- poses to the West. It's a new way of war, "an expanded theory of modern warfare," or even "a vision of total warfare."

There's one small problem. It doesn't exist. And the longer we pretend it does, the longer we misunderstand the -- real, but different -- challenge Russia poses.

I feel I can say that because, to my immense chagrin, I created this term, which has since acquired a destructive life of its own, lumbering clumsily into the world to spread fear and loathing in its wake.

The Institute for Statecraft's "Specialist in Russian strategic thinking", an expert of disinformation and hybrid warfare, created a non-existing Russian doctrine out of hot air and used it to press for anti-Russian measures. Like Ben Nimmo he is an aptly example of the quality of the Institute's experts and work.


One of the newly released documents headlined CND Gen list 2 (pdf) (CND= Chris Nigel Donnelly) includes the names and email addresses of a number of military, government and think tank people. The anonymous releaser of the documents claims that the list is "of employees who attended a closed-door meeting with the white helmets". (No document has been published yet that confirms this.) One name on the list is of special interest:


bigger

Pablo Miller was the handler and friend of Sergej Skripal, the British double agent who was "novichoked" in Salisbury. When Miller's name was mentioned in the press the British government issued a D-Notice to suppress its further publishing,


bigger

As we wrote in April:

Pablo Miller, a British MI6 agent, had recruited Sergej Skripal. The former MI6 agent in Moscow, Christopher Steele, was also involved in the case. Skripal was caught by the Russian security services and went to jail. Pablo Miller, the MI6 recruiter, was also the handler of Sergej Skripal after he was released by Russia in a spy swap. He reportedly also lives in Salisbury. Both Christopher Steele and Pablo Miller work for Orbis Business Intelligence which created the "Dirty Dossier" about Donald Trump.

In 1979, before becoming a spy, Pablo Miller served at the 4th Royal Tank Regiment . ( BBC Newsnight 'journalist' Mark Urban, who later published a book based on interviews with Skripal , served together with Miller in the same regiment.) The 4th regiment's motto was "Fear Naught". Pablo Miller's email address given in the Chris Donnelly list is [email protected].

At the very beginning of the Skripal affair, before there was any talk of 'Novichok', we asked if Skripal was involved in creating the now debunked "Dirty Dossier" and if that was a reason for certain British insiders to move him out of the way:

Here are some question: If there is a connection between the dossier and Skripal, which seems very likely to me, then there are a number of people and organizations with potential motives to kill him. Lots of shady folks and officials on both sides of the Atlantic were involved in creating and running the anti-Trump/anti-Russia campaign. There are several investigations and some very dirty laundry might one day come to light. Removing Skripal while putting the blame on Russia looks like a convenient way to get rid of a potential witness.

The most recent release of Integrity Initiative documents includes lots of in-depth reports (pdf) about foreign media reactions to the Skripal affair. One wonders why the Initiative commissioned such research (pdf) and paid for it.

After two years the Muller investigation found zero evidence for the 'collusion' between Russia and the Trump campaign that the fake Steele dossier suggested. The whole collusion claim is a creation by 'former' British intelligence operatives who likely acted on request of U.S. intelligence leaders Clapper and Brennan. How deep was the Russia specialist Chris Donnelly and his Institute for Statecraft involved in this endeavor?


Checking through all the released Initiative papers and lists one gets the impression of a secret military intelligence operation, disguised as a public NGO. Financed by millions of government money the Institute for Statecraft and the Integrity Initiative work under a charity label to create and disseminate disinformation to the global public and back into the government and military itself.

The paranoia about Russia, which does way less harm than the 'western' "rules based system" constantly creates, is illogical and not based on factual analysis. It creates Russia as an "enemy" when it is none. It hypes a "threat" out of hot air. The only people who profit from this are the propagandists and the companies and people who back them.

The Initiatives motto "Defend Democracy Against Disinformation" is a truly Orwellian construct. By disseminating propaganda and using it to influence the public, parliament, the military and governments, the Institute actively undermines the democratic process that depends on the free availability of truthful information.

It should be shut down immediately.

---
Note: There have already been attempts to delete the released files from the Internet. A complete archive of all Integrity Initiative files published so far is here . Should the public links cease to work, you can contact the author of this blog for access to private backups.

flayer , Dec 15, 2018 11:49:39 AM | link

Aside from the fact that the government itself funds this organization, the creepiest thing about it is that the "non-governmental individuals" that help fund it are the same people that run the think tanks: a bunch of Rhodesians.

Russ , Dec 15, 2018 11:59:03 AM | link

"Such half-assed thinking...Think for a moment how Russia would have responded to a mining of Sevastopol harbor, the frying of its satellites or the destruction of its fighter jets in Crimea. Those "gestures" would have been illegal acts of war against the forces of a nuclear power which were legally stationed in Crimea."

It sure seems like this half-assed thinking isn't just the domain of a fringe element, but is increasingly mainstream among the elites. Doesn't bode well.

Roy G , Dec 15, 2018 12:10:11 PM | link
Thank you B. It is truly amazing to watch the UK elites unravel as they have become truly unhinged by their own connivances. It is a bad joke at the commoner's expense that they propagandize and demonize in the name of the 'Western rules based system' even as they are busy shooting themselves in both feet by committing Brexit. Although there are legitimate grievances with the EU, it is clear that Brexit is a Tory power play that is all politics and zero governance. Alas, Perfidious Albion has succumbed to Mad Cow disease.
Sally Snyder , Dec 15, 2018 12:10:23 PM | link
Here is an interesting look at how little the Russia-linked entities spent on advertising on Google during the 2016 election: https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/12/google-russia-and-4700-in-advertising.html Slowly but surely, the Russian meddling narrative is falling apart.
bjd , Dec 15, 2018 12:46:08 PM | link
Thanks, b.

What remains mysterious (not really) is why --if these initiatives are truly meant to save and strengthen democracy-- they aren't proudly proclaimed and advertised, in the open, transparent, for everyone one to see and judge, like an adult democracy that they claim to stand for might want to debate and form an opinion on.

The fact that it isn't, is testimony to the nefarious anti-democratic, authoritarian and totalitarian streak that runs in between every two lines that they put on paper.

Jackrabbit , Dec 15, 2018 12:58:35 PM | link
McCarthyesque smear campaigns to discredit opponents and squash dissent has become normal practice. Integrity Initiative tweets against Corbyn is a stark example, but there have been MANY other people and groups that have been tarred with claims of being sponsored/led/influenced by Russia, including Catalonian independence activists and Yellow vest protesters.

Every time one scratches the surface of such smears, it seems there is a connection to US/British MIC, Ukraine, or Israel - essentially, those who benefit (financially or otherwise) from greater tensions with Russia.

At what point does neocon doubling-down on failed foreign policy become more than just picking our pockets and warping our minds? At what point do they start killing our kids in another unnecessary war?

Clueless Joe , Dec 15, 2018 1:01:40 PM | link
Cold War has been over for nearly 30 years. It's time enough for Western countries to send into real retirement every single cold-warrior, their time is over, their mindset is quaint and useless, if not downright dangerous and counter-productive.
Mark2 , Dec 15, 2018 1:11:36 PM | link
Thank you 'b'
I'll just say -- - there is safety in numbers ! Already valuable information, important to the public good and democracy has been spread wide enough to be certain, this gene won't go back in the bottle ! D notice or no ! And by doing that, has made the fearless journalists and investigators lives all the safer ! Safety in numbers, spread this wide everyone?

Are these people above the law ? ...

psychohistorian , Dec 15, 2018 1:12:59 PM | link
Thanks for the continued exposition of this story b.....may it go viral

I want to comment on some of the wording you quote Donnelly as writing

" .....is giving way to a world of Darwinian competition where all the players – nation states, sub-state actors, big corporations, ethnic or religious groups, and so on – are constantly striving with each other in a "war of all against all". "

This is Donnelly's characterization of a world in which finance is a public utility instead of the private jackboot that it currently is. This is the delusion these people have been led to believe.

So instead of his "war of all against all" that some might call human cooperation on the basis of merit we have a mythical God of Mammon religion that continues to instantiate the private finance led world of the West with it parasitic elite and fawning acolytes.

Kadath , Dec 15, 2018 1:34:30 PM | link
Dear god, what has gotten into the minds of the military and political "elite" within the UK! Mining Sevastopol would have been an obvious act of war against Russia and Russia would have responded with force.

Thankfully it wasn't done but the fact this was even discussed by senior figures confirms that there was at least a sizable minority pushing for it. 30 years after the fall of the Soviet Union, the Western elite have truly abandoned all sense of reality and embraced a consequence free view of the use of force. After Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya they haven't learned a thing! I'm becoming more and more certain that a peaceful transition to the multipolar world is impossible and that it will only happen after the US or one of its' vassal states blunder into a proxy war and get utterly and comprehensively defeated, forcing a radical world realignment, but with nuts like John Bolton and the neocons in the Whitehouse it could easily lead to a nuclear war

Mina , Dec 15, 2018 1:45:39 PM | link
It looks like one of the decision was to get closer to France (after getting very close friends in Homs and Aleppo?) See the list of people in the French II cluster dumped yesterday by Anonymous: half the names work at the fr Min of F Affairs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancaster_House_Treaties and http://www.gmfus.org/publications/frances-defense-partnerships-and-dilemmas-brexit

The grumpy general at Turcopolier has skept the II topic entirely.

TJ , Dec 15, 2018 1:53:44 PM | link
@13 psychohistorian

" we have a mythical God of Mammon religion" I hope you're not here in dear old Blighty, as you'll probably get arrested for antisemitism

Peter AU 1 , Dec 15, 2018 2:13:14 PM | link
This group may have officially formed in 2015, but its work is no different from the British propaganda that swamped the MSM when MH17 was downed. Tied into the Steel dossier and Russian collusion in the US. This is the anglosphere or five eyes permanent state.
exiled off mainstreet , Dec 15, 2018 2:22:39 PM | link
As an aside this happens to be "Bill of Rights Day", the anniversary of the passage of the Bill of Rights as amendments to the yankee constitution. This reveals again how far from the rule of law the yankee imperium, now the key element of the British Empire they supposedly seceded from, has strayed, since it is apparent that this "Integrity Initiative" was engaged in to ensure that the regime was in the safe hands of the harpy.

It has also ensured that the victorious candidate has been neutered and faithfully follows the world control line put forward by the five eyes spy-masters making up the empire in its present iteration. This also shows what a farce the regime, based on the rule of law, now presents.

It is interesting that Trudeau, the Canadian figurehead, clothes his country's kidnapping of the Chinese business figure as "in defence of the rule of law." All in all, it is now apparent we would be far better off if the Kaiserreich, with all of its militaristic and bombastic flaws, had triumphed in the Great War. No Hitler, no Stalin, no five eyes fascism.

GeorgeV , Dec 15, 2018 2:27:49 PM | link
The "Western-based rules system" described in this article reminds me of a game called "Calvin Ball" which appeared in the former comic strip "Calvin and Hobbes." In the strip Calvin a wildly imaginative adolescent boy who plays a free-form of football with his imaginary pet toy tiger (Hobbes). Rules of the game are made up as the game is played to suit the players. There you have it real life imitates art.
bjd , Dec 15, 2018 2:38:50 PM | link
b, I downloaded the zip file, and had also downloaded all the PDF's from pdf-archive yesterday. There are more files in the zip, but the following were on pdf-archive and are NOT in the zip:
sejomoje , Dec 15, 2018 3:06:48 PM | link
Better yet, can anyone name an NGO, any NGO ever, that's not closely if not directly linked to "a secret military intelligence operation." Anyone? Mueller?
jayc , Dec 15, 2018 4:05:08 PM | link
Thank you very much for this terrific analysis. Donnelly: "... it is we who must either generate the debate or wait for something dreadful to happen to shock us into action. " Numerous American publications featured very similar language in the years ahead of 9/11, with "Islamic terrorist threat" substituted for the Russians.
Emmanuel Goldstein , Dec 15, 2018 4:21:51 PM | link
The transcript of his conversation with the general shows very starkly that we would last about two minutes in a nuclear exchange, but about half a day in a conventional one. No reserves, no equipment stockpiles, a navy consisting of two fat targets, neither of which has any aircraft and some destroyers which have propulsion problems, a smallish air force and very small numbers of troops. The tripwire force in Estonia is wholly sacrificial. In fact he lays bare the whole fallacy of biting the bear. With the armed forces in the state he describes, and with the recruitment and retention problems, wouldn't it be better, as one defense minister said, 'to go away and shut up'...
uncle tungsten , Dec 15, 2018 4:27:59 PM | link
Thanks b and especially the link to Valentina Lisitsa who I had tinkling in the background as I read your grand expose. These people are seditious morons, parasites infesting the state apparatus. Shut these fools down. Nice touch publishing the passport image. I can just imagine the frenzied aftermath of Kit's visit to the basement. Big thanks to anonymous and Craig Murray too. Their IT personel are probably visiting Devil's Island or Diego Garcia as we read.
Sasha , Dec 15, 2018 5:00:51 PM | link
Vesti News has published an excellent documentary on how "clusters" work....not only to spread Russophobia...but also on continuous intends to overthrown Russian legitimate government... https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=7&v=E8-Stfrl5aM

The British and US connections to loot and evade Russian riches and funds are exposed, as well as the origin of sanctions, supposed "alt-media" "truth-seakers" like Meduza...or supposed "pro-Russian" US intelligence operatives married to Russian women....

Sasha , Dec 15, 2018 5:32:32 PM | link
@Posted by: Mina | Dec 15, 2018 1:45:39 PM | 18

Amongst the many issues he usually passes over trying to make himself the fool, while at the same time trying to convince us of the oustanding intellectual capacities, honesty and classy stance of him and his "comittee"...

https://www.stalkerzone.org/an-american-military-attache-held-a-closed-meeting-with-uaf-commanders-in-mariupol/

For that travel, to end bluntly and in such public view siding with the nazis of the "Azov Regiment" and other criminals of war, there was no need of so many saddlebags, so as pretending that the people who supported Trump as if there was no tomorrow, were enlightened people who only wanted to rescue "America" for the "Americans", as if there would not be a sign of blatant exceptionalism in appropriating of the term "Americans" for themselves in such a huge continent....

NemesisCalling , Dec 15, 2018 5:44:31 PM | link
In my view, the USA's FP has been undermined by EURO elites which is forcing a game of chicken with Russia.

The FP pre-Soviet collapse consisted of one MO: GET THE COMMIES!

Since then, Neocons and Neolibs which are frontmen for this Non-National Globalized Elite, have hijacked our country's military and have steered it to a Global agenda where dominance in the ME means either superiority for these EURO elites or Vassal-hood.

The last two periods of the US FP could be understood thusly: (1) Pre-Soviet collapse which was marked by a horrifically tragic and misplaced ideal of defending against communism (Good guys v. Bad Guys); and (2) Post-Soviet collapse which has been a period of coup d'etats where our hijacked military has been used for a Globalist Agenda for increasingly opaque (less defensible) reasons and missions.

The average American could care less about the ME and the US would be 1000x better-off reverting to an isolationist stance.

But this will not happen so long as Nationalism in the US and UK is repeatedly put-down. It seems as though there is going to be another Brexit vote. Does anyone doubt that miraculously the people by then will have second-guessed their will to Brexit and so will vote against it given another crack at a vote?

Sickening.

slit , Dec 15, 2018 6:04:29 PM | link
"Unfortunately, or luckily, such lobbying operations are mostly run by people who are incompetent in the specific field they are lobbying for. "

Incompetence in general and IT and data analysis, physics 101, etc.:

Cry boo hoo hoo to wake up with indigenous capacity decades behind world players like Russia, China, India, etc who operate on fractional budgets...

But this drama also exposes ashura/emigods intra necine warfare: right after 2016 US elections there was a facade of split between military and intelligence differentiation. Seems that veil has been dispensed with , but it invites other questions, insofar as UK is Her Majesty's Service, so are we to read this with Prince Harry or Philip's culture, or a "consent by silence") in mind? Defending crown or EU "Saturnus Sattelitus"?

MadMax2 , Dec 15, 2018 6:28:58 PM | link
@Nemisis

Yeah, they hijacked a few other countries too, including Russia. Or if not hijacking, setting the mood right for some shenanigans in the near future... I think you're quite right about the cheif host of the globalist neolib parasite. Hijacked near fully. Being bled dry. That unaccounted for 21 Trillion at the pentagon is a bit of a giveaway. All under the guise of free markets and democracy.

Good to see Trump finally give it a face... 'you need freedom and security now pay up bitches'

Jackrabbit , Dec 15, 2018 6:38:00 PM | link
NemesisCalling | Dec 15, 2018 5:44:31 PM | 37
In my view, the USA's FP has been undermined by EURO elites which is forcing a game of chicken with Russia.... Globalist Agenda
I think the opposite is true.

The US-led Empire and their globalist sycophants seek to weaken Europe so that it can not act independently in its own best interests. They will do what ever they can to ensure that the vassals never join with Russia/China and the SCO.

Russian scare-mongering and immigration have been effective in furthering this agenda. Also note: what USA has termed "new Europe" - eastern European states like Poland and Ukraine - are solidly pro-American.

John2o2o , Dec 15, 2018 6:56:17 PM | link
'Integrity Initiative' - A Military Intelligence Operation Designed To Create A New Enemy

Perfect description.

Why has this ageing nutjob been allowed to secretly dictate British foreign policy? He's clearly insane.

vk , Dec 15, 2018 6:58:49 PM | link
@

[Dec 16, 2018] Neoliberalism has had its day. So what happens next (The death of neoliberalism and the crisis in western politics) by Martin Jacques

Highly recommended!
It is very interesting and educational to read this pre-election article two years later and see where the author is right and where he is wrong. The death of neoliberalism was greatly exaggerated. It simply mutated in the USA into "national neoliberalism" under Trump. As no clear alternative exists it remain the dominant ideology and universities still brainwash students with neoclassical economics. And in way catchy slogan "Make America great again" under Trump means "Make American working and lower middle class great again"
It is also clear that Trump betrayed or was forced to betray most of his election promises. Standrd of living of common americans did not improve under his watch. most of hi benefits of his tax cuts went to large corporations and financial oligarch. He continued the policy of financial deregulation, which is tantamount of playing with open fire trying to warm up the house
What we see under Trump is tremendous growth of political role of intelligence agencies which now are real kingmakers and can sink any candidate which does not support their agenda. And USA intelligence agencies operated in 2016 in close cooperation with the UK intelligence agencies to the extent that it is not clear who has the lead in creating Steele dossier. They are definitely out of control of executive branch and play their own game. We also see a rise of CIA democrats as a desperate attempt to preserve the power of Clinton wing of the Democratic Party ('soft neoliberals" turned under Hillary into into warmongers and neocons) . Hillary and Bill themselves clearly belong to CIA democrats too, not only to Wall Street democrats, despite the fact that they sold Democratic Party to Wall Street in the past. New Labor in UK did the same.
But if it is more or less clear now what happened in the USa in 2016-2018, it is completely unclear what will happen next. I think in no way neoliberalism will start to be dismantled. there is no social forces powerful enough to start this job, We probably need another financial crisi of the scale of 2008 for this work to be reluctantly started by ruling elite. And we better not to have this repetition of 2008 as it will be really devastating for common people.
Notable quotes:
"... the causes of this political crisis, glaringly evident on both sides of the Atlantic, are much deeper than simply the financial crisis and the virtually stillborn recovery of the last decade. They go to the heart of the neoliberal project that dates from the late 70s and the political rise of Reagan and Thatcher, and embraced at its core the idea of a global free market in goods, services and capital. The depression-era system of bank regulation was dismantled, in the US in the 1990s and in Britain in 1986, thereby creating the conditions for the 2008 crisis. Equality was scorned, the idea of trickle-down economics lauded, government condemned as a fetter on the market and duly downsized, immigration encouraged, regulation cut to a minimum, taxes reduced and a blind eye turned to corporate evasion. ..."
"... It should be noted that, by historical standards, the neoliberal era has not had a particularly good track record. The most dynamic period of postwar western growth was that between the end of the war and the early 70s, the era of welfare capitalism and Keynesianism, when the growth rate was double that of the neoliberal period from 1980 to the present. ..."
"... In the period 1948-1972, every section of the American population experienced very similar and sizable increases in their standard of living; between 1972-2013, the bottom 10% experienced falling real income while the top 10% did far better than everyone else. In the US, the median real income for full-time male workers is now lower than it was four decades ago: the income of the bottom 90% of the population has stagnated for over 30 years . ..."
"... On average, between 65-70% of households in 25 high-income economies experienced stagnant or falling real incomes between 2005 and 2014. ..."
"... As Thomas Piketty has shown, in the absence of countervailing pressures, capitalism naturally gravitates towards increasing inequality. In the period between 1945 and the late 70s, Cold War competition was arguably the biggest such constraint. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, there have been none. As the popular backlash grows increasingly irresistible, however, such a winner-takes-all regime becomes politically unsustainable. ..."
"... Foreign Affairs ..."
"... "'Populism' is the label that political elites attach to policies supported by ordinary citizens that they don't like." Populism is a movement against the status quo. It represents the beginnings of something new, though it is generally much clearer about what it is against than what it is for. It can be progressive or reactionary, but more usually both. ..."
"... According to a Gallup poll, in 2000 only 33% of Americans called themselves working class; by 2015 the figure was 48%, almost half the population. ..."
"... The re-emergence of the working class as a political voice in Britain, most notably in the Brexit vote, can best be described as an inchoate expression of resentment and protest, with only a very weak sense of belonging to the labour movement. ..."
"... Economists such as Larry Summers believe that the prospect for the future is most likely one of secular stagnation . ..."
"... those who have lost out in the neoliberal era are no longer prepared to acquiesce in their fate – they are increasingly in open revolt. We are witnessing the end of the neoliberal era. It is not dead, but it is in its early death throes, just as the social-democratic era was during the 1970s. ..."
"... Capital in the Twenty-First Century ..."
"... Financial Times ..."
Aug 21, 2016 | www.theguardian.com

In the early 1980s the author was one of the first to herald the emerging dominance of neoliberalism in the west. Here he argues that this doctrine is now faltering. But what happens next?

The western financial crisis of 2007-8 was the worst since 1931, yet its immediate repercussions were surprisingly modest. The crisis challenged the foundation stones of the long-dominant neoliberal ideology but it seemed to emerge largely unscathed. The banks were bailed out; hardly any bankers on either side of the Atlantic were prosecuted for their crimes; and the price of their behaviour was duly paid by the taxpayer. Subsequent economic policy, especially in the Anglo-Saxon world, has relied overwhelmingly on monetary policy, especially quantitative easing. It has failed. The western economy has stagnated and is now approaching its lost decade, with no end in sight.

After almost nine years, we are finally beginning to reap the political whirlwind of the financial crisis. But how did neoliberalism manage to survive virtually unscathed for so long? Although it failed the test of the real world, bequeathing the worst economic disaster for seven decades, politically and intellectually it remained the only show in town. Parties of the right, centre and left had all bought into its philosophy, New Labour a classic in point. They knew no other way of thinking or doing: it had become the common sense. It was, as Antonio Gramsci put it, hegemonic. But that hegemony cannot and will not survive the test of the real world.

The first inkling of the wider political consequences was evident in the turn in public opinion against the banks, bankers and business leaders. For decades, they could do no wrong: they were feted as the role models of our age, the default troubleshooters of choice in education, health and seemingly everything else. Now, though, their star was in steep descent, along with that of the political class. The effect of the financial crisis was to undermine faith and trust in the competence of the governing elites. It marked the beginnings of a wider political crisis.

But the causes of this political crisis, glaringly evident on both sides of the Atlantic, are much deeper than simply the financial crisis and the virtually stillborn recovery of the last decade. They go to the heart of the neoliberal project that dates from the late 70s and the political rise of Reagan and Thatcher, and embraced at its core the idea of a global free market in goods, services and capital. The depression-era system of bank regulation was dismantled, in the US in the 1990s and in Britain in 1986, thereby creating the conditions for the 2008 crisis. Equality was scorned, the idea of trickle-down economics lauded, government condemned as a fetter on the market and duly downsized, immigration encouraged, regulation cut to a minimum, taxes reduced and a blind eye turned to corporate evasion.

It should be noted that, by historical standards, the neoliberal era has not had a particularly good track record. The most dynamic period of postwar western growth was that between the end of the war and the early 70s, the era of welfare capitalism and Keynesianism, when the growth rate was double that of the neoliberal period from 1980 to the present.

But by far the most disastrous feature of the neoliberal period has been the huge growth in inequality. Until very recently, this had been virtually ignored. With extraordinary speed, however, it has emerged as one of, if not the most important political issue on both sides of the Atlantic, most dramatically in the US. It is, bar none, the issue that is driving the political discontent that is now engulfing the west. Given the statistical evidence, it is puzzling, shocking even, that it has been disregarded for so long; the explanation can only lie in the sheer extent of the hegemony of neoliberalism and its values.

But now reality has upset the doctrinal apple cart. In the period 1948-1972, every section of the American population experienced very similar and sizable increases in their standard of living; between 1972-2013, the bottom 10% experienced falling real income while the top 10% did far better than everyone else. In the US, the median real income for full-time male workers is now lower than it was four decades ago: the income of the bottom 90% of the population has stagnated for over 30 years .

A not so dissimilar picture is true of the UK. And the problem has grown more serious since the financial crisis. On average, between 65-70% of households in 25 high-income economies experienced stagnant or falling real incomes between 2005 and 2014.

Large sections of the population in both the US and the UK are now in revolt against their lot

The reasons are not difficult to explain. The hyper-globalisation era has been systematically stacked in favour of capital against labour: international trading agreements, drawn up in great secrecy, with business on the inside and the unions and citizens excluded, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) being but the latest examples; the politico-legal attack on the unions; the encouragement of large-scale immigration in both the US and Europe that helped to undermine the bargaining power of the domestic workforce; and the failure to retrain displaced workers in any meaningful way.

As Thomas Piketty has shown, in the absence of countervailing pressures, capitalism naturally gravitates towards increasing inequality. In the period between 1945 and the late 70s, Cold War competition was arguably the biggest such constraint. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, there have been none. As the popular backlash grows increasingly irresistible, however, such a winner-takes-all regime becomes politically unsustainable.

Large sections of the population in both the US and the UK are now in revolt against their lot, as graphically illustrated by the support for Trump and Sanders in the US and the Brexit vote in the UK. This popular revolt is often described, in a somewhat denigratory and dismissive fashion, as populism. Or, as Francis Fukuyama writes in a recent excellent essay in Foreign Affairs : "'Populism' is the label that political elites attach to policies supported by ordinary citizens that they don't like." Populism is a movement against the status quo. It represents the beginnings of something new, though it is generally much clearer about what it is against than what it is for. It can be progressive or reactionary, but more usually both.

Brexit is a classic example of such populism. It has overturned a fundamental cornerstone of UK policy since the early 1970s. Though ostensibly about Europe, it was in fact about much more: a cri de coeur from those who feel they have lost out and been left behind, whose living standards have stagnated or worse since the 1980s, who feel dislocated by large-scale immigration over which they have no control and who face an increasingly insecure and casualised labour market. Their revolt has paralysed the governing elite, already claimed one prime minister, and left the latest one fumbling around in the dark looking for divine inspiration.

The wave of populism marks the return of class as a central agency in politics, both in the UK and the US. This is particularly remarkable in the US. For many decades, the idea of the "working class" was marginal to American political discourse. Most Americans described themselves as middle class, a reflection of the aspirational pulse at the heart of American society. According to a Gallup poll, in 2000 only 33% of Americans called themselves working class; by 2015 the figure was 48%, almost half the population.

Brexit, too, was primarily a working-class revolt. Hitherto, on both sides of the Atlantic, the agency of class has been in retreat in the face of the emergence of a new range of identities and issues from gender and race to sexual orientation and the environment. The return of class, because of its sheer reach, has the potential, like no other issue, to redefine the political landscape.

The working class belongs to no one: its orientation, far from predetermined, is a function of politics

The re-emergence of class should not be confused with the labor movement. They are not synonymous: this is obvious in the US and increasingly the case in the UK. Indeed, over the last half-century, there has been a growing separation between the two in Britain. The re-emergence of the working class as a political voice in Britain, most notably in the Brexit vote, can best be described as an inchoate expression of resentment and protest, with only a very weak sense of belonging to the labour movement.

Indeed, Ukip has been as important – in the form of immigration and Europe – in shaping its current attitudes as the Labour party. In the United States, both Trump and Sanders have given expression to the working-class revolt, the latter almost as much as the former. The working class belongs to no one: its orientation, far from predetermined, as the left liked to think, is a function of politics.

The neoliberal era is being undermined from two directions. First, if its record of economic growth has never been particularly strong, it is now dismal. Europe is barely larger than it was on the eve of the financial crisis in 2007; the United States has done better but even its growth has been anaemic. Economists such as Larry Summers believe that the prospect for the future is most likely one of secular stagnation .

Worse, because the recovery has been so weak and fragile, there is a widespread belief that another financial crisis may well beckon. In other words, the neoliberal era has delivered the west back into the kind of crisis-ridden world that we last experienced in the 1930s. With this background, it is hardly surprising that a majority in the west now believe their children will be worse off than they were. Second, those who have lost out in the neoliberal era are no longer prepared to acquiesce in their fate – they are increasingly in open revolt. We are witnessing the end of the neoliberal era. It is not dead, but it is in its early death throes, just as the social-democratic era was during the 1970s.

A sure sign of the declining influence of neoliberalism is the rising chorus of intellectual voices raised against it. From the mid-70s through the 80s, the economic debate was increasingly dominated by monetarists and free marketeers. But since the western financial crisis, the centre of gravity of the intellectual debate has shifted profoundly. This is most obvious in the United States, with economists such as Joseph Stiglitz, Paul Krugman, Dani Rodrik and Jeffrey Sachs becoming increasingly influential. Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century has been a massive seller. His work and that of Tony Atkinson and Angus Deaton have pushed the question of the inequality to the top of the political agenda. In the UK, Ha-Joon Chang , for long isolated within the economics profession, has gained a following far greater than those who think economics is a branch of mathematics.

Meanwhile, some of those who were previously strong advocates of a neoliberal approach, such as Larry Summers and the Financial Times 's Martin Wolf, have become extremely critical. The wind is in the sails of the critics of neoliberalism; the neoliberals and monetarists are in retreat. In the UK, the media and political worlds are well behind the curve. Few recognize that we are at the end of an era. Old attitudes and assumptions still predominate, whether on the BBC's Today programme, in the rightwing press or the parliamentary Labor party.

Following Ed Miliband's resignation as Labour leader, virtually no one foresaw the triumph of Jeremy Corbyn in the subsequent leadership election. The assumption had been more of the same, a Blairite or a halfway house like Miliband, certainly not anyone like Corbyn. But the zeitgeist had changed. The membership, especially the young who had joined the party on an unprecedented scale, wanted a complete break with New Labour. One of the reasons why the left has failed to emerge as the leader of the new mood of working-class disillusionment is that most social democratic parties became, in varying degrees, disciples of neoliberalism and uber-globalisation. The most extreme forms of this phenomenon were New Labour and the Democrats, who in the late 90s and 00s became its advance guard, personified by Tony Blair and Bill Clinton, triangulation and the third way.

But as David Marquand observed in a review for the New Statesman , what is the point of a social democratic party if it doesn't represent the less fortunate, the underprivileged and the losers? New Labour deserted those who needed them, who historically they were supposed to represent. Is it surprising that large sections have now deserted the party who deserted them? Blair, in his reincarnation as a money-obsessed consultant to a shady bunch of presidents and dictators, is a fitting testament to the demise of New Labour.

The rival contenders – Burnham, Cooper and Kendall – represented continuity. They were swept away by Corbyn, who won nearly 60% of the votes. New Labour was over, as dead as Monty Python's parrot. Few grasped the meaning of what had happened. A Guardian leader welcomed the surge in membership and then, lo and behold, urged support for Yvette Cooper, the very antithesis of the reason for the enthusiasm. The PLP refused to accept the result and ever since has tried with might and main to remove Corbyn.

Just as the Labour party took far too long to come to terms with the rise of Thatcherism and the birth of a new era at the end of the 70s, now it could not grasp that the Thatcherite paradigm, which they eventually came to embrace in the form of New Labour, had finally run its course. Labour, like everyone else, is obliged to think anew. The membership in their antipathy to New Labour turned to someone who had never accepted the latter, who was the polar opposite in almost every respect of Blair, and embodying an authenticity and decency which Blair patently did not.

Labour may be in intensive care, but the condition of the Conservatives is not a great deal better

Corbyn is not a product of the new times, he is a throwback to the late 70s and early 80s. That is both his strength and also his weakness. He is uncontaminated by the New Labour legacy because he has never accepted it. But nor, it would seem, does he understand the nature of the new era. The danger is that he is possessed of feet of clay in what is a highly fluid and unpredictable political environment, devoid of any certainties of almost any kind, in which Labour finds itself dangerously divided and weakened.

Labour may be in intensive care, but the condition of the Conservatives is not a great deal better. David Cameron was guilty of a huge and irresponsible miscalculation over Brexit. He was forced to resign in the most ignominious of circumstances. The party is hopelessly divided. It has no idea in which direction to move after Brexit. The Brexiters painted an optimistic picture of turning away from the declining European market and embracing the expanding markets of the world, albeit barely mentioning by name which countries it had in mind. It looks as if the new prime minister may have an anachronistic hostility towards China and a willingness to undo the good work of George Osborne. If the government turns its back on China, by far the fastest growing market in the world, where are they going to turn?

Brexit has left the country fragmented and deeply divided, with the very real prospect that Scotland might choose independence. Meanwhile, the Conservatives seem to have little understanding that the neoliberal era is in its death throes.

Dramatic as events have been in the UK, they cannot compare with those in the United States. Almost from nowhere, Donald Trump rose to capture the Republican nomination and confound virtually all the pundits and not least his own party. His message was straightforwardly anti-globalisation. He believes that the interests of the working class have been sacrificed in favour of the big corporations that have been encouraged to invest around the world and thereby deprive American workers of their jobs. Further, he argues that large-scale immigration has weakened the bargaining power of American workers and served to lower their wages.

He proposes that US corporations should be required to invest their cash reserves in the US. He believes that the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) has had the effect of exporting American jobs to Mexico. On similar grounds, he is opposed to the TPP and the TTIP. And he also accuses China of stealing American jobs, threatening to impose a 45% tariff on Chinese imports.

To globalisation Trump counterposes economic nationalism: "Put America first". His appeal, above all, is to the white working class who, until Trump's (and Bernie Sander's) arrival on the political scene, had been ignored and largely unrepresented since the 1980s. Given that their wages have been falling for most of the last 40 years, it is extraordinary how their interests have been neglected by the political class. Increasingly, they have voted Republican, but the Republicans have long been captured by the super-rich and Wall Street, whose interests, as hyper-globalisers, have run directly counter to those of the white working class. With the arrival of Trump they finally found a representative: they won Trump the Republican nomination.

Trump believes that America's pursuit of great power status has squandered the nation's resources

The economic nationalist argument has also been vigorously pursued by Bernie Sanders , who ran Hillary Clinton extremely close for the Democratic nomination and would probably have won but for more than 700 so-called super-delegates, who were effectively chosen by the Democratic machine and overwhelmingly supported Clinton. As in the case of the Republicans, the Democrats have long supported a neoliberal, pro-globalisation strategy, notwithstanding the concerns of its trade union base. Both the Republicans and the Democrats now find themselves deeply polarised between the pro- and anti-globalisers, an entirely new development not witnessed since the shift towards neoliberalism under Reagan almost 40 years ago.

Another plank of Trump's nationalist appeal – "Make America great again" – is his position on foreign policy. He believes that America's pursuit of great power status has squandered the nation's resources. He argues that the country's alliance system is unfair, with America bearing most of the cost and its allies contributing far too little. He points to Japan and South Korea, and NATO's European members as prime examples. He seeks to rebalance these relationships and, failing that, to exit from them.

As a country in decline, he argues that America can no longer afford to carry this kind of financial burden. Rather than putting the world to rights, he believes the money should be invested at home, pointing to the dilapidated state of America's infrastructure. Trump's position represents a major critique of America as the world's hegemon. His arguments mark a radical break with the neoliberal, hyper-globalisation ideology that has reigned since the early 1980s and with the foreign policy orthodoxy of most of the postwar period. These arguments must be taken seriously. They should not be lightly dismissed just because of their authorship. But Trump is no man of the left. He is a populist of the right. He has launched a racist and xenophobic attack on Muslims and on Mexicans. Trump's appeal is to a white working class that feels it has been cheated by the big corporations, undermined by Hispanic immigration, and often resentful towards African-Americans who for long too many have viewed as their inferior.

A Trump America would mark a descent into authoritarianism characterised by abuse, scapegoating, discrimination, racism, arbitrariness and violence; America would become a deeply polarised and divided society. His threat to impose 45% tariffs on China , if implemented, would certainly provoke retaliation by the Chinese and herald the beginnings of a new era of protectionism.

Trump may well lose the presidential election just as Sanders failed in his bid for the Democrat nomination. But this does not mean that the forces opposed to hyper-globalisation – unrestricted immigration, TPP and TTIP, the free movement of capital and much else – will have lost the argument and are set to decline. In little more than 12 months, Trump and Sanders have transformed the nature and terms of the argument. Far from being on the wane, the arguments of the critics of hyper-globalisation are steadily gaining ground. Roughly two-thirds of Americans agree that "we should not think so much in international terms but concentrate more on our own national problems". And, above all else, what will continue to drive opposition to the hyper-globalisers is inequality.

[Dec 16, 2018] Exploitation of other people as a priority as well as lack on empathy and compassion are two components which make up a psychopathic personality

Neoliberalism as "psychopath-friendly" social system...
Dec 16, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

ShaunNewman -> Mauryan , 23 Aug 2016 20:59

Exploitation is high on the priority list of any Tory government, wealth should be distributed much more fairly than it currently is. The tories only serve the rich, they have no time or empathy for the poor.

Empathy and compassion are vacant in the tory philosophy of the world. These two components make up a psychopathic personality.

[Dec 16, 2018] One of the CIA's main allies in carrying out this policy, recruiting tens of thousands of Islamist fighters worldwide to go and fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, was a young Saudi billionaire, Osama bin Laden, the future leader of Al Qaeda. Hensman endorses the US policy in Afghanistan, while remaining silent on the CIA-Al Qaeda alliance, and presents it as part of a liberation struggle against Soviet imperialism.

Notable quotes:
"... From the Shadows ..."
Dec 16, 2018 | www.wsws.org

After the Soviet-backed People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) took power in 1978, the Pentagon began arming the Islamist opposition to the PDPA. US officials, reeling from their defeat in Vietnam, devised a policy of "sucking the Soviets into a Vietnamese quagmire" in Afghanistan, as CIA official Robert Gates wrote in his 1996 memoir From the Shadows . When the Kremlin invaded Afghanistan in December 1979, in a reactionary attempt to strengthen the PDPA regime in Kabul and stabilize the PDPA's relations with the Afghan rural elites, Washington used Afghanistan as a battleground to bleed the Soviet army.

One of the CIA's main allies in carrying out this policy, recruiting tens of thousands of Islamist fighters worldwide to go and fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, was a young Saudi billionaire, Osama bin Laden, the future leader of Al Qaeda. Hensman endorses the US policy in Afghanistan, while remaining silent on the CIA-Al Qaeda alliance, and presents it as part of a liberation struggle against Soviet imperialism.

She writes, "A PDPA coup in 1978 faced tribal revolts that developed into a full-scale uprising by December 1979, when the Russians invaded and occupied Afghanistan. The military campaign that followed resembled the US campaign in Vietnam in its brutality to civilians The war had reached a stalemate in the mid-1980s when Reagan, who was already supporting the mujahideen, agreed to supply them with Stinger anti-aircraft missiles. These weapons turned the tide against the Russians..."

Hensman's defense of the US role in the Soviet-Afghan war, and her silence on CIA-backed Islamist terror networks, are reactionary. She hides the bloody character of the CIA-backed Islamist proxy wars, both in 1979–1992 in Afghanistan and in 1979–1982 in Syria. It is the descendants of these same forces, who are fighting today's Syrian war, that Hensman hails as a "democratic revolution."

nurmin • a day ago

And then there's Brzezinski, with his murderous legacy that contains a curious thread linking the Mujahideen "freedom fighters" to 9/11. As was written in the recently republished article on the Bush family fortune and the Holocaust, "the only constant is the defense of the power and privilege of the ruling oligarchy by whatever means are required."
---
Brzezinski acknowledged in an interview with the French news magazine Le Nouvel Observateur in January 1998 that he initiated a policy in which the CIA covertly began arming the mujahedeen in July 1978 -- six months before Soviet troops intervened in Afghanistan -- with the explicit aim of dragging the Soviet Union into a debilitating war.

Asked, given the catastrophe unleashed upon Afghanistan and the subsequent growth of Islamist terrorist groups like Al Qaeda, whether he regretted the policy he championed in Afghanistan, Brzezinski replied:

"Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam War. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire."

Asked specifically whether he regretted the CIA's collaboration with and arming of Islamist extremists, including Al Qaeda, in fomenting the war in Afghanistan, Brzezinski responded contemptuously: "What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?"

Kind of a funny aside: to find the Z-bigz quote I wanted, I put "Brzezinski on Afghanistan" into duckduckgo, and the wsws obituary was third from the top.

[Dec 16, 2018] Skripal father probably fully participated to the whole story. These kinds of narratives are useful to distract the masses from the complete impotency of their politicians.

Dec 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mina , Dec 15, 2018 2:07:25 PM | link

Skripal father probably fully participated to the whole story. These kinds of narratives are useful to distract the masses from the complete impotency of their politicians.

He now enjoys a forced holiday in Brasil under a new name and a new face, and the same for his daughter, who had to share in this involuntarily .

[Dec 16, 2018] The neoliberals are organised and well funded. The left have fragmented and is infected with identity politics. That means that neoliberalism will survive and prosper in the foreseeable future and the standard of living of population will slide further

End of cheap oil is the next milestone in the development of neoliberalism. It remain to be seen if it can survive the end of cheap oil.
Notable quotes:
"... According to a Gallup poll, in 2000 only 33% of Americans called themselves working class; by 2015 the figure was 48%, almost half the population. ..."
"... American politicians, Obama in particular, constantly talk about "the middle class" when they want to refer to the bulk of the working population, as if almost everybody were doctors, lawyers, teachers and managers. ..."
"... This situation in the USA remind me of Australia where we have a choice between two right wing parties ..."
"... austerity for the working class while the rich go untouched even to pay a fair share of taxation. It's world wide the servants of the 1% who own 50% of the world's economy. ..."
"... There is no country in the world that doesn't have a mixture of both. The mix is probably a bit strained in north Korea but those countries where private capital is supreme all have intolerable conditions for workers. The Nordic countries probably have the most enlightened approach and best living standards for the majority. Remember well the old adage: With communism man exploits man. With capitalism it's the other way round. ..."
"... one can only hope neoliberalism is dead and/or dying.... ..."
"... Trump does not truly represent the labor or economically frustrated class. He is saying things that they'd like to hear. He is a rich and pompous man who belongs to the class which benefited tremendously from neoliberalistic policies. People are so fed up with inequality, their emotions can be directed in any direction and manipulated. Anger needs a target - Mexicans, Blacks, women, Muslims, immigrants and the list expands. Trump is misleading them by speaking in their voices while enjoying the comfort of luxury that he built by exploiting those very people. ..."
Dec 16, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

opinerimo , 23 Aug 2016 23:23

Quote: According to a Gallup poll, in 2000 only 33% of Americans called themselves working class; by 2015 the figure was 48%, almost half the population.

How strange. American politicians, Obama in particular, constantly talk about "the middle class" when they want to refer to the bulk of the working population, as if almost everybody were doctors, lawyers, teachers and managers. It's good therefore to know that the American people know better than their politicians how to classify themselves.

ShaunNewman -> shockrah , 23 Aug 2016 21:28
This situation in the USA remind me of Australia where we have a choice between two right wing parties. The LNP is extreme/ultra right wing and our Labor Party is right wing controlled. At least in Britain you have a choice, from afar it seems that your Conservative Party is equal to our LNP but your Labour Party seems to be a little more Left wing than our Labor Party which is a good thing for Britain.
ShaunNewman -> willpodmore , 23 Aug 2016 21:21
willpodmore your next target must be your tory government, they are doing to you what our tory government in Australia is doing to us and if Trump gets elected the USA tory government will do to them, austerity for the working class while the rich go untouched even to pay a fair share of taxation. It's world wide the servants of the 1% who own 50% of the world's economy. If you don't believe me type the 1% own 50% of Earth's economy into Dr Goggle and see what come up.
ShaunNewman -> CivilDiscussion , 23 Aug 2016 21:16
The one thing all Left leaning people do agree on is 'fairness' and equity for all, in economic terms it means that huge corporations pay a fair share of tax, as working people do. Sadly Tory govts ignore the profits of corporations and fail to force them to pay a fair share of tax. The basic problem that the neo-cons suffer from is insatiable greed where enough is never enough, selfishness is also a trait along with lack of empathy or compassion for their fellow mankind.
ShaunNewman -> IsleWalker , 23 Aug 2016 21:12
"neoliberalism" is simply unregulated capitalism as practiced by Tory governments around the world. Labour governments usually regulate and force these huge corporations to pay a fair share of taxation from their huge incomes. The corporations are owned by the 1% who own 50% of the world economy and continuing to grow on a daily basis.
ShaunNewman -> Vintage59 , 23 Aug 2016 21:09
Yes, nothing has changed in my lifetime except the 1% now own 50% of Earth's economy. Working people have always struggled while the rich build their mansions, both Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn have the right idea of a fair distribution of wealth. This means these huge corporations paying their fair share of their income in taxes to the host country so "all" the people receive some benefit, apart from the 1%.
ShaunNewman -> blaster1 , 23 Aug 2016 21:04
blaster1, the joke of the century, globalisation -- which will only increase to the benefit of everyone eventually. You obviously have little knowledge apart from what the Tories feed you. 1% of the global population own 50% of Earth's economy and through their corporations who the tories allow to avoid paying tax will build on that 50% how long will it eventually take the other 99% to receive any benefit? 200,000 years?
ShaunNewman -> Mauryan , 23 Aug 2016 20:59
Exploitation is high on the priority list of any Tory government, wealth should be distributed much more fairly than it currently is. The tories only serve the rich, they have no time or empathy for the poor. Empathy and compassion are vacant in the tory philosophy of the world. These two components make up a psychopathic personality.
ShaunNewman -> pantomimetorie , 23 Aug 2016 20:56
pantomimetorie yes, and England could also be if you had a government who were not merely servants of the rich. A government interested in the fair distribution of wealth. Not a tory government, obviously!
ShaunNewman -> pantomimetorie , 23 Aug 2016 20:53
There's no such thing as neoliberalism, it's just capitalism and capitalism actually works, unlike socialism.

Yes it works alright, it works for the 1% of the global population who own 50% of the global economy, sadly it leaves in its wake an underclass of people living below the poverty line struggling to survive. It works for the rich, but there is no mechanism in the system that the conservative will use to force the rich to pay their fair share of taxation to the country included in that are the multibillion pound multinational corporations who pay little to naught in taxes also which leaves a huge swathe of the population on Struggle Street and the sooner that democratic socialism is instituted the better off the other 99% will be.

foryousure -> pantomimetorie , 23 Aug 2016 19:00
Keep up! There is no country in the world that doesn't have a mixture of both. The mix is probably a bit strained in north Korea but those countries where private capital is supreme all have intolerable conditions for workers. The Nordic countries probably have the most enlightened approach and best living standards for the majority. Remember well the old adage: With communism man exploits man. With capitalism it's the other way round.
foryousure -> AmyInNH , 23 Aug 2016 18:51
Think they call it lobbying. Companies pay professional lobby firms staffed with ex MPs or whatever to ' meet' ministers. The PR companies make 'donations' to party funds and push for government contracts, changes in legislation, favorable to their industry tax breaks. You can do it of course. Write to your mp to get your local roads, parks, libraries, improved. Don't hold your breath.

That has to be the joke of the year if not the century!!!!!!!!!!!!

pantomimetorie , 23 Aug 2016 17:02
The most dynamic period of postwar western growth was that between the end of the war and the early 70s, the era of welfare capitalism and Keynesianism, when the growth rate was double that of the neoliberal period from 1980 to the present.

It would be interesting to see those growth figures with inflation taken into account or to average them out across the whole world and not just the West. I suspect that if the massive growth in India, China and the rest of Asia was taken into account the growth figures wouldn't be so bad.

66378741 , 23 Aug 2016 14:50
one can only hope neoliberalism is dead and/or dying....
Dave_P -> AmyInNH , 23 Aug 2016 13:58
Excuse me? You're the one claiming rural inhabitants "have no idea" what city life entails. That may have been the case centuries ago, but not now. Offshoring is small potatoes in the shift of global production. It may have been big news a decade ago. We aren't a decade ago.

"Poverty = no kids" is your myth. Human history proves otherwise. Nobody's "decimating western/westernized population for profit". Is what you're about really more white people, fewer brown people? Just say it, this is the Guardian, we've heard it all before.

So run your country then. But intelligently, not on the basis of twisted myth-making and dodgy race myths that we had enough of in 1945.

makingtime -> ijustcalledtosay85 , 23 Aug 2016 13:36

The left, at least as far as I know, have not been able to build up a solid set of ideas on which to build a political agenda nor have they sought to gain traction for their ideas in sites of knowledge production. The neoliberals were organised and waiting when their turn came. For me, the left have fragmented and have turned to cultural critiques and identity politics, forgoing any kind of realistic transformative agenda.

Apologies for not answering earlier.

i) Traction in sites of knowledge production is happening certainly. Again I can point to the article for support - Stiglitz, Ha-Joon Chang, Piketty etc did not arise to such prominence due to an organised left-wing agenda but because events in the real world demanded an explanation for why neoliberalism wasn't delivering its universal benison as promised, and indeed was showing empirical signs that it might be poisonous to economic activity in certain fundamental ways.

ii) In my view it is quite possible to support identity politics (social liberalism if you like) and a more left wing view of economics. At present the more enthusiastic placard wavers are seeing identity politics as more likely to produce a beneficial change, but many are recognising that the former hegemony of neoliberalism is breaking, and the best way to really enhance the welfare of vulnerable groups is to promote universal economic justice in some form.

iii) You appear to want to replace one hegemonic system of thought with another. But these are the wrong tactics for me, since we have things to do in the real world.

By all means explain some of the properties your new left hegemonic theory should have, I'd be very interested to hear them.
But in the end the practical steps are obvious and consist of applying left wing principles to the modern economy. An example would be privatising the natural monopoly of the railways.

If that sounds retro, it isn't, because we've never had to deal with an economy in this condition before. We must proceed step by step in my view. The hegemony of neoliberalism was damaging and lasted 40 years and counting. We must be pragmatic to be successful, given what we know about the modern economy, and proceed by finding successful strategies rather than an abstruse new theory that ignores the messy present in favour of some pure, simple conception of the world backed up by the PR department. As I said above, one of the critical faults of neoliberalism is its insistence that it is the answer to everyone's prayers. That certainty is also the seed of its destruction, because to avoid doubts it eventually has to answer those unrealistic prayers.

Mauryan , 23 Aug 2016 13:24
Trump does not truly represent the labor or economically frustrated class. He is saying things that they'd like to hear. He is a rich and pompous man who belongs to the class which benefited tremendously from neoliberalistic policies. People are so fed up with inequality, their emotions can be directed in any direction and manipulated. Anger needs a target - Mexicans, Blacks, women, Muslims, immigrants and the list expands. Trump is misleading them by speaking in their voices while enjoying the comfort of luxury that he built by exploiting those very people.
AmyInNH -> Dave_P , 23 Aug 2016 13:18
Billions of Chinese and Indian have never seen a toilet in their life, so yes, they really don't know what life in a city is. And that doesn't make them "dumb". In their domain, farming, you don't look like a brain storm either.

Offshoring isn't a "tiny element". We are no longer self sustaining and if China slammed the door (as they did for a brief instant on Japan), there'd be serious heartburn in the US before transitioning.

The official western tautology is fail/fail for the public. Not enough jobs to consider having kids? Too bad. Not enough money to raise your kids? Too bad. Due to natural events? No, due to political gaming.

Decimating western/westernized population for profit. It's not complicated. It is you who claim immigration is needed to leave it as it is. "Ending our ability to pay pensions by ending immigration isn't improvement either. "

The west has no business meddling with the rest of the planet if it can't run their own countries.

Matthew Coate -> blaster1 , 23 Aug 2016 12:52

What they are really referring to is globalisation -- which will only increase to the benefit of everyone eventually.

Given the available statistics, your statement can only be described as the proclamation of a sort of religious faith.

Dave_P -> AmyInNH , 23 Aug 2016 12:29
People aren't so dumb as you imagine. They really didn't know about life in the city? Every village had its emigrant. I've no such disdain for those who made that move.

Offshoring's now a tiny element in western deindustrialisation. Your costs are too high, you can't compete: don't blame those worse off than yourself, put your own house in order and educate your workforce to do better than flip burgers.

"Birth control brings down reproduction rates" is a meaningless tautology. People have been practising birth control for centuries, mainly by delaying marriage. The PRB peddles malthusian nonsense that the past half-century has clearly discredited. I thought you were for population growth anyway: "economies so economically unstable that population declines"? Make your mind up.

The ridiculous boom did crash, in 2008. Maybe you missed it. I want to know how we go forward. But people need to pay attention to what's going on outside our head too.

weematt -> Mizzentop , 23 Aug 2016 12:13
I correct misrepresentations of the truth such as yours.

And the problem with communism is that it suspends peoples right in favour of central control.

Communism and socialism is a post -capitalist society, means exactly the same thing to me as they did to Marx also.

The common ownership and democratic control by us all, of all the means and instruments for creating and distributing wealth. 'Common' and 'social' mean the same. Nothing to do with state ownership or corporate or private ownership.

Nothing to do with central control either . It is a post-capitalist system which utilises the technological advances of capitalism to produce for use to satisfy human needs, using self feeding loopback informational tools for stock measurements and control with direct inputs at local regional and global levels to allow calculation in kind, as opposed to the economic calculation of capitalism, only necessary to satisfy profit taking.

The reality is that we can all choose to be rich or poor. We are free to do as we wish (within the law).

Nonsense. If you are born poor you will most likely die poor. Poverty is both absolute and relative. All wealth comes from the exploited abour of the working class which creates a surplus value above its rationed access (wages). A commonly owned society, would not have rich or poor, we would all have free access to the commonly produced wealth, with no elite classes creaming it off and storing it.

Other than that, mind your own damn business, if you can't deal with the arguments.

blaster1 , 23 Aug 2016 12:04
One of the biggest downsides of the rise of Corbyn and Sanders, interesting though it is, is the oxygen it seems to be giving to several old Marxist hacks who have made a good living for decades banging on about their discredited and blood soaked ideology, ie Jacques et al. Recently joined by that newly hatched Marxist harpie on the block, the hipster bearded and thoroughly poisonous Richard Seymour.
The fact is there is not and never was any such thing as "neoliberalism". What they are really referring to is globalisation- which will only increase to the benefit of everyone eventually. The world is shrinking ever faster and that is no bad thing. Progress, evolution, the future, call it what you want. To try and make out that it is halting or in reverse is plainly nonsense.
AmyInNH -> foryousure , 23 Aug 2016 11:18
They buy politicians who gift them with cheap labor via labor glut. Buying politicians is called bribery.
AmyInNH -> Roger Elliott , 23 Aug 2016 11:14
???
What I remember of Reagan,
- spent like a drunken sailor, "defense" spending, til it broke US economy
- unbounded "adjustable rate" and "balloon" mortgages, first bank bailout, bill kicked down the road to Bush Sr., $125 billion, when it blew up
- "trickle down", wealth transfer, via having taxed public pick up the tab for not just his defense binge spending, but also corporate welfare programs (patent office, Import/Export bank, infrastructure, etc.)
- first soup kitchens, adults panhandling/will work for food signs that I'd ever seen
- illegal immigrant amnesty, millions
- "War On Drugs" and right after that black neighborhoods flooded with crack
Reagan and Thatcher kicking off their "gut the public of wealth" agenda.
AmyInNH -> ShaunNewman , 23 Aug 2016 11:00
Including suppression of wage/benefits by flooding the labor markets.
AmyInNH -> macsporan , 23 Aug 2016 10:57
Their story is "you're a failure". Because a) you don't work hard enough/long enough, b) hold your household together (if you were at work all waking hours), c) don't know how to raise decent, independent kids (whilst being at work every waking hour), d) aren't motivated to improve your lot in life if you need to work every waking hour and e) probably need to take stress management classes if this gets on your nerves because you personally are driving up "our" health care costs with your irresponsible neglect of your health.

Or, as the economists tout in the papers, "Productivity is up!" Or as the oligarchical put it, "we need immigrant work force", who'll do it for cheaper and not complain or burden us with their need for an actual life outside of work.

CivilDiscussion , 23 Aug 2016 10:54
Clinton is, was, and still is. despite her recent fake reversal, a staunch supporter of TPP and other trade agreements that will further impoverish the working class. She is the furthest thing from a populist. Case closed.
Vintage59 , 23 Aug 2016 10:54
It's the neobullshit era but then it always is.
AmyInNH -> Mkjaks , 23 Aug 2016 10:40
The "experts", like Greenspan, use extremely limited variables. Hence, reports of a "good economy". We ask, good for who?

[Dec 15, 2018] Newly Released Integrity Intitiative Papers Include Proposal For Large Disinformation Campaigns

Notable quotes:
"... It seemed to start with Bill Browder being kicked out of Russia. So I would assume that the main reason is that the west became aware that Russia was (had been) taking back control of their economy and resources and kicking out the western carpet-baggers. ..."
"... In June of 2016 a bill named Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act of 2016 was introduced into the house by Congressmen Adam Kinzinger and Ted Lieu. H.R. 5181 sought a "whole-government approach without the bureaucratic restrictions" to counter "foreign disinformation and manipulation," which they believe threaten the world's "security and stability." A similar bill was introduced in March in the Senate long before Russia gate. It was passed signed by Obama in December after the Russia Gate was played up following the election. ..."
"... Like I said US and UK are basically one entity on such matters. Soon after being passed we saw Prop or Not introduce its hit list of alt media sites. Sadly over the last 2 years alt media has been decimated. Engdahl seems to be the latest to fall, helped no doubt by Soros suit for 1 million against him for calling out his daughters NGO. Now he has fallen into line and backing Trump. Maybe next he will support the Climate Change meme. ..."
"... As I posted on an earlier thread, the demonization of Russia by Anglos began with the First Afghan War in the late 1830s and has continued at differing degrees of intensity ever since always due to geopolitics. ..."
"... The US State Department gives the title "public diplomacy" to its propaganda. ..."
"... Just ask John Kiriakou, a former CIA officer who was sent to prison for telling the truth about US torture. ..."
"... Thanks, that looks great and should be reposted across alternative media- most of these groups use "anti-Russia" as a front to dismantle dissent and left-wing politics on behalf of the Multinationals and the Neoliberal Establishment- let's call it the "blob," and let's call that list Counter-Propornot. ..."
"... karlof1... my impression is the anti russian meme got real traction somewhere about 2014-2015 with the advent of Ukraine dynamics and Russia commitment to going into Syria.. around that time it all really picked up steam.. now you have think tanks and etc. etc. profiting from the sale of anti-russia spin.. there appears to be endless money available for this.. ..."
"... This is an incomplete narrative, think tanks are basically mercenaries who relieve the population from the need to think about the complicated matters, letting the folks to believe what is either true or should be believed to be true for the "common good". ..."
"... And indeed, Russian danger was identified ca. 2014 as the major worthy theme in the central parts of that nexus. So who are the paymasters? In part, "capitalists", wealthy individuals with means and motivation to set the course for the West and all forces of good. In part, intelligence agencies. Here Integrity Initiative seems an erratic creature: apparently, run by spooks on military and intelligence payroll, and yet also benefiting from a government grant that makes them a quango, "a semipublic administrative body outside the civil service but receiving financial support from the government, which makes senior appointments to it." In other words, they double dip. The total amount is relatively modest, so rather than getting fat on taxpayer money they merely double or triple they spare official salaries thus reaching "upper middle class" level. Therefore the morale in the outfit was mediocre and we can see one of the more amusing leaks of 2018. ..."
"... Note: Kissinger's WSJ Op-Ed was published on August 29, 2014. Within weeks of its publication, the Obama Administration was in full anti-Russia swing. Trump would enter the race for Republican nomination 9 1/2 months after Kissinger's Op-Ed (June 15, 2015). ..."
"... The hate campaign against Russia is just the old campaign, against any country resisting the Empire's hegemony, focused on the one power that had resisted since 1917 and was able to do so, returning to its old role of saying 'Niet' when all the rest of the world said either 'Aye Aye,Sir' "If you insist" or kept quiet and said nothing at all. ..."
"... One can't just edit a Wikipedia article, no matter how fact-based. It will almost immediately be retracted if it doesn't follow the 'official' narrative. If said person then tries to reestablish that content or tries to engage in a discussion with the admins, in many cases, they simply get banned then. ..."
"... Try this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlgGx9LM5cM It's about a former female STASI-employee turned fighter for freedom and democracy. Currently she is the head of the Antonio-Amadeo-Foundation dedicated, to put it bluntly, to doing the bidding for the usual suspects - and to add insult to injury taxpayer funded to a large part. ..."
"... Russia is the go to enemy when you need to bump up your purchasing of very expensive military equipment and to pour money into various security projects to achieve to goals (1 is to lock down infrastructure etc. but the other is to suppress the US citizens so a two-for). ..."
"... The long game plan, which continues unabated regardless of which party or who is in power, is American hegemony of the planet. When you consider the US has military bases in 155 countries (who essentially have become colonies) it seems like the goal is nearly completed unless you consider that major nuclear armed nations are resisting (Russia, China and maybe Pakistan and India as well). ..."
"... If you take a look at Russia during Yeltsin the US companies nearly bought everything in the country and the raping was in full vigor. Someone at DoS or the CIA very badly miscalculated letting Putin come into power. He was, after all, a minor minion and basically came out of no where. I am assuming they thought he would continue the raping and disarmament of all former Soviet weapons and Russian businesses. Sadly for them he turned out to be a patriot and actively resisted everything the US was trying to do to Russia. I believe the Yukos deal was the final straw which would have given nearly all Russian oil and gas to Exxon/Mobil. So, Putin has been battling the US successfully since and is very slowly eliminating all the oligarchs the US put into power and draining his swamp of Atlantacists and 5th column. ..."
"... i recall how quickly 'cambridge analytica' came and went, in spite of the strength of the data on them manipulating much... i imagine a similar story hee with 'integrity initiative'.. ..."
"... as for wikipedia - everyone knows it's a full on propaganda site masquerading as a neutral info site. ..."
"... the Chinese government currently has its hands around the financial windpipe of the man ultimately responsible for Ms. Meng's arrest ..."
"... "MAGA was as much a policy change as it was a campaign slogan....To prevail, Empire strategists recognized that USA needed to be able to call on regular troops and a deep sense of patriotism and righteousness that required re-developing nationalism. In short, 'MAGA'." ..."
"... Trump's invocation of MAGA on the campaign trail was presented in such a way as to seem to overwhelmingly favour a pullback from Imperialism in order to make things right at home. ..."
"... Trump engaged in a bare, pointed, often crass and bordering on contemptuous criticism of his predecessors' foreign policy. The irreverent tone was unprecedented in recent campaign history and was so plain and completely at odds with Hilary's stated positions that it essentially committed him (in my eyes anyway) to following through, or to make all efforts to follow through. If not, he would set one of the worst examples of a duplicitous politician, perhaps ever. The same applies to other bold campaign positions, such as the border wall, for example. ..."
"... Now Judge Emmet Sullivan wants expanded information, and wishes to see the actual notes (FD-302) that were mentioned by Flynn; and Judge Sullivan is directing the special counsel to provide all documents created by the FBI surrounding the Flynn interview: ..."
Dec 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

The person(s) who first published documents of the shady UK organization Integrity Initiative decided that the discussion is about the Initiative is not yet sufficient and published more documents.

The first dump on the Cyberguerilla site happened on November 5. We discussed it here . A smaller dump on November 29 revealed more about the UK government paid Integrity Initiatives influence work in Germany, Spain and Greece. A third dump followed today.

The leaker, who uses the widely abused Anonymous label, promises to publish more:

Well-coordinated efforts of the Anonymous from all over the world have forced the UK politicians to react to the unacceptable and in fact illegal activity of the British government that uses public money to carry out misinformation campaigns not only in the EU, US and Canada but in the UK as well, in particular campaigns against the Labour party.
The Integrity Initiative is now under first official investigation. We promise to give close scrutiny to the investigation that we believe should be conducted honestly, openly and absolutely transparently for the society, rather than become an internal and confidential case of the Foreign Office.

To show our expertise in the investigation as well as to warn the UK government that they must not even try to put it all down to the activity of some charity foundations and public organizations we reveal a part of documents unveiling the true face of The Institute for Statecraft and some information about its leadership.
...
As the scandal in the UK is gaining momentum, it is ever so striking that European leaders and official representatives remain so calm about the Integrity Initiative's activity in their countries. We remind you that covert clusters made up for political and financial manipulation and controlled by the UK secret services are carrying out London's secret missions and interfering in domestic affairs of sovereign states right in front of you.
...
This is another part of documents that we have on the Integrity Initiative. We do not change the goals of this operation. When we return with the next portion of revelations, names and facts depends on how seriously the UK and EU leaders take our intentions this time.

The dump includes invoices, internal analyses of international media responses to the Skripal affair, the Initiative's operations in Scotland, France and Italy, some strategy papers and various other stuff. There are some interesting bits about the cooperation of the Initiative with British Ministry of Defense. It will take me a while to read through all of it.

The most interesting paper I found so far is:

COMBATTING RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION
LAUNCHING AN ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS CAMPAIGN TO INFORM, DEBUNK, AND COMBAT STATE-SPONSORED PROPAGANDA
Comprehensive action proposal (pdf)

A "strictly confidential" proposal by the French company Lexfo to spread the Integrity Initiative's state-sponsored propaganda through an offensive online influence campaigns for a monthly pay per language of €20-40.000. The proposal also includes an offer for "counter activism" through "negative PR, legal actions, ethical hack back, etc." for €50,000 per month.


bigger

The offer claims that the company can launch hundreds of "news" pieces per day on as many websites. It notably also offers to "edit" Wikipedia articles.

In short: This proposal describes large disinformation operations under the disguise of fighting alleged Russian disinformation.

It is at the core what the Integrity Initiative, which obviously requested the proposal, is about.

But as we saw in the information revealed yesterday there is more to it. The Initiative, which has lots of 'former' military and intelligence people among its staff, is targeting the political left in Britain as well as in other countries. It is there where it becomes a danger to the democratic societies of Europe.

Zanon , Dec 14, 2018 3:12:30 PM | link

Integrity Initiative: Spanish Cluster Misled UK Parliament Over Assange, Russia
https://sputniknews.com/world/201812141070699912-assange-integrity-institute-parliament/

What a bunch of mentalist type of people!

Mark2 , Dec 14, 2018 3:41:18 PM | link
I'd bet a weeks wages on it that this is where Craig Summers came from and what he was ! This blog is the antidote to the official spin! It was good to here from Craig Murray very thought provoking regards tactics.we all need our own method ! But not be gagged. I respect others ways we are on the same side .being united is the defence against devide and rule.

I wonder what the Tory's think of this scandal they must be angry at this attack on democracy, nah only joking! It'l be the dog that did'nt bark ! just like the media oh and the police ! One rule for them 'no rule' opression for us 99%

james , Dec 14, 2018 3:42:42 PM | link
thanks b.... aside from wondering if this is Russia accessing and sharing this, i think the sticking point is in this "Unintegrity initiative" going after the uk political left... that is where i think this is going to get traction as more folks are going to wake up if they see how deep and ugly this goes in targeting their own..

i could be wrong, but if this news catches on, or the uk MP women keeps hammering away on this, i think we will see some results..

i opened the pdf... here is a quick list of their objectives..

maybe the uk folks can tell us how this is going

ashley albanese , Dec 14, 2018 3:42:44 PM | link
In Australia the scale of tendentious anti-Chinese propaganda is absurd . Australia is flailing around trying to cope with changing circumstances . Already at a disadvantage in 'reading ' the world because of her geographical isolation the clear bias of information she now faces from the Anglo/ U S media and government systems puts her at a disadvantage in forming intelligent policies .
DontBelieveEitherPropaganda , Dec 14, 2018 4:38:49 PM | link
Can anyone make a zip with all dumps and files? For sharing and archiving this would be much easier.. As i believe it will not last long till the scribd uploads etc are DMCAed.. My LUKS+Veracrypt secured storage system would be a safe bet for archiving, so i would volunteer..
Much appreciated!
bjd , Dec 14, 2018 4:44:33 PM | link
Buyer beware!

Note that this document --and I've seen more-- presumes there is a large scale Russian disinformation campaign going on. Other documents presume Skripal was poisoned by Russia.

Once you run with these documents, beware that you are making those presumptions yours . That may be the objective here.

In short: all these documents need to be vetted.

Zanon , Dec 14, 2018 4:48:48 PM | link
DontBelieveEitherPropaganda

"Can anyone make "

No. Do it yourself.

No offense but in this age and on this blog, dont ask other people to do what you can do yourself. Make an effort and influence.

Jackrabbit , Dec 14, 2018 5:08:37 PM | link
Integrity Initiative got a lot of scrutiny because they used their Twitter account to attack Corbyn. In it's latest info dump, Anonymous describes additional UK political manipulation, writing that the Director of The Institute for Statecraft Christopher Donnelly:
... lobbied the House of Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee for an inquiry into Russia's interference in the Catalan referendum. He invited members of the Integrity Initiative Spain cluster Francisco de Borja Lasheras and Mira Milosevich-Juaristi. At that moment they were receiving funds from the Foreign Office, i.e. the UK intelligence paid its own agents for fake proof of Russia's interference in the Catalan referendum and later told them to lie to the Parliament to convince it to take anti-Russian steps .
Kit Klarenberg , Dec 14, 2018 5:36:22 PM | link
This dump has plenty on our pal Simon.

His official profile is very telling indeed I think - https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/12/13/the-institute-for-statecraft-expert-team-v-3/the-institute-for-statecraft-expert-team-v-3.pdf:

"Simon Bracey-Lane: Currently runs the IfS "Integrity Initiative" network communications and network development process; deep experience in democratic election campaign processes in UK and especially in USA, viz: Regional Campaign Organiser: John Wisniewski for Governor of New Jersey, USA. January - May 2017; Statewide Campaign Organiser: Bernie Sanders for President 2016, USA. Sept 2015 – May 2016; special study of Russian interference in the US electoral process."

Whatever the truth of the matter, he can definitely multitask. Running the II network communications and development process (cultivating, recruiting, handling?) while also being a research fellow at the II's 'parent organization' Institute for Statecraft? I wonder how many hours he has left in a day to sleep!

Then again he seems to have form in this regard. 'Special study of Russian interference in the election process' simultaneously as being a key organizer in Sanders' campaign. Maybe he did his 'special study' in his free time?

karlof1 , Dec 14, 2018 5:42:04 PM | link
Pure brazen depravity. And how will the average UK citizen become informed of what seems treasonous activity? Seems venders with broadsheets in the style of yesteryear standing on street corners yelling EXTRA! need to return so the public can be informed of its government's activities--Social Media is not sufficient.

Bevin and other UK citizens: What do you call your Swamp?

jayc , Dec 14, 2018 5:46:12 PM | link
Any thoughts as to why exactly Russia became the chief demon? It seems the hysterical propaganda was focused exclusively on ISIS until Putin spoke at the UN announcing Russia's intervention in Syria. Then the propaganda shifted, first directed at Putin, then generally at Russia and Putin together. Is it anger over the prevention of imperialist design in the Middle East?
Koen , Dec 14, 2018 5:49:54 PM | link
Here's a list of about 60 organizations & projects devoted to spreading anti-Russia content in Western media. The Integrity Initiative is just the tip of the iceberg. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-wtpA2NomEj35bbVe1-iHX7rt4YzahPINm5w9A-SkcQ/edit?usp=drive_web&ouid=109242632477374337132

And here are 2 great books about the origins and nature of Russophobia

Lastly, I collect examples of anti-Russia content that I come across in the media at www.blameputin.com

ADKC , Dec 14, 2018 6:26:19 PM | link
jayc @15

It seemed to start with Bill Browder being kicked out of Russia. So I would assume that the main reason is that the west became aware that Russia was (had been) taking back control of their economy and resources and kicking out the western carpet-baggers. This belated realisation, that the prize that the west had gained and plundered in the '90s (from the collapse of the Soviet Union) had managed to wriggle free, seems to be something that the west can't accept.

Pft , Dec 14, 2018 6:54:10 PM | link
In June of 2016 a bill named Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act of 2016 was introduced into the house by Congressmen Adam Kinzinger and Ted Lieu. H.R. 5181 sought a "whole-government approach without the bureaucratic restrictions" to counter "foreign disinformation and manipulation," which they believe threaten the world's "security and stability." A similar bill was introduced in March in the Senate long before Russia gate. It was passed signed by Obama in December after the Russia Gate was played up following the election.

Like I said US and UK are basically one entity on such matters. Soon after being passed we saw Prop or Not introduce its hit list of alt media sites. Sadly over the last 2 years alt media has been decimated. Engdahl seems to be the latest to fall, helped no doubt by Soros suit for 1 million against him for calling out his daughters NGO. Now he has fallen into line and backing Trump. Maybe next he will support the Climate Change meme.

Oh well, looks like its almost over for Truth, although some truth probably gets allowed if enough of the lies are also presented. So my take is the anti Russia hysteria was just a clever way of getting support for a war on Truth (fake news).

Russia now has a similar initiative said to combat fakes news from US which will likely be used against Putin critics (US agents). The law allows them "to block online content, including social media websites, whose activities are deemed "undesirable" or "extremist." Maybe Putin is part of the Fake Wrestling game. Heel or Face, your choice.

I see the EU has set up a rapid alert system to help EU member states recognize disinformation campaigns, and increase the budget set aside for the detection of disinformation from . It will also press technology companies to play their part in cracking down on fake news. Major social media platforms have already signed up to a code of conduct. One minister said the EU would not stand for "an internet that is the wild west, where anything goes".

Macron introduced a bill recently seeking to get " judges and the media sector's regulator involved in the fight against fake news. A fact-checking state-run website would be created and social media would have to pitch in by warning users when a post is sponsored -- or when someone pays to give it better visibility in a feed."

I suppose the War on Truth has gone global. I wont bother to mention China as they are the role model the West follows.

karlof1 , Dec 14, 2018 7:36:27 PM | link
jayc @15--

As I posted on an earlier thread, the demonization of Russia by Anglos began with the First Afghan War in the late 1830s and has continued at differing degrees of intensity ever since always due to geopolitics.

bevin , Dec 14, 2018 8:08:33 PM | link
@14 What do you call your Swamp? "The Establishment", coined, I believe, by the historian AJP Taylor. The founder of modern journalism William Cobbett used to call it "The Thing"
Don Bacon , Dec 14, 2018 8:35:18 PM | link
The US State Department gives the title "public diplomacy" to its propaganda. Robert Parry wrote about it, and its contrast with truth, a couple years ago.
The idea of questioning the claims by the West's officialdom now brings calumny down upon the heads of those who dare do it. "Truth" is being redefined as whatever the U.S. government, NATO and other Western interests say is true. Disagreement with the West's "group thinks," no matter how fact-based the dissent is, becomes "fake news."

So, we have the case of Washington Post columnist David Ignatius having a starry-eyed interview with Richard Stengel, the State Department's Undersecretary for Public Diplomacy, the principal arm of U.S. government propaganda.

Entitled "The truth is losing," the column laments that the official narratives as deigned by the State Department and The Washington Post are losing traction with Americans and the world's public.

Stengel, a former managing editor at Time magazine, seems to take aim at Russia's RT network's slogan, "question more," as some sinister message seeking to inject cynicism toward the West's official narratives.

"They're not trying to say that their version of events is the true one. They're saying: 'Everybody's lying! Nobody's telling you the truth!'," Stengel said. "They don't have a candidate, per se. But they want to undermine faith in democracy, faith in the West." . . here

Just ask John Kiriakou, a former CIA officer who was sent to prison for telling the truth about US torture.
Blooming Barricade , Dec 14, 2018 8:47:12 PM | link
@15

Thanks, that looks great and should be reposted across alternative media- most of these groups use "anti-Russia" as a front to dismantle dissent and left-wing politics on behalf of the Multinationals and the Neoliberal Establishment- let's call it the "blob," and let's call that list Counter-Propornot.

james , Dec 14, 2018 9:19:09 PM | link
@ 15 jayc, @18 ADKC and @21 karlof1... my impression is the anti russian meme got real traction somewhere about 2014-2015 with the advent of Ukraine dynamics and Russia commitment to going into Syria.. around that time it all really picked up steam.. now you have think tanks and etc. etc. profiting from the sale of anti-russia spin.. there appears to be endless money available for this..
Piotr Berman , Dec 14, 2018 9:49:29 PM | link
... now you have think tanks and etc. etc. profiting from the sale of anti-russia spin.. there appears to be endless money available for this..

Posted by: james | Dec 14, 2018 9:19:09 PM | 26

This is an incomplete narrative, think tanks are basically mercenaries who relieve the population from the need to think about the complicated matters, letting the folks to believe what is either true or should be believed to be true for the "common good". And the "common good" is decided by paymasters. Somewhere in between are mass media populated by folks particularly averse to thinking -- again, they were selected by the employers not to think but to write and talk "correctly". But the press/TV lords will not chisel all details of what is true and important, and what is false, unimportant or both, so journalists can absorb it from think tanks and briefing from government informed sources. There are also astro-turfs and so on.

And indeed, Russian danger was identified ca. 2014 as the major worthy theme in the central parts of that nexus. So who are the paymasters? In part, "capitalists", wealthy individuals with means and motivation to set the course for the West and all forces of good. In part, intelligence agencies. Here Integrity Initiative seems an erratic creature: apparently, run by spooks on military and intelligence payroll, and yet also benefiting from a government grant that makes them a quango, "a semipublic administrative body outside the civil service but receiving financial support from the government, which makes senior appointments to it." In other words, they double dip. The total amount is relatively modest, so rather than getting fat on taxpayer money they merely double or triple they spare official salaries thus reaching "upper middle class" level. Therefore the morale in the outfit was mediocre and we can see one of the more amusing leaks of 2018.

Jackrabbit , Dec 14, 2018 10:41:58 PM | link
james @26:
... my impression is the anti russian meme got real traction somewhere about 2014-2015 with the advent of ukraine dynamics and russias commitment to going into syria..
I think we can surmise that the Russian objection to US bombing Syria in September 2013 was countered with a two-prong strategy:
> doubling down in Syria via ISIS;

> pushing hard for overthrow of Ukrainian government to: a) punish Russia, and b) keep Russia busy so that the Russians refrain from any further support for Syria

It was a superb and well-thought out strategy . . . that failed miserably. The coup in Ukraine succeeded and ISIS came within weeks of defeating Assad BUT Russia managed to secure the best parts of Ukraine -and- intervened in Syria anyway (along with Iran).

The failure to contain Russia was realised by Kissinger when he penned an Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal that made a cryptic call for MAGA to counter the Russians/Chinese . After outlining the challenge to the World Order, Kissinger concludes:

Even as the lessons of challenging decades are examined, the affirmation of America's exceptional nature must be sustained. History offers no respite to countries that set aside their sense of identity in favor of a seemingly less arduous course . But nor does it assure success for the most elevated convictions in the absence of a comprehensive geopolitical strategy.
So the strategy changed once again. MAGA was as much a policy change as it was a campaign slogan. Obama's devious faux peacefulness that used covert action and proxy forces could not succeed against determined opposition from Russia/China. To prevail, Empire strategists recognized that USA needed to be able to call on regular troops and a deep sense of patriotism and righteousness that required re-developing nationalism. In short, "MAGA".

<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

This is what I wrote at nakedcapitalism.com shortly after Kissinger's Op-Ed was published in August 2014 :

My reading is that Kissinger is asserting that the US can and should do whatever it takes to keep the US preeminent – even if that means ignoring allies and/or the post-war international structure (UN, UNSC). That exceptional! message comes through loud and clear despite his 'triage' formalism. And it is a message that is comforting to the elite who read the WSJ (before a holiday weekend), though it should give Joe Sixpack nightmares if fully understood.

There is a lot more there which would take much longer to unpack. But I'll point to one more thing: Note how he forms an equivalence between all the troubles that the 'West' now face, and ignores US/Western actions that have contributed to these conflicts by conflating them. NC readers understand this via Merschemer's (in today's links) work on Ukraine and many links regarding ISIS (like this one).

This comforting message [from Kissinger] is needed because the Ukraine gambit has failed miserably – as many independent obeservers [sic] predicted– and a deeper conflict with Russia (possibly extending to others) is now in the cards. Like the true neocon that he is, Kissinger has doubled down on Nuland's obnoxious and misguided "f*ck the EU" with an exceptional! "f*ck the World".

God help us.

Jackrabbit , Dec 14, 2018 10:51:26 PM | link
Note: Kissinger's WSJ Op-Ed was published on August 29, 2014. Within weeks of its publication, the Obama Administration was in full anti-Russia swing. Trump would enter the race for Republican nomination 9 1/2 months after Kissinger's Op-Ed (June 15, 2015).

Trump was the ONLY populist, out of 19 contenders, in the Republican race. Hillary told Democratic-friendly media to focus on Trump and did things during the Presidential race that call into question her desire to actually win. Trump is a MUCH better choice for a MAGA nationalist than Hillary.

WJ , Dec 14, 2018 11:03:55 PM | link
@Jackrabbit 28,

You were right then, and you are right now. My one beef with your 2016 election analysis is that it seems to me you shortchange slightly the evidence of a real conflict and possibly fissure within the oligarchic elite, only certain segments of which seem convinced that now is the time for MAGA. Others among the actual power brokers would I think have preferred HRC and 4-8 more years of neoliberal internationalist interventionist grift a la Obama before having to finally turn to the MAGA nationalist strategy (which given the resource struggles that will emerge over the next decades was always inevitable once the Project for the New American (Israeli) Century collapsed, as it was bound to once Russia called its bluff in Syria.) But this is a minor point. What is much more important is that behind MAGA is an envisioned world war on the scale of WWI and WWII in which "The West" takes on China-Russia leading to the death of probably everybody.

bevin , Dec 14, 2018 11:33:45 PM | link
"..my impression is the anti russian meme got real traction somewhere about 2014-2015 with the advent of ukraine dynamics and russias commitment to going into syria..."

I think that the proper context begins with the failure of Medvedev's Russia to veto the UNSC motion establishing a No Fly zone over Libya. Inter alia this led to a real reverse for and an humiliation of China which had large financial investments as well as large numbers of personnel involved in Ghadaffi's imaginative schemes.

My guess, and it is not a particularly well informed one, is that after the Libyan disaster-the worst sort of imperialist over reach and brutality not only did China realise that Imperialism was reverting to its nightmarish type, but Russians leaders saw that a permanent alliance-until the defeat of the empire- was the only alternative that it and China had to 'hanging separately'. And that the same went for Iran and Syria-nobody could trust the west any longer and it would be foolish, and dangerous, to continue to do so.

The hate campaign against Russia is just the old campaign, against any country resisting the Empire's hegemony, focused on the one power that had resisted since 1917 and was able to do so, returning to its old role of saying 'Niet' when all the rest of the world said either 'Aye Aye,Sir' "If you insist" or kept quiet and said nothing at all.

Of course, 2011 was the last in a long series of increasingly stupid US aggressions, all of which Russia knew very well were aimed at it as much as the selected sacrificial victim. Those who say that Saddam was about oil could not be more wrong: he was a human sacrifice, slaughtered ritually on the corpses of a million of his fellows, to demonstrate that the USA can do what it chooses when it wishes. Karl Rove was wrong: not even Empires can create their own realities. The extravagant and bloody theatre of decades swaggering around the middle east finds the US not only poorer but weaker than it was in 1980.

V , Dec 14, 2018 11:37:12 PM | link
"It notably also offers to "edit" Wikipedia articles." b

Wikipedia stopped being a reliable source for accurate information a long time ago. Finding reliable alternatives is a bit more effort; but worth it for accurate information.

Piotr Berman , Dec 15, 2018 12:02:03 AM | link
Wikipedia stopped being a reliable source for accurate information a long time ago. Finding reliable alternatives is a bit more effort; but worth it for accurate information.

Posted by: V | Dec 14, 2018 11:37:12 PM | 32

It is more complicated. Wikipedia is sprawling and manipulations happen on entry basis, and it often leaves "controversies". I also discovered that it is worth to brush up on language skills, if there are any. For example, on recent events in Crimea there is an entry "Crimea Crisis" with Russian and Polish versions, and Polish "pro-Westerners" somehow left few traces of activity. I wonder how is it in German and French Wikipedias. In English, think tanks and deep states indeed lack sufficient counter-activity.

b , Dec 15, 2018 12:16:08 AM | link
@DontBelieveEitherPropaganda

Why didn't you make an archive yourself? Meanwhile the leakers account at Scribd has been slashed and all the files with it. Anyway - here is a Mediafire zip created yesterday of (allegedly) all files published so far. IntegrityInitiative.zip . Save it as long as it is available.

Augustin L , Dec 15, 2018 12:47:50 AM | link
@ jackrabbit, I've heard other observers make the link with Kissinger's op-ed, but your demonstration is very convincing. William Engdahl made the same call, Hillary's not a suitable player to pull off MAGA with masses of deplorables. Unfortunately for Anglo-American strategists, Trump with his linear cretinism lacks the necessary wherewithal to implement and execute a comprehensive geopolitical strategy. Kissinger comes from another era, and probably cannot grasp how far devolution has taken American elites in the cesspit of post modern hedonism.
Blooming Barricade , Dec 15, 2018 12:54:41 AM | link
@V

It's illuminating to see this NATO-backed operation looking at a PR firm to edit Wikipedia because this brings to mind the notorious "Philip Cross," which, for those not in the know, was uncovered by Craig Murray and others ( https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/05/the-philip-cross-affair/) as having edited the pages of prominent left wing people and Labour Party people. In Germany, Left Party Bundestag member Diether Dehm has highlighted a similar figure in German language Wikipedia, "Feliks," targeting socialists in that country. The similarities of both to the proposals made by the PR firm above are eerie.

Hmpf , Dec 15, 2018 1:25:47 AM | link
@ Piotr Berman | Dec 15, 2018 12:02:03 AM | 33

Can't speak for the French version of Wikipedia but with the German edition it is as bad as anywhere else when it comes to social and political issues, particularly so if geopolitics (the West, ME, Russia ..) is concerned.

Two people, a biologist and a journalist, independently investigated networks on a senior editor and admin level active within WikipediaG. What they found is rather shocking. One can't just edit a Wikipedia article, no matter how fact-based. It will almost immediately be retracted if it doesn't follow the 'official' narrative. If said person then tries to reestablish that content or tries to engage in a discussion with the admins, in many cases, they simply get banned then.

These guys can also be found on Youtube: Gruppe42 (group42) Unfortunately their main documentaries are only available in German language but there's some other content 'Geschichten aus Wikihausen' - 'The Tales of Wikihausen' with English subtitles.

Try this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlgGx9LM5cM It's about a former female STASI-employee turned fighter for freedom and democracy. Currently she is the head of the Antonio-Amadeo-Foundation dedicated, to put it bluntly, to doing the bidding for the usual suspects - and to add insult to injury taxpayer funded to a large part.

Mina , Dec 15, 2018 4:16:39 AM | link
The BBC won't taalk about it but when it is in the House of Commons they have to Sole result of a search "Integrity Initiative" on the BBC news website
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0bv9zxj (12/12 when then question was raised in the house of commons)
Zanon , Dec 15, 2018 4:43:24 AM | link
"Anonymous Hackers Expose UK Plans to Mine Sevastopol Days Before Crimea Vote" https://sptnkne.ws/kpWP
Russ , Dec 15, 2018 5:01:57 AM | link
Posted by: Soft Asylum | Dec 15, 2018 4:36:27 AM | 39

Such people might be some of the worst examples of humans, but that doesn't mean they're trolls. In fact, plucking some kind of motivations out of their psychopathic minds might be a good thing for the rest of us. If people such as them are posters here, this would allow an opportunity to study them.

You feel you lack opportunities to study them? Pick up a newspaper, or turn on the cable news.

TJ , Dec 15, 2018 5:03:04 AM | link
The thread over on Craig Murrays site- British Security Service Infiltration, the Integrity Initiative and the Institute for Statecraft
William Bowles , Dec 15, 2018 6:01:23 AM | link
Integrity Initiative Part 3 https://williambowles.info/2018/12/15/integrity-initiative-part-3/

Combatting Russian Disinformation http://williambowlesnet.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/combatting-russian-disinformation.pdf

William Bowles , Dec 15, 2018 6:08:03 AM | link
B: this info is astounding! Or perhaps not? Maybe the fact that the spooks are notoriously inept is what's astounding? I mean you would think that what with all dweebs working for the state (eg GCHQ), they would be able to protect their own excreta? The earlier disinfo (it's a Russian plot etc) makes sense but it didn't work!
Old Microbiologist , Dec 15, 2018 7:09:31 AM | link
Jay @15
Sorry, I didn't read any of this until this morning. Russia is the go to enemy when you need to bump up your purchasing of very expensive military equipment and to pour money into various security projects to achieve to goals (1 is to lock down infrastructure etc. but the other is to suppress the US citizens so a two-for).

Asymmetrical wars against tiny nations without air support are hard to justify spending Trillions of dollars forever. That dog just won't hunt after 18 years of a no-win war in Afghanistan (or anywhere else). So, Russia and now just to make it even more critical, China are enemies that demand massive military buildups of equipment that won't ever actually (hopefully) be put to use. This is to fight a two theater war against two nuclear superpowers. Basically, it is insanity but it will make a few people very rich.

The long game plan, which continues unabated regardless of which party or who is in power, is American hegemony of the planet. When you consider the US has military bases in 155 countries (who essentially have become colonies) it seems like the goal is nearly completed unless you consider that major nuclear armed nations are resisting (Russia, China and maybe Pakistan and India as well).

If you take a look at Russia during Yeltsin the US companies nearly bought everything in the country and the raping was in full vigor. Someone at DoS or the CIA very badly miscalculated letting Putin come into power. He was, after all, a minor minion and basically came out of no where. I am assuming they thought he would continue the raping and disarmament of all former Soviet weapons and Russian businesses. Sadly for them he turned out to be a patriot and actively resisted everything the US was trying to do to Russia. I believe the Yukos deal was the final straw which would have given nearly all Russian oil and gas to Exxon/Mobil. So, Putin has been battling the US successfully since and is very slowly eliminating all the oligarchs the US put into power and draining his swamp of Atlantacists and 5th column.

That is the over simplified view but it sums it up enough to explain what we are seeing. It is as always all about money. So, Putin has resisted aggressively all US encroachments into the Russian sphere of influence. The sanctions actually help Russia. A devalued ruble is great for oil exports which are only 12% of Russia's GDP. More self sufficiency is also a huge benefit. A partnership with China ensures the US cannot ever achieve their goals of global domination. The US military has proven for the past 70+ years they are incapable of any meaningful fighting and that the military is woefully incompetent. The ABM test results even when cheating heavily are only roughly a 50% hit rate. That is against "normal" ballistic missiles. Russia's new systems already circumvent this system by mid-flight course corrections.

The biggest problem is the neocon elites really believe all their own propaganda. That is very scary.

William Bowles , Dec 15, 2018 7:54:52 AM | link
Posted by: jayc | Dec 14, 2018 5:46:12 PM | 15

Jayc: you ask why Russia and specifically Putin? Cast your mind back to 1991 and the fall of the USSR and Yeltsin's coup and the theft of billions of Russia's capital resources by Goldman Sachs et al. The Empire figured what was left of the former USSR was a pushover and its vast natural resources, highly educated population, ripe for plucking and along comes the Tatar Putin, a descendent of Genghis Khan! Whoops!

And only just in time. Then think about the invasion of Iraq in 1991 and later in 2003 and then Libya. The Russians stood by. But Syria was a step too far and too near!

Jayc, it's Western, racist hubris. The Russkies are just a bunch of jumped up peasants (Hitler made the same mistake), so when they asserted their right to resist, and it really started in 2015 with the Western financed 'revolution' against Assad, it came as a real shock to the system to see that Russia actually did have real guns that fired and real jets and satellites to watch it all. After all, it was those peasant Russians who went into space first (Duck agogo Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, the genuine father of space exploration).

It must have rocked the bastards back on their heels. So they hate Putin! He restored Russia's faith in itself and that is simply not permissible! And do it with a military budget a small fraction of the Empire's and one that Putin CUT by 10% this year! Wakey-wakey!

Okay, this is a vastly simplified explanation and I'm not going to deal with the internal contradictions of Russia, that's for the Russians to do. But it seems that once more, the Russkies are saving our tired, sorry Western arses.

Bill

Emmanuel Goldstein , Dec 15, 2018 9:29:46 AM | link
William Bowles @ 57

I commented at the Saker at the time of the first Ukrainian war that it looks like Mother Russia is being set up to defeat fascism for the second time in 100 years. History may not exactly repeat itself but it does rhyme.

If I were the West I would tread very carefully, after the catastrophes of the 1990's the Russians are in no mood to roll over for anyone. The West was surprised at the weapons and operational arts displayed in Syria, and that was just the conventional stuff....

AnneR , Dec 15, 2018 9:30:57 AM | link
karlofi - Britain doesn't have swamps (environmental sort), but it does have lots of Bogs. And Bog is also another term for lavatory/toilet - so one might describe Westminster, the City of London and the rest of the bourgeois British world as one Big Bog (if only someone would flush it).
BM , Dec 15, 2018 10:18:31 AM | link
Well, I was excited about the supposed "lots on Skripal" and thought maybe there would be a smoking gun. Disappointed (mediafire zip linked by b)! All I opened was the files with the word skripal in the name - nothing but ultra-boring newspeak from what seem like spotty adolescents trying their best to feed their paymasters with the propaganda they want. The only one of any interest at all was the one reporting on skripal news coverage in Greece: the author was relatively normal, and coverage in Greece was pretty neutral and sceptical of the UK propaganda.

There were only 100 documents in the zip which was supposed to be everything released so far (i.e. all three dumps).

Is there any evidence to confirm that all three dumps were done by the same person/people? I can't help wondering whether the third dump might have been damage control from the Integrity Initiative themselves, to try to show that there is not much there.

As I said though, I didn't open anything except the files with skripal in the filename, so maybe there is something interesting somewhere else. It may be that by specifically looking for skripal I failed to find any files with policy or analysis. All the files I looked at seemed to be reports from the clusters in various countries (often addressed to Simon), or pure propaganda (spotty teenagers) with no analysis.

psychohistorian , Dec 15, 2018 10:32:15 AM | link
ZH has a posting up about the Integrity Initiative and gives MoA a hat tip for being early onto the issue. This should insure that it won't be buried but I suspect it is time for another big shiny thing to appear to distract the masses
William Bowles , Dec 15, 2018 10:52:51 AM | link
Okay! It is/was called Spybase, and created by Daniel Brandt. Foreign Affairs magazine badmouthed it here:

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/capsule-review/1989-03-01/spybase

And they misidentified it as well!

See also Namebase, the original collection of intelligence agents.

NameBase - Wikipedia
Founder Daniel Brandt began collecting clippings and citations pertaining to influential people and intelligence agents in the 1960s and especially in the 1970s after becoming a member of Students for a Democratic Society, an organization that opposed US foreign policy.
[Search domain en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spybase] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spybase

William Bowles , Dec 15, 2018 11:16:15 AM | link
Scary but worth a read: What are the Odds of a Shooting War Between NATO and Russia? "70% Chance of Combat" An Interview with George Szamuely https://www.globalresearch.ca/what-are-the-odds-of-a-shooting-war-between-nato-and-russia-70-chance-of-combat/5663011
Russ , Dec 15, 2018 11:44:03 AM | link
Posted by: William Bowles | Dec 15, 2018 11:16:15 AM | 67

That piece sums it up well, especially NATO's increasingly aggressive posture. And how self-righteously stupid the US is being. I think 70% might be optimistic. This situation is even more like 1914 than 1914 was, in that the reallywantingwar-to-bluster ratio looks even worse. Meanwhile Trump, with his self-indulgent saber-rattling, is like a twitter-empowered Kaiser. Imagine that back then.

Another commenter up above says this'll be Russia's second go-round with fascism. Yup, and they can send US/NATO where they sent Hitler, Napoleon, Charles XII.

William Bowles , Dec 15, 2018 12:15:58 PM | link
Posted by: Russ | Dec 15, 2018 11:44:03 AM | 69

Russ, I wish I could be that optimistic. Yes, madmen they may be but they're madmen with tactical nukes! And judging by another End of Days scenario, they actually seem to be contemplating their use, gambling that the Russians wont call their bluff! More like the Cuban Missile Crisis than Sarevevo. So which side will blink first?

See: Be Afraid Be Very Afraid! By John Rachel

https://williambowles.info/2018/11/23/be-afraid-be-very-afraid-by-john-rachel/

And then of course, we have Global Heating, which the Empire figures will 'take care' of that surplus to requirement population, whilst the 1% wait it out in their bunkers.


I'm glad I'm at the other end of my life, rather than the beginning.

" we have the certainty that matter remains eternally the same in all its transformations, that none of its attributes can ever be lost, and therefore, also, that with the same iron necessity that it will exterminate on the earth its highest creation, the thinking mind, it must somewhere else and at another time again produce it". -- Frederick Engels, from the introduction to 'The Dialectics of Nature', 1883.
james , Dec 15, 2018 12:41:47 PM | link
thanks everyone for giving a response to either my comment, or @jayc's initial comment on what started this russiaphobia... i think many of the answers are relevant and there is no one answer...

i recall how quickly 'cambridge analytica' came and went, in spite of the strength of the data on them manipulating much... i imagine a similar story hee with 'integrity initiative'..

as for wikipedia - everyone knows it's a full on propaganda site masquerading as a neutral info site... the fact that it is mentioned in this integrity initiative data dump shows just how mainstream and 'go to' in the world of propaganda it is viewed by the intel services and anyone else trying to get in on some of the gov't money handouts for this type propaganda.. it would be very cool if the wikipedia site made a statement saying we no longer need donations, as the intel services of the west have been paying us to continue... at what point does wikipedia become an official and open arm of western propaganda?? why continue to try to hide this when it is so apparent??

Russ , Dec 15, 2018 12:47:43 PM | link
Posted by: james | Dec 15, 2018 12:41:47 PM | 71

"at what point does wikipedia become an official and open arm of western propaganda?? why continue to try to hide this when it is so apparent??"

That's one of neoliberalism's refinements over classical fascism: Just as they figured out you don't need to kill dissenters since no one listens to us anyway, so you also don't need formal Gleichshaltung under a de jure Geobbels ministry since the MSM will happily "coordinate" itself and really doesn't need to be told what to do. They already know since theirs is the same ideology.

Russ , Dec 15, 2018 12:51:58 PM | link
@ William Bowles 70

Well, I'm only optimistic about that last part if they really can keep it to just shooting and not let the missiles fly.

On the other hand I'm not at all optimistic about that. Though even then I suspect it'll hit the West worst, precisely because any such leveling is hardest on the most complex, most high maintenance, most just-in-time, least robust, least resilient, most top-heavy Tower of Babel. That would be the US, Europe, and their dependencies.

Noirette , Dec 15, 2018 12:52:52 PM | link
from the link in b's post: As we see it, the main weakness in the Russians' disinformation campaign is their embrace of a quantity - over quality and credibility - strategy as shown by their lack of credible spokespeople, their publication of a high volume of "easily" identifiable propaganda and "fake news", and their heavy reliance on a few biased partisan sites, dubious social media pages and uninspired trolls. Their stories are hard to believe,...

That sounds so much like a self-description of the US-UK MSM it is uncanny. (Bellingcat anyone? for ex.) Which, imho, shows a complete lack of creativity, suppleness, or even a low-level semi-efficient approach to the general problem of information / narrative control. Because that is what it is all about: much of the discourse around it is waffle, which masquerades as 'new' as it invokes 'new info' double-speak: social circuits, fake news, distribution, deep learning, connectivity, targetting, etc. (and other terms that are less readily comprehensible..)

William Bowles , Dec 15, 2018 1:30:28 PM | link

Posted by: Noirette | Dec 15, 2018 12:52:52 PM | 74

Hah! I think it was Goebbels who said that the biggest mistake a propagandist can make is to believe his own propaganda and I think your quote exemplifies it! But note it always has to contain an element of truth eg, 'as shown by their lack of credible spokespeople'. Yes, the Russians, just like the North Koreans ain't very good at spin and thank goodness. It was a lesson that Nixon never learned, the Emperor really is naked!

james , Dec 15, 2018 1:39:04 PM | link
@72 russ.. okay.. i get that... thanks!

on the newest thread bjd make what i thought was an exceptional comment, which is easy enough to gloss over, but i think worth repeating on this thread... here it is

"...why --if these initiatives are truly meant to save and strengthen democracy-- (aren't they) proudly proclaimed and advertised, in the open, transparent, for everyone one to see and judge, like an adult democracy that they claim to stand for..."
The fact that they aren't, is testimony to the nefarious anti-democratic, authoritarian and totalitarian streak that runs in between every two lines that they put on paper."

Posted by: bjd | Dec 15, 2018 12:46:08 PM | 8"

i modified bjds words in a minor way..

William Bowles , Dec 15, 2018 2:13:24 PM | link
I'm sure Bernard is going to ban me soon but before he does, you have to read this from Ron Unz on the Huawei debacle:
Although it is far from clear whether the very elderly [Sheldon] Adelson played any direct personal role in Ms. Meng's arrest, he surely must be viewed as the central figure in fostering the political climate that produced the current situation. Perhaps he should not be described as the ultimate puppet-master behind our current clash with China, but any such political puppet-masters who do exist are certainly operating at his immediate beck and call. In very literal terms, I suspect that if Adelson placed a single phone call to the White House, the Trump Administration would order Canada to release Ms. Meng that same day.

Adelson's fortune of $33 billion ranks him as the 15th wealthiest man in America, and the bulk of his fortune is based on his ownership of extremely lucrative gambling casinos in Macau, China. In effect, the Chinese government currently has its hands around the financial windpipe of the man ultimately responsible for Ms. Meng's arrest and whose pro-Israel minions largely control American foreign policy. I very much doubt that they are fully aware of this enormous, untapped source of political leverage.(my emph.

Averting World Conflict With China

The PRC Should Retaliate by Targeting Sheldon Adelson's Chinese Casinos

By Ron Unz

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/50767.htm

Activist Potato , Dec 15, 2018 2:17:05 PM | link
"MAGA was as much a policy change as it was a campaign slogan....To prevail, Empire strategists recognized that USA needed to be able to call on regular troops and a deep sense of patriotism and righteousness that required re-developing nationalism. In short, 'MAGA'."
@28 Jackrabbit

I highlight these lines of your interesting post because, in the context of the Kissinger Op-Ed you refer to, they capture an angle I had not considered and have to a degree nudged my thinking off what had been a steady course of assumptions and beliefs relating to MAGA that go in the opposite direction from your hypothesis.

Trump's invocation of MAGA on the campaign trail was presented in such a way as to seem to overwhelmingly favour a pullback from Imperialism in order to make things right at home. It drew from, and fed on, the angst and diminishing prosperity of the segment of the population that had been hit hardest by Globalization of the economy, to which Imperial adventures can be, and after are, associated. The possibility that MAGA was, in fact, a sly misdirection to co-opt the fervour of re-ignited passions in a disenfranchised segment of the America people - to re-capture the kind of patriotic commitment and ardor that drove the war effort in two world wars - into a renewed Imperial adventure was obviated, in my view, by Trump's loud and overt criticism of past Imperial adventures such as the Iraq war and Obama's inaction regarding ISIS (the accusation that Obama "created" ISIS was a bombshell, in my opinion).

Trump engaged in a bare, pointed, often crass and bordering on contemptuous criticism of his predecessors' foreign policy. The irreverent tone was unprecedented in recent campaign history and was so plain and completely at odds with Hilary's stated positions that it essentially committed him (in my eyes anyway) to following through, or to make all efforts to follow through. If not, he would set one of the worst examples of a duplicitous politician, perhaps ever. The same applies to other bold campaign positions, such as the border wall, for example.

But when viewed in the context of a deep state "policy change," such a clear and utter denunciation and discrediting of the former policy would be necessary to shift the National mindset and would not necessarily preclude Trump from engaging in further Imperial adventures, as long as they were different from the discredited policy.

Doing it smarter and better than Obama did seems to the ticket to legitimacy for whatever Trump does in the foreign policy realm. Replacing ISIS with actual American troops (while protecting a core capacity to revive ISIS if needed) is an example of doing it differently from Obama, but the net result – with parts of Syria denied to the legitimate government – still supports stark Imperialist, interventionists goals in a different way. The Russians and Syrians have free reign to attack ISIS, but do not have the same liberty against American troops. The flip-side is that the American troops do not have the freedom of action of ISIS to attack Syria. This creates a static line that serves the purpose of a partitionist goal. (ISIS is being allowed to survive to enable an element of proxy action, for harassment purposes).

I find I can no longer dismiss Trump's appointments, in particular Pompeo and Bolton to key positions directing and shaping US foreign policy, as some kind of 5-D chess move. They are signs that he is either a hostage President, or he is in on the act. There is so much that remains unknown, but the clear outward indicators are that nothing really has changed when it comes to US foreign policy objectives, only the methods and approaches are different.

William Bowles , Dec 15, 2018 2:47:47 PM | link
@78

Remember Obama's 'Change' meme? We don't understand that behind all these guys, and they are mostly men, stands industry and its skills; advertising, marketing, statistics, psychology, pr, on and on it goes. And billions, billions, to spend! We are the amateurs! Remember Saatchi & Saatchi's campaign to have Thatcher elected?

Noirette , Dec 15, 2018 3:20:14 PM | link
A new extremely lucrative 'industry' has sprung up.

a) to exploit hugely massive data sets (Facebook's trove and money earner..) and influence ppl => attitudes, behavior, votes, etc. For ex. Cambridge Analytica. Much of this stuff is for now on the level of a scam. E.g. Trump was not elected due to any type of manipulation or meddling by anyone, excepting those who financed him (other story, hard bucks and bribes - not! internet detritus or subliminal messages) and imho the US MSM - TV specially - who care more about ratings and the money it brings than anything else.

These efforts have got a lot of press, imho it is all smoke. If anyone has a good ex. of success ? (The model is built on about 200 years of advertising lore.)

b) Further upstream is to control the information that goes out / the audiences who are allowed to see whatever info, react to it, communicate it - other. With the corollary of repressing dissident, unwelcome, contradictory, info, etc. Been going on since say the Upper Paleolithic.

Today, what has to be managed is the extreme free-flow (internet): the only way this can be done is:

- to limit the channel, block info or some proportion of it, make the channel too expensive / unusable / forbid, repress

- to limit or corral the users (via propaganda / coercion / permission / certification / numbers / privilege / cost, etc.)

- to triage the information, the 'news', the narratives, the opinions, the appeals, etc. which represents the ultimate control and is the choice made by the US-UK to mention only those.

Ex.

https://twitter.com/ERC_Research/status/999632938936479746

or totally 'bogus' 'science' like this:

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6380/1146

William Bowles , Dec 15, 2018 3:34:42 PM | link
Posted by: Noirette | Dec 15, 2018 3:20:14 PM | 80

Noirette, yuo want proof? Check out 'Programming of the President' by Roland Perry, Aurum Books, 1984. It's About Richard Wirthlin and the Mormons. Can a computer be used to elect a president? Wel it elected Ronald Reagan. It's only a coupleof quid on Abe Books. Essential reading IMHOP.

https://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=22859608878&searchurl=tn%3DProgramming%2Bof%2Bthe%2BPresident%26sortby%3D17%26an%3DRoland%2BPerry&cm_sp=snippet-_-srp1-_-image1

pogohere , Dec 15, 2018 5:57:43 PM | link
jackrabbit @ 28

activist potato @ 78

Re: "The possibility that MAGA was, in fact, a sly misdirection to co-opt the fervour of re-ignited passions in a disenfranchised segment of the America people - to re-capture the kind of patriotic commitment and ardor that drove the war effort in two world wars - into a renewed Imperial adventure was obviated, in my view, by Trump's loud and overt criticism of past Imperial adventures such as the Iraq war and Obama's inaction regarding ISIS (the accusation that Obama "created" ISIS was a bombshell, in my opinion).

Trump engaged in a bare, pointed, often crass and bordering on contemptuous criticism of his predecessors' foreign policy. The irreverent tone was unprecedented in recent campaign history and was so plain and completely at odds with Hilary's stated positions that it essentially committed him (in my eyes anyway) to following through, or to make all efforts to follow through. If not, he would set one of the worst examples of a duplicitous politician, perhaps ever. The same applies to other bold campaign positions, such as the border wall, for example.

But when viewed in the context of a deep state "policy change," such a clear and utter denunciation and discrediting of the former policy would be necessary to shift the National mindset and would not necessarily preclude Trump from engaging in further Imperial adventures, as long as they were different from the discredited policy."

So which of Trump's nominees gets kneecapped first? Michael Flynn Former Military Chief: Iraq War Was A 'Failure' That Helped Create ISIS

12-19-16

Retired Lt. General Michael Flynn, the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency who came up through intelligence positions in Iraq and Afghanistan, says that the George W. Bush administration's Iraq war was a tremendous blunder that helped to create the self-proclaimed Islamic State, or ISIS.

"It was a huge error," Flynn said about the Iraq war in a detailed interview with German newspaper Der Spiegel published Sunday.

"As brutal as Saddam Hussein was, it was a mistake to just eliminate him," Flynn went on to say. "The same is true for Moammar Gadhafi and for Libya, which is now a failed state. The historic lesson is that it was a strategic failure to go into Iraq. History will not be and should not be kind with that decision."

When told by Der Spiegel reporters Matthias Gebauer and Holger Stark that the Islamic State would not "be where it is now without the fall of Baghdad," Flynn, without reservations, said: "Yes, absolutely."

Read the entire interview here: https://tinyurl.com/zmxd3uf

Flynn, who served in the U.S. Army for more than 30 years, also said that the American military response following 9/11 was not well thought-out at all and based on significant misunderstandings.


BTW:

Hold the Phone on Flynn Sentencing – Judge Emmet Sullivan Has Questions

12-12-18

Interesting, very interesting. As noted in the Flynn sentencing memo last night there were some curiously framed explanations of events surrounding his FBI inquisition.

Now Judge Emmet Sullivan wants expanded information, and wishes to see the actual notes (FD-302) that were mentioned by Flynn; and Judge Sullivan is directing the special counsel to provide all documents created by the FBI surrounding the Flynn interview:

from the comments:

Curt says:
December 12, 2018 at 9:56 pm
This could be big news! Judge Emmet Sullivan was the same judge that had prosecutors investigated for criminal actions they took in the Sen. Ted Stevens FALSE prosecution. Some on Mueller's team, including Weinstein, were held in contempt. One prosecutor committed suicide. Others threatened with disbarment and some were suspended. "A federal judge dismissed the ethics conviction of former Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska on Tuesday after taking the extraordinary step of naming a special prosecutor to investigate whether the government lawyers who ran the Stevens case (2008) should themselves be prosecuted for criminal wrongdoing.

Mueller was also involved in that horrible attempt by prosecutors to frame Sen. Ted Stevens. Judge Sullivan has absolutely no use for this group of prosecutors. He smells a rat here and is asking for all investigative materials, including 302s. This judge will not hesitate to take action against these crooked prosecutors if he finds evidence of ANY wrong doing.


See: Cautionary Tale: The Ted Stevens Prosecution

On April 7, 2009, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia unleashed his fury before a packed courtroom. For 14 minutes, he scolded. He chastised. He fumed. "In nearly 25 years on the bench," he said, "I've never seen anything approaching the mishandling and misconduct that I've seen in this case.

. . .

For months Judge Sullivan had warned U.S. prosecutors about their repeated failure to turn over evidence. Then, after the jury convicted Stevens, the Justice Department discovered previously unrevealed evidence. Meanwhile, a prosecution witness and an agent from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) came forward alleging prosecutorial misconduct. Finally, newly appointed U.S. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced that he had had enough and recommended that the seven-count conviction against the former Alaska senator be dismissed.

On April 7, Judge Sullivan did just that. But he was far from done.

In an extraordinarily rare move, he ordered an inquiry into the prosecutors' handling of the case. Judge Sullivan insisted that the misconduct allegations were "too serious and too numerous" to be left to an internal Justice Department investigation. He appointed Washington lawyer Henry F. Schuelke III of Janis, Schuelke & Wechsler to investigate whether members of the trial team should be prosecuted for criminal contempt.

Judge sentencing . . . Michael Flynn orders special counsel to hand over all 302s"


12-13-18 Following the allegations, U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan yesterday ordered that both the Mueller investigation and the Flynn team turn over all documents [the "302s"] relating to the fateful interview, including all contemporaneous notes, before 3pm Friday.

DiGenova slams Mueller's handling of Flynn FBI meeting

4:04

Rumor has it the next chapter of this story unfolds Monday, 17 Dec '18.

Jackrabbit , Dec 15, 2018 6:58:24 PM | link
Flynn was likely set-up and railroaded because he was a whistle-blower. I wrote about Flynn here.

In recent days we have discovered that Flynn was advised not to have counsel present during his FBI interview and that the FBI is withholding the actual interview notes. The same FBI cabal that has dogged Trump - but AFAIK, Trump has said nothing about the Flynn case.

Yet another reason to believe that Trump is not a "populist" savior but yet another agent of the establishment/Deep State.

Augustin L , Dec 15, 2018 7:48:43 PM | link
New Mueller memo smacks down Flynn's latest legal gambit: Nobody forced him to lie to the FBI. Dead in the water.
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/12/new-mueller-memo-smacks-flynns-latest-legal-gambit-nobody-forced-lie-fbi/

Michael Flynn's a well known islamophobe who'd gladly defend zionist interests to the last american soldier. He'd fit right in with Bolton on the NSC council. Flynn in his own words: "Islam is not a real religion, but a political ideology masked behind a religion," While campaigning for Trump in 2016: ''Islamism a vicious cancer inside the body of 1.7 billion people that has to be excised "

I wonder how he planned on excising the cancer ? Deploying more stormtroopers to the levant to fight Iran ?
As Trump assumed control of the executive in early 2017, it didn't take long for Flynn to push for direct military involvement in Yemen and confrontation with Iran: "Instead of being thankful to the United States for these agreements, Iran is now feeling emboldened... As of today, we are officially putting Iran on notice."

Michael Flynn was also a fellow at the foundation for defence of democracies a well known den of zionists and universal fascists such as Michael Ledeen. In fact they both wrote a book together The Field of Fight: How We Can Win the Global War against Radical Islam and Its Allies, where we find such nuggets as:

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Putin has declared the United States (and NATO generally) to be a national security threat to Russia, and "Death to America" is the official chant of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Both the Putinists and the radical Iranian Muslims agree on the identity of their main enemy. Hence, one part of the answer is surely that their alliance is simply the logical outgrowth of their hostility toward America.''

"The Russians and Iranians have more in common than a shared enemy. There is also a shared contempt for democracy and an agreement -- by all members of the enemy alliance -- that dictatorship is a superior way to run a country, an empire, or a caliphate."

Flynn's angle was to exploit any potential fissure to pry Russia away from Iran and China. Presumbably after having dealt with Iran and the middle Kingdom, the hegemon could then strike a final blow to defeat and contain an isolated Russia.
https://www.amazon.com/Field-Fight-Global-Against-Radical/dp/1250131626

Deplorables envisioning multi-dimensional chess moves, fancy Flynn as some sort of superpatriot but like most men surrounding Chump he's nothing but a grifter:
Lobbying for Turkey: https://theintercept.com/2016/11/17/turkish-client-paid-trump-adviser-michael-flynns-company-tens-of-thousands-of-dollars-for-lobbying/

[Dec 15, 2018] No sorrow for The Weekly Standard demice. We can't forgive their cheerleading for stupid neocon wars >

Notable quotes:
"... Anything that gets Kristol out of public life is good. Sometimes collateral damage is part of the package. ..."
"... I remember these jackasses screaming for an American Empire. How many people did they help kill with their braying for war? They pushed failed, murderous policies and showed little to no regard for the people they would use as cannon fodder. ..."
"... as Tucker Carlson noted, the Kristols, the Boots and others only really turned against Trump when he accused Bush of lying us into war in the GOP debates. That's what turned them off: the possibility that he wouldn't keep the guns blazing. ..."
"... Now they're out of a job? Gosh, too bad. I guess they should learn how to code. Maybe they need to rent a U-Haul and leave town. ..."
"... If this is a sign that neoconservatives are losing influence, I say it's a good thing ..."
"... These are the guys who are totally cool with $40k a year factory jobs going to Mexico -- that's creative destruction -- but act as if it's some kind of crisis when they lose their $200k editing job. ..."
Dec 15, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Bookbread December 14, 2018 at 2:15 pm

McCarthy's analysis is sound but there are some variables he either misses or omits concerning TWS's demise: See my "8 Thoughts" on the matter, including, for example: " TWS was a strong voice of neoconservatism–which emerged in the 1970s as a theory, but only matured into an applied political praxis during a post-Clinton presidency–and even then–only after September 10, 2001 . but when Clinton lost to Trump, TWS lost a lot of its original enemies, hence its original purpose ." http://www.bookbread.com/2018/12/06/8-thoughts-on-the-new-york-times-article-about-the-demise-of-the-weekly-standard/
Ron Snyder , says: December 14, 2018 at 2:35 pm
Anything that gets Kristol out of public life is good. Sometimes collateral damage is part of the package.
C. L. H. Daniels , says: December 14, 2018 at 3:26 pm
His wrongness rises almost to the level of genius: he is the Einstein of wrong predictions, the Machiavelli of outrageous proposals ("regime change in China"), the Napoleon of unnecessary wars.

I laughed out loud at this. Well done.

MikeS , says: December 14, 2018 at 3:35 pm
No sorrow here. I can't forget their cheerleading for stupid neocon wars in which so many died, or the nasty things they said about such men as Buchanan who favored a more sensible foreign policy.
Augustine , says: December 14, 2018 at 3:39 pm
Good riddance! The vile warmongers at Weekly Standard and the National Review give conservatives a bad name and justifiably so.
Polichinello , says: December 14, 2018 at 3:53 pm
Nah, bro. I remember these jackasses screaming for an American Empire. How many people did they help kill with their braying for war? They pushed failed, murderous policies and showed little to no regard for the people they would use as cannon fodder.

Bear in mind this, all you liberals looking for "good conservatives", as Tucker Carlson noted, the Kristols, the Boots and others only really turned against Trump when he accused Bush of lying us into war in the GOP debates. That's what turned them off: the possibility that he wouldn't keep the guns blazing.

Now they're out of a job? Gosh, too bad. I guess they should learn how to code. Maybe they need to rent a U-Haul and leave town.

Sands , says: December 14, 2018 at 4:14 pm
If this is a sign that neoconservatives are losing influence, I say it's a good thing. I remember when WS first started publishing during the '96 presidential campaign and it going all out for Steve Forbes. Flat-taxes, shining city on a hill, come one come all immigration policy, beacon of light to the rest of the world, blah, blah, blah. While they were obsessing about taxes and attempting to democratize the rest of the world, our culture was quickly advancing to the bottom.
John , says: December 14, 2018 at 5:26 pm
These are the guys who are totally cool with $40k a year factory jobs going to Mexico -- that's creative destruction -- but act as if it's some kind of crisis when they lose their $200k editing job.

I'm sure there are some good people there, and I feel bad for families, but Kristol, Podhoretz and Hayes can go to hell.

[NFR: "$200K editing job." If only! -- RD]

[Dec 15, 2018] Weekly Standard, RIP

From comments: "Bill Kristol is possibly the single most delusional figure in our public life. His wrongness rises almost to the level of genius: he is the Einstein of wrong predictions, the Machiavelli of outrageous proposals ("regime change in China"), the Napoleon of unnecessary wars. Why anyone takes him seriously, except as an example of what *not* to do, is a mystery." Unfortunately, this does nothing to diminish the influence of neoconservative foreign policy – those writers will keep propagandizing from the Washington Free Beacon, Washington Examiner, Commentary, National Review, etc
Notable quotes:
"... Weekly Standard ..."
"... openly despising your potential customers is never a successful business strategy. ..."
"... Stephen Hayes called Rand Paul a Russian Stooge because he didn't want a confrontational policy. This is typical of the stuff they printed. They were not interested in any sort of serious debate. They were interested in shouting down opposition to their Invade the world, Invite the world, In hoc to the world policy. ..."
"... Boo-hoo Sorry if I'm more saddened for a lot of brave men and women in uniform senselessly losing their lives over some chickenhawk writers having to find a new job on the DC cocktail circuit because they can't work for the smug, elitists ideologues anymore who used their worthless "Standard" to inspire one of the dumbest foreign policy disasters in American history ..."
Dec 15, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

The Weekly Standard is no more. Its parent company is shutting the magazine down after 23 years. It is hard to imagine that the magazine that was the home to such greats such as Andrew Ferguson, Matt Labash, and Christopher Caldwell no longer exists. Those are the times in which we live.

That's quite a "Merry Christmas" from owner Philip Anschutz, a conservative Evangelical worth over $10 billion.

Kronsteen1963 December 14, 2018 at 5:30 pm

Good riddance. The Weekly Standard peddles a brand of conservatism that has been largely repudiated by the Republican Party's rank and fle. Rather than accept reality, self-assess, take stock, and possibly change the WS doubled down on neoconservatism in a particularly arrogant and insulting way. Gary (above) is absolutely correct – openly despising your potential customers is never a successful business strategy.

Oh, yeah – Kristol wants to run for President in 2020. And this guy thinks Trump is delusional!

Polichinello , says: December 14, 2018 at 6:21 pm
No sorrow here. I can't forget their cheerleading for stupid neocon wars in which so many died, or the nasty things they said about such men as Buchanan who favored a more sensible foreign policy.

Stephen Hayes called Rand Paul a Russian Stooge because he didn't want a confrontational policy. This is typical of the stuff they printed. They were not interested in any sort of serious debate. They were interested in shouting down opposition to their Invade the world, Invite the world, In hoc to the world policy.

Why should I mourn this jingoist publication's demise? It's not very often you see justice apportioned in this world, but here it is, even if too little and too late.

No, this should be celebrated. The only thing that would make this better is seeing them walked out of the building with boxes full of personal effects in hand, as security makes sure they don't steal any office supplies.

George , says: December 14, 2018 at 9:26 pm
Boo-hoo Sorry if I'm more saddened for a lot of brave men and women in uniform senselessly losing their lives over some chickenhawk writers having to find a new job on the DC cocktail circuit because they can't work for the smug, elitists ideologues anymore who used their worthless "Standard" to inspire one of the dumbest foreign policy disasters in American history . They also used their rag to trash any conservatives who disagreed with their call for endless wars as weak Neville Chamberlins reincarnated or un-American agents of Putin. I feel nothing but contempt for them all. Their names will live on in infamy as a scourge to our sadly dying republic.
TR , says: December 14, 2018 at 9:51 pm
Polichinello knows how to pile it on: "Let them learn to code." Priceless.

However, RD is right. The loss of any publication is painful. My pain actually began when the mechanical workers–printers, engravers, stereotypers, etc. were done in by progress. And now I get to see friends at the former St. Pete Times get the axe.

Seraphim , says: December 14, 2018 at 9:59 pm
I disagreed with their neocon imperialism, of course, but this article is well worth preserving somehow:

https://www.weeklystandard.com/robert-messenger/theirs-but-to-do-and-die

jonas , says: December 14, 2018 at 10:09 pm
Besides supporting that nation destroying (US and Iraq war) and being an Israel Firster, Mr. Dreher, here's a 2010 ad Bill Kristol and Liz Cheney producing, implying that Obama DOJ lawyers who represented GITMO detainees were terrorists. They called them the "Al Qaeda 7"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=31&v=ZIxg7LmlEQg

Heckuva guy that Bill Kristol dry sense of humor and wit! Bill Buckley but for MSNBC!

Noah172 , says: December 14, 2018 at 11:03 pm
Nick wrote:

It's funny that Bill Kristol is now persona non grata in the conservative movement, considering he really is just a standard issue Republican. There's no difference between him and Scott Walker and the Koch Brothers

I read (can't say 100%) that the Kochs opposed the Iraq War. They're not much for overseas crusading, although they agree with neocons on immigration, trade, and caving to PC.

Walker talked a little about immigration restriction during his brief presidential campaign, one of the reasons his donor money dried up.

Trump has reoriented the party on its immigration, trade, and foreign policy stances, and Kristol isn't a God-guns-gays culture warrior, so, yeah, makes sense he would drift away (aside from his personality).

Bankotsu , says: December 15, 2018 at 1:37 am
Fancy this neo con rag finally dies off. lol.

Good riddance to total and complete garbage.

Kronsteen1963 , says: December 15, 2018 at 2:20 pm
Noah172
December 14, 2018 at 11:13 pm
This is not the demise I would have wanted for the WS. I would have preferred its writers be fired and replaced with immigrants of color. That would have been delicious.

******************************************************
Yes! Use H1B visas to replace the WS staff with foreign workers at a far lower salary, and force the staff to train them before they're let go.

It is extremely hypocritical for guys like Podhoretz to Moanin and complain about the way the magazine was cancelled. He admits that it never made money but thinks some multi-billionaire should continue to keep it afloat anyway. Talk about corporate welfare! These guys advocated an extreme form of globalism that resulted in American jobs being shipped overseas and economic hardship for millions of Americans, all in the name of profitability. Why should the WS being any different?

To Kristol, Podhoretz, Hayes, etc: Tough luck – that's the way it goes. The marketplace decided and you couldn't cut it. Why aren't you cheering cheering that decision? Don't the rules apply to you too? I guess it's different when the shoe is on the other foot.

about:blank

Greg , says: December 15, 2018 at 4:34 pm
George you nailed it. There's a special place in hell for people like the editors of the weekly standard – I believe that wholeheartedly and not metaphorically.
Jonah R. , says: December 15, 2018 at 5:10 pm
What's weird to me is to see everyone decrying Kristol and his Weekly Standard colleagues as "the Establishment." If that were still the case, the Standard would still be flying and Kristol would be cruising. But no, Kristol and the neocons are now old news; has-beens; last month's cold cuts.

Thus must I say to Trump and his fans: Congrats! You are now the GOP Establishment. Have fun being able to please nobody. Have fun disappointing everybody. Have fun being held accountable for bad policy decisions and the fate of a major political party. This is the power, leadership, and influence you wanted, so you got it. We'll soon find out if history remembers you less fondly than Bill Kristol.

Each passing year just raises the probability that Trump, being a U.S. president, will launch a foolish war. When he does, and when you have to contort yourselves like circus freaks to justify it, some of us are going to be quite amused.

[Dec 15, 2018] Robert Kagan s Jungle Book of Forever War

One problem with this fat warmonger (and his wife Victoria Nuland) is that nether he not his children were ever forced to take M16 and fight for the policies he promotes. In other words he is a typical chickenhawk, a lobbyist of MIC on good salary. In some way this fat pig bellicosity is aside effect of abolishing universal draft. He also probably was not a fighter and never was severely beaten by super fighters in school or university. A typical nice Jewish kid.
Attempt to build global neoliberal empire reserving for the USA dominant position ("Full spectrum dominance") cost dear to the common Americans and now it is clear that this initiative of neocons and their paymasters (financial oligarchy and military industrial complex -- the neoliberal elite in other words) failed.
Kagan might be a talented propagandist of "full spectrum dominance" neoconservative policies, but it is important to understand that intellectually he is a lightweight: he believes his own propaganda.
From comments: "When one sees Pompeo's lips move about a new American world order, it is Kagan talking with his neo con war mongering."
Notable quotes:
"... Call a spade a spade: This guy has been part of and feeding the political class with the arguments to continue performing the 'Crime of Aggression' and doing that as part of preserving US primacy doesn't excuse him from the 'Crime of Aggression' part of the ICC mandate. Most of those guys are very much aware of that as demonstrated by Bolton's attack on the ICC. ..."
"... The Obama administration's point person for the overthrow of an elected government in Ukraine was Victoria Nuland, Kagan's wife. Even as the administration's duplicity was intercepted by the recording of her discussing who the U.S. would install as the new leaders, it would be interesting to hear the pillow talk of these two. ..."
"... The theory they embrace is that of an American New World Order, and a bipartisan practice of economic and military Full Spectrum Dominance of the planet to enforce that hegemony against the democratic aspirations of others – and to maintain support domestically for it, necessarily against democratic accountability for war to the American people. ..."
"... "the willingness to apply that power, with all the pain and the suffering, the uncertainties and the errors, the failures and follies, the immorality and brutality, the lost lives and the lost treasure." One can feel his depraved, almost prurient, excitement at the wretchedness he would inflict. ..."
"... Skip the geopolitical arguments. What I see in the photo is an obviously well-fed desk jockey from the Swamp exhorting us to waste yet more blood and treasure on his grandiose political vision. ..."
"... Göring: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. ..."
"... warmongers are opportunists, and democrats are as supportive of war efforts as GOP. This guy is a traitor of the people of this country, period. ..."
"... One should understand that committing to trillions of dollars in military spending each decade pretty much eliminates any possibility of true liberalism spreading. ..."
"... When one sees pompeo's lips move about a new American world order, it is kagan talking with his neo con war mongering. ..."
Dec 15, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Today, Kagan is an influential scholar at the Brookings Institution, a columnist at The Washington Post , and a member of the U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Policy Board. Despite being known as a neoconservative, his appeal spans party and ideological divides. Indeed, Kagan's 2016 support for Hillary Clinton showed his willingness to cross these divides himself in terms of electoral loyalties.

As a writer and public intellectual, Kagan has skillfully crafted historical narratives and strategic assessments supporting his overarching neoconservative vision for U.S. foreign policy. His 1996 Foreign Affairs article with Bill Kristol, " Toward a Neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy ," still resonates today as a concise hallmark statement of that approach to America's role in the world. With a long list of prominent books and articles following in that vein, it is little wonder that Andrew Bacevich called him "the chief foreign policy theorist of the neoconservative movement."

Kagan's newest book, The Jungle Grows Back: America and Our Imperiled World , fits nicely into his corpus. It is a spirited defense of the "American-led liberal world order" by one of its most cogent and articulate advocates. It is part curated history, part philippic for his preferred strategic vision for the United States. In this small volume, Kagan argues that the enlightened order America created after World War II has allowed for much progress in the world. But this order is not natural, and its great benefits have been "made possible by the protection afforded liberalism within the geographical and geopolitical space created by American power." To Kagan, this liberal order is "fragile and impermanent," requiring constant care by its architect and beneficiary, the United States. He sees the liberal order as being "like a garden, artificial and forever threatened by the forces of nature." Thus "preserving it requires a persistent, unending struggle against the vines and weeds that are constantly working to undermine it from within and overwhelm it from without." Otherwise, the jungle will "grow back and engulf us all."

The problem with the book is its reliance on some questionable historical and contemporary assessments, not to mention that it fails to really make the case for the necessity and desirability of the liberal order in today's world.

Kagan begins The Jungle Grows Back by noting that the last 70 years of peace, prosperity, and the expansion of democracy and respect for individual rights have been an exception to the historical norm. Far from being the natural course or inevitable, this progress required something special and unique: that a liberal democratic country like the United States, with so many geopolitical and economic advantages, rose to international prominence after World War II. Not only that, but, as Kagan argues, American leaders were willing to use their great power at this special moment in history to act differently and to create a new and unique world order.

Rather than merely defend its narrow national interests, the United States created a liberal international order that it would take responsibility for upholding and protecting. Kagan argues that this approach wasn't, as some might argue, directed at the Soviet Union or anyone else in particular (though he admits the rise of the Soviet threat made it easier for Americans to accept it even as the strategy became more difficult to implement). Instead, "its chief purpose was to prevent a return to the economic, political, and strategic circumstances that had given rise to the last war." Thus, Kagan believes this internationalist approach was rooted in a realism about the nature of geopolitics in the 20th century and a realization that the world was a jungle that required "meeting power with greater power." American leaders had learned from World War II that they had to adopt a new approach to the world, one that created, in Dean Acheson's words, "an environment for freedom." To do otherwise would be to let disorder reign or for others to order the international system to the detriment of American interests and values.

JR December 14, 2018 at 12:35 am

Call a spade a spade: This guy has been part of and feeding the political class with the arguments to continue performing the 'Crime of Aggression' and doing that as part of preserving US primacy doesn't excuse him from the 'Crime of Aggression' part of the ICC mandate. Most of those guys are very much aware of that as demonstrated by Bolton's attack on the ICC.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/what-is-john-boltons-bully-pulpit-attack-on-the-international-criminal-court-really-about

Fran Macadam , says: December 14, 2018 at 1:59 am
"Despite being known as a neoconservative, his appeal spans party and ideological divides. Indeed, Kagan's 2016 support for Hillary Clinton showed his willingness to cross these divides himself in terms of electoral loyalties."

The Obama administration's point person for the overthrow of an elected government in Ukraine was Victoria Nuland, Kagan's wife. Even as the administration's duplicity was intercepted by the recording of her discussing who the U.S. would install as the new leaders, it would be interesting to hear the pillow talk of these two.

The theory they embrace is that of an American New World Order, and a bipartisan practice of economic and military Full Spectrum Dominance of the planet to enforce that hegemony against the democratic aspirations of others – and to maintain support domestically for it, necessarily against democratic accountability for war to the American people.

Given that the liberal cultural order in the Homeland is so quickly degrading, the imposition of it internationally is likely to become increasingly infected by poor judgment as well as resistance to it increasing.

It used to be in popular entertainment that the villains were interested in ruling the world, madmen with megalomania. That enemy is now within.

Daniel Good , says: December 14, 2018 at 5:55 am
"the willingness to apply that power, with all the pain and the suffering, the uncertainties and the errors, the failures and follies, the immorality and brutality, the lost lives and the lost treasure." One can feel his depraved, almost prurient, excitement at the wretchedness he would inflict.
Lawrence Coleman , says: December 14, 2018 at 6:23 am
Skip the geopolitical arguments. What I see in the photo is an obviously well-fed desk jockey from the Swamp exhorting us to waste yet more blood and treasure on his grandiose political vision.
Sid Finster , says: December 14, 2018 at 11:23 am
"Göring: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.

Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.

Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

In an interview with Gilbert in Göring's jail cell during the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials (18 April 1946)

david , says: December 14, 2018 at 12:28 pm
"Indeed, Kagan's 2016 support for Hillary Clinton showed his willingness to cross these divides himself in terms of electoral loyalties."

It is probably due to the fact that most people at that time thought Clinton was going to win. So his support for Clinton proved 2 things: warmongers are opportunists, and democrats are as supportive of war efforts as GOP. This guy is a traitor of the people of this country, period.

balconesfault , says: December 14, 2018 at 12:59 pm
One should understand that committing to trillions of dollars in military spending each decade pretty much eliminates any possibility of true liberalism spreading.
balconesfault , says: December 14, 2018 at 1:01 pm
@Wayne

"The same containment strategy appears to be what the Iraq War was about: contain the Iranian Muslim Revolution from not spilling over from Iraq into US ally nations: "

Had there never been an Iraq War – Muslim revolution could never have spilled over from Iraq to any other nations – because Saddam wasn't going to allow any Muslim revolution from happening within his borders.

WorkingClass , says: December 14, 2018 at 1:08 pm
..to his emergence in the post-Cold War era as arguably the leading intellectual advocate for a foreign policy of "benevolent global hegemony" -- what scholars call "primacy."

An "intellectual" war monger? A "benevolent" Imperialist? ...

S , says: December 14, 2018 at 3:39 pm
Wayne Lusvardi,

"The same containment strategy appears to be what the Iraq War was about: contain the Iranian Muslim Revolution from not spilling over from Iraq into US ally nations: Saudi, UAE, Qatar, Egypt, Jordan. Afghanistan is just another buffer country to fight the Iranian stealth war."

I presume that history started in 2003 and that you have never heard of Saddam Hussein (the guy who fought a long war with Iran aided by the US) or the Sunni Taliban who ruled Afghanistan and were opposed to Shia Iran. Except for the fraud and deceit done by the neocon controlled US regime of the time, these illegal wars would not have been possible. Pick up some real history books for a change. Don't learn about the Soviet Union from the Pravda.

Taras 77 , says: December 14, 2018 at 5:01 pm
When one sees pompeo's lips move about a new American world order, it is kagan talking with his neo con war mongering.

[Dec 14, 2018] Neoliberalism has spawned a financial elite who hold governments to ransom by Deborah Orr

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The crash was a write-off, not a repair job. The response should be a wholesale reevaluation of the way in which wealth is created and distributed around the globe ..."
"... The IMF also admits that it "underestimated" the effect austerity would have on Greece. Obviously, the rest of the Troika takes no issue with that. Even those who substitute "kick up the arse to all the lazy scroungers" whenever they encounter the word "austerity", have cottoned on to the fact that the word can only be intoned with facial features locked into a suitably tragic mask. ..."
"... Yet, mealy-mouthed and hotly contested as this minor mea culpa is, it's still a sign that financial institutions may slowly be coming round to the idea that they are the problem. ..."
"... Markets cannot be free. Markets have to be nurtured. They have to be invested in. Markets have to be grown. Google, Amazon and Apple haven't taught anyone in this country to read. But even though an illiterate market wouldn't be so great for them, they avoid their taxes, because they can, because they are more powerful than governments. ..."
"... The neoliberalism that the IMF still preaches pays no account to any of this. It insists that the provision of work alone is enough of an invisible hand to sustain a market. Yet even Adam Smith, the economist who came up with that theory , did not agree that economic activity alone was enough to keep humans decent and civilised. ..."
"... Governments are left with the bill when neoliberals demand access to markets that they refuse to invest in making. Their refusal allows them to rail against the Big State while producing the conditions that make it necessary. ..."
Jun 08, 2013 | www.theguardian.com

The crash was a write-off, not a repair job. The response should be a wholesale reevaluation of the way in which wealth is created and distributed around the globe

Sat 8 Jun 2013 02.59 EDT First published on Sat 8 Jun 2013 02.59 EDT

The IMF's limited admission of guilt over the Greek bailout is a start, but they still can't see the global financial system's fundamental flaws, writes Deborah Orr. Photograph: Boris Roessler/DPA FILE T he International Monetary Fund has admitted that some of the decisions it made in the wake of the 2007-2008 financial crisis were wrong, and that the €130bn first bailout of Greece was "bungled". Well, yes. If it hadn't been a mistake, then it would have been the only bailout and everyone in Greece would have lived happily ever after.

Actually, the IMF hasn't quite admitted that it messed things up. It has said instead that it went along with its partners in "the Troika" – the European Commission and the European Central Bank – when it shouldn't have. The EC and the ECB, says the IMF, put the interests of the eurozone before the interests of Greece. The EC and the ECB, in turn, clutch their pearls and splutter with horror that they could be accused of something so petty as self-preservation.

The IMF also admits that it "underestimated" the effect austerity would have on Greece. Obviously, the rest of the Troika takes no issue with that. Even those who substitute "kick up the arse to all the lazy scroungers" whenever they encounter the word "austerity", have cottoned on to the fact that the word can only be intoned with facial features locked into a suitably tragic mask.

Yet, mealy-mouthed and hotly contested as this minor mea culpa is, it's still a sign that financial institutions may slowly be coming round to the idea that they are the problem. They know the crash was a debt-bubble that burst. What they don't seem to acknowledge is that the merry days of reckless lending are never going to return; even if they do, the same thing will happen again, but more quickly and more savagely. The thing is this: the crash was a write-off, not a repair job. The response from the start should have been a wholesale reevaluation of the way in which wealth is created and distributed around the globe, a "structural adjustment", as the philosopher John Gray has said all along.

The IMF exists to lend money to governments, so it's comic that it wags its finger at governments that run up debt. And, of course, its loans famously come with strings attached: adopt a free-market economy, or strengthen the one you have, kissing goodbye to the Big State. Yet, the irony is painful. Neoliberal ideology insists that states are too big and cumbersome, too centralised and faceless, to be efficient and responsive. I agree. The problem is that the ruthless sentimentalists of neoliberalism like to tell themselves – and anyone else who will listen – that removing the dead hand of state control frees the individual citizen to be entrepreneurial and productive. Instead, it places the financially powerful beyond any state, in an international elite that makes its own rules, and holds governments to ransom. That's what the financial crisis was all about. The ransom was paid, and as a result, governments have been obliged to limit their activities yet further – some setting about the task with greater relish than others. Now the task, supposedly, is to get the free market up and running again.

But the basic problem is this: it costs a lot of money to cultivate a market – a group of consumers – and the more sophisticated the market is, the more expensive it is to cultivate them. A developed market needs to be populated with educated, healthy, cultured, law-abiding and financially secure people – people who expect to be well paid themselves, having been brought up believing in material aspiration, as consumers need to be.

So why, exactly, given the huge amount of investment needed to create such a market, should access to it then be "free"? The neoliberal idea is that the cultivation itself should be conducted privately as well. They see "austerity" as a way of forcing that agenda. But how can the privatisation of societal welfare possibly happen when unemployment is already high, working people are turning to food banks to survive and the debt industry, far from being sorry that it brought the global economy to its knees, is snapping up bargains in the form of busted high-street businesses to establish shops with nothing to sell but high-interest debt? Why, you have to ask yourself, is this vast implausibility, this sheer unsustainability, not blindingly obvious to all?

Markets cannot be free. Markets have to be nurtured. They have to be invested in. Markets have to be grown. Google, Amazon and Apple haven't taught anyone in this country to read. But even though an illiterate market wouldn't be so great for them, they avoid their taxes, because they can, because they are more powerful than governments.

And further, those who invest in these companies, and insist that taxes should be low to encourage private profit and shareholder value, then lend governments the money they need to create these populations of sophisticated producers and consumers, berating them for their profligacy as they do so. It's all utterly, completely, crazy.

The other day a health minister, Anna Soubry , suggested that female GPs who worked part-time so that they could bring up families were putting the NHS under strain. The compartmentalised thinking is quite breathtaking. What on earth does she imagine? That it would be better for the economy if they all left school at 16? On the contrary, the more people who are earning good money while working part-time – thus having the leisure to consume – the better. No doubt these female GPs are sustaining both the pharmaceutical industry and the arts and media, both sectors that Britain does well in.

As for their prioritising of family life over career – that's just another of the myriad ways in which Conservative neoliberalism is entirely without logic. Its prophets and its disciples will happily – ecstatically – tell you that there's nothing more important than family, unless you're a family doctor spending some of your time caring for your own. You couldn't make these characters up. It is certainly true that women with children find it more easy to find part-time employment in the public sector. But that's a prima facie example of how unresponsive the private sector is to human and societal need, not – as it is so often presented – evidence that the public sector is congenitally disabled.

Much of the healthy economic growth – as opposed to the smoke and mirrors of many aspects of financial services – that Britain enjoyed during the second half of the 20th century was due to women swelling the educated workforce. Soubry and her ilk, above all else, forget that people have multiple roles, as consumers, as producers, as citizens and as family members. All of those things have to be nurtured and invested in to make a market.

The neoliberalism that the IMF still preaches pays no account to any of this. It insists that the provision of work alone is enough of an invisible hand to sustain a market. Yet even Adam Smith, the economist who came up with that theory , did not agree that economic activity alone was enough to keep humans decent and civilised.

Governments are left with the bill when neoliberals demand access to markets that they refuse to invest in making. Their refusal allows them to rail against the Big State while producing the conditions that make it necessary. And even as the results of their folly become ever more plain to see, they are grudging in their admittance of the slightest blame, bickering with their allies instead of waking up, smelling the coffee and realizing that far too much of it is sold through Starbucks.

[Dec 14, 2018] Neoliberalism has spawned a financial elite who hold governments to ransom by Deborah Orr

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The crash was a write-off, not a repair job. The response should be a wholesale reevaluation of the way in which wealth is created and distributed around the globe ..."
"... The IMF also admits that it "underestimated" the effect austerity would have on Greece. Obviously, the rest of the Troika takes no issue with that. Even those who substitute "kick up the arse to all the lazy scroungers" whenever they encounter the word "austerity", have cottoned on to the fact that the word can only be intoned with facial features locked into a suitably tragic mask. ..."
"... Yet, mealy-mouthed and hotly contested as this minor mea culpa is, it's still a sign that financial institutions may slowly be coming round to the idea that they are the problem. ..."
"... Markets cannot be free. Markets have to be nurtured. They have to be invested in. Markets have to be grown. Google, Amazon and Apple haven't taught anyone in this country to read. But even though an illiterate market wouldn't be so great for them, they avoid their taxes, because they can, because they are more powerful than governments. ..."
"... The neoliberalism that the IMF still preaches pays no account to any of this. It insists that the provision of work alone is enough of an invisible hand to sustain a market. Yet even Adam Smith, the economist who came up with that theory , did not agree that economic activity alone was enough to keep humans decent and civilised. ..."
"... Governments are left with the bill when neoliberals demand access to markets that they refuse to invest in making. Their refusal allows them to rail against the Big State while producing the conditions that make it necessary. ..."
Jun 08, 2013 | www.theguardian.com

The crash was a write-off, not a repair job. The response should be a wholesale reevaluation of the way in which wealth is created and distributed around the globe

Sat 8 Jun 2013 02.59 EDT First published on Sat 8 Jun 2013 02.59 EDT

The IMF's limited admission of guilt over the Greek bailout is a start, but they still can't see the global financial system's fundamental flaws, writes Deborah Orr. Photograph: Boris Roessler/DPA FILE T he International Monetary Fund has admitted that some of the decisions it made in the wake of the 2007-2008 financial crisis were wrong, and that the €130bn first bailout of Greece was "bungled". Well, yes. If it hadn't been a mistake, then it would have been the only bailout and everyone in Greece would have lived happily ever after.

Actually, the IMF hasn't quite admitted that it messed things up. It has said instead that it went along with its partners in "the Troika" – the European Commission and the European Central Bank – when it shouldn't have. The EC and the ECB, says the IMF, put the interests of the eurozone before the interests of Greece. The EC and the ECB, in turn, clutch their pearls and splutter with horror that they could be accused of something so petty as self-preservation.

The IMF also admits that it "underestimated" the effect austerity would have on Greece. Obviously, the rest of the Troika takes no issue with that. Even those who substitute "kick up the arse to all the lazy scroungers" whenever they encounter the word "austerity", have cottoned on to the fact that the word can only be intoned with facial features locked into a suitably tragic mask.

Yet, mealy-mouthed and hotly contested as this minor mea culpa is, it's still a sign that financial institutions may slowly be coming round to the idea that they are the problem. They know the crash was a debt-bubble that burst. What they don't seem to acknowledge is that the merry days of reckless lending are never going to return; even if they do, the same thing will happen again, but more quickly and more savagely. The thing is this: the crash was a write-off, not a repair job. The response from the start should have been a wholesale reevaluation of the way in which wealth is created and distributed around the globe, a "structural adjustment", as the philosopher John Gray has said all along.

The IMF exists to lend money to governments, so it's comic that it wags its finger at governments that run up debt. And, of course, its loans famously come with strings attached: adopt a free-market economy, or strengthen the one you have, kissing goodbye to the Big State. Yet, the irony is painful. Neoliberal ideology insists that states are too big and cumbersome, too centralised and faceless, to be efficient and responsive. I agree. The problem is that the ruthless sentimentalists of neoliberalism like to tell themselves – and anyone else who will listen – that removing the dead hand of state control frees the individual citizen to be entrepreneurial and productive. Instead, it places the financially powerful beyond any state, in an international elite that makes its own rules, and holds governments to ransom. That's what the financial crisis was all about. The ransom was paid, and as a result, governments have been obliged to limit their activities yet further – some setting about the task with greater relish than others. Now the task, supposedly, is to get the free market up and running again.

But the basic problem is this: it costs a lot of money to cultivate a market – a group of consumers – and the more sophisticated the market is, the more expensive it is to cultivate them. A developed market needs to be populated with educated, healthy, cultured, law-abiding and financially secure people – people who expect to be well paid themselves, having been brought up believing in material aspiration, as consumers need to be.

So why, exactly, given the huge amount of investment needed to create such a market, should access to it then be "free"? The neoliberal idea is that the cultivation itself should be conducted privately as well. They see "austerity" as a way of forcing that agenda. But how can the privatisation of societal welfare possibly happen when unemployment is already high, working people are turning to food banks to survive and the debt industry, far from being sorry that it brought the global economy to its knees, is snapping up bargains in the form of busted high-street businesses to establish shops with nothing to sell but high-interest debt? Why, you have to ask yourself, is this vast implausibility, this sheer unsustainability, not blindingly obvious to all?

Markets cannot be free. Markets have to be nurtured. They have to be invested in. Markets have to be grown. Google, Amazon and Apple haven't taught anyone in this country to read. But even though an illiterate market wouldn't be so great for them, they avoid their taxes, because they can, because they are more powerful than governments.

And further, those who invest in these companies, and insist that taxes should be low to encourage private profit and shareholder value, then lend governments the money they need to create these populations of sophisticated producers and consumers, berating them for their profligacy as they do so. It's all utterly, completely, crazy.

The other day a health minister, Anna Soubry , suggested that female GPs who worked part-time so that they could bring up families were putting the NHS under strain. The compartmentalised thinking is quite breathtaking. What on earth does she imagine? That it would be better for the economy if they all left school at 16? On the contrary, the more people who are earning good money while working part-time – thus having the leisure to consume – the better. No doubt these female GPs are sustaining both the pharmaceutical industry and the arts and media, both sectors that Britain does well in.

As for their prioritising of family life over career – that's just another of the myriad ways in which Conservative neoliberalism is entirely without logic. Its prophets and its disciples will happily – ecstatically – tell you that there's nothing more important than family, unless you're a family doctor spending some of your time caring for your own. You couldn't make these characters up. It is certainly true that women with children find it more easy to find part-time employment in the public sector. But that's a prima facie example of how unresponsive the private sector is to human and societal need, not – as it is so often presented – evidence that the public sector is congenitally disabled.

Much of the healthy economic growth – as opposed to the smoke and mirrors of many aspects of financial services – that Britain enjoyed during the second half of the 20th century was due to women swelling the educated workforce. Soubry and her ilk, above all else, forget that people have multiple roles, as consumers, as producers, as citizens and as family members. All of those things have to be nurtured and invested in to make a market.

The neoliberalism that the IMF still preaches pays no account to any of this. It insists that the provision of work alone is enough of an invisible hand to sustain a market. Yet even Adam Smith, the economist who came up with that theory , did not agree that economic activity alone was enough to keep humans decent and civilised.

Governments are left with the bill when neoliberals demand access to markets that they refuse to invest in making. Their refusal allows them to rail against the Big State while producing the conditions that make it necessary. And even as the results of their folly become ever more plain to see, they are grudging in their admittance of the slightest blame, bickering with their allies instead of waking up, smelling the coffee and realizing that far too much of it is sold through Starbucks.

[Dec 14, 2018] Hackers reveal British government s interference in Spanish politics by Alejandro López

Dec 06, 2018 | www.wsws.org

Documents leaked by internet hackers of Anonymous reveal how a supposedly independent think-tank based in the UK is a government funded and controlled operation of misinformation and fake news.

At the same time that the Western powers were accusing Russia of interference in democracy, the UK government and its intelligence services MI5 and MI6 were busily preventing the nomination of a Spanish official to Director of National Security, one of Spain's top advisory roles.

Details of the operation carried out by the Integrity Initiative (II), a project launched in 2015 by the Institute of Statecraft, have been published by the web site CyberGuerilla.org. It is a trove of documents allegedly hacked from II, showing carefully worked out campaigns, costs and internal guidelines, as well as names of individuals cooperating with the network.

Anonymous shows that the network:

1. Is mainly funded by the UK government through the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO).

2. Cost Ł1,961,000 ($2.5 million) this year.

3. Has received Ł168,000 in funding from HQ NATO Public Diplomacy and Ł250,000 from the US State Department.

4. Is controlled by figures in the UK who manipulate "clusters" of politicians, high-ranking military officials, academics and journalists.

5. Clusters are said to operate in Spain, France, Germany, Italy, Greece, the Netherlands, Lithuania, Norway, Serbia, and Montenegro.

6. Its activities are carried under absolute secrecy via named intelligence services operatives in British embassies.

The Integrity Initiative poses as "Defending Democracy against Misinformation," but does exactly the opposite, spreading fake news against Russia in order to defend the national interests of the UK and its imperialist allies, influence Russian speakers in Europe and North America and "change attitudes in Russia itself".

An example of II's activities was the operation launched last June against the nomination of Army reserve colonel Pedro Bańos as Spain's Director of National Security. Attached to La Moncloa, the official residence and workplace of the prime minister of Spain, the director's role is to advise the PM on existing and potential threats to the country and possible responses.

II's operation started after it was warned that the new Socialist Party (PSOE) government under Pedro Sánchez, which had just been elected in parliament through a no confidence vote, was considering Bańos and was about to confirm his appointment on June 7, 2018.

Immediately, newspapers like El Mundo and El País published articles accusing Bańos of "sympathy for Russia." Proof of this for El País was his "regular presence" on Russia Today and Sputnik , media outlets funded by the Putin government. Further "evidence" was his tweet in response to a survey showing a domestic popularity rating of 74 percent for Russian President Vladimir Putin: "Wouldn't we love to have a political leader half as popular right here in the European Union!!!"

Bańos was also quoted as saying, "Which country has everything that we lack? Russia does. We will not gain anything by provoking Russia. So Russia wants to have its own sphere of influence? Of course it does, just like the United States or China do. It also wants to have its markets and like-minded countries nearby."

Numerous articles also put in doubt Bańos' sanity for his participation in the popular offbeat TV show Cuarto Milenio that often investigates topics such as conspiracy theories, ufology and parapsychology.

Bańos reflects a minority realpolitik opinion within the Spanish ruling class which opposes provocative military actions and sanctions against Russia. He sees the need to defend Spain's imperialist interests through a European army and closer relations with Russia -- positions also held by sections of the German and French ruling elite.

The UK-sponsored II, however, saw Bańos as a threat to British national interests and an obstacle to its anti-Russia campaign. According to the hacked documents, at midday on June 7, 2018, the Spanish Cluster, obviously through informants at the highest levels of the PSOE, "hear that a well-known pro-Kremlin voice, Pedro Bańos, is to be appointed at the weekend (09.06.2018) as the Director of the National Security Department (DSN), which works closely with the Spanish PM's office (La Moncloa) and is very influential in shaping policy."

An action plan is drawn up laying out how Institute of Statecraft Fellow and Spain Cluster leader Nicólas de Pedro will alert "the rest of the cluster members and prepare[s] a dossier to inform the main Spanish media. The cluster starts a Twitter campaign... trying to prevent an appointment."

Spanish Cluster members also include Borja Lasheras and Quique Badia-Masoni, writers and journalists well known for their hysterical anti-Russian positions. They are supported by II Team UK members Chris Hernon, Simon Bracey-Lane and Ben Robinson, and StopFake Spanish Desk members Alina Mosendz and Serbian Cluster member Jelena Milic.

At 15:45, "The head of the Spanish cluster urgently contacts the British cluster, which activates the II network in order to create international support for the Twitter campaign. The British Cluster creates a group in the WhatsApp messenger... to coordinate the reaction on Twitter, gets contacts on Twitter to spread concerns and encourage people to 'retweet' the material. He publishes material written by the head of the Spanish cluster Niko de Pedro on the Spanish version of the StopFake website, which is also 'retweeted' by key influential figures."

The Spanish cluster then sends material to El País and El Mundo to publish. On the same day, El País publishes, "Spanish PM taps Russia supporter for National Security Director."

The documents reveal that by 19:45, barely eight hours after the start of the operation, the "campaign [had] raised significant noise on Twitter Contacts in the Socialist Party confirmed that this information reached the Prime Minister. Some Spanish diplomats also expressed their concern. In the end, both the People's Party and the Civil Party (Ciudadanos) asked the Prime Minister to stop the appointment."

The following day, the government drops Bańos and nominates general Miguel Ángel Ballesteros instead.

The operation against Bańos is a graphic illustration of the inner workings of the intelligence services in collaboration with alleged "independent" journalists and academics. The same forces that accuse Russia of meddling in European nations' internal affairs are themselves meddling to stop elected governments from nominating officials when it conflicts with their interests. They use social media in the same way they accuse the Kremlin of using it.

By showing the real sources of information on which they rely, newspapers like El País or El Mundo are exposed as conduits of the intelligence services to support the suppression of maverick political viewpoints, in this case, Bańos' call for closer relations with Russia.

Last year, El País carried out a frenzied and paranoid campaign claiming that the Catalan crisis was not sparked by the Popular Party government's violent repression of the secessionists, but was the result of Moscow and its "fake news." It quoted experts and specialists working for Spanish think tanks like Instituto Elcano and Barcelona Centre for International Affairs (CIDOB), and the European Council on Foreign Relations.

The leaked documents show that many members of these think tanks are members of the "Spanish Cluster" of the Integrity Initiative. The most notorious is Senior Analyst for Instituto Elcano, Mira Milosevich-Juaristi who testified last year in parliament to claim that Russia was promoting fake news.

The Bańos case is just one of the highlighted campaigns of Integrity Initiative, but according to Anonymous, similar operations have been carried out in numerous other EU states.

[Dec 14, 2018] Whataboutism proclaim that each asserted truth stands on its own, and has no essential relation to any other past, present, or future asserted truth

Like the term "conspiracy theory "whataboutism" is a nasty and dirty propaganda trick. Truth can be understood only in historical context.
Notable quotes:
"... The detail of b's analysis that stands out to me as especially significant and brilliant is his demolition of the Guardian's reuse of the Merkel "quote." ..."
"... Related to the above, consider the nature of the recently christened thought-crime, "whataboutism." The crime may be defined as follows: ..."
"... "Whataboutism" is the attempt to understand a truth asserted by propaganda by way of relation to other truths it has asserted contemporaneous with or prior to this one. It is to ask, "What about this *other* truth? Does this *other* truth affect our understanding of *this* truth? And if so, how does it?" ..."
"... Whataboutism seems to proclaim that each asserted truth stands on its own, and has no essential relation to any other past, present, or future asserted truth. ..."
May 04, 2018 | moonofalabama.org
XXX | 12

The detail of b's analysis that stands out to me as especially significant and brilliant is his demolition of the Guardian's reuse of the Merkel "quote."

This one detail tells us so much about how propaganda works, and about how it can be defeated. Successful propaganda both depends upon and seeks to accelerate the erasure of historical memory. This is because its truths are always changing to suit the immediate needs of the state. None of its truths can be understood historically. b makes the connection between the documented but forgotten past "truth" of Merkel's quote and its present reincarnation in the Guardian, and this is really all he *needs* to do.

What b points out is something quite simple; yet the ability to do this very simple thing is becoming increasingly rare and its exercise increasingly difficult to achieve. It is for me the virtue that makes b's analysis uniquely indispensable.

Related to the above, consider the nature of the recently christened thought-crime, "whataboutism." The crime may be defined as follows:

"Whataboutism" is the attempt to understand a truth asserted by propaganda by way of relation to other truths it has asserted contemporaneous with or prior to this one. It is to ask, "What about this *other* truth? Does this *other* truth affect our understanding of *this* truth? And if so, how does it?"

Whataboutism seems to proclaim that each asserted truth stands on its own, and has no essential relation to any other past, present, or future asserted truth.

[Dec 14, 2018] Less Than Grand Strategy: Zbigniew Brzezinski s Cold War The Nation

The subtitle of this effusively admiring biography of Zbigniew Brzezinski, America's Grand Strategist, does not reflect its true purpose. A more accurate one might be this: "Just as Smart as the Other Guy." The other guy, of course, is Henry Kissinger. The implicit purpose of Justin Vaďsse's book is to argue that in his mastery of strategic thought and practice, Brzezinski ranks as Kissinger's equal.
Notable quotes:
"... That Brzezinski, who died last year at age 89, lived a life that deserves to be recounted and appraised is certainly the case. Born in Warsaw in 1928 to parents with ties to Polish nobility, Brzezinski had a peripatetic childhood. ..."
"... After graduating from McGill, Brzezinski set his sights on Harvard, which at the time was the very archetype of a "Cold War university." Senior faculty and young scholars on the make were volunteering to advise the national-security apparatus just then forming in Washington. For many of them, the Soviet threat appeared to eclipse all other questions and fields of inquiry. In this setting, Brzezinski flourished. Even before becoming an American citizen, he was thoroughly Americanized, imbued with the mind-set that prevailed in circles where members of the power elite mixed and mingled. Partially funded by the CIA, the Russian Research Center, Brzezinski's home at Harvard, was one of those places. ..."
"... From his time in Cambridge, he emerged committed, in his own words, to "nothing less than formulating a coherent strategy for the United States, so that we could eventually dismantle the Soviet bloc" and, not so incidentally, thereby liberate Poland. To this cause, the young Brzezinski devoted himself with single-minded energy. ..."
"... Convinced that the Soviet Union and the Soviet bloc were internally fragile, he believed that economic and cultural interaction with the West would ultimately lead to their collapse. The idea was to project strength without provoking confrontation, while patiently exerting indirect influence. ..."
"... This limited academic influence probably did not bother Zbig; he never saw himself as a mere scholar. He was a classic in-and-outer, rotating effortlessly from university campuses to political campaigns, and from government service to plummy think-tank billets. According to Vaďsse, Brzezinski never courted the media. Even so, he demonstrated a pronounced talent for getting himself in front of TV cameras, becoming a frequent guest on programs like Meet the ..."
"... Toward the end of his life, Brzezinski even had a Twitter account. His last tweet, from May 2017, both summarizes the essence of his worldview and expresses his dismay regarding the presidency of Donald Trump: "Sophisticated US leadership is the sine qua non of a stable world order. However, we lack the former while the latter is getting worse." ..."
"... Although not an ideologue, Brzezinski was a liberal Democrat of a consistently hawkish persuasion. Committed to social justice at home, he was also committed to toughness abroad. In the 1960s, he supported US intervention in Vietnam, treated the domino theory as self-evidently true, and argued that, with American credibility on the line, the United States had no alternative but to continue prosecuting the war. Even after the war ended, Vaďsse writes, Brzezinski "did not view Vietnam as a mistake." ..."
"... Yet Vietnam did nudge Brzezinski to reconsider some of his own assumptions. In the early 1970s, with an eye toward forging a new foreign policy that might take into account some of the trauma caused by Vietnam, he organized the Trilateral Commission. Apart from expending copious amounts of Rockefeller money, the organization produced little of substance. For Brzezinski, however, it proved a smashing success. It was there that he became acquainted with Jimmy Carter, a Georgia governor then contemplating a run for the presidency in 1976. ..."
"... When Carter won, he rewarded Brzezinski by appointing him national-security adviser, the job that had vaulted Kissinger to the upper ranks of global celebrity. ..."
"... Because of Brzezinski's limited influence on foreign policy after Carter, Vaďsse's case for installing him in the pantheon of master strategists therefore rests on the claim that on matters related to foreign policy, the Carter presidency was something less than a bust. Vaďsse devotes the core of his book to arguing just that. Although valiant, the effort falls well short of success. ..."
"... From the outset of his administration, Carter accorded his national-security adviser remarkable deference. Brzezinski was not co-equal with the president; yet neither was he a mere subordinate. He was, Vaďsse writes, "the architect of Carter's foreign policy," while also exercising "an exceptional degree of control" over its articulation and implementation. ..."
"... The disintegration of the Soviet bloc and eventually of the Soviet Union itself was, in his view, a nominal goal of American foreign policy, but not an immediate prospect. ..."
"... The Camp David accords did nothing to resolve the Palestinian issue that underlay much of Israeli-Arab enmity; it produced a dead-end peace that left Palestinians without a state and Israel with no end of problems. And the Brzezinski-engineered embrace of China, enhancing Chinese access to American technology and markets, accelerated that country's emergence as a peer competitor. ..."
Nov 24, 2018 | www.thenation.com

Zbigniew Brzezinski: America's Grand Strategist By Justin Vaďsse; Catherine Porter, trans.

Buy this book

Underlying that purpose are at least two implicit assumptions. The first is that, when it comes to statecraft, grand strategy actually exists, not simply as an aspiration but as a discrete and identifiable element. The second is that, in his writings and contributions to US policy, Kissinger himself qualifies as a strategic virtuoso. For all sorts of reasons, we should treat both of these assumptions with considerable skepticism.

That Brzezinski, who died last year at age 89, lived a life that deserves to be recounted and appraised is certainly the case. Born in Warsaw in 1928 to parents with ties to Polish nobility, Brzezinski had a peripatetic childhood. His father was a diplomat whose family accompanied him on postings to France, Germany, and eventually to Canada. The Nazi invasion of 1939, which extinguished Polish independence, also effectively ended his father's diplomatic career. With war engulfing nearly all of Europe, Brzezinski would not set foot on Polish soil again for nearly two decades.

Although the young Brzezinski quickly adapted to life in Canada, the well-being of Poles and Poland remained an abiding preoccupation. After the war, he studied economics and political science at McGill University, focusing in particular on the Soviet Union, which by then had replaced Germany as the power that dominated the country of his birth. Brzezinski was a brilliant student with a particular interest in international affairs, a field increasingly centered on questions related to America's role in presiding over the postwar global order.

After graduating from McGill, Brzezinski set his sights on Harvard, which at the time was the very archetype of a "Cold War university." Senior faculty and young scholars on the make were volunteering to advise the national-security apparatus just then forming in Washington. For many of them, the Soviet threat appeared to eclipse all other questions and fields of inquiry. In this setting, Brzezinski flourished. Even before becoming an American citizen, he was thoroughly Americanized, imbued with the mind-set that prevailed in circles where members of the power elite mixed and mingled. Partially funded by the CIA, the Russian Research Center, Brzezinski's home at Harvard, was one of those places.

From his time in Cambridge, he emerged committed, in his own words, to "nothing less than formulating a coherent strategy for the United States, so that we could eventually dismantle the Soviet bloc" and, not so incidentally, thereby liberate Poland. To this cause, the young Brzezinski devoted himself with single-minded energy.

A s a scholar and author of works intended for a general audience, Zbig, as he was widely known, was nothing if not prolific. Churning out a steady stream of well-regarded books and essays, he demonstrated a particular knack for "summarizing things in a concise and striking way."

Clarity took precedence over nuance.

And with his gift for stylish packaging -- crafting neologisms ("technetronic") and high-sounding phrases ("Histrionics as History in Transition") -- his analyses had the appearance of novelty, even if they often lacked real substance.

Whether writing for his fellow scholars or addressing a wider audience, Brzezinski had one big idea when it came to Cold War strategy: He promoted the concept of "peaceful engagement" as a basis for US policy.

Convinced that the Soviet Union and the Soviet bloc were internally fragile, he believed that economic and cultural interaction with the West would ultimately lead to their collapse. The idea was to project strength without provoking confrontation, while patiently exerting indirect influence.

Yet little of the Brzezinski oeuvre has stood the test of time. The American canon of essential readings in international relations and strategy, beginning with George Washington's farewell address and continuing on through works by John Quincy Adams, Alfred Thayer Mahan, Hans Morgenthau, and a handful of others (the list is not especially long), does not include anything penned by Brzezinski. Although Vaďsse, a senior official with the French foreign ministry, appears to have read and pondered just about every word his subject wrote or uttered, he identifies nothing of Brzezinski's that qualifies as must-reading for today's aspiring strategist.

This limited academic influence probably did not bother Zbig; he never saw himself as a mere scholar. He was a classic in-and-outer, rotating effortlessly from university campuses to political campaigns, and from government service to plummy think-tank billets. According to Vaďsse, Brzezinski never courted the media. Even so, he demonstrated a pronounced talent for getting himself in front of TV cameras, becoming a frequent guest on programs like Meet the Press . He knew how to self-promote.

Toward the end of his life, Brzezinski even had a Twitter account. His last tweet, from May 2017, both summarizes the essence of his worldview and expresses his dismay regarding the presidency of Donald Trump: "Sophisticated US leadership is the sine qua non of a stable world order. However, we lack the former while the latter is getting worse."

F rom the time Brzezinski left Harvard in 1960 to accept a tenured position at Columbia, he made it his mission to nurture and facilitate that sophistication. For Zbig, New York offered a specific advantage over Cambridge: It provided a portal into elite political circles. As it had for Kissinger, the then-still-influential Council on Foreign Relations provided a venue that enabled Brzezinski to curry favor with the rich and powerful, and to establish his bona fides as a statesman to watch. Henry's patron was Nelson Rockefeller; Zbig's was Nelson's brother David.

Although not an ideologue, Brzezinski was a liberal Democrat of a consistently hawkish persuasion. Committed to social justice at home, he was also committed to toughness abroad. In the 1960s, he supported US intervention in Vietnam, treated the domino theory as self-evidently true, and argued that, with American credibility on the line, the United States had no alternative but to continue prosecuting the war. Even after the war ended, Vaďsse writes, Brzezinski "did not view Vietnam as a mistake."

Yet Vietnam did nudge Brzezinski to reconsider some of his own assumptions. In the early 1970s, with an eye toward forging a new foreign policy that might take into account some of the trauma caused by Vietnam, he organized the Trilateral Commission. Apart from expending copious amounts of Rockefeller money, the organization produced little of substance. For Brzezinski, however, it proved a smashing success. It was there that he became acquainted with Jimmy Carter, a Georgia governor then contemplating a run for the presidency in 1976.

Zbig and Jimmy hit it off. Soon enough, Brzezinski signed on as the candidate's principal foreign-policy adviser. When Carter won, he rewarded Brzezinski by appointing him national-security adviser, the job that had vaulted Kissinger to the upper ranks of global celebrity.

Zbig held this post throughout Carter's one-term presidency, from 1977 to 1981. It would be his first and last time in government. After 1981, Brzezinski went back to writing, continued to opine, and was occasionally consulted by Carter's successors, both Democratic and Republican. Yet despite having ascended to the rank of elder statesman, never again did Brzezinski occupy a position where he could directly affect US policy.

Because of Brzezinski's limited influence on foreign policy after Carter, Vaďsse's case for installing him in the pantheon of master strategists therefore rests on the claim that on matters related to foreign policy, the Carter presidency was something less than a bust. Vaďsse devotes the core of his book to arguing just that. Although valiant, the effort falls well short of success.

From the outset of his administration, Carter accorded his national-security adviser remarkable deference. Brzezinski was not co-equal with the president; yet neither was he a mere subordinate. He was, Vaďsse writes, "the architect of Carter's foreign policy," while also exercising "an exceptional degree of control" over its articulation and implementation.

In a characteristic display of self-assurance and bureaucratic shrewdness, as the new president took office, Brzezinski gave him a 43-page briefing book prescribing basic administration policy. Under the overarching theme of "constructive global engagement," Brzezinski identified 10 specific goals. The first proposed to "create more active and solid cooperation with Europe and Japan," the 10th to "maintain a defense posture designed to dissuade the Soviet Union from committing hostile acts." In between were less-than-modest aspirations to promote human rights, reduce the size of nuclear arsenals, curb international arms sales, end apartheid in South Africa, normalize Sino-American relations, terminate US control of the Panama Canal, and achieve an "overall solution to the Israeli-Palestinian problem."

While Brzezinski's agenda was as bold as it was comprehensive, it nonetheless hewed to the Soviet-centric assumptions that had formed the basis of US policy since the end of World War II. Zbig recognized that the world had changed considerably in the ensuing years, but he also believed that any future changes would still occur in the context of a continuing Soviet-American rivalry. His strategic perspective, therefore, did not include the possibility that the international order might center on something other than the binaries imposed by the Cold War. The disintegration of the Soviet bloc and eventually of the Soviet Union itself was, in his view, a nominal goal of American foreign policy, but not an immediate prospect.

Using Brzezinski's 10 policy objectives as a basis for evaluating his performance, Vaďsse gives the national-security adviser high marks. "Few administrations have known so many tangible successes in only four years," he writes, citing the Panama Canal Treaty, the Israeli-Egyptian peace agreement, and improved relations with China. Yet while Panama remains an underappreciated achievement, the other two qualify as ambiguous at best. The Camp David accords did nothing to resolve the Palestinian issue that underlay much of Israeli-Arab enmity; it produced a dead-end peace that left Palestinians without a state and Israel with no end of problems. And the Brzezinski-engineered embrace of China, enhancing Chinese access to American technology and markets, accelerated that country's emergence as a peer competitor.

More troubling still was Brzezinski's failure to anticipate or to grasp the implications of the two developments that all but doomed the Carter presidency: the 1978 Iranian Revolution and the 1979 Soviet intervention in Afghanistan. Vaďsse does his best to cast a positive light on Brzezinski's role in these twin embarrassments. But there's no way around it: Brzezinski misread both -- with consequences that still haunt us today.

The Iranian Revolution, which Brzezinski sought to forestall by instigating a military coup in Tehran, offered a warning against imagining that Washington could shape events in the Islamic world. Brzezinski missed that warning entirely, although he would by no means be the last US official to do so. As for the Kremlin's plunge into Afghanistan, widely interpreted as evidence of the Soviet Union's naked aggression, it actually testified to the weakness and fragility of the Soviet empire, already in an advanced state of decay. Again, Brzezinski -- along with many other observers -- misread the issue. When clarity of vision was most needed, he failed to provide it.

Together, these two developments ought to have induced a wily strategist to reassess the premises of US policy. Instead, they resulted in decisions to deepen -- and to overtly militarize -- US involvement in and around the Persian Gulf. While this commitment is commonly referred to as the Carter Doctrine, Vaďsse insists that it "was really a Brzezinski doctrine."

Regardless of who gets the credit, the militarization of US policy across what Brzezinski termed an "arc of crisis" encompassing much of the Islamic world laid the basis for a series of wars and upheavals that continue to this day. If, as national-security adviser, Brzezinski wielded as much influence as Vaďsse contends, then this too forms part of his legacy. When it mattered most, the master strategist failed to understand the implications of the crisis that occurred on his watch.

The most glaring problem anyone faces in trying to assert Brzezinski's mastery of world affairs, however, rests not in Iran or Afghanistan, but in how the Cold War came to an end. Indeed, Brzezinski viewed it as essentially endless. As late as 1987, just two years before the fall of the Berlin Wall, he was still insisting that "the American-Soviet conflict is an historical rivalry that will endure for as long as we live."

B rzezinski was certainly smart, flexible, and pragmatic, but he was also a prisoner of the Cold War paradigm. So too were virtually all other members of the foreign-policy establishment of his day. Indeed, subscribing to that paradigm was a prerequisite of membership. Yet this adherence amounted to donning a pair of strategic blinders: It meant seeing only those things that it was convenient to see.

Which brings us back to Zbig's last tweet, with its paean to American leadership as the sine qua non of global stability. The tweet neatly captures the mind-set that the foreign-policy establishment has embraced with something like unanimity since the Cold War surprised that establishment by coming to an end. This mind-set gets expressed in myriad ways in a thousand speeches and op-eds: The United States must lead. There is no alternative; history itself summons the country to do so. Should it fail in that responsibility, darkness will cover the earth.

This is why Trump so infuriates the foreign-policy elite: He appears oblivious to the providential call that others in Washington take to be self-evident. Yet adhering to this post–Cold War paradigm is also the equivalent of donning blinders. Whatever the issue -- especially when the issue is ourselves -- it means seeing only those things that we find it convenient to see.

The post–Cold War paradigm of American moral and political hegemony prevents us from appreciating the way that the world is actually changing -- rapidly, radically, and right before our very eyes. Today, with the planet continuing to heat up, the nexus of global geopolitics shifting eastward, and Americans pondering security threats for which our pricey and far-flung military establishment is all but useless, the art of strategy as practiced by members of Brzezinski's generation has become irrelevant. So too has Zbig himself.

[Dec 14, 2018] What percentage of CIA budget goes to the support of free press

Notable quotes:
"... Because once we go from "corruption is getting more and more common; something must be done" to "meh," we are crossing from a flawed democratic republic to outright tyranny and oligarchy with little way back. ..."
"... Why would anyone expect anything different from the Times, or any major U.S. Newspaper or media outlet? They are organs of the intelligence community and have been for many years. ..."
"... I think the ridiculous and pathetic explanations by NYT in this case are, in part, due to the fact that they simply don't care enough to produce better answers. In their view, these CIA connections and those with other Govt. agencies are paramount, and must be maintained at all costs. ..."
"... It is likely that the relationship is a little more formal than mere collusion ..."
"... "Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few" [George Bernard Shaw" ..."
"... Has been since Judith Miller told us there were WMD in Iraq in 2003. They don't plan anticipations of crises, but the actual crises themselves. In a moral world, the NYT is as guilty of genocide as Bush and Blair. ..."
Dec 01, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

capatriot , 29 Aug 2012 15:49

Good article. I especially like this:

The more important objection is that the fact that a certain behavior is common does not negate its being corrupt. Indeed, as is true for government abuses generally, those in power rely on the willingness of citizens to be trained to view corrupt acts as so common that they become inured, numb, to its wrongfulness. Once a corrupt practice is sufficiently perceived as commonplace, then it is transformed in people's minds from something objectionable into something acceptable.

Because once we go from "corruption is getting more and more common; something must be done" to "meh," we are crossing from a flawed democratic republic to outright tyranny and oligarchy with little way back.

Besides, they don't all do it ... there are honorable reporters out there, some few of whom work for the Times and the Post.

BradBenson , 29 Aug 2012 15:48
Another great article Glenn. The Guardian will spread your words further and wider. Salon's loss is the world's gain.

Why would anyone expect anything different from the Times, or any major U.S. Newspaper or media outlet? They are organs of the intelligence community and have been for many years. That these email were allowed to get out under FOIA is indicative of the fact that there are some people on the inside who would like to get the truth out. Either that, or the head of some ES-2's Assistant Deputy for Secret Shenanigans and Heinous Drone Murders will roll.

CautiousOptimist , 29 Aug 2012 15:40
Glenn - Any comments on the recently disclosed emails between the CIA and Kathryn Bigelow?
CasualObs , 29 Aug 2012 15:32
Scott Horton quote on closely related Mazzetti reporting (in this case regarding misleading reporting on how important CIA/Bush torture was in tracking down and getting bin Laden, the focus of this movie):

"I'm quite sure that this is precisely the way the folks who provided this info from the agency [to Mazzetti] wanted them to be understood, but there is certainly more than a measure of ambiguity in them, planted with care by the NYT writers or their editors. This episode shows again how easily the Times can be spun by unnamed government sources, the factual premises of whose statements invariably escape any examination."

http://www.hillmanfoundation.org/blog/winners-sinners-mary-murphy-mark-mazzetti

I think the ridiculous and pathetic explanations by NYT in this case are, in part, due to the fact that they simply don't care enough to produce better answers. In their view, these CIA connections and those with other Govt. agencies are paramount, and must be maintained at all costs.

If you don't like their paper-thin answers, tough. In their view (imo) this will blow over and business will resume, with the all-important friends and connections intact. Thus leaving the machinery intact for future uncritical, biased and manipulative "spin" of NYT by any number of unnamed govt. sources/agencies...

Montecarlo2 , 29 Aug 2012 15:29

In what conceivable way is Mazzetti's collusion with the CIA an "intelligence matter" that prevents the NYT's managing editor from explaining what happened here?

That one is easy, as we learned in the Valerie Plame affair. It is likely that the relationship is a little more formal than mere collusion.

hominoid , 29 Aug 2012 15:27
Just another step down the ladder towards despotism. "Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few" [George Bernard Shaw"
LakerFan , 29 Aug 2012 15:13

The relationship between the New York Times and the US government is, as usual, anything but adversarial. Indeed, these emails read like the interactions between a PR representative and his client as they plan in anticipation of a possible crisis.

Has been since Judith Miller told us there were WMD in Iraq in 2003. They don't plan anticipations of crises, but the actual crises themselves. In a moral world, the NYT is as guilty of genocide as Bush and Blair.

The humor seems to go completely out of the issue when 100,000 people are dead and their families and futures changed forever.

Like I said, in a moral world....

[Dec 14, 2018] New York Times fraudulent election plot dossier escalates anti-Russia hysteria

Notable quotes:
"... It acknowledges that "police never identified who had hung the banners," but nonetheless goes on to assert that: "The Kremlin, it appeared, had reached onto United States soil in New York and Washington. The banners may well have been intended as visual victory laps for the most effective foreign interference in an American election in history." ..."
"... The authors, Scott Shane and Mark Mazzetti, complain about a lack of "public comprehension" of the "Trump-Russia" story. Indeed, despite the two-year campaign of anti-Russian hysteria whipped up in Washington and among the affluent sections of the upper-middle class that constitute the target audience of the Times ..."
Sep 21, 2018 | www.wsws.org

The New York Times published a fraudulent and provocative "special report" Thursday titled "The plot to subvert an election."

Replete with sinister looking graphics portraying Russian President Vladimir Putin as a villainous cyberage cyclops, the report purports to untangle "the threads of the most effective foreign campaign in history to disrupt and influence an American election."

The report could serve as a textbook example of CIA-directed misinformation posing as "in-depth" journalism. There is no news, few substantiated facts and no significant analysis presented in the 10,000-word report, which sprawls over 11 ad-free pages of a separate section produced by the Times.

The article begins with an ominous-sounding recounting of two incidents in which banners were hung from bridges in New York City and Washington in October and November of 2016, one bearing the likeness of Putin over a Russian flag with the word "peacemaker," and the other that of Obama and the slogan "Goodbye Murderer."

It acknowledges that "police never identified who had hung the banners," but nonetheless goes on to assert that: "The Kremlin, it appeared, had reached onto United States soil in New York and Washington. The banners may well have been intended as visual victory laps for the most effective foreign interference in an American election in history." The article begins with an ominous-sounding recounting of two incidents in which banners were hung from bridges in New York City and Washington in October and November of 2016, one bearing the likeness of Putin over a Russian flag with the word "peacemaker," and the other that of Obama and the slogan "Goodbye Murderer."

It acknowledges that "police never identified who had hung the banners," but nonetheless goes on to assert that: "The Kremlin, it appeared, had reached onto United States soil in New York and Washington. The banners may well have been intended as visual victory laps for the most effective foreign interference in an American election in history."

Why does it "appear" to be the Kremlin? What is the evidence to support this claim? Among the 8.5 million inhabitants of New York City and another 700,000 in Washington, D.C., aren't there enough people who might despise Obama as much as, if not a good deal more than, Vladimir Putin?

This absurd passage with its "appeared" and "may well have" combined with the speculation about the Kremlin extending its evil grip onto "United States soil" sets the tone for the entire piece, which consists of the regurgitation of unsubstantiated allegations made by the US intelligence agencies, Democratic and Republican capitalist politicians and the Times itself.

The authors, Scott Shane and Mark Mazzetti, complain about a lack of "public comprehension" of the "Trump-Russia" story. Indeed, despite the two-year campaign of anti-Russian hysteria whipped up in Washington and among the affluent sections of the upper-middle class that constitute the target audience of the Times , polls have indicated that the charges of Russian "meddling" in the 2016 presidential election have evoked little popular response among the

[Dec 14, 2018] New York Times aka The Langley Newsletter

"We pledge subservience to the Owners of the United Corporations of America, and to the Oligarchy for which it stands, one Greed under God, indivisible, with power and wealth for few."
Notable quotes:
"... bin laden gave terror a face. how conveeeenient for warmongers everywhere! ..."
"... CIA in collusion with mainstream newspaper NYT. And you call this news ? ..."
"... collusion between the us media and the us government goes back much, much further. Chomsky has plenty of stuff about this... ..."
"... The NYTimes has its own agenda and bends the news that's fit to print. Journalistic integrity? LOL. No one beat the war drums louder for Bush's Neocons before the Iraq war. Draining our nation's resources, getting young Americans killed (they didn't come from the 1%, you see). The cradle of civilization that's the Iraqi landscape wiped out. Worst, 655,000 Iraqis lost their lives, said British medical journal Lancet, creating 2.5mn each internal & external refugees. ..."
"... The NYT never dwelled on the numbers of Iraqis killed. Up to a few weeks ago, its emphasis on the current Syrian tragedy is to inform us on the hundreds or thousands who've lost their lives. ..."
"... World financial meltdown? When Sanford Weill of Citi pushed for the repeal of Glass-Steagall late 1990's, the FDR era 17-page law separating commercial from investment banks, a measure that's preserved the nation's banking integrity for over half a century, the Nyt added its megaphone to the task, urging Treasury Secretary Bob Rubin to comply, editorializing In 1988: "Few economic historians now find the logic behind Glass-Steagall persuasive" . In 1990, that "banks and stocks were a dangerous mixture" "makes little sense now." ..."
"... just off the top of my head I recall the editor of one of a British major was an MI5 agent; this is in the public domain. ..."
"... We pledge subservience to the Owners of the United Corporations of America, and to the Oligarchy for which it stands, one Greed under God, indivisible, with power and wealth for few. ..."
"... The NYT has been infiltrated for decades by CIA agents. Just notice their dogged reporting on the completely debunked "lone-gunman" JFK theory---they will always report that Oswald acted alone---this is the standard CIA story, pushed and maintained by the NYT despite overwhelming evidence that there was a conspiracy (likely involving the CIA). ..."
Aug 30, 2012 | www.theguardian.com

samesamesame , 1 Sep 2012 13:02

bin laden gave terror a face. how conveeeenient for warmongers everywhere!
loftytom , 1 Sep 2012 10:40

I assume we're going to see a NYT expose on the large scale dodgy dealings of the Guardian Unlimited group then?

They could start with the tax dodging hypocrisy first. http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2012/05/16/has-the-guardian-exploited-tax-loopholes-to-save-millions/

kantarakamara , 1 Sep 2012 10:04
"@smartypants54

29 August 2012 9:44PM
Glenn,

I've often wondered what you think of the journalism of someone like Seymour Hirsch. (sic) He broke some very important stories by cozying up to moles in the MIC.

You'e confusing apples with oranges. Hersh seeks information on issues that outrage him. These do not usually include propaganda for the intelligence agencies, but information they would like to suppress. He's given secret information because he appears to his informers as someone who has a long record of integrity.

Therealguyfaux -> Montecarlo2 , 1 Sep 2012 07:48
It's straight outta that old joke about the husband being caught by his wife in flagrante delicto with the pretty young lady neighbour, who then tells his wife that he and his bit on the side weren't doing anything: "And who do you believe-- me, or your lying eyes?"
Haigin88 , 1 Sep 2012 06:58
New York Times a.k.a. The Langley Newsletter
globalsage , 1 Sep 2012 06:32
CIA in collusion with mainstream newspaper NYT. And you call this news ?
snookie -> LakerFan , 1 Sep 2012 05:46
collusion between the us media and the us government goes back much, much further. Chomsky has plenty of stuff about this...
hlkcna , 1 Sep 2012 02:28
The NYTimes has its own agenda and bends the news that's fit to print. Journalistic integrity? LOL. No one beat the war drums louder for Bush's Neocons before the Iraq war. Draining our nation's resources, getting young Americans killed (they didn't come from the 1%, you see). The cradle of civilization that's the Iraqi landscape wiped out. Worst, 655,000 Iraqis lost their lives, said British medical journal Lancet, creating 2.5mn each internal & external refugees.

Following the pre-Iraq embellishment, NYT covered up its deeds by sacrificing Journalist Judith Miller. As Miller answered a post-war court case, none other than Chairman & CEO Arthur Sulzberger jr. locked arms with her as they entered the courtroom.

The NYT never dwelled on the numbers of Iraqis killed. Up to a few weeks ago, its emphasis on the current Syrian tragedy is to inform us on the hundreds or thousands who've lost their lives.

World financial meltdown? When Sanford Weill of Citi pushed for the repeal of Glass-Steagall late 1990's, the FDR era 17-page law separating commercial from investment banks, a measure that's preserved the nation's banking integrity for over half a century, the Nyt added its megaphone to the task, urging Treasury Secretary Bob Rubin to comply, editorializing In 1988: "Few economic historians now find the logic behind Glass-Steagall persuasive" . In 1990, that "banks and stocks were a dangerous mixture" "makes little sense now."

NYT, a liberal icon? In year 2000, when I lived in NYC, New York Daily News columnist A.M. Rosenthal used to regularly demonize China in language surpassing even Rush Limbaugh. I told myself nah, that's not the Rosenthal-former-editor of the NYT. Only when I read his obituary a few years later did I learn that it was indeed the same one.

Grandfield , 1 Sep 2012 00:56
Well of course. And just off the top of my head I recall the editor of one of a British major was an MI5 agent; this is in the public domain.
weallshineon , 1 Sep 2012 00:42
We pledge subservience to the Owners of the United Corporations of America, and to the Oligarchy for which it stands, one Greed under God, indivisible, with power and wealth for few.

NOAM CHOMSKY _MANUFACTURING CONSENT haven't read it? read it. read it? read it again.

thought totalitarianism and the ruling class died in 1945? think again. thought you wouldn't have to fight like grandpa's generation to live in a democratic and just society? think again.

You are not the 1 percent.

JET2023 -> MonaHol , 31 Aug 2012 21:53
Would that we could hold these discussions without reference to personal defamations -- "darkened ignorance" and "educate yourself" which sounds like "f___ yourself". Why can't we just say "I respectfully disagree"? Alas, when discussing political issues with leftists, that seems impossible. Why the vitriol?

Greenwald's more lengthy posts make it clear that he believes that people who differ with him are "lying" and basing their viewpoint upon "a single right wing blogger". He chooses this explanation over the obvious and accurate one -- legal rationales developed by the Office of Legal Counsel during the Bush administration. The date of Greenwald's archive is February 19, 2006. Oddly, he bases all of his contentions upon whatever he could glean up to that date. But the legal rationale for warrantless wiretaps was based upon memos written by John Yoo at the OLC that Greenwald did not have access to in 2006. The memos were not released until after Obama took office in 2009.

Obama released them in a highly publicized press conference staged for maximum political impact. Greenwald could not possibly have understood the legal rationale for the program since he had not been privy to them until March 2009 if, indeed, he has bothered to acquaint himself with them since then. Either way, nobody was "lying" except those who could have understood the full dimension and willfully chose to hide or ignore the truth. It's not exactly like I am new to this subject as you seem to imply. I wrote a 700 page book about Obama administration duplicity in this same vein. An entire chapter is devoted to this very topic.

Warrantless wiretaps were undertaken after a legal ruling from OLC. And after Obama took office, warrantless wiretaps were continued. Obviously since they were based upon OLC rulings, since no prosecutions have ever been suggested and since they have continued uninterrupted after Obama took office, the Justice Department under both administrations agrees with me and disagrees with Greenwald. We arrive at this disagreement respectfully. Despite Obama's voluminous denunciations of the Bush anti-terror approach on the campaign trail, he resurrected nearly every plank of it once he took office.

But this is a subsidiary point to a far larger point that some observers on this discussion to their credit were able to understand. Despite all of these pointless considerations, the larger point of my original post was that Greenwald missed the "real" story here, which was that the collusion between NYT and CIA was not due to institutional considerations as Greenwald seems to allege, but due to purely partisan considerations. That, to me, is the story he missed.

I find that people who are losing debates try to shift the focus to subsidiary points hoping that, like a courtroom lawyer, if they can refute a small and inconsequential detail raised in testimony, they will undercut the larger truth offered by the witness. It won't work. Too much is on the record. And neither point, the ankle-biting non-issue about legality of warrantless wiretaps or the larger, salient point about the overt partisan political dimension of NYT's collusion with a political appointee at CIA who serves on the Obama reelection committee, has been refuted.

Joseph Toomey
Author, "Change You Can REALLY Believe In: The Obama Legacy of Broken Promises and Failed Policies"

JoshuaFlynn , 31 Aug 2012 20:15
Conspiracy theorists, have been, of course, telling you this for years (given media's motive is profit and not honesty). I suppose the exact same conspiracy theorists other guardian authors have been too eager to denounce previously?
MonaHol -> JET2023 , 31 Aug 2012 18:50

The NSA wiretap program revealed by Risen was not illegal as Greenwald wrongly asserts. As long as one end of the intercepted conservation originated on foreign soil as it did, it was perfectly legal and required no FISA court authorization.

Mr. Toomey, in 2006 Greenwald published a compendium of legal arguments defending the Bush Admin's warrantless wiretapping and the (sound) rebuttals of them. It is exhaustive, and covers your easily dispensed with argument. By way of introduction to his many links to his aggregated, rigorous analyses of the legal issues, he wrote this:

I didn't just wake up one day and leap to the conclusion that the Administration broke the law deliberately and that there are no reasonable arguments to defend that law-breaking (as many Bush followers leaped to the conclusion that he did nothing wrong and then began their hunt to find rationale or advocates to support this conclusion). I arrived at the conclusion that Bush clearly broke the law only by spending enormous amounts of time researching these issues and reading and responding to the defenses from the Administration's apologists.

He did spend enormous time dealing with people such as yourself, and all of his work remains available for you to educate yourself with, at the link provided above.

JET2023 -> Franklymydear0 , 31 Aug 2012 18:43
Maybe you'd like to explain that to Samuel Loring Morison who was convicted and spent years in the federal system for passing classified information to Janes Defence Weekly. I'm sure he'd be entertained. Larry Franklin would also like to hear it. He's in prison today for violating the Espionage Act.

Courts have recognized no press privilege exists when publishing classified data. In 1971, the Supreme Court vacated a prior restraint against NYT and The Washington Post allowing them to publish the Pentagon Papers. But the court also observed that prosecutions after-the-fact would be permissible and not involve an abridgement of the free speech clause. It was only the prior restraint that gave the justices heartburn. They had no issue with throwing them in the slammer after the deed was done.

Thomas Drake, a former NSA official, was indicted and convicted after revealing information to reporters in 2010. The statute covers mere possession which even NYT recognized could cover reporters as well. There have been numerous other instances of arrests, indictments and prosecutions for disclosure to reporters. It's only been due to political calculations and not constitutional limitations that have kept Risen and others out of prison.

utkarsh356 , 31 Aug 2012 12:39
Manufacturing Consent: The political economy of mass media by Noam Chomsky can perhaps explain most of the media behaviour.
HiggsBoson1984 , 31 Aug 2012 12:26
The NYT has been infiltrated for decades by CIA agents. Just notice their dogged reporting on the completely debunked "lone-gunman" JFK theory---they will always report that Oswald acted alone---this is the standard CIA story, pushed and maintained by the NYT despite overwhelming evidence that there was a conspiracy (likely involving the CIA).
Leviathan212 , 31 Aug 2012 10:54
What outrages me the most is the NYT's condescending attitude towards its readers when caught in this obvious breach of journalistic ethics.

Both Baquet and Abramson, rather than showing some humility or contrition, are acting as if nothing bad has happened, and that we are stupid to even talk about this.

Leviathan212 -> AnnaMc , 31 Aug 2012 10:28

This article misses the elephant in the room. Namely, that the NYT only plays footsies with Democrats in positions of power. With the 'Pubs, it's open season.

Not true. There are many examples of the NYT colluding with the Bush administration, some of which Glenn has mentioned in this article. Take, for example, the fact that the NYT concealed Bush's wire-tapping program for almost a year, at the request of the White House, and didn't release details until after Bush's re-election.

ranroddeb , 31 Aug 2012 10:10
" The optics aren't what they look like " This phrase brings to mind the old Dem catch phrase " Who you gonna believe me or your lying eyes? " .

[Dec 14, 2018] Operation Mockingbird has never stopped

Notable quotes:
"... The Government leaks classified material at will for propaganda advantage, but hunts Assange and tortures Private Manning for the same. ..."
"... these emails reflect the standard full-scale cooperation – a virtual merger – between our the government and the establishment media outlets that claim to act as "watchdogs" over them. ..."
"... The issue under discussion here, however, is the extent to which the media is an eager partner in the message-sending, rather than an unwitiing tool. ..."
Aug 30, 2012 | www.theguardian.com
Chris Harlos , 29 Aug 2012 19:01
The New York Crimes. The seamless web of media, government, business: a totalitarian system. Darkly amusing, perhaps, unless one begins to tally the damage.

USA Inc. Viva Death,

Did you hear the one about the investment banker whose very expensive hooker bite off his crank?

rrheard , 29 Aug 2012 18:36
I'm not sure what's scarier--that the CIA is spending taxpayer dollars spending even a split second worrying about what a two bit hack like Maureen Dowd writes, or that the NY Times principals are so institutionally "captured" that they parrot "CIA speak".

Well what's actually scarier is that Operation Mockingbird has never stopped.

Or maybe that our purported public servants in the legislature are bipartisanly and openly attempting to repeal portions of the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 and Foreign Relations Authorization Act in 1987 banning domestic propaganda.

America is becoming a real sick joke. And the last to know will be about 65% of the populace I like to call Sheeple.

024601 -> SanFranDouglas , 29 Aug 2012 18:32
Very depressing. I thought we would get a smart bunch over here. The major trend I've noticed instead? Blind support for the empire and the apparatus that keeps it thriving. Unable to be good little authoritarians and cheer for the now collapsing British Empire, they have to cheer for it's natural predecessor, the American Empire. This includes attacking all those who might question the absolute infallible of The Empire. Folks like.. Glenn. It is fascinating to watch, if not disheartening.
SanFranDouglas -> smartypants54 , 29 Aug 2012 18:29

So all cozying up to spooks is not always a bad thing, huh?

Just my point.

I see. I thought your point was that there was some sort of equivalence between Hersh's development of sources to reveal truths that their agencies fervently wished to keep secret and Mazzetti's active assistance in protecting an agency's image from sullying by fellow journalists.

I guess I stand corrected. . .

shenebraskan -> Jpolicoff , 29 Aug 2012 18:12
And that ended his career in government service, as it should have...or not:

From Wikipedia: John O. Brennan is chief counterterrorism advisor to U.S. President Barack Obama; officially his title is Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, and Assistant to the President.

Jpolicoff , 29 Aug 2012 18:01
Unfortunately this is nothing new for Mazetti or the New York Times, nor is it the first time Glenn Greenwald has called Mazetti out on his cozy relationship with the CIA:

The CIA and its reporter friends: Anatomy of a backlash
The coordinated, successful effort to implant false story lines about John Brennan illustrates the power the intelligence community wields over political debates.
Glenn Greenwald Dec. 08, 2008 |

...Just marvel at how coordinated (and patently inaccurate) their messaging is, and -- more significantly -- how easily they can implant their message into establishment media outlets far and wide, which uncritically publish what they're told from their cherished "intelligence sources" and without even the pretense of verifying whether any of it is true and/or hearing any divergent views:

Mark Mazzetti and Scott Shane, New York Times, 12/2/2008:

Last week, John O. Brennan, a C.I.A. veteran who was widely seen as Mr. Obama's likeliest choice to head the intelligence agency, withdrew his name from consideration after liberal critics attacked his alleged role in the agency's detention and interrogation program. Mr. Brennan protested that he had been a "strong opponent" within the agency of harsh interrogation tactics, yet Mr. Obama evidently decided that nominating Mr. Brennan was not worth a battle with some of his most ardent supporters on the left.

Mr. Obama's search for someone else and his future relationship with the agency are complicated by the tension between his apparent desire to make a clean break with Bush administration policies he has condemned and concern about alienating an agency with a central role in the campaign against Al Qaeda.

Mark M. Lowenthal, an intelligence veteran who left a senior post at the C.I.A. in 2005, said Mr. Obama's decision to exclude Mr. Brennan from contention for the top job had sent a message that "if you worked in the C.I.A. during the war on terror, you are now tainted," and had created anxiety in the ranks of the agency's clandestine service.

...The story, by Mark Mazzetti and Scott Shane, noted that John O. Brennan had withdrawn his name from consideration for CIA director after liberal critics attacked his role in the agency's interrogation program, even though Brennan characterized himself as a "strong opponent" within the agency of harsh interrogation techniques. Brennan's characterization was not disputed by anyone else in the story, even though most experts on this subject agree that Brennan acquiesced in everything that the CIA did in this area while he served there.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/12/08/cia/print.html

CitizenTM , 29 Aug 2012 17:52
The Government leaks classified material at will for propaganda advantage, but hunts Assange and tortures Private Manning for the same.
tballou , 29 Aug 2012 17:51
"these emails reflect the standard full-scale cooperation – a virtual merger – between our the government and the establishment media outlets that claim to act as "watchdogs" over them."

Glenn - the only objection I have to your column and all your previous columns on this matter is that I am not sure the establishment media actually claim to be watchdogs, at least not any more, and certainly not since Sept 11. They really are more like PR reps.

SanFranDouglas -> OneWorldGovernment , 29 Aug 2012 17:51

The media is another tool in the [government, in this case] arsenal to help send a message, as are speeches before think tanks and etc.

Yes. The issue under discussion here, however, is the extent to which the media is an eager partner in the message-sending, rather than an unwitiing tool.

OneWorldGovernment , 29 Aug 2012 17:44
Did everyone forget the Judith Miller article? The usage of Twitter and other social media during the Iranian election of 2009? The leaks about the Iranian nuclear program in the Telegraph? ARDA?

The U.S. government, along with every other government in the world, uses the media to influence public opinion and send geopolitical messages to others that understand the message (normally not the masses). The media is another tool in the arsenal to help send a message, as are speeches before think tanks and etc.

We use social media to create social unrest if it aligns with our interests. We use the media to send political messages and influence public opinion. The vast majority of reporting in the N.Y. Times, WSJ, Guardian, Telegraph, and etc. do not reflect this, but every now and then "unnamed sources" help further a geopolitical message.

In this country, it has been that way since before the founding fathers and the Republic. Remember the Federalist, Anti-Federalist, Sam Adams as Vtndex, and etc.? Newspapers used for "propaganda" purposes.

SanFranDouglas -> smartypants54 , 29 Aug 2012 17:42

Upthread I asked him for his comments on the reporting of Seymour Hirsh. He is someone who cozied up to all kinds of people - and wound up busting some extremely important stories in the process.

I think a modest amount of review of Sy Hersh's work will demonstrate that his "cozying up" hasn't included running interference for the spooks' official PR flacks.

DuErJournalist , 29 Aug 2012 17:42
The New York Times: Burn after reading!

[Dec 14, 2018] The whole austerity crisis thing appears to have been engineered so that a few blinkered and unpatriotic, vulture mafia privateers can make a killing, selling off vital state assets, such as infrastructure and ports, to the Chinese. This is a very suspicious and widespread trend.

Notable quotes:
"... Bob Marley got it right.... the human race is becoming a rat race, and it's a disgrace. ..."
"... The biggest problem is the financialisation of the economy... what is the actual value of things? The market is so manipulated that real price discovery is not possible. ..."
"... We have an over-cooked service-sector economy unsustainably reliant on cheap debt, cheap energy, and cheap manufactured goods to fuel our 'high-end levels of consumption, and mobility or living standards, and an over-heated housing market that is unsustainably run according to the needs of investors and landlords rather than residents or tenants. ..."
"... What we need is a coordinated approach between our nations. Undercutting each other on corporate taxes, writing tax avoidance into law, and continuing to allow multinationals to influence our politicians and play our governments against each other is exactly the game we must end. ..."
"... Instead, it places the financially powerful beyond any state, in an international elite that makes its own rules, and holds governments to ransom. That's what the financial crisis was all about. The ransom was paid, and as a result, governments have been obliged to limit their activities yet further.... ..."
"... "Ransom". There is no better word to describe it. This (the ransom mentality) is exactly the reactionary, vindictive, doctrinaire psychology that must be extracted like a cancer from our institutional lives and the human species. A monolithic task. But identifying the cause is the first step to cure. ..."
"... these are the new medieval transnational barons ..."
Jun 09, 2013 | theguardian.com
MysticFish -> Crackerpot , 8 Jun 2013 14:43
@Crackerpot - The whole austerity crisis thing appears to have been engineered so that a few blinkered and unpatriotic, vulture mafia privateers can make a killing, selling off vital state assets, such as infrastructure and ports, to the Chinese. This is a very suspicious and widespread trend.
artheart , 8 Jun 2013 14:38

Bob Marley got it right.... the human race is becoming a rat race, and it's a disgrace.

I see it every day from the window of my flat, on a main road, in Bethnal Green. There's a 'mentally unstable' Rastafarian who stands by the overground station, and shouts things out to people like "You're living in babylon".

I do sometimes think he's not the mental one.

artheart -> HolyInsurgent , 8 Jun 2013 14:32
@HolyInsurgent

The biggest problem is the financialisation of the economy... what is the actual value of things? The market is so manipulated that real price discovery is not possible.

We have an over-cooked service-sector economy unsustainably reliant on cheap debt, cheap energy, and cheap manufactured goods to fuel our 'high-end levels of consumption, and mobility or living standards, and an over-heated housing market that is unsustainably run according to the needs of investors and landlords rather than residents or tenants.

The whole thing is going to blow apart. Our 'aspirations' are slowly killing us - they're destroying the social fabric.

MikeInCanada , 8 Jun 2013 14:28
What we need is a coordinated approach between our nations. Undercutting each other on corporate taxes, writing tax avoidance into law, and continuing to allow multinationals to influence our politicians and play our governments against each other is exactly the game we must end.
HolyInsurgent , 8 Jun 2013 14:08

Deborah Orr: Instead, it places the financially powerful beyond any state, in an international elite that makes its own rules, and holds governments to ransom. That's what the financial crisis was all about. The ransom was paid, and as a result, governments have been obliged to limit their activities yet further....

I never thought I would live long enough to see this level of honesty ATL. It should have been published long ago, but at least the discussion now begins.

"Ransom". There is no better word to describe it. This (the ransom mentality) is exactly the reactionary, vindictive, doctrinaire psychology that must be extracted like a cancer from our institutional lives and the human species. A monolithic task. But identifying the cause is the first step to cure.

peterpuffin -> PointOfYou , 8 Jun 2013 14:03
@PointOfYou - these are the new medieval transnational barons

[Dec 14, 2018] Here's the funny thing about those who cheer the broken neoliberal model. They promise we will get to those "sunny uplands" with exactly the same fervor as old Marxists.

Notable quotes:
"... Neoliberalism? This is not just a financial agenda. This a highly organized multi armed counterculture operation to force us, including Ms Orr [unless she has...connections] into what Terence McKenna [who was in on it] termed the `Archaic Revival'. That is - you and me [and Ms Orr] - our - return to the medieval dark ages, if we indeed survive that far. ..."
"... The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organised habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are moulded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. ..."
"... the UK government did intervene in the economy when it bailed out the banks to the tune of many billions of pounds underwritten by the taxpayer. The markets should always be regulated sufficiently (light touch is absolutely useless) to prevent the problems currently being experienced from ever happening again. ..."
"... Traditional liberalism had died decades before WWII and was replaced by finance capitalism. What happened after WW II was that capitalism had to make various concessions to avoid a socialist revolution: social and political freedoms indeed darted ahead. ..."
"... No chance mate, at least not all the time greasy spiv and shyster outfits like hedge funds are funding Puffin face and the Vermin Party. They are never going to bite the hand that feeds them ..."
"... And in case we get uppity and endeavour to challenge the economic paradigm and the rule of these neoliberal elites, there's the surveillance state panopticon to track our movements and keep us in check. ..."
"... There is not a shred of logical sense in neoliberalism. You're doing what the fundamentalists do... they talk about what neoliberalism is in theory whilst completely ignoring what it is in practice. In theory the banks should have been allowed to go bust, but the consequences where deemed too high (as they inevitable are). The result is socialism for the rich using the poor as the excuse, which is the reality of neoliberalism. ..."
"... She, knowingly, let neo-liberal economic philosophy come trumpeting through the door of No10 and it's been there ever since; it has guided our politicians for the past 30 odd years. Hence, it is Thatcher's fault. She did this and another bad thing: the woman who glorified household economics pissed away billions of pounds of North Sea Oil. ..."
"... Bailouts have been a constant feature of neoliberalism. In fact the role of the state is simply reduced to a merely commissioning agent to private parasitical corporations. History has shown the state playing this role since neoliberalism became embedded in policy since the 1970s - Long Term Capital Management, Savings and Loans, The Brady Plan, numerous PFI bailouts and those of the Western banking system during the 1982 South American, 1997 Asian and 2010 European debt crises. ..."
Jun 08, 2013 | discussion.theguardian.com

Jenny340 -> EllisWyatt, 8 Jun 2013 13:37

@EllisWyatt - Here's the funny thing about those who cheer the broken neoliberal model. They promise we will get to those "sunny uplands" with exactly the same fervor as old Marxists.
PointOfYou , 8 Jun 2013 13:37

Neoliberalism has spawned a financial elite who hold governments to ransom

Neoliberalism? This is not just a financial agenda. This a highly organized multi armed counterculture operation to force us, including Ms Orr [unless she has...connections] into what Terence McKenna [who was in on it] termed the `Archaic Revival'. That is - you and me [and Ms Orr] - our - return to the medieval dark ages, if we indeed survive that far.

The same names come up time and time again. One of them being, father of propaganda, Edward Bernays.

Bernays wrote what can be seen as a virtual Mission Statement for anyone wishing to bring about a "counterculture." In the opening paragraph of his book Propaganda he wrote:

"..The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organised habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are moulded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.

This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organised. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses.

It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind..."[28]

Bernays' family background made him well suited to "control the public mind." He was the double nephew of psychoanalysis pioneer Sigmund Freud. His mother was Freud's sister Anna, and his father was Ely Bernays, brother of Freud's wife Martha Bernays.

Snookerboy -> OneCommentator , 8 Jun 2013 13:17
@OneCommentator - the UK government did intervene in the economy when it bailed out the banks to the tune of many billions of pounds underwritten by the taxpayer. The markets should always be regulated sufficiently (light touch is absolutely useless) to prevent the problems currently being experienced from ever happening again.

Those at the bottom of society and those in the public sector are the ones paying the price for this intervention in the UK. If you truly believe in the 'free' market then all of these failing organisations (banks, etc) should have been allowed to fail. The problem is that the wealth created under the current system is virtually all going to those at the top of the income scale and this needs to change and is one of the main reasons that neo liberalism should be binned!

ATrueFinn -> OneCommentator , 8 Jun 2013 13:09
@ OneCommentator 08 June 2013 5:21pm

No, it was as recently as ww2 more or less

Traditional liberalism had died decades before WWII and was replaced by finance capitalism. What happened after WW II was that capitalism had to make various concessions to avoid a socialist revolution: social and political freedoms indeed darted ahead.

Do read a book about history!

clairesdad -> brighton2 , 8 Jun 2013 13:06
@brighton2 - No chance mate, at least not all the time greasy spiv and shyster outfits like hedge funds are funding Puffin face and the Vermin Party. They are never going to bite the hand that feeds them.
NotWithoutMyMonkey , 8 Jun 2013 13:01
And in case we get uppity and endeavour to challenge the economic paradigm and the rule of these neoliberal elites, there's the surveillance state panopticon to track our movements and keep us in check.
TedStewart , 8 Jun 2013 12:51
Neoliberalism has spawned a financial elite who hold governments to ransom

Are you saying neoliberalism is a great big useless pile of shit? Then you are absolutely right!

kingcreosote -> MickGJ , 8 Jun 2013 12:47
@ MickGJ 08 June 2013 1:08pm . Get cifFix for Firefox .

I know what you are saying it's just sooner or later as those at the bottom continue to be squeezed the wealthy will sow their own seeds of destruction. I think we are witnessing the end game which is reflected in the desperation of the coalition to flog everything regardless of the efficacy of such behavior, they feel time is running out and they would be right.

taxhaven , 8 Jun 2013 12:44
Call it what you will - "neoliberalism", "neoconservatism", "socialism" or whatever it is...

This debate is not even really solely about money: this is about liberty , about free choice, about being permitted to engage in voluntary exchange of goods and services with others, unmolested. About the users of services becoming the ones paying for those services.

Ultimately the real effect will be to remove power from governments and hand it back to where it belongs - the free market.

dmckm -> OneCommentator , 8 Jun 2013 12:43
@ OneCommentator 08 June 2013 5:04pm . Get cifFix for Firefox .

voluntary transactions among free agents. That's called a free market and it is by far the most efficient way to produce wealth humanity has ever known.

Could you explain how someone bound by a contract of employment, with the alternative, destitution, is a 'free agent'?

jazzdrum -> SpinningHugo , 8 Jun 2013 12:25
@SpinningHugo - Nothing comes out of nothing and i well remember black Monday in the City. That was the start of the spivs running the economy as if it were a casino. If you think its only on CiF that Thatcher gets the blame, think on this, Scotland, a whole nation blames her too.
TedSmithAndSon -> theguardianisrubbish , 8 Jun 2013 12:24
@theguardianisrubbish -

Unless you are completely confused by what neoliberalism is there is not a shred of logical sense in this.

There is not a shred of logical sense in neoliberalism. You're doing what the fundamentalists do... they talk about what neoliberalism is in theory whilst completely ignoring what it is in practice. In theory the banks should have been allowed to go bust, but the consequences where deemed too high (as they inevitable are). The result is socialism for the rich using the poor as the excuse, which is the reality of neoliberalism.

Savers in a neoliberal society are lambs to the slaughter. Thatcher "revitalised" banking, while everything else withered and died.

Neoliberalism is based on the thought of personal freedom, communism is definitely not. Neoliberalist policies have lifted millions of people out of poverty in Asia and South America.

Neoliberalism is based on the thought that you get as much freedom as you can pay for, otherwise you can just pay... like everyone else. In Asia and South America it has been the economic preference of dictators that pushes profit upwards and responsibility down, just like it does here.

I find it ironic that it now has 5 year plans that absolutely must not be deviated from, massive state intervention in markets (QE, housing policy, tax credits... insert where applicable), and advocates large scale central planning even as it denies reality, and makes the announcement from a tractor factory.

Neoliberalism is a blight... a cancer on humanity... a massive lie told by rich people and believed only by peasants happy to be thrown a turnip. In theory it's one thing, the reality is entirely different. Until we're rid of it, we're all it's slaves. It's an abhorrent cult that comes up with purest bilge like expansionary fiscal contraction to keep all the money in the hands of the rich.

outragedofacton -> MickGJ , 8 Jun 2013 12:02
@MickGJ - You are wrong about the first 2 of course. Banksters get others to do their shit.

But unfortunately the poor sods who went down on D Day were in their way fighting for Wall Street as much as anything else. It's just that they weren't told about it by the Allies massive propaganda machine. So partly right

5/10

LetsGetCynical , 8 Jun 2013 11:57

The response should be a wholesale reevaluation of the way in which wealth is created and distributed around the globe

Which would be what? State planning? Communism? Totally free market capitalism? Oh wait, we already have the best of a bad bunch, a mixed capitalist economy with democracy. That really is the crux of it, our system isn't perfect, never will be, but nobody has come up with a better solution.

outragedofacton -> artheart , 8 Jun 2013 11:55
@artheart - Thank goodness for RT.

Learn also about the West's nefarious activities in the Middle East.

ATrueFinn -> fr0mn0where , 8 Jun 2013 11:51
@ fr0mn0where 08 June 2013 4:29pm

Barclays bank "only" paid out £660m in dividends to the bearers of risk capital, while its bonus pot for a very select number of its staff was £1.5bn.

Fascinating! Now, one could infer that Barclays represent "beneficial capitalism", rewarding its hard-working employees, but maybe we won't.

This is not the traditional capitalist style

The Traditional capitalist is not an extinct species but under threat. For the time being the population is stagnant in some countries and even increasing in some others. However, due to the foraging capacity of Neoliberal creature , competing in the same economical niche, the size and life expectation of it are diminishing.

dmckm -> SpinningHugo , 8 Jun 2013 11:50
@ SpinningHugo 08 June 2013 10:59am . Get cifFix for Firefox .

She, knowingly, let neo-liberal economic philosophy come trumpeting through the door of No10 and it's been there ever since; it has guided our politicians for the past 30 odd years. Hence, it is Thatcher's fault. She did this and another bad thing: the woman who glorified household economics pissed away billions of pounds of North Sea Oil.

szwalby -> MickGJ , 8 Jun 2013 11:30
@MickGJ - No, you're right. Why let yesterdays experience feed into what you expect of the future? Lets go forwards goldfish like, every minute a brand new one, with no baggage!
And by the way, who saved the hide of the very much private sector banks and financial institutions? The hated STATE, us tax payers!
fr0mn0where -> ATrueFinn , 8 Jun 2013 11:29
@ATrueFinn -

I think I agree with everything that you say here? The people at the top these days aren't really of much use for anything, including capitalism. The only thing that they do excel at is lining their own pockets and securing their privileged position in society.

They have become quite up front about it. There was a bit of a fuss last year when Barclays bank "only" paid out £660m in dividends to the bearers of risk capital, while its bonus pot for a very select number of its staff was £1.5bn. Barclays released a statement before their AGM explaining:

"Barclays is fully committed to ensuring that a greater proportion of income and profits flow to shareholders notwithstanding that it operates within the constraints of a competitive market."

This is not the traditional capitalist style competition that they are talking about where companies competed as to who can return the biggest profit for their shareholders this now comes secondary to the real competition which is for which company can return the biggest bonuses for a small group of employees.

theonionmurders -> theguardianisrubbish , 8 Jun 2013 11:05
@theguardianisrubbish

Bailouts have been a constant feature of neoliberalism. In fact the role of the state is simply reduced to a merely commissioning agent to private parasitical corporations. History has shown the state playing this role since neoliberalism became embedded in policy since the 1970s - Long Term Capital Management, Savings and Loans, The Brady Plan, numerous PFI bailouts and those of the Western banking system during the 1982 South American, 1997 Asian and 2010 European debt crises.

No wonder you're so ignorant of the basics of economic policy if you won't flick through a book - fear of accepting that you're simply wrong is a sure sign of either pig ignorance or denial, and is as I said embarrassing so its not really much point in wasting anymore time engaging with you.

petercs , 8 Jun 2013 10:44

The neoliberal idea is that the cultivation itself should be conducted privately as well. They see "austerity" as a way of forcing that agenda.

..."neoliberal", concept behind the word, has nothing to do with liberal or liberty or freedom...it is a PR spin concept that names slavery with a a word that sounds like the opposite...if "they" called it neoslavery it just wouldn't sell in the market for political concepts.

..."austerity" is the financial sectors' solution to its survival after it sucked most the value out of the economy and broke it. To mend it was a case of preservation of the elite and the devil take the hindmost, that's most of us.

...and even Labour, the party of trade unionism, has adopted austerity to drive its policy.

...we need a Peoples' Party to stand for the revaluation of labour so we get paid for our effort rather than the distortion, the rich xxx poor divide, of neoslavery austerity.

Crackerpot , 8 Jun 2013 10:43
When the IMF 'admitted' that the first bail out of Greece was 'bungled' are they trying to imply that the subsequent bail outs have been a success....
artheart , 8 Jun 2013 10:34
People need to start watching The Keiser Report to hear the truth, if they can handle the truth. Link here: http://rt.com/shows/keiser-report/

I simply cannot recommend it enough.

MickGJ -> bluebirds , 8 Jun 2013 10:30

@bluebirds - deregulated capitalism has failed

Of course it has. And it will continue to "fail", while provide us with all sorts of goodies, for the foreseeable future. Capitalism's endless "failure" is of no more concern than human mortality. Ever tried, ever failed, try again, fail better.
epinoa -> CaptainGrey , 8 Jun 2013 10:25
@CaptainGrey -

Except it's not. It is still very much alive and growing.

In as much as a zombie is.

The "alternatives" have crashed and burned save Cuba and North Korea.

I'd say the current oligarchical form of capitalism has crashed quite spectacularly. I say this as a free market capitalist too.

[Dec 14, 2018] Noam Chomsky pointed this out aeons ago though-that the American model is to use tax money to benefit private interests through technological infrastructure

Notable quotes:
"... Now we see moneyed entities with vested interests, carpet bagging and flogging off the NHS and an unelected fossil fuel mandarin, at the heart of government decision making, appointing corporate yea-sayers, to the key government departments, with environmental responsibilities. Corporations capturing the state apparatus for their own ends, is 'corporatism.' ..."
"... "Neoliberalism in practice is every bit as bad as Communism in practice, with none of the benefits." ..."
"... The bailout is simply actual neoliberalism as opposed to the theory inside tiny right wing minds. The system depends on the wealthy not being allowed to suffer the consequences of their own greed, or it would represent revolution and still not work. ..."
"... Neoliberalism in practice is every bit as bad as Communism in practice, with none of the benefits. It always amusing to see neoliberal morons shout about the red menace when they're two sides of the same coin. ..."
"... Neoliberalism is nothing if not the opposite extreme of the communist planned economy. Like the communist planned economy, neoliberalism is doomed to failure. I think we've all been sold a lie. ..."
Jun 08, 2013 | discussion.theguardian.com

epinoa -> Fachan , 8 Jun 2013 10:19

@Fachan -

Just as democracy is the worst system of government except for all other, so capitalism is the worst economic model except for all other.

Shame we only have bastardized forms of them.
bridkid5 -> NotAgainAgain , 8 Jun 2013 10:18
@NotAgainAgain - this is very true, it reminds me of an engineering company I worked for in Nottingham (since gone under). The production manger was a corrupt thief. He gradually sub-contracted the production work out to other companies in the area, taking backhanders for his troubles.

Once all the production was farmed out, he somehow got himself promoted to director level, where he and a sycophant subbed all the design work out. So all the production and design was done out of house, standards dropped and the company closed, leaving him with a nice payoff, just prior to retirement.

Some would say he played a blinder, my interpretation is he ruined a perfectly viable company, making a very good product, and over the course of about 5 years put over 30 people out of work.

In a just world he would be spending his retirement in prison.

ATrueFinn -> MickGJ , 8 Jun 2013 10:13
@ MickGJ 08 June 2013 2:16pm

ext year's harvest (possibly of GM food which makes better use of scarce resources)

Indeed. Wheat will grow as flour and fly to our cupboards.

ATrueFinn -> fr0mn0where , 8 Jun 2013 10:10
@ fr0mn0where 08 June 2013 1:53pm

Income distribution and a happy workforce is actually very good for business as well as society!

Of course it is, but the capitalists do not know it. In many countries, including Finland, the "condition of the working classes", ie. working conditions, have been in rapid decline for the last 20 years.

Permanent salaried jobs have been replaced with temps from agencies, unpaid overtime is becoming the norm, burnouts are commonplace and so on.

If in your country things are different, no mass lay-outs and outsourcing to China, count yourself lucky!

crinklyoldgit , 8 Jun 2013 10:04
On form, Debs. Here is something I like.

But even though an illiterate market wouldn't be so great for them, they avoid their taxes, because they can, because they are more powerful than governments

Noam Chomsky pointed this out aeons ago though-that the American model is to use tax money to benefit private interests through technological infrastructure.

It was ever thus, if in slightly different forms. Still it is surprising that they have gone so quickly from their stated position at the start of the republic of a rejection of kings and emperors to their position now of corruption so ingrained it is impossible to make distinctions. Proxy emperors are emperors all the same, no matter the rhetoric that promotes them.

One senses that there is very little 'going back' possible. Besides, the great Neoliberal scam is predicated upon the qualities of the 'governments' we have and the capacity of those 'rhetoricians' with the capacity to say anything or play any role, to lick any arse, to get elected. Such apparent strength is weakness. In this world that now exists here, we have now entered the same world as the USSR in the eighties, where the announcement of bumper harvests of wheat, made everyone with a brain cell groan and think 'Oh fuck! no bread this winter-quick, run to the shops now, and buy up all the flour there'.

But there is now no way to declare that without being seen as beyond the pale-a bug eyed conspiracist.

Still, I am a believer in the connectedness of this world. The economic system and its mythologies are just weird and distorted canaries in the coalmine of the wider environment. It is indicating that there is a misalignment between the way we think and what is possible in this world. Austerity promoters and 'Keynsian' Ballsites are one and the same thing-both pretenders that the key to the problems is within their narrow gifts

Hubris is followed by nemesis. In a wider sense what we seen now is a complete failure of the capacity to educate and to learn,and moderate behaviour, and find some way of caring for our 'others', beyond the core of 'self'. nationalism is essentially an extension of 'self'. We now shall see the failure of a retraction of thought into nationalism and scapegoating.

I predict that the population of the world will decline over the next century-quite markedly.
The only solace is that at the end of the process, the pain will be forgotten. It always is.

MysticFish -> MickGJ , 8 Jun 2013 09:57
@MickGJ - Cameron said 'We will cut the deficit, not the NHS,' and promised to be the 'greenest government ever,' saying that you could 'go green,' if you voted 'blue.'

Now we see moneyed entities with vested interests, carpet bagging and flogging off the NHS and an unelected fossil fuel mandarin, at the heart of government decision making, appointing corporate yea-sayers, to the key government departments, with environmental responsibilities. Corporations capturing the state apparatus for their own ends, is 'corporatism.'

Spoutwell , 8 Jun 2013 09:53

Much of the healthy economic growth – as opposed to the smoke and mirrors of many aspects of financial services – that Britain enjoyed during the second half of the 20th century was due to women swelling the educated workforce.

There was very little 'healthy economic growth' in Britain in the second half of the 20th century. Britain was bankrupt after WW2 with its people dependent on Marshall Aid and food contributions from its former 'colonies'.

Whatever 'growth' occured after Marshall Aid arrived was scuppered by a class system where company managers were more concerned with walking on the workers than with keeping their businesses afloat while such discrimination provoked hard left trade union policies which left british industry uncompetitive and ultimately non-existent.

If that wasn't enough, Thatcherism arrived to re-inforce class discrimination, sell off national services and assets and replace social policy with neo-liberal consumerism. Whether the workforce was swollen by women or anyone else is immaterial.

The anti-democratic incestuous class conflict latent in British society continues to ensure that the UK will remain a mere vassal state of foot-soldiers and consumers for international neo-liberal capitalism.

MurchuantEacnamai -> DasInternaut , 8 Jun 2013 09:49
@DasInternaut - Completely agree. The performance has been poor to absymal. But this is a failure of democratic governance because the collective interests of citizens as consumers and service users are not being represented and enforced by the elected politicians since they have been suborned by the capitalists elites and their fellow-travellers.

The people, indeed, have been sold a lie, but, unfortunately, it is only UKIP which is making the political waves by revealing selected aspects of this lie. The three established parties have been 'bought' to varying extents. But more and more citizens are beginning to realise the extent to which they have been bought.

Itsrainingtin , 8 Jun 2013 09:44
There is an upside to all of this, maybe I wont get modded so much from now on for being so angry at the ideological criminals . Hopefully the middle classes will cotton on to the fact that all this is not a mad hatters tinfoil hobby, we need more of them to be grumpy.
szwalby -> MickGJ , 8 Jun 2013 09:43
@MickGJ - We've already seen it. Not great so far. GS4, Winterbourne view, southern cross, trains...............Welfare to work companies, delivering no better results than people left to their own devices. Energy companies.

We'll see if the new wave of free schools, academy schools, and all the service outsourced by the council perform any better.

Doubtful, as to make a profit, they have to employ poorer paid people, less well qualified, and once they've got a contract, they've got very little competition, as when the second round of bidding comes around, as the firms having got the first contract are the only one with relevant experience, they are assured of renewal, the money machine will keep going!

MurchuantEacnamai -> TedSmithAndSon , 8 Jun 2013 09:39
@TedSmithAndSon - There's a huge difference between meddling and ensuring effective governance. But I expect in your omniscence you know that.
theguardianisrubbish -> theonionmurders , 8 Jun 2013 09:38
@theonionmurders - I am not going to read a book.

Neoliberalism are policies that are influenced by neo classical economics. If you are suggesting that the neoliberal school of thought would advocate any kind of a bailout then you are mistaken. Where else have I "apparently" embarrassed myself?

theguardianisrubbish -> TedSmithAndSon , 8 Jun 2013 09:28
@TedSmithAndSon - This is just an inaccurate rant not a reply.

"The system depends on the wealthy not being allowed to suffer the consequences.."

Unless you are completely confused by what neolibralism is there is not a shred of logical sense in this.

"The debt industry are the lenders who take advantage of a financial system..."

Which is what savers are. They come in the form of individuals businesses and governments. This encompasses everyone.

"whilst paying the lowest possible rate. Wonga, for instance."

If you are a lender you do not pay anything, you receive.

"Thatchers revolution was to take our citizenship and give it a value, whilst making everyone else a consumer, all for a handful of magic beans in the shape of British Gas shares."

...not forgetting that she revitalised the economy and got everyone back to work again.

"Neoliberalism in practice is every bit as bad as Communism in practice, with none of the benefits."

Neoliberalism is based on the thought of personal freedom, communism is definitely not. Neoliberalist policies have lifted millions of people out of poverty in Asia and South America. Communism has no benefits for society open your eyes!

theonionmurders -> theguardianisrubbish , 8 Jun 2013 09:24

@theguardianisrubbish - Does this author not realise that a government bailout goes against the whole neoliberal school of thought?

No it isn't. You're confusing neoliberalism with neo classical economics. The level of knowledge on economic theory here is sometimes embarrassing.

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/sociology/rsw/research_centres/theory/conf/rg/harvey_a_brief_history_of_neoliberalism.pdf

MickGJ -> ATrueFinn , 8 Jun 2013 09:16

@ATrueFinn - After they are finished, what do Singaporeans eat?

Next year's harvest (possibly of GM food which makes better use of scarce resources). I imagine the sun will eventually stop bombarding us with the energy that powers photosynthesis but I'm not losing any sleep over it.
richmanchester -> MurchuantEacnamai , 8 Jun 2013 09:13
@MurchuantEacnamai - I think the point is this, Amazon make money by selling books, they avoid paying taxes, yet expect an educated, literate population to be provided for them, on the grounds that illiterate people don't buy books, and expect roads to move the books around on.

So who will pay for this?

TedSmithAndSon -> theguardianisrubbish , 8 Jun 2013 09:12
@theguardianisrubbish - No! The bailout is simply actual neoliberalism as opposed to the theory inside tiny right wing minds. The system depends on the wealthy not being allowed to suffer the consequences of their own greed, or it would represent revolution and still not work.

The debt industry are the lenders who take advantage of a financial system designed to push profits upwards (neoliberalism in practice), whilst paying the lowest possible rate. Wonga, for instance.

Thatchers revolution was to take our citizenship and give it a value, whilst making everyone else a consumer, all for a handful of magic beans in the shape of British Gas shares.

Neoliberalism in practice is every bit as bad as Communism in practice, with none of the benefits. It always amusing to see neoliberal morons shout about the red menace when they're two sides of the same coin.

szwalby -> MickGJ , 8 Jun 2013 09:04
@MickGJ -

.and provides them at a massively inflated cost accompanied by unforgivable waste and inefficiency, appalling service and life-threatening incompetence.

as opposed to the private sector, who always does what it says it will do, at reasonable cost, for the benefit of their customers, and with due regards to ethics? Like the Banks, the financial sector, who will never sell you a product that isn't the best for you, regardless of their interest? the private companies like Southern Cross, GS4?

The private insurance who refuse to take you on the minute you've got some illness or disability? Get off it! The state isn't perfect, the services it provides are not perfect, but replacing them with private provision isn't the answer!

DasInternaut -> MurchuantEacnamai , 8 Jun 2013 08:59
@MurchuantEacnamai - How would you rate how well British government has done in ensuring markets are genuinely competitive. How well has British government done in ensuring our energy market is competitive, for example. Does the competitiveness we observe in the energy market give customers better or worse value than they had before deregulation? How do you rate the British government's performance in rail and public transport, with respect to competitiveness?

Personally, and notwithstanding the notable exception of telecoms, I rate the British (and US) government's performance in deregulating state entities, creating new markets and ensuring competition, as poor.

Neoliberalism is nothing if not the opposite extreme of the communist planned economy. Like the communist planned economy, neoliberalism is doomed to failure. I think we've all been sold a lie.

[Dec 14, 2018] Neoliberal ideology acted as a smokescreen that enabled the financially powerful to rewrite the rules and place themselves beyond the law

Notable quotes:
"... Neoliberalism has spawned a financial elite who hold governments to ransom ..."
"... Neoliberal ideology acted as a smokescreen that enabled the financially powerful to rewrite the rules and place themselves beyond the law. ..."
"... So it seems that your suggestion is for a return to western capitalism post-war style - would that be right? (b.t.w. if I bring up the whole Soviet Union thing, it is partly because quite a few commentators in this debate come across as if they wish for something much more leftist than that). ..."
"... What you have missed, is that the lions share of the proceeds of that growth are not going to ordinary people but to a tiny minority of super rich. It is not working for the majority. ..."
"... The taxpayers are left to pick up the tab, nations are divided against immigrants and scroungers and then unfettered evangelists like you can spout as pompously as you like about how much big business would like to remove the state from corporate affairs. ..."
"... Without the state there wouldn't be neo-Liberalism, it took state regulated capitalism to build what unfettered purists insist on tearing apart for short term greed. ..."
"... The trouble is Neo-Liberals do not want to remove the state at all, they want to BE the state and in the process rendering democracy pretty much meaningless. And they've succeeded. ..."
"... The biggest swindle ever pulled was turning the most glaring and crushing failure of unfettered corporatism into the biggest and most crushing power grab implemented in order to suppress the will of the people ..."
"... Nobody hates a market more than a monopoly and capitalism must inevitably end in monopoly as it has. For the profiteering monopolies investment especially via taxation is insane as it can only undermine their monopoly. ..."
"... The bankers have always known that the austerity caused by having to pay off un-payable loans, that increase every year, will eventually produce countries very similar to the "Weimar Days" in pre-Hitler Germany. ..."
"... They also know that drastic conditions such as these often lead to a collapse of democracy and a resurgence of Fascism. ..."
"... Neoliberalism could not exist without massive state support. So the term is meaningless. There is nothing "liberal" about having a huge state funded military industrial complex that acts a Trojan horse for global corporations, invading other countries for resources. ..."
"... Neoliberalism is a branch of economic ideology which espouses the value of the free-market, and removing all protective legislation, so that large companies are free to do what they want, where-ever they want, with no impediments from social or environmental considerations, or a nation's democratic preferences. ..."
"... Business-friendly to who exactly: the nation or hostile overseas speculators? ..."
"... The golden age of 1945 - 1975 or so witnessed huge rises in standards of living so your point linking neo-liberalism to rising standards of living is literally meaningless. There was an explosive growth in economic activity during the three or four post war decades ..."
"... The assumption shared by many round here that the young are some untapped resource of revolutionary energy is deeply mistaken ..."
Jun 10, 2013 | www.theguardian.com

WyldeWolfe , 10 Jun 2013 19:42

Neoliberalism has spawned a financial elite who hold governments to ransom

So it's been a success then.

disorderedworld , 10 Jun 2013 17:21
A wonderful article that names the central issue. Neoliberal ideology acted as a smokescreen that enabled the financially powerful to rewrite the rules and place themselves beyond the law. The resultant rise of financial capitalism, which now eclipses the productive manufacturing-based capitalism that was the engine of world growth since the industrial revolution, has propelled a dangerous self-serving elite to the centre of world power. It's not just inequality that matters, but the character of the global elite.
MatthewBall -> murielbelcher , 10 Jun 2013 16:23
@murielbelcher -

The neo-liberal order commenced only in the late 1970s - there was a very different order prior to this which was not "soviet socialism" as you term it.

So it seems that your suggestion is for a return to western capitalism post-war style - would that be right? (b.t.w. if I bring up the whole Soviet Union thing, it is partly because quite a few commentators in this debate come across as if they wish for something much more leftist than that).

Anyway, my worry with this idea is that I am just not convinced that life in "The West 1945-80" was better on the whole than in "The West 1980-present". It's true that unemployment is higher these days, but a lot of work in the post-war years was boring and physically exhausting; in factories and mines where conditions were degrading and bad for health; and where industrial relations were simply terrible. I think as well that the higher unemployment is a localized phenomenon that many developing countries are not experiencing (this is relevant because Deborah Orr proposes change for the whole world, not merely the West).

There were also frequent recessions and booms - in fact, more frequent (albeit shorter) than now. What seems to have changed in this respect is that, whereas we used to alternate regularly between 2-3 years of boom and 1-2 years of bust, we now have 15 years of continuous boom followed by a (maybe?) 10 year bust (this pattern began around 1980). If you asked me which of these two patterns I preferred, then I think I'd go for the pre-1980 pattern, but its not clear to me that the post-1980 pattern is so much worse as to underwrite a savage indictment of the whole system.

As for Casino banking: they should reform that. Britain's Coalition Government has done something in that respect, although its not very radical - I am hoping Labour can do more. There is certainly a lot to be said for banks going back to a pre-"Big Bang" sense of tradition and prudence.

Buts let's not also forget the plus sides in the ledger for post-1980 capitalism: hundreds of millions in the former third world lifted out of poverty; unprecedented technological innovation (e.g. the internet, which makes access to knowledge more equal even as income inequality grows); and the accomodation (at least in the West) of progressive social change, such as the empowerment of ethnic minorities, LGBT people and women.

Change, yes - but lets be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

MatthewBall -> Grich , 10 Jun 2013 15:40
@Grich -

What you have missed, is that the lions share of the proceeds of that growth are not going to ordinary people but to a tiny minority of super rich. It is not working for the majority. http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/07/58-of-real-income-growth-since-1976-went-to-top-1-and-why-that-matters.html

OK, but both the claim and the link cited in support talk only about a problem in the US. This can't really answer my point, which was that the rest of the world should not be expected to support a change to the economic system of the whole world just because of problems that are mostly localised to North America and Europe. People in developing countries might like the fact that they are, at last, catching "the West" up, and might well not care much about widening inequality of incomes in Western societies.

If you are going to propose changes that you want the whole world to adopt, as Deborah Orr does, then you should be careful to avoid casually assuming that Africa, India, China, et al, feel the same way about the world's recent history as we do. It seems to me that not enough care has been demonstrated in this regard.

MarkHH -> MickGJ , 10 Jun 2013 13:34

@MickGJ - Left to their own devices the most extreme neo-liberals would remove the state almost completely from corporate life.

Except when the State has to step in to prop up an unsustainable ideology. Then it's all meek murmurings and pleas for forgiveness and a timid "we'll be better from now" concessions and the Government obliges the public with the farce that they actually intend to do anything at all but make the public pay for the financial sector's state subsidized profligacy.

Once the begging bowl is re-filled of course then the pretense of "business as usual" profligacy rises to the fore.

The taxpayers are left to pick up the tab, nations are divided against immigrants and scroungers and then unfettered evangelists like you can spout as pompously as you like about how much big business would like to remove the state from corporate affairs.

When you well know that is the last thing big business would like to do. More of the state owned pie is always the most urgent of priorities. Poorer services at inflated costs equates as 'efficiency' until the taxpayer is again left to step in and pick up the bill.

Without the state there wouldn't be neo-Liberalism, it took state regulated capitalism to build what unfettered purists insist on tearing apart for short term greed.

The trouble is Neo-Liberals do not want to remove the state at all, they want to BE the state and in the process rendering democracy pretty much meaningless. And they've succeeded.

The biggest swindle ever pulled was turning the most glaring and crushing failure of unfettered corporatism into the biggest and most crushing power grab implemented in order to suppress the will of the people.

Just as IMF loans come with 'obligations' the principle of democracy itself was sold as part of 'the solution'.

The unsustainable, sustained. By slavery to debt, removal of society's safety net and an economy barely maintained by industries that serve the rich, vultures that prey on the weak and rising living costs and the drudgery of a life compounded by a relentless bombardment of everything in life that is unattainable.

Toeparty , 10 Jun 2013 05:28
Nobody hates a market more than a monopoly and capitalism must inevitably end in monopoly as it has. For the profiteering monopolies investment especially via taxation is insane as it can only undermine their monopoly. With the economy now globalised not even a world war could sweep away the current ossified political economy and give capitalism a new lease on life. It's socialism or monopoly capitalist barbarism. Make your choice.
DracoTBastard , 10 Jun 2013 05:26

The IMF exists to lend money to governments,

Money that the governments don't actually need as they can print their own money and spend it to use their countries own resources and then raise taxes to offset the extra spending and thus maintaining monetary value. The reality is that a government should never, ever borrow money.
Malakia123 , 10 Jun 2013 03:35
The beginning period between the two world wars (1919-33) in Germany called the Weimar Republic shows us exactly what severe austerity imposed by the Treaty of Versailles caused. Because the German economy contracted severely due to reparations payments, steady inflation and severe unemployment ensued. Of course the FED having started the Great Depression in America had not helped matters much anywhere in the world. The bankers have always known that the austerity caused by having to pay off un-payable loans, that increase every year, will eventually produce countries very similar to the "Weimar Days" in pre-Hitler Germany.

They also know that drastic conditions such as these often lead to a collapse of democracy and a resurgence of Fascism.

What causes inflation is uncontrolled speculation of the kind we have seen fed by private banking at various crucial points in history, such as the Weimar Republic. When speculation is coupled with debt (owed to private banking cartels) such as we are seeing in America and Europe now, the result is disaster. On the other hand, when a government issues its own "good faith" commerce-related currency in carefully measured ways as we saw in Roman times or Colonial America, it causes supply and demand to increase together, leaving prices unaffected. Hence there is no inflation, no debt, no unemployment, and no need for income taxes.

In reality, the Weimar financial crisis began with the impossible reparations payments imposed at the Treaty of Versailles. It is very similar to the austerity being imposed on European Nations and America as we speak – regardless of the fact that the IMF is trying to pose as "the Good Cop" at the moment! The damage has been done to nations like Greece, and others are soon to follow. The uncontrollable greed of banks and corporations is leading to an implosion of severe magnitude! It's time to open their books and put a stop to these private banks right now!

brucefiiona -> MysticFish , 9 Jun 2013 20:36
@MysticFish - So the US who has a greater spend on the military than communist China is neoliberal?

Neoliberalism could not exist without massive state support. So the term is meaningless. There is nothing "liberal" about having a huge state funded military industrial complex that acts a Trojan horse for global corporations, invading other countries for resources.

The term neoliberal is not only meaningless but misleading as it implies a connection with true liberalism, of which it has no meaningful connection.

brucefiiona , 9 Jun 2013 20:28
Do away with deceptive terms like neoliberalism, capitalism, socialism, left wing and right wing and things become clearer.

At root a lot of the people who get involved in all of the above have very similar character traits - love of power, greed, deceitful, ruthlessness. Most start out with these character traits, and others gain them as a result of power.

Anyone high up in politics or business is unhinged. You have to be. The organizational structures in these things are so synthetic, the beliefs so artificial, rigid, dogmatic and inhuman that only a unhinged person could prosper in this climate.

Most reasonable people admit doubt, are willing to accept compromise, are willing to make the occasional sacrifice for the greater good. All these things are what make us human, however all these things are seen as weaknesses in the inverted world of business and politics.

Business and politics creates an environment where the must inhuman traits prosper.

fr0mn0where -> murielbelcher , 9 Jun 2013 14:42
@murielbelcher -

"no but the highly placed banking and financial class are along with their venal political mates"

For sure but are they capitalists? Although they may well own capital does their power derive from the ownership of capital? You may, or may not be interested in this lecture on the future of capitalism by John Kay.

MysticFish -> AssistantCook , 9 Jun 2013 14:28
@AssistantCook - Neoliberalism is a branch of economic ideology which espouses the value of the free-market, and removing all protective legislation, so that large companies are free to do what they want, where-ever they want, with no impediments from social or environmental considerations, or a nation's democratic preferences. Von Hayek was a major influence and Thatcher was a loyal disciple, as was the notorious dictator, Pinochet. It is economic theory, designed for vulture capitalists, and unpopular industries like fossil fuel or tobacco, and usually the 'freedom' is all one-sided.
MysticFish -> DavidPavett , 9 Jun 2013 14:12
@DavidPavett - If states are too big, then what about multinational banks and corporations? I wonder why Neoliberal ideology does not try to limit the size of these. They are cumbersome and destructive, predatory dinosaurs and yet our politicians seem mesmerised to the point of allowing them special favours, tax incentives and the ability to determine our nation's policies in matters such as energy and health. Why not 'Small is Beautiful,' when it comes to companies? It doesn't make sense to shrink the state but then let non-transparent and unaccountable, multinational companies become too powerful. One gets the feeling the country is being invaded by the interests of hostile nations, using all-too-convenient Neoliberal ideology and hidden behind a corporate mask.
Jesús Rodriguez , 9 Jun 2013 12:46
Is the IMF ever stop evading its responsibility and blaming others for the worldwide financial tragedy it has provoked? Is it ever stop hurting the working class?
theguardianisrubbish -> murielbelcher , 9 Jun 2013 07:28
@murielbelcher -

"Neo-liberalism is based on the thought of personal freedom for the rich and powerful elites is all."

No it is not that is what you want to believe. There is nothing in this statement other than an opinion based on nothing.

"Many people across the globe were lifted out of poverty between 1945-1980 so what does your statement about neo-liberalism prove"

Which countries during this period saw massive sustainable reductions in poverty without some free market model in place?

"It is you who should open your eyes and stop expecting people on here to accept your ideological beliefs and statements as facts."

I don't expect people to accept my beliefs I am just pointing out why I think their beliefs are wrong. This is a comment section the whole idea of it is to comment on different views and articles. How can you ever benefit or make an accurate decision or belief if you do not try to understand what the opposite belief is? I think nearly everything I have said has been somewhat backed up by logic or a fact, I have not said wishy washy statements like:

"Neo-liberalism is based on the thought of personal freedom for the rich and powerful elites is all."

Unless you can expand on this and give evidence or some form of an example why you think its true then it makes no sense. You are not the only commentor on this article to make a similar statement and the way people have attempted to justify it is due to bailouts but as I have said a bailout is not part of the neoliberal school of thought so if you have a problem with bailouts you don't have a problem with neoliberalism.

theguardianisrubbish -> murielbelcher , 9 Jun 2013 07:10
@murielbelcher - I don't want to go to far into Thatcherism because it is slightly off topic. The early 80s recession was a global recession and yes during the first few years unemployment soared. Why was that because the trade unions were running amok the UK was losing millions of days of work per month.

Inflation was getting out of control and the only way to solve it was a self induced recession. You cannot seriously believe that without the reforms that she implemented we would not have recovered as quick as we did nor can you argue that it was possible for her or anyone else to turn around such an inefficient industry. Don't forget the problems of the manufacturing industry go back way before Thatcher's time.

theguardianisrubbish -> someoneionceknew , 9 Jun 2013 06:34
@someoneionceknew -

"Here's your problem. You believe that banks lend savings. They don't. Loans create deposits create reserves."

I am not claiming to be an expert on this if you are then let me know and please do correct me. I agree banks do not lend deposits but they do lend savings. There is a difference putting money on deposit is different to say putting money into an ISA. I don't agree though that deposits create reserves I believe that they come from the central bank otherwise banks would be constrained by the amount of deposits in the system which is not true and something you have said is not true.

Nevertheless, the majority of liquidity in the bond markets (like most other markets) comes from institutional investors, i.e pension funds, unit trusts, insurance companies, etc. They get their money from savings by consumers as well as sometimes companies. Ok we don't always give our money to insurance companies when we save but via premiums is another way the ordinary consumer contributes to this so called "debt industry". I also said that foreign and local governments buy debt and companies invest directly into the debt market.

MysticFish -> MickGJ , 9 Jun 2013 06:17
@MickGJ - Business-friendly to who exactly: the nation or hostile overseas speculators?
theguardianisrubbish -> TedSmithAndSon , 9 Jun 2013 06:14
"In theory the banks should have been allowed to go bust, but the consequences where deemed too high (as they inevitable are). "

Iceland would disagree.

"The result is socialism for the rich using the poor as the excuse, which is the reality of neoliberalism."

Why have only the rich benefited from the bailout? You are not making any sense.

"The result is socialism for the rich using the poor as the excuse, which is the reality of neoliberalism."

Why? You cannot just say a statement like that and not expand, it makes no sense.

"Thatcher "revitalised" banking, while everything else withered and died."

...but also revitalised the economy and got everyone back to work.

"Neoliberalism is based on the thought that you get as much freedom as you can pay for, otherwise you can just pay... like everyone else."

Again you have to expand on this because it makes no sense.

"In Asia and South America it has been the economic preference of dictators that pushes profit upwards and responsibility down, just like it does here."

Don't think that is true in most cases nor would it make sense. Why would a dictator who wants as much power as possible operate a laissez-faire economy? You cannot have personal freedom without having economic freedom, it is a necessary not sufficient condition. Tell me a case where these is a large degree of political freedom but little to no economic freedom. Moreover look at the countries in Asia and South America that have adopted a neoliberal agenda and notice their how poverty as reduced significantly.

"I find it ironic that it now has 5 year plans that absolutely must not be deviated from, massive state intervention in markets (QE, housing policy, tax credits... insert where applicable), and advocates large scale central planning even as it denies reality, and makes the announcement from a tractor factory."

Who has 5 year plans?

"In theory it's one thing, the reality is entirely different."

If the reality is different to the theory then it is not neoliberalism that is being implemented therefore it makes no sense to dispute the theory. Look at where it has been implemented, the best case in the world at the moment is Hong Kong look at how well that country has performed.

"a massive lie told by rich people "

I can assure you I am not rich.

"Until we're rid of it, we're all it's slaves."

Neoliberalism is based on personal freedom. If you believe this about neoliberalism in your opinion give me one economic school of thought where this does not apply.

theguardianisrubbish -> theonionmurders , 9 Jun 2013 05:35
@theonionmurders -

"Bailouts have been a constant feature of neoliberalism."

What you are saying does not make sense. Whatever you say about that there was no where else to turn the government had to bailout out the banks a neolibralist would disagree.

"In fact the role of the state is simply reduced to a merely commissioning agent to private parasitical corporations. "

That's corporatism which so far you have described pretty well.

"History has shown the state playing this role since neoliberalism became embedded in policy since the 1970s - Long Term Capital Management, Savings and Loans, The Brady Plan, numerous PFI bailouts and those of the Western banking system during the 1982 South American, 1997 Asian and 2010 European debt crises."

What?! Bailouts have been occurring before the industrial revolution. Deregulation in the UK occurred mainly during the 80s not 70's. Furthermore financial deregulation occurred in the UK in 1986. In the USA the major piece of financial deregulation was the Gramm Leach Bliley Act which was passed in 1999. So you have just undercut your own point with the examples you gave above. You could argue Argentina and we could argue all day about the causes of that, but I would say that any government that pursues an expansionary monetary policy under a fixed ER is never going to end well.

"...policy if you won't flick through a book."

My point was that when people quote a source they tend to either quote the page that the point comes from. To be honest if this book is telling you that neoliberalism and neoclassical are significantly different (which you seemed to suggest in you earlier post) then I would suggest put the book down.

ATrueFinn -> fireman36 , 9 Jun 2013 04:17
@ fireman36 09 June 2013 1:32am

Don't like it? Change the rules.

Exactly! However:

"Google, Amazon and Apple... avoid their taxes, because they can, because they are more powerful than governments."

Yes to the first, no to the second. Corporations with revenues exceeding the GDP of a small nation have quite a lot of power: Exxon's revenue is between the GDP of Norway and Austria. In Finland Nokia generated 3 4 % of the GDP for a decade and the government bent backwards to accommodate its polite requests, including a specific law reducing the privacy of employees' emails.

Grich -> MatthewBall , 8 Jun 2013 22:29
@MatthewBall -

I am not sure if this is true. We have the same economic system (broadly speaking, capitalism) as nearly every country in the world, and the world economy is growing at a reasonable rate, at around 3-4% for 2013-14 (see http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2013/01/pdf/c1.pdf for more details).

We percieve a problem in (most of) Europe and North America because our economies are growing more slowly than this, and in some cases not at all. The global growth figure comes out healthy because of strong growth in the emerging countries, like China, Brazil and India, who are narrowing the gap between their living standards and ours. So, the world as a whole isn't broken, even if our bit of it is going through a rough patch.

What you have missed, is that the lions share of the proceeds of that growth are not going to ordinary people but to a tiny minority of super rich. It is not working for the majority. http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/07/58-of-real-income-growth-since-1976-went-to-top-1-and-why-that-matters.html

oriel46 -> Fachan , 8 Jun 2013 22:08
@Fachan - Except that it isn't capitalism that was being criticized here, but neoliberalism: a distinction that's often lost on neoliberals themselves, ironically.
TomorrowsWorld , 8 Jun 2013 19:58
I'm sure that Denis Healy and any number of African economists would confirm that the IMF is quite simply a refuge of absolutely last resort, when investor confidence in your economy is so shattered that the only way ahead is to open the shark gates and allow big money to plunder whatever value remains there, without the benefit of any noticeable return for your people. Greece is but one more victim of a syndrome that encompasses all the science and forensic analysis of ritual sacrifice.
murielbelcher -> OneCommentator , 8 Jun 2013 19:10
@OneCommentator - don't confuse economic deregulation which acted as handmaiden to global finance and multinationals as economic freedoms for population

China's govt was doing what china's govt had decided to do from 1978 BEFORE the election of Thatcher in 1979 or Reagan in 1980 (office from Jan 1981), so very little correlation there I think

The GATT rounds whether you agree with their aims or not were the products of the post war decades, again before Thatcher and Reagan came to power

The golden age of 1945 - 1975 or so witnessed huge rises in standards of living so your point linking neo-liberalism to rising standards of living is literally meaningless. There was an explosive growth in economic activity during the three or four post war decades

murielbelcher -> theguardianisrubbish , 8 Jun 2013 19:04
@theguardianisrubbish - you can't get away with this

She DID not get everyone back to work again. There were two recessions at either end of the 1980s. She TRIPLED unemployment during the first half of the 1980s and introduced the phenomenon of high structural unemployment and placing people on invalidity benefits to massage the headline unemployment count. Give us the figures to back up your assertion that she "got everyone back to work again." I suspect that you cannot and your statement stands for the utter nonsense that it is in any kind of reality.

A few months after she was forced out Tory Chancellor Norman Lamont in 1991 during yet another recession declared that "unemployment was a price worth paying"!!!

Neo-liberalism is based on the thought of personal freedom for the rich and powerful elites is all. Many people across the globe were lifted out of poverty between 1945-1980 so what does your statement about neo-liberalism prove

It is you who should open your eyes and stop expecting people on here to accept your ideological beliefs and statements as facts.

Because they are not: in no shape, way or form

fireman36 , 8 Jun 2013 19:03
Not very impressed to be honest. For starters:

"The IMF exists to lend money to governments, so it's comic that it wags its finger at governments that run up debt. And, of course, its loans famously come with strings attached: adopt a free-market economy, or strengthen the one you have, kissing goodbye to the Big State."

That's glib and inaccurate. A better read about the IMF from an insider: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/05/the-quiet-coup/307364/ Digest: the biggest problem the IMF have to deal with in bailouts is always the politics of cronyism; free-market oligarchs and government in cahoots.

"Many IMF programs "go off track" (a euphemism) precisely because the government can't stay tough on erstwhile cronies, and the consequences are massive inflation or other disasters. A program "goes back on track" once the government prevails or powerful oligarchs sort out among themselves who will govern -- and thus win or lose -- under the IMF-supported plan. The real fight in Thailand and Indonesia in 1997 was about which powerful families would lose their banks. In Thailand, it was handled relatively smoothly. In Indonesia, it led to the fall of President Suharto and economic chaos."

MickGJ -> JohnBroggio , 8 Jun 2013 18:42

@JohnBroggio - who caters for the idealist vote?

Generally whoever happens to be in opposition at the time. This made the LibDems the ideal (sorry) choice for a long time but then they broke a long-standing if unspoken promise that they would never actually be in government.

Last weekś Economist has some very interesting stuff from the British Social Attitudes survey which shows the increasing drift away from collectivist ideals towards liberalism over each succeeding generation.

The assumption shared by many round here that the young are some untapped resource of revolutionary energy is deeply mistaken

[Dec 14, 2018] The era of neoliberalism has seen a massive increase in government, not a shrinkage. The biggest change is the role of governments - to protect markets rather than to protect the rights and dignities of its citizens

Notable quotes:
"... The era of neoliberalism has seen a massive increase in government, not a shrinkage. The biggest change is the role of governments - to protect markets rather than to protect the rights and dignities of its citizens. When viewed by outcome rather than ideological rhetoric, it becomes increasingly clear that neoliberalism has nothing to do with shrinking the state, freeing markets, or freeing the individual, and everything to do with a massive power grab by a global elite. ..."
"... What was the billions of pounds in bank bailout welfare and recession on costs all about? You tell me. All the result of the application of your extremist free market ideology? Let the banks run wild, they mess up and the taxpayer has to step in with bailout welfare and pay to clear up the recession debris ..."
"... Market participants and their venal political friends have during the past 30 years of extremist neo-liberal ideology rigged, abused, distorted and subverted their market and elite power to tilt the economic and social balance massively in their favour ..."
"... Neo liberalism = the favoured ideology of the very rich and powerful elite ..."
"... at last somebody is looking at globalisation and asking whose interests is it designed to serve? It certainly ain't for the people. ..."
"... the highly placed banking and financial class are along with their venal political mates ..."
"... We've had three decades of asset stripping in favor of the rich elites and look at the mess we're in now. ..."
"... I strongly believe that people are not being told the full story. Like the NSA surveillance revelation, the effects will not be pretty when the facts are known. No country needs the IMF. ..."
"... The mythology surrounding deficits and national debt is a religion that the world is in desperate need of debunking. Like religion, the mythology is used as a means of power and entrenchment of privilege for the Ruling Caste, not the plebs (lesser mortals). ..."
Dec 03, 2018 | www.theguardian.com
justamug , 8 Jun 2013 18:09
This article is a testament to our ignorance. Orr is no intellectual slouch, but somehow, like many in the mainstream, she still fails to address some fundamental assumptions and thus ends up with a muddled argument.

"What they don't seem to acknowledge is that the merry days of reckless lending are never going to return;"

Lending has not stopped - it's just moved out of one market into another. Banks are making profits, and banks profit are made by expanding credit.

Neoliberal ideology insists that states are too big and cumbersome, too centralised and faceless, to be efficient and responsive.

Yes and no. There is a difference between what is preached and what happens in practice. The era of neoliberalism has seen a massive increase in government, not a shrinkage. The biggest change is the role of governments - to protect markets rather than to protect the rights and dignities of its citizens. When viewed by outcome rather than ideological rhetoric, it becomes increasingly clear that neoliberalism has nothing to do with shrinking the state, freeing markets, or freeing the individual, and everything to do with a massive power grab by a global elite.
murielbelcher -> MurchuantEacnamai , 8 Jun 2013 18:06
@MurchuantEacnamai - well righty ideologues such as yourself and your venal political acolytes have utterly failed to support the case or institute measures that: "apply effective democratic governance to ensure market

What was the billions of pounds in bank bailout welfare and recession on costs all about? You tell me. All the result of the application of your extremist free market ideology? Let the banks run wild, they mess up and the taxpayer has to step in with bailout welfare and pay to clear up the recession debris

Market participants and their venal political friends have during the past 30 years of extremist neo-liberal ideology rigged, abused, distorted and subverted their market and elite power to tilt the economic and social balance massively in their favour

You the taxpayer are good enough to bail us out when we mess up but then we demand that your services are cut in return and that your employment is ever more precarious and wages depressed (at the lower end of the scale - never ever the higher of course!! That's the neo-liberal deal isn't it

Neo liberalism = the favoured ideology of the very rich and powerful elite and boy don't they know how to work its levers

freedomrespect , 8 Jun 2013 18:00
Very insightful commentary and at last somebody is looking at globalisation and asking whose interests is it designed to serve? It certainly ain't for the people. Amazing it's been approved on a UK liberal newspaper as well!
Boguille -> Fachan , 8 Jun 2013 17:57
@Fachan - There was nothing in the article about envy. It was an exposition of the failure of our present system which allows the rich to get ever richer. That would be fine if it weren't for the fact that the increasing disparity in wealth is bringing down the economy and making it less productive while leaving a large part of the population in, or on the verge of, poverty.
murielbelcher -> CaptainGrey , 8 Jun 2013 17:41
@CaptainGrey - but we're not talking about that form of capitalism are we?

Surely you must realise that there are very very different forms of capitalism. The capitalism that reigns now would not have permitted the creation of the NHS had it not been devised in the1940s when a very different type of capitalism reigned. Its political acolytes and its cheerleader press would have denounced the NHS as an extremist commie idea!!

murielbelcher -> fr0mn0where , 8 Jun 2013 17:39
@fr0mn0where - it was crumbling in the 1980s

The Chicago boys swarmed into eastern Europe after 1989 to introduce a form of gangster unbridled capitalism. The very Chicago boys led by Milton Friedman who used the dictator Pinochet's Chile as test bed for their ideology from September 1973 after the coup that overthrew Allende

murielbelcher -> fr0mn0where , 8 Jun 2013 17:35
@fr0mn0where - no but the highly placed banking and financial class are along with their venal political mates

We've had three decades of asset stripping in favor of the rich elites and look at the mess we're in now.

murielbelcher -> MatthewBall , 8 Jun 2013 17:33
@MatthewBall - social democracy

The neo-liberal order commenced only in the late 1970s - there was a very different order prior to this which was not "Soviet Socialism" as you term it.

As such this extremist rich man's ideological experiment has had a long innings and has failed as the events of 2008 laid bare for all to see - it has been tried out disastrously on live human beings for 34 years and has now been thoroughly discredited with the huge bank bailouts and financial crash and ensuing and enduring recession It was scarcely succeeding prior to this with high entrenched rates of unemployment, frequent recessions/booms and busts and unsustainable property bubbles and deregulated unstable speculative aka casino banking activity

Time for a change

RidiculousPseudonym , 8 Jun 2013 17:26
This is basically right, but a few comments.

1. Neoliberalism cannot be pinned on one party alone. It was accepted by the Thatcher government, but no Prime Minister since has seriously challenged it.

2. Neoliberalism is logically contrary to conservative values. Either there are certain moral imperatives so important that it is worth wasting money over them, or there are not. No wonder that Tories are torn in two, not to mention Labour politicians who also try to combine neoliberalism and moral principle.

3. Saying "even Adam Smith" is understandable but unfair. His work was rather enlightened in the context of mercantilism, and of course the Wealth of Nations was not his only book. Others will know his work better than me, but I think he dwells rather strongly on problems of persistent poverty.

4. The political and redistributive functions of nations are indeed damaged by neolib, but I don't think there is any realistic way of getting that power back without applying capital controls. If we apply capital controls, all hell breaks loose.

5. Ergo, we are stuck with a situation where neolib is killing democracy, distributive justice and conservative moral values, but there is nothing we can do about it without pulling the plug altogether and unleashing a sharp drop in wealth and 1930s nationalistic havoc. A bit of a tragedy, indeed.

HolyInsurgent , 8 Jun 2013 17:22

Deborah Orr: The IMF exists to lend money to governments, so it's comic that it wags its finger at governments that run up debt.

I strongly believe that people are not being told the full story. Like the NSA surveillance revelation, the effects will not be pretty when the facts are known. No country needs the IMF. Any national government with its own national currency sovereignty can pay its own debts within its own country with its own currency. International borrowing in foreign markets is the biggest myth since religion. But since neoliberalism and its inherent myths have been swallowed whole for so long, we are still at the stage where the child points and laughs at the nude emperor. The fallout from the revelation and remedy is to follow.

The problem with the Eurozone is not that the Euro is the "national" currency. Control of the Euro resides with the European Central Bank, not the Troika (European Commission, European Central Bank, IMF). The European Central Bank, as sole controller of the Euro (the "national" currency), can issue funds to constituent Eurozone states to the extent necessary. I challenge anyone to demonstrate how any central bank does not have power over its own currency!

The mythology surrounding deficits and national debt is a religion that the world is in desperate need of debunking. Like religion, the mythology is used as a means of power and entrenchment of privilege for the Ruling Caste, not the plebs (lesser mortals).

someoneionceknew -> colonelraeburn , 8 Jun 2013 17:18
@colonelraeburn - Excuse me? Private bank credit caused the housing price inflation.

Politicians were complicit in deregulating and appointing non-regulators but they didn't make the loans.

MickGJ -> DavidPavett , 8 Jun 2013 17:16

@DavidPavett - Does anyone have any idea what this is supposed to mean? There are certainly no leads on this in the link given to "the philosopher" John Gray

Gray wrote this in the Guardian in 2007:

Whether in Africa, Asia, Latin America or post-communist Europe, policies of wholesale privatisation and structural adjustment have led to declining economic activity and social dislocation on a massive scale

This doesn't seem to support Orrś assertion that he is calling for a structural adjustment, rather the opposite. I'ḿ not really familiar with Grayś work but he seems to be rather against the universal imposition of any system, new or old.
katiewm -> CaptainGrey , 8 Jun 2013 16:46
@CaptainGrey - Capitalism is not an undifferentiated mass. Late-stage neoliberal hypercapitalism as practiced in the US and increasingly in the UK is a very different beast than the traditional European capitalist social democracy or the Nordic model, which have been shown to work relatively well over time. In fact, neoliberal capitalism - the sort Orr is talking about here - is marked by increasing decline both in the state and in the economy, as inequality in wealth distribution creates a society of beggars and kings instead of spenders and savers. The gains achieved through carefully regulated capitalism won't stick around in the free-for-all conditions preferred by those whose ideology demands the sell-off of the state.
jazzdrum -> PeterWoking , 8 Jun 2013 16:16
@PeterWoking - For some parts of the world , yes they are more affluent now , but a huge part of the globe is still without food and water .

I think de regulation of the financial sector has caused a huge amount of damage to the world all round and to be honest, i expect more of the same as the Bankers are still in control.

[Dec 13, 2018] Averting World Conflict with China by Ron Unz

Notable quotes:
"... New York Times ..."
"... Wall Street Journal ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... this is a clear sign that Canada no longer exists as an independent nation, but is a colony of the USA/Israeli empire. ..."
"... This story is not about an ultra-wealthy Chinese heiress enduring an odd adventure in Canada. This story is about a complete loss of Canadian sovereignty, because detaining this lady is outright insane. Canada was conquered without firing a shot! Welcome back to the royal empire run as a dictatorship. ..."
"... If only America focused its attention inward, on growth and stability, instead of transcendent American Imperialism then the world may stand a chance. ..."
"... Western positions on climate, neoliberalism, migration, in my opinion point into the same direction: critical thinking, almost gone. ..."
"... Defrauding the nation into "war of aggression" is the supreme crime one can commit against the American People. The "SUPREME CRIME"! ..."
"... Every "penny" belonging to each and every Neocon Oligarch who CONSPIRED TO DEFRAUD US INTO ILLEGAL WAR should be forfeit until the debt from those wars is paid down .. IN FULL ! ..."
"... Canada may be the obvious criminal. But on consideration, isn't it rather like the low-level thug who carries out a criminal assignment on the orders of a gang boss? And isn't it the gang boss who is the real problem for society? ..."
"... and Ms. Meng was seized on the same day that he was personally meeting on trade issues with Chinese President Xi. Some have even suggested that the incident was a deliberate slap in Trump's face. ..."
Dec 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

As most readers know, I'm not a casual political blogger and I prefer producing lengthy research articles rather than chasing the headlines of current events. But there are exceptions to every rule, and the looming danger of a direct worldwide clash with China is one of them.

Consider the arrest last week of Meng Wanzhou, the CFO of Huawei, the world's largest telecom equipment manufacturer. While flying from Hong Kong to Mexico, Ms. Meng was changing planes in the Vancouver International Airport airport when she was suddenly detained by the Canadian government on an August US warrant. Although now released on $10 million bail, she still faces extradition to a New York City courtroom, where she could receive up to thirty years in federal prison for allegedly having conspired in 2010 to violate America's unilateral economic trade sanctions against Iran.

Although our mainstream media outlets have certainly covered this important story, including front page articles in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal , I doubt most American readers fully recognize the extraordinary gravity of this international incident and its potential for altering the course of world history. As one scholar noted, no event since America's deliberate 1999 bombing of China's embassy in Belgrade , which killed several Chinese diplomats, has so outraged both the Chinese government and its population. Columbia's Jeffrey Sachs correctly described it as "almost a US declaration of war on China's business community."

Such a reaction is hardly surprising. With annual revenue of $100 billion, Huawei ranks as the world's largest and most advanced telecommunications equipment manufacturer as well as China's most internationally successful and prestigious company. Ms. Meng is not only a longtime top executive there, but also the daughter of the company's founder, Ren Zhengfei, whose enormous entrepreneurial success has established him as a Chinese national hero.

Her seizure on obscure American sanction violation charges while changing planes in a Canadian airport almost amounts to a kidnapping. One journalist asked how Americans would react if China had seized Sheryl Sandberg of Facebook for violating Chinese law especially if Sandberg were also the daughter of Steve Jobs.

Indeed, the closest analogy that comes to my mind is when Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia kidnapped the Prime Minister of Lebanon earlier this year and held him hostage. Later he more successfully did the same with hundreds of his wealthiest Saudi subjects, extorting something like $100 billion in ransom from their families before finally releasing them. Then he may have finally over-reached himself when Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi dissident, was killed and dismembered by a bone-saw at the Saudi embassy in Turkey.

We should actually be a bit grateful to Prince Mohammed since without him America would clearly have the most insane government anywhere in the world. As it stands, we're merely tied for first.

Since the end of the Cold War, the American government has become increasingly delusional, regarding itself as the Supreme World Hegemon. As a result, local American courts have begun enforcing gigantic financial penalties against foreign countries and their leading corporations, and I suspect that the rest of the world is tiring of this misbehavior. Perhaps such actions can still be taken against the subservient vassal states of Europe, but by most objective measures, the size of China's real economy surpassed that of the US several years ago and is now substantially larger , while also still having a far higher rate of growth. Our totally dishonest mainstream media regularly obscures this reality, but it remains true nonetheless.

Provoking a disastrous worldwide confrontation with mighty China by seizing and imprisoning one of its leading technology executives reminds me of a comment I made several years ago about America's behavior under the rule of its current political elites:

Or to apply a far harsher biological metaphor, consider a poor canine infected with the rabies virus. The virus may have no brain and its body-weight is probably less than one-millionth that of the host, but once it has seized control of the central nervous system, the animal, big brain and all, becomes a helpless puppet.

Once friendly Fido runs around foaming at the mouth, barking at the sky, and trying to bite all the other animals it can reach. Its friends and relatives are saddened by its plight but stay well clear, hoping to avoid infection before the inevitable happens, and poor Fido finally collapses dead in a heap.

Normal countries like China naturally assume that other countries like the US will also behave in normal ways, and their dumbfounded shock at Ms. Meng's seizure has surely delayed their effective response. In 1959, Vice President Richard Nixon visited Moscow and famously engaged in a heated "kitchen debate" with Premier Nikita Khrushchev over the relative merits of Communism and Capitalism. What would have been the American reaction if Nixon had been immediately arrested and given a ten year Gulag sentence for "anti-Soviet agitation"?

Since a natural reaction to international hostage-taking is retaliatory international hostage-taking, the newspapers have reported that top American executives have decided to forego visits to China until the crisis is resolved. These days, General Motors sells more cars in China than in the US, and China is also the manufacturing source of nearly all our iPhones, but Tim Cook, Mary Barra, and their higher-ranking subordinates are unlikely to visit that country in the immediate future, nor would the top executives of Google, Facebook, Goldman Sachs, and the leading Hollywood studios be willing to risk indefinite imprisonment.

Canada had arrested Ms. Meng on American orders, and this morning's newspapers reported that a former Canadian diplomat had suddenly been detained in China , presumably as a small bargaining-chip to encourage Ms. Meng's release. But I very much doubt such measures will have much effect. Once we forgo traditional international practices and adopt the Law of the Jungle, it becomes very important to recognize the true lines of power and control, and Canada is merely acting as an American political puppet in this matter. Would threatening the puppet rather than the puppet-master be likely to have much effect?

Similarly, nearly all of America's leading technology executives are already quite hostile to the Trump Administration, and even if it were possible, seizing one of them would hardly be likely to sway our political leadership. To a lesser extent, the same thing is true about the overwhelming majority of America's top corporate leaders. They are not the individuals who call the shots in the current White House.

Indeed, is President Trump himself anything more than a higher-level puppet in this very dangerous affair? World peace and American national security interests are being sacrificed in order to harshly enforce the Israel Lobby's international sanctions campaign against Iran, and we should hardly be surprised that the National Security Adviser John Bolton, one of America's most extreme pro-Israel zealots, had personally given the green light to the arrest. Meanwhile, there are credible reports that Trump himself remained entirely unaware of these plans, and Ms. Meng was seized on the same day that he was personally meeting on trade issues with Chinese President Xi. Some have even suggested that the incident was a deliberate slap in Trump's face.

But Bolton's apparent involvement underscores the central role of his longtime patron, multi-billionaire casino-magnate Sheldon Adelson, whose enormous financial influence within Republican political circles has been overwhelmingly focused on pro-Israel policy and hostility towards Iran, Israel's regional rival.

Although it is far from clear whether the very elderly Adelson played any direct personal role in Ms. Meng's arrest, he surely must be viewed as the central figure in fostering the political climate that produced the current situation. Perhaps he should not be described as the ultimate puppet-master behind our current clash with China, but any such political puppet-masters who do exist are certainly operating at his immediate beck and call. In very literal terms, I suspect that if Adelson placed a single phone call to the White House, the Trump Administration would order Canada to release Ms. Meng that same day.

Adelson's fortune of $33 billion ranks him as the 15th wealthiest man in America, and the bulk of his fortune is based on his ownership of extremely lucrative gambling casinos in Macau, China . In effect, the Chinese government currently has its hands around the financial windpipe of the man ultimately responsible for Ms. Meng's arrest and whose pro-Israel minions largely control American foreign policy. I very much doubt that they are fully aware of this enormous, untapped source of political leverage.

Over the years, Adelson's Chinese Macau casinos have been involved in all sorts of political bribery scandals , and I suspect it would be very easy for the Chinese government to find reasonable grounds for immediately shutting them down, at least on a temporary basis, with such an action having almost no negative repercussions to Chinese society or the bulk of the Chinese population. How could the international community possibly complain about the Chinese government shutting down some of their own local gambling casinos with a long public record of official bribery and other criminal activity? At worst, other gambling casino magnates would become reluctant to invest future sums in establishing additional Chinese casinos, hardly a desperate threat to President Xi's anti-corruption government.

I don't have a background in finance and I haven't bothered trying to guess the precise impact of a temporary shutdown of Adelson's Chinese casinos, but it wouldn't surprise me if the resulting drop in the stock price of Las Vegas Sands Corp would reduce Adelson's personal net worth were by $5-10 billion within 24 hours, surely enough to get his immediate personal attention. Meanwhile, threats of a permanent shutdown, perhaps extending to Chinese-influenced Singapore, might lead to the near-total destruction of Adelson's personal fortune, and similar measures could also be applied as well to the casinos of all the other fanatically pro-Israel American billionaires, who dominate the remainder of gambling in Chinese Macau.

The chain of political puppets responsible for Ms. Meng's sudden detention is certainly a complex and murky one. But the Chinese government already possesses the absolute power of financial life-or-death over Sheldon Adelson, the man located at the very top of that chain. If the Chinese leadership recognizes that power and takes effective steps, Ms. Meng will immediately be put on a plane back home, carrying the deepest sort of international political apology. And future attacks against Huawei, ZTE, and other Chinese technology companies would not be repeated.

China actually holds a Royal Flush in this international political poker game. The only question is whether they will recognize the value of their hand. I hope they do for the sake of America and the entire world.

Carlton Meyer , says: Website December 13, 2018 at 5:36 am GMT

This is no surprise. Anyone who follows political events knows that John Bolton is insane, so no surprise that he devised this insane idea. The problem will be corrected within a week, and hopefully Bolton sent to an asylum.

However, this is a clear sign that Canada no longer exists as an independent nation, but is a colony of the USA/Israeli empire. Canada provides soldiers for this empire in Afghanistan even today, and in Latvia. Most Canadians can't find that nation on a map, but it's a tiny unimportant nation in the Baltic that NATO adsorbed as part of its plan for a new Cold War.

This story is not about an ultra-wealthy Chinese heiress enduring an odd adventure in Canada. This story is about a complete loss of Canadian sovereignty, because detaining this lady is outright insane. Canada was conquered without firing a shot! Welcome back to the royal empire run as a dictatorship.

Cloak And Dagger , says: December 13, 2018 at 5:40 am GMT
I hope someone in China is reading this article. I would love to see Adelson and his cohorts go down in flames. This would fit right in with China's current anti-corruption foray. Xi has a reputation for hanging corrupt officials. Shutting down Adelson's casinos would be consistent with what Xi has been doing and increase his popularity, not least of all, right here in the US.
Tusk , says: December 13, 2018 at 5:43 am GMT
If only America focused its attention inward, on growth and stability, instead of transcendent American Imperialism then the world may stand a chance. The future will suffer once China's debt traps collapse and like America it begins placing military globally. America would be the one country who could work towards a Western future but this will never be the case. Better start learning Mandarin lest we end up like the Uyghurs.
Frankie P , says: December 13, 2018 at 5:55 am GMT
@Anonymous Use your brain. The Chinese elite want to use the political clout that Adelson and the other big casino Jews have with the US government. To gain lobby power from a proven expert, Shelly Adelson, they are willing to allow him to make the big bucks in Macao. They expect quid pro quo.
sarz , says: December 13, 2018 at 6:02 am GMT
Great suggestion, based on sound analysis, especially your pointing out the centrality of Zionism in Trump's foreign policy.

I wish you would blog more.

Anonymous [346] Disclaimer , says: December 13, 2018 at 6:11 am GMT
The Chinese are pussies and will always back down. The U.S. laughed in their face after they bombed and killed them in Belgrade and got crickets from the Chinamen. China can't project much power beyond its borders. They can't punch back. The Chinese (and East Asians) are only part of the global business racket because they are efficient worker bees facilitating the global financial system. They have no real control over the global market. And if they start to think they do they'll get a quick lesson. Like they're getting with Meng, who is being treated like coolie prostitute. LMAO.
Baxter , says: December 13, 2018 at 6:44 am GMT
I always enjoy fresh writing from Mr. Unz. Clarity of thought is a fine thing to witness in language. It should be stated, America is not in any danger.the empire is and is in terminal decline. As Asia's economic might grows in leaps ad bound, so does the empire scramble to thwart losing its global grip.

As Fred Reed once pointed out, declining empires rarely go quietly. Will America's leadership gamble on a new war to prevent asia's ascendancy?
I think it's possible.

But what do I know. As my father once said, "I'm just a pawn in a game."

To his credit he had the wherewithal to see that. Alas, most Americans are asleep.

renfro , says: December 13, 2018 at 8:08 am GMT
The call for Ms. Meng's arrest had to come from the US Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control. They enforce every thing related to sanctions, which they claim is what Meng was arrested for– sale of phones and software to Iran. But they also say they had been on her company's case since 2013 so their timing is rather suspect.

What else I don't understand is her company has research and offices in Germany, Sweden, the U.S., France, Italy, Russia, India, China and Canada ..So if what they sold or attempted to sell to Iran wasn't outright 'stolen' intellectual property from the US or even if it was why not transfer it to and or have it made in China or some country not signed onto the Iran sanctions and then sell it to Iran. I haven't boned up on exactly what kinds of phone software they were selling but I think it has something to do with being able to bypass NSA and others intercepts.

The Alarmist , says: December 13, 2018 at 8:49 am GMT
You are assuming Meng is not a sacrificial pawn in some larger game.

It would be priceless for Xi to shut down Adelson's operations in Macau for a few days or weeks, but I'm afraid Xi is very much akin to Capitain Louis Renault in Casablanca , and after walking into a Macau casino and uttering the phrase, "I am shocked- shocked- to find that gambling is going on in here!" might admit in the next breath, "I blow with the wind, and the prevailing wind happens to be from Jerusalem."

jilles dykstra , says: December 13, 2018 at 9:06 am GMT
Half a century or so propaganda like 'the USA policing the world' of course had effect. Not realised is that in normal circumstances police is not an autonomous force, but has to act within a legal framework. The illusion of this framework of course exists, human rights, democracy, whatever
anon [426] Disclaimer , says: December 13, 2018 at 9:09 am GMT
She's out on bail. Agree that Bolton blindsided Trump. Trump is going to try to turn this into some sort of PR gesture when he pardons her. No way he will let this mess up his trade deal. Which is beached until she exonerated.
jilles dykstra , says: December 13, 2018 at 9:28 am GMT
@Anonymous

What is true of these stories of course cannot be known with certainty, but it is asserted that USA military technology is way behind China and Russia. Several examples exist, but of course, if these examples tell the truth, not sure. PISA comparisons of levels of education world wide show how the west is intellectually behind the east.

Western positions on climate, neoliberalism, migration, in my opinion point into the same direction: critical thinking, almost gone.

Tom Welsh , says: December 13, 2018 at 9:41 am GMT
"I very much doubt that they are fully aware of this enormous, untapped source of political leverage".

I very much doubt whether that is the case. As far as I know, most Chinese people are distinguished by their intelligence, thoroughness and diligence. What do the thousands of people employed by China's foreign ministry and its intelligence services do all day, if they are unaware of such important facts?

However I also doubt if China's leaders are inclined to see matters in nearly such a black and white way as many Westerners. Jewish people seem to get along very well in China and with the Chinese, which could be because both have high levels of intelligence, culture, and subtlety. As well as being interested in money and enterprise.

It's certainly an interesting situation, and I too am waiting expectantly for the other shoe to drop.

Tom Welsh , says: December 13, 2018 at 9:45 am GMT
@TheMediumIsTheMassage

Yes, whatever your bias is, China is a "normal" country. In the sense of being closer to the ideal than most countries – not of being average.

You may bewail some of the "human rights" issues in China, although I believe they may be somewhat magnified for PR purposes. But when did China last attack another country without provocation and murder hundreds of thousands of its citizens, level its cities, or destroy the rule of law? (Like Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya )

The Chinese seem to be law-abiding, sensible, and strongly disposed to peace. Which is something the world needs a lot more of right now.

alexander , says: December 13, 2018 at 9:47 am GMT
@Dan Hayes "why hasn't anyone before thought of it.. "

" WHY HASN'T ANYONE BEFORE THOUGHT OF IT !!"

You must be kidding me.

For over three years I have been issuing comment after comment after comment .Like a crazed wolf howling in a barren forest .That the "number one" priority of the American people should be demanding the seizure of ALL the assets of Neocon oligarchic class.

Why ?

Not because they are "oligarchs." ..or some might own "casinos" but because they "deliberately" Conspired to Defraud the American People into illegal Wars of Aggression and have nearly bankrupted the nation in the process.

That's why.

And it is the worlds BEST REASON to seize the assets a thousand times better than "bribery charges." I have issued statement after statement to that affect ,on Unz Review, in the hope that at some point it might, at least subliminally, catch on.

What I have witnessed over the past six years, is a lot of intelligent, thoughtful people "correctly diagnosing" the issues which plague the nation But no one had any idea of what to do about it. I have been pointing out, that if people really want to do something about it then do whats RIGHT: Seize the assets of the defrauders.!

Of course we can. Of course we can Its the LAW! Defrauding the nation into "war of aggression" is the supreme crime one can commit against the American People. The "SUPREME CRIME"!

(If you don't think so, go ask your local Police Officer. He will tell you FLAT OUT ..it is the Worst crime "Conspiracy to Defraud into Mass Murder! .Not good ! You can even ask him if there is a statute of limitations. He will probably say something like " Yeah .When the Sun collapses!")

And they are GUILTY as charged There is no doubt , .. not anymore. We all know it and can "prove" it ! Every "penny" belonging to each and every Neocon Oligarch who CONSPIRED TO DEFRAUD US INTO ILLEGAL WAR should be forfeit until the debt from those wars is paid down .. IN FULL !

The keys to the kingdom are right there, right in front of your noses. If you want to change things ."take action" the law is on YOUR side. We don't need China to do a damn thing ..We just need the American People to rise up,"apply the law" and take back their country and its solvency.

Tom Welsh , says: December 13, 2018 at 9:47 am GMT
@Nonny

Canada may be the obvious criminal. But on consideration, isn't it rather like the low-level thug who carries out a criminal assignment on the orders of a gang boss? And isn't it the gang boss who is the real problem for society?

Brabantian , says: December 13, 2018 at 9:59 am GMT
An article with the identical take as Ron Unz, including the idea that China has its key lever via Sheldon Adelson's casinos, was published on the Canadian website of Henry Makow also noting that USA political king-maker Adelson, is a major force behind the anti-Iran obsessions that partly grounded the arrest of Ms Meng, and so well-deserves consequences here...

In the Jeffrey Sachs article linked above, Sachs lists no less than 25 other companies which have been 'violating US sanctions' and admitted guilt via paying of fines, but never suffered any executive arrests, including banks including JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, PayPal, Toronto-Dominion Bank, and Wells Fargo.

In terms of international law, the Meng case violates numerous basic legal and United Nations norms :

This is also a significant humiliation of President Trump personally, his own advisors apparently colluding to render him powerless and uninformed

The Meng case brings to mind the story of another sanctions-violating 'target' arrested at USA request, the great USA chess master and non-Zionist Jew, Bobby Fischer (1943-2008).

Born in Chicago, Illinois, USA, Fischer impressed the world with his genius, but, like Ms Meng became criminally indicted by the USA regime, for the 'crime' of playing chess in Yugoslavia when the Serb government was under USA 'sanctions'. Harassed across the globe, Fischer was jailed in Japan in 2004-05 by embarrassed Japanese leaders, for this fake 'crime' which few people in the world thought was wrong. Fischer had been using his celebrity voice to strongly criticise the USA & Israeli governments, making him also a political target, much as Ms Meng is a political target due to her being a prominent citizen and quasi-princess of China.

The Japanese, loath to be the instrument of Fischer's USA imprisonment, finally allowed Bobby to transit to Iceland where he was given asylum and residency. Living not far from Iceland's NATO military base, Fischer became quickly and mysteriously struck with disease, and Fischer died in Reykjavik, perhaps a victim of a CIA-Mossad-Nato assassination squad.

The Chinese government, I am told, directly understands the power and role of Sheldon Adelson here, and Chinese inspectors are perhaps inside Adelson's Macau properties as you read this. Perhaps Chinese officials may show up soon in Adelson's casinos, and repeat the line of actor Claude Rains' character in the 1942 film 'Casablanca' -
"I'm shocked, shocked, to find that gambling is going on in here!"

OMG , says: December 13, 2018 at 10:24 am GMT
@renfro Seconded
LondonBob , says: December 13, 2018 at 10:32 am GMT
@renfro http://www.atimes.com/article/did-trumps-enemies-try-to-derail-a-trade-deal-with-china/

Article suggests the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence which Mr Giraldi has commented on.

http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/israels-fifth-column-2/

Heros , says: December 13, 2018 at 10:47 am GMT
@sarz Great links.

What we have to realize is that just as there is no real difference between Democrats and Republicans because they are both owned by the same people, so must we realize that in reality there is little difference between the leaders of the worlds countries because they are all owned by the same central banks. This is why Nate Rothschild famously stated "give me control of a countries money supply, and I care not who makes its laws" . All the world's central banks are tied together by BIS, WB and IMF and the US marines. This is the reason Syria, Libya, NK and Venezuela have been taken down: Rothchild central bank control.

So this Huaiwei arrest almost certainly has nothing to do with the "trade war", and is with certainly a hit by one side of the Kabal against the other. Zionist Nationalists versus Chabad Lubbovitz perhaps?

Jared Kushner has been lying pretty low lately and recently was stripped of his security clearance. He was linked to Kissilev the Russian ambassador, plus he was pushing Trump to help protect MBS in SA. I would bet that he is at the center of this storm.

AndrewR , says: December 13, 2018 at 10:54 am GMT
I'm honestly shocked no one has stated the obvious: very, very few Americans would be likely to care if Sheryl Sandberg were arrested on dubious charges in China. I cant say I would be one of those few people.

I also should note that the crown prince of KSA is Mohammad bin Salman. Salman is his father, the king. The crown prince is Mohammad, son of (aka "bin") Salman.

AndrewR , says: December 13, 2018 at 11:00 am GMT
@Nonny Lmao! Canada is a vassal state of the US. The US govt ordered Canada to arrest Meng, and Canada's govt dutifully complied.
AndrewR , says: December 13, 2018 at 11:11 am GMT
@TheMediumIsTheMassage In many ways China does deviate from international norms, but of course so does the United States. As Tom Welsh pointed out, Chinese foreign policy is downright angelic compared to the US, even if you consider Tibet and Xinjiang to be illegitimately occupied territories (an argument I'm sympathetic to). Perhaps China would act as belligerently as the US does if China were the sole global superpower, but it's not, so it's fair to judge China favorably compared to the US.
Sean , says: December 13, 2018 at 11:18 am GMT Godfree Roberts , says: December 13, 2018 at 11:20 am GMT
@TheMediumIsTheMassage It's certainly abnormal in having a functioning democracy and the trust of 90% of its citizens.

Is there anything else that disqualifies it from normalcy?

AndrewR , says: December 13, 2018 at 11:21 am GMT
@Craig Nelsen Trump deserves it for hiring Bolton at all. Perhaps one might argue Trump was blackmailed into doing so but he doesn't seem to be acting like a blackmailed man.
SimplePseudonymicHandle , says: December 13, 2018 at 12:16 pm GMT
Mr. Unz, at no time since Ms. Wanzhou's arrest have I felt myself in a position to judge that this was a strategically unwise or incautious act. It might be, but apparently I'm to be contrasted from so many of your readers, and you, simply for understanding myself to have an inadequate handle on the facts to make the call. That would be true, that my handle on the facts would be inadequate, even if I didn't have personal knowledge of Huawei's suspicious practices or their scale.

I worry that you don't seem to evidence the presence of someone trusted who will go toe to toe with you as Devil's Advocate. Too often, on affairs of too great a consequence, you come across too strongly, when the data doesn't justify the confidence. A confident error is still an error and Maimonides' advice on indecision notwithstanding, a confident error is a candidate for hubris, the worst kind of error. All of this, of course, assumes you make these arguments in good faith because if not the calculus changes mightily.
Too many of your readers evidence that they interpret this event and form an opinion of it based on nothing but this higher order syllogism:

Because I distrust the US government
[or because I distrust those I believe to control the US government]
It follows that this was an unjustified act or else a dangerous strategic error

After this higher order syllogism is accepted without due critique, evidence is sought to justify it and no further consideration of the possibilities is tallied.

At minimum you need to have run a permutation where you seriously consider that : it is well know to US operatives, if not to US citizens, you, and your readers, that Huawei is actively, constantly and maliciously waging covert war on the USA. You should at least consider this possibility. If true, this act may merely be a shot across the bow that notifies China of a readiness to expose things China may not wished exposed, and might stop endangering US citizens, if it were made aware such things stand to be exposed.

If that's true, not only are you a fishing trawler captain causing distraction with a loudspeaker yelling at the captain of the destroyer that just fired the warning shot across the bow of a Chinese vessel that is likely covert PLA/N, but now you may be positioning your trawler to block the destroyer.
Do you really have enough information to know this is wise? Do you really know as much as the destroyer captain?
I will be away today, in the off chance you reply and I don't immediately answer it is because I can't.

ariadna , says: December 13, 2018 at 12:24 pm GMT
Superb, as always, Ron Unz!
For someone who says he has no background in economics you you put your finger dead center on the money nexus of this "puppet run by another puppet controlled by another puppet dangling from the strings of a still bigger puppet" chain from hell.
I wish someone would read out the entire article, may be with photos of the culprits, on Youtube with subtitles in Chinese.
Wizard of Oz , says: December 13, 2018 at 12:26 pm GMT
@Craig Nelsen Nobody is suggesting that "the order" came from Bolton or that he could indeed give any such order. True his not telling Trump about what was about to happen bears a sinister interpretation.
lavoisier , says: Website December 13, 2018 at 12:32 pm GMT
@TheMediumIsTheMassage I think what he means by normal are countries whose leaders are interested in the well being of their nation and the people they rule. No divided or corrupted loyalties to another nation.

By this standard the United States is clearly not a normal country.

Che Guava , says: December 13, 2018 at 12:33 pm GMT
Well said, Mr. Unz.

I was finding the arrest hard to believe, too.

One angle you did not mention, Cisco (U.S. company) of course until not too many years ago had a near-monopoly on the kind of network systems Huawei is selling as number one now (actually, I did not know of Huawei's success there, thought of it as a handset maker), that may be a factor here.

There are a few Chinese or U.S. people of that descent on this site, mainly PRC-sympathetic, it would be very amusing if they were able to ignite a big discussion of your hypothetical reprisals

Ahoy , says: December 13, 2018 at 12:35 pm GMT
@ Anonymous [346] #10

For whatever is worth, if any.

During the bombing of Belgrade a missile fell on the Chinese Embassy. A local tv reporter approached a Chinese Embassy official and asked him. What are you going to do now? The answer was.

"Ask me this question forty years from now"

Strictly personal, Wow!

Durruti , says: December 13, 2018 at 12:52 pm GMT
@Brabantian Nice comment.

Yes, poor Bobby Fischer.

The Meng case brings to mind the story of another sanctions-violating 'target' arrested at USA request, the great USA chess master and non-Zionist Jew, Bobby Fischer (1943-2008).

Fischer was another victim of Zionist controlled American imperialism. Yugoslavia, the child of Woodrow Wilson, became the victim of the Imperialist war Against Russia. Russia's brother, and ally, Yugoslavia, was destroyed by the kind democrat gang administration of Wm (that was not sex), Clinton.

Nonny , says: December 13, 2018 at 12:55 pm GMT
@Tom Welsh You complicate things by bringing up the Mafia boss. Who committed the actual crime? Who kidnapped the woman?
Anon55 , says: December 13, 2018 at 12:58 pm GMT
Excellent article, and an ingenious suggestion regarding the Adelson casinos. But I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a casino shutdown. Having worked in the marketing end of the casino industry myself, I can tell you the most coveted demographic lists were always the Chinese players, words like fanatical and obsessive don't even come close to describing their penchant for gambling. I could literally see casino shutdowns in China causing a national Gilet Jaune moment followed by the overthrow of the Communist Party LOL.

I would definitely welcome seeing more Ron Unz articles on current topics.

Jim Christian , says: December 13, 2018 at 1:04 pm GMT
@Carlton Meyer Any chance this is Democrat, Deep State types at State and Justice manufacturing this cluster-f in order to make Trump look unaware? This is a President that respects casinos. And business. If Bolton and Company pulled this from behind the scenes without Executive knowledge or authorization, is that even legal? More treason? But given the circumstances, how does all this even GET to Iran, hurt Iran at all? What was supposedly illegal was done in 2010. Are we certain bags of cash from the Chinese and Russians and Iran weren't traveling about Democrat-ruled DC back then? Grabbing this chick helps the case against Iran? I'm at a loss as to how.

And so the thought of a more local political benefit/purpose, stirring a diplomatic shit-storm on Trump's watch, something he'd have to take responsibility for. To start a near war, sort of like the Bay of Pigs. Operatives, pulling tricks, writing checks the President then has to cover, looking like an unelectable mook throughout.

I'm happy to give the AIPAC kiddies full credit, I just don't see the damage to Iran in all this. For crying out loud, we carted $500 billion cash over to Iran under Obama's watch, what, 2013 or 2014ish? I don't know how we skip over THAT, to get to trade shenanigans in 2010, also taking place under Obama's watch. What was Holder doing when he was AG after all, why no action then? If it's Israeli-driven today, why wasn't Israel pushing Holder to take action against Huawei back in 2010?

Makes no sense.

TRASH(NOT) , says: December 13, 2018 at 1:06 pm GMT
@TheMediumIsTheMassage How is the USA a "normal" country in any sense of the word? It once was truly great among the nations of the world but that ship sailed looooong back.

We invade for fake "freedom", inject the poison of homo mania into nations that do not do the bidding of the homos and/or bend to the will of the chosen ones, pretend it's all for some good cause then invite the survivors to displace the founding stock of this country. You call that "normal"??

We are nothing more than a vehicle for every kind of degenerate (((loser))) with cash to use our men and women as their private mercenaries. We spread filth around the place, destroy nations and proclaim ourselves as the peace-makers with the shrill voice of a worn out street prostitute on kensingtion ave (philly).

We are like that hoe, living out the last days of her aids infested body, with a grudge on the world for something that was completely of our (((own))) making. Philly might have been the birthplace of this country but camden is where we are all headed. And looking at China, we are dysfunctional beyond repair. Of course we still have quite a few things the Chinese might want to emulate (no the SJW versions but the read deal) but looking at our other maladies, they probably won't who'll blame them?

Icy Blast , says: December 13, 2018 at 1:08 pm GMT
Gosh I hope Agent Orange gets a copy of this article. But I am afraid he is surrounded by Bolton-type traitors.
Anon [257] Disclaimer , says: December 13, 2018 at 1:09 pm GMT
@Anon Yes it was s Portuguese colony. Interesting that Persian traders including Jews were in Macau going back st least to 500 AD probably more.

Ron, have you sent this article to the Chinese ambassador in DC yet?

Strange that the Chinese let Adelson in. The Macau casinos have thrived for a long time. The Portuguese left valuable casinos and the Chinese let the Jews in soon after the Portuguese left.

It makes sense that foreign casino operators would want to move into Macau, but why would China let foreigners in?

Could it be that one of the largest investors in China since the mid 1970s Richard Blum husband of Dianne Feinstein has something to do with it??
She's as much the Senator representing China as a Senator representing California.

Ronnie , says: December 13, 2018 at 1:11 pm GMT
Another interesting aspect of all this is the "suicide" of Physics Professor Zhang Shoucheng at Stanford just a few hours after Meng was arrested on Dec 1. According to reliable Chinese sources and widespread reporting on social media Zhang was the conduit to China from Silicone Valley. He was richly rewarded by Chinese investment in his US companies. IMHO the Chinese understand the role of Israel and Adelson in US politics but are cautious in going this far. The Chinese are taking the light touch approach with Trump and his Adelson selected neocons. A Chinese businessman Guo WenGui with the highest connections to the Chinese elites and security services has sought political asylum in the USA. On the internet he daily speaks to the Chinese diaspora (in Mandarin) on the complex developments in Chinese official corruption. The NY Times has now started to take him seriously (good idea ) and reports that he and Steve Bannon have formed an alliance to expose Chinese government activities. You can read all this in the NY Times. Unz should translate Guo Wengui into English and publish his commentaries. In my analysis he is usually right about China and has shown remarkable predictive powers. He knows how and what the Chinese think, where the bones are buried and what comes next. He and Bannon plan to reveal the facts about the recent suicide in France of another prominent Chinese businessman Wang Jian who was Chairman of Hainan Airlines parent company.
Buzz Mohawk , says: December 13, 2018 at 1:18 pm GMT
This article by Mr. Unz is a good example of why people should read and support the Unz Review. No one is better equipped to shed light on otherwise unmentioned interests behind mainstream news events like this one.

Kudos for making a smart suggestion that no doubt will be heard by people who could carry it out.

Ilyana_Rozumova , says: December 13, 2018 at 1:37 pm GMT
Good article, but it is only scratching the surface.
Many things would be explained if somebody would find out what is the volume of US investment in China, and what percentage of it is Jewish.
That would shed light why the rabid Jewish press in US so bestially attacking Trump, after Trump started to impose tariffs on Chinese goods.
I do not know, but I could guess that Trump reached deep into Jewish profits.
We have no choice than wait what will happen to tariffs after Trump will be replaced.
RVBlake , says: December 13, 2018 at 1:40 pm GMT
@Carlton Meyer Canada declared an end to participating in combat operations in Afghanistan in July 2011 and withdrew its combat forces, leaving a dwindling number of advisors to Afghan forces. The last Canadian soldier departed Afghanistan in March 2014. You are spot on regarding Bolton's certifiability.
Virgile , says: December 13, 2018 at 1:50 pm GMT
Trump has been totally phagocyted by the Neo-Cons in the foreign policy. The two pillars of the neocons foreign policy are now Saudi Arabia and Israel. Trump is benefitting from the neo-cons intelligence and their powerful financial network that he is convinced would help in his reelection.
Once he is re-elected then he may decrease his reliance on them but for the next few years the jewish lobby will prevail in Trump's foreign policy. Unless they are not able to protect Trump from falling under the democrats assaults or been eliminated from power, they are on for more wars, more troubles and more deaths. History will place Trump near Bush junior as neo-cons puppets responsible for the largest destruction of countries since WWII.
eah , says: December 13, 2018 at 1:50 pm GMT
Doesn't really address the core problem.
Anon [257] Disclaimer , says: December 13, 2018 at 2:02 pm GMT
@Brabantian Interesting that she was arrested in the Chinese colony of Vancouver BC. Maybe the Canadian government is asserting sovereignty over Vancouver at long last.

That must have been frightening. There she was sitting in the VIP lounge surrounded by deferential airline clerks as usual and suddenly she's under arrest.

Johnny Smoggins , says: December 13, 2018 at 2:02 pm GMT
The most disappointing thing about this whole incident, so far, is China's timidity in dealing with America.

Holding some C level former Canadian diplomat? Come on China, prove you're a serious nation, you can do much, much better.

Johnny Smoggins , says: December 13, 2018 at 2:06 pm GMT
@Carlton Meyer Canada has been a vassal state of the U.S. since it stopped being a vassal state of the U.K. in the 1960′s.
Sean , says: December 13, 2018 at 2:10 pm GMT

Since the end of the Cold War, the American government has become increasingly delusional, regarding itself as the Supreme World Hegemon.

More delusional than when in 1957 the US government gave Iran a nuclear reactor and weapons grade uranium? In his latter years Khashoggi 's relative, the weapons dealer Adnan Khashoggi, much later mused on what the US was trying to achieve by giving Iran vast amounts of armaments, when all it did was set off an arms race in the region. America then switched to Iraq as its cop on the beat and gave them anything they asked for, and were placatory of Saddam when he started talking crazy. This was under the US government least attentive to Israel. Yes things should be more balanced as Steven Walt suggests

Averting World Conflict with China, by Ron Unz - The Unz Review If it wants to create the conditions for a final settlement of the Palestinian problem, then America should be more even handed but it must also be very cautious about Iran. We don't know who will be in power there in the future and history shows that once those ME counties are given an inch they take a mile.

Saudi Arabia seems quite sensible, its liking for US gov bonds that even Americans think offer too low a rate of interest is easily explained as payment for US protection. Killing Khashoggi that way was a dreadful moral and foreign policy mistake from someone who is too young for the amount of authority he has been given, but the victim did not beg for death like more than a few Uygurs are doing right now. The CIA agent China rounded up with the help of it's network of double agents in the US were doubtless glad to have their interrogation terminated.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-10-20/vancouver-is-drowning-in-chinese-money

Some sweeteners from Adelson are likely in the Tsunami of dirty Chinese money, which are amusingly being laundered in Canadian casinos. As Walt points out the Chinese elite want bolt holes and bank accounts in north America. By the way most of the ill gotten gains are from sale of opiates such as fentanyl.

Targeting Sheldon Adelson's Chinese Casinos

Yes that will work, especially when added to what China is already doing in targeting farmers who supported Trump, so he is definitely not going to be reelected now you have explained all this to them, and you are also opening up Harvard to their children, which can only redound to the detriment of white gentiles. Deliberate pouring of the vials of wrath or just accidentally spilling them? I am begining to wonder.

Silva , says: December 13, 2018 at 2:35 pm GMT
@Nonny Someone commits a crime while wearing a hat, and you blame the hat? What's wrong with you?
Almost Missouri , says: December 13, 2018 at 2:43 pm GMT
Thank you, Ron, for a clear-headed and insightful article.

There are however, two tiny infelicities, which I would not want for them to distract from the article's merit.

First, I think the Saudi Arabian Prince you are referring to is Prince Mohammed bin Salman, not "Prince Salman". "Prince Mohammed" would be the abbreviated form of his name. "Bin" is of course the Arabic equivalent of the Hebrew "ben" indicating paternity, rather than a middle name, so "Salman" is not his surname. "Prince Salman" would refer to the current Saudi King before he was King, rather than to the current Prince.

Second, maybe the hypothetical of China seizing Sheryl Sandberg of Facebook is not the best analogy since I, and I suspect others who are aware of her key role in empowering and enriching a deceptive and parasitical industry, would not be terribly troubled if China seized her. Indeed, we might consider it a public service. Admittedly, it is hard to find a good analogy for a prominent female executive of a US national champion company since so many of our prominent companies are predatory rather than productive and scorn their native country rather than serve it.

Anon [732] Disclaimer , says: December 13, 2018 at 2:53 pm GMT

and Ms. Meng was seized on the same day that he was personally meeting on trade issues with Chinese President Xi. Some have even suggested that the incident was a deliberate slap in Trump's face.

The unmistakable style is there.

Bill H , says: Website December 13, 2018 at 2:56 pm GMT
@Baxter "America is not in any danger." America is in very great danger, but only from within.

Almost half of all millenials believe that Capitalism is evil and that the Socialism should be the guiding economic principle of this nation. When you point out that it has failed for every nation in history that has tried it, notably the Soviet Union and more recently Venezuela, they retort that it is because those countries "did it wrong" and that "we will do it right." When you ask for specifics as what they "did wrong" that we will "do right" they stare at you wordlessly as if you are the one who is an idiot.

It should also be pointed out that a vast majority of Democrats think that Ocasio-Cortez is brilliant and that we need more legislators like her.

anonomy , says: December 13, 2018 at 2:58 pm GMT
What if Ms. Meng, was giving Iranian dissidents phones and other equipment to undermine the Government of Iran, starting another color revolution, that sucks in America and Israel? What if the Trump administration asked that this not be done in order to end the endless "revolutions" that have been happening and bankrupting our country and threatening Israel? What if the sanctions are benefiting Iran's government too? China was allowed to become so large at our expense when we opened up trade and moved businesses over there, but this was to keep them from being too cozy with Soviet Russia, just ask Nixon.
DESERT FOX , says: December 13, 2018 at 3:00 pm GMT
Part of the Zionist plan for a Zionist NWO was laid by David Rockefeller when he sent Kissinger to China to open up Chinas slave labor to the NWO types like Rockefeller and the Zionist controlled companies in the U.S. and part of the plan was the deindustrialization of America thus bringing down the American standard of living while raising the standard of living in China.

I will never believe the fake disagreement between the Zionist controlled U.S. and the Chinese government as long as G.M and Google and the other companies that have shut down their operations in the U.S. and opened operations in China, it is all a NWO plan to bring down we Americans to third world status and then meld all of us into a Zionist satanic NWO.

The enemy is not at the gates, the enemy is in the government and its name is Zionism and the Zionist NWO!

[Dec 10, 2018] The American Melting Pot Can Turn Into A Volatile Mixture At The Top by Wayne Madsen

Melania slap of Bolton face might be a good sobering measure. But neocons can't probably recover from their addition
Notable quotes:
"... Ricardel is a longtime friend and associate of national security adviser John Bolton, who brought her into the National Security Council from the Department of Commerce, where she served as Undersecretary for Export Administration. Ricardel reportedly angered Ms. Trump over seating arrangements on a flight by Ms. Trump to Africa two weeks ago. Ricardel, who was to accompany the First Lady, did not make the trip. Ms. Trump, in an interview conducted with ABC News during the trip, said there were people in the White House she did not trust. Apparently, Ricardel was one of them. ..."
"... Perhaps no one in recent memory brought such a degree of ethnic baggage to her job like Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. Albright's Czech roots and the Yugoslav warrant issued for the arrest of her professor-diplomat father, Joseph Korbel, for the post-World War II theft of art from Prague, brought forth extreme anti-Serbian policies by the woman who would represent the United States at the United Nations and then serve as America's chief diplomat. Albright's hatred for Serbia was not much different than Zbigniew Brzezinski's Polish heritage evoking an almost-pathological hatred of Russia, while he served as Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser. ..."
"... In 1981, Ronald Reagan appointed Valdas Adamkus as the regional administrator for the US Environmental Protection Agency, responsible for the Mid-West states. Retiring from the US government after 29 years of service, Adamkus was elected to two terms as President of Lithuania. ..."
"... One might ask whether Ilves and Adamkus were kept on the US government payroll merely to support them until they could return to their countries in top leadership positions to help lead the Baltic nations into NATO membership. ..."
"... From 1993 to 1997, Army General John Shalikashvili served as Chairman of the Joint Chefs of Staff. Shalikashvili was born in Warsaw, Poland to a Georgian and Polish mother. During World War II, his father served in the Georgian Legion, a special unit incorporated into the Nazi German "SS-Waffengruppe Georgien." General Shalikashvili served as commander of all US military forces during a time of NATO expansion into Eastern Europe. It was no surprise that he was an avid cheerleader for NATO's expansion to the East. ..."
Nov 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Wayne Madsen via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

America has always fancied itself as a "melting pot" of ethnicities and religions that form a perfect union. The Latin phrase, E Pluribus Unum, "out of many, one," is even found on the Great Seal of the United States.

However, as seen in a recent blow-up between First Lady Melania Trump and now-former Deputy National Security Adviser Mira Ricardel, old feuds from beyond the borders of the United States can result in major rifts at the highest echelons of the US government.

On November 13, Ms. Trump's communications director, Stephanie Grisham, fired off a tweet that read: "it is the position of the Office of the First Lady that she [Ricardel] no longer deserves the honor of serving in this White House." The White House announced Ricardel's departure the next day, November 14.

Ricardel is a longtime friend and associate of national security adviser John Bolton, who brought her into the National Security Council from the Department of Commerce, where she served as Undersecretary for Export Administration. Ricardel reportedly angered Ms. Trump over seating arrangements on a flight by Ms. Trump to Africa two weeks ago. Ricardel, who was to accompany the First Lady, did not make the trip. Ms. Trump, in an interview conducted with ABC News during the trip, said there were people in the White House she did not trust. Apparently, Ricardel was one of them.

The bitter feud between Melania Trump and Mira Ricardel likely has its roots in their backgrounds in the former Yugoslavia. Ricardel was born Mira P. Radielović, the daughter of Peter Radielovich, a native of Breza, Bosnia-Herzegovina in the former Yugoslavia. Ricardel speaks fluent Croatian and was a member of the Croatian Catholic Church. Melania Trump was born Melanija Knavs [pronounced Knaus] in Novo Mesto in Slovenia, also in the former Yugoslavia. Villagers in the village of Sevnica, where Ms. Trump was raised, claim she and her Communist Party parents were officially atheists. Ms. Trump later converted to Roman Catholicism. She and her son by Mr. Trump, Barron Trump, speak fluent Slovenian. The Yugoslav Civil War, which began in earnest in 1991, pitted the nation's ethnic groups against one another. There are ample reasons, political, ethnic, and religious, for bad blood between the Slovenian-born First Lady and a first-generation Croatian-American. The "battle royale" between Ms. Trump and Ricardel is but one example of a constant problem in the United States when individuals with foreign ties bring age-old inter-ethnic and inter-religious squabbles to governance.

Perhaps no one in recent memory brought such a degree of ethnic baggage to her job like Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. Albright's Czech roots and the Yugoslav warrant issued for the arrest of her professor-diplomat father, Joseph Korbel, for the post-World War II theft of art from Prague, brought forth extreme anti-Serbian policies by the woman who would represent the United States at the United Nations and then serve as America's chief diplomat. Albright's hatred for Serbia was not much different than Zbigniew Brzezinski's Polish heritage evoking an almost-pathological hatred of Russia, while he served as Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser.

Albright's bias against Serbia saw her influence US policy in casting a blind eye toward the terrorism carried out by the Kosovo Liberation Army and its terrorist leader Hashim Thaci. That policy resulted in Washington backing an independent Kosovo, a state beholden to organized criminal syndicates protected by one of the largest US military bases in Europe, Camp Bondsteel.

Ties by US foreign policy officials to their countries of origin continued to plagued administrations after Carter. For example, Kateryna Chumachenko served in the Reagan White House and State and Treasury Departments and later worked for KPMG as "Katherine" Chumachenko. She also worked in the White House Public Liaison Office, where she conducted outreach to various right-wing and anti-communist exile groups in the United States, including the Friends of Afghanistan, on whose board Afghan refugee and later George W. Bush pro-consul in Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, sat. Khalilzad, like Chumachenko, worked in the Reagan State Department. Chumachenko was married to Ukrainian "Orange Revolution" President Viktor Yushchenko, and, thusly, became the First Lady of Ukraine. Khalilzad became the Bush 43 ambassador to the UN, where he often was at loggerheads with Iran, Libya, Syria, and other Muslim states. As was the case with Albright and her anti-Serb underpinnings, it was difficult to ascertain whose agenda Khalilzad was serving.

After being fired from the White House, there were reports that Ricardel was offered the post of ambassador to Estonia. That Baltic country was no stranger to hauling foreign baggage into the US government. Former Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves, a bow-tie wearing former Estonian language broadcaster for the Central Intelligence Agency-funded Radio Free Europe ; long time resident of Leonia, New Jersey; could have just as easily ended up in a senior State Department position rather than President of Estonia. Such is the nature of divided loyalties among senior US government officials of both major political parties.

In 1981, Ronald Reagan appointed Valdas Adamkus as the regional administrator for the US Environmental Protection Agency, responsible for the Mid-West states. Retiring from the US government after 29 years of service, Adamkus was elected to two terms as President of Lithuania.

One might ask whether Ilves and Adamkus were kept on the US government payroll merely to support them until they could return to their countries in top leadership positions to help lead the Baltic nations into NATO membership.

From 1993 to 1997, Army General John Shalikashvili served as Chairman of the Joint Chefs of Staff. Shalikashvili was born in Warsaw, Poland to a Georgian and Polish mother. During World War II, his father served in the Georgian Legion, a special unit incorporated into the Nazi German "SS-Waffengruppe Georgien." General Shalikashvili served as commander of all US military forces during a time of NATO expansion into Eastern Europe. It was no surprise that he was an avid cheerleader for NATO's expansion to the East.

Natalie Jaresko served in positions with the State Department, the Departments of Commerce, Treasury, the US Trade Representative, and Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC). In 2014, she became the Finance Minister for Ukraine. Earlier, she served as a financial adviser to Yushchenko. The United States is not the only "melting pot" in North America that suffers from officials burdened by ethnic dual loyalties. Halyna Chomiak, the Ukrainian-born émigré mother of Canada's Foreign Minister, Chrystia Freeland, weighs heavily on Freeland's ability to advance Canada's interests over those of the nation of her mother's birth.

Trump's entire White House Middle East police team is composed of individuals who place Israel's interests ahead of the United States. Trump takes his Middle East advice from principally his son-in-law Jared Kushner, a contributor to and member of the board of the "Friends of the IDF," an American non-profit that raises funds for the Israeli armed forces. Kushner was named by Trump as a "special envoy" to the Middle East, while Jason Greenblatt, a former attorney with the Trump Organization, was named as special envoy in charge of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Although the two positions appear to overlap, Kushner and Greenblatt, both Orthodox Jews who have little time for Palestinians, are on the same page when it comes to advancing the West Bank land grabbing policies of the Binyamin Netanyahu government in Israel. Trump thoroughly Zionized his administration's Middle East policy with the appointment of another Israel supporter, David M. Friedman, as US ambassador to Israel. Friedman had been a bankruptcy lawyer with the Trump Organization's primary law firm, Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman.

Trump has nominated as US ambassador to South Africa, handbag designer Lana Marks, who was born in South Africa. Marks, who is known only to Trump from her membership in his Mar-a-Lago, Florida "billionaires club," left South Africa in 1975, when the country was under the apartheid regime. Marks claims to speak Afrikaans, the language preferred by the apartheid regime, and Xhosa, the ethnic language of the late President Nelson Mandela. Because Marks embellished her professional tennis career by claiming, without proof, participation in the French Open and Wimbledon in the 1970s, her mastery of Xhosa can be taken with a grain of salt. So, too, can her ability to deal with the current African National Congress government led by President Cyril Ramaphosa, who had just been released from prison when Marks left the country in 1975. The claims and politics of Marks and every official and would-be US official who failed to shed their biases from their native and ancestral homelands, can all be taken with a metric ton of salt.

Melting pots are fine, so long as they truly blend together. However, that is not the situation in the United States as high government officials have difficulty in consigning the bigotry inherent in family folklore and beliefs to the family scrapbooks.

[Dec 10, 2018] The Code of Putinism Brian D. Taylor 9780190867317 Amazon.com Books

Dec 10, 2018 | www.amazon.com

This book completely lacks the understanding of the phenomenon called Putinism. Which is a flavor neoliberalism (neoliberalism with Russian Characteristics to borrow the term from Chinese ;-)

The author limits himself to very superficial, kitchen level of understand of Putinism
== quote ==
<blockquote>
The code of Putinism has also shaped the economic system. "Putinomics" is also a hybrid system, combining the formal institutions of market capitalism with a set of informal clan networks. At the top of the Putinist economic system are Putin and his circle, who make the most important decisions and benefit from and sustain the system. State domination of the oil and gas sector is central to Putinomics, as are Putin's personal links to the
key players in this industry. Throughout the economy, the arbitrary power of state officials is often central to who wins and who loses, given the weakness of the rule of law and formal property rights.
</blockquote>
== end ==
The author also adhere to the dominant Western propaganda clichés way too much. Interpretation of Khodorkovsky travails is one example. As soon as you read how the author interpret Yukos story, you can throw the book into the garbage can -- it is clear that it is mostly propaganda, not an academic study.

Similarly the author makes big deal that Putin is a statist, forgetting that all neoliberals are statists par excellence:
== quote ==
Perhaps the most fundamental component of Putin's thinking is that he
is a statist (in Russian, a gosudarstvennik). In his first major programmatic
statement as Russia's ruler, on the eve of the millennium in December 1999,
he made this point quite emphatically. Russia, he averred, was different from
the United States or England, with their liberal traditions; in Russia, the state
"has always played an exceptionally important role... [and] is the source and
guarantor of order, the initiator and driving force of any change."
== end ==

And it is neoliberal ideology which determines who wins and who loses. And not understanding this simple fact dooms the book.

In reality, the events of 1991 were a neoliberal revolution in Russia when Communists elite defected and changed the sides adopting neoliberalism. This transformation instantly brought to the power oligarchs and resulted in economic rape of Russia by Western powers (Harvard mafia story is one example here, Browder is another).

The only issue that the author presented more or less OKt is the existence of a huge problem of the selection of Putin's successor. Charismatic leaders often present this problem, and they often create political crisis or turmoil when they leave the political arena. But with the collapse of neoliberalism in 2008 Putin's days are numbered in any case. And recent fiasco with pension reform is just one confirmation of the problems that any neoliberal leader faces. Even tremendously popular one. Russia needs the new leader with the clear "after-neoliberalism" vision. Re-nationalization of some former state assets probably would be urgently needed as well. With all his strengths and tremendous political talent, Putin is not such a leader. He is yet another "soft" neoliberal, and the key members of his close circle (Medvedev, Kudrin, etc.) are "soft" neoliberals too.

After coming to power, Putin tried to tame Russian oligarchs and transform comprador capitalism that emerged under Yeltsin into what can be called "national neoliberalism" (somewhat similar to Trumpism, although politically Trump is a pigmy in comparison with Putin, who is probably one of the most capable diplomats and politicians of our era).

Truth be told Putin fight with oligarch proved to be somewhat futile "in the long run." But it was a brilliant tactical move in the short run. The problem is that neoliberalism like a dragon in fairy tale regenerates comprador oligarchs heads after most odious heads were cut. Now Sechin and Deripaska started also represent a problem. But in any case taking of the chessboard, so to speak, such notorious oligarchs like Boris Berezovsky, Vladimir Gusinsky, and Mikhail Khodorkovsky ( the purge, which, unfortunately, was not done in the USA after 2008 and speeds troubles to this country) was a positive step and the act of political courage on the part of Putin. Ukraine represents an example of what happens if such a purge is not done and oligarchs became more powerful then the state.

This is the nature of the beast as a version of Trotskyism (with the slogan "Financial elite unite" instead of "Proletarians of all countries unite and the same idea of Permanent Revolution with the goal to build the global neoliberal empire via color revolutions and direct invasions.) It also creates strong comprador mentality among the Russian neoliberal elite (Medvedev, Kudrin, etc.), the problem that China faces as well, and that undermines Putin efforts.

The level of technological dependence on the West is another unsolvable problem for Putinism ( to the extent it represents economically resurging Russia.) That gives the USA as the center the global neoliberal empire powerful tools to keep Russia in check. Which Obama started to use to squeeze Russia and Trump continuing the Obama policy with probably even more vigor (with Pompeo and Bolton as the "sanctions men" of neocon persuasion)

The main crime of Putin as for Washington, DC is that he refused to be the vassal of Washington, and that generated sanctions and the series of provocations as well as the attempt to encircle Russia, including Nulandgate -- coups d'état which brought to power Ukrainian far-right nationalists in 2014. But still, in a way, subscribed to neoliberal dogma and he wanted co-existence with other neoliberal powers, including the USA.

I understand the element of "publish-of-perish" mentality here and the need for political correctness, but there should be some courage, or at least flexibility as well. Taking the position of a stooge of standard Western propaganda outline guarantee publishing but is despicable from the academic standpoint.

[Dec 10, 2018] The American Melting Pot Can Turn Into A Volatile Mixture At The Top by Wayne Madsen

Melania slap of Bolton face might be a good sobering measure. But neocons can't probably recover from their addition
Notable quotes:
"... Ricardel is a longtime friend and associate of national security adviser John Bolton, who brought her into the National Security Council from the Department of Commerce, where she served as Undersecretary for Export Administration. Ricardel reportedly angered Ms. Trump over seating arrangements on a flight by Ms. Trump to Africa two weeks ago. Ricardel, who was to accompany the First Lady, did not make the trip. Ms. Trump, in an interview conducted with ABC News during the trip, said there were people in the White House she did not trust. Apparently, Ricardel was one of them. ..."
"... Perhaps no one in recent memory brought such a degree of ethnic baggage to her job like Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. Albright's Czech roots and the Yugoslav warrant issued for the arrest of her professor-diplomat father, Joseph Korbel, for the post-World War II theft of art from Prague, brought forth extreme anti-Serbian policies by the woman who would represent the United States at the United Nations and then serve as America's chief diplomat. Albright's hatred for Serbia was not much different than Zbigniew Brzezinski's Polish heritage evoking an almost-pathological hatred of Russia, while he served as Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser. ..."
"... In 1981, Ronald Reagan appointed Valdas Adamkus as the regional administrator for the US Environmental Protection Agency, responsible for the Mid-West states. Retiring from the US government after 29 years of service, Adamkus was elected to two terms as President of Lithuania. ..."
"... One might ask whether Ilves and Adamkus were kept on the US government payroll merely to support them until they could return to their countries in top leadership positions to help lead the Baltic nations into NATO membership. ..."
"... From 1993 to 1997, Army General John Shalikashvili served as Chairman of the Joint Chefs of Staff. Shalikashvili was born in Warsaw, Poland to a Georgian and Polish mother. During World War II, his father served in the Georgian Legion, a special unit incorporated into the Nazi German "SS-Waffengruppe Georgien." General Shalikashvili served as commander of all US military forces during a time of NATO expansion into Eastern Europe. It was no surprise that he was an avid cheerleader for NATO's expansion to the East. ..."
Nov 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Wayne Madsen via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

America has always fancied itself as a "melting pot" of ethnicities and religions that form a perfect union. The Latin phrase, E Pluribus Unum, "out of many, one," is even found on the Great Seal of the United States.

However, as seen in a recent blow-up between First Lady Melania Trump and now-former Deputy National Security Adviser Mira Ricardel, old feuds from beyond the borders of the United States can result in major rifts at the highest echelons of the US government.

On November 13, Ms. Trump's communications director, Stephanie Grisham, fired off a tweet that read: "it is the position of the Office of the First Lady that she [Ricardel] no longer deserves the honor of serving in this White House." The White House announced Ricardel's departure the next day, November 14.

Ricardel is a longtime friend and associate of national security adviser John Bolton, who brought her into the National Security Council from the Department of Commerce, where she served as Undersecretary for Export Administration. Ricardel reportedly angered Ms. Trump over seating arrangements on a flight by Ms. Trump to Africa two weeks ago. Ricardel, who was to accompany the First Lady, did not make the trip. Ms. Trump, in an interview conducted with ABC News during the trip, said there were people in the White House she did not trust. Apparently, Ricardel was one of them.

The bitter feud between Melania Trump and Mira Ricardel likely has its roots in their backgrounds in the former Yugoslavia. Ricardel was born Mira P. Radielović, the daughter of Peter Radielovich, a native of Breza, Bosnia-Herzegovina in the former Yugoslavia. Ricardel speaks fluent Croatian and was a member of the Croatian Catholic Church. Melania Trump was born Melanija Knavs [pronounced Knaus] in Novo Mesto in Slovenia, also in the former Yugoslavia. Villagers in the village of Sevnica, where Ms. Trump was raised, claim she and her Communist Party parents were officially atheists. Ms. Trump later converted to Roman Catholicism. She and her son by Mr. Trump, Barron Trump, speak fluent Slovenian. The Yugoslav Civil War, which began in earnest in 1991, pitted the nation's ethnic groups against one another. There are ample reasons, political, ethnic, and religious, for bad blood between the Slovenian-born First Lady and a first-generation Croatian-American. The "battle royale" between Ms. Trump and Ricardel is but one example of a constant problem in the United States when individuals with foreign ties bring age-old inter-ethnic and inter-religious squabbles to governance.

Perhaps no one in recent memory brought such a degree of ethnic baggage to her job like Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. Albright's Czech roots and the Yugoslav warrant issued for the arrest of her professor-diplomat father, Joseph Korbel, for the post-World War II theft of art from Prague, brought forth extreme anti-Serbian policies by the woman who would represent the United States at the United Nations and then serve as America's chief diplomat. Albright's hatred for Serbia was not much different than Zbigniew Brzezinski's Polish heritage evoking an almost-pathological hatred of Russia, while he served as Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser.

Albright's bias against Serbia saw her influence US policy in casting a blind eye toward the terrorism carried out by the Kosovo Liberation Army and its terrorist leader Hashim Thaci. That policy resulted in Washington backing an independent Kosovo, a state beholden to organized criminal syndicates protected by one of the largest US military bases in Europe, Camp Bondsteel.

Ties by US foreign policy officials to their countries of origin continued to plagued administrations after Carter. For example, Kateryna Chumachenko served in the Reagan White House and State and Treasury Departments and later worked for KPMG as "Katherine" Chumachenko. She also worked in the White House Public Liaison Office, where she conducted outreach to various right-wing and anti-communist exile groups in the United States, including the Friends of Afghanistan, on whose board Afghan refugee and later George W. Bush pro-consul in Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, sat. Khalilzad, like Chumachenko, worked in the Reagan State Department. Chumachenko was married to Ukrainian "Orange Revolution" President Viktor Yushchenko, and, thusly, became the First Lady of Ukraine. Khalilzad became the Bush 43 ambassador to the UN, where he often was at loggerheads with Iran, Libya, Syria, and other Muslim states. As was the case with Albright and her anti-Serb underpinnings, it was difficult to ascertain whose agenda Khalilzad was serving.

After being fired from the White House, there were reports that Ricardel was offered the post of ambassador to Estonia. That Baltic country was no stranger to hauling foreign baggage into the US government. Former Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves, a bow-tie wearing former Estonian language broadcaster for the Central Intelligence Agency-funded Radio Free Europe ; long time resident of Leonia, New Jersey; could have just as easily ended up in a senior State Department position rather than President of Estonia. Such is the nature of divided loyalties among senior US government officials of both major political parties.

In 1981, Ronald Reagan appointed Valdas Adamkus as the regional administrator for the US Environmental Protection Agency, responsible for the Mid-West states. Retiring from the US government after 29 years of service, Adamkus was elected to two terms as President of Lithuania.

One might ask whether Ilves and Adamkus were kept on the US government payroll merely to support them until they could return to their countries in top leadership positions to help lead the Baltic nations into NATO membership.

From 1993 to 1997, Army General John Shalikashvili served as Chairman of the Joint Chefs of Staff. Shalikashvili was born in Warsaw, Poland to a Georgian and Polish mother. During World War II, his father served in the Georgian Legion, a special unit incorporated into the Nazi German "SS-Waffengruppe Georgien." General Shalikashvili served as commander of all US military forces during a time of NATO expansion into Eastern Europe. It was no surprise that he was an avid cheerleader for NATO's expansion to the East.

Natalie Jaresko served in positions with the State Department, the Departments of Commerce, Treasury, the US Trade Representative, and Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC). In 2014, she became the Finance Minister for Ukraine. Earlier, she served as a financial adviser to Yushchenko. The United States is not the only "melting pot" in North America that suffers from officials burdened by ethnic dual loyalties. Halyna Chomiak, the Ukrainian-born émigré mother of Canada's Foreign Minister, Chrystia Freeland, weighs heavily on Freeland's ability to advance Canada's interests over those of the nation of her mother's birth.

Trump's entire White House Middle East police team is composed of individuals who place Israel's interests ahead of the United States. Trump takes his Middle East advice from principally his son-in-law Jared Kushner, a contributor to and member of the board of the "Friends of the IDF," an American non-profit that raises funds for the Israeli armed forces. Kushner was named by Trump as a "special envoy" to the Middle East, while Jason Greenblatt, a former attorney with the Trump Organization, was named as special envoy in charge of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Although the two positions appear to overlap, Kushner and Greenblatt, both Orthodox Jews who have little time for Palestinians, are on the same page when it comes to advancing the West Bank land grabbing policies of the Binyamin Netanyahu government in Israel. Trump thoroughly Zionized his administration's Middle East policy with the appointment of another Israel supporter, David M. Friedman, as US ambassador to Israel. Friedman had been a bankruptcy lawyer with the Trump Organization's primary law firm, Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman.

Trump has nominated as US ambassador to South Africa, handbag designer Lana Marks, who was born in South Africa. Marks, who is known only to Trump from her membership in his Mar-a-Lago, Florida "billionaires club," left South Africa in 1975, when the country was under the apartheid regime. Marks claims to speak Afrikaans, the language preferred by the apartheid regime, and Xhosa, the ethnic language of the late President Nelson Mandela. Because Marks embellished her professional tennis career by claiming, without proof, participation in the French Open and Wimbledon in the 1970s, her mastery of Xhosa can be taken with a grain of salt. So, too, can her ability to deal with the current African National Congress government led by President Cyril Ramaphosa, who had just been released from prison when Marks left the country in 1975. The claims and politics of Marks and every official and would-be US official who failed to shed their biases from their native and ancestral homelands, can all be taken with a metric ton of salt.

Melting pots are fine, so long as they truly blend together. However, that is not the situation in the United States as high government officials have difficulty in consigning the bigotry inherent in family folklore and beliefs to the family scrapbooks.

[Dec 10, 2018] It's time to recognize the term "anti-Semitism" as a misnomer Countercurrents

Notable quotes:
"... Rima Najjar is a former professor (now retired) at Al-Quds University, Palestine ..."
Dec 10, 2018 | countercurrents.org

This morning I woke up to two news reports in my mailbox that indicated two things to me:

  1. Bigotry against Jews can no more nor less be distinguished from bigotry against any other group of people or religion. Sectarianism by any other name is sectarianism.
  2. The insistence on making bigotry against Jews (in its sense of sectarianism) a separate or unique class of discrimination or hatred altogether, one that is given a special term and that involves controversial and false definitions, is designed to play into the hands of Zionists and neo-Nazis.

Zionist desperation to criminalize anti-Zionist criticism of Israel by legalizing false definitions of anti-Semitism is a measure of how far the term "anti-Semitism" has traveled as a misnomer.

The first news item is from The New York Times – an opinion piece( Opinion | Anti-Zionism Isn't the Same as Anti-Semitism ) by Michelle Goldberg, in which she says,

The conflation of anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism is a bit of rhetorical sleight-of-hand that depends on treating Israel as the embodiment of the Jewish people everywhere. Certainly, some criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic, but it's entirely possible to oppose Jewish ethno-nationalism without being a bigot. Indeed, it's increasingly absurd to treat the Israeli state as a stand-in for Jews writ large, given the way the current Israeli government has aligned itself with far-right European movements that have anti-Semitic roots.

The second news item comes from the Lobby Watch of the Electronic Intifada, in which Asa Winstanley, an investigative reporter, writes :

A new European Union declaration could make it harder to criticize Israel as a racist state without being dubbed an anti-Semite.

Politicians in Brussels on Thursday rubber-stamped the document .

The declaration asks all EU governments to "endorse the non-legally binding working definition of anti-Semitism employed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance."

The move, passed by EU member states' home affairs ministers, has already been condemned by a number of Israeli and French academics .

The declaration was spearheaded by Austria, whose coalition government includes ministers who are members of a neo-Nazi party .

The term "anti-Semitism" to refer to animus against all Jews is a misnomer. By all accounts, it was coined or popularized by Friedrich Wilhelm Adolph Marr in 1879, a radical writer and politician, described in the title of his first biography as "The Patriarch of Anti-Semitism" and founder of the first "Anti-Semitic League", which he formed in order to agitate against Jewish emancipation in Germany. "Anti-Semitism", as Marr coined it, referred specifically to the anti-Jewish campaigns in central Europe at that time, and not to bigotry or hatred against all Jews, as the term today connotes.

As I write in Anti-Semitism Is Not the Issue; Palestine Is ,

As is well known by now, the building of Palestine in the form of Israel did, in fact, depend, and continues to depend in large part, on the good will of the Jews "outside," many as Norman H. Finkelstein writes in American Jewish History, deriving renewed pride in their religion and their connections to Israel with each Israeli military victory.

The irony/tragedy is that Israeli governments throughout history, including now with the Trump /Bannon merger, work with anti-Semites to promote Jewish immigration to Israel. Zionist collaboration with Nazis is also documented. Nevertheless, anti-Semitism should not be taking center stage either in arguments against Palestinians or in pro-Palestine arguments.

Israel is using a misnomer (the term "anti-Semitism" as animus against all Jews) in order to further its cause among Jews worldwide and among Western governments guilty of past bigotry against Jews in their midst.

Does animus toward Jews because they are Jews exist? Yes. Is this animus special or unique in what FiratHacıahmetoğlu calls "the darker side of western modernity (colonisation, domination, poverty, misery, inequities, injustices, commodification, and dispensability of human life)" or in Western Dark Ages?

Of course, not.

Zionism is a political movement, not "a belief", as expressed in the following definition :

Zionism is the belief that the Jewish nation, the exiles of the Kingdom of Judea that was conquered by Rome in the year 70 CE, have a right to reclaim their homeland.

Jewish suffering, like the suffering of those subjected to bigotry anywhere, is the result of conditions of society and ought to be addressed by fixing society through an increase in political power for disenfranchised groups of people, wherever bigotry exists, thus aiding all the oppressed  --  as, in fact, many Jews in the U.S. have done.

In the early days of Zionism, the Jews who believed that Jewish suffering in Europe is impossible to remedy within their societies (through socialism, for example) because of their lack of political rights and the economic structure imposed on Jews at the time and those who opted for a struggle to separate as a tribe through the acquisition of territory, any territory, outside their countries, represent what Zionism really is as a political movement, which is now oppressing a fourth generation of indigenous Palestinians in their own homeland.

The way I see it, it is time to recognize "anti-Semitism" as the misnomer it is, in order for us to be able to envision Palestinian emancipation and, indeed, all human emancipation, as universal and just.

Note: The above content was first published (7 Dec 2018) as my answer on Quora to the question "Is anti-Semitism a special kind of bigotry? What is the history of the term?".

Rima Najjar is a former professor (now retired) at Al-Quds University, Palestine

[Dec 09, 2018] Neoliberalism is more like modern feudalism - an authoritarian system where the lords (bankers, energy companies and their large and inefficient attendant bureaucracies), keep us peasants in thrall through life long debt-slavery simply to buy a house or exploit us as a captured market in the case of the energy sector.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... I don't like using the term "neo-liberalism" that much because there is nothing "new" or "liberal" about it, the term itself just helps hide the fact that it's a political project more about power than profit and the end result is more like modern feudalism - an authoritarian system where the lords (bankers, energy companies and their large and inefficient attendant bureaucracies), keep us peasants in thrall through life long debt-slavery simply to buy a house or exploit us as a captured market in the case of the energy sector. ..."
"... Since the word "privatisation" is clearly no longer popular, the latest buzzword from this project is "outsourcing". ..."
"... As far as I can see "neo-liberalism", or what I prefer to call managerial and financialised feudalism is not dead, it's still out and about looking around for the next rent-seeking opportunity. ..."
"... In the political arena, is enabling porkies facilitate each other in every lunatic pronouncement about "Budget repair" and "on track for a surplus". And its spotty, textbook-spouting clones ("all debt is debt! Shriek, gasp, hyperventilate!") fall off the conveyor belts of tertiary education Australia-wide, then turn up on The Drum as IPA 'Research Fellows' to spout their evidence-free assertions. ..."
"... And don't forget the handmaiden of neoliberalism is their macroeconomic mythology about government "debt and borrowing" which will condemn our grandchildren to poverty - inter-generational theft! It also allows them to continue dismantling government social programs by giving tax-cuts to reduce "revenue" and then claiming there is no money to fund those programs. ..."
"... "Competition" as the cornerstone of neoliberal economics was always a lie. Corporations do their best to get rid of competitors by unfair pricing tactics or by takeovers. And even where some competitors hang in there by some means (banks, petrol companies) the competition that occurs is not for price but for profit. ..."
"... We find a shift away from democratic processes and the rise of the "all new adulation of the so-called tough leader" factor, aka Nazism/Fascism. From Trump to Turkey, Netanyahu to Putin, Brazil to China, the rise of the "right" in Europe, the South Americas, where the leader is "our great and "good" Teacher", knows best, and thus infantalises the knowledge and awareness of the rest of the population. Who needs scientists, when the "leader" knows everything? ..."
"... There are indeed alternatives to neoliberalism, most of which have been shown to lead back to neoliberalism. Appeals for fiscal and monetary relief/stimulus can only ever paper over the worst aspects of it's relentless 'progress', between wars, it seems. ..."
"... Neoliberalism seems vastly, catastrophically misunderstood. Widely perceived as the latest abomination to spring from the eternal battle 'twixt Labour and Capital, it's actual origins are somewhat more recent. Neoliberalism really, really is not just "Capitalism gone wrong". It goes much deeper, to a fundamental flaw buried( more accurately 'planted') deep in the heart of economics. ..."
"... In 1879 an obscure journalist from then-remote San Francisco, Henry George, took the world by storm with his extraordinary bestseller Progress and Poverty . Still the only published work to outsell the Bible in a single year, it did so for over twenty years, yet few social justice advocates have heard of it. ..."
"... George gravely threatened privileged global power-elites , so they erased him from academic history. A mind compared, in his time with Plato, Copernicus and Adam Smith wiped from living memory, by the modern aristocracy. ..."
"... In the process of doing so, they emasculated the discipline of economics, stripped dignity from labour, and set in motion a world-destroying doctrine. Neo-Classical Economics(aka neoliberalism) was born , to the detriment of the working-citizen and the living world on which s/he depends. ..."
Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

ElectricJolt , 31 Oct 2018 04:38

I don't like using the term "neo-liberalism" that much because there is nothing "new" or "liberal" about it, the term itself just helps hide the fact that it's a political project more about power than profit and the end result is more like modern feudalism - an authoritarian system where the lords (bankers, energy companies and their large and inefficient attendant bureaucracies), keep us peasants in thrall through life long debt-slavery simply to buy a house or exploit us as a captured market in the case of the energy sector.

Since the word "privatisation" is clearly no longer popular, the latest buzzword from this project is "outsourcing". If you've had a look at The Canberra Times over the last couple of weeks there have been quite a few articles about outsourcing parts of Medicare and Centrelink, using labour hire companies and so on – is this part of a current LNP plan to "sell off" parts of the government before Labour takes the reins in May?

As far as I can see "neo-liberalism", or what I prefer to call managerial and financialised feudalism is not dead, it's still out and about looking around for the next rent-seeking opportunity.

Friarbird , 31 Oct 2018 04:02
Neoliberalism "dead"? I think not. It is riveted on the country like a straitjacket.

Which is exactly what it was always intended to be, a system gamed and rigged to ensure the wage-earning scum obtain progressively less and less of the country's productive wealth, however much they contributed to it. The wage theft and exploitation Neoliberalism fosters has become the new norm. Neoliberal idealogues thickly infest Federal and State Treasuries.

In the political arena, is enabling porkies facilitate each other in every lunatic pronouncement about "Budget repair" and "on track for a surplus". And its spotty, textbook-spouting clones ("all debt is debt! Shriek, gasp, hyperventilate!") fall off the conveyor belts of tertiary education Australia-wide, then turn up on The Drum as IPA 'Research Fellows' to spout their evidence-free assertions.

The IPA itself has moles in govt at every level--even in your local Council. Certainly in ours.

Neoliberalism is "dead"? Correction. Neoliberalism is alive, thriving---and quick to ensure its glaring deficiencies and inequities are solely attributable to its opponents. Now THERE'S a surprise.....

totaram -> JohnArmour , 31 Oct 2018 03:01
Agree! And don't forget the handmaiden of neoliberalism is their macroeconomic mythology about government "debt and borrowing" which will condemn our grandchildren to poverty - inter-generational theft! It also allows them to continue dismantling government social programs by giving tax-cuts to reduce "revenue" and then claiming there is no money to fund those programs.
exTen , 31 Oct 2018 02:30
Neoliberalism will not be dead until the underpinning of neoliberalism is abandoned by ALP and Greens. That underpinning is their mindless attachment to "budget repair" and "return to surplus". The federal government's "budget" is nothing like a currency user's budget. Currency users collect in order to spend whereas every dollar spent by the federal government is a new dollar and every dollar taxed by the federal government is an ex-dollar. A currency cannot sensibly have "debt" in the currency that it issues and no amount of surplus or deficit now will enhance or impair its capacity to spend in future. A currency issuer does not need an electronic piggybank, or a Future Fund, or a Drought Relief Fund. It can't max out an imaginary credit card. It's "borrowing" is just an exchange of its termless no-coupon liabilities (currency) for term-limited coupon-bearing liabilities (bonds). The federal budget balance is no rational indicator of any need for austerity or for stimulus. The rational indicators are unemployment (too small a "deficit"/too large a surplus) and inflation (too large a "deficit"/too small a "surplus"). Federal taxation is where dollars go to die. It doesn't "fund" a currency issuer's spending - it is there to stop the dollars it issues from piling up and causing inflation and to make room for spending by democratically elected federal parliament. The name of the game is to balance the economy, not the entirely notional and fundamentally irrelevant "budget".
Copperfield , 31 Oct 2018 01:51
"Competition" as the cornerstone of neoliberal economics was always a lie. Corporations do their best to get rid of competitors by unfair pricing tactics or by takeovers. And even where some competitors hang in there by some means (banks, petrol companies) the competition that occurs is not for price but for profit.

And changing the electoral system? Yes indeed. After years of observation it seems to me that the problem with our politics is not individual politicians (although there are notable exceptions) but political parties. Rigid control of policies and voting on party instruction (even by the Greens) makes the proceedings of parliament a complete waste of time. If every policy had to run the gauntlet of 150 people all voting by their conscience we would have better policy. The executive functions could be carried out by a cabinet also elected from those members. But not going to happen - too many vested interests in the parties and their corporate sponsors.

gidrys , 31 Oct 2018 01:34
With the election of Bolsonaro in Brazil (even though nearly 30% of electors refused to vote) it may be a little presumptuous to dissect the dead corpse of neoliberalism, as Richard Denniss' hopes that we can.

What is absolutely gob-smacking is that Brazilians voted for him; a man that Glenn Greenwald describes as "far more dangerous than Trump" , that Bolsonaro envisages military dictatorships as "being a far more superior form of government" advocating a civil war in order to dispose of the left.

Furthermore, the election of this far-right neoliberal extremist also threatens the Amazon forest and its indigenous people; with a global impact that will render combatting climate change even more difficult.

Locally, recent Liberal Party battles over leadership have included the neolib factor, as the lunatic right in that party - who I suspect would all love to be a Bolsonaro themselves - aggressively activate their grumblings and dissension.

Oh, Richard how I wish you were right; but in the Victorian election campaign - currently underway - I have seen Socialist candidates behaving in a manner that doesn't garner hope in a different way of doing politics.

The fact that 'our' democracy is based on an adversarial, partisan system leaves me with little hope. Alain Badiou wrote that "ours is not a world of democracy but a world of imperial conservatism using democratic phraseology" ; and until that imposition is discarded 'our' democracy will remain whatever we are told it is, and neolibs will continue to shove their bullshit down our throats as much as they can.

beeden , 31 Oct 2018 01:33
There is no abatement to the wealthiest in the global communities seeking greater wealth and thus increasing inequality.

Taking a local example,

We find a shift away from democratic processes and the rise of the "all new adulation of the so-called tough leader" factor, aka Nazism/Fascism. From Trump to Turkey, Netanyahu to Putin, Brazil to China, the rise of the "right" in Europe, the South Americas, where the leader is "our great and "good" Teacher", knows best, and thus infantalises the knowledge and awareness of the rest of the population. Who needs scientists, when the "leader" knows everything?

Have the people of the world abrogated their democratic responsibility?

Or is it the gerrymandering chicanery of US Republican backers/politicians( so long as you control the voting machines ) that have sent the ugly message to the world, Power is yours for the making and taking by any means that ignores the public's rights in the decision making process. Has the "neo-liberal" world delivered a corrupted system of democracy that has deliberately alienated the world's population from actively participating fully in the full awareness that their vote counts and will be counted?

Do we need to take back the controls of democracy to ensure that it is the will of the people and not a manipulation by vested interest groups/individuals? You're darn tootin'!!!

Matt Quinn , 31 Oct 2018 01:32
A thoughtful piece. Thanks. There are indeed alternatives to neoliberalism, most of which have been shown to lead back to neoliberalism. Appeals for fiscal and monetary relief/stimulus can only ever paper over the worst aspects of it's relentless 'progress', between wars, it seems.

Neoliberalism seems vastly, catastrophically misunderstood. Widely perceived as the latest abomination to spring from the eternal battle 'twixt Labour and Capital, it's actual origins are somewhat more recent. Neoliberalism really, really is not just "Capitalism gone wrong". It goes much deeper, to a fundamental flaw buried( more accurately 'planted') deep in the heart of economics.

Instead of trying to understand Neo-Classical Economics it is perhaps more instructive to understand what it was built, layer by layer, to obscure. First the Land system, then the Wealth system, and finally the Money system (hived off into a compartment - 'macroeconomics'). Importantly, three entirely different categories of "thing" .

In 1879 an obscure journalist from then-remote San Francisco, Henry George, took the world by storm with his extraordinary bestseller Progress and Poverty . Still the only published work to outsell the Bible in a single year, it did so for over twenty years, yet few social justice advocates have heard of it.

George set out to discover why the worst poverty always seemed to accompany the most progress. By chasing down the production process to its ends, and tracing where the proceeds were going, he succeeded spectacularly. From Progress and Poverty , Chapter 17 - "The Problem Explained" :

Three things unite in production: land, labor, and capital. Three parties divide the output: landowner, laborer, and capitalist. If the laborer and capitalist get no more as production increases, it is a necessary inference that the landowner takes the gain.

George gravely threatened privileged global power-elites , so they erased him from academic history. A mind compared, in his time with Plato, Copernicus and Adam Smith wiped from living memory, by the modern aristocracy.

In the process of doing so, they emasculated the discipline of economics, stripped dignity from labour, and set in motion a world-destroying doctrine. Neo-Classical Economics(aka neoliberalism) was born , to the detriment of the working-citizen and the living world on which s/he depends.

Einstein was a fan of George, and used his methods of thought-experiment and powerful inductive reasoning to discover Relativity, twenty years later. Henry Georges brilliant insights into Land (aka nature), Wealth (what you want, need), and Money (sharing mechanism) are as relevant as ever, and until they are rediscovered, we are likely to re-run the 1900's over and over, with fewer and fewer resources.

~ How Land Barons, Industrialists and Bankers Corrupted Economics .

[Dec 09, 2018] Pax Americana: Pompeo tells UN, WTO, ICC to bow and comply with US-led world order

Notable quotes:
"... The senior member of the Donald Trump administration said a multilateral approach is failing to produce a world of unrestricted capitalism, so the US should rule supreme – sorry, assume a leadership role – to ensure that countries like China didn't try to offer an alternative way. ..."
"... The UN is a vehicle for regional powers to "collude" and vote in bad actors into the Human Rights Council. "Bad actors" are of course not Saudi Arabia. The World Bank and the International Monetary fund are in the way of private lenders. The EU is good, but Brexit should be a wake-up call for its bureaucracy, which doesn't know how good nationalism actually is. The International Criminal Court is "rogue" because it attempts to hold Americans accountable for crimes in Afghanistan. ..."
"... But what organization was a good boy and doesn't deserve a piece of coal from Uncle Sam? SWIFT was. The banking communications organization caved in to Washington and cut off Iranians from its system, so it has a place in the bright new world of US leadership. ..."
"... "new liberal order" ..."
Dec 09, 2018 | www.rt.com

The US will lead a new liberal world order, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo declared. Organizations and treaties not fitting this picture must be scrapped or reformed, so that non-compliers could not use them against America. The vision of the bold new and prosperous (for the US and its supporters) world was delivered by Pompeo in a keynote speech to the German Marshall Fund on Tuesday.

The senior member of the Donald Trump administration said a multilateral approach is failing to produce a world of unrestricted capitalism, so the US should rule supreme – sorry, assume a leadership role – to ensure that countries like China didn't try to offer an alternative way.

China, as well as Russia, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela and other nations on the US grudge list got their share of bashing in the speech, but its focus was more on international institutions, which Pompeo claimed to be incompatible with his grand vision.

The UN is a vehicle for regional powers to "collude" and vote in bad actors into the Human Rights Council. "Bad actors" are of course not Saudi Arabia. The World Bank and the International Monetary fund are in the way of private lenders. The EU is good, but Brexit should be a wake-up call for its bureaucracy, which doesn't know how good nationalism actually is. The International Criminal Court is "rogue" because it attempts to hold Americans accountable for crimes in Afghanistan.

Also on rt.com 'Surrealism': Iran blasts US claim its missile test violated UN resolution on nuclear deal

The Paris Agreement on climate change was bad for America, so it left. NAFTA was bad for America, so it forced a renegotiation. The nuclear deal with Iran didn't make Tehran complacent, so it had to go.

But what organization was a good boy and doesn't deserve a piece of coal from Uncle Sam? SWIFT was. The banking communications organization caved in to Washington and cut off Iranians from its system, so it has a place in the bright new world of US leadership.

Watch Murad Gazdiev's report about Pompeo's "new liberal order" to find out more.

[Dec 09, 2018] The blatant, dangerous gambits to wreck Russuans relations with the USA and Europe by MI6 and British goverment: more staged confrontations, lies and subversion.

Notable quotes:
"... This is the context in which to see the blatant, dangerous gambits to wreck the Buenos Aires gathering of leaders, and any other such future opportunity, coming from the British Empire crowd, in the form of staged confrontations, lies and subversion. ..."
"... Look at recent destabilizing events: the Nov. 24 chemical weapons attack on Syrians in Aleppo; the stoking of suffering and strife at the Mexico-U.S. border; and on Nov. 25, Ukraine's naval provocation against Russia in the Black Sea. The British government asset, the "Integrity Initiative" is fully deployed to goad the U.S. and Western Europe to launch an offensive against Russia over the Ukraine incident, blaming Russia for "aggression" against Ukraine. The British imperialists are making a habit of exposing their own role in demanding world war! ..."
"... These provocations are not a sign of power, but of desperation, desperation to stop the spreading success of the New Paradigm of collaborative development expressed in the Belt and Road Initiative, and what lies ahead if the U.S. joins up. Schiller Institute Chairwoman Helga Zepp-LaRouche today emphasized that each time the British Imperialist apparatus steps forward in its own name to sabotage world peace, it works to the detriment of their dying system. The Empire is dangerous, but all the easier to crush. ..."
"... Zepp-LaRouche nailed the Integrity Initiative in a Sputnik interview published yesterday, now being run in media internationally. She said that the group's activity displays the " modus operandi of British intelligence operations, and it very well may turn out, that it is this network, which is deeply involved in 'Russiagate' and the entire coup against President Trump." ..."
Nov 28, 2018 | larouchepac.com
We are in a showdown moment. At this week's Group of 20 Summit -- only three days away, in Buenos Aires, there is the potential for Great Power diplomacy in the direction of a New Paradigm of foreign relations, as an outcome of the sideline meetings of heads of state and government of the United States, China, Russia, India and others.

The growing momentum for New Paradigm economic development is seen in high-level events this month in six Western European nations: in Germany, the "Hamburg Summit: China Meets Europe" (Nov. 26-27); in France, the Lyon "Franco-Chinese Forum" (Nov. 26-28); in Spain, President Xi Jinping's state visit (Nov. 27-29); in Portugal, Xi's visit (Dec. 4-5); in Italy, a new Xinhua-associated Italian financial media service will be set up (Nov. 6 agreement); in Norway, the first Polar Route icebreaker delivery of Yamal LNG, for transshipment from the northern port of Honnigsvag.

This is the context in which to see the blatant, dangerous gambits to wreck the Buenos Aires gathering of leaders, and any other such future opportunity, coming from the British Empire crowd, in the form of staged confrontations, lies and subversion.

Look at recent destabilizing events: the Nov. 24 chemical weapons attack on Syrians in Aleppo; the stoking of suffering and strife at the Mexico-U.S. border; and on Nov. 25, Ukraine's naval provocation against Russia in the Black Sea. The British government asset, the "Integrity Initiative" is fully deployed to goad the U.S. and Western Europe to launch an offensive against Russia over the Ukraine incident, blaming Russia for "aggression" against Ukraine. The British imperialists are making a habit of exposing their own role in demanding world war!

These provocations are not a sign of power, but of desperation, desperation to stop the spreading success of the New Paradigm of collaborative development expressed in the Belt and Road Initiative, and what lies ahead if the U.S. joins up. Schiller Institute Chairwoman Helga Zepp-LaRouche today emphasized that each time the British Imperialist apparatus steps forward in its own name to sabotage world peace, it works to the detriment of their dying system. The Empire is dangerous, but all the easier to crush.

The Nov. 25 Ukrainian naval breach of Russian territorial waters was long pre-planned. As the Italian military journal Difesa Online wrote on Nov. 25, "it was evident to all those who follow local events that for some days already, the Poroshenko government in Ukraine was trying to provoke an armed confrontation with Moscow in the Crimean waters." Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova, said the same yesterday, adding a warning. "We are talking about a pre-planned, deliberate, and now realized large-scale provocation.... I think everybody should be careful next time. I think there will be a next time, considering what is happening now."

President Donald Trump's first response to the Ukraine incident, Nov. 26, was to express concern, and hopes for settlement. "We do not like what's happening, either way; ... hopefully, it will get straightened out." President Vladimir Putin will issue his statement on this incident in a few days.

From London, however, comes a raving "script" of what Trump and the West must do against Russia. It is the featured item on the website of the Integrity Initiative, which is a British intelligence black war propaganda operation. Its funding is from the U.K. Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Its Nov. 26 posting is titled, "West Is Once Again Failing Test Set by Russian Aggression," by Edward Lucas, formerly of The Economist , and a longtime Russia-hater, who wrote such books as Deception: Spies, Lies and How Russia Dupes the West (2012) and The New Cold War: Putin's Russia and the Threat to the West (2nd ed., 2014). Lucas calls for "kinetic, symbolic, and financial measures" against Russia. This is to include, the West sending military aid to Ukraine, running a NATO flotilla to the Ukrainian port of Mariupol on the Sea of Azov, putting sanctions on Russian officials and businessmen present in the West, and cutting Russia off from Western finance. Lucas says that the West didn't act against Nazi Germany's 1939 invasion of Poland, but they must act now against Russia's aggression against Ukraine.

Lucas is part of the British "cluster" of Integrity Initiative's operatives, which also includes former British Ambassador to Russia Sir Andrew Wood of Orbis Business Intelligence, the firm of "former" MI6 agent Christopher Steele, who fabricated the infamous anti-Trump dossier. These figures are at the heart of the coup operations against Trump, and before that, the Obama Administration election subversion.

Zepp-LaRouche nailed the Integrity Initiative in a Sputnik interview published yesterday, now being run in media internationally. She said that the group's activity displays the " modus operandi of British intelligence operations, and it very well may turn out, that it is this network, which is deeply involved in 'Russiagate' and the entire coup against President Trump."

It is now urgent for all the documents bearing on these criminal, treasonous operations to be de-classified, and the full story revealed. Every hour counts.

[Dec 09, 2018] Neoliberalism is more like modern feudalism - an authoritarian system where the lords (bankers, energy companies and their large and inefficient attendant bureaucracies), keep us peasants in thrall through life long debt-slavery simply to buy a house or exploit us as a captured market in the case of the energy sector.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... I don't like using the term "neo-liberalism" that much because there is nothing "new" or "liberal" about it, the term itself just helps hide the fact that it's a political project more about power than profit and the end result is more like modern feudalism - an authoritarian system where the lords (bankers, energy companies and their large and inefficient attendant bureaucracies), keep us peasants in thrall through life long debt-slavery simply to buy a house or exploit us as a captured market in the case of the energy sector. ..."
"... Since the word "privatisation" is clearly no longer popular, the latest buzzword from this project is "outsourcing". ..."
"... As far as I can see "neo-liberalism", or what I prefer to call managerial and financialised feudalism is not dead, it's still out and about looking around for the next rent-seeking opportunity. ..."
"... In the political arena, is enabling porkies facilitate each other in every lunatic pronouncement about "Budget repair" and "on track for a surplus". And its spotty, textbook-spouting clones ("all debt is debt! Shriek, gasp, hyperventilate!") fall off the conveyor belts of tertiary education Australia-wide, then turn up on The Drum as IPA 'Research Fellows' to spout their evidence-free assertions. ..."
"... And don't forget the handmaiden of neoliberalism is their macroeconomic mythology about government "debt and borrowing" which will condemn our grandchildren to poverty - inter-generational theft! It also allows them to continue dismantling government social programs by giving tax-cuts to reduce "revenue" and then claiming there is no money to fund those programs. ..."
"... "Competition" as the cornerstone of neoliberal economics was always a lie. Corporations do their best to get rid of competitors by unfair pricing tactics or by takeovers. And even where some competitors hang in there by some means (banks, petrol companies) the competition that occurs is not for price but for profit. ..."
"... We find a shift away from democratic processes and the rise of the "all new adulation of the so-called tough leader" factor, aka Nazism/Fascism. From Trump to Turkey, Netanyahu to Putin, Brazil to China, the rise of the "right" in Europe, the South Americas, where the leader is "our great and "good" Teacher", knows best, and thus infantalises the knowledge and awareness of the rest of the population. Who needs scientists, when the "leader" knows everything? ..."
"... There are indeed alternatives to neoliberalism, most of which have been shown to lead back to neoliberalism. Appeals for fiscal and monetary relief/stimulus can only ever paper over the worst aspects of it's relentless 'progress', between wars, it seems. ..."
"... Neoliberalism seems vastly, catastrophically misunderstood. Widely perceived as the latest abomination to spring from the eternal battle 'twixt Labour and Capital, it's actual origins are somewhat more recent. Neoliberalism really, really is not just "Capitalism gone wrong". It goes much deeper, to a fundamental flaw buried( more accurately 'planted') deep in the heart of economics. ..."
"... In 1879 an obscure journalist from then-remote San Francisco, Henry George, took the world by storm with his extraordinary bestseller Progress and Poverty . Still the only published work to outsell the Bible in a single year, it did so for over twenty years, yet few social justice advocates have heard of it. ..."
"... George gravely threatened privileged global power-elites , so they erased him from academic history. A mind compared, in his time with Plato, Copernicus and Adam Smith wiped from living memory, by the modern aristocracy. ..."
"... In the process of doing so, they emasculated the discipline of economics, stripped dignity from labour, and set in motion a world-destroying doctrine. Neo-Classical Economics(aka neoliberalism) was born , to the detriment of the working-citizen and the living world on which s/he depends. ..."
Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

ElectricJolt , 31 Oct 2018 04:38

I don't like using the term "neo-liberalism" that much because there is nothing "new" or "liberal" about it, the term itself just helps hide the fact that it's a political project more about power than profit and the end result is more like modern feudalism - an authoritarian system where the lords (bankers, energy companies and their large and inefficient attendant bureaucracies), keep us peasants in thrall through life long debt-slavery simply to buy a house or exploit us as a captured market in the case of the energy sector.

Since the word "privatisation" is clearly no longer popular, the latest buzzword from this project is "outsourcing". If you've had a look at The Canberra Times over the last couple of weeks there have been quite a few articles about outsourcing parts of Medicare and Centrelink, using labour hire companies and so on – is this part of a current LNP plan to "sell off" parts of the government before Labour takes the reins in May?

As far as I can see "neo-liberalism", or what I prefer to call managerial and financialised feudalism is not dead, it's still out and about looking around for the next rent-seeking opportunity.

Friarbird , 31 Oct 2018 04:02
Neoliberalism "dead"? I think not. It is riveted on the country like a straitjacket.

Which is exactly what it was always intended to be, a system gamed and rigged to ensure the wage-earning scum obtain progressively less and less of the country's productive wealth, however much they contributed to it. The wage theft and exploitation Neoliberalism fosters has become the new norm. Neoliberal idealogues thickly infest Federal and State Treasuries.

In the political arena, is enabling porkies facilitate each other in every lunatic pronouncement about "Budget repair" and "on track for a surplus". And its spotty, textbook-spouting clones ("all debt is debt! Shriek, gasp, hyperventilate!") fall off the conveyor belts of tertiary education Australia-wide, then turn up on The Drum as IPA 'Research Fellows' to spout their evidence-free assertions.

The IPA itself has moles in govt at every level--even in your local Council. Certainly in ours.

Neoliberalism is "dead"? Correction. Neoliberalism is alive, thriving---and quick to ensure its glaring deficiencies and inequities are solely attributable to its opponents. Now THERE'S a surprise.....

totaram -> JohnArmour , 31 Oct 2018 03:01
Agree! And don't forget the handmaiden of neoliberalism is their macroeconomic mythology about government "debt and borrowing" which will condemn our grandchildren to poverty - inter-generational theft! It also allows them to continue dismantling government social programs by giving tax-cuts to reduce "revenue" and then claiming there is no money to fund those programs.
exTen , 31 Oct 2018 02:30
Neoliberalism will not be dead until the underpinning of neoliberalism is abandoned by ALP and Greens. That underpinning is their mindless attachment to "budget repair" and "return to surplus". The federal government's "budget" is nothing like a currency user's budget. Currency users collect in order to spend whereas every dollar spent by the federal government is a new dollar and every dollar taxed by the federal government is an ex-dollar. A currency cannot sensibly have "debt" in the currency that it issues and no amount of surplus or deficit now will enhance or impair its capacity to spend in future. A currency issuer does not need an electronic piggybank, or a Future Fund, or a Drought Relief Fund. It can't max out an imaginary credit card. It's "borrowing" is just an exchange of its termless no-coupon liabilities (currency) for term-limited coupon-bearing liabilities (bonds). The federal budget balance is no rational indicator of any need for austerity or for stimulus. The rational indicators are unemployment (too small a "deficit"/too large a surplus) and inflation (too large a "deficit"/too small a "surplus"). Federal taxation is where dollars go to die. It doesn't "fund" a currency issuer's spending - it is there to stop the dollars it issues from piling up and causing inflation and to make room for spending by democratically elected federal parliament. The name of the game is to balance the economy, not the entirely notional and fundamentally irrelevant "budget".
Copperfield , 31 Oct 2018 01:51
"Competition" as the cornerstone of neoliberal economics was always a lie. Corporations do their best to get rid of competitors by unfair pricing tactics or by takeovers. And even where some competitors hang in there by some means (banks, petrol companies) the competition that occurs is not for price but for profit.

And changing the electoral system? Yes indeed. After years of observation it seems to me that the problem with our politics is not individual politicians (although there are notable exceptions) but political parties. Rigid control of policies and voting on party instruction (even by the Greens) makes the proceedings of parliament a complete waste of time. If every policy had to run the gauntlet of 150 people all voting by their conscience we would have better policy. The executive functions could be carried out by a cabinet also elected from those members. But not going to happen - too many vested interests in the parties and their corporate sponsors.

gidrys , 31 Oct 2018 01:34
With the election of Bolsonaro in Brazil (even though nearly 30% of electors refused to vote) it may be a little presumptuous to dissect the dead corpse of neoliberalism, as Richard Denniss' hopes that we can.

What is absolutely gob-smacking is that Brazilians voted for him; a man that Glenn Greenwald describes as "far more dangerous than Trump" , that Bolsonaro envisages military dictatorships as "being a far more superior form of government" advocating a civil war in order to dispose of the left.

Furthermore, the election of this far-right neoliberal extremist also threatens the Amazon forest and its indigenous people; with a global impact that will render combatting climate change even more difficult.

Locally, recent Liberal Party battles over leadership have included the neolib factor, as the lunatic right in that party - who I suspect would all love to be a Bolsonaro themselves - aggressively activate their grumblings and dissension.

Oh, Richard how I wish you were right; but in the Victorian election campaign - currently underway - I have seen Socialist candidates behaving in a manner that doesn't garner hope in a different way of doing politics.

The fact that 'our' democracy is based on an adversarial, partisan system leaves me with little hope. Alain Badiou wrote that "ours is not a world of democracy but a world of imperial conservatism using democratic phraseology" ; and until that imposition is discarded 'our' democracy will remain whatever we are told it is, and neolibs will continue to shove their bullshit down our throats as much as they can.

beeden , 31 Oct 2018 01:33
There is no abatement to the wealthiest in the global communities seeking greater wealth and thus increasing inequality.

Taking a local example,

We find a shift away from democratic processes and the rise of the "all new adulation of the so-called tough leader" factor, aka Nazism/Fascism. From Trump to Turkey, Netanyahu to Putin, Brazil to China, the rise of the "right" in Europe, the South Americas, where the leader is "our great and "good" Teacher", knows best, and thus infantalises the knowledge and awareness of the rest of the population. Who needs scientists, when the "leader" knows everything?

Have the people of the world abrogated their democratic responsibility?

Or is it the gerrymandering chicanery of US Republican backers/politicians( so long as you control the voting machines ) that have sent the ugly message to the world, Power is yours for the making and taking by any means that ignores the public's rights in the decision making process. Has the "neo-liberal" world delivered a corrupted system of democracy that has deliberately alienated the world's population from actively participating fully in the full awareness that their vote counts and will be counted?

Do we need to take back the controls of democracy to ensure that it is the will of the people and not a manipulation by vested interest groups/individuals? You're darn tootin'!!!

Matt Quinn , 31 Oct 2018 01:32
A thoughtful piece. Thanks. There are indeed alternatives to neoliberalism, most of which have been shown to lead back to neoliberalism. Appeals for fiscal and monetary relief/stimulus can only ever paper over the worst aspects of it's relentless 'progress', between wars, it seems.

Neoliberalism seems vastly, catastrophically misunderstood. Widely perceived as the latest abomination to spring from the eternal battle 'twixt Labour and Capital, it's actual origins are somewhat more recent. Neoliberalism really, really is not just "Capitalism gone wrong". It goes much deeper, to a fundamental flaw buried( more accurately 'planted') deep in the heart of economics.

Instead of trying to understand Neo-Classical Economics it is perhaps more instructive to understand what it was built, layer by layer, to obscure. First the Land system, then the Wealth system, and finally the Money system (hived off into a compartment - 'macroeconomics'). Importantly, three entirely different categories of "thing" .

In 1879 an obscure journalist from then-remote San Francisco, Henry George, took the world by storm with his extraordinary bestseller Progress and Poverty . Still the only published work to outsell the Bible in a single year, it did so for over twenty years, yet few social justice advocates have heard of it.

George set out to discover why the worst poverty always seemed to accompany the most progress. By chasing down the production process to its ends, and tracing where the proceeds were going, he succeeded spectacularly. From Progress and Poverty , Chapter 17 - "The Problem Explained" :

Three things unite in production: land, labor, and capital. Three parties divide the output: landowner, laborer, and capitalist. If the laborer and capitalist get no more as production increases, it is a necessary inference that the landowner takes the gain.

George gravely threatened privileged global power-elites , so they erased him from academic history. A mind compared, in his time with Plato, Copernicus and Adam Smith wiped from living memory, by the modern aristocracy.

In the process of doing so, they emasculated the discipline of economics, stripped dignity from labour, and set in motion a world-destroying doctrine. Neo-Classical Economics(aka neoliberalism) was born , to the detriment of the working-citizen and the living world on which s/he depends.

Einstein was a fan of George, and used his methods of thought-experiment and powerful inductive reasoning to discover Relativity, twenty years later. Henry Georges brilliant insights into Land (aka nature), Wealth (what you want, need), and Money (sharing mechanism) are as relevant as ever, and until they are rediscovered, we are likely to re-run the 1900's over and over, with fewer and fewer resources.

~ How Land Barons, Industrialists and Bankers Corrupted Economics .

[Dec 09, 2018] CyberGuerrilla soApboX " Operation 'Integrity Initiative'. British informational war against all

Dec 09, 2018 | www.cyberguerrilla.org
Greetings. We are Anonymous.

We have obtained a large number of documents relating to the activities of the 'Integrity Initiative' project that was launched back in the fall of 2015 and funded by the British government. The declared goal of the project is to counteract Russian propaganda and the hybrid warfare of Moscow. Hiding behind benevolent intentions, Britain has in fact created a large-scale information secret service in Europe, the United States and Canada, which consists of representatives of political, military, academic and journalistic communities with the think tank in London at the head of it.

As part of the project Britain has time and again intervened into domestic affairs of independent European states. A most demonstrative example is operation 'Moncloa' in Spain. Britain set to prevent Pedro Baños from appointment to the post of Director of Spain's Department of Homeland Security. It took the Spanish cluster of the Integrity Initiative only a few hours to accomplish the task.

https://www.scribd.com/document/392195691/Moncloa-Campaign-6-AttTwitter-08-06-18
For now, Britain is capable of conducting such operations in the following states:

Spain https://www.scribd.com/document/392195775/Spain-Cluster

France https://www.scribd.com/document/392195457/France-Cluster

Germany https://www.scribd.com/document/392195486/Germany-Cluster

Italy https://www.scribd.com/document/392195660/Italy-Cluster

Greece https://www.scribd.com/document/392195527/Greece-Cluster

The Netherlands https://www.scribd.com/document/392195718/Netherlands-Cluster

Lithuania https://www.scribd.com/document/392195170/Baltics-Cluster

Norway https://www.scribd.com/document/392195748/Nordic-Clusters

Serbia and Montenegro https://www.scribd.com/document/392195208/Central-Eastern-Cluster

London's near-term plans to create similar clusters include Latvia, Estonia, Portugal, Sweden, Belgium, Canada, Armenia, Ukraine, Moldova, Malta, Czechia, countries of the Middle East and North Africa, Poland, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, Georgia, Hungary, Cyprus, Austria, Switzerland, Turkey, Finland, Iceland, Denmark, and the USA.

https://www.scribd.com/document/392195321/Cluster-Roundup-Jul18

All the work is done under absolute secrecy via concealed contacts in British embassies, which gives rise to more suspicion that Britain uses plausible excuse to create a global system of information influence and political interference into affairs of other countries.
Covert structures for political and financial manipulative activities under control of British secret services are created not only in the EU countries but also on other continents. In point of fact, quiet colonization of both former British neighbors in the EU and NATO allies is taking place.

The government of Great Britain has to come out of the dark and declare straight its intentions and unveil the results of the Integrity Initiative activities! Otherwise, we will do it!

Today, we make public a part of the documents we have available. In case London gives no response to our demands during the following week, we will reveal the rest of the documents that contain many more secrets of the United Kingdom.

Integrity Initiative Handbook. https://www.scribd.com/document/392195560/II-Handbook-v2

Integrity Initiative Guide to Countering Russian Disinformation May 2018. https://www.scribd.com/document/392195802/The-Integrity-Initiative-Guide-to-Countering-Russian-Disinformation-May-2018-v1

Austria Cluster. https://www.scribd.com/document/392194912/Austria-Cluster

Cluster leaders. https://www.scribd.com/document/392195250/Cluster-Leaders

Cluster participants. https://www.scribd.com/document/392195286/Cluster-Participants

UK Cluster. https://www.scribd.com/document/392195849/UK-Cluster

USA and Canada Cluster. https://www.scribd.com/document/392195882/USA-Canada-Cluster

xCountry. https://www.scribd.com/document/392195906/x-Country

xOutreach. https://www.scribd.com/document/392195933/x-Outreach

FCO application form 2017-18. https://www.scribd.com/document/392195350/FCO-Application-Form-2017-18

FCO application form 2018v2. https://www.scribd.com/document/392195390/FCO-Application-Form-2018-v2

FCO proposal Integrity budget 2017-18. https://www.scribd.com/document/392195430/FCO-Proposal-Integrity-Budget-2017-18

Integrity 2018 Activity Budget v3. https://www.scribd.com/document/392195593/Integrity-2018-Activity-Budget-v3

Top 3 deliverables (for FCO). https://www.scribd.com/document/392195825/Top-3-Deliverables-for-FCO

We are Anonymous.

We are Legion.

We do not forgive.

We do not forget.

Expect us.

Backup copies of the documents:

Moncloa campaign https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/moncloa-campaign-6-atttwitter080618/moncloa-campaign-6-atttwitter080618.pdf

Spain https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/spain-cluster/spain-cluster.pdf

France https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/france-cluster/france-cluster.pdf

Germany https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/germany-cluster/germany-cluster.pdf

Italy https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/italy-cluster/italy-cluster.pdf

Greece https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/greece-cluster/greece-cluster.pdf

The Netherlands https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/netherlands-cluster/netherlands-cluster.pdf

Lithuania https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/baltics-cluster/baltics-cluster.pdf

Norway https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/nordic-clusters/nordic-clusters.pdf

Serbia and Montenegro https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/central-eastern-cluster/central-eastern-cluster.pdf

Cluster roundup https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/clusterroundupjul18/clusterroundupjul18.pdf

Integrity Initiative Handbook. https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/iihandbookv2/iihandbookv2.pdf

Integrity Initiative Guide to Countering Russian Disinformation May 2018. https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/untitled-pdf-document-1/untitled-pdf-document.pdf

Austria Cluster. https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/austria-cluster/austria-cluster.pdf

Cluster leaders. https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/cluster-leaders/cluster-leaders.pdf

Cluster participants. https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/cluster-participants/cluster-participants.pdf

UK Cluster. https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/uk-cluster/uk-cluster.pdf

USA and Canada Cluster. https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/usacanada-cluster/usacanada-cluster.pdf

xCountry. https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/xcountry/xcountry.pdf

xOutreach. https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/xoutreach/xoutreach.pdf

FCO application form 2017-18. https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/fco-application-form-2017-18/fco-application-form-2017-18.pdf

FCO application form 2018v2. https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/fco-application-form-2018-v2/fco-application-form-2018-v2.pdf

FCO proposal Integrity budget 2017-18. https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/fco-proposal-integrity-budget-2017-18/fco-proposal-integrity-budget-2017-18.pdf

Integrity 2018 Activity Budget v3. https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/integrity2018activitybudgetv3/integrity2018activitybudgetv3.pdf

Top 3 deliverables (for FCO). https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/top-3-deliverables-for-fco/top-3-deliverables-for-fco.pdf

[Dec 09, 2018] Psyops oops UK-funded 'anti-Russian' programme outed in leak

Nov 28, 2018 | www.blogger.com
Isn't this interesting? A UK program to propagandize US and European audiences is set up to demonize Russia around the same time GCHQ and MI6 are busy spying on US presidential candidates and then ultimately doing their best to throw an election over here... while trying to frame Russia... for trying to throw an election over here. Cute right?

https://youtu.be/f0PY2M1r6Rc

Integrity Initiative , Russian hacking psyop

[Dec 09, 2018] 'Perpetual confrontation' MI6 chief lures young Brits into espionage with Russia-bashing

Dec 09, 2018 | eptoday.com

The head of MI6, the UK's intelligence service, hopes to recruit a new generation of tech-savvy spies, with a passionate speech urging graduates to protect the homeland against the arch nemesis who subverts the UK way of life.
"The era of the fourth industrial revolution calls for a fourth generation of espionage," Alex Younger will say at St. Andrews University on 3rd December.

To lure young Brits into the spy agency who otherwise might not have seen themselves in MI6, Younger paints an image of a clever arch nemesis –Russia– which can only be stopped with the help of brilliant young minds from all sorts of backgrounds, not just by the snobbish Oxbridge graduates typically associated with the service.

Fresh blood is needed to defend UK web domains against cyber-attacks, the spread of fake news and interference in domestic politics, Alex Younger will say, at the same time praising the old guard for "exposing" Russia in the highly-controversial Salisbury attack.

Russia, or any other UK adversary, better "not underestimate our determination and our capabilities, or those of our allies," Younger's speech warns.

Hardly historic friends and bitter Cold War rivals, the UK and Russia have seen their relations slip to new lows in March, following the poisoning of ex-Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia. London immediately pinned the blame for the Salisbury incident directly on the Kremlin, and rejected any idea of an open joint investigation with Russia, insisting its own probe would suffice to make the case and then punishing Moscow with sanctions.

Moscow is also perpetually facing accusations of cyberwarfare against other states and attempts to undermine democracy and to influence the political process within those countries. And despite multiple reassurances that Moscow could not care less about the internal political struggles in foreign states, London and British mass media continue to vilify Russia with bizarre reports, like half of London's Russian community are spies for the Kremlin.

Claims of 'Russian meddling' look particularly hypocritical in the wake of a leak that exposed the Integrity Initiative – a group that claims to be fighting back against 'Russian misinformation' – being a clandestine network of influencers that manipulate European politics with the British government's backing.

The anti-Russia paranoia in the UK arguably reached its peak over the weekend, when military bases across the nation issued security alerts after a Russian TV crew was accused of spying outside the army's secret cyber warfare headquarters.

Credit : https://www.rt.com/uk/445410-mi6-spies-russia-confrontation/

[Dec 09, 2018] Hackers Leak More Details on UK's Info War in Europe

Dec 09, 2018 | sputniknews.com

International hacker group Anonymous went ahead with its efforts to counter what it calls Britain's interference with the domestic affairs of sovereign states. In a second dump of secret documents within two weeks, the hacktivists disclose more details on the ongoing UK-funded, anti-Russia information campaign spreading across Europe. The second batch of documents leaked by Anonymous unravels more information on the activities of the Integrity Initiative (II), a UK-based NGO ostensibly founded to counter disinformation and defend democratic processes from malign influence. According to the first documents leaked by the hacktivist organization last month, the project was in fact a "large-scale information secret service" sponsored and created by London to tackle 'Russian propaganda.'

However, the latest leak suggests that "the British government goes far beyond and exploits the Integrity Initiative to solve its domestic problems inside the United Kingdom by defaming the opposition."

Discrediting UK Opposition

Anonymous refers to a "scorching" article that surfaced in The Times on November 25 and was dedicated to Seumas Milne, director of strategy and communications under Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. The Times' official Twitter account promoted the piece three times within 24 hours on social media -- the only case for all of its articles, Anonymous says. The hacktivists add that the Integrity Initiative retweeted the "defamatory" article right after its publication (the post is now unavailable, but Anonymous provided a screengrab of the retweet).

Screenshot © Photo : Screenshot Screenshot

The group announced in November that the II constituted a network of clusters across Europe, which sought to tamper with domestic affairs of several European countries such as France, Germany, Italy, Greece, the Netherlands, Lithuania, Norway, Serbia, Spain, and Montenegro.

Countering Russia on German Soil

Another part of the leak is an interim report on the establishment of a German cluster, which was purportedly written by Hannes Adomeit, a German political expert specialising in Russian foreign policy. According to the uncovered documents, the German cluster is coordinated by suspected MI6 agent Harold Elletson.

The report focuses mainly on research of Germans' attitudes toward Russia. Adomeit says that the so-called "Russian narrative" on the origins of the crisis in Moscow's relations with the West is "widely accepted by German public opinion." He adds that further research would be carried out to examine "the reasons for the great receptivity of the Russia narrative" in Germany.

READ MORE: Switzerland Follows Russophobic Narrative by Pressuring Diplomats -- Scholars

He also addresses the case of Andrei Kovalchuk, a Russian arrested in Germany on suspicion of smuggling cocaine to Moscow from Argentina. Kovalchuk was extradited to Russia in late July -- much to the dissatisfaction of Adomeit, who suggests that German prosecutors could have "made an effort" to question him and dig up some dirt on Russia.

Watching Russia's Reaction to Catalan Events

The activities of the Integrity Initiative's Spanish cluster were partly revealed by Anonymous in the first leak on the project. However, a newly unveiled document titled "Cluster Breakdown" identifies people associated with the Spanish chapter.

The list includes territorial minister Jose Ignacio Sanchez Amor, MEP Fernando Maura, head of Spain's peacekeeping mission in Central African Republic Dionisio Urteaga Todo, European Commission Speaker Dimitri Barua, State Secretary for Foreign Affairs Fernando Valenzuela Marzo, head of Spanish delegation to NATO PA Ricardo Blanco Torno, former defence minister Eduardo Serra Rexach. Other affiliates include foreign affairs reporters and pundits from Spanish think tanks: the Barcelona Centre for International Affairs, the European Council on Foreign Relations, and the Elcano Royal Institute.

Screenshot © Photo : Screenshot Screenshot

The Spanish cluster was apparently closely watching Russia's reaction to the movement in support of Catalan independence in 2016. According to another leaked interim report , the project's members were disappointed with Russia's moderate position on the situation in Spain. However, they claimed, while Vladimir Putin insisted that the issue of Catalan sovereignty was Spain's internal affair, he was happy to watch Europe "take its own medicine" (a reference to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence).

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov © Sputnik / Vitaly Belousov UK Integrity Initiative Project Aims to Damage Russia's Public Image - Lavrov

This is why, they said, the Russian media took advantage of the 2016 developments in Catalonia to portray the European Union as "declining, undemocratic and troubled". They went on to link the media coverage of the Catalan events in Russia to Russia's alleged disinformation campaign against the West.

The authors contend that given that Catalonia has become part of Russia's "big narrative about the West," Russian meddling has also become part of the debates in Spain. "This represents a clear window of opportunity" for promoting anti-Russia sentiment, they conclude.

Skripal Case Coverage in Greece

The Integrity Initiative's Greek cluster was keeping a close eye on the media coverage of the Salisbury poisoning in local newspapers. They went to considerable lengths, studying 193 articles across six major media outlets. It seems, however, that the result of all the hard work was rather unsatisfactory: the authors confess that the majority of Greek newspapers adopted a neutral stance towards the Skripal case.

They claim that the Greek media were influenced into not taking sides and remaining unbiased. "The strong pro-Russian sentiment in the Greek public opinion seems to have influenced the Greek newspapers not to emphasize Russia's involvement."

The Integrity Initiative has yet to comment on this information dump. Anonymous claimed that it released the second batch of documents after the EU leaders and international organisations had ignored its first disclosure. The group accused the II and its sponsors of failing to "give assurances that the network of clusters will only be used to counter Russia's disinformation policy."

[Dec 09, 2018] Britain on the Leash with the United States but at Which End by James George Jatras

Oct 13, 2018 | off-guardian.org

The "special relationship" between the United States and the United Kingdom is often assumed to be one where the once-great, sophisticated Brits are subordinate to the upstart, uncouth Yanks.

Iconic of this assumption is the mocking of former prime minister Tony Blair as George W. Bush's "poodle" for his riding shotgun on the ill-advised American stagecoach blundering into Iraq in 2003. Blair was in good practice, having served as Bill Clinton's dogsbody in the no less criminal NATO aggression against Serbia over Kosovo in 1999.

On the surface, the UK may seem just one more vassal state on par with Germany, Japan, South Korea, and so many other useless so-called allies . We control their intelligence services, their military commands, their think tanks, and much of their media. We can sink their financial systems and economies at will. Emblematic is German Chancellor Angela Merkel's impotent ire at discovering the Obama administration had listened in on her cell phone, about which she – did precisely nothing. Global hegemony means never having to say you're sorry.

These countries know on which end of the leash they are: the one attached to the collar around their necks. The hand unmistakably is in Washington. These semi-sovereign countries answer to the US with the same servility as member states of the Warsaw Pact once heeded the USSR's Politburo. (Sometimes more. Communist Romania, though then a member of the Warsaw Pact refused to participate in the 1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia or even allow Soviet or other Pact forces to cross its territory.

By contrast, during NATO's 1999 assault on Serbia, Bucharest allowed NATO military aircraft access to its airspace, even though not yet a member of that alliance and despite most Romanians' opposition to the campaign.)

But the widespread perception of Britain as just another satellite may be misleading.

To start with, there are some relationships where it seems the US is the vassal dancing to the tune of the foreign capital, not the other way around. Israel is the unchallenged champion in this weight class, with Saudi Arabia a runner up. The alliance between Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman (MbS) – the ultimate Washington "power couple" – to get the Trump administration to destroy Iran for them has American politicos listening for instructions with all the rapt attention of the terrier Nipper on the RCA Victor logo . (Or did, until the recent disappearance of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Whether this portends a real shift in American attitudes toward Riyadh remains questionable . Saudi cash still speaks loudly and will continue to do so whether or not MbS stays in charge.)

Specifics of the peculiar US-UK relationship stem from the period of flux at the end of World War II. The United States emerged from the war in a commanding position economically and financially, eclipsing Britannia's declining empire that simply no longer had the resources to play the leading role. That didn't mean, however, that London trusted the Americans' ability to manage things without their astute guidance. As Tony Judt describes in Postwar , the British attitude of " superiority towards the country that had displaced them at the imperial apex " was "nicely captured" in a scribble during negotiations regarding the UK's postwar loan:

In Washington Lord Halifax
Once whispered to Lord Keynes:
"It's true they have the moneybags
But we have all the brains."

Even in its diminished condition London found it could punch well above its weight by exerting its influence on its stronger but (it was confident) dumber cousins across the Pond. It helped that as the Cold War unfolded following former Prime Minister Winston Churchill's 1946 Iron Curtain speech there were very close ties between sister agencies like MI6 (founded 1909) and the newer wartime OSS (1942), then the CIA (1947); likewise the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ, 1919) and the National Security Administration (NSA, 1952). Comparable sister agencies – perhaps more properly termed daughters of their UK mothers – were set up in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. This became the so-called "Five Eyes" of the tight Anglosphere spook community, infamous for spying on each others' citizens to avoid pesky legal prohibitions on domestic surveillance .

Despite not having two farthings to rub together, impoverished Britain – where wartime rationing wasn't fully ended until 1954 – had a prime seat at the table fashioning the world's postwar financial structure. The 1944 Bretton Woods conference was largely an Anglo-American affair , of which the aforementioned Lord John Maynard Keynes was a prominent architect along with Harry Dexter White, Special Assistant to the US Secretary of the Treasury and Soviet agent.

American and British agendas also dovetailed in the Middle East. While the US didn't have much of a presence in the region before the 1945 meeting between US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Saudi King ibn Saud, founder of the third and current ( and hopefully last ) Saudi state – and didn't assume a dominant role until the humiliation inflicted on Britain, France, and Israel by President Dwight Eisenhower during the 1956 Suez Crisis – London has long considered much of the region within its sphere of influence. After World War I under the Sykes-Picot agreement with France , the UK had expanded her holdings on the ruins of the Ottoman Empire, including taking a decisive role in consolidating Saudi Arabia under ibn Saud. While in the 1950s the US largely stepped into Britain's role managing the "East of Suez," the former suzerain was by no means dealt out. The UK was a founding member with the US of the now-defunct Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) in 1955.

CENTO – like NATO and their one-time eastern counterpart, the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) – was designed as a counter to the USSR. But in the case of Britain, the history of hostility to Russia under tsar or commissar alike has much deeper and longer roots, going back at least to the Crimean War in the 1850s . The reasons for the longstanding British vendetta against Russia are not entirely clear and seem to have disparate roots: the desire to ensure that no one power is dominant on the European mainland (directed first against France, then Russia, then Germany, then the USSR and again Russia); maintaining supremacy on the seas by denying Russia warm-waters ports, above all the Dardanelles; and making sure territories of a dissolving Ottoman empire would be taken under the wing of London, not Saint Petersburg. As described by Andrew Lambert , professor of naval history at King's College London, the Crimean War still echoes today :

"In the 1840s, 1850s, Britain and America are not the chief rivals; it's Britain and Russia. Britain and Russia are rivals for world power, and Turkey, the Ottoman Empire, which is much larger than modern Turkey -- it includes modern Romania, Bulgaria, parts of Serbia, and also Egypt and Arabia -- is a declining empire. But it's the bulwark between Russia, which is advancing south and west, and Britain, which is advancing east and is looking to open its connections up through the Mediterranean into its empire in India and the Pacific. And it's really about who is running Turkey. Is it going to be a Russian satellite, a bit like the Eastern Bloc was in the Cold War, or is it going to be a British satellite, really run by British capital, a market for British goods? And the Crimean War is going to be the fulcrum for this cold war to actually go hot for a couple of years, and Sevastopol is going to be the fulcrum for that fighting."

Control of the Middle East – and opposing the Russians – became a British obsession, first to sustain the lifeline to India, the Jewel in the Crown of the empire, then for control of petroleum, the life's blood of modern economies. In the context of the 19th and early 20th century Great Game of empire, that was understandable. Much later, similar considerations might even support Jimmy Carter's taking up much the same position, declaring in 1980 that "outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force." The USSR was then a superpower and we were dependent on energy from the Gulf region.

But what's our reason for maintaining that posture almost four decades later when the Soviet Union is gone and the US doesn't need Middle Eastern oil? There are no reasonable national interests, only corporate interests and those of the Arab monarchies we laughably claim as allies. Add to that the bureaucracies and habits of mind that link the US and UK establishments, including their intelligence and financial components.

In view of all the foregoing, what then would policymakers in the United Kingdom think about an aspirant to the American presidency who not only disparages the value of existing alliances – without which Britain is a bit player – but openly pledges to improve relations with Moscow ? To what lengths would they go to stop him?

Say 'hello' to Russiagate!

One can argue whether or not the phony claim of the Trump campaign's "collusion" with Moscow was hatched in London or whether the British just lent some " hands across the water " to an effort concocted by the Democratic National Committee, the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, the Clinton Foundation, and their collaborators at Fusion GPS and inside the Obama administration. Either way, it's clear that while evidence of Russian connection is nonexistent that of British agencies is unmistakable, as is the UK's hand in a sustained campaign of demonization and isolation to sink any possible rapprochement between the US and Russia .

As for Russiagate itself, just try to find anyone involved who's actually Russian. The only basis for the widespread assumption that any material in the Dirty Dossier that underlies the whole operation originated with Russia is the claim of Christopher Steele , the British "ex" spy who wrote it, evidently in collaboration with people at the US State Department and Fusion GPS. (The notion that Steele, who hadn't been in Russia for years, would have Kremlin personal contacts is absurd. How chummy are the heads of the American section of Chinese or Russian intelligence with White House staff?)

While there are no obvious Russians in Russiagate, there's no shortage of Brits. These include (details at the link) :

Andrew Wood , a former British ambassador to Russia Stefan Halper , a dual US-UK citizen. Ex-MI6 Director Richard Dearlove . Robert Hannigan , former director of GCHQ; there is reason to think surveillance of Trump was conducted by GCHQ as well as by US agencies under FISA warrants. Hannigan abruptly resigned from GCHQ soon after the British government denied the agency had engaged in such spying. Alexander Downer , Australian diplomat (well, not British but remember the Five Eyes!). Joseph Mifsud , Maltese academic and suspected British agent.

At present, the full role played by those listed above is not known. Release of unredacted FISA warrant requests by the Justice Department, which President Trump ordered weeks ago, would shed light on a number of details. Implementation of that order was derailed after a request by – no surprise – British Prime Minister Theresa May . Was she seeking to conceal Russian perfidy, or her own underlings'?

It would be bad enough if Russiagate were the sum of British meddling in American affairs with the aim of torpedoing relations with Moscow. (And to be fair, it wasn't just the UK and Australia. Also implicated are Estonia, Israel, and Ukraine .) But there is also reason to suspect the same motive in false accusations against Russia with respect to the supposed Novichok poisonings in England has a connection to Russiagate via a business associate of Steele's, one Pablo Miller , Sergei Skripal's MI6 recruiter . (So if it turns out there is any Russian connection to the dossier, it could be from Skripal or another dubious expat source, not from the Russian government.) Skripal and his daughter Yulia have disappeared in British custody. Moscow flatly accuses MI6 of poisoning them as a false flag to blame it on Russia.

A similar pattern can be seen with claims of chemical weapons use in Syria : "We have irrefutable evidence that the special services of a state which is in the forefront of the Russophobic campaign had a hand in the staging" of a faked chemical weapons attack in Douma in April 2018. Ambassador Aleksandr Yakovenko pointed to the so-called White Helmets, which is closely associated with al-Qaeda elements and considered by some their PR arm: "I am naming them because they have done things like this before. They are famous for staging attacks in Syria and they receive UK money." Moscow warned for weeks before the now-postponed Syrian government offensive in Idlib that the same ruse was being prepared again with direct British intelligence involvement, even having prepared in advance a video showing victims of an attack that had not yet occurred.

The campaign to demonize Russia shifted into high gear recently with the UK, together with the US and the Netherlands, accusing Russian military intelligence of a smorgasbord of cyberattacks against the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) and other sports organizations, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), the Dutch investigation into the downing of MH-17 over Ukraine, and a Swiss lab involved with the Skripal case, plus assorted election interference. In case anyone didn't get the point, British Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson declared : "This is not the actions of a great power. This is the actions of a pariah state, and we will continue working with allies to isolate them."

To the extent that the goal of Williamson and his ilk is to ensure isolation and further threats against Russia, it's been a smashing success. More sanctions are on the way . The UK is sending additional troops to the Arctic to counter Russian "aggression." The US threatens to use naval power to block Russian energy exports and to strike Russian weapons disputed under a treaty governing intermediate range nuclear forces. What could possibly go wrong?

In sum, we are seeing a massive, coordinated hybrid campaign of psy-ops and political warfare conducted not by Russia but against Russia, concocted by the UK and its Deep State collaborators in the United States. But it's not only aimed at Russia, it's an attack on the United States by the government of a foreign country that's supposed to be one of our closest allies, a country with which we share many venerable traditions of language, law, and culture.

But for far too long, largely for reasons of historical inertia and elite corruption, we've allowed that government to exercise undue influence on our global policies in a manner not conducive to our own national interests. Now that government, employing every foul deception that earned it the moniker Perfidious Albion , seeks to embroil us in a quarrel with the only country on the planet that can destroy us if things get out of control.

This must stop. A thorough reappraisal of our "special relationship" with the United Kingdom and exposure of its activities to the detriment of the US is imperative.

James George Jatras is an analyst, former U.S. diplomat and foreign policy adviser to the Senate GOP leadership.

[Dec 09, 2018] British Government Runs Secret Anti-Russian Smear Campaigns

Dec 09, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

British Government Runs Secret Anti-Russian Smear Campaigns

In 2015 the government of Britain launched a secret operation to insert anti-Russia propaganda into the western media stream.

We have already seen many consequences of this and similar programs which are designed to smear anyone who does not follow the anti-Russian government lines. The 'Russian collusion' smear campaign against Donald Trump based on the Steele dossier was also a largely British operation but seems to be part of a different project.

The ' Integrity Initiative ' builds 'cluster' or contact groups of trusted journalists, military personal, academics and lobbyists within foreign countries. These people get alerts via social media to take action when the British center perceives a need.

On June 7 it took the the Spanish cluster only a few hours to derail the appointment of Perto Banos as the Director of the National Security Department in Spain. The cluster determined that he had a too positive view of Russia and launched a coordinated social media smear campaign (pdf) against him.


bigger

The Initiative and its operations were unveiled when someone liberated some of its documents, including its budget applications to the British Foreign Office, and posted them under the 'Anonymous' label at cyberguerrilla.org .
---
Update - The Integrity Initiative confirms the release of its documents. - End Update
---

The Initiative is nominally run under the (government financed) non-government-organisation The Institute For Statecraft . Its internal handbook (pdf) describes its purpose:

The Integrity Initiative was set up in autumn 2015 by The Institute for Statecraft in cooperation with the Free University of Brussels (VUB) to bring to the attention of politicians, policy-makers, opinion leaders and other interested parties the threat posed by Russia to democratic institutions in the United Kingdom, across Europe and North America.

It lists Bellingcat and the Atlantic Council as "partner organisations" and promises that:

Cont. reading: British Government Runs Secret Anti-Russian Smear Campaigns

[Dec 09, 2018] Integrity Initiative: Country list of MI6 agents of influence according to the leak

Dec 09, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Zanon , Nov 24, 2018 2:12:45 PM | link

Country list of agents of influence according to the leak:

Germany

Harold Elletson ,Klaus NaumannWolf-Ruediger Bengs, Ex Amb Killian, Gebhardt v Moltke, Roland Freudenstein, Hubertus Hoffmann, Bertil Wenger, Beate Wedekind, Klaus Wittmann, Florian Schmidt, Norris v Schirach

Sweden, Norway, Finland

Martin Kragh , Jardar Ostbo, Chris Prebensen, Kate Hansen Bundt, Tor Bukkvoll, Henning-Andre Sogaard, Kristen Ven Bruusgard, Henrik O Breitenbauch, Niels Poulsen, Jeppe Plenge, Claus Mathiesen, Katri Pynnoniemi, Ian Robertson, Pauli Jarvenpaa, Andras Racz

Netherlands

Dr Sijbren de Jong, Ida Eklund-Lindwall, Yevhen Fedchenko, Rianne Siebenga, Jerry Sullivan, Hunter B Treseder, Chris Quick

Zanon , Nov 24, 2018 2:13:28 PM | link
Spain

Nico de Pedro, Ricardo Blanco Tarno, Eduardo Serra Rexach, Dionisio Urteaga Todo, Dimitri Barua, Fernando Valenzuela Marzo, Marta Garcia, Abraham Sanz, Fernando Maura, Jose Ignacio Sanchez Amor, Jesus Ramon-Laca Clausen, Frances Ghiles, Carmen Claudin, Nika Prislan, Luis Simon, Charles Powell, Mira Milosevich, Daniel Iriarte, Anna Bosch, Mira Milosevich-Juaristi, Tito, Frances Ghiles, Borja Lasheras, Jordi Bacaria, Alvaro Imbernon-Sainz, Nacho Samor

US, Canada

Mary Ellen Connell, Anders Aslund, Elizabeth Braw, Paul Goble, David Ziegler, Evelyn Farkas, Glen Howard, Stephen Blank, Ian Brzezinski, Thomas Mahnken, John Nevado, Robert Nurick, Jeff McCausland, Todd Leventhal

UK

Chris Donnelly, Amalyah Hart, William Browder, John Ardis, Roderick Collins, Patrick Mileham, Deborah Haynes, Dan Lafayeedney Chris Hernon, Mungo Melvin, Rob Dover Julian Moore, Agnes Josa, David Aaronovitch, Stephen Dalziel, Raheem Shapi, Ben Nimmo, Robert Hall Alexander Hoare Steve Jermy Dominic Kennedy
Victor Madeira Ed Lucas Dr David Ryall
Graham Geale Steve Tatham Natalie Nougayrede
Alan Riley [email protected] Anne Applebaum Neil Logan Brown James Wilson Primavera Quantrill
Bruce Jones David Clark Charles Dick
Ahmed Dassu Sir Adam Thompson Lorna Fitzsimons Neil Buckley Richard Titley Euan Grant
Alastair Aitken Yusuf Desai Bobo Lo Duncan Allen Chris Bell
Peter Mason John Lough Catherine Crozier
Robin Ashcroft Johanna Moehring Vadim Kleiner David Fields Alistair Wood Ben Robinson Drew Foxall Alex Finnen
Orsyia Lutsevych Charlie Hatton Vladimir Ashurkov
Giles Harris Ben Bradshaw
Chris Scheurweghs James Nixey
Charlie Hornick Baiba Braze J Lindley-French
Craig Oliphant Paul Kitching Nick Childs Celia Szusterman
James Sherr Alan Parfitt Alzbeta Chmelarova Keir Giles
Andy Pryce Zach Harkenrider
Kadri Liik Arron Rahaman David Nicholas Igor Sutyagin Rob Sandford Maya Parmar Andrew Wood Richard Slack Ellie Scarnell
Nick Smith Asta Skaigiryte Ian Bond Joanna Szostek Gintaras Stonys Nina Jancowicz
Nick Washer Ian Williams Joe Green Carl Miller Adrian Bradshaw
Clement Daudy Jeremy Blackham Gabriel Daudy Andrew Lucy Stafford Diane Allen Alexandros Papaioannou
Paddy Nicoll

Jen , Nov 24, 2018 2:25:43 PM | link
I see that the cluster of UK journalists to receive propaganda from the Integrity Initiative includes Guardian writer and former Le Monde chief editor (run out by her senior editors for her "Putinesque" leadership style) Natalie Nougayrede. As if The Guardian needs any more persuasion or encouragement to recede deeper into its labyrinthine network of rabbit-holes. Jonathan Freedland must be jumping up and down in an infantile tantrum that Nugget-head got such privileged access.
Zanon , Nov 24, 2018 2:30:45 PM | link
Agents of influence in Italy according to the leak:

Italy
Fabrizio Luciolli Vittorfranco Pisano Jason Wiseman Beppe Severigni Jacopo Iacoboni Alvise Armellini

erichwwk , Nov 24, 2018 2:32:15 PM | link
@ #2 pretzelattack Thanks for the Robert Mueller Guardian article link.

Am I the only one not to know that "As acting deputy attorney general, he [Robert Mueller] was in charge of the investigation and indictment of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the Libyan convicted of the terrorist attack that brought down Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie in Scotland just before Christmas 1988.

Seems every new article I read on Robert Mueller, he was carrying out another CIA covert plan.


The Framing of al-Megrahi by Gareth Peirce London Review of Books 24 Sept 2019

Laguerre , Nov 24, 2018 2:32:37 PM | link
Britain has been a US dog for years, most overtly in Blair's time over Iraq and Afghanistan, but things haven't really changed. Britain's military has become more and more dependent on the US. There is no longer an independent nuclear deterrent - the weapons are rented from the US, and I'm certain that they couldn't be used without US approval (sure to be a backdoor somewhere in the electronics which would enable the US to turn them off, if the US disagreed). The F35s they've insisted on buying are probably in the same situation.

They're not slaves, or rather 'vassals' - the current word of sensitivity about the EU. More active collaborators, which implies initiatives also stemming from Britain.

One should also recall Britain's function as US agent in the European Union. They were opposed to many EU proposals, obviously to fit in with US desires. The most recent example is the Galileo GPS system - they were opposed to it for years, but as Ivan Rogers told us (former Brit ambassador to the EU), the opposition he was instructed to make failed.

It's all gone off a bit recently though. Trump is not interested in Britain in the way Obama was. Brexit is a nativist movement, not what America wants. If Brexit goes through finally, the interest of the US will be even less, as we can no longer intervene on the US's behalf in Europe.

Zanon , Nov 24, 2018 2:35:35 PM | link
French agents of inluence according to leak:
France
Francoise Thom Jusin Vaisse Thomas Bertin Caroline Gondaud Guillaume Schlumberger Raphael de Lagarde Roland Galharague
Martin Briens Jean-Christophe Noel Laurent Rucker Alexandre Escorcia Nikola Guljevatej David Behar Claire le Flecher Remy Bouallegue Paul Zajac Nicolas Roche Manuel Lafont Rapnouil Laurent Rucker Patrick Hardouin Etienne de Durand
Janaina Herrera
Bart Hansen , Nov 24, 2018 2:41:35 PM | link
I just knew if I scrolled down far enough the name Anne Applebaum would appear - Queen of the Dual-Loyalists; but Wm. Browder!?

From her Wikipedia page: "She is a visiting Professor of Practice at the London School of Economics, where she runs Arena, a project on propaganda and disinformation." I reckon she "Practices" at the Post.

steve , Nov 24, 2018 2:43:03 PM | link
Of course none of this will be reported in the "real" news outlets.
dh , Nov 24, 2018 2:43:03 PM | link
@7 "...things didn't go as planned for the expropriation of russia after the fall of the soviet union.. it seems the west is still hurting from not being able to exploit russia fully, as they'd intended..."

Crimea is the one that really hurts. NATO was all set to build a shiny new base.

james , Nov 24, 2018 2:50:46 PM | link
@18 russ... yes - that pretty well sums it up... as for putin falling into the neoliberal order - at this point it does look that way.. i am curious how russia could move forward at this moment in some alternative way? what would the alternative way look like?

@zanon... thanks, but the list given for usa/canada has only one person on it that appears to be a canuck - glen howard.. and unless it is a different glen howard, the guy is some curling wiz, but no mention of his anti-russian credentials... his e mail address is given as jamestown.org which is connected to the jamestown foundation.. turns out, he is not a canuck either - "Glen Howard President

Mr. Howard is fluent in Russian and proficient in Azerbaijani and Arabic, and is a regional expert on the Caucasus and Central Asia. He was formerly an Analyst at the Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) Strategic Assessment Center. His articles have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, the Central Asia-Caucasus Analyst, and Jane's Defense Weekly. Mr. Howard has served as a consultant to private sector and governmental agencies, including the U.S. Department of Defense, the National Intelligence Council and major oil companies operating in Central Asia and the Middle East."


one of the people on the usa-can list - john nevado appears to be an equadorian...

bottom line - as a sensitive canuck, i think someone needs to change the list to say usa and remove canada, as no canucks are on the list from the small research i did...

that is the sad thing about canada - it gets lumped in with the usa for good and bad on a regular basis... maybe they could put crystia freelands name on this list... i think she would qualify as a rabid anti-russia canuck...

james , Nov 24, 2018 2:51:44 PM | link
@31 dh.. i think you are right about that.. annie applepants is still aching over that... her and crystia freeland..
frances , Nov 24, 2018 2:55:24 PM | link
reply to Plantman 13
re:
"Funding from institutional and national governmental sources in the US has been delayed by internal disputes within the US government, but w.e.f. March 2018 that deadlock seems to have been resolved and funding should now flow."
I don't think it was the Republican party that was the source of the deadlock.
I think it may have been Tillerson. He had close ties to Russia and in March 2018, he was forced out of State and Pompeo came in.
"President Donald Trump nominated Pompeo as Secretary of State in March 2018, with Pompeo succeeding Rex Tillerson after his dismissal."
jayc , Nov 24, 2018 3:00:23 PM | link
"The organisation is led by one Chris N. Donnelly who receives (pdf) £8,100 per month ..."

That's a decent salary. He probably can work from home too - like Bellingcat. A fake NGO operating with fake "integrity" to identify "fake news". Everything is rather upside-down these days. Good to have all those names attached. Where's C Summers on the list? - maybe he never realized till now the monthly salaries available.

Zanon , Nov 24, 2018 3:21:34 PM | link
Agents from:

Central Europe
Anne Bader Eduard Abrahayman Mitar Kuyundzic Plamen Pantev Solomon Passy Jaroslav Hajecek Jakub Janda Frantisek Vrabel Peter Kreko Jan Strzelecki Mario Nicolini
Austria
Harold Elletson Susan Stewart

Yul , Nov 24, 2018 3:23:47 PM | link
@ Zanon #28
All the French clique works for the government, especially Foreign affairs @ Quai d'Orsay.
Zanon , Nov 24, 2018 3:25:10 PM | link
Baltic section according to the leak:
Tomas Tauginas Asta Skaisgiryte Saulius Guzevicius Eitvydas BAJARŪNAS Renatas Norkus
Vytautas Bakas Laurynas Kasciunas Dr Povilas Malakauskas Ainis Razma Mantas Martisius Linas Kojala
Major Jane Witt Claire Lawrence James Rogers Andriy Tyushka Viktorija Urbonaviciute
frances , Nov 24, 2018 3:27:18 PM | link
reply to dh 31
"Crimea is the one that really hurts. NATO was all set to build a shiny new base."
True that!
I was blown away by their arrogance when I saw the US had bids out to remodel the existing Russian buildings in the Crimean port to for a school, housing.
It clearly never occurred to them that they could/would lose, nor did they even bother to think that Russia may keep an eye out for such mind blowing acts of stupidity such as these bids?
Jackrabbit , Nov 24, 2018 3:31:44 PM | link
Where's C Summers on the list?

There's only one "Craig" for all countries.

Perhaps Craig Oliphant is our resident troll? He was just talking trash about Russia on the Thanksgiving Open Thread .

ICRA Think tank bio


Craig Oliphant is Senior Advisor, Peaceful Change Initiative (PCI), based in London, and Senior Research Associate at the Foreign Policy Centre. Until the end of 2010, he worked in the diplomatic service and was Head of the Eastern Research Group in the Foreign Office, dealing with Russia and Eastern Europe.

In the first half of the 1990s, Craig held posts in Brussels at NATO as an advisor on Russia/Eastern Europe and was then at the OSCE in The Hague, as a regional advisor to the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities. Before that he was at the UK Ministry of Defence (MOD), as a senior lecturer at the Conflict Studies Research Centre at RMA Sandhurst; he also worked for several years in the 1980s at Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty in Munich, Germany. Craig has published widely on Russia/FSU affairs. He is a member of IISS; RUSI; a Fellow of Royal Society of Arts; and is a Vice Chairman of the British Georgian Society.


Independent Conflict Research & Analysis (ICRA) was founded in May 2010 as a not-for-profit organisation providing objective conflict analysis and training. It is led by Christopher Langton OBE, who spent 32 years in the British Army. During this time he served in Northern Ireland, Russia, the South Caucasus where he was Deputy Chief of UNOMIG and held defence attaché appointments in Russia, the South Caucasus, and Central Asia. Subsequently he worked at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) for 9 years where he was the focus on Afghanistan. At IISS he held appointments as the Head of Defence Analysis, Editor of "The Military Balance" and Research Fellow for Russia before being appointed Senior Fellow for Conflict & Defence Diplomacy.

He has worked as an independent expert on the international investigation into the Russia-Georgia conflict of August 2008 and on the Kyrgyzstan Inquiry Commission investigating the violence that occurred in Southern Kyrgyzstan in 2010. Christopher was Advisor to the UK-China Conflict Prevention Working Group 2014-2015 under the aegis of Saferworld and supported by DFID.

He is also on the Board of a nonprofit that is active in Russia and other countries .
His photo is there.

Jackrabbit , Nov 24, 2018 3:33:25 PM | link
@craigsummers

Are you Craig Oliphant?

frances , Nov 24, 2018 3:36:33 PM | link
reply to:
This cureemt state of affairs cannot last longer. Right?
Posted by: PacoRepublicano | Nov 24, 2018 3:02:15 PM | 37
That may be why the globalists seem to be a bit off the rails.
I read in an article on the present French fuel tax protests/riots that a recent poll of world millennials found that 50 percent would go along with a change of govt, it was 75 percent in France. Concurrent with these riots the French govt is trying to bring back mandatory military service for those in the 3rd year of high school.
Indoctrination camps ala China is my guess.
craigsummers , Nov 24, 2018 4:01:51 PM | link
No Jackrabbit. That isn't me. I am far less important than you want to make me. Nor do I work for ORB International.
Bob , Nov 24, 2018 4:05:47 PM | link
Can we call 'Craig' Summers 'Anne' Summers?

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

james , Nov 24, 2018 4:10:18 PM | link
i do think it is better to ignore the local shill... they say the same stupid shit on a regular basis.. out of the kindness of b, it is unlikely to stop... quoting jamestown.org is more of the same stupidity that i have come to expect from our resident shill..
Anta , Nov 24, 2018 4:27:51 PM | link
Craigsummers, | 36 |: "According to Bellingcat..."

Craig, you should see a neuropsychologists to check your sensory systems as well as basic cognitive abilities.

bevin , Nov 24, 2018 4:34:08 PM | link
Two more links
https://twitter.com/ShoebridgeC/status/1066080476404822017

https://www.cyberguerrilla.org/blog/operation-integrity-initiative-british-informational-war-against-all/
New I hope, from Murray's blog.
Note that Ben Bradshaw a Labour MP, famous forbeing the first MP who married a man, a fellow BBC reporter, and a Blairite is one of the scum on the UK list. So is 'Prof' Alan Riley, a lawyer with extensive interests in oil.
These people are constantly being wheeled out in the media as independent experts.
Talking of Murray's blog the latest piece laments the death of the Al Nusra spokesman who was killed yesterday, by fellow salafists, as a democrat, secular etc etc.

Jackrabbit , Nov 24, 2018 4:58:18 PM | link
Well Craig, the blatent disinfo that you write @36 is so godawful that I actually believe that you are nobody. Just another pathetic paid jerk-off.

But the embarrassment of Cold Warriors destroying democracy in order to save it is so consistent with your own goofball antics that I had to ask.

Zanon , Nov 24, 2018 4:59:26 PM | link
Check the propaganda organization's twitter account: https://twitter.com/initintegrity
They have been in a retweeting spam mode since they got exposed. Quite hilarious.
Entropy Wins , Nov 24, 2018 5:08:57 PM | link
"The Initiatives Guide to Countering Russian Information (pdf) is a rather funny read. It lists the downing of flight MH 17 by a Ukranian BUK missile, the fake chemical incident in Khan Sheikhoun and the Skripal Affair as examples for "Russian disinformation"."

This following document explicitly states that the Skripal incident is a Dirty Trick operation against Russia. It also mentions the use of aspects of Russian culture to be used as a weapon against it (eg the church)

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/iihandbookv2/iihandbookv2.pdf

It lists tream members, funding for specificic tasks and this statement:

"Code of Conduct (Greg to commence with internet etiquette)
Anonymity of the team remains paramount. As our activity increases we will, no doubt, attract unwanted attention."

That directly contradicts the official UK government statement to the Russians that the Integrity Initiative is a public domain program.

spike , Nov 24, 2018 5:17:57 PM | link
the secret to all good propaganda: accuse the other side of doing what you're guilty of

so people believe that anonymous collective managed to gain access, via 'hacking'to the FCO computer system? really? seriously? you think that the second, or third most critical/secure UK govt. system can be either 'spearfished' or accessed by some other means?

have a word with yourself

uncle tungsten , Nov 24, 2018 5:29:17 PM | link
Feeding trolls is pointless they are forever ravenous. That is until the willow finds its mark.

Thank you b and zanon and sam @8. You make a magnificent day for our world.

Harry , Nov 24, 2018 5:35:36 PM | link
Do we know this is "genuine"?

I will say this. I had always assumed Ed Lucas was ex -UK intel. He worked at the Moscow embassy for the FCO and has stuck to the "save the baltics from the evil empire" line ever since. There is a surprisingly tight network of folk (Yes Ann Applebaum) who have been together hating the commies and now the non-commie Russians since the 90s. Some of them are very prominent now (Yes Chrystia) despite having backgrounds which might suggest an irrational agenda driven outlook (Nazis?). They meet up at conferences discussing the Soviet/Russian menace and never mention that on raw spend, Nato outspends their hated Russia by 10x or 20x.

Still, for some reason these people are considered angels of light and the rest of us need to follow their barely literate lead (actually Ed Lucas is very literate, as is Peter Pomerantsev). Anders Aslund a lot less so.

Ghost Ship , Nov 24, 2018 5:36:57 PM | link
>>>>: Forthestate | Nov 24, 2018 12:26:09 PM | 10
"A separate subcluster of so-called journalists names Deborah Haynes, David Aaronovitch of the London Times and Neil Buckley from the FT." Subcluster. Love it. Just how crap do you have to be to fail to make it to membership of a full cluster of smear merchants?

Luke "The Plagiarist" Harding and the other Guardian hacks must be really pissed off that they weren't considered to be worthy of even a sub-cluster.

Ghost Ship , Nov 24, 2018 5:41:16 PM | link
>>>>: Anya | Nov 24, 2018 11:57:00 AM | 4
For M16 to expose this level of stupidity is stunning.

No, not really. MI6 have demonstrated even greater levels of stupidity in the past. For example, supporting the salafist Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and then being surprised at the blowback that was the Manchester Arena suicide bombing by one of its followers

Zanon , Nov 24, 2018 6:23:51 PM | link
Ghost Ship

Now you are being too kind:
Manchester Arena suicide bomber rescued from Libya by Royal Navy
https://www.rt.com/uk/434701-manchester-bomber-royal-navy

-

Greek group according to leak: Despina afentouli ELIAMEP Thanos Dokos Ioannis Armakolas George Tzogopoulos Dimitris Xenakis Katerina Oikonomakou Ioannis Goranitis Tasos Telloglou Katerina Chryssanthopoulou Sissy Alonistiotou

uncle tungsten , Nov 24, 2018 6:30:36 PM | link
I would include Russia Insider on the list of fake news fronts that they support.
simjam , Nov 24, 2018 6:40:48 PM | link
This is the most explosive piece you have ever published. Another indication that the West is in a "panic" stage of its demise.
Willie Wobblestick , Nov 24, 2018 7:06:22 PM | link
Hastily Written Job Application

Dear Department of Integrity
I'd like to apply for a job.
I'm short of work at the moment
And could do with an extra few bob.

I don't have a problem lying
And am prepared to work scruple-free.
I will smear anyone you want
In return for an appropriate fee.

I've established a reputation
As a bit of an internet bard,
So talking some utter bollocks
Wouldn't be particularly hard.

I've studied your regular output
Viz the work of Bellingcat
And know I can do a lot better
Than that useless speccy twat.

Vladimir Putin eats babies
And Lavrov tortures rabbits.
Bashar Assad wears make-up
And Rouhani has disgusting habits

The above is a free sample
Of my slimy slanderous verse,
And as long as the money's right
I know I could a lot worse.

I'm not a very nice person
With terrible self-esteem,
So I'm sure I'll fit in swimmingly
With your personality-disordered team.

I know I'll just be perfect
So why not take the chance?
For a mere eight grand a month
I'll happily dance the Devil's dance.


wendy davis , Nov 24, 2018 7:06:24 PM | link
i remain agnostic for now on the authenticity of the 'integrity initiative, but is has a definite Gladio/NATO feel to it, so it's entirely plausible.

but as i was pasting together a new diary on the ever-increasing increased jeopardy to julian assange by way the Wikileaks account on twitter, they had these tweets up:


https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1066266619863855105

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1066357360153821189

but the breaking story, two days after this:

'Ecuador's president has signed a decree terminating the ambassador to the United Kingdom, Carlos Abad. All diplomats known to Assange have now been terminated to transferred away from the embassy.'

was this:

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1066370157826777091

psychohistorian , Nov 24, 2018 7:29:48 PM | link
@ Willie Wobblestick with the righteous poem....very nice, may it go viral with b's piece

@ wendy davis with the status of julian assange...thanks
I think these actions reek of desperation and lack of understanding of what exposure may ensue from julian going down in some way. Julian may be holding old news but I expect that there are depths of it that will be new to many.

The circus tent is starting to burn and the animals are freaking out, ready to stampede.

Can we evolve away from the private finance motivated world soon, please and thank you?

wendy davis , Nov 24, 2018 8:00:42 PM | link
@psychohistorian # 65

the first wikitweet was to the anon 'operation integrity initiative'; the second one says: "We have analyzed these documents and assess that a portion of them show hallmarks of being fabrications."

assange attorney hannah jonnason (@AssangeLegal) had been looking carefully at them, parsing them in belief, but finally had re-tweeted wikileaks take. the 'portion' as i took it by way of the subtweets was 'fabricated emails'. she's gret, plus brilliant, but on one thread i'd posted she'd called marcy wheeler 'fbi informant MW', lol.

karlof1 , Nov 24, 2018 8:17:14 PM | link
Golly gee-whiz! Why am I not surprised? Gotta have complementary sources of disinformation operating in tandem with BigLie Media! Indeed, the synchronicity of so much fairly well proves BigLie Media is part of this system. The Tower of Immorality being built primarily by the Outlaw US Empire and its UK sidekick is like a Ponzi Scheme in that for it not to fall it must have ever more lies continually added where eventually everything said by them will be 100% false.
psychohistorian , Nov 24, 2018 8:18:16 PM | link
It is getting tedious to have to type my personal information in every time I want to comment. B has written that he is working on issues but I may forgo the web site link if this continues....lazy as I am

@ wendy davis with the marcy wheeler as fbi informant claim....marcy seems well intentioned but seems to have some way weird bias blinders in her thinking. I have stopped following her because her signal to noise ratio got too bad. There are lots of folks like her I am sorry to write. Well intentioned but drinking some koolaid that has them mixed up in strategic ways.....almost like it was planned.....maybe more lists will come out now of other organizations that are paying folk to build and/or maintain certain narratives like GWOT, etc.


And yes, we can take the truth. It will set many free.

karlof1 , Nov 24, 2018 8:33:59 PM | link
To further my @67--

The chemical attack on Aleppo earlier today wasn't accompanied by immediate synchronized media and NATO political leader accusations against the terrorists like we've seen associated with the FFs. I've yet to see any, nor have any been reported on Twitter.

james , Nov 24, 2018 8:40:28 PM | link
@ 68 pscychohistorian.. ditto your comments on marcy wheeler... all the folks at emptywheel have gone off the rails, led by lead bozo - bmaz... i used to enjoy reading her, but the hate russia memo they all swallowed is tedious slogging and i am not up for it..
psychohistorian , Nov 24, 2018 8:56:04 PM | link
@ karlof1 with the reference to chemical attack on Aleppo today

I just posted a link from Xinhuanet on the thanksgiving open thread about it.

Roy G , Nov 24, 2018 9:11:53 PM | link
James @70 i'm right there with ya. Watching how the Russian Derangement Syndrome has afflicted otherwise sane and smart people has been disillusioning to say the least.
juliania , Nov 24, 2018 9:15:46 PM | link
Blessings, b and comment support on this - it takes me back to the days when Five Eyes was unravelling, and I can't but think that dastardly plot to surveil and snoop by means of developing technology was going to be a worldwide instrument of torture and oneupmanship that many thought would make that consortium top dog for all time.

So, they smashed the Guardian's computers, and they co-opted or blackmailed where they could, but the genie was out. And out for good. It would make a good spy novel if it weren't for the very real deaths and destruction that have happened in the wake of the revelations. And that will happen before this sorry historical episode is over. I simply believe, however, that thanks to nearly everyone contributing to this forum, such possibilities are diminishing. Thank you,b and everyone.

wendy davis , Nov 24, 2018 9:33:57 PM | link
@ psychohistorian #68

well, never mind.

Uncle $cam , Nov 24, 2018 9:35:33 PM | link

Wikileaks: "British Army creates a 1,500 strong team of Facebook psychological operations warriors...3 years ago."


on a different note... Hope -if he isn't dead,-Assange, makes it through the weekend...

Uncle $cam , Nov 24, 2018 9:41:12 PM | link
Wikileaks: "British Army creates a 1,500 strong team of Facebook psychological operations warriors...3 years ago." grrr. sorry...
V , Nov 24, 2018 10:42:02 PM | link
b's article is a sad, sad, commentary on today's reality.
But in fact, there is nothing shocking or even unexpected; just sad...
Geo , Nov 24, 2018 10:45:06 PM | link
Curious if and how this recent push against Zuckerberg by the UK government plays into this.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/nov/24/mps-seize-cache-facebook-internal-papers?CMP=share_btn_tw

I'm not well versed enough myself but I am baffled by this whole mess. All sides of this are entities I don't trust at all: Intelligence agencies, Facebook, Trump and his crooked playmates... seems there are no sides to trust or root for in this whole game of espionage.

Jen , Nov 24, 2018 10:54:06 PM | link
Ghost Ship @ 58: There is a Guardian writer in that UK journalist sub-cluster list and that is Natalie Nougayrede. No surprise there ... over at Off-Guardian.org, commenters have their own unprintable names for her. And you thought the bar at Integrity Initiative wasn't low enough for Fraudian hacks.
SayLess , Nov 25, 2018 12:16:03 AM | link
It is important to note that Wikileaks questioned the authenticity of these documents. We should be cautious before drawing any conclusions and wait for more information.

"We have analyzed these documents and assess that a portion of them show hallmarks of being fabrications."

https://web.archive.org/web/20181125051405/https:/twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1066357360153821189

iv> Jelena Milić is actually doing very good job of making people sick of NATO and the UKUS governments. She's a laughing stock in Serbia. Idk why are they paying her in the first place. She could easily be Kremlin lobbyist the way how she's doing her job :) If they are all incapable like her I wouldn't be worried too much about this

Posted by: Б , Nov 25, 2018 12:41:26 AM | link

Jelena Milić is actually doing very good job of making people sick of NATO and the UKUS governments. She's a laughing stock in Serbia. Idk why are they paying her in the first place. She could easily be Kremlin lobbyist the way how she's doing her job :) If they are all incapable like her I wouldn't be worried too much about this

Posted by: Б | Nov 25, 2018 12:41:26 AM | link

Brian , Nov 25, 2018 1:06:56 AM | link
So Facebook is s co sponsor ? Social media not just about bringing people together but manipulator and subversion .
If they were targeting Jews this would be called antisemitism , as iybisvtheytecyargetumg russians ,
What role did they play In the novichok hoax ?
Brian , Nov 25, 2018 1:09:15 AM | link
'Making people see we arecinder attack by russia ' !
Could war paranoia . Do the British people want their funds to be used to manipulate them ?
Brian , Nov 25, 2018 1:26:23 AM | link
'Clusters established in each country' reads an awful lot like subversion and treachery
Should this be a matter for country police and national security ?
Quentin , Nov 25, 2018 1:54:01 AM | link
Brian @ 84

Right. Like sleeper cells ready at a moment's notice to spread terrifying disinformation and propaganda.

alain , Nov 25, 2018 2:06:13 AM | link
@Zanon 28
Même pour les Français, l'information est aujourd'hui en anglais... Ceci dit, l'hystérie et l'"activité" anti-russe n'est pas très effective en France... Trop d'Histoire et d'histoires partagées pour adhérer à cette soupe servie pour les peuples anglo-saxons... Mais enfin, pas besoin d'avoir lu Hegel pour comprendre que toute cette agitation-propagande sert in fine l'ennemi désigné, la Russie; et précipite encore un peu plus, si c'est possible, la fin de l'empire.
alain , Nov 25, 2018 2:10:11 AM | link
Oops... And by the way, thanks again b. for being :-)
b , Nov 25, 2018 2:25:31 AM | link
Hmmm -
WikiLeaks @wikileaks - 10:45am · 24 Nov 2018

Purported internal documents, from a UK government "counter-Russia" influence network targeting mostly Europe and US, appear on site often alleged to be used by Russian state hackers. cyberguerrilla.org/blog/operation

We have analyzed these documents and assess that a portion of them show hallmarks of being fabrications.

I have no idea what the Wikileaks folks mean. I did not notice any signs of fakery in the stash. There are some small but explainable inconsistencies (i.e. between budget plan and approved budget?) and the whole stash is likely bigger than the published one. But all the details I could check seem to fit.

b , Nov 25, 2018 3:17:29 AM | link
This seems to confirm that the papers are real:
Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda - 8:58pm · 23 Nov 2018

So the Russians hacked Institute for Statecraft (@InitIntegrity).

I am one of many people mentioned in here, as part of wide movement of folks trying to push hard aganist Kremlin influence operations.

It is a badge of honor to be among people who are together standing up!


Russ , Nov 25, 2018 3:37:33 AM | link
Posted by: b | Nov 25, 2018 2:25:31 AM | 88

"I have no idea what the Wikileaks folks mean. I did not notice any signs of fakery in the stash."

Who's running the show at Wikileaks by now? (I assume Assange can't do so from his hideout.) My memory's hazy, but I recall there being some kind of internal struggle there, and that a pro-Wall Street faction opposed the release of the Bank of America files and destroyed them.

Are they now trying to turn and appease their system enemies? Wouldn't be the first such sell-out. Maybe they're jealous of the prestige, lucre, and system respectability of the Snowden/Greenwald/Intercept industrial complex.

Emmanuel Goldstein , Nov 25, 2018 4:01:51 AM | link
This has everything...right down to FCO email addresses. For FCO read MI6. Either this is colossal disinfo from Anonymous or a significant operation is truly blown. To resort to something like this, on this scale, showa that they are worried about something. Perhaps RT is getting wore viewing and hits in the UK and Europe than their outlets are. Once the internet was invented this was bound to happen. In some societies this would be regarded as espionage and subversion and these shills would be rounded up for a little chat. Great journalism b, stay safe......at least we now know who the provocateurs for the next false flag are....
donkeytale , Nov 25, 2018 4:12:41 AM | link
Zero Hedge also striking similar skeptical notes. They retweet Assange from 2016 stating anonymous to be an FBI cutout organisation. These anti-Russian organisations are real and their aim is to fight Russian propaganda, they will say by publishing truth while Russia says with lies. Of course they are funded. So is Russian propaganda. What the Russians are doing is classic "Spy vs Spy" and Barflies of course lap up the kool-aid just as easily as every kool-aid drinker we deride. The constant state of confirmation bias and psychological projection on the internets isn't even newsworthy but it's interesting sociology. Wash. Rinse. Repeat. Same as it ever was. Whatever gets us through the night. It's alright. But is Assange only speaking truth when he confirms our biases? I have more respect for him.


Thanks b for posting Wikileak's skeptical take even as you wish to believe otherwise. That's integrity. And to those who say Assange is only doing so to suck up belatedly to the US as a possible defense strategy I can only SMH. More projection. This is what you might do maybe if you were in his shoes.

Felipe , Nov 25, 2018 4:25:10 AM | link
This is so big of a news but the western media do not say a word about it!
This screams subversion, Gladio from the very top/deep state of western society.
Russ , Nov 25, 2018 4:30:24 AM | link
Posted by: donkeytale | Nov 25, 2018 4:12:41 AM | 92

"And to those who say Assange is only doing so to suck up belatedly to the US as a possible defense strategy I can only SMH. More projection. This is what you might do maybe if you were in his shoes."

Who said that, donkeydumbass? Learn to read. I asked if the post-Assange Wikileaks might be trying to do that. Of course I don't know what Assange himself might or might not do, any more than you do.

Peter AU 1 , Nov 25, 2018 4:32:15 AM | link
b 88

Perhaps a little bit of appeasement.. unless something changes, the brits will be sending Assange off to yankee land soon.

Horse's mouth , Nov 25, 2018 5:57:04 AM | link
https://apnews.com/fc570e4b400f4c7db3b0d739e9dc5d4d

The head of the French government's cyber security agency, which investigated leaks from President Emmanuel Macron's election campaign, says they found no trace of a notorious Russian hacking group behind the attack.

In an interview in his office Thursday with The Associated Press, Guillaume Poupard said the Macron campaign hack "was so generic and simple that it could have been practically anyone."

He said they found no trace that the Russian hacking group known as APT28, blamed for other attacks including on the U.S. presidential campaign, was responsible.

Poupard is director general of the government cyber-defense agency known in France by its acronym, ANSSI. Its experts were immediately dispatched when documents stolen from the Macron campaign leaked online on May 5 in the closing hours of the presidential race.

Poupard says the attack's simplicity "means that we can imagine that it was a person who did this alone. They could be in any country."

___

b , Nov 25, 2018 5:58:16 AM | link
@all

Some commentators claim that 'Anonymous' is an FBI operations and that lets them doubt this issue.

Actually 'Anonymous' has been used as a cover by various shady agencies and individuals. Everybody can publish whatever they want under the 'Anonymous' moniker. The moniker has no credibility or meaning.

As always one has to distinguish between the source of information and the actual content of the information.
Here the source is obviously shady. But the content, as far as I can tell, seems to be real.
---

Also - don't feed the house troll. Craigsummers is allowed to comment here solely for our amusement. There is no need to discuss whatever he posts.

john stack , Nov 25, 2018 6:12:18 AM | link
I cannot get into the list of agents. Who is listed for Ireland ?
blues , Nov 25, 2018 6:28:41 AM | link
My comments have been getting short of late.

It's crystal clear to me that the so-called "British" anti-Russia project is really sponsored by the CIA. Most everything is. I think. How else are they keep their VERY lucrative racket going?

BM , Nov 25, 2018 6:51:59 AM | link
In countries that may be hostile to this programme (Serbia, Spain, Italy for example), the exposed cluster members should be immediately arrested as foreign spies and tried for treason, and the exposed British Embassy contacts should be immediately expelled.
Funding from institutional and national governmental sources in the US has been delayed by internal disputes within the US government, but w.e.f. March 2018 that deadlock seems to have been resolved and funding should now flow.

Interesting isn't it, that from March 2018 the Trump Administration is no longer blocking this programme! When was Trump's first meeting with President Putin, wasn't that in March? Immediately afterwards of course he was lambasted. Was he turned at that point?

S , Nov 25, 2018 7:22:21 AM | link
@BM: The meeting was in summer. Early March was when the Skripal saga started.
William Bowles , Nov 25, 2018 7:57:23 AM | link
@15 Re Analytica:

It's owned by a US firm, or at least it was, until they wound it up.

Anya , Nov 25, 2018 8:48:43 AM | link
"Edward Snowden accused an Israeli cybersecurity firm of developing and selling surveillance software to Saudi Arabia, enabling the murder of dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=25&v=_LeOt4HCI-M

So humanitarian of Israeli!

Ghost Ship , Nov 25, 2018 8:52:17 AM | link
>>>> blues | Nov 25, 2018 6:28:41 AM | 98
It's crystal clear to me that the so-called "British" anti-Russia project is really sponsored by the CIA. Most everything is. I think. How else are they keep their VERY lucrative racket going?

Nah. like Skripal this is a home grown effort. After backing that loser Clinton with the Steele file, the British Conservative government which likes to have its head even further up Washington's arse than Tony Blair's is scared shitless that Trump will shit on them from a great height for backing his rival. I suspect he will wait for Brexit to go through and then take a dump on them when they turn up with their begging bowl in Washington looking for a "free trade deal". They're hoping that with these attacks on Russia they will ingratiate themselves with the Washington foreign policy establishment (Pat Lang's Borg) enough to reduce the incredible volumes of shit Trump would dump on them. It looks like it's working at the moment, but then Trump is known to be capricious so its anybody's guess what happens later. Bear in mind that if the Conservative government make enough mistakes, it's that socialist Corbyn who replaces it which is its Worst. Nightmare. Evah.

steve , Nov 25, 2018 9:01:14 AM | link
The bottom line as Al Gore said is there is no overriding authority. Sites like Above Top Secrect are obviously run by people who want things kept top secrect. Snopes revealed itself with its take on the White Helmets in Syria. Remember when the Greenpeace guy turned out to be a shill for Nuclear Energy.
alaff , Nov 25, 2018 9:08:00 AM | link
Thank you. Very good covering of the 'event', written in clear accessible language.
I am afraid that what was discovered is only a small part of the ocean of lies in which they are trying to force us to swim.
I am amazed how these people can sleep well. Rotten and lying through and through...

In fact, nothing "surprising" or "unbelievable" was found. Specialists, experts, as well as ordinary people, who have been interested in the topic, have long understood that it is about a targeted propaganda, which operates according to its laws. This propaganda calls truth a lie, and a lie truth, it calls white black and black it calls white. The work of this propaganda is also clearly visible, for example, when, on the eve of some important event, the "world community" suddenly (mean, "suddenly") finds out something "sensational", while MSM all start writing the same thing with a certain bias (often anti-Russian). The Russian Foreign Ministry has repeatedly pointed out the obvious coordination of the work of the Western media when it comes to 'anti-Russian news'. All these info are in briefings and statements of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which are publicly available on the Ministry's website.

Especially clearly a targeted coordinated work of propaganda was visible during the events in Syria, in particular, during the liberation of Aleppo. Remember all these "the last hospitals". Even high-ranking representatives of the UN, many of whom are essentially Western protégés, were also participating in this propaganda. For those who are interested in how this worked during the liberation of Aleppo, I recommend reading this in full. A lot of interesting details.

One thing is good - that such info become publicly known. Maybe more people will wake up and think about what is going on.

Ghost Ship , Nov 25, 2018 9:13:38 AM | link
We have analyzed these documents and assess that a portion of them show hallmarks of being fabrications.

This particular story might originate within MI6. If MI6 knew that the Russians had gathered compromising information on this operation, MI6 would put out a story favourable to them to capture the narrative before the Russians could. Like all black propaganda, they would have to include some of the real truth to make the fake "truth" appear reliable. It also allows the supposedly devious twats at MI6 to demonstrate their steadfastness in "fighting" the Russians.

BTW, it's entirely possible that the Skripal incident was by the Russians but only designed to incapacitate Skripal pere as a warning to him or MI6 to behave themselves and not do stupid things in future but the Conservative government rather stupidly decided to put out a bullshit narrative about what happened. Furthermore, don't forget that Churchill, the hero of the Conservative Party used chemical weapons against the Russians/Soviets. Most Brit's probably never knew or have forgotten but I doubt the Russians have or ever will.

donkeytale , Nov 25, 2018 9:14:41 AM | link
Here is the link to the Zero Hedge commentary , which was posted on Friday, including the Assange tweet from 2016.
WikiLeaks ‏ Verified account @wikileaks

Replying to @MashiRafael
"Anonymous" has been controlled by FBI agent "Sabu" and other agencies, including the CIA. Likely an attempt to manipulate.

6:28 PM - 24 Oct 2016

BM , Nov 25, 2018 9:32:22 AM | link
We have analyzed these documents and assess that a portion of them show hallmarks of being fabrications.

I have no idea what the Wikileaks folks mean. I did not notice any signs of fakery in the stash.
Posted by: b | Nov 25, 2018 2:25:31 AM | 87

The best way the elite can undermine wikileaks is to infiltrate it and undermine it from within, as they did to Amnesty International, and later Human Rights Watch, both of which are completely controlled by US and UK intelligence services. I think it is a given that they will have successfully infiltrated wikileaks - because I think it is impossible that wikileaks could have avoided it completely, but lets hope that wikileaks keep up sufficient defences to isolate the infiltration and limit its damage. With the current threats to Assange that will be a big challenge!

If, as I suspect, this claim that the documents were fake was being pushed by an infiltrator, then that infiltrator is raising flags to himself, so it is a high risk action and emphasises the desperation the elite are in, that they are willing to burn a key asset.

William Bowles , Nov 25, 2018 9:57:25 AM | link
The docs are fakes? I don't think so, there's just too much detail and the names it exposes, Aaronovich, Marcus (BBC), the financing. It's an awful lot of exposing in order to mislead us don't you think? And if it was, it was one, gigantic failure!

The best way is to see how the MSM deal with it, if at all, so today for example, there's been no mention on the BBC's RSS feed and there was none yesterday. I'd say that judging by the nature and structure of the 'Institute of Statecraft', it's straight out of Whitehall.

wendy davis , Nov 25, 2018 10:05:18 AM | link
@ psychohistorian #68

my apologies for my truncated response. what i'd meant to say is that we're talking past one another. my fault entirely, as i never should have brought wheeler into the discussion, and derailed my larger point. but i got in a hurry, and that was that.

but to those wondering why 'assange' would have noted that 'some portions have been fabricated', asange notably has been incommunicado for the past seven months, and any 'visitors' (really just his legal team) are forced to surrender all their communication device before entering the embassy. so who on the Wikileaks team had decided that is unknowable, of course. but on one of the subtweets where b had noted jakub janda's pride in being part of the organization (nice catch, by the way, b) one idiot linked to his home website noting that assange is a Mossad operative.

when i'd been contemplating writing some of up, i will say that my favorite part was the handbook, most especially this great psyop:

"What funding do they have/have access to/need? Caution! This is always a very sensitive issue. NB 1 If asked about money for funding activities of a cluster, always be firmly vague and helpfully uninformative and at all costs avoid making any funding commitments until we have discussed it! NB 2 When talking about the Institute, be sure you can explain clearly what we are and what we do. NB 3 if asked about our funding, be very clear: the Integrity Initiative is funded by the Institute for Statecraft. The IfS gets its funding from multiple sources to ensure its independence. These include: private individuals; charitable foundations; international organisations (EU, NATO); UK Govt (FCO, MOD"

one commenter on the cyber guerilla doc dump page had noted: 'Propagandist Stephen Dalziel is a given a regular platform by Monocle 24 in the UK and rebroadcast around the world. Dalziel shills for the fraud "Bellingcat".'


Anya , Nov 25, 2018 10:13:53 AM | link
And what is the difference between the MbS treatment of "unpleasant" Khashoggi and the US/UK treatment of "unpleasant" Assange?

The absolute majority of the "progressives" and "liberals" in both the US and the UK are sheepishly quiet when the most important journalist of our times, Julian Assange, has been smeared and his life endangered by the kangaroo courts of the western corrupt judiciary.

https://consortiumnews.com/2018/11/24/the-fate-of-julian-assange-chris-hedges-interviews-consortium-news-editor-in-chief-joe-lauria/

mike k: "The US Mafia Government kangaroo court gathers it's phony "legal" forces, salivating in anticipation of Assange as a choice morsel for it's evil appetite. Their "logic" goes like this, "if we say you are guilty, then you are guilty".

And where is the zionized MSM? -- With the kangaroo courts, of course, working in a accord with the mega war profiteers and other big-time criminals.

Noirette , Nov 25, 2018 10:27:10 AM | link
In France, last Pres. election, the favored candidate from the right (Républicains) was Alain Juppé. As the F establishment likes to mimic the US in all ways, they instored 'primaires' - primaries, to 'elect' 'the most popular candidate' from the two main parties. As the French don't glom the depth of corruption of the US system and how to do that, and just love - for all kinds of reasons - such gadgets, the vote at the Républicain table (even the name is a tribute) turned out surprise to be for Francois Fillon - who was (is) Catholic, pro-Russia, while your standard right-wing F-flavored stooge.

He was brought down speedily in a corruption scandal, for hiring his wife and children amongst others to do no work or symbolic stuff. One third of F Parliament members do this (off the cuff nos., but attested to ..), it is completely accepted. An allowed 'perk' - a way to spend the budgets > 'favored' 'loyal' ppl.

The effiency and speed of this attack surprised me. Fillon - no fool - 'withdrew' so to speak and made no waves beyond the acceptable i.e. stalwart opposition / defense at first, then went to work for a Financial Co. All the hype about suing the wife, about getting money back, whatever, died pronto.

I have no idea how this was organised. (The left was conveniently split.. between the entrenched "Socialists" and "Mélenchon," France Insoumise ) and so the end-run was between the vilified National Front (renamed now) Marine Le Pen, party which survives only as they play their puppet role to guarantee they collect low-class opposition to then always lose facing either the Socialists or the Républicains.

Piotr Berman , Nov 25, 2018 10:44:22 AM | link
NYT today:

Syria Urges U.N. to Condemn Rebels After Apparent Chemical Attack
Syria accused rebel forces of launching an attack in Aleppo that sent scores of choking victims to hospitals. Medical officials suspected chlorine had been used.

Characteristically, the attack is "apparent", but almost strangely, NYT reported Reuters news providing an inconvenient story rather fast.

lysias , Nov 25, 2018 10:44:25 AM | link
If some at least of the documents are fabrications, the plan of the Western intelligence agencies may be to expose some false details in the documents to discredit the whole story.
donkeytale , Nov 25, 2018 10:49:04 AM | link
So, what several posters here are now stating or at least implying is the @wikileaks account is basically the same as "Anonymous"? That is, it is merely a cover used by shadowy individuals and therefore no longer possesses any credibility unless it posts something with which we can all agree?

And the thoughts it expressed do not necessarily bear any relationship to Julian Assange?

Unless, of course, we agree with those thoughts?

Blooming Barricade , Nov 25, 2018 10:50:38 AM | link
The Integrity Initiative is now trying to smear and attack Seumas Milne, Jeremy Corbyn's communications director and a key voice on the anti-war, anti-capitalist left, tweeting a Times article that appears to have been contributed to by them. They also retweeted Michael Weiss on Milne, who they appear to want to remove from a future Corbyn government in the vein of that Spanish minister This should be a HUGE scandal given that this is funded by the UK government and thus the Tory administration and is thus GOVERNMENT PROPAGANDA against the leader of the opposition, paid for by the taxpayer and in line with big business/military Euro-Atlanticist lobby. Thanks to the digital urban guerrilla site for exposing this assault on socialism and the public. https://twitter.com/InitIntegrity/status/1066691553350086656
AntiSpin , Nov 25, 2018 11:21:03 AM | link
Best MoA blockbuster yet!!! Somewhere down there Joseph Goebbels is gazing upward at all this exposed chicanery, eyes shining with delight, and also green with envy.
Ghost Ship , Nov 25, 2018 11:58:48 AM | link
>>>>: AntiSpin | Nov 25, 2018 11:21:03 AM | 117
down there Joseph Goebbels is gazing upward

Goebbels was a rank amateur and grossly overrated - he could do white propaganda when things were going well for the Nazis which wasn't difficult, otherwise he was useless. When things started to go bad for the Nazis, the British, particularly Sefton Delmer, started running rings around him. The Americans really never understood black propaganda but why should they, and the British are still trying to fight World War 11 with their black propaganda and are still losing.

Jackrabbit , Nov 25, 2018 12:20:47 PM | link
donkeytale

Donkeys don't read too good.

Reread b's comment @96.

And 'echo chamber' allegations are laughable coming from a Kool-Aid drinker/pusher.

Trailer Trash , Nov 25, 2018 12:49:07 PM | link
These kind of propaganda campaigns end up as own goals for the establishment. Peons and serfs don't need to know what is going on, but the Dear Leaders' functionaries do need accurate info in order to make correct decisions that further establishment goals. With all the smoke and chaos of conflicting stories, can bureaucrats keep their lies straight? I think not.

As I understand it, glowing but inaccurate fabricated reports submitted to the former German Democratic Republic (East Germany) Dear Leaders left them unable to comprehend just how unhappy the GDR citizens actually were, so the collapse came as a surprise. [1] We can see this happening in Afghanistan today. The Pentagon insists they are "winning" while the Taliban-controlled territory continues to increase. When Uncle Sam is finally driven out, it will come as a complete surprise to the DC Dunces who believe their own phony reports.

[1] Fulbrook, Mary; Anatomy of a Dictatorship: Inside the GDR 1949-1989; Oxford University Books; 1995

Zanon , Nov 25, 2018 1:00:36 PM | link
Just imagine the response and publicity if this was a Russian government funded organization, having a network of agents of influence groups of people in western europe...
frances , Nov 25, 2018 2:25:27 PM | link
reply to Russ 89
"Who's running the show at Wikileaks by now?"

Good question. Do you recall when Assange's attorney was killed when pushed in front of a train at the time the Wikileaks founder Gavin Macfadyen died?

The staff roster at Wikileaks then went through an almost total turnover and there were reports that someone was escorted from the building with a bag over their head and there were reports that Assange's deadman switch was activated but stopped. All this occurred back in 2016.
The reason no one who knows Assange is being allowed physical contact may be because someone else is in his place.I have a sad feeling that he is in a Langley basement.

wendy davis , Nov 25, 2018 5:44:38 PM | link
on sept. 26, 2018 julian assange had named Kristinn Hrafnsson of iceland as the new editor-in-chief of wikileaks. at that time julian had been cut off from communicating for six months.

an hour ago wikileaks had tweeted:

@wikileaks: WikiLeaks Retweeted Integrity Initiative 'UK government backed anti-Russian influence network account for "Integrity Initiative" confirms release of documents.'

@InitIntegrity 'Here is our statement on the recent publication by Russian media of hacked Integrity Initiative documents.'

they offered some caveats, among them:

"We have not yet had the chance to analyse all of the documents, so cannot say with confidence whether they are all genuine or whether they include doctored or false material. Although it is clear that much of the material was indeed on the Integrity Initiative or Institute systems, much of it is dated and was never used. In particular, many of the names published were on an internal list of experts in this field who had been considered as potential invitees to future cooperation. In the event, many were never contacted by the Integrity Initiative and did not contribute to it. Nor were these documents therefore included in any funding proposals. Not only did these individuals have nothing to do with the programme – they may not even have heard of us. We are of course trying to contact all named individuals for whom we have contact details to ensure that they are aware of what has happened."

now my guess, fwiw, is that the WL knows chapter and verse how the CIA vault 7 revelations can be used to create false email addresses, etc., so perhaps they'd spotted some.

but assange's attorney jennifer robinson did get to see him on nov. 16.

https://on.msnbc.com/2zm3Eg8

wendy davis , Nov 25, 2018 5:47:36 PM | link
oh, fie; i'd forgotten the Tweet's url:

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1066804727973855233

arby , Nov 25, 2018 6:25:40 PM | link
Russia seizes Ukraine naval ships


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46338671

Mr Reynard , Nov 25, 2018 10:00:42 PM | link
British Government Runs Secret Anti-Russian Smear Campaigns ??
Secret ??? Is that an OXYMORON ??
Col. B. Bunny , Nov 26, 2018 3:00:33 AM | link
Thus is an extraordinary article. It describes distilled hypocrisy on the part of the U.S. and U.K. who have conniptions over Russian "meddling," that has proved to be thin gruel indeed, but who organize a vast, expensive enterprise of their own to implement disinformation and smear campaigns to influence the internal affairs of other countries and friendly ones at that. Russia purchases a modest message on Twitter (?) and that is an attack on "our democracy."The attack on the now oddly-sequestered Skripals is an epic East Asian fire drill with Theresa May written all over it and it sure as hell has nothing "made in Moscow" about it.

Anne Appelebaum and the other "journalists" have some 'splainin' to do about what independent, unbiased journalists are doing as players in government propaganda organizations.

Brian , Nov 26, 2018 11:42:00 AM | link
Is the Sea of Azov incident a ploy to put off presidential elections in Ukraine ?
https://mobile.twitter.com/I_Katchanovski/status/1067050340623630337
Zanon , Nov 26, 2018 1:07:20 PM | link
'Anti-Russian psy-ops' program confirms UK govt funding, Anonymous denies leak
https://www.rt.com/news/444899-uk-psyop-leak-reaction/
kula , Nov 26, 2018 2:32:19 PM | link
Look y'all, @craigsummers is a paid troll. So all your responses are earning him or her income. Trolling is an art form. b, you could regularly remined new readers to ignore mwn.
Anton from Russia , Nov 27, 2018 5:14:22 AM | link
I am Russian, live in Russia.
This is the most interesting journalistic investigation I've read in the last six months.
Thanks.
Most of all I am surprised, the whole world is in economic crisis, people in developed countries are becoming poorer. Britain has an external debt of 7.5 trillion-314% of GDP. But all useless garbage the money is. And most importantly, Why?
We all (USA, Russia, Britain, EU) are just village losers who fight in a roadside ditch, proving that "I am good, they are bad".
And at this time past us at full speed is a huge Chinese train.
Anton from Russia , Nov 27, 2018 5:42:03 AM | link
And the destruction of the MH-17 Boeing by the Russians is also disinformation.
Do you know what the official version of the investigation is?
"Once upon a time. One air defense "Buk" secretly arrived from Russia, shot once, one rocket, in one civil plane, and left back to Russia" (facepalm). Seriously, I'm not kidding, this nonsense is the official version.
The involvement of several dozen Ukrainian air defense " Buk " located in the area of the disaster, not even considered.
No one knows what they were doing.
All photos of "wandering, mad Russian "Buk" were false.

But sanctions imposed by the EU after the disaster, no one is going to cancel. And to assume aloud "that" new authorities" of Ukraine at which hands on an elbow in blood " can be guilty of accident, it is impossible, taboo.

Emmanuel Goldstein , Nov 27, 2018 5:45:32 AM | link
Neatly observed Anton, neatly observed....;-)
Zanon , Nov 27, 2018 5:51:24 AM | link
Just been some days and this big news is already dead. Really scary how big of a impact the western MSM really have in silencing topics.
Russ , Nov 27, 2018 6:52:49 AM | link
@ 134

I bet if I surveyed my acquaintances (American middle class, NYT-reader types) few if any would even have heard of this potential Sarajevo flashpoint.

b , Dec 2, 2018 10:19:08 AM | link
Derelict Scottish mill is shadowy hub in UK's fight against Putin's propaganda machine

Gateside Mills in rural Fife is the official headquarters of the controversial Institute for Statecraft (IFS) – a "think tank" set up to combat Russian disinformation.

For the tiny number of people aware of its existence, Gateside Mills is a derelict building in rural Fife without any obvious signs of life.

Anyone curious enough to carry out further investigation might find a seemingly small Scottish charity is registered there.

But the Sunday Mail can reveal the crumbling Victorian mill is actually the official headquarters of the controversial Institute for Statecraft (IFS) – a shadowy "think tank" whose Integrity Initiative programme has been set up to combat Russian propaganda.

Leaked documents prove the organisation received hundreds of thousands of pounds of funding from the British Government via the Foreign Office.
...
The manager of the Integrity Initiative appears to be Christopher Donnelly.

A website biography states he is a graduate of Manchester University and reserve officer in the British Army Intelligence Corps who previously headed the British Army's Soviet Studies Research Centre at Sandhurst.

Between 1989 and 2003, he was a special adviser to Nato Secretaries General and was involved in dealing with the disintegration of the Soviet Union and reform of newly emerging democracies in Central and Eastern Europe.

He left NATO in 2003 to set up and run the UK Defence Academy's Advanced Research and Assessment Group. In 2010, he became a director of IFS.

[Dec 09, 2018] NATO's Clandestine Bureau UK 'Integrity Initiative' Spreading Anti-Russian Propaganda - 21st Century Wire

www.unz.com
Disqus is a discussion network

Read full terms and conditions

John C Carleton • 2 days ago ,

"UK 'Integrity "

Thanks!

Needed a good laugh!

Rollo10 • 3 days ago ,

Russia are the problem along with China, because they both oppose their NWO agenda! This agenda has been getting pushed from UK for decades now. It first started back in 1800's, but now is world wide. The Corporate & Bankers want complete control of all economies & jobs.
This way they control everything, where and who manufactures what and how much, all controlled by Corporations. Governments become non existent, as do the Electorate. This would have been obvious IF all TPP-TTIP-CETA Treaties had been signed. We'd have had one huge Single Market that excluded BRICS, who'd have been forced in by war!
To their end, 'deep state; then attacked Rouseff in Brazil, had her 'impeached' and placed their puppet Temer in charge, as an 'anchor' to BRICS, as well as creating problems in ME, where China's One Belt One Road [New Silk Road] crosses continents.
The more people become aware of their intentions, the harder it becomes for them to win, as they are now losing ground all round the world. The last two, Israel & UK are about to fall. Netinyahoo has been charged with Corruption and May in UK, is on the verge of being brought down, after being the first PM to be charged and found guilty of Contempt for Parliament! Next to fall, the corrupt EU.

verner • 3 days ago ,

CIA they are everywhere!

Rollo10 verner • 3 days ago ,

I think you'll find it's Secular Zionists!
https://www.ukcolumn.org/ar...

John2o2o2o Rollo10 • 3 days ago ,

No, no, no! CIA in the US, MI6 in the UK, Secular Zionists in Cloud Cuckoo Land.

imbroglio verner • 2 days ago ,

Pro-Israel lobby Influence on US congress. --- http://www.informationclear...

[Dec 09, 2018] Showdown Moment -- British Enemy Apparatus Very Exposed, Very Ready for Termination LaRouchePAC

Notable quotes:
"... This is the context in which to see the blatant, dangerous gambits to wreck the Buenos Aires gathering of leaders, and any other such future opportunity, coming from the British Empire crowd, in the form of staged confrontations, lies and subversion. ..."
"... Look at recent destabilizing events: the Nov. 24 chemical weapons attack on Syrians in Aleppo; the stoking of suffering and strife at the Mexico-U.S. border; and on Nov. 25, Ukraine's naval provocation against Russia in the Black Sea. The British government asset, the "Integrity Initiative" is fully deployed to goad the U.S. and Western Europe to launch an offensive against Russia over the Ukraine incident, blaming Russia for "aggression" against Ukraine. The British imperialists are making a habit of exposing their own role in demanding world war! ..."
"... These provocations are not a sign of power, but of desperation, desperation to stop the spreading success of the New Paradigm of collaborative development expressed in the Belt and Road Initiative, and what lies ahead if the U.S. joins up. Schiller Institute Chairwoman Helga Zepp-LaRouche today emphasized that each time the British Imperialist apparatus steps forward in its own name to sabotage world peace, it works to the detriment of their dying system. The Empire is dangerous, but all the easier to crush. ..."
Nov 28, 2018 | larouchepac.com
We are in a showdown moment. At this week's Group of 20 Summit -- only three days away, in Buenos Aires, there is the potential for Great Power diplomacy in the direction of a New Paradigm of foreign relations, as an outcome of the sideline meetings of heads of state and government of the United States, China, Russia, India and others.

The growing momentum for New Paradigm economic development is seen in high-level events this month in six Western European nations: in Germany, the "Hamburg Summit: China Meets Europe" (Nov. 26-27); in France, the Lyon "Franco-Chinese Forum" (Nov. 26-28); in Spain, President Xi Jinping's state visit (Nov. 27-29); in Portugal, Xi's visit (Dec. 4-5); in Italy, a new Xinhua-associated Italian financial media service will be set up (Nov. 6 agreement); in Norway, the first Polar Route icebreaker delivery of Yamal LNG, for transshipment from the northern port of Honnigsvag.

This is the context in which to see the blatant, dangerous gambits to wreck the Buenos Aires gathering of leaders, and any other such future opportunity, coming from the British Empire crowd, in the form of staged confrontations, lies and subversion.

Look at recent destabilizing events: the Nov. 24 chemical weapons attack on Syrians in Aleppo; the stoking of suffering and strife at the Mexico-U.S. border; and on Nov. 25, Ukraine's naval provocation against Russia in the Black Sea. The British government asset, the "Integrity Initiative" is fully deployed to goad the U.S. and Western Europe to launch an offensive against Russia over the Ukraine incident, blaming Russia for "aggression" against Ukraine. The British imperialists are making a habit of exposing their own role in demanding world war!

These provocations are not a sign of power, but of desperation, desperation to stop the spreading success of the New Paradigm of collaborative development expressed in the Belt and Road Initiative, and what lies ahead if the U.S. joins up. Schiller Institute Chairwoman Helga Zepp-LaRouche today emphasized that each time the British Imperialist apparatus steps forward in its own name to sabotage world peace, it works to the detriment of their dying system. The Empire is dangerous, but all the easier to crush.

The Nov. 25 Ukrainian naval breach of Russian territorial waters was long pre-planned. As the Italian military journal Difesa Online wrote on Nov. 25, "it was evident to all those who follow local events that for some days already, the Poroshenko government in Ukraine was trying to provoke an armed confrontation with Moscow in the Crimean waters." Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova, said the same yesterday, adding a warning. "We are talking about a pre-planned, deliberate, and now realized large-scale provocation.... I think everybody should be careful next time. I think there will be a next time, considering what is happening now."

President Donald Trump's first response to the Ukraine incident, Nov. 26, was to express concern, and hopes for settlement. "We do not like what's happening, either way; ... hopefully, it will get straightened out." President Vladimir Putin will issue his statement on this incident in a few days.

From London, however, comes a raving "script" of what Trump and the West must do against Russia. It is the featured item on the website of the Integrity Initiative, which is a British intelligence black war propaganda operation. Its funding is from the U.K. Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Its Nov. 26 posting is titled, "West Is Once Again Failing Test Set by Russian Aggression," by Edward Lucas, formerly of The Economist , and a longtime Russia-hater, who wrote such books as Deception: Spies, Lies and How Russia Dupes the West (2012) and The New Cold War: Putin's Russia and the Threat to the West (2nd ed., 2014). Lucas calls for "kinetic, symbolic, and financial measures" against Russia. This is to include, the West sending military aid to Ukraine, running a NATO flotilla to the Ukrainian port of Mariupol on the Sea of Azov, putting sanctions on Russian officials and businessmen present in the West, and cutting Russia off from Western finance. Lucas says that the West didn't act against Nazi Germany's 1939 invasion of Poland, but they must act now against Russia's aggression against Ukraine.

Lucas is part of the British "cluster" of Integrity Initiative's operatives, which also includes former British Ambassador to Russia Sir Andrew Wood of Orbis Business Intelligence, the firm of "former" MI6 agent Christopher Steele, who fabricated the infamous anti-Trump dossier. These figures are at the heart of the coup operations against Trump, and before that, the Obama Administration election subversion.

Zepp-LaRouche nailed the Integrity Initiative in a Sputnik interview published yesterday, now being run in media internationally. She said that the group's activity displays the " modus operandi of British intelligence operations, and it very well may turn out, that it is this network, which is deeply involved in 'Russiagate' and the entire coup against President Trump."

It is now urgent for all the documents bearing on these criminal, treasonous operations to be de-classified, and the full story revealed. Every hour counts.

[Dec 09, 2018] NYT and CIA have had relationship with, and was caught having planted CIA workers as NYT writers

Notable quotes:
"... Non-elite members of the Party -- functionaries -- mistake their "secret" knowledge as professional courtesy rather than as perquisite and status marker. (I don't suppose it's a secret to anyone that the US CIA regularly plants stories in the NYTimes and elsewhere... unless you weren't paying attention in the strident disinfo campaign prior to the Iraq invasion.) ..."
Aug 30, 2012 | www.theguardian.com
sanda1scuptorNYC , 30 Aug 2012 07:36
Howard Zinn said, in a speech given shortly after the 2008 Presidential election, "If you don't know history, it's like you were born yesterday. The government can tell you anything." (Speech was played on DemocracyNow www.democracynow.org about Jan. 4, 2009 and is archived, free on the website.)

Being older (18 on my last Leap Year birthday - 72), I recall the NYTimes and CIA have had relationship with, and was caught having "planted CIA workers" as NYTimes writers. Within my adult lifetime, in fact.

sigil , 30 Aug 2012 05:49

This is what the CIA reflexively does: insists that [...] it is an "intelligence matter".

In a sense the CIA is always going to be right on this one - "Central Intelligence Agency" - but only as a matter of nomenclature, rather than of any other dictionary definition of the word "intelligence".

Brusselsexpats , 30 Aug 2012 05:49
Actually the collusion between the CIA and big business is far more damaging. The first US company I worked for in Brussels (it was my first job) was constantly being targeted by the US media for having connections to corrupt South American and Third World regimes. On what seemed like an almost monthly basis our personnel department would send round memos saying that we were strictly forbidden to talk to journalists about the latest exposé.

It was great fun - even the telex operators knew who the spies were.

kcameron , 30 Aug 2012 05:26
The line "'The optics aren't what they look like,' is truly an instant classic. It reminds me of one of my favorite Yogi Berra quotes (which, unlike many attributed to him, is real, I think). Yogi once said about a restaurant in New York "Nobody goes there anymore. It's too crowded." Perhaps Yogi should become an editor for the Times.
AmityAmity , 30 Aug 2012 04:55
British readers will no doubt be shocked -- shocked! -- to learn of cozy relations between a major news organization and a national intelligence agency.

... ... ...

MiltonWiltmellow , 30 Aug 2012 02:40

"'I know the circumstances, and if you knew everything that's going on, you'd know it's much ado about nothing,' Baquet said. 'I can't go into in detail. But I'm confident after talking to Mark that it's much ado about nothing.'

"'The optics aren't what they look like,' he went on. 'I've talked to Mark, I know the circumstance, and given what I know, it's much ado about nothing.'"

How can you have a Party if you don't have Party elites?

And how can a self-respecting member of the Party claim their individual status within the Party without secret knowledge designed to identify one another as members of the Party elite?

[Proles are] natural inferiors who must be kept in subjection, like animals ... Life, if you looked about you, bore no resemblance not only to the lies that streamed out of the telescreens, but even to the ideals the Party was trying to achieve. ... The ideal set up by the Party was something huge, terrible, and glittering -- a world of of steel and concrete, of monstrous machines and terrifying weapons -- a nation of warriors and fanatics, marching forward in perfect unity, all thinking the same thoughts and shouting the same slogans, perpetually working, fighting, triumphing, persecuting -- 300 million people all with the same face. The reality was decaying, dingy cities, where underfed people shuffled to and fro in leaky shoes... [ 1984 ,pp 73-74]

It makes no difference if an imagined socialist England, a collapsing Roman city-state empire, an actual Soviet Union, or a modern American oligarchy.

Party members thrive while those wretched proles flail in confused and hungry desperation for something authentic (like a George Bush) or even simply reassuring (like a Barack Obama.)

Non-elite members of the Party -- functionaries -- mistake their "secret" knowledge as professional courtesy rather than as perquisite and status marker. (I don't suppose it's a secret to anyone that the US CIA regularly plants stories in the NYTimes and elsewhere... unless you weren't paying attention in the strident disinfo campaign prior to the Iraq invasion.)

Manzetti has "no bad intent" because he is loyal to the Party.

Like all loyal (and very well compensated) Party members, he would never do anything as subversive as reveal Party secrets.

People can be detained for almost any reason these days!

After all, what's the future of a Party that lacks effective enforcement?

[Dec 09, 2018] The fatal flaw of neoliberalism: it s bad economics: Neoliberalism and its usual prescriptions – always more markets, always less government – are in fact a perversion of mainstream economics by Dani Rodrik

Notable quotes:
"... The term is used as a catchall for anything that smacks of deregulation, liberalisation, privatisation or fiscal austerity. Today it is routinely reviled as a shorthand for the ideas and practices that have produced growing economic insecurity and inequality, led to the loss of our political values and ideals, and even precipitated our current populist backlash ..."
"... The use of the term "neoliberal" exploded in the 1990s, when it became closely associated with two developments, neither of which Peters's article had mentioned. One of these was financial deregulation, which would culminate in the 2008 financial crash and in the still-lingering euro debacle . The second was economic globalisation, which accelerated thanks to free flows of finance and to a new, more ambitious type of trade agreement. Financialisation and globalisation have become the most overt manifestations of neoliberalism in today's world. ..."
"... That neoliberalism is a slippery, shifting concept, with no explicit lobby of defenders, does not mean that it is irrelevant or unreal. ..."
"... homo economicus ..."
"... A version of this article first appeared in Boston Review ..."
"... Main illustration by Eleanor Shakespeare ..."
Nov 14, 2017 | www.theguardian.com
As even its harshest critics concede, neoliberalism is hard to pin down. In broad terms, it denotes a preference for markets over government, economic incentives over cultural norms, and private entrepreneurship over collective action. It has been used to describe a wide range of phenomena – from Augusto Pinochet to Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, from the Clinton Democrats and the UK's New Labour to the economic opening in China and the reform of the welfare state in Sweden.

The term is used as a catchall for anything that smacks of deregulation, liberalisation, privatisation or fiscal austerity. Today it is routinely reviled as a shorthand for the ideas and practices that have produced growing economic insecurity and inequality, led to the loss of our political values and ideals, and even precipitated our current populist backlash .

We live in the age of neoliberalism, apparently. But who are neoliberalism's adherents and disseminators – the neoliberals themselves? Oddly, you have to go back a long time to find anyone explicitly embracing neoliberalism. In 1982, Charles Peters, the longtime editor of the political magazine Washington Monthly, published an essay titled A Neo-Liberal's Manifesto . It makes for interesting reading 35 years later, since the neoliberalism it describes bears little resemblance to today's target of derision. The politicians Peters names as exemplifying the movement are not the likes of Thatcher and Reagan, but rather liberals – in the US sense of the word – who have become disillusioned with unions and big government and dropped their prejudices against markets and the military.

The use of the term "neoliberal" exploded in the 1990s, when it became closely associated with two developments, neither of which Peters's article had mentioned. One of these was financial deregulation, which would culminate in the 2008 financial crash and in the still-lingering euro debacle . The second was economic globalisation, which accelerated thanks to free flows of finance and to a new, more ambitious type of trade agreement. Financialisation and globalisation have become the most overt manifestations of neoliberalism in today's world.

That neoliberalism is a slippery, shifting concept, with no explicit lobby of defenders, does not mean that it is irrelevant or unreal. Who can deny that the world has experienced a decisive shift toward markets from the 1980s on? Or that centre-left politicians – Democrats in the US, socialists and social democrats in Europe – enthusiastically adopted some of the central creeds of Thatcherism and Reaganism, such as deregulation, privatisation, financial liberalisation and individual enterprise? Much of our contemporary policy discussion remains infused with principles supposedly grounded in the concept of homo economicus , the perfectly rational human being, found in many economic theories, who always pursues his own self-interest.

But the looseness of the term neoliberalism also means that criticism of it often misses the mark. There is nothing wrong with markets, private entrepreneurship or incentives – when deployed appropriately. Their creative use lies behind the most significant economic achievements of our time. As we heap scorn on neoliberalism, we risk throwing out some of neoliberalism's useful ideas.

The real trouble is that mainstream economics shades too easily into ideology, constraining the choices that we appear to have and providing cookie-cutter solutions. A proper understanding of the economics that lie behind neoliberalism would allow us to identify – and to reject – ideology when it masquerades as economic science. Most importantly, it would help us to develop the institutional imagination we badly need to redesign capitalism for the 21st century.

N eoliberalism is typically understood as being based on key tenets of mainstream economic science. To see those tenets without the ideology, consider this thought experiment. A well-known and highly regarded economist lands in a country he has never visited and knows nothing about. He is brought to a meeting with the country's leading policymakers. "Our country is in trouble," they tell him. "The economy is stagnant, investment is low, and there is no growth in sight." They turn to him expectantly: "Please tell us what we should do to make our economy grow."

The economist pleads ignorance and explains that he knows too little about the country to make any recommendations. He would need to study the history of the economy, to analyse the statistics, and to travel around the country before he could say anything.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Tony Blair and Bill Clinton: centre-left politicians who enthusiastically adopted some of the central creeds of Thatcherism and Reaganism. Photograph: Reuters

But his hosts are insistent. "We understand your reticence, and we wish you had the time for all that," they tell him. "But isn't economics a science, and aren't you one of its most distinguished practitioners? Even though you do not know much about our economy, surely there are some general theories and prescriptions you can share with us to guide our economic policies and reforms."

The economist is now in a bind. He does not want to emulate those economic gurus he has long criticised for peddling their favourite policy advice. But he feels challenged by the question. Are there universal truths in economics? Can he say anything valid or useful?

So he begins. The efficiency with which an economy's resources are allocated is a critical determinant of the economy's performance, he says. Efficiency, in turn, requires aligning the incentives of households and businesses with social costs and benefits. The incentives faced by entrepreneurs, investors and producers are particularly important when it comes to economic growth. Growth needs a system of property rights and contract enforcement that will ensure those who invest can retain the returns on their investments. And the economy must be open to ideas and innovations from the rest of the world.

But economies can be derailed by macroeconomic instability, he goes on. Governments must therefore pursue a sound monetary policy , which means restricting the growth of liquidity to the increase in nominal money demand at reasonable inflation. They must ensure fiscal sustainability, so that the increase in public debt does not outpace national income. And they must carry out prudential regulation of banks and other financial institutions to prevent the financial system from taking excessive risk.

Now he is warming to his task. Economics is not just about efficiency and growth, he adds. Economic principles also carry over to equity and social policy. Economics has little to say about how much redistribution a society should seek. But it does tell us that the tax base should be as broad as possible, and that social programmes should be designed in a way that does not encourage workers to drop out of the labour market.

By the time the economist stops, it appears as if he has laid out a fully fledged neoliberal agenda. A critic in the audience will have heard all the code words: efficiency, incentives, property rights, sound money, fiscal prudence. And yet the universal principles that the economist describes are in fact quite open-ended. They presume a capitalist economy – one in which investment decisions are made by private individuals and firms – but not much beyond that. They allow for – indeed, they require – a surprising variety of institutional arrangements.

So has the economist just delivered a neoliberal screed? We would be mistaken to think so, and our mistake would consist of associating each abstract term – incentives, property rights, sound money – with a particular institutional counterpart. And therein lies the central conceit, and the fatal flaw, of neoliberalism: the belief that first-order economic principles map on to a unique set of policies, approximated by a Thatcher/Reagan-style agenda.

Consider property rights. They matter insofar as they allocate returns on investments. An optimal system would distribute property rights to those who would make the best use of an asset, and afford protection against those most likely to expropriate the returns. Property rights are good when they protect innovators from free riders, but they are bad when they protect them from competition. Depending on the context, a legal regime that provides the appropriate incentives can look quite different from the standard US-style regime of private property rights.

This may seem like a semantic point with little practical import; but China's phenomenal economic success is largely due to its orthodoxy-defying institutional tinkering. China turned to markets, but did not copy western practices in property rights. Its reforms produced market-based incentives through a series of unusual institutional arrangements that were better adapted to the local context. Rather than move directly from state to private ownership, for example, which would have been stymied by the weakness of the prevailing legal structures, the country relied on mixed forms of ownership that provided more effective property rights for entrepreneurs in practice. Township and Village Enterprises (TVEs), which spearheaded Chinese economic growth during the 1980s, were collectives owned and controlled by local governments. Even though TVEs were publicly owned, entrepreneurs received the protection they needed against expropriation. Local governments had a direct stake in the profits of the firms, and hence did not want to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

China relied on a range of such innovations, each delivering the economist's higher-order economic principles in unfamiliar institutional arrangements. For instance, it shielded its large state sector from global competition, establishing special economic zones where foreign firms could operate with different rules than in the rest of the economy. In view of such departures from orthodox blueprints, describing China's economic reforms as neoliberal – as critics are inclined to do – distorts more than it reveals. If we are to call this neoliberalism, we must surely look more kindly on the ideas behind the most dramatic poverty reduction in history.

One might protest that China's institutional innovations were purely transitional. Perhaps it will have to converge on western-style institutions to sustain its economic progress. But this common line of thinking overlooks the diversity of capitalist arrangements that still prevails among advanced economies, despite the considerable homogenisation of our policy discourse.

What, after all, are western institutions? The size of the public sector in OECD countries varies, from a third of the economy in Korea to nearly 60% in Finland. In Iceland, 86% of workers are members of a trade union; the comparable number in Switzerland is just 16%. In the US, firms can fire workers almost at will; French labour laws have historically required employers to jump through many hoops first. Stock markets have grown to a total value of nearly one-and-a-half times GDP in the US; in Germany, they are only a third as large, equivalent to just 50% of GDP.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest 'China turned to markets, but did not copy western practices ... ' Photograph: AFP/Getty

The idea that any one of these models of taxation, labour relations or financial organisation is inherently superior to the others is belied by the varying economic fortunes that each of these economies have experienced over recent decades. The US has gone through successive periods of angst in which its economic institutions were judged inferior to those in Germany, Japan, China, and now possibly Germany again. Certainly, comparable levels of wealth and productivity can be produced under very different models of capitalism. We might even go a step further: today's prevailing models probably come nowhere near exhausting the range of what might be possible, and desirable, in the future.

The visiting economist in our thought experiment knows all this, and recognises that the principles he has enunciated need to be filled in with institutional detail before they become operational. Property rights? Yes, but how? Sound money? Of course, but how? It would perhaps be easier to criticise his list of principles for being vacuous than to denounce it as a neoliberal screed.

Still, these principles are not entirely content-free. China, and indeed all countries that managed to develop rapidly, demonstrate the utility of those principles once they are properly adapted to local context. Conversely, too many economies have been driven to ruin courtesy of political leaders who chose to violate them. We need look no further than Latin American populists or eastern European communist regimes to appreciate the practical significance of sound money, fiscal sustainability and private incentives.

O f course, economics goes beyond a list of abstract, largely common-sense principles. Much of the work of economists consists of developing stylised models of how economies work and then confronting those models with evidence. Economists tend to think of what they do as progressively refining their understanding of the world: their models are supposed to get better and better as they are tested and revised over time. But progress in economics happens differently.

Economists study a social reality that is unlike the physical universe. It is completely manmade, highly malleable and operates according to different rules across time and space. Economics advances not by settling on the right model or theory to answer such questions, but by improving our understanding of the diversity of causal relationships. Neoliberalism and its customary remedies – always more markets, always less government – are in fact a perversion of mainstream economics. Good economists know that the correct answer to any question in economics is: it depends.

Does an increase in the minimum wage depress employment? Yes, if the labour market is really competitive and employers have no control over the wage they must pay to attract workers; but not necessarily otherwise. Does trade liberalisation increase economic growth? Yes, if it increases the profitability of industries where the bulk of investment and innovation takes place; but not otherwise. Does more government spending increase employment? Yes, if there is slack in the economy and wages do not rise; but not otherwise. Does monopoly harm innovation? Yes and no, depending on a whole host of market circumstances.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest 'Today [neoliberalism] is routinely reviled as a shorthand for the ideas that have produced growing economic inequality and precipitated our current populist backlash' Trump signing an order to take the US out of the TPP trade pact. Photograph: AFP/Getty

In economics, new models rarely supplant older models. The basic competitive-markets model dating back to Adam Smith has been modified over time by the inclusion, in rough historical order, of monopoly, externalities, scale economies, incomplete and asymmetric information, irrational behaviour and many other real-world features. But the older models remain as useful as ever. Understanding how real markets operate necessitates using different lenses at different times.

Perhaps maps offer the best analogy. Just like economic models, maps are highly stylised representations of reality . They are useful precisely because they abstract from many real-world details that would get in the way. But abstraction also implies that we need a different map depending on the nature of our journey. If we are travelling by bike, we need a map of bike trails. If we are to go on foot, we need a map of footpaths. If a new subway is constructed, we will need a subway map – but we wouldn't throw out the older maps.

Economists tend to be very good at making maps, but not good enough at choosing the one most suited to the task at hand. When confronted with policy questions of the type our visiting economist faces, too many of them resort to "benchmark" models that favour the laissez-faire approach. Kneejerk solutions and hubris replace the richness and humility of the discussion in the seminar room. John Maynard Keynes once defined economics as the "science of thinking in terms of models, joined to the art of choosing models which are relevant". Economists typically have trouble with the "art" part.

This, too, can be illustrated with a parable. A journalist calls an economics professor for his view on whether free trade is a good idea. The professor responds enthusiastically in the affirmative. The journalist then goes undercover as a student in the professor's advanced graduate seminar on international trade. He poses the same question: is free trade good? This time the professor is stymied. "What do you mean by 'good'?" he responds. "And good for whom?" The professor then launches into an extensive exegesis that will ultimately culminate in a heavily hedged statement: "So if the long list of conditions I have just described are satisfied, and assuming we can tax the beneficiaries to compensate the losers, freer trade has the potential to increase everyone's wellbeing." If he is in an expansive mood, the professor might add that the effect of free trade on an economy's longterm growth rate is not clear either, and would depend on an altogether different set of requirements.

This professor is rather different from the one the journalist encountered previously. On the record, he exudes self-confidence, not reticence, about the appropriate policy. There is one and only one model, at least as far as the public conversation is concerned, and there is a single correct answer, regardless of context. Strangely, the professor deems the knowledge that he imparts to his advanced students to be inappropriate (or dangerous) for the general public. Why?

The roots of such behaviour lie deep in the culture of the economics profession. But one important motive is the zeal to display the profession's crown jewels – market efficiency, the invisible hand, comparative advantage – in untarnished form, and to shield them from attack by self-interested barbarians, namely the protectionists . Unfortunately, these economists typically ignore the barbarians on the other side of the issue – financiers and multinational corporations whose motives are no purer and who are all too ready to hijack these ideas for their own benefit.

As a result, economists' contributions to public debate are often biased in one direction, in favour of more trade, more finance and less government. That is why economists have developed a reputation as cheerleaders for neoliberalism, even if mainstream economics is very far from a paean to laissez-faire. The economists who let their enthusiasm for free markets run wild are in fact not being true to their own discipline.

H ow then should we think about globalisation in order to liberate it from the grip of neoliberal practices? We must begin by understanding the positive potential of global markets. Access to world markets in goods, technologies and capital has played an important role in virtually all of the economic miracles of our time. China is the most recent and powerful reminder of this historical truth, but it is not the only case. Before China, similar miracles were performed by South Korea, Taiwan, Japan and a few non-Asian countries such as Mauritius . All of these countries embraced globalisation rather than turn their backs on it, and they benefited handsomely.

Defenders of the existing economic order will quickly point to these examples when globalisation comes into question. What they will fail to say is that almost all of these countries joined the world economy by violating neoliberal strictures. South Korea and Taiwan, for instance, heavily subsidised their exporters, the former through the financial system and the latter through tax incentives. All of them eventually removed most of their import restrictions, long after economic growth had taken off.

But none, with the sole exception of Chile in the 1980s under Pinochet, followed the neoliberal recommendation of a rapid opening-up to imports. Chile's neoliberal experiment eventually produced the worst economic crisis in all of Latin America. While the details differ across countries, in all cases governments played an active role in restructuring the economy and buffering it against a volatile external environment. Industrial policies, restrictions on capital flows and currency controls – all prohibited in the neoliberal playbook – were rampant.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Protest against Nafta in Mexico City in 2008: since the reforms of the mid-90s, the country's economy has underperformed. Photograph: EPA

By contrast, countries that stuck closest to the neoliberal model of globalisation were sorely disappointed. Mexico provides a particularly sad example. Following a series of macroeconomic crises in the mid-1990s, Mexico embraced macroeconomic orthodoxy, extensively liberalised its economy, freed up the financial system, sharply reduced import restrictions and signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta). These policies did produce macroeconomic stability and a significant rise in foreign trade and internal investment. But where it counts – in overall productivity and economic growth – the experiment failed . Since undertaking the reforms, overall productivity in Mexico has stagnated, and the economy has underperformed even by the undemanding standards of Latin America.

These outcomes are not a surprise from the perspective of sound economics. They are yet another manifestation of the need for economic policies to be attuned to the failures to which markets are prone, and to be tailored to the specific circumstances of each country. No single blueprint fits all.

A s Peters's 1982 manifesto attests, the meaning of neoliberalism has changed considerably over time as the label has acquired harder-line connotations with respect to deregulation, financialisation and globalisation. But there is one thread that connects all versions of neoliberalism, and that is the emphasis on economic growth . Peters wrote in 1982 that the emphasis was warranted because growth is essential to all our social and political ends – community, democracy, prosperity. Entrepreneurship, private investment and removing obstacles that stand in the way (such as excessive regulation) were all instruments for achieving economic growth. If a similar neoliberal manifesto were penned today, it would no doubt make the same point.

ss="rich-link"> Globalisation: the rise and fall of an idea that swept the world Read more

Critics often point out that this emphasis on economics debases and sacrifices other important values such as equality, social inclusion, democratic deliberation and justice. Those political and social objectives obviously matter enormously, and in some contexts they matter the most. They cannot always, or even often, be achieved by means of technocratic economic policies; politics must play a central role.

Still, neoliberals are not wrong when they argue that our most cherished ideals are more likely to be attained when our economy is vibrant, strong and growing. Where they are wrong is in believing that there is a unique and universal recipe for improving economic performance, to which they have access. The fatal flaw of neoliberalism is that it does not even get the economics right. It must be rejected on its own terms for the simple reason that it is bad economics.

A version of this article first appeared in Boston Review

Main illustration by Eleanor Shakespeare

[Dec 09, 2018] MI6's Spymaster Revealed How The UK Is Conducting Fourth Generation Espionage by Andrew Korybko

Recently MI6 were implicated in Steel report, Skripals poisonings, Browder machinations, and creation of the Integrity Initiative. Nice "non-interference" mode...
Notable quotes:
"... The UK's top spy spent some of his time blaming Russia for trying to, as he put it, "subvert the UK way of life" by supposedly poisoning the Skripals and through other mischievous but ultimately never verified actions, though moving beyond the infowar aspect of his speech and into its actual professional substance, he nevertheless touched on some interesting themes ..."
"... In other words, it's all about applying what he calls the "Fusion Doctrine" for building the right domestic and international teams across skillsets in order to best leverage new technologies for accomplishing his agency's eternal mission, which is "to understand the motivations, intentions and aspirations of people in other countries." ..."
"... "being able to take steps to change [targets'] behavior", this has actually been part and parcel of the intelligence profession since time immemorial, albeit nowadays facilitated by social media and other technological platforms that allow shadowy actors such as the UK's own "77th Brigade" to carry out psychological, influence, and informational operations. ..."
"... Considering Russia to be a country that "regards [itself] as being in a state of perpetual confrontation with [the West]", Younger believes that unacceptably high costs must be imposed upon it every time it's accused of some wrongdoing, forgetting that the exact same principle could more applicably be applied against the West by Russia for the same reasons. ..."
"... If read from a cynical standpoint by anyone who's aware of the true nature of contemporary geopolitics, Younger's speech is actually quite informative because it inadvertently reveals what the West itself is doing to Russia by means of projecting its own actions onto its opponent . ..."
"... That in and of itself is actually the very essence of Hybrid War , which is commonly understood to largely include blatantly deceptive techniques such as the one that the UK's top spy is unabashedly attempting to pull off. ..."
"... Accusing one's adversaries of the exact same thing that you yourself are doing is a classic method of deflecting attention from one's own actions by pretending that you're being victimized by the selfsame, which therefore "justifies" escalating tensions by portraying all hostile acts as "proactive defensive responses to aggression". ..."
"... Basically, the British spymaster just sloppily revealed his hand to Russia while attempting to implicate it for allegedly conducting "fourth generation espionage" against the UK. ..."
Dec 09, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Oriental Review,

The head of the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) Alex Younger briefed the public about the challenges of so-called " fourth generation espionage ".

The UK's top spy spent some of his time blaming Russia for trying to, as he put it, "subvert the UK way of life" by supposedly poisoning the Skripals and through other mischievous but ultimately never verified actions, though moving beyond the infowar aspect of his speech and into its actual professional substance, he nevertheless touched on some interesting themes.

According to him, "fourth generation espionage" involves "deepening our partnerships to counter hybrid threats, mastering covert action in the data age, attaching a cost to malign activity by adversaries and innovating to ensure that technology works to our advantage."

In other words, it's all about applying what he calls the "Fusion Doctrine" for building the right domestic and international teams across skillsets in order to best leverage new technologies for accomplishing his agency's eternal mission, which is "to understand the motivations, intentions and aspirations of people in other countries."

While he remarked that the so-called "hybrid threats" associated with "fourth generation espionage" necessitate "being able to take steps to change [targets'] behavior", this has actually been part and parcel of the intelligence profession since time immemorial, albeit nowadays facilitated by social media and other technological platforms that allow shadowy actors such as the UK's own "77th Brigade" to carry out psychological, influence, and informational operations.

Younger warned that "bulk data combined with modern analytics" could be "a serious challenge" if used against his country , obviously alluding to Cambridge Analytica's purported weaponization of these cutting-edge technological processes to supposedly "hack" elections, though neglecting to draw any attention to the fact that his intelligence agency and its allies could conceivably do the same in advance of their own interests, something that everyone who uses Western-based social media platforms is theoretically at risk of having happen to them.

What Younger is most concerned about, however, are what he describes as the "eroded boundaries" that characterize so-called "hybrid threats" lying between war and peace, which he fears could undermine NATO's Article 5 obligation for all of the military alliance's members to support one another during times of conflict. Considering Russia to be a country that "regards [itself] as being in a state of perpetual confrontation with [the West]", Younger believes that unacceptably high costs must be imposed upon it every time it's accused of some wrongdoing, forgetting that the exact same principle could more applicably be applied against the West by Russia for the same reasons.

He claims that it's the UK that will never respond in kind by destabilizing Russia like Moscow's accused of doing to the UK, but in reality, it's President Putin's so-called "judo moves" which prove that it's Russia who has mastered asymmetrical responses instead. If read from a cynical standpoint by anyone who's aware of the true nature of contemporary geopolitics, Younger's speech is actually quite informative because it inadvertently reveals what the West itself is doing to Russia by means of projecting its own actions onto its opponent .

That in and of itself is actually the very essence of Hybrid War , which is commonly understood to largely include blatantly deceptive techniques such as the one that the UK's top spy is unabashedly attempting to pull off.

Accusing one's adversaries of the exact same thing that you yourself are doing is a classic method of deflecting attention from one's own actions by pretending that you're being victimized by the selfsame, which therefore "justifies" escalating tensions by portraying all hostile acts as "proactive defensive responses to aggression".

Basically, the British spymaster just sloppily revealed his hand to Russia while attempting to implicate it for allegedly conducting "fourth generation espionage" against the UK.

[Dec 09, 2018] Wannabe Zionists (Bolton) has been trying hard to show his loyalty to the Jewish State

Notable quotes:
"... Trump won't fire his son-in-law, so if Jared doesn't have the decency to resign on his own, he may well be responsible for Trump's downfall in addition to his own. Trump's silly daughter, Ivanka, needs to go to. ..."
"... Time for Bolton to send for the clairvoyant Theresa May who has managed to accuse Russia, and Mr. Putin personally, in the Skripals' poisoning n the absence of any evidence ..."
Nov 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

annamaria, November 13, 2018 at 6:43 pm GMT

@Z-man The "wannabe Zionists (Bolton)" has been trying hard to show his loyalty to the Jewish State.

The latest tragicomic attempt by the mustached "person of easy morals": "John Bolton Says "No Evidence" Implicating Crown Prince On Khashoggi Kill Tape" https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-11-13/john-bolton-says-no-evidence-implicating-crown-prince-khashoggi-kill-tape

Comment section (David Wooten): "According to the crown prince himself, Trump's [Jewish] son-in-law gave him a secret list of his enemies -- the ones like Al Aweed who were tortured and shaken down for cash. Khashoggi might even have been on that list.

One or more of the tortured ones likely tipped off Erdogan, which is why Turkey only needed to enter the consulate, retrieve the recorded audio device they planted, and walk out with the evidence. Turkey also has evidence that puts MbS' personal doctor and other staff arriving in Turkey at convenient times to do the job -- and probably more. Khashoggi was anything but a nice person but Trump cannot say that or he'll likely be accused of involvement in his murder.

Dissociation is made far more difficult by the fact that Jared is a long time friend of Netanyahu who, like Jared, has befriended MbS .

Trump won't fire his son-in-law, so if Jared doesn't have the decency to resign on his own, he may well be responsible for Trump's downfall in addition to his own. Trump's silly daughter, Ivanka, needs to go to.

Were it not for the Khashoggi affair, fewer Republican seats would have been lost in the election."

-- Time for Bolton to send for the clairvoyant Theresa May who has managed to accuse Russia, and Mr. Putin personally, in the Skripals' poisoning n the absence of any evidence .

These people -- Bolton, May, Gavin Williamson and likes -- are a cross of the ever-eager whores and petty brainless thieves. To expose themselves as the willing participants in the ZUSA-conducted farce requires a complete lack of integrity.

Of course, there is no way to indict the journalist's murderers since the principal murderer is a personal friend of Netanyahu and Jared.

Jump, Justice, jump, as high as ordered by the "chosen."

By the way, why do we hear nothing about Seth Rich who was murdered in the most surveilled city of the US?

Z-man , says: November 13, 2018 at 7:21 pm GMT
@annamaria A 1st grader can see that MbS was behind the murder of Kashoggi.

Trump won't fire his son-in-law, so if Jared doesn't have the decency to resign on his own, he may well be responsible for Trump's downfall in addition to his own. Trump's silly daughter, Ivanka, needs to go to.

I've been hoping for this since they moved to Washington with 'big daddy'.

annamaria , says: November 14, 2018 at 12:49 pm GMT
@Anon " crappy bedtime reading the woolyheadedness "

Hey, Anon[436], is this how your parents have been treating you? My condolences.

If you feel that you succeeded with your "see, a squirrel" tactics of taking attention from the zionists' dirty and amoral attempts at coverup of the murder of the journalists Khashoggi, which was accomplished on the orders of the clown prince (the dear friend of Bibi & Jared), you are for a disappointment.

One more time for you, Anon[436]: the firm evidence of MbS involvement in the murder of Khashoggi contrasts with no evidence of the alleged poisoning of Skripals by Russian government.

The zionists have been showing an amazing tolerance towards the clown prince the murderer because zionists need the clown prince for the implementation of Oded Yinon Plan for Eretz Israel.

The stinky Skripals' affair involves harsh economic actions imposed on the RF in the absence of any evidence , as compared to no sanctions in response to the actual murder of Khashoggi, which involved MbS according to the available evidence . Thanks to the zionists friendship with the clown prince, the firm evidence of Khashoggi murder is of no importance. What else could be expected from the "most moral" Bibi & Kushner and the treasonous Bolton.

Z-man , says: November 14, 2018 at 1:58 pm GMT
@annamaria

The stinky Skripals' affair involves harsh economic actions imposed on the RF in the absence of any evidence, as compared to no sanctions in response to the actual murder of Khashoggi, which involved MbS according to the available evidence. Thanks to the zionists friendship with the clown prince, the firm evidence of Khashoggi murder is of no importance. What else could be expected from the "most moral" Bibi & Kushner and the treasonous Bolton.

Bears repeating.

[Dec 09, 2018] Proportional representation is definitely the way to go. I am sick to death of the born-to-rule mentality of the major parties, and how they change the rules to benefit themselves and to exclude others

Notable quotes:
"... Yes, its far better than the "first past the post" systems of the UK and the US where the number of votes split between two almost identical candidates can lead to a far different candidate winning with only a little over a third of the total vote. ..."
Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

MikeSw , 30 Oct 2018 22:36

Proportional representation is definitely the way to go. I am sick to death of the born-to-rule mentality of the major parties, and how they change the rules to benefit themselves and to exclude others.

Minority government? There is no such thing - there is only 'government', and it is supposed to involve all members of parliament in the decision-making process. 'Majority' governments are an anathema to good governance. Every time I hear the likes of Tony Abbott claim they have a mandate to implement ALL their policies, even though they only receive around 35% of the primary vote, I want to throw something at the TV.

Bugger them! Make them work for a living - and make them consider ALL views, not just the ones from their own party.

Bradtheunveiler -> BrianLC , 30 Oct 2018 22:36
Win the ALP will next election. By a huge majority too. Looking forward to neg gearing and CGT discount reform in particular.
Onesimus_Tim -> StuartJJ , 30 Oct 2018 22:35

Preferences are an extremely good feature of our voting system

Yes, its far better than the "first past the post" systems of the UK and the US where the number of votes split between two almost identical candidates can lead to a far different candidate winning with only a little over a third of the total vote.

Preferential voting also makes it more possible for the major party duopoly being overturned, allowing people to vote for a good independent without taking the risk of helping a despised major party candidate from winning by default.

[Dec 09, 2018] The problem with representative democracy is that it represents the special interest groups far more than it represents the citizenry

Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Territorian -> Hoskins50 , 30 Oct 2018 23:49

"The problem with representative democracy is that it represents the special interest groups far more than it represents the citizenry." You are spot on.

Nigel Scullion: Minister for Handing out buckets of money to NT Country Liberal Party supporters. Scullion just happened to be a professional fisher before entering parliament.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/oct/31/indigenous-advancement-funding-redirected-to-cattlemen-and-fishing-groups

Barnaby Joyce: Minister for Agriculture while his Department was too scared to report disgusting conditions in the live sheep export trade.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/oct/31/agriculture-minister-promises-to-fix-live-export-regulation-after-damning-report

DukeofWoyWoy , 30 Oct 2018 23:48
What a logical and stirring argument you put forward Richard Denniss, and a large majority of the electorate would have to agree.
However there is also a large number of people in the electorate that cannot appear to rise from their nightly slumber without wearing their Blue, Red, Green or Orange tinted glasses before facing the new day.
And because of this, and preferential voting, sneaking in the background is a plethora of the wild mindless sub creatures called politicians who demand their rights to sit in the big white building on Canberra;s Capital Hill, just waiting to spoil not only the electorate's party but also known to prostitute the country's governance to their own advantage.
Richard, we desperately need a follow up stirring article on how to overcome this black menace to our country, for the sake of our country.
Hoskins50 , 30 Oct 2018 23:38
If you think the public has an appetite for more bureaucrats, more rules and regulations to micromanage people's lives and even more political wheeling and dealing in Canberra, you should get out more.

That the coalition government is on the slide is of no long term consequence. We'll get a Labor government next year and in a few years another coalition government and so on.

What is of long term significance is the loss of public trust in pretty much all of the institutions - including goverment and the various government agencies that would be more powerful under your scenario.

The problem with representative democracy is that it represents the special interest groups far more than it represents the citizenry. Perhaps the solution lies in more direct democracy.

The same sex marriage plebiscite demonstrated that we commoners can deliberate on a sensitive issue, and in doing so behave far better than our elected representatives in Parliament. And can make a sensible and progressive decision that our elected representatives could not - both coalition and Labor MPs had opposed same sex marriage when it was raised in th e Parliament.

The internet provides a platform for direct decision making by the citizenry. Perhaps we should try that instead of what you are suggesting.

diggerdigger , 30 Oct 2018 22:12
It's been clear for years that proportional representation has progressively meant death to effective government, and that it forces major parties policy development further to the political fringes to appeal to the fruit loops on the periphery of their respective demographics. Time for a return to simple preferential voting (a-la-house of Reps) in the senate, and an overhaul of what's considered a valid ballot - if you want to only rank 1, 2, 3 or all candidates it should be entirely your choice.

Hung parliaments, with diametrically opposed clumps of "independents" jointly holding the balance of power can only ever deliver legislative stasis and constant political turmoil (as we have experienced since 2010 and Europe and the US have suffered for the last decade).

Oh for the good old days when one or the other of the major parties held a working majority in both houses, and policy was targeted at the 'sensible centre" of the Australian electorate. At worst, they only had to deal with a couple of sensible Democrats, and the odd lunatic fringe-ist like Harradine.

[Dec 09, 2018] People who vote but really don't get represented. All those votes just get mopped up by two major parties who represent thatsame neooliberal sharks who want to devour the voters

Notable quotes:
"... I find the Australian electoral system very mediocre. All those people who vote but really don't get represented. All those votes that just get mopped up by the major parties. I really can't understand why Australians have put up with such a poor system for so long. ..."
Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

RonGlaeston , 31 Oct 2018 04:56

Yes, yes! MMP!!

Having spent many years in a New Zealand under a First Past the Post system and then Mixed Member Proportional, I am an enthusiastic supporter of proportional systems.

I find the Australian electoral system very mediocre. All those people who vote but really don't get represented. All those votes that just get mopped up by the major parties. I really can't understand why Australians have put up with such a poor system for so long.

Hettie7-> melbournesam 31 Oct 2018 00:45

Proportional representation makes the most sense. Each party gets the same percentage of seats in the parliament as it received votes in the election. That really is fair.

[Dec 09, 2018] Nationalisation of essential services is required to put this country back on an even keel. It was a stupid idea by governments (of all persuasions) to sell off monopoly essential service assets. The neoliberal experiment has failed.

Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

RonRabbit99 , 31 Oct 2018 01:17

Nationalisation of essential services is required to put this country back on an even keel. It was a stupid idea by governments (of all persuasions) to sell off monopoly essential service assets. The neoliberal experiment has failed.
Carlosthepossum , 31 Oct 2018 01:15
'Neoliberalism is dead.'
However, we cannot rest until it is buried and cremated.
economicalternative -> Bewareofnazihippies , 31 Oct 2018 01:03
Beware: Just build a HUGE worker owned, democratically run (by workers) sector to compete against privately owned concerns. If workers are (democratically) involved in running and managing their own workplaces that will give plenty of competition for private concerns. Workers will be involved in the 'politics' and economics of their local area as part of work. They'll have more control over the technologies they want to use, how much profit they want to make or not, wages, investment, working conditions and all aspects of their concern. Workers would 'participate' more and be more involved in thinking about larger concerns. This would make a nation/region more democratic on the 'ground'. Not just reliant on 'representative' democracy/voting. You'd still need over-arching government(s) but people would have more direct control over their livelihoods and work conditions. Such a BIG sector would give (I'm talking about Health, Education, manufacturing etc - not 'bread shop', basket-weaving coops/social enterprises) private enterprise some REAL competition on prices and services. It would deliver democracy to masses of people, some control over wealth generation/economy and on a large enough scale CHANGE society in terms of social justice and politics.

You don't need to go to State control or Private control of 'the economy'. Just the right kinds of structures.

Nintiblue , 31 Oct 2018 01:03
Its not dead yet.

Neoliberalism is like a cancer on a health democracy. If we'd treated it in its early magnifications (when the Librerals and far right old version of Labor), first started selling off public assets (that are then charged back to citizens to use at increasing price rates etc), we would have been fine.

But now the cancer is deep in democracy's lymph glads ( in many of our public services) and so needs radical prolonged treatment and some surgery to assure the country's thriving democracy survives.

First surgically remove the source: cease (vote out always) all right wing conservative nutters from ever gaining power, or media mogul influence of government. Most but not all hide in the Coalition.

Then, begin the reconstruction surgery to re-assert public assets and services. This is a temporary but life saving cost.

Then, monitor and manage, (educate) the citizens about this scourge on democracy.

Dunkey2830 , 31 Oct 2018 01:00

The death of neoliberalism means we can finally have a national debate about the size and role of government, and the shape of the economy and society we want to build.

Neoliberalism is far from dead Richard - neoliberalism is deeply entrenched in mainstream thinking its corporate enriching magic works insidiously - mostly subliminally under cover of 'sensible' free market self clearing 'orthodox' economics.
You and many others from 'progressive' TAI almost daily, unwittingly play a role in reinforcing and entrenching neoliberal ideology in the community by framing macroeconomic analysis/commentary in neoliberal terms.
Your oft repeated call for 'budget balance' over the business cycle is such an example. Only fiscal deficits can build a prosperous productive nation in the absence of consistent external surpluses - no government can ever build and expand a nation without permanently injecting more funds into the non government sector than (through taxation etc) it withdraws.

Both our major parties of government espouse neoliberal economic orthodoxy as if there is no alternative - and no one calls them out - not even the quasi progressive TAI.

DSGE based 'orthodox' economics provides the lifeblood to neoliberalism - the myth of tax collections funding expenditure provides plausible cover to constrain spending on citizen/social services - but when it comes to war/corporate subsidy spending, such constraints are immediately abandoned.
Hetereodox MMT exposes the lie of such DSGE myths - but faithful Ptolemaic 'progressives' refuse to investigate or debate such Copernican macroeconomic sacrilege.

The recent TAI 'outlook' economic conference (proudly sponsored by 'The Australian'!! ) was a classic progressive 'fail'; loaded with orthodox 'experts' like Bowen and Keating spouting austerity inducing neoliberal orthodoxy - not one heterodox economist was invited to present the unwelcome, uncomfortable truth of sovereign nation macroeconomic reality.
Prof Bill Mitchell is Australia's most widely & internationally respected REAL progressive heterodox academic - yet the TAI ignores him.

Neoliberalism won't die until it extracts the last breath of available wealth from Australia's citizenry. It will die a savage death with the onset of the impending depression 'to end all depressions' when the collapsing housing bubble leaves citizens with a 'decades long' bubble of unpayable private debt.

Only then will people realise they have been elaborately 'conned' - too late.

P.S. For all TRUE progressives:
Some brilliant short videos here and here by Parody Project.

CaligulaMcNutt -> CaptnGster , 31 Oct 2018 00:54
That's really the point, much as you might expect government like the Howard and Abbott ones to have stuck to their claimed neo-liberal principles, neither substantially altered the compulsory nature of the scheme, despite the fact that it ran more or less completely contrary to Chicago School principles. Howard might have been fond of shouting "socialism" or "nanny state" when he felt the need to criticise something, but deeds speak stronger than words, and for all his p!ssing and moaning he was never going to do anything that stopped all those truckloads of money finding their way to his friends in the banking industry.
Alltherage -> elliot2511 , 31 Oct 2018 00:51
Yes historically high mass immigration in Australia has been used as a trojan horse by the adherents of neo-liberalism - to break down the pay and conditions of Australian workers and their rights and entitlements.
By importing "ready made" skilled workers, neither the Government or the private sector have had to go to the trouble of training their workforce nor bear any of the costs of educating and training them.
As to the lower skilled imported workers, in the main, this is a crude device to cut out the locals so that accepted or legislated pay and conditions can be lowered. Most of those imported workers don't know their rights and are ripe for exploitation.
The shonks, rip off and quick buck merchants love neo-liberalism for the what it has done to the Australian labour market.
And the Labor party has been complicit in all this - when it should have been protecting Australians and Australian workers present and future from the ravaging impacts of neo-liberalism.
Ozperson , 31 Oct 2018 00:48
For something that's supposedly dead, it still looks like neoliberalism is in charge to me. The relentless commodification of every aspect of life continues apace. Money is still the measure of everything and takes precedence over the environment, ethics, community, creativity, discovery, and virtually everything else you care to name. When water thiefs, big bankers, corrupt politicians, environmental despoilers, and those that start pointless wars are IN GAOL, then I'll start to believe things are changing.
Saint-Just -> FelixKruell , 31 Oct 2018 00:47
Neoliberalism is not simply an economic agenda. From the beginning it was conceived as and then constructed to be much more than that - it was in fact as much a pedagogical cum psychological operation to change minds across generations with regard to free-market capitalism and thus to orient all thinking to that, than it was a matter of simple monetary or trade policy. Of course, this had to be done with a good deal of repression and oppression backing it up, here and there - Chile e.g. Thus electing neoliberalism is an effect of this pedagogy over time - we are all schooled in its 'normality - and not a reflection of either some natural desire for it or an educated choice.
Nicholas Haines , 31 Oct 2018 00:40
I agree that we should be discussing fiscal policy but I suspect that Richard Denniss is using a false frame for this topic. He probably adheres to the claim made by the macroeconomic equivalent of pre-Copernican physics that a government that issues its own currency, enforces taxes in that currency, and allows the currency to float in foreign exchange markets can run out of its currency.

The fiscal policy of the federal government should be to employ all available labour in socially useful and environmental sustainable productive activity, maintain price stability, minimize inequality of income and wealth, and fund public services and infrastructure to the maximum extent permitted by the resources that are available for sale in the government's currency.

If you think that the government's fiscal policy should be to reduce a fiscal deficit or deliver a fiscal surplus, you are a dill.

It makes no sense to target a particular fiscal balance because the outcome is driven largely by the aggregated spending and saving decisions of the domestic non-government sector and the external sector. The federal government does not control those variables.

The federal government needs to target economically, socially, and environmentally desirable goals and allow the fiscal balance to reach whatever level is needed at any given time to achieve those goals.

economicalternative -> BlueThird , 31 Oct 2018 00:39
'Democracy' needs to be structural as well as a moral idea. Workers have been disempowered and impoverished and disenfranchished by neoliberalism. An answer to structurally improve the wealth AND democratic power of the workers is to build a HUGE co operative sector in each economy: worker owned workplaces/businesses/concerns AND democratically run. THAT will improve the situation for workers/punters: democracy where they live and work. Democracy rooted not in fine ideas only about rights but bedded down in economic livelihoods. People will take an interest in their local 'politics' and also understand more of the politics of the nation. You don't have to get rid of 'capitalism' just give it a 'good run' for it's money - some real COMPETITION. Cooperatively run Hospitals, owned by doctors and nurses and other stakeholders - not for profit - that'll soon see the 'private' for profit' health providers/rorters wind their prices and necks in. Socially owned, worker-owned, government/taxpayer supported enterprise, work places, democratically run will boot up the level of 'democracy' in our societies. We can still have voter style over-arching national government of course. If you don't root democracy where people actually can participate and which gives them a lot of control over their workplaces/livelihood, then it can all be hijacked by the greedy and cunning (see neoliberalism). OH, a large cooperative sector in the economy democratically run by workers won't deliver 'heaven on earth' - it'll still be run by people!
slorter -> HauptmannGurski , 31 Oct 2018 00:37
It is also a tool of the neoliberals along with the whole neoliberal trend in macroeconomic policy. The essential thing underlying this, is to try to reduce the power of government and social forces that might exercise some power within the political economy -- workers and others -- and put the power primarily in the hands of those dominating in the markets. That's often the financial system, the banks, but also other elites. The idea of neoliberal economists and policymakers being that you don't want the government getting too involved in macroeconomic policy. You don't want them promoting too much employment because that might lead to a raise in wages and, in turn, to a reduction in the profit share of the national income.

Austerity fits into the mix very well Keeping wages low, or debt pressure high, means workers will be less likely to complain or make demands. As workers struggle to provide their families with all the temptations that a capitalist society offers, they become far less likely to risk their employment, and less able to improve their situation.

At bottom, conservatives believe in a social hierarchy of "haves" and "have nots". They have taken this corrosive social vision and dressed it up with a "respectable" sounding ideology which all boils down to the cheap labour they depend on to make their fortunes.

Alltherage -> misterwildcard , 31 Oct 2018 00:29
It shows a great sense of inferiority and knowing our "proper"place, that the populace apparently accepted the colloquial term for neo-liberalism or economic rationalism, as being "trickle down economics" and that all that the populace deserved and was going to get was a trickle of the alleged wealth and benefits created.
Why were most people so compliant and accepting of something that as a concept, from the outset, was clearly signalling it would economically completely discriminate against the 99% and was intended to provide such a meager share of the wealth and economic benefits generated?
eerstehondopdemaan -> MikeSw , 31 Oct 2018 00:23
Excellent statement Mike.

A quick look around the world provides clear evidence that there really are a lot of alternatives.

That's the crux: many (western, developed) countries before us have proven over and over again that the best type of democratic government is one in which consensus is the basis for long-term decisions to the benefit of all. Is it tedious? Yes. Frustrating at times? You bet. Slow? Indeed, quite often so. But the point is, consensus-based decision making works and eventually is in everyone's interest (left, right and centre), resulting in better long-term outcomes. With the added benefit that new "majority" Governments won't throw out the children with the bathwater all the time.

I'd add one aspect to the article though, and that is to combine a form of proportional representation with longer terms of Government. You won't get much meaningful done in 3 years, whatever form of representation you choose. 4 years, 5 years... whatever strikes the best balance between governments getting some runs on the board and voters feeling empowered to change government coalitions in the ballot box when they stuff up.

[Dec 09, 2018] Neoliberalism clearly works for the interests of the minority and against the interests of the majority. Households are now worse off than they were 6 years ago and large businesses are enjoying record profits.

But what economic system worked in the interests of majority of population. There was only one such system -- USA in 1935-1970th and it was the result of WWII and record profits of the US corporation after the war, when both Europe and Japan were devastated.
In no way the USSR was social system that worked for the majority of population. It worked for the Nomenklatura -- a pretty narrow caste, similar to current top 1% under neoliberalism.
Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

regoblivion , 31 Oct 2018 00:08

I like Prof.Bill Mitchell's saying that most Progressives are Neo liberals in disguise. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOMo3xuSyWM&t=66s

Until we ditch the Neo Liberal garbage about Deficits, Debt and their confusion about Monetary and Fiscal Policy, nothing can change.

meanwhile Tick Tock goes the Carbon Clock.

ianwford , 31 Oct 2018 00:02
Neoliberalism clearly works for the interests of the minority and against the interests of the majority. Households are now worse off than they were 6 years ago and large businesses are enjoying record profits. It feels as if the australian economy is being run for the benefit of a small percentage of wealthy shareholders.

[Dec 09, 2018] Neoliberalism contains policies that the right have embraced with open arms, like compulsory retirement savings (which have enriched the private sector, especially banks and their shareholders), would have caused sharp intakes of breath from the steely-eyed theorists who came up with the concept

While a purported devotion to the principles and precepts of neo-liberalism has been claimed by decades of right-wing politicians, businesses and bankers, drilling down deeper often reveals that what is really happening in favoring the economic interests of the few at the expense of the many, and very often involving compulsorily actions like switch to 401K accounts. Which was stoke of genius for neoliberals to fleeces common people. acquired
Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

CaligulaMcNutt , 30 Oct 2018 23:45

Speaking as no fan of neo-liberalism, but there is a risk that the term gets overused. Things that the right have embraced with open arms, like compulsory retirement savings (which have enriched the private sector, especially banks and their shareholders), would have caused sharp intakes of breath from the steely-eyed theorists who came up with the concept. While a purported devotion to the principles and precepts of neo-liberalism has been claimed by decades of right-wing politicians, businesses and bankers, drilling down deeper often reveals that what is really happening in favouring the economic interests of the few at the expense of the many, and very often involving compulsorily acquired public resources being re-directed to business, with barely even the thinnest veneer of genuine theoretical observance to the neo-liberal model. Both neo-liberalism itself, and bogus claims of its practical use and benefits, need to be dead and buried.
LovelyDaffodils -> misterwildcard , 30 Oct 2018 23:45
I really would love the rich and powerful who basically prey on the average person/worker/mums and dads, to be held accountable and penalised properly in relation to their deeds. These bastards destroy families in their grab for greed, and almost every time they are excused by their cohorts, and even go on to bigger and better opportunities to keep feeding their voracious greedy appetites. Basically they steal, so why isn't their proceeds of crime taken back by government; and why do they not do any jail time?
GreyBags , 30 Oct 2018 23:36
Natural monopolies like water and power, roads and public transport should be in public hands. All call centres dealing with government issues should be done by public servants, not outsourced to foreign corporations.

I'd start with a bank. Give people a non-greed infested alternative.

Under neo-liberalism we have gone from 1 person, 1 vote to $1, one vote. The con job that is 'small government and little or no regulations' is bad for society and the environment. Greed over need.

slorter -> MachiavellisCat , 30 Oct 2018 23:20
https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/10/30/why-a-neoliberal-society-cant-survive /

Dr. T. J. Coles is director of the Plymouth Institute for Peace Research and the author of several books, including Voices for Peace (with Noam Chomsky and others) and the forthcoming Fire and Fury: How the US Isolates North Korea, Encircles China and Risks Nuclear War in Asia (both Clairview Books).

Jakartaboy , 30 Oct 2018 22:42
The current economic model being used by capitalist countries across the world is failing most of the people in these countries while enriching tiny elites. Unfortunately, politicians in these countries are often in the pockets of the elite or are themselves members of the elite.

We need a new economic narrative which better reconciles the needs of the population with the directives of the market.

[Dec 09, 2018] China version of neoliberalism is not without huge problems

Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

diggerdigger -> everywhereman , 30 Oct 2018 23:41

Why not? Profits to the nation, not greedy corporates and their shareholders.

I think you will find there were no profits made that could be put "to the nation." When the wall came down, the USSR and the entire eastern bloc were completely bankrupt.

As was Mao's China prior to the emergence of Deng and his "to get rich is glorious" mantra, that set China on its current path. Of course his generally market-oriented approach has since been bastardised to one of One Party State-capitalism dominated by cronyism, corruption, and a perverted justice system.

Yes it has generated vast wealth, but it is an empire built on sand. As any analysis of its shadow banking system will show.

And while the legions of newly minted millionaires of party benevolence celebrate, the hundreds of millions stuck in poverty are left to fend for themselves.

[Dec 09, 2018] The death of neoliberalism means we can finally have a national debate about the size and role of government, and the shape of the economy and society we want to build

Neoliberalism is a secular religion, so it doe need to be rational, to remains influential or even dominant, much like Bolshevism or Trotskyism (actually neoliberalism should be viewed as a perverted mutation of Trotskyism -- Trotskyism for irch) . It took 70 years for Bolshevism to became discredited and collapse (under the attack from neoliberalism).
In the absence of alternatives neoliberalism might continues to exist in zombie state for a very long time.
Notable quotes:
"... Poverty rate in the USA has been increasing since about the year 2000. ..."
"... Why do you think that all around the world voters are going hard against Neoliberalism and why do you think that Neoliberals are desperately trying to save their bankrupt philosophy by hiding behind Nationalism and Racism? ..."
"... While I would very much like to agree with the notion that neo-liberalism is dead, there's rather too much evidence that its pernicious influence lingers ghost-like and ghastly, having suffused far too many politicians of an ultra-conservative ilk ..."
"... The true believers in the neo-liberal faith, as it was never other than a creed espoused by Thatcher and Pinochet among others, are like those in the catholic church who continued to advocate an earth centric universe long after science proved them wrong. ..."
"... It will be a long wait until these myopic adherents to the gospel of Hayek, Friedman and Buchanan, are consigned to the waste bin of history where they belong. Until then, it will remain a struggle to right the many wrongs of this mis-guided and shallow populism. ..."
"... The neocons have had their day, though it'll no doubt take one hell of an effort to drag them out of their crony-capitalist, snouts-in-the-trough ways. The profit motive in the provision of essential services should be confined to covering costs, maintenance and associated investment. ..."
Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

GreenExerciseAddict , 30 Oct 2018 23:29

The death of neoliberalism means we can finally have a national debate about the size and role of government, and the shape of the economy and society we want to build.

Unfortunately, I see lots of deaths but none of them is neoliberalism. I can see death of a decent safety net in Australia. Death of biodiversity. Death of ecosystems. Death of intelligent debate. Death of science.

Alpo88 -> Fred1 , 30 Oct 2018 23:26
You are completely delusional Freddie.

Poverty rate in the USA has been increasing since about the year 2000. The international poverty trend has been decreasing over time only because the definition of poverty is to earn less than $1.25 per day..... So, if you earn $10/day you are well above the poverty line: Good luck living on that income in any OECD country!

Standards of living are decreasing in Australia... ever heard of the housing crisis? The household debt crisis?.... Paying for hospital and medicines, education, electricity and other services.... should I go on?.... ACOSS found that "there are just over 3 million people (13.2%) living below the poverty line of 50% of median income – including 739,000 children (17.3%)".

"The evil neo-liberalism" has delivered poverty, massive inequality, dissatisfaction, unemployment/sub-employment and casualization, collapse of public services, high costs of living.... and deterioration of the environment...

Why do you think that all around the world voters are going hard against Neoliberalism and why do you think that Neoliberals are desperately trying to save their bankrupt philosophy by hiding behind Nationalism and Racism?

Revenant13 , 30 Oct 2018 23:24
While I would very much like to agree with the notion that neo-liberalism is dead, there's rather too much evidence that its pernicious influence lingers ghost-like and ghastly, having suffused far too many politicians of an ultra-conservative ilk.

The true believers in the neo-liberal faith, as it was never other than a creed espoused by Thatcher and Pinochet among others, are like those in the catholic church who continued to advocate an earth centric universe long after science proved them wrong.

It will be a long wait until these myopic adherents to the gospel of Hayek, Friedman and Buchanan, are consigned to the waste bin of history where they belong. Until then, it will remain a struggle to right the many wrongs of this mis-guided and shallow populism.

David Smith -> adamhumph , 30 Oct 2018 23:21
Abso-bloody-lutely! The neocons have had their day, though it'll no doubt take one hell of an effort to drag them out of their crony-capitalist, snouts-in-the-trough ways. The profit motive in the provision of essential services should be confined to covering costs, maintenance and associated investment. It's so painfully obvious that the market has not met the needs of the average citizen without absurd cost. Bring on the revolution!

[Dec 09, 2018] What made anyone think neo-liberalism was going to work? Why was this even tried or got past a focus group?

Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

misterwildcard , 30 Oct 2018 22:12

What made anyone think neo-liberalism was going to work? Why was this even tried or got past a focus group?
Only the Murdoch press ever dreamed this could have any merit and a few totally selfish and controlling wealthy people. 2008 and the GFC should have killed this idea instead it gained traction as the perpetrators not only were not prosecuted but were subsidised to create more havoc. Find the culprits and jail them ... it is not too late.

[Dec 09, 2018] All essential infrastructure should be Nationalised. Water electricity supply and generation, ports and railways, educational facilities, one major bank, one country wide telco and mail delivery.

Notable quotes:
"... What about "competition", the God of Neoliberals?.... Competition can have some positive role in society only in an environment of Regulation. That's why the future is neither Neoliberal nor Socialist, but a Mixed Economy Social Democracy. ..."
"... Bring back a Commonwealth Bank! In fact bring back State run Electricity, Gas and Water utilities... ..."
"... The Coalition these days proudly subsidise their friends and regulate their enemies in order to reshape Australia in their preferred form. ..."
Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

adamhumph , 30 Oct 2018 22:14

All essential infrastructure should be Nationalised. Water electricity supply and generation, ports and railways, educational facilities, one major bank, one country wide telco and mail delivery. Remove the for profit aspect, and they become assets. In at least a few of these they also provide training opportunities across a wide spectrum of careers
Joshua Tree , 30 Oct 2018 22:13
Nationalise the banks and the Mining Industry . Take back control of outrageous wages in both these sectors and return profits to the taxpayer .

Nationalise the State Governments in other words get rid of them and appoint federal controlled administrators same with local councils, sack the lot of them and appoint administrators.

Alpo88 , 30 Oct 2018 22:08
Just like the AFP is "nationalised", or education is also to a big extent "nationalised", alongside a big chunk of the health system.... so we can nationalise other things, such as the modes of production and distribution of energy, major mineral resources, etc.

What about "competition", the God of Neoliberals?.... Competition can have some positive role in society only in an environment of Regulation. That's why the future is neither Neoliberal nor Socialist, but a Mixed Economy Social Democracy.

Which party is for a Mixed Economy Social Democracy?.... Labor and to some extent the Greens. A bunch of independents are also happy with the concept.... Together they are currently a majority, only waiting for a Federal election.

JAKLAUGHING , 30 Oct 2018 22:08
Bring back a Commonwealth Bank! In fact bring back State run Electricity, Gas and Water utilities...
Joey Rocca , 30 Oct 2018 22:01

The Coalition these days proudly subsidise their friends and regulate their enemies in order to reshape Australia in their preferred form.

Spot on Richard, excellent article. A Federal ICAC is a must.

[Dec 09, 2018] Neoliberalism us the economic stablemate of big religion's Prosperity Evangelism cult

Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Alan Ritchie , 31 Oct 2018 22:24

Neoliberalism, the economic stablemate of big religion's Prosperity Evangelism cult. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosperity_theology . Dual streams of bull shit to confuse the citizens while the Country's immense wealth is stolen.

[Dec 09, 2018] The TPP is the penultimate wet dream of all neoliberal multinational vulture corporations

Notable quotes:
"... Apologies, but Neoliberalism is far from 'dead'. But of course it should never have given 'life'. However, if it were 'dead' why did Labor vote with the Coalition to ratify the ultra-Neoliberal TPP??? The TPP is the penultimate wet dream of all neoliberal multinational vulture corporations. Why???? Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) Under these rules, foreign investors can legally challenge host state regulations outside that country's courts. A wide range of policies can be challenged. ..."
Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

MobyAhab , 31 Oct 2018 00:09

Apologies, but Neoliberalism is far from 'dead'. But of course it should never have given 'life'. However, if it were 'dead' why did Labor vote with the Coalition to ratify the ultra-Neoliberal TPP??? The TPP is the penultimate wet dream of all neoliberal multinational vulture corporations. Why???? Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) Under these rules, foreign investors can legally challenge host state regulations outside that country's courts. A wide range of policies can be challenged.

Yeah! Philip Morris comes to mind. "The cost to taxpayers of the Australian government's six-year legal battle with the tobacco giant Philip Morris over plain packaging laws can finally be revealed, despite the government's efforts to keep the cost secret.

The commonwealth government spent nearly $40m defending its world-first plain packaging laws against Philip Morris Asia, a tobacco multinational, according to freedom of information documents.

Documents say the total figure is $38,984,942.97."

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jul/02/revealed-39m-cost-of-defending-australias-tobacco-plain-packaging-laws

[Dec 09, 2018] Neo- liberalism is not dead its only just started. We are not in an era of democracy and freedom but of Oligarchy and governmental servitude. In the era of legalised privateering.

Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Moron_Strictos_freed , 31 Oct 2018 00:00

Neo- liberalism is not dead its only just started. We are not in an era of democracy and freedom but of Oligarchy and governmental servitude.
Less restrictions doesn't mean freedom it mean free booters, privateers , and plunderers are given government support and handouts the only thing free is their right to take.

The pirates who plunder the most are given Hero status and those plundered are laughed at as losers.

Looks around you governments are becoming agents of theft find ways to channel money to those who don't need it . They say its right wing fascism but its not for all their evil the fascists were determined to improve the lot of the people, however perversely they went about it.

What we have today is legalised privateering.

None of the political parties today have the least intention to change a system that works for them.

Bewareofnazihippies -> Fred1 , 30 Oct 2018 23:58
Fred, I can't remember who said it, but an observer of human systems and institutions made the observation that unless the prevalent social, economic or political structures of the day was not either changed or renewed, then those within the system would 'game' it; corrupting it from within for personal benefit to the detriment of society as a whole.
This perfectly sums up neo-liberalism.
Whatever positive virtues were extolled when this ideology was adopted wholesale by so many governments and societies (and please spare me the '-we delivered billions out of poverty!' line, that was a positive byproduct, never the objective of neo-liberalism), it has since become thoroughly corrupted, serving an ever shrinking percentage of society - entrenching a super-wealthy 'ruling class' that makes a mockery of the idea of democracy.
It's time to ditch this 21st Century feudalistic construct, and replace it with something that serves the whole of society with more justice than this current gravy train for the one percenters.
Bluetwo , 30 Oct 2018 23:54
Fully agree with the things being said here. The privatisation of essential services has been a bloody disaster. Telecommunications, health, education energy production/distribution. Look at what the NSW conservatives are doing the the public transport or the feds have done to our communications, including Telstra the ABC and SBS.

But the issue is that this will just turn into an ongoing political football with each successive conservative government trying to sell off the farm again.

These critical public services and infrastructure must be protected in law needing a referendum to make major changes. Also their funding must be guaranteed and they must be run at arms length from the government to reduce political interference and ensure they are delivering the best possible service and are competitive with the huge private sector operators.

There charter of operation and obligation to the public must be extremely robust and clearly outline their duties of care to operate in a transparent and open fashion putting the public interest as a priority.

FelixKruell , 30 Oct 2018 23:50

The opposite of a neoliberal economic agenda isn't a progressive economic agenda, but democratic re-engagement.

You can have democratic engagement voting for a 'neo-liberal economic agenda'. In fact we've had it for decades.

But of course not even the Coalition believes that any more. These days they proudly subsidise their friends and regulate their enemies in order to reshape Australia in their preferred form.

They're politicians - they've never applied their ideological views in a pure way. This is nothing new.

Ironically, one of the major objections to proportional representation in Australia has been that it tends to deliver minority government, a situation that the major parties prefer to avoid.

There's a big difference between minority government by a major party + a handful of votes, versus a minority government by a handful of minority parties, or a major party + a minor party. They tend to lead to the kind of instability we'd prefer to avoid.

The death of neoliberalism means

I think you've called it a bit prematurely. Both major parties here are still peddling neo-liberalism, with policies which only differ on the margins.

[Dec 09, 2018] Never forget that fascism is the natural defence mechanism of capital. After it is accrued, it must be defended

Notable quotes:
"... Neoliberal doctrine leads to skyrocketing inequality, a swelling in the desperate and forgotten poor who are vulnerable to populist messaging and the idea of a strongman peddling easy answers to keep people safe as civil unrest increases. Fascism seeks power for power's sake and total control over the populace, and always cruelty to the marginalised, the 'others'. How all the right wingers hand-wringing over the idea of 'socialist communisms!!1!' can't see that, I don't know. ..."
"... All over the world, failed neoliberalism is being replaced by right-wing populist nationalism & I don't think "repairing democratic institutions" is at the top of their to-do list. ..."
"... I'm certainly in favour of greater nationalisation, especially of essential services. But around the world, neo-liberalism has morphed into neo-fascism and this is where the next fight must be. ..."
"... In social systems, natural selection favours cooperation. In addition, we are biased toward ethical behaviours, so cooperation and sharing are valued in human societies. ..."
"... The consequences of four decades of financialized neoliberal trade policies were by no means equally shared. Internal and external class relations were made evident through narrowly distributed booms followed by widely distributed busts. ..."
"... No wonder you get fascist right wing insurgence in this climate! ..."
Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

CatPerson420 , 30 Oct 2018 23:18

Never forget that fascism is the natural defence mechanism of capital. After it is accrued, it must be defended. The current trend in global politics is not an anomaly but an entirely predictable outcome.

Neoliberal doctrine leads to skyrocketing inequality, a swelling in the desperate and forgotten poor who are vulnerable to populist messaging and the idea of a strongman peddling easy answers to keep people safe as civil unrest increases. Fascism seeks power for power's sake and total control over the populace, and always cruelty to the marginalised, the 'others'. How all the right wingers hand-wringing over the idea of 'socialist communisms!!1!' can't see that, I don't know.

It's too late for the US I fear, and time is rapidly running out for the UK if they don't pull their finger out and have another referendum before the self immolation of Brexit.

Rikyboy , 30 Oct 2018 23:07
All over the world, failed neoliberalism is being replaced by right-wing populist nationalism & I don't think "repairing democratic institutions" is at the top of their to-do list.

If Australia does swing the pendulum to the left, it, along with NZ, will be one of the few countries to do so. De-privatising will not be easy & will be met with a huge reactionary backlash. They'll need to tread very carefully if they want to stay in government.

jclucas , 30 Oct 2018 23:02
Neoliberalism may be dead but the neoliberals in the government will never admit it as they seamlessly transition to authoritarian nationalism with populist promises - and failure to deliver on them.

The neoliberal project was always a philosophical cover for crony capitalism that betrayed the public interest by rewarding vested interests for their patronage, perverted democracy, and served as a mechanism for perverting the natural function of an economy - to fairly distribute goods, resources, and services throughout society - to favor the welfare of the few over the many.

The self-interested culture of neoliberalism - the cult of the individual that denies the common good - pervades every aspect of Australia's life as a nation - business, politics, sport, education, and health - denying and crowding out public spirit, selfless service, and societal wellbeing.

For meaningful change to occur there must be a rebirth of the conception of the public good, and the virtue and necessity of acting to realise it.

However at this stage there is not a communal recognition of what the problem is let alone how to go about repairing it. For that to happen there must be a widely accepted narrative that naturally leads to the obvious actions that must be take to redress the damage done by the neoliberal con job: decreasing economic inequality, restoring democracy, and rebuilding a sense of common cause.

Piecemeal change will not be sufficient to enact the the sweeping transformation that has to occur in every department of life. It is not enough to tax multinationals, to have a federal integrity commission, to build a renewable future, or to move to proportional representation.

Someone, some party, some coherent philosophical perspective has to explain why it must be done.

BlueThird , 30 Oct 2018 22:57
It's certainly the case that the Liberal party, in particular, are now using ideas that fall outside and to the right of neo-liberalism, but it's also obviously the case that neo-liberalism and current Liberal thinking share the same underlying goal. Namely, the transfer of wealth and power towards a narrower and narrower group of people and corporations.

That suggests the death of neo-liberalism is coming about because – having done so much damage already – it's no longer capable of delivering the required results, and that we're moving into a new phase of the death spiral. I think that can also be seen in both the US (where Trump is using the identified problems of neo-liberalism to further the same basic agenda, but with less decorum and a larger cadre of useful idiots) and the UK (where there's still a very strong possibility that Brexit will be used as an excuse to roll back great swathes of social and democratic safeguards).

Perhaps even more worrying – given the latest reports on how we're destroying habitat as well as the climate, and how much of our biodiversity is in South America, particularly the Amazon – is that Brazil is how on a similar path.

The likelihood is that the Liberal party won't get away with what they have planned, but they – and the forces behind them – certainly won't stop trying. And unfortunately it's far from obvious that the Labor party will repudiate neo-liberalism anytime soon. That they signed up for the latest iteration of TPP is hardly a good omen.

Democratic re-engagement is the better way forward from neo-liberalism, but unfortunately I think it's unlikely to be the one that we end up taking.

All of that said, the deepest problem of all is the way in which democracy and government have been corrupted, often via the media, but typically at the behest of corporations, and if there is a way forward it has to be found in addressing those interactions

tolpuddler , 30 Oct 2018 22:28
I'm certainly in favour of greater nationalisation, especially of essential services. But around the world, neo-liberalism has morphed into neo-fascism and this is where the next fight must be.
slorter , 30 Oct 2018 22:19
Well we have had 3+ decades of the dogma!

In social systems, natural selection favours cooperation. In addition, we are biased toward ethical behaviours, so cooperation and sharing are valued in human societies.

But what happens when we are forced into an economic system that makes us compete at every level? The logical outcome is societal decline or collapse.

Perhaps the worst aspect of neoliberalism was its infection of the Labor party. This has left our social infrastructure alarmingly exposed.

The consequences of four decades of financialized neoliberal trade policies were by no means equally shared. Internal and external class relations were made evident through narrowly distributed booms followed by widely distributed busts.

Globally, debt has forced policy convergence between political parties of differing ideologies. European center-left parties have pushed austerity even when ideology would suggest the opposite.

No wonder you get fascist right wing insurgence in this climate!

Thank you Richard Denniss we need to highlight this more and more and start educating the dumbed down population saturated with neoliberal snake oil!

[Dec 09, 2018] Pax Americana: Pompeo tells UN, WTO, ICC to bow and comply with US-led world order

Notable quotes:
"... The senior member of the Donald Trump administration said a multilateral approach is failing to produce a world of unrestricted capitalism, so the US should rule supreme – sorry, assume a leadership role – to ensure that countries like China didn't try to offer an alternative way. ..."
"... The UN is a vehicle for regional powers to "collude" and vote in bad actors into the Human Rights Council. "Bad actors" are of course not Saudi Arabia. The World Bank and the International Monetary fund are in the way of private lenders. The EU is good, but Brexit should be a wake-up call for its bureaucracy, which doesn't know how good nationalism actually is. The International Criminal Court is "rogue" because it attempts to hold Americans accountable for crimes in Afghanistan. ..."
"... But what organization was a good boy and doesn't deserve a piece of coal from Uncle Sam? SWIFT was. The banking communications organization caved in to Washington and cut off Iranians from its system, so it has a place in the bright new world of US leadership. ..."
"... "new liberal order" ..."
Dec 09, 2018 | www.rt.com

The US will lead a new liberal world order, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo declared. Organizations and treaties not fitting this picture must be scrapped or reformed, so that non-compliers could not use them against America. The vision of the bold new and prosperous (for the US and its supporters) world was delivered by Pompeo in a keynote speech to the German Marshall Fund on Tuesday.

The senior member of the Donald Trump administration said a multilateral approach is failing to produce a world of unrestricted capitalism, so the US should rule supreme – sorry, assume a leadership role – to ensure that countries like China didn't try to offer an alternative way.

China, as well as Russia, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela and other nations on the US grudge list got their share of bashing in the speech, but its focus was more on international institutions, which Pompeo claimed to be incompatible with his grand vision.

The UN is a vehicle for regional powers to "collude" and vote in bad actors into the Human Rights Council. "Bad actors" are of course not Saudi Arabia. The World Bank and the International Monetary fund are in the way of private lenders. The EU is good, but Brexit should be a wake-up call for its bureaucracy, which doesn't know how good nationalism actually is. The International Criminal Court is "rogue" because it attempts to hold Americans accountable for crimes in Afghanistan.

Also on rt.com 'Surrealism': Iran blasts US claim its missile test violated UN resolution on nuclear deal

The Paris Agreement on climate change was bad for America, so it left. NAFTA was bad for America, so it forced a renegotiation. The nuclear deal with Iran didn't make Tehran complacent, so it had to go.

But what organization was a good boy and doesn't deserve a piece of coal from Uncle Sam? SWIFT was. The banking communications organization caved in to Washington and cut off Iranians from its system, so it has a place in the bright new world of US leadership.

Watch Murad Gazdiev's report about Pompeo's "new liberal order" to find out more.

[Dec 08, 2018] Postmodern Imperialism: Geopolitics and the Great Games

Highly recommended!
You can read online at epdf.tips
Dec 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Richard , Dec 7, 2018 2:50:07 PM | link

Came across this book which gives some excellent background to where we're at today:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Postmodern-Imperialism-Geopolitics-Great-Games/dp/098335393X

There may be a pdf available if you search.

"The game motif is useful as a metaphor for the broader rivalry between nations and economic systems with the rise of imperialism and the pursuit of world power. This game has gone through two major transformations since the days of Russian-British rivalry, with the rise first of Communism and then of Islam as world forces opposing imperialism. The main themes of Postmodern Imperialism: Geopolitics and the Great Games include:

This work brings these elements together in historical perspective with an understanding from the Arab/ Muslim world's point of view, as it is the main focus of all the "Great Games"."

Jay Dyer discusses the book here, its strengths and weaknesses:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcmrBD4Ez2c

[Dec 08, 2018] Postmodern Imperialism: Geopolitics and the Great Games

Highly recommended!
You can read online at epdf.tips
Dec 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Richard , Dec 7, 2018 2:50:07 PM | link

Came across this book which gives some excellent background to where we're at today:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Postmodern-Imperialism-Geopolitics-Great-Games/dp/098335393X

There may be a pdf available if you search.

"The game motif is useful as a metaphor for the broader rivalry between nations and economic systems with the rise of imperialism and the pursuit of world power. This game has gone through two major transformations since the days of Russian-British rivalry, with the rise first of Communism and then of Islam as world forces opposing imperialism. The main themes of Postmodern Imperialism: Geopolitics and the Great Games include:

This work brings these elements together in historical perspective with an understanding from the Arab/ Muslim world's point of view, as it is the main focus of all the "Great Games"."

Jay Dyer discusses the book here, its strengths and weaknesses:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcmrBD4Ez2c

[Dec 08, 2018] US Big Banks Are A Culture of Crime! TheTradingReport

Notable quotes:
"... L.A City Attorney Mike Feuer announced a $185 million settlement reached with Wells Fargo, after thousands of bank employees siphoned funds from their customers to open phony checking and savings accounts raking in millions in fraudulent fees. ..."
"... So where is the FBI? Where is the Department of Justice? How about California Attorney General Kamala Harris? Too busy campaigning for the Senate to notice? How about L.A. District Attorney Jackie Larry? ..."
"... Only City Attorney Mike Feuer took action, and he only has the authority to prosecute misdemeanors ..."
"... multi-billion dollar ..."
"... If the ancient Greek philosopher Diogenes were to go out with his lantern in search of an honest man today, a survey of Wall Street executives on workplace conduct suggests he might have to look elsewhere. ..."
"... A quarter of Wall Street executives see wrongdoing as a key to success, according to a survey by whistleblower law firm Labaton Sucharow released on Tuesday. ..."
"... In a survey of 500 senior executives in the United States and the UK ..."
"... , 26 percent of respondents said they had observed or had firsthand knowledge of wrongdoing in the workplace, while 24 percent said they believed financial services professionals may need to engage in unethical or illegal conduct to be successful ..."
"... fast-tracked for promotion ..."
Dec 08, 2018 | www.thetradingreport.com

Organized crime. This phrase is now a precise synonym for big-banking in the United States. These Big Banks commit big crimes; they commit small crimes. They cheat their own clients; they swindle outsiders. They break virtually every financial law on the books. What do all these crimes have in common? The Big Banks commit all these crimes again and again and again – with utter impunity.

These fraud factories commit their serial mega-crimes, year after year, because the Big Banks know that they will never, ever be punished. On rare occasions, their crimes have been so egregious that U.S. 'justice' officials could no longer pretend to be oblivious to them. In such cases, there was a token prosecution, there was a settlement where the law-breaking banks didn't even have to acknowledge their own criminality, and there was a microscopic fine – which didn't even force the felonious financial institutions to disgorge all of their profits from these crimes.

Criminal sanctions, by definition, are supposed to deter criminal conduct. The token prosecutions against U.S. Big Banks didn't deter Big Bank crime, they encouraged it. But even these wrist-slaps were becoming embarrassing for this crime syndicate, so they dealt with this problem. The Big Bank crime syndicate told its lackeys in the U.S. 'justice' department that they were not allowed to prosecute one of its tentacles, ever again.

The lackeys, as always, obeyed their Masters, and issued a new proclamation . The U.S. 'Justice' Department would never prosecute a U.S. Big Bank ever again – no matter what crimes it committed, no matter how large the crimes, no matter how many times the same Big Banks committed the same crimes. Complete, legal immunity; totally above the law. A literal culture of crime.

What happens when you create a culture of crime in (big) banking? Not only the banks break laws – with impunity – their bank employees do so as well. Case in point: Warren Buffett's favorite Big Bank – Wells Fargo. Wells Fargo employees came up with a good idea for boosting their salaries: stealing money directly out of the accounts of the bank's clients .

Consider how large this crime became, in just one of these tentacles of organized crime.

L.A City Attorney Mike Feuer announced a $185 million settlement reached with Wells Fargo, after thousands of bank employees siphoned funds from their customers to open phony checking and savings accounts raking in millions in fraudulent fees. [emphasis mine]

Thousands of bank employees stealing millions of dollars from bank customers, in tiny, little increments, again and again and again. But the story gets much worse. Why was a lowly city attorney involved with the prosecution of this organized crime?

So where is the FBI? Where is the Department of Justice? How about California Attorney General Kamala Harris? Too busy campaigning for the Senate to notice? How about L.A. District Attorney Jackie Larry?

Only City Attorney Mike Feuer took action, and he only has the authority to prosecute misdemeanors

There are only two ways in which the non-action of the U.S. pseudo-justice system can be explained:

Take your pick. The U.S. pseudo-justice system is used to seeing so many multi-billion dollar mega-crimes being committed by these fraud factories that the systemic crime at Wells Fargo (which was 'only' in the $millions) didn't even attract their attention. Or, the entire U.S. pseudo-justice system is completely bought-off and corrupt – and they refuse to prosecute Big Bank organized crime .

A culture of crime.

It gets still worse. Thousands of Wells Fargo employees stole millions of dollars, from countless clients. They were caught. But not even one banker was sent to jail. In a real justice system, systemic crime of this nature would/could only be prosecuted in one of three ways. Either every Wells Fargo criminal would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law (given the egregious nature of the crime), or Wells Fargo management would be prosecuted – because they would have/should have known about this crime-wave. Or else both.

Bankers stealing money, directly and brazenly, right out of customer accounts, but no one goes to jail? A culture of crime.

Understand that endemic, cultural changes of this nature don't originate at the bottom of the corporate ladder. They originate at the top. In the case of the Wall Street crime syndicate; we already know that their management personnel are criminals, because they have admitted to being criminals.

Many Wall Street executives says [sic] wrongdoing is necessary: survey

If the ancient Greek philosopher Diogenes were to go out with his lantern in search of an honest man today, a survey of Wall Street executives on workplace conduct suggests he might have to look elsewhere.

A quarter of Wall Street executives see wrongdoing as a key to success, according to a survey by whistleblower law firm Labaton Sucharow released on Tuesday.

In a survey of 500 senior executives in the United States and the UK [New York and London] , 26 percent of respondents said they had observed or had firsthand knowledge of wrongdoing in the workplace, while 24 percent said they believed financial services professionals may need to engage in unethical or illegal conduct to be successful [emphasis mine]

One-quarter of Big Bank management admitted that they "need" to commit crimes. A culture of crime. More needs to be said about the rampant, disgusting criminality among upper management in the Big Banks of the U.S. (and UK).

A known whistleblower was conducting a public survey, asking known criminals how many of them were engaging in criminal behavior. What percentage of respondents would lie when answering such a survey? Three-quarters sounds about right. One-quarter of Wall Street executives admitted that committing crimes was a way of life. The other three-quarters lied about their criminal acts.

Monkey see; monkey do. The lower level foot soldiers see their Bosses breaking laws, with impunity, on a daily basis. Their reaction, at Wells Fargo? "Me too."

Most if not all of the Wall Street fraud factories conduct detailed "personality testing" on their bank personnel. Are they looking to weed-out those with criminal (if not psychopathic) inclinations? Of course not. They conduct this personality testing to find which employees have no reservations about engaging in criminal conduct – so they can be fast-tracked for promotion .

There is no other way in which the systemic criminality of senior banking personnel can be reconciled with the detailed personality-testing in which they participated, in order to reach that level of management. The Wall Street fraud factories look for the most amoral criminals which they can find. And with the exorbitant, ludicrous "compensation" they award to these criminals for their systemic crimes, they end up with (literally) the best criminals that money can buy.

A culture of crime.

As a final note; the U.S. system of pretend-justice already has a powerful weapon in its arsenal to fight organized crime: the "RICO" act. This anti-racketeering statute was created for one, precise purpose: to not merely prosecute/punish organized crime, but to literally dismantle the crime infrastructure which supports the organized crime.

Not only does the statute confer strong (almost limitless) powers in gathering evidence of organized crime, it also permits mass seizures of assets – anything/everything connected to the organized crime of the entity(ies) in question. In the case of the Big Bank crime syndicate, where all of its operations are directly/indirectly tied into criminal operations of one form or another, if RICO was turned loose on these fraud factories, by the time the dust had settled there would be nothing left.

Oh yes. If the U.S. 'Justice' Department ever went "RICO" on U.S. Big Banks, lots and lots and lots of bankers would go to prison, for a very, long time.

[Dec 08, 2018] How False Testimony and a Massive U.S. Propaganda Machine Bolstered George H.W. Bush's War on Iraq - YouTube

Dec 05, 2018 | www.youtube.com

https://democracynow.org - As the media memorializes George H.W. Bush, we look at the lasting impact of his 1991 invasion of Iraq and the propaganda campaign that encouraged it. Although the Gulf War technically ended in February of 1991, the U.S. war on Iraq would continue for decades, first in the form of devastating sanctions and then in the 2003 invasion launched by George W. Bush. Thousands of U.S. troops and contractors remain in Iraq. A largely forgotten aspect of Bush Sr.'s war on Iraq is the vast domestic propaganda effort before the invasion began. We look at the way U.S. media facilitated the war on Iraq with journalist John "Rick" MacArthur, president and publisher of Harper's Magazine and the author of the book "Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda in the 1991 Gulf War."

Democracy Now! is an independent global news hour that airs weekdays on nearly 1,400 TV and radio stations Monday through Friday. Watch our livestream 8-9AM ET: https://democracynow.org

Please consider supporting independent media by making a donation to Democracy Now! today: https://democracynow.org/donate

[Dec 08, 2018] Former Ukrainian Deputy Aleksey Zhuravko The Order to Provoke Russia in the Kerch Strait Came From the US Embassy -ZO

Notable quotes:
"... Translated by Ollie Richardson & Angelina Siard ..."
"... Aleksey Zhuravko ..."
"... "we are dealing with this issue ..."
Dec 08, 2018 | www.stalkerzone.org

Translated by Ollie Richardson & Angelina Siard 19:45:09
05/12/2018 Aleksey Zhuravko


Dear friends!

FOR INFORMATION. EVERYONE SHOULD KNOW THIS! IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO HIDE THE TRUTH.

Today I had a conversation with a serious person from Kiev who is on active service. For safety reasons I cannot give its name. I trust this person. Many thanks that there are still decent people.

Here is what he told me. The special operation in the Black Sea made on November 25th in the Kerch Strait was prepared over three months by the American intelligence agencies and the SBU. All orders on carrying out a provocation in the Black Sea were given to Poroshenko by the US Embassy in Ukraine. And Poroshenko, in turn, personally gave the instructions to the performers. He consciously sent boats and young guys off to be shot, and members of the crew were equipped with a large number of cartridges and small arms, having being told that they must fire back to the last bullet. They were sent to a certain death for the purpose of carrying out a provocation.

There's more. Poroshenko gave the order to not hold any negotiations with Russia concerning returning sailors, and if the people will insist and kick up a storm around it, then drag out he negotiation process as much as possible. This order came from the US Embassy in Ukraine.

Dear parents of the aggrieved Ukrainian sailors detained by the border service of Russia! Your children were used by Poroshenko and his gang as cannon fodder, and you continue to be deceived. That 50,000 hryvnia that he promised you will end very quickly. He met you only to calm your anger, to appease you, like saying "we are dealing with this issue

... ... ...

[Dec 08, 2018] Our benighted nation has become a "Global" entity, which entails our young men and women being used as cannon fodder for Israel's designs

Dec 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

David Baker , says: December 4, 2018 at 9:40 pm GMT

Though I'm no friend of Michael Moore, he at least was candid about American "Judeo-Christian" adventures within foreign countries. America needs to pull in its horns, and stop fooling around with other governments.

Our benighted nation has become a "Global" entity, which entails our young men and women being used as cannon fodder for Israel's designs, in addition to furthering the campaign by Globalists to divvy up the world's resources and labor markets .

Our country is blessed with all the necessary raw materials, manufacturing capabilities, educated and motivated work forces and security to completely support our population, without the need to obtain staple supplies from foreign countries. Developing alternative energy sources should be a top priority, to free our people from the yoke of foreign oil cartels -- or the domestic variety, for that matter. Globalism has done little more than implement the enslavement of populations to mega-corporations, establishing a cabal of non-elected, inviolable potentates who wield tremendous power over our leaders to do their bidding.

[Dec 08, 2018] The zionized MIC and the "biased" truth about Russia's stance towards the West

Dec 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Anya , Dec 6, 2018 11:32:15 AM | link

The zionized MIC and the "biased" truth about Russia's stance towards the West:
http://thesaker.is/why-russia-wont-invade-the-ukraine-the-baltic-statelets-or-anybody-else/

"Today, just like in 1911, Russia needs internal and external peace more than anything else, and that is not what she would get if she got involved in some foreign military adventure! In fact, attacking an alliance which includes three nuclear power would be suicidal, and the Russians are anything but suicidal."

The zionized MIC has been prevailing because of money. The uncounted and unaccountable money: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/50711.htm

The practice of DoD "violates Article I Section 9 of the US Constitution, which stipulates that, "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time." ... The status quo has been generating ever-higher DoD budgets for decades...

The losers in this situation are everyone else. The Pentagon's accounting fraud diverts many billions of dollars that could be devoted to other national needs: health care, education, job creation, climate action, infrastructure modernization, and more. Indeed, the Pentagon's accounting fraud amounts to theft on a grand scale -- theft not only from America's taxpayers, but also from the nation's well-being and its future."

[Dec 08, 2018] Putin wants to normalize relations with the west but, inexplicably, he provokes and alienates the West just prior to every scheduled meeting with Trump. These events only makes sense if the provocations are coming from agents in the West who wish to derail any rapprochement between the US and Russia

Dec 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

Mike from Jersey , says: December 4, 2018 at 6:21 pm GMT

Good article. You wrote:

There also has to be some consideration the encounter with the Russians on the Kerch Strait was contrived by Poroshenko with the assistance of a gaggle of American neoconservative and Israeli advisers who have been actively engaged with the Ukrainian government for the past several years. The timing was good for Poroshenko for his own domestic political reasons but it was also an opportunity for the neocons warmongers that surround Trump and proliferate inside the Beltway to scuttle any possible meeting between a vulnerable Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin at the G20 gathering in Argentina.

I came to the exact same conclusion.

Putin wants to normalize relations with the west but, inexplicably, he provokes and alienates the West just prior to every scheduled meeting with Trump. Of course, that doesn't make any sense. These events only makes sense if the provocations are coming from agents in the West who wish to derail any rapprochement between the US and Russia. Then it makes sense.

If this is true (as it appears to be) one can reasonably predict that any time Trump and Putin are about to meet, that a Skripal/Ukraine or other Russia-is-evil event will be staged to derail the meeting.

Let's watch in 2019 and see if this prediction comes true.

If it does, we will know that someone, behind the scenes, is staging these events.

APilgrim , says: December 5, 2018 at 4:42 am GMT
The ongoing campaign to vilify Vladimir Putin & the Russian Federation, is a complete failure, with conservatives, evangelicals, and republicans.

The globalists continue to waste their time & our money, with this shit.

JLK , says: December 5, 2018 at 5:09 am GMT
@APilgrim

The ongoing campaign to vilify Vladimir Putin & the Russian Federation, is a complete failure, with conservatives, evangelicals, and republicans.

I'll keep an open mind until Mueller's report is released, but Cohen's connections are allegedly with the mainly Jewish Russian mob. It is unclear what their agenda may have been, but Trump has been a lot nicer to Israel than to Russia.

[Dec 08, 2018] Anyone who knows anything about history is that the rich were always better off than the poor, in fact the very definition of rich and poor. In this respect it never mattered if a society was capitalistic, communistic, or a theocracy,

Notable quotes:
"... Capitalism never was benign, Chrustjow worked as a miner in a commercially exploited mine, where there was little regard for safety, he abhorred capitalism. ..."
Dec 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

jilles dykstra , says: December 4, 2018 at 12:30 pm GMT

@Bill Jones Interesting to read how these idealists agree with Christian Gerondeau, 'Le CO2 est bon pour la planete, Climat, la grande manipulation', Paris 2017

Gerondeau explains how many deaths reducing CO2 emissions will cause in poor countries, simply as an example how electricity for cooking will remain too expensive for them, so cooking is done on smoky fires in confined spaces.

" to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history." " To intentionally impoverish the world. To what end, I wonder ?

Anyone who knows anything about history is that the rich were always better off than the poor, in fact the very definition of rich and poor.
In this respect it never mattered if a society was capitalistic, communistic, or a theocracy, as Tibet was.

These idealistic idiots do not understand how they created the problem they now intend to solve with creating an even bigger problem, their example is the EU, the EU is following this policy for more than twelve years now, since 2005, when the EU grabbed power through the rejected EU 'consitution'.

Capitalism is no more than deciding between consumption and investment, Robinson Crusoë invested in a fishing net by temporarily reducing consumption, he did not go fishing, but made a fishing net, expecting that his investment would make it possible to eat more fish.

Capitalism never was benign, Chrustjow worked as a miner in a commercially exploited mine, where there was little regard for safety, he abhorred capitalism.

Dutch 17th century capitalistic commerce to the far Indies, east and west, was not benign. Typically a ship left Amsterdam, near the Schreierstoren, trans 'the tower for the crying', wives, mothers and girl friends, with 300 men aboard, and returned with 100. Most of those who died were common sailors, captain and officers had a far lower mortality, mainly better food.

Our East Indies commerce also was not much fun for the people in the East, in the Banda Sea Islands massacre some 30.000 people were killed, for a monopoly on pepper, if I remember correctly.

But, as the earth developed economically, there came room for also poor people getting lives beginning to look as worth living. Engels in 1844, hope the year is right, described the conditions of working people in GB, this resulted in Das Kapital.

This room for a better life for also the poor was not given by the capitalistic system

In their struggle for a better world for anyone the idealists wanted globalisation, level playing field, anyone should be welcome anywhere, slogans like this.
Globaliation, however, is the end of the nation state, the very institution in which it was possible to provide a better life. Anyone following me until here now can see the dilemma, the end of the nation state was also the end of protection by that state against unbridled capitalism.

As the idealists cannot give up their globalisation religion they must, as those who cannot give up the biblical creation story, find an ideological way out of their dilemma. My conclusion now is 'in order to save our globalisation religion we try to destroy economic growth, by making energy very expensive, in the hope of destroying capitalism'.

Alas, better, luckily, capitalism cannot be destroyed, those who invented the first furnaces for more or less mass producing iron, they were capitalists. They saw clearly how cheap iron would bring economic growth, the plow.

In the country where the CO2 madness has struck most, my country, the Netherlands, the realisation of the poverty that drastically reducing CO2 emissions will cause, has begun. If there really is madness, I wonder.

I indeed see madness, green leftists unable to make a simple multipiclation calculations about costs, but maybe mainly political opportunism. Our dictator, Rutte, is now so hated that he needs a job outside the Netherlands, in order to qualify, either at Brussels or in New York, with the UN, has to howl with the wolves.

At the same time, we have a gas production problem,, earthquakes in the NE, houses damaged, never any decision made to solve the problem, either stop gas production, or strenghten the houses, both expensive solutions.

So, in my suspicious ideas, Rutte now tries to improve himself, at the same time solving a problem: within, say ten years, the Netherlands functions without gas, and remains prosperous; the idea he tries to sell to us. In a few years time it will emerge that we cannot have both, prosperous, and zero emission, but the time horizon for a politician is said to be five years.

[Dec 08, 2018] Israel is one undeniably large factor behind spending surges since 2005.

Dec 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

anon [228] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 7:18 pm GMT

Israel is one undeniably large factor behind spending surges since 2005. Israel successfully demanded enormous increases in joint U.S.-Israeli cyber warfare expenditures and benefited from related U.S. contingency planning. Due to onerous secrecy, Americans remain unable to engage in informed public debate about whether what amounts to US subjugation to the Israeli prerogatives driving these massive expenditures should continue.

The US increased spending on the National Intelligence Program by 9 percent in fiscal year 2018 to $59.4 billion. The Military Intelligence Program surged 20 percent to $22.1 billion. NIP plus MIP beat the year 2005 expenditure record totaling $81.5 billion for fiscal year 2018.

The development of secret offensive cyber warfare programs targeting Iran are included in MIP and NIP budgets. According to the 2016 documentary Zero Days by director Alex Gibney, Israel's incessant public threats to attack Iran coupled with intense secret demands for cyber warfare targeting Iran were the catalyst for massive new US black budget spending.

Former NSA Director (1999-2005) and CIA Director (2006-2009) Michael Hayden claimed in Zero Days that the goal of any Israeli air attack against Iran's nuclear facilities would be to drag the United States into war.

by Grant Smith Posted on November 07, 2018 He is director of the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy in Washington, D.C.

Jon Baptist , says: December 4, 2018 at 10:38 pm GMT
There is very little spoken of the foreign threat of the Chabad network. It must be serious opposition if even the CFR "globalists" write about it. ( https://www.theglobalist.com/donald-trump-benjamin-netanyahu-democracy-corruption/ ) When I say threat, I mean global nuclear war, mass starvation, and disease. Chabad is the link binding Trump and Putin advisors. Do you think anyone belonging in this protected "religion" holds any sort of good will for the regular common folk inhabiting the world?
Art , says: December 5, 2018 at 12:59 am GMT
@Art

What chance does peace have with these people having Trump's ear: Javanka Kushner, Gina Haspel, Nikki Haley, Mike Pompeo, Mike Pence, Mad Dog Mattis, and John Bolton?

Doesn't look good does it!

West Point says NO to Peace!

The warmongering bastard and West Point grad (first in class) -- Pompeo -- says NO peace for Yemeni! Trump says wars are for Israel.

West Point is Jew occupied territory. All US Army generals are pro Israel.

US to keep aiding Saudis in Yemen despite furor: Pompeo

Buenos Aires (AFP) -- Secretary of State Mike Pompeo vowed Saturday that the United States would continue suppor ting Saudi Arabia's military campaign in Yemen, despite rising outrage over the kingdom.

Speaking from a Group of 20 summit in Buenos Aires, Pompeo acknowledged that the humanitarian crisis in Yemen -- where millions are at risk of starvation -- had reached "epic proportions" but said Washington and Riyadh were offering aid.

"The program that we're involved in today we intend to continue," Pompeo told CNN when asked about military assistance to the Saudi-led coalition.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-keep-aiding-saudis-yemen-despite-furor-pompeo-173323301.html

Think Peace -- Do No Harm -- Art

p.s. Pompeo defends MBS -- what human trash!

Art , says: December 5, 2018 at 5:15 am GMT
@JLK

All US Army generals are pro Israel

I suspect not, but they answer to politicians. Ditto the CIA.

I suspect not also -- but only privately and in secret, would they be anti-Israel. If they keep their mouth shut, they will have a six figure job waiting for them in the J-MIC. Hmm -- so much for the flag. Think Peace -- Do No Harm -- Art

ChuckOrloski , says: December 5, 2018 at 1:47 pm GMT
Fyi, The AIPAC Starship strikes back, and excluded Senator Rand Paul from meeting with Gina Haspel on the Kashoggi murder.

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/dec/4/rand-paul-rips-deep-state-for-freezing-him-out-of-/

anon [415] Disclaimer , says: December 5, 2018 at 3:01 pm GMT
"The AIPAC Starship strikes back, and excluded Senator Rand Paul from meeting with Gina Haspel on the Kashoggi murder."

Could it not be more clear that Mossad runs our government? Didn't the military swear oaths to protect the US from enemies foreign AND domestic? Oh, and I've given up on Trump. He's an Israel-worshiping ineffective

Anon [340] Disclaimer , says: December 5, 2018 at 3:33 pm GMT
What foreign threats indeed. Out biggest threats come from our own government:

"The new version clarifies that people cannot face jail time for participating in a boycott, but the ACLU has argued that it still leaves the door open for criminal financial penalties."

https://theintercept.com/2018/12/04/israel-anti-boycott-act-lame-duck/

But yet these clowns will do next to nothing to stop illegal seizures of white farms in South Africa. Our treasonous government busy working to strip away our freedoms. Don't think they won't use this precedent to outlaw other types of "hate speech." And brought to you by the republican party.

anon [309] Disclaimer , says: December 5, 2018 at 3:57 pm GMT
@anon As AIPAC and WINEP demanded in 2003, the office as initially led by Undersecretary of Treasury Stuart Levey, who worked in unusually close coordination with the Israeli government. Levey's Harvard thesis (PDF) was about how Israel lobbying organizations could become more effective by staying beneath the radar of public scrutiny and distancing themselves from the notoriety generated by the illicit activities of such ideological fellow travelers as the Jewish Defense League. https://original.antiwar.com/smith-grant/2018/08/29/treasury-sanctions-foreigners-for-israel
anon [309] Disclaimer , says: December 5, 2018 at 4:21 pm GMT
A few years ago, I had the temerity to write to David McCullough, the biographer of Harry Truman, to tell him I thought he was wrong about an aspect of Truman's character.

McCullough was nice enough to write back. He said he thought Truman had not been malicious but had simply lacked understanding, and in a revealing remark, he acknowledged that Truman "just didn't know enough about [the Palestinians] and their situation" -- which he said, quite accurately, is still true of most Americans. "The great shame," he wrote, "is that a reasonable discussion of the subject remains so difficult to achieve in any public way."

Which brings me to my point: Reasonable discussion of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and particularly of the Palestinian perspective, has always been "so difficult to achieve in any public way," and since the days of Woodrow Wilson .

https://www.counterpunch.org/2002/07/15/the-history-of-anti-palestinian-bias-from-wilson-to-bush/ by BILL CHRISTISON -- KATHLEEN CHRISTIAN

Prevent any discussion , don't expose,don't talk,don't report and when alluded to the issue by someone call it HATE SPEECH or CONSPIRACY THEORY .

Art , says: December 5, 2018 at 9:22 pm GMT
@ChuckOrloski

Fyi, The AIPAC Starship strikes back, and excluded Senator Rand Paul from meeting with Gina Haspel on the Kashoggi murder.

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/dec/4/rand-paul-rips-deep-state-for-freezing-him-out-of-/

From the article: Tuesday's briefing on Khashoggi's killing was limited to a small group of lawmakers, including those of the Senate's Armed Services Committee, Intelligence Committee, and Foreign Relations Committee.

Chuck,

These oversite committees are a joke!

Those committees are cheer leaders for those agencies. Those senators are hand picked to support the Jew Security State.

We can be sure that they work to hide what those agencies are doing from We the People.

Think Peace -- Do No Harm -- Art

[Dec 08, 2018] The British, most directly, and then the US Brennan-Hayden (ok, he is no longer operational) CIA-Deep State are launching myriad ops to wedge Trump in (Khashoggi, current CentCom terror ops in Syria, and Ukraine now).

Notable quotes:
"... The British, most directly, and then the US Brennan-Hayden (ok, he is no longer operational) CIA-Deep State are launching myriad ops to wedge Trump in (Khashoggi, current CentCom terror ops in Syria, and Ukraine now). ..."
"... Ukrainian and British officials all agreed that a safe and secure Ukraine is necessary for the safety and security of Europe. The time for talk from Ukraine's so-called allies is long over. It's time to act." -- The article is otherwise full of juicy nonsense: I highly recommend it. ..."
Dec 08, 2018 | thesaker.is

GeorgeG on November 28, 2018 , · at 11:27 am EST/EDT

Short overview as it looks from my current perch: Piggy Poro will go down in history , way down, that's for sure.

1. The British, most directly, and then the US Brennan-Hayden (ok, he is no longer operational) CIA-Deep State are launching myriad ops to wedge Trump in (Khashoggi, current CentCom terror ops in Syria, and Ukraine now). If the Trump-Putin meeting a G20 falls through, it would not necessarily be a definitive signal; if it does not fall through, that would be a definitive signal. Yes, MI-6 and the US cohorts are anxious about the "declassification" of FISA and other documents, both because of Russiagate as well as the definitive disenfranchisment it entails. That makes the timing of Piggy's Kerch fiasco important.

2. At the moment, the European or NATO response is not what the British or CIA expected or wanted.

a. Yesterday Ursula von der Leyen, German Defense Minster, spoke at a security conference covered by Sputnik (German): "Russia has Europe in check" was the headline, "check" as in chess, which in a chess game sometimes means not just a single check, but chasing the opponent with "checks" over the board until finally declaring "checkmate."

b. https://www.kyivpost.com/article/opinion/op-ed/jack-laurenson-in-this-dark-hour-where-are-ukraines-allies.html?cn-reloaded=1 In this dark hour, where are Ukraine's allies?, "The Kremlin wants to know how much it can get away with. If the response so far, in the last day or so, is a measure of that, then Moscow will likely feel emboldened to push even further. There is still time for NATO and the West to respond, but the question on everyone's lips is how and whether the political will and strength to do so exists." The end: "At Ukrainian Week in London this October, Ukrainian and British officials all agreed that a safe and secure Ukraine is necessary for the safety and security of Europe. The time for talk from Ukraine's so-called allies is long over. It's time to act." -- The article is otherwise full of juicy nonsense: I highly recommend it.

c. https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-russia-putin-is-in-control/ 'Putin is in control' Europe stands by as Russian president goes after Ukraine. "BERLIN -- Chalk another one up for Vlad." "To be perfectly honest, we don't have many options," a senior European official said. "We don't want to risk war, but Putin is already waging one. That makes us look weak." Given Europe's dearth of options, its leaders revert to hackneyed pronouncements about the importance of dialogue and, as German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas put it, "de-escalation on both sides."

d. https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/11/27/ukraines-new-front-is-europes-big-challenge/ Ukraine's New Front Is Europe's Big Challenge -- There's plenty Europe should do to push back against Russia's latest attack on Ukraine.
There's plenty Europe should do to push back against Russia's latest attack on Ukraine. By Carl Bildt, Nicu Popescu. -- Juicy nonsense galore, a plea sent into the winds.

e. http://time.com/5463988/russia-ukraine-trump-putin-g20/?utm_source=RC+Defense+Morning+Recon&utm_campaign=1f01df16ac-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_11_27_07_09&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_694f73a8dc-1f01df16ac-85033789 President Trump Could Help Stop a War Between Russia and Ukraine -- But Only If He Will Stand Up to Putin -- Admiral Stavridis (Ret.) was the 16th Supreme Allied Commander at NATO and is an Operating Executive at The Carlyle Group. "

f. https://www.afpc.org/publications/articles/why-is-the-sea-of-azov-so-important -- Atlantidc Council -- Stephen Blank -- Why Is the Sea of Azov So Important? "Moreover, even a casual examination of Russian actions reveals the deep and continuing parallels with China's equally illegitimate actions in the South and East China Sea. In the Asian case, the United States has mounted and continues to stage numerous Freedom of Navigation Operations to demonstrate to China that it will uphold the time-honored principle of the freedom of the seas. This principle is no less at stake in the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov. Ideally, NATO, at Kyiv's invitation, should send a fleet to Mariupol to shatter the pretense of Russian sovereignty and show Putin that the invasion of Ukraine has brought NATO into Ukraine. This is precisely the outcome Russia aimed to avert."

And that is what, at the moment, "NATO" of "the Europeans" apparently do not want. Send a fleet to Mariupol? -- Ask the Germans: they have a few speed boats that might not get stuck.

Poroshenko seems to be on the way to demonstrating that NATO is irrelevant.

[Dec 07, 2018] Theresa May's Husband's Capital Group Is Largest Shareholder in BAE

Dec 07, 2018 | www.unz.com

Anon [144] Disclaimer , says: December 7, 2018 at 3:23 am GMT

Theresa May's Husband's Capital Group Is Largest Shareholder in BAE

Philip May's Capital Group owned around 7.09% of Lockheed Martin

Theresa May's Husband's Investment Firm Made a "Financial Killing" from the Bombing of Syria

https://www.globalresearch.ca/disgusting-conflict-of-interest-theresa-mays-husbands-investment-firm-made-a-financial-killing-from-the-bombing-of-syria/5636632


The Brits recently landed in Mexico. Will they use the Mercosur-EU FTAS to secretly continue to hold the grip on Europe? Will they install additional military bases in MAKEDONIA, ALBANIA, KOSOVA the heroin-smuggling human trafficking FAKE US state, BULGARIA, to finish the AMBO pipeline from IRAQ to GREECE?

City of London
Parasites' Paradise (Or the Best Criminal Sanctuary Money Can Buy)

From: Newsbud.com

"with multi-billion pound drug, arms, people smuggling and sex-slave cartels. The "Brits" specialize in laundering funds from the Mexican, Colombian, Peruvian, Russian, Polish, Czech, Nigerian narco-kings. Albanian white slavers have their 'private bankers' at prestigious City banks with a preference for graduates of the London School of Economics. Bi-lingual Greek kleptocrats, lifelong billion dollar tax evaders, fleeing from their pillaged homeland have their favorite real estate brokers, who never engage in any sort of naughty 'due diligence' which might uncover improper tax returns. The City Boys with verve and positive initiative, aided and abetted by the hyper-kinetic "Tony" Blair's open door policy to swindlers and saints of all colors and creeds, welcomed each and every Russian gangster-oligarch-democrat, especially those who paid cash for multi-pound 'Olde English' landmark estates'.

MONSTERS:

Miro23 , says: December 7, 2018 at 3:45 am GMT
@JLK naling of open frontiers and multiculturalism among the educated (indoctrinated).

For example, it's still completely unacceptable in middle class British society to support Nationalism (you're a Nazi) or Anglo racial identity (other races are welcome to their identities – but if you're and Anglo you're a racist).

It will eventually be resolved by the people who don't care (the working class), who will toss out their elite and their "educated" middle class collaborators – in fact it's already happening with Brexit – check out the Daily Mail comments section.

[Dec 06, 2018] Tom Kirkman

Notable quotes:
"... The psychological reason behind this trick has to do with "pattern recognition". Human beings – through evolution – have learned to identify a phenomenon as real and true because it repeats again and again and again ..."
"... The American knee-jerk reaction to the recent Kerch bridge incident is a case in point. Ignoring facts, people automatically placed Russian behavior in the "aggressive" category because they have been programed by constant repetition for many years to think this way. Not having been taught this trick of the mind even educated people buy into the narrative unaware that their schemata dictate that the belief must be reinforced. All experiences regarding Russia are simply put into one box labeled "aggressive behavior". ..."
"... Another psychological cause of why Americans buy into the "Russia is aggressive" narrative is due to "confirmation bias". For a variety of reasons many Americans demonize Russians. Part of this is due to the fact that people actually enjoy having a "bad guy" to hate. This is why outlaw cowboys and mafia gangsters are so popular in American culture. We love our "anti-heroes" as much if not more than our heroes. Putin, of course, is the prototypical "baddie". He's a real-life Boris from the Bullwinkle cartoon who satisfies our need to boo and hiss the proverbial bad guy. ..."
Dec 04, 2018 | community.oilprice.com

Tom Kirkman

Normally I don't quote entire articles, but this is a Panic Service Announcement (and a gentle ribbing).

My comment at the bottom, after the article.

The Psychological Origins of American Russophobia

The main reason so many Americans buy into the anti-Russian craze is not only due to what people are told by the government and media, but by how they think and process information. For if Americans were taught how to analyze and think properly they would not fall for the blatant propaganda.

For example, we are told that the Nazis discovered the secret of repetition as a means of programming people into believing something to be true, but we are not taught why this practice is so effective.

The psychological reason behind this trick has to do with "pattern recognition". Human beings – through evolution – have learned to identify a phenomenon as real and true because it repeats again and again and again. After a while, the mind interprets this consistent pattern as proof of truth value. In psychological terms, "schemata" are created by a layering of memories similar in nature over time so that all events associated with the phenomenon are perceived through a prism of previous repetitions. In other words, even if a certain type of behavior is different from the norm it will still be identified as belonging to the typical pattern regardless. It is literally a trick of the mind.

The American knee-jerk reaction to the recent Kerch bridge incident is a case in point. Ignoring facts, people automatically placed Russian behavior in the "aggressive" category because they have been programed by constant repetition for many years to think this way. Not having been taught this trick of the mind even educated people buy into the narrative unaware that their schemata dictate that the belief must be reinforced. All experiences regarding Russia are simply put into one box labeled "aggressive behavior".

Another psychological cause of why Americans buy into the "Russia is aggressive" narrative is due to "confirmation bias". For a variety of reasons many Americans demonize Russians. Part of this is due to the fact that people actually enjoy having a "bad guy" to hate. This is why outlaw cowboys and mafia gangsters are so popular in American culture. We love our "anti-heroes" as much if not more than our heroes. Putin, of course, is the prototypical "baddie". He's a real-life Boris from the Bullwinkle cartoon who satisfies our need to boo and hiss the proverbial bad guy.

To a certain extent, pattern recognition comes into play as well because in America TV shows and films over the past two decades evil Russian spies and mafia types have figured prominently. The repeating portrayals create schemata which then create stereotypes that frame how we think.

Russophobia, however, will not last forever because it is essentially based upon lies. Truth always wins out over time and fantasy gives way to reality. Despite the censorship on social media and the attempts to silence RT America the truth will eventually triumph.

For gagging the tongue of truth is always followed by a long-suppressed shout that echoes ever louder throughout the ages.

===============================

My comment:

The most basic form of mind control is repetition.
The most basic form of mind control is repetition.
The most basic form of mind control is repetition.
... ... ...
The most basic form of mind control is repetition.

Marina Schwarz
Well, Dr. Paul Whatshisname is obviously an agent of Putin. Did I even need to say this?

On a serious note, repetition works perhaps shockingly well. I was taught in my childhood that Germans are bad because Hitler and Russia was good because twice saviors. Simple and effective. However, with no social media at the time, critical thinking was also available so I could outgrow the propaganda.

A/Plague

... ... ...

Are you on a salary in "Russia Today" or a volunteer?

Tom Kirkman
On 12/5/2018 at 10:29 AM, A/Plague said: Are you on a salary in "Russia Today" or a volunteer?

I try to gently (and if possible, humorously) nudge people to question the "official narrative". CNN / WaPo is far worse propaganda than RT. RT is clearly biased, but they are open about their pro-Russia bias. CNN pretends to be objective "journalism".

And sometimes I feel like commenting in the same vein of this little guy, bouncing all over excitedly:

https://twitter.com/i/status/945219733464469504

Marina Schwarz
By the way, did you know RT was nominated for an Emmy this year? It actually has a few nominations. Shocking, right? I suspect a lot of the people who say "Ew, RT, propaganda," have never read anything from RT. I have. they regularly republish Reuters and the FT as well as major U.s. outlets. I don't know what to think about that, it's so confusing.
Tom Kirkman
16 hours ago, Marina Schwarz said: By the way, did you know RT was nominated for an Emmy this year? It actually has a few nominations. Shocking, right? I suspect a lot of the people who say "Ew, RT, propaganda," have never read anything from RT. I have. they regularly republish Reuters and the FT as well as major U.s. outlets. I don't know what to think about that, it's so confusing.

https://www.rt.com/about-us/

Dan Warnick
16 hours ago, Marina Schwarz said: By the way, did you know RT was nominated for an Emmy this year? It actually has a few nominations. Shocking, right? I suspect a lot of the people who say "Ew, RT, propaganda," have never read anything from RT. I have. they regularly republish Reuters and the FT as well as major U.s. outlets. I don't know what to think about that, it's so confusing.

When I read their articles I am mindful that they are Russian. Having said that, they seem to publish a lot of good content, and much of it is from Reuters and other (mostly) reputable sources. Editorials are free for anyone to research for themselves. Pretty much the same as other pubs.

Rodent
Laying conspiracy theories aside for one moment (and I do so love a good conspiracy theory), let's chat about this Russia panic.

I am not one to panic in general. Sure, I have a food, guns, and water stash in my basement. I'm generally well prepared. There are Russia-is-the-boogeyman theories, and then there are Russia-boogey-man-theories-are-silly theories. Of course they both can't be right.

But where do these theories come from?

I am sure I'm not going to do a very good job explaining my self in the rant that follows. But I'm going to give it a good college try.

I want to talk about the Russia Boogeyman theory. First, there's no way to explain this other than to divulge my age. So I'm just going to spit it out right here and get that out of the way. I'm 40. I've been 40 for approximately 5 years, stubbornly refusing to go further than that. There. I said it. Now that that's out of the way, it's important to note that children are sponges. As such, they are impressionable and in young childhood, traumatic events can have a profound and lasting effect, and even change how someone thinks.

When I was about 10ish, in about 1983, a movie came out. If you lived in America, and likely even if you didn't, and you're over the age of 40 (or if you've been 40 for a while), you've seen it. It's a movie called "The Day After". It was a huge production and it aired on television. The most watched TV movie ever. And ranked as one of the top 10 movies ever by several sources. You millennial whippersnappers will have no clue what I'm talking about. Read on anyway, if you'd like. I'm all inclusive.

The movie was about nuclear warfare, and most importantly, the aftermath. The setting was a small town in Kansas, I think. A small town that very closely resembled my home town, making it particularly impactful (I know that's not a word. Sue me.) to me at the time. In the movie, which although was a complete work of fiction was very realistic, Russia unleashed nuclear weapons. It was freaky. So eerily unsettling was it that I obsessed about it after I saw it. I thought about it every night. I remember being so afraid that in the event of a nuclear blast, I might be separated from my family. I remember pondering if I would rather be obliterated in the blast immediately, or whether I would prefer to be spared instant death only to survive without my family under horrid conditions. I also remember drills at school around that same time that were designed to get people prepared in the event of such a disaster. While it may have done so, it also solidified in my mind that there was a real possibility these events would unfold.

Nearly two years post-freaky-movie, Sting released it's "Russia" song, about Russians loving their children too. Although it was not talked about much at the time, since life proceeded as normal, in my mind I remember thinking that I didn't much care if the Russians loved their children, because they were looking to wipe us off the map. And I lived near the Soo Locks, and I distinctly remember knowing (but I don't have any idea where I came by this information) that the Locks would be a nuclear target in the event of a strike, since it is a main thoroughfare for ships.

You can't undo that kind of fear, no more than you can undo my fear of spiders. I know in my head that spiders, at least where I live, are not poisonous and they cannot harm me. I know it. But my head cannot eradicate the intense creepiness that even thinking about spiders conjures up. Likewise, no rational thought about Russia can completely undo a fear that was borne as a child.

There you have it. My Russia hysteria may be founded or unfounded--I know not. But I do not have the power within me to change this mindset.

Okay Russia-boogeyman-theories-are-silly promoters: fire away.

@Tom Kirkman @Marina Schwarz

Dan Warnick
Great description of what life was like back then, er, so I was told, by older people. Not those of us born in the 60's, er, I mean the 70's, er, the 80's. Yeah, that's it, the 80's!
Marina Schwarz
We had attack training at school in the 80s -- complete with gas masks and stuff -- on the other side of the Iron Curtain for when the imperialists invaded, what can I say. I was too distracted by everything to pay attention, though. @Rodent , your story tells me your propaganda was better than our propaganda, perish the thought. The Cold War was a blast, right?

P.S. Stephen King has done a really good overview of this stage in the U.S. entertainment industry, by the way. The stages of horror in movies. behind the curtain we only had heroic movies about the Second World War. I shall now hypothesize that the Soviet bloc lost the Cold War because its entertainment industry was absent. End of hypothesizing. Thank you for your attention.

Rodent
8 hours ago, Marina Schwarz said: We had attack training at school in the 80s -- complete with gas masks and stuff -- on the other side of the Iron Curtain for when the imperialists invaded, what can I say. I was too distracted by everything to pay attention, though. @Rodent , your story tells me your propaganda was better than our propaganda, perish the thought. The Cold War was a blast, right?

P.S. Stephen King has done a really good overview of this stage in the U.S. entertainment industry, by the way. The stages of horror in movies. behind the curtain we only had heroic movies about the Second World War. I shall now hypothesize that the Soviet bloc lost the Cold War because its entertainment industry was absent. End of hypothesizing. Thank you for your attention.

Makes sense. Not surprisingly the movie makers (supposedly) did not want to have Russia be the first striker in the movie, but they needed to borrow some footage from the DoD, and the govt. refused to play ball unless Russia struck first. The guy who made the movie, while he was making it, reportedly would go home at night literally sick to his stomach at the horrific nature of the movie. It went rounds and rounds with the censors who thought it might not be suitable for families.

Also interesting, speaking of Russia-led propaganda, and coming from someone who has dabbled a tiny bit in white-hatishness, if you google "The Day After Russia" as I did to inquire about the movie, there is actually a Russian movie titled "the day after" about zombies. Yup, let's just bury those search results! It's a conspiracy!!!

There is another interesting thread here about the different search results showing up for different people. What shows up when YOU google "The Day After"?

Rodent
You know, speaking of conspiracies, there is a fairly logical opinion that that movie was designed to scare the bajeezus out of people so they wouldn't vote for Reagan a second term.

[Dec 05, 2018] Beleaguered British Prime Minister Theresa May is wailing loudly against a Trump threat to reveal classified documents relating to Russiagate by Philip Giraldi

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Rather, they seem to appear to reveal a plot by the British intelligence and security services working in collusion with then CIA Director John Brennan to subvert the course of the 2016 election in favor of the Deep State and Establishment favorite Hillary Clinton. How did that one work out? ..."
Dec 05, 2018 | www.unz.com
121 Comments Reply

And there are other friends in unlikely places. Beleaguered British Prime Minister Theresa May is wailing loudly against a Trump threat to reveal classified documents relating to Russiagate. The real problem is that the documents apparently don't expose anything done by the Russians.

Rather, they seem to appear to reveal a plot by the British intelligence and security services working in collusion with then CIA Director John Brennan to subvert the course of the 2016 election in favor of the Deep State and Establishment favorite Hillary Clinton. How did that one work out?

So how about it? Teenagers who get in trouble often have to ditch their bad friends to turn their lives around. There is still a chance for the United States if we keep our distance from the bad friends we have been nurturing all around the world, friends who have been convincing us to make poor choices. Get rid of the ties the bind to the Saudis, Israelis, Ukrainians, Poles, and yes, even the British. Deal fairly with all nations and treat everyone the same, but bear in mind that there are only two relationships that really matter – Russia and China. Make a serious effort to avoid a war by learning how to get along with those two nations and America might actually survive to celebrate a tricentennial in 2076.

The Alarmist , says: December 4, 2018 at 10:39 am GMT
You don't say; British Collusion to influence the 2016 US Presidential elections. Why, if the beneficiary was anyone other than a Democrat, much less one named Clinton, someone might actually appoint a Special Counsel to look into it, not to mention the misdeeds of the various agencies and departments who aided and abetted it.
anon [178] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 11:43 am GMT
"You don't say; British Collusion to influence the 2016 US Presidential elections."

MI6, along with elements of the CIA, was behind the Steele Dossier. Representatives of John Brennan met in London to discus before the go ahead was given. They later put Michael Steele onto the project; he was a guy with credible Russian contacts. Basically, the scam worked like this:

They funneled an MI6 intelligence file to Michael Steele (governments routinely keep such files on influential foreigners and what they are up to) so he could use his contacts to launder the information and make it appear that it came from sources within Russia; they then funneled the report back to elements of the FBI so they could use it to justify to the FISA court a spying campaign on Trump (the FBI illegally withheld the source of the document); they found nothing proving any Russian connection but they kept the spy program going; they tried justifying the spy program with a fake story involving a reliable asset that once passed information from Jimmy Carter's campaign to George H.W. Bush in an effort to help Reagan win the 1980 election; they later paid the asset nearly a quarter million dollars for his efforts using a fake "India-China" grant despite the grant running to 2018, the asset attempted to get a job in the Trump administration so he could act as a mole ; the Obama regime purposely mishandled information in regards to the spying program (ex: Michael Steele leaked his document to various news sources before the election and later lied to congress about it), ensuring it would leak to the press; the Obama regime illegally unmasked elements of Trump's personal contacts so they could clandestinely leak suggested targets off the record to the right people

They lost the election anyway, so they then planted dirt and negative press to make the document look legit – lies about Manafort meeting Assange (Guardian is funded by the British government to police the left), WaPo lies claiming a vast Russian conspiracy just as Trump came into office (it was an effort to delegitimize him and create calls for Hillary to take his place), leaking bank records, the special counsel .and leaking information on Trump policies to the media using a secret security clearance credentials program enacted by Obama. They also ran interference through CIA guys like Mark Warner in an effort to cover up the mole they planted; they falsely asserted this was a national security issue when the man's identity was well-known to the press and he was never an undercover spy like Jarret was, at least not in recent history.

To put this all into perspective, imagine the following scenario:

The government takes cctv footage of you at a grocery store; in the background there is an attractive woman. The woman then goes missing. The government illegally reads your emails and finds that you like sexual jokes. The government then interviews a friend of yours who claims that you once made a risque rape joke back in college. They also plant a mole in your workplace who befriends you and reports back all of your politically incorrect humor. Then the cops find the woman's body and the government claims that you killed her because you were in the area at the time and you make bad jokes, which has been confirmed by multiple credible people. You look guilty, don't you? The government 1) took information out of context 2) laundered circumstantial evidence through a credible witness when they originally obtained it elsewhere using nefarious sources. That's what they did to Trump, but much much much worse.

Johnny Walker Read , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:38 pm GMT
Like a friends divorce lawyer told him: You go to bed with a nasty bitch, you wake up with a nasty bitch.
Johnny Rottenborough , says: Website December 4, 2018 at 1:46 pm GMT
a plot by the British intelligence and security services to subvert the course of the 2016 election in favor of the Deep State and Establishment favorite Hillary Clinton. How did that one work out?

Deep State and Establishment stooge Donald Trump.

There is still a chance for the United States if we

declare independence from the Jewish Empire.

[Dec 05, 2018] Who are the Neocons by Guyenot

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The American Neocons are Zionists (Their goal is expanding political / military power. Initially this is focused on the state of Israel.) ..."
"... Obviously , if Zionism is synonymous with patriotism in Israel, it cannot be an acceptable label in American politics, where it would mean loyalty to a foreign power. This is why the neoconservatives do not represent themselves as Zionists on the American scene. Yet they do not hide it all together either. ..."
"... American Jewish Committee ..."
"... Contemporary Jewish Record ..."
"... If there is an intellectual movement in America to whose invention Jews can lay sole claim, neoconservatism is it. It's a thought one imagines most American Jews, overwhelmingly liberal, will find horrifying . And yet it is a fact that as a political philosophy, neoconservatism was born among the children of Jewish immigrants and is now largely the intellectual domain of those immigrants' grandchildren ..."
"... Goyenot traces the Neocon's origins through its influential writers and thinkers. Highest on the list is Leo Strauss. (Neocons are sometimes called "the Straussians.") Leo Strauss is a great admirer of Machiavelli with his utter contempt for restraining moral principles making him "uniquely effective," and, "the ideal patriot." He gushes over Machiavelli praising the intrepidity of his thought, the grandeur of his vision, and the graceful subtlety of his speech. ..."
"... believes that Truth is harmful to the common man and the social order and should be reserved for superior minds. ..."
"... nations derive their strength from their myths , which are necessary for government and governance. ..."
"... national myths have no necessary relationship with historical reality: they are socio-cultural constructions that the State has a duty to disseminate . ..."
"... to be effective, any national myth must be based on a clear distinction between good and evil ; it derives its cohesive strength from the hatred of an enemy nation. ..."
"... deception is the norm in political life ..."
"... Office of Special Plans ..."
"... The Zionist/Neocons are piggy-backing onto, or utilizing, the religious myths of both the Jewish and Christian world to consolidate power. This is brilliant Machiavellian strategy. ..."
"... the "chosen people" myth (God likes us best, we are better than you) ..."
"... the Holy Land myth (one area of real estate is more holy than another) ..."
"... General Wesley Clark testified on numerous occasions before the cameras, that one month after September 11th, 2001 a general from the Pentagon showed him a memo from neoconservative strategists "that describes how we're gonna take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia and Sudan and finishing off with Iran". ..."
"... Among them are brilliant strategists ..."
"... They operate unrestrained by the most basic moral principles upon which civilization is founded. They are undisturbed by compassion for the suffering of others. ..."
"... They use consciously and skillfully use deception and "myth-making" to shape policy ..."
"... They have infiltrated the highest levels of banking, US military, NATO and US government. ..."
Dec 11, 2015 | Peak Prosperity

Mememonkey pointed my to a 2013 essay by Laurent Guyenot, a French historian and writer on the deep state, that addresses the question of "Who Are The Neoconservatives." If you would like to know about that group that sends the US military into battle and tortures prisoners of war in out name, you need to know about these guys.

First, if you are Jewish, or are a GREEN Meme, please stop and take a deep breath. Please put on your thinking cap and don't react. We are NOT disrespecting a religion, spiritual practice or a culture. We are talking about a radical and very destructive group hidden within a culture and using that culture. Christianity has similar groups and movements--the Crusades, the KKK, the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, etc.

My personal investment: This question has been a subject of intense interest for me since I became convinced that 9/11 was an inside job, that the Iraq war was waged for reasons entirely different from those publically stated. I have been horrified to see such a shadowy, powerful group operating from a profoundly "pre-moral" developmental level-i.e., not based in even the most rudimentary principles of morality foundational to civilization.

Who the hell are these people?!

Goyenot's main points (with a touch of personal editorializing):

1. The American Neocons are Zionists (Their goal is expanding political / military power. Initially this is focused on the state of Israel.)

Neoconservativism is essentially a modern right wing Jewish version of Machiavelli's political strategy. What characterizes the neoconservative movement is therefore not as much Judaism as a religious tradition, but rather Judiasm as a political project, i.e. Zionism, by Machiavellian means.

This is not a religious movement though it may use religions words and vocabulary. It is a political and military movement. They are not concerned with being close to God. This is a movement to expand political and military power. Some are Christian and Mormon, culturally.

Obviously , if Zionism is synonymous with patriotism in Israel, it cannot be an acceptable label in American politics, where it would mean loyalty to a foreign power. This is why the neoconservatives do not represent themselves as Zionists on the American scene. Yet they do not hide it all together either.

He points out dual-citizen (Israel / USA) members and self proclaimed Zionists throughout cabinet level positions in the US government, international banking and controlling the US military. In private writings and occasionally in public, Neocons admit that America's war policies are actually Israel's war goals. (Examples provided.)

2. Most American Jews are overwhelmingly liberal and do NOT share the perspective of the radical Zionists.

The neoconservative movement, which is generally perceived as a radical (rather than "conservative") Republican right, is, in reality, an intellectual movement born in the late 1960s in the pages of the monthly magazine Commentary, a media arm of the American Jewish Committee, which had replaced the Contemporary Jewish Record in 1945. The Forward, the oldest American Jewish weekly, wrote in a January 6th, 2006 article signed Gal Beckerman: "If there is an intellectual movement in America to whose invention Jews can lay sole claim, neoconservatism is it. It's a thought one imagines most American Jews, overwhelmingly liberal, will find horrifying. And yet it is a fact that as a political philosophy, neoconservatism was born among the children of Jewish immigrants and is now largely the intellectual domain of those immigrants' grandchildren".

3. Intellectual Basis and Moral developmental level

Goyenot traces the Neocon's origins through its influential writers and thinkers. Highest on the list is Leo Strauss. (Neocons are sometimes called "the Straussians.") Leo Strauss is a great admirer of Machiavelli with his utter contempt for restraining moral principles making him "uniquely effective," and, "the ideal patriot." He gushes over Machiavelli praising the intrepidity of his thought, the grandeur of his vision, and the graceful subtlety of his speech.

Other major points:

4. The Zionist/Neocons are piggy-backing onto, or utilizing, the religious myths of both the Jewish and Christian world to consolidate power. This is brilliant Machiavellian strategy.

[The]Pax Judaica will come only when "all the nations shall flow" to the Jerusalem temple, from where "shall go forth the law" (Isaiah 2:1-3). This vision of a new world order with Jerusalem at its center resonates within the Likudnik and neoconservative circles. At the Jerusalem Summit, held from October 12th to 14th, 2003 in the symbolically significant King David Hotel, an alliance was forged between Zionist Jews and Evangelical Christians around a "theopolitical" project, one that would consider Israel "the key to the harmony of civilizations", replacing the United Nations that's become a "a tribalized confederation hijacked by Third World dictatorships": "Jerusalem's spiritual and historical importance endows it with a special authority to become a center of world's unity. [...] We believe that one of the objectives of Israel's divinely-inspired rebirth is to make it the center of the new unity of the nations, which will lead to an era of peace and prosperity, foretold by the Prophets". Three acting Israeli ministers spoke at the summit, including Benjamin Netanyahu, and Richard Perle.

Jerusalem's dream empire is expected to come through the nightmare of world war. The prophet Zechariah, often cited on Zionist forums, predicted that the Lord will fight "all nations" allied against Israel. In a single day, the whole earth will become a desert, with the exception of Jerusalem, who "shall remain aloft upon its site" (14:10).

With more than 50 millions members, Christians United for Israel is a major political force in the U.S.. Its Chairman, pastor John Haggee, declared: "The United States must join Israel in a pre-emptive military strike against Iran to fulfill God's plan for both Israel and the West, [...] a biblically prophesied end-time confrontation with Iran, which will lead to the Rapture, Tribulation, and Second Coming of Christ".

And Guyenot concludes:

Is it possible that this biblical dream, mixed with the neo-Machiavellianism of Leo Strauss and the militarism of Likud, is what is quietly animating an exceptionally determined and organized ultra-Zionist clan? General Wesley Clark testified on numerous occasions before the cameras, that one month after September 11th, 2001 a general from the Pentagon showed him a memo from neoconservative strategists "that describes how we're gonna take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia and Sudan and finishing off with Iran".

Is it just a coincidence that the "seven nations" doomed to be destroyed by Israel form part of the biblical myths? [W]hen Yahweh will deliver Israel "seven nations greater and mightier than yourself [ ] you must utterly destroy them; you shall make no covenant with them, and show no mercy to them."

My summary:

[Dec 05, 2018] Beleaguered British Prime Minister Theresa May is wailing loudly against a Trump threat to reveal classified documents relating to Russiagate by Philip Giraldi

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Rather, they seem to appear to reveal a plot by the British intelligence and security services working in collusion with then CIA Director John Brennan to subvert the course of the 2016 election in favor of the Deep State and Establishment favorite Hillary Clinton. How did that one work out? ..."
Dec 05, 2018 | www.unz.com
121 Comments Reply

And there are other friends in unlikely places. Beleaguered British Prime Minister Theresa May is wailing loudly against a Trump threat to reveal classified documents relating to Russiagate. The real problem is that the documents apparently don't expose anything done by the Russians.

Rather, they seem to appear to reveal a plot by the British intelligence and security services working in collusion with then CIA Director John Brennan to subvert the course of the 2016 election in favor of the Deep State and Establishment favorite Hillary Clinton. How did that one work out?

So how about it? Teenagers who get in trouble often have to ditch their bad friends to turn their lives around. There is still a chance for the United States if we keep our distance from the bad friends we have been nurturing all around the world, friends who have been convincing us to make poor choices. Get rid of the ties the bind to the Saudis, Israelis, Ukrainians, Poles, and yes, even the British. Deal fairly with all nations and treat everyone the same, but bear in mind that there are only two relationships that really matter – Russia and China. Make a serious effort to avoid a war by learning how to get along with those two nations and America might actually survive to celebrate a tricentennial in 2076.

The Alarmist , says: December 4, 2018 at 10:39 am GMT
You don't say; British Collusion to influence the 2016 US Presidential elections. Why, if the beneficiary was anyone other than a Democrat, much less one named Clinton, someone might actually appoint a Special Counsel to look into it, not to mention the misdeeds of the various agencies and departments who aided and abetted it.
anon [178] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 11:43 am GMT
"You don't say; British Collusion to influence the 2016 US Presidential elections."

MI6, along with elements of the CIA, was behind the Steele Dossier. Representatives of John Brennan met in London to discus before the go ahead was given. They later put Michael Steele onto the project; he was a guy with credible Russian contacts. Basically, the scam worked like this:

They funneled an MI6 intelligence file to Michael Steele (governments routinely keep such files on influential foreigners and what they are up to) so he could use his contacts to launder the information and make it appear that it came from sources within Russia; they then funneled the report back to elements of the FBI so they could use it to justify to the FISA court a spying campaign on Trump (the FBI illegally withheld the source of the document); they found nothing proving any Russian connection but they kept the spy program going; they tried justifying the spy program with a fake story involving a reliable asset that once passed information from Jimmy Carter's campaign to George H.W. Bush in an effort to help Reagan win the 1980 election; they later paid the asset nearly a quarter million dollars for his efforts using a fake "India-China" grant despite the grant running to 2018, the asset attempted to get a job in the Trump administration so he could act as a mole ; the Obama regime purposely mishandled information in regards to the spying program (ex: Michael Steele leaked his document to various news sources before the election and later lied to congress about it), ensuring it would leak to the press; the Obama regime illegally unmasked elements of Trump's personal contacts so they could clandestinely leak suggested targets off the record to the right people

They lost the election anyway, so they then planted dirt and negative press to make the document look legit – lies about Manafort meeting Assange (Guardian is funded by the British government to police the left), WaPo lies claiming a vast Russian conspiracy just as Trump came into office (it was an effort to delegitimize him and create calls for Hillary to take his place), leaking bank records, the special counsel .and leaking information on Trump policies to the media using a secret security clearance credentials program enacted by Obama. They also ran interference through CIA guys like Mark Warner in an effort to cover up the mole they planted; they falsely asserted this was a national security issue when the man's identity was well-known to the press and he was never an undercover spy like Jarret was, at least not in recent history.

To put this all into perspective, imagine the following scenario:

The government takes cctv footage of you at a grocery store; in the background there is an attractive woman. The woman then goes missing. The government illegally reads your emails and finds that you like sexual jokes. The government then interviews a friend of yours who claims that you once made a risque rape joke back in college. They also plant a mole in your workplace who befriends you and reports back all of your politically incorrect humor. Then the cops find the woman's body and the government claims that you killed her because you were in the area at the time and you make bad jokes, which has been confirmed by multiple credible people. You look guilty, don't you? The government 1) took information out of context 2) laundered circumstantial evidence through a credible witness when they originally obtained it elsewhere using nefarious sources. That's what they did to Trump, but much much much worse.

Johnny Walker Read , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:38 pm GMT
Like a friends divorce lawyer told him: You go to bed with a nasty bitch, you wake up with a nasty bitch.
Johnny Rottenborough , says: Website December 4, 2018 at 1:46 pm GMT
a plot by the British intelligence and security services to subvert the course of the 2016 election in favor of the Deep State and Establishment favorite Hillary Clinton. How did that one work out?

Deep State and Establishment stooge Donald Trump.

There is still a chance for the United States if we

declare independence from the Jewish Empire.

[Dec 05, 2018] Who are the Neocons by Guyenot

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The American Neocons are Zionists (Their goal is expanding political / military power. Initially this is focused on the state of Israel.) ..."
"... Obviously , if Zionism is synonymous with patriotism in Israel, it cannot be an acceptable label in American politics, where it would mean loyalty to a foreign power. This is why the neoconservatives do not represent themselves as Zionists on the American scene. Yet they do not hide it all together either. ..."
"... American Jewish Committee ..."
"... Contemporary Jewish Record ..."
"... If there is an intellectual movement in America to whose invention Jews can lay sole claim, neoconservatism is it. It's a thought one imagines most American Jews, overwhelmingly liberal, will find horrifying . And yet it is a fact that as a political philosophy, neoconservatism was born among the children of Jewish immigrants and is now largely the intellectual domain of those immigrants' grandchildren ..."
"... Goyenot traces the Neocon's origins through its influential writers and thinkers. Highest on the list is Leo Strauss. (Neocons are sometimes called "the Straussians.") Leo Strauss is a great admirer of Machiavelli with his utter contempt for restraining moral principles making him "uniquely effective," and, "the ideal patriot." He gushes over Machiavelli praising the intrepidity of his thought, the grandeur of his vision, and the graceful subtlety of his speech. ..."
"... believes that Truth is harmful to the common man and the social order and should be reserved for superior minds. ..."
"... nations derive their strength from their myths , which are necessary for government and governance. ..."
"... national myths have no necessary relationship with historical reality: they are socio-cultural constructions that the State has a duty to disseminate . ..."
"... to be effective, any national myth must be based on a clear distinction between good and evil ; it derives its cohesive strength from the hatred of an enemy nation. ..."
"... deception is the norm in political life ..."
"... Office of Special Plans ..."
"... The Zionist/Neocons are piggy-backing onto, or utilizing, the religious myths of both the Jewish and Christian world to consolidate power. This is brilliant Machiavellian strategy. ..."
"... the "chosen people" myth (God likes us best, we are better than you) ..."
"... the Holy Land myth (one area of real estate is more holy than another) ..."
"... General Wesley Clark testified on numerous occasions before the cameras, that one month after September 11th, 2001 a general from the Pentagon showed him a memo from neoconservative strategists "that describes how we're gonna take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia and Sudan and finishing off with Iran". ..."
"... Among them are brilliant strategists ..."
"... They operate unrestrained by the most basic moral principles upon which civilization is founded. They are undisturbed by compassion for the suffering of others. ..."
"... They use consciously and skillfully use deception and "myth-making" to shape policy ..."
"... They have infiltrated the highest levels of banking, US military, NATO and US government. ..."
Dec 11, 2015 | Peak Prosperity

Mememonkey pointed my to a 2013 essay by Laurent Guyenot, a French historian and writer on the deep state, that addresses the question of "Who Are The Neoconservatives." If you would like to know about that group that sends the US military into battle and tortures prisoners of war in out name, you need to know about these guys.

First, if you are Jewish, or are a GREEN Meme, please stop and take a deep breath. Please put on your thinking cap and don't react. We are NOT disrespecting a religion, spiritual practice or a culture. We are talking about a radical and very destructive group hidden within a culture and using that culture. Christianity has similar groups and movements--the Crusades, the KKK, the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, etc.

My personal investment: This question has been a subject of intense interest for me since I became convinced that 9/11 was an inside job, that the Iraq war was waged for reasons entirely different from those publically stated. I have been horrified to see such a shadowy, powerful group operating from a profoundly "pre-moral" developmental level-i.e., not based in even the most rudimentary principles of morality foundational to civilization.

Who the hell are these people?!

Goyenot's main points (with a touch of personal editorializing):

1. The American Neocons are Zionists (Their goal is expanding political / military power. Initially this is focused on the state of Israel.)

Neoconservativism is essentially a modern right wing Jewish version of Machiavelli's political strategy. What characterizes the neoconservative movement is therefore not as much Judaism as a religious tradition, but rather Judiasm as a political project, i.e. Zionism, by Machiavellian means.

This is not a religious movement though it may use religions words and vocabulary. It is a political and military movement. They are not concerned with being close to God. This is a movement to expand political and military power. Some are Christian and Mormon, culturally.

Obviously , if Zionism is synonymous with patriotism in Israel, it cannot be an acceptable label in American politics, where it would mean loyalty to a foreign power. This is why the neoconservatives do not represent themselves as Zionists on the American scene. Yet they do not hide it all together either.

He points out dual-citizen (Israel / USA) members and self proclaimed Zionists throughout cabinet level positions in the US government, international banking and controlling the US military. In private writings and occasionally in public, Neocons admit that America's war policies are actually Israel's war goals. (Examples provided.)

2. Most American Jews are overwhelmingly liberal and do NOT share the perspective of the radical Zionists.

The neoconservative movement, which is generally perceived as a radical (rather than "conservative") Republican right, is, in reality, an intellectual movement born in the late 1960s in the pages of the monthly magazine Commentary, a media arm of the American Jewish Committee, which had replaced the Contemporary Jewish Record in 1945. The Forward, the oldest American Jewish weekly, wrote in a January 6th, 2006 article signed Gal Beckerman: "If there is an intellectual movement in America to whose invention Jews can lay sole claim, neoconservatism is it. It's a thought one imagines most American Jews, overwhelmingly liberal, will find horrifying. And yet it is a fact that as a political philosophy, neoconservatism was born among the children of Jewish immigrants and is now largely the intellectual domain of those immigrants' grandchildren".

3. Intellectual Basis and Moral developmental level

Goyenot traces the Neocon's origins through its influential writers and thinkers. Highest on the list is Leo Strauss. (Neocons are sometimes called "the Straussians.") Leo Strauss is a great admirer of Machiavelli with his utter contempt for restraining moral principles making him "uniquely effective," and, "the ideal patriot." He gushes over Machiavelli praising the intrepidity of his thought, the grandeur of his vision, and the graceful subtlety of his speech.

Other major points:

4. The Zionist/Neocons are piggy-backing onto, or utilizing, the religious myths of both the Jewish and Christian world to consolidate power. This is brilliant Machiavellian strategy.

[The]Pax Judaica will come only when "all the nations shall flow" to the Jerusalem temple, from where "shall go forth the law" (Isaiah 2:1-3). This vision of a new world order with Jerusalem at its center resonates within the Likudnik and neoconservative circles. At the Jerusalem Summit, held from October 12th to 14th, 2003 in the symbolically significant King David Hotel, an alliance was forged between Zionist Jews and Evangelical Christians around a "theopolitical" project, one that would consider Israel "the key to the harmony of civilizations", replacing the United Nations that's become a "a tribalized confederation hijacked by Third World dictatorships": "Jerusalem's spiritual and historical importance endows it with a special authority to become a center of world's unity. [...] We believe that one of the objectives of Israel's divinely-inspired rebirth is to make it the center of the new unity of the nations, which will lead to an era of peace and prosperity, foretold by the Prophets". Three acting Israeli ministers spoke at the summit, including Benjamin Netanyahu, and Richard Perle.

Jerusalem's dream empire is expected to come through the nightmare of world war. The prophet Zechariah, often cited on Zionist forums, predicted that the Lord will fight "all nations" allied against Israel. In a single day, the whole earth will become a desert, with the exception of Jerusalem, who "shall remain aloft upon its site" (14:10).

With more than 50 millions members, Christians United for Israel is a major political force in the U.S.. Its Chairman, pastor John Haggee, declared: "The United States must join Israel in a pre-emptive military strike against Iran to fulfill God's plan for both Israel and the West, [...] a biblically prophesied end-time confrontation with Iran, which will lead to the Rapture, Tribulation, and Second Coming of Christ".

And Guyenot concludes:

Is it possible that this biblical dream, mixed with the neo-Machiavellianism of Leo Strauss and the militarism of Likud, is what is quietly animating an exceptionally determined and organized ultra-Zionist clan? General Wesley Clark testified on numerous occasions before the cameras, that one month after September 11th, 2001 a general from the Pentagon showed him a memo from neoconservative strategists "that describes how we're gonna take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia and Sudan and finishing off with Iran".

Is it just a coincidence that the "seven nations" doomed to be destroyed by Israel form part of the biblical myths? [W]hen Yahweh will deliver Israel "seven nations greater and mightier than yourself [ ] you must utterly destroy them; you shall make no covenant with them, and show no mercy to them."

My summary:

[Dec 05, 2018] Integrity Initiative Organizing Neo-macarthyism and the new Cold War

Notable quotes:
"... 26 November 2018 ..."
Dec 03, 2018 | Defend Democracy Press
Greetings. We are Anonymous. We have obtained a large number of documents relating to the activities of the 'Integrity Initiative' project that was launched back in the fall of 2015 and funded by the British government.

The declared goal of the project is to counteract Russian propaganda and the hybrid warfare of Moscow. Hiding behind benevolent intentions, Britain has in fact created a large-scale information secret service in Europe, the United States and Canada, which consists of representatives of political, military, academic and journalistic communities with the think tank in London at the head of it.

Read more at https://www.cyberguerrilla.org/blog/operation-integrity-initiative-british-informational-war-against-all/

'UK Integrity Initiative is Meddling in The Affairs of Other Nations' 26.11.2018

A leaked hybrid warfare plan of the British government, known as the "Integrity Initiative," published by the hacker group Anonymous, has become a theme of discussion among scholars in Europe. Sputnik spoke to Professor David Miller of the University of Bristol on a plan allegedly adopted by London to counter "Russian propaganda." Sputnik: It [Integrity Initiative] states that its main aim is to counter Russian disinformation, however, what was happening with the Moncloa Campaign' in Spain suggests other motives does it not? Read more at https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201811261070148913-uk-integrity-russia-propaganda/

Statement on Russian media publication of hacked II documents 26 November 2018

"The Integrity Initiative is a partnership of several independent institutions led by The Institute for Statecraft. This international public programme was set up in 2015 to counter disinformation and other forms of malign influence being conducted by states and sub-state actors seeking to interfere in democratic processes and to undermine public confidence in national political institutions. You will find details on the website ( https://www.integrityinitiative.net/ ), and you can follow the programme on its Twitter account or on Facebook (both @InitIntegrity). Read more at https://www.integrityinitiative.net/articles/statement-russian-media-publication-hacked-ii-documents Read also: In Defence of Democratic Rights in Catalonia

EU-wide 'anti-Russian psy-ops' program confirms UK govt funding, Anonymous denies leak 26 Nov, 2018

A network exposed by leaked documents as a Europe-wide PR operation aimed at curbing "Russian propaganda" has confirmed receiving money from the British government, while Anonymous has denied on Twitter that it's behind the leak. The Integrity Initiative (II) is a network claiming to fight disinformation that threatens democracy. A trove of alleged II documents, which purports to show costs and internal guidelines as well as names of individuals cooperating with it, has been published by people claiming to be part of the Anonymous collective. A major Anonymous-linked Twitter account has denied it was linked to the leak. Read more at https://www.rt.com/news/444899-uk-psyop-leak-reaction/

Moncloa Campaign 6 AttTwitter Read more at https://www.scribd.com/document/392195691/Moncloa-Campaign-6-AttTwitter-08-06-18 Also read

A MUST SEE: Gladio or Undermining Democracy "to Fight the Soviets"
Dec 05, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press

[Dec 05, 2018] What Foreign Threats by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... This shtick of blaming US state crimes on foreign influence is getting annoying. You know none of this would be happening if the DO didn't like it. If you want to stop CIA's common plan or conspiracy for war, you've got to end the impunity that permits it. Ratify the Rome Statute. With the judiciary completely gelded, that's the only way to get the CIA regime under control. It's that or DCI Poppy Hager swings at Nuremberg II. ..."
"... Nuland admitted to spending $5 billion to set Maidan up. That $5B is worth 10 times that much in Ukraine. You don't spend that kind of money unless you have a follow up plan, and NATOizing Ukraine to attack Russia was it. The trigger was NATO's bitch, the EU, creating such a horrible deal for Ukraine that only an imbecile would have accepted it. Viktor Yanukovych was no imbecile. The "Russian deal" wasn't all that great for Ukraine either, it was just infinitely better than the turd the EU told Yanukovych to sign. ..."
Dec 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

One of the local Washington television stations was doing a typical early morning honoring our soldiers schtick just before Thanksgiving. In it soldiers stationed far from home were treated to videolinks so they could talk to their families and everyone could nod happily and wish themselves a wonderful holiday. Not really listening, I became interested when I half heard that the soldier being interviewed was spending his Thanksgiving in Ukraine.

It occurred to me that the soldier just might have committed a security faux pas by revealing where he was, but I also recalled that there have been joint military maneuvers as well as some kind of training mission going on in the country, teaching the Ukrainian Army how to use the shiny new sophisticated weapons that the United States was providing it with to defend against "Russian aggression."

Ukraine is only one part of the world where the Trump Administration has expanded the mission of democracy promotion, only in Kiev the reality is more like faux democracy promotion since Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko is clearly exploiting a situation that he himself provoked . He envisions setting himself up as a victim of Moscow to aid in his attempts to establish his own power through a security relationship with Washington. That in turn will help his bid for reelection in March 2019 elections, in which his poll numbers are currently running embarrassingly low largely due to the widescale corruption in his government. Poroshenko has already done much to silence the press in his county while the developing crisis with Russia has enabled him to declare martial law in the eastern parts of the country where he is most poorly regarded. If it all works out, he hopes to win the election and subsequently, it is widely believed, he will move to expand his own executive authority.

There also has to be some consideration the encounter with the Russians on the Kerch Strait was contrived by Poroshenko with the assistance of a gaggle of American neoconservative and Israeli advisers who have been actively engaged with the Ukrainian government for the past several years. The timing was good for Poroshenko for his own domestic political reasons but it was also an opportunity for the neocons warmongers that surround Trump and proliferate inside the Beltway to scuttle any possible meeting between a vulnerable Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin at the G20 gathering in Argentina.

The defection of Trump's lawyer Michael Cohen, together with the assumption that a lot of anti-Trump dirt will be spilled soon, means that the American president had to be even more cautious than ever in any dealings with Moscow and all he needed was a nod of approval from National Security Adviser John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to cancel the encounter. A heads-of-state meeting might not have solved anything but it certainly would be better than the current drift towards a new cold war. If the United States has only one vitally important relationship anywhere it is with Russia as the two countries are ready, able and apparently willing to destroy the world under the aegis of self-defense.

Given the anti-Russian hysteria prevailing in the U.S. and the ability of the neocons to switch on the media, it should come as no surprise that the Russian-Ukrainian incident immediately generated calls from the press and politicians for the White House to get tough with the Kremlin. It is important to note that the United States has no actual national interest in getting involved in a war between Russia and Ukraine if that should come about. The two Eastern European countries are neighbors and have a long history of both friendship and hostility but the only thing clear about the conflict is that it is up to them to sort things out and no amount of sanctions and jawing by concerned congressmen will change that fact.

Other Eastern European nations that similarly have problems with Russia should also be considered provocateurs as they seek to create tension to bind the United States more closely to them through the NATO alliance. The reality is that today's Russian Federation is not the Soviet Union and it neither aspires to nor can afford hegemony over its former allies. What it has made very clear that it does want is a modus vivendi where Russia itself is not being threatened by the West.

Recent military maneuvers in Poland and Lithuania and the stationing of new missiles in Eastern Europe do indeed pose a genuine threat to Moscow as it places NATO forces on top of Russia's border. When Russia reacts to incursions by NATO warships and planes right along its borders, it is accused of acting aggressively. One wonders how the U.S. government would respond if a Russian aircraft carrier were to take up position off the eastern seaboard and were to begin staging reconnaissance flights. Or if the Russian army were to begin military exercises with the Cubans? Does anyone today remember the Bay of Pigs?

renfro , says: December 4, 2018 at 5:53 am GMT

The only foreign threats we have come from the various psychos in the think tanks and special interest lobbies in the US.

As Jean-Jules Jusserand, the French ambassador to the United States
from once said of the US : .

"On the north, she has a weak neighbor; on the south, another weak neighbor; on the east, fish, and on the west, more fish.'

Justsaying , says: December 4, 2018 at 6:01 am GMT
Crying wolf provides a perfect pretext for the Empire's MIC to line the pockets of the merchants of death. In keeping with its time-honored tradition of propping up tyrants kowtowing to imperial hegemonic wishes, America hardly has friends without some military collaboration. Even the recently anointed sh*thole countries of Africa over 50 such countries have American military cooperation agreements under the guise of the infamous AFRICOM and the War on Terror. The number of military bases in sh*thole African countries remain unknown.

..the ability of the neocons to switch on the media

Hard to distinguish between the two really. The "free press" of WMD notoriety, Ghaddafi's "genocidal drive" against Libyan citizens, Iraq's involvement with 9/11? Iranian arms in Yemen that have not massacred children in school buses? Iranian fabricated nuclear weapons? Syrian chemical attacks?

The biggest threats to America come from its "friends"

America is being unwittingly exonerated as an innocent bystander unable to choose her own friends. It so happens America's "friends" share the common trait of pushing for war. In countries awash in petrodollars, purchasing billions of dollars in arms used in Yemen to murder children; Zionists are gifted with American state of the art arsenals to murder Palestinians, including women and children. The biggest threat to America comes from inside the deep state itself, especially with the Zionist Israel Firsters pulling strings at will.

anon [355] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 6:43 am GMT
America's all time #1 phony "friend". -- -Israel.

With a "friend" like Israel, America doesn't need any enemies.

Ludwig Watzal , says: Website December 4, 2018 at 8:30 am GMT
I agree with Phil Giraldi on its analysis of US foreign policy. When lying with dogs, you get fleas. This saying holds especially true for the so-called US friends such as the Saudis, Israelis, Ukrainians, Poles, and the Brits. The NeoZion gang plays President Trump is an open secret. He still employes one of its guiding spirits as national security adviser. As long this Gordian knot is not cut, American foreign policy will not change, and it's getting worse. These folks who surround Trump want war, first with Iran and then with Russia. Their lackey Poroshenko is doing the bitting of Trump and the Zionist regime and their European puppets. The Zionist regime is deeply involved in steering up tensions. Prime minister Wolodymyr Hrojsman is Jewish. Is anyone surprised?
Art , says: December 4, 2018 at 8:33 am GMT
What chance does peace have with these people having Trump's ear: Javanka Kushner, Gina Haspel, Nikki Haley, Mike Pompeo, Mike Pence, Mad Dog Mattis, and John Bolton?

Doesn't look good does it!

Think Peace -- Art

jilles dykstra , says: December 4, 2018 at 8:41 am GMT
Around 1890 one Rothschild wrote to another 'the only enemy of jews is jews'.

In my opinion at present the only enemy of the USA is the USA, that part of the USA that failed in getting Hillary elected.

On the European continent a similar situation, even an establishment Dutch politician, of a christian party, Segers, found out that a substantial part of the Dutch see the government as the enemy.

He has the illusion that pr can save him, and his cronies.

anon [121] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 10:24 am GMT
"I am not sure that he ever understood "

He never understood. That was evident the moment he started floating names like Romney for his cabinet. Personally, I sympathize with Trump after what the deep state has done to him and his family, and I even respect the guy for telling things like they are – the poor autistic bastard just can't help but blurt out the truth about things* but he's also not the guy we needed. We needed a fearless, ruthless, and cunning fighter ready to martyr himself for our interests, the people's interests.

*Global Warming IS a scam – the Paris Accords would not decrease CO2 levels even under perfect – near miraculous – circumstances and is merely being floated by the Chinese so they can give off the appearance of doing something while doing nothing, as they have done before.

RVBlake , says: December 4, 2018 at 10:50 am GMT
I am left wondering again, what's so bad about isolationism?
james charles , says: December 4, 2018 at 11:08 am GMT
@jilles dykstra 'One of many truths lost within this discourse is the reality that the creation of a no-fly zone would, in the words of the most senior general in the US Armed Forces, mean the US going to war "against Syria and Russia". '

https://mronline.org/2016/12/13/allday131216-html/

During the election campaign H.R.C., three times, {stupidly?} threatened to impose a 'no fly zone' in Syria – confronting a nuclear armed country.

anonymous [340] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 11:41 am GMT
For a peek into Establishment orthodoxy, check out "Why Does America Spend So Much on Israel?" on Beltway Conservatism's Cartoon Network, aka the PragerU Channel. I've recently started auditing classes there via the Videos page here at The Unz Review.

Beyond parody, a pensioned warrior narrates over 3rd grade graphics, telling most Americans all they care to know about what he calls "Izrul." Perhaps Mr. Giraldi could, despite the apparent taboo, leave a comment and get some discussion going with the Team Red NPCs -- it hasn't worked for me.

Moi , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:53 pm GMT
@Art I've wondered why we are the way we are. Then I came across this, and I understood:

D.H. Lawrence

"All the other stuff, the love, the democracy, the floundering into lust, is a sort of by-play. The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted."

Moi , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:56 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra We failed the moment the "pilgrims" seeking freedom started slaughtering the native peoples.
Minidrop , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:29 pm GMT
This shtick of blaming US state crimes on foreign influence is getting annoying. You know none of this would be happening if the DO didn't like it. If you want to stop CIA's common plan or conspiracy for war, you've got to end the impunity that permits it. Ratify the Rome Statute. With the judiciary completely gelded, that's the only way to get the CIA regime under control. It's that or DCI Poppy Hager swings at Nuremberg II.
wayfarer , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:49 pm GMT
@Moi

"All the other stuff, the love, the democracy, the floundering into lust, is a sort of by-play. The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._H._Lawrence

"You the one who killed our friend?"

DESERT FOX , says: December 4, 2018 at 3:14 pm GMT
The leading sponsors of terror in the world are Israel and the Zionist controlled U.S. and Britain and NATO and their terrorist mercenaries ISIS aka AL CIADA and all of the various off shoots that have been seeded throughout the world by the satanic Zionists.

The Zionists have a long historical experience with bringing terror to the world , one example being the Zionist/ Bolshevik revolution in Russia where the Bolsheviks killed some 60 million Russians bringing terror to Russia on an industrial level turning the whole country into a slaughter house!

The Zionist attack on the WTC is but another example of Zionist terrorism, where in one fell swoop the Zionists killed some 3000 Americans and got away with it and every thinking American knows that the Zionists did it!

The greatest terrorist kabal in the world is Zionism and these terrorists have control of every facet of the U.S. government and at some point are going to provoke a war with Russia that will get the whole world blown to hell and in fact this is what the Zionists want as they believe they will survive in their DUMBS akd Deep Underground Military Bases which they have in the U.S. and Israel and Britain, but they care not for the rest of humanity, that is terrorism in spades!

The enemy is not at the gates , the enemy is in control of the U.S. government and is going to be the destruction of America!

Curmudgeon , says: December 4, 2018 at 3:22 pm GMT
You can't really pin Ukraine on Trump. Maidan was not spontaneous.

Nuland admitted to spending $5 billion to set Maidan up. That $5B is worth 10 times that much in Ukraine. You don't spend that kind of money unless you have a follow up plan, and NATOizing Ukraine to attack Russia was it. The trigger was NATO's bitch, the EU, creating such a horrible deal for Ukraine that only an imbecile would have accepted it. Viktor Yanukovych was no imbecile. The "Russian deal" wasn't all that great for Ukraine either, it was just infinitely better than the turd the EU told Yanukovych to sign.

The real story on Russia is this: the same people that own every "Western liberal democracy" owned the USSR. The Russians got rid of them, and the USSR collapsed. A new invasion was hatched under the guise of "Westernizing" Russia. When the Russians saw that Yeltsin was suckered, and it was the same game, run by the same people, they got a new sheriff. That sheriff started to sort things out, while the owners fled to the UK and Israel. The lives of Russians got better, as the owners are gradually being stripped of their power. The long and short of it, our owners want their ownership of Russia restored.

All wars are economic wars. Capitalism and communism are the two sides of the same coin. Both seek to concentrate ownership, just in different ways using different scams.

wayfarer , says: December 4, 2018 at 3:39 pm GMT

"The best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy, but the best weapon of a democracy should be the weapon of openness."

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

"Dangerous Tribalism of the Ruling Class"

Z-man , says: December 4, 2018 at 4:17 pm GMT
@Justsaying

The biggest threat to America comes from inside the deep state itself, especially with the Zionist Israel Firsters pulling strings at will.

Bears repeating.

Z-man , says: December 4, 2018 at 4:21 pm GMT
@Art I'd have to give 'Slurpy Dog' Mattis a pass on that list. I think (hope) he is aware of the pernicious power of the Cabal .
Anonymous [295] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 6:31 pm GMT
The reason why Trump supports the Ukraine is easy.

"According to the European Jewish Congress, as of 2014, there are 360,000–400,000 Jews in Ukraine."

And there you have it. Wherever or whatever the interest of Jewry there will be the United States standing tall behind it. Let's just say the Ukraine is guaranteed to stay poor. While the Jews get rich!

CanSpeccy , says: Website December 4, 2018 at 6:33 pm GMT

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko is clearly exploiting a situation that he himself provoked. He envisions setting himself up as a victim of Moscow to aid in his attempts to establish his own power through a security relationship with Washington. That in turn will help his bid for reelection in March 2019 elections

Nah, Porky needs a war to avoid an election which he would undoubtedly lose.

JLK , says: December 4, 2018 at 6:41 pm GMT
There's no use having an empire if you can't exact an economic advantage. Ultimately, most of the events unfolding today are about keeping the loot flowing to lower Manhattan and central London.
EugeneGur , says: December 4, 2018 at 6:42 pm GMT

Teenagers who get in trouble often have to ditch their bad friends to turn their lives around. There is still a chance for the United States if we keep our distance from the bad friends

It's hard to do if you are in fact the worst of those bad friends.

friends who have been convincing us to make poor choices.

The poor choices had been made long before these friends even appeared on the scene. In fact, many of these friends owe their very existence and/or influence to the poor choices the US had made. It's so disingenuous to blame the US politics on someone's influence when the reality is exactly the opposite.

If the US were in normal country prepared to behave in a sensible way it would've picked much better partners. But the thing is the US isn't a normal country; it doesn't want partners – in wants vassals, so it is naturally limited in its choice of friends.

Agent76 , says: December 4, 2018 at 6:47 pm GMT
September 17, 2014 US Pursues 134 Wars Around the World

The US is now involved in 134 wars or none, depending on your definition of war The White House spent much of last week trying to figure out if the word "war" was the right one to describe its military actions against the Islamic State. US Secretary of State John Kerry was at first reluctant: "We're engaged in a major counterterrorism operation," he told CBS News on Sept. 11. "I think war is the wrong terminology and analogy but the fact is that we are engaged in a very significant global effort to curb terrorist activity I don't think people need to get into war fever on this. I think they have to view it as a heightened level of counter terrorist activity." – Global Post

http://www.thedailybell.com/news-analysis/35654/US-Pursues-134-Wars-Around-the-World/

Choose wisely America!

RobinG , says: December 4, 2018 at 7:39 pm GMT
Blowback: An Inside Look at How US-Funded Fascists in Ukraine Mentor US White Supremacists https://www.mintpressnews.com/us-backed-fascist-azov-battalion-in-ukraine-is-training-and-radicalizing-american-white-supremacists/251951/

"Not only are white supremacists from across the West flocking to Ukraine to learn from the combat experience of their fascist brothers-in-arms, they are doing so openly, under the nose of a shrugging law enforcement -- chronicling their experiences on social media before they bring their lessons back home."

AnonFromTN , says: December 4, 2018 at 7:49 pm GMT
The greatest threat to America comes from its elites. Nobody else did as much damage to the country as those greedy thieves.
AnonFromTN , says: December 4, 2018 at 7:53 pm GMT
@CanSpeccy

Nah, Porky needs a war to avoid an election which he would undoubtedly lose.

You hit the nail on the head.

Realist , says: December 4, 2018 at 9:44 pm GMT

The timing was good for Poroshenko for his own domestic political reasons but it was also an opportunity for the neocons warmongers that surround Trump and proliferate inside the Beltway to scuttle any possible meeting between a vulnerable Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin at the G20 gathering in Argentina.

Trump isn't vulnerable he hired the Deep State apparatchiks, Bolton, Pompeo and many others. Trump is a Deep Stater and is doing a great Kabuki theater to dupe his followers into believing his hands are tied.

Rurik , says: December 5, 2018 at 9:19 pm GMT
@tzatz

How do YOU expect me (and others) to swallow YOUR position?

with a great gulps of satisfaction, that's how.

The conflict between Russia and Ukraine was manufactured by the ZUS State Dept. ((Victoria Nuland)) and John McBloodstain in particular, when Putin upset the Zionist's plans to do a 'Libya' – to Syria.

It was a bloody coup foisted with 5 billion federal reserve note$, of the famous phone call ('Yats is our guy'). Since then the imbeciles in Ukraine have been doing Nazi salutes while taking orders from Jewish supremacist Zionists like Ihor Kolomoyskyi and assorted ZUS Zionists.

The conflict with Iran started when the CIA deposed the duly elected president Mohammed Mossadeq in 1953, and installed the brutal quisling Shah in his place. To keep the Iranian people terrorized for decades into submitting to this perfidy, they utilized the CIA and Mossad run SAVAK.

Learn a little history as you swallow.

[Dec 05, 2018] INF Treaty End Is Near After Pompeo Gives Russia An Ultimatum

Pompeo is glib and insincere. That a very bad feature for a diplomat.
Dec 05, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

"We must confront Russian cheating on their nuclear obligations," Pompeo said at the conclusion of the NATO meeting, claiming the U.S. has warned Russia to re-enter compliance about 30 times over the past five years. He urged the West to increase pressure, arguing it can no longer "bury its head in the sand" over repeat violations.

But for the first time Pompeo signaled it's not too late to salvage the treaty, despite Trump already saying the US it taking steps to pull out: he said Washington "would welcome a Russian change of heart."

On Oct. 20 President Trump first announced the United States' planned withdrawal from the historic treaty brokered by Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev and US President Ronald Reagan in 1987. At the time Russia's Foreign Ministry slammed the move as "a very dangerous step" which is ultimately part of "continuing attempts to achieve Russia's concessions through blackmail". Russian officials have issued the counter-charge that it is the US that's out of compliance with the treaty.

Ace006 , 9 hours ago link

The US is waging unconstitutional war in Syria without authorization of the UNSC but Pompeo has the effrontery to lecture the Russians on their "lawlessness."

Is there ONE freaking day out of the year when some senior official of the USG is not acting like an utter horse's ***?

Victor999 , 9 hours ago link

""We don't want a new arms race, we don't want a new Cold War,""

Yet NATO and the US are doing everything they can to start one. Threatening others with ultimatums is no way to negotiate new terms.

thisandthat , 8 hours ago link

"doesn't account for China or North Korea as rising technologically advanced threats"

Yeah, nor for israel...

dogismycopilot , 11 hours ago link

Putin should just have the SVR make some fake "proof" Trump is a Russian agent and feed it to the democratic-isis-******-lover party and let them tear Trump a new *******.

Pompeo is an aging **** pig.

thisandthat , 8 hours ago link

Considering it was the democrats who first pushed this muh russian meddlings, can't even see how will the US be able to pull itself out of this (****)hole they dug for themselves...

rtb61 , 11 hours ago link

So the US with a big lead in ballistic missiles and anti-ballistic missiles, wants to blow that up to promote the development of long range stealth cruise missiles, well, I guess there must be a massive profit in it.

The normal rule in a arms race though, the big losers are the countries with the biggest lead in current war technologies, when new technologies enter the fray, negating existing investments and bankrupting that country as the right off their existing lead and having to race to play catch up and take the lead again.

It's like the crazy, the US leads in space, great lets that it into a battlefield and eliminate that lead, why, just ******* why would you be stupid enough, banning war in space protects you lead, promoting war in space ends it. Blocking long range cruise missiles protects the US lead in ballistic missiles and anti-ballistics missile systems, allowing it ends that lead.

Now in the most idiotic fashion, the US has declared it will arbitrarily leave that treaty without any evidence of anything, now setting the precedent, that any country can withdraw from any treaty with the US for any arbitrary reason because that is the behaviour the US government has set precedent for, why hold any treaty with the US, when they will pull out at any time for any reason. The probable message from the rest of the world to the US, yeah **** off America, we are not Native Americans who exist for you to abuse us https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2015/01/18/368559990/broken-promises-on-display-at-native-american-treaties-exhibit (we know it is in the American government nature but **** off anyhow).

haruspicio , 12 hours ago link

What a pompous *** Pompeo is. After his lies about MbS how can I trust him on this issue. Is the US clean? They are certainly not in compliance with the chemical weapons treaty having destroyed no stockpiles as they agreed to do....almost 2 decades after the treaty was signed.

Treaties are ******** unless the parties to them actually implement them and follow the rules. The US seems to believe they have an inherent right to ignore the treaties they sign up to. Why anyone deals with them I have no idea.

dogfish , 13 hours ago link

Donald Trump has lost complete control of his presidency and is being led by the nose by his cabinet,the US will start a new world war.

CatInTheHat , 13 hours ago link

Where did Trump get these Bush 2,Zionist pig holdovers?

After Bush 2 dumped ABM treaty NATO/US have been creeping up to Russias border.

Then in 2014, Obama & Nuland decided it would be a good idea to effect regime change in Ukraine and put neonazi thugs on Russia's border.

EU Israhelli clients all know this is ******** about Russia. But Russia pissed off the Zionist entity in interfering with Yinon/7countries in five years plan.

How LONG are we going to put up with this Zionist attack on our country?

Et Tu Brute , 13 hours ago link

"We don't want a new arms race, we don't want a new Cold War," Stoltenberg added.

A bit like a rapist doesn't want sex, he just wants to **** people.

NATO doesn't want a cold war, they want a real one!

africoman , 9 hours ago link

Correct!!

Predator mindset and US exceptionalism at play

They are asking why Russia not keeping treaty while we violate it?

Secretary of war Mike Pompeo

Washington Seeks 'Pretext' to Abandon INF Treaty - Russian Envoy to US

"...We are accused of violating the Treaty by allegedly possessing a certain 9M729 missile that violates the accord's provisions. However, we do not see any clear facts or arguments that could lead to conclusions of violations," Sputnik Here

Russia, China, Iran challenging global US leadership: Pompeo

"..US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has targeted Russia, China and Iran for opposing Washington's "leadership role". PressTv

Just accuse without any specific evidence.

another

China has simply made no effort to halt its ongoing pattern of aggressive , predatory trade .

Chain election meddling blah balh

NiggaPleeze , 14 hours ago link

US always blaming others while violating every law and treaty known to man.

" I regret that we now most likely will see the end of the INF Treaty," North Atlantic Treaty Organization Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg declared ...

Fixed: " I'm ecstatic that our fabricated accusations allows us to finally see the end of the INF Treaty, which really benefits Russia far more than NATO," North Atlantic Treaty Organization Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg declared ...

chippers , 14 hours ago link

They dont want another cold war? Thats why they are doing everything possible to start another cold if not hot war I suppose.

Anunnaki , 14 hours ago link

We have been in a Cold War since Ukraine 2014

me or you , 14 hours ago link

5000+ bunker shelters and unknown number of hypersonic weapons...US has zero chance.

NiggaPleeze , 14 hours ago link

The whole point of the US strategy is to use short-range cruise missiles to take out Russian retaliatory capability in a first strike, thereby destroying all of those hypersonic weapons, and using their ABM systems to "clean up" any missiles that survived the initial onslaught. The "advantage" of the short-range cruise missiles is that they greatly reduce Russia's available response times - it basically must decide to annihilate the US within 5 minutes of notice of an attack, or face being wiped out with no retaliatory capabilities. (It is worth noting that, in the past, false alarms have lasted for longer than 5 minutes.)

This is by far the most destabilizing, dangerous move, ever - any false blip on a Russian radar can lead to an all-out nuclear exchange. It is infinitely more threatening to humanity than "global warming". Brought to you by the Evil Drumfpster.

Anunnaki , 14 hours ago link

Dead Man Hand

NiggaPleeze , 12 hours ago link

The Dead Man Hand only allows you to respond with capabilities that have survived and that are not eliminated by the ABM. The 5 minutes notice is until the vast majority of your nuclear arsenal is decimated - dead hand (i.e., ability to retaliate if the leadership is entirely decapitated) or not.

me or you , 13 hours ago link

With the black-holes awaiting somewhere in the big oceans it's enough to take the whole US territory.

me or you , 14 hours ago link

If you have not hypersonic missiles you are powerless to dictate.

artistant , 14 hours ago link

The CONFLICT with Russia was orchestrated by Apartheid Israhell

because Russia is an IMPEDIMENT to Israhell's design for the MidEast .

In the process, the Zionist Neocons mortally WOUNDED America

and the CONSEQUENCES are just getting started .

Omega_Man , 14 hours ago link

west would lose arms race against Russia and China and Iran and NK easy... just as they lose all races in manufacturing... cheap labour

Minamoto , 14 hours ago link

Mike Pompeo ought to be reminded that confrontation with Russia in missile technology is unwise.

Russia has hypersonic missiles. The US doesn't have anything remotely comparable.

beijing expat , 14 hours ago link

Even if they did it wouldn't change the equation. These are doomsday weapons.

Minamoto , 14 hours ago link

Absolutely not. They can deliver conventional warheads. They can sink carriers anywhere on the planet.

Moribundus , 14 hours ago link

USA do not need hypersonic m. because Russia do not have big navy fleet. Russia is building defense, USA prepares for attack

Minamoto , 14 hours ago link

Yet... the US is busy trying to catch up with the Russians.

CatInTheHat , 13 hours ago link

The US CANT.

https://southfront.org/why-the-u-s-military-is-woefully-unprepared-for-a-major-conventional-conflict/

francis scott falseflag , 15 hours ago link

INF Treaty End Is Near After Pompeo Gives Russia An Ultimatum

Unless Trump caves or changes his mind as he has been known to do

Moribundus , 15 hours ago link

Is Mike Pompeo Starting to Look Like Kim Jong Un? He is talking like communist leader at Communist party congress.

Mike Pompeo argued that Trump's reassertion of national sovereignty through his "America First" policy would make those institutions function better. "In the finest traditions of our great democracy, we are rallying the noble nations of the world to build a new liberal order that prevents war and achieves greater prosperity for all," Pompeo said at a speech at the German Marshall Fund thinktank. "We're supporting institutions that we believe can be improved; institutions that work in American interests – and yours – in service of our shared values."

He listed a series of current international institutions, including the EU, UN, World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, that he said were no longer serving their mission they were created.

The remarks were frequently punctuated with praise for Trump, who is referred to 13 times in the text. Pompeo portrayed his president as restoring an era of triumphal US leadership in the world, for the first time since the end of the cold war.

"This American leadership allowed us to enjoy the greatest human flourishing in modern history," the secretary of state said. "We won the cold war. We won the peace. With no small measure of George HW Bush's effort, we reunited Germany. This is the type of leadership that President Trump is boldly reasserting."

http://thebrutaltimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/popmeo-un-260x200.jpg

Federica Mogherini:

President [George H. W.] Bush used to talk about a new world order, based on shared rules and on cooperation among free nations. I was at high school at the time, and I remember perfectly well the sense of hope and of opening that one could breathe in Europe over these years.

He imagined - and I quote - "a world where the rule of law supplants the role of the jungle; a world in which nations recognise their shared responsibility for freedom and justice; a world where the strong respect the rights of the weak."

My generation believed in this vision, believed in the possibility for this vision to turn into reality, to become true, especially in Europe - a continent divided by the Cold War. We hoped that after the Cold War a more cooperative world order would indeed be possible and indeed be built.

Today, I am afraid we have to admit that such a new world order has never truly materialised and worse, there is a real risk today that the rule of the jungle replaces the rule of law. The same international treaties - so many in which we are together - that ended the Cold War are today put into question.

Instead of building a new order, we have to today invest a huge part of our energy in preventing the current rules from being dismantled piece by piece.

https://eeas.europa.eu/topics/culture/54773/speech-hrvp-federica-mogherini-harvard-kennedy-school-science-and-international-affairs_en

torabora , 11 hours ago link

well Russia rolling on Georgia and then Eastern Ukraine Crimea put all that unicorn **** to bed. You need to get woke.

pinkfloyd , 15 hours ago link

children

DEDA CVETKO , 15 hours ago link

Ultimatum? To Russia ???????

Um...WTF...? Where's this guy been for the past 300 years?

uhland62 , 14 hours ago link

In his bubble. Being confrontational gets your bubble pierced - someone tell him.

Let it Go , 15 hours ago link

Like many people, I do not find what is known as the concept of Mutual Assured Destruction, or MAD to be reassuring. Spurring the creation of more ways to use nuclear weapons is what ending the INF Treaty will do. Joschka Fischer, German Foreign Minister, and Vice-Chancellor from 1998-2005 writes;

In this new environment, the "rationality of deterrence" maintained by the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War has eroded. Now, if nuclear proliferation increases, the threshold for using nuclear weapons will likely fall.

The nuclear deterrent we hold is a hundred times larger than needed to stop anyone sane or rational from attacking America, and for anyone else, an arsenal of any size will be insufficient. What we are talking about is the Intermediate-range Nuclear-Forces treaty also known as the INF Treaty which limits short-range missiles. The article below explores the insanity of a new arms race.

https://Who Profits From Ending The Mid-Range Nuclear Treaty.html

attah-boy-Luther , 15 hours ago link

Dear POMPUS *** Pompa-oh:

We will happily comply with your chicken chit terms right after you take ALL of your NATO toys back to the Berlin wall line.

You know the one where your peeps told Gorbachev not one inch east.

Other wise F-U!

Luv,

Vlad

Haboob , 15 hours ago link

Mike Pompeo offered 'military assistance' to Ukraine in Crimea stand-off with Russia, says Poroshenko

'We have full support, full assistance,' Ukrainian president says

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-crimea-latest-russia-petro-poroshenko-mike-pompeo-vladimir-putin-donald-trump-a8655106.html

Haboob , 15 hours ago link

China and Russia don't want a military arms race but they will get one. The funny part is they will confide in Trump about their woes and he will mimic their desires but not agree with them.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1070110615627333632

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1070110927788347393

"We are either going to have a REAL DEAL with China, or no deal at all - at which point we will be charging major Tariffs against Chinese product being shipped into the United States. Ultimately, I believe, we will be making a deal - either now or into the future....

.....China does not want Tariffs!"

Bet hes laughing his *** off and so am i.

uhland62 , 14 hours ago link

China will find customers elsewhere, it just takes more than a day. The US is not the only game on this planet.

[Dec 05, 2018] Manufacturing Official Narrative by C.J. Hopkins

Guardian is just a propaganda outlet. That sad fact does not exclude the possibility of publishing really good articles, thouth. That still happens occasionally.
The fact that they follow MI6 and Foreign Office talking points in all foreign events coverage a is just a testament the GB is a "national security state". Nothing more, nothing less.
Notable quotes:
"... I'm not going to debunk the Guardian article here. It has been debunked by better debunkers than I (e.g., Jonathan Cook , Craig Murray , Glenn Greenwald , Moon of Alabama , and many others). ..."
"... The short version is, The Guardian 's Luke Harding, a shameless hack who will affix his name to any propaganda an intelligence agency feeds him, alleged that Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign manager, secretly met with Julian Assange (and unnamed "Russians") on numerous occasions from 2013 to 2016, presumably to conspire to collude to brainwash Americans into not voting for Clinton. Harding's earth-shaking allegations, which The Guardian prominently featured and flogged, were based on well, absolutely nothing, except the usual anonymous "intelligence sources." After actual journalists pointed this out, The Guardian quietly revised the piece ( employing the subjunctive mood rather liberally ), buried it in the back pages of its website, and otherwise pretended like they had never published it. ..."
"... By that time, of course, its purpose had been served. The story had been picked up and disseminated by other "respectable," "authoritative" outlets, and it was making the rounds on social media. Nonetheless, out of an abundance of caution, in an attempt to counter the above-mentioned debunkers (and dispel the doubts of anyone else still capable of any kind of critical thinking), Politico posted this ass-covering piece speculating that, if it somehow turned out The Guardian 's story was just propaganda designed to tarnish Assange and Trump well, probably, it had been planted by the Russians to make Luke Harding look like a moron. This ass-covering piece of speculative fiction, which was written by a former CIA agent, was immediately disseminated by liberals and "leftists" who are eagerly looking forward to the arrest, rendition, and public crucifixion of Assange. ..."
"... And this is why The Guardian will not be punished for publishing a blatantly fabricated story. Nor will Luke Harding be penalized for writing it. Luke Harding will be rewarded for writing it, as he has been handsomely rewarded throughout his career for loyally serving the ruling classes. Greenwald, on the other hand, is on thin ice. It will be instructive to see how far he pushes his confrontation with The Guardian regarding this story. ..."
"... It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. ..."
"... Those who are conforming to [official truth] are doing so, not because they are deceived, but because it is safer and more rewarding to do so. ..."
"... The powerless are either servants of power or they are heretics. There is no third alternative. ..."
"... It is important to realize that "the truth" is not going to "rouse the masses from their slumber" and inspire them to throw off their chains. People are not going to suddenly "wake up," "see the truth" and start "the revolution." ..."
"... The distinction is simple. We can't know the truth about distant and complex events like 9/11 or JFK unless we were directly involved, and those people are all dead. For big events we have to rely on, or ignore, the official accounts. ..."
"... Given all this, still, we can approach an approximation of truth that some can agree on. Here is where the trouble starts . ..."
Dec 03, 2018 | www.unz.com

...First, let's look at a concrete example of our system manufacturing official narrative (aka "official truth" or "truth" -- note quotes ). I'm going to use The Guardian 's most recent blatantly fabricated article (" Manafort held secret talks with Assange in Ecuadorian embassy ") as an example, but I could just as well have chosen any of a host of other fabricated stories disseminated by "respectable" outlets over the course of the last two years. The " Russian Propaganda Peddlers " story. The " Russia Might Have Poisoned Hillary Clinton " story. The " Russians Hacked the Vermont Power Grid " story. The " Golden Showers Russian Pee-Tape " story. The " Novichok Assassins " story. The " Bana Alabed Speaks Out " story. The " Trump's Secret Russian Server " story. The " Labour Anti-Semitism Crisis " story. The " Russians Orchestrated Brexit " story. The " Russia is Going to Hack the Midterms " story. The " Twitter Bots " story. And the list goes on.

I'm not going to debunk the Guardian article here. It has been debunked by better debunkers than I (e.g., Jonathan Cook , Craig Murray , Glenn Greenwald , Moon of Alabama , and many others).

The short version is, The Guardian 's Luke Harding, a shameless hack who will affix his name to any propaganda an intelligence agency feeds him, alleged that Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign manager, secretly met with Julian Assange (and unnamed "Russians") on numerous occasions from 2013 to 2016, presumably to conspire to collude to brainwash Americans into not voting for Clinton. Harding's earth-shaking allegations, which The Guardian prominently featured and flogged, were based on well, absolutely nothing, except the usual anonymous "intelligence sources." After actual journalists pointed this out, The Guardian quietly revised the piece ( employing the subjunctive mood rather liberally ), buried it in the back pages of its website, and otherwise pretended like they had never published it.

By that time, of course, its purpose had been served. The story had been picked up and disseminated by other "respectable," "authoritative" outlets, and it was making the rounds on social media. Nonetheless, out of an abundance of caution, in an attempt to counter the above-mentioned debunkers (and dispel the doubts of anyone else still capable of any kind of critical thinking), Politico posted this ass-covering piece speculating that, if it somehow turned out The Guardian 's story was just propaganda designed to tarnish Assange and Trump well, probably, it had been planted by the Russians to make Luke Harding look like a moron. This ass-covering piece of speculative fiction, which was written by a former CIA agent, was immediately disseminated by liberals and "leftists" who are eagerly looking forward to the arrest, rendition, and public crucifixion of Assange.

At this point, I imagine you're probably wondering what this has to do with manufacturing "truth." Because, clearly, this Guardian story was a lie a lie The Guardian got caught telling. I wish the "truth" thing was as simple as that (i.e., exposing and debunking the ruling classes' lies). Unfortunately, it isn't. Here is why.

Much as most people would like there to be one (and behave and speak as if there were one), there is no Transcendental Arbiter of Truth. The truth is what whoever has the power to say it is says it is. If we do not agree that that "truth" is the truth, there is no higher court to appeal to. We can argue until we are blue in the face. It will not make the slightest difference. No evidence we produce will make the slightest difference. The truth will remain whatever those with the power to say it is say it is.

Nor are there many "truths" (i.e., your truth and my truth). There is only one "truth" the "official truth". The "truth" according to those in power. This is the whole purpose of the concept of truth. It is the reason the concept of "truth" was invented (i.e., to render any other "truths" lies). It is how those in power control reality and impose their ideology on the masses (or their employees, or their students, or their children). Yes, I know, we very badly want there to be some "objective truth" (i.e., what actually happened, when whatever happened, JFK, 9-11, the resurrection of Jesus Christ, Schrödinger's dead cat, the Big Bang, or whatever). There isn't. The truth is just a story a story that is never our story.

The "truth" is a story that power gets to tell, and that the powerless do not get to tell, unless they tell the story of those in power, which is always someone else's story. The powerless are either servants of power or they are heretics. There is no third alternative. They either parrot the "truth" of the ruling classes or they utter heresies of one type or another. Naturally, the powerless do not regard themselves as heretics. They do not regard their "truth" as heresy. They regard their "truth" as the truth, which is heresy. The truth of the powerless is always heresy.

For example, while it may be personally comforting for some of us to tell ourselves that we know the truth about certain subjects (e.g., Russiagate, 9-11, et cetera), and to share our knowledge with others who agree with us, and even to expose the lies of the corporate media on Twitter, Facebook, and our blogs, or in some leftist webzine (or "fearless adversarial" outlet bankrolled by a beneficent oligarch), the ruling classes do not give a shit, because ours is merely the raving of heretics, and does not warrant a serious response.

Or all right, they give a bit of a shit, enough to try to cover their asses when a journalist of the stature of Glenn Greenwald (who won a Pulitzer and is frequently on television) very carefully and very respectfully almost directly accuses them of lying. But they give enough of a shit to do this because Greenwald has the power to hurt them, not because of any regard for the truth. This is also why Greenwald has to be so careful and respectful when directly confronting The Guardian , or any other corporate media outlet, and state that their blatantly fabricated stories could, theoretically, turn out to be true. He can't afford to cross the line and end up getting branded a heretic and consigned to Outer Mainstream Darkness, like Robert Fisk, Sy Hersh, Jonathan Cook, John Pilger, Assange, and other such heretics.

Look, I'm not trying to argue that it isn't important to expose the fabrications of the corporate media and the ruling classes. It is terribly important. It is mostly what I do (albeit usually in a more satirical fashion). At the same time, it is important to realize that "the truth" is not going to "rouse the masses from their slumber" and inspire them to throw off their chains. People are not going to suddenly "wake up," "see the truth" and start "the revolution." People already know the truth the official truth, which is the only truth there is. Those who are conforming to it are doing so, not because they are deceived, but because it is safer and more rewarding to do so.

And this is why The Guardian will not be punished for publishing a blatantly fabricated story. Nor will Luke Harding be penalized for writing it. Luke Harding will be rewarded for writing it, as he has been handsomely rewarded throughout his career for loyally serving the ruling classes. Greenwald, on the other hand, is on thin ice. It will be instructive to see how far he pushes his confrontation with The Guardian regarding this story.

As for Julian Assange, I'm afraid he is done for. The ruling classes really have no choice but to go ahead and do him at this point. He hasn't left them any other option. Much as they are loathe to create another martyr, they can't have heretics of Assange's notoriety running around punching holes in their "truth" and brazenly defying their authority. That kind of stuff unsettles the normals, and it sets a bad example for the rest of us heretics.

#

C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and political satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing (USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23 , is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. He can be reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org .

Manufacturing Truth

James Forrestal , says: December 3, 2018 at 6:26 pm GMT

Good piece. I think there's another layer, though.

The truth or falsehood of individual facts about the physical world can often be determined with near-certainty. But when it comes to history, or "news" about current events/ politics, reality is much too complex to address directly. Too many individual facts to be comprehensible, let alone useful.

We must pick, choose, emphasize, or ignore particular elements, and arrange them into some kind of structure, in order to form a useful narrative. Or in the case of "news," the legacy media oligarchy largely performs this function for us -- we simply passively accept/ adopt their narrative. Or, in many cases, "choose" between the closely-related variants of that narrative offered by the "liberal" vs. "conservative" press.

This process of abstraction, simplification, and organization inevitably involves data loss. So no narrative is "true" in the same sense that individual facts about the real world are true. But some narratives incorporate large amounts of "facts" that are demonstrably false, and some are more useful/ descriptive/ predictive than others. No one engaged in this process is "objective." They -- or we -- are all in some way part of the story. It should be self-evident that some narratives are more useful to the perceived interests of owners of major media outlets than others, and that these will assume a much more prominent place in their coverage than ones that are deleterious to those interests.

Ideally, most people would take these factors into account when evaluating the "news," and maintain a much more skeptical attitude than they typically do. But there are several factors that prevent this.

One is simply time/ efficiency. These individual narratives, taken together, support -- and are supported by -- our overall worldview. There aren't enough hours in the day to be constantly skeptical about everything, especially since the major tools of distortion involved in constructing mainstream narratives tend to be selection bias/ memory-holing, with obvious lies about known facts (like the Guardian story referenced here) used only sparingly. It's simply not practical to to constantly consider potentially "better" narratives, and to reevaluate one's worldview based on these.

And which narrative we believe often has more to do with perceived social pressure/ social acceptability than with "truth." As you put it,

Those who are conforming to it are doing so, not because they are deceived, but because it is safer and more rewarding to do so.

Mass media pushing a common narrative creates an artificial perception of social consensus. Creating, or even finding, alternative narratives means fighting the inertia of this perceived consensus, and potentially suffering social costs for believing in the "wrong" one. The social role of narratives is largely independent of their "truth" -- if what you're "supposed" to believe is highly implausible, that actually gives it higher value as a signal of loyalty to the establishment.

It's probably best to maintain a resolutely agnostic attitude toward most "news" items, unless one is particularly interested in that particular event. " Why are they pushing this particular story?" "Why now ?" and " What are they trying to accomplish here?" are often more useful questions than "Is it true?"

It's not a new issue -- only exacerbated by the advent of mass visual media:
"Propaganda" -- Edward Bernays (1928)
"The Free Press"– Hilaire Belloc (1918)

Kratoklastes , says: December 3, 2018 at 11:17 pm GMT
I get what Hopkins is trying to do here, but redefining terms (i.e., "truth") doesn't do what he thinks it does.

The truth is not ' what most people think '; it's not ' what we are told to believe '; it's not ' the official narrative '.

There is a useful cautionary tale embedded in Hopkins' piece, but he doesn't tease it out properly.

Take this excerpt:

The truth is what whoever has the power to say it is says it is. If we do not agree that that "truth" is the truth, there is no higher court to appeal to. We can argue until we are blue in the face. It will not make the slightest difference. No evidence we produce will make the slightest difference. The truth will remain whatever those with the power to say it is say it is.

With significant caveats, it is a reasonable description of the way the political world works: if the political class decides that its interests are best served by declaring that a specific narrative X is 'true', it will obtain immediate compliance from about half the livestock, and can then rely on force (peer pressure; subsidy or taxation; state coercion) to get an absolute majority of the herd to declare that they accept the 'truth' of X .

If X is objectively false, too bad.

Try to run a legal argument based on the objective falsity of a thing that the political class has deemed to be true: you'll be shit outta luck.

This is highly relevant where I am sitting: here are two examples – one really obvious, one a bit less so (but far more important because of its radical implications).

Obvious Example: Drug Dogs

Recent research has shown that drug sniffing dogs give false positive signals between 60% and 80% of the time – i.e., in terms of identifying people who are in actual physical possession of drugs at any point in time, drug sniffing dogs perform worse than a coin toss.

Note that this is before considering that the dog's handler is often pointing the dog at a target that the handler thinks is likely to be carrying drugs. (Although in reality, drug dogs are paraded around at concerts and in public spaces, sniffing every passer-by).

However there is an Act of Parliament (capitalise all the magic words) that asserts that a signal from a drug sniffing dog is sufficient to qualify as what Americans call "probable cause" – i.e., reasonable suspicion for a search.

Does anyone think that evidence should be admissible if it results from a search conducted based on 'probable cause' derived from a method that produces worse outcomes than tossing a coin?

Judges will tie themselves into absolute epistemological knots to get that evidence admitted – and they will refuse to permit defence Counsel from adducing evidence about drug dog inaccuracy because since the defendant actually did have drugs in their possession, the dog didn't signal falsely.

In other words, the judge conflates posterior probability with prior probability; the prior probability that the dog is correct, is 10%-40%; this should not suffice to generate probable cause (or 'reasonable suspicion).

More Interesting Example: 'Representative' Democracy

In general, Western governments assert that their legitimacy stems from two primary sources: some founding set of principles (usually a constitution – written or otherwise), and 'representativeness' (including ratification of the constitution by a representative mechanism, for those places with written foundational documents).

The Arrow Impossibility Theorem [1,2] and the Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem [3,4], both show that there is no way of accurately determining group preferences using an ordinal voting mechanism.

What this boils down to, is that representativeness is a lie – and it's a lie before any consideration of voting outcomes ; it's a meta -problem (the problem that ordinal voting cannot do what it is claimed to do – viz ., accurately identify the 'will of the people'/'social preferences'/'what the people want').

Beyond the meta-problem, there is also the actual counting problem: no government has ever been elected having obtained the votes of an outright bare majority, i.e., 50%-plus-1 of the entire eligible franchise. (It's more like 25-35% for most parliamentary systems – for US presidential elections in the full-franchise period, the winner is voted for by 29% of the eligible population; you would be horrified to look at US Senate results).

So when the new unhappy lords (and their Little Eichmann bureaucrat enablers) promulgate laws based on assertions of legitimacy because of a constitutional Grundnorm and/or the representative nature of government both of those things are pretty obvious furphies; they are objectively not 'truth' and no amount of heel-clicking and wishing will make it so.

Which brings us to a key legal aphorism that has a jurisprudential history going back four centuries: Ratio legis est anima legis, et mutata legis ratione, mutatur ex lex – which dates from Milborn's case ( Coke 7a KB [1609]).

The reason for a law is the soul of the law, and if the reason for a law has changed, the law is changed .

What this means – explicitly – is that " no law can survive the [extinction of the] reasons on which it is founded ".

American courts re-expressed this as " cessante ratione legis, cessat ipsa lex " (the reason for a law having ceased, the law itself ceases) – e.g., in Funk v. United States , 290 US 371 (1933) in which Justice Sutherland opined –

This means that no law can survive the reasons on which it is founded. It needs no statute to change it; it abrogates itself . If the reasons on which a law rests are overborne by opposing reasons, which in the progress of society gain a controlling force, the old law, though still good as an abstract principle, and good in its application to some circumstances, must cease to apply as a controlling principle to the new circumstances.

(Emphasis mine)

Again: try running this argument in a court: " The asserted basis for all laws promulgated by the government, is provably false. Under a doctrine with a 4-century jurisprudential provenance, the law itself is void ."

See how far you get.

So Hopkins makes a good-but-obvious point – power does not respect either rights or truth; as such it does you no good whatsoever to have the actual truth on your side. He should have made the point better.

References (links are to PDFs of each paper)

[1] Arrow (1950). " A Difficulty in the Concept of Social Welfare " Journal of Political Economy 58 (4): 328–346

[2] Geanakoplos, John (2005). " Three Brief Proofs of Arrow's Impossibility Theorem " Economic Theory 26 (1): 211–215

[3] Gibbard (1973). " Manipulation of voting schemes: a general result " Econometrica 41 (4): 587–601.

[4] Satterthwaite (April 1975). " Strategy-proofness and Arrow's Conditions: Existence and Correspondence Theorems for Voting Procedures and Social Welfare Functions " Journal of Economic Theory 10: 187–217.

Brabantian , says: December 3, 2018 at 11:18 pm GMT
C J Hopkins, despite some good quotes and insights above, regrettably falls into the trap of peddling Derrida-tier relativistic nonsense, playing a word game about 'truth', as if 'truth' was not real merely because most people have strong incentives to avoid being devoted to it

Where you stand depends upon where you sit, etc., Karl Marx's dictums about economic and power positions shaping consciousness, and of course the century-old classic:

It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.

from Upton Sinclair (1878-1968). Hopkins more or less repeats Sinclair when he says

Those who are conforming to [official truth] are doing so, not because they are deceived, but because it is safer and more rewarding to do so.

Despite selling-out truth to the relativism devil in some passages, Hopkins nevertheless creates some quotable, including the particularly insightful:

The powerless are either servants of power or they are heretics. There is no third alternative.

The following notion of Hopkins is seen now and then in the alt-sphere, but always bears repeating

It is important to realize that "the truth" is not going to "rouse the masses from their slumber" and inspire them to throw off their chains. People are not going to suddenly "wake up," "see the truth" and start "the revolution."

... ... ...

Kratoklastes , says: December 3, 2018 at 11:28 pm GMT
@Tulip

The coin of truth is iron and blood.

That's absolutely, 100% wrong.

Iron and blood are the tools used to force people to accept what isn't true. (Another way to tell: it was uttered by a fucking politician – a cunt who wanted to live in palaces paid for by the sweat of other people's brows).

Truth does not need violence to propagate itself: in a completely-peaceful system of free exchange, bad ideas (of which lies are a subset) will get driven out of the market place because they will fail to conform to ground truth.

Falsehood requires violence (arguably it is a form of violence: fraud is 'violent' because it causes its victims to misallocate their resources or to deform their preferences and expectations).

In a very real sense, truth does not need friends: all it requires is an absence of powerful enemies.

RobinG , says: December 4, 2018 at 12:21 am GMT
@James Forrestal

Occupation of the American Mind: Israel's Public Relations War in the United States

https://www.occupationmovie.org/

This film shows a great example of propaganda in action. Free to watch now and this link also includes a short version and a trailer.

Jett Rucker , says: Website December 4, 2018 at 3:04 am GMT
When I tell any Truth, it is not for the sake of Convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those who Do.

~ William Blake, 1810

polistra , says: December 4, 2018 at 7:33 am GMT
The distinction is simple. We can't know the truth about distant and complex events like 9/11 or JFK unless we were directly involved, and those people are all dead. For big events we have to rely on, or ignore, the official accounts.

But we CAN know the truth about our own situation, our own neighborhood, and our own families. The current riots in France are a concrete ASSERTION of local truth against the blatant and condescending official lies. The majority of France is getting poorer and suffering more from migrant crime. Macron insists that starvation is necessary to serve Gaia, and crime is necessary to serve Juncker. The people would prefer to have a leader that serves France.

The scalpel , says: Website December 4, 2018 at 1:07 pm GMT
@FB Scientific truth is limited by two factors – assumptions, and hidden variables. For example, we might drop a brick in a vacuum and believe that it falls at 9.8 m/s squared. Here, we make the assumption that the force of gravity is constant. And for most of history we were unaware of the hidden variable of relativity to the speed of light.

So, assuming (LOL) that we are able to eliminate all assumptions and account for all hidden variables, there is a scientific truth. That is ASSUMING we are not just a simulation in someone elses computer!

Given all this, still, we can approach an approximation of truth that some can agree on. Here is where the trouble starts .

DFH , says: December 4, 2018 at 4:05 pm GMT
What is truth? – John 18:38
FB , says: December 4, 2018 at 4:26 pm GMT
@The scalpel LOL and then there is the 'observer effect' also especially in good old quantum mechanics in the end scientific truth does boil down to what 'some can agree on'
Tulip , says: December 4, 2018 at 5:40 pm GMT
@Kratoklastes Strength is the production of force over distance. That is to say, force is a quantifiable, physical phenomenon that, deconstruct it as much as you want, will hit you like a tsunami whether you believe it or not.

Force only works because there is a real world that transcends philosophical bullshit and marketing.

The subjective piece is will: victory is attained when the enemies will to resist is crushed. Through the repeated use of physical force, eventually any enemy can be worn down and vanquished.

The world is finite, desire is infinite, and for every desire and appetite, there is a will. As multiple wills will that they attain their infinite desires in a finite world, there will always be a conflict of will, which will always ultimately be resolved by force. Which means ultimately, despite the rich imaginations and appetites of humans, and their related striving, physical force will ultimately rule the day, and conquer, condition, and constrain the mental life of mankind.

Of course, desire and appetite will not take no for an answer, and in their frustration, they will imagine, fantasize, and conceptualize rationales for why this is not so. This is the nature of our desires, and in good times of prosperity and peace, they may even bend our reason in the direction of these appetites and fantasies, until the instincts for self preservation and endurance rust, and are even forgotten. But like the moon revealed by a passing cloud, the perpetual war of human existence will inevitably reassert itself, and those that have prepared for the inevitable will vanquish those who were content to daydream when they should have been preparing.

TimothyPMadden , says: December 4, 2018 at 8:52 pm GMT
What is truth ?

Truth is a word .

After reading the article and the aggregate comments, I am strengthened in my belief that the physics analogy of Schrödinger's cat is among the most useful (and notwithstanding the otherwise valid criticism of it in the comments). In the same way that the Oxford English Dictionary, for example, does not purport to define a given word, per se , but rather gives a detailed description of how the word has in fact been used over the years and centuries.

I refer to my version of Schrödinger's cat as counter-sense words or oscillating-contradictions .

Oscillating contradictions and cogno-linguistic manipulation

The primary means by which corporate supremacy, for example, is achieved and maintained in practice is via the maintenance and use of a small arsenal of about two dozen critical counter-sense or yo-yo -like words/terms that are asserted or claimed to mean either "X" or "Minus-X" at the option of the decision-maker.

Among the most important and sui generis (in a class of its own) is the word person which is held to mean a living, breathing being of conscience (literally a being of equity) with the rights, powers and privileges of such being ("X"), or else it can mean a corporate entity which is a notional/inanimate item of property to be bought and sold and otherwise traded for profit in the stock and financial markets ("Minus-X").

By way of example/demonstration of the ongoing cognitive manipulation process, if someone had managed to hit the judges of the U.S. Supreme Court with a blast of truth-ray just before they announced their decision in Citizens United, here is what we may have got instead:

[MORE]

We here at the Supreme Court are part of what can be fairly and broadly referred to as an arm of the entrenched-money-power.

At certain times and under certain circumstances it is to our enormous advantage over you the masses that corporations be natural-persons-in-law with the rights, powers and privileges of a natural person or living being of conscience.

At other times and other circumstances it is to our enormous advantage over you the masses that corporations be items of property that can be actively bought and sold and traded for profit in the stock and financial markets.

Your laughable naiveté is manifest in your expectation that you are going to receive a definitive answer from this Court, or even that it is possible for us to give you one. Among the foundational purposes of this Court is to actively prevent that question from being answered definitively at all. The instant we give a definitive answer, the game is over.

Whatever answer we give you must perpetuate the systematized delusion that the same concept (corporate personhood) can mean either X (a living being of conscience), or minus-X (an item of property), depending on the ever-changing needs of the decider.

So our current answer is that a corporation is a natural-person-in-law with the rights, powers and privileges of a natural person, except when it isn't. We'll let you know next time whether that situation has changed in the meantime.

Essentially all counter-sense words/terms follow that same template .

Notwithstanding that the respective concepts are logically and objectively mutually exclusive , the judges of the Courts (and the broadly-defined financial-world/social-control-structure) maintain that it can be either or both , and we'll let you know if and when it becomes important.

So a corporate person has a right of free speech when giving money to influence political parties, but not to object to itself being sold as a piece of property in the stock and financial markets or when it is acquired in a merger or takeover financed by its own assets. If a corporation has the legal capacity and rights of a natural person, then how can it be owned as the legal property of another? The purpose of the Courts is to ensure that that question is never presented in that way.

After person , the remaining most significant counter-sense or yo-yo -like words are (surprise surprise) essentially all money-and-finance-based, and the most important among these is the word principal and its role in facilitating illegal front-loading or ex-temporal fraud (interest illegally and unlawfully compounded in advance).

Is the amount of principal the actual or net amount advanced by the creditor and received by the debtor for their own use and control?

Or is it the amount that the debtor agrees that they owe regardless of the amount received?

Is the amount of principal a question of fact ? Or of the agreement of parties ?

[Here is the premise / offer that is referenced immediately below:]

Lender (e.g., typical second-mortgage lender): "I will loan you $10,000 at 20% per annum provided that you sign and give to me a marketable security that claims or otherwise purports to evidence that I have loaned you $15,000 at 10% per annum, plus an undisclosed and unregistered side-agreement and cheque (check) back to me for a bonus or loan fee of $5,000 as a payment from the nominal proceeds."

In the process example used above, what is the principal amount of the loan? Is it $10,000 because that is the factual net amount invested by the creditor and received by the debtor for their own use? Or is it $15,000 because that is the amount that the debtor is required to falsely agree that they have received and owe as a condition of the loan? Or is it $20,000 because that is the total cash-equivalent/money assets ($15,000 mortgage + $5,000 cheque) that the debtor has to give to the creditor?

Is it a noun/fact ? Or is it an adjective/opinion merely pretending to be a noun? All debt and therefore money in the world today depends on the answer to that question that theoretically cannot exist.

Principal is a special type (and most significant form) of counter-sense word or oscillating contradiction where dictionaries normally only give one sense, while commercial practice defines the contrary. It would be very difficult to put the Whatever-the-debtor-agrees-that-they-owe sense into a dictionary, because the fraud against meaning (as well as the criminal law) is manifest in spelling it out, and ever more so in more specialized financial dictionaries.

So virtually every legal, financial, accounting, and ordinary English dictionary and/or regulation defines it to the effect "The actual amount invested, loaned or advanced to the debtor/borrower net of any interest, discount, premium or fees", while virtually every financial security in the real world at least implicitly incorporates the fraudulent alternative/contrary meaning.

This in turn allows the academic world to function on the rational/factual definition, while the markets maintain a wholly contradictory deemed or pretended reality, while both remain oblivious to the contradiction.

Thus principal means the nominal creditor's actual and net investment, unless it doesn't .

With this class of counter-sense word where there is a necessary and definitive answer, the real job of the judges of the Courts becomes to make certain that the question is never officially asked, and under no circumstances is it to be definitively answered.

With just one of these words you can theoretically steal the Earth . With a financial system that is relatively saturated with them, such becomes child's play . With these rules a group of competently-trained chimpanzees otherwise pulling levers at random could do as well as the so-called wizards of Wall Street .

And significantly, these oscillating contradictions enable the judges to be self-righteous in the extreme on behalf of the entrenched-money-power, while looting the little people of the product of their labour.

As in: You have received the principal amount ($10,000) and you are going to pay back the principal amount ($15,000) plus the ever-accumulating (and super-leveraged) interest upon it according to your contract, while the meaning of the word oscillates between fact and opinion – between a noun and an adjective – according to what the judge needs it to mean (or accommodate) at any given instant in time.

It seems impossibly obvious in this simple example, but with several of them orchestrated simultaneously or sequentially, anything can truly be made to mean anything .

A partial list of the most critical oscillating-contradicitions includes: loan, credit, discount, interest, rate-of-interest, agreement, contract, security, repay, restitution, etc., all of which mean either "X" or its conceptual opposite "Minus-X" at the option of the entrenched-money-power whose vast financial fortunes are founded on such cogno-linguistic arbitrage .

Here are what I believe to be four essential tools needed to triangulate reality via congo-linguistic parallax . The first two are mine, and the last two are from the American and English Courts, respectively.

1. Humans are highly cogno-linguistic . We perceive reality very largely as a function of the language that we use to describe it. Most everyone inherently believes and presumes that you have to be able to think something before you can say it. The greater reality is that, above a certain base level of perception and communication, you have to have the words and language by which to say something before you can think it .

2. The world is ever-increasingly controlled and administered by people who genuinely believe whatever is necessary for the answer they need. Administrative agents of the entrenched-money-power have solved the criminal-law enigma of mens rea or guilty mind by evolving or devolving (take your pick) into professional schizophrenics who genuinely believe whatever they need to believe for the answer they need, and who communicate among themselves subconsciously by how they name things. They suffer a cogno-linguistically-induced diminished capacity that renders them incapable of perceiving reality beyond labels .

3. Their core business model or modus operandi is the systematized delusion :

"A "systematized delusion" is one based on a false premise, pursued by a logical process of reasoning to an insane conclusion ; there being one central delusion, around which other aberrations of the mind converge." Taylor v. McClintock, 112 S.W. 405, 412, 87 Ark. 243. (West's Judicial Words and Phrases (1914)).

4.

One must not confuse the object of a conspiracy [to defraud] with the means by which it is intended to be carried out. Scott v. Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1974] 60 Cr. App. R. 124 H.L.

I have long since abandoned my search for truth, per se, since I came to realize that the best I can ever do is to constantly strive to move closer to it. With apologies to the physicists, Truth is the Limit of Infinite Good Faith .

The Scalpel , says: Website December 5, 2018 at 12:34 am GMT
@Tulip " which will always ultimately be resolved by force."

Right there is where you lost the plot. That statement is just your opinion and it cannot be proven true. The rest of your argument falls victim to this logical error.

" and those that have prepared for the inevitable will vanquish those who were content to daydream when they should have been preparing."

Also, just your opinion. For example, the "dreamer" might die still comforted by his/her dreams, while the "prepper" might waste his life witing for the "inevitable' that never arrives.

redmudhooch , says: December 5, 2018 at 2:15 am GMT
Truth shall set you free.

For the First Time Since 9/11, Federal Gov't Takes Steps to Prosecute the Use of Explosives to Destroy WTCs

https://thefreethoughtproject.com/911-lawyers-petition-grand-jury-explosives/

In what can be described as a monumental step forward in the relentless pursuit of 9/11 truth, a United States Attorney has agreed to comply with federal law requiring submission to a Special Grand Jury of evidence that explosives were used to bring down the World Trade Centers.

The Lawyers' Committee for 9/11 Inquiry successfully submitted a petition to the federal government demanding that the U.S. Attorney present to a Special Grand Jury extensive evidence of yet-to-be-prosecuted federal crimes relating to the destruction of three World Trade Center Towers on 9/11 (WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7).

After waiting months for the reply, the U.S. Attorney responded in a letter, noting that they will comply with the law.

Some good documentary films here to watch for free:

http://metanoia-films.org/psywar/

Heres a couple more. Occupation of the American Mind is very good. All of John Pilgers films are great.

James Forrestal , says: December 5, 2018 at 3:58 am GMT

@Wizard of Oz

My question/quibble relates to your objection to the use of sniffer dogs to establish probable cause for search because it is no better than a coin toss. That seems fallacious if, according to your figures, the dogs sniff 500 people and get excited by 10 of them of which 3 are correctly identified and 7 are false positives.

Yeah. The concepts of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value might be very helpful in assessing this.

[Dec 04, 2018] Comparing China and America by Fred Reed

Chinese version of neoliberalism and the USA version do differ.
Notable quotes:
"... I especially encourage the Russians on here to return to their home country. There is little point writing material critical of America in English on fringe media sites while in America contributing to the US economy and paying US taxes. My observation has been that the Russian personality not to mention background doesn't fare terribly well in corporate America. Why waste your energy in a country and system beyond reform that despises you for who you are that only accepts you for your labor. You'll find a better fit in your home country where you'll actually have genuine social belonging, which, unlike China, actually really needs more people. ..."
"... Xi might have stepped up too early, but maybe this wouldn't matter. When the Americans decide to confront China depends on the Americans. In case you believe that US presidents drive US policy, Trump was saying things about China 25 years ago. ..."
"... Chinese progress has been most impressive but the country is sitting on an enormous pile of private and SOE debt.. There has not been a country in recorded history that has accumulated debt at the rate China did post the 2008 crash. ..."
"... @Achmed E. Newman Dictatorships are personality dependent, as opposed to democracies that are ? dependent. Communism came up with a catchy slogan – dictatorship of the proletariat. Why couldn't US – which are, after all, a birthplace of propaganda – come up with a similarly catchy slogan, such as: Democracy – dictatorship of the elitariat? Or maybe, Democracy – dictatorship of the deep state. ..."
"... I worked for Chinese-Filipinos and this is really 100% true. The ethnic Chinese in Southeast Asia are the most heartless capitalists on earth. ..."
"... [You have been repeatedly warned that you leave far too many rambling, vacuous comments, especially since so many of them demonstrate your total ignorance. Fewer and fewer of your comments will be published until you improve your commenting-behavior or better yet permanently depart for another website] ..."
Dec 04, 2018 | www.unz.com

Jason Liu , says: November 30, 2018 at 7:42 am GMT

Great, but kinda pedestrian. Lemme use this platform to point out China's flaws from a Chinese perspective.

Chinese society and Chinese people are too arrogant, materialistic, and hypersensitive to criticism.

This is a huge problem. One, it alienates pretty much anyone who becomes familiar with China. Two, it leads to mistake after mistake when no criticism is offered to correct them in time. Three, it causes society to view things overly in terms of money, falling behind in all other aspects. Nobody cares how much rich or strong you are if you're a crass, materialistic asshole. They'll hate you.

All societies have these issues, few are as bad as China. There are Chinese reading this right now and getting angry and ready to call me a traitor, demonstrating my point exactly.

A wise dictator is great for the country, but Xi is not wise. He is a stubborn old man stuck in the past who is clearly not listening to advisers. He has overplayed his hand, confronted the US 10~20 years too early, damaged China's image out of some paranoid fear of Uyghurs, and absolutely failed at making friends with our East Asian neighbors, instead driving them further into the arms of the Americans.

China does not need more repression right now, it needs to slowly liberalize to keep the economy growing and competitive. I'm not talking about western style "open society" bullshit, traitors like multiculturalists and feminists should always be persecuted. But the heavy-handed censorship, monitoring of everyday citizens is completely unnecessary. If China does not develop a culture of trust, and genuine, non-money based curiosity, it will not have the social structure to overcome the west.

Outside of trade and money-related issues, the Chinese citizenry is woefully ignorant of the outside world. There is no widespread understanding of foreign cultures and ideologies, how they might threaten us, how to defend against them, or how to work around them. An overwrought sense of nationalism emphasizes Chinese victimhood to the point of absurdity, squandering any sympathy onlookers might have, and actually causes some to turn 180 and hate China instead.

Angry, condescending attitudes towards our neighbors, especially Japan, severely cripple China's ability to be a world player. Without a network of like-minded friends (actual friends, not trade partners), China will never be able to match the western alliance. It is not just America we have to overcome, but an entire bloc of nations. I don't care how much people hate our neighbors, China must extend the olive branch, present a sincere face of benevolence, and not act like the big guy with a fragile ego. Racially and culturally similar East Asians are the best candidates for long-term friendship, it is wrong to forsake them under the assumption that all we need is Russia or Pakistan.

Despite the trade war, I'm not worried about China's economy, infrastructure, political system, or innate ability. These are our strengths. I have no love for liberal democracy or western values. But China must change its attitude and the way it interacts with the outside world soon, or face geopolitical disaster.

Don't overreact to every insult or criticism. Compete in areas that isn't just money or materials. Really understand soft power, and what it takes to be liked around the world. Develop our own appealing ideas and worldview. Listen to well-meaning, nationalistic critics, and change before the world discovers China's ugly side.

Cyrano , says: November 30, 2018 at 8:06 am GMT
I would say that yes, dictatorships tend to be more efficient than "democracy". The only major downside to dictatorships are that usually dictators – thanks perhaps to personal ambitions, lack of accountability, volatile personalities – tend to cause major wars.

That's a reason why someone becomes a dictator – to make it into the history books. And the easiest way to make it into the history books is to cause a major war(s) and capture all the glory that comes with causing the deaths of as many people as possible.

But then again, looking at the US, they don't seem to have been disadvantaged by a lack of dictators at all, as far as starting wars goes. One has to wonder, are dictatorships even competitive with US in the category of causing wars?

gmachine1729 , says: Website November 30, 2018 at 8:16 am GMT
https://gmachine1729.com/2018/11/30/a-call-to-boycott-jewish-media/

By Tiensen do you mean Tencent, famous now for its WeChat which I use for messaging and payments. I now also use their cloud storage Weiyun (3 TB on only 10 RMB / month) as well as their email.

By the way, Nvidia, YouTube, and Yahoo were all founded by ethnic Chinese from Taiwan. I actually think Nvidia is more impressive than both Microsoft or Google. Its GPU technology is much higher barrier to entry and as far as I can tell still exclusive to America.

I may well never come back to America ever again, and thus, most of what goes on in America will no longer be directly relevant to me. I could give pretty much zero of a fuck about the nonsense on China in the English language press, which I will only look at very occasionally, and those who create it. It would be rather futile to try to change the views of the majority of white Americans. Of course, there are a minority of white Americans who are more informed, reasonable, and open-minded, the ones I tended to interact with back in America, many of whom are unhappy with the state of American society. They are welcome to contact me (my email is on my website), and if they use not an American email, I'll be more willing to share certain information with them and possibly connect them to China-related business/opportunities.

I especially encourage the Russians on here to return to their home country. There is little point writing material critical of America in English on fringe media sites while in America contributing to the US economy and paying US taxes. My observation has been that the Russian personality not to mention background doesn't fare terribly well in corporate America. Why waste your energy in a country and system beyond reform that despises you for who you are that only accepts you for your labor. You'll find a better fit in your home country where you'll actually have genuine social belonging, which, unlike China, actually really needs more people.

Anon [319] Disclaimer , says: November 30, 2018 at 9:00 am GMT
Main difference is China is about Chinese ruling over Chinese with Chinese pride, whereas America is about JAG(Jews-Afros-Gays) ruling over whites with 'white guilt', jungle fever, and homomania.

Problem with China is too much corruption and petty greed.

Anon [319] Disclaimer , says: Website November 30, 2018 at 9:20 am GMT
If you look at centuries of Chinese painting, you will see that each generation largely made copies of earlier masters.

Prior to Romanticism and esp modernism, Western Art changed very slowly over centuries.

Franz , says: November 30, 2018 at 11:25 am GMT
Many tried to warn the weenies what would happen while our industries were "donated" to China and got hosed for their trouble. Pat Buchanan's troubles actually started when he wrote The Great Betrayal , even if they took a little extra time to pull his syndicated column down.

Did you know about a World War II-era Kaiser steel mill once in California, that was cut up in blocks like a model kit and shipped in its entirety to China?

It happened right out in the open, under Daddy Bush, and everyone who complained became an unperson, Orwell-style. Nobody dared object to the glories of free trade. And the Chinese in California said it was doing so because they had a multi-million ton Plan to fill, and it was almost the 21st century.

China is now taking the wealth their nation is creating with stuff developed in Europe, Britain, and the United States. The hole in the donut is they could have done all that under license and we could have kept on with, and even improved our industrial base.

But in fact our leaders had Gender Reassignment in mind for the 21st century, not actual productive work that truly builds nations. The Impoverishment of Nations is well known: Send the real work out, keep the barbarians inside well-fed, sharp-clawed, and morally depraved.

Godfree Roberts , says: November 30, 2018 at 11:44 am GMT
" its stunning advance in forty years from impoverished Third World to a huge economy"

Bullshit. The stunning advance occurred between 1950-1975. Starting with an industrial base smaller than that of Belgium's in the 50s, the China that for so long was ridiculed as "the sick man of Asia" emerged at the end of the Mao period as one of the six largest industrial producers in the world.

National income grew five-fold over the 25-year period 1952-78, increasing from 60 billion to over 300 billion yuan, with industry accounting for most of the growth. On a per capita basis, the index of national income (at constant prices) increased from 100 in 1949 (and 160 in 1952) to 217 in 1957 and 440 in 1978.

Over the last two decades of the Maoist era, from 1957 to 1975, China's national income increased by 63 percent on a per capita basis during this period of rapid population growth, more than doubling overall and the basic foundations for modern industrialism were laid and outpacing every other development takeoff in history.

Bear in mind that, save for limited Soviet aid in the 1950s, repaid in full and with interest by 1966, Mao's industrialization proceeded without benefit of foreign loans or investments–under punitive embargoes the entire 25 years–yet Mao was unique among developing country leaders in being able to claim an economy burdened by neither foreign debt nor internal inflation.

Anonymous [126] Disclaimer , says: November 30, 2018 at 12:24 pm GMT

Socially China has a great advantage over America in that, except for the Muslims of Xinjiang, it is pretty much a Han monoculture. Lacking America's racial diversity, its cities do not burn, no pressure exists to infantilize the schools for the benefit of incompetent minorities, racial mobs do not loot stores, and there is very little street crime.

Wait, weren't you a supporter of American racial diversity? Weren't the millions of dusty beaners entering the US a God's gift to the country's rich, colorful, cultural tapestry?

A dictatorship can simply do things. It can plan twenty, or fifty, years down the road.

So can the Western, globalist (((deep state))). The Chinese dictatorship is simply doing it for themselves and their nation. Their people's lives are getting better for decades while we have every reason to envy our grandfathers.

dearieme , says: November 30, 2018 at 12:43 pm GMT
"China has an adult government that gets things done. America has a kaleidoscopically shifting cast of pathologically aggressive curiosities in the White House."

Well put: I have long argued that the last adult president was Bush the Elder – what followed was a sorry sequence of adolescents.

There was only one chance to elect a non-preposterous grown-up – Romney. It was spurned.

But be of good cheer: the White House might currently be occupied by an absurd oaf, but it might have been Hellary, a grown-up with vices not to my taste. Better the absurd than the appalling?

As for China – I've never been there. At second-hand I am impressed. But it too could take a tumble – life's like that.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website November 30, 2018 at 1:44 pm GMT
@Cyrano Having a dictator is not just a bad idea because of wars, Cyrano. The English spent many centuries slowly chipping away at the ultimate power of Kings and Queens. I'm pretty sure that if they hadn't done that, you and I would not be here writing to each other today.

There can be a powerful Monarchy or Dictator, say, like under Queen Victoria or Josef Stalin. There will be much different outcomes. It would be a shame if the good King or dictator happens to die and leave the whole nation to a bad one, and your children's lives are much the worse for it, don't you think?

China is a perfect example, as anyone growing up under Mao had it very rough, even if he didn't get swept up in the 1,000 lawnmowers campaign or the Cultural Revolution. If you had been born in 1950, say, that was tough luck for much of your life. If you were born in 1985, though, well, as one can read in the column above, it's a different story.

Since I brought up Queen Victoria, and now have this song in my head (not a bad thing), I will move it into Reed's Reeders' heads now. Great stuff!:

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website November 30, 2018 at 2:00 pm GMT
@dearieme I agree with your sentiment, Dearieme, and I completely agree with you about George H.W. Bush* being the last President to act like one should.. However, that shouldn't matter anyway. Our system of government is NOT supposed to be about who is president making a big difference in how things run. It used to work like that too, before the people betrayed the US Constitution and let the Feral Gov't get out of hand.

The fact is, that Mitt Romney or not, per Mr. Franz above, the country has been in the process of being given away for > 2 decades now. Yes, no manufacturing might, no country left. That brings up what is wrong with Mr. Reed's article, which I'll get to in a minute.

* Politically, I hate the guy, but that's not what your point is.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website November 30, 2018 at 2:25 pm GMT
I am not knocking the observations of how things run economically in America vs. in China. I think the article does a good job on that. However, the whole analysis part seems kind of STATIC. I know Fred knows better, as he grew up in what was a different country and BY FAR the most powerful economically, precisely because it was when the US Feral Gov't still left private (at least small) business alone for the most part.

You do realize, Mr. Reed, that the US was NOT created to be a democracy, but a Constitutional Republic? China WAS a totalitarian society, but things only got (WAY) better after Chairman Deng decided that the central government would start leaving people alone to do business. The Chinese are very good at business and are very hard workers.

Yes, the Chinese government runs much better, at this point, than the US Feral Gov't after years and years (say 5 decades) of infiltration by the ctrl-left. All of our institutions have been infiltrated, governments , big-business , media , universities , lower education all of it. China had it's physical Long March, and 3 decades of hard-core Communism, but they got over it. America has had it's Long March on the down low, and is reaping the whirlwind at the present. Will we get over it? Maybe, but it'll take guns. We got 'em.

The winds of change have blown through. They can change direction again. For a place like America, it's not going to take one powerful man (look how ineffective President Trump has been), but the people and a movement. Just as some have been unobservant of China over the last 2 decades, many will miss the changes here too.

Thorfinnsson , says: November 30, 2018 at 2:37 pm GMT
@Godfree Roberts Glad to see our resident white Maozuo is back.

Your comparisons are not good.

Germany in 1880 was much nearer the technological frontier than China was in 1950. The Japan comparison is better, but Japan at the end of the Tokugawa era was about as developed as Britain in 1700 (and had already for instance substantially displaced China in the exported silk market).

The Soviet Union suffered certain events in the period from 1941-1945 you may wish to look up.

More relevant comparisons might be South Korea and Taiwan. Or even postwar Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Greece.

I think most informed people now are aware that Soviet-style central planning is effective for the initial industrialization phase. What we dispute is that it is uniquely effective, as Mazuo and Sovoks insisted. Other systems have matched its performance at lower human and geopolitical cost.

Thorfinnsson , says: November 30, 2018 at 2:45 pm GMT
@dearieme GHW certainly acted Presidential, but did that help America?

He was the architect of NAFTA (even if signed by Bill Clinton) and signed the Immigration Act of 1990, which significantly increased the yearly number of immigrant visas that could be issued and created the disastrous Temporary Protected Status visa.

Anonymous [261] Disclaimer , says: November 30, 2018 at 2:54 pm GMT
@Jason Liu

A wise dictator is great for the country, but Xi is not wise. He is a stubborn old man stuck in the past who is clearly not listening to advisers. He has overplayed his hand, confronted the US 10~20 years too early, damaged China's image out of some paranoid fear of Uyghurs, and absolutely failed at making friends with our East Asian neighbors, instead driving them further into the arms of the Americans.

Xi might have stepped up too early, but maybe this wouldn't matter. When the Americans decide to confront China depends on the Americans. In case you believe that US presidents drive US policy, Trump was saying things about China 25 years ago.

The Uyghur thing nobody cares about. The western media would find something else to lie about.

I agree with the things you say afterwards. although I find it difficult to see China becoming likable to it's neighbors. I believe the big thing will be to see what the CCP does in the next economic crisis; will they change or will they turtle into bad policy and stagnate. The challenge after that would be the demographics.

The Anti-Gnostic , says: Website November 30, 2018 at 3:02 pm GMT
@dearieme Mormons are idealists, not realists, which puts them outside the grown-up pale in my book. Mormonism might as well be called American Suburbanism at this point. That lifestyle takes a lot of things for granted that will not be around much longer. They top out intellectually at the level of mid-tier management.

To be fair, this applies to most Americans, convinced that inside everybody is a conformist, suburban American just waiting to get out.

There's a case that can be made that Mormonism is actually the official American religion.

Ali Choudhury , says: November 30, 2018 at 3:25 pm GMT
Chinese progress has been most impressive but the country is sitting on an enormous pile of private and SOE debt.. There has not been a country in recorded history that has accumulated debt at the rate China did post the 2008 crash.

When the chickens come home to roost it will not be pretty.

Anonymous [126] Disclaimer , says: November 30, 2018 at 3:28 pm GMT
@Achmed E. Newman

It would be a shame if the good King or dictator happens to die and leave the whole nation to a bad one, and your children's lives are much the worse for it, don't you think?

Sure, but the bad one would run the risk of being overthrown and his bloodline slaughtered. Everyone would know that the buck ends with him and his family.

Modern "democracies" dilute this responsibility and leave room for a set of hidden kings and dictators to run the show from the shadows. The plebs are supposed to vent their frustration by voting out the bad guys but that's useless (a pressure relief valve, really) if the shadow dictators control the information and the choices.

Luckily, the goyim are waking up to this scam.

Ali Choudhury , says: November 30, 2018 at 3:33 pm GMT
@dearieme The Cold War and threat of nuclear annihilation is gone, so why not elect entertaining charlatans, dunces, fools and outright crooks?
dearieme , says: November 30, 2018 at 4:06 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson "GHW certainly acted Presidential, but did that help America?:

I've no idea but it's not the point anyway. The point is that he presumably arrived at his decisions by thinking like an adult, instead of being blown around on gusts of adolescent emotions, like Slick Willie, W, O, and Trump.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website November 30, 2018 at 4:19 pm GMT
@Anonymous He may run that risk, but with absolute authority, who will stand up to him? You've got to know the history of Western Civilization (Europe, I mean) is filled with years and centuries of terrible, evil Kings and Queens in countries far and wide, right?

As far as democracies go, no, it doesn't work in the long, or even medium, run, unless you withhold the vote for landowners and only those with responsibility. I don't thing that's been the case here except for the first 50 years or so. You give the vote to the young, the stupid, the irresponsible, the women, etc., and it goes downhill. In America's case, it took a long time to go downhill because we had a lot of human and real capital built up.

Now, this is all why this country, as I wrote already above, was not set up to BE a democracy, Mr #126. It was to be a Constitutional Republic, with powers of the Feral Gov't limited by the document. However, once the population treats it as nothing but a piece of paper, that's all it becomes.

AnonFromTN , says: November 30, 2018 at 4:56 pm GMT
Chinese progress is impressive in absolute terms, but it is much more impressive in relative terms. While the US and all its sidekicks are ruining their countries by losing manufacturing, running up mountains of debt, and dumbing down the populace by horrible educational system and uncontrolled immigration of wild hordes with medieval mentality, some countries, including China, keep moving up. But the achievements of China or Russia wouldn't look so great without the simultaneous suicide of the West.

Let me give you the example I know best. As a scientist and an Editor of several scientific journals I see the decline of scientific production in the US: just 20 years ago it clearly dominated, but now it went way down. There emerged lots of papers from big China. Quality-wise, most of them are still sub-par, but they are getting into fairly decent journals because of the void left by the decline of science in the US.

Yes, if current tendencies continue for 20 more years, Chinese science would improve and China would become an uncontested leader in that field. However, if the US reins in its thieving elites and shifts to a more sensible course, it still has the potential to remain the world leader in science. It just needs to cut military spending to 20-30% of its current crazy unsustainable levels and invest some of the saved resources into science, industry (real one, not banking that only produces bubbles galore), and infrastructure. Is this realistic? Maybe not, but hope springs eternal.

DB Cooper , says: November 30, 2018 at 5:05 pm GMT
@Jason Liu As a long time China watcher myself I didn't see anything you described with regards to China's foreign policy, including its dealing with its East Asian neighbors. From what I saw China's statecraft with respect to its neighbors is mature, friendly, measured, restraint and long term thinking. May be I am missing something or see something and interpret it in an opposite way than you did. For example you said

"and absolutely failed at making friends with our East Asian neighbors, instead driving them further into the arms of the Americans"

"Angry, condescending attitudes towards our neighbors, especially Japan, severely cripple China's ability to be a world player. "

I didn't see any of that. Any specific example to illustrate your point?

AnonFromTN , says: November 30, 2018 at 5:23 pm GMT
@DB Cooper Again, Chinese and Russian foreign policy looks best when you compare it to the US. Both countries made their fair share of blunders, but next to the rabid dog US they look decidedly sensible and restrained.
Digital Samizdat , says: November 30, 2018 at 6:38 pm GMT
@Jason Liu You may very well be accurately describing the attitudes of individual Chinamen; but I see no evidence that the Chinese government is all that guilty of alienating other countries. On the contrary, they seem to be doing quite well. Even the hated Japs can't seem to invest enough money into China.
Digital Samizdat , says: November 30, 2018 at 6:43 pm GMT

There may be something to this. If you look at centuries of Chinese painting, you will see that each generation largely made copies of earlier masters. As nearly as I, a nonexpert, can tell, there is more variety and imagination in the Corcoran Gallery's annual exhibition of high-school artists than in all of Chinese paining.

There was a point in time when I would have agreed with Fred on this; but seeing what's become of Western art over the last century, I can't anymore. A few centuries ago, Western art was surely making progress by leaps and bounds. These days though, it's in swift decline. All it's got left to offer is pointless pretentiousness. At least traditional Chinese painting still requires some real craftsmanship and skill.

Digital Samizdat , says: November 30, 2018 at 6:56 pm GMT
@Ali Choudhury

Chinese progress has been most impressive but the country is sitting on an enormous pile of private and SOE debt.. There has not been a country in recorded history that has accumulated debt at the rate China did post the 2008 crash.

This is what happens to your brain on Forbes and the Wall Street Journal . In reality, China is the world's largest creditor. In fact, it's the US which is the largest debtor in the world.

All that Chinese debt that the Western presstitutes go on an on about is really just an accounting gimmick: some state-owned bank in China makes a loan to some state-owned conglomerate there, and this gets written down as a debt. But the Chinese government (which owns both of them) is never going to allow either of the two parties to actually go bankrupt, so the debt isn't actually real. It's no different than ordering your right-pocket to lend your left-pocket ten dollars: your right-pocket may now record that loan as an 'asset' on a balance sheet somewhere, while your left-pocket will now record it as a 'liability', but you as a person aren't any richer or poorer than you were before. You still have ten dollars–no more, no less. And so it is with China. They merely 'owe' that money to themselves.

Cyrano , says: November 30, 2018 at 7:11 pm GMT
@Achmed E. Newman Dictatorships are personality dependent, as opposed to democracies that are ? dependent. Communism came up with a catchy slogan – dictatorship of the proletariat. Why couldn't US – which are, after all, a birthplace of propaganda – come up with a similarly catchy slogan, such as: Democracy – dictatorship of the elitariat? Or maybe, Democracy – dictatorship of the deep state.

I personally prefer elections where there is only one candidate and one voter – the dictator, it kind of simplifies things. I think it takes a lot of bravery to be a dictator, you don't delegate glory, but you don't delegate blame either, you take full responsibility and full credit for whatever is happening in the country.

raywood , says: November 30, 2018 at 8:07 pm GMT
I didn't have time to read all the comments. But the ones I read, and especially the article itself, I found very interesting. Keep up the good work!
Ali Choudhury , says: November 30, 2018 at 8:40 pm GMT
@Digital Samizdat The sheer amount of shadow debt outstanding is huge. 250 to 300% of GDP by some estimates. You reckon the Chinese government have this covered and can rescue failing institutions. They probably don't even know how many bad loans need to be written off and how badly it will cause a squeeze on normal lending.
Random Smartaleck , says: November 30, 2018 at 8:56 pm GMT
@DB Cooper

From what I saw China's statecraft with respect to its neighbors is mature, friendly, measured, restraint and long term thinking.

Do you think that correctly describes China's handling of claims in the South China Sea, or its attitude toward the independent country of Taiwan, or its promotion of anti-Japanese propaganda on Chinese television?

Random Smartaleck , says: November 30, 2018 at 9:09 pm GMT
@Digital Samizdat

but I see no evidence that the Chinese government is all that guilty of alienating other countries.

Its complete disregard of other nations' entirely legitimate claims in the South China Sea is evidence to the contrary. It's not as if other nations must completely sever all relations with China for any alienation to be occurring.

Random Smartaleck , says: November 30, 2018 at 9:22 pm GMT
@Jason Liu Excellent comment, Jason. Certainly if China wishes to again become Elder Brother to East Asia, it needs to start relating to its neighbors as Little Brothers instead of obstacles to be rudely shoved aside.
Brian Reilly , says: November 30, 2018 at 9:24 pm GMT
@gmachine1729 gmachine, Glad to hear you are in a place that you like and suits you. That is what nations are all about. I am also in favor of native peoples contributing their effort (through commercial, intellectual and spiritual endeavors) to the benefit of their fellow nation-citizens, as long as those contributions are not wrung out by force of the state.

And Russia will have a lot more people by and by. They will be Chinese or Uyghar (sp?) perhaps, but that empty space will surely be put to use by someone or someones. Whether the Russians like that much could be another matter.

DB Cooper , says: November 30, 2018 at 9:35 pm GMT
@Random Smartaleck China's handling of the claims in South China Sea has been characterized by restraint and a lot of patience. Basically a combination of dangling a big carrot with a small stick. This is the reason the ASEAN has signed up to the SCS code of conduct and the relation between the Philippines and China is at a all time high since Aquino's engineered the PCA farce several years ago.

Taiwan considered itself the legitimate government of all of China encompassing the mainland. It's official name is the Republic of China. Mainland China considered itself the legitimate the government of all of China encompassing the island of Taiwan. Its official name is the People's Republic of China. The so called 92 consensus agreed by both sides is that each side agreed there is only one China and each side is free to interpret its own version of China. For the mainland that means PRC (Peoples Republic of China). For Taiwan that means ROC (Republic of China). There is no such thing as the independent country of Taiwan.

China's tv has world war II drama doesn't constitute propaganda in as much as history channel in the US has world war II topics all the time.

Brian Reilly , says: November 30, 2018 at 9:38 pm GMT
If the reporting I have read (widely sourced) about infrastructure quality, durability, and actual utility is even 1/2 correct, quite a lot of government (especially provincial government) directed development cannot and will not prove to be wise investment. Combined with the opaque economic reporting, also subject to differing reporting as is infrastructure rating, there is some good reason t believe that the nation has some huge huge challenges diretly ahead.

The male overhang in China (and in India, others as well, but much smaller) is another potential problem that is difficult to assess. Maybe it is a nothingburger, and 50 million men without any chance to have a single wife will just find something else worthwhile and rewarding to do with their time. Maybe not. Combine wasted urban investment, financial chicanery on a gross scale, a narrow authoritarian structure and tens of millions of unsatisfied, un-familied men, the downside looks pretty ugly.

Maybe that reporting is all bullshit. I don't think so. I think that Chinese leadership is likely very concerned, hence so many of them securing property and anchor babies in the West. I do hope for the sake of the Chinese people, and the rest of the globe, that whatever comes along will not be too bad.

DB Cooper , says: November 30, 2018 at 9:43 pm GMT
@Random Smartaleck "Its complete disregard of other nations' entirely legitimate claims in the South China Sea is evidence to the contrary."

The fact is that the claim of the Phillipines and Vietnam is highly illegitimate according to international law and convention.

Anon [348] Disclaimer , says: November 30, 2018 at 10:58 pm GMT
This is why I'm not afraid of China: Chinese are greedy soulless capitalists, or pagans as another poster calls them. Spot on. A country of 1.3 billion pagans will always stay a low trust society. Every Chinese dreams of getting rich, so they can get the hell out of China.

As for all the worship of education, no fear there either, the end goal of every single one of their top students is to go an American university, then once they get here, do everything they can to stay and never go back.

This is why I fear China: they are invading us, and bringing their dog-eat-dog, pagan ways with them, slowly but surely turning us into another low-trust, pagan society like the one they left behind. Also once they get here they instantly start chanting "China #1!", and look out for interest of China rather than that of the US. If we were wise we would stop this invasion now, but Javanka can't get enough of their EB5 dollars.

Anon [348] Disclaimer , says: November 30, 2018 at 11:10 pm GMT

when a society favors profits over freedom and conscience, it becomes crass, shallow, and materialistic.

i.e. it becomes the United States.

another fred , says: November 30, 2018 at 11:50 pm GMT
@Digital Samizdat The problem is neither debt nor bankruptcies, although they are part of what is going on. It is the artificially elevated level of economic activity and the expectations of the people depending on that level continuing to sustain their lifestyles. The activity can only be sustained by expanding credit. If you believe that credit can continue to expand infinitely, well, we will see.

I notice that the Chinese are reducing their personal consumption in response to the cracks appearing in the economies of the world. They are wise to do so.

We have the same problem in the US, probably worse, and it exists throughout most of the "first" world. China has a decided advantage because of the degree of social control of its people, but China will not be immune when the bubble breaks.

witters , says: December 1, 2018 at 12:02 am GMT
@Anon Fred probably shouldn't say anything about art, but when has ignorance got in the way of USian cultural putdowns? Anyway, the very idea that the Chinese merely make copies is nonsense, pure and simple.

https://aeon.co/essays/why-in-china-and-japan-a-copy-is-just-as-good-as-an-original

Mark T , says: December 1, 2018 at 11:54 am GMT
@Digital Samizdat Well put. The propaganda on US websites is always about the debt as there is a need to believe that China is going to collapse as it simply can't have achieved what it has without freedom, democracy and the American way, or more accurately by not employing the disastrous policy mix known as the Washington Consensus. It is the countries who followed that (likely deliberately) flawed model of open exchange rates, low value added manufacturing (to enrich US multinationals and consumers) with western FDI that have given the support for the otherwise flawed Reinhardt and Roghoff study that everyone (who hasn't actually read it) uses to justify why debt to GDP is 'a bad thing' over a certain level. As those benighted emerging economies prospered from their trade relationship they were then offered lots of nice $ loans for consumption, buying cars and houses and lots of western consumer goods. So current account deficit, more $ funding, inflation, higher interest rates to control inflation triggering a flow of hot money that drivers the exchange rate temporarily higher undermining the export model. Then crash – exchange rate has killed export model, interest rates cripple domestic demand, financial markets plummet, hot money rushes out, exchange rate collapses so stagflation. Wall Street comes in and privatises the best assets and the US taxpayer bails out the banks. Rinse and repeat.
China was supposed to 'act like a normal country' and play this game, but it didn't. It followed the mercantilist model and built a balanced economy without importing western consumer goods and financial services. However, unlike Germany, Japan or S.Korea, China does not have a standing US Army on its soil to ensure that everything gets done for good old Uncle Sam. Hence the bellicosity and the propaganda. China's debts are owned by China, as are a lot of America's debts. Raising debt to build infrastructure and assets like toll roads, airports, electricity grids, high speed railways means that there is an income bearing asset to offset the liability. Raising debt to maintain hundreds of imperial bases around the world less so.
Digital Samizdat , says: December 1, 2018 at 5:50 pm GMT
@Mark T You are very perceptive. The reason why China's debts are 'bad' while Uncle Scam's debts are 'good' is because (((the usual suspects))) are profiting off the latter, but not the former. They were betting that, if they gave the Chinese our industry, China would repay the favor by giving them their finance sector in return. But that's not what happened! And now, (((the usual suspects))) are waking up to the rather embarrassing realization they got played by some slick operators from the East from wayyyy back East.
Random Smartaleck , says: December 1, 2018 at 9:15 pm GMT
@DB Cooper

The so called 92 consensus agreed by both sides is that each side agreed there is only one China and each side is free to interpret its own version of China. For the mainland that means PRC (Peoples Republic of China). For Taiwan that means ROC (Republic of China). There is no such thing as the independent country of Taiwan.

The "One China Policy" is a diplomatic sham designed to avoid bruising the fragile egos of the two Chinas, and is insisted on by the PRC to aid in their Finlandization & eventual absorption of Taiwan. Taiwan has been an independent country in all but diplomatic nomenclature for 70 years. The PRC's claim that Taiwan is a "renegade province" is laughable. The island is simply territory that the CCP never conquered. It is only the CCP's mad insistence on the "China is the CCP, the CCP is China" formulation that convinces it otherwise.

Likewise, Taiwan's claim of jurisdiction over the mainland -- while justifiable given history -- is simply delusional. The ROC can do absolutely nothing to enforce this claim, and, barring something truly extraordinary, will never be the government of the mainland again. Regardless, this claim does not negate Taiwan's de facto independence because it has absolutely nothing to do with placing Taiwan under others' control.

So, thus, "the independent country of Taiwan."

Random Smartaleck , says: December 1, 2018 at 9:37 pm GMT
@DB Cooper

China's tv has world war II drama doesn't constitute propaganda in as much as history channel in the US has world war II topics all the time.

You know better than that. We aren't talking about sober, fair-minded documentaries here. The Chinese productions are lurid, over-the-top demonizations of the Japanese. These combined with the National Humiliation curriculum and various museums show that the CCP quite likes stoking hatred against Japan among the Chinese masses perhaps they hope to exploit it in some near-future manufactured conflict.

DB Cooper , says: December 1, 2018 at 10:42 pm GMT
@Random Smartaleck "The "One China Policy" is a diplomatic sham designed to avoid bruising the fragile egos of the two Chinas, and is insisted on by the PRC to aid in their Finlandization & eventual absorption of Taiwan. "

It is insisted on by both sides. The quarrel between the ROC and the PRC is which one is the legitimate government of China. The 92′ consensus only formalized this understanding in a documented form.

This "One China Policy" has its root deep into the historic narrative of China when successive dynasties replaced one after another and which dynasty should be recognized as the legitimate successor dynasty to the former dynasty. If you read any Chinese history book at the end of the book there is usually a cronological order of successive Chinese dynasties one followed another in a linear fashion. But of course in reality very often it is not that clean cut. Sometimes between transition several petty dynasties coexist each vying for the legitimacy to get the mandate of heaven to rule the whole of China. This "One China Policy" is just a modern manifestation of this kind of cultural understanding of the Chinese people and has nothing to do with Communism, Nationalism or whateverism.

DB Cooper , says: December 1, 2018 at 10:48 pm GMT
@Random Smartaleck "These combined with the National Humiliation curriculum and various museums show that the CCP quite likes stoking hatred against Japan among the Chinese masses perhaps they hope to exploit it in some near-future manufactured conflict."

These kind of museums are fairly newly built, three decades old at most, many are even newer and is a direct response to Japan historic revisism. If the CCP want to milk this kind of anti-Japanese sentiment for its political purpose shouldn't they built this kind of museum earlier? From what I understand the elaborate annual reenactment of the atomic bombing in Nagasaki and Hiroshima begin the moment the US retreated from the administration of Japan in 1972. Now this is what I called the milking a victimhood sentiment for its political purpose.

The largest tourist group to Japan from a foreign country is from mainland. If the CCP is really stoking hatred to the Japanese then they really suck at it. What Japan did to China in the last century don't need any stoking. History speaks for itself.

Simply Simon , says: December 1, 2018 at 11:02 pm GMT
I would not debate Fred on any of the points he makes but I have a point of my own.After they read Fred's article select any number of Chinese men and women at random and tell them they are welcome to migrate to the US with no strings attached and at the same time select any number of American men and women at random and tell them they will likewise be welcomed by the Chinese. The proof should be in the pudding.
Anon [131] Disclaimer , says: December 1, 2018 at 11:28 pm GMT
@Mark T

It followed the mercantilist model and built a balanced economy without importing western consumer goods and financial services.

Agree somewhat. China did and does import a lot of western consumer goods. China is Germany's biggest trading partner, and Germany has trade surplus with China. And China isn't even the world's largest trade surplus country . Germany is, followed by Japan. ..

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-poised-to-set-worlds-largest-trade-surplus/a-45150968

Germany poised to set world's largest trade surplus. Germany is on track to record the world's largest trade surplus for a third consecutive year. The country's $299 billion surplus is poised to attract criticism, however, both at home and internationally. Germany is expected to set a €264 billion ($299 billion) trade surplus this year, far more than its closest export rivals Japan and the Netherlands, according to research published Monday by Munich-based economic research institute Ifo.

GM does well in China, selling more cars in China than it does in the US. (Personally I think GM makes crappy cars. ) It is successful in China, because GM has been doing a fantastic job of marketing its brand and American brands still enjoy prestige in China. And Apple certainly wouldn't have become the first trillion dollar company without China's market.

On a personal note, one of my relatives sells American medical devices to China and makes decent money. It isn't easy though as competition is fierce. America is not the only country that makes good medical devices. You have to compete with products from other countries.

With regard to the financial section, China has been extremely cautious of opening it up. Can you blame China? Given how the Wall Street operates. China just didn't have expertise, experience or regulations to handle a lot of these stuff. China has been preparing it, though, and it is ready to reform the market.

Beijing pushes ahead with opening up its financial sector despite trade tensions.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/25/beijing-pushes-ahead-with-financial-opening-up-despite-trade-tensions.html

Also, China is one of the backers for the WTO reform.

Anon [131] Disclaimer , says: December 2, 2018 at 12:25 am GMT
@DB Cooper Well said.

In "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" , the first sentence of the book is " 話說天下大勢，分久必合，合久必分. It can be roughly translated as "Under the heaven the general trend is : what is long divided, must unite; what is long united, must divide".

I believe in my lifetime China and Taiwan will unite again, and North Korea and South Korea will become One Korea.

Romance of the Three Kingdoms – Wikipedia

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

Romance of the Three Kingdoms is a 14th-century historical novel attributed to Luo Guanzhong. It is set in the turbulent years towards the end of the Han dynasty and the Three Kingdoms period in Chinese history

SZ , says: December 2, 2018 at 4:22 pm GMT
What is wrong with less 'inventiveness'? Do we really need a software update every 1 or 2 years? Just think, for example, how annoying the 'microsoft office ribbon' is for most of its adult and serious users who would prefer good-old drop-down menus! Or do we really need to change our clothes and phones every year and renew our furniture every decade because the preferred style is changing? The vast majority of the world, especially those areas where communitarian family models were the norm at some point in time, would embrace a little stability over coping with each unnecessary 'invention'. For the Anglo-Saxon world, marked by the 'absolute nuclear family', on the other hand, stability and predictability is a nightmare and an assault on their precious individuality. Hence, the tension between the US-led bloc of English-speaking nations and China-Russia-led Eurasia is no surprise, but rather the natural outcome of the cultural fabric of each bloc. A world succumbing to the Chinese vision would definitely be more dull, but more stable and foreseeable as well.
Rich , says: December 2, 2018 at 6:44 pm GMT
This has been an excellent article along with some excellent commentary. It's difficult to get a clear picture of what's actually happening in China and every little bit helps. Two of my kids went to Ivy League schools and when we were doing the drive to check them all out, they were filled with Asians. The Chinese I deal with are very materialistic and appear to base their importance on wealth and position. One poor Chinese kid I know who works as a mechanic tells me Chinese girls won't even date him because of his status. Of course I live in NY where most people are materialistic so it's hard to tell if that's a Chinese trait or not. They do appear to be a very smart, hard driven people and there's a whole lot of them, so there's a chance we start seeing them replace our present elite in the near future.
Achmed E. Newman , says: Website December 2, 2018 at 7:48 pm GMT
@Rich

One poor Chinese kid I know who works as a mechanic tells me Chinese girls won't even date him because of his status.
so it's hard to tell if that's a Chinese trait or not.

Yes that is a trait, Rich, and though somewhat prevalent in America too, the Chinese seem to have no respect for guys that work with their hands. To me, that's shameful. They respect the rich conniving businessman over the honest laborer.

I'd like to see one of the China-#1 commenters on here, or even Fred Reed*, argue with me on that one. The British-descended especially, but all of white American culture has a respect for honesty. That is absolutely NOT the case with the Chinese, whether living in China or right here. See Peak Stupidity on DIY's in China vs. America – Here is Part 1 .

* You're not gonna gain this kind of knowledge in a couple of weeks and without hanging with Chinese people, though.

Realist , says: December 2, 2018 at 8:00 pm GMT

Socially China has a great advantage over America in that, except for the Muslims of Xinjiang, it is pretty much a Han monoculture. Lacking America's racial diversity, its cities do not burn, no pressure exists to infantilize the schools for the benefit of incompetent minorities, racial mobs do not loot stores, and there is very little street crime.

America's huge urban pockets of illiteracy do not exist. There is not the virulent political division that has gangs of uncontrolled Antifa hoodlums stalking public officials. China takes education seriously, as America does not. Students study, behave as maturely as their age would suggest, and do not engage in middle-school politics.

Agreed. China is not burdened by the abomination of cultural and racial strife. The United States has lost trillions of dollars due to racial and cultural differences.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website December 2, 2018 at 8:00 pm GMT
@DB Cooper I'm not picking on, or arguing at all with, you in particular, Mr. Cooper, but let me chime in about this whole Mainland China vs. Taiwan thing. The first thing to remember is, excepting the original Taiwanese people who've been invaded left and right, these people are ALL CHINESE. They will eventually get back together, as the Germans have, and (I'm in agreement with another guy on this thread) the Koreans will.

Even the Chinese widow of Claire Chenault, the leader of the great American AVG Flying Tigers who supported the Nationalist Chiang Kai-Shek, had worked for years enabling business between Taiwan and the mainland. There is so much business between the 2 that any kind of war would seriously impede, and right now, the business of China is business (where have I heard that before?)

Another thing I can say about it is that it's sure none of America's business, at this point. The Cold War ended almost 3 decades ago. We are beyond broke, and it does us nothing but harm in thinking we must "defend" an island of Chinamen against a continent of Chinamen. Let the Republic Of China and the People's Republic Of China save faces in whatever asinine ways they see fit to. It's not a damn bit of America's business.

Realist , says: December 2, 2018 at 8:06 pm GMT
@Simply Simon

After they read Fred's article select any number of Chinese men and women at random and tell them they are welcome to migrate to the US with no strings attached and at the same time select any number of American men and women at random and tell them they will likewise be welcomed by the Chinese. The proof should be in the pudding.

American propaganda plays a big part here. Plus more Chinese speak English than Americans speak Mandarin.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website December 2, 2018 at 8:40 pm GMT
@Citizen of a Silly Country YOU may be behind about about a decade on this one, CoaSC, so touche*!

What I mean is, you may not have looked at it in a while, but the last bunch of times I've seen the "History Channel", it was all about one set of guys trying to sell their old crap to another bunch of guys, and the drama that apparently goes with that the Pawn Stars . Where history comes in, I have no earthly idea. I'd much rather be watching the Nazi Channel over this latest iteration of that network. Better yet, though, I don't watch TV.

* I think from the Chongching vs. Chongqing thing (you were right, of course). I hope I am remembering correctly.

MIT Handle , says: December 2, 2018 at 9:09 pm GMT
@Simply Simon I recently did a graduate degree at MIT, where there are a ton of Chinese students. They seem to be proud of China's progress, but as far as I can tell, almost all of them want to remain in the U.S.
Ben Sampson , says: December 2, 2018 at 10:18 pm GMT
@Jason Liu fine commentary Jason Lu. from the little I know Lu is very useful here..for the Chinese!
Ben Sampson , says: December 2, 2018 at 10:35 pm GMT
@Realist abomination of racial and cultural strife! Incredible! why is such diversity an abomination and not an advantage?

Because America ripped off all the people who are in strife' currently..and never addressed what such exploitation did to them socially ..making what could be an advantage a so-called 'abomination'

if some of the trillions had been spent on the needs of the American people by building essential physical and social infrastructure to meet popular need, then there would be no strife, people would have opportunity and structures to do their business..there would be no social loss and diversity would not be the problem that it is

the American system uses up people and discards them to the wayside when immediate exploitation needs are met. but we all know this making that comment inaccurate, nonsense really.

and again the 'strife has been going on so long that the elites should know it inside out and be able to address it positively. that they have not means that they do not care about the people period. they are prepared to let the strife go on and exploit that for profit and social control too

Simply Simon , says: December 3, 2018 at 12:14 am GMT
@MIT Handle It's the proof of the pudding. No matter how progressive China is the students value America's freedom of speech, movement, and religious liberty to name a few of the things we cherish.
Biff , says: December 3, 2018 at 6:12 am GMT
@AnonFromTN

It just needs to cut military spending to 20-30% of its current crazy unsustainable levels and invest some of the saved resources into science,

An idealist, and way off the mark. Empire's number one goal isn't a scientific one, but rather a financial one. The entire purpose of the U.S. military is to secure, and shore up Wall Street(White/Jewish) capitol on a global scale. Smedley Butler wrote about this very fact in the 1930's, and it still remains just as true. The Cold War/Vietnam war wasn't fought to battle a weak, retarded economic system such as communism, but rather to shore up financial dominance – for the same reason the U.S. military is fixated on oil fields, pipelines and other resources – Money!
Financial weapons(sanctions) can kill way more people than bombs, and(loan sharking-IMF World Bank) can conquer more territory than armies(Central, South America, Africa, Greece, etc )
And the goal is not to just remain the the financial dominant system, but more importantly, to destroy any potential competition – this is what is putting Russia, China, and the Eurasian economic system in Washington's cross hairs.

The U.S. military strategists have mentioned on many occasions that they are not afraid of a larger military, but rather they are deathly afraid of a larger economy. If scientists are needed for stated goals then so be it, but they are not the crucial factor.

Priorities man.

Jeff Stryker , says: December 3, 2018 at 6:56 am GMT
@MBlanc46 Why would China need US investment? They get massive investment from Singapore other wealthy Asian countries.

There is massive remissions from Chinese in Canada, UK and Australia. China has the money to invest extensively in Africa. Recently the Philippines went to China for investment instead of the United States. The rest of the world has pretty much written the US as declining irrelevant former Superpower in economic terms. It still has military power as Fred noted but you cannot take over foreign economies with a military.

Jeff Stryker , says: December 3, 2018 at 7:08 am GMT
@Jason Liu JASON

You say all that but Fuji Chinese took over the economies of Philippines (A US ally no less), Malaysia, Indonesia, Cambodia, Vietnam (Less so because the Vietnamese hate the Chinese).

If the Koreans or Japanese did not hate the Chinese so much, they would probably take over their economies as well.

The real Chinese power is not IN China. It is with Fuji Chinese merchants in Southeast Asia.

Petty greed? And this is not rampant in Israel, US, Russia, Latin America .

Tyrion 2 , says: December 3, 2018 at 8:03 am GMT
@Jason Liu The most anti-China people I've ever spent time with were the incredibly successful Chinese diaspora in SE Asia. I found their contempt shocking. Chinese people were made the butt of their jokes even on seemingly random topics. Your post offers an explanation.

I'm much more positive about your (?) country. I really liked it. But it does give me pause for thought whenever familiarity breeds contempt.

My own little annoyance came recently. I had reason to download WeChat. It was the easiest way to coordinate some business. When I later tried to delete my account, I found I could not. After searching for an answer, I read that I had to email the company and was certainly not guaranteed a response nor any action. That put the first line of their marketing about "300 million" users into perspective.

Another anecdotal thing I've noticed. There used to be lots of Chinese restaurants in London and very few Japanese, Korean, Thai and Vietnamese. There are now more of all of the latter near me, and the Chinese restaurants are generally very low quality holdouts, probably surviving by holding long cheap leases. People really like the other cultures, especially Korea and Japan, not so much the Chinese – a strange fact given the history of East Asia.

Hanoodtroll , says: December 3, 2018 at 9:19 am GMT
@Thorfinnsson

More relevant comparisons might be South Korea and Taiwan

Neither comparisons are exactly relevant. These two countries are tiny compared to China. But more importantly, America took both of them entirely under its wings, due to specific geopolitical conditions. Without the Korean and Vietnam wars, China-US thaw might have happened earlier, who knows. Godfree isn't wrong when he points out that China was under complete embargo. It's not like they had much of a choice other than central planning.

Nonny , says: December 3, 2018 at 10:14 am GMT
@Jason Liu Brilliant, Jason! Now, what does he have to fear from giving the Uigurs and Tibetans the right of self-determination instead of following the Israeli model and sending swarms of Han in?

And why the threat of war over every square inch along the Indian border, where the people are definitely not Han?

Why this greedy insanity, when if the idiot could learn the meaning of reconciliation China would zoom ahead at record speed! Is he a Jew in disguise?

Jeff Stryker , says: December 3, 2018 at 12:18 pm GMT
@Tyrion 2 I worked for Chinese-Filipinos and this is really 100% true. The ethnic Chinese in Southeast Asia are the most heartless capitalists on earth.
Mike P , says: December 3, 2018 at 1:15 pm GMT

China has a government that can do things: In 2008 an 8.0 quake devastated the region near the Tibetan border, killing, according to the Chinese government, some 100,000 people. Buildings put up long before simply collapsed

Well what the Chinese government could not do is prevent the corruption that allowed many of these collapsed buildings to be constructed from poor materials and without regard for earthquake-related building codes.

That an overall mediocre country like China can be held up as a paragon of efficiency and achievement to an American audience only speaks to the desperate rot afflicting America itself. China has not managed to produce any internationally competitive products of any complexity such as cars or airplanes; and to the extent it is beginning to succeed, this is due to foreign investment and theft of IP. Meanwhile, South Korea has shown the world how it's done properly.

Prusmc , says: December 3, 2018 at 2:25 pm GMT
@Mike P Poor construction materials, second rate engineering, pay offs and cronyism sounds like diversity bridge that collapsed in Miami.
therevolutionwas , says: December 3, 2018 at 2:35 pm GMT
@Jason Liu Alasdair Macleod puts out some interesting articles on China, economically speaking. I liked your comment. https://www.goldmoney.com/research/goldmoney-insights/china-s-monetary-policy-must-change
Z-man , says: December 3, 2018 at 2:51 pm GMT

In terms of economic systems, the Chinese are clearly superior. China runs a large economic surplus

Up to now on the backs of poorly paid/overworked peasants. Shot a big hole in your article right away. Damn and I don't get paid for this?!? (Grin)

PS. Intelectual theft of mostly Western knowledge. Snap! Second hole shot. I need to get an agent, I'm soooo good I should be in charge of Face the Nation. (Smile) But I would keep the lovley Margaret Brennan as the host. (Grin)

TG , says: December 3, 2018 at 3:00 pm GMT
OK, good points, but a couple of comments.

1. China's one-child policy did not come about as a sort of attempt at eugenics. It came about because the previous six-child policy ("strength through numbers") was a colossal failure, and the resulting poverty nearly tore the communist state apart at the seems. So often governments insist on rapidly growing the population, and then when they get their wish, they realize that a massive number of hungry and angry people leads not to strength but to weakness. Just look at what happened when the Syrian government tried that

2. China peaceful? Not hardly. China is peaceful now because most people are doing OK. Back when population was pushing at the limits – during Mao's early phase, and before – when people were chronically malnourished and living in mud – no, the Chinese people were not peaceful.

3. Again, numbers do not always translate into strength. India looks to surpass China in total population, and they will be lucky just to avoid collapse.

4. Another thought: China is essentially ethnically pure Han Chinese. This might make revolts possible, as the people find it easy to band together. Not so in India, which is a massive pastiche of 100′s of different racial and ethnic groups – which are too busy competing with each other to band together. There is an old saying that the worst poverty that a people will accept before revolting, is exactly what they will end up with. Could part of China's strength be the fear of the elites that, if the people are crushed too much, that things could fall apart?

Carroll Price , says: December 3, 2018 at 3:41 pm GMT
Regarding economic and scientific advancements with which no one at the time could effectively compete, China sounds a bit like Germany prior to England, Russia and the United States combining economic and military resources to destroy it.
Jeff Stryker , says: December 3, 2018 at 3:42 pm GMT
@Realist That isn't true. There are thousands of us now in Asia. White males are everywhere in Asia doing every kind of business. I've been here for years.
anonymous [739] Disclaimer , says: December 3, 2018 at 3:46 pm GMT
Can some ethnic Han Chinese in the know give us the scoop on this: Are Han Chinese merchants, bankers getting back on top in places like Vietnam, Indonesia? There were huge anti Chinese riots in Indonesia in the 1960s and Han Chinese Merchants were singled out for ethnic cleansing by victorious Vietnamese Communists in ~ 1975 – the first Vietnamese boat people were Han Chinese merchants.

My take is that the Han Chinese in China and elsewhere in Asia are a lot like Japanese nationalist in the 1930s and Jewish merchants/bankers forever.

In all of this Chinese sphere of influence ares of Asia I think 2018 USA has pretty much nothing to offer except maybe playing balance of power to contain China and yes, have military alliances with all the countries in Asia that are not mainland China – I'm sure the Vietnamese want us back to militarize the Vietnam/China border – and we're good at that sort of thing, but we absolutely can not and will not control, protect our own Southern border.

Life sucks.

Agent76 , says: December 3, 2018 at 3:48 pm GMT
Nov 28, 2018 Belt & Road Billionaire in Massive Bribery Scandal

The bribery trial of Dr. Patrick Ho, a pitchman for a Chinese energy company, lifts the lid on how the Chinese regime relies on graft to cut Belt and Road deals in its global push for economic and geopolitical dominance.

Sent from my iPhone

Carroll Price , says: December 3, 2018 at 4:06 pm GMT
@nickels When was the last time Western Christianity demonstrated any moral conduct toward other nations? Was it England and the US fire-bombing German cities filled with civilians, followed by dropping two nuclear bombs on a defeated nation?
Rurik , says: December 3, 2018 at 5:22 pm GMT

as the US tries to garrison the world. Always favoring coercion, Washington now tries to batter the planet into submission via tarifffs, sanctions, embargos, and so on.

"and so on" ? Why not just be honest Fredo? Without tariffs, the lot of the American working class would eventually fall to the level of the rest of the Third World's teeming billions of near-starving wretches. As the one percent continued to move all its manufacturing to the slave labor wage rates of China and Mexico, et al.

By imposing tariffs on the products that the internationalist scumfucks build in China and elsewhere, it tends to encourage the production of these things domestically, thereby protecting the ever falling wages of the reviled American working class. Also China engages in policies that are specifically intended to bolster China, like protectionist economics. Whereas the ZUS does the opposite, its elite favoring policies that specifically fuck over the despised American citizen in favor of anyone else.

So Trump's tariffs are one of the few things he's actually doing right. At least if you're not one of those internationalist scumfucks who despise all things working class American.

As for

"US tries to garrison the world. Always favoring coercion, Washington now tries to batter the planet into submission sanctions, embargos,"

That is all being done on behalf of the Zionist fiend who owns our central bank. Duh.

What would be good, is for the ZUS to tell the Zionists to fuck off –

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/30/rand-paul-israel-military-aid-congress-senate-1036943

- returned to being the USA (by ending the Fed), and imposed massive tariffs on any industry that off-shored its manufacturing. Hell, any industry that threatens the well-being of our domestic industries. That pay domestic taxes and employ Americans.

This is the kind of thing China does, and if though some miracle our treasonous government scoundrels were all to get hanged by lampposts on the glorious Day of the Rope, perhaps then we'd do the same.

denk , says: December 3, 2018 at 6:11 pm GMT
@Jason Liu A wog's self critique

A wise dictator is great for the country, but Xi is not wise. He is a stubborn old man stuck in the past who is clearly not listening to advisers. He has overplayed his hand, confronted the US 10~20 years too early, *

When was the last time China sent gunboats or spy planes to murikka's doorstep ? [hint] fukus have been doing that since the day of Opium war.]

Who started the trade war anyway ?

*damaged China's image out of some paranoid fear of Uyghurs,*

Tell that to the victims of CIA sponsored Uighurs head choppers

[1]

*and absolutely failed at making friends with our East Asian neighbors, instead driving them further into the arms of the Americans.*

[sic]

I've posted many times here and MOA, a tally of all panda huggers PM/prez in EA, SA, SEA .,who were ousted/liquidated by fukus shenanigans. [2]

True to form, fukus turned around to accuse China .of ' driving all its friends into the arm of the murikkans'

fukus have many sins.
but their vilest depravity must surely be .
Robbery crying out robbery.

There's this sanctimonious journo from BBC , who 'boldly' confront a Chinese diplomat,
' Do you realise your assertive/aggressive policies are driving all your friends away/ / .'

what a prick !

[1]
Ron frowns on image posting,
but very often a picture is worth a thousand words.!

[2]
Exhibit jp

http://www.4thmedia.org/2012/10/a-japanese-ex-diplomat-accues-the-sino-japanese-rift-part-of-us-agenda-the-truth-behind-post-war-history/

P.S.
YOUR critique might be very PC and earns you hundreds of up votes, but its all a load of bull.
Trouble is, the mushroom club members have been kept in the dark and fed bullshit so long, bull is exactly what they enjoy most.
hehehheh

Realist , says: December 3, 2018 at 6:14 pm GMT
@Jeff Stryker

That isn't true. There are thousands of us now in Asia.

Thousands out of 1.6 billion .that is insignificant. Are you a citizen of China???

MarkinPNW , says: December 3, 2018 at 7:38 pm GMT
@Achmed E. Newman So Mao's Cultural Revolution to elevate the status of workers and peasants didn't have any lasting effect?

I seem to remember from Historian David Hackett Fisher how in the British American colonies craftsmen who work with their hands such as tinsmith/silversmith Paul Revere were highly regarded and enjoyed status due to recognition of the value of their work to society, with honest skilled workers enjoying status as a calling equal to religious and government leaders.

I also remember from somewhere the idea that countries with thriving middle classes were countries that acknowledged and valued the work of blue collar and even unskilled labor, while those that don't value the work of the "lower classes" are the ones stuck with a rich elite, and poverty for the masses.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website December 3, 2018 at 7:47 pm GMT
@Durruti Nah, humor doesn't come across too well, or you missed my "dictator" signature – your language, if you will recall. That's where the "or else" came from. You do need to calm down, as we are pretty much on the same side here.

Don't mind the Commies on here – it was much worse under the previous 2 Fred Reed posts on China.

OK, pre-emptive apologies here for any more wrong interpretations

SafeNow , says: December 3, 2018 at 7:49 pm GMT
Great comments. I can only add (1) Here in Calif the Chinese-Americans I know all seem to love vegetables, and are lean. I wish I could be more like that. New Year's Resolution. (2) Harvard downgrades Asian-American applicants because of the "personality" factor of being decent. I think our culture is in trouble if we are penalizing students for being polite, genial, decent.
Carroll Price , says: December 3, 2018 at 8:00 pm GMT
@Nonny

Why was there a Cold War?

Answer: To replace WW 2, which was the best thing that ever happened to the US economy, allowing it to recover from an economic depression that would have otherwise been permanent. The US started the Cold War like they started all other wars in which they've been engaged, including the current war on terror.

Sven Lystbæk , says: December 3, 2018 at 8:18 pm GMT
@Random Smartaleck As I understand it the ROC and the PRC share the view that the South China Sea islands are Chinese even though they don't entirely agree how to define China.
Achmed E. Newman , says: Website December 3, 2018 at 8:46 pm GMT
@MarkinPNW

So Mao's Cultural Revolution to elevate the status of workers and peasants didn't have any lasting effect?

Noooooo it didn't. [/George Castanza mode]

Actually, wait, it didn't have ANY effect to elevate ANYONE, besides those elevated onto the stage to get pig blood poured on them sort of a poor man's Carrie scene.

Anyway, Mark, whatever you remember from your David Hackett Fischer (sorry that I'm not familiar) along with your last paragraph sound like pretty good explanations. Though China has a pretty large middle class now, it's NOT your father's middle class. I don't know if it could ever be a very trusting society, no matter how much money the median Chinafamily has.

Whether things were different in this respect way back a century ago, before the > 1/2 century of turmoil (starting with the end of the last empire .. 1912, I believe), I don't know. I do know that 3-4 decades of hard-core Communism will beat the trust and morality out of a whole lot of people .

Carroll Price , says: December 3, 2018 at 8:54 pm GMT
@Jeff Stryker

If you are not Chinese you cannot be a citizen.

If you read Mein Kampf, you'll find that Adolph Hitler held similar views regarding German citizenship, with the first requirement being that you must be of German blood, followed by meeting various physical, civic and educational requirements prior to anyone becoming a citizen of Germany, including those born in Germany. The idea that there could be any such thing as a Black German struck him as preposterous.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website December 3, 2018 at 8:58 pm GMT
@SafeNow

(2) Harvard downgrades Asian-American applicants because of the "personality" factor of being decent. I think our culture is in trouble if we are penalizing students for being polite, genial, decent.

If you don't already, SafeNow, you should read the archives (or current writings) of Mr. Steve Sailer, right here on this very site. He has been all over this stuff for years – I think that the college admissions/high-school quality/graduation rates/etc by race, IQ etc. is close to an obsession for him, but the posts are usually pretty interesting.

As to this specific point of yours, my answer is that this is the way Harvard keeps the black/hispanic/other special people's numbers up where they want them along with Oriental numbers down where they want them. That personality thing is just a way of putting "vibrant" young people ahead. I don't like vibrancy a whole lot myself, unless there are kegs of beer involved and only on the weekends. That is a problem for some of the Oriental young people, as they can't drink as much as they would like – I'm not sure if it's allergies or not.

BTW, I'd be remiss in not letting you know that the blog owner himself, Mr. Unz, is involved in a lawsuit about Harvard admissions and has also written a whole lot about this.

Oh, on your (1), agreed about the tons of vegetables, but they do not consider anything without rice a meal. Rice can be OK, but when you eat lots of the white rice, with its very high Glycemic Loading, you can balloon up fast. Not as many of the Oriental girls I see in America and China are as slim as the way it used to be.

Vidi , says: December 3, 2018 at 9:19 pm GMT
@Ali Choudhury

The sheer amount of shadow debt outstanding is huge. 250 to 300% of GDP by some estimates.

The amount of shadow debt is probably exaggerated: all that extra cash would either increase China's inflation rate or else greatly boost the import of goods. The Chinese inflation rate is reasonable, as is the quantity of imports (nowhere near GDP).

As Digital Samizdat said, China's debt is mostly internal; the country's development was largely due to her own efforts.

phil , says: December 3, 2018 at 9:33 pm GMT
@Godfree Roberts You continue to use bad statistics. World Bank specialists know more than you do. Ordinary Chinese know that their living standards lagged terribly under Chairman Mao. The most important changes came after he died.

Deng Xiaoping traveled to Southeast Asia in November 1978. Rather than telling the Southeast Asians about China's "incredible advances," he sought to learn from Singapore's progress and listened intently to Lee Kuan Yew, who told Deng that China must re-open international trade, move toward privatization, and respect market forces. Farmers were given greater choice in planting crops and, after meeting production quotas, were allowed to sell surplus produce on the free market. Starvation deaths declined. Widespread privatization began in the 1990s. China eventually acceded to the World Trade Organization. Economic growth took off as economic freedom increased from less than 4 to more than 6 on a 10-point scale. (Hong Kong and Singapore are close to 9 on this scale, and the US is about 8.) Human capital, which China has in abundance (more so than the US) is more than important than economic freedom, once a minimum of economic freedom (at least 6 on a 10-point scale) is attained, but economic freedom below 4 (as in pre-1979 China or today's Venezuela or North Korea) does not lead to much improvement in living standards.

Vidi , says: December 3, 2018 at 10:02 pm GMT
@Simply Simon China is still a developing country: the average per capita income is lower than Mexico's level. (China is growing faster than Mexico, of course.) However, because China has so many people, the country as a whole can do great things.
Rurik , says: December 3, 2018 at 10:08 pm GMT
@denk

tar all whiteys as white trash supremacists, even tho there's an army out there.

what is that? another gratuitous smear? Here's a clue: Not wanting to see your nation- whether it be Chinese or Palestinian or German – flooded and overcome by foreigners- does not make you a Chinese or Palestinian or German "supremacist". K? It simply means that you are sane and of sound mind and psychological health. Only the insane would agitate to fund an army of foreign invaders to overcome your nation and people. That, or having an ((elite)) that resents, envies and despises your people, and desires to see them replaced and bred out and overcome.

Being an American, we're acutely aware of the loss suffered by the Amerindian tribes when whitey overcame them.

But somehow I can't imagine anyone telling an Apache that his desire to preserve the lands they had conquered – as distinctly Apache lands, suggested that he was a vile and reprobate "Apache supremacist". I can only imagine the look on Geronimo's face if some SJW type of the day, were to scold him as an 'Apache supremacist!' for not laying down and accepting his tribe's marginalization and replacement.

But in the insane world we live in, Germans and N. Americans and others, are all expected to want to be overcome, or it can only mean that they must be terrible "white trash supremacists".

It's so laughably deranged that it's literally, clinically insane, but you still hear such raving nevertheless.

Simply Simon , says: December 3, 2018 at 10:14 pm GMT
@neutral It's all relative. Our freedom of speech , movement and religious liberty has been degraded but obviously not to the degree the MIT students would prefer to return to China.
FB , says: December 3, 2018 at 11:02 pm GMT
@Jason Liu You sound like a retard

So you have a better plan than President Xi ? That's pretty fucking funny especially as your plan sounds like the talking points coming out of some neocon stinktank

The world is moving on your dinosaur thinking where the irrelevant west is still the reference point doesn't exist anymore except in the fervid imaginations of American exceptionalists

Basically everything you said is bullshit China's diplomacy is light years ahead of the west the country is in fact presenting all kinds of benevolence to neighbors, with mutually beneficial development pulled along by the Chinese locomotive

Even Japan, a country in denial about its massive crimes of the past, is coming around to the inevitable conclusion that it must live in CHINA'S neighborhood India joined the SCO last year look up the SCO btw and think about which will be more relevant 10 or 20 years from now this org or dying bullshit like Nato and the G7

As for supposedly 'challenging' the US that's pretty funny what's to challenge US doesn't have a pot to piss in

US doesn't even have an industrial base anymore with which to produce weapons in case of a real war with an actual enemy that doesn't wear sandals look up the Pentagon's 'Annual Industrial Capabilities' report even the MIC's stuff comes from China, somewhere down the supply chain that's fucking hilarious

US is is well on its way to finding out the hard way a financialized Ponzi economy that has figured out how to de-industrialize a previously industrial country for untold riches for a handful of parasites and actually being a strong and healthy country with actual capabilities to PRODUCE REAL STUFF are two mutually exclusive goals

Look at the so-called 'trade war' most Americans don't even realize that tariffs on Chinese goods only means that they will be paying an extra tax Chinese are laughing at this 'trade war' what happens to Walmart and Amazon if China just stops exporting stuff to the US they can do that you know it will hit some Chinese billionaires but so what 70 percent of the economy is in government hands and there is enough of a consumer base in China that even eliminating all US exports is not going to do much damage

In the meantime GM is shutting down factories and cutting 15,000 high paying jobs but setting up shop in China along with Harley and others LOL

You're obviously some brainwashed Chang Kai-shek acolyte keep on living in your make believe disneyworld while a socialist and dynamic China grows tall all around you LOL

anon [153] Disclaimer , says: December 3, 2018 at 11:20 pm GMT
No amount of tariff will force China to go along with Trump's "fair trade" plan until Trump does what his brilliant senior advisor Stephen Miller wants him to do -- stop issuing student visas, plus EB5, H1b, OPT and green cards to Chinese nationals, step up raids of Chinese birth hotels in CA, NY, WA, and rescind all passports issued to Chinese birth tourist babies. That will send tens of thousands of Chinese citizens out on the streets protesting as they are all eager to get the hell out with their ill gotten gains while they still can, and Xi will bend over backwards in no time.
anon [153] Disclaimer , says: December 3, 2018 at 11:26 pm GMT
@FB I think your diatribe just proved Jason Liu's point about mainland Chinese being thin skin, arrogant and, I will also add, extremely dishonest and ill-mannered. It's why most people in Southeast Asia, Oz and NZ, including the Chinese diaspora, despise the mainland Chinese.
ThreeCranes , says: December 3, 2018 at 11:38 pm GMT
@Anon Machine tools make up a fair percentage of what China imports from Germany. Tools to make tools and patterns for manufacturing should be considered an investment.
someone , says: December 3, 2018 at 11:58 pm GMT
@FB FB gets it. All the bluster of the disingenuous American billionaire sellouts and their xenophobic, gullible domestic fanbase will amount to nothing.

Apart from nuking China or bribing their leaders (a la Yeltsin) to follow the Washington Consensus, China will continue its economic development. And unlike dissolution era Soviet Union, China isn't broken and desperate to seek the "knowledge" of neoclassical economists. Unlike Plaza Accord Tokyo, China isn't under American occupation, and unlike Pinochet era Chile and countless other minnows, the US establishment cannot hope to overthrow the Chinese government.

Then we get the Anon dude who replied to FB. Way to ignore history and empirical evidence and bolster yet another dimbulb argument with racism.

someone , says: December 3, 2018 at 11:59 pm GMT
@anon LOL.

Jason Liu is a retard. You resorting to typical racism is acceptable to a number of this site's resident know-nothings, but resorting to racism to bolster your non-argument is pretty much the definition of stupidity.

the grand wazoo , says: December 4, 2018 at 12:05 am GMT
Democracy fails simply because it is basically mob rule, and 51% of the mob isn't anymore intelligent than the minor 49%. When the Supreme Court passed Citizens United (a misnomer) which misinterpreted money as speech, the coup, that began with the assassination of JFK, was complete. The effect has been devastating for the average Joe; completing the transfer of power from the people to the corporations and the billionaire class, i.e. the bGanksters. There's much to be said of a dictatorship, but where do we fit in with the selection, and would the elite ever allow a new JFK? No, they wouldn't even tolerate a new Muammar Gaddafi. So were stuck with the revolving door wannabes.
utu , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:03 am GMT
No western country allowed itself to be destroyed by its leadership as China did. This includes Nazi Germany (and I do not consider USSR a western country). Watch this video and reflect on the fatal flaw in Chinese culture and character.
Jeff Stryker , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:15 am GMT
@anonymous The ethnic Chinese of Southeast Asia who control the economies of those places are Fuji Chinese, not Han.

Fuji Chinese actually immigrated to Philippines and Malaysia and Indonesia to escape Han persecution and the Han themselves were escaping the Manchu Chinese by migrating South into the Fuji Province.

Virtually all the ethnic Chinese of Southeast Asia are from the Fujian Province. This is especially true of the Philippines. Virtually all Chinese-Filipinos are from Amoy very near to Taiwan on the coast of the Fujian Province.

Anon [436] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:20 am GMT
@someone But he didn't resort to racism. And if anyone deserves the insulting "retard" it is you and FB for not seeming to see the lack of relevance to what he said in your purported responses to Jason Liu.
Jeff Stryker , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:23 am GMT
@Carroll Price Hitler wrote that in jail before he was taking orders from psychics and astrologers. The syphilis had not really set in yet at that point.

Black US GI's wreaked a fair amount of havoc in Germany on and off the bases. There were always rapes, stolen cars, assaults around US army bases.

Of course so did some white American GI's. Dahmer is suspected-though he did not admit it-of having killed people around the base where he was stationed. Ironically the country most adhering to this policy these days is Israel.

someone , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:24 am GMT
What is it with people whose grasp of Chinese history is limited to the Cultural Revolution? Why do they comment here, and why are they somehow ignorant of the previous.. say 130 years of Chinese history? Maybe, just maybe, Chinese society would not have collapsed if it weren't for Opium traders destroying both China and India under the guise of free trade, de facto colonization, then outright genocidal invasion and occupation from the Japanese military regime?

And way to bag on any sort of collective action against the ossified rentier class. Cause Marx/Engels/Lenin/Mao is a scourge of present-day societies for some reason?

The Cultural Revolution sure has an analogue in the US and its vassal states. The whole neoliberal/militarist Reagan revolution and similar class war developments have wracked the US and its minion states for FORTY YEARS. Yet few people seem to be aware of it. And others correctly note the decline in living standards, then proceed to ignore the oligarchy beneficiaries of neoliberalism/militarism, and instead are led to demagogues to blame irrelevant scapegoats.

Anon [436] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:26 am GMT
@FB If you believe this arrogant rant counts as a responsive reply to Jason Liu then, assuredly you are the candidate retard. And that is true notwithstanding the presence of intemperately stated truths in your rant.
Jeff Stryker , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:28 am GMT
@denk And you are a typical non-American who is obsessed with a country you have never been to because you have been watching US films your entire life and your perception of reality is formed by screenwriters in Los Angeles.

You secretly would like to go to the United States but have a distorted perception based upon second-rate Hollywood films.

Typical of the Chinese Singaporean you are not Chinese and possibly have never been to China. Your family has been in Singapore for three or four generations.

As a result you see white Americans and are secretly enthralled by them. Their towering height and self-confidence and loud voices in Orchard Road STARBUCKS.

someone , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:30 am GMT
@Jeff Stryker Jeff, your history sucks, your political economy sucks.

Filipino Chinese are Fujian, not Fuji–Not written nor pronounced like the Japanese mountain or film.

Fujianese are Han. Their dialect is distinct, but they are as Han as the other southern subgroups like the Hakka (who also compose a part of Sino-Filipinos) and Cantonese. Places like Thailand and Malaysia have large numbers of Teochow and Cantonese, not Fujis or Fujians or any other of your malapropisms.

What is it with your dipsh!t obsession with (incorrect) demographics and your piss poor knowledge of EVERYTHING ELSE?

Jeff Stryker , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:35 am GMT
@denk How would a Singaporean (Who vaunts his Chinese heritage but is probably third or fourth-generation Singaporean) KNOW anything about this?

You've never even BEEN to the West. Perhaps you have been to the United Kingdom, but I am dubious that you are even that well-traveled.

What would you know about white Supremacy from seeing a few Westerners at the STARBUCKS on Orchard Road a time or two?

I can speak with firsthand knowledge about Asia because I have lived all over it and done business there for years.

Wizard of Oz , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:38 am GMT
@Carroll Price Yes, the comparison of late 19th century Germany and China today has been made quite often with at least some plausibility for non specialist readers. Happily Miranda Carter's marvellous New Yorker article doesn't seem to have relevance to China's leadership today. See

"What happens when a bad tempered distractible doofus runs an empire".

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/what-happens-when-a-bad-tempered-distractible-doofus-runs-an-empire/amp#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s

Jeff Stryker , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:46 am GMT
@Realist I've already said that no person not born in China can be a citizen.

The only Caucasians who are Chinese citizens are the descendants of Portuguese settlers in Macau of which there is still a small community.

Philippines in particular would take a huge economic hit if every Western man living there left. Other Asian countries would feel a similar affect to their economies.

Locals PREFER to work for Western men rather than the Chinese ethnics because Chinese ethnics treat Malay employees like farm animals and pay a pittance.

Jeff Stryker , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:52 am GMT
@someone The correct term is "Chinese-Filipino" or "Chinoy" not "Filipino Chinese".

Fukkian Province, Fujian Province, Hakkan, Hokkien

You say Tom-AH-Toe, I say To-MAY-toe.

I did not mention Thailand because the Chinese-Thai (I'm married to one and we have two children) are no longer a distinct group and don't have the economy in a stranglehold like they do in Philippines or Malaysia.

Cantonese have never been the businessmen that Fujian Chinese are in Southeast Asia and live in piss-poor Chinatowns in Manila or Jakarta.

When we talk about ethnic Chinese economic dominance in Southeast Asia we are talking about Fujian Chinese shopkeepers.

Jeff Stryker , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:59 am GMT
[You have been repeatedly warned that you leave far too many rambling, vacuous comments, especially since so many of them demonstrate your total ignorance. Fewer and fewer of your comments will be published until you improve your commenting-behavior or better yet permanently depart for another website]

ATTENTION ALL CHINESE POSTERS (OR ETHNIC CHINESE WHO FANCY THEMSELVES AS SUCH)

You may be offended by my views but I have earned them. I've worked with ethnic Chinese in Asia a long time.

I'm married to one. I have two children with one. They go to Chinese schools.

So I have a right to my cynical opinions.

Most of you see a bunch of loud American tourists in some local Starbucks and you think you know everything about the West.

You know very little.

I at least have lived in squalor with ethnic Chinese in Southeast Asia in the trenches doing business with them.

last straw , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:17 am GMT
@Mike P @Mike P

Well what the Chinese government could not do is prevent the corruption that allowed many of these collapsed buildings to be constructed from poor materials and without regard for earthquake-related building codes.

That an overall mediocre country like China can be held up as a paragon of efficiency and achievement to an American audience only speaks to the desperate rot afflicting America itself. China has not managed to produce any internationally competitive products of any complexity such as cars or airplanes; and to the extent it is beginning to succeed, this is due to foreign investment and theft of IP. Meanwhile, South Korea has shown the world how it's done properly.

Those buildings were built in a different era, when China was much poorer. When China gets richer, the regulations will be strengthened and more effectively enforced. It's the same for every country.

East Asian countries develop in stages. Today's China is like South Korea 20 years ago. 20 years ago, South Korea was like Japan 40 years ago. The difference is that while Japan and South Korea can obtain Western technologies without problem, China has been under Western military embargo since 1989.

You probably did not realize it, but China has burst onto the scene of some cutting edge technologies such as super computer, the application of quantum physics, and space technologies including China's own GPS system; not to mention dominating in ship-building, the manufacturing of solar panel, LCD panel and LED light, cell phone including 5G technology, electric vehicles and highspeed rail etc etc.

Also, do not forget all the Chinese infrastructures. Go to there and take a look youself: https://www.skyscrapercity.com/forumdisplay.php?s=90e04ddfc408930e982a709bcb9991ff&f=803

FB , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:19 am GMT
@someone Dude you're never going to convince the koolaid gulping Unz whackadoodles with actual historical knowledge and facts

They're Pavlovian reactions is to defend the rentier class that is driving them into the ground talk about irrational and self-destructive they must love and worship the 0.01 percent since they are voting for their good which in fact entails the death of the middle class and ordinary folks by definition

What clowns they only spout what they have been spoonfed to spout marching blindly like the proverbial lemmings off the cliff believe me, better men have tried to talk sense into these morons, without effect see PCR

PS notice the flurry of anon retards here and they actually think I'm Chinese LOL

last straw , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:25 am GMT
@Simply Simon Most MIT graduates want to stay in the U.S. because it's a much richer country than China and much easier to get ahead materialistically. After working 10-15 years in the U.S., you can easily get a 4-bed room house with 2 nice cars in its garages in a decent neighborhood. What can you get in China? You probably can only afford an apartment with a semi-decent car with nowhere to park. It has little to do with free speech or politics.
someone , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:26 am GMT
@Anon You worship at the altar of that incompetent demagogue Steven Miller. Not only are you a dimbulb racist, you can't see through the thinnest veneer of an oligarch who harnesses the latent xenophobia of the masses to ram through yet more regressive policies. His dipsh!t eugenicist immigration policies are just a reflection of the same color/ethnicity bar which led to the deaths of his relatives several generations ago.

You think banning individuals of a certain ethnicity are enough to make America Great Again? That's gullible, even for this site.

Should have followed eugenics and banned your idiot fetus from ever hatching.

Agent76 , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:31 am GMT
20 SEPTEMBER 2010 Mao's Great Famine: the History of China's Most Devastating Catastrophe (1958-62)

https://www.newstatesman.com/books/2010/09/mao-china-famine-western

China under Mao – Great Leap Forward

Anonymous [392] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:32 am GMT
@Jason Liu Wow. Well said.
FB , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:45 am GMT
@someone Actually I have to wonder if even the standard narrative about the 'terrible' cultural revolution has anything to do with reality

I would love to see a Godfree Roberts essay on this subject, since I am far from anything approaching a China scholar his essays on Mao were absolutely tremendous there can be no doubt that there could have been no modern Chinese economic miracle had it not been for Mao's Great Leap Forward

Anonymous [392] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:55 am GMT
@DB Cooper The point being is that China currently has poor relations with its East Asian neighbors when it could be a strong relationship.
utu , says: December 4, 2018 at 3:06 am GMT
@someone You are wrong. Stopping immigration form India and China would be a good thing.
DB Cooper , says: December 4, 2018 at 3:20 am GMT
@Anonymous Which one you are talking about? Name the countries and we can talk about them.
The scalpel , says: Website December 4, 2018 at 3:42 am GMT
@Annonymous Yes, and no matter where you go – there you are.
Anonymous [681] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 3:55 am GMT
@Jeff Stryker

I did not mention Thailand because the Chinese-Thai are no longer a distinct group and don't have the economy in a stranglehold like they do in Philippines or Malaysia.

According to Amy Chua in her book World on Fire , the Chinese make up 12% of Thailand's population and they do still by and large control Thailand's economy, it's just that it's very hard to tell them apart from native Thais because they've changed their names to local Thai names, but those in the know can still tell because Chinese Thai last names tend to be very long.

DB Cooper , says: December 4, 2018 at 4:05 am GMT
@FB I like Godfree. He is a contrarian and certainly not afraid of voicing his opinions. He offers some unique perspective on looking at China and this is very refreshing because I can say most of the things the MSM on China is just nonsense and Godfree got some but not all of them right, in my opinion.

As to Mao's Great Leap Forward, or Cultural Revolution for that matter, let's look at it this way. If you pay attention to China's pundits talking about China in Chinese TV today you get the impression that the Chinese government is very proud of what it has accomplished in the last forty years. And it should be. Lifting hundreds of millions of people out of abject poverty and transforming China to today's situation like what Fred described in such a short span is no easy feat. These Chinese pundits always talk about 'Reform and Opening Up' all the time. This is the phrase they used most often. But 'Reform and Opening Up' refers to the policy Deng implemented when he took over. I have yet to see anybody praising the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution in Chinese TV. To the extent that it was brought up on very rare occasion, it was brought up in passing but never elaborated. It is as if the history of Communist China started in 1979 instead of 1949. May be it has some dirty laundry it doesn't want to air? The CCP has officially declared Mao's legacy as 70% good and 30% bad. What's that 30% bad about?

I am convinced that the standard narrative about the 'terrible' cultural revolution is close to reality. utu posted a video on China's Great Leap Forward on this thread. Do you think the video is CGI graphics?

Biff , says: December 4, 2018 at 4:19 am GMT
@someone

Places like Thailand and Malaysia have large numbers of Teochow and Cantonese, not Fujis or Fujiafns or any other of your malapropisms.

My family in Thailand refer to themselves as Teochow. Never heard of Fuji's, so you may be on to something.

Jeff Stryker , says: December 4, 2018 at 4:27 am GMT
@Anonymous Amy Chau got a good many things about her own Chinese-Filipino people wrong, I place little stock in what she says about Thailand. Or even about the Philippines.

She is only relevant for touting herself as Chinese when her family has been in the Philippines for generations-that reflects how at odds Chinese-Filipinos are with the predominant population and also why the Indonesians and Malaysians have carried out savage pogroms from time to time.

Worse in the Philippines is Chinese-Filipino involvement in meth. They make it and distribute it and import it from China. The drug war in Philippines is entirely the result of Chinese. And Tiger Mom is unlikely to bring that up in her wildly self-congratulatory books which also focus on German Jews because she is married to one.

Chinese do not control the Thai economy to anywhere near the extent that they control the economy of the Philippines or other countries. Thailand has actively forced the Chinese to assimilate to a degree and at any rate they are probably the most clever of the Southeast Asians.

Chinese immigrants also fair best in countries broken up by colonialism like Philippines by Spain or Malaysia by Brits where they can slide in during post-colonial confusion.

denk , says: December 4, 2018 at 4:29 am GMT
@Nonny

*And why the threat of war over every square inch along the Indian border, where the people are definitely not Han?*

Pleeeeze, Show me ONE instance of China threatening war on India.

*In the NEFA, China seemed tacitly to have accepted the Indian claim and the fact of indian occupation, even though this meant the loss of a very large and valuable territory populated by Mongoloid people and which in the past had clearly belonged to Tibet. It had come into Indian hands only as a result of British expansionism during China's period of historical weakness, a fact firmly suggested by the very name of the frontier Beijing had tacitly accepted as the line of control -- the McMahon Line. *

https://www.rediff.com/news/2002/oct/24chin.htm

How did the seven sisters ended up as India's sex slaves old chap ?

[Dec 04, 2018] Neoliberalism has spawned a financial elite who hold governments to ransom by Deborah Orr

Notable quotes:
"... The IMF exists to lend money to governments, so it's comic that it wags its finger at governments that run up debt. And, of course, its loans famously come with strings attached: adopt a free-market economy, or strengthen the one you have, kissing goodbye to the Big State. ..."
"... Yet, the irony is painful. Neoliberal ideology insists that states are too big and cumbersome, too centralized and faceless, to be efficient and responsive ..."
"... The problem is that the ruthless sentimentalists of neoliberalism like to tell themselves – and anyone else who will listen – that removing the dead hand of state control frees the individual citizen to be entrepreneurial and productive. Instead, it places the financially powerful beyond any state, in an international elite that makes its own rules, and holds governments to ransom. That's what the financial crisis was all about ..."
"... Markets cannot be free. Markets have to be nurtured. They have to be invested in. Markets have to be grown. Google, Amazon and Apple haven't taught anyone in this country to read. But even though an illiterate market wouldn't be so great for them, they avoid their taxes, because they can, because they are more powerful than governments. ..."
"... The neoliberalism that the IMF still preaches pays no account to any of this. It insists that the provision of work alone is enough of an invisible hand to sustain a market. Yet even Adam Smith, the economist who came up with that theory , did not agree that economic activity alone was enough to keep humans decent and civilised. ..."
Jun 08, 2013 | www.theguardian.com

The crash was a write-off, not a repair job. The response should be a wholesale reevaluation of the way in which wealth is created and distributed around the globe

he IMF's limited admission of guilt over the Greek bailout is a start, but they still can't see the global financial system's fundamental flaws, writes Deborah Orr.

The International Monetary Fund has admitted that some of the decisions it made in the wake of the 2007-2008 financial crisis were wrong, and that the €130bn first bailout of Greece was "bungled". Well, yes. If it hadn't been a mistake, then it would have been the only bailout and everyone in Greece would have lived happily ever after.

Actually, the IMF hasn't quite admitted that it messed things up. It has said instead that it went along with its partners in "the Troika" – the European Commission and the European Central Bank – when it shouldn't have. The EC and the ECB, says the IMF, put the interests of the Eurozone before the interests of Greece. The EC and the ECB, in turn, clutch their pearls and splutter with horror that they could be accused of something so petty as self-preservation.

The IMF also admits that it "underestimated" the effect austerity would have on Greece. Obviously, the rest of the Troika takes no issue with that. Even those who substitute "kick up the arse to all the lazy scroungers" whenever they encounter the word "austerity", have cottoned on to the fact that the word can only be intoned with facial features locked into a suitably tragic mask.

Yet, mealy-mouthed and hotly contested as this minor mea culpa is, it's still a sign that financial institutions may slowly be coming round to the idea that they are the problem. They know the crash was a debt-bubble that burst. What they don't seem to acknowledge is that the merry days of reckless lending are never going to return; even if they do, the same thing will happen again, but more quickly and more savagely. The thing is this: the crash was a write-off, not a repair job. The response from the start should have been a wholesale reevaluation of the way in which wealth is created and distributed around the globe, a "structural adjustment", as the philosopher John Gray has said all along.

The IMF exists to lend money to governments, so it's comic that it wags its finger at governments that run up debt. And, of course, its loans famously come with strings attached: adopt a free-market economy, or strengthen the one you have, kissing goodbye to the Big State.

Yet, the irony is painful. Neoliberal ideology insists that states are too big and cumbersome, too centralized and faceless, to be efficient and responsive. I agree.

The problem is that the ruthless sentimentalists of neoliberalism like to tell themselves – and anyone else who will listen – that removing the dead hand of state control frees the individual citizen to be entrepreneurial and productive. Instead, it places the financially powerful beyond any state, in an international elite that makes its own rules, and holds governments to ransom. That's what the financial crisis was all about. The ransom was paid, and as a result, governments have been obliged to limit their activities yet further – some setting about the task with greater relish than others. Now the task, supposedly, is to get the free market up and running again.

But the basic problem is this: it costs a lot of money to cultivate a market – a group of consumers – and the more sophisticated the market is, the more expensive it is to cultivate them. A developed market needs to be populated with educated, healthy, cultured, law-abiding and financially secure people – people who expect to be well paid themselves, having been brought up believing in material aspiration, as consumers need to be.

So why, exactly, given the huge amount of investment needed to create such a market, should access to it then be "free"? The neoliberal idea is that the cultivation itself should be conducted privately as well. They see "austerity" as a way of forcing that agenda. But how can the privatization of societal welfare possibly happen when unemployment is already high, working people are turning to food banks to survive and the debt industry, far from being sorry that it brought the global economy to its knees, is snapping up bargains in the form of busted high-street businesses to establish shops with nothing to sell but high-interest debt? Why, you have to ask yourself, is this vast implausibility, this sheer un-sustainability, not blindingly obvious to all?

Markets cannot be free. Markets have to be nurtured. They have to be invested in. Markets have to be grown. Google, Amazon and Apple haven't taught anyone in this country to read. But even though an illiterate market wouldn't be so great for them, they avoid their taxes, because they can, because they are more powerful than governments.

And further, those who invest in these companies, and insist that taxes should be low to encourage private profit and shareholder value, then lend governments the money they need to create these populations of sophisticated producers and consumers, berating them for their profligacy as they do so. It's all utterly, completely, crazy.

The other day a health minister, Anna Soubry , suggested that female GPs who worked part-time so that they could bring up families were putting the NHS under strain. The compartmentalised thinking is quite breathtaking. What on earth does she imagine? That it would be better for the economy if they all left school at 16? On the contrary, the more people who are earning good money while working part-time – thus having the leisure to consume – the better. No doubt these female GPs are sustaining both the pharmaceutical industry and the arts and media, both sectors that Britain does well in.

As for their prioritising of family life over career – that's just another of the myriad ways in which Conservative neoliberalism is entirely without logic. Its prophets and its disciples will happily – ecstatically – tell you that there's nothing more important than family, unless you're a family doctor spending some of your time caring for your own. You couldn't make these characters up. It is certainly true that women with children find it more easy to find part-time employment in the public sector. But that's a prima facie example of how unresponsive the private sector is to human and societal need, not – as it is so often presented – evidence that the public sector is congenitally disabled.

Much of the healthy economic growth – as opposed to the smoke and mirrors of many aspects of financial services – that Britain enjoyed during the second half of the 20th century was due to women swelling the educated workforce. Soubry and her ilk, above all else, forget that people have multiple roles, as consumers, as producers, as citizens and as family members. All of those things have to be nurtured and invested in to make a market.

The neoliberalism that the IMF still preaches pays no account to any of this. It insists that the provision of work alone is enough of an invisible hand to sustain a market. Yet even Adam Smith, the economist who came up with that theory , did not agree that economic activity alone was enough to keep humans decent and civilised.

Governments are left with the bill when neoliberals demand access to markets that they refuse to invest in making. Their refusal allows them to rail against the Big State while producing the conditions that make it necessary. And even as the results of their folly become ever more plain to see, they are grudging in their admittance of the slightest blame, bickering with their allies instead of waking up, smelling the coffee and realising that far too much of it is sold through Starbucks.

[Dec 04, 2018] The Ignored Legacy Of George H.W. Bush War Crimes, Racism, Obstruction Of Justice

Dec 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

by Tyler Durden Tue, 12/04/2018 - 00:05 178 SHARES Authored by Mehdi Hasan via The Intercept,

The tributes to former President George H.W. Bush, who died on Friday aged 94, have been pouring in from all sides of the political spectrum. He was a man "of the highest character," said his eldest son and fellow former president, George W. Bush. "He loved America and served with character, class, and integrity," tweeted former U.S. Attorney and #Resistance icon Preet Bharara. According to another former president, Barack Obama , Bush's life was "a testament to the notion that public service is a noble, joyous calling. And he did tremendous good along the journey." Apple boss Tim Cook said : "We have lost a great American."

In the age of Donald Trump, it isn't difficult for hagiographers of the late Bush Sr. to paint a picture of him as a great patriot and pragmatist; a president who governed with "class" and "integrity." It is true that the former president refused to vote for Trump in 2016, calling him a " blowhard ," and that he eschewed the white nationalist, "alt-right," conspiratorial politics that has come to define the modern Republican Party. He helped end the Cold War without, as Obama said , "firing a shot." He spent his life serving his country -- from the military to Congress to the United Nations to the CIA to the White House. And, by all accounts, he was also a beloved grandfather and great-grandfather to his 17 grandkids and eight great-grandkids .

Nevertheless, he was a public, not a private, figure -- one of only 44 men to have ever served as president of the United States. We cannot, therefore, allow his actual record in office to be beautified in such a brazen way. "When a political leader dies, it is irresponsible in the extreme to demand that only praise be permitted but not criticisms," as my colleague Glenn Greenwald has argued , because it leads to "false history and a propagandistic whitewashing of bad acts."

The inconvenient truth is that the presidency of George Herbert Walker Bush had far more in common with the recognizably belligerent, corrupt, and right-wing Republican figures who came after him - his son George W. and the current orange-faced incumbent - than much of the political and media classes might have you believe.

Consider:

... ... ...

He made a dishonest case for war . Thirteen years before George W. Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction to justify his invasion and occupation of Iraq, his father made his own set of false claims to justify the aerial bombardment of that same country. The first Gulf War, as an investigation by journalist Joshua Holland concluded , "was sold on a mountain of war propaganda."

For a start, Bush told the American public that Iraq had invaded Kuwait " without provocation or warning ." What he omitted to mention was that the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, had given an effective green light to Saddam Hussein, telling him in July 1990, a week before his invasion, "[W]e have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait."

Then there is the fabrication of intelligence. Bush deployed U.S. troops to the Gulf in August 1990 and claimed that he was doing so in order "to assist the Saudi Arabian Government in the defense of its homeland." As Scott Peterson wrote in the Christian Science Monitor in 2002, "Citing top-secret satellite images, Pentagon officials estimated that up to 250,000 Iraqi troops and 1,500 tanks stood on the border, threatening the key U.S. oil supplier."

Yet when reporter Jean Heller of the St. Petersburg Times acquired her own commercial satellite images of the Saudi border, she found no signs of Iraqi forces; only an empty desert. "It was a pretty serious fib," Heller told Peterson, adding: "That [Iraqi buildup] was the whole justification for Bush sending troops in there, and it just didn't exist."

President George H. W. Bush talks with Secretary of State James Baker III and Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney during a meeting of the cabinet in the White House on Jan. 17, 1991 to discuss the Persian Gulf War. Photo: Ron Edmonds/AP

He committed war crimes. Under Bush Sr., the U.S. dropped a whopping 88,500 tons of bombs on Iraq and Iraqi-occupied Kuwait, many of which resulted in horrific civilian casualties. In February 1991, for example, a U.S. airstrike on an air-raid shelter in the Amiriyah neighborhood of Baghdad killed at least 408 Iraqi civilians . According to Human Rights Watch , the Pentagon knew the Amiriyah facility had been used as a civil defense shelter during the Iran-Iraq war and yet had attacked without warning. It was, concluded HRW, "a serious violation of the laws of war."

U.S. bombs also destroyed essential Iraqi civilian infrastructure -- from electricity-generating and water-treatment facilities to food-processing plants and flour mills. This was no accident. As Barton Gellman of the Washington Post reported in June 1991: "Some targets, especially late in the war, were bombed primarily to create postwar leverage over Iraq, not to influence the course of the conflict itself. Planners now say their intent was to destroy or damage valuable facilities that Baghdad could not repair without foreign assistance. Because of these goals, damage to civilian structures and interests, invariably described by briefers during the war as 'collateral' and unintended, was sometimes neither."

Got that? The Bush administration deliberately targeted civilian infrastructure for "leverage" over Saddam Hussein. How is this not terrorism? As a Harvard public health team concluded in June 1991, less than four months after the end of the war, the destruction of Iraqi infrastructure had resulted in acute malnutrition and "epidemic" levels of cholera and typhoid.

By January 1992, Beth Osborne Daponte, a demographer with the U.S. Census Bureau, was estimating that Bush's Gulf War had caused the deaths of 158,000 Iraqis, including 13,000 immediate civilian deaths and 70,000 deaths from the damage done to electricity and sewage treatment plants. Daponte's numbers contradicted the Bush administration's, and she was threatened by her superiors with dismissal for releasing " false information. " (Sound familiar?)

He refused to cooperate with a special counsel . The Iran-Contra affair , in which the United States traded missiles for Americans hostages in Iran, and used the proceeds of those arms sales to fund Contra rebels in Nicaragua, did much to undermine the presidency of Ronald Reagan. Yet his vice president's involvement in that controversial affair has garnered far less attention. "The criminal investigation of Bush was regrettably incomplete," wrote Special Counsel Lawrence Walsh, a former deputy attorney general in the Eisenhower administration, in his final report on the Iran-Contra affair in August 1993.

Why? Because Bush, who was "fully aware of the Iran arms sale," according to the special counsel, failed to hand over a diary "containing contemporaneous notes relevant to Iran/contra" and refused to be interviewed in the later stages of the investigation. In the final days of his presidency, Bush even issued pardons to six defendants in the Iran-Contra affair, including former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger -- on the eve of Weinberger's trial for perjury and obstruction of justice. "The Weinberger pardon," Walsh pointedly noted, "marked the first time a president ever pardoned someone in whose trial he might have been called as a witness, because the president was knowledgeable of factual events underlying the case." An angry Walsh accused Bush of "misconduct" and helping to complete "the Iran-contra cover-up."

[Dec 03, 2018] Neoliberalism is a modern curse. Everything about it is bad and until we're free of it, it will only ever keep trying to turn us into indentured labourers. It's acolytes are required to blind themselves to logic and reason to such a degree they resemble Scientologists or Jehovah's Witnesses more than people with any sort of coherent political ideology, because that's what neoliberalism actually is... a cult of the rich, for the rich, by the rich... and it's followers in the general population are nothing but moron familiars hoping one day to be made a fully fledged bastard.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... What sticks in the neoliberalism craw is that the state provides these services instead of private businesses, and as such "rob" them of juicy profits! The state, the last easy cash cow! ..."
"... Who could look at the way markets function and conclude there's any freedom? Only a neoliberal cult member. They cannot be reasoned with. They cannot be dissuaded. They cannot be persuaded. Only the market knows best, and the fact that the market is a corrupt, self serving whore is completely ignored by the ideology of their Church. ..."
"... when Thatcher and Reagan deregulated the financial markets in the 80s, that's when the trouble began which in turn led to the immense crash in 2008. ..."
"... Neo-liberalism is just another symptom of liberal democracy which is government by oligarchs with a veneer of democracy ..."
"... The state has merged with the corporations so that what is good for the corporations is good for the state and visa versa. The larger and richer the state/corporations are, the more shyster lawyers they hire to disguise misdeeds and unethical behavior. ..."
"... If you support a big government, you are supporting big corporations as well. The government uses the taxpayer as an eternal fount of fresh money and calls it their own to spend as they please. Small businesses suffer unfairly because they cannot afford the shyster lawyers and accountants that protect the government and the corporations, but nobody cares about them. ..."
"... Deborah's point about the illogical demands of neoliberalism are indeed correct, which is somewhat ironic as neoliberalism puts objective rationality at the heart of its philosophy, but I digress... ..."
"... There would not be NHS, free education etc. without socialism; in fact they are socialism. It took the Soviet-style socialism ("statism") 70 years to collapse. The neoliberalistic capitalism has already started to collapse after 30 years. ..."
"... I'm always amused that neoliberal - indeed, capitalist - apologists cannot see the hypocrisy of their demands for market access. Communities create and sustain markets, fund and maintain infrastructure, produce and maintain new consumers. Yet the neolibs decry and destroy. Hypocrites or destructive numpties - never quite decided between Pickles and Gove ..."
"... 97% of all OUR money has been handed over to these scheming crooks. Stop bailing out the banks with QE. Take back what is ours -- state control over the creation of money. Then let the banks revert to their modest market-based function of financial intermediaries. ..."
"... The State can't be trusted to create our money? Well they could hardly do a worse job than the banks! Best solution would be to distribute state-created money as a Citizen's Income. ..."
"... To promote the indecent obsession for global growth Australia, burdened with debt of around 250 billion dollars, is to borrow and pay interest on a further 7 billion dollars to lend to the International Monetary Fund so as it can lend it to poorer nations to burden them with debt. ..."
Dec 03, 2018 | www.theguardian.com
szwalby , 8 Jun 2013 06:03
This private good, public bad is a stupid idea, and a totally artificial divide. After all, what are "public spends"? It is the money from private individuals, and companies, clubbing together to get services they can't individually afford.

What sticks in the neoliberalism craw is that the state provides these services instead of private businesses, and as such "rob" them of juicy profits! The state, the last easy cash cow!

TedSmithAndSon , 8 Jun 2013 06:01
Neoliberalism is a modern curse. Everything about it is bad and until we're free of it, it will only ever keep trying to turn us into indentured labourers. It's acolytes are required to blind themselves to logic and reason to such a degree they resemble Scientologists or Jehovah's Witnesses more than people with any sort of coherent political ideology, because that's what neoliberalism actually is... a cult of the rich, for the rich, by the rich... and it's followers in the general population are nothing but moron familiars hoping one day to be made a fully fledged bastard.

Who could look at the way markets function and conclude there's any freedom? Only a neoliberal cult member. They cannot be reasoned with. They cannot be dissuaded. They cannot be persuaded. Only the market knows best, and the fact that the market is a corrupt, self serving whore is completely ignored by the ideology of their Church.

It's subsumed the entire planet, and waiting for them to see sense is a hopeless cause. In the end it'll probably take violence to rid us of the Neoliberal parasite... the turn of the century plague.

fr0mn0where -> CaptainGrey , 8 Jun 2013 05:51
@CaptainGrey -

"Capitalism, especially the beneficial capitalism of the NHS, free education etc. has won and countless people have gained as a result."

I agree with you and it was this beneficial version of capitalism that brought down the Iron Curtain. Working people in the former Communist countries were comparing themselves with working people in the west and wanted a piece of that action. Cuba has hung on because people there compare themselves with their nearest capitalist neighbor Haiti and they don't want a piece of that action. North Korea well North Korea is North Korea.

Isn't it this beneficial capitalism that is being threatened now though? When the wall came down it was assumed that Eastern European countries would become more like us. Some have but who would have thought that British working people would now be told, by the likes of Kwasi Kwarteng and his Britannia Unchained chums, that we have to learn to accept working conditions that are more like those in the Eastern European countries that got left behind and that we are now told that our version of Capitalism is inferior to the version adopted by the Communist Party of China?

jazzdrum -> bullwinkle , 8 Jun 2013 05:51
@bullwinkle - No , when Thatcher and Reagan deregulated the financial markets in the 80s, that's when the trouble began which in turn led to the immense crash in 2008.
Eddiel899 , 8 Jun 2013 05:51
Neo-liberalism is just another symptom of liberal democracy which is government by oligarchs with a veneer of democracy.

This type of government began in America about 150 years ago with the Rockefellers, Carnegie, J.P. Morgan, Ford etc who took advantage of new inventions, cheap immigrant labour and financial deregulation in finance and social mores to amass wealth for themselves and chaos and austerity for workers.

All this looks familiar again today with new and old oligarchs hiding behind large corporations taking advantage of the invention of the €uro, mass immigration into western Europe and deregulation of the financial "markets" and social mores to amass wealth for a super-wealthy elite and chaos and austerity for workers.

So if we want to see where things went wrong we need only go back 150 years to what happened to America. There we can also see our future?

WilliamAshbless -> CaptainGrey , 8 Jun 2013 05:49
@CaptainGrey

The beneficial capitalism of the NHS, free education etc. has won

Free education and the NHS are state institutions. As Debbie said, Amazon never taught anyone to read. Beneficial capitalism is an oxymoron resulting from your lack of understanding.

cpp4ever -> CaptainGrey , 8 Jun 2013 05:41
@CaptainGrey -

especially the beneficial capitalism of the NHS, free education etc. has won and countless people have gained as a result.

At one and the same time being privatized and having their funding squeezed, a direct result of the neoliberal dogma capitalism of austerity. Free access is being eroded by the likes of ever larger student loans and prescription costs for a start.

ATrueFinn -> SpinningHugo , 8 Jun 2013 05:41
@ SpinningHugo 08 June 2013 10:02am .

Nah. They achieved this by copying the west.

I would not go that far. The Western Capitalist Party is only now getting to be as powerful as CCP and China started the "reforms" in the late 1970s.

succulentpork , 8 Jun 2013 05:36

they avoid their taxes, because they can, because they are more powerful than governments

Let's not get carried away here. Let's consider some of the things governments can do, subject only to a 5 yearly check and challenge:

  1. force people upon pain of imprisonment to pay taxes to them
  2. pay out that tax money to whomever they like
  3. spend money they don't have by borrowing against obligations imposed on future taxpayers without their agreement
  4. kill people in wars, often from the comfort of a computer screen thousands of miles away
  5. print money and give it to whomever they like,
  6. get rid of nation state currencies and replace them with a single, centrally controlled currency
  7. make laws and punish people who break them, including the ability to track them down in most places in the world if they try and run away.
  8. use laws to create monopolies and favour special interests

Let's now consider what power apple have...

- they can make iPhones and try to sell them for a profit by responding to the demands of the mass consumer market. That's it. In fact, they are forced to do this by their owners who only want them to do this, and nothing else. If they don't do this they will cease to exist.

generalelection , 8 Jun 2013 05:26
The state has merged with the corporations so that what is good for the corporations is good for the state and visa versa. The larger and richer the state/corporations are, the more shyster lawyers they hire to disguise misdeeds and unethical behavior.

If you support a big government, you are supporting big corporations as well. The government uses the taxpayer as an eternal fount of fresh money and calls it their own to spend as they please. Small businesses suffer unfairly because they cannot afford the shyster lawyers and accountants that protect the government and the corporations, but nobody cares about them. Remember, that Green Energy is big business, just like Big Pharma and Big Oil. Most government shills have personally invested in Green Energy not because they care about the environment, only because they know that it is a safe investment protected by government for government. The same goes for large corporations who befriend government and visa versa.

... ... ...

finnkn -> NeilThompson , 8 Jun 2013 05:20
@NeilThompson - It's all very well for Deborah to recommend that the well paid share work. Journalists, consultants and other assorted professionals can afford to do so. As a self-employed tradesman, I'd be homeless within a month.
finnkn -> SpinningHugo , 8 Jun 2013 05:17
@SpinningHugo - Interesting that those who are apparently concerned with prosperity for all and international solidarity are happy to ignore the rest of the world when it's going well, preferring to prophesy apocalypse when faced with government spending being slightly reduced at home.
sedan2 -> Fachan , 8 Jun 2013 05:11
@Fachan -

Dont see a lot of solutions in this article - as long as our sentiments revolve around envy of the rich, we wont get very far

Yeah, there actually wasn't anything in this article which even smelled of "envy of the rich". Read it again.

KingOfNothing -> 1nn1t , 8 Jun 2013 05:03
@1nn1t - That is a point which just isn't made enough. This is the first group of politicians for whom a global conflict seems like a distant event.

As a result we have people like Blair who see nothing wrong with invading countries at a whim, or conservatives and UKIP who fail to understand the whole point of the European Court of Human Rights.

They seem to act without thought of our true place in the world, without regard for the truly terrible capacity humanity has for self destruction.

REDLAN1 , 8 Jun 2013 05:03
Deborah's point about the illogical demands of neoliberalism are indeed correct, which is somewhat ironic as neoliberalism puts objective rationality at the heart of its philosophy, but I digress...

The main problem with replacing neoliberalism with a more rational, and fairer system, entails that people like Deborah accept that they will be less wealthy. And that my friends is the main problem. People like Deborah, while they are more than happy to point the fingers at others, are less than happy to accept that they are also part of the problem.

(Generalisation Caveat: I don't know in actuality if Deborah would be unhappy to be less wealthy in exchange for a fairer system, she doesn't say)

Herbolzheim , 8 Jun 2013 04:49
Good critique of conservative-neoliberalism, unless you subscribe to it and subordinate any morals or other values to it. She mentions an internal tension and I think that's because conservatism and neoliberal market ideology are different beasts.
NotAgainAgain -> CaptainGrey , 8 Jun 2013 04:47
@CaptainGrey -

There are different models of capitalism quite clearly the social democratic version in Scandinavia or the "Bismarkian" German version have worked a lot better than the UKs.

DavidPavett , 8 Jun 2013 04:45

Yet, mealy-mouthed and hotly contested as this minor mea culpa is, it's still a sign that financial institutions may slowly be coming round to the idea that they are the problem.

How is it a sign of that? We are offered no clues.

What they don't seem to acknowledge is that the merry days of reckless lending are never going to return;

Try reading a history of financial crashes to dislodge this idea.

... even if they do, the same thing will happen again, but more quickly and more savagely.

This may or may not be true but here it is mere assertion.

The IMF exists to lend money to governments, so it's comic that it wags its finger at governments that run up debt.

At this point I start to have real doubts as to whether Deborah Orr has actually read even the Executive Summary of the Report this article is ostensibly a response to.

All the comments that follow about the need for public infrastructure, education, regulated markets and so on are made as if they were a criticism of the IMF and yet the IMF says many of those same things itself. The IMF position may, of course, be contradictory - but then that is something that would need to be demonstrated. It seems that Deborah has not got beyond reading a couple of Guardian articles on the issues she discusses and therefore is in no position to do this.

Thus, for example in its review of world problems of Feb 2013 the IMF comments favorably that in Bangladesh in order to boost competitiveness

Efforts are being made to narrow the skills gap with other countries in the region, as the authorities look to take full advantage of Bangladesh's favorable demographics and help create conditions for more labor-intensive led growth. The government is also scaling up spending on education, science and technology, and information and communication technology.

Which seems to be the sort of thing Deborah Orr is calling for. She should spend a little time on the IMF website before criticising the institution. It is certainly one that merits much criticism - but it needs to be informed.

And the solution to the problems? For Deborah Orr the response

... from the start should have been a wholesale reevaluation of the way in which wealth is created and distributed around the globe, a "structural adjustment", as the philosopher John Gray has said all along.

Does anyone have any idea what this is supposed to mean? There are certainly no leads on this in the link given to "the philosopher" John Gray. And what a strange reference that is. John Gray, in his usual cynical mode, dismisses the idea of progress being achieved by the EU. But then I suppose that is consistent from a man who dismisses the idea of progress itself.

... Conservative neoliberalism is entirely without logic.

The first step in serious political analysis is to understand that the people one opposes are not crazy and are not devoid of logic. If that is not clearly understood then all that is left is the confrontation of assertion and contrary assertion. Of course Conservative neoliberalism has a logic. It is one I do not agree with but it is a logic all the same.

The neoliberalism that the IMF still preaches pays no account to any of this [the need for public investment and a recognition of the multiple roles that individuals have].

Wrong again.

It insists that the provision of work alone is enough of an invisible hand to sustain a market.

And again.

This stuff can't be made up as you go along on the basis of reading a couple of newspaper articles. You actually have to do some hard reading to get to grip with the issues. I can see no signs of that in this piece.

EllisWyatt -> NotAgainAgain , 8 Jun 2013 04:43
@NotAgainAgain - We are going off topic and that is in no small part down to my own fault, so apologies. Just to pick up the point, I guess my unease with the likes of Buffet, Cooper-Hohn or even the wealthy Guardian columnists is that they are criticizing the system from a position of power and wealth.

So its easy to advocate change if you feel that you are in the vanguard of defining that change i.e. the reforms you advocate may leave you worse off, but at a level you feel comfortable with (the prime example always being Polly's deeply relaxed attitude to swingeing income tax increases when her own lifestyle will be protected through wealth).

I guess I am a little skeptical because I either see it as managed decline, a smokescreen or at worst mean spiritedness of people prepared to accept a reasonable degree of personal pain if it means other people whom dislike suffer much greater pain.

Again off topic so sorry about that

NotAgainAgain -> mountman , 8 Jun 2013 04:43
@mountman -

The critical bit is this

"There is a clear legal basis in Germany for the workplace representation of employees in all but the very smallest companies. Under the Works Constitution Act, first passed in 1952 and subsequently amended, most recently in 2001, a works council can be set up in all private sector workplaces with at least five employees."

http://www.worker-participation.eu/National-Industrial-Relations/Countries/Germany/Workplace-Representation

The UK needs to wake up to the fact that managers are sometimes inept or corrupt and will destroy the companies they work for, unless their are adequate mechanisms to hold poor management to account.

ATrueFinn -> SpinningHugo , 8 Jun 2013 04:42
@ SpinningHugo 08 June 2013 9:26am

More people lifted out of poverty in China over the last 25 years than the entire population of South America.

Maybe we need the Chinese Communist Party to take over the world?

ATrueFinn -> CaptainGrey , 8 Jun 2013 04:40
@ CaptainGrey 08 June 2013 8:43am

Capitalism, especially the beneficial capitalism of the NHS, free education etc. has won

There would not be NHS, free education etc. without socialism; in fact they are socialism. It took the Soviet-style socialism ("statism") 70 years to collapse. The neoliberalistic capitalism has already started to collapse after 30 years.

irishaxeman , 8 Jun 2013 04:40
I'm always amused that neoliberal - indeed, capitalist - apologists cannot see the hypocrisy of their demands for market access. Communities create and sustain markets, fund and maintain infrastructure, produce and maintain new consumers. Yet the neolibs decry and destroy. Hypocrites or destructive numpties - never quite decided between Pickles and Gove, y'see.
EllisWyatt -> JamesValencia , 8 Jun 2013 04:38
@JamesValencia - Actually on reflection you are correct and I was wrong in my attack on the author above. Having re-read the article its a critique of institutions rather than people so my points were wide of the mark.

I still think that well heeled Guardian writers aren't really in a position to attack the wealthy and politically connected, but I'll save that for a thread when they explicitly do so, rather than the catch all genie of neoliberalism.

bullwinkle -> bluebirds , 8 Jun 2013 04:38
@bluebirds -

@CaptainGrey - deregulated capitalism has failed. That is the product of the last 20 years. The pure market is a fantasy just as communism is or any other ideology. In a pure capitalist economy all the banks of the western world would have bust and indeed the false value "earned" in the preceding 20 years would have been destroyed.

If the pure market is a fantasy, how can deregulated capitalism have failed? Does one not require the other? Surely it is regulated capitalism that has failed?

snodgrass , 8 Jun 2013 04:36
97% of all OUR money has been handed over to these scheming crooks. Stop bailing out the banks with QE. Take back what is ours -- state control over the creation of money. Then let the banks revert to their modest market-based function of financial intermediaries.

The State can't be trusted to create our money? Well they could hardly do a worse job than the banks! Best solution would be to distribute state-created money as a Citizen's Income.

EllisWyatt -> 1nn1t , 8 Jun 2013 04:35
@1nn1t - Some good points, there is a whole swathe of low earners that should not be in the tax system at all, simply letting them keep the money in their pocket would be a start.

Second the minimum wage (especially in the SE) is too low and should be increased. Obviously the devil is in the detail as to the precise rate, the other issue is non compliance as there will be any number of businesses that try and get around this, through employing people too ignorant or scared to know any better or for family businesses - do we have the stomach to enforce this?

Thirdly there is a widespread reluctance to separate people from the largesse of the state, even at absurd levels of income such as higher rate payers (witness child tax credits). On the right they see themselves as having paid in and so are "entitled" to have something back and on the left it ensures that everyone has a vested interest in a big state dipping it hands into your pockets one day and giving you something back the next.

Broken system

1nn1t -> Uncertainty , 8 Jun 2013 04:34

@Uncertainty - Which is why the people of the planet need to join hands.

The only group of people in he UK to see that need were the generation that faced WW2 together. It's no accident that, joining up at 18 in 1939, they had almost all retired by 1984.
BruceMullinger , 8 Jun 2013 04:31
To promote the indecent obsession for global growth Australia, burdened with debt of around 250 billion dollars, is to borrow and pay interest on a further 7 billion dollars to lend to the International Monetary Fund so as it can lend it to poorer nations to burden them with debt.

It is entrapment which impoverishes nations into the surrender of sovereignty, democracy and national pride. In no way should we contribute to such economic immorality and the entire economic system based on perpetual growth fuelled by consumerism and debt needs top be denounced and dismantled. The adverse social and environmental consequence of perpetual growth defies all sensible logic and in time, in a more responsible and enlightened era, growth will be condemned.

[Dec 03, 2018] Neoliberalism is a modern curse. Everything about it is bad and until we're free of it, it will only ever keep trying to turn us into indentured labourers. It's acolytes are required to blind themselves to logic and reason to such a degree they resemble Scientologists or Jehovah's Witnesses more than people with any sort of coherent political ideology, because that's what neoliberalism actually is... a cult of the rich, for the rich, by the rich... and it's followers in the general population are nothing but moron familiars hoping one day to be made a fully fledged bastard.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... What sticks in the neoliberalism craw is that the state provides these services instead of private businesses, and as such "rob" them of juicy profits! The state, the last easy cash cow! ..."
"... Who could look at the way markets function and conclude there's any freedom? Only a neoliberal cult member. They cannot be reasoned with. They cannot be dissuaded. They cannot be persuaded. Only the market knows best, and the fact that the market is a corrupt, self serving whore is completely ignored by the ideology of their Church. ..."
"... when Thatcher and Reagan deregulated the financial markets in the 80s, that's when the trouble began which in turn led to the immense crash in 2008. ..."
"... Neo-liberalism is just another symptom of liberal democracy which is government by oligarchs with a veneer of democracy ..."
"... The state has merged with the corporations so that what is good for the corporations is good for the state and visa versa. The larger and richer the state/corporations are, the more shyster lawyers they hire to disguise misdeeds and unethical behavior. ..."
"... If you support a big government, you are supporting big corporations as well. The government uses the taxpayer as an eternal fount of fresh money and calls it their own to spend as they please. Small businesses suffer unfairly because they cannot afford the shyster lawyers and accountants that protect the government and the corporations, but nobody cares about them. ..."
"... Deborah's point about the illogical demands of neoliberalism are indeed correct, which is somewhat ironic as neoliberalism puts objective rationality at the heart of its philosophy, but I digress... ..."
"... There would not be NHS, free education etc. without socialism; in fact they are socialism. It took the Soviet-style socialism ("statism") 70 years to collapse. The neoliberalistic capitalism has already started to collapse after 30 years. ..."
"... I'm always amused that neoliberal - indeed, capitalist - apologists cannot see the hypocrisy of their demands for market access. Communities create and sustain markets, fund and maintain infrastructure, produce and maintain new consumers. Yet the neolibs decry and destroy. Hypocrites or destructive numpties - never quite decided between Pickles and Gove ..."
"... 97% of all OUR money has been handed over to these scheming crooks. Stop bailing out the banks with QE. Take back what is ours -- state control over the creation of money. Then let the banks revert to their modest market-based function of financial intermediaries. ..."
"... The State can't be trusted to create our money? Well they could hardly do a worse job than the banks! Best solution would be to distribute state-created money as a Citizen's Income. ..."
"... To promote the indecent obsession for global growth Australia, burdened with debt of around 250 billion dollars, is to borrow and pay interest on a further 7 billion dollars to lend to the International Monetary Fund so as it can lend it to poorer nations to burden them with debt. ..."
Dec 03, 2018 | www.theguardian.com
szwalby , 8 Jun 2013 06:03
This private good, public bad is a stupid idea, and a totally artificial divide. After all, what are "public spends"? It is the money from private individuals, and companies, clubbing together to get services they can't individually afford.

What sticks in the neoliberalism craw is that the state provides these services instead of private businesses, and as such "rob" them of juicy profits! The state, the last easy cash cow!

TedSmithAndSon , 8 Jun 2013 06:01
Neoliberalism is a modern curse. Everything about it is bad and until we're free of it, it will only ever keep trying to turn us into indentured labourers. It's acolytes are required to blind themselves to logic and reason to such a degree they resemble Scientologists or Jehovah's Witnesses more than people with any sort of coherent political ideology, because that's what neoliberalism actually is... a cult of the rich, for the rich, by the rich... and it's followers in the general population are nothing but moron familiars hoping one day to be made a fully fledged bastard.

Who could look at the way markets function and conclude there's any freedom? Only a neoliberal cult member. They cannot be reasoned with. They cannot be dissuaded. They cannot be persuaded. Only the market knows best, and the fact that the market is a corrupt, self serving whore is completely ignored by the ideology of their Church.

It's subsumed the entire planet, and waiting for them to see sense is a hopeless cause. In the end it'll probably take violence to rid us of the Neoliberal parasite... the turn of the century plague.

fr0mn0where -> CaptainGrey , 8 Jun 2013 05:51
@CaptainGrey -

"Capitalism, especially the beneficial capitalism of the NHS, free education etc. has won and countless people have gained as a result."

I agree with you and it was this beneficial version of capitalism that brought down the Iron Curtain. Working people in the former Communist countries were comparing themselves with working people in the west and wanted a piece of that action. Cuba has hung on because people there compare themselves with their nearest capitalist neighbor Haiti and they don't want a piece of that action. North Korea well North Korea is North Korea.

Isn't it this beneficial capitalism that is being threatened now though? When the wall came down it was assumed that Eastern European countries would become more like us. Some have but who would have thought that British working people would now be told, by the likes of Kwasi Kwarteng and his Britannia Unchained chums, that we have to learn to accept working conditions that are more like those in the Eastern European countries that got left behind and that we are now told that our version of Capitalism is inferior to the version adopted by the Communist Party of China?

jazzdrum -> bullwinkle , 8 Jun 2013 05:51
@bullwinkle - No , when Thatcher and Reagan deregulated the financial markets in the 80s, that's when the trouble began which in turn led to the immense crash in 2008.
Eddiel899 , 8 Jun 2013 05:51
Neo-liberalism is just another symptom of liberal democracy which is government by oligarchs with a veneer of democracy.

This type of government began in America about 150 years ago with the Rockefellers, Carnegie, J.P. Morgan, Ford etc who took advantage of new inventions, cheap immigrant labour and financial deregulation in finance and social mores to amass wealth for themselves and chaos and austerity for workers.

All this looks familiar again today with new and old oligarchs hiding behind large corporations taking advantage of the invention of the €uro, mass immigration into western Europe and deregulation of the financial "markets" and social mores to amass wealth for a super-wealthy elite and chaos and austerity for workers.

So if we want to see where things went wrong we need only go back 150 years to what happened to America. There we can also see our future?

WilliamAshbless -> CaptainGrey , 8 Jun 2013 05:49
@CaptainGrey

The beneficial capitalism of the NHS, free education etc. has won

Free education and the NHS are state institutions. As Debbie said, Amazon never taught anyone to read. Beneficial capitalism is an oxymoron resulting from your lack of understanding.

cpp4ever -> CaptainGrey , 8 Jun 2013 05:41
@CaptainGrey -

especially the beneficial capitalism of the NHS, free education etc. has won and countless people have gained as a result.

At one and the same time being privatized and having their funding squeezed, a direct result of the neoliberal dogma capitalism of austerity. Free access is being eroded by the likes of ever larger student loans and prescription costs for a start.

ATrueFinn -> SpinningHugo , 8 Jun 2013 05:41
@ SpinningHugo 08 June 2013 10:02am .

Nah. They achieved this by copying the west.

I would not go that far. The Western Capitalist Party is only now getting to be as powerful as CCP and China started the "reforms" in the late 1970s.

succulentpork , 8 Jun 2013 05:36

they avoid their taxes, because they can, because they are more powerful than governments

Let's not get carried away here. Let's consider some of the things governments can do, subject only to a 5 yearly check and challenge:

  1. force people upon pain of imprisonment to pay taxes to them
  2. pay out that tax money to whomever they like
  3. spend money they don't have by borrowing against obligations imposed on future taxpayers without their agreement
  4. kill people in wars, often from the comfort of a computer screen thousands of miles away
  5. print money and give it to whomever they like,
  6. get rid of nation state currencies and replace them with a single, centrally controlled currency
  7. make laws and punish people who break them, including the ability to track them down in most places in the world if they try and run away.
  8. use laws to create monopolies and favour special interests

Let's now consider what power apple have...

- they can make iPhones and try to sell them for a profit by responding to the demands of the mass consumer market. That's it. In fact, they are forced to do this by their owners who only want them to do this, and nothing else. If they don't do this they will cease to exist.

generalelection , 8 Jun 2013 05:26
The state has merged with the corporations so that what is good for the corporations is good for the state and visa versa. The larger and richer the state/corporations are, the more shyster lawyers they hire to disguise misdeeds and unethical behavior.

If you support a big government, you are supporting big corporations as well. The government uses the taxpayer as an eternal fount of fresh money and calls it their own to spend as they please. Small businesses suffer unfairly because they cannot afford the shyster lawyers and accountants that protect the government and the corporations, but nobody cares about them. Remember, that Green Energy is big business, just like Big Pharma and Big Oil. Most government shills have personally invested in Green Energy not because they care about the environment, only because they know that it is a safe investment protected by government for government. The same goes for large corporations who befriend government and visa versa.

... ... ...

finnkn -> NeilThompson , 8 Jun 2013 05:20
@NeilThompson - It's all very well for Deborah to recommend that the well paid share work. Journalists, consultants and other assorted professionals can afford to do so. As a self-employed tradesman, I'd be homeless within a month.
finnkn -> SpinningHugo , 8 Jun 2013 05:17
@SpinningHugo - Interesting that those who are apparently concerned with prosperity for all and international solidarity are happy to ignore the rest of the world when it's going well, preferring to prophesy apocalypse when faced with government spending being slightly reduced at home.
sedan2 -> Fachan , 8 Jun 2013 05:11
@Fachan -

Dont see a lot of solutions in this article - as long as our sentiments revolve around envy of the rich, we wont get very far

Yeah, there actually wasn't anything in this article which even smelled of "envy of the rich". Read it again.

KingOfNothing -> 1nn1t , 8 Jun 2013 05:03
@1nn1t - That is a point which just isn't made enough. This is the first group of politicians for whom a global conflict seems like a distant event.

As a result we have people like Blair who see nothing wrong with invading countries at a whim, or conservatives and UKIP who fail to understand the whole point of the European Court of Human Rights.

They seem to act without thought of our true place in the world, without regard for the truly terrible capacity humanity has for self destruction.

REDLAN1 , 8 Jun 2013 05:03
Deborah's point about the illogical demands of neoliberalism are indeed correct, which is somewhat ironic as neoliberalism puts objective rationality at the heart of its philosophy, but I digress...

The main problem with replacing neoliberalism with a more rational, and fairer system, entails that people like Deborah accept that they will be less wealthy. And that my friends is the main problem. People like Deborah, while they are more than happy to point the fingers at others, are less than happy to accept that they are also part of the problem.

(Generalisation Caveat: I don't know in actuality if Deborah would be unhappy to be less wealthy in exchange for a fairer system, she doesn't say)

Herbolzheim , 8 Jun 2013 04:49
Good critique of conservative-neoliberalism, unless you subscribe to it and subordinate any morals or other values to it. She mentions an internal tension and I think that's because conservatism and neoliberal market ideology are different beasts.
NotAgainAgain -> CaptainGrey , 8 Jun 2013 04:47
@CaptainGrey -

There are different models of capitalism quite clearly the social democratic version in Scandinavia or the "Bismarkian" German version have worked a lot better than the UKs.

DavidPavett , 8 Jun 2013 04:45

Yet, mealy-mouthed and hotly contested as this minor mea culpa is, it's still a sign that financial institutions may slowly be coming round to the idea that they are the problem.

How is it a sign of that? We are offered no clues.

What they don't seem to acknowledge is that the merry days of reckless lending are never going to return;

Try reading a history of financial crashes to dislodge this idea.

... even if they do, the same thing will happen again, but more quickly and more savagely.

This may or may not be true but here it is mere assertion.

The IMF exists to lend money to governments, so it's comic that it wags its finger at governments that run up debt.

At this point I start to have real doubts as to whether Deborah Orr has actually read even the Executive Summary of the Report this article is ostensibly a response to.

All the comments that follow about the need for public infrastructure, education, regulated markets and so on are made as if they were a criticism of the IMF and yet the IMF says many of those same things itself. The IMF position may, of course, be contradictory - but then that is something that would need to be demonstrated. It seems that Deborah has not got beyond reading a couple of Guardian articles on the issues she discusses and therefore is in no position to do this.

Thus, for example in its review of world problems of Feb 2013 the IMF comments favorably that in Bangladesh in order to boost competitiveness

Efforts are being made to narrow the skills gap with other countries in the region, as the authorities look to take full advantage of Bangladesh's favorable demographics and help create conditions for more labor-intensive led growth. The government is also scaling up spending on education, science and technology, and information and communication technology.

Which seems to be the sort of thing Deborah Orr is calling for. She should spend a little time on the IMF website before criticising the institution. It is certainly one that merits much criticism - but it needs to be informed.

And the solution to the problems? For Deborah Orr the response

... from the start should have been a wholesale reevaluation of the way in which wealth is created and distributed around the globe, a "structural adjustment", as the philosopher John Gray has said all along.

Does anyone have any idea what this is supposed to mean? There are certainly no leads on this in the link given to "the philosopher" John Gray. And what a strange reference that is. John Gray, in his usual cynical mode, dismisses the idea of progress being achieved by the EU. But then I suppose that is consistent from a man who dismisses the idea of progress itself.

... Conservative neoliberalism is entirely without logic.

The first step in serious political analysis is to understand that the people one opposes are not crazy and are not devoid of logic. If that is not clearly understood then all that is left is the confrontation of assertion and contrary assertion. Of course Conservative neoliberalism has a logic. It is one I do not agree with but it is a logic all the same.

The neoliberalism that the IMF still preaches pays no account to any of this [the need for public investment and a recognition of the multiple roles that individuals have].

Wrong again.

It insists that the provision of work alone is enough of an invisible hand to sustain a market.

And again.

This stuff can't be made up as you go along on the basis of reading a couple of newspaper articles. You actually have to do some hard reading to get to grip with the issues. I can see no signs of that in this piece.

EllisWyatt -> NotAgainAgain , 8 Jun 2013 04:43
@NotAgainAgain - We are going off topic and that is in no small part down to my own fault, so apologies. Just to pick up the point, I guess my unease with the likes of Buffet, Cooper-Hohn or even the wealthy Guardian columnists is that they are criticizing the system from a position of power and wealth.

So its easy to advocate change if you feel that you are in the vanguard of defining that change i.e. the reforms you advocate may leave you worse off, but at a level you feel comfortable with (the prime example always being Polly's deeply relaxed attitude to swingeing income tax increases when her own lifestyle will be protected through wealth).

I guess I am a little skeptical because I either see it as managed decline, a smokescreen or at worst mean spiritedness of people prepared to accept a reasonable degree of personal pain if it means other people whom dislike suffer much greater pain.

Again off topic so sorry about that

NotAgainAgain -> mountman , 8 Jun 2013 04:43
@mountman -

The critical bit is this

"There is a clear legal basis in Germany for the workplace representation of employees in all but the very smallest companies. Under the Works Constitution Act, first passed in 1952 and subsequently amended, most recently in 2001, a works council can be set up in all private sector workplaces with at least five employees."

http://www.worker-participation.eu/National-Industrial-Relations/Countries/Germany/Workplace-Representation

The UK needs to wake up to the fact that managers are sometimes inept or corrupt and will destroy the companies they work for, unless their are adequate mechanisms to hold poor management to account.

ATrueFinn -> SpinningHugo , 8 Jun 2013 04:42
@ SpinningHugo 08 June 2013 9:26am

More people lifted out of poverty in China over the last 25 years than the entire population of South America.

Maybe we need the Chinese Communist Party to take over the world?

ATrueFinn -> CaptainGrey , 8 Jun 2013 04:40
@ CaptainGrey 08 June 2013 8:43am

Capitalism, especially the beneficial capitalism of the NHS, free education etc. has won

There would not be NHS, free education etc. without socialism; in fact they are socialism. It took the Soviet-style socialism ("statism") 70 years to collapse. The neoliberalistic capitalism has already started to collapse after 30 years.

irishaxeman , 8 Jun 2013 04:40
I'm always amused that neoliberal - indeed, capitalist - apologists cannot see the hypocrisy of their demands for market access. Communities create and sustain markets, fund and maintain infrastructure, produce and maintain new consumers. Yet the neolibs decry and destroy. Hypocrites or destructive numpties - never quite decided between Pickles and Gove, y'see.
EllisWyatt -> JamesValencia , 8 Jun 2013 04:38
@JamesValencia - Actually on reflection you are correct and I was wrong in my attack on the author above. Having re-read the article its a critique of institutions rather than people so my points were wide of the mark.

I still think that well heeled Guardian writers aren't really in a position to attack the wealthy and politically connected, but I'll save that for a thread when they explicitly do so, rather than the catch all genie of neoliberalism.

bullwinkle -> bluebirds , 8 Jun 2013 04:38
@bluebirds -

@CaptainGrey - deregulated capitalism has failed. That is the product of the last 20 years. The pure market is a fantasy just as communism is or any other ideology. In a pure capitalist economy all the banks of the western world would have bust and indeed the false value "earned" in the preceding 20 years would have been destroyed.

If the pure market is a fantasy, how can deregulated capitalism have failed? Does one not require the other? Surely it is regulated capitalism that has failed?

snodgrass , 8 Jun 2013 04:36
97% of all OUR money has been handed over to these scheming crooks. Stop bailing out the banks with QE. Take back what is ours -- state control over the creation of money. Then let the banks revert to their modest market-based function of financial intermediaries.

The State can't be trusted to create our money? Well they could hardly do a worse job than the banks! Best solution would be to distribute state-created money as a Citizen's Income.

EllisWyatt -> 1nn1t , 8 Jun 2013 04:35
@1nn1t - Some good points, there is a whole swathe of low earners that should not be in the tax system at all, simply letting them keep the money in their pocket would be a start.

Second the minimum wage (especially in the SE) is too low and should be increased. Obviously the devil is in the detail as to the precise rate, the other issue is non compliance as there will be any number of businesses that try and get around this, through employing people too ignorant or scared to know any better or for family businesses - do we have the stomach to enforce this?

Thirdly there is a widespread reluctance to separate people from the largesse of the state, even at absurd levels of income such as higher rate payers (witness child tax credits). On the right they see themselves as having paid in and so are "entitled" to have something back and on the left it ensures that everyone has a vested interest in a big state dipping it hands into your pockets one day and giving you something back the next.

Broken system

1nn1t -> Uncertainty , 8 Jun 2013 04:34

@Uncertainty - Which is why the people of the planet need to join hands.

The only group of people in he UK to see that need were the generation that faced WW2 together. It's no accident that, joining up at 18 in 1939, they had almost all retired by 1984.
BruceMullinger , 8 Jun 2013 04:31
To promote the indecent obsession for global growth Australia, burdened with debt of around 250 billion dollars, is to borrow and pay interest on a further 7 billion dollars to lend to the International Monetary Fund so as it can lend it to poorer nations to burden them with debt.

It is entrapment which impoverishes nations into the surrender of sovereignty, democracy and national pride. In no way should we contribute to such economic immorality and the entire economic system based on perpetual growth fuelled by consumerism and debt needs top be denounced and dismantled. The adverse social and environmental consequence of perpetual growth defies all sensible logic and in time, in a more responsible and enlightened era, growth will be condemned.

[Dec 03, 2018] Neoliberalism is just a sanitised-sounding expression, to cover-up the fact that what we are really seeing here is re-branded, far-right corporatist ideology

Notable quotes:
"... 'Neoliberalism' is just a sanitised-sounding expression, to cover-up the fact that what we are really seeing here is re-branded, far-right, corporatist ideology. ..."
"... There is a major dividing line. There are those who recognise the abuses of the system and lobby for changes and there are those who lobby for further exploitation. ..."
"... The West became over-indebted when it embraced globalisation which necessarily impoverishes the Middle and Working Classes of the developed nations. A chap called Jimmy Goldsmith warned of this and was widely condemned for it. There is another issue Guardianistas would rather not confront : you can a welfare state or you can have open borders. But you can't have both. ..."
"... Private enterprise is inefficient because at it's heart it rules out cooperation. Being happiest if it's a monopoly, there's nothing a business would like better than wipe out all competition. ..."
"... Right now, the neoliberals think that those in the Far East are the workers and those in the West are the consumers, until the Far East becomes the market and wages so low in the West that they become the workers, unless of course some kind souls decide to invest money in Education, Health and infrastructure in Africa on a huge scale, so we then have Africa as the workers and the far East as the market, and the West, apart from those who own large numbers of shares or business outright, presumably either starve to death or pull themselves up by their bootstraps, and start all over again, inventing and setting up completely new industries, providing the newly universally educated and healthy Chinese and Africans and South Americans haven't done it first. ..."
"... The economic model we have is bankrupt and in its death throes ..."
"... Except it's not. It is still very much alive and growing. ..."
"... deregulated capitalism has failed. That is the product of the last 20 years. The pure market is a fantasy just as communism is or any other ideology. In a pure capitalist economy all the banks of the western world would have bust and indeed the false value "earned" in the preceding 20 years would have been destroyed. ..."
"... "Multinationals need to recognise that paying tax is an investment. Without that tax, their markets will slowly evaporate." However, the gains for the transnational rich are immediate and enormous, while the failure of their markets is slow and, so far, almost entirely painless. ..."
"... Accountants now hold the whip hand in government and business. They know the price of everything but the value of nothing. They advocate selling off industries, outsourcing to low wage economies, zero hours contracts and deregulation (under the bogus campaign line of cutting red tape). ..."
"... Google, Amazon and Apple haven't taught anyone in this country to read. But even though an illiterate market wouldn't be so great for them, they avoid their taxes, because they can , because they are more powerful than governments. ..."
"... If you invent a set of rules that says a country that deficit spends above an arbitrary percentage of its GDP is horribly inefficient and far too high then it should not be a surprise that when that happens, it is described as such. ..."
"... But the basic problem is this: it costs a lot of money to cultivate a market – a group of consumers – and the more sophisticated the market is, the more expensive it is to cultivate them. A developed market needs to be populated with educated, healthy, cultured, law-abiding and financially secure people ..."
"... The economic model we have is bankrupt and in its death throes is gobbling up the last scintilla of surplus that can be extracted from the poor ( anyone not independently wealthy). ..."
Dec 03, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

MysticFish , 8 Jun 2013 04:29

'Neoliberalism' is just a sanitised-sounding expression, to cover-up the fact that what we are really seeing here is re-branded, far-right, corporatist ideology.

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power."
- Benito Mussolini

NotAgainAgain -> EllisWyatt , 8 Jun 2013 04:15
@EllisWyatt -

There is a major dividing line. There are those who recognise the abuses of the system and lobby for changes and there are those who lobby for further exploitation.

So on the one hand there are relatively rich philanthropists who are quietly supporting campaigns to redistribute wealth and our abstaining, and on the other you have people arguing for repealing employment legislation.Worst of the lot are people who pretend to care about the poor but then proceed to fill their own boots.

As consequence people like Warren Buffet should perhaps be among the good guys, whilst people like Tony Blair are the worst of lot.

Uncertainty -> RedHectorReborn , 8 Jun 2013 04:09
@RedHectorReborn - The rich have extracted all of the wealth from the wells and is now turning to fracking, regardless of the cost to us all.
thenardiers , 8 Jun 2013 04:08
All very true. The failures of markets are well documented in economics: the tendency towards monopoly, the failure to value social goods etc.

In addition, it is ironic that the arch advocates of the 'free market' came begging ( read lobbying) to their governments insisting upon public financial bailouts for themselves or their counter parties. It was the 'free markets' failure to correctly price 'risk' that was the route of the economic collapse.

As regards access to 'free markets' it seems patently obvious that if you extract the most money from that market (Amazon et al), you should contribute a fair share towards the infrastructure of that market: roads, educations, health care etc.

1nn1t -> EllisWyatt , 8 Jun 2013 04:06

@EllisWyatt - ... we have a real problem with corporations that have a default setting of minimize taxes through ever more complex structures. It can't be beyond the wit of HMRC to reduce the complexity of the tax legislation and make it harder to avoid? The prize is continued access to the UK market

We also have the problem that for half the households in the land the level of welfare and benfits rather than wages is the major determinant of their disposable income and general prosperity.

The welfare code is now comparable in size to the tax code. The tax-benefit affairs of the working poor in the UK are now becoming as complex as those of the companies that employ them.

The welfare rights industry, which is essentially tax-benefit-lawyering for claimants, is now as large and complex as the tax-lawyering industry for companies.

It really is insane that we set the minimum wage so low that it attracts income tax, and then attempt to collect tax from the employing company to fund a tax credit to top up the same low wages that the same company is paying.

marienkaefer , 8 Jun 2013 04:00
The neoliberalism that the IMF still preaches pays no account to any of this. It insists that the provision of work alone is enough of an invisible hand to sustain a market

Does it? where does it say that? An article which as usual blanket condemns "financial institutions" but actually means banks.

gyges1 , 8 Jun 2013 03:59
The West became over-indebted when it embraced globalisation which necessarily impoverishes the Middle and Working Classes of the developed nations. A chap called Jimmy Goldsmith warned of this and was widely condemned for it. There is another issue Guardianistas would rather not confront : you can a welfare state or you can have open borders. But you can't have both.
JamesValencia , 8 Jun 2013 03:59
Most interesting.

Though I'd say private enterprise is capable of building markets - but not of sustaining them. Take books: If few people know how to read, someone will start a fee paying school to teach those who can pay for it. Then books will take off. And that will generate money for some, who'll send their kids to school.

However it will always, inevitably, crash at some point: Business can build up, but will always do it in destructuve cycles - exactly like the brush fires that destroy and regenerate the savannas. As somebright spark once said: Capitalism contains the seeds of it's own destruction, or something along those lines.

And we don't want to live like that - so we have regulation, and the state.And the state fertilises, and safeguards, by cutting the grass, making mulch, and spreading the rich gooey muck all over the nice, green, verdant, state controlled pampa.

The cowboys, now, they prefer no cutting of grass, and letting their cattle chomp away undistrurbed. And now my analogy is starting to wear thin.

The bottom line: Private enterprise is inefficient because at it's heart it rules out cooperation. Being happiest if it's a monopoly, there's nothing a business would like better than wipe out all competition.

Hence, the necessity for state spending, and state regulation, which the private sector is blind to, because it can't look ahead.

Rochdalelass , 8 Jun 2013 03:57
Well said Deborah!

People are members of families, and are employers and workers, who are customers or clients, and part of their local communities and professions and trades and hobbyists/clubs who are large scale wholesale consumers who create the markets that provides employment and income to individuals who are workers. And, and, one big circle.

Right now, the neoliberals think that those in the Far East are the workers and those in the West are the consumers, until the Far East becomes the market and wages so low in the West that they become the workers, unless of course some kind souls decide to invest money in Education, Health and infrastructure in Africa on a huge scale, so we then have Africa as the workers and the far East as the market, and the West, apart from those who own large numbers of shares or business outright, presumably either starve to death or pull themselves up by their bootstraps, and start all over again, inventing and setting up completely new industries, providing the newly universally educated and healthy Chinese and Africans and South Americans haven't done it first.

OK. I was against it for a long time, but go ahead. There's no way of avoiding it. Eat the Rich. Apart from the fact that ultra thin is fashionable, and with all that dieting and exercising, they are the only people who actually get the time for lots of exercise these days, and they'll taste incredibly tough and stringy.

EllisWyatt -> CaptainGrey , 8 Jun 2013 03:56
@CaptainGrey - Ssshhh not on CiF, we all know that capitalism has failed its just that we can't point to a successful alternative model because such a thing has never existed, its just that this time its different and the model I advocate will lead us all to the sunny uplands of utopia.

Obviously there will be a little bit of coercion and oppression to get us to those sunny uplands, but you can't make an omlette etc. plus don't worry that stuff will only happen to "bad people"

CaptainGrey -> emkayoh , 8 Jun 2013 03:55
@emkayoh -

The economic model we have is bankrupt and in its death throes

Except it's not. It is still very much alive and growing. The "alternatives" have crashed and burned save Cuba and North Korea. Capitalism, especially the beneficial capitalism of the NHS, free education etc. has won and countless people have gained as a result.
bluebirds -> CaptainGrey , 8 Jun 2013 03:55
@CaptainGrey - deregulated capitalism has failed. That is the product of the last 20 years. The pure market is a fantasy just as communism is or any other ideology. In a pure capitalist economy all the banks of the western world would have bust and indeed the false value "earned" in the preceding 20 years would have been destroyed.
MylesMackie , 8 Jun 2013 03:55
In the 19th century based on experience the public services became part of the public sector to avoid corruption and corporate blackmail. The neoclassical revolution of the late 20th century has pushed us back to days when elites regarded the state as their property. Democracy was a threat which won out either through the British model or violent revolution. A small elite cannot endure if the majority feel exploited.

The Bilderberg Conference should look to the past and learn from the mistakes committed. Neoclassicism will eventually impoverish them

1nn1t -> UnevenSurface , 8 Jun 2013 03:53

@UnevenSurface - Multinationals need to recognise that paying tax is an investment. Without that tax, their markets will slowly evaporate.

"Multinationals need to recognise that paying tax is an investment. Without that tax, their markets will slowly evaporate." However, the gains for the transnational rich are immediate and enormous, while the failure of their markets is slow and, so far, almost entirely painless.
EllisWyatt -> UnevenSurface , 8 Jun 2013 03:52
@UnevenSurface - I think corporation tax is becoming obsolete given globalization and the increasing dominance of online / global distribution.

Amazon, Starbucks (and to a lesser extent Google) need to have people on the ground in their market, for customer service, distribution, warehouse staff, baristas etc. So they'll pay employer taxes etc.

The question is is that enough? I think we are missing a trick with the UK market due to outdated tax legislation that hasn't really changed in 30 years.

After the US the UK is arguably the most attractive market in the world. Large, homogenous, wealthy with a low propensity to save and a rapid rate of adoption of new technology / products. We need to think about how we can exploit this in relation to corporate taxes because even though I am far from left wing, we have a real problem with corporations that have a default setting of minimise taxes through ever more complex structures.

It can't be beyond the wit of HMRC to reduce the complexity of the tax legislation and make it harder to avoid? The prize is continued access to the UK market

bluebirds , 8 Jun 2013 03:42
Accountants now hold the whip hand in government and business. They know the price of everything but the value of nothing. They advocate selling off industries, outsourcing to low wage economies, zero hours contracts and deregulation (under the bogus campaign line of cutting red tape).

All of these policies will ultimately end up with capitalism destroying itself. Low wage stagnation will result in penniless consumers which results in no growth which results in cuttin wages to maintain shareholder returns which results in penniless consumers etc etc etc. All our institutions are gradually eroded and life for the average citizen will become more and more unpleasant.

Willsmodger , 8 Jun 2013 03:42
Profit share may be a way forward, it's not perfect, companies can effectively use it to freeze wages and benefit from unpaid overtime, that creates unemployment as four people working a couple of hours extra ever day are denying someone else a job, but used in the right way it could ensure people get a share in the wealth they help create.

At the sharp end it's tough, at the company I worked at, all the managers were summoned to a meeting in September and told they had until Christmas to increase turnover and profits, or they would be out of a job.

At the same company, one of my managers complained that a successful manager at another branch was a crook. The CEO replied 'Yes, but he's a crook that makes a million pounds in profit every year'. I wonder how Deborah's article would have gone down with him?

peterfieldman , 8 Jun 2013 03:42
Everything was easier when the U S and Europe ran the world's economies with Bank regulations, currency controls and only the establishment could avoid income, capital gains and IHT taxes and grow wealthy generation after generation. Today there are simply too many players in the global arena and the rules have been torn up. We are in a jungle where greed is rife and only the powerful and corrupt survive, shipping and burying their loot in offshore havens.

We need a new global order with a change of mentality and more morality among the world's politicians, banking and corporate leaders. Unless we end corruption and exploitation of natural resources in the poor nations and a fairer distribution of the economic wealth the world faces economic and social collapse

Febo , 8 Jun 2013 03:41

Google, Amazon and Apple haven't taught anyone in this country to read. But even though an illiterate market wouldn't be so great for them, they avoid their taxes, because they can , because they are more powerful than governments.

Is it beyond the wit of government to close these (perfectly legal) loopholes? Otherwise, what you are asking for is for these companies to make charitible donations to government - nothing wrong with that per se, but let's not hide behind the misleading term 'tax avoidance' - companies are obliged to minimise taxes within the law, face it.

Liquidity Jones -> NicholasB , 8 Jun 2013 03:35
@NicholasB -

It is perfectly clear that in much of the EU public expenditure has been horribly inefficient and far too high

If you invent a set of rules that says a country that deficit spends above an arbitrary percentage of its GDP is horribly inefficient and far too high then it should not be a surprise that when that happens, it is described as such.

Whether that has any basis in reality or, as I suspect, is only relevant within its own ridiculous framework, is surely the question.

NotAgainAgain -> Fachan , 8 Jun 2013 03:32
@Fachan -

Deborah Orr is established writer for the Guardian and Married to a Will Self whose is almost certainly a millionaire. She is one of the rich. The idea that envy is driving her politics is just utterly absurd, and suggests a total lack of reflection.

finnkn , 8 Jun 2013 03:31

But the basic problem is this: it costs a lot of money to cultivate a market – a group of consumers – and the more sophisticated the market is, the more expensive it is to cultivate them. A developed market needs to be populated with educated, healthy, cultured, law-abiding and financially secure people

Not really; Amazon is just as happy to sell us trashy films, multipacks of chocolate, obesity drugs and baseball bats to stove our neighbour's head in. There's certainly an argument to be made that companies should have a duty to invest in the infrastructure that enables their product to be transported, stored etc...but they shouldn't be expected to give a toss if their customers are unhealthy ignoramuses. A market's a market.

NotAgainAgain -> NicholasB , 8 Jun 2013 03:24
@NicholasB -

But some countries manage to do this much more efficiently and effectively than others.

In Europe it would appear to be the Social Democratic Nordic countries and Germany which has very strong employment rights. Korea's economic growth was based on government investment and a degree of protectionism. These are precisely the ideas that neoliberalism opposes.

Liquidity Jones , 8 Jun 2013 03:23
If they had adopted The Keynes Plan at the 1944 Bretton Woods conference then the IMF and the World Bank would never have been set up. We most likely would not have had the euro crisis and the problem of trade imbalances between counties would most likely have gone away.

Now that is what I call 'Keynesian'. Feel free to continue to make up your own definitions though.

kingcreosote , 8 Jun 2013 03:19
Socialism for the 1% with the rest scraping around for the crumbs in an ever more divided world run by The Bilderbergers who play the politicians like puppets.
RedHectorReborn -> emkayoh , 8 Jun 2013 03:18
@emkayoh - I am not sure its in its death throes, I think what we are seeing is capitalism attempting to transform itself again. The success of that transformation will depend on how willing people across the western world to put up with reduced welfare, poverty pay and almost no employment rights. If we say no and make things too hot for the ruling class we have a chance to take control of the future direction of our world, if not then what's the point.
NicholasB , 8 Jun 2013 03:16
This is a strange rant. Everyone agrees that free markets need to be nurtured by appropriate state institutions. But some countries manage to do this much more efficiently and effectively than others. It is perfectly clear that in much of the EU public expenditure has been horribly inefficient and far too high.

There is no contradiction between being in favour of free markets and believing that markets and societies should be nurtured appropriately. We think people should be free and all accept that they should be nurtured.

UnevenSurface , 8 Jun 2013 03:10

So why, exactly, given the huge amount of investment needed to create such a market, should access to it then be "free"?

Corporate taxation is best explained as the license that business pays to access the market -- which is in turn created through the schools, hospitals, roads, etc. that the tax pays for. Unfortunately the new Corporate Social Irresponsibility being acted out by multinationals today neatly avoids paying that license, and sooner or later will damage them. Multinationals need to recognize that paying tax is an investment. Without that tax, their markets will slowly evaporate.

emkayoh , 8 Jun 2013 03:09
The economic model we have is bankrupt and in its death throes is gobbling up the last scintilla of surplus that can be extracted from the poor ( anyone not independently wealthy).

[Dec 03, 2018] The banks put their own short-term interests above their long-term interests of financial stability

Notable quotes:
"... Socialism for the 1% with the rest scraping around for the crumbs ..."
"... Don't you think a global recession and massive banking collapse should be classified as 'crash and burn'? ..."
"... It's one of the major contradictions of modern conservatism that the raw, winner-takes-all version of capitalism it champions actually undermines the sort of law abiding, settled communities it sees as the societal ideal. ..."
"... Rich people have benefited from this more than most: they need workers trained by a state-funded education system and kept healthy by a state-funded healthcare system; they depend on lending from banks rescued by the taxpayer; they rely on state-funded infrastructure and research, and – like all of us – on a society that does not collapse. Whether they like it or not, they would not have made their fortunes without the state spending billions of pounds ..."
"... You have to be careful when you take on the banksters. Abe Lincoln John Kennedy and Hitler all tried or (in Kennedy's case planned) on the issuance of money via the state circumventing the banks. All came to a sticky end. No wonder politicians run scared of them. ..."
"... Now, that's a novel interpretation! The working people in "Communist" countries had free healthcare and education, guaranteed employment and heavily subsidized housing. The reason we have healtcare and free education is that working people in Capitalist countries would otherwise have revolted to have Socialism. In the absence of competition, there is no benefit for the Capitalist to be "beneficial". ..."
"... The banks could plainly see that they were stoking a bubble, but chose not to pass on the increased risk of lending to consumers by raising their interest rates and coolling the market. Why? Because they were making a handsome short-term profit. The banks put their own short-term interests above their long-term interests of financial stability. When the house of cards came tumbling down - we bailed them out. It was idiotic banks who failed to properly control their risk of lending that caused the crash, not interventionist politicians. ..."
Jun 08, 2013 | www.theguardian.com
JFBridge , 8 Jun 2013 08:21
Virtually everyone knows what went wrong, with the exception only of uncontrollable ultra-right neoliberal buffs who try and put the blame on everyone else with various out and out lies and deceptions, and they are thankfully petering and dying out by the day, including deluded contributors to CiF, who seem to be positively and cruelly reveling in the suffering their beloved thesis has and is causing.

So, now that we know the symptoms, what about the cure? The coalition want to make the poor and vulnerable suffer even more than they have done over the last three decades or so while still refusing to clamp down and wholly regulate the bankers, corporates and free markets, who still hold too much power like the unions in the 70's,while Ed Miliband and 'One Nation Labour' merely suggest in mild, diffident terms about financial regulation and a more balanced economy, while still not wanting to upset those nice bankers too much.

It's time they were upset though, and made to pay for their errors and recklessness; while they still award themselves bonuses and take advantage of Gideon's recent tax cut, the poor and vulnerable who were never responsible for the long recession now have money taken off them and struggle to feed, pay bills and clothe themselves and their families, supported by the Daily Fail and co. who look on them as scrounging, lazy, criminal, violent, drunken, drug addicted and promiscuous sub-humans, who deserve their fate.

There's quite a few in the middle/professional classes (many bankers) if they didn't know, but they don't bother with such, do they?

MatthewBall -> emkayoh , 8 Jun 2013 08:20
@emkayoh -

The economic model we have is bankrupt and in its death throes

I am not sure if this is true. We have the same economic system (broadly speaking, capitalism) as nearly every country in the world, and the world economy is growing at a reasonable rate, at around 3-4% for 2013-14 (see http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2013/01/pdf/c1.pdf for more details).

We perceive a problem in (most of) Europe and North America because our economies are growing more slowly than this, and in some cases not at all. The global growth figure comes out healthy because of strong growth in the emerging countries, like China, Brazil and India, who are narrowing the gap between their living standards and ours. So, the world as a whole isn't broken, even if our bit of it is going through a rough patch.

This is pertinant to a discussion of Deborah Orr's article, because in it she calls for global changes:

The response from the start should have been a wholesale reevaluation of the way in which wealth is created and distributed around the globe, a "structural adjustment", as the philosopher John Gray has said all along.

My point is: I don't think this argument will work, because I don't see why the emerging countries would want wholesale change to what, for them, is quite a successful recipe, just because it going down badly in Europe. Instead, European countries need to do whatever it takes to fix their banking systems; but also learn to live within their means, and show some more of the discipline and enterprise that made them wealthy in the first place.

jazzdrum -> Uncertainty , 8 Jun 2013 08:12
@Uncertainty - I`m not defending philanthropy, i am saying in answer to some personal attacks on Miss Orr below the line, that her status as either rich or poor is irrelevant, it is her politics that count .
Tony Benn and Polly Toynbee both receive much abuse in this manner on Cif.
00000010 -> colonelraeburn , 8 Jun 2013 08:10
@colonelraeburn - You really are under the quaint illusion you are in a democracy...
MickGJ -> kingcreosote , 8 Jun 2013 08:08

@kingcreosote - Socialism for the 1% with the rest scraping around for the crumbs

And yet the rest have more crumbs than under any other conceivable system. Look at the difference that even limited market liberalisation has made to poverty in China. No loaf, no crumbs. You can always throw the loaf out of the window if you don't like the inequality and then no-one can have anything.

That's fair, isn't it?

Uncertainty -> jazzdrum , 8 Jun 2013 07:57
@jazzdrum - I don't have much time for those rich who feel guilty about their greed and do 'charity' to salve their souls. Oh and get a Knighthood as a result.

The more honest giver is the person who gives of what little they have in their purse and go without as a result. Not a tax dodge re-branded as philanthropy.

Also, such giving from the rich often has strings and may be tailored to what they think are the 'deserving poor'. I don't like that either.

Uncertainty -> CaptainGrey , 8 Jun 2013 07:54
@CaptainGrey - That is not capitalism. You cannot point to the benefits of socialism and call it capitalism.

Don't you think a global recession and massive banking collapse should be classified as 'crash and burn'?

liberalcynic -> Herbolzheim , 8 Jun 2013 07:52
@Herbolzheim - It's one of the major contradictions of modern conservatism that the raw, winner-takes-all version of capitalism it champions actually undermines the sort of law abiding, settled communities it sees as the societal ideal.
Rainborough , 8 Jun 2013 07:51
"Why, you have to ask yourself, is this vast implausibility, this sheer unsustainability, not blindingly obvious to all?"

- asked the journalist employed by an organ of the capitalist press, with an implausible air of puzzlement.

liberalcynic -> szwalby , 8 Jun 2013 07:50
@szwalby -

The state, the last easy cash cow!

Damn, you've just revealed Richard Branson's secret business plan.
AndyPerry , 8 Jun 2013 07:39
More and more people are beginning to understand this as a fundamentally political problem ( ref. @XerXes1369). The 'left' prefers to concentrate on the role of a financial elite (which is supposed to be exerting some kind of malign supernatural force on the state), to divert attention from what mainstream 'left' poltics in this society has turned out to be.
szwalby -> colonelraeburn , 8 Jun 2013 07:26
@colonelraeburn -

When the state is taking over 60% of the income of even those on minimum wages we se how, from the very top to the very bottom, that the state is the problem.

It's become a monster that will destroy us all.

I would query where you get these figures from, but where it not for the state, do you really think that somebody on the minimum wage, keeping 100% of their wages, would be able to afford, out of these wages, health care, schooling for their children, infrastructure maintenance, their own police force and army, their own legal system? This from an article in the Independent:

Rich people have benefited from this more than most: they need workers trained by a state-funded education system and kept healthy by a state-funded healthcare system; they depend on lending from banks rescued by the taxpayer; they rely on state-funded infrastructure and research, and – like all of us – on a society that does not collapse. Whether they like it or not, they would not have made their fortunes without the state spending billions of pounds.

So the state, although not perfect benefit all of us, get over it!
outragedofacton , 8 Jun 2013 07:23
You have to be careful when you take on the banksters. Abe Lincoln John Kennedy and Hitler all tried or (in Kennedy's case planned) on the issuance of money via the state circumventing the banks. All came to a sticky end. No wonder politicians run scared of them.
CaptainGrey -> WilliamAshbless , 8 Jun 2013 07:04
@WilliamAshbless -

Free education and the NHS are state institutions. As Debbie said, Amazon never taught anyone to read. Beneficial capitalism is an oxymoron resulting from your lack of understanding.

Yes they are state institutions and the tax system should be changed to prevent Amazon et al from avoiding paying their fair share. But beneficial capitalism is not an oxymoron, it is alive and present in virtually every corner of the world. Rather than accuse me of not understanding, I think you would do well to take the beam out of your eye.
ATrueFinn -> fr0mn0where , 8 Jun 2013 07:02
@ fr0mn0where 08 June 2013 10:51am

I agree with you and it was this beneficial version of capitalism that brought down the Iron Curtain. Working people in the former Communist countries were comparing themselves with working people in the west and wanted a piece of that action.

Now, that's a novel interpretation! The working people in "Communist" countries had free healthcare and education, guaranteed employment and heavily subsidized housing. The reason we have healtcare and free education is that working people in Capitalist countries would otherwise have revolted to have Socialism. In the absence of competition, there is no benefit for the Capitalist to be "beneficial".

s0lar1 -> colonelraeburn , 8 Jun 2013 06:33
@colonelraeburn -

The banks couldn't stop property hyperinflation, at 20% a year for well over a decade.

The banks could plainly see that they were stoking a bubble, but chose not to pass on the increased risk of lending to consumers by raising their interest rates and coolling the market. Why? Because they were making a handsome short-term profit. The banks put their own short-term interests above their long-term interests of financial stability. When the house of cards came tumbling down - we bailed them out. It was idiotic banks who failed to properly control their risk of lending that caused the crash, not interventionist politicians.

[Dec 03, 2018] The classic form of neoliberal corruption: The rotating door betweens banks and intelligence agencies brass

This is the key feature of modern National Security State. Note where Mueller was after his retirement and before becoming the Special Procecutor.
Dec 03, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

MysticFish -> gbru2505 , 8 Jun 2013 16:23

@gbru2505 -

Last week there was a story where HSBC have taken on a senior ex-MI5 person to shore up their money laundering 'problems'. They're being fined over a billion dollars by the fed for taking blood money from murderers, drug dealers and corrupt politicians.

Not the Security Services' Director General by any chance?

-- In a filing to the Bermuda Stock Exchange ("BSX"), HSBC Holdings plc (Ticker: HSBC.BH), announced the appointment of Sir Jonathan Evans to the Board of Directors.

The filing stated:

Sir Jonathan Evans (55) has been appointed a Director of HSBC Holdings plc with effect from 6 August 2013. He will be an independent non-executive Director and a member of the Financial System Vulnerabilities Committee.

Sir Jonathan's career in the Security Service spanned 33 years, the last six of which as Director General. During his career Sir Jonathan's experience included counter-espionage, protection of classified information and the security of critical national infrastructure. His main focus was, however, counter-terrorism, both international and domestic including, increasingly, initiatives against cyber threats. As Director General he was a senior advisor to the UK government on national security policy and attended the National Security Council.

He was appointed Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath (KCB) in the 2013 New Year's Honours List and retired from the Service in April 2013.

http://www.bsx.com/NewsArticle.asp?articleID=1100794622

gbru2505 , 8 Jun 2013 16:13
I think there's some really good points in the article.

Last week there was a story where HSBC have taken on a senior ex-MI5 person to shore up their money laundering 'problems'. They're being fined over a billion dollars by the fed for taking blood money from murderers, drug dealers and corrupt politicians.

Their annual fee for this guy with 20 years experience to tackle a billion dollar fine and the disfunction in their organisation? A lousy 100 k. Fee to UK for training him? 0.

Ridiculous! It should have been 10 times that for him and a finders fee of perhaps 10 million to the state.

Realistically, the state has NO clue about it's real value, or the real value of the UK population. And the example above, I think, demonstrates banks' attitude to the global demand that they clean up their act. We neef to take this lot to the cleaners before the stench gets any worse.

[Dec 03, 2018] Neoliberalism is a secular religion because it relies of beliefs (which in this case are presented using the mathematical notation of neoclassic economics)

Like bolshevism this secular regions is to a large extent is a denial of Christianity. While Bolshevism is closer to the Islam, Neoliberalism is closer to Judaism.
The idea of " Homo economicus " -- a person who in all his decisions is governed by self-interest and greed is bunk.
Notable quotes:
"... There is not a shred of logical sense in neoliberalism. You're doing what the fundamentalists do... they talk about what neoliberalism is in theory whilst completely ignoring what it is in practice. ..."
"... In theory the banks should have been allowed to go bust, but the consequences where deemed too high (as they inevitable are). The result is socialism for the rich using the poor as the excuse, which is the reality of neoliberalism. ..."
"... Neoliberalism is based on the thought that you get as much freedom as you can pay for, otherwise you can just pay... like everyone else. In Asia and South America it has been the economic preference of dictators that pushes profit upwards and responsibility down, just like it does here. ..."
"... We all probably know the answer to this. In order to maintain the consent necessary to create inequality in their own interests the neoliberals have to tell big lies, and keep repeating them until they appear to be the truth. They've gotten so damn good at it. ..."
"... Neoliberalism is a modern curse. Everything about it is bad and until we're free of it, it will only ever keep trying to turn us into indentured labourers. ..."
"... It's acolytes are required to blind themselves to logic and reason to such a degree they resemble Scientologists or Jehovah's Witnesses more than people with any sort of coherent political ideology, because that's what neoliberalism actually is... a cult of the rich, for the rich, by the rich... and it's followers in the general population are nothing but moron familiars hoping one day to be made a fully fledged bastard ..."
"... Who could look at the way markets function and conclude there's any freedom? Only a neoliberal cult member. They cannot be reasoned with. They cannot be dissuaded. They cannot be persuaded. Only the market knows best, and the fact that the market is a corrupt, self serving whore is completely ignored by the ideology of their Church. ..."
Dec 03, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com
TedSmithAndSon -> theguardianisrubbish , 8 Jun 2013 12:24
@theguardianisrubbish -

Unless you are completely confused by what neoliberalism is there is not a shred of logical sense in this.

There is not a shred of logical sense in neoliberalism. You're doing what the fundamentalists do... they talk about what neoliberalism is in theory whilst completely ignoring what it is in practice.

In theory the banks should have been allowed to go bust, but the consequences where deemed too high (as they inevitable are). The result is socialism for the rich using the poor as the excuse, which is the reality of neoliberalism.

Savers in a neoliberal society are lambs to the slaughter. Thatcher "revitalised" banking, while everything else withered and died.

Neoliberalism is based on the thought of personal freedom, communism is definitely not. Neoliberalist policies have lifted millions of people out of poverty in Asia and South America.

Neoliberalism is based on the thought that you get as much freedom as you can pay for, otherwise you can just pay... like everyone else. In Asia and South America it has been the economic preference of dictators that pushes profit upwards and responsibility down, just like it does here.

I find it ironic that it now has 5 year plans that absolutely must not be deviated from, massive state intervention in markets (QE, housing policy, tax credits... insert where applicable), and advocates large scale central planning even as it denies reality, and makes the announcement from a tractor factory.

Neoliberalism is a blight... a cancer on humanity... a massive lie told by rich people and believed only by peasants happy to be thrown a turnip. In theory it's one thing, the reality is entirely different. Until we're rid of it, we're all it's slaves. It's an abhorrent cult that comes up with purest bilge like expansionary fiscal contraction to keep all the money in the hands of the rich.

Jacobsadder , 8 Jun 2013 11:35
Bloody well said Deborah!

Why, you have to ask yourself, is this vast implausibility, this sheer unsustainability, not blindingly obvious to all?

We all probably know the answer to this. In order to maintain the consent necessary to create inequality in their own interests the neoliberals have to tell big lies, and keep repeating them until they appear to be the truth. They've gotten so damn good at it.

iluvanimals54 , 8 Jun 2013 07:58
Today all politicians knee before the Altar that is Big Business and the Profit God, with his minions of multinational Angels.
TedSmithAndSon , 8 Jun 2013 06:01
Neoliberalism is a modern curse. Everything about it is bad and until we're free of it, it will only ever keep trying to turn us into indentured labourers.

It's acolytes are required to blind themselves to logic and reason to such a degree they resemble Scientologists or Jehovah's Witnesses more than people with any sort of coherent political ideology, because that's what neoliberalism actually is... a cult of the rich, for the rich, by the rich... and it's followers in the general population are nothing but moron familiars hoping one day to be made a fully fledged bastard.

Who could look at the way markets function and conclude there's any freedom? Only a neoliberal cult member. They cannot be reasoned with. They cannot be dissuaded. They cannot be persuaded. Only the market knows best, and the fact that the market is a corrupt, self serving whore is completely ignored by the ideology of their Church.

It's subsumed the entire planet, and waiting for them to see sense is a hopeless cause. In the end it'll probably take violence to rid us of the Neoliberal parasite... the turn of the century plague.

[Dec 03, 2018] The problem with giving any novel political idea a really extended trial is that you have to try it out on live human beings.

Dec 03, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

MatthewBall -> Rainborough , 8 Jun 2013 14:19

@Rainborough -

How many alternative economic systems would you say have been given a fair trial under reasonably favorable circumstances?

A good question. Answer: admittedly, not a huge number - but not none either. Feudalism held sway in the middle ages and mercantilism in the 18th century, before both fell out of fashion. In the 20th century Russia stuck with communism for 74 years, and many other countries tried it for a while. At one time (around 1949-89) there were enough countries in the communist block for us to be able to say that they at least had a fair chance to make it work - that is, if it didn't work, they can't really blame it on the rest of the world ganging up on them.

Lately, serious challengers to the global economic order have been more isolated (Venzuela, Cuba, North Korea?) - so maybe you could argue that, if they are struggling, it is because they have been unfairly ganged up on. But then again, aren't they pursuing a version of socialism that has close affinities to that tried in the Soviet Union?

The problem with giving any novel political idea a really extended trial is that you have to try it out on live human beings. This means that, once a critical mass of data has built up that indicates a political idea doesn't work out as hoped, then people inevitably lose the will to try that idea again.

So my question is: are critics of the current world economic order able to spell out exactly how their proposed alternative would differ from Soviet-style socialism?

[Dec 03, 2018] There is no alterative (TINA) myth expressed via "Just as democracy is the worst system of government except for all other, so capitalism is the worst economic model except for all other"

Neoliberalism is clearly the result of coup d'état of financial oligarchy. So other forms of capitalism are possible.
Below is a set of typical augments for TINA from Guardian posts
Notable quotes:
"... How many alternative economic systems would you say have been given a fair trial under reasonably favorable circumstances? ..."
Dec 03, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Rainborough -> Fachan , 8 Jun 2013 10:24

@Fachan - " Just as democracy is the worst system of government except for all other, so capitalism is the worst economic model except for all other."

How many alternative economic systems would you say have been given a fair trial under reasonably favorable circumstances?

epinoa -> Fachan , 8 Jun 2013 10:19

@Fachan -

Just as democracy is the worst system of government except for all other, so capitalism is the worst economic model except for all other.

Shame we only have bastardized forms of them.
MickGJ -> 00000010 , 8 Jun 2013 09:51

@00000010 - Neo-Liberalism is the only choice.

I'd tend to agree with you but in that case it's not an ideology, merely pragmatism. The convergence of the parties merely reflects the wider consensus in society.
Eddiel899 -> colonelraeburn , 8 Jun 2013 06:48
@colonelraeburn -

But you haven't got any alternative

The alternative is simple but people have become so wedded to the libertarian parts of liberal democracy that it will be some time before they are ready to contemplate the alternative, a return to the Judaeo/Christian version of human rights - an absolute right to God who made us, to the truth, to life, to a natural family, and to own the means of earning a living - to which all should be entitled and all should be held to account.

These are rights that any sensible person will tell you that we should be entitled to but believe it or not they are anathema to liberal democracy which is based on exploiting the selfishness of the individual to the detriment of the common good and the good of society at large.

colonelraeburn -> Eddiel899 , 8 Jun 2013 06:06
@Eddiel899 - Neo-liberalism is just another symptom of liberal democracy which is government by oligarchs with a veneer of democracy.

But you haven't got any alternative.

What are we supposed to do elect you Guardian Occupy lot on the promise you will come up with something.

You will have to do better than that.

[Dec 03, 2018] What is the result of "the peal oil" and technological progress (which was a side result of the Cold War arm race, especially in computers and communications, and in no way activity of private sector alone) is presented a gift from neoliberalism to mankind

This post is a variant of "fake prosperity" -- yet another neoliberal myth. Also known as "rising tidelift all boats"
The improvement of the standard of living in 90th was mainly due to economic plunder of xUSSR and Eastern Europe as well as well as communication revolution happening simultaneously. The period from 1990 to 2000 is known as "Triumphal March of Neoliberalism". Aftger year 200 neoliberalism went into recession and in 2008 in deep crisis. The neoliberal ideology was dead by 2008.
Dec 03, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

OneCommentator -> ATrueFinn , 8 Jun 2013 12:21

@ATrueFinn -

Indeed. That was in the time of feudalism and mercantilism.

No, it was as recently as WW2 more or less. After that it followed a confusing period where social and political freedoms darted ahead up to the '80s when the economic freedoms started being championed by the right: Thatcher, Reagan, etc.

That saw a liberalisation of trade and an explosive growth in international trade with huge benefits for the whole world: developing countries like the Asian dragons have seen their standards of living skyrocket and practically they can't get up with the developed countries in one generation. China, and India to an extent, is following on that path with pretty good results.

As the same time the developed countries saw a huge improvement in their standard of living with products and services available at incredible prices. Even the countries that did not get on this yet are benefiting and the fact that starvation in the world is less of a problem is the proof of that for example.

OneCommentator , 8 Jun 2013 12:04

The response should be a wholesale reevaluation of the way in which wealth is created and distributed around the globe

But we know already how that is done: voluntary transactions among free agents. That's called a free market and it is by far the most efficient way to produce wealth humanity has ever known. Sure, we tried other methods (slavery, forced labour, communal entities, government controlled economies, tribal economies, etc.) but nothing worked as well as free markets.

The calls for governments' intervention in the economy is misguided and counterproductive. They already extract about 50% of all wealth created in this country. That's way too much since most of the money taken by governments is money diverted from productive use.

ATrueFinn -> OneCommentator , 8 Jun 2013 12:00
@ OneCommentator 08 June 2013 4:46pm

Wrong. Traditional liberalism supported both social and economic freedoms. That included support for most of the civil rights and freedoms we enjoy today AND free trade and free investments.

Indeed. That was in the time of feudalism and mercantilism.

I take this opportunity to draw everyone's attention to a Finnish theorist and proponent of liberal economical and political thinking, whose treatise on liberal national economy preceded Adam Smith by 11 years: Anders Chydenius (1729-1803).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Chydenius

I have the feeling that he and Smith are rolling in their graves seeing what is done under the auspices of "liberalism".

SpinningHugo -> jazzdrum , 8 Jun 2013 05:59
@ jazzdrum 08 June 2013 10:51am . Get cifFix for Chrome .

Margaret Thatcher left office 23 years ago. The de-regulation of the City occurred in 1986, 27 years ago. Since then UK GDP has more than doubled, inflation and unemployment are far lower, and the numbers living in extreme poverty have fallen dramatically.

And yet in CiF world it is all Thatcher's fault.

[Dec 03, 2018] Neoliberal propaganda dictum: Nobody is owed a good living in this world

This is an attractive but idealistinc notion, because the person destiny often is shaped by forces beyond his control. Like Great Depression or WWII. The proper idea is that the society as a whole serves as a "social security" mechanism to prevent worst outcomes. At the same time neoliberalism accept bailout for financial sector and even demand them for goverment.
Dec 03, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

OneCommentator -> dmckm , 8 Jun 2013 13:03

@dmckm - Nobody is owed a good living in this world. That's what freedom means: one is free to chose the best way to make a living. Are you saying that by forcing people to pay you something they don't want to is freedom?

[Dec 03, 2018] No market is 'Free'. Free markets do not exist. Markets are there for those with a vested interest. i.e. the banksters. Note the growth of Hedge funds or slush funds for the rich.

Dec 03, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Stonk , 8 Jun 2013 08:18

No market is 'Free'. Free markets do not exist. Markets are there for those with a vested interest. i.e. the banksters. Note the growth of Hedge funds or slush funds for the rich.

[Dec 03, 2018] The detachment from reality of "free market" propaganda is intentional. This notion is pure propaganda and there were never "free market" in any country in history of mankind

Neoliberalism like Bolshevism is based on brainwashing and propaganda. In this case by bought by financial elite and controlled by intelligence agencies MSM.
Notable quotes:
"... Neoliberalism? This is not just a financial agenda. This a highly organized multi armed counterculture operation to force us, including Ms Orr [unless she has...connections] into what Terence McKenna [who was in on it] termed the `Archaic Revival'. That is - you and me [and Ms Orr] - our - return to the medieval dark ages, if we indeed survive that far. ..."
"... The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organised habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are moulded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. ..."
"... A free market larger than a boot fair has never existed. A market can never have power, it's just a market after all. It's the people in the market that have power... or some of them... the few... have it disproportionately compared to others, and straight away the market isn't free. ..."
"... It's only even approximately free when properly regulated, but that's anathema to market fundamentalists so they end up with a market run for the benefit of vested interests that they will claim is "free" until their dying breath. ..."
"... Power belongs with democratically elected governments, not people in markets responsible only to themselves. Amazing that people still think as you do after all that's happened. ..."
Dec 03, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

LiberteEgalite1 -> taxhaven , 8 Jun 2013 13:31

@taxhaven - I love this "free markets" expression, but can we really have free markets please then? This means that no taxpayer money is to be spent to bail out the capitalist bankers when things so sour.

It also means that there is completely free movement of labor so I as an employer should be able to hire anyone I like for your job and pay the wage that the replacement is willing to take i.e. tough luck to you if the person is more qualified and is willing to work for less but does not have the work visa because in free markets there will be no such things as work permits.

PointOfYou , 8 Jun 2013 13:37

Neoliberalism has spawned a financial elite who hold governments to ransom

Neoliberalism? This is not just a financial agenda. This a highly organized multi armed counterculture operation to force us, including Ms Orr [unless she has...connections] into what Terence McKenna [who was in on it] termed the `Archaic Revival'. That is - you and me [and Ms Orr] - our - return to the medieval dark ages, if we indeed survive that far.

The same names come up time and time again. One of them being, father of propaganda, Edward Bernays.

Bernays wrote what can be seen as a virtual Mission Statement for anyone wishing to bring about a "counterculture." In the opening paragraph of his book Propaganda he wrote:

".. The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organised habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are moulded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.

This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organised. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses.

It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind..."[28]

Bernays' family background made him well suited to "control the public mind." He was the double nephew of psychoanalysis pioneer Sigmund Freud. His mother was Freud's sister Anna, and his father was Ely Bernays, brother of Freud's wife Martha Bernays.

TedSmithAndSon -> taxhaven , 8 Jun 2013 13:25
@taxhaven -

about being permitted to engage in voluntary exchange of goods and services with others, unmolested.

And if we ever had that, would it make the ideal society?

A free market larger than a boot fair has never existed. A market can never have power, it's just a market after all. It's the people in the market that have power... or some of them... the few... have it disproportionately compared to others, and straight away the market isn't free.

It's only even approximately free when properly regulated, but that's anathema to market fundamentalists so they end up with a market run for the benefit of vested interests that they will claim is "free" until their dying breath.

Power belongs with democratically elected governments, not people in markets responsible only to themselves. Amazing that people still think as you do after all that's happened.

[Dec 03, 2018] Is this corporatism when corporate funded think-tanks are having their non-mandated corporatist policies prioritized over government election pledges on policy?

Dec 03, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

MickGJ -> MysticFish , 8 Jun 2013 09:44

@MysticFish - If these are completely different things, why has the austerity-stricken tax-payer been co-opted into paying for events like Thatcher's funeral

How is that corporatism?

Bilderberg policing,

How is that corporatism?

corporate funded think-tanks are having their non-mandated corporatist policies prioritized over government election pledges on policy?

Are they?
MysticFish -> MickGJ , 8 Jun 2013 09:24
@MickGJ -

Neo-liberalism and fascist corporatism are completely different things.

If these are completely different things, why has the austerity-stricken tax-payer been co-opted into paying for events like Thatcher's funeral and Bilderberg policing, and why is it that corporate funded think-tanks are having their non-mandated corporatist policies prioritised over government election pledges on policy?

[Dec 03, 2018] Neoliberal myth: Austerity is caused by incompetent governments unable to balance their budgets

In reality this is mostly neocolonial way of dealing with countries. Allowing local oligarchy to steal as much loaned by foreign states money as they can and converting the country into the debt slave. Look at Greece and Ukraine for two prominent examples.
The position of OneCommentator is a typical position of defenders and propagandists of neoliberalism
IMF is part of "Washington Consensus" with the direct goal of converting countries into debt slaves of industrialized West. It did not work well with Acia counties, but it is great success in some countries in Europe and most of Africa and Latin America (with Argentina as the most recent example)
Notable quotes:
"... As central banks such as the FED and the ECB operate with insatiable greed and cannot be audited or regulated by any government body anywhere in the world, due to their charters having been set up that way, then bankers are free to meet secretly and plot depressions so as to gain full control over sovereign nations and manipulate markets so that their "chums and agents" in business can buy up assets and land in depressed economies – while possible wars could also make corporations and banks more money as well! ..."
Dec 03, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com
OneCommentator -> petercs , 8 Jun 2013 11:46
@petercs -

..."neoliberal", concept behind the word, has nothing to do with liberal or liberty or freedom..

Wrong. Traditional liberalism supported both social and economic freedoms. That included support for most of the civil rights and freedoms we enjoy today AND free trade and free investments. It used to be that liberals were practically unpopular with right wing (traditional conservative for example) parties but more or less on the same side as left wing parties, mainly because of their social positions. More recently the left wing parties became more and more unhappy with the economic freedoms promoted by liberals while the right wing parties embraced both the economic and social freedoms to a certain degree.

So, the leftists found themselves in a bind practically having reversed roles which the the conservatives as far as support for liberalism goes. So, typically, they're using propaganda to cover their current reactionary tendencies and coins a new name for liberals: neoliberals which, they say, are not the same as liberals (who are their friends since liberal means freedom lover and they like to use that word a lot).

"austerity" is the financial sectors' solution to its survival after it sucked most the value out of the economy and broke it.

Austerity is caused by incompetent governments unable to balance their budgets. They had 60 years to do it properly after ww2 and the reconstruction that followed but many of them never did it. So now it is very simple: governments ran out of money and nobody wants to lend them more. That's it, they hit the wall and there is nothing left on the bottom if the purse.
OneCommentator , 8 Jun 2013 10:49

The IMF exists to lend money to governments, so it's comic that it wags its finger at governments that run up debt.

It is a bit more complicated than that. Developed countries like Greece are supposed to run more or less balanced budgets over longer periods. Sure, they need to borrow money on a regular basis and may that is supposed to be done by issuing bonds or other forms of government debt that investors buy on the open market. For such governments the IMF is supposed to just fill in in a minor way not to provide the bulk of all the loans needed on a temporary basis. Because of incompetent governments Greece is practically bankrupt hence it is not going to be able to pay back most of the existing debts and definitely not newer debts. So practically the IMF is not, ending money to them, it is giving them the money. So, I would say that they have a good reason to wag its finger.

Malakia123 , 8 Jun 2013 11:15

LOGIC 101: Introductory Course of Study

If private, stockholder-held central banks such as the FED and the FED-backed ECB were not orchestrating this depression, and anybody who believed they were was a "wacko-nutcase conspiracy theorist", then why do they keep repeating the same mistakes of forcing un-payable bailout loans, collapsing banks, wiping out people's savings and then imposing austerity on those nations year after year – when it is clearly a failed policy?

Possible Answers :

1. Bank presidents are all ex-hippies who got hooked on LSD in the 70's and have not yet recovered fully as their brains are still fried!

2. Central bankers have been recruited from insane asylums in both Europe and America in government-sponsored programs to see whether blithering idiots are capable of running large, international financial institutions.

3. All catastrophic events in the banking/business world, such as the derivative and housing crash of 2008, the Stock Market Crash of 1929 and The Great Depression of 1929-40 were totally random events that just occurred out of nowhere and central banks were caught off guard – leaving them no option but to play with their willies for years on end until a major war suddenly happened to pull the whole world out of "bad times"!

4. As central banks such as the FED and the ECB operate with insatiable greed and cannot be audited or regulated by any government body anywhere in the world, due to their charters having been set up that way, then bankers are free to meet secretly and plot depressions so as to gain full control over sovereign nations and manipulate markets so that their "chums and agents" in business can buy up assets and land in depressed economies – while possible wars could also make corporations and banks more money as well!


Please choose one of the possible answers from above and write a short 500 word essay on whether it may or may not true – using well-defined logical arguments. I expect your answers in by Friday of this week as I would like to get pissed out of my mind at the pub on Saturday night!

petercs , 8 Jun 2013 10:44

The neoliberal idea is that the cultivation itself should be conducted privately as well. They see "austerity" as a way of forcing that agenda.

..."neoliberal", concept behind the word, has nothing to do with liberal or liberty or freedom...it is a PR spin concept that names slavery with a a word that sounds like the opposite...if "they" called it neoslavery it just wouldn't sell in the market for political concepts.

..."austerity" is the financial sectors' solution to its survival after it sucked most the value out of the economy and broke it. To mend it was a case of preservation of the elite and the devil take the hindmost, that's most of us.

...and even Labour, the party of trade unionism, has adopted austerity to drive its policy.

...we need a Peoples' Party to stand for the revaluation of labour so we get paid for our effort rather than the distortion, the rich xxx poor divide, of neoslavery austerity.

[Dec 03, 2018] Ukrainian leadership is a party of war, and it will continue as long as they're in power Putin

Notable quotes:
"... "When I look at this latest incident in the Black Sea, all what's happening in Donbass – everything indicates that the current Ukrainian leadership is not interested in resolving this situation at all, especially in a peaceful way," ..."
"... This is a party of war and as long as they stay in power, all such tragedies, all this war will go on. ..."
"... "As they say, for one it's war, for other – it's mother. That's reason number one why the Ukrainian government is not interested in a peaceful resolution of the conflict," ..."
"... Second, you can always use war to justify your failures in economy, social policy. You can always blame things on an aggressor. ..."
"... "We care about Ukraine because Ukraine is our neighbor," ..."
Dec 03, 2018 | www.rt.com

Russia's President Vladimir Putin has branded the Ukrainian leadership a "party of war" which would continue fueling conflicts while they stay in power, giving the recent Kerch Strait incident as an example. "When I look at this latest incident in the Black Sea, all what's happening in Donbass – everything indicates that the current Ukrainian leadership is not interested in resolving this situation at all, especially in a peaceful way," Putin told reporters during a media conference in the aftermath of the G20 summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

This is a party of war and as long as they stay in power, all such tragedies, all this war will go on.

The Kiev authorities are craving war primarily for two reasons – to rip profits from it, and to blame all their own domestic failures on it and actions of some sort of "aggressors."

Also on rt.com 'Kiev would get away even with eating babies': Putin says Kerch Strait standoff is a provocation

"As they say, for one it's war, for other – it's mother. That's reason number one why the Ukrainian government is not interested in a peaceful resolution of the conflict," Putin stated.

Second, you can always use war to justify your failures in economy, social policy. You can always blame things on an aggressor.

This approach to statecraft by the Ukrainian authorities deeply concerns Russia's President. "We care about Ukraine because Ukraine is our neighbor," Putin said.

Tensions between Russia and Ukraine have been soaring after the incident in the Kerch Strait. Last weekend three Ukrainian Navy ships tried to break through the strait without seeking the proper permission from Russia. Following a tense stand-off and altercation with Russia's border guard, the vessels were seized and their crews detained over their violation of the country's border.

Also on rt.com 'I had a short conversation with Trump and I DIDN'T sit next to Melania' – Putin

While Kiev branded the incident an act of "aggression" on Moscow's part, Russia believes the whole Kerch affair to be a deliberate "provocation" which allowed Kiev to declare a so-called "partial" martial law ahead of Ukraine's presidential election.

[Dec 03, 2018] I do always enjoy the scenes in Saving Private Ryan when thousands of heavily-armed Goldman Sachs employees land on Omaha beach.

Dec 03, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

MickGJ -> outragedofacton , 8 Jun 2013 08:50

@outragedofacton - You have to be careful when you take on the banksters.
Abe Lincoln, John Kennedy and Hitler all tried or (in Kennedy's case planned) on the issuance of money via the state circumventing the banks.

I hadn't realised the John WIlkes Booth and Lee Harey Oswald were bankers.

But I do always enjoy the scenes in Saving Private Ryan when thousands of heavily-armed Goldman Sachs employees land on Omaha beach.

[Dec 03, 2018] I've spat my tea every time I hear some non-Brit brag of their freedom from royal tyranny. They are blissfully unaware they have created/inherited such in all but name

Dec 03, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Itsrainingtin -> crinklyoldgit , 8 Jun 2013 10:30

@ crinklyoldgit

Still it is surprising that they have gone so quickly from their stated position at the start of the republic of a rejection of kings and emperors to their position now of corruption so ingrained it is impossible to make distinctions.

Too right, I've spat my tea every time I hear some non-Brit brag of their freedom from royal tyranny. They are blissfully unaware they have created/inherited such in all but name. Fat Cat Bastard or Henry the Eighth, try to spot the difference in style or attitude.

[Dec 02, 2018] CIA Officials Continue Efforts To Marginalize President Trump

Dec 02, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Caius Keys , 6 hours ago link

CIA Officials Continue Efforts To Marginalize President Trump Via Washington Post

There is a particular transparency of motive which becomes clear, and reconciles all inquiry, when an interested observer accepts a particular media framework:

Hadenough1000 , 4 hours ago link

Arab brennan

was arab Obamas weaponizing king

dumbocrats you put Arabs in total power??? 😳😳

After the rapist Clinton's Arabs burned 3000 Americans to death???

what possibly could go wrong😜😜

Caius Keys , 4 hours ago link

Bushes love SA long time https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/05/12/its-time-to-stop-holding-saudi-arabias-hand-gcc-summit-camp-david/

CatInTheHat , 6 hours ago link

"the rout of Sunni jihadists in Syria by the combined forces of the Syrian government, Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah, it's clear that Islamic terrorism is no longer a threat that stirs the paranoia necessary to feed big military and intelligence budgets . For all the money they've spent, intelligence has done a terrible job of either anticipating terrorist strikes or defeating them in counterinsurgency warfare"

Excuse me,but WTF??

It's the US,NATO, Israhell and Saudis that created ISIS, with the above mentioned spending BILLIONS to combat ISIS in Syria.

The war on terror is a hoax. The lame exploitation of Arabs and Islam to manufacture consent for war on Iraq, starting with Mossad planting of low yield thermal nuke weapons that brought the Towers down..Saudis were the patsies.

All of this with blessing of Zionists banksters and US Treasury& Fed Reserve.

[Dec 02, 2018] MSM are the biggest tool of passive compliance and propagandizing by a relatively docile population

Dec 02, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

PAX November 30, 2018 at 10:34 am

A timely article. Main Stream Media (MSM) are the biggest tool of passive compliance and propagandizing by a relatively docile population. I open the CNN URL and it is like reading the neocon version of 1960's Pravda. The Australian government should be doing more to get Julian Assange out of his current predicament. The 4th Estate is withering on the vine to comply with lobby dictates.The Founders had a reason to mention this entity in the Constitution.
Fran Macadam , says: November 30, 2018 at 10:37 am
Donald Trump used to love Julian Assange's WikiLeaks media outlet. Said so over a hundred times. Sad!
Sid Finster , says: November 30, 2018 at 11:10 am
To be fair to the MSM, they know that they are safe from persecution, as they never print a word that the establishment does not want to see published.
Fran Macadam , says: November 30, 2018 at 4:50 pm
Now here are some purveyors of Fake News, all evidence-free assertions proven totally false:

"But the evidence increasingly points to Assange having made himself a willing tool of Russian Intelligence. There's a huge difference between pursuing the public's right to know and and acting as the clandestine agent of an adversarial foreign power."

"He's a spy, a saboteur and a rapist. I'm all in for the free and adversarial press but when a reporter is an actual criminal, lock him up."

Fran Macadam , says: November 30, 2018 at 4:54 pm
"I don't think that it's the content of his email release that got Assange in hot water. It was his calculated timing of the release to cause the most harm to a candidate's run for President."

Right, journalists should always withhold true information about a politician and the political processes they engage in from the public, so that the voters will remain deceived. Well, I guess, the politicians YOU favor.

polistra , says: November 30, 2018 at 5:47 pm
The press does not have to be afraid. The press is Deepstate. The Department of "Justice" is Deepstate. They are the same machine, working in beautiful synchrony to obliterate civilization.
SteveK9 , says: December 1, 2018 at 9:03 am
Peter the 'press' is obviously not worried about losing their ability to inform the public of the truth, because they no longer view that as their function. They are tools of propaganda for the oligarchs that rule America. There are a few people like yourself, who want to inform the public, but you represent a (shrinking) minority.
Bill Lawrence , says: December 1, 2018 at 10:05 am
It's funny how Ds claim Assange helped seal Hillary's fate by releasing the emails without recognizing the reality that the emails needed to exist in order to be released.

Why would you vote for someone who admitted to doing the things described?

BTW, should "John Doe" the leaker of the Panama Papers be tracked down?

Chef , says: December 1, 2018 at 4:08 pm
This conundrum is partially the result of picking and choosing the enforcement of laws based on political affiliation or beliefs.
We are not a republic now.
The individual has been declared an enemy of GovCo, the EstGOP and the Democrat People's Parties.

[Dec 01, 2018] Reality of G20 meeting is even fancier the fiction: Trump pretends that the USA is not connected to Kerch Strait incident and CIA did not inform him who planned this provocation

See also: Ukraine security chief admits intel agents were on board Navy ships during Kerch standoff
Dec 01, 2018 | www.rt.com

FILM:

PRESIDENT: This is incredible! I never ordered such a thing!
SOVIET AMBASSADOR (scornfully): Our [intelligence] source was the New York Times.
-- "Dr. Strangelove"

REALITY:

US President Donald Trump is still unsure whether to meet with Vladimir Putin, pending a 'full report' about the Kerch Strait incident that by pure coincidence happened just days before the upcoming G20 summit in Argentina.

Trump cancels Putin meeting at G20 over Ukraine standoff ... Trump, Putin to meet at G20 amid Russia-Ukraine tensions ... Trump to meet Putin at G20, but not MBS - Bolton - rt.com

[Dec 01, 2018] Assange Never Met Manafort by Craig Murray

Notable quotes:
"... I can also assure you that Luke Harding, the Guardian, Washington Post and New York Times have been publishing a stream of deliberate lies, in collusion with the security services. ..."
Nov 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

Luke Harding and the Guardian Publish Still More Blatant MI6 Lies

The right wing Ecuadorean government of President Moreno continues to churn out its production line of fake documents regarding Julian Assange, and channel them straight to MI6 mouthpiece Luke Harding of the Guardian.

Amazingly, more Ecuadorean Government documents have just been discovered for the Guardian, this time spy agency reports detailing visits of Paul Manafort and unspecified "Russians" to the Embassy. By a wonderful coincidence of timing, this is the day after Mueller announced that Manafort's plea deal was over.

The problem with this latest fabrication is that Moreno had already released the visitor logs to the Mueller inquiry. Neither Manafort nor these "Russians" are in the visitor logs.

This is impossible. The visitor logs were not kept by Wikileaks, but by the very strict Ecuadorean security. Nobody was ever admitted without being entered in the logs. The procedure was very thorough. To go in, you had to submit your passport (no other type of document was accepted). A copy of your passport was taken and the passport details entered into the log. Your passport, along with your mobile phone and any other electronic equipment, was retained until you left, along with your bag and coat. I feature in the logs every time I visited.

There were no exceptions. For an exception to be made for Manafort and the "Russians" would have had to be a decision of the Government of Ecuador, not of Wikileaks, and that would be so exceptional the reason for it would surely have been noted in the now leaked supposed Ecuadorean "intelligence report" of the visits. What possible motive would the Ecuadorean government have for facilitating secret unrecorded visits by Paul Manafort? Furthermore it is impossible that the intelligence agency – who were in charge of the security – would not know the identity of these alleged "Russians".

Previously Harding and the Guardian have published documents faked by the Moreno government regarding a diplomatic appointment to Russia for Assange of which he had no knowledge. Now they follow this up with more documents aimed to provide fictitious evidence to bolster Mueller's pathetically failed attempt to substantiate the story that Russia deprived Hillary of the Presidency.

My friend William Binney, probably the world's greatest expert on electronic surveillance, former Technical Director of the NSA, has stated that it is impossible the DNC servers were hacked, the technical evidence shows it was a download to a directly connected memory stick. I knew the US security services were conducting a fake investigation the moment it became clear that the FBI did not even themselves look at the DNC servers, instead accepting a report from the Clinton linked DNC "security consultants" Crowdstrike.

I would love to believe that the fact Julian has never met Manafort is bound to be established. But I fear that state control of propaganda may be such that this massive "Big Lie" will come to enter public consciousness in the same way as the non-existent Russian hack of the DNC servers.

Assange never met Manafort. The DNC emails were downloaded by an insider. Assange never even considered fleeing to Russia. Those are the facts, and I am in a position to give you a personal assurance of them.

I can also assure you that Luke Harding, the Guardian, Washington Post and New York Times have been publishing a stream of deliberate lies, in collusion with the security services.

I am not a fan of Donald Trump. But to see the partisans of the defeated candidate (and a particularly obnoxious defeated candidate) manipulate the security services and the media to create an entirely false public perception, in order to attempt to overturn the result of the US Presidential election, is the most astonishing thing I have witnessed in my lifetime.

Plainly the government of Ecuador is releasing lies about Assange to curry favour with the security establishment of the USA and UK, and to damage Assange's support prior to expelling him from the Embassy. He will then be extradited from London to the USA on charges of espionage.

Assange is not a whistleblower or a spy – he is the greatest publisher of his age, and has done more to bring the crimes of governments to light than the mainstream media will ever be motivated to achieve. That supposedly great newspaper titles like the Guardian, New York Times and Washington Post are involved in the spreading of lies to damage Assange, and are seeking his imprisonment for publishing state secrets, is clear evidence that the idea of the "liberal media" no longer exists in the new plutocratic age. The press are not on the side of the people, they are an instrument of elite control.

Assange Never Met Manafort

SporadicMyrmidon , says: December 1, 2018 at 7:47 am GMT

My opinions are conflicted, but I'd rather give Assange a Nobel Peace Prize than a criminal conviction. He definitely deserves a Nobel Prize more than Obama. I was in an eatery in Cambridge, MA, when I heard Obama's prize announced, and even there people where aghast and astounded.
jilles dykstra , says: December 1, 2018 at 10:25 am GMT
The Guardian was bought by Soros, a few years ago.
Washpost, NYT and CNN, Deep State mouthpieces.
That the USA, as long as Deep State has not been eradicated completely from USA society, will continue to try to get Assange, and of course also Snowdon, in it claws, is more than obvious.
So what are we talking about ?
Assange just uses the freedom of information act, or how the the USA euphemism for telling them nothing, is called.
How Assange survives, mentally and bodily, being locked up in a small room without a bathroom, for several years now, is beyond my comprehension.
But of course, for 'traitors' like him human rights do not exist.
Bill Jones , says: December 1, 2018 at 10:33 am GMT
I tried this in the Grauniad search box

Term: "Far Right" result: "About 1,400,000 results (0.23 seconds)"

Term : "Far Left" result: "About 7,310 results (0.22 seconds) "

Only Pol Pot is to the Left of that bird-cage liner.

anon [271] Disclaimer , says: December 1, 2018 at 10:38 am GMT
"I can also assure you that Luke Harding, the Guardian, Washington Post and New York Times have been publishing a stream of deliberate lies, in collusion with the security services."

These outfits are largely state-run at this point. The Washington Post is owned by Jeff Bezos, a man with deep ties to the CIA through his Amazon company (which depends upon federal subsidies and has received security agency "support") and the Guardian is clandestinely funded through UK government purchases, among other things. MI6 has also effectively compromised the former integrity and objectivity of that outlet by threatening them with prosecutions for revealing MI6 spy practices. And the NYT has always been state-run. See their coverage of the Iraq War. The Israelis have bragged about having an asset at the Times. The American government has several.

Altai , says: December 1, 2018 at 11:38 am GMT
It's amazing to see the obvious progression of the lies as they take hold in an anti-Trump elite who seem completely impervious to understanding his victory over Clinton. All these people who claim to be so cosmopolitan and educated seem to think Assange or Manafort would have any interest in meeting each other. (Let alone in the company of unspecified 'Russians'.)

At first it was that Assange was wrong to publish the DNC leaks because it hurt Clinton and thus helped Trump.

Then it was that Assange was actively trying to help Trump.

Now it's that Assange is in collusion with Trump and the 'Russians'.

The same thing happened with the Trump-Russian nonsense which goes ever more absurd as time goes on. Slowly boiling the frog in the public's mind. The allegations are so nonsensical, yet there are plenty of educated, supposedly cosmopolitan people who don't understand the backgrounds or motives of their 'liberal' heroes in the NYT or Guardian who believe this on faith.

None of these people will ever question how if any of this is true how the security services of the West didn't know it and if they supposedly know it, how come they aren't acting like it's true. They are acting like they're attempting to smear politicians they don't like, however.

Che Guava , says: December 1, 2018 at 11:51 am GMT
Luke Harding is particularly despicable. He made his name as a journalist off privileged access to Wilkileaks docs, and has been persistently attacking Assange ever since the Swedish fan-girl farce.

Assange did make a mistake (of which I am sure he is all too aware now) in the choice to, rather than leave the info. open on-line, collaborate with the filthy Guardian, the sleazy NYT, and I forget dirty name of the third publication.

Big tactictal error.

Che Guava , says: December 1, 2018 at 12:05 pm GMT
@anon Since you are posting as Anon coward, I am not expecting a reply, but would be interested in (and would not doubt) state funding of the 'Guardian'?

As for the NYT, they are plainly in some sense state-funded, but the state in question is neither New York nor the U.S.A., but the state of Israel.

mike k , says: December 1, 2018 at 12:33 pm GMT
Only the thoroughly brainwashed can doubt the truths in this article. Unfortunately that includes a huge number of Americans.
Bill Jones , says: December 1, 2018 at 1:05 pm GMT
@Altai The one lesson that the left has learned is to double downin perpetuity.

Their invincible arragance is matched only by their stupidity.

Simon Tugmutton , says: December 1, 2018 at 1:23 pm GMT
@Che Guava Perhaps he is referring to the sheer volume of ads the British government places for public sector appointments. As for the paper edition, most of it seems to be bought by the BBC!

[Dec 01, 2018] A typical normal person reaction on reading a fresh issue of NYT or Guardian is screaming "ALL LIES, ALL LIES, ALL LIES"

Slightly edited for clarity ;-)
Notable quotes:
"... The Western MSM is a lying scamming neoliberal propaganda machine. ..."
Dec 01, 2018 | www.unz.com

Rational , says: November 29, 2018 at 7:51 pm GMT

"ALL LIES, ALL LIES, ALL LIES"

So he screamed in the cafeteria and spilled his morning coffee. We all wondered what happened to him and so we looked at his friend, and he told us that he must have read the NYT, as that was his common reaction, a cry of pain and anguish and screams of "all lies, all lies, all lies" whenever he reads the newspaper or watches the TV, esp. NYT.

Your article and the previous news about Manfort visiting Assange and the funny timing of the same reminded me of this story.

The Western MSM is a lying scamming neoliberal propaganda machine.

[Dec 01, 2018] The New York Times As Corrupt Judge And Jury

Notable quotes:
"... We've seen it before : a newspaper and individual reporters get a story horribly wrong but instead of correcting it they double down to protect their reputations and credibility - which is all journalists have to go on - and the public suffers. ..."
"... Sometimes this maneuver can contribute to a massive loss of life. The most egregious example was the reporting in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq. Like nearly all Establishment media, The New York Times got the story of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction -- the major casus belli for the invasion -- dead wrong. But the Times , like the others, continued publishing stories without challenging their sources in authority, mostly unnamed, who were pushing for war. ..."
"... The Times' unsteady conviction is summed up in this paragraph, which the paper itself then contradicts only a few paragraphs later: "What we now know with certainty: The Russians carried out a landmark intervention that will be examined for decades to come. Acting on the personal animus of Mr. Putin, public and private instruments of Russian power moved with daring and skill to harness the currents of American politics. Well-connected Russians worked aggressively to recruit or influence people inside the Trump campaign." ..."
Sep 23, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

We've seen it before : a newspaper and individual reporters get a story horribly wrong but instead of correcting it they double down to protect their reputations and credibility - which is all journalists have to go on - and the public suffers.

Sometimes this maneuver can contribute to a massive loss of life. The most egregious example was the reporting in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq. Like nearly all Establishment media, The New York Times got the story of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction -- the major casus belli for the invasion -- dead wrong. But the Times , like the others, continued publishing stories without challenging their sources in authority, mostly unnamed, who were pushing for war.

The result was a disastrous intervention that led to hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths and continued instability in Iraq, including the formation of the Islamic State.

In a massive Times ' article published on Thursday, entitled, "A Plot to Subvert an Election: Unravelling the Russia Story So Far," it seems that reporters Scott Shane and Mark Mazzetti have succumbed to the same thinking that doubled down on Iraq.

They claim to have a "mountain of evidence" but what they offer would be invisible on the Great Plains.

With the mid-terms looming and Special Counsel Robert Mueller unable to so far come up with any proof of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign to steal the 2016 election -- the central Russia-gate charge -- the Times does it for him, regurgitating a Russia-gate Round-Up of every unsubstantiated allegation that has been made -- deceptively presented as though it's all been proven.

Mueller: No collusion so far.

This is a reaffirmation of the faith, a recitation of what the Russia-gate faithful want to believe is true. But mere repetition will not make it so.

The Times' unsteady conviction is summed up in this paragraph, which the paper itself then contradicts only a few paragraphs later: "What we now know with certainty: The Russians carried out a landmark intervention that will be examined for decades to come. Acting on the personal animus of Mr. Putin, public and private instruments of Russian power moved with daring and skill to harness the currents of American politics. Well-connected Russians worked aggressively to recruit or influence people inside the Trump campaign."

But this schizoid approach leads to the admission that "no public evidence has emerged showing that [Trump's] campaign conspired with Russia."

The Times also adds: "There is a plausible case that Mr. Putin succeeded in delivering the presidency to his admirer, Mr. Trump, though it cannot be proved or disproved."

This is an extraordinary statement. If it cannot be "proved or disproved" what is the point of this entire exercise: of the Mueller probe, the House and Senate investigations and even of this very New York Times article?

Attempting to prove this constructed story without proof is the very point of this piece.

A Banner Day

The 10,000-word article opens with a story of a pro-Russian banner that was hung from the Manhattan Bridge on Putin's birthday, and an anti-Obama banner hung a month later from the Memorial Bridge in Washington just after the 2016 election.

On public property these are constitutionally-protected acts of free speech. But for the Times , "The Kremlin, it appeared, had reached onto United States soil in New York and Washington. The banners may well have been intended as visual victory laps for the most effective foreign interference in an American election in history."

Kremlin: Guilty, says NYT. (Robert Parry, 2016)

Why? Because the Times tells us that the "earliest promoters" of images of the banners were from social media accounts linked to a St. Petersburg-based click-bait farm, a company called the Internet Research Agency. The company is not legally connected to the Kremlin and any political coordination is pure speculation. IRA has been explained convincingly as a commercial and not political operation. Its aim is get and sell "eyeballs."

For instance the company conducted pro and anti-Trump rallies and social media messages, as well as pro and anti-Clinton. But the Times , in classic omission mode, only reports on "the anti-Clinton, pro-Trump messages shared with millions of voters by Russia." Sharing with "millions" of people on social media does not mean that millions of people have actually seen those messages. And if they had there is little way to determine whether it affected how they voted, especially as the messages attacked and praised both candidates.

The Times reporters take much at face value, which they then themselves undermine. Most prominently, they willfully mistake an indictment for a conviction, as if they do not know the difference.

This is in the category of Journalism 101. An indictment need not include evidence and under U.S. law an indictment is not evidence. Juries are instructed that an indictment is merely an accusation. That the Times commits this cardinal sin of journalism to purposely confuse allegations with a conviction is not only inexcusable but strikes a fatal blow to the credibility of the entire article.

It actually reports that "Today there is no doubt who hacked the D.N.C. and the Clinton campaign. A detailed indictment of 12 officers of Russia's military intelligence agency, filed in July by Mr. Mueller, documents their every move, including their break-in techniques, their tricks to hide inside the Democrats' networks and even their Google searches."

Who needs courts when suspects can be tried and convicted in the press?

What the Times is not taking into account is that Mueller knows his indictment will never be tested in court because the GRU agents will never be arrested, there is no extradition treaty between the U.S. and Russia and even if it were miraculously to see the inside of a courtroom Mueller can invoke states secrets privilege to show the "evidence" to a judge with clearance in his chambers who can then emerge to pronounce "Guilty!" without a jury having seen that evidence.

This is what makes Mueller's indictment more a political than a legal document, giving him wide leeway to put whatever he wants into it. He knew it would never be tested and that once it was released, a supine press would do the rest to cement it in the public consciousness as a conviction, just as this Times piece tries to do.

Errors of Commission and Omission

There are a series of erroneous assertions and omissions in the Times piece, omitted because they would disturb the narrative:

Trump: Sarcastically calls on Russia to get Clinton emails.

Distorts Geo-Politics

The piece swallows whole the Establishment's geo-strategic Russia narrative, as all corporate media do. It buys without hesitation the story that the U.S. seeks to spread democracy around the world, and not pursue its economic and geo-strategic interests as do all imperial powers.

The Times reports that, "The United States had backed democratic, anti-Russian forces in the so-called color revolutions on Russia's borders, in Georgia in 2003 and Ukraine in 2004." The Times has also spread the erroneous story of a democratic revolution in Ukraine in 2014, omitting crucial evidence of a U.S.-backed coup.

The Times disapprovingly dismisses Trump having said on the campaign trail that "Russia was not an existential threat, but a potential ally in beating back terrorist groups," when an objective view of the world would come to this very conclusion.

The story also shoves aside American voters' real concerns that led to Trump's election. For the Times, economic grievances and rejection of perpetual war played no role in the election of Trump. Instead it was Russian influence that led Americans to vote for him, an absurd proposition defied by a Gallup poll in July that showed Americans' greatest concerns being economic. Their concerns about Russia were statistically insignificant at less than one percent.

Ignoring Americans' real concerns exposes the class interests of Times staffers and editors who are evidently above Americans' economic and social suffering. The Times piece blames Russia for social "divisions" and undermining American democracy, classic projection onto Moscow away from the real culprits for these problems: bi-partisan American plutocrats. That also insults average Americans by suggesting they cannot think for themselves and pursue their own interests without Russia telling them what to do.

Establishment reporters insulate themselves from criticism by retreating into the exclusive Establishment club they think they inhabit. It is from there that they vicariously draw their strength from powerful people they cover, which they should instead be scrutinizing. Validated by being close to power, Establishment reporters don't take seriously anyone outside of the club, such as a website like Consortium News.

But on rare occasions they are forced to take note of what outsiders are saying. Because of the role The New York Timesplayed in the catastrophe of Iraq its editors took the highly unusual move of apologizing to its readers. Will we one day read a similar apology about the paper's coverage of Russia-gate? Tags Politics

[Dec 01, 2018] The Times isn't a newspaper at all but a clandestine operation run by intelligence units.

Notable quotes:
"... You might like to report on the recent bill in Congress giving broadcasters "immunity" for spying. The New York Times acquires information from spying on citizens by the CIA twenty four hours a day - aa CIA Wire Service which is unconscionable for a newspaper. Such information allows the Times to keep competitors out of favored industries, scoop other news groups, and enhance revenues by pirated material. The Times isn't a newspaper at all but a clandestine operation run by intelligence units. ..."
"... Interestingly, the NYT revelation itself was illegal, a felony under the Intelligence Act of 1917. ..."
"... Which, ipso facto, makes at least that part of the Intelligence Act of 1917 unconstitutional: "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press" ( US. Constitution, Amendment I ). This perhaps explains why no newspaper has ever been prosecuted under the Intelligence Act of 1917. Prosecutors would rather have it available as a threat rather than having it thrown out as unconstitutional, and of course the Supreme Court can't rule on its constitutionality unless someone has standing to bring a case against it before them. ..."
"... It's also not surprising that the CIA would take an interest in how it is perceived. I would argue that the CIA was actually preventing or controlling the flow of info the WH was giving to filmmakers. ..."
"... This story only scratches the surface on the extent of corruption in US media and journalism in general over the last 10-15 years. The loss of journalistic integrity and objectivity in US media is on display as many media outlets showcase their one-sided liberal or conservative views. Sadly, the US media has become just as polarized as the government. However, the greatest corruption is not with the govt-media connection; the greatest corruption involves the lobbyists - foreign and domestic. Lobbying groups exert an enormous influence on politicians and the media and it extends to both sides of the aisle. ..."
"... It's no secret that the CIA and State Department have colluded with media since 1950. Public relations is nothing more than propaganda. And if you think the CIA doesn't have it's own PR department, with *hundreds* of employees, dedicated to misinformation, spin, half-truths, and psychological operations, well, consider this your wake-up call. ..."
"... "The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media." - William Colby - Former CIA Director ..."
"... "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." - William Casey, CIA Director 1981 ..."
"... While you rightly characterize this case as indicating the "virtual merger" of government and media "watchdogs," I think a meta-theme running through your writings illuminates the "virtual merger" of both corporate & state power (esp. after Citizens United), ..."
"... the real issue is not personalities or trivial post deletions, the real issue is that the CIA is tightly bound to the institutions of America ... and that this is not a good thing for everyone ..."
Aug 30, 2012 | www.theguardian.com
Zilchnada -> TerryMKl , 31 Aug 2012 09:47
...this is the norm not the exception. It's also representative of a very significant cross section of the State Department/CIA/Pentagon/DC Beaurcratic Machine, made up of various Leftists, Statists, academia, and privileged youth with political science degrees from east coast/DC/Ivy League schools.
TerryMKl , 31 Aug 2012 08:44
I am having a very difficult time wrapping my mind around this story.....we have an alleged CIA spokesperson purportedly attempting to engage in damage control with a prominent national newspaper regarding the flow of information between the CIA and film-makers doing a story on the Bin Laden raid. Ostensibly, the information provided, regarding the raid, was to help secure the President's reelection bid?

I note that the logo on the phone of the published photo of CIA spokesperson Marie Harf looks remarkably similar, if not identical, to the Obama campaign logo. A "Twitter" account profile for M's. Harf references that she is a "National Security Wonk at OFA...." . Could the "OFA" she makes reference to possibly be "Obama for America"? Her recent tweet history includes commentaries critical of Romney and his supporters, which appear to be in response to her observations while watching Republican Convention coverage.

My understanding heretofore was that those engaged in the Intelligence Community, particularly spokespersons, preferred to keep a low profile and at least appear apolitical. Based upon the facts as presented, one must reexamine whether a US intelligence agency is engaging in the most blatant form political partisanship to unduly influence a US Presidential election.

zany12 , 31 Aug 2012 08:31
You might like to report on the recent bill in Congress giving broadcasters "immunity" for spying. The New York Times acquires information from spying on citizens by the CIA twenty four hours a day - aa CIA Wire Service which is unconscionable for a newspaper. Such information allows the Times to keep competitors out of favored industries, scoop other news groups, and enhance revenues by pirated material. The Times isn't a newspaper at all but a clandestine operation run by intelligence units.
TheCharlatone , 31 Aug 2012 07:23
I'm surprised by the pettiness of it all. And it's this pettiness that makes me think that such data exchange is not only routine, but
an accepted way to enhance a career. After all, who really cares what Dowd writes? I believe Chomsky called her 'kinda a gossip columnist'. And, that's what she is.

That anyone would bother passing her column to the CIA is, on the face of it, a little absurd. I don't say she is a bad columnist, she's probably quite good, but hardly of interest to the CIA, even when she is writing about the CIA. So basically, someone passed her column along, because this is normal, and the more ambitious understand that this is how you 'get along'.

This kind of careerism is something I see, on some level, every day: the ambitious see the rules of the game, and follow them, and the rationale comes later. For most of us, this doesn't involve the security services. However, the principle that the MSM is, at the least, heavily influenced by state power is fairly well understood by now in more critical circles: all forms of media are subject to unusual and particular state pressures, due to their central import in propaganda and mass-persuasion. The NYT is, in short, an obvious target for this kind of influencing. And as such should really know much much better.

Sadly, I have come to the conclusion that most of what I read, or see on the nightly broadcasts, is essentially bullshit. I could switch to RT, and in a way its counter-point would be useful in stimulating my own critical thinking, but much of what RT broadcasts is also likely to be bullshit. We have a world of competing propaganda memes where nobody knows the truth. It's like we are all spooks now, each and every one of us. An excellent article, again.

Franklymydear0 -> JET2023 , 31 Aug 2012 04:26

Interestingly, the NYT revelation itself was illegal, a felony under the Intelligence Act of 1917.

Which, ipso facto, makes at least that part of the Intelligence Act of 1917 unconstitutional: "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press" ( US. Constitution, Amendment I ). This perhaps explains why no newspaper has ever been prosecuted under the Intelligence Act of 1917. Prosecutors would rather have it available as a threat rather than having it thrown out as unconstitutional, and of course the Supreme Court can't rule on its constitutionality unless someone has standing to bring a case against it before them.

gibbon22 , 31 Aug 2012 03:57
Excellent article, but it's not necessarily a surprise to see a reporter who has developed a relationship with his source do that source a favor in hopes that the favor will some day be returned with greater access.

It's also not surprising that the CIA would take an interest in how it is perceived. I would argue that the CIA was actually preventing or controlling the flow of info the WH was giving to filmmakers.

This story only scratches the surface on the extent of corruption in US media and journalism in general over the last 10-15 years. The loss of journalistic integrity and objectivity in US media is on display as many media outlets showcase their one-sided liberal or conservative views. Sadly, the US media has become just as polarized as the government. However, the greatest corruption is not with the govt-media connection; the greatest corruption involves the lobbyists - foreign and domestic. Lobbying groups exert an enormous influence on politicians and the media and it extends to both sides of the aisle.

marjac , 31 Aug 2012 02:27
Obama's CIA leaking to anyone, including the NY Times and colluding? I'm shocked do your hear, shocked..........
Zilchnada , 31 Aug 2012 01:02
What the commoners fail to understand is that the Public Relations (PR) industry controls 75% of the information that you are fed from major media outlets. It's an industry that has artfully masked everything you thought you knew. It's no secret that the CIA and State Department have colluded with media since 1950. Public relations is nothing more than propaganda. And if you think the CIA doesn't have it's own PR department, with *hundreds* of employees, dedicated to misinformation, spin, half-truths, and psychological operations, well, consider this your wake-up call.
jaydiggity , 30 Aug 2012 22:30
"The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media." - William Colby - Former CIA Director

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." - William Casey, CIA Director 1981

Christopher Tucker , 30 Aug 2012 21:52
Glenn, thanks for illuminating the insidious, dangerous cynicism pervading American media & culture, which have become so inured to hypocrisy, corruption & desecration of sacrosanct democratic values & institutions that has been crucial to the normalization of formerly intolerable practices, laws & policies eating away at the foundations of our constitutional democracy. The collective moral, principled "lines in the sand" protecting us from authoritarian pressures are steadily being washed away, compromised, thanks to media obsequious complicity.

While you rightly characterize this case as indicating the "virtual merger" of government and media "watchdogs," I think a meta-theme running through your writings illuminates the "virtual merger" of both corporate & state power (esp. after Citizens United), and all the "checks & balances" enshrined in our constitution after 9/11 (e.g. deferential judiciary, bi-partisan Congressional consensus on increasingly authoritarian, secretive US executive, propagandistic media, etc.). At least that's my thinking, and I see no significant countervailing pressure capable of slowing- let alone reversing- this authoritarian re-ordering of our constitutional order & political culture, though a few exceptions exist (e.g. Judge Forrest's suprising courage to suspend NDAA provision 1021), and rare journalists like yourself.

One astounding example of this widespread cynicism facilitating this authoritarian trend, was the media's rather restrained response to the revelation that elements in the massive Terrorist/Military Industrial Complex (HBGary) had been plotting military-style social-engineering operations to discredit & silence progressive journalists, specifically naming YOU, who I see as one of the rare defenders of the constitutional/democratic "lines in the sand" under relentless attack. Where was the overwhelming collective shock & outrage, or media demanding criminal investigations into US taxpayer-funded attacks on our so-called "free press?"

The paucity of outrage, outraged- but did not surprise- me, and neither does this revelation of a cozy relationship between censored/propagandistic media, CIA, White House, etc., as indicated by my articles about the " War on Whistleblowers, " " Where's the Free Press, " & " NDAA 2013 Legalizing US Propaganda Could Make Americans Less Gullible. "

My question for Glenn, is whether he thinks it would be possible for him to get legal standing to sue the private (& US??) entities, which proposed the covert discrediting/repression operations targeting you specifically?

I'm no lawyer, but it seems the documents published by Anonymous, reveal actions constituting criminal conspiracy. Given the proposed methods included forms of politically-motivated military warfare & coercion, the guilty parties would likely be aggressively investigated and charged with some terrorist crimes, if they had been busted planning attacks on people/entities that trumpeted Obama administration policies or its corporate backers (i.e. if they were Anonymous). The HBGary proposal to discredit/silence Wikileaks defenders strongly indicated they had experience with- & confidence in- such covert operations. Requiring a journalist/academic to be covertly discredited/destroyed/silenced before they get legal standing would be as absurd as the Obama administration's argument that Chris Hedges & Co. plaintiffs lack standing because they hadn't yet been stripped of their rights & secretly indefinitately detained without charges or trial.

I thought you might be in the unique position to use the US courts to pry open & shine some light upon the clearly anti-democratic, authoritarian abuses of power, & virtual fusion of corporate & state powers, which you so eloquently write about.

Grizz Mann , 30 Aug 2012 21:34
Is the CIA stuff in with the FAST AND FURIOUS files?
kschroder , 30 Aug 2012 20:26
I glad that foreign journalism is available for me to read our the internet, it's the only way i can find truthful information about what's going on in my own country (USA). I've known the liberal media bias was a problem for a long time, but articles like this continually remind me that things are far worse than they appear.
JRobinetteBiden , 30 Aug 2012 20:08
State-run media; right along with Apie-See, Empty-See and See-BS...
Steven Kingham , 30 Aug 2012 20:02
This is hilarious - even the left-wing Guardian is contemptuous of the lap-dog relationship the US press has with the Obama administration.
SmirkingChimp , 30 Aug 2012 19:09
All the actions surrounding the NY Times and the CIA on this issue are atrocious. With this type of "journalistic independence", why am I paying for a Times account??
Intercooler , 30 Aug 2012 18:16
As a favor to all readers, following is a summation of all past, present, and future ideas as articulated by the Fortune Cookie Thinker, John Andersson:
  1. A certain amount of genocide is good because the world is overpopulated.
  2. You should never question authority; after all, you are not an expert on authority.
  3. Everyone wins when we kill terrorists; the more we kill, the more we generate, thus the more we kill again, which makes us win more.
  4. It is not possible to have absolute power; therefore, power does not corrupt.
  5. Drones kill bad people. Only bad people are killed by drones. Thus, drones are good. We should have more drones. That is all.

I secretly think he's the real "Jack Handy" from the Deep Thoughts series on SNL.

kerrypay , 30 Aug 2012 18:00
In my high school history class in 1968 I learned all about how newspapers printed propaganda stories before WWI and Spanish American war in order to influence the public so they would want to go to war and it was called "yellow journalism". I also had an English teacher that taught us about "marketing" and how they use visuals and printed words and film to make us want to buy a product. My father taught me to NOT BELEIVE everything you read. Now it is called "critical thinking" and has been added as a general education class in college that you have to take for a college degree. Critical thinking about what you read and see and hear should be taught as early as 10 year olds so people can think for themselves. I do not read main stream newspapers in America but read news sites all over the world.

THANK GOD FOR THE INTERNET THAT YOU CAN READ WHAT OTHER NEWSPAPERS. I discovered Glenn on Democracy Now and they are my go to place to read about what is really happening.

JohnAndersson , 30 Aug 2012 17:47
the real issue is not personalities or trivial post deletions, the real issue is that the CIA is tightly bound to the institutions of America ... and that this is not a good thing for everyone

[Dec 01, 2018] The critical articles are nothing more than smokescreens. We are led to believe how hard-hitting the newspapers are and how they hold the politicians and other power-brokers to fire. All hogwash. It is better we recognize that the citizens are merely props they need to claim legitimacy.

Notable quotes:
"... We should not even talk about "conflict of interest" anymore. It is a collusion all the way. We saw it in the phone hacking scandal here, now at the New York Times. I have always wondered about these white tie dinners in Washington DC and how chummy and cozy the reporters looked mingling with the power-holders and -brokers. ..."
"... In what is turning out to be the CIA Century, the American President and major news outlets seem to operate under CIA authority and in accordance with CIA standard operating procedures. ..."
"... Or Afghanistan. Many of the cruise missile libs supported the invasion of Afghanistan but not Iraq. ..."
"... The press is managed on behalf of what I will call US powers. Those powers seem to be high level military, clandestine agencies, financial industry "leaders", and war contractors. The political parties and the faces they present to the public (with some few exceptions) act as functionaries to keep up the illusion that the US is a democracy. ..."
"... And I am not sure why I associate Washington's bureaucratic CIA with dancing midgets. ..."
Aug 30, 2012 | www.theguardian.com
jayant , 30 Aug 2012 11:17
If we thought the public trust in journalism is low, then this news only pushes it down further. Do people in journalism care? Some do very much but for the most the media and the power-holders are in collusion.

We should not even talk about "conflict of interest" anymore. It is a collusion all the way. We saw it in the phone hacking scandal here, now at the New York Times. I have always wondered about these white tie dinners in Washington DC and how chummy and cozy the reporters looked mingling with the power-holders and -brokers.

The critical articles are nothing more than smokescreens. We are led to believe how hard-hitting the newspapers are and how they hold the politicians and other power-brokers to fire. All hogwash. It is better we recognize that the citizens are merely props they need to claim legitimacy.

SeminoleSky , 30 Aug 2012 11:11
Not till this moment did I realize that we are under siege. I thought Julian Assange was the one under siege but he was just trying to offer us a path to freedom. With Assange neutralized and The New York Times and its brethren by all appearances thoroughly compromised, how can any one of us stand for all of us against government malfeasance let alone tyranny?

Where would you go if you had dispositive proof of devastating government malfeasance? In what is turning out to be the CIA Century, the American President and major news outlets seem to operate under CIA authority and in accordance with CIA standard operating procedures.

It would actually be foolish to take evidence of horrific government behavior to the titular head of the government {who'd likely persecute you as a whistleblower} or the major news organizations supposedly reporting to us about it {they'd bring it right back to the government for guidance on what to do}.

Without safe and reliable ways to stand and speak for and to each other on a large scale about the foul deeds of our government, we are damned to live very lonely vulnerable lives at the mercy of an unrestrained government.

Excerpt from script of Three Days of the Condor --

  • Higgins: I can't let you stay out, Turner.
  • Turner slowly stops, leans back against a building, shakes his head sadly.
  • Turner: Go home, Higgins. They have it all.
  • Higgins: What are you talking about?
  • Turner: Don't you know where we are?
  • Higgins looks around. The huge newspaper trucks are moving out.
  • Turner: It's where they ship from.
  • Higgins' head darts upward and he reads the legend above Turner's head. THE NEW YORK TIMES. He is stunned.
  • Higgins: You dumb son of a bitch.
  • Turner: It's been done. They have it.
  • Higgins: You've done more damage than you know.
  • Turner: I hope so.
  • Higgins: You want to rip us to pieces, but you damn fool you rely on us. {then} You're about to be a very lonely man, Turner.
  • ***
    Higgins: It didn't have to turn out like this.
  • Turner: Of course it did.
  • Higgins: {calling out as they depart separate ways} Turner! How do you know they'll print it?
  • Turner stops. Stares at Higgins. Higgins smiles.
  • Higgins: You can take a walk. But how far? If they don't print it.
  • Turner: They'll print it.
  • Higgins: How do you know?
BillOwen , 30 Aug 2012 11:00
Several commenters have pointed out that the NYT does do "good" journalism. That is true. It is also true that they tell absolute lies. See Judith Miller. The best way to sell a lie is to wrap it in the truth.
OnYourMarx -> avelna2001 , 30 Aug 2012 10:57
Or Afghanistan. Many of the cruise missile libs supported the invasion of Afghanistan but not Iraq.
Intercooler , 30 Aug 2012 10:56
I know it's late in the comments thread by the time anyone bothers to read THIS minor contribution, but I think it worth mentioning how this article from Glenn proves just how important are outlets like Democracy Now, RT, Cenk Uyger, Dylan Ratigan, et al. You really have to turn away from the mainstream media as a source of anything. Far too compromised, by both their embeddedness with the government, and their for-profit coroporate owners.

Note CNN's terrible ratings problems as of late, and the recent news that they are considering turning to more reality-type shows to get the eyeballs back. If that isn't proof positive of the current value of corporate news, I don't know what is.

DemocracyNow.org. I think I'm going to donate to them today....

Franklymydear0 -> rransier , 30 Aug 2012 10:08

i'm do not understand why so many people are against authority in general, even when the legal & enforcement system is there to protect your property, life and rights. i understand when corruption exists, it should be seriously addressed, but why throw out a whole system that is "somewhat working"? why blindly call for revolution?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

– The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776

Do you understand now?

Ahzeld , 30 Aug 2012 10:07
This is a political officer acting as editor of a major newspaper. I agree this has been going on for some time. Here is my analysis of that. The press is managed on behalf of what I will call US powers. Those powers seem to be high level military, clandestine agencies, financial industry "leaders", and war contractors. The political parties and the faces they present to the public (with some few exceptions) act as functionaries to keep up the illusion that the US is a democracy.

Romney and Obama are functionaries. They do as they're told. Obama is the more useful of the two as fewer people seem able to look honestly at his policies. They will not oppose Obama for doing the same things and worse as Bush. It is why all stops are being pulled out to get him, rather than Romney elected. The policies will be the same but the reaction of our population to each man is vastly different.

So yes, the capture of the media has been going on for quite some time. It appears nearly consolidated at this time. Instead of using this as a reason to ignore the situation, it is more important than ever to speak out. History is helpful in learning how to confront injustice. It is not a reason, as I see many use it, to say; "well it's always been that way, so what?" In history, we learn about corruption but we also learn that people opposed corruption. Is there some reason why we cannot also oppose corruption right now?

evenharpier -> MonotonousLanguor , 30 Aug 2012 09:16
"During the Vietnam War the Military Briefings were Derisively called the Five O' Clock Follies."

... ... ...

IgAIgEIgG , 30 Aug 2012 08:32
I though Michael Wolff's recent analysis of Apple (here in the Guardian) was in many ways metaphorical for Western leadership, his article acting in some ways to explain the behavior we see in cultural "elites."

Worth the read.

And somehow, after reading this article, all I can think of is the Wizard of Oz and a dancing midget army singing in repetitive, high-pitched tones.

And I am not sure why I associate Washington's bureaucratic CIA with dancing midgets.

BaldieMcEagle , 30 Aug 2012 08:15
Who will be the first commenter to leave the classic devastating critique: "The author fails to present a balanced view, showing only one side. The author's argument has no substance and is not really worth anything."

Don't forget this one: "The author just complains and complains without ever offering a solution or a better approach."

Also, can anyone 'splain me how to do a "response"?

thedark , 30 Aug 2012 08:09
I think Glenn Greenwald would be better off concerning himself less with matters below the ads and more with researching interesting stuff.

[Dec 01, 2018] G20 Summit, Top Agenda Item Bye-Bye American Empire by Finian Cunningham

China does not have its own technological base and is depended on the USA for many technologies. So while China isdefinitly in assendance, Washington still have capability to stick to "total global dominance" agenda for some time.
Attempt to crush China by Tariffs might provoke the economic crisi in China and possible a "regime change", like Washington santions to the USSR in the past. And that's probably the calculation.
Notable quotes:
"... President Trump has taken long-simmering US complaints about China to boiling point, castigating Beijing for unfair trade, currency manipulation, and theft of intellectual property rights. China rejects this pejorative American characterization of its economic practices. ..."
"... The problem is that Washington is demanding the impossible. It's like as if the US wants China to turn the clock back to some imagined former era of robust American capitalism. But it is not in China's power to do that. The global economy has shifted structurally away from US dominance. The wheels of production and growth are in China's domain of Eurasia. ..."
"... Combined with its military power, the postwar global order was defined and shaped by Washington. Sometimes misleading called Pax Americana, there was nothing peaceful about the US-led global order. It was more often an order of relative stability purchased by massive acts of violence and repressive regimes under Washington's tutelage. ..."
"... In American mythology, it does not have an empire. The US was supposed to be different from the old European colonial powers, leading the rest of the world through its "exceptional" virtues of freedom, democracy and rule of law . In truth, US global dominance relied on the application of ruthless imperial power. ..."
"... Washington likes to huff and puff about alleged Chinese expansionism "threatening" US allies in Asia-Pacific. But the reality is that Washington is living in the past of former glory. Trading blocs like the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) realize their bread is buttered by China, no longer America. ..."
"... Washington's rhetoric about "standing up to China" is just that – empty rhetoric. It doesn't mean much to countries led by their interests of economic development and the benefits of Chinese investment. ..."
"... China's strategic economic plans – the One Belt One Road initiative – of integrating regional development under its leadership and finance have already created a world order analogous to what American capital achieved in the postwar decades. ..."
"... American pundits and politicians like Vice President Mike Pence may disparage China's economic policies as creating "debt traps" for other countries . But the reality is that other countries are gravitating to China's dynamic leadership ..."
Dec 01, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Finian Cunningham via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

The G20 summits are nominally about how the world's biggest national economies can cooperate to boost global growth. This year's gathering – more than ever – shows, however, that rivalry between the US and China is center stage.

Zeroing in further still, the rivalry is an expression of a washed-up American empire desperately trying to reclaim its former power. There is much sound, fury and pretense from the outgoing hegemon – the US – but the ineluctable reality is an empire whose halcyon days are a bygone era.

Ahead of the summit taking place this weekend in Argentina, the Trump administration has been issuing furious ultimatums to China to "change its behavior". Washington is threatening an escalating trade war if Beijing does not conform to American demands over economic policies.

President Trump has taken long-simmering US complaints about China to boiling point, castigating Beijing for unfair trade, currency manipulation, and theft of intellectual property rights. China rejects this pejorative American characterization of its economic practices.

Nevertheless, if Beijing does not comply with US diktats then the Trump administration says it will slap increasing tariffs on Chinese exports.

The gravity of the situation was highlighted by the comments this week of China's ambassador to the US, Cui Tiankai, who warned that the "lessons of history" show trade wars can lead to catastrophic shooting wars. He urged the Trump administration to be reasonable and to seek a negotiated settlement of disputes.

The problem is that Washington is demanding the impossible. It's like as if the US wants China to turn the clock back to some imagined former era of robust American capitalism. But it is not in China's power to do that. The global economy has shifted structurally away from US dominance. The wheels of production and growth are in China's domain of Eurasia.

For decades, China functioned as a giant market for cheap production of basic consumer goods. Now under President Xi Jinping, the nation is moving to a new phase of development involving sophisticated technologies, high-quality manufacture, and investment.

It's an economic evolution that the world has seen before, in Europe, the US and now Eurasia. In the decades after the Second World War, up to the 1970s, it was US capitalism that was the undisputed world leader. Combined with its military power, the postwar global order was defined and shaped by Washington. Sometimes misleading called Pax Americana, there was nothing peaceful about the US-led global order. It was more often an order of relative stability purchased by massive acts of violence and repressive regimes under Washington's tutelage.

In American mythology, it does not have an empire. The US was supposed to be different from the old European colonial powers, leading the rest of the world through its "exceptional" virtues of freedom, democracy and rule of law . In truth, US global dominance relied on the application of ruthless imperial power.

The curious thing about capitalism is it always outgrows its national base. Markets eventually become too small and the search for profits is insatiable. American capital soon found more lucrative opportunities in the emerging market of China. From the 1980s on, US corporations bailed out of America and set up shop in China, exploiting cheap labor and exporting their goods back to increasingly underemployed America consumers. The arrangement was propped up partly because of seemingly endless consumer debt.

That's not the whole picture of course. China has innovated and developed independently from American capital. It is debatable whether China is an example of state-led capitalism or socialism. The Chinese authorities would claim to subscribe to the latter. In any case, China's economic development has transformed the entire Eurasian hemisphere. Whether you like it or not, Beijing is the dynamo for the global economy. One indicator is how nations across Asia-Pacific are deferring to China for their future growth.

Washington likes to huff and puff about alleged Chinese expansionism "threatening" US allies in Asia-Pacific. But the reality is that Washington is living in the past of former glory. Trading blocs like the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) realize their bread is buttered by China, no longer America.

Washington's rhetoric about "standing up to China" is just that – empty rhetoric. It doesn't mean much to countries led by their interests of economic development and the benefits of Chinese investment.

One example is Taiwan. In contrast to Washington's shibboleths about "free Taiwan", more and more Asian countries are dialing down their bilateral links with Taiwan in deference to China's position, which views the island as a renegade province. The US position is one of rhetoric, whereas the relations of other countries are based on material economic exigencies. And respecting Beijing's sensibilities is for them a prudent option.

A recent report by the New York Times starkly illustrated the changing contours of the global economic order. It confirmed what many others have observed, that China is on the way to surpass the US as the world's top economy. During the 1980s, some 75 per cent of China's population were living in "extreme poverty", according to the NY Times. Today, less than 1 per cent of the population is in that dire category. For the US, the trajectory has been in reverse with greater numbers of its people subject to deprivation.

China's strategic economic plans – the One Belt One Road initiative – of integrating regional development under its leadership and finance have already created a world order analogous to what American capital achieved in the postwar decades.

American pundits and politicians like Vice President Mike Pence may disparage China's economic policies as creating "debt traps" for other countries . But the reality is that other countries are gravitating to China's dynamic leadership.

Arguably, Beijing's vision for economic development is more enlightened and sustainable than what was provided by the Americans and Europeans before. The leitmotif for China, along with Russia, is very much one of multipolar development and mutual partnership. The global economy is not simply moving from one hegemon – the US – to another imperial taskmaster – China.

One thing seems inescapable. The days of American empire are over. Its capitalist vigor has dissipated decades ago. What the upheaval and rancor in relations between Washington and Beijing is all about is the American ruling class trying to recreate some fantasy of former vitality. Washington wants China to sacrifice its own development in order to somehow rejuvenate American society. It's not going to happen.

That's not to say that American society can never be rejuvenated . It could, as it could also in Europe. But that would entail a restructuring of the economic system involving democratic regeneration. The "good old days" of capitalism are gone. The American empire, as with the European empires, is obsolete.

That's the unspoken Number One agenda item at the G20 summit. Bye-bye US empire.

What America needs to do is regenerate through a reinvented social economic order, one that is driven by democratic development and not the capitalist private profit of an elite few.

If not, the futile alternative is US failing political leaders trying to coerce China, and others, to pay for their future. That way leads to war.

[Dec 01, 2018] Nationalism Is Loyalty Irritated by Michael Brendan Dougherty

An interesting distinction: "nationalism is patriotism in its irritated state, or that nationalism recruits the patriotic sentiment to accomplish something in a fit of anger." But he might be mixing nationalism, far right nationalism, and fascism. It is fascism that emerges out of feeling of nation/country being humiliated, oppressed, fall into economic despair... It tries to mobilize nation on changing the situation as a united whole -- in this sense fascism rejects individualism and "human rights".
BTW there were quite numerous far right movements in the USA history.
The current emergence of nationalist movements is a reaction on the crisis of neoliberalism as an ideology (since 2008). So nationalism might be a defense reaction of societies when the dominant ideology (in our case neoliberalism) collapses. It is a temporary and defensive reaction. As the author notes: "Foreign aggression and the onset of war will reliably generate nationalist moods and responses. "
The key question here is when a nation "deserves" a sovereign state, and when it would be better off by being a part of a larger ("imperial state" if we understand empire as conglomerate of multiple nations). As it involved economics, some choices can be bad, even devastating for people's wellbeing.
Notable quotes:
"... Macron is not the first to try to make a hard, fast, and rhetorically pungent distinction between nationalism and patriotism. Orwell attempted to do the same in a famous essay . He wrote that patriotism is "devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally." ..."
"... In the end, Orwell gives a rather unsatisfying account in which all the mental and moral vices of self-interest and self-regard are transmuted and supercharged by their absorption into a nationalistic "we." Nationalists in his account hold their nations supreme, thereby encouraging themselves to traduce any other people or nation. For Orwell, the patriot prefers this to that . The nationalist privileges us over them . For us, everything, to others nothing. ..."
"... In his recent book, The Virtue of Nationalism , Yoram Hazony makes a different contrast. His work is not primarily concerned with the moral status or self-deception of individuals, but with the organization of geopolitics. For him the contrast is between nationalism and imperialism. ..."
"... Orwell is tempted to believe the nationalist thinks his nation is best in all things, but much of nationalist rhetoric throughout Europe is a rhetoric of envy or arousal. Nationalists sometimes boast about their nations, but in many circumstances they express despair about their countries; they want to excite their people to achieve more, to take themselves as seriously as some rival national actor takes itself. ..."
"... Instead, nationalism is an eruptive feature of politics. It grows out of the normal sentiments of national loyalty, like a pustule or a fever. It could even be said that nationalism is patriotism in its irritated state, or that nationalism recruits the patriotic sentiment to accomplish something in a fit of anger. ..."
"... National loyalty attaches us to a place, and to the people who share in its life. Destroying national loyalty would almost certainly bring about the return of loyalties based on creed and blood. ..."
"... One of the outstanding features of nationalist political movements, the thing that almost always strikes observers about them, is their irritated or aroused character. And it is precisely this that strikes non-nationalists as signaling danger. ..."
"... nationalist movements are teeming with powerful emotions: betrayal, anger, aggression. ..."
"... Nationalist politics tends to be opportunist; it takes other political ideas, philosophies, and forms of mobilization in hand and discards them. Nationalists throughout the 20th century adopted Communism or capitalism to acquire the patronage or weapons to throw off imperial rule, or stick it to a neighbor, for example. ..."
"... The reemergence of nationalist politics in America and abroad requires us to ask those simple questions. What is bothering them? Do they have a point? What do they want to do about it? Would it be just? In broad strokes I intend to take those questions up. ..."
"... What the vast majority of people apparently fail to realize is that the United states is an empire which by definition is a group of states or countries containing diverse ethnic and cultural identities. ..."
"... The break-up of the Soviet Union can be blamed in part for failing to establish a strong national identity ..."
"... Greenfeld describes it as "civic nationalism" to differentiate it from the ethnic, anti-liberal "nationalism" later adopted by Russia and Germany. ..."
"... Identifying "the people" as a linguistic-cultural entity with or without borders set the stage for the bloody conflicts that were fought over borders for these groups, and the discrimination and ethnic cleansing for those who didn't belong to the dominant linguistic-cultural group, to say nothing of what needed to be done about members of the dominant group who lived outside its borders. ..."
"... Also, in the late 16th century during what is now called the Wars of Religions (but which they called Civil Wars) in continental Europe, people moved from Monarchists to Republicans and back, depending of whether they were Catholics or Protestants, but mostly depending of the position of strength in which they were at the time... ..."
"... "Modern Conservatives" have a vested interest in muddying the debate, so that it does not become clear that "conservatism" is not linked to specific political or economical models, and more importantly it is not true that the Founding Fathers were all absolutist libertarian free traders... ;-) ..."
"... What, exactly, are our children inheriting? Press 2 for Spanish. ..."
"... And let us not forget neocons. ..."
"... You should be out there carving an empire for yourself, showing your supremacy and spreading the seeds of your "culture" over uncharted territories and untamed tribes... ;-) ..."
"... I think the obvious irritant lending support to Nationalist sentiments is the non benign aspects of Globalism. ..."
Nov 21, 2018 | www.nationalreview.com
By Michael Brendan Dougherty A stab at defining a tricky word

What is nationalism? The word is suddenly and surprisingly important when talking about the times we live in. But we seem to be working without a shared definition.

"You know what I am? I'm a nationalist," Donald Trump said in an October rally in Houston.

French president Emmanuel Macron slapped back at a commemoration ceremony for World War I in France. "Nationalism is a betrayal of patriotism," he said. "By saying 'our interests first, who cares about the others,' we erase what a nation holds dearest, what gives it life, what makes it great and what is essential: its moral values."

Macron is not the first to try to make a hard, fast, and rhetorically pungent distinction between nationalism and patriotism. Orwell attempted to do the same in a famous essay . He wrote that patriotism is "devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally."

On the other hand, "The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality."

In the end, Orwell gives a rather unsatisfying account in which all the mental and moral vices of self-interest and self-regard are transmuted and supercharged by their absorption into a nationalistic "we." Nationalists in his account hold their nations supreme, thereby encouraging themselves to traduce any other people or nation. For Orwell, the patriot prefers this to that . The nationalist privileges us over them . For us, everything, to others nothing.

In his recent book, The Virtue of Nationalism , Yoram Hazony makes a different contrast. His work is not primarily concerned with the moral status or self-deception of individuals, but with the organization of geopolitics. For him the contrast is between nationalism and imperialism. For Hazony, it is the nationalist who respects spontaneous order and pluralism. Imperialists run roughshod over these, trampling local life for the benefit of the imperial center.

A border will rein in the ambition of the nationalist, whereas the imperial character rebels against limits. A century ago, in what he called the days of "clashing and crashing Empires," the Irish nationalist Eoin MacNeil felt similarly. For him, the development of a nation -- any nation -- had in it "the actuality or the potentiality of some great gift to the common good of mankind."

It's difficult to find a consistent definition of nationalism from its critics, meanwhile. Sometimes nationalism is dismissed as the love of dirt, or mysticism about language. Other times it's the love of DNA.

In the critics' defense, though, the way nationalism has expressed itself in different nations and different times can be maddeningly diverse. Orwell is tempted to believe the nationalist thinks his nation is best in all things, but much of nationalist rhetoric throughout Europe is a rhetoric of envy or arousal. Nationalists sometimes boast about their nations, but in many circumstances they express despair about their countries; they want to excite their people to achieve more, to take themselves as seriously as some rival national actor takes itself.

I'd like to propose a different way of thinking about the question. When we use the vocabulary of political philosophies, we recognize that we are talking about things that differ along more than one axis. Take Communism, liberalism, and conservatism: The first is a theory of history and power. The second is a political framework built upon rights. The final disclaims the word "ideology" and has been traditionally defined as a set of dispositions toward a political and civilizational inheritance.

I would like to sidestep Hazony's championing of nationalism as a system for organizing political order globally, a theory that my colleague Jonah Goldberg is tempted to call "nationism."

My proposal is that nationalism as a political phenomenon is not a philosophy or science, though it may take either of those in hand. It isn't an account of history. Instead, nationalism is an eruptive feature of politics. It grows out of the normal sentiments of national loyalty, like a pustule or a fever. It could even be said that nationalism is patriotism in its irritated state, or that nationalism recruits the patriotic sentiment to accomplish something in a fit of anger.

In normal or propitious circumstances, national loyalty is the peaceful form of life that exists among people who share a defined territory and endeavor to live under the laws of that territory together. National loyalty attaches us to a place, and to the people who share in its life. Destroying national loyalty would almost certainly bring about the return of loyalties based on creed and blood.

One of the outstanding features of nationalist political movements, the thing that almost always strikes observers about them, is their irritated or aroused character. And it is precisely this that strikes non-nationalists as signaling danger. Republican democracies should be characterized by deliberation. Conservatives distrust swells of passion. Liberals want an order of voluntary rights. But nationalist movements are teeming with powerful emotions: betrayal, anger, aggression.

Therefore, I contend, like a fever, nationalism can be curative or fatal. And, like fevers, it can come and go depending on the nation's internal health or the external circumstances a nation finds itself in. Foreign aggression and the onset of war will reliably generate nationalist moods and responses. But cultural change can do it too. Maybe a national language falls into sharp and sudden decline under pressure from a more powerful lingua franca. Even something as simple or common as rapid urbanization can be felt to agitate upon a people's loyalties, and may generate a cultural response for preserving certain rural traditions and folkways. And of course, sometimes nationalism is excited by the possibility of some new possession coming into view, the opportunity to recover or acquire territory or humiliate a historic rival. The variety of irritants explains the variety of nationalisms.

You tend to find a lot of nationalism where there are persistent or large irritants to the normally peaceful sense of national loyalty. Think of western Ukraine, where the local language and political prerogatives have endured the powerful irritant of Moscow's power and influence in its region, and even in its territory. You find a great deal of nationalism in Northern Ireland, where a lineage of religious differences signals dueling loyalties to the United Kingdom and to Ireland.

Until recently you didn't find a lot of political nationalism in the United States, because it is a prosperous nation with unparalleled independence of action. But we are familiar with bursts of nationalism nonetheless -- for example, at times when European powers threatened the U.S. in the early days of the Republic, during the Civil War and its aftermath, and especially during World War I, which coincided with the tail end of a great wave of migration into the country.

If nationalist political movements are national loyalties in this aroused state, then we must judge them on a case-by-case basis. When non-nationalists notice the irritated and irritable character of nationalism, often the very next thing they say is, "Well, they have a point." You would judge a nationalist movement the way you would judge any man or group of men in an agitated state. Do you have a right to be angry about this matter? What do you intend to do about it? How do you intend to do it?

We all do this almost instinctively. We understand that there are massive differences among nationalist projects. In order to assert his young nation's place on the world stage, John Quincy Adams sought to found a national university. We may judge that one way, whereas we judge Andrew Jackson's Indian-removal policy very differently. In Europe, we might cheer on the ambition of the Irish Parliamentary party to establish a home-rule parliament in Dublin. That was a nationalist project, but so was the German policy of seeking lebensraum through the racial annihilation of the Jews and the enslavement of Poland, which we judge as perhaps the most wicked cause in human history. We might cheer the reestablishment of a Polish nation after World War I, but deplore some of the expansionist wars it immediately embarked upon.

Nationalist politics tends to be opportunist; it takes other political ideas, philosophies, and forms of mobilization in hand and discards them. Nationalists throughout the 20th century adopted Communism or capitalism to acquire the patronage or weapons to throw off imperial rule, or stick it to a neighbor, for example.

The reemergence of nationalist politics in America and abroad requires us to ask those simple questions. What is bothering them? Do they have a point? What do they want to do about it? Would it be just? In broad strokes I intend to take those questions up.

Kontraindicated 2 days ago

There is much discussion below as to the meaning of the term "nationalism" below. In the minds of many, it seems to be a relatively benign term.

However, even recently we have seen extremely violent episodes break out that appear to be associated with some sort of flavour of "nationalism", however it's defined.

In the former Yugoslavia, Tito tried to create a new "nation" that would have a common identity by breaking up the "nations" that had previously existed on the same territory. This involved the forced relocation of various groups of Serbs and Croats (and, to a lesser extent, Bosnians) who would now all live together in peace and harmony. However, when the political structures fell, the people fell back into their old groups and immediately began fighting each other. The end result was an incredibly bloody and vicious civil war and the ultimate re-establishment of Nations/Countries that mapped more closely to the ethnic/cultural/race divisions that the people involved in the conflict were concerned with. Ultimately, they (as individuals) decided which team they wanted to belong to and, as long as the "nation" agreed, they became part of that "nation".

Similar scenarios have played out across Africa and the Middle East (which was artificially set up for a century's worth of conflict by Europeans in 1919).

All of which is mildly interesting, but it's not really related to the reason that this topic is coming up in NRO. The reason that we are discussing this is that Macron spent a considerable amount of time during the Armistice Ceremony decrying "Nationalism" (which, if we treat the term in the Yugoslavian context, likely did play a significant role in two World Wars) and Fox and Friends were then able to teach Donald Trump a new word - after which he declared himself a "Nationalist".

So rather than beating ourselves up over semantics, would it not be better instead to debate two questions?:

  1. Does "Nationalism" represent a growing force within enough countries that it represents a significant threat to the current world order?
  2. Does whatever Donald Trump thinks "Nationalism" means pose a threat to America's current place in the world and is it driving the US away from its leadership role? (will "America First" lead to "America Isolated and Alone?")
Jean_Christophe_Jouffrey 2 days ago

Dear Kontraindicated,

First, your last question is already answered, in the WTO, the EU, China, Canada, Mexico have raised a complaint against the falsified use of "national security" by Trump to justify tariffs. If the USA decided then to leave the WTO, because Trump's personal honor would be stained, (without forgetting that the US Congress should have already protested that these tariffs were illegal in the first place) this will be another occasion to show that it is indeed "America Isolated and Alone"... Trump could have allied himself with the EU, Canada, etc. against some of the unfair practices of China, instead he got two of the biggest trading block in the world (including its two territorial neighbors) to ally themselves against the USA.

What a way of winning Donnie! ;-)

Then, let's go back to the question of the meaning of Nationalism.

There are two aspects:

  1. What is the real meaning of nationalism compared to patriotism, when we remove all the fake ideological recent additions to these terms? (and I have answered at length on this in my other comments) And this meaning is not necessarily nefarious. It becomes a problem when one claims that each Nation must have one "sovereign" State (in the sense of country), and there should be only one such Nation per country.
  2. What is the meaning which is actually meant by Trump? And it is clear that he means it the way that it was whispered to him, which is "One Nation, One and only One State; One State, One and only One Nation"...

It is no longer "e pluribus unum", but "e uno unum" (one from one), which is slightly less ambitious and certainly less of a reason to get up in the morning and do something productive (but then there is a lot of opportunity for "Executive Time" and playing golf)... ;-)

Leroy 2 days ago

"Out of many, one." ONE. Get it through your head. ONE. If you are MANY, you ARE Yugoslavia. And that doesn't end well.

TitoPerdue 2 days ago

I try to imagine my parents being informed that they must now accustom themselves to white people being turned into a minority. Would have been stunned, my folks, who first arrived in 1771.

My folks: "But what did we do wrong!"
Me: "You've been too successful and must now be punished."
My folks: "What's wrong with being successful!"
Me: "It's racist. Ask Jonah Goldberg. You know how much the Jews despise ethnocentrism."

Gaurus 3 days ago

This is a useful take on the subject. There is a big Tower of Babel problem with this word as it seems to mean different things to different people, and different nations also define it differently.

This language barrier is why Macron's criticism of the President should be taken with a grain of salt. The left's myopic/robotic attempts to unilaterally define this word on their terms is reprehensible, just like so many of their other attempts at PC authoritarianism aka thought control which is pushed by the national media.

What the vast majority of people apparently fail to realize is that the United states is an empire which by definition is a group of states or countries containing diverse ethnic and cultural identities.

You must at some point come to ask yourself, "what keeps these diverse groups contained in the U.S. from fracturing, dividing, and falling apart?" The answer is nationalism/national identity. It is the keystone or glue that binds these diverse ethnic and cultural groups together. Anyone or anything that tugs or tears at nationalism therefore is altogether a bad thing for the country and will sow division and strife that was not previously there. Ultimately civil war could result if those seeking to divide the country for political gain go too far and the left ignorantly seems all-in on doing this.

Applying recent trends in politics using this as a backdrop, one can see how pro-globalists wouldn't care to attack nationalism as they are by definition against the very concept of a nation-state and want top bring back good old feudalism, but this time on a global scale. For comparison Russia is another example of an empire that is aware It needs to fuel nationalist sentiment to hold itself together. The EU is an emerging empire that is conflicted with what this means. The break-up of the Soviet Union can be blamed in part for failing to establish a strong national identity.

Plymouth mtng, PA 3 days ago

Well said! This truth is exemplified by the evidentiary and documented history that the Founding Fathers and Jackson, Lincoln, and Grant and the whole of 19th century America used the language of Liberty and Patriot to define the American Republic.

Leroy 3 days ago

I just learned something new. I thought that ethnicity was the same as race. It isn't. Ethnicity: "the fact or state of belonging to a social group that has a common national or cultural tradition." By that definition, we're all in an ethnic group, and we can belong to smaller ethnic groups as well.

If Americans don't become nationalists, understand that we share common interests and goals, it won't matter how much we love our country, because it will be unrecognizable.

Jean_Christophe_Jouffrey 3 days ago

Dear Leroy,

I happen to think that "race" does not exist, but we know that in the USA when people say "ethnic" they mean "race"... ;-)

I remember 30 years ago, at the hairdresser in London, picking up a copy of the tabloid "The Sun", and reading a sentence where "ethnic" was used to mean "foreigner with a darker complexion"... (something like "the three men were ethnic") ;-)

Once more "ethnic" means "national", nothing more nothing less: "ethnos" is the Greek translation of "natio". These are words which have been used for a few thousand years, and we have to understand what they really meant and what they really mean now, and to remove from them the "ideological" additions.

The definition which you give shows such ideological addition, by adding "cultural" and "tradition". By definition a "nation", as the same traditions and therefore the same "culture": they are just redundant in this definition.

An ethnic group is a nation. So yes, you are in an ethnic group, and you can "define" smaller and smaller ethnic groups within the bigger one (the "tribes"). So in Gaul, there were many different "nations", who were Gauls, but had a great diversity between them (just read a few pages of Cćsar).

But at some point when there are many ethnic groups within you country (and this is how a country like France was made by the addition of regions with varying ethnic backgrounds and the migration/invasion of many other ethnic groups), at some point the only unity is in the country, the "patria", this is there that you find the common interests and goals.

So you see in France the difference going from Nation to the Country, because in the early middle ages the king was called "King of the French" Rex Francorum, (there were many other nations recognized on the French territory) and in the later part of the Middle Ages, he was called "King of France", Rex Franciae.

But because the word "nation" is important, and people would not let it go, there has been a tendency to use it to mean "country", as when we speak of the National Anthem, but this is by a shifting of its original sense.

When we want to oppose nationalism and patriotism, we need to go back to the original technical meaning, not invent a new one.

PS: the reason why "ethnic" and "race" are not the same thing, and we saw it with "Pocahontas" controversy (I mentioned it then), it is because a nation can "adopt" somebody who was not genetically related to them. They shall still be fully part of the nation... but their genetic material shall be different.

Leroy 3 days ago

I know you enjoy history, but the meaning of words can shift. I'll go with the meaning of the word Nation that the founders meant when they founded this nation. Nations are sovereign, make laws and control territory. A group of people, who share a culture, but who do not control territory is not a nation.

Hub312 3 days ago ( Edited )

Whoever wants a clear-headed understanding of nationalism, I suggest you read the world's foremost scholar on nationalism, Liah Greenfeld's "Nationalism: Five Roads to Modernity" and Pierre Manent's concise but rich "Democracy Without Nations?".

Nationalism is really just another word for modernity and democracy. . It arose in England at the end of the 17th and the 18th centuries as the liberal answer to the question: if the people are sovereign, who are "the people" that we are now calling the nation? Answer: those who live within the borders controlled by the sovereign. The nation state is our home and our protection and we're all in it together regardless of language, culture, etc. This was the essentially liberal idea that was adopted and adapted by the French. This was the form adopted by Americans too. Greenfeld describes it as "civic nationalism" to differentiate it from the ethnic, anti-liberal "nationalism" later adopted by Russia and Germany.

It is the Russians, followed by the Germans and other central Europeans who followed their lead that gave nationalism a bad name. Identifying "the people" as a linguistic-cultural entity with or without borders set the stage for the bloody conflicts that were fought over borders for these groups, and the discrimination and ethnic cleansing for those who didn't belong to the dominant linguistic-cultural group, to say nothing of what needed to be done about members of the dominant group who lived outside its borders.

Empires and nations based on racial and ethnic identity have bloody borders, since it is impossible to draw any border anywhere in the world that includes all members of the dominant group and excludes or oppresses all members of other groups.

Are they both called nationalisms? Yes. But they couldn't be farther apart.

Jean_Christophe_Jouffrey 3 days ago

Dear Hub312,

the word that is missing in your comment is "country". "if the people are sovereign, who are "the people" that we are now calling the nation?... etc."

I am interested to see in which English author of the end of the 17th century you find the expression of "sovereign people" or the "people are sovereign". Do you have some primary sources? I do not find it in Locke, but perhaps I am looking in the wrong place.

And in the UK, in the 18th and 19th century, and still now, it is clear that English, Welsh, Irish and Scots are different nations in the same "country"... Today, in Rugby the 6 nations championship takes place actually between four countries.

In the Middle Ages it is clear that the "supreme power" "summa potestas" comes God, and after this it is a question of open debate whether it is invested directly in the King, or through the people who then may elect a king, or decide on a Republic.

And I find in the Renaissance of the 16th and early 17th century, many proponents of a summa potestas that belongs to the people, which gives incidentally rise to the possibility of removing from power bad kings, but they happen to be Spanish and Catholics: Francisco Suarez, Juan de Mariana and Roberto Bellarmino... worse, they are all Jesuits... ;-), and they claim that the supreme power comes from the consent of the governed, and they were all dead by 1630... So that's it when it comes to the notion of people's sovereignty "arising" in England in the late 17th century... It was up and awake already.

I cannot find "souveraineté" as a word (which is different from having a "sovereign"), before Jean Bodin (16th century) (but you perhaps have better sources than mine), then I can direct you to many discussions about the nature and origin of "souveraineté" in French in the 16th and 17th century.

Rousseau (mid-18th century) is famous for ascribing sovereignty to the people, but he was not English (although he was Protestant), nor French, but he is also the inspiration for the "dictatorship of the people", and the Terror.

Rousseau is part of the Social Contract school, to which is usually adjoined his predecessors Hobbes and Locke, but there is no doubt that Hobbes is a partisan of absolute monarchy, and again I fail to see in Locke a direct notion of people's sovereignty: when he speaks of civil sovereigns he speaks of the "magistrates" who rule. But I am certain that you shall direct me to the proper place in Locke, which currently escapes me.

The thing is that the "consent of the people" or even the "sovereignty of the people", or the "social contract" does not mean that they are individually free afterwards... they may actually live under an absolute monarchy and still have "consented" to it, or under a dictatorship of the people (socialist), or a national dictatorship, or a mixture of both... ;-)

Jean_Christophe_Jouffrey 3 days ago

Of course, as I read again what I wrote, I made the most silly of blunders: Bellarmino was Italian, not Spanish... this invalidates all that I have ever written.. ;-)

Jean_Christophe_Jouffrey 3 days ago

Also, in the late 16th century during what is now called the Wars of Religions (but which they called Civil Wars) in continental Europe, people moved from Monarchists to Republicans and back, depending of whether they were Catholics or Protestants, but mostly depending of the position of strength in which they were at the time... There is a very interesting literature regarding the nature and origin of the supreme power, and whether the people must have absolute obedience to the the sovereign civil power (whatever shape it has). Of course none of this has to do with 17th century England, except that the same questions where asked and answered their own way in the English Civil War (which was a religious war), when the Round-Heads decided to chop that of their King, whose shape they did not like. ;-)

Bellarmino wrote against James I when he tried to sustain is absolute divine right to rule.

All of this to say that these questions were raised long before the Glorious Revolution. ;-)

Jean_Christophe_Jouffrey 2 days ago

Dear Hub312,

well, why would I read a secondary source book, if it does not know the primary sources which I know?

If this book describes nothing more than what you described (i.e. England, end of the 17th century, etc.), which is refuted by the sources that I know, why would I waste time reading it? it could not edify me, if it does not add to what I know.

Hub312 4 hours ago ( Edited )

...and you would love the Manent book, written from a very European liberal perspective, which is brief and very concise.

Jean_Christophe_Jouffrey 3 days ago

Dear Michael Brendan Dougherty,

I have a revolutionary proposal: instead of investing words with supposed meanings in order to be able to say that we approve of them or not (which in English is called begging the question), why don't we simply use the etymological meaning of the word? ;-)

It's easy, "national" means precisely the same thing as "ethnic": one is Latin, the other is Greek. You know what ethnicity is a euphemism for in the US: "race". A "nation" does not need to have borders to be a nation, the "barbarian nations" of late Antiquity early Middle Ages were roving nations. This is why also initially German nationalism i the 19th and early 20th century was expansive: it meant to "unify" the German nation in one country. This is why Irish, Scottish or Welsh nationalism is divisive and restrictive, it is meant to separate the English (seen as invaders) from the local version of a Celtic nation.

The "Patria" is the Land of the fathers: this is the "country", the "land".

The one is "Blood", the other is "Soil", you see that each can be assigned bad meaning or good meaning, if one wants to.

Behind this you have the age old conflicts between Cain and Abel, between the roving pastor, and the settled farmer.

Both Nation and Patria can be a limit within which to stay, or a limit to expand: so one can be an "imperialist" or not, whether one is a patriot or a nationalist. Because even a patriot, may require more land, to ensure the safety of the one that he has, his own version of "lebensraum".

These two notions are also linked to the "jus sanguinis" (right of blood) and the "jus soli" (right of soil/land) question regarding citizenship.

In countries which have official separate notions of citizenship and nationality (in the former USSR for instance), citizenship is clearly ascribed to the country, and nationality is clearly ascribed to ethnicity: so one can be a Russian national, citizen of Kazakhstan.

It is the notion of the Nation-State (which is comparatively recent), which tends to make believe that for each identifiable "Nation" there must be one identifiable "Country" (a sovereign state). It is the geographical difficulty if not impossibility of this which lead to the political upheavals in the 19th and 20th centuries. It was trying to merge Nationalism and Patriotism that created the problems.

In some cases when supposed "nations" wanted to be unified within one country, there was the notion of "Pan-somethingism", Pan-Germanism, Pan-Slavism, etc., and/or Nations wanted to become independent: so you had the fights for the unification of Italy, Germany, the independence of Poland, Greece, etc., within the 19th century. And then there were all these places were the population was too mixed to make any such separation easy: the Balkans, the remnants of the Turkish Empire (a perfect example together with the Persian Empire (for those who read Xenophon), why "Imperialism" does not mean "centralization"), remnants of "German" populations in "Slavic" countries, etc. You know what followed.

So both nationalism and patriotism can have a good or a bad meaning, depending of how one intends to use them.

For instance the notion of a "Europe of Nations" is what helped secure the Good Friday Agreement, because another way of saying it is a "Europe of Regions", where Irish, Scottish, Welsh, Basques, Bretons (of little Brittany), etc., have a possibility of recognition, without necessarily breaking up "countries".

So you are right there is much more than one axis of meaning, and it is important that one opposes the right terms, and this is the responsibility of what used to be called the "publicists", those who speak of the Res Publica, what we now call "pundits": but in the USA none are more adept at using the wrong formulations than the "modern conservative" pundits. Why? well, "modern conservative" says it all... because you are partly right conservatism is about "a set of dispositions toward a political and civilizational inheritance", and "modern conservatism" is therefore an oxymoron. ;-)

And this is why "Modern Conservatism" became such an easy prey for the Alt-Right Anarchists: because they are not grounded in an actual "tradition", but like all the "progressives" (which they are), they have to reinvent for themselves a new beginning... in the 1950s, they said, now that there is National Review, we shall become "real" conservatives, "modern conservatives", before us, they were not really conservatives... ;-)

But you cannot be a real conservative if you have to identify a date for the birth of your movement.

"Modern Conservatives" have a vested interest in muddying the debate, so that it does not become clear that "conservatism" is not linked to specific political or economical models, and more importantly it is not true that the Founding Fathers were all absolutist libertarian free traders... ;-)

So Conservatism is not the opposite of Liberalism, it is the opposite of Progressivism. Imperialism is indeed about expansion of power, but it is not necessarily about "centralization", as many empires not only have left the "local life" untouched, but this "local life" disappeared when a supposedly more "liberal" power took over...

Therefore I do beg American publicists, especially those of the conservative variety writing in NRO, stop begging the question when you falsely "define" terms, so that they align with what you deem to be good or bad; be instead a real conservative, go back to the etymology and the actual meaning of the words, see how they were used initially, not only in the last 50 or even 100 years... because then you are using "progressive" definitions, and you keep repeating that "progressives" always change the meaning of the words to suit their purpose... You are right on that one. ;-)

Leroy 3 days ago

Conservatism "has been traditionally defined as a set of dispositions toward a political and civilizational inheritance"?

That can't be true. We all know that conservatism now means free trade, where American workers are replaced by Chinese slave labor. We know that conservatism means an insatiable desire for foreign migrants, adding millions of campesino's to our economy every year. Most of all, we know that conservatism stands for foreign imperialist wars and globalist profits.

What, exactly, are our children inheriting? Press 2 for Spanish.

Jean_Christophe_Jouffrey 3 days ago

Dear Leroy,

I agree with you that US Conservatives are Progressives by another name. see my main comment here. ;-)

TitoPerdue 2 days ago

Indeed. And let us not forget neocons.

Jean_Christophe_Jouffrey 2 days ago

Dear TitoPerdue,

given that the Founding Fathers were already progressives, who for you committed the original sin of believing that "all men are created equal", why do you still live in that den of iniquity that is the USA?

You should be out there carving an empire for yourself, showing your supremacy and spreading the seeds of your "culture" over uncharted territories and untamed tribes... ;-)

I hear that there are still some fairly inaccessible places in Papua-New-Guinea... ;-)

Perfect place to show your supremacy, or end up in the cooking pot. For once your philosophy of life would become true: eat or be eaten! ;-)

hawkesappraisal 3 days ago

I agree. "Nationalism" is a charged but nebulous word, but it describes something that is clearly important in spite of the obscurity of its meaning. So the struggle to come up with coherent definitions is worthwhile. The current Nationalism is probably best defined by, Progressives saying "America sucks!" and the Right responding, "No it doesn't! America is Awesome!"

freedom1 3 days ago ( Edited )

Thoughtful piece. I think the obvious irritant lending support to Nationalist sentiments is the non benign aspects of Globalism.

[Dec 01, 2018] The US elite started viewing Chin a a grave threat to "full spectrum dominance"

Notable quotes:
"... China is leveraging military modernization, influence operations, and predatory economics to coerce neighboring countries to reorder the Indo-Pacific region to their advantage, ..."
"... As China continues its economic and military ascendance, asserting power through an all-of-nation long-term strategy, it will continue to pursue a military modernization program that seeks Indo-Pacific regional hegemony in the near-term and displacement of the United States to achieve global preeminence in the future. The most far-reaching objective of this defense strategy is to set the military relationship between our two countries on a path of transparency and non-aggression. ..."
"... Shouldn't an important US foreign policy goal of the next couple of decades be regime change in China? ..."
Dec 01, 2018 | www.rt.com

"China is a sleeping lion," Napoleon Bonaparte said. "Let her sleep, for when she wakes, she will shake the world." A new Cold War is upon us, only this time the giant is no longer deep asleep; stirring as it begins to wake. " China is leveraging military modernization, influence operations, and predatory economics to coerce neighboring countries to reorder the Indo-Pacific region to their advantage, " a recent summary of the 2018 US National Defense Strategy states .

" As China continues its economic and military ascendance, asserting power through an all-of-nation long-term strategy, it will continue to pursue a military modernization program that seeks Indo-Pacific regional hegemony in the near-term and displacement of the United States to achieve global preeminence in the future. The most far-reaching objective of this defense strategy is to set the military relationship between our two countries on a path of transparency and non-aggression. "

... ... ...

Donald Trump's trade war with China also signals a greater shift towards a US-China Cold War 2.0 scenario, and the stakes are even higher than we imagined.

The aim of the US appears to be to change China for good (if not its attitude, then its regime ) and build a new international framework which still puts Washington's interests above that of its adversaries. Successfully doing so requires the US to retain and promote its more traditional allies, something which seems somewhat questionable in the age of Trump.

... ... ...

Shouldn't an important US foreign policy goal of the next couple of decades be regime change in China? " The Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol asked his 411,000 followers on Twitter.

Shouldn't an important U.S. foreign policy goal of the next couple of decades be regime change in China? https://t.co/TpFODNTwQZ

-- Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) November 23, 2018

After failed regime change operations in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and Iran, just to name a few, I think the answer to this question is quite clearly a resounding " no ."

[Dec 01, 2018] In a separate interview, a retired four-star general, who has advised the Bush and Obama Administrations on national-security issues, said that he had been privately briefed in 2005 about the training of Iranians associated with the M.E.K. in Nevada

Dec 01, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

RobGehrke -> MonaHol , 30 Aug 2012 06:12

"What do you mean by claiming Hersh "cozys up" to MIC ppl? And what would be a specific example of a story he broke after doing that?"

Our Men in Iran?

"We did train them here, and washed them through the Energy Department because the D.O.E. owns all this land in southern Nevada," a former senior American intelligence official told me. ... In a separate interview, a retired four-star general, who has advised the Bush and Obama Administrations on national-security issues, said that he had been privately briefed in 2005 about the training of Iranians associated with the M.E.K. in Nevada

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/04/mek.html

His conversations with Lieutenant Calley are apparently what allowed him to break the My Lai massacre story as well, even though members of the military had already spoken out about it, and there had been already been charges brought. It just revealed the story to the general public, which prompted a fuller investigation and courts martial. I'm sure there are others.

So, obviously Hersh's "cozying up" (surely not the right term for it, though) is in the interests of raising public awareness of nefarious deeds, and is not scared of painting these organizations in a bad light, whereas Mazzetti's goal here seems to be to maintain his privileged access by providing favors - totally different motivations. It's rather easy to contrast the two, which "smartypants54" has even stated here.

Whatever the case, it's true that elements of the NYT have been mouthpieces more or less for government and corporate power for a long time. While I agree with Glenn about the faux cynicism perpetuating this kind of activity - "don't be naive, this is done all the time" - I can understand that it exists.

Such cynicism on the part of the public, rather than being an acknowledgment of acceptance and approval of such practices, can also be seen as part of a more radical critique of the corporate media in general, and the NYT particularly, in that such organizations - not that I totally agree with this - , by their very nature, can't be reformed and can never be totally effective checks on power because of the way they're structured, and who they answer to.

That's definitely not a reason to stop pointing it out, though.

[Dec 01, 2018] An old but still relevant joke about NYT connection to intelligence agencies: The New York Times -- all the news the CIA decided is fit to print.

"this didn't come from me and please delete after you read." -- Mazzetti to CIA PR person forwarding NYT article for vetting
Notable quotes:
"... The New York Times-all the news the CIA decided is fit to print. ..."
Aug 30, 2012 | www.theguardian.com
DuErJournalist , 29 Aug 2012 17:42
The New York Times: Burn after reading!
JinTexas , 29 Aug 2012 16:02
" The New York Times-all the news the CIA decided is fit to print. "

[Dec 01, 2018] Reality of G20 meeting is even fancier the fiction: Trump pretends that the USA is not connected to Kerch Strait incident and CIA did not inform him who planned this provocation

See also: Ukraine security chief admits intel agents were on board Navy ships during Kerch standoff
Dec 01, 2018 | www.rt.com

FILM:

PRESIDENT: This is incredible! I never ordered such a thing!
SOVIET AMBASSADOR (scornfully): Our [intelligence] source was the New York Times.
-- "Dr. Strangelove"

REALITY:

US President Donald Trump is still unsure whether to meet with Vladimir Putin, pending a 'full report' about the Kerch Strait incident that by pure coincidence happened just days before the upcoming G20 summit in Argentina.

Trump cancels Putin meeting at G20 over Ukraine standoff ... Trump, Putin to meet at G20 amid Russia-Ukraine tensions ... Trump to meet Putin at G20, but not MBS - Bolton - rt.com

[Dec 01, 2018] An interesting book: The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence by Victor Marchetti

Notable quotes:
"... Here's a wonderful example of the NYT's propensity for re-writing history: http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2012/08/30/ny-times-scrubs-mention-cia-arming-syrian-rebels-177311/ Long live the memory hole. ..."
Aug 30, 2012 | www.theguardian.com

bilejones, 30 Aug 2012 16:16

Here's a wonderful example of the NYT's propensity for re-writing history: http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2012/08/30/ny-times-scrubs-mention-cia-arming-syrian-rebels-177311/ Long live the memory hole.
BillOwen , 30 Aug 2012 13:15
The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence Victor Marchetti

"It is the first book the federal government of the United States ever went to court to censor before its publication. The CIA demanded the authors remove 399 passages but they stood firm and only 168 passages were censored. The publisher, Alfred A. Knopf, chose to publish the book with blanks for censored passages and with boldface type for passages that were challenged but later uncensored."

There exists in our nation today a powerful and dangerous secret cult -- the cult of intelligence. Its holy men are the clandestine professionals of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Its patrons and protectors are the highest officials of the federal government. Its membership, extending far beyond governmental circles, reaches into the power centers of industry, commerce, finance, and labor. Its friends are many in the areas of important public influence -- the academic world and the communications media.

The cult of intelligence is a secret fraternity of the American political aristocracy.

The purpose of the cult is to further the foreign policies of the U.S. government by covert and usually illegal means, while at the same time containing the spread of its avowed enemy, communism. Traditionally, the cult's hope has been to foster a world order in which America would reign supreme, the unchallenged international leader.

Today, however, that dream stands tarnished by time and frequent failures. Thus, the cult's objectives are now less grandiose, but no less disturbing. It seeks largely to advance America's self-appointed role as the dominant arbiter of social, economic, and political change in the awakening regions of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. And its worldwide war against communism has to some extent been reduced to a covert struggle to maintain a self-serving stability in the Third World, using whatever clandestine methods are available.

Wiki

[Nov 30, 2018] America Is Headed For Military Defeat in Afghanistan

Notable quotes:
"... other year of the war ..."
"... Enough Afghans either support the Taliban or hate the occupation, and managed, through assorted conventional and unconventional operations, to fight on the ground. And "on the ground" is all that really matters. This war may well have been ill-advised and unwinnable from the start. ..."
"... There's no shame in defeat. But there is shame, and perfidy, in avoiding or covering up the truth. It's what the whole military-political establishment did after Vietnam, and, I fear, it's what they're doing again. ..."
Nov 30, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

about:blank

America Is Headed For Military Defeat in Afghanistan It is time to acknowledge this is more than political. We can lose on the battlefield, and it's happening right now. By Danny Sjursen • November 30, 2018

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?app_id=347697165243043&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2Fr%2F7LloFuHvA7I.js%3Fversion%3D43%23cb%3Df14748e39457f%26domain%3Dwww.theamericanconservative.com%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%252Ff82bc2938f8f8b%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=0&font=lucida%20grande&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Famerica-is-headed-for-military-defeat-in-afghanistan%2F&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&send=true&show_faces=false&width=125

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.0568ee90c37ccf52b40a4b1e312811ff.en.html#dnt=false&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&original_referer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Famerica-is-headed-for-military-defeat-in-afghanistan%2F&related=amconmag&size=m&text=America%20Is%20Headed%20For%20Military%20Defeat%20in%20Afghanistan%20%7C%20The%20American%20Conservative&time=1543603027326&type=share&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Famerica-is-headed-for-military-defeat-in-afghanistan%2F&via=amconmag

https://apis.google.com/se/0/_/+1/fastbutton?usegapi=1&size=medium&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Famerica-is-headed-for-military-defeat-in-afghanistan%2F&gsrc=3p&ic=1&jsh=m%3B%2F_%2Fscs%2Fapps-static%2F_%2Fjs%2Fk%3Doz.gapi.en_US.4BOpmQl8fPg.O%2Fam%3DQQ%2Frt%3Dj%2Fd%3D1%2Frs%3DAGLTcCMoKF2A6fOyMfdBCNikAdyYCXQ5iw%2Fm%3D__features__#_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_close%2C_open%2C_resizeMe%2C_renderstart%2Concircled%2Cdrefresh%2Cerefresh&id=I0_1543603027036&_gfid=I0_1543603027036&parent=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&pfname=&rpctoken=3167179

Marines with Bravo Company, 1st Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment, sprint across a field to load onto a CH-53E Super Stallion helicopter during a mission in Helmand province, Afghanistan, July 4, 2014. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Joseph Scanlan / released) There's a prevailing maxim, both inside the armed forces and around the Beltway, that goes something like this: "The U.S. can never be militarily defeated in any war," certainly not by some third world country. Heck, I used to believe that myself. That's why, in regard to Afghanistan, we've been told that while America could lose the war due to political factors (such as the lack of grit among "soft" liberals or defeatists), the military could never and will never lose on the battlefield.

That entire maxim is about to be turned on its head. Get ready, because we're about to lose this war militarily.

Consider this: the U.S. military has advised, assisted, battled, and bombed in Afghanistan for 17-plus years. Ground troop levels have fluctuated from lows of some 10,000 to upwards of 100,000 servicemen and women. None of that has achieved more than a tie, a bloody stalemate. Now, in the 18th year of this conflict, the Kabul-Washington coalition's military is outright losing.

Let's begin with the broader measures. The Taliban controls or contests more districts -- some 44 percent -- than at any time since the 2001 invasion. Total combatant and civilian casualties are forecasted to top 20,000 this year -- another dreadful broken record. What's more, Afghan military casualties are frankly unsustainable: the Taliban are killing more than the government can recruit. The death rates are staggering, numbering 5,500 fatalities in 2015, 6,700 in 2016, and an estimate (the number is newly classified) of "about 10,000" in 2017. Well, some might ask, what about American airpower -- can't that help stem the Taliban tide? Hardly. In 2018, as security deteriorated and the Taliban made substantial gains, the U.S. actually dropped more bombs than in any other year of the war . It appears that nothing stands in the way of impending military defeat.

Then there are the very recent events on the ground -- and these are telling. Insider attacks in which Afghan "allies" turn their guns on American advisors are back on the rise, most recently in an attack that wounded a U.S. Army general and threatened the top U.S. commander in the country. And while troop numbers are way down from the high in 2011, American troops deaths are rising. Over the Thanksgiving season alone, a U.S. Army Ranger was killed in a friendly fire incident and three other troopers died in a roadside bomb attack. And in what was perhaps only a (still disturbing) case of misunderstood optics, the top U.S. commander, General Miller, was filmed carrying his own M4 rifle around Afghanistan. That's a long way from the days when then-General Petraeus (well protected by soldiers, of course) walked around the markets of Baghdad in a soft cap and without body armor.

More importantly, the Afghan army and police are getting hammered in larger and larger attacks and taking unsustainable casualties. Some 26 Afghan security forces were killed on Thanksgiving, 22 policemen died in an attack on Sunday, and on Tuesday 30 civilians were killed in Helmand province. And these were only the high-profile attacks, dwarfed by the countless other countrywide incidents. All this proves that no matter how hard the U.S. military worked, or how many years it committed to building an Afghan army in its own image, and no matter how much air and logistical support that army received, the Afghan Security Forces cannot win. The sooner Washington accepts this truth over the more comforting lie, the fewer of our adulated American soldiers will have to die. Who is honestly ready to be the last to die for a mistake, or at least a hopeless cause?

Now, admittedly, this author is asking for trouble -- and fierce rebuttals -- from both peers and superiors still serving on active duty. And that's understandable. The old maxim of military invincibility soothes these men, mollifies their sense of personal loss, whether of personal friends or years away from home, in wars to which they've now dedicated their entire adult lives. Questioning whether there even is a military solution in Afghanistan, or, more specifically, predicting a military defeat, serves only to upend their mental framework surrounding the war.

Still, sober strategy and basic honesty demands a true assessment of the military situation in America's longest war. The Pentagon loves metrics, data, and stats. Well, as demonstrated daily on the ground in Afghanistan, all the security (read: military) metrics point towards impending defeat. At best, the Afghan army, with ample U.S. advisory detachments and air support, can hold on to the northernmost and westernmost provinces of the country, while a Taliban coalition overruns the south and east. This will be messy, ugly, and discomfiting for military and civilian leaders alike. But unless Washington is prepared to redeploy 100,000 soldiers to Afghanistan (again) -- and still only manage a tie, by the way -- it is also all but inevitable.

America's Disastrous Occupation of Afghanistan Turns 17 The War in Afghanistan is Enabling Pedophilia

The United States military did all it was asked during more than 17 years of warfare in Afghanistan. It raided, it bombed, it built, it surged, it advised, it everything. Still, none of that was sufficient. Enough Afghans either support the Taliban or hate the occupation, and managed, through assorted conventional and unconventional operations, to fight on the ground. And "on the ground" is all that really matters. This war may well have been ill-advised and unwinnable from the start.

There's no shame in defeat. But there is shame, and perfidy, in avoiding or covering up the truth. It's what the whole military-political establishment did after Vietnam, and, I fear, it's what they're doing again.

Danny Sjursen is a U.S. Army officer and a regular contributor to Unz. He served combat tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught history at his alma mater, West Point. He is the author of a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghostriders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge . Follow him on Twitter @SkepticalVet .

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author, expressed in an unofficial capacity, and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. government.

[Nov 30, 2018] Mueller Takes Aim, But Is Trump in Trouble by By Aaron Maté

Witch hunt has its own dynamics and it is not necessary to get any facts to inflict great damage. Mueller, the key person in 8/11 investigation, is first and foremost a loyal neocon/neolib establishment stooge, not so much a lawyer. So the shadow of McCarthyism fall on the Washitnton, DC.
Felix Sater was FBI asset from the very beginning.
Which such Byzantium politics in Washington and intrigues between almost identical parties worth of Madrid court it is not accidental that FBI coves with upper hand in its struggle with Russian intelligence, Russians can't get such training in viciousness, double dealing and false flag operations anywhere.
Notable quotes:
"... Disappearing for the midterms , Russiagate has re-emerged front and center. This week's barrage of developments in the cases of indicted Trump campaign figures Paul Manafort, Michael Cohen, and George Papadopoulos have renewed long-running declarations of a presidency in peril . ..."
"... They coincide with a fresh round of alarm over the fate of Mueller's investigation following Trump's ouster of attorney general Jeff Sessions and the installation of Matthew Whitaker in his place. ..."
"... Although Mueller's final report has yet to be released, the issue that sparked the FBI investigation he inherited has already been resolved. The FBI began eyeing potential Trump-Russia ties in July 2016 after getting a tip that unpaid campaign aide George Papadopoulos may have been informed that Russia was in possession of stolen Democratic Party emails well before WikiLeaks made them public. But that trail went cold. It turns out that a London-based professor, Joseph Mifsud, told Papadopoulos that the Russian government might possess thousands of Hillary Clinton's emails. ..."
"... The Russia probe's other instigating figure, Carter Page, was also a low-level, unpaid campaign official. The information that led to his investigation is even more suspect. ..."
"... But its a key source for that supposition turned out to be the Steele dossier -- the salacious, Democratic Party-funded opposition research compiled by former MI6 agent Christopher Steele. And while the FBI got Papadopoulos on lying to them, Page has not been accused of any crime... ..."
"... Just as the evidence used in Manafort's bank and tax fraud case underscored that he worked against Russian interests in Ukraine , Flynn's indictment turns up another inconvenient fact for the collusion hopeful: The foreign government that Flynn colluded with on Trump's behalf -- against the US government -- is not Russia, but Israel . ..."
"... Russians never signed on, and Cohen only grew increasingly frustrated with Sater's failure to live up to his lofty pledges. "You are putting my job in jeopardy and making me look incompetent," Cohen wrote Sater on December 31, 2015. "I gave you two months and the best you send me is some bullshit garbage invite by some no name clerk at a third-tier bank." ..."
"... It is also possible that Manafort's alleged lies have nothing to do with a Russia conspiracy; after all, his case, and that of his deputy Rick Gates, pertained not to Russia or the 2016 campaign, but instead to financial crimes during Manafort's lobbying stint in Ukraine. ..."
Nov 30, 2018 | www.thenation.com
Disappearing for the midterms , Russiagate has re-emerged front and center. This week's barrage of developments in the cases of indicted Trump campaign figures Paul Manafort, Michael Cohen, and George Papadopoulos have renewed long-running declarations of a presidency in peril .

They coincide with a fresh round of alarm over the fate of Mueller's investigation following Trump's ouster of attorney general Jeff Sessions and the installation of Matthew Whitaker in his place. Leading Democrats now see the probe as so paramount that, despite having re-captured the House running on health-care issues, protecting the investigation has been deemed "our top priority" (Representative Jerry Nadler) and "at the top of the agenda," (Representative Adam Schiff).

There is nothing objectionable about wanting to safeguard the Mueller investigation, nor about concerns that Trump's appointment of an unqualified loyalist may jeopardize it. Mueller should complete his work, unimpeded. The question is one of priorities. After all, the fixation on Mueller has not just raised anticipation of Trump's indictment, or even impeachment -- it has also overshadowed many of the actual policies that those seeking his political demise oppose him for. At this highly charged moment, it seems prudent to re-consider whether the probe remains worthy of such attention and high hopes.

Although Mueller's final report has yet to be released, the issue that sparked the FBI investigation he inherited has already been resolved. The FBI began eyeing potential Trump-Russia ties in July 2016 after getting a tip that unpaid campaign aide George Papadopoulos may have been informed that Russia was in possession of stolen Democratic Party emails well before WikiLeaks made them public. But that trail went cold. It turns out that a London-based professor, Joseph Mifsud, told Papadopoulos that the Russian government might possess thousands of Hillary Clinton's emails.

The FBI interviewed Mifsud in Washington, DC, in February 2017, but Mueller has never alleged that Mifsud works with the Russian government. Papadopoulos was ultimately sentenced to just 14 days behind bars for lying to the FBI about the timing and nature of his contacts with Mifsud. He reported to a federal prison on Monday.

The Russia probe's other instigating figure, Carter Page, was also a low-level, unpaid campaign official. The information that led to his investigation is even more suspect. In its October 2016 application for a surveillance warrant on Page, the FBI claimed it "believes that [Russia's] efforts are being coordinated with Page and perhaps other individuals associated with [the Trump campaign]." But its a key source for that supposition turned out to be the Steele dossier -- the salacious, Democratic Party-funded opposition research compiled by former MI6 agent Christopher Steele. And while the FBI got Papadopoulos on lying to them, Page has not been accused of any crime...

With the Russia investigation's catalysts coming up all but empty, there is little reason to expect that the remaining campaign members who face prison time will reverse that trend. Former national security adviser Michael Flynn awaits sentencing in the coming weeks on charges similar to Papadopoulos's. Just as the evidence used in Manafort's bank and tax fraud case underscored that he worked against Russian interests in Ukraine , Flynn's indictment turns up another inconvenient fact for the collusion hopeful: The foreign government that Flynn colluded with on Trump's behalf -- against the US government -- is not Russia, but Israel .

Despite much hoopla to the contrary, Muller's new indictment of former Trump fixer Michael Cohen contains more inconvenient facts. Cohen has pleaded guilty to a single count for lying to Congress about his role in a failed attempt to build a Trump Tower in Moscow. According to the plea document, Cohen gave Congress false written answers in order to "minimize links," between the Moscow project and Trump, and to "give the false impression" that it was abandoned earlier than it actually was. Cohen told the court that he made these statements to "be loyal" to Trump and to be consistent with his "political messaging."

As I noted in The Nation in October 2017 , the attempted real-estate venture in Russia "does raise a potential conflict of interest" for Trump, who "pursued a Moscow deal as he praised Putin on the campaign trail." But nothing in Cohen's indictment incriminates Trump. Much of what it details was previously known, and rather than revealing an illicit, transatlantic collusion scheme, it reads more like a slapstick mafia buddy comedy. As Buzzfeed News reported in May , Cohen communicated extensively with Trump organization colleague Felix Sater -- identified in the Cohen plea as "Individual 2″ -- who had promised to secure Russian financing for the proposed Moscow project. But the Russians never signed on, and Cohen only grew increasingly frustrated with Sater's failure to live up to his lofty pledges. "You are putting my job in jeopardy and making me look incompetent," Cohen wrote Sater on December 31, 2015. "I gave you two months and the best you send me is some bullshit garbage invite by some no name clerk at a third-tier bank."

Cohen then took matters into his own hands. As was previously known, he did not have an email address for a Russian contact, so he wrote to a generic email address at the office of Dmitri Peskov, the press secretary for Vladimir Putin ("Russian Official 1," in the indictment). We now learn from Cohen that he managed to reach Peskov's assistant, who asked him "detailed questions and took notes." But as The New York Times noted when the Trump Moscow story first emerged: "The project never got [Russian] government permits or financing, and died weeks later." Sater tried to save the project. He discussed arranging visits to Russia by both Cohen and Trump, but Cohen ultimately backed out after allegations of Russian email hacking surfaced in June 2016. According to Buzzfeed , Sater even proposed giving Putin a $50 million penthouse as an enticement, but "the plan never went anywhere because the tower deal ultimately fizzled, and it is not clear whether Trump knew of "Sater's idea."

Cohen now claims that he spoke to Trump about the project more than the three times that he informed Congress about. For their part, Trump's attorneys do not seem concerned, saying that his recently submitted answers to Mueller align with Cohen's account. That Cohen perjured himself to Congress raises problems for him, but it is hard to see how his lies about a project that failed and a proposed trip to Russia that never happened can hurt Trump. That could only change if, as part of his new cooperation deal with Mueller, Cohen has more to give.

As for Manafort, his case took a major turn when Mueller canceled their cooperation agreement and accused him of "crimes and lies." The crucial questions are what does Mueller allege he lied to him about and what evidence is there to substantiate that charge. Mueller is expected to provide details in the coming weeks. In the meantime, we can only speculate. The revelation that Manafort's lawyers shared information with Trump's attorneys even after the plea deal was struck in September has inevitably fueled speculation that Manafort is lying to benefit Trump, or even hide evidence of a Russia conspiracy. That is certainly possible. But theories that Manafort is then banking on a pardon from Trump do not square with the prevailing view that his agreement with Mueller -- which included admitting to crimes that could be re-charged in state court -- was " pardon proof ."

It is also possible that Manafort's alleged lies have nothing to do with a Russia conspiracy; after all, his case, and that of his deputy Rick Gates, pertained not to Russia or the 2016 campaign, but instead to financial crimes during Manafort's lobbying stint in Ukraine. The Wall Street Journal suggests that is the case, reporting that Manafort's alleged lies "don't appear to be central to the allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 election that Mr. Mueller is investigating." Earlier this month, ABC News claimed , citing "multiple sources," that Mueller's investigators are "not getting what they want" from Manafort's cooperation deal. When it comes to collusion, perhaps there is just nothing to get.

[Nov 30, 2018] Ukraine Doesn't Deserve America's Blind Support by Ted Galen Carpenter

A long as neocons dominate the USA foreign policy establishment Ukraine will get unconditional support as long as it remain hostile to Russia. And from geopolitical perspective Ukraine does deserve support as it seriously weaken Russia and the major (according to Trump administration) geopolitical enemy of the USA (along with China).
The current event can be viewed as artificially sped up process which would occur anyway, but with less economic losses. Baltic scenario was waiting for Ukraine sooner of later, as Western Ukrainian nationalists automatically became the major political force after independence and were nurtured by all Ukrainian governments, including the government of Yanukovich (who become kind of Godfather of Svoboda party with the calculation that it will antagonize enough voters in the East that he can win the reelection).
Notable quotes:
"... Poroshenko had to know that his attempt to send warships through a narrow passage between what the Kremlin insists are two portions of Russian territory was certain to cause an incident. Why did Kiev risk (if not avidly seek) such a confrontation? And why now? There are several likely motives. ..."
"... Kiev wants to increase pressure on NATO, and especially the United States, to take a harder stance against Moscow. Despite their official position that the Kremlin must disgorge Crimea and end support for pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine, Western policy looks increasingly stale and ineffectual. Some European officials even muse that it may be time to reconsider (weaken) the economic sanctions that the West imposed on Russia. President Trump has stated that Russia should be re-admitted to the G-7 group of leading economic powers. ..."
"... Ukrainian leaders are especially determined to nurture greater bilateral strategic cooperation with the United States. The notion that the Trump administration has pursued a "soft" policy toward Russia, much less one that amounts to appeasement, has always been overstated. Trump's initiatives are actually more hardline than those Barack Obama's administration embraced. That is especially true regarding Washington's relationship with Kiev . Whereas Obama consistently refused to provide weapons to Ukraine, the Trump administration has approved two major arms sales, one of which included sophisticated anti-tank missiles. U.S. troops have participated in joint military exercises with Ukrainian forces, and Secretary of Defense James Mattis concedes that the United States is training Ukrainian units at a base in western Ukraine. ..."
"... Poroshenko thus has ample foreign policy reasons for taking the actions he did in the Kerch Strait. He also has significant political and ideological incentives. His government did not announce the official date for Ukraine's 2019 presidential election until two days following the naval clash; it is now set for March 31. To say that the timing of the announcement was suspicious is an understatement. ..."
"... In addition to creating a "rally around the flag" effect, thereby boosting Poroshenko's status, Russian seizure of the Ukrainian vessels gave the president a justification to impose outright martial law in 10 regions of eastern Ukraine -- areas likely to be especially hostile to his political prospects. It could also serve as a basis for tightening Ukraine's already worrisome restrictions on freedom of expression. ..."
"... The vagueness of the applicable laws (and the absence of any meaningful independent review or right of appeal) has been especially alarming. Indeed, it seems that anyone who disputes the government's account of the Maidan revolution (especially those who dare to mention the role of ultranationalist, neo-fascist elements) or the conflict in eastern Ukraine is likely to be silenced. ..."
Nov 29, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
The recent clash between Russian and Ukrainian naval vessels in the Kerch Strait has generated a flurry of alarm. NATO was compelled to call an emergency meeting with Ukraine and the UN Security Council convened an urgent session to discuss the crisis. Exercising their usual tendency to oversimplify murky geopolitical rivalries, Western officials and journalists embraced the knee-jerk narrative that the incident is yet another case of Vladimir Putin's blatant aggression and " outlaw behavior " against its peace-loving, democratic neighbor. Right on cue, CNN, MSNBC, and other media outlets dispatched stridently anti-Russian editorials masquerading as news stories .

In reality, the Kerch Strait incident involves a complex mixture of factors. They include the tense Russian-Ukrainian bilateral relationship, Kiev's broader foreign policy objectives, and Ukraine's volatile domestic politics.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko had to know that a decision to send three naval vessels through the Kerch Strait would be disruptive. The strait, which connects the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov, separates Russia's Taman Peninsula from the Crimea Peninsula. Despite Moscow's annexation of the latter in 2014, Kiev still considers Crimea to be Ukrainian territory, a position that the United States and its allies back emphatically. Moreover, passage through the strait is the only oceanic link between Ukraine's Black Sea ports and those on the Azov. Kiev, not surprisingly, views the strait as international waters. Russia, however, regards the waterway as its own territorial waters and viewed the attempted transit by the three Ukrainian ships as a violation.

Whatever the legal merits of the competing positions regarding sovereignty over Crimea and the status of the Kerch Strait, the reality is that Russia controls that peninsula and is unlikely to ever restore it to Ukraine , despite Western demands. Poroshenko had to know that his attempt to send warships through a narrow passage between what the Kremlin insists are two portions of Russian territory was certain to cause an incident. Why did Kiev risk (if not avidly seek) such a confrontation? And why now? There are several likely motives.

Kiev wants to increase pressure on NATO, and especially the United States, to take a harder stance against Moscow. Despite their official position that the Kremlin must disgorge Crimea and end support for pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine, Western policy looks increasingly stale and ineffectual. Some European officials even muse that it may be time to reconsider (weaken) the economic sanctions that the West imposed on Russia. President Trump has stated that Russia should be re-admitted to the G-7 group of leading economic powers.

Such talk is potentially quite threatening to Ukraine's interests. Creating an incident that reminds Kiev's Western supporters (and the rest of the world) of Moscow's aggressive tendencies makes any prospect of even a limited rapprochement between Russia and either NATO or the European Union less likely.

Ukrainian leaders are especially determined to nurture greater bilateral strategic cooperation with the United States. The notion that the Trump administration has pursued a "soft" policy toward Russia, much less one that amounts to appeasement, has always been overstated. Trump's initiatives are actually more hardline than those Barack Obama's administration embraced. That is especially true regarding Washington's relationship with Kiev . Whereas Obama consistently refused to provide weapons to Ukraine, the Trump administration has approved two major arms sales, one of which included sophisticated anti-tank missiles. U.S. troops have participated in joint military exercises with Ukrainian forces, and Secretary of Defense James Mattis concedes that the United States is training Ukrainian units at a base in western Ukraine.

Poroshenko and his associates want to encourage and intensify those trends. They hope that creating a new incident underscoring aggressive Russian conduct will lead the Trump administration to boost arms sales and other forms of bilateral military cooperation. Even if Trump proved reluctant to adopt that course, domestic and international pressure might leave him little choice. Indeed, Western news media outlets excoriated Trump for not immediately condemning Russia as an outright aggressor in the Kerch Strait incident.

Washington Quietly Increases Lethal Weapons to Ukraine Admitting Ukraine Into NATO Would Be a Fool's Errand

Poroshenko thus has ample foreign policy reasons for taking the actions he did in the Kerch Strait. He also has significant political and ideological incentives. His government did not announce the official date for Ukraine's 2019 presidential election until two days following the naval clash; it is now set for March 31. To say that the timing of the announcement was suspicious is an understatement.

No candidate in the extremely crowded field is likely to exceed the 50 percent mark needed to avoid a runoff, but recent surveys have indicated that Poroshenko is in surprisingly poor political shape. Most polls showed him receiving between 8 and 15 percent of the first-round vote. The leading candidate is former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko, with Poroshenko running in third. Corruption scandals continue to bedevil his administration, making his re-election (or even his ability to make the runoff) far from certain.

In addition to creating a "rally around the flag" effect, thereby boosting Poroshenko's status, Russian seizure of the Ukrainian vessels gave the president a justification to impose outright martial law in 10 regions of eastern Ukraine -- areas likely to be especially hostile to his political prospects. It could also serve as a basis for tightening Ukraine's already worrisome restrictions on freedom of expression.

That track record should trouble Kiev's backers in the West. To wage war against eastern separatists, Kiev early on not only instituted military conscription, it arrested critics of that action. Authorities jailed television journalist and blogger Ruslan Kotsaba and charged him with treason for making a video denouncing the conscription law. Kotsaba become Amnesty International's first "prisoner of conscience" in Ukraine since the 2014 so-called Maidan revolution.

The vagueness of the applicable laws (and the absence of any meaningful independent review or right of appeal) has been especially alarming. Indeed, it seems that anyone who disputes the government's account of the Maidan revolution (especially those who dare to mention the role of ultranationalist, neo-fascist elements) or the conflict in eastern Ukraine is likely to be silenced.

Bogdan Ovcharuk, a spokesperson for Amnesty International's Kiev office, expressed the concerns of many proponents of freedom of expression when he told the BBC: "This is a very slippery slope indeed. It's one thing to restrict access to texts advocating violence, but in general banning books because their authors have views deemed unacceptable to politicians in Kiev is deeply dangerous." The consequences of such a campaign, he warned , were certain to damage the fabric of liberty.

Yet the Kiev government's restrictive policies continue unabated. In September 2015, Ukrainian authorities issued an order banning 34 journalists and seven bloggers from even entering the country. The Committee to Protect Journalists reported that the newly publicized list was merely part of a larger blacklist that contained the names of 388 individuals and more than a hundred organizations that were barred from entry on the grounds of "national security" and allegedly posing a threat to Ukraine's "territorial integrity."

Human Rights Watch criticized the Kiev government in September 2017 for imposing yet more restrictions on journalists, especially foreign correspondents. The Poroshenko government even pushed through legislation barring criticism of Ukraine's past , including the role that ultra-nationalist guerilla leader (and Nazi collaborator) Stepan Bandera and his followers played in World War II. Censorship provisions and other media restrictions may become even more widespread and arbitrary with Poroshenko's new declaration of martial law.

Ukraine's Western admirers typically ignore such evidence of authoritarian conduct, since it does not fit with their portrayal of the country as an enlightened member of the democratic community. The reality is that Ukraine epitomizes what CNN analyst Fareed Zakaria has aptly described as an "illiberal democracy." The Poroshenko regime certainly does not warrant unquestioned Western backing. Kiev is not above engaging in provocations to serve either its political leadership's domestic agenda or its foreign policy objectives. The United States does not have vital strategic or moral interests at stake in the overall Ukraine-Russia quarrel, much less the latest parochial spat in the Kerch Strait. A cautious, restrained posture is appropriate.

Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and a contributing editor at The American Conservative, is the author of 12 books and more than 700 articles on international affairs. His latest book is Gullible Superpower: U.S. Support for Bogus Foreign Democratic Movements (forthcoming, February 2019).

[Nov 30, 2018] Is Putin the Provocateur in the Kerch Crisis, by Pat Buchanan

Crimea was a variation of Kosovo. As the USA destroyed post WWII order, as its position weakens, real chaos can occurs. because Might is right can work not only for the USA anymore. And in this theater the USA has no advantages, other then their geopolitical weight. It is too fat from US mainland.
The USA speed up events probably by 20 years or so and coursed considerable suffering of the Ukrainian population. Ukraine was gradually detaching itself from Russia anyway (which is a natural process for any xUSSR republic after the independence.). Essentially the USA raped the Ukraine using Ukrainian nationalist as a fifth column of neoliberal globalization.
The net result of the premature and by-and-large successful attempt to break Ukraine from Russia and play Baltic's scenario (which was possible due to existence of Western Ukrainian nationalists) was drastic impoverishing (already very poor after chaos and neoliberal economic plunder of 1990th) of the bottom 99% of Ukrainian population which now is the poorest population of Europe.
Ukrainian nationalists now are finding the hard way that bordering with Russia created some problems for their agenda... The good analogy is Canada and the USA.
In a way, incorporation of Western Ukraine into the USSR looks now like Stalin's geopolitical mistake. Now attempts to colonize Eastern Ukraine by Western Ukrainian nationalists will face resistance and it already led to civil war in Donbass.
Things became way too complex and unpredictable in this region. Of course, neocons still are pushing their usual might is right policy, not they might face considerable setbacks in the future. Like they did in Iraq. Which still did not affect much their paychecks.
Notable quotes:
"... Russian warships fired at the Ukrainian vessels and rammed the tug. Three Ukrainian sailors were wounded, and 24 crew taken into custody. Russia's refusal to release the sailors was given by President Trump as the reason for canceling his Putin meeting. Moscow contends that Ukraine deliberately violated the new rules of transit that Kiev had previously observed, to create an incident. ..."
"... For his part, Putin has sought to play the matter down, calling it a "border incident, nothing more." "The incident in the Black Sea was a provocation organized by the authorities and maybe the president himself. (Poroshenko's) rating is falling so he needed to do something." Maxim Eristavi, a fellow at the Atlantic Council, seems to concur: "Poroshenko wants to get a head start in his election campaign. He is playing the card of commander in chief, flying around in military uniform, trying to project that he is in control." ..."
"... Predictably, our interventionists decried Russian "aggression" and demanded we back up our Ukrainian "ally" and send military aid. Why was Poroshenko's ordering of gunboats into the Sea of Azov, while ignoring rules Russia set down for passage, provocative? Because Poroshenko, whose warships had previously transited the strait, had to know the risk that he was taking and that Russia might resist. ..."
"... Why would he provoke the Russians? Because, with his poll numbers sinking badly, Poroshenko realizes that unless he does something dramatic, his party stands little chance in next March's elections. ..."
"... Some Westerners want even more in the way of confronting Putin. Adrian Karatnycky of the Atlantic Council urges us to build up U.S. naval forces in the Black Sea, send anti-aircraft and anti-ship missiles to Ukraine, ratchet up sanctions on Russia, threaten to expel her from the SWIFT system of international bank transactions, and pressure Europe to cancel the Russians' Nord Stream 2 and South Stream oil pipelines into Europe. ..."
"... If Ukraine had a right to break free of Russia in 1991, why do not Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk have the right to break free of Kiev? ..."
Nov 30, 2018 | www.unz.com

On departure for the G-20 gathering in Buenos Aires, President Donald Trump canceled his planned weekend meeting with Vladimir Putin, citing as his reason the Russian military's seizure and holding of three Ukrainian ships and 24 sailors.

But was Putin really the provocateur in Sunday's naval clash outside Kerch Strait, the Black Sea gateway to the Sea of Azov?

Or was the provocateur Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko?

First, a bit of history.

In 2014, after the pro-Russian regime in Kiev was ousted in a coup, and a pro-NATO regime installed with U.S. backing, Putin detached and annexed Crimea, for centuries the homeport of Russia's Black Sea fleet.

With the return of Crimea, Russia now occupied both sides of Kerch Strait. And this year, Russia completed a 12-mile bridge over the strait and Putin drove the first truck across.

The Sea of Azov became a virtual Russian lake, access to which was controlled by Russia, just as access to the Black Sea is controlled by Turkey.

While the world refused to recognize the new reality, Russia began to impose rules for ships transiting the strait, including 48 hours notice to get permission.

Ukrainian vessels, including warships, would have to notify Russian authorities before passing beneath the Kerch Strait Bridge into the Sea of Azov to reach their major port of Mariupol.

Sunday, two Ukrainian artillery ships and a tug, which had sailed out of Odessa in western Ukraine, passed through what Russia now regards as its territorial waters off Crimea and the Kerch Peninsula. Destination: Mariupol.

The Ukrainian vessels refused to obey Russian directives to halt.

Russian warships fired at the Ukrainian vessels and rammed the tug. Three Ukrainian sailors were wounded, and 24 crew taken into custody. Russia's refusal to release the sailors was given by President Trump as the reason for canceling his Putin meeting. Moscow contends that Ukraine deliberately violated the new rules of transit that Kiev had previously observed, to create an incident.

For his part, Putin has sought to play the matter down, calling it a "border incident, nothing more." "The incident in the Black Sea was a provocation organized by the authorities and maybe the president himself. (Poroshenko's) rating is falling so he needed to do something." Maxim Eristavi, a fellow at the Atlantic Council, seems to concur: "Poroshenko wants to get a head start in his election campaign. He is playing the card of commander in chief, flying around in military uniform, trying to project that he is in control."

Our U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, however, accused Russia of "outlaw actions" against the Ukrainian vessels and "an arrogant act the international community will never accept."

Predictably, our interventionists decried Russian "aggression" and demanded we back up our Ukrainian "ally" and send military aid. Why was Poroshenko's ordering of gunboats into the Sea of Azov, while ignoring rules Russia set down for passage, provocative? Because Poroshenko, whose warships had previously transited the strait, had to know the risk that he was taking and that Russia might resist.

Why would he provoke the Russians? Because, with his poll numbers sinking badly, Poroshenko realizes that unless he does something dramatic, his party stands little chance in next March's elections.

Immediately after the clash, Poroshenko imposed martial law in all provinces bordering Russia and the Black Sea, declared an invasion might be imminent, demanded new Western sanctions on Moscow, called on the U.S. to stand with him, and began visiting army units in battle fatigues.

Some Westerners want even more in the way of confronting Putin. Adrian Karatnycky of the Atlantic Council urges us to build up U.S. naval forces in the Black Sea, send anti-aircraft and anti-ship missiles to Ukraine, ratchet up sanctions on Russia, threaten to expel her from the SWIFT system of international bank transactions, and pressure Europe to cancel the Russians' Nord Stream 2 and South Stream oil pipelines into Europe.

But there is a larger issue here. Why is control of the Kerch Strait any of our business? Why is this our quarrel, to the point that U.S. strategists want us to confront Russia over a Crimean Peninsula that houses the Livadia Palace that was the last summer residence of Czar Nicholas II?

If Ukraine had a right to break free of Russia in 1991, why do not Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk have the right to break free of Kiev?

Why are we letting ourselves be dragged into everyone's quarrels -- from who owns the islets in the South China Sea, to who owns the Senkaku and Southern Kurils; and from whether Transnistria had a right to secede from Moldova, to whether South Ossetia and Abkhazia had the right to break free of Georgia, when Georgia broke free of Russia?

Do the American people care a fig for these places? Are we really willing to risk war with Russia or China over who holds title to them?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of "Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever."

[Nov 30, 2018] Siding with fascism: Western ideologues pose greater threat to the West's security than ISIS by John Wight

Notable quotes:
"... 'Popping' recently over Russia have been key figures of the Western geopolitical and ideological firmament – people for whom the world is made of a Western bloc of nations divinely ordained to command, and the rest of the world condemned to obey. ..."
"... A prime example of what I mean concerns the Atlantic Council in Washington, one of the more notorious of an ever expanding network of neocon think tanks in our world, within whose Washington offices you will find gathered cranks of inordinate dimension. For such people Russia is not a country of 146 million people whose contribution to the world in the fields of art, science, culture and so on has been profound throughout its history and remains so today, but instead is a cancer that needs to be removed – preferably by force. ..."
"... react sharply before it is too late ..."
"... In losing his mind so, Mr Aslund reminds us that the Atlantic Council is an organization stacked with people for whom rationality is a vice and irrationality a virtue. Perhaps such a state of affairs might even be funny if not for the influence this particular think tank wields in Western foreign policy circles; influence that is on a par with an arsonist being taken seriously when it comes to fire prevention. ..."
"... The womb from that which crawled remains fertile ..."
"... Strange then – or indeed perhaps not so strange – that British Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson should recently declare with the bombast of a man who spends his days memorizing the wartime speeches of Winston Churchill: " As long as Ukraine faces Russian hostilities, it will find a steadfast partner in the United Kingdom. By continuing to work together, whether through training programmes or military exercises, we help Ukraine to stand up for our shared values. " ..."
"... Since the beginning of 2018, C14 and other far-right groups such as the Azov-affiliated National Militia, Right Sector, Karpatska Sich, and others have attacked Roma groups several times, as well as anti-fascist demonstrations, city council meetings, an event hosted by Amnesty International, art exhibitions, LGBT events, and environmental activists ..."
"... After the March 8 attacks, Amnesty International warned, 'Ukraine is sinking into a chaos of uncontrolled violence posed by radical groups and their total impunity. Practically no one in the country can feel safe under these conditions. ..."
"... Thinking about the victims of Stalin's famine of 1933 and the useful idiots – then and now – who blind their eyes to the truth that throughout too much recent history the Kremlin has been little more than a killing machine ..."
"... Russia today indisputably represents a far greater threat to our national security than Islamic extremist threats such as al-Qaida and Isil (ISIS). ..."
Nov 30, 2018 | www.rt.com

Progressive Journal, and Foreign Policy Journal. Published time: 29 Nov, 2018 13:09 Get short URL

A Western ideologue unravelling is no pretty sight. It's like watching a lobster boiling in a pot. And like that lobster he or she eventually pops. 'Popping' recently over Russia have been key figures of the Western geopolitical and ideological firmament – people for whom the world is made of a Western bloc of nations divinely ordained to command, and the rest of the world condemned to obey.

A prime example of what I mean concerns the Atlantic Council in Washington, one of the more notorious of an ever expanding network of neocon think tanks in our world, within whose Washington offices you will find gathered cranks of inordinate dimension. For such people Russia is not a country of 146 million people whose contribution to the world in the fields of art, science, culture and so on has been profound throughout its history and remains so today, but instead is a cancer that needs to be removed – preferably by force.

Take Mr Anders Aslund – economist, author and senior crank/fellow at the Atlantic Council. His outpouring of vituperation in response to the Kerch Strait incident involving Russia and Ukraine – calling for the West and NATO to " react sharply before it is too late " – is redolent of a man suffering emotional and psychological meltdown.

Everything suggests that Russia slowly takes one step after the other to block the Azov Sea off from Ukraine & international shipping. The West & NATO should react sharply before it is too late. https://t.co/kZMn2XTEls

-- Anders Åslund (@anders_aslund) November 25, 2018

In losing his mind so, Mr Aslund reminds us that the Atlantic Council is an organization stacked with people for whom rationality is a vice and irrationality a virtue. Perhaps such a state of affairs might even be funny if not for the influence this particular think tank wields in Western foreign policy circles; influence that is on a par with an arsonist being taken seriously when it comes to fire prevention.

It also comes as no surprise that the Atlantic Council's financial sponsors amount to a rogue's gallery of global corporations, oil companies, banks and financial institutions, governments and various other entities of such nature. It confirms that the relationship between global capitalism and Western imperialism is one forged in hell – or at least it does for those nations and people forced to exist at the sharp end of its egregious role around the world when it comes to fomenting conflict, crises, carnage and instability.

Ukraine is a prime example of what I mean. Lest anyone forget, the last democratically elected government of Ukraine to enjoy a mandate covering the entire country was unceremoniously toppled by a violent coup at the start of 2014. It was a coup supported by Western ideologues such as Anders Aslund, and one in which neo-Nazis were in the vanguard on the ground.

Also on rt.com US, Europe & NATO risk all-out war by backing unhinged Kiev regime

It is no coincidence that Western Ukraine, where the 2014 coup was centered and where the government it hatched continues to enjoy the bulk of its support, is a part of the world where fascism has deep historical and cultural roots. This is reflected in the recrudescence and elevation of fascism as a legitimate and openly flaunted creed in this part of the world today, calling to mind German playwright Bertolt Brecht's prescient warning at the end of the Second World War: " The womb from that which crawled remains fertile ."

Strange then – or indeed perhaps not so strange – that British Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson should recently declare with the bombast of a man who spends his days memorizing the wartime speeches of Winston Churchill: " As long as Ukraine faces Russian hostilities, it will find a steadfast partner in the United Kingdom. By continuing to work together, whether through training programmes or military exercises, we help Ukraine to stand up for our shared values. "

As long as Ukraine faces Russian hostilities, it will find a steadfast partner in the United Kingdom. By continuing to work together, whether through training programmes or military exercises, we help Ukraine to stand up for our shared values. #Defence pic.twitter.com/ofqyjl817N

-- Gavin Williamson MP (@GavinWilliamson) November 21, 2018

You heard that, yes? Shared values, the man said.

Williamson's stentorian words of support for the coup government in Kiev should be weighed in the balance against the analysis of US academic Stephen F. Cohen, set out in a May 2018 podcast for The Nation magazine. In it Cohen reveals the extent to which neo-Nazis are now an integral part of the Kiev government's armed forces, specifically the controversial Azov Battalion .

Even the previously mentioned Atlantic Council is unable to place democratic lipstick on the far right pig of Western Ukraine in 2018. In a June article for the think tank, Josh Cohen (no relation to Stephen F.) writes:

" Since the beginning of 2018, C14 and other far-right groups such as the Azov-affiliated National Militia, Right Sector, Karpatska Sich, and others have attacked Roma groups several times, as well as anti-fascist demonstrations, city council meetings, an event hosted by Amnesty International, art exhibitions, LGBT events, and environmental activists ."

He continues:

" After the March 8 attacks, Amnesty International warned, 'Ukraine is sinking into a chaos of uncontrolled violence posed by radical groups and their total impunity. Practically no one in the country can feel safe under these conditions. '"

Also on rt.com Another Crimean war looms as NATO provocations enter Russian waters – George Galloway

Given the 'actual' society hatched by Euromaidan in 2014, rather than the 'illusory' one touted in the West, it is prudent to point that the while the likes of Gavin Williamson may well harbor delusions of Churchillian grandeur in his capacity as Britain's defence secretary, one important distinction cannot be overlooked.

It is that while Churchill – racist and imperialist though he was – sided with Moscow against fascism, the current generation of aspiring Winstons within the British establishment are siding with fascism against Moscow.

Speaking of which, the Second World War is always a sumptuous feast when it comes to highlighting the bubble of unreality in which your average Western ideologue exists. Here, allow me to introduce John Sweeney of the BBC.

Mr Sweeney recently saw fit to tweet the following: " Thinking about the victims of Stalin's famine of 1933 and the useful idiots – then and now – who blind their eyes to the truth that throughout too much recent history the Kremlin has been little more than a killing machine ."

'Stalin's famine' of 1932-1933 was undeniably egregious, but any less so than Churchill's Bengal famine of 1943? As for the Kremlin being a 'killing machine', it was certainly Europe's good fortune that this was the case between 1941 and 1945, or else the entire continent would have been enslaved by the Nazis; turned thereafter into a mass grave the like of which would have made the Holocaust that Hitler and his hordes authored mere child's play in comparison.

With a view to saving the worst till last, newly installed British army chief, General Mark Carleton-Smith, is evidently not a man whom anyone could accuse of having a serious grasp on reality – not when according to him " Russia today indisputably represents a far greater threat to our national security than Islamic extremist threats such as al-Qaida and Isil (ISIS). "

The lobsters, as you can see, are well and truly popping.

John Wight has written for a variety of newspapers and websites, including the Independent, Morning Star, Huffington Post, Counterpunch, London

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

[Nov 29, 2018] Truth is dangerous! Former Homeland Security official laments RT's truth-telling

Cover your ears and avert your eyes, Americans: RT is attempting to weaken the United States using a whole host of nefarious methods – such as telling the truth, a former Homeland Security official has warned.
Notable quotes:
"... Cover your ears and avert your eyes, Americans: RT is attempting to weaken the United States using a whole host of nefarious methods – such as telling the truth, a former Homeland Security official has warned. ..."
"... "corrupt and broken" ..."
"... "taken over by politicians and the elite for their own corrupt ends." ..."
"... They feature every week, stories from our courts all across the country to demonstrate the truth of this statement. I don't think there's anything in there that is a lie. ..."
"... "using information operations, sometimes enabled by cyber, to weaken us" ..."
"... Oftentimes, they don't even have to make things up, they simply replay, they take kernels of truth, they take existing divisions and weaknesses of our own making and reproduce them, put them out, retweet them indefinitely in a very one-sided way. ..."
Nov 28, 2018 | www.rt.com
Cover your ears and avert your eyes, Americans: RT is attempting to weaken the United States using a whole host of nefarious methods – such as telling the truth, a former Homeland Security official has warned. Sounding the alarm during a panel discussion at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, Suzanne Spaulding, former deputy secretary for cyber and infrastructure protection at DHS in the Obama administration, said that one of RT's methods when it comes to its influencing vulnerable Americans is telling the truth.

As an example of this worrisome and effective truth-telling, Spaulding cited one of RT's weekly shows, America's Lawyer, hosted by prominent US trial lawyer Mike Papantonio. The theme of this show , Spaulding revealed to the audience is that the US justice system is "corrupt and broken" and has been "taken over by politicians and the elite for their own corrupt ends."

They feature every week, stories from our courts all across the country to demonstrate the truth of this statement. I don't think there's anything in there that is a lie.

A truthful news show dedicated to exposing the corruption of the American justice system? Terrifying!

Adversaries like Russia, Spaulding said, are "using information operations, sometimes enabled by cyber, to weaken us" – but the reason it can be so effective, she said, is that the information doesn't have to be a lie.

Oftentimes, they don't even have to make things up, they simply replay, they take kernels of truth, they take existing divisions and weaknesses of our own making and reproduce them, put them out, retweet them indefinitely in a very one-sided way.

Now, to many Americans, this might sound like some worthwhile viewing, but to Spaulding it is still "propaganda" because the ultimate objective is to weaken the country by revealing its flaws and stirring up trouble.

[Nov 29, 2018] Putin On Washington Asking For Russian Help Americans Are Interesting Folks

Nov 29, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Red onyx , 11 months ago

Maaan , Putin is really smart guy...

Maria Kuzali , 11 months ago

He is something else. He has the right answer for everything, and a lots of sense of humer!!!!

Johnny Aingel , 11 months ago (edited)

Asking for help after all the crap they did to Russia unbelievable but...

Dawud Yasin , 11 months ago

I'm British and I trust Putin more than any other leader in the world. He's a good politician and has been at the top longer than any of today's leaders his down to earth approach is something that reaches out to the masses. There's a new sheriff in town and he's Russian...

[Nov 29, 2018] Putin Shocked St. Petersburg Forum Participants with Frankness

Nov 29, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Paul van Dijck , 1 year ago

I am a Dutchman, but when I listen to Wladimir Putin, I can only conclude ANY western politician is a small child compared to him.

Maria Jordan , 1 year ago

Putin is brilliant intellectually and politically! He is strong and independent but not in a proud way, but with a strength coming directly from his heart for his Russia! I am originally Polish and I wish we would have had such a leader in our country. So, many mistakes in our history could have been avoided! Bravo Putin! American leaders look impressive but most of them have a plastic personalities

Susie Gladwell , 1 year ago

I love the forthrightness of President Putin; he is kind in his choice of words, patient as ever and manages to add his wonderful humor. A sheer joy to listen to.

joshron99 , 1 year ago

What an amazing human being is Putin. His command of the issues, their histories, the big picture as well as minute details, his ability to express himself, his steeliness and his humor must impact everyone who meets him and foreign leaders drawn to him who, with this generation of Russians seem to have a "rendezvous with destiny."

joshron99 , 1 year ago

What an amazing human being is Putin. His command of the issues, their histories, the big picture as well as minute details, his ability to express himself, his steeliness and his humor must impact everyone who meets him and foreign leaders drawn to him who, with this generation of Russians seem to have a "rendezvous with destiny."

zpetar , 1 year ago

These days all media is talking is about Russia hacking US elections. Why nobody is talking about NSA hacked Angela Merkel's phone? Maybe because that's old news not worth mentioning any more? Or maybe because its because US is democratic country so it doesn't count. This is quote from The Guardian "Germany has closed its investigation into a report that the US National Security Agency had hacked Chancellor Angela Merkel's mobile phone, a move that appears to be aimed at ending transatlantic friction that threatened intelligence cooperation between the two countries." Who cares about democracy and truth when higher interests are threatened.

Lia Spring , 1 year ago

Putin is a true PEACE MAKER !! May God be with Russia and its PRESIDENT!

ecocivilian , 1 year ago

Putin is just the baddest man on the planet jeez he really rocks like a superstar on stage such a diplomat but deadly like a stinging bee when you dont treat him seriously how can you not like this man

[Nov 29, 2018] Putin Kiev Would Get Away Even With Eating Babies! Kerch Strait Standoff Is Poroshenko Provocation - YouTube

Nov 29, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Mr Egusi , 11 hours ago

Imagine if Putin had imposed Martial Law after a border incident with any of Russia's neighbours close to an election he was guaranteed to lose? USA would be at the UN demanding an immediate end to the martial law and free and fair elections.

Robert Gorden , 11 hours ago

Poroshenko is just a cat's paw for the Anglo American Empire. His purpose is to help stir up Russophobia internationally. While this simultaneous acts to rally Russia hating Ukrainians to support him politically. Virtually anything that Poroshenko were to say or do against Russia will be propagated by the MSM as the newest form of Russian aggression. The Cold Warriors in the West need this feeding to grind their war axes with, and the Ukrainian people need to be constantly reminded how much they hate Russia so as to support their ruling elite presently in place.

Cheryl Brandon , 11 hours ago

Is it Russia's fault that 95% of Ukraines do not support the IMF/USA/NWO puppet/ lapdog Petro Poroshenko? Serves USA right, go on installing Chocolate Kings into POWER/ They often meltdown big time/

Danko Kovačević , 11 hours ago (edited)

Russia repaid it's debt to IMF (Russian debt/GDP is only 18% vs US 108% and Ukrainian 81%) and they sold all of their US treasury bonds last month, so they are decoupling from $$$ because the learned a hard lesson in 2008 world crisis caused by Wall Street greed! And another one is coming! btw Ukraine owes Russia billions of $$$ for gas and oil Russia provided them since they separated, and if Russia stops delivering gas via Ukraine and use only Nord Stream 1, Turk Stream 1, China Ukraine and half of the Europe will either froze (and meteorologist are announcing harsh and long winter) or have a huge bills for heating and power!!! Ukraine can not sustain itself without IMF, World bank and EU loans (that will strangle them as they did it to Argentina) and yet they are investing in military, dividing people between ethnicity, religion, banning Russian LANGUAGE (same thing happened in Germany after 1933.) and religion (Azov brigades are beating people in churches, looting them and closing them), banning Ukrainian born Russian to form parties and representatives, they already banned existing ones and they are doing the same thing to Hungarian minority (7%) and Hungary and Orban are mad as hell, they even struck on Polish community, and majority of Poles are ultra extreme Russophobes!!! It is a good thing Putin is not taking a bait to strike back, and Petro "the Thief" Poroshenko act, declaring Martial Law, just because he is polling 8%, 3+ months before the election (under Martial Law, he has all the power in the country, he can postpone elections, he can arrest anyone, he can close news outlets, Martial Law is a complete tyranny and yet we haven't heard nothing about that from human rights activists and NGO's or Western MSM. If Putin did the same they would be screaming for months!!!). And Putin explained it clearly and calmly, Poroshenko didn't declare martial law when Crimea voted to leave Ukraine and join Russia, during now 4 years of fighting in Donbass, but after this stunt he is doing it??? LOL

Doctor Attitude 2 , 9 hours ago (edited)

So basically, Poroshenko sent a boat to provoke Russia so he can find a cheap "excuse" to impose martial law AND get some NATO support. The same-old line from him: "Oh look 😮, Russian aggression in the Ukraine! NATO, liberate us! Help my Ukrop forces fight off the Russian commies aggravating our territorial integrity!" (Complete sarcasm). Poroshenko genocides his own Donbass people. Pathetic Nazi soyboy Poroshenko is. A dictator that is nothing without NATO support. As an American who thinks like Russel Bentley, I am behind Russia and Donbass 4 Life 🇷🇺

sam calvinist , 8 hours ago

i think russia must now further go inside ukraine and must reclaim eastern ukraine which is made up of majority russian speaking citizens.

cisa93 , 6 hours ago

Putin has a point. They've had these issues along the border since 2014 and yet no martial law has been imposed? Now because of a small skirmish in the Kerch Strait, Poroshenko has imposed martial law and at least 10 regions/provinces....looks suspicious 😒

Tdorr Engineer , 7 hours ago

Mr Putin rely on Russian people and act for Russian people therefore as you see he always comes on top ,,,any leader try to depend on outsider will be doomed to failure, for example look at these Arab countries around Persian Gulf ,they are always looser ,,,I wish this russian president more success ,,,

Dava Golino , 6 hours ago

Russia should not have to explain anything to anyone about this act, th Crimean coast all day. At 7 AM, a group of three military ships of the Ukrainian Navy sailed from Odessa and illegally crossed the Russian border. Russia has been more than patient with this whole act of aggression in the area. it is wrong that NATO is helping the George Soros created, illegal government. bravo, good job Russia.of course america is on the wrong side AGAIN because of the EU, BANKER CONTROLLED NATO THIS Sucks. Had hope the President would stop caving in to this. The EU OWNS the UN, BOTH NEED TO BE EXPUNGED. get our troops out of NATO and BRING them HOME to DEFEND the BORDERS and CLEAN OUT the sanctuary cities. NATO is also under the EU, Banker influence. get out of Russia's backyard and protect our backyard's ,Russia is not an enemy, they are fighting the same EU agenda garbage that GEORGE SOROS FUNDS.OF COURSE WHILE THIS IS HAPPENING the same Soros, EU controlled UN is pushing the invasion on our southern border.

Max Alesund , 11 hours ago

We are waiting for the year 2024! I am sure that it will be the little-known person from Putin's environment. Some counselor. I would very much like to see Surkov as head of Russia. Surkov is also Putin's adviser. And it is a kind of Minister for Donbass, South Ossetia and Abkhazia. This is the only person in the country who drank and did not agree with Putin. He does not threaten to become a photocopy of Putin. Very cool dude! Very! Strong personality! No less clever than Putin. Something even cooler. If he becomes President then Western whores will only have to pray! :)

D J , 9 hours ago

US Coup Government morale is quite low, and I imagine it's a similar situation in Ukraine. After Obama... You could imagine, though there is so much to cheer about, that everyone could agree on, like George Washington. A few handsome George (or Martha) Washingtons, a handful even, and I don't think US morale could take it, after they've really gone so far from their own basic ideology.

Francois Ducon , 3 hours ago

Poor Ukrainians! They live under Dictatorship, a " state " completely subjected to american and NATO agenda... And of course, too ignorant to understand that their (Western puppet) government is playing like a kid with a videogame and will do everything possible and impossible to go in War against Russia " wishing " big casualties to be present on worldwide news. I really hope that men (If they have some) will wake-up soon and overthrow this illegitimate government placed by the West after a coup d'état if remembered. Unfortunately we all know that War exists because some honorable people, government, medias and NGO wants it. To Russians: Be more than ready because West need and want not just a War but a TOTAL ANNIHILATION of the Christian Russia. Пака😉

Antonio Estupinian , 32 minutes ago

I dont know how the ucranian people like this obbey dog of the USA. Poroshenko is a criminal, nothing more, and Great Putin explain clearly which are the leit motiv of his coward actuation. The angry thing of all this, is the blind support of the european vassals follows instructions from Washington to the criminal actions of this psicotic criminal Poroshenko. Here in Guatemala. in radio France they say that " Rusia atacked the ships of Ucrania" but without any explication about the fact that ucranian ships traspased the territorial waters of Rusia...and that is only a partialized new to demonize Rusia even more on the brains of the lobotomized citizens of europe, thas is the reason to introduce the article # 13 in its laws...Grande RUSIA, armate hasta los dientes que estos psicoticos otaneros y su jefe hampon terrorista no dejaran de fastidiarte...

[Nov 29, 2018] 'Kiev would get away even with eating babies' Putin says Kerch Strait standoff is a provocation

See also Putin at VTB Investment Forum Using the Dollar as a Weapon Will Backfire SPECTACULARLY for the US - YouTube
Putin at VTB Investment Forum Using the Dollar as a Weapon Will Backfire SPECTACULARLY for the US - YouTube
Notable quotes:
"... "The authorities in Kiev are selling anti-Russian sentiment with quite a success today. They have nothing else to do," ..."
"... If they demand babies for breakfast, they would probably be served babies. They'd say: 'Why not, they are hungry, what is to be done about it?' This is such a shortsighted policy and it cannot have a good outcome. It makes the Ukrainian leadership complacent, gives them no incentive to do normal political work in their country or pursue a normal economic policy. ..."
Nov 29, 2018 | www.rt.com

"The authorities in Kiev are selling anti-Russian sentiment with quite a success today. They have nothing else to do," Putin said during a business forum in Moscow. The Russian president said it seemed like Kiev could get away with anything as far as foreign nations supporting Ukraine's anti-Russian stance were concerned.

If they demand babies for breakfast, they would probably be served babies. They'd say: 'Why not, they are hungry, what is to be done about it?' This is such a shortsighted policy and it cannot have a good outcome. It makes the Ukrainian leadership complacent, gives them no incentive to do normal political work in their country or pursue a normal economic policy.

Putin said the incident, which ended in Russia's seizure of three Ukrainian ships and Kiev imposing a partial martial law in the country, was a "dirty game" by Poroshenko, who needs to suppress his political opponents ahead of the March presidential election. He assured that the Ukrainian side was responsible for the escalation of tensions, since the incident was a deliberate and planned provocation by the Ukrainian Navy.

Also on rt.com Ukraine security chief admits intel agents were on board Navy ships during Kerch standoff

The Russian leader also defended the border guards, who stopped the Ukrainian ships from passing through the Kerch Strait, saying it was their duty as sworn service members to do so and that if they failed they could face a tribunal for defying an order.

[Nov 29, 2018] Truth is dangerous! Former Homeland Security official laments RT's truth-telling

Cover your ears and avert your eyes, Americans: RT is attempting to weaken the United States using a whole host of nefarious methods – such as telling the truth, a former Homeland Security official has warned.
Notable quotes:
"... Cover your ears and avert your eyes, Americans: RT is attempting to weaken the United States using a whole host of nefarious methods – such as telling the truth, a former Homeland Security official has warned. ..."
"... "corrupt and broken" ..."
"... "taken over by politicians and the elite for their own corrupt ends." ..."
"... They feature every week, stories from our courts all across the country to demonstrate the truth of this statement. I don't think there's anything in there that is a lie. ..."
"... "using information operations, sometimes enabled by cyber, to weaken us" ..."
"... Oftentimes, they don't even have to make things up, they simply replay, they take kernels of truth, they take existing divisions and weaknesses of our own making and reproduce them, put them out, retweet them indefinitely in a very one-sided way. ..."
Nov 28, 2018 | www.rt.com
Cover your ears and avert your eyes, Americans: RT is attempting to weaken the United States using a whole host of nefarious methods – such as telling the truth, a former Homeland Security official has warned. Sounding the alarm during a panel discussion at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, Suzanne Spaulding, former deputy secretary for cyber and infrastructure protection at DHS in the Obama administration, said that one of RT's methods when it comes to its influencing vulnerable Americans is telling the truth.

As an example of this worrisome and effective truth-telling, Spaulding cited one of RT's weekly shows, America's Lawyer, hosted by prominent US trial lawyer Mike Papantonio. The theme of this show , Spaulding revealed to the audience is that the US justice system is "corrupt and broken" and has been "taken over by politicians and the elite for their own corrupt ends."

They feature every week, stories from our courts all across the country to demonstrate the truth of this statement. I don't think there's anything in there that is a lie.

A truthful news show dedicated to exposing the corruption of the American justice system? Terrifying!

Adversaries like Russia, Spaulding said, are "using information operations, sometimes enabled by cyber, to weaken us" – but the reason it can be so effective, she said, is that the information doesn't have to be a lie.

Oftentimes, they don't even have to make things up, they simply replay, they take kernels of truth, they take existing divisions and weaknesses of our own making and reproduce them, put them out, retweet them indefinitely in a very one-sided way.

Now, to many Americans, this might sound like some worthwhile viewing, but to Spaulding it is still "propaganda" because the ultimate objective is to weaken the country by revealing its flaws and stirring up trouble.

[Nov 28, 2018] Leaked Transcript Proves Russiagaters Have Been Right All Along (Spoiler Not Really)

Nov 28, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via Medium.com,

A transcript of exchanges between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin has been leaked to National News Conglomerate by an anonymous source within the Kremlin . We here at NNC have confirmed the authenticity of this document using the same rigorous verification process we've been using to authenticate the evidence for all our other reporting on Russia's involvement in the 2016 US elections over the last two years. These verification methods include hunches, gut intuitions, and an introspective assessment of the way our feelings feel. The following exchanges revealed in this transcript provide the clearest evidence yet that the President of the United States has been in collusion with the Russian government for years.

This introduction has been authored by the editorial board of the National News Conglomerate. Obey.

11/9/2016

Trump: I have done as you commanded, my dominant and all-powerful lord. I have conspired with your hackers to steal the election, and now I'm going to be president! I want to thank you for not releasing that video footage of those Russian prostitutes I hired to urinate on a bed the Obamas once slept in. If that had come out it would have offended and alienated a lot of people, which is something I never normally do.

Putin: Yes that is an old KGB tactic called kompromat, a word which only extremely intelligent people know about. Keep this line of communication open. As long as you do as I command, your pee pee tape will remain secret.

Trump: One thing I'm curious about though my lord, if you don't mind my asking. If you already had an army of hackers targeting Democratic Party emails, why did you need my help? Couldn't you just have hacked the emails and published them on your own? Why did you need me to interact with them at all?

Putin: Moral support, mainly. We don't need to get into specifics.

Trump: Oh okay.

~

1/20/2017

Trump: I'm in! Whew! I was really worried that leaked dossier would be the end of me! What are my instructions, my lord?

Putin: Begin introducing racism and division to the United States. America has never experienced these things before, and it will shock and disorient them. With the US divided against itself, your nation will be far too weak to stand against my plans of total world domination.

Trump: That's a really tall order! America has always been a harmonious place where everyone gets along up until today. I'll try my best though. Anything else?

Putin: Yes, make them distrust your nation's large media outlets and convince them that the US intelligence community is often dishonest.

Trump: That will be really hard because those institutions have always been trusted for their unparalleled integrity. But your wish is my command, oh lord.

~

4/7/2017

Putin: Bomb a Syrian airbase.

Trump: What? Really? Aren't they, like, your allies?

Putin: Exactly. This will throw inquisitive minds off the scent. We can't have them finding out about that pee tape.

Trump: Are you sure? Some people are saying that chemical attack looks like it could have been perpetrated by the many terrorist factions in Syria and not the government.

Putin: Who cares? Have you seen how relentless they've been in exposing us?? Have you never watched Rachel Maddow? That woman is a psychic bloodhound, masterfully sniffing out the truth at every turn! We can't afford to take chances. Do as I say.

Trump: Yes sir.

Putin: And see if you can arrest that WikiLeaks guy.

6/28/17

Trump: Hey do you want me to do anything about Montenegro's addition to NATO?

Putin: No. NATO expansion is good.

Trump: Uhhh okay.

~

6/28/17

Trump: Who do you want tapped for Ukraine envoy?

Putin: Kurt Volker.

Trump: Volker? He hates you! He's like the biggest Russia hawk ever.

Putin: We still need to throw the Russiagaters off the scent. We're playing 3-D chess here. This is high-level disinformation, or dezinformatsiya as very smart people call it. I want as many Russia hawks in your administration as possible.

Trump: 3-D chess? Alright. I guess you know what you're doing.

~

8/30/17

Putin: Shut down the Russian consulate in San Francisco and throw out a bunch of diplomats. That will confuse the hell out of them.

~

11/21/17

Putin: Now approve the sale of arms to Ukraine. Not even Obama would do that. This will throw them off the trail for sure.

~

1/1/18

Putin: Happy new year. Force RT and Sputnik to register as foreign agents.

~

1/29/18

Putin: Make sure your Nuclear Posture Review greatly escalates its aggressive posture toward Russia.

~

2/14/18

Putin: Happy Valentine's Day. Don't worry about those Russians your guys killed in Syria.

~

2/19/18

Putin: Send a fleet of war ships to the Black Sea.

~

3/25/18

Putin: Better expel a few dozen diplomats over the Skripal thing.

~

4/5/18

Putin: Sanction a bunch of Russian oligarchs.

~

4/10/18

Putin: Bomb Syria.

Trump: What?? Again?

Putin: Yes.

Trump: What the hell, man? Why'd you even recruit me if you're just going to have me do everything all the Russia hawks want?

Putin: Well, you know how I told you we were playing 3-D chess against the Russiagate investigation?

Trump: Yeah?

Putin: Well that wasn't enough. Now we're playing 4-D chess.

Trump: Fine, whatever, I don't care. Just don't release my pee tape.

~

7/17/18

Trump: Oh man. They're really making a major fuss about that summit. What should I do?

Putin: Play it cool. Don't let them know about our secret diabolical plot.

Trump: Right. Remind me what that was again?

Putin: Make Jim Acosta feel really, really sad.

~

9/2/18

Putin: Have you arrested Julian Assange yet?

Trump: Working on it.

~

10/20/18

Putin: I like John Bolton's idea. Pull out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.

~

11/25/18

Putin: Make sure your administration loudly and aggressively backs Ukraine in our Kerch Strait spat.

Trump: OMFG this is getting too weird. Are you just trolling me? What the hell is this?

Trump: Hello?

Trump: Are you there?

Trump: Answer me!

Putin: 5-D chess.

* * *

Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website , which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following my antics on Twitter , throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal , buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone , or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers .

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

The little voice inside my head , 18 minutes ago link

Just encountered a Denzel Washington interview from last year, how true it's become, like the Guardian and Wikileaks "story"

Doesn't matter if it's true or not, just be the first , sell it!

DisorderlyConduct , 1 hour ago link

LOL.

...bomb a Syrian airbase...

This is awesome.

francis scott falseflag , 1 hour ago link

Hey, that's where I stopped reading. Did I miss anything?

The little voice inside my head , 13 minutes ago link

Not to sound like a Russian misinformation dude, but I was watching some of Putin's interviews and the dude speaks in common sense terms.

ABC asks Putin about meddling in the elections.

And the one with Megyn Kelly:

Was this interview ever broadcasted in full in the US?

Element , 1 hour ago link

NNC logo?

bfellow , 1 hour ago link

Really Element? Does Keyser have to add a /s at the end to realize he was being sarcastic?

cbxer55 , 1 hour ago link

CNN backwards. LOL!!!!

[Nov 28, 2018] Greenwald Goes Ballistic On Politico Theory Guardian's Assange-Manafort Story Was Planted By Russians

Nov 28, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Greenwald Goes Ballistic On Politico "Theory" Guardian's Assange-Manafort Story Was Planted By Russians

by Tyler Durden Wed, 11/28/2018 - 20:25 105 SHARES

After The Guardian attempted to shovel what appears to be a wholly fabricated story down our throats that Trump campaign manager met with Julian Assange at the London Embassy - Politico allowed an ex-CIA agent to use their platform to come up with a ham-handed cover story ever; Russia tricked The Guardian into publishing the Manafort-Assange propaganda.

To that end, The Intercept 's Glenn Greenwald (formerly of The Guardian ) ripped Politico an entirely new oriface in a six-part Twitter dress down.

Greenwald also penned a harsh rebuke to the Guardian 's "problematic" reporting in a Tuesday article titled: "It Is Possible Paul Manafort Visited Julian Assange. If True, There Should Be Ample Video and Other Evidence Showing This."

In sum, the Guardian published a story today that it knew would explode into all sorts of viral benefits for the paper and its reporters even though there are gaping holes and highly sketchy aspects to the story.

It is certainly possible that Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, and even Donald Trump himself "secretly" visited Julian Assange in the Embassy. It's possible that Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong Un joined them.

And if any of that happened, then there will be mountains of documentary proof in the form of videos, photographs, and other evidence proving it . Thus far, no such evidence has been published by the Guardian. Why would anyone choose to believe that this is true rather than doing what any rational person, by definition, would do: wait to see the dispositive evidence before forming a judgment?

The only reason to assume this is true without seeing such evidence is because enough people want it to be true. The Guardian knows this. They knew that publishing this story would cause partisan warriors to excitedly spread the story, and that cable news outlets would hyperventilate over it , and that they'd reap the rewards regardless of whether the story turned out to be true or false. It may be true. But only the evidence, which has yet to be seen, will demonstrate that one way or the other. - Glenn Greenwald, The Intercept

In short, The Guardian tried to proffer a load of easily disprovable claims - which if not true, are pure propaganda. Once it began to blow up in their face, Politico let an ex-CIA operative try to save face by suggesting Russia did it . Insanity at its finest.

zerofucks , 20 minutes ago link

loving the lies being drug into the light

anyone who believes the MSM about anything is a fool

and i am shocked an ex-CIA guy was behind the fake news

CatInTheHat , 20 minutes ago link

GG neatly tied in the nefarious connection between the CIA and the media together

This CIA a criminal organization that has lied us into every single war. Yet the Resistance upholds the CIA as beyond reproach.

TODAY THEY LOOK AS FOOLS.

nidaar , 25 minutes ago link

They jumped the shark. This show has its days numbered.

Chuckster , 30 minutes ago link

We don't need the Russians re-chewing our cabbage. We have enough natural born idiots to screw the facts up.

Hippocleides , 34 minutes ago link

Someone ate my sandwich out of the work fridge, God damn Russians!

The Terrible Sweal , 38 minutes ago link

It looks like Greenwald is just about at the point of capitulation and accepting that the entire MSM is utterly fraudulent.

Alternative , 42 minutes ago link

Up next: Guardian journos suffer from Novichik poisoning but survive this lethal nerve gas.

Badsamm , 45 minutes ago link

That still doesn't clear the Guardian from lawsuits.

xrxs , 39 minutes ago link

Maybe discovery will reveal their 'sources.'

Jung , 46 minutes ago link

Ever since Alan Rusbridger. left the Guardian as Chief Editor and made room for Assange and Snowden etc., it seems that they have been infiltrated by the CIA and Luke H. gets attention for his stories and Russia-hatred. The ENglish have been conditioned to hate Russia and the Guardian will do anything to discredit Russia with whatever silly stories. Now they are begging for money to survive: well, NO, because you went along with fake news to get some money: corrupt, unlike Alan Rusbridger, Assange, Manning and Snowden.

Captain Nemo de Erehwon , 49 minutes ago link

Up next: The Russians put up the Guardian to launch a slimy and obviously stupid defence to discredit them.

Later: The Russians are making my hands move on the keys and making me type this nonsense.

BankSurfyMan , 48 minutes ago link

when you masturbate on the HEDGE...

5onIt , 50 minutes ago link

Doesnt matter, 1/2 of our population is convinced, that our governmemt would never do to the USA. what they do to other countries for the past 60 years.

BankSurfyMan , 50 minutes ago link

Assange took another dump today, he is full of **** just like the rest of us ??? Doom 2019! Your *** is on FIRE! neXT!

bluebird100 , 54 minutes ago link

Wow Glenn is discovering that the Fake News is real after all! He's such a hack

JimmyJones , 34 minutes ago link

Yep, the Russian Collusion / interference is so weak. Look at this story, it's breaking and will be huge. Epstine's dirty details released, Muller looks pretty bad.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/11/robert-muellers-fbi-gave-orgy-island-billionaire-epstein-light-sentence-today-details-were-released-on-his-widespread-child-sex-abuse/

[Nov 28, 2018] Escobar Kerch Strait Chaos Looks More Like A Cheap Ploy By Desperate Neocons by Pepe Escobar

Notable quotes:
"... Predictably, Western media has been complaining again about "Russian aggression", a gift that keeps on giving. Or blaming Russia for its over-reaction, overlooking the fact that Ukraine's incursion was with military vessels, not fishing boats. Russian resolve was quite visible, as powerful Ka-52 "Alligator" assault helicopters were promptly on the scene. ..."
"... Still, Kiev – "encouraged" by Washington – insists on militarizing the Sea of Azov. Misinformed American hawks emerging from the US Army War College even advocate that NATO should enter the Sea of Azov – a provocative act as far as Moscow is concerned. The Atlantic Council , which is essentially a mouthpiece of the powerful US weapons industry, is also pro-militarization. ..."
"... Rostislav Ischchenko , arguably the sharpest observer of Russia-Ukraine relations, in a piece written before the Kerch incident, said: "Ukraine itself recognized the right of Russia to introduce restrictions on the passage of ships and vessels through the Kerch Strait, having obeyed these rules in the summer." ..."
"... Thus a Kerch Strait incident designed as a cheap provocation, bearing all the hallmarks of a US think-tank ploy, is automatically interpreted as "Russian aggression", regardless of the facts. Indeed, any such tactics are good when it comes to derailing the Trump-Putin meeting at the G20 in Buenos Aires this coming weekend. ..."
"... Poroshenko's approval rate barely touches 8% . His chances of being re-elected, assuming polls are credible, are virtually zero. ..."
"... But the US would lose no sleep if they had to throw Poroshenko under the (Soviet) bus ..."
"... Poroshenko, wallowing in despair, may still ratchet up provocations. But the best he can aim at is NATO attempting to modernize the collapsing Ukrainian navy – an endeavor that would last years, with no guarantee of success. ..."
"... Feel sorry for the Ukrainians being used as tools. Before Obama-Hillary-and Pedo Biden overthrew the Democratically elected leader, people were just doing their normal stuff. Now they hide in bomb shelters and search for food at night. ..."
"... But vainglorious folks are not paying attention, and this is dangerous especially for Europe, and the pretenders in the Middle East, if it goes down, they too will go down, it's that simple and why? Because of military and security imperatives. Russia will take down, and out, any US or European ally in the M.E. lest, they open themselves up to flanking maneuvers. ..."
"... Putin already intimated of the current Russian mindset thus: "If you like, let's all go explain ourselves to God!". Do the neocons feel confident of cogent explanation to God, or do they even wish to come before him? I doubt it, and very much so, seeing as their hands are stained with the blood of innocents, and their hearts,plot evil continuously. ..."
"... And this my friends, viscerally demonstrates the wisdom of the founding fathers, especially Washington, who warned of "entangling alliances", buttressed a few generations later, by John Q. Adams, who re-advised "Go not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy". Pay attention folks, pay attention to the architects of the Republic, who knew what they were building, better than the "war loving battle dodging" chickenhawks who love to sip exotic drinks, while instructing others to kill for their depraved egos. ..."
"... NATO delenda est!... ..."
"... Poroshenko & Allies have a team of experts who spend 24/7 searching for the next provocation. Reminds me of May on this Brexit fiasco. ..."
"... This US coup of the Ukraine is turning out to be more hassle than its worth, a bankrupt corrupt country, installing Neo Nazi's as the first government was a big mistake, it could have been handled with more finesse, instead it was like a bull in a China shop. ..."
"... Poroshenko decided to not let a good crisis go to waste. ..."
"... Geopolitics and realpolitik, bitches. So much happening in the gas domain in Eastern Europe. Nordstream, Turkish Stream, BP stream, US LNG facilities in Greece, Poland and Germany, Russia supplying LNG to Germany, Cyprus-Greece-Israel drilling in the East Med, Turkey drilling in Cyprus EEZ. In the meanwhile I see gas infrastructure being build allover Eastern Europe, connecting houses to the grid. Gas heating and energy production is coming to Eastern Europe in addition to supplying Western Europe. The stakes are enormous and that what this is all about and that is why we can see more of this. ..."
"... Most of the Ukraine people hate Poroshenko and he knows he can't win re-election. He threatens Trump with dirt on Manafort, and demands Trump start a war. Or what? is the left in the US going to impeach Trump with the supposed Poroshenko dirt on Manafort? ..."
"... He was installed by Soros during the "Purple Color Revolution" (agent provocateurs with tiki torches getting violent to force a coup against the prior sitting President, a tactic attempted in Charlottesville only a couple years later) ..."
"... " Poroshenko's approval rate barely touches 8% . His chances of being re-elected, assuming polls are credible, are virtually zero. Little wonder he used the Kerch to declare martial law, effective this Wednesday, lasting for 30 days and bound to be extended. Poroshenko will be able to control the media and increase his chances of rigging the election. ..."
Nov 28, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Asia Times,

The West is complaining about Russian 'aggression' but the incident looks more like a cheap ploy by a desperate Ukrainian president and US conservatives keen to undermine Trump's next pow-wow with Putin...

When the Ukrainian navy sent a tugboat and two small gunboats on Sunday to force their way through the Kerch Strait into the Sea of Azov, it knew in advance the Russian response would be swift and merciless.

After all, Kiev was entering waters claimed by Russia with military vessels without clarifying their intent.

The intent, though, was clear; to raise the stakes in the militarization of the Sea of Azov.

The Kerch Strait connects the Sea of Azov with the Black Sea. To reach Mariupol, a key city in the Sea of Azov very close to the dangerous dividing line between Ukraine's army and the pro-Russian militias in Donbass, the Ukrainian navy needs to go through the Kerch.

Yet since Russia retook control of Crimea via a 2014 referendum, the waters around Kerch are de facto Russian territorial waters.

Kiev announced this past summer it would build a naval base in the Sea of Azov by the end of 2018. That's an absolute red line for Moscow. Kiev may have to trade access to Mariupol, which, incidentally, also trades closely with the People's Republic of Donetsk. But forget about military access.

And most of all, forget about supplying a Ukrainian military fleet in the port of Berdyansk capable of sabotaging the immensely successful, Russian-built Crimean bridge .

Predictably, Western media has been complaining again about "Russian aggression", a gift that keeps on giving. Or blaming Russia for its over-reaction, overlooking the fact that Ukraine's incursion was with military vessels, not fishing boats. Russian resolve was quite visible, as powerful Ka-52 "Alligator" assault helicopters were promptly on the scene.

Washington and Brussels uncritically bought Kiev's "Russian aggression" hysteria, as well as the UN Security Council, which, instead of focusing on the facts in the Kerch Strait incident, preferring to accuse Moscow once again of annexing Crimea in 2014.

The key point, overlooked by the UNSC, is that the Kerch incident configures Kiev's flagrant violation of articles 7, 19 and 21 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea .

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fbackandalive%2Fvideos%2F254116231915896%2F&show_text=0&width=560

Russian lakes

I happened to be right in the middle of deep research in Istanbul over the geopolitics of the Black Sea when the Kerch incident happened.

For the moment, it's crucial to stress what top Russian analysts have been pointing out in detail. My interlocutors in Istanbul may disagree, but for all practical purposes, the Kerch Strait, the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea, in military terms, are de facto Russian lakes.

At best, the Black Sea as a whole might evolve into a Russia-Turkey condominium, assuming President Erdogan plays his cards right. Everyone else is as relevant, militarily, as a bunch of sardines.

Russia is able to handle anything – naval or aerial – intruding in the Kerch Strait, the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea in a matter ranging from seconds to just a few minutes. Every vessel moving in every corner of the Black Sea is tracked 24/7. Moscow knows it. Kiev knows it. NATO knows it. And crucially, the Pentagon knows it.

Still, Kiev – "encouraged" by Washington – insists on militarizing the Sea of Azov. Misinformed American hawks emerging from the US Army War College even advocate that NATO should enter the Sea of Azov – a provocative act as far as Moscow is concerned. The Atlantic Council , which is essentially a mouthpiece of the powerful US weapons industry, is also pro-militarization.

Any attempt to alter the current, already wobbly status quo could lead Moscow to install a naval blockade in a flash and see the annexation of Mariupol to the People's Republic of Donetsk, to which it is industrially linked anyway.

This would be regarded by the Kremlin as a move of last resort. Moscow certainly does not want it. Yet it's wise not to provoke the Bear.

Cheap provocation

Rostislav Ischchenko , arguably the sharpest observer of Russia-Ukraine relations, in a piece written before the Kerch incident, said: "Ukraine itself recognized the right of Russia to introduce restrictions on the passage of ships and vessels through the Kerch Strait, having obeyed these rules in the summer."

Yet, after the US Deep State's massive investment even before the protests on the Maidan in Kiev in 2014 that wrested Ukraine away from Russian influence a possible entente cordiale between the Trump administration and the Kremlin, with Russia in control of Crimea and a pro-Russian Donbass, could only be seen as a red line for the Americans.

Thus a Kerch Strait incident designed as a cheap provocation, bearing all the hallmarks of a US think-tank ploy, is automatically interpreted as "Russian aggression", regardless of the facts. Indeed, any such tactics are good when it comes to derailing the Trump-Putin meeting at the G20 in Buenos Aires this coming weekend.

Meanwhile, in Ukraine, chaos is the norm . President Petro Poroshenko is bleeding. The hryvnia is a hopeless currency. Kiev's borrowing costs are at their highest level since a bond sale in 2018. This failed state has been under IMF "reform" since 2015 – with no end in sight.

Poroshenko's approval rate barely touches 8% . His chances of being re-elected, assuming polls are credible, are virtually zero. Little wonder he used the Kerch to declare martial law, effective this Wednesday, lasting for 30 days and bound to be extended. Poroshenko will be able to control the media and increase his chances of rigging the election.

But the US would lose no sleep if they had to throw Poroshenko under the (Soviet) bus. Ukrainians will not die for his survival. One of the captains at the Kerch incident surrendered his boat voluntarily to the Russians. When Russian Su-25s and Ka-52s started to patrol the skies over the Kerch Strait, Ukrainian reinforcements instantly fled.

Poroshenko, wallowing in despair, may still ratchet up provocations. But the best he can aim at is NATO attempting to modernize the collapsing Ukrainian navy – an endeavor that would last years, with no guarantee of success.

For the moment, forget all the rhetoric, and any suggestion of a NATO incursion into the Black Sea. Call it the calm before the inevitable future storm

ExpatNL , 24 seconds ago link

Imagine Russian PT boats cruising the straits between USA and Cuba and straying INTENTIONALLY into US waters.

CheapBastard , 7 minutes ago link

Feel sorry for the Ukrainians being used as tools. Before Obama-Hillary-and Pedo Biden overthrew the Democratically elected leader, people were just doing their normal stuff. Now they hide in bomb shelters and search for food at night.

Scipio Africanuz , 17 minutes ago link

The Bear has set the Trap, let NATO or whoever walk into it, but do so if they must, with the knowledge that it's a one way ticket to hell. The Russians have been warning for years now, that one day, they'll have had enough and then..

But vainglorious folks are not paying attention, and this is dangerous especially for Europe, and the pretenders in the Middle East, if it goes down, they too will go down, it's that simple and why? Because of military and security imperatives. Russia will take down, and out, any US or European ally in the M.E. lest, they open themselves up to flanking maneuvers.

So someone, in this case, Europe, better tell, or force Poroshenko to tone it down, the Russians are not kidding around, this is not a game, this is existential serious! Ukraine will go down, along with Poland, and the Baltics, if Russia feels, in any way, shape, or manner, provoked beyond reason. Note the word "feels", some may play games, thinking it's just a game, Russia is NOT playing games, not at all, not one bit.

Putin already intimated of the current Russian mindset thus: "If you like, let's all go explain ourselves to God!". Do the neocons feel confident of cogent explanation to God, or do they even wish to come before him? I doubt it, and very much so, seeing as their hands are stained with the blood of innocents, and their hearts,plot evil continuously.

Minsk was the best the Russians are willing to offer, from here on, the offer reduces exponentially, with every provocation until there's no offer, just RAW discipline!

Word enough for the prudent...

Scipio Africanuz , 6 minutes ago link

And this my friends, viscerally demonstrates the wisdom of the founding fathers, especially Washington, who warned of "entangling alliances", buttressed a few generations later, by John Q. Adams, who re-advised "Go not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy". Pay attention folks, pay attention to the architects of the Republic, who knew what they were building, better than the "war loving battle dodging" chickenhawks who love to sip exotic drinks, while instructing others to kill for their depraved egos.

The biggest victims in all their failed adventures, are the US troops, folks who are deployed to fight wars which does nothing to secure the Republic, but instead weakens the Republic, deprives the military of honor, capable recruits, and the economy, of treasure, vigor, and vitality.

NATO delenda est!...

WTFUD , 21 minutes ago link

Poroshenko & Allies have a team of experts who spend 24/7 searching for the next provocation. Reminds me of May on this Brexit fiasco.

When you're up ****-creek, Kerch, in this instance, you clutch at straws as the boat sinks.

With regard to NATO, they can't be involved as they're not imbeciles. Russia has provided the s300/Other upgraded Missile Defense Systems to Syria, effectively nullifying Israeli's illegal incursions via Lebanon airspace, so what protections will Putin have in place for one of his most strategic jurisdictions in his country? Rhetorical.

Aussiekiwi , 21 minutes ago link

This US coup of the Ukraine is turning out to be more hassle than its worth, a bankrupt corrupt country, installing Neo Nazi's as the first government was a big mistake, it could have been handled with more finesse, instead it was like a bull in a China shop.

On the Crimea, let us all remember the following :

95% of Crimean's voted yes to joining Russia a result that western agencies, media etc have accepted as correct, This makes it and the waters surrounding it Russian, I suspect the US would have a similar reaction if a couple of Russian gun boats cruised unannounced into a US port and started doing donuts.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26606097

DEMIZEN , 19 minutes ago link

Things changed. Syria is a clusterfuck, Turks switched side, KSA pulled financing out of Russian soft belly.

Obama fucked it up and trump has to clean up.

DEMIZEN , 28 minutes ago link

****** porkoshenko wont last until spring. ukraine is not a chocolate factory. a country too big for a chess piece. the best move for trump is to stay out or invite willy wonka to pay a visit to us embassy and chop him off lol

Joe A , 39 minutes ago link

Poroshenko decided to not let a good crisis go to waste.

Geopolitics and realpolitik, bitches. So much happening in the gas domain in Eastern Europe. Nordstream, Turkish Stream, BP stream, US LNG facilities in Greece, Poland and Germany, Russia supplying LNG to Germany, Cyprus-Greece-Israel drilling in the East Med, Turkey drilling in Cyprus EEZ. In the meanwhile I see gas infrastructure being build allover Eastern Europe, connecting houses to the grid. Gas heating and energy production is coming to Eastern Europe in addition to supplying Western Europe. The stakes are enormous and that what this is all about and that is why we can see more of this.

MK ULTRA Alpha , 1 hour ago link

The cheap shot at Trump at the same time demanding action from Trump was Poroshenko's threat the Ukraine has dirt on Manafort. How low can Poroshenko go?

Most of the Ukraine people hate Poroshenko and he knows he can't win re-election. He threatens Trump with dirt on Manafort, and demands Trump start a war. Or what? is the left in the US going to impeach Trump with the supposed Poroshenko dirt on Manafort?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/interview-ukrainian-president-asks-trump-deliver-pointed-message-putin-n940716

"The Ukrainian leader also told NBC News that his country is ready to cooperate with the investigation of former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort , who spent nearly a decade in Ukraine as a consultant to a pro-Moscow political party.

But asked if the Ukraine has any evidence that Manafort was getting paid directly by the Kremlin, Poroshenko said, "I am not personally connected with the process.""

Nayel , 1 hour ago link

Not just undermine Trump/Putin meetings, but the big picture, Ukrainian "President" declaring martial law to suspend the election he would no doubt lose.

He was installed by Soros during the "Purple Color Revolution" (agent provocateurs with tiki torches getting violent to force a coup against the prior sitting President, a tactic attempted in Charlottesville only a couple years later)

" Poroshenko's approval rate barely touches 8% . His chances of being re-elected, assuming polls are credible, are virtually zero. Little wonder he used the Kerch to declare martial law, effective this Wednesday, lasting for 30 days and bound to be extended. Poroshenko will be able to control the media and increase his chances of rigging the election.

[Nov 28, 2018] Leaked Transcript Proves Russiagaters Have Been Right All Along (Spoiler Not Really)

Nov 28, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via Medium.com,

A transcript of exchanges between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin has been leaked to National News Conglomerate by an anonymous source within the Kremlin . We here at NNC have confirmed the authenticity of this document using the same rigorous verification process we've been using to authenticate the evidence for all our other reporting on Russia's involvement in the 2016 US elections over the last two years. These verification methods include hunches, gut intuitions, and an introspective assessment of the way our feelings feel. The following exchanges revealed in this transcript provide the clearest evidence yet that the President of the United States has been in collusion with the Russian government for years.

This introduction has been authored by the editorial board of the National News Conglomerate. Obey.

11/9/2016

Trump: I have done as you commanded, my dominant and all-powerful lord. I have conspired with your hackers to steal the election, and now I'm going to be president! I want to thank you for not releasing that video footage of those Russian prostitutes I hired to urinate on a bed the Obamas once slept in. If that had come out it would have offended and alienated a lot of people, which is something I never normally do.

Putin: Yes that is an old KGB tactic called kompromat, a word which only extremely intelligent people know about. Keep this line of communication open. As long as you do as I command, your pee pee tape will remain secret.

Trump: One thing I'm curious about though my lord, if you don't mind my asking. If you already had an army of hackers targeting Democratic Party emails, why did you need my help? Couldn't you just have hacked the emails and published them on your own? Why did you need me to interact with them at all?

Putin: Moral support, mainly. We don't need to get into specifics.

Trump: Oh okay.

~

1/20/2017

Trump: I'm in! Whew! I was really worried that leaked dossier would be the end of me! What are my instructions, my lord?

Putin: Begin introducing racism and division to the United States. America has never experienced these things before, and it will shock and disorient them. With the US divided against itself, your nation will be far too weak to stand against my plans of total world domination.

Trump: That's a really tall order! America has always been a harmonious place where everyone gets along up until today. I'll try my best though. Anything else?

Putin: Yes, make them distrust your nation's large media outlets and convince them that the US intelligence community is often dishonest.

Trump: That will be really hard because those institutions have always been trusted for their unparalleled integrity. But your wish is my command, oh lord.

~

4/7/2017

Putin: Bomb a Syrian airbase.

Trump: What? Really? Aren't they, like, your allies?

Putin: Exactly. This will throw inquisitive minds off the scent. We can't have them finding out about that pee tape.

Trump: Are you sure? Some people are saying that chemical attack looks like it could have been perpetrated by the many terrorist factions in Syria and not the government.

Putin: Who cares? Have you seen how relentless they've been in exposing us?? Have you never watched Rachel Maddow? That woman is a psychic bloodhound, masterfully sniffing out the truth at every turn! We can't afford to take chances. Do as I say.

Trump: Yes sir.

Putin: And see if you can arrest that WikiLeaks guy.

6/28/17

Trump: Hey do you want me to do anything about Montenegro's addition to NATO?

Putin: No. NATO expansion is good.

Trump: Uhhh okay.

~

6/28/17

Trump: Who do you want tapped for Ukraine envoy?

Putin: Kurt Volker.

Trump: Volker? He hates you! He's like the biggest Russia hawk ever.

Putin: We still need to throw the Russiagaters off the scent. We're playing 3-D chess here. This is high-level disinformation, or dezinformatsiya as very smart people call it. I want as many Russia hawks in your administration as possible.

Trump: 3-D chess? Alright. I guess you know what you're doing.

~

8/30/17

Putin: Shut down the Russian consulate in San Francisco and throw out a bunch of diplomats. That will confuse the hell out of them.

~

11/21/17

Putin: Now approve the sale of arms to Ukraine. Not even Obama would do that. This will throw them off the trail for sure.

~

1/1/18

Putin: Happy new year. Force RT and Sputnik to register as foreign agents.

~

1/29/18

Putin: Make sure your Nuclear Posture Review greatly escalates its aggressive posture toward Russia.

~

2/14/18

Putin: Happy Valentine's Day. Don't worry about those Russians your guys killed in Syria.

~

2/19/18

Putin: Send a fleet of war ships to the Black Sea.

~

3/25/18

Putin: Better expel a few dozen diplomats over the Skripal thing.

~

4/5/18

Putin: Sanction a bunch of Russian oligarchs.

~

4/10/18

Putin: Bomb Syria.

Trump: What?? Again?

Putin: Yes.

Trump: What the hell, man? Why'd you even recruit me if you're just going to have me do everything all the Russia hawks want?

Putin: Well, you know how I told you we were playing 3-D chess against the Russiagate investigation?

Trump: Yeah?

Putin: Well that wasn't enough. Now we're playing 4-D chess.

Trump: Fine, whatever, I don't care. Just don't release my pee tape.

~

7/17/18

Trump: Oh man. They're really making a major fuss about that summit. What should I do?

Putin: Play it cool. Don't let them know about our secret diabolical plot.

Trump: Right. Remind me what that was again?

Putin: Make Jim Acosta feel really, really sad.

~

9/2/18

Putin: Have you arrested Julian Assange yet?

Trump: Working on it.

~

10/20/18

Putin: I like John Bolton's idea. Pull out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.

~

11/25/18

Putin: Make sure your administration loudly and aggressively backs Ukraine in our Kerch Strait spat.

Trump: OMFG this is getting too weird. Are you just trolling me? What the hell is this?

Trump: Hello?

Trump: Are you there?

Trump: Answer me!

Putin: 5-D chess.

* * *

Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website , which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following my antics on Twitter , throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal , buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone , or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers .

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

The little voice inside my head , 18 minutes ago link

Just encountered a Denzel Washington interview from last year, how true it's become, like the Guardian and Wikileaks "story"

Doesn't matter if it's true or not, just be the first , sell it!

DisorderlyConduct , 1 hour ago link

LOL.

...bomb a Syrian airbase...

This is awesome.

francis scott falseflag , 1 hour ago link

Hey, that's where I stopped reading. Did I miss anything?

The little voice inside my head , 13 minutes ago link

Not to sound like a Russian misinformation dude, but I was watching some of Putin's interviews and the dude speaks in common sense terms.

ABC asks Putin about meddling in the elections.

And the one with Megyn Kelly:

Was this interview ever broadcasted in full in the US?

Element , 1 hour ago link

NNC logo?

bfellow , 1 hour ago link

Really Element? Does Keyser have to add a /s at the end to realize he was being sarcastic?

cbxer55 , 1 hour ago link

CNN backwards. LOL!!!!

[Nov 28, 2018] Moscow NATO Playing a 'Dangerous Tit-For-Tat Game' in the Ukraine

Notable quotes:
"... Legally speaking I'm not quite sure, because there are a number of protocols that are at play here. On top of everything is the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the designation of territorial waters and shelfs, economic zones and so forth. ..."
"... And declaring martial law, what the heck does that have to do with naval affairs? Many suspect that he's reading his polls and knowing that he's in trouble, political trouble, and so he's trying to start something that will help his political chances. ..."
"... And since NATO and the European Union and the United States have been rather in the front of the foxhole claiming that Ukraine is right in many of these disputes, then you've got the recipe for real problem. You've got NATO's ships, U.S. ships, other ships that might challenge Russia in these waters. ..."
"... NATO, so close to Russia's borders–I mean, incorporating former Warsaw Pact members into NATO. Putin's reactions in that regard are perfectly understandable. I'm not saying that the United States and NATO shouldn't take measures to defend themselves. But why does that include taking over for alliance purposes, now? Commercial purposes, the EU, the common market, so forth and so on, that's another deal. But taking them over for alliance purposes–we forget. It's a political alliance, surely. But it's also a military alliance, and that's the way Moscow has to look at it. ..."
"... So their military exercises since about 2013 have been postulated on a NATO invasion of the near abroad, and even a NATO invasion of Russia proper. So this is the way they do their military exercises. Clearly they're not doing that because they think spending all that money on that preposterous possible situation is just that: preposterous. They think it's a probability, or at least a possibility. ..."
"... And to fight over Ukraine–you remember the old expression "Who would die for Danzig?" I keep asking myself, if Americans really were asked to fulfill Article 5 of the NATO treaty for a place like Tbilisi, or even a place like Riga, or any of those countries we've now expanded NATO into or proposed expanding NATO into, like Ukraine, what would Americans say when they were told that full conscription was in process, full mobilization was in process, war taxes are going to be levied, and we're going to war for a city you can't even pronounce and couldn't find on a map? That's what we're talking about. And oh, by the way, Russia is generally speaking cheek and jowl with that city, whereas we're ten thousand miles away. ..."
"... Yaas, let us continue with the fear-uncertainty-doubt support of the Neocon Narrative and whatever Great Game BS the CIA and US Global Network-Centric Battlespace Management have up their dirty sleeves for that part of the world. On the way to Full Spectrum Dominance, of course. Because that is the Manifest Destiny of We The People, new? ..."
"... Excuse me, but what is a US military training range doing in Ukraine? How would US like it if a Russian range were established in Sonora or Coahuila? And if a tourist notices it, don't you think Russians are painfully aware of the situation? But they should just accept it, as US/Nato creep ever closer to the Russian border. The amount of hypocrisy seems boundless ..."
"... I'm waiting for NSA Bolton or SecState Pompeo to claim that Poroshenko made a miscalculation. Isn't that approximately what former SecState Condoleezza Rice said about Saakashvili's shelling of Russian peace keeping troops in South Ossetia, Georgia? So if Poroshenko's aim was internal politics, it was one big belly-flop. ..."
"... Poroshenko got his martial law, but for only 30 days. It will not cover Ukraine entirely, but only regions subject to "Russian aggression," including Vinnytsia, Luhansk, Mykolayiv, Odesa, Sumy, Kharkiv, Chernihiv, Kherson, Sea of Azov. Well, just about any region that voted for former President Viktor Yanukovych. ..."
"... Right, most of those regions were bases of support for the pro-Moscow Party of Regions. This is simply broadcasting an intention to commit election fraud. The declaration of martial law is a means to an end. ..."
"... On the other hand, it appears that some of the crew on the Ukrainian vessels were from Ukrainian secret service, one wonders why. ..."
"... There have been op-ed pieces in major US media advocating blowing the bridge up. Russia has to take that seriously. ..."
"... Who needs a mere op-ed when you have the Atlantic Council? http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/russia-s-provocations-in-the-sea-of-azov-what-should-be-done ..."
"... If Mexico formed an alliance with Russia, how would the US respond? (Cuban missile crisis?) From the point of view of traditional great power politics, it's that simple. Monroe Doctrine and all that. Russia has been fighting the West in this area from at least 1610. We're poking around their neighborhood and no great power can tolerate such arrogance. ..."
Nov 28, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

... ... ...

GREG WILPERT: The Ukraine is saying that Russia has no reason to hold its ships, and Russia is accusing the Ukraine of intentionally creating a provocation in order to draw NATO from what we know of what happened. Who seems to be in the more solid position here, legally speaking?

LARRY WILKERSON: Legally speaking I'm not quite sure, because there are a number of protocols that are at play here. On top of everything is the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the designation of territorial waters and shelfs, economic zones and so forth. And the right, even though those things might intersect, to pass through what are called International Straits or international waters, no matter how narrow they may be. Then you've also got, underneath that, various protocols and agreements that have been made. In this case, I think there's one between Russia and Ukraine. There are probably other agreements that impact on the Black Sea, which, as you know, the strait they were trying to pass through is to the north of, or the north side of.

So there are all kinds of international agreements and bilateral agreements about passage through this area. The legal aspects of it really, I think, would boil down to, in many respects, who has Crimea? Ukraine still claims Crimea. Russia now claims Crimea. And if they claim Crimea, then their territorial water, even with unclassed–with respect to unclassed, its definition of straights and so forth–then that territorial water, that is territorial water, even under [unclass], is Russian. If it's Ukranian, it's Ukrainian. The Russians are claiming it's Russian and Ukrainian ships violated it. Ukrainians, I guess, are complaining or asserting the fact that they think it's still Ukrainian, and so they didn't violate anything.

But all of that, the legal aspects of it, really boil down–as Mao Zedong said, international law comes out the barrel of a gun. Who has the biggest gun? And in this case, Russia has the biggest gun. It's also complicated by the fact that Poroshenko has elections coming up, I think, in March. And declaring martial law, what the heck does that have to do with naval affairs? Many suspect that he's reading his polls and knowing that he's in trouble, political trouble, and so he's trying to start something that will help his political chances.

So you have so many different variables here that it's hard to say who's right and who's wrong, except to say that you have to determine whether Russia is right about Ukraine, and ultimately about Crimea, or whether Ukraine is right about Ukraine. And since NATO and the European Union and the United States have been rather in the front of the foxhole claiming that Ukraine is right in many of these disputes, then you've got the recipe for real problem. You've got NATO's ships, U.S. ships, other ships that might challenge Russia in these waters. And there again, though, power comes out of the barrel of a gun. Russia has the advantage because it's operating on interior lines from this area, very close to its own homeland, close to its ports in Crimea. And the United States or NATO would be operating, in the case of NATO, at quite a distance from the United States, quite a distance from its home water.

So this is just another incident in Putin's ability to poke his fingers in the eyes of NATO, and the United States in particular, since the United States and NATO started encroaching on his near abroad.

GREG WILPERT: Right. Actually, that's something I was going to ask as well, is the extent to which this might be also driven by domestic politics within Russia. Clearly something's happening within the Ukraine in terms of the elections and the fact that, as you mentioned, that Poroshenko is behind in the polls. But Putin's own popularity might be being impacted right now due to a declining economic situation. So I'm just wondering, what role do you think that those domestic factors within Russia might be at play, that this might be a way for him to recuperate some of his own popularity?

LARRY WILKERSON: Well, no question about it. We say domestic politics drives most of Donald Trump's decision making. And I think that's a correct interpretation. It also has an impact on people like Poroshenko and Putin. And the plunge in oil prices, my goodness. I looked at a sign this morning, it was $2.19. I never thought I'd see that price again here in Williamsburg. The plunge in oil prices, the benchmarks, has probably hurt Russia pretty badly. They are, as one person said to me recently, a gas station with a capital in Moscow. So Putin, if he's sinking in the polls, this would be something for him to do that has worked for him in the past. Stick your fingers in Ukraine, which by extension is sticking your fingers in the U.S.'s eyes, and you get a bump in the polls. I wouldn't put it past him at all.

GREG WILPERT: Now, in 2014, Russia held a referendum in Crimea and ended up annexing the peninsula after it said that 97 percent of the population voted to join Russia. Now, looking at the Kerch Strait between Crimea and Russia, which Ukraine needs in order to access its southeastern coast from the Black Sea, wasn't such a crisis inevitable sooner or later?

LARRY WILKERSON: Oh, it was. And we have had a number of incidents where a Russian patrol craft, FSB or otherwise, Navy, had come out and challenged Ukrainian ships in accordance with, they said, the agreement that they saw. And they actually, as I understand it, boarded some of these ships and searched them, and caused them commercial damage, if you will, because they held them up so long; didn't let them get under way for a long period of time. So this is, this has been working up to this more dramatic confrontation that we have now, I think, for some time. And it's the tit for tat game that Putin is playing with Kiev, and in essence that NATO, the EU, and the United States are playing with Moscow. Ukraine is Ukraine, and it is going to be a member of NATO and a member of the EU. And Moscow says over, over our prostrate body will the whole country of Ukraine–and we've taken Crimea, thank you very much, and have invested with little green men and other things in much of Eastern Ukraine. So over my prostate body will that happen.

And Putin has, as I said, the interior lines. It's much easier for him to operate than it is for NATO or the United States to operate. And as long as that situation exists he's going to continue to test this. He's not the equal of us in combination, but he is in a position to test us all the time, and he's become brilliant at it. He goes into a fissure here, a fissure there, a crack here, a crack there. And if he's challenged resolutely, he just kind of holds what he's got or he backs up a little bit. But if he finds more mobility he widens it, deepens it, and exploits it; Syria being a perfect example. And Syria being almost to the point where it's exterior lines for him.

LARRY WILKERSON: So I have to admire the guy for the brilliance with which he does this, and then, as you said, he turns it into domestic political gain.

GREG WILPERT: But now turning, actually, to the West, the conflict between pro-Russian separatists and pro-European government in the Ukraine has been all about an international conflict already, with constant intervention from NATO, as well as from Russia. Now, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg issued a declaration, actually, where he declared, quote, full support for Ukraine's territorial integrity and sovereignty. However, the Ukraine is not yet part of NATO, and thus there's no obligation to defend the Ukraine. But Stoltenberg's statement makes it sound like NATO would do just that, defend the Ukraine should a conflict escalate. Now, what do you think? Is that a wise position for the West to take, considering the potential for escalation and outright war?

LARRY WILKERSON: Well, I don't think it's been a wise position for the West, quote-unquote, to take, the United States leading the way. But it's pushed itself and its alliance, NATO, so close to Russia's borders–I mean, incorporating former Warsaw Pact members into NATO. Putin's reactions in that regard are perfectly understandable. I'm not saying that the United States and NATO shouldn't take measures to defend themselves. But why does that include taking over for alliance purposes, now? Commercial purposes, the EU, the common market, so forth and so on, that's another deal. But taking them over for alliance purposes–we forget. It's a political alliance, surely. But it's also a military alliance, and that's the way Moscow has to look at it.

So their military exercises since about 2013 have been postulated on a NATO invasion of the near abroad, and even a NATO invasion of Russia proper. So this is the way they do their military exercises. Clearly they're not doing that because they think spending all that money on that preposterous possible situation is just that: preposterous. They think it's a probability, or at least a possibility.

So we're giving them the incentive to do this. And to fight over Ukraine–you remember the old expression "Who would die for Danzig?" I keep asking myself, if Americans really were asked to fulfill Article 5 of the NATO treaty for a place like Tbilisi, or even a place like Riga, or any of those countries we've now expanded NATO into or proposed expanding NATO into, like Ukraine, what would Americans say when they were told that full conscription was in process, full mobilization was in process, war taxes are going to be levied, and we're going to war for a city you can't even pronounce and couldn't find on a map? That's what we're talking about. And oh, by the way, Russia is generally speaking cheek and jowl with that city, whereas we're ten thousand miles away.

GREG WILPERT: All right. Well, we're going to leave it there for now. I was speaking to Larry Wilkerson, Distinguished Professor at the College of William and Mary. Thanks again, Larry, for having joined us today.

LARRY WILKERSON: Thanks for having me on.

GREG WILPERT: And thank you for joining The Real News Network. If you like Real News Network stories such as this one, please keep in mind that we've started our winter fundraiser and need your help to reach our goal of raising $400,000. Every dollar that you donate will be matched. Unlike practically all other news outlets, we do not accept support from governments or corporations. Please do what you can today.

rd , November 27, 2018 at 10:09 am

The US has had the "Monroe Doctrine" for two centuries now. I think Russia views Ukraine as within its own "Monroe Doctrine" zone.

While, I would not wish the Russian government on anybody I know, the same can be said for many CIA-backed governments over the past 65 years, including many in Central America where the current migrant caravan is coming from. The Ukrainian government is not a bed of roses either.

This is a pretty sticky situation with a lot of pride on the Russian side that is in play.

pretzelattack , November 27, 2018 at 10:26 am

moon has a good post.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/11/russia-blocks-ukrainian-navy-from-militarizing-the-sea-of-azov.html#comments

Wat , November 27, 2018 at 10:27 am

Well, I like Larry Wilkerson generally, but shouldn't we always be reminding ourselves of the context of Western aggression in which the Ukrainian/Russian drama is playing out? That would be including the broken promise to refuse NATO membership to former Warsaw Pact countries if Russia agreed to accept German reunification, the American-sponsored regime change coup in Kiev of Feb. 'f4, and the ethnic cleansing that followed in Eastern Ukraine at the hands of literal Ukrainian Neo-Nazis who honor Stepan Bandera?

vlade , November 27, 2018 at 12:58 pm

Bandera wasn't a nazi per se. Bandera was a fanatical Ukrainian nationalist, who was happy to ally with anyone to fight Soviet Russia (and Poles). He was even for a time in a Nazi concentration camp with the intention to be liquidated. UPA (Ukrainian Insurgent Army), which emerged from Bandera-led Organization of Ukrainian Nationalist, were Ukrainian nationalistic partisans, who fought Germans (once it was clear that they would not creat a Ukrainian state) and Soviets alike (and Poles).

He was a convenient person for Soviet Russia to paint as a Nazi, because otherwise they would have to acknowledge strong nationalistic feelings in Ukraine, which would imply that it wasn't happy to be part of the Soviet Union. Which just wasn't on. It was supposed to be one happy family.

Before commenting on Ukraine, I recommend one studies the history of it, from original Kiev Russ via Polish-Lithuanian Duchy and subsequent partitions, to what was happening there in 1930 (although reading on the Soviet induced famine really requries guts – but its crucial in understanding of the ethnic composition of the current Eastern Ukraine), WW2 and immediately post WW2.

Most people have an idea of the problems Balkans suffer as great powers rolled this and that way, but Ukraine has not dissimilar unhappy history. Which does not excuse it – but may stop people talking total nonsense and buying propaganda as truth.

Tobin Paz , November 27, 2018 at 2:59 pm

When you talk like a nazi, think like a nazi, and commit genocide like a nazi you probably are a nazi:

Who Was Stepan Bandera?

Although Bandera and his followers would later try to paint the alliance with the Third Reich as no more than "tactical," an attempt to pit one totalitarian state against another, it was in fact deep-rooted and ideological. Bandera envisioned the Ukraine as a classic one-party state with himself in the role of führer, or providnyk, and expected that a new Ukraine would take its place under the Nazi umbrella, much as Jozef Tiso's new fascist regime had in Slovakia or Ante Pavelić's in Croatia.

Olga , November 27, 2018 at 3:53 pm

In some sense, you're right about his not being a nazi. He was, in fact, far worse than German nazis, who put him under a house arrest. "Bandera remains a highly controversial figure today in Ukraine, with some hailing him as a liberator who fought both the Soviets and the Nazis, while trying to establish an independent Ukraine, while others consider him to be a Nazi collaborator and a war criminal, who was, together with his followers, largely responsible for the Volhynian genocide and partially for the Holocaust in Ukraine." And that is just Wikipedia.
When your followers commit atrocities that make even German nazis blush – what exactly are you?

Olga , November 27, 2018 at 4:05 pm

Good to recommend studying history! And when one does, one learns that there was no such thing as Ukraine(a), until Lenin and Stalin spliced it together from assorted parts of the czarist empire: the western part (which was under Poland/Litva, Habsburgs, and taken over Poland again); the centre (ancient Kievskaja Rus); and the eastern part (which was Russian Novorosija). They were also, in part, concerned about balancing the ratio of workers and peasants on this newly formed territory. U. had its own seat at the UN – a ploy by those pesky Russkies to increase the strength of the socialist bloc.
Under the USSR, U. was perhaps the most prosperous republic, highly developed and productive. How far it has fallen since 1991 is worse than a Greek tragedy.

pretzelattack , November 27, 2018 at 2:58 pm

and another one!
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/11/ukraine-poroshenko-initiated-clash-with-russia-to-gain-dictatorial-powers-he-failed.html#more

flora , November 27, 2018 at 11:13 am

Unmentioned are Nordstream, Nordstream II, Southstream (this year, 2018,Bulgaria proposed restarting the Southstream construction project) and Turkish Stream. Southstream maps through Ukraine. Turkish Stream maps through Turkey and the Black Sea & Azov Sea.

Interesting coincidence.

flora , November 27, 2018 at 11:58 am

adding: the Southstream project is now mapped to go through Bulgaria, immediately north of Ukraine, for obvious reasons. Both routes require crossing the Black Sea.

(tin foil hat time:

  1. a shooting war in the Black Sea might shut gas pipeline projects down.
  2. a shooting war in the Black Sea/Balkans will play hell with the Eurozone and it's reliance on Russian gas for winter heating at a reasonable price and reliable delivery.
  3. a shooting war in the Black Sea/Balkans will play hell with the Eurozone's cohesion and with NATO's cohesion, as if there aren't already enough problems with the Eurozone's cohesion.
  4. NATO alliance to thwart Russian military aggression is one thing; NATO alliance to force purchase of US products (gas, in this case) to the detriment of European NATO members is something else.

removes tin foil hat.)

flora , November 27, 2018 at 12:07 pm

typo: Bulgaria is south of Ukraine.

David May , November 27, 2018 at 11:37 am

Purely anecdotal,
Last week a Ukrainian waitress who had been just back to visit family told me that she could not believe the amount of US military in Ukraine. She said that people felt that "something was going to happen". Sorry I couldn't get more details.

Bill Smith , November 27, 2018 at 3:47 pm

"believe the amount of US military in Ukraine"

Could be pretty subjective if her parents lived next to one of the training ranges.

I wonder if this is in the hundreds or thousands.

For example, the "Clear Sky" depicted as "huge" happened earlier this month.

"Clear Sky brought together nearly 1,000 soldiers and airmen from nine partner nations, including Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania and the United Kingdom."

JTMcPhee , November 27, 2018 at 5:19 pm

Yes, it's all just subjective, and just one little anecdote, of course. So easy to dismiss.

There's this, however, https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2017/06/08/amid-russia-tensions-us-army-continues-to-build-up-ukrainian-forces-training-center/ , among a lot of other bits of available info on US fiddling in Ukraine if one does a search in open sources. And let's remember that the "combat training center" is reported to be manned (and woman'd, too, of course) by rotating brigades of US and of course other "Western Alliance" troops. A "standard NATO brigade" is what, like 3 to 5,000 troops? So sayeth Wiki, at least: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigade

Imagine a Russian "combat training post" of brigade size in, say, Quebec, maybe teaching the separatists there the fine points of maneuver-and-fire and hand to hand combat and how to conduct war in an urban area and how to use the weapons the goddam Rooskies would be shipping to them, and spreading the Gospel of Putinism amongst the population there to assist said Separatists to achieve their goal of, you know, separation. Not the best analogy, of course, given the Ukraine-Russia geography and the presence of "NATO" forces of all kinds on as much of the periphery of Russia as or War Leaders and Sneaky Petes have been able to manage, but might be worth a thought.

Yaas, let us continue with the fear-uncertainty-doubt support of the Neocon Narrative and whatever Great Game BS the CIA and US Global Network-Centric Battlespace Management have up their dirty sleeves for that part of the world. On the way to Full Spectrum Dominance, of course. Because that is the Manifest Destiny of We The People, new?

Hey, business as usual, and it's killing not only retail quantities of people in many lands, but the whole living part of the planet -- albeit at a pace that the mopes can hardly notice, among all the other claims on their attention and lives. Because that's what the people who make and sell and deploy and create "doctrines" for the use of and know how to run a regime change know how to do, right?

Olga , November 27, 2018 at 7:03 pm

Excuse me, but what is a US military training range doing in Ukraine? How would US like it if a Russian range were established in Sonora or Coahuila? And if a tourist notices it, don't you think Russians are painfully aware of the situation? But they should just accept it, as US/Nato creep ever closer to the Russian border. The amount of hypocrisy seems boundless

Wilkerson is often correct, but all those comments about Putin poking the the eye of the US if just plain gibberish. The Russians did not start this one.

Peter , November 27, 2018 at 10:00 pm

For the past two months, Eastern European media have been reporting on large US Army troop movements through their countries heading to Ukraine. Trains after trains full of tanks and other equipment.

Peter Pan , November 27, 2018 at 12:23 pm

Poroshenko got his martial law, but for only 30 days. It will not cover Ukraine entirely, but only regions subject to "Russian aggression," including Vinnytsia, Luhansk, Mykolayiv, Odesa, Sumy, Kharkiv, Chernihiv, Kherson, Sea of Azov. Well, just about any region that voted for former President Viktor Yanukovych.

The Lviv region certainly isn't covered under martial law. Even though they're rabid Russophobes, I suspect that the nationalist Svoboda Party and the white supremacist Right Sektor would've put on their paranoid tin-foil-hats and figured that Poroshenko was going to use martial law to go after them. If Poroshenko had gotten what he wanted then there might have been an internal insurrection and possibly Poroshenko hanging from a lamp post (or on the lam with his frenemy, Mikheil Saakashvili, former president of Georgia & former governor of Odesa region).

I'm waiting for NSA Bolton or SecState Pompeo to claim that Poroshenko made a miscalculation. Isn't that approximately what former SecState Condoleezza Rice said about Saakashvili's shelling of Russian peace keeping troops in South Ossetia, Georgia? So if Poroshenko's aim was internal politics, it was one big belly-flop.

Andrew Watts , November 27, 2018 at 1:53 pm

Poroshenko got his martial law, but for only 30 days. It will not cover Ukraine entirely, but only regions subject to "Russian aggression," including Vinnytsia, Luhansk, Mykolayiv, Odesa, Sumy, Kharkiv, Chernihiv, Kherson, Sea of Azov. Well, just about any region that voted for former President Viktor Yanukovych.

Right, most of those regions were bases of support for the pro-Moscow Party of Regions. This is simply broadcasting an intention to commit election fraud. The declaration of martial law is a means to an end.

It kinda seems like a dubious proposition to think that anybody in Kiev or Washington wouldn't anticipate the Russian response when they poked the Bear. So I'm not convinced that Poroshenko flopped.

I guess we'll find out in the next thirty days.

vlade , November 27, 2018 at 12:44 pm

Just purely legally, the Ukraina and Russia had 2003 treaty with Russia on unimpeded access to Azov sea (for both parties). That was unchallenged until now – when Ukraine tried to send naval vessels there, not just civilian. I believe they provided an upfront note. Note that Ukraine still has a non-trivial chunk of coastline in Azov sea, and as such has legal right to send its vessels there – especially if they give substantial warning.

Russian bridge between Kerch and Crimea blocks largest ships from Mariupol, which is an important export port for Ukraine.

On the other hand, it appears that some of the crew on the Ukrainian vessels were from Ukrainian secret service, one wonders why.

There are NO good guys in this conflict.

Andrey Subbotin , November 27, 2018 at 4:36 pm

No, they did not provide an up front note, that's the entire point of controversy. By now
* FSB published captured orders to cross the straights *stealthily*
* FSB published interviews with sailors, who confirm this
* The radio conversations between Russians and Ukrainian ships are out, and Russians keep saying "back off and file your request properly, just like you did last time"
* About a month ago two Ukrainian navy ships did file correctly, and passed with no problems

Under current rules you have to file your request 48 hours in advance, take a pilot to pass under the bridge, and pass at assigned time in transit queue

Olga , November 27, 2018 at 6:05 pm

More on the matter at https://voelkerrechtsblog.org/ukraine-v-russia-passage-through-kerch-strait-and-the-sea-of-azov/

flora , November 27, 2018 at 12:54 pm

Automatic Earth has an interesting post about this event:
https://www.theautomaticearth.com/2018/11/you-are-well-inside-the-matrix/

As for the 'attacks' the other day, the Guardian of all outlets explains: "Since the completion of the bridge over the Kerch strait, Moscow has demanded that Ukrainian ships not only give notice of their intention to transit the strait but request permission, a change that Kiev has rejected. According to western diplomats, the dispatch of the three ships was intended to assert freedom of navigation.."

Sure, you can claim that Russia has no right to ask Ukraine to ask for permission to the Sea of Azov, but then Kiev should have protested that demand, not send three armed vessels to ignore the demand and sail through anyway. That is called provocation.

And Ukraine provoking Russia is a bad idea. Unless you're NATO, and you want Ukraine as a member. And unless you're the chocolate billionaire who took over the government and now has an approval rating in the single digits with elections coming up in March. Question: how much chocolate do Ukrainians eat?

jsn , November 27, 2018 at 1:12 pm

There have been op-ed pieces in major US media advocating blowing the bridge up. Russia has to take that seriously.

Quentin , November 27, 2018 at 1:53 pm

Really? And where have those op-eds appeared?

witters , November 27, 2018 at 4:06 pm

Who needs a mere op-ed when you have the Atlantic Council? http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/russia-s-provocations-in-the-sea-of-azov-what-should-be-done

Olga , November 27, 2018 at 4:13 pm

source: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/ukraine-should-blow-up-putins-crimea-bridge

Bruce Weiers , November 27, 2018 at 2:07 pm

Russia just spent several billions on a combined highway – railway bridge over the Kerch strait. That bridge relieves the threat of siege by Ukraine (and not incidentally is reducing the cost of living in Ukraine and increasing tourism adding to the sense of economic vitality that makes accession to Russia popular locally). But, of course, if Ukraine can routinely route warships and tugs thru the strait under the bridge, without so much as a by-the-by to Russia, that is itself an important threat to Russia's hold on Crimea.
.
These are realist and economic not legal considerations. But, it is an important aspect of the context of political context underneath the narrative of who did what to whom when. Crimea used to be one of highest income provinces of Ukraine and then overnight it became one of the poorest in European Russia, which is in a good position to give Crimea prosperity and income growth. There is plenty of cause for dissatisfaction with Russia, particularly among the Crimean Tartars whose official leader is now a Ukrainian politician. But, absent war, the Russians are likely to hold on to Crimea with the somewhat grudging approval of the vast majority of residents.

MyLessThanPrimeBeef , November 27, 2018 at 4:15 pm

For history buffs (from Wikipedia again):

The Crimean Khanate, a vassal state of the Ottoman Empire, succeeded the Golden Horde and lasted from 1449 to 1783.[33] In 1571, the Crimean Tatars attacked and sacked Moscow, burning everything but the Kremlin.[34] Until the late 18th century, Crimean Tatars maintained a massive slave trade with the Ottoman Empire, exporting about 2 million slaves from Russia and Ukraine over the period 1500–1700.[35]

And a lot more at Wikipedia's Crimea article.

Do Crimean Tartars dream of independence for themselves?

Olga , November 27, 2018 at 5:53 pm

They may dream, but ain't gonna happen. OTOH, they are getting a marvelous new, grand mosque in Simferopol. Generally, relations between Russians and Tatars in Crimea are cordial.

MyLessThanPrimeBeef , November 27, 2018 at 6:12 pm

Yes, it will be hard for one reason, if not more – most of the Crimean Tartars are in Turkey today (millions of them there, while there are only about 250,000 in Crimea, since the inhumane and lawless removal by the USSR in 1944.)

Olga , November 27, 2018 at 7:35 pm

Inhumane – may be in the eye of the beholder. The reason they were moved was because they sided with the Gerrman nazis during WWII and actively supported them against the Russian population. Among their oh-so-humane acts was betraying the locations of groups that organized to fight against the nazis. They hid in the mountains, and the ever-humane Tatars disclosed it all to the Germans.

Given that they spent centuries raiding what are today Ukrainian and Russian territories and poaching the population to sell people into slavery, I am puzzled they tolerate them at all. Half of Stambul is blonde and blue-eyed as a result of those raids. Better to know a bit of history then repeat debunked factoids.

The Rev Kev , November 27, 2018 at 10:02 pm

I was reading stories back in 2014 how the Turks gathered some of their Jihadist fighters from Syria and were going to fly them into Crimea on two airliners to come down hard on separatists with the Muslim Tatars as a base for them. If true, then this would explain why the Russians shut down the airport in Crimea as a priority when they made their move. Probably have to wait years more before the real story comes out about those times.

BlueMoose , November 27, 2018 at 3:38 pm

What a bunch of f*cktards, all of them (gov't critters). Normal people in Ukraine, Poland, Russia, etc just want to get on with a normal life. But no, we have to have ideologies and subterfuge. Gov't should just be a service provided and paid for by our taxes. Nothing else. And they should learn the meaning of the words: cooperate, compromise, civility for the benefit of their citizens.

Rant off.

Olga , November 27, 2018 at 4:11 pm

Several commentators were predicting that Porky Porosh would resort to one or more provocations in the run up to the election – mainly on account of his garnering no more than 8-9% popularity rating. There really is not too much mystery to this whole affair.

The Rev Kev , November 27, 2018 at 6:04 pm

So I was reading how Poroshenko was briefing Pompeo on progress in trying to get martial law passed ( https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/11/mps-block-poroshenko-he-flees-from-the-rada-to-his-facebook-page-phones-pompeo/ ) and then I began to wonder. The Ukrainian elections are on 29th March next year so even if Poroshenko got his full 60 days of martial law, there was still a long gap until the elections itself so why the odd timing.
Then the penny dropped. There is the G-20 Buenos Aires summit starting soon and Putin is supposed to be meeting Trump while there. Trump has not fallen in line with people like Nikki Halley but said: "We do not like what's happening, either way, we don't like what's happening and hopefully it will get straightened out." So he is not onboard with another raft of sanctions nor refusing not to meet Putin. Was this all then an attempt to spike that meeting hence the early timing?

Andrey Subbotin , November 27, 2018 at 7:19 pm

There must be a period of 3-4 months between the end of martial law and elections for candidate registration, agitation etc. For elections to happen on time it must end in early January 2019

Once martial law is in place, the president can prolong it indefinitely with no legal limitations. Unhappiness of western backers might be a practical constraint, but that can be mitigated through more provocations. So expect something happening in a month – parliament initially only authorized 30 days, and Poroshenko needs to create a reason to prolong

Paul Hirschman , November 27, 2018 at 8:24 pm

If Mexico formed an alliance with Russia, how would the US respond? (Cuban missile crisis?) From the point of view of traditional great power politics, it's that simple. Monroe Doctrine and all that. Russia has been fighting the West in this area from at least 1610. We're poking around their neighborhood and no great power can tolerate such arrogance.

JTMcPhee , November 27, 2018 at 10:04 pm

And recall another recent "incident," January 2016, those Mope Marines on "riverine command boats" somehow "straying into Iranian waters' near the military base on Farsi Island. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_U.S.–Iran_naval_incident First, "mechanical failure," then "navigation error," then punishment of 9 of the 10 Marines for dereliction or something. And there was, drum roll, a Command Investigation, that found mumble mumble grunt sigh Could not have been one of those probing operations that the Great (sic) Powers do, or the Israel -ites, to check out the capabilities and responses and electronic and "kinetic" equipage of "the enemy," by sending sacrificial mopes Into Harm's Way, could it? Naaahh.

Even worse, if it was just Mope Gyrenes demonstrating the actual incompetence in Warcraft of Our World's Greatest Military, let's remember that there's 4,000 nuclear warheads on sub-launched and land-based multiple warhead ICBMs and in the bomb bays of the "ready line" bombers and attack aircraft of "NATO," and thousands more on the Evil Soviet Russian side, and China with a couple hundred, and Yisrael with 200 to 600 more. All poised for quick if not instantaneous launch, increasingly under control of Advanced Artificial Intelligence Genius Command and Control Systems ™, https://thebulletin.org/landing_article/the-promise-and-peril-of-military-applications-of-artificial-intelligence/ . All waiting, impatiently in many cases, especially the Revelationist Xtian Air Farce officers and enlisted men, for action, I might add. Waiting for some little 'incident" like the ginned-up Ukraine idiocy or that oopsie by the Jarheads in January 2016 to trigger the cascade of interlocking events and doctrines and directives and Operational Plans that means I can stop churning my guts over the environment my child and grandchildren would otherwise find themselves having to try to survive in

Effing stupid humans. Top to bottom.

[Nov 28, 2018] Porky is just throwing his weight about, and while it might be considerable, it has little significance to NATO. The US warmongers would love to get something started, but the last thing most Americans want is a major war with a nuclear power that has already said "I'm done fucking around."

Notable quotes:
"... This is probably the most worrying development of the Martial Law thing. Porky is a despicable opportunist but he seems to be a predictable and practical despicable opportunist. He will wind up the tension and provocation song and dance for his NATO/US/EU sponsors in order to start the flow of delicious $$$s. ..."
"... Turchinov though, is a true believer. Or seems to be. And there is nothing more dangerous in a tense situation that one who believes his own rhetoric. I can easily see Turchinov being one to turn the nationalist rhetoric into reality and go off on a crusade to cleanse the moskals or die trying. ..."
Nov 28, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman November 25, 2018 at 9:59 pm

Agreed; although the Hal Turner site says there is a full-on naval battle in progress between the Ukrainian Navy and the Russian Navy, there is actually nothing of the sort. There is great excitement that it may flash into a full-blown war in Europe, but that isn't going to happen, either. Not now, anyway. Ukraine, properly speaking, doesn't really have a Navy; they only have one major surface combatant that is seaworthy, if I remember correctly, and a hodgepodge of smaller gunboats – Ukraine's ability to project power at sea is basically non-existent. Russia could squash Ukraine like a bug, both at sea and on land, and before President Porkchop throws his invincible millions into battle, he should bear in mind that although Ukraine is a special project for Washington and Brussels, it is not a member of NATO. American think-tankers have publicly urged Ukraine to blow up the Crimea Bridge, so Russia is right to guard it, and Ukraine is ignoring all norms of territorial waters in a childish attempt to play That Never Happened, as if Crimea still belonged to Ukraine. It does not, and there was nothing illegal about its return to Russia, which is plainly the will of its people who were never Ukrainians.

Porky is just throwing his weight about, and while it might be considerable, it has little significance to NATO. The US warmongers would love to get something started, but the last thing most Americans want is a major war with a nuclear power that has already said "I'm done fucking around."

Nat November 25, 2018 at 1:57 pm
Now that all three Ukrainian ships have been captured and that he stupidly risked his officers' lives, Poroshenko may finally rest easy: Turchinov just announced the possibility of imposing Martial law which would cancel the Presidential elections (they won't be until March 2019, so it seems a little early to declare that, but who knows).
yalensis November 26, 2018 at 4:49 pm
Latest in Russian press is that the Ukie commanders performed on camera for video interrogations, according to the rules of the genre, here is the link with the interrogations/confessions:

https://vz.ru/news/2018/11/26/952451.html

The first guy, with the shaved head, who claims to be just an "ordinary crew member" is said to be from Ukrainian SBU, as he gives his evidence to the camera he keeps playing with his fingers and thumbs, probably sending Morse code signals to NATO!

Mark Chapman November 26, 2018 at 10:37 am
What does the bridge conversation on the Russian vessel say? I believe the video was recorded from the Russian viewpoint, and I hear a lot of "Davaiy! Davaiy!!" which is not "Oh dear, we should turn away". It's 'Let's do it".
et Al November 26, 2018 at 11:48 am
Yes, it sounds like the blood was up after such a goose chase but it does look like hitting a suspect after he as given up. They could have handled it better. Not that I have any sympathy for the Ukies, obvs, as you can really reasonable expect them to try anything to wind up Russia.
Moscow Exile November 26, 2018 at 1:33 am
Порошенко обратился с требованием к властям России.

"Я обращаюсь к руководству Российской Федерации с требованием немедленно освободить украинских военнослужащих, которые в нарушение международного права, грубо были задержаны и судьба которых неизвестна", -- заявил Порошенко.

Poroshenko has appealed to the Russian authorities.

"I appeal to the leadership of the Russian Federation with the demand that Ukrainian military personnel, who, in violation of international law, have been roughly detained and whose fate is unknown, be immediately released", Poroshenko said.

There's that thing called "International Law" again, something that the Exceptional Nation and its satraps love so well to bandy about -- whenever it suits them to do so. Of course, cutting off water and power supplies to civilians is quite alright.

The elections are already in question, because martial law (it must be confirmed by the Rada today) is to be imposed for 2 months. This is very convenient for a head of state whose popularity is rock-bottom and whose chances of being elected for a second presidential term are as slim as are the chances of finding a virgin in a whorehouse.

By the way, Poroshenko has demanded that the sailors be urgently transferred along with the ships to the Ukrainian side as a first step in de-escalating the situation in the Sea of ​​Azov. He stressed that he was waiting for an answer to his appeal .

There is something else that should give rise to Poroshenko becoming nervous: martial law automatically makes the Bloody Pastor and the head of the National Security and Defence Council number 2 in the Kiev Junta. And in the case of any incapacity that Poroshenko should suffer -- including death from an overdose -- Turchinov then becomes head of the regime.

And Turchinov, in my opinion, is as mad as a hatter, a bent Holy Joe -- and there's nothing worse than a bible thumping wanker such as he is.

yalensis November 26, 2018 at 4:22 am
That's a good point: Under Martial Law, Turchinov could easily put a cap in Porky and make himself the capo di capos. "Yet Brutus says he was ambitious "
Murdock November 27, 2018 at 11:53 am
This is probably the most worrying development of the Martial Law thing. Porky is a despicable opportunist but he seems to be a predictable and practical despicable opportunist. He will wind up the tension and provocation song and dance for his NATO/US/EU sponsors in order to start the flow of delicious $$$s. He does this with the knowledge that unless Russian servicemen are killed or other obvious red lines are crossed, engaging Ukraine in open war is of no benefit to Russia and it will not happen. Sure Russia will slap them around a little (ex these boats), but ultimately nothing of serious significance will take place. Porky will huff and puff and kneel for the nationalists all day as long as there is benefit to it and it keeps him in the feeding trough if you will, but he will not intentionally commit to a serious course of action that will ruin him and his largesse.

Turchinov though, is a true believer. Or seems to be. And there is nothing more dangerous in a tense situation that one who believes his own rhetoric. I can easily see Turchinov being one to turn the nationalist rhetoric into reality and go off on a crusade to cleanse the moskals or die trying.

He is definitely the one to watch during the Martial Law saga.

[Nov 28, 2018] Russia Is Disadvantaged by Her Belief that the West Is Governed by Law by Paul Craig Roberts

Notable quotes:
"... The Russian Navy detained the Ukrainian ships. Of course, the Western presstitutes, most of whom are CIA assets, will blame "Russian aggression." Washington and its presstitutes are doing everything they can to make impossible Trump's expressed goal of normal relations with Russia. NATO spokesperson Oana Lungescu quickly aligned NATO with Ukraine: "NATO fully supports Ukraine's sovereignty and its territorial integrity, including its navigation rights in its territorial waters." ..."
"... The Russian government's response to Ukraine's provocation and violation of law was to call an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council, as if anything would come of this. Washington pays such a large percentage of the UN budget, that few countries will side against Washington. As President Trump's crazed UN ambassador Nikki Haley said, "we take names." ..."
"... From all evidence, the Russian government still, despite all indications to the contrary, believes that presenting a non-threatening posture to the West, which appeals to law and not to arms, is effective in discrediting Western charges of aggression against Russia. If only it were true, but no sooner than a high Russian official announced that, despite the overwhelming elections for independence from Kiev in the breakway Russian provinces of Ukraine, Russia would not recognize the independent republics of Donetsk and Luhansk than "the Ukrainian army opened massive artillery fire on Sunday, shelling residential areas of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic." https://sputniknews.com/europe/201811261070125114-ukraine-kerch-strait-crisis-martial-law-poroshenko/ ..."
Nov 26, 2018 | www.unz.com
Ukrainian military ships have violated Russian restrictions in the Sea of Azov and Articles 19 and 21 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Ukrainian Navy crossed the Russian sea border and entered a closed area of Russian territorial waters. Clearly, Washington was behind this as Ukraine would not undertake such a provocation on its own. Here is an accurate explanation of the event: https://www.rt.com/news/444857-russia-ukraine-kerch-strait-standoff/

The Russian Navy detained the Ukrainian ships. Of course, the Western presstitutes, most of whom are CIA assets, will blame "Russian aggression." Washington and its presstitutes are doing everything they can to make impossible Trump's expressed goal of normal relations with Russia. NATO spokesperson Oana Lungescu quickly aligned NATO with Ukraine: "NATO fully supports Ukraine's sovereignty and its territorial integrity, including its navigation rights in its territorial waters." https://twitter.com/NATOpress/status/1066796714672222210/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1066796714672222210&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fnews%2F444853-russia-ukraine-ships-conflict%2F

The US military/security complex prefers the risk of nuclear war to any diminution of its $1,000 billion annual budget, a completely unnecessary sum that is destined to grow as the presstitutes, in line with the military/security complex, continue to demonize both Russia and Putin and to never question the obvious orchestrations that are used to portray Russia as a threat.

The Russian government's response to Ukraine's provocation and violation of law was to call an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council, as if anything would come of this. Washington pays such a large percentage of the UN budget, that few countries will side against Washington. As President Trump's crazed UN ambassador Nikki Haley said, "we take names."

From all evidence, the Russian government still, despite all indications to the contrary, believes that presenting a non-threatening posture to the West, which appeals to law and not to arms, is effective in discrediting Western charges of aggression against Russia. If only it were true, but no sooner than a high Russian official announced that, despite the overwhelming elections for independence from Kiev in the breakway Russian provinces of Ukraine, Russia would not recognize the independent republics of Donetsk and Luhansk than "the Ukrainian army opened massive artillery fire on Sunday, shelling residential areas of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic." https://sputniknews.com/europe/201811261070125114-ukraine-kerch-strait-crisis-martial-law-poroshenko/

By trusting that there is a rule of law in the West, the Russian government is digging Russia's grave while it allows Washington's Ukrainian Nazis to murder Russian people. The Russian government is discrediting itself by trusting US vassals, such as Germany, to enforce the Minsk agreement and, despite all evidence to the contrary, believing that there is a rule of law in the West. Russia continues, year after year, to appeal to this non-existent entity called the Western Rule of Law.

This policy reassures the Zionist Neoconservatives who rule Washington's foreign policy that Russia is incapable of defending its interests.

The Putin government seems to think that in order to prove that it is democratic, it must tolerate every Russian traitor in the name of free speech. https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/11/25/if-the-united-states-can-arrest-julian-assange-why-cant-russia-arrest-these-real-traitors/

ORDER IT NOW Russia Is Disadvantaged by Her Belief that the West Is Governed by Law, by Paul Craig Roberts - The Unz Review

This makes Russia an easy mark for Washington to destabilize. We see it already in Putin's falling approval ratings in Russia. The Russian government permits US-financed Russian newspapers and NGO organizations to beat up the Russian government on a daily basis. Decades of American propaganda have convinced many in the world that Washington's friendship is the key to success. The Russian Atlanticist Integrationists believe that Putin stands in the way of this friendship.

China is also an easy mark. The Chinese government permits Chinese students to study in the US from whence they return brainwashed by US propaganda and become Washington's Fifth Column in China.

It sometimes seems that Russia and China are more focused on gaining wealth than they are on national survival. It is extraordinary that these two governments are still constrained in their independence and remain dependent on the US dollar and Western financial systems for clearances of their international trade.

As Washington controls the explanations, surviving Washington's hegemony is proving to be a challenge for both countries.

[Nov 28, 2018] Detained Ukrainian Servicemen Confirm They Provoked Black Sea Incident With Russia Upon Order From Their Command

Nov 28, 2018 | southfront.org

The FSB further revealed that there were two Ukrainian intelligence officers were coordinating the provocation on board of the ships.

"The Ukrainian warships entered Russia's territorial waters at a direct order from the Kiev authorities. The warships trespassed into the Russian territorial water that had enjoyed this status even before Crimea's reunification with Russia. The provocation was coordinated by two Ukrainian Security Service officers who were aboard the Ukrainian ships ," the FSB said in a statement.

[Nov 27, 2018] 'Highly likely' that Magnitsky was poisoned by toxic chemicals on Bill Browder's orders

Highly recommended!
Skripal events probably helped to advance this line of investigation. So in a way UK intelligence services put their own stooge on the line of fire.
Notable quotes:
"... Russian prosecutors on Monday claimed that Magnitsky and several other people familiar with Browder's illicit activities in Russia may have been killed on his order. They said a new criminal case has been opened against Browder in Russia, and that Moscow will seek his extradition as an alleged ringleader of an international criminal enterprise involved in money laundering ..."
"... The prosecutors identified four people who were suspects in the Browder case, all of whom died over the course of less than two years as the investigation against him unfolded. Oktay Gasanov was the first of the four, dying in October 2007; while Magnitsky's death in November 2009 was the last. By the time of his death, Magnitsky had spent almost a year in pre-trial detention. The two others were Valery Kurochkin and Sergey Korobeinikov, who died in April 2008 and September 2008, respectively. ..."
"... Considering that the three individuals, with the exception of Magnitsky, died within months of each other while being investigated as part of Browder's case, "it is highly likely that they were killed to get rid of accomplices who could give an incriminating testimony against Browder," a senior official with the Russian General Prosecutor's office told journalists. The same may be true for Magnitsky, he said. The prosecutor stressed that Russia didn't conduct detailed studies into how the suspected poison affects living organisms, but several research institutions based in the US, France and Italy did. ..."
"... The prosecutors claim that Browder was the party who benefited most from the death of Magnitsky. They cited journalist Oleg Lurie, who shared a prison cell with Magnitsky before the latter's death. Speaking under oath during a court hearing in New York, Lurie said that his cellmate had complained to him that Browder's lawyers were pressuring him into signing a false statement. Magnitsky's testimony claimed that he had uncovered a conspiracy to embezzle taxpayers' money involving Russian officials. ..."
"... The Russian prosecutors said Browder allegedly wanted to silence his employee after obtaining the false claim. The statement itself was used to blame Russian officials for Magnitsky's death and accuse the Russian government of a cover-up. ..."
"... Described by critics as a 'vulture capitalist,' Browder seemed quite comfortable earning millions of dollars in the financial wild west. In 2005, as fallen oil tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky was standing trial for tax evasion, Browder scolded him on the BBC for using personal wealth to grasp at political power, and for leaving "in his wake aggrieved investors too numerous to count." He was also a staunch public supporter of the policies of Russian President Vladimir Putin. ..."
"... The investor then reinvented himself as an anti-Putin figure, using the death of Magnitsky to lobby various countries to impose sanctions on the Russian officials he blamed for his employee's death. The US Magnitsky Act was passed in 2012, allowing people accused by Washington of human rights violations to be targeted. However, it is perceived by the Kremlin as just a tool to restrain Russia for the sake of global political and economic competition. ..."
"... Among Browder's latest exploits is playing a role in the 'Russiagate' story. A key part of the elusive search for collusion between US President Donald Trump and the Russian government is a meeting between Donald Trump Jr. and a Russian lawyer. The meeting was apparently organized with a view to lobbying for the repeal of the Magnitsky Act. Its architect, Browder, has therefore been eager to lend his expertise on 'Russian machinations' to US lawmakers and media outlets. ..."
"... If you like this story, share it with a friend! ..."
Nov 19, 2018 | www.rt.com
Kremlin critic Bill Browder may have given the order for his employee Sergei Magnitsky to be poisoned with a rare toxin in a Russian prison cell, along with other suspects in a tax-evasion probe against him, prosecutors have said. British financier Browder was once a well-connected investor in post-Soviet Russia, but he became a fugitive from the law in the country after being accused of financial crimes. In the West, however, he is best known as the employer of Sergei Magnitsky, a Russian accountant who died in police custody while being investigated in connection to the Browder case. Magnitsky's death became an international scandal, with Browder accusing Russian officials of killing him.

Russian prosecutors on Monday claimed that Magnitsky and several other people familiar with Browder's illicit activities in Russia may have been killed on his order. They said a new criminal case has been opened against Browder in Russia, and that Moscow will seek his extradition as an alleged ringleader of an international criminal enterprise involved in money laundering.

The prosecutors identified four people who were suspects in the Browder case, all of whom died over the course of less than two years as the investigation against him unfolded. Oktay Gasanov was the first of the four, dying in October 2007; while Magnitsky's death in November 2009 was the last. By the time of his death, Magnitsky had spent almost a year in pre-trial detention. The two others were Valery Kurochkin and Sergey Korobeinikov, who died in April 2008 and September 2008, respectively.

Korobeinikov died after falling off a high-rise building, while the others had health complications. The Russian prosecutors believe all four of them may have been killed with a rare water-soluble compound of aluminum. Each of the men showed symptoms consistent with being poisoned by the toxin prior to their deaths, while Korobeinikov had traces of it in his liver, according to a post mortem. An investigation into four possible murders has been opened.

Read more
UK 'fraudster' Browder briefly detained in Spain on Russian warrant, tweets from police car

Considering that the three individuals, with the exception of Magnitsky, died within months of each other while being investigated as part of Browder's case, "it is highly likely that they were killed to get rid of accomplices who could give an incriminating testimony against Browder," a senior official with the Russian General Prosecutor's office told journalists. The same may be true for Magnitsky, he said. The prosecutor stressed that Russia didn't conduct detailed studies into how the suspected poison affects living organisms, but several research institutions based in the US, France and Italy did.

The prosecutors claim that Browder was the party who benefited most from the death of Magnitsky. They cited journalist Oleg Lurie, who shared a prison cell with Magnitsky before the latter's death. Speaking under oath during a court hearing in New York, Lurie said that his cellmate had complained to him that Browder's lawyers were pressuring him into signing a false statement. Magnitsky's testimony claimed that he had uncovered a conspiracy to embezzle taxpayers' money involving Russian officials.

The Russian prosecutors said Browder allegedly wanted to silence his employee after obtaining the false claim. The statement itself was used to blame Russian officials for Magnitsky's death and accuse the Russian government of a cover-up.

Last year, Browder was sentenced by a Russian court to nine years in prison for tax evasion. The trial was held in absentia and Moscow failed to have him extradited to serve the term. The prosecutors said that they will renew attempts to get custody of Browder as part of the new criminal case, using a UN convention on fighting transnational crime to have him arrested.

Browder is a US-born British financier, whose change of citizenship had the benefit of allowing him to avoid paying tax on foreign earnings. However, he claimed the switch was prompted by his family being persecuted in the US during the McCarthyism witch hunt, while the UK seemed like the land of law and order.

Read more

Magnitsky Act mastermind seeks to stop Cyprus from revealing his offshore assets to Russia

He made a fortune in Russia during the country's chaotic transition to a market economy, having invested before there was a stock exchange in Moscow. His Hermitage Capital Management fund was a leading foreign investment entity in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

Described by critics as a 'vulture capitalist,' Browder seemed quite comfortable earning millions of dollars in the financial wild west. In 2005, as fallen oil tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky was standing trial for tax evasion, Browder scolded him on the BBC for using personal wealth to grasp at political power, and for leaving "in his wake aggrieved investors too numerous to count." He was also a staunch public supporter of the policies of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The transformation of his public image from a financial shark into a human rights crusader started when Browder himself entered the spotlight of Russian law enforcement. In 2007, the foundation he ran was targeted by a probe into possible large-scale embezzlement of Russian taxpayers' money. Magnitsky, who worked for Browder and had knowledge of his firms' finances, was arrested and held in pre-trial detention until his death in November 2009. The British businessman insisted that the entire case was fabricated and that Magnitsky had been assassinated for exposing a criminal scheme involving several Russian tax officials.

The investor then reinvented himself as an anti-Putin figure, using the death of Magnitsky to lobby various countries to impose sanctions on the Russian officials he blamed for his employee's death. The US Magnitsky Act was passed in 2012, allowing people accused by Washington of human rights violations to be targeted. However, it is perceived by the Kremlin as just a tool to restrain Russia for the sake of global political and economic competition.

Browder's new-found status as a rights advocate and self-proclaimed worst enemy of Putin helps him deflect Russia's attempts to prosecute him. On several occasions, Russia filed international arrest warrants against him with Interpol, which even led to his brief detention in Spain last May.

Among Browder's latest exploits is playing a role in the 'Russiagate' story. A key part of the elusive search for collusion between US President Donald Trump and the Russian government is a meeting between Donald Trump Jr. and a Russian lawyer. The meeting was apparently organized with a view to lobbying for the repeal of the Magnitsky Act. Its architect, Browder, has therefore been eager to lend his expertise on 'Russian machinations' to US lawmakers and media outlets.

If you like this story, share it with a friend!

[Nov 27, 2018] US Foreign Policy Has No Policy by Philip Giraldi

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Trump's memo on the Saudis begins with the headline "The world is a very dangerous place!" Indeed, it is and behavior by the three occupants of the White House since 2000 is largely to blame. ..."
"... Indeed, a national security policy that sees competitors and adversaries as enemies in a military sense has made nuclear war, unthinkable since the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991, thinkable once again. ..."
"... George Washington's dictum in his Farewell Address , counseling his countrymen to "observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all." And Washington might have somehow foreseen the poisonous relationships with Israel and the Saudis when he warned that " a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification." ..."
"... Cautious optimism may be better than none, but futile nonetheless. Bullying, dispossession, slavery and genocide constitute the very bedrock, the essence and soul of the founding of our country. ..."
"... Truth be told we simply know of no other kinder, gentler alternatives to perpetual war and destruction as the cornerstone of our foreign policy. Normality? Not in my lifetime. ..."
"... Your CNI and 'If Americans Knew' informed me about Rand Paul's courageous move. I plan to call his office today to give him encouragement and call my Senators and Representative to urge them to support him (fat chance of that but I have to stick it in their face). ..."
"... America doesn't have a policy because America is no longer a real nation. It's an empire filled with diverse groups of peoples who all hate each other and want to use the power of the government for the benefit of their overseas co-ethnics. ..."
Nov 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

President Donald Trump's recent statement on the Jamal Khashoggi killing by Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince might well be considered a metaphor for his foreign policy. Several commentators have suggested that the text appears to be something that Trump wrote himself without any adult supervision, similar to the poorly expressed random arguments presented in his tweeting only longer. That might be the case, but it would not be wise to dismiss the document as merely frivolous or misguided as it does in reality express the kind of thinking that has produced a foreign policy that seems to drift randomly to no real end, a kind of leaderless creative destruction of the United States as a world power.

Lord Palmerston, Prime Minister of Britain in the mid nineteenth century, famously said that "Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests."The United States currently has neither real friends nor any clearly defined interests. It is, however, infested with parasites that have convinced an at-drift America that their causes are identical to the interests of the United States. Leading the charge to reduce the U.S. to "bitch" status, as Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard has artfully put it , are Israel and Saudi Arabia, but there are many other countries, alliances and advocacy groups that have learned how to subvert and direct the "leader of the free world."

Trump's memo on the Saudis begins with the headline "The world is a very dangerous place!" Indeed, it is and behavior by the three occupants of the White House since 2000 is largely to blame. It is difficult to find a part of the world where an actual American interest is being served by Washington's foreign and global security policies. Indeed, a national security policy that sees competitors and adversaries as enemies in a military sense has made nuclear war, unthinkable since the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991, thinkable once again. The fact that no one is the media or in political circles is even talking about that terrible danger suggests that war has again become mainstreamed, tacitly benefiting from bipartisan acceptance of it as a viable foreign policy tool by the media, in the U.S. Congress and also in the White House.

The part of the world where American meddling coupled with ignorance has produced the worst result is inevitably the Middle East...

... ... ...

All of the White House's actions have one thing in common and that is that they do not benefit Americans in any way unless one works for a weapons manufacturer, and that is not even taking into consideration the dead soldiers and civilians and the massive debt that has been incurred to intervene all over the world. One might also add that most of America's interventions are built on deliberate lies by the government and its associated media, intended to increase tension and create a casus belli where none exists.

So what is to be done as it often seems that the best thing Trump has going for him is that he is not Hillary Clinton? First of all, a comprehensive rethink of what the real interests of the United States are in the world arena is past due. America is less safe now than it was in 2001 as it continues to make enemies with its blundering everywhere it goes. There are now four times as many designated terrorists as there were in 2001, active in 70 countries. One would quite plausibly soon arrive at George Washington's dictum in his Farewell Address , counseling his countrymen to "observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all." And Washington might have somehow foreseen the poisonous relationships with Israel and the Saudis when he warned that " a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification."

George Washington or any of the other Founders would be appalled to see an America with 800 military bases overseas, allegedly for self-defense. The transfer of wealth from taxpayers to the military industrial complex and related entities like Wall Street has been catastrophic. The United States does not need to protect Israel and Saudi Arabia, two countries that are armed to the teeth and well able to defend themselves. Nor does it have to be in Syria and Afghanistan. And

If the United States were to withdraw its military from the Middle East and the rest of Asia tomorrow, it would be to nearly everyone's benefit. If the armed forces were to be subsequently reduced to a level sufficient to defend the United States it would put money back in the pockets of Americans and end the continuous fearmongering through surfacing of "threats" by career militarists justifying the bloated budgets.

... ... ...

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests [email protected] .

anon [355] Disclaimer , says: November 27, 2018 at 5:38 am GMT

US foreign policy is controlled by a few key ethnic groups and (to a lesser degree) the military-industrial complex.
Justsaying , says: November 27, 2018 at 6:04 am GMT

but even small steps in the right direction could initiate a gradual process of turning the United States into a more normal country in its relationships with the rest of the world rather than a universal predator and bully.

Cautious optimism may be better than none, but futile nonetheless. Bullying, dispossession, slavery and genocide constitute the very bedrock, the essence and soul of the founding of our country.

To expect mutations -- no matter how slow or fast in a trait that appears deeply embedded in our DNA is to be naive. Add to that the intractable stranglehold Zionists and organized world Jewry has on our nuts and decision making. A more congruent convergence of histories and DNAs would be hard to come by among other nations. Truth be told we simply know of no other kinder, gentler alternatives to perpetual war and destruction as the cornerstone of our foreign policy. Normality? Not in my lifetime.

Z-man , says: November 27, 2018 at 9:11 am GMT
Great article and I will spread it around.

Your CNI and 'If Americans Knew' informed me about Rand Paul's courageous move. I plan to call his office today to give him encouragement and call my Senators and Representative to urge them to support him (fat chance of that but I have to stick it in their face).

Hey, how about a Rand Paul-Tulsi Gabbard fusion ticket in 2024, not a bad idea, IMHO.

Going back to the Administration you can see the slimy Zionist hands of Steven Miller on all of those foreign policy statements. Trump is allowing this because he has to protect his flanks from Zionists, Christian or otherwise. He might be just giving Miller just enough rope to jettison him (wishful thinking on my part). Or he doesn't care or is unaware of the texts, a possibility.

anon [336] Disclaimer , says: November 27, 2018 at 9:26 am GMT
1. Because that defies human nature. See all of history if you disagree.

2. America doesn't have a policy because America is no longer a real nation. It's an empire filled with diverse groups of peoples who all hate each other and want to use the power of the government for the benefit of their overseas co-ethnics.

jilles dykstra , says: November 27, 2018 at 9:30 am GMT
The beginning of USA foreign policy for me is the 1820 or 1830 Monroe Declaration: south America is our backyard, keep out. Few people know that at the time European countries considered war on the USA because of this beginning of world domination. When I told this to a USA correspondent the reply was 'but this declaration still is taught here in glowing terms'.

What we saw then was the case until Obama, USA foreign policy was for internal political reasons. As Hollings stated in 2004 'Bush promising AIPAC the war on Iraq, that is politics'. No empire ever, as far as I know, ever was in the comfortable position to be able to let foreign policy to be decided (almost) completely by internal politics.

This changed during the Obama reign, the two war standard had to be lowered to one and a half. All of a sudden the USA had to develop a foreign policy, a policy that had to take into consideration the world outside the USA. Not the whole USA understands this, the die hards of Deep State in the lead.

What a half war accomplishes we see, my opinion, in Syria, a half war does not bring victory on an enemy who wages a whole war.
Assad is still there, Russia has airforce and naval bases in Syria.

Normally, as any history book explains, foreign policy of a country is decided on in secret by a few people. British preparations for both WWI and WWII included detailed technical talks with both the USA and France, not even all cabinet members knew about it. One of Trump's difficulties is that Deep State does not at all has the intention of letting the president decide on foreign policy, at the time of FDR he did what he liked, though, if one reads for example Baruch's memoirs, in close cooperation with the Deep State that then existed.

The question 'why do we not leave the rest of the world alone', hardly ever asked. The USA is nearly autarcic, foreign trade, from memory, some five percent of national income, a very luxurious position. But of course, leaving the rest of the world alone, huge internal consequences, as Hinckley explains with an example, politically impossible to stop the development of a bomber judged to be superfluous.

Barbara Hinckley Sheldon Goldman, American Politics and Government, Glenview Ill.,1990

Jim Christian , says: November 27, 2018 at 9:43 am GMT
Good luck. A fight over resources with the biggest consumer of resources, the People That Kill People and all their little buddies in the Alphabet Soup of Law Enforcement and Intelligence Depravity..

That could get a fella hurt. Ask Jack and Bob Kennedy.

Michael Kenny , says: November 27, 2018 at 10:10 am GMT
"The bilateral relationship between the U.S. and Russia is now worse than it was towards the end of the Cold War". Classic American cold warrior mentality. The present-day Russian Federation is assimilated to the former Soviet Union.
Johnny Rottenborough , says: Website November 27, 2018 at 11:31 am GMT
Tragically for America, and the West in general, President Trump is unrecognizable from candidate Trump :

'This is a crossroads in the history of our civilization that will determine whether or not we the people reclaim control over our government. The political establishment that is trying to stop us is the same group responsible for our disastrous trade deals, massive illegal immigration and economic and foreign policies that have bled our country dry Their financial resources are virtually unlimited, their political resources are unlimited, their media resources are unmatched, and most importantly, the depths of their immorality is absolutely unlimited.'

[Nov 27, 2018] terms that carry with them implicit moral connotations. Investment implies an action, even a sacrifice, undertaken for a better future. It evokes a future positive outcome. Another words that reinforces neoliberal rationality is "growth", Modernization and

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... And that bloody word...'modernisation' (Moderni- z -ation - for the management speak geeks). Why is it every time I come across that word in meetings, it means some worker is either losing money or losing their job? ..."
"... the monetisation of everything and the use of language to make the neo-liberal nightmare through which we are living seem, not only the norm, but the only way. ..."
"... Social security becomes welfare and suddenly masses of society (the majority of benefit claimants being in work) are not drawing on an insurance policy but are in receipt of 'welfare' subject to the largesse and judgements of an ever more cruel and avaricious 'elite'. ..."
"... I'm a big fan of Steven Poole's Unspeak , which looks at the way in which terms and terminology have been engineered precisely to hollow out meaning and present an argument instead. A kind of Neoliberal Emperor's New Clothes, the problem is that, obviously, if your vocabulary and your meanings become circumscribed, it limits what can be said, and even how people think about what's being said. ..."
Nov 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

restructuring

Sidfishes , 11 Jun 2013 04:26

And that bloody word...'modernisation' (Moderni- z -ation - for the management speak geeks). Why is it every time I come across that word in meetings, it means some worker is either losing money or losing their job? Or some manager is about to award themselves a bonus?
thesingingdetective -> gyges1 , 11 Jun 2013 04:22
@gyges1 - No, she is surely railing against the monetisation of everything and the use of language to make the neo-liberal nightmare through which we are living seem, not only the norm, but the only way.

Social security becomes welfare and suddenly masses of society (the majority of benefit claimants being in work) are not drawing on an insurance policy but are in receipt of 'welfare' subject to the largesse and judgements of an ever more cruel and avaricious 'elite'.

Language matters and its distortion is a political act.

michaelsylvain , 11 Jun 2013 04:17
But without these Exciting New Word Uprating Initiatives, we can never win The Global Race... or something.

I'm a big fan of Steven Poole's Unspeak , which looks at the way in which terms and terminology have been engineered precisely to hollow out meaning and present an argument instead. A kind of Neoliberal Emperor's New Clothes, the problem is that, obviously, if your vocabulary and your meanings become circumscribed, it limits what can be said, and even how people think about what's being said.

(By the way, the link's to Amazon, but, obviously, you may find you have a better "Customer Experience" if you get from somewhere less tax-dodgy.)

[Nov 27, 2018] The Argentinian military coup, like those in Guatemala, Honduras, Brazil, Paraguay, Bolivia and Nicaragua, was sponsored by the US to protect and further its interests during the Cold War. By the 1970s neoliberalism was very much part of the menu; paramilitary governments were actively encouraged to practice neoliberal politics; neoliberalism was at this stage, what communism was to the Soviet Union

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... I was, of course, referring to the families of the disappeared in Chile. They are, of course, relevant and should not be excluded from any arguments about neoliberalism and its effects. Nor should the families of the disappeared in Argentina, though it is less well known, the junta was entrusted with the introduction of neoliberal policies in Argentina. ..."
"... The Argentinian military coup, like those in Guatemala, Honduras, Brazil, Paraguay, Bolivia and Nicaragua, was sponsored by the US to protect and further its interests during the Cold War. By the 1970s neoliberalism was very much part of the menu; paramilitary governments were actively encouraged to practice neoliberal politics; neoliberalism was at this stage, what communism was to the Soviet Union; the ideological wing of the Cold War. You may be familiar with Operation Condor? ..."
"... It has been pretty firmly established that the Allende regime was victim of US sponsored military coup and that said coup was sponsored to protect US interests. The Chicago boys then flew into Chile to use the nation as a laboratory for the more outlandish (at the time) neoliberal policies they were unable to practice at home. ..."
"... The political class, with the aid of their subservient corporate media quislings, have taken our language apart and used it against us. We have been backed into a corner, we are told, by both Labour and Tories, that there is no choice, either rabid profiteering or penury and we have, to our everlasting shame, lapped up every word of it. ..."
"... We have become so embedded in the language of individuals, choice, contracts and competition that we cannot see any alternative. Even Adam Smith understood the difference between "economy" and "society" when he argued that labor is directly connected to public interest while business is connected to self-interest. If business took over the public sphere, Smith argued, this would be quite destructive. ..."
Nov 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com
maxfisher -> finnkn , 11 Jun 2013 07:45
@finnkn - Apologies. I was, of course, referring to the families of the disappeared in Chile. They are, of course, relevant and should not be excluded from any arguments about neoliberalism and its effects. Nor should the families of the disappeared in Argentina, though it is less well known, the junta was entrusted with the introduction of neoliberal policies in Argentina.

The Argentinian military coup, like those in Guatemala, Honduras, Brazil, Paraguay, Bolivia and Nicaragua, was sponsored by the US to protect and further its interests during the Cold War. By the 1970s neoliberalism was very much part of the menu; paramilitary governments were actively encouraged to practice neoliberal politics; neoliberalism was at this stage, what communism was to the Soviet Union; the ideological wing of the Cold War. You may be familiar with Operation Condor?

To be clear: I am arguing that the direct effects of 'actually existing neoliberalism' are very far from benign. I do not argue that the militarisation of Central and South America are the direct consequence neoliberal theory.

maxfisher -> finnkn , 11 Jun 2013 07:04
@finnkn - Well I think many would. It has been pretty firmly established that the Allende regime was victim of US sponsored military coup and that said coup was sponsored to protect US interests. The Chicago boys then flew into Chile to use the nation as a laboratory for the more outlandish (at the time) neoliberal policies they were unable to practice at home.

Neoliberalism was first practiced in authoritarian states; the states in which neoliberalism is most deeply embedded are (surprise, surprise) increasingly authoritarian, and neoliberalism solutions are regularly imposed on client/vulnerable states by suprastructures such as the IMF, the EU, and the World Bank. Friedrich Hayek and Adam Smith were very clear that the potential for degeneracy existed. We have now reached that potential; increasingly centralised authority, states within states, the denuding of democratic institutions and crony capitalism. Neoliberalism in practice is very different to neoliberalism in practice. Rather like 'really existing socialism' and Marxism.

works best in authoritarian states because (in practice, if not in theory

finnkn -> BaronessHawHaw , 11 Jun 2013 07:41

@BaronessHawHaw - Simply untrue.

http://www.pewglobal.org/2009/11/02/end-of-communism-cheered-but-now-with-more-reservations/

As the statistics on that link show, there are certain countries (notably Russia and the Ukraine) where the +65 age group disapprove of the change to democracy and capitalism. In the majority, however, people of all ages remain in favour.

retro77 -> anonid , 11 Jun 2013 07:10
@anonid -

For 'job' read 'bribe' (keep your mouth shut or lose it), for 'management' read 'take most of the interest out of the job for everybody else and put them on a lower scale', etc. I guess you get my drift.

It's sad that you have such a negative, self-hating attitude towards your work.

BobJanova , 11 Jun 2013 07:09

Work is usually – and certainly should be – a central source of meaning and fulfilment in human lives. And it has – or could have – moral and creative (or aesthetic) values at its core

Spoken like a true champagne socialist in a creative industry. How do you find meaning and fulfillment, or creative values, in emptying bins, cleaning offices, sweeping the streets and a whole load of other work which needs doing but which is repetitive, menial and not particularly pleasant?

There are two ways to get people to do work that needs doing but wouldn't be done voluntarily: coercion or payment. I think the second is a more healthy way to run a society.

retarius , 11 Jun 2013 07:07
I've thought pretty much the same myself. Democracies can be good or bad (as the Greeks knew well)...but in our politic-speak it is used to denounce and make good; as in "Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East"...it is intended to make us feel something good about Israel, as it humiliates the Palestinians and steals their land.

In ancient Greece....'tyrant' simply meant 'usurper' without any neccessary negative association....simply someone who had usurped political power...they recognized that tyrannies could be good, bad or indifferent.

In Rome, dictator simply meant the cahp that took over fpr periods of six months at a time, during times of crisis.

I used to vacation in Yugoslavia in Marshall Tito's time....it was a wonderful place, beautiful, inexpensive and safe...very very safe. What came into the power vacuum after he died in 1980...what happened to the country? I'd argue that his was a good dictatorship or tyranny....

I'm also not too sure what the 90% of people unaffected by and uninterested in power politics in any given country feel about the 'liberation' of Libya and Iraq from their prior dictatorships...I'm sure that plenty of people whose previously steady lives have been wrecked, are all that thrilled.

Antiquarian , 11 Jun 2013 07:06
I have recently been exercised by the right's adoption of "Social Justice". In the past it was the left and churches who talked of social justice as a phenomenon to empower the poor and dispossessed, whether in this country or the developing world. Social Justice was a touchstone of Faith in the City, for example, but it seems now to be the smoke screen behind which benefits are stipped from the "undeserving poor".
BaronessHawHaw , 11 Jun 2013 06:59
Most of this crap comes from America. Crappy middle-management bureaucrats spouting "free-market" bollocks.
The efficiency of the private sector - some nob with a name badge timing how long you've been on the toilet.
Freedommm!!!!
BlankReg -> joseph1832 , 11 Jun 2013 06:56
@ joseph1832 11 June 2013 9:24am . Get cifFix for Firefox .

It is not just neoliberalism. Everyone is at it - sucking the meaning out of words. Corporate bullshit, public sector bullshit. Being customers of your own government is a crime that everyone is guilty of. This is what Orwell railed against decades ago, and it has got worse.

Case in point; just look at the way in which the Cameron set about co-opting words and phrases justifiably applied to his own regime and repurposed them against his detractors.

For example, people who took a stand against the stealth privatisation of the NHS were branded as "vested interests", quite unlike the wholesome MPs who voted for the NHS bill who, despite the huge sums of money they received from the private healthcare lobby, we are encouraged to believe were acting in our best interests by selling our health service to their corporate paymasters. Or the farcical attempt to rebrand female Tory MPs as "feminists" despite their anti-social mobility, anti-equality, anti-human rights and anti-abortion views.

The political class, with the aid of their subservient corporate media quislings, have taken our language apart and used it against us. We have been backed into a corner, we are told, by both Labour and Tories, that there is no choice, either rabid profiteering or penury and we have, to our everlasting shame, lapped up every word of it.

Arabica Robusta -> Obelisk1 , 11 Jun 2013 06:55
@Obelisk1 - You have single-handedly proven Massey's argument. We have become so embedded in the language of individuals, choice, contracts and competition that we cannot see any alternative. Even Adam Smith understood the difference between "economy" and "society" when he argued that labor is directly connected to public interest while business is connected to self-interest. If business took over the public sphere, Smith argued, this would be quite destructive.
Snapshackle , 11 Jun 2013 06:50

Our whole conversation seemed somehow reduced, my experience of it belittled into one of commercial transaction. My relation to the gallery and to this engaging person had become one of instrumental market exchange.

But in the eyes of the economic right, that is precisely the case. Adjectives like altruistic, caring, selfless, empathy and sympathy are simply not in their vocabulary. They are only ever any of those things provided they can see some sort of beneficial payback at the end.

maxfisher -> Venebles 11 Jun 2013 06:20

@Venebles - I was simply joining many commentators in the mire. Those that dispute the neoliberal worldview are routinely dismissed as marxists. I thought I'd save you all the energy, duck.

I'm not sure that the families of the disappeared of Chile and Argentina would concur with you benign view of neoliberalism and its effects.

Liquidity Jones, 11 Jun 2013 06:04
Might as well define it.

Neoliberalism framework vs Full employment framework

Full employment. The 3 pillars

Redistributive pillar

Collective pillar

Neo-liberalism. The 3 pillars

Economic pillar

Redistributive pillar

Individuality pillar

[Nov 27, 2018] 'Highly likely' that Magnitsky was poisoned by toxic chemicals on Bill Browder's orders

Highly recommended!
Skripal events probably helped to advance this line of investigation. So in a way UK intelligence services put their own stooge on the line of fire.
Notable quotes:
"... Russian prosecutors on Monday claimed that Magnitsky and several other people familiar with Browder's illicit activities in Russia may have been killed on his order. They said a new criminal case has been opened against Browder in Russia, and that Moscow will seek his extradition as an alleged ringleader of an international criminal enterprise involved in money laundering ..."
"... The prosecutors identified four people who were suspects in the Browder case, all of whom died over the course of less than two years as the investigation against him unfolded. Oktay Gasanov was the first of the four, dying in October 2007; while Magnitsky's death in November 2009 was the last. By the time of his death, Magnitsky had spent almost a year in pre-trial detention. The two others were Valery Kurochkin and Sergey Korobeinikov, who died in April 2008 and September 2008, respectively. ..."
"... Considering that the three individuals, with the exception of Magnitsky, died within months of each other while being investigated as part of Browder's case, "it is highly likely that they were killed to get rid of accomplices who could give an incriminating testimony against Browder," a senior official with the Russian General Prosecutor's office told journalists. The same may be true for Magnitsky, he said. The prosecutor stressed that Russia didn't conduct detailed studies into how the suspected poison affects living organisms, but several research institutions based in the US, France and Italy did. ..."
"... The prosecutors claim that Browder was the party who benefited most from the death of Magnitsky. They cited journalist Oleg Lurie, who shared a prison cell with Magnitsky before the latter's death. Speaking under oath during a court hearing in New York, Lurie said that his cellmate had complained to him that Browder's lawyers were pressuring him into signing a false statement. Magnitsky's testimony claimed that he had uncovered a conspiracy to embezzle taxpayers' money involving Russian officials. ..."
"... The Russian prosecutors said Browder allegedly wanted to silence his employee after obtaining the false claim. The statement itself was used to blame Russian officials for Magnitsky's death and accuse the Russian government of a cover-up. ..."
"... Described by critics as a 'vulture capitalist,' Browder seemed quite comfortable earning millions of dollars in the financial wild west. In 2005, as fallen oil tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky was standing trial for tax evasion, Browder scolded him on the BBC for using personal wealth to grasp at political power, and for leaving "in his wake aggrieved investors too numerous to count." He was also a staunch public supporter of the policies of Russian President Vladimir Putin. ..."
"... The investor then reinvented himself as an anti-Putin figure, using the death of Magnitsky to lobby various countries to impose sanctions on the Russian officials he blamed for his employee's death. The US Magnitsky Act was passed in 2012, allowing people accused by Washington of human rights violations to be targeted. However, it is perceived by the Kremlin as just a tool to restrain Russia for the sake of global political and economic competition. ..."
"... Among Browder's latest exploits is playing a role in the 'Russiagate' story. A key part of the elusive search for collusion between US President Donald Trump and the Russian government is a meeting between Donald Trump Jr. and a Russian lawyer. The meeting was apparently organized with a view to lobbying for the repeal of the Magnitsky Act. Its architect, Browder, has therefore been eager to lend his expertise on 'Russian machinations' to US lawmakers and media outlets. ..."
"... If you like this story, share it with a friend! ..."
Nov 19, 2018 | www.rt.com
Kremlin critic Bill Browder may have given the order for his employee Sergei Magnitsky to be poisoned with a rare toxin in a Russian prison cell, along with other suspects in a tax-evasion probe against him, prosecutors have said. British financier Browder was once a well-connected investor in post-Soviet Russia, but he became a fugitive from the law in the country after being accused of financial crimes. In the West, however, he is best known as the employer of Sergei Magnitsky, a Russian accountant who died in police custody while being investigated in connection to the Browder case. Magnitsky's death became an international scandal, with Browder accusing Russian officials of killing him.

Russian prosecutors on Monday claimed that Magnitsky and several other people familiar with Browder's illicit activities in Russia may have been killed on his order. They said a new criminal case has been opened against Browder in Russia, and that Moscow will seek his extradition as an alleged ringleader of an international criminal enterprise involved in money laundering.

The prosecutors identified four people who were suspects in the Browder case, all of whom died over the course of less than two years as the investigation against him unfolded. Oktay Gasanov was the first of the four, dying in October 2007; while Magnitsky's death in November 2009 was the last. By the time of his death, Magnitsky had spent almost a year in pre-trial detention. The two others were Valery Kurochkin and Sergey Korobeinikov, who died in April 2008 and September 2008, respectively.

Korobeinikov died after falling off a high-rise building, while the others had health complications. The Russian prosecutors believe all four of them may have been killed with a rare water-soluble compound of aluminum. Each of the men showed symptoms consistent with being poisoned by the toxin prior to their deaths, while Korobeinikov had traces of it in his liver, according to a post mortem. An investigation into four possible murders has been opened.

Read more
UK 'fraudster' Browder briefly detained in Spain on Russian warrant, tweets from police car

Considering that the three individuals, with the exception of Magnitsky, died within months of each other while being investigated as part of Browder's case, "it is highly likely that they were killed to get rid of accomplices who could give an incriminating testimony against Browder," a senior official with the Russian General Prosecutor's office told journalists. The same may be true for Magnitsky, he said. The prosecutor stressed that Russia didn't conduct detailed studies into how the suspected poison affects living organisms, but several research institutions based in the US, France and Italy did.

The prosecutors claim that Browder was the party who benefited most from the death of Magnitsky. They cited journalist Oleg Lurie, who shared a prison cell with Magnitsky before the latter's death. Speaking under oath during a court hearing in New York, Lurie said that his cellmate had complained to him that Browder's lawyers were pressuring him into signing a false statement. Magnitsky's testimony claimed that he had uncovered a conspiracy to embezzle taxpayers' money involving Russian officials.

The Russian prosecutors said Browder allegedly wanted to silence his employee after obtaining the false claim. The statement itself was used to blame Russian officials for Magnitsky's death and accuse the Russian government of a cover-up.

Last year, Browder was sentenced by a Russian court to nine years in prison for tax evasion. The trial was held in absentia and Moscow failed to have him extradited to serve the term. The prosecutors said that they will renew attempts to get custody of Browder as part of the new criminal case, using a UN convention on fighting transnational crime to have him arrested.

Browder is a US-born British financier, whose change of citizenship had the benefit of allowing him to avoid paying tax on foreign earnings. However, he claimed the switch was prompted by his family being persecuted in the US during the McCarthyism witch hunt, while the UK seemed like the land of law and order.

Read more

Magnitsky Act mastermind seeks to stop Cyprus from revealing his offshore assets to Russia

He made a fortune in Russia during the country's chaotic transition to a market economy, having invested before there was a stock exchange in Moscow. His Hermitage Capital Management fund was a leading foreign investment entity in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

Described by critics as a 'vulture capitalist,' Browder seemed quite comfortable earning millions of dollars in the financial wild west. In 2005, as fallen oil tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky was standing trial for tax evasion, Browder scolded him on the BBC for using personal wealth to grasp at political power, and for leaving "in his wake aggrieved investors too numerous to count." He was also a staunch public supporter of the policies of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The transformation of his public image from a financial shark into a human rights crusader started when Browder himself entered the spotlight of Russian law enforcement. In 2007, the foundation he ran was targeted by a probe into possible large-scale embezzlement of Russian taxpayers' money. Magnitsky, who worked for Browder and had knowledge of his firms' finances, was arrested and held in pre-trial detention until his death in November 2009. The British businessman insisted that the entire case was fabricated and that Magnitsky had been assassinated for exposing a criminal scheme involving several Russian tax officials.

The investor then reinvented himself as an anti-Putin figure, using the death of Magnitsky to lobby various countries to impose sanctions on the Russian officials he blamed for his employee's death. The US Magnitsky Act was passed in 2012, allowing people accused by Washington of human rights violations to be targeted. However, it is perceived by the Kremlin as just a tool to restrain Russia for the sake of global political and economic competition.

Browder's new-found status as a rights advocate and self-proclaimed worst enemy of Putin helps him deflect Russia's attempts to prosecute him. On several occasions, Russia filed international arrest warrants against him with Interpol, which even led to his brief detention in Spain last May.

Among Browder's latest exploits is playing a role in the 'Russiagate' story. A key part of the elusive search for collusion between US President Donald Trump and the Russian government is a meeting between Donald Trump Jr. and a Russian lawyer. The meeting was apparently organized with a view to lobbying for the repeal of the Magnitsky Act. Its architect, Browder, has therefore been eager to lend his expertise on 'Russian machinations' to US lawmakers and media outlets.

If you like this story, share it with a friend!

[Nov 27, 2018] US Foreign Policy Has No Policy by Philip Giraldi

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Trump's memo on the Saudis begins with the headline "The world is a very dangerous place!" Indeed, it is and behavior by the three occupants of the White House since 2000 is largely to blame. ..."
"... Indeed, a national security policy that sees competitors and adversaries as enemies in a military sense has made nuclear war, unthinkable since the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991, thinkable once again. ..."
"... George Washington's dictum in his Farewell Address , counseling his countrymen to "observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all." And Washington might have somehow foreseen the poisonous relationships with Israel and the Saudis when he warned that " a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification." ..."
"... Cautious optimism may be better than none, but futile nonetheless. Bullying, dispossession, slavery and genocide constitute the very bedrock, the essence and soul of the founding of our country. ..."
"... Truth be told we simply know of no other kinder, gentler alternatives to perpetual war and destruction as the cornerstone of our foreign policy. Normality? Not in my lifetime. ..."
"... Your CNI and 'If Americans Knew' informed me about Rand Paul's courageous move. I plan to call his office today to give him encouragement and call my Senators and Representative to urge them to support him (fat chance of that but I have to stick it in their face). ..."
"... America doesn't have a policy because America is no longer a real nation. It's an empire filled with diverse groups of peoples who all hate each other and want to use the power of the government for the benefit of their overseas co-ethnics. ..."
Nov 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

President Donald Trump's recent statement on the Jamal Khashoggi killing by Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince might well be considered a metaphor for his foreign policy. Several commentators have suggested that the text appears to be something that Trump wrote himself without any adult supervision, similar to the poorly expressed random arguments presented in his tweeting only longer. That might be the case, but it would not be wise to dismiss the document as merely frivolous or misguided as it does in reality express the kind of thinking that has produced a foreign policy that seems to drift randomly to no real end, a kind of leaderless creative destruction of the United States as a world power.

Lord Palmerston, Prime Minister of Britain in the mid nineteenth century, famously said that "Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests."The United States currently has neither real friends nor any clearly defined interests. It is, however, infested with parasites that have convinced an at-drift America that their causes are identical to the interests of the United States. Leading the charge to reduce the U.S. to "bitch" status, as Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard has artfully put it , are Israel and Saudi Arabia, but there are many other countries, alliances and advocacy groups that have learned how to subvert and direct the "leader of the free world."

Trump's memo on the Saudis begins with the headline "The world is a very dangerous place!" Indeed, it is and behavior by the three occupants of the White House since 2000 is largely to blame. It is difficult to find a part of the world where an actual American interest is being served by Washington's foreign and global security policies. Indeed, a national security policy that sees competitors and adversaries as enemies in a military sense has made nuclear war, unthinkable since the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991, thinkable once again. The fact that no one is the media or in political circles is even talking about that terrible danger suggests that war has again become mainstreamed, tacitly benefiting from bipartisan acceptance of it as a viable foreign policy tool by the media, in the U.S. Congress and also in the White House.

The part of the world where American meddling coupled with ignorance has produced the worst result is inevitably the Middle East...

... ... ...

All of the White House's actions have one thing in common and that is that they do not benefit Americans in any way unless one works for a weapons manufacturer, and that is not even taking into consideration the dead soldiers and civilians and the massive debt that has been incurred to intervene all over the world. One might also add that most of America's interventions are built on deliberate lies by the government and its associated media, intended to increase tension and create a casus belli where none exists.

So what is to be done as it often seems that the best thing Trump has going for him is that he is not Hillary Clinton? First of all, a comprehensive rethink of what the real interests of the United States are in the world arena is past due. America is less safe now than it was in 2001 as it continues to make enemies with its blundering everywhere it goes. There are now four times as many designated terrorists as there were in 2001, active in 70 countries. One would quite plausibly soon arrive at George Washington's dictum in his Farewell Address , counseling his countrymen to "observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all." And Washington might have somehow foreseen the poisonous relationships with Israel and the Saudis when he warned that " a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification."

George Washington or any of the other Founders would be appalled to see an America with 800 military bases overseas, allegedly for self-defense. The transfer of wealth from taxpayers to the military industrial complex and related entities like Wall Street has been catastrophic. The United States does not need to protect Israel and Saudi Arabia, two countries that are armed to the teeth and well able to defend themselves. Nor does it have to be in Syria and Afghanistan. And

If the United States were to withdraw its military from the Middle East and the rest of Asia tomorrow, it would be to nearly everyone's benefit. If the armed forces were to be subsequently reduced to a level sufficient to defend the United States it would put money back in the pockets of Americans and end the continuous fearmongering through surfacing of "threats" by career militarists justifying the bloated budgets.

... ... ...

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests [email protected] .

anon [355] Disclaimer , says: November 27, 2018 at 5:38 am GMT

US foreign policy is controlled by a few key ethnic groups and (to a lesser degree) the military-industrial complex.
Justsaying , says: November 27, 2018 at 6:04 am GMT

but even small steps in the right direction could initiate a gradual process of turning the United States into a more normal country in its relationships with the rest of the world rather than a universal predator and bully.

Cautious optimism may be better than none, but futile nonetheless. Bullying, dispossession, slavery and genocide constitute the very bedrock, the essence and soul of the founding of our country.

To expect mutations -- no matter how slow or fast in a trait that appears deeply embedded in our DNA is to be naive. Add to that the intractable stranglehold Zionists and organized world Jewry has on our nuts and decision making. A more congruent convergence of histories and DNAs would be hard to come by among other nations. Truth be told we simply know of no other kinder, gentler alternatives to perpetual war and destruction as the cornerstone of our foreign policy. Normality? Not in my lifetime.

Z-man , says: November 27, 2018 at 9:11 am GMT
Great article and I will spread it around.

Your CNI and 'If Americans Knew' informed me about Rand Paul's courageous move. I plan to call his office today to give him encouragement and call my Senators and Representative to urge them to support him (fat chance of that but I have to stick it in their face).

Hey, how about a Rand Paul-Tulsi Gabbard fusion ticket in 2024, not a bad idea, IMHO.

Going back to the Administration you can see the slimy Zionist hands of Steven Miller on all of those foreign policy statements. Trump is allowing this because he has to protect his flanks from Zionists, Christian or otherwise. He might be just giving Miller just enough rope to jettison him (wishful thinking on my part). Or he doesn't care or is unaware of the texts, a possibility.

anon [336] Disclaimer , says: November 27, 2018 at 9:26 am GMT
1. Because that defies human nature. See all of history if you disagree.

2. America doesn't have a policy because America is no longer a real nation. It's an empire filled with diverse groups of peoples who all hate each other and want to use the power of the government for the benefit of their overseas co-ethnics.

jilles dykstra , says: November 27, 2018 at 9:30 am GMT
The beginning of USA foreign policy for me is the 1820 or 1830 Monroe Declaration: south America is our backyard, keep out. Few people know that at the time European countries considered war on the USA because of this beginning of world domination. When I told this to a USA correspondent the reply was 'but this declaration still is taught here in glowing terms'.

What we saw then was the case until Obama, USA foreign policy was for internal political reasons. As Hollings stated in 2004 'Bush promising AIPAC the war on Iraq, that is politics'. No empire ever, as far as I know, ever was in the comfortable position to be able to let foreign policy to be decided (almost) completely by internal politics.

This changed during the Obama reign, the two war standard had to be lowered to one and a half. All of a sudden the USA had to develop a foreign policy, a policy that had to take into consideration the world outside the USA. Not the whole USA understands this, the die hards of Deep State in the lead.

What a half war accomplishes we see, my opinion, in Syria, a half war does not bring victory on an enemy who wages a whole war.
Assad is still there, Russia has airforce and naval bases in Syria.

Normally, as any history book explains, foreign policy of a country is decided on in secret by a few people. British preparations for both WWI and WWII included detailed technical talks with both the USA and France, not even all cabinet members knew about it. One of Trump's difficulties is that Deep State does not at all has the intention of letting the president decide on foreign policy, at the time of FDR he did what he liked, though, if one reads for example Baruch's memoirs, in close cooperation with the Deep State that then existed.

The question 'why do we not leave the rest of the world alone', hardly ever asked. The USA is nearly autarcic, foreign trade, from memory, some five percent of national income, a very luxurious position. But of course, leaving the rest of the world alone, huge internal consequences, as Hinckley explains with an example, politically impossible to stop the development of a bomber judged to be superfluous.

Barbara Hinckley Sheldon Goldman, American Politics and Government, Glenview Ill.,1990

Jim Christian , says: November 27, 2018 at 9:43 am GMT
Good luck. A fight over resources with the biggest consumer of resources, the People That Kill People and all their little buddies in the Alphabet Soup of Law Enforcement and Intelligence Depravity..

That could get a fella hurt. Ask Jack and Bob Kennedy.

Michael Kenny , says: November 27, 2018 at 10:10 am GMT
"The bilateral relationship between the U.S. and Russia is now worse than it was towards the end of the Cold War". Classic American cold warrior mentality. The present-day Russian Federation is assimilated to the former Soviet Union.
Johnny Rottenborough , says: Website November 27, 2018 at 11:31 am GMT
Tragically for America, and the West in general, President Trump is unrecognizable from candidate Trump :

'This is a crossroads in the history of our civilization that will determine whether or not we the people reclaim control over our government. The political establishment that is trying to stop us is the same group responsible for our disastrous trade deals, massive illegal immigration and economic and foreign policies that have bled our country dry Their financial resources are virtually unlimited, their political resources are unlimited, their media resources are unmatched, and most importantly, the depths of their immorality is absolutely unlimited.'

[Nov 27, 2018] terms that carry with them implicit moral connotations. Investment implies an action, even a sacrifice, undertaken for a better future. It evokes a future positive outcome. Another words that reinforces neoliberal rationality is "growth", Modernization and

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... And that bloody word...'modernisation' (Moderni- z -ation - for the management speak geeks). Why is it every time I come across that word in meetings, it means some worker is either losing money or losing their job? ..."
"... the monetisation of everything and the use of language to make the neo-liberal nightmare through which we are living seem, not only the norm, but the only way. ..."
"... Social security becomes welfare and suddenly masses of society (the majority of benefit claimants being in work) are not drawing on an insurance policy but are in receipt of 'welfare' subject to the largesse and judgements of an ever more cruel and avaricious 'elite'. ..."
"... I'm a big fan of Steven Poole's Unspeak , which looks at the way in which terms and terminology have been engineered precisely to hollow out meaning and present an argument instead. A kind of Neoliberal Emperor's New Clothes, the problem is that, obviously, if your vocabulary and your meanings become circumscribed, it limits what can be said, and even how people think about what's being said. ..."
Nov 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

restructuring

Sidfishes , 11 Jun 2013 04:26

And that bloody word...'modernisation' (Moderni- z -ation - for the management speak geeks). Why is it every time I come across that word in meetings, it means some worker is either losing money or losing their job? Or some manager is about to award themselves a bonus?
thesingingdetective -> gyges1 , 11 Jun 2013 04:22
@gyges1 - No, she is surely railing against the monetisation of everything and the use of language to make the neo-liberal nightmare through which we are living seem, not only the norm, but the only way.

Social security becomes welfare and suddenly masses of society (the majority of benefit claimants being in work) are not drawing on an insurance policy but are in receipt of 'welfare' subject to the largesse and judgements of an ever more cruel and avaricious 'elite'.

Language matters and its distortion is a political act.

michaelsylvain , 11 Jun 2013 04:17
But without these Exciting New Word Uprating Initiatives, we can never win The Global Race... or something.

I'm a big fan of Steven Poole's Unspeak , which looks at the way in which terms and terminology have been engineered precisely to hollow out meaning and present an argument instead. A kind of Neoliberal Emperor's New Clothes, the problem is that, obviously, if your vocabulary and your meanings become circumscribed, it limits what can be said, and even how people think about what's being said.

(By the way, the link's to Amazon, but, obviously, you may find you have a better "Customer Experience" if you get from somewhere less tax-dodgy.)

[Nov 27, 2018] The Argentinian military coup, like those in Guatemala, Honduras, Brazil, Paraguay, Bolivia and Nicaragua, was sponsored by the US to protect and further its interests during the Cold War. By the 1970s neoliberalism was very much part of the menu; paramilitary governments were actively encouraged to practice neoliberal politics; neoliberalism was at this stage, what communism was to the Soviet Union

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... I was, of course, referring to the families of the disappeared in Chile. They are, of course, relevant and should not be excluded from any arguments about neoliberalism and its effects. Nor should the families of the disappeared in Argentina, though it is less well known, the junta was entrusted with the introduction of neoliberal policies in Argentina. ..."
"... The Argentinian military coup, like those in Guatemala, Honduras, Brazil, Paraguay, Bolivia and Nicaragua, was sponsored by the US to protect and further its interests during the Cold War. By the 1970s neoliberalism was very much part of the menu; paramilitary governments were actively encouraged to practice neoliberal politics; neoliberalism was at this stage, what communism was to the Soviet Union; the ideological wing of the Cold War. You may be familiar with Operation Condor? ..."
"... It has been pretty firmly established that the Allende regime was victim of US sponsored military coup and that said coup was sponsored to protect US interests. The Chicago boys then flew into Chile to use the nation as a laboratory for the more outlandish (at the time) neoliberal policies they were unable to practice at home. ..."
"... The political class, with the aid of their subservient corporate media quislings, have taken our language apart and used it against us. We have been backed into a corner, we are told, by both Labour and Tories, that there is no choice, either rabid profiteering or penury and we have, to our everlasting shame, lapped up every word of it. ..."
"... We have become so embedded in the language of individuals, choice, contracts and competition that we cannot see any alternative. Even Adam Smith understood the difference between "economy" and "society" when he argued that labor is directly connected to public interest while business is connected to self-interest. If business took over the public sphere, Smith argued, this would be quite destructive. ..."
Nov 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com
maxfisher -> finnkn , 11 Jun 2013 07:45
@finnkn - Apologies. I was, of course, referring to the families of the disappeared in Chile. They are, of course, relevant and should not be excluded from any arguments about neoliberalism and its effects. Nor should the families of the disappeared in Argentina, though it is less well known, the junta was entrusted with the introduction of neoliberal policies in Argentina.

The Argentinian military coup, like those in Guatemala, Honduras, Brazil, Paraguay, Bolivia and Nicaragua, was sponsored by the US to protect and further its interests during the Cold War. By the 1970s neoliberalism was very much part of the menu; paramilitary governments were actively encouraged to practice neoliberal politics; neoliberalism was at this stage, what communism was to the Soviet Union; the ideological wing of the Cold War. You may be familiar with Operation Condor?

To be clear: I am arguing that the direct effects of 'actually existing neoliberalism' are very far from benign. I do not argue that the militarisation of Central and South America are the direct consequence neoliberal theory.

maxfisher -> finnkn , 11 Jun 2013 07:04
@finnkn - Well I think many would. It has been pretty firmly established that the Allende regime was victim of US sponsored military coup and that said coup was sponsored to protect US interests. The Chicago boys then flew into Chile to use the nation as a laboratory for the more outlandish (at the time) neoliberal policies they were unable to practice at home.

Neoliberalism was first practiced in authoritarian states; the states in which neoliberalism is most deeply embedded are (surprise, surprise) increasingly authoritarian, and neoliberalism solutions are regularly imposed on client/vulnerable states by suprastructures such as the IMF, the EU, and the World Bank. Friedrich Hayek and Adam Smith were very clear that the potential for degeneracy existed. We have now reached that potential; increasingly centralised authority, states within states, the denuding of democratic institutions and crony capitalism. Neoliberalism in practice is very different to neoliberalism in practice. Rather like 'really existing socialism' and Marxism.

works best in authoritarian states because (in practice, if not in theory

finnkn -> BaronessHawHaw , 11 Jun 2013 07:41

@BaronessHawHaw - Simply untrue.

http://www.pewglobal.org/2009/11/02/end-of-communism-cheered-but-now-with-more-reservations/

As the statistics on that link show, there are certain countries (notably Russia and the Ukraine) where the +65 age group disapprove of the change to democracy and capitalism. In the majority, however, people of all ages remain in favour.

retro77 -> anonid , 11 Jun 2013 07:10
@anonid -

For 'job' read 'bribe' (keep your mouth shut or lose it), for 'management' read 'take most of the interest out of the job for everybody else and put them on a lower scale', etc. I guess you get my drift.

It's sad that you have such a negative, self-hating attitude towards your work.

BobJanova , 11 Jun 2013 07:09

Work is usually – and certainly should be – a central source of meaning and fulfilment in human lives. And it has – or could have – moral and creative (or aesthetic) values at its core

Spoken like a true champagne socialist in a creative industry. How do you find meaning and fulfillment, or creative values, in emptying bins, cleaning offices, sweeping the streets and a whole load of other work which needs doing but which is repetitive, menial and not particularly pleasant?

There are two ways to get people to do work that needs doing but wouldn't be done voluntarily: coercion or payment. I think the second is a more healthy way to run a society.

retarius , 11 Jun 2013 07:07
I've thought pretty much the same myself. Democracies can be good or bad (as the Greeks knew well)...but in our politic-speak it is used to denounce and make good; as in "Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East"...it is intended to make us feel something good about Israel, as it humiliates the Palestinians and steals their land.

In ancient Greece....'tyrant' simply meant 'usurper' without any neccessary negative association....simply someone who had usurped political power...they recognized that tyrannies could be good, bad or indifferent.

In Rome, dictator simply meant the cahp that took over fpr periods of six months at a time, during times of crisis.

I used to vacation in Yugoslavia in Marshall Tito's time....it was a wonderful place, beautiful, inexpensive and safe...very very safe. What came into the power vacuum after he died in 1980...what happened to the country? I'd argue that his was a good dictatorship or tyranny....

I'm also not too sure what the 90% of people unaffected by and uninterested in power politics in any given country feel about the 'liberation' of Libya and Iraq from their prior dictatorships...I'm sure that plenty of people whose previously steady lives have been wrecked, are all that thrilled.

Antiquarian , 11 Jun 2013 07:06
I have recently been exercised by the right's adoption of "Social Justice". In the past it was the left and churches who talked of social justice as a phenomenon to empower the poor and dispossessed, whether in this country or the developing world. Social Justice was a touchstone of Faith in the City, for example, but it seems now to be the smoke screen behind which benefits are stipped from the "undeserving poor".
BaronessHawHaw , 11 Jun 2013 06:59
Most of this crap comes from America. Crappy middle-management bureaucrats spouting "free-market" bollocks.
The efficiency of the private sector - some nob with a name badge timing how long you've been on the toilet.
Freedommm!!!!
BlankReg -> joseph1832 , 11 Jun 2013 06:56
@ joseph1832 11 June 2013 9:24am . Get cifFix for Firefox .

It is not just neoliberalism. Everyone is at it - sucking the meaning out of words. Corporate bullshit, public sector bullshit. Being customers of your own government is a crime that everyone is guilty of. This is what Orwell railed against decades ago, and it has got worse.

Case in point; just look at the way in which the Cameron set about co-opting words and phrases justifiably applied to his own regime and repurposed them against his detractors.

For example, people who took a stand against the stealth privatisation of the NHS were branded as "vested interests", quite unlike the wholesome MPs who voted for the NHS bill who, despite the huge sums of money they received from the private healthcare lobby, we are encouraged to believe were acting in our best interests by selling our health service to their corporate paymasters. Or the farcical attempt to rebrand female Tory MPs as "feminists" despite their anti-social mobility, anti-equality, anti-human rights and anti-abortion views.

The political class, with the aid of their subservient corporate media quislings, have taken our language apart and used it against us. We have been backed into a corner, we are told, by both Labour and Tories, that there is no choice, either rabid profiteering or penury and we have, to our everlasting shame, lapped up every word of it.

Arabica Robusta -> Obelisk1 , 11 Jun 2013 06:55
@Obelisk1 - You have single-handedly proven Massey's argument. We have become so embedded in the language of individuals, choice, contracts and competition that we cannot see any alternative. Even Adam Smith understood the difference between "economy" and "society" when he argued that labor is directly connected to public interest while business is connected to self-interest. If business took over the public sphere, Smith argued, this would be quite destructive.
Snapshackle , 11 Jun 2013 06:50

Our whole conversation seemed somehow reduced, my experience of it belittled into one of commercial transaction. My relation to the gallery and to this engaging person had become one of instrumental market exchange.

But in the eyes of the economic right, that is precisely the case. Adjectives like altruistic, caring, selfless, empathy and sympathy are simply not in their vocabulary. They are only ever any of those things provided they can see some sort of beneficial payback at the end.

maxfisher -> Venebles 11 Jun 2013 06:20

@Venebles - I was simply joining many commentators in the mire. Those that dispute the neoliberal worldview are routinely dismissed as marxists. I thought I'd save you all the energy, duck.

I'm not sure that the families of the disappeared of Chile and Argentina would concur with you benign view of neoliberalism and its effects.

Liquidity Jones, 11 Jun 2013 06:04
Might as well define it.

Neoliberalism framework vs Full employment framework

Full employment. The 3 pillars

Redistributive pillar

Collective pillar

Neo-liberalism. The 3 pillars

Economic pillar

Redistributive pillar

Individuality pillar

[Nov 27, 2018] EU-wide 'anti-Russian psy-ops' program confirms UK govt funding, Anonymous denies leak

Notable quotes:
"... "clear that much of the material was indeed on the Integrity Initiative or Institute systems." ..."
"... The organization expressed outrage over the publication of emails belonging to its alleged agents, and implied that the Russian intelligence community must have been behind the leak. ..."
"... The leaked documents, if confirmed genuine, expose the II as a semi-secretive operation to coordinate efforts by seemingly independent journalists, academics and experts involved in exposing and countering "Russian propaganda." The documents say the program cost £1,961,000 ($2.5 million) this year alone. ..."
Nov 26, 2018 | www.rt.com
A network exposed by leaked documents as a Europe-wide PR operation aimed at curbing "Russian propaganda" has confirmed receiving money from the British government, while Anonymous has denied on Twitter that it's behind the leak. The Integrity Initiative (II) is a network claiming to fight disinformation that threatens democracy. A trove of alleged II documents, which purports to show costs and internal guidelines as well as names of individuals cooperating with it, has been published by people claiming to be part of the Anonymous collective. A major Anonymous-linked Twitter account has denied it was linked to the leak.

Also on rt.com Anonymous blows lid off huge psyop in Europe and it's funded by UK & US

Responding to the leak on Monday, the organization said it did indeed receive funding from the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) for the past two years, but insisted that private donors were its primary source of money.

The statement neither confirmed nor denied that the documents were genuine, saying that it didn't have time to validate them yet. But it said it was "clear that much of the material was indeed on the Integrity Initiative or Institute systems."

It claimed that many of the published documents were "dated and never used," and that many of the individuals listed as members of II "clusters of influencers" were never contacted by the program.

The documents not confirmed. However:
1. Their detail suggests they may be genuine
2. Nobody with knowledge has denied they're genuine
3. Some of those named have confirmed their association
4. Wkileaks hasn't evidenced its concerns
5. A history of some Wiki & Anonymous animosity

-- Charles Shoebridge (@ShoebridgeC) November 25, 2018

The organization expressed outrage over the publication of emails belonging to its alleged agents, and implied that the Russian intelligence community must have been behind the leak.

Russian news agency RIA Novosti contacted the FCO for comment about the disclosure, but its representative said that information about the II was "already in the public domain," and that the British diplomatic service was "happy for the project to receive greater exposure."

Interesting to watch Westerners picking up the Kremlin propaganda line that standing up to Putin's lying, thieving, murdering regime is 'anti Russian'. Putin and his enablers and appeasers are the true 'Russophobes'.

-- Integrity Initiative (@InitIntegrity) November 25, 2018

The leaked documents, if confirmed genuine, expose the II as a semi-secretive operation to coordinate efforts by seemingly independent journalists, academics and experts involved in exposing and countering "Russian propaganda." The documents say the program cost £1,961,000 ($2.5 million) this year alone.

RT, which reported on the leak last Friday, asked a number of alleged participants in the II program about their contribution. The majority of these have not yet replied, except for journalist Edward Lucas and Senior Fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council Stephen Blank.

It's been amusing to watch Putin sympathisers in the West who claim to be so adept at seeing through 'government lies' and 'MSM bias' uncritically swallow and regurgitate the version of events spread by Kremlin propaganda outlets that are known to relentlessly lie and distort.

-- Integrity Initiative (@InitIntegrity) November 25, 2018

If you like this story, share it with a friend!

[Nov 27, 2018] Ukraine To Impose Martial Law After Russia Fires At Ukraine Ships, Seizes Three Vessels Off Crimea

Nov 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Update 4 : A UN Security Council meeting has been called for 11am tomorrow after Ukraine incident with Russia, US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley said in a tweet.

* * *

Update 3 : according to media reports, on Monday Ukraine's president will propose imposing military law, amid the ongoing crisis with Russia.

* * *

Update 2: This is the moment when the escalating crisis started...

* * *

Update 1: Following reports from the Ukraine navy that Russian ships had fired on Ukraine vessels near the Kerch Strait, Ukraine accused Moscow of also illegally seizing three of its naval ships - the "Berdyansʹk" and "Nikopolʹ" Gurza-class small armored artillery boats and a raid tug A-947 "Jani Kapu" - off Crimea on Sunday after opening fire on them, a charge that if confirmed could ignite a dangerous new crisis between the two countries.

As reported earlier, Russia did not immediately respond to the allegation, but Russian news agencies cited the FSB security service as saying it had incontrovertible proof that Ukraine had orchestrated what it called "a provocation" and would make its evidence public soon. According to media reports, Russia said it has "impounded" three Ukrainian naval ships after they crossed the border with Russia

Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko immediately called a meeting with his top military and security chiefs to discuss the situation.

Separately, the EU has urged both sides to rapidly de-escalate the tense situation at the Kerch strait:

NATO has confirmed it is "closely monitoring" developments and is calling for "restraint and de-escalation"...

" NATO is closely monitoring developments in the Azov Sea and the Kerch Strait, and we are in contact with the Ukrainian authorities. We call for restraint and de-escalation.

NATO fully supports Ukraine's sovereignty and its territorial integrity, including its navigational rights in its territorial waters. We call on Russia to ensure unhindered access to Ukrainian ports in the Azov Sea, in accordance with international law.

At the Brussels Summit in July, NATO leaders expressed their support to Ukraine, and made clear that Russia's ongoing militarisation of Crimea, the Black Sea, and the Azov Sea pose further threats to Ukraine's independence and undermines the stability of the broader region. "

Finally, Ukraine has called for an urgent UN Security Council meeting over 'Russian aggression' while Ukraine's secretary for national security, Oleksander Turchynov, accused Russia of engaging in an act of war: "We heard reports on incident and have concluded that it was an act of war by Russian Federation against Ukraine"

* * *

As we detailed earlier, the Ukrainian navy has accused Russia of opening fire on some of its ships in the Black Sea, striking one vessel, and wounding a crew member.

In a statement on its Facebook page , the Ukrainian navy said the Russian military vessels opened fire on Ukrainian warships after they had left the 12-mile zone near the Kerch Strait, leaving one man wounded, and one Ukrainian vessel damaged and immobilized, adding that Russian warships "shoot to kill."

Ukraine accused a Russian coastguard vessel, named the Don, of ramming one of its tugboats in "openly aggressive actions". The incident allegedly took place as three Ukrainian navy boats - including two small warships - headed for the port of Mariupol in the Sea of Azov, an area of heightened tensions between the countries.

Russia accused Ukraine of illegally entering the area and deliberately provoking a conflict.

Sky News reports that the Ukrainian president has called an emergency session of his war cabinet in response to the incident.

"Today's dangerous events in the Azov Sea testify that a new front of [Russian] aggression is open," Ukrainian foreign ministry spokeswoman Mariana Betsa said.

"Ukraine [is] calling now for emergency meeting of United Nations Security Council."

It comes after a day of rising tensions off the coast of Crimea, and especially around the Kerch Strait, which separates Crimea from mainland Russia after Ukrainian vessels allegedly violated the Russian border. The passage was blocked by a cargo ship and fighter jets were scrambled.

According to RT , Russia has stopped all navigation through the waterway using the cargo ship shown above. Videos from the scene released by the Russian media show a large bulk freighter accompanied by two Russian military boats standing under the arch of the Crimea Bridge and blocking the only passage through the strait.

"The [Kerch] strait is closed for security reasons," the Director-General of the Crimean sea ports, Aleksey Volkov, told TASS, confirming earlier media reports.

Russian Air Force Su-25 strike fighters were also scrambled to provide additional security for the strait as the situation remains tense. The move came as five Ukrainian Navy ships had been approaching the strait from two different sides.

According to RT, two Ukrainian artillery boats and a tugboat initially approached the strait from the Black Sea while "undertaking dangerous maneuvers" and "defying the lawful orders of the Russian border guards." Later, they were joined by two more military vessels that departed from a Ukrainian Azov Sea port of Berdyansk sailing to the strait from the other side.

The Russian federal security agency FSB, which is responsible for maintaining the country's borders, denounced the actions of the Ukrainian ships as a provocation, adding that they could create a "conflict situation" in the region. According to the Russian media reports, the Ukrainian vessels are still sailing towards the strait, ignoring the warnings of the Russian border guards.

According to Reuters , a bilateral treaty gives both countries the right to use the sea, which lies between them and is linked by the narrow Kerch Strait to the Black Sea. Moscow is able to control access between the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea after it built a bridge that straddles the Kerch Strait between Crimea and southern Russia.

Reuters adds that tensions surfaced on Sunday after Russia tried to intercept three Ukrainian ships -- two small armored artillery vessels and a tug boat -- in the Black Sea, accusing them of illegally entering Russian territorial waters.

The Ukrainian navy said a Russian border guard vessel had rammed the tug boat, damaging it in an incident it said showed Russia was behaving aggressively and illegally. It said its vessels had every right to be where they were and that the ships had been en route from the Black Sea port of Odessa to Mariupol, a journey that requires them to go through the Kerch Strait.

Meanwhile, Russia's border guard service accused Ukraine of not informing it in advance of the journey, something Kiev denied, and said the Ukrainian ships had been maneuvering dangerously and ignoring its instructions with the aim of stirring up tensions.

It pledged to end to what it described as Ukraine's "provocative actions", while Russian politicians lined up to denounce Kiev, saying the incident looked like a calculated attempt by President Petro Poroshenko to increase his popularity ahead of an election next year. Ukraine's foreign ministry said in a statement it wanted a clear response to the incident from the international community.

"Russia's provocative actions in the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov have crossed the line and become aggressive," it said. "Russian ships have violated our freedom of maritime navigation and unlawfully used force against Ukrainian naval ships."

Both countries have accused each other of harassing each other's shipping in Sea of Azov in the past and the U.S. State Department in August said Russia's actions looked designed to destabilize Ukraine, which has two major industrial ports there.

[Nov 27, 2018] Ukraine Deploys Reservists To 10 Border Provinces As President Warns Of Russian Invasion

It is clear that Poroshenko wants to stay in power. And this is one of the ways to increase Poroshenko chances on forthcoming elections. It is simultaneously increase chances for him to land in jail as Timoshenko does not looks kindly on such blatant attempts to hijack elections.
Nov 27, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Unwilling to simply accept Poroshenko's claims that he had heard reliable whispers about an imminent Russian invasion, opposition figures pressed Poroshenko on his reasoning for the emergency measures, and ultimately succeeded in forcing him to water down the proposal. But even before Poroshenko's decree won the approval of lawmakers, the Ukrainian president had already started deploying troops into the streets of his country.

Now in a state of martial law, Ukraine has called up its reservists and deployed all available troops to join the mobilization. Initially expected to last for two months, Poroshenko revised his degree to avoid accusations that he would try to interfere in the upcoming Ukrainian election. The decree passed by the Rada will leave martial law in effect for 30 days. The country has also started restricting travel for Russian nationals. NATO Commander Jens Stoltenberg told the Associated Press that Poroshenko had given his word that the order wouldn't interfere with the upcoming vote. The conflict between the Ukraine and Russia exploded into life on Sunday when Russian ships fired on two Ukrainian artillery ships and rammed a tugboat as the ships traveled toward the Kerch Strait, which connects the Sea of Azov to the Black Sea. Russia's mighty Black Sea fleet has taken the three ships and their crew into custody, and has so far ignored calls to release the soldiers by the UN, European leaders and Poroshenko himself.

US officials criticized Russia for its "aggressive" defense of the Kerch Strait, which Ukraine has a right to use according to a bilateral treaty. After Nikki Haley said during an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council that Russia was making it "impossible" to have normal relations with the US, Mike Pompeo said Russia's "aggressive action" was a "dangerous escalation" and also "violates international law." He also advocated for Poroshenko and Russian President Vladimir Putin to engage in direct talks. Russia says the ships disobeyed orders to halt, and that Ukraine had failed to notify Russia of the ships' advance. Ukraine claims that it did notify Russia, and that the incident is the result of "growing Russian aggression." Six Ukrainian crewmen were injured in the Russian attack, which was the first act of violence between the two nations since the annexation of Crimea.

Chief diplomats from both countries traded accusations of provocations and "deliberate hostility."

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin tweeted that the dispute was not an accident and that Russia had engaged in "deliberately planned hostilities," while Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov blamed Kiev for what he described as a "provocation," adding that "Ukraine had undoubtedly hoped to get additional benefits from the situation, expecting the U.S. and Europe to blindly take the provocateurs' side."

Poroshenko said the martial law was necessary because Ukraine was facing nothing short of a all-out ground invasion.

Poroshenko said it was necessary because of intelligence about "a highly serious threat of a ground operation against Ukraine." He did not elaborate.

"Martial law doesn't mean declaring a war," he said. "It is introduced with the sole purpose of boosting Ukraine's defense in the light of a growing aggression from Russia."

But the president's plans to impose martial law throughout the country were rebuffed as the opposition forced a compromise where troops will only be deployed in 10 border provinces. These provinces share borders with Russia, Belarus and the Trans-Dniester, a pro-Moscow breakaway region of Moldova.

Still, many remained skeptical. Opposition figures, including former President Yulia Tymoshenko pointed out that the order would give soldiers broad latitude to do pretty much whatever they want. Furthermore, Ukraine never called for martial law during the insurgency in the east that erupted back in 2014, eventually leading to an armed conflict that killed more than 10,000.

The approved measures included a partial mobilization and strengthening of air defenses. It also contained vaguely worded steps such as "strengthening" anti-terrorism measures and "information security" that could curtail certain rights and freedoms.

But Poroshenko also pledged to respect the rights of Ukrainian citizens.

[...]

Despite Poroshenko's vow to respect individual rights, opposition lawmaker and former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko warned before the vote that his proposal would lead to the possible illegal searches, invasion of privacy and curtailing of free speech.

"This means they will be breaking into the houses of Ukrainians and not those of the aggressor nation," noted Tymoshenko, who is leading in various opinion polls. "They will be prying into personal mail, family affairs ... In fact, everything that is written here is a destruction of the lives of Ukrainians."

Poroshenko's call also outraged far-right groups in Ukraine that have advocated severing diplomatic ties with Russia. Hundreds of protesters from the National Corps party waved flares in the snowy streets of Kiev outside parliament and accused the president of using martial law to his own ends.

But Poroshenko insisted it was necessary because what happened in the Kerch Strait between Crimea and the Russian mainland "was no accident," adding that "this was not the culmination of it yet."

His critics reacted to his call for martial law with suspicion, wondering why Sunday's incident merited such a response. With his approval ratings in free fall following a series of corruption scandals, Poroshenko's enemies worry that the incident may have been stage-managed to give the president an excuse to crack down on dissent and free movement ahead of the vote.

Joe A , 8 minutes ago link

And then there is Yulia Tymoshenko who is doing well in the polls. That crazy bitch said that the separatists in the East should be nuked. Ukraine gave up on its nukes though.

Wise lesson for the West here: All politicians in Eastern Europe -whatever country and whatever party- are sick psychopaths. Not that ours are any better. Yet, people keep voting for them.

Oxbo Rene , 10 minutes ago link

Going by the book ! ! ! !

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEyujOSEexM

The Terrible Sweal , 21 minutes ago link

Russia could take the entire south and east of the Ukraine in a weekend jaunt and the people living there would cheer it on.

Joe A , 4 minutes ago link

Perhaps but Putin has more interest to keep the situation as it is. Russian gas needs to keep flowing into Europe. Russia needs that cash cow that the US is trying to disrupt .

WTFUD , 38 minutes ago link

Did we ever find out who arrested/confiscated Ukraine's GOLD stash in the wee hours on the tarmac?

Find them and the Answers to their plethora of problems will materialise. I feel it in my water.

The Terrible Sweal , 28 minutes ago link

High price for Vicki's cookies

Justin Case , 24 minutes ago link

One of my Russian mates sent me a link to a Russian news website and according to the iskra-news.info last night ,Ukrainian gold reserves (40 sealed boxes) were loaded on an unidentified transport aircraft in Kiev's Borispol airport. The plane took off immediately.

A source in the Ukrainian government confirmed that the transfer of the gold reserves of Ukraine to the United States was ordered by the acting PM Arseny Yatsenyuk.

So my guess is, that is if indeed this report is true it either means the new ruling elite have stolen the gold bullion or perhaps their is a legitimate fear of the Russians taking possession of this bullion, whatever the facts, it still looks very shady indeed.

Conclusion

Official narrative: gold bullion is going to USA (maybe to reassure the Germans their gold is in safe hands, after all the despite numerous requests from the German Govt The Feds have not given access for them to even view their Gold Bullion) . Real narrative: probably to Switzerland where it is divided between Yulia Tymoshenko and her cronies.

StheNine , 40 minutes ago link

Porky doesn't want to go.

The video of the incident shows the ukraine vessel not responding-clear violation and a provocative act.

NATO is willing to sacrifice the people of ukraine just to bother Putin.

cglabb , 51 minutes ago link

There will be wars.....and rumors of wars

This is sooo McCain 2.0

Once again I simply implore one ACTUAL journalist to report on what's happening there.

Beside the mercenary sociopaths that took in millions off the first round of "freedom".

Russia is a hurt and vulnerable nation.

The US has ginormous truth issues never to be resolved

Hence the Goths and Barbarians will agree that once more......Rome is burning

Btw, not defending Russia and as convoluted as it sounds my point is truth has been lost even in this Instagram milli-second of info slop offering by those who are not standing in the snow covered mud of unbiased reality

rejected , 52 minutes ago link

I always thought Ukrainians were smarter than this.

Guess not.

So far being the USA's bitch they have lost 1/3 of their country and about to lose another 1/3.

Their GDP went into the dirt and the average monthly wage is half what it was.

But they still keep doubling down on stupid!

johnnycanuck , 1 minute ago link

US foreign policy writ large.

Create chaos.

Offer solution.

If we can find one.

Chaos however, is our middle name.

Just thought of that old bastard Ledeen. "Creative destruction "

johnnycanuck , 57 minutes ago link

The last time Poroshenko, the US man in Ukraine (OU) as he was referred to in US diplomatic cables from 2006 and exposed by Wkikleads, got the Ukes into a war with the Eastern oblasts, a lot of Ukrainians got killed.

Hopefully they won't play his game this time.

The Terrible Sweal , 50 minutes ago link

Yeah, Porko, the hero of Debaltsev.

johnnycanuck , 26 minutes ago link

Poor buggers were crushed and they should never have been there. The US / McCain et al used them as cannon fodder.

The Uke military had rotted after the breakup of the Soviet Union, and that was largely because their corrupt leaders never gave any consideration to going to war against anyone, other than political war against each other to determine who got the biggest slice from plundering the state.

The plundering continues, only now there is scant left for the general population.

After the US putsch, income per capita dropped by approx a third, cost of living doubled and tax collection was hampered even more than before because the average Uke had no money left to pay taxes so they went underground. and paid off local officials just to let them make a living doing whatever the could..

IMF injections have kept the body warm. So far.

TahoeBilly2012 , 1 hour ago link

It ain't Ukraine, it's about gnawing away at Putin controlling Russia. How dare you stand in the way of our *** WORLD ORDER !! It's ours damn you!!

researchfix , 41 minutes ago link

Ukraine soldiers and officers will be the only ones who surrender quicker than the French.

I don´t blame them for that, they know Russians won´t hurt them.

squid , 38 minutes ago link

No one ever asks the obvious question:

"Why would Russia want Ukraine in the first place?".

Lets see.....so they can fund an addition 50 million lazy ***** and pick up the tab for 25 million fat, diabetes ridden BROKE Ukrainian pensioners?

So Russia can sink tens of billions into Ukraine's bankrupt healthcare system?

Where is the upside for Russia?

Putin can add, he is not in the least bit interested in ruling Ukraine, he'd just as well seal the ******* boarder and be done with it, in fact its what he is doing. Once those alternate pipe lines are in there will be a 5,000 km fence and the Ukes can freeze in the dark on their own.

Squid

Justin Case , 13 minutes ago link

Russia isn't interested in taking any country, the countries are warming up to Russia and China. This is pissing off mushroom head and band of gypsies in DC. The failing empire looking for a war.

Algo Rhythm , 1 hour ago link

If a vote of the people in Crimea to leave Ukraine is an annexation, Zero Hedge is a truther website.

Please stop using incorrect US government propaganda language in your articles.

I Am Jack's Macroaggression , 1 hour ago link

Call it the Kosovo Rule

or the Laugher Rule

It is very important to the Zios and Russiphobes to ignore what Crimeans themselves want.

https://consortiumnews.com/2016/02/11/how-crimeans-see-ukraine-crisis/

https://consortiumnews.com/2015/03/22/crimeans-keep-saying-no-to-ukraine/

44magnum , 13 minutes ago link

"Please stop using incorrect US government propaganda language in your articles."

US Intel cant remember everything remember they have an agenda to push. It might be a truther website for the people posting but it is also a intel gathering site to keep abreast of how some of the sheeple really feel. What better way to get the sheeple to open up?

Stuto , 1 hour ago link

Watch out for a false flag. Demon rats planted one of their own to control the country.

TahoeBilly2012 , 1 hour ago link

Reminds me of Hogan's Heroes for some reason.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onZm-1GjYdw

[Nov 27, 2018] The GRU could obviously learn a few lessons from Browder

Notable quotes:
"... Now Browder is suspected of organizing and leading a criminal community in Russia ..."
Nov 27, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Warren November 26, 2018 at 3:35 pm

https://youtu.be/YvxpNAXLaBI

Vesti News
Published on 26 Nov 2018
Subscribe to Vesti News
On Monday, the Russian General Prosecutor's Office announced the initiation of a new criminal case against William Browder, an international schemer and fraudster. Now Browder is suspected of organizing and leading a criminal community in Russia. For many years, Browder has been making frantic efforts to avoid going to Russian prison.

Mark Chapman November 26, 2018 at 11:33 pm

Well, lucky for him Interpol can't come after him, now that he almost singlehandedly prevented a Russian from becoming Director. He's only Assistant Director, so he must be powerless.
Mark Chapman November 26, 2018 at 11:41 pm
There; you see? The GRU could obviously learn a few lessons from Browder. If you want to rub someone out, don't use a distinctive nerve agent that everyone will know came from Russia, you numbskulls. Try to make it something undetectable, but if you can't manage that, at least make it something so general it might have come from anywhere. Then immediately announce that Browder did it.

[Nov 27, 2018] Russia-Ukraine Fight Over Narrow Sea Passage Risks Wider War

If Russia can prove that Poroshenko administration staged this conflict for election purposes and members of SBU were on board, he is not only a toast election-wise. He might face prosecution from the newly elected government of Yulia Timoshenko. Yulia has a long memory and she definitely view this as an attempt to steal elections.
Nov 27, 2018 | www.nytimes.com

The Kremlin, along with some Ukrainian opposition figures, called the martial drumbeats echoing from Kiev a domestic political ploy by its embattled president, Petro O. Poroshenko. They accused him of fearmongering in order to delay or at least reconfigure the March 31 election that he had seemed certain to lose.

Mr. Poroshenko delivered a speech to Ukraine's Parliament asking it to approve the declaration of martial law starting on Wednesday, with the military already on full alert. The attack on the naval vessels near the shared waterway, the Kerch Strait, represented a new stage of aggression in what he called Russia's "hybrid war" against Ukraine.

"This is a bold and frank participation of the regular units of the Russian Federation, their demonstrative attack on the detachment of the Ukrainian Armed Forces," Mr. Poroshenko said. "This is a qualitatively different situation, a qualitatively different threat."

Members of 450-member Verkhovna Rada, the Parliament, who were present voted overwhelmingly to support the measure -- 276 to 30 -- after the president agreed to dilute its scope.

Ukraine also received a boost from the international reaction, underscoring both the isolation of Russia from the West over the Ukraine conflict, and the desire to protect the international maritime convention that allows for unimpeded shipping through any strait.

... ... ...

The Kremlin remained largely silent for much of the day. It was left to Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov to address the issue , and his ministry accused Ukraine of creating threats to normal shipping traffic in the strait by violating international maritime law, and trying to foment a crisis for domestic political purposes.

... ... ...

Asked about events during his daily briefing, Dmitri S. Peskov, Mr. Putin's spokesman, framed the Russian actions against the Ukrainian boats as an interception, not an attack.

"The question here is of incursion into the territorial waters of the Russian Federation by foreign military vessels," Mr. Peskov said. "They entered the territorial waters of Russia without responding to any queries from our border guards, in no way responded to offers to make use of pilotage service, and so on and so forth."

... ... ...

There was, however, a widespread sense among opposition figures and analysts that Mr. Poroshenko aimed to put off the March election, noting that he had not called for martial law during previous points in the conflict when the fighting was far worse.

Mr. Poroshenko tried to assuage that criticism by cutting the period of martial law from two months to one, so it would not interfere with the official start of the campaign season on Dec. 31.

Other compromises mean that the martial law declaration will only affect the 10 provinces bordering Russia or Transnistria, a breakaway province of neighboring Moldova, also controlled by Russian-backed forces.

The president also promised that martial law would not be used to curb civil liberties or to announce a general military mobilization, and that it would only be enforced in the case of new attacks. Still, the very prospect of martial law could help boost support for him as a wartime leader.

[Nov 27, 2018] Conflict over control of the passage of Kerch strait has a long history

Nov 27, 2018 | www.nytimes.com

Ukraine had previously sought and been granted permission for similar passages, according to official Russian accounts, but did not this time.

But Ukraine wants to assert its continued sovereignty in areas which Russia considers its own, analysts said. Controlling passage from the Black Sea through the Kerch Strait into the Sea of Azov is a key element in asserting Russia's broader claim to Crimea.

"Moscow clearly seeks to turn the Azov Sea into a Russian basin, and to use it to bring leverage to bear on Kiev," wrote Mark Galeotti, an expert on Russian intelligence services at the Institute of International Relations in Prague, on Twitter . "It wants to demonstrate its capacity to act without having to worry about external constraint."

The two sides signed an agreement in 2003 to guarantee free passage through the strait, but in recent months have been harassing each other's ships. The port of Mariupol and a couple of others are important for the Ukrainian economy for exports of steel and grain, as well as for imports.

Steven Pifer, a former American ambassador to Ukraine, said that the Kremlin might be testing the level of support for Ukraine using the waterway. "They can very easily back off," he said. "But if they sense the reaction is weak, I think that they will continue the blockade."

[Nov 27, 2018] The only war the US will fight with Iran is a nuclear war.

Nov 27, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

Paul Greenwood , October 23, 2018 at 07:28

The only war the US will fight with Iran is a nuclear war. A population of 80 million bordering Pakistan with 197 million is a big effort and the US has been a complete flop with even 35 million Afghans and $2 Trillion spent. Israel can play the "Polish Card" the one FDR used to blackmail Chamberlain into declaring war in 1939 – and boy did he apply pressure ! – but it won't help Israel survive and more than Poland did.

Israel cannot "solve the Palestinian problem" any more than the "Jewish problem" was solved when Tsarist Russia let them emigrate to USA and USA stopped them emigrating from Nazi Germany under Johnson-Reed Act 1924 as in case of SS St Louis in 1939 sent back to Germany.

Israel will never resolve the problem they perceive. The actions of their ally and friend Mohammed bin Salman will make it nigh on impossible now the crudity of the gangsters running alongside Israel are plain to see and Trump had better read up on Uncle Remus and the Tar Baby

Tom Welsh , October 23, 2018 at 11:38

A thermonuclear attack on Iran by the USA would probably trigger a response by Russia. The Russian defence doctrine clearly states that thermonuclear weapons will be used in the event of an attack on Russia or its allies.

How close an ally Iran is in that context may be debatable; but Russia could not afford to stand by while Iran was destroyed.

[Nov 27, 2018] Poroshenko's worse than a lame duck. That the Rada acted somewhat independently is a good sign

The net effect of marital law for 30 days in those region might surprise Poroshenko and his handlers
Notable quotes:
"... Russia's FSB says that among the Ukrainian crew members detained are two guys from Ukraine's domestic secret service SBU... ..."
"... I'd also guess that "f*ck the EU" is still the order of the day. These provocations will be used to put more pressure on EU to increase military spending and accept US natural gas. ..."
"... This provocation just seems to be straight out of the FUKUS playbook...i am not sure that poroshenko is smart enough to have laid all this out...he is just a motivated servant(election he is sure to lose) following the orders of his financiers... ..."
"... Well, good luck to Kiev in trying to maintain a police state apparatus in the eastern, southeastern and southern parts of Ukraine. If there's one thing that will break up Ukraine as a political entity, surely it's got to be actions on Kiev's part that punish people in those oblasts just for being next door to Russia or for not being Nazi enough. ..."
"... The current Ukie provocation may well be to take the Aleppo CW attack out of the news. Around 2014 2015 In noticed that when blocked on one front, the US et al (I have started to think in terms of a five-eyes permanent state) would move to another front - Ukraine, Syria, South China Sea. The last couple of years, their attention seems to have been mostly on Syria, Iran and the middle east. ..."
Nov 27, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
Zanon , Nov 26, 2018 2:21:32 PM | link
< Live update- US Senator Urges Trump to Boost Ukraine Security Aid Before Meeting Putin>
https://sptnkne.ws/keAM

Brendan , Nov 26, 2018 2:23:45 PM | link


At the UN today, US Ambassador Nikki Haley denounced what she called Russia's "outrageous violation of sovereign Ukrainian territory".
She didn't say which laws were violated or mention that the ships were Navy vessels:

"Let's be clear about what is known.

Ukrainian ships set sail from one Ukrainian port to another Ukrainian port. They attempted to do so by the only possible way to go, through the Kerch Strait. Both Russia and Ukraine use the strait routinely. But this time, Russia decided to prevent passage of the Ukrainian ships, rammed them, and then opened fire on them.

This is no way for a law-abiding, civilized nation to act. Impeding Ukraine's lawful transit through the Kerch Strait is a violation under international law."
https://usun.state.gov/remarks/8784

the pessimist , Nov 26, 2018 2:32:16 PM | link
TASS article claims that the FSB posted a video of the questioning of the Ukrainian sailors. Anyone seen it?

Here is a choice provocative piece by Stephen Blank linked in the Kyiv Post:

http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/russia-s-provocations-in-the-sea-of-azov-what-should-be-done

Harold Smith , Nov 26, 2018 2:51:54 PM | link
This provocation was probably planned by the evil orange clown in the white house and his handlers, for the express purpose of creating an excuse (look Ma, more "Russian aggression") that the demonic orange poseur can use to avoid meeting with Vladimir Putin.
Peter AU 1 , Nov 26, 2018 3:00:29 PM | link
The amount of assets Russia put into this operation most likely means there is a lot more going on than has been reported on.
From the reports I have read, this was an FSB operation. FSB duties according to wikipedia "Its main responsibilities are within the country and include counter-intelligence, internal and border security, counter-terrorism, and surveillance as well as investigating some other types of grave crimes and federal law violations."
Laguerre , Nov 26, 2018 3:45:43 PM | link
re 105

You mean the Russians knew in advance what the Ukies were planning. Not difficult with ships, which move slowly.

the pessimist , Nov 26, 2018 4:00:29 PM | link
https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/parliament-approves-martial-law-in-10-oblasts-for-30-days.html

"Ukraine's parliament approved late on Nov. 26 the imposition of 30 days of martial law in 10 oblasts located on the Russian border, the border with the Russian-controlled Transnistria region of Moldova and oblasts located by the Black and Azov seas.

The 276 lawmakers out of 330 present in parliament voted in favor of a bill by President Petro Poroshenko who proposed it in response to Russian escalation in the Black Sea.Ukraine's parliament approved late on Nov. 26 the imposition of 30 days of martial law in 10 oblasts located on the Russian border, the border with the Russian-controlled Transnistria region of Moldova and oblasts located by the Black and Azov seas.

The 276 lawmakers out of 330 present in parliament voted in favor of a bill by President Petro Poroshenko who proposed it in response to Russian escalation in the Black Sea. ...

... In an address to the nation that preceded the vote, Poroshenko sad martial law will take effect at 9 a.m. Kyiv time on Nov. 28. It will include Vinnytsia, Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, Mykolayiv, Odesa, Sumy, Chernihiv, Kharkiv and Kherson oblasts.

It will enable the military to take over control over these areas and restrict the civic and political rights of their residents. The text of the bill is still now published and the lawmakers voted for it based on the oral presentation of parliament speaker Andriy Parubiy.

Parliament passed it after 10 hours of backroom discussions and disputes in the meeting hall, amid swearing and insults.

Many found it odd to impose the martial law in the fifth year of Russia's war against Ukraine and claimed Poroshenko offered the bill to postpone the presidential elections in 2019. According to recent polls, he has the highest negative rating among all the candidates and low chances to win.

Under pressure, Poroshenko agreed to limit martial law to 30 days instead the earlier planned 60 days and restrict its scope to 10 oblasts instead of the entire territory of Ukraine.

Speaking in parliament, Poroshenko also assured the lawmakers he was going to implement the martial law "explicitly in case of the Russian aggression on the ground." Otherwise, there will be no limitations of the human rights in these areas, h said."

Andrey Subbotin , Nov 26, 2018 4:01:25 PM | link
@103 https://youtu.be/fZGbkkOOuDA - video of the questioning in Russian. No new revelations, just a few sailors saying more or less the same thing - yes, we got the orders to cross into Azov sea and intentionally ignored Russian commands.

There is also a timeline published by FSB in Russian at http://www.fsb.ru/fsb/press/message/single.htm%21id%3D10438315%40fsbMessage.html that basically says
* Ukrainian ships approached, stated their intent to cross the straits and said they do not recognize Russian authority
* Russia blocked the straits, standoff continued for some time
* Russia intercepted radio calls discussing leaving slow tug behind and charging the straits with two gunboats
* The gunboats uncovered their autocannons; night approached
* at some point FSB decided it might end badly and ordered the ships to surrender. Faced with overwhelming force, and not being suicidal, they more or less did

james , Nov 26, 2018 4:01:51 PM | link
@105 laguerre.. i think the issue of some in the usa suggesting to blow up the bridge, not to mention some loose cannons in the ukraine maybe saying something similar, has put russia in a different position then otherwise... obviously they can monitor anything moving in the vicinity via water, very easily.. the tactical nuke story was probably a pile of bs, or we would have been told more by now, after russia ceased the tug...

however, perhaps the biggest issue is how the west under the leadership of the usa-uk - have wanted to ramp up the hostility towards russia in all ways... this can't go unnoticed by ordinary observers, including russia, here.. this is the type of environment that the west has intentionally cultivated... this event is a byproduct of their indiscretion..

karlof1 , Nov 26, 2018 4:20:01 PM | link
Peter AU 1 @105--

The rumored suitcase nuke likely activated the FSB besides the fact that some sort of provocation's been expected since the Kerch Bridge construction began. The videos I've seen show lots of commercial freighters--12-14, perhaps more--and other vessels on a lovely day to be out on the water. The provocation also conveniently upstaged any mention of the terrorist chemical attack in Aleppo and further Turkish Khashoggi drips. Although written before the provocation, Alastair Crooke's latest is of tangential import as the Il-20 shootdown's stiffening of Russian resolve wasn't limited to Syria and has likely had ripple effects throughout Russia's military and security services.

Jen , Nov 26, 2018 4:39:07 PM | link
Jackrabbit @ 96:

I re-read Point 9 in The Pessimist's comment @ 47 again:
Martial law will also allow to cancel diplomatic agreements with the enemy and to seize the property of the aggressor that is on the territory of Ukraine

In other words, martial law would not only allow Ukraine to continue ignoring Minsk I and II agreements but also allow it to invade and claim Crimea and the city of Sevastopol.

The naval base in Sevastopol is more valuable to the Americans than Crimea and Ukraine themselves. They also want to get rid of the Turkstream gas pipeline which opened recently.

Ahhh, got the answer to The Pessimist's query @ 54! If the Ukrainians provoke an incident with Russia, then Russia (according to their thinking) will retaliate with force, justifying Poroshenko's call for martial law and the compulsory military draft and putting Ukraine on a war footing that go with it. (This would "explain" the gas and water stoppages as well.) Martial law would enable Ukraine (along with assistance from NATO "advisors") to seize Crimea and Sevastopol. Sevastopol could be delivered to the Americans.

With the naval base transferred to the US military, the Black Sea effectively becomes a US lake and the Turkstream gas pipeline from Russia to Turkey (which would supply gas to southeast Europe and Italy) becomes a target for attack.

Jen , Nov 26, 2018 4:40:54 PM | link
Re my comment @ 111: Sorry, Turkstream hasn't started yet - construction finished this month (November).
james , Nov 26, 2018 4:50:09 PM | link
@ jen... that would be yet another way to start ww3... i am sure the neo cons running usa-uk-west - foreign policy, are working full time to accomplish this...
Ger , Nov 26, 2018 4:57:44 PM | link
Jen@36

'Coming to a blog near us ...... all Ukrainians being subjected to a compulsory military draft'

Thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of young military age men have fled Ukraine.... much like young white men fled the US war of aggression on Viet Nam. Ukraine does not have millions of young black children to fight their war using the draft. They will need to draft housewives and broke down farmers.

Zanon , Nov 26, 2018 5:29:32 PM | link
Ger

Even kids..
Teaching Kids to Kill at a Far Right Nationalist Summer Camp in Ukraine

"We never aim guns at people, but we don't count separatists, little green men, occupiers from Moscow, as people. So we can and should aim at them."

https://www.mintpressnews.com/training-kids-to-kill-at-a-far-right-nationalist-summer-camp-in-ukraine/251845/

Scotch Bingeington , Nov 26, 2018 6:01:31 PM | link
To add to the many thank-you notes - thank you, b, superb job staying on top of unfolding events! Highly appreciated!

Russia's FSB says that among the Ukrainian crew members detained are two guys from Ukraine's domestic secret service SBU... https://sputniknews.com/russia/201811261070150606-russia-ukraine-kerch-sbu-fsb/

If this is true there can't be any denying the incident was a deliberate provocation.

karlof1 , Nov 26, 2018 6:32:49 PM | link
Seems the best situation for Ukrainians in general who want peaceful relations with Russia and an end to the UrkoNazi nightmare would be for the Rada to declare war against Russia then, a la The Mouse That Roared , surrender and allow Russia to gain control so they could thaw out, drink water and eat decent food again. The polling data presented shows no one potential leader has anything near to a majority of people having confidence in her/him, which is the real bankruptcy of Ukraine engineered by UK/US/EU, leading one to wonder what numbers Putin would garner.
exiled off mainstreet , Nov 26, 2018 6:37:01 PM | link
Perhaps now that the Poroshenko regime has ordered a general mobilisation, it is time for Russia to liquidate this regime once and for all. I recognize that this threatens nuclear war, but the mobilisation order seems to indicate that the Ukrainian regime attacked first and makes it a bit less likely that nuclear war might ensue if this problem is liquidated once and for all. Of course, the cost of redevelopment of this failed state will be humongous.
Jackrabbit , Nov 26, 2018 6:45:56 PM | link
the pessimist @107

I'd guess that Porky will try to extend and expand the martial law sometime before it expires.

I'd also guess that "f*ck the EU" is still the order of the day. These provocations will be used to put more pressure on EU to increase military spending and accept US natural gas.

oldenyoung , Nov 26, 2018 7:03:02 PM | link
This provocation just seems to be straight out of the FUKUS playbook...i am not sure that poroshenko is smart enough to have laid all this out...he is just a motivated servant(election he is sure to lose) following the orders of his financiers... his willingness to pay for a "full readiness" military operation, when his people are freezing to death and have no money...seems more like a desperate servant than a leader of the people...he is expendable as far as everyone is concerned...
The legal paperwork for the martial law was completed weeks before this provocation was launched...the MSM had their stories all ready to go..
I am not certain where FUKUS is going to take this, but i think they will try to get NATO embroiled in it...that could be a real problem...
Jen , Nov 26, 2018 7:52:51 PM | link
The Pessimist @ 107, Jackrabbit @ 119:

Noticed that Poroshenko's martial law applies to those oblasts that border Russia to the north and east, the southern oblasts that border Crimea or which have a seaboard, and Vinnitsya and Odessa oblasts to the southwest because those two oblasts border the self-proclaimed maverick Transnistria Republic. So there is pressure being applied as well to Transnistria Republic to swallow its pride and return to Moldova with tail between its legs. On top of that, the oblasts being subjected to martial law are dominated by Russian-language speakers and these oblasts are also the oblasts that supported Viktor Yanukovych and his party in Presidential elections in 2010.

No oblasts in the northwest part of the country bordering EU nations (that is, the hardcore Banderite-Nazi strongholds) have been subjected to martial law.

Well, good luck to Kiev in trying to maintain a police state apparatus in the eastern, southeastern and southern parts of Ukraine. If there's one thing that will break up Ukraine as a political entity, surely it's got to be actions on Kiev's part that punish people in those oblasts just for being next door to Russia or for not being Nazi enough.

karlof1 , Nov 26, 2018 8:21:34 PM | link
The Saker's Update reports :

"Looks like Poroshenko ran into some real problems in the Rada. Unsurprisingly, pretty much all the political parties have immediately understood what this was all about and have categorically rejected the text Poroshenko submitted. They only adopted a much watered-down version in which the martial law is introduced only for one month, not two, and the fact that the elections will take place as scheduled has been re-confirmed ." [Emphasis mine]

Poroshenko's worse than a lame duck. That the Rada acted somewhat independently is a good sign.

Peter AU 1 , Nov 26, 2018 8:27:40 PM | link
karlof1 110

Thanks for the link to Crooke's article. The Khashoggi killing looks to have been a game changer for the region and Crooke sums it up well. The current Ukie provocation may well be to take the Aleppo CW attack out of the news. Around 2014 2015 In noticed that when blocked on one front, the US et al (I have started to think in terms of a five-eyes permanent state) would move to another front - Ukraine, Syria, South China Sea. The last couple of years, their attention seems to have been mostly on Syria, Iran and the middle east.

the pessimist , Nov 26, 2018 8:33:45 PM | link
Jen@121 yes exactly. The monstrousnes of US foreign policy and its consequences still staggers and shames me, despite my cynicism. Empowering such people, providing weapons and encouragement even when they are not more directly involved.
John Gilberts , Nov 26, 2018 8:55:56 PM | link
"...Over the past four years over 1,000 Canadian troops (a rotation of 200 every six months) has deployed to the Ukraine to train a force that includes the best-organized neo-Nazis in the world. Far right militia members are part of the force fighting Russia-aligned groups in eastern Ukraine.

Five months ago Canada's military attache in Kiev, Colonel Brian Irwin, met privately with officers from the Azov battalion, who use the Nazi 'Wolfangal' symbol and praise officials who helped slaughter Jews during WWII. According to Azov, the Canadian officials concluded the June briefing by expressing 'their hopes for further fruitful cooperation.'

More generally, Canadians have fundraised for and joined rightist militias fighting inside Ukraine. For their part, top politicians have spoken alongside and marched with members of Ukraine's Right Sector, which said it was 'defending the values of White Christian Europe against the loss of the Nation and deregionalisation.'

The Neo-Nazis in Canada's Military - by Yves Engler https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/11/26/the-neo-nazis-in-canadas-military/

Daniel C , Nov 26, 2018 9:04:22 PM | link
Didnt they try to sail a US ship near Crimea a few years back and it wound up having its electronics quickly disabled and fighter jets flown at it to show it can easily be sunk? There's provoking these guys with sanctions but if you're going to escalate it and threaten so sail a fleet into its territory, I'd expect a war. Im sure they've already prepared for this to potentially happen and that fleet would be hit with missiles from all angles. Ridiculous
Peter AU 1 , Nov 26, 2018 9:08:54 PM | link
John Gilberts 125

Not just Canada. The five eyes permanent state utilises nazis, wahhabi's and zionists - zionist's it seems being deeply embedded in the permanent state.

Fernando Martinez , Nov 26, 2018 9:15:52 PM | link
Great reporting
james , Nov 26, 2018 9:22:28 PM | link
smoothies article on this topic - http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/11/poroshenkos-gambit.html

@121 jen.. thanks for the more detailed analysis on that...

@125 john gilberts.. thanks... have you contacted The Honourable Harjit Singh Sajjan MP who is the dept. of defense minister on this? here is his e mail.. [email protected]

sad canuck , Nov 26, 2018 11:01:45 PM | link
Not much to see here. The empire's little gas monkeys got off their leash in Syria and did something stupid and embarrassing, so a diversion was required to avoid all those uncomfortable questions at the UN. Luckily the embarrassingly half-witted, submissive Ukrainian leadership is only too happy to help out the empire and sacrifice its soldiers and national interests. The alphabet agencies must ROFL at the clowns in Kyiv. Local population not so much.
Hoarsewhisperer , Nov 26, 2018 11:28:47 PM | link
...
i) A vessel to starboard has right of way.
ii) A larger vessel has right of way over a smaller vessel.

The small Ukrainian tug had the larger Russian vessel to its starboard (rules i and ii against it). The tug effectively cut across the bow of the larger Russian vessel and slowed down in front of it. The Russian vessel was turning away to minimise the inevitable impact arising from the deliberate actions of Ukranian captain of the tug.

Posted by: Entropy Wins | Nov 26, 2018 1:59:52 PM | 97

Thanks for the clarification/refresher.

So whilst the optics look bad, the rules obliged the tug to get out of the way. Nice.

It's an amplification of the routine pre-race jostling behind the START line before a yacht race. If your timing is lousy then you'll cross the START line before the gun goes off and be disqualified unless you go back and cross the START line AFTER the gun fired. A majority of casual Sunday yacht racers are just there to have fun and are happy to sit well back from the line with limp sails and yank them tight when the gun has fired, and leave the jostling to the fanatics.

Peter AU 1 , Nov 26, 2018 11:50:48 PM | link
Hoarsewhisperer 131

Apart from the ramming of the tug boat, it seems the Ukie navy vessels were fired on. Whatever intel Russia had, they were there to stop the pricks rather than just a nice day on the water.

[Nov 27, 2018] Russia Blocks Ukrainian Navy From Militarizing The Sea of Azov - Updated

The desire of Poroshenko to stay in power is evident here, but there might be other motives for staging this incident.
Notable quotes:
"... The Kerch waters is Russian. The Bridge is Russian. Passage is controlled by Russian FSB-coast guard. This makes the Sea of Azov a Russian inland waterway in fact. ..."
Nov 27, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

psychohistorian , Nov 25, 2018 1:02:46 PM | link

Originally posted Nov 25: 18:00 utc - Updated below on Nov. 26, 6:00 utc
---

The Ukrainian government under the oligarch Petro Poroshenko is in election campaign mode. That is one reason why it is launching new provocations against Russia. Yesterday Ukrainian forces reportedly occupied a town within the neutral zone between the government controlled part and the rebel held Donetsk area. Today the Ukrainian navy sent a tug and two small gun boats, recently acquired from the U.S. Coast Guard, Ukrainian build Gurza-M class types, to pass through the Kerch Strait into the Sea of Azov.

When the ships entered Russian waters without announcing their intent, a Russian coast guard ship rammed ( vid ) and damaged the tug. The two gun boats escaped but did not pass the strait. The pictures show the melee at sea.


bigger

bigger

With Crimea back in Russian hands, the Kerch Strait is solely Russian territorial water. The Treaty on the Legal Status of the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait, signed in 2003 by Russia and the Ukraine, provides that military ship entry into the sea is only allowed with mutual consent. Ukraine disputes the status of the sea in an arbitration court. (For a legal discussion of the case see 1 , 2 , 3 .)

The Ukrainian government, urged on by the U.S., wants to establish a new military harbor in the Sea of Azov. Two of its navy ships, a rescue vessel and a tug, passed through the street on September 23. In October the Russian government warned that it will not allow any further militarization of the sea. Some U.S. hawks even want NATO ships to enter the Sea of Azov. The Sea of Azov has a maximum depth of 7 meters. Typical U.S. frigates have a draft of 10+ meters. What NATO or U.S. ship could even go there? As Russia firmly controls the sole entry point into the sea and can easily attack any ship in the Sea of Azov from within its borders the idea is incredibly stupid.

The Kerch Strait is now blocked by a large cargo ship the Russians anchored under the new Kerch bridge.


bigger

The passage is closed and a number of ships are bunched up on both sides.


Pic via MarineTraffic of traffic at 15:45 utc - bigger

The Ukrainian provocation may well be aimed to sour the meeting between President Trump and Putin that is planned for November 30 during the G20 summit in Argentina. It should be more careful. It is quite possible that Russia will block commercial traffic to the Ukrainian port of Mariupol over any further incident. The big loser of this useless provocation would then again be the Ukraine.


---
Update - Nov. 26, 6:00 utc

The Russian coast guard detained the three Ukrainian ships and their crews in Russian waters. They again illegally attempted to cross from the Black Sea through the Kerch Strait into the Sea of Azov. The Ukrainian side says the two of its seaman were injured.

Since Crimea voted to again become a part of Russia the Kerch Strait is Russian territorial water. Ships can pass the strait but are required to take on a pilot and to undergo inspections if the Russian coast guard demand such. The Ukrainian side understands that these are legal measures. In a report by the U.S. government outlet RFL/RE published in August the Ukrainian side admitted as much :

[The Ukrainian Sea Guard and the squadron's spokesman] Poliakov said that, while Russia's actions are "provocative," because of a controversial 2003 agreement on cooperation and shared use of the Sea of Azov and Kerch Strait, " everything Russia is doing here is technically legal. "

The three Ukrainian ships tried to pass Russian waters without informing Russian authorities and without taking on pilots. Since Russia build the $3.7 billion Kerch bridge which connects Crimea with Russia, U.S. commentators and Ukrainian politicians threatened to blow up the bridge:

"The Kerch Bridge is an enemy's infrastructure. It connects the occupied territory with the mainland of the aggressor country, that is why it is an enemy's infrastructure," Mosiychuk said on air of 112 Ukraine channel.

According to him, "any normal country" in a state of war strives for destroying enemy's infrastructure. Answering a question whether he personally would destroy the bridge, he said that he would do it if he were the defense minister.

The Russians are understandably careful with any traffic near to it.

Following yesterday's incident the president of the Ukraine Pedro Poroshenko proposed to declare martial law. The parliament will have to decide on that. This is a very convenient move for Poroshenko as it will allow him to move the March 2019 general election date. Poroshenko trails in the polls with some 8% of the total vote.

Russia called for a UN Security Council emergency meeting which will be held at today at 11:00am EST. The passage through the Kerch Strait is again open for civil vessels .

The usual anti-Russian subject in "western" political circles use the incident to demand more measures against Russia. Fronting the effort is the weapon industry lobbying group Atlantic Council:

Anders Åslund, a resident senior fellow in the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center, said: "NATO and the United States should send in naval ships in the Sea of Azov to guarantee that it stays open to international shipping."

Such action, Åslund said, "would be in full compliance with the UN Law of the Sea Convention of 1982 and the Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Straits of 1936."

Anders Aslund is listed as member of the "U.S. & Canadian Cluster" of the secret influence operation by the British Foreign Office describe here two days ago . He is obviously unable to read a map, sea chart, or UN convention. The Ukrainian attempt to pass through the Kerch Strait without Russian consent is a breach of Article 7, 19 and 21 of the UN Law of the Sea Convention (pdf):

Article 7: "Subject to this Convention, ships of all States, whether coastal or land-locked, enjoy the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea."
...
Article 19-1: "Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State. Such passage shall take place in conformity with this Convention and with other rules of international law."
...
Article 21-4: "Foreign ships exercising the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea shall comply with all such [coastal state] laws and regulations and all generally accepted international regulations relating to the prevention of collisions at sea."

There will now be again a lot of noise in the media about the 'nefarious Russians' and new demands for even more useless sanctions. But the legal case is clear. It was the Ukrainian navy that willfully attempted to pass from the Black Sea into the Sea of Azov through Russian territorial waters without regard to the laws and regulations of the coastal state. Russia was within its full rights to prevent the passage and to seize the Ukrainian boats. Thanks for the more balanced reporting b then anywhere in MSM land of this event.

I agree with your connection to the coming G20 as I think the gas attack in Aleppo yesterday is/was as well.

The coming G20 should be quite interesting. Lots could happen given all we see happening around us

Zanon , Nov 25, 2018 1:03:18 PM | link

Seems like Ukraine trying to do what Georgia, with its western supporters, tried to do in 2008.

BBC NEWS | Europe | Georgia 'started unjustified war'
http://www.news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8281990.stm

Russ , Nov 25, 2018 1:10:53 PM | link
"Some U.S. hawks even want NATO ships to enter the Sea of Azov. The Sea of Azov has a maximum depth of 7 meters. Typical U.S. frigates have a draft of 10+ meters. What NATO or U.S. ship could even go there?"

Ha ha, that sure is typical of neocon chickenhawks. They babble insanely in favor of war but are utterly ignorant of even the most elementary facts about any technology or place or situation.

Canthama , Nov 25, 2018 1:19:22 PM | link
The once called Ukraine country is losing daily. Population is fast approaching 30 million people, down from mid 50's, economy is basically non existent, ordinary people are starving, freezing and have become the poorest in all Europe, while oligarchs like Porky continue to play games of grandeur and power. The people living in the once called Ukraine must fight back, there is no salvation from politicians, they must take control of the country or soon it will be a wasted land.
2019 will be a very tough year for the once called Ukraine, it is very likely Russia will not renew the gas transit contract, meaning less income for Kiev's regime, Donbass may finally take its future to the next step and get closer to Russia while the rest of the once called Ukraine will see many pockets of rebellion and civil war, very bad omen for the once called Ukraine in 2019.
alaff , Nov 25, 2018 1:34:31 PM | link
FSB showed a video of the chase of the Russian border guards for the ships of the Ukrainian Navy - video here .
Fran , Nov 25, 2018 1:48:29 PM | link
I have been observing the situation in the Sea of Azov for a while. It all started out with the Ukraine confiscating a Crimean fishing boat. Next step was threatening to cancel the contract between the Ukraine and Russia on the use of the Sea of Azov. With out the contract the Sea of Azov would become an international water. I am pretty sure there is a NATO plan being followed as not to long ago the UK war minister demanded access to the Sea of Azov and last week Mogherini from the EU was treathening new sactions if Russia would not change its position concerning the Sea of Azov. I am sure this treath was not something Kiev was willing to ignore an pass a chance to provoke Russia once again - maybe thus today provocation.

What I find interessting is the silence in the western MSM.

alaff , Nov 25, 2018 1:53:59 PM | link
Yesterday Ukrainian forces occupied a town within the neutral zone between the government controlled part and the rebel held Donetsk area.

By the way, in the LPR they denied the information of the Ukraine's Armed Forces about the "capturing" of a settlement in the Donbass.

"The statement of the headquarters of Operation Combined Forces of Ukraine on the "capture" of a settlement in the Donbass is not true. This settlement has been under their control before" - this was stated by the Acting Head of the People's Militia of the LPR, Mikhail Filiponenko. According to him, such statements of the Ukraine's Armed Forces speak about the desire to demonstrate the "essence of the Ukrainian command", which wants to exaggerate its merits before the visit to the Donbass of the presidents of Ukraine and Latvia.

Source .

karlof1 , Nov 25, 2018 3:11:35 PM | link
Crimea's governor places blame squarely where it belongs:

"I am sure Western patrons of the Kiev regime are behind this provocation - it doesn't look a mere coincidence that European and American politicians have been so concerned over the situation in the Sea of Azov in the recent months. Ukraine, as a country stripped of sovereignty and being under external governance , is an instrument for whipping up international tensions."

His description of what sort of "state" Ukraine's become is 100% spot-on, and Canthama's description of conditions for civilians is also correct. Many towns have had gas supplies cut off completely in what's known as Warming Season, and their citizens are literally freezing .

As for the upcoming G-20, the spectacle of MbS confronting Erdogan outshines any Putin-Trump sideline meet, IMO. Indeed, there really isn't any reason for Trump to even show, except maybe as the referee between an bin-Salman/Erodogan wrestling match.

Ghost Ship , Nov 25, 2018 7:11:00 PM | link
The lying shits at the Atlantic Council are putting out their usual crap comparing this with "Russia's war on Georgia" - I seem to recall that the EU stated it was Georgia's war on Russia. Does this mean we're going to see more garbage from Bellingcat?
Kadath , Nov 25, 2018 7:19:32 PM | link
Under international law Kiev is allowed access to the Sea of Azov thorough its' port city of Mariupol. However, just like the straits of Hormuz Russia still has the 12 mile territoriality around its' coast so the current ship incursion into Russia's territory is clearly a provocative action by Ukraine. No doubt Ukraine believe that the current NATO wargames will dissuade the Russian from making a firm response (a dubious theory at best, especially since it now appears that the Russians have seized several of the offending vessels). Unhappily, it appears that Russia made a mistake when it forced the Donetsk troops to stop their advance to take Mariupol back in 2015/2016 as part of the peace settlement as Kiev's possession of Mariupol (and the resulting right of access into the Sea of Azov), makes it a weeping wound that Kiev can salt whenever it feels like provoking a timely crisis (It's just been announced that Poroshenko has used the ship incident to declare marshal law throughout Ukraine - this could lead to all sorts of situations; a new attack on the separatists, delaying the upcoming elections, cracking down on his political enemies/rivals, etc...)
Red Ryder , Nov 25, 2018 9:35:19 PM | link
Comment at the Hal Turner site from inteldrop333 at 17:59 11/25/2018

Very improtant Info appeared briefly on Russian media (before being scrubbed) that a NATO SADM, possibly a Diver deployable device, was being transported to the Kerch Straight to be used on the Crimean bridge. The device was being tracked by the Russians and they knew it had been loaded on to a Ukrainian Tug (escorted by 5 warships!! – 3 in the Black Sea, including one NATO vessel, and 2 waiting in the Sea of Azov).
This is why the Russians acted!
They never react with force and have never blockaded the Sea of Azov. Ground attack jets and Helicopter gunships, plus a warship armed with ASM and Torpedos were waiting.
This level of force would not be used just for a tug and a few old Ukrainian ships. But a tug carrying a tactical nuclear device about to bring down one of the worlds most strategic bridges, a bridge hated by NATO – as per the recent Op Ed in the 'Washington Examiner' (Ukraine should bomb the Crimean Bridge).
Ukraine regularly provokes Russia to little effect, but today the Rusians acted to stop a terrible event.
Ukraine is now in panic mode and there may be direct NATO intervention if the to cover this, if the Russians make this public.
The device may have come from the UK.
The UK have been psychologically preparing thier people for a war with Russia.
The SADM low-yield nuclear explosion would have brought down the bridge and melted the foundations, but looked like a conventional IED blast from above due to the underwater detonation and relatively low yeield of less than 1KT.
This was a WW3 level provocation STOPPED by the Russian FSB and SF's!
All traces of these reports are being scrubbed as I write!

Get this out before the story is completly scrubbed.

@28, Ben

"So the Ukrainians piloted a tanker out underneath a bridge crossing this strait in the Sea Of Azov that forms a choke point for shipping."

You have this wrong. The tanker-freighter was placed there by Russian FSB coast guard to block any passage from either side. The Ukies had two boats coming from the Azov side also, beside the three from Odessa in the Black Sea.

The Kerch waters is Russian. The Bridge is Russian. Passage is controlled by Russian FSB-coast guard. This makes the Sea of Azov a Russian inland waterway in fact.

The Black Sea waters also are coastal to Russia in significant lengths including Crimea.

This is the significance of Sevastopol and Crimea to the national security of Russia. It almost fell into NATO hands. 2014 was much more than Maidan and Donbass. Crimea is one of the most strategic pieces of real estate in history and absolutely necessary to Russia Federation security.

the pessimist , Nov 25, 2018 11:20:21 PM | link
Interesting, points #8 and #9

http://www.stalkerzone.org/what-does-martial-law-in-ukraine-mean/

Martial law in Ukraine means the following:

1 In the event that martial law is introduced, able-bodied citizens have a labor duty for the purpose of performing work of a defensive nature.

2 A curfew on the territory where martial law is imposed.

3 A specific regime of entrance and exit.

4 Verification of documents, examination of things, vehicles, and so forth.

5 Martial law allows the state to control the activity of the media, cultural institutions, and printing houses.

6 Natural persons and legal persons are obliged to provide space for quartering of military personnel should the need arise.

7 The military command can ban the activity of parties and public organizations if they threaten security, territory, the independence of the country, or the life of citizens.

8 It is impossible to dismiss the parliament or to announce the impeachment of the president in a state of martial law. This also applies to most ministers, judges, the prosecutor's office, and local governments.

9 Martial law will also allow to cancel diplomatic agreements with the enemy and to seize the property of the aggressor that is on the territory of Ukraine.

[Nov 27, 2018] US Required to Give Israel $10,500,000 Each Day

Nov 26, 2018 | www.unz.com
wayfarersays: November 22, 2018 at 5:46 am GMT 100 Words

U.S. Required to Give Israel $10,500,000 Each Day
source: https://ifamericaknew.org/stat/usaid.html
source: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf

U.S. National Debt Clock
source: http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Agent76 , says: November 22, 2018 at 3:06 pm GMT

Jun 6, 2017 50 Years After Launching June 1967 War, Israel Continues World's Longest Military Occupation

In the final installment of our three-part special on the 50th anniversary of the June 1967 war, author and scholar Norman Finkelstein discusses why the U.S.-backed "peace process" was never meant to end the Israeli occupation, and how, despite the ongoing brutality, mass Palestinian civil resistance could still bring it to an end.

[Nov 27, 2018] Why the Two State Solution is Apartheid by Craig Murray

Notable quotes:
"... The proposal is precisely analogous to South Africa not only because of the displacement of the original population into separated enclosures, but because it leaves the bulk of the land in the hands of a colonial population, whose identity and exclusivity is specifically enshrined in law by ethnicity. Israel's adoption this year of a new nation state law putting the state on an officially racist basis only confirmed the reality encapsulated in a raft of hundreds of other laws and regulations. The harsh discriminatory regime faced by non-Jews in Israel has been exhaustively documented , and it is not my purpose to repeat it here. I recommend this lecture by Ben White: ..."
"... A major difference between South Africa's apartheid and Israel's is that the political will was there in the sixties to oppose this ignominy. The Labour Party and Liberal Party and some Conservatives fought against it in the days before Israel (with its various friends' groups) owned all the political parties and, shamefully, nobody has the balls to stand against this evil regime ..."
"... The people instrumental in demonising apartheid and organising campaigns against South Africa were often the same people who were devoted to the State of Israel. When you look at the people behind the campaigns you see which ideological positions they adhered to, so it is worth looking up key individuals and their doctrinal adherences ..."
Nov 27, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

The original apartheid state of South Africa created "homelands", known colloquially as "bantustans", and proposed that, as the apotheosis of apartheid, these "homelands" would become independent states and house the majority black population of the country in fenced-off areas which had been too arid, rocky or commercial mineral free to attract significant white settlement over three centuries of theft. South Africa actually did recognise some of these as Independent states, while the rest were supposed to be on a course to recognition.

The maps really do bring out the startling similarity between these two attempts to formalise the dispossession of the original people. Thankfully, even though the "Homelands solution" had its supporters including Thatcher, it never achieved support beyond what was then an extreme right wing view, and none of the "independent states" ever achieved international recognition.

I worked in the FCO as the South Africa (Political) desk officer from 1984-6, and seeing off right wing Tory lobbying to adopt the Homelands policy was a major problem. It is simply symptomatic of the extraordinary right wing shift in western politics over the intervening three decades, that a "Bantustan" solution for Palestine, laughably called a "two state solution", is now the accepted wisdom of the political and media class.

The proposal is precisely analogous to South Africa not only because of the displacement of the original population into separated enclosures, but because it leaves the bulk of the land in the hands of a colonial population, whose identity and exclusivity is specifically enshrined in law by ethnicity. Israel's adoption this year of a new nation state law putting the state on an officially racist basis only confirmed the reality encapsulated in a raft of hundreds of other laws and regulations. The harsh discriminatory regime faced by non-Jews in Israel has been exhaustively documented , and it is not my purpose to repeat it here. I recommend this lecture by Ben White:

Many of the practices Ben describes have strong echoes of the apartheid regime, as do the disregard for Black/Palestinian life, the regular use of disproportionate lethal force against protestors, the mass arrests and detentions, the impunity for both law enforcers and "master race" civilians who attack blacks/Palestinians. These features are highly analogous.

But what I want to address here is the striking similarity between the arguments used by supporters of apartheid, with which I dealt every day at the FCO, and the arguments used today by supporters of Israel. They came by post thirty years ago not internet, and we did not use the word meme, but the key arguments are exactly the same.

Harry Law , October 25, 2018 at 11:10

Imagine if the UK had in its statutes, and the USA had in its constitution measures to ensure only white people had the right to immigration [one of Israel's basic laws is only Jews have the right to immigration into Israel]. Continuing the analogy with Israel's recently passed 'Nation-State' [basic law].

1. "The states of the UK and the US are the nation-states of the 'white people".

2. "The actualization of the right of national self- determination in the states of the UK/USA is unique to white people"

3. "The UK/USA will labour to ensure the safety of sons of white people".

4. "The UK/USA will act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious legacy of white people among the Diaspora".

5. "The UK/USA views 'white's only' settlement as joint national values and will labour to encourage and promote its establishment and development".

Now let us look at one of the IHRA examples which the Labour Party have incorporated into the Labour Party rule book:

"Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination – e.g. by claiming that the existence of a state of Israel is a racist endeavour".

Who could deny that examples 1 to 5 above if incorporated into UK and US law would prove 100% that the UK and US were inherently racist and that their 'existence were racist endeavours' and that anyone in the UK/US [including Jeremy Corbyn] who disapproved of 1 to 5 above, and said so, would fall foul of the IHRA definition, be accused of being Anti Semitic and drummed out of associations like the Labour Party and possibly ostracised from society for life. Disgraceful.

Blunderbuss , October 26, 2018 at 00:57

I've been trying to find out why anti-J_ism is called anti-Semitism and I've been told that the term was coined by Wilhelm Marr (1819-1904).

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

Wilhelm Marr seems to have been strongly anti-J_ish and, in 1879, "he founded the League of Antisemites (Antisemiten-Liga), the first German organization committed specifically to combating the alleged threat to Germany posed by the J_s and advocating their forced removal from the country".

I find it bizarre that a term coined by a vehemently anti-J_ish person is used by the IHRA in preference to the more accurate term anti-J_ism.

antonym , October 26, 2018 at 04:48

Meanwhile: The Fatah-led Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Hamas authorities in Gaza routinely arrest and torture peaceful critics and opponents, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/10/23/palestine-authorities-crush-dissent
Explains a lot

Zoltan Jorovic , October 26, 2018 at 18:12

I think you'll find that most "bantustans" were led by corrupt officials who mistreated their "citizens". You don't imagine that the Apartheid colonisers would want a genuine, free and united populace in their client statelets, do you? What goes for South Africa, applies just as neatly to Israel.

Hoi Polloi , October 26, 2018 at 22:13

As a South African there are lots of parallels with Israel/Palestine and a few differences. The differences are never in Israel's favour. The one thing that I always convinced myself of was that Palestinians were not controlled like our Bantustan leaders were – like Buthelezi managing the Zulus into good little darkies.
But now I am not so sure when I see the deliberate shut down of electricity.
Those in Israel will tell you that it is a better life than a Black South African experienced living in the madam or master's house. There are Palestinian Doctors working in real jobs in real hospitals alongside real jews. That never happened in South Africa.
Those in Gaza will tell you that it is a worse life than living in a Homeland. That I can believe, we could at least grow food, tend animals, create a community.

John Goss , October 23, 2018 at 17:16

Well argued Craig.

A major difference between South Africa's apartheid and Israel's is that the political will was there in the sixties to oppose this ignominy. The Labour Party and Liberal Party and some Conservatives fought against it in the days before Israel (with its various friends' groups) owned all the political parties and, shamefully, nobody has the balls to stand against this evil regime . If they do they get shadow-banned or dragged through the courts/

Keep up the good work.

Paul Greenwood , October 24, 2018 at 06:19

The people instrumental in demonising apartheid and organising campaigns against South Africa were often the same people who were devoted to the State of Israel. When you look at the people behind the campaigns you see which ideological positions they adhered to, so it is worth looking up key individuals and their doctrinal adherences

tril , October 24, 2018 at 22:48

Many whites have in fact been murdered since blacks took over South Africa. The facts are clear. So their fears were not only a fantasy but realistic. This is the weakness of your argument, that you simply reject the fears of whites, which have come to fruition. I suspect you simply have an animus towards white South Africans, it is a result of your moral self-righteousness. I also noticed that you changed topic after mentioning that many whites genuinely believed that they would be murdered by blacks.

We suffered an armed robbery, my mother, who had just come out of intensive care, was beaten. She died less than 1 year later, most probably from trauma. Many whites are not as lucky to have survived even the robbery. We have since emigrated. My family has been living in SA for 250 years. More than 50% of blacks are immigrants of the last 50 years. Yet you insinuate that our right to live in the land is less than theirs.

The number of whites, especially farmers, who have since been murdered brutally, create facts on the ground which you cannot gloss over or dismiss if you were honest. It is telling that you changed topics just after mentioning the fears of whites. Because you will never let a fact get in the way of your moral self.righteousness.

Dave , October 25, 2018 at 10:07

I do understand it. Once the Israeli's had established themselves, as immigrants have in UK, you almost can't turn the clock back without inflicting the same policies/suffering in reverse. The Palestinians have de facto recognised this, hence their support for a two state solution. I.e. two viable independent nations. Except, in practice, its not on offer as the Likud want to drive them all into the sea or, until they expand further, Jordan.

Now that two states is unviable, the one multi-national state solution takes centre stage, but the Likud want a one-state without the Palestinians, hence the new apartheid laws, in an attempt to keep the multi-national one-state, Jewish.

But it wont work, once the Palestinians embrace the one-state solution, and in effect declare themselves Israeli's, as the world, even US, will support the need for all Israeli's to have equal rights, and Trump's decision to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (and de facto Palestine) brings that day closer.

Dave , October 25, 2018 at 16:59

To illustrate the point, the Zionists are advancing too far, like Hitler towards Stalingrad, to be cut off in the rear, resulting in a pyrrhic victory. Instead of settling for a Jewish state, mostly occupied by Jews, alongside a Palestinian state, they are forcing the creation of a multi-national one state, only half occupied by Jews, hence the need for new apartheid rules, to keep the multi-national state, Jewish.

Hatuey , October 23, 2018 at 00:53

From an Israeli perspective, the "problem" is more or less solved. They'd love to fully take over Gaza and the West Bank, of course, build a few hotels etc., but these are more or less clean-up operations. Something like 90% of the Palestinian population has been expelled.

The whole area is a massive crime scene. I can't even fathom the idea of finding any solution there. It'd be like trying to find the solution to the Big Bang. I can't see past making them stop and then setting up some sort of Nuremberg type system to deal with the criminals.

There's nothing more depressing than this subject for me.

Shatnersrug , October 23, 2018 at 01:19

I posted this early Hatuey, it provides a detailed potential road map for final Decolonisation

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/10/12/choices-made-from-zionist-settler-colonialism-to-decolonization/

You might find it interesting

Hatuey , October 23, 2018 at 09:12

That's a huge read. I stopped about half way. I actually disagreed quite a bit of it. The parts I agreed with were the unrealistic parts.

If I could give a Palestinian advice, it would be to get away from the scumbags. Let them have Palestine for now.

Israel is doomed to fail. Sooner or later they're going to pick on the wrong guys and get hammered.

Deep down inside, everybody -- even those who back Israel in the West -- hates Israel.

Yeah, Right , October 23, 2018 at 01:28

"I can't even fathom the idea of finding any solution there."

One man, One vote.

The demographics will then sort themselves out very quickly as those Israelis with dual-citizenship decamp and move to their "second" country.

I would think that within a decade – maybe two – the demographics would be 70/30 or even more in favour of the Arab-speaking population, and nobody will be killed and nobody will be dispossessed. And at that point "Israel" will change its name to "Palestine" and nobody will make the slightest fuss about it.

Hatuey , October 23, 2018 at 09:16

Yeah, right, yeah, right.

Simple as that eh

Yeah, Right , October 23, 2018 at 13:04

"Simple as that eh "

I wouldn't use that phrase, no.
But it is as inevitable as that.

When the Zionist grip starts to loosen then a significant number of those Zionists are going to bolt – and that will accelerate the process until it become a steamroller.

That's what nobody pays any attention to: the Palestinians won't go away because they have nowhere to go.
But there are enough Zionists who can – and will – and that will end up being the decisive factor.

They're not bolting for the exits yet because they are convinced that they are winning.
But they will waver, and it won't take many to break before the whole thing collapses.

Hatuey , October 23, 2018 at 14:46

Yeah, Right, there's no sign of wavering though. They're intensifying and extending their grip. The Golan Heights aren't even an issue today, that's how bad it's gotten. Poverty levels in Gaza thanks to sanctions and blockade have never been so bad as they are right now.

Any day now we are expecting another major attack on Gaza along the lines of Caste Lead. They will hit schools and hospitals as usual and thousands of unarmed civilians will die.

laguerre , October 23, 2018 at 15:52

" there's no sign of wavering though."

Not on the surface, no. The Israelis have excellent propaganda. Negative points are quickly brushed under the carpet. But Israel is being hollowed out from the inside. Everybody has their second passport, ready to run. You will remember there was a big panic in 2006 during Olmert's war in Lebanon. Hizbullah missiles were falling on Israel, and there were lengthy queues outside foreign embassies for Israelis desperate to renew their second passports.

Nobody wants to fight any more. I mean, would you want to spend your life in the army reserve, obliged to be ready to go to war whenever Netanyahu happens to decide on another invasion of Gaza? No, you would say sod it, I'm off to the States for a more peaceful 'normal' life. The Israeli army is just a poor militia now (see Pat Lang, passim). Even the Gazans stopped them cold in 2014. That said, the airforce is very good, but it's the only arm that works now. And then Hizbullah have their stash of missiles that can now reach anywhere in Israel, and Israel can do nothing about it (if they could, they would).

Yeah, Right , October 24, 2018 at 02:46

"Yeah, Right, there's no sign of wavering though."

Agreed, there is no *sign* of wavering.

Indeed, the degree of bombast coming out of the Israeli establishment is now deafening.

"The Golan Heights aren't even an issue today, that's how bad it's gotten."

Oh, I think that once the Syrian government wipes out the last of the jihadists and then forces the US to withdraw from Syrian territory then you will find the Golan Heights will become very much a hot potato.

After all, it will then be the last piece of Syrian territory that is not under the control of the Syrians, and they'll be in no mood to be "intimidated" by the Israelis.

The Israelis will keep beating up on the Gaza Strip? Sure, they will.
And that will lull the Likud into thinking that the IDF is still a mighty fighting force, sure, it will.

But the strategic situation for Israeli is getting worse and worse, to the point where the Israelis dare not attack Lebanon for fear that the Syrians will take the opportunity to seize the Golan Heights, and the Israelis dare not launch an attack into Syria lest Hezbollah launch a counter-attack on the flank of that expeditionary force.

And either way there is this slight problem: the IDF is now a bunch of fluffy-girls-blouses, and as such is likely to get its arse kicked in a fight with a real army.

laguerre has it correct below: the IDF has been hollowed out, as has Israeli society as a whole. They are riding for a fall, and when they do they will come down to earth with a thud.

And nobody will be more surprised than them, which is when they will stampede for the door.

[Nov 27, 2018] Why social security became welfare under neoliberalism

Nov 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

thesingingdetective -> ABasu , 11 Jun 2013 05:38

@ABasu - My comment was not in direct agreement with the article, it was a critique of the first comment above.

I won't even begin with the welfare debate in which you somehow think that 'welfare' and its relatively recent introduction is somehow anti neo-liberal because that is nothing other than newspeak...

The point I was making (with perhaps a less than perfect example) is that language is political and therefore it matters greatly what we call things.

[Nov 27, 2018] Language is the first victim of any hegemonic project. This is true for communism, fascism and neoliberalism

Nov 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

maxfisher , 11 Jun 2013 05:42

Quite. Language is the first victim of any hegemonic project. Examples abound in communism, fascism and neoliberalism. There's nothing to argue with in this article yet, unsurprisingly, the usual swivel-eyed brigade seem to have popped up. Perhaps your discussion of work strays a little too close to philosophy for the unthinking. I don't know why I'm disheartened by some of the responses, as the same voices appear btl in almost ever CIF article, but I am somehow. Perhaps because the point of the article - the hijacking of language - is so obviously true as to be uncontroversial to any but the ideologically purblind, yet still....
ABasu -> thesingingdetective , 11 Jun 2013 05:28
@thesingingdetective - what is an insurance policy other than a financial product where in return for payments over a period of time a claim can be made in certain circumstances?

If anything, particularly given that the link between contributions and claims is now nugatory, describing welfare as welfare is much more honest and much less "neoliberal". It is a set of payments and entitlements society has agreed upon to ensure a level of welfare for all rather than an insurance policy which each individual may claim against if they've kept up their payments.

If an anti-neo-liberal, supportive of the article can get this so back to front, perhaps the "debate" being posited is an empty one about language.

OberynMartell , 11 Jun 2013 05:22
If you changed a few words from the Communist Manifesto, it could easily be about neo-liberalism and leftist attitudes towards it.

"A spectre is haunting Europe; the spectre of neo-liberalism. All the leftists of old Europe have entered into a Holy Alliance to exorcise this spectre; Toynbee and Loach; Redgrave and Harris.

Where is the party in power that has not been decried as neo-liberalistic by its leftist opponents on the sidelines?"

Sidfishes , 11 Jun 2013 05:19
Take FE as a case study on how the coin counters have taken over the world.

Back in the dark ages of the 1980s, the maths department had 7 lecturers (2 part time) and two people to look after the admin - there was also the Department Head (who was a lecturer) and a Head of School. They had targets, loosely defined, but it was a rare year when there wasn't a smattering of A grades at A level...

Then along came the coin counters, the target setters, with their management degrees and swivel eyed certainty that 'greed is good... competition! competition! competition!' and with them came the new professionals into the department... the 'Quality Manager'... the 'Curriculum Manager' the 'Exams Manager' the 'Deputy Exams Manager'... and the paperwork increased to feed the beast that counts everything but knows nothing... and targets were set.... 'Targets! Targets! Targets!... and we were all sent in search of excellence... 'teach to the exam' 'We must meet our targets'... 'we won't use exam board 'A' because they're tough' and the exam boards reacted to their own target culture by all simplifying. The universities began to notice the standard of 'A' grade students (who increased) was equivelant to a C grade of 5 years ago. However, targets were being met (on paper) quality was maintained (on paper) we were improving year on year (on paper). However, what was going on in the real world is that our students were being sold a pup - their level of competence and of knowledge was very much inferior to their same grade fore bearers of just 5 years previous

Eventually, the department became 1 full time lecturer and 4 on 'zero hour contracts' and the Head of School became 'Chief Executive' the 'Head of Department' became 'Department Manager' and a gap developed between those who taught and those who 'managed'... not just a culture gap... a bloody big pay gap...

Who benefited from all this marketisation?

Not the lecturers... not the students... not the universities... not industry...not the economy...

Who benefited? Work it out for yourselves (as I used to tell my students)

Damntheral -> roachclip , 11 Jun 2013 05:18
@roachclip - I am familiar with the numerous wiki sites including Wikipedia, thank you very much. If you read the article yourself you would see it supports my point of view here.
retro77 , 11 Jun 2013 05:17

There are loads of other examples of rarely scrutinised terms in our economic vocabulary, for instance that bundle of terms clustered around investment and expenditure – terms that carry with them implicit moral connotations. Investment implies an action, even a sacrifice, undertaken for a better future. It evokes a future positive outcome. Expenditure, on the other hand, seems merely an outgoing, a cost, a burden.

This is absolute nonsense...the terms "investment" and "expenditure" carry no moral connotations that I can determine. Does the author accept that we need to have terms to express each of these concepts? Perhaps she would like to come up with some alternative suggestions for the notions of "contributing money" and "spending money"?

Mark Taylor , 11 Jun 2013 05:11
Seconded, its uses and abuses of the English Language second only that of the Church. A fitting comparison in my book because they both have much in common. Both are well aware that it is through language and the control of which that true cultural change is achieved.
Both know that this new language must be propagated as far and as wide as possible, with saturation coverage. Control of information is a a must, people must see and they must know only things of your choosing.
For example, back in the 4th Century AD (which is incidentally an abbreviation of the Latin 'Anno Domini', which means 'in the year of our Lord'), the church became centralised and established under the patronage of the Roman Emperor Constantine. Part of this centralising mission was the creation of a uniform belief system. Those that 'chose' to believe something else were branded 'heretics'. The word 'heresy' coming from the Greek 'αἵρεσις' for 'choice'. Thus to choose to have your own opinions was therefore deemed to be a bad thing.
As a quick aside, 'Pagan' comes from the Latin 'paganus' which means 'rural dweller'. I.e. those beyond the remit of the urban Christian elites. 'Heathen' on the other hand is Old English (hæðen). It simply means 'not Christian or Jewish.
When you have complete control over the flow of information, as the Church did by the 5th Century, then you can write practically anything. This doesn't mean just writing good things about yourself and bad things about your enemies. Rather it means that you can frame the debate anyway you wish.
In modern times, I would argue that you can see similar things happen here. As the author suggests, terms like 'Wealth Creator', 'Scrounger', 'Sponger', 'living on welfare', 'Growth', 'progress' and my personal favourite, 'reform', take on a whole new meaning.
Their definition of the word 'reform' and what we would see it to mean are two totally different things, Yet since it is they that has access to the wider world and not us, then it is their definition that gets heard. The same could be said for all the other words and their latter day connotations.
Thus when you hear the news and you hear what passes for debate, you hear things on their terms. Using their language with their meanings. A very sad state of affairs indeed.
Themiddlegound , 11 Jun 2013 05:11
Neoliberalism is in the first instance a theory of political economic practices that proposes that human well-being can best be advanced by liberating individual entrepreneurial freedoms and skills within an institutional framework characterized by strong private property rights, free markets, and free trade.

You'll notice I've highlighted the word freedoms. Freedom is a word they hijacked right from the start of the process and how they hijacked the Republican party in the USA.

For any way of thought to become dominant, a conceptual apparatus has to be advanced that appeals to our intuitions and instincts, to our values and our desires, as well as to the possibilities inherent in the social world we inhabit. If successful, this conceptual apparatus becomes so embedded in common sense as to be taken for granted and not open to question. The founding figures of neoliberal thought took political ideals of human dignity and individual freedom as fundamental.

Concepts of dignity and individual freedom are powerful and appealing in their own right. Such ideals empowered the dissident movements in eastern Europe and the Soviet Union before the end of the Cold War as well as the students in Tiananmen Square. The student movements that swept the world in 1968––from Paris and Chicago to Bangkok and Mexico City––were in part animated by the quest for greater freedoms of speech and of personal choice.
More generally, these ideals appeal to anyone who values the ability to make decisions for themselves.

The idea of freedom, long embedded in the US tradition, has played a conspicuous role in the US in recent years. '9/11' was immediately interpreted by many as an attack on it. 'A peaceful world of growing freedom', wrote President Bush on the first anniversary of that awful day, 'serves American long-term interests, reflects enduring American ideals and unites America's allies.' 'Humanity', he concluded, 'holds in its hands the opportunity to
offer freedom's triumph over all its age-old foes', and 'the United States welcomes its responsibilities to lead in this great mission'. This language was incorporated into the US National Defense Strategy document issued shortly thereafter. 'Freedom is the Almighty's gift to every man and woman in this world', he later said, adding that 'as the greatest power on earth we have an obligation to help the spread of freedom'.

When all of the other reasons for engaging in a pre-emptive war against Iraq were proven wanting, the president appealed to the idea that the freedom conferred on Iraq was in and of itself an adequate justification for the war. The Iraqis were free, and that was all that really mattered. But what sort of 'freedom' is envisaged here, since, as the cultural critic Matthew Arnold long ago thoughtfully observed, 'freedom is a very good horse to ride, but to
ride somewhere'.To what destination, then, are the Iraqi people expected to ride the horse of freedom donated to them by force of arms?

As Hayek quoted....

Planning and control are being attacked as a denial of freedom. Free
enterprise and private ownership are declared to be essentials of freedom.
No society built on other foundations is said to deserve to be called free.
The freedom that regulation creates is denounced as unfreedom; the justice, liberty and welfare it offers are decried as a camouflage of slavery.

The Neoliberal idea of freedom 'thus degenerates into a mere advocacy of free
enterprise. It helps explain why neoliberalism has turned so authoritarian, forceful, and anti-democratic at the very moment when 'humanity holds in its hands the opportunity to offer freedom's triumph over all its age-old foes'. It makes us focus on how so many corporations have profiteered from withholding the benefits of their technologies, famine, and environmental disaster. It raises the worry as to whether or not many of these calamities or
near calamities (arms races and the need to confront both real and
imagined enemies) have been secretly engineered for corporate advantage.

Political slogans can be invoked that mask specific strategies beneath vague rhetorical devices. The word 'freedom' resonates so widely within the common-sense understanding of Americans that it becomes 'a button that elites can press to open the door to the masses' to justify almost anything.

Appeals to traditions and cultural values bulked large in all of this. An open project around the restoration of economic power to a small elite would probably not gain much popular support. But a programmatic attempt to advance the cause of individual freedoms could appeal to a mass base and so disguise the drive to restore class power.

Wastoid , 11 Jun 2013 05:05
Fascinating article, thanks for publishing. It goes some way to explaining, not only the tenacity of neo-liberalism, but also its ability to consolidate its power, even at the moment when it seemed weakest. Its ability to rearticulate language and to present as natural law what is socially constructed, shows the depth of its hold on society, economics, politics, culture and even science.

There is a neat cross-over here between neo-liberal discourses and the use of language by the military. Not only does this extend to the general diffusion of certain key phrases, but I think it also runs deeper. Just as the elision of meaning in the language of war facilitates the perpetuation of abuses and war crimes, so the neo-lib discourse permits the perpetuation of questionable economic activity, even as this presents itself in the unquestionable guise of "common sense".

[Nov 27, 2018] Why the fact the neoliberal MSM avoiv the work "neoliberalism" is important: the unwillingness to even call a spade a spade has political consequences

Notable quotes:
"... This unwillingness to even call a spade a spade has political consequences ..."
Nov 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

KingOfNothing -> gyges1 , 11 Jun 2013 07:22

@gyges1 - The idea of language is very important in the production of a way of thinking which closes down other alternatives and futures. One which leaves neoliberal globalisation as 'the only game in town'.

I worry that the very term 'neoliberalism' is one not used by the political classes and much of the media, I don't think I've ever heard the world 'neoliberalism' used on the BBC.

This unwillingness to even call a spade a spade has political consequences . For example, I had an online discussion with someone over Thatchers death a little while ago. He called me 'comrade' and then questioned the very existence of the term Neo-liberalism. At the time I thought this was a bit of a cheap shot, but if you can quite cheerfully label someone a 'socialist' and then refuse to accept that neo-liberalism exists, you are well on your way to making people believe that the current set of social relations are indeed completely normal and that there are few, if any, alternative ways of rewiring the world which can create a better world.

[Nov 27, 2018] There is a neat cross-over here between neo-liberal discourses and the use of language by the military. Not only does this extend to the general diffusion of certain key phrases, but I think it also runs deeper. Just as the elision of meaning in the language of war facilitates the perpetuation of abuses and war crimes, so the neo-lib discourse permits the perpetuation of questionable economic activity, even as this presents itself in the unquestionable guise of "common sense"

Nov 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Wastoid , 11 Jun 2013 05:05

Fascinating article, thanks for publishing. It goes some way to explaining, not only the tenacity of neo-liberalism, but also its ability to consolidate its power, even at the moment when it seemed weakest. Its ability to rearticulate language and to present as natural law what is socially constructed, shows the depth of its hold on society, economics, politics, culture and even science.

There is a neat cross-over here between neo-liberal discourses and the use of language by the military. Not only does this extend to the general diffusion of certain key phrases, but I think it also runs deeper. Just as the elision of meaning in the language of war facilitates the perpetuation of abuses and war crimes, so the neo-lib discourse permits the perpetuation of questionable economic activity, even as this presents itself in the unquestionable guise of "common sense".

[Nov 26, 2018] Phanar Phantom by Israel Shamir

Nov 24, 2018 | unz.com

The Russian world is caught up in a drama. Its leading Orthodox Church faces a schism over the Ukraine's drive for its own independent church. If Kiev regime succeeds, the split between Russia proper and its breakaway Western part, the Ukraine, will widen. The Russian Church will suffer a great loss, comparable to the emergence of the Anglican church for the Catholics. However, there is a chance for the Russians to gain a lot from the split, to gain more than to lose.

The Ukraine actually has its own church, and this church is the self-ruling autonomous Ukrainian Orthodox Church, a part of the Russian Orthodox Church. Its autonomy is very broad; it can be considered independent practically in every aspect excepting its nominal recognition of Moscow supremacy. The Ukrainian Church does not pay tribute to Moscow, it elects its own bishops; it has no reason to push for more. No tangible reason, at least.

But in the Ukraine, there was and is a strong separatist tendency, with a somewhat romantic and nationalist tinge, comparable to Scots or Languedoc separatism. Its beginning could be traced to 18th Century, when a Moscow-appointed ruler Hetman Mazeppa rose against Russia's Peter the Great and allied himself with the Swedish warrior-king Charles XII. A hundred years after the revolt, the foremost Russian poet, Alexander Pushkin, composed a beautiful romantic poem Poltava (following Byron's Mazeppa ) where he gives Mazeppa the following words:

For far too long we've bowed our heads,
Without respect or liberty,
Beneath the yoke of Warsaw's patronage,
Beneath the yoke of Moscow's despotism.
But now is Ukraine's chance to grow
Into an independent power. (trans. by Ivan Eubanks)

This romantic dream of an independent Ukraine became real after the 1917 Revolution, under the German occupation at the conclusion of World War One. Within a year or two, as the defeated Germans withdrew, the independent Ukraine became Soviet and joined Soviet Russia in the Soviet Union of equal Republics. Even within the Union, the Ukraine was independent and it had its own UN seat. When Russian President Yeltsin dissolved the Union, Ukraine became fully independent again.

In the 1991 divorce with rump Russia (after hundreds of years of integration), the Ukraine took with her a major portion of the former Union's physical and human assets. The spacious country with its hard-working people, fertile black soil, the cream of Soviet industry producing aircraft, missiles, trains and tractors, with the best and largest army within the Warsaw Treaty, with its universities, good roads, proximity to Europe, expensive infrastructure connecting East and West, the Ukraine had a much better chances for success than rump Russia.

But it didn't turn out this way, for reasons we shall discuss elsewhere. A failed state if there ever was one, the Ukraine was quickly deserted by its most-valuable people, who ran away in droves to Russia or Poland; its industries were dismantled and sold for the price of scrap metal. The only compensation the state provides is even more nationalism, even more declarations of its independence.

This quest for full independence has been even less successful than economic or military measures. The Kiev regime could dispense with Moscow, but it became subservient to the West. Its finances are overseen by the IMF, its army by NATO, its foreign policy by the US State Department. Real independence was an elusive goal, beyond the Ukraine's reach.

A total break of the Ukrainian church with the nominal supremacy of Moscow appealed to President Petro Poroshenko as a convincing substitute for real independence, especially with a view toward the forthcoming elections. He turned to the patriarch of Constantinople, His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew asking him to grant his church its full independence (called autocephaly in ecclesiastical language).

Fine, but what is 'his church'? The vast majority of Ukrainian Orthodox Christians and their bishops are content with their status within the Russian Church. They have their own head, His Beatitude Metropolitan Onuphrius, who is also content with his position. They do not see any need for autocephaly. However, the Ukraine has two small splinter orthodox churches, one led by the ambitious bishop Filaret and another by Macarius; both are very nationalist and anti-Russian, both support the regime and claim for autonomy, both are considered illegitimate by the rest of the Orthodox world. These two small churches are potential embryos of a future Ukrainian Church of President Poroshenko.

Now we shall turn to Bartholomew. His title describes him as the patriarch of Constantinople, but in vain you will seek this city on a map. Constantinople, the Christian capital of the Eastern Roman Empire, the greatest city of his time, the seat of Roman emperors, was conquered by the Ottoman Turks in 1453 and became Islamic Istanbul, the capital of the Ottoman Empire and of the last Muslim Caliphate; since 1920 it has been a city in the Republic of Turkey. The Constantinople Patriarchate is a phantom fossil of a great past; it has a few churches, a monastery and a few ambitious monks located in Phanar, an old Greek quarter of Istanbul.

The Turkish government considers Bartholomew a bishop of the local Greeks, denying his 6 th -century title of Ecumenical Patriarch. There are only three thousand Greeks in the city, so Bartholomew has very small foothold there indeed. His patriarchate is a phantom in the world of phantoms, such as the Knights of Maltese and Temple Orders, Kings of Greece, Bulgaria and Serbia, emperors of Brazil and of the Holy Roman Empire Phantom is not a swear word. Phantoms are loved by romantics enamoured by old rituals and uniforms with golden aiguillettes. These honourable gentlemen represent nobody, they have no authority, but they can and do issue impressive-looking certificates.

ORDER IT NOW

The Orthodox Church differs from its Roman Catholic sister by having no central figure like the Pope of Rome. The Orthodox have a few equal-ranking heads of national churches, called Patriarchs or Popes. The Patriarch of Constantinople is one of these fourteen church leaders, though he has more than his share of respect by virtue of tradition. Now the Phantom of Phanar seeks to make his position much more powerful, akin to that of the Pope of Rome for the Western Church. His organization claims that "The Ecumenical Patriarchate has the responsibility of being the Church of final appeal in Orthodoxy, and it is the only Church that may establish autocephalous and autonomous Churches". These claims are rejected by the Russian Church, by far the biggest Orthodox Church in the world.

As the Ukrainian church is a part of the Russian Church, it could seek its full independence (autocephaly) in Moscow, but it has no such wish. The two small splinter churches turned to Phanar, and the Phanar leader was more than happy to get into the game. He had sent two of his bishops to Kiev and started with establishing a united Ukrainian church. This church wouldn't be independent, or autocephalous; it would be a church under the direct rule of Phanar, an autonomous or the stavropegial church. For Ukrainian nationalists, it would be a sad reminder that they have the choice to go with Moscow or with Istanbul, now as their ancestors had four hundred years ago. Full independence is not on the cards.

For the Phanar, it was not a first foray into Russian territory: Bartholomew also used the anti-Russian sentiments of Tallinn and took a part of the Estonian churches and their faithful under his rule. However, then the Russians took it easy, for two reasons. Estonia is small, there are not too many churches nor congregants; and besides, the Phanar had taken some positions in Estonia between the wars, when Soviet Russia did not care much about the Church. The Ukraine is absolutely different. It is very big, it is the heart of Russian church, and Constantinople has no valid claim on it.

The Russians say that President Poroshenko bribed Bartholomew. This is nonsense of very low grade; even if the Patriarch is not averse to accepting gifts. Bartholomew had a very valid reason to accept Poroshenko's offer. If he would realize his plan and establish a church of Ukraine under his own rule, call it autonomous or stavropegial or even autocephalous, he would cease being a phantom and would become a very real church leader with millions of faithful. The Ukraine is second only to Russia in the Orthodox world, and its coming under Constantinople would allow Bartholomew to become the most-powerful Orthodox leader.

The Russians are to blame themselves for much of their difficulties. They were too eager to accept the Phanar Phantom for the real thing in their insistent drive for external approval and recognition. They could have forgotten about him three hundred years ago instead of seeking his confirmation now and then. It is dangerous to submit to the weak; perhaps it is more risky than to submit to the strong.

This reminds me of a rather forgotten novel by H. G. Wells The Food of the Gods and How It Came to Earth . It is a story of a wondrous nourishment that allows children to grow into forty-foot-high giants. Society mistreats the young titans. In a particularly powerful episode, a mean old hag scolds the tall kids – thrice her size, and they timidly accept her silly orders. In the end, the giants succeed in standing their ground, throw off the yoke and walk tall. Wells writes about "young giants, huge and beautiful, glittering in their mail, amidst the preparations for the morrow. The sight of them lifted his heart. They were so easily powerful! They were so tall and gracious! They were so steadfast in their movements!"

Russia is a young giant that tries to observe the pygmy-established rules. International organisation called PACE (The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe) where Russia is harshly mistreated and is not even allowed to defend itself, is a good example. International courts where Russia has little chance to stand its ground is another one. President Trump has taken the US out of a few international organisations, though the US has huge weight in international affairs and all states pay heed to the US position. Russia's voice is not even heard, and only now the Russians begin to ponder the advantages of Ruxit.

The church rules are equally biased as they place the biggest Orthodox state with millions of faithful Christians on the same footing as Oriental phantoms.

In the days of the Ottoman Empire, the Patriarch of Constantinople had real weight. The Sultan defended his position, his decisions had legal implications for the Orthodox subjects of the Empire. He caused many troubles for the Russian Church, but the Russians had to observe his decrees as he was an imperial official. After Ataturk's revolution, the Patriarch lost his status, but the Russian church, this young giant, continued to revere him and support him. After 1991, when Russia had turned to its once-neglected church, the Russian Church multiplied its generosity towards Phanar and turned to him for guidance, for the Moscow Church had been confused and unprepared for its new position. Being in doubt, it turned to tradition. We can compare this to the English "rotten boroughs" of Dickens novels, towns that had traditionally sent their representatives to the Parliament though they scarcely had any dwellers.

In this search for tradition, the Russian church united with the Russian Church abroad, the émigré structure with its checkered history that included support for Hitler. Its main contribution was fierce anti-Communism and rejection of the Soviet period of the Russian past. However it could be justified by the Russians' desire to heal the White vs. Red split and restore the émigrés to the Russian people. While honouring the Phanar Phantom as the honorary head of the Orthodox world had no justification at all.

The Phanar had US State Department backing to consider. US diplomacy has had a good hand in dealings with phantoms: for many years Washington supported phantom governments-in-exile of the Baltic states, and this support was paid back a hundredfold in 1991. Now, the US support for Phanar has paid back well in this renewed attack on Russia.

ORDER IT NOW

The Patriarch of Phanar, perhaps, underestimated possible Russian response to his Ukrainian meddling. He got used to Russian good treatment; he remembered that the Russians meekly accepted his takeover of the Estonian church. Being encouraged by the US and driven by his own ambitions, he made the radical step of voiding Constantinople's agreement of transfer of Kiev Metropolitan seat to Moscow, had sent his bishops and took over the Ukraine to himself.

The Moscow Church anathemised Bartholomew, and forbade its priests to participate in service with Phanar priests and (!!!) with priests that accept Phanar priests. While ending communion with Phanar is no pain at all, the secondary step – of ending communion with the churches that refuse to excommunicate Phanar – is a very radical one. Other Orthodox churches are unhappy about Phanar moves. They are aware that Phanar's new rules may threaten them, too. They are not keen to establish a Pope above themselves. But I doubt they are ready to excommunicate Phanar.

The Russian church can take a less radical and more profitable way. The Orthodox world's unity is based on two separate principles. One, the Eucharist. All Orthodox churches are united in the communion. Their priests can serve together and accept communion in any recognised church. Two, the principle of canonical territory . No church should appoint bishops on the other church's territory.

Phanar transgressed against the territorial principle. In response, the Russian Church excommunicated him. But Phanar refused to excommunicate the Russians. As the result, the Russians are forbidden by their own church to accept communion if excommunicated priests participate in the service. But the priests of the Church of Jerusalem do not ban anybody, neither Russians, no Phanariots.

As it happened with Russian counter-sanctions, they cause harm and pain mainly to Russians themselves. There are few Orthodox pilgrims visiting Russia, while there are many Russian pilgrims visiting the Holy Land, Mount Athos and other important sites of Greece, Turkey and Palestine, first of all Jerusalem and Bethlehem. Now these pilgrims won't be able to receive the holy communion in the Holy Sepulchre and in the Nativity Cathedral, while Russian priests won't be able to celebrate mass in these churches.

The Russian priests will probably suffer and submit, while the lay pilgrims will probably break the prohibition and accept the Eucharist in the Church of Jerusalem.

It would be better if the Russian church were to deal with Phanar's treachery on the reciprocity basis. Phanar does not excommunicate Russians, and Russians may go back to full communion with Phanar. Phanar broke the territorial principle, and the Russians may disregard territorial principle. Since the 20th century, canonical territory has increasingly become a violated principle of canon law, says OrthodoxWiki . Facing such major transgression, the Russians may completely drop the territorial principle and send their bishops to Constantinople and Jerusalem, to Rome and Washington, while keeping all Orthodox churches in full communion.

The Russian church will be able to spread the Orthodox faith all over the world, among the French in France, among the Italians in Italy, among Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs. The Russian church dos not allow women into priesthood, does not allow gay unions, does not consider the Jews its elder brothers, does not tolerate homosexual priests and allows its priests to marry. Perhaps it has a good chance to compete with other churches for the flock and clergy.

Thus Moscow Church will be free of tenets it voluntarily accepted. Regarding communion, the Russian church can retain communion with Phanar and Jerusalem and with other Orthodox churches, even with splinter churches on reciprocity basis. Moreover, the Russian Church may allow communion with Catholics. At present, Catholics allow Russians to receive communion, but the Russian Church do not allow their flock to accept Catholic communion and does not allow Catholics to receive communion in Russian churches. With all the differences between the churches, we the Christians can share communion, flesh and blood of our Saviour, and this all we need.

All this is extremely relevant for the Holy Land. The Patriarch of Jerusalem, His Beatitude Theophilos does not want to quarrel with Constantinople nor with Moscow. He won't excommunicate the priests of Phanar despite Moscow's requests, and I think he is right. Ban on communion in the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem or in the Nativity of Bethlehem would become a heavy unnecessary and self-inflicted punishment for Russian pilgrims. That is why it makes sense to retain joint communion, while voiding the territorial principle.

Russian church may nominate its bishops in Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Nazareth to attract the flock presently neglected by the traditional Patriarchate of Jerusalem. I mean the Palestinian Christians and Israeli Christians, hundreds of thousands of them.

The Church of Jerusalem is, and had been ruled by ethnic Greeks since the city was conquered by the Ottomans in 16th century. The Turks removed local Arab Orthodox clerics and appointed their loyal Greeks. Centuries passed by, the Turks are gone, the Greeks are loyal only to themselves, and they do not care much about the natives. They do not allow Christian Palestinian monks to join monasteries, they bar them from holding bishop cathedra and do not let them into the council of the church (called Synod). This flagrant discrimination annoys Palestinian Christians; many of them turned to the Catholic, or even Protestant churches. The flock is angry and ready to rise in revolt against the Greeks, like the Syrian Orthodox did in 1898, when they expelled the Greek bishops and elected an Arab Patriarch of Antioch – with Russian support. (Until that time the Patriarch of Antioch had been elected in Istanbul by Phanar monks exclusively from the "Greeks by race", as they said in those days, and as is the custom of the See of Jerusalem now).

Last Christmas, the Patriarch of Jerusalem had been blocked from entering the Church of Nativity in Bethlehem by angry local Christians, and only Israeli army allowed him to get in. If the Russian Church will establish its bishops in the Holy Land, or even appoint her own Patriarch of Rum (traditional name of the Church) many churches of the Holy Land will accept him, and many faithful will find the church that they can relate to. For the Greek leadership of the Jerusalem church is interested in pilgrimage churches only; they care for pilgrims from Greece and for Greeks in the Holy Land.

ORDER IT NOW

There are many Russian Orthodox in Israel; the Greeks of the Church do not attend to their needs. Since 1948, not a single new church had been built by the Orthodox in Israel. Big cities with many Christians – Beer Sheba, Afula, touristy Eilat – have no churches at all. For sure, we can partly blame Israeli authorities and their hatred of Christianity. However, the Church of Jerusalem is not trying hard enough to erect new churches.

There is a million of immigrants from Russia in Israel. Some of them were Christians, some want to enter the church, being disappointed by brutal and hostile Judaism. They had some romantic image of the Jewish faith, being brought up in atheist USSR, but the reality was not even similar. Not only them; Israelis of every origin are unhappy with Judaism that exists now in Israel. They are ready for Christ. A new church of the Holy Land established by Russians can bring Israelis, Jews and non-Jews, native Palestinians and immigrants to Christ.

Thus Phanar's rejection of territorialism can be used for the greater glory of the Church. Yes, the Russian church will change its character and assume some of global, ecumenical function. This is big challenge; I do not know whether the Russians are ready for it, whether the Patriarch of Moscow Kyril is daring enough for it.

His Church is rather timid; the bishops do not express their views in public. However, a Moscow priest Fr Vsevolod Chaplin, who was close to the Patriarch until recently, publicly called for full reformatting of the Orthodox Christianity, for getting rid of rotten boroughs and phantoms, for establishing sturdy connection between laity and Patriarchate. Without great push by the incautious Patriarch Bartholomew, these ideas could gestate for years; now they can come forth and change the face of the faith.

Israel Shamir can be reached at [email protected]

This article was first published at The Unz Review .

geokat62 , says: November 24, 2018 at 2:44 am GMT

Constantinople, the Christian capital of the Eastern Roman Empire, the greatest city of his time, the seat of Roman emperors, was conquered by the Ottoman Turks in 145 2

According to Wiki:

The Fall of Constantinople was the capture of the capital of the Byzantine Empire by an invading Ottoman army on 29 May 145 3 .

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Constantinople

Macon Richardson , says: November 24, 2018 at 6:23 am GMT
@geokat62 First, using Wikipedia as a reference source is rather déclassé. You are right, however–Wikipedia is right, however–Constantinople did fall in 1493 and Mr. Shamir was wrong. However, as the title of The Cambridge History of the Byzantine Empire c.500-1492 (sic) tells, the empire was gone in 1492. We all make mistakes and a few months' difference in events that happened over 500 years ago seems of little significance. That you needed to bring it to our attention has far more significance to me.
FB , says: November 24, 2018 at 7:39 am GMT
Well now we have the second installment of the Great Orthodox Schism Controversy

I must say that Shamir does spin a rather lively story here rather more gripping than Saker's sombre monograph of a few weeks ago

One is tantalized by images of dancing Israelis who are 'ready for Christ' and French and Italians converting en masse to Orthodoxy [what with all the advantages outlined here by Shamir, I must admit it does sound rather attractive, for anyone thinking of 'trading in' so to speak...]

A possible 'takeover' of the Patriarchate of Rum [will they add Coke...?] the possibilities are endless

'A new church of the Holy Land established by Russians can bring Israelis, Jews and non-Jews, native Palestinians and immigrants to Christ.'

Amen to that Brother Shamir Amen

FromSA , says: November 24, 2018 at 8:31 am GMT
I usually like Shamir's writings but this article clearly shows up his shortcomings on this particular subject. He treats the whole affair as if it is a business deal and then tallies up the pluses and the minuses for the Russian Orthodox church. He forgets that the Russian church was massively persecuted and that for them doing the correct thing in God's site is the only thing.
Felix Keverich , says: November 24, 2018 at 10:56 am GMT

The spacious country with its hard-working people, fertile black soil, the cream of Soviet industry producing aircraft, missiles, trains and tractors, with the best and largest army within the Warsaw Treaty, with its universities, good roads, proximity to Europe, expensive infrastructure connecting East and West, the Ukraine had a much better chances for success than rump Russia.

Soviet-era industries couldn't compete in the modern capitalist economy, and were destined to die. Post-communist Ukraine had no capable class of entrepreneurs, its univercities couldn't meet the demands of the market economy, Ukrainian workers lacked marketable skills. It was a recipe for failure. Russia had all the same problems of course, but it also retained its vast reserves of oil and gas

jilles dykstra , says: November 24, 2018 at 11:23 am GMT
" The Russian Church will suffer a great loss, comparable to the emergence of the Anglican church for the Catholics. "
The loss of the catholic church because of the Anglican church indeed was horrible, financially.
Not just catholic priests in England suffered, archbishops on the continent, of British sees, who had never been in England, suffered enormously.
Isidora , says: November 24, 2018 at 12:40 pm GMT
While I respect and generally enjoy Shamir's intellect and writing skills, in this topic he is completely out of his depth. He recommends actions which would totally destroy Christ's Church on earth, deforming it into a mere worldly contestant for the praise of men.

The one true Church is not an episode in political gamesmanship–regardless how heretical bishops may behave from time to time–but Shamir only relates to it in terms of what behaviors would yield the greatest worldly satisfaction in political power. This is the fatal road the Roman church went down (labeled with the year 1054) when their mere bishop decided he needs to be the Pope of the entire world and so broke communion and excommunicated the rest of the Church (which remained Orthodox). The papacy then went on to a successful pursuit of worldly power through the sword that continues to this day. Restore communion with the Roman pope??? Is Shamir crazy??? Each pope puts himself in the place of Christ (antichrist), and true Orthodox will never have Eucharist with that.

Russia's mistake and the mistake of the rest of Orthodoxy is to have gone along with Constantinople (out of brotherly love and respect for Tradition) for the past 100 years of her micro-heresies. The First and Most Egregious action by Constantinople was to exploit the bloody Soviet persecution of the Church in Russia to declare that the rest of the Orthodox world must switch from the Church calendar to the secular, civil calendar devised by the Latins. This was the kickoff of a chain of heretical actions which are continuing throughout the world, to the extent that now so-called churches contemplate legitimizing women priests, sodomy, pedophilia, and turning the Eucharist into a cafeteria.

The USA is 100% actively behind the actions in Ukraine and the Phanar. In fact no one can be enthroned in Constantinople without the sponsorship of the CIA. So this arch-heretic Bartholomew of the Phanar "elevates" an excommunicated prideful heretic, Philaret, to be the "head" a new "orthodox church in Ukraine." This is the empire seeking to destroy the strength of Russia, which is Orthodoxy. The Evil wants to turn Orthodoxy into a beautiful whitewashed tomb: resplendent cathedrals, sumptuous robes, exalted chanting, artful icons, politically correct bishops. But inside it will be full of dead men's bones.

jilles dykstra , says: November 24, 2018 at 11:23 am GMT
" The Russian Church will suffer a great loss, comparable to the emergence of the Anglican church for the Catholics. "
The loss of the catholic church because of the Anglican church indeed was horrible, financially.
Not just catholic priests in England suffered, archbishops on the continent, of British sees, who had never been in England, suffered enormously.
Isidora , says: November 24, 2018 at 12:40 pm GMT
While I respect and generally enjoy Shamir's intellect and writing skills, in this topic he is completely out of his depth. He recommends actions which would totally destroy Christ's Church on earth, deforming it into a mere worldly contestant for the praise of men.

The one true Church is not an episode in political gamesmanship -- regardless how heretical bishops may behave from time to time–but Shamir only relates to it in terms of what behaviors would yield the greatest worldly satisfaction in political power. This is the fatal road the Roman church went down (labeled with the year 1054) when their mere bishop decided he needs to be the Pope of the entire world and so broke communion and excommunicated the rest of the Church (which remained Orthodox).

The papacy then went on to a successful pursuit of worldly power through the sword that continues to this day. Restore communion with the Roman pope??? Is Shamir crazy??? Each pope puts himself in the place of Christ (antichrist), and true Orthodox will never have Eucharist with that.

Russia's mistake and the mistake of the rest of Orthodoxy is to have gone along with Constantinople (out of brotherly love and respect for Tradition) for the past 100 years of her micro-heresies. The First and Most Egregious action by Constantinople was to exploit the bloody Soviet persecution of the Church in Russia to declare that the rest of the Orthodox world must switch from the Church calendar to the secular, civil calendar devised by the Latins. This was the kickoff of a chain of heretical actions which are continuing throughout the world, to the extent that now so-called churches contemplate legitimizing women priests, sodomy, pedophilia, and turning the Eucharist into a cafeteria.

The USA is 100% actively behind the actions in Ukraine and the Phanar. In fact no one can be enthroned in Constantinople without the sponsorship of the CIA. So this arch-heretic Bartholomew of the Phanar "elevates" an excommunicated prideful heretic, Philaret, to be the "head" a new "orthodox church in Ukraine." This is the empire seeking to destroy the strength of Russia, which is Orthodoxy. The Evil wants to turn Orthodoxy into a beautiful whitewashed tomb: resplendent cathedrals, sumptuous robes, exalted chanting, artful icons, politically correct bishops. But inside it will be full of dead men's bones.

Giuseppe , says: November 24, 2018 at 4:48 pm GMT
Very thoughtful article. While the brilliant conclusion that there could be advantages in abandoning the territorial principle in Orthodoxy might offer some hope to the incoherent situation in the American Church, on the other hand letting go of territoriality sacrifices regionalism for globalism. So is this a great opportunity or an execration? That would depend on whether the Patriarchs are intent on building Christ's Kingdom, or their own.

[Nov 26, 2018] >Revealed: faulty medical implants harm patients around world by Hilary Osborne , Hannah Devlin and Caelainn Barr

Notable quotes:
"... In the US, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has collected 5.4m "adverse event" reports over the past decade, some from manufacturers reporting problems in other parts of the world. ..."
"... Interviews with patients and doctors have revealed flaws in how the medical devices industry is regulated. ..."
Nov 25, 2018 | www.theguardian.com
The Implant Files investigation reveals damage caused by poor regulation and lax testing rules

• Why we're examining the implants industry

Patients around the world are suffering pain and many have died as a result of faulty medical devices that have been allowed on to the market by a system dogged by poor regulation, lax rules on testing and a lack of transparency, an investigation has found.

Pacemakers, artificial hips, contraceptives and breast implants are among the devices that have caused injuries and resulted in patients having to undergo follow-up operations or in some cases losing their lives.

In some cases, the implants had not been tested in patients before being allowed on to the market.

In the UK alone, regulators received 62,000 "adverse incident" reports linked to medical devices between 2015 and 2018. A third of the incidents had serious repercussions for the patient, and 1,004 resulted in death.

In the US, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has collected 5.4m "adverse event" reports over the past decade, some from manufacturers reporting problems in other parts of the world.

These included 1.7m reports of injuries and almost 83,000 deaths. Nearly 500,000 mentioned an explant – surgery to remove a device.

The figures come from research by 252 journalists from 59 media organisations in 36 countries, which has uncovered a litany of problems in the global $400bn (£310bn) industry.

Examples of failure in the market include:

Replacement hips and vaginal mesh products sold to hospitals without any clinical trials. Patients relying on faulty pacemakers when manufacturers were aware of problems. Complications with hernia mesh that ruled one of Britain's top athletes out of competing for years. Regulators approving spinal disc replacements that later disintegrated and migrated in patients. Surgeons admitting they were unable to tell patients about the risks posed by implants because of a lack of central registers. Patients in Australia being given devices that the regulator has approved on the basis they have been approved in Europe.

The findings raise concerns about the level of scrutiny devices undergo before and after they go on the market, and whether regulators detect and act upon findings quickly enough.

Information about problems with devices is, in many countries, kept under wraps, making it difficult for patients to research procedures that have been recommended to them.

Interviews with patients and doctors have revealed flaws in how the medical devices industry is regulated.

Prof Derek Alderson, the president of the Royal College of Surgeons, said there had been enough incidents involving flawed devices to "underline the need for drastic regulatory changes", including the introduction of mandatory national registries for all implantable devices.

"In contrast to drugs, many surgical innovations are introduced without clinical trial data or centrally held evidence," he said. "This is a risk to patient safety and public confidence."

The Guardian and organisations including the BBC , Le Monde and Süddeutsche Zeitung, coordinated by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), have trawled through thousands of documents, many obtained through freedom of information (FoI) requests, to unearth some of the biggest problems.

Alongside interviews with patients and doctors, these have revealed flaws in the way the industry is regulated that are unlikely to be fixed by rules due to come into force in Europe.

Among the concerns raised by the Implant Files project are that manufacturers are in charge of testing their own products after faults have developed – and are allowed to shop around for approval to market their products, without declaring any refusals.

The Guardian has also heard about doctors who have close industry ties or seem eager to be early adopters of the latest devices to enhance their professional standing.

Plans for tougher EU rules have been watered down after industry lobbying, according to a huge trove of documents uncovered by the project.

[Nov 26, 2018] Ten Good Reasons to Hate Putin by Patrick Armstrong

Nov 26, 2018 | russia-insider.com
  1. He's macho. When he takes his photographer along in his "private" moments, it's to show him wrestling tigers, petting leopards, landing large fish, wearing tough guy headgear, hurling people around the judo mat. What do our leaders do in their photographed "private" moments? Golf.
  2. Even the false rumours about him are macho. Affairs with beautiful young women, not pedophilia or secret homosexuality.
  3. He's got a real army. With air defences, fighter planes, modern tanks, tough special forces. So a fun little air campaign won't be possible. Besides, Russia hasn't lost many wars, has it? And they never give up; just ask the Mongols.
  4. Nukes. Russia has them; they work: Bulava , Topol and Sineva . Meanwhile, in the USA not so much.
  5. He's Russian. And Russians are all horrible. Except for Pussy Riot .
  6. He's smarter than our team. Well... doesn't he prove this every day?
  7. You can't bully him. Ditto.
  8. He's not going anywhere. He's staying right there in Russia. And that, for the geographically challenged, is a great big country not very far from anywhere.
  9. And one bonus reason. He knows gold is a better investment than US Treasuries .
  10. And just one more. Russian babes say they like him . Imagine the campaign "Babes for (insert the name of your wearisome leader)". Didn't think you could imagine it without feeling a bit nauseous. Well, OK, there was Obamagirl . But that was fake .

[Nov 26, 2018] Lavrov Tells It Right to Pence's Smug Face Russia Will End US-Led World Order

This two years old article can be written yesterday...
Notable quotes:
"... "Aiming to calm European fears about US-Russia ties, Vice President Mike Pence told world leaders Saturday that the United States will stand firm against Moscow while also seeking avenues for cooperation." ..."
Feb 19, 2017 | russia-insider.com

Pence told a room full of Washington lapdogs that the United States would "continue to hold Russia accountable". Then Lavrov went up to the podium and straightened him out. Rudy Panko Sun, Feb 19, 2017 | 400 words 38,161 417 YOLO Lavrov

"Aiming to calm European fears about US-Russia ties, Vice President Mike Pence told world leaders Saturday that the United States will stand firm against Moscow while also seeking avenues for cooperation."

This is the opening line to CNN's report on the predictable saber-rattling that took place at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday.

Lavrov is our spirit animal

Pence also told the audience that Washington remained "unwavering" in its commitment to NATO as it faced a "more assertive Russia."

Shortly after Pence had finished his war liturgy, Russia's Foreign Minister took to the podium.

Sergei Lavrov phrased his comments in a very simple manner, so that his American counterparts could understand :

Lavrov said that the time when the West called the shots was over and, dismissing NATO as a relic of the Cold War, added: "I hope that (the world) will choose a democratic world order -- a post-West one -- in which each country is defined by its sovereignty."

Lavrov said Moscow wanted to build relations with Washington which would be "pragmatic with mutual respect and acknowledgement of our responsibility for global stability."

Lavrov is a career diplomat and a true gentleman. But we've noticed a subtle change in his approach to U.S. bullshittery over the last two years. He rarely dances around issues anymore. Sure, he still refers to Washington as "our western friends" or "our American colleagues". But he doesn't hold back after that.

The crisis in Ukraine made it clear that Washington wanted blood. But the U.S.-led crimes against the people of Syria is what made Russia realize that they are not dealing with normal, reasonable people. Washington is a cabal of psychopaths.

The war in Syria has also ushered in a new era: We are witnessing a seismic shift in how international relations are conducted. Russia and Iran just proved that fighting the bully works. And other countries have taken notice.

Lavrov's comments are more than just an invitation to all nations to join Russia in the creation of a new world order based on state sovereignty and international consensus.

He was also issuing a warning to Washington: Pack your bags. It's over.

Buckle up, buttercup.

Tsarkov19 Richard Harris • 2 years ago ,

Well, that would be the brain-dead, full of shit, Fox News/CNN version of events.

The USA has made it clear that unless Russia allows the full raping of its economy and submits to second rate lapdog status (are you listening Germany?) that they will continue to encroach and threaten.

Crimea would never have happened had it not been for the US seeded, illegal coup.

The USA is the nation responsible for hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths over the past 15+ years, not Russia.

Kelly Ann Tsarkov19 • 2 years ago ,

Past 15 years? truth be told it's a much higher number than that if you take in all nations they have overthrown since post WWII .

teddyfromcd Kelly Ann • 2 years ago ,

AND remember that whatever the purpose of overthrowing or even merely meddling inside countries - really -- as many as there are american embassies...

the consequences -- the repercussions of these -- result in BILLIONS in misery, unnecessary suffering and difficulty -- once the effects of american meddling , operations, influence, trouble-making are accounted for.

take the economy alone...an american company ....without all the bombings obviousness --

IF AN american mining company goes to a country and ''obtains'' bending the rules so the company can mine all they want -- hire private security or EVEN a corrupt government's ARMY or rogue generals to ''provide security" against peasants or workers who complain they are not being paid well , their health disregarded, the environment and village they live in polluted -- and the company takes all the profits OUT --

the consequences of that american company's activities harms far more, far longer and deeper - you count that along with all other activities and behavior the USA commits across the world wherever there is an american embassy, representative, organization working for ''american interests''

and what do we get in TOTAL if a proper accounting were made?

BILLIONS OF LIVES and UNTOLD DAMAGE TO THE ENVIRONMENT , FUTURE GENERATIONS AND THE HERITAGE OF THEIR COUNTRIES ACROSS THE WORLD, ACROSS GENERATIONS RUINED.

from effects in poverty, wealth gaps, misery, descent by populations in poverty into criminality, destruction of farm and natural lands, social cohesion disturbed...divisions created...death , terrorism, and an endless list of MISERY brought by america's ''INSTITUTIONS".

Paulo Rocha teddyfromcd • 2 years ago ,

If America don't respect it's own indigenous people, how can they do it with the rest of the world?!?!?
America is leading the world!! To it's destruction....

Helen B Danny Canusa • 5 months ago ,

What a whitewash.
Blankets infected with smallpox ...
Massacres ...
Alcohol ...
Broke every treaty ...
The indigenous Americans were the subjects of the greatest genocide the world has known. We can only estimate the numbers, but they were huge.
They were a majestic and beautiful people. No doubt they had tribal indifferences, but they were not genocidal.
Shame on you.

andrew Kelly Ann • 2 years ago ,

You are right. From the point of view of Russia, the situation looks like this: NATO forces located on our borders are not a big threatening force.
Dangerous other:

First: the Americans gave the nuclear weapons at the disposal of its partners in NATO. The Polish, Danish and other aircraft can fly with nuclear bombs along our borders.

Second: latest launchers for cruise missiles are close to our border. This means that the flight time to, for example Saint Petersburg, becoming about 3 minutes.
That is, in case of any error, accidental launch due to a technical fault no one have time for any questions. No time for a phone call or any other communication, anti-missile system Russia will work automatically.

That is, the previous policy and NATO leaders created a situation which is extremely dangerous in itself. No matter how hostile their intentions.

Kelly Ann andrew • 2 years ago ,

Yes very much so, I hate it. No need for this insanity. Saw pictures of NATO troops taking group shots right on Russias boarder. And all it takes is one tiny mistake, Americans are famous for making mistakes , thats how they justify killing people. Ever watch Reilly interview Trump? Could smack that bloating neocon oreilly. Europeans don't get it , if this goes bad it will get real bloody for them as well, they have no shield of protection, when are they going to finally wake up n realize NATO is using them n their land to launch attacks on Russia, so stupid

[Nov 26, 2018] Muller investigation might last another six months

Nov 26, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

She thought the investigation might have about six months left, although if Trump refuses a face-to-face meeting, Mueller could seek a subpoena to put him before the grand jury. That could be fought all the way to the supreme court.

There is a precedent, US v Nixon, when the justices ruled that the president must deliver subpoenaed materials to a district court. Sixteen days later, Nixon resigned.

If Mueller decides not to have that fight, he could write a report saying he believed the president obstructed justice. If he does not reach that conclusion, the Democratic-led House could issue its own subpoenas.

"It is a chess match," said Milgram. "We'll have to see how it plays out in the next year."

[Nov 26, 2018] Kerch strait incident might well be an inventive Persidentail election move on the part of Poroshenko and forces which are behind him

Looks like a desperate attempt of Poroshenko to save his scalp. And pay of EU and the USA hostility toward Russia for his own political ends. But Timoshenko is shrewd enough and politically powerful enough to block any attempt to postpone Presidential elections.
Notable quotes:
"... I believe this was a preplanned Ukrainian provocation to garner international support in her effort to get unfettered passage through the Kerch Strait. Russia has been increasing her inspections of ships transiting the Strait this year. That is Russia's right under the 2003 agreement, international and maritime laws. ..."
"... With Poroshenko polling at 8% for the election in 2 months it is very convenient to use any excuse to declare martial law and postpone the election. ..."
"... In any case the "Russia, Russia evil" crowd in the west will find this another opportunity to create more hysteria and take actions to "punish" Russia. ..."
"... Eversince fall of USSR a bunch of crazy neocon warmongers our running US/western foreign policy. ..."
"... about the prospects for Ukraine electing a government willing to negotiate with Russia ..."
"... Probability of that is approaching zero. US will not allow this anyway even if to imagine that such prospects do exist. In fact, this latest provocation could be, as one of the commenters at Unz short time ago astutely observed, an attempt by Trump to avoid meeting with Putin at G-20. Realistically speaking, at this stage there is really nothing to talk about between the US and Russia. ..."
"... Madame Nuland and her erstwhile cabal of neo-cons might have given some thought to such unpredictable eventualities when we were pouring the big dough into the Ukraine to effect regime change in a country that we may be sure she knew next to nothing about in actuality. ..."
"... this was a political provocation to support the introduction of martial law in Ukraine - apparently to help Poroshenko stay in office ..."
"... the only casualty was a crew member on one of the Ukraine vessels shot by the captain when the crew member refused orders to open fire on a Russian vessel.. ..."
"... Here is the latest from The Saker, who thinks that it's also about Ukrainian politics and the upcoming election there. This is hardly news to anyone that has been following this. Poroshenko is in a very bad position and is forced by circumstances to act, even if rashly, since he faces probable prosecution for corruption if he loses, which is a foregone conclusion given the numbers. ..."
"... Oh, and Ukraine desperately, desperately needs to change the subject. The Nuland Experiment (a great movie title) has failed miserably and is about to be turned over like a rock and the slimy creatures are going to come pouring forth. Europe is very much coming around to the belief that they want nothing to do with Ukraine, but this "event" put NATO into the conversation, and NATO is the big one. "Ukraine needs to be part of NATO!" ..."
Nov 26, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

smoothieX12 . , 10 hours ago

I don't know about that. The whole thing was about martial law--Poroshenko barely clings to power--and he got it now. Any provocation in Azov Sea will be met fully within appropriate protocols (namely Law on the State Border) and ROE of other forces, so militarily speaking there was nothing extraordinary. I really doubt this version with SADM--comes across as a complete baloney.
TTG -> smoothieX12 . , 7 hours ago
I agree the SADM story is more likely just a crazy conspiracy theory. The commenter could even be a Russian or Russian supporter trying to muddy the waters on his own, painting the Ukrainians as full on crazies. I believe this was a preplanned Ukrainian provocation to garner international support in her effort to get unfettered passage through the Kerch Strait. Russia has been increasing her inspections of ships transiting the Strait this year. That is Russia's right under the 2003 agreement, international and maritime laws.
smoothieX12 . -> TTG , 6 hours ago
painting the Ukrainians as full on crazies.

Actually, there is a case to be made (obviously without any conspiracy theories) of mind-boggling stupidity of contemporary Ukraine's "elites". This is even apart from sheer military incompetence.

Grazhdanochka -> TTG , 4 hours ago
Ukraine already has unfettered access through Kerch beyond usual protocol and procedures, they have even admitted so before with their Ships making the transit... You are correct as per the Agreements, but one could not expect to ignore such Procedures even with allied States, let alone one that supposedly is 'at war' with
Jack -> TTG , 4 hours ago
With Poroshenko polling at 8% for the election in 2 months it is very convenient to use any excuse to declare martial law and postpone the election. Would be interesting to see how his political opponents respond. In any case the "Russia, Russia evil" crowd in the west will find this another opportunity to create more hysteria and take actions to "punish" Russia.
Kooshy -> smoothieX12 . , an hour ago
SX12

After the 2014 coup do you believe or do you consider Ukraine to be (politically) a failed state.

Good of Russia for sake of world to stand up to westerners push and provocations. Eversince fall of USSR a bunch of crazy neocon warmongers our running US/western foreign policy. Good to see Russia under Putin, has woke up to the reality that she can't have a friend (partner) in the west, unless she agrees to become a subservient to the interests of the US/West

Chris Chuba -> smoothieX12 . , 3 hours ago
If the Ukrainians (goaded on by some NATO nutjob) really wanted to destroy the bridge, they would try their level best to make it look like some 'patriot' living under the yoke of Russian oppression in Crimea damaged the bridge. The last thing they would do is create a clear link to a Ukrainian military vessel.
James Thomas -> smoothieX12 . , 8 hours ago
smoothieX12,

Do you have anything to say about the prospects for Ukraine electing a government willing to negotiate with Russia? I don't think the last few years have been all that good for the average Ukrainian.

smoothieX12 . -> James Thomas , 6 hours ago
about the prospects for Ukraine electing a government willing to negotiate with Russia

Probability of that is approaching zero. US will not allow this anyway even if to imagine that such prospects do exist. In fact, this latest provocation could be, as one of the commenters at Unz short time ago astutely observed, an attempt by Trump to avoid meeting with Putin at G-20. Realistically speaking, at this stage there is really nothing to talk about between the US and Russia.

Mad_Max22 , 7 hours ago
One would have to be certifiable to believe that an attack on that bridge would not trigger an overwhelming military attack by Russia on the Ukraine. This would not be "brinkmanship." This would be insane. Maybe there is some insanity lurking in the halls of power in the Ukraine, would anyone be surprised. Maybe there is some insanity lurking closer to home. The temperament of John Brennan on recent display deoesn't exactly inspire much confidence.

Madame Nuland and her erstwhile cabal of neo-cons might have given some thought to such unpredictable eventualities when we were pouring the big dough into the Ukraine to effect regime change in a country that we may be sure she knew next to nothing about in actuality. No, Madame, we are not all Ukrainians now, nor, God willing, will we ever be. These dingbats put one in mind of Charlie Chaplin blithly bouncing the globe about over his head and doing his best to stay beneath it.

Did these so called area experts down there in la la land really think that Russia would see Sevastopol made a port of call for NATO without so much as a whimper? I sometimes wonder whether a single person sitting around the big table said, "you know, maybe overthrowing the government of the Ukraine is not such a great idea, it being so close to Russia, and all..."

EEngineer , 19 hours ago
You can't hide the radioactive residue of a nuclear detonation, no matter how small. They also have a characteristic fingerprint that will be identifiable. Therefor using one starts WWIII.

That's not to say someone didn't think it would be clever to provoke the Russians into acting to make them look like an aggressor. Or perhaps to gauge their intelligence penetration of NATO and or Ukrainian operations...

For some time now I've been of the opinion that there are great many fools who really want a hot war with Russia.

I just finished watching the "The Unknown War", the Russian equivalent of the BBC's "The World At War" series on WWII. Both were made in the 1970's while most of the survivors were still alive to tell their tales. It would seem they have been ignored by those who most need to see them...

JoeC , 9 hours ago
Colonel Cassad's website suggests this was a political provocation to support the introduction of martial law in Ukraine - apparently to help Poroshenko stay in office. It also cites a report that the only casualty was a crew member on one of the Ukraine vessels shot by the captain when the crew member refused orders to open fire on a Russian vessel..
tjfxh , 19 hours ago
This seems to make more sense, without the drama of a small nuke.

The Vineyard of the Saker Kerch Provocation – Causes and Consequences http://thesaker.is/kerch-pr... Rostislav Ishchenko Translated by Ollie Richardson and Angelina Siard

Update:

Here is the latest from The Saker, who thinks that it's also about Ukrainian politics and the upcoming election there. This is hardly news to anyone that has been following this. Poroshenko is in a very bad position and is forced by circumstances to act, even if rashly, since he faces probable prosecution for corruption if he loses, which is a foregone conclusion given the numbers.

About the latest Ukronazi provocation in the Kerch strait by The Saker http://thesaker.is/about-th...

Bill Herschel , 3 hours ago
Baloney? In the first place, very economical. You're British Special Forces. You've studied how to get the bridge down and stay down. This was the only choice that was deliverable without fingerprints. A tugboat forsooth. And, btw, in the video that has sound, someone is really screaming and yelling in panic mode, I suspect it is the captain of the tug. Would you scream and yell if you were carrying a SADM and a Russian warship was about to ram you? Oh, and who would they blame? Iran. Simple. Why? Because it's Iran.

Russia doesn't react hard unless there's something there. And they have really, really good intelligence, I'm convinced of it. And who would plant this story, which, with the exception of the nuclear dimension of the weapon, is trivially believable.

Oh, and Ukraine desperately, desperately needs to change the subject. The Nuland Experiment (a great movie title) has failed miserably and is about to be turned over like a rock and the slimy creatures are going to come pouring forth. Europe is very much coming around to the belief that they want nothing to do with Ukraine, but this "event" put NATO into the conversation, and NATO is the big one. "Ukraine needs to be part of NATO!"

if the tug was captured, and a SADM is involved, has it fallen into Russian hands?

Off topic, TTG. If you have not read The Riddle of the Sands by Erskine Childers, please read it now. It was published in 1903 and is considered to be the first spy novel. It takes place in a sailboat. I have read it well over ten times. On any list of the five best novels, it must appear.

Pat Lang Mod -> Bill Herschel , an hour ago
TTG is US Army Special Forces. You don't know that?
English Outsider , 6 hours ago
There are also reports of proposed increases in British naval forces in the Ukraine for training purposes - https://www.gov.uk/governme...

Also in the Baltic - https://www.army.mod.uk/dep...

Brief summary - http://www.warfare.today/20...

I do not understand why we and others send enough to hearten the Ukrainians and the surrounding NATO countries but not enough to make a difference should serious hostilities break out. For PR or for real?

Fred S , 9 hours ago
These people sound like idiots. All they need is a freighter not a bomb.
http://wusfnews.wusf.usf.ed...

[Nov 26, 2018] Some observers suggest that this might well be Poroshenko government attempt to switch attention of the population from "heating crisis" and dismal (lowest in europe) standard of living to more favorable for them topics just before the Presidential elections, which Poroshenko is supposed to to lose with huge margings (his current support is at 8%)

Nov 26, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Nov 25, 2018 3:11:35 PM | link

Crimea's governor places blame squarely where it belongs:

"I am sure Western patrons of the Kiev regime are behind this provocation - it doesn't look a mere coincidence that European and American politicians have been so concerned over the situation in the Sea of Azov in the recent months. Ukraine, as a country stripped of sovereignty and being under external governance , is an instrument for whipping up international tensions."

His description of what sort of "state" Ukraine's become is 100% spot-on, and Canthama's description of conditions for civilians is also correct. Many towns have had gas supplies cut off completely in what's known as Warming Season, and their citizens are literally freezing .

As for the upcoming G-20, the spectacle of MbS confronting Erdogan outshines any Putin-Trump sideline meet, IMO. Indeed, there really isn't any reason for Trump to even show, except maybe as the referee between an bin-Salman/Erodogan wrestling match.

Jen , Nov 25, 2018 5:41:23 PM | link

... Canthama @ 6, Karlof1 @ 17:

Add to the shutdown of natural gas supplies to towns and cities around Ukraine (with the consequent closure of schools, universities and even hospitals) the possible shutdown of water supplies and the looming collapse of water pipeline and sanitation infrastructure.
https://ria.ru/world/20181120/1533162137.html?referrer_block=index_most_popular_5

Ordinary people not just facing starvation and freezing but also the lack of clean drinking water.

Snorko , Nov 25, 2018 6:03:14 PM | link
Now we know why this happened: Ukrainian president will propose declaring martial law after sea clash with Russia
karlof1 , Nov 25, 2018 6:13:48 PM | link
Russia says You'd better think twice . The Azov provocation and increased Donbas shelling were planned to coincide. As Jen @24 adds, the situation there is indeed dire for commonfolk. However, Ukies tire of waiting and want war to result.
Timothy Hagios , Nov 25, 2018 6:35:43 PM | link
Perhaps Porky (or his handlers) concluded that he needs martial law to keep the people down maintain power, but he wouldn't be doing himself any favors my admitting it outright. Instigating a provocation with Russia would give him the excuse he needs.
karlof1 , Nov 25, 2018 7:11:17 PM | link
TH @31--

Begging the question: How many Ukrainians are genuinely fooled by this provocation?

Poroshenko wants to declare martial law as a way to avoid upcoming presidential elections is a widely shared opinion on Twitter.

Jen , Nov 25, 2018 7:23:29 PM | link
Timothy Hagios @ 31: The declaration of martial law (with no end date) means that Presidential elections in 2019, which Porky Pig would be certain to lose to the equally loathsome Yulia Tymoshenko, can be deferred indefinitely. Must be tempting for Porky Pig to approve that.

And indeed he has!
https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/ukrainian-navy-russias-coast-guard-opens-fire-on-ukrainian-boats-in-the-azov-sea-developing.html

Coming soon to a blog near us ... all Ukrainians being subjected to a compulsory military draft:
https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/what-martial-law-in-ukraine-could-mean-for-nation.html

Kadath , Nov 25, 2018 7:40:50 PM | link
Re: @32, Actually comparing this event to the 2009 Russian-Georgian seems quite appropriate, just like Georgia, Kiev launched an attack on territory protected by Russian servicemen and Kiev got a bit of a whipping. now lets see if Kiev doubles down like Georgia and makes everything worse for itself, will we soon see Poroshenko eating his own tie on live television, time will tell!
alaff , Nov 25, 2018 7:42:13 PM | link
Just now, at the meeting of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko made a proposal to impose martial law in the country. Today it will be considered (and most likely accepted) at an emergency meeting of the Verkhovna Rada. Source

Anticipating his obvious loss in the upcoming presidential election, Poroshenko (read, war criminal) decided to make a reckless and dangerous provocation in the Black Sea and thereby get a "legal basis" for the introduction of martial law in the country, in which any elections are canceled.

Debsisdead , Nov 25, 2018 8:26:28 PM | link
The provocation suits the suits in the amerikan war machine, plus it helps Porky to stay in power by giving him an excuse and apparently a legal out to suspend elections. WTF writes these new improved constitutions? When a jumped up sad sack of a pol pushes martial law on the people, that is exactly the time the scuzzbag should be made to be accountable to them. A bit more of declare martial law and all bets are off, you gotta get re-approved and there would be much less of these weak, lame and totally unnecessary push comes to shove dust-ups in the ally out back. amerika who claims to be just 'holding Porky's coat' will be tossing out barbs right left and center to keep the pot boiling.

See France over the weekend. That country needs an early election now, Macron imagines he will be able to just 'tough it out' against the expressed wishes of the population, in the process overturning 250 years of political tradition which began with the fall of the Bastille, through the Paris commune and the 1968 Paris insurrection. An accepted part of french politics has been the right for people to show their dissatisfaction if a slimy pol exceeds their mandate.
He will discover how wrong he is, as even those who don't object to massive cuts in public spending, tax relief for the elite whilst hitting Joe/Jo Sh1tkicker with the heaviest taxes and charges in the EU, are seeing that destroying the rights of people to oppose tyranny bodes badly. Why, in no time at all the French will be as buggered as the englanders already are.

Heheh so much for for MUKGA (making the empire great again) thru brexit, Terri May has just given Gibraltar back to the olive oil merchants. The englanders have clung grimly to that rock after stealing it in 1713. Imagine the situation at the Sea of Azov magnified about 1000 times, the englanders used their unjustifiable occupation to exert absolute control over all movement between the mediterranean and the atlantic oceans for 300 years, I betcha May's hero Churchill wouldn't be too impressed with that heheheh.
Another week of watching a slo mo train wreck eh.

[Nov 26, 2018] Russia to UK Prove Your Spies Did Not Poison Our Citizens or Face Consequences

Nov 26, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Russia to UK: Prove Your Spies Did Not Poison Our Citizens or Face Consequences What a great Russian response! Finally! RI Staff Thu, Mar 29, 2018 | 300 words 17,686 225 YOLO Lavrov What is good for the goose is good for the gander. At least Russia seems to think so. There may not be conclusive evidence Britain poisoned Sergei Skripal and his visiting daughter Yulia. But then neither is there evidence Moscow did it and that did not prevent London from demanding Russia proves its innocent (in 24 hours). Moreover the British are keeping Russians away from evidence, not the other way around.

So why wouldn't Russia now demand Britain instead proves its own innocence? Well, Lavrov's Ministry of External Affairs can't think of a reason why not.

It better be something good!

Russia as demanded that London provide proof that British spies did not carry out the poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement that their analysis of the assassination attempt has them to believe in 'a possible involvement in it of the British intelligence services'.

The Ministry says that in the absence of proof of British innocence, Moscow will regard the incident as an attempt on the lives of Russian citizens on foreign soil.

'An analysis of all the circumstances ... leads us to think of the possible involvement in it (the poisoning) of the British intelligence services,' the foreign ministry said in a statement.

'If convincing evidence to the contrary is not presented to the Russian side we will consider that we are dealing with an attempt on the lives of our citizens as a result of a massive political provocation.'

Excellent! 'Do what you demand of us and prove your innocence to us, or we will regard it was a state-sponsored attempt at murder of our citizens.'

Lavrov has truly outdone himself here. And yet all he has done is responded in kind. So simple and yet so brilliant.

[Nov 26, 2018] Language is a mental battlefield

The denial of the economic ideology of Neo-liberalism is nothing more than a cheap debating point. If you pretend something doesn't exist then you make it difficult to attack.
Notable quotes:
"... Strange then, that you can buy a book called: "Masters of the Universe: Hayek, Friedman, and the Birth of Neoliberal Politics. By Daniel Stedman Jones. Princeton University Press". ..."
"... What were Friedrich Heyek and Milton Friedman: lollypop salesmen? ..."
"... All one needs to know is that English language is being manipulated just as it always has been by those that have the power to do it. Today the main manipulators are, Madison Avenue, agencies and departments the United States government, Wall Street, US television media. Most people don't realize that the language is being manipulated, when they hear or see in print words being used in unusual ways they just go along with it. ..."
"... Advertising frequently refers to things being "better" with no explanation of what it is better than. ..."
"... "Underpriviliged" to describe people living in poverty but no explanation of the privileges that people have who are not poor. ..."
"... I could go on and on, but I am sure that you scribblers who do not indulge in "confuse speak" know exactly what I am trying to explain. Best example I can give is "The free world" which by latest check includes Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and sundry other brutal regimes and one time actually included outright fascist countries. ..."
"... Yes - the person who said language was mankind's first technology were absolutely correct. I expect language was invented by those who invent all technology to be just out of reach of the general public until the inventers decide they can do business for themselves out of it. ..."
"... Neoliberalism is the final stage of liberal democracy which has been around for 60-70 years, the most destructive form of government the world has ever seen, based on deregulation for the wealthy oligarchs and debt and debauchery for the poor .............. which is rapidly taking us back to feudal times. ..."
"... I prescribe a course of Orwell, Start, perhaps, with short stories...... Politics and the English Language, Why I Write, Notes on Nationalism, for example. And then a full dose of Nineteen Eighty-Four. That should do the trick! ..."
"... Nothing has been learnt from the crash of 2008 beyond "get rich even quicker", or as its more commonly known, economic and ecological suicide. ..."
Nov 26, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

MartynInEurope , 11 Jun 2013 13:13

Term abuse didn't arrive with neoliberalism; it's been around since forever. Also, the fact that most of our daily transactions might be commercial is a reflection of our own habits as much as the changing use of language.

If a person is employed by a commercial gallery, they are effectively working in a shop, and the people who visit these galleries are potentially customers. No surprise there. Just like a person who uses transport can be a customer. Of course, there are public services where commercial terms such as customer make little sense.

Nostradamus333 , 11 Jun 2013 13:08
Marxism has hijacked our vocabulary for a 150 years. Nice to have a change for awhile.
MartynInEurope -> bongoid , 11 Jun 2013 13:06
@bongoid -

Sure, it isn't that important who is making the point, even if the point is made by reference to questionable and contentious examples.

I also think that any even bigger influence on meaning / lack of meaning / interchangeable meaning etc.has been postmodernity far more than neoliberalism.

dourscot , 11 Jun 2013 13:00
All true but the left is just as bad as coining its Orwellisms. Witness the way nobody has to use an approved vocabulary to talk about every and any group on fear of moral ridicule or worse. Language is a mental battlefield.
LondonPhil -> RClayton , 11 Jun 2013 12:57
@RClayton - Can I suggest resurrecting William Morris's distinction between "work" (ie labour that is moral, creative, aesthetic or, at least, hygienic - ie intrinsically worth doing) and "toil" which is work done only because of the necessity to earn money to buy the means of existence?

Having words that distinguish between these two ideas is useful. The 'work' you talk about is 'toil' and most of it is done simply to service the money/capitalist system.

As an example, I have in front of me a rubber 'stress reliever' in the shape of PacMan. It was given to me as a gift.

Presumably, somewhere in the world there is a factory full of people turning out this rubbish. It adds nothing to the world's beauty, nor its ability to support the people living on it. Its only uses are in providing paid 'toil' to support the factory workers and to enable someone to give me something I don't need as a token of their friendship, probably paid for from the fruits of their own toil.

Changing the words we use will not change this, but it does give us a framework in which to think about how it might be changed.

KingOfNothing -> Yorkied24 , 11 Jun 2013 12:45
@Yorkied24 -

Strange then, that you can buy a book called: "Masters of the Universe: Hayek, Friedman, and the Birth of Neoliberal Politics. By Daniel Stedman Jones. Princeton University Press".

What were Friedrich Heyek and Milton Friedman: lollypop salesmen?

If I can repeat what I said at the top of this thread - The denial of the economic ideology of Neo-liberalism is nothing more than a cheap debating point. If you pretend something doesn't exist then you make it difficult to attack.

Sorry, but it just won't wash with me.

bill4me -> darylrevok , 11 Jun 2013 12:10
@darylrevok - Well, perhaps you might describe the sweet smell of success as 'funny', but I don't.
MartynInEurope , 11 Jun 2013 12:08
The biggest problem isn't so much that people use the language of commercial business and are free and easy with their abuse of terms (there's a new one), but that people treat government and politics as a service, and see their relationship with governance as akin to a client/customer relationship, to that end we elect politicians who tell us what we want to hear, even if what we hear can be, all to often, somewhat meaningless or trite.
makingtime -> TheRealCmdrGravy , 11 Jun 2013 11:55
@TheRealCmdrGravy - There's nothing vague about it, It represents the whole of UK and US government economic policy for the last thirty years with the happy outcomes that we enjoy today.

But now you know what a neoliberal is, perhaps you can reread the excellent article above with added relish and understanding. Glad to be of assistance. If you want anything else looking up I suggest using a search engine before posting here that a particular word is too difficult for you.

darylrevok -> bill4me , 11 Jun 2013 11:49
@bill4me - And Capitalism is not dead, it just smells funny.
MartynInEurope , 11 Jun 2013 11:40
According to Bradford DeLong, a Berkeley economic historian, neoliberalism has two main tenets:

"The first is that close economic contact between the industrial core and the developing periphery is the best way to accelerate the transfer of technology which is the sine qua non for making poor economies rich (hence all barriers to international trade should be eliminated as fast as possible).

The second is that governments in general lack the capacity to run large industrial and commercial enterprises. Hence, [except] for core missions of income distribution, public-good infrastructure, administration of justice, and a few others, governments should shrink and privatize)."

Justthefactsman , 11 Jun 2013 11:36
Such a long article.

All one needs to know is that English language is being manipulated just as it always has been by those that have the power to do it. Today the main manipulators are, Madison Avenue, agencies and departments the United States government, Wall Street, US television media. Most people don't realize that the language is being manipulated, when they hear or see in print words being used in unusual ways they just go along with it.

Example:

A couple of years back a motormouth U.S TV show host used the word "impact" in place of the word "affect". He did so simply because "impact" seemed more dramatic. Now it is almost impossible to hear or see the word "affect" used anywhere.

Now there are some of you that will say that language and usage of words change over time, and I would agree with you, but when you see a word used in a context that is completely inappropriate and that use is adopted in general you have to ask yourself questions like who benefits from this.
Remember when Bush wanted to increase troop levels, he refered to the increase as a "surge". "Surge" until then had a distinct meaning it was not associated with any meaning of permanence, and that is why it was used.

Advertising frequently refers to things being "better" with no explanation of what it is better than.

"Underpriviliged" to describe people living in poverty but no explanation of the privileges that people have who are not poor.

I could go on and on, but I am sure that you scribblers who do not indulge in "confuse speak" know exactly what I am trying to explain.
Best example I can give is "The free world" which by latest check includes Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and sundry other brutal regimes and one time actually included outright fascist countries.

Enough said.

ascania , 11 Jun 2013 11:34
Now all London Underground passengers are 'customers', which implies you are buying the travel experience rather than paying for transportation. When misused it suggests to me lack of strength and self-belief from the organization concerned.
bill4me -> callaspodeaspode , 11 Jun 2013 11:31
@callaspodeaspode - Gosh - an excellent example of how to get things completely wrong. Just because a firm has the government for a customer does not mean it is a public sector business.

Note the word 'customer'. In the case of the FE college, who is the customer - the government or the students? Are the students just incidental fodder?

Your contract with the government will be for a certain job done in a certain for a certain sum of money. In FE, the government has a sum of money which gets paid out irrespective of the outcome. Indeed, how do you measure the 'outcome' of an FE college? In your case, it's easy - either the software works or it doesn't.

Your company no doubt is either owned by an individual, or has shareholders. Those people live on the profits of the company, or lose their money if it goes bust. What is the profit made by an FE college? Who are the shareholders? Who goes broke if the college folds? Still think an FE college is the same as private company?

makingtime -> TheRealCmdrGravy , 11 Jun 2013 11:15
@TheRealCmdrGravy - No definition is a distinct improvement on your deliberate distortion. I was assuming you had the sense to find a definition on the internet for yourself, since you managed to find your way here.

I do not consider alternative viewpoints brainless, i consider a refusal to even engage in debate brainless, pretending that a word is undefined when there's reams of literature as well as concise definitions freely available from any number of sources. That might reasonably be construed as brainless.

Here, fill your boots, then if you have an actual argument instead of a crude attempt to derail the debate it can be considered.

Neoliberalism is a political philosophy whose advocates support economic liberalization, free trade and open markets, privatization, deregulation, and decreasing the size of the public sector while increasing the role of the private sector in modern society. (From wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism)

I'm convinced you had the brains to look it up yourself, that's why I suspect your agenda. Now please stop wasting everyone's time unless you have something to contribute. I even looked it up for you.

callaspodeaspode -> bill4me , 11 Jun 2013 11:13
@bill4me - That's an excellent point.

And I can give a further example. I used to work in a Private Equity-owned firm, which happened to have some contracts to provide software support to the government. Thus, in your conceptual framework, it was a public sector business. Indeed, by your reasoning, Lockheed Martin is a state-owned company as well.

seanmatthews , 11 Jun 2013 11:06
I agree that 'Neoliberalism' has hijacked our vocabulary, but that is about the limit of our agreement. People fling the word 'neoliberalism' around these days as a synonym for 'anything I and my friends have decided is politically-economically objectionable' ('have decided', not 'think'). In the old days, 'fascist' served the same purpose in all those late-night student flat discussions. I assume, until proven otherwise, that people who talk about 'neoliberalism', fall into the same category as those people who had so much difficulty distinguishing between 'liberal democracy' and 'fascism'.

I can actually think of liberal left-leaning intellectuals who I can recall having self-described as neoliberal. They, however, are distinctive for the sort of nuanced understanding of political economy you are unlikely to find represented around the candles in the kitchen on a Friday night when the world's problems are being discussed and solved.

HarryTheHorse -> TheRealCmdrGravy , 11 Jun 2013 11:03
@TheRealCmdrGravy -

First of all I am impressed by the psychic ability which enables you to deduce my "closed political agenda", very impressive

Not really. It is transparently obvious when you declare that neo-liberalism is "vague stuff which I don't like" when there are cogent definitions of it, to which you have been referred in the past.

pagey23 , 11 Jun 2013 10:57
this is not the kind of liberalism we needed it needed to be socially liberal but not economically liberal. How dare people become entrepenurial or take the thatcherite tax cuts, or buy goods made from slave labour. Some seriously sick yuppies out there.
PointOfYou , 11 Jun 2013 10:54
Yes - the person who said language was mankind's first technology were absolutely correct. I expect language was invented by those who invent all technology to be just out of reach of the general public until the inventers decide they can do business for themselves out of it.
Claire75 -> gyges1 , 11 Jun 2013 10:22
@gyges1 - doesn't say that though, does it?

She says that we need to look at the language as it says a lot about how we think. Sounds about right to me. It's hardly arguing white means black, just that the words we choose say something about what we mean.

Then she says that what we talk about isn't the stuff we need to concentrate on. That's a matter of debate and opinion.

Snapshackle -> Yorkied24 , 11 Jun 2013 10:12
@ Yorkied24 11 June 2013 12:57pm . Get cifFix for Firefox .

Except that preference theory does not take into account causality. In any event we have the evidence, there are those who are perfectly happy to cast others to the wall just so long as they do OK and even benefit from it.

TheRealCmdrGravy -> makingtime , 11 Jun 2013 09:58
@makingtime - Really ? Some very interesting points you've made there ...

your closed political agenda may make it impossible for you to understand without a brain transplant.

First of all I am impressed by the psychic ability which enables you to deduce my "closed political agenda", very impressive. Secondly though it's interesting that you think a "closed political agenda", which I am taking to mean a concrete political viewpoint, can only be remedied with a "brain transplant" rather than through discussion. It's almos as though you're saying "those with political views different to mine are brainless" which is quite a bigoted point of view.

No definition from you regarding the word neo-liberal though so all in all not a very helpful or insightful post. Disappointing.

makingtime -> TheRealCmdrGravy , 11 Jun 2013 09:45
@TheRealCmdrGravy -

..the word "neo-liberal" which, so far as I can see, simply means "vague stuff which I don't like".

Is it possible that you can't see very far because you're deliberately not looking? There are perfectly adequate and precise definitions. I quite liked 'A Brief History of Neoliberalism' by Prof D.Harvey as a long form definition, but since it's rather critical of 'vague stuff which I don't like', your closed political agenda may make it impossible for you to understand without a brain transplant.

It is exasperating when political discussion is reduced to which foghorn can generate the loudest interference. I suppose it's a mistake to waste time on correcting this rubbish

tiojo , 11 Jun 2013 09:41
Doreen Massey is an academic. It shows in the way she writes. It's good that she raises fundamental questions about society and the way it is managed. It has traditionally been the role of academics to play that role.

The disappointing feature of the debate however is the absence of input from our politicians. All our leading politicians have essentially the same view of our society and economy. One in which, as Ms Massey indicates, choice exercised through market based mechanisms is the key principal. There is no view of progress towards a good society. There is no view of co-operation rather than competition. The only option is for us to measure ourselves by what we consume.

Our political system and its parties have failed us. In particular it is the left that has failed. It has accepted the social and economic arguments of the right and contented itself with suggesting minor variations on the same theme. Activists on the left need to re-gather their strength and more forcefully put forward a better alternative.

Damntheral -> roachclip , 11 Jun 2013 09:40
@roachclip - The fact that you refer to "neoliberalism" as "they" in a comment below speaks volumes about the mental fog behind that term.
Eddiel899 -> retarius , 11 Jun 2013 09:34
@retarius - Any government is only as good as the human rights it upholds.

Neoliberalism is the final stage of liberal democracy which has been around for 60-70 years, the most destructive form of government the world has ever seen, based on deregulation for the wealthy oligarchs and debt and debauchery for the poor .............. which is rapidly taking us back to feudal times.

Pagey -> TobyLatimer , 11 Jun 2013 09:33
@TobyLatimer - See also: "hardworking famiies/taxpayers"
OneCommentator , 11 Jun 2013 09:15

This is a view that misunderstands where pleasure and fulfilment in human lives are found. Work is usually – and certainly should be – a central source of meaning and fulfilment in human lives.

Wishful and naive thinking. Most work is very unfulfilling and even in cases where it is meaningful the day to day grind and intensity required by a job is making it a chore. There are very few people who have a job that is really a pleasure. There are many people though who have empty lives and were brainwashed into believing that their job is the most important part of their existence.
Barry1858 -> gyges1 , 11 Jun 2013 09:05
@gyges1 - " This is playground level debating. You are just saying the meaning you give to words is to be preferred to that of your opponents."

Ah, I see the problem - a narrow mind with a broad-brush tendency.

I prescribe a course of Orwell, Start, perhaps, with short stories...... Politics and the English Language, Why I Write, Notes on Nationalism, for example. And then a full dose of Nineteen Eighty-Four. That should do the trick!

natedogg -> RClayton , 11 Jun 2013 09:01
@RClayton - But if we start to think about work differently - which then gets its expression with the words we use - maybe it can change. Your Bangladeshi example is interesting because it assumes they need to work in that way to exist. Should we not try and change the system so a Bangladeshi can harness his or her creativity to connect their creative ideas to a global market and earn money in this way, rather than selling their physical labour to connect someone else's t-shirt to a global market?
MartynInEurope , 11 Jun 2013 08:48
Good grief, how many more times will Adorno be plagiarised?
bongoid , 11 Jun 2013 08:38
It's not just vocabulary, its demeanor, etiquette and peoples entire self perception that has been usurped by the skewed modern logic of markets and the service industry.

People are preempting the technological singularity by rendering themselves robotic in a quite tragic struggle to perpetually remain relevant and employable in the form that the whims of the dictatorship of the market see fit to determine.

Some nationalities even have an intrinsic advantage, their national character tending rather to the robotic from the outset. What remains of human expression, of impulsivity, of spontaneity, of charisma, of originality is up for question, but the paucity of modern life, of human expression and interaction, will increase in direct relation to the increases in efficiency and productivity that will be demanded of citizens. And this despite the fact that we are suffering under the weight of massive over production, and the excessive demand on resources that this entails.

Nothing has been learnt from the crash of 2008 beyond "get rich even quicker", or as its more commonly known, economic and ecological suicide.

BobJanova -> BaronessHawHaw , 11 Jun 2013 08:37
@BaronessHawHaw - Working class pride in their jobs came from being highly skilled – for example riveting in shipyards was difficult and you really were adding value there, so was assembling a car and so on. Also, didn't most of their 'meaning and fulfilment' come from the community, not really the work they were doing, except in so far as most of the people in the community would be doing the same work so it gave them something to talk about?

I've never heard a modern person saying how much any of the jobs I listed give them meaning or fulfilment. The kind of jobs that gave working class people a meaningful identity have pretty much all gone.

Giggidy -> BaronessHawHaw , 11 Jun 2013 08:30
@BaronessHawHaw - most? You are kidding right?

Just looking at the Governments of Poland, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Hungary as an example seems to indicate centrist and centre-right parties in power.

Venebles -> BaronessHawHaw , 11 Jun 2013 08:25
@ BaronessHawHaw

Most want socialism back. Socialism with the freedom to travel and the ability to buy a nice pair of jeans to look cool in.

May I suggest that you look up the meaning of the word "patronising"?

Giggidy -> Sidfishes , 11 Jun 2013 08:24
@Sidfishes - does your FE College pay tax, then?

As I'm reading the annual report of my old sixth form college - which also operate adult learning courses - and they're an exempt charity and therefore not liable for corporation tax. They have an operating surplus (read: profit) on which no tax is paid, quite unlike a private sector company.

[Nov 26, 2018] Neoliberalism has hijacked our vocabulary by Doreen Massey

Notable quotes:
"... Neoliberalism is bankrupt, it isn't even a philiosophy its simple social nihilism. The proof is in the get rich quick, or short term profit mentality of those at the top. Get rich quick is tantamount to jumping the ship, its the economic equivalent of deserting a sinking vessel. Until people recognise the destructive cynical nature of the current economic philosophy and cast out those that are steering the ship, we are all doomed. ..."
"... Strange then, that you can buy a book called: "Masters of the Universe: Hayek, Friedman, and the Birth of Neoliberal Politics. By Daniel Stedman Jones. Princeton University Press". ..."
"... What were Friedrich Heyek and Milton Friedman: lollypop salesmen? ..."
"... Well it could be argued that postmodernism is the necessary condition for neoliberalism. ..."
Jun 11, 2013 | www.theguardian.com

'Customer'; 'growth'; 'investment'. We should scrutinise the everyday language that shapes how we think about the economy

'We need to question that familiar categorisation of the economy as a space into which people enter in order to reluctantly undertake unwelcome and unpleasing "work''.'

A t a recent art exhibition I engaged in an interesting conversation with one of the young people employed by the gallery. As she turned to walk off I saw she had on the back of her T-shirt "customer liaison". I felt flat. Our whole conversation seemed somehow reduced, my experience of it belittled into one of commercial transaction. My relation to the gallery and to this engaging person had become one of instrumental market exchange.

The message underlying this use of the term customer for so many different kinds of human activity is that in all almost all our daily activities we are operating as consumers in a market – and this truth has been brought in not by chance but through managerial instruction and the thoroughgoing renaming of institutional practices. The mandatory exercise of "free choice" – of a GP, of a hospital, of schools for one's children – then becomes also a lesson in social identity, affirming on each occasion our consumer identity.

This is a crucial part of the way that neoliberalism has become part of our commonsense understanding of life. The vocabulary we use to talk about the economy is in fact a political construction, as Stuart Hall, Michael Rustin and I have argued in our Soundings manifesto .

Another word that reinforces neoliberal common sense is "growth", currently deemed to be the entire aim of our economy. To produce growth and then (maybe) to redistribute some of it, has been a goal shared by both neoliberalism and social democracy. In its crudest formulation this entails providing the conditions for the market sector to produce growth, and accepting that this will result in inequality, and then relying on the redistribution of some portion of this growth to help repair the inequality that has resulted from its production.

This of course does nothing to question the inequality-producing mechanisms of market exchange itself, and it has also meant that the main lines of struggle have too often been focused solely on distributional issues. What's more, today we are living with a backlash to even the limited redistributional gains made by labour under social democracy. In spite of all this, growth is still seen as providing the solution to our problems.

The second reason our current notion of wealth creation, and our commitment to its growth, must be questioned is to do with our relationship with the planet. The environmental damage brought about by the pursuit of growth threatens to cause a catastrophe of which we are already witnessing intimations. And a third – and perhaps most important – defect of this approach is that increased wealth, especially as measured in the standard monetary terms of today, has few actual consequences for people's feelings of wellbeing once there is a sufficiency to meet basic needs, as there is in Britain. In pursuing "growth" in these terms, as a means to realise people's life goals and desires, economies are pursuing a chimera.

Instead of an unrelenting quest for growth, might we not ask the question, in the end: "What is an economy for?", "What do we want it to provide?"

Our current imaginings endow the market and its associated forms with a special status. We think of "the economy" in terms of natural forces, into which we occasionally intervene, rather than in terms of a whole variety of social relations that need some kind of co-ordination.

Thus "work", for example, is understood in a very narrow and instrumental way. Where only transactions for money are recognised as belonging to "the economy", the vast amount of unpaid labour – as conducted for instance in families and local areas – goes uncounted and unvalued. We need to question that familiar categorisation of the economy as a space into which people enter in order to reluctantly undertake unwelcome and unpleasing "work", in return for material rewards which they can use for consuming.

This is a view that misunderstands where pleasure and fulfilment in human lives are found. Work is usually – and certainly should be – a central source of meaning and fulfilment in human lives. And it has – or could have – moral and creative (or aesthetic) values at its core. A rethinking of work could lead us to address more creatively both the social relations of work and the division of labour within society (including a better sharing of the tedious work, and of the skills).

There are loads of other examples of rarely scrutinised terms in our economic vocabulary, for instance that bundle of terms clustered around investment and expenditure – terms that carry with them implicit moral connotations. Investment implies an action, even a sacrifice, undertaken for a better future. It evokes a future positive outcome. Expenditure, on the other hand, seems merely an outgoing, a cost, a burden.

Above all, we need to bring economic vocabulary back into political contention, and to question the very way we think about the economy in the first place. For something new to be imagined, let alone to be born, our current economic "common sense" needs to be challenged root and branch.

• Doreen Massey will be discussing Vocabularies of the Economy at a Soundings seminar on 13 June, 6.30-8.30pm, at the Marx Memorial Library, London. More information [email protected]

KingOfNothing -> Yorkied24 , 12 Jun 2013 13:06

@Yorkied24 - Well, I just don't accept that. I agree that monetarism is a major part of Friedman's legacy (as incorporated into neo-liberal doctrine). But, neo-liberalism is what is says on the tin. It is a 'new' version of the liberalist free trade agenda of the past, modified to take into account the welfare state.

I guess what I'm most interested in is how you can disentangle and separate politics from economics, since they are two sides of the same coin (where does 'science' fit in, by the way).

Eddiel899 , 12 Jun 2013 12:12
it seems that the political side of Neo-liberalism (or liberal democracy) has come up with a new definition of the word "Catholic".

The Irish Prime-minster stated with a straight face in the Irish parliament today ........ that he is a "Catholic" outside parliament but when he enters parliament he is not a "Catholic"........ in relation to a bill allowing for abortion to be legalized in Ireland.

Ronpert -> NeverMindTheBollocks , 12 Jun 2013 07:22
@NeverMindTheBollocks - when you criticise the author of "nonsensical thinking", this suggests to me that you are uncomfortable with ideas that question "common sense". Rather than engaging with the arguments, you are simply dismissing them as somebody's arbitrary opinion. You seem to be suggesting that Massey is forcing her opinion on you - but surely, like any good academic, she is really asking critical questions, rather than providing answers and solutions. That's what academia is for. Why does that seem to make you so angry?
MagicRusski , 11 Jun 2013 19:44
Add "development" to that list.
bongoid -> Pumplechook , 11 Jun 2013 19:24
@Pumplechook - Enterprise culture is a fine emboldening phrase to describe the sinking of society casting citizens adrift with nothing but what nature gave them to keep them afloat. Some might suggest we need to concentrate on mono platform non deliverables going backwards. Or on a fleet of very cheap rubber dinghies.
Pumplechook , 11 Jun 2013 18:48
Ms Massey clearly fails to see importance of remaining customer/client-focused in our modern enterprise culture. It is crucial in terms of achieving outcomes-based win-win solutions, as well as assisting in the interation of leading-edge opportunities and leveraging cross-platform deliverables going forward.
Yorkied24 -> KingOfNothing , 11 Jun 2013 17:44
@KingOfNothing - No, what I said was that neoliberalism is not an economic theory. For a start, Milton Friedman's work has its own name in economics, which is monetarism. Neoliberalism is a made up political word only used by those who are more interested in politics and rhetoric than economics and science.
bongoid , 11 Jun 2013 17:08
Neoliberalism is bankrupt, it isn't even a philiosophy its simple social nihilism. The proof is in the get rich quick, or short term profit mentality of those at the top. Get rich quick is tantamount to jumping the ship, its the economic equivalent of deserting a sinking vessel. Until people recognise the destructive cynical nature of the current economic philosophy and cast out those that are steering the ship, we are all doomed.
darylrevok -> bill4me , 11 Jun 2013 17:02
@bill4me - 'Sweet smell of success'?
No, it's just that your shit-detector is so absent or degraded that you can no longer smell the stink of 'filthy lucre'.
bongoid -> Yorkied24 , 11 Jun 2013 16:59
@Yorkied24 - I disagree. There is only one writer that deserves volleys of ad hominem attacks and cheap insults and thats Julie Burchill. I know she's about as relevant as a horse drawn carriage but nevertheless I think we need to keep criticism of journalists in proportion.
maxfisher -> bill4me , 11 Jun 2013 16:07
@bill4me - The US under the aegis of freedom and capitalism sponsored paramilitary regimes in Guatemala, Honduras, Brazil, Paraguay, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Chile and Argentina. Not to mention Greece and Iran. It continues to sponsor repressive regimes in the middle east and is about to make peace with the Taliban.

You mistake capitalism as it exists in theory, or in your head with 'actually existing capitalism' which is often red in tooth and claw. The bloody history of the 20th century (particularly world war one, without which no world war two) was in many ways a consequence of imperialism which was a consequence of capitalism.

Theories are all very well, but they run into problems called people. This applies equally to Marx, Smith and Hayek.

MartynInEurope -> maxfisher , 11 Jun 2013 16:05
@maxfisher -

True.

ascania -> bongoid , 11 Jun 2013 16:01
@bongoid - I'd like to see the second sentence of your comment engraved above a University Sociology Department office. Quite brilliant!
maxfisher -> Yorkied24 , 11 Jun 2013 15:57
@Yorkied24 - But they don't do they? They don't engage in cowardly and anonymous ad hominem attacks. They are professional journalists. The Guardian pays them to write articles. They then put their name to said articles. It's a transparent process. They are infinitely better than people who anonymously insult them without engaging in debate.
maxfisher -> bill4me , 11 Jun 2013 15:40
@bill4me - No, but it rather skews the data doesn't it? The Soviet Union lifted more people out of extreme poverty than perhaps any society before or since. But I wouldn't advocate Stalinism. I'm sure Pinochet's supporters could point to a growth in prosperity during his reign, but I shouldn't imagine many Chileans would favour a return to authoritarian rule.

Headline date is often meaningless, for example George Osborne may be able to argue that more people are employed than ever before, whilst the opposition may be able to argue that more people are unemployed than ever before. Bo

Both statements my be true, but what do they tell us in isolation?

Does it not occur to you that appalling governance may be a consequence of the form capitalism takes right now?

Yorkied24 -> maxfisher , 11 Jun 2013 15:40
@maxfisher - Most of them aren't ad homs. They're just insults.

And the pair of them deserve it. They're embarrassing enough for all of us.

Yorkied24 -> KingOfNothing , 11 Jun 2013 15:25
@KingOfNothing - Oh, and no, it's not difficult to attack at all - you just attack something that exists. Like capitalism.

Keynes has already done the work for you. You're crying about nothing.

Yorkied24 -> KingOfNothing , 11 Jun 2013 15:24
@KingOfNothing -

Strange then, that you can buy a book called: "Masters of the Universe: Hayek, Friedman, and the Birth of Neoliberal Politics. By Daniel Stedman Jones. Princeton University Press".

What were Friedrich Heyek and Milton Friedman: lollypop salesmen?

So, someone writes a book calling two economists 'neoliberals', so that makes it so? By that argument, it also calls them Masters of the Universe, so they're fucking He-Man too.

Is this how logic works in your world?

maxfisher -> bill4me , 11 Jun 2013 15:09
@bill4me -

If you think capitalism is all winners and no losers you're either tremendously naive or a bit thick.

I wouldn't rely on headline figures on Wikipedia to support your argument. Drill down a little, find the data, look at individual countries, see what type of regimes operate in said countries. And imagine, for a second, that the stats are meaningful, then imagine what responsible capitalism could achieve.

maxfisher -> Justthefactsman , 11 Jun 2013 14:40
@Justthefactsman - Slightly off topic, but I hanker for obliged rather than obligated. Also, most of the time I just feel ok, sometimes good, sometimes bad. Fair to middlin' you might say. I seldom feel awesome.
maxfisher -> natedogg , 11 Jun 2013 14:34
@natedogg - Of course. Francis Fukuyama told us so in the 80s. Oh....
maxfisher -> MartynInEurope , 11 Jun 2013 14:33
@MartynInEurope - Well it could be argued that postmodernism is the necessary condition for neoliberalism.
maxfisher -> Damntheral , 11 Jun 2013 14:29
@Damntheral - No, it means this:

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/sociology/rsw/research_centres/theory/conf/rg/harvey_a_brief_history_of_neoliberalism.pdf

Go on, read it. Then come back to me.

JTStone -> TheRealCmdrGravy , 11 Jun 2013 14:27
@TheRealCmdrGravy -

No definition from you regarding the word neo-liberal though so all in all not a very helpful or insightful post. Disappointing.

It's sometimes worth having a debate about what particular words mean, but all debate rests on certain presumptions, a foundation on which the argument is built, and in this case, Massey counts on her audience sharing her understanding of the term 'neoliberal', which many of us do. Anyone who doesn't can very easily look it up online and quickly find a definition which sits well with Massey's points.

Your and others' approach to rejecting her argument is ungracious cavilling. It's easy to do this in response to any argument, and make no mistake - anyone with intelligence and an open mind can recognise it very clearly.

darylrevok -> Ken Terry , 11 Jun 2013 14:01
@Ken Terry - Chomsky is right, ("The Manufacturing of Consent") 'At the head of it is the Military\Industrial Complex, coining the euphemisms of war to make the unthinkable palatable.

On a localised scale, consider the Coalition who have done a similar job on the word, "Reform". If you look at history's most accurate and honorific incidences of political and parliamentary Reform look at the two Reform Acts which extended the franchise to adult male suffrage, 1832 and 1867, under Peel and Disraeli, Tories FFS, opposed to the Liberal's merciless free market obsessions.

What is "reforming" about stripping poor, ill and vulnerable people of their material support?

Pure Deformation.

I'm not a Tory, (Lifelong Socialist) but I think it's important to reconnect the Conservative Party with some of its avowed traditional self-definitions. "Maintaining continuity with past institutions, and a 'gradualism', if change is necessary." (Henry Cecil, I think).

Where has been the 'gradualism' in this Govt's' sudden and relentless pace of forcing change on the mass of its people by Bill after Bill restricting our aspirations and well-being?

We are governed by political liars who see this state of affairs as a triumph for their expertise. Any criticism is dismissed as not being able to accept the world 'as it is.'

maxfisher -> Giggidy , 11 Jun 2013 14:00
@Giggidy - You've got it. Except that you haven't. 'Trickle up' would be more accurate though a little illogical: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/10/truth-richard-branson-virgin-rail-profits
r0ssa -> Giggidy , 11 Jun 2013 13:55
@Giggidy -

The irony, of course, is that neoliberalism has *always* been coupled by high state spending. I know they say different, but that doesn't make it a reality. Stop showing your ignorance of the subject and go and delve in to some of the vast literature on the subject.

r0ssa -> joseph1832 , 11 Jun 2013 13:50
@joseph1832 - I think this misses the point though. You're trying to claim there can be words that are neutral, a language without a political dimension. This is besides the point, it's certainly not feasible in a society constructed as it is now.

The real point is that language is itself a field of struggle. It's a terrain on which neoliberalism must be fought. In doing so we need not pretend to be doing anything less than entering a political fight. In combating neoliberalism no claim to be 'neutral' is necessary, that would be precisely to do what it does from the opposite direction - claim universality, eternalisation etc. The left does need to assert interrogate the language of neoliberalism and assert its own. Not becuase this is less political (I think "manipulation" is too strong a word here, the matter is somewhat more complex than that) but becuase it can offer a better future.

maxfisher -> DemocracyNever , 11 Jun 2013 13:45
@DemocracyNever - I should think the first two responses illustrate how and why debate is increasingly meaningless. Neither of you engage with the argument or posit an alternative; hence no debate.

That debate should be meaningful is given, that it should be an art form is, frankly, silly.

Ken Terry , 11 Jun 2013 13:34
"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum."
Noam Chomsky

[Nov 26, 2018] Fighting primitive antisemitism

Nov 26, 2018 | www.unz.com

West Bank Settler and American Patriot

Tyrion 2 , says: November 22, 2018 at 3:37 pm GMT

November 22, 2018 at 3:37 pm GMT 300 Words @neutral

Marxism – (((Marx)))

Marxism is a brilliant sui generis philosophy of history. The attending political position was a heartfelt reaction to the immiseration of the working classes of Europe.

There were many similar ideologies to Marxism in political viewpoint, but Marxism is outstandingly intellectually interesting.

Marx is not differentiated from other (Gentile) socialists by his politics but by his genius. I doubt his part Jewishness had much to do with that.

Libertarianism/Free Market fundamentalists – (((Alisa Rosenbaum, aka Ayn Rand))) , (((Mises)))

Jews have made up a huge proportion of decent economists from all economic perspectives.

Meanwhile, Ayn Rand was an highly eccentric writer of romantic fiction that lucidly captured the snivelling, resentment fueled scumbags who make up the denizens of the swamp.

Pychoanalysis – (((Freud)

Freud's psychoanalysis might be flawed but his work constitutes a truly great body of literature and the invention of a new and important subject. He is one of the greatest thinkers of all time.

USSR – (((Lenin))), (((Trotsky)

Lenin wasn't Jewish. Trotsky was. Lenin was in charge, while Trotsky ended up murdered while in ignominious exile.

SJW/open society/antifa movements – (((Soros))) and other forture 400 (((billionaires)))

I'm not sure how you think antifa and billionaires are best buddies but Jews are obviously a minority among billionaires.

Soros is deranged. There are plenty of bad people in every group. There are more maniac progressive types among Jews. The explanations are mundane.

Big tech censorship – (((ADL))), (((SPLC))), (((Zuckerberg))), (((Brin)))

Again, Jews are a small minority of those enacting big tech censorship. Indeed, America remains one of human history's least censored societies. That doesn't make it good but you need get some perspective before you go all crazy.

Hollywood and other pop culture entertainment – easily all senior positions at the very least 50% jewish

Nonsense. And a lot of that stuff is pretty good.

The jew really is to blame, which is also why they are so hell bent on censoring and jailing people for stating these blatant truths.

Is this self-satire?

anon [100] Disclaimer , says: November 22, 2018 at 3:52 pm GMT
@neutral

Hollywood and other pop culture entertainment – easily all senior positions at the very least 50% jewish.

might even be closer to 75% if you look at those accused of sexual improprieties in the last year or so and if that is an accurate sample

anon [100] Disclaimer , says: November 22, 2018 at 4:04 pm GMT
@Tyrion 2

Lenin wasn't Jewish. Trotsky was. Lenin was in charge, while Trotsky ended up murdered while in ignominious exile.

apparently Lenin was part jewish and had disdain for white people, ethnic Russians

Trotsky was the racist he accused others of being – he wanted to fill Russia with what he called "white n1ggers" presumably to ruled by jews like himself – what right a 5% has to rule the rest of the country? It would be like Chinese ruling the U.S.

Again, Jews are a small minority of those enacting big tech censorship.

really? (((Facebook))), (((Google))), and (((SPLC))) and (((ADL))) are the so called "safety advisors" so no leftist or jew should ever have to stumble upon the truth on those sites

also, why do you thnk BitChute lost access to PayPal and Stripe? why do think Paul Nehlen suddenly had trouble with his upstream suppliers for the business he manages? its because jews behind the scenes collude against and punish any competitiors or anyone speaking out about jews – this is what they do

Indeed, America remains one of human history's least censored societies.

no thanks to the jews, who have pulled this "hate speech" crap already in Canada, UK, Australia, and Europe. They are the reason those countries don't have Free Speech and they're coming for Free Speech here in the U.S. too – because (((their))) feelings are more important than your rights

Durruti , says: November 22, 2018 at 4:48 pm GMT
Once more:

I am not an anti-Semite. I like Arabs.

The overwhelming majority of Jews are not Semites (peoples from the Middle East). Most Jews' points of origin are in Europe.

My family (mother's side) German Jews – not a Semite in the bunch. Mostly blond haired & blue eyes.

There is real resistance to those, who attempt to clarify this vital point. Ron Unz, this is your website, and these are some of your topics. Why fear to tread? Why fear the truth? You've come so far. Come all the way into the light.

Most Jews come from – – – Read Arthur Koestler's "The Thirteenth Tribe" as a start for your education and a cure for your being brainwashed.

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

&

https://www.bing.com/shop?q=the+thirteenth+tribe+koestler&FORM=SHOPPA&originIGUID=9A859D826E0441D89971DA67F8762DAF

Have received some threatening emails, and despite all the political views this Anarchist has, the threats have ALL been in response to my analysis of just who are, and are not Semites. Unz, and Commentators, I need no help here. I fear not, and cannot live forever.

Orwell's 1984 , explains in detail the use of false language and false History as the KEY tools in repressing Humanity, and Humanity's Liberty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four

&

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=nineteen+eighty-four&qpvt=nineteen+eighty-four&FORM=IGRE

The misidentification of just who Semites are is a powerful weapon in the hands of the Zionist Land Thieves and their American, British, & French puppets. The Jewish claim to Semitism goes in tandem with their insistence on their right to exterminate Palestinians and occupy their land, and later, the Zionist Oligarchs will continue to occupy all the Middle East "eretz Israel," and concurrently, they will occupy and control (with the weapons of financial/banking and physical terror), the peoples of this planet.

It is no wonder Gilad Atzmon has it all wrong. Look for no help here.

Jews have not been the only recipients of the Brutality that humans often inflict on one another. And Jews have not been specially singled out, over Serbians, Russians, Chinese, Armenians, Native Americans, Iraqis, Syrians, Vietnamese, Indonesians (1965), Yemenis, Libyans, Afghanis, Africans (slavery and neo colonizing of their nations), and dozens more.

Jews belong (yes, they, with all the rest of Earth's people, belong). Jews belong in America, and Europe, where they may reside in happiness and freedom with all the other peoples, and, if they wish, they may visit their newly Freed and Happy Palestinian friends, (and host them in their European and American homes) – as well.

We American Patriots , we will host all, in our Restored American Republic.

And America's finest statesman, Dr. Ron Paul , will become our First Constitutional President – since John F. Kennedy.

The Living Dream, and do not Fear.

Durruti for the Anarchist Collective

West Bank Settler and American Patriot, by Gilad Atzmon - The Unz Review
follyofwar , says: November 22, 2018 at 6:10 pm GMT
@wayfarer The USA is full of Jewish billionaires. Why on earth does Israel need any blood money from the hard-pressed taxpayers when they could supply their home away from home with all the extra money it needs, if indeed it needs any at all? If you are wondering about one of the main causes of US anti-Semitism, look no further than the billions our AIPAC-controlled traitorous Congress gives to that apartheid state every year.

West Bank Settler and American Patriot, by Gilad Atzmon - The Unz Review

mark green , says: November 22, 2018 at 6:13 pm GMT
What a pleasure to find Gilad Atzmon here at UNZ. And as usual, Mr. Atzmon delivers fresh insights and bold perspectives.

I am grateful that Gilad is examining as well as talking to hyper-Zionists living in Pennsylvania. This is revealing. I appreciate Yonatan Stern's willingness to address Atzmon's questions.

I was similarly impressed–unexpectedly so–when I met the late Rabbi Meir Kahane, who I briefly interviewed for a televised TV debate I produced ('Why Terrorism?') in 1986. Former US Congressman, Pete McCloskey (R-CA), took the opposing side in this exchange concerning the future of Palestine/Israel as well as US policies there. In my opinion, Kahane won the debate (though not on its merits).

Rabbi Kahane was an unabashed separatist (like most devout Jews) and he famously declared (somewhat prematurely) that Israel's native gentiles ('Palestinians') had no future in a Jewish State.

Kahane believed that all these resentful, recalcitrant Arabs should be kicked out of Israel. He was unabashedly pro-separation. From a Zionist point of view, Kahane offered a violent though practical long-term solution. Multiculturalism is inherently problematic and destabilizing. It is also incompatible with Jewish nationalism. But Kahane made Jewish liberals blush. As a result, he was declared a 'racist' by establishment Jews; even though Judaism is, at its core, race-driven.

Please keep in mind that during this era (Carter through Clinton) the endless Mideast 'peace process' was still underway with all the hype, fanfare, and false hopes.

The 'peace process' ended up being a road to nowhere–full of highfalutin awards, accords, meetings, 'confidence-building measures' and an endless array of Jewish advisors, pro-Israel committees, donors and 'experts'. Kahane knew that it was doomed from the start.

Nevertheless, Jews from nearly every 'mainstream' political faction world-wide derided Kahane's straightforward and 'racist' solutions, even though his prophetic advice now mirrors today's Israeli policies. Meir Kahane was simply ahead of his time. He was also far too candid for his liberal cousins to own up to.

A few years after Kahane's televised debate with McCloskey, he was assassinated in NYC.

In any event, it is undeniable that blood/ancestry is at the heart of Judaism. The Law of Return tells us so. Religiosity on the other hand has become somewhat incidental to Jewishness. A committed, ethnic Jew (but an atheistic one) such as Allen Dershowitz, for instance, is as 'Jewish' as any orthodox rabbi. Identity and ancestry is what matters.

Thus I appreciate Stern's criticism of his Jewish cousins who have saddled America with top-down 'liberalism', a movement that's functioned as a court-ordered Trojan Horse inside America.

Like his Jewish cousins however, Stern's still a bit of a fraud–since he relies on double-standards, special privileges, and ancestral grievances to justify his unique collection of rights as a land-grabbing Zionist.

Stern hypocritically derides non-violent whites in Charlottesville who want the same rights for themselves in America as Jews get in Israel: to preserve their culture, traditions, racial lineage, and majority status. These are core Zionist values. But Stern would deny them to any and all American whites.

Stern is also disinclined to express any gratitude to his duplicitous, liberal cousins for their decades-long, pro-Jewish activism. Yet Stern is beneficiary of their subterfuge. Jewish activism helps explain why Jews have risen in America while others–such as the white, working-class men in Charlottesville–have fallen.

US Liberalism (with plenty of help from Zionist Jews) coercively integrated America racially (but not in Israel), opened our borders to all (but not in Israel) and erected a towering wall between 'church and state' (but not in Israel).

These tricks have been good for the Jews, which includes Stern. He can now wear his yarmulke proudly and not get laughed at–or punched (since its a 'hate crime' today).

Liberal and 'secular' Jews also helped orchestrate Washington's de facto marriage to the State of Israel. This has also empowered Stern. And to the delight of most Jews (both left and right) the US has been largely de-Christianized over the past sixty years. This is more smart work by Jewish jurists, lawyers, and academics–many with close ties to the 'liberal' ACLU.

As a beneficiary of all this, Stern should thank his liberal cousins for this political black magic. Yet he pretends to object.

Stern is at least correct when he acknowledges that 'progressive' Jews have damaged the West and that they are still doing so.

[Nov 25, 2018] A new type of US disclaimer: No Russian, living or dead, had anything to do with the posting of this comment

Notable quotes:
"... Disclaimer: No Russian, living or dead, had anything to do with the posting of this proudly home-grown comment ..."
Nov 25, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

What else is amazing about her emails @leveymg

is how no one really talked about their content, eh? We learned that she rigged the primary against Bernie and then everyone started talking about Russia ! Just as she and Podesta wanted.

#1
Amazing how elusive they are (scrubbed from the State Dept website) and how they have never been picked up on by most of the corporate media.

up 8 users have voted. --

Disclaimer: No Russian, living or dead, had anything to do with the posting of this proudly home-grown comment

[Nov 25, 2018] A Gamechanger In European Gas Markets by Irina Slav

Notable quotes:
"... "The 10 Bcm/year into Europe is not a game-changer from a volume point of view, but it is a game-changer from a new source of product into mainland Europe perspective and it can be expanded." ..."
"... Meanwhile, however, Russia and Turkey are building another pipeline, Turkish Stream, that will supply gas to Turkey and Eastern Europe, as well as possibly Hungary. The two recently marked the completion of its subsea section. Turkish Stream will have two lines, each able to carry up to 15.75 billion cubic meters. One will supply the Turkish market and the other European countries. ..."
"... In this context, the Southern Gas Corridor seems to have more of a political rather than practical significance for the time being , giving Europe the confidence that it could at some future point import a lot more Caspian gas because the infrastructure is there. ..."
Nov 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Irina Slav via Oilprice.com,

The Southern Gas Corridor on which the European Union is pinning most of its hopes for natural gas supply diversification away from Russia is coming along nicely and will not just be on schedule, but it will come with a price tag that is US$5-billion lower than the original budget , BP's vice president in charge of the project told S&P Global Platts this week.

"Often these kinds of mega-projects fall behind schedule. But the way the projects have maintained the schedule has meant that your traditional overspend, or utilization of contingency, has not occurred," Joseph Murphy said, adding that savings had been the top priority for the supermajor.

The Southern Gas Corridor will carry natural gas from the Azeri Shah Deniz 2 field in the Caspian Sea to Europe via a network of three pipelines : the Georgia South Caucasus Pipeline, which was recently expanded and can carry 23 billion cubic meters of gas; the TANAP pipeline via Turkey, with a peak capacity of 31 billion cubic meters annually; and the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline, or TAP, which will link with TANAP at the Turkish-Greek border and carry 10 billion cubic meters of gas annually to Italy.

TANAP was commissioned in July this year and the first phase of TAP is expected to be completed in two years, so Europe will hopefully have more non-Russian gas at the start of the new decade. But not that much, at least initially: TANAP will operate at an initial capacity of 16 billion cubic meters annually, of which 6 billion cubic meters will be supplied to Turkey and the remainder will go to Europe. In the context of total natural gas demand of 564 billion cubic meters in 2020, according to a forecast from the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies released earlier this year, this is not a lot.

Yet at some point the TANAP will reach its full capacity and hopefully by that time, TAP will be completed. Surprisingly, it was the branch to Italy that proved the most challenging, and BP's Murphy acknowledged that. While Turkey built TANAP on time to the surprise of the project operator, TAP has been struggling because of legal issues and uncertainty after the new Italian government entered office earlier this year.

At the time, the government of Giuseppe Conte said the pipeline was pointless but, said Murphy, since then he has accepted the benefits the infrastructure would offer, such as transit fees. And yet local opposition in southern Italy remains strong but BP still sees first deliveries of gas through Italy in 2020.

The BP executive admitted that at first the Southern Gas Corridor wouldn't make a splash.

"The 10 Bcm/year into Europe is not a game-changer from a volume point of view, but it is a game-changer from a new source of product into mainland Europe perspective and it can be expanded."

Meanwhile, however, Russia and Turkey are building another pipeline, Turkish Stream, that will supply gas to Turkey and Eastern Europe, as well as possibly Hungary. The two recently marked the completion of its subsea section. Turkish Stream will have two lines, each able to carry up to 15.75 billion cubic meters. One will supply the Turkish market and the other European countries.

In this context, the Southern Gas Corridor seems to have more of a political rather than practical significance for the time being , giving Europe the confidence that it could at some future point import a lot more Caspian gas because the infrastructure is there.

[Nov 25, 2018] Death of GRU Chief Sends Western Media and Pundits Into Tailspin of Conspiracy Theories

Notable quotes:
"... The Private Contractors Using Vault 7 Tools for US Gov: Testimony Shows US Intel Needs a Ground-Up Rebuild Part 1... https://www.opednews.com/ar... ..."
"... Why Vault 7 Tools Used by Private Contractors Shows US Intel Needs a Ground-Up Rebuild- It's the News- Part 2... https://www.opednews.com/ar... ..."
"... Or is it owing to MI5/MI6 desperation, with how Trump will handle their involvement in the US Presidential Campaign. James Bond never had those types of problems, in the days when UK intelligence was not run by social media outlets. ..."
Nov 25, 2018 | russia-insider.com

[Nov 25, 2018] The Price of Peace

Nov 25, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

6 Nov, 2018 in Uncategorized by craig | View Comments

I have never managed fully to understand the mechanism by which the media and political class decide when to leave a fact, a glaringly obvious and vital fact, completely excluded from public debate. That process of exclusion is a psychological, not an organisational, phenomenon but extremely effective.

Brexit continues to dominate mainstream political discussion, and the Northern Ireland border issue remains at the centre of current negotiations, forced there by the London government's reneging on the agreement it signed almost a year ago. But there is a secret here, hidden in plain sight, the glaring fact driving the entire process, but which the media somehow never mention.

[Nov 25, 2018] Felix Keverich

Nov 25, 2018 | www.unz.com

says: November 24, 2018 at 5:38 pm GMT 100 Words @Big Bill They fought that it was Russia, that was holding them back, and by separating they could quickly achieve Western European standard of living. The first guy to become president of independent Ukraine promised people that they were going to "live like France" .in 5 years (!). lol

So their plan was something like this:

step 1: Separate from Russia.

step 2:

step 3: France

Lately, they began to think that the Ukraine's path to prosperity goes through EU membership, hence popular support for Euromaidan, and you know the results Phanar Phantom

Felix Keverich , says: November 24, 2018 at 5:53 pm GMT

@FB

You're full of shit what the heck do you know about industry you useless little fart ? are you an industrial engineer do you have any technical qualifications whatsoever or do you just pull buzzwords like 'marketable skills' out your wazoo, as needed ?

Your industries are worth ZERO, if you're unable to sell your products, and the Ukraine struggled to sell its manufactured goods after 1991. Its traditional customer – Russia began to import Western goods.

You sound like Martyanov. lol It doesn't take any "special qualification" to figure out that Soviet-era factories were churning out worthless crap – there is a reason why that system fell apart, you know.

Now, off to ignore list with you.

FB , says: November 24, 2018 at 6:25 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich Thanks for confirming that you have zero credentials in any technical field yet you are somehow posing as someone qualified to talk about industry

Glad you are blocking me you little worm the Ostrich response do you cover your eyes and ears when your teacher or parent [or caregiver, since you are obviously retarded] says something that is true but which you don't want to hear ?

As for Soviet era factories churning out 'worthless crap' that would include the world's best rocket engines, decades ahead of the west's technology ?

What a worthless little shrimp

Sergey Krieger , says: November 24, 2018 at 6:46 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich Liberast opinion. People with this views destroyed the country, caused massive displacement and demographic and social catastrophes. People with your views should not be allowed to the levers of power for the distance of avangard shot. If to follow your logic USA and China must dismantle and sell as scrap metal their MIC as they both clearly cannot compete with Russian MIC. National manufacturing of everything is not about competition. It is about souverenity in everything and national capability to provide own population both with goods and means to make a living via manufacturing of everything needed. Current situation with so much of everything made in China is an abomination that hurts too much people around the globe. People with your views in Russia should be purged and preferably executed for crimes against former Soviet people.
Sergey Krieger , says: November 24, 2018 at 6:56 pm GMT
I find it strange that shamir who professes communist views is paying so much attention to this basically religious spat about power and money. Wasn't it once th as t that religion is opium for masses. It is here to keep population down so that it is easily fleeced by thieves. The only value for Russia in orthodoxy at the moment is that the country completely devote of ideology as per constitution there must be something to hold people together and give some meaning to their existence.

[Nov 25, 2018] Doubling Down on Mueller by Kimberley A. Strassel

When McCarthyism ghost is out it is difficult to suppress it. The bottom feeder from Democratic Party have no other viable agenda that demonizing Russia and presenting it as the the root cause of 2016 fiasco, which actually are result of their neoliberal transformation under Bill Clinton. CIA democrats are now married to Russiagate.
Nov 25, 2018 | www.wsj.com

The Mueller probe has lost its political potency, as Democrats acknowledged on the midterm trail. They didn't win House seats by warning of Russian collusion. They didn't even talk about it. Most voters don't care, or don't care to hear about it. A CNN exit poll found 54% of respondents think the Russia probe is "politically motivated"; a 46% plurality disapprove of Mr. Mueller's handling of it.

That hasn't stopped Democrats from fixating on it since the election, in particular when President Trump fired Attorney General Jeff Sessions and named Matthew Whitaker as a temporary replacement. The left now insists the appointment is unconstitutional or that because Mr. Whitaker once voiced skepticism on the Russia-collusion narrative, he is unfit to oversee the Mueller investigation and must recuse himself.

The joke here is that neither Mr. Whitaker nor anybody else is likely to exercise any authority over Mr. Mueller -- and more's the pity. The probe has meandered along for 18 months, notching records for leaks and derivative prosecutions, though all indications are it has accomplished little by way of its initial mandate.

As a practical matter, Mr. Mueller should have been brought to heel some time ago. As a political matter, that won't happen. The administration has always understood that such a move would provoke bipartisan political blowback, ignite a new "coverup" scandal, and maybe trigger impeachment. It's even more unlikely officials would risk those consequences now, as Mr. Mueller is said to be wrapping up.

Democrats know this, as does the grandstanding Sen. Jeff Flake. Yet they demand a Whitaker recusal and are again pushing legislation to "protect" the special counsel's probe. Senate Republicans rightly blocked that bill this week, partly on grounds that it is likely unconstitutional. They also made the obvious point that if Mr. Trump intended to fire Mr. Mueller, he'd have done so months ago and wouldn't need to ax Mr. Sessions to do it. And while the president tweets ceaseless criticism of the probe, he has never threatened to end it.

Democrats are nonetheless doubling down on the probe for political advantage. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer declared members of his caucus will demand that language making it more difficult to fire Mr. Mueller be included in a spending bill that needs to pass before the end of the current legislative session. Mr. Flake is offering an assist, saying that he will block any judicial nominees in committee until a Mueller protection bill gets a Senate floor vote. Over in the House, incoming Democratic committee chairmen, led by soon-to-be Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, are vowing an investigation blitz focused on collusion with Russia.

Mr. Schumer's last shutdown -- a year ago -- was a bust even though it was waged over the emotionally compelling issue of Dreamers, illegal aliens brought to the U.S. as children. He now proposes shutting down the government over a probe few people outside of Washington care about. Mitch McConnell should be so lucky.

Mr. Flake, should he run for president, will struggle to explain to conservative voters his obstruction of Trump judicial nominees, who'll be confirmed in 2019 anyway when the Republicans expand their Senate majority.

Democrats' other problem is that this strategy hinges in large degree on an expectation that Mr. Mueller ultimately finds something. There's no reason to believe he has turned up any evidence of Trump-Russia collusion.

Sure, he's secured convictions against longtime Beltway bandits for long-ago lobbying. He's squeezed the ole standby lying-to-investigators plea out of a few targets. He's indicted a squad of Russian trolls, who will never be brought to trial and who even Mr. Mueller's office admits had nothing to do with the Trump team. And while it seems likely his report to the Justice Department will criticize Mr. Trump, it's improbable it will contain proof of collusion.

And then? The president will have a field day. He will claim vindication and mercilessly drive home that the investigation was a waste and a witch hunt. And he will have a point. Two years of Democratic hyperbole will be undercut by the special counsel they've held out as the ultimate sleuth. They'll have to decide whether to deride Mr. Mueller's findings as insufficient to justify continuing their own probes.

Maybe Mr. Mueller has something. We'll see. But if the reporting is correct that he's wound up high and dry, Democrats will end up there with him.

[Nov 24, 2018] Anonymous Exposes UK-Led Psyop To Battle Russian Propaganda

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Operating on a budget of Ł1.9 million (US$2.4 million), the secretive Integrity Initiative consists of "clusters" of local politicians, journalists, military personnel, scientists and academics. The team is dedicated to searching for and publishing "evidence" of Russian interference in European affairs , while themselves influencing leadership behind the scenes, the documents claim. ..."
"... The Integrity Initiative "clusters" currently operate out of Spain, France, Germany, Italy, Greece, Montenegro, Serbia, Norway, Lithuania and the netherlands. According to the leak by Anonymous, the Integrity Initiative is working to aggressively expand its sphere of influence throughout eastern Europe, as well as the US, Canada and the MENA region ..."
"... The work done by the Initiative - which claims it is not a government body, is done under "absolute secrecy via concealed contacts embedded throughout British embassies," according to the leak. It does, however, admit to working with unnamed British "government agencies." ..."
Nov 23, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

The hacking collective known as "Anonymous" published a trove of documents on November 5 which it claims exposes a UK-based psyop to create a " large-scale information secret service " in Europe in order to combat "Russian propaganda" - which has been blamed for everything from Brexit to US President Trump winning the 2016 US election.

The primary objective of the " Integrity Initiative " - established in 2015 by the Institute for Statecraft - is "to provide a coordinated Western response to Russian disinformation and other elements of hybrid warfare."

And while the notion of Russian disinformation has become the West's favorite new bogeyman to excuse things such as Hillary Clinton's historic loss to Donald Trump, we note that "Anonymous" was called out by WikiLeaks in October 2016 as an FBI cutout, while the report on the Integrity Initiative that Anonymous exposed comes from Russian state-owned network RT - so it's anyone's guess whose 400lb hackers are at work here.

Operating on a budget of Ł1.9 million (US$2.4 million), the secretive Integrity Initiative consists of "clusters" of local politicians, journalists, military personnel, scientists and academics. The team is dedicated to searching for and publishing "evidence" of Russian interference in European affairs , while themselves influencing leadership behind the scenes, the documents claim.

The UK establishment appears to be conducting the very activities of which it and its allies have long-accused the Kremlin, with little or no corroborating evidence. The program also aims to "change attitudes in Russia itself" as well as influencing Russian speakers in the EU and North America, one of the leaked documents states. - RT

The Integrity Initiative "clusters" currently operate out of Spain, France, Germany, Italy, Greece, Montenegro, Serbia, Norway, Lithuania and the netherlands. According to the leak by Anonymous, the Integrity Initiative is working to aggressively expand its sphere of influence throughout eastern Europe, as well as the US, Canada and the MENA region .

The work done by the Initiative - which claims it is not a government body, is done under "absolute secrecy via concealed contacts embedded throughout British embassies," according to the leak. It does, however, admit to working with unnamed British "government agencies."

The initiative has received Ł168,000 in funding from HQ NATO Public Diplomacy and Ł250,000 from the US State Department , the documents allege.

Some of its purported members include British MPs and high-profile " independent" journalists with a penchant for anti-Russian sentiment in their collective online oeuvre, as showcased by a brief glance at their Twitter feeds. - RT

Noted examples of "inedependent" anti-Russia journalists:

Spanish "Op"

In one example of the group's activities, a "Moncloa Campaign" was successfully conducted by the group's Spanish cluster to block the appointment of Colonel Pedro Banos as the director of Spain's Department of Homeland Security. It took just seven-and-a-half hours to accomplish, brags the group in the documents .

"The [Spanish] government is preparing to appoint Colonel Banos, known for his pro-Russian and pro-Putin positions in the Syrian and Ukrainian conflicts, as Director of the Department of Homeland Security, a key body located at the Moncloa," begins Nacho Torreblanca in a seven-part tweetstorm describing what happened.

Others joined in. Among them – according to the leaks – academic Miguel Ángel Quintana Paz, who wrote that "Mr. Banos is to geopolitics as a homeopath is to medicine." Appointing such a figure would be "a shame." - RT

The operation was reported in Spanish media, while Banos was labeled "pro-Putin" by UK MP Bob Seely.

In short, expect anything counter to predominant "open-border" narratives to be the Kremlin's fault - and not a natural populist reflex to the destruction of borders, language and culture.

[Nov 24, 2018] British Government Runs Secret Anti-Russian Smear Campaigns

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... It lists Bellingcat and the Atlantic Council as "partner organisations" ..."
"... "The UK's Secret Intelligence Service, otherwise known as MI6, has been scrambling to prevent President Trump from publishing classified materials linked to the Russian election meddling investigation. ... much of the espionage performed on the Trump campaign was conducted on UK soil throughout 2016." ..."
"... "Gregory R. Copley, editor and publisher of Defense & Foreign Affairs, posited that Sergei Skripal is the unnamed Russian intelligence source in the Steele dossier. ... In Skripal's pseudo-country-gentleman retirement, the ex-GRU-MI6 double agent was selling custom-made "Russian intelligence"; he had fabricated "material" that went into the Steele dossier..." ..."
"... this movement in the west by gov'ts to pay for generating lies, hate and propaganda towards russia is really sick... it is perfect for the military industrial complex corporations though and they seem to be calling the shots in the west, much more so then the voice of the ordinary person who is not interested in war ..."
"... Seems to me that this shows the primacy of the City of London, with its offshore network of illicit capital accumulation, within Britain. It is a state within a state or even a financial empire within a state, which, for deep historical reasons isn't subject to the same laws as the rest of the UK. ..."
"... The UK's pathological obsession with Russia only makes sense to me as the city's insistence on continued 90s style appropriation of Russia's wealth ..."
"... British hypocrisy publicly called out. How this all unravels is one to watch. Extra large popcorn and soda for me ..."
"... It seems to me that the UK has far more to lose from doxxing than Russia does. The interference in sovereign allied states to 'manage' who the UK thinks they should appoint does not bode well for such relations ..."
"... A separate subcluster of so-called journalists names Deborah Haynes, David Aaronovitch of the London Times and Neil Buckley from the FT." Subcluster. Love it. Just how crap do you have to be to fail to make it to membership of a full cluster of smear merchants? ..."
"... I doubt very seriously that the British launched this operation without the CIA's implicit and explicit support. This has all the markings of a John Brennan operation that has been launched stealthily to prevent anyone from knowing its real origins. ..."
"... The Brits don't act alone, and a project of this magnitude did not begin without Langley's explicit approval. ..."
"... Now check out the wording in the above document: "Funding from institutional and national governmental sources in the US has been delayed by internal disputes within the US government, but w.e.f. March 2018 that deadlock seems to have been resolved and funding should now flow." Think about that. What would have blocked the flow of USG support for this project?? Why, the allegations of collusion against Trump, of course. Naturally, the Republicans are not going to provide money to an operation that threatens to destroy the head of their own party. So, there has been no bipartisan agreement on funding for anti-Russia propaganda ..."
"... This mob was created in the autumn of 2015, according to their site. That would have been about the time -- probably just after -- the Russians intervened in Syria. The Brits had plans for an invasion of Syria in 2009, according to their fave Guardian fish wrap. ..."
"... Pat Lang posted a report that strongly implies that charges of Russian influence on Trump are a deliberate falsification ..."
"... It seems quite possible that what is alleged as "Russian meddling" is actually CIA-MI6 meddling ..."
"... As I have said before, MAGA is a POLICY RESPONSE to the challenge from Russia and China. The election of a Republican faux populist was necessary and Trump, despite his many flaws, was the best candidate for the job. ..."
"... The Integrity Initiative's goal is to defend democracy against the truth about Russia. All this is so Orwellian. When will we get the Ministry of Love? ..."
"... They shot at an elephant and failed to kill it. So yes, out of the combo of frustration, resentment, and fear they hate the resurgent Russia and prefer Cold War II, and if necessary WWIII, to peaceful co-existence. Of course the usual corporate imperative (in this case weapons profiteering) reinforces the mass psychological pathology among the elites. ..."
"... The ironic thing is that Putin doesn't prefer to challenge the neoliberal globalist "order" at all, but would happily see Russia take a prominent place within it. It's the US and its UK poodle who are insisting on confrontation. ..."
"... Great article! It reminded me of what I read in George Orwell's novella "1984." He summed it all up brilliantly in nine words: "War is Peace"; "Freedom is Slavery"; "Ignorance is Strength." The three pillars of political power. ..."
"... Since UK has always blocked the "European Intelligence" initiative, on the basis of his pertenence to the "Five Eyes", and as UK is leaving the European Union, where it has always been the Troyan Horse of the US, one would think that all these people belonging to the so called "clusters" should register themselves as "foreign agents" working for UK government. ..."
"... William Browder ..."
Nov 24, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

British Government Runs Secret Anti-Russian Smear Campaigns Steveg , Nov 24, 2018 11:43:44 AM | link

In 2015 the government of Britain launched a secret operation to insert anti-Russia propaganda into the western media stream.

We have already seen many consequences of this and similar programs which are designed to smear anyone who does not follow the anti-Russian government lines. The 'Russian collusion' smear campaign against Donald Trump based on the Steele dossier was also a largely British operation but seems to be part of a different project.

The ' Integrity Initiative ' builds 'cluster' or contact groups of trusted journalists, military personal, academics and lobbyists within foreign countries. These people get alerts via social media to take action when the British center perceives a need.

On June 7 it took the the Spanish cluster only a few hours to derail the appointment of Perto Banos as the Director of the National Security Department in Spain. The cluster determined that he had a too positive view of Russia and launched a coordinated social media smear campaign (pdf) against him.


bigger

The Initiative and its operations were unveiled when someone liberated some of its documents, including its budget applications to the British Foreign Office, and posted them under the 'Anonymous' label at cyberguerrilla.org .

The Initiative is nominally run under the (government financed) non-government-organisation The Institute For Statecraft . Its internal handbook (pdf) describes its purpose:

The Integrity Initiative was set up in autumn 2015 by The Institute for Statecraft in cooperation with the Free University of Brussels (VUB) to bring to the attention of politicians, policy-makers, opinion leaders and other interested parties the threat posed by Russia to democratic institutions in the United Kingdom, across Europe and North America.

It lists Bellingcat and the Atlantic Council as "partner organisations" and promises that:

Cluster members will be sent to educational sessions abroad to improve the technical competence of the cluster to deal with disinformation and strengthen bonds in the cluster community. [...] (Events with DFR Digital Sherlocks, Bellingcat, EuVsDisinfo, Buzzfeed, Irex, Detector Media, Stopfake, LT MOD Stratcom – add more names and propose cluster participants as you desire).

The Initiatives Orwellian slogan is 'Defending Democracy Against Disinformation'. It covers European countries, the UK, the U.S. and Canada and seems to want to expand to the Middle East.

On its About page it claims: "We are not a government body but we do work with government departments and agencies who share our aims." The now published budget plans show that more than 95% of the Initiative's funding is coming directly from the British government, NATO and the U.S. State Department. All the 'contact persons' for creating 'clusters' in foreign countries are British embassy officers. It amounts to a foreign influence campaign by the British government that hides behind a 'civil society' NGO.

The organisation is led by one Chris N. Donnelly who receives (pdf) £8,100 per month for creating the smear campaign network.


Chris Donnelly - Pic via Euromaidanpress

From its 2017/18 budget application (pdf) we learn how the Initiative works:

To counter Russian disinformation and malign influence in Europe by: expanding the knowledge base; harnessing existing expertise, and; establishing a network of networks of experts, opinion formers and policy makers, to educate national audiences in the threat and to help build national capacities to counter it .

The Initiative has a black and white view that is based on a "we are the good ones" illusion. When "we" 'educate the public' it is legitimate work. When others do similar, it its disinformation. That is of course not the reality. The Initiative's existence itself, created to secretly manipulate the public, is proof that such a view is wrong.

If its work were as legit as it wants to be seen, why would the Foreign Office run it from behind the curtain as an NGO? The Initiative is not the only such operation. It's applications seek funding from a larger "Russian Language Strategic Communication Programme" run by the Foreign Office.

The 2017/18 budget application sought FCO funding of £480,635. It received £102,000 in co-funding from NATO and the Lithuanian Ministry of Defense. The 2018/19 budget application shows a planned spending (pdf) of £1,961,000.00. The co-sponsors this year are again NATO and the Lithuanian MoD, but also include (pdf) the U.S. State Department with £250,000 and Facebook with £100,000. The budget lays out a strong cooperation with the local military of each country. It notes that NATO is also generous in financing the local clusters.

One of the liberated papers of the Initiative is a talking points memo labeled Top 3 Deliverable for FCO (pdf):

  • Developing and proving the cluster concept and methodology, setting up clusters in a range of countries with different circumstances
  • Making people (in Government, think tanks, military, journalists) see the big picture, making people acknowledge that we are under concerted, deliberate hybrid attack by Russia
  • Increasing the speed of response, mobilising the network to activism in pursuit of the "golden minute"

Under top 1, setting up clusters, a subitem reads:

- Connects media with academia with policy makers with practitioners in a country to impact on policy and society: ( Jelena Milic silencing pro-kremlin voices on Serbian TV )

Defending Democracy by silencing certain voices on public TV seems to be a self-contradicting concept.

Another subitem notes how the Initiative secretly influences foreign governments:

We engage only very discreetly with governments, based entirely on trusted personal contacts, specifically to ensure that they do not come to see our work as a problem, and to try to influence them gently, as befits an independent NGO operation like ours, viz;
- Germany, via the Zentrum Liberale Moderne to the Chancellor's Office and MOD
- Netherlands, via the HCSS to the MOD
- Poland and Romania, at desk level into their MFAs via their NATO Reps
- Spain, via special advisers, into the MOD and PM's office (NB this may change very soon with the new Government)
- Norway, via personal contacts into the MOD
- HQ NATO, via the Policy Planning Unit into the Sec Gen's office.
We have latent contacts into other governments which we will activate as needs be as the clusters develop.

A look at the 'clusters' set up in U.S. and UK shows some prominent names.


bigger

Members of the Atlantic Council, which has a contract to censor Facebook posts , appear on several cluster lists. The UK core cluster also includes some prominent names like tax fraudster William Browder , the daft Atlantic Council shill Ben Nimmo and the neo-conservative Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum. One person of interest is Andrew Wood who handed the Steele 'dirty dossier' to Senator John McCain to smear Donald Trump over alleged relations with Russia. A separate subcluster of so-called journalists names Deborah Haynes, David Aaronovitch of the London Times, Neil Buckley from the FT and Jonathan Marcus of the BBC.


bigger - bigger

A ' Cluster Roundup ' (pdf) from July 2018 details its activities in at least 35 countries. Another file reveals (pdf) the local partnering institutions and individuals involved in the programs.

The Initiatives Guide to Countering Russian Information (pdf) is a rather funny read. It lists the downing of flight MH 17 by a Ukranian BUK missile, the fake chemical incident in Khan Sheikhoun and the Skripal Affair as examples for "Russian disinformation". But at least two of these events, Khan Sheikun via the UK run White Helmets and the Skripal affair, are evidently products of British intelligence disinformation operations.

The probably most interesting papers of the whole stash is the 'Project Plan' laid out at pages 7-40 of the 2018 budget application v2 (pdf). Under 'Sustainability' it notes:

The programme is proposed to run until at least March 2019, to ensure that the clusters established in each country have sufficient time to take root, find funding, and demonstrate their effectiveness. FCO funding for Phase 2 will enable the activities to be expanded in scale, reach and scope. As clusters have established themselves, they have begun to access local sources of funding. But this is a slow process and harder in some countries than others. HQ NATO PDD [Public Diplomacy Division] has proved a reliable source of funding for national clusters. The ATA [Atlantic Treaty Association] promises to be the same, giving access to other pots of money within NATO and member nations. Funding from institutional and national governmental sources in the US has been delayed by internal disputes within the US government, but w.e.f. March 2018 that deadlock seems to have been resolved and funding should now flow.

The programme has begun to create a critical mass of individuals from a cross society (think tanks, academia, politics, the media, government and the military) whose work is proving to be mutually reinforcing . Creating the network of networks has given each national group local coherence, credibility and reach, as well as good international access. Together, these conditions, plus the growing awareness within governments of the need for this work, should guarantee the continuity of the work under various auspices and in various forms.

The third part of the budget application (pdf) list the various activities, their output and outcome. The budget plan includes a section that describes 'Risks' to the initiative. These include hacking of the Initiatives IT as well as:

Adverse publicity generated by Russia or by supporters of Russia in target countries, or by political and interest groups affected by the work of the programme, aimed at discrediting the programme or its participants, or to create political embarrassment.

We hope that this piece contributes to such embarrassment.

Posted by b on November 24, 2018 at 11:24 AM | Permalink

Comments Perfidious ALbion!

When will we learn?

pretzelattack , Nov 24, 2018 11:44:00 AM | link

Coincidentally, or not, i just saw this article at the guardian; https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/23/robert-mueller-profile-donald-trump-russia-investigation.
Anya , Nov 24, 2018 11:57:00 AM | link
The British government has been running a serious meddling into the US affairs:
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-11-23/mi6-scrambling-stop-trump-releasing-classified-docs-russia-probe

"The UK's Secret Intelligence Service, otherwise known as MI6, has been scrambling to prevent President Trump from publishing classified materials linked to the Russian election meddling investigation. ... much of the espionage performed on the Trump campaign was conducted on UK soil throughout 2016."

A Steele & Skrupal's anti-Russian / anti-Trump saga: https://spectator.org/big-dots-do-they-connect/

"Gregory R. Copley, editor and publisher of Defense & Foreign Affairs, posited that Sergei Skripal is the unnamed Russian intelligence source in the Steele dossier. ... In Skripal's pseudo-country-gentleman retirement, the ex-GRU-MI6 double agent was selling custom-made "Russian intelligence"; he had fabricated "material" that went into the Steele dossier..."

For M16 to expose this level of stupidity is stunning.

james , Nov 24, 2018 11:58:02 AM | link
thanks b....

this movement in the west by gov'ts to pay for generating lies, hate and propaganda towards russia is really sick... it is perfect for the military industrial complex corporations though and they seem to be calling the shots in the west, much more so then the voice of the ordinary person who is not interested in war.. i guess the idea is to get the ordinary people to think in terms of hating another country based on lies and that this would be a good thing... it is very sad what uk / usa leadership in the past century has come down to here.... i can only hope that info releases like this will hasten it's demise...

Ingrian , Nov 24, 2018 12:03:55 PM | link
Seems to me that this shows the primacy of the City of London, with its offshore network of illicit capital accumulation, within Britain. It is a state within a state or even a financial empire within a state, which, for deep historical reasons isn't subject to the same laws as the rest of the UK.

The UK's pathological obsession with Russia only makes sense to me as the city's insistence on continued 90s style appropriation of Russia's wealth

james , Nov 24, 2018 12:15:31 PM | link
@6 ingrian... things didn't go as planned for the expropriation of Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union.. it seems the west is still hurting from not being able to exploit Russia fully, as they'd intended...
et Al , Nov 24, 2018 12:20:09 PM | link

Let the Doxx wars begin! Sure, Anonymous is not Russian but it will surely now be targeted and smeared as such which would show that it has hit a nerve. British hypocrisy publicly called out. How this all unravels is one to watch. Extra large popcorn and soda for me.

I think we've all noticed the euro-asslantic press (and friends) on behalf of, willingly and in cooperation with the British intelligence et al 'calling out' numerous Russians as G(R)U/spies/whatever for a while now yet providing less than a shred of credible evidence.

It seems to me that the UK has far more to lose from doxxing than Russia does. The interference in sovereign allied states to 'manage' who the UK thinks they should appoint does not bode well for such relations.

Meanwhile in Brussels they are having their cake and eating it, i.e. bemoaning Europe's 'weak response' to Russian propaganda:

https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/experts-lament-underfunding-of-eu-task-force-countering-russian-disinformation/

BTW, did anyone read Wired UK's current advertorial (nov 14) by Carl Miller for Brigade 77?

Forthestate , Nov 24, 2018 12:26:09 PM | link
"A separate subcluster of so-called journalists names Deborah Haynes, David Aaronovitch of the London Times and Neil Buckley from the FT." Subcluster. Love it. Just how crap do you have to be to fail to make it to membership of a full cluster of smear merchants?
worldblee , Nov 24, 2018 12:33:05 PM | link
Yet another example of the pot calling the kettle black when in fact the kettle may not be black at all; it's just the pot making up things. "These Russian criminals are using propaganda to show (truths) like the fact the DNC and Clinton campaigns colluded to prevent Sanders from being nominated, so we need to establish a clandestine propaganda network to establish that the Russians are running propaganda!"
psychohistorian , Nov 24, 2018 12:34:32 PM | link

....full cluster of smear merchants". May all the clusters of smear merchants be exposed to the public as the acolytes of evil they are.

plantman , Nov 24, 2018 12:36:48 PM | link
"In 2015 the government of Britain launched a secret operation to insert anti-Russia propaganda into the western media stream."

I doubt very seriously that the British launched this operation without the CIA's implicit and explicit support. This has all the markings of a John Brennan operation that has been launched stealthily to prevent anyone from knowing its real origins.

The Brits don't act alone, and a project of this magnitude did not begin without Langley's explicit approval.

Now check out the wording in the above document: "Funding from institutional and national governmental sources in the US has been delayed by internal disputes within the US government, but w.e.f. March 2018 that deadlock seems to have been resolved and funding should now flow." Think about that. What would have blocked the flow of USG support for this project?? Why, the allegations of collusion against Trump, of course. Naturally, the Republicans are not going to provide money to an operation that threatens to destroy the head of their own party. So, there has been no bipartisan agreement on funding for anti-Russia propaganda

BUT...the author assures us that the "deadlock seems to have been resolved and funding should now flow" Huh?? In other words, the fix is in. Mueller will pardon Trump on collusion charges but the propaganda campaign against Russia will continue...with the full support of both parties. I could be wrong, but that's how I see it...

m , Nov 24, 2018 12:40:07 PM | link
This mob was created in the autumn of 2015, according to their site. That would have been about the time -- probably just after -- the Russians intervened in Syria. The Brits had plans for an invasion of Syria in 2009, according to their fave Guardian fish wrap.

A lot of sour grapes with this so-called 'integrity initiative', IMO. BP was behind a lot of this, I would also think. When Assad pulled the plug on the pipeline through the Levant in 2009, the Brits hacked up a fur ball. It's gone downhill for them ever since. Couldn't happen to a nicer lot. If you can't invade or beat them with proxies, you can at least call them names.

Jackrabbit , Nov 24, 2018 12:40:58 PM | link
Anya

Pat Lang posted a report that strongly implies that charges of Russian influence on Trump are a deliberate falsification: THE CHIMERA OF DONALD TRUMP, RUSSIAN MONEY LAUNDERER :

If Trump was taking dirty money or engaged in criminal activity with Russians then he was doing it with Felix Sater, who was under the control of the FBI... And who was in charge of the FBI during all of the time that Sater was a signed up FBI snitch? You got it -- Robert Mueller (2001 thru 2013) ...

It seems quite possible that what is alleged as "Russian meddling" is actually CIA-MI6 meddling, including:

Steele dossier: To create suspicion in government, media, and later the public

Leaking of DNC emails to Wikileaks (but calling it a "hack"): To help with election of Trump and link Wikileaks (as agent) to Russian election meddling

Cambridge Analytica: To provide necessary reasoning for Trump's (certain) win of the electoral college.

Note: We later found that dozens of firms had undue access to Facebook data. Why did the campaign turn to a British firm instead of an American firm? Well, it had to be a British firm if MI6 was running the (supposed) Facebook targeting for CIA.

As I have said before, MAGA is a POLICY RESPONSE to the challenge from Russia and China. The election of a Republican faux populist was necessary and Trump, despite his many flaws, was the best candidate for the job.
Cyril , Nov 24, 2018 1:10:13 PM | link
The Integrity Initiative's goal is to defend democracy against the truth about Russia. All this is so Orwellian. When will we get the Ministry of Love?
Russ , Nov 24, 2018 1:16:21 PM | link
Posted by: james | Nov 24, 2018 12:15:31 PM | 7

"things didn't go as planned for the expropriation of russia after the fall of the soviet union.. it seems the west is still hurting from not being able to exploit russia fully, as they'd intended..."

They shot at an elephant and failed to kill it. So yes, out of the combo of frustration, resentment, and fear they hate the resurgent Russia and prefer Cold War II, and if necessary WWIII, to peaceful co-existence. Of course the usual corporate imperative (in this case weapons profiteering) reinforces the mass psychological pathology among the elites.

The ironic thing is that Putin doesn't prefer to challenge the neoliberal globalist "order" at all, but would happily see Russia take a prominent place within it. It's the US and its UK poodle who are insisting on confrontation.

GeorgeV , Nov 24, 2018 1:34:08 PM | link
Great article! It reminded me of what I read in George Orwell's novella "1984." He summed it all up brilliantly in nine words: "War is Peace"; "Freedom is Slavery"; "Ignorance is Strength." The three pillars of political power.
Sasha , Nov 24, 2018 1:38:39 PM | link
Since UK has always blocked the "European Intelligence" initiative, on the basis of his pertenence to the "Five Eyes", and as UK is leaving the European Union, where it has always been the Troyan Horse of the US, one would think that all these people belonging to the so called "clusters" should register themselves as "foreign agents" working for UK government...and in this context, new empowerished sovereign governemts into the EU should consider the possibility expelling these traitors as spies of the UK....

http://www.voltairenet.org/article204051.html

Some of the "clusters" unmasked here....some, like Ignacio Torreblanca in Spain, are related to the CFR....

https://www.rt.com/news/444737-uk-funded-campaign-russia-leaks/

Zanon , Nov 24, 2018 2:12:45 PM | link
Country list of agents of influence according to the leak:
Zanon , Nov 24, 2018 2:13:28 PM | link
cresty , Nov 24, 2018 2:18:30 PM | link
Thank you very much for going through all the files, b. Will share far and wide

[Nov 24, 2018] Now we know created MH17 smear campaign, who financial Steele dossier and created Skripal affair ;-)

Highly recommended!
Nov 24, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Perfidious Albion: or yet another example of the pot calling the kettle black when in fact the kettle may not be black at all; it's just the pot making up things

In 2015 the government of Britain launched a secret operation to insert anti-Russia propaganda into the western media stream.

We have already seen many consequences of this and similar programs which are designed to smear anyone who does not follow the anti-Russian government lines. The 'Russian collusion' smear campaign against Donald Trump based on the Steele dossier was also a largely British operation but seems to be part of a different project.

The ' Integrity Initiative ' builds 'cluster' or contact groups of trusted journalists, military personal, academics and lobbyists within foreign countries. These people get alerts via social media to take action when the British center perceives a need.

[Nov 24, 2018] When you are paid a lot of money to come up with plots psyops, you tend to come up with plots for psyops . The word entrapment comes to mind. Probably self-serving also.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... When you are paid a lot of money to come up with plots "psyops", you tend to come up with plots for "psyops". The word "entrapment" comes to mind. Probably "self-serving" also. ..."
"... Anti-Russian is just a code word for Globalist, Internationalist. ..."
"... This is such BS. Since when does Russia have the resources to pull all this off? They have such a complex program that they need the coordinated efforts of all the resources of the WEST? This is nuts. ..."
Nov 24, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

HowdyDoody , 7 hours ago link

One of the documents lists a series of propaganda weapons to be used against Russia. One is use of the church as a weapon. That has already been started in Ukraine with Poroshenko buying off regligious leader to split Ukraine Orthodoxy from Russian Orthodoxy. It also explicitly states that the Skripal incident is a 'Dirty Trick' against Russia.

activisor , 10 hours ago link

The British political system is on the verge of collapse. BREXIT has finally demonstrated that the Government/ Opposition parties are clearly aligned against the interests of the people. The EU is nothing more than an arm of the Globalist agenda of world domination.

The US has shown its true colours - sanctioning every country that stands for independent sovereignty is not a good foreign policy, and is destined to turn the tide of public opinion firmly against global hegemony, endless wars, and wealth inequity.

The old Empire is in its death throes. A new paradigm awaits which will exclude all those who have exploited the many, in order to sit at the top of the pyramid. They cannot escape Karma.

smacker , 11 hours ago link

The Western world needs to come to terms with the collapse of the Soviet Union and its aftermath. Today, Russia is led by Putin and he obviously has objectives as any national leader has.

Western "leaders" need to decide whether Putin:

  1. Is trying to create Soviet Union 2.0, to have a 2nd attempt at ruling the world thru communism and to do this by holding the world to ransom over oil/gas supplies. OR
  2. Is wanting Russia to become a member of the family of nations and of a multi-polar world to improve the lives of Russian people, but is being blocked at every twist and turn by manufactured events like Russia-gate and the Skripal affair and now this latest revelation of anti-Russian propaganda campaigns being coordinated and run out of London.

Both of the above cannot be true because there are too many contradictions. Which is it??

Lokiban , 13 hours ago link

Yes because imagine that that we lived in 1940 without any means to inform ourselves and that media was still in control over the information that reaches us. We would already be in a fullblown war with Russia because of it but now with the Internet and information going around freely only a whimpy 10% of we the people stand behind their desperately wanted war. Imagine that, an informed sheople.
Can't have that, they cannot do their usual stuff anymore.... good riddance.

LOL123 , 14 hours ago link

"250,000 from the US State Department , the documents allege."....... Interesting.

"During the third Democratic debate on Saturday night, Hillary Clinton called for a "Manhattan-like project" to break encrypted terrorist communications. The project would "bring the government and the tech communities together" to find a way to give law enforcement access to encrypted messages, she said. It's something that some politicians and intelligence officials have wanted for awhile,"........

***wasn't the Manhatten project a secret venture?????? Hummmmm"

Hillary Clinton has all of our encryption keys, including the FBI's . "Encryption keys" is a general reference to several encryption functions hijacked by Hillary and her surrogate ENTRUST. They include hash functions (used to indicate whether the contents have been altered in transit), PKI public/private key infrastructure, SSL (secure socket layer), TLS (transport layer security), the Dual_EC_DRBG NSA algorithm and certificate authorities.

The convoluted structure managed by the "Federal Common Policy" group has ceded to companies like ENTRUST INC the ability to sublicense their authority to third parties who in turn manage entire other networks in a Gordian knot of relationships clearly designed to fool the public to hide their devilish criminality. All roads lead back to Hillary and the Rose Law Firm."- patriots4truth

artistant , 14 hours ago link

But, but some people keep getting away with it.

hooligan2009 , 15 hours ago link

When you are paid a lot of money to come up with plots "psyops", you tend to come up with plots for "psyops". The word "entrapment" comes to mind. Probably "self-serving" also.

larryriedel , 15 hours ago link

FBI/Anonymous can use this story to support a narrative that social media bots posting memes is a problem for everybody, and it's not a partisan issue. The idea is that fake news and unrestricted social media are inherently dangerous, and both the West and Russia are exploiting that, so governments need to agree to restrict the ability to use those platforms for political speech, especially without using True Names.

Baron Samedi , 15 hours ago link

Oilygawkies in the UK and USSA seem to be letting their spooks have a good-humored (rating here on the absurd transparency of these ops) contest to see who can come up with the most surreal propaganda psy-ops.

But they probably also serve as LHO distractions from something genuinely sleazy.

headless blogger , 15 hours ago link

Anti-Russian is just a code word for Globalist, Internationalist. Anything that is remotely like Nationalism is the true enemy of these Globalist/Internationalists, which is what the Top-Ape Bolshevik promoted: see Vladimir Lenin and his quotes on how he believed fully in "internationalism" for a world without borders. Ironic how they Love the butchers of the Soviet Union but hate Russia. It is ALL ABOUT IDEOLOGY to these people and "the means justify the ends".

They are frightening people.

Push , 15 hours ago link

Basically, if one acquires factual information from an internet source, which leads to overturning the propaganda to which we're all subjected, then it MUST have come from Putin. This is the direction they're headed. Anyone speaking out against the official story is obviously a Russian spy.

Xena fobe , 15 hours ago link

"Instutute for Statecraft"? Seriously?

OverTheHedge , 11 hours ago link

"Substitute for Statecraft"

Fify ;-)

koan , 16 hours ago link

The UK is waging psyop against their own people using the Russians as an excuse to further oppress the population, especially the white population.

FIFY.

East Indian , 16 hours ago link

Never thought Putin would be the symbol of free speech! The totalitarian EU and Deep State can come out of closet and denounce their predecessors.

brewing_it , 17 hours ago link

If you call ******** on the whole Russia cyberscare, you will be labeled a puppet of Putin.

The establishment is afraid of free thinking men and women that can call ******** when they see and hear it.

AriusArmenian , 17 hours ago link

Better to call it the Anti-Integrity Initiative. UK cretins up to their usual dirty tricks - let them choke on their poison. The judgement of history will eventually catch up with them.

Mike Rotsch , 17 hours ago link

A good 'ole economic collapse will give western countries a chance to purge their crazy leaders before they involve us all in a thermonuclear war. Short everything with your entire accounts.

RealistDuJour , 17 hours ago link

This is such BS. Since when does Russia have the resources to pull all this off? They have such a complex program that they need the coordinated efforts of all the resources of the WEST? This is nuts.

Isn't it just as likely someone in the WEST planted this cache, intending Anonymous to find it?

HRClinton , 18 hours ago link

When two sides fight - especially white v white - the hidden 3rd party (((instigator))) wins.

How dumb and mallaleable can these goys be? Pretty dumb and mallaleable, it seems.

J S Bach , 18 hours ago link

Any propaganda coming from the UK or US is strictly zionist. EVERYTHING they put out is to the benefit of Israel and the "lobby". Russia isn't perfect, but if they're an enemy of the latter, then they should NOT be considered a foe to all thinking and conscientious people.

OverTheHedge , 11 hours ago link

Yesterday, the BBC had a thing on Thai workers in Israel, and how they keep dying of accidents, their general level of slavery etc. Very odd to have a negative Israel story, so I wonder who upset whom, and what the ongoing status will be.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-middle-east-46311922/thai-labourers-in-israel-tell-of-harrowing-conditions

Thai labourers in Israel tell of harrowing conditions

A year-long BBC investigation has discovered widespread abuse of Thai nationals living and working in Israel - under a scheme organized by the two governments.

Many are subjected to unsafe working practices and squalid, unsanitary living conditions. Some are overworked, others underpaid and there are dozens of unexplained deaths.

Herdee , 18 hours ago link

England and the U.S. don't like their very poor and rotten social conditions put out for the public to see. Both countries have severely deteriorating problems on their streets because of bankrupt governments printing money for foreign wars.

Quadruple_Rainbow , 18 hours ago link

More of the same fraudulent duality while alleged so called but not money etc continues to flow (everything is criminal) and the cesspool of a hierarchy pretends it's business as usual.

This isn't about maintaining balance in a lie this is about disclosing the truth and agendas (Agenda 21 now Agenda 2030 = The New Age Religion is Never Going To Be Saturnism). The layers of the hierarchy are a lie so unless the alleged so called leaders of those layers are publicly providing testimony and confession then everything that is being spoon fed to the pablum puking public through all sources is a lie.

Herdee , 18 hours ago link

They're afraid of stories like this: https://www.rt.com/news/444737-uk-funded-campaign-russia-leaks/

HRClinton , 17 hours ago link

Operating on a budget of £1.9 million (US$2.4 million), the secretive Integrity Initiative consists of "clusters" of (((local politicians, journalists, military personnel, scientists and academics))).

The (((team))) is dedicated to searching for and publishing "evidence" of Russian interference in European affairs, while themselves influencing leadership behind the scenes, the documents claim.

gatorengineer , 18 hours ago link

Do Neocons get time and half for Overtime, they sure have been putting in a bunch lately.

[Nov 24, 2018] Anonymous Exposes UK-Led Psyop To Battle Russian Propaganda

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Operating on a budget of Ł1.9 million (US$2.4 million), the secretive Integrity Initiative consists of "clusters" of local politicians, journalists, military personnel, scientists and academics. The team is dedicated to searching for and publishing "evidence" of Russian interference in European affairs , while themselves influencing leadership behind the scenes, the documents claim. ..."
"... The Integrity Initiative "clusters" currently operate out of Spain, France, Germany, Italy, Greece, Montenegro, Serbia, Norway, Lithuania and the netherlands. According to the leak by Anonymous, the Integrity Initiative is working to aggressively expand its sphere of influence throughout eastern Europe, as well as the US, Canada and the MENA region ..."
"... The work done by the Initiative - which claims it is not a government body, is done under "absolute secrecy via concealed contacts embedded throughout British embassies," according to the leak. It does, however, admit to working with unnamed British "government agencies." ..."
Nov 23, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

The hacking collective known as "Anonymous" published a trove of documents on November 5 which it claims exposes a UK-based psyop to create a " large-scale information secret service " in Europe in order to combat "Russian propaganda" - which has been blamed for everything from Brexit to US President Trump winning the 2016 US election.

The primary objective of the " Integrity Initiative " - established in 2015 by the Institute for Statecraft - is "to provide a coordinated Western response to Russian disinformation and other elements of hybrid warfare."

And while the notion of Russian disinformation has become the West's favorite new bogeyman to excuse things such as Hillary Clinton's historic loss to Donald Trump, we note that "Anonymous" was called out by WikiLeaks in October 2016 as an FBI cutout, while the report on the Integrity Initiative that Anonymous exposed comes from Russian state-owned network RT - so it's anyone's guess whose 400lb hackers are at work here.

Operating on a budget of Ł1.9 million (US$2.4 million), the secretive Integrity Initiative consists of "clusters" of local politicians, journalists, military personnel, scientists and academics. The team is dedicated to searching for and publishing "evidence" of Russian interference in European affairs , while themselves influencing leadership behind the scenes, the documents claim.

The UK establishment appears to be conducting the very activities of which it and its allies have long-accused the Kremlin, with little or no corroborating evidence. The program also aims to "change attitudes in Russia itself" as well as influencing Russian speakers in the EU and North America, one of the leaked documents states. - RT

The Integrity Initiative "clusters" currently operate out of Spain, France, Germany, Italy, Greece, Montenegro, Serbia, Norway, Lithuania and the netherlands. According to the leak by Anonymous, the Integrity Initiative is working to aggressively expand its sphere of influence throughout eastern Europe, as well as the US, Canada and the MENA region .

The work done by the Initiative - which claims it is not a government body, is done under "absolute secrecy via concealed contacts embedded throughout British embassies," according to the leak. It does, however, admit to working with unnamed British "government agencies."

The initiative has received Ł168,000 in funding from HQ NATO Public Diplomacy and Ł250,000 from the US State Department , the documents allege.

Some of its purported members include British MPs and high-profile " independent" journalists with a penchant for anti-Russian sentiment in their collective online oeuvre, as showcased by a brief glance at their Twitter feeds. - RT

Noted examples of "inedependent" anti-Russia journalists:

Spanish "Op"

In one example of the group's activities, a "Moncloa Campaign" was successfully conducted by the group's Spanish cluster to block the appointment of Colonel Pedro Banos as the director of Spain's Department of Homeland Security. It took just seven-and-a-half hours to accomplish, brags the group in the documents .

"The [Spanish] government is preparing to appoint Colonel Banos, known for his pro-Russian and pro-Putin positions in the Syrian and Ukrainian conflicts, as Director of the Department of Homeland Security, a key body located at the Moncloa," begins Nacho Torreblanca in a seven-part tweetstorm describing what happened.

Others joined in. Among them – according to the leaks – academic Miguel Ángel Quintana Paz, who wrote that "Mr. Banos is to geopolitics as a homeopath is to medicine." Appointing such a figure would be "a shame." - RT

The operation was reported in Spanish media, while Banos was labeled "pro-Putin" by UK MP Bob Seely.

In short, expect anything counter to predominant "open-border" narratives to be the Kremlin's fault - and not a natural populist reflex to the destruction of borders, language and culture.

[Nov 24, 2018] British Government Runs Secret Anti-Russian Smear Campaigns

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... It lists Bellingcat and the Atlantic Council as "partner organisations" ..."
"... "The UK's Secret Intelligence Service, otherwise known as MI6, has been scrambling to prevent President Trump from publishing classified materials linked to the Russian election meddling investigation. ... much of the espionage performed on the Trump campaign was conducted on UK soil throughout 2016." ..."
"... "Gregory R. Copley, editor and publisher of Defense & Foreign Affairs, posited that Sergei Skripal is the unnamed Russian intelligence source in the Steele dossier. ... In Skripal's pseudo-country-gentleman retirement, the ex-GRU-MI6 double agent was selling custom-made "Russian intelligence"; he had fabricated "material" that went into the Steele dossier..." ..."
"... this movement in the west by gov'ts to pay for generating lies, hate and propaganda towards russia is really sick... it is perfect for the military industrial complex corporations though and they seem to be calling the shots in the west, much more so then the voice of the ordinary person who is not interested in war ..."
"... Seems to me that this shows the primacy of the City of London, with its offshore network of illicit capital accumulation, within Britain. It is a state within a state or even a financial empire within a state, which, for deep historical reasons isn't subject to the same laws as the rest of the UK. ..."
"... The UK's pathological obsession with Russia only makes sense to me as the city's insistence on continued 90s style appropriation of Russia's wealth ..."
"... British hypocrisy publicly called out. How this all unravels is one to watch. Extra large popcorn and soda for me ..."
"... It seems to me that the UK has far more to lose from doxxing than Russia does. The interference in sovereign allied states to 'manage' who the UK thinks they should appoint does not bode well for such relations ..."
"... A separate subcluster of so-called journalists names Deborah Haynes, David Aaronovitch of the London Times and Neil Buckley from the FT." Subcluster. Love it. Just how crap do you have to be to fail to make it to membership of a full cluster of smear merchants? ..."
"... I doubt very seriously that the British launched this operation without the CIA's implicit and explicit support. This has all the markings of a John Brennan operation that has been launched stealthily to prevent anyone from knowing its real origins. ..."
"... The Brits don't act alone, and a project of this magnitude did not begin without Langley's explicit approval. ..."
"... Now check out the wording in the above document: "Funding from institutional and national governmental sources in the US has been delayed by internal disputes within the US government, but w.e.f. March 2018 that deadlock seems to have been resolved and funding should now flow." Think about that. What would have blocked the flow of USG support for this project?? Why, the allegations of collusion against Trump, of course. Naturally, the Republicans are not going to provide money to an operation that threatens to destroy the head of their own party. So, there has been no bipartisan agreement on funding for anti-Russia propaganda ..."
"... This mob was created in the autumn of 2015, according to their site. That would have been about the time -- probably just after -- the Russians intervened in Syria. The Brits had plans for an invasion of Syria in 2009, according to their fave Guardian fish wrap. ..."
"... Pat Lang posted a report that strongly implies that charges of Russian influence on Trump are a deliberate falsification ..."
"... It seems quite possible that what is alleged as "Russian meddling" is actually CIA-MI6 meddling ..."
"... As I have said before, MAGA is a POLICY RESPONSE to the challenge from Russia and China. The election of a Republican faux populist was necessary and Trump, despite his many flaws, was the best candidate for the job. ..."
"... The Integrity Initiative's goal is to defend democracy against the truth about Russia. All this is so Orwellian. When will we get the Ministry of Love? ..."
"... They shot at an elephant and failed to kill it. So yes, out of the combo of frustration, resentment, and fear they hate the resurgent Russia and prefer Cold War II, and if necessary WWIII, to peaceful co-existence. Of course the usual corporate imperative (in this case weapons profiteering) reinforces the mass psychological pathology among the elites. ..."
"... The ironic thing is that Putin doesn't prefer to challenge the neoliberal globalist "order" at all, but would happily see Russia take a prominent place within it. It's the US and its UK poodle who are insisting on confrontation. ..."
"... Great article! It reminded me of what I read in George Orwell's novella "1984." He summed it all up brilliantly in nine words: "War is Peace"; "Freedom is Slavery"; "Ignorance is Strength." The three pillars of political power. ..."
"... Since UK has always blocked the "European Intelligence" initiative, on the basis of his pertenence to the "Five Eyes", and as UK is leaving the European Union, where it has always been the Troyan Horse of the US, one would think that all these people belonging to the so called "clusters" should register themselves as "foreign agents" working for UK government. ..."
"... William Browder ..."
Nov 24, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

British Government Runs Secret Anti-Russian Smear Campaigns Steveg , Nov 24, 2018 11:43:44 AM | link

In 2015 the government of Britain launched a secret operation to insert anti-Russia propaganda into the western media stream.

We have already seen many consequences of this and similar programs which are designed to smear anyone who does not follow the anti-Russian government lines. The 'Russian collusion' smear campaign against Donald Trump based on the Steele dossier was also a largely British operation but seems to be part of a different project.

The ' Integrity Initiative ' builds 'cluster' or contact groups of trusted journalists, military personal, academics and lobbyists within foreign countries. These people get alerts via social media to take action when the British center perceives a need.

On June 7 it took the the Spanish cluster only a few hours to derail the appointment of Perto Banos as the Director of the National Security Department in Spain. The cluster determined that he had a too positive view of Russia and launched a coordinated social media smear campaign (pdf) against him.


bigger

The Initiative and its operations were unveiled when someone liberated some of its documents, including its budget applications to the British Foreign Office, and posted them under the 'Anonymous' label at cyberguerrilla.org .

The Initiative is nominally run under the (government financed) non-government-organisation The Institute For Statecraft . Its internal handbook (pdf) describes its purpose:

The Integrity Initiative was set up in autumn 2015 by The Institute for Statecraft in cooperation with the Free University of Brussels (VUB) to bring to the attention of politicians, policy-makers, opinion leaders and other interested parties the threat posed by Russia to democratic institutions in the United Kingdom, across Europe and North America.

It lists Bellingcat and the Atlantic Council as "partner organisations" and promises that:

Cluster members will be sent to educational sessions abroad to improve the technical competence of the cluster to deal with disinformation and strengthen bonds in the cluster community. [...] (Events with DFR Digital Sherlocks, Bellingcat, EuVsDisinfo, Buzzfeed, Irex, Detector Media, Stopfake, LT MOD Stratcom – add more names and propose cluster participants as you desire).

The Initiatives Orwellian slogan is 'Defending Democracy Against Disinformation'. It covers European countries, the UK, the U.S. and Canada and seems to want to expand to the Middle East.

On its About page it claims: "We are not a government body but we do work with government departments and agencies who share our aims." The now published budget plans show that more than 95% of the Initiative's funding is coming directly from the British government, NATO and the U.S. State Department. All the 'contact persons' for creating 'clusters' in foreign countries are British embassy officers. It amounts to a foreign influence campaign by the British government that hides behind a 'civil society' NGO.

The organisation is led by one Chris N. Donnelly who receives (pdf) £8,100 per month for creating the smear campaign network.


Chris Donnelly - Pic via Euromaidanpress

From its 2017/18 budget application (pdf) we learn how the Initiative works:

To counter Russian disinformation and malign influence in Europe by: expanding the knowledge base; harnessing existing expertise, and; establishing a network of networks of experts, opinion formers and policy makers, to educate national audiences in the threat and to help build national capacities to counter it .

The Initiative has a black and white view that is based on a "we are the good ones" illusion. When "we" 'educate the public' it is legitimate work. When others do similar, it its disinformation. That is of course not the reality. The Initiative's existence itself, created to secretly manipulate the public, is proof that such a view is wrong.

If its work were as legit as it wants to be seen, why would the Foreign Office run it from behind the curtain as an NGO? The Initiative is not the only such operation. It's applications seek funding from a larger "Russian Language Strategic Communication Programme" run by the Foreign Office.

The 2017/18 budget application sought FCO funding of £480,635. It received £102,000 in co-funding from NATO and the Lithuanian Ministry of Defense. The 2018/19 budget application shows a planned spending (pdf) of £1,961,000.00. The co-sponsors this year are again NATO and the Lithuanian MoD, but also include (pdf) the U.S. State Department with £250,000 and Facebook with £100,000. The budget lays out a strong cooperation with the local military of each country. It notes that NATO is also generous in financing the local clusters.

One of the liberated papers of the Initiative is a talking points memo labeled Top 3 Deliverable for FCO (pdf):

  • Developing and proving the cluster concept and methodology, setting up clusters in a range of countries with different circumstances
  • Making people (in Government, think tanks, military, journalists) see the big picture, making people acknowledge that we are under concerted, deliberate hybrid attack by Russia
  • Increasing the speed of response, mobilising the network to activism in pursuit of the "golden minute"

Under top 1, setting up clusters, a subitem reads:

- Connects media with academia with policy makers with practitioners in a country to impact on policy and society: ( Jelena Milic silencing pro-kremlin voices on Serbian TV )

Defending Democracy by silencing certain voices on public TV seems to be a self-contradicting concept.

Another subitem notes how the Initiative secretly influences foreign governments:

We engage only very discreetly with governments, based entirely on trusted personal contacts, specifically to ensure that they do not come to see our work as a problem, and to try to influence them gently, as befits an independent NGO operation like ours, viz;
- Germany, via the Zentrum Liberale Moderne to the Chancellor's Office and MOD
- Netherlands, via the HCSS to the MOD
- Poland and Romania, at desk level into their MFAs via their NATO Reps
- Spain, via special advisers, into the MOD and PM's office (NB this may change very soon with the new Government)
- Norway, via personal contacts into the MOD
- HQ NATO, via the Policy Planning Unit into the Sec Gen's office.
We have latent contacts into other governments which we will activate as needs be as the clusters develop.

A look at the 'clusters' set up in U.S. and UK shows some prominent names.


bigger

Members of the Atlantic Council, which has a contract to censor Facebook posts , appear on several cluster lists. The UK core cluster also includes some prominent names like tax fraudster William Browder , the daft Atlantic Council shill Ben Nimmo and the neo-conservative Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum. One person of interest is Andrew Wood who handed the Steele 'dirty dossier' to Senator John McCain to smear Donald Trump over alleged relations with Russia. A separate subcluster of so-called journalists names Deborah Haynes, David Aaronovitch of the London Times, Neil Buckley from the FT and Jonathan Marcus of the BBC.


bigger - bigger

A ' Cluster Roundup ' (pdf) from July 2018 details its activities in at least 35 countries. Another file reveals (pdf) the local partnering institutions and individuals involved in the programs.

The Initiatives Guide to Countering Russian Information (pdf) is a rather funny read. It lists the downing of flight MH 17 by a Ukranian BUK missile, the fake chemical incident in Khan Sheikhoun and the Skripal Affair as examples for "Russian disinformation". But at least two of these events, Khan Sheikun via the UK run White Helmets and the Skripal affair, are evidently products of British intelligence disinformation operations.

The probably most interesting papers of the whole stash is the 'Project Plan' laid out at pages 7-40 of the 2018 budget application v2 (pdf). Under 'Sustainability' it notes:

The programme is proposed to run until at least March 2019, to ensure that the clusters established in each country have sufficient time to take root, find funding, and demonstrate their effectiveness. FCO funding for Phase 2 will enable the activities to be expanded in scale, reach and scope. As clusters have established themselves, they have begun to access local sources of funding. But this is a slow process and harder in some countries than others. HQ NATO PDD [Public Diplomacy Division] has proved a reliable source of funding for national clusters. The ATA [Atlantic Treaty Association] promises to be the same, giving access to other pots of money within NATO and member nations. Funding from institutional and national governmental sources in the US has been delayed by internal disputes within the US government, but w.e.f. March 2018 that deadlock seems to have been resolved and funding should now flow.

The programme has begun to create a critical mass of individuals from a cross society (think tanks, academia, politics, the media, government and the military) whose work is proving to be mutually reinforcing . Creating the network of networks has given each national group local coherence, credibility and reach, as well as good international access. Together, these conditions, plus the growing awareness within governments of the need for this work, should guarantee the continuity of the work under various auspices and in various forms.

The third part of the budget application (pdf) list the various activities, their output and outcome. The budget plan includes a section that describes 'Risks' to the initiative. These include hacking of the Initiatives IT as well as:

Adverse publicity generated by Russia or by supporters of Russia in target countries, or by political and interest groups affected by the work of the programme, aimed at discrediting the programme or its participants, or to create political embarrassment.

We hope that this piece contributes to such embarrassment.

Posted by b on November 24, 2018 at 11:24 AM | Permalink

Comments Perfidious ALbion!

When will we learn?

pretzelattack , Nov 24, 2018 11:44:00 AM | link

Coincidentally, or not, i just saw this article at the guardian; https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/23/robert-mueller-profile-donald-trump-russia-investigation.
Anya , Nov 24, 2018 11:57:00 AM | link
The British government has been running a serious meddling into the US affairs:
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-11-23/mi6-scrambling-stop-trump-releasing-classified-docs-russia-probe

"The UK's Secret Intelligence Service, otherwise known as MI6, has been scrambling to prevent President Trump from publishing classified materials linked to the Russian election meddling investigation. ... much of the espionage performed on the Trump campaign was conducted on UK soil throughout 2016."

A Steele & Skrupal's anti-Russian / anti-Trump saga: https://spectator.org/big-dots-do-they-connect/

"Gregory R. Copley, editor and publisher of Defense & Foreign Affairs, posited that Sergei Skripal is the unnamed Russian intelligence source in the Steele dossier. ... In Skripal's pseudo-country-gentleman retirement, the ex-GRU-MI6 double agent was selling custom-made "Russian intelligence"; he had fabricated "material" that went into the Steele dossier..."

For M16 to expose this level of stupidity is stunning.

james , Nov 24, 2018 11:58:02 AM | link
thanks b....

this movement in the west by gov'ts to pay for generating lies, hate and propaganda towards russia is really sick... it is perfect for the military industrial complex corporations though and they seem to be calling the shots in the west, much more so then the voice of the ordinary person who is not interested in war.. i guess the idea is to get the ordinary people to think in terms of hating another country based on lies and that this would be a good thing... it is very sad what uk / usa leadership in the past century has come down to here.... i can only hope that info releases like this will hasten it's demise...

Ingrian , Nov 24, 2018 12:03:55 PM | link
Seems to me that this shows the primacy of the City of London, with its offshore network of illicit capital accumulation, within Britain. It is a state within a state or even a financial empire within a state, which, for deep historical reasons isn't subject to the same laws as the rest of the UK.

The UK's pathological obsession with Russia only makes sense to me as the city's insistence on continued 90s style appropriation of Russia's wealth

james , Nov 24, 2018 12:15:31 PM | link
@6 ingrian... things didn't go as planned for the expropriation of Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union.. it seems the west is still hurting from not being able to exploit Russia fully, as they'd intended...
et Al , Nov 24, 2018 12:20:09 PM | link

Let the Doxx wars begin! Sure, Anonymous is not Russian but it will surely now be targeted and smeared as such which would show that it has hit a nerve. British hypocrisy publicly called out. How this all unravels is one to watch. Extra large popcorn and soda for me.

I think we've all noticed the euro-asslantic press (and friends) on behalf of, willingly and in cooperation with the British intelligence et al 'calling out' numerous Russians as G(R)U/spies/whatever for a while now yet providing less than a shred of credible evidence.

It seems to me that the UK has far more to lose from doxxing than Russia does. The interference in sovereign allied states to 'manage' who the UK thinks they should appoint does not bode well for such relations.

Meanwhile in Brussels they are having their cake and eating it, i.e. bemoaning Europe's 'weak response' to Russian propaganda:

https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/experts-lament-underfunding-of-eu-task-force-countering-russian-disinformation/

BTW, did anyone read Wired UK's current advertorial (nov 14) by Carl Miller for Brigade 77?

Forthestate , Nov 24, 2018 12:26:09 PM | link
"A separate subcluster of so-called journalists names Deborah Haynes, David Aaronovitch of the London Times and Neil Buckley from the FT." Subcluster. Love it. Just how crap do you have to be to fail to make it to membership of a full cluster of smear merchants?
worldblee , Nov 24, 2018 12:33:05 PM | link
Yet another example of the pot calling the kettle black when in fact the kettle may not be black at all; it's just the pot making up things. "These Russian criminals are using propaganda to show (truths) like the fact the DNC and Clinton campaigns colluded to prevent Sanders from being nominated, so we need to establish a clandestine propaganda network to establish that the Russians are running propaganda!"
psychohistorian , Nov 24, 2018 12:34:32 PM | link

....full cluster of smear merchants". May all the clusters of smear merchants be exposed to the public as the acolytes of evil they are.

plantman , Nov 24, 2018 12:36:48 PM | link
"In 2015 the government of Britain launched a secret operation to insert anti-Russia propaganda into the western media stream."

I doubt very seriously that the British launched this operation without the CIA's implicit and explicit support. This has all the markings of a John Brennan operation that has been launched stealthily to prevent anyone from knowing its real origins.

The Brits don't act alone, and a project of this magnitude did not begin without Langley's explicit approval.

Now check out the wording in the above document: "Funding from institutional and national governmental sources in the US has been delayed by internal disputes within the US government, but w.e.f. March 2018 that deadlock seems to have been resolved and funding should now flow." Think about that. What would have blocked the flow of USG support for this project?? Why, the allegations of collusion against Trump, of course. Naturally, the Republicans are not going to provide money to an operation that threatens to destroy the head of their own party. So, there has been no bipartisan agreement on funding for anti-Russia propaganda

BUT...the author assures us that the "deadlock seems to have been resolved and funding should now flow" Huh?? In other words, the fix is in. Mueller will pardon Trump on collusion charges but the propaganda campaign against Russia will continue...with the full support of both parties. I could be wrong, but that's how I see it...

m , Nov 24, 2018 12:40:07 PM | link
This mob was created in the autumn of 2015, according to their site. That would have been about the time -- probably just after -- the Russians intervened in Syria. The Brits had plans for an invasion of Syria in 2009, according to their fave Guardian fish wrap.

A lot of sour grapes with this so-called 'integrity initiative', IMO. BP was behind a lot of this, I would also think. When Assad pulled the plug on the pipeline through the Levant in 2009, the Brits hacked up a fur ball. It's gone downhill for them ever since. Couldn't happen to a nicer lot. If you can't invade or beat them with proxies, you can at least call them names.

Jackrabbit , Nov 24, 2018 12:40:58 PM | link
Anya

Pat Lang posted a report that strongly implies that charges of Russian influence on Trump are a deliberate falsification: THE CHIMERA OF DONALD TRUMP, RUSSIAN MONEY LAUNDERER :

If Trump was taking dirty money or engaged in criminal activity with Russians then he was doing it with Felix Sater, who was under the control of the FBI... And who was in charge of the FBI during all of the time that Sater was a signed up FBI snitch? You got it -- Robert Mueller (2001 thru 2013) ...

It seems quite possible that what is alleged as "Russian meddling" is actually CIA-MI6 meddling, including:

Steele dossier: To create suspicion in government, media, and later the public

Leaking of DNC emails to Wikileaks (but calling it a "hack"): To help with election of Trump and link Wikileaks (as agent) to Russian election meddling

Cambridge Analytica: To provide necessary reasoning for Trump's (certain) win of the electoral college.

Note: We later found that dozens of firms had undue access to Facebook data. Why did the campaign turn to a British firm instead of an American firm? Well, it had to be a British firm if MI6 was running the (supposed) Facebook targeting for CIA.

As I have said before, MAGA is a POLICY RESPONSE to the challenge from Russia and China. The election of a Republican faux populist was necessary and Trump, despite his many flaws, was the best candidate for the job.
Cyril , Nov 24, 2018 1:10:13 PM | link
The Integrity Initiative's goal is to defend democracy against the truth about Russia. All this is so Orwellian. When will we get the Ministry of Love?
Russ , Nov 24, 2018 1:16:21 PM | link
Posted by: james | Nov 24, 2018 12:15:31 PM | 7

"things didn't go as planned for the expropriation of russia after the fall of the soviet union.. it seems the west is still hurting from not being able to exploit russia fully, as they'd intended..."

They shot at an elephant and failed to kill it. So yes, out of the combo of frustration, resentment, and fear they hate the resurgent Russia and prefer Cold War II, and if necessary WWIII, to peaceful co-existence. Of course the usual corporate imperative (in this case weapons profiteering) reinforces the mass psychological pathology among the elites.

The ironic thing is that Putin doesn't prefer to challenge the neoliberal globalist "order" at all, but would happily see Russia take a prominent place within it. It's the US and its UK poodle who are insisting on confrontation.

GeorgeV , Nov 24, 2018 1:34:08 PM | link
Great article! It reminded me of what I read in George Orwell's novella "1984." He summed it all up brilliantly in nine words: "War is Peace"; "Freedom is Slavery"; "Ignorance is Strength." The three pillars of political power.
Sasha , Nov 24, 2018 1:38:39 PM | link
Since UK has always blocked the "European Intelligence" initiative, on the basis of his pertenence to the "Five Eyes", and as UK is leaving the European Union, where it has always been the Troyan Horse of the US, one would think that all these people belonging to the so called "clusters" should register themselves as "foreign agents" working for UK government...and in this context, new empowerished sovereign governemts into the EU should consider the possibility expelling these traitors as spies of the UK....

http://www.voltairenet.org/article204051.html

Some of the "clusters" unmasked here....some, like Ignacio Torreblanca in Spain, are related to the CFR....

https://www.rt.com/news/444737-uk-funded-campaign-russia-leaks/

Zanon , Nov 24, 2018 2:12:45 PM | link
Country list of agents of influence according to the leak:
Zanon , Nov 24, 2018 2:13:28 PM | link
cresty , Nov 24, 2018 2:18:30 PM | link
Thank you very much for going through all the files, b. Will share far and wide

[Nov 24, 2018] Now we know created MH17 smear campaign, who financial Steele dossier and created Skripal affair ;-)

Highly recommended!
Nov 24, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Perfidious Albion: or yet another example of the pot calling the kettle black when in fact the kettle may not be black at all; it's just the pot making up things

In 2015 the government of Britain launched a secret operation to insert anti-Russia propaganda into the western media stream.

We have already seen many consequences of this and similar programs which are designed to smear anyone who does not follow the anti-Russian government lines. The 'Russian collusion' smear campaign against Donald Trump based on the Steele dossier was also a largely British operation but seems to be part of a different project.

The ' Integrity Initiative ' builds 'cluster' or contact groups of trusted journalists, military personal, academics and lobbyists within foreign countries. These people get alerts via social media to take action when the British center perceives a need.

[Nov 24, 2018] When you are paid a lot of money to come up with plots psyops, you tend to come up with plots for psyops . The word entrapment comes to mind. Probably self-serving also.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... When you are paid a lot of money to come up with plots "psyops", you tend to come up with plots for "psyops". The word "entrapment" comes to mind. Probably "self-serving" also. ..."
"... Anti-Russian is just a code word for Globalist, Internationalist. ..."
"... This is such BS. Since when does Russia have the resources to pull all this off? They have such a complex program that they need the coordinated efforts of all the resources of the WEST? This is nuts. ..."
Nov 24, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

HowdyDoody , 7 hours ago link

One of the documents lists a series of propaganda weapons to be used against Russia. One is use of the church as a weapon. That has already been started in Ukraine with Poroshenko buying off regligious leader to split Ukraine Orthodoxy from Russian Orthodoxy. It also explicitly states that the Skripal incident is a 'Dirty Trick' against Russia.

activisor , 10 hours ago link

The British political system is on the verge of collapse. BREXIT has finally demonstrated that the Government/ Opposition parties are clearly aligned against the interests of the people. The EU is nothing more than an arm of the Globalist agenda of world domination.

The US has shown its true colours - sanctioning every country that stands for independent sovereignty is not a good foreign policy, and is destined to turn the tide of public opinion firmly against global hegemony, endless wars, and wealth inequity.

The old Empire is in its death throes. A new paradigm awaits which will exclude all those who have exploited the many, in order to sit at the top of the pyramid. They cannot escape Karma.

smacker , 11 hours ago link

The Western world needs to come to terms with the collapse of the Soviet Union and its aftermath. Today, Russia is led by Putin and he obviously has objectives as any national leader has.

Western "leaders" need to decide whether Putin:

  1. Is trying to create Soviet Union 2.0, to have a 2nd attempt at ruling the world thru communism and to do this by holding the world to ransom over oil/gas supplies. OR
  2. Is wanting Russia to become a member of the family of nations and of a multi-polar world to improve the lives of Russian people, but is being blocked at every twist and turn by manufactured events like Russia-gate and the Skripal affair and now this latest revelation of anti-Russian propaganda campaigns being coordinated and run out of London.

Both of the above cannot be true because there are too many contradictions. Which is it??

Lokiban , 13 hours ago link

Yes because imagine that that we lived in 1940 without any means to inform ourselves and that media was still in control over the information that reaches us. We would already be in a fullblown war with Russia because of it but now with the Internet and information going around freely only a whimpy 10% of we the people stand behind their desperately wanted war. Imagine that, an informed sheople.
Can't have that, they cannot do their usual stuff anymore.... good riddance.

LOL123 , 14 hours ago link

"250,000 from the US State Department , the documents allege."....... Interesting.

"During the third Democratic debate on Saturday night, Hillary Clinton called for a "Manhattan-like project" to break encrypted terrorist communications. The project would "bring the government and the tech communities together" to find a way to give law enforcement access to encrypted messages, she said. It's something that some politicians and intelligence officials have wanted for awhile,"........

***wasn't the Manhatten project a secret venture?????? Hummmmm"

Hillary Clinton has all of our encryption keys, including the FBI's . "Encryption keys" is a general reference to several encryption functions hijacked by Hillary and her surrogate ENTRUST. They include hash functions (used to indicate whether the contents have been altered in transit), PKI public/private key infrastructure, SSL (secure socket layer), TLS (transport layer security), the Dual_EC_DRBG NSA algorithm and certificate authorities.

The convoluted structure managed by the "Federal Common Policy" group has ceded to companies like ENTRUST INC the ability to sublicense their authority to third parties who in turn manage entire other networks in a Gordian knot of relationships clearly designed to fool the public to hide their devilish criminality. All roads lead back to Hillary and the Rose Law Firm."- patriots4truth

artistant , 14 hours ago link

But, but some people keep getting away with it.

hooligan2009 , 15 hours ago link

When you are paid a lot of money to come up with plots "psyops", you tend to come up with plots for "psyops". The word "entrapment" comes to mind. Probably "self-serving" also.

larryriedel , 15 hours ago link

FBI/Anonymous can use this story to support a narrative that social media bots posting memes is a problem for everybody, and it's not a partisan issue. The idea is that fake news and unrestricted social media are inherently dangerous, and both the West and Russia are exploiting that, so governments need to agree to restrict the ability to use those platforms for political speech, especially without using True Names.

Baron Samedi , 15 hours ago link

Oilygawkies in the UK and USSA seem to be letting their spooks have a good-humored (rating here on the absurd transparency of these ops) contest to see who can come up with the most surreal propaganda psy-ops.

But they probably also serve as LHO distractions from something genuinely sleazy.

headless blogger , 15 hours ago link

Anti-Russian is just a code word for Globalist, Internationalist. Anything that is remotely like Nationalism is the true enemy of these Globalist/Internationalists, which is what the Top-Ape Bolshevik promoted: see Vladimir Lenin and his quotes on how he believed fully in "internationalism" for a world without borders. Ironic how they Love the butchers of the Soviet Union but hate Russia. It is ALL ABOUT IDEOLOGY to these people and "the means justify the ends".

They are frightening people.

Push , 15 hours ago link

Basically, if one acquires factual information from an internet source, which leads to overturning the propaganda to which we're all subjected, then it MUST have come from Putin. This is the direction they're headed. Anyone speaking out against the official story is obviously a Russian spy.

Xena fobe , 15 hours ago link

"Instutute for Statecraft"? Seriously?

OverTheHedge , 11 hours ago link

"Substitute for Statecraft"

Fify ;-)

koan , 16 hours ago link

The UK is waging psyop against their own people using the Russians as an excuse to further oppress the population, especially the white population.

FIFY.

East Indian , 16 hours ago link

Never thought Putin would be the symbol of free speech! The totalitarian EU and Deep State can come out of closet and denounce their predecessors.

brewing_it , 17 hours ago link

If you call ******** on the whole Russia cyberscare, you will be labeled a puppet of Putin.

The establishment is afraid of free thinking men and women that can call ******** when they see and hear it.

AriusArmenian , 17 hours ago link

Better to call it the Anti-Integrity Initiative. UK cretins up to their usual dirty tricks - let them choke on their poison. The judgement of history will eventually catch up with them.

Mike Rotsch , 17 hours ago link

A good 'ole economic collapse will give western countries a chance to purge their crazy leaders before they involve us all in a thermonuclear war. Short everything with your entire accounts.

RealistDuJour , 17 hours ago link

This is such BS. Since when does Russia have the resources to pull all this off? They have such a complex program that they need the coordinated efforts of all the resources of the WEST? This is nuts.

Isn't it just as likely someone in the WEST planted this cache, intending Anonymous to find it?

HRClinton , 18 hours ago link

When two sides fight - especially white v white - the hidden 3rd party (((instigator))) wins.

How dumb and mallaleable can these goys be? Pretty dumb and mallaleable, it seems.

J S Bach , 18 hours ago link

Any propaganda coming from the UK or US is strictly zionist. EVERYTHING they put out is to the benefit of Israel and the "lobby". Russia isn't perfect, but if they're an enemy of the latter, then they should NOT be considered a foe to all thinking and conscientious people.

OverTheHedge , 11 hours ago link

Yesterday, the BBC had a thing on Thai workers in Israel, and how they keep dying of accidents, their general level of slavery etc. Very odd to have a negative Israel story, so I wonder who upset whom, and what the ongoing status will be.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-middle-east-46311922/thai-labourers-in-israel-tell-of-harrowing-conditions

Thai labourers in Israel tell of harrowing conditions

A year-long BBC investigation has discovered widespread abuse of Thai nationals living and working in Israel - under a scheme organized by the two governments.

Many are subjected to unsafe working practices and squalid, unsanitary living conditions. Some are overworked, others underpaid and there are dozens of unexplained deaths.

Herdee , 18 hours ago link

England and the U.S. don't like their very poor and rotten social conditions put out for the public to see. Both countries have severely deteriorating problems on their streets because of bankrupt governments printing money for foreign wars.

Quadruple_Rainbow , 18 hours ago link

More of the same fraudulent duality while alleged so called but not money etc continues to flow (everything is criminal) and the cesspool of a hierarchy pretends it's business as usual.

This isn't about maintaining balance in a lie this is about disclosing the truth and agendas (Agenda 21 now Agenda 2030 = The New Age Religion is Never Going To Be Saturnism). The layers of the hierarchy are a lie so unless the alleged so called leaders of those layers are publicly providing testimony and confession then everything that is being spoon fed to the pablum puking public through all sources is a lie.

Herdee , 18 hours ago link

They're afraid of stories like this: https://www.rt.com/news/444737-uk-funded-campaign-russia-leaks/

HRClinton , 17 hours ago link

Operating on a budget of £1.9 million (US$2.4 million), the secretive Integrity Initiative consists of "clusters" of (((local politicians, journalists, military personnel, scientists and academics))).

The (((team))) is dedicated to searching for and publishing "evidence" of Russian interference in European affairs, while themselves influencing leadership behind the scenes, the documents claim.

gatorengineer , 18 hours ago link

Do Neocons get time and half for Overtime, they sure have been putting in a bunch lately.

[Nov 24, 2018] Forget Nordstream 2, Turkstream Is The Prize by Tom Luongo,

Comments while mostly naive, are indicative for the part of the US society that elected Trump and that Trump betrayed.
But the fact that gas went not to Europe, but to Turkey is pretty indicative. And even larger volume with go to China. At some point Europe might lose part or all Russia gas supply as Russian gas reserved are not infinite. That the perspective EU leaders are afraid of.
US shale gas is OK as long as the USA is supplied from Canada, Russia and other places as well. Some quantity can be exported. But the USA can't be a large and stable gas supplier to Europe as shale gas is capital intensive and sweet spots are limited.
Notable quotes:
"... Some worthy observations, especially with all the US "Think Tanks." But I would include the number of non-Jewish elites who have banded together with the Jewish elite and who have greatly aided in eating out the very heart of America. ..."
"... History also shows that ANY smaller entity (Israel) that depends on a larger entity (America) for its survival becomes a failed entity in the long run. Just saying. ..."
"... The American Empire is all cost and no benefit to the great majority of Americans. The MIC and that's it. Politicians on the right wave the flag and politicians on the left describe a politically correct future. All on our dime. ..."
Nov 24, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Authored by Tom Luongo,

While the Trump Administration still thinks it can play enough games to derail the Nordstream 2 pipeline via sanctions and threats, the impotence of its position geopolitically was on display the other day as the final pipe of the first train of the Turkstream pipeline entered the waters of the Black Sea.

The pipe was sanctioned by Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan who shared a public stage and held bilateral talks afterwards. I think it is important for everyone to watch the response to Putin's speech in its entirety. Because it highlights just how far Russian/Turkish relations have come since the November 24th, 2015 incident where Turkey shot down a Russian SU-24 over Syria.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/TkFR25SArYM

When you contrast this event with the strained and uninspired interactions between Erdogan and President Trump you realize that the world is moving forward despite the seeming power of the United States to derail events.

And Turkey is the key player in the region, geographically, culturally and politically. Erdogan and Putin know this. And they also know that Turkey being the transit corridor of energy for Eastern Europe opens those countries up to economic and political power they haven't enjoyed in a long time.

The first train of Turkstream will serve Turkey directly. Over the next couple of years the second train will be built which will serve as a jumping off point for bringing gas to Eastern and Southern Europe.

Countries like Bulgaria, Hungary, Italy, Greece, Serbia and Slovakia are lining up for access to Turkstream's energy. This, again, is in stark contrast to the insanely expensive Southern Transport Corridor (STC) pipeline set to bring one-third the amount of gas to Italy at five times the initial cost .

Turkstream will bring 15.75 bcm annually to Turkey and the second train that same amount to Europe. The TAP – Trans Adriatic Pipeline -- will bring just 10 bcm annually and won't do so before 2020, a project more than six years in the making.

Political Realities

The real story behind Turkstream, however, is, despite Putin's protestations to the contrary, political. No project of this size is purely economic, even if it makes immense economic sense. If that were the case then the STC wouldn't exist because it makes zero economic sense but some, if not much, political sense.

No, this pipeline along with the other major energy projects between Russia and Turkey have massive long-term political implications for the Middle East. Erdogan wants to re-take control of the Islamic world from the Saudis.

This is why they have the Saudis on a residual-poison-type drip feed of information relating to the death of Jamal Khashoggi to extract maximal value from the situation as Erdogan plays the U.S. deep state against the Trump/Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) alliance.

The U.S. deep state wants Trump weakened and MbS removed from power. Trump needs MbS to advance his plans for securing Israel's future and prolong the dollar's long-term health. Erdogan is using this rift to extract concessions left and right while continuing to do whatever he wants to do vis a vis Syria, Iran and his growing partnership with Russia.

Erdogan is in a position now to drive a very hard bargain over U.S. involvement in Syria, which neither faction in the U.S. government (Trump and the deep state) wants to give up on.

By controlling the oil fields in the eastern part of Syria and blocking the roads leading from Iraq the U.S. is playing a game it can't win because ultimately the Kurds will either have to be betrayed by the U.S. to keep Erdogan happy or cut a deal with the Syrian government for their future alienating the U.S.

This has been the ultimate end-game of the occupation of eastern Syria for months now and time is on both Putin's and Erdogan's side. Because the U.S. can't pressure Turkey to stop growing closer to Russia and Iran.

Eventually the U.S. troops in Syria will be nothing more than an albatross around Trump's neck politically and he'll have to announce a pull out, which will be popular back home helping his re-election campaign for 2020.

The big loser in this is Israel who is now having to circle the wagons politically since Putin put the screws to Benjamin Netanyahu for his part in the deaths of 15 Russian airmen back in September by closing the Syrian airspace and allowing mostly free movement of materiel to Lebanon.

Netanyahu, as I talked about last week, is now in a very precarious position after Israel was forced to sue for peace thanks to the unprecedentedly strong response by the Palestinians in Gaza.

Elijah Magnier commented recently that it this was the net result of Trump's unconditional support of Israel which united the Arab resistance rather than dividing and conquering it.

But the US establishment decided to distance itself from the Palestinian cause and embraced unconditionally the Israeli apartheid policy towards Palestine: the US supports Israel blindly. It has recognised Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, suspended financial aid to UN institutions supporting Palestinian refugees (schools, medical care, homes), and rejected the right of return of Palestinians. All this has pushed various Palestinian groups, including the Palestinian Authority, to acknowledge that any negotiation with Israel is useless and that also the US can no longer be considered a reliable partner. Moreover, the failed regime-change in Syria and the humiliating conditions place on Arab financial support were in a way the last straws that convinced Hamas to change its position, giving up on the Oslo agreement and joining the Axis of the Resistance.

Project Netanyahu, as Alistair Crooke termed it , was predicated on keeping the support of the Palestinians split with Hamas and the Palestinian Authority at odds and then grinding out the resistance in Gaza over time.

Trump's plans also involved the formation of the so-called "Arab NATO" the summit for which has been put off until next year thanks to Erdogan's deft handling of the Saudi hit on Khashoggi. There are still a number of issues outstanding -- the financial blockade of Qatar, the war in Yemen, etc. -- that need to be resolved as well before any of this is even remotely possible.

At this point that plan has failed and the clash with Israel last week proved it is unworkable without tacit approval of Turkey who is gunning for the Saudis as the leaders of the Sunni world.

Show me the Money

But, more importantly, over time, a Turkey that can ween itself off the U.S. dollar over the next decade is a Turkey that can survive politically the upheaval to the post-WWII institutional order coming over the next few years.

Remember, all of this is happening against the backdrop of a U.S. and European political order that is failing to maintain the confidence of the people it governs.

The road to dollar independence will be long and hard but it will be possible. Russia is the model for this having successfully removed the dollar from a great deal of its trade and is now reaping the benefits of that stability.

And projects like Turkstream and the soon to be completed Power of Siberia Pipeline to China will see the gas from both trade without the dollar as the intermediary.

If you don't think this de-dollarization of the Russian economy is happening or significant, take one look at the Russian ruble versus the price of Brent crude in recent weeks. We've had another historic collapse in oil prices and yet the ruble versus the dollar hasn't really moved at all.

The upward move from earlier this year in the ruble (not shown) came from disruptions in the Aluminum market and the threat of further sanctions. But, as the U.S. puts the screws even tighter to Russia's finances by forcing the price of oil down, the effect on the ruble has been minimal.

With today's move Brent is off nearly $30 from its October high ( a massive 35% drop in prices) just seven weeks ago and the Ruble hasn't budged. The Bank of Russia hasn't been in there propping up its price. Normally this would send the ruble into a tailspin but it hasn't.

The other so-called 'commodity currencies' like the Canadian and Australian dollars have been hit hard but not the ruble.

Set the Way Back Machine to 2014 when oil prices cratered and you'll see a ruble in free fall which culminated in a massive blow-off top that required a fundamental shift in both fiscal and monetary policy for Russia.

This had to do with the massive dollar-denominated debt of its, you guessed it, oil and gas sector. Today that is not a point of leverage.

Today lower oil prices will be a forward headwind for Russian oil companies but a boon to the Russian economy that won't experience massive inflation thanks to the ruble being sold to cover U.S. dollar liabilities.

Those days are over.

And so too will those days come for Turkey which is now in the process of doing what Russia did in 2015, divest itself of future dollar obligations while diversifying the currencies it trades in.

Stability, transparency and solvency are the things that increase the demand for a currency as not only a medium of exchange but also as a reserve asset. Russia announced the latest figures of bilateral trade with China bypassing the dollar and RT had a very interesting quote from Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev.

No one currency should dominate the market, because this makes all of us dependent on the economic situation in the country that issues this reserve currency, even when we are talking about a strong economy such as the United States," Medvedev said.

He added that US sanctions have pushed Moscow and Beijing to think about the use of their domestic currencies in settlements, something that "we should have done ten years ago."

" Trading for rubles is our absolute priority, which, by the way, should eventually turn the ruble from a convertible currency into a reserve currency, " the Russian prime minister said.

That is the first statement by a major Russian figure about seeing the ruble rise to reserve status, but it's something that many, like myself, have speculated about for years now.

Tying together major economies like Turkey, Iran, China and eventually the EU via energy projects which settle the trade in local currencies is the big threat to the current political and economic program of the U.S. It is something the EU will only embrace reluctantly.

It is something the U.S. will oppose vehemently.

And it is something that no one will stop if it makes sense for the people on each side of the transaction. This is why Turkstream and Nordstream 2 are such important projects they change the entire dynamic of the flow of global capital.

* * *

Join my Patreon if you like asking tough questions.

RioGrandeImports , 21 seconds ago link

Oil and commodity markets were used as a finishing move on the Soviet system. The book, "The Oil Card: Global Economic Warfare in the 21st Century" by James R. Norman details the use of oil futures as a geopolitical tool. Pipelines change the calculus quite a bit.

Jack Oliver , 3 hours ago link

De - Dollarisation is sweeping the world !!

Soros funded 'migration' to Europe has also failed and created a massive cultural and economic burden on Europe.

The Soros/Rothschild plan to destroy Middle Eastern countries and displace the people was - of course - motivated by the Rothschilds 'bread and butter ' - OIL ( the worlds largest traded commodity ) !!

... ... ...

Fantome , 4 hours ago link

...Where ever they go, they [neoliberals] get organised, identify the institutions/establishments/courts to infiltrate and then use that influence to -

* Hijack the economy.

* Corrupt the society.

As the current trend shows, the nexus of the international economic activity is shifting east. Turkey is not making a mistake aligning itself with the goals of Russia, Iran and China. Although there is still a huge debt of the previous deeds that has to be paid.

... ... ...

Rubicon727 , 1 hour ago link

"Half of the US billionaires are Jews while only being less then 3% of the population. And it doesn't stop there. They work collectively to hijack the institutions critical for the operations of the democracy."

Some worthy observations, especially with all the US "Think Tanks." But I would include the number of non-Jewish elites who have banded together with the Jewish elite and who have greatly aided in eating out the very heart of America.

Joiningupthedots , 4 hours ago link

I read on here previously some dimwit comment about "America prints a bill for 2 cents while other countries have to earn a dollars worth of equity to buy it and we can do this forever" kind of thing. Not if other countries don't supply the demand you can't :)

History also shows that ANY smaller entity (Israel) that depends on a larger entity (America) for its survival becomes a failed entity in the long run. Just saying.

Consuelo , 4 hours ago link

I think you could quite reasonably replace the term 'depends on a larger entity', with a term that better describes a (smaller) ' parasite ' on a (larger) host...

DEDA CVETKO , 4 hours ago link

US Guvmint to the World: My way or the highway. The World to the US Guvmint: HIGHWAY!!!!!

scraping_by , 2 hours ago link

From your lips to God's ear. The American Empire is all cost and no benefit to the great majority of Americans. The MIC and that's it. Politicians on the right wave the flag and politicians on the left describe a politically correct future. All on our dime.

CatInTheHat , 4 hours ago link

Israhell is losing its status via Putins peaceful diplomacy and trade with ME countries who are not onboard with the Yinon plan. This is why RUSSIAGATE, led by dual Israhelli democrats in Congress. There is always a foreign policy issue attached to their demonizing of other countries. This is also why the UK just sent UK soldiers to Ukraine declaring war on Russia for "invading Ukraine" and not telling parliament or the UK people.

UK/US blind support for Israhell will get us all killed.

adonisdemilo , 4 hours ago link

We do know that UK soldiers have been sent to the Ukraine. We also know that, according to elements in the Government and the Civil Service, Russia invaded and annexed the Ukraine, which is just another reason to not trust the Government--any Government.

max_is_leering , 2 hours ago link

it's Crimea by the way, and it wasn't annexed... Crimeans voted to re-unite with Russia after they saw the NAZI hell breaking loose in Ukieville

IronForge , 4 hours ago link

WRONG!!!!! NordStream Eins und Zwei are the Prizes, because DEU, Scandinavia, CHE, and FRA will Benefit. TRK Wins 2nd Prize with TRKStream and SouthStream Pipelines. Losers are BGR and EU_PARAGOV, since BGR went from Prime Partner to Trickledown Transiteer.

The Terrible Sweal , 4 hours ago link

The US has ripped open its own ballsack through arrogance and beligerence.

Bingo Hammer , 1 hour ago link

Actually it was a little country in the ME that owns the US that ripped open the US ballsack

opport.knocks , 4 hours ago link

The other so-called 'commodity currencies' like the Canadian and Australian dollars have been hit hard but not the ruble.

The Canadian dollar is only down $0.025 from its October 1st high, and still has not touched the June low.

https://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=CAD&to=USD&view=1Y

DEDA CVETKO , 5 hours ago link

Ultimately, along with Nordstream and Turkstream, there will also be a Polarstream (leading to UK and Iceland) and Southstream (which was already begun but temporarily suspended after Obama threatened Bulgaria via Angela Merkel).

And, oh...I am sure there will also be a Ukrostream (also known as Mainstream) unfortunately the Ukronazi government of Ukrainistan doesn't know this just yet. They will find out in due course, I am sure.

JohninMK , 3 hours ago link

Well, that's some confused comments.

First PolarStream is highly unlikely both because laying it would be extremely difficult and expensive and because Iceland has no need for gas as it is sitting on thermal reserves and the UK won't deal with Russia.

You are correct on SouthStream.

As to UkroStream (I assume you mean Ukraine) it is already in existence and has been for 50 plus years. Given the bad history between the parties the Russians will want to stop that route asap, hence the timing of NordStream 2 and TurkStream. So in the future UkroSream is going to end, not start.

raalon , 4 hours ago link

The US and Israel are the threats to world Peace. Just how many countries has Russia attacked lately

21st.century , 5 hours ago link

long-term political implications for the Middle East. Erdogan wants to re-take control of the Islamic world from the Saudis.

SA still has control of the Hajj -- religious tourism - command by the Magic Book that even Turkish mohammadist must complete. +/- 18% of SA GDP-- and SA isn't sharing any of that loot.

Ticip is required to go and throw rocks at the black orb -- and do the Muslim Hokey Pokey along with all the rest.. oh, and pay the SA kings for the privilege !

the war's are about religious tourism

Mr. Kwikky , 5 hours ago link

..What about "The Grand Chessboard", Zbigniew hello where are you? /s

InsaneBane , 5 hours ago link

..Rotting in hell /s

Winston Churchill , 5 hours ago link

Zbigniew plagarized MacKinder, who plagarized someone else. The playbook is that old.

JohninMK , 3 hours ago link

The new 3D Grand Chessboard is being played very quietly out of Moscow.

The article is a wee bit deceptive. Whilst this was indeed the last bit of under sea pipe they were celebrating, it should be pointed out the stunning speed that they achieved, about a mile a day some to a depth of over 1000 feet, quite an achievement on land, let alone at sea. This is quite interesting, especially the map

https://www.rt.com/business/444344-russia-turkish-stream-opening/

Also, as its landfall in Turkey is west of the Bosphorus, that is west of Istanbul, maybe that 'for Turkish use' is a cover for its primary purpose, supplying the Balkans as well as Turkey from January 2020.

Note the significance of the start to pump date, December 2019, the same as NordStream 2. What else happens then? Oh yes, the gas transit contract with Ukraine ends. The combination of these two new pipelines to a very great extent replace that agreement. Even though politically everyone is saying Ukraine ($4B p.a. transit fees) should be protected.

Take another look at the map, note that it takes a dogleg south to Turkey. If at that point it had gone straight ahead it would have gone to Bulgaria as SouthStream. But the US and its EU vassal stopped that. Maybe the second pipeline the Russians are now discussing will resurrect that route.

[Nov 24, 2018] Oil and commodity markets were used as a finishing move on the Soviet system.

Nov 24, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

RioGrandeImports, 21 seconds ago link

Oil and commodity markets were used as a finishing move on the Soviet system. The book, "The Oil Card: Global Economic Warfare in the 21st Century" by James R. Norman details the use of oil futures as a geopolitical tool. Pipelines change the calculus quite a bit.

[Nov 24, 2018] Russian Diplomacy Is Winning the New Cold War by Stephen F. Cohen

Notable quotes:
"... During the preceding Cold War with the Soviet Union, no attempt was made to "isolate" Russia abroad; instead, the goal was to "contain" it within its "bloc" of Eastern European nations and compete with it in what was called the "Third World." ..."
"... The notion of "isolating" a country of Russia's size, Eurasian location, resources, and long history as a great power is vainglorious folly. It reflects the paucity and poverty of foreign thinking in Washington in recent decades, not the least in the US Congress and mainstream media. ..."
"... Nationalism, that is, by whatever name, has long been a major political force in most countries, whether in liberal enlightened or reactionary right-wing forms. Russia and the United States are not exceptions. ..."
Nov 24, 2018 | www.thenation.com

Washington's attempt to "isolate Putin's Russia" has failed and had the opposite effect.

On the fifth anniversary of the onset of the Ukrainian crisis, in November 2013, and of Washington "punishing" Russia by attempting to "isolate" it in world affairs -- a policy first declared by President Barack Obama in 2014 and continued ever since, primarily through economic sanctions -- Cohen discusses the following points:

1. During the preceding Cold War with the Soviet Union, no attempt was made to "isolate" Russia abroad; instead, the goal was to "contain" it within its "bloc" of Eastern European nations and compete with it in what was called the "Third World."

2. The notion of "isolating" a country of Russia's size, Eurasian location, resources, and long history as a great power is vainglorious folly. It reflects the paucity and poverty of foreign thinking in Washington in recent decades, not the least in the US Congress and mainstream media.

3. Consider the actual results. Russia is hardly isolated. Since 2014, Moscow has arguably been the most active diplomatic capital of all great powers today. It has forged expanding military, political, or economic partnerships with, for example, China, Iran, Turkey, Syria, Saudi Arabia, India, and several other East Asian nations, even, despite EU sanctions, with several European governments. Still more, Moscow is the architect and prime convener of three important peace negotiations under way today: those involving Syria, Serbia-Kosovo, and even Afghanistan. Put differently, can any other national leaders in the 21st century match the diplomatic records of Russian President Vladimir Putin or of his foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov? Certainly not former US presidents George W. Bush or Obama or soon-to-depart German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nor any British or French leader.

4. Much is made of Putin's purportedly malign "nationalism" in this regard. But this is an uninformed or hypocritical explanation. Consider French President Emmanuel Macron, who recently reproached Trump for his declared nationalism. The same Macron who has sought to suggest (rather implausibly) that he is a second coming of Charles de Gaulle, who himself was a great and professed nationalist leader of the 20th century, from his resistance to the Nazi occupation and founding of the Fifth Republic to his refusal to put the French military under NATO command. Nationalism, that is, by whatever name, has long been a major political force in most countries, whether in liberal enlightened or reactionary right-wing forms. Russia and the United States are not exceptions.

5. Putin's success in restoring Russia's role in world affairs is usually ascribed to his "aggressive" policies, but it is better understood as a realization of what is characterized in Moscow as the "philosophy of Russian foreign policy" since Putin became leader in 2000. It has three professed tenets. The first goal of foreign policy is to protect Russia's "sovereignty," which is said to have been lost in the disastrous post-Soviet 1990s. The second is a kind of Russia-first nationalism or patriotism: to enhance the well-being of the citizens of the Russian Federation. The third is ecumenical: to partner with any government that wants to partner with Russia. This "philosophy" is, of course, non- or un-Soviet, which was heavily ideological, at least in its professed ideology and goals.

6. Considering Washington's inability to "isolate Russia," considering Russia's diplomatic successes in recent years, and considering the bitter fruits of US militarized and regime-change foreign policies (which long predate President Trump), perhaps it's time for Washington to learn from Moscow rather than demand that Moscow conform to Washington's thinking about -- and behavior in -- world affairs. If not, Washington is more likely to continue to isolate itself.

... ... ...

Stephen F. Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at NYU and Princeton, and John Batchelor continue their (usually) weekly discussions of the new US-Russian Cold War. (Previous installments, now in their fifth year, are at TheNation.com.)

[Nov 23, 2018] Bellingcat (not Belingcat) is a [intelligence aenies] front, financed by amongst other orgs, the Atlantic Council which in turn is financed by, well it's a long list!

Nov 23, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

William Bowles , Nov 23, 2018 10:55:00 AM | link

@61

Bellingcat (not Belingcat) is a [intelligence aenies] front, financed by amongst other orgs, the Atlantic Council which in turn is financed by, well it's a long list!

http://www.thinktankwatch.com/2015/11/the-donors-of-atlantic-council.html

[Nov 23, 2018] Kunstler Exposes The Core Truth Of The 2016 Russia Collusion Story

Notable quotes:
"... For decades, it has been rumored that the Clintons have FBI files on most members of Congress and use these files for blackmail purposes. Given the events of the past few years, I actually believe this rumor to be grounded in truth. ..."
"... For decades, it has been rumored that the Clintons have FBI files on most members of Congress and use these files for blackmail purposes. Given the events of the past few years, I actually believe this rumor to be grounded in truth. ..."
Nov 23, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Kunstler Exposes "The Core Truth" Of The 2016 Russia Collusion Story

by Tyler Durden Fri, 11/23/2018 - 15:25 23 SHARES Authored by James Howard Kunstler via Kunstler.com, Holiday Doings And Undoings

Somehow I doubt that this Christmas will win the Bing Crosby star of approval. Rather, we see the financial markets breaking under the strain of sustained institutionalized fraud, and the social fabric tearing from persistent systemic political dishonesty. It adds up to a nation that can't navigate through reality, a nation too dependent on sure things, safe spaces, and happy outcomes. Every few decades a message comes from the Universe that faking it is not good enough.

The main message from the financials is that the global debt barge has run aground, and with it, the global economy. That mighty engine has been chugging along on promises-to-pay and now the faith that sustained those promises is dissolving. China, Euroland, and the USA can't possibly meet their tangled obligations, and are running out of tricks for rigging, gaming, and jacking the bond markets, where all those promises are vested. It boils down to a whole lot of people not getting paid, one way or the other -- and it's really bad for business.

Our President has taken full credit for the bubblicious markets, of course, and will be Hooverized as they gurgle around the drain. Given his chimerical personality, he may try to put on an FDR mask -- perhaps even sit in a wheelchair -- and try a few grand-scale policy tricks to escape the vortex. But the net effect will surely be to make matters worse -- for instance, if he can hector the Federal Reserve to buy every bond that isn't nailed to some deadly derivative booby-trap. But then he'll only succeed in crashing the dollar. Remember, there are two main ways you can go broke: You can run out of money; or you can have plenty of worthless money.

On the social and political scene, I sense that some things have run their course. Is a critical mass of supposedly educated people not fatigued and nauseated by the regime of "social justice" good-think, and the massive mendacity it stands for , starting with the idea that "diversity and inclusion" require the shut-down of free speech. The obvious hypocrisies and violations of reason emanating from the campuses -- a lot, but not all of it, in response to the Golden Golem of Greatness -- have made enough smart people stupid to endanger the country's political future. A lot of these formerly-non-stupid people work in the news media. It's not too late for some institutions like The New York Times and CNN to change out their editors and producers, and go back to reporting the reality-du-jour instead of functioning as agit-prop mills for every unsound idea ginned through the Yale humanities departments.

Shoehorned into the festivity of the season is the lame-duck session in congress, and one of the main events it portends is the end of Robert Mueller's Russia investigation. The Sphinx-like Mueller has maintained supernatural silence about his tendings and intentions. But if he'd uncovered anything substantial in the way of "collusion" between Mr. Trump and Russia, the public would know by now, since it would represent a signal threat to national security. So it's hard not to conclude that he has nothing except a few Mickey Mouse "process" convictions for lying to the FBI. On the other hand, it's quite impossible to imagine him ignoring the well-documented evidence trail of Hillary Clinton colluding with Russians to influence the 2016 contest against Mr. Trump -- and to defame him after he won. There's also the Hieronymus Bosch panorama of criminal mischief around the racketeering scheme known as the Clinton Foundation to consider. Do these venal characters get a pass on all that?

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) has announced plans to call Federal Attorney John Huber (Utah District) to testify about his assignment to look into these Clinton matters. It's a little hard to see how that might produce any enlightenment, since prosecutors are bound by law to not blab about currently open cases. The committee has also subpoenaed former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, former FBI Director James Comey, and others who have some serious 'splainin' to do. But if both Huber and Mueller come up empty-handed on the Clintons it will be one of the epic marvels of official bad faith in US history.

There is a core truth to the 2016 Russia collusion story, and the Clintons are at the heart of it. Failure to even look will have very dark consequences for the public interest.

XWeatherman , 40 seconds ago link

It ought to be obvious to just about everyone who is paying attention and not a Corporate-Whore Democrat that the "The Russians Did It" delusion and the accompanying Mueller "investigation" is only a distraction to draw attention away from the obvious and numerous crimeS of H. Clinton, including running an electronic drop-box for U.S. state secrets using a server in her basement, charity fraud, pay-to-play bribe-taking, the uranium to Russia case, etc. And, that's not counting the inexcusable Unprovoked War of Aggression WAR CRIME against Libya. (Of course, she had an excuse: "Destroy a country in order to save a few "protesters".

Mueller is the Deep State (Corporations [especially Military Industrial Complex Death-Merchants, who direct the politicians and foreign policy actions (continual War-For-Humongous-Profits that has taken and takes multiple trillions of dollars away from potential domestic programs & Wall Street bankster-fraudsters who bankrupted the country with the lead-up to and aftermath of the 2008-2009 financial fiasco and who sent U.S. industrial production jobs to other countries] and Oligarchs who reap the profits of such crimes and their results) operative who apparently was brought in the head the FBI to fail to prevent and to coverup the real actors and actions that occurred in association with the downing of buildings at the New York City World Trade center on 9/11.

Hapa , 5 minutes ago link

Sorry, nobodies going to jail and all will be swept under the rug. We will have war to cover their tracks along with all the other frauds. The political buddy buddy system at the upper levels is set up to protect the guilty, and nobody has to pay the price lest the whole thing crumble. It's built that way.

Our only way out is a crash and a reset, with no guarantee what happens on the other side.

I used to be optimistic, but the level of lies, double speak and university factories pumping out marxist leftists portends a bleak future. How anyone thinks we can reason our way out of this situation is fooling themselves about human nature.

SantaClaws , 6 minutes ago link

Nice to see Kunstler focusing on some serious issues like the Uranium One scandal for a change. He seems to be on the concluding end of a cold-turkey or other rehab from some long-term unholy influence. As a result, he has been producing increasingly readable articles for the past several months. Congratulations are due him but with the warning that recovery is always one day at a time.

VWAndy , 7 minutes ago link

Did the Clintons go on a world tour like some kinda rockstars selling us all out?

An nobody said ****!

He–Mene Mox Mox , 14 minutes ago link

" Remember, there are two main ways you can go broke: You can run out of money; or you can have plenty of worthless money". Both pretty much sums up America's predicament. Americans are deep in debt, and their money is worthless.

MarsInScorpio , 1 minute ago link

OK.let's try this for speculative prediction:

Mueller isn't going to touch the Clintons - they have way too much criminal dirt on him. And Huber is an unknown lightweight with no Malicious Seditious Media support.

Sooooo . . . there is only one thing to do once the new Congress takes its oath: Trump gets DOJ Acting AG to appoint the long-awaited Special Prosecutor.

There are more than enough recognized felonies to go after - unlike the Mueller fishing expedition. That will put the Democrat investigation on ice - mainly because lots of Demo chairs and members will be part of the investigation.

"Yes Virginia, Hillary is going to prison . . .:"

navy62802 , 34 minutes ago link

Any serious investigation of the Clinton Foundation would reveal that "Russian Collusion" has everything to do with distraction from the crimes of the Clinton family. The fact that Bill and Hillary have escaped accountability for their heinous crimes is one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in US history. It is truly quite frightening.

The Merovingian , 34 minutes ago link

There is a reason why the DOJ, Congress (both parties), MSM, the MIC, the Deep State don't want ANYONE to look into corruption ... because they are ALL ******* guilty as sin and buried neck deep in ****. Its long past time for the whole ******* thing to come down. We're all fucked.

Jim in MN , 13 minutes ago link

Weiner laptop For The Win. Give us that hard drive, Mr. President! We'll have it all analyzed in one weekend.

Meanwhile, Seth Rich awaits Mueller's OH SO DILIGENT investigation.

Can you believe that the 'core' of Mueller's 'case' ends up being about WIKILEAKS?

What the serious ****.

If he's done zero serious looks at Seth Rich all Mueller's work will just be thrown out of court anyway.

Ham sandwich my fat turkey-enriched ***.

For decades, it has been rumored that the Clintons have FBI files on most members of Congress and use these files for blackmail purposes. Given the events of the past few years, I actually believe this rumor to be grounded in truth.

chippers , 40 minutes ago link

This guy is dreaming if he thinks anything is going to happen to the clintons, the MSM/DOJ is protected those 2 scumbags with the line that if they are investigated trump is going after his political opponents, just like a banana republic. But truthfully nothing reaks more of banana repubicism more then letting the high and mighty of on crimes.

chunga , 12 minutes ago link

I'd like to give a shout out to the "opposition" red team that has sat by and done nothing for more than 30 years.

And for you dopes in Rio Linda, that doesn't mean I'd rather have Honest Hill'rey, for crying out loud.

Bricker , 41 minutes ago link

Theres only one truth...Hillary and Co (CIA) colluded to bring down Trump and Trump kicked the **** out of her.

If we had a true republic, Hillary, Holder, Lynch, Obama, Clapper, Brennan, Lerner would all be under indictment. I mean the ******* list is long

pissonmefico , 19 minutes ago link

If they weren't all on the same side, that of the international bankster cabal, Trump would order his justice department to prosecute those people you mentioned.

The purpose of the Russia investigation is to fool you into thinking there are two sides, and to demonized Russia to create public opinion in favor of attacking Russia because it is not on board with the jwo totalitarian world government. WTFU.

navy62802 , 28 minutes ago link

For decades, it has been rumored that the Clintons have FBI files on most members of Congress and use these files for blackmail purposes. Given the events of the past few years, I actually believe this rumor to be grounded in truth.

Teamtc321 , 24 minutes ago link

Mueller long ago gave up the fruitless hunt for Russian collusion involving President Trump and is now desperately seeking overdue library books or unpaid parking tickets on anyone remotely connected to President Trump to justify his mooching taxpayer dollars.

[Nov 23, 2018] RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP 22 NOVEMBER 2018 (by Patrick Armstrong)

Nov 23, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

VICTORY! I've been waiting a decade for Washington to explain that the Ossetia war was actually a triumph for it. And here it is at last. American efforts resulted in " the Russians withdrawing to their start positions ." Well, they never intended to occupy Georgia . The same official then creatively blames Assad for "producing" ISIS. A complete echo chamber of delusion.

SANCTIONS. Bloomberg calculates that the Russian economy is about 10% smaller than it forecasted it would be in 2013. It reckons that about six percentage points of the decrease are due to Western sanctions and the rest to other factors. In short, sanctions have hurt but not as much as all that. I have long believed that this is transitory pain which will pay off later. For example, the increase in Russian food production has been remarkable. It would be interesting to see Bloomberg do an estimate for the cost to the EU: plenty of estimates out there, some as high as €100 billion . The point is that Russia wasn't such a big market for the EU, but it was one of the few that was growing.

CORRUPTION. We are told that 300 police officers have been fired this year after complaints from citizens. There were 45,000 complaints. VTsIOM reports that trust in the police has dropped ten points since last year's all-time high of 67%. Better than the old days when trust was under 50%; so, more work to be done, but work is being done. Corruption is a tricky subject, often treated too simply, I believe .

DIPLOMACY. Russia is trying to fix Libya and Afghanistan . I think it's time to start contemplating the thought that Moscow might have some soft power.

WAR. A recent report comes as close as we will ever see to an admission that the USA would lose a war with either Russian or China on their home turf . This comes on the heels of a report showing that a large number of key defence components manufacturers are not secure and an earlier one that said many US weapons systems are vulnerable to hacking . These are consequences of endless wars in MENA, twenty years of poking Russia and China and unilateralism. Surely the rational conclusion would be that Washington should start rethinking things from the bottom up. Nope, more of the same is the answer: " The report also called for an expansion of the current $716 billion defense budget ."

THE LATEST. " GPS glitches during NATO's largest war games in decades blamed on (DRUM ROLL) Russia ". Maybe. Russia is preparing for a war and, without GPS, NATO ground and air forces would be pretty helpless. So maybe a teeny tiny test to see if jammers worked. On the other hand, excuses are cheap and the exercise was not a very happy experience for Norway.

WESTERN VALUES™. Over the years I have grown drearily accustomed to human rights organisations being co-opted – weaponised is the fashionable word – by the Western war party ( MSF , Pussy Riot and the rest) and have pretty well given up on them. But, a ray of light appears. Amnesty International is active in reporting the destruction of Raqqa by the US coalition. It is starting a project to record the destruction : what they have collected so far on "the most destroyed city in modern times" is at strike-tracker . So the next time the White Helmets or Bellingcat tells you of some Russian atrocity, remember that it would be impossible to be more indiscriminately destructive than US/NATO " targeted actions ".

US ELECTIONS. Did Putin fix them? If so how? Why did he want Trump's party to lose the House? If he didn't, why didn't he? I look forward to the NYT explaining how this fits into Operation Infektion .

NUGGETS FROM THE STUPIDITY MINE. Masha and the Bear . " Putin's tanks are hidden in Masha's backpack ". DM readers treat this with the scorn it deserves. A friend suggested setting up a mock conference to make deadpan over-the-top claims to ridicule Russophobia. I don't think you can ridicule people who believe in Masha's armoured backpack and Medvedev's pillow carrier .

EUROPEANS ARE REVOLTING. Some more straws in the wind. Madrid has allowed 3 Russian warships to resupply at Cueta, the first time in 3 years . A minister says Paris will lead EU efforts to create a payment mechanism to keep trade with Iran . And TurkStream marks another milestone .

UKRAINE. Remember when Ukrainian nazis were just Putin propaganda? US News , Daily Beast , AIM , Fox , and plenty more assured us ( BBC here ) that reports of nazis in Ukraine were only troll factory output. Now, for some reason, the Western media is noticing: New Republic , CBS , AP , Max Blumenthal . Even the US propaganda outlet RFE/RL tells us: " Azov, Ukraine's Most Prominent Ultranationalist Group, Sets Its Sights On U.S., Europe." And chickens are arriving home as this Criminal Complaint shows. Why they notice today what was perfectly obvious then, I cannot tell you.

© Patrick Armstrong Analysis, Canada Russia Observer

[Nov 23, 2018] One leaked document from UK Government 'Integrity Initiative' project launched in 2017 contains an interesting reference the the Skripal incident. The project team describe it as a 'Dirty Trick'. Given these documents all pass through the FCO for funding and overall project approval, that must also be the FCO view.

Nov 23, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Entropy Wins , Nov 22, 2018 7:04:54 PM | link

Anonymous have leaked some documents relating to a secretive (and Orwellian) UK Government 'Integrity Initiative' project launched in 2017. There are numerous PDF files detailing members, organizational structure, budgets, 'mission statements', etc. The backup documents are held at pdf-archive. The project has members from the FCO, MOD, journalists, academics, the usual thinktanks - Chatham House, Atlantic Council, Hermitage Foundation - and the usual suspects - Browder, Applebaum, Aaronovitch.

https://www.cyberguerrilla.org/blog/operation-integrity-initiative-british-informational-war-against-all/

One document contains an interesting reference the the Skripal incident. The project team describe it as a 'Dirty Trick'. Given these documents all pass through the FCO for funding and overall project approval, that must also be the FCO view. That suggests that the government is fully aware that Skripal wasn't poisoned by the Russians. If the Russians really had attempted to murder Skripal, it would be referred to as attempted murder, use of CW, act of war, etc. and not a 'dirty trick'.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/iihandbookv2/

[Nov 23, 2018] Head Of Russian Military Intelligence Dies From Serious Illness

Embarrassing yellow paper journalism: attempt to connect the deal with Skripals false flag operation by British intelligence agencies. The Daily Mail story preudo-analyst from Bellingcat as a serious source, but provides no source at all for the alleged Russian quotes.
Nov 22, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

An official defense ministry statement called Korobov "a wonderful person, a faithful son of Russia and a patriot of his homeland."

Joiningupthedots , 5 hours ago link

This actually a quite interesting article ( [written] by the 5 eyes intelligence agencies)

Hot on the heels of proven Saudi state sanctioned murder under diplomatic immunity we have a completely UNFOUNDED accusation that Russia has essentially committed the same crime.

Saudi bad guy.....Russia bad guy. Two negatives equals a positive (kind of thing). See what I just did there? LMAO

surfing another apocalypse , 14 hours ago link

The US spent $824.6 billion in 2018 compared to Russia's budget of $46 billion (18 times the difference). Nevertheless, Congress recently declared, that in the event of a war with Russia, the US could lose! So, if a President (Obama, Trump, whoever) really wanted to "Make America Great Again" he would have to begin by firing 90% of the Military Industrial Complex.

Yen Cross 1 day ago

Polonium 210 rears its ugly head again?

The 1/2 life is sillier than the accusations.

/ s

Shemp 4 Victory 1 day ago

Polonium is a sign of British 'Intelligence' involvement, as they are also behind the killing then tried to blame on Putin.

Yen Cross 1 day ago

You caught the </sarc> tag?

I'm sure he just sacrificed himself for the Motherland.

Volkodav 23 hours ago (Edited)

Litvinenko - Ryan Dawson

https://www.voutube.com/watch?v=Hlalk2Fqd

Pandelis 1 day ago (Edited)

and Daily Mail knows this detail of how he emerged after the meeting because ...

more to come from BS factory ...

janus 1 day ago

Daily Mail will report that he died trying to slaughter a convention of journalists at Putin's behest.

So ******* sick of britain's ruling class i want to wretch, if we need to break Britain to get rid of them, so be it. They're all a bunch of decadent pedos and foppish fags matriculated on globalism. they're disgusting, and even though we'll never get to see the details, they actively tried to undermine our democracy (along with Tel Aviv).

And so it goes with our 'special relationships', special indeed, with friends like these...

janus

Shemp 4 Victory 1 day ago

And Daily Mail knows this detail of how he emerged after the meeting because. Because they read it from a script provided by a branch of MI6 known as OSF (Office of Substandard Fiction).

[Nov 22, 2018] Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Jewish Political Power

Highly recommended!
Nov 22, 2018 | www.unz.com

geokat62 , says: November 21, 2018 at 3:27 am GMT

@jilles dykstra

How long jews can maintain their political power, not just in the USA, but in the whole west, I have no idea, there is not much that points to an important change soon.

This, of course, is the $64,000 question. Rather than us Dumb Goyim speculating about it, why not listen to what a political insider had to say about this issue back in 2001?

His name is Dr. Stephen Steinlight. And although Ron Unz has characterized him as "some totally obscure Jewish activist" he was was for more than five years Director of National Affairs (domestic policy) at the American Jewish Committee. If that doesn't qualify him as an "insider," I don't know what does.

Excerpts from The Jewish Stake in America's Changing Demography: Reconsidering a Misguided Immigration Policy :

Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Jewish Political Power

Not that it is the case that our disproportionate political power (pound for pound the greatest of any ethnic/cultural group in America) will erode all at once, or even quickly. We will be able to hang on to it for perhaps a decade or two longer. Unless and until the triumph of campaign finance reform is complete , an extremely unlikely scenario, the great material wealth of the Jewish community will continue to give it significant advantages. We will continue to court and be courted by key figures in Congress. That power is exerted within the political system from the local to national levels through soft money, and especially the provision of out-of-state funds to candidates sympathetic to Israel , a high wall of church/state separation, and social liberalism combined with selective conservatism on criminal justice and welfare issues.

Jewish voter participation also remains legendary; it is among the highest in the nation. Incredible as it sounds, in the recent presidential election more Jews voted in Los Angeles than Latinos. But should the naturalization of resident aliens begin to move more quickly in the next few years, a virtual certainty -- and it should -- then it is only a matter of time before the electoral power of Latinos, as well as that of others, overwhelms us.

All of this notwithstanding, in the short term, a number of factors will continue to play into our hands, even amid the unprecedented wave of continuous immigration. The very scale of the current immigration and its great diversity paradoxically constitutes at least a temporary political asset. While we remain comparatively coherent as a voting bloc, the new mostly non-European immigrants are fractured into a great many distinct, often competing groups, many with no love for each other. This is also true of the many new immigrants from rival sides in the ongoing Balkan wars, as it is for the growing south Asian population from India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. They have miles and miles to go before they overcome historical hatreds, put aside current enmities and forgive recent enormities, especially Pakistani brutality in the nascent Bangladesh. Queens is no melting pot!

For perhaps another generation, an optimistic forecast, the Jewish community is thus in a position where it will be able to divide and conquer and enter into selective coalitions that support our agendas. But the day will surely come when an effective Asian-American alliance will actually bring Chinese Americans, Japanese Americans, Koreans, Vietnamese, and the rest closer together. And the enormously complex and as yet significantly divided Latinos will also eventually achieve a more effective political federation. The fact is that the term "Asian American" has only recently come into common parlance among younger Asians (it is still rejected by older folks), while "Latinos" or "Hispanics" often do not think of themselves as part of a multinational ethnic bloc but primarily as Mexicans, Cubans, or Puerto Ricans.

Even with these caveats, an era of astoundingly disproportionate Jewish legislative representation may already have peaked. It is unlikely we will ever see many more U.S. Senates with 10 Jewish members. And although had Al Gore been allowed by the Supreme Court to assume office, a Jew would have been one heartbeat away from the presidency, it may be we'll never get that close again. With the changes in view, how long do we actually believe that nearly 80 percent of the entire foreign aid budget of the United States will go to Israel?

https://cis.org/Report/Jewish-Stake-Americas-Changing-Demography

[Nov 22, 2018] Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Zionist Political Power

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... What struck me in one of his articles is how he sees the holocaust story as essential to Zionist power in the USA. ..."
Nov 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

geokat62 , says: November 21, 2018 at 3:27 am GMT

@jilles dykstra

How long jews can maintain their political power, not just in the USA, but in the whole west, I have no idea, there is not much that points to an important change soon.

This, of course, is the $64,000 question. Rather than us Dumb Goyim speculating about it, why not listen to what a political insider had to say about this issue back in 2001?

His name is Dr. Stephen Steinlight. And although Ron Unz has characterized him as "some totally obscure Zionist activist" he was was for more than five years Director of National Affairs (domestic policy) at the American Zionist Committee. If that doesn't qualify him as an "insider," I don't know what does.

Excerpts from The Zionist Stake in America's Changing Demography: Reconsidering a Misguided Immigration Policy :

Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Zionist Political Power

Not that it is the case that our disproportionate political power (pound for pound the greatest of any ethnic/cultural group in America) will erode all at once, or even quickly. We will be able to hang on to it for perhaps a decade or two longer. Unless and until the triumph of campaign finance reform is complete , an extremely unlikely scenario, the great material wealth of the Zionist community will continue to give it significant advantages. We will continue to court and be courted by key figures in Congress. That power is exerted within the political system from the local to national levels through soft money, and especially the provision of out-of-state funds to candidates sympathetic to Israel , a high wall of church/state separation, and social liberalism combined with selective conservatism on criminal justice and welfare issues.

Zionist voter participation also remains legendary; it is among the highest in the nation. Incredible as it sounds, in the recent presidential election more Jews voted in Los Angeles than Latinos. But should the naturalization of resident aliens begin to move more quickly in the next few years, a virtual certainty -- and it should -- then it is only a matter of time before the electoral power of Latinos, as well as that of others, overwhelms us.

All of this notwithstanding, in the short term, a number of factors will continue to play into our hands, even amid the unprecedented wave of continuous immigration. The very scale of the current immigration and its great diversity paradoxically constitutes at least a temporary political asset. While we remain comparatively coherent as a voting bloc, the new mostly non-European immigrants are fractured into a great many distinct, often competing groups, many with no love for each other. This is also true of the many new immigrants from rival sides in the ongoing Balkan wars, as it is for the growing south Asian population from India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. They have miles and miles to go before they overcome historical hatreds, put aside current enmities and forgive recent enormities, especially Pakistani brutality in the nascent Bangladesh. Queens is no melting pot!

For perhaps another generation, an optimistic forecast, the Zionist community is thus in a position where it will be able to divide and conquer and enter into selective coalitions that support our agendas. But the day will surely come when an effective Asian-American alliance will actually bring Chinese Americans, Japanese Americans, Koreans, Vietnamese, and the rest closer together. And the enormously complex and as yet significantly divided Latinos will also eventually achieve a more effective political federation. The fact is that the term "Asian American" has only recently come into common parlance among younger Asians (it is still rejected by older folks), while "Latinos" or "Hispanics" often do not think of themselves as part of a multinational ethnic bloc but primarily as Mexicans, Cubans, or Puerto Ricans.

Even with these caveats, an era of astoundingly disproportionate Zionist legislative representation may already have peaked. It is unlikely we will ever see many more U.S. Senates with 10 Zionist members. And although had Al Gore been allowed by the Supreme Court to assume office, a Jew would have been one heartbeat away from the presidency, it may be we'll never get that close again. With the changes in view, how long do we actually believe that nearly 80 percent of the entire foreign aid budget of the United States will go to Israel?

https://cis.org/Report/ Zionist-Stake-Americas-Changing-Demography

jilles dykstra , says: November 21, 2018 at 10:49 am GMT

@geokat62

If Steinlight was obscure or not, I do not know. What struck me in one of his articles is how he sees the holocaust story as essential to Zionist power in the USA.

Also in that article he wondered if at some point in time Jews might be driven out of the USA, 'but, there is always the life boat Israel'. That Israel will collapse the minute Zionist power in the USA [eventually] ends, he seems unable to see this. About your quote, it seems to have been written before it became clear to the world that western power is diminishing.

So even if Zionist power over the West remains, Zionist power in the world is diminishing too. NATO, EU, Pentagon, neocons, whatever, may still want war with Russia, my idea is that on the other hand that more and more people see this intention, and are absolutely against.

While western influence is receding, Assad still is there, Russia has bases in Syria, Erdogan, on what side is he ?; and so on and so forth.

The battle cry 'no more war for Israel' exists for a long time in the USA. And I interpret discussions on this side of the Atlantic about increasing anti-Semitism as the acknowledgement of the fact that more and more people on this side begin to criticize Zionists, especially with regard to Palestinians.

[Nov 22, 2018] Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Jewish Political Power

Highly recommended!
Nov 22, 2018 | www.unz.com

geokat62 , says: November 21, 2018 at 3:27 am GMT

@jilles dykstra

How long jews can maintain their political power, not just in the USA, but in the whole west, I have no idea, there is not much that points to an important change soon.

This, of course, is the $64,000 question. Rather than us Dumb Goyim speculating about it, why not listen to what a political insider had to say about this issue back in 2001?

His name is Dr. Stephen Steinlight. And although Ron Unz has characterized him as "some totally obscure Jewish activist" he was was for more than five years Director of National Affairs (domestic policy) at the American Jewish Committee. If that doesn't qualify him as an "insider," I don't know what does.

Excerpts from The Jewish Stake in America's Changing Demography: Reconsidering a Misguided Immigration Policy :

Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Jewish Political Power

Not that it is the case that our disproportionate political power (pound for pound the greatest of any ethnic/cultural group in America) will erode all at once, or even quickly. We will be able to hang on to it for perhaps a decade or two longer. Unless and until the triumph of campaign finance reform is complete , an extremely unlikely scenario, the great material wealth of the Jewish community will continue to give it significant advantages. We will continue to court and be courted by key figures in Congress. That power is exerted within the political system from the local to national levels through soft money, and especially the provision of out-of-state funds to candidates sympathetic to Israel , a high wall of church/state separation, and social liberalism combined with selective conservatism on criminal justice and welfare issues.

Jewish voter participation also remains legendary; it is among the highest in the nation. Incredible as it sounds, in the recent presidential election more Jews voted in Los Angeles than Latinos. But should the naturalization of resident aliens begin to move more quickly in the next few years, a virtual certainty -- and it should -- then it is only a matter of time before the electoral power of Latinos, as well as that of others, overwhelms us.

All of this notwithstanding, in the short term, a number of factors will continue to play into our hands, even amid the unprecedented wave of continuous immigration. The very scale of the current immigration and its great diversity paradoxically constitutes at least a temporary political asset. While we remain comparatively coherent as a voting bloc, the new mostly non-European immigrants are fractured into a great many distinct, often competing groups, many with no love for each other. This is also true of the many new immigrants from rival sides in the ongoing Balkan wars, as it is for the growing south Asian population from India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. They have miles and miles to go before they overcome historical hatreds, put aside current enmities and forgive recent enormities, especially Pakistani brutality in the nascent Bangladesh. Queens is no melting pot!

For perhaps another generation, an optimistic forecast, the Jewish community is thus in a position where it will be able to divide and conquer and enter into selective coalitions that support our agendas. But the day will surely come when an effective Asian-American alliance will actually bring Chinese Americans, Japanese Americans, Koreans, Vietnamese, and the rest closer together. And the enormously complex and as yet significantly divided Latinos will also eventually achieve a more effective political federation. The fact is that the term "Asian American" has only recently come into common parlance among younger Asians (it is still rejected by older folks), while "Latinos" or "Hispanics" often do not think of themselves as part of a multinational ethnic bloc but primarily as Mexicans, Cubans, or Puerto Ricans.

Even with these caveats, an era of astoundingly disproportionate Jewish legislative representation may already have peaked. It is unlikely we will ever see many more U.S. Senates with 10 Jewish members. And although had Al Gore been allowed by the Supreme Court to assume office, a Jew would have been one heartbeat away from the presidency, it may be we'll never get that close again. With the changes in view, how long do we actually believe that nearly 80 percent of the entire foreign aid budget of the United States will go to Israel?

https://cis.org/Report/Jewish-Stake-Americas-Changing-Demography

[Nov 22, 2018] Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Zionist Political Power

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... What struck me in one of his articles is how he sees the holocaust story as essential to Zionist power in the USA. ..."
Nov 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

geokat62 , says: November 21, 2018 at 3:27 am GMT

@jilles dykstra

How long jews can maintain their political power, not just in the USA, but in the whole west, I have no idea, there is not much that points to an important change soon.

This, of course, is the $64,000 question. Rather than us Dumb Goyim speculating about it, why not listen to what a political insider had to say about this issue back in 2001?

His name is Dr. Stephen Steinlight. And although Ron Unz has characterized him as "some totally obscure Zionist activist" he was was for more than five years Director of National Affairs (domestic policy) at the American Zionist Committee. If that doesn't qualify him as an "insider," I don't know what does.

Excerpts from The Zionist Stake in America's Changing Demography: Reconsidering a Misguided Immigration Policy :

Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Zionist Political Power

Not that it is the case that our disproportionate political power (pound for pound the greatest of any ethnic/cultural group in America) will erode all at once, or even quickly. We will be able to hang on to it for perhaps a decade or two longer. Unless and until the triumph of campaign finance reform is complete , an extremely unlikely scenario, the great material wealth of the Zionist community will continue to give it significant advantages. We will continue to court and be courted by key figures in Congress. That power is exerted within the political system from the local to national levels through soft money, and especially the provision of out-of-state funds to candidates sympathetic to Israel , a high wall of church/state separation, and social liberalism combined with selective conservatism on criminal justice and welfare issues.

Zionist voter participation also remains legendary; it is among the highest in the nation. Incredible as it sounds, in the recent presidential election more Jews voted in Los Angeles than Latinos. But should the naturalization of resident aliens begin to move more quickly in the next few years, a virtual certainty -- and it should -- then it is only a matter of time before the electoral power of Latinos, as well as that of others, overwhelms us.

All of this notwithstanding, in the short term, a number of factors will continue to play into our hands, even amid the unprecedented wave of continuous immigration. The very scale of the current immigration and its great diversity paradoxically constitutes at least a temporary political asset. While we remain comparatively coherent as a voting bloc, the new mostly non-European immigrants are fractured into a great many distinct, often competing groups, many with no love for each other. This is also true of the many new immigrants from rival sides in the ongoing Balkan wars, as it is for the growing south Asian population from India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. They have miles and miles to go before they overcome historical hatreds, put aside current enmities and forgive recent enormities, especially Pakistani brutality in the nascent Bangladesh. Queens is no melting pot!

For perhaps another generation, an optimistic forecast, the Zionist community is thus in a position where it will be able to divide and conquer and enter into selective coalitions that support our agendas. But the day will surely come when an effective Asian-American alliance will actually bring Chinese Americans, Japanese Americans, Koreans, Vietnamese, and the rest closer together. And the enormously complex and as yet significantly divided Latinos will also eventually achieve a more effective political federation. The fact is that the term "Asian American" has only recently come into common parlance among younger Asians (it is still rejected by older folks), while "Latinos" or "Hispanics" often do not think of themselves as part of a multinational ethnic bloc but primarily as Mexicans, Cubans, or Puerto Ricans.

Even with these caveats, an era of astoundingly disproportionate Zionist legislative representation may already have peaked. It is unlikely we will ever see many more U.S. Senates with 10 Zionist members. And although had Al Gore been allowed by the Supreme Court to assume office, a Jew would have been one heartbeat away from the presidency, it may be we'll never get that close again. With the changes in view, how long do we actually believe that nearly 80 percent of the entire foreign aid budget of the United States will go to Israel?

https://cis.org/Report/ Zionist-Stake-Americas-Changing-Demography

jilles dykstra , says: November 21, 2018 at 10:49 am GMT

@geokat62

If Steinlight was obscure or not, I do not know. What struck me in one of his articles is how he sees the holocaust story as essential to Zionist power in the USA.

Also in that article he wondered if at some point in time Jews might be driven out of the USA, 'but, there is always the life boat Israel'. That Israel will collapse the minute Zionist power in the USA [eventually] ends, he seems unable to see this. About your quote, it seems to have been written before it became clear to the world that western power is diminishing.

So even if Zionist power over the West remains, Zionist power in the world is diminishing too. NATO, EU, Pentagon, neocons, whatever, may still want war with Russia, my idea is that on the other hand that more and more people see this intention, and are absolutely against.

While western influence is receding, Assad still is there, Russia has bases in Syria, Erdogan, on what side is he ?; and so on and so forth.

The battle cry 'no more war for Israel' exists for a long time in the USA. And I interpret discussions on this side of the Atlantic about increasing anti-Semitism as the acknowledgement of the fact that more and more people on this side begin to criticize Zionists, especially with regard to Palestinians.

[Nov 22, 2018] America had a net export capacity of 5 bcm in 2017 because it imported about 87 bcm from Canada

Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

kirill November 14, 2018 at 6:35 am

These American fucktards actually think they can replace Russian gas supply to the EU. With what you utter void heads? America had a net export capacity of 5 bcm in 2017 because it imported about 87 bcm from Canada. When you fuckwad, douchebags get 150 bcm export capacity, then start yapping. Until then, STFU.

Of course, it is clear to anyone with a functional brain that the US is totally dishonest on claiming to want to supply the EU. In fact, it wants to saddle the EU with onerous LNG contracts to third parties (e.g. Qatar) who can currently and for the near term supply the volumes of LNG needed. At the same time the US damages the Asian tigers by increasing LNG prices.

It is time for all the US bootlicks (Japan, the EU) to tell Uncle Scumbag to shove himself in his own ass. The US is not even pretending to treat these countries with respect.

[Nov 22, 2018] US warns Hungary and neighbours against Turkish Stream

Nov 22, 2018 | www.euractiv.com

The US has repeatedly taken position against Nord Stream 2, a Russia-sponsored pipeline planned to bring gas to Germany under the Baltic Sea. But this time Washington warned against another such pipeline, bringing Russian gas under the Black Sea.

US Energy Secretary Rick Perry called on Hungary and its neighbors to reject Russian gas pipelines which Washington says are being used to cement Moscow's grip on central and eastern Europe.

Energy diversification would be crucial for the region, as Russia has used energy as a weapon in the past, he said, as quoted by Reuters.

"Russia is using a pipeline project Nord stream 2 and a multi-line Turkish stream to try to solidify its control over the security and the stability of Central and eastern Europe," Perry added during a visit to Budapest.

Last July, Hungary signed a deal with Russia's Gazprom to link the country with the Turkish Stream pipeline by end-2019.

true 14/11/2018 at 09:46

Rick Perry is a salesman. He wants us Europeans to buy USA gas. Which is why he is against North Stream 2 and Turkish Stream. Not because Russia may use gas to blackmail Europe -- unlike the USA, which blackmails Europe to sanction Iran and Russia –. No, he just wants us to buy America.

Despite the fact that gas produced in the USA is far more expensive than Russia's. Well, what can you expect from a minister in the government of a tycoon? What else can you expect from today's USA?

[Nov 22, 2018] Swiss court has ordered all Nord Stream partners to not make any payments to Gazprom, instead to pay all monies owed to Gazprom to Swedish bailiffs

Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman November 15, 2018 at 1:09 pm

One way or another, Gazprom is going to have to pay Ukraine $2.6 Billion, so they might as well just do it and have it over with. Of course the Ukies will prance and jump up and down in the streets and yell 'Slava Ukrainy' – and hasten off to prepare new lawsuits in search of more money from the Russian state. But a Swiss court has ordered all Nord Stream partners to not make any payments to Gazprom, instead to pay all monies owed to Gazprom to Swedish bailiffs, who will redistribute it to Ukraine until they recover all their money.

https://www.naturalgasworld.com/ns2-in-trouble-gazprom-hopeful-65959

[Nov 22, 2018] Magnitsky was a tax accountant employed by Firestone Duncan, the auditing firm in its turn employed by Hermitage Capital Management.

Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman November 19, 2018 at 12:41 pm

No, you're right; Magnitsky was a tax accountant employed by Firestone Duncan, the auditing firm in its turn employed by Hermitage Capital Management. I don't know if the 'Duncan' is still part of the outfit, but Firestone Duncan was headed by Jamison Firestone. He's an American lawyer, born in Los Angeles and a member of the New York state bar.

https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/person.asp?personId=108901451&privcapId=108901383

I and others have hazarded a guess that Magnitsky was persistently referred to as a lawyer because testimony between a lawyer and his/her client is protected by attorney-client privilege; thus, much of what the Russian state might want to know from Magnitsky might fall under this protection. But of course Russia would not be fooled into thinking he was a lawyer – the device was likely just for western consumption, so Browder could scream that Russia was suborning testimony illegally from Magnitsky.

Browder, however, had no real reason to believe Magnitsky was a lawyer, as he admitted when questioned under oath.

" In a 2015 deposition regarding Prevezon, Browder again described Magnitsky as his lawyer. He was quickly questioned by opposing counsel. This time, Browder was under oath (page 25):

Q: Mr. Magnitsky is an attorney; you think that's accurate?

BROWDER: He was my attorney.

Q: I see. And he had a law degree in Russia?

BROWDER: I'm not aware that he did.

Q: I see. And he went to law school?

BROWDER: No.

Magnitsky had been granted power of attorney on several occasions, but he was not a lawyer. As Browder would detail in his deposition, when there was a 2002 challenge regarding tax payments, Magnitsky represented Hermitage in court."

https://themarketswork.com/2018/09/06/the-inconsistencies-of-bill-browder/

That's a very useful source, incidentally; it discusses that Magnitsky never once mentioned in his testimony the tax fraud which the Russian government supposedly perpetrated to steal millions, and Hermitage did not lose anything thereby; the Russian treasury absorbed the loss. And the fraud was discovered by testimony delivered by Rimma Starova, who worked for one of the shell companies accused. But Magnitsky is regularly and stubbornly credited with having discovered the theft, and his alleged stubborn investigation is in turn credited with his arrest, to get him out of the way.

Browder agreed to be deposed in 2015, in an action he initiated against Prevezon, which firm he accused of using the profits from the alleged tax rebate scheme to purchase New York real estate. Prevezon was represented in this action by Natalia Veselnitskaya. I'm sure you will recognize her name.

Here are a couple of my old posts, one of them an excellent one by kovane which drew on some Russian sources and which demonstrated that Browder – in collusion with Magnitsky – claimed tax deductions for hiring handicapped employees who either did not perform the jobs for which they had been hired or did no work at all. Magnitsky signed their employment books, and Browder himself signed off on the tax deduction application. They pertain directly to the Magnitsky deception and to Browder's slippery background.

https://marknesop.wordpress.com/2011/01/19/sergei-magnitsky-bill-browder-hermitage-capital-management-and-wondrous-metamorphoses/

http://abeldanger.blogspot.com/2016/04/its-not-what-you-know-its-who-you-know.html

[Nov 22, 2018] Browder's fears did not materialise: Prokopchuk did not became the head of Interpol

Notable quotes:
"... Browder is chuffed to pieces, because it is a big victory for him and his pal Khodorkovsky. ..."
"... Pretty soon it will be every country for itself, with ad-hoc coalitions forming for short-term situations, and the whole international system of justice and law will just fall apart. For which you can thank ruthless crooks like Bill Browder and Mikhail Khodorkovsky. So Browder might as well have said thanks for being the saps I always knew you were. ..."
Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile November 21, 2018 at 11:59 am

The objectively independent UK rag "The independent" declared the result to be a defeat for "Putin's ally".
Mark Chapman November 21, 2018 at 7:07 pm
People should remember, when international institutions continue to falter and crumble after all the decades of effort to build them, that they were doing what makes Michael McFaul happy. I hope that's enough.
Jen November 21, 2018 at 3:39 pm
Oh well, whatever tickles these pathetic people's fantasies Michael McFawl going buuuuk-buk-buk and Bill Brawder ('cos he's full of electrolytes) must not have very much to do these days except think about what Vladimir Putin does every early morning.
yalensis November 21, 2018 at 4:40 pm
Realistically, this IS a tactical defeat for Russia. The votes had already been counted, and Prokopchuk was pretty much a shoo-in. Then the U.S. launched a campaign to stop this, and must have intimidated a lot of the countries into changing their vote.

Russophiles should just admit that it was a tactical defeat, shrug it off, and continue the war Because it IS a war. One battle lost Realistically.

Mark Chapman November 21, 2018 at 7:16 pm
As I keep saying, it is a tactical defeat for international institutions. They are exposed as merely fronts for American influence, with no genuine objectivity. Prokopchuk is already a Deputy Head of Interpol, and will remain one. Browder was simply exercising self-preservation disguised as the usual progressive activism, but when people who were in a position to cast votes see that they are being personally thanked by Michael Mcfaul, then by God any one of them who does not realize he or she has been had is thicker than most people are who are allowed out unsupervised.

Russia – and Putin – was never going to 'run' Interpol; in fact, if Prokopchuk had won, the USA would be tying itself in knots trying to impede every Interpol investigation after that, just to spite Russia. Washington simply did not want a Russian to win, and it was successful in scaring enough people to prevent it from happening. But Prokopchuk hasn't gone away, and will still be as influential as he was before. Nothing has really changed very much at Interpol, but the USA just publicly turned on a huge influence campaign to change the decision. Does that mean Interpol is just another political western tool? It surely does. Who can't see that now? Anyone?

Mark Chapman November 21, 2018 at 6:12 pm
Browder is chuffed to pieces, because it is a big victory for him and his pal Khodorkovsky. They were the two 'high-profile dissidents' who were cited in a flood-the-English-speaking newspapers campaign that said Putin was about to get control of Interpol. They pointed out that the Nazis had control over it in the 1930's, but apparently that was not as bad as Putin running it. Of course they managed to panic enough voters that the Russian who had been the favourite was repudiated. But the whole thing is just too childish for words, because the net effect is to showcase how political international institutions have become, and undermine confidence in them.

Pretty soon it will be every country for itself, with ad-hoc coalitions forming for short-term situations, and the whole international system of justice and law will just fall apart. For which you can thank ruthless crooks like Bill Browder and Mikhail Khodorkovsky. So Browder might as well have said thanks for being the saps I always knew you were.

[Nov 22, 2018] Prosecutor General: Magnitsky was chemically poisoned on Browder's orders by substance typically used by intelligence agencies

Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile November 19, 2018 at 8:54 am

Further to Yalensis' comment above

Генпрокуратура: Магнитский отравлен по приказу Браудера диверсионными химвеществами

Prosecutor General: Magnitsky chemically poisoned as a diversion on Browder's orders


You dirty Russian rats can't pin that goddam rap on me!!!

A new criminal case has been opened in the Russian Federation against William Browder, founder of the Hermitage Capital Foundation, international financial speculator, lobbyist for anti-Russian sanctions and a sponsor of a significant part of the Russian liberal opposition.

Details revealed at a special briefing organized by the Office of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation.

Browder has been accused of creating a criminal organization (part 1 of article 210 of the criminal code), which had been operating since 1999, which was formed for "committing serious economic crimes on Russian territory and that of other countries". Nikolay Atmon'ev, advisor to the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation, said that companies in Cyprus, Latvia and Switzerland had ben established in Browder's interests and had cashed and laundered hundreds of millions of dollars.

The Office of the Prosecutor General believes it "very likely" that the auditor Sergei Magnitsky and several other of his accomplices were killed on Browder's direct orders because they were undesirable witnesses: "Initially, the deaths of Gasanov, Kurochkin and Magnitsky were considered to have been through natural causes, because of sicknesses that they had; the death of Korobyeinikov seemed to have been accidental. However, further data was obtained, indicating the violent nature of the deaths of these persons". The Investigative Committee opened a murder inquiry into Browder's business partners Oktai Gasanov, Valeriy Kurochkin and Sergei Korobyenikov. Browder is a suspect as regards the elimination of financier Alexander Perepelichny, who died in 2012 in the British town of Weybridge (in the Russian immigrant's stomach were found traces of Asian poisonous plant Gelsemium elegans). According to Atmen'ev, the Prosecutor's office sent to the Investigative Committee notification of its decision that an inquiry be opened as regards making a criminal case against Browder because of the suspicion that he had been involved in the murder of Perepelichny. As for Magnitsky, who died in 2009 at the hospital of the "Matrosskaya Tishina" remand centre, the Office of the Prosecutor General believes that he was poisoned "as a diversion and by a chemical substance consisting of aluminium compounds", which brought about the development of his cardio-hepatic failure. "What Browder was especially interested in was that Sergei Magnitsky die so as to avoid his being exposed", said Atmon'ev.

"Amongst the chemicals that pose a hidden threat to humans, there is a group of toxic aluminium compounds. In Russia, there has not been an investigation targeted at these substances. Detailed analysis of scientific information shows that for several decades toxicological studies of aluminium compounds have been carried out previously and there continues exclusive research into them by organizations in the the United States, France and Italy. There has been studied particularly closely the acute and chronic toxicity of a number of hazardous aluminium compounds that are ingested orally or inhaled and their effects on the human body Analysis of substances obtained from the bodies of Kurochkin, Korobyenikov, Gasanov and Magnitsky has led to the conclusion that the deceased persons had signs of chronic poisoning with a toxic water-soluble aluminium compound that had been administered orally", said a representative of the Office of the Russian Prosecutor, Mikhail Alexandrov.

In the very near future, the Russian Federation will announce that Browder is on the international wanted list under the UN Convention against transnational crime. "There is the possibility of extradition provided for in the Convention, even in cases when between the countries that decide the issue of extradition,there is no bilateral extradition Treaty", said Atmon'ev.


They gotta be joking! Trust me! I'm as straight as they come!

Moscow Exile November 19, 2018 at 9:04 am
Same story now up on RT:

'Highly likely' that Magnitsky was poisoned by toxic chemicals on Bill Browder's orders – Moscow
Published time: 19 Nov, 2018 09:16
Edited time: 19 Nov, 2018 16:48

Moscow Exile November 19, 2018 at 9:24 am
RT keeps stating that Magnitsky was employed by Browder. I'm pretty sure he wasn't. He was employed by an audit company, Firestone Duncan, that advised Browder in his shady, tax-dodging operations.

Browder has always tried to make out that he was a pal of Magnitsky and how he grieved for his fate.

Browder not once visited his "friend" Magnitsky when he was held on remand.

At least they have stopped calling Magnitsky a "lawyer".

Browder persisently called him a lawyer, though, in numerous interviews, when he must have known damned well he was no such thing.

Moscow Exile November 19, 2018 at 9:33 am
Talking about tax dodging:


Oh shit! The tax man cometh!

She's still a US citizen so

Meghan Markle's US citizenship sparks tax troubles for royals
Harry and Meghan's sizeable fortune is under threat because of a legal loophole described as the royal family's "worst nightmare".

Poor thing!

Jen November 19, 2018 at 1:58 pm
You'd think the British would have tried to sort out the taxation implications of Markly Meg's marriage to Prince Harry BEFORE they got married. It's not as if this is the first time someone in the British political establishment has been hit with this issue of being a US citizen and therefore liable to pay tax to the IRS on income earned outside the US as well as within the country.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/08/boris-johnson-renounces-us-citizenship-record-2016-uk-foreign-secretary

Mark Chapman November 19, 2018 at 2:47 pm
Well, she could always do what Mr. Capitalism Bill Browder did, and renounce her American citizenship. The US government has demonstrated on more than one occasion that, in his case, it does not hold that against him although he plainly did it for tax reasons.
Jen November 19, 2018 at 3:57 pm
Ahem

" Persons who wish to renounce U.S. citizenship should be aware of the fact that renunciation of U.S. citizenship may have no effect on their U.S. tax or military service obligations (contact the Internal Revenue Service or U.S. Selective Service for more information). In addition, the act of renouncing U.S. citizenship does not allow persons to avoid possible prosecution for crimes which they may have committed or may commit in the future which violate United States law, or escape the repayment of financial obligations, including child support payments, previously incurred in the United States or incurred as United States citizens abroad "
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal/travel-legal-considerations/us-citizenship/Renunciation-US-Nationality-Abroad.html

They still get you even when you're no longer an American citizen.

And then there's the fee of US$2,350 she has to pay to renounce her citizenship.
https://www.advisor.ca/columnists_/max-reed/tax-consequences-of-renouncing-u-s-citizenship/

Mark Chapman November 19, 2018 at 5:58 pm
Oh, bullshit. If a former American like, say, Bill Browder, murders somebody in England, the USA is going to get nowhere demanding his extradition to be tried as a previous American citizen for murder. What would be the use of renouncing one's citizenship as an American if all American rules still apply to you?

I can see the US authorities going after you if you renounced your citizenship just to escape child support or alimony, providing you have a job in your new country. But I don't see how the USA could just access your bank account – in another country – and drain off payments; doesn't sovereignty count for anything?

Presumably, as well, the USA is not going to get into a pissing contest with the British Royal Family over what it claims as its share of Markle's newfound wealth.

Moscow Exile November 19, 2018 at 8:58 pm
Buffoon Boris of Bullingdon Club notoriety and British Foreign and Commonwealth Office risability got whacked with a US tax bill because he too was a US citizen. He huffed and puffed and said he would not pay and would renounce his being one of the Exceptional Nation. In the end, he coughed up what he owed, but he still renounced his US citizenship.

Once bitten, twice shy I suppose.

Jen November 20, 2018 at 2:54 am
I assume the passage I quoted is basically saying that renouncing US citizenship will not automatically wipe out previous or outstanding unpaid tax liabilities, crimes committed in the past in territories under US jurisdiction or future crimes in the same territories. So even if the Markly One does renounce US citizenship, any income she receives individually or jointly with her husband, including gifts, can still be subjected to taxation if she still owes unpaid tax to the authorities.
Mark Chapman November 20, 2018 at 4:21 am
Then that's probably reasonable – the United States could recover income from her up to the amount she has outstanding in US taxes. Unless she has one of those invisible-but-building student loans, such a sum would probably not amount to much. But the way the law is worded suggests US citizenship is far more a curse than a gift, in that renouncing it frees you from none of the responsibilities. It implies that American law follows you around like a bridal train.
cartman November 20, 2018 at 11:25 am
As part of their hissy fit over a Russian in charge of Interpol (a Russian whose brother is a Ukrainian diplomat lol), Senators wants it so anyone whose name is put on a red notice by Russia cannot be denied entry or asylum.

Reminds me of when Castro sent all the trash from Cuba to the United States once they made a similar law.

Mark Chapman November 20, 2018 at 5:12 pm
That'd be awesome. Get the bunting and the confetti ready at O'Hare for the arrival of a couple of hundred Pavlenskys, who will promptly nail their sacks to the parking lot of the 35 East Wacker Building, a Chicago landmark. Most appropriate. I think you will agree.

[Nov 22, 2018] Russian prosecutor's office opened a criminal case against William Browder. He is accused of (1) organizing a criminal gang, (2) poisoning his gang member Sergei Magnitsky, and (3) also killing several other members of the gang.

Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

yalensis November 19, 2018 at 2:59 am

From VZGLIAD this morning : Browder reacts to accusations of Russian Prosecutor.

Just this morning (Monday 19 Nov) the Russian prosecutor's office opened a criminal case against William Browder. He is accused of (1) organizing a criminal gang, (2) poisoning his gang member Sergei Magnitsky, and (3) also killing several other members of the gang. It is alleged that Browder used military-level "diversionary chemical substances" [whatever that is] mixed to aluminium, to form the poison.

Browder denies the charges, and also points the finger at Major-General Alexander Prokopchuk of the Russian Federation police. Prokopchuk is in the running to become head of Interpol. Which, if he does, he said he will pursue Bill Browder to the ends of the earth, and nowhere on this planet will it be safe for him any more.
Which is why Browder is worried about Prokopchuk's nomination.

kirill November 19, 2018 at 7:16 am
Now we know why the UK staged the Skripal farce. It is a redirection attempt to make Browder look like a victim. The fallout of Browder being convicted of using chemical weapons from criminal purposes would make NATzO look bad since NATzO invested itself in his "victimhood" and elevated the corrupt accountant Magnitsky into a human rights martyr saint.
Mark Chapman November 19, 2018 at 10:25 am
I imagine they mean the poison was mixed with other substances to conceal the presence of the poison itself, since he would certainly be autopsied if he died. And poisoning would certainly explain his very sudden and rapid turn for the worse. But Browder never visited him – neither did anyone from Hermitage Capital Management or Firestone Duncan, to the best of my knowledge. Browder's story was always that Magnitsky was the sole employee left behind, because he – Browder – had pulled everyone else out, for their safety. Who administered the poison? And in what circumstances – Browder's story also was that Magnitsky died from beatings and neglect, in that the prison authorities would not let anyone bring him the medicine he needed for a known condition. In medicine would be the perfect way to deliver a poison, but Browder's story was that he was denied medicine, and he'd surely be suspicious of anything else, wouldn't he? Here, Sergey; brought you a nice meat pie, old man. quite apart from the likelihood that prison authorities would not let non-family visitors give him any food, since he was the prosecution's star witness.

Of all the fuckers who simply make up scurrilous crap about Russia and Russians, Browder is the one I'd most like to see them get. My dream is that he would go to prison in Russia, but we mustn't be greedy, and I think we all know that will never happen.

Jen November 19, 2018 at 3:18 pm
Could aluminium phosphide have been put into Magnitsky's cell in the form of tablets or pellets mixed with water, supposedly to get rid of an insect or rat infestation?

Inhaling the compound is as dangerous as consuming it and inhalation could have caused his fatal heart attack. Water would be an ideal way to transport the poison especially if it is colourless in that medium.

http://pmep.cce.cornell.edu/profiles/extoxnet/24d-captan/aluminum-phosphide-ext.html

Jen November 19, 2018 at 3:21 pm
Come to think of it, my earlier comment was unnecessarily complicated: the poison, if it had been aluminium phosphide, only had to be given to Magnitsky in a glass of water when he got thirsty.
kirill November 19, 2018 at 4:10 pm
Don't need exotic "made only in Russia" chemicals. AlP is not going to leave a trail back to its source. And both Al and P are found in the body so forensic identification is not trivial.
Mark Chapman November 19, 2018 at 5:34 pm
Anything is possible, but visitors to the state's star witness would be viewed with the greatest suspicion if they were not family, you would think, as doubtless the state would have stressed what a valuable prisoner he potentially was. I would imagine they would be subjected to a pretty thorough scan and search. And there would be a record of all visits and visitors. Anyone who was Russian and still living in Russia would doubtless be investigated.

[Nov 22, 2018] In Poland, Nato military drills brace against the unspoken threat of Putin

Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile November 18, 2018 at 10:37 am

The "Long Read" in yesterday's not so independent "Independent" [paywall]:

In Poland, Nato military drills brace against the unspoken threat of Putin
Russian aggression along Europe's eastern border has Nato ramping up training efforts in anticipation of all manner of warfare – from cyber to chemical. William Cook experiences Poland's biggest Nato operation first hand

Smoke billows across the battlefield, obscuring the armoured cars ahead of us. A Polish soldier keels over, then another, and then another. Military hardware is no use here – this is a chemical attack. Army ambulances race through the acrid fog to evacuate the casualties. If you'd arrived here unawares, you'd never know this was just a drill – it all feels frighteningly real. Welcome to Drawsko Pomorskie, the biggest military training ground in Europe. And welcome to Anakonda 18, Poland's biggest Nato exercise.

Anakonda 18 features 17,500 soldiers from 10 Nato members: 12,500 here in Poland, plus 5,000 more in parallel exercises in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. It's no surprise that these military exercises are happening here. This is the site of Nato's "Enhanced Forward Presence": four combat-ready battlegroups, stationed in these four eastern European countries, supporting the defence forces of each of these countries with over 4,000 foreign troops. The multinational makeup of these battlegroups underlines the significance of Article 5 of Nato's founding treaty, which states that an armed attack against one of its members constitutes an attack against them all.

I'd tagged along on a couple of these Nato exercises before, and though no two are alike, one thing never changes: nobody mentions Vladimir Putin, but his malign influence is everywhere. "Nato exercises are not directed against any country," reads the disclaimer in my Nato press pack. "They are based on fictitious scenarios with fictitious adversaries." Yet Putin is omnipresent, the ghost at every feast. A few years ago, he boasted that Russian troops could be in five Nato capitals in two days. He was too coy to name them, but you can be sure they included the capitals of Poland and the Baltic states.

However, the Russian threat isn't confined to conventional warfare, and Anakonda 18 bears this out. Putin's invasion of Crimea was overt, but Russian incursions into eastern Ukraine have been more enigmatic – non-uniformed insurgents operating as so-called "freedom fighters", what commentators in the Baltic states call "little green men".

Today's drill is preparation for this sort of threat: an improvised assault by covert operatives using poison gas made from stolen fertilizer. Ukraine isn't a Nato member, so Russia could occupy Crimea safe in the knowledge that Nato wouldn't be compelled to retaliate. Here on Nato's eastern flank, Putin needs to be more canny. For Poland, Article 5 is a powerful insurance policy – but like the cyberwar that Russia has waged so successfully in the Baltic states, there are many ways to destabilise a nation without making an "armed attack".

And on and on it goes in like manner

Russia currently has soldiers in three countries – Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine – without the consent of their governments .

Russian aggression along Europe's eastern border has given Nato a much-needed wake-up call

Next year it'll be 20 years since Poland joined Nato, a real cause for celebration, but as I headed for home it was the sober, sombre words of Anakonda 18's exercise commander, Major General Tomasz Piotrowski, which stayed with me. He explained the purpose of the exercise with the studied neutrality of the career soldier ("hybrid threats emerging along the eastern flank of Nato and, of course, activation of Article 5 to conduct high intensity warfare") but when I asked him about the background to this exercise, his comments were more stark. He talked about cyber-attacks against Estonia, open warfare in Georgia and instability in eastern Ukraine. He didn't mention Russia – he didn't need to. Everyone at this press conference knew the name of the elephant in the room. As Nato's press office always points out, Nato exercises are based on fictitious scenarios with fictitious adversaries. Here's hoping these exercises are sufficient preparation if that fiction ever becomes fact.

One comment so far:

The American journalist Paul Jay described, in an interview, meeting representatives of western arms firms at the 2012 Munich security conference; although NATO, in breach of undertakings given to Michael Gorbachov, that had expanded eastwards to Russia's borders, they were in despair. Arms sales were still declining. Shortly afterwards, as boasted by Victoria Nuland, the US spent four billion dollars 'influencing' Ukraine, leading to the Maidan protests, the coup and a new government whose Prime Minister Nuland is on (audio) record as having chosen. At least three new ministers were from the neo-fascist far right. This led to protests and occupations, particularly in the east; the new far-right government quickly sent armed troops to quell civil disturbances, leading to civil war.

The EU fact-finding mission on the conflict between Georgia and Russia (suppression of local indigenous minority, suppression of local language, closure of native-language schools, attacks on civilians, invasion of the territory and murder of UN-mandated Russian peace-keeping troops) concluded that Georgia (led by Saakashvili) was to blame.

The far-right, in Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Ukraine, Poland, Hungary and Georgia, with support from NATO and the American government, is on the march again in Eastern Europe. These countries suppress languages other than their own, and continue to deny citizenship to tens of millions of Russian-speakers who have lived in these countries for generations.

This article ignores these inconvenient facts. Russia has not created this new cold war. Printing propaganda pieces for NATO and the big arms companies is not an appropriate role for an 'independent' newspaper.

Clearyl mailed from Savushkina Street!

kirill November 18, 2018 at 4:12 pm
The lunatics in NATzO are planning a war on Russia. That is why they are buttering up the sheeple with transparent rubbish propaganda pieces. For some reason these lunatics believe they will win the war. For the last 1000 years this has been a standard feature of western decision making. But in every case they lose. Russia is much more prepared to take on NATzO today than the USSR was prepared to take on the Nazis in 1940. In fact, in the nuclear missile era, NATzO has no advantage over Russia whatsoever. There is no "blitzkrieg" that NATzO could launch. It would be "blitzkrieg"ed in return.

But what I say is considered delusional inanity by YouTube snot nosed "experts". So perhaps it is not surprising that the NATzO elites think the same way. Apples don't fall far from trees.

[Nov 22, 2018] Anyone thinking WWIII is winnable is certifiably insane

Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

kirill November 20, 2018 at 5:52 am

https://russia-insider.com/en/bipartisan-panel-us-must-prepare-horrendous-devastating-war-russia-and-china/ri25414a

F*cking nutjobs. Anyone thinking such a war is tractable is certifiably insane.

Northern Star November 20, 2018 at 4:02 pm
"The most ominous US move is the recent decision to withdraw from the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty with the former Soviet Union, which frees the Pentagon to build up a new arsenal of short and medium-range nuclear missiles that will be targeted primarily at China. The Pentagon's previous AirSea Battle strategy for war with China, involving a massive conventional air and missile attack on the Chinese mainland from nearby bases, is now being supplemented or replaced by plans for a devastating nuclear attack.

The Trump administration is setting course for a catastrophic war with China that will inevitably involve the deaths of many millions, if not billions, of people. In founding the Fourth International in 1938, on the eve of World War II, Leon Trotsky warned that humanity faced only two alternatives: either socialism or barbarism. A new revolutionary International, opposed to the treacherous Social Democratic and Stalinist leaderships, was needed to mobilise and unite workers around the world to abolish capitalism and its outmoded division of the world into rival nation states."

"Putin said on November 19 that Russia responded to the U.S. move by developing new weapons that he said were capable of piercing any prospective missile shield. The Russian leader had previously warned that the U.S. plan to withdraw from the INF Treaty could lead to a new "arms race."

Read more on UNIAN:
https://www.unian.info/world/10343919-putin-mulls-russia-retaliation-if-u-s-quits-inf-treaty-media.html

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/11/20/pers-n20.html

A USA nuclear first strike on China would have to guarantee eliminating almost 100% of China's offensive nuclear delivery capabilities Including Chinese SSBNs. However as the following article indicates, China's land based ballistic missile force including mobile launch systems is already deployed throughout the vast Chinese interior in (possibly shifting) locations that are far from trivial to detect and neutralize. Furthermore, 'You close to me then me close to you'.

The missile flight time FROM China to Japan or Australia is how the encirclement door swings both ways.

https://chinapower.csis.org/ssbn/

Mark Chapman November 20, 2018 at 5:40 pm
Not to mention that Russia need only announce it is selling its new technology to China. America is maneuvering itself into a place where it cannot be confident any of its weapons will reach their targets, while there is a strong possibility a retaliatory counter-strike would kill millions of Americans.
Mark Chapman November 20, 2018 at 7:23 pm
The seabed section of Turkish Stream is complete; the last pipe was laid in place with mutual direction from Putin and Erdogan. All that remains now is completion of the land section in Turkey, pressure-testing and cleanup, and then Turkish Stream is ready to deliver gas.

This won't last long, did it?

Cortes November 21, 2018 at 12:17 am
I had a couple of close encounters with mind-blowing pieces of equipment some years back when doing technical translation work – all the more interesting since I can barely change a fuse. The gigantic pipe laying ?barge seems inadequate – is awesome. Thanks for that video.

[Nov 22, 2018] Russia and ECHR

Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

cartman November 16, 2018 at 1:03 pm

I think there's about three years left before the rest of the terms expire for all the judges Russia elected (including the one from Russia).

I have no idea if the government actually values the ECHR, but they have a free excuse to leave if they desire. This is a court with elected judges, and Russia's participation in it is already cut off.

Mark Chapman November 16, 2018 at 1:15 pm
I think Russia remains a participant in international institutions, despite how it is treated, in the hope that the current madness will pass and things will go back to some approximation of the way they were instead of this constant agitation for war. It's hard to walk away from organizations which took decades if not centuries to build, because once the door closes on you, you won't be asked back. The west recognizes its mistake in ever letting Russia participate on an equal basis, and if it could ever get rid of the Russian permanent-member UN veto, Washington at least would be over the moon with pleasure. The Russian veto has prevented several opportunities for the USA to rampage and smash and regime-change as it loves to do, and once that restriction was gone it could re-order the world to its heart's content. If Russia left voluntarily, the most it would ever be granted again would be observer status.

[Nov 22, 2018] Bloomberg: Here's One Measure That Shows Sanctions on Russia are Working

Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

et Al November 19, 2018 at 7:15 am

Bloomturd: Here's One Measure That Shows Sanctions on Russia are Working
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-16/here-s-one-measure-that-shows-sanctions-on-russia-are-working

Sanctions may have knocked as much as 6 percent off Russia's economy over the past four years and the drag isn't likely to go away anytime soon.

A new study by Bloomberg Economics has found that the economy of the world's biggest energy exporter is more than 10 percent smaller compared with what might have been expected at the end of 2013, before the Crimea crisis triggered wave after wave of restrictions by the U.S. and EU. While some of the blame falls on the slump in oil prices, sanctions are the bigger culprit .

"The underperformance has been much bigger than crude alone can explain," wrote Scott Johnson, an analyst at Bloomberg Economics in London. "Part of the gap is likely to reflect the enduring impact of sanctions both imposed and threatened over the last five years."..

They admit that part of the 6 percent gap could be attributed to other shocks, such as the introduction of inflation targeting and a sell-off in emerging markets
####

More anal-cysts at the link & my extra emphasis not to mention more qualifiers in the article too boot.

Timely 'proof' that USA still runs the world and can punish people? Hardly a surprise but they could have also pointed to not so great EU economic performance and its effect, but what would be the point in that? Is it a) keep the sanction up and Russia will collapse/change its foreign policy etc.? b) no need for more far reaching sanctions that could lead to Boeing/ULA being stranded etc.? c) filler and fluff? d) Bloomturd shilling for business after their Supermicro debacle?

Again, what's the point? What's it trying to prove?

If anything, de-dollarization and accelerating ties with the growing Asia-Pacific region is very good for Russia, even if there is some initial short term pain inflicted by others. If I do have a problem with Russia, it is that it seems to be cautious and then reactionary by nature – or is this more institutionally safe behavior?

kirill November 19, 2018 at 7:39 am
I smell GDP growth shenanigans at GKS. Hellevig had a piece earlier that debunked the claim of a 1.3% GDP growth in the first quarter of 2018 and estimated that it was closer to 6%. He was a bit too optimistic but the point is that 1.5% annual GDP growth (roughly 6%/4years) is falling through the cracks and likely deliberately.

I believe Putin introduced a misinformation campaign late in his first term in regards to GDP growth in Russia to keep NATzO confused about Russia's resurgence. The CIA was not doing a good job estimating the Russian GDP, so Putin could fake the numbers and NATzO triumphalists would lap them up with glee. I think this policy was smart and actually worked. That is why in 2014 Obama was certain the Russia's economy would collapse from the sanctions. Read the articles in the NATzO MSM from 2014 and even through 2017 which assumed that massive damage to Russia's economy was a given.

By keeping NATzO ignorant of Russia's actual potential, it could re-arm and regroup in peace. I think it would have been bad for Russia if the events of 2014 happened in 2004. In 2004, the Russian defense industry physical plant was still in sad shape and collapsing. This condition was basically rectified by 2014. And Russia was also able to deploy its new hypersonic wunderwaffen. Anyone who thinks such machinations are tin foil hat nonsense does not know the history leading up to WWII. The USSR managed to delay the attack of the Nazis by 2 years which allowed it to increase its military potential by 40% and to move defense factories to the Urals.

Today Putin is pretending that NATzO sanctions are actually working when it is patently obvious that they are not. This is ***physically*** apparent in Russia as import substitution occurs on a massive scale. Since every dollar imports saved amounts to two dollars of domestic production (one for local production and one for not exporting the dollar and incurring a negative GDP accounting penalty) Russia's GDP growth should be over 4%. But you would think that nothing was happening in terms of import substitution and that Russia's economy was running cool and near recession. The employment statistics show that this is not the reality. If the economy was near stagnation, the unemployment rate would go up. Low unemployment occurs when the economy runs hot.

The way that Russia's GDP statistics are skewed is through the official CPI and PPI. Nabiullina at the CBR claims that Russia is has serious inflationary instability. That is why the prime rate is over three times the actual CPI (7.5% vs 2.3%). I have posted before why there is no evidence of 1970s style South American inflation in Russia given the extremely short lived inflation spike after the late 2014 ruble forex devaluation; the spike was force-damped and did not have any recurring peaks after the initial one. Under real inflationary conditions a 7.5% prime rate would do didley squat and, in fact, there is no magic prime rate that controls the inflation. If it is set too high, the inflation actually increases. Also, if Russia's economy was running cool there would not be any need for a 7.5% rate since it would push the economy into a recession. So reality indicates that Russia's economy is actually running hot and this has some inflationary pressure but also means that 1.3% GDP growth numbers are BS.

et Al November 19, 2018 at 8:22 am
Today Putin is pretending that NATzO sanctions are actually working when it is patently obvious that they are not.

I suspect that he is not the only one. There's a whole host of other sanctions that the West has studiously avoided putting on Russia because of the damage that would be done to itself, not to mention that it would always like to have a few extra sanctions to dangle publicly/privately or both at will.

Vis the Bloomturd report, do they expect someone to pay for it? When you click on the link to the 'report' you get:

The article you requested is only available for Bloomberg Professional Service subscribers.

The article you requested is only available for Bloomberg Professional Service subscribers.
####

Uh-huh. Who exactly is their target audience again?

Eric November 20, 2018 at 5:02 pm
"I believe Putin introduced a misinformation campaign late in his first term in regards to GDP growth in Russia to keep NATzO confused about Russia's resurgence."

Well, you could be right with this , Kirill.

Belarus, Armenia ( near 10%) and Kyrgyzstan( countries with economies interlinked heavily with Russia's of course) all had very strong growth in their economies in the last year. Russia as the mother economy for those countries would be expected to have a lesser but still significant growth figures like 3-4%.
Other things like improved health and rapidly improving crime statistics in Russia, plus public spending could further support your theory ( nearly 60 trillion roubles for the next 3 years is allocated). On the other hand salaries going up is what is needed to substantiate your theory.

kirill November 20, 2018 at 5:28 pm
Salaries are determined by what the market perceives. If the Russian government and CBR are spreading a fake image of Russia's economic health, then that will have negative consequences. The choice is between those negative consequences and the neo-Reich lunatics who are openly baying for war on Russia.
davidt November 19, 2018 at 4:45 pm
GNP is undoubtedly a fairly crude indicator of the health of an economy- I am a little surprised that both GNP and the size of FIRE are not routinely published. Here is an interesting bar graph giving some detail as to how the Russian economy managed in 2015-2016

People like Andrei Martyanov (smoothieX12) argue that the (real) US economy is much smaller than customarily claimed, whilst the Russian economy is much larger. I have copied the above graph from a comment by smoothieX12 to his article
http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/11/it-begins-to-sink-finally-but-too-late.html
Mark Chapman November 19, 2018 at 6:04 pm
Interesting. I would have thought there was much more growth in Russian agriculture than that, but maybe some of the self-sufficiency efforts are still in their early stages, or perhaps domestic sales are harder to track for effect. Anyway, it puts paid to the nonsense that American sanctions are crushing the Russian economy.

[Nov 22, 2018] This calls to mind Russia's deal with Iran, in which Russia will trade food, medicines and what necessities Iran desires but which American-imposed sanctions make difficult to obtain, for Iranian oil and gas which Russia will use domestically.

Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman November 18, 2018 at 5:59 pm

This calls to mind Russia's deal with Iran, in which Russia will trade food, medicines and what necessities Iran desires but which American-imposed sanctions make difficult to obtain, for Iranian oil and gas which Russia will use domestically. Countries are reverting to the barter system to nullify US sanctions in a way that does not use currency flow the USA might try to interdict or confiscate. No actual money changes hands, so America can snoop on SWIFT to its heart's content without seeing evidence of promising targets. Striking, too, is the prevalence of real sympathy for Iran and an evident desire to help it with its problems. The USA has apparently bitten off more than it can chew here, and several nations are openly flouting its rules. If America cannot think of a way to come down hard on them, their example may become contagious.

[Nov 22, 2018] Norway and Finland have accused Russia of causing GPS malfunction that ocurred during the latest NATO arsing around close to Russian frontiers

Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile November 15, 2018 at 12:32 am

Norway and Finland have accused Russia of causing GPS malfunction that ocurred during the latest NATO arsing around close to Russian frontiers.

No evidence given, mind.

"Norway has determined that Russia was responsible for jamming GPS signals in the Kola Peninsula" said a Nato spokesman.

Then the Norwegian Ministry of Defence stated that had traced the source of jamming that ocurred in Norway and Finnish Lapland "to a Russian military base on the Kola Peninsula".

So then the Finnish prime minister joined in with the condemnation, whilst at the same time conceding that the Norwegian authorities were unlikely to present any proof, saying that there still was "every reason to trust them",

It's that old "very likely" mantra again! Loud accusations and nothing to back up the accusations.

I wonder when former Secretary of State for the USA Kerry is going to present evidence that he uneqivocally stated the US had as regards the persons who were responsible for downing MH-17.

He started shouting his mouth off about this before the bodies of those who died as a result of that tragedy were even stiff.

Mark Chapman November 15, 2018 at 12:13 pm
Quite a bit like that stranded Russian secret submarine in Swedish waters, which was sending distress signals that the Swedes or somebody in that neck of the woods was picking up. A great burst of alarms and outcries, no proof, nothing shown to the public, silence and then forgetting. It'll be the same this time; it has become fashionable in western circles to accuse Russia of all manner of aggression, and brings approval from Washington and Brussels. Hopefully Russia has a longer memory.

I wonder if they will tie the collision of the Norwegian frigate with the tanker to GPS jamming – they didn't know where they were, poor dears. But warships use a gyro to navigate, not GPS. Still, fortune favours the bold.

Jen November 15, 2018 at 5:11 pm
The frigate Helge Ingstad and the oil tanker Sola collided near Bergen which, if I am not mistaken, has to be at least 2,300 km away from the Kola Peninsula and any Russian military bases there.

Apparently the last message of the frigate to the oil tanker was this (it's in the link to the article on the collision):
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/24828/norwegian-frigate-to-oil-tanker-before-collision-we-have-everything-under-control

Somebody should have told the captain and the navigator to look up and out the window.

Mark Chapman November 15, 2018 at 5:33 pm
Yes; Russian GPS jamming in this incident is beyond unlikely. I'm just being sarcastic. Like I said, it has become fashionable to blame Russia for everything bad that happens, no matter how preposterous the case.

There's a captain who is all finished in the navy, even if he/she doesn't go to jail for incompetence. Responsibility stops with the Captain no matter what happens because he is responsible overall for everything that happens in his ship, but in a congested waterway with limited maneuverability, he would be on the bridge and in command. There will be no sloughing it off on a junior officer. And the part about turning on their AIS after the collision just makes it look like they were trying to cover up. What a disaster.

Incidentally, if anyone was wondering why so little has been mentioned about the crew and suspected some political dimension – congratulations. Four of five navigators aboard Helge Ingstad were women, and the Norwegian Armed Forces had barely gotten done championing her as a stake in the heart of the patriarchy. Jeez; we just can't get away from it, can we?

In the Norwegian magazine, Armed Forces Forum No. 2 in 2017 it was stated that "Four out of five navigators on frigate KNM Helge Ingstad are women".

"It is advantageous to have many women on board. It will be a natural thing and a completely different environment, which I look at as positive," Lieutenant Iselin Emilie Jakobsen Ophus said. She is a navigation officer at KNM Helge Ingstad, according to Defense Forum. In yet another politically correct nod, the text notes that: "The Navy receives a much higher number of women after general conscription duty was introduced. Therefore, more women are also more motivated for further career opportunities in the Armed Forces."

"There has always been a perception that the Armed Forces are characterized by a very masculine environment, and in many ways it is true. It is mostly men in the Armed Forces, but it is important for me to show that you do not have to be 'one of the guys' to assume a role in the Armed Forces. Finding one's place should not be at the expense of being a woman," said Ophus.

When more women are able to work together, it becomes easier to discover and to create a more balanced defense, the Armed Forces Forum opined. "It is important that the integration of women should work in every aspect: from officers and constables, to people," Ophus said, adding: "The most important thing for me is that my job makes sense because you work for something bigger than yourself."

In the same magazine where the Norwegians boast about gender equality in their Navy, they also explained that they are looking into every department of their Armed Forces to apply the same formula.

Gender would have had nothing to do with this accident; a woman can fuck up just as easily as a man and no more. But all that bunk about it being 'important to be a woman, and not acting like one of the guys to find one's place aboard' is just that – bunk. On board you are just a sailor and you have a job to do that does not require you to showcase your womanhood. Similarly, 'having a lot of women on board' is no more 'advantageous' than having a lot of men. All that politically-correct bullshit looks very unfortunate now.

https://ussanews.com/News1/2018/11/14/gender-politics-and-knm-helge-ingstad/

The ship was not insured – I'm pretty sure you cannot get coverage for a warship, and lots of personal insurance policies have a clause which states that if you die as a result of combat action in war you are not covered, something a lot of people do not know – and will be a total loss. That loss will equal Norway's entire annual defense budget, according to this source. If you watch the maritime center's radar recording, Helge Ingstad displayed no AIS identifier and was doing more than 17 knots just before the collision. She appeared to intend to cross the tanker's bow, but if that was the intent it was beyond stupid because that course would have taken her into the center of the passage where several other ships were on similar opposing courses.

It is important to note that input from the navigator in home waters would normally not be required, and navigating such a well-traveled waterway would be an exercise in chart-reading and radar-picture management which would fall to the Officer of the Watch regardless whether he/she is a navigator. But the Captain would normally be on the bridge when other marine traffic was expected in close proximity, because mistakes happen.

[Nov 22, 2018] "Traditional political blindness": Russia has responded to the adoption of the UN resolution on the Crimea

Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile November 16, 2018 at 9:29 am

"Традиционная политическая слепота": в России отреагировали на принятие резолюции ООН по Крыму
11:26

"Traditional political blindness": Russia has responded to the adoption of the UN resolution on the Crimea

In the Crimea, the adoption of the UN resolution on alleged human rights violations on the peninsula has been condemned. In the state Duma and the Federation Council, representatives of the region and local legislators are confident that the Ukraine, which presented this document to be voted on, is trying to present to the world the best image of itself that it can,whilst thos countries that support the position that the Ukraine has taken are displaying "political blindness". RT interlocutors stressed that after the reunification with Russia, there had been created all the conditions for inhabitants of the peninsula regardless of their ethnic or religious affiliation. The Commissioner for human rights in the republic, Lyudmila Lubina, had invited UN representatives to visit the Crimea. They were convinced of the absence of violations. An earlier positive assessment of the situation in the region had been given by independent delegations from the United States, Germany, Italy and other countries.

The Third Committee of the UN General Assembly, which is responsible for social, humanitarian and cultural issues, adopted a resolution proposed by the Ukraine that condemns alleged violations of human rights on Crimea territory.

67 countries voted in support of the document, 26 against: 82 countries abstained. The number of countries that adhere to neutrality in this matter has increased: in the year 2017 in a similar situation, 76 countries abstained and in 2016 -- 77.

The text of the resolution was made in Kiev. It reported on the "illegal establishment of Russian Federation laws, jurisdiction and administration" in the region. According to the authors of the document, on the peninsula there is "increased pressure on communities of religious minorities, including frequent police raids, threats and harassment against supporters of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kiev Patriarchate and Protestant churches, mosques and Muslim religious schools, the Greek Catholics, the Roman Catholics and "Jehovah's Witnesses", and the "groundless prosecution of dozens of peaceful Muslims for their alleged affiliation to the Islamic organizations" was condemned

"Uncompromising war with Russia"

Deputy permanent representative of Russia to the UN, Gennady Kuzmin, commented on the content of the resolution, noting the aggressiveness of the text presented by the Ukraine.

"The authors have tried hard to present the situation in the Crimea as a kind of armed conflict, using terms like "annexation", and occupation". According to this terminology, the Ukraine for four years has been waging an uncompromising war against Russia. But Russia has simply been part of this war: no one is going to quarrel with the Ukrainian people, who have the same blood ties. To punish the population of the Crimea for its choice in favouring Russia will not succeed", he stressed.

The Russian diplomat also pointed out that the referendum on the reunification of the Crimea with Russia was carried out strictly in accordance with international law.The inhabitants of the peninsula voted openly, expressing their desire "to live without the new Ukrainian idol: Bandera, Shukhevych and other Nazi collaborators" and to defend their right to education in and to speak freely in their native language: Russian, Ukrainian or Crimean Tatar.

"No oppression. None"

In the Crimea there is outrage over the text of the resolution. Representatives of the region in the Federation Council and the state Duma emphasize that the situation on the peninsula does not correspond to what is set out in the document.

"There is neither oppression of religious minorities nor raids, arrests and persecution as regards freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Moreover, all conditions have been created to meet the needs of all religious communities", said Sergey Tsekov, a member of the Federation Council Committee on International Affairs of the Republic of the Crimea in an interview with RT

The violations that were noted in the UN resolution have been created by the Ukraine, the "illusion of non-existent human rights abuses in the Crimea", said Vice-Premier of the Crimean government, Dmitry Polonsky.

"That political blindness has become a tradition for nearly 70 states (those that voted for the resolution. -- RT) does not surprise anyone. This disease does not allow them to see the amazing extent of human rights violations in the Ukraine, which already for several years has been waging war against its own people on the territory of the Donbass", said the Crimean government representative.

Mark Chapman November 16, 2018 at 12:59 pm
Sadly, international institutions don't really matter any more, since the ridiculous obeisance you have to show to gain their approval amounts to a complete abrogation of sovereignty. In this the USA has managed its greatest success in Ukraine; Washington chafes under the burden of upholding all the regulations it helped write in order to place hobbles on others, not itself, and now finds it has little use for international law or international regulation. So it has created the conditions for its irrelevance. Countries that pay their political figures high salaries to sit in the UN and bleat and blather are wasting their money; they should just remove their representatives and bring them home, and teach them some useful trade.
kirill November 16, 2018 at 4:58 pm
Human rights evaluation by a popularity vote. What a joke! Give us real cases of abuse and not claims by Tatar clowns based outside Crimea. All of the sudden Crimean Tatars are the most precious minority in the world. They have to be given everything they demand or it is oppression. How come Canada's native population gets to rot on reservation ghettos and nobody cares? America ripped up the last of the substantial treaties it had with the aboriginals during the 1960s and expropriated their lands. Last time I checked 2014 is not 1930 and nobody is in a rush to give the US aboriginals back their lands.
Mark Chapman November 16, 2018 at 7:05 pm
All of it is designed to irritate Russia, with a secondary function of reassuring Ukraine that the west is in its corner. That's pretty good value for money, when you think about it – the Ukies will go on struggling for the price of a pat on the head, and the west does not have to actually buy their stuff or support them beyond a couple of billion in emergency aid once a year or so. But the whole effort is gaining next to no traction at all; I can't even remember the last time I saw Mustafa Dzemilev mugging with the adults, looking like a little wrinkled kid dressed in his dad's clothes. Absent urgent entreaties from the Crimeans themselves, it all just looks like harassment. The west just has to do something for the Two Minutes Hate.

[Nov 22, 2018] Ukraine, where it's already snowing, isn't ready for winter

Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Warren November 20, 2018 at 11:37 am

Vesti News
Published on 19 Nov 2018
Subscribe to Vesti News
Since Monday, we've been watching Poroshenko's panic. On the one hand, he was throwing rude tantrums because his project to create a "new Church of Ukraine" didn't go as planned. He only managed to create a branch of the Constantinople Patriarchate in Kiev, which is not the division-building thing Poroshenko dreamed of. On the other hand, Ukraine, where it's already snowing, isn't ready for winter.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/8D6e7YZf1lA

Jen November 20, 2018 at 1:35 pm
My suspicion then that Poroshenko must have intended for this new Church of Ukraine to be subservient to Kiev so that all its properties could be declared state properties and the Church's wealth could be Kiev's (and Poroshenko's) for the taking only increased when I saw this report. Interesting too that Poroshenko only now, near the end of his Presidency, is selling off the assets he should have sold off at the start of his Presidency in compliance with Ukrainian law.
Mark Chapman November 20, 2018 at 5:35 pm
Gee; who could ever have imagined such a thing would happen? Russia should handle any emerging crisis very carefully, because Kiev will want to find a way to blame all Ukraine's problems on Russia, as usual. Russia might win quite a few allies if it boxes clever.

No need to write Poroshenko's epitaph just yet; he's only sold off a ratty old shipyard that likely was not making him any money anyway. That's not a bellwether of panic; not yet. But he is almost certain to lose to Tymoshenko, and she will be a double whammy for Ukraine because she has no more idea how to solve the problem than does Poroshenko, is steadfastly loyal to the west although it has done nothing since the glorious Maidan but mess Ukraine up even more than it already was, with the added bonus that she will probably usher in a circuses-but-no-bread distraction of gunning for Poroshenko and his government, using the premise that they are to blame for Ukraine's disintegration. That's broadly true, but Tymoshenko has no plan at all for what comes after Ukrainians' fury is sated.

[Nov 22, 2018] Ukraine is actually ruled by a small group of tycoons; according to the European Council on Foreign Relations (which wants Ukraine to succeed as a western satellite, so you can bet anything negative about it will be soft-pedaled), the 50 5ichest Ukrainians pre-maidan controlled 45% of national GDP.

Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman November 19, 2018 at 5:08 pm

"On Nov.14, just a day before the decision to cut assistance, the European Parliament overwhelmingly passed a nonbinding resolution saying Moldova has become a "state captured by oligarchic interests" that exert their influence over most parts of Moldova's society. The country is actually ruled by a small group of tycoons."

Ukraine is actually ruled by a small group of tycoons; according to the European Council on Foreign Relations (which wants Ukraine to succeed as a western satellite, so you can bet anything negative about it will be soft-pedaled), the 50 5ichest Ukrainians pre-maidan controlled 45% of national GDP.

https://www.ecfr.eu/publications/summary/survival_of_the_richest_how_oligarchs_block_reform_in_ukraine6091

Anyone want to present the case that the situation has improved since its oligarchic president took power, and used it to continuously enrich himself and his family, maintaining his status as a wealthy businessman even as he takes the odd moment out now and again to see how the country's doing? I thought not.

http://uacrisis.org/54793-top-5-ukrainian-oligarchs

Last year, after the country has had quite a generous spell to throw off the shackles of its oligarchy, the top FIVE Ukrainian oligarchs alone control 13% of the nation's GDP – Rinat Akhmetov, Ihor Kolomoyskiy, Victor Pinchuk, Petro Poroshenko and Dmytro Firtash. Waiting in the wings to take over the helm, Yulia Tymoshenko, once known as 'the Gas Princess", and another oligarch who has been rich since she was very young, whose past performance suggests Ukraine is in for another round of nest-feathering and struggle for financial gain among its wealthy citizens, with not a toss given for the rest.

Think we'll see the EU cut them off from funding any time soon? Me, either.

[Nov 22, 2018] Ukraine 5 years after Euromaidan: Have ordinary citizens benefitted from the Western-backed 'revolution'?

Notable quotes:
"... "trade suicide" ..."
"... "limited results" ..."
"... "governance issues" ..."
"... "It's basically a high level of corruption and the rule of man instead of the rule of law" ..."
"... "We're getting a lot of inquiries from various investors, they come to talk to us, and we see the opportunities in Ukraine, but time after time we hear the concerns about the governance." ..."
"... "meaningful progress" ..."
"... "inefficient court system continues to obstruct the administration of justice." ..."
Nov 21, 2018 | www.sott.net

Originally from RT

It has been five years to the day since Ukraine's 'Euromaidan' protest movement began, with anti-government protesters demanding an end to corruption and a closer relationship with the European Union. But what became of the dream?

On the evening of November 21, 2013, pro-West protesters began flocking to Kiev's Maidan Square, carrying banners and waving EU flags. Hours earlier, then-president Viktor Yanukovych had suspended preparations to sign a European Association Agreement, which would have been a potential step on the road to joining the EU - and a move which Russia had warned would be "trade suicide" for the post-Soviet state. The West, on the other hand, was determined to wrangle Ukraine out of Russia's "orbit" and lure it into its own.

Ukraine was facing an economic crossroads. The country was being pulled in two directions, asked to choose between closer alignment with the EU or Russia. When Yanukovych chose Russia by refusing to sign the Association Agreement, it sparked outrage within the EU and a protest movement which would quickly be hijacked and used to engineer a Western-backed coup - a shortcut to bringing a pro-West government to power.

Such interference, manipulation and exploitation of Ukraine's internal political and societal divisions was not without consequences. More than 10,000 died during an insurgency in the eastern regions which began when the ethnic Russian population began to fear it would be swallowed into an anti-Russia nationalist state backed by Western powers. But the West ignored dangerous signs of growing nationalism - and outright Nazi-style fascism - in Ukraine, bargaining that anything was better than Russia 'winning' in a game of geopolitical chess.

Five years on, what has become of the protesters' dreams to rid Ukraine of corruption and build an equal, transparent and functional democracy? The sad answer is that Ukraine's revolution was a disaster which left the country teetering on the edge of becoming a failed state.

An anti-corruption revolution?

Corruption is still rampant in Ukraine. A recent assessment by the International Monetary Fund suggested that corruption wipes about two percent off the country's GDP growth per year.

The IMF and World Bank also scolded the Ukrainian government for the "limited results" that have been seen in fighting corruption, with no high-level officials convicted - something which is said to be keeping investors out of the country.

World Bank Country Director for Belarus, Moldova, and Ukraine Satu Kahkonen said that "governance issues" were forcing investors to steer clear. "It's basically a high level of corruption and the rule of man instead of the rule of law" that have prevailed in Ukraine, she said. "We're getting a lot of inquiries from various investors, they come to talk to us, and we see the opportunities in Ukraine, but time after time we hear the concerns about the governance."

Higher living standards?

Ukraine is also emerging as Europe's poorest country , with a GDP per capita of just €2,960 - well below Estonia's €22,420 and Slovenia's €26,590 GDP per capita.

In fact, according to a recent Credit Suisse report, Ukrainians rank among the world's poorest people, coming a dismal 123rd out of 140 countries, with the net wealth of the country's citizens lagging behind Bangladesh and Cameroon. Another recent study by the United Nations Development Program found that, despite continuing economic growth, 60 percent of Ukrainians live below the poverty line.

Less income inequality?

Meanwhile, Ukraine's richest 100 citizens have seen their wealth increase significantly in the years after the Euromaidan protests. A recent report from the Novoe Vremya magazine showed that the wealth of the country's richest people is growing 12 times faster than Ukraine's total GDP. Pro-West President Petro Poroshenko is the country's sixth richest man, increasing his wealth by 10 percent to about $1.1 billion, all while average Ukrainians see little or no improvement in their own living standards or net wealth.

Political reforms?

While some recent reforms in education, pensions and healthcare were welcomed by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development in its l atest country report , there has still been a lack of "meaningful progress" in the reform of governance and an "inefficient court system continues to obstruct the administration of justice."

European values?

Scant attention has also been paid by the Ukrainian government - and Western powers and media - to the increasingly worrying growth of neo-Nazi sentiment in Ukraine. When, in October 2017, Ukraine witnessed its biggest neo-Nazi march in years, Western media all but ignored it. In fact, in deeds and words, Ukraine's government has almost encouraged this kind of sentiment, by praising as an "inspiration" the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) fighters who the Nazi marchers were commemorating. In recent months, mainstream media have done more to acknowledge this creeping fascism in Ukraine, but the admission comes far too late.

On the world stage, too, Ukraine's pro-West President Petro Poroshenko has faded into near irrelevance, barely acknowledged by US President Donald Trump at recent Armistice Day commemorations in Paris, as geopolitics returned to business-as-usual with Kiev fading from the headlines.

[Nov 22, 2018] On Thanksgiving eve some Russian oppositionists decided to personally thank the US authorities for the sanctions against Russia.

Nov 21, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Vesti News

Published on 21 Nov 2018

On Thanksgiving eve some Russian oppositionists decided to personally thank the US authorities for the sanctions against Russia. They met them in Washington, but instead of the traditional turkey, the guests offered senators and State Department officials to check out their lists of Russians who deserve to be sanctioned.

https://youtu.be/0WDKEmF0kQ4

yalensis November 21, 2018 at 4:34 pm

Interesting list of names on the Opps hitlist, which these narcs presented to their American overlords.

Note also the names of Zeman, Dodon, Burzhanadze, Maria Le Pen, Graham Phillips, Kedmi, and a few others whom I don't recognize

What a bunch of dirty rats and slimy "stukachi", are these Opps!

[Nov 22, 2018] The New Times has dodged almost certain closure this week by crowdfunding some 25 million rubles to pay off a government fine after an unprecedented show of support.

Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile November 16, 2018 at 5:16 am

Oh look! What an amazing surprise!!!

The New Times has dodged almost certain closure this week by crowdfunding some 25 million rubles to pay off a government fine after an unprecedented show of support.

The online magazine was handed a crippling fine in late October by the Russian media watchdog Roskomnadzor for failing to disclose foreign financing.

"Russian people are very sensitive to injustice, we are a nation of survivors", the magazine's chief editor Yevgenia Albats said.

So despite the fact that nobody reads it, 20 thousand people, according to another Western organ that nobody reads (see link below), stumped up the dosh for Albat's electronic rag.

Nov. 13 2018 – 17:11
20K People Donate to Russian Liberal Outlet to Pay Government Fine

i wonder where the money really came from?

Probably from the same place that funds her publication and which she hasn't revealed for the past 2 years, something that she legally has to, her electronic publication being classed as an NGO.

That's why she got whacked with a fine.

Political persecution, I call it!

Off to the ECHR with you, Yevgenia! You know they'll find in your favour.

[Nov 22, 2018] Navalny has demanded off his regional staff more fake investigations

Nov 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile, November 16, 2018 at 8:13 am

Навальный потребовал от региональных штабов больше фейковых расследований

A few days ago, it became known that the notorious blogger Aleksei Navalny had set the bar higher for the heads of his regional headquarters as regards number of "anti-corruption investigations" they were to undertake and if they were not undertaken, then the headquarters would be deprived of funding.

Well, taking into account the fact that until today the video clips from the regional offices have been filled with, to put it mildly, a lot of inconsistencies and unreliable facts: so far, nothing good has come out of this.

Suffice it to recall how the staff of the Omsk headquarters once made a false accusation of corruption against the superintendant of the Soviet District of Omsk tax Inspectorate, Anatoly Chekmaryov. The investigation said that for a person not of the highest position, the official had a very luxurious house, which, according to them, was not on the land register, meaning that Chekmaryov allegedly did not pay property tax on it. As it turned out, the information was refuted, and the Navalny headquarters staff had to make a public apology to the official.

A similar story happened in Volgograd, where the "Navalnyites" tried to slander the local authorities, accusing them of buying too expensive cars. However, the auction, on the basis of which this "investigation" was built, had not taken place, and accordingly, no procurement had been made.

In Ivanovo, "The City of Brides" [a textile town with a large female population, hence its nickname -- ME] , the staff of the Navalny headquarters have also distinguished themselves. There, the entire city administration was immediately accused of corruption, which, in the opinion of the Navalny HQ staff, spent too much money on the purchase of software for state institutions. In the end it turned out that the prices were fully consistent with market prices

The number of false accusations made by the Navalnyites can go on endlessly because they have never really bothered to double-check the facts and search for proof. Obviously, following their being put under such pressure by Aleksei, the quality of these "investigations" made by his HQ staff will not only not improve, but vice versa. For the sake of fulfilling the plan and maintaining their salaries, HQ staffs will simply make up new accusations, which even a naive schoolchild would hardly believe. And all in order to help Navalny organize hype around himself and to create some sort of illusion about his popularity.

Mark Chapman says: November 16, 2018 at 12:49 pm
It's really little wonder that Washington is so paternally fond of Navalny and considers him such a stout chap; their methods are similar. Make a nuisance of yourself until the other fellow swings for you, and then there will be a big fight and it's all his fault because he swung first – you were therefore only defending yourself against aggression. It is in this manner that Navalny tries to get noticed and become such a pain in the ass that the authorities must recognize him and talk about him. That's probably why Putin's refusal to name him in public generates such a buzz of excitement among the hamsters. Alexei's tactics are working!!! In much the same fashion, Washington hopes that its sanctions will so damage and complicate the life of ordinary Russians that they must acknowledge it is a great and mighty power, and beg for relief from their torment. Both are fantasizing about what a big noise they are.

[Nov 22, 2018] American foreign aid is prohibited from being given to any country that has not signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (the Symington Amendment) or refuses to abide by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) guidelines regarding its nuclear devices.

Nov 22, 2018 | www.unz.com

anarchyst , says: November 20, 2018 at 4:32 pm GMT

American foreign aid is prohibited from being given to any country that has not signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (the Symington Amendment) or refuses to abide by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) guidelines regarding its nuclear devices. Guess what?? Israel does not abide by EITHER and still gets the majority of American foreign aid. This prohibition also applies to countries that do not register their agents of a foreign government with the U S State Department. Guess what?? Israel (again) with its American Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC) still gets "foreign aid" in contravention of American law..
There are forty or so congressmen, senators and thousands of high-level policy wonks. infecting the U S government who hold dual citizenship with Israel. Such dual citizenship must be strictly prohibited. Refusal to renounce foreign citizenship should result in immediate deportation with permanent loss of American citizenship. Present and former holders of "dual citizenship" should never be allowed to serve in any American governmental capacity.
In addition, any American citizen who serves or has served in Israel's military (Israel Defense Forces) should automatically lose their American citizenship and be immediately deported to Israel.
When Netanyahu addressed both houses of Congress, it was sickening to see our politicians slobber all over themselves to see who would be the most rabid admirer of that foreign head of state. The almost constant applause by our Congress was reminiscent of the Soviet Politburo in which no one wanted to be the last person to stop clapping. Just who do they work for? Certainly not for the interests of the United States.

[Nov 22, 2018] A USA politician on tv 'we do not love them, w're afraid of them'.

Nov 22, 2018 | www.unz.com

jilles dykstra , says: November 20, 2018 at 10:40 am GMT

Anyone can see that the USA is the only 'real' friend of Israel in the world.
But the USA is not a friend, as I heard long ago a USA politician say on tv, on jews in the USA 'we do not love them, w're afraid of them'.
Any USA politcian who openly opposes Israel is without a job.
This is, in my opinion, what jewry does not realise, their power over the USA can disappear overnight, could even become open hatred of jews.
These jewish organisations, with media controlled by jews, and politicians who accept the inevitable, for money or not for money, just something like the Hoover Dam: one earthquake, and their power over the USA is gone.
How long jews can maintain their political power, not just in the USA, but in the whole west, I have no idea, there is not much that points to an important change soon.
However, in many history books one finds sentences as 'and then something happened that nobody foresaw, but had grave consequences'.

[Nov 21, 2018] I've been rolling on the floor with uncontrollable laughter (between episodes of schizoid lamentation) listening to Russophobes (e.g., David Sanger of the NYT) rant on in alarmism about the perils of RUSSIAN COLLUSION, all the while ignoring the elephant from Israel standing right next to their shoulders.

Nov 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

cassandra , says: November 20, 2018 at 6:59 pm GMT

Registering Israel's Useful Idiots

This is long overdue for so many reasons, but the corruption is so pervasive that reform is nigh impossible (which I'm sure will reassure certain hearts).

I've been rolling on the floor with uncontrollable laughter (between episodes of schizoid lamentation) listening to Russophobes (e.g., David Sanger of the NYT) rant on in alarmism about the perils of RUSSIAN COLLUSION, all the while ignoring the elephant from Israel standing right next to their shoulders.

Seriously, who can coherently argue that any hazard to democracy posed by Russia's election influence was remotely comparable to the interference of Israel and Britain? And why should the latter 2′s intentions any more than the former's?

[Nov 21, 2018] There Are Hundreds of Groups in the US Furthering the Interests of the Israeli State - They Should be Registered As Foreign Agents by Philip Giraldi

Israel's artificial 'war on terror' in the Middle East, has cost US taxpayers nearly $6 trillion and killed roughly half a million human beings, and there's still no end in sight. source: https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/news
Notable quotes:
"... But just as in the case of FDD, it is time to require AIPAC to register as what it really is: a foreign agent. As a registered agent, it will still be able to exercise First Amendment rights to defend Israel but it would not be able to be involved in lobbying on Capitol Hill and directing money to politicians who are described as pro-Israeli, as it does now. Its finances will be transparent and it will be perceived as an official advocate for Israel, not as an educational resource for what is happening in the Middle East. Hopefully, when AIPAC stops throwing money around, the politicians and media types will find another place to roost. ..."
"... National Security Advisor John Bolton recently received the "Defender of Israel" award from the Zionist Organization of America. ..."
"... one might suggest that the U.S. United Nations delegation, headed by Ambassador Nikki Haley, is directed by the Israeli government, particularly given events of last Friday whereby the U.S. voted against a motion condemning Israel's continued illegal occupation of the Syrian Golan Heights, thereby recognizing for the first time Israel's sovereignty over the area. Whether Haley was speaking for herself or for the administration was characteristically unclear, but it hardly matters ..."
"... Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] . ..."
Nov 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

"Nikki Haley might be referred to as a useful idiot, as Lenin put it, but her consistent pattern of extreme loyalty in defense of Israel marks her out as being particularly beholden to the Jewish state ..." Depending on what criteria one uses, there are between 200 and 600 groups in the United States that wholly or in part are dedicated to furthering the interests of Israel. The organizations are both Jewish, like the Zionist Organization of America, and Christian Zionist to include John Hagee's Christians United for Israel, but the funding of the Israel Lobby and both its political and media access comes overwhelmingly from Jewish supporters and advocates.

Many of the groups are registered with the Internal Revenue Service for tax purposes as 501(c)3 "educational" or "charitable" foundations, which enables them to solicit tax exempt donations. One might dispute whether promoting Israeli interests in the United States is actually educational, but as of right now the Department of the Treasury believes it can be so construed, protected by the First Amendment.

But there is a more serious consideration in terms of the actual relationships that many of the groups enjoy with the Israeli government. To be sure, many of them boast on their promotional literature and websites about their relationships with the Benjamin Netanyahu and his cabinet, so the issue of dual loyalty or, worse, acting as actual Israeli government agents must be considered.

There is a legal remedy to hostile foreigners acting against American interests and that is the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (FARA). Originally intended to identify and monitor agents of Nazi Germany propagandizing in the United States, it has since been applied to individuals and groups linked to other nations. Most recently, it was used against Russian news agencies RT America and Sputnik, which were forced to register. It is also being considered for Qatar based al-Jazeera.

FARA requires identified agents to be transparent in terms of their funding and contacts while also being publicly identified as representing the interests of a foreign nation. They must report to the Department of Justice every contact they have with congressmen or other government officials. The text of the Act defines a foreign agent as

"any person who acts as an agent, representative, employee, or servant, or any person who acts in any other capacity at the order, request, or under the direction or control, of a foreign principal or of a person any of whose activities are directly or indirectly supervised, directed, controlled, financed, or subsidized in whole or in major part by a foreign principal, and who directly or through any other person --

(i) engages within the United States in political activities for or in the interests of such foreign principal;

(ii) acts within the United States as a public relations counsel, publicity agent, information-service employee or political consultant for or in the interests of such foreign principal;

(iii) within the United States solicits, collects, disburses, or dispenses contributions, loans, money, or other things of value for or in the interest of such foreign principal; or

(iv) within the United States represents the interests of such foreign principal before any agency or official of the Government of the United States."

In spite of language that would presumably cover many of the hundreds of Jewish organizations acting for Israel, FARA has never been used to compel registration of any such groups or individuals even when it was public knowledge that they were working closely with the Israeli government to coordinate positions and promote other Israeli interests.

That failure is at a minimum a tribute to Jewish power in the United States, but it is also due to the fact that the organizations are funded from within the United States by wealthy American Jews, not by Israel, which is the argument sometimes inaccurately made by the groups themselves to demonstrate that they are not being directed by the Israeli government.

The difficulty in proving that one is directed by a foreign government has been definitively resolved regarding one group the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD), which has become the leading neoconservative bastion seeking a war with Iran, Israel's bęte noir . The recent al-Jazeera expose on the activities of the Israeli lobbies in both Britain and the United States, which I wrote about last week , included a surreptitiously filmed conversation with Sima Vaknin-Gil, a former Israeli intelligence officer who now heads the Ministry of Strategic Affairs, which is tasked with countering what is perceived to be anti-Israeli activity worldwide.

The Ministry is particularly focused on the non-violent Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS), which is increasingly active in both the United States and Europe.

Vaknin-Gil was discussing his activities with Tony Kleinfeld, an undercover investigative reporter who was secretly recording and filming his encounters with various members of the Israel Lobby as well as of the Israeli government.Vaknin-Gil provided explicit confirmation that the FDD works directly with the Israeli government, making it an Israeli agent by the definition of FARA.

For those who are unfamiliar with FDD, it is probably currently the most prominent neocon organization though it nevertheless claims to be a non-partisan "research group." It focuses on foreign policy and security issues by "Fighting Terrorism and Promoting Freedom," as it informs us on its website masthead.

It works to "defend free nations against their enemies," which frequently means in practice anyone whom Israel considers to be hostile, most particularly Iran. FDD's Leadership Council has featured former CIA Director James Woolsey, Senator Joe Lieberman, and Bill Kristol. Its Executive Director is Canadian import Mark Dubowitz, who is obsessed with Iran. Its advisors and experts are mostly Jewish and most of its funding comes from Jewish oligarchs.

FDD's auditorium has become a preferred venue for senior officials of the Trump Administration to go and make hardline speeches, just as the American Enterprise Institute was under George W. Bush. Mike Pence, Mike Pompeo, John Bolton and Nikki Haley have all spoken there recently, frequently focusing on Iran and the threat that it allegedly constitutes.

FDD aside, Vaknin-Gil also confirmed that there were other groups in the United States doing the same sorts of things on behalf of Israel. He said "We have FDD. We have others working on this," elaborating that FDD is "working on" projects for Israel including "data gathering, information analysis, working on activist organizations, money trail."

So Vaknin-Gil was admitting that FDD and others were working as Israeli proxies, collecting information on U.S. citizens, spying on legal organizations, and both planning and executing disinformation at Israeli direction. Kleinfeld also spoke with a Jonathan Schanzer, a senior official in FDD, who filled in a bit more of what the foundation is up to in terms of discrediting groups in the U.S. that support the BDS movement.

Schanzer admitted "BDS has taken everybody by surprise" before complaining that the Jewish response has been "a complete mess. I don't think that anybody's doing a good job. We're not even doing a good job." He then complained that attempts to discredit Palestinian groups by linking them to terrorist groups had failed, as also had the use of the label anti-Semitism. "Personally I think anti-Semitism as a smear is not what it used to be."

So, when will the Justice Department move on FDD now that its true colors have been exposed by al-Jazeera? The group must be required to register if justice be done, but will it? Its principal partner in crime the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has avoided registering for more than sixty years by claiming that it is an American organization working to educate the U.S. public about the all the good things connected to Israel. Even though it meets regularly with Israeli government officials, it claims not to be representing Israeli interests.

But just as in the case of FDD, it is time to require AIPAC to register as what it really is: a foreign agent. As a registered agent, it will still be able to exercise First Amendment rights to defend Israel but it would not be able to be involved in lobbying on Capitol Hill and directing money to politicians who are described as pro-Israeli, as it does now. Its finances will be transparent and it will be perceived as an official advocate for Israel, not as an educational resource for what is happening in the Middle East. Hopefully, when AIPAC stops throwing money around, the politicians and media types will find another place to roost.

To be sure the lovefest for Israel in government extends far beyond FDD and AIPAC. It can be found in many dark corners. National Security Advisor John Bolton recently received the "Defender of Israel" award from the Zionist Organization of America. And one might suggest that the U.S. United Nations delegation, headed by Ambassador Nikki Haley, is directed by the Israeli government, particularly given events of last Friday whereby the U.S. voted against a motion condemning Israel's continued illegal occupation of the Syrian Golan Heights, thereby recognizing for the first time Israel's sovereignty over the area. Whether Haley was speaking for herself or for the administration was characteristically unclear, but it hardly matters .

Nikki Haley might be referred to as a useful idiot, as Lenin put it, but her consistent pattern of extreme loyalty in defense of Israel marks her out as being particularly beholden to the Jewish state, which will no doubt arrange to richly reward her through some position in financial services for which she is totally unqualified when she leaves her post in January. And then she will be well funded to run for president in 2020.

Having Haley in charge, one might just as well vote for Benjamin Netanyahu.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

Source: The Unz Review Registering Israel's Useful Idiots

hasbarafails , says: November 20, 2018 at 6:57 am GMT

@Thomm What "deep end" is that?

Trump is presently Israel's man in the Oval Office and if he should not be available or bets need to be hedged for 2020, nikki likudnik is a sensible substitute.

After all (as Giraldi rightly points out), she appears to serve not as U.N. ambassador for her own country, but for the Jewish State of Israel.

The only "deep end" is Trump allowing the United States to be controlled by and have its national interests subverted by a tiny client state via the out-sized lobbying bucks of Israel-firsters like Sheldon Adelson and his cabal.

Giraldi has consistently made this point and its clear who is unhappy about it.

Colin Wright , says: Website November 20, 2018 at 7:18 am GMT
' In spite of language that would presumably cover many of the hundreds of Jewish organizations acting for Israel, FARA has never been used to compel registration of any such groups or individuals even when it was public knowledge that they were working closely with the Israeli government to coordinate positions and promote other Israeli interests '

I think you've failed to grasp that Israel is not subject to gentile law.

Colin Wright , says: Website November 20, 2018 at 7:24 am GMT
' Having Haley in charge, one might just as well vote for Benjamin Netanyahu '

You say that as if it would mark a change. Every president we've had since Bill Clinton has done as Israel commanded.

EliteCommInc. , says: November 20, 2018 at 9:50 am GMT
" . . . but it is also due to the fact that the organizations are funded from within the United States by wealthy American Jews, not by Israel, which is the argument sometimes inaccurately made by the groups themselves to demonstrate that they are not being directed by the Israeli government."

I am not sure given the scope of the references that it matters. it appears that anyone advocating for any foreign entity is included.

"(i) engages within the United States in political activities for or in the interests of such foreign principal; (ii) acts within the United States as a public relations counsel, publicity agent, information-service employee or political consultant for or in the interests of such foreign principal; (iii) within the United States solicits, collects, disburses, or dispenses contributions, loans, money, or other things of value for or in the interest of such foreign principal; or (iv) within the United States represents the interests of such foreign principal before any agency or official of the Government of the United States."

These "by the way, that includes" list makes it very clear what organizations are bound to register.

FARA:

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2009-title22/pdf/USCODE-2009-title22-chap11-subchapII.pdf

wayfarer , says: November 20, 2018 at 12:50 pm GMT
Israel, the Self-Serving Busybody Nation

"By Way of Dishonor, Thou Shalt Do War!"

U.S. National Debt Clock
source: http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Israel's artificial 'war on terror' in the Middle East, has cost US taxpayers nearly $6 trillion and killed roughly half a million human beings, and there's still no end in sight. source: https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/news

Ludwig Watzal , November 20, 2018 at 3:13 pm GMT

Geraldi's article shows how the Zionist Israel lobby holds the US public in choke cold and to put Israeli political goals into the throat of the people and the US administration. Besides their power, there have to be many useful idiots who put up with it and to support their bad goals. Their penetration of all walks of life renders it impossible to get FDD, AIPAC or all the hundred other Israeli lobby groups registered as foreign agents. As Al Jazeera has demonstrated, these folks are working foremost for Israeli interests. Their loyalty belongs primarily to Israel. If people would know, perhaps something could change. But people are not allowed to tell because the Zionist controlled media are making sure of that.

Agent76 , says: November 20, 2018 at 4:00 pm GMT
Nov 3, 2018 The Lobby – USA, episode 1 Episode 1: The Covert War.

This video is posted here for news reporting purposes.

https://youtu.be/3lSjXhMUVKE

Agent76 , says: November 20, 2018 at 4:02 pm GMT
Documentary: On Company Business [1980] FULL [Remaster]

Rare award winning CIA documentary, On Company Business painfully restored from VHS.

https://youtu.be/ZyRUlnSayQE

Curmudgeon , says: November 20, 2018 at 4:23 pm GMT
@DESERT FOX Dual citizenship has now been allowed in most (((Western liberal democracies))). There are two old adages on the subject with slightly different views:

1) A slave cannot serve two masters; and 2) A slave with two masters is truly free.

All of the Jewish lobby groups fit into these views, but their magical mental gymnastics absolves them. In the first instance, it is true that they cannot serve two masters, so they only serve one – Israel. In the second instance, they are free, as they are not bound by allegiance to either master, they voluntarily serve Israel.

Removing dual citizenship would be a step. Another step would be revisiting Chapter 115 on Sedition. The definition under law, does not correlate with the normal legal definition.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2384 and https://thelawdictionary.org/sedition/

The law contemplates force, the legal definition does not. Aligning the law with the legal concept of sedition would put the "educational" groups would place them on less solid ground.

And finally, given that the US Constitution contemplates the government being "We, the people", all aid to Israel is harvested from "We, the people" without consent. The famous Davy Crockett story covers it nicely

http://hushmoney.org/Davy_Crockett_Farmer_Bunce.htm

[Nov 21, 2018] The mukhtar DJT, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Israel

Notable quotes:
"... In Trumpworld Israel's fantasy of the overarching Iranian menace creates a need for an alliance of steel to combat this threat to the world and that alliance must include Saudi Arabia. ..."
"... DJT wants the Saudis'money for the US economy. Like any businessman/trader at that elevated level he is loathe to surrender market share to his competitors who in this case are Russia and China. He is also quite grateful that SA has pumped enough oil and gas to depress prices. All in all, I would say that he was quite considerate in his forthright explanation to us all that he really IS the Saudi mukhtar of the United States. ..."
"... "I call upon Salman, the King of Saudi, to invite the prime minister of Israel Netanyahu to visit Saudi Arabia," Katz said on Thursday speaking at the Herzliya conference . "We saw what a wonderful host you can be when President Trump was there. You can also send your heir, the new one, Prince Mohammed bin Salman. He's a dynamic person. He is an initiator. And he wants to break through."" SF ..."
Nov 21, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

In Trumpworld Israel's fantasy of the overarching Iranian menace creates a need for an alliance of steel to combat this threat to the world and that alliance must include Saudi Arabia. Why that is so is not clear to me. Saudi Arabia has no armed forces that possess real combat power to do anything but bomb civilians and oppress the Shia of the Eastern Province. Possession of military equipment does not equal combat power. A more convincing feature of theTrumpish view is the economic bit. DJT wants the Saudis'money for the US economy. Like any businessman/trader at that elevated level he is loathe to surrender market share to his competitors who in this case are Russia and China. He is also quite grateful that SA has pumped enough oil and gas to depress prices. All in all, I would say that he was quite considerate in his forthright explanation to us all that he really IS the Saudi mukhtar of the United States. pl

**********

Old Post

"I call upon Salman, the King of Saudi, to invite the prime minister of Israel Netanyahu to visit Saudi Arabia," Katz said on Thursday speaking at the Herzliya conference . "We saw what a wonderful host you can be when President Trump was there. You can also send your heir, the new one, Prince Mohammed bin Salman. He's a dynamic person. He is an initiator. And he wants to break through."" SF

--------------

OK, Yisrael Katz, the intelligence minister of Israel has asked the present king of Saudi Arabia to invite Benjamin Natanyahu to a state visit in Riyadh. What a great idea! (irony) IMO there is nothing that would be more likely to trigger a revolt within and without the SA royal family against King Salman and his son, the new crown prince. People just don't understand that the Saudi population and the royal family (thousands of people in various factions) continue to regard Israel as the ultimate enemy. For all these carefully indoctrinated Wahhabis, Israel is an abomination that occupies a portion of the territory of the 'umma, God's territory on earth. To invite Israel's prime minister to Riyadh for a state visit or, indeed any kind of visit, would be to recognize Israel as a state legitimately and perpetually occupying Palestine. The behind the scenes machinations of various acculturated princes like Muhammad bin Salman mean nothing to the people of the Saudi kingdom. What we are talking about in such a demand is an invitation to blasphemy and apostasy. It is typical of the vast majority of Israelis that in their contempt for non-Jews and especially their neighbors, they remain ignorant of such realities. A truce would be possible but not permanent recognition. pl

https://southfront.org/israeli-intelligence-calls-saudi-king-invite-netanyahu-riyadh/

********

" ... it is unlikely in the extreme that Saudi Arabia would have undertaken something so drastic without coordination with the US, particularly since this action comes literally on the heels of President Trump's high-profile visit to Saudi Arabia. While initially silent, President Trump ultimately took to Twitter to back Saudi Arabia against Qatar, even as the US still maintains major military presence in that country."

... the nature of the accusations leveled at Qatar is nothing short of extreme. Both US and Saudi leaders accused Qatar of about the worst offense currently available, namely supporting violent Islamic extremism. Trump went so far as to say that Qatar's change of policies would be a major step toward resolving the problem of terrorism." SF

----------

Saudi Arabia is a larger sponsor of Sunni jihadi movements than Qatar. That has always been true. The "kingdom" is a state built on Sunni fanaticism. There are no churches, no synagogues, no legally resident ministers of other faiths than Islam in the country. Mukhtar (appointed head man and tax farmer) Donald Trump swore allegiance to his Saudi pals in Riyadh. He did that before an army of witnesses from across the Islamic world. The Saudis have always sought to impose their sphere of influence upon all Muslims within their reach. They understandably think that mukhtar Trump gave them an extended reach as their henchman. The air base at al-odeid in Qatar is a Qatari base in which the US has been allowed to position the forward element of US CENTCOM's headquarter, the US air operations center for the whole region and ten thousand bird men. (and women). Arabs do not do things like that from altruistic love. The Qataris expected protection from Iran and Saudi Arabia and have not gotten much of anything in return. Now Turkey , pursuing its Turanian destiny (on hold since the Ottoman collapse) is building a military position as an ally of the al-than i family rulers of Qatar. SA and its pipsqueak Gulfie allies are now threatening Turkey with - what? Unhappiness if it does not abandon Qatar.? Did mukhtar Trump understand any of this before he swore fealty to King Salman? I doubt it. pl

it is unlikely in the extreme that Saudi Arabia would have undertaken something so drastic without coordination with the US, particularly since this action comes literally on the heels of President Trump's high-profile visit to Saudi Arabia. While initially silent, President Trump ultimately took to Twitter to back Saudi Arabia against Qatar, even as the US still maintains major military presence in that country.

The nature of the accusations leveled at Qatar is nothing short of extreme. Both US and Saudi leaders accused Qatar of about the worst offense currently available, namely supporting violent Islamic extremism. Trump went so far as to say that Qatar's change of policies would be a major step toward resolving the problem of terrorism.

The nature of the crisis suggests it represents tensions that long bubbled under the surface but now have finally burst into the open. The Qatari-Saudi falling out, and the make-up of the pro-Saudi faction, suggests that several factors at work here. it is unlikely in the extreme that Saudi Arabia would have undertaken something so drastic without coordination with the US, particularly since this action comes literally on the heels of President Trump's high-profile visit to Saudi Arabia. While initially silent, President Trump ultimately took to Twitter to back Saudi Arabia against Qatar, even as the US still maintains major military presence in that country.

The nature of the accusations leveled at Qatar is nothing short of extreme. Both US and Saudi leaders accused Qatar of about the worst offense currently available, namely supporting violent Islamic extremism. Trump went so far as to say that Qatar's change of policies would be a major step toward resolving the problem of terrorism.

The nature of the crisis suggests it represents tensions that long bubbled under the surface but now have finally burst into the open. The Qatari-Saudi falling out, and the make-up of the pro-Saudi faction, suggests that several factors at work here. it is unlikely in the extreme that Saudi Arabia would have undertaken something so drastic without coordination with the US, particularly since this action comes literally on the heels of President Trump's high-profile visit to Saudi Arabia. While initially silent, President Trump ultimately took to Twitter to back Saudi Arabia against Qatar, even as the US still maintains major military presence in that country.

The nature of the accusations leveled at Qatar is nothing short of extreme. Both US and Saudi leaders accused Qatar of about the worst offense currently available, namely supporting violent Islamic extremism. Trump went so far as to say that Qatar's change of policies would be a major step toward resolving the problem of terrorism.

The nature of the crisis suggests it represents tensions that long bubbled under the surface but now have finally burst into the open. The Qatari-Saudi falling out, and the make-up of the pro-Saudi faction, suggests that several factors at work here.

https://southfront.org/qatar-crisis-consequences/

[Nov 21, 2018] Sixteen years ago Wesley Clark said that the PNAC plan was for the US to take out 7 countries in 5 years, with Iran being the coup de gras. Hasn't happened yet.

Nov 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

follyofwar , says: November 20, 2018 at 9:26 pm GMT

@Colin Wright

In a sense, that could be reversed. Indeed, none of the presidents since Bill Clinton has done ALL that Netanyahu's Israel has demanded, since none of them have gone to war against Iran.

Obama, it is said, couldn't stand to be in the same room as Bibi. He and SOS Kerry negotiated the multi-party Iran Nuclear Deal against Bibi's wishes, which our current POTUS irrationally tore up. Was Trump carrying out the will of Israel, or was it because he could not bear to allow one of the few good things that Obama accomplished to stand? Perhaps both.

Sixteen years ago Wesley Clark said that the PNAC plan was for the US to take out 7 countries in 5 years, with Iran being the coup de gras. Hasn't happened yet. And is Trump really that crazy? Let's hope that Bibi, who may be on his way out of office for corruption, never gets his war.

[Nov 21, 2018] Magnitsky Act mastermind seeks to stop Cyprus from revealing his offshore assets to Russia

Notable quotes:
"... "He [Browder] is afraid of the Russian probe that has conclusive evidence of his financial crimes and proof that his theory of Magnitsky's death is an absolute fake. That's why Browder is ready to stage any provocation," ..."
"... "influenced by the fact that the entire network of offshore companies that make up his organized criminal group is located on the territory of Cyprus." ..."
"... "the Cypriot government is actively assisting the Russian government in furthering human rights violations through assistance with politically motivated prosecutions, in contravention of its obligations under European conventions," ..."
Nov 16, 2017 | defenddemocracy.press

A group of MEPs have urged Cyprian authorities not to cooperate with Russia on an inquiry against the man behind the Magnitsky Act, William Browder. Now, a Russian lawyer claims that Browder himself arranged this petition to hide data on his operations.

Browder, a US-born British investor and the founder of Hermitage Capital Management, fears that his fraudulent investment schemes involving offshore assets in Cyprus would be revealed to European authorities if Cyprus continues to cooperate with Moscow on its probe against him, Natalya Veselnitskaya, a Russian lawyer who conducted her own investigation into Browder's operations, told RT. She added that Browder is actively trying to paint the investigation against him as politically motivated.

"He [Browder] is afraid of the Russian probe that has conclusive evidence of his financial crimes and proof that his theory of Magnitsky's death is an absolute fake. That's why Browder is ready to stage any provocation," Veselnitskaya said. She went on to say that the investor's decision to intervene was particularly "influenced by the fact that the entire network of offshore companies that make up his organized criminal group is located on the territory of Cyprus."

The incident that Veselnitskaya was referring to took place in late October 2017. At that time, 17 members of the European Parliament appealed to Cypriot President Nikos Anastasiades in an open letter, in which they called on him to stop assisting Russia in its investigation against Browder.

The MEPs particularly expressed their concerns over the fact that "the Cypriot government is actively assisting the Russian government in furthering human rights violations through assistance with politically motivated prosecutions, in contravention of its obligations under European conventions," as reported by the local Cyprus Mail daily.

[Nov 20, 2018] A Finance Magnates analysis reports that one of the swindles alone has brought in over a billion dollars and employs 5,000 people. And a new scam, described below, may help what is predicted to be "the next major driver of the Israeli economy."

Nov 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

ChuckOrloski , says: November 17, 2018 at 1:13 pm GMT

Very important, with "Eyes Wide Open," Alison Weir, below!

https://israelpalestinenews.org/is-israel-turning-a-blind-eye-as-israeli-scammers-swindle-victims-in-france-us-elsewhere/

renfro , says: November 17, 2018 at 5:53 pm GMT
@ChuckOrloski Not surprising to anyone who understands that stealing ,especially from 'others' is a first choice career of Jews/Israelis.
I have always suspected that the 9 billion of stolen Iraq funds were stolen by the Jews who were embedded in the US occupation administration and sent to Israel. Israel was so broke in 2001 they asked the Us for economic aid then suddenly in 2004 by some miracle they were rolling in surplus money again.

Investigations reveal a pattern of Israeli officials stone-walling efforts to stop the perpetrators of massive financial swindles in various countries, from Europe to the US to the Philippines While some Israeli reporters work to expose the scams, a new one is already underway

By Alison Weir

[MORE]
French and Israeli media report that a group largely made up of Israelis scammed 3,000 French citizens out of approximately $20 million. Most of the stolen money is in Israel, but Israeli authorities are reportedly failing to cooperate with France in prosecuting the scammers and retrieving the money.
This is the latest of numerous examples of Israeli officials stone-walling international efforts against the perpetrators of massive financial swindles around the world, according to Israeli investigative journalists and others. These scams have brought estimated billions into the Israeli economy, propping up a regime widely condemned for human rights abuses and ethnic cleansing against indigenous Palestinians. Together, the stories paint a picture of a government that seems to be turning a blind eye to -- and even protecting -- scammers.

A Finance Magnates analysis reports that one of the swindles alone has brought in over a billion dollars and employs 5,000 people. And a new scam, described below, may help what is predicted to be "the next major driver of the Israeli economy."

A former IRS expert on international crime notes that "fraudulent industries are often major economic drivers, and that can translate into political clout."
Some Israeli journalists have been working to expose the situation in Israeli newspapers, publishing exposés like "As Israel turns blind eye to vast binary options fraud, French investigators step in" and "Are French Jewish criminals using Israel as a get-out-of-jail card?" (Short answer: yes.)

Victimizing French business owners & churches

The victims of the recent scam against French citizens included churches and the owners of small businesses -- delicatessens, car repair shops, hair salons, plumbers, etc. Some lost their life savings and describe being threatened and intimidated by the scammers.

[Nov 20, 2018] A Jewish conman Bill Browder, who made the US Congress to dance to his tune, is named as a suspect in four murders: "'Highly likely that Magnitsky was poisoned by toxic chemicals on Bill Browder's orders"

Notable quotes:
"... "The prosecutors identified four people who were suspects in the Browder case, all of whom died over the course of less than two years as the investigation against him unfolded. ..."
"... Considering that the three individuals, with the exception of Magnitsky, died within months of each other while being investigated as part of Browder's case, "it is highly likely that they were killed to get rid of accomplices who could give an incriminating testimony against Browder," a senior official with the Russian General Prosecutor's office told journalists. The same may be true for Magnitsky The prosecutors claim that Browder was the party who benefited most from the death of Magnitsky." ..."
"... This is not some funny Skripal affair. This is a real case of several murders (see four cold bodies) ordered by the known scoundrel. ..."
Nov 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

annamaria , says: Next New Comment November 19, 2018 at 7:41 pm GMT

@anonymous A Jewish conman Bill Browder, who made the US Congress to dance to his tune, is named as a suspect in four murders: "'Highly likely that Magnitsky was poisoned by toxic chemicals on Bill Browder's orders" https://www.rt.com/russia/444340-browder-magnitsky-murder-moscow/

"The prosecutors identified four people who were suspects in the Browder case, all of whom died over the course of less than two years as the investigation against him unfolded.

The Russian prosecutors believe all four of them may have been killed with a rare water-soluble compound of aluminum. Each of the men showed symptoms consistent with being poisoned by the toxin prior to their deaths An investigation into four possible murders has been opened.

Considering that the three individuals, with the exception of Magnitsky, died within months of each other while being investigated as part of Browder's case, "it is highly likely that they were killed to get rid of accomplices who could give an incriminating testimony against Browder," a senior official with the Russian General Prosecutor's office told journalists. The same may be true for Magnitsky The prosecutors claim that Browder was the party who benefited most from the death of Magnitsky."

– This is not some funny Skripal affair. This is a real case of several murders (see four cold bodies) ordered by the known scoundrel.

That Browder (a liar and cheat that made a huge fortune in Russia) has "benefited most from the death of Magnitsky" is undoubtedly true.

[Nov 20, 2018] When do we take a stand, (when do we fight)?

Nov 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

TRASH(NOT) , says: November 14, 2018 at 2:01 pm GMT

@anonymous

Both share an implacable sense of Islamophobia. And, the deep sense of racial inferiority complex which the hindoos feel, fits well with the cursed ideology of their supremacist white-skinned Zionist masters. Them hindoos are willful lickspittle of the Jooscum.

Man you really hit the bull's eye with this astute observation of yours (or is the golden cafe we have here?? ;))

What I think is that, these hindoos (at least the ones who are on the top of the totem pole) have what robert lindsay used to describe as, a very deep sense of inferiority complex intertwined with a very superficial sense of superiority on the outside. Deeper the inferiority complex, stronger the (external) superiority complex to offset the deep sense of shame they have on the inside. I wonder why that is?

However it would be wrong to paint the whole country of India with the same brush. A massive percentage of people there are bearing the brunt of toxic hatred and violence emanating from the likes of 'zionist lickspittles' you mentioned. One can only surmise what they must be enduring. These low caste and other minorities there would be a very patient and stoic people as otherwise India would've erupted into a full blown civil war by now.

As for the 'jooscum', I take issue with that. There certainly are Jews, like Unz, Atzmon and Shamir who defy the stereotype and become champions of real free speech and truth. So again one must NOT go down that slippery slope of putting each and everyone to the guillotine just because they happen to be cohen or ahmed or rahul or whatever. We are better than that

Durruti , says: November 14, 2018 at 3:20 pm GMT
@anon Thanks for reading my comment.

The Bill of Rights (1st 10 Amendments), to the Constitution were added to mitigate criticism of the new centralized American Constitutional Gov't.

Jefferson said the Constitution made his stomach turn.

Nevertheless, (with all its faults) it (the somewhat sovereign American gov't), was replaced on November 22, 1963

When do we take a stand? We must Restore our Republic (there is no obfuscating around our duty).

You care.

God bless!

[Nov 20, 2018] Israel support const Us taxpayers more than just the 3 billion per year, it more like 5 billion if you count the 760,000 for missile defense and a dozen other programs for aid to Israel. Cost was 1.6 trillion as of 2002, probably 2 trillion by now.

Nov 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

renfro , says: November 16, 2018 at 6:38 pm GMT

@ChuckOrloski Its much more than that .we have a lot of cost for Israel than just the yearly 3 billion, it more like 5 billion if you count the 760,000 for missile defense and a dozen other programs for aid to Israel. Cost was 1.6 trillion as of 2002, probably 2 trillion by now.

Economist tallies swelling cost of Israel to US

December 9, 2002

By David R. Francis ,Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

[MORE]
Since 1973, Israel has cost the United States about $1.6 trillion. If divided by today's population, that is more than $5,700 per person.

This is an estimate by Thomas Stauffer, a consulting economist in Washington. For decades, his analyses of the Middle East scene have made him a frequent thorn in the side of the Israel lobby.

For the first time in many years, Mr. Stauffer has tallied the total cost to the US of its backing of Israel in its drawn-out, violent dispute with the Palestinians. So far, he figures, the bill adds up to more than twice the cost of the Vietnam War.

And now Israel wants more. In a meeting at the White House late last month, Israeli officials made a pitch for $4 billion in additional military aid to defray the rising costs of dealing with the intifada and suicide bombings. They also asked for more than $8 billion in loan guarantees to help the country's recession-bound economy.

Considering Israel's deep economic troubles, Stauffer doubts the Israel bonds covered by the loan guarantees will ever be repaid. The bonds are likely to be structured so they don't pay interest until they reach maturity. If Stauffer is right, the US would end up paying both principal and interest, perhaps 10 years out.

Israel's request could be part of a supplemental spending bill that's likely to be passed early next year, perhaps wrapped in with the cost of a war with Iraq.

Israel is the largest recipient of US foreign aid. It is already due to get $2.04 billion in military assistance and $720 million in economic aid in fiscal 2003. It has been getting $3 billion a year for years.

Adjusting the official aid to 2001 dollars in purchasing power, Israel has been given $240 billion since 1973, Stauffer reckons. In addition, the US has given Egypt $117 billion and Jordan $22 billion in foreign aid in return for signing peace treaties with Israel.

"Consequently, politically, if not administratively, those outlays are part of the total package of support for Israel," argues Stauffer in a lecture on the total costs of US Middle East policy, commissioned by the US Army War College, for a recent conference at the University of Maine.

These foreign-aid costs are well known. Many Americans would probably say it is money well spent to support a beleagured democracy of some strategic interest. But Stauffer wonders if Americans are aware of the full bill for supporting Israel since some costs, if not hidden, are little known.

One huge cost is not secret. It is the higher cost of oil and other economic damage to the US after Israel-Arab wars.

In 1973, for instance, Arab nations attacked Israel in an attempt to win back territories Israel had conquered in the 1967 war. President Nixon resupplied Israel with US arms, triggering the Arab oil embargo against the US.

That shortfall in oil deliveries kicked off a deep recession. The US lost $420 billion (in 2001 dollars) of output as a result, Stauffer calculates. And a boost in oil prices cost another $450 billion.

Afraid that Arab nations might use their oil clout again, the US set up a Strategic Petroleum Reserve. That has since cost, conservatively, $134 billion, Stauffer reckons.

Other US help includes:

• US Jewish charities and organizations have remitted grants or bought Israel bonds worth $50 billion to $60 billion. Though private in origin, the money is "a net drain" on the United States economy, says Stauffer.

• The US has already guaranteed $10 billion in commercial loans to Israel, and $600 million in "housing loans." (See editor's note below.) Stauffer expects the US Treasury to cover these.

• The US has given $2.5 billion to support Israel's Lavi fighter and Arrow missile projects.

• Israel buys discounted, serviceable "excess" US military equipment. Stauffer says these discounts amount to "several billion dollars" over recent years.

• Israel uses roughly 40 percent of its $1.8 billion per year in military aid, ostensibly earmarked for purchase of US weapons, to buy Israeli-made hardware. It also has won the right to require the Defense Department or US defense contractors to buy Israeli-made equipment or subsystems, paying 50 to 60 cents on every defense dollar the US gives to Israel.

US help, financial and technical, has enabled Israel to become a major weapons supplier. Weapons make up almost half of Israel's manufactured exports. US defense contractors often resent the buy-Israel requirements and the extra competition subsidized by US taxpayers.

• US policy and trade sanctions reduce US exports to the Middle East about $5 billion a year, costing 70,000 or so American jobs, Stauffer estimates. Not requiring Israel to use its US aid to buy American goods, as is usual in foreign aid, costs another 125,000 jobs.

• Israel has blocked some major US arms sales, such as F-15 fighter aircraft to Saudi Arabia in the mid-1980s. That cost $40 billion over 10 years, says Stauffer.

https://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1209/p16s01-wmgn.html

[Nov 20, 2018] Supposedly the 1965 Immigration Act was engineered by Jews to destroy white society. What it did accomplish was importing a bunch of Asians and Hispanics who do not care a whit about Israel or Jews and some Muslims who detest them.

Nov 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

Jeff Stryker , says: November 15, 2018 at 1:24 am GMT

@JC1 Asian-Americans are not brainwashed. When the LA riots occurred in part because a Korean woman shot a black girl in the back of the head in her store, the Korean shopkeepers simply got out their guns and started shooting black rioters like dogs which of course they privately regard them to be. Blacks paid cash in their liquor stores but once this was no longer a factor they simply started shooting at them-with much greater accuracy, too. The average ghetto black was no match for a Korean with an SKS rifle.

Iranian Muslims are not brainwashed. When Irv Rubin of the Jewish Defense League who had previously been known for brawling with Metzger and the Klan on talk shows tried to blow up the mosque and congressman Issa after 9-11 (I guess he did not get the memo that the Z were behind it) he was imprisoned. His death was suspicious and probably the result of Aryan gangs on the inside. At any rate, so much for Jewish domination of the Muslims.

Hindus are supposedly cooperating with Jews in their takeover of the tech industry. I cannot be sure of that. However, they are not brainwashed.

And as our Italian-American posters have noted here, the Italians who long resided in the same cities with Jews don't give a "rat's culo" for Israel.

Supposedly the 1965 Immigration Act was engineered by Jews to destroy white society. What it did accomplish was importing a bunch of Asians and Hispanics who do not care a whit about Israel or Jews and some Muslims who detest them.

So it is the rural white prole who is brainwashed. He comes home from a hard day's work and watches some film like BLACK PANTHER where a bunch of effete British character actors play the baddies and the black Mandingo walks around in a costume and they want him to screw their sister.

The Korean or Iranian or Italian in the city does not want to imitate blacks. Few of them are whiggers. It is the rural white prole who wants to "keep it real". Italians who do choose to be gangsters do not go to jail for the petty crimes that whiggers do.

I must say that the white is something of a fool. And I should add, I am one. Whites seemed smarter in the 1990′s. But somehow they declined after Bush was elected.

[Nov 20, 2018] Doesn't anyone else get fatigued by the constant demand for attention by the one Ethnostate supposedly created by God

Nov 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

renfro , says: November 14, 2018 at 3:48 am GMT

@Burgess Shale

Doesn't anyone else get fatigued by the constant demand for attention by the one Ethnostate supposedly created by God ? What's in it for me ?

You get to pay for it.

Why Israel Will Never Repay US Loans

Dr. Israel Shahak

[MORE]
"All conceivable questions have been discussed about scheduling and conditions of the $10 billion in loan guarantees requested by Israel from the US government except one: How can Israel possibly repay such a huge sum? After all, if Israel cannot repay these loans, the burden will fall upon the guarantor, the US government, which in the last analysis means upon the US taxpayers.

Such a repayment would in fact amount to foreign aid under another name. Because of the deterioration of economic conditions in the US, no matter what forms of pressure the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) may use, the Congress will be reluctant to offer Israel $10 billion in an extra aid gift.
Given these realities, the best guess would be that both sides already know that since Israel is not capable of repaying the US guaranteed loans, they regard the guarantees as a gift to Israel in disguise.

A Gift in Disguise

Yitzhak Shamir and other Israeli government spokesmen, as well as spokesmen for Israel's US lobby, constantly reiterate that Israel has so far been repaying its debts on time. They don't mention that the US pays the interest on those loans, and eventually forgives them. If the US did not do this, Israel's case would soon be comparable to that of the USSR and other debt-ridden states which used their past good repayment records as justification for borrowing more and more, until finally they defaulted on all their loans. The situation is described by Israeli economist Zvi Timor, the editor of Al-Hamishmar, in an article entitled "Dignified Behavior Under Pressure" in his journal's September 17 issue:
"For years we have been repaying all our debts from what we've been receiving as American aid. Every year Israel gets $1.3 billion of economic aid, of which $ 1.1 billion goes for debt repayment."
In other words, 85 percent of American economic aid "is not spent as it is supposed to be. From private but reliable sources, I know that last year the sum in question reached $1.2 billion, i.e. 92 percent of the received "economic aid." It means that the American taxpayers have been, without their knowledge, repaying the Israeli debt for years. Ordinary Americans would be overjoyed if they learned that their debts were being repaid by somebody else. If Israeli debt repayment goes under the name of "economic aid," it is to conceal from the US public the knowledge that they are repaying somebody else's debts.

The deception is nevertheless obvious for the simple reason that the expenditure of between $11 and $12 billion over 10 years would otherwise have produced some visible effects in Israel. None, however, can be seen.

According to the Congressional Research Service issue brief, "Israel: US Foreign Assistance Facts" by Clyde R. Mark (updated May 8, 1991), Israel also benefits from periodic US government waivers. From 1974 to 1984, the United States waived repayment of part of Israel's annual FMS (Foreign Military Sales). Since 1985, the US has waived repayment of the total FMS. The waiver avoids establishing a program and personnel to oversee the program, as would be required if the same amount were given as a Military Assistance Program grant.

What this means is that since the entire value of the enormous military aid the US has granted Israel over the years is in fact a gift, Israel does not owe the US very much. The brief states further that "the United States gives all ESF (Economic Support Funds) directly to the Government of Israel rather than under a specific program. There is no accounting of how the funds are used. " No other recipient of American aid benefits from such conditions, which seem almost to have been designed to beget fraud. And fraud they did beget.
In fact, fraud and deceit have pervaded Israeli utilization of US support. Even the magnitude of this support has been misreported. Contrary to the data routinely cited by the Western press, combined US military and economic support to Israel has amounted not to $3.1 billion yearly, but, as Timor stated, "in sum total, without counting the guarantees, the US government helps Israel financially to the extent of about $5 billion."
In this sum he includes the value (to Israel) of "deductions [from US income tax] accruing to funds raised by the United Jewish Appeal. " Incidentally, the bulk of these funds, although they are put at the disposal of the Israeli government, remain in the US. They are used by AIPAC and other segments of the Israeli lobby in the United States. In this way, the US administration actually subsidizes lobbying power used against itself.

Other forms of covert American aid cited by Timor are discussed by Yossi Verter and Yigal Laviv in an article headlined "The American financial aid to Israel is much higher than previously known" in Hadashut of September 20. Their estimate of the total amount of support received by Israel from the US roughly concurs with Timor's.
Relying on "documents leaked by the State Department, which were published in part by the Wall Street Journal, " and also "on sources in the Congress" (and apparently on Israeli sources as well), the writers conclude that "financial aid which Israel receives from the US is much higher than published figures indicate, largely because Israel uses the received money for complex financial speculation schemes which are without exception detrimental to the interests of the American taxpayer."
They also assert that "between 1974 and 1989 Israel received from the US over $16 billion in the form of military aid, but no one in the US really expected that any part of this total would ever be repaid."

Asking About the Future

But let us leave the past aside, and ask about the future. Right now, the US pays existing Israeli debts to commercial banks and allows their recycling. The question that therefore remains is, how can Israel repay the additional principal and interest on the $10 billion in loans? Or, alternatively, can Israel renounce the guarantees and impose an austerity regime in their stead?
The latter option is already advocated by such Israeli ministers from the extreme right as former Chief of Staff and present Minister of Agriculture Rafael Eitan. After all, in order to repay this sum each year, Israel would have to increase its exports by at least $4 billion, or more if the profits from such exports did not reach 50 percent.
The last officially recorded value for Israeli exports was some $9.4 billion in 1988. The value of imports was $12.3 billion, yielding a trade deficit of 23.2 percent, according to the "Statistical Abstract of Israel, 1989." Since Israel is now in recession, the value of its exports could not have increased much since then.
In fact, one particular export, that of weaponry, has collapsed since 1988. The value of exported weapons, one-third of which went to Colombia alone, amounted in 1988 to $1.5 billion. The forecast for the next fiscal year was that this particular export would decrease to $213 million.
Two major markets for the Israeli exports now are North America ($3.1 billion, of which $3 billion goes to the US) and the European Common Market ($3.2 billion). Israeli exports to the US were composed chiefly of polished diamonds ($1.2 billion), medicines and chemicals ($180 million), and clothes and textiles ($125 million).

Only the gullible can expect that Americans, under present economic conditions, can be influenced by AIPAC to buy more Israeli diamonds in quantifies sufficient to cover the repayment of the new loans, to be borrowed at the rate of $2 billion per year for five years. An increase of Israeli exports by $4 billion, or some 43 percent in a single year, is, as Timor clearly recognizes, absolutely impossible.
Timor is right in pointing out that without the US guarantees, "a state like Israel, which already has an enormous foreign debt per capita, enormous defense budget, enormous budgetary deficit, and quite sizable trade deficit, would not be considered an attractive borrower on the international financial market. " It can be mentioned in passing that an Israeli budgetary deficit exists when the notyet granted American guarantees are already counted on its revenue side! All these facts only reinforce disbelief in Israel's ability to ever repay the loans guaranteed by the US.
The Austerity Alternative
The alternative option of renouncing the guarantees and imposing an austerity regime would also have dire consequences. The proposed reduction of all salaries by 10 percent would yield the equivalent in Israeli shekels of $2 billion. In addition to the social consequences of this proposal, a hefty proportion of Israeli wage-earners would thus rapidly land below the poverty line.
Nor would these sacrifices yield the intended economic effects. As Timor reminds his readers, Israeli shekels are worthless outside of Israel. His conclusion, backed by some additional arguments not mentioned here, is: "Any savings in shekels are bound to be quite ineffective, because shekels are not dollars."
The prediction that Israel cannot possibly repay the loans which the US is requested to guarantee rests on firm grounds. The data upon which this prediction is based, although not publicized by the media before the current clash of the US administration with the Israeli government and with the Israeli lobby in the US, were surely known to the advocates of the guarantees from the start. This inescapably leads to the conclusion that the guarantees were originally conceived as a grant in disguise. It would have been more honest to call them a gift.
A loan guarantee is essentially the same thing whether you're buying a car, an apartment, or housing materials for Soviet immigrants. A reliable financial entity (a bank, your parents, the United States) promises to pay off the balance of a loan if the borrower cannot. So when Congress promises Israel $9 billion in loan guarantees (as they did this year), that means the U.S. government accepts responsibility for up to $9 billion that Israel can then borrow from international creditors. And loans guaranteed by the Federal Reserve provide an additional benefit: The interest rates offered are much lower than they would be if Israel (or any small, debt-troubled nation) sought the loan without backers.

renfro , says: November 14, 2018 at 4:00 am GMT
Explainer

What are Israel's Loan Guarantees?
2003

"The New York Times reported Tuesday that the United States may be planning to reduce Israel's loan guarantees to account for any money the country spends constructing a "security perimeter" that will divide its citizens from Palestinians. What are these loan guarantees, and how important are they to Israel?
A loan guarantee is essentially the same thing whether you're buying a car, an apartment, or housing materials for Soviet immigrants. A reliable financial entity (a bank, your parents, the United States) promises to pay off the balance of a loan if the borrower cannot. So when Congress promises Israel $9 billion in loan guarantees (as they did this year), that means the U.S. government accepts responsibility for up to $9 billion that Israel can then borrow from international creditors. And loans guaranteed by the Federal Reserve provide an additional benefit: The interest rates offered are much lower than they would be if Israel (or any small, debt-troubled nation) sought the loan without backers.

The $9 billion in loan guarantees (along with $1 billion in direct aid) comprise a special post-Gulf War II aid package, awarded to Israel on top of the $3 billion in other assistance that the United States gives annually. But with loan guarantees, it's never clear how much money is actually "given": In a perfect world, they wouldn't cost the United States a cent. Israel -- or Turkey, Egypt, and Jordan, all of which snagged loan guarantees as postwar rewards -- could borrow on the international markets, then pay off the loans completely, leaving the United States with no financial obligation. But Israel has already received nearly $10 billion in loan guarantees from the United States since 1992, and while it has yet to default on any of those loans, this new round of guarantees is intended in part to help Israel pay off the old debt. Which means the United States could be stuck with a bill ranging anywhere from zero to $9 billion plus interest.
When borrowing on the United States' good credit, the Israeli government can use the money for any purpose. However, Congress attached a series of stipulations to the recent package, including one that reserves the right to reduce the guarantee amount to counterbalance any money Israel spends creating new settlements in contested territory. This caveat is exactly what Bush may use now to pressure Israel to cease construction on its "security perimeter" -- if the caveat is employed, Israel would find itself fully responsible for part of its loan (and thus with higher interest rates). And because Israel's annual revenues top out at $40 billion, any tweaks to a $9 billion aid package could shake up the country's economy.
Experts say it's far from clear that the Bush administration will follow through with this plan. But simply threatening to reduce the guarantees can also be effective because Israel needs the U.S.-backed loans to keep debt payments under control. In 1991, Israel was in a similarly desperate financial situation, and the United States used the threat of limiting loan guarantees to force then-Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir to attend the Madrid peace conference and suspend settlement construction while he was there

renfro , says: November 14, 2018 at 4:28 am GMT
Jewish Groups Get 94% of Homeland Security Grants

https://forward.com/news/breaking-news/203059/jewish-groups-get-94-of-homeland-security-grants/

"The Department of Homeland Security allocated to Jewish institutions $12 million, or 94 percent, of $13 million in funds for securing nonprofits.
The $13 million disbursed last week brings to $151 million the amount disbursed since the program started in 2005, most of it to Jewish institutions "

anon [423] Disclaimer , says: November 14, 2018 at 4:33 am GMT
@Durruti Its not a no longer situation.

The USA is not a sovereign nation, America is a sovereign nation, could that be what you meant to say?

The USA is a corporation organized to govern; it owners are not investor-shareholders but robber-barren bandit stakeholders. The USA was established to mitigate and tame down the Democracy Americans had bleed red blood to achieve. Take a look at the corporate bylaws (constitution) of the USA, they consist of seven articles.

The Executive, Article I. (pres. vp,), the Congress Art. II. (board of directors), the Judiciary ( to settle difference) (Article III), Articles IV clarifies relations between the different generally lesser governments (states), Article V, invents a way to make it possible for the constitution to terminate the Confederation (that invention is called Ratification) It was ratification that transferred the power of government from the continental "democracy-practicing" masses right back into the hands of the few caretakers who were beholding to, or in service to, private banking and foreign interest. America governed itself for 11 years . After that the pre -evolution Oligarchs (wealthy or highly educated elites) managed to get ratified their constitution and to use it to put themselves right back into the positions of political and autocratic power they enjoyed before the revolution. The constitution eliminated the right of Americans to a say in the affairs of their government. (the government, and the affairs of government, were separated from the masses of the people. The USA was used to protect and enhance the aristocrats from the needs, wants and plight of the masses and to extract from the masses the funds that support USA operations. To accomplish that transition feat, the banksters used ( or invented and used) a process called ratification (Article VII). Ratification eliminated the American Democracy overseen by the Articles of Confederation (as administered by the American democratic continental government).

Read Constitution Article VI [2] and [3].. you will see.. authority..shall be supreme.. Judges Senators and Representatives ,.. Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the US and of the several States [shall be bound by it].

Constitution Article VI [1] ..engagements entered into, before the Adoption[ratification] ..shall be valid against the US [<=meaning in spite of the democratic wish of those who fought the British , the US corporation (USA) would "recognize as valid" deeds to real estate obtained by Land grant from a foreigner. Millions of acres of America would remain in a very few private hands. It meant many other similar things.. to numerous to mention here. Had the Confederation continued slavery most likely would have not survived.

Why bother with writing Article VI{1}? These few words allowed wealthy Washington Aristocrat types to retain their vast personal ownership in their humongous-stretches of real estate (land holdings) given (land granted) to them or to those from whom they acquired them by a foreign power (on behalf of the Banksters who in those days controlled everything). Democracy itself was the threat that produced the US Constitution ; the US constitution eliminated democracy ; the constitution replaced America's democracy by confederation with a republic (meaning no one but the elected few are to be permitted any say in anything (go back to work and shut the **** up).

Why was democracy a threat ? The Confederation (government by agreement) was being urged by its war vets to make good on its promises to give every vet a homestead and a pension for their service in the war. The vets were demanding all land in America belonged to Americans. they were insisting to refuse to recognize claims (deeds) to real estate that predated the American revolution; we don't recognize deeds from foreign kings. British, French or Spanish land grant owners turn the ownership of your land over to America (the confederation), such land does not belong to you. We Americans do not recognize land grants from foreign governments; these lands never belonged to foreigners so they could not give them to you. Needless to say, land grant owners (Washington and family owned most of Virginia and a great part of West Virginia <=reason George was appointed general of the continental army, he was so rich everyone would know who he was and volunteer to help fight the British).

It must be remembered that the Confederation (Articles of Confederation, not the USA) was the government that defeated the British in the American Revolution, 1776-1778! The USA did not then exist. Eleven Confederation years between 1776 (Declaration of Independence) and the ratification of the USA (1789)

Ratification truncated the American Democracy; ratification re-established the British Bankster appointed Aristocrats as puppets in charge over America.

The US Constitution created an Americanized form of British Parliamentary government, in virtually the same form as existed in British Colonial times, but without a king or queen (instead a President and Vice President); so the USA was the banker's government that would control America, its just that most Americans did not know it. Most Americans cannot name one of the 11 presidents of the Confederation (AOC government) because misleading propaganda has been substituted in their school taught histories. Most Americans don't understand federalism, nor do they have any idea the angry controversy that forced the USA into existence.

I have written this several times and each time I understand more about what happened. If you see I am wrong please say so.. I am really interested to sort out the truth and that was a long time ago.

[Nov 20, 2018] Israel Wins 2018 Election by Philip Giraldi

With all due respect to Philip Giraldi I do not buy this reasoning. Outsize influence of Israel in the US politics and especially in foreign policy is a direct result of correlation of the goals of Israel and USA on the Middle East. In a way Israel acts as yet another (informal) US state. The moment Israel tries to pursue independent foreign policy (for example by booting Likud from government and electing more reasonable party and deviating from the USA goals) it will face consequences, Israeli lobby or no Israeli lobby. Israel also acts as yet another lobbyist for the US military industrial complex.
The fact that media is owned by large corporations does no imply that it is owned by Israeli interests. And if MSM conduct pro-Israeli propaganda they do so reflecting interests of the the US elite -- financial oligarchy. And a large percentage of financial oligarchy support Zionism.
But the fact of interference of Israeli government in the USA election are reprehensible and those involved should be prosecuted. Possibly using RICO act.
Discussion of the article is much more interesting then the article itself, revealing many additional aspects of the power of Israeli lobby to influence the US elections. As well as the list of US politicians they managed to send to the dustbin of history.
Notable quotes:
"... While acknowledging the great debt to Walt and Mearsheimer, it is one thing to read about something in a book and quite another thing to see it live, which is what the new evidence of Israeli interference consists of. Several years ago, the Qatari news service al-Jazeera commissioned two investigations. The first was on the activities of the Israeli Lobby in Britain and the second was on the lobby in the United States. The material consisted largely of meetings with members of Israel's active lobby that were secretly filmed by journalists who were pretending to be supporters and who eventually managed to penetrate some of the organizations that were most active in promoting Israel's interests. ..."
"... It demonstrated how the Israeli Embassy in London connived with government officials to "take down" parliamentarians and government ministers who were considered to be critical of the Jewish State. It also revealed how the Israeli Embassy was secretly subsidizing and advising private groups promoting Israeli interests, including associations of Members of Parliament (MPs). ..."
"... There appears to be a Jewish moneyed lobby, working in conjunction with other moneyed lobbies to create a universal, one world government supervised by themselves. America was the first to go. Next? ..."
"... The book – Dangerous Liaison – was not particularly controversial it simply put forth what kind special relationship Israel has with its ally the US (Iran-contra, Pollard Affair, USS Liberty, Dimona, et al). The type of information all Americans should have a working knowledge of (but do not). Sorry Leslie, I was rooting for you. ..."
"... Well sure they bought Congress. But Congress has been a vestigial constitutional appendix ever since CIA sent Don Gregg to see the Church and Pike Committees. He threatened martial law and that was that. ..."
"... The three branches of the US government are still CIA, CIA, and CIA. The only interesting development is the catastrophic collapse of CIA's aggression by sending of armed bands in Syria. ..."
"... The Electronic Intifada has obtained a complete copy of The Lobby – USA, a four-part undercover investigation by Al Jazeera into Israel's covert influence campaign in the United States. I suggest everyone watch all four episodes of this Doc. ..."
"... The Al-Jazeera documentary reveals that these fifth columnist spies and narcs are using a definition of anti-Semitism from the U.S. State Dept. to crush dissent. This definition came from none other than Hillary Clinton. ..."
"... What do you think the reaction would be, and by whom, if a US politician proposed a resolution "that Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state be supported until a majority of Middle Eastern states by number and population, and all those contiguous to Israel, have ended discrimination on grounds of religion"? ..."
"... You are correct. Israel is the only country to flout the Symington Amendment, which mandates that "foreign aid" be denied to any country that has not signed the "Nuclear Non-Proliferation" agreement and refuses to allow International Atomic Energy Agency inspections of their nuclear facilities. ..."
"... Add to that, AIPAC and many other pro-Israel organizations that have not registered as "agents of a foreign government" as required by American law. ..."
"... Israel is indeed a "special case". ..."
Nov 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

It is particularly ironic that as the midterm campaigns were drawing to a close there appeared some serious investigative journalism that demonstrates precisely how Israel and Jewish groups corrupt the political process in America to provide virtually unlimited support for anything and everything that the despicable Benjamin Netanyahu and his gang of war criminals seek to do. How the process has succeeded is best illustrated by the current Israeli government's policy of "mowing the grass" in Gaza where it is using army snipers to kill unarmed Palestinian protesters. Washington not only does not protest against the in-your-face war crime, it aids and abets it with U.S. Ambassador David Friedman justifying the military response as measured and appropriate.

Another area where Washington chooses to look the other way is regarding Israel's nuclear arsenal, believed to consist of two hundred warheads. Under U.S. law, any country that has an undeclared nuclear weapons arsenal cannot obtain American-made weapons and cannot received aid of any type. Congress and the White House pretend that the Israeli nuclear arsenal does not exist, in spite of the fact that the Israelis themselves have more than once implicitly acknowledged it and instead of cutting aid to Israel have instead increased it. It is currently $3.8 billion per year guaranteed for the next ten years, with extra money also available if needed. No other country benefits from such largesse and gives in return so little.

To be sure, the groundbreaking book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy by professors Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, which appeared in 2007, pulled no punches in describing how the Israel Lobby operates in the United States. It also made clear that the relationship with Israel serves no United States national interest whatsoever and exists solely because of the corruption of the political system and the media by principally Jewish individuals and groups that are dedicated to that task.

While acknowledging the great debt to Walt and Mearsheimer, it is one thing to read about something in a book and quite another thing to see it live, which is what the new evidence of Israeli interference consists of. Several years ago, the Qatari news service al-Jazeera commissioned two investigations. The first was on the activities of the Israeli Lobby in Britain and the second was on the lobby in the United States. The material consisted largely of meetings with members of Israel's active lobby that were secretly filmed by journalists who were pretending to be supporters and who eventually managed to penetrate some of the organizations that were most active in promoting Israel's interests.

The British expose, in two parts, aired in January, and was based on discussions and interviews that took place between June and November 2017. It demonstrated how the Israeli Embassy in London connived with government officials to "take down" parliamentarians and government ministers who were considered to be critical of the Jewish State. It also revealed how the Israeli Embassy was secretly subsidizing and advising private groups promoting Israeli interests, including associations of Members of Parliament (MPs).

The secret recording revealed how an Israeli Embassy diplomat/spy named Shai Masot connived with a senior civil servant to get rid of Foreign Office Minister Sir Alan Duncan, regarded as a supporter of an independent Palestinian state. To Masot's additional query "Can I give you some MPs that I would suggest you would take down?" the civil servant suggested " if you look hard enough, I'm sure there is something that they're trying to hide a little scandal maybe." Another alleged pro-Arab member of Parliament Crispin Blunt was also identified and confirmed to be on a "hit list."

It was also learned that Masot had been secretly subsidizing and advising two ostensibly independent groups, the parliamentary Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI) and the Labour Friends of Israel (LFI). Masot did, however, express concern that Israel's control over incoming parliamentarians was not quite what it used to be: "For years, every MP that joined the parliament joined the LFI. They're not doing that any more in the Labour Party. CFI, they're doing it automatically. All the 14 new MPs who got elected in the last elections did it automatically."

The documentary was initially a sensation in Britain but then, predictably, it went away as Israel's loyal host of media scriveners took charge. Masot was recalled to Israel and Prime Minister Teresa May, as good a friend to Jewish money and power as one is likely to find, decided to do nothing. Her characteristically toothless reaction to the suggestion that her government officials might be removed by the clandestine activity of a foreign country was: "The Israeli ambassador has apologized the U.K. has a strong relationship with Israel and we consider the matter closed."

The four-part series by al-Jazeera on the Lobby in the U.S. was meanwhile temporarily spiked because the Qatari government was seeking to obtain the mediation of prominent American Jews to pressure the White House to help resolve its outstanding conflict with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

The documentary has remained in limbo but in the past two weeks it has surfaced and is now available . Its undercover investigative journalist, a British Jew named Tony Kleinfeld, quickly charmed his way into the inner circle of Israel's supporters where he discovered a network of organizations that act as fronts for the Israeli government. Their activities include spying on supporters of Palestinian rights and disrupting demonstrations, with a particular focus on the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS), which Israel has particularly targeted. They also resorted to tactics like smearing critics by generating false accusations of sexual and personal misconduct, all of which was coordinated by Israel's Ministry of Strategic Affairs. The ministry's director general is Sima Vaknin-Gil , a former senior officer with Israel's military intelligence , and is staff consists mostly of former spies drawn from Israel's various security agencies.

Later, Kleinfeld became involved with The Israel Project , which is a U.S. based Israeli government backed propaganda organ that claims to be "a non-partisan American educational organization dedicated to informing the media and public conversation about Israel and the Middle East."

In a recorded conversation, Project employee Jordan Schachtel, explained the objectives and extent of a secret Facebook operation. "We're putting together a lot of pro-Israel media through various social media channels that aren't The Israel Project's channels. So we have a lot of side projects that we are trying to influence the public debate with. That's why it's a secretive thing, because we don't want people to know that these side projects are associated with The Israel Project."

In another episode, the Israel on Campus Coalition's Jacob Baime, who claimed to have a $2 million budget, described coordinating with the Israeli government, with an approach "modeled on General Stanley McChrystal's counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq copied a lot from that strategy that has been working really well for us, actually" using "offensive information operations." Baime described putting "up some anonymous website" along with targeted Facebook ads so that critics "either shut down or they spend time responding to it and investigating it, which is time they can't spend attacking Israel. It's psychological warfare, it drives them crazy."

Kleinfeld also met with other groups. Foundation for Defense of Democracies was revealed as yet another agent of Israel's Ministry of Strategic Affairs, its directors meeting regularly with Israeli Embassy staff in Washington. In spite of that the Treasury Department has not compelled it to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (FARA). It is also registered with the IRS as a tax exempt 501(c)3 "charity." Indeed, no Jewish organization active on behalf of Israel has ever had to register under FARA and most are classified as tax exempt charities or educational foundations. Interestingly, however, the FDD's Jonathan Schanzer lamented in his recorded conversation with Kleinfeld that "anti-Semitism as a smear is not what is used to be."

In another bizarre episode, Kleinfeld visited the neocon dominated Hoover Institute in California where he participated in a demonstration together with a group of bored young conservative think tankers compelled by their professors to protest against a Students for Justice in Palestine conference. The think tank fellows admit that they were "astroturfing" – rent-a-crowd activism to make a small demonstration appear much larger.

Another segment includes Israeli Lobby financier Adam Milstein, who is reported to be the principal funder of Canary Mission, which has targeted some 1,900 students and academics in its profiles since 2015 , smearing them as "racist," "anti-American" and "anti-Semitic." Jacob Baime, executive director of the Israel on Campus Coalition, boasts in the film that "Canary Mission is highly, highly effective to the extent that we monitor the Students for Justice in Palestine and their allies."

In his recording, Milstein also talks about the need to "investigate" and "expose" critics of Israel, who Milstein claims are anti-Semites, as well as "anti-Christian" and "anti-freedom" activists who "terrorize us." His foundation also funds numerous anti-Palestinian organizations, including the Israel on Campus Coalition , StandWithUs , CAMERA , the AMCHA Initiative and the FDD . Milstein also funds and is chairman of the board of the Israeli-American Council. An Israeli-born California based real estate developer, Milstein reportedly served time in federal prison after a 2009 conviction for tax evasion.

An Israeli spy at the University of California at Davis, Julia Reifkind also described to Kleinfeld how the system worked at the campus level. She used multiple fake Facebook accounts to monitor the activities of Students for Justice in Palestine. "I follow all the SJP accounts. I have some fake names. My name is Jay Bernard or something. It just sounds like an old white guy, which was the plan. I join all these groups." The information she obtained was then passed on to her contact in the Embassy for forwarding on to Israel to be entered into their data base of enemies.

So, Israel was engaging in interfering in legitimate political activity and also generating fake news on the social media in both 2016 and 2018, the same accusation that has been leveled against Moscow, but Special Counsel Robert Mueller seems curiously uninterested. And beyond the al-Jazeera revelations, there is also the evidence that it was Israel that sought favors from the incoming Trump Administration in 2016, not Russia. So who was actually corrupting whom?

And then there are the more overt Israeli front groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) with its $100 million annual budget and 200 employees, as well as the other special arrangements to pander to Israel and the powerful American Jews who have made it their mission to use the U.S. government as a mechanism to protect and nurture Israel. Last week in Los Angeles $60 million was raised by Hollywood's finest for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), "Their Job is to Look After Israel. Ours is to Look After Them," the website proclaims. Last month, an additional $32 million was raised for the IDF in New York City. Donations are tax exempt, to support the armed forces of a country that is currently engaged in war crimes and that has a secret nuclear arsenal.

So, Israel was technically speaking not running in the 2018 election, but it was very much in the race. Jewish Democrats are already boasting how the presence of a couple of Israel critics in the House, who will be "reeducated" on the Middle East, will make no difference, that the party will be solid for the Jewish state with more Jewish congressmen than ever before. Indeed, the "special relationship" bond will be stronger than ever. Five committee chairmanships in the House of Representatives will be in the hands of passionate Israel firsters, including Adam Schiff at the Intelligence Committee and Eliot Engel at Foreign Affairs. On the Republican side, the House is already 100% in Israel's pocket. And as part of the White House team we have John Bolton and Mike Pompeo. Donald Trump's Ambassador to Israel David Friedman expressed the dual loyalty phenomenon best in a recent speech . The United States is his "country of citizenship" but Israel is the country he "loves so much."

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

Baxter , says: November 13, 2018 at 7:49 am GMT

Gosh, I don't know where to start. By God, Giraldi, you said a mouthful. Even two mouthfuls. Where do we begin? I don't know. I am not a 'anti-Semite' or anti-Jew. As a matter of fact my girlfriend for four years was Jewish. That's another story.

There appears to be a Jewish moneyed lobby, working in conjunction with other moneyed lobbies to create a universal, one world government supervised by themselves. America was the first to go. Next?

Mark James , says: November 13, 2018 at 8:08 am GMT
While I don't live in Va I was hoping for wins from congressional candidates Abigail Spanberger and Leslie Cockburn. Unfortunately Cockburn was handed a defeat and while she was probably always a longshot it undoubtedly didn't help that the journalist was questioned about a book she co-authored in the 90′s (which I read).

The book – Dangerous Liaison – was not particularly controversial it simply put forth what kind special relationship Israel has with its ally the US (Iran-contra, Pollard Affair, USS Liberty, Dimona, et al). The type of information all Americans should have a working knowledge of (but do not). Sorry Leslie, I was rooting for you.

Anonymous [172] Disclaimer , says: November 13, 2018 at 8:44 am GMT

The list of prominent politicians "taken down" by Israel is lengthy

True, and yet, we're getting bombarded by "Kremlin influence" narratives 24/7.

LondonBob , says: November 13, 2018 at 8:59 am GMT
Sadly Crispin Blunt was taken down as Chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee and replaced by execrable arch neocon and descendant of German Jews Tom Tugendhat. Blunt had authored reports criticising government actions in Libya and Syria and was looking to investigate the influence of lobbies on British policy in the Middle East.
Z-man , says: November 13, 2018 at 9:49 am GMT

The list of prominent politicians "taken down" by Israel is lengthy, and includes Cynthia McKinney, Adlai Stevenson III, Paul Findley, Chuck Percy, William Fulbright, Roger Jepsen, and Pete McCloskey.

I'm trying to think of a more recent example to make this point more relevant today and I can only come up with Chuck Hagel even if it was done with velvet gloves.

mark green , says: November 13, 2018 at 10:46 am GMT
No matter what sort of war crime Israel commits, no matter what level on interference crypto-Israeli donors and partisans inject into America's political landscape, the Zionist nexus inside our civilization is now so embedded and untouchable that its operatives can openly suborn US lawmakers while other Zionists initiate war (or use US power to do so) against rising Mideast countries that Israel wants weakened, divided, or crushed.

Saddam's Iraq, Assad's Syria and Khadaffy's Libya discovered this the hard way.

Despite these slick machinations, there are few public protests, (((Media))) examinations, or movements inside America that effectively oppose/thwart Israeli violence or the shrewd interference by Zionists in every US election since LBJ.

Why?

No one dares.

This, despite 1) Israel's possession of a rogue nuclear stockpile along with 2) Israel's multi-decade campaign to expel or subjugate its native population of non-Jews, 3) Israel's ongoing acquisition of territory by force and 4) Israel's trigger-happy propensity to annihilate (or harness US power to do so) any surrounding non-Jewish peoples (or nation) which poses a potential "existential threat"to the Jewish state. (Palestine, Lebanon, Iran are you listening?)

Not only do American taxpayers subsidize and protect affluent Israel above beyond every other nation in world history, but this oddball US commitment to the Zionist State is granted without precondition. That's right. It's unconditional. Israel's extraordinary political privilege is astoundingly unique and uniquely dangerous.

Despite this political anomaly, in no US election (including the last one) is Zio-Washington's 'special relationship' with nuclear-ready Israel ever an issue. Not one. Compare this to Washington's wild, unhinged obsession with Iran's non-nuclear stockpile of weapons. America's irrational fear of Iran is an exotic delusion that's been cooked up by Zionists. Like Iraq and Libya before it, Iran is slated for dismemberment. So stay tuned to your TVs for the latest news!

America's arranged but artificial marriage to the Zionist cause benefits Israel. Immensely. At the same time, it's cost us trillions. Trillions. Oil embargos, annual billion-dollar aid packages, along with winless, trillion-dollar wars do gradually add up. Yet political dissent remains muted. Taboo.

Anti-Semitism! (hush.) Meanwhile, America's pro-Zionist news and entertainment industries simplify, amplify, enable, and solidify Israel's near-sacred status. No accident. You've heard the stories. You've heard the speeches. You've seen the films. You've visited the museums.

Israel's unique untouchability allows it to rise above international constraints (with the assistance of Zio-Washington and (((Big Media))) as it conducts military operations (and acts of war) that violate US laws, the UN Charter, as well as the Geneva Conventions. Shouldn't this matter?

Certainly. But supreme victims enjoy supreme privileges.

Today, a tiny foreign power steers and shapes the policies and mindset of the world's most powerful civilization. No small feat. No small threat.

Jeff Stryker , says: November 13, 2018 at 11:47 am GMT
@Anonymous

Yep, Indian-Americans have not read it and do not seem that interested in Jews. Neither do Iranians. Catholics, which means Irish and Italians on the East Coast and Latinos everywhere, do not seem to much care about Israel either.

Blacks in the US do not seem to much love Jews or care about Israel at all with the Muslim lunatic fringe of Farrakan etc. deeply disliking them.

Apparently Evangelical Protestants of various sects love Jews for theological reasons and these people seem to have the smallest piece of the pie these days.

Chinese, Indians, Iranian Muslims etc either are indifferent or detest Israel and yet they seem to be doing better than the whites in the "bible belt".

Though a good number of rednecks who grew up singing old testament hymns would say that Jews deny their savior and don't worship Jews.

jt , says: November 13, 2018 at 12:03 pm GMT
@Z-man Charles Freeman. His nomination to the NSC blocked by the Israeli lobby. Brilliant guy, career foreign service officer and former U.S. ambassador.
Grahamsno(G64) , says: November 13, 2018 at 12:49 pm GMT
Ultra liberal Hollywood just held a fundraiser for the Israeli Military!! Americans are shameless revolting whores.
Wally Streeter , says: November 13, 2018 at 12:52 pm GMT
American politicians love Israel because it legitimizes their own corruption. They can be bought and paid for political whores without having to hide it. As soon as anyone points out that they are selling out their own country, they can recite the magic "anti-semitism" incantation to make the criticism go away.
wayfarer , says: November 13, 2018 at 12:57 pm GMT
Judaism is nothing more than a "service-to-self" ideology, characterized by negative concepts (e.g. greed, selfishness, etc.) and incapable of forgiveness. It's absolutely immiscible with any form of a "service-to-others" ideology.

source: https://www.lawofone.info/synopsis.php

Ken Doll , says: November 13, 2018 at 2:07 pm GMT
Well sure they bought Congress. But Congress has been a vestigial constitutional appendix ever since CIA sent Don Gregg to see the Church and Pike Committees. He threatened martial law and that was that. Congress degenerated into a crooked pedo playpen with a single function: deciding matters beneath CIA's notice with legalized peculation.

The three branches of the US government are still CIA, CIA, and CIA. The only interesting development is the catastrophic collapse of CIA's aggression by sending of armed bands in Syria. This latest, possibly terminal, failure has spurred a frenzy of finger-pointing. When CIA wrecked Vietnam they blamed the Pentagon (see Prouty's The Secret Team) and everybody fell for it. But now with Syria, CIA pretended the Jews made them do it. That failed the laugh test, so now they're framing Amway shitstain Eric Prince.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-11-12/2bn-saudi-plan-assassinate-iranian-officials-involved-erik-prince-and-trump

Just ask yourself, would any of this stuff have happened without CIA's approval?

Jeff Stryker , says: November 13, 2018 at 2:10 pm GMT
@Anonymous "Take another survey"

Another words walk up to any Chinese-American (The ones in California have been in the US longer than most East Coast ethnic whites like the Italians) or Indian-Americans and ask them what they know or care to know about Jews or Israel. They will say zero.

You'd get something genuinely negative from the Iranian Muslim community out in Los Angeles. And also a good number of blacks.

Hispanics know little about Israel. Did not stop Cubans from taking over Miami.

I don't know what you define as a "real American".

And I am not Indian. Not in the slightest.

Johnny Walker Read , says: November 13, 2018 at 2:32 pm GMT
The Electronic Intifada has obtained a complete copy of The Lobby – USA, a four-part undercover investigation by Al Jazeera into Israel's covert influence campaign in the United States. I suggest everyone watch all four episodes of this Doc.

https://www.sott.net/article/399738-The-Lobby-USA-Watch-the-film-the-Israel-lobby-has-tried-to-suppress-UPDATE-Parts-3-4-released

Wade , says: November 13, 2018 at 2:40 pm GMT
@Baxter It's more than just a moneyed lobby that has pulled this off for the past 100 years in america. Much more. The Jewish mafia was heavily involved from the earliest days of the 20th century. I highly recommend you all listen to this interview with Jeff Gates, someone who has as many qualifications as any of the authors on Unz.com to talk about the Jewish lobby. The youtube interviews with Jeff Gates are essential listening:

I wish I could find the quote but Jeff Gates thinks Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer's "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" is light weights. Somewhere he makes the comment "anyone who compares the Jewish Lobby to other lobbies [like the dairy lobby] as if the Jewish Lobby happens just to be a little more effective than the rest is missing the point of the exercise here."

Anonymous [272] Disclaimer , says: November 13, 2018 at 2:56 pm GMT
lol @ this article and these comments. Love the tears! Never was there a more deserving group of people to feel dejected and demoralized.

I think the most hilarious part though was this one:

In fact, Americans have never had the option of voting on the "special relationship" that Israel enjoys with the United States as no Congressman would dare run against it lest they be smeared in the media and find themselves running against an extraordinarily well funded opponent benefitting from large donations coming from out of state sources.

Public opinion polls have consistently, over decades, shown that Americans are pro-Israel. The only exceptions are blacks, far leftist whites, and Muslims, and even the first two are not overwhelmingly anti. The needle has hardly moved in decades.

Americans have had the chance to vote, over and over, every Congressional and Presidential election for going on 40 years now, on whether US policy should be more pro-Iran and less pro-Israel, and they have constantly chosen, with more consistency than basically any other issue in that time period, to side with Israel. Complaining that there are -gasp- organizations with money involved in this issue, even some from -gasp- out of state , is hilarious and pathetic. Every issue in American politics has lobbyists and national money flying around like crazy – guns, abortion, you name it. And every side that loses in the court of public opinion says that they did so because of 'out of state' money, even when they have more of it. Giraldi worked in government so he knows it, but why have an honest perspective when you can enrage the hive?

You really can't come up with a more thorough rejection by the American people of a political position than they have delivered, decade after decade, to the anti-Israel side. The only side less popular than Iran lackeys in American discourse might be NAMBLA, and even that is a close call.

America looks at the anti-Israel coalition and accurately sees a motley and pathetic mix of Farrakhan FOI stompers, Borat-like Islamists, triggered blue-haired college screamers, and Nazi-larping neckbeards, and says no thanks.

Philip Giraldi , says: November 13, 2018 at 3:04 pm GMT
@Anonymous Bullshit. Americans are only "pro-Israel" because that is all they hear from the media and the politicians. And that is because Jews control the media and the politicians.
Bragadocious , says: November 13, 2018 at 3:45 pm GMT
The Al-Jazeera documentary reveals that these fifth columnist spies and narcs are using a definition of anti-Semitism from the U.S. State Dept. to crush dissent. This definition came from none other than Hillary Clinton. I especially liked this line:

Applying double standards by requiring of [Israel] a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation

They may want to rethink that one, as Israel fails pretty much all tests of the behavior of a democratic nation, starting with being a democracy in the first place.

To think that Hillary, along with her fellow travelers like Victoria Nuland, are the arbiters of what is or isn't anti-Semitism is quite a laugh.

annamaria , says: November 13, 2018 at 4:17 pm GMT
@Anonymous The word has been spoken: Judeo-Nazism

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20181112-chomsky-echoes-prominent-israeli-warns-of-the-rise-of-judeo-nazi-tendencies-in-israel/

Sean , says: November 13, 2018 at 4:58 pm GMT
Israel is just getting itself deeper and deeper into a quandary about what to do with the Arabs in the occupied territories. They cannot be given full rights and there is not the unsettled land to give them the state everyone including America pretends is going to be the outcome of a temporarily stalled process. Israel is greasing the skids to disaster.
Reuben Kaspate , says: November 13, 2018 at 5:36 pm GMT
@Philip Giraldi

Indeed, bullshit! Why do you love Palestinians so much or conversely, dislike/hate Israelis in equal measure?

Is it really the treatment of Christians of Arab origin in Judea and Samaria that really galls you but won't say it out loud? If Jews are as powerful as you claim they are, then why not just give them the Southern Lebanon, the Bekka Valley, the Gaza strip and the Sainai Peninsula and ten billion dollars a year, which would be just a drop in the bucket, to live us alone?

Why not resettle the most educated of all Arabs, the Palestinians, in other Arab nations, and there're so many lands to choose from, but especially, Saudi Arabia to help those gluttonous Afro-Semitic morons? Why egg on the Palestinians without hope, to the discomfort of all humanity by giving the Jews the very excuse to hammer the world with the exaggerated accusations of anti-Semitism? Why prolong what is inevitable and how does it benefit, the people on whose behalf you are fuming?

lavoisier , says: Website November 13, 2018 at 7:38 pm GMT
@Anonymous

As I said above, maybe start with the optics of all these Holocaust deniers, Borats, Farrakhans, and blue-hairs. Look at who your articles attract – do you think Americans like those people?

Most Americans are totally ignorant of the evil that has been done to their nation and the West by Zionist Jews.

Most Americans are completely ignorant about the extent Zionist Jews control the government of the United States and the media.

Most Americans know nothing about the role played by Zionist Jews in the mass murders perpetrated by the communists in Russia and China.

Most Americans take the holocaust as gospel and believe the Jews have never harmed anyone but have been the victims of the worst genocide in history.

Do not use the ignorance of the average American to claim that criticism of Zionist Jews is irrational.

It is totally rational and justified.

Wizard of Oz , says: November 13, 2018 at 7:43 pm GMT
@Philip Giraldi It is slightly amusing is it not to find that specious intervener illustrating part of your case by appearing as Anonymous [272] and Anonymous [279] just a breath apart ..?

What do you think the reaction would be, and by whom, if a US politician proposed a resolution "that Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state be supported until a majority of Middle Eastern states by number and population, and all those contiguous to Israel, have ended discrimination on grounds of religion"?

Maccabi , says: November 13, 2018 at 9:33 pm GMT
@RobinG He is known to be an Islam hater thus unconditional support for Israel. This remark in itself is a proof how Israel is used to inflict havoc on the Islamic civilization. Jews are the biggest beneficiaries of demonization of Islam. The mercenary terrorist army of CIA/Mossad is called Islamic state.
schrub , says: November 13, 2018 at 10:34 pm GMT
@Z-man Liberal Republican Senator Chuck Percy's takedown was particularly egregious and revealing.

He lost his position despite his popularity in Illinois politics. The deep pockets of The Lobby and its control of the media (and the Republican Party) were simply too much for him to counter.

After his senatorial defeat in 1985, The Lobby must have felt that an example must be made of him. He then became a total nonperson both in politics and in the Washington DC social scene which he chose to continue to reside in. He never spoke again (to my knowledge) before any significant Republican Party event. In fact, his very name became a virtual dirty word in Republican circles, right up there with the names of convicted child molesters or embezzlers. Arch-Zionist Ronald Reagan enforced this shunning up until the end of his presidency.

Percy was no longer invited to appear in the mainstream media or speak before business or academic groups. He simply disappeared.

Poof, like he had never been there in the first place.

When he died in 2011, many people In Washington were surprised. They had assumed he has died decades before because of his blacklisting and the resulting invisibility.

Senator J. William Fulbright, a one-time icon of the left wing because of his opposition to the Vietnam War was also quickly disposed of after he tried to oppose The Lobby and found his left wing "friends" (along with their contributions) deserting him in droves.

Al this happened because they tried to be very slightly impartial about Israel.

chris , says: November 13, 2018 at 10:38 pm GMT
@Anonymous

Americans have had the chance to vote, over and over, every Congressional and Presidential election for going on 40 years now, , and they have constantly chosen, with more consistency than basically any other issue in that time period, to side with Israel.

If that's true, then why are they spending such enormous sums of money to buy all of Congress ? If the thing runs by itself, then why on God's green earth, does it need such constant greasing of the skids ? Grant Smith of IRmep, who studies the financial pooling of something like 200 Jewish organizations in the US, estimates I that together, they're collecting money on the order of hundreds of millions of dollars from their diaspora and lunatic Christian sects. This money is then used to buy Congress lock stock and barrel and then to force it, among other things, to sign over billions in "aid" to Israel.

You poor child, were you not aware of any of this ? And you just thought the sniveling prostrations and groveling our elected "leaders" perform each year at the AIPAC conference or on their campaigns is all spontaneous ? Dear, dear, there is better quality acting at the AIPAC conference than there ever was at any Oscar show or in any therein nominated film.

chris , says: November 13, 2018 at 10:56 pm GMT
@Anonymous

Face it, Israel is no different. Both sides are mustering money and influence, and you lost fair and square in the court of public opinion.

Oh, but you might have the perspective a tad off; the fight may be just beginning.

It may be that in the past, Israel's friends might well have exercised power which easily swung in their direction, but there may not have been much at stake for everyone else. Maybe the fight wasn't worth it if you disagreed, but there could come a time when the balance sheet of liabilities might begin to swing in the other direction. I sincerely hope you'll maintain your sportsmanship attitude when that time comes, as it inevitably always does.

exiled off mainstreet , says: November 13, 2018 at 11:09 pm GMT
It seems like these facts are likely to increase anti-Semitism even against those who don't deserve to be subjects of prejudice, since this reveals the colonial nature of the Anglosphere.
pensword , says: November 13, 2018 at 11:47 pm GMT
@Anonymous Face it, Israel is no different.

Uh huh.

I don't recall the chief beneficiary of any other lobby helping to lie America into a war with muslims that has since metastasized into pandemic proportions. I also don't recall any other lobby beneficiary running interference for one of its compatriots who happened to inflict the worst damage to American intelligence in its history. Come to think of it, this very same beneficiary has been caught repeatedly committing espionage against America ~ a crime which, if committed by any other actor, would warrant severe punishment ~ yet received no punitive consequences for it.

Yeah. I'd say Israel is different.

Sir Launcelot Canning , says: November 14, 2018 at 12:07 am GMT
@exiled off mainstreet But, as you admit, they are FACTS. And, as such, must be disseminated to the uninformed and ignorant Americans.

If it does cause anti-Semitism, which is becoming as meaningless term as racism, how are the Anglos at fault? Whose behavior is going to cause this resentment and blowback? Its certainly not the British! The British haven't been colonial for quite awhile.

However the USA has become a colonial vassal for Israel. So who is the imperial power now?

anarchyst , says: November 14, 2018 at 12:10 am GMT
@pensword

You are correct. Israel is the only country to flout the Symington Amendment, which mandates that "foreign aid" be denied to any country that has not signed the "Nuclear Non-Proliferation" agreement and refuses to allow International Atomic Energy Agency inspections of their nuclear facilities.

Add to that, AIPAC and many other pro-Israel organizations that have not registered as "agents of a foreign government" as required by American law.

Israel is indeed a "special case".

redmudhooch , says: November 14, 2018 at 12:46 am GMT
Mr. Giraldi gets it.

Be sure to watch The Lobby USA to see how treacherous our illegitimate govt. has become. It gives you an idea of how these 6,000,000 Jewish lobbies work around the clock spying on, blackmailing, subverting our govt. here in occupied America. They're letting these agents of a hostile and repressive govt. (Israel) run around the US spying on Americans, using blackmail, extortion, threats, violating their Constitutional rights. Nobody in Washington seems to care. How long before Israel is assassinating American citizens for exercising their rights?

Sheldon Adelson was at the White House watching the results of the midterm elections with his puppet Trump, eating pizza, "mini" hotdogs, and burgers. No joke. He's started his own lobby called IAC – Israeli American Council, thats even more extreme that AIPAC.

All traitors, all loyal to Israel. Republicans are owned by the Zionists and war profiteers folks. Democrats not any better. All traitors.

Sad!

JLK , says: November 14, 2018 at 1:00 am GMT
As the British were bankrupted by an unnecessary war with Germany, the "New American Century" isn't shaping up very well two decades in. 6T in additional debt from fighting Middle Eastern wars for Israel is the biggest reason why, and there is no end in sight.

I actually don't think Israel has that much genuine organic political support among Americans. It is all held together with media-fed illusions and threats.

Colin Wright , says: Website November 14, 2018 at 1:03 am GMT
@Jeff Stryker ' Palestinians themselves don't care about the plight of whites in bad cities in the US or the Muslims causing problems in Europe.'

Nae doot however, Palestinians are not funding and making possible either the condition of whites in the US or the difficulties of Muslims in Europe.

We pursue -- as no doubt most nations at most times do -- in innumerable short-sighted, callous, selfish, or just witless policies.

Our support for Israel is the one inarguably evil act we commit, and one for which we will -- at a minimum -- have to do penance.

Colin Wright , says: Website November 14, 2018 at 1:10 am GMT
@Cal Eyefornia 'I agree with you. Lots of anti-Semitic nonsense on this site, e.g. "where are all the millions buried?" (How about: all over Europe and Russia, cretins.) While the number of Jews murdered by Nazis may be, say, half of the "official" figure (still horrific), the lunatic fringe here won't provide their own figure (likely because they think it's zero). They actually believe Hitler was a nice guy and every Jew in the world is a member of the "Jew Illuminati." They think Israel bosses the USA around, and is the world's big dog that wags the tail. They laughably point to people like Henry Ford and anti-Semitic sites like codoh.com as "unbiased" sources for debate. They all need to "get a life."'

Well, Israel does boss the US around, and is inarguably one of the world's 'big dogs,' which, for a nation the size of Honduras or Togo, does call for an explanation.

Colin Wright , says: Website November 14, 2018 at 1:24 am GMT
@exiled off mainstreet 'It seems like these facts are likely to increase anti-semitism even against those who don't deserve to be subjects of prejudice, since this reveals the colonial nature of the Anglosphere.'

Nu? The Holocaust increased bigotry directed at Germans, and Pearl Harbor didn't do much for the popularity of Japanese.

Compared to these two groups, Jews are overwhelmingly supportive of their chosen evil. It'd be damned strange if they didn't wind up having to pay.

Jeff Stryker , says: November 14, 2018 at 1:42 am GMT
@Tyrion 2 Jews don't possess military power. They possess the benefit of a verbal dexterity and business savvy that allows them to network in order to control banks and media.

You cannot conquer. You can only manipulate.

It is the difference between Mike Tyson threatening to kick your ass and Charles Manson hypnotizing you.

Justsaying , says: November 14, 2018 at 2:29 am GMT
@anon

The Unites States of America is effectively owned and controlled by Jews

How about The US of A is effectively colonized by the Zionists ?

All the noise and nonsense about Russian interference in American elections pale in comparison to decisions on America's elected reps right to the President requiring Zionist approval before they can win their seats. The control is total and absolute. This coming from a country which depends on our tax dollars to maintain their criminal activities. And now the push is on for WWIII forcing us to brinkmanship with the Russians in Syria and Europe. This is an unprecedented abdication of US sovereignty.

Jeff Stryker , says: November 14, 2018 at 2:39 am GMT
@Colin Wright Penance?

Europeans bore the brunt for US invasions of Iraq that ultimately created the power-vacuum that unleashed refugees.

The US itself was too far away. That is simple geography. Muslims could not sail the Atlantic just as Latinos cannot get to Europe.

Only white Americans give two shits about Israel or the plight of Palestine. No Hispanic could find it on a map and no Asian-American would care.

A great deal of the problem is that whites can be made to give a shit. Asians cannot. Hindus cannot. Latinos cannot.

Matthew/Boston , says: November 14, 2018 at 2:53 am GMT
@redmudhooch redmudhooch,

I can't read all the responses, but I caught yours.

Look at it this way. 537 politicians in Washington, DC know 9-11 was a zionist jewish operation and not a word out of any of them. Maybe a few are slow or hopelessly naive about israel, so bump that number down to, say, 530. And again, not a peep.

537 of our "leaders" know israel was behind 9-11 yet they gave Netanyahu the record for standing ovations during a speech. Think of how profound that fact is. Pure traitors.

Chistopher Bollyn once mentioned the point that not one college or high school has a course or class on what subject is the 9-11 attacks. Suspicious, isn't it?

Jeff Stryker , says: November 14, 2018 at 3:28 am GMT
@Anonymous When do you EVER see Jewish missionaries trying to convert people? I've seen Mormons and Catholics overseas trying to convert people. But not Jews. When Jews do convert locals it is for pussy-some ancient handful of males settle somewhere like Ethiopia or Italy and marry local women. But it is not for salvation. Only for their pussies.

Part of this is empathy. The Christian sees the poor and disenfranchised and wants to assist. The Korean shopkeeper in a black ghetto does not give a shit what the blacks believe in and just wants his money.

annamaria , says: November 14, 2018 at 3:36 am GMT
@Anonymous " maybe start with the optics of all these Holocaust deniers.."

– Why don't we start with the "optics" of Jewish Bolsheviks and their murderous hatred towards Russians and Russian culture? Millions died in the labor camps (run and "improved" by the Jewish administrators, see Naftali Frenkel), in the chambers of secret police (see Yagoda and Berman), and in the villages of Ukraine and Kazakhstan during Holodomor (courtesy of certain Kaganovich).

The most important "deniers" of today are Nuland-Kagan (the organizer of pro-neo-Nazi putsch in Ukraine), Knesset (the provider of Ukrainian neo-Nazi with Israel-made rifles), and the zionized US Congress that has been supporting the neo-Nazi-infested Ukranian government.

And do not forget the profiteering and amoral ADL and Simon Wiesenthal Center that both refused to support the Conyers amendment: "If passed, Conyers' amendment would have explicitly barred those found to have offered "praise or glorification of Nazism or its collaborators, including through the use of white supremacist, neo-Nazi, or other similar symbols" from receiving any form of support from the US Department of Defense. The ADL and Wiesenthal Center refused to support Jeffries and Conyers' proposal." https://www.alternet.org/world/how-israel-lobby-protected-ukrainian-neo-nazis

The Nuland-Kagan' brigade: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-11-13/separatists-are-not-people-explosive-ap-footage-ukrainian-far-right-summer-camp

renfro , says: November 14, 2018 at 4:23 am GMT
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf

U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel

P.L. 115-141, the FY 2018 Consolidated Appropriations Act, provides the following for Israel:
· $3.1 billion in Foreign Military Financing, of which $815.3 million is for off-shore procurement;
· $705.8 million for joint U.S.-Israeli missile defense projects, including $92 million for Iron Dome, $221.5 million for David's Sling, $310 million for Arrow 3, and $82.3 million for Arrow 2;
· $47.5 million for the U.S.-Israeli anti-tunnel cooperation program;
· $7.5 million in Migration and Refugee Assistance;
· $4 million for the establishment of a U.S.-Israel Center of Excellence in energy and water technologies;
· $2 million for the Israel-U.S. Binational Research & Development Foundation (BIRD) Energy program; and
· The reauthorization of War Reserves Stock Allies-Israel (WRSA-I) program through fiscal year 2019.

For FY2019, the Trump Administration is requesting an additionl $3.3 billion in Foreign Military Financing for Israel and $500 million in missile defense aid to mark the first year of the new MOU. The Administration also is seeking $5.5 million in Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA) funding for humanitarian migrants to Israel.

TheBoom , says: November 14, 2018 at 4:24 am GMT
Israeli and American Jewish actions detailed in the article make perfect sense when you come to realize that the US is no longer a sovereign nation at its core. The US only has a facade of being one.

The facade is starting to crumble both because of the internet and Jewish arrogance. Consequently, the goys are the beneficiaries of more censorship of bad thoughts. The plan is to use increased censorship to prevent the facade from crumbling sufficiently to expose the reality to the masses. Any empire wants to keep its colonies in line

tac , says: November 14, 2018 at 7:54 am GMT
@Anonymous

America looks at the anti-Israel coalition and accurately sees a motley and pathetic mix of Farrakhan FOI stompers, Borat-like Islamists, triggered blue-haired college screamers, and Nazi-larping neckbeards, and says no thanks.

It seems apparent that you took exception (a sudden high blood pressure alert is making you post this response?) to my expose on the role of Jewish slavery [as the videos of Dr. Louis Farrakhan, who also happens to be AGAINST usury and in conjunction with PEACE--like most of Christindom] (and I did not even include the Roman/Greek periods and the hand that was attributed to the Jewish predominant role in slavery). But do continue because . it will expose this inhumane dominance of slavery–just like it still exists today.

RE (original reference included here):

Why do the supremacist Jews refuse to take accountability in their role for slavery?:

Educate yourself here:

http://www.unz.com/ishamir/pittsburgh-advice-to-jews/#comment-2615210

and here:

http://www.unz.com/ishamir/pittsburgh-advice-to-jews/#comment-2615278

Skeptikal , says: November 16, 2018 at 12:49 am GMT
@Wizard of Oz

"What do you think the reaction would be, and by whom, if a US politician proposed a resolution "that Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state be supported until a majority of Middle Eastern states by number and population, and all those contiguous to Israel, have ended discrimination on grounds of religion"?"

Not sure what you are on about. Iraq was a secular state until invaded by the USA, which churned things up politically . Syria has traditionally been a tolerant state that was home to one of the oldest Christian commujities, and a number of different Islamic groups. Libya was a secular state–no state religion in Libya that I know of.

It is the US and Zionist ally, Saudi Arabia, that is the most religiously intolerant state in the ME and also the biggest exporter of religious fanaticism.

Israel is the only [Religious designation] State in the ME -- no, in the whole world. I am unaware of the existence of a Christian State, an Islamic State (except the caliphate), a Buddhist State, a Zoroastrian State. Israel is the most intolerant state on the planet.

ChuckOrloski , says: November 16, 2018 at 2:42 am GMT
@SolontoCroesus Hey SolontoCroesus!

Ben Norton & guys like you give me hope that our country could still become saved by "facts and a timeline."

As you know, Israeli crimes foisted upon upon the divided-Homeland, including unnecessary, immoral, & ruinously expensive wars against "rogue/foes," for example, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and likely soon Iran, NEVER NEVER NEVER require presentation of solid evidence to dumb-goyim trained 'Merkins.

Disgusting. Embarrassing. A Yinon Plan underway for the USA! Ycch. I am pissed.

Along with partner Corporate Media-conspirators, The New York Times editorial board deserves instant "regime change" because of their theatrical complicity with our treasonous Zio Congress and Executive Branch.

Thanks, S2C.

renfro , says: November 16, 2018 at 5:54 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

What do you think the reaction would be, and by whom, if a US politician proposed a resolution "that Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state be supported until a majority of Middle Eastern states by number and population, and all those contiguous to Israel, have ended discrimination on grounds of religion"?

How typically ridiculous.

The reaction we should see would be to the statement that we will not support Israel as long as it occupies Palestine and discriminates against non Jews in Israel. Israel is a midget Nazi state not a democracy.

JC1 , says: November 17, 2018 at 5:02 pm GMT
@anon Mr Girardi didn't mention Jim Trafficante or JFK.
Hiram of Tyre , says: November 18, 2018 at 4:51 am GMT
Most fail to realize that Britain controls the US via Israel. Jews serve as pawns.
L.K , says: November 18, 2018 at 6:57 pm GMT
@Hiram of Tyre

Most fail to realize that Britain controls the US via Israel. Jews serve as pawns.

Pure nonsense.

The Israel network rules in Britain too.

[Nov 19, 2018] US-Funded Neo-Nazis in Ukraine Mentor US White Supremacists by Max Blumenthal

Notable quotes:
"... Last month, an unsealed FBI indictment of four American white supremacists from the Rise Above Movement (RAM) declared that the defendants had trained with Ukraine's Azov Battalion, a neo-Nazi militia officially incorporated into the country's national guard. The training took place after the white supremacist gang participated in violent riots in Huntington Beach and Berkeley, California and Charlottesville, Virginia in 2017. ..."
"... Let's not forget that the illegal coup in Ukraine and ensuing civil war was pushed by Obama/Hillary. It was HRC who promoted Dick Cheney's chief foreign adviser, Victoria Nuland, to Secretary of European Affairs, and it was Nuland who was caught on tape discussing how to "midwife this thing" in Ukraine. ..."
Nov 19, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

US-Funded Neo-Nazis in Ukraine Mentor US White Supremacists November 17, 2018 • 43 Comments

Short-sighted U.S. foreign policy that backs jihadists in the Middle East and neo-Nazis in Ukraine is once again blowing back on the United States, as Max Blumenthal explains.

FBI: Azov Battalion Trained Rise Above Movement

Last month, an unsealed FBI indictment of four American white supremacists from the Rise Above Movement (RAM) declared that the defendants had trained with Ukraine's Azov Battalion, a neo-Nazi militia officially incorporated into the country's national guard. The training took place after the white supremacist gang participated in violent riots in Huntington Beach and Berkeley, California and Charlottesville, Virginia in 2017.

The indictment stated that the Azov Battalion "is believed to have participated in training and radicalizing United States-based white supremacy organizations."

After a wave of racist violence across America that culminated in the massacre of twelve Jewish worshippers at a Pittsburgh synagogue, the revelation that violent white supremacists have been traveling abroad for training and ideological indoctrination with a well-armed neo-Nazi militia should cause extreme alarm.

Not only are white supremacists from across the West flocking to Ukraine to learn from the combat experience of their fascist brothers-in-arms, they are doing so openly -- chronicling their experiences on social media before they bring their lessons back home. But U.S. law enforcement has done nothing so far to restrict the flow of right-wing American extremists to Azov's bases.

There is one likely explanation for the U.S. government's hands-off approach to Azov recruitment: the extremist militia is fighting pro-Russian separatists as a front-line proxy of Washington. In fact, the United States has directly armed the Azov Battalion, forking over anti-tank rocket launchers and even sending a team of Army officers to meet in the field with Azov commanders in 2017.

Though Congress passed legislation this year forbidding military aid to Azov on the grounds of its white supremacist ideology, the Trump administration's authorization of $200 million in offensive weaponry and aid to the Ukrainian military makes it likely new stores of weapons will wind up the extremist regiment's hands. When queried by reporters about evidence of American military training of Azov personnel, multiple U.S. army spokespersons admitted there was no mechanism in place to prevent that from happening.

... ... ...

Hide Behind , November 18, 2018 at 6:55 pm

Strange people that live in US, those that live under belife of free speech and expression, and yet there are literally thousands of examples where those of opposing view points that try and present them in public are met with disruptive behaviors, banning from presentations of opposing ideology from speaking at Colleges and University campus, and removal and witholding of tenure to those who question edicts of correct speech and lets admit it anything that questions support of Israel the State.

And condoling of violent behavior by groups in US , crosses religious, political Partys, Anarchist, and now a liber storm trooper style ANTIFA that is beginning to better equip themselve tha. just pipes, knives, and clubs into having numbers armed with the Leftist hate most guns.

We have ultra right Trump supportive Militia that actively said they would revolt if Trump was defeated and now if he is impeached. The largest and most virulent part of the southern state militia are of Christian Zionist, and some militias signature patches have Star of David upon them and the cross

... ... ...

frank mintz , November 18, 2018 at 5:28 pm

You think that the October massacre marks a culmination? That is naive: it is undoubtedly not an end point and part of a crescendo building for decades. Meanwhile, the professional Right keeps denouncing the Democrats for anti-Semitism, which is frequently simply criticism of Israel and has nothing whatever to do with attacks on persons or property. Your article reminds us that these psychopathic attacks are coming from a particular branch of the "White Right" which has been talking upon Satanic Judaism and killing Jews–and targeting synagogues–for quite a while.

Zenobia van Dongen , November 18, 2018 at 5:21 pm

Fascinating article by Max Blumenthal. Max Blumenthal rightly denounces Italy's fascist Casa Pound party but fails to report that Casa Pound is on excellent terms with Hezbollah, as reported by the Italian daily Repubblica in 2015. According to Repubblica, the European Parliament declared Hezbollah a terrorist group on 10 March 2005.

On 26 September 2015 a convention called "Mediterranean Solidarity", "the first international convention of solidarity [among] identities" was held in Rome attended by Rima Fakhri, member of Hezbollah's politburo and Sayyed Ammar Al Moussaw, responsible for Hezbollah's international relations, as well as by top Casa Pound leaders like Alberto Palladino, who was seen in the Donbass during fighting between Russia and the Ukraine, Franco Nerozzi, who was convicted of international terrorism in Verona after taking part in a failed coup detat on the Comoros islands, Casa Pound leader Giovanni Feola, and Luca Bertoni, representing the Lombardy-Russia Association, who always accompanies Matteo Salvini, leader of the far-right Lega, on his trips to Moscow.

"Italian right-wingers have consolidated relations with the most fundamentalist and militant Islamic groups. In 2013 the City of Rome refused permission to the Syrian Uodai Soso Ramadan, also invited to the congress, to hold a pro-Assad demonstration. At the time he was staying at CasaPound."

Source: Roma, la strana coppia Hezbollah-Casapound insieme al convegno, di Corrado Zunino, Repubblica, 20 settembre 2015
https://roma.repubblica.it/cronaca/2015/09/20/news/roma_convegno_mediterraneo_solidale_iniziativa_fascio-islamica-123310960/

tom metzger , November 18, 2018 at 3:37 pm

The article on the neo-Nazi presence in Ukraine is very interesting. I am a white working-class white separatist with some longtime following. Even though this article had both lies, truths and maybes. It was well done. However, when it says there is no other side in the US with another view, you are wrong. I have experienced the attempted and sometimes successful penetration of the right wing by CIA types for many years and gotten rid of 2 serious penetrations in years past.

I have warned those that listen not to involve themselves in the Ukraine situation. In fact, don't travel to other countries. Where you do not really know the score and may be fighting on the wrong side anyway.

I am aware that anything the State Department involves itself in is totally suspect and probably criminal. Even if you don't acknowledge it there are other factions that are pretty much out of the right wing, but are still very strongly White separatists . In fact, my politics have moved to the left on several important issues. It would appear to me that the powers that be are attempting to design a right wing alleged neo-Nazi movement somewhat patterned some what after ISIS.It is obvious Blumenthal's article has a lot of truth in it, but his mindset tends to get in the way . When he uses the old dog whistles like Trump when labeling people. Tom Metzger

Geo , November 18, 2018 at 6:36 pm

Curious why you are a White Separatist? Is there any logical reason because the best I can gather from the many separatist commenters that have littered threads like these over the years is that they're too fragile to get by in an ethically equal society. It seems that they're greatest problem is that others have rights now so it's harder for these White Separatists to succeed seeing as how they must do so on merit instead of birthright.

Be curious to find out if there is any justification for ethnic separatism other than petty whining because of some mythical birthright you feel you're being denied?

rosemerry , November 18, 2018 at 1:56 pm

Notice that they admit the connection goes back at least to 2014. We never hear much about the overthrow of the new pro-Russian government in Ukraine after the Russians had worked for four years with the pro-Western lot. Only when Nuland/Yats and co interfered did the new "government" with its Nazi links become powerful with the help of the EU and of course USA. The whole continuing insistence on Russia being an enemy has no basis in reason or sense. To support Ukraine now just because it is fanatically against Russia after decades of cooperation in the USSR is not justified by any possible link with "national security of the USA" or of Europe.

O Society , November 18, 2018 at 1:13 pm

Sadly, white nationalism is a thing the United States enjoys exporting. It's an existential crises. https://opensociet.org/2018/11/16/the-rise-of-trump-is-white-america-dying/

Bruce Gagnon , November 18, 2018 at 12:55 pm

See this video of Obama's ambassador to Ukraine Pyatt going to visit training base in western Ukraine where Nazis brought into the then newly formed National Guard are still being trained by US Army Special Forces from Fort Carson, Colorado . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxeZFS9hTUg

Patrick Lucius , November 18, 2018 at 12:01 pm

Let's not forget that the illegal coup in Ukraine and ensuing civil war was pushed by Obama/Hillary. It was HRC who promoted Dick Cheney's chief foreign adviser, Victoria Nuland, to Secretary of European Affairs, and it was Nuland who was caught on tape discussing how to "midwife this thing" in Ukraine.

Nuland is wife of chief neocon Richard Kagan, founder of PNAC. This essentially restarted the cold war between Russia and America. Obama tarnished his presidency primarily by working with Clinton, including the destruction of Libya. Where were the Democrats to object to such shenanigans? I don't know where they were, but I do know where they are now–charging Trump with colluding with the Russians. I thought it was fascinating that Trump, when he secured the Republican nomination, insisted that the Republicans remove from their platform the promise of military aid to Western Ukraine, to fight the pro-Russian eastern Ukrainians. Where were the Democrats to applaud this anti-war mongering? I know where I, as a Democrat was–I was leaving the party and becoming a Trump supporter.

Martin - Swedish citizen , November 18, 2018 at 2:30 pm

Thanks, these are important points, is about the neocons.
On our smaller Swedish scale ,
I was similarly disgusted with the support by the once much more ethical Social Democratic Party for the US- and EU-supported coup in Kiev.

lucius , November 18, 2018 at 7:58 pm

Lots of room for disgust In America, the traditional Democrats and Republicans both are backing the neocons' stance with just about no questioning or examination. It seems to be a tribal thing, or some sort of group response, like geese in flight, or buffalo running off a cliff

Jesse , November 18, 2018 at 11:41 am

Thank you for providing a platform for Max Blumenthal's reporting.

Wayne Mclaughlin , November 18, 2018 at 10:35 am

Very good article except for the line " .. Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the failure of the EU and NATO to prevent it ." I always take issue with that representation because it implies an aggressive and forceful action by Russia when in fact Crimea seceded from Ukraine after the western backed and illegal coup of the democratically elected government.

Skip Scott , November 18, 2018 at 2:11 pm

One of the definitions of annexation is "the adding of new territory". I believe this is the way the word is being used in this article. It has come to mean "forceful acquisition" to many folks, and this leads to confusion. To those of us who know a little history, maybe a better word would have "rejoining", since Crimea was part of Russia until the early 1950's. When Khrushchev gave it to Ukraine it was still part of the USSR, so it was really no more than a gesture. The Russian naval base in Sevastopol has been there since the 1700's.

Martin - Swedish citizen , November 18, 2018 at 2:25 pm

Very good point!
Wording is important, and accepting the word annexation without clarification may be a step towards buying the lie.

Joe Tedesky , November 18, 2018 at 3:16 pm

Great point Skip. Joe

dale t hood , November 18, 2018 at 10:32 pm

thank you wayne

torture this , November 18, 2018 at 10:28 am

It must be a terrible feeling to know you can't compete with people that you believe are inferior. Nice to have some fellow losers to commiserate with, I suppose.

JOHN CHUCKMAN , November 18, 2018 at 8:33 am

Ah, America, land of liberty!

Is there anything you won't do in your rabid efforts to dominate the planet?

Of course, when you think about it, these Ukrainian thugs are no worse than other outfits America heavily supports, from the mercenaries of Syria and the government of Saudi Arabia to the King of Bahrain and the government of Israel.

A couple of these last – Israel, Saudi Arabia – kill more innocent civilians than any terrorist organization could dream of doing.

And no one says a thing.

mike k , November 18, 2018 at 8:27 am

Max Blumenthal does a valuable service shining a light into the dark places of Nazi Fascism in the US. Anyone who thinks these groups are too small to be important, should recall how small the movement that gave us Hitler was in it's beginnings.

mike k , November 18, 2018 at 8:16 am

Pro Nazi sentiment has never died in the US Oligarchy. The CIA is essentially a fascist organization pretending to be protectors of democracy. Worship of violence and authoritarianism is endemic to the American Spirit. All the better for being the world's greatest bully, pretending to be the guardians of the highest values. Those in high places here are the evil scum of the universe.

(Thanks for the new font! So much better.)

John A , November 18, 2018 at 7:57 am

The US is now funding a schism in the Orthodox church between Ukraine and Russia. The evil of the US knows no bounds.

rosemerry , November 18, 2018 at 2:01 pm

Of course, "good ole Americans" like Mike Pence claim to be Christians, and many other US Christians blame the Russian Orthodox church for not being as modern as they are and ready to accept LGBTQ..

Realist , November 18, 2018 at 4:14 am

Not surprising that some Americans think that racial bigotry is okie dokie when both political parties in Washington, especially the one that bases its platform on membership in certain favored identity groups, practice it routinely against anyone or anything Russian or Iranian. They have a few other fall guys as well, but those are the two blamed for everything these days.

No question but that Ukraine is one of the most ethnically prejudiced and fascist regimes on the planet, though that doesn't seem to bother Washington, as long as they are frenetically Russophobic. Neither does Israel's rampant anti-Arab, anti-Persian and anti-Muslim Zionism bother the bigots in DC in the slightest.

Yet they get into a lather when the small nations of Eastern Europe, especially those in the Visegrad countries (plus Austria, Slovenia and Croatia) constituting most of the Intermarium that the author alluded to, which happen to have both small populations and low birthrates, reasonably fear that their native populations will be swamped out within a couple of generations if they are forced by the EU to take in significant numbers of Islamic migrants from the lands thrown into turmoil by the U.S.-instigated wars throughout the Middle East and North Africa. Hungary's Viktor Orban is vilified in the West as some sort of new Hitler (must be Putin's twin brother) for implementing on a much smaller scale what Donald Trump is trying to institutionalise in the enormously larger United States.

Rather than force all these sociological "side effects" to its catastrophic wars on its putative "allies," perhaps Washington should finally see the light and do the right thing by winding down the carnage and aiding the resettlement and rebuilding of the war-torn countries by their displaced citizens. But they won't–they have overtly refused, at least until none of America's debts can be paid with devalued petrodollars, because that would let Russia off the hook, whom Washington wants to see crushed as badly as der Fuehrer did–I think it's trying to complete his mission. Plus the glorious new war against Iran would have to be cancelled. They used to say, "all roads lead to Rome." They oughta re-write that for the modern world as, "all strife traces from Washington."

mike k , November 18, 2018 at 8:19 am

Excellent comments Realist.

Joe Tedesky , November 18, 2018 at 10:55 am

Like our 'Big Pharma Over Medicated Society' we in the West would rather beat the hell out of the symptom rather than cure the cause, is our American hegemonic trademark. Similar to tightening the screw so tight the fragile glass begins to crack so you fix it with a hammer. It appears our leaders love spreading their chaos. None of this shows signs of ever ending well, but yet we overdose the symptom to the extreme that the side affect is what finally kills us. In the end it only matters how it shows on a profit and loss sheet.

rosemerry , November 18, 2018 at 2:05 pm

An excellent contribution-thanks realist.
The USA has steadfastly refused to rebuild their devastated victims' lands even when UN legal demands clearly demanded it eg Nicaragua.

Jean , November 18, 2018 at 3:01 am

Short sited or planned.

michael weddle , November 18, 2018 at 1:44 am

Excellent reporting, Max! I'm curious. Is there any connection with present or former Eric Prince mercenary soldiers, or soldiers from other private mercenary organizations, with these fascist movements?

Joe Tedesky , November 17, 2018 at 11:15 pm

This fascist trend should go well with Operation Timber Sycamore, where the U.S. armed the terrorist jihadist. When will our American leaders learn, that if you play with fire you will get burned. The rise of the Nazi is one more reason that we Americans should focus on this type of news as Max Blumenthal reports. Furthermore the American Jewish who do not support the Israeli apartheid state should join good thinking Americans to put down this disgusting happening. So thank you Victoria Nuland, Geoffrey Pratt, and the rest of this sick and insane DC bunch, because without you where would our Homeland Security budget be?

Think it can't happen here . the Pittsburgh Synagogue Shooter lived 4 blocks from me. Btw these racist don't vote, they just hate. And 'no' I didn't know him, but I know of others sick birds all of them.

And especially a warm thank you goes out to Max Blumenthal for his courageous reporting. Bless you Max. Joe

Bob Van Noy , November 18, 2018 at 10:32 am

Thank you Joe. The larger picture and insanity of the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" Philosophy, is and always has been totally without moral responsibility. Interestingly, it seems to be a fundamental aspect of post WWII organizing by our own OSS, who became the CIA in 1949. Alan Dulles was busy organizing this kind of activity before that war ended.

Thanks to you Joe and of course Max Blumenthal for addressing this subject. I'll include a link to the early heritage of this bizarre and illegal concept here. Many thanks Consortium News.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2014-08-18/why-ukraine-crisis-west-s-fault

Joe Tedesky , November 18, 2018 at 11:24 am

Thanks Bob reading John Mearsheimer well defined portrayal of what led up to the fall of the Ukraine as we once knew it, is reminiscent of reading Robert Parry's many articles on this subject. If you recall Parry was deeply into this U.S. led NATO aggression. Through the MSM of the West the tables were turned to point the finger to instead Russian aggression. Putin is never shown in light of his policy achievements nor are his speeches calling out to the world for sensible detente where needed ever covered, but instead Putin is demonized to no end.

Little is remembered, or even known by those in the West of another time where American and British capitalism hugged the very nature of Nazism, while the Russians even back then were too the target of this type of Western aggression. Who's needs history when dreams of speculative profit should cloud their eyes?

[Nov 19, 2018] This article in The Intercept suggests that Zionists wanted Trump to win the election

Nov 19, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Circe , Nov 18, 2018 1:42:23 PM | link

This article in The Intercept provides incontrovertible proof that Zionists wanted Trump to win the election and that Chuck Schumer, their representative in Congress used the DNC and Facebook to help him. It also demonstrates how Chuck Schumer supports Republican Presidents and policies denying the will of many in his party even a Democratic President and betraying millions of voters on the Left to forward the Zionist agenda in each and every case. I would call this collusion and subversion of Democracy. Everything else Schumer does not to lose his choice position as Senate minority leader is window dressing, lip service and a charade.

Chuck Schumer supports Trump

jayc , Nov 18, 2018 4:04:40 PM | link

Trump often refers to his "leverage" in approaching geopolitics as a business negotiation, and yet he is effectively hamstrung with two countries (Israel and KSA) where US leverage should be overwhelming due to security guarantees. The complex web of influence and court politics will prevent coherent decisive moves, which presumably he refers to when stating he would rather "stay out" of the Middle East. It's a teachable moment, an opportunity for the sort of truth-telling necessary to promote a draining of the swamp - the chance to publicly acknowledge that nothing can be done because the interests of power blocs within the two countries are embedded directly in the US political system itself.

Obama had the opportunity for truth-telling early in his administration when he could have acknowledged that a single-payer health care system is not possible in America at this time - not because it isn't rational and effective but because powerful domestic interests will not allow it.

[Nov 17, 2018] OPEC Plus Putin's move to control energy market with Saudi partnership (Video)

Nov 17, 2018 | theduran.com

The Express UK reports that Russia and Saudi Arabia's 'long-term relationship' will not only survive, but grow, regardless of geopolitical turmoil and internal Saudi scandal as the energy interests between both nations bind them together.

... ... ...

But IHS Market vice chairman Daniel Yergin said the decision was unlikely to jeopardise the relationship between the two allies.

The Saudis have faced significant international criticism in the wake of the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Turkey.

Speaking to CNBC, Mr Yergin made it clear that Moscow and Riyadh would continue to be closely aligned irrespective of external factors.

He explained: "I think it's intended to be a long-term relationship and it started off about oil prices but you see it taking on other dimensions, for instance, Saudi investment in Russian LNG (liquefied natural gas) and Russian investment in Saudi Arabia.

"I think this is a strategic relationship because it's useful to both countries."

Saudi Arabia and Russia are close, especially as a result of their pact in late 2016, along with other OPEC and non-OPEC producers, to curb output by 1.8 million barrels per day in order to prevent prices dropping too far – but oil markets have changed since then, largely as a result.

The US criticised OPEC, which Saudi Arabia is the nominal leader of, after prices rose.

Markets have fluctuated in recent weeks as a result of fears over a possible drop in supply, as a result of US sanctions on Iran, and an oversupply, as a result of increased production by Saudi Arabia, Russia and the US, which have seen prices fall by about 20 percent since early October.

Saudi Arabia has pumped 10.7 million barrels per day in October, while the figure for Russia and the US was 11.4 million barrels in each case.

Mr Yergin said: "It's the big three, it's Saudi Arabia, Russia and the US, this is a different configuration in the oil market than the traditional OPEC-non-OPEC one and so the world is having to adjust."

BP Group Chief Executive Bob Dudley told CNBC: "The OPEC-plus agreement between OPEC and non-OPEC producers including Russia and coalition is a lot stronger than people speculate.

"I think Russia doesn't have the ability to turn on and off big fields which can happen in the Middle East.

"But I fully expect there to be coordination to try to keep the oil price within a certain fairway."

Markets rallied by two percent on Monday off the back of the Saudi decision to cut production , which it justified by citing uncertain global oil growth and associated oil demand next year.

It also suggested waivers granted on US sanctions imposed on Iran which have been granted to several countries including China and Japan was a reason not to fear a decline in supply.

Also talking to CNBC, Russia's Oil Minister Alexander Novak indicated a difference of opinion between Russia and the Saudis, saying it was too soon to cut production, highlighting a lot of volatility in the oil market.

He added: "If such a decision is necessary for the market and all the countries are in agreement, I think that Russia will undoubtedly play a part in this.

"But it's early to talk about this now, we need to look at this question very carefully."

[Nov 17, 2018] The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity US Midterms Expose Russia Hacker Myth

Nov 17, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

< Older US Midterms Expose Russia Hacker Myth Written by Finian Cunningham Wednesday November 14, 2018

Don't hold your breath for it, but there should be an abject apology coming from US politicians, pundits, media and intelligence agencies.

For months leading up to the midterm elections held last week, we were told that the Kremlin was deviously targeting the ballot, in a replay of the way Russian hackers allegedly interfered in the 2016 presidential race to get Donald Trump into the White House.

Supposedly reliable news media outlets like the New York Times and heavyweight Senate panels were quoting intelligence sources warning that the "Russians are coming – again".

So what just happened? Nothing. Where were the social media campaigns of malicious Russian-inspired misinformation "sowing division"? Whatever happened to the supposed army of internet bots and trolls that the Kremlin command? Where are the electoral machines tampered with to give false vote counts?

Facebook said it had deleted around 100 social media accounts that it claimed "were linked" to pro-Russian entities intent on meddling in the midterms. How did Facebook determined that "linkage"? It was based on a "tip-off" by US intelligence agencies. Hardly convincing proof of a Kremlin plot to destabilize American democracy.

If elusive Russian hackers somehow targeted the midterm Congressional elections they certainly seem to have a convoluted objective. Trump's Republican party lost the House of Representatives to Democrat control. That could result in more Congressional probes into his alleged collusion with Russia. It could also result in Democrats filing subpoenas for Trump to finally disclose his personal tax details which he has strenuously refused to do so far.

Moreover, having lost control of one of the two Congressional chambers, Trump will find his legislative plans being slowed down and even blocked.

Thus, if Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Kremlin are the purported "puppet masters" behind the Trump presidency, they have a very strange way of showing their support, as can be seen from the setbacks of the midterms.

A far simpler, more plausible explanation is that there was no Russian hacking of the midterms, just as there wasn't in the 2016 presidential election. Russian interference, influence campaigns, malign activity, "Russia-gate", and so on, are nothing but myths conjured up by Trump's domestic political opponents and their obliging media outlets.

Now that all the dire warnings of Russia hacking into the midterms have been shown to be a mirage, the US intelligence agencies seem to be adopting a new spin on events. We are told that they "prevented Russian interference".

In a Bloomberg article headlined 'One Big Loser of the Midterms – Russian Hackers', it is claimed: "Security officials believe [sic] they prevented cyberattacks on election day." However, they added, "it's hard to tell."

In other words, US security officials have no idea if putative Russian hackers were targeting the elections. The contorted logic is that if there were no hacking incidents, then it was because US cybersecurity prevented them. This is tantamount to invoking absence to prove presence. It's voodoo intelligence.

President Trump has a point when he lambastes Democrats and their supportive media for crying foul only when they lose an election. In various midterm races, it was apparent that Democrats would protest some alleged electoral discrepancy when their candidate lost against a Republican. But when Democrats came out on top, there were no irregularities.

One can imagine therefore that if the Democrats had failed to win control over the House of Representatives, then they and their intelligence agency and media supporters would have been clamoring about "Russian interference" to help Republicans retain the House.

As it turned out, the Democrats won the House, so there is no need to invoke the Russian bogeyman. In that case, it is claimed, Russian hackers "did not succeed" to penetrate the electoral system or pivot social media.

Nonetheless, there was indeed rampant interference in the recent US election. For one thing, some 28 pro-Israeli Political Action Committees and wealthy individuals spent around $15 million to promote 80 candidates in the Congressional elections, according to the organization If Americans Knew. This foreign influence on US voters in favor of Israeli interests is nothing new. It is standard practice in every election.

During the presidential campaign in 2016, the Israeli-American billionaire Sheldon Adelson reportedly donated $25 million to Trump's campaign. Undoubtedly that legalized bribery is why Trump on becoming president has pushed such a slavishly pro-Israeli Middle East policy, including his inflammatory declaration of Jerusalem as the sole capital of the Zionist state.

But there is no outcry about "Israeli influence campaigns" and "hacking" from the US media or from Democrats over this egregious interference in American democracy. No, they prefer to obsess about the phantom of Russian meddling.

Another evident source of electoral hacking was of the homegrown variety. There seem to be valid grievances among ordinary American voters about gerrymandering of electoral districts by incumbent parties, as well as voter disenfranchisement, especially among poor African-American and Latino communities. There were also reported cases of phone canvassers making malicious calls to discredit candidates, as was claimed by the beaten Democrat contenders in Florida and Georgia.

Clearly, there are huge flaws in the US electoral system. Most glaringly, the gargantuan problem of campaign funding by corporations, banks and other representatives of the oligarchic system.

A further chronic problem is yawning voter apathy. The recent midterms were said to have seen a "record turnout" of voters. The official figure is that only 48 per cent of voters exercised their democratic right. That is, over half the voting population view the ballot exercise as not worth while or something worse. This is a constant massive disavowal of American democracy expressed in every US election.

The midterm elections demonstrate once again that American democracy has its own inherent failings. But the political establishment and the ruling oligarchy are loathe to fix a system from which they benefit.

When the system becomes unwieldy or throws up results that the establishment does not quite like – such as the election of uncouth, big mouth Trump – then the "error" must be "explained" away by some extraneous factor, such as "Russian hacking".

However, the latest exercise in American democracy, for what it is worth, gave the salutary demonstration of the myth of Russian interference – at least for those who care to honestly see that.

Another valuable demonstration was this: if supposedly reliable news media and an intelligence apparatus that is charged with national security have been caught out telling spectacular lies with regard to "Russian hacking", then what credibility do they have on a host of other anti-Russia claims, or, indeed, on many other matters?

Reprinted with permission from Strategic Culture Foundation .

[Nov 17, 2018] Difficult times are coming for the US military industrial complex as for foreign arms sales

Nov 17, 2018 | thesaker.is

Andrew S MacGregor on November 12, 2018 , · at 11:05 pm EST/EDT

Dear Eric,

May I ever so slightly differ from one of your points?

You stated; "The result of this will, however, be catastrophic for the top 100 U.S. 'defense' contractors, such as Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, and Raytheon, because then all of those firms' foreign sales except to the Sauds, Israel and a few other feudal and fascist regimes, will greatly decline."

I would suggest that these top US defense contractors sales will decline for the simple reason that they would then have to compete with the rest of the world. One of these US defense strategies had been to sell their products, or rather say force their products on NATO no matter how inferior they were. If my memory serves me correctly the UK had a good fighter jet in the Lightning, but the US forced NATO to buy the vastly inferior American product which had many crashes and killed quite a few pilots.

But in the situation of a multi-polar world the US would have to really compete with the likes of Russia and China, which as we know are already producing superior products and the US has never really been able to compete in such an atmosphere.

There is one other statement which I would also like to differ upon: " a mono-polar world is a world in which one nation stands above international law" and this statement is flawed.

A mono-polar world' has never given the right for one nation to be above international law. America did though start calling itself the International 'policeman', modelling itself on something similar to a New York policeman stealing apples from a greengrocer's stand. Once the US realised that there were no voices to be heard, they automatically progressed from the uniform policeman to the likes of 'Al Capone', which I've noted many bent policemen do.

The trick for such policemen is to know when to retire and get out of the game, but the US has never been able to retire, and now its fruits are coming back to haunt them.

[Nov 17, 2018] Macron -- Not the Nationalists -- is Stuck in the 1930s by Scott McConnell

Notable quotes:
"... Treason of the Intellectuals ..."
Nov 16, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

It's in Europe's elite that we find the spirit of appeasement that once enabled fascists and communists. • November 16, 2018

French President Emmanuel Macron has a new go-to rhetorical trope: alarm over the return of the horrors of the 1930s. Last summer, he decried the reappearance of populist governments "rising like a leprosy, throughout Europe," as well as a "resurgent nationalism" and the emergence of governments that support the closing of frontiers and don't respect "even the right to asylum."

Macron's targets are the newly formed government of Italy, along with Hungary, Poland, and the Czech Republic, all resistant to the flow of migrants into Europe. He returned again to the analogy earlier this month, telling an interviewer he was "struck" by the present's similarities to the 1930s and calling again for resistance to the "nationalist leprosy." He went on this tear yet again while hosting the Armistice Day centenary commemorations, where he contrasted the "generous" France of "universal values" with the shallow nationalism of nations that look out only for their own interests, a remark widely interpreted as a rebuke to President Trump.

To punctuate his point, he added a reference to Julien Benda's Treason of the Intellectuals , published in 1927, which decried burgeoning nationalist sentiments among Europe's intellectuals as a whole and certain French conservatives in particular. It closed with a paean to Franco-German cooperation, the European Union, and the United Nations.

Macron is surely correct that the 1930s were generally a terrible decade. That's true even if what he said is not all that different from the commonplace left-wing view that all conservatives who think about anything more than reducing taxes can be safely decried as fascists and Nazis and deserve no platform in our political system. But the analogy to the 1930s deserves unpacking. Whatever lessons might be learned from history, they're not nearly so straightforward as Macron seems to believe.

First of all, there was not one but two active murderous totalitarian movements popular in the '30s: fascism and communism. Communism came first. The Soviet government had probably killed 10 million innocent people before Hitler came to power. By the 1930s, huge slices of the intelligentsia in Britain, France, and, yes, the United States were head over heels in love with Stalinism. These thinkers produced reams of tributes to the bloodthirsty Soviet system, and were far more dominant in Western intellectual life than the targets of Benda's ire in the 1920s. Second, because Bolshevism came first, it acted as an accelerant, perhaps even a major cause, of fascism. One definition of fascism -- from my thesis supervisor Bob Paxton, probably the greatest American expert on the subject -- is "hard measures by a frightened middle class."

What they were frightened of, of course, was Bolshevism. And rightly so, even if pursuing violent and anti-democratic means in defense of property and order had a cost in suffering just as horrific as those they had feared.

Additionally, among the large numbers of people who were neither fascists nor communists, nor fellow travelers to either, there were significant currents of opinion hardly conducive to maintaining democratic peace. In early 1933, the Oxford Union held one of its most famous and historically significant debates: aye or nay on the motion "that this House will in no circumstance fight for its King and Country." The motion carried by a nearly two-to-one margin, a result noted and commented upon all over the world.

Some of the arguments made in favor of "aye" were standard communist fare, i.e., "It is no mere coincidence that the only country fighting for the cause of peace, Soviet Russia, is the country that has rid itself of the warmongering clique." But it's likely that the vast majority of the students who supported the motion, the bright and favored sons of Britain's establishment, were motivated by pure disgust at the horrendous toll, paid for no terribly good reason, in the trenches of the Western Front. In any case, the sentiment was widespread enough in Britain's ruling circles to buttress the arguments for appeasement made a few years later. It certainly contributed to Hitler's view that Britain and France were soft, unwilling to resist him.

Macron Trash Talks "America First" In Defense of Ethnic Nationalism

So if one of the evils of the '30s was the extreme nationalism and fascism that Macron decried, another was communism. And the combined energy of both led to a spirit of appeasement on the part of those attached to neither far left or right but unable also to summon much energy to defend an imperfect bourgeois order. It's this spirit that's most analogous to the regnant attitudes in contemporary Europe.

For as world leaders and press descended upon Paris to commemorate the end of World War I, one could see that desire for appeasement take a new form. Last week, a middle-aged Pakistani Christian woman, a farm worker named Asia Bibi, was freed after eight years on death row for the charge of "blasphemy." Her conviction was overturned by Pakistan's supreme court, a decision that immediately provoked mass demonstrations by fundamentalist Muslims demanding her death. Her attorney fled the country for his safety. Her family requested asylum in Britain, a request that was reportedly denied because the British government feared it would provoke "unrest" among Muslims.

Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron, those wordy celebrants of Europe's asylum generosity, have uttered not a word in support of Bibi, even as both (particularly Merkel) have facilitated entry into Europe of millions of young Muslim men as "refugees." In contrast to them, Italy's interior minister Matteo Salvini has said that Italy would welcome Bibi and her family -- who at this writing are still unable to leave Pakistan.

It's a telling moment -- the government indirectly accused by Macron of harkening back the dark days of the 1930s is ready to open its arms to a genuine political refugee, while the governments of Theresa May, Macron, and Merkel opt for social peace -- a "paix bien Munichoise" as a writer for the French journal Causeur aptly describes the establishment's accommodating stance towards fundamentalist Islam on European soil.

The Bibi case brings to mind the fascinating story of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Dutch woman of Somali origin who became a member of parliament and then, after 9/11, a critic of Islam. Because of threats of murder from Dutch Islamists, she was first forced to live under police protection and eventually had her citizenship withdrawn by the Dutch government. She moved to America, becoming, as Salman Rushdie put it, "maybe the first refugee from Western Europe since the Holocaust."

But in Macron's view, and the view of others from the West's Davos-style establishment, the threat to Europe's core values can come only from "nationalists" like Hungary's Victor Orbán, Italy's Salvini, and the likes of Donald Trump. In his famous poem written at the outbreak of World War II, W.H. Auden famously called the 1930s "a low dishonest decade." The attitudes that made it so are very much alive in Europe's ruling classes today.

Scott McConnell is a founding editor of and the author of Ex-Neocon: Dispatches From the Post-9/11 Ideological Wars .

[Nov 17, 2018] Crosstalk: Nationalism by RPI Staf

Nov 17, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

Was French president Emmanuel Macron correct at the WWI commemoration over the weekend when he asserted that patriotism is the opposite of nationalism in a pointed dig at US president Donald Trump? RPI Board Members Lew Rockwell and John Laughland join scholar George Szamuely on RT's Crosstalk to debate whether nationalism is the bogeyman that Macron and others make it out to be. Or is blaming nationalism just a way to further destroy national sovereignty and bring about an unelected permanent globalist empire?

https://www.youtube.com/embed/_aOfBdbCqU0

Copyright © 2018 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

[Nov 16, 2018] The proposal I would l ike to see introduced at the United Nations would be one to remove a nation that systematically violates the UN Charter

Nov 12, 2018 | thesaker.is

The proposal I would like to see introduced at the United Nations would be one to remove a nation that systematically violates the UN Charter. If not totally remove them, then at least bar them from being on the Security Council, and of course thus removing their veto.

The UN Charter is the treaty that any nation must adopt to join the United Nations. The very purpose of the UN when it was formed after WW2 was to prevent war. Thus, the UN charter has clauses that say a nation can only attack another nation under the authority of the UN Security Council. It has a clause that says that it violates the UN Charter to even mass forces on another nation's borders and to then threaten to attack in order to coerce another nation.

The USA has of course frequently been in violation of the UN Charter. Certainly what it has been doing in Syria is in violation of the UN Charter. The US has been in violation of the UN Charter for some time. At least back as far as when Clinton couldn't get the UN Security Council to support his attack on Serbia and he went ahead and did it anyways. There is of course a long list of such violations. Israel is of course also in violation of the UN Charter with its constant attacks on its neighbors.

From there, the course would follow basically what Mr. Zuesse says. America's poodle, the UK would certainly veto a resolution seeking to discipline the USA for breaking the very core notion of the UN, which is to prevent another worldwide catastrophe like what the world experienced during WW2. It was a world that was horrified by what had occurred during WW2 that formed the UN to prevent that from happening again.

To me, its hard to see how the UN accepts the leadership of a nation that violates the Charter that every nation had to agree to in order to join the organization. Of course, mob bosses have their own ways of breaking the rules of civilized society. Still, it seems like a place to try to rally the world about.

Eric Zuesse on November 12, 2018 , · at 5:29 pm EST/EDT

Dear "Anonymous": Your comment is extremely well-informed and relevant, but the U.N. has been highly dependent upon the U.S. financially, and therefore the initiative cannot come from the U.N. itself, but only from particular nations. What I was summarily describing in concern to the U.N. as it actually exists (not to the U.N. as it should exist, which maybe we'll get to some day) is an ongoing PR stunt, to be staged at the U.N., to draw the public's attention to the fact that the U.S. Government has been functioning blatantly, for many years, as a fascist power. This truth needs to be rubbed constantly into the face of today's America's Government so as to isolate that Government internationally to become the pariah-Government that the people who founded the U.N. would puke to see. What won WW II was physically the Allies, but what has since taken over in spirit is Hitler's spirit, but with different priorities of whom the 'enemies' are, not Jews especially but this time Russians especially. Instead of the 'vast Jewish conspiracy', we've got the 'cunning Russian conspiracy' now having supposedly chosen the evil Trump and made him become America's President, etc, and it's based on lies now just as it was based on lies in Hitler's time. But it's now the American aristocracy, instead of the German aristocracy. I was proposing there a PR campaign, to expose them as what they are.
JJ on November 13, 2018 , · at 2:51 pm EST/EDT
So sad that UN seems to not follow up any requests from Syrian government for investigations .actions against the usa coalition ­
mike k on November 12, 2018 , · at 7:41 pm EST/EDT
The wealthy owners of America were always in favor of Hitler's idea of world domination, butt hey wanted to be in charge of it instead of the Germans. After WWII they saw their chance to take the lead and have been working to enslave the world ever since. Of course they hate the UN, or anyone who does not bow to their will to power.
Serbian girl on November 12, 2018 , · at 8:02 pm EST/EDT
Thank you for this important article. I do not see the development of PESCO or any homegrown European military as something positive. I think this is simply a re-branding exercise on behalf of those who control NATO. These " new" proxy militaries will continue to buy US military equipment as NATO did before. My fear is that the re-branding effort may result in a revised military doctrine which may actually be more aggressive than NATO..
Anonymous on November 13, 2018 , · at 10:10 am EST/EDT
Laugh if you will, but I think the Eurocrats want to attempt to (re)take the North American continent (probably with DC's blessing.) Did you see Putin and Trudeau huddle together at the WWI commemoration meeting?
Anonymous on November 13, 2018 , · at 10:27 am EST/EDT
(And another thing ) We (the people of the West) should remember that the European, English and American aristocracies (as Zuesse refers to them) keep a boot to each others throats, and if one lets up, the other grabs a knife from the back pocket and goes for the jugular. Because they are like that.
milan on November 13, 2018 , · at 9:22 pm EST/EDT
In other words: a mono-polar world is a world in which one nation stands above international law, and that nation's participation in an invasion immunizes also each of its allies who join in the invasion, protecting it too from prosecution, so that a mono-polar world is one in which the United Nations can't even possibly impose international law impartially, but can impose it only against nations that aren't allied with the mono-polar power, which in this case is the United States.

Might I suggest a viewing and listening to a Dr. Navarro speech:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3rxjaOPQD4

Economic Security is National Security

"This is a must watch video – now you will understand the Chinese implosion & why China stocks & economy are not coming back for probably decades!"

­
Anonymous on November 14, 2018 , · at 1:24 am EST/EDT
America is not only the true "evil empire," but it is also a very sick and deluded evil empire.

The Trump Regime is unhinged, as it desperately tries to Make the American Empire Great Again by attacking its opponents such as Russia, China, or Iran; waging financial and economic wars on the world; and projecting its own imperial insanity onto others one twitter tweet at a time.

But this is true of America in general, regardless of whatever malign regime is in Washington DC.

The more that America lashes out and seeks to maintain its pretensions as the Exceptionalist nation, the more it only accelerates its own decline and destruction, as well as its Day of Financial Reckoning with the collapse of the Ponzi Scheme US economy and Wall Street.

Indeed, it's not a secret that another Wall Street implosion is coming, one that will make the 2008 version triggered by the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy seem like a tea party in comparison.

Given Donald Trump's own record of multiple business bankruptcies, perhaps it's only appropriate that he is the current ruler of America. LOL.

The real issue is when America itself will shatter into a several separate nation states. Indeed, the prospect of a Second American Civil War is increasingly on the minds of US foreign policy experts and even the American masses themselves.

According to Dmitry Orlov, America is fast closing the "collapse gap" with its former Cold War nemesis, the USSR.

Reinventing Collapse: The Soviet Experience and American Prospects
https://www.amazon.com/Reinventing-Collapse-Experience-American-Prospects/dp/0865716854

US Collapse – the Spectacle of Our Time
https://sputniknews.com/columnists/201802251061983205-us-collapse-spectacle-of-our-time/

[Nov 16, 2018] Food scarcity and malnutrition of children under the age of 5, places the Ukraine in percentage terms lower than Pakistan, Ethiopia, Libya, Iraq

Nov 16, 2018 | thesaker.is

PeterP on November 12, 2018 , · at 9:06 pm EST/EDT

Food scarcity and malnutrition of children under the age of 5, places the Ukraine in percentage terms lower than Pakistan, Ethiopia, Libya, Iraq .the Ukraine welcomes the Cookie Monster (stats National Geographic)

[Nov 16, 2018] They give that con artist the Nobel Peace Prize as a reward for his glib platitudes and deceits promising a more peaceful, egalitarian and prosperous world

Obama forever denigrated Nobel Peace Price, making it a cruel joke.
Notable quotes:
"... That Obomber was a real duplicitous piece of shi er, work. They give that con artist the Nobel Peace Prize as a reward for his glib platitudes and deceits promising a more peaceful, egalitarian and prosperous world, and without a hesitation or apology he turns around and initiates four or five new wars in addition to the two he had inherited from Dubya. ..."
"... He re-ignites the Cold War, threatens Russia militarily at several staging areas along its Western frontier, and doubles or triples down in expenditures on the American nuclear arsenal. No price is too high for the American taxpayer when it comes to guaranteed American hegemony over the planet. Nuclear brinksmanship is preferable to any modicum of peaceful co-existence. ..."
Nov 16, 2018 | thesaker.is

Whistling Shrimp on November 13, 2018 , · at 4:28 am EST/EDT

That Obomber was a real duplicitous piece of shi er, work. They give that con artist the Nobel Peace Prize as a reward for his glib platitudes and deceits promising a more peaceful, egalitarian and prosperous world, and without a hesitation or apology he turns around and initiates four or five new wars in addition to the two he had inherited from Dubya.

He re-ignites the Cold War, threatens Russia militarily at several staging areas along its Western frontier, and doubles or triples down in expenditures on the American nuclear arsenal. No price is too high for the American taxpayer when it comes to guaranteed American hegemony over the planet. Nuclear brinksmanship is preferable to any modicum of peaceful co-existence.

The other sides (defined as enemies solely by Washington, not themselves) are treated with disdain and disrespect, as Barry flaunts his trash talking skills, obviously learned in his self-admitted days of street hustling and tripping on the drug du jour.

Trump has also been a master of insults, but it was Obama who unilaterally unveiled the skill as a favored American diplomatic tactic.

I'm sure it has Putin, Xi, Kim and Rouhani shivering and willing to swallow any insult to avoid unbridled Neocon wrath [sarc.]. Fools like the guys the American aristocracy routinely put in the White House are gonna get us all killed one of these days.

[Nov 16, 2018] The Meaning Of A Multipolar World

Nov 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

The Meaning Of A Multipolar World

by Tyler Durden Fri, 11/16/2018 - 00:05 4 SHARES Authored by Eric Zuesse via The Saker Blog,

Right now, we live in a monopolar world.

Here is how U.S. President Barack Obama proudly, even imperially, described it when delivering the Commencement address to America's future generals, at West Point Military Academy, on 28 May 2014 :

The United States is and remains the one indispensable nation . [Every other nation is therefore 'dispensable'; we therefore now have "Amerika, Amerika über alles, über alles in der Welt".] That has been true for the century passed and it will be true for the century to come. America must always lead on the world stage. If we don't, no one else will...

Russia's aggression toward former Soviet states unnerves capitals in Europe, while China's economic rise and military reach worries its neighbors. From Brazil to India, rising middle classes compete with us. [He was here telling these future U.S. military leaders that they are to fight for the U.S. aristocracy, to help them defeat any nation that resists.] ...

In Ukraine, Russia's recent actions recall the days when Soviet tanks rolled into Eastern Europe. But this isn't the Cold War. Our ability to shape world opinion helped isolate Russia right away. [He was proud of the U.S. Government's effectiveness at propaganda, just as Hitler was proud of the German Government's propaganda-effectiveness under Joseph Goebbels.] Because of American leadership, the world immediately condemned Russian actions; Europe and the G7 joined us to impose sanctions; NATO reinforced our commitment to Eastern European allies; the IMF is helping to stabilize Ukraine's economy; OSCE monitors brought the eyes of the world to unstable parts of Ukraine.

Actually, his - Obama's - regime, had conquered Ukraine in February 2014 by a very bloody coup , and installed a racist-fascist anti-Russian Government there next door to Russia, a stooge-regime to this day, which instituted a racial-cleansing campaign to eliminate enough pro-Russia voters so as to be able to hold onto power there. It has destroyed Ukraine and so alienated the regions of Ukraine that had voted more than 75% for the democratically elected Ukrainian President whom Obama overthrew, so that those pro-Russia regions quit Ukraine. What remains of Ukraine after the U.S. conquest is a nazi mess and a destroyed nation in hock to Western taxpayers and banks .

Furthermore, Obama insisted upon (to use Bush's term about Saddam Hussein) "regime-change" in Syria. Twice in one day the Secretary General of the U.N. asserted that only the Syrian people have any right to do that, no outside nation has any right to impose it. Obama ignored him and kept on trying. Obama actually protected Al Qaeda's Syrian affiliate against bombing by Syria's Government and by Syria's ally Russia, while the U.S. bombed Syria's army , which was trying to prevent those jihadists from overthrowing the Government. Obama bombed Libya in order to "regime-change" Muammar Gaddafi, and he bombed Syria in order to "regime-change" Bashar al-Assad; and, so, while the "U.S. Drops Bombs; EU Gets Refugees & Blame. This Is Insane." And Obama's successor Trump continues Obama's policies in this regard. And, of course, the U.S. and its ally UK invaded Iraq in 2003, likewise on the basis of lies to the effect that Iraq was the aggressor . (Even Germany called Poland the aggressor when invading Poland in 1939.)

No other nation regularly invades other nations that never had invaded it. This is international aggression. It is the international crime of "War of Aggression" ; and the only nations which do it nowadays are America and its allies, such as the Sauds, Israel, France, and UK, which often join in America's aggressions (or, in the case of the Sauds' invasion of Yemen, the ally initiates an invasion, which the U.S. then joins). America's generals are taught this aggression, and not only by Obama. Ever since at least George W. Bush, it has been solid U.S. policy. (Bush even kicked out the U.N.'s weapons-inspectors, so as to bomb Iraq in 2003.)

In other words: a mono-polar world is a world in which one nation stands above international law, and that nation's participation in an invasion immunizes also each of its allies who join in the invasion, protecting it too from prosecution, so that a mono-polar world is one in which the United Nations can't even possibly impose international law impartially, but can impose it only against nations that aren't allied with the mono-polar power, which in this case is the United States. Furthermore, because the U.S. regime reigns supreme over the entire world, as it does, any nations -- such as Russia, China, Syria, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, and Ecuador -- that the U.S. regime (which has itself been scientifically proven to be a dictatorship ) chooses to treat as an enemy, is especially disadvantaged internationally. Russia and China, however, are among the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and therefore possess a degree of international protection that America's other chosen enemies do not. And the people who choose which nations to identify as America's 'enemies' are America's super-rich and not the entire American population, because the U.S. Government is controlled by the super-rich and not by the public .

So, that's the existing mono-polar world: it is a world that's controlled by one nation, and this one nation is, in turn, controlled by its aristocracy, its super-rich .

If one of the five permanent members of the Security Council would table at the U.N. a proposal to eliminate the immunity that the U.S. regime has, from investigation and prosecution for any future War of Aggression that it might perpetrate, then, of course, the U.S. and any of its allies on the Security Council would veto that, but if the proposing nation would then constantly call to the international public's attention that the U.S. and its allies had blocked passage of such a crucially needed "procedure to amend the UN charter" , and that this fact means that the U.S. and its allies constitute fascist regimes as was understood and applied against Germany's fascist regime, at the Nuremberg Tribunal in 1945, then possibly some members of the U.S.-led gang (the NATO portion of it, at least) would quit that gang, and the U.S. global dictatorship might end, so that there would then become a multi-polar world, in which democracy could actually thrive.

Democracy can only shrivel in a mono-polar world, because all other nations then are simply vassal nations, which accept Obama's often-repeated dictum that all other nations are "dispensable" and that only the U.S. is not. Even the UK would actually gain in freedom, and in democracy, by breaking away from the U.S., because it would no longer be under the U.S. thumb -- the thumb of the global aggressor-nation.

Only one global poll has ever been taken of the question "Which country do you think is the greatest threat to peace in the world today?" and it found that, overwhelmingly, by a three-to-one ratio above the second-most-often named country, the United States was identified as being precisely that, the top threat to world-peace . But then, a few years later, another (though less-comprehensive) poll was taken on a similar question, and it produced similar results . Apparently, despite the effectiveness of America's propagandists, people in other lands recognize quite well that today's America is a more successful and longer-reigning version of Hitler's Germany. Although modern America's propaganda-operation is far more sophisticated than Nazi Germany's was, it's not entirely successful. America's invasions are now too common, all based on lies, just like Hitler's were.

On November 9th, Russian Television headlined "'Very insulting': Trump bashes Macron's idea of European army for protection from Russia, China & US" and reported that "US President Donald Trump has unloaded on his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron, calling the French president's idea of a 'real European army,' independent from Washington, an insult." On the one hand, Trump constantly criticizes France and other European nations for allegedly not paying enough for America's NATO military alliance, but he now is denigrating France for proposing to other NATO members a decreasing reliance upon NATO, and increasing reliance, instead, upon the Permanent Structured Cooperation (or PESCO) European military alliance , which was begun on 11 December 2017, and which currently has "25 EU Member States participating: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Spain and Sweden." Those are the European nations that are now on the path to eventually quitting NATO.

Once NATO is ended, the U.S. regime will find far more difficult any invasions such as of Iraq 2003, Libya 2011, Syria 2012-, Yemen 2016-, and maybe even such as America's bloody coup that overthrew the democratically elected Government of Ukraine and installed a racist-fascist or nazi anti-Russian regime there in 2014 . All of these U.S. invasions (and coup) brought to Europe millions of refugees and enormously increased burdens upon European taxpayers. Plus, America's economic sanctions against both Russia and Iran have hurt European companies (and the U.S. does almost no business with either country, so is immune to that, also). Consequently, today's America is clearly Europe's actual main enemy. The continuation of NATO is actually toxic to the peoples of Europe. Communism and the Soviet Union and its NATO-mirroring Warsaw Pact military alliance, all ended peacefully in 1991, but the U.S. regime has secretly continued the Cold War, now against Russia , and is increasingly focusing its "regime-change" propaganda against Russia's popular democratic leader, Vladimir Putin, even though this U.S. aggression against Russia could mean a world-annihilating nuclear war.

On November 11th, RT bannered "'Good for multipolar world': Putin positive on Macron's 'European army' plan bashed by Trump (VIDEO)" , and opened:

Europe's desire to create its own army and stop relying on Washington for defense is not only understandable, but would be "positive" for the multipolar world, Vladimir Putin said days after Donald Trump ripped into it.

" Europe is a powerful economic union and it is only natural that they want to be independent and sovereign in the field of defense and security," Putin told RT in Paris where world leader gathered to mark the centenary of the end of WWI.

He also described the potential creation of a European army "a positive process," adding that it would "strengthen the multipolar world." The Russian leader even expressed his support to French President Emmanuel Macron, who recently championed this idea by saying that Russia's stance on the issue "is aligned with that of France" to some extent.

Macron recently revived the ambitious plans of creating a combined EU military force by saying that it is essential for the security of Europe. He also said that the EU must become independent from its key ally on the other side of the Atlantic, provoking an angry reaction from Washington.

Once NATO has shrunk to include only the pro-aggression and outright nazi European nations, such as Ukraine (after the U.S. gang accepts Ukraine into NATO, as it almost certainly then would do), the EU will have a degree of freedom and of democracy that it can only dream of today, and there will then be a multi-polar world, in which the leaders of the U.S. will no longer enjoy the type of immunity from investigation and possible prosecution, for their invasions, that they do today. The result of this will, however, be catastrophic for the top 100 U.S. 'defense' contractors , such as Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, and Raytheon, because then all of those firms' foreign sales except to the Sauds, Israel and a few other feudal and fascist regimes, will greatly decline. Donald Trump is doing everything he can to keep the Sauds to the agreements he reached with them back in 2017 to buy $404 billion of U.S. weaponry over the following 10 years . If, in addition, those firms lose some of their European sales, then the U.S. economic boom thus far in Trump's Presidency will be seriously endangered. So, the U.S. regime, which is run by the owners of its 'defense'-contractors , will do all it can to prevent this from happening.

* * *

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They're Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010 , and of CHRIST'S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity .

[Nov 16, 2018] What America's Coup in Ukraine Did by Eric Zuesse

This critique is pretty superficial. The truth is that Ukraine drifted to Baltic model (not without help from Western Europe and the USA) for a long time. And the process started in 2001 not in 2014. That means that February 2014 coup d'état by far right nationalist forces was just quantity turned into quality. With the dissolution of the USSR, it is clear that the result of WWII and Yalta conference will be revised.
While it is true that it was the greatest geopolitical victory of Barack Obama and the USA against Russia, it made the world more dangerous. The fact that it saws the teeth of dragon escaped those great US neocon strategists, like Victoria Nuland. She looks pretty medictre person to me, judging from her public appearances. Far below the level of position she occupied. Out of depth. Kind of early variation of Nikki Haley theme.
The USA established itself as a world power at the end of WWI, and the No.1 nation after WWII. So apparance of the USA on world scene happened a century ago and the period of the USA primacy started around 1945 or 72 year ago. But after dissolution of the USSR the US elite lost the countervailing power that kept it in check (and Sober) and now neocons which came to power after the crash fo the USSR are destroying the USA pretty fast. They are real national cancer. So sad... Neocons policy of fighting and challenging the rest of the world essentially guarantee that its dominant position will not last more one century.
Mar 24, 2017 | off-guardian.org
In March 23rd, Gallup headlined "South Sudan, Haiti and Ukraine Lead World in Suffering" , and the Ukrainian part of that can unquestionably be laid at the feet of U.S. President Barack Obama, who in February 2014 imposed upon Ukraine a very bloody coup (see above), which he and his press misrepresented (and still misrepresent) as being (and still represent as having been) a 'democratic revolution', but was nothing of the sort, and actually was instead the start of the Ukrainian dictatorship and the hell that has since destroyed that country, and brought the people there into such misery, it's now by far the worst in Europe, and nearly tied with the worst in the entire world.

America's criminal 'news' media never even reported the coup, nor that in 2011 the Obama regime began planning for a coup in Ukraine . And that by 1 March 2013 they started organizing it inside the U.S. Embassy there . And that they hired members of Ukraine's two racist-fascist, or nazi, political parties, Right Sector and Svoboda (which latter had been called the Social Nationalist Party of Ukraine until the CIA advised them to change it to Freedom Party, or "Svoboda" instead). And that in February 2014 they did it (and here's the 4 February 2014 phone call instructing the U.S. Ambassador whom to place in charge of the new regime when the coup will be completed), under the cover of authentic anti-corruption demonstrations that the Embassy organized on the Maidan Square in Kiev, demonstrations that the criminal U.S. 'news' media misrepresented as 'democracy demonstrations,' though Ukraine already had democracy (but still lots of corruption, even more than today's U.S. does, and the pontificating Obama said he was trying to end Ukraine's corruption -- which instead actually soared after his coup there).

The head of the 'private CIA' firm Stratfor said it was "the most blatant coup in history" but he couldn't say that to Americans, because he knows that our press is just a mouthpiece for the regime (just like it was during the lead-up to George W. Bush's equally unprovoked invasion of Iraq -- for which America's 'news' media suffered likewise no penalties).

When subsequently accused by neocons for his having said this, his response was "I told the business journal Kommersant that if the US were behind a coup in Kiev, it would have been the most blatant coup in history," but he was lying to say this, because, as I pointed out when writing about that rejoinder of his, he had, in fact, made quite clear in his Kommersant interview, that it was, in his view "the most blatant coup in history," no conditionals on that.

Everybody knows what Obama, and Clinton , and Sarkozy, did to Libya -- in their zeal to eliminate yet another nation's leader who was friendly toward Russia (Muammar Gaddafi), they turned one of the highest-living-standard nations in Africa into a failed state and huge source of refugees (as well as of weapons that the Clinton State Department transferred to the jihadists in Syria to bring down Bashar al-Assad, another ally of Russia) -- but the 'news' media have continued to hide what Obama (assisted by America's European allies, especially Poland and Netherlands, and also by America's apartheid Middle Eastern ally, Israel) did to Ukraine.

I voted for Obama, partly because the insane McCain ("bomb, bomb, bomb Iran") and the creepy Romney ("Russia, this is, without question, our number one geopolitical foe") were denounced by the (duplicitous) Obama for saying such evil things, their aggressive international positions, which continued old Cold-War-era hostilities into the present, even after the Cold War had ended long ago (in 1991) ( but only on the Russian side ). I since have learned that in today's American political system, the same aristocracy controls both of our rotten political Parties, and American democracy no longer exists. (And the only scientific study of whether America between the years 1981 and 2002 was democratic found that it was not, and it already confirmed what Jimmy Carter later said on 28 July 2015 :

Now it's just an oligarchy with unlimited political bribery being the essence of getting the nominations for president or being elected president. And the same thing applies to governors, and U.S. Senators and congress members."

But yet our Presidents continue the line, now demonstrably become a myth, of 'American democracy', and use it as a sledgehammer against other governments, to 'justify' invading (or, in Ukraine's case, overthrowing via a 'democratic revolution') their lands (allies of Russia) such as in Iraq, Libya, Syria, and maybe even soon, Iran.

Here are some of the events and important historical details along the way to Ukraine's plunge into a worse condition than most African nations:

"Yanukovych's Removal Was Unconstitutional" "Obama Definitely Caused The Malaysian Airliner To Be Downed" "War on Donbass was planned to ignite a major war in Europe." "Our 'Enemies' In Ukraine Speak" "Meet Ukraine's Master Mass-Murderer: Dmitriy Yarosh" "Ukrainian Soldier Explains Why He Enjoys Killing Russians" "Russia's Leader Putin Rejects Ukrainian Separatists' Aim To Become Part Of Russia" "Gallup: Ukrainians Loathe the Kiev Government Imposed by Obama"

Please send this article to every friend who is part of the majority that, as a Quinnipiac University poll published on March 22nd reported, "A total of 51 percent of voters say they can trust U.S. intelligence agencies to do what is right 'almost all of the time' or 'most of the time'" (and that level of trust was far higher than for the rotten press and for the rotten politicians), even after the CIA's rubber-stamping Bush's lies to invade Iraq, and after the FBI's shameless performance on Hillary Clinton's privatized State Department emails even after her smashing their cell-phones with hammers , etc., and all the other official cover-ups, with no American officials even so much as being charged for their rampant crimes against the American public. Besides: ever since the CIA's founding, it has had an "Operation Gladio" that specializes in organizing terrorist acts so as for them to be blamed on, first, communist countries when they existed; and, then, after the end of communism, on allies of Russia. Did the American dictatorship begin right after FDR died in 1945? How much longer will these lies succeed?

For the people of Iraq , and of Syria , and of Ukraine, and many such countries, this dictatorship has destroyed their lives. Trusting the 'intelligence' services of a dictatorship doesn't make any sense at all. They're all working for the aristocracy, the billionaires -- not for any public, anywhere; not here, not there, just nowhere. Should the cattle trust the feedlot-operator? Only ignorance can produce trust, under the conditions that actually exist.

So, unless the idea is that ignorance is bliss, pass along the truth, when you find it, because it is very rare -- and the system operates to keep it that way.

Farrier says Nov, 14, 2017

Overthrowing Ukraine was an attempt to end Russia being the major power on the Black Sea and establish it as a NATO lake to stop Russia from using the sea to aid Syria or Iran. That was ruined when Putin seized Crimea, keeping the Russian naval base.
Frank says Mar, 25, 2017
In fact, the destabilization of the Ukraine occurred at the dawn of the new century in 2004. The Presidential election of that year between Victor Yuschenko and Victor Yanukovich resulted initially in the victory of Yanukovich. However serious allegations regarding electoral fraud were raised. This resulted in mass demonstrations in Kiev and other cities throughout Ukraine.

A re-run was ordered and the second time around Yushchenko took the Presidency with 52% of the vote to Yanukovich's 44%. Suffice it to say that prior to the re-run a number of shadowy foreign NGOs – including the National Endowment for Democracy – were active in promoting civic disobedience in a number of Ukrainian cities in west and central Ukraine. Independence Square in the middle of Kiev was occupied after the first election which was declared invalid. These events became known as the 'Orange Revolution'.

It would be misleading to assume that significant numbers of the protestors did not have a valid case against Yanukovich in terms of corruption and self-serving. However, it was equally true that many of the demonstrators' motives were somewhat less noble. Prior to the election Yushchenko had promised his running mate Yulia Tymoshenko the position of Prime Minister should he win the election. Thus throughout, the disturbances were a struggle between the eastern and western oligarchs.

On the crucial question of the nature of these events, 'Peoples power' or 'revolutionary coup' the issue remains undecided.
This notwithstanding the British historian David Lane of Emmanuel College Cambridge argued that

"The 'Orange Revolution' in Ukraine was widely considered to be an instance of the 'coloured revolutions' of 1989 engendered by democratic values and nascent civil societies in the process of nation building. The extent to which the 'Orange Revolution' could be considered a revolutionary event stimulated by civil society, or a different type of political activity (a putsch, coup d'état), legitimated by elite-sponsored 'soft' political power. Based on public opinion poll data and responses from focus groups, the author contends that what began as an orchestrated protest election fraud developed into a novel type of political activity -- a revolutionary coup d'état. It is contended that the movement was divisive rather than integrative and did not enjoy widespread popular support."

Which is about the nearest we will get to an authentic answer.

What followed, however, was a complete and corrupt shamble of opportunism, corruption and self-serving misrule of Yuschenko and Tymoshenko who, after becoming involved in some dubious energy deals was to become known as the 'Gas Princess'. These two paragons of democracy eventually became bitter enemies and saw the return of Yanukovich after the Presidential contest between her and Yanukovich in 2010 which Yanukovich narrowly won.

leruscino says Mar, 24, 2017
Wanted Dead or Alive !

BARRACK HUSSEIN OBAMA – AKA 'Barry Soetoro'

Crimes:
Mass Murder (c) 600,000+ Killed, Syria, Libya, Ukraine, Yemen.
&
Wiretapping

Reward : Clear Conscious, Service to Humanity.

Loading...
mohandeer says Mar, 24, 2017
Reblogged this on wgrovedotnet and commented:

It's long been a truth that democracy in the US died a long time ago and the wealth and power behind the POTUS, irrespective of who that might be, are mere puppets. Obama won his presidency on outright lies and the crooked Clintons and Sarkozys of the US corrupt elite serve no-one's interests but their own at the cost of the lives of Ukrainian Russian ethnics and the Libyan, Iraqi and Syrian people. "Saving Syria's children" would require the removal of the source of their suffering, which can be firmly laid at the door of murderous Washington War Hawks, rent-a-gobs like Samantha Powers and Victoria Nuland(nee Kagan)and corrupt MSM supporting the rogue state that is the USA.

[Nov 15, 2018] Chaos in Israel Are Bibi's Days Numbered

Nov 14, 2018 | www.antiwar.com
Just days into a ceasefire with Gaza, the Israelis sent commandos in to assassinate a Hamas leader. Hamas then surprised Israel with more than 400 rockets in retaliation, leading to another ceasefire agreed by Netanyahu. But this time his defense minister was having none of it. He wants a conflict and is threatening to bring down the government if he does not get one. What's next? Tune in to the Ron Paul Liberty Report:

[Nov 15, 2018] Trump Understands The Important Difference Between Nationalism And Globalism

Nov 15, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Raheem Kassam, op-ed via The Daily Caller,

President Macron's protests against nationalism this weekend stand in stark contrast with the words of France's WWII resistance leader and the man who would then become president: General Charles de Gaulle.

Speaking to his men in 1913, de Gaulle reminded them:

"He who does not love his mother more than other mothers, and his fatherland more than other fatherlands, loves neither his mother nor his fatherland."

This unquestionable invocation of nationalism reveals how far France has come in its pursuit of globalist goals, which de Gaulle described later in that same speech as the "appetite of vice."

While this weekend the media have been sharpening their knives on Macron's words, for use against President Trump, very few have taken the time to understand what really created the conditions for the wars of the 20th century. It was globalism's grandfather: imperialism, not nationalism.

This appears to have been understood at least until the 1980s, though forgotten now. With historical revisionism applied to nationalism and the great wars, it is much harder to understand what President Trump means when he calls himself a "nationalist." Though the fault is with us, not him.

" Patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism: nationalism is a betrayal of patriotism By pursuing our own interests first, with no regard to others,' we erase the very thing that a nation holds most precious, that which gives it life and makes it great: its moral values," President Macron declared from the pulpit of the Armistice 100 commemorations.

Had this been in reverse, there would no doubt have been shrieks of disgust aimed at Mr. Trump for "politicizing" such a somber occasion. No such shrieks for Mr. Macron, however, who languishes below 20 percent in national approval ratings in France.

With some context applied, it is remarkably easy to see how President Macron was being disingenuous.

Nationalism and patriotism are indeed distinct. But they are not opposites.

Nationalism is a philosophy of governance, or how human beings organize their affairs. Patriotism isn't a governing philosophy. Sometimes viewed as subsidiary to the philosophy of nationalism, patriotism is better described as a form of devotion.

For all the grandstanding, Mr. Macron may as well have asserted that chicken is the opposite of hot sauce, so meaningless was the comparison.

Imperialism, we so quickly forget, was the order of the day heading into the 20th century. Humanity has known little else but empire since 2400 B.C. The advent of globalism, replete with its foreign power capitals and multi-national institutions is scarcely distinct.

Imperialism -- as opposed to nationalism -- seeks to impose a nation's way of life, its currency, its traditions, its flags, its anthems, its demographics, and its rules and laws upon others wherever they may be.

Truly, President Trump's nationalism heralds a return to the old U.S. doctrine of non-intervention, expounded by President George Washington in his farewell address of 1796:

" It must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of [Europe's] politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities."

It should not have to be pointed out that the great wars of the 20th century could not be considered "ordinary vicissitudes", but rather, that imperialism had begun to run amok on the continent.

It was an imperialism rooted in nihilism, putting the totality of the state at its heart. Often using nationalism as nothing more than a method of appeal, socialism as a doctrine of governance, and Jews as a subject of derision and scapegoating.

Today's imperialism is known as globalism.

It is what drives nations to project outward their will, usually with force; causes armies to cross borders in the hope of subjugating other human beings or the invaded nation's natural resources; and defines a world, or region, or continent by its use of central authority and foreign capital control.

Instead of armies of soldiers, imperialists seek to dominate using armies of economists and bureaucrats. Instead of forced payments to a foreign capital, globalism figured out how to create economic reliance: first on sterling, then on the dollar, now for many on the Euro. This will soon be leapfrogged by China's designs.

And while imperialism has served some good purposes throughout human history, it is only when grounded in something larger than man; whether that be natural law, God, or otherwise. But such things are scarcely long-lived.

While benevolent imperialism can create better conditions over a period of time, humanity's instincts will always lean towards freedom and self-governance.

It is this fundamental distinction between the United States' founding and that of the modern Republic of France that defines the two nations.

The people of France are "granted" their freedoms by the government, and the government creates the conditions and dictates the terms upon which those freedoms are exercised.

As Charles Kesler wrote for the Claremont Review of Books in May, "As a result, there are fewer and fewer levers by which the governed can make its consent count".

France is the archetypal administrative state, while the United States was founded on natural law, a topic that scarcely gets enough attention anymore.

Nationalism - or nationism, if you will - therefore represents a break from the war-hungry norm of human history . Its presence in the 20th century has been rewritten and bastardized.

A nationalist has no intention of invading your country or changing your society. A nationalist cares just as much as anyone else about the plights of others around the world but believes putting one's own country first is the way to progress. A nationalist would never seek to divide by race, gender, ethnicity, or sexual preference, or otherwise. This runs contrary to the idea of a united, contiguous nation at ease with itself.

Certainly nationalism's could-be bastard child of chauvinism can give root to imperialistic tendencies. But if the nation can and indeed does look after its own, and says to the world around it, "these are our affairs, you may learn from them, you may seek advice, we may even assist if you so desperately need it and our affairs are in order," then nationalism can be a great gift to the 21st century and beyond.

This is what President Trump understands.

[Nov 15, 2018] I think the film should be seen not so much as a testament to the success of the Israel lobby, but of its failure

Nov 15, 2018 | therealnews.com

ALI ABUNIMAH: Yeah, it can be very intimidating and disruptive on a personal level. And you know, there are certainly stories of students feeling that in the film, and that we've also reported on for many years. But I think people should look at the big picture; that this operation the film reveals, that Israel has been spending tens or hundreds of millions of dollars on, Israel and its lobby groups, and people like Sheldon Adelson, Donald Trump's biggest campaign donor, and people like Adam Milstein, who is named in the film as- he's an Israeli-American financier, a convicted tax dodger who is named in the film as one of the main funders and founders of the anonymous smear site Canary Mission, which tries to destroy the reputations of college students so that they can't get jobs.

It is very scary for individuals. But the big picture here is that Israel is losing the support of progressive segments of society, big time. We see that in poll after poll. Just last month there was a poll by YouGov for the Economist that showed a collapse in support for Israel among progressives, among liberals, among younger people, among people of color. And that the strong support for Israel now looks exactly like Donald Trump's base. It's white, it's male, it's very right wing.

And so I think the film should be seen not so much as a testament to the success of the Israel lobby, but of its failure. The fact that they have had to mount this massive operation, and it has not been able to staunch the hemorrhage of support for Israel, I think really should encourage people that speaking out is the right thing to do. The more normalized that it becomes to talk about Palestinian rights, the less power the smear and intimidation tactics have. So the message I think people should take away is speak up more, not less, because we're winning.

BEN NORTON: Well, we'll have to end it there. We were speaking with Ali Abunimah, who is the co-founder and editor of The Electronic Intifada. The Electronic Intifada is an award-winning news website that published this censored Al Jazeera documentary with an undercover reporter investigating the Israel lobby in the United States. Thanks for joining us, Ali.

SkepticalPartisan • a day ago ,

Transparency and knowledge is the key to dis-empowering the power elite and empowering everyday people. Israel's suppression of this film is a clear example of information control. Thank you Ali Abunimah and The Electronic Intifada for helping relieve the yolk of information asymmetry with regards to Israel's treatment of Palestinians and Israel's manipulation of American policy.

Misterioso SkepticalPartisan • a day ago ,

Amen.

Abner Doubleday • 7 hours ago ,

I wrote a letter to my U. S. senator, critical of accepting "contributions" from an ardently pro-Israel government lobbying group. The FBI showed up in the neighborhood and called to interrogate me. This for holding my (so-anointed "liberal") senator accountable to act in the "best interests" of constituents!

Totalitarianism and fascism are creeping forward, and the governments of Israel and its US collaborators -- in every branch and level of government -- are its leading proponents. What the Zionists do is not only unconstitutional, it's seditious.

A lot of us in the human race don't look lightly upon truly seditious behavior, such as that carried out every day by the U. S. government on behalf of multinational corporations and foreign agents in direct violations of U. S. laws. Indeed, a lot of us consider sedition a capital crime, with all its attendant accountability implied.

[Nov 15, 2018] Finally Released Censored Al Jazeera Documentary Exposes Israel-Backed Attacks on US Activists

Nov 13, 2018 | therealnews.com
Series Content Al Jazeera's undercover film The Lobby – USA, censored by Qatar, has finally been published by The Electronic Intifada. Editor Ali Abunimah discusses the documentary's explosive revelations, exposing Israel-backed attacks on US activists

[Nov 14, 2018] Nationalism vs partiotism

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Look, mostly this whole patriotism/nationalism word game is just sadly funny. You are a patriot if you think like me. You are a nationalist if you don't. Patriotism is good, nationalism is bad. If I am a patriot, I am good, if you are a nationalist, you must be bad. ..."
Nov 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Degringolade , 13 hours ago

... Look, mostly this whole patriotism/nationalism word game is just sadly funny. You are a patriot if you think like me. You are a nationalist if you don't. Patriotism is good, nationalism is bad. If I am a patriot, I am good, if you are a nationalist, you must be bad.

I think that the wisdom of Humpty Dumpty when speaking to Alice fits here:

"When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less."

"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

"The question is which is to be master -- that's all."

[Nov 14, 2018] Nationalism vs partiotism

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Look, mostly this whole patriotism/nationalism word game is just sadly funny. You are a patriot if you think like me. You are a nationalist if you don't. Patriotism is good, nationalism is bad. If I am a patriot, I am good, if you are a nationalist, you must be bad. ..."
Nov 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Degringolade , 13 hours ago

... Look, mostly this whole patriotism/nationalism word game is just sadly funny. You are a patriot if you think like me. You are a nationalist if you don't. Patriotism is good, nationalism is bad. If I am a patriot, I am good, if you are a nationalist, you must be bad.

I think that the wisdom of Humpty Dumpty when speaking to Alice fits here:

"When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less."

"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

"The question is which is to be master -- that's all."

[Nov 14, 2018] Jewish Politics in America A Post Political View by Gilad Atzmon

Nov 14, 2018 | www.unz.com
The Washington Report on the Middle East Affairs has been producing outstanding work as well. The crucial question is, why have Americans let this happen?

My study of Jewish ID politics suggests that America isn't just influenced by one Jewish lobby or another. The entire American political-cultural-spiritual spectrum has been transformed into a internal Jewish exchange. Most American do not see the true nature of the battle they participate in and, for the obvious reasons, their media and their academics do not help. It is more convenient to keep Americans in the dark.

America is rapidly moving towards a civil war. The divide isn't only ideological or political. The split is geographical, spiritual, educational and demographical. In a Vox article titled, "The Midterm Elections Revealed that America is in a Cold Civil War," Zack Beauchamp writes, "This is a country fundamentally split in two, with no real room for compromise." Of the midterm election Beauchamp reports that "American politics is polarized not on the basis of class or even ideology, but on identity One side open to mass immigration and changes to the country's traditional racial hierarchy, the other is deeply hostile to it." He correctly observes that "Republicans and Democrats see themselves as part of cultural groups that are fundamentally distinct: They consume different media and attend different churches; live in distinct kinds of places and rarely interact with people who disagree with them."

Despite this American schism, Israel and its Lobby are somehow able to influence both sides, managing to finding pathways to the secluded corridors of both parties. Although Democrats and Republicans can no longer talk to each other, it seems that both are happy to talk to Israel and the Lobby. And it is at AIPAC's annual conference that these political foes compete in their eagerness to appease a foreign state. This anomaly in American politics demands attention.

As a former Israeli, I had not observed the effects of the Israel/ Jewish Diaspora dilemma until I had my experience at the Student Union Hall in Britain. Israel was born with the Zionist desire to eradicate the identity of Jews as cosmopolitans. Zionism promised to bond the Jew with the soil, with a territory, with borders. Thus, it is consistent with the Zionist paradigm that Israel is notorious for its appalling treatment ofasylum seekers, immigrants and, of course, the indigenous people of the land. Israel has surrounded itself with separation walls. Israel deployed hundreds of snipers in its fight to stop the March of Return – a 'caravan' of Palestinian refugees who were marching towards its border. Israel has been putting into daily practice that which Trump has promised to deliver. For a Trump supporter, Israel's politics is a wet dream. Maybe Trump should consider tweaking his motto in 2020 into 'Let's make America Israel.' This would encompass building separation walls, bullying America's neighbors, the potential to cleanse America of the 'enemy within,' and so on. It is not surprising that in 2016 Trump beat Clinton in an Israeli absentee exit poll . The Israelis do love Trump. To them, he is a vindication of their hawkish ideological path. Although during the election Trump was castigated as a vile anti-Semite and a Hitler figure by the Jewish progressive press, once elected, Fox News was quick to point out that Trump was actually the 'First Jewish President.'

We can see that Israel, Trump and his voters have a lot in common. They want militant anti immigration policies , they love 'walls,' they hate Muslims and they believe in borders. When alt right icon Richard Spencer described himself on Israeli TV as "a White Zionist" he was actually telling the truth. Israel puts into practice the ideas that Spencer and Trump can so far only entertain. But the parallels between Israel and the Trump administration's Republican voters is just one side of the story.

... ... ...

The story of Jewish political strength in America doesn't end there. A New York Jew can easily metamorphosize from an hard-core Identitarian into rabid Zionist settler and vice versa, but such a manoeuvre is not available to ordinary Americans. White nationalist Richard Spencer can not make the political shift that would turn him into a progressive or a liberal just as it is unlikely that a NY transsexual icon would find it possible to become a 'redneck.' While Jewish political identity is inherently elastic and can morph endlessly, the American political divide is fairly rigid. Jewish ideologists frequently change positions and camps, they shift from left to right, from Clinton to Trump (Dershowitz), they support immigration in their host counties yet oppose it in their own Jewish State, they are against rigid borders and even states in general, yet support the two state solution in Palestine (Chomsky). Gentiles are less flexible. They are expected to be coherent and consistent.

It was this manoeuvrability that made PM Netanyahu's 2015 speech in front of a joint session of Congress a 'success,' although it might well have been considered a humiliation for any American with an ounce of patriotic pride. As we wellknow, Bibi can communicate easily with both Republicans and Democrats just as he cansimultaneously befriend Trump and Putin. ....

... ... ...

jilles dykstra , says: November 14, 2018 at 8:35 am GMT

Reading the article the thought came up 'when will the USA, the majority of USA citizens, (begin to) realise that the era of USA foreign politics for internal political reasons, is over, no longer affordable ?'
The 19th century USA Civil War was horrible, as with all civil wars it was, to a large extent a foreign war.
If indeed again a USA civil war starts, I'm not optimistic about the possibility of preventing it, not much of the present USA will still be there at the end, fysically.
And, will there still be a political USA when the fighting stops, or will it end as Germany, the foreign victors creating the USA they want ?
A USA, as Germany now under Merkel, intent on destroying itself culturally ?
Digital Samizdat , says: November 14, 2018 at 11:39 am GMT
So good to see Gilad Atzmon here at Unz. I have read his two books, The Wandering Who? and Being in Time , and can thoroughly recommend them.

These Jewish bodies tend to preach inclusiveness while practicing exclusivity.

But of course! They first begged for inclusion into our powers structures, then once we complied, they returned the favor by taking them over and excluding us from them.

Pongid-American , says: November 14, 2018 at 2:28 pm GMT
This is a bit reductive. This commenter does not recognize himself in the dichotomy above. When forced to choose a race on bureaucratic forms, this commenter enters 'human.' Letting them call you an American opens you up for intensely manipulative statist propaganda. And when you know your rights – your human rights, as opposed to your bullshit half-assed revoked constitutional rights – your race is incidental. You know that nondiscrimination underpins your ethics and the law.

This sort of identity is certainly ferociously suppressed by the Israeli fifth column. Falk is this kind of guy too, a Jew but so what, and look what they did to him. Ajamu Baraka too. This overwhelming tidal wave of immigrants from the global south: they grew up with human rights, including the crucial right to solidarity, which negates all the invidious aspects of identity politics. Basically, as a human you side with underdogs worldwide: Okinawans, Palestinians, landless Latin Americans, Africans, you name it. Cohesive social forces are not confined to ethnic groups.

Tensions behind the Iron Curtain inside the US are incidental. The real conflict is us humans versus overreaching states. Given the downtrodden nature of the US subject population, this conflict is playing out mainly outside US borders. The left/right continuum has always been a CIA construction. Statists and humanists array on an orthogonal axis, and that contention continued when CIA rolled the old left up. Cosmopolitans have not gone away.

Israel may be infecting the US with statist divide et impera, but humanist institutions are penetrating Israel too. Look what's happening as the HRC and other human rights treaty bodies review Israel.

http://www.treatybodywebcast.org/cat-57th-session-israel/

Israel is formally accused of interpreting its commitments in bad faith. This allows treaty bodies to gang up and apply international criminal law to Israeli torture, murder, and extermination. It's already happening to criminal US officials. Israel's next.

Bardon Kaldian , says: November 14, 2018 at 2:51 pm GMT
Atzmon is right re "New York Jews", them being potentially mutable. But, Israelis, being normal nationalists, cannot show the same level of "shape-shifting". A multiculturalist minority in one country can become other nation's nationalist majority. Just, Israeli nationalists cannot become Israeli open borders advocates, multiculturalists, globalists etc.

Only a minority population, basically strangers in another country, can practice various ways of behavior. Host, dominant culture in a country- cannot. Dershowitz can change positions; just, both Netanyahu & any Israeli labor politician can not.

Johnny Smoggins , says: November 14, 2018 at 2:51 pm GMT
It's the hypocrisy that pisses everyone off with Jews. Few people, especially on the right, have any issue with a nation defending itself. It's that the same Jews who are trying to shove diversity/multiculturalism/refugees 49.Reuben Kaspate says: November 14, 2018 at 3:42 pm GMT Civil war? How soon are we talking here? Perhaps, the status quo will be the foreseeable future just humming along. down our throats are either supportive or silent when it comes to Israel making itself into a pure ethnostate behind barbed wire.

... ... ...

Miro23 , says: November 14, 2018 at 4:45 pm GMT

But at a certain point in my life, around my thirties, I started to find all of it too exhausting. I wanted to simplify things. I demoted myself into an ordinary human being.

A lot of people want this, but ordinary humans beings also have to live in societies – and quite sophisticated ones at that. Elected representatives (or leadership) need responsibility and integrity for it to work.

THE US JOINS THE 3RD WORLD

Government responsibility and integrity are not guaranteed (notably in places like Africa and S.E. Asia), but the United States is probably the leading example of a government failure in an advanced society. In the US, like much of the 3rd world, special interests (minority ethnic and commercial) loot the public through a corrupt bargain with the holders of political power. Hillary Clinton was the classic example, with the same "Pay to Play" philosophy as the usual leadership of the Philippines or the Congo.

The 3rd world antidotes are Nationalism and Populism, but having gained power, political leaders usually sell out (sounds familiar). Also the public of the US have learnt to be trusting, and find it hard to believe that they've been hit by a classic 3rd world problem.

In the US, Zionists have looted $ trillions in support of their Special Interest (Israel) and corporations have extracted many more $ trillions through the mass outsourcing of entire industries, complete with their technology and supply networks to Asia. It's not engraved in stone that US industry, had to relocated to Asia or Indians have to be recruited for its IT work. Germany and Japan for example, have held onto their industrial leadership in recent decades and the US could have done the same. At one time the US was the world leader in US based automobile production (Detroit), steel, aluminium, camera and film, industrial chemicals, communications equipment, computers and electronics, aircraft and aerospace (still partly) etc. With what's left in mostly in services and retail (often looted by Hedge Fund asset strippers).

In other words, under a genuine post WW2 "America First" policy involving top quality national education, research and government support of leading industries, the US could still be the world's leading industrial and economic power and not have to worry about debt, deficits and social decline, and also find plenty of jobs for Latino migrants.

However, the US got instead its present 3rd world style corrupt elite who know that nationalism is their Nº1 enemy.

Only Anglos can mount a nationalist challenge, hence the paranoia when Trump arrived on the scene with his "America First" dialogue and Anglo base. In contrast, the whole apparatus of the Zioglob/ deep state/MSM defence is Identitarian, and aimed at destroying the foundations of Anglo society, with LGBT, "White guilt dialectics", multiculturalism, exclusion from Ivy League universities, Hollywood slime, speech laws, statue demolition, in-your-face Africanization, massive debt, political corruption, open frontiers and exporting middle class jobs.

CHINA JOINS THE 1ST WORLD

The Chinese seem to be doing it right.They have an explicit national policy to gain and hold top positions in key world industries and make it a joint national effort to succeed (especially in national human development/education). Also when they find corrupt government officials (even at high levels) they quickly put them on trial and shoot them.

anonymous [739] Disclaimer , says: November 14, 2018 at 5:24 pm GMT
Winston Churchill talked about this/these divisions in the Jewish people in the 1930s, back before Israel became a Jewish ethnostate – he presented the main 2 divisions between ethnic Jews who fell down in to the worst forms of Communism, Bolshevism, Anarchism in Russia and Eastern Europe and those other ethnic Jews who were sort of doing OK being loyal to their European/American countries especially England they lived in while also promoting a healthier form of Zionism working for some eventual Jewish national state somewhere probably in then British administered Palestine.

Zionism vs Communism – a struggle for the Jewish Soul:

https://communismblog.wordpress.com/2014/12/10/zionism-versus-bolshevism-by-winston-churchill/

Churchill didn't present the extremely bad alternative we had today:

Jews in the diasapora everywhere from Russia to Poland to Germany, France, England, Canada, Sweden Australia, few left in South Africa our USA doing this:

Promoting Israel over everything as an exclusively Jewish ethno state with endless US, UK other wars against Israel's neighbors and .

Promoting the worst forms of multi culturalism, open borders immigration in to the West, Jewish media mafia domination/monopoly of the mainstream media, social media in USA, UK, Sweden etc promoting the worst forms of porn, rap music, fake news, endless movies and TV shows demonizing all White European men as evil Racists, rapists – promoting the worst Jewish feminists/lesbians to the US Supreme Court, Rachel Maddow type news commentary etc.

Agent76 , says: November 14, 2018 at 5:54 pm GMT
Nov 3, 2018 The Lobby – USA, episode 1

The Covert War. This video is posted here for news reporting purposes.

Been_there_done_that , says: November 14, 2018 at 6:31 pm GMT
@OMG

He, I believe, was the first to identify or at least name and define the religion of Holocaustianity and deserves credit for that.

Ingrid Rimland openly used that term decades ago already to describe this religion, years before she eventually married Ernst Zündel.

Rurik , says: November 14, 2018 at 6:34 pm GMT
Hello Mr. Atzmom,

I have long admired your noble efforts on behalf of the Palestinian people. You often write in ways that resonate with me, and I'm glad to see you here at The Unz Review.

Israel deployed hundreds of snipers in its fight to stop the March of Return – a 'caravan' of Palestinian refugees who were marching towards its border. Israel has been putting into daily practice that which Trump has promised to deliver. For a Trump supporter, Israel's politics is a wet dream.

But I have to tell you, you're waaayyy off with this characterization of Trump supporters.

There are, I'm sure, a lot of brain-dead "Christian" Zionists who drool at the prospect of slaughtered Palestinians, because murdering Christ's modern day relatives living in his lands are the only way to force Jesus to return and give them their rapture. And I suppose there are perhaps a fraction of a percentage point of people who actually want Trump to throw out (or murder) all non-whites to create the kind of racial purity Bibi and his crew of psychopaths are demanding for Israel.

But from what I've seen, and being one of them, as to the vast majority of what you call "Trump supporters", the idea of murdering people in order to steal their land, is a monstrous absurdity.

For the record, we voted for Trump to end the demonic reign of terror and mass murder in the Middle East. The very kind of mass-murder and daily atrocities that were cackling Hillary's ("we came, we saw, he died) and Bill's ("it's worth it") trademark.

We voted for Trump as a repudiation of those evils, that had long stained our national soul, and indeed had made America the kind of place Bibi was pleased with.

We did not vote for Trump to murder and steal, or otherwise do anyone harm. We voted for Trump to do the opposite, and end the Eternal Wars for Israel. No one on the Alt-right likes the wars. We simply want to be left alone, to pursue our humble lives unmolested by globalists and their nefarious designs for us. Is that so terrible?

. In fact, Israel has become a prime model for American nationalists.

with all due respect, that is a vile smear, Sir.

Where are these 'white nationalists' who're demanding we terrorize and murder and steal other people's land? Eh?

For the record, white nationalists are today's Palestinians. What they're demanding is that they don't have to give up the lands they have, and were born on, and be forced out to make room for unlimited others. Or forced to assimilate to an Hispanic or Muslim culture and way of life. Is that so egregious? To want to persevere as an American in an American culture, with hostility to none, and trade with and good relations with all and any who respond in good faith?

Why is it that all white people, from Europe to N. America and everywhere else, are all expected to invite every non-white, non-Western, often hostile armies of (especially military age young men) into our lands, and then treat them better than the indigenous, white second class citizens?

What is it with that?!

Either Germans and Swedes and Americans hand over their nations or we're all going to be called "Nazis" or "racists" or God help us, "Zionists".

WTF?

We can see that Israel, Trump and his voters have a lot in common. They want militant anti immigration policies , they love 'walls,' they hate Muslims and they believe in borders.

well, only the stupidest imbecile on the planet doesn't believe in borders. (or, an ideologue that wants to see *certain* nations destroyed by armies of immigrants – hostile or otherwise).

No one wants recognized borders more than the Palestinians. It is Israel that refused to state its border, because it want to steal more land. How many Trump voters do you hear talking about stealing other people's land? (I'm not talking about lunatics like Bolton. American nationalists despise Bolton and McCain and all the rest of the Zionist, globalist scum)

And I don't personally know of any reasonable American nationalist who 'hates Muslims'. They just don't want them all here. Have you ever heard of Kosovo, Mr. Atzmon? There are neighborhoods in Michigan that were Polish Catholic for generations. And they liked it that way. They never hated Muslims or anyone else. But they do hate having their communities taken over by alien peoples with alien cultures and now have to listen to 'calls to prayer' at five in the morning every day. And demands for Sharia and other clashes with their former way of life.

Are these people rabid Zionists demanding to murder people and steal their land, just because they don't want throngs of Muslims coming in and transforming their community into something they don't recognize or have any predilection for. Are they simply too racist and hateful, and need to learn to assimilate? Eh?

I don't know who this Spencer guy is, and he sound like controlled opposition to me.

It would be wrong to equate nationalism with the frothing's of some so called "white-Zionist". The only white Zionists I know of are the lunatic "Christian" Zionists.

The nationalists I know of simply want to be left -the fuck- alone!

Stop demanding that we hand over our country to people who don't appreciate it. (Indeed, often hate it) Stop demanding that we doom our children to living in a nation that puts them last in every way, behind every single non-white immigrate that can get to these shores. It is insane to want to have people come to your nation who will be a burden, who often hate you and yours, not to mention your culture, and want to displace you. It is insane to insist that millions of people come in and compete with your children on an un-level playing field. Every non-White immigrant that comes here gets Affirmative Action promotions and jobs and university preference over the white children who were born here. Unless you hate white people, that state of affairs is insane.

And yet here we are being badgered as thieving, psychotic murderous goons (Zionists) simply for wanting what every single sane person on the planet wants: to preserve our way of life and hand it down to our progeny – for them to have a decent life and hope for theirs in turn.

And yet somehow, if we have white skin, wanting this is the most evil and wicked and racist thing imaginable!

Anon [884] Disclaimer , says: November 14, 2018 at 7:00 pm GMT
@Rurik White nationalists are a mixed bunch, going from the very bad (as Atzmon) sees them to, maybe, the peaks of sainthood you attribute to them.

The whole idea of legit owners of land is a rationalization: everybody (meaning: every group) took from someone else the land where they are, and did so by combat and might.

Sure, in our more civilized times we'd like such things to be relegated in the past, borders to become stable, and ethnic cleansing and warfare to be a closed chapter.

These are wishes and words about said wishes, though.

Do you own a swath of land in the countryside, by chance? I do, and over the years all of the three of my neighbours have applied pressure to broaden their owned land so as to include a bit more than mine. Being the first stripe allowed, they'd go on, until I were left with no land at all, all of this while seeing themselves as honest.

Whoever owns land, and whoever doesn't have a need to believe Jews worse than other people knows what human nature is like when it comes to property, borders, and expansion.

L. Allen Bivin , says: November 14, 2018 at 10:03 pm GMT
@Agent76 Thank you for sharing that. Fascinating four-part series.
renfro , says: November 15, 2018 at 1:35 am GMT
@Anon

Do you own a swath of land in the countryside, by chance? I do, and over the years all of the three of my neighbours have applied pressure to broaden their owned land so as to include a bit more than mine.

I doubt your neighbors have attacked you, burned your land, cut off or poisoned your water and then confiscated your house and land ..as is the case of Israel's theft of Palestine.

This is the 21 century, not the 17th or 18th century.

[Nov 14, 2018] Notes From Smartphone-Era Israel by by Andrew J. Bacevich

Nov 14, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

When we interrupt our travels to take a break, I approach a group of young Israeli soldiers, themselves waiting for a bus. Anyone speak English, I ask? Sure, answers one good-looking kid. His accent is familiar.

Where are you from?

Connecticut.

He turns out to be an Ohio State grad, serving a tour as a "lone soldier" -- a Jew but not an Israeli -- in the IDF. There are thousands of them.

I have never been comfortable with this phenomenon. If a young American hankers to defend a country, it strikes me that he ought to defend his own rather than someone else's. But this Buckeye from Connecticut is obviously a fine upstanding fellow so I don't press him to explain.

[Nov 14, 2018] Macron Trash Talks "America First"

Notable quotes:
"... Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of ..."
"... . To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at www.creators.com. ..."
Nov 14, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

In a rebuke that bordered on a national insult Sunday, Emmanuel Macron sniped at Donald Trump's calling himself a nationalist.

"Patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism; nationalism is a betrayal of patriotism," Macron said.

As for Trump's policy of "America first," Macron trashed such atavistic thinking in this new age: "By saying we put ourselves first and the others don't matter, we erase what a nation holds dearest, what gives it life, what makes it great and what is essential: its moral values."

Though he is being hailed as Europe's new anti-Trump leader who will stand up for transnationalism and globalism, Macron revealed his ignorance of America.

Trump's ideas are not ideological but rooted in our country's history.

America was born between the end of the French and Indian War, the Declaration of Independence in 1776, and the ratification of the Constitution in 1788. Both the general who led us in the Revolution and the author of that declaration became president. Both put America first. And both counseled their countrymen to avoid "entangling" or "permanent" alliances with any other nation, as we did for 160 years.

Were George Washington and Thomas Jefferson lacking in patriotism?

When Woodrow Wilson, after being re-elected in 1916 on the slogan "He Kept Us Out of War," took us into World War I, he did so as an "associate," not as an Allied power. American troops fought under American command.

Emmanuel Macron: The New King of Europe? When 'America First' Becomes Negotiable

After that war, the U.S. Senate rejected an alliance with France. Under Franklin Roosevelt, Congress formally voted for neutrality in any future European war.

The U.S. emerged from World War II as the least bloodied and least damaged nation because we stayed out for more than two years after it had begun.

We did not invade France until four years after it was occupied, the British had been thrown off the Continent, and Josef Stalin's Soviet Union had been fighting and dying for three years.

The leaders who kept us out of the two world wars as long as they did -- did they not serve our nation well, given that America's total losses were just over 500,000 dead, compared with the millions that other nations lost?

At the Armistice Day ceremony, Macron declared, "By saying we put ourselves first and the others don't matter, we erase what a nation holds dearest its moral values."

But Trump did not say that other countries don't matter. He only said we should put our own country first.

What country does Emmanuel Macron put first?

Does the president of France see himself as a citizen of the world with responsibility for all of Europe and all of mankind?

Charles de Gaulle was perhaps the greatest French patriot of the 20th century. Yet he spoke of a Europe of nation-states, built a national nuclear arsenal, ordered NATO out of France in 1966, and, in Montreal in 1967, declared, "Long live a free Quebec" -- inciting French Canadians to rise up against "les Anglo-Saxons" and create their own nation.

Was de Gaulle lacking in patriotism?

By declaring American nationalists anti-patriotic, Macron has asserted a claim to the soon-to-be-vacant chair of Angela Merkel.

But is Macron really addressing the realities of the new Europe and world in which we now live? Or is he simply assuming a heroic liberal posture to win the applause of Western corporate and media elites?

The realities: in Britain, Scots are seeking secession, and the English have voted to get out of the European Union. Many Basques and Catalans wish to secede from Spain. Czechs and Slovaks have split the blanket and parted ways.

Anti-EU sentiment is rampant in populist-dominated Italy.

A nationalism their peoples regard as deeply patriotic has triumphed in Poland and Hungary and is making gains even in Germany.

The leaders of the world's three greatest military powers -- Trump in the U.S., Vladimir Putin in Russia, and Xi Jinping in China -- are all nationalists.

Turkish nationalist Recep Tayyip Erdogan rules in Ankara; Hindu nationalist Narendra Modi is head of India. Jair Bolsonaro, a Trumpian nationalist, is the incoming president of Brazil. Is not Benjamin Netanyahu an Israeli nationalist?

In France, a poll of voters last week showed that Marine Le Pen's renamed party, Rassemblement National, has moved ahead of Macron's party for the May 2019 European Parliament elections.

If there is a valid criticism of Trump's foreign policy, it is not that he has failed to recognize the new realities of the 21st century. It's that he has not moved expeditiously to dissolve old alliances that put America at risk of war in faraway lands where no vital U.S. interests exist.

Why are we still committed to fight for a South Korea far richer and more populous than the nuclear-armed North? Why are U.S. planes and ships still bumping into Russian planes and ships in the Baltic and Black seas?

Why are we still involved in the half-dozen wars into which Bush II and Barack Obama got us in the Middle East?

Why do we not have the "America first" foreign policy we voted for?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever . To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at www.creators.com.

[Nov 14, 2018] The Short War With Gaza Exposed Israel s Weakness by Laguerre

Notable quotes:
"... Israel's newly won "friends" in the leadership of Saudi Arabia and the UAE proved to be unstable and of little value. ..."
"... The Israeli army is cr*p these days, only capable of shooting down unarmed Palestinians. No-one wants to spend their lives fighting, ready to go off to war at any moment, rather than living normal Western lives. ..."
"... The Zionists politically unified the Gaza defense factions for the first time, which is a very important development that needed to occur long ago. ..."
"... If the 1973 War were to be waged again using today's forces, it's likely Zionistan would lose. The Cabinet infighting mirrors the growing divide within Zionistan's polity. Unfortunately, that divide doesn't seem to be producing an alternative political party that's anti-Apartheid and favors a One State solution. Hard to argue with b's concluding assessment. ..."
"... This appears to be a planted explosive after the bus was emptied out -- except for the driver who was sacrificed. It certainly does not look like a Kornet as shown in this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ePvNlfrxfw ..."
"... The US and Israel are doing their best to encourage a multi-polar world able to oppose their reckless actions, although there's still a long way to go. The sooner both nations start to behave in a more circumspect manner, the safer the world will be. ..."
"... I have often wondered how does the Israeli economy stay afloat ..."
"... Never has Israel been so powerful and dominant and never has Israel's power seemed so impotent. Israel's nuclear weapons may deter other countries but they are useless against Palestinians unless Israel really wants to launch such weapons against itself. ..."
"... What will become of Israel? How will the region deal with it as, over time, it is increasingly defeated and forced to supply proofs that it deserves to exist? What answer will it make, as it throws away all semblance of community? ..."
"... I see Trump as clearly representative of the global elite that are having to kill their current empire host without being certain of how they can live with or make China's socialism with a Chinese face be controlled by an ongoing world of global private finance. ..."
"... Trump is their public face deal maker and I will agree with Peter AU 1 that Kissinger is the global elite's behind the scenes deal maker. I have written here before that Trump will default on US debt before he is out of office, IMO. ..."
"... Can the global elite pressure the world's nations into their continued existence as the jackboot of global finance? Despite the wild and crazy of grifter Donald Trump I still believe that reason is about to triumph over faith in the hallowed halls of global finance......and Israel is the proxy front for that lost faith in monotheistic religions with better than others value, bias and use of victimization. ..."
Nov 13, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Last week a ceasefire was agreed upon between Palestinian factions in Gaza and Israel:

The aim of the change, in a plan mediated by Egypt and with money supplied by Qatar, is to provide much-needed relief for Gaza, restore calm on the Israeli side of the border and avert another war.

On Sunday night Israeli special forces broke the ceasefire by invading Gaza under disguise. Such incursions happen quite often but are usually left unreported. The invaders wore civilian clothing and some were cloaked as women. Their cars arrived at the house of a local Qassam commander but suspicious guards held them up. A firefight ensued in which 7 Palestinians and 1 Israeli officer were killed. It is not clear what the intent of the Israeli raid was. A car left behind held what appeared to be surveillance equipment. The intruders fled back to Israel.

It is likely that rivalry within the Israeli government was behind this provocation:

[T]he perception that Israel, by allowing the fuel and cash shipments into Gaza, was paying off Hamas set off acrimonious wrangling between two rival right-wing members of Israel's security cabinet.

Earlier Sunday, Education Minister Naftali Bennett called the cash infusion "protection money." Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman accused Mr. Bennett of having supported such payments and of having opposed in recent weeks the more aggressive military reprisals against Hamas that Mr. Lieberman favored.
...
By night's end Mr. Netanyahu had cut short his trip [to Paris] and was flying back to Israel in response to the Gaza hostilities.

Did Lieberman order the incursion to undercut Netanyahoo ceasefire and his rival Bennet?


Map via SouthFront.org - bigger

The breach of the ceasefire by Israel set off another round of tit for tat strikes. A commando unit of Hamas' Qassam brigade launched an attack against a bus that had carried Israeli soldiers to the border. To avoid further escalation the shooter waited until the soldiers were out of the way before hitting it. Only the driver was injured. Then the Israeli air force destroyed the al-Aqsa TV station in Gaza city after notifying the Palestinians of its intent. It also damaged a university building. Rocket volleys from Gaza followed and the Israeli air-force hit several buildings. After 48 hours the ceasefire was renewed.

During the conflict the Palestinian side demonstrated a series of new capabilities:

It was Israel that practically begged to return to the ceasefire . Egypt led the negotiations:

Earlier Tuesday, the Political-Security Cabinet meeting that convened following the escalation in the south came to a halt after seven hours. After hearing the army's and the security establishment's assessments, the cabinet instructed the IDF to continue to operate in Gaza as necessary.

All the officials from the defense establishment who participated in the cabinet meeting -- IDF chief of staff, the head of Military Intelligence, the head of the Shin Bet, the head of the Mossad, and the head of the NSC -- supported the Egyptian request for a cease-fire .
...
" If we had intensified the attacks, rockets would have been fired at Tel Aviv ," senior cabinet officials said.

Since 15:30 local time today the situation is again quiet and calm. But the squabbling within the Israeli cabinet immediately resumed:

All the ministers -- including Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman and Minister Naftali Bennett -- did not object to a cease fire.

Following this report, the Defense Ministry said that Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman's support of a cease-fire deal were "fake news." The statement said that the Defense Minister's position was consistent and had not changed. Ministers Naftali Bennett, Ayelet Shaked and Ze'ev Elkin also said they did not support a cease-fire deal with Hamas.

In total 13 people were killed in Gaza and at least 2 on the Israeli side. A Hamas spokesperson accused Lieberman of being responsible for the breach of the ceasefire and demanded that Netanyahoo fires him.

The short conflict demonstrated that:

For decades the Zionist entity was able to attack its neighbors as it pleased. That changed. It no longer dares to step into Lebanon for fear of Hezbullah's reprisal. Syria's western airspace is closed for Israel thanks to the new S-300PMU2 air defense Russia delivered to the Syrian army. Israeli special forces botched their incursion into Gaza and the Iron Dome missile defense proved to be to faulty to protect Zionist settlements. The resistance in Gaza has new capabilities and surprises for Israel should it again attack.

Israel's newly won "friends" in the leadership of Saudi Arabia and the UAE proved to be unstable and of little value. The Boycott, divest and sanctions movement against the self declared apartheid state has undermined its image . Its lobby has been exposed . Its budget deficit is too high .

The short conflict in Gaza only demonstrated that Israel is weak and that its downward trend continues.

Posted by b on November 13, 2018 at 02:52 PM | Permalink

Comments The Israeli army is cr*p these days, only capable of shooting down unarmed Palestinians. No-one wants to spend their lives fighting, ready to go off to war at any moment, rather than living normal Western lives. That probably had something to do with the failure of the original raid - they left behind their (specially equipped) car, did they? Only the air force is any good, and, lo and behold, it had to be brought in to recover the situation.

Pat Lang is right on this one.

LJ , Nov 13, 2018 3:24:00 PM | link

This appears to be a planted explosive after the bus was emptied out -- except for the driver who was sacrificed. It certainly does not look like a Kornet as shown in this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ePvNlfrxfw
psychohistorian , Nov 13, 2018 3:56:04 PM | link
Thanks for the journalism not found anywhere else b

The West house of cards is self destructing before our eyes. It is way past time, IMO I just hope that global public finance comes with the change.

Sadness , Nov 13, 2018 4:01:06 PM | link
The sooner Israel returns to being Palestine, where Jewish folks who want to live in the ME can do so in peace with their neighbours, the better. The violent murderous destructive settler ethnics please go home, ta.
In MC doo , Nov 13, 2018 4:07:36 PM | link
The hornet attack on the bus is in all likelyhood faked, around 26 seconds in your tube video at least 8 IDF are at the front of the bus chatting, at around 46 seconds they are gone. We hear the sound of the missile being fired but are unable to see it tracking the target as it moves in.
john , Nov 13, 2018 4:18:35 PM | link
very nice perspective, b, very good. thanks. and for all those asshats out there who think that uncle sam is israel's bitch, well. live and learn.
CarlD , Nov 13, 2018 4:26:16 PM | link
@2

This Video is probably and most assuredly a Houthi destruction of a SA tank. It has nothing to do with the Israeli bus.

bjd , Nov 13, 2018 4:26:47 PM | link
If fear for Tel Aviv was a motivation, an additional conclusion might be the Israeli's have little real faith in their Iron Dome -- no?
Where is Iran in this story, that Lieberman is so keen on?
Yonatan , Nov 13, 2018 4:28:10 PM | link
LJ @2.

There is a difference. The cameraman in the Abrams shot is close to the launcher and to the line of fire so the ATGM rocket motor exhaust is clearly visible. In the IDF shot, the cameraman could be well away from the launch, even at right angles to its line of flight, totally hiding the rocket motor. That said, it would be even more gutsy to have placed an IED where the IDF was likely to gather and much cheaper. The ATGMs are more valuable against IDF armor. $1 million of US taxpayer money going up in smoke just like that.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dr0LWUUXgAAVuBD.jpg

Hamas - bringing the US closer to bankruptcy $10 bottle rocket by $10 bottle rocket.

karlof1 , Nov 13, 2018 4:37:36 PM | link
The Zionists politically unified the Gaza defense factions for the first time, which is a very important development that needed to occur long ago. The Zionist's response to perform a War Crime fits their behavioral norm to a Tee.

If the 1973 War were to be waged again using today's forces, it's likely Zionistan would lose. The Cabinet infighting mirrors the growing divide within Zionistan's polity. Unfortunately, that divide doesn't seem to be producing an alternative political party that's anti-Apartheid and favors a One State solution. Hard to argue with b's concluding assessment.

frances , Nov 13, 2018 5:11:47 PM | link
reply to

This appears to be a planted explosive after the bus was emptied out -- except for the driver who was sacrificed. It certainly does not look like a Kornet as shown in this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ePvNlfrxfw

Posted by: LJ | Nov 13, 2018 3:24:00 PM | 2
I agree, I think this was an Israeli False Flag to justify an invasion and I agree it is a bomb beneath the bus. A Kornet has a distinctive undulating pattern and leaves a smoke trail, for example: here is what a Kornet looks like hitting something: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5xKCzdhAC8

james , Nov 13, 2018 5:19:49 PM | link
thanks b... it sounds like none of the Israeli politicians want to own up to wanting a ceasefire.. why is that? is the idea of projecting strength and aggressiveness the only posture Israel can take for the majority Israel religious orthodox voting public??

as b notes, Israel's situation is becoming more difficult for a number of reasons.. i see on mondoweiss, another article that highlights the continuation of policies that will come back to bite Israel in the ass.. A familiar invasion: Settlers take another mountain top, soldiers follow, and Palestinians demonstrate for their rights...

@6 john... i am curious... it sure looks to me like the usa is israels bitch... it's not just usa either.. one could include canada, australia, uk and all the western poodles too... how does this event appear to make it look any different to you? thanks..

worldblee , Nov 13, 2018 5:22:55 PM | link
The US and Israel are doing their best to encourage a multi-polar world able to oppose their reckless actions, although there's still a long way to go. The sooner both nations start to behave in a more circumspect manner, the safer the world will be.
LJ , Nov 13, 2018 6:36:01 PM | link
@12 Yes, Francis. I agree. It's a bad fake, too.
steve , Nov 13, 2018 7:31:56 PM | link
I have often wondered how does the Israeli economy stay afloat. I am on the side of Israel. However it seems increasingly a losing side. To survive they have had to adopt increasingly harsh and embarrassing measures. The only way to achieve victory is to ethnically cleanse Arabs from the Middle East. The Heart of Darkness Rabbit Bomb Blues.
PeacefulProsperity , Nov 13, 2018 8:13:21 PM | link
And the carnage has been sponsored by the Hollyweird scum: Palestinians critical of Hollywood stars donating $60 million to support Israeli army terror
PeacefulProsperity , Nov 13, 2018 8:14:44 PM | link
Hollyweird anti-Trmp scum, that is.
james , Nov 13, 2018 8:21:21 PM | link
@19 pp.. trump is no different.. hollywood and trump - 2 sides of the same coin.. both subservient to Israel..
sejomoje , Nov 13, 2018 8:34:01 PM | link
#18 - Gerard Butler hosted that event. His Malibu(?) house was just burned to the frame. Coincidence? I think not. He is all over social media whining about it and people are actually calling him out. Maybe there's some hope for us after all.
ADKC , Nov 13, 2018 8:54:57 PM | link
Adam & Steve @16 & @17

Palestinians already know that Israel plans a genocide. Palestinians know that they will not be helped by the west or any other country. Palestinians know that they have no voice and no way of countering the Israeli lobby. But where has this success really got you and Israel?

I suggest that you are pursuing a path that means doom for both Palestinian and Israeli. You imagine that you can get rid of Palestinians but lack the commonsense to see that this is impossible. You are building a future of (ever more) death and destruction.

There is another option (which you won't be interested in) and that is to change Israel from an apartheid state and grant equality to Palestinians (including the right of return and restitution of property).

That you two could post such loathsome views indicates that you are completely unaware that you are staring into an abyss that will consume both Palestinian and Israeli.

Never has Israel been so powerful and dominant and never has Israel's power seemed so impotent. Israel's nuclear weapons may deter other countries but they are useless against Palestinians unless Israel really wants to launch such weapons against itself.

You need to wake up to the idea that Palestinian and Israeli might have a future together and consider that the path you are following will bring a great tragedy to both sides.

Kiza , Nov 13, 2018 9:02:21 PM | link
@ karlof1 10

My thoughts were identical - the single biggest development is the exhibited unity among the Palestinians. It does not spell good for the expansionist apartheid bankrupt state (just like all its bankrupt Western bitches).

I also support renaming Gaza into Auschwitz, that was a brilliantly symbolic idea.

ADKC , Nov 13, 2018 9:22:20 PM | link
I am against renaming Gaza as Auschwitz. It is a transparent attempt to appeal to western/European sensitivities (which will not work), will be nothing more than a publicity stunt, and is a denial of the unique Palestinian experience.

Probably more people in the world know of Gaza than they do of Auschwitz.

Gaza is, and should remain, Gaza.

Grieved , Nov 13, 2018 9:57:42 PM | link
@22 ADKC

Thank you for putting that into words. The two entities are joined in an intimate embrace of destiny from which it seems that no single side can emerge alone. How futile that Israel cannot see that its best chance to emerge as a nation, or at least as a people, is now, and that every day it seeks to further reduce Palestine it furthers its own diminishing.

What will become of Israel? How will the region deal with it as, over time, it is increasingly defeated and forced to supply proofs that it deserves to exist? What answer will it make, as it throws away all semblance of community?

Hoarsewhisperer , Nov 13, 2018 10:19:32 PM | link
@19 pp.. trump is no different.. hollywood and trump - 2 sides of the same coin.. both subservient to israel..
Posted by: james | Nov 13, 2018 8:21:21 PM | 20

Well that's wrong. Trump can read the Zio-Jews like a book. They're so-o predictably evil and stupid. His unlawful and MEANINGLESS recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of "Israel" encouraged them to put their mass-murdering skills on display while the civilized world watched in horror and revulsion.

As b points out, Lebanon has long been too dangerous for their peculiarly wussy brand of courage, Syria is now off-limits, and now the Powerless Palestinians have made them re-think their aggressive idiocy. The fact that they've always been their own worst enemy is rapidly coming home to roost...

Peter AU 1 , Nov 13, 2018 11:17:18 PM | link
Hoarsewhisperer 27

Israel is the land of Ivanka and Kissinger. I think US vetos at the UNSC will continue. US embassy is now at Jerusalem and Trump has declared it the capital of Israel.

james , Nov 13, 2018 11:17:22 PM | link

... ... ...

@27 hw... we have to disagree then... israels mass-murdering skills have been on display prior to and during trumps position.. nothing has changed with regard to Israel's attitude, trump or no trump.. and frankly trump could give a shit.. The money continues to flow to Israel and usa subservience continues... i wish it was different, but i am not into some pipe dream in thinking trump has made any difference.. he hasn't.. you have much greater faith in trump then i..

Zachary Smith , Nov 13, 2018 11:57:39 PM | link
I'm about 6,000 miles away from the current excitement, and can't read any of the languages. So I've got to rely on second and third hand reports of everything . What I'm hearing through those slender grapevines is that there are bitter faction fights within the government of the apartheid Jewish State. Another factor is that none of the 'leaders' known to me are exactly oozing competence. When your major propaganda outlet starts whining about the stupidity, things aren't going well.
1) The S-300 air defense missiles Russia has deployed to Syria. Netanyahu's brief chat with President Vladimir Putin in Paris on Sunday yielded no concurrence for the resumption of Israeli air strikes against Iran. It is now up to him to decide whether to take this as a Russian embargo on Israel overflights, or to go ahead and risk resuming those air strikes. In the worst case, the Israeli air force might have to operate on two fronts: Syria and Gaza.

No, that's not the worst case. Dozens of Russian cruise missiles skimming the treetops while heading for the air and naval bases of the Apartheid State is worse than that. Frankly, I doubt if the murderous and thieving little nation is capable of overcoming both the jamming and the S-300 systems. But what do I know? - if they manage to do it without killing any Russians, the Syrians will probably be reinforced with even heavier air defenses. Right now Syria is a lose/lose proposition.

2) Israel has tied its hands with an ultimatum to Beirut to shut down Iran's workshops in Lebanon for adding precision-guidance to Hizballah's surface missiles, or else face Israeli attacks to destroy them. There was no date on the ultimatum. But to carry it through, every ounce of Israel's air force capabilities will be required. The question is how did Israel's policy-makers failed to avoid a situation which paralyses its ability to operate against strategic foes in Syria and Lebanon?
Notice the despair. Who on earth was running his mouth with a promise to destroy those Hezbollah shops? Yet even that's a losing proposition, for Hezbollah is doubtlessly running many fakes and decoys, and keeping everything on such a small scale they'll be barely scratched, if touched at all. But could the pilots of the apartheid Jewish State do even this? I ask because I don't know the range of those Russian jamming devices. Hezbollah has every opportunity to set an ambush for incoming aircraft attacks. The F-35 may be low visibility in terms of radar, but it represents an enormous infra-red beacon. There are anti-air missiles in existence which are optimized for IR.

The final wild card is the Trumpster. He has been mighty erratic of late, and while he might do something wild and crazy, could the Jewish State rely on whatever-it-is he might do helping them? Could be just the opposite.

Is Trump Cracking Up? (Updated)

psychohistorian , Nov 14, 2018 12:44:47 AM | link
@ Grieved with the internet interaction insight and wisdom....thanks and hope many read and understand your words.

@ Zachary Smith with the comment and question about Trump.

I see Trump as clearly representative of the global elite that are having to kill their current empire host without being certain of how they can live with or make China's socialism with a Chinese face be controlled by an ongoing world of global private finance.

Trump is their public face deal maker and I will agree with Peter AU 1 that Kissinger is the global elite's behind the scenes deal maker. I have written here before that Trump will default on US debt before he is out of office, IMO.

Can the global elite pressure the world's nations into their continued existence as the jackboot of global finance? Despite the wild and crazy of grifter Donald Trump I still believe that reason is about to triumph over faith in the hallowed halls of global finance......and Israel is the proxy front for that lost faith in monotheistic religions with better than others value, bias and use of victimization.

For me the only question is how long will the transition take and how ugly will it be?

[Nov 14, 2018] Nationalism and Patriotism

It's probably more complex and there is not solid boundary between nationalism (love of your own country or ethnicity at the expense of other) and patriotism (just love of you own country). Envy is a very human trait (Great Russian poet Alexander Pushkin said that it is the sister of competition, so it comes for noble family) and if you love you country you definitely can envy other countries and this feeling complicates things -- bridging the gap between the patriotism and the nationalism.
The two are not always easy to distinguish and a 'My country right or wrong' mindset seems to be dangerously on the rise. Also often this whole patriotism/nationalism word game is just sadly funny. You are a patriot if you think like me. You are a nationalist if you don't. Patriotism is good, nationalism is bad. If I am a patriot, I am good, if you are a nationalist, you must be bad.
Ukrainians has a saying that reflect this deep feeling of envy " God I do not want any specific favors for myself, but please make it so that my neighbor house was burned out"
Notable quotes:
"... I long ago decided that Nationalism as these two great minds defined it was a bad thing and that I hoped the United States would not descend to such a depth of false pride as to become nationalistic in this sense. I have lived to be disappointed in this. ..."
Nov 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

George Orwell wrote in "Notes on Nationalism," that "By 'patriotism' I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force upon other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality ."

I have tried to act as I imagine a patriot should and in a way that Kedourie and Orwell might approve. I long ago decided that Nationalism as these two great minds defined it was a bad thing and that I hoped the United States would not descend to such a depth of false pride as to become nationalistic in this sense. I have lived to be disappointed in this.

In general I support Macron's expressed view on this subject but it should be said that much of his vehemence on this subject is caused by his own search for approval in France and reluctance to see Europe deprived of the post WW2 economic benefits and subsidized defense against the USSR long provided by the United States. From my point of view Macron appears a self serving politician in this matter.

We should all be careful not to confuse Patriotism and Nationalism. pl

smoothieX12 . , 12 hours ago

Chesterton comes to mind immediately:"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him."
Lord Lemur , 7 hours ago
Orwell's intellect is overrated, and his aphorisms have become thought-ending cliches. Look at the string of assumptions in quote above. Do individuals really 'choose' to 'sink' their consciousness into a greater body? What makes far more sense is that at the 'core' of I there is a 'we', which is conditioned by prior forms of particularity - religion, ethnicity, language, race, and culture. This is the basis of a harmonious common good, and a meaningful lifeworld.

Orwell grew up in a time of increasing scale, managerialism, and atomizaton. His thinking narrates the moral discourse shaped by that anti-social environment and its effects (mass wars) but dresses it up in an emancipatory narrative. One is immediately struck by his lack of foresight in predicting how power would operate as the 20th century wore on (Foucault and and Huxley are a lot closer the truth), and his inability to grapple with the essence of power and its moral and conceptual implications as a whole.

In reality, power is a moral imperative, and its acquisition and application the inaugural raison d'être of the state and the concomitant society. Hence, the cogito subject at the heart of Orwell's evaluative presuppositions is itself a product of prior systems of power, upstream from personal judgement and value sets. Orwell proceeds to demand by implication we view the ancestral efforts which secured our position in the present day as illegitimate, since they conformed to emergent anthropological patterns of conflict and conquest instead of categorical laws plucked out of thin air by self-styled 'enlightened' big-brains during the 18th century. Had we actually lived by these 'standards', those of us left would be a marginalized set of tribes pushed to the far north of Europe, regularly getting shafted by whatever Magian civilization moved in. As a matter of fact, that's happening right now as these self-critical ideas have installed themselves within our cultural substrate.

These pious set of mere assertions are deployed by the ruling globalist cabal to justify the replacement of Western founding stocks. Yet they are so ingrained among our senior cohort, when their *own people actually under attack* seek to affirm themselves without contradiction in *response*, they are viewed as the root menace. But if you have a decline and you have a desire to assert yourself to arrest the decline, and you have to apologize to yourself about even having the idea of assertion to arrest decline, you're not going to get anywhere, are you?

Those who feel uncomfortable about this should have worked harder to prevent the erosion of the historic American nation, and if there is nothing they could have done against the DC Behemoth, abstain from opposing the instinctive response of the cultural immune system.

Pat Lang Mod -> Lord Lemur , 7 hours ago

I beg you pardon, O neocon scion of the WASP elite. and what did you ever do for the "historic America?"
Lord Lemur -> Pat Lang , 7 hours ago
I'm not American, but i'm 5th generation in an Anglo-setter nation. The implication here is that i'm an ungrateful you whipper-snapper who just doesn't grasp the sacrifices and horrors of the 20th century. Exactly when does my generation get the moral cachet entitling us to input directions into the civilizational compass? Arguments predicated on commitment to a cause haven no inherent validity. I'm certainly not disparaging or denying here, but you're putting us in a position where our ambit of choice is circumscribed by the ideology that justified post-War US hegemony (for which people from my community were still dying until very recently in Afghanistan).
Pat Lang Mod -> Lord Lemur , 6 hours ago
I have long thought that NATO should have been abolished after the fall of the USSR. Go your own way. I am not concerned with you foreigners in Europe or anywhere else. I am concerned with the state of mind of my own people who should wise up and forget about Europe except as a trading partner and a tourist destination.
Lord Lemur -> Pat Lang , 6 hours ago
Well, I would love to do that Col., but unfortunately Western civilization as a whole goes the way of Washington, New York, Brussels, and maybe Paris and Moscow. What happens to weaker power centres without the strong ones? What has happened Tibet, that's what.

Thinking in terms of elites tied to specific nations is no longer a good model to conceive of politics. Formal institutions like NATO are an expression of that. We have to address transnational networks of soft power that bind together and enculturate the ruling class. I have more in common with a Trump voter from flyover country and he with me than either of us with our respective 'national' elites.

Pat Lang Mod -> Lord Lemur , 5 hours ago
Blah Blah. At least you did not tell me about your hero grandpa.
JJackson , 13 hours ago
An important distinction, thank you for forcing us to consider the difference.

The two are not always easy to distinguish and a 'My country right or wrong' mindset seems to be dangerously on the rise. I was considering the use of the national flag on homes in the US and UK. It surprised me how common it seemed in the States and assumed it was a show of Patriotic fervor when I see it in the UK it sends a shiver down my spine as (with the exception of major international sporting events) I interpret it as extreme Nationalism often associated with racist or Neo-Nazi sympathies. Conflation of the two seems much the same as that of Anti-Israeli, Anti-Zionist and Anti-Semitic again three very distinct mindsets.

Degringolade , 13 hours ago
I can truthfully state that I am either fish, nor fowl, nor good red meat on this one. It seems to me to be a standard bit of verbal "wanking" so beloved by the folks in the political arena.

I think that mostly this is a in your face dig at Trump, same tenor, same sneering superiority that was displayed by the urban democrats who are currently in their third year of an extended tantrum over Trump's taking their shiny ball from them.

Look, mostly this whole patriotism/nationalism word game is just sadly funny. You are a patriot if you think like me. You are a nationalist if you don't. Patriotism is good, nationalism is bad. If I am a patriot, I am good, if you are a nationalist, you must be bad.

I think that the wisdom of Humpty Dumpty when speaking to Alice fits here:

"When I use a word..it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less."

"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

"The question is which is to be master -- that's all."

Pat Lang Mod -> Degringolade , 9 hours ago
If you see life as a zero sum game then you would be right. I do not see it that way. I never did.
Eugene Owens , 12 hours ago
Self serving
Eugene Owens , 12 hours ago
Self serving, yes. As are all politicians.

But I suspect he also does not want to see another Verdun. Or another Douaumont charnel house where the unidentified bones of 130,000 French and German soldiers reside.

https://www.atlasobscura.co...

Eugene Owens -> Eugene Owens , 8 hours ago
Or he does not want another Zone Rouge like the two million acres around Verdun that remains forbidden territory even now. The only ones allowed in are the EOD techs of the Département du Déminage that are still digging out unexploded ordnance 102 years later. Much of that UXO contains mustard, phosgene, or chlorine. All of it is badly corroded and volatile. French EOD pulls out hundreds of tons every year.

https://orionmagazine.org/a...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

Pat Lang Mod -> Eugene Owens , 7 hours ago
I just heard that ignorant swine pansy Jesse Watters say that the French have not known military glory sine Bonaparte. Too bad we cannot deposit him in that contaminated zone to find his way out.
Rob Stevenson , 13 hours ago
Somewhat related: Trump's refusal to stand in the rain on that solemn 100th anniversary spoke more of the man than anything previous. Didn't want to get rained on! That war, those trenches, the rain, the rain, the rain. He probably cannot spell infantry, much less describe what it is. There is the Commander In Chief in all his glory. We are lost.
Eric Newhill -> Rob Stevenson , 9 hours ago
Rob,
That was the fake news take on it. The reality is that the Secret Service wasn't prepared to get him there in a vehicle. The original plan was to arrive by helo. He was there the next day in the rain. Fake news is the enemy of the people.
A.Trophimovsky -> Rob Stevenson , 9 hours ago
"That war, those trenches, the rain, the rain, the rain...." Play Hide
Pat Lang Mod -> A.Trophimovsky , 7 hours ago
Inform us of your military record.
A.Trophimovsky -> Pat Lang , 6 hours ago
No military record here, sir, I am a civilian, born in peace time, even at a time when military service was no more mandatory....But no unaware of war fatigues, since here in Europe we have had almost all relatives who fought the great war....Granpa was a partisan then....

Just read that about the trenches and the rain...and remembered this film....I hope you all can enjoy it....It´s good to watch this kind of films, especially for us who had the great fortune of never being there...

Pat Lang Mod -> A.Trophimovsky , 5 hours ago
I am always amused when civilians tell me about their soldier relatives. you are not your "grandpa." Grow up.

[Nov 13, 2018] Imperfect they might be, national goverments are the only mechanism we have for protecting citizens' rights and freedom to pursue a path of development independently of the dictates global monopoly capitalism is trying to impose on the world.

Nov 13, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Daniel , Nov 13, 2018 12:47:39 AM | link

b sez:

It did not learn a single lesson from its fake reporting that led the Iraq War

Eh? They learned everything from it. They got away with it. Subsequent wars and aggression in Libya, Syria, Yemen, Ukraine, Georgia could not have happened without Iraq paving the way. Self professed liberals and leftists cams out in favour of, or remained indifferent to, all of these assaults on national sovereignty. What is under attack here is the concept of independent and sovereign nation states and national governments. Imperfect they might be, but they are the only mechanism we have for protecting citizens' rights and freedom to pursue a path of development independently of the dictates global monopoly capitalism is trying to impose on the world.

[Nov 12, 2018] The Best Way To Honor War Veterans Is To Stop Creating Them by Caitlin Johnstone

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Veterans Day is not a holiday to honor the men and women who have dutifully protected their country. The youngest Americans who arguably defended their nation from a real threat to its shores are in their nineties, and soon there won't be any of them left. ..."
"... Every single person who has served in the US military since the end of the second World War has protected nothing other than the agendas of global hegemony, resource control and war profiteering. They have not been fighting and dying for freedom and democracy, they have been fighting and dying for imperialism, Raytheon profit margins, and crude oil. ..."
"... Veterans Day, like so very, very much in American culture, is a propaganda construct designed to lubricate the funneling of human lives into the chamber of a gigantic gun. It glorifies evil, stupid, meaningless acts of mass murder to ensure that there will always be recruits who are willing to continue perpetrating it, and to ensure that the US public doesn't wake up to the fact that its government's insanely bloated military budget is being used to unleash unspeakable horrors upon the earth. ..."
"... Your rulers have never feared the Koreans, the Vietnamese, the Iraqis, the terrorists, the Iranians, the Chinese or the Russians. They fear you. They fear the American public suddenly waking up to the evil things that are being done in your name and using your vast numbers to shrug off the existing power structures without firing a shot, as easily as removing a heavy coat on a warm day. If enough of you loudly withdraw your consent for their insatiable warmongering, that fear will be enough to keep them in check. ..."
Nov 12, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via Medium.com,

The US will be celebrating Veterans Day, and many a striped flag shall be waved. The social currency of esteem will be used to elevate those who have served in the US military, thereby ensuring future generations of recruits to be thrown into the gears of the globe-spanning war machine

Veterans Day is not a holiday to honor the men and women who have dutifully protected their country. The youngest Americans who arguably defended their nation from a real threat to its shores are in their nineties, and soon there won't be any of them left.

Every single person who has served in the US military since the end of the second World War has protected nothing other than the agendas of global hegemony, resource control and war profiteering. They have not been fighting and dying for freedom and democracy, they have been fighting and dying for imperialism, Raytheon profit margins, and crude oil.

I just said something you're not supposed to say. People have dedicated many years of their lives to the service of the US military; they've given their limbs to it, they've suffered horrific brain damage for it, they've given their very lives to it. Families have been ripped apart by the violence that has been inflicted upon members of the US Armed Forces; you're not supposed to let them hear you say that their loved one was destroyed because some sociopathic nerds somewhere in Washington decided that it would give America an advantage over potential economic rivals to control a particular stretch of Middle Eastern dirt. But it is true, and if we don't start acknowledging that truth lives are going to keep getting thrown into the gears of the machine for the power and profit of a few depraved oligarchs. So I'm going to keep saying it.

Last week I saw the hashtag #SaluteToService trending on Twitter. Apparently the NFL had a deal going where every time someone tweeted that hashtag they'd throw a few bucks at some veteran's charity. Which sounds sweet, until you consider three things:

1. The NFL's ten wealthiest team owners are worth a combined $61 billion .

2. The NFL has taken millions of dollars from the Pentagon for displays of patriotism on the field, including for the policy of bringing all players out for the national anthem every game starting in 2009 (which led to Colin Kaepernick's demonstrations and the obscene backlash against him).

3. VETERANS SHOULD NOT HAVE TO RELY ON FUCKING CHARITY.

Seriously, how is "charity for veterans" a thing, and how are people not extremely weirded out by it? How is it that you can go out and get your limbs blown off for slave wages after watching your friends die and innocent civilians perish, come home, and have to rely on charity to get by? How is it that you can risk life and limb killing and suffering irreparable psychological trauma for some plutocrat's agendas, plunge into poverty when you come home, and then see the same plutocrat labeled a "philanthropist" because he threw a few tax-deductible dollars at a charity that gave you a decent prosthetic leg?

Taking care of veterans should be factored into the budget of every act of military aggression . If a government can't make sure its veterans are housed, healthy and happy in a dignified way for the rest of their lives, it has no business marching human beings into harm's way. The fact that you see veterans on the street of any large US city and people who fought in wars having to beg "charities" for a quality mechanical wheelchair shows you just how much of a pathetic joke this Veterans Day song and dance has always been.

They'll send you to mainline violence and trauma into your mind and body for the power and profit of the oligarchic rulers of the US-centralized empire, but it's okay because everyone gets a long weekend where they're told to thank you for your service. Bullshit.

Veterans Day, like so very, very much in American culture, is a propaganda construct designed to lubricate the funneling of human lives into the chamber of a gigantic gun. It glorifies evil, stupid, meaningless acts of mass murder to ensure that there will always be recruits who are willing to continue perpetrating it, and to ensure that the US public doesn't wake up to the fact that its government's insanely bloated military budget is being used to unleash unspeakable horrors upon the earth.

The only way to honor veterans, really, truly honor them, is to help end war and make sure no more lives are put into a position where they are on the giving or receiving end of evil, stupid, meaningless violence. The way to do that is to publicly, loudly and repeatedly make it clear that you do not consent to the global terrorism being perpetrated in your name. These bastards work so hard conducting propaganda to manufacture your consent for endless warmongering because they need that consent . So don't give it to them.

Your rulers have never feared the Koreans, the Vietnamese, the Iraqis, the terrorists, the Iranians, the Chinese or the Russians. They fear you. They fear the American public suddenly waking up to the evil things that are being done in your name and using your vast numbers to shrug off the existing power structures without firing a shot, as easily as removing a heavy coat on a warm day. If enough of you loudly withdraw your consent for their insatiable warmongering, that fear will be enough to keep them in check.

This Veterans Day, don't honor those who have served by giving reverence and legitimacy to a war machine which is exclusively used for inflicting great evil. Honor them by disassembling that machine.

* * *

Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website , which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following my antics on Twitter , checking out my podcast , throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal , buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone , or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers .

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

[Nov 12, 2018] Protecting Americans from foreign influence, smells with COINTELPRO. Structural witch-hunt effect like during the McCarthy era is designed to supress decent to neoliberal oligarcy by Andre Damon and Joseph Kishore

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... There is something very, very COINTELPRO about the idea of "protecting" Americans from "foreign influence", and that should give liberals the heebie-jeebies. There is also an ongoing structural witch-hunt effect, unchanged from the McCarthy era, when internet firm heads are called to testify before congress. ..."
"... Bottom line - the Russians may have had no more effect on the election than the loose change in your house has on your salary. ..."
"... "Even more extreme measures are being planned and implemented, motivated by the basic principle that the greater the lie, the more aggressive the methods required to enforce it." ..."
"... "While the extortionate salaries commanded by the BBC's biggest stars are justified by "market rates," this underlying premise is never challenged by the women who are leading the gender pay fight. They don't oppose the capitalist market; they just want a bigger slice of the pie, with the working class footing the bill via contributions to the Ł4 billion annual license fee." - BBC gender pay row: Selective outrage of wealthy women ..."
"... The greater the inequality, the greater the lie to enforce it. ..."
"... While WSWS was uniquely correct in exposing Bush, Powell, and the ruling-elite structure of the U.S. as using deceit and lies to start an 'aggressive war' (the ultimate war crime), your description of this corrupt system of global power headquartered in the U.S. did not fully diagnose and expose it for what it was; a disguised global capitalist EMPIRE. ..."
"... Your description could have more effectively warned American citizen/'subjects' and the world that "Rather, it is a war of colonial (Empire) conquest, driven by a series of economic and geo-political aims that center on the seizure of Iraq's oil resources and the assertion of US global (Empire, not merely) hegemony." ..."
"... In any case, Andre and Joseph, thanks for reminding readers of this dark and deceitful moment of U.S. history in starting another 'aggressive war' almost two decades ago --- which wars will unfortunately continue until Americans themselves expose and ignite an essential Second America "Revolution Against Empire" [Justin duRivage] ..."
"... The Anglo-American-Israelite Empire is globally entrenched and enjoying expansion since 1945 ..."
"... I must admit myself I am disturbed by the sheer volume of unchallenged propaganda regarding these claims in the past few months. The media talking heads and various analysts don't ever really say what the implication of what their claims really mean-war. We are in an age of new mccarthyism ..."
"... What was amazing about Powell's charade was that even if Old Bad Ass as I call Saddam had had some Wombars of Mass Destruction they posed no danger whatsoever! It was obvious 9/11 had put the masses into a tizzy and they would have attacked Mars if told to! ..."
"... Yes, the "New Pearl Harbour" called for and carried out by the authors of the "Project for a New American Century" worked as planned. ..."
"... Quite right. My late father was a structural design engineer, specializing in large steel structures like the WTC and he called it as soon as the buildings imploded! ..."
"... Yes, Michael, the 'media/propaganda-sector' of this seven-sectored Disguised Global Capitalist EMPIRE is currently the most effective sector --- but the other six; corporate, financial, militarist, extra-legal, CFR 'Plot-Tanks', and of course the dual-party Vichy-political facade of the 'rougher-talking' neocon 'R' Vichy Party and the 'smoother-lying' neoliberal-con 'D' Vichy Party are all helping to keep the Empire sound, hidden, and empowered over the only American citizen/'subjects' who could possibly form a "Political Revolution against Empire" ..."
"... While it is true that D.C. is run by delusional psychotics that does not mean they are irrational as far as their greed is concerned. ..."
"... As R. Luxemburg pleaded that WWI was not "our" war but war of bunch of aristocrats wanting to divide colonies and bunch of bankers wanted their bad speculative loans repaid, using working class flesh and blood. ..."
Feb 20, 2018 | www.wsws.org

Wnt1 • a month ago

This is one of the most sensible editorials on the Russia issue I've seen, and it is true, insofar as it goes. There is something very, very COINTELPRO about the idea of "protecting" Americans from "foreign influence", and that should give liberals the heebie-jeebies. There is also an ongoing structural witch-hunt effect, unchanged from the McCarthy era, when internet firm heads are called to testify before congress.

That said, I wouldn't dismiss the effect of the Russian involvement, or the relevance of the charges against Trump and his people. Bear in mind that the Party of McCarthy has been all about spying on its opponents from the days of HUAC. Nixon's break-in at the Watergate Hotel didn't singlehandedly decide the election ... but who would believe that was the only underhanded tactic he used? Republicans believe that if you're not cheating, you're not trying -- holding out for any ethical standard makes you inherently disloyal and unworthy of support. Something like Kavanaugh's involvement in the hacking of Democrats in 2003 ( http://www.foxnews.com/poli... ) should be no surprise; neither should the "Guccifer" hack that put the Democrats' data in the hands of Wikileaks. (Their subsequent attempts to demand Wikileaks not publish such a newsworthy leak, of course, is the sort of thing that undermines their position with me!)

Bottom line - the Russians may have had no more effect on the election than the loose change in your house has on your salary.

But if you go back in your house after the Republicans were minding it, don't be surprised if together with the missing couch change you notice some missing silverware, your kitchen tap has been sawed off, and the laptop is short half its RAM. By the time you've catalogued everything missing, the stolen brass part from the gas main downstairs might have blown you to smithereens.

Greg • 8 months ago
"Even more extreme measures are being planned and implemented, motivated by the basic principle that the greater the lie, the more aggressive the methods required to enforce it."

There are many reasons the bourgeoisie is unfit to rule. Each one of them is bound up with the lies required to enforce its rule. The greater its unfitness, "the greater the lie, the more aggressive the methods required to enforce it.

"While the extortionate salaries commanded by the BBC's biggest stars are justified by "market rates," this underlying premise is never challenged by the women who are leading the gender pay fight. They don't oppose the capitalist market; they just want a bigger slice of the pie, with the working class footing the bill via contributions to the Ł4 billion annual license fee." - BBC gender pay row: Selective outrage of wealthy women

The greater the inequality, the greater the lie to enforce it.

Alan MacDonald • 8 months ago
While WSWS was uniquely correct in exposing Bush, Powell, and the ruling-elite structure of the U.S. as using deceit and lies to start an 'aggressive war' (the ultimate war crime), your description of this corrupt system of global power headquartered in the U.S. did not fully diagnose and expose it for what it was; a disguised global capitalist EMPIRE.

Your description could have more effectively warned American citizen/'subjects' and the world that "Rather, it is a war of colonial (Empire) conquest, driven by a series of economic and geo-political aims that center on the seizure of Iraq's oil resources and the assertion of US global (Empire, not merely) hegemony."

In any case, Andre and Joseph, thanks for reminding readers of this dark and deceitful moment of U.S. history in starting another 'aggressive war' almost two decades ago --- which wars will unfortunately continue until Americans themselves expose and ignite an essential Second America "Revolution Against Empire" [Justin duRivage]

Ambricourt -> Alan MacDonald • 8 months ago
The Anglo-American-Israelite Empire is globally entrenched and enjoying expansion since 1945. It is time radical critiques of its values, power and methods should call it by its right name.
Bob Marley • 8 months ago
I must admit myself I am disturbed by the sheer volume of unchallenged propaganda regarding these claims in the past few months. The media talking heads and various analysts don't ever really say what the implication of what their claims really mean-war. We are in an age of new mccarthyism
michaelroloff • 8 months ago
What was amazing about Powell's charade was that even if Old Bad Ass as I call Saddam had had some Wombars of Mass Destruction they posed no danger whatsoever! It was obvious 9/11 had put the masses into a tizzy and they would have attacked Mars if told to!
Terry Lawrence -> michaelroloff • 8 months ago
Yes, the "New Pearl Harbour" called for and carried out by the authors of the "Project for a New American Century" worked as planned.
michaelroloff -> Terry Lawrence • 8 months ago
don't tell me that you think that the blow-back that was 9/11 is a conspiracy - if you do, be so kind as to mention specific conspirators!
Terry Lawrence -> michaelroloff • 8 months ago
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rice, are a few obvious ones, . . . and that famous CIA asset, Bin Laden, to recruit the expendable hijackers.
michaelroloff -> Terry Lawrence • 8 months ago
just because it was a convenient act for them to do what they wanted in conquering iraq is not reason that idiots like that are capable of planning and concealing the numerous co-conspirators to arrange something like 9..11. imperialism can always count on blowback to have occasion for further crimes. there is the slim chance that they knew what was being planned and that they let it happen - except that none of those folks is evil enough for that. not even dick cheney. what i love about all conspiracy theories of the american kind is that they never nam or show an actual conspirator conspiring. look at one of the truly great failed conspiracy, that of the 20th july 1944 in germany that was meant to kill hitler and how many people were arrested in no time at all and executed..
Terry Lawrence michaelroloff • 8 months ago
A "conspiracy" is just any two or more people getting together to discuss something affecting one or more other people without them being party to the discussion. Like a surprise birthday party, for instance. Obviously the "official" version of the 9/11 events is also a "conspiracy theory" that 19 mostly Saudi Arabians led by a guy hiding in a cave in Afghanistan conspired to carry out co-ordinated attacks that just happened to coincide with most of the USAF being conveniently off in Alaska and northern Canada on an exercise that day, and another "coinciding exercise" simulating a multiple hijacking being carried out in the northeast US thereby confusing the Air Traffic Controllers as to whether the hijackings were "real world or exercise", significantly delaying the response, among other things.

Do you really believe that WTC 7, a steel frame building which was not adjacent to WTC 1 & 2, and was NOT hit by any airplanes, coincidentally collapsed due to low temperature paper and furniture office fires? Something that has never happened before or since? Or that such low temperature fires would cause the massive heavily reinforced concrete central core/elevator shaft to collapse first, pulling the rest of the building inward onto it in classic controlled demolition technique?

It is getting more difficult to find the videos showing that now as Google, as with WSWS articles, is pushing them off the front pages of results, while Snopes has put out a some very misleading reports that set up false "straw man" claims and then "disprove" them. Even the "disproofs" are false.

For instance, a Snopes report on the WTC 7 collapse states: "relied heavily on discredited claims, none of which were new, including:

Jet fuel cannot melt steel beams (This claim is misleading, as steel beams do to not need to melt completely to be compromised structurally).

A sprinkler system would have prevented temperatures from rising high enough to cause to cause structural damage. (This claim ignores the fact that a crash from a 767 jet would likely destroy such a system.)

The structural system would have been protected by fireproofing material (similarly, such a system would have been damaged in a 767 crash). "

Jet fuel, which is Kerosene, burns at around 575ş in open air, which was the case in WTC buildings 1 & 2. Most of it was vaporized by the impact with the buildings and burned of within minutes. At any rate, 575ş is far below the point at which structural steel specifically designed to withstand high temperature fires like that used in the World Trade Centre buildings is weakened.

All of which is irrelevant, as are the other "points" made by Snopes, because Building 7 was not hit by an airplane and there was no jet fuel involved. Something conveniently "overlooked" by Snopes and other similar misleading "disproofs". Not to mention that the Intelligence establishment is busy putting out false trails constantly which use, for instance, obviously faked photos or videos of the three WTC buildings collapsing to discredit the real videos and photos by setting up "straw men" they can then "disprove" and point to as "evidence" that people who don't believe the official version are "creating fake news".

liz_imp Terry Lawrence • 8 months ago
Brilliant points!! :)
Carolyn Zaremba Terry Lawrence • 8 months ago
Quite right. My late father was a structural design engineer, specializing in large steel structures like the WTC and he called it as soon as the buildings imploded!
Terry Lawrence michaelroloff • 8 months ago
"The perpetrators and their conspiracy is not a theory since it has been proved."

By "proved" I assume you are referring to "proofs" such as the fantastical claim that Mohammed Atta's passport was allegedly and fortuitously "found" when it supposedly survived the 600 mph impact of the 767 he was supposedly piloting with a huge steel and concrete building, survived the huge fireball it was supposedly in the middle of unscorched, and conveniently fluttered to the ground intact to land at the feet of an FBI agent who immediately realized it must have belonged to one of the hijackers!

Even Hans Christian Andersen couldn't invent Fairy Tales like that.

Carolyn Zaremba michaelroloff • 8 months ago
See my comment above. It is the "official" explanation that is a fantasy.
michaelroloff Carolyn Zaremba • 8 months ago
the best that conspiracy theorist can do is, invariably, to call proven facts "just another theory " which only proves that they are actually aware that they are full of hot air! zarembas father as a structural engineer unless a fantasy is certainly better off among the dead than among the living and perpetrating his ignorance of steel and weight and fire onto the world!
clubmarkgirard michaelroloff • 8 months ago
Just because all the details aren't known as to who conspired and why there's enough holes in the "official conspiracy theory" of 19 hijackers to conclude that this could not have been pulled off without some conspiring on the American side. Certainly the the neocons benefited greatly from these attacks. So motive is there for sure.
Alan MacDonald michaelroloff • 8 months ago
Yes, Michael, the 'media/propaganda-sector' of this seven-sectored Disguised Global Capitalist EMPIRE is currently the most effective sector --- but the other six; corporate, financial, militarist, extra-legal, CFR 'Plot-Tanks', and of course the dual-party Vichy-political facade of the 'rougher-talking' neocon 'R' Vichy Party and the 'smoother-lying' neoliberal-con 'D' Vichy Party are all helping to keep the Empire sound, hidden, and empowered over the only American citizen/'subjects' who could possibly form a "Political Revolution against Empire"
Kalen • 8 months ago
While it is true that D.C. is run by delusional psychotics that does not mean they are irrational as far as their greed is concerned.

There is nothing to win in global nuke war, all know it while the outcome would be surely the current global oligarchy loosing grip on population destroying the system that works for them so well giving chance to what they dread socialist revolution they would have been much weaker to counter.

Regional conflicts are just positioning of oligarchy for management of global oligarchic country club while strict class morality is maintained.

What I do not we are conditions for war (split of global ruling elites) while what I see is broad propaganda of war as a excuse to clamp down on fake enemy in order to control respective populations while there is factual unity among world oligarchy.

As R. Luxemburg pleaded that WWI was not "our" war but war of bunch of aristocrats wanting to divide colonies and bunch of bankers wanted their bad speculative loans repaid, using working class flesh and blood.

She died abandoned by those on the left who embraced the war for their political aspirations, she was murdered for her true internationalism i.e. No war fought between working people of one country and working people of another country.

Alan MacDonald Kalen • 8 months ago
Kalen, it's only effective to use the correct and understandable term 'Empire' in exposing, warning, and motivating average Americans --- since very few even know what words like; oligarchy, plutocracy, fascism, authoritarianism, corporate-state, or Wolin's 'inverted totalitarianism' mean --- let alone could ever serve as rallying cries for the coming essential Second American Revolution against EMPIRE.

As Pat would have shouted if Tom had taken the Paine to edit his call, "Give me Liberty over EMPIRE, or Give me Death!"

Carolyn Zaremba Alan MacDonald • 8 months ago
Do you really believe that average Americans are that stupid? Shame on you!
Alan MacDonald Carolyn Zaremba • 8 months ago
"Sweet Carolyn" OH OH OH --- Yes, only a very small percentage of Americans understand that our former country, the U.S. of America, is categorically, provably, and absolutely a new form of Empire, and is inexorably the first in world history an; 'effectively-disguised', 'truly-global', 'dual-party Vichy', and 'capitalist-fueled' EMPIRE --- an EMPIRE, really just an EMPIRE!

Just do an honest survey, "Sweet Carolyn", yourself, and if you're not a "Sweet Liarlyn", you will have to admit that essentially ZERO of the first 1000 people you ask, will say --- "Oh ya, Carolyn, of course I know that this whole effin 'system' that others less informed may still be so stupid that they think they live in a real country, when I (enter their name) do solemnly swear is just an effin EMPIRE, which is so well disguised, that these few idiots who don't understand that they are just citizen/'subjects' of this monsterous EMPIRE."

Do the survey, "Sweet Carolyn" and if you don't lie to yourself --- which maybe you do, because HELL, your job is to lie to others (so it's quite likely that you'll lie about anything) --- you'll find that exactly zero average Americans have the effin slightest idea in the world that their great 'country' is actually an effin EMPIRE.

HELL, Carolyn, almost half the Americans repeatedly yell, "We're number ONE", "We're number ONE", that their brains would rather rattle themselves to death than even let logic, history, knowledge, or anything into their addled and propaganda filled heads!

liz_imp Alan MacDonald • 8 months ago
Personal attacks are not allowed on this site.
Alan MacDonald liz_imp • 8 months ago
Sorry, Liz-imp, are you a friend of "Sweet Carolyn" --- or some other relation? Perhaps working together?
dmorista • 8 months ago
Excellent article, and it did a particularly good job of tying together the foreign policy and domestic policy stratagems of a major faction of the U.S. ruling class. I, for one, do not doubt that the Russians conduct some sort of cyber warfare against the U.S.; but that must be understood by considering the fact that every major governmental, political, military, and business organization on the face of the Earth must now operate in this manner. A friend of mine's son, who was in the Army, pointed out that the big players, by a wide margin, in spying on and to some degree interfering in the U.S. domestic scene are China and Israel. Kevin Barrett has written and said on various radio shows that much of what is attributed to the "Russians" are actually the actions of Russian/Israeli dual citizens, many of whom move freely between the U.S., Russia, and Israel. And, of course, the U.S. runs major spy and manipulation operations in more countries than any other nation of Earth, and U.S. based corporations are busy both inside the U.S. and in foreign places in similar activities.

It is clearly a desire of significant sectors, of the Capitalist rulers of the U.S., to repress dissent and political activities that oppose their agendas. It took them a few years to realize that their old methods using TV, hate radio, magazines, direct mail, and newspapers were losing their effectiveness. They have been increasing their attacks on leftist websites, hacking into websites, closing websites using phonied-up "national security" justifications, employing numerous trolls, and establishing and funding more far right websites, such as Breitbart and Infowars. These efforts are most effective when they are not overpowering and heavy handed.

The classic book on this was the 1988 book "Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media" by Noam Chomsky and Edward Hermann. Rob Williams has updated the concept for the internet age in
<http: www.vermontindependent.org ="" the-post-truth-world-reviving-the-propaganda-model-of-news-for-our-digital-age=""/>.

The strategy is nothing new, the methods are merely updated and use the latest technologies.

Maxwell dmorista • 8 months ago
Superb post.

I guess the lesson to be learned here is that rigging elections through byzantine electoral laws and billion dollar corporate slush funds is a thing of the past. All you need now is 13 amateur IT goomba's with a marketing scheme and twitter accounts. Well, sure is a fragile "World's Sole Superpower" we got here. Go Team?

[Nov 12, 2018] The Best Way To Honor War Veterans Is To Stop Creating Them by Caitlin Johnstone

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Veterans Day is not a holiday to honor the men and women who have dutifully protected their country. The youngest Americans who arguably defended their nation from a real threat to its shores are in their nineties, and soon there won't be any of them left. ..."
"... Every single person who has served in the US military since the end of the second World War has protected nothing other than the agendas of global hegemony, resource control and war profiteering. They have not been fighting and dying for freedom and democracy, they have been fighting and dying for imperialism, Raytheon profit margins, and crude oil. ..."
"... Veterans Day, like so very, very much in American culture, is a propaganda construct designed to lubricate the funneling of human lives into the chamber of a gigantic gun. It glorifies evil, stupid, meaningless acts of mass murder to ensure that there will always be recruits who are willing to continue perpetrating it, and to ensure that the US public doesn't wake up to the fact that its government's insanely bloated military budget is being used to unleash unspeakable horrors upon the earth. ..."
"... Your rulers have never feared the Koreans, the Vietnamese, the Iraqis, the terrorists, the Iranians, the Chinese or the Russians. They fear you. They fear the American public suddenly waking up to the evil things that are being done in your name and using your vast numbers to shrug off the existing power structures without firing a shot, as easily as removing a heavy coat on a warm day. If enough of you loudly withdraw your consent for their insatiable warmongering, that fear will be enough to keep them in check. ..."
Nov 12, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via Medium.com,

The US will be celebrating Veterans Day, and many a striped flag shall be waved. The social currency of esteem will be used to elevate those who have served in the US military, thereby ensuring future generations of recruits to be thrown into the gears of the globe-spanning war machine

Veterans Day is not a holiday to honor the men and women who have dutifully protected their country. The youngest Americans who arguably defended their nation from a real threat to its shores are in their nineties, and soon there won't be any of them left.

Every single person who has served in the US military since the end of the second World War has protected nothing other than the agendas of global hegemony, resource control and war profiteering. They have not been fighting and dying for freedom and democracy, they have been fighting and dying for imperialism, Raytheon profit margins, and crude oil.

I just said something you're not supposed to say. People have dedicated many years of their lives to the service of the US military; they've given their limbs to it, they've suffered horrific brain damage for it, they've given their very lives to it. Families have been ripped apart by the violence that has been inflicted upon members of the US Armed Forces; you're not supposed to let them hear you say that their loved one was destroyed because some sociopathic nerds somewhere in Washington decided that it would give America an advantage over potential economic rivals to control a particular stretch of Middle Eastern dirt. But it is true, and if we don't start acknowledging that truth lives are going to keep getting thrown into the gears of the machine for the power and profit of a few depraved oligarchs. So I'm going to keep saying it.

Last week I saw the hashtag #SaluteToService trending on Twitter. Apparently the NFL had a deal going where every time someone tweeted that hashtag they'd throw a few bucks at some veteran's charity. Which sounds sweet, until you consider three things:

1. The NFL's ten wealthiest team owners are worth a combined $61 billion .

2. The NFL has taken millions of dollars from the Pentagon for displays of patriotism on the field, including for the policy of bringing all players out for the national anthem every game starting in 2009 (which led to Colin Kaepernick's demonstrations and the obscene backlash against him).

3. VETERANS SHOULD NOT HAVE TO RELY ON FUCKING CHARITY.

Seriously, how is "charity for veterans" a thing, and how are people not extremely weirded out by it? How is it that you can go out and get your limbs blown off for slave wages after watching your friends die and innocent civilians perish, come home, and have to rely on charity to get by? How is it that you can risk life and limb killing and suffering irreparable psychological trauma for some plutocrat's agendas, plunge into poverty when you come home, and then see the same plutocrat labeled a "philanthropist" because he threw a few tax-deductible dollars at a charity that gave you a decent prosthetic leg?

Taking care of veterans should be factored into the budget of every act of military aggression . If a government can't make sure its veterans are housed, healthy and happy in a dignified way for the rest of their lives, it has no business marching human beings into harm's way. The fact that you see veterans on the street of any large US city and people who fought in wars having to beg "charities" for a quality mechanical wheelchair shows you just how much of a pathetic joke this Veterans Day song and dance has always been.

They'll send you to mainline violence and trauma into your mind and body for the power and profit of the oligarchic rulers of the US-centralized empire, but it's okay because everyone gets a long weekend where they're told to thank you for your service. Bullshit.

Veterans Day, like so very, very much in American culture, is a propaganda construct designed to lubricate the funneling of human lives into the chamber of a gigantic gun. It glorifies evil, stupid, meaningless acts of mass murder to ensure that there will always be recruits who are willing to continue perpetrating it, and to ensure that the US public doesn't wake up to the fact that its government's insanely bloated military budget is being used to unleash unspeakable horrors upon the earth.

The only way to honor veterans, really, truly honor them, is to help end war and make sure no more lives are put into a position where they are on the giving or receiving end of evil, stupid, meaningless violence. The way to do that is to publicly, loudly and repeatedly make it clear that you do not consent to the global terrorism being perpetrated in your name. These bastards work so hard conducting propaganda to manufacture your consent for endless warmongering because they need that consent . So don't give it to them.

Your rulers have never feared the Koreans, the Vietnamese, the Iraqis, the terrorists, the Iranians, the Chinese or the Russians. They fear you. They fear the American public suddenly waking up to the evil things that are being done in your name and using your vast numbers to shrug off the existing power structures without firing a shot, as easily as removing a heavy coat on a warm day. If enough of you loudly withdraw your consent for their insatiable warmongering, that fear will be enough to keep them in check.

This Veterans Day, don't honor those who have served by giving reverence and legitimacy to a war machine which is exclusively used for inflicting great evil. Honor them by disassembling that machine.

* * *

Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website , which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following my antics on Twitter , checking out my podcast , throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal , buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone , or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers .

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

[Nov 12, 2018] Protecting Americans from foreign influence, smells with COINTELPRO. Structural witch-hunt effect like during the McCarthy era is designed to supress decent to neoliberal oligarcy by Andre Damon and Joseph Kishore

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... There is something very, very COINTELPRO about the idea of "protecting" Americans from "foreign influence", and that should give liberals the heebie-jeebies. There is also an ongoing structural witch-hunt effect, unchanged from the McCarthy era, when internet firm heads are called to testify before congress. ..."
"... Bottom line - the Russians may have had no more effect on the election than the loose change in your house has on your salary. ..."
"... "Even more extreme measures are being planned and implemented, motivated by the basic principle that the greater the lie, the more aggressive the methods required to enforce it." ..."
"... "While the extortionate salaries commanded by the BBC's biggest stars are justified by "market rates," this underlying premise is never challenged by the women who are leading the gender pay fight. They don't oppose the capitalist market; they just want a bigger slice of the pie, with the working class footing the bill via contributions to the Ł4 billion annual license fee." - BBC gender pay row: Selective outrage of wealthy women ..."
"... The greater the inequality, the greater the lie to enforce it. ..."
"... While WSWS was uniquely correct in exposing Bush, Powell, and the ruling-elite structure of the U.S. as using deceit and lies to start an 'aggressive war' (the ultimate war crime), your description of this corrupt system of global power headquartered in the U.S. did not fully diagnose and expose it for what it was; a disguised global capitalist EMPIRE. ..."
"... Your description could have more effectively warned American citizen/'subjects' and the world that "Rather, it is a war of colonial (Empire) conquest, driven by a series of economic and geo-political aims that center on the seizure of Iraq's oil resources and the assertion of US global (Empire, not merely) hegemony." ..."
"... In any case, Andre and Joseph, thanks for reminding readers of this dark and deceitful moment of U.S. history in starting another 'aggressive war' almost two decades ago --- which wars will unfortunately continue until Americans themselves expose and ignite an essential Second America "Revolution Against Empire" [Justin duRivage] ..."
"... The Anglo-American-Israelite Empire is globally entrenched and enjoying expansion since 1945 ..."
"... I must admit myself I am disturbed by the sheer volume of unchallenged propaganda regarding these claims in the past few months. The media talking heads and various analysts don't ever really say what the implication of what their claims really mean-war. We are in an age of new mccarthyism ..."
"... What was amazing about Powell's charade was that even if Old Bad Ass as I call Saddam had had some Wombars of Mass Destruction they posed no danger whatsoever! It was obvious 9/11 had put the masses into a tizzy and they would have attacked Mars if told to! ..."
"... Yes, the "New Pearl Harbour" called for and carried out by the authors of the "Project for a New American Century" worked as planned. ..."
"... Quite right. My late father was a structural design engineer, specializing in large steel structures like the WTC and he called it as soon as the buildings imploded! ..."
"... Yes, Michael, the 'media/propaganda-sector' of this seven-sectored Disguised Global Capitalist EMPIRE is currently the most effective sector --- but the other six; corporate, financial, militarist, extra-legal, CFR 'Plot-Tanks', and of course the dual-party Vichy-political facade of the 'rougher-talking' neocon 'R' Vichy Party and the 'smoother-lying' neoliberal-con 'D' Vichy Party are all helping to keep the Empire sound, hidden, and empowered over the only American citizen/'subjects' who could possibly form a "Political Revolution against Empire" ..."
"... While it is true that D.C. is run by delusional psychotics that does not mean they are irrational as far as their greed is concerned. ..."
"... As R. Luxemburg pleaded that WWI was not "our" war but war of bunch of aristocrats wanting to divide colonies and bunch of bankers wanted their bad speculative loans repaid, using working class flesh and blood. ..."
Feb 20, 2018 | www.wsws.org

Wnt1 • a month ago

This is one of the most sensible editorials on the Russia issue I've seen, and it is true, insofar as it goes. There is something very, very COINTELPRO about the idea of "protecting" Americans from "foreign influence", and that should give liberals the heebie-jeebies. There is also an ongoing structural witch-hunt effect, unchanged from the McCarthy era, when internet firm heads are called to testify before congress.

That said, I wouldn't dismiss the effect of the Russian involvement, or the relevance of the charges against Trump and his people. Bear in mind that the Party of McCarthy has been all about spying on its opponents from the days of HUAC. Nixon's break-in at the Watergate Hotel didn't singlehandedly decide the election ... but who would believe that was the only underhanded tactic he used? Republicans believe that if you're not cheating, you're not trying -- holding out for any ethical standard makes you inherently disloyal and unworthy of support. Something like Kavanaugh's involvement in the hacking of Democrats in 2003 ( http://www.foxnews.com/poli... ) should be no surprise; neither should the "Guccifer" hack that put the Democrats' data in the hands of Wikileaks. (Their subsequent attempts to demand Wikileaks not publish such a newsworthy leak, of course, is the sort of thing that undermines their position with me!)

Bottom line - the Russians may have had no more effect on the election than the loose change in your house has on your salary.

But if you go back in your house after the Republicans were minding it, don't be surprised if together with the missing couch change you notice some missing silverware, your kitchen tap has been sawed off, and the laptop is short half its RAM. By the time you've catalogued everything missing, the stolen brass part from the gas main downstairs might have blown you to smithereens.

Greg • 8 months ago
"Even more extreme measures are being planned and implemented, motivated by the basic principle that the greater the lie, the more aggressive the methods required to enforce it."

There are many reasons the bourgeoisie is unfit to rule. Each one of them is bound up with the lies required to enforce its rule. The greater its unfitness, "the greater the lie, the more aggressive the methods required to enforce it.

"While the extortionate salaries commanded by the BBC's biggest stars are justified by "market rates," this underlying premise is never challenged by the women who are leading the gender pay fight. They don't oppose the capitalist market; they just want a bigger slice of the pie, with the working class footing the bill via contributions to the Ł4 billion annual license fee." - BBC gender pay row: Selective outrage of wealthy women

The greater the inequality, the greater the lie to enforce it.

Alan MacDonald • 8 months ago
While WSWS was uniquely correct in exposing Bush, Powell, and the ruling-elite structure of the U.S. as using deceit and lies to start an 'aggressive war' (the ultimate war crime), your description of this corrupt system of global power headquartered in the U.S. did not fully diagnose and expose it for what it was; a disguised global capitalist EMPIRE.

Your description could have more effectively warned American citizen/'subjects' and the world that "Rather, it is a war of colonial (Empire) conquest, driven by a series of economic and geo-political aims that center on the seizure of Iraq's oil resources and the assertion of US global (Empire, not merely) hegemony."

In any case, Andre and Joseph, thanks for reminding readers of this dark and deceitful moment of U.S. history in starting another 'aggressive war' almost two decades ago --- which wars will unfortunately continue until Americans themselves expose and ignite an essential Second America "Revolution Against Empire" [Justin duRivage]

Ambricourt -> Alan MacDonald • 8 months ago
The Anglo-American-Israelite Empire is globally entrenched and enjoying expansion since 1945. It is time radical critiques of its values, power and methods should call it by its right name.
Bob Marley • 8 months ago
I must admit myself I am disturbed by the sheer volume of unchallenged propaganda regarding these claims in the past few months. The media talking heads and various analysts don't ever really say what the implication of what their claims really mean-war. We are in an age of new mccarthyism
michaelroloff • 8 months ago
What was amazing about Powell's charade was that even if Old Bad Ass as I call Saddam had had some Wombars of Mass Destruction they posed no danger whatsoever! It was obvious 9/11 had put the masses into a tizzy and they would have attacked Mars if told to!
Terry Lawrence -> michaelroloff • 8 months ago
Yes, the "New Pearl Harbour" called for and carried out by the authors of the "Project for a New American Century" worked as planned.
michaelroloff -> Terry Lawrence • 8 months ago
don't tell me that you think that the blow-back that was 9/11 is a conspiracy - if you do, be so kind as to mention specific conspirators!
Terry Lawrence -> michaelroloff • 8 months ago
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rice, are a few obvious ones, . . . and that famous CIA asset, Bin Laden, to recruit the expendable hijackers.
michaelroloff -> Terry Lawrence • 8 months ago
just because it was a convenient act for them to do what they wanted in conquering iraq is not reason that idiots like that are capable of planning and concealing the numerous co-conspirators to arrange something like 9..11. imperialism can always count on blowback to have occasion for further crimes. there is the slim chance that they knew what was being planned and that they let it happen - except that none of those folks is evil enough for that. not even dick cheney. what i love about all conspiracy theories of the american kind is that they never nam or show an actual conspirator conspiring. look at one of the truly great failed conspiracy, that of the 20th july 1944 in germany that was meant to kill hitler and how many people were arrested in no time at all and executed..
Terry Lawrence michaelroloff • 8 months ago
A "conspiracy" is just any two or more people getting together to discuss something affecting one or more other people without them being party to the discussion. Like a surprise birthday party, for instance. Obviously the "official" version of the 9/11 events is also a "conspiracy theory" that 19 mostly Saudi Arabians led by a guy hiding in a cave in Afghanistan conspired to carry out co-ordinated attacks that just happened to coincide with most of the USAF being conveniently off in Alaska and northern Canada on an exercise that day, and another "coinciding exercise" simulating a multiple hijacking being carried out in the northeast US thereby confusing the Air Traffic Controllers as to whether the hijackings were "real world or exercise", significantly delaying the response, among other things.

Do you really believe that WTC 7, a steel frame building which was not adjacent to WTC 1 & 2, and was NOT hit by any airplanes, coincidentally collapsed due to low temperature paper and furniture office fires? Something that has never happened before or since? Or that such low temperature fires would cause the massive heavily reinforced concrete central core/elevator shaft to collapse first, pulling the rest of the building inward onto it in classic controlled demolition technique?

It is getting more difficult to find the videos showing that now as Google, as with WSWS articles, is pushing them off the front pages of results, while Snopes has put out a some very misleading reports that set up false "straw man" claims and then "disprove" them. Even the "disproofs" are false.

For instance, a Snopes report on the WTC 7 collapse states: "relied heavily on discredited claims, none of which were new, including:

Jet fuel cannot melt steel beams (This claim is misleading, as steel beams do to not need to melt completely to be compromised structurally).

A sprinkler system would have prevented temperatures from rising high enough to cause to cause structural damage. (This claim ignores the fact that a crash from a 767 jet would likely destroy such a system.)

The structural system would have been protected by fireproofing material (similarly, such a system would have been damaged in a 767 crash). "

Jet fuel, which is Kerosene, burns at around 575ş in open air, which was the case in WTC buildings 1 & 2. Most of it was vaporized by the impact with the buildings and burned of within minutes. At any rate, 575ş is far below the point at which structural steel specifically designed to withstand high temperature fires like that used in the World Trade Centre buildings is weakened.

All of which is irrelevant, as are the other "points" made by Snopes, because Building 7 was not hit by an airplane and there was no jet fuel involved. Something conveniently "overlooked" by Snopes and other similar misleading "disproofs". Not to mention that the Intelligence establishment is busy putting out false trails constantly which use, for instance, obviously faked photos or videos of the three WTC buildings collapsing to discredit the real videos and photos by setting up "straw men" they can then "disprove" and point to as "evidence" that people who don't believe the official version are "creating fake news".

liz_imp Terry Lawrence • 8 months ago
Brilliant points!! :)
Carolyn Zaremba Terry Lawrence • 8 months ago
Quite right. My late father was a structural design engineer, specializing in large steel structures like the WTC and he called it as soon as the buildings imploded!
Terry Lawrence michaelroloff • 8 months ago
"The perpetrators and their conspiracy is not a theory since it has been proved."

By "proved" I assume you are referring to "proofs" such as the fantastical claim that Mohammed Atta's passport was allegedly and fortuitously "found" when it supposedly survived the 600 mph impact of the 767 he was supposedly piloting with a huge steel and concrete building, survived the huge fireball it was supposedly in the middle of unscorched, and conveniently fluttered to the ground intact to land at the feet of an FBI agent who immediately realized it must have belonged to one of the hijackers!

Even Hans Christian Andersen couldn't invent Fairy Tales like that.

Carolyn Zaremba michaelroloff • 8 months ago
See my comment above. It is the "official" explanation that is a fantasy.
michaelroloff Carolyn Zaremba • 8 months ago
the best that conspiracy theorist can do is, invariably, to call proven facts "just another theory " which only proves that they are actually aware that they are full of hot air! zarembas father as a structural engineer unless a fantasy is certainly better off among the dead than among the living and perpetrating his ignorance of steel and weight and fire onto the world!
clubmarkgirard michaelroloff • 8 months ago
Just because all the details aren't known as to who conspired and why there's enough holes in the "official conspiracy theory" of 19 hijackers to conclude that this could not have been pulled off without some conspiring on the American side. Certainly the the neocons benefited greatly from these attacks. So motive is there for sure.
Alan MacDonald michaelroloff • 8 months ago
Yes, Michael, the 'media/propaganda-sector' of this seven-sectored Disguised Global Capitalist EMPIRE is currently the most effective sector --- but the other six; corporate, financial, militarist, extra-legal, CFR 'Plot-Tanks', and of course the dual-party Vichy-political facade of the 'rougher-talking' neocon 'R' Vichy Party and the 'smoother-lying' neoliberal-con 'D' Vichy Party are all helping to keep the Empire sound, hidden, and empowered over the only American citizen/'subjects' who could possibly form a "Political Revolution against Empire"
Kalen • 8 months ago
While it is true that D.C. is run by delusional psychotics that does not mean they are irrational as far as their greed is concerned.

There is nothing to win in global nuke war, all know it while the outcome would be surely the current global oligarchy loosing grip on population destroying the system that works for them so well giving chance to what they dread socialist revolution they would have been much weaker to counter.

Regional conflicts are just positioning of oligarchy for management of global oligarchic country club while strict class morality is maintained.

What I do not we are conditions for war (split of global ruling elites) while what I see is broad propaganda of war as a excuse to clamp down on fake enemy in order to control respective populations while there is factual unity among world oligarchy.

As R. Luxemburg pleaded that WWI was not "our" war but war of bunch of aristocrats wanting to divide colonies and bunch of bankers wanted their bad speculative loans repaid, using working class flesh and blood.

She died abandoned by those on the left who embraced the war for their political aspirations, she was murdered for her true internationalism i.e. No war fought between working people of one country and working people of another country.

Alan MacDonald Kalen • 8 months ago
Kalen, it's only effective to use the correct and understandable term 'Empire' in exposing, warning, and motivating average Americans --- since very few even know what words like; oligarchy, plutocracy, fascism, authoritarianism, corporate-state, or Wolin's 'inverted totalitarianism' mean --- let alone could ever serve as rallying cries for the coming essential Second American Revolution against EMPIRE.

As Pat would have shouted if Tom had taken the Paine to edit his call, "Give me Liberty over EMPIRE, or Give me Death!"

Carolyn Zaremba Alan MacDonald • 8 months ago
Do you really believe that average Americans are that stupid? Shame on you!
Alan MacDonald Carolyn Zaremba • 8 months ago
"Sweet Carolyn" OH OH OH --- Yes, only a very small percentage of Americans understand that our former country, the U.S. of America, is categorically, provably, and absolutely a new form of Empire, and is inexorably the first in world history an; 'effectively-disguised', 'truly-global', 'dual-party Vichy', and 'capitalist-fueled' EMPIRE --- an EMPIRE, really just an EMPIRE!

Just do an honest survey, "Sweet Carolyn", yourself, and if you're not a "Sweet Liarlyn", you will have to admit that essentially ZERO of the first 1000 people you ask, will say --- "Oh ya, Carolyn, of course I know that this whole effin 'system' that others less informed may still be so stupid that they think they live in a real country, when I (enter their name) do solemnly swear is just an effin EMPIRE, which is so well disguised, that these few idiots who don't understand that they are just citizen/'subjects' of this monsterous EMPIRE."

Do the survey, "Sweet Carolyn" and if you don't lie to yourself --- which maybe you do, because HELL, your job is to lie to others (so it's quite likely that you'll lie about anything) --- you'll find that exactly zero average Americans have the effin slightest idea in the world that their great 'country' is actually an effin EMPIRE.

HELL, Carolyn, almost half the Americans repeatedly yell, "We're number ONE", "We're number ONE", that their brains would rather rattle themselves to death than even let logic, history, knowledge, or anything into their addled and propaganda filled heads!

liz_imp Alan MacDonald • 8 months ago
Personal attacks are not allowed on this site.
Alan MacDonald liz_imp • 8 months ago
Sorry, Liz-imp, are you a friend of "Sweet Carolyn" --- or some other relation? Perhaps working together?
dmorista • 8 months ago
Excellent article, and it did a particularly good job of tying together the foreign policy and domestic policy stratagems of a major faction of the U.S. ruling class. I, for one, do not doubt that the Russians conduct some sort of cyber warfare against the U.S.; but that must be understood by considering the fact that every major governmental, political, military, and business organization on the face of the Earth must now operate in this manner. A friend of mine's son, who was in the Army, pointed out that the big players, by a wide margin, in spying on and to some degree interfering in the U.S. domestic scene are China and Israel. Kevin Barrett has written and said on various radio shows that much of what is attributed to the "Russians" are actually the actions of Russian/Israeli dual citizens, many of whom move freely between the U.S., Russia, and Israel. And, of course, the U.S. runs major spy and manipulation operations in more countries than any other nation of Earth, and U.S. based corporations are busy both inside the U.S. and in foreign places in similar activities.

It is clearly a desire of significant sectors, of the Capitalist rulers of the U.S., to repress dissent and political activities that oppose their agendas. It took them a few years to realize that their old methods using TV, hate radio, magazines, direct mail, and newspapers were losing their effectiveness. They have been increasing their attacks on leftist websites, hacking into websites, closing websites using phonied-up "national security" justifications, employing numerous trolls, and establishing and funding more far right websites, such as Breitbart and Infowars. These efforts are most effective when they are not overpowering and heavy handed.

The classic book on this was the 1988 book "Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media" by Noam Chomsky and Edward Hermann. Rob Williams has updated the concept for the internet age in
<http: www.vermontindependent.org ="" the-post-truth-world-reviving-the-propaganda-model-of-news-for-our-digital-age=""/>.

The strategy is nothing new, the methods are merely updated and use the latest technologies.

Maxwell dmorista • 8 months ago
Superb post.

I guess the lesson to be learned here is that rigging elections through byzantine electoral laws and billion dollar corporate slush funds is a thing of the past. All you need now is 13 amateur IT goomba's with a marketing scheme and twitter accounts. Well, sure is a fragile "World's Sole Superpower" we got here. Go Team?

[Nov 12, 2018] When dual citizenship becomes conflict of interest by L. Michael Hager

Notable quotes:
"... Afroyim v. Rusk ..."
"... Yet the media and government watchdog organizations have largely ignored the potential conflict of interest inherent in dual citizenship. Why the neglect of this issue? Shouldn't members of Congress (and federal judges and executive branch officials) at least be required to disclose their citizenship in another country? ..."
"... Even if our legal system continues to allow dual citizens to serve in high positions of the U.S. government, it should require them to recuse themselves from participating in decisions or policy debates that relate to their second country. ..."
Nov 12, 2018 | thehill.com

The Biblical injunction that "No one can serve two masters" (Matthew 6:24) doesn't apply to nations. Almost half of the world's countries, including the U.S., recognize dual citizenship-- even when they don't encourage it for the complicated legal issues it often raises.

For example, one who obeys a requirement to give allegiance to a country or votes in a foreign election may be regarded as having renounced citizenship in the other country. What happens when the legal claims of one country conflict with those of the second country? Which of the two countries has an obligation to assist a dual national in distress?

Until the Supreme Court decided otherwise in the 1967 case of Afroyim v. Rusk , a U.S. citizen who voted in a political election in a foreign state would forfeit his or her U.S. citizenship. From that point on, dual citizens have maintained their right to vote and hold public office without penalty.

Anyone can become a dual citizen, even members of Congress, high court judges and top officials of the executive branch. There's no law or regulation against it. Nor are they required to disclose such dual citizenship.

So what's the problem?

For most dual citizens, having the benefits of citizenship in two countries (including expedited immigration) outweigh the costs (which may include tax obligations to both countries).

Yet dual citizenship in the United States poses a hitherto unappreciated issue for policy-level members of the legislative, executive and judicial branches. The divided national loyalties of dual citizens can create real or apparent conflicts of interest when such legislators, judges or senior officials make or speak out on policies that relate to their second country.

The potential damage to our democracy is the greater when such potential conflicts of interest are concealed in undisclosed dual citizenship.

Current entries on the Internet contain a number of undocumented assertions as to which members of Congress and senior officers are dual citizens. Without reliable data, however, Americans can only speculate on which senators and representatives may have divided national loyalties.

The lack of transparency regarding citizenship erodes trust in government, raising credibility doubts where there should be none, and allowing some apparent conflicts of interest to continue undetected.

When a senator, representative or senior U.S. official speaks out, submits bills or determines policy on an issue of importance to a foreign country of which that member or official (or judge) has the tie of citizenship, their constituents and the U.S. public at large should at least be able to assess whether such views or actions are influenced by the divided loyalty.

Since they don't involve national loyalty, religion and ethnicity seldom raise conflict issues. Moreover, they are generally matters of public record.

By contrast, dual citizenship creates conflict of interest through divided loyalties. Thus it would seem reasonable to require that dual citizen members of Congress, the judiciary and the executive be required to renounce citizenship in another country as a condition of public service.

Both Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and former Rep. Michelle Bachman (R-Minn.) recently received wide press coverage when they renounced their Canadian and Swiss nationalities, respectively.

Yet the media and government watchdog organizations have largely ignored the potential conflict of interest inherent in dual citizenship. Why the neglect of this issue? Shouldn't members of Congress (and federal judges and executive branch officials) at least be required to disclose their citizenship in another country?

Even if our legal system continues to allow dual citizens to serve in high positions of the U.S. government, it should require them to recuse themselves from participating in decisions or policy debates that relate to their second country.

[Nov 12, 2018] The backstory behind Diane Rehm's question to Bernie Sanders on dual Israeli citizenship

Notable quotes:
"... If an American citizen applies for foreign citizenship voluntarily, they "may lose U.S. nationality," if there is evidence, through their statements or conduct, that they intend to give up their U.S. citizenship. ..."
Nov 12, 2018 | www.politifact.com

Applying for citizenship under the Law of Return "is a formal procedure which you could expect normally to take a number of months except under emergency conditions," said Yoram Hazony, president of the the Herzl Institute, a Jerusalem think tank. "There is no such thing as receiving Israeli citizenship without submitting a formal request to the Israeli government."

... ... ...

It's also worth noting that the U.S. government doesn't look especially kindly on dual citizenship. The United States "recognizes that dual nationality exists but does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause," according to the Department of State.

If an American citizen applies for foreign citizenship voluntarily, they "may lose U.S. nationality," if there is evidence, through their statements or conduct, that they intend to give up their U.S. citizenship.

... ... ...

Sanders' case

So has Sanders ever taken action to claim the Israeli citizenship the would qualify for? He told Rehm no, and we have no evidence that would call that into question. While Sanders is Jewish by birth and spent some time on an Israeli kibbutz, or community farm, in the early 1960s, he would not have become a citizen without a concerted effort to become one.

We did not hear back from Sanders' office, but a spokesman, Michael Briggs, told Politico that "Diane Rehm is an excellent radio host. There's a great big Internet out there with lots of good and bad information. I've never heard the question come up before."

Hazony, an Israeli who studied at Princeton and Rutgers and who has written widely about both American and Israeli politics, said he's not aware of any American lawmakers with Israeli citizenship. "In fact, it is common for Jews who are dual U.S.-Israel citizens to renounce one or the other before serving in official government capacities," he said.

[Nov 12, 2018] The problem of dial citizenship is the US is not limited to Isreal

Nov 12, 2018 | www.latimes.com

In 1967, the court ruled that the State Department had violated the Constitution when it refused to issue a new U.S. passport to a U.S. citizen who had voted in an election in Israel. The decision overturned a law saying that "a person, who is a national of the United States, whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voting in a political election in a foreign state."

...there is no authoritative tally of how many U.S. citizens possess another nationality. Michael A. Olivas, an immigration professor at the University of Houston Law Center, believes that the number is well over 1 million and could be several times that number.

... ... ...

But the concept of dual citizenship is problematic both symbolically and practically, and could become divisive if more immigrants decide to avail themselves of the privileges of U.S. citizens -- as we believe they ought to do. U.S citizens with strong ties to their ancestral countries have been accused of divided loyalties in the past even when they didn't possess citizenship in those countries -- witness the internment of 110,000 Japanese and Japanese Americans during World War II. But when a U.S. citizen is also a citizen of another country, the accusation is even easier to make.

... ... ...

But it's also true that dual citizenship undermines the common bond that unites U.S. citizens regardless of their ethnicity, religion or place of birth. Dual citizenship places a sort of asterisk next to the names of some U.S. citizens but not others.

... ... ...

Nations vary in their attitudes toward dual citizenship. Some reject the concept outright; others allow their citizens to take out a second citizenship only in selected countries and some have drawn a distinction between citizenship and nationality.

Yet there's no question that dual citizenship poses practical problems both for those who possess it and for the government. The U.S. State Department discourages U.S. citizens from retaining or applying for citizenship in another country because "dual nationality may limit U.S. government efforts to assist nationals abroad. The country where a dual national is located generally has a stronger claim to that person's allegiance." The department also warns that "dual citizenship can present a security issue whether to permit access to classified information which affects recruitment, employment and assignments." In some cases, dual citizenship could disqualify an applicant for a sensitive position with the CIA or the State Department.

The complexities and complications raised by dual citizenship are not enough to justify amending the Constitution to overrule the Supreme Court. But we agree with the State Department that U.S. citizens should think twice about professing allegiance to another country. Moreover, by reinforcing the doubts that some hold about the loyalty of immigrants -- some U.S. citizens, for instance, fume when Mexican Americans display the Mexican flag at Cinco de Mayo rallies -- the persistence of dual citizenship may make it politically more difficult to secure a path to citizenship for immigrants who came here illegally.

[Nov 12, 2018] War has become USA's 2nd nature above beyond the very essence of the military use, which should be to protect the nation's sovereignty

Nov 12, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

All Risk No Reward , 52 seconds ago link

>>Johnstone: The Best Way To Honor War Veterans Is To Stop Creating Them<<

Preach!

The military defends Money Power Monopolist Mega-Corporate Fascist Global Empire, not America, and definitely NOT the Constitution. The New Deal effectively wiped out the Constitution, which was the "Old Deal."

Syria and Iran aren't threats, they are countries that don't have debt-based money systems controlled by the Money Power Monopolists.

"In a sense, there is no "future". Currently, you note a consolidation of the few remaining countries without a "central bank" ...and how rapidly this is occurring. Look for Syria next to fall, and fall quickly. North Korea has already cut a deal under the aegis of China...feit accompli. Cuba has also agreed to the North American integration once Fidel "passes". That leaves IRAN. And biblical prophesy. The fallout from that conflict sets the stage for the true new world order as has been broadcast in the media for the last 13 years or so." ~Unnamed Rothschild

The establishment of central banks is ALWAYS a necessary first step of subjugation of geographically congregated bloodlines. Note that Libya's first official act, before even the corpses turned stiff...was the establishment of a central bank. Those rebel forces were certainly well schooled by someone! ~Unnamed Rothschild

Amazing how Libyan rebels took time out of their daily war duties to establish a CENTRAL BANK! Imagine the paperwork in getting that done on the battlefield! Those rebels are a well educated lot! Laughing out Loud! Seriously, don't the serfs notice things like this? ~Unnamed Rothschild

The financier of the military makes it clear they are attacking Western countries - monetarily and economically.

"Remember, the equity and bond markets exist only to remove fiat from circulation!" ~Unnamed Rothschild

https://ia802300.us.archive.org/8/items/rofschildv1/IAmARofschildAxeMeAQuestion.html

BitchesBetterRecognize , 14 minutes ago link

Difficult to argue the points made in the article, despite the author's background...

War has become USA's 2nd nature above & beyond the very essence of the military use, which should be to protect the nation's sovereignty

Golden Showers , 21 minutes ago link

Our soldiers joined, were trained, given orders. The best way to honor veterans is to quit putting it on them. This is the government we have because it is the government we want. It's the government we allow. This is on all of us . I think it's time for people who are dissatisfied with the treatment of veterans, with the voter fraud, with the lies and theft of elected officials, local, state, and federal, tired of the media lying to us and creating fake events... perhaps it's time to peacefully strike. Perhaps it's time to say No to vote fraud, to say No to lies and deceit.

Perhaps it's time to peacefully petition the government for redress of grievances. That's a Constitutional Right guaranteed to Citizens of the United States. That requires an active, constructive peaceful assembly. Everyone has had it up to the eyes with this ******** and this con-game we're being fed.

I'd rather get stomped to death than live on with this never ending slow coup against We The People. We hold the power. Just us. We designate that power. It should be here to protect us. That social contract deserves respect. You may be watching the only chance in your life that you could do anything about it, given the current President and his attitude. I really think that. It's not enough to watch the Proud Boys punch an Antifa in the jaw. That doesn't do it for me. That's theatre.

My girlfriends father is old army security. I'm paying the bill at Dennys and he says, let me put my military discount on that. So he's behind a guy in an Operation Iraqi Freedom jacket. He says, hey; I like your jacket. The guy looks at him and he says, nice hat. Army Security Agency. The military deserves more than a discount at ******* Denny's. They deserve a country. So do I. So do you. But there's not going to be any country if we don't peacefully come together to hang every last traitor scumbag lying trasonous seditious bastard by just saying NO! Arrest these traitors! I don't want my vote raped. I don't want my speach raped. Or yours! I don't give a **** about illegals or their kids because I take care of my kids legally and lawfully and didn't put them in that **** expecting a parent of the century award.

I don't ******* care what you call yourself. But if it's more important than your right to call yourself whatever you want, you are my enemy and I tell you no.

If it's legal to vote and legal to be off work to vote, to peacefully assemble, it should be legal to redress government. It's time to show out. It's time to say we want this ******** to stop. We have paid very well for the lifestyles and presidential libraries and foundations and kept all the traitors in good health. But we reserve the right to cut you off if you abuse our sacrifice to you and our votes to you. We reserve the right without prejudice to say NO. That's our right. And until we say NO! our silence equals consent.

I say NO. I say **** THE SEDITIOUS TRAITORS trying to hold on to rape us of all our Rights. And I say long live Trump for giving our country back to us at inauguration. That's what's up. Let's peacefully **** these people up. USE IT OR LOSE IT.

Hubbs , 22 minutes ago link

A quiet tribute to the Vets from Dire Straits

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5JkHBC5lDs

And from a movie that says the futility of it all: "We fight because we are here." Imagine dying in the trenches of WWI or in a shithole like the trenches of Korea.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nPdVJQaci0&t=186s&list=LLMCbuscsdXrwVsvALbKO5pw&index=19

@3:16

The least we could do is to learn what really happened and why. I realize I was taught an endless string of lies about history, especially US History, WWI, WWII, Vietnam war.

Be very careful and informed before joining the military.

Mike Rotsch , 42 minutes ago link

Libtards don't really know much about anything, so it seems. Here's the deal:

As long as there are assholes in the world, there will be wars.

I don't have a problem with that. It's the world that I live in. It's been the case throughout all of human history. A world without wars is pure ******* fantasy. It will never happen. It's high time that libtards start accepting the world that they live in.

The problem that we're having , is that we're shooting the wrong assholes instead of the right ones. But you know what? All of human history shows that problems like that are always remedied as well. And if you're doing some soul-searching, trying to figure out who the assholes are, they're probably going to be any group of people, who can't leave other groups of people the hell alone .

Not surprisingly, the 20th century seems to be characterized by assholes fighting each other.

Buddha 71 , 43 minutes ago link

Our psychopathic dna as a nation comes mainly from england, one of the most, if not the most murdering countries in history. england cruelly colonized Asia and Africa, and literally never stopped murdering the innocents. Now as our ALLY, among the other killing nations, such as France and Germany, we the USA can kill literally any country or countries for any reason or no reason.

we as the american people will be blamed for all the monstrous destruction and innocents deaths. separation of our country and our politicians would be necessary if we are to have a future. looking dim. why are we still dirty, and killing innocents, why are we allowing saudi and israel to mass murder innocent women and children ?

no one cares enough yet. you would think by 2018 we all would have banned war and conflict, we have not. this makes me sick. I am a vet.

vic and blood , 43 minutes ago link

"since the end of the second world war..."

No matter how they were presented at the time, ultimately, neither world war served the cause of freedom, either.

vic and blood , 51 minutes ago link

No more wars for Zionists.

punchasocialist , 56 minutes ago link

Happy 99th ARMISTICE DAY everyone!

kudocast , 1 hour ago link

http://www.untoldhistory.com

LeadPipeDreams , 1 hour ago link

Hmmm...what about Israhell and the ZioNazi tribe of the Talmud? Don't they deserve a mention?

hangemhigh77 , 1 hour ago link

I'm actually thinking of not watching football anymore the war propaganda is constant. I went to a game and it was like walking into an armed camp. Hundreds of cops and military. Every five minutes they're marching around and everyone has to "honor" them. It's disgusting. All the players are told to kiss every soldiers ***. The Army are the terrorists. They all make me want to puke.

khnum , 1 hour ago link

In Australia at the moment the suicide rate is a shocker among those coming back from Afghanistan, Iraq and places unknown, the solution they are proposing is for priority airport treatment and more medals and other stuff along the model the US has, which is an insult as it does nothing to financially support or mentally cure, its a cop out.

warpigs , 50 minutes ago link

Yes, it is ******** Khnum.

Very few wars are even about righting some amazing wrong. They merely tend to be about treasure i.e. nat gas, oil, rare earth materials, diamonds, water, blah blah blah. And, if there happens to be some fight, ala WWII, then you can bet your *** on it that all corporate assholes are funding and benefiting from the war....on both sides of the coin i.e. backing each side until a peace is called.

I don't have an answer to the human condition or our propensity to be violent and fight etc., but I sure as **** am not cool with sacking places, and killing kids, over ******* things. We're better than this.

I have 2 kids myself. You can all be on notice that if a bomb were to be dropped on my house, and if my kids were killed, I would likely devolve and start picking off the low hanging fruit i.e. the zombies shuffling in and out of said bomb makers companies, and wasting them 1 person as a time. I'd slowly, if still able, work my way up to the execs. Hopefully, and along the way, I'd be able to wipe shareholders off of the grid, also.

Overfed , 5 minutes ago link

When you go off to fight for "freedom", and arrive home to find that you have little to no real freedom and essentially live in a police state, it's a shocking blow.

halcyon , 2 minutes ago link

You get what you sign up for. It's not like the soldiers didn't know.

kudocast , 56 minutes ago link

Yeh I go to games, it is completely disgusting how the NFL promotes the military at the games.

https://www.facebook.com/DenverBroncosCheerleaders/photos/pb.85485353285.-2207520000.1542000250./10156691022423286/?type=3&theater

They look like a bunch of Nazis.

hangemhigh77 , 1 hour ago link

This sounds like something I would write. And even the damn CHURCHES honor the veteran "serving" his country. What a crock of ****. I tell the pastor that he will be judged harshly when his time comes. And I tell Christians that because they support the rampant murder of millions that when they die and are standing before Jesus for judgement they will be soaked in the blood of the innocent and he will ask you why did you support this? Why did you not speak out against it? Then I look at them and say "good luck because you're gonna need it".

LightBulb18 , 1 hour ago link

The world is not ruled by pure evil yet. In Brazil A nationalist was elected, in Italy and much of eastern Europe other nationalists were elected. You think the Chinese protected the Italian and Brazilian right to free and fair elections? You think Russia is the arsenal of freedom? You think the EU upheld the votes of the people, allowing Britain to vote on leaving the EU and Italy and eastern Europe? You think the unelected rulers of the EU respected other peoples right to vote? Look out onto the world, and recognize that as of today, the nations of the world have A group to join if they chose to fight for liberty, capitalism and all the other virtues, and that group is grounded and guaranteed by the United States of America. In G-d I trust.

stonedogz , 1 hour ago link

Hopeful thinking for a hopeless reality. Truth is tyrants never fall by their own swords. It always takes someone else's. The modern problem is a bit more complex when we make the tyrants that we later topple. The toppling is where the bucks are... just ask any of the the last 4 Presidents and their respective Congresses.

minionz1 , 1 hour ago link

I am eagerly waiting the time when they replace Veterans Day with Peace Day.

Oldwood , 1 hour ago link

So war is just an American problem, something we just invented? Do we read much history or is it all PBS specials now. War has ALWAYS been fucked up. Violence has been a major contributor to immigration for all of history. Like it or not, we live in dangerous times. We can ASSUME that if America shrank it's military and ended all interventions that world peace would magically appear....but it won't. We can pray that while we retreat behind of big screen TVs that China will end their territorial expansion and military programs, but they WON'T.

I'm all for reigning in our interventions, but let's not pretend that America is to blame for human evil and aggressive behaviors....just because we are good at it..

There is an endless stream of history illustrating the absolute brutality and evil that had persisted since the beginning of time. We should avoid embracing it but we should avoid thinking we have the power to end it. More arrogance to be used for destructive purposes.

halcyon , 3 minutes ago link

Nah, it is just that USA has made forever war such a profitable and ongoing mega-business. The degenerate banker and royal families of Europe would only fight every generation or two. You fight all the time and try to start new ones, before you finish off with the old ones, and print global toilet paper to pay for it all. Because it is good business. **** laws, lives and human decency.

And then you have Hollywood make ****-for-brain movies about just wars, war comradery and heroic sacrifice and spread that **** all over the world.

So yeah, you got all the reasons for being hated for your war business.

PuttingIsLikeWisdom , 1 hour ago link

"..nerd somewhere in Washington.."?? 'Washington' is beholding to Netanyahu's ilk.

OZZIDOWNUNDER , 1 hour ago link

The only way to honor veterans, really, truly honor them, is to help end war and make sure no more lives are put into a position where they are on the giving or receiving end of evil, stupid, meaningless violence

A bit too close to the Bone for the average American to appreciate. A well thought out & articulated article.

minionz1 , 1 hour ago link

I predict, one day soon, this Zombie Nation will soon awaken. Great Song by Kernkraft 400: Zombie nation - woah oh oh

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRbuvKYKI54

Pooper Popper , 1 hour ago link

Well,Well,Well,,,,,,,, Bomb Scare at Fort Lauderdale Airport....... "Suspicious Package Found" Provisional Ballots,,,,,,,,,,,

https://twitter.com/Richard...

Hmmmmmmmmmm?

WWG1
WGA

DarthVaderMentor , 1 hour ago link

The machine is not the problem. It's like a gun. Guns are just mechanical devices and can't kill until people aim them and pull the trigger. It's people that kill by forcing the machine to do their terrible evil bidding.

It's the business and political leaders that build, guide and enable the machine and facilitate the infrastructure and culture to wage war.

Blue Boat , 1 hour ago link

Absolutely! No more freaking WAR. Instead, death to the MIC, globalists and Marxists. Thank you!

Handful of Dust , 1 hour ago link

Democrats love War as we saw with LBJ, Bill Clinton (bombing the hell out of and destroying Yugoslavia), Obama and Hillary Clinton. Democrat McNamara was one of their finest! McNamara's Folly: The Use of Low-IQ Troops in the Vietnam War

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_J2VwFDV4-g

PS: I will add, the Deep State and Neocons are not much better.

kudocast , 1 hour ago link

It's both Republicans and Democrats - George Bush I's Desert Storm, Panama; George Bush II invading Iraq, Afghanistan; Reagan invading GRENADA!, Nixon in Vietnam, assassinating Salvador Allende in Chile, bombing Laos and Cambodia; Eisenhower started in Vietnam, installed a dictator in Guatemala in 1954, installed Batista in Cuba, Kennedy was going to withdraw from Vietnam and part of the reason he was assassinated; and on and on and on.

FrankieGoesToHollywood , 1 hour ago link

Thank you veterans for the cheap oil.

[Nov 12, 2018] We Are Heading For Another Tragedy Like World War I by Eric Margolis

Notable quotes:
"... officials and politicians in Britain and France conspired to transform Serbia's murder of Austro-Hungary's Crown Prince into a continent-wide conflict. France burned for revenge for its defeat in the 1870 Franco-Prussian War and loss of Alsace-Lorraine. Britain feared German commercial and naval competition. At the time, the British Empire controlled one quarter of the world's surface. Italy longed to conquer Austria-Hungary's South Tyrol. Turkey feared Russia's desire for the Straits. Austria-Hungary feared Russian expansion. ..."
"... Prof Clark clearly shows how the French and British maneuvered poorly-led Germany into the war. The Germans were petrified of being crushed between two hostile powers, France and Russia. The longer the Germans waited, the more the military odds turned against them. Tragically, Germany was then Europe's leader in social justice. ..."
"... Britain kept stirring the pot, determined to defeat commercial and colonial rival, Germany. The rush to war became a gigantic clockwork that no one could stop. All sides believed a war would be short and decisive. Crowds of fools chanted 'On to Berlin' or 'On to Paris.' ..."
"... The 1904 Russo-Japanese War offered a sharp foretaste of the 1914 conflict, but Europe's grandees paid scant attention. ..."
"... This demented war in Europe tuned into an even greater historic tragedy in 1917 when US President Woodrow Wilson, driven by a lust for power and prestige, entered the totally stalemated war on the Western Front. One million US troops and starvation caused by a crushing British naval blockade turned the tide of battle and led to Germany's surrender. ..."
"... Vengeful France and Britain imposed intolerable punishment on Germany, forcing it to accept full guilt for the war, an untruth that persists to this day. The result was Adolf Hitler and his National Socialists. If an honorable peace had been concluded in 1917, neither Hitler nor Stalin might have seized power and millions of lives would have been saved. This is the true tragedy of the Great War. ..."
"... Let us recall the words of the wise Benjamin Franklin: `No good war, no bad peace.' ..."
Nov 12, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Eric Margolis via EricMargolis.com,

We are now upon the 100th anniversary of World War I, the war that was supposed to end all wars. While honoring the 16 million who died in this conflict, we should also condemn the memory of the politicians, officials and incompetent generals who created this horrendous blood bath.

I've walked most of the Western Front of the Great War, visited its battlefields and haunted forts, and seen the seas of crosses marking its innumerable cemeteries.

As a former soldier and war correspondent, I've always considered WWI as he stupidest, most tragic and catastrophic of all modern wars.

The continuation of this conflict, World War II, killed more people and brought more destruction on civilians in firebombed cities but, at least for me, World War I holds a special horror and poignancy. This war was not only an endless nightmare for the soldiers in their pestilential trenches, it also violently ended the previous 100 years of glorious European civilization, one of mankind's most noble achievements.

I've explored the killing fields of Verdun many times and feel a visceral connection to this ghastly place where up to 1,000,000 soldiers died. I have even spent the night there, listening to the sirens that wailed without relent, and watching searchlights that pierced the night, looking for the ghosts of the French and German soldiers who died here.

Verdun's soil was so poisoned by explosives and lethal gas that to this day it produces only withered, stunted scrub and sick trees. Beneath the surface lie the shattered remains of men and a deadly harvest of unexploded shells that still kill scores of intruders each year. The spooky Ossuaire Chapel contains the bone fragments of 130,000 men, blown to bits by the millions of high explosive shells that deluged Verdun.

The town of the same name is utterly bleak, melancholy and cursed. Young French and German officers are brought here to see firsthand the horrors of war and the crime of stupid generalship.

Amid all the usual patriotic cant from politicians, imperialists and churchmen about the glories of this slaughter, remember that World War I was a contrived conflict that was totally avoidable. Contrary to the war propaganda that still clouds and corrupts our historical view, World War I was not started by Imperial Germany.

Professor Christopher Clark in his brilliant book, `The Sleepwalkers' shows how officials and politicians in Britain and France conspired to transform Serbia's murder of Austro-Hungary's Crown Prince into a continent-wide conflict. France burned for revenge for its defeat in the 1870 Franco-Prussian War and loss of Alsace-Lorraine. Britain feared German commercial and naval competition. At the time, the British Empire controlled one quarter of the world's surface. Italy longed to conquer Austria-Hungary's South Tyrol. Turkey feared Russia's desire for the Straits. Austria-Hungary feared Russian expansion.

Prof Clark clearly shows how the French and British maneuvered poorly-led Germany into the war. The Germans were petrified of being crushed between two hostile powers, France and Russia. The longer the Germans waited, the more the military odds turned against them. Tragically, Germany was then Europe's leader in social justice.

Britain kept stirring the pot, determined to defeat commercial and colonial rival, Germany. The rush to war became a gigantic clockwork that no one could stop. All sides believed a war would be short and decisive. Crowds of fools chanted 'On to Berlin' or 'On to Paris.'

Few at the time understood the impending horrors of modern war or the geopolitical demons one would release. The 1904 Russo-Japanese War offered a sharp foretaste of the 1914 conflict, but Europe's grandees paid scant attention.

Even fewer grasped how the collapse of the antiquated Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian Empires would send Europe and the Mideast into dangerous turmoil that persists to our day. Or how a little-known revolutionary named Lenin would shatter Imperial Russia and turn it into the world's most murderous state.

This demented war in Europe tuned into an even greater historic tragedy in 1917 when US President Woodrow Wilson, driven by a lust for power and prestige, entered the totally stalemated war on the Western Front. One million US troops and starvation caused by a crushing British naval blockade turned the tide of battle and led to Germany's surrender.

Vengeful France and Britain imposed intolerable punishment on Germany, forcing it to accept full guilt for the war, an untruth that persists to this day. The result was Adolf Hitler and his National Socialists. If an honorable peace had been concluded in 1917, neither Hitler nor Stalin might have seized power and millions of lives would have been saved. This is the true tragedy of the Great War.

Let us recall the words of the wise Benjamin Franklin: `No good war, no bad peace.'

[Nov 11, 2018] The Unraveling of the Netanyahu Project for the Middle East

Notable quotes:
"... Washington Post ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
Nov 11, 2018 | theduran.com

There has been, from the outset, a second level , too: This entire 'inverted pyramid' of Middle East engineering had, as its single point of departure, Mohammed bin Salman (MbS). It was Jared Kushner, the Washington Post reports , who "championed Mohammed as a reformer poised to usher the ultraconservative, oil-rich monarchy into modernity. Kushner privately argued for months, last year, that Mohammed would be key to crafting a Middle East peace plan, and that with the prince's blessing, much of the Arab world would follow". It was Kushner, the Post continued, "who pushed his father-in-law to make his first foreign trip as president to Riyadh, against objections from then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson – and warnings from Defense Secretary Jim Mattis".

Well, now MbS has, in one form or another, been implicated in the Khashoggi murder. Bruce Riedel of Brookings, a longtime Saudi observer and former senior CIA & US defence official, notes , "for the first time in 50 years, the kingdom has become a force for instability" (rather than stability in the region), and suggests that there is an element of 'buyer's remorse' now evident in parts of Washington.

The 'seamless office process' to which the Israeli official referred with Caspit, is known as 'stovepiping', which is when a foreign state's policy advocacy and intelligence are passed straight to a President's ear – omitting official Washington from the 'loop'; by-passing any US oversight; and removing the opportunity for officials to advise on its content. Well, this has now resulted in the Khashoggi strategic blunder. And this, of course, comes in the wake of earlier strategic 'mistakes': the Yemen war, the siege of Qatar, the Hariri abduction, the Ritz-Carlton princely shakedowns.

To remedy this lacuna, an 'uncle' (Prince Ahmad bin Abdel Aziz) has been dispatched from exile in the West to Riyadh (with security guarantees from the US and UK intelligences services) to bring order into these unruly affairs, and to institute some checks and balances into the MbS coterie of advisers, so as to prevent further impetuous 'mistakes'. It seems too, that the US Congress wants the Yemen war, which Prince Ahmad consistently has opposed (as he opposed MbS elevation as Crown Prince), stopped. (General Mattis has called for a ceasefire within 30 days.) It is a step toward repairing the Kingdom's image.

MbS remains – for now – as Crown Prince. President Sisi and Prime Minister Netanyahu both have expressed their support for MbS and "as U.S. officials contemplate a more robust response [to the Khashoggi killing], Kushner has emphasized the importance of the U.S.-Saudi alliance in the region", the Washington Post reports . MbS' Uncle (who as a son of King Abdel Aziz, under the traditional succession system, would be himself in line for the throne), no doubt hopes to try to undo some of the damage done to the standing of the al-Saud family, and to that of the Kingdom. Will he succeed? Will MbS accede now to Ahmad unscrambling the very centralisation of power that made MbS so many enemies, in the first place, to achieve it? Has the al-Saud family the will , or are they too disconcerted by events?

And might President Erdogan throw more wrenches into this delicate process by further leaking evidence Turkey has, if Washington does not attend sufficiently to his demands. Erdogan seems ready to pitch for the return of Ottoman leadership for the Sunni world, and likely still holds some high-value cards up his sleeve (such as intercepts of phone calls between the murder cell and Riyadh). These cards though are devaluing as the news cycle shifts to the US mid-terms.

Time will tell, but it is this nexus of uncertain dynamics to which Bruce Reidel refers, when he talks of 'instability' in Saudi Arabia . The question posed here, though, is how might these events affect Netanyahu's and MbS' 'war' on Iran?

May 2018 now seems a distant era. Trump is still the same 'Trump', but Putin is not the same Putin. The Russian Defence Establishment has weighed in with their President to express their displeasure at Israeli air strikes on Syria – purportedly targeting Iranian forces in Syria. The Russian Defence Ministry too, has enveloped Syria in a belt of missiles and electronic disabling systems across the Syrian airspace. Politically, the situation has changed too: Germany and France have joined the Astana Process for Syria. Europe wants Syrian refugees to return home, and that translates into Europe demanding stability in Syria. Some Gulf States too, have tentatively begun normalising with the Syrian state.

The Americans are still in Syria; but a newly invigorated Erdogan (after the release of the US pastor, and with all the Khashoggi cards, produced by Turkish intelligence, in his pocket), intends to crush the Kurdish project in north and eastern Syria, espoused by Israel and the US. MbS, who was funding this project, on behalf of US and Israel, will cease his involvement (as a part of the demands made by Erdogan over the Khashoggi murder). Washington too wants the Yemen war, which was intended to serve as Iran's 'quagmire', to end forthwith. And Washington wants the attrition of Qatar to stop, too.

These represent major unravelings of the Netanyahu project for the Middle East, but most significant are two further setbacks: namely, the loss of Netanyahu's and MbS' stovepipe to Trump, via Jared Kushner, by-passing all America's own system of 'checks and balances'. The Kushner 'stovepipe' neither forewarned Washington of coming 'mistakes', nor was Kushner able to prevent them. Both Congress and the Intelligences Services of the US and UK are already elbowing into these affairs. They are not MbS fans. It is no secret that Prince Mohamed bin Naif was their man (he is still under 'palace arrest').

Trump will still hope to continue his 'Iran project' and his Deal of the Century between Israel and the Palestinians (led nominally by Saudi Arabia herding together the Sunni world , behind it). Trump does not seek war with Iran, but rather is convinced of a popular uprising in Iran that will topple the state.

[Nov 10, 2018] US Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan Killed 500,000 by Jason Ditz

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Over 60,000 US troops either killed or wounded in conflicts ..."
"... The study estimates between 480,000 and 507,000 people were killed in the course of the three conflicts. ..."
"... Civilians make up over half of the roughly 500,000 killed, with both opposition fighters and US-backed foreign military forces each sustaining in excess of 100,000 deaths as well. ..."
"... This is admittedly a dramatic under-report of people killed in the wars, as it only attempts to calculate those killed directly in war violence, and not the massive number of others civilians who died from infrastructure damage or other indirect results of the wars. The list also excludes the US war in Syria, which itself stakes claims to another 500,000 killed since 2011. ..."
Nov 10, 2018 | news.antiwar.com

Over 60,000 US troops either killed or wounded in conflicts

Brown University has released a new study on the cost in lives of America's Post-9/11 Wars, in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. The study estimates between 480,000 and 507,000 people were killed in the course of the three conflicts.

This includes combatant deaths and civilian deaths in fighting and war violence. Civilians make up over half of the roughly 500,000 killed, with both opposition fighters and US-backed foreign military forces each sustaining in excess of 100,000 deaths as well.

This is admittedly a dramatic under-report of people killed in the wars, as it only attempts to calculate those killed directly in war violence, and not the massive number of others civilians who died from infrastructure damage or other indirect results of the wars. The list also excludes the US war in Syria, which itself stakes claims to another 500,000 killed since 2011.

The report also notes that over 60,000 US troops were either killed or wounded in the course of the wars. This includes 6,951 US military personnel killed in Iraq and Afghanistan since 9/11.

The Brown study also faults the US for having done very little in the last 17 years to provide transparency to the country about the scope of the conflicts, concluding that they are "inhibited by governments determined to paint a rosy picture of perfect execution and progress."

Those wishing to read the full Brown University study can find a PDF version here .

[Nov 10, 2018] US Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan Killed 500,000 by Jason Ditz

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Over 60,000 US troops either killed or wounded in conflicts ..."
"... The study estimates between 480,000 and 507,000 people were killed in the course of the three conflicts. ..."
"... Civilians make up over half of the roughly 500,000 killed, with both opposition fighters and US-backed foreign military forces each sustaining in excess of 100,000 deaths as well. ..."
"... This is admittedly a dramatic under-report of people killed in the wars, as it only attempts to calculate those killed directly in war violence, and not the massive number of others civilians who died from infrastructure damage or other indirect results of the wars. The list also excludes the US war in Syria, which itself stakes claims to another 500,000 killed since 2011. ..."
Nov 10, 2018 | news.antiwar.com

Over 60,000 US troops either killed or wounded in conflicts

Brown University has released a new study on the cost in lives of America's Post-9/11 Wars, in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. The study estimates between 480,000 and 507,000 people were killed in the course of the three conflicts.

This includes combatant deaths and civilian deaths in fighting and war violence. Civilians make up over half of the roughly 500,000 killed, with both opposition fighters and US-backed foreign military forces each sustaining in excess of 100,000 deaths as well.

This is admittedly a dramatic under-report of people killed in the wars, as it only attempts to calculate those killed directly in war violence, and not the massive number of others civilians who died from infrastructure damage or other indirect results of the wars. The list also excludes the US war in Syria, which itself stakes claims to another 500,000 killed since 2011.

The report also notes that over 60,000 US troops were either killed or wounded in the course of the wars. This includes 6,951 US military personnel killed in Iraq and Afghanistan since 9/11.

The Brown study also faults the US for having done very little in the last 17 years to provide transparency to the country about the scope of the conflicts, concluding that they are "inhibited by governments determined to paint a rosy picture of perfect execution and progress."

Those wishing to read the full Brown University study can find a PDF version here .

[Nov 10, 2018] US Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan Killed 500,000 by Jason Ditz

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Over 60,000 US troops either killed or wounded in conflicts ..."
"... The study estimates between 480,000 and 507,000 people were killed in the course of the three conflicts. ..."
"... Civilians make up over half of the roughly 500,000 killed, with both opposition fighters and US-backed foreign military forces each sustaining in excess of 100,000 deaths as well. ..."
"... This is admittedly a dramatic under-report of people killed in the wars, as it only attempts to calculate those killed directly in war violence, and not the massive number of others civilians who died from infrastructure damage or other indirect results of the wars. The list also excludes the US war in Syria, which itself stakes claims to another 500,000 killed since 2011. ..."
Nov 10, 2018 | news.antiwar.com

Over 60,000 US troops either killed or wounded in conflicts

Brown University has released a new study on the cost in lives of America's Post-9/11 Wars, in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. The study estimates between 480,000 and 507,000 people were killed in the course of the three conflicts.

This includes combatant deaths and civilian deaths in fighting and war violence. Civilians make up over half of the roughly 500,000 killed, with both opposition fighters and US-backed foreign military forces each sustaining in excess of 100,000 deaths as well.

This is admittedly a dramatic under-report of people killed in the wars, as it only attempts to calculate those killed directly in war violence, and not the massive number of others civilians who died from infrastructure damage or other indirect results of the wars. The list also excludes the US war in Syria, which itself stakes claims to another 500,000 killed since 2011.

The report also notes that over 60,000 US troops were either killed or wounded in the course of the wars. This includes 6,951 US military personnel killed in Iraq and Afghanistan since 9/11.

The Brown study also faults the US for having done very little in the last 17 years to provide transparency to the country about the scope of the conflicts, concluding that they are "inhibited by governments determined to paint a rosy picture of perfect execution and progress."

Those wishing to read the full Brown University study can find a PDF version here .

[Nov 10, 2018] Russian State-Owned Bank VTB Funded Rosneft Stake Sale To Qatari Fund

Notable quotes:
"... Later, it emerged that QIA and Glencore planned to sell the majority of the stake they had acquired in Rosneft to China's energy conglomerate CEFC, but the deal fell through after Beijing set its sights on CEFC and launched an investigation that saw the removal of its chief executive. The investigation was reportedly part of a wide crackdown on illicit business practices on the part of private Chinese companies favored by Beijing. ..."
Nov 10, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Irina Slav via Oilprice.com,

Russian VTB, a state-owned bank, funded a significant portion of the Qatar Investment Authority's acquisition of a stake in oil giant Rosneft , Reuters reports , quoting nine unnamed sources familiar with the deal.

VTB, however, has denied to Reuters taking any part in the deal.

"VTB has not issued and is not planning to issue a loan to QIA to finance the acquisition," the bank said in response for a request for comment.

The Reuters sources, however, claim VTB provided a US$6 billion loan to the Qatar sovereign wealth fund that teamed up with Swiss Glencore to acquire 19.5 percent in Rosneft last year. Reuters cites data regarding VTB's activity issued by the Russian central bank that shows VTB lent US$6.7 billion (434 billion rubles) to unnamed foreign entities and the loan followed another loan of US$5.20 billion (350 billion rubles) from the same central bank.

The news first made headlines in December, taking markets by surprise, as Rosneft's partial privatization was expected by most to be limited to Russian investors. The price tag on the stake was around US$11.57 billion (692 billion rubles), of which Glencore agreed to contribute US$324 million. The remainder was forked over by the Qatar Investment Authority, as well as non-recourse bank financing.

Russia's budget received about US$10.55 billion ( 710.8 billion rubles ) from the deal, including US$ 270 million (18 billion rubles) in extra dividends. Rosneft, for its part, got an indirect stake in Glencore of 0.54 percent.

Later, it emerged that QIA and Glencore planned to sell the majority of the stake they had acquired in Rosneft to China's energy conglomerate CEFC, but the deal fell through after Beijing set its sights on CEFC and launched an investigation that saw the removal of its chief executive. The investigation was reportedly part of a wide crackdown on illicit business practices on the part of private Chinese companies favored by Beijing.

solidtare , 30 minutes ago link

Took z/h almost 2 years, and of course from a tertiary source - Reuters

John Helmer nailed this scam 2 years ago, and got hammered for it

[Nov 10, 2018] How Secession from the Soviet Union Created Booming Economies and Innovative Government Zero Hedge

Notable quotes:
"... With all due cynical respect... I find it highly ironic that some of the biggest money launderers and Mafiosi are Baltic banks. The hilarity never ends. ..."
"... Full scale bull ****. No single former Soviet bloc country get into economic level of pre-Berlin wall fall. They are done. ..."
Nov 10, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

DoctorFix , 46 minutes ago link

With all due cynical respect... I find it highly ironic that some of the biggest money launderers and Mafiosi are Baltic banks. The hilarity never ends.

Moribundus , 1 hour ago link

Here is classic: GDP PPP per capita. What to pay attention.

#1, After 30 years and joining EU and NATO there is no difference in former Soviet bloc. Just looks like Russia is greatest profiteer. Now those parasites are chained to west.

#2, countries of former Soviet bloc are in better shape than countries that were in sphere of western imperialism. Especially look at countries where USA imperialism worked since 1823 Monroe's doctrine. Chart shows that in 200 years USA was not able to achieve much progress despite permanent military interventions and political influence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

Moribundus , 1 hour ago link

Latvia, a disappearing nation

https://www.politico.eu/article/latvia-a-disappearing-nation-migration-population-decline/

Moribundus , 1 hour ago link

Full scale bull ****. No single former Soviet bloc country get into economic level of pre-Berlin wall fall. They are done.

Europe's Depopulation Time Bomb Is Ticking in the Baltics

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-20/europe-s-depopulation-time-bomb-is-ticking-in-the-baltics

Cohen-cide-nce , 2 hours ago link

The balts have become them most libtarded cucks in the EU. They all need to get nuked. Bunch of atheist-feminist faggots.

Dick Buttkiss , 1 hour ago link

Due punishment, no doubt, for being on the cutting edge of technology-driven economic development and personal freedom.

From what planet/galaxy/universe does your information emanate?

Trader200K , 2 hours ago link

As much as I like the idea of taking my state to Estonia status, too many winner-take-all politicians and weak thinkers to recognize that new borders would solve lots and lots of problems.

Socialists are clearly smart, but in actuality just simple evil, immoral thieves. They will be unlikely to support any secession because they know their enemies are the source of their lucre.

Balkanization, what little there will be, will most likely come after we are drug into WWIII and we are back to a 1700's subsistence existence.

A pessimist is never disappointed, but I will happily take an optimist's surprise if people just stop and live and let live.

Flankspeed60 , 3 hours ago link

If at first you don't secede.............

Dick Buttkiss , 2 hours ago link

.............. try, try to "Unchain America" next July 4. What better way to celebrate Independence Day than with a joining of hands across the land, if not to secede, then to affirm our right to, one state at a time?

Are one in 66 Americans not prepared to do so?

Salzburg1756 , 3 hours ago link

So... Diversity is their strength? Or was I misinformed?

Dick Buttkiss , 3 hours ago link

It's 2,790 miles from New York to Los Angeles, which is 14,731,200 feet. At three feet per person, it would take around 4,910,400 people -- less than 1/66th of the US population -- to make a human chain like the three Balkan states did.

Count me in.

[Nov 09, 2018] Globalism Vs Nationalism in Trump's America by Joe Quinn

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... You know something is fundamentally wrong when the average high school drop-out MAGA-hat-wearing Texan or Alabaman working a blue collar job has more sense, can SEE much more clearly, than the average university-educated, ideology-soaked, East Coast liberal. ..."
"... Trump is a "nationalist". More or less every administration previous to his, going back at least 100 years, was "globalist". For much of its history, the USA has been known around the world as a very patriotic (i.e., nationalist) country. Americans in general had a reputation for spontaneous chants of "USA! USA! USA!", flying the Stars And Stripes outside their houses and being very proud of their country. Sure, from time to time, that pissed off people a little in other countries but, by and large, Americans' patriotism was seen as endearing, if a little naive, by most foreigners. ..."
"... Globalism, on the other hand, as it relates to the USA, is the ideology that saturates the Washington establishment think-tanks, career politicians and bureaucrats, who are infected with the toxic belief that America can and should dominate the world . This is presented to the public as so much American largess and magnanimity, but it is, in reality, a means to increasing the power and wealth of the Washington elite. ..."
"... Consider Obama's two terms, during which he continued the massively wasteful (of taxpayer's money) and destructive (of foreigners' lives and land) "War on Terror". Consider that he appointed Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, who proceeded to joyfully bomb Libya back to the stone age and murder its leader. Consider that, under Obama, US-Russia relations reached an all-time low, with repeated attacks (of various sorts) on the Russian president, government and people, and the attempted trashing of Russia's international reputation in the eyes of the American people. Consider the Obama regime's hugely destructive war waged (mostly by proxy) on the Syrian people. Consider the Obama era coup in Ukraine that, in a few short months, set that country's prospects and development back several decades and further soured relations with Russia. ..."
"... The problem however, is that the Washington elite want - no, NEED - the American people to support such military adventurism, and what better way to do that than by concocting false "Russian collusion" allegations against Trump and having the media program the popular mind with exactly the opposite of the truth - that Trump was a "traitor" to the American people. ..."
"... The only thing Trump is a traitor to is the self-serving globally expansionist interests of a cabal of Washington insiders . This little maneuver amounted to a '2 for 1' for the Washington establishment. They simultaneously demonized Trump (impeding his 'nationalist' agenda) while advancing their own globalist mission - in this case aimed at pushing back Russia. ..."
"... The US 'Deep State' did this in response to the election of Trump the "nationalist" and their fears that their globalist, exceptionalist vision for the USA - a vision that is singularly focused on their own narrow interests at the expense of the American people and many others around the world - would be derailed by Trump attempting to put the interests of the American people first . ..."
Nov 08, 2018 | www.sott.net
Billed as a 'referendum on Trump's presidency', the US Midterm Elections drew an unusually high number of Americans to the polls yesterday. The minor loss, from Trump's perspective, of majority Republican control of the lower House of Representatives, suggests, if anything, the opposite of what the media and establishment want you to believe it means.

An important clue to why the American media has declared permanent open season on this man transpired during a sometimes heated post-elections press conference at the White House yesterday. First, CNN's obnoxious Jim Acosta insisted on bringing up the patently absurd allegations of 'Russia collusion' and refused to shut up and sit down. Soon after, PBS reporter Yamiche Alcindor joined her colleagues in asking Trump another loaded question , this time on the 'white nationalism' canard:

Alcindor : On the campaign trail you called yourself a nationalist. Some people saw that as emboldening white nationalists...

Trump : I don't know why you'd say this. It's such a racist question.

Alcindor : There are some people who say that now the Republican Party is seen as supporting white nationalists because of your rhetoric. What do you make of that?

Trump : Why do I have among the highest poll numbers with African Americans? That's such a racist question. I love our country. You have nationalists, and you have globalists . I also love the world, and I don't mind helping the world, but we have to straighten out our country first. We have a lot of problems ...

The US media is still "not even wrong" on Trump and why he won the 2016 election. You know something is fundamentally wrong when the average high school drop-out MAGA-hat-wearing Texan or Alabaman working a blue collar job has more sense, can SEE much more clearly, than the average university-educated, ideology-soaked, East Coast liberal.

Trump is a "nationalist". More or less every administration previous to his, going back at least 100 years, was "globalist". For much of its history, the USA has been known around the world as a very patriotic (i.e., nationalist) country. Americans in general had a reputation for spontaneous chants of "USA! USA! USA!", flying the Stars And Stripes outside their houses and being very proud of their country. Sure, from time to time, that pissed off people a little in other countries but, by and large, Americans' patriotism was seen as endearing, if a little naive, by most foreigners.

Globalism, on the other hand, as it relates to the USA, is the ideology that saturates the Washington establishment think-tanks, career politicians and bureaucrats, who are infected with the toxic belief that America can and should dominate the world . This is presented to the public as so much American largess and magnanimity, but it is, in reality, a means to increasing the power and wealth of the Washington elite.

Consider Obama's two terms, during which he continued the massively wasteful (of taxpayer's money) and destructive (of foreigners' lives and land) "War on Terror". Consider that he appointed Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, who proceeded to joyfully bomb Libya back to the stone age and murder its leader. Consider that, under Obama, US-Russia relations reached an all-time low, with repeated attacks (of various sorts) on the Russian president, government and people, and the attempted trashing of Russia's international reputation in the eyes of the American people. Consider the Obama regime's hugely destructive war waged (mostly by proxy) on the Syrian people. Consider the Obama era coup in Ukraine that, in a few short months, set that country's prospects and development back several decades and further soured relations with Russia.

These are but a few examples of the "globalism" that drives the Washington establishment. Who, in their right mind, would support it? (I won't get into what constitutes a 'right mind', but we can all agree it does not involve destroying other nations for profit). The problem however, is that the Washington elite want - no, NEED - the American people to support such military adventurism, and what better way to do that than by concocting false "Russian collusion" allegations against Trump and having the media program the popular mind with exactly the opposite of the truth - that Trump was a "traitor" to the American people.

The only thing Trump is a traitor to is the self-serving globally expansionist interests of a cabal of Washington insiders . This little maneuver amounted to a '2 for 1' for the Washington establishment. They simultaneously demonized Trump (impeding his 'nationalist' agenda) while advancing their own globalist mission - in this case aimed at pushing back Russia.

Words and their exact meanings matter . To be able to see through the lies of powerful vested interests and get to the truth, we need to know when those same powerful vested interests are exploiting our all-too-human proclivity to be coerced and manipulated by appeals to emotion.

So the words "nationalist" and "nationalism", as they relate to the USA, have never been "dirty" words until they were made that way by the "globalist" element of the Washington establishment (i.e., most of it) by associating it with fringe Nazi and "white supremacist" elements in US society that pose no risk to anyone, (except to the extent that the mainstream media can convince the general population otherwise). The US 'Deep State' did this in response to the election of Trump the "nationalist" and their fears that their globalist, exceptionalist vision for the USA - a vision that is singularly focused on their own narrow interests at the expense of the American people and many others around the world - would be derailed by Trump attempting to put the interests of the American people first .

[Nov 09, 2018] Globalism Vs Nationalism in Trump's America by Joe Quinn

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... You know something is fundamentally wrong when the average high school drop-out MAGA-hat-wearing Texan or Alabaman working a blue collar job has more sense, can SEE much more clearly, than the average university-educated, ideology-soaked, East Coast liberal. ..."
"... Trump is a "nationalist". More or less every administration previous to his, going back at least 100 years, was "globalist". For much of its history, the USA has been known around the world as a very patriotic (i.e., nationalist) country. Americans in general had a reputation for spontaneous chants of "USA! USA! USA!", flying the Stars And Stripes outside their houses and being very proud of their country. Sure, from time to time, that pissed off people a little in other countries but, by and large, Americans' patriotism was seen as endearing, if a little naive, by most foreigners. ..."
"... Globalism, on the other hand, as it relates to the USA, is the ideology that saturates the Washington establishment think-tanks, career politicians and bureaucrats, who are infected with the toxic belief that America can and should dominate the world . This is presented to the public as so much American largess and magnanimity, but it is, in reality, a means to increasing the power and wealth of the Washington elite. ..."
"... Consider Obama's two terms, during which he continued the massively wasteful (of taxpayer's money) and destructive (of foreigners' lives and land) "War on Terror". Consider that he appointed Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, who proceeded to joyfully bomb Libya back to the stone age and murder its leader. Consider that, under Obama, US-Russia relations reached an all-time low, with repeated attacks (of various sorts) on the Russian president, government and people, and the attempted trashing of Russia's international reputation in the eyes of the American people. Consider the Obama regime's hugely destructive war waged (mostly by proxy) on the Syrian people. Consider the Obama era coup in Ukraine that, in a few short months, set that country's prospects and development back several decades and further soured relations with Russia. ..."
"... The problem however, is that the Washington elite want - no, NEED - the American people to support such military adventurism, and what better way to do that than by concocting false "Russian collusion" allegations against Trump and having the media program the popular mind with exactly the opposite of the truth - that Trump was a "traitor" to the American people. ..."
"... The only thing Trump is a traitor to is the self-serving globally expansionist interests of a cabal of Washington insiders . This little maneuver amounted to a '2 for 1' for the Washington establishment. They simultaneously demonized Trump (impeding his 'nationalist' agenda) while advancing their own globalist mission - in this case aimed at pushing back Russia. ..."
"... The US 'Deep State' did this in response to the election of Trump the "nationalist" and their fears that their globalist, exceptionalist vision for the USA - a vision that is singularly focused on their own narrow interests at the expense of the American people and many others around the world - would be derailed by Trump attempting to put the interests of the American people first . ..."
Nov 08, 2018 | www.sott.net
Billed as a 'referendum on Trump's presidency', the US Midterm Elections drew an unusually high number of Americans to the polls yesterday. The minor loss, from Trump's perspective, of majority Republican control of the lower House of Representatives, suggests, if anything, the opposite of what the media and establishment want you to believe it means.

An important clue to why the American media has declared permanent open season on this man transpired during a sometimes heated post-elections press conference at the White House yesterday. First, CNN's obnoxious Jim Acosta insisted on bringing up the patently absurd allegations of 'Russia collusion' and refused to shut up and sit down. Soon after, PBS reporter Yamiche Alcindor joined her colleagues in asking Trump another loaded question , this time on the 'white nationalism' canard:

Alcindor : On the campaign trail you called yourself a nationalist. Some people saw that as emboldening white nationalists...

Trump : I don't know why you'd say this. It's such a racist question.

Alcindor : There are some people who say that now the Republican Party is seen as supporting white nationalists because of your rhetoric. What do you make of that?

Trump : Why do I have among the highest poll numbers with African Americans? That's such a racist question. I love our country. You have nationalists, and you have globalists . I also love the world, and I don't mind helping the world, but we have to straighten out our country first. We have a lot of problems ...

The US media is still "not even wrong" on Trump and why he won the 2016 election. You know something is fundamentally wrong when the average high school drop-out MAGA-hat-wearing Texan or Alabaman working a blue collar job has more sense, can SEE much more clearly, than the average university-educated, ideology-soaked, East Coast liberal.

Trump is a "nationalist". More or less every administration previous to his, going back at least 100 years, was "globalist". For much of its history, the USA has been known around the world as a very patriotic (i.e., nationalist) country. Americans in general had a reputation for spontaneous chants of "USA! USA! USA!", flying the Stars And Stripes outside their houses and being very proud of their country. Sure, from time to time, that pissed off people a little in other countries but, by and large, Americans' patriotism was seen as endearing, if a little naive, by most foreigners.

Globalism, on the other hand, as it relates to the USA, is the ideology that saturates the Washington establishment think-tanks, career politicians and bureaucrats, who are infected with the toxic belief that America can and should dominate the world . This is presented to the public as so much American largess and magnanimity, but it is, in reality, a means to increasing the power and wealth of the Washington elite.

Consider Obama's two terms, during which he continued the massively wasteful (of taxpayer's money) and destructive (of foreigners' lives and land) "War on Terror". Consider that he appointed Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, who proceeded to joyfully bomb Libya back to the stone age and murder its leader. Consider that, under Obama, US-Russia relations reached an all-time low, with repeated attacks (of various sorts) on the Russian president, government and people, and the attempted trashing of Russia's international reputation in the eyes of the American people. Consider the Obama regime's hugely destructive war waged (mostly by proxy) on the Syrian people. Consider the Obama era coup in Ukraine that, in a few short months, set that country's prospects and development back several decades and further soured relations with Russia.

These are but a few examples of the "globalism" that drives the Washington establishment. Who, in their right mind, would support it? (I won't get into what constitutes a 'right mind', but we can all agree it does not involve destroying other nations for profit). The problem however, is that the Washington elite want - no, NEED - the American people to support such military adventurism, and what better way to do that than by concocting false "Russian collusion" allegations against Trump and having the media program the popular mind with exactly the opposite of the truth - that Trump was a "traitor" to the American people.

The only thing Trump is a traitor to is the self-serving globally expansionist interests of a cabal of Washington insiders . This little maneuver amounted to a '2 for 1' for the Washington establishment. They simultaneously demonized Trump (impeding his 'nationalist' agenda) while advancing their own globalist mission - in this case aimed at pushing back Russia.

Words and their exact meanings matter . To be able to see through the lies of powerful vested interests and get to the truth, we need to know when those same powerful vested interests are exploiting our all-too-human proclivity to be coerced and manipulated by appeals to emotion.

So the words "nationalist" and "nationalism", as they relate to the USA, have never been "dirty" words until they were made that way by the "globalist" element of the Washington establishment (i.e., most of it) by associating it with fringe Nazi and "white supremacist" elements in US society that pose no risk to anyone, (except to the extent that the mainstream media can convince the general population otherwise). The US 'Deep State' did this in response to the election of Trump the "nationalist" and their fears that their globalist, exceptionalist vision for the USA - a vision that is singularly focused on their own narrow interests at the expense of the American people and many others around the world - would be derailed by Trump attempting to put the interests of the American people first .

[Nov 09, 2018] Russia will see oil only is euro by Yoel Minkof

Nov 09, 2018 | seekingalpha.com

Seeking protection against possible new U.S. sanctions, Russian energy majors are heaping pressure on Western oil buyers to use euros instead of dollars for payments, as well as penalty clauses in contracts.

Russia supplies over 10% of global oil, so severe sanctions could affect crude prices.

Global oil majors further rely on Russia to feed their refineries, especially in Europe and Asia, so they cannot just walk away from annual contract negotiations.

[Nov 08, 2018] And who do you suppose are the forces which are funding US politicians and thus getting to call their shots in foreign policy?

Nov 08, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

CTacitus , 15 minutes ago link

LetThemEatRand:

America is weak precisely because it is trying so hard to project strength, because anyone with half a brain knows that it is projecting strength to enrich oligarhcs [sic], not to protect or favor the American people.

And who do you suppose are the forces which are funding US politicians and thus getting to call their shots in foreign policy? Can you bring yourself to name them? Oligarchs...you're FULL of ****. Who exactly pools all (((their))) money, makes sure the [s]elected officials know (((who))) to not question and, instead, just bow down to them, who makes sure these (((officials))) sign pledges for absolute commitment towards Israel--or in no uncertain terms-- and know who will either sponsor them/or opposes them next time around?

... ... ...

[Nov 08, 2018] And who do you suppose are the forces which are funding US politicians and thus getting to call their shots in foreign policy?

Nov 08, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

CTacitus , 15 minutes ago link

LetThemEatRand:

America is weak precisely because it is trying so hard to project strength, because anyone with half a brain knows that it is projecting strength to enrich oligarhcs [sic], not to protect or favor the American people.

And who do you suppose are the forces which are funding US politicians and thus getting to call their shots in foreign policy? Can you bring yourself to name them? Oligarchs...you're FULL of ****. Who exactly pools all (((their))) money, makes sure the [s]elected officials know (((who))) to not question and, instead, just bow down to them, who makes sure these (((officials))) sign pledges for absolute commitment towards Israel--or in no uncertain terms-- and know who will either sponsor them/or opposes them next time around?

... ... ...

[Nov 07, 2018] China ruled by Chinese...Russia ruled Russians...US ruled by dual citizens. See the difference

Nov 07, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Fu Ying, the chairwoman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of China's National People's Congress, said while confirming the reality that China and Russia now find themselves in the same trenches: "I just hope that if some people in the U.S. insist on dragging us down the hill into Thucydides' trap, China will be smart enough not to follow."

Indeed to step back and review the breadth of Russia-China cooperation over the past couple years alone reveals the full potential "cost" of a US-China conflict , given the ways Russia could easily be pulled in. Fu Ying articulated the increasingly common view from Beijing, that "There is no sense of threat from Russia" and that "We feel comfortable back-to-back."

And participants in a recent study by the National Bureau of Asian Research , a Seattle-based think tank, actually agree. They were asked whether American policy was at fault for pushing China and Russia into closer cooperation, and alarmingly, as Bloomberg notes: "Some among the 100-plus participants called for Washington to prepare for the worst-case scenario the realignment implies: a two-front war ."

Here's but a partial list of the way Sino-Russian relations have been transformed in recent years:

waseda-anon , 27 minutes ago link

There were moments when Putin showed support and a practical approach toward Trump (like when he schooled Fareed Zakaria). Putin even expressed that he was welcoming and respectful of Trumps proposition to restore full-fledged relations with Russia.

I blame the democrats for pointlessly antagonizing Russia for two years just to attempt to cover up the stench of their own excrement. Now it will be even more difficult to address the problem of the Chi-coms.

KTX , 37 minutes ago link

US has nothing to offer Russia as China has. Stop dreaming to befriend Russia to fight China. US had the opportunity to lead the world after the collapse of USSR but flunk it big time being the biggest bully in the history.

hoist the bs flag , 41 minutes ago link

Bilateral trading of Russian and Chinese currency continues on. As do their trade agreements, military gear and friendship.

Thank you Mr. Trump, for helping along that SDR/NWO currency inception for these countries, starting a trade war while the dollar and T Bills drop.

outstanding. Here I thought a stupid ******* Democrat would be at the helm, imploding the United States. shocking...a billionaire con man is.

steverino999 , 8 minutes ago link

Forrest Trump - "My Herpes and Genital Warts are responsible for Melania sleeping in another room, not my small uncircumcised **** and uncontrollable flatulence. Just wanted to clarify." Hum, ahhhhhhh gee thanks for info...I think. Poor Forrest...sigh

me or you , 9 minutes ago link

China ruled by Chinese...Russia ruled Russians...US ruled by traitors and dual citizens. See the difference.

Buck Shot , 1 minute ago link

You are absolutely right. Add in that they are greedy motherfuckers and pied pipers to millions of blithering idiots that can't go one day without making things worse.

g3h , 12 minutes ago link

We are in a trap set by ourselves. The neocon and the liberals want wars with both. On those front they are unuted.

That's what we get.

Captain Nemo de Erehwon , 14 minutes ago link

Go ahead. Merge to form Ruina, with leaders PuXi and XiPu.

InnVestuhrr , 14 minutes ago link

China and Russia make an almost perfect symbiosis:

  1. Adjacent countries, transportation costs are as low as possible
  2. Neither regime cares as much as a gnat tear about civil rights & freedoms and neither is impeded by the vagaries of elections
  3. China has a huge need for natural resources, especially oil & nat gas, but has few resources beyond coal & not-so-rare earths, while Russia has natural resources in abundance
  4. Russia manufactures almost nothing for the international goods market while China is the world's factory
  5. USA regime lords have done an excellent job of alienating and uniting both of them
Karmageddon , 17 minutes ago link

While the US tears itself apart....

The_Juggernaut , 20 minutes ago link

Wow. Putin is even shorter than Xi? No wonder he feels compelled to post the shirtless tiger-wresting pics. He's about as shrimpy as Stalin was.

waseda-anon , 27 minutes ago link

There were moments when Putin showed support and a practical approach toward Trump (like when he schooled Fareed Zakaria). Putin even expressed that he was welcoming and respectful of Trumps proposition to restore full-fledged relations with Russia.

I blame the democrats for pointlessly antagonizing Russia for two years just to attempt to cover up the stench of their own excrement. Now it will be even more difficult to address the problem of the Chi-coms.

KTX , 37 minutes ago link

US has nothing to offer Russia as China has. Stop dreaming to befriend Russia to fight China. US had the opportunity to lead the world after the collapse of USSR but flunk it big time being the biggest bully in the history.

The_Juggernaut , 18 minutes ago link

Russia and China will come to blows soon enough. China has their eyes on all of that unpopulated land in Siberia, and they won't like it too much when Russia takes advantage of the fact that China is dependent on them for energy. The idea that they'll be best buddies is laughable.

hoist the bs flag , 41 minutes ago link

Bilateral trading of Russian and Chinese currency continues on. As do their trade agreements, military gear and friendship.

Thank you Mr. Trump, for helping along that SDR/NWO currency inception for these countries, starting a trade war while the dollar and T Bills drop.

outstanding. Here I thought a stupid ******* Democrat would be at the helm, imploding the United States. shocking...a billionaire con man is.

LetThemEatRand , 57 minutes ago link

Trump's balls are so big that he ran like a bitch away from his campaign promises to normalize relations with Russia and prevent this exact scenario. Or maybe he was just lying.

Nevermind, the ZH herd is stampeding on how great Trump is for pulling some press privileges of a CNN guy.

Sinophile , 52 minutes ago link

I don't think Trump was lying. I think he is doing his best to stay alive and get done what he can. This country is more fucked up than even he realized.

LetThemEatRand , 49 minutes ago link

He's so smart he realized that almost immediately and brought in a bunch of Goldman Sachs guys to be in his cabinet.

Trump should have said "I could hire a bunch of Goldman Sachs guys, and my idiot anti-banker supporters will still shill for me."

Alternative , 42 minutes ago link

Nobody gives a **** about normalizing relations with Russia.

Sad but true. You know that.

steverino999 , 8 minutes ago link

Forrest Trump - "My Herpes and Genital Warts are responsible for Melania sleeping in another room, not my small uncircumcised **** and uncontrollable flatulence. Just wanted to clarify." Hum, ahhhhhhh gee thanks for info...I think. Poor Forrest...sigh

me or you , 9 minutes ago link

China ruled by Chinese...Russia ruled Russians...US ruled by traitors and dual citizens. See the difference.

Buck Shot , 1 minute ago link

You are absolutely right. Add in that they are greedy motherfuckers and pied pipers to millions of blithering idiots that can't go one day without making things worse.

g3h , 12 minutes ago link

We are in a trap set by ourselves. The neocon and the liberals want wars with both. On those front they are unuted.

That's what we get.

Captain Nemo de Erehwon , 14 minutes ago link

Go ahead. Merge to form Ruina, with leaders PuXi and XiPu.

InnVestuhrr , 14 minutes ago link

China and Russia make an almost perfect symbiosis:

  1. Adjacent countries, transportation costs are as low as possible
  2. Neither regime cares as much as a gnat tear about civil rights & freedoms and neither is impeded by the vagaries of elections
  3. China has a huge need for natural resources, especially oil & nat gas, but has few resources beyond coal & not-so-rare earths, while Russia has natural resources in abundance
  4. Russia manufactures almost nothing for the international goods market while China is the world's factory
  5. USA regime lords have done an excellent job of alienating and uniting both of them
Karmageddon , 17 minutes ago link

While the US tears itself apart....

The_Juggernaut , 20 minutes ago link

Wow. Putin is even shorter than Xi? No wonder he feels compelled to post the shirtless tiger-wresting pics. He's about as shrimpy as Stalin was.

waseda-anon , 27 minutes ago link

There were moments when Putin showed support and a practical approach toward Trump (like when he schooled Fareed Zakaria). Putin even expressed that he was welcoming and respectful of Trumps proposition to restore full-fledged relations with Russia.

I blame the democrats for pointlessly antagonizing Russia for two years just to attempt to cover up the stench of their own excrement. Now it will be even more difficult to address the problem of the Chi-coms.

KTX , 37 minutes ago link

US has nothing to offer Russia as China has. Stop dreaming to befriend Russia to fight China. US had the opportunity to lead the world after the collapse of USSR but flunk it big time being the biggest bully in the history.

The_Juggernaut , 18 minutes ago link

Russia and China will come to blows soon enough. China has their eyes on all of that unpopulated land in Siberia, and they won't like it too much when Russia takes advantage of the fact that China is dependent on them for energy. The idea that they'll be best buddies is laughable.

hoist the bs flag , 41 minutes ago link

Bilateral trading of Russian and Chinese currency continues on. As do their trade agreements, military gear and friendship.

Thank you Mr. Trump, for helping along that SDR/NWO currency inception for these countries, starting a trade war while the dollar and T Bills drop.

outstanding. Here I thought a stupid ******* Democrat would be at the helm, imploding the United States. shocking...a billionaire con man is.

LetThemEatRand , 57 minutes ago link

Trump's balls are so big that he ran like a bitch away from his campaign promises to normalize relations with Russia and prevent this exact scenario. Or maybe he was just lying.

Nevermind, the ZH herd is stampeding on how great Trump is for pulling some press privileges of a CNN guy.

Sinophile , 52 minutes ago link

I don't think Trump was lying. I think he is doing his best to stay alive and get done what he can. This country is more fucked up than even he realized.

LetThemEatRand , 49 minutes ago link

He's so smart he realized that almost immediately and brought in a bunch of Goldman Sachs guys to be in his cabinet.

Trump should have said "I could hire a bunch of Goldman Sachs guys, and my idiot anti-banker supporters will still shill for me."

Alternative , 42 minutes ago link

Nobody gives a **** about normalizing relations with Russia.

Sad but true. You know that.

[Nov 07, 2018] US Declares War On Troika Of Tyranny, Pushing Them Closer To Russia

Nov 07, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

US Declares War On "Troika Of Tyranny", Pushing Them Closer To Russia

by Tyler Durden Wed, 11/07/2018 - 22:45 2 SHARES Authored by Alex Gorka via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

The US is going to extend its "combat operations" - the sanctions war aimed at reshaping the world - to Latin America.

Tough new penalties are planned against the "troika of tyranny," consisting of Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua "in the very near future." This announcement was made by National Security Adviser (NSA) John Bolton on Nov.1 -- a few days before the US mid-term elections -- in an attempt to draw more support from Hispanic voters, especially in Florida. An executive order on sanctions against Venezuela has already been signed by President Trump, but that's just the beginning.

It was rather symbolic that on the same day the NSA delivered his bellicose speech, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) voted overwhelmingly in support of a resolution calling for an end to the US economic embargo against Cuba. The document did not include amendments proposed by the US that would put pressure on Havana to improve its human-rights record.

This is a prelude to a massive escalation in US foreign policy, which will include the formation of alliances, in addition to the active confrontation of those who dare to pursue policies believed to be anti-US.

"Under this administration, we will no longer appease dictators and despots near our shores," Bolton stated, adding,

"The troika of tyranny in this hemisphere -- Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua - has finally met its match."

Sounds like a declaration of war. Brazil, Colombia, Argentina, Chile, and Peru are probably some of the nations the US is eyeing for a potential alliance.

Bolton's "troika" includes only countries ruled by governments that are openly "red" or Communist. The list of nations unfriendly to the US is much longer and includes Bolivia, Ecuador, Dominica, Grenada, Uruguay, and some other states ruled by leftist governments. Andrés Obrador , the president-elect of Mexico, takes office on Dec. 1. The Mexican leader represents the country's left wing and looks like a tough nut to crack. Outright pressure may not be helpful in this particular case.

Now that this new US policy is in place, Moscow and Washington appear to have another divisive issue clouding their relationship. The "troika of tyranny" against which Washington has declared war enjoys friendly relations with Russia.

With Cuba facing tougher restrictions, new opportunities are opening up that will encourage the Russian-Cuban relationship to thrive. The chairman of the Cuban State Council and Council of Ministers, Miguel Diaz-Canel Bermudez, held talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin during his official visit to Moscow Nov. 1-3. Their joint statement reaffirmed the strategic and allied relations between the two counties. Their long list of joint projects includes the deployment of a Russian GLONASS ground station in Cuba, which will give it access to a broad array of technical capabilities for satellite and telecommunications services and for taking remote readings of Earth. Russia will modernize Cuba's railways. Sixty contracts are scheduled to be signed during President Putin's visit to Cuba next year. Rosneft, the Russian state oil giant, has recently resumed fuel shipments to Cuba and is negotiating a major energy agreement.

Military cooperation is also to get a boost. The military chiefs are to meet this month to discuss the details. Moscow is considering granting Havana €38 million for Russian arms purchases.

The US-imposed restrictions are a factor spurring Russian exports to Cuba and other regional countries. When the US cut aid to Nicaragua in 2012, Russia increased its economic and military cooperation with that country. The memorandum signed between the Russian and Nicaraguan governments on May 8, 2018 states that the parties are to "mark a new step to boost political dialog" in such areas as "international security and cooperation through various international political platforms." Russia accounts for about 90% of Nicaraguan arms and munitions imports. It has far-reaching interests in building the Nicaraguan Canal in its role as a stakeholder and partner responsible for security-related missions.

President Vladimir Putin offered support for his Venezuelan counterpart Nicolas Maduro after the United States rejected his reelection in May. Russian energy giant Rosneft plays an important role in that country's energy sector. It was Russia that came to Venezuela's rescue in 2017 with a debt-restructuring deal that prevented the default that was looming after the US sanctions were imposed. This was just another example of Moscow lending a helping hand to a Latin American nation that was facing difficult times.

Russia is currently pursuing a number of commercial projects in the region, in oil, mining, nuclear energy, construction, and space services. It enjoys a special relationship with the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA), which was founded by Cuba and Venezuela and includes Bolivia, Ecuador, and Nicaragua, among other countries. This grouping is looking to create economic alternatives to Western-dominated financial institutions. This cooperation with Latin American nations goes far beyond ALBA. For instance, the Peruvian air force is in the process of contracting for 24 additional Mi-171s, as well as establishing a maintenance facility for their helicopters near the La Joya base in Arequipa. A contract to upgrade its aging Mig-29 fighters is under consideration. In January 2018, Russia signed a number of economic agreements with Argentina during President Macri's visit to Moscow. All in all, trade between Russia and Latin American countries reached $14.5 bln in 2017 and is growing.

RT Spanish was launched in 2009, featuring its own news presenters and programming in addition to translated content, with bureaus operating in Buenos Aires, Caracas , Havana , Los Angeles , Madrid , Managua , and Miami. Russia's Sputnik media outlet has been broadcasting in Spanish since 2014, offering radio- and web-based news and entertainment to audiences across Latin America.

Some countries may back down under the US sanctions and threats, but many will not. There's a flip side to everything. The policy could backfire. The harder the pressure, the stronger the desire of the affected nations to diversify their international relations and resist the implementation of the Monroe doctrine that relegates them to the role of America's backyard.

[Nov 07, 2018] China ruled by Chinese...Russia ruled Russians...US ruled by dual citizens. See the difference

Nov 07, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Fu Ying, the chairwoman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of China's National People's Congress, said while confirming the reality that China and Russia now find themselves in the same trenches: "I just hope that if some people in the U.S. insist on dragging us down the hill into Thucydides' trap, China will be smart enough not to follow."

Indeed to step back and review the breadth of Russia-China cooperation over the past couple years alone reveals the full potential "cost" of a US-China conflict , given the ways Russia could easily be pulled in. Fu Ying articulated the increasingly common view from Beijing, that "There is no sense of threat from Russia" and that "We feel comfortable back-to-back."

And participants in a recent study by the National Bureau of Asian Research , a Seattle-based think tank, actually agree. They were asked whether American policy was at fault for pushing China and Russia into closer cooperation, and alarmingly, as Bloomberg notes: "Some among the 100-plus participants called for Washington to prepare for the worst-case scenario the realignment implies: a two-front war ."

Here's but a partial list of the way Sino-Russian relations have been transformed in recent years:

waseda-anon , 27 minutes ago link

There were moments when Putin showed support and a practical approach toward Trump (like when he schooled Fareed Zakaria). Putin even expressed that he was welcoming and respectful of Trumps proposition to restore full-fledged relations with Russia.

I blame the democrats for pointlessly antagonizing Russia for two years just to attempt to cover up the stench of their own excrement. Now it will be even more difficult to address the problem of the Chi-coms.

KTX , 37 minutes ago link

US has nothing to offer Russia as China has. Stop dreaming to befriend Russia to fight China. US had the opportunity to lead the world after the collapse of USSR but flunk it big time being the biggest bully in the history.

hoist the bs flag , 41 minutes ago link

Bilateral trading of Russian and Chinese currency continues on. As do their trade agreements, military gear and friendship.

Thank you Mr. Trump, for helping along that SDR/NWO currency inception for these countries, starting a trade war while the dollar and T Bills drop.

outstanding. Here I thought a stupid ******* Democrat would be at the helm, imploding the United States. shocking...a billionaire con man is.

steverino999 , 8 minutes ago link

Forrest Trump - "My Herpes and Genital Warts are responsible for Melania sleeping in another room, not my small uncircumcised **** and uncontrollable flatulence. Just wanted to clarify." Hum, ahhhhhhh gee thanks for info...I think. Poor Forrest...sigh

me or you , 9 minutes ago link

China ruled by Chinese...Russia ruled Russians...US ruled by traitors and dual citizens. See the difference.

Buck Shot , 1 minute ago link

You are absolutely right. Add in that they are greedy motherfuckers and pied pipers to millions of blithering idiots that can't go one day without making things worse.

g3h , 12 minutes ago link

We are in a trap set by ourselves. The neocon and the liberals want wars with both. On those front they are unuted.

That's what we get.

Captain Nemo de Erehwon , 14 minutes ago link

Go ahead. Merge to form Ruina, with leaders PuXi and XiPu.

InnVestuhrr , 14 minutes ago link

China and Russia make an almost perfect symbiosis:

  1. Adjacent countries, transportation costs are as low as possible
  2. Neither regime cares as much as a gnat tear about civil rights & freedoms and neither is impeded by the vagaries of elections
  3. China has a huge need for natural resources, especially oil & nat gas, but has few resources beyond coal & not-so-rare earths, while Russia has natural resources in abundance
  4. Russia manufactures almost nothing for the international goods market while China is the world's factory
  5. USA regime lords have done an excellent job of alienating and uniting both of them
Karmageddon , 17 minutes ago link

While the US tears itself apart....

The_Juggernaut , 20 minutes ago link

Wow. Putin is even shorter than Xi? No wonder he feels compelled to post the shirtless tiger-wresting pics. He's about as shrimpy as Stalin was.

waseda-anon , 27 minutes ago link

There were moments when Putin showed support and a practical approach toward Trump (like when he schooled Fareed Zakaria). Putin even expressed that he was welcoming and respectful of Trumps proposition to restore full-fledged relations with Russia.

I blame the democrats for pointlessly antagonizing Russia for two years just to attempt to cover up the stench of their own excrement. Now it will be even more difficult to address the problem of the Chi-coms.

KTX , 37 minutes ago link

US has nothing to offer Russia as China has. Stop dreaming to befriend Russia to fight China. US had the opportunity to lead the world after the collapse of USSR but flunk it big time being the biggest bully in the history.

The_Juggernaut , 18 minutes ago link

Russia and China will come to blows soon enough. China has their eyes on all of that unpopulated land in Siberia, and they won't like it too much when Russia takes advantage of the fact that China is dependent on them for energy. The idea that they'll be best buddies is laughable.

hoist the bs flag , 41 minutes ago link

Bilateral trading of Russian and Chinese currency continues on. As do their trade agreements, military gear and friendship.

Thank you Mr. Trump, for helping along that SDR/NWO currency inception for these countries, starting a trade war while the dollar and T Bills drop.

outstanding. Here I thought a stupid ******* Democrat would be at the helm, imploding the United States. shocking...a billionaire con man is.

LetThemEatRand , 57 minutes ago link

Trump's balls are so big that he ran like a bitch away from his campaign promises to normalize relations with Russia and prevent this exact scenario. Or maybe he was just lying.

Nevermind, the ZH herd is stampeding on how great Trump is for pulling some press privileges of a CNN guy.

Sinophile , 52 minutes ago link

I don't think Trump was lying. I think he is doing his best to stay alive and get done what he can. This country is more fucked up than even he realized.

LetThemEatRand , 49 minutes ago link

He's so smart he realized that almost immediately and brought in a bunch of Goldman Sachs guys to be in his cabinet.

Trump should have said "I could hire a bunch of Goldman Sachs guys, and my idiot anti-banker supporters will still shill for me."

Alternative , 42 minutes ago link

Nobody gives a **** about normalizing relations with Russia.

Sad but true. You know that.

steverino999 , 8 minutes ago link

Forrest Trump - "My Herpes and Genital Warts are responsible for Melania sleeping in another room, not my small uncircumcised **** and uncontrollable flatulence. Just wanted to clarify." Hum, ahhhhhhh gee thanks for info...I think. Poor Forrest...sigh

me or you , 9 minutes ago link

China ruled by Chinese...Russia ruled Russians...US ruled by traitors and dual citizens. See the difference.

Buck Shot , 1 minute ago link

You are absolutely right. Add in that they are greedy motherfuckers and pied pipers to millions of blithering idiots that can't go one day without making things worse.

g3h , 12 minutes ago link

We are in a trap set by ourselves. The neocon and the liberals want wars with both. On those front they are unuted.

That's what we get.

Captain Nemo de Erehwon , 14 minutes ago link

Go ahead. Merge to form Ruina, with leaders PuXi and XiPu.

InnVestuhrr , 14 minutes ago link

China and Russia make an almost perfect symbiosis:

  1. Adjacent countries, transportation costs are as low as possible
  2. Neither regime cares as much as a gnat tear about civil rights & freedoms and neither is impeded by the vagaries of elections
  3. China has a huge need for natural resources, especially oil & nat gas, but has few resources beyond coal & not-so-rare earths, while Russia has natural resources in abundance
  4. Russia manufactures almost nothing for the international goods market while China is the world's factory
  5. USA regime lords have done an excellent job of alienating and uniting both of them
Karmageddon , 17 minutes ago link

While the US tears itself apart....

The_Juggernaut , 20 minutes ago link

Wow. Putin is even shorter than Xi? No wonder he feels compelled to post the shirtless tiger-wresting pics. He's about as shrimpy as Stalin was.

waseda-anon , 27 minutes ago link

There were moments when Putin showed support and a practical approach toward Trump (like when he schooled Fareed Zakaria). Putin even expressed that he was welcoming and respectful of Trumps proposition to restore full-fledged relations with Russia.

I blame the democrats for pointlessly antagonizing Russia for two years just to attempt to cover up the stench of their own excrement. Now it will be even more difficult to address the problem of the Chi-coms.

KTX , 37 minutes ago link

US has nothing to offer Russia as China has. Stop dreaming to befriend Russia to fight China. US had the opportunity to lead the world after the collapse of USSR but flunk it big time being the biggest bully in the history.

The_Juggernaut , 18 minutes ago link

Russia and China will come to blows soon enough. China has their eyes on all of that unpopulated land in Siberia, and they won't like it too much when Russia takes advantage of the fact that China is dependent on them for energy. The idea that they'll be best buddies is laughable.

hoist the bs flag , 41 minutes ago link

Bilateral trading of Russian and Chinese currency continues on. As do their trade agreements, military gear and friendship.

Thank you Mr. Trump, for helping along that SDR/NWO currency inception for these countries, starting a trade war while the dollar and T Bills drop.

outstanding. Here I thought a stupid ******* Democrat would be at the helm, imploding the United States. shocking...a billionaire con man is.

LetThemEatRand , 57 minutes ago link

Trump's balls are so big that he ran like a bitch away from his campaign promises to normalize relations with Russia and prevent this exact scenario. Or maybe he was just lying.

Nevermind, the ZH herd is stampeding on how great Trump is for pulling some press privileges of a CNN guy.

Sinophile , 52 minutes ago link

I don't think Trump was lying. I think he is doing his best to stay alive and get done what he can. This country is more fucked up than even he realized.

LetThemEatRand , 49 minutes ago link

He's so smart he realized that almost immediately and brought in a bunch of Goldman Sachs guys to be in his cabinet.

Trump should have said "I could hire a bunch of Goldman Sachs guys, and my idiot anti-banker supporters will still shill for me."

Alternative , 42 minutes ago link

Nobody gives a **** about normalizing relations with Russia.

Sad but true. You know that.

[Nov 06, 2018] US-British Threats Against Russia Have a Long History by T.J. Coles – Matthew Alford

Notable quotes:
"... Union Jackboot: What Your Media and Professors Don't Tell You About British Foreign Policy ..."
"... There seems to be a consensus that we need a strong military because Russia is on the rise. What do you think about that rationale? ..."
"... What about military threats? ..."
"... So we've extended NATO to pretty much the Russian border? But there's a hard border there. Everyone knows we're never going to attack Russia, both for reasons of morality and self-preservation. So maybe this situation is safer than you imply. ..."
"... Brexit White Paper ..."
"... T. J. Coles is a postdoctoral researcher at Plymouth University's Cognition Institute and the author of several books. ..."
"... Matthew Alford teaches at Bath University in the UK and has also written several books. Their latest is ..."
"... The Rise and Fall of the British Empire ..."
"... Bolshevism and Imperial Sedition ..."
"... Power without Responsibility ..."
"... Russian Roulette: A Deadly Game: How British Spies Thwarted Lenin's Global Plot ..."
"... Statement for the Record: Worldwide Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community ..."
"... Vision for 2020 ..."
"... Russian Nuclear Weapons: Past, Present, and Future ..."
"... The New Atlanticist ..."
"... The United Kingdom's relations with Russia ..."
Nov 06, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

In their new book Union Jackboot: What Your Media and Professors Don't Tell You About British Foreign Policy (Até Books), doctors T.J. Coles and Matthew Alford debate the rationale of Anglo-American policy towards Russia.

Alford: There seems to be a consensus that we need a strong military because Russia is on the rise. What do you think about that rationale?

Coles: There's no consensus, except among European and American elites. Europe and America are not the world.

There are a lot of issues to consider with regards to Russia. Is it a threat? If so to whom? What kind of threat is Russia? So let's consider these questions carefully. As far as the British establishment is concerned, Russia is an ideological threat because it is a major power with a substantial population. It's also self-reliant where oil and gas is concerned, unlike Britain. So there's lots of potential for Russian political ideology to undermine Britain's status. In fact, there are European Council on Foreign Relations papers saying that Putin's Russia presents an "ideological alternative" to the EU. [i] And that's dangerous.

Britain, or more accurately its policymaking elites, have considered Russia a significant enemy for over a century. Under the Tsar, the so-called Great Game was a battle for strategic resources, trading routes, and so on. The historian Lawrence James calls this period the first Cold War, which went "hot" with the Crimean War (1853-56). [ii] Britain had a mixed relationship with the Tsars because, on the one hand, theirs' were repressive regimes and Britain tended to favour repressive regimes, hence their brief alliance with Russia's enemy, the Ottomans. On the other hand, Russia was a strategic threat to Britain's imperial interests, and thus the Crimean War (1853-56).

When the Bolsheviks took over Russia, beginning 1917, the relationship became much less ambiguous – Russians, and especially Bolsheviks, were clearly the enemy. Their ideology posed a threat internally. So Winston Churchill, who began as a Liberal and became a Conservative, considered the Labour Party, which was formed in 1900, as basically a front for Bolsheviks. [iii] That shows the level of paranoia among elites. The Labour Party, at least at the beginning, was a genuine, working man's political organisation – women couldn't vote then, remember. So by associating this progressive, grassroots party representing the working classes as an ideological ally or even puppet of the brutal Bolshevik regime, the Tories had an excuse to undermine the power of organised, working people. So you had the Zinoviev letter in 1924, which we now know was a literal conspiracy between the secret services and elements of the Tory party to fabricate a link between Labour and Moscow. And it famously cost Labour the general election, since the right-wing, privately-owned media ran with the story as though it was real. It's an early example of fake news. [iv]

That's the ideological threat that Russia has posed, historically. But where there's a threat, there's an opportunity. The British elites exploited the "threat" then and as they do today by associating organised labour with evil Bolshevism and, in doing so, alienate the lower classes from their own political interests. Suddenly, we've all got to be scared of Russia, just like in 1917. And let's not forget that Britain used chemical weapons – M-Devices, which induced vomiting – against the Bolsheviks. Chemical weapons were "the right medicine for the Bolshevist," in Churchill's words. This was in 1919, as part of the Allied invasion of Russia in support of the White Army. [v]

So if we're talking about the historical balance of forces and cause and effect, Britain not Russia initiated the use of chemical weapons against others. But this history is typically inverted to say that Russia poses a threat to the West, hence all the talk about Novichok, the Skripals, and Dawn Sturgess, the civilian who supposedly came into contact with Novichok and died in hospital a few days later.

The next question: What sort of threat is Russia? According to the US Army War College, since the collapse of the Soviet Union and since pro-US, pro-"free market" President Boris Yeltsin resigned in 1999, Russia has pursued so-called economic nationalism. And the US doesn't like this because markets suddenly get closed and taxes are raised against US corporations. [vi] That's the real threat. But you can't tell the public that: that we hate Russia because they aren't doing what we say. If you look through the military documents, you can find almost nothing about security threats against the US in terms of Russian expansion, except in the sense that "security" means operational freedom. You can find references to Russia's nuclear weapons, though, which are described as defensive, designed "to counter US forces and weapons systems." [vii] Try finding that on the BBC. I should mention that even "defensive" nukes can be launched accidentally.

The real goal with regards to Russia is maintaining US economic hegemony and the culture of open "free markets" that goes with it, while at the same time being protectionist in real life. (US protectionism didn't start under Trump, by the way.) Liberal media like the New York Times run sarcastic articles about Russian state oil and gas being a front for Putin and his cronies. And yes, that may be true. But what threat is Russia to the US if it has a corrupt government? The threat is closing its markets to the US. The US is committed to what its military calls Full Spectrum Dominance. So the world needs to be run in a US-led neoliberal order, in the words of the US military, "to protect US interests and investment." [viii] But this cannot be done if you have "economic nationalism," like China had until the "reforms" of the '70s and '80s, and still has today to some extent. Russia and China aren't military threats. The global population on the whole knows this, even though the domestic US and British media say the opposite.

Alford: What about military threats?

Coles: The best sources you can get are the US military records. Straight from the horse's mouth. The military plans for war and defence. They have contingencies for when political situations change. So they know what they're talking about. There's a massive divide between reality, as understood from the military records, and media and political rhetoric. Assessments by the US Army War College, for instance, said years ago that any moves by NATO to support a Western-backed government in Ukraine would provoke Russia into annexing Crimea. They don't talk about Russia spontaneously invading Ukraine and annexing it, which is the image we get from the media. The documents talk about Russia reacting to NATO provocation. [ix]

If you look at a map, you see Russia surrounded by hostile NATO forces. The media don't discuss this dangerous and provocative situation, except the occasional mention of, say, US-British-Polish war-gaming on the border with Russia. When they do mention it, they say it's for "containment," the containment of Russia. But to contain something, the given thing has to be expanding. But the US military – like the annual threat assessments to Congress – say that Russia's not expanding, except when provoked. So at the moment as part of its NATO mission, the UK is training Polish and Ukrainian armed forces, has deployed troops in Poland and Estonia, and is conducting military exercises with them. [x]

Imagine if Scotland ceded from the UK and the Russians were on our border conducting military exercises, supposedly to deter a British invasion of Scotland. That's what we're doing in Ukraine. Britain's moves are extremely dangerous. In the 1980s, the UK as part of NATO conducted the exercise, Operation Able Archer, which envisaged troop build-ups between NATO and the Warsaw Pact countries. Now-declassified records show that the Russians briefly mistook this exercise for a real-world scenario. That could have escalated into nuclear war. This is very serious. [xi]

But the biggest player is the USA. It's using the threat of force and a global architecture of hi-tech militarism to shape a neoliberal order. Britain is slavishly following its lead. I doubt that Britain would position forces near Russia were it not for the USA. Successive US administrations have or are building a missile system in Europe and Turkey. They say it's to deter Iran from firing Scud missiles at Europe. But it's pointed at Russia. It's a radar system based in Romania and Turkey, with a battery of Patriot missiles based in Poland. The stationing of missiles there provoked Russia into moving its mobile nuclear weapons up to the border in its Kaliningrad exclave, as it warned it would do in 2008. [xii] Try to find any coverage of that in the media, except for a few articles in the print media here or there. If Western media were interested in survival, there would be regular headlines: "NATO provoking Russia."

But the situation in Ukraine is really the tipping point. Consider the equivalent. Imagine if Russia was conducting military exercises with Canada or Mexico, and building bases there. How would the US react? It would be considered an extreme threat, a violation of the UN Charter, which prohibits threats against sovereign states.

Alford: So we've extended NATO to pretty much the Russian border? But there's a hard border there. Everyone knows we're never going to attack Russia, both for reasons of morality and self-preservation. So maybe this situation is safer than you imply.

Coles: There's no morality involved. States are abstract, amorphous entities comprised of dominant minorities and subjugated majorities who are conditioned to believe that they are relatively free and prosperous. The elites of those states act both in their self-interests – career, peer-pressure, kickbacks, and so on – and in the interests of their class, which is of course tied to international relations because their class thrives on profiting from resource exploitation. So you can't talk about morality in this context. Only individuals can behave morally. The state is made up of individuals, of course, but they're acting against the interests of the majority. As we speak, they are acting immorally – or at least amorally – but creating the geopolitical conditions that imperil each and every one of us.

As for invasion, we're not going to invade Russia. This isn't 1918. Russia has nuclear weapons and can deter an invasion. But that's not the point. Do we want to de-escalate an already tense geopolitical situation or make it worse to the point where an accident happens? So while it's not about invading Russia directly, the issue is about attacking what are called Russia's "national interests." Russia's "national interests" are the same as the elites' of the UK. National interest doesn't mean the interests of the public. It means the interests of the policymaking establishment and the corporations. For example, the Theresa May government sacrificed its own credibility to ensure that its Brexit White Paper (2018) appeased both the interests of the food and manufacturing industries that want a soft Brexit – easy trade with the EU – and the financial services sector which wants a hard Brexit – freedom from EU regulation. Everyone else be damned. That's the "national interest."

So for its real "national interest," Russia wants to keep Ukraine in its sphere of influence because its oil and gas to Europe pass through Ukraine. About 80% of Russia's export economy is in the oil and gas sector. It's already had serious political tensions with Ukraine, which on several occasions hasn't paid its energy bills, so Russia has cut supplies. If Europe can bump Ukraine into its own sphere of influence it has more leverage over Russia. This is practically admitted in Parliamentary discussions by Foreign Office ministers, and so forth. [xiii] Again, omitted by the media. Also, remember that plenty of ethnic Russians live in eastern Ukraine. In addition, Russia has a naval base in Crimea. That's not to excuse its illegal action in annexing Ukraine, it's to highlight the realpolitik missing in the media's coverage of the situation.

T. J. Coles is a postdoctoral researcher at Plymouth University's Cognition Institute and the author of several books.

Matthew Alford teaches at Bath University in the UK and has also written several books. Their latest is Union Jackboot (Até Books).

SOURCES

[i] Mark Leonard and Nicu Popescu (2007) 'A Power Audit of EU-Russia Relations' European Council on Foreign Relations, Policy Paper, p. 1 http://www.ecfr.eu/page/-/ECFR-02_A_POWER_AUDIT_OF_EU-RUSSIA_RELATIONS.pdf .

[ii] 'Anglo-Russian relations were severely strained; what was in effect a cold war lasted from the late 1820s to the beginning of the next century'. The Crimean War seems to have set a precedent for today. James writes:

[It] was an imperial war, the only one fought by Britain against a European power during the nineteenth century, although some would have regarded Russia as essentially an Asiatic power. No territory was at stake; the war was undertaken solely to guarantee British naval supremacy in the Mediterranean and, indirectly, to forestall any threat to India which might have followed Russia replacing Britain as the dominant power in the Middle East.

Lawrence James (1997) The Rise and Fall of the British Empire London: Abacus, pp. 180-82.

[iii] Churchill said in 1920:

All these strikes and rumours of strikes and threats of strikes and loss and suffering caused by them; all this talk of revolution and "direct action" have deeply offended most of the British people. There is a growing feeling that a considerable section of organized Labour is trying to tyrannize over the whole public and to bully them into submission, not by argument, not by recognized political measures, but by brute force

But if we can do little for Russia [under the Bolsheviks], we can do much for Britain. We do not want any of these experiments here

Whether it is the Irish murder gang or the Egyptian vengeance society, or the seditious extremists in India, or the arch-traitors we have at home, they will feel the weight of the British arm.

Winston Churchill (1920) Bolshevism and Imperial Sedition . Speech to United Wards Club. London: The International Churchill Society https://winstonchurchill.org/resources/speeches/1915-1929-nadir-and-recovery/bolshevism-and-imperial-sedition/ .

[iv] The fake letter says:

A settlement of relations between the two countries [UK and Russia] will assist in the revolutionising of the international and British proletariat, [and] make it possible for us to extend and develop the propaganda and ideas of Leninism in England and the colonies.

It also says that 'British workmen' have 'inclinations to compromise' and that rapprochement will eventually lead to domestic '[a]rmed warfare'. It was leaked by the services to the Conservative party and then to the media. Richard Norton-Taylor (1999) 'Zinoviev letter was dirty trick by MI6' Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/politics/1999/feb/04/uk.politicalnews6 and Louise Jury (1999) 'Official Zinoviev letter was forged' Independent http://www.independent.co.uk/news/official-zinoviev-letter-was-forged-1068600.html . For media coverage at the time, see James Curran and Jean Seaton (1997) Power without Responsibility London: Routledge, p. 52.

[v] Paul F. Walker (2017) 'A Century of Chemical Warfare: Building a World Free of Chemical Weapons' Conference: One Hundred Years of Chemical Warfare: Research, Deployment, Consequences pp. 379-400 and Giles Milton (2013) Russian Roulette: A Deadly Game: How British Spies Thwarted Lenin's Global Plot London: Hodder, eBook.

[vi] 'The Russian Federation has shown repeatedly that common values play almost no role in its consideration of its trading partners', meaning the US and EU. 'It often builds relationships with countries that most openly thwart Western values of free markets and democracy', notably Iran and Venezuela. 'In this regard, the Russian Federation behaves like "Russia Incorporated." It uses its re-nationalized industries to further its wealth and influence, the latter often at the expense of the EU and the U.S.'. Colonel Richard J. Anderson (2008) 'A History of President Putin's Campaign to Re-Nationalize Industry and the Implications for Russian Reform and Foreign Policy' Senior Service College, US Army War College, Pennsylvania: Carlisle Barracks, p. 52.

[vii] Daniel R. Coats (2017) Statement for the Record: Worldwide Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Washington, DC: Office of the Director of

National Intelligence, pp. 18-19 https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Newsroom/Testimonies/SSCI%20Unclassified%20SFR%20-%20Final.pdf .

[viii] US Space Command (1997) Vision for 2020 Colorado: Peterson Air Force Base https://ia802705.us.archive.org/10/items/pdfy-j6U3MFw1cGmC-yob/U.S.%20Space%20Command%20Vision%20For%202020.pdf .

[ix] The document also says: 'a replay of the West-sponsored coup against pro-Russian elites could result in a split, or indeed multiple splits, of the failed Ukraine, which would open a door for NATO intervention'.Pavel K. Baev (2011) 'Russia's security relations with the United States: Futures planned and unplanned' in Stephen J. Blank (ed.) Russian Nuclear Weapons: Past, Present, and Future Strategic Studies Institute Pennsylvania: Carlisle Barracks, p. 170, www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB1087.pdf.

[x] Forces Network (2016) 'British troops to deploy to Poland' https://www.forces.net/news/tri-service/british-troops-deploy-poland .

[xi] For example, Nate Jones, Thomas Blanton and Christian F. Ostermann (2016) 'Able Archer 83: The Secret History' Nuclear Proliferation International History Project Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars https://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/able-archer-83-the-secret-history .

[xii] It was reported in the ultra-right, neo-con press at the time that:

[Russian] President Dmitri Medvedev announced in his first state-of-the-nation address plans to deploy the short-range SS-26 ("Iskander") missiles in the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad if the U.S. goes ahead with its European Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS). Medvedev told parliament that the deployment would "neutralize" U.S. plans for a missile defense shield based in Poland and the Czech Republic [now in Romania), which the U.S. claims as vital in defending against missile attacks from 'rogue states' such as Iran.

Neil Leslie (2008) 'The Kaliningrad Missile Crisis' The New Atlanticist , available at http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/the-kaliningrad-missile-crisis.

[xiii] For example, a Parliamentary inquiry into British-Russian relations says of the newly-imposed US-British ally in Ukraine:

President Poroshenko's Government is more openly committed to economic reform and anti-corruption than any previous Ukrainian Administration. The reform agenda has made considerable progress and has enjoyed some successes including police reform, liberalisation of the energy market and the launch of an online platform for government procurement

The annexation of Crimea also resulted in a ban on importing products from Crimea, on investing in or providing services linked to tourism and on exporting certain goods for use in the transport, telecoms and energy sectors.

House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee (2017) The United Kingdom's relations with Russia Seventh report of session 2016-17, HC 120 London: Stationary Office, pp. 28, 31 https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmfaff/120/120.pdf

[Nov 06, 2018] Haves and Have nots under US neoliberalism by Rania Khalek

Notable quotes:
"... "As the heat of packed-together bodies fogged the windows, passengers beat on the walls and clawed at the doors in a scene from a real-life horror story," ..."
Nov 06, 2018 | www.rt.com

Spending time in Western Europe, as I have done the last several months, provides some serious perspective on America's decline. In most European countries, like Germany for example, public transportation works efficiently and there is a social safety net. While homelessness is a problem, it's nowhere near as rampant as in the US and usually seems to be associated with addiction. People in Europe are generally much healthier and happier, housing and food and higher education are affordable and people don't spend all their time working – they are able to take vacations and enjoy life in a way the vast majority of Americans are not. Europeans are typically entitled to lengthy paid maternity leave, whereas in the US working class women are forced to return to work in as little as two weeks . Read more © Christopher Furlong / Getty 130,000 homeless children, empty food banks predicted this Christmas

Meanwhile, New York's Subway system is decaying due to disinvestment and corruption. Last summer a train stalled, leaving passengers in the dark with no air conditioning for an hour. "As the heat of packed-together bodies fogged the windows, passengers beat on the walls and clawed at the doors in a scene from a real-life horror story," reported the New York Times. In Washington DC, the nation's capital, the Metro is always late and totally unreliable, with train fires becoming a regular occurrence while Amtrak trains experience routine derailments . These are just some examples of infrastructure decay. The list goes on: bridges are crumbling, schools are shuttered. In Baltimore dozens of schools had no heat during record freezing temperatures this winter. The only thing America's leadership seems capable of investing in is prisons and war.

In America, the old devour the young. Young Americans are struggling under the weight of $1.4 trillion in student loan debt. But don't let that confuse you about the state of America's elderly. They too aren't taken care of. In many European countries people are entitled to pensions and they can retire comfortably. In the US some have to work until they die as Social Security isn't enough to live on and Medicare doesn't quite cover all of their medical needs. As for healthcare, as many as 45,000 people a year die because they cannot access it.

And then there is the issue of water. There are over 3,000 counties across America whose water supplies have lead levels higher than in Flint, Michigan, and nothing substantial is being done to address the problem.

Haves and Have nots

All this is taking place in a nation where inequality continues to climb. There are counties a few miles apart from one another where the life expectancy drops by 20 years.

Researchers say the life expectancy gap, as high as 20.1 years between rich and poor counties, resembles the gap seen between low-income countries versus rich countries. In other words, there are pockets of the US that have the characteristics of third world countries. It seems that the US in many ways, after having destroyed other parts of the world, has turned inward on itself, sacrificing its most vulnerable citizens at the altar of capitalism.

Bernie Sanders made an issue of this during his presidential bid, often noting in his stump speeches the dramatic difference in lifespan in McDowell County, West Virginia, where men live to about 64, and six hours away in Fairfax, Virginia, where the average lifespan shoots up to 82.

[Nov 06, 2018] The latest garbage issued by the yanks

Nov 06, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Peter AU 1 , Nov 6, 2018 5:39:03 PM | link

The latest garbage issued by the yanks.

https://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2018/08/285043.htm
"Following the use of a "Novichok" nerve agent in an attempt to assassinate UK citizen Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia Skripal, the United States, on August 6, 2018, determined under the Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act of 1991 (CBW Act) that the Government of the Russian Federation has used chemical or biological weapons in violation of international law or has used lethal chemical or biological weapons against its own nationals.

Following a 15-day Congressional notification period, these sanctions will take effect upon publication of a notice in the Federal Register, expected on or around August 22, 2018"
.....

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-sanctions/u-s-says-to-issue-chemical-weapons-related-sanctions-against-russia-idUSKCN1NB2M7?il=0
"The department in August had threatened Russia with added sanctions after 90 days unless it complied with the 1991 Chemical and Biological Weapons and Warfare Elimination Act.

Under the law, Russia had to end the use of the nerve agent Novichok, which was used in the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in March, commit to not using chemical weapons against its own people, and allow on-site inspections by agencies like the United Nations.

"Today, the department informed Congress we could not certify that the Russian Federation met the conditions," U.S. State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said in a statement."

[Nov 05, 2018] Bolsonaro a monster engineered by our media by Jonathan Cook

Notable quotes:
"... Bolsonaro, like Trump, is not a disruption of the current neoliberal order; he is an intensification or escalation of its worst impulses. He is its logical conclusion. ..."
"... Despite their professed concern, the plutocrats and their media spokespeople much prefer a far-right populist like Trump or Bolsonaro to a populist leader of the genuine left. They prefer the social divisions fuelled by neo-fascists like Bolsonaro, divisions that protect their wealth and privilege, over the unifying message of a socialist who wants to curtail class privilege, the real basis of the elite's power. ..."
"... The true left – whether in Brazil, Venezuela, Britain or the US – does not control the police or military, the financial sector, the oil industries, the arms manufacturers, or the corporate media. It was these very industries and institutions that smoothed the path to power for Bolsonaro in Brazil, Viktor Orban in Hungary, and Trump in the US. ..."
"... Former socialist leaders like Brazil's Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva or Hugo Chavez in Venezuela were bound to fail not so much because of their flaws as individuals but because powerful interests rejected their right to rule. These socialists never had control over the key levers of power, the key resources. Their efforts were sabotaged – from within and without – from the moment of their election. ..."
"... The media, the financial elites, the armed forces were never servants of the socialist governments that have been struggling to reform Latin America. The corporate world has no interest either in building proper housing in place of slums or in dragging the masses out of the kind of poverty that fuels the drug gangs that Bolsonaro claims he will crush through more violence. ..."
"... As in Pinochet's Chile, Bolsonaro can rest assured that his kind of neo-fascism will live in easy harmony with neoliberalism. ..."
"... Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His books include "Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East" (Pluto Press) and "Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair" (Zed Books). His website is www.jonathan-cook.net . ..."
Nov 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

With Jair Bolsonaro's victory in Brazil's presidential election at the weekend, the doom-mongers among western elites are out in force once again. His success, like Donald Trump's, has confirmed a long-held prejudice: that the people cannot be trusted; that, when empowered, they behave like a mob driven by primitive urges; that the unwashed masses now threaten to bring down the carefully constructed walls of civilisation.

The guardians of the status quo refused to learn the lesson of Trump's election, and so it will be with Bolsonaro. Rather than engaging the intellectual faculties they claim as their exclusive preserve, western "analysts" and "experts" are again averting their gaze from anything that might help them understand what has driven our supposed democracies into the dark places inhabited by the new demagogues. Instead, as ever, the blame is being laid squarely at the door of social media.

Social media and fake news are apparently the reasons Bolsonaro won at the ballot box. Without the gatekeepers in place to limit access to the "free press" – itself the plaything of billionaires and global corporations, with brands and a bottom line to protect – the rabble has supposedly been freed to give expression to their innate bigotry.

Here is Simon Jenkins, a veteran British gatekeeper – a former editor of the Times of London who now writes a column in the Guardian – pontificating on Bolsonaro:

"The lesson for champions of open democracy is glaring. Its values cannot be taken for granted. When debate is no longer through regulated media, courts and institutions, politics will default to the mob. Social media – once hailed as an agent of global concord – has become the purveyor of falsity, anger and hatred. Its algorithms polarise opinion. Its pseudo-information drives argument to the extremes."

This is now the default consensus of the corporate media, whether in its rightwing incarnations or of the variety posing on the liberal-left end of the spectrum like the Guardian. The people are stupid, and we need to be protected from their base instincts. Social media, it is claimed, has unleashed humanity's id.

Selling plutocracy

There is a kind of truth in Jenkins' argument, even if it is not the one he intended. Social media did indeed liberate ordinary people. For the first time in modern history, they were not simply the recipients of official, sanctioned information. They were not only spoken down to by their betters, they could answer back – and not always as deferentially as the media class expected.

Clinging to their old privileges, Jenkins and his ilk are rightly unnerved. They have much to lose.

But that also means they are far from dispassionate observers of the current political scene. They are deeply invested in the status quo, in the existing power structures that have kept them well-paid courtiers of the corporations that dominate the planet.

Bolsonaro, like Trump, is not a disruption of the current neoliberal order; he is an intensification or escalation of its worst impulses. He is its logical conclusion.

The plutocrats who run our societies need figureheads, behind whom they can conceal their unaccountable power. Until now they preferred the slickest salespeople, ones who could sell wars as humanitarian intervention rather than profit-driven exercises in death and destruction; the unsustainable plunder of natural resources as economic growth; the massive accumulation of wealth, stashed in offshore tax havens, as the fair outcome of a free market; the bailouts funded by ordinary taxpayers to stem economic crises they had engineered as necessary austerity; and so on.

A smooth-tongued Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton were the favoured salespeople, especially in an age when the elites had persuaded us of a self-serving argument: that ghetto-like identities based on colour or gender mattered far more than class. It was divide-and-rule dressed up as empowerment. The polarisation now bewailed by Jenkins was in truth stoked and rationalised by the very corporate media he so faithfully serves.

Fear of the domino effect

Despite their professed concern, the plutocrats and their media spokespeople much prefer a far-right populist like Trump or Bolsonaro to a populist leader of the genuine left. They prefer the social divisions fuelled by neo-fascists like Bolsonaro, divisions that protect their wealth and privilege, over the unifying message of a socialist who wants to curtail class privilege, the real basis of the elite's power.

The true left – whether in Brazil, Venezuela, Britain or the US – does not control the police or military, the financial sector, the oil industries, the arms manufacturers, or the corporate media. It was these very industries and institutions that smoothed the path to power for Bolsonaro in Brazil, Viktor Orban in Hungary, and Trump in the US.

Former socialist leaders like Brazil's Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva or Hugo Chavez in Venezuela were bound to fail not so much because of their flaws as individuals but because powerful interests rejected their right to rule. These socialists never had control over the key levers of power, the key resources. Their efforts were sabotaged – from within and without – from the moment of their election.

Local elites in Latin America are tied umbilically to US elites, who in turn are determined to make sure any socialist experiment in their backyard fails – as a way to prevent a much-feared domino effect, one that might seed socialism closer to home.

The media, the financial elites, the armed forces were never servants of the socialist governments that have been struggling to reform Latin America. The corporate world has no interest either in building proper housing in place of slums or in dragging the masses out of the kind of poverty that fuels the drug gangs that Bolsonaro claims he will crush through more violence.

Bolsonaro will not face any of the institutional obstacles Lula da Silva or Chavez needed to overcome. No one in power will stand in his way as he institutes his "reforms". No one will stop him creaming off Brazil's wealth for his corporate friends. As in Pinochet's Chile, Bolsonaro can rest assured that his kind of neo-fascism will live in easy harmony with neoliberalism.

Immune system

If you want to understand the depth of the self-deception of Jenkins and other media gatekeepers, contrast Bolsonaro's political ascent to that of Jeremy Corbyn, the modest social democratic leader of Britain's Labour party. Those like Jenkins who lament the role of social media – they mean you, the public – in promoting leaders like Bolsonaro are also the media chorus who have been wounding Corbyn day after day, blow by blow, for three years – since he accidentally slipped past safeguards intended by party bureacrats to keep someone like him from power.

The supposedly liberal Guardian has been leading that assault. Like the rightwing media, it has shown its absolute determination to stop Corbyn at all costs, using any pretext.

Within days of Corbyn's election to the Labour leadership, the Times newspaper – the voice of the British establishment – published an article quoting a general, whom it refused to name, warning that the British army's commanders had agreed they would sabotage a Corbyn government. The general strongly hinted that there would be a military coup first.

We are not supposed to reach the point where such threats – tearing away the façade of western democracy – ever need to be implemented. Our pretend democracies were created with immune systems whose defences are marshalled to eliminate a threat like Corbyn much earlier.

Once he moved closer to power, however, the rightwing corporate media was forced to deploy the standard tropes used against a left leader: that he was incompetent, unpatriotic, even treasonous.

But just as the human body has different immune cells to increase its chances of success, the corporate media has faux-liberal-left agents like the Guardian to complement the right's defences. The Guardian sought to wound Corbyn through identity politics, the modern left's Achille's heel. An endless stream of confected crises about anti-semitism were intended to erode the hard-earned credit Corbyn had accumulated over decades for his anti-racism work.

Slash-and-burn politics

Why is Corbyn so dangerous? Because he supports the right of workers to a dignified life, because he refuses to accept the might of the corporations, because he implies that a different way of organising our societies is possible. It is a modest, even timid programme he articulates, but even so it is far too radical either for the plutocratic class that rules over us or for the corporate media that serves as its propaganda arm.

The truth ignored by Jenkins and these corporate stenographers is that if you keep sabotaging the programmes of a Chavez, a Lula da Silva, a Corbyn or a Bernie Sanders, then you get a Bolsonaro, a Trump, an Orban.

It is not that the masses are a menace to democracy. It is rather that a growing proportion of voters understand that a global corporate elite has rigged the system to accrue for itself ever greater riches. It is not social media that is polarising our societies. It is rather that the determination of the elites to pillage the planet until it has no more assets to strip has fuelled resentment and destroyed hope. It is not fake news that is unleashing the baser instincts of the lower orders. Rather, it is the frustration of those who feel that change is impossible, that no one in power is listening or cares.

Social media has empowered ordinary people. It has shown them that they cannot trust their leaders, that power trumps justice, that the elite's enrichment requires their poverty. They have concluded that, if the rich can engage in slash-and-burn politics against the planet, our only refuge, they can engage in slash-and-burn politics against the global elite.

Are they choosing wisely in electing a Trump or Bolsonaro? No. But the liberal guardians of the status quo are in no position to judge them. For decades, all parts of the corporate media have helped to undermine a genuine left that could have offered real solutions, that could have taken on and beaten the right, that could have offered a moral compass to a confused, desperate and disillusioned public.

Jenkins wants to lecture the masses about their depraved choices while he and his paper steer them away from any politician who cares about their welfare, who fights for a fairer society, who prioritises mending what is broken.

The western elites will decry Bolsonaro in the forlorn and cynical hope of shoring up their credentials as guardians of the existing, supposedly moral order. But they engineered him. Bolsonaro is their monster.

Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His books include "Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East" (Pluto Press) and "Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair" (Zed Books). His website is www.jonathan-cook.net .

[Nov 05, 2018] Will US Sanctions Sway Iran to Enter Oil Deal with Russia

Nov 05, 2018 | russia-insider.com

However, the primary problem would not even be the doubtful profitability, but rather logistics. Iran's oil fields are in the south. To reach Russia, the oil would have to make its way to Caspian ports in the north. Iran has no main pipelines connecting its southern oil fields with northern ports. These ports do have the infrastructure for oil, but they were built to receive oil from swap deals with Kazakhstan, Russia and Azerbaijan. They were never meant to export oil.

Consequently, before any exports could begin, Moscow and Tehran would have to invest in creating the necessary storage and loading infrastructure at the Iranian ports. Iran would also need to upgrade its transport infrastructure to deliver oil from the south to the Caspian seashore -- that would also present a challenge.

Finally, Russia and Iran would have to substantially increase their tanker fleets in the landlocked Caspian Sea to exchange large quantities of oil, as the local geography does not allow for the use of large tankers. In this situation, a planned railroad connection between Russia and Iran via Azerbaijan could increase the volume of oil moved from Iran to Russia, but this project has not been completed.

Under these circumstances, Russian officials are demonstrating far greater interest in resuming the so-called oil-for-products program, under which Russia would broker Iranian oil abroad in exchange for Iran buying Russian industrial machinery and providing investment opportunities to Moscow.

Russia and Iran have discussed an oil-for-products initiative for years. Initially, it was supposed to help Tehran evade the oil trade embargo imposed by the United States, European Union (EU) and their partners. When those sanctions were lifted as part of the 2015 nuclear deal, the initiative was expected to compensate for Iran's lack of financial reserves, which kept Tehran from paying for imports of Russian equipment in hard currency. However, after US President Donald Trump withdrew from the deal in 2018 and began reimposing sanctions, the oil-for-products deal again gained importance as a way to evade sanctions.

In November 2017, Moscow received 1 million barrels from Iran as payment for railroad equipment imported from Russia, and arrangements were in the works for Russia to buy an additional 5 million tons of oil in 2018. Indeed, in January and February there were reports of some oil dispatches transferred from Iran to Russian companies. Yet, by March, they stopped . Moscow still plans to revive the deal in 2019, though it might never happen.

On the one hand, Russia has had problems finding buyers for Iranian oil. Concerned about the US sanctions, potential clients refused to purchase it. On the other hand, Iran's main hopes for sanctions relief are more connected to the EU than Russia. There is a strong belief in Tehran that Europeans will be able to offset the negative influence of US economic pressure on Iran. The EU wants to salvage as much of the nuclear deal as possible. Yet the strength of Tehran's belief is hard to explain: Large EU companies have already pulled out of Iran. The EU officials Al-Monitor interviewed openly said that Tehran should not expect a lot from Brussels.

Though Russian and Iranian officials have an on-again, off-again marriage of convenience, Iran's general public and its elite strongly oppose any substantial deals with Moscow. Russia is not trusted or welcomed by Iranians and the countries have a long history of differences . A well-informed and respected Iranian expert on Tehran's foreign policy told Al-Monitor on condition of anonymity that a Russian oil-for-products initiative would be difficult to implement.

"A large part of Iranian society believes that giving our oil to Russia -- especially at the discounted prices -- is no better than agreeing to Trump's demands," he said.

[Nov 05, 2018] Housing market reminiscent of 2006 bubble, ready to burst Nobel Prize-winning economist Shiller

Notable quotes:
"... "a sign of weakness." ..."
"... "the housing market does have a momentum component and we're seeing a clipping of momentum at this time." ..."
"... "If the markets go down, it could bring on another recession. The housing market has been an important element of economic activity. If people start to get pessimistic about housing and pull back and don't want to buy, there will be a drop in construction jobs and that could be a seed for another recession." ..."
"... "By the way, we're overdue for another recession." ..."
"... "The drop in home prices in the financial crisis was the most severe drop in the US market since my data begin in 1890," ..."
"... "It could be that we're primed to repeat it because it's in our memory and we're thinking about it but still I wouldn't expect something as severe as the Great Financial Crisis coming on right now. There could be a significant correction or bear market, but I'm waiting and seeing now." ..."
Nov 05, 2018 | www.rt.com

The weakening housing market is similar to the last market high, just before the subprime housing bubble burst a decade ago, says famed housing-watcher Robert Shiller. The economist, who predicted the 2007-2008 crisis, told Yahoo Finance that current data shows "a sign of weakness."

Housing pivots take more time than those in the stock market, Shiller said, adding that "the housing market does have a momentum component and we're seeing a clipping of momentum at this time."

The Nobel Laureate explained: "If the markets go down, it could bring on another recession. The housing market has been an important element of economic activity. If people start to get pessimistic about housing and pull back and don't want to buy, there will be a drop in construction jobs and that could be a seed for another recession." He added: "By the way, we're overdue for another recession."

When reminded that 2006 predated the greatest financial crisis in a lifetime, Shiller acknowledged that any correction would likely be far less severe.

"The drop in home prices in the financial crisis was the most severe drop in the US market since my data begin in 1890," the Yale economist said.

"It could be that we're primed to repeat it because it's in our memory and we're thinking about it but still I wouldn't expect something as severe as the Great Financial Crisis coming on right now. There could be a significant correction or bear market, but I'm waiting and seeing now."

The infamous US housing bubble in the mid-2000s and the subsequent subprime meltdown were key factors spurring the broader financial crisis of 2008. A speculative frenzy over house prices, mortgages beyond long-term capabilities to finance, and eventually a wave of defaults by borrowers, threatened the solvency of some key financial institutions which in turn led to a stock market crash, and the global financial crisis.

Read more

Echoes of Black Monday: Market sell-off could get 'significantly worse' - strategist READ MORE: Decade after financial crisis JPMorgan predicts next one's coming soon

[Nov 05, 2018] A superb new book on the duty of resistance

Notable quotes:
"... A Duty to Resist: When Disobedience Should Be Uncivil ..."
"... The Duty to Resist: When Disobedience Should Be Uncivil ..."
Nov 05, 2018 | crookedtimber.org

by Chris Bertram on October 31, 2018 Candice Delmas, A Duty to Resist: When Disobedience Should Be Uncivil (Oxford University Press, 2018).

Political obligation has always been a somewhat unsatisfactory topic in political philosophy, as has, relatedly, civil disobedience. The "standard view" of civil disobedience, to be found in Rawls, presupposes that we live in a nearly just society in which some serious violations of the basic liberties yet occur and conceives of civil disobedience as a deliberate act of public lawbreaking, nonviolent in character, which aims to communicate a sense of grave wrong to our fellow citizens. To demonstrate their fidelity to law, civil disobedients are willing to accept the consequences of their actions and to take their punishment. When Rawls first wrote about civil disobedience, in 1964, parts of the US were openly and flagrantly engaged in the violent subordination of their black population, so it was quite a stretch for him to think of that society as "nearly just". But perhaps its injustice impinged less obviously on a white professor at an elite university in Massachusetts than it did on poor blacks in the deep South.

The problems with the standard account hardly stop there. Civil disobedience thus conceived is awfully narrow. In truth, the range of actions which amount to resistance to the state and to unjust societies is extremely broad, running from ordinary political opposition, through civil disobedience to disobedience that is rather uncivil, through sabotage, hacktivism, leaking, whistle-blowing, carrying out Samaritan assistance in defiance of laws that prohibit it, striking, occupation, violent resistance, violent revolution, and, ultimately, terrorism. For the non-ideal world in which we actually live and where we are nowhere close to a "nearly just" society, we need a better theory, one which tells us whether Black Lives Matter activists are justified or whether antifa can punch Richard Spencer. Moreover, we need a theory that tells us not only what we may do but also what we are obliged to do: when is standing by in the face of injustice simply not morally permissible.

Step forward Candice Delmas with her superb and challenging book The Duty to Resist: When Disobedience Should Be Uncivil (Oxford University Press). Delmas points out the manifold shortcomings of the standard account and how it is often derived from taking the particular tactics of the civil rights movement and turning pragmatic choices into moral principles. Lots of acts of resistance against unjust societies, in order to be effective, far from being communicative, need to be covert. Non-violence may be an effective strategy, but sometimes those resisting state injustice have a right to defend themselves. [click to continue ]

Hidari 10.31.18 at 3:41 pm (no link)

Strangely enough, the link I was looking at immediately before I clicked on the OP, was this:

https://www.thecanary.co/opinion/2018/10/30/our-time-is-up-weve-got-nothing-left-but-rebellion/

It would be interesting to see a philosopher's view on whether or not civil disobedience was necessary, and to what extent, to prevent actions that will lead to the end of our species.

Ebenezer Scrooge 10.31.18 at 4:52 pm (no link)
Two points:
As far as the Nazi-punching goes, it is important to remember that we hung Julius Streicher for nothing but speech acts.
I have no idea who Candice Delmas is, but "Delmas" is a French name. The French have a very different attitude toward civil disobedience than we do.
Moz of Yarramulla 10.31.18 at 11:23 pm (no link)

civil disobedience as a deliberate act of public lawbreaking, nonviolent in character, which aims to communicate a sense of grave wrong to our fellow citizens.

I think that's a pretty narrow view of civil disobedience even if you just count the actions of the protesters. Often NVDA is aimed at or merely accepts that a violent response is inevitable. The resistance at Parihaka, for example, was in no doubt that the response would be military and probably lethal. And Animal Liberation are often classified as terrorists by the US and UK governments while murderers against abortion are not.

Which is to say that the definition of "nonviolent" is itself an area of conflict, with some taking the Buddhist extremist position that any harm or even inconvenience to any living thing makes an action violent, and others saying that anything short of genocide can be nonviolent (and then there are the "intention is all" clowns). Likewise terrorism, most obviously of late the Afghani mujahideen when they transitioned from being revolutionaries to terrorists when the invader changed.

In Australia we have the actual government taking the view that any action taken by a worker or protester that inconveniences a company is a criminal act and the criminal must both compensate the company (including consequential damages) as well as facing jail time. tasmania and NSW and of course the anti-union laws . The penalties suggest they're considered crimes of violence, as does the rhetoric.

Moz of Yarramulla 11.01.18 at 12:13 am (no link)
Jeff@11

one should never legitimize any means toward social change that you would not object to seeing used by your mortal enemies.

Are you using an unusual definition of "mortal enemy" here? Viz, other than "enemy that wants to kill you"? Even US law has theoretical prohibitions on expressing that intention.

It's especially odd since we're right now in the middle of a great deal of bad-faith use of protest techniques by mortal enemies. "free speech" used to protect Nazi rallies, "academic freedom" to defend anti-science activists, "non-violent protest" used to describe violent attacks, "freedom of religion" used to excuse terrorism, the list goes on.

In Australia we have a 'proud boys' leader coming to Australia who has somehow managed to pass the character test imposed by our government. He's the leader of a gang that requires an arrest for violence as a condition of membership and regularly says his goal is to incite others to commit murder. It seems odd that our immigration minister has found those things to be not disqualifying while deporting someone for merely associating with a vaguely similar gang , but we live in weird times.

J-D 11.01.18 at 12:50 am ( 18 )
Ebenezer Scrooge

As far as the Nazi-punching goes, it is important to remember that we hung Julius Streicher for nothing but speech acts.

I do remember that*, but it's not clear to me why you think it's important to remember it in this context. If somebody who had fatally punched a Nazi speaker were prosecuted for murder, I doubt that 'he was a Nazi speaker' would be accepted as a defence on the basis of the Streicher precedent.

*Strictly speaking, I don't remember it as something that 'we' did: I wasn't born at the time, and it's not clear to me who you mean by 'we'. (Streicher himself probably would have said that it was the Jews, or possibly the Jews and the Bolsheviks, who were hanging him, but I don't suppose that would be your view.) However, I'm aware of the events you're referring to, which is the real point.

engels 11.01.18 at 12:51 am ( 19 )
Rawls presupposes that we live in a nearly just society in which some serious violations of the basic liberties yet occur For the non-ideal world in which we actually live and where we are nowhere close to a "nearly just" society, we need a better theory
Brandon Watson 11.01.18 at 12:02 pm (no link)
People need to stop spreading this misinterpretation about Rawls on civil disobedience, which I've seen several places in the past few years. Rawls focuses on the case of a nearly just society not because he thinks it's the only case in which you can engage in civil disobedience but because he thinks it's the only case in which there are difficulties with justifying it. He states this very clearly in A Theory of Justice : in cases where the society is not nearly just, there are no difficulties in justifying civil disobedience or even sometimes armed resistance. His natural duty account is not put forward as a general theory of civil disobedience but to argue that civil disobedience can admit of justification even in the case in which it is hardest to justify.

I'm not a fan of Rawls myself, but I don't know how he could possibly have been more clear on this, since he makes all these points explicitly.

LFC 11.02.18 at 12:45 am (no link)
J-D @18

The Nuremberg tribunal was set up and staffed by the U.S., Britain, USSR, and France; so whether Ebenezer's "we" was intended to refer to the four countries collectively or just to the U.S., it's clear who hanged Streicher et al., and the tone of your comment on this point is rather odd.

anon 11.02.18 at 4:23 pm (no link)
Resisting by protesting is OK.

However, here in the USA, actual legislation creating laws is done by our elected representatives.

So if you're an Amaerican and really want Social Change and aren't just posturing or 'virtue signaling' make sure you vote in the upcoming election.

I'm afraid too many will think that their individual vote won't 'matter' or the polls show it isn't needed or some other excuse to justify not voting. Please do not be that person.

Don Berinati 11.02.18 at 5:06 pm (no link)
Recently re-reading '1968' by Kurlansky and he repeatedly made this point about protests – that to be effective they had to get on television (major networks, not like our youtube, I think, so it would be seen by the masses in order to sway them) and to do that the acts had to be outlandish because they were competing for network time. This increasingly led to violent acts, which almost always worked in getting on the news, but flew in the face of King's and others peaceful methods.
So, maybe punching out a Nazi is the way to change people's minds or at least get them to think about stuff.

[Nov 05, 2018] "They Will Not Forgive Us" by James Carroll

Nov 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

It was only an announcement, but think of it as the beginning of a journey into hell. Last week, President Donald Trump made public his decision to abrogate the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), a 1987 agreement with the Soviet Union. National Security Advisor John Bolton , a Cold Warrior in a post-Cold War world, promptly flaunted that announcement on a trip to Vladimir Putin's Moscow. To grasp the import of that decision, however, quite another kind of voyage is necessary, a trip down memory lane.

That 1987 pact between Moscow and Washington was no small thing in a world that, during the Cuban Missile Crisis only 25 years earlier, had reached the edge of nuclear Armageddon. The INF Treaty led to the elimination of thousands of nuclear weapons, but its significance went far beyond that. As a start, it closed the books on the nightmare of a Europe caught between the world-ending strategies of the two superpowers, since most of those "intermediate-range" missiles were targeting that very continent. No wonder, last week, a European Union spokesperson, responding to Trump, fervently defended the treaty as a permanent "pillar" of international order.

To take that trip back three decades in time and remember how the INF came about should be an instant reminder of just how President Trump is playing havoc with something essential to human survival.

In October 1986 in Reykjavik, Iceland, the leaders of the United States and the Soviet Union, Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev , briefly came close to fully freeing the planet from the horrifying prospect of nuclear annihilation. In his second inaugural address, a year and a half earlier, President Reagan had wishfully called for "the total elimination" of nuclear weapons. At that Reykjavik summit, Gorbachev, a pathbreaking Soviet leader, promptly took the president up on that dream, proposing -- to the dismay of the aides of both leaders -- a total nuclear disarmament pact that would take effect in the year 2000.

Reagan promptly agreed in principle. "Suits me fine," he said. "That's always been my goal." But it didn't happen. Reagan had another dream, too -- of a space-based missile defense system against just such weaponry, the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), also dubbed "Star Wars." He refused to yield on the subject when Gorbachev rejected SDI as the superpower arms race transferred into space. "This meeting is over," Reagan then said.

Of the failure of Reykjavik, Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze would then comment : "When future generations read the transcripts of this meeting, they will not forgive us." At that point, the nuclear arsenals of the U.S. and the USSR had hit a combined 60,000 weapons and were still growing. (Five new American nuclear weapons were being added each day.) A month after Reykjavik, in fact, the U.S. deployed a new B-52-based cruise missile system in violation of the 1979 SALT II Treaty. Hawks in Moscow were pressing for similar escalations. Elites on both sides -- weapons manufacturers, intelligence and political establishments, think tanks, military bureaucracies, and pundits -- were appalled at what the two leaders had almost agreed to. The national security priesthood, East and West, wanted to maintain what was termed "the stability of the strategic stalemate," even if such stability, based on ever-expanding arsenals, could not have been less stable.

But a widespread popular longing for relief from four decades of nuclear dread had been growing on both sides of the Iron Curtain. In a surge of anti-nuclear activism , millions of ordinary citizens took to the streets of cities in the U.S. and Europe to protest the superpower nuclear establishments. Even behind the Iron Curtain, voices for peace could be heard. "Listen," Gorbachev pleaded after Reykjavik, "to the demands of the American people, the Soviet people, the peoples of all countries."

A Watershed Treaty

As it happened, the Soviet leader refused to settle for Reagan's no. Four months after the Iceland summit, he proposed an agreement "without delay" to remove from Europe all intermediate missiles -- those with a range well under that of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). When Pentagon officials tried to swat Gorbachev's proposal aside by claiming that there could be no such agreement without on-site inspections, he said fine, inspect away! That was an unprecedented concession from the Soviet Union.

President Reagan was surrounded by men like then-Assistant Secretary of State Paul Wolfowitz (later to become infamous for his role in promoting a post-9/11 invasion of Iraq), who assumed Gorbachev was a typical Soviet "master of deceit." But for all his hawkishness, the president had other instincts as well. Events would show that, on the subject of nukes (SDI notwithstanding), Reagan had indeed recognized the threat to the human future posed by the open-ended accumulation of ever more of those weapons and had become a kind of nuclear abolitionist. Even if ending that threat was inconceivable to him, his desire to mitigate it would prove genuine.

At the time, however, Reagan had other problems to deal with. Just as Gorbachev put forward his surprising initiative, the American president found himself engulfed in the Iran-Contra scandal -- a criminal conspiracy to trade arms for hostages with Iran, while illegally aiding right-wing paramilitaries in Central America. It threatened to become his Watergate. It would, in the end, lead to the indictments of 14 members of his administration. Beleaguered, he desperately wanted to change the subject. A statesman-like rescue of faltering arms-control negotiations might prove just the helping hand he was looking for. So the day before he went on television to abjectly offer repentance for Iran-Contra, he announced that he would accept Gorbachev's INF proposal. His hawkish inner circle was thoroughly disgusted by the gesture. Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger promptly resigned in protest. (He would later be indicted for Iran-Contra.)

On December 8, 1987, Reagan and Gorbachev would indeed meet in Washington and sign the INF Treaty, eliminating more than 2,000 ground-based warheads and giving Europe the reprieve its people had wanted. This would be the first actual reduction in nuclear weapons to occur since two atomic bombs were built at Los Alamos in 1945. The INF Treaty proved historic for turning back the tide of escalation. It showed that the arms race could be not just frozen but reversed, that negotiations could lead the two superpowers out of what seemed like the ultimate impasse -- a model that should be urgently applicable today.

In reality, the mutually reinforcing hair-trigger nuclear posture of the United States and the Soviet Union was not much altered by the treaty, since only land-based, not air- and submarine-launched missiles, were affected by it and longer range ICBMs were off the table. (Still, Europe could breathe a bit easier, even if, in operational terms, nuclear danger had not been much reduced.) Yet that treaty would prove a turning point, opening the way to a better future. It would be essential to the political transformation that quickly followed, the wholly unpredicted and surprisingly non-violent end to the Cold War that arrived not quite two years later. The treaty showed that the arms race itself could be ended -- and eventually, it nearly would be. That is the lesson that somehow needs to be preserved in the Trump era.

A Man for All Apocalypses

In reality, the Trump administration's abandonment of the INF Treaty has little to do with the actual deployment of intermediate-range missiles, whether those that the Pentagon may now seek to emplace in Europe or those apparently already being put in place in Russia. In truth, such nuclear firepower will not add much to what submarine- and air-launched cruise missiles can already do. As for Vladimir Putin's bellicosity, removing the restraints on arms control will only magnify the Russian leader's threatening behavior. However, it should be clear by now that Donald Trump's urge to trash the treaty comes from his own bellicosity , not from Russian (or, for that matter, Chinese) aggressiveness. Trump seems to deplore the pact precisely because of what it meant to Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, as well as to the millions who cheered them on long ago: its repudiation of an apocalyptic future. (As his position on climate change indicates, the president is visibly a man for all apocalypses.)

Trump has launched a second nuclear age by rejecting the treaty that was meant to initiate the closing of the first one. The arms race was then slowed, but, alas, the competitors stumbled on through the end of the Cold War. Shutting that arms-contest down completely remained an unfinished task, in part because the dynamic of weapons reduction proved so reversible even before Donald Trump made it into the Oval Office. George W. Bush, for instance, struck a blow against arms control with his 2002 abrogation of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which rekindled Reagan's Star Wars fantasy. The way Washington subsequently promoted missile defense systems in Europe, especially in Poland, where a nearly $5 billion missile contract was agreed to this year, empowered the most hawkish wing of the Kremlin, guaranteeing just the sort of Russian build-up that has indeed occurred. If present Russian intermediate-range missile deployments are in violation of the INF Treaty, they did not happen in a vacuum.

Barack Obama, of course, won the Nobel Peace Prize in the early moments of his presidency for his vision of a nuclear-weapons-free world, yet not even he could curb the malevolent influence of nuclear planning in the Pentagon and elsewhere in Washington. To get approval of the 2010 New START Treaty, which was to further reduce the total number of strategic warheads and launchers on both sides, from the Republican Senate, the Peace Laureate president had to agree to an $80 billion renewal of America's existing nuclear arsenal just when it was ripe for a fuller dismantling. That devil's bargain with Washington's diehard nuclear hawks further empowered Russia's similarly hawkish militarists.

All of this reflects a pattern established relatively early in the Cold War years. U.S. arms escalations in that era -- from the long-range bomber and the hydrogen bomb to the nuclear-armed submarine and the cruise missile to the "high frontier" of space -- inevitably prompted the Kremlin to follow in lockstep (and these days, you would need to add the Chinese into the equation as well). Americans should recall that, since August 6, 1945, the ratcheting up of nuclear weapons competition has always begun in Washington. And so it has again.

By the time the Obama administration left office, the Defense Department was already planning to "modernize" the U.S. nuclear arsenal in a massively expensive way. Last February, with the release of the Pentagon's 2018 Nuclear Posture Review, the Trump administration committed to that arsenal's full bore reinvention, big time, to the tune of at least $1.2 trillion and possibly $1.6 trillion over the next three decades. ICBM silos only recently slated for closing will be rebuilt. There will be new generations of nuclear-armed bombers and submarines, as well as nuclear cruise missiles. There will be wholly new nuclear weapons expressly designed to be "usable." And in that context, American nuclear strategy is also being recast. For the first time, the United States is now explicitly threatening to launch those "usable" weapons in response to non-nuclear assaults.

The surviving lynchpin of arms control is that New START Treaty that mattered so to Obama in 2010. It capped deployed strategic nuclear warheads at 1,550 and implied that there would be further reductions to come. It must, however, be renewed in 2021. Trump is already on record calling it a bad deal, but he may not have to wait until possible reelection in 2020 to do it in. His INF Treaty abrogation might do the trick first. Limits on long-range strategic missiles may not survive the pressures that are sure to follow an arms race involving the intermediate variety.

No less worrisome, the Trump administration's fervent support for the Pentagon's modernization, and so reinvention, of the American nuclear arsenal amounts to a blatant violation of the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which required nuclear powers to work toward "the cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date." The president's explicit desire to maintain an ever more lethal nuclear arsenal into the indefinite future violates that requirement and will certainly undermine that treaty, too.

It's no exaggeration to say that those arms control treaties, taken together, probably saved the world from a nuclear Armageddon

[Nov 05, 2018] James Carroll Entering the Second Nuclear Age by Tom Engelhardt

Notable quotes:
"... TomDispatch ..."
"... The Fate of the Earth ..."
"... In that remarkable volume, Schell offered a stunning vision of what a ten-thousand-megaton nuclear strike on the U.S. might mean. ("In the ten seconds or so after each bomb hit, as blast waves swept outward from thousands of ground zeros, the physical plant of the United States would be swept away like leaves in a gust of wind.") In the end, after radiation had also taken its toll, he wrote, the United States -- in a phrase that's haunted me ever since -- "would be a republic of insects and grass." ..."
Nov 04, 2018 | www.unz.com

He was the candidate who, while talking to a foreign policy expert, reportedly wondered "why we can't use nuclear weapons." He was the man who would never rule anything out or take any "cards," including nuclear ones, off the proverbial table. He was the fellow who, as president-elect, was eager to expand the American nuclear arsenal and told Morning Joe host Mika Brzezinski, "Let it be an arms race. We will outmatch them at every pass and outlast them all." I'm referring, of course, to the president who, early on, spoke with his top national security officials of returning the country to a Cold War footing when it came to such weaponry and called for the equivalent of a tenfold expansion of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. I'm thinking of the president who once threatened North Korea with "fire and fury like the world has never seen" and proudly claimed that he had a "bigger nuclear button" than that country's leader, Kim Jong-un.

Given his fascination with nuclear weaponry, it's hardly surprising that the very same president would decide to pull the U.S. out of the Cold War-era 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) or that his vice president would refuse to rule out -- another potentially treaty-busting act -- the deployment of nuclear weapons in space. It's a gesture that, as TomDispatch regular and former Boston Globe columnist James Carroll explains today, could not be more devastating when it comes to creating a new nuclear arms race on this increasingly godforsaken planet of ours. Reading Carroll's piece, I thought of a mobilizing nuclear moment in my own life. It was the time in 1982 when I read Jonathan Schell's bestselling book The Fate of the Earth , which helped create a global anti-nuclear movement, millions of active citizens desiring a nuke-free world, that prepared the way for the INF Treaty.

In that remarkable volume, Schell offered a stunning vision of what a ten-thousand-megaton nuclear strike on the U.S. might mean. ("In the ten seconds or so after each bomb hit, as blast waves swept outward from thousands of ground zeros, the physical plant of the United States would be swept away like leaves in a gust of wind.") In the end, after radiation had also taken its toll, he wrote, the United States -- in a phrase that's haunted me ever since -- "would be a republic of insects and grass."

That, in other words, is what it might mean, in the twenty-first century, as in the previous one, for a president to put all those nuclear "cards" back on the table and "outmatch and outlast them all."

[Nov 05, 2018] Nuclear war threat is now real

Nov 05, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Northern Star November 5, 2018 at 2:25 pm

USA Psychopaths in Power WATCH:

"Phil Collins
The only thing that can stop this ever happening is if the American people stand up to these psychopaths running their country its called people power and would stop them in their tracks madmen now run the Whitehouse"

https://youtu.be/OpQuUMURex8

[Nov 05, 2018] Both in Skriplas affair and in Syria the UK is slowly sinking to its appropriate level of incompetence and self-delusion

Nov 05, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

et Al November 5, 2018 at 8:22 am

I'm not surprised that you are such a fine shot with his harpoon considering your naval background, Mark! The UK is slowly sinking to its appropriate level of incompetence and self-delusion with the likes of former PM Dave Cameron declaring that he is 'shit bored' and would like to return to cabinet, preferably as Foreign Minister. That could be arranged, but as Foreign minister in Libya.

Still, the whole 'Russian corrupting in Britain' is the British government's perception management at its finest. As someone recently posted on the last thread, a Spanish case against RUSSIAN MAFIA collapsed for lack of evidence after ten years , which I suspect was partly provided by British Intelligence paid organized crime experts from Russia like Litvenenko & Skripal. Who's been bilked then?

Yes, this is a classic case of 'LOOK OVER THERE!' rather than the billions upon billions sunk in to London by the UK and the west's bestest Gulf buddies, you know, the one's who fear not their exposure for outrageous human rights abuses on a genocidal scale such as in Yemen, and a much smaller scale with the likes of their own citizens, sic Kashoggi. But, Chelsea & Westminster are such a fundamental part of British Life (coz its London, innit?) and does very well for itself. I have to admit, it is (mostly) nice around there where you can take a stroll along the Embankment, wander around Hyde Park and visit the museums.

Northern Star November 5, 2018 at 5:33 pm
"Like in the Wild West, betting in the saloon is also common when it comes to Syria. The US State Department under Obama placed all its bets on some entity they invented, which they liked to call "moderate rebels" (why not "respectable terrorists" or "polite criminals"?). They lost. Numerous left-wing academics signed on to regime change years ago, and because they only pretend to be seasoned analysts for their day jobs, they did not foresee the collapse of the anti-government forces in Syria. That list included noted "post-colonial" scholars and anthropologists, united in their belief in "democracy promotion" and remaking Syria into something palatable to them, with the right leaders in place. Five years later and a smaller group -- including feminists like Gloria Steinem and Judith Butler, anarchists like Noam Chomsky and the anthropologist David Graeber, the Marxist David Harvey, and advocates of recolonization like Michael Walzer -- placed their bets on socialist Kurdish militias, presumably increasing the value of their bet by the important sign value of their brand name authority. Ironically, in the process of reimagining legendary Rojava as the site of a second Spanish Civil War, they were openly collaborating with Donald Trump (not naming him directly, since "the US government" was more convenient). These signatories were thus complicit with the very same commander-in-chief of the armed forces they were calling on for support of Syrian Kurds. They wanted "the US government," whose President is Donald Trump, to impose sanctions on Turkey, and to develop a foreign policy that put Kurdish interests at the forefront. You can be sure that, elsewhere, in front of different crowds, they return to "the Resistance" by puffing up their little chests and sounding all "anti-Trump" -- but when it came to cheering their favourite band of ethnic anarchists, they could dispense with appearances. Less "prestigious" characters, publishing in a less "prestigious" outlet, countered the call to "defend Rojava", a call which appropriated "progressive" politics for the cause of imperialism (thus reigniting an old marriage). (David Harvey, by the way, having cashed in on abundant sales of his volume, The New Imperialism, has recently changed his mind: he has decided that imperialism is merely a metaphor, "rather than anything real". Out of curiosity, we have to wonder if "capitalism" is also a metaphor, rather than anything real, seeing how Marxists have linked capitalism with imperialism. Perhaps even socialism is a metaphor, rather than anything real."

This Canadian has a lot to say well worth reading!!!!!

https://zeroanthropology.net/2018/10/06/syria-the-new-terra-nullius/

https://syria360.wordpress.com/2018/11/04/syria-the-new-terra-nullius/

[Nov 04, 2018] The U.S. Cannot Win Militarily In Afghanistan, Says Top Commander In Shocking Interview

Nov 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Historians of the now seventeen-year old U.S. war in Afghanistan will take note of this past week when the newly-appointed American general in charge of US and NATO operations in the country made a bombshell, historic admission. He conceded that the United States cannot win in Afghanistan .

Speaking to NBC News last week, Gen. Austin Scott Miller made his first public statements after taking charge of American operations, and shocked with his frank assessment that that the Afghan war cannot be won militarily and peace will only be achieved through direct engagement and negotiations with the Taliban -- the very terror group which US forces sought to defeat when it first invaded in 2001.

"This is not going to be won militarily," Gen. Miller said. "This is going to a political solution."

Gen. Austin Scott Miller, the U.S. commander of resolute support, via EPA/NBC

Miller explained to NBC :

My assessment is the Taliban also realizes they cannot win militarily. So if you realize you can't win militarily at some point, fighting is just, people start asking why. So you do not necessarily wait us out, but I think now is the time to start working through the political piece of this conflict.

He gave the interview from the Resolute Support headquarters building in Kabul. "We are more in an offensive mindset and don't wait for the Taliban to come and hit [us]," he said. "So that was an adjustment that we made early on. We needed to because of the amount of casualties that were being absorbed."

Starting last summer it was revealed that US State Department officials began meeting with Taliban leaders in Qatar to discuss local and regional ceasefires and an end to the war . It was reported at the time that the request of the Taliban, the US-backed Afghan government was not invited; however, there doesn't appear to have been any significant fruit out of the talks as the Taliban now controls more territory than ever before in recent years .

Such controversial and shaky negotiations come as in total the United States has spent well over $840 billion fighting the Taliban insurgency while also paying for relief and reconstruction in a seventeen-year long war that has become more expensive, in current dollars, than the Marshall Plan , which was the reconstruction effort to rebuild Europe after World War II.

Even the New York Times recently chronicled the flat out deception of official Pentagon statements vs. the reality in terms of the massive spending that has gone into the now-approaching two decade long "endless war" which began in the immediate aftermath of 9/11.

Via NYT report

As of September of this year the situation was as bleak as it's ever been after over a decade-and-a-half of America's longest running war, per the NYT's numbers :

But since 2017, the Taliban have held more Afghan territory than at any time since the American invasion . In just one week last month, the insurgents killed 200 Afghan police officers and soldiers, overrunning two major Afghan bases and the city of Ghazni.

The American military says the Afghan government effectively "controls or influences" 56 percent of the country. But that assessment relies on statistical sleight of hand . In many districts, the Afghan government controls only the district headquarters and military barracks, while the Taliban control the rest .

For this reason Gen. Miller spoke to NBC of an optimal "political outcome" instead of "winning" -- the latter being a term rarely if ever used by Pentagon and officials and congressional leaders over the past years.

Miller told NBC : "I naturally feel compelled to try to set the conditions for a political outcome. So, pressure from that standpoint, yes. I don't want everyone to think this is forever."

And ending on a bleak note in terms of the "save face" and "cut and run" nature of the U.S. future engagement in Afghanistan, Gen. Miller concluded, "This is my last assignment as a soldier in Afghanistan. I don't think they'll send me back here in another grade. When I leave this time I'd like to see peace and some level of unity as we go forward."

Interestingly, the top US and NATO commander can now only speak in remotely hopeful terms of "some level of unity" -- perhaps just enough to make a swift exit at least. Tags War Conflict Politics

play_arrow Reply Report

God is The Son , 3 minutes ago link

There not going to come out as say, where here because we want BOMB IRAN a few years down the track and maintain US Military deployment for Israel's long-term interests. Israel are suspected of committing 9/11 attacks, if you think about it long term policy of expansion, getting ride of its surrounding threats it's all makes sense. scraficing 3000 americans for Israel's longterm policy's seems to be the pill they were willing to swallow.

R19 , 5 minutes ago link

We spent a lot of money, killed people, and protected and served the **** out of a lot. That is the win that the elite are looking for.

God is The Son , 6 minutes ago link

Prorably remain there because of Zionist Influence in order to get IRAN sooner or later.

veritas semper vinces , 10 minutes ago link

US already lost the war there too.

The Talibans control the country.

US is trying to shift the blame on Russia, as the Talibans went to Moscow for peace talks.

And with Pakistan aligning with Russia/China and Iran ( Pakistan being the main supply route for the US army in Afghanistan), the US army is practically f*cked.

So, this is a face saving movement.

cheoll , 14 minutes ago link

Israhell wants the US bogged down in the Middle East

in order to destroy it, so Apartheid Israhell can become

the regional superpower .

veritas semper vinces , 21 minutes ago link

I just published a caricature of top US generals, including Mattis.

A lot of work , but worth it.

next : Soros, Adelson, Rockefeller and Rothschild.

This is going to take 3-4 days.


https://veritassempervincitscaricaturesdrawings.wordpress.com/

Bricker , 22 minutes ago link

This aint going over well with Trump. not W-W-W-winning?

Tirion , 33 minutes ago link

Good to know that Trump is not prepared to continue to protect Deep State opium production at the taxpayers' expense. I hope he's planning to withdraw US armed forces from all foreign soil.

JuliaS , 26 minutes ago link

Based on what? What did he stop? Which wars did he pull out out of?

Military was a huge contributor to his votes. He's not going to lift a finger. He would have started by pardoning Snowden, or closing Gitmo - something Obama lied about when making campaign promises. Where, here is your chance, Donald. Do at least one single thing that shows you as anything other that a MIC puppet. Just one thing! Anything!

Bombing Syria? Yep. Blind eye to Saudi crimes in Yemen? Yep. Dancing to Zionist demands? Yep.

Trade wars? Oh sure, those things never lead to military conflict either!

Push , 31 minutes ago link

The only reason we were in Afghanistan in the first place was to protect the heroin trade from acquisition by the Taliban. It's time to pull out and let the British protect their poppy fields if they want em that badly.

Push , 28 minutes ago link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUATfLDiwVA

Push , 19 minutes ago link

Notice that Rivera says the Marines just had a visit from Prince Charles. If you want to know more about why we have so much heroin in America now and who benefits.. read Dope Inc.

navy62802 , 42 minutes ago link

Stunning NeoCon victory ... almost 20 years later. This is why I am frightened that John Bolton still has a voice in government.

algol_dog , 47 minutes ago link

It's not about winning. It's about perpetuating a never ending need for defensive tax dollars.

Tirion , 21 minutes ago link

Not tax dollars, Deep State dollars from the sale of opium to fund black projects.

[Nov 03, 2018] NatGasDude

Nov 03, 2018 | community.oilprice.com

+ 45 DR Members + 45 28 posts Posted Wednesday at 03:48 AM

On ‎10‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 11:38 PM, Jan van Eck said: The problem that Qatar faces is one of population and geography. Qatar is dominantly Sunni, but not the really severe branch that envelops KSA. And it sits next door to Bahrain, which is apparently about 70% Shia. Qatar also juts way out into the Gulf, and is thus a convenient sea-land bridge from Iran. Were Iran to go for a land invasion of KSA, then crossing into Qatar with landing craft, or seizing a Qatari airport, is logical. To prevent this, the USA has built a major air base in Qatar, specifically to cut off this route. That big US base is a natural (and juicy) target for Iran should a shooting war break out, and the USA join in against Iran (and that would be logical).

Meanwhile Qatar has this bizarre and unfathomable dysfunctional relationship with MbS, and a very difficult relationship with Bahrain, which has cut off diplomatic relations and sent the Qatari diplomats packing, in 2017. Now Iran is under sanctions, which is stressing their cash receipts. Iran pushes back, against their ideological and religious rivals and enemies the Sunnis, by threatening to either invade or to sink tankers with gas coming out of Qatar. The problem for gas LNG tankers is that the stuff is kept docile by bringing the temp down to minus 176 degrees. If you whack an LNG tanker with a torpedo and breach the container spheres, easy enough to do, then that ship is likely to blow up; one little spark and all that gas will be a salient lesson for all the others.

The deterrent effect of this will be that nobody will dare to tempt fate by sending in an LNG tanker. So Iran can shut down LNG traffic without firing a shot, all they have to do is go crazy and start threatening. Iran has these subs that can go sit on the bottom of the Gulf and pop up to launch a torpedo, and everyone knows it. That is one heck of a deterrent.

Meanwhile you have Europe now heavily dependent on gas. Either the Europeans continue to genuflect to the Russians, which some Europeans at least find unpalatable, or they have to find an alternative source. That is likely going to be the USA. I predict that the aggressions of the Russians, and the problems of Qatar in any real ability to fill long-term contracts, and the threat of force-majeure hovering in the background, brings Europe to buy US LNG.

Qatar delivered 80 million tons last year, as number 1 LNG exporter by a long shot. Australia trailed behind at 56 million, followed by Malaysia 26M, Nigeria 21M, Indonesia 16M, USA 13M, Algeria 12M.

Qatar was responsible for 17M tons exported to EU, followed by Algeria at 10.4M. US Liquefaction capacity is estimated to match the whole Middle East by 2025 with Calcasieu, LA at 4 bcf/day, Brownsville, TX at 3.6 bcf/day; Plaquemines at 3.4 bcf/day; and Nikiski Alaska at 2.6 Bcf/day for the Asian market.

BP has its new 'Partnership Fleet', Shell is chartering heavily and owns a large fleet as well. Gaslog has over 25 modern large capacity vessels on the water, and the order book for 2019-2020 deliveries is extensive, and they will be available for US to EU transport (Tellurian and Cheniere have already chartered Gaslog ships for their exclusive use)

The catch here is that Russia is delivering 10.8 million tons per year via Yamal, and their upcoming Arctic 2LNG that will be on the ice in the Arctic circle adding even more to that production. They have a fleet delivering year round of Teekay and Dynagas ice breaker LNG carriers, and their primary clients have been Belgium, France and Spain during their debut ice breaking season. They are centrally located to maximize deliveries to Asia and Europe.

I doubt that Russia will cut off Europe after spending all that money to secure liquefaction and transport capabilities in the Arctic, but who knows. They are geared up to deliver to Asia, but could only do so in the Summer months, or during the Winter months with the assistance of a Nuclear Icebreaker to lead the ships.

Honestly, I hope that Germany completes the Hamburg LNG Terminal quickly and begins buying US LNG so that we can diversify from our usual Mexico, S Korea, Japan, Spain, Portugal, Chile, Egypt, Jordan clientele. Germany consumed over 90 million CBM of natural gas last year (controversial because they stopped 'officially' disclosing the numbers after 2016, these are OECD estimates from the IEA), and are getting close to Japan's 120 million CBM.

Qatar/Iran tensions could be the perfect storm for a US to EU energy boom.

[Nov 03, 2018] Withdrawing From the INF Treaty Is One of Trump's Most Dangerous Moves Yet

Nov 03, 2018 | original.antiwar.com

It's important to note why the INF Treaty was negotiated in the first place.

In the 1970s, the Soviets developed and began deploying a new "intermediate range" nuclear missile that threatened Europe, Asia, North Africa, and Alaska. The United States responded by deploying "Pershing II" missiles to Germany and Ground Launched Cruise Missiles to several NATO nations in Europe. The Soviet SS-20 and American Pershing II ballistic missiles would have been particularly destabilizing in a crisis by virtue of their short, six- to eleven-minute flight times to target.

Recognizing the danger, US and Soviet leaders agreed upon the INF Treaty, which prohibited the entire class of ground-launched intermediate-range nuclear weapons. The INF entered into force in 1988, and since then 2,692 missiles have been verifiably removed or destroyed.

The INF contributed to the end of the Cold War and played a significant role in reducing the global arms race. The INF also opened the door for other historic nuclear disarmament treaties to be pursued through diplomatic channels. If the United States unilaterally withdrew from the INF, it would set a dangerous and woefully irresponsible precedent for all nuclear-armed nations to renege on their disarmament responsibilities.

In a statement responding to the president's announcement, the European Union declared, "The world doesn't need a new arms race that would benefit no one and on the contrary would bring even more instability."

They're not alone. In the days since Trump's announcement, foreign policy experts, diplomats, former US government officials, and even leaders of other nations have spoken out in opposition to the proposed United States withdrawal from the treaty. Even Mark Hamill, Luke Skywalker himself, has weighed in .

The United States must negotiate with all nuclear-armed countries for total elimination of their nuclear arsenals. In the meantime, it is critical that the INF remain in force, with both parties fully and demonstrably adhering to the terms of this vital international agreement.

If the Trump administration continues along its present foolhardy course, then Congress should use the power of the purse and refuse to fund anything that would support new intermediate-range weapons.

JMartin Fleck is the Nuclear Weapons Abolition Program Director at Physicians for Social Responsibility . Reprinted with permission from Foreign Policy In Focus .

[Nov 03, 2018] Truman Delayed End of WWII to Demonstrate Nuclear Weapons - Daniel Ellsberg on RAI (3-8)

Notable quotes:
"... To intimidate the Soviet Union and prove to Congress the nuclear program should be funded, Truman dropped nuclear weapons on Japan ..."
Nov 02, 2018 | therealnews.com

To intimidate the Soviet Union and prove to Congress the nuclear program should be funded, Truman dropped nuclear weapons on Japan to end the war; no scientist came forward to warn of the dangers to life on earth, says Daniel Ellsberg on Reality Asserts Itself with Paul Jay

DANIEL ELLSBERG: Yes. You know, a more even controversial episode is that Heisenberg- the one who had made the estimate on atmospheric ignition as a possibility, but it would take too long for the bomb- indicated in various ways that he was reluctant to see a bomb coming to Hitler's hands, even though he had joined the Nazi party and he was a very patriotic German, did not want to see Germany to lose the war. But when they learned of the bomb they were discussing being tapped, wiretapped, by the British where they were in custody saying, you know, we didn't really want to do it. Had we wanted to, we would have seen through these obstacles and moved ahead.

American physicists took very great exception to the thesis presented by Thomas Powers on Heisenberg's war, and so forth, that the Germans might have had more qualms than they did, in effect, than Heisenberg- you know, that was a very offensive idea. And he had gone to see Niels Bohr, the father of quantum physics, who came over later and helped the bomb project, in Denmark in a in a quite controversial issue. Heisenberg indicated that he wanted to see if Bohr could find a way of collaborating with the Western scientists in not bringing this bomb about at all. Bohr didn't read what he was saying that way. He thought that he was feeling him out to discover how advanced the Americans were, the British were. Anyway, they were at odds on this point. And it's definitely not settled as to what Heisenberg's actual motives were on that point. But it is interesting how offended, how very the Americans just dismissed any idea.

But actually, it isn't that hard to explain, in a way, because two things. From the American side, the very plausible idea that the Germans were ahead just dismissed virtually all moral considerations from what they were doing. And that's understandable. I couldn't say that then or now, as I am now, I would have felt differently on that point in that light, whether they should move ahead to try to at least match whatever the Germans had. The Germans for that, from their side, didn't have that consideration. They weren't that afraid. They might or might not have been concerned about whether Hitler should have it.

But I will say this. Many of the scientists who were early on in this process, in particular Leo Szilard, fled Nazi Germany right after the Reichstag fire. He went and became an emigre in London, then in the U.S. because of what he saw Hitler would mean. He was sure that war was coming at that point. As he said, by the way, because he was sure the Germans would not resist. Not because they would be enthusiastic about what he was doing, but they wouldn't oppose him effectively. And so he left Germany.

He had the thought that very year in 1933, the possibility of a chain reaction- the first to have that notion- that a heavy element being split by neutrons might emit more neutrons in an explosive, exponential chain reaction, and produce both energy or an enormous explosion. And he patented that idea and gave it to the Admiralty so that would not be known, he thought, to the Germans. He was very anxious that Hitler not get that idea. Later, he was- when he concluded, after uranium had been split. And he concluded with an experiment that he did that it did release extra neutrons in the course of this. He said he shut off the device that was showing this process with a sense that the world was sure to come to grief. In other words, he saw and others saw right from the beginning that this was something that could threaten civilization, and possibly the existence of humanity.

Two other points. In concern that the Germans would get it first, it was Szilard who drafted the letter for Einstein to send- his colleague- to send to Roosevelt, asking, telling about the German possibility, and that we should start a program so that the Germans did not get it first. So he was the, Szilard was a critical figure in getting the program started. Finally, working with Enrico Fermi, that I mentioned earlier, in Chicago, at what they called for cover the Metallurgical Lab, they started the first working reactor, then called a pile, that would demonstrate that you could control the reaction and produce plutonium. The reactors were essential to producing the Pu-239 that was eventually used as the core of the Nagasaki bomb. For most bombs, now. That night, the scientists who were present all celebrated with a bottle of Chianti, and Szilard stayed behind and said to Fermi, "This day may go down as a black day in the history of humanity."

So, some say it was evident from the beginning that this had a potential of, you know, the most, when we say existential threat, literally the case. Not for the globe. Atmospheric ignition, even that would not destroy the earth. Just all the conditions for life on it. It would go like a rock through space. But that was, turned out with a number of tests, finally, that wasn't a big problem. But destroying cities, that's what it was made for, essentially. And by '42 the British had made their major project in the war, having been thrown off the continent earlier, the destroying of cities by firebombing.

PAUL JAY: OK. Before we go there, let me just follow up one thing. When Germany loses the war, and- as you said- there's no other nuclear power, why didn't the American scientists quit the program?

DANIEL ELLSBERG: They worked harder. When Germany ended the war they were pressed to redouble their efforts to get the bomb. Basically, people like Gar Alperovitz, but many others have concluded in the end, in order to have the bomb before the war ended. Which, with the war ended there'd be no excuse for demonstrating it on a city.

PAUL JAY: No, I get why the American military and the government wanted to keep it going. But why didn't the scientists quit?

DANIEL ELLSBERG: They don't have a good answer. Many of them have asked later- they were pressed to do it for national security. And of course, the Japanese too- for all they knew, like the American public, not knowing that the Japanese were discussing, and discussing with their ambassadors in Soviet Union and elsewhere, and with the Soviets their desire to end the war if the Emperor could be kept. There were other conditions that the Army wanted. They wanted more than that even after the bombs. But the Emperor and the people close to him and in the foreign ministry were ready to end the war.

Oppenheimer and the others didn't know that. And they knew that the Japanese were fighting very hard. And the idea of ending the war sooner rather than later- they were actually contributing, in effect, to keeping the war going. Had there been no program, the- almost surely, had there been no bomb program, the offer to negotiate with the Japanese would have been earlier, instead of waiting for the bomb.

PAUL JAY: But the military wanted to be able to prove they had the bomb.

DANIEL ELLSBERG: No, it wasn't the military so much. It was actually Truman and Burns, his foreign secretary. No, the military were in favor of making the offer, on the whole.

And in a matter of fact, here is an almost funny thing in retrospect. LeMay, who was in charge of dropping the bomb in the Pacific, was under Tooey Spaatz, who was in charge of all the Pacific Air Forces. Neither of them were very enthusiastic about the idea of demonstrating the bomb. As Spaatz put it later when he heard about the bomb, how could we justify a large Air Force when the atom bomb exists? Even against Russia, one plane does the work of 300. Now, we have 300. But how do you justify ever using them day after day to burn cities to the ground? And we were doing that. And we killed more people that way, by firebombing, on the night of March 9 and 10, 1945 in Tokyo than either Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

In the spring- or actually, after May of 1945 when the Germans had surrendered, so now we're just facing Japan- for the first time, really, a committee was was put together under James Franck. A Nobel Prize winner who, by the way, regretted his role and Germany's role in introducing poison gas to the world in the First World War, and concluded in his own mind that if the occasion ever arose again, he would demand real consideration in his new country, the U.S., a role, a voice at least, in the policy implications of this scientific development.

So the Franck committee, which included Szilard, and as its rapporteur Eugene Rabinowitz, who later became the head of the Federation of American Scientists, and the editor of The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, with its doomsday clock. Rabinowitz was for many years the editor of that. And they concluded- as I said earlier, the first group really to be looking at it, thinking, amazingly enough, at the problem of where are we going with this? What are the implications of it? What does it mean for the world to have this weapon, and what can we do about it? Should have been done earlier. As I say, I believe if Rotblat had told people they were not racing Germany, they would have had this process months, six months earlier, in the fall, and possibly had much more influence on the final decision.

As I say, their recommendations, that the implications of the U.S. using this as a weapon in war- one bomb, one city- a weapon that would soon become much larger, there would be thousands of them, and would be supplanted by a weapon that was a thousand times more than this, that they thought should not be undertaken. That should be an effort in international control, and that required not having a monopoly of the bomb and using it in warfare. So we should at least, as Niels Bohr said, bring the Russians in as partners. The alternative being they would get it as adversaries within a few years in a cold war, which is what did happen.

So the front committee then met and had these conclusions, which did not get up through channels to the president. Rabinowitz, I learned only in the last couple of years in a thing that was not really published until quite recently, during the Franck Committee proceedings after the report was finished made the proposal that they should reveal, they should go beyond the bounds of security, and reveal to the public, the press and the public, not the details of bomb making, but the fact that this enormous weapon was in prospect and was about to be used. He actually put that in writing. I've never seen anything in writing, ever, like that in government. In effect, a proposal by a government insider to leak.

Obviously, leaks happen all the time. not with much discussion, usually. people don't want other people to know they might be a source. But in this case, Rabinowitz actually made that proposal, and nothing came of it. Then, however, he revealed in a letter to the New York Times in 1971, in June- a time very vivid in my memory because his letter came out in the New York Times while Patricia and I, my wife and I, were eluding the FBI. We were they say underground putting out the Pentagon Papers for 13 days while the FBI was searching for us. So I didn't see this at the time. I wasn't seeing the New York Times. I saw it many years later that while we were underground, he put out this letter saying, in the matter of Daniel Ellsberg that his under public discussion now- they were searching for me- he said, I myself spent sleepless nights in the spring of 1945 considering that I should reveal to the public this prospect- I'm paraphrasing here a little bit, but I remember the sleepless nights very well. And how his letter ended: I still believe that had I done so, I would have been justified. It would have been the right thing to do. Well, indeed, had Americans known about this, as Rabinowitz said later, I have no illusions that they might have supported the use of the bomb anyway. But at least they would have responsibility. They would have known what we were getting into.

And Szilard, by the way, was meanwhile putting a petition together, which eventually had more than 100 scientists, calling at first for not using the bomb even if it would save lives, and then to get more signers saying at least it should not be done without a demonstration, without the serious consideration of the moral concerns. None of this got to Truman. And in fact, Szilard was forbidden to publish the petition, that it had occurred, for decades. And when they finally did publish that there had a petition, they were unwilling to release the names of the scientists with the authority. In other words, that there was this alternative.

The point of all this is that time after time, I think, decisions were made in secret, at high levels, without real consideration of long-term implications of this or of alternative paths; without knowledge that the scientists had of what was coming, or where this might lead, and so forth. And there were people who saw the dangers of this so clearly, that they knew that civilization was in danger. I could go into the same story with respect to the H bomb. And in each case, each one decided to keep his clearance- they were all men- at the time. As a matter of fact, Hans Bethe's wife was one person, who was a physicist, who when Hans told her about the H bomb they were imagining in 1942 said, do you really want to be part of this? And she's the one person on record as sort of having told one of the scientists, think again about this. But Szilard, as I say, they all wanted to say, well, the Germans are in the process, or later the Russians are in the process, and they put aside moral considerations. But not one of them took the step of acting on his concerns and fears to bring the public and the Congress into the picture, and to have a discussion of whether this was the way that we wanted to go.

The bottom line for me is from the time they knew that Germany did not have the bomb- and I'm saying now the fall of '45 for the British, at least, and Rotblat- the overwhelming consideration about that bomb should have been how do we keep it from being an instrument of national policy, by us or anybody? Now, that was far from the minds of the people at the top. The idea of having a monopoly of it was so irresistible. There was no discussion whatever of not doing it at that level. They say the Franck notion didn't get to them. And they didn't- Franck didn't tell them, Rabinowitz didn't tell them, Szilard didn't tell them. By the way, the FBI were afraid that Szilard, knowing his views, would leak on this, that he was under constant surveillance. But as far as we know, it didn't occur to him to actually tell. C.P. Snow, who had been in charge of scientific recruitment at one point- later a novelist in Britain, I've read all his novels- commented, actually, on my case, in Esquire, after I was indicted for the Pentagon Papers, along with several other people. And he said, I would not- you know, I had sworn an oath not to tell secrets. I would not have done what Ellsberg did. However, I do have the feeling that if Einstein had been made aware of what was coming, he would have found a way to tell the public and bring them in.

It's very interesting what if- you know, conjecture. Because as a matter of fact, Szilard did meet with Einstein in '45 to send his report, or his views, to Roosevelt. And before that was actually set up Roosevelt died, and he was sidetracked over to Burns, who didn't sympathize with this at all. But he couldn't tell Einstein why he wanted to see Roosevelt, because Einstein wasn't cleared. Einstein was a pacifist. Not about World War II, not about Hitler. But he was generally a pacifist; later head of the War Resisters League. And they didn't trust him. So he didn't get a clearance, and he was never involved in the Manhattan Project, having laid the theoretical foundations for it himself earlier. Szilard didn't tell Einstein, because that would have put his own clearance in jeopardy, frankly. And they warned him. Groves and others warned him. Keep in mind, this stuff is classified. Your clearance is at stake here, and so forth.

No one actually came out, in the end. Oppenheimer, others who opposed the H bomb, did not reveal to a totally unwitting and ignorant public or Congress what they knew, having been persuaded that that would be unpatriotic. It would be not gentlemanly. That's what Dean Acheson told them. Don't let them know why you are resigning from the General Advisory Commission. In fact, don't resign at this time, because people will ask you why. Don't tell them the reason is because an H bomb threatens the existence of humanity.

Fermi, on the General Advisory Commission at that time along with Isidor Rabi, signed a report saying the super, the thermonuclear weapon, is in itself an evil thing. It should not exist. And they even with Rabi proposed something like a test ban, moratorium. We won't test first unless you do. But Truman overruled Fermi, and worked on the bomb; Bethe worked on the bomb. They all did, you know, patriotically and whatnot. And that's why we're where we are. Nobody felt, on the one hand, strongly enough to risk their own careers and their own status. Or to put in a little better light, their own identity as people who were trusted by the president to keep his secrets, whatever they were, was so important to them that it didn't even occur to them that the public maybe ought to know about this. Where Rabinowitz is an interesting exception is he did wrestle with that.

PAUL JAY: OK. In the next segment of our interview we're going to talk about those firebombings, and how in 1942 the British established the precedent for it. Please join us for Reality Asserts Itself with Daniel Ellsberg on The Real News Network.

[Nov 02, 2018] A color revolution in the making: Vladimir Kara-Murza and Keith Gessen at Columbia University

Notable quotes:
"... Along with Nemtsov, Kara-Murza was an early backer of the US congressional passage of the Magnitsky Act in 2012, which targets Russian oligarchs and officials who support the Putin regime and are accused of corruption and human rights abuses. ..."
"... Since 2014, Kara-Murza has worked for the Open Russia Foundation, which was founded by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who rose to become one of the most powerful and richest oligarchs of Russia during the 1990s and was imprisoned by Putin in 2003. ..."
"... Gessen also teaches at Columbia University's Journalism School and is the brother of Masha Gessen, who has been heavily involved in the anti-Putin media propaganda for many years. ..."
Nov 02, 2018 | www.wsws.org

On Wednesday, October 17, Vladimir Kara-Murza, a leading Russian liberal oppositionist, was interviewed by Keith Gessen, editor of the n+1 magazine, in an event hosted by Columbia University's Harriman Institute for the Study of Eurasia, Russia and Eastern Europe. The event was a stark testimony to the advanced preparations for a US-backed "color revolution" in Russia, i.e., an imperialist-orchestrated and funded movement of a section of the oligarchy and upper middle class to topple the Putin regime, similar to those that have taken place in Ukraine and Georgia.

Vladimir Kara-Murza is one of the many shadowy figures of Russian politics who, while little known to most people inside or outside Russia, are playing a key role in directing and supporting the US anti-Russia policy and the course of the Russian pro-US liberal opposition. The son of Vladimir Kara-Murza, Sr., who was a major figure in the oligarch-controlled Russian media under Boris Yeltsin in the 1990s, Vladimir Kara-Murza, Jr. worked for many years as the right-hand man of Boris Nemtsov, one of Yeltsin's key allies in the 1990s and a right-wing political opponent of Putin, who was assassinated in 2015 under murky circumstances.

Along with Nemtsov, Kara-Murza was an early backer of the US congressional passage of the Magnitsky Act in 2012, which targets Russian oligarchs and officials who support the Putin regime and are accused of corruption and human rights abuses. He has lobbied for the adoption of similar legislation by governments throughout the world. Through this work, Kara-Murza also became close to the late John McCain, one of Washington's foremost supporters of "color revolutions" throughout the territory of the former Soviet Union. In August, Kara-Murza served as a pallbearer at McCain's funeral, along with former Vice President Joe Biden and the actor Warren Beatty.

Since 2014, Kara-Murza has worked for the Open Russia Foundation, which was founded by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who rose to become one of the most powerful and richest oligarchs of Russia during the 1990s and was imprisoned by Putin in 2003.

In short, Kara-Murza has been at the center of the operations for a color-revolution-type movement in Russia for years. And this is precisely what he was invited to speak on with the self-styled leftist and Russia expert Keith Gessen, founding editor of the n+1 magazine, one of the most popular magazines among pseudo-left circles. (Gessen also teaches at Columbia University's Journalism School and is the brother of Masha Gessen, who has been heavily involved in the anti-Putin media propaganda for many years.)

The event started with Keith Gessen asking Kara-Murza about the assassination of Boris Nemtsov which the latter, of course, attributed to the Kremlin. For most of the discussion, however, Kara-Murza detailed his involvement in the preparations for a color revolution in Russia.

Kara-Murza insisted that "the history of Russia teaches us that big political changes in our country can start quickly and unexpectedly." He referred to both the 1905 Revolution and the February Revolution of 1917, which, as Kara-Murza pointed out, even took Lenin by surprise, and then the collapse of the USSR "in three days" in 1991. "This is how things happen in Russia", he insisted, and "the problem with this is that nobody is prepared. We [at the Open Russia Foundation] see it as our mission to begin those preparations for future change now. We cannot afford to not be ready again. Most of the things we do inside of Russia is targeted at preparing for this future transition."

The Open Russia Foundation, he continued, had 25 regional branches and a series of working groups which were already elaborating plans for political reforms and constitutional changes for the post-Putin period. Furthermore, they were focusing on "work with the new generation, the people who will be in charge of Russia" through training and education programs. Lastly, they were doing "international" work, which he himself was in charge of, which included "outreach" directed, again, at preparing the "future transition."

When later asked by an audience member how he saw the future of Russia in the next few decades, he declared that this change would come not within the next few decades, but within the next few years.

When he was asked from the audience whether the latest pension reform, which is opposed by over 90 percent of the population, could trigger the kind of "sudden change" he was expecting, Kara-Murza said: "It could but it doesn't have to. There is always the argument that it's [going to be] something of a socio-economic nature. Actually, if we look at the two decades of Putin, the peak of the protests was in December 2011 when the middle class was booming. It was about dignity, it had nothing do to with social issues. The trigger will not be necessarily economic."

He continued, "The only really shaky point [for Putin] was when so many people felt insulted that the government was wiping its feet over them. I think it's going to be something like that. A color revolution of dignity," like the events in Ukraine in 2014. In other words, what Kara-Murza and the Open Russia Foundation are working on is the promotion of a right-wing middle-class movement similar to the Maidan in Ukraine, which would provide the basis for a coup to topple the current government.

The key figures and mechanisms for such a "color revolution" were also addressed at some length. Keith Gessen asked how Kara-Murza viewed the campaign of the blogger Alexei Navalny, who, as the WSWS has written, is a far-right, pro-US figure who cloaks his right-wing program behind murky phrases about corruption. Just how fraudulent and politically calculated this focus is became clear in the discussion when Keith Gessen asked whether Navalny's focus on corruption as the center of his political platform was "a winning platform." Kara-Murza responded: "Yes, it is. Corruption is such a widely understandable issue. It's an issue that everybody is aware of."

In the discussion, a graduate student from Harriman asked whether the Open Russia Foundation had a "particular road map" for what to do when the "sudden event" Kara-Murza expected actually occurred. Kara-Murza replied: "If there were a model, it would be something like the Polish roundtable [of 1989]. The way we want a transition to happen in Russia is peaceful and smooth. We don't want a violent revolution. Russia has had enough revolutions. The problem is that the people who are in power today are doing everything for a revolution to occur."

Then, he went into the figures who would be included in such a roundtable. "Of course, Boris Nemtsov would have been at the roundtable", but, he assured his audience, there were many others. The figures he named were: Yevgeni Roizman, the mayor of Yekaterinburg, who is a notorious far-right-winger, with deep ties to the local mafia. In Russia, he became known above all through his alleged "drug" relief program, which has involved heavy physical abuse of drug addicts.

He also named Galina Shirshina, a member of the liberal opposition party Yabloko (which Nemtsov led until his assassination) as well as Lev Shlosberg, a local politician in Pskov who is also a leading member of "Yabloko." Finally, Kara-Murza named Dmitri Gudkov, who is heading the opposition "Party of Changes" with Ksenia Sobchak, the daughter of Putin's mentor Anatoly Sobchak, who ran as a presidential candidate this year .

"Navalny and Khodorkovsky would obviously also be at the roundtable", Kara-Murza added. When Gessen asked "What about the Communists?" Kara-Murza said that Sergei Udaltsov, the leader of the Stalinist and National Bolshevik "Left Front", may also hope for a seat at the roundtable. "We have very different views, but we have a good personal relationship. He's a decent human being, politically and on a human level."

Then, he added, "there are also many nationalists who are not controlled by the Kremlin" and who could join the roundtable. Throughout the event, Kara-Murza repeated that he and his allies were the true patriots and Russian nationalists, as opposed to Putin and the oligarchs and officials around him. "I just don't want to bore everyone with a long list of names," he said, as he concluded his enumeration of prospective of roundtable participants.

Like all Russian liberal oppositionists, Kara-Murza makes a hue and cry about rigged elections under Putin. Yet at no point did he even mention the possibility of an election before or after such a "roundtable," the participants of which have most evidently already been discussed and set.

There could hardly be a more open statement about the complicity of the so called opposition forces in Russian in a premeditated, US-backed plot to overthrow the Putin regime and install another, more pro-US, right-wing government in its place.

Kara-Murza speaks for a section of the oligarchy which not only seeks to gain control over the social and economic wealth of Russia, but also fears that a continuation of the Putin regime will threaten not only Russia's geopolitical position, but also social revolution. They see their main goal in making sure that a reshuffling within the oligarchy and upper middle class takes place, to assure both a reorientation of Russian foreign policy more directly in line with the interests of imperialism, and the ongoing suppression of the working class.

The complete indifference toward the implications of these policies for the masses of working people in Russia was at full display when Kara-Murza defended the process of capitalist restoration and the 1990s as time when Russia was actually make headway on the world stage: Russia was included in the G8 and finally internationally recognized, Kara-Murza stressed.

He contemptuously dismissed any criticism of the 1990s by referring to this decade as the "supposedly horrible 90s." The fact that the Russian economy experienced the worst collapse recorded in modern history for peacetime; that life expectancy plummeted, that hundreds of thousands committed suicide and were driven into substance abuse and that workers were going without pay for months and years, all of this is evidently of no concern to him.

Underlining the recklessness of the whole operation, the question of the potential consequences of a "color revolution" was not even raised. But anyone who looks at the past three decades of US foreign policy knows where this type of intervention of leads: civil war, ethnic strife, dictatorial regimes, and decades of economic, social and economic crisis. In the case of Russia, a "color revolution" would most likely mean the violent break-up of the Russian Federation -- many opposition leaders in fact argue for different borders of Russia. It would, moreover, raise the very immediate danger of a nuclear catastrophe: what if a section of the military resorts to the vast nuclear arsenal of Russia to defend its interests? And what will the US military and NATO do if a color revolution underway in Russia suddenly threatens to go astray? Will they intervene directly militarily?

The involvement of Keith Gessen in this dubious event is revealing. At no point did he raise something akin to a critical question. His role was nothing but to ask polite questions and provide Kara-Murza with a platform. A self-styled leftist, Gessen has translated and published the writings of Kirill Medvedev, a leading figure in the Russian Socialist Movement (RSM), a Pabloite formation in Russia. This year, he published a novel "A Terrible Country" in which he, yet again, promotes the Russian pseudo-left. In 2014, the RSM fully backed the far-right coup in Kiev. In Russia itself, the RSM has long shifted toward full support for Alexei Navalny's right-wing "anti-corruption campaign," ignoring or dismissing his history of support for Russian fascism and racism. The role of Gessen in this event is emblematic of the role of these forces as handmaidens US and European imperialism.

It was befitting for Columbia University's Harriman Institute to host this event: the first interdisciplinary Russia institute to be formed after the beginning of the Cold War, it has historically been associated with US imperialist plotting against first the Soviet Union and then Russia. To this day, the Harriman Institute, which is a non-profit, functions primarily as a think tank as well as an educational and recruiting center for Washington's foreign policy establishment and the CIA.

For much of its existence, the Harriman Institute was dominated by the figure and work of Zbigniew Brzezinski who, for over half a century, played a central role in elaborating the world strategy and justifying the war crimes of US imperialism. One of Brzezinski's political trademarks was his advocacy for fostering political opposition and insurrections in the Soviet Union, to undermine the regime and thus fight what he saw as one of the US's main competitors for the control of Eurasia. The "color revolution" strategy of US imperialism since 1991 stands in precisely this tradition. Now as then, far-right forces within the elites and fake left tendencies are the props of imperialism "on the ground."

Events like the one at Columbia reveal much about the state of world politics. "Color revolutions" which will impact the lives of hundreds of millions and threaten civil and all-out nuclear war, are being discussed and plotted behind the exclusive doors of an Ivy League institution with an audience of some 50 people, most of whom are graduate students and professors who, one may assume, either already are on the payroll of the CIA and the State Department or seeking to get there.

The Putin regime offers no alternative to these imperialist machinations. Like the sections of the oligarchy that Kara-Murza speaks for, Putin and his cronies have emerged out of and enriched themselves on the basis of the destruction of the Soviet Union which was carried by the Stalinist bureaucracy hand-in-gloves with imperialism. It considers not imperialism, but the Russian working class to be its main enemy, and, hence, responds to every imperialist provocation is a response of desperate attempts to find a deal with imperialism, largely behind closed doors, and the promotion of nationalism and militarism at home.

This sinister event is a warning to the international working class about the advanced preparations for the next step in the efforts of US imperialism to topple the Putin regime and bring the resources of Russia under its direct control: it is high time for workers both in the US and in Russia to intervene in politics on an independent basis to put an end to these dangerous conspiracies of imperialism through the struggle for socialism.

[Nov 02, 2018] By Way Of Deception - False Flag Terror Acts Press Europe To Sanction Iran by B

Looks like Iran was "Skripaled". Intelligence agencies are now capable to perform false flag operation in thier home countries and blame other government with absolute impunity.
Notable quotes:
"... Israels secret service Mossad, with the CIA behind it, is framing Iran with alleged assassination plots in Europe. ..."
"... It is unlikely that Iran would take action in Europe, which it urgently needs to reduce the damage of U.S. sanction, over an incident for which it already punished the Islamic State. ..."
"... The Danish claims are allegedly based on information provided by Mossad. That only increases the suspicion that the assassination plot is a false flag operation similar to a recent one in Belgium. More likely though is that the CIA is behind such false flag incidents. ..."
"... Bahram Ghasemi, Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman, said Iran "re-emphasized" to the diplomats a previous warning about the presence in their respective countries of members of a group that Iran classifies as a terrorist group and wants arrested and prosecuted. ..."
"... On October 30 Denmark suddenly accused Iran of an assassination plot against a leader of the ASMLA group ..."
"... It indeed seems that Danish government, led by the rightwing Venstre party, is collaborating with the U.S. and Britain to sabotage the European position against U.S. sanctions on Iran ..."
"... The former Secretary General of NATO and U.S. stooge Anders Fogh Rasmussen is the predecessor of the current Venstre party leader and Danish premier Lars Lřkke Rasmussen. Both are hawks. ..."
"... Yesterday Israeli journalist reported that the information on which Denmark acted came from Israel ..."
"... Iran's foreign minister accuses Israel of running false flag operations to frame Iran ..."
"... Times of Israel ..."
"... Iran has no interest in causing any upheaval with Europe shortly before the second round of U.S. sanctions, which threaten its economic well being, come into place early this month. Iran already took revenge for the Ahvaz attack. It has no need to tackle some unrelated separatist who resides in Denmark. Iran needs Europe to work around the U.S. sanctions. That aim prohibits any such operations. ..."
"... Both, the MEK plot as well as the case in Denmark, smell of false flag incidents. In both case no one was hurt. In both cases some stooges with no current relation to Iran were caught. Both cases came to light after information was allegedly provided by Mossad ..."
"... "Both, the MEK plot as well as the case in Denmark, smell of false flag incidents. In both case no one was hurt." Just like with the "bombs" shipped to a few US "liberals" recently. ..."
"... It was only going to be a matter of time until Iran got Skripalled. Iran's Foreign Minister Javad Zarif Tweets a list : "Incredible series of coincidences. Or, a simple chronology of a MOSSAD program to kill the JCPOA?" ..."
Nov 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Israels secret service Mossad, with the CIA behind it, is framing Iran with alleged assassination plots in Europe.

In September a terror attack killed some 30 people in Iran. Two entities, an Arab separatist movement as well as the Islamic State terror group ISIS, took responsibility. After an investigation Iran found that it was ISIS which was responsible. It took revenge against the identified culprits.

Six weeks later Denmark claims, without providing evidence, that Iran tried to assassinate a leader of the Arab separatist movement over the incident. Iran denies any such attempt. The right wing Danish government uses the claim to urge other European countries to sanction Iran.

It is unlikely that Iran would take action in Europe, which it urgently needs to reduce the damage of U.S. sanction, over an incident for which it already punished the Islamic State.

The Danish claims are allegedly based on information provided by Mossad. That only increases the suspicion that the assassination plot is a false flag operation similar to a recent one in Belgium. More likely though is that the CIA is behind such false flag incidents.

The details:

On September 22 gunmen killed 29 and wounded more than 70 participants and onlookers of a veterans day parade in Ahvaz, Iran:

Three of the attackers were gunned down during clashes with the security forces and one other was arrested, news agencies reported.
...
"The terrorists disguised as Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) and Basiji (volunteer) forces opened fire to the authority and people from behind the stand during the parade," the governor of Khuzestan, Gholam-Reza Shariati, said, according to IRNA.

U.S. State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert also referred to the attack as terrorism. Nauert said on Saturday, "We stand with the Iranian people against the scourge of radical Islamic terrorism and express our sympathy to them at this terrible time".

The Islamic State as well as an Arab separatist movement claimed responsibility :

On 22 September 2018, Yaqoob Al-Ahvaz claimed responsibility for the 2018 Ahvaz military parade attack in comments to UK-based Iran International TV. He said that his group Ahvaz National Resistance, a part of Arab Struggle Movement for the Liberation of Ahvaz, has "no choice but to resist." On 23 September, a statement made in The Hague, Netherlands, on the ASMLA website, denied responsibility for the attack, saying that the claim was made by a "group that was expelled from the organization since 2015."

After Yaqoob Al-Ahvaz claimed responsibility Iran accused Saudi Arabia of involvement in the attack:

IRGC spokesman Ramezan Sharif said the attackers were affiliated with a terrorist group supported by Saudi Arabia, Iran's state-run Press TV said.

"The individuals who fired at the people and the armed forces during the parade are connected to the al-Ahvaziya group which is fed by Saudi Arabia," Sharif said. Saudi Arabia has yet to respond to the allegations.

The UK-based Iran International TV, where Yaqoob Al-Ahvaz claimed responsibility, is funded by a firm with ties to Prince Mohammed bin Salman .

Several years ago ASMLA aka Al-Ahvaziya committed several terror attacks in Iran. Its leaders live in the Netherlands and Denmark.

Iran immediately reminded those countries of their duties:

Iran's Foreign Ministry summoned the ambassadors of the Netherlands and Denmark, along with a senior British diplomat on Saturday to issue a strong protest the attack, Iran's state-run media reports.

Bahram Ghasemi, Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman, said Iran "re-emphasized" to the diplomats a previous warning about the presence in their respective countries of members of a group that Iran classifies as a terrorist group and wants arrested and prosecuted.

According to IRNA, Ghasemi said "it is unacceptable" that members of a terrorist group be allowed in those countries and not be included on the European Union's terror list only because they have not committed crimes on European soil.

A few days later though, Iran concluded that the attack was not committed by the Ahvaz movement, but by the Islamic State. On October 1 it responded with a missile salvo that hit Islamic State facilities in Syria:

The Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) announced they have bombed a site in eastern Syria in retaliation to the terrorist attack against a military parade in Iranian Ahvaz 10 days ago.

...

The IRGC confirmed that the targeted terrorist group was behind the terror attack that killed over a dozen and injured many more in the city of Ahvaz.

An additional operation against the planers of the attack took place on October 15 in Iraq:

Iran's Revolutionary Guards said on Tuesday they had killed the "mastermind" behind an attack on a military parade in the Iranian city of Ahvaz last month which left 25 people dead, nearly half of them members of the Guards.

The Guards said in a statement published on state media their forces had killed a man named Abu Zaha and four other militants in Diyala province in Iraq. One news website run by Iran's state television said Abu Zaha was a member of Islamic State.

That closed the issue for Iran.

On October 30 Denmark suddenly accused Iran of an assassination plot against a leader of the ASMLA group:

Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen described the alleged planned assassination by Iran of an exiled separatist leader in Denmark as "totally unacceptable"

The Iranian ambassador to Copenhagen was summoned to the foreign ministry over the allegations. A Norwegian citizen of Iranian origin was arrested in Sweden on 21 October in connection with the alleged plan. The man denies the charges. Authorities conducted a massive manhunt on 28 September which led to road closures, trains and ferries being cancelled, and bridges being shut across Denmark.

On Tuesday, Danish intelligence chief Finn Borch Andersen confirmed the measures had been taken to prevent the alleged plot.

The Danish intelligence accused the Norwegian citizens of taking pictures of a house where one of the ASMLA leader lives. It provide no evidence for its claims. Iran rejected the accusations:

An Iranian foreign ministry spokesman said such "biased reports" and allegations pursued " the enemy's plots and conspiracies" to harm the developing relations between Iran and Europe , according to Tasnim news agency.

It indeed seems that Danish government, led by the rightwing Venstre party, is collaborating with the U.S. and Britain to sabotage the European position against U.S. sanctions on Iran:

Mr Rasmussen said, after a meeting with his British counterpart Theresa May in Oslo, that he appreciated her support. "In close collaboration with UK and other countries we will stand up to Iran," he tweeted. Foreign Minister Anders Samuelsen said Denmark would discuss further actions with European partners in the coming days.

The US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, congratulated Denmark on arresting "an Iranian regime assassin".

The former Secretary General of NATO and U.S. stooge Anders Fogh Rasmussen is the predecessor of the current Venstre party leader and Danish premier Lars Lřkke Rasmussen. Both are hawks.

Yesterday Israeli journalist reported that the information on which Denmark acted came from Israel:

Barak Ravid @BarakRavid - 10:12 utc- 31 Oct 2018

BREAKING: Israeli Mossad gave Danish Security and Intelligence Service (PET) the information about the assassination attempt planned by Iranian intelligence service against the leader of the Iranian opposition organization ASMLA, Israeli official tells me

Well - if Israeli officials says Iran did something bad that will surely be true. (Not.)

Iran's foreign minister accuses Israel of running false flag operations to frame Iran :

Javad Zarif @JZarif - 20:15 utc - 31 Oct 2018

Mossad's perverse & stubborn planting of false flags (more on this later) only strengthens our resolve to engage constructively with the world. [...]

The Times of Israel notes :

Denmark's accusations against Iran followed the unveiling of another suspected Iranian plot to target a Paris rally by an opposition group in June. According to Israeli reports, the Mossad helped thwart that attack as well , which led to the arrest of several Iranians in Europe, including a diplomat.

The earlier plot involved two members of the anti-Iranian terror cult MEK in Belgium who were caught with explosives that they allegedly wanted to use to blow up a MEK conference in Paris:

The allegation that an Iranian operative plotted an attack on French soil is jeopardizing Europe's support for the accord. As U.S. and Israeli officials ramp up pressure on Europe to sever ties with Tehran, they have cited it as a reason why Mr. Macron and other leaders should end their support for the deal.

On Tuesday, Denmark announced it had foiled an Iranian operation to kill a dissident, turning up the pressure on Europe to harden its posture toward Tehran. A spokesman for Iran's foreign ministry said Iran had no involvement in the case.

The most interesting question about such plots is always "Cui bono?". Who benefits from these incidents?

Iran has no interest in causing any upheaval with Europe shortly before the second round of U.S. sanctions, which threaten its economic well being, come into place early this month. Iran already took revenge for the Ahvaz attack. It has no need to tackle some unrelated separatist who resides in Denmark. Iran needs Europe to work around the U.S. sanctions. That aim prohibits any such operations.

Both, the MEK plot as well as the case in Denmark, smell of false flag incidents. In both case no one was hurt. In both cases some stooges with no current relation to Iran were caught. Both cases came to light after information was allegedly provided by Mossad .

But is it really Israel who set up these incidents? Both serve U.S. interest just as much. It is no secret that the U.S. wants to prevent European subversion of U.S. sanctions on Iran.

In June 2017 the Trump administration installed a new CIA group to plot and launch undercover operations against Iran. It is led by its most ruthless operator:

He is known as the Dark Prince or Ayatollah Mike, nicknames he earned as the Central Intelligence Agency officer who oversaw the hunt for Osama bin Laden and the American drone strike campaign that killed thousands of Islamist militants and hundreds of civilians.

Now the official, Michael D'Andrea, has a new job. He is running the C.I.A.'s Iran operations, according to current and former intelligence officials, an appointment that is the first major sign that the Trump administration is invoking the hard line the president took against Iran during his campaign.

Mr. D'Andrea's new role is one of a number of moves inside the spy agency that signal a more muscular approach to covert operations under the leadership of Mike Pompeo, the conservative Republican and former congressman, the officials said.

A year later the same Mike Pompeo, now Secretary of State, created the Iran Action Group within the State Department. It is a complementary entity to the CIA group. Little has been published about the action both groups have taken so far. What has Ayatollah Mike done since he set up shop 18 month ago?

It is likely that the false flag operations in Europe, like the ones in Belgium and Denmark, are run by the CIA with the Mossad only in an auxiliary role. The U.S. can hardly admit that it is faking terrorist incidents in Europe while the overrated Mossad loves to take credit for everything that happens on this world.

Europe has no interest in supporting or escalating Trump's war on Iran. EU countries should demand hard evidence from Denmark and other accusers of Iran and should not act on the basis of only vague accusations.

Posted by b on November 1, 2018 at 10:30 AM | Permalink

Comments Iran should sue the puppet state Denmark. End of story

worldblee , Nov 1, 2018 10:59:28 AM | link

Israel is regarded as a beneficent country with no ulterior motives by western governments and media. Every time, you can count on like clockwork, no matter how outrageous or self serving the claim.
Occidentosis , Nov 1, 2018 11:08:14 AM | link
@mark2 about yemen you should read peter konig's Khashoggi versus 50,000 Slaughtered Yemeni Children Peter Koenig
https://thesaker.is/khashoggi-versus-50000-slaughtered-yemeni-children-peter-koenig-26-october-2018/
james , Nov 1, 2018 11:17:21 AM | link
thanks b.. i agree with your analysis here.. the usa needs to keep its puppet states. on a string... cia has a long history of these types of actions.. i am surprised at how easily or convenient it is for the puppets to continue as puppets.. and of course as we approach the nov 5 th financial santion bs from the evil empire that claims equality for all (after usa and israel are cared for) will be trying to alienate the rest of the world to iran as much as possible.. the timing here is in line with that goal post.. very predictible, just like our local shill who will claim it is iran as opposed to usa-israel-ksa and etc, that pull this shit regularly.. the same ugly crew responsible for supporting terrorism as witnessed in syria, yemen and etc further back are at work here... predictible..

i suspect more bs to come from these same state sponsored liars....

Mark2 , Nov 1, 2018 11:50:38 AM | link
And just take a look at Britain's disgusting priority's money is more important than preventing / stopping US/UK genacide !
https://mobile.twitter.com/BaFana3/status/1057698127623438336/photo/1
Gary Weglarz , Nov 1, 2018 11:57:22 AM | link
The complete and utter amorality of the West on display yet again, as if we needed any more examples. There is certainly compelling evidence that a group of "extremists" are endangering all of humanity and the entire planet, the only problem for Western MSM in reporting on this is that those "extremists" are in fact the ruling elites of the West and their "allies" in Saudi Arabia and Israel.
Clueless Joe , Nov 1, 2018 11:59:44 AM | link
"Both, the MEK plot as well as the case in Denmark, smell of false flag incidents. In both case no one was hurt." Just like with the "bombs" shipped to a few US "liberals" recently.
WJ , Nov 1, 2018 12:01:42 PM | link
I thought the War on Terror dictated that the whole world was the battlefield. What's the difference between Iran trying to take down a terrorist in Denmark and the US trying to take one down in Pakistan or Afghanistan or Africa?
karlof1 , Nov 1, 2018 12:16:51 PM | link
It was only going to be a matter of time until Iran got Skripalled. Iran's Foreign Minister Javad Zarif Tweets a list : "Incredible series of coincidences. Or, a simple chronology of a MOSSAD program to kill the JCPOA?"

Please note the last listed "coincidence."

Also on Zarif's Twitter is a video segment of his interview with Face The Nation and other important announcements. This is what he said about the Pittsburg attack:

"Extremism and terrorism know no race or religion, and must be condemned in all cases. The world deserves better than to have to live with weaponized demagoguery. Thoughts and prayers with victims of terrorist attack on Pittsburgh synagogue and their loved ones." [My Emphasis]

The nations of the world have had the following choice to make for awhile now, and I'd say the choice can no longer be kicked down the road:

Either blindly follow the two prevaricating Outlaw Nations--United States and Israel--or stand with Russia, China, and others in supporting proven truths and upholding the fundamental principles of International Law as expressed via the UN Charter. In other words, it's past time to review GW Bush's dicta: Either you're with us or against us--abet the lawbreakers or join the posse to contain them.

b , Nov 1, 2018 12:17:18 PM | link
@Mark2 - NO MORE ONE-LINERS FROM YOU or I will ban you.

Every time you come up to this site you disrupt all discussions here by posting 10+ one-line comments.

All those have the same characteristic. They are useless.

Stop this nonsense. Write decent comments that are on the subject of the post or just go away.

ben , Nov 1, 2018 12:19:24 PM | link
The evil empire and their bought minions are infecting the globe. They will never stop until their domination by organised $ brings surfs everywhere under their control.

These forces do not believe in a "middle class", they believe the wealthiest should rule because it creates a more stable and predictable society..

A society Charles Dickens wrote about. Wonderful...

Ger , Nov 1, 2018 12:29:25 PM | link
One needs a high level of stupid among the western population to sell bull s... by the buckets. But then again, that is US and allies. As was said: Too stupid to realize they are stupid. In the US the most trusted institution is the military. Proof enough?
Mark2 , Nov 1, 2018 12:35:54 PM | link
'B' that's o k i'll Just go away good bye good luck, and thanks for having me.
james , Nov 1, 2018 1:34:01 PM | link
about MEK, the terrorist group... our shithead exprime minister steven harper was singing the praises of them the past month.... apparenlty stevie just can't do enough for israel and zionism, and if the canuck media which is essentialy bought and paid for by the same interests has its way, we will get a similar insane gov't after trudeau light is finished his term... apparently canucks are one cycle behind the usa in electing its leaders... it will be a trump type israel subservient toad for next pm of cauckistan... i sure wish the western political players weren't so beholden to neoliberalism. and we had someone even half the leader putin is.... but, we don't....
Vitaliy , Nov 1, 2018 2:12:05 PM | link
East by not responding strongly to West provocations is begging for war.
East by crying for West for cooperation is begging for war.
And since East and West are controlled by the same same cabal - war is inevitable.
Just ask Mr. Kissinger...
hans , Nov 1, 2018 2:19:10 PM | link
The Edomites, who after Rome's extermination of the remnant of the House of Israel at Jerusalem began calling themselves "Jews" for "controlled opposition" for "the real Anti-Christ" "engine for enslaving mankind" we founded God's America to escape, become sex perverts, including incesting Sabbatean Frankists - hence the Manchu-baldness, as a consequence of their satanic cult's ritual sodomy of innocent toddlers while being rabbinically inculcated as "gods chosen by God to rule the world."

It is, in fact, the Synagogue of Satan.

notheonly1 , Nov 1, 2018 2:25:25 PM | link
Wow. Thank You for this one. After reading this excellent assessment of the present situation, of which we might only know the most shallow facts, I had to do a search (DDG) about Iran during the time of the first openly Fascist Europe - being described as having emanated from 3rd-Reich-Germany and Italy.
I was unaware that there was an Anglo-Soviet Invasion of Iran , because of the alleged sympathy of the Shah's Iran with Nazi-Germany. The Brits and the Russians were buddies then and wanted to prevent that Iranian oil is accessible to Nazi-Germany.

All over sudden I am confused that the Brits invaded shoulder to shoulder with Soviet forces Iran - while now, besides delivering the political ham theater of saber rattling against Russia, supporting terror and instigating sanctions against Iran again.

To make things much worse to comprehend, one is to wonder how many European countries actually did join Nazi Germany without much ado at the time, based on the fact that the Scandinavians and the Netherlands are now as Fascist as Nazi Germany was during its short 1000 years of glory. Does anybody else get the impression that this was always this way? That we have been lied to about everything regarding Fascism? That it was never Fascism that was the problem in Europe - as it appears to do very well there - but a strong Germany that could have easily governed its territory via effective 'bureaucracy'. All of Europe.

The truth is, that the stench of Fascism today, was already stinking badly in the 20th century, but was never really a problem. The problem were the Germans. And somehow, the Germans want to continue to have economic ties with Iran. Is this how history repeats itself - minus the marching Soviet/Russian and British buddy forces?

Quite ludicrous the whole theater.

Vitaliy , Nov 1, 2018 2:38:54 PM | link
19
Earth been damned and given to Worldmaster to rule - what else one needs to know?
craigsummers , Nov 1, 2018 2:48:11 PM | link
How many false flag operations have been invoked to explain unpopular events in recent years? The British government was behind the attempted murder of Skripal. All of the chemical attacks launched against the opposition in Syria were false flag operations to bring the US into the war (which amounted to nothing burgers anyway). Ray McGovern hypothesized the US used the Vault 7 tools as a false flag to blame Russia for the DNC hack. Is there any end to false flag speculation?

Who cares if the Iranians deny the charge? That means absolutely nothing. Russia has been lying and denying for years. Additionally, that Mossad would have provided the information to Denmark and France is completely logical since they have been collecting intelligence on Iran for years - and have been dealing with Iranian-supported terrorists for decades.

There is no evidence for a false flag operation. Sure it's a possibility (it's always a possibility), but the current evidence points toward Iranian plans to murder dissidents. The British were right about Skripal. The Dutch were right about MH17. Ray McGovern was wrong about the CIA hacking the DNC - and the likely result of this investigation is that Iran planned to murder a couple of dissidents. In lieu of the stupidity exhibited by the Saudis in the Khashoggi murder, it's completely believable.

With all of that said, this is a well thought out attempt to blame the US.

Red Ryder , Nov 1, 2018 3:00:44 PM | link
Denmark has become another UK, willing to perform any act and light any fuse against Russia, Iran or any nation that challenges the hegemony of US, EU and NATO.

Just a subservient vassal, self-degradating. I would compare Denmark to a whore, but that defames those poor souls.

The Danes are like Brits. There, I said it. Nothing worse than the official scumbags of Britain. Pity the good folks of both countries.

Such a little country desperately trying to hide their true Nazi soul, fabricating events and promulgating Fake News and bogus Intel.
In service to big Hegemon and little hegemon (Israel).

Just disgusting.

b , Nov 1, 2018 3:07:09 PM | link
@craig - With all of that said, this is a well thought out attempt to blame the US.

Thanks for acknowledging my geniality, and for the amusement. Shall we make you the house buffoon of the bar?

pretzelattack , Nov 1, 2018 3:10:54 PM | link
thanks for the analysis. we all see the pattern, but i guess it's still important to debunk the bullshit--it just never seems to stop the predetermined goals. it was widely seen that saddam's alleged wmd's didn't exist, but the invasion went on. now the u.s. wants war with iran. unless russia or china intervenes, what can stop it?
DontBelieveEitherPropaganda , Nov 1, 2018 3:15:48 PM | link
@10 - WJ: Difference is, USA has drones and some 19 yo teen can kill you with his joystick. ;)
I think false flag seems likely, but i also have some doubts about ISIS claiming to be resposible. The Iranian state is also pretty complex, with many different actors and power centers. So it cant be ruled out that those arab seperatists are resposible and that some rouge IRGC faction took action against reason of the state as a whole.
Like B said, the EU should demand evidence. Like with Skripal.. Not trust the Danish NATO proxys.
Nick Baam , Nov 1, 2018 3:33:01 PM | link
craigsummers:

The Dutch were not right about MH17, and neither are the Danes. Almost certainly another anti-Iranian false flag coming -- this on American soil -- w war soon to follow.

https://southfront.org/summing-up-russian-military-briefing-on-mh17-incident-missiles-serial-numbers-fake-videos-and-intercepted-radio-communications/

'The Russian military traced the Buk missile [9M38 missile], which shot down the Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 in eastern Ukraine in 2014, using serial numbers found on missile fragments showcased by an international team of investigators led by the Netherlands.

'Using the serial number of the nozzle cluster 9D13105000 No. 8-30-113 and the engine of the missile 9D131 with the serial number 8869032, the Russian military identified this missile as one produced by the Dolgoprudny plant – a Soviet/Russian designer and mass producer of surface-to-air missiles located in the city of Dolgoprudny, Moscow Oblast.

'The military said that the documentation for the aforementioned missile is still stored at the plant – the missile with the aforementioned engine and nozzle cluster has the manufacturing serial number of 8868720.

'According to the provided documents, the nozzle cluster was installed in the missile on December 24, 1986. The engine was installed to the missile on the same day.'

karlof1 , Nov 1, 2018 3:38:31 PM | link
Outlaw US Empire attacks Iran with new version of Stuxnet virus.

About the only difference between Trump and Hillary I can judge is he's not quite as reckless. Otherwise, their policy goal remains the same: Full Spectrum Dominance by any means necessary. The attack proves yet again the Outlaw US Empire would rather have destabilization and war in the region than peace, still thinking it remains the World's Boss.

Lozion , Nov 1, 2018 4:01:11 PM | link
@22 Nah, better make him the corner spit bowl..
sejomoje , Nov 1, 2018 4:12:36 PM | link
Thanks b, this is Journalism. Poor craigsummers appears to be in shock. It's ok craig.

We're in a really strange place vis a vis "Mossad" in the west. The average person on the street doesn't know whether to idolize them as superhuman kickass kravmaga-inventing Jason Bourne types, or diabolical creeps like Weinstein's "former Mossad" minions. Then Sacha Baron Cohen comes around and makes them funny again. Are they scary? Funny? When they appear in official media, it's usually in a display of mindblowing incompetence or fraud. So you can see how we're confused.

Bart Hansen , Nov 1, 2018 5:01:13 PM | link
25 - "USA has drones and some 19 yo teen can kill you with his joystick."

Yes, from a safe place in some place in the U.S. desert, but I wonder how the pilots of the aircraft refueling the KSA bombing runs to Yemen feel as they finish and do a 180 to return to base. Do they first look to see what their evil has done before heading back?

Kalen , Nov 1, 2018 5:31:34 PM | link
More likely it is Iran conveniently concluded that ISIS was responsible, only to get off the hook of EU countries that harbor terrorists not only anti Iran by anti Russia, so they closed the case not to wreck meek EU attempt to find the way around US sanctions with trade with Iran. Mossad did not like that and hence used another Russia Gate like provocation to stop EU Iran accommodation, this time claiming new Iranian terrorism issue Orwelian style blame victims.
Peter AU 1 , Nov 1, 2018 5:59:37 PM | link
karlof1 27 "About the only difference between Trump and Hillary I can judge is he's not quite as reckless."

I would agree with that, but I also think he will be willing to take big risks to see his plan through. He may well be like Putin's cornered rat if his plans are blocked.

Jen , Nov 1, 2018 6:14:52 PM | link
One question we should be asking is why all of a sudden is Denmark taking a leading role in accusing Iran of supporting terrorism and terrorist cells in Europe. Is Denmark's action as much to pressure Sweden and Finland into joining NATO as it is to pressure the EU into following the US in sanctioning Iran and tearing up the nuclear treaty the EU still adheres to?
Jen , Nov 1, 2018 6:20:00 PM | link
B @ 23, Lozion @ 28:

Craig's ambitions are rather more lofty than what you both have proposed. He aspires to be the President Trump of MoA.

Peter AU 1 , Nov 1, 2018 6:59:40 PM | link
This crap by the Danes is not without precedent. They were in on the US attack against the SAA at Deir Ezzor. US, UK, Australia and Denmark all took part in that attack.
hans , Nov 1, 2018 7:00:12 PM | link
One question we should be asking is why all of a sudden is Denmark taking a leading role

the danes swede and norway,netherlands folks have all been anglo zion borged.
the man leading this charge is a mr samuel son a proud son of a son i am sure he believes what he says i'm sure he has good reason.
wait for future headlines involving norways trillion dollar sovreign wealth fund vanishing just like gadaffi libya or ukraines gold..

country control via epstein lolita express blackmail.
young boys and girls in ritual cctv horror show as a form of soft power persuasion

Ninel , Nov 1, 2018 7:17:39 PM | link
I'm not entirely convinced b. The Iranian government has a long history of assassination attempts. And Denmark is not exactly a war mongering nation so your claims seem a bit shaky. I have never been impressed by analyses of Iran on this blog, as I think both b and many commentators here totally ignorant of the IRI's crimes against its own citizens. I am very knowledgable when it comes to Iran and so incidents like these do not surprise me. Of course I should make clear that it is possible to be against the IRI and western war mongering nations at the same time.
Circe , Nov 1, 2018 7:21:09 PM | link
I just can't stand responding to cs21 hasbara garbage; nothing is more annoying than hasbara. To quote Irish Nobel laureate GB Shaw: never wrestle with pigs, you both get dirty and the pig loves it!

Mossad used the MEK and another terrorist group, Jundallah in Iran when they didn't do the dirty job themselves to assassinate Iranian scientists extra-judicially. Imagine if JFK had done same when Israel was developing its nuclear weapons on the sly?

That's not all, Mossad used these terrorists like they used terrorists in Syria to foment manufactured revolution, specifically, in Iran, the Green Revolution and as for example what was done in Ukraine, terrorist snipers masquerading as basiji fired into the crowd of green protestors and killed a young women who the Western media elevated as the face of the Revolution hoping it would incite anger that would spread exponentially and trigger riots everywhere then civil war like in Syria and Ukraine, but they were very disappointed. This is playbook Mossad/CIA revolution engineering. All constituted criminal acts against sovereign nations, except in Iran their plan fizzled.

Mossad also used false flag against Gadaffi in Libya and years earlier against Mossadegh, the democratically elected leader of Iran that preceded the Shah. The Lavon Affair was a false flag comprised of multiple terrorist attacks that Israel planned and plotted to execute and blame on the Muslim Brotherhood and other Egyptian groups.

Mossad has assassinated what it considered to be terrorists in Europe, Syria, Lebanon, UAE, Jordan and on and on with total impunity. Some of these so-called terrorists were political leaders recent example Arafat, and attempted murder of Meschal, at least one or more were false flag to trigger civil war, i.e. in Lebanon, and some were what South African Apartheid victims would consider resistance and freedom fighters.

Israel also attacked the USSLiberty and no doubt had a hand in U.S. military sabotage in Lebanon not to mention murdering American journalists and activists.

ALL this was done with impunity. So in regards to these foiled terrorist attacks I have no doubt Mossad is up to no good and Israel has everything to gain in this dirty business they have executed many times before.

The truth lies in who benefits most and who has exhibited the most egregious pattern of behaviour. ISRAEL.

AriusArmenian , Nov 1, 2018 7:29:41 PM | link
Yes, it certainly smells like a false flag operation.
The CIA, MI6, and Mossad have been doing such operations in Europe since the end of WW2.
No surprise.
Ninel , Nov 1, 2018 7:30:56 PM | link
For those interested in the IRI, especially those uncritical, naive supporters, here is some light reading:


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_executions_of_Iranian_political_prisoners

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evin_Prison

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_murders_of_Iran

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_labor_law

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syndicate_of_Workers_of_Tehran_and_Suburbs_Bus_Company

Circe , Nov 1, 2018 8:16:27 PM | link
IRAN must be a hasbara trigger word. The Zionist web army recruits have arrived. Everything you pulled out of wiki I can double, triple, quadruple for Isra-hell. For starters, let's talk about Prison facility 1391 - torture, murder, perpetual isolation--dark ages stuff.

Let's talk about the kidnapping, imprisonment, even torture of children. Perhaps, the worst human rights record against children. 8000 Palestinian children arrested since 2000.

What about the two-tier justice system in Isra-hell?

Shall we discuss the murder of activists, journalists and protestors? What about political prisoners in Isra-hell? What about administrative detention. Detention without trial.

This is the tip of the iceberg regarding Isra-hell's human rights abuses. Don't get me started.

ben , Nov 1, 2018 8:34:13 PM | link
cs @ 21 said;"With all of that said, this is a well thought out attempt to blame the US."

For your perusal cs. Gee, I can't imagine why anyone would be suspicious of the U$A's motives
https://truthout.org/video/overthrow-100-years-of-us-meddling-and-regime-change-from-iran-to-nicaragua-to-hawaii-to-cuba/

craigsummers , Nov 1, 2018 9:27:36 PM | link
b @23
"......Thanks for acknowledging my geniality, and for the amusement. Shall we make you the house buffoon of the bar?......"

What ever suits you. I just appreciate you not deleting my account!

Thanks.

bokin , Nov 1, 2018 11:41:15 PM | link

As we approach the end of the year the big questions facing Europe are:

(1) Which country will win the prize for the most decapitations or slit throats? France or Germany?

With dozens of horrific crimes recently these two competitors are running neck and neck, however with Macron's France averaging close to one slit throat per day, France is probably going to win this contest

Which leaves us with the big question Germans are asking

(2) Which city will earn the distinction of being 2018's Rape Capital of Germany?

For a long time it seemed that the winner would surely be Berlin, but then Freiburg lurched into the lead a few weeks ago.

And now, with a 15-year-old being gang-raped by Afghan asylum seekers, Munich is hustling to take the title.

This crime and subsequent arrests were kept out of the media for a few weeks

-- coincidentally, until just after the recent local elections in Bavaria

The article below from Bild, also translated into English, contains additional details:

Suspects in Custody: Six Men Allegedly Raped Girl (15)

October 30, 2018

Munich -- The Munich police have arrested five Afghan refugees; according to Bayerischer Rundfunk another alleged perpetrator is on the run.

The allegation: They reportedly raped a 15-year-old girl.

The Munich public prosecutor confirmed to BILD upon request that there is an investigation involving a sexual assault and several people have been arrested. The spokesman did not want to comment further.

The case: The girl, who is being psychologically cared for, according to BILD's information, had filed charges against her "partner" at the end of September. The asylum seeker is said to have verbally threatened her and thereby forced her to have intercourse.

Also, he forced her to have intercourse with several his friends. She was so intimidated that she had to endure being abused by them all for several days. Each case is to be handled individually. Physical violence had played no role in the incidents.

In addition to the alleged victim's partner, four other refugees (all between 20 and 25 years old) were arrested. The alleged perpetrators are registered asylum seekers.

In the meantime, warrants have been issued against them on suspicion of rape. They are in custody.

The assaults are said to have occurred at the end of September. The first arrests were made four weeks ago.

Some interrogations remain to be conducted to substantiate the allegations made by the alleged victim, which is one explanation for why the authorities have not made the case public.

Some of the detainees admitted that they had intercourse with the minor, but said that it had taken place by mutual agreement."

Got that?

According to Bild, "Physical violence played no role in the incidents"

snedly arkus , Nov 2, 2018 12:43:12 AM | link
First their is money laundering charges by the US against Denmark's largest bank and now we have Denmark joining the Trump stomp on Iran project. Could it be the US cut a deal with Denmark to limit their investigations and penalties into this bank and maybe others, or possible involvement of Danish government officials, and the Dane's jumped at the chance to limit the damage to the country and it's economy and keep sanction happy Trump from sanctioning them into the poor house.
Steve , Nov 2, 2018 4:49:42 AM | link
Denmark, like Sweden and Norway are the biggest enablers of USA's imperial efforts more than any other nations in the whole world. I think it is only Russia which gets that fact. Nobel prizes are nothing but tooks of the US empire
james , Nov 2, 2018 4:54:55 AM | link
42 ben, ditto... cs has never heard of the cia and the past countless years of there horrors... in fact as far as cs is concerned, they never had any role to play in ghouta 2011 and afterwards either...cs thinks the letters stand for charity international association...usaid is another benevolent org as far as cs is concerned... if cs was ever to read john perkins 'confessions of an economic hit man' he would fall out of his chair and have his world turned upside down.... cs really needs to hang over at pat langs site where some of his love and ignorance of the usa's covert history has a place of acceptance.. it ain't here..
Laguerre , Nov 2, 2018 6:06:55 AM | link
44 bokin. German far-right propaganda reaches MoA.
Laguerre , Nov 2, 2018 7:24:45 AM | link
"It is likely that the false flag operations in Europe, like the ones in Belgium and Denmark, are run by the CIA with the Mossad only in an auxiliary role."

Very difficult to distinguish the two. Israel declared its campaign to internally destabilise Iran last spring (evidently having quailed at the risks of the open military attack), the US has been fruitlessly attempting the same for forty years. I suppose the new Israeli campaign has revived US efforts.

By the way, I was interested by Alastair Crooke's recent remark that Israeli air superiority has been broken by the S300s. Crooke's views are to take seriously.

https://www.rt.com/shows/rt-interview/442703-lavelle-crooke-middle-east/

That could be very grave for Israel, if so, and a context for what's happening.

Mina , Nov 2, 2018 7:51:49 AM | link
No one has picked up on this ?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/jamal-khashoggi-latest-news-saudi-arabia-turkey-embassy-washington-dc-a8601961.html
Did Khalid bin Salman return because might be accused of being part of the plot? There was a phonecall to the US apparently right after the killing.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/11120629/Saudi-prince-and-Emirates-first-female-fighter-pilot-take-part-in-Syria-air-strikes.html
It is getting closer to Kushner.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/01/world/middleeast/with-saudi-prince-holding-on-to-power-us-seen-standing-by-him.html
"Two people close to the Saudi royal court said Mr. Kushner and Prince Mohammed communicate often, including by text message, and multiple times since Mr. Khashoggi's disappearance. A White House spokesman declined to comment about those communications."

The guy is said to have participated in some coalition attacks in Yemen and Syria
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/11120629/Saudi-prince-and-Emirates-first-female-fighter-pilot-take-part-in-Syria-air-strikes.html
(I can't find anymore the recent paper where Yemen was mentioned).
Is this the new bigger than screen playstation for Saudi psychopaths? What about the enquiry into the non-identified plane that bombed civilians during an exchange of prisoners in northern Syria? Could it be a Saudi plane? How many of them have been used in Syria and Yemen?

Bandit , Nov 2, 2018 8:02:39 AM | link
Steve, how could you overlook the all time top lap dog: the UK? The UK would be first on most people's list of sycophant enablers of US terrorism, regime change, and false flag operations. Sometimes Macron tries to run ahead of the pack, but gets slapped back by Trump, but when all is said and done, the whole NATO crew are self-serving idiots and assholes.
mali , Nov 2, 2018 8:13:19 AM | link
Denmark, like Sweden and Norway are the biggest enablers of USA's imperial efforts more than any other nations in the whole world. I think it is only Russia which gets that fact. Nobel prizes are nothing but tooks of the US empire

Posted by: Steve | Nov 2, 2018 4:49:42 AM | 46
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well said!

I totally agree with you after saw the ghastly bully behaviour of Denmark on 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference, who was actively trying to force down the throat of BRICS (EPS. China & India) and developing countries the schemes that US & Co wanted: 1): to strangle the development chance of third world and 2). to escape the accountability/ownership of the big messy pollution the Western countries has been emitted into the air and the world for centuries.

Another aggressive Dane who was in full swing to propagate the Empire's interests/schemes is Anders Fogh Rasmussen, ex-NATO Secretary General, who was so belligerent that I sometimes question how the peace-love Denmark can produce such an aggressive person......

Rhisiart Gwilym , Nov 2, 2018 8:43:10 AM | link
b, is there any way to highlight a 'Craig Summers' post at the top, so we can skip over his/her/their lying rubbish unread. Bad enough having to wade through the effusions of the sprinkling of religious loonies who seem to be posting now, without wasting time on this bellingcrap-style hasbarollocks.
Jormaaja , Nov 2, 2018 8:48:51 AM | link
Is Denmark going to "stand up to Turkey" also?

"In the beginning of 2017 the Danish Security Service PET had received information about planned political murder of individuals in Denmark who oppose the Turkish government. The PET acted on the information and put the would be targets in safety. This is revealed by Swedish Radio Ekot.
https://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=83&artikel=6975341

And is Denmark going to stop doing this:"Denmark's foreign minister has for the first time acknowledged that the government allowed the sale of surveillance technology to authoritarian Arab governments, including Saudi Arabia and the UAE." "Mass surveillance during and after the Arab Spring was used to facilitate the mass incarceration of dissidents, leading to the eventual crushing of popular movements, the report alleged."

https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2017/8/21/danish-fm-admits-selling-mass-surveillance-technology-to-saudi-arabia

And what are the Syro-Ahwazian pro-FSA dudes up to in Denmark:"One battalion of the rebel Free Syrian Army is called the "Ahwaz Brigade", although the group says there are no foreign fighters in its ranks.

"We have relations with different factions of the (Syrian) rebels," said Habib Nabgan, the former head of a coalition of Ahwazi parties whose armed wing carried out last week's pipeline attack.
"They need information, which we give them, and we need some of their expertise, so there is cooperation and that is developing," he told Reuters via telephone from Denmark, where he took refuge in 2006."
https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-iran-arabs-insight-idUKBRE97E0O620130815


Ahwazians in Syria:"Before the Syrian uprising, the Ahwazi community in Damascus was living in fear, but is now fully behind the revolutionary struggle.There have been frequent demonstrations in Syria by Ahwazi Arabs flying the opposition flag alongside their own."

https://www.alahwaz.info/en/?p=4642

EtTuBrute , Nov 2, 2018 9:26:51 AM | link
Interesting, the first time i heard of this story my instinct immediately was, why on earth would Iran conduct such risky and rather pointless operations where the downside would greatly outweigh any benefit if they were caught?? Add to that, no one was harmed, they got "caught".. and Mossad involved.. seems pretty clear to anyone who actually understands what's going on in the world.. but there aren't many of us who actually think when we read the news.. thanks again MR B for another insightful piece on analysis :)
Circe , Nov 2, 2018 10:24:00 AM | link
@43

Why? Because you think your Zionist propaganda claptrap is actually convincing and working to bring down surviving bastions of independent thought? It's laughable how hasbara-scripted you read; delivering superficially well-constructed neoliberal brainwash, whitewash material. Your disingenuous ilk courting the Left with liberal goodies, in one hand while unleashing double-standard neoconservative righteous destruction with the other is the main reason we now suffer Trump's fascist right-wing version of same. People protest vote neoliberalism and end up in the arms of the hard right-wing version. It's a no choice choice; an affront to real democracy. You play the desperation of the Left against the Right and then deliver it into the same neoconstruct. You're two sides of the same cult and neither can stand independent thought. After I read your Zionist-contrived claptrap, I feel like my mind has been abused and my time wasted. Once you're wise to the trap, you never go back to falling for whichever charismatic puppet is going to save us from the other side.

The goal becomes helping others break free of the vicious, cyclical no-choice duopoly to viably challenge and destroy it for good! You pretend at righeousness, but you're on the side of status quo darkness.

Circe , Nov 2, 2018 10:39:58 AM | link
Uh, just one more point, I still believe in GW Shaw's wisdom that you shouldn't wrestle with ignorance, ie pigs, but I just intended @56 as a Reader Beware CS for anyone who's out there only reading.
Peter AU 1 , Nov 2, 2018 11:31:43 AM | link
Laguerre 49

Perhaps of more importance was Crooke's remark on US debt. He said in August the cost of servicing the debt, for the first time, exceeded tax revenue. On top of that, the US must sell over a trillion of new debt each year for the next three years.

Laguerre , Nov 2, 2018 12:06:57 PM | link
Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Nov 2, 2018 11:31:43 AM | 58

Yes I too thought that was interesting. But Israel's problem is more fatal, in a permanent sense. Air superiority once lost won't be recovered, but the US could, if it wanted to, live more within its means.

Yul , Nov 2, 2018 12:13:06 PM | link
@b

Do you remember the Green revolution of 2009 that went pfttttt?
Well here is an edifying article wrt the CIA :

https://www.yahoo.com/news/cias-communications-suffered-catastrophic-compromise-started-iran-090018710.html?.tsrc=fauxdal

As usual, some former official has to include : Israeli intelligence tipped off the CIA that Iran had likely identified some of its assets, said the same former official.

james , Nov 2, 2018 12:24:36 PM | link
thanks b wise words as usual thanks for soft shoe shuffle i will of course let you know when you cross the antisemenetic line.
by the way
i love you
karlof1 , Nov 2, 2018 1:11:54 PM | link
58&59--

Regarding US Debt as a problem, Bolton sees it as a threat to national security:

"Bolton, speaking Wednesday at an event hosted by the Alexander Hamilton Society in Washington, said he expects U.S. defense spending "to flatten out" in the near term. He said he didn't anticipate major cuts to entitlements such as Medicare and Social Security.

""It is a fact that when your national debt gets to the level ours is, that it constitutes an economic threat to the society," Bolton said. "And that kind of threat ultimately has a national security consequence for it.""

Of course, he wants to cut support for citizens instead of support for the Deep State and its massively corrupt MIC. The massive cut in revenues caused by Trump's giveaways to corporations and the 1% were designed to exacerbate the problem and create an artificial crisis in discretionary spending. Most from all sides of the political spectrum can see this for what it is and are already pushing back, which will be the fundamental reason Trump won't get a 2nd term--his policies are proving to be a fiscal nightmare.

David Hollander , Nov 2, 2018 1:21:29 PM | link
The evidence provided by the author that the CIA was the primary driving agent in these incidents is not compelling. In fact, the US government under Obama supported the JCPOA against the wishes of the Netanyahu government. Thus the statement that "US interests" are necessarily defined by sanctions against Iran seems to me to be unfounded. Had the author replaced "US interests" with "Trump administration policies", which are clearly much more aligned with the interests of the Likud and Netanyahu the statement might be more supportable.
Laguerre , Nov 2, 2018 1:22:55 PM | link
re Yul

"Do you remember the Green revolution of 2009 that went pfttttt?"

Very interesting article, but the Green Revolution didn't go pfft because of that. 2009 failed because the middle class aren't very good at revolutions. They aren't the majority, and they didn't have popular support.

[Nov 02, 2018] 'We have met the enemy and he is us' Who's really 'undermining' US democracy asks Stephen Cohen

Notable quotes:
"... War with Russia? From Putin and Ukraine To Trump and Russiagate ..."
"... undermine American democracy ..."
"... are engaging in an elaborate campaign of 'information warfare' to interfere with the American midterm elections ..."
"... public evidence ..."
"... arsenal of disruption capabilities... to sow havoc on election day ..."
"... Kremlin propaganda ..."
"... portraying Russian and Syrian government forces favorably as they battled 'terrorists' in what US officials for years have portrayed as a legitimate uprising against the authoritarian government of President Bashar al-Assad. ..."
"... Kremlin propaganda ..."
"... what US officials for years have ..."
"... undermining of American democracy ..."
"... We have met the enemy and he is us ..."
"... This article was originally published by The Nation . ..."
Nov 02, 2018 | www.rt.com

Allegations that Russia is still "attacking" US elections, now again in November, could delegitimize our democratic institutions. Summarizing one of the themes in his new book, ' War with Russia? From Putin and Ukraine To Trump and Russiagate ,' Stephen F. Cohen argues that Russiagate allegations of Kremlin attempts to " undermine American democracy " may themselves erode confidence in those institutions.

Ever since Russiagate allegations began to appear more than two years ago, their core narrative has revolved around purported Kremlin attempts to " interfere " in the 2016 US presidential election on behalf of then-candidate Donald Trump. In recent months, a number of leading American media outlets have taken that argument even further, suggesting that Putin's Kremlin actually put Trump in the White House and now is similarly trying to affect the November 6 midterm elections, particularly House contests, on behalf of Trump and the Republican Party. According to a page-one New York Times "report," for example, Putin's agents " are engaging in an elaborate campaign of 'information warfare' to interfere with the American midterm elections ."

Despite well-documented articles by Gareth Porter and Aaron Mate effectively dismantling these allegations about 2016 and 2018, the mainstream media continues to promote them. The occasionally acknowledged lack of " public evidence " is sometimes cited as itself evidence of a deep Russian conspiracy, of the Kremlin's " arsenal of disruption capabilities... to sow havoc on election day ." (See the examples cited by Alan MacLeod .)

Lost in these reckless allegations is the long-term damage they may themselves do to American democracy. Consider the following possibilities:

Even though still unproven, charges that the Kremlin put Trump in the White House have cast a large shadow of illegitimacy over his presidency and thus over the institution of the presidency itself. This is unlikely to end entirely with Trump. If the Kremlin had the power to affect the outcome of one presidential election, why not another one, whether won by a Republican or a Democrat? The 2016 presidential election was the first time such an allegation became widespread in American political history, but it may not be the last.

Now the same shadow looms over the November 6 elections and thus over the next Congress. If so, in barely two years, the legitimacy of two fundamental institutions of American representative democracy will have been challenged, also for the first time in history.

And if US elections are really so vulnerable to Russian " meddling ," what does this say about faith in American elections more generally? How many losing candidates on November 6 will resist blaming the Kremlin? Two years after the last presidential election, Hillary Clinton and her adamant supporters still have not been able to do so.

We know from critical reporting and from recent opinion surveys that the origins and continuing fixation on the Russiagate scandal since 2016 have been primarily a product of US political-intelligence-media elites. It did not spring from the American people – from voters themselves. Thus a Gallup poll recently showed that 58 percent of those surveyed wanted improved relations with Russia. And other surveys have shown that Russiagate is scarcely an issue at all for likely voters on November 6. Nonetheless, it remains a front-page issue for US elites.

Indeed, Russiagate has revealed the low esteem that many US political-media elites have for American voters – for their ability to make discerning, rational electoral decisions, which is the bedrock assumption of representative democracy. It is worth noting that this disdain for rank-and-file citizens echoes a longstanding attitude of the Russian political intelligentsia, as recently expressed in the argument by a prominent Moscow policy intellectual that Russian authoritarianism springs not from the nation's elites but from the "genetic code" of its people .

US elites seem to have a similar skepticism about – or contempt for – American voters' capacity to make discerning electoral choices. Presumably this is a factor behind the current proliferation of programs – official, corporate, and private – to introduce elements of censorship in the nation's " media space " in order to filter out " Kremlin propaganda ." Here, it also seems, elites will decide what constitutes such " propaganda ."

The Washington Post recently gave such an example : " portraying Russian and Syrian government forces favorably as they battled 'terrorists' in what US officials for years have portrayed as a legitimate uprising against the authoritarian government of President Bashar al-Assad. " That is, thinking that the forces of Putin and Assad were fighting terrorists, even if closer to the truth, is " Kremlin propaganda " because it is at variance with " what US officials for years have " been saying. This was the guiding principle of Soviet censorship as well.

If the American electoral process, presidency, legislature, and voter cannot be fully trusted, what is left of American democracy? Admittedly, this is still only a trend, a foreboding, but one with no end in sight. If it portends the " undermining of American democracy ," our elites will blame the Kremlin. But they best recall the discovery of Walt Kelly's legendary cartoon figure Pogo: " We have met the enemy and he is us ."

Stephen F. Cohen is a professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University and a contributing editor of The Nation.

This article was originally published by The Nation .

Read more US invents new 'meddling' charges to play 'Russia card' ahead of midterms - Moscow FM official US Congress has no Russian policy other than sanctions' – Stephen Cohen Suspicious packages could be 'Russian operation,' says MSNBC host

[Nov 02, 2018] The US is using every tool to destabilize russia and change the goverment into Yeltsin style comprador elite

Nov 02, 2018 | www.wsws.org

Kalen Blaine • 8 months ago

Hitler and Napoleon learned that it is impossible to conquer Russia size of continent of militarily impossible weather with now a network of underground fortifications, tunnels that cannot be nuked.

There is no conquering Russia with measly million soldiers west could at best deploy for their sure deaths. Hence no western strategist plan for that and so the idea of Russia responding to conventional attack with nuke was a propaganda aim to end the conversation about that absurd, no sides really considers, but is used to spread fear.

US may attack Russia with nukes but no strategic goal would be achieved by that while retaliation would have been devastating.

Even conventional attack on Russia is absurd. Poland 50k 5k offensive capability, All Baltic states 10k, Slovakia 5k, Hungary 9k facing what?

Russian allies: Donbas rebels 40k war hardened rebel soldiers would be hard to beat; Belarus 250k highly trained soldiers, fully integrated Air, Space, Ground and electronic warfare with all newest Russian toys, while entire army of 2 millions. Russia 3-5 million military can call at least 10 millions will maintain air and space superiority over their territory , digged in while invaders are exposed.

There is will be no invasion of Russia only intimidation of the elites to submit to US political and economic dictates. Also there is no conquering China as well. Not possible.

The only nuke war can occur when global elite will be losing grip on power and going down in flames in socialist revolution and only to take entire humanity with them to hell.

Blaine OL • 8 months ago
If faced with an existential conventional attack, Russian doctrine calls for nuclear response. It would be silly to think they'd limit it to low yield missiles in staging areas in E Europe. They WILL hit continental US and the Pentagon whizkids know this.

The US is using every tool to destabilize them for a change of government, and all the provocations to now are not on a scale of all out war. It does serve to build a compelling narrative that allows no discussion when laws are finally passed limiting freedom of information and association.

The US citizen is the real target here.

OL Blaine • 8 months ago
I see it as the real target being all the natural resources and cheap but skilled labor in the former USSR (on top of bringing down a competitor), and the US population just stading in the way because they're not brainwashed enough for the generals taste.
The capitalist economies can't work in autarchy, they need to get more markets, they need to bring down competitors. or they fall themselves, If you place the control of the population at the top of their priorities, how do you explain the invasion of Afghanistan, Iraq etc ? How do you explain the mamoth military budget ? is it just in case a whole US city turns communist and they need to reduce it to ashes ?
Blaine OL • 8 months ago
First they would have to make sure the rest of the country didn't learn about the one that went communist. Then instead of reducing it to ashes they would use the association trees they have built tracking internet and social media to identify and round up the ringleaders. Rest of the country might never even know what had happened between partial blackouts and misinformation.

Don't get me wrong, the US would love to replace partial state control of key Russian industries with Western banking interests and have a free hand with the natural resources. This is certainly the long term plan. But...in the near term they have to reestablish control of the narrative.

The military budget is wealth transfer to folks who enjoy and agitate for any war. Afghanistan was about military contracts, hydrocarbons and opium, the Taliban had to go. Iraq (and Syria) are a problem for Israel - problem solved. Libya was setting up an alternative banking system and possessed attractive gold reserves.

OL Blaine • 8 months ago
Afghanistan was a good occasion for military contracts, but hydrocarbons of the whole region, (especially the project for a pipeline through the caspian sea that Russia and Iran opposed), were a bigger reason.

Why israel so important to the US ? because the resources of the whole region, and because they could threaten the suez canal.

etc

[Nov 02, 2018] I discovered in Baghdad a group of British scientific technicians who had been sent by the UK Ministry of Defense to build outlawed biological weapons at Salman Pak. These included deadly anthrax and Q-fever but only for use against Iran if a second Iraq-Iran War erupted.

Nov 02, 2018 | www.wsws.org

Southern • 8 months ago

Here's a related article that's interesting.
Saddam Hussein had no nuclear weapons, contrary to US and British claims. I discovered in Baghdad a group of British scientific technicians who had been sent by the UK Ministry of Defense to build outlawed biological weapons at Salman Pak. These included deadly anthrax and Q-fever – but only for use against Iran if a second Iraq-Iran War erupted.
[Eric Margolis February 17, 2018]

[Nov 02, 2018] The Russian meddling fraud Weapons of mass destruction revisited by Andre Damon and Joseph Kishore

20 February 2018
Notable quotes:
"... World Socialist Web Site ..."
"... Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen, who rushed off a column before he could have examined Powell's allegations, declared, "The evidence he presented to the United Nations -- some of it circumstantial, some of it absolutely bone-chilling in its detail -- had to prove to anyone that Iraq not only hasn't accounted for its weapons of mass destruction but without a doubt still retains them. Only a fool -- or possibly a Frenchman -- could conclude otherwise." ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... While the present campaign over Russian "meddling" has much in common with the claims about "weapons of mass destruction," the implications are far more ominous. The "war on terror" is exhausted, in part because the US is allied in Syria and elsewhere with the Islamic fundamentalist organizations it was purportedly fighting. ..."
"... The Mueller indictment is intended to provide an appropriate "narrative" for military aggression motivated by different aims. At the same time, it serves as a ready-made pretext for censorship and domestic repression that goes far beyond the extraordinary measures adopted under the framework of the "war on terror." Russia, the American people are supposed to believe, uses domestic social opposition to weaken the United States, rendering political dissent effectively treasonous. ..."
"... Even more extreme measures are being planned and implemented, motivated by the basic principle that the greater the lie, the more aggressive the methods required to enforce it. The target of the repressive measures is not Russia, but the American working class. The ruling elite is well aware that as it plots war abroad, it stands upon a social powder keg at home. ..."
Nov 02, 2018 | www.wsws.org

Fifteen years ago, on February 5, 2003, against the backdrop of worldwide mass demonstrations in opposition to the impending invasion of Iraq, then-US Secretary of State Colin Powell argued before the United Nations that the government of Saddam Hussein was rapidly stockpiling "weapons of mass destruction," which Iraq, together with Al Qaeda, was planning to use against the United States.

In what was the climax of the Bush administration's campaign to justify war, Powell held up a model vial of anthrax, showed aerial photographs and presented detailed slides purporting to show the layout of Iraq's "mobile production facilities."

There was only one problem with Powell's presentation: it was a lie from beginning to end.

The World Socialist Web Site , in an editorial board statement published the next day, declared the brief for war "the latest act in a diplomatic charade laced with cynicism and deceit." War against Iraq, the WSWS wrote, was not about "weapons of mass destruction." Rather, "it is a war of colonial conquest, driven by a series of economic and geo-political aims that center on the seizure of Iraq's oil resources and the assertion of US global hegemony."

The response of the American media, and particularly its liberal wing, was very different. Powell's litany of lies was presented as the gospel truth, an unanswerable indictment of the Iraqi government.

Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen, who rushed off a column before he could have examined Powell's allegations, declared, "The evidence he presented to the United Nations -- some of it circumstantial, some of it absolutely bone-chilling in its detail -- had to prove to anyone that Iraq not only hasn't accounted for its weapons of mass destruction but without a doubt still retains them. Only a fool -- or possibly a Frenchman -- could conclude otherwise."

The editorial board of the New York Times -- whose reporter Judith Miller was at the center of the Bush administration's campaign of lies -- declared one week later that there "is ample evidence that Iraq has produced highly toxic VX nerve gas and anthrax and has the capacity to produce a lot more. It has concealed these materials, lied about them, and more recently failed to account for them to the current inspectors."

Subsequent developments would prove who was lying. The Bush administration and its media accomplices conspired to drag the US into a war that led to the deaths of more than one million people -- a colossal crime for which no one has yet been held accountable.

Fifteen years later, the script has been pulled from the closet and dusted off. This time, instead of "weapons of mass destruction," it is "Russian meddling in the US elections." Once again, assertions by US intelligence agencies and operatives are treated as fact. Once again, the media is braying for war. Once again, the cynicism and hypocrisy of the American government -- which intervenes in the domestic politics of every state on the planet and has been relentlessly expanding its operations in Eastern Europe -- are ignored.

The argument presented by the American media is that the alleged existence of a fly-by-night operation, employing a few hundred people, with a budget amounting to a minuscule fraction of total election spending in the US, constitutes a "a virtual war against the United States through 21st-century tools of disinformation and propaganda" ( New York Times ).

In the countless articles and media commentary along this vein, nowhere can one find a serious analysis of the Mueller indictment of the Russians itself, let alone an examination of the real motivations behind the US campaign against Russia. The fact that the indictment does not even involve the Russian government or state officials is treated as a nonissue.

While the present campaign over Russian "meddling" has much in common with the claims about "weapons of mass destruction," the implications are far more ominous. The "war on terror" is exhausted, in part because the US is allied in Syria and elsewhere with the Islamic fundamentalist organizations it was purportedly fighting.

More fundamentally, the quarter-century of invasions and occupations that followed the dissolution of the Soviet Union is rapidly developing into a conflict between major nuclear-armed powers. The effort of the American ruling class to offset its economic decline using military force is leading mankind to the brink of another world war. As the National Defense Strategy, published less than a month before the release of the indictments, declared, "Inter-state strategic competition, not terrorism, is now the primary concern in US national security."

Russia is seen by dominant sections of the military-intelligence apparatus as a principal obstacle to US efforts to control the Middle East and to take on China -- and it is this that has been at the center of the conflict between the Democratic Party and the Trump administration.

There have already been a series of clashes in recent weeks between the world's two largest nuclear-armed powers. On February 3, a Russian close-air support fighter was shot down by al-Nusra Front fighters, which are indirectly allied with the United States in its proxy war against the government of Bashar Al-Assad. Then, on February 7 and 8, Russian soldiers were killed in US air and artillery barrages in Deir Ezzor, in what survivors called a "massacre." Both the US and Russian governments have sought to downplay the scale of the clash, but some sources have reported the number killed to be in the hundreds.

Even as US and Russian forces clashed in Syria, representatives of the Kremlin and the Pentagon sparred at the Munich security conference this weekend over the deployment and development of nuclear weapons. While accusing Russia of violating the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, Washington this month issued a nuclear posture review envisioning a massive expansion of the deployment of battlefield nuclear weapons.

The Mueller indictment is intended to provide an appropriate "narrative" for military aggression motivated by different aims. At the same time, it serves as a ready-made pretext for censorship and domestic repression that goes far beyond the extraordinary measures adopted under the framework of the "war on terror." Russia, the American people are supposed to believe, uses domestic social opposition to weaken the United States, rendering political dissent effectively treasonous.

Already, this campaign has led the major US technology firms to implement far-reaching measures to censor political speech on the Internet. Google is manipulating its search results and Facebook is manipulating its news feeds, while seeking to turn the social media platform it has developed into an instrument of corporate-state surveillance.

Even more extreme measures are being planned and implemented, motivated by the basic principle that the greater the lie, the more aggressive the methods required to enforce it. The target of the repressive measures is not Russia, but the American working class. The ruling elite is well aware that as it plots war abroad, it stands upon a social powder keg at home.

The working class must draw the necessary conclusions from its past experiences. In 2003, the Democratic Party supported the Bush administration's invasion of Iraq and provided it with the necessary political cover. Now, the Democrats, along with their appendages among the organizations of the upper-middle class, are at the forefront of the campaign for war, employing neo-McCarthyite tactics to criminalize opposition while seeking to subordinate all popular opposition to the Trump administration to its right-wing and militarist agenda.

The urgent task is to mobilize the working class, in the United States and internationally, against the entire apparatus of the capitalist ruling elite. The fight against war and dictatorship is at the same time the fight against inequality and exploitation, for the overthrow of capitalism and the establishment of a global socialist society.

Andre Damon and Joseph Kishore

[Nov 02, 2018] Moscow Shocked by French Cabinet Spokesman's Remarks Regarding RT

This is a typical projection. France is a member of "dirty four". Macron government is a typical neoliberal cabinet, not that different from Merkel government. As such it is controlled by the USA.
Nov 02, 2018 | sputniknews.com

"Honestly, to say that we were surprised or upset is to say nothing. I think this condition could be better described as 'shock' when we heard the spokesman for the French government, Mr. Griveaux, just recently said the following. I quote: there are two media outlets that I refuse to see in the press room of the Elysee Palace, they are RT and Sputnik because I do not consider them to be media, they are not journalists, they are engaged in propaganda," Zakharova said at a weekly news briefing.

According to Zakharova, such an approach is the result of "the unwillingness of the French authorities to hear alternative sources of information."

Last month, two French government's think tanks issued a report, which recommended the country's authorities to abstain from accrediting journalists of the RT broadcaster and the Sputnik news agency.

Last year, RT reporters were denied entry to the headquarters of then-French presidential candidate Macron twice in April, and in May, a Sputnik reporter was not allowed to enter the square in front of Paris' Louvre museum where Macron and his supporters were celebrating the victory in the presidential run-off. After Macron became French president, he accused RT and Sputnik of "spreading false information and slander."

READ MORE: US Homeland Security Recommends Public to 'Be Aware' of RT, Sputnik

The situation around RT and Sputnik in France is not unique for the European Union: in 2016, the European Parliament adopted a resolution claiming that Russia was waging information warfare and singled out RT and Sputnik. Russian President Vladimir Putin said the resolution proved that Western democracy was failing, but expressed hope that common sense would prevail and Russian media outlets would be able to work abroad without restrictions.

[Nov 02, 2018] MUST WATCH Shocking Video by Comedian Bill Maher - Russia Delusion Still Raging Among US Liberals

Nov 02, 2018 | russia-insider.com

MUST WATCH: Shocking Video by Comedian Bill Maher - Russia Delusion Still Raging Among US Liberals Richard Brandt 10 min ago | 600 words 10 131 RussiaHoax Bill Maher outdid himself recently with this video, but in doing so, he inadvertently showed how out of touch the Jewish Hollywood liberal elites like Maher are with most of the country, and even more so with the rest of the world.

Take the 5 minutes to watch the video, it is an eye-opener. Bullet points follow below:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/QhJIt4uv9x4

Somehow, Maher managed to pack the following into his monologue:

[Nov 01, 2018] Ukraine s depopulation crisis by Jason Melanovski

This is the net result of neoliberalism enforced debt slavery for the country. And there is no chances for Ukrainians to climb back from this debt hole.
Notable quotes:
"... Ukraine's SSS has acknowledged that so far this year, the population has already decreased by 122,000. ..."
"... While the country's low birth rate of approximately 1 birth for 1.5 deaths is a contributing factor to the country's depopulation, emigration is by far the biggest factor. ..."
"... Between 2002 and 2017, an estimated 6.3 million Ukrainians emigrated with no plans to return. ..."
"... Through 2015 and 2017, as a result of the ongoing war in the Donbass region and the plunging value of the Ukrainian hryvnia, migration increased notably: 507,000 people went to Poland; 147,000 to Italy; 122,000 to the Czech Republic; 23,000 to the United States; and 365,000 to Russia or Belarus. ..."
"... The easing of visa-free travel by the European Union (EU) in September 2017 only increased the flow of Ukrainians to countries such as Poland, which is facing its own demographic crisis and in need of workers. In 2018 alone, more than 3 million Ukrainians applied for passports that would allow them to work in Poland. Poland is the only EU country that allows Ukrainians to obtain seasonal work visas with just a passport. Ukrainians have received 81.7% of all work visas issued in Poland this year. ..."
"... Between 1 and 2 million Ukrainian workers now reside in Poland, where they are often forced to take jobs "under the table," are easily exploited by employers, and work in dangerous conditions. Many Ukrainian laborers are recruited to Poland by scam offers of employment, only to then find themselves stranded and forced to work for whatever wage they can get. ..."
"... While Russia is constantly demonized in the Ukrainian and Western press as the eternal enemy of Ukraine, 2 million Ukrainian citizens now live or work in Russia. According to Olga Kirilova, between 2014 and 2017, 312,000 Ukrainians were granted Russian citizenship and Ukrainians make up the vast majority of immigrants to Russia. ..."
"... The migration of Ukrainian workers abroad has reached such a level that remittances from migrants now constitute 3 to 4 percent of the country's GDP. They exceed the amount of foreign investment in Ukraine. Nonetheless, such transfers are not nearly enough to make up for the negative impact of the currency's falling value, inflation, and the disappearance of skilled workers. ..."
"... The Ukrainian ruling class acknowledges that the country is in serious trouble. "One of the main risks of the current scenario is the continuation of the outflow of labor from Ukraine, which will create a further increase in the imbalance between demand and supply in the labor market," noted a report from the country's national bank. ..."
"... The Corrupt, extreme right wing government of Poroshenko, that has driven large proportions of the Ukrainian population into poverty and despair has only been able to take power and remain I office thanks to US imperialism and Angela Merkel's scheming and regime change program. ..."
"... Popular support for the "maidan" in the Ukraine was based on misleading and dishonest claims by pro EU and Pro US opportunistic political operators that such "regime change" would lead to total integration with Europe and open borders.... ..."
"... One of the most horrific consequences of the dismantling of the Soviet Union was the explosion of sex trafficking and very large numbers of Ukrainian women were caught up in this horrific exploitation and continue to be. ..."
"... Oh the benefits of US installed dictatorships. ..."
"... "Welcome to Europe, Ukraine. Here are your rubber gloves and toilet cleaning brush. Oh, you're a young woman? The red light district is three blocks that way". ..."
"... In Baltic states after being "freed from communism and Soviet occupation" the population decline is also very prominent, the same reasons as in Ukraine too. ..."
Nov 01, 2018 | www.wsws.org

As fascist far-right nationalist groups regularly parade through the country demanding "Ukraine for Ukrainians," Ukraine faces a massive depopulation crisis. Millions of people of all ethnicities are leaving the country, fleeing poverty and war.

Since the restoration of capitalism in 1991, the overall population of Ukraine has declined from just over 52 million to approximately 42 million today, a decrease of nearly 20 percent. If the separatist-controlled provinces of the Donbass region and Crimea are excluded, it is estimated that just 35 million people now live in the area controlled by the government of Petro Porosehnko.

Ukrainian governments, including the current one, have been loath to carry out an official census, as it is widely believed that the population estimates reported by the country's State Statistics Service (SSS) are inflated by including deceased individuals. One aim of this is to rig elections. An official country-wide census has not been held since 2001. In late 2015, the Poroshenko government postponed the 2016 census until 2020.

Despite the lack of reliable official numbers, all independent reports point to a sharp reduction in the population. According to Ukraine's Institute of Demography at the Academy of Sciences, by 2050 only 32 million people will live in the country. The World Health Organization has estimated that the population of the country will drop even further, to just 30 million people.

Ukraine's SSS has acknowledged that so far this year, the population has already decreased by 122,000.

Such data are a testament to the monumental failure of capitalism to provide a standard of living that matches, much less exceeds, that which existed during the Soviet period over 25 years ago.

While the country's low birth rate of approximately 1 birth for 1.5 deaths is a contributing factor to the country's depopulation, emigration is by far the biggest factor.

Between 2002 and 2017, an estimated 6.3 million Ukrainians emigrated with no plans to return.

Facing poor employment prospects, deteriorating social and medical services, marauding far-right gangs, and the ever-present prospect of a full-scale war with Russia, Ukrainian workers are fleeing the country in great numbers, either permanently or as temporary labor migrants.

According to a report from the Center for Economic Strategy (CES), almost 4 million people, or up to 16% of the working-age population, are labor migrants. Despite having Ukrainian citizenship and still technically living in Ukraine, they actually reside and work elsewhere. Ukraine's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has put the number of Ukrainian migrant workers even higher, at 5 million.

Through 2015 and 2017, as a result of the ongoing war in the Donbass region and the plunging value of the Ukrainian hryvnia, migration increased notably: 507,000 people went to Poland; 147,000 to Italy; 122,000 to the Czech Republic; 23,000 to the United States; and 365,000 to Russia or Belarus.

The easing of visa-free travel by the European Union (EU) in September 2017 only increased the flow of Ukrainians to countries such as Poland, which is facing its own demographic crisis and in need of workers. In 2018 alone, more than 3 million Ukrainians applied for passports that would allow them to work in Poland. Poland is the only EU country that allows Ukrainians to obtain seasonal work visas with just a passport. Ukrainians have received 81.7% of all work visas issued in Poland this year.

Between 1 and 2 million Ukrainian workers now reside in Poland, where they are often forced to take jobs "under the table," are easily exploited by employers, and work in dangerous conditions. Many Ukrainian laborers are recruited to Poland by scam offers of employment, only to then find themselves stranded and forced to work for whatever wage they can get.

While migrant workers in Poland are constantly subjected to anti-immigrant rhetoric from the right-wing PiS government in Warsaw, the Polish state classifies Ukrainian laborers as "refugees" in order to comply with EU quotas and reject refugees from Syria and elsewhere.

According to polls of Ukrainian migrants in Poland, over half are planning to move to Germany if the labor market there is ever open to them.

While Russia is constantly demonized in the Ukrainian and Western press as the eternal enemy of Ukraine, 2 million Ukrainian citizens now live or work in Russia. According to Olga Kirilova, between 2014 and 2017, 312,000 Ukrainians were granted Russian citizenship and Ukrainians make up the vast majority of immigrants to Russia.

The dearth of a working-age population in Ukraine is putting further strain on an already struggling pension system. According to Ukraine's SSS, as a result of widespread labor migration, only 17.8 million out of 42 million Ukrainians are economically active and paying into the pension system.

The migration of Ukrainian workers abroad has reached such a level that remittances from migrants now constitute 3 to 4 percent of the country's GDP. They exceed the amount of foreign investment in Ukraine. Nonetheless, such transfers are not nearly enough to make up for the negative impact of the currency's falling value, inflation, and the disappearance of skilled workers.

The Ukrainian ruling class acknowledges that the country is in serious trouble. "One of the main risks of the current scenario is the continuation of the outflow of labor from Ukraine, which will create a further increase in the imbalance between demand and supply in the labor market," noted a report from the country's national bank.

However, the government can do nothing to slow the mass emigration, as it is thoroughly under the control of international finance capital and committed to implementing the austerity programs demanded by Western states and banks.

Despite assurances from the Poroshenko regime that the economy will improve, the emigration and emptying of the country shows no signs of slowing.

John Upton • 5 hours ago

The Corrupt, extreme right wing government of Poroshenko, that has driven large proportions of the Ukrainian population into poverty and despair has only been able to take power and remain I office thanks to US imperialism and Angela Merkel's scheming and regime change program.

Without the working class intervening the only ones remaining in Ukraine will be those unable to leave and those that have their noses in the trough.

Kalen • 7 hours ago
Another excellent report of decaying of artificial entity of Ukraine (and capitalism specializes in collapsing societies) that never even existed before 1992 in European history and was resurrected ( from brief self declared by Bandera racist state status in 1941) and funded by Germany, Canada and US only to nurture their Fascist and actual Nazi traditions starting from Doncov to Bandera terror of hundreds of thousands dead 1941-1948 of OUN-B, UPA and Ukrainian SS, all against Russia, as Ukrainian "Country" was and is used as a Trojan horse to push Putin to submit to the west even more than he does now.

Pain and suffering of Ukrainian people is enormous as only 5% of population of Ukrainian Nazi thugs terrorist nation like like Hitler street thugs in 1932-1934. It is tragedy that capitalism instigated, exasperated and augmented and should be a lesson for the left what nationalism does, divides working class that was rendered powerless in Ukraine as Ukrainian industry tied to Russia collapsed and forces massive migration and de-cohesion of communities, divisions of working class and eradication of any real leftist leadership via murder, intimidation and exile.

Just a note. All that anti Russia hoopla after 2014 and ensuing NATO belligerence and warmongering and sanctions all were focused on so called annexation of Crimea to Russia which was nothing but reunification of land under control of Russia since 1754.

I was shocked watching an episode of Columbo, crime series in 1970s when one of characters proudly referred to California joining in US 1845 as annexation from Mexico, with no shame or condemnation like hinting that it was international aggression of US as Alta California was never part of US before that.

Well, it was before 1984 and Orwellian newspeak.

Note that Crimea remained autonomous region, not a part of Russia but part of Russian Federation.

solerso • 8 hours ago
Popular support for the "maidan" in the Ukraine was based on misleading and dishonest claims by pro EU and Pro US opportunistic political operators that such "regime change" would lead to total integration with Europe and open borders.... That would have allowed (so the misconception went) Ukrainians to flee the country much more openly with less red tape and hassle at the borders. So, far from being politically or ideologically supportive of Europe or the US or opportunist/nationalist Ukrainian politicians, the vast majority of Ukrainians only wanted to be allowed to flee, as they experience it, a social shipwreck
Charles • 8 hours ago
One of the most horrific consequences of the dismantling of the Soviet Union was the explosion of sex trafficking and very large numbers of Ukrainian women were caught up in this horrific exploitation and continue to be.
John Upton • 9 hours ago
Victoria Newland and Geoffrey Pyatt, both US officials, were recorded at the time of the right wing and fascist led coup that overthrew Russian backed Yanakovic, boasting that Washington had poured $5 billion into Ukraine ensuring that their man, an ex World Bank executive, was elected.

Since then the most rabid anti working class/ anti Russian governments have ruled the roost. Only those unable to flee this hell- hole and those whose snout is in the trough will soon be left there. Oh the benefits of US installed dictatorships.

Warren Duzak • 13 hours ago
In addition to emigration, Ukraine's decreasing population is a result of a higher infant mortality rate than surrounding countries. High infant mortality rates always indicate economic and social stress.
According to The World Bank 2017 figures for infant mortality in that region, the rate per 1,000 births in Ukraine is 7.5 compared to the following rates in surrounding countries:
Poland - 4.0
Romania - 6.6
Russia - 6.5
Belarus - 2.8
Hungary -3.8
Slovak Republic - 4.6
Only poor Moldova is higher at 13.3
Terry Lawrence • 15 hours ago
Kinda shot themselves in the foot with their "Revolution of Dignity" fascist coup. "Welcome to Europe, Ukraine. Here are your rubber gloves and toilet cleaning brush. Oh, you're a young woman? The red light district is three blocks that way".

Life in Crimea must be looking pretty good to them now.

Richard Mod • 16 hours ago
including the deceased in the population statistics brings to mind Gogol's "Dead Souls"!
erika • 16 hours ago
This is an important update on developments in the Ukraine.
Raycomeau • 17 hours ago
The puppet of the USA, Poroshenko , needs to go, and the USA should get the hell out of the Ukraine plus NATO has no business being on the borders of Russia. This is all the fault of the USA, And, the current immigration problem world wide is because the USA bombs countries eviscerating them yet the USA refuses to admit refugees which are fleeing from the USA wars.
Terry Lawrence Raycomeau • 5 hours ago
NATO has no business even existing, Ray.
manchegauche • 18 hours ago
Very illuminating article - great topic to choose. NIce one
лидия • 19 hours ago
In Baltic states after being "freed from communism and Soviet occupation" the population decline is also very prominent, the same reasons as in Ukraine too.
Human6 лидия • 5 hours ago
These same right-wing, fascist Ukrainian Banderovitzes love to yell and scream about the bogus "Holodomor" hoax (which has been debunked by serious scholars such as Pers Anders Rudling, and others, as well as Thottle). They falsely claim that the USSR tried to "depopulate" Ukrainians, when they are the ones who have depopulated Ukraine.

They are such shameless, low down, dirty liars.

[Nov 01, 2018] Trade between Russia and Ukraine hit a low of $10.26 Billion in 2016, but struggled back up to $12.9 Billion last year. Pre Maidan it was more than $50 Billion annually.

Nov 01, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman November 1, 2018 at 11:48 am

Speaking of Ukraine, the Russian sanctions against Ukraine have been announced. Predictably, Poroshenko considers them to be 'an award', or so he says. I don't know why he feels qualified to speak for those so honoured, since he was not on the list.

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1N6564

Trade between Russia and Ukraine hit a low of $10.26 Billion in 2016, but struggled back up to $12.9 Billion last year. Mind you, pre-glorious-Maidan it was more than $50 Billion annually. Never mind; I'm sure Yurrup will pick up the slack, just like it did after the glorious Maidan. Amazingly, the New York Times is still referring to Poroshenko as a 'chocolate tycoon', in the same sentence in which it calls Viktor Pinchuk an oligarch.

[Nov 01, 2018] Organized Greed vs. Disorganized Democracy

Notable quotes:
"... "In a society governed passively by free markets and free elections, organized greed always defeats disorganized democracy." ..."
"... "Well first of all, tell me: Is there some society you know that doesn't run on greed? You think Russia doesn't run on greed? You think China doesn't run on greed? What is greed? Of course, none of us are greedy, it's only the other fellow who's greedy. The world runs on individuals pursuing their separate interests. The great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus. Einstein didn't construct his theory under order from a bureaucrat. Henry Ford didn't revolutionize the automobile industry that way. In the only cases in which the masses have escaped from the kind of grinding poverty you're talking about, the only cases in recorded history, are where they have had capitalism and largely free trade. If you want to know where the masses are worse off, worst off, it's exactly in the kinds of societies that depart from that. So that the record of history is absolutely crystal clear, that there is no alternative way so far discovered of improving the lot of the ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive activities that are unleashed by the free-enterprise system." ..."
"... The United States has expended considerable energy and no end of media manipulation to make an enemy of Russia. It hardly seems sensible on Russia's part to go on helping America with its aerospace industry, since much of it is devoted to weapons and military systems production. The others, in order, are Japan (which produces less than half China's total), Kazakhstan, Ukraine and India. ..."
"... The Diplomatic Courier ..."
"... "United States-Russia relations have been perplexing in the last two years, and tensions between the two increased in April when newly imposed sanctions were placed on Russia. Because of these sanctions, Russia has threatened to halt titanium exports to the United States. With a growing dependency on titanium, the result of this would be ruinous for the United States defense industry and for aircraft manufacturers such as Boeing." ..."
Nov 01, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

"In a society governed passively by free markets and free elections, organized greed always defeats disorganized democracy."

Matt Taibbi, from Griftopia

"Well first of all, tell me: Is there some society you know that doesn't run on greed? You think Russia doesn't run on greed? You think China doesn't run on greed? What is greed? Of course, none of us are greedy, it's only the other fellow who's greedy. The world runs on individuals pursuing their separate interests. The great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus. Einstein didn't construct his theory under order from a bureaucrat. Henry Ford didn't revolutionize the automobile industry that way. In the only cases in which the masses have escaped from the kind of grinding poverty you're talking about, the only cases in recorded history, are where they have had capitalism and largely free trade. If you want to know where the masses are worse off, worst off, it's exactly in the kinds of societies that depart from that. So that the record of history is absolutely crystal clear, that there is no alternative way so far discovered of improving the lot of the ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive activities that are unleashed by the free-enterprise system."

Milton Friedman

It's maybe a little unfortunate that cynicism has shoved its way to the fore in social consciousness; if you smell flowers, look around for a funeral. The world wasn't always that way, and once the American Dream which is really the dream of everyone everywhere – the fond hope that all that will make us happy in life; love, family, the kind of paycheck that will let one enjoy both, will somehow find us if only we are loyal and determined – was relatively humble, and sort of sweet. Enough was just enough, and not just a little bit more, if you feel me.

Somewhere along the storied path, greed became a virtue, as enshrined by Milton Friedman and others like him. Greed is nothing to be ashamed of – it's nothing less than the pistons in the great engine of human development. Greed is the puppet-master, pulling the strings of democracy.

So when Uncle Sam starts talking up democracy, look around for something you have that he might want.

Enter Daniel Witt, with a sad but hopeful piece on how Ukraine is pooching its big chance to be a real democracy . Because the road to democracy is paved with privatization.

Pardon a brief interjection here; Daniel Witt seems like a pretty straightforward guy. If this is the same Daniel Witt, his motivation genuinely seems to be the straightest road to profitability. His most-requested speech, according to his bio, is "U.S. Protectionism Begs World Retaliation". He shows every sign of being a guy who believes in free trade going both ways, the freer the better, and not a shill for an end-run by the US government.

So what makes me so suspicious, suspicion being the natural companion of cynicism? I'm glad you asked. In a word, titanium.

What's the only state-owned asset he singles out by name as a sign that the Ukrainian government is backsliding on its reform road, just when real partnership beckons? The Zaporizhia Titanium and Magnesium Combine. Hmmm. Which just happens to be 49% owned by Dmytro Firtash, the sole Ukrainian oligarch to whom the USA seems to have taken a deep and abiding dislike. He remains under house arrest in Vienna at the request of the US government, for 'alleged corrupt practices using U.S. banks', and it seems pretty clear that same US government would have no problems with the Zaporizhia Titanium and Magnesium Combine being nationalized and then sold to a private investor with or without his consent. Which is kind of an odd position for the US government to take, considering its decidedly negative assessment of Crimea's nationalization of businesses located in Crimea which were formerly the property of Ukrainian oligarchs.

Two basic facts will guide us as we proceed; one, the United States uses a lot of titanium, and it is absolutely vital to its aerospace and aircraft industry. Titanium is stronger than steel but much lighter, and if America had to substitute steel for titanium in its passenger aircraft, they would be much heavier, and able to carry only reduced loads of passengers and cargo. Not to mention fuel, so they couldn't fly as far. The Boeing Dreamliner is somewhere between 12% and 15% titanium , and Boeing was losing $23 million on every Dreamliner that left the factory in 2015.

Two, the United States is not on the list of major titanium producers . In fact, only one lone ally is – Japan. Doubtless further adding to American chagrin, the runaway leader in titanium production is China, with whom the United States is currently engaged in a loud and messy trade war which relies heavily, from the American perspective, on acting the tough guy and employing a quickly-escalating sequence of threats and tariffs. Not a country you want to have your balls in a vise over supplies of a commodity you have to have in order to remain dominant in a major global industry.

Who's next? Russia. Ditto. The United States has expended considerable energy and no end of media manipulation to make an enemy of Russia. It hardly seems sensible on Russia's part to go on helping America with its aerospace industry, since much of it is devoted to weapons and military systems production. The others, in order, are Japan (which produces less than half China's total), Kazakhstan, Ukraine and India.

Hmmmm .Ukraine. Ukraine produces about 10,000 metric tons a year, but if a private investor took over and modernized production, it might be much more. Of course the business could not sell at a loss, but perhaps it might arrive at a Wal-Mart solution; I know a customer who will buy 100% of your output – here's how much he's willing to pay. Perhaps not as much as you hoped, but you can be assured of selling as much as you can produce. Free trade in action, baby; dig it.

That's roughly what The Diplomatic Courier thinks, too . In its article, we learn that the United States sold off its entire National Defense stockpile of titanium, beginning in the late 90's. Perhaps not the brightest decision, considering the USA now imports 79% of its titanium, and relies on it more than ever.

"United States-Russia relations have been perplexing in the last two years, and tensions between the two increased in April when newly imposed sanctions were placed on Russia. Because of these sanctions, Russia has threatened to halt titanium exports to the United States. With a growing dependency on titanium, the result of this would be ruinous for the United States defense industry and for aircraft manufacturers such as Boeing."

Ruinous – you don't say. I hope you'll understand, then, why the cynic in me is suspicious as the United States turns on the indignation and sorrow when Ukraine's titanium industry doesn't appear on the list of state assets to be privatized, and simultaneously claims that such privatization is vital to modernizing the Ukrainian economy. Which is all Uncle Sam really cares about. Honest.

Going back to the original reference, Daniel Witt waves the carrot under Ukraine's nose by citing the UK and New Zealand as examples of successful privatization. Ukraine is hesitating, he says, but it must go down the same path.

Curiously enough, a search using the term "privatization a disaster for UK" yields contentions that privatization of state rail, bus and water services have all yielded terrible results. Significantly, though, they have not been a uniform failure – they have been great for business; in fact, the article describes privatization as 'a bonanza'. Where they have been a disaster, using water services as an example, is for users, the environment and those employed in the industry.

Transpose that situation to the titanium industry in Ukraine. Ask yourself how much the USA would care if the environment in Ukraine suffered because of an ambitious new private producer and his investors. How about if the workers got dicked over, and the 'bonanza' passed them by? What about Friedman's implication that Einstein's Theory of Relativity was inspired by his loyalty to capitalist principles, or that Henry Ford achieved such success because he was an early advocate for free trade? If anything, his description of individuals pursuing their own interests making the world go 'round in a manner which is pleasing to the gods of private enterprise ought to serve as a warning.

You know, I think we're on the same page here. At least I hope so.

Ronald Thomas West October 30, 2018 at 9:47 pm

Hey Mark

I thought to mention how the economics should work out with privatizing the penal system. It should be easy enough; you simply legislate a conversion of the state itself into the Gulag. Or invite in the IMF. Just now Kiev is under the gun to raise gas prices where the pension is reduced in real value to something like $40 a month, the most recent figure we've heard from our Ukrainian retiree buddy; insuring every Ukrainian must aspire to become a criminal to survive. So, there's your legitimate rationale to create 'the first circle' of Solzhenitsyn's dreams where everyone is a prisoner, and the state apparatus (bureaucrat) is made up of a higher class of prisoner (I believe the term is 'trusty') in a position to skim the scant rations. Uh, there might be a concern the averaged IQ of 90, typical of Americans these days, might miss your closing irony

BTW, speaking of world class crimes, if you hadn't seen this one:

https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2018/10/12/a-breaking-point-in-geopolitical-torsion/

Mark Chapman October 31, 2018 at 10:48 am
That's a great piece, Ron, and – as usual – you did not pull any punches. It's inspiring to see someone actually trying to do something to force the ICC to notice and to hold accused perpetrators to account. I hope your evidence is solid, because western governments have any number of attorneys while western intelligence agencies are getting pretty good at cover-ups – a natural consequence of having had their mistakes exposed without incurring any penalty thereby. How smart do you have to be to write in your little notebook "Don't do that again"?

it must be dangerous for you, so please be careful. Bolton's unmistakable statement that the USA does not and will not recognize the authority or judgments of the ICC marks America as a nation which reserves the right to operate outside the law. Imaginary America has always prided itself on holding itself and its citizens to an even higher standard than any national set of laws, and its refusal to be bound – 'restricted' might be a better word – by the ICC should be a warning that it has already violated its rules of conduct, and knows it.

Cortes October 31, 2018 at 1:02 am
It's the altruism that kills hahaha.

"You have titanium languishing in the ground? Well, fry me for an oyster! Who'd have thunk it?"

Thanks again, Mark. It's always great to learn of the selflessness of Uncle Sugar. An example to us all.

Moscow Exile October 31, 2018 at 4:17 am
Greed is one of the "7 deadly sins" -- if you are a Christian, that is.

They are: pride, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, wrath and sloth.

Done 5 of 'em, me, and regularly at that. Still do!.

But then, I ain't no Christian!

Waes hael!

Mark Chapman October 31, 2018 at 11:20 am
It's important to note that this is only Friedman's opinion, and probably most who analyze the course of human development over history would not attribute the work of geniuses as a byproduct of either greed or capitalism. Often it's just a person or a team that is driven to solve a problem, and prove that their solution works – it is the drive for accomplishment, even glory, perhaps, rather than the drive for enrichment. A good example is the drug industry; very seldom is the discoverer of a remedy motivated by profit. Very seldom is he who gains control over the marketing of that discovery motivated by anything else.
Jen October 31, 2018 at 2:25 pm
Milton Friedman actually lived long enough (he died in 2006) to see his neoliberal policies fail in Chile. The initial neoliberal economic experiment in that country as put together by the notorious Chicago Boys (Chilean graduates in economics from the University of Chicago) ran from the mid-1970s (after Augusto Pinochet took over as leader after the 1973 coup) to 1981: the year the Chilean banking sector had a meltdown. From then on, Pinochet steered the economy back to mixed socialist / neoliberal policies but any credibility he still might have had with the Chilean public was destroyed and he was a lame duck president until 1988. The Falklands War and Argentina still being a military police state might have saved his bacon for a while but once that country's government was out and a limited democracy was restored, Pinochet's days were numbered.
Mark Chapman October 31, 2018 at 2:31 pm
That goes a long way toward explaining why Latynina worships Pinochet – she's as Randian as they come, and considers herself a model of progressive enlightenment.
kirill October 31, 2018 at 11:43 am
This is just Randroid intellectual excrement. These clowns worship at the altar of self-organizing order out of chaos. But no such process exists for human society. The order comes from collusion and ***conspiracy***. And it is all about hiding this from the gullible masses that are to be fleeced by informed Randroids.

Russia imported this rubbish religion back during the early 1990s thanks to the Harvard Boys and the comprador regime of Yeltsin. But by 1998 it was apparent that it definitely does not account for western "prosperity" and Chernomyrdin proclaimed that the era of market romanticism was over. This coincided with a real turn-around in the Russian economy and there was a surge in GDP and industrial growth (overseen by Primakov and later Putin).

The "invisible hand" of Adam Smith is not taken in the same sense as used by Smith. Smith did not actually say that the market is self-organizing. He knew that order requires planning and power to issue orders (or coerce compliance via more abstract means such as your real choices as a consumer). The notion that a gas of no-holds-barred self-interested entities can produce optimal economic and social order is certifiably insane. The only reason this crap manages to persist is that most people just don't have the mathematical (and to some extent physics) education to see through it. So Randroids can engage in the same trickery as global warming deniers, i.e. spew plausibly sounding rubbish.

Consider a system consisting of N elements (where N is large) and each element is essentially more likely to undermine than support each other element (since they are all ruthless competitors and totally self-interested). Any positive interactions would be inadvertent and resulting from greed maximization. You have the show stopping bootstrap problem. Before any positive coherence can develop in the system allowing for inadvertent net benefit (individual and collective) interactions, you have primitive local interactions with nearest-neighbours. In this absurd theory, the elements or humans would behave like bears (or other solitary predators) and not the social animals that they are. There would be negligible incentive to cooperate since nobody is rich and the presence of others is competition for available resources. You would have each element trying to create an exclusive territory since that is what gives maximal gain (as it does in the real world for various animal species). Clearly this is the diametric opposite of real humans who form family communes and optimize their survival through collaboration. This tribal socialism was there for good reasons and not some accident of history. All "primitive" tribes are socialist and only exhibit capitalist style greed and self-interest at the inter-tribe level since the dynamics at this scale begin to resemble those for bears (thanks to the strong human tribalism and group identification).

Without a process to form human society, Randroid theorizing is not even academic, it is removed from relevance by its own contradictions. Society has always been a species of socialism even it involved rule by kings and the development of aristocracy. The justification for society was and remains the collective good. Tribes became kingdoms because of the need for security and the incentive to develop the economy to provide better living conditions. (This does not exclude various regimes where the peasant masses were actually worse off than if they remained more "primative", but social development is not defined just by the negative aspects).

Greed is good capitalism is a pathology enabled by social development. And it sells itself using socialist benefits. That is why we have government, taxes, courts and laws. In the Randroid theory all of these things are a hindrance to the well being of the greedy. But the greedy would not have the riches to pillage without all this "inefficient" socialism to build up society and the economy. These greedy should properly use the totally undeveloped reference state for their baseline since there would not be any human society if humans behaved like bears.

Mark Chapman October 31, 2018 at 11:50 am
On Rand, I'm with Gore Vidal;

"Ayn Rand's 'philosophy' is nearly perfect in its immorality, which makes the size of her audience all the more ominous and symptomatic as we enter a curious new phase in our society . To justify and extol human greed and egotism is to my mind not only immoral, but evil."

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/475162-ayn-rand-s-philosophy-is-nearly-perfect-in-its-immorality-which

Northern Star October 31, 2018 at 3:29 pm
"Rand underwent surgery for lung cancer in 1974 after decades of heavy smoking.[97] In 1976, she retired from writing her newsletter and, despite her initial objections, she allowed social worker Evva Pryor, an employee of her attorney, to enroll her in ***Social Security and Medicare.***[98][99] During the late 1970s her activities within the Objectivist movement declined, especially after the death of her husband on November 9, 1979.[100] One of her final projects was work on a never-completed television adaptation of Atlas Shrugged."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_Rand#Later_years

PaulR October 31, 2018 at 5:48 am
Friedman was just parsing Mandeville 1705's poem 'The Fable of the Bees' (and neither, in my view, was entirely wrong – greed does incentivize):

T h e Root of Evil, Avarice,
That damn'd ill-natur'd baneful Vice,
Was Slave to Prodigality,
That noble Sin; whilst Luxury
Employ'd a Million of the Poor,
And odious Pride a Million more:
Envy it self, and Vanity,
Were Ministers of Industry;
Their darling Folly, Fickleness,
In Diet, Furniture and Dress,
That strange ridic'lous Vice, was made
The very Wheel that turn'd the Trade.
Their Laws and Clothes were equally
Objects of Mutability;
For, what was well done for a time,
In half a Year became a Crime;
Yet while they alter'd thus their Laws,
Still finding and correcting Flaws,
They mended by Inconstancy
Faults, which no Prudence could foresee.

T h u s Vice nurs'd Ingenuity,
Which join'd with Time and Industry,
Had carry'd Life's Conveniencies
It's real Pleasures, Comforts, Ease,
To such a Height, the very Poor
Liv'd better than the Rich before,
And nothing could be added more.

Mark Chapman October 31, 2018 at 11:28 am
It's certainly true that not all the great accomplishments are the result of altruism, perhaps not even half. And I suppose if I had to qualify it, I would say it is safe in a process for the workers to be motivated by greed, if they must have a selfish motivation. But if the overall controller of the effort is motivated by greed and the 'product' is something everyone needs, some will surely have to go without because they will not be able to afford it.
kirill October 31, 2018 at 11:51 am
One has to consider the whole timeline of social evolution and not just the instantaneous events of recent history. Various scientists back 200 years ago sponsored by the rich and engaged in selfish pursuits would not be there in the first place if the only parameter driving human "progress" was greed. There would be no rich either since they depend on the conformity of the masses (peasants) to get rich. Randroid theories are not relevant for humans and in fact not relevant for anything.
yalensis October 31, 2018 at 2:05 pm
There is confusion about what the actual "7 deadly sins" are, and what are their definitions.
For example, some people say "Greed" and some say "Avarice". There is a technical difference between the two concepts, but I am not sure what it is.
There is also a confusion between "Envy" and "Jealousy".
And much confusion surrounding the concept of "Pride". Many modern people consider "Pride" to be a positive virtue, not a sin. As in "Pride Week", or the like.
Jane Austen considered "Pride" to be a negative characteristic, synonym with "contumely".
Everybody agrees that "Gluttony" and "Lust" are sins, no second thoughts there
Jen October 31, 2018 at 2:53 pm
The difference between greed and avarice is that greed, being the more commonly used term, is more general and vague in its meaning whereas avarice has a more specific meaning of intense and compulsive greed and has connotations of rapacity. As one of the 7 Deadly Sins, Avarice is the more correct concept.

In this context as well (of the 7 Deadly Sins), Pride refers to arrogance and belief in one's own superiority over others.

Gluttony and Lust refer to the extreme and compulsive over-indulgence of the senses, to the point where they become dulled and the person who indulges in gluttony and lust needs more heightened and more extreme experiences to obtain the same levels of satisfaction. Notice how such indulgence becomes an addiction that virtually rules the person's life.

moscowexile October 31, 2018 at 6:10 pm
Texting all day non-stop with smart phones should be one of the 7 deadlies!

The metro here is full of people (mostly women) doing this. Sometimes they are so bloody busy talking about fuck-all non-stop, that when the doors open, they're still at it and you can't get on or off.

Time was when folk on the metro read books.

I am grown too old for this world!

yalensis November 1, 2018 at 3:06 am
Agree; and compulsively taking Selfies with one's phone should also be the 8th Deadly sin.
Although maybe this fits into the category of "Vanity".
Speaking of which, some people say that "Vanity" rather than "Pride" is the deadly sin.
As in the movie Bedazzled , I mean the original one with Dudley Moore, not the remake.
In that movie, the 7 sins are: Lust, Vanity, Anger, Envy, Gluttony, Avarice and Sloth.

I don't think Pride is actually a sin, depending. It could just mean just a feeling of satisfaction or self-worth that one has accomplished something.
Whereas Vanity, as Pushkin noted, is more like a fascination with the notion of celebrity.

Cortes November 1, 2018 at 8:38 am
Envy and jealousy were explained to me by my first Spanish teacher by reference to the iron bars over street level windows.
The person outside, looks in with envy while the guy inside is jealous of what's his own.
It didn't hurt that the name of the set of bars in Spanish is "celosía."
et Al October 31, 2018 at 12:21 pm
Privatize the profits, socialize the losses, innit?

[Nov 01, 2018] Angela Merkel Migrates Into Retirement The American Conservative

Notable quotes:
"... Her announcement on Monday that she will vacate the leadership of Germany's ruling center-right Christian Democrats marks the culmination of what has been a slow denouement of Merkelism. ..."
"... Long the emblematic figure of "Europe," hailed by the neoliberal Economist as the continent's moral voice, long the dominant decider of its collective foreign and economic policies, Merkel will leave office with border fences being erected and disdain for European political institutions at their highest pitch ever. In this sense, she failed as dramatically as her most famous predecessors, Konrad Adenauer, Willy Brandt, Helmut Schmidt, and Helmut Kohl, succeeded in their efforts to make Germany both important and normal in the postwar world. ..."
"... "We can do this!" she famously declared. Europe, she said, must "show flexibility" over refugees. Then, a few days later, she said there was "no limit" to the number of migrants Germany could accept. At first, the burgeoning flood of mostly young male asylum claimants produced an orgy of self-congratulatory good feeling, celebrity posturing of welcome, Merkel greeting migrants at the train station, Merkel taking selfies with migrants, Merkel touted in The Economist as "Merkel the Bold." ..."
"... The euphoria, of course, did not last. Several of the Merkel migrants carried out terror attacks in France that fall. (France's socialist prime minister Manuel Valls remarked pointedly after meeting with Merkel, "It was not us who said, 'Come!'") Reports of sexual assaults and murders by migrants proved impossible to suppress, though Merkel did ask Mark Zuckerberg to squelch European criticism of her migration policies on Facebook. Intelligent as she undoubtedly is (she was a research chemist before entering politics), she seemed to lack any intellectual foundation to comprehend why the integration of hundreds of thousands of people from the Muslim world might prove difficult. ..."
"... Merkel reportedly telephoned Benjamin Netanyahu to ask how Israel had been so successful in integrating so many immigrants during its brief history. There is no record of what Netanyahu thought of the wisdom of the woman posing this question. ..."
"... In any case, within a year, the Merkel initiative was acknowledged as a failure by most everyone except the chancellor herself. ..."
Nov 01, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Her refugee blunder changed the European continent in irreversible ways for decades to come. By Scott McConnell • November 1, 2018

https://web.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?app_id=347697165243043&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2Fr%2F__Bz3h5RzMx.js%3Fversion%3D42%23cb%3Df1e05916197a506%26domain%3Dwww.theamericanconservative.com%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%252Ffa22eaad4bf7dc%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=0&font=lucida%20grande&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Fangela-merkel-migrates-into-retirement%2F&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&send=true&show_faces=false&width=125

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.fe97d5b55faa73e82b8adbe10e393b13.en.html#dnt=false&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&original_referer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Fangela-merkel-migrates-into-retirement%2F&related=amconmag&size=m&text=Angela%20Merkel%20Migrates%20Into%20Retirement%20%7C%20The%20American%20Conservative&time=1541069527058&type=share&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Fangela-merkel-migrates-into-retirement%2F&via=amconmag

https://apis.google.com/se/0/_/+1/fastbutton?usegapi=1&size=medium&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Fangela-merkel-migrates-into-retirement%2F&gsrc=3p&ic=1&jsh=m%3B%2F_%2Fscs%2Fapps-static%2F_%2Fjs%2Fk%3Doz.gapi.en_US.r3VEB-hu6dk.O%2Fam%3DQQ%2Frt%3Dj%2Fd%3D1%2Frs%3DAGLTcCPdzfaDsFYsZF5Fx6dxuyMdlAHKvg%2Fm%3D__features__#_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_close%2C_open%2C_resizeMe%2C_renderstart%2Concircled%2Cdrefresh%2Cerefresh&id=I0_1541069526884&_gfid=I0_1541069526884&parent=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&pfname=&rpctoken=60814349

Drop of Light/Shutterstock Whatever her accomplishments as pathbreaking female politician and respected leader of Europe's dominant economic power, Angela Merkel will go down in history for her outburst of naivete over the issue of migration into Europe during the summer of 2015.

Her announcement on Monday that she will vacate the leadership of Germany's ruling center-right Christian Democrats marks the culmination of what has been a slow denouement of Merkelism.

She had seen the vote share of her long dominant party shrink in one regional election after another. The rebuke given to her last weekend in Hesse, containing the Frankfurt region with its booming economy, where she had campaigned extensively, was the final straw. Her CDU's vote had declined 10 points since the previous election, their voters moving toward the further right (Alternative fur Deutschland or AfD). Meanwhile, the further left Greens have made dramatic gains at the expense of Merkel's Social Democrat coalition partners.

Long the emblematic figure of "Europe," hailed by the neoliberal Economist as the continent's moral voice, long the dominant decider of its collective foreign and economic policies, Merkel will leave office with border fences being erected and disdain for European political institutions at their highest pitch ever. In this sense, she failed as dramatically as her most famous predecessors, Konrad Adenauer, Willy Brandt, Helmut Schmidt, and Helmut Kohl, succeeded in their efforts to make Germany both important and normal in the postwar world.

One can acknowledge that while Merkel never admitted error for her multiculti summer fling (beyond wishing she had communicated her goals better), she did manage to adjust her policies. By 2016, Germany under her watch was paying a healthy ransom to Turkey to keep would-be migrants in camps and preventing them from sailing to Greece. Merkel's departure will make the battle to succeed her one of the most watched political contests in Europe. She has turned migration into a central and quite divisive issue within the CDU and Germany, and the party may decide that it has no choice but to accommodate, in one way or another, the voters who have left them for the AfD.

Related to the issue of who should reside in Europe (objectively the current answer remains anyone who can get there) is the question of how are such questions decided. In July 2015, five years after asserting in a speech that multiculturalism has "utterly failed" in Germany (without addressing what policies should be pursued in an increasingly ethnically diverse society) and several weeks after reducing a young Arab girl to tears at a televised forum by telling her that those whose asylum claims were rejected would "have to go back" and that "politics is hard," Merkel changed course.

For those interested in psychological studies of leadership and decision making, it would be hard to imagine a richer subject. Merkel's government first announced it would no longer enforce the rule (the Dublin agreement) that required asylum claimants to be processed in the first country they passed through. Then she doubled down. The migrants fleeing the Syrian civil war, along with those who pretended to be Syrian, and then basically just anyone, could come to Germany.

"We can do this!" she famously declared. Europe, she said, must "show flexibility" over refugees. Then, a few days later, she said there was "no limit" to the number of migrants Germany could accept. At first, the burgeoning flood of mostly young male asylum claimants produced an orgy of self-congratulatory good feeling, celebrity posturing of welcome, Merkel greeting migrants at the train station, Merkel taking selfies with migrants, Merkel touted in The Economist as "Merkel the Bold."

The Angela Merkel Era is Coming to an End The Subtle Return of Germany Hegemony

Her words traveled far beyond those fleeing Syria. Within 48 hours of the "no limit" remark, The New York Times reported a sudden stirring of migrants from Nigeria. Naturally Merkel boasted in a quiet way about how her decision had revealed that Germany had put its Nazi past behind it. "The world sees Germany as a land of hope and chances," she said. "That wasn't always the case." In making this decision personally, Merkel was making it for all of Europe. It was one of the ironies of a European arrangement whose institutions were developed in part to transcend nationalism and constrain future German power that 70 years after the end of the war, the privately arrived-at decision of a German chancellor could instantly transform societies all over Europe.

The euphoria, of course, did not last. Several of the Merkel migrants carried out terror attacks in France that fall. (France's socialist prime minister Manuel Valls remarked pointedly after meeting with Merkel, "It was not us who said, 'Come!'") Reports of sexual assaults and murders by migrants proved impossible to suppress, though Merkel did ask Mark Zuckerberg to squelch European criticism of her migration policies on Facebook. Intelligent as she undoubtedly is (she was a research chemist before entering politics), she seemed to lack any intellectual foundation to comprehend why the integration of hundreds of thousands of people from the Muslim world might prove difficult.

Merkel reportedly telephoned Benjamin Netanyahu to ask how Israel had been so successful in integrating so many immigrants during its brief history. There is no record of what Netanyahu thought of the wisdom of the woman posing this question.

In any case, within a year, the Merkel initiative was acknowledged as a failure by most everyone except the chancellor herself. Her public approval rating plunged from 75 percent in April 2015 to 47 percent the following summer. The first electoral rebuke came in September 2016, when the brand new anti-immigration party, the Alternative fur Deutschland, beat Merkel's CDU in Pomerania.

In every election since, Merkel's party has lost further ground. Challenges to her authority from within her own party have become more pointed and powerful. But the mass migration accelerated by her decision continues, albeit at a slightly lower pace.

Angela Merkel altered not only Germany but the entire European continent, in irreversible ways, for decades to come.

Scott McConnell is a founding editor of and the author of Ex-Neocon: Dispatches From the Post-9/11 Ideological Wars .

[Nov 01, 2018] Lame Duck Merkel Has Only Her Legacy On Her Mind

Notable quotes:
"... On the other hand, President Trump is pushing Merkel on policy on Russia and Ukraine that furthers the image that she is simply a stooge of U.S. geopolitical ambitions. Don't ever forget that Germany is, for all intents and purposes, an occupied country. So, what the U.S. military establishment wants, Merkel must provide. ..."
"... But Merkel, further weakened by another disastrous state election, isn't strong enough to fend off her emboldened Italian and British opposition (and I'm not talking about The Gypsum Lady, Theresa May here). ..."
"... Merkel is a lame-duck now. Merkelism is over. Absentee governing from the center standing for nothing but the international concerns has been thoroughly rebuked by the European electorate from Spain to the shores of the Black Sea. ..."
"... Germany will stand for something other than globalism by the time this is all over. There will be a renaissance of culture and tradition there that is similar to the one occurring at a staggering pace in Russia. ..."
Nov 01, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Tom Luongo,

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has stepped down as the leader of the Christian Democratic Union, the party she has led for nearly two decades. Yesterday's election in Hesse, normally a CDU/SPD stronghold was abysmal for them.

She had to do something to quell the revolt brewing against her.

Merkel knew going in what the polls were showing. Unlike American and British polls, it seems the German ones are mostly accurate with pre-election polls coming close to matching the final results.

So, knowing what was coming for her and in the spirit of trying to maintain power for as long as possible Merkel has been moving away from her staunch positions on unlimited immigration and being in lock-step with the U.S. on Russia.

She's having to walk a tightrope on these two issues as the turmoil in U.S. political circles is pulling her in, effectively, opposite directions.

The globalist Davos Crowd she works for wants the destruction of European culture and individual national sovereignty ground into a paste and power consolidated under the rubric of the European Union.

They also want Russia brought to heel.

On the other hand, President Trump is pushing Merkel on policy on Russia and Ukraine that furthers the image that she is simply a stooge of U.S. geopolitical ambitions. Don't ever forget that Germany is, for all intents and purposes, an occupied country. So, what the U.S. military establishment wants, Merkel must provide.

So, if she rejects that role and the chaos U.S. policy engenders, particularly Syria, she's undermining the flow of migrants into Europe.

This is why it was so significant that she and French President Emmanuel Macron joined this weekend's summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Istanbul.

It ended with an agreement on Syria's future that lies in direct conflict with the U.S.'s goals of the past seven years.

It was an admission that Assad has prevailed in Syria and the plan to atomize it into yet another failed state has itself failed. Merkel has traded 'Assad must go' for 'no more refugees.'

To President Trump's credit he then piggy-backed on that statement announcing that the U.S. would be pulling out of Syria very soon now. And that tells me that he is still coordinating in some way with Putin and other world leaders on the direction of his foreign policy in spite of his opposition.

But the key point from the Istanbul statement was that Syria's rebuilding be prioritized to reverse the flow of migrants so Syrians can go home. While Gilbert Doctorow is unconvinced by France's position here , I think Merkel has to be focused on assisting Putin in achieving his goal of returning Syria to Syrians.

Because, this is both a political necessity for Merkel as well as her trying to burnish her crumbling political throne to maintain power.

The question is will Germans believe and/or forgive her enough for her to stay in power through her now stated 'retirement' from politics in 2021?

I don't think so and it's obvious Davos Crowd boy-toy Macron is working overtime to salvage what he can for them as Merkel continues to face up to the political realities across Europe, which is that populism is a natural reaction to these insane policies.

Merkel's job of consolidating power under the EU is unfinished. They don't have financial integration. The Grand Army of the EU is still not a popular idea. The euro-zone is a disaster waiting to happen and its internal inconsistencies are adding fuel to an already pretty hot political fire.

On this front, EU integration, she and Macron are on the same page. Because 'domestically' from an EU perspective, Brexit still has to be dealt with and the showdown with the Italians is only just beginning.

But Merkel, further weakened by another disastrous state election, isn't strong enough to fend off her emboldened Italian and British opposition (and I'm not talking about The Gypsum Lady, Theresa May here).

And Macron should stop looking in the mirror long enough to see he's standing on a quicksand made of blasting powder.

This points to the next major election for Europe, that of the European Parliament in May where all of Merkel's opposition are focused on wresting control of that body and removing Jean-Claude Juncker or his hand-picked replacement (Merkel herself?) from power.

The obvious transition for Merkel is from German Chancellor to European Commission President. She steps down as Chancellor in May after the EPP wins a majority then to take Juncker's job. I'm sure that's been the plan all along. This way she can continue the work she started without having to face the political backlash at home.

But, again, how close is Germany to snap elections if there is another migrant attack and Chemnitz-like demonstrations. You can only go to the 'Nazi' well so many times, even in Germany.

There comes a point where people will have simply had enough and their anger isn't born of being intolerant but angry at having been betrayed by political leadership which doesn't speak for them and imported crime, chaos and violence to their homes.

And the puppet German media will not be able to contain the story. The EU's speech rules will not contain people who want to speak. The clamp down on hate speech, pioneered by Merkel herself is a reaction to the growing tide against her.

And guess what? She can't stop it.

The problem is that Commies like Merkel and Soros don't believe in anything. They are vampires and nihilists as I said over the weekend suffused with a toxic view of humanity.

Oh sure, they give lip service to being inclusive and nice about it while they have control over the levers of power, the State apparatus. But, the minute they lose control of those levers, the sun goes down, the fangs come out and the bloodletting begins.

These people are vampires, sucking the life out of a society for their own ends. They are evil in a way that proves John Barth's observation that "man can do no wrong." For they never see themselves as the villain.

No. They see themselves as the savior of a fallen people. Nihilists to their very core they only believe in power. And, since power is their religion, all activities are justified in pursuit of their goals.

Their messianic view of themselves is indistinguishable to the Salafist head-chopping animals people like Hillary empowered to sow chaos and death across the Middle East and North Africa over the past decade.

Add to this Merkel herself who took Hillary's empowerment of these animals and gave them a home across Europe. At least now Merkel has the good sense to see that this has cost her nearly everything.

Even if she has little to no shame.

Hillary seems to think she can run for president again and win with the same schtick she failed with twice before. Frankly, I welcome it like I welcome the sun in the morning, safe in the knowledge that all is right with the world and she will go down in humiliating defeat yet again.

Merkel is a lame-duck now. Merkelism is over. Absentee governing from the center standing for nothing but the international concerns has been thoroughly rebuked by the European electorate from Spain to the shores of the Black Sea.

Germany will stand for something other than globalism by the time this is all over. There will be a renaissance of culture and tradition there that is similar to the one occurring at a staggering pace in Russia.

And Angela Merkel's legacy will be chaos.

* * *

Join my patreon because you hate chaos.

[Oct 31, 2018] Russia enacts sanctions against Ukraine which will, among other things, prohibit transferring money from Russian to Ukrainian banks

Kind of continuation of neocon foreign policy success after 2014, at the expense of Ukrainian people.
Oct 31, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman October 29, 2018 at 3:27 pm

Uh oh; Russia enacts sanctions against Ukraine which will, among other things, prohibit transferring money from Russian to Ukrainian banks. There will still be ways for Ukrainian workers in Russia to get their pay home to relatives in Ukraine, but it just got the official Russian stamp of disapproval and it is going to be made more difficult.

There will also be embargoes against certain Ukrainian products (maybe it spells it out, I didn't watch the whole thing yet).

https://youtu.be/bgS__Idlq5w

[Oct 31, 2018] British must have hours of footage on Skripals that they have chosen not to reveal. And as the article concludes, the only logical reason for that is that it does not support the official narrative, since one has obviously been decided upon and vigorously defended.

Oct 31, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

et Al October 30, 2018 at 3:21 am

Sic Semper Tyrannis: "LOOPS OF LIES RE 'SIGINT'" by David Habakkuk
https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/10/loops-of-lies-re-sigint-by-david-habakkuk.html

LOOPS OF LIES RE 'SIGINT':

GIANNANGELLI'S CLAIMS, IN THE LIGHT OF

HIS EARLIER REPORTS ON GHOUTA, SKRIPALS.
####

Plenty of good stuff at the link including what we have read before.

The article leads me to this question: If whomever can fabricate Syrian Army messages, isn't there one small problem with it? I.e. The Brits may be hoovering up SIGNIT from Mount Troodos in Cyprus, but unless the radio signals are highly directional (and even then they emanate outwards), other nations are also recording these signals, such as Russia, which we never hear about.

Therefore, the Brits/8200 whomever must assume that the Russians have copies and would know if the former are putting up the bs and can call it out behind closed doors at the UN to other nations. So what's the point? Simply for building media outrage and DO SOMETHING! momentum, hoping to act first before it can be scotched? That's what used to happen in the past

Mark Chapman October 30, 2018 at 11:20 am
That's a really good piece, with loads of interesting information. What jumped out for me, though was what amounts to a professional acknowledgement of something that was introduced by commenters early on in the Skripal affair – the almost complete absence of CCTV footage of their movements and those of people close to them. As both sources point out, England is lousy with CCTV, you can barely move without being picked up on multiple cameras. Therefore the British must have hours of footage that they have chosen not to reveal. And as the article concludes, the only logical reason for that is that it does not support the official narrative, since one has obviously been decided upon and vigorously defended.

As an aside, it is tragic that intelligence is manipulated the way it is to present a desired conclusion. Because intelligence is supposed to be something like the irrefutable clue, the piece that doesn't fit, in detective stories. It is supposed to provide that epiphanous moment when you know what has transpired beyond any reasonable doubt. Every time that moment is discovered to have been brought about by fabrication and deceit so as to push an incorrect conclusion to the forefront, trust in the method diminishes. Consequently, the harder governments push this or that piece of evidence as the conclusive piece of proof which cannot be denied, the more likely it is to have been manufactured rather than discovered.

[Oct 30, 2018] Lightening Skies The Case for Optimism by Justin Raimondo

Oct 29, 2018 | original.antiwar.com

Why American nationalism is different

[Oct 29, 2018] What is often missing in comments is the importance of not confusing Zionism with Zionist "Jews", Zionists with Jew and Jews with Semites!

Zionists represent nothing more then Israeli lobby in the USA, much like neocons and Izreal represent lobby for military industrial complex
Oct 29, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
Pft , Oct 28, 2018 6:36:52 PM | link
< Assuming this was not another psyops it seems amazing to me that people cant distinguish between the Israeli government and their lobby which influences policy and elections in the US and the average Jew attending a synagogue.>

As with any event I always look at who benefits. Certainly the anti-gun lobby. Zionists have always benefitted from such acts as they use them to get more protection against criticism of their policies (eg legislation to define antisemitism as hate speech which would include criticism of Israel). Remember the NY bombing threats a couple of years ago were coming from an individual said to be working alone in Israel)

Be interesting to learn more about this Bowers. I am skeptical its a psyops at this point because he was taken alive, but who knows.

Krollchem , Oct 28, 2018 8:29:26 PM | link

What is often missing in comments is the importance of not confusing Zionism with Zionist "Jews", Zionists with Jew and Jews with Semites!

Zionism is an extremely radical anti-Jewish ideology that is based on a fantasy of a racial/cultural pure society, as was Nazism and the Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states (excluding Oman). This is not to say that there are not other societies that are racist, such as the US, Japan and India to mention just a few.

Most believers in Zionism are Radical conservative Christians with some 40 million in the US alone. A vast majority of US Christians support Zionism via their voting for Politicians that support Zionism and Zionist "Jews".

Jews are just those that practice one of the variations of the Jewish religion much like there are various Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox sects. As long as a religion practices an inner form of the religion (e.g. some Sufi Islamic sects) that provides a moral basis for interactions with other in a society there is little harm in religion.

Jews are considered a part of the broad category of Semitic people the denotes a family of languages that includes Hebrew, Arabic, and Aramaic and certain ancient languages such as Phoenician and Akkadian, constituting the main subgroup of the Afro-Asiatic family."
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/semitic

"Genetic studies indicate that modern Jews (Ashkenazi, Sephardic and Mizrahi specifically), Levantine Arabs, Assyrians/Syriacs, Samaritans, Maronites, Druze, Mandaeans, and Mhallami, all have a common Near Eastern heritage which can be genetically mapped back to the ancient Fertile Crescent, but often also display genetic profiles distinct from one another, indicating the different histories of these peoples."

Furthermore, Jews are generally less Semitic than their current neighbors as: "A DNA study of "six Middle Eastern populations (Ashkenazi, Sephardic, and Kurdish Jews from Israel; Muslim Kurds; Muslim Arabs from Israel and the Palestinian Authority Area; and Bedouin from the Negev)" found that Jews were more closely related to groups in the north of the Fertile Crescent (Kurds, Turks, and Armenians) than to their Arab neighbors."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitic_people

It is important to point out that Benzion Netanyahu (AKA Ben Nitay) may not be Semitic like many of the Jews in the government of Israel. His father was a Zionist Rabbi in Poland named Benzion Mileikowsky who was also a one-time secretary of Vladimir Jabotinsky.
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Benzion-Netanyahu


Anti-Semitic Zionist "Jews" are mostly Ashkenazim (only some 40% of these have generic markers for Semitic Jews) and not only are anti-Semitic against the Palestinian Muslims and Christians but are also discriminating against the Ultra-Orthodox Semitic Jews. Furthermore, the Zionist Jews are facing daily protests against their rule from Semitic Jews, Christians and Muslims who are actually citizens of the state of Israel. Recently these protests have increased since the Zionist "Jews" that currently control Israel even passed a bill that officially defines Israel as the national homeland of the Jewish people and Hebrew as the country's official language.

Anti-Semitic Zionist "Jews" also do not recognize the Syrian citizenship of the Druze living in the occupied Golan Heights. The refuse to take Israeli citizenship and use a Israeli laissez-passer to travel outside of Israel with the citizenship box left empty.

Likewise, the Zionist anti-Semites suppress three million, mostly Semites, living in open air concentration camps and have killed and wounded some 10,000 as collective punishment with the approval of the West (including Australia).
https://joanroelofs.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/insecurity-blanket.pdf

Grieved , Oct 28, 2018 10:55:26 PM | link
@51 Krollchem - "...the importance of not confusing Zionism with Zionist "Jews", Zionists with Jew and Jews with Semites!"

Yes indeed.

True it is that Zionists are the Jews' worst enemies, as Alan Hart pointed out in this talk, titled after his 3-volume book and available on YouTube: Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews

We are familiar now with seeing how many of our confusions are actually caused by the disinformation machine, and the same can be said for the massive conflation that takes place between the notions of Zionism, Jewishness and Semitism.

Trolls come to western discussions all the time to inflame anti-semitism - why would Israel send them to do that? Because anti-semitism is the racism that forms the smoke behind which Zionism can hide.

Zionism essentially uses the Jews as human shields. Like the Wahhabi, Zionism hides behind innocent civilians. And because of the fog of war put out by Zionist disinformation and field-level trolling, few critics can take aim at the Zionist actions hiding behind the Jews, and don't dare shoot for fear of hitting "Semites", so called.

Caitlin Johnstone has an interesting new article on this subject today: On Antisemitism, Critical Thinking, And Conspiracy Theories .

Krollchem , Oct 28, 2018 11:31:13 PM | link
Grieved@63

Thanks for the two links! I come to MoA to learn and appreciate your comment and the additional info.

Pft , Oct 28, 2018 6:36:52 PM | 39
">link
Assuming this was not another psyops it seems amazing to me that people cant distinguish between the Israeli government and their lobby which influences policy and elections in the US and the average Jew attending a synagogue.

[Oct 28, 2018] The Jewish Ethnic Nexus of Bill Browder' Financial Operations The Occidental Observer

Jul 27, 2018 | www.theoccidentalobserver.net

A tweetstorm consisting of quotes from Israel Shamir's excellent article on Bill Browder showing how he operated in an entirely Jewish milieu. Jewish ethnic networking is alive and well in the twenty-first century.

Kevin MacDonald @TOOEdit Jul 27, 2018

What makes Browder so powerful? He invests in politicians. This probably a uniquely Jewish quality: Jews outspend everybody in contributions to political figures, unz.com/ishamir/the-go...

The Untouchable Mr. Browder?

The Browder affair is a heady upper-class Jewish cocktail of money, spies, politicians and international crime.

unz.com

Kevin MacDonald @TOOEdit

Russian NTV channel reported that Browder lavishly financed the US lawmakers. Here they present alleged evidence of money transfers: some hundred thousand dollars was given by Browder's structures officially to the senators and congressmen in order to promote the Magnitsky Act
12:04 PM-Jul 27, 2018

Q? 15 See Kevin MacDonald's other Tweets

Kevin MacDonald @TOOEdit

Much bigger sums were transferred via good services of Brothers Ziff, mega-rich Jewish American businessmen, said the researchers in two articles published on the Veteran News Network and in The Huffington Post.

12:05 PM-Jul 27, 2018

Kevin MacDonald @TOOEdit Jul 27, 2018 # Replying to @TOOEdit

"Beneficiary of Browder's generosity is Ben Cardin, a Democrat from Maryland, the engine behind Magnitsky Act. Cardin is a fervent supporter of Hillary Clinton, also a cold warrior of good standing. More to a point, Cardin is a prominent member of Israel Lobby.

Kevin MacDonald @TOOEdit

"Browder affair is a heady upper-class Jewish cocktail of money, spies, politicians and international crime. Almost all involved figures appear to be Jewish, not only Browder, Brothers Ziff and Ben Cardin." Lists other Jews he was involved with: Robert Maxwell, Safra, Berezovsky,

12:11 PM-Jul 27, 2018

[Oct 28, 2018] Russia tried to have resolution passed at the UN in favour of the INF Treaty. It was blocked by Washington's EU lickspittles including Germany.

Oct 28, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

kirill October 27, 2018 at 3:02 pm

Russia tried to have resolution passed at the UN in favour of the INF Treaty. It was blocked by Washington's EU lickspittles including Germany. Never, ever take any pronouncement by NATzO hyenas at face value. When it comes time to put money where the mouth is, then true beliefs become apparent. These morons couldn't even support Russia's UN resolution although they are in harm's way from the death of the INF.

[Oct 28, 2018] Skripal and Khashoggi West Manufactures Absurd Fantasy to Pin on Russia, Lets Saudi Get Away With Chopping up WaPo Journalist by Finian Cunningham

Oct 28, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Two disappearances, and two very different responses from Western governments, which illustrates their rank hypocrisy.

When former Russian spy Sergei Skripal went missing in England earlier this year, there was almost immediate punitive action by the British government and its NATO allies against Moscow. By contrast, Western governments are straining with restraint towards Saudi Arabia over the more shocking and provable case of murdered journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

The outcry by Western governments and media over the Skripal affair was deafening and resulted in Britain, the US and some 28 other countries expelling dozens of Russian diplomats on the back of unsubstantiated British allegations that the Kremlin tried to assassinate an exiled spy with a deadly nerve agent. The Trump administration has further tightened sanctions citing the Skripal incident.

London's case against Moscow has been marked by wild speculation and ropey innuendo. No verifiable evidence of what actually happened to Sergei Skripal (67) and his daughter Yulia has been presented by the British authorities . Their claim that President Vladimir Putin sanctioned a hit squad armed with nerve poison relies on sheer conjecture.

All we know for sure is that the Skripals have been disappeared from public contact by the British authorities for more than seven months, since the mysterious incident of alleged poisoning in Salisbury on March 4.

Russian authorities and family relatives have been steadfastly refused any contact by London with the Skripal pair, despite more than 60 official requests from Moscow in accordance with international law and in spite of the fact that Yulia is a citizen of the Russian Federation with consular rights.

It is an outrage that based on such thin ice of "evidence", the British have built an edifice of censure against Moscow, rallying an international campaign of further sanctions and diplomatic expulsions.

Now contrast that strenuous reaction, indeed hyper over-reaction, with how Britain, the US, France, Canada and other Western governments are ever-so slowly responding to Saudi Arabia over the Khashoggi case.

After nearly two weeks since Jamal Khashoggi entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, Turkey, the Saudi regime is this week finally admitting he was killed on their premises – albeit, they claim, in a "botched interrogation".

... ... ...

Source: Strategic Culture

[Oct 28, 2018] Twitter was too busy banning 'Russians' to notice #MAGAbomber's threats

Notable quotes:
"... Whether Twitter had made an honest mistake, or scrambled to engage in damage control, is sort of immaterial at this point. Some of his posts have been archived , but not responses to them. All that suspending his account accomplished is to make it more difficult to parse the Florida man's motives. By the way, Sayoc's Facebook page was likewise taken down on Friday. ..."
"... Reprinted with permission from RT . ..."
Oct 28, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

The history of criminal behavior and online threats by Cesar Sayoc, the Florida man charged with sending suspicious packages to prominent Democrats, somehow went ignored by both government and social media police.

Sayoc, 56, was arrested on Friday, and stands accused of sending pipe bombs - 14, as of the last count - to former presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, actor Robert De Niro, billionaire Democrat donors George Soros and Tom Steyer, and several Democrat lawmakers.

Federal authorities have refused to speculate on the suspect's motives, but news outlets quickly pored over Sayoc's social media feeds , finding photos and videos of pro-Trump memes, Trump rallies, and abusive language towards Democrats. A van in which he reportedly lived, after losing his home to foreclosure, was covered in pro-Trump decals. Twitter #Resistance activists, who had already coined the term "MAGAbomber" to describe the suspect, rejoiced.

It was Sayoc's prior run-ins with the law that allowed the FBI to find him, matching a fingerprint and DNA from some of the packages to samples they had on file. His criminal record shows charges of grand theft, misdemeanor theft, battery, felony steroid possession, and even threatening a bomb attack in 2002 - leaving an open question of how he kept getting away with it all, over and over again.

Then there is the matter of Sayoc's social media accounts. Over the past two years, under intense pressure by Democrats and drummed-up charges of "Russian meddling," Twitter and Facebook have cracked down on users left and right . Time and again, people engaging in protected free speech have been " shadowbanned " or suspended, permanently or until they deleted posts someone reported as "offensive."

Yet when Democratic strategist Rochelle Ritchie actually reported Sayoc's account to Twitter two weeks ago, over a threat she received from him after appearing on a Fox News show, Twitter did not find the post objectionable .

Richie then received an email from Twitter saying the previous response to her complaint had been "an error."

Whether Twitter had made an honest mistake, or scrambled to engage in damage control, is sort of immaterial at this point. Some of his posts have been archived , but not responses to them. All that suspending his account accomplished is to make it more difficult to parse the Florida man's motives. By the way, Sayoc's Facebook page was likewise taken down on Friday.

Both Twitter and Facebook claim they are trying to improve "conversations" on their platforms, and that their purges are nonpartisan. While technically correct, that's misleading. Establishment figures and outfits somehow always skate, while both critics of Clintonism on the left and Trump Republicans end up under the banhammer.

Meanwhile, the social media giants continue to insist they are not publishers, and delegate the dirty work of policing to quasi-NGOs like the National Endowment for Democracy and the Atlantic Council . They end up deciding who's a "Russian bot" or "Iranian troll" based on arbitrary criteria, which the mainstream media repeats uncritically.

That someone like Sayoc ended up under the radar of both the authorities and social media police suggests that he was either deliberately tolerated, or that their "defense of democracy" is a sham. It is perhaps fitting that none of Sayoc's bombs actually exploded; the only thing they blew up in the end seems to be some illusions.

Reprinted with permission from RT .

[Oct 27, 2018] The Legal Battle Behind the Trump Tower Meeting by Ken Dilanian

We say Browder, but we mean MI6. He was a part of larger plan concocted by US intelligence agencies to decimate Russia after the dissolution of the USSR. Of which Harvard mafia played even more important role. The fact that he gave up his U.S. citizenship in 1997 points to his association with MI6.
The level of distortions the US neoliberal MSM operated with in case of Magnitsky (starting with the widely repeated and factually incorrect claim that he was a lawyers, in create a sympathy; their effort to portrait shady accountant involved in tax fraud for Browder, as a fighter for justice should be described in a separate chapter on any modem book on the power of propaganda; this is simply classic ) is compatible with lies and distortions of Skripal affair and point of strong interest ion intelligence services in both.
Browder and Magnistsky affair really demonstrate that as for foreign events we already live "Matrix environment" of artificial reality created by MSM and controlled by intelligence agencies and foreign policy establishment; and that ordinary people are forced into artificial reality with little or no chance to escape.
Notable quotes:
"... Prevezon's American legal team alleged that Browder's story was full of holes -- and that the U.S. and other governments had relied on Browder's version without checking it. ..."
"... The chief American investigator, Todd Hyman of the Department of Homeland Security, testified in a deposition that much of the evidence in the government's complaint came from Browder and his associates. He also said the government had been unable to independently investigate some of Browder's claims. ..."
"... In court documents, Prevezon's lawyers alleged that Magnitsky was jailed not because he was a truth-seeker -- but because he was helping Browder's companies in tax evasion. ..."
"... The Prevezon attorneys charged that Browder "lied," and "manipulated" evidence to cover up his own tax fraud. ..."
"... The story was "contrived and skillfully sold by William F. Browder to politicians here and abroad to thwart his arrest for a tax fraud conviction in Russia," says a 2015 federal court filing by one of Prevezon's lawyers, Mark Cymrot of BakerHostetler. ..."
"... A Russian-born filmmaker named Andrei Nekrasov made a similar set of arguments in a docudrama released last year. Neither Prevezon nor the Russian government had a role in funding or making the film, both parties say, though Veselnitskaya and Akhmetshin helped promote it. ..."
Jul 24, 2017 | www.nbcnews.com

As Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya tells it, she met with Donald Trump Jr. and other Trump aides in New York last summer to press her case against a widely accepted account of Russian malfeasance, one that underpins a set of sanctions against Russians.

It's a cause Veselnitskaya has been pursuing for years. So, too, has Rinat Akhmetshin, the colorful Russian-born American lobbyist she brought with her to Trump Tower.

Trump Jr., who agreed to the June 2016 meeting at the request of a Russian business associate with a promise of dirt on Hillary Clinton , has said he didn't find much to interest him in the presentation. And little wonder: The subject is a dense and tangled web, hinging on a complex case that led Congress to pass what is known as the Magnitsky Act. The law imposed sanctions on individual Russians accused of human rights violations. It has nothing to do with Clinton.

The Trump Tower meeting has become the latest flashpoint in the ongoing investigation into whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia's election interference . The topic of the meeting, many observers have said, is almost beside the point.

But the substance of what the pair of Russian advocates say they came to discuss has a fascinating backstory.

It's an epic international dispute -- one that has pitted the grandson of a former American Communist who made a fortune as a capitalist in Russia against a Russian leader who pines for the glory days of his country's Communist past.

In a cinematic twist, one person on the side advocated by Vladimir Putin, Veselnitskaya and Akhmetshin is a former American newspaper reporter turned investigator named Glenn Simpson. He is the same Glenn Simpson whose firm, Fusion GPS, helped craft the controversial dossier alleging that the Trump campaign colluded with Russian intelligence .

That dossier, published by Buzzfeed , made other, more salacious allegations about Trump, and FBI Director James Comey briefed the Republican about it before he took office. The dossier is not favorable to Putin and the Russian government.

Simpson's role on both sides of the Putin divide is set to be explored in a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday examining the Justice Department's requirements for foreign lobbying disclosures.

Due to testify at the hearing is Simpson's longtime opponent in the Magnitsky dispute, William Browder, an American-born hedge-fund investor who made millions investing in post-Soviet Russia and gave up his U.S. citizenship in 1997.

Simpson's lawyer said he would defy a subpoena to appear Wednesday because he was on vacation, and that he would decline to answer questions anyway, citing his right against self-incrimination.

Browder, whose grandfather Earl led the American Communist Party, accuses Simpson of peddling falsehoods as an agent of the Russian government. The law firm Simpson worked with on the case accused Browder in court papers of perpetrating a web of lies. Both men dispute the allegations.

The Death of Sergei Magnitsky

The story begins with the November 2009 death of Sergei Magnitsky, a Russian tax accountant who was working for Browder, and who later died in prison .

Browder's account of Magnitsky's death triggered international outrage. According to Browder, Magnitsky was a lawyer who had been investigating a theft of $230 million in tax rebates paid to Browder's companies in Russia. Browder says his companies had been taken over illegally and without his knowledge by corrupt Russian officials.

Browder says Magnitsky was arrested as a reprisal by those same corrupt officials, and then was tortured and beaten to death. Browder presented documents suggesting that some officials who benefited from the alleged fraud purchased property abroad.

That account led Congress to pass the so-called Magnitsky Act in 2012, imposing sanctions on the Russian officials who were alleged to have violated Magnitsky's human rights.

The Russian government soon imposed a ban on American adoptions of Russian children, ostensibly for other reasons but done in response, many experts say, to the Magnitsky sanctions.

Forty-four Russians are currently on the Magnitsky sanctions list maintained by the U.S. Treasury Department, meaning their U.S. assets are frozen and they are not allowed to travel to the U.S.

Once a Putin supporter, Browder became one of the Russian leader's most ardent foes, spearheading a campaign to draw international attention to the Magnitsky case. He and his employees at Hermitage Capital Management presented information to governments, international bodies and major news organizations.

Browder's advocacy marks a shift from 2004, when, as one of Russia's leading foreign investors, he praised Putin so vigorously that he was labeled Putin's "chief cheerleader" by an analyst in a Washington Post article. Browder has said that Magnitsky's death spurred him to reexamine his view of Putin.

The State Department, lawmakers of both parties and the Western news media have described the Magnitsky case in a way that tracks closely with Browder's account. Browder's assertions are consistent with the West's understanding of the Putin government -- an authoritarian regime that has been widely and credibly accused of murdering journalists and political opponents.

In 2013, the Manhattan U.S. attorney's office sued a Russian company, accusing it of laundering some of the proceeds of the fraud Magnitsky allegedly uncovered. The complaint incorporated Browder's account about what happened to Magnitsky.

That lawsuit set in motion a process through which that version of events would come under challenge.

The defendant, a company called Prevezon, is owned by Denis Katsyv, who became wealthy while his father was vice governor and transport minister for the Moscow region, according to published reports. The father, Pyotr Katsyv, is now vice president of the state-run Russian Railways. Veselnitskaya has long represented the family.

Prevezon hired a law firm, BakerHostetler, and a team that included a longtime New York prosecutor, John Moscow. Also working on Prevezon's behalf were Simpson, Veselnitskaya and Akhmetshin.

Simpson, a former investigative reporter for the Wall Street Journal, declined to comment.

Simpson also worked with former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele in the creation of the dossier that asserts Trump collusion with Russian election interference. A source close to him said his work on the dossier was kept confidential from his other clients.

The federal civil lawsuit by the Manhattan U.S. attorney against Prevezon was the first opportunity for the U.S. government to publicly present whatever evidence it had to support its legal assertions regarding Magnitsky. It was also an opportunity for the defendants to conduct their own investigation.

Prevezon's American legal team alleged that Browder's story was full of holes -- and that the U.S. and other governments had relied on Browder's version without checking it. Browder and the U.S. government disagreed.

The chief American investigator, Todd Hyman of the Department of Homeland Security, testified in a deposition that much of the evidence in the government's complaint came from Browder and his associates. He also said the government had been unable to independently investigate some of Browder's claims.

In court documents, Prevezon's lawyers alleged that Magnitsky was jailed not because he was a truth-seeker -- but because he was helping Browder's companies in tax evasion.

The Prevezon attorneys charged that Browder "lied," and "manipulated" evidence to cover up his own tax fraud.

The story was "contrived and skillfully sold by William F. Browder to politicians here and abroad to thwart his arrest for a tax fraud conviction in Russia," says a 2015 federal court filing by one of Prevezon's lawyers, Mark Cymrot of BakerHostetler.

A Russian-born filmmaker named Andrei Nekrasov made a similar set of arguments in a docudrama released last year. Neither Prevezon nor the Russian government had a role in funding or making the film, both parties say, though Veselnitskaya and Akhmetshin helped promote it.

[Oct 27, 2018] The Jewish Ethnic Nexus of Bill Browder s Financial Shenanigans

Oct 27, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Onno Frowein • a day ago ,

Russians were robbed by Jewish people both domestic & foreign under Yeltsin & president Putin stopped them starting with Yukos & Khodorkovsky & others like Berezovski fled to UK.

A similar history we found in the 30th in Germany which caused the rise of Adolf Hitler & his anti-Semitism ultimately ending in the Holocaust.

Presently we see the same happening in USA where the Democratic establishment in media, industry & banks are fighting back - using any illegal method in the book -against the white 'Waspy' Republicans of Trump. And let's not forget that the US population is for 72% White!! That's NOT racism but pure & simple democracy at work.

[Oct 27, 2018] Trump Came This Close to Getting Afghanistan Right by Daniel L. Davis

Trump may have his own views, but he has no own foreign policy. He is a neocon's marionette.
Notable quotes:
"... Instead Bush, and later Obama, transitioned the military mission -- without consultation from Congress -- into a nation-building effort that was doomed from the start. Candidate Donald Trump spoke of a different approach to the Middle East and railed against nation-building abroad. His instincts on Afghanistan have been consistent and correct from very early on. Had it not been for the relentless pressure of several key officials, the war might already have come to end. ..."
"... Woodward wrote ..."
"... Trump defers to the Pentagon because he doesn't really care. He says he wants to get out of Afghanistan (and I support that) but getting out isn't going to make him any money, or get him any votes. So why bother with it, especially when he can lie to his base and tell them we are already out, and they'll believe him? ..."
"... Trump is the kind of person who likes to "talk the talk" but when comes right down to it, he going to sadly, "walk the walk" that the Washington establishment tells him to walk. ..."
"... The treasonous MIC and those top generals do not care about the nation and ordinary Americans. They care only about their profits, careers and their own egos. ..."
"... There is no war they don't like – Middle East, checked, Ukraine, yes, South China Sea, sure, Korea, definitely. It is so sad that Trump turns out to be such a weak and impotent president, contrary to what the supporters claim. ..."
Oct 25, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
In a routine dating back to 2004, U.S. officials regularly claim that the latest strategy in Afghanistan is working -- or as General David Petraeus said in 2012 , the war had "turned a corner." It hadn't and it still hasn't. In fact, evidence overwhelmingly affirms that the newest "new" strategy will be no more effective than those that came before it. It is time to stop losing U.S. lives while pretending that victory is just around the corner. It is time to end the war in Afghanistan.

Last week, one of the most brazen insider attacks of the war took place in Kandahar when one of the Afghanistan governor's bodyguards turned rogue, killing three high-profile Afghan leaders and wounding the senior U.S. field commander, Brigadier General Jeffrey Smiley. Miraculously, the new commander, General Scott Miller, escaped harm. But in 2018, eight Americans have been killed in Afghanistan, bringing the American death toll to 2,351 .

On October 7, 2001, President George W. Bush addressed the nation as combat operations in Afghanistan began. He emphasized that the American "mission is defined. The objectives are clear. [Our] goal is just." Those objectives, he explained , were "targeted actions" that were "designed to disrupt the use of Afghanistan as a terrorist base of operations and to attack the military capability of the Taliban regime."

By the summer of 2002, those objectives were fully met as the Taliban organization was wholly destroyed and al-Qaeda severely degraded. As of 2009, there were reportedly as few as 100 stragglers scattered impotently throughout Afghanistan. The military mission should therefore have ended and combat forces redeployed.

Instead Bush, and later Obama, transitioned the military mission -- without consultation from Congress -- into a nation-building effort that was doomed from the start. Candidate Donald Trump spoke of a different approach to the Middle East and railed against nation-building abroad. His instincts on Afghanistan have been consistent and correct from very early on. Had it not been for the relentless pressure of several key officials, the war might already have come to end.

After a December 2015 insider attack, Trump tweeted : "A suicide bomber has just killed U.S. troops in Afghanistan. When will our leaders get tough and smart. We are being led to slaughter!" According to Bob Woodward's book Fear , Trump brought that same passion against the futility of the Afghan war into the White House.

Woodward wrote that at an August 2017 meeting on Afghanistan, Trump told his generals that the war had been "a disaster," and chided them for "wanting to add even more troops to something I don't believe in."

Woodward claims that Trump then told the top brass, "I was against this from the beginning. He folded his arms. 'I want to get out,' the president said. 'And you're telling me the answer is to get deeper in.'" Under pressure -- from the likes of Secretary of Defense James Mattis and Senator Lindsey Graham -- Trump eventually gave in.

America's Disastrous Occupation of Afghanistan Turns 17 Time to Talk to the Taliban

Events have since proven that Trump would have done the country a favor by resisting that pressure and sticking to his instincts to end the war. The violence keeps up at a record pace, civilian casualties continue to set all-time highs , and Afghan troops struggle mightily with battle losses. The president was right in August 2017 and his instincts remain solid today.

The longer Trump continues to defer to the establishment thinking that produced 17 consecutive years of military failure, the longer that failure will afflict us, the more casualties we will suffer unnecessarily, and the more money we will pour down the drain.

It is time for Trump to remember that it is futile to try to win the unwinnable and finally end America's longest war.

Daniel L. Davis is a senior fellow for Defense Priorities and a former Lieutenant Colonel in the U.S. Army who retired in 2015 after 21 years, including four combat deployments, two of which were in Afghanistan.

One Guy October 25, 2018 at 2:35 pm

Trump defers to the Pentagon because he doesn't really care. He says he wants to get out of Afghanistan (and I support that) but getting out isn't going to make him any money, or get him any votes. So why bother with it, especially when he can lie to his base and tell them we are already out, and they'll believe him?
Fred Bowman , says: October 25, 2018 at 3:10 pm
Trump is the kind of person who likes to "talk the talk" but when comes right down to it, he going to sadly, "walk the walk" that the Washington establishment tells him to walk.
david , says: October 25, 2018 at 3:45 pm
The treasonous MIC and those top generals do not care about the nation and ordinary Americans. They care only about their profits, careers and their own egos.

There is no war they don't like – Middle East, checked, Ukraine, yes, South China Sea, sure, Korea, definitely. It is so sad that Trump turns out to be such a weak and impotent president, contrary to what the supporters claim.

SDS , says: October 25, 2018 at 3:48 pm
I think a lot of us could have tolerated the asinine antics if he had stuck to his campaign positions on this and other things . God; what might have been .
One Guy , says: October 25, 2018 at 4:13 pm
SDS, you are correct. I've often thought that Trump could have forged a majority coalition by doing things the People really wanted, or at least didn't hate: nominating another Gorsuch, cutting the size of government, appointing competent people, getting out of the Middle East, no tariffs, less racism, getting concession from businesses that benefited from the tax cut, following emoluments rules, etc. etc.
JeffK , says: October 25, 2018 at 4:37 pm
@SDS
October 25, 2018 at 3:48 pm

"I think a lot of us could have tolerated the asinine antics if he had stuck to his campaign positions on this and other things . God; what might have been ."

First, sorry you fell for The Con. I understand. Maybe. Second, the real question is, "What are you going to do about it?". Vote Republican Nov 6? Why would you do that? Hope against all hope? Dementia? Gluttony for punishment? BTW. HRC is not on the ballot this time, and will never be again.

EliteCommInc. , says: October 25, 2018 at 6:49 pm
Unless we intend to invade en mass, and scour the country from one end to the other to defeat any and all opponents, the mission in Afghanistan will remain what it is. "new wine (of sorts) in old wineskins.

If we are going to remake a country -- we had better remake it. I am not sure i have ever said this before but the entire affair

was unnecessary and unwise from the start.

kalendjay , says: October 25, 2018 at 6:52 pm
We hear Pakistan is now desperate for IMF aid. That the One belt One Road initiative there by China has already put the country in the position of having to stand down its creditor, China. Partly with the help of Japanese finance, Iran and India are out to squeeze Islamabad out of world trade.

The Pakis are headed into a new dark age, so don't expect the Russians to bark wildly and chase down this car. With any luck, they and China will revive the Northern Alliance, make a garrison of Kabul, and eventually Xi and Vladi will have their own escalating civil war over control over Central Asia.

I'd say January 2019 is a good time to begin a quick US withdrawal, just as long as we pull out of the IMF and not give another red American cent to the region, save a green zone around Kabul with economically productive areas.

I would argue that although this would seem like an American loss, it will put our Progressive yappers to shame. What human values would they stand up and defend now, among the IndoPak Caravan? Maybe then we'll really focus on our own border and wage the good fight where it is needed -- the Culture War.

Balderdash , says: October 26, 2018 at 3:06 am
Obama had intended to leave. The military insisted on vict'ry and another Surge. He gave them their Surge and their time to do it. They failed, made things worse and prevented Obama from leaving. They're still playing. Trump's just the latest Oval Office 'sucker'.
Sid Finster , says: October 26, 2018 at 10:02 am
One more example of how Trump is weak, stupid, ill-informed and easily manipulated.
Scob , says: October 26, 2018 at 10:50 am
Afghanistan borders Iran, do you really need to say more?

[Oct 27, 2018] Trump Surrenders to John Bolton on Russia and Arms Control by Scott Ritter

Notable quotes:
"... Trump appears to have surrendered to the anti-arms control philosophy of John Bolton, who views such agreements as unduly restricting American power. (Bolton was also behind the 2001 decision by President George W. Bush to withdraw from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, an act the Russians viewed as inherently destabilizing.) ..."
"... By involving China, which was not a signatory to the INF Treaty, into the mix, the president appears to be engaging in a crude negotiating gambit designed to shore up a weak case for leaving the 1987 arms control agreement by playing on previous Russian sensitivities about Chinese nuclear capabilities. ..."
"... Although unspoken, both Bolton and Trump appear to be trying to drive a wedge between Russia and China. They're doing so as those two nations are coming together to craft a joint response to what they view as American overreach on trade and international security. While the Russian concerns over Chinese INF capabilities might have held true a decade ago, that doesn't seem to be the case any longer. ..."
"... The deployment of Pershing II missiles to Europe in the fall of 1983 left the Soviet leadership concerned that the U.S. was seeking to acquire a viable nuclear first-strike capability against the Soviet Union. The Soviets increased their intelligence collection efforts against U.S. targets to be able to detect in advance any U.S./NATO first-strike attack, as well as a "launch on detection" plan to counter any such attack. ..."
"... In November 1983, when the U.S. conducted a full-scale rehearsal for nuclear war in Europe, code-named Able Archer 83, Soviet intelligence interpreted the exercise preparations for the real thing. As a result, Soviet strategic nuclear forces were put on full alert, needing only an order from then-general secretary Yuri Andropov to launch. ..."
"... If the U.S. were ever to make use of the Mk-41 in an anti-missile configuration, the Russians would have seconds to decide if they were being attacked by nuclear-armed cruise missiles. Putin, in a recent speech delivered in Sochi, publicly stated that the Russian nuclear posture operated under the concept of "launch on warning," meaning once a U.S. or NATO missile strike was detected, Russia would immediately respond with the totality of its nuclear arsenal to annihilate the attacking parties. "We would be victims of an aggression and would get to heaven as martyrs," Putin said . Those who attacked Russia would "just die and not even have time to repent." ..."
"... There is no master plan here, no eleven dimensional chess. Trump appears to be weak, stupid, ill-informed and easily manipulated because he in fact is weak, stupid, ill-informed and easily manipulated. ..."
Oct 27, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Of course he's not the first president the arch hawk has convinced to ditch a nuke treaty Declaring that "there is a new strategic reality out there," President Donald Trump's hardline national security advisor John Bolton announced during a visit to Moscow earlier this week that the United States would be withdrawing from the 31-year-old Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. "This was a Cold War bilateral ballistic missile-related treaty," Bolton said, "in a multi-polar ballistic missile world."

"It is the American position that Russia is in violation," Bolton told reporters after a 90-minute meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. "Russia's position is that they aren't. So one has to ask how to ask the Russians to come back into compliance with something they don't think they're violating."

Left unsaid by Bolton was the fact that the Russians have been asking the U.S. to provide evidence to substantiate its allegations of Russian noncompliance, something it so far has not done. "The Americans have failed to provide hard facts to substantiate their accusations," a Kremlin spokesperson noted last December after a U.S. delegation was briefed NATO on the allegations. "They just cannot provide them, because such evidence essentially does not exist."

Bolton's declaration mirrored an earlier statement by Trump announcing that "I'm terminating the agreement because [the Russians] violated the agreement." When asked if his comments were meant as a threat to Putin, Trump responded, "It's a threat to whoever you want. And it includes China, and it includes Russia, and it includes anybody else that wants to play that game. You can't do that. You can't play that game on me."

Trump appears to have surrendered to the anti-arms control philosophy of John Bolton, who views such agreements as unduly restricting American power. (Bolton was also behind the 2001 decision by President George W. Bush to withdraw from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, an act the Russians viewed as inherently destabilizing.)

By involving China, which was not a signatory to the INF Treaty, into the mix, the president appears to be engaging in a crude negotiating gambit designed to shore up a weak case for leaving the 1987 arms control agreement by playing on previous Russian sensitivities about Chinese nuclear capabilities.

In 2007, Putin had threatened to withdraw from the INF Treaty because of these reasons. "We are speaking about the plans of a number of neighboring countries developing short- and mid-range missile systems," Dmitry Peskov, Putin's spokesperson, said at the time , citing China, India and Pakistan. "While our two countries [the U.S. and Russia] are bound by the provisions of the INF treaty there will be a certain imbalance in the region."

Although unspoken, both Bolton and Trump appear to be trying to drive a wedge between Russia and China. They're doing so as those two nations are coming together to craft a joint response to what they view as American overreach on trade and international security. While the Russian concerns over Chinese INF capabilities might have held true a decade ago, that doesn't seem to be the case any longer.

"The Chinese missile program is not related to the INF problem," Konstantin Sivkov, a member of the Russian Academy of Missile and Ammunition Sciences, recently observed . "China has always had medium-range missiles, because it did not enter into a bilateral treaty with the United States on medium and shorter-range missiles." America's speculations about Chinese missiles are "just an excuse" to withdraw from the INF Treaty, the Russian arms control expert charged.

Will Congress Have the Spine to Defy Trump on a Russian Nuke Treaty? Trump Needs to Put Up or Shut Up on Russian Arms Race

Moreover, China doesn't seem to be taking the bait. Yang Chengjun, a Chinese missile expert, observed that the U.S. decision to withdraw from the INF Treaty would have a "negative" impact on China's national security, noting that Beijing "would have to push ahead with the modest development of medium-range missiles" in response. These weapons would be fielded to counter any American build-up in the region, and as such would not necessarily be seen by Russia as representing a threat.

Any student of the INF Treaty knows that the issue of Russia's national security posture vis-à-vis China was understood fully when the then-USSR signed on to the agreement. During the negotiations surrounding INF in the 1970s and 1980s, the Soviets had sought to retain an INF capability in Asia as part of its Chinese deterrence posture. Indeed, the Soviet insistence on keeping such a force was one of the main reasons behind the "zero option" put forward by the U.S. in 1982, where a total ban on INF-capable weapons was proposed. The U.S. knew that the total elimination of INF systems was a poison pill that Russia simply would not swallow, thereby dooming future negotiations.

Mikhail Gorbachev turned the tables on the Americans in 1986, when he embraced the "zero option" and called upon the U.S. to enter into an agreement that banned INF-capable weapons. For the Soviet Union, eliminating the threat to its national security posed by American INF weapons based in Europe was far more important than retaining a limited nuclear deterrence option against China.

The deployment of Pershing II missiles to Europe in the fall of 1983 left the Soviet leadership concerned that the U.S. was seeking to acquire a viable nuclear first-strike capability against the Soviet Union. The Soviets increased their intelligence collection efforts against U.S. targets to be able to detect in advance any U.S./NATO first-strike attack, as well as a "launch on detection" plan to counter any such attack.

In November 1983, when the U.S. conducted a full-scale rehearsal for nuclear war in Europe, code-named Able Archer 83, Soviet intelligence interpreted the exercise preparations for the real thing. As a result, Soviet strategic nuclear forces were put on full alert, needing only an order from then-general secretary Yuri Andropov to launch.

The Soviet system had just undergone a stress test of sorts in September 1983, when malfunctioning early warning satellites indicated that the U.S. had launched five Minuteman 3 Intercontinental missiles toward the Soviet Union. Only the actions of the Soviet duty officer, who correctly identified the warning as a false alarm, prevented a possible nuclear retaliatory strike.

A similar false alarm, this time in 1995, underscored the danger of hair-trigger alert status when it comes to nuclear weapons -- the launch of a Norwegian research rocket was interpreted by Russian radar technicians as being a solo U.S. nuclear missile intended to disrupt Russian defenses by means of an electromagnetic pulse generated by a nuclear air burst. Russia's president at the time, Boris Yeltsin, ordered the Russian nuclear codes to be prepared for an immediate Russian counter-strike, and was on the verge of ordering the launch when Russian analysts determined the real purpose of the rocket, and the crisis passed.

The Europeans had initially balked at the idea of deploying American INF weapons on their territory, fearful that the weapons would be little more than targets for a Soviet nuclear attack, resulting in the destruction of Europe while the United States remained unharmed. To alleviate European concerns, the U.S. agreed to integrate its INF systems with its overall strategic nuclear deterrence posture, meaning that the employment of INF nuclear weapons would trigger an automatic strategic nuclear response. This approach was designed to increase the deterrence value of the INF weapons, since there would be no "localized" nuclear war. But it also meant that given the reduced flight times associated with European-based INF systems, each side would be on a hair-trigger alert, with little or no margin for error. It was the suicidal nature of this arrangement that helped propel Gorbachev and President Ronald Reagan to sign the INF Treaty on December 8, 1987.

This history seems to be lost on both Trump and Bolton. Moreover, the recent deployment of the Mk-41 Universal Launch System, also known as Aegis Ashore, in Romania and Poland as part of a NATO ballistic missile shield only increases the danger of inadvertent conflict. Currently configured to fire the SM-3 surface-to-air missile, the Mk-41 is also capable of firing Tomahawk cruise missiles which, if launched in a ground configuration, would represent a violation of the INF Treaty. The U.S. Congress has authorized $58 billion in FY 2018 to fund development of an INF system, the leading candidate for which is a converted Tomahawk.

If the U.S. were ever to make use of the Mk-41 in an anti-missile configuration, the Russians would have seconds to decide if they were being attacked by nuclear-armed cruise missiles. Putin, in a recent speech delivered in Sochi, publicly stated that the Russian nuclear posture operated under the concept of "launch on warning," meaning once a U.S. or NATO missile strike was detected, Russia would immediately respond with the totality of its nuclear arsenal to annihilate the attacking parties. "We would be victims of an aggression and would get to heaven as martyrs," Putin said . Those who attacked Russia would "just die and not even have time to repent."

"We'll have to develop those weapons," Trump noted when he announced his decision to leave the INF Treaty, adding "we have a tremendous amount of money to play with our military." Nuclear deterrence isn't a game -- it is, as Putin noted, a matter of life and death, where one split second miscalculation can destroy entire nations, if not the world. One can only hope that the one-time real estate mogul turned president can figure this out before it is too late; declaring bankruptcy in nuclear conflict is not an option.

Scott Ritter is a former Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties, in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm, and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD. He is the author of Deal of the Century: How Iran Blocked the West's Road to War .

General Manager October 25, 2018 at 9:41 pm

What Sheldon Adelson wants, Sheldon gets. Shame on Trump.
EliteCommInc , says: October 25, 2018 at 11:40 pm
"Left unsaid by Bolton was the fact that the Russians have been asking the U.S. to provide evidence to substantiate its allegations of Russian noncompliance, something it so far has not done. "

Always the bottom line. And that has been our folly since 9/11. We have not had proof to justify our actions. And the fact that this executive continues mollywog forward based soley on the accusations of "knowledgeable advisers"

Laugh -- just makes for bad policy.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -

But again the president has no ground. He has acknowledged that Russia sabotaged or attempted to sabotage the US electoral process and believes as to the record that Russia engaged in murder and attempted murder at the behest of Pres. Putin.

Anything less than aggressive confrontation makes him appear

1. he distrusts the intel and mil. community

2. he is too weak to stand up to Russia

3. actually colluded with Russia in sabotaging the
election

4. a combination of above

Minus the courage to stand his preferred course – foreign policy with Russia has been relinquished to others. Even if their leadership has been repeatedly a failure.

Ohhh well. frustrating

Christian Chuba , says: October 26, 2018 at 7:15 am
Comments on the Yahoo message board (aptly named) capture the true reason quite well. We bankrupted the Russians in the 1980's and we will do it again. There is an axiom Generals always prepare for the last war.

Why compromise when you can win? Accusing your opponents of aggression and claiming the moral high ground is just a bonus. We will break up Russia into even smaller pieces, Crimea gone for good, Chechnya gone, far east gone, arctic claims gone, ?

Sisera , says: October 26, 2018 at 10:46 am
@GeneralManager

Agreed, and what's left out of Trump-Russia discussions is how the Israelis wanted Trump to do a charm offensive to the Russians over Syria. The idea was at Bibi's orders (from as early as 2016) the US would relieve sanctions on Russia in exchange for Russia forcing Iranians to leave Syria. It may also be used as Russia's permission for an US-led Iranian invasion.

However, Israel just cannot help itself and persistent attacks on Syrians (not merely Iranians) convinced the Russians they were bad faith actors. This was reported in Haaretz over the summer but I've lost the link.

Sid Finster , says: October 26, 2018 at 11:20 am
There is no master plan here, no eleven dimensional chess. Trump appears to be weak, stupid, ill-informed and easily manipulated because he in fact is weak, stupid, ill-informed and easily manipulated.
say who and who say , says: October 26, 2018 at 3:52 pm
Trump surrenders to whoever's whispering in his ear. It happens to be Bolton, which is bad.

He surrenders because he has to, which is because he's stone ignorant about important stuff.

That's all there is, baby. Bolton talks, Trump listens, and next thing you know it's fifty years ago and we're in a nuclear arms race. This "the President wants" stuff you hear from Bolton is a joke. It's "John Bolton wants, and the President says".

[Oct 27, 2018] Who profits from the end of the mid-range nuclear treaty Asia Times

Notable quotes:
"... The harsh language may not be exactly diplomatic. What it does is reflect plenty of exasperation towards the US conservatives who peddle the absurd notion of a "limited" nuclear war. ..."
"... The harsh language also reflects a certainty that whatever the degree of escalation envisaged by the Trump administration and the Pentagon, that won't be enough to neutralize Russian hypersonic missiles. ..."
"... So, it's no wonder that EU diplomats, trying to ease their discomfort, recognize that this, in the end, is all about the Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine and the necessity of keeping the massive US military-industrial-surveillance complex running. ..."
Oct 27, 2018 | www.atimes.com

By now it's clear the Trump administration's rationale for pulling out of the INF Treaty is due, in Bolton's words, to "a new strategic reality". The INF is being dismissed as a "bilateral treaty in a multipolar ballistic missile world", which does not take into consideration the missile capabilities of China, Iran and North Korea.

But there is a slight problem. The INF Treaty limits missiles with a range from 500 km to 5,000 km. China, Iran and North Korea simply cannot pose a "threat" to the United States by deploying such missiles. The INF is all about the European theater of war.

So, it's no wonder the reaction in Brussels and major European capitals has been of barely disguised horror.

EU diplomats have told Asia Times the US decision was a "shock", and "the last straw for the EU as it jeopardizes our very existence, subjecting us to nuclear destruction by short-range missiles", which would never be able to reach the US heartland.

The "China" reason – that Russia is selling Beijing advanced missile technology – simply does not cut it in Europe, as the absolute priority is European security. EU diplomats are establishing a parallel to the possibility – which was more than real last year – that Washington could nuclear-bomb North Korea unilaterally. South Korea and Japan, in that case, would be nuclear "collateral damage". The same might happen to Europe in the event of a US-Russia nuclear shoot-out.

It goes without saying that shelving the INF could even accelerate the demise of the whole post-WWII Western alliance, heralding a remix of the 1930s with a vengeance.

And the clock keeps ticking

Reports that should be critically examined in detail assert that US superiority over China's military power is rapidly shrinking. Yet China is not much of a military technology powerhouse compared to Russia and its state of the art hypersonic missiles.

NATO may be relatively strong on the missile front – but it still wouldn't be able to compete with Russia in a potential battle in Europe.

The supreme danger, in Doomsday Clock terms, is the obsession by certain US neocon factions that Washington could prevail in a "limited", localized, tactical nuclear war against Russia.

That's the whole rationale behind extending US first-strike capability as close as possible to the Russian western borderlands.

Russian analysts stress that Moscow is already – "unofficially" – perfecting what would be their own first-strike capability in these borderlands. The mere hint of NATO attempting to start a countdown in Poland, the Baltics or the Black Sea may be enough to encourage Russia to strike.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov starkly refuted Trump and Bolton's claims that Russia was violating the INF Treaty: "As far as we understood, the US side has made a decision, and it will launch formal procedures for withdrawing from this treaty in the near future."

As for Russia's resolve, everything one needs to know is part of Putin's detailed intervention at the Valdai Economic Forum . Essentially, Putin did not offer any breaking news – but a stark reminder that Moscow will strike back at any provocation configured as a threat to the future of Russia.

Russians, in this case, would "die like martyrs" and the response to an attack would be so swift and brutal that the attackers would "die like dogs".

The harsh language may not be exactly diplomatic. What it does is reflect plenty of exasperation towards the US conservatives who peddle the absurd notion of a "limited" nuclear war.

The harsh language also reflects a certainty that whatever the degree of escalation envisaged by the Trump administration and the Pentagon, that won't be enough to neutralize Russian hypersonic missiles.

So, it's no wonder that EU diplomats, trying to ease their discomfort, recognize that this, in the end, is all about the Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine and the necessity of keeping the massive US military-industrial-surveillance complex running.

Even as the clock keeps ticking closer to midnight.

[Oct 25, 2018] Putin jokes with Bolton: Did the eagle eaten all the olives

Highly recommended!
John Bolton suffers a crippling shortage of olives.
Notable quotes:
"... "As far as I remember, the US coat of arms features a bald eagle that holds 13 arrows in one talon and an olive branch in another, which is a symbol of a peace-loving policy," ..."
"... "Looks like your eagle has already eaten all the olives; are the arrows all that is left?" ..."
Oct 25, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Meeting with US national security adviser John Bolton in Moscow, Russian President Vladimir Putin made a comment about Washington's hostility that went right over the hawkish diplomat's head. "As far as I remember, the US coat of arms features a bald eagle that holds 13 arrows in one talon and an olive branch in another, which is a symbol of a peace-loving policy," Putin said in a meeting with Bolton in Moscow on Tuesday.

"I have a question," the Russian president added. "Looks like your eagle has already eaten all the olives; are the arrows all that is left?"

boz , October 23, 2018 at 3:49 pm

The Saker has the transcript of Putin's comments at a recent plenary in Sochi, small snippets of which have already appeared in the media.

http://thesaker.is/president-putin-meeting-of-the-valdai-international-discussion-club-2/

About 15-20 minutes to get through (the facilitator seems like a bit of a wet blanket), but fascinating to read, if like me, most of what you hear about Putin has been filtered through the MSM.

A couple of reflections:

Putin does detail. He is courteous and patient. He is highly pragmatic and appears to be widely (and, for my money, effectively) briefed.

Olga , October 23, 2018 at 5:33 pm

For those of us lucky enough to follow VVP in his native language – it is indeed a delight. (And – mind you – it was only after I took the time to follow him in his native language that I was able to appreciate this person and his leadership abilities. If one follows him through NYT – no chance that would give one an accurate picture.)
He is erudite, informed, and has a wicked sense of humour, as shown in this clip:
https://www.rt.com/news/442068-putin-olives-eagle-bolton/

[Oct 25, 2018] Putin jokes with Bolton: Did the eagle eaten all the olives

Highly recommended!
John Bolton suffers a crippling shortage of olives.
Notable quotes:
"... "As far as I remember, the US coat of arms features a bald eagle that holds 13 arrows in one talon and an olive branch in another, which is a symbol of a peace-loving policy," ..."
"... "Looks like your eagle has already eaten all the olives; are the arrows all that is left?" ..."
Oct 25, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Meeting with US national security adviser John Bolton in Moscow, Russian President Vladimir Putin made a comment about Washington's hostility that went right over the hawkish diplomat's head. "As far as I remember, the US coat of arms features a bald eagle that holds 13 arrows in one talon and an olive branch in another, which is a symbol of a peace-loving policy," Putin said in a meeting with Bolton in Moscow on Tuesday.

"I have a question," the Russian president added. "Looks like your eagle has already eaten all the olives; are the arrows all that is left?"

boz , October 23, 2018 at 3:49 pm

The Saker has the transcript of Putin's comments at a recent plenary in Sochi, small snippets of which have already appeared in the media.

http://thesaker.is/president-putin-meeting-of-the-valdai-international-discussion-club-2/

About 15-20 minutes to get through (the facilitator seems like a bit of a wet blanket), but fascinating to read, if like me, most of what you hear about Putin has been filtered through the MSM.

A couple of reflections:

Putin does detail. He is courteous and patient. He is highly pragmatic and appears to be widely (and, for my money, effectively) briefed.

Olga , October 23, 2018 at 5:33 pm

For those of us lucky enough to follow VVP in his native language – it is indeed a delight. (And – mind you – it was only after I took the time to follow him in his native language that I was able to appreciate this person and his leadership abilities. If one follows him through NYT – no chance that would give one an accurate picture.)
He is erudite, informed, and has a wicked sense of humour, as shown in this clip:
https://www.rt.com/news/442068-putin-olives-eagle-bolton/

[Oct 25, 2018] Nikki Haley Almost Started a Nuclear War

Oct 25, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

While soon-to-be ex-UN ambassador Nikki Haley might be the talk of the town at the moment -- from chatter she should run in 2020 against Donald Trump to replacing Mike Pence on the GOP ticket all the way to running against Pence in 2024 -- her many faults are being glossed over. That's a big problem for someone being floated as the next leader of the free world -- as recent history has taught us all too tragically.

Thankfully, reality always has a way of casting doubt on such picture-perfect narratives before they are ever fully formed. Case in point, buried in a recent article from Harper's Magazine was the fact that Haley tried out her own amateur hour version of what can only be described as nuclear poker: telling China's ambassador to the UN that Trump might invade North Korea.

I had to read the article over and over to make sure I didn't miss something. But alas it was real -- and terrifying. Such a threat, if relayed to North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un, combined with several other U.S. actions at the time -- and one that almost occurred that we know of thanks to Bob Woodward's recent book -- could have set in motion a preemptive strike by Pyongyang that almost certainly would have involved the use of nuclear weapons. And that means millions of people would have died.

Now ask yourself: is this person really ready to be president? Is this what passes as the stuff of presidential timber?

Here are the details. Journalist Max Blumenthal recorded Haley's remarks -- her last major address before she handed in her resignation -- as the only journalist present at a late September event at the Council for National Policy. In a Q&A session that Blumenthal described as "an extended series of candid, and at times disturbing, recollections of Trump's campaign of maximum pressure against North Korea," Haley broke down her opposition to the president's tough talk at the UN. But the real money shot from Blumenthal's piece is here:

It was September 2, 2017, and North Korea had just embarked on its sixth nuclear test launch. Haley's mission was to ram a resolution through the UN Security Council to sanction the isolated state. This meant that she had to secure abstentions from Russia and China, the two permanent members that maintained relations with Pyongyang. It was a tall task, but as she boasted to the rapt audience at the CNP, she had a few tricks up her sleeve.

"I said to the Russians, 'Either you're with North Korea, or you're with the United States of America,'" Haley recalled. She said she went to the Chinese ambassador and raised the prospect of an American military invasion of North Korea. "My boss is kind of unpredictable, and I don't know what he'll do," she said she warned her Chinese counterpart.

Sadly, besides some mentions on social media and a few articles , her threat received very little mainstream media coverage. Maybe that's a blessing in disguise. But one can easily construct a scenario where Haley's comment sets off a chain of events that starts a Second Korean War. For example, we don't know what the Chinese ambassador did after Haley made the threat, but most likely he promptly reported it back to Beijing. What the Chinese government did with that information is vital. Did they warn the North Koreans? Did they react in some other way?

Nikki Haley: Trump's Baghdad Bob A War of Choice With North Korea is an Immensely Dumb Idea

We will never really know. However, if Pyongyang was tipped off by Beijing, seeing three U.S. Navy aircraft carriers drilling with South Korean and Japanese warships in November of last year surely must have terrified them. Such a concentration of firepower would have been a prerequisite for any type of invasion or attack. In fact, could these have been the reasons the north decided to test another ICBM in November?

Again, we will never know. However, Trump's very real proposal, as reported in Bob Woodward's book Fear , of "sending a tweet declaring that he was ordering all U.S. military dependents -- thousands of the family members of 28,500 troops -- out of South Korea" definitely would have provoked a response from the Kim regime.

While Woodward does not give specific dates as to when this nearly occurred -- the full text before this section suggests an early 2018 timeframe -- he still reveals that we did dodge a potential war. Just two paragraphs down, Woodward notes that on December 4, 2018, "[M]cMaster had received a warning at the White House. Ri Su-yong, the vice chairman of the [North Korean] Politburo, had told intermediaries 'that the North would take the evacuation of U.S. civilians as a sign of imminent attack.'"

If you put it all together -- not to mention the now famous call to give Kim a " bloody nose " in early January 2018 -- it is easy to see how close to war we came from roughly September 2017 to early January of this year. If events had occurred just a little differently -- if North Korea had perceived things in a direr way thanks to a Chinese warning of a possible invasion, if Trump had acted on his impulses a little further -- our world would be a very different place. Pyongyang, thinking an invasion was coming, might have decided that its only chance to survive was to use its vast arsenal of weapons of mass destruction before they were destroyed. That would have meant launching atomic weapons at military bases and potential ports of entry for U.S. forces in South Korea, Japan, Guam, Hawaii -- or even attacking the American homeland itself with nuclear weapons. From simulations I have run over the years, I can tell you that millions of people would have died in such an event.

Thankfully, history broke a little different and it never happened -- and thank God for that. But let's not heap praise on public figures who think they can bluff their way through the great game of global politics. That's not what great presidents are made of.

Harry J. Kazianis (@Grecianformula ) serves as director of Defense Studies at the Center for the National Interest, founded by President Richard Nixon. The views expressed in this piece are his own.

[Oct 25, 2018] Europe's Gas Game Just Took A Wild Twist

Oct 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Tim Daiss via Oilprice.com,

Despite the almost unprecedented divisive nature of Donald J. Trump's presidency, he is chalking up some impressive foreign policy victories, including finally bringing Beijing to task over its decades long unfair trade practices, stealing of intellectual property rights, and rampant mercantilism that has given its state-run companies unfair trade advantages and as a result seen Western funds transform China to an emerging world power alongside the U.S.

Now, it looks as if Trump's recent tirade against America's European allies over its geopolitically troubling reliance on Russian gas supply may also be bearing fruit. On Tuesday, The Wall Street Journal reported that earlier this month German Chancellor Angela Merkel offered government support to efforts to open up Germany to U.S. gas, in what the report called "a key concession to President Trump as he tries to loosen Russia's grip on Europe's largest energy market."

German concession

Over breakfast earlier this month, Merkel told a small group of German lawmakers that the government had made a decision to co-finance the construction of a $576 million liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal in northern Germany, people familiar with the development said.

The project had been postponed for at least a decade due to lack of government support, according to reports, but is now being thrust to the center of European-U.S. geopolitics. Though media outlets will mostly spin the development, this is nonetheless a geopolitical and diplomatic win for Trump who lambasted Germany in June over its Nordstream 2 pipeline deal with Russia.

In a televised meeting with reporters and NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg before a NATO summit in Brussels, Trump said at the time it was "very inappropriate" that the U.S. was paying for European defense against Russia while Germany, the biggest European economy, was supporting gas deals with Moscow.

Both the tone and openness of Trumps' remarks brought scathing rebukes both at home and among EU allies, including most media outlets. However, at the end of the day, it appears that the president made a fair assessment of the situation. Russia, for its part, vehemently denies any nefarious motives over its gas supply contacts with its European customers, though Moscow's actions in the past dictate otherwise.

Moscow also claims that the Nordstream 2 gas pipeline is a purely commercial venture. The $11 billion gas pipeline will stretch some 759 miles (1,222 km), running on the bed of the Baltic Sea from Russian gas fields to Germany, bypassing existing land routes over Ukraine, Poland and Belarus. It would double the existing Nord Stream pipeline's current annual capacity of 55 bcm and is expected to become operational by the end of next year.

Russia, who stands the most to lose not only in terms of regional hegemony, but economically as well, if Germany pushes through with plans to now build as many as three LNG terminals, always points out that Russian pipeline gas is cheaper and will remain cheaper for decades compared to U.S. LNG imports.

While that assessment is correct, what Moscow is missing, or at least not admitting, is a necessary German acquiescence to Washington. Not only does the EU's largest economy need to stay out of Trump's anti-trade cross hairs, it still needs American leadership in both NATO and in Europe as well.

Russian advantages

Without U.S. leadership in Europe, a vacuum would open that Moscow would try to fill, most likely by more gas supply agreements. However, Russia's gas monopoly in both Germany and in Europe will largely remain intact for several reasons.

First, Russian energy giant Gazprom, which has control over Russia's network of pipelines to Europe, supplies close to 40 percent of Europe's gas needs.

Second, Russia's gas exports to Europe rose 8.1 percent last year to a record level of 193.9 bcm, even amid concerns over Russia's cyber espionage allegations, and its activities in Syria, the Ukraine and other places.

Moreover, Russian gas is indeed as cheap as the country claims and will remain that way for decades. Using a Henry Hub gas price of $2.85/MMBtu as a base, Gazprom recently estimated that adding processing and transportation costs, the price of U.S.-sourced LNG in Europe would reach $6/MMBtu or higher – a steep markup.

Henry Hub gas prices are currently trading at $3.151/MMBtu. Over the last 52-week period U.S. gas has traded between $2.64/MMBtu and $3.82/MMBtu. Russian gas sells for around $5/MMBtu in European markets and could even trade at lower prices in the future as Gazprom removes the commodity's oil price indexation.

[Oct 25, 2018] RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP 25 OCTOBER 2018 by Patrick Armstrong

Notable quotes:
"... NATO is a defensive Alliance... committed to defense and deterrence. " A defensive alliance with a moving doorstep. ..."
"... USS Donald Cook ..."
Oct 25, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

CHURCH DISPUTE. I dreaded having to write something because I really don't know enough. But US Secretary of State Pompeo has saved me much study by proving that those who see the hand of Washington are correct to do so: " We urge Church and government officials to actively promote these values in connection with the move towards the establishment of an autocephalous Ukrainian Orthodox Church ." Who knew an avowedly secular state like the USA felt competent to make rulings on such esoterica as ethnophyletism or autocephaly? You've heard Official Washington's opinion (swiftly retransmitted by your local news outlet ), here are others: one , two , three , four , five . Their argument is that Constantinople has arrogated too much to himself and Orthodoxy will split; Washington & Co talk of "freedom" (but don't show much understanding of who's who). This further excuse for violence will increase the misery of Ukraine. (And, ironically, the dominant church in western Ukraine, the home of the Ukrainian nationalism that's driving things, has nothing to do with this: it's under Rome .)

NUCLEAR DOCTRINE. At Valdai, Putin made a statement on Russia's nuclear doctrine . No change, but with a twist that caught people's attention: "Our concept is based on a reciprocal counter strike... any aggressor should know that retaliation is inevitable and they will be annihilated." The attention-catching part was "And we as the victims of an aggression, we as martyrs would go to paradise while they will simply perish because they won't even have time to repent their sins". Don't forget that American spokesmen have made some stupidly aggressive statements lately.

DRONE ATTACK. The Russian MoD says a US aircraft coordinated the January drone attack on their Syrian bases .

EXPLOSION. There was an explosion and shooting at the Kerch Polytechnic College in Crimea and a number of people were killed. It is said to have been done by one student who then killed himself .

RUSSIA INC. Russia has climbed two places the World Economic Forum ranking to 43 of 140. Current account surplus predicted .

AGRICULTURE. One of the most surprising developments to me, who remembers farms in the 1990s, has been Russia's agricultural turnaround. This five-minute report gives an introduction.

STRATEGIC CULTURE FOUNDATION. Let me put in a plug for this site . It has now acquired quite a stable of writers (myself included) and is a good place to get alternative views to those repeated by the drearily monotonic Western outlets. There may be Russian government money behind it but my bet is that the government's effort is still in RT (see below). My guess (and another author's) is that it's bankrolled by a rich Russian who's tired of the endless anti-Russia coverage. I have never had anything I have written changed or censored. I recommend you bookmark it.

WESTERN VALUES™. Enjoying the irony, RT introduces New Samizdat to bring you the news that the Zap GlavLit (if I may coin a neologism) hides.

NUGGETS FROM THE STUPIDITY MINE. Watch it . Adam Schiff , senior Democrat on House Intelligence Committee.

NATO EXERCISE. NATO bravely shows it won't be intimidated by R ussia's building up its military on its doorstep by holding an exercis e on said doorstep . " NATO is a defensive Alliance... committed to defense and deterrence. " A defensive alliance with a moving doorstep.

INF TREATY. Trump talks of pulling the US out. Is this the loud prelude to re-negotiation that we saw him do with Korea and NAFTA? Or is he clearing the battlespace for the expected damp squib from Mueller or a blue dribble ? Tune in in mid-November.

NEW NWO. " The Perfect Storm Bringing China And Russia Together ".

OOPS. Apparently many US weapons are very vulnerable to cyberattacks . Stories of cruise missile attacks , USS Donald Cook , destroyers rammed by container ships make you wonder, don't they?

UKRAINE. " Entrepreneurs of political violence: the varied interests and strategies of the far-right in Ukraine" In Open Democracy no less. Bit by bit the word is seeping out. IMF rates Ukraine the poorest country in Europe . This piece gives a summary of its problems with Hungary, Poland and Belarus .

GEORGIA. The Chief Prosecutor's Office says it has a recording that proves Saakashvili sanctioned the murder of Patarkatsishvili . ( English ) ( Georgian ) ( At the time some UK outlets blamed Putin but when they discovered he was Saakashvili's enemy they quickly shut up.)

[Oct 25, 2018] The Crumbling Architecture of Nuclear Arms Control

Notable quotes:
"... By Dan Smith, Director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute . He is also a part-time Professor of Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Manchester, affiliated with the Humanitarian and Conflict Response Institute . Until August, 2015, he was Secretary General of International Alert , the London-based international peacebuilding organization. Originally published at his blog ; cross posted from openDemocracy ..."
Oct 25, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

By Dan Smith, Director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute . He is also a part-time Professor of Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Manchester, affiliated with the Humanitarian and Conflict Response Institute . Until August, 2015, he was Secretary General of International Alert , the London-based international peacebuilding organization. Originally published at his blog ; cross posted from openDemocracy

At a political rally on Saturday 20 October President Trump announced that the US will withdraw from the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty of 1987. This confirms what has steadily unfolded over the last couple of years: the architecture of US-Russian nuclear arms control is crumbling.

Building Blocks of Arms Control

As the Cold War ended, four new building blocks of east-west arms control were laid on top of foundations set by the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty of 1972:

1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) reduced the numbers of strategic nuclear weapons; further cuts were agreed in 2002 and again in 2010 in the New START agreement. – The 1990 Treaty on Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE Treaty) capped at equal levels the number of heavy weapons deployed between the Atlantic and the Urals by the then-members of both the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Warsaw Treaty Organization (WTO). – The 1991 Presidential Nuclear Initiatives (PNIs) were parallel, unilateral but agreed actions by both the US and the USSR to eliminate short-range tactical nuclear weapons, of which thousands existed.

Taken together, the nuclear measures – the INF Treaty, START and PNIs – had a major impact, as this graph from the Federation of American Scientists shows:

The fastest pace of reduction was in the 1990s. A deceleration began just before the new century started, and there has been a further easing of the pace in the last six years. But year by year, the number continues to fall. By the start of 2018 the global total of nuclear weapons was 14,700 compared to an all-time high of some 70,000 in the mid-1980s. Nuclear weapons are more capable in many ways than before; the reduction is, nonetheless, both large and significant.

Cracks Appear: Charge and Counter-Charge

Even while the numbers continued to drop, problems were emerging. Not least, in 2002 the US unilaterally withdrew from the ABM Treaty. That did not stop the US and Russia signing the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty in 2002 or New START in 2010 but perhaps it presaged later developments.

Trump's announcement brings towards its conclusion a process that has been going on for several years . The US declared Russia to be violating the Treaty in July 2014. That, of course, was during the Obama administration. The allegation that Russia has breached the INF Treaty, in other words, is not new. This year the USA's NATO allies also aligned themselves with the US accusation, albeit somewhat guardedly (cf the careful wording in paragraph 46 of the July Summit Declaration ).

The charge is that Russia has developed a ground-launched cruise missile with a range over 500 kilometres. Many details have not been clearly stated publicly but it seems Russia may have modified a sea-launched missile (the Kalibr ) and combined it with a mobile ground-based launcher (the Iskander K system). The modified system is known sometimes as the 9M729 , or t he SSC-8, or the SSC-X-8 .

Russia rejects the US accusation. It makes the counter-charge that the US has itself violated the Treaty in three ways: first by using missiles banned under the Treaty for target practice; second because some US drones are effectively cruise missiles; and third because it has taken a maritime missile defence system and based it on land ( Aegis Ashore ) although its launch tubes could, the Russians say, be used for intermediate range missiles. Naturally, the US rejects these charges.

A further Russian criticism of the US over the INF Treaty is that, if the US wanted to discuss alleged non-compliance, it should have used the Treaty's Special Verification Commission before going public. This was designed specifically to address questions about each side's compliance. It did not meet between 2003 and November 2016; it was during that 13-year interval that US concerns about Russian cruise missiles arose.

Now Trump seems to have closed the argument by announcing withdrawal. Under Article XV of the Treaty, withdrawal can happen after six months' notice. Unless there is a timely change of approach by either side or both, the Treaty looks likely to be a dead letter by April 2019.

It could be, however, that the announcement is intended as a manoeuvre to get concessions from the Russian side on the alleged missile deployment or on other aspects of an increasingly tense US-Russian relationship. That is what Russian deputy foreign minister, Sergei Ryabkov, implied by calling it "blackmail".

Arms Control in Trouble

Whether the imminence of the INF Treaty's demise is more apparent than real, its plight is part of a bigger picture. Arms control is in deep trouble. As well as the US abrogation of the ABM Treaty in 2002,

effectively withdrew from the CFE Treaty in 2015 arguing that the equal cap was no longer fair when five former Warsaw Pact states had joined NATO. – The 2010 New START agreement on strategic nuclear arms lasts until 2021 and there are currently no talks about prolonging or replacing it. – Russia claims that the US is technically violating New START because some launchers have been converted to non-nuclear use in a way that is not visible to Russia so it cannot verify them in the way the Treaty says it must be able to. The Russian government's position is that until this is resolved, it is not possible to start work on the prolongation of New START, despite its imminent expiry date.

It seems likely that the precarious situation of US-Russian arms control will simultaneously put increasing pressure on the overall nuclear non-proliferation regime, and sharpen the arguments about the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons . For the advocates of what is often known as the nuclear ban, the erosion of arms control reinforces the case for moving forward to a world without nuclear weapons. For its opponents, the erosion of arms control shows the world is not at all ready for or capable of a nuclear ban.

The risk of a return to nuclear weapons build-ups by both Russia and the US is visible. We risk losing the degree of safety we gained with the end of the Cold War and have enjoyed since then. With US National Security Advisor John Bolton in Moscow as I write, and more importantly with the well-earned reputation for springing surprises that the US and Russian Presidents both have, there may be more developments in one direction or another in the coming days or weeks.

The Rev Kev , October 25, 2018 at 6:22 am

The British author John Wyndham once wrote that 95 per cent of the human race wants to live in peace while the other 5 per cent was always considering its chances if it should risk starting anything. It was chiefly because no one's chances looked too good, what with nuclear weapons, that the lull after WW2 continued. Now it looks like a new generation of wonks who are not reality-based want to put the US in the position of being able to launch a pre-emptive nuclear attack on at least Russia with missiles based in Europe. Like with the old Pershing missiles, tough luck if you live in Europe. Russia has already said that they will target any European country that houses these missiles with nukes.
Saw a hint on RT that if the US continues these efforts, that Russia may develop missiles that could set off the Yellowstone Caldera. That would be not good. The Russians are always ready to negotiate but the problem is that the US now has a reputation of being agreement-incapable. Remember that Bush was stationing missiles in Europe as a shield against non-existent Iranian nukes on top of Iranian missiles that did not have the range. Russia suggested that the missiles be located in Turkey but the US refused. After the Iran treaty went into effect, the US announced that – surprise, surprise – the missiles were for use against Russia after all. How do you negotiate with something like that?

Bill Smith , October 25, 2018 at 7:04 am

In regard to the INF Treaty the Russian newspapers have had some stories that they consider that particular treaty likely the worst they ever signed. That's because the USSR gave up many more missiles than the US did. The articles also mention that the Russians feel they are many counties that have those type of missiles all around them. For example, China, Pakistan, Iran and Israel are specially mentioned. Lastly the technology has changed so much in the 30 or so years since that treaty was signed.

In a better time a new series of treaties might be negotiated but these are not better times.

David , October 25, 2018 at 10:45 am

Ambassador Bolton agrees with you. ( source )

But there is a larger question here – I think one that applies to both Russia and the United States – and that's the countries that are producing intermediate range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles right now, specifically Iran, China and North Korea. We have this very unusual circumstance where the United States and Russia are in a bilateral treaty, whereas other countries in the world are not bound by it. Now some of the successor states to the Soviet Union are bound by it, but it's really only Russia that has the wherewithal to have this kind of program. So it has been the view of the United States, in effect, that only two countries were bound by the INF treaty.

It appears that Mr. Trump likes bilateral trade agreements and multi-lateral arms agreeements.

Tomonthebeach , October 25, 2018 at 2:23 pm

This is all part of Bolton's war on Russia. Like Trump, he indulges in old score-settling with Beltway & Pentagon colleagues as well as proving he was right all along to oppose these and most other treaties. I am highly suspicious of this entire fiasco.

Why are we so preoccupied with a country that has an economy a fifth the size of the US alone (much less NATO/EU)? Even if allied with China and NATO ally (?) Califwannabe Erdogan, Russia is more annoying than a threat.

Bolton, on the other hand, scares the crap out me. He's just plain nuts.

Lambert Strether , October 25, 2018 at 7:55 am

I'm very glad this post is up. That this isn't a huge story is a fine example of "The tyranny of the urgent." (Those who read the transcript of Putin at the Valdai Club may recall this passage :

[PUTIN] Look, we live in a world where security relies on nuclear capability. Russia is one of the largest nuclear powers. You may be aware, I have said it publicly, we are improving our attack systems as an answer to the United States building its missile defence system. Some of these systems have already been fielded, and some will be put into service in the coming months. I am talking about the Avangard system. Clearly, we have overtaken all our, so to speak, partners and competitors in this sphere, and this fact is acknowledged by the experts. No one has a high-precision hypersonic weapon. Some plan to begin testing it in one or two years, while we have this high-tech modern weapon in service. So, we feel confident in this sense.

Naturally, there are many other risks, but they are shared risks, such as environment, climate change, terrorism, which I mentioned, and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. If we are unable to put an effective end to this, it is not clear where it will lead to, and in whose hands this deadly weapon may end up.

So, in this sense, nothing has changed. We are not going anywhere, we have a vast territory, and we do not need anything from anyone. But we value our sovereignty and independence. It has always been this way, at all times in the history of our state. It runs in the blood of our people, as I have repeatedly said. In this sense, we feel confident and calm.

And this:

I have said that our nuclear weapons doctrine does not provide for a pre-emptive strike. I would like to ask all of you and those who will later analyse and in one way or another interpret my every word here, to keep in mind that there is no provision for a pre-emptive strike in our nuclear weapons doctrine. Our concept is based on a reciprocal counter strike. There is no need to explain what this is to those who understand, as for those who do not, I would like to say it again: this means that we are prepared and will use nuclear weapons only when we know for certain that some potential aggressor is attacking Russia, our territory. I am not revealing a secret if I say that we have created a system which is being upgraded all the time as needed – a missile early warning radar system. This system monitors the globe, warning about the launch of any strategic missile at sea and identifying the area from which it was launched. Second, the system tracks the trajectory of a missile flight. Third, it locates a nuclear warhead drop zone.

Only when we know for certain – and this takes a few seconds to understand – that Russia is being attacked we will deliver a counter strike. This would be a reciprocal counter strike. Why do I say 'counter'? Because we will counter missiles flying towards us by sending a missile in the direction of an aggressor. Of course, this amounts to a global catastrophe but I would like to repeat that we cannot be the initiators of such a catastrophe because we have no provision for a pre-emptive strike. Yes, it looks like we are sitting on our hands and waiting until someone uses nuclear weapons against us. Well, yes, this is what it is. But then any aggressor should know that retaliation is inevitable and they will be annihilated. And we as the victims of an aggression, we as martyrs would go to paradise while they will simply perish because they won't even have time to repent their sins.

I've see a video of a fancy new weapon. Is it real?

Bill Smith , October 25, 2018 at 9:00 am

The Avangard is in testing or just completed testing. Depending what stories you see it has been successfully tested at least once. Even successful testing may not mean deployment. Earliest estimate for deployment is about 2020 in very limited numbers. I'm not sure how big a deal this thing is as it launched from an ICBM. How much faster than an incoming ICBM warhead does it move?

The Avangard has nothing to do with the INF.

The Russian nuclear doctrine does allow for the use of nuclear weapons – at least in fairly narrow circumstances. The wording implies the circumstances would "have to threaten the collapse of the state". First use in those circumstances might not be considered preemptive. Putin help write to doctrine when he was Secretary of the Russian National Security Council Staff .

Andrew Foland , October 25, 2018 at 9:04 am

Just a general thing, for those interested in excellent technical (both scientific and legal/compliance) commentary on arms control, I highly recommend Arms Control Wonk . The level of discussion is very high, the kind of level NC readers would appreciate. I'm in no way associated with it except for being a longtime reader.

Scott1 , October 25, 2018 at 1:28 pm

The UN was created not to sell Sustainable Development but to prevent Apocalyptic Riot. During the Cold War & a Bi Polar power balance of separate economics it did the job. However flawed it was, it did that one job.
Now it sits there selling Sustainable Development, which is great, but not what it was really made to do.
If the UN, or a new one with an overt and covert armed forces becomes the World's Unitary Power intent on eliminating nuclear weapons it could negotiate them away and fight a war or two, and be involved in a permanent level of conflict to keep the fields free of nukes.
In fact the banning of nuclear weapons would give a UN the power to enforce transformational energy programs. I have strong doubt that the UN as it exists now will prevent apocalyptic riot.
Human nature being what it is does not get excited and passionate about the environment. Humans get excited about big new power systems and war.

There has been a demonstrated desire to reduce the likelihood of nuclear war. The Cold War worked. During that period it was long only the US & the USSR that had nuclear bombs and delivery systems.
Russia moved into the Ukraine with tanks, took Crimea and got away with it. Pretty much the situation is that wherever you see tanks move you may see the employment of tactical nuclear weapons. A conventional ability to stop all tanks then is important for those nations vulnerable to tank attacks.
In fact I say that you cannot expect to reduce nuclear devices unless you address the reason for them, and that is to stop tanks. Reducing tanks first is then the right order to do things. Come to tank treaties first and then tackle nuclear weapons and the rest of the WMDs is what I say.

Jeremy Grimm , October 25, 2018 at 2:38 pm

'Tactical' nuclear weapons are not the only way to stop tanks. The Russian move into Crimea is hardly an argument for the superiority of a tank invasion or the need for tactical nuclear weapons. Tanks are effective in open relatively flat even terrain, and as long as you have control of the air and sufficient infantry support around them. If the objective is to stop a tank rather than destroy it there are ways. You could stop a tank by spraying glue over their weapons sight, or vision blocks, or the camera port for some of the more recent armored vehicles. Even if you can't stop a tank you can stop parts from coming in to make repairs or diesel to run the their hungry engines if their supply lines are not well protected. The tanks will quickly stop on their own. You could also stop tanks with opposing tanks if you're ready to absorb the costs for building the force and keep it ready to roll near an attack corridor. Tactical nuclear weapons might save a little money (???) but they are a hellish invention for increasing the threats to our fragile world as we transition through Climate Disruptions into the new Anthropocene Climate Regime.

While you're working on those tank treaties, please include ground mines especially those with plastic casings -- oh! and don't forget to eliminate those nasty spent-uranium shells.

rosemerry , October 25, 2018 at 4:36 pm

"Russia moved into the Ukraine with tanks, took Crimea and got away with it" Rather a warped interpretation of a situation where the USA had overthrown the Ukrainian government and Crimea had been part of Russia and the population overwhelmingly voted to return. NO bloodshed at all. The video "Crimea, the way back Home" is worth a look.

Jeremy Grimm , October 25, 2018 at 2:15 pm

This is a very disturbing post coming as it does only two days before Vasili Arkhipov day.

I cannot imagine what kind of people could seriously consider using nuclear weapons under any circumstance whatsoever.

[Oct 25, 2018] Entrepreneurs of political violence: the varied interests and strategies of the far-right in Ukraine

Oct 25, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

UKRAINE. " Entrepreneurs of political violence: the varied interests and strategies of the far-right in Ukraine" In Open Democracy no less.

Bit by bit the word is seeping out. IMF rates Ukraine the poorest country in Europe .

This piece gives a summary of its problems with Hungary, Poland and Belarus .

[Oct 25, 2018] Nikki Haley Almost Started a Nuclear War

Oct 25, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

While soon-to-be ex-UN ambassador Nikki Haley might be the talk of the town at the moment -- from chatter she should run in 2020 against Donald Trump to replacing Mike Pence on the GOP ticket all the way to running against Pence in 2024 -- her many faults are being glossed over. That's a big problem for someone being floated as the next leader of the free world -- as recent history has taught us all too tragically.

Thankfully, reality always has a way of casting doubt on such picture-perfect narratives before they are ever fully formed. Case in point, buried in a recent article from Harper's Magazine was the fact that Haley tried out her own amateur hour version of what can only be described as nuclear poker: telling China's ambassador to the UN that Trump might invade North Korea.

I had to read the article over and over to make sure I didn't miss something. But alas it was real -- and terrifying. Such a threat, if relayed to North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un, combined with several other U.S. actions at the time -- and one that almost occurred that we know of thanks to Bob Woodward's recent book -- could have set in motion a preemptive strike by Pyongyang that almost certainly would have involved the use of nuclear weapons. And that means millions of people would have died.

Now ask yourself: is this person really ready to be president? Is this what passes as the stuff of presidential timber?

Here are the details. Journalist Max Blumenthal recorded Haley's remarks -- her last major address before she handed in her resignation -- as the only journalist present at a late September event at the Council for National Policy. In a Q&A session that Blumenthal described as "an extended series of candid, and at times disturbing, recollections of Trump's campaign of maximum pressure against North Korea," Haley broke down her opposition to the president's tough talk at the UN. But the real money shot from Blumenthal's piece is here:

It was September 2, 2017, and North Korea had just embarked on its sixth nuclear test launch. Haley's mission was to ram a resolution through the UN Security Council to sanction the isolated state. This meant that she had to secure abstentions from Russia and China, the two permanent members that maintained relations with Pyongyang. It was a tall task, but as she boasted to the rapt audience at the CNP, she had a few tricks up her sleeve.

"I said to the Russians, 'Either you're with North Korea, or you're with the United States of America,'" Haley recalled. She said she went to the Chinese ambassador and raised the prospect of an American military invasion of North Korea. "My boss is kind of unpredictable, and I don't know what he'll do," she said she warned her Chinese counterpart.

Sadly, besides some mentions on social media and a few articles , her threat received very little mainstream media coverage. Maybe that's a blessing in disguise. But one can easily construct a scenario where Haley's comment sets off a chain of events that starts a Second Korean War. For example, we don't know what the Chinese ambassador did after Haley made the threat, but most likely he promptly reported it back to Beijing. What the Chinese government did with that information is vital. Did they warn the North Koreans? Did they react in some other way?

Nikki Haley: Trump's Baghdad Bob A War of Choice With North Korea is an Immensely Dumb Idea

We will never really know. However, if Pyongyang was tipped off by Beijing, seeing three U.S. Navy aircraft carriers drilling with South Korean and Japanese warships in November of last year surely must have terrified them. Such a concentration of firepower would have been a prerequisite for any type of invasion or attack. In fact, could these have been the reasons the north decided to test another ICBM in November?

Again, we will never know. However, Trump's very real proposal, as reported in Bob Woodward's book Fear , of "sending a tweet declaring that he was ordering all U.S. military dependents -- thousands of the family members of 28,500 troops -- out of South Korea" definitely would have provoked a response from the Kim regime.

While Woodward does not give specific dates as to when this nearly occurred -- the full text before this section suggests an early 2018 timeframe -- he still reveals that we did dodge a potential war. Just two paragraphs down, Woodward notes that on December 4, 2018, "[M]cMaster had received a warning at the White House. Ri Su-yong, the vice chairman of the [North Korean] Politburo, had told intermediaries 'that the North would take the evacuation of U.S. civilians as a sign of imminent attack.'"

If you put it all together -- not to mention the now famous call to give Kim a " bloody nose " in early January 2018 -- it is easy to see how close to war we came from roughly September 2017 to early January of this year. If events had occurred just a little differently -- if North Korea had perceived things in a direr way thanks to a Chinese warning of a possible invasion, if Trump had acted on his impulses a little further -- our world would be a very different place. Pyongyang, thinking an invasion was coming, might have decided that its only chance to survive was to use its vast arsenal of weapons of mass destruction before they were destroyed. That would have meant launching atomic weapons at military bases and potential ports of entry for U.S. forces in South Korea, Japan, Guam, Hawaii -- or even attacking the American homeland itself with nuclear weapons. From simulations I have run over the years, I can tell you that millions of people would have died in such an event.

Thankfully, history broke a little different and it never happened -- and thank God for that. But let's not heap praise on public figures who think they can bluff their way through the great game of global politics. That's not what great presidents are made of.

Harry J. Kazianis (@Grecianformula ) serves as director of Defense Studies at the Center for the National Interest, founded by President Richard Nixon. The views expressed in this piece are his own.

[Oct 25, 2018] Entrepreneurs of political violence the varied interests and strategies of the far-right in Ukraine openDemocracy

Notable quotes:
"... "Violent entrepreneurs" ..."
"... By taking a similarly pragmatic look at the activities of Ukrainian far right, I claim that they should be viewed as political entrepreneurs who are trying to capitalise on their expertise in violence. ..."
"... Azov's network amounts to a far-right "state within a state" – a universe that aims to monopolise the nationalist sector of Ukraine's political field ..."
"... On the national level, this makes Azov's political patron, Ukraine's Interior Minister Arsen Avakov, the second most powerful person in the country, effectively possessing a private army which once in a while makes ambiguous comments about the possibility of a coup . However, the patronage networks and conflicts go much deeper on the local level. Some of them can be uncovered by analysing the events mentioned above. ..."
"... Many of Azov's public gestures, including incidents involving violence, are aimed at reinforcing the image of an independent movement, opposed to both Ukraine's police leadership and corrupt elites ..."
"... November 2016: Autonomous Resistance's social centre in Lviv is attacked by far-right. Source: YouTube / Kateryna Benjuk. ..."
"... In Kyiv, open struggle against the (weaker) leftists and liberals is the preferred activity of C14 – an organisation headed by Yevgen Karas, a former Svoboda activist who split from the party to become an independent entrepreneur of political violence. ..."
"... Aiming for Ukraine's mainstream patriotic public, C14 positions itself as a group of young and resolute men ready to employ violence for the sake of (national) justice. Their enemies are usually represented as (latent) supporters of pro-Russian separatists, which automatically diminishes their worth in the eyes of the public and amplifies the attackers' heroism. In effect, C14 is trying to take the niche that was occupied by Svoboda before Maidan: relatable and well-meaning troublemakers prepared to break the law for the greater good (by comparison, the agenda of National Corps stresses the values of order). ..."
"... Karas freely admitted to a sympathetic journalist that he cooperates with Ukraine's security services. Among Ukrainian far-right organisations, the activities of C14 are closest to those of Russian online vigilante movements such as "Occupy Pedophily" or "Lev Protiv"; their YouTube channel is consciously crafted to attract audiences (thus literally monetising their violence), and the most popular videos have between 50,000 and 300,000 views. ..."
"... Having created a "municipal guard" officially financed by Kyiv's city council, C14 works towards realising both aims: it gives them a pretext to patrol streets and maximise the probability of violent encounters (which can be publicised), and at the same time provides a "second-best" opportunity to those who could or would not join the structures of Azov. ..."
"... Its advertised readiness to resort to violence was the key to Svoboda's electoral success before Maidan, but this was overshadowed by the efforts of the competing entrepreneurs of political violence in the post-Maidan conjuncture, in which the level of and tolerance to violence has escalated. On the other hand, Svoboda keeps holding on to its hegemony in regional power settings in western Ukraine, even though its relations to nation-wide patronage networks is unclear. All in all, Azov/National Corps seems to be clearly the most successful partner in the big nationalist threesome, receiving the most from this alliance. ..."
"... As I have argued above, Ukraine's far right are taking the logic of "violent entrepreneurship" outside the purely commercial and apolitical realm – and employing it in the domain of political contestation, where illicit violence is a precious resource that can be bought and rented. ..."
Oct 25, 2018 | www.opendemocracy.net

The recent wave of anti-Roma pogroms in Ukraine has spawned a new series of texts on right-wing violence. However, a significant part of this literature still mostly relies on discourse analysis , which cannot fully explain the actions of far right organisations on the ground. Analysing far-right movements' programmes and ideological statements can be useful when combined with a closer look at the actual activities of the movements in question, the way they interact among themselves and the wider social and political context. But judging a group primarily by how it presents itself to the world is misleading.

The lack of primary sources from Ukraine's far-right milieu, as well as the general scarcity of research on non-EU (and non-Russian) eastern Europe, has led to an exoticised perception of central and eastern Europe as whole – and one that is open to politicisation by both liberals and leftists. Public discussion thus tends to degenerate into either liberal denial of the very existence of the far-right problem in Ukraine or sensationalist and exaggerated "anti-imperialist" accounts of the "fascist junta" ruling the country.

To avoid oversimplification, I focus on the grounded context rather than ideologies and programmes of far-right groups. Here, I will try to contribute to a better understanding of the far right in Ukraine by conceptualising them as "entrepreneurs of political violence" – a portmanteau of two established terms from different fields. A "political entrepreneur" is a political actor who pursues opportunistic strategies aimed at gaining popularity and influence, rather than following a specific ideological agenda. Likewise, "Violent entrepreneurs" is the title of an influential study of Russian organised crime by sociologist Vadim Volkov, who analysed post-Soviet mafia as a particular kind of entrepreneurship where violence resources become a crucially important capital asset.

By taking a similarly pragmatic look at the activities of Ukrainian far right, I claim that they should be viewed as political entrepreneurs who are trying to capitalise on their expertise in violence. This can be a more productive lens than engaged approaches which "take a stance" on the far right – approaches that simply acknowledge the gravity of the situation or belittle it. These tend to be accompanied by wider political conclusions, and do not seek to understand the issue at hand.

I give a concise chronology of the incidents of right-wing violence between January and April 2018 (i.e. before the more recent string of Roma pogroms). I will look only at episodes reported in the media, involving violence or a realistic threat of violence by members of various organised far-right groups, directed outside the far right subculture, in peaceful areas of Ukraine. I will then regroup these episodes, interpreting them as several processes that have their own inner logic, but which intersect in time and space.

Chronology of events

The 2018 season of political violence opened in Kyiv on 19 January, when nationalist organisation C14 attacked a demonstration commemorating Russian antifascists Stanislav Markelov and Anastasia Baburova.

This annual event is a traditional target for the far right , although previous attacks had been led by different forces. C14 activists blocked the demonstration organised by liberal and leftist activists in central Kyiv, shouting down the speakers and attacking them with snowballs and eggs. The Kyiv police failed to create a barrier separating the two demonstrations, advising the antifascists simply "not to provoke" their opponents. Later, the police detained eight anarchists; the arrest was met with cheers from the nationalists, who were free to keep assaulting the demonstrators physically and verbally. After the end of the demonstration, the far right attacked a random passerby whom they mistook for an antifascist – he happened to be a British tourist .

19 January 2018: attack on anti-fascist march, Kyiv. Source: Youtube. Ten days later, an important incident took place in Lviv . On 28 January, a large group of far-right activists, mostly members of the Azov National Corps and its allied group Misanthropic Division, violently attacked a demonstration (organised by the local leftist scene) against the use of animals in circuses. The attackers threw smoke grenades into the crowd and shook hands with police officers, exchanging the motto "White Pride". The police soon intervened by detaining leftist demonstrators in a brutal manner; they were all taken to a police station, where they spent several hours.

On the next day, 29 January, Azov's vigilante organisation National Militia blocked Cherkasy city hall in central Ukraine. Here, they forced city deputies to vote for the self-dissolution of the city council after they refused to approve new members of the executive committee proposed by the mayor. The police did not intervene.

These January events set the trends for the period that followed. On 11 February, Azov fighters violently intervened and stopped a lecture about discrimination in the film industry, held at a cultural centre in Mariupol. On 13 February, a group called Freikorps, which is believed to be close to the Azov/National Corps movement, attacked a lecture on the LGBT movement in Kharkiv in a similar manner. Two days later, C14 and Azov's National Militia clashed with police forces in Kyiv during a bail court hearing concerning Odessa city mayor Gennady Trukhanov, who is facing theft charges.

International Women's Day, 8 March, saw many public events and almost as many attacks by far right groups. Azov assaulted feminists and liberals marching in Mariupol. In Kyiv, attackers from several organisations made use of the benevolent passivity of the police, who were reluctant to protect the marchers . A plainclothes police officer actually helped them steal a feminist banner.

The Kyiv police ignored statements by victims of violence. Instead, they opened criminal proceedings against Olena Shevchenko, the organiser of the Women's March, after nationalists claimed that the contents of the banner were tantamount to desecration of national symbols. The first court hearing was held in the presence of a large nationalist audience, mobilised by C14, Katekhon (a conservative circle tied to Ukrainian far-right political party Svoboda) and Tradition and Order (TiP), a conservative nationalist group. At the second hearing, the defence mobilised their own support, including some diplomats and liberal politicians. With the dignitaries present in the court hall, and with far right waiting outside, the court acquitted Shevchenko. She had to leave by taking a taxi from the court's backdoor.

On the same day in Lviv, members of National Corps physically assaulted visitors at a feminist exhibition and participants of a "Sisterhood, Support, Solidarity" march. When the marchers retreated into a tram, the attackers started throwing cobblestones at it and later burnt one of their banners saying "No means no". The city police, meanwhile, stood by, ready to intervene the moment the leftists would try to fight back. Some of the police exchanged friendly greetings with the far right.

Meanwhile, in Uzhgorod, events took a slightly different turn. Activists of the local organisation Karpatska Sich (KS) poured red paint over a speaker at a local feminist demonstration, which led to a chemical eye burn. Here, the police promptly detained the attackers – though they were released later that day. In the week that followed, Karpatska Sich organised a string of attacks against local leftist and liberal activists. Coincidentally, that week also hosted a wave of anonymous property destruction against cars with Hungarian or other EU number plates. Once again, local police reacted very reluctantly. According to activists, these were preparations for a large demonstration that Karpatska Sich staged on 17 March. In Uzhgorod as well as in Lviv, local police, realising their own inability to control the streets during such big events, simply gave carte blanche to the far right.

A 17 March event in Uzhgorod to honour wartime nationalist anti-Hungarian fighters (Karpatska Sich's namesake) became an event of nationwide importance , gathering a wide spectrum of Ukraine's extreme right, from Right Sector and Tryzub to C14 and Freikorps. Karpatska Sich, the hosting organisation, accounted for a few dozen of the 250 participants. Contrary to the customary repertoire, the marchers readily demonstrated "controversial" symbols like the "Celtic cross" and gestures like the "Roman salute". Normally these are avoided at public events as too "provocative".

17 March: Karpatska Sich hosts a march in honour of wartime anti-Hungarian fighters, Uzhgorod. Source: Karpatska Sich. On the eve of this gathering, the regional police chief refused to take measures to protect a roundtable on discrimination and hate crimes organised by an LGBT organisation, and strongly advised them to cancel it. Upon receiving this information, the hotel that was to host the event revoked its agreement. Rank-and-file police officers were better disposed to the organisers and helped them leave the town safely.

The town's leftist/liberal milieu reacted to these events by organising a demonstration "For a European Uzhgorod" on 31 March. Their opponents occupied the same square with their own demonstration,"For traditional family values". The city council tried to forbid all demonstrations on that day, citing public safety considerations. However, a local court did not prohibit the gatherings. Notably, Karpatska Sich was not officially present at the counter-demonstration: it was formally organised by a KS-allied group "Black Sun", Social-Nationalist Assembly (SNA) and a few less significant organisations. Karpatska Sich militant activists were present next to the square, but there was no violence on that day. The police did their job, efficiently separating the two demonstrations.

On 19 March, the far right blocked two events organised by liberal NGOs: a roundtable on countering discrimination and hate crimes in Vinnytsia and a lecture on gender-sensitive words in Ivano-Frankivsk . In Vinnytsia, around 40 far right introduced themselves as ordinary citizens, blocking the entrance and demanding to be let inside. The police created a corridor to evacuate the participants of the roundtable. In Ivano-Frankivsk, the lecture was sabotaged by Karpatska Sich and their partner organisation, Sokil. KS promised to repeat such interventions in the future.

Unlike Right Sector, which tried and failed a strategy of violent confrontation with the post-Maidan government, Azov's leadership has opted for a "long march through the institutions"

On 23 March, a special police squad conducted searches at Kyiv's ATEK factory, which is used by Azov as its headquarters and training grounds. Police chiefs explained that the intervention had nothing to do with Azov, but the latter nevertheless quickly mobilised around 1,000 supporters, including members of parliament from Svoboda, to block the work of the police and expel them. On that day, Azov leader Andriy Biletsky mentioned that "a considerable part of the military will support in their hearts" a hypothetical coup d'état.

Three days later, 26 March was marked by far-right violence against a lecture about the dangers of the far-right violence in Kyiv: Right Sector, Svoboda and Tradition and Order, altogether around 40 people, invaded a cultural centre and tore down posters bearing the slogan "Respect diversity". The police pushed them outside, where they verbally attacked people coming in. Two hours later, the police evacuated the building due to an anonymous report of a bomb threat.

On 29 March, several dozen National Militia members broke into the Mykolayiv regional council and demanded that the deputies impeach the regional governor. The deputies did not comply with this request, but the next day the governor himself asked the president Poroshenko for temporary suspension.

On 16 April, an art exhibition dedicated to the far-right violence, which was opened at the premises of a university in Kyiv under heavy police protection, had to close down . The exhibition's curator insisted on shutting it down, citing the risk of aggression from far-right groups; the administration of the university put additional pressure, accusing the artists of a provocation.

On 18 April, C14 organised an anti-Roma raid at Kyiv railway station. The Roma, who had been staying at the station for a few days, had become the subject of a moral panic in the mainstream Ukrainian media a few days before. On 20 April, Hitler's birthday, a voluntary "municipal guard" consisting of C14 activists violently expelled a Roma camp from a Kyiv park, burning their possessions in the process. Their report, illustrated with picturesque photos, received a very enthusiastic feedback from the wider public on social media. The city police chief said they had not received any official violence complaints, and that the municipal guard had simply burnt some garbage left by the Roma.

A few days later, when a news website published a video of men chasing Roma families and attacking them with pepper spray and stones, the police said they had opened two criminal proceedings into hate crime and hooliganism.

Connecting the dots

Can this intimidating but chaotic sequence of events be disentangled and regrouped into several distinct plots, each having its own main characters and dynamics even while intersecting with others? I will try to do so below.

The main character of the first thread to be found here, and indeed of the far-right political scene in Ukraine as a whole, is the extended network of various structures known under the general Azov movement brand . Unlike Right Sector, which tried and failed a strategy of violent confrontation with the post-Maidan government, Azov's leadership has opted for a "long march through the institutions", extending local patronage networks with criminals and politicians and building a wide network of organisations and side projects.

Azov's network amounts to a far-right "state within a state" – a universe that aims to monopolise the nationalist sector of Ukraine's political field

The creation of the Azov Civil Corps was the first step in this direction. This structure, formally divorced from the Azov National Guard regiment, decided on a more pronounced public political face. The Civil Corps served the double purpose of keeping Azov military regiment veterans busy while also spreading Azov's hegemony among the far-right audience. This was followed by creating the National Corps political party, the network of Azovets children's summer camps, the Sports Corps, the veterans organisation Zirka, the nation-wide vigilante network of National Militias and other outlets. Azov's network thus amounts to a far-right "state within a state" – a universe that aims to monopolise the nationalist sector of Ukraine's political field.

Azov has become an important umbrella brand for Ukrainian far right organisations. On the national level, this makes Azov's political patron, Ukraine's Interior Minister Arsen Avakov, the second most powerful person in the country, effectively possessing a private army which once in a while makes ambiguous comments about the possibility of a coup . However, the patronage networks and conflicts go much deeper on the local level. Some of them can be uncovered by analysing the events mentioned above.

For instance, the March 2018 incident at the ATEK factory in Kyiv. Here what's at stake is the struggle for ownership rights to this factory, which currently hosts Azov's headquarters. The factory previously belonged to Oleksandr Tretiakov, a politician and owner of a Ukrainian lottery operator which allegedly benefits from the National Corps' violent raids directed against competing lottery outlets under the pretext of a campaign against illegal gambling. Tretiakov's old political partner, Ukraine's former justice minister Roman Zvarych, helped Azov establish itself at the factory's premises in November 2014.

At the time, the factory was at the centre of a corporate conflict. As reported by Hromadske , a former lawyer for one of the parties to the factory dispute, KVV Group, claimed he paid $195,000 to Sergey Korotkikh, Azov's head of intelligence, to occupy the factory on KVV's behalf. However, after Azov did this, they refused to permit KVV to enter. Instead, according to KVV's former lawyer, Azov advised KVV to discuss financial matters with Svitlana Zvarych, whose charity foundation demanded 45.5m UAH ($3m) in order for Azov to leave the premises. Svitlana Zvarych refutes this claim. Meanwhile, Azov started converting the factory to produce military equipment with an eye on attracting government orders, while Azov Civil Corps, headed at that time by Roman Zvarych, politicised the conflict by staging street protests "in defense of the factory" .

Many of Azov's public gestures, including incidents involving violence, are aimed at reinforcing the image of an independent movement, opposed to both Ukraine's police leadership and corrupt elites

In October 2016, the co-owner of KVV Group, having spent two months in prison on charges of financing separatism, surrendered his ownership rights to Zvarych's charitable foundation. However, in the same month, according to Svitlana Zvarych, she was kicked out of the factory by Azov's forces after refusing to give a share in the company's capital to Sergey Korotkikh and Vadym Troyan, Kyiv regional police chief and former Azov battalion commander.

This context allows us to better understand Azov's apparent overreaction to the police visit in March 2018 in contrast to their official explanation, which stated that the ""unreformed" police wanted to plant weapons at Azov's base and then disband them. Indeed, Azov's official version helps them mute their ties with Avakov, posing for the nationalist audience as victims of the regime.

Many of Azov's public gestures, including incidents involving violence, are aimed at reinforcing the image of an independent movement, opposed to both Ukraine's police leadership and corrupt elites. Azov's clash with Odessa mayor Gennady Trukhanov's hired thugs and, more importantly, with the police, is one such publicity stunt which "cleanses" the image of National Squads from allegations of Avakov's patronage.

Azov's involvement in the incidents in Cherkasy and Mykolayiv, on the other hand, seems to be connected with its involvement in patronage networks. Cherkasy city council was torn by a conflict between city mayor Anatoliy Bondarenko and city council secretary Oleksandr Radytsky. The latter, supported by the president's Petro Poroshenko Bloc and the nationalist Svoboda party, commanded the majority of votes in the assembly and paralysed the budget confirmation process. The mayor asked the parliament to dissolve the city council and call a new election.

Here, the sudden intervention of Azov's National Militia, sporting balaclavas and firearms cases, turned the tide in the mayor's favour. The city council passed the budget and then voted for its own dissolution. Whether or not the claims about Avakov's political interests in Cherkasy are true, this episode shows that the local configuration of power is often more important than broad political agreements on the national level. Azov played into the hands of the forces belonging to a different camp on the national scale, against fellow nationalists and formal partners from Svoboda.

In Mykolayiv, the official reason for the intervention of Azov's National Militia were accusations against regional governor Oleksiy Savchenko, whose corrupt ways allegedly motivated the suicide of the local airport director, a war veteran. However, according to another interpretation , this is an episode of a wider conflict between Azov's patron Arsen Avakov and Ukraine's former general attorney, police general Vitaliy Yarema. The latter is gaining influence on president Poroshenko, putting his trusted men, former policemen, to important positions in the regions – and Oleksiy Savchenko is one of Yarema's protégés. For Avakov, who wants to monopolise influence on the Ukrainian police force, this situation is perceived as a threat.

Finally, the Mariupol episodes demonstrate the behaviour of Azov in their "base" city close to the front line. As any large industrial city, Mariupol has a lot of powerful local and regional interests , such as the important metallurgical assets belonging to the country's richest man, Rinat Akhmetov -- these would normally dwarf the influence of the likes of Azov. But the war, given the city's strategic importance and reasonable doubts about the political loyalty of its population, has made Azov a more influential player.

Mariupol's Azov movement feel enough at home to have installed a statue of medieval prince Sviatoslav (a central figure in post-Soviet anti-Semitic mythology) in the city centre, despite the lack of official permission from the city council, and to organise regular torchlight marches there. A soldier from Azov, who killed a man in the street after a political argument earlier this year, was released by the local court , which sentenced him to a fine. Even if they do not possess a complete monopoly on violence, Azov has certainly established political control of the streets in Mariupol. To maintain this control, they have to react violently, even if not officially, to any public event which diverges sufficiently from their political agenda.

The struggle for hegemony in Lviv

The contested hegemony over street-level political activism is the common rationale behind the acts of far-right political violence in Lviv. This western city, Ukraine's "national Piedmont", has always been considered the heartland of Ukrainian nationalism.

As early as 2010, Svoboda gained an absolute majority in the city council and relative majority in the regional council. At that point, the party was in the control of an energetic militant movement, Autonomous Resistance (AO). Founded by the former Hitlerist leadership of the now defunct Ukrainian National Labour Party, it was headed by Svoboda deputy Yuriy Mykhalchyshyn, whose PhD thesis dealt with the history of NSDAP and Mussolini's PNF. The militant movement, which followed Strasserism , borrowed its political style from the German autonomists. After a bitter conflict with Mykhalchyshyn in 2013, Autonomous Resistance cut ties with Svoboda and gradually slided leftward politically. It played a prominent role during Maidan in Lviv, occupying the regional council and fighting Svoboda deputies. Coming from a right-wing background, AO paid attention to the development of combat skills of its membership. It created its own MMA training facility, which is the core of a social centre that hosts lectures and presentations. An online shop selling imported athletic clothing previously provided the organisation with an independent source of income.

The peculiar political face of AO – their eclectic left nationalist ideology, commitment to key nationalist symbols and figures, and active participation in the military conflict in the east – has allowed them to survive politically, unlike most other leftist organisations which have failed to find a winning strategy in the post-Maidan environment. A number of splits gave birth to several other organisations, less nationalist but very active, possessing street violence skills and maintaining partnerships with AO. This meant that the street politics of the most important city in western Ukraine was dominated by a leftist milieu.

The first far-right organisation that attempted to contest this situation was Right Sector. In 2015, its local cell forcibly blocked the 1 May "Social march" organised by AO, in order to "prevent a neo-Bolshevik revanche". However, after a series of splits, Right Sector lost its mobilising potential, as did Svoboda. Over 2016-2017, Lviv has seen a string of dramatic incidents of right-wing violence: a mobilisation against a Festival of Equality which intended to tackle LGBT rights issues; a brutal attack on an AO march by several hundred Nazis; attacks at a Publishers Forum because of two books allegedly promoting LGBT and leftist politics. However, Right Sector did not figure prominently in these incidents. Most of these far-right mobilisations were to a large extent anonymous, featuring "patriotic youth" instead of specific political brands.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/36K3dSkfaWk

November 2016: Autonomous Resistance's social centre in Lviv is attacked by far-right. Source: YouTube / Kateryna Benjuk.

The same lack of clear authorship is also true of violent incidents in 2018. However, in personal communication to me, activists who were present on the ground clearly indicate the leading role of Azov's National Corps in these attacks. According to them, Right Sector today constitutes an alternative to Azov only as a military unit in eastern Ukraine, but politically the latter "has swallowed up both Right Sector and Svoboda". Most participants of the 2015 blockade have since then either joined National Corps, or military battalions allied to Right Sector or the police force. Having consolidated the local far-right scene, Azov is trying to clean the political field of its leftist competitors. The Lviv police rank-and-file, which is infiltrated by the far right according to local activists, do not prevent, or even choose to help them to achieve this aim.

Why then is the National Corps reluctant to lead the struggle in Lviv as openly as it does elsewhere? Several hypotheses can help answer this question. First, it cannot afford to lose publicly. In November 2016, a potent coalition of several hundred Nazis joined forces to physically destroy the organised left in Lviv – activists arrived from different regions, representing Azov's Civic Corps, Right Sector and Karpatska Sich. Amazingly, they lost: failing to penetrate the gates of the office under attack, eventually they had to retreat. For political reasons, this kind of loss is unacceptable for an ambitious movement like Azov. Therefore, they will not lead the fight officially unless they are guaranteed to win.

The second hypothesis concerns competition between the agencies of state violence. Both 2016 and 2017 have seen attacks on the Lviv left scene organised by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU). According to persons involved, these investigations seem to have been partially motivated by SBU's own strategic aims, partially by the request of a local developer, and partially by the personal revenge of Yuri Mykhalchyshyn (who now works for the SBU as a consultant). Whatever the exact reasons in each specific case, Azov's National Corps would hardly consider it expedient to be seen voluntarily helping the state institution which is traditionally hostile to their political patron Arsen Avakov – and to give other far right groups even more grounds to talk about their subservience to "the regime".

Finally, Azov's hegemony over the local extreme right may still not be quite consolidated yet. Their relations with Svoboda may be too complicated for open involvement in Lviv at a scale similar to other cities which have less competitive far-right scenes.

Challengers in Kyiv

In Kyiv, open struggle against the (weaker) leftists and liberals is the preferred activity of C14 – an organisation headed by Yevgen Karas, a former Svoboda activist who split from the party to become an independent entrepreneur of political violence. Compared to the other far right organisations mentioned above, C14's profile has less to do with quietly establishing informal domination and engaging in illicit activities for material gain, and more with mediatised activities oriented at a wider audience.

Aiming for Ukraine's mainstream patriotic public, C14 positions itself as a group of young and resolute men ready to employ violence for the sake of (national) justice. Their enemies are usually represented as (latent) supporters of pro-Russian separatists, which automatically diminishes their worth in the eyes of the public and amplifies the attackers' heroism. In effect, C14 is trying to take the niche that was occupied by Svoboda before Maidan: relatable and well-meaning troublemakers prepared to break the law for the greater good (by comparison, the agenda of National Corps stresses the values of order).

C14's profile has less to do with quietly establishing informal domination and engaging in illicit activities for material gain, and more with mediatised activities oriented at a wider audience

This orientation is obvious from a Facebook poll in which C14 asked their audience which politician associated with the old regime they would like the group to beat up (so far they did not manage to target any of the persons mentioned in the poll). In line with this strategy, Karas freely admitted to a sympathetic journalist that he cooperates with Ukraine's security services. Among Ukrainian far-right organisations, the activities of C14 are closest to those of Russian online vigilante movements such as "Occupy Pedophily" or "Lev Protiv"; their YouTube channel is consciously crafted to attract audiences (thus literally monetising their violence), and the most popular videos have between 50,000 and 300,000 views.

The recent wave of anti-Roma pogroms fits this strategy very well: it has produced immense positive feedback in the form of online comments from non-politicised "regular citizens", enhancing brand recognition for C14. Roma can hardly pass as "separatists", but their marginalised status makes them a perfect aim for this kind of strategically calculated violence. Notably, the first anti-Roma raid at Kyiv railway station was a reaction to swelling public demand (heated up by a moral panic in the media), rather than C14's own ideologically dictated initiative. Meanwhile, the attack on the Kyiv antifascist rally in January 2018 is the continuation of C14's more traditional political style – attacking easy targets that can be represented as the "fifth column".

The 2018 feminist march in Kyiv also proves the selective approach of C14: it did not figure prominently among the counter-protesters on 8 March, but afterwards it seized the opportunity to inflate the hysteria around the feminist banner, claiming that the symbol of Azov's National Militia on it looked too much like Ukraine's national symbol, and was located too close to the woman's anus. Characteristically, the National Militia ignored the story, but C14 did its best to mobilise its activists to attend the court hearings.

Here, though, there is a deeper calculation: consolidating Kyiv's far-right scene behind C14. Just like Azov, C14 combine generic "healthy patriotic" message with subtler hints which can be easily deciphered by members of the subculture (such as the symbolic date of the Roma pogrom on Hitler's birthday or indeed the very name of the organisation). Similarly, people belonging to politicised subcultures understand very well that the antifascists who were attacked in January 2018 were not Kremlin agents, but old political enemies who cannot be allowed to grow stronger. Having created a "municipal guard" officially financed by Kyiv's city council, C14 works towards realising both aims: it gives them a pretext to patrol streets and maximise the probability of violent encounters (which can be publicised), and at the same time provides a "second-best" opportunity to those who could or would not join the structures of Azov.

The desire to dominate the local far-right milieu is also apparent behind another series of violent acts by C14, not mentioned above because they were directed against the participants of the far-right scene. Dmitry Riznichenko, a prominent veteran of Ukraine's far right scene and former member of C14, left the organisation after Maidan. After serving in the Donbas volunteer battalion, Riznichenko created his own organisation, more socially liberal than is custom among today's far right. (Some have gone as far as declaring him a leftist.) Whatever Riznichenko's actual political views, the important thing is that he, along with another "erring rightist" organisation ChorKom (Black Committee), maintains openly friendly relations with Lviv's AO and openly challenges the hierarchy within the scene. Struggling to defend its authority, C14 launched an intensive campaign of brutal physical attacks against Riznichenko.

"Anti-gender" ideology as a universal mobiliser

Even though neither Azov nor C14 explicitly mobilised for International Women's Day on 8 March, the demonstration did encounter violent far-right counter-protesters, aided and abetted by some rank-and-file policemen belonging to the same political milieu.

The most prominent violent proponent of the "anti-gender" agenda in the post-Maidan years has been Right Sector. Its ideological face was always more "fascist" or "Francoist" than the white supremacist/Hitlerist Azov or LePen-like Svoboda. Inside the movement, Right Sector was the main engine behind violent mobilisations against LGBT events such as the Equality March in Kyiv. On the wider scale, it contributed to popularising and reinforcing the dichotomy between pro-EU, pro-Poroshenko liberals and revolutionary conservative nationalists.

Today, this dichotomy is a common-sense understanding. The "anti-gender" ideology has turned from an exclusive feature of Right Sector into a generic far-right set of ideas, which can be used by anyone. This is one reason behind the anonymity of some attacks and blockages: their authorship is known inside the relevant milieu, serving as one of the criteria for building subculture hierarchies.

It is also noticeable that Azov has never officially participated in any "gendered" violent actions. Even in their "home" town of Mariupol, attacks are not formally done on behalf of the movement. Partially, this can be explained by their special relationship with the state leadership, which was dying to hide all visible manifestations of xenophobia, homophobia and other signs of lack of social progress from the eyes of the EU, which could have reacted by backtracking on the visa-free regime, politically important for Ukrainian government.

However, this type of violence also generally does not fit Azov's strategy of publicity. They like repeating that they fight "real and strong" enemies – Russians and separatists, but also corrupt officials and other powerful figures within the society, almost ignoring some classic rightist scapegoats.

Instead, the "anti-gender" violence scene has recently seen the rise of two new aspiring actors, which stand behind all recent "gendered" episodes in Kyiv. One of them, Katekhon, is a conservative Orthodox group, somewhat resembling the Russian Union of Orthodox Banner-Bearers with their aggressive fundamentalist style. This group is headed by Yuriy Noyevyi, a politician from Svoboda. Not long ago, in 2012-2014, Noyevyi and his comrades were active in a different niche: their organisation Ukrainian Student attempted to become a far-right student union, competing for the influence with the anarcho-syndicalist union Priama Diya (Direct Action). When the latter ceased to be an important political contender, Noyevyi's interests shifted from university syndicalism to religious fundamentalism. Effectively, Katekhon is the rebranded Ukrainian Student, serving the same technological purposes – promoting the interests of the party in the spheres which are considered the most promising at the moment.

The second ambitious newcomer at the market of gendered political violence is Tradition and Order (TiP). This party was created in the second half of 2016, and took Revanche, a group of admirers of Italian fascism, as its basis. The creation of the party was facilitated by political technologists involved in the patronage circles of the president's political party, Petro Poroshenko Bloc. Today, the perception of TiP as "pro-Poroshenko" is widely shared in Kyiv's marginal political subculture. Most likely, their task is to try and create an alternative centre of gravity among the far right that would balance the influence of Azov (whose political patron is not unconditionally loyal to Poroshenko) and the remaining authority of Svoboda and Right Sector.

Thus, people violently fighting against "gender propaganda" shoulder to shoulder were brought together in the same place by very different, and sometimes mutually exclusive, considerations. In March 2017, National Corps, Svoboda and Right Sector signed a "National Manifesto", pledging to coordinate their efforts in a joint struggle against the government; however, in reality this political field is full of conflicting interests as well as ambitious newcomers with powerful patrons.

The regional monopoly in Uzhgorod

There is one more far right group actively and violently fighting against "gender ideology" in Ukraine – Karpatska Sich (KS), whose area of activity is mostly confined to Uzhgorod. Unlike Azov, they are not tied by the limitations imposed by high-status patrons and parliamentary political ambitions, and do not shy away from certain topics, catering to all possible audiences in the regional far-right milieu.

This group is a financially self-sufficient political and criminal unit, functioning in a border region where smuggling and similar petty criminal activities are an important source of income for a large part of the population. The leadership of KS are founders of a charitable foundation that receives goods confiscated at the customs for free, pledging to deliver them to soldiers at the eastern front. However, among the goods thus obtained there were two tonnes of marble and women's lingerie , which can be hardly considered a useful material aid but can be profitably sold. One of the founders also figures in cases of illicit land allocations by Uzhgorod city council.

Simultaneously, KS has successfully established its exclusive control over street-level violence in Uzhgorod. The publication of the information on their illicit activities by a local anti-corruption activist was followed by a string of attacks against him and his colleagues by KS. On the other hand, the nature of their relations with the police and local government is markedly different from the situation in Kyiv and Lviv. In this case, there is hardly an infiltration or benevolent attitude on the part of rank-and-file policemen; rather, the police and the state apparatus are too weak to persecute KS as severely as they perhaps would like to. In 2017, the leader of KS Taras Deyak was included in the list of 100 most influential people of the region – this is very unusual, and suggests the depth of the group's involvement in local criminal networks.

This influence is used to expand the clout of KS among the far-right scene and reap benefits in high politics. The list of organisations which participated in the 79th anniversary march was telling. It did not include either National Corps or Svoboda. Instead, it featured C14 (whose sphere of influence is geographically divided from KS) and the Social-National Assembly. According to some rumours , the leader of SNA Oleh Odnorozhenko (who was previously Azov's main ideologue) is drifting closer to Oleh Lyashko and Igor Mosiychuk – people who left Azov in 2014. Lyashko's Radical Party is an influential player in mainstream politics, and he personally enjoys high rankings in presidential polls, opposing both Avakov and Poroshenko. Odnorozhenko's frequent visits to Uzhgorod and participation in joint events may be a prelude to the inclusion of SNA and KS into Lyashko's electoral machine.

Hegemony toolkit: Dosing violence, choosing friends and victims

The first and most important of the plots we have been able to discern above is the establishment of the Azov movement as dominant in Ukraine's far-right scene on the national level – and as a significant political player in the mainstream political scene.

The key factors that have allowed Azov to rise to these positions are its strategic choices to maintain a reserved but not hostile public attitude towards the government and to maintain close patron-client relationships with certain factions both on the national level and in specific regional and local configurations. The third factor is Azov's military background, which grants it access to the infrastructure of violence (arms, training facilities etc.) and ensures its legitimacy both in the eyes of the wider public and of the nationalist scene. This legitimacy hinges on the balanced demonstration of the resources of violence available to the movement and its discretion in using them.

This combination is unique among the major far-right structures in Ukraine. Right Sector has a strong military component, but its decision to choose an openly confrontational path in its relations with the governing factions of the ruling class has prevented it from gaining access to important physical and symbolic resources. In this situation, Right Sector's bet on their clientelist relations with an opposition faction of Ukraine's haute bourgeoisie (Ihor Kolomoisky's Privat Group) and revolutionary image did not pay off. Now this movement seems to be in decline.

Svoboda, meanwhile, was too compromised by its perceived proximity to power during and immediately after Maidan. The creation of Svoboda's own volunteer war units appears to have failed to neutralise the lack of radicalism and militarism in its public image. Its advertised readiness to resort to violence was the key to Svoboda's electoral success before Maidan, but this was overshadowed by the efforts of the competing entrepreneurs of political violence in the post-Maidan conjuncture, in which the level of and tolerance to violence has escalated. On the other hand, Svoboda keeps holding on to its hegemony in regional power settings in western Ukraine, even though its relations to nation-wide patronage networks is unclear. All in all, Azov/National Corps seems to be clearly the most successful partner in the big nationalist threesome, receiving the most from this alliance.

As mentioned above, Azov's success hinges partly on the measured dosage of violence in the public space, which should project an image of a force conscious of its superiority in terms of violent resources – but still using it sparingly. This is why National Corps prefers semi-anonymity when acting in situations where its single-handed superiority is not guaranteed a priori, like in Kyiv and Lviv. Its interpenetration with the police forces helps it establish its hegemony in a covert manner. The efforts of National Corps to dominate street politics in Lviv are the second plot.

The third plot concerns the activities of C14 in Kyiv. This movement is closer to a classic vigilante group, generously using violence against commonly recognised "public enemies", i.e. subjects of moral panic like the Roma or alleged pro-Russian fifth columnist. In their activity, they appeal to two audiences: the wider public with its patriotic and anti-Roma instincts and the far-right political subculture able to see more nuanced details. The first dimension makes C14 a structural analogue of Russian vigilante groups with their commercialised online platforms; the second dimension, oriented inside the far-right scene, has elevated C14 to the position of a co-organiser of the annual nationalist marches on 14 October, on a par with the much more powerful Azov, Svoboda and Right Sector.

The use of "anti-gender" ideology is the fourth theme. The cases analysed here show that this mobilising subject is used as a self-promotion arena by two competing groups: Katekhon, trying to restore Svoboda's once leading positions in the scene; and TiP, aimed at creating there a separate gravitation pole embedded in Poroshenko's patronage network. On the other hand, Azov/National Corps seems reluctant to invest too much effort in forcing the topic.

Finally, a separate plot is unfolding in Uzhgorod, where the locally entrenched political and criminal structure Karpatska Sich is overtly competing with the state apparatus for influence on the regional level and is struggling to build alliances on the national scale. These alliances, if constructed successfully, will be able to undermine the dominance of Azov/National Corps by creating a patronage network of comparable capacity to compete with it politically and otherwise on all levels.

As I have argued above, Ukraine's far right are taking the logic of "violent entrepreneurship" outside the purely commercial and apolitical realm – and employing it in the domain of political contestation, where illicit violence is a precious resource that can be bought and rented.

Ukrainian Nazi movements thus exist on the intersection of several worlds (criminal, commercial, military, marginal-political, mainstream political) and are prepared to mobilise their violent resources for advancement of their own positions, up to and including displacing former patrons and stepping into their shoes. The skillful and measured management and use of these violent resources is the key to success in this strategy.

[Oct 24, 2018] It does seem that the murder allowed the war and killing in Yemen to move to the foreground

Oct 24, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Nemesiscalling , Oct 23, 2018 2:37:45 PM | link

B, it does seem that the k affair has risen the crisis in Yemen to the foreground just as many predicted. Thank goodness.

You are correct in that many are looking too far into this as some kind of conspiracy. I am reminded by this of many who put forth that it made no difference as to who won the prez election. It did make a difference to the military as well as Hillary's backers in the cIa and fbI.

The Saudis screwed up and they will get their comeuppance it seems. Russia might be able to wiggle their way into the middle then, filling the vacuum of uncle Sam at the circle jerk. The Saudis will have to curtail their operation in Yemen and no quarter will be given to wahhabi-terrorists by ksa who wish retribution against Russia. Win-win.

m , Oct 23, 2018 3:11:58 PM | link

Interesting take by Ghassan Kadi on the Saker's blog, for those who still sense a conspiracy in this. https://thesaker.is/insights-into-the-khashoggi-ordeal-who-and-why/ Goes back to this 'fiance', but adds Gullen to the mix and makes Erdy out to be an instigator. Good to have a viewpoint from someone who has lived in Sawdi land.

[Oct 24, 2018] 10-3-18 Gareth Porter on Trump and the American Empire

Notable quotes:
"... Manufactured Crisis: The Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare ..."
"... This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: Kesslyn Runs , by Charles Featherstone; NoDev NoOps NoIT , by Hussein Badakhchani; The War State , by Mike Swanson; WallStreetWindow.com ; Roberts and Roberts Brokerage Inc. ; Zen Cash ; Tom Woods' Liberty Classroom ; ExpandDesigns.com/Scott ; and TheBumperSticker.com . ..."
Oct 08, 2018 | libertarianinstitute.org

Gareth Porter is interviewed on his article for Truthdig, " Can Trump Take Down the American Empire? " Porter talks about revelations in the Bob Woodward book "Fear", about the Trump presidency, and how they may pertain to the American Empire. Porter also talks about the Trump presidency, North Korea, and Iran.

Gareth Porter is an investigative historian and journalist on the national security state, and author of Manufactured Crisis: The Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare . Follow him on Twitter @GarethPorter and listen to Gareth's previous appearances on the Scott Horton Show.

This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: Kesslyn Runs , by Charles Featherstone; NoDev NoOps NoIT , by Hussein Badakhchani; The War State , by Mike Swanson; WallStreetWindow.com ; Roberts and Roberts Brokerage Inc. ; Zen Cash ; Tom Woods' Liberty Classroom ; ExpandDesigns.com/Scott ; and TheBumperSticker.com .

[Oct 23, 2018] Insights Into The Khashoggi Ordeal; Who And Why by Ghassan Kadi

This is the same turkey in which Russian ambassador was gunned down... Russian ambassador shot dead in Ankara gallery Reuters (Dec 19, 2016)
Notable quotes:
"... As a Muslim, Mr. Khashoggi could have gone to any country that upholds Muslim marriage rites and remarried without having to formally divorce his first wife, and then go to America and live with his "new wife" under the guise of a de-facto relationship. So why would he risk his life and walk into a potential death trap? ..."
"... Logic stipulates that Khashoggi entered the Consulate after he was given vehement assurances that his safety was guaranteed by the Saudi Crown. He would have never entered the Consulate had he not been given this assurance. ..."
"... Hatice Cengiz (Turkish for Khadijeh Jengiz) it is claimed, raised the first alarm for Khashoggi's disappearance, announcing at the same time that she is/was his fiancée. But that latter announcement of hers came as a surprise even to Khashoggi's own family. ..."
"... Some reports allege that Hatice has had a colourful history, including Mossad training https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SPuKo7WMSA&feature=youtu.be . The same YouTube alleges that she was a Gülenist and was arrested by Erdogan and released under the condition that she works for his security apparatus in order to guarantee her freedom. If such is the case, do we know if she has been also blackmailed in exchange for security of family members, loved ones, property etc? We don't know. ..."
"... In reality, irrespective of what his family members are saying now, Khashoggi has never introduced her to the world as his fiancée; and this is fact. So was she his fiancée? It is at least possible that she wasn't? So, who was she to Khashoggi and what role did she possibly play? ..."
"... Gülen is falling out of America's favour as he seems to have outlived his use-by date, and the Gülenist movement would be in dire need of a new benefactor. ..."
"... Cengiz, a former Gülenist, released on the above-mentioned conditions and possible threats, might have introduced herself to Khashoggi as an undercover Gülenist, and she had a history to support her claim. Being a former Gülenist, she might have indeed kept a foot in the Gülenist camp, and with the diminishing support of the American Government to the Gulenist movement, she might have been recruited to source finance. The Gülenists might have eyed Saudi Arabia to take this role, and as the rift between the Saudi royals and Erdogan intensified after their former joint effort to topple the legitimate secular government of Syria ..."
"... MBS himself would have inadvertently invited the Gülenists to approach him when he announced, back in March 2018 during a visit to the Coptic Pope Tawadros II in Egypt, that the triangle of evil in the Middle East is comprised of Iran, Islamist extremists groups and Turkey, and, in naming Turkey, he obviously meant Erdogan personally. ..."
"... With the Saudi-led Wahhabi version of fundamentalist Islam competing with the Muslim Brotherhood side, politically and militarily headed by Erdogan, it is not far-fetched to believe that either party is conspiring to topple the other. ..."
"... It is highly likely that Saudi officials had several contingency plans for Khashoggi's visit; depending on its outcome and the information that he had to offer. Those plans might have included giving him a wide range of treatments, ranging from a red carpet reception in Saudi Arabia, to beheading and dismembering him within the Consulate's grounds. ..."
"... It is possible that the Saudi officials in Turkey have had their own contacts with the Gülenists prior to the supposed ground-breaking visit of Khashoggi. In such a case, if the story Khashoggi may have offered did not fall in line with the story the Saudi's already know, then Khashoggi would have automatically been branded as suspicious and his safe entry would have been revoked. In such a case, he would have walked into his own trap. ..."
"... If any of the above scenarios are accurate, then the role of Erdogan in this story is not that of a scavenger who capitalized on the rift generated between the Saudis and America, but that he was instrumental in conjuring up and orchestrating the whole drama. Erdogan might have subjected the Saudi Government to the Gülen litmus test, and in such a case, the victim is Saudi Arabia and the scavenger is America seeking silence money in lieu of continued protection of Saudi interests. ..."
"... In all of the above scenarios, Khashoggi would have been driven into the trap by his alleged fiancée and had his impunity revoked by the Saudi officials because he failed the test. ..."
"... Most likely, Khashoggi was after amnesty from the Saudi Crown, and this would be a safety concern not only for Khashoggi himself, but also for his family that continued to live in Saudi Arabia ..."
"... Arabic media are inundated with posts and YouTube videos that are very damning of Hatice Cengiz ..."
"... . In reality however, her sudden emergence as Khashoggi's "fiancée", the fact that she allegedly waited for nearly 24 hours before reporting his disappearance and her personal, professional and political history are all factors that cast much doubt about her innocence and instead, portray her as a possible key element in the series of events that led to the disappearance of Khashoggi. ..."
"... And if Trump is seizing the opportunity to grab MBS, and this time he will be grabbing by the wallet, if Erdogan smells a hint of preparedness of MBS to support Gülen, then Erdogan would want MBS's wallet and head. Any whichever way, the silver lining of this story is that for once, Saudi Arabia is finally running for cover. Few around the world will give this brutal royal family any sympathy. ..."
"... MBS has committed heinous war crimes in Yemen and has made huge errors of judgment with regard to Syria and Qatar. He made many enemies, and it seems that Erdogan is out to get him. ..."
"... It does seem possible that the Assad-must-go curse has reached the neck of the Saudi throne ..."
"... Interestingly enough apparently K handed his two phones to fiancée before he went in ..any good journalist would have left a cache somewhere to be opened incase of certain events?????? ..."
"... why enter the consulate in Turkey? And, not in USA? And, why not the Embassy as the Ambassador has more power, than the Consular? Also, both the Muslim Brotherhood have Wahhabism have been friends for ages, as their theology is very similar with each other. And, if fact Erdogan is not Muslim Brotherhood but a Sufi. ..."
"... I've read several articles about Khashoggi and my feeling right now is everyone is lying, including B and Ghassan Kadi. ..."
"... Seems to me that also the Old US Establishment, along with the EU Establishment, both anti-Trump, never wanted MbS in the first place. Israel, and therefore Trump, are happy with MbS but a lot of people would like to see him gone and get the old "safe" gang back (who paid handsome bribes/salaries for decades). MbS is similar to Trump, way too impulsive, unpredictable and manic, and a special kind of crazy on top to make for a reliable partner in crime. ..."
"... The Establishment wants the Saudis to sell them their oil, then to recycle the money back into their economies. They'd prefer that they do this quietly, without any big fuss. They can get rich doing so, but they shouldn't disrupt the world. And this is the role that the Saudis have played mostly for the last 60-70 years. ..."
"... Until MbS. So yes, it is conceivable that some other powerful people are getting a bit tired of him. The same powerful people who really don't want the disruption of the world that a Shiite-Sunni war over the oil fields would cause. The same powerful friends who are also worried about Trump upsetting apple carts. Perhaps these powerful people are moving against a war, which means against Trump on Iran, and against MbS if they feel he keeps stirring things up too much. ..."
"... One problem throughout this whole affair is that I don't believe the Turks. Erdogon shutdown or converted the independent media that they once had. And in a case like this, all information comes from the government anyways. The Sauds have been rightly attacked for changing their story. But the Turks have been too. I've gotten the feeling that the 'news' reports from Turkish leaks (supposedly) have simply been the plot lines of various Hollywood movies. The body was cut up (with a chainsaw? like in Texas?), the body was dissolved in acid, the killers watched on Skype (always good to get that hip tech tie-in to a story). It can't all be true. ..."
"... Like The Salisbury Affair, The Case of the Disappearing Lover in Instanbul simply is going to have to be one to sit back and wait and see what if anything actually emerges as the truth. ..."
"... Seems pretty clueless to drop the bits in a well. Maybe the "local contact" was actually the consul, suggesting: Hey, I have an idea! How about dropping the body parts down the well? ..."
"... That is about the dumbest thing I have heard yet in the Story of K. Except, the idea of the body double. The people who thought up the body double idea must be the same Einsteins who figured the well in the consul's garden was a solution to disposal. Keystone Konsul. ..."
"... That bit of imagination leads to the idea that one of Khashoggi's last thoughts was "shit, I knew getting married again was a bad idea." ..."
"... The interesting thing was watching the US media go crazy about this. I kept thinking how different was this from Obama ordering Anwar Al-Awaki executed by drone strike? Al-Awaki received no trial, or even some kind of demand. Obama and his team just had him executed. So MBS is a horrible monster for doing exactly what Obama did. ..."
"... Khashoggi seemed to be working to "end dictatorship" and spread "free speech," democracy, voting, opinion polls, feminism, gender theory, lgbt washrooms, all that. All the great stuff of democracy. Worked out great in Sweden, why not Saudi Arabia? ..."
"... It was Khashoggi beating the Assad must go drum. The last Saudi represented on this site said Assad is harmless as long as he understands Saudi interests exist in Syria. Not ideal, but a better offer than London's. Further, the dead "journalist" believed Syria should be divided, and worse, that we should now act as if Assad is already gone ..."
"... Seems to come down to him being lied to, conn'd or lured into the consulate and his death. Then we come to the whole other point of why on earth did the Saudis use their consulate as an assassination killing ground? ..."
"... Governments killing people within their consulates is very rare. For reasons that are now very obvious, if they weren't before. ..."
"... The pundits who say MBS wanted to send a message set off alarms in my brain. Because that is exactly the reason we are supposed to believe that Putin uses all sorts of bizarre assasination methods that are obviously traced back to him. He wants to send a message. Yeah, right. And that's why they brought a bleep-storm of trouble down on top of their heads. To send a message? ..."
Oct 23, 2018 | thesaker.is

­ When I worked and lived in Saudi Arabia, one of the first things I learnt was that the company I worked for had a fulltime employee with the job description of "Mu'aqeb". The best translation of this title is "expeditor". This man was in charge of every matter that had to do with dealing with government. He is the one who takes one's passport and sees that a Saudi "Iquama" (temporary certificate of residence) is produced. He is the one who renews driving licenses. He is the one that does the necessary paperwork to grant employees exit and re-entry visas when they go away on holidays. He even applies on one's behalf for visas to visit other countries. He even paid water and electricity bills. He did it all, and of course, on top of his salary, he expected a present from employees on their return to work from holidays, and some employees would risk big penalties smuggling in Playboy magazines to reward him with. But the company I worked for was not alone in this regard; all other companies had their own "Mu'aqeb".

It is against the Saudi psyche, culture and "pride" to go to a government office, wait in line and make an application for anything. Not even uneducated poor Saudis are accustomed to go through the rigmarole of government red-tape and routine.

Mr. Khashoggi was from the upper crust, and it is highly doubtful that he would have been willing and prepared to physically enter the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul seeking an official document.

Furthermore and more importantly, Mr. Khashoggi had a better reason not to enter any Saudi territory. Even though some recent reports portray him as a Wahhabi in disguise among other things, the man had nonetheless made some serious anti-MBS (Mohamed bin Salman) statements https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jamal-khashoggi-saudi-journalist-called-saudi-arabia-crown-prince-mohammed-bin-salmans-behavior-in-foreign-policy-impulsive-2017/

Jamal Khashoggi was no fool. He knew the modus operandi of the Saudi Government too well. He knew that what he had said was tantamount to a death sentence in the brutal Kingdom of Sand. So what incited him to walk into the Consulate? To receive a divorce certificate so he could remarry as the reports are trying to make us believe? Not a chance.

But this is not all. As a Muslim, Mr. Khashoggi could have gone to any country that upholds Muslim marriage rites and remarried without having to formally divorce his first wife, and then go to America and live with his "new wife" under the guise of a de-facto relationship. So why would he risk his life and walk into a potential death trap?

Logic stipulates that Khashoggi entered the Consulate after he was given vehement assurances that his safety was guaranteed by the Saudi Crown. He would have never entered the Consulate had he not been given this assurance.

But why would the Saudi Government give him this assurance even though he had been very critical of MBS? A good question.

Once again, a logical hypothetical answer to this question could be that Khashoggi had some important meeting with a high ranking Saudi official to discuss some issues of serious importance, and this normally means that he had some classified information to pass on to the Saudi Government; important enough that the Saudi Crown was prepared to set aside Khashoggi's recent history in exchange of this information.

If we try to connect more dots in a speculative but rational manner, the story can easily become more interesting.

Hatice Cengiz (Turkish for Khadijeh Jengiz) it is claimed, raised the first alarm for Khashoggi's disappearance, announcing at the same time that she is/was his fiancée. But that latter announcement of hers came as a surprise even to Khashoggi's own family.

Not much is said and speculated about Hatice in the West, but she is definitely making some headlines in the Arab World, especially on media controlled and sponsored by Saudi Arabia. To this effect, and because the Saudi neck is on the chopping board, it is possible that for the first time ever perhaps, the Saudis are telling the truth.

But the Saudis are the boys who cried wolf, and no one will ever believe them. But, let us explore how they might have got themselves into this bind.

As we connect the dots, we speculate as follows:

Some reports allege that Hatice has had a colourful history, including Mossad training https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SPuKo7WMSA&feature=youtu.be . The same YouTube alleges that she was a Gülenist and was arrested by Erdogan and released under the condition that she works for his security apparatus in order to guarantee her freedom. If such is the case, do we know if she has been also blackmailed in exchange for security of family members, loved ones, property etc? We don't know.

It has also been reported that Jamal Khashoggi met her only as early as May 2018 and later introduced her as an expert on Omani history and politics. In reality, irrespective of what his family members are saying now, Khashoggi has never introduced her to the world as his fiancée; and this is fact. So was she his fiancée? It is at least possible that she wasn't? So, who was she to Khashoggi and what role did she possibly play?

The following speculation cannot be proved, but it makes sense:

To explain what a Gülenist is for the benefit of the reader who is unaware of this term, Erdogan blamed former friend and ally Fethullah Gülen for the failed coup attempt of July 2016 and persecuted his followers, putting tens of thousands of them in jail. Erdogan's relationship with America was already deteriorating at that time because of America's support to Syrian Kurds, and to add to Erdogan's woes, America was and continues to give Gülen a safe haven despite many requests by Erdogan to have him extradited to Turkey to face trial. But Gülen is falling out of America's favour as he seems to have outlived his use-by date, and the Gülenist movement would be in dire need of a new benefactor.

Cengiz, a former Gülenist, released on the above-mentioned conditions and possible threats, might have introduced herself to Khashoggi as an undercover Gülenist, and she had a history to support her claim. Being a former Gülenist, she might have indeed kept a foot in the Gülenist camp, and with the diminishing support of the American Government to the Gulenist movement, she might have been recruited to source finance. The Gülenists might have eyed Saudi Arabia to take this role, and as the rift between the Saudi royals and Erdogan intensified after their former joint effort to topple the legitimate secular government of Syria

The Gülenists would have found in Al-Saud what represents an enemy of an enemy, and they had to find a way to seek Saudi support against Erdogan. MBS himself would have inadvertently invited the Gülenists to approach him when he announced, back in March 2018 during a visit to the Coptic Pope Tawadros II in Egypt, that the triangle of evil in the Middle East is comprised of Iran, Islamist extremists groups and Turkey, and, in naming Turkey, he obviously meant Erdogan personally. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/03/08/saudi-crown-prince-sees-a-new-axis-of-evil-in-the-middle-east/

Khashoggi, with his expansive connections, looked like a good candidate to introduce the would-be new partners and broker a deal between them.

Back to what may have incited Khashoggi to enter the Saudi Consulate and to why the Saudi Government would have, in that case, given him a safe entry despite his history. Possibly, Khashoggi believed that he had a "big story" to relay to the Saudi Government; one that most likely exposed big time anti-Saudi dirt about Erdogan.

With the Saudi-led Wahhabi version of fundamentalist Islam competing with the Muslim Brotherhood side, politically and militarily headed by Erdogan, it is not far-fetched to believe that either party is conspiring to topple the other. If Khashoggi had a story to this effect, even if it was fake but credible enough for him to believe, it would have given him the impetus to seek an audience at the Saudi Consulate and hence an expectation for the Consulate to positively reciprocate. In reality, given the history and culture involved, it is hard to fathom that any scenario short of this one would have given either Khashoggi and/or the Saudi officials enough reasons to meet in the manner and place they did.

It is highly likely that Saudi officials had several contingency plans for Khashoggi's visit; depending on its outcome and the information that he had to offer. Those plans might have included giving him a wide range of treatments, ranging from a red carpet reception in Saudi Arabia, to beheading and dismembering him within the Consulate's grounds. What happened after Khashoggi entered the precinct of the Consulate is fairly muddy and hard to speculate on. If the above speculations thus far have been accurate, then these are the possible scenarios that followed the fateful CCTV coverage of Khashoggi's entry to the Consulate:

1. It is possible that the Saudi officials in Turkey have had their own contacts with the Gülenists prior to the supposed ground-breaking visit of Khashoggi. In such a case, if the story Khashoggi may have offered did not fall in line with the story the Saudi's already know, then Khashoggi would have automatically been branded as suspicious and his safe entry would have been revoked. In such a case, he would have walked into his own trap.

2. On the other hand, if Khashoggi indeed gave Saudi authorities vital information, so vital that it clearly is vehemently pro-Gülen, and as Gülen is no longer an American favourite, then upon his return to America he may have become a Saudi liability that can potentially muddy the Saudi-American waters that the Saudis desperately try to keep clear. In such an instance, it would be opportune for the Saudis to finish him off before he could return to America.

3. A third possibility is that some Saudi officials already working covertly with Gülen saw in Khashoggi an already persona non grata, a dangerous Erdogan implant and decided to take action against him.

If any of the above scenarios are accurate, then the role of Erdogan in this story is not that of a scavenger who capitalized on the rift generated between the Saudis and America, but that he was instrumental in conjuring up and orchestrating the whole drama. Erdogan might have subjected the Saudi Government to the Gülen litmus test, and in such a case, the victim is Saudi Arabia and the scavenger is America seeking silence money in lieu of continued protection of Saudi interests.

In all of the above scenarios, Khashoggi would have been driven into the trap by his alleged fiancée and had his impunity revoked by the Saudi officials because he failed the test.

But what triggered him off personally to walk into this possible trap? What was in it for him? Definitely not divorce documents. Most likely, Khashoggi was after amnesty from the Saudi Crown, and this would be a safety concern not only for Khashoggi himself, but also for his family that continued to live in Saudi Arabia. He may well have thought that by providing vital and sensitive information to his government, his previous "sins" would be set aside and he would be treated as a hero, his family would feel safe, despite that fact that he has criticized the Crown Prince in the past.

Arabic media are inundated with posts and YouTube videos that are very damning of Hatice Cengiz. Most of them perhaps are Saudi propaganda and should not be taken without a grain of salt. In reality however, her sudden emergence as Khashoggi's "fiancée", the fact that she allegedly waited for nearly 24 hours before reporting his disappearance and her personal, professional and political history are all factors that cast much doubt about her innocence and instead, portray her as a possible key element in the series of events that led to the disappearance of Khashoggi.

Furthermore, why would a person in her position make rules and conditions about meeting the President of the United States of America, even if this President is Donald Trump? ( Jamal Khashoggi's fiancee I will only visit Trump if he takes action World news The Guardian ) How many people in history have refused the invitation of American Presidents? Who does she think she is or who is she trying to portray herself as?

And if Trump is seizing the opportunity to grab MBS, and this time he will be grabbing by the wallet, if Erdogan smells a hint of preparedness of MBS to support Gülen, then Erdogan would want MBS's wallet and head. Any whichever way, the silver lining of this story is that for once, Saudi Arabia is finally running for cover. Few around the world will give this brutal royal family any sympathy.

There are other rumors spreading in the Arab world now alluding to the removal of MBS from office and passing over the reins to his brother. MBS has committed heinous war crimes in Yemen and has made huge errors of judgment with regard to Syria and Qatar. He made many enemies, and it seems that Erdogan is out to get him.

It does seem possible that the Assad-must-go curse has reached the neck of the Saudi throne.

JJ on October 23, 2018 , · at 11:22 am EST/EDT

https://www.rt.com/news/442023-khashoggis-body-parts-found/

Allegedly?

Erdogan presentation to his party today too most media seemingly reporting deep international concern and hubris from arms suppliers... Interestingly enough apparently K handed his two phones to fiancée before he went in ..any good journalist would have left a cache somewhere to be opened incase of certain events??????
No confirmation of victims "screams", etc although a there is one report he was held in a stranglehold which would prevent such vocalisation?

Talha on October 23, 2018 , · at 12:28 pm EST/EDT
You left the elephant out of the room. You are right that Jamal Khashoggi had no need to enter the consulate for his divorce, and you suggested the reason being quid pro quo. But why enter the consulate in Turkey? And, not in USA? And, why not the Embassy as the Ambassador has more power, than the Consular? Also, both the Muslim Brotherhood have Wahhabism have been friends for ages, as their theology is very similar with each other. And, if fact Erdogan is not Muslim Brotherhood but a Sufi.

So, why did you leave out the elephant in the room, Israel. With the fall of Saudi Arabia, Israel has more to loose and Iran has more to gain.

Talha

Zico the musketeer on October 23, 2018 , · at 3:48 pm EST/EDT
I was waiting for this article. Looks B is not buying this version.

"There seem to be a lot of conspiracy theories being weaved around the case. Some of them were mentioned in the comments here. I don't buy it. Turkey did not arrange the incident. I see no sign that the U.S., Israel, Qatar or the UAE had a hand in this. This was a very stupid crime committed by Mohammad bin Salman. Or even worse, a mistake. The wannabe-sultan Erdogan is a crafty politician. He is simply riding the wave."
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/10/how-will-caligula-fall.html#more

I've read several articles about Khashoggi and my feeling right now is everyone is lying, including B and Ghassan Kadi. (wrote this article. Mod.)

B ignores all said by Ghassan Kadi . And Ghassan Kadi is being soft on SA cuz Russian wants it. SA is a prize big enough to the bear get out of his cave. Deep State set the trap and SA fell like a kid cuz they are very predictable. They simply kill a lot! Everybody is trying to profit and only one thing is sure about all this: we will never know!

Christian W on October 23, 2018 , · at 12:36 pm EST/EDT
Seems to me that also the Old US Establishment, along with the EU Establishment, both anti-Trump, never wanted MbS in the first place. Israel, and therefore Trump, are happy with MbS but a lot of people would like to see him gone and get the old "safe" gang back (who paid handsome bribes/salaries for decades). MbS is similar to Trump, way too impulsive, unpredictable and manic, and a special kind of crazy on top to make for a reliable partner in crime.
Talks-to-Dawgs on October 23, 2018 , · at 3:41 pm EST/EDT
The Establishment wants the Saudis to sell them their oil, then to recycle the money back into their economies. They'd prefer that they do this quietly, without any big fuss. They can get rich doing so, but they shouldn't disrupt the world. And this is the role that the Saudis have played mostly for the last 60-70 years.

Until MbS. So yes, it is conceivable that some other powerful people are getting a bit tired of him. The same powerful people who really don't want the disruption of the world that a Shiite-Sunni war over the oil fields would cause. The same powerful friends who are also worried about Trump upsetting apple carts. Perhaps these powerful people are moving against a war, which means against Trump on Iran, and against MbS if they feel he keeps stirring things up too much.

Anonymous on October 23, 2018 , · at 2:48 pm EST/EDT
One problem throughout this whole affair is that I don't believe the Turks. Erdogon shutdown or converted the independent media that they once had. And in a case like this, all information comes from the government anyways. The Sauds have been rightly attacked for changing their story. But the Turks have been too. I've gotten the feeling that the 'news' reports from Turkish leaks (supposedly) have simply been the plot lines of various Hollywood movies. The body was cut up (with a chainsaw? like in Texas?), the body was dissolved in acid, the killers watched on Skype (always good to get that hip tech tie-in to a story). It can't all be true.

To some extant, I get the feeling I'm watching Qatar money buying news stories to get back at the Sauds. If so, good for them.

Like The Salisbury Affair, The Case of the Disappearing Lover in Instanbul simply is going to have to be one to sit back and wait and see what if anything actually emerges as the truth.

JJ on October 23, 2018 , · at 5:44 pm EST/EDT
Could not be sulphuric acid the "traditional acid" for dissolving bodies you would need more than 25 litres the most dangerous lethal fumes and smell would have filled the whole building which would have been contaminated other people choking with deadly fumes. How to get acid in and out/disposed ..people in PPE hosing down etc etc
Katherine on October 23, 2018 , · at 6:41 pm EST/EDT
I actually thought the "local contact" who supposed disposed of the body took it rolled up in a rug and cremated it. Seems pretty clueless to drop the bits in a well. Maybe the "local contact" was actually the consul, suggesting: Hey, I have an idea! How about dropping the body parts down the well?

That is about the dumbest thing I have heard yet in the Story of K. Except, the idea of the body double. The people who thought up the body double idea must be the same Einsteins who figured the well in the consul's garden was a solution to disposal. Keystone Konsul.

Katherine

Anonymous on October 23, 2018 , · at 2:53 pm EST/EDT
Maybe I'm being sexist, but I imagine a discussion between the couple, with the future wife saying she wants to get married, while the future husband is saying "Ah, aren't things great now? Why change it? We can just live together." That bit of imagination leads to the idea that one of Khashoggi's last thoughts was "shit, I knew getting married again was a bad idea."
John Neal Spangler on October 23, 2018 , · at 3:01 pm EST/EDT
The interesting thing was watching the US media go crazy about this. I kept thinking how different was this from Obama ordering Anwar Al-Awaki executed by drone strike? Al-Awaki received no trial, or even some kind of demand. Obama and his team just had him executed. So MBS is a horrible monster for doing exactly what Obama did.
Katherine on October 23, 2018 , · at 6:42 pm EST/EDT
And not to forget Assange. Still fighting for his freedom and his life. Elephant in the newsroom.

Katherine

Paul on October 23, 2018 , · at 3:24 pm EST/EDT
Khashoggi seemed to be working to "end dictatorship" and spread "free speech," democracy, voting, opinion polls, feminism, gender theory, lgbt washrooms, all that. All the great stuff of democracy. Worked out great in Sweden, why not Saudi Arabia?

All I'm getting out of this article is a desire to see the house of Saud fall. Plus some dense little leaguer stuff about a marriage or something. Come on!

It was Khashoggi beating the Assad must go drum. The last Saudi represented on this site said Assad is harmless as long as he understands Saudi interests exist in Syria. Not ideal, but a better offer than London's. Further, the dead "journalist" believed Syria should be divided, and worse, that we should now act as if Assad is already gone – said the guy who got sawed up and buried under a flower bed.

Anonymous on October 23, 2018 , · at 3:32 pm EST/EDT
Seems to come down to him being lied to, conn'd or lured into the consulate and his death. Then we come to the whole other point of why on earth did the Saudis use their consulate as an assassination killing ground? Governments wanting to kill people is nothing new. That's what governments do. Governments killing people within their consulates is very rare. For reasons that are now very obvious, if they weren't before.

The pundits who say MBS wanted to send a message set off alarms in my brain. Because that is exactly the reason we are supposed to believe that Putin uses all sorts of bizarre assasination methods that are obviously traced back to him. He wants to send a message. Yeah, right. And that's why they brought a bleep-storm of trouble down on top of their heads. To send a message?

Email is cheaper. And if someone is dead from methods not traced back to you, then someone else goes and whispers the message into the few ears you want to hear it, that is a lot more effective than either Novachuk in a park or a bloody murder in a consulate.

Anonymous on October 23, 2018 , · at 4:15 pm EST/EDT
Israel/US/Saudi tried to pass Turkey off as the sole sponsor and creator of ISIS. It was an important player, certainly, largely because of its geographic location. So a bit of revenge?

As with all these events, there will be multiple facets from the various actors, some mutually exclusive.

The only thing that is certain so far is the west's concern for Saudi's alleged execution of a 'journalist' is rank hypocrisy.

pogohere on October 23, 2018 , · at 4:54 pm EST/EDT
I had some trouble with the syntax here:

"2. On the other hand, if Khashoggi indeed gave Saudi authorities vital information, so vital that it clearly is vehemently pro-Gülen, and as Gülen is no longer an American favourite, then upon his return to America he may have become a Saudi liability that can potentially muddy the Saudi-American waters that the Saudis desperately try to keep clear. In such an instance, it would be opportune for the Saudis to finish him off before he could return to America."

The SA gang would want to protect the "vital" . . . pro-Gulan" information obtained from K because that information would have given the SA gang an advantage in dealing with America because a K running free could expose SA sources and knowledge, so he had to be eliminated. (??)

Or, Erdogan knows via Cengiz that K believes he can facilitate a deal between Gulan and SA to the detriment of Turkey, in order that K can protect his family in SA. But SA already knows somehow that K is in effect an agent for SA's enemy Erdogan and is peddling polyester rugs, that K's story is donkey doo, so SA believes K is betraying SA with said donkey doo, so out comes the Popeil's Pocket Body Dismemberer. ??

". . . should not be taken for (without) a grain of salt." ??

As for the conflict between the Muslim Brotherhood and SA's Wahabbists, it strikes me that the custodianship of the two holy mosques in SA, or better said the moral leadership role that said literal custodianship confers could be in contention if Erdogan can demonstrate to his immense egoic neo-Ottoman satisfaction belongs to Turkey under his direction.

It seems no matter who "wins" every one of the players loses credibility any way this plays out.

Katherine on October 23, 2018 , · at 6:48 pm EST/EDT
"contention if Erdogan can demonstrate to his immense egoic neo-Ottoman satisfaction belongs to Turkey under his direction."

This was my main takeaway from Erd's address to Parliament. The bit about the Saudis as protectors of the holy cities. Like, maybe not. LIke, look at the mess they have made.

They are clearly incompetent and have no standing as protectors of holy sites. Hmm, so who would be a better "protector"? Could it be the one who arrogates to himself the authority to call out false 'protectors" by any chance?

Katherine

Katherine

Uncle Bob on October 23, 2018 , · at 5:47 pm EST/EDT
Probably this murder will end with nothing more than "The Saudis are really evil. Who didn't already know that". But lets look at what we do know about the killing (and what is rumored in news reports).

Before Khashoggi goes into for the meeting a team of 15 Saudi agents, several of them men close to MBS arrive from Saudi Arabia and go into the building. Including among them an autopsy expert with a "bonesaw". One of them is a body double for Khashoggi and carries with him a fake beard to make his resemblance to Khashoggi even stronger. An hour or so later that man leaves the building wearing Khashoggi's clothes and sunglasses. And the fake beard. So that the CCTV might record him as Khashoggi.

RT reports that minutes before the killing Khashoggi talks on the phone to MBS. Its thought that MSB wants Khashoggi to agree to return to Saudi Arabia, Khashoggi refuses. Right after that Khashoggi is killed and dismembered. The Turkish press is now reporting that parts of Khashoggi's remains have been found in a well at the Saudi Consuls official residence. I'd say with that kind of evidence anyone would have to be braindead (or just not willing to admit the truth for political reasons), to not conclude MBS is up to his beard in this conspiracy to commit murder.

One question being asked is why would MBS risk it. But I think the answer is simple. He believes he is untouchable and can do whatever he wants (the track record for that is pretty good for him until now, and maybe now as well). He took power in Saudi Arabia from his cousins, and got away with it. He starts and conducts a bloody war against Yemen, and isn't punished. He holds hostage dozens of the wealthiest Saudis and tortures them for large chunks of their wealth. And gets away with it. He kidnaps the Lebanese PM, and forces him to resign (at least for a while). And he gets no punishment even for that. He threatens Qatar with war, closes the border. And still no punishment. He funds terrorists all over the Middle East. And yet again no punishment. So why on earth would he pause at murdering a "pain in the a$$" Saudi dissident who dares to defy him. He may have gone a "bridge too far" this time. But his record points to his surviving this time too (hopefully not).

Katherine on October 23, 2018 , · at 7:49 pm EST/EDT
Has anyone commented of the features of this grisly murder that make it look like some kind of ritual murder? They could have just stabbed or strangled him or druged him. Bu why cut off fingers? Symbolism? Why deface facial features? Was he drawn and quartered like traitors in medieval Europe? Or was it renaissance Europe?
And, what happened to all the blood? How did they keep it off the clothing that the body double then donned?

Just wondering what kind of "message" K's murder was designed to send to him, as he died. Or, what kind of cultic weirdness was being provided for bin Salman to feel satisfaction at the manner of the death?

Katherine

[Oct 23, 2018] Bezos blog (Washington Post) does not love Saudi Arabia. Who knew?

It looks like CIA turned on MBS and want to replace him.
Oct 23, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

"The Saudis say they are countering Iran, which backs the Houthis. But the Houthis are an indigenous group with legitimate grievances, and the war has only enhanced Iranian influence . As has been obvious for some time, the only solution is a negotiated settlement. But the Saudis have done their best to sabotage a U.N.-led peace process. Talks planned for Geneva in September failed when Saudi leaders would not grant safe travel guarantees to Houthi leaders." Bezos' editorial board at WaPo

---------------

Beneath the largely specious argument that Saudi Arabia has the US by the cojones economically lies the true factor that has caused the two countries to be glued together.

This factor is the Israeli success in convincing the US government, and more importantly, the American people, that Iran is a deadly enemy, a menace to the entire world, a reincarnation of Nazi Germany, and that Saudi Arabia, a country dedicated to medieval methods of operation, is an indispensable ally in a struggle to save the world from Iran. The successful effort to convince us of the reality of the Iranian menace reflects the previous successful campaign to convince us all that Iraq was also Nazi Germany come again.

The Iran information operation was probably conceived at the Moshe Dayan Center or some other Israeli think tank. and then passed on in the form of learned papers and conferences to the Foreign Ministry, the Mossad and the IDF. After adoption as government policy the Foreign ministry and Zionist organizations closely linked to media ownership in the US and Europe were tasked for dissemination of the propaganda themes involved. This has been a brilliantly executed plan. The obvious fact that Iran is not presently a threat to the US has had little effect in countering this propaganda achievement.

Last Saturday morning, the Philadelphia based commentator Michael Smerconish openly asked on his popular talk show why it is that US policy favors the Sunni Muslims over the Shia. i.e., Saudi Arabia over Iran. To hear that was for me a first. This was an obvious defiance of the received wisdom of the age. I can only hope that the man does not lose his show.

It is a great irony that the barbaric murder of a personally rather unpleasant but defiant exiled journalist has caused re-examination of the basis and wisdom of giving strategic protection to a family run dictatorship. pl

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/this-is-the-first-step-to-recalibrating-us-saudi-relations/2018/10/22/fb9eb598-d61f-11e8-a10f-b51546b10756_story.html?utm_term=.f3a1169429e7

Posted at 09:32 AM in Current Affairs , Media , Middle East , Saudi Arabia | Permalink | 3 Comment

TTG , 3 hours ago

Erdogan called the Khashoggi murder brutal and premeditated, but did not reveal any damning audio or video evidence. Elijah Magnier surmises Erdogan extracted a heavy payment from both the Saudis and the Americans in exchange for his relative silence. We shall see if the economic pressure on Turkey dissipates in the coming days and weeks.

It appears the central pillar of the Borg creed, so eloquently and precisely described here by Colonel Lang, will survive this bout of heretical thinking. Will journalists and other members of the press be able to keep challenging the Borg? With Trump so thoroughly assimilated into the Borg, will the "resistance" keep the issue of Saudi perfidy alive? I have my doubts. The Israeli information operations machine is a juggernaut. Few have the stamina and will to resist it. But it is a fight worth fighting.

Onslaw , 5 hours ago
Too little, too late to derail this Zioconned merdias campaign. Soon enough kashoggi will be forgotten and the looney toons will be back in force...
jnewman , 6 hours ago
There are some interesting threads to chew on in this:
https://off-guardian.org/20...

[Oct 23, 2018] Inconvenient Thoughts on Cold War and Other News by Stephen F. Cohen

Oct 17, 2018 | www.thenation.com

Stephen F. Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian Studies and politics at Princeton and NYU, and John Batchelor continue their (usually) weekly discussions of the new US-Russian Cold War. (Previous installments, now in their fifth year, are at TheNation.com). Cohen comments on the following subjects currently in the news:

1. National intelligence agencies have long played major roles, often not entirely visible, in international politics. They are doing so again today, as is evident in several countries, from Russiagate in the United States and the murky Skripal assassination attempt in the UK to the apparent murder of Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Turkey. Leaving aside what President Obama knew about Russiagate allegations against Donald Trump and when he knew it, the question arises as to whether these operations were ordered by President Putin and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) or were "rogue" operations unknown in advance by the leaders and perhaps even directed against them.

There have been plenty of purely criminal and commercial "rogue" operations by intelligence agents in history, but also "rogue" ones that were purposefully political. We know, for example, that both Soviet and US intelligence agencies -- or groups of agents -- tried to disrupt the Eisenhower-Khrushchev détente of the late 1950s and early 1960s, and that some intelligence players tried to stop Khrushchev's formal recognition of West Germany, also in the early 1960s.

It is reasonable to ask, therefore, whether the attacks on Skripal and Khashoggi were "rogue" operations undertaken by political opponents of the leaders' policies at home or abroad, with the help of one or another intelligence agency or agents. Motive is a -- perhaps the -- crucial question. Why would Putin order such an operation in the UK at the very moment when his government had undertaken a major Western public-relations campaign in connection with the upcoming World Cup championship in Russia? And why would MBS risk a Khashoggi scandal as he was assiduously promoting his image abroad as an enlightened reform-minded Saudi leader?

We lack the evidence and official candor needed to study these questions, as is usually the case with covert, secretive, disinforming intelligence operations. But the questions are certainly reason enough not to rush to judgment, as many US pundits do. Saying "we do not know" may be unmarketable in today's mass-media environment, but it is honest and the right approach to potentially fruitful "analysis."

2. We do know, however, that there has been fierce opposition in the US political-media establishment to President Trump's policy of "cooperating with Russia," including in US intelligence agencies, particularly the CIA and FBI -- and at high levels of his own administration.

We might consider Nikki Haley's resignation as UN ambassador in this light. Despite the laurels heaped on her by anti-Trump media, and by Trump himself at their happy-hour farewell in the White House, Haley was not widely admired by her UN colleagues. When appointed for political reasons by Trump, she had no foreign-policy credentials or any expert knowledge of other countries or of international relations generally. Judging by her performance as ambassador, nor did she acquire much on the job, almost always reading even short comments from prepared texts.

Current Issue

View our current issue

Subscribe today and Save up to $129.

More to the point, Haley's statements regarding Russia at the UN were, more often than not, dissimilar from Trump's -- indeed, implicitly in opposition to Trump's. (She did nothing, for example, to offset charges in Washington that Trump's summit meeting with Putin in Helsinki, in July, had been "treasonous.") Who wrote these statements for her, which were very similar to statements regarding Russia that have been issued by US intelligence agencies since early 2017? It is hard to imagine that Trump was unhappy to see her go, and easier to imagine him pushing her toward the exit. A president needs a loyalist as secretary of state and at the UN. Haley's pandering remarks at the White House about Trump's family suggests some deal had been made to ease her out, with non-recrimination promises made on both sides. We will see if opponents of Trump's Russia policy can put another spokesperson at the UN.

As to which aspects of US foreign policy Trump actually controls, we might ask more urgently if he authorized, or was fully informed about, the joint US-NATO-Ukraine military air exercises that got under way over Ukraine, abutting Russia, on October 8. Moscow regards these exercises as a major "provocation," and not unreasonably.

3. What do Trump's opponents want instead of "cooperation with Russia"? A much harder line, including more "crushing" economic sanctions. Sanctions are more like temper tantrums and road rage than actual national-security policy, and thus are often counterproductive. We have some recent evidence. Russia's trade surplus has grown to more than $100 billion. World prices for Russia's primary exports, oil and gas, have grown to over $80 a unit while Moscow's federal budget is predicated on $53 a barrel. Promoters of anti-Russian sanctions gloat that they have weakened the ruble. But while imposing some hardships on ordinary citizens, the combination of high oil prices and a weaker ruble is ideal for Russian state and corporate exporters. They sell abroad for inflated foreign currency and pay their operating expenses at home in cheaper rubles. To risk a pun, they are "crushing it."

Congressional sanctions -- for exactly what is not always clear -- have helped Putin in another way. For years, he has unsuccessfully tried to get "oligarchs" to repatriate their wealth abroad. US sanctions on various "oligarchs" have persuaded them and others to begin to do so, perhaps bringing back home as much as $90 billion already in 2018.

Support Progressive Journalism

If you like this article, please give today to help fund The Nation's work.

If nothing else, these new budgetary cash flows help Putin deal with his declining popularity at home -- he still has an approval rating well above 60 percent -- due to the Kremlin's decision to raise the pension age for men and women, from 60 to 65 and from 55 to 60 respectively. The Kremlin can use the additional revenue to increase the value of pensions, supplement them with other social benefits, or to enact the age change over a longer period of time.

It appears that Congress, particularly the Senate, has no Russia policy other than sanctions. It might think hard about finding alternatives. One way to start would be with real "hearings" in place of the ritualistic affirmation of orthodox policy by "experts" that has long been its practice. There are more than a few actual specialists out there who think different approaches to Moscow are long overdue.

4. All of these dangerous developments, indeed the new US-Russian Cold War itself, are elite projects -- political, media, intelligence, etc. Voters were never really consulted. Nor do they seem to approve. In August, Gallup asked its usual sample of Americans which policy toward Russia they preferred. Fifty-seven percent wanted improved relations vs. only 36 percent who wanted a tougher US policy with more sanctions. (Meanwhile, two-thirds of Russians surveyed by an independent agency now see the United States as their country's number-one enemy, and about three-fourths view China favorably.)

Will any of the US political figures already jockeying for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020 take these realities into account?

Stephen F. CohenStephen F. Cohen is a professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University and a contributing editor of The Nation.

[Oct 23, 2018] Putin's Puppet Advances Nuclear Missile Escalations Against...Putin by Caitlin Johnstone

Oct 23, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via Medium.com,

Yesterday the news broke that Swamp Monster-In-Chief John Bolton has been pushing President Trump to withdraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, the 1988 arms control agreement between the US and the Soviet Union eliminating all missiles of a specified range from the arsenals of the two nuclear superpowers. Today, Trump has announced that he will be doing exactly as Bolton instructed.

This would be the second missile treaty between the US and Russia that America has withdrawn from since it abandoned the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002. John Bolton, an actual psychopath who Trump hired as his National Security Advisor in April, ran point on that move as well back when he was part of the increasingly indistinguishable Bush administration.

me title=

"This is why John Bolton shouldn't be allowed anywhere near US foreign policy," tweeted Senator Rand Paul in response to early forecasts of the official announcement.

"This would undo decades of bipartisan arms control dating from Reagan. We shouldn't do it. We should seek to fix any problems with this treaty and move forward."

"This is the most severe crisis in nuclear arms control since the 1980s," Malcolm Chalmers, the deputy director general of the Royal United Services Institute, told The Guardian .

"If the INF treaty collapses, and with the New Start treaty on strategic arms due to expire in 2021, the world could be left without any limits on the nuclear arsenals of nuclear states for the first time since 1972."

"A disaster for Europe," tweeted Russia-based journalist Bryan MacDonald. "The treaty removed Cruise & Pershing missiles, and Soviet ss20's from the continent. Now, you will most likely see Russia launch a major build up in Kaliningrad & the US push into Poland. So you're back to 1980, but the dividing line is closer to Moscow."

"Russia has violated the agreement. They've been violating it for many years and I don't know why President Obama didn't negotiate or pull out," Trump told reporters in Nevada.

"We're not going to let them violate a nuclear agreement and do weapons and we're not allowed to. We're the ones that have stayed in the agreement and we've honored the agreement but Russia has not unfortunately honored the agreement so we're going to terminate the agreement, we're going to pull out."

What Trump did not mention is that the US has indeed been in violation of that agreement due to steps it began taking toward the development of a new ground-launched cruise missile last year. The US claims it began taking those steps due to Russian violations of the treaty with its own arsenal, while Russia claims the US has already been in violation of multiple arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament agreements.

me title=

So, on the one front where cooler heads prevailing is quite literally the single most important thing in the world, the exact opposite is happening. Hotter, more impatient, more violent, more hawkish heads are prevailing over diplomacy and sensibility, potentially at the peril of the entire world should something unexpected go wrong as a result. This is of course coming after two years of Democratic Party loyalists attacking Trump on the basis that he has not been sufficiently hawkish toward Russia, and claiming that this is because he is Putin's puppet.

In response to this predictable escalation the path for which has been lubricated by McResistance pundits and their neoconservative allies, those very same pundits are now reacting with horror that Putin's puppet is now dangerously escalating tensions with Putin.

"BREAKING: Trump announces that the United States will pull out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty that the US has been in for 31 years," exclaimed the popular Russiagater Brian Krassenstein in a tweet that as of this writing has over 5,000 shares. "Welcome back to the Cold War. This time it's scarier And no, It's not Obama, or Hillary or the Democrat's fault. It's ALL TRUMP!"

"Hilarious to listen to all this alarmed screaming about US withdrawal from INF Treaty emanating from those who for 2 years have been demanding that Trump get tough with Russia," tweeted George Szamuely of the Global Policy Institute. "Now that they've got their arms race I hope they are pleased with themselves."

"Are those who have spent the past two years warning of a Trump-Kremlin conspiracy & cheering confrontation w/ Russia ready to shut the fuck up yet?" asked Aaron Maté, who has been among the most consistently lucid critics of the Russiagate narrative in the US.

me title=

Are they ready to shut the fuck up? That would be great, but this is just the latest escalation in a steadily escalating new cold war, and these blithering idiots didn't shut the fuck up at any of the other steps toward nuclear holocaust.

They didn't shut the fuck up after Trump's capitulation to the longstanding neoconservative agenda to arm Ukraine against Russia.

They didn't shut the fuck up after Americans killed Russians in Syria as part of their regime change occupation of that country .

They didn't shut the fuck up when this administration adopted a Nuclear Posture Review with greatly increased aggression toward Russia and blurred lines between when nuclear strikes are and are not appropriate.

They didn't shut the fuck up when Trump started sending war ships into the Black Sea "to counter Russia's increased presence there."

They didn't shut the fuck up when this administration forced RT and Sputnik to register as foreign agents.

They didn't shut the fuck up when this administration helped expand NATO with the addition of Montenegro, at the assigning of Russia hawk Kurt Volker as special representative to Ukraine, at the shutting down of a Russian consulate in San Francisco and throwing out Russian diplomats in August of last year, when Trump threw out dozens more diplomats in response to shaky claims about the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal, or when he implemented aggressive sanctions on Russian oligarchs .

Why would they shut the fuck up now?

As signs point to Mueller's investigation wrapping up in the near future without turning up a single shred of evidence that Trump colluded with the Russian government, it's time for everyone who helped advance this toxic, suicidal anti-Russia narrative to ask themselves one question: was it worth it? Was it worth it to help mount political pressure on a sitting president to continually escalate tensions with a nuclear superpower and loudly screaming that he's a Putin puppet whenever he takes a step toward de-escalation? Was it worth it to help create an atmosphere where cooler heads don't prevail in the one area where it's absolutely essential for everyone's survival that they do? Or is it maybe time to shut the fuck up for a while and rethink your entire worldview?

* * *

Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website , which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following my antics on Twitter , checking out my podcast , throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal , buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone , or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers .

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

[Oct 23, 2018] Russiagate 2.0 Now with more stupid

Notable quotes:
"... I've come to the realization that the MSM and our government are using a very different definition of "democracy" and "democratic institutions" than the one in the dictionary. Their version of "democracy" is all about national security and financial interests, and have very little to do with elections and popular will. ..."
"... ideas and opinions ..."
"... @The Voice In the Wilderness ..."
"... ideas and opinions ..."
"... @The Voice In the Wilderness ..."
"... @The Voice In the Wilderness ..."
"... @enhydra lutris ..."
"... @enhydra lutris ..."
"... @enhydra lutris ..."
"... @The Liberal Moonbat ..."
"... , surprised the special counsel in April when they actually showed up in court to fight the charges ..."
"... "There is no statute of interfering with an election. There just isn't," said Dubelier, who added that Mueller's office alleged a "made-up crime to fit the facts they have." ..."
Oct 23, 2018 | caucus99percent.com
gjohnsit
We can soon forget Russia's "meddling" in the 2016 election (or lack of meddling ), because the Justice Department is already throwing down indictments for meddling in the 2018 midterm elections.
Russians working for a close ally of President Vladimir V. Putin are engaging in an elaborate campaign of "information warfare" to interfere with the American midterm elections next month, federal prosecutors said on Friday in unsealing charges against a woman whom they labeled the project's "chief accountant."

Information warfare? That sounds serious. So what exactly is her objectives?

But this time, prosecutors said the operatives appeared beholden to no particular candidate. Russia's trolls did not limit themselves to either a liberal or conservative position, according to the complaint. They often wrote from diverging viewpoints on the same issue.

Uh, that's called trolling, and if trolling is against the law then 4Chan should watch out.
It seems that trolling now equals fraud .

It isn't just Russia. China and Iran are meddling as well.

In a joint statement, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Justice Department, FBI and Department of Homeland Security said they "do not have any evidence" that foreign countries have disrupted the voting process or changed any tallies , but that the campaigns have spread "disinformation" and "foreign propaganda."

"We are concerned about ongoing campaigns by Russia, China and other foreign actors, including Iran, to undermine confidence in democratic institutions and influence public sentiment and government policies," the statement said. "These activities also may seek to influence voter perceptions and decision making in the 2018 and 2020 U.S. elections."

So how exactly are they defrauding the American public? As for "undermine confidence in democratic institutions", we already know that we are an oligarchy , not a democracy. So I think the burden of evidence is on our government to prove otherwise, not on Russia.

I've come to the realization that the MSM and our government are using a very different definition of "democracy" and "democratic institutions" than the one in the dictionary. Their version of "democracy" is all about national security and financial interests, and have very little to do with elections and popular will.

Leftists aren't cooperating on Russiagate

You would think from the MSM that Russiagate is "liberals" versus Trump, and that everyone on "the left" is OK with this.
But even some in the media have noticed that leftists that don't identify as Democrats are Russiagate skeptics.

Why Are So Many Leftists Skeptical of the Russia Investigation?

Why the left needs to wise up to the growing Trump-Russia scandal

and of course TOP is fully onboard

The Voice In th... on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 4:28pm
So what specifically was illegal?

@gjohnsit
AFAIK, all those facebook posts would be legal if posted by someone in the USA.
Are foreign ideas illegal now? are ideas and opinions illegal?

You would think from the MSM that Russiagate is "liberals" versus Trump, and that everyone on "the left" is OK with this.
But even some in the media have noticed that leftists that don't identify as Democrats are Russiagate skeptics.

Why Are So Many Leftists Skeptical of the Russia Investigation?

Why the left needs to wise up to the growing Trump-Russia scandal

and of course TOP is fully onboard

gjohnsit on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 5:33pm
Consider Russia's "crimes" with RT

@The Voice In the Wilderness
This is supposed to be bad from the official report

RT aired a documentary about the OccupyWall Street movement on 1, 2, and 4 November. RT framed the movement as a fight against "the ruling class" and described the current US political system as corrupt and dominated by corporations.

RT advertising for the documentary featured Occupy movement calls to "take back" the government. The documentary claimed that the US system cannot be changed democratically, but only through "revolution." After the 6 November US presidential election, RT aired a documentary called "Cultures of Protest," about active and often violent political resistance

RT's reports often characterize the United States as a "surveillance state" and allege widespread infringements of civil liberties, police brutality, and drone use

RT has also focused on criticism of the US economic system, US currency policy, alleged Wall Street greed, and the US national debt. Some of RT's hosts have compared the United States to Imperial Rome and have predicted that government corruption and "corporate greed" will lead to US financial collapse

#1 AFAIK, all those facebook posts would be legal if posted by someone in the USA. Are foreign ideas illegal now? are ideas and opinions illegal?

Linda Wood on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 11:19pm
Oh, come on.

@gjohnsit

alleged Wall Street greed

Alledged Wall Street greed?

leveymg on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 5:49pm
This criminalizes a practice that is commonplace and legal

@The Voice In the Wilderness @The Voice In the Wilderness
when carried out by employees of thousands of foreign-owned companies from countries other than Russia.

Basically, this Russian woman is being indicted for doing the books for a Russian entity that incorporated a number of US businesses. These businesses had persons write and post under pen names a number of articles dealing with political subjects. That has been interpreted by the Special Counsel as a conspiracy to violate a federal campaign law that forbids contributions to US election campaigns. That's right, the indictment construes written opinion to be the same as money contributions.

The case would probably be thrown out -- nobody has been prosecuted for this before -- however the woman indicted will never be in court to defend herself, as the prosecutor and FBI know. Mueller is getting desperate to come up with indictments to fill in his jig saw puzzle.

enhydra lutris on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 7:27pm
The supremes, infamusly, ruled that miney is speech. Hence,

@leveymg
speech must be money, n'est ce pas?
/s

leveymg on Sun, 10/21/2018 - 1:09pm
SCOTUS also found in the same case that even foreign corporate

@enhydra lutris @enhydra lutris @enhydra lutris speech is constitutionally protected and can't be limited by campaign finance legislation. Mueller appears to have decided on his own to abrogate the Citizens United decision.

That would be okay, if he applied it to prosecute political mouthpieces such as AIPAC, along with corporate fronts owned by the Saudis, Chinese, British and 100 other countries who similiarly post anonymously.

It's now undeniable: Mueller is the prosecutorial weapon of a very selective political vendetta.

snoopydawg on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 7:51pm
This is from your first link

@gjohnsit

But somewhere on the left, right around the fault line where Barack Obama is deemed to have been a bad president, opinion turns back again toward skepticism.

It gets worse from there. I'm betting that this was written by someone from the Atlantic Council or maybe Friedman's twin brother. This person sure went to a lot of work to deride anyone who doesn't believe in Russia Gate didn't he?

Facebook has almost admitted that they are censoring people and websites because of Russia's ads on it that they say affected the election. BTW. Didn't Obama also use Cambridge Analytics during his campaign and did the same things that Trump did? Pretty sure that he did. But I guess that was different because of reasons. Yep. That's why.

You would think from the MSM that Russiagate is "liberals" versus Trump, and that everyone on "the left" is OK with this. But even some in the media have noticed that leftists that don't identify as Democrats are Russiagate skeptics.

Why Are So Many Leftists Skeptical of the Russia Investigation?

Why the left needs to wise up to the growing Trump-Russia scandal

and of course TOP is fully onboard

snoopydawg on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 5:25pm
For gawd's sake!
We are concerned about ongoing campaigns by Russia, China and other foreign actors, including Iran, to undermine confidence in democratic institutions and influence public sentiment and government policies,

First off the GOP is doing a hell of a job undermining confidence in democratic institutions and the voting process by its gerrymandering and its voter ID policies. Look at what's happening in Georgia (?) where the guy running is in charge of the voting policies and is kicking thousands of people off the voting rolls.

Influence government policies you say? If millions of Americans can't do that then how could a foreign country do it? BTW. This is already happening what with all the lobbyists and super PACs. But sure. Let's blame the 3 countries that they want to war with. Anyone who believes this shit ... well I'll not finish this sentence.

gjohnsit on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 6:00pm
Russiagate is useful for crushing dissent

@snoopydawg
Look at this hit piece on Jill Stein

Months before the 2016 election they were already calling Jill Stein a "Nader spoiler" ( here , here , and here )

Funny how 3rd parties are demonized in this "democracy"

We are concerned about ongoing campaigns by Russia, China and other foreign actors, including Iran, to undermine confidence in democratic institutions and influence public sentiment and government policies,

First off the GOP is doing a hell of a job undermining confidence in democratic institutions and the voting process by its gerrymandering and its voter ID policies. Look at what's happening in Georgia (?) where the guy running is in charge of the voting policies and is kicking thousands of people off the voting rolls.

Influence government policies you say? If millions of Americans can't do that then how could a foreign country do it? BTW. This is already happening what with all the lobbyists and super PACs. But sure. Let's blame the 3 countries that they want to war with. Anyone who believes this shit ... well I'll not finish this sentence.

snoopydawg on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 6:35pm
Ugh!

@gjohnsit

There is so much BS in that article it's hard to choose which one is the worst but I'm going with this one.

But Stein's willingness to praise Russian propaganda outlets and push Kremlin talking points didn't end in Moscow. Indeed, she challenged – and arguably surpassed – Trump in crafting the most Moscow-friendly campaign of 2016.

For instance, Stein made the strange claim multiple times that NATO had "surrounded" Russia with nuclear weapons. As she told The Intercept, "This is the Cuban Missile Crisis in reverse, on steroids – in fact, on crack." (Less than 10 percent of Russia's land border touches any NATO member-states.) She also said last year that NATO is only fighting "enemies we invent to give the weapons industry a reason to sell more stuff."

This is what she actually said about NATO and Russia.

Stein: I think this is an issue where something does need to be said--but it's important to understand where they are coming from. The United States, under Bush 1, had an agreement when Germany joined NATO--Russia agreed with the understanding that NATO would not move one inch to the east. Since then NATO has pursued a policy of basically encircling Russia--including the threat of nukes and drones and so on.

Okay and this one too.

Likewise, Stein claimed that Ukraine's 2014 revolution was, in reality, a "coup" that the U.S. "helped foment." Only two other leaders have described Ukraine's toppling of former president Viktor Yanukovych as a "coup": Putin and Kazakhstani President Nursultan Nazarbayev, whose country remains a security ally of Russia. Stein even spent time last year saying that "Russia used to own Ukraine."

Pretty sure that during Obama's presidency the Ukraine government was overthrown by this country and now we're arming neo Nazis with some very bad weapons.

ThinkProgress says it's being targeted by ad networks for producing 'controversial political content'. I'm thinking it's more because they lie their asses off to people who read its website. This is the most blatant lying I've seen from a website. How many people believed every word written there?

divineorder on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 7:08pm
FWIW Jill Stein out campaigning for Greens

@gjohnsit

Join us on Sunday 10/28 to meet Jill Stein and Alameda/SF County Green candidates: Laura Wells, Saied Karamooz, Aidan Hill and Mike Murphy. to support our candidates. People,... https://t.co/EtWyo6fism

-- Santa Clara Greens (@SCCGreens) October 19, 2018

Deja on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 7:05pm
You left out the D establishment

@snoopydawg

First off the GOP is doing a hell of a job undermining confidence in democratic institutions and the voting process by its gerrymandering and its voter ID policies.

I agree with your whole comment. Just wanted to make sure we don't leave out the monster that is the Dem establishment, aka the other half of the single body that screws us every chance it gets. Supposed differences are only spoken, especially in election years. When it gets down to the meat and potatoes, our representatives are one big symbiotic meal -- the kind that gives you the shits until you're dead.

We are concerned about ongoing campaigns by Russia, China and other foreign actors, including Iran, to undermine confidence in democratic institutions and influence public sentiment and government policies,

First off the GOP is doing a hell of a job undermining confidence in democratic institutions and the voting process by its gerrymandering and its voter ID policies. Look at what's happening in Georgia (?) where the guy running is in charge of the voting policies and is kicking thousands of people off the voting rolls.

Influence government policies you say? If millions of Americans can't do that then how could a foreign country do it? BTW. This is already happening what with all the lobbyists and super PACs. But sure. Let's blame the 3 countries that they want to war with. Anyone who believes this shit ... well I'll not finish this sentence.

snoopydawg on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 7:24pm
Not for that comment

@Deja

The GOP has made it so that over 10% of the population can't vote this year. I think it's in Georgia where thousands are being kicked off the voting rolls almost every day by the dude that is in charge of it and he is also running for an office. They have been gerrymandering the country and other things. Of course the democrats don't seem to be doing much to make it easier for people to vote. But yeah, both parties are just as corrupt.

boriscleto on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 9:36pm
Georgia has purged 340,000

@snoopydawg @snoopydawg

Illinois purged 550,000...Indiana purged 20,000...etc...

snoopydawg on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 10:16pm
Thanks for the numbers and the links

@boriscleto

Isn't it Brian Kemp who is not only running for office, but he is also in a position to purge the voting rolls? This is a huge conflict of interest and some judge should have stopped him from being able to do that. I guess that's what people are suing him for?

Close to 500,000 people were not able to vote in one of the states that Trump won in. Not sure if they were Hillary's or Trump's voters though.

BTW. People are upset with Jill Stein because they think that her votes cost Hillary the election when the libertarian candidate got more votes than Jill did. And yet he's not blamed for her loss. I wonder why that is?

dervish on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 11:46pm
It's because they're sexist. n/t

@snoopydawg

#2.2.1.1

Isn't it Brian Kemp who is not only running for office, but he is also in a position to purge the voting rolls? This is a huge conflict of interest and some judge should have stopped him from being able to do that. I guess that's what people are suing him for?

Close to 500,000 people were not able to vote in one of the states that Trump won in. Not sure if they were Hillary's or Trump's voters though.

BTW. People are upset with Jill Stein because they think that her votes cost Hillary the election when the libertarian candidate got more votes than Jill did. And yet he's not blamed for her loss. I wonder why that is?

lotlizard on Sun, 10/21/2018 - 2:03am
The Dems only kick people off voting rolls in *primaries*

@Deja
That makes it all okay for "lesser of two evils" voters.

#2

First off the GOP is doing a hell of a job undermining confidence in democratic institutions and the voting process by its gerrymandering and its voter ID policies.

I agree with your whole comment. Just wanted to make sure we don't leave out the monster that is the Dem establishment, aka the other half of the single body that screws us every chance it gets. Supposed differences are only spoken, especially in election years. When it gets down to the meat and potatoes, our representatives are one big symbiotic meal -- the kind that gives you the shits until you're dead.

snoopydawg on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 5:34pm
From the ToP link
Robert Mueller's indictment of the Russians who interfered in our election is a milestone in an ongoing investigation. The charges focus on the Russians who used online social networking platforms to divide voters and disrupt the electoral process.

Changed any votes? Party affiliations? Removed people from the voting rolls? Closed down voting precincts? Didn't supply enough voting machines for high voting areas? Nope. Nope. Nope and nope. Just placed a few ads on Fakebook and most of them after the election was over. It's taken Mueller two years to look into this? If he hasn't found any evidence yet then why waste time and money worrying about China and Iran doing anything? I'm thinking that Mueller is just pretending to be investigating, but he's really spending his time golfing or whatever his favorite activities are.

Bisbonian on Sun, 10/21/2018 - 10:20am
No kidding

@snoopydawg , its like a nuclear submarine calling the teapot black.

Robert Mueller's indictment of the Russians who interfered in our election is a milestone in an ongoing investigation. The charges focus on the Russians who used online social networking platforms to divide voters and disrupt the electoral process.

Changed any votes? Party affiliations? Removed people from the voting rolls? Closed down voting precincts? Didn't supply enough voting machines for high voting areas? Nope. Nope. Nope and nope. Just placed a few ads on Fakebook and most of them after the election was over. It's taken Mueller two years to look into this? If he hasn't found any evidence yet then why waste time and money worrying about China and Iran doing anything? I'm thinking that Mueller is just pretending to be investigating, but he's really spending his time golfing or whatever his favorite activities are.

Bollox Ref on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 6:16pm
Remember all those wonderful presents

we were going to receive at Fitzmas? Hoping the Establishment is going to finally reveal its sausage-making, really is a flight of fancy. McSausage for the McResistance. The Public are to be seen at voting stations, and not heard.

divineorder on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 6:28pm
Great essay. Thanks!

Hell I am surprised they even mentioned that first part.

In a joint statement, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Justice Department, FBI and Department of Homeland Security said they "do not have any evidence" that foreign countries have disrupted the voting process or changed any tallies,

At any rate cracked up when I read Caitlin on FB this morning:

Politico Report Says Russiagaters Should Prepare To Kiss My Ass

"In a just world, everyone who helped promote this toxic narrative would apologize profusely and spend the rest of their lives being mocked and marginalized." #Mueller #TrumpRussia https://t.co/eN349xhjG3

-- Caitlin Johnstone (@caitoz) October 20, 2018

snoopydawg on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 7:28pm
In case you missed it

@divineorder

We had Great discussion about Caitlin's article. Lots of good comments.

Hell I am surprised they even mentioned that first part.

In a joint statement, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Justice Department, FBI and Department of Homeland Security said they "do not have any evidence" that foreign countries have disrupted the voting process or changed any tallies,

At any rate cracked up when I read Caitlin on FB this morning:

Politico Report Says Russiagaters Should Prepare To Kiss My Ass

"In a just world, everyone who helped promote this toxic narrative would apologize profusely and spend the rest of their lives being mocked and marginalized." #Mueller #TrumpRussia https://t.co/eN349xhjG3

-- Caitlin Johnstone (@caitoz) October 20, 2018

MrWebster on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 7:04pm
We are looking at the terminus point of the Russian hysteria.

Actually, I am thinking nuclear war with Russia may be the terminus point, but in terms of propaganda we are seeing it. I have followed the Russia hysteria since 2015 when it was in its infant stage here in the States, but advancing in Europe.

There are still some charges that Russians broke into certain accounts as Microsoft has claimed a few months back, but the claims go no where as they have to admit they had absolutely no proof. And the story fades away until a new charge is made, and those now are hard to make up.

As previous posters before in have commented above, basically the terminus point is ascribing all dissent within the Western powers as Russian created. In this charge it is impossible to to argue as no proof is needed except for the existance of dissent. No more charges which can be proved such as an actual hack. And that dissent can be for or against an issue. All issues lead to Moscow.

The huge censorship of various sites done by Facebook and Twitter begin and are justified by the Russia hysteria and "fan news".

divineorder on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 8:19pm
Aside from in your comment though, plenty wrong with Dems?

@MrWebster @snoopydawg

The long con that is #RussiaGate . https://t.co/HvTHam5Rlb pic.twitter.com/nxlRpYH26b

-- John "Squinty Forehead Man" Graziano (@jvgraz) October 18, 2018

Actually, I am thinking nuclear war with Russia may be the terminus point, but in terms of propaganda we are seeing it. I have followed the Russia hysteria since 2015 when it was in its infant stage here in the States, but advancing in Europe.

There are still some charges that Russians broke into certain accounts as Microsoft has claimed a few months back, but the claims go no where as they have to admit they had absolutely no proof. And the story fades away until a new charge is made, and those now are hard to make up.

As previous posters before in have commented above, basically the terminus point is ascribing all dissent within the Western powers as Russian created. In this charge it is impossible to to argue as no proof is needed except for the existance of dissent. No more charges which can be proved such as an actual hack. And that dissent can be for or against an issue. All issues lead to Moscow.

The huge censorship of various sites done by Facebook and Twitter begin and are justified by the Russia hysteria and "fan news".

snoopydawg on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 10:27pm
And the Vermont electrical grid that Russia hacked into the

@MrWebster

computer that wasn't even hooked up to the internet. Brennan said that Russia tried to meddle in 21?state's voting rolls, but the states said that never happened. But just like people are still saying that all 17 intelligence (3) agencies agree that Russia interfered with the election people still think that the other stuff is true. This is why spreading propaganda is so powerful. The lies are what they remember, not the retractions if they're ever given.

About those FB ads that swayed the election ...

The majority of the Russian ad spend happened AFTER the election. We shared that fact, but very few outlets have covered it because it doesn't align with the main media narrative of Tump and the election. https://t.co/2dL8Kh0hof

-- Rob Goldman (@robjective) February 17, 2018

Actually, I am thinking nuclear war with Russia may be the terminus point, but in terms of propaganda we are seeing it. I have followed the Russia hysteria since 2015 when it was in its infant stage here in the States, but advancing in Europe.

There are still some charges that Russians broke into certain accounts as Microsoft has claimed a few months back, but the claims go no where as they have to admit they had absolutely no proof. And the story fades away until a new charge is made, and those now are hard to make up.

As previous posters before in have commented above, basically the terminus point is ascribing all dissent within the Western powers as Russian created. In this charge it is impossible to to argue as no proof is needed except for the existance of dissent. No more charges which can be proved such as an actual hack. And that dissent can be for or against an issue. All issues lead to Moscow.

The huge censorship of various sites done by Facebook and Twitter begin and are justified by the Russia hysteria and "fan news".

Bisbonian on Sun, 10/21/2018 - 10:25am
by the way

@snoopydawg , there are only sixteen intelligence agencies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Intelligence_Community

#6

computer that wasn't even hooked up to the internet. Brennan said that Russia tried to meddle in 21?state's voting rolls, but the states said that never happened. But just like people are still saying that all 17 intelligence (3) agencies agree that Russia interfered with the election people still think that the other stuff is true. This is why spreading propaganda is so powerful. The lies are what they remember, not the retractions if they're ever given.

About those FB ads that swayed the election ...

The majority of the Russian ad spend happened AFTER the election. We shared that fact, but very few outlets have covered it because it doesn't align with the main media narrative of Tump and the election. https://t.co/2dL8Kh0hof

-- Rob Goldman (@robjective) February 17, 2018

The Liberal Moonbat on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 8:38pm
NOT FROM THE ONION - oh, wait, yes it is...wait, what?

Who's on first...?

https://www.theonion.com/mueller-ready-to-deliver-major-parts-of-finding...

Bisbonian on Sun, 10/21/2018 - 10:33am
I like the comment from the Lobster Murderer the best.

@The Liberal Moonbat

Who's on first...?

https://www.theonion.com/mueller-ready-to-deliver-major-parts-of-finding...

snoopydawg on Sat, 10/20/2018 - 11:06pm
Remember the Russian agencies that Mueller charged?

He still doesn't want to give their attorneys the evidence he has against them.

Judge Orders Mueller To Prove Russian Company Meddled In Election

A Washington federal judge on Thursday ordered special counsel Robert Mueller's team to clarify election meddling claims lodged against a Russian company operated by Yevgeny Prigozhin, an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to Bloomberg.

Concord Management and Consulting, LLC. - one of three businesses indicted by Mueller in February along with 13 individuals for election meddling , surprised the special counsel in April when they actually showed up in court to fight the charges . Mueller's team tried to delay Concord from entering the case, arguing that thee Russian company not been properly served, however Judge Dabney Friedrich denied the request - effectively telling prosecutors 'well, they're here.'

* Concord pleaded not guilty in May. Their attorney, Eric Dubelier - a partner at Reed Smith, has described the election meddling charges as "make believe," arguing on Monday that Mueller's indictment against Concord "doesn't charge a crime."

"There is no statute of interfering with an election. There just isn't," said Dubelier, who added that Mueller's office alleged a "made-up crime to fit the facts they have."

Concord is one of the corporations that Mueller said placed ads on FB to sway people's opinion on Trump and Hillary. The ads that most were placed after the election.

[Oct 22, 2018] Russian has a unique descriptive term--Anglicized as Neculturny: Those without/incapable of having culture, an extremely disparaging term. I

Notable quotes:
"... Russian has a unique descriptive term--Anglicized as Neculturny: Those without/incapable of having culture, an extremely disparaging term. I bring this up because what we see rising again in the United States is intolerance and the criminalization of charity--particularly toward the homeless. The attitude of the Outlaw US Empire's military toward the bombing of civilians, their infrastructure and all related behavior that are War Crimes is the most graphic example--Yemen, Haiti, Palestine, Somalia, and all too many other places. Just the Russian attempts to try and minimize civilian casualties in Syria versus NATO's attitude on the question shows the vast divide present. Which nations are tolerant thus ipso facto humanitarian and which aren't? IMO, the divide is very stark. One side says There's No Alternative, while the other says Another World's Possible that dignifies people rather than denigrating them. ..."
Oct 22, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Oct 21, 2018 5:20:19 PM | link

The following is from the Q&A portion of Valdai Club's Plenary Session and IMO is very critical as we attempt to understand what underlies the extreme Russophobia displayed by Western elites and their minions:

"Chairman of the Patriarchal Council for Culture Metropolitan Tikhon:

"The round table I took part in here, at Valdai, dealt with cultural issues, or to be exact, whether and how culture can affect the life of society in the 21st century and today.

"At the onset of the discussion Mr Zanussi asked the following question, Can we even grasp, can we assess a nation's culture today? An opinion was voiced that the level of charity in society may be such an assessment criterion. I mean general culture, not its specific manifestations.

"It may seem that it was a fairly abstract discussion. But the events in Kerch, even though we do not fully understand the motives behind this ill-fated person's actions, let us see how aggression and intolerance are on the rise not only in Russia but also generally everywhere.

"My question is as follows: Firstly, what do you yourself think of the conclusions we have made at this round table regarding charity as a key criterion of society's general culture ? [My Emphasis]

"Secondly, we talk a lot of about state culture policy nowadays. There is a lot of debate. We are all aware that the state will not regulate culture in a rough or intrusive way, and this is probably absolutely correct. But can the state deliberately support all those creative and historical spiritual and cultural keynote dominants that have developed in Russia, something we call spiritual and cultural values?

"Vladimir Putin: I think this what we have been doing, in reference to the second part of your question. I think the state must do this very carefully by allowing people with different outlooks to work out their own views, express them and compete, let us say, with your views. It may seem surprising for me to say that, but I think this is the way it is.

"My sympathies certainly lie with you, but as a state official, I still think it is my duty to ensure the opportunity for every person to express their position. Why? Because my position is based on the first part of your comment.

" What is charity? To use more modern words, it is tolerance, commitment to compromise. At any rate, it is one of the facets of charity. This is the way it is. If we claim that charity, tolerance is a criterion of culture, then we must be in a position to let people express their views and listen to them. " [My Emphasis]

Russian has a unique descriptive term--Anglicized as Neculturny: Those without/incapable of having culture, an extremely disparaging term. I bring this up because what we see rising again in the United States is intolerance and the criminalization of charity--particularly toward the homeless. The attitude of the Outlaw US Empire's military toward the bombing of civilians, their infrastructure and all related behavior that are War Crimes is the most graphic example--Yemen, Haiti, Palestine, Somalia, and all too many other places. Just the Russian attempts to try and minimize civilian casualties in Syria versus NATO's attitude on the question shows the vast divide present. Which nations are tolerant thus ipso facto humanitarian and which aren't? IMO, the divide is very stark. One side says There's No Alternative, while the other says Another World's Possible that dignifies people rather than denigrating them.

[Oct 22, 2018] Vladimir now realises what so many other unlucky business partners have.....help out the Don to achieve his greater goals and sooner than later you will be rewarded with a swift kick in the [very manly] groin.

Notable quotes:
"... The most distracting game player of all time, Donald Gump, is trying his darndest to weaken the dollar and force lower interest rates by doing everything in his power to destabilise global trade...which of course only serves to strengthen the dollar....because any hint of monetary instability for any reason will always be met with a "flight to safety." Whether the flight is in reality "safe" is beside the point. The flight itself is all that matters. The flight itself is the existential reality. ..."
"... China is onboard out of necessity. Their economy is doldrumic without the US market to sell into. The wealthy Chinese will continue to accept dollar debt notes forever, or so long as they can continue to sell trinkets to USAryans, whichever comes first; Gump's lacklustre trade maneuvres notwithstanding. And the US needs China to keep the consumer culture afloat. This is a pure balancing act but, again, no one of the .002, including those who are of Chinese and Russian descent, will risk any imbalance. ..."
Oct 22, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

donkeytale , Oct 21, 2018 10:15:13 AM | link

< "Money Sings and Bullshiite Clings (to the .998)">

In part one we discovered the global world is not what it appears to be, especially to those of us who believe we have it all figured out from wet nursing on the internets. That is, there is an interconnected globalist world for "them" and a multipolar, disconnected, discognitive nationalist world for the rest of "us." And "we" are further subdivided by race, gender, class, sociopolitical and religious biases as taught to us through "their" media.

The ones who control the information flow of the internets use this control to 1. facilitate world trade 2. create even greater wealth for "them" 3. evade taxation of that wealth 4. make even bigger fools out of the rest of "us" who remain year after livelong year stuck glumly online following our favourite "nation/states" as if they are World Cup contenders. When our favourite team wins, so the delusional daydreaming goes, the .998 win too. Rah-rah, go team!

We determined the reason the dollar's acceptance as the international currency is existential, as it has been since time immemorial. The world's financial oligarchs made that determination postwar and placed their bets....in fiat dollars during the 1970s. Changing the international currency system will require a complete re-wiring of that mindset. And for that to happen Hell will first freeze over. After all, currency is merely a medium of exchange and the controlling mindset belongs to those who control the wealth expressed in that medium. It isn't up for popular vote folks. And those .002 controlling are the most conservative people on earth. They exist in every nation on earth but they aren't playing some World Cup game. No, their game is entirely different from ours. Our game is team sports.

The most distracting game player of all time, Donald Gump, is trying his darndest to weaken the dollar and force lower interest rates by doing everything in his power to destabilise global trade...which of course only serves to strengthen the dollar....because any hint of monetary instability for any reason will always be met with a "flight to safety." Whether the flight is in reality "safe" is beside the point. The flight itself is all that matters. The flight itself is the existential reality.

China is onboard out of necessity. Their economy is doldrumic without the US market to sell into. The wealthy Chinese will continue to accept dollar debt notes forever, or so long as they can continue to sell trinkets to USAryans, whichever comes first; Gump's lacklustre trade maneuvres notwithstanding. And the US needs China to keep the consumer culture afloat. This is a pure balancing act but, again, no one of the .002, including those who are of Chinese and Russian descent, will risk any imbalance.

This is Gump's hole card in his silly game of pocket poker.

And whither Russia?

Vladimir now realises what so many other unlucky business partners have.....help out the Don to achieve his greater goals and sooner than later you will be rewarded with a swift kick in the [very manly] groin. Vlad surely thought Gump owed him, too. Lol.

We all owe them both is closer to the truth.

Jackrabbit , Oct 21, 2018 11:03:05 AM | link

donkeytale: Vladimir now realises what so many other unlucky business partners have

donkey continues to flaunt his foul pro-establishment 'tale' as he slyly asserts the Trump-Putin connection that Mueller has failed to prove.

Caitlin Johnston explains better than I can:

Politico Report Says Russiagaters Should Prepare to Kiss My Ass

"Putin's Puppet" Advances Nuclear Missile Escalations Against Putin .

[Oct 22, 2018] Russian has a unique descriptive term--Anglicized as Neculturny: Those without/incapable of having culture, an extremely disparaging term. I

Notable quotes:
"... Russian has a unique descriptive term--Anglicized as Neculturny: Those without/incapable of having culture, an extremely disparaging term. I bring this up because what we see rising again in the United States is intolerance and the criminalization of charity--particularly toward the homeless. The attitude of the Outlaw US Empire's military toward the bombing of civilians, their infrastructure and all related behavior that are War Crimes is the most graphic example--Yemen, Haiti, Palestine, Somalia, and all too many other places. Just the Russian attempts to try and minimize civilian casualties in Syria versus NATO's attitude on the question shows the vast divide present. Which nations are tolerant thus ipso facto humanitarian and which aren't? IMO, the divide is very stark. One side says There's No Alternative, while the other says Another World's Possible that dignifies people rather than denigrating them. ..."
Oct 22, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Oct 21, 2018 5:20:19 PM | link

The following is from the Q&A portion of Valdai Club's Plenary Session and IMO is very critical as we attempt to understand what underlies the extreme Russophobia displayed by Western elites and their minions:

"Chairman of the Patriarchal Council for Culture Metropolitan Tikhon:

"The round table I took part in here, at Valdai, dealt with cultural issues, or to be exact, whether and how culture can affect the life of society in the 21st century and today.

"At the onset of the discussion Mr Zanussi asked the following question, Can we even grasp, can we assess a nation's culture today? An opinion was voiced that the level of charity in society may be such an assessment criterion. I mean general culture, not its specific manifestations.

"It may seem that it was a fairly abstract discussion. But the events in Kerch, even though we do not fully understand the motives behind this ill-fated person's actions, let us see how aggression and intolerance are on the rise not only in Russia but also generally everywhere.

"My question is as follows: Firstly, what do you yourself think of the conclusions we have made at this round table regarding charity as a key criterion of society's general culture ? [My Emphasis]

"Secondly, we talk a lot of about state culture policy nowadays. There is a lot of debate. We are all aware that the state will not regulate culture in a rough or intrusive way, and this is probably absolutely correct. But can the state deliberately support all those creative and historical spiritual and cultural keynote dominants that have developed in Russia, something we call spiritual and cultural values?

"Vladimir Putin: I think this what we have been doing, in reference to the second part of your question. I think the state must do this very carefully by allowing people with different outlooks to work out their own views, express them and compete, let us say, with your views. It may seem surprising for me to say that, but I think this is the way it is.

"My sympathies certainly lie with you, but as a state official, I still think it is my duty to ensure the opportunity for every person to express their position. Why? Because my position is based on the first part of your comment.

" What is charity? To use more modern words, it is tolerance, commitment to compromise. At any rate, it is one of the facets of charity. This is the way it is. If we claim that charity, tolerance is a criterion of culture, then we must be in a position to let people express their views and listen to them. " [My Emphasis]

Russian has a unique descriptive term--Anglicized as Neculturny: Those without/incapable of having culture, an extremely disparaging term. I bring this up because what we see rising again in the United States is intolerance and the criminalization of charity--particularly toward the homeless. The attitude of the Outlaw US Empire's military toward the bombing of civilians, their infrastructure and all related behavior that are War Crimes is the most graphic example--Yemen, Haiti, Palestine, Somalia, and all too many other places. Just the Russian attempts to try and minimize civilian casualties in Syria versus NATO's attitude on the question shows the vast divide present. Which nations are tolerant thus ipso facto humanitarian and which aren't? IMO, the divide is very stark. One side says There's No Alternative, while the other says Another World's Possible that dignifies people rather than denigrating them.

[Oct 21, 2018] Let's play Global Thermonuclear War

See also Trump To Pull U.S. Out Of 1987 Nuclear Weapons Treaty With Russia ":
"We're not going to let them violate a nuclear agreement," Trump said Saturday after a campaign rally in Elko, Nevada. "We're going to terminate the agreement."
Oct 21, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

gnjus , 3 hours ago link

War Games (1983)

- Shell me play a game ?

-- Love to. How about Global Thermonuclear War?

- Wouldn't you prefer a nice game of chess?

-- Later. Let's play Global Thermonuclear War.

[Oct 21, 2018] Let's play Global Thermonuclear War

See also Trump To Pull U.S. Out Of 1987 Nuclear Weapons Treaty With Russia ":
"We're not going to let them violate a nuclear agreement," Trump said Saturday after a campaign rally in Elko, Nevada. "We're going to terminate the agreement."
Oct 21, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

gnjus , 3 hours ago link

War Games (1983)

- Shell me play a game ?

-- Love to. How about Global Thermonuclear War?

- Wouldn't you prefer a nice game of chess?

-- Later. Let's play Global Thermonuclear War.

[Oct 21, 2018] Naftogaz has now begun to help itself to money from Russia's gas-transit payments, arguing that it is owed money from the Stockholm Arbitration ruling which Gazprom has refused to pay

Oct 21, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman October 13, 2018 at 10:22 pm

Naftogaz has now begun to help itself to money from Russia's gas-transit payments, arguing that it is owed money from the Stockholm Arbitration ruling which Gazprom has refused to pay.

https://www.naturalgasworld.com/ukraine-takes-9mn-from-gazprom-penalty-payment-65062

Apparently Russia is still paying the old rate, from before the ruling (because to do otherwise would be to recognize the debt and accept responsibility for it), which results in an overpayment since it is higher than Naftogaz would charge, if I understand correctly. So Naftogaz has decided to confiscate it as owing.

This, obviously, sets the stage for another shutdown of European gas supplies, just as winter is coming on. Perhaps Ukraine has realized that nothing it can do or say is going to stop Nord Stream II from going ahead, and so it might as well recover what it can, and who cares if it results in a shutdown of Europe's gas, regardless where the blame ends up? Once again Ukraine's maneuvering puts Russia in a difficult spot – it can recognize the Stockholm award and pay Ukraine $2.6 Billion or whatever it was. Or it can accept that Ukraine will keep part of its transit payments against the debt until it can shut down gas transit across Ukraine altogether. Or it can shut off the gas now.

If it were up to me, I would take the middle option. Let Ukraine congratulate itself on one-upping me with its native cleverness (assuming here that I am Russia), and let them keep $9 or $10 million of the transit fees each month; that would probably be a lot cheaper than acknowledging the Stockholm award and paying Ukraine billions, in view of the fact that Ukraine never paid back the money it was lent by Russia; Stockholm neatly solved that for them, by awarding them huge damages, part of which was understood to be the amount Ukraine owed. Okay, that goes toward Ukraine's debt to Russia, and now you owe Ukraine $2.6 Billion more.

I would just focus on getting Nord Stream II completed. Then I would not only stop gas transit through Ukraine, I would tell them to kiss my ass if they wanted to buy gas for themselves. You were so pleased with yourselves for not buying any gas from Russia last year – obviously you can get along fine without it. But I sure hope Europe is going to keep giving you money to buy European gas forever.

[Oct 21, 2018] Live Putin attends Valdai Club plenary session

Oct 21, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Russian President Vladimir Putin attends the 15th Annual Meeting of the Valdai Discussion Club in Sochi on Thursday, October 18.

The Valdai Discussion Club, established in 2004, has become an internationally recognised platform for interaction between leading world experts and Russian scholars, politicians and government officials.

[Oct 21, 2018] Putin lays down the law to the Davos crowd at this year's Valdai conference: There is a limit to your provocations and attempts to undermine Russia. So don't cross that line

Notable quotes:
"... The Davos Crowd ..."
"... It's not that Putin's stance was any different than in the past. Russia will strike back at an aggressor under any circumstance where the future of Russia is at stake. It was his assurance that in doing so 1) it would be just and righteous "dying like martyrs" and 2) so swift and brutal the aggressors would "die like dogs" bereft of the chance to ask for salvation. ..."
"... Notice how there have been no attacks or even harsh language coming out of Israel or the U.S. in the past few weeks. The failure of the British/French/Israeli operation to sucker Trump into an invasion of Syria is now complete. ..."
"... Putin wasn't boasting or grandstanding about Russia's hypersonic weapons capability. He told everyone they are deployed. He did this to shut up the U.S. neoconservative chattering class who he rightly says whisper in President Trump's ear that they can win a nuclear conflict with Russia. ..."
"... They are insane. And you have to treat them that way. ..."
Oct 21, 2018 | www.sott.net

Every year Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks at the Valdai Economic Forum. And each year his talk is important. Putin isn't one to mince words on important issues.

With tensions between Russia and the West reaching Cold War levels, Valdai represented the first time we've heard Putin speak in a long-form discussion since Helsinki and the events thereafter - IL-20, Khashoggi, etc.

So, this talk is worth everyone's time. And when I say everyone's I mean every single person who could be affected by the breakdown of the U.S. political system and how that spills over onto Russia's shores.

In other words, pretty much everyone on the planet.

Because what Putin did at Valdai was to lay down the new rules of conduct in geopolitical affairs. He put the U.S. and European oligarchs I call The Davos Crowd on notice.

There is a limit to your provocations and attempts to undermine Russia. So don't cross that line.

Peace Through Strength

The big quote from his talk is the one everyone is focusing on, and rightly so, Russia's policy about using nuclear weapons.

It's not that Putin's stance was any different than in the past. Russia will strike back at an aggressor under any circumstance where the future of Russia is at stake. It was his assurance that in doing so 1) it would be just and righteous "dying like martyrs" and 2) so swift and brutal the aggressors would "die like dogs" bereft of the chance to ask for salvation.


Those are strong words. They are the words of a meek man. And the word meek, as Jordan Peterson reminds us, describes someone who has weapons, knows how to use them and keeps them sheathed until they have no other option.

The reaction from the audience (see video above) was nervous laughter, but I don't think Putin was having one over on anyone.

He was serious. This is the very definition of meek.

It is really no different than the attitude of Secretary of Defense James Mattis who said, "I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you f$*k with me, I'll kill you all."

Men like this are not to be tested too hard. And Putin's response to the shooting down of the IL-20 plane and its crew was to cross a bunch of diplomatic lines by handing out S-300s to Syria and erecting a de facto no-fly zone over Western Syria and the Eastern Mediterranean.

Notice how there have been no attacks or even harsh language coming out of Israel or the U.S. in the past few weeks. The failure of the British/French/Israeli operation to sucker Trump into an invasion of Syria is now complete.

And I'm convinced that Nikki Haley paid the price.

All of this highlights the major theme that came out of Putin's comments.

Strength through resolve. Resolve comes as a consequence of defending culture.

Putin wasn't boasting or grandstanding about Russia's hypersonic weapons capability. He told everyone they are deployed. He did this to shut up the U.S. neoconservative chattering class who he rightly says whisper in President Trump's ear that they can win a nuclear conflict with Russia.

They are insane. And you have to treat them that way.

Culture First

Putin sees himself, quite rightly, as the custodian of the Russian people and, as such, the Russian state as the reflection of Russian culture. If you are going to have a state and someone is going to be the head of it, this is the attitude that you want from that person.

In his dialogue with an Orthodox priest Putin wholeheartedly agreed with the idea that "the state cannot dictate culture" but rather, at best, be the facilitator of it through its applications of law.

In a back and forth with a very enthusiastic Russian dairy farmer, who was quite proud of his cheese, Putin reminded the man that while he loved sanctions (from European competition) protecting his business today he should not get used to them. They will be removed at some point and the farmer would have to stand on his own wits to survive in the international market.

Putin understands that subsidies breed sloth. That was a message he made loud and clear.

It's why when the sanctions first went into effect in 2014 over the reunification of Crimea and during the Ruble crisis Putin shifted state subsidies away from the petroleum sector which had thrived and gotten soft during years of $100+/bbl oil and shifted that money to agriculture.

The fruits of that successful policy shift he confronted head on at Valdai. Russia's food production across all sectors is flourishing thanks to a cheap ruble, which the U.S. keeps beating down via sanctions, and the Russian state getting out of the way of investment.

At the time he incurred the wrath of Rosneft CEO Igor Sechin and Putin ignored him, much to everyone's surprise. The message was clear, we'll help you out of your current troubles but it's time to do business differently. Because it was Rosneft that needed the biggest bailouts in late 2014/early 2015 having tens of billions in dollar-denominated debt which couldn't be rolled over thanks to the sanctions.

The Limits of Empire

Ultimately, Putin looked resigned, if confused, to the insanity emanating from U.S. policy. But it's obvious to him that Russia cannot get caught up in the tit-for-tat nuisances put up to derail Russia's future.

He mentioned the Empire loses its way because it believed itself invulnerable or as my dad used to say about certain athletes, "He reads his own press clippings too much."

There is a solipsism that infects dominant societies which creates the kind of over-reactions we're witnessing today. Power is slipping away from the U.S. and Trump is both helping the process along while also trying to preserve the core of what's left.

And no interaction during Putin's talk was more indicative of his view of the U.S. empire than his interaction with a Japanese delegate who asked him about signing a peace treaty with Japan.

And Putin's answer was clear. It's Japan's pride and political entanglements that preclude this from happening. Signing the peace treaty is not necessary to solving ownership of the Kuril Islands. Russia and Japan are both diminished by having this obstacle in the way.

The issue can resolve itself after the peace treaty is signed. The current state of things is silly and anachronistic and keep the divide between Russians and Japanese from healing. Create trust through agreement then move forward.

That's what is happening between Russia and Egypt and that is why Putin is winning the diplomatic war.

And it's why Trump is losing the diplomatic war. Putin knows where Trump is. He was there himself seventeen years ago, except an order of magnitude worse. The problems Trump is facing are the same problems Putin faced, corruption, venality, treason all contributing to a collapse in societal and cultural institutions.

Putin knows the U.S. is at a crossroads, and he's made his peace with whatever comes next. The question is have we?

[Oct 21, 2018] The basic plans of nuclear war today are essentially the same as those developed in the 1960s, which is essentially a system of thousands of nuclear weapons aimed at Russian cities and military targets ready to be launched at a moment's notice. The US strategy has always been for a first strike

Oct 21, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Northern Star October 13, 2018 at 12:34 pm

"The basic plans of nuclear war today are essentially the same as those developed in the 1960s, which is essentially a system of thousands of nuclear weapons aimed at Russian cities and military targets ready to be launched at a moment's notice.
The US strategy has always been for a first strike: not necessarily a surprise attack but not an attack which came "second" in a nuclear war.
Every US president, all the way to Trump, has used the threat of nuclear war as deterrence to their adversaries.
The US threat of nuclear attack has precluded any "effective nonproliferation campaign" among other nation-states which have decided to acquire nuclear weapons themselves.
US nuclear war plans, and the hypothetical and real scenarios under which they unfold, are far more extensive than the public can imagine. Ellsberg writes how the public perception of a "nuclear button" with one finger on it, presumably the President's, is a lie. In fact, there are many fingers on many buttons, to delegate authority to launch nuclear missiles in case the President and the leadership were incapacitated. These same systems exist in Russia, and probably other nuclear-armed powers as well.
The Cuban Missile Crisis was even more dangerous than previously thought, as demonstrated in a highly classified study in 1964 which was never made public until this book.
The strategic nuclear war systems are much more prone to "accidents" and false alarms than previously thought, risking the threat of unauthorized launchings.
The potential risk of nuclear war has been systematically covered up from the public, including the aforementioned graph showing hundreds of millions of deaths, a third of the planet at the time. Ellsberg notes that in 1961 when the document was made, it was two decades before the concept of nuclear winter and nuclear famine were accepted, which meant that in reality most humans would die along with most other large species after a nuclear war."

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/10/13/doom-o13.html

[Oct 21, 2018] A non-nuclear war between Russia and USA/NATO waged in Western Europe is impossible

Oct 21, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Northern Star October 20, 2018 at 12:33 pm

Nuclear war between NATO/USA and Russia:
We are no longer in Kansas matter of fact there ain't any Kansas:
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2018/10/19/17873822/nuclear-war-weapons-bombs-how-kill

As for a non-nuclear war between Russia and USA/NATO waged in Western Europe.
@PO and Mark and other stooges

I don't see how one is possible. Unless Scotty et al with working teleporter equipment are able to teleport NATO armor and troops into Russia , their columns moving through Belarus ,Ukraine and Poland would be massacred. There wouldn't be much left by the time they got to the Russian frontier. where waiting Russian armor and artillery would have all routes of approach thoroughly zeroed in and sighted. Not to mention waves of Iskander and cruise missile strikes together with attacks from Russian aircraft . The NATO forces would almost certainly not have the crucial element of air superiority thanks to Russian S-400 systems.

https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/su25/
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russias-deadly-su-27-the-plane-terrifies-nato-buzzes-its-25642
"The Iskander is not a strategic weapon -- it's a tactical ballistic missile. During combat operations, it would be used to destroy both stationary and moving targets. Targets would range from surface-to-air missile batteries, enemy short-range missiles, airfields, ports, command and communication centers, factories and other hardened targets."
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/why-russias-iskander-missile-killer-26216

The Russians wouldn't have to actually DO anything on the offensive other than to show up at the signing of the surrender document by Stoltenberg, Merkel ,Morawiecki ,May and Bolton.
(France capitulated within 72 hours of the start of hostilities )
I just don't see a NATO conventional attack on Russia as even remotely feasible.
Just my opinion .

Mark Chapman October 20, 2018 at 12:47 pm
Well, the way it is supposed to work, you don't start at Day One with your forces deep inside enemy territory. You start on your own side, and one attacks the other and each tries to prevent penetration by the other (if you'll forgive such an image) while achieving penetration into enemy territory himself, usually only seizing territory which follow-up forces are available to hold, so as not to be encircled and wiped out. It is demonstrably quite possible for huge amounts of US forces and armor to be assembled in England and the Netherlands and France and so forth, because it has already been done once on that scale. Likewise, Russia would not start out with troops in any of those countries.

Missiles are dandy for wiping out enemy forces at the touch of a button, but you still have to seize that territory, once vacated, and prevent the enemy from simply flowing into the vacuum and re-taking it. That sort of doctrine is pretty much like the US vision of air superiority, where the USAF would simply fly over and bomb the shit out of everything, no troops required. That's how it was supposed to go in Iraq, except it didn't. Fortunately, I guess, because otherwise the phrase "Boots on the ground" might never have been coined, and then what would journalists say when they wanted to appear salty and battle-jaded?

A conventional attack on Russia is not preferred – let's just get that up front. But I don't see any other way for the west to have a war with Russia (and it has run out of ways short of war to assert its control) without it going nuclear. And Washington is not quite that crazy yet. It still wants Europe to be around afterward to be a consumer of American goods and services.

[Oct 21, 2018] Russian Deputy FM Ludicrous 'meddling' charges an excuse for more sanctions and to play 'Russia card' ahead of midterm elections

Oct 21, 2018 | www.sott.net

Washington is concocting ludicrous charges against a Russian national for alleged election meddling merely to find reasons for new sanctions and to play the 'Russia card' ahead of the midterms, a top Kremlin official has warned.

The US is bringing up "ludicrous accusations" with a "laughable 'body of proof'" simply to slap Moscow with a new round of sanctions, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said in a statement on Saturday. He added that "certain" US politicians hope to use charges against Russia to gain the upper hand in "interparty brawls" ahead of the midterm elections, slated for November 6.

Ryabkov made his remarks after the US Department of Justice officially leveled charges against Russian national Elena Khusyaynova, who allegedly served as the chief accountant for 'Project Lakhta.' The officials suspect her of handling the funds used to pay online trolls for posting comments to "sow discord in the US political system," and to "undermine faith" in US democracy. These alleged activities were part of what Washington calls Russian strategic efforts to meddle in the 2016 US presidential race and as well as the upcoming midterms.

... ... ...

Russian official Ryabkov dismissed the charges as "flagrant lies" and yet another element of the "shameful slanderous campaign" unleashed by Washington against Moscow.

"The US clearly overestimates its capabilities," the deputy foreign minister said.

"While exhibiting hostility towards Russia and looking down on the whole world, they will only meet tougher pushback."

[Oct 21, 2018] Where is Sergei Skripalt by Rob Slane

Oct 18, 2018 | www.sott.net

The Blogmire
According to an article in The Mail , the mother of Sergei Skripal, Yelena, has not heard from her son since the incident on 4th March , and the last time she heard from her granddaughter, Yulia, was on 24th July:

"Recalling her phone conversation with Yulia, Yelena told the Daily Mirror : 'The last time I ­actually spoke to Yulia was on the 24th of July on my 90th birthday. She rang - it was unexpected but it was so lovely to hear from her. She called and was actually with Sergei. She told me: "I'm with daddy he is beside me but he can't speak as he has a pain in his throat". She said he had been in some pain.'"
This is interesting for a number of reasons.

Firstly, we know that during the conversation on 24th July, according to a number of reports (for example here ), Yulia told her grandmother that the reason Sergei was unable to speak was because his voice was still weak due to a tracheostomy :

"Babushka, happy birthday, everything is fine, everything is perfect. I am in London with papa. He can't speak because he's got a tracheostomy, that pipe, which will be taken off in three days. Now when he speaks with that pipe, his voice is first of all very weak and secondly, he makes quite a lot of wheeze. So babushka with your poor hearing you would really struggle to understand him. He'll call after the tracheostomy is off. "
This was almost 3 months ago. So the tracheostomy was preventing Sergei from speaking; but it was coming off in three days; yet nearly 3 months later and still no call from Sergei? Is that not very odd? Indeed, especially given that Yelena states in the interview that she and Sergei used to speak every week .

Secondly, the call on 24th July is itself very odd. Notice that Yulia uses the phrases "everything is fine, everything is perfect." These are basically the same sorts of phrases that she repeated over and over in her call with her cousin Viktoria on 5th April :

"Everything is ok, everything is fine."

"Everything is fine, but we'll see how it goes, we'll decide later. You know what the situation is here. Everything is fine, everything is solvable, everyone is recovering and is alive."

"Everything is ok. He is resting now, having a nap. Everyone's health is fine, there are no irreparable things. I will be discharged soon. Everything is ok."

She seems very keen - some would say overly keen - to emphasise that everything is fine and okay and perfect etc. To me it sounds unnatural and forced. What do you think?

But more than this, imagine yourself in the same situation. Your father is next to you. He can speak, but not very well, and so can't communicate through the phone to his mother. What would you do? Well, I know what I would do. I would relay speech from the one to the other. "He says he's getting better and misses you very much grandma." "She says she loves you, dad." Isn't that what normal people would do in such circumstances?

But instead, Yulia speaks in a way that doesn't fill me with too much certainty that he was actually in the room with her. It's all very medical and somewhat officious. And even if his voice was a bit wheezy and hard to understand, his ears were okay, weren't they? Couldn't Yulia have held the phone to her dad's ear so he could hear his mother speak to him? Again, that would be what a normal person would do in such circumstances, wouldn't it? But of course they don't do normal in SkripalWorld.

Thirdly, we have to reckon with the fact that since that call, in which Yulia indicated that Sergei would call in as little as three days, there has been no communication at all . Not with grandma. Not with Viktoria. Not with anyone (apparently even Mark Urban got the cold shoulder).

Actually, that's not quite the case. We don't really have to reckon with this because the heroic journalism of The Mail gives us the answer. In the same piece that it mentioned a call between Yulia and her grandma, in which Sergei was apparently sat right next to Yulia, we get this:

"Since that solitary phone conversation, she [Yelena] has not heard from her the two targeted relatives as any contact could lead Russian forces to the pair."
Remarkable, isn't it? So according to The Mail , the reason that Sergei Skripal cannot call his mother, is because Russian forces might be able to trace his whereabouts and order a hit on him. Another one, apparently. And yet in the very same piece they report on Yulia Skripal calling her grandmother on 24th July, with Sergei Skripal at her side. See? It's obvious, isn't it?

Not for the first time in this case, I'm left scratching my head and wondering whether the journalists who write this sort of thing believe their readers to be so dim that they won't notice statements in the same article that utterly refute one another, or whether the journalists themselves are so witless that they simply don't realise that they are contradicting themselves in the space of a few sentences. Any thoughts?

The fact is that Yulia has phoned her cousin Viktoria a number of times since the beginning of April, and in most, if not all of those calls, her father was said to be close by. She even did a little film for Reuters in May, with her father apparently in the same compound. Why were these allowed, since according to The Mail , it could have led Russian forces to the pair? Or are we to believe that Russian forces have only just developed the capability to trace phone calls since 24th July? Worse still, have British Security Services forgotten how to prevent phone calls being traced by other intelligence agencies since 24th July, not to mention also losing the ability to stop Russian forces from coming and getting them?

Or is it more likely that The Mail cannot be bothered to ask the obvious questions that stem from their own report. Such as:

1. Why is the apparent victim in this case, Sergei Skripal, who is under the protection of British (and possibly US) intelligence services, unable to phone his mother, whom he used to speak to on a weekly basis?

2. Does this constitute a violation of his human rights?

3. Given that he has had no contact with his mother since 4th March, how can we be sure that he is alive, and if he is, whether he is not being held against his will?

[Oct 20, 2018] Cloak and Dagger by Israel Shamir

Highly recommended!
UK politicians in Skripal story behaved by cheap clowns. Their story with door knob was pathetic. They tried to invent the legend with poisoning on the fly and that shows. There is definitely something else brewing here and Shamir proposed his version with Skripal double dealings or something along those line is quite plausible.
We will never know, but I think British discredited themselves for the whole world in this story. Trump was not better will using this tory to impose additional sanctions on Russia. This is just another proof that he is another neocon who during election campaign like Obama played the role of isolationalist and then appointed Haley to UN and hired Pompeo as his Secretary of state and Bolton as his security advisor -- a typical "bat and switch" operation in US politics.
Notable quotes:
"... Vrublevsky thinks that British intelligence convinced the GRU (probably we should say that GRU is not called GRU anymore but GU, the Chief Directorate of the General Staff, but it hardly matters) that Mr Skripal wanted to return home to Russia. Probably they were told that Mr Skripal intended to bring some valuable dowry with him, including Porton Down data and the secrets of the Golden Rain dossier. It is possible that Skripal had been played, too; perhaps he indeed wanted to go back to Russia, the country he missed badly. ..."
"... As we had learned from videos and stills published by the Brits, the two men had been carefully followed from the beginning to the end. Meanwhile, British intelligence staged a 'poisoning' of Skripal and his daughter, and the two agents quickly returned home. ..."
"... There is not a single man close to Russian intelligence who thinks that Skripal had actually been poisoned by the Russians. First, there was absolutely no reason to do it, and second, if the Russians would poison him, he would stay poisoned, like the Ukrainian Quisling Stepan Bandera was. ..."
"... However, by playing this card, the British secret service convinced the Foreign Office to expel all diplomats who had contacts and connection to the exposed GRU agents. The massive expulsion of 150 diplomats caused serious damage to the Russian secret services. ..."
"... Such a massive operation against Russian agents and their contacts could signal forthcoming war. In normal circumstances, states do not reveal their full knowledge of enemy agents. ..."
"... I do not know what is the truth. At this point I no longer care because we will never know but it will be the British version that will be the most popular. I like most people like good stories. Unfortunately for Russia the Brits have better script writers, director and actors. ..."
Oct 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

... ... ...

Vrublevsky thinks that British intelligence convinced the GRU (probably we should say that GRU is not called GRU anymore but GU, the Chief Directorate of the General Staff, but it hardly matters) that Mr Skripal wanted to return home to Russia. Probably they were told that Mr Skripal intended to bring some valuable dowry with him, including Porton Down data and the secrets of the Golden Rain dossier. It is possible that Skripal had been played, too; perhaps he indeed wanted to go back to Russia, the country he missed badly.

Two GRU agents, supposedly experts on extraction (they allegedly sneaked the Ukrainian president Yanukovych from Ukraine after the coup and saved him from lynching mob) were sent to Salisbury to test the ground and make preparations for Skripal's return. As we had learned from videos and stills published by the Brits, the two men had been carefully followed from the beginning to the end. Meanwhile, British intelligence staged a 'poisoning' of Skripal and his daughter, and the two agents quickly returned home.

There is not a single man close to Russian intelligence who thinks that Skripal had actually been poisoned by the Russians. First, there was absolutely no reason to do it, and second, if the Russians would poison him, he would stay poisoned, like the Ukrainian Quisling Stepan Bandera was.

However, by playing this card, the British secret service convinced the Foreign Office to expel all diplomats who had contacts and connection to the exposed GRU agents. The massive expulsion of 150 diplomats caused serious damage to the Russian secret services.

Still, the Russians had no clue how the West had learned identities of so many diplomats connected to GRU. They suspected that there was a mole, and a turncoat who delivered the stuff to the enemy.

That is why Vladimir Putin decided to dare them. As he knew that the two men identified by the British service had no connection to the alleged poisoning, he asked them to appear on the RT in an interview with Ms Simonyan. By acting as village hicks, they were supposed to provoke the enemy to disclose its source. The result was unexpected: instead of revealing the name of a turncoat, the Belling Cat, a site used by the Western Secret Services for intentional leaks, explained how the men were traced by using the stolen databases. Putin's plan misfired.

The Russian secret service is not dead. Intelligence services do suffer from enemy action from time to time: the Cambridge Five infiltrated the upper reaches of the MI-5 and delivered state secrets to Moscow for a long time, but the Intelligence Service survived. Le Carre's novels were based on such a defeat of the intelligence. However they have a way to recover. Identity of their top agents remain secret, and they are concealed from the enemy's eyes.

But in order to function properly, the Russians will have to clean their stables, remove their databases from the market place and keep its citizenry reasonably safe. Lax, and not-up-to-date agents do not apparently understand the degree the internet is being watched. Considering it should have been done twenty years ago, and meanwhile a new generation of Russians has came of age, perfectly prepared to sell whatever they can for cash, it is a formidable task.

There is an additional reason to worry. Such a massive operation against Russian agents and their contacts could signal forthcoming war. In normal circumstances, states do not reveal their full knowledge of enemy agents. It made president Putin worry; and he said this week: we'll go to heaven as martyrs, the attackers will die as sinners. In face of multiple and recent threats, this end of the world is quite possible.

utu , says: October 20, 2018 at 4:23 am GMT

Great story. If told many people would believe it. But now it is kind of late. So why it wasn't told within few days or weeks of Skripal affair? Why it is the British media that has initiative and Russian media is reactive and defensive? The story that Skripal wanted to return and that two agents were lured in there should have been told right away and that it turned out be MI5 provocation should have been insinuated. And the two agents should have been interviewed on Russian media. Instead we get defensive inept and indolent Russian reactions.

I do not know what is the truth. At this point I no longer care because we will never know but it will be the British version that will be the most popular. I like most people like good stories. Unfortunately for Russia the Brits have better script writers, director and actors.

jilles dykstra , says: October 20, 2018 at 7:25 am GMT
@utu " Instead we get defensive inept and indolent Russian reactions."
The reaction 'if we want to kill somebody that somebody does not survive' I cannot see as inept and indolent.
Malaysian Truther , says: October 20, 2018 at 8:24 am GMT
Excellent piece by Israel Shamir which I think gives the correct explanation of the Skripal poisoning. This was a classic fishing, 'click bait' operation which produced a very valuable haul for Western Intelligence. The only question is whether Skripal cooperated with it – which I think he did – not knowing that both he and his daughter were meant to die. Hence Putin's rage against Skripal a few weeks ago ( calling him a scumbag traitor etc, etc) after the Russian operatives were identified because retired agents are supposed to stay retired.

Russia made a very serious mistake with the RT interview with the 2 operatives. Better not to say anything if you can't give the whole story. The GU weren't happy to show their incompetence, but compounded the original mistake with obvious lying. That was a propaganda gift to the Western media and has helped convince original disbelievers of Russian perfidy.

Russia needs to step up its game especially in the media dept.

Tom Welsh , says: October 20, 2018 at 9:38 am GMT
"Unfortunately for Russia the Brits have better script writers, director and actors".

Maybe, if your taste runs to "Dr Who" or "Carry On Spying". That's about the level of the Skripal nonsense.

If it was meant for public consumption, the British government's opinion of the British people is much lower than mine.

jilles dykstra , says: October 20, 2018 at 10:33 am GMT
@Anatoly Karlin " British or American human capital, but there are certainly consummate professionals relative to what passes for today's Russian intelligence services. "

On what this 'certainly' is based, I see no argument whatsoever.
Already a long time ago, I must admit, the CIA director had to admit to senator Moynihan that he had lied about the CIA not laying mines in Havana harbour.
A professional in espionage does not get caught.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan, 'Secrecy', New Haven 1998
Anyone acquinted with Sept 11 understands that the USA's secret army, the CIA, was involved.
Another blunder.
As far as I know British secret services never get caught.
How clever the Russians are, suppose quite clever, I for one do not think that the stupid stories about for example Skripal have any truth in them.
Until now the asserted Russian meddling in USA elections have not been proved.
Do not know of anything credible that Russian intelligence people are said to have done.
But of course Russian intelligence does exist.

Fatima Manoubia , says: October 20, 2018 at 11:18 am GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

"A related problem is that since there is now a free market economy, with many more attractive career options for talented people, the high quality people go to work in other spheres, leaving the intelligence agencies with the dregs;" .

A direct result of erasing ideology so as to erase personality cult towards highly respected people in former USSR .When you have no ideology ( or worst, share ideology with your opponent, i.e free market .) all what you have, from values to secrets, from scientific human capital to secret service officials, are out there in the global market for possible selling to the best postor .this is the principle of capitalism .. after all, it is said, almost everybody has a price .The challenge is finding out where that little bunch who have not are ..Obviously, in this scenario, the one who has the printing machine has a "little" advantage How to overcome this would be part of "what is to be done" ..

Ilyana_Rozumova , says: October 20, 2018 at 12:07 pm GMT
If the Russians wanted to kill them they would be dead. Period. It is all FN hoax.
The latest English came up with was that poison was smeared on the door handle and that both touched the door handle. Give me a break. Such a idiocy. Just imagine the exit procedure where both are touching the door knob.
And than both Russians went to garbage dump carrying the little bottle and thru it there.
What an exemplary citizen neat behavior by Russians,
All English story is such a stupid idiocy that it turns my stomach.
All we like sheep , says: October 20, 2018 at 12:14 pm GMT

However, the presence of Russian spies in Salisbury can be explained by its nearness to Porton Down, the secret British chemical lab and factory for manufacturing chemical weapons applied by the White Helmets in Syria in their false-flag operation in Douma and other places. It is possible that a resident of Salisbury (Mr Skripal?) had delivered samples from Porton Down to the Russian intelligence agents. This makes much more sense than the dubious story of Russians trying to poison an old ex-spy who did his stretch in a Russian jail.

If Mr. Skripal has been poisoned by the stuff of which he himself took samples in Porton Down, this would run completely parallel to the earlier poisoning of Mr. Alexander Valterovich Litvinenko, who also became ill because of carrying poison (polonium) around.

Eagle Eye , says: October 20, 2018 at 12:54 pm GMT

If [Yulia Skripal] had not had the courage to make this call while slipping the observance of British intelligence, she would probably be dead by now.

Both Skripals are most likely DEAD, murdered by British "intelligence" services.

The formulaic and curiously uninterested treatment of the matter in the British media seems inconsistent with the Skripals still being alive.

The article above suggests that the Skripals were unwitting or witting participants in a sting to expose Russian intelligence agents. More importantly, Sergey Skripal appears to have had a role in the creation of the DNC's "dossier" to undermine the Trump presidencey.

Whatever the background, Sergey Skripal became privy to important secrets that the Brits and their seditious allies in the U.S. Deep State do not want exposed.

macilrae , says: October 20, 2018 at 2:38 pm GMT
In the Skripal case the British have not explained why, after claiming to have found the closest approach to a smoking gun in the form of traces of novichok in that hotel room, the hotel was not then immediately quarantined.

And assuredly, with Putin's name on the line, the Russians have to do a better job if they are to refute the standing accusations – the RT interview was something of a PR disaster.

The Belloncat data, although superficially convincing, could so easily have been faked by anybody with reasonable knowledge of Russian internet infrastructure and some proficiency in Photoshop.

CalDre , says: October 20, 2018 at 3:21 pm GMT
@utu

But now it is kind of late. So why it wasn't told within few days or weeks of Skripal affair?

It's still not being told – believe it or not, Israel Shamir is not Sergei Lavrov. I hypothesized to the same state of affairs in early September re: Skripals.

But I did not know about these massive intelligence security breaches in Russia. Wow, that's huge. Even though it's not clear to me how this indicates Putin's plan misfired. If anything he got exactly what he wanted: confirmation that the "West" had access to the entire passport database. Knowing what your enemy has in intelligence is a huge win, now they can work on correcting it (hard as it may be, it would be impossible without knowing).

CalDre , says: October 20, 2018 at 3:24 pm GMT
@macilrae You are right, it could have been faked, anything can be faked today, even a video of Putin speaking (search for "deep fakes" and watch the video at https://www.wsj.com/articles/deepfake-videos-are-ruining-lives-is-democracy-next-1539595787 ).

But the fact is Russia has not really disputed the results so I am fairly confident that not only was Belling Cat right, but Israel is right, and now we have the situation where Russia knows that Western intelligence has full access to Russia's passport database.

wayfarer , says: October 20, 2018 at 3:55 pm GMT
@Tyrion 2 Had some experiences with Chinese and Mossad spies, not to mention Russian Jewish hard-drug dealers.

Here are a few examples.

There was an AMES postdoc at UCSD, a Chinese applied-math brain who had a 10-plus female handler. She'd stop by occasionally to check up on him. He always get extremely anxious when she was around. Couldn't figure out if it was fear, sexual excitement, or a combination of both.

There was an old Chinese man and his foxy young female protege, who enjoyed filming U.S. military maneuvers along the San Diego coast. I observed their operation for days.

There was a swing-shift cleaning crew in a Southern California high-tech mfg facility that was all Chinese, in an area that typically employed Latin American crews. Its head honcho was a beautiful Chinese lady. They made it their job to sort through trash bins and save papers. The feds busted them.

As far as the Mossad, I spent two years on a rental property in SD county, which was occupied by them as well. Mostly Israeli kids using the property and a local Israeli-owned vegetarian restaurant as their "scorpion den." Got fairly familiar with some of their espionage work and methods.

I don't go looking for this stuff. I'm just able to recognize it. As an empath I can read people, quite well. It's a natural gift.

Can't stomach Israel's insensitive nature. That's why you'll typically find me pointing out their self-serving bullshit.

source: https://themindunleashed.com/2013/10/30-traits-of-empath.html

FB , says: October 20, 2018 at 4:13 pm GMT
This is a pretty good article but also falls on its face at the end

Mr Shamir's 'inside' information confirms my own take on Petrov and Boshirov which I published a few days after that RT interview with Ms Simonyan I wrote this on Col Lang's blog on Sept 14

'Yeah those two 'tourists' do look the part don't they I would say they are probably GRU or something similar but nobody 'poisoned' the Skripals that's total kabuki theater another Potemkin village production from the reality masters

Something is afoot here though perhaps these two were lured to Salisbury as part of a frame up plot, perhaps by Skripal himself or perhaps the Brits caught wind of their plans to visit [on some standard spying mission, certainly not assassination] and put in motion the elaborate hoax

Everybody there protested loudly including Andrey Martyanov [Smoothie] I also added this

' I disagree with everyone here it seems these guys aren't tourists but they also didn't try to kill anyone that's stupid

It's some sort of spy game

Here's one scenario double agent Skripal makes convincing noises about flipping back someone at GRU [or some similar outfit] sends these two to Salisbury to check it out a very stupid move which is why Putin is now miffed enough to display these guys publicly and their field career surely over also a slap in the face to the silly Limeys for playing dirty pool even in the cloak and dagger game there are unwritten rules '

This is now exactly the story that Mr Shamir is presenting here but he is a day late and a dollar short

I also don't agree with his take that this is all somehow a big loss for Russian intel the Brits are the ones who have painted themselves in a corner their Skripal story is a wet paper bag waiting to fall apart the fact that they lured the Russians to Salisbury, under whatever pretext, be it Skripal or Porton Down/white helmets etc was their only small tactical victory because they could then later expose those two after months of Russian denials in order to show the Russians were in fact somehow involved

But that exposure came months later all that time the Russians would have known that Boshirov and Petrov had been captured on candid camera and would have had time to work on their countermove

Mr Shamir writes this like the game is over that is ridiculous the Brits have no way out of the Skripal hoax there was never any poisoning the original diagnosis of the Skripals in the Salisbury hospital was opioid overdose that came out in the first BBC interview with the hospital staff months after the 'poisoning'

It was not until 48 hours after the Skripals were admitted to hospital and the convenient intervention of Porton Down that the medical diagnosis was 'changed' to nerve agent poisoning

BUT this is an unsustainable story that WILL FALL APART the simple reason is medical and chemical fact both nerve agents and agricultural pesticides are based on the exact same chemical compound organophosphates

It just so happens that organophsphate poisoning is 'one of the most common causes of poisoning worldwide '

'There are nearly 3 million poisonings per year resulting in two hundred thousand deaths.'

That is the simple reason why emergency doctors EVERYWHERE are trained to recognize and treat this kind of poisoning especially in rural, agricultural areas like Salisbury

That is why it took months for media to gain access to the medical staff at that hospital the British spooks needed to do a lot of 'persuading' with medical professionals that would have wanted no part in such trickery and fakery

But this is a ticking time bomb that is bound to blow up in the faces of the very stupid Brits

So yes they pulled off a minor coup in luring those two to Salisbury but the game is very very far from over

As for Skripal he is in on it for sure as I speculated in my original comment on the matter..the Russian intel services are perfectly aware of this, yet Mr Shamir's supposedly well connected source has zero knowledge of this which tells me this source is actually a useless clown who 'knows' exactly what an internet commenter [myself] already knew two months ago

PS the fact that the Brits supposedly have all kinds of database info on the Russian intel apparatus and personnel files etc doesn't mean anything the author is a making a big deal out of this, but his story lacks meat on its bones most 'intel' is open source material anyway

As for sensitive stuff that may have been 'sold' by 'corrupt' bureaucrats one must ask if such 'info' is actually real or a clever plant providing fake info is the oldest spy trick in the book and this article simply takes for granted that such a trick would not have been employed why not ?

CalDre , says: October 20, 2018 at 5:30 pm GMT
@FB How would a fake database leak include the real data on the two GRU agents that just happened to be sent to UK? Maybe it was to make the data leak seem real?

In spycraft it is always impossible to know how deep the deception goes. That's why the very article to which you are responding started with:

It is hard to evaluate the exact measure of things in the murky world of spies and counter-spies, but it appears that the Western spies have had extraordinary success in the subterranean battle.

An acknowledgement you stubbornly ignore.

M Edward , says: October 20, 2018 at 6:01 pm GMT
None of this matters.

All governments are corrupt and have no interest in the welfare of the native populations.

All this he said she said crap is irrelevant, in the end we all will end up under a totalitarian police state run out of Tel-Aviv and Jerusalem.

Cyrano , says: October 20, 2018 at 6:06 pm GMT
I think that a clear strategy by the western "intelligence" services is starting to emerge vis-a-vis the Russians. By accusing any Russian that they can get their hands on, of being a spy, they want to scare the ordinary Russians from visiting the west, so afterwards any Russian actually caught traveling to the west can be safely assumed to be a spy – since by the calculations of the clever western intelligence – only someone who is actually a spy while at the same time being Russian, would dare to travel to the west. How smart is that?

Joking aside, it really is becoming unsafe for Russian nationals to travel to the west. Even though the west reserves the generosity of calling somebody equal only for those that are from the 3rd world – Russians clearly don't deserve such generosity.

Despite this, exceptions can be made and some unfortunate Russian soul could be accused of being equal with those highly evolved westerners and against their will can be offered protection from Mother Russia.

Pretty much like it happened to Yulia Skripal. She was only visiting her gastarbeiter father in GB, who apparently expressed desire to return to Russia, against pretty much everybody's wishes, and all of a sudden Yulia Skripal found herself bestowed with the western generosity of being declared equal, and was disappeared from public eye in order to protect her from those with whom she is clearly not equal – the Russians.

Thank God at least MI-6 proved equal to the task and discovered her equalness in a nick of time and saved her. The moral of the story: Only democracy has the power to recognize who is equal and who is not. Then, on the other hand, capitalism can keep acquiring new monikers such as "democracy" – all they want, Russia still has better quality of equality, despite ditching socialism.

FB , says: October 20, 2018 at 6:24 pm GMT
@CalDre Yes I 'stubbornly' refuse to take at face value this silly statement

it appears that the Western spies have had extraordinary success in the subterranean battle.'

Because it's not backed up by anything other than hot air as for that supposed 'data' about Petrov and Boshirov that was put out by Bellingcat

Ie mickey mouse stuff as with everything these clowns do, it is meant only to bamboozle the most utterly stupid bipeds

A very nice clue is the fact that a Russian website called 'The Insider' is Bellingcat's acknowledged partner here

If you read the article in English they claim to have 'dug' up a lot of info from various sources such the central Russian resident database and passenger check in data for their flight to the UK

Big deal that Shamir is building a mountain out of a molehill is more than clear

In fact this entire Shamir tale appears to have one subtle purpose to publicize and glorify the Bellingcat outfit

which irredeemably lost any credibility a few weeks back when illiterate poofter Eliott Higgins refused a debate challenge by the distinguished MIT physicist and former presidential advisor Ted Postol actually calling Postol an 'idiot' a move that astounded even those willing to entertain Higgins on a semi-credible level

peterAUS , says: October 20, 2018 at 6:39 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin Be that as it may, the "Western side" had (publicly known) Aldrich, Hanssen and Benghazi fiasco.

Boils down to, from the comment below:

When you have no ideology ( or worst, share ideology with your opponent, i.e free market .) all what you have, from values to secrets, from scientific human capital to secret service officials, are out there in the global market for possible selling to the best postor .this is the principle of capitalism .. after all, it is said, almost everybody has a price..

and

Obviously, in this scenario, the one who has the printing machine has a "little" advantage.

And, on top of it, in West, since the fall of The Wall, we've been having "Cooking the Intelligence to Fit the Political Agenda".

Incompetence vs blatant lying?
What a choice.

Kubarking , says: October 20, 2018 at 6:43 pm GMT
This commenter begs to differ with M. Karlin's assessment (8) of the relative competence of Russian sovok and CIA. "consummate professionals relative to what passes for today's Russian intelligence services"? Mais non.

CIA always gets caught. All they do is step on their crank, again and again. They depend not on professionalism but on what Russ Baker describes as a strange mix of ruthlessness and ineptitude. Both stem from impunity in municipal law.

For example: CIA torture and coercive interference got comprehensively exposed, worldwide, in the '70s. What happened? Don Gregg gave the Church and Pike committees an ultimatum: Back off or it's martial law. CIA got busted again in the '80s for the criminal enterprises under the Iran/Contra rubric. By then CIA had installed Tom Polgar, Former Saigon Station Chief, as chief investigator for the cognizant Senate Select committee, and Polgar assured Gregg that his hearings would not be a repeat of the abortive Pike and Church flaps.

So CIA are clowns. They can afford to be clowns because they know they can get away with it. Getting away with it is their only skill, and the only skill they need.

The persistent category error at this site is failing to realize that CIA is the state. They rule the USA.

[Oct 20, 2018] I am most encouraged by the apparent Putin's realisation that the First Strike is possible now if not even likely. If the Russians expect an attack they are much less likely to be totally surprised, as usual. In fact, never in history was such attack by the West more likely than now, for various reasons which would take a while to explain.

Highly recommended!
Oct 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

Kiza says: October 20, 2018 at 9:13 am GMT 200 Words

Although it is almost off topic, I did find one point in Putin's Valdai speech quite telling. It was his point about the Russian automated system for detection and tracking of missile launches. Putin tried to boost the credibility of the Russian nuclear deterant by advertising this system for detecting the First Strike launches.

Although I do not believe that this system is as reliable as advertised, I am most encouraged by the apparent Putin's realisation that the First Strike is possible now if not even likely.

If the Russians expect an attack they are much less likely to be totally surprised, as usual. In fact, never in history was such attack by the West more likely than now, for various reasons which would take a while to explain.

I just hope that the Russian office corps is as prepared as Putin is to be productive martyrs (no more Arkhipovs please).

[Oct 20, 2018] Cloak and Dagger by Israel Shamir

Highly recommended!
UK politicians in Skripal story behaved by cheap clowns. Their story with door knob was pathetic. They tried to invent the legend with poisoning on the fly and that shows. There is definitely something else brewing here and Shamir proposed his version with Skripal double dealings or something along those line is quite plausible.
We will never know, but I think British discredited themselves for the whole world in this story. Trump was not better will using this tory to impose additional sanctions on Russia. This is just another proof that he is another neocon who during election campaign like Obama played the role of isolationalist and then appointed Haley to UN and hired Pompeo as his Secretary of state and Bolton as his security advisor -- a typical "bat and switch" operation in US politics.
Notable quotes:
"... Vrublevsky thinks that British intelligence convinced the GRU (probably we should say that GRU is not called GRU anymore but GU, the Chief Directorate of the General Staff, but it hardly matters) that Mr Skripal wanted to return home to Russia. Probably they were told that Mr Skripal intended to bring some valuable dowry with him, including Porton Down data and the secrets of the Golden Rain dossier. It is possible that Skripal had been played, too; perhaps he indeed wanted to go back to Russia, the country he missed badly. ..."
"... As we had learned from videos and stills published by the Brits, the two men had been carefully followed from the beginning to the end. Meanwhile, British intelligence staged a 'poisoning' of Skripal and his daughter, and the two agents quickly returned home. ..."
"... There is not a single man close to Russian intelligence who thinks that Skripal had actually been poisoned by the Russians. First, there was absolutely no reason to do it, and second, if the Russians would poison him, he would stay poisoned, like the Ukrainian Quisling Stepan Bandera was. ..."
"... However, by playing this card, the British secret service convinced the Foreign Office to expel all diplomats who had contacts and connection to the exposed GRU agents. The massive expulsion of 150 diplomats caused serious damage to the Russian secret services. ..."
"... Such a massive operation against Russian agents and their contacts could signal forthcoming war. In normal circumstances, states do not reveal their full knowledge of enemy agents. ..."
"... I do not know what is the truth. At this point I no longer care because we will never know but it will be the British version that will be the most popular. I like most people like good stories. Unfortunately for Russia the Brits have better script writers, director and actors. ..."
Oct 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

... ... ...

Vrublevsky thinks that British intelligence convinced the GRU (probably we should say that GRU is not called GRU anymore but GU, the Chief Directorate of the General Staff, but it hardly matters) that Mr Skripal wanted to return home to Russia. Probably they were told that Mr Skripal intended to bring some valuable dowry with him, including Porton Down data and the secrets of the Golden Rain dossier. It is possible that Skripal had been played, too; perhaps he indeed wanted to go back to Russia, the country he missed badly.

Two GRU agents, supposedly experts on extraction (they allegedly sneaked the Ukrainian president Yanukovych from Ukraine after the coup and saved him from lynching mob) were sent to Salisbury to test the ground and make preparations for Skripal's return. As we had learned from videos and stills published by the Brits, the two men had been carefully followed from the beginning to the end. Meanwhile, British intelligence staged a 'poisoning' of Skripal and his daughter, and the two agents quickly returned home.

There is not a single man close to Russian intelligence who thinks that Skripal had actually been poisoned by the Russians. First, there was absolutely no reason to do it, and second, if the Russians would poison him, he would stay poisoned, like the Ukrainian Quisling Stepan Bandera was.

However, by playing this card, the British secret service convinced the Foreign Office to expel all diplomats who had contacts and connection to the exposed GRU agents. The massive expulsion of 150 diplomats caused serious damage to the Russian secret services.

Still, the Russians had no clue how the West had learned identities of so many diplomats connected to GRU. They suspected that there was a mole, and a turncoat who delivered the stuff to the enemy.

That is why Vladimir Putin decided to dare them. As he knew that the two men identified by the British service had no connection to the alleged poisoning, he asked them to appear on the RT in an interview with Ms Simonyan. By acting as village hicks, they were supposed to provoke the enemy to disclose its source. The result was unexpected: instead of revealing the name of a turncoat, the Belling Cat, a site used by the Western Secret Services for intentional leaks, explained how the men were traced by using the stolen databases. Putin's plan misfired.

The Russian secret service is not dead. Intelligence services do suffer from enemy action from time to time: the Cambridge Five infiltrated the upper reaches of the MI-5 and delivered state secrets to Moscow for a long time, but the Intelligence Service survived. Le Carre's novels were based on such a defeat of the intelligence. However they have a way to recover. Identity of their top agents remain secret, and they are concealed from the enemy's eyes.

But in order to function properly, the Russians will have to clean their stables, remove their databases from the market place and keep its citizenry reasonably safe. Lax, and not-up-to-date agents do not apparently understand the degree the internet is being watched. Considering it should have been done twenty years ago, and meanwhile a new generation of Russians has came of age, perfectly prepared to sell whatever they can for cash, it is a formidable task.

There is an additional reason to worry. Such a massive operation against Russian agents and their contacts could signal forthcoming war. In normal circumstances, states do not reveal their full knowledge of enemy agents. It made president Putin worry; and he said this week: we'll go to heaven as martyrs, the attackers will die as sinners. In face of multiple and recent threats, this end of the world is quite possible.

utu , says: October 20, 2018 at 4:23 am GMT

Great story. If told many people would believe it. But now it is kind of late. So why it wasn't told within few days or weeks of Skripal affair? Why it is the British media that has initiative and Russian media is reactive and defensive? The story that Skripal wanted to return and that two agents were lured in there should have been told right away and that it turned out be MI5 provocation should have been insinuated. And the two agents should have been interviewed on Russian media. Instead we get defensive inept and indolent Russian reactions.

I do not know what is the truth. At this point I no longer care because we will never know but it will be the British version that will be the most popular. I like most people like good stories. Unfortunately for Russia the Brits have better script writers, director and actors.

jilles dykstra , says: October 20, 2018 at 7:25 am GMT
@utu " Instead we get defensive inept and indolent Russian reactions."
The reaction 'if we want to kill somebody that somebody does not survive' I cannot see as inept and indolent.
Malaysian Truther , says: October 20, 2018 at 8:24 am GMT
Excellent piece by Israel Shamir which I think gives the correct explanation of the Skripal poisoning. This was a classic fishing, 'click bait' operation which produced a very valuable haul for Western Intelligence. The only question is whether Skripal cooperated with it – which I think he did – not knowing that both he and his daughter were meant to die. Hence Putin's rage against Skripal a few weeks ago ( calling him a scumbag traitor etc, etc) after the Russian operatives were identified because retired agents are supposed to stay retired.

Russia made a very serious mistake with the RT interview with the 2 operatives. Better not to say anything if you can't give the whole story. The GU weren't happy to show their incompetence, but compounded the original mistake with obvious lying. That was a propaganda gift to the Western media and has helped convince original disbelievers of Russian perfidy.

Russia needs to step up its game especially in the media dept.

Tom Welsh , says: October 20, 2018 at 9:38 am GMT
"Unfortunately for Russia the Brits have better script writers, director and actors".

Maybe, if your taste runs to "Dr Who" or "Carry On Spying". That's about the level of the Skripal nonsense.

If it was meant for public consumption, the British government's opinion of the British people is much lower than mine.

jilles dykstra , says: October 20, 2018 at 10:33 am GMT
@Anatoly Karlin " British or American human capital, but there are certainly consummate professionals relative to what passes for today's Russian intelligence services. "

On what this 'certainly' is based, I see no argument whatsoever.
Already a long time ago, I must admit, the CIA director had to admit to senator Moynihan that he had lied about the CIA not laying mines in Havana harbour.
A professional in espionage does not get caught.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan, 'Secrecy', New Haven 1998
Anyone acquinted with Sept 11 understands that the USA's secret army, the CIA, was involved.
Another blunder.
As far as I know British secret services never get caught.
How clever the Russians are, suppose quite clever, I for one do not think that the stupid stories about for example Skripal have any truth in them.
Until now the asserted Russian meddling in USA elections have not been proved.
Do not know of anything credible that Russian intelligence people are said to have done.
But of course Russian intelligence does exist.

Fatima Manoubia , says: October 20, 2018 at 11:18 am GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

"A related problem is that since there is now a free market economy, with many more attractive career options for talented people, the high quality people go to work in other spheres, leaving the intelligence agencies with the dregs;" .

A direct result of erasing ideology so as to erase personality cult towards highly respected people in former USSR .When you have no ideology ( or worst, share ideology with your opponent, i.e free market .) all what you have, from values to secrets, from scientific human capital to secret service officials, are out there in the global market for possible selling to the best postor .this is the principle of capitalism .. after all, it is said, almost everybody has a price .The challenge is finding out where that little bunch who have not are ..Obviously, in this scenario, the one who has the printing machine has a "little" advantage How to overcome this would be part of "what is to be done" ..

Ilyana_Rozumova , says: October 20, 2018 at 12:07 pm GMT
If the Russians wanted to kill them they would be dead. Period. It is all FN hoax.
The latest English came up with was that poison was smeared on the door handle and that both touched the door handle. Give me a break. Such a idiocy. Just imagine the exit procedure where both are touching the door knob.
And than both Russians went to garbage dump carrying the little bottle and thru it there.
What an exemplary citizen neat behavior by Russians,
All English story is such a stupid idiocy that it turns my stomach.
All we like sheep , says: October 20, 2018 at 12:14 pm GMT

However, the presence of Russian spies in Salisbury can be explained by its nearness to Porton Down, the secret British chemical lab and factory for manufacturing chemical weapons applied by the White Helmets in Syria in their false-flag operation in Douma and other places. It is possible that a resident of Salisbury (Mr Skripal?) had delivered samples from Porton Down to the Russian intelligence agents. This makes much more sense than the dubious story of Russians trying to poison an old ex-spy who did his stretch in a Russian jail.

If Mr. Skripal has been poisoned by the stuff of which he himself took samples in Porton Down, this would run completely parallel to the earlier poisoning of Mr. Alexander Valterovich Litvinenko, who also became ill because of carrying poison (polonium) around.

Eagle Eye , says: October 20, 2018 at 12:54 pm GMT

If [Yulia Skripal] had not had the courage to make this call while slipping the observance of British intelligence, she would probably be dead by now.

Both Skripals are most likely DEAD, murdered by British "intelligence" services.

The formulaic and curiously uninterested treatment of the matter in the British media seems inconsistent with the Skripals still being alive.

The article above suggests that the Skripals were unwitting or witting participants in a sting to expose Russian intelligence agents. More importantly, Sergey Skripal appears to have had a role in the creation of the DNC's "dossier" to undermine the Trump presidencey.

Whatever the background, Sergey Skripal became privy to important secrets that the Brits and their seditious allies in the U.S. Deep State do not want exposed.

macilrae , says: October 20, 2018 at 2:38 pm GMT
In the Skripal case the British have not explained why, after claiming to have found the closest approach to a smoking gun in the form of traces of novichok in that hotel room, the hotel was not then immediately quarantined.

And assuredly, with Putin's name on the line, the Russians have to do a better job if they are to refute the standing accusations – the RT interview was something of a PR disaster.

The Belloncat data, although superficially convincing, could so easily have been faked by anybody with reasonable knowledge of Russian internet infrastructure and some proficiency in Photoshop.

CalDre , says: October 20, 2018 at 3:21 pm GMT
@utu

But now it is kind of late. So why it wasn't told within few days or weeks of Skripal affair?

It's still not being told – believe it or not, Israel Shamir is not Sergei Lavrov. I hypothesized to the same state of affairs in early September re: Skripals.

But I did not know about these massive intelligence security breaches in Russia. Wow, that's huge. Even though it's not clear to me how this indicates Putin's plan misfired. If anything he got exactly what he wanted: confirmation that the "West" had access to the entire passport database. Knowing what your enemy has in intelligence is a huge win, now they can work on correcting it (hard as it may be, it would be impossible without knowing).

CalDre , says: October 20, 2018 at 3:24 pm GMT
@macilrae You are right, it could have been faked, anything can be faked today, even a video of Putin speaking (search for "deep fakes" and watch the video at https://www.wsj.com/articles/deepfake-videos-are-ruining-lives-is-democracy-next-1539595787 ).

But the fact is Russia has not really disputed the results so I am fairly confident that not only was Belling Cat right, but Israel is right, and now we have the situation where Russia knows that Western intelligence has full access to Russia's passport database.

wayfarer , says: October 20, 2018 at 3:55 pm GMT
@Tyrion 2 Had some experiences with Chinese and Mossad spies, not to mention Russian Jewish hard-drug dealers.

Here are a few examples.

There was an AMES postdoc at UCSD, a Chinese applied-math brain who had a 10-plus female handler. She'd stop by occasionally to check up on him. He always get extremely anxious when she was around. Couldn't figure out if it was fear, sexual excitement, or a combination of both.

There was an old Chinese man and his foxy young female protege, who enjoyed filming U.S. military maneuvers along the San Diego coast. I observed their operation for days.

There was a swing-shift cleaning crew in a Southern California high-tech mfg facility that was all Chinese, in an area that typically employed Latin American crews. Its head honcho was a beautiful Chinese lady. They made it their job to sort through trash bins and save papers. The feds busted them.

As far as the Mossad, I spent two years on a rental property in SD county, which was occupied by them as well. Mostly Israeli kids using the property and a local Israeli-owned vegetarian restaurant as their "scorpion den." Got fairly familiar with some of their espionage work and methods.

I don't go looking for this stuff. I'm just able to recognize it. As an empath I can read people, quite well. It's a natural gift.

Can't stomach Israel's insensitive nature. That's why you'll typically find me pointing out their self-serving bullshit.

source: https://themindunleashed.com/2013/10/30-traits-of-empath.html

FB , says: October 20, 2018 at 4:13 pm GMT
This is a pretty good article but also falls on its face at the end

Mr Shamir's 'inside' information confirms my own take on Petrov and Boshirov which I published a few days after that RT interview with Ms Simonyan I wrote this on Col Lang's blog on Sept 14

'Yeah those two 'tourists' do look the part don't they I would say they are probably GRU or something similar but nobody 'poisoned' the Skripals that's total kabuki theater another Potemkin village production from the reality masters

Something is afoot here though perhaps these two were lured to Salisbury as part of a frame up plot, perhaps by Skripal himself or perhaps the Brits caught wind of their plans to visit [on some standard spying mission, certainly not assassination] and put in motion the elaborate hoax

Everybody there protested loudly including Andrey Martyanov [Smoothie] I also added this

' I disagree with everyone here it seems these guys aren't tourists but they also didn't try to kill anyone that's stupid

It's some sort of spy game

Here's one scenario double agent Skripal makes convincing noises about flipping back someone at GRU [or some similar outfit] sends these two to Salisbury to check it out a very stupid move which is why Putin is now miffed enough to display these guys publicly and their field career surely over also a slap in the face to the silly Limeys for playing dirty pool even in the cloak and dagger game there are unwritten rules '

This is now exactly the story that Mr Shamir is presenting here but he is a day late and a dollar short

I also don't agree with his take that this is all somehow a big loss for Russian intel the Brits are the ones who have painted themselves in a corner their Skripal story is a wet paper bag waiting to fall apart the fact that they lured the Russians to Salisbury, under whatever pretext, be it Skripal or Porton Down/white helmets etc was their only small tactical victory because they could then later expose those two after months of Russian denials in order to show the Russians were in fact somehow involved

But that exposure came months later all that time the Russians would have known that Boshirov and Petrov had been captured on candid camera and would have had time to work on their countermove

Mr Shamir writes this like the game is over that is ridiculous the Brits have no way out of the Skripal hoax there was never any poisoning the original diagnosis of the Skripals in the Salisbury hospital was opioid overdose that came out in the first BBC interview with the hospital staff months after the 'poisoning'

It was not until 48 hours after the Skripals were admitted to hospital and the convenient intervention of Porton Down that the medical diagnosis was 'changed' to nerve agent poisoning

BUT this is an unsustainable story that WILL FALL APART the simple reason is medical and chemical fact both nerve agents and agricultural pesticides are based on the exact same chemical compound organophosphates

It just so happens that organophsphate poisoning is 'one of the most common causes of poisoning worldwide '

'There are nearly 3 million poisonings per year resulting in two hundred thousand deaths.'

That is the simple reason why emergency doctors EVERYWHERE are trained to recognize and treat this kind of poisoning especially in rural, agricultural areas like Salisbury

That is why it took months for media to gain access to the medical staff at that hospital the British spooks needed to do a lot of 'persuading' with medical professionals that would have wanted no part in such trickery and fakery

But this is a ticking time bomb that is bound to blow up in the faces of the very stupid Brits

So yes they pulled off a minor coup in luring those two to Salisbury but the game is very very far from over

As for Skripal he is in on it for sure as I speculated in my original comment on the matter..the Russian intel services are perfectly aware of this, yet Mr Shamir's supposedly well connected source has zero knowledge of this which tells me this source is actually a useless clown who 'knows' exactly what an internet commenter [myself] already knew two months ago

PS the fact that the Brits supposedly have all kinds of database info on the Russian intel apparatus and personnel files etc doesn't mean anything the author is a making a big deal out of this, but his story lacks meat on its bones most 'intel' is open source material anyway

As for sensitive stuff that may have been 'sold' by 'corrupt' bureaucrats one must ask if such 'info' is actually real or a clever plant providing fake info is the oldest spy trick in the book and this article simply takes for granted that such a trick would not have been employed why not ?

CalDre , says: October 20, 2018 at 5:30 pm GMT
@FB How would a fake database leak include the real data on the two GRU agents that just happened to be sent to UK? Maybe it was to make the data leak seem real?

In spycraft it is always impossible to know how deep the deception goes. That's why the very article to which you are responding started with:

It is hard to evaluate the exact measure of things in the murky world of spies and counter-spies, but it appears that the Western spies have had extraordinary success in the subterranean battle.

An acknowledgement you stubbornly ignore.

M Edward , says: October 20, 2018 at 6:01 pm GMT
None of this matters.

All governments are corrupt and have no interest in the welfare of the native populations.

All this he said she said crap is irrelevant, in the end we all will end up under a totalitarian police state run out of Tel-Aviv and Jerusalem.

Cyrano , says: October 20, 2018 at 6:06 pm GMT
I think that a clear strategy by the western "intelligence" services is starting to emerge vis-a-vis the Russians. By accusing any Russian that they can get their hands on, of being a spy, they want to scare the ordinary Russians from visiting the west, so afterwards any Russian actually caught traveling to the west can be safely assumed to be a spy – since by the calculations of the clever western intelligence – only someone who is actually a spy while at the same time being Russian, would dare to travel to the west. How smart is that?

Joking aside, it really is becoming unsafe for Russian nationals to travel to the west. Even though the west reserves the generosity of calling somebody equal only for those that are from the 3rd world – Russians clearly don't deserve such generosity.

Despite this, exceptions can be made and some unfortunate Russian soul could be accused of being equal with those highly evolved westerners and against their will can be offered protection from Mother Russia.

Pretty much like it happened to Yulia Skripal. She was only visiting her gastarbeiter father in GB, who apparently expressed desire to return to Russia, against pretty much everybody's wishes, and all of a sudden Yulia Skripal found herself bestowed with the western generosity of being declared equal, and was disappeared from public eye in order to protect her from those with whom she is clearly not equal – the Russians.

Thank God at least MI-6 proved equal to the task and discovered her equalness in a nick of time and saved her. The moral of the story: Only democracy has the power to recognize who is equal and who is not. Then, on the other hand, capitalism can keep acquiring new monikers such as "democracy" – all they want, Russia still has better quality of equality, despite ditching socialism.

FB , says: October 20, 2018 at 6:24 pm GMT
@CalDre Yes I 'stubbornly' refuse to take at face value this silly statement

it appears that the Western spies have had extraordinary success in the subterranean battle.'

Because it's not backed up by anything other than hot air as for that supposed 'data' about Petrov and Boshirov that was put out by Bellingcat

Ie mickey mouse stuff as with everything these clowns do, it is meant only to bamboozle the most utterly stupid bipeds

A very nice clue is the fact that a Russian website called 'The Insider' is Bellingcat's acknowledged partner here

If you read the article in English they claim to have 'dug' up a lot of info from various sources such the central Russian resident database and passenger check in data for their flight to the UK

Big deal that Shamir is building a mountain out of a molehill is more than clear

In fact this entire Shamir tale appears to have one subtle purpose to publicize and glorify the Bellingcat outfit

which irredeemably lost any credibility a few weeks back when illiterate poofter Eliott Higgins refused a debate challenge by the distinguished MIT physicist and former presidential advisor Ted Postol actually calling Postol an 'idiot' a move that astounded even those willing to entertain Higgins on a semi-credible level

peterAUS , says: October 20, 2018 at 6:39 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin Be that as it may, the "Western side" had (publicly known) Aldrich, Hanssen and Benghazi fiasco.

Boils down to, from the comment below:

When you have no ideology ( or worst, share ideology with your opponent, i.e free market .) all what you have, from values to secrets, from scientific human capital to secret service officials, are out there in the global market for possible selling to the best postor .this is the principle of capitalism .. after all, it is said, almost everybody has a price..

and

Obviously, in this scenario, the one who has the printing machine has a "little" advantage.

And, on top of it, in West, since the fall of The Wall, we've been having "Cooking the Intelligence to Fit the Political Agenda".

Incompetence vs blatant lying?
What a choice.

Kubarking , says: October 20, 2018 at 6:43 pm GMT
This commenter begs to differ with M. Karlin's assessment (8) of the relative competence of Russian sovok and CIA. "consummate professionals relative to what passes for today's Russian intelligence services"? Mais non.

CIA always gets caught. All they do is step on their crank, again and again. They depend not on professionalism but on what Russ Baker describes as a strange mix of ruthlessness and ineptitude. Both stem from impunity in municipal law.

For example: CIA torture and coercive interference got comprehensively exposed, worldwide, in the '70s. What happened? Don Gregg gave the Church and Pike committees an ultimatum: Back off or it's martial law. CIA got busted again in the '80s for the criminal enterprises under the Iran/Contra rubric. By then CIA had installed Tom Polgar, Former Saigon Station Chief, as chief investigator for the cognizant Senate Select committee, and Polgar assured Gregg that his hearings would not be a repeat of the abortive Pike and Church flaps.

So CIA are clowns. They can afford to be clowns because they know they can get away with it. Getting away with it is their only skill, and the only skill they need.

The persistent category error at this site is failing to realize that CIA is the state. They rule the USA.

[Oct 20, 2018] Russia has a lot of fundamentals going for it, but it is also possible that the mistakes of the past and the pathological hatreds Russia has engendered among the Western and other imperial crazies will strike again. It is big and tempting.

Oct 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

Beckow says: October 18, 2018 at 1:47 pm GMT 400 Words @Anon 2 You are right that Central Europe – or more precisely Eastern Central Europe that includes Austria and parts of Germany – has been blesses with a rare combination of good (great!) geography, enough resources, high quality demographics, good location and weather, fantastic infrastructure and a relatively normal history. Western countries have suffered from a combination of imperial overreach and the inevitable blowback. Westerners have also lost the due diligence habits that make civilizations last. They often seem lazy and unserious.

To the east the lawlessness of the open spaces, harsh weather, and the frequent exposures to the nihilistic Asiatic exotica, have delayed the development of a viable, stable and pleasant way of life. They might get there eventually and I wish them all the best. Russia has a lot of fundamentals going for it, but it is also possible that the mistakes of the past – and the pathological hatreds Russia has engendered among the Western and other imperial crazies – will strike again. It is big and tempting.

The endless attempts to slice the borders of Russia, to shrink it as Brzezinski openly dreamt about, are a foolish thing that might bury us all. A compulsion of obsessive map readers. Russia is at its most destabilising when it is weak. That's when the temptations become too much and some nutcase – or a 'council' of idiots – push and push. Unfortunately for the imperial builders in the West they missed their window of opportunity and they don't seem capable of admitting it. We get ' religious schisms ' just to make sure that no stone remains unturned. It will amount to nothing. They will have to wait for the next dip, there always seems to be one in the ennui filled steppes.

Central Europe (V4+) is about to take over as the most desirable place on the planet. That's why we are seeing the Western attacks on it about some very basic and sound ideas like having borders, homogeneous populations, freedom of speech and peace with neighbours, from the rapidly disintegrating Western world. West cannot stand to live with the mistakes they have made, they want to create a multi-racial, neo-liberal, war mongering cataclysm in order to hide the painful truth of they have done. The demographic suicide of the West is probably irreversible. Macron and Merkel can prance around and preach their silly slogans, but they cannot change the numbers of the ground.

They can still convince some elderly Greek in Istanbul to pour more oil on the fire. What that shows is desperation; if all West has left are these self-defeating intrigues, they don't have much.

[Oct 20, 2018] According to Global Wealth Report by the personal wealth of the population Ukraine is in the 123rd place (out of 140 countries ranked).

Oct 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

AP says: October 18, 2018 at 9:58 pm GMT 100 Words @Gerard2

This months gas tariff for "Ukrainians" increases by 24%!!

The context is that Ukrainian consumers have the lowest gas rate in Europe. Moldovan households pay more for gas than do Ukrainian ones. Even with a 24% price increase Ukraine will still have the cheapest gas in Europe for its consumers:

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Natural_gas_price_statistics

AP says: October 19, 2018 at 12:46 am GMT @Gerard2

The price increase will go past 40% in May

Which will make gas prices for Ukrainian consumers more or less tied with those in Moldova as the cheapest in Europe.

For whatever reason IMF wanted Ukrainian consumers not be subsidized as much as they have been.

AnonFromTN , says: October 19, 2018 at 2:51 pm GMT

@Anon According to Global Wealth Report ( https://www.credit-suisse.com/corporate/en/articles/news-and-expertise/global-wealth-report-2018-us-and-china-in-the-lead-201810.html ), by the personal wealth of the population Ukraine is in the 123rd place (out of 140 countries ranked).
By this measure Ukraine is behind Nepal, Cameroon, Kenia, Bangladesh, and Lesotho, just ahead of Zambia. But there are 135 people in Ukraine with personal wealth greater than $50 million.

A huge line for free food at the charity kitchen in Kiev can be seen here: http://rusvesna.su/news/1539952343 (those who read Russian can find details in the accompanying news item).

I guess all of this is a great achievement of Maidan. Ukies, please comment.

[Oct 20, 2018] Trump is de facto neocon

Oct 20, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Peter AU 1 , Oct 19, 2018 4:34:37 AM | link

@ Hoarsewhisper

I initially backed Trump, though with reservations on his attitude to Iran and his wanting to increase US military spending - build a stronger US military. Pulling out of the TPP was great. Au had sovereignty on paper if not in practice, but with the TPP, Australia would not have had sovereignty legally. His first attack on Syria was a flash bang exercise to disable his opponents. His second attack I thought initially was the same, but with everything I've read since, I believe Trump's US planned to destroy Syrian military but not wanting to go to war with Russia at that time, respected the Russian nyet on targets.

With Idlib it moved up a notch, Trump's US threatening attack on Syria including Russian personal stationed there, and Russia moving to asymmetrical moves rather than in your face nuclear amageddon, which is what a full on US attack on Syria would have amounted to..

[Oct 20, 2018] 'US Congress has no Russian policy other than sanctions' Stephen Cohen -- RT Op-ed

Notable quotes:
"... we do not know ..."
"... cooperating with Russia ..."
"... cooperation with Russia ..."
"... Stephen F. Cohen is a professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University and a contributing editor of The Nation. ..."
"... This article was originally published by The Nation . ..."
Oct 20, 2018 | www.rt.com
'US Congress has no Russian policy other than sanctions' – Stephen Cohen Published time: 19 Oct, 2018 09:09 Edited time: 19 Oct, 2018 12:25 Get short URL 'US Congress has no Russian policy other than sanctions' – Stephen Cohen © Reuters / Jonathan Ernst Inconvenient thoughts on Cold War and other news. Intelligence agencies, Nikki Haley, sanctions, and public opinion. 1. National intelligence agencies have long played major roles, often not entirely visible, in international politics. They are doing so again today, as is evident in several countries, from Russiagate in the United States and the murky Skripal assassination attempt in the UK to the apparent murder of Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Turkey. Leaving aside what President Obama knew about Russiagate allegations against Donald Trump and when he knew it, the question arises as to whether these operations were ordered by President Putin and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) or were " rogue " operations unknown in advance by the leaders and perhaps even directed against them.

There have been plenty of purely criminal and commercial " rogue " operations by intelligence agents in history, but also " rogue " ones that were purposefully political. We know, for example, that both Soviet and US intelligence agencies - or groups of agents - tried to disrupt the Eisenhower-Khrushchev détente of the late 1950s and early 1960s, and that some intelligence players tried to stop Khrushchev's formal recognition of West Germany, also in the early 1960s.

Read more © Reuters / Alexander Zemlianichenko Putin compares Khashoggi case to Skripal poisoning, asks why Russia condemned despite lack of proof

It is reasonable to ask, therefore, whether the attacks on Skripal and Khashoggi were " rogue " operations undertaken by political opponents of the leaders' policies at home or abroad, with the help of one or another intelligence agency or agents. Motive is a - perhaps the - crucial question. Why would Putin order such an operation in the UK at the very moment when his government had undertaken a major Western public-relations campaign in connection with the upcoming World Cup championship in Russia? And why would MbS risk a Khashoggi scandal as he was assiduously promoting his image abroad as an enlightened reform-minded Saudi leader?

We lack the evidence and official candor needed to study these questions, as is usually the case with covert, secretive, disinforming intelligence operations. But the questions are certainly reason enough not to rush to judgment, as many US pundits do. Saying " we do not know " may be unmarketable in today's mass-media environment, but it is honest and the right approach to potentially fruitful " analysis. "

2. We do know, however, that there has been fierce opposition in the US political-media establishment to President Trump's policy of " cooperating with Russia ," including in US intelligence agencies, particularly the CIA and FBI - and at high levels of his own administration.

We might consider Nikki Haley's resignation as UN ambassador in this light. Despite the laurels heaped on her by anti-Trump media, and by Trump himself at their happy-hour farewell in the White House, Haley was not widely admired by her UN colleagues. When appointed for political reasons by Trump, she had no foreign-policy credentials or any expert knowledge of other countries or of international relations generally. Judging by her performance as ambassador, nor did she acquire much on the job, almost always reading even short comments from prepared texts.

More to the point, Haley's statements regarding Russia at the UN were, more often than not, dissimilar from Trump's -- indeed, implicitly in opposition to Trump's. (She did nothing, for example, to offset charges in Washington that Trump's summit meeting with Putin in Helsinki, in July, had been " treasonous .") Who wrote these statements for her, which were very similar to statements regarding Russia that have been issued by US intelligence agencies since early 2017? It is hard to imagine that Trump was unhappy to see her go, and easier to imagine him pushing her toward the exit. A president needs a loyalist as secretary of state and at the UN. Haley's pandering remarks at the White House about Trump's family suggests some deal had been made to ease her out, with non-recrimination promises made on both sides. We will see if opponents of Trump's Russia policy can put another spokesperson at the UN.

As to which aspects of US foreign policy Trump actually controls, we might ask more urgently if he authorized, or was fully informed about, the joint US-NATO-Ukraine military air exercises that got under way over Ukraine, abutting Russia, on October 8. Moscow regards these exercises as a major " provocation ," and not unreasonably.

Read more US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley © Reuters / Yuri Gripas 'Ambitious as Lucifer': Steve Bannon takes dig at Nikki Haley and her 'suspicious' resignation

3. What do Trump's opponents want instead of " cooperation with Russia "? A much harder line, including more " crushing " economic sanctions. Sanctions are more like temper tantrums and road rage than actual national-security policy, and thus are often counterproductive. We have some recent evidence. Russia's trade surplus has grown to more than $100 billion. World prices for Russia's primary exports, oil and gas, have grown to over $80 a unit while Moscow's federal budget is predicated on $53 a barrel. Promoters of anti-Russian sanctions gloat that they have weakened the ruble. But while imposing some hardships on ordinary citizens, the combination of high oil prices and a weaker ruble is ideal for Russian state and corporate exporters. They sell abroad for inflated foreign currency and pay their operating expenses at home in cheaper rubles. To risk a pun, they are " crushing it. "

Congressional sanctions - for exactly what is not always clear - have helped Putin in another way. For years, he has unsuccessfully tried to get " oligarchs " to repatriate their wealth abroad. US sanctions on various " oligarchs " have persuaded them and others to begin to do so, perhaps bringing back home as much as $90 billion already in 2018.

If nothing else, these new budgetary cash flows help Putin deal with his declining popularity at home - he still has an approval rating well above 60 percent - due to the Kremlin's decision to raise the pension age for men and women, from 60 to 65 and from 55 to 60 respectively. The Kremlin can use the additional revenue to increase the value of pensions, supplement them with other social benefits, or to enact the age change over a longer period of time.

It appears that Congress, particularly the Senate, has no Russia policy other than sanctions. It might think hard about finding alternatives. One way to start would be with real " hearings " in place of the ritualistic affirmation of orthodox policy by " experts " that has long been its practice. There are more than a few actual specialists out there who think different approaches to Moscow are long overdue.

READ MORE: Most Americans favor diplomacy over sanctions when it comes to Russia – poll

4. All of these dangerous developments, indeed the new US-Russian Cold War itself, are elite projects -- political, media, intelligence, etc. Voters were never really consulted. Nor do they seem to approve. In August, Gallup asked its usual sample of Americans which policy toward Russia they preferred. Fifty-eight percent wanted improved relations vs. only 36 percent who wanted a tougher US policy with more sanctions. (Meanwhile, two-thirds of Russians surveyed by an independent agency now see the United States as their country's number-one enemy, and about three-fourths view China favorably.)

Will any of the US political figures already jockeying for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020 take these realities into account?

Stephen F. Cohen is a professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University and a contributing editor of The Nation.

This article was originally published by The Nation .

[Oct 19, 2018] How to select a UN diplomat: any politicized US housewife qualifies, the least qualified candidate wins

Notable quotes:
"... 'When she was offered the UN role, Haley reportedly recalled, "I told [Trump], 'Honestly, I don't even know what the UN does,' " ..."
"... Baturally after saying she doesn't know what UN does Nikki got the job ..."
Oct 19, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

brian , Oct 18, 2018 5:06:15 PM | link

Nimratas tell all https://pagesix.com/2018/10/17/nikki-haley-dishes-on-her-time-in-trump-administration-in-private-talk-with-conservatives/

'When she was offered the UN role, Haley reportedly recalled, "I told [Trump], 'Honestly, I don't even know what the UN does,' " to which the crowd "erupted with sympathetic laughter and applause," Blumenthal writes.

Baturally after saying she doesn't know what UN does Nikki got the job

[Oct 19, 2018] UK press riddled with spooks, conduits for intelligence agencies keen to score one for the Empire by John Wight

Notable quotes:
"... A 2000 article reveals Coughlin was fed material by MI6 for years, which he then turned into Telegraph news articles ..."
"... There is - or has been until recently - a very active programme by the secret agencies to colour what appears in the British press, called, if publications by various defectors can be believed, information operations, or 'I/Ops'. ..."
"... A colourful example of the way these techniques expanded to meet the exigencies of the hour came in the early 70s, when the readers of the News of the World were treated to a front-page splash, "Russian sub in IRA plot sensation", complete with aerial photograph of the conning tower of a Soviet sub awash off the coast of Donegal ..."
"... Read more British intelligence now officially a by-word for organized crime ..."
"... he [Coughlin] regaled [the newspaper's] readers with the dramatic story of the son of Libya's Colonel Gadafy (sic) and his alleged connection to a currency counterfeiting plan. The story [implicating Saif Gaddafi] was falsely attributed to a 'British banking official.' In fact, it had been given to him by officers of MI6, who, it transpired, had been supplying Coughlin with material for years. ..."
"... It could well be, therefore, that the unfortunate Mr Khashoggi has become the victim of the region's dangerous and conflicting currents. ..."
"... The incestuous relationship between the intelligence services and sections of the [British] media is, of course, nothing new. The connection is notoriously close in the case of foreign correspondents Sandy Gall, the ITN reporter and newsreader, boasted of his work for MI6 in Afghanistan during the 1980s ..."
"... After US Senate hearings in 1975 revealed the extent of CIA recruitment of both American and British journalists, 'sources' let it be known that half the foreign staff of a British daily [newspaper] were on the MI6 payroll. ..."
Oct 18, 2018 | www.rt.com

John Wight has written for a variety of newspapers and websites, including the Independent, Morning Star, Huffington Post, Counterpunch, London Progressive Journal, and Foreign Policy Journal. Published time: 18 Oct, 2018 13:16 Edited time: 18 Oct, 2018 14:44

Get short URL

That a free press underpins British democracy is an enduring myth that has been allowed to go unchallenged, up there with unicorns and the Loch Ness Monster. Because if a clutch of right-wing reactionary billionaires owning the bulk of a nation's major newspaper titles and media constitutes a free press, the word 'free' has been stripped and shorn of all meaning.

Yet, while the aforementioned – let's be kind here – 'anomaly' has long been understood by anyone of adult years with the ability to put their underpants on the right way round in the morning, the extent to which the British establishment press and media has been penetrated by intelligence services and acts as a conduit for their agenda is less well known.

Read more Guardian columnist Owen Jones © REUTERS / Simon Dawson Telegraph defence editor savaged by Owen Jones over Saudi-links, deletes Twitter account

That it is less well known remains one of life's great mysteries nonetheless. Scratch your average British journalist and you have yourself a frustrated spook; someone who would be on their toes at the sound of a car door slamming shut in the street, while harbouring fantasies of coming across Vladimir Putin in a dark alley one night and scoring one for the Empire.

Take Con Coughlin, for example, Defence Editor at The Daily Telegraph (more colloquially and accurately known as The Daily Torygraph). Coughlin is a product of a private school production line that has unleashed more knaves on the world than spittle on a dentist's chair. While his outing as an MI6 asset may have been a long time coming, now that it has, it marks yet another nail in the coffin of a media class whose relationship to truth and objectivity belongs in the box marked non-existent.

Though I hold no candle for Guardian columnist, Owen Jones, it remains a truism that even a blind chicken gets a piece of corn sometimes; and on this basis Jones has rendered us a service in outing Coughlin in a recent series of devastating tweets. Also providing an invaluable service in helping join the dots of the story is The Canary , independent left-wing news and views web journal that currently boasts a larger readership than a growing section of the mainstream media.

As it turns out, Mr Coughlin's links to MI6 (Britain's foreign intelligence agency) go back some time. As Jones writes: " A 2000 article reveals Coughlin was fed material by MI6 for years, which he then turned into Telegraph news articles ."

The Guardian article Jones is referring to was published at a time when the centre-left newspaper was a worthy source of information and analysis, home to the likes of Seumas Milne, one of Britain's finest-ever columnists currently plying his trade as chief press adviser to Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn. It just goes to show that whoever said evolution only moves in one direction had never taken the time to follow the trajectory of The Guardian in recent years.

But that's another story.

We are informed in the aforesaid 2000 Guardian article that " There is - or has been until recently - a very active programme by the secret agencies to colour what appears in the British press, called, if publications by various defectors can be believed, information operations, or 'I/Ops'. "

Further on: " A colourful example of the way these techniques expanded to meet the exigencies of the hour came in the early 70s, when the readers of the News of the World were treated to a front-page splash, "Russian sub in IRA plot sensation", complete with aerial photograph of the conning tower of a Soviet sub awash off the coast of Donegal ."

Read more British intelligence now officially a by-word for organized crime

This story was of course entirely bogus, as was one published in the Sunday Telegraph, sister paper of the aforementioned Daily Telegraph, over two decades later, written by – you guessed it – Con Coughlin.

From the article: " he [Coughlin] regaled [the newspaper's] readers with the dramatic story of the son of Libya's Colonel Gadafy (sic) and his alleged connection to a currency counterfeiting plan. The story [implicating Saif Gaddafi] was falsely attributed to a 'British banking official.' In fact, it had been given to him by officers of MI6, who, it transpired, had been supplying Coughlin with material for years. "

Coughlin, by the way, is also revealed, according to Jones, to have been an eager shill for the Saudis.

In the wake of the disappearance of Saudi dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, whom according to Turkish authorities was brutally murdered and dismembered by a group of Saudis, who, equipped with a bone saw, flew in to the country from the Kingdom to carry out the deed especially, Coughlin went to work shrouding matters in a fog of benign uncertainty. Consider: " It could well be, therefore, that the unfortunate Mr Khashoggi has become the victim of the region's dangerous and conflicting currents. " Ahem indeed.

Coughlin also saw fit to describe current Saudi tyrant - sorry Crown Prince - Muhammad Bin Salman (affectionately known as MbS) as a " human dynamo ," after he was afforded the privilege of a sit down interview.

At the risk of focusing too much on Mr Coughlin and his work, however, we are obliged to make the point that he is merely one among many British establishment journalists who have eagerly embraced the role of conduit of the nation's intelligence services over the years.

In his classic work on the 1984-85 miners' strike, The Enemy Within, Seumas Milne writes: " The incestuous relationship between the intelligence services and sections of the [British] media is, of course, nothing new. The connection is notoriously close in the case of foreign correspondents Sandy Gall, the ITN reporter and newsreader, boasted of his work for MI6 in Afghanistan during the 1980s ."

Milne, in the same passage, goes on to reveal how " After US Senate hearings in 1975 revealed the extent of CIA recruitment of both American and British journalists, 'sources' let it be known that half the foreign staff of a British daily [newspaper] were on the MI6 payroll. "

So there you have it, the murky relationship between British intelligence and the country's establishment journalists is one that reaches far back in time and continues in the present, as redoubtable and reliable as Big Ben itself.

In fact considering where we are, the indefensible positions taken by prominent newspaper journalists and columnists at not only The Telegraph but also The Times and, yes, The Guardian over Russia, Ukraine, Syria, Venezuela et al. – in other words, the way that almost to a man and woman they have fallen into line behind their own government when it comes to who the officially designated enemies of the moment should be – the question we need to ask ourselves is not how many of them might be in the pay of MI6 and MI5, but how many of them might not?

In fact considering where we are, the indefensible positions taken by prominent newspaper journalists and columnists at not only The Telegraph but also The Times and, yes, The Guardian over Russia, Ukraine, Syria, Venezuela et al. – in other words, the way in which they have fallen into line behind their own government when it comes to who the officially designated enemies of the moment should be – the question we need to ask ourselves is not how many of them might be in the pay of MI6 and MI5, but how many of them might not?

Like this story? Share it with a friend! The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

[Oct 19, 2018] Ukrainian religious shism as a part of color revolution

Attempt to split the church were pretty much predictable, as it increases the level of sovereignty of the Ukrainian state. So Poroshenko position is logical.
The problem here that there are not that many believers in eastern part of Ukraine. But there is substantial number of Uniate believers in Western part of Ukraine.
Notable quotes:
"... Could it be that the Vatican is the principal force behind the 2014 Maidan uprising in Kiev, the regime-change operation in Ukraine, as a part of its millennium-old war against Russian Orthodoxy? ..."
"... a very clear way the textbook activities of color revolution conducted by that most powerful and respectable institution of soft power, a religious university - the Ukrainian Catholic University - with its own media group, its own business academy, and funding and contacts with many "philanthropies" from the west. It's also headed by an American bishop, with a substantial provenance and respected standing in US elite circles. ..."
"... The Catholic Church is losing its hold over the masses, losing its power, and yet continues with its war against the Orthodox side of the schism, and doubles down on tools of domination, experimenting in Ukraine and some other eastern European countries with ways to control a society - a clear threat to western Europe if it could but see it. ..."
Oct 19, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Grieved , Oct 19, 2018 12:08:14 AM | link

Could it be that the Vatican is the principal force behind the 2014 Maidan uprising in Kiev, the regime-change operation in Ukraine, as a part of its millennium-old war against Russian Orthodoxy?

The Saker is carrying a long article by Russian author Aleksandr Voznesensky, translated heroically by Ollie Richardson and Angelina Siard. It's cross-posted from StalkerZone, but there are some comments on Saker, and I know we can link there, so here goes:
How the Vatican Is Preparing to Launch a Religious War in Ukraine with the Help of the Constantinople Patriarchate and the Uniates

The article is a keeper - I recommend bookmarking it for reference if nothing else. It details the events leading up to and following the Maidan, and illustrates in a very clear way the textbook activities of color revolution conducted by that most powerful and respectable institution of soft power, a religious university - the Ukrainian Catholic University - with its own media group, its own business academy, and funding and contacts with many "philanthropies" from the west. It's also headed by an American bishop, with a substantial provenance and respected standing in US elite circles.

Although the article is long, it's very readable, and well translated.

Towards the end, it poses a view that I had never considered, but which resonates with the trajectory of the more secular US empire. The Catholic Church is losing its hold over the masses, losing its power, and yet continues with its war against the Orthodox side of the schism, and doubles down on tools of domination, experimenting in Ukraine and some other eastern European countries with ways to control a society - a clear threat to western Europe if it could but see it.

I don't understand much about the recent moves of the Church in Ukraine, but anyone can see how fraught are the faithful because of these lawless acts. I often forget the old battle by Rome against Constantinople, but I have every inclination to believe it completely. This article does a splendid job of detailing it and making it very visible.

[Oct 19, 2018] You'll learn a great many things you didn't know before from Putin and Lavrov interviews. I certainly did!

Oct 19, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Ross , Oct 18, 2018 6:08:19 PM | link

@ben | Oct 18, 2018 5:09:50 PM | 40

If you are finding your way out of the dark forest of propaganda there are two speeches by Putin that I point people toward. First, at the Munich Security Conference in 2007. Video here : Transcript here

Second, at the UN General Assembly September 2015, Video here : Transcript here .

I fail to see how any rational person could disagree with the sentiments he expresses. Warning! You may become a Putin-bot!

karlof1 , Oct 18, 2018 8:40:07 PM | link

Lots of interviews: Putin, Medvedev, and Lavrov twice. The only two I haven't linked to are Lavrov's --done!

Putin's Valdai Club transcript isn't 100% complete yet, but the summary I linked to earlier @11 has the video. The Medvedev link's @21.

You'll learn a great many things you didn't know before from these interviews. I certainly did!

[Oct 19, 2018] Oh for the day when a western leader could speak with such intellectual rigour, such philosophical integrity and with such basic common sense. Russia has a giant, we have a bunch of pygmies

Notable quotes:
"... Russia does not have the concept of a preventive strike in its doctrine for using nuclear arms. We only consider using it in response. That means that we are prepared to use nuclear weapons only when we have hard facts that a potential aggressor is striking on Russia, on Russian territory with nuclear weapons. ..."
"... They tried to do the same by attacking South Ossetia. As a result of those criminal, basically, criminal actions, Georgia has lost significant territories -- as a result of Saakashvili's actions, this is the result of his work. It would be very sad if today's Ukrainian authorities would follow in his footsteps. ..."
Oct 19, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Oct 18, 2018 2:41:08 PM | link

CarlD@23--

One al-Masdar News item I tried to link was about Zionist jets testing the outer envelope of Syrian airspace earlier today. Clearly they think the Ukrainian S-300 they trained against differs little from the very upgraded versions employed in Syria, which are much closer to S-400 in most abilities other than missile performance. I wonder if the Zionist pilots will draw straws to see which one of them becomes the sacrificial lamb--perhaps it ought to fall to the top Zionist air force commander.

For all Aussie Barflies, Partisangirl posts an "Honest #australian government ad about anti-encryption laws," in which they are called "Ass Access." Excellent short vid that ought to catch fire before YouTube yanks it.

S , Oct 18, 2018 3:04:23 PM | link

RT has posted the full video of the annual Valdai Club meeting with Putin. This year they've ditched the traditional panel discussion in favor of Putin answering questions solo. For those MoA regulars who don't have the time to watch it, I've transcribed a few of Putin's answers that I found interesting.

Putin on Crimea school shooting

This is most likely a result of globalization, strange as that may sound. On social media, on the internet, we see entire communities created. It all started with the well-known tragic shootings in U.S. high schools, where young people who are mentally unstable create false idols, false heroes for themselves. And that means that all of us, not only in Russia, but globally, we don't react promptly to the changing realities around the Globe, we don't create content that would be helpful and interesting for young people, and so they have to grab this surrogate of heroic images, and that leads to tragedies like this one.

Putin on nuclear retaliation

In our concept of using nuclear weapons there is no such notion as a preventive strike. And I would like to request all those present here and all those who will be reporting on what I'm saying and analyzing every word I say or using what I say for their own narrative, please take note of this fact, that Russia does not have the concept of a preventive strike in its doctrine for using nuclear arms. We only consider using it in response. That means that we are prepared to use nuclear weapons only when we have hard facts that a potential aggressor is striking on Russia, on Russian territory with nuclear weapons.

Now, this is no secret, we have prepared an early warning system, we have created it and we keep improving it. This system analyzes globally, world-wide, where launches are being made, including oceanic surface, they identify where missiles are being launched from, secondly, their trajectory and the point of impact. All this is being identified and analyzed within seconds.

And so only if we identify through that system that missiles are being launched at us, only then will we deliver a retaliatory strike, a strike in response. Only when there are missiles airborne being launched at Russia.

Of course, that would lead to a global disaster, to a nuclear catastrophe, but Russia cannot become its instigator or initiator, because we don't have a preventive strike as part of our military doctrine. Of course, once someone has launched nuclear missiles at us, it would be maybe too late to stop them, but a potential aggressor should know that there would be a retaliation, and we will get to heaven as martyrs, and our enemies will simply simply die as dogs, because they won't even have time to redeem themselves (repent). (nervous laughter in the audience)

Putin on Ukraine

Currently, the Ukrainian regime is not merely deadlocking the situation. There're conducting an anti-state and anti-public policy, the same way it was done by Saakashvili in Georgia. They tried to do the same by attacking South Ossetia. As a result of those criminal, basically, criminal actions, Georgia has lost significant territories -- as a result of Saakashvili's actions, this is the result of his work. It would be very sad if today's Ukrainian authorities would follow in his footsteps.

I hope that that would not be the case. But what has happened over the past time in social sphere, in economics? What's happening there? What we see is de-industrialization of the Ukrainian economy. There's basically no investments coming. They're just talking about investments, but nothing is taking place in reality. How can you work with economy that is always shaken by some kinds of shocks or undermined by domestic political crises? There is also war hysteria. All things have been destroyed. Where is that ship-building industry that Ukraine was proud of? Where's the aircraft-building industry, which was created by the whole Soviet Union throughout decades? What about spaceship-building? It has also been lost. And the same goes for every part of Ukrainian pride of the past. And what's happening is what I have been saying. I'm just saying it outloud here, but I wanted to ask you a rhetorical question. Why did our Western partners need that, especially the previous leadership of European Commission? Why did they have to insist on such a hard choice, hard engagement of Ukraine in the European Association? What did that give to Ukraine? The open market? So they're asking for Ukraine to bring out round timber. But it's not Siberia -- three or four years of work, and they're going to destroy all of the forests. And now Western partners are asking for GMO products in agriculture. Then we will have to close borders, because GMO is prohibited in our country. Now they're going to take the black earth soil out of Ukraine. Therefore, I believe that today's policy of Ukrainian authorities is aimed at what, what are they trading in? They're trading in Russophobia and anti-Russian sentiments, there are no more goods there. And they're being forgiven for everything for that. Because the nightmare of our Western partners is that Russia and Ukraine are cooperating in any way, because they think there will be growing competition in the world as a result of such cooperation. But we don't a claim for that, we just wanted to have normal work. Why did they have to open up Ukrainian markets without giving anything in return? And demanding from the Ukrainian government, constantly, to raise the prices for (natural) gas. They understand that the purchasing power of the population is not so high, they used to gather just peanuts for the (natural) gas industry before (in utility payments), and now they're basically gathering nothing -- all benefits, all pensions are at zero. So we're gonna have to wait for the domestic political cycle to end, and I truly hope that with a new leadership of the country we'll be capable of building at least some kind of relations and agree on something. We are prepared for that and we want that.

Ross , Oct 18, 2018 3:19:17 PM | link
re Putin's comments @29

Oh for the day when a western leader could speak with such intellectual rigour, such philosophical integrity and with such basic common sense. Russia has a giant, we have a bunch of pygmies.

[Oct 19, 2018] Putin's remarks at Valdai Club

Oct 19, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Oct 18, 2018 12:12:47 PM | link

Recap of Putin's remarks at Valdai Club provided by Sputnik covers lots of ground. I'll post a link to the full transcript when I find it. Yes, he does comment on Khashoggi affair, which I'll post onto that thread. Haven't seen a recap of Lavrov's remarks yet.

karlof1 , Oct 18, 2018 1:35:43 PM | link

It appears that links to al-Masdar News are now being blocked by TypePad where they weren't previously.

Medvedev interview transcript with Euronews TV shows he's learned a few pointers from Putin on not being cowed. He'll represent Russia at the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM). This Summit, which few have probably heard about, is mainly a talk-shop not a deal-making venue like the G-20, but Medvedev sees it as a useful forum. No, he wasn't asked about Khashoggi, but was queried about Skripal affair.

karlof1 , Oct 18, 2018 2:41:08 PM | link S , Oct 18, 2018 3:04:23 PM | link
RT has posted the full video of the annual Valdai Club meeting with Putin. This year they've ditched the traditional panel discussion in favor of Putin answering questions solo. For those MoA regulars who don't have the time to watch it, I've transcribed a few of Putin's answers that I found interesting.

Putin on Crimea school shooting

This is most likely a result of globalization, strange as that may sound. On social media, on the internet, we see entire communities created. It all started with the well-known tragic shootings in U.S. high schools, where young people who are mentally unstable create false idols, false heroes for themselves. And that means that all of us, not only in Russia, but globally, we don't react promptly to the changing realities around the Globe, we don't create content that would be helpful and interesting for young people, and so they have to grab this surrogate of heroic images, and that leads to tragedies like this one.

Putin on nuclear retaliation

In our concept of using nuclear weapons there is no such notion as a preventive strike. And I would like to request all those present here and all those who will be reporting on what I'm saying and analyzing every word I say or using what I say for their own narrative, please take note of this fact, that Russia does not have the concept of a preventive strike in its doctrine for using nuclear arms. We only consider using it in response. That means that we are prepared to use nuclear weapons only when we have hard facts that a potential aggressor is striking on Russia, on Russian territory with nuclear weapons. Now, this is no secret, we have prepared an early warning system, we have created it and we keep improving it. This system analyzes globally, world-wide, where launches are being made, including oceanic surface, they identify where missiles are being launched from, secondly, their trajectory and the point of impact. All this is being identified and analyzed within seconds. And so only if we identify through that system that missiles are being launched at us, only then will we deliver a retaliatory strike, a strike in response. Only when there are missiles airborne being launched at Russia. Of course, that would lead to a global disaster, to a nuclear catastrophe, but Russia cannot become its instigator or initiator, because we don't have a preventive strike as part of our military doctrine. Of course, once someone has launched nuclear missiles at us, it would be maybe too late to stop them, but a potential aggressor should know that there would be a retaliation, and we will get to heaven as martyrs, and our enemies will simply simply die as dogs, because they won't even have time to redeem themselves (repent). (nervous laughter in the audience)

Putin on Ukraine

Currently, the Ukrainian regime is not merely deadlocking the situation. There're conducting an anti-state and anti-public policy, the same way it was done by Saakashvili in Georgia. They tried to do the same by attacking South Ossetia. As a result of those criminal, basically, criminal actions, Georgia has lost significant territories -- as a result of Saakashvili's actions, this is the result of his work. It would be very sad if today's Ukrainian authorities would follow in his footsteps. I hope that that would not be the case. But what has happened over the past time in social sphere, in economics? What's happening there? What we see is de-industrialization of the Ukrainian economy. There's basically no investments coming. They're just talking about investments, but nothing is taking place in reality. How can you work with economy that is always shaken by some kinds of shocks or undermined by domestic political crises? There is also war hysteria. All things have been destroyed. Where is that ship-building industry that Ukraine was proud of? Where's the aircraft-building industry, which was created by the whole Soviet Union throughout decades? What about spaceship-building? It has also been lost. And the same goes for every part of Ukrainian pride of the past. And what's happening is what I have been saying. I'm just saying it outloud here, but I wanted to ask you a rhetorical question. Why did our Western partners need that, especially the previous leadership of European Commission? Why did they have to insist on such a hard choice, hard engagement of Ukraine in the European Association? What did that give to Ukraine? The open market? So they're asking for Ukraine to bring out round timber. But it's not Siberia -- three or four years of work, and they're going to destroy all of the forests. And now Western partners are asking for GMO products in agriculture. Then we will have to close borders, because GMO is prohibited in our country. Now they're going to take the black earth soil out of Ukraine. Therefore, I believe that today's policy of Ukrainian authorities is aimed at what, what are they trading in? They're trading in Russophobia and anti-Russian sentiments, there are no more goods there. And they're being forgiven for everything for that. Because the nightmare of our Western partners is that Russia and Ukraine are cooperating in any way, because they think there will be growing competition in the world as a result of such cooperation. But we don't a claim for that, we just wanted to have normal work. Why did they have to open up Ukrainian markets without giving anything in return? And demanding from the Ukrainian government, constantly, to raise the prices for (natural) gas. They understand that the purchasing power of the population is not so high, they used to gather just peanuts for the (natural) gas industry before (in utility payments), and now they're basically gathering nothing -- all benefits, all pensions are at zero. So we're gonna have to wait for the domestic political cycle to end, and I truly hope that with a new leadership of the country we'll be capable of building at least some kind of relations and agree on something. We are prepared for that and we want that.

karlof1 , Oct 18, 2018 3:35:12 PM | link
S @29--

Thanks for doing that work! Transcript at Kremlin website's still incomplete, containing probably half of entire program. As usual, much of importance was stated. Putin's matter-of-fact delivery regarding use of nuclear weapons and the nature of those who would launch a first strike was sobering. The question today's reversed: Do Americans love their children too? Unfortunately, given what's happening here domestically, the answer provided by DC Duopoly policy makers is NO, they don't give a damn about their kids or anyone else's!

[Oct 19, 2018] For the $TRILLIONS hoovered up by Deep State and their war profiteering minions, we could have put every Afghan male of military age through Harvard Business School.

Oct 19, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

b , Oct 18, 2018 9:28:57 AM | link

The governor General Abdul Raziq, the police chief and the intelligence chief of Kandahar have all been killed today. Bodyguards turned their guns on them. Two U.S. soldiers were wounded. The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan was present but not hurt.

Raziq was a brut, thief, killer, drug baron and the CIA's man in Kandahar.

In 2011 Matthieu Atkins portrait him: Our Man in Kandahar
Abdul Raziq and his men have received millions of dollars' worth of U.S. training and equipment to help in the fight against the Taliban. But is our ally -- long alleged to be involved in corruption and drug smuggling -- also guilty of mass murder?

Anton Worter , Oct 18, 2018 10:05:07 AM | link

b

Been there. Done that. Kandahar is beautiful.

The United States, specifically Cheney and Petraeus and Rodham, imposed the Imperial Executor form of Federalist government upon a people who were a well-organized heirarchical society while William the Conqueror was still head chopping Anglo-Saxons in bear skins.

Cheny wrote the Afghan petroleum and strategic resources laws *in English* at the beginning of the 2001 invasion. The US imposed a new flag, a new pledge of allegiance, a new national song and even a new national currency on the Afghan people, then imposed the first imperial caesar, Karzai.

You break it, you own it!

For the $TRILLIONS hoovered up by Deep State and their war profiteering minions, we could have put every Afghan male of military age through Harvard Business School.

On to Tehran!! Lu,lu,lu,lu,lu!

Anton Worter , Oct 18, 2018 2:36:09 PM | link
12

Cheney, Petraeus and Rodham ALSO created the Federal Republican Guard ANA and ANP, goombahs, renegade hijackers and shakedown artists who, like those same ANA/ANP 'personal guards' mentioned in b's article, assassinated the governor and the others. And umm, yes, I've been on the muzzle end of those ANA/ANP thugs in an attempted kidnapping, so been there, done that.

AFA Russ' defense of William the Conqueror as some 'high point' of a Western Civilization of Red Haired Yettis, they were still head-chopping each other in England while Afghanistan ruled from East Persia to Western India, an advanced civilization far more ancient than Anglo-Saxon bearskin cave dwelling knuckle draggers, at the time.

Of course, now today we have the White Scientocratic Triumphal Exceptionalist Civilization and its Miracle of the Two Planes and Three Towers to prove it, even if Johnny and Jillian can't read, write or do their ciphers.

[Oct 19, 2018] This is about spreading our liberal values" (translation: the American people don't need to be informed about the region are changes are non-negotiable).

Oct 19, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Kadath , Oct 18, 2018 5:49:18 PM | link

just watched the Atlantic council's Championing the Frontlines of Freedom: Erasing the "Grey Zone", only interesting thing to come out of the conference was Kurt Volker's (US Special Representative for Ukraine) comments;

  1. Escalating sanctions vs Russia every 1-2 months there will be new & expanded sanctions on Russia.
  2. Stable borders should not be a requirement to be a part of NATO, "Occupied" states can be taken into NATO and receive support from NATO to liberate themselves (he stressed that the US would not be escalate the conflict, but how the hell could anyone guarantee that).
  3. Opposition to Russia is now bipartisan, regardless of the Nov elections, US Senate & Congress are unified against Russia
  4. when asked how "We" (the Atlantic council) can make political elites care about Baltic states (plus Ukraine/Georgia), WITHOUT knowing the historical and political details of these states he, unsurprisingly answered "this is about spreading our liberal values" (translation: the American people don't need to be informed about the region are changes are non-negotiable). the long and the short of the 3 hour conference was the new cold war vs Russia will continue indefinitely, I would say this is the start of another generation conflict that will last 10-20 years at least

Mark2 , Oct 18, 2018 5:55:03 PM | link

Ok i'l stick my neck out !
It's over for America ! That's my assessment their day is d d d done ! Am basing my view on the worldwide picture politically, the mind set of the general public I talk to, the many sites I visit on the net left and right. Plus overall wisdom and overstanding (a Rasta thing) Empires fall, this one has more than had its day. If it was a buseness what does it produce ? And at what cost? It just robs other peoples hard earned resources and assets! For all it's wealth it treats it's own public like dirt milking them dry. It's intelligent public it curupt's. Nature abbor's greed, and wil correct that imbalance.

I think Putin understands this, and understands as I do 'desperate people do desperate things' hence his speech.
Censoring the truth on a massive network like the internet is truly impossible and plainly desperate !!!

[Oct 19, 2018] Merkel Coalition Gets Overdue Spanking in Bavaria but 5 years Too Late to Save Germany

Oct 19, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

In Bavaria's state elections, German voters sent a powerful message to German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has been harshly criticized for opening up Germany's borders to the free flow of migration. But strangely enough the pro-immigrant Green Party took a solid second place.

Merkel and her fragile coalition, comprised of the Christian Social Union (CSU), the Social Democrats Party (SPD) and Merkel's Christian Democratic Union (CDU) suffered staggering losses in Bavaria on Sunday, losses not experienced by the two powerhouse conservative parties for many decades.

The CSU won just 37.3 percent of the vote, down 12.1 percent from 2013, thus failing to secure an absolute majority. It marked the worst showing conservative Christian Bavaria, where the CSU has ruled practically unilaterally since 1957. But the political mood in Germany has changed, and Merkel's so-called sister party will now be forced to seek a coalition to cover its losses.

Meanwhile, the left-leaning Social Democrats (SPD), in an awkward alliance with their conservative allies, secured just 9.5 percent of the Bavarian vote, down almost 10.9 percent from its 2013 showing.

The dismal results were not altogether unexpected. CSU leader Horst Seehofer has regularly clashed with Angela Merkel over the question of her loose refugee policies, which saw 1.5 million migrants pour into Germany unmolested in 2015 alone. In January 2016, when the number of arrivals had peaked, Bavaria grabbed headlines as Peter Dreier, mayor of the district of Landshut, sent a busload of refugees to Berlin, saying his city could not handle any more new arrivals.

Yet, despite such expressions of frustration, and even anger, Germany, perhaps out of some fear of reverting back to atavistic nationalistic tendencies that forever lurks in the background of the German psyche, has not come out in full force against the migrant invasion, which seems to have been forced upon the nation without their approval. As with the young girl in the video below, however, some Germans have come forward to express their strong reservations with the trend.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/uGfP8CyJAhg

In general, however, the German people, in direct contradiction to the stereotype of them being an orderly and logical people, do not seem overly concerned with the prospects of their tidy country being overrun by the chaos of undocumented and illegal migrants. This much seemed to be confirmed by the strong showing of the pro-immigration Green Party, which took second place with 18.3 percent of the votes, a 9 percent increase since the last elections.

Katharina Schulze, the 33-year old co-leader of the Bavarian Greens, told reporters "Bavaria needs a political party that solves the problems of the people and not create new ones over and over again."

However, a political platform that seems fine with open borders seems to contradict Schulze's claim to not creating new problems "over and over again." Today, thanks to Merkel's disastrous refugee non-plan, which the Greens applaud, every fifth person in Germany comes from immigration, a figure that will naturally increase over time, placing immense pressure on the country's already overloaded social welfare programs, not to mention disrupting the country's social cohesiveness.

Thus Schulze may find it an impossible challenge "solving the problems of the people," one of the vaguest campaign pledges I have ever heard, while embracing a staunchly refugee-friendly platform that seems doomed to ultimate disaster.

Indeed, Germany appears to be on a collision course between those who accept the idea of being the world's welcome center for refugees, and those who think Germany must not only close its borders, but perhaps even send back many refugees. After all, it has been proven that many of these new arrivals are in reality ' economic migrants' who arrived in Europe not due to any persecution back home, but rather from the hope of improving their lot in life. While it's certainly no crime to seek out economic opportunities, it becomes a real problem when it comes at the expense of the domestic population.

From an outsider's perspective, I cannot fathom how it is possible that Angela Merkel is still in power. Although there is no term limit on the chancellorship, people must still go to the polls and vote for this woman and the CDU, which the majority continues to do – despite everything.

In a search for answers, I found an explanation by one Arne Trautmann, a German lawyer from Munich.

"I think the answer lies in German psychology. We do not like instability. We had our experience with it (hyperinflation, wars and such) and it did not work very well. Angela Merkel offers such stability. Simply because she has been around for so long."

Still, that answer just drags up more questions that perhaps only the Germans can answer. After all, if the German people "do not like instability," then the specter of their borders being violated on a daily basis such be simply unacceptable to them. Perhaps I am missing something.

In any case, there was a consolation prize of sorts in the Bavarian elections, as the anti-immigrant AfD party took fourth place (behind the Free Voters) with 10.2 percent of the votes, an increase of 10 percent from their 2013 performance.

This will give the AfD parliamentary power in the state assembly for the first time, which should work to put the brakes on illegal migrants entering the country. For the future of Germany, it may be the last hope.

[Oct 19, 2018] It appears that somebody tired to create Saudigate out of this incident. This potentially is good news for Iran and Russia. Perhaps not so good for Trump, Saidis and Israel

Oct 19, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Pft , Oct 18, 2018 12:29:54 AM | link

TheBag @72

The President has authority under the Global Magnitsky Act to impose sanctions against anyone who has committed a human rights violation. Congress has already requested a HR investigation which Trump must act on and report to them within 4 months

It appears my prediction of Saudi gate may be right. This potentially is good news for Iran and Russia. Perhaps not so good for Trump and Saidis. Israel may not be happy. Perhaps his wife's plane troubles were a warning shot to remind him who is boss. Who knows ?

Haleys resignation beginning to make sense now. The House of Trump and House of Saud may soon fall, and Bibi wont be happy losing Trump and MBS. We all know what they are capable of to get things back on track

Why did the media held back on this so for so long?

Yemen (and Gaza).

CGTN & Al-Jazeera are the only global news outlets consistently and regularly reporting on the US facilitated genocides in Yemen and Jewish-occupied Palestine/Gaza.

The never-ending Khashoggi non-mystery mystery keeps Yemen & Gaza out of the Jew-controlled Western Media headlines. Saudi Barbaria and "Israel" are natural allies because each of them is an artificial Western political construct with a cowardly and incompetent military apparatus and an anti-heroic penchant for slaughtering undefended civilians - for psychopathic reasons.
--------
Talking about psychopathy...
Oz's Christian Zionist PM, Sco Mo, is blathering about following Trump's lead and moving Oz's Embassy in "Israel" to Jerusalem. Sc Mo, who has never had an original idea in his life, still hasn't woken up to the fact that Trump's Jerusalem gambit was a trap for Bibi. So it's hilarious that Sco Mo The Unoriginal, is planning to take a flying leap into the same trap!
Anyone with more than half a brain would realise that...
1. No civilised country has followed Trump's lead.
2. Trump can, and will, reverse his (illegal) Jerusalem decision out of a 'new-found respect' for International Law.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Oct 18, 2018 12:14:08 AM | 83

Posted by: JNDillard | Oct 17, 2018 11:59:34 PM | 81


https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-saudi-arabia-payment-20181017-story.html

Posted by: Krollchem | Oct 17, 2018 11:19:22 PM | 79

Whoever is ultimately behind this campaign (which I suspect is a loose association of interest groups spread throughout SA, Turkey, London citi, wall street, whoever) they will not stop until MbS is paraded through the streets in chains or at least his head at the end of a lance. At this point the only question how many days will it take to see his head on a pike?

Posted by: ToivoS | Oct 17, 2018 11:24:27 PM | 80

"Their target that night: Anssaf Ali Mayo, the local leader of the Islamist political party Al-Islah. The UAE considers Al-Islah to be the Yemeni branch of the worldwide Muslim Brotherhood, which the UAE calls a terrorist organization. Many experts insist that Al-Islah, one of whose members won the Nobel Peace Prize, is no terror group. They say it's a legitimate political party that threatens the UAE not through violence but by speaking out against its ambitions in Yemen."

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/aramroston/mercenaries-assassination-us-yemen-uae-spear-golan-dahlan

Posted by: Krollchem | Oct 17, 2018 10:26:46 PM | 77

Posted by: Gary Weglarz | Oct 17, 2018 10:22:19 PM | 76

[Oct 19, 2018] I just love the fact that Trump is publicly calling out Merkel on this; she has been nothing but two-faced and hypocritical on the Russia question.

Notable quotes:
"... I just love the fact that Trump is publicly calling out Merkel on this; she has been nothing but two-faced and hypocritical on the Russia question. ..."
"... She was one of the ones who pushed the EU hard, for example, to sanction Russia in the wake of the coup in Ukraine (which she had also supported). And then she pushed the EU hard to kill off the South Stream pipeline, which would have gone through SE Europe into Austria. She used the excuse of 'EU solidarity' against 'Russian aggression' to accomplish that only to then turn around and start building yet another pipeline out of Russia and straight into Germany! The Bulgarians et al. must feel like real idiots now. It seems Berlin wants to control virtually all the pipelines into Europe. ..."
Oct 19, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Seamus Padraig , , October 18, 2018 at 2:14 pm

I just love the fact that Trump is publicly calling out Merkel on this; she has been nothing but two-faced and hypocritical on the Russia question.

She was one of the ones who pushed the EU hard, for example, to sanction Russia in the wake of the coup in Ukraine (which she had also supported). And then she pushed the EU hard to kill off the South Stream pipeline, which would have gone through SE Europe into Austria. She used the excuse of 'EU solidarity' against 'Russian aggression' to accomplish that only to then turn around and start building yet another pipeline out of Russia and straight into Germany! The Bulgarians et al. must feel like real idiots now. It seems Berlin wants to control virtually all the pipelines into Europe.

So, three cheers for Trump embarrassing Merkel on this issue!

[Oct 18, 2018] Lavrov Accuses Bellingcat of Serving Western Intelligence

Oct 18, 2018 | themoscowtimes.com

https://themoscowtimes.com/news/moscow-accuses-bellingcat-serving-western-intelligence-63212):

".......Russia's foreign minister has accused the open-source Bellingcat investigative team of acting as a front for Western intelligence services seeking to manipulate public opinion.

Bellingcat has played a leading role in identifying the alleged names of two men accused of trying to poison ex-spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Britain this year. It has previously published investigations that reportedly link Russia to the downing of flight MH17 in eastern Ukraine and suspected chemical attacks in Syria.

"It's no secret to anyone, Western journalists write openly that Bellingcat is connected to special services," Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in an interview with Euronews on Tuesday.

"They leak information through it to have some effect on public opinion," he said......."

[Oct 18, 2018] Germany Clashes With The US Over Energy Geopolitics

Notable quotes:
"... This is Naked Capitalism fundraising week. 1018 donors have already invested in our efforts to combat corruption and predatory conduct, particularly in the financial realm. Please join us and participate via our donation page , which shows how to give via check, credit card, debit card, or PayPal. Read about why we're doing this fundraiser and what we've accomplished in the last year, and our current goal, extending our reach . ..."
"... By Tsvetana Paraskova, a writer for the U.S.-based Divergente LLC consulting firm. Originally published at OilPrice ..."
"... As long as NATO exists, Washington will continue to use it to drive a wedge between the EU and Russia. Merkel foolishly went along with all of Washington's provocations against Russia in Ukraine, even though none of it benefited Germany's national interest. ..."
"... She did indeed go along with all the provocations and she sat back and said nothing while Putin railed against US sanctions. Yet Putin didn't blame Germany or the EU. Instead he said that the Germany/EU is currently trapped by the US and would come to their senses in time. He is leaving the door open. ..."
"... What US LNG exports? The US is a net importer of NG from Canada. US 2018 NG consumption and production was 635.8 and 631.6 Mtoe respectively (BP 2018 Stats). Even the BP 2018 Statistical Review of World Energy has an asterisks by US LNG exports which says, "Includes re-exports" which was 17.4 BCM or 15 Mtoe for 2018. ..."
"... Natural gas negotiations involve long term contracts so there are lots of money to exchange ensuring business for many years to come. Such a contract has recently been signed between Poland's PGNiG and American Venture Global Calcasieu & Venture Global Plaquemines LNG (Lousiana). According to the Poland representative this gas would be 20% cheaper than Russian gas. (if one has to believe it). Those contracts are very secretive in their terms. This contract in particular is still dependent on the termination of liquefaction facilities in Lousiana. ..."
"... IIRC, the US is pushing LNG because fracking has resulted in a lot of NG coincident with oil production. They've got so much NG coming out of fracked oil wells that they don't know what to do with it and at present, a lot of it just gets flared, or leaks into the atmosphere. ..."
"... So they turn to bullying the EU to ignore the price advantage that Russia is able to offer, due to the economics of pipeline transport over liquefaction and ocean transport, and of course the issues of reliability and safety associated with ocean transport, and high-pressure LNG port facilities compared to pipelines. ..."
"... Trump will probably offer the EU 'free' LNG port facilities financed by low-income American tax-payers, and cuts to 'entitlements', all designed to MAGA. ..."
"... It seems we have been maneuvering for a while to raise our production of LNG and oil (unsustainably) in order to become an important substitute supplier to the EU countries. It sort of looks like our plan is to reduce EU opposition to our attacking Russia. Then we will have China basically surrounded. This is made easier with our nuclear policy of "we can use nuclear weapons with acceptable losses." What could go wrong? ..."
"... The United States should lead by example. Telling Germany not to import Russian gas is rich considering the U.S. also imports from Russia. https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2018/07/12/russia-was-a-top-10-supplier-of-u-s-oil-imports-in-2017/ ..."
"... I just love the fact that Trump is publicly calling out Merkel on this; she has been nothing but two-faced and hypocritical on the Russia question. ..."
"... She was one of the ones who pushed the EU hard, for example, to sanction Russia in the wake of the coup in Ukraine (which she had also supported). And then she pushed the EU hard to kill off the South Stream pipeline, which would have gone through SE Europe into Austria. She used the excuse of 'EU solidarity' against 'Russian aggression' to accomplish that only to then turn around and start building yet another pipeline out of Russia and straight into Germany! The Bulgarians et al. must feel like real idiots now. It seems Berlin wants to control virtually all the pipelines into Europe. ..."
Oct 18, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
This is Naked Capitalism fundraising week. 1018 donors have already invested in our efforts to combat corruption and predatory conduct, particularly in the financial realm. Please join us and participate via our donation page , which shows how to give via check, credit card, debit card, or PayPal. Read about why we're doing this fundraiser and what we've accomplished in the last year, and our current goal, extending our reach .

Yves here. It's not hard to see that this tiff isn't just about Russia. The US wants Germany to buy high-priced US LNG.

By Tsvetana Paraskova, a writer for the U.S.-based Divergente LLC consulting firm. Originally published at OilPrice

The United States and the European Union (EU) are at odds over more than just the Iran nuclear deal – tensions surrounding energy policy have also become a flashpoint for the two global powerhouses.

In energy policy, the U.S. has been opposing the Gazprom-led and highly controversial Nord Stream 2 pipeline project , which will follow the existing Nord Stream natural gas pipeline between Russia and Germany via the Baltic Sea. EU institutions and some EU members such as Poland and Lithuania are also against it, but one of the leaders of the EU and the end-point of the planned project -- Germany -- supports Nord Stream 2 and sees the project as a private commercial venture that will help it to meet rising natural gas demand.

While the U.S. has been hinting this year that it could sanction the project and the companies involved in it -- which include not only Gazprom but also major European firms Shell, Engie, OMV, Uniper, and Wintershall -- Germany has just said that Washington shouldn't interfere with Europe's energy choices and policies.

"I don't want European energy policy to be defined in Washington," Germany's Foreign Ministry State Secretary Andreas Michaelis said at a conference on trans-Atlantic ties in Berlin this week.

Germany has to consult with its European partners regarding the project, Michaelis said, and noted, as quoted by Reuters, that he was "certainly not willing to accept that Washington is deciding at the end of the day that we should not rely on Russian gas and that we should not complete this pipeline project."

In July this year, U.S. President Donald Trump said at a meeting with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg that "Germany is a captive of Russia because they supply." Related: The Implications Of A Fractured U.S., Saudi Alliance

"Germany is totally controlled by Russia, because they will be getting from 60 to 70 percent of their energy from Russia and a new pipeline," President Trump said.

Germany continues to see Nord Stream 2 as a commercial venture, although it wants clarity on the future role of Ukraine as a transit route, German government spokeswoman Ulrike Demmer said last month.

Nord Stream 2 is designed to bypass Ukraine, and Ukraine fears it will lose transit fees and leverage over Russia as the transit route for its gas to western Europe.

Poland, one of the most outspoken opponents of Nord Stream 2, together with the United States, issued a joint statement last month during the visit of Polish President Andrzej Duda to Washington, in which the parties said , "We will continue to coordinate our efforts to counter energy projects that threaten our mutual security, such as Nord Stream 2."

The United States looks to sell more liquefied natural gas (LNG) to the European market, including to Germany , to help Europe diversify its energy supply, which is becoming increasingly dependent on Russian supplies. Related: High Prices Benefit Iran Despite Lost Oil Exports

The president of the Federation of German Industry (BDI), Dieter Kempf, however, told German daily Süddeutsche Zeitung last month, that he had "a big problem with a third country interfering in our energy policy," referring to the United States. German industry needs Nord Stream 2, and dropping the project to buy U.S. LNG instead wouldn't make any economic sense, he said. U.S. LNG currently is not competitive on the German market and would simply cost too much, according to Kempf.

The lower price of Russian pipeline gas to Europe is a key selling point -- and one that Gazprom uses often. Earlier this month Alexey Miller, Chairman of Gazprom's Management Committee, said at a gas forum in Russia that "Although much talk is going on about new plans for LNG deliveries, there is no doubt that pipeline gas supplies from Russia will always be more competitive than LNG deliveries from any other part of the world. It goes without saying."

The issue with Nord Stream 2 -- which is already being built in German waters -- is that it's not just a commercial project. Many in Europe and everyone in the United States see it as a Russian political tool and a means to further tighten Russia's grip on European gas supplies, of which it already holds more than a third. But Germany wants to discuss the future of this project within the European Union, without interference from the United States.

Alex V , October 18, 2018 at 4:43 am

Thankfully liquefying gas and then reconstituting it uses no additional energy, and transportation into major harbors is perfectly safe.

Capitalism inaction!

Quentin , October 18, 2018 at 6:23 am

Maybe the US thinks it will also have to go out of its way to accommodate Germany and the EU by offering to construct the necessary infrastructure in Europe for the import of LNG at exorbitant US prices. MAGA. How long would that take?

disillusionized , October 18, 2018 at 7:03 am

The question is, is it inevitable that the EU/US relationship goes sour?

Continentalism is on the rise generally, and specifically with brexit, couple this with the geographical gravity of the EU-Russia relationship makes a EU-Russia "alliance" make more sense than the EU-US relationship.

Ever since the death of the USSR and the accession of the eastern states to the EU, the balance of power in the EU-US relationship has moved in ways it seems clear that the US is uncomfortable with.

To all of this we must add the policy differences between the US and the EU – see the GDPR and the privacy shield for example.

I have said it before – the day Putin dies (metaphorically or literally) is a day when the post war order in Europe may die, and we see the repairing of the EU-Russia relationship (by which I mean the current regime in Russia will be replaced with a new generation far less steeped in cold war dogma and way more interested in the EU).

NotReallyHere , October 18, 2018 at 1:23 pm

"The post war order in Europe will doe and we see the repairing of the EU/Russian relationship "

I think you mean the German/Russian relationship and that repair has been under way for more than a decade. The post war order is very very frayed already and looks close to a break point.

This Nord Stream 2 story illustrates more than most Germany's attitudes to the EU and to the world at large. Germany used its heft within the EU to 1 ) get control of Russian gas supplies into Central Europe (Germany insisted that Poland could not invest in the project apparently and refused a landing point for the pipeline in Poland. Instead it offered a flow back valve from Germany into Poland that the Germans would control) 2) thumb its nose at the US while outwardly declaring friendship through the structures provided by EU and NATO membership.

Even Obama suspected the Germans of duplicity (the Merkel phone hacking debacle).

It's is this repairing relationship that will set the tone for Brexit, the Ukraine war, relations between Turkey and EU and eventually the survival of the EU and NATO. The point ? Germany doesn't give a hoot about the EU it served its purpose of keeping Germany anchored to the west and allowing German reunification to solidify while Russia was weak. Its usefulness is in the past now, however from a German point of view.

Seamus Padraig , October 18, 2018 at 2:01 pm

Putin dying isn't going to change Washington. As long as NATO exists, Washington will continue to use it to drive a wedge between the EU and Russia. Merkel foolishly went along with all of Washington's provocations against Russia in Ukraine, even though none of it benefited Germany's national interest.

Come to think of it, maybe Merkel dying off would improve German-Russian relations

NotReallyHere , October 18, 2018 at 4:49 pm

She did indeed go along with all the provocations and she sat back and said nothing while Putin railed against US sanctions. Yet Putin didn't blame Germany or the EU. Instead he said that the Germany/EU is currently trapped by the US and would come to their senses in time. He is leaving the door open.

Germany won't lose if NATO and the EU break up. It would free itself from a range increasingly dis-functional entities that, in its mind, restrict its ability to engage in world affairs.

Susan the other , October 18, 2018 at 3:02 pm

I think you are right. Russia and Germany are coming together and there's nothing we can do about it because "private commercial venture." Poetic justice.

And the economic link will lead to political links and we will have to learn a little modesty. The ploy we are trying to use, selling Germany US LNG could not have been anything more than a stopgap supply line until NG from the ME came online but that has been our achilles heel.

It feels like even if we managed to kick the Saudis out and took over their oil and gas we still could no longer control geopolitics. The cat is out of the bag and neoliberalism has established the rules. And it's pointless because there is enough gas and oil and methane on this planet to kill the human race off but good.

NotReallyHere , October 18, 2018 at 5:00 pm

@Susan

That exactly right. and Gerhard Schroder has been developing those political relationships for more than a decade. The political/economic links already go very deep on both sides.

if the rapprochement is occurring, Brexit, the refugee crisis and Italy's approaching debt crisis are all just potential catalysts for an inevitable breakup. Germany likely views these as potential opportunities to direct European realignment rather than existential crises to be tackled.

JimL , October 18, 2018 at 7:08 am

What US LNG exports? The US is a net importer of NG from Canada. US 2018 NG consumption and production was 635.8 and 631.6 Mtoe respectively (BP 2018 Stats). Even the BP 2018 Statistical Review of World Energy has an asterisks by US LNG exports which says, "Includes re-exports" which was 17.4 BCM or 15 Mtoe for 2018.

Ignacio , October 18, 2018 at 7:49 am

The US produces annually about 33,000,000 million cubic feet and consumes 27.000.000 million according to the EiA . So there is an excess to export indeed.

Synoia , October 18, 2018 at 3:23 pm

Leaving 6,000,000 million to be exported, until the shale gas no longer flows. How farsighted.

Ignacio , October 18, 2018 at 7:42 am

Natural gas negotiations involve long term contracts so there are lots of money to exchange ensuring business for many years to come. Such a contract has recently been signed between Poland's PGNiG and American Venture Global Calcasieu & Venture Global Plaquemines LNG (Lousiana). According to the Poland representative this gas would be 20% cheaper than Russian gas. (if one has to believe it). Those contracts are very secretive in their terms. This contract in particular is still dependent on the termination of liquefaction facilities in Lousiana.

I don't know much about NG markets in Poland but according to Eurostat prices for non-household consumers are very similar in Poland, Germany, Lithuania or Spain.

PlutoniumKun , October 18, 2018 at 10:36 am

Gas contracts are usually linked to oil prices. A lot of LNG is traded as a fungible product like oil, but that contract seems different – most likely its constructed this way because of the huge capital cost of the LNG facilities, which make very little economic sense for a country like Poland which has pipelines criss-crossing it. I suspect the terminals have more capacity that the contract quantity – the surplus would be traded at market prices, which would no doubt be where the profit margin is for the supplier (I would be deeply sceptical that unsubsidised LNG could ever compete with Russia gas, the capital costs involved are just too high).

Watt4Bob , October 18, 2018 at 8:26 am

IIRC, the US is pushing LNG because fracking has resulted in a lot of NG coincident with oil production. They've got so much NG coming out of fracked oil wells that they don't know what to do with it and at present, a lot of it just gets flared, or leaks into the atmosphere.

IMO, the folks responsible for this waste are as usual, ignoring the 'externalities', the costs to the environment of course, but also the cost of infrastructure and transport related to turning this situation to their advantage.

So they turn to bullying the EU to ignore the price advantage that Russia is able to offer, due to the economics of pipeline transport over liquefaction and ocean transport, and of course the issues of reliability and safety associated with ocean transport, and high-pressure LNG port facilities compared to pipelines.

This doesn't even take into account the possibility that the whole fracked gas supply may be a short-lived phenomenon, associated with what we've been describing here as basically a finance game.

Trump will probably offer the EU 'free' LNG port facilities financed by low-income American tax-payers, and cuts to 'entitlements', all designed to MAGA.

PlutoniumKun , October 18, 2018 at 10:39 am

Just to clarify, fracked gas is not usually a by-product of oil fracking – the geological beds are usually distinct (shale gas tends to occur at much deeper levels than tight oil). Gas can however be a byproduct of conventional oil production. 'wet' gas (propane, etc), can be a by-product of either.

Synapsid , October 18, 2018 at 11:14 am

PlutoniumKun,

It's common for oil wells both fracked and conventional to produce natural gas (NG) though not all do. The fracked wells in the Permian Basin are producing a great deal of it.

Natural gas does indeed form at higher temperatures than oil does and that means at greater depth but both oil and NG migrate upward. Exploration for petroleum is hunting for where it gets captured at depth, not for where it's formed. Those source rocks are used as indicators of where to look for petroleum trapped stratigraphically higher up.

Steve , October 18, 2018 at 8:53 am

It seems we have been maneuvering for a while to raise our production of LNG and oil (unsustainably) in order to become an important substitute supplier to the EU countries. It sort of looks like our plan is to reduce EU opposition to our attacking Russia. Then we will have China basically surrounded. This is made easier with our nuclear policy of "we can use nuclear weapons with acceptable losses." What could go wrong?

Watt4Bob , October 18, 2018 at 9:02 am

What could go wrong?

I wonder what the secret industry studies say about the damage possible from an accident at a LNG port terminal involving catastrophic failure and combustion of the entire cargo of a transport while unloading high-pressure LNG.

They call a fuel-air bomb the size of a school bus 'The Mother of all bombs', what about one the size of a large ocean going tanker?

Anarcissie , October 18, 2018 at 10:46 am

Many years ago, someone was trying to build an LNG storage facility on the southwest shore of Staten Island 17 miles SW of Manhattan involving very large insulated tanks. In spite of great secrecy, there came to be much local opposition. At the time it was said that the amount of energy contained in the tanks would be comparable to a nuclear weapon. Various possible disaster scenarios were proposed, for example a tank could be compromised by accident (plane crashes into it) or terrorism, contents catch fire and explode, huge fireball emerges and drifts with the wind, possibly over New Jersey's chemical farms or even towards Manhattan. The local opponents miraculously won. As far as I know, the disused tanks are still there.

Wukchumni , October 18, 2018 at 10:55 am

This was a fuel-air bomb @ Burning Man about a dozen years ago, emanating from an oil derrick of sorts.

I was about 500 feet away when it went up, and afterwards thought maybe we were a bit too close to the action, as we got blasted with heat

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wyc6LTVxhJA

The Rev Kev , October 18, 2018 at 10:56 am

Does this page help Watt4Bob?

https://www.laohamutuk.org/Oil/LNG/app4.htm

Watt4Bob , October 18, 2018 at 2:53 pm

That last one was a doozy as they say!

Nigeria 2005;

A 28-inch LNG underground pipeline exploded in Nigeria and the resulting fire engulfed an estimated 27 square kilometers.

Here's one from Cleveland;

On 20 October 1944, a liquefied natural gas storage tank in Cleveland, Ohio, split and leaked its contents, which spread, caught fire, and exploded. A half hour later, another tank exploded as well. The explosions destroyed 1 square mile (2.6 km2), killed 130, and left 600 homeless.

Synoia , October 18, 2018 at 3:54 pm

The locals in Nigeria drill hole in pipeline to get free fuel.

The Nigeria Government has been really wonderful about sharing the largess and riches of their large petroleum field in the Niger delta. Mostly with owners of expensive property around the world.

The Rev Kev , October 18, 2018 at 9:05 am

I am trying to think of what might be in it for the Germans to go along with this deal but cannot see any. The gas would be far more expensive that the Russian deliveries. A fleet of tankers and the port facilities would have to be built and who is going to pick up the tab for that? Then if the terminal is in Louisiana, what happens to deliveries whenever there is a hurricane?

I cannot see anything in it for the Germans at all. Trump's gratitude? That and 50 cents won't buy you a cup of coffee. In any case Trump would gloat about the stupidity of the Germans taking him up on the deal, not feel gratitude. The US wants Germany to stick with deliveries via the Ukraine as they have their thumb on that sorry country and can threaten Germany with that fact. Nord Stream 2 (and the eventual Nord Stream 3) threaten that hold.

The killer argument is this. In terms of business and remembering what international agreements Trump has broken the past two years, who is more reliable as a business partner for Germany – Putin's Russia or Trump's America?

Ignacio , October 18, 2018 at 10:20 am

Apart from cost issues, If American companies rely on shale gas to keep or increase production will they be able to honor 20 year supply contracts?

PlutoniumKun , October 18, 2018 at 10:37 am

I find it impossible to believe that a gas supplier would keep to an artificially low LNG contract if, say, a very cold winter in the US led to a shortage and extreme price spike. They'd come up with some excuse not to deliver.

The Rev Kev , October 18, 2018 at 10:40 am

Good question that. Poland has just signed a 20 year agreement with the US so I will be curious how that works out for them. Story at - https://www.rt.com/business/441494-poland-us-gas-lng/

jsn , October 18, 2018 at 12:16 pm

Trumps argument appears to be that Germany as a NATO member relies on US DOD for defense, to pay for that they must buy our LNG.

jefemt , October 18, 2018 at 9:25 am

My recollection was that there was a law that prohibited export-sales of domestic US hydrocarbons. That law was under attack, and went away in the last couple years?

LNG with your F35? said the transactional Orangeman

Duck1 , October 18, 2018 at 2:51 pm

The fracked crude is ultralight and unsuitable for the refineries in the quantities available, hence export, which caused congress to change the law. No expert, but understand that it is used a lot as a blender with heavier stocks of crude, quite a bit going to China.

oh , October 18, 2018 at 10:01 am

The petroleum industry has been bribing lobbying the administration for quite a while to get this policy in place, The so called surplus of NG today (if there is), won't last long. Exports will create a shortage and will result in higher prices to all.

vidimi , October 18, 2018 at 10:43 am

also, if Germany were to switch to American LNG, for how long would this be a reliable energy source? Fracking wells are short lived, so what happens once they are depleted? who foots the bill?

John k , October 18, 2018 at 12:48 pm

We do. Shortage here to honor export contracts, as has happened in Australia.

Big Tap , October 18, 2018 at 2:02 pm

The United States should lead by example. Telling Germany not to import Russian gas is rich considering the U.S. also imports from Russia. https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2018/07/12/russia-was-a-top-10-supplier-of-u-s-oil-imports-in-2017/

Seamus Padraig , October 18, 2018 at 2:14 pm

I just love the fact that Trump is publicly calling out Merkel on this; she has been nothing but two-faced and hypocritical on the Russia question.

She was one of the ones who pushed the EU hard, for example, to sanction Russia in the wake of the coup in Ukraine (which she had also supported). And then she pushed the EU hard to kill off the South Stream pipeline, which would have gone through SE Europe into Austria. She used the excuse of 'EU solidarity' against 'Russian aggression' to accomplish that only to then turn around and start building yet another pipeline out of Russia and straight into Germany! The Bulgarians et al. must feel like real idiots now. It seems Berlin wants to control virtually all the pipelines into Europe.

So, three cheers for Trump embarrassing Merkel on this issue!

Unna , October 18, 2018 at 2:24 pm

Putting money aside for a moment, Trump, as well as the entire American establishment, doesn't want Russia "controlling" Germany's energy supplies. That's because they want America to control Germany's energy supplies via controlling LNG deliveries from America to Germany and by controlling gas supplies to Germany through Ukraine. This by maintaining America's control over Ukraine's totally dependent puppet government. The Germans know this so they want Nord Stream 2 & 3.

Ukraine is an unreliable energy corridor on a good day. It is run by clans of rapacious oligarchs who don't give one whit about Ukraine, the Ukrainian "people", or much of anything else except business. The 2019 presidential election may turn into a contest among President Poroshenko the Chocolate King, Yulia Tymoshenko the Gas Princess, as well as some others including neo Nazis that go downhill from there. What competent German government would want Germany's energy supplies to be dependent on that mess?

It has been said that America's worst geopolitical nightmare is an economic-political-military combination of Russia, Iran, and China in the Eurasian "heartland". Right up there, if not worse, is a close political-economic association between Germany and Russia; now especially so since such a relationship can quickly be hooked into China's New Silk Road, which America will do anything to subvert including tariffs, sanctions, confiscations of assets, promotion of political-ethnic-religious grievances where they may exist along the "Belt-Road", as well as armed insurrections, really maybe anything short of all out war with Russia and China.

Germany's trying to be polite about this saying, sure, how about a little bit of LNG along with Nord Stream 2 & 3? But the time may come, if America pushes enough, that Germany will have to make an existential choice between subservience to America, and pursuit of it's own legitimate self interest.

Synoia , October 18, 2018 at 3:33 pm

The Empire fights Back.

Study a map of the ME, and consider the silk road Terminii.

Synoia , October 18, 2018 at 3:30 pm

It's hard to make NG explode, as it is with all liquid hydrocarbons. It is refrigerated, and must change from liquid to gaseous for, and be mixed with air.

I've also worked on a Gas Tanker in the summer vacations. The gas was refrigerated, and kept liquid. They is a second method, used for NG, that is to allow evaporation from the cargo, and use it as fuel for the engine (singular because there is one propulsion engine on most large ships) on the tanker.

Watt4Bob , October 18, 2018 at 5:31 pm

I dunno, there are other opinions .

[Oct 18, 2018] Skripal and Khashoggi West Manufactures Absurd Fantasy to Pin on Russia, Lets Saudi Get Away With Chopping up WaPo Journalist

Oct 18, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

Two disappearances, and two very different responses from Western governments, which illustrates their rank hypocrisy.

When former Russian spy Sergei Skripal went missing in England earlier this year, there was almost immediate punitive action by the British government and its NATO allies against Moscow. By contrast, Western governments are straining with restraint towards Saudi Arabia over the more shocking and provable case of murdered journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

The outcry by Western governments and media over the Skripal affair was deafening and resulted in Britain, the US and some 28 other countries expelling dozens of Russian diplomats on the back of unsubstantiated British allegations that the Kremlin tried to assassinate an exiled spy with a deadly nerve agent. The Trump administration has further tightened sanctions citing the Skripal incident.

London's case against Moscow has been marked by wild speculation and ropey innuendo. No verifiable evidence of what actually happened to Sergei Skripal (67) and his daughter Yulia has been presented by the British authorities . Their claim that President Vladimir Putin sanctioned a hit squad armed with nerve poison relies on sheer conjecture.

All we know for sure is that the Skripals have been disappeared from public contact by the British authorities for more than seven months , since the mysterious incident of alleged poisoning in Salisbury on March 4.

Russian authorities and family relatives have been steadfastly refused any contact by London with the Skripal pair, despite more than 60 official requests from Moscow in accordance with international law and in spite of the fact that Yulia is a citizen of the Russian Federation with consular rights.

It is an outrage that based on such thin ice of "evidence", the British have built an edifice of censure against Moscow, rallying an international campaign of further sanctions and diplomatic expulsions.

Now contrast that strenuous reaction, indeed hyper over-reaction, with how Britain, the US, France, Canada and other Western governments are ever-so slowly responding to Saudi Arabia over the Khashoggi case.

After nearly two weeks since Jamal Khashoggi entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, Turkey, t he Saudi regime is this week finally admitting he was killed on their premises – albeit, they claim, in a "botched interrogation".

Turkish and American intelligence had earlier claimed that Khashoggi was tortured and murdered on the Saudi premises by a 15-member hit squad sent from Riyadh.

Even more grisly, it is claimed that Khashoggi's body was hacked up with a bone saw by the killers, his remains secreted out of the consulate building in boxes, and flown back to Saudi Arabia on board two private jets connected to the Saudi royal family.

What's more, the Turks and Americans claim that the whole barbaric plot to murder Khashoggi was on the orders of senior Saudi rulers, implicating Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The latest twist out of Riyadh, is an attempt to scapegoat "rogue killers" and whitewash the House of Saudi from culpability.

The fact that 59-year-old Khashoggi was a legal US resident and a columnist for the Washington Post has no doubt given his case such prominent coverage in Western news media. Thousands of other victims of Saudi vengeance are routinely ignored in the West.

Nevertheless, despite the horrific and damning case against the Saudi monarchy, the response from the Trump administration, Britain and others has been abject.

President Trump has blustered that there "will be severe consequences" for the Saudi regime if it is proven culpable in the murder of Khashoggi. Trump quickly qualified, however, saying that billion-dollar arms deals with the oil-rich kingdom will not be cancelled. Now Trump appears to be joining in a cover-up by spinning the story that the Khashoggi killing was done by "rogue killers".

Britain, France and Germany this week issued a joint statement calling for "a credible investigation" into the disappearance. But other than "tough-sounding" rhetoric, n one of the European states have indicated any specific sanctions, such as weapons contracts being revoked or diplomatic expulsions.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said he was "concerned" by the gruesome claims about Khashoggi's killing, but he reiterated that Ottawa would not be scrapping a $15 billion sale of combat vehicles to Riyadh.

The Saudi rulers have even threatened retaliatory measures if sanctions are imposed by Western governments.

Saudi denials of official culpability seem to be a brazen flouting of all reason and circumstantial evidence that Khashoggi was indeed murdered in the consulate building on senior Saudi orders.

This week a glitzy international investor conference in Saudi Arabia is being boycotted by top business figures, including the World Bank chief, Jim Yong Kim, JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon and Britain's venture capitalist Richard Branson. Global firms like Ford and Uber have pulled out, as have various media sponsors, such as CNN, the New York Times and Financial Times. Withdrawal from the event was in response to the Khashoggi affair.

A growing bipartisan chorus of US Senators, including Bob Corker, Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham and Chris Murphy, have called for the cancellation of American arms sales to Saudi Arabia, as well as for an overhaul of the strategic partnership between the two countries.

Still, Trump has rebuffed calls for punitive response. He has said that American jobs and profits depend on the Saudi weapons market. Some 20 per cent of all US arms sales are estimated to go to the House of Saud.

The New York Times this week headlined: "In Trump's Saudi Bargain, the Bottom Line Proudly Stands Out".

The Trump White House will be represented at the investment conference in Saudi Arabia this week – dubbed "Davos in the Desert" by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. He said he was attending in spite of the grave allegations against the Saudi rulers.

Surely the point here is the unseemly indulgence by Western governments of Saudi Arabia and its so-called "reforming" Crown Prince. It is remarkable how much credulity Washington, London, Paris, Ottawa and others are affording the Saudi despots who, most likely, have been caught redhanded in a barbarous murder.

Yet, when it comes to Russia and outlandish, unproven claims that the Kremlin carried out a bizarre poison-assassination plot, all these same Western governments abandon all reason and decorum to pile sanctions on Russia based on lurid, hollow speculation. The blatant hypocrisy demolishes any pretense of integrity or principle.

Here is another connection between the Skripal and Khashoggi affairs. The Saudis no doubt took note of the way Britain's rulers have shown absolute disregard and contempt for international law in their de facto abduction of Sergei and Yulia Skripal. If the British can get away with that gross violation, then the Saudis probably thought that nobody would care too much if they disappeared Jamal Khashoggi.

Grotesquely, the way things are shaping up in terms of hypocritical lack of action by the Americans, British and others towards the Saudi despots, the latter might just get away with murder. Not so Russia. The Russians are not allowed to get away with even an absurd fantasy.

Source: Strategic Culture

[Oct 17, 2018] Did Saudis, CIA Fear Khashoggi 9-11 Bombshell-

Oct 17, 2018 | theduran.com

The macabre case of missing journalist Jamal Khashoggi raises the question: did Saudi rulers fear him revealing highly damaging information on their secret dealings? In particular, possible involvement in the 9/11 terror attacks on New York in 2001.

Even more intriguing are US media reports now emerging that American intelligence had snooped on and were aware of Saudi officials making plans to capture Khashoggi prior to his apparent disappearance at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul last week. If the Americans knew the journalist's life was in danger, why didn't they tip him off to avoid his doom?

Jamal Khashoggi (59) had gone rogue, from the Saudi elite's point of view. Formerly a senior editor in Saudi state media and an advisor to the royal court, he was imminently connected and versed in House of Saud affairs. As one commentator cryptically put it: "He knew where all the bodies were buried."

For the past year, Khashoggi went into self-imposed exile, taking up residence in the US, where he began writing opinion columns for the Washington Post.

Khashoggi's articles appeared to be taking on increasingly critical tone against the heir to the Saudi throne, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The 33-year-old Crown Prince, or MbS as he's known, is de facto ruler of the oil-rich kingdom, in place of his aging father, King Salman.

While Western media and several leaders, such as Presidents Trump and Macron, have been indulging MbS as "a reformer", Khashoggi was spoiling this Saudi public relations effort by criticizing the war in Yemen, the blockade on Qatar and the crackdown on Saudi critics back home.

However, what may have caused the Saudi royals more concern was what Khashoggi knew about darker, dirtier matters. And not just the Saudis, but American deep state actors as as well.

He was formerly a media aide to Prince Turki al Faisal, who is an eminence gris figure in Saudi intelligence, with its systematic relations to American and British counterparts. Prince Turki's father, Faisal, was formerly the king of Saudi Arabia until his assassination in 1975 by a family rival. Faisal was a half-brother of the present king, Salman, and therefore Prince Turki is a cousin of the Crown Prince – albeit at 73 more than twice his age.

For nearly 23 years, from 1977 to 2001, Prince Turki was the director of the Mukhabarat, the Saudi state intelligence apparatus. He was instrumental in Saudi, American and British organization of the mujahideen fighters in Afghanistan to combat Soviet forces. Those militants in Afghanistan later evolved into the al Qaeda terror network, which has served as a cat's paw in various US proxy wars across the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia, including Russia's backyard in the Caucasus.

Ten days before the 9/11 terror attacks on New York City, in which some 3,000 Americans died, Prince Turki retired from his post as head of Saudi intelligence. It was an abrupt departure, well before his tenure was due to expire.

There has previously been speculation in US media that this senior Saudi figure knew in advance that something major was going down on 9/11. At least 15 of the 19 Arabs who allegedly hijacked three commercial airplanes that day were Saudi nationals.

Prince Turki has subsequently been named in a 2002 lawsuit mounted by families of 9/11 victims. There is little suggestion he was wittingly involved in organizing the terror plot. Later public comments indicated that Prince Turki was horrified by the atrocity. But the question is: did he know of the impending incident, and did he alert US intelligence, which then did not take appropriate action to prevent it?

Jamal Khashoggi had long served as a trusted media advisor to Prince Turki, before the latter resigned from public office in 2007. Following 9/11, Turki was the Saudi ambassador to both the US and Britain.

A tentative idea here is that Khashoggi, in his close dealings with Prince Turki over the years, may have gleaned highly sensitive inside information on what actually happened on 9/11. Were the Arab hijackers mere patsies used by the American CIA to facilitate an event which has since been used by American military planners to launch a global "war on terror" as a cover for illegal wars overseas? There is a huge body of evidence that the 9/11 attacks were indeed a "false flag" event orchestrated by the US deep state as a pretext for its imperialist rampages.

The apparent abduction and murder last week of Jamal Khashoggi seems such an astoundingly desperate move by the Saudi rulers. More evidence is emerging from Turkish sources that the journalist was indeed lured to the consulate in Istanbul where he was killed by a 15-member hit squad. Reports are saying that the alleged assassination was ordered at the highest level of the Saudi royal court, which implicates Crown Prince MbS.

Why would the Saudi rulers order such a heinous act, which would inevitably lead to acute political problems, as we are seeing in the fallout from governments and media coverage around the world?

Over the past year, the House of Saud had been appealing to Khashoggi to return to Riyadh and resume his services as a media advisor to the royal court. He declined, fearing that something more sinister was afoot. When Khashoggi turned up in Istanbul to collect a divorce document from the Saudi consulate on September 28, it appears that the House of Saud decided to nab him. He was told to return to the consulate on October 2. On that same day, the 15-member group arrived from Riyadh on two private Gulfstream jets for the mission to kill him.

Official Saudi claims stretch credulity. They say Khashoggi left the consulate building unharmed by a backdoor, although they won't provide CCTV images to prove that. The Turks say their own CCTV facilities monitoring the front and back of the Saudi consulate show that Khashoggi did not leave the premises. The Turks seem confident of their claim he was murdered inside the building, his remains dismembered and removed in diplomatic vehicles. The two private jets left the same day from Istanbul with the 15 Saudis onboard to return to Riyadh, via Cairo and Dubai.

To carry out such a reckless act, the Saudis must have been alarmed by Khashoggi's critical commentaries appearing in the Washington Post. The columns appeared to be delivering more and more damaging insights into the regime under Crown Prince MbS.

The Washington Post this week is reporting that US intelligence sources knew from telecom intercepts that the Saudis were planning to abduct Khashoggi. That implicates the House of Saud in a dastardly premeditated act of murder.

But furthermore this same disclosure could also, unwittingly, implicate US intelligence. If the latter knew of a malicious intent towards Khashoggi, why didn't US agents warn him about going to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul? Surely, he could have obtained the same personal documents from the Saudi embassy in Washington DC, a country where he was residing and would have been safer.

Jamal Khashoggi may have known too many dark secrets about US and Saudi intel collusion, primarily related to the 9/11 terror incidents. And with his increasing volubility as a critical journalist in a prominent American news outlet, it may have been time to silence him. The Saudis as hitmen, the American CIA as facilitators.

[Oct 16, 2018] CIA Whistleblower claims Nikki Haley will run for president in 2024

Oct 16, 2018 | failedevolution.blogspot.com

During a discussion with Tyrel Ventura and Tabetha Wallace, hosts of RT show Watching the Hawks , CIA Whistleblower, John Kiriakou, revealed that Nikki Haley who recently resigned from her position as US ambassador to the United Nations, is planning to run for president in 2024.

As Kiriakou said:

I actually had occasion to speak with a former very senior member of the Trump campaign, and he told me a fascinating story. He told me that Henry McMaster, who is currently the governor of South Carolina and had been a lieutenant governor, was the first elected official in America to endorse Donald Trump in early 2016.

And by the end of the year, Donald Trump had won the presidency and the campaign contacted McMaster and said 'what do you want as a reward?' And he said 'I want to be governor of South Carolina.'

Well, Nikki Haley was the governor of South Carolina. So, what is Nikki Haley want? Nikki Haley wants to be President of the United States, and she had zero foreign policy experience.

So, what they did, is they moved Haley to the United Nations to give her a foreign policy experience, Henry McMaster now is a very happy governor of South Carolina. Haley only wanted to be in the position long enough to say she had been in the position and she knew a lot about foreign policy.

So, now she's resigning. She's going to campaign for Republicans running for Congress - She's gonna campaign for the president in 2020 - She's gonna make a lot of money in the meantime. And then, she's gonna run for president in 2024. During a discussion with Tyrel Ventura and Tabetha Wallace, hosts of RT show Watching the Hawks , CIA Whistleblower, John Kiriakou, revealed that Nikki Haley who recently resigned from her position as US ambassador to the United Nations, is planning to run for president in 2024.

As Kiriakou said:

I actually had occasion to speak with a former very senior member of the Trump campaign, and he told me a fascinating story. He told me that Henry McMaster, who is currently the governor of South Carolina and had been a lieutenant governor, was the first elected official in America to endorse Donald Trump in early 2016.

And by the end of the year, Donald Trump had won the presidency and the campaign contacted McMaster and said 'what do you want as a reward?' And he said 'I want to be governor of South Carolina.'

Well, Nikki Haley was the governor of South Carolina. So, what is Nikki Haley want? Nikki Haley wants to be President of the United States, and she had zero foreign policy experience.

So, what they did, is they moved Haley to the United Nations to give her a foreign policy experience, Henry McMaster now is a very happy governor of South Carolina. Haley only wanted to be in the position long enough to say she had been in the position and she knew a lot about foreign policy.

So, now she's resigning. She's going to campaign for Republicans running for Congress - She's gonna campaign for the president in 2020 - She's gonna make a lot of money in the meantime. And then, she's gonna run for president in 2024.

https://youtu.be/ETgiMtZk92c

[Oct 16, 2018] Defeat in Bavaria delivers knockout punch to Merkel's tenure as Chancellor (Video)

Oct 16, 2018 | theduran.com

The stunning CSU defeat in Bavaria means that the coalition partner in Angela Merkel's government has lost an absolute majority in their worst election results in Bavaria since 1950.

In a preview analysis before the election, Deutsche Welle noted that a CSU collapse could lead to Seehofer's resignation from Merkel's government, and conceivably Söder's exit from the Bavarian state premiership, which would remove two of the chancellor's most outspoken critics from power , and give her room to govern in the calmer, crisis-free manner she is accustomed to.

On the other hand, a heavy loss and big resignations in the CSU might well push a desperate party in a more volatile, abrasive direction at the national level. That would further antagonize the SPD, the center-left junior partners in Merkel's coalition, themselves desperate for a new direction and already impatient with Seehofer's destabilizing antics, and precipitate a break-up of the age-old CDU/CSU alliance, and therefore a break-up of Merkel's grand coalition. In short: Anything could happen after Sunday, up to and including Merkel's fall.

The Financial Times reports that the campaign was dominated by the divisive issue of immigration, in a sign of how the shockwaves from Merkel's disastrous decision to let in more than a million refugees in 2015-16 are continuing to reverberate through German politics and to reshape the party landscape.

The Duran's Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the stunning Bavarian election defeat of the CSU party, and the message voters sent to Angela Merkel, the last of the Obama 'rat pack' neo-liberal, globalist leaders whose tenure as German Chancellor appears to be coming to an end.

[Oct 16, 2018] CIA Whistleblower claims Nikki Haley will run for president in 2024

Oct 16, 2018 | failedevolution.blogspot.com

During a discussion with Tyrel Ventura and Tabetha Wallace, hosts of RT show Watching the Hawks , CIA Whistleblower, John Kiriakou, revealed that Nikki Haley who recently resigned from her position as US ambassador to the United Nations, is planning to run for president in 2024.

As Kiriakou said:

I actually had occasion to speak with a former very senior member of the Trump campaign, and he told me a fascinating story. He told me that Henry McMaster, who is currently the governor of South Carolina and had been a lieutenant governor, was the first elected official in America to endorse Donald Trump in early 2016.

And by the end of the year, Donald Trump had won the presidency and the campaign contacted McMaster and said 'what do you want as a reward?' And he said 'I want to be governor of South Carolina.'

Well, Nikki Haley was the governor of South Carolina. So, what is Nikki Haley want? Nikki Haley wants to be President of the United States, and she had zero foreign policy experience.

So, what they did, is they moved Haley to the United Nations to give her a foreign policy experience, Henry McMaster now is a very happy governor of South Carolina. Haley only wanted to be in the position long enough to say she had been in the position and she knew a lot about foreign policy.

So, now she's resigning. She's going to campaign for Republicans running for Congress - She's gonna campaign for the president in 2020 - She's gonna make a lot of money in the meantime. And then, she's gonna run for president in 2024. During a discussion with Tyrel Ventura and Tabetha Wallace, hosts of RT show Watching the Hawks , CIA Whistleblower, John Kiriakou, revealed that Nikki Haley who recently resigned from her position as US ambassador to the United Nations, is planning to run for president in 2024.

As Kiriakou said:

I actually had occasion to speak with a former very senior member of the Trump campaign, and he told me a fascinating story. He told me that Henry McMaster, who is currently the governor of South Carolina and had been a lieutenant governor, was the first elected official in America to endorse Donald Trump in early 2016.

And by the end of the year, Donald Trump had won the presidency and the campaign contacted McMaster and said 'what do you want as a reward?' And he said 'I want to be governor of South Carolina.'

Well, Nikki Haley was the governor of South Carolina. So, what is Nikki Haley want? Nikki Haley wants to be President of the United States, and she had zero foreign policy experience.

So, what they did, is they moved Haley to the United Nations to give her a foreign policy experience, Henry McMaster now is a very happy governor of South Carolina. Haley only wanted to be in the position long enough to say she had been in the position and she knew a lot about foreign policy.

So, now she's resigning. She's going to campaign for Republicans running for Congress - She's gonna campaign for the president in 2020 - She's gonna make a lot of money in the meantime. And then, she's gonna run for president in 2024.

https://youtu.be/ETgiMtZk92c

[Oct 14, 2018] Empire Loyalists Grieve Resignation of Moderate Psychopath Nikki Haley

Notable quotes:
"... Describing Nikki Haley as a "moderate Republican" is like describing Jeffrey Dahmer as "a moderate meat eater". Besides John Bolton there is nobody within the depraved Trump administration who's been a more reliable advocate for war, oppression and American/Israeli supremacism, no more virulent a proponent of the empire's photogenic version of fascism than she. ..."
"... But because she only advocates establishment-sanctioned mass murders (and perhaps partly because she wears the magical "Woman of Color" tiara), Haley can be painted as a sane, sensible adult-in-the-room by empire lackeys who are paid to normalize the brutality of the ruling class. ..."
"... Haley will be departing with a disgusting 75 percent approval rating with Republicans and 55 percent approval with Democrats, because God is dead and everything is stupid. ..."
Oct 14, 2018 | medium.com

Empire Loyalists Grieve Resignation of Moderate Psychopath Nikki Haley "Describing Nikki Haley as a 'moderate Republican' is like describing Jeffrey Dahmer as 'a moderate meat eater'" Caitlin Johnstone Thu, Oct 11, 2018 | 820 words 3,560 164

World War Three proponent and US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley has announced her resignation today, to the dismay of establishment bootlickers everywhere.

"Nikki Haley, ambassador to the United Nations, has resigned, leaving the administration with one less moderate Republican voice," tweeted the New York Times, without defining what specifically is "moderate" about relentlessly pushing for war and starvation sanctions at every opportunity and adamantly defending the slaughter of unarmed Palestinian protesters with sniper fire.

"Too bad Nikki Haley has resigned," tweeted law professor turned deranged Russia conspiracy theorist Laurence Tribe. "She was one of the last members of Trumplandia with even a smidgen of decency."

"Thank you @nikkihaley for your remarkable service. We look forward to welcoming you back to public service as President of the United States," tweeted Mark Dubowitz, Chief Executive of the neoconservative think tank/ covert Israeli war psyop firm Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

"Thank you @nikkihaley for your service in the @UN and unwavering support for Israel and the truth," tweeted the fucking IDF. "The soldiers of the Israel Defense Forces salute you!"

I'm not going to go over every single fawning, sycophantic tweet, but if you ever ingest poison and can't afford to go to the hospital because of America's disastrous healthcare system, you can always try going to Haley's Twitter page and looking at all the empire loyalists she's been retweeting who've been falling all over themselves to paint her as something other than the bloodthirsty psychopath that she is. If that doesn't empty your stomach contents all over your screen, you are made of stronger stuff than I.

Describing Nikki Haley as a "moderate Republican" is like describing Jeffrey Dahmer as "a moderate meat eater". Besides John Bolton there is nobody within the depraved Trump administration who's been a more reliable advocate for war, oppression and American/Israeli supremacism, no more virulent a proponent of the empire's photogenic version of fascism than she.

Whether it's been blocking any condemnation of or UN investigation into the slaughter of unarmed Palestinian protesters via sniper fire, calling for a coalition against Syria and its allies to prevent them from fighting western-backed terrorist factions, outright lying about Iran to advance this administration's regime change agenda in that nation, her attempts to blame Iran for Saudi Arabia's butchery of Yemeni civilians with the help of the US and UK, her calls for sanctions against Russia even beyond those this administration has been willing to implement, her warmongering against North Korea , and many, many examples from a list far too long to get into here, Haley has made death and destruction her life's mission every day of her gore-spattered tenure.

But because she only advocates establishment-sanctioned mass murders (and perhaps partly because she wears the magical "Woman of Color" tiara), Haley can be painted as a sane, sensible adult-in-the-room by empire lackeys who are paid to normalize the brutality of the ruling class. While you still see Steve Bannon routinely decried as a monster despite his being absent from the Trump administration for over a year, far more dangerous and far more powerful ghouls are treated with respect and reverence because they know what to say in polite company and never smoked cigars with Milo Yiannopoulos. All it takes to be regarded as a decent person by establishment punditry is the willingness to avoid offending people; do that and you can murder as many children with explosives and butterfly bullets as your withered heart desires.

Haley will be departing with a disgusting 75 percent approval rating with Republicans and 55 percent approval with Democrats, because God is dead and everything is stupid. It is unknown who will replace her once she vacates her position (I've got my money on Reaper drone in a desk chair), but it's a safe bet that it will be someone who espouses the same neoconservative imperialist foreign policy that this administration has been elevating since the beginning. Whoever it is should be watched closely, as should the bipartisan beltway propagandists whose job it is to humanize them.

UPDATE: Had to include this gem from the New York Times editorial board:

Source: Medium.com

[Oct 14, 2018] Nobody in the adults world will miss Haley

Notable quotes:
"... They should definitely send more women to the places they messed up - Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Iraq, Iran etc. They should never send them to Iran as they will have a fit when they see how civilised and courteous ordinary people are over there. For some strange reason, most Iranians like America. I could never understand that. ..."
Oct 14, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Canosin • 3 days ago ,

what a poisonous snake.. .... nobody in the adults world will miss this piece of lying shit.....

Alberto Canosin • 2 days ago ,

Samantha Power was terrible too. Hard to say which is worse. They share the same discourse. No difference between democrats and Republicans. Both defend the Empire by resorting to invasions, conspiracies, and murder.

Seán Murphy Alberto • 2 days ago ,

Think Power had slightly more between her ears... but the same warmongering attitudes. What's wrong with women when they get into positions of power, that so many of them become warhawks? Think Power, Haley, Rice (both of them), Clinton, Albrighton, Thatcher, et al?
And them the feminists tell us that the world would be a more just and peaceful place if there were more of them in office!

Nassim7 Seán Murphy • 2 days ago ,

"What's wrong with women when they get into positions of power, that so many of them become warhawks?"

They should definitely send more women to the places they messed up - Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Iraq, Iran etc. They should never send them to Iran as they will have a fit when they see how civilised and courteous ordinary people are over there. For some strange reason, most Iranians like America. I could never understand that.

franz kafka Nassim7 • 2 hours ago ,

The US propaganda was effective. It worked in the USSR too... but only once.

Alberto Seán Murphy • 2 days ago ,

Because women in power want to imitate men's behavior. Don't want to differentiate themselves. Bad news for bad feminism. U.S. feminists adore people like Albright or H Clinton. They are not credible.

JIMI JAMES Alberto • 2 days ago ,

They all suffer severe complex mental deficiencies, this is why the people rejected likes of clintons, bush +co's

Kjell Hasthi Gonzogal • 3 days ago ,

US and its 100,000 Intelligence community working for "Monaco" makes as much sense as Hitler worked for Luxembourgh. With 22 new Capitol Hill size buildings in Washington DC for CIA since 2001, they could house whole Israeli state administration alone

Billo Kjell Hasthi • 2 days ago ,

I think maybe they do.

[Oct 14, 2018] I don't think Trump cared much about the Skripal case either. He imposed a few more sanctions under pressure from the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, GOP Rep. Ed Royce of California.

Notable quotes:
"... Any scenario is possible coming from the Saudis or the Anglo media. The Skripal has been a successful one. ..."
Oct 14, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

dh , Oct 12, 2018 5:02:06 PM | link

@81 I don't think Trump cared much about the Skripal case either.

He imposed a few more sanctions under pressure from the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, GOP Rep. Ed Royce of California.

Virgile , Oct 12, 2018 5:07:49 PM | link

@71 Activist potatoe

We are in "Pulp Fiction" aren't we? Any scenario is possible coming from the Saudis or the Anglo media. The Skripal has been a successful one.
Thanks for completing the scenario with your own ideas of the beheading of witnesses that you mistakenly attributed to me.

I would suppose that Saudis have something usually convincing to shut off talkative people, like they will shut off Trump or even the Turks: Money

Activist Potato , Oct 12, 2018 6:08:40 PM | link

... ... ...

The Skripal hoax grew legs I never imagined possible. If people did quietly question it, those people were deprived of a public counter-narrative in the mainstream Press to nurture their skepticism. This could cause a dimwit to renounce natural suspicion and a sharpie to know when to shut-up if he/she did not wish to be laughed at or worse.

They have so many of us dangling on a string. Thank b and others for MoA!


Den Lille Abe , Oct 12, 2018 10:10:26 PM | link
Cool down! We had TWO GRU murderers walk into Salisbury, with no CCCTV ecidense yet that they were near Skripal's house, and no evidence from his house , which surely must have under surveillance. Do you believe this? OK you believe the official story too.
And apart from that, Kashroggis probable demise is all cool, as he was a head chopping advocate, a Wahabistst. Fuck him . Wahabists go in Class on camps which has on the entrance "Arbeit mach frei" which of course is a general lie, but the whe get to kill them in a humanely way (see instruction manual from CiA)
Or you just shoot them in the chest, less smatter and more blood. Headshots are messy, stuff everywhere., sometimetimes, if you accidentially hit a weak point in the cranium , you have brains everywhere , dont wan't that.
Den Lille Abe , Oct 13, 2018 8:46:30 AM | link
As another poster commented, something is missing...
It is like a well choreograhped drame, Skripals were the same, this also is tooooo nice fitting together... Hmfr!
Qui bono? Who makes money on this? I certainly cannot answer that, but lets play safe : The Russians did it!
They beamed up Kasshoggi to their base on the dark side of the moon, the re killed him in civilized manner, fucking him to death with nice looking whores and spoonfeeding him Beluga caviar and interjected wit sips of Russian Starka. He was then made to mush and beamed back into the Saudi consulate making a real mess. Now poor headchop promoter is all over the place! He must love that up in his muslum heaven with 72 old hags. There is no martyrdom in being beamed to the moon and put through a garden shredder, that is nothing special.
So now the Saudi's has Khassoggi al over their faces (literally :)) and the Turks eye a new way to betray someone (Putin, wake up!!). Ever since democracy was bestowed on these people, they have made a mess of it.
Back in the day (when I was gung ho Army boy), it was OK for a Turk officer to shoot dead a couple of conscripts a year, no problemo, the sentries with weapons had no live rounds hi-hi. Turkey does not need a hard shove and it will crumble, and the Americans will intervene, unless Russia is first.
This game is about Turkey, and not goat herders in Saudi Sodoma. They have hardly oil left and the plebs are angry.
Robert Snefjella , Oct 13, 2018 8:50:46 AM | link
Trivia?

Jared Kushner's friendship/affair with previously merely progressive war criminal MBS, who has progressed to now also beinted tainted with responsibility for the lurid butchery of an offensive to MBS 'journalist' who was but days from marriage and the arms of his love, does not elevate Kushner's already dubious standing in some circles.

Kushner, he who on one memorable occasion chatted til the early hours of the morning, "cultivating a close friendship", with the mass murdering progressive MBS, who (thus inspired?; coincidentally?) to Trumpian applause arrested and shook down many members of his billionaire-cult family. But is this a busom buddy friendship born of equality, two young men with so much in common?

MBS has been quoted as saying he has "Kushner in my pocket". Hmmm.

And then there's NYT's Tom Friedman's gushing rhapsody in purple over MBS: "... a genuine reformer, mega-popular dude, and an all-around super awesome guy." Friedman's love was stoked over what he presumed was a lamb dinner, but in the light of further developments, we are not so sure....

mali , Oct 13, 2018 9:30:32 AM | link
Trump vows 'severe punishment' if Saudi Arabia is behind killing of WaPo journalist Khashoggi . However, Trump stressed that even if the journalist was killed at the hands of Riyadh, he still wouldn't end the arms deal between the two countries .
Noirette , Oct 13, 2018 9:53:35 AM | link
Reminded me of the Sultan Bin Turki affair.

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

He was most critical of the Saudi Royals and ;) 'pro-reform.' He was kidnapped in Geneva, apparently as carried out or 'allowed' for a good part by the Saudi Ambassador.

He was, allegedly, 'rendered' back to KSA, drugged and tortured. Five masked men knocked him unconscious, anesthetized him, taken him to a Boeing 747 waiting at the Geneva airport, and flew him to the Saudi capital Riyadh

http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940427000348

In F, closer to the events: Celui-ci s'éclipse de la pièce et peu après, des hommes armés font irruption, frappent Sultan ben Turki, le menottent, lui font une injection et le transportent inconscient jusqu'à l'aéroport de Cointrin, où il est embarqué à bord d'un Boeing médical arrivé plusieurs jours auparavant et toujours prêt à décoller, selon le récit qu'il en a fait plus tard.

https://www.letemps.ch/monde/ne-prince-saoudien-exile-europe

Prison > house arrest, > once freed - he was allowed to go to Boston for medical treatment - he fled - back to Geneva! - and a court case took place (2016.) Pierre de Preux, a well known lawyer here, represented him. Imho the state prosecutor (= DA) was brave to take on this case. It was nevertheless shelved for lack of evidence.

Killing off critics / potential trouble makers / other / takes different forms in different régimes.

In the US for ex. no big show is made, and the death is classed as suicide, car accident, druggie death, mystery fall / drowning, etc. no matter how weird the circumstances. In other lands, it is deemed necessary to demonstrate the power of the Overlords, who can organise 15 ppl, a stark warning is projected.

Piotr Berman , Oct 13, 2018 10:40:02 AM | link
Posted by: Den Lille Abe | Oct 13, 2018 8:46:30 AM | 118

On one hand, the quantity of black flag incidents is increasing, and that leads to low quality at many occasions. Ukrainians in particular excel in making most laughable incidents and the British seem to be influenced. Babchenko was killed, his murder condemned by Her Majesty Foreign Office and then got resurected. Brits seem to liked that, as exemplified by heroics of Sir Gavin, the Lord Defender of the United Kingdom (England, Wales, Scotland, Island of Man etc. etc.) on the frontline of the Free Ukraine.

On the other hand, were Saudis innocent they should have means of proving it. Consulates have security systems including cameras near the entry. While they are attacked less frequently than convenience stores, they have a better budget for such systems. Thus it should not be hard to show that either (a) Jamal Khashoggi actually did not enter KSA consulate in Istanbul on the day in question or (b) he entered and exited. Barring the use of hitherto unknown types of beam weapons, I would conclude that he entered and did not exit by normal means.

That said, there were no reports on beam weapons capable of transporting material objects. At worst, Russians could focus microwave weapons reducing people inside the consulate to incontinent cricket hearing idiots, enter through the underground and get out carrying whatever they please. KSA could be reluctant to release videos showing their people as they looked like idiots who just pissed into their pants and worse. This is what I can imagine on the basis of stories from American press that include at least two of "Russia, consulate/embassy, microwave weapons", usually all three. If we restrict ourself to more corroborated stories, Russians could drill holes and saturate the air with "military grade fentanyl" and eschew microwaves. But it would be easier if it was done by Turks with the help of Russian experts who botched something like that at least once, so they have data how to drill, spray and calculate the dosage.

Surely, one should not deprecate the ability of Turks to concoct tales. For example, a typical tale from Tales of 1001 Nights features a beautiful Turkish princess that falls from one misfortune to another at the hands of a trio of bad characters: a Jewish merchant, a Christian magician and a Kurdish leader of a band of robbers, only to be eventually rescued by a dashing young Muslim Arab, and we may have such a tale suitable altered for the occasion -- perhaps despicable Kurds will show up later.

But really, offering Starka to a prisoner? Because of long aging time and the demand, it is surprisingly hard to buy, and it is hard to tell if it is popular in Russia at all, Poland and the Baltics have more of Starka tradition.

[Oct 14, 2018] Nobody in the adults world will miss Haley

Notable quotes:
"... They should definitely send more women to the places they messed up - Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Iraq, Iran etc. They should never send them to Iran as they will have a fit when they see how civilised and courteous ordinary people are over there. For some strange reason, most Iranians like America. I could never understand that. ..."
Oct 14, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Canosin • 3 days ago ,

what a poisonous snake.. .... nobody in the adults world will miss this piece of lying shit.....

Alberto Canosin • 2 days ago ,

Samantha Power was terrible too. Hard to say which is worse. They share the same discourse. No difference between democrats and Republicans. Both defend the Empire by resorting to invasions, conspiracies, and murder.

Seán Murphy Alberto • 2 days ago ,

Think Power had slightly more between her ears... but the same warmongering attitudes. What's wrong with women when they get into positions of power, that so many of them become warhawks? Think Power, Haley, Rice (both of them), Clinton, Albrighton, Thatcher, et al?
And them the feminists tell us that the world would be a more just and peaceful place if there were more of them in office!

Nassim7 Seán Murphy • 2 days ago ,

"What's wrong with women when they get into positions of power, that so many of them become warhawks?"

They should definitely send more women to the places they messed up - Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Iraq, Iran etc. They should never send them to Iran as they will have a fit when they see how civilised and courteous ordinary people are over there. For some strange reason, most Iranians like America. I could never understand that.

franz kafka Nassim7 • 2 hours ago ,

The US propaganda was effective. It worked in the USSR too... but only once.

Alberto Seán Murphy • 2 days ago ,

Because women in power want to imitate men's behavior. Don't want to differentiate themselves. Bad news for bad feminism. U.S. feminists adore people like Albright or H Clinton. They are not credible.

JIMI JAMES Alberto • 2 days ago ,

They all suffer severe complex mental deficiencies, this is why the people rejected likes of clintons, bush +co's

Kjell Hasthi Gonzogal • 3 days ago ,

US and its 100,000 Intelligence community working for "Monaco" makes as much sense as Hitler worked for Luxembourgh. With 22 new Capitol Hill size buildings in Washington DC for CIA since 2001, they could house whole Israeli state administration alone

Billo Kjell Hasthi • 2 days ago ,

I think maybe they do.

[Oct 13, 2018] Haley's Poor Record at the U.N. The American Conservative

Notable quotes:
"... Haley lied a lot, but maybe half the time at least probably had no idea she was lying. Don't give her too much credit. Remember "Binomo." ..."
Oct 13, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Harry Kazianis reviews Nikki Haley's record as ambassador to the U.N. and finds it very lacking:

That was my problem with the ambassador. Not that she did a bad job, not that she was a terrible representative of our nation's interests, but simply that she lacked of the experience and natural abilities needed in such a role. Spitting back Trumpian rhetoric is not enough to be credible on the world's stage.

Kazianis is right that Haley was ill-prepared for the job, and I would add that she made a habit of making false claims , unreasonable demands, and unnecessary threats . Whether she was threatening military action over missile tests, telling lies about the nuclear deal with Iran , or warning that the U.S. would be "taking names" of the states that didn't fall in line, Haley proved herself to be a poor diplomat and an ineffective representative of the United States. Her time at the U.N. was marked by unwarranted, cruel actions to punish the Palestinian civilian population, a disgraceful defense of the massacre of protesters in Gaza, and a misguided decision to withdraw from the Human Rights Council. While the world's worst humanitarian crisis intensified in Yemen with U.S. support for the Saudi coalition, Haley was too busy trying to distract everyone's attention by shouting about Iran.

Haley didn't have a good grasp of substance, and instead relied on talking points to a fault. Kazianis quotes a Republican consultant's view of the ambassador:

"Haley was a great spokesperson for the administration; in fact, she was great at parroting whatever lines Trump wanted her to deliver," the consultant continued. "But for anyone who has ever interacted with her, one thing became very clear. The second she left the land of talking points, any time she was asked to discuss any issue in any depth, it was apparent there was nothing there. And that is not what we need as ambassador at the UN."

It is a sign of how little many of her fellow hawks care about substantive knowledge that several of them greeted news of her resignation with dismay. Max Boot described her resignation as a "sad moment," and Bill Kristol began fantasizing about a primary challenge to Trump that will never happen. When these are the people touting Haley's record, it is a safe bet that the U.S. will be better off being represented by someone else at the U.N.

b. October 10, 2018 at 2:14 pm

"When these are the people touting Haley's record, it is a safe bet that the U.S. will be better off being represented by someone else at the U.N."

Sara Palin? She can see 2022 from here house, too.

b. , says: October 10, 2018 at 2:20 pm
Haley was just another Cargo Cult politician.

Following Reagan and Trump, the only reason we don't see actual actors hired for candidacies and campaigns is because the best Judas Goat for any election rodeo is one that believes its own BS.

Blimbax , says: October 10, 2018 at 4:26 pm
Thaomos says, "A diplomat is a person sent to lie on behalf of their country. Maybe Haley just got tired of doing it."

Haley lied a lot, but maybe half the time at least probably had no idea she was lying. Don't give her too much credit. Remember "Binomo."

Minnesota Mary , says: October 10, 2018 at 7:48 pm
Let's face it. Trump did not have an army of qualified people to fill government and administration posts. He had to fill positions from the Neocon pool of bureaucrats. Nikki Haley is a mind-numbed robot, drunk on Neocon Kool-Aid and Premillenial Dispensationalism. Really sad that Trump picked her for the UN slot. Even sadder is he will replace her with someone just as bad, but more clever at disguising a rotten foreign policy.

[Oct 13, 2018] Any sce nario is possible coming from the Saudis or the Anglo media. The Skripal has been a successful one

Notable quotes:
"... Any scenario is possible coming from the Saudis or the Anglo media. The Skripal has been a successful one. ..."
"... The Skripal hoax grew legs I never imagined possible. If people did quietly question it, those people were deprived of a public counter-narrative in the mainstream Press to nurture their skepticism. This could cause a dimwit to renounce natural suspicion and a sharpie to know when to shut-up if he/she did not wish to be laughed at or worse. ..."
"... It is like a well choreograhped drame, Skripals were the same, this also is tooooo nice fitting together... ..."
"... Jared Kushner's friendship/affair with previously merely progressive war criminal MBS, who has progressed to now also beinted tainted with responsibility for the lurid butchery of an offensive to MBS 'journalist' who was but days from marriage and the arms of his love, does not elevate Kushner's already dubious standing in some circles. ..."
"... And then there's NYT's Tom Friedman's gushing rhapsody in purple over MBS: "... a genuine reformer, mega-popular dude, and an all-around super awesome guy." Friedman's love was stoked over what he presumed was a lamb dinner, but in the light of further developments, we are not so sure.... ..."
"... Reminded me of the Sultan Bin Turki affair. ..."
"... He was most critical of the Saudi Royals and ;) 'pro-reform.' He was kidnapped in Geneva, apparently as carried out or 'allowed' for a good part by the Saudi Ambassador. ..."
"... On one hand, the quantity of black flag incidents is increasing, and that leads to low quality at many occasions. Ukrainians in particular excel in making most laughable incidents and the British seem to be influenced. Babchenko was killed, his murder condemned by Her Majesty Foreign Office and then got resurected. ..."
Oct 13, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Virgile , Oct 12, 2018 5:07:49 PM | link

@71 Activist potatoe

We are in "Pulp Fiction" aren't we? Any scenario is possible coming from the Saudis or the Anglo media. The Skripal has been a successful one.
Thanks for completing the scenario with your own ideas of the beheading of witnesses that you mistakenly attributed to me.

I would suppose that Saudis have something usually convincing to shut off talkative people, like they will shut off Trump or even the Turks: Money

Activist Potato , Oct 12, 2018 6:08:40 PM | link

... ... ...

The Skripal hoax grew legs I never imagined possible. If people did quietly question it, those people were deprived of a public counter-narrative in the mainstream Press to nurture their skepticism. This could cause a dimwit to renounce natural suspicion and a sharpie to know when to shut-up if he/she did not wish to be laughed at or worse.

They have so many of us dangling on a string. Thank b and others for MoA!

Den Lille Abe , Oct 12, 2018 10:10:26 PM | link
Cool down! We had TWO GRU murderers walk into Salisbury, with no CCCTV ecidense yet that they were near Skripal's house, and no evidence from his house , which surely must have under surveillance. Do you believe this? OK you believe the official story too.

And apart from that, Kashroggis probable demise is all cool, as he was a head chopping advocate, a Wahabistst. Fuck him . Wahabists go in Class on camps which has on the entrance "Arbeit mach frei" which of course is a general lie, but the whe get to kill them in a humanely way (see instruction manual from CiA)

Or you just shoot them in the chest, less smatter and more blood. Headshots are messy, stuff everywhere., sometimetimes, if you accidentially hit a weak point in the cranium , you have brains everywhere , dont wan't that.

Den Lille Abe , Oct 13, 2018 8:46:30 AM | link
As another poster commented, something is missing...

It is like a well choreograhped drame, Skripals were the same, this also is tooooo nice fitting together... Hmfr!

Qui bono? Who makes money on this? I certainly cannot answer that, but lets play safe : The Russians did it!

They beamed up Kasshoggi to their base on the dark side of the moon, the re killed him in civilized manner, fucking him to death with nice looking whores and spoonfeeding him Beluga caviar and interjected wit sips of Russian Starka. He was then made to mush and beamed back into the Saudi consulate making a real mess. Now poor headchop promoter is all over the place! He must love that up in his muslum heaven with 72 old hags. There is no martyrdom in being beamed to the moon and put through a garden shredder, that is nothing special.

So now the Saudi's has Khassoggi al over their faces (literally :)) and the Turks eye a new way to betray someone (Putin, wake up!!). Ever since democracy was bestowed on these people, they have made a mess of it.

Back in the day (when I was gung ho Army boy), it was OK for a Turk officer to shoot dead a couple of conscripts a year, no problemo, the sentries with weapons had no live rounds hi-hi. Turkey does not need a hard shove and it will crumble, and the Americans will intervene, unless Russia is first.

This game is about Turkey, and not goat herders in Saudi Sodoma. They have hardly oil left and the plebs are angry.

Robert Snefjella , Oct 13, 2018 8:50:46 AM | link
Trivia?

Jared Kushner's friendship/affair with previously merely progressive war criminal MBS, who has progressed to now also beinted tainted with responsibility for the lurid butchery of an offensive to MBS 'journalist' who was but days from marriage and the arms of his love, does not elevate Kushner's already dubious standing in some circles.

Kushner, he who on one memorable occasion chatted till the early hours of the morning, "cultivating a close friendship", with the mass murdering progressive MBS, who (thus inspired?; coincidentally?) to Trumpian applause arrested and shook down many members of his billionaire-cult family. But is this a busom buddy friendship born of equality, two young men with so much in common?

MBS has been quoted as saying he has "Kushner in my pocket". Hmmm.

And then there's NYT's Tom Friedman's gushing rhapsody in purple over MBS: "... a genuine reformer, mega-popular dude, and an all-around super awesome guy." Friedman's love was stoked over what he presumed was a lamb dinner, but in the light of further developments, we are not so sure....

mali , Oct 13, 2018 9:30:32 AM | link
Trump vows 'severe punishment' if Saudi Arabia is behind killing of WaPo journalist Khashoggi . However, Trump stressed that even if the journalist was killed at the hands of Riyadh, he still wouldn't end the arms deal between the two countries .
Noirette , Oct 13, 2018 9:53:35 AM | link
Reminded me of the Sultan Bin Turki affair.

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

He was most critical of the Saudi Royals and ;) 'pro-reform.' He was kidnapped in Geneva, apparently as carried out or 'allowed' for a good part by the Saudi Ambassador.

He was, allegedly, 'rendered' back to KSA, drugged and tortured. Five masked men knocked him unconscious, anesthetized him, taken him to a Boeing 747 waiting at the Geneva airport, and flew him to the Saudi capital Riyadh

http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940427000348

In F, closer to the events: Celui-ci s'éclipse de la pičce et peu aprčs, des hommes armés font irruption, frappent Sultan ben Turki, le menottent, lui font une injection et le transportent inconscient jusqu'ŕ l'aéroport de Cointrin, oů il est embarqué ŕ bord d'un Boeing médical arrivé plusieurs jours auparavant et toujours pręt ŕ décoller, selon le récit qu'il en a fait plus tard.

https://www.letemps.ch/monde/ne-prince-saoudien-exile-europe

Prison > house arrest, > once freed - he was allowed to go to Boston for medical treatment - he fled - back to Geneva! - and a court case took place (2016.) Pierre de Preux, a well known lawyer here, represented him. Imho the state prosecutor (= DA) was brave to take on this case. It was nevertheless shelved for lack of evidence.

Killing off critics / potential trouble makers / other / takes different forms in different régimes.

In the US for ex. no big show is made, and the death is classed as suicide, car accident, druggie death, mystery fall / drowning, etc. no matter how weird the circumstances. In other lands, it is deemed necessary to demonstrate the power of the Overlords, who can organise 15 ppl, a stark warning is projected.

Piotr Berman , Oct 13, 2018 10:40:02 AM | link
@Den Lille Abe | Oct 13, 2018 8:46:30 AM | 118

On one hand, the quantity of black flag incidents is increasing, and that leads to low quality at many occasions. Ukrainians in particular excel in making most laughable incidents and the British seem to be influenced. Babchenko was killed, his murder condemned by Her Majesty Foreign Office and then got resurected. Brits seem to liked that, as exemplified by heroics of Sir Gavin, the Lord Defender of the United Kingdom (England, Wales, Scotland, Island of Man etc. etc.) on the frontline of the Free Ukraine.

... ... ..

[Oct 13, 2018] Haley's Poor Record at the U.N. The American Conservative

Notable quotes:
"... Haley lied a lot, but maybe half the time at least probably had no idea she was lying. Don't give her too much credit. Remember "Binomo." ..."
Oct 13, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Harry Kazianis reviews Nikki Haley's record as ambassador to the U.N. and finds it very lacking:

That was my problem with the ambassador. Not that she did a bad job, not that she was a terrible representative of our nation's interests, but simply that she lacked of the experience and natural abilities needed in such a role. Spitting back Trumpian rhetoric is not enough to be credible on the world's stage.

Kazianis is right that Haley was ill-prepared for the job, and I would add that she made a habit of making false claims , unreasonable demands, and unnecessary threats . Whether she was threatening military action over missile tests, telling lies about the nuclear deal with Iran , or warning that the U.S. would be "taking names" of the states that didn't fall in line, Haley proved herself to be a poor diplomat and an ineffective representative of the United States. Her time at the U.N. was marked by unwarranted, cruel actions to punish the Palestinian civilian population, a disgraceful defense of the massacre of protesters in Gaza, and a misguided decision to withdraw from the Human Rights Council. While the world's worst humanitarian crisis intensified in Yemen with U.S. support for the Saudi coalition, Haley was too busy trying to distract everyone's attention by shouting about Iran.

Haley didn't have a good grasp of substance, and instead relied on talking points to a fault. Kazianis quotes a Republican consultant's view of the ambassador:

"Haley was a great spokesperson for the administration; in fact, she was great at parroting whatever lines Trump wanted her to deliver," the consultant continued. "But for anyone who has ever interacted with her, one thing became very clear. The second she left the land of talking points, any time she was asked to discuss any issue in any depth, it was apparent there was nothing there. And that is not what we need as ambassador at the UN."

It is a sign of how little many of her fellow hawks care about substantive knowledge that several of them greeted news of her resignation with dismay. Max Boot described her resignation as a "sad moment," and Bill Kristol began fantasizing about a primary challenge to Trump that will never happen. When these are the people touting Haley's record, it is a safe bet that the U.S. will be better off being represented by someone else at the U.N.

b. October 10, 2018 at 2:14 pm

"When these are the people touting Haley's record, it is a safe bet that the U.S. will be better off being represented by someone else at the U.N."

Sara Palin? She can see 2022 from here house, too.

b. , says: October 10, 2018 at 2:20 pm
Haley was just another Cargo Cult politician.

Following Reagan and Trump, the only reason we don't see actual actors hired for candidacies and campaigns is because the best Judas Goat for any election rodeo is one that believes its own BS.

Blimbax , says: October 10, 2018 at 4:26 pm
Thaomos says, "A diplomat is a person sent to lie on behalf of their country. Maybe Haley just got tired of doing it."

Haley lied a lot, but maybe half the time at least probably had no idea she was lying. Don't give her too much credit. Remember "Binomo."

Minnesota Mary , says: October 10, 2018 at 7:48 pm
Let's face it. Trump did not have an army of qualified people to fill government and administration posts. He had to fill positions from the Neocon pool of bureaucrats. Nikki Haley is a mind-numbed robot, drunk on Neocon Kool-Aid and Premillenial Dispensationalism. Really sad that Trump picked her for the UN slot. Even sadder is he will replace her with someone just as bad, but more clever at disguising a rotten foreign policy.

[Oct 12, 2018] It no longer possible to hide the fact that Bellingcat is a propaganda operation financed by intelligence againcies, not that different from White Helmetss

Oct 12, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

jsb , Oct 11, 2018 6:00:34 PM | link

@Red Ryder (14)

Even Bellingcat beginning to be outed by the Independent

not seen till now though is any questioning of Bellingcat's credentials in mainstream media. So let me hand you over, without further ado and with hearty if surprised approval, to Mary Dejevsky: not known as a Kremlin stooge or Putin troll. Yet here she is, in today's Independent, asking in all sincerity and with admirable bluntness just WTF is Bellingcat?

[Oct 12, 2018] 'Land of censorship home of the fake' Alternative voices on Facebook and Twitter's crackdown

Normal people do not browse Facebook, anyway.
Notable quotes:
"... "misleading users." ..."
"... Journalist Glenn Greenwald hit out at those on the left who cheered Facebook and Twitter's coordinated 'deplatforming' of right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones in August. "Those who demanded Facebook & other Silicon Valley giants censor political content...are finding that content that they themselves support & like end up being repressed," he wrote. "That's what has happened to every censorship advocate in history." ..."
"... "a wider war on dissident narratives in online media." ..."
"... "eyes and ears" ..."
Oct 12, 2018 | www.rt.com

Alternative voices online are incensed after Facebook and Twitter closed down hundreds of political media pages ahead of November's crucial midterm elections. Facebook says they broke its spam rules, they say it's censorship. Some 800 pages spanning the political spectrum, from left-leaning organizations like The Anti Media, to flag-waving opinion sites like Right Wing News and Nation in Distress, were shut down. Other pages banned include those belonging to police brutality watchdog groups Filming Cops and Policing the Police.

Even RT America's Rachel Blevins found her own page banned for posts that were allegedly "misleading users."

Journalist Glenn Greenwald hit out at those on the left who cheered Facebook and Twitter's coordinated 'deplatforming' of right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones in August. "Those who demanded Facebook & other Silicon Valley giants censor political content...are finding that content that they themselves support & like end up being repressed," he wrote. "That's what has happened to every censorship advocate in history."

In America, Conservatives were the first to complain about unfair treatment by left-leaning Silicon Valley tech giants. However, leftist sites have increasingly become targets in what Blumenthal calls "a wider war on dissident narratives in online media." In identifying enemies in this "war," Facebook has partnered up with the Digital Forensics Lab, an offshoot of NATO-sponsored think tank the Atlantic Council. The DFL has promised to be Facebook's "eyes and ears" in the fight against disinformation (read: alternative viewpoints).

[Oct 12, 2018] Kuwait and Bahrein might reevaluate relations with Syria, the UAE might slowly move out the Yemen war

Oct 12, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Virgile , Oct 12, 2018 10:40:45 AM | link

Qatar is jubilating! Turkey, too! Saudi Arabia will be criticized and isolated as most GCC countries would dissaprove and prefer to dissociate from such a crime. Dismembering the body of a dead moslem man is a very serious crime in Islam.

Kuwait and Bahrein are already cozyng up with Syria, the UAE is slowly moving out the Yemen war and reviewing ist relation with Syria.

Kashoogi's alleged martyr may save Yemenis lives and may have the Western world faced to the reality that in the region, the evil is not Iran but their best friend, Saudi Arabia and its smiling monster MBS.

Kashoogi may have succeeded unintentionally to destabilize MBS and probably trigger his removal. The USA will have no problem in sacrificing MBS for the sake of keeping the Saudi milking under control. The only problem will be that it will reflect on Kushner-MBS Grand Palestinian plan.

Maybe Kashoogi's love for fiancee made him take the risk to get a divorce paper from the Saudi Arabia consulate and be killed.

A sad ending to a love story.

dh , Oct 12, 2018 3:19:01 PM | link

@75 Why should Trump make a big issue about some dead Arab? Because he was a journalist? Trump hates journalists.

If bleeding heart progressives want to make a fuss so be it. He knows his base don't give a shit about the world outside the USA as long as they buy American arms.

[Oct 12, 2018] The Shaky Case That Russia Manipulated Social Media to Tip the 2016 Election by Gareth Porter

Russians under each Facebook account
Oct 12, 2018 | original.antiwar.com
adopted false US personas online to get people to attend rallies and conduct other political activities. (An alternative explanation is that IRA is a purely commercial, and not political, operation.)

Whether those efforts even came close to swaying US voters in the 2016 presidential election, as Shane and Mazzetti claimed, is another matter.

Shane and Mazzetti might argue that they are merely citing figures published by the social media giants Facebook and Twitter, but they systematically failed to report the detailed explanations behind the gross figures used in each case, which falsified their significance.

Their most dramatic assertions came in reporting the alleged results of the IRA's efforts on Facebook. "Even by the vertiginous standards of social media," they wrote, "the reach of their effort was impressive: 2,700 fake Facebook accounts, 80,000 posts, many of them elaborate images with catchy slogans, and an eventual audience of 126 million Americans on Facebook alone."

Then, to dramatize that "eventual audience" figure, they observed, "That was not far short of the 137 million people who would vote in the 2016 presidential elections."

But as impressive as these figures may appear at first glance, they don't really indicate an effective attack on the US election process at all. In fact, without deeper inquiry into their meaning, those figures were grossly misleading.

A Theoretical Possibility

What Facebook general counsel Colin Stretch actually said in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee last October was quite different from what the Times reporters claimed. "Our best estimate is that approximately 126,000 million people may have been served one of these [IRA-generated] stories at some time during the two year period," Stretch said.

Stretch was expressing a theoretical possibility rather than an established accomplishment. Facebook was saying that it estimated 126 million Facebook members might have gotten at least one story from the IRA –- not over the ten week election period but over 194 weeks during the two years 2015 through 2017. That, figure, in turn, was based on the estimate that 29 million people might have gotten at least one story in their Facebook feed over that same two-year period and on the assumption that they shared it with others at a particular rate.

The first problem with citing those figures as evidence of impact on the 2016 election is that Facebook did not claim that all or even most of those 80,000 IRA posts were election–related. It offered no data on what proportion of the feeds to those 29 million people was, in fact, election-related. But Stretch did testify that IRA content over that two–year period represented just four thousandths (.0004) of the total content of Facebook newsfeeds.

Thus each piece of IRA content in a twitter feed was engulfed in 23,000 pieces of non-IRA content.

That is an extremely important finding, because, as Facebook's Vice President for News Feed, Adam Moseri, acknowledged in 2016 , Facebook subscribers actually read only about 10 percent of the stories Facebook puts in their News Feed every day. The means that very few of the IRA stories that actually make it into a subscriber's news feed on any given day are actually read.

Facebook did conduct research on what it calls "civic engagement" during the election period, and the researchers concluded that the "reach" of the content shared by what they called "fake amplifiers" was "marginal compared to the volume of civic content shared during the US elections." That reach, they said, was "statistically very small" in relation to "overall engagement on political issues."

Shane and Mazzaetti thus failed to report any of the several significant caveats and disclaimers from Facebook itself that make their claim that Russian election propaganda "reached" 126 million Americans extremely misleading.

Tiny IRA Twitter Footprint

Shane and Mazzetti's treatment of the role of Twitter in the alleged Russian involvement in the election focuses on 3,814 Twitter accounts said to be associated with the IRA, which supposedly "interacted with 1.4 million Americans." Although that number looks impressive without any further explanation, more disaggregated data provide a different picture: more than 90 percent of the Tweets from the IRA had nothing to do with the election, and those that did were infinitesimally few in relation to the entire Twitter stream relating to the 2016 campaign.

Twitter's own figures show that those 3,814 IRA-linked accounts posted 175,993 Tweets during the ten weeks of the election campaign, but that only 8.4 percent of the total number of IRA-generated Tweets were election-related.

Twitter estimated that those 15,000 IRA-related tweets represented less than .00008 (eight one hundred thousandths) of the estimated total of 189 million tweets that Twitter identified as election-related during the ten-week election campaign. Twitter has offered no estimate of how many Tweets, on average were in the daily twitter stream of those people notified by Twitter and what percentage of them were election-related Tweets from the IRA. Any such notification would certainly show, however, that the percentage was extremely small and that very few would have been read.

Research by Darren Linvill and Patrick Warren of Clemson University on 2.9 million Tweets from those same 3,814 IRA accounts over a two year period has revealed that nearly a third of its Tweets had normal commercial content or were not in English; another third were straight local newsfeeds from US localities or mostly non-political "hashtag games", and the final third were on "right" or "left" populist themes in US society.

Furthermore, there were more IRA Tweets on political themes in 2017 than there had been during the election year. As a graph of those tweets over time shows, those "right" and "left" Tweets peaked not during the election but during the summer of 2017.

The Mysterious 50,000 'Russia-Linked' Accounts

Twitter also determined that another 50,258 automated Twitter accounts that tweeted about the election were associated with Russia and that they have generated a total to 2.1 million Tweets – about one percent of the total number election-related tweets of during the period.

But despite media coverage of those Tweets suggesting that they originated with the Russian government, the evidence doesn't indicate that at all. Twitter's Sean Edgett told the Senate Intelligence Committee last November that Twitter had used an "expansive approach to defining what qualifies as a Russian-linked account". Twitter considered an account to be "Russian" if any of the following was found: it was created in Russia or if the user registered the account with a Russian phone carrier or a Russian email; the user's display name contains Cyrillic characters; the user frequently Tweets in Russian, or the user has logged in from any Russian IP address.

Edgett admitted in a statement in January, however, that there were limitations on its ability to determine the origins of the users of these accounts. And a past log-in from a Russian IP address does not mean the Russian government controls an account. Automated accounts have bought and sold for many years on a huge market, some of which is located in Russia. As Scott Shane reported in September 2017, a Russian website BuyAccs.com offers tens and even hundreds of thousands of Twitter accounts for bulk purchase.

Twitter also observed that "a high concentration of automated engagement and content originated from data centers and users accessing Twitter via Virtual Private Networks ("VPNs") and proxy servers," which served to mask the geographical origin of the tweet. And that practice was not limited to the 50,000 accounts in question. Twitter found that locations of nearly 12 percent of the Tweets generated during the election period were masked because of use of such networks and servers.

Twitter identified over half of the Tweets, coming from about half of the 50,000 accounts as being automated, and the data reported on activity on those 50,000 accounts in question indicates that both the Trump and Clinton campaigns were using the automated accounts in question. The roughly 23,000 automated accounts were the source of 1.34 million Tweets, which represented .63 percent of the total election-related Tweets. But the entire 50,000 accounts produced about 1 percent of total election-related tweets.

Hillary Clinton got .55 percent of her total retweets from the 50,000 automated accounts Twitter calls "Russia-linked" and .62 percent of her "likes" from them. Those percentages are close to the percentage of total election-related Tweets generated by those same automated accounts. That suggests that her campaign had roughly the same proportion of automated accounts among the 50,000 accounts as it did in the rest of the accounts during the campaign.

Trump, on the other hand, got 1.8 percent of this total "likes" and 4.25 percent of his total Retweets for the whole election period from those accounts, indicating his campaign was more invested in the automated accounts that were the source of two-thirds of the Tweets in those 50,000 "Russia-linked" accounts.

The idea promoted by Shane and Mazzetti that the Russian government seriously threatened to determine the winner of the election does not hold up when the larger social media context is examined more closely. Contrary to what the Times' reporters and the corporate media in general would have us believe, the Russian private sector effort accounted for a minuscule proportion of the election-related output of social media. The threat to the US political system in general and its electoral system in particular is not Russian influence; it's in part a mainstream news media that has lost perspective on the truth.

Gareth Porter, an investigative historian and journalist specializing in US national security policy, received the UK-based Gellhorn Prize for journalism for 2011 for articles on the U.S. war in Afghanistan. His new book is Manufactured Crisis: the Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare . He can be contacted at [email protected] . Reprinted from Consortium News with the author's permission.

[Oct 12, 2018] Sic Semper Tyrannis RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP 11 OCTOBER 2018 by Patrick Armstrong

Notable quotes:
"... its russia and chinas job to assist america to reach the acceptance stage as peacefully as possible while allowing as much face saving as possible for washington and their ruling class. at the end of the day everyone wants to go on living. the next 15 years ought to be quite exciting. ..."
Oct 12, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

SKRIPALMANIA. Has now been completely outsourced to Bellingcat . Which tells the discerning observer two things: 1) there is no evidence 2) the truth is probably the opposite. (And for those of you who take Bellingcat seriously: become discerning .)

Araminta Smade , 16 hours ago

SKRIPALMANIA. Has now been completely outsourced to Bellingcat. Which tells the discerning observer two things: 1) there is no evidence 2) the truth is probably the opposite. (And for those of you who take Bellingcat seriously: become discerning.)

To those of you who are like myself deeply sceptical about this story can I recommend this article in the UK Independent newspaper.

We should be asking for answers about the Skripals and Bellingcat – and not just from Russia. Mary Dejevsky.

https://www.independent.co....

Snow Flake -> Araminta Smade , 5 hours ago
It has transatlantic connections.

Higgins has entered the polite academic space both in the Uk and the US in lightening speed. And as a result of that got special attention by media. Not only that, but in the US he additionally joined an important cog of the EU-US think thank world. The Atlantic Council made him a non-resident "Senior Fellow". As expert in digital forensics, open source and the future of Europe.

When the huge open source "gold rush" caught my attention in the early post 9/11 years, all the excited members I witnessed more close up were quite system conform. That was after the Iraq war intelligence expertise. That's why it made me wonder. Thus,the story of Eliot Higgins seems no outlier from my rather limited perspective.

And yes, I am with Paul Robinson, who a while ago noticed the same contradictions as Mary Dejevsky. On one hand the Russians seem to be omnipotent, on the other they have all these bungling secret service members that are so easy to out. But notice not by a bunch of laymen, but by a crowd led by a serious senior expert and academic. ;)

Peddling Certainty:

https://irrussianality.word...

Snow Flake -> Araminta Smade , 5 hours ago
It has transatlantic connections.

Higgins has entered the polite academic space both in the Uk and the US in lightening speed. And as a result of that got special attention by media. Not only that, but in the US he additionally joined an important cog of the EU-US think thank world. The Atlantic Council made him a non-resident "Senior Fellow". As expert in digital forensics, open source and the future of Europe.

When the huge open source "gold rush" caught my attention in the early post 9/11 years, all the excited members I witnessed more close up were quite system conform. That was after the Iraq war intelligence expertise. That's why it made me wonder. Thus,the story of Eliot Higgins seems no outlier from my rather limited perspective.

And yes, I am with Paul Robinson, who a while ago noticed the same contradictions as Mary Dejevsky. On one hand the Russians seem to be omnipotent, on the other they have all these bungling secret service members that are so easy to out. But notice not by a bunch of laymen, but by a crowd led by a serious senior expert and academic. ;)

Peddling Certainty:

https://irrussianality.word...

FB -> Snow Flake , an hour ago
I think some people here are actually taking Eliott Higgins far too seriously...he is still an uneducated underwear salesman...and acts like it...case in point his recent twitter outburst at Ted Postol, calling him an 'idiot'...that just shows what a substance free clown this guy is...

I briefly looked at that blog article linked to by snowflake and it is basically verbal diarrhea...bottom line is that Higgins and that Bellincat 'outfit' are best simply ignored...not worth the time or mental bandwidth to even think about...

smoothieX12 . -> Snow Flake , 2 hours ago
Atlantic Council has a very great Ph.D consultant, and strategists' strategist and tacticians' tactician, Dr. Blank. He, of all places, taught in US Army War College. He taught, of course, about Russia, since he has Ph.D in Soviet/Russian "history" or whatever passes as such in US "Russian Studies" field.

http://www.wikistrat.com/ex...

His strategic concepts are so devoid of even basic high school level knowledge of Russia (and her geography, BTW) that one is forced to ask how is it even possible to have this kind of "experts"? Among many outlandish ideas Dr. Blank proposed in his academic career dedicated to fighting evil Russians was to send US Navy to the Azov Sea to demonstrate the US Naval might.

http://www.atlanticcouncil....

This was one of the most profound facepalm moments of my life--I mean it. Not only Dr. Blank has no clue about Russia, he also has no clue about US Navy. Yet, he is an expert, alright.

TTG , 19 hours ago
You left the best part out of that State Department policy statement. He announced a new position, the Senior Advisor for Russian Malign Activities and Trends or SARMAT for short. That's straight out of the axis of evil mindset. How can we have a sober and productive policy towards Russia with crap like this?
PRC90 -> TTG , 8 hours ago
I thought that was from Duffleblog but you're right: https://www.state.gov/p/eur...
Third para from the bottom. Part of that $380 million must be Bellingcat's budget.
Timothy Hagios -> TTG , 9 hours ago
I can't wait to see what awful person is selected for this role. Also, Sarmat is also the name for Russia's newest ICBM, which makes one wonder what was on the back of their minds when they came up with this one.
ted richard , 4 hours ago
washingtons foreign policy visa vie russia and china is as yet unable to reach the psychological stage of sublimation. frustrated, angry and demoralised that they can not militarily atttack russia once and for all putting paid ....to who is the biggest dog in the yard...... american elites lash out ineffectually using various media, economic and financial games to assuage their inability to get their way.

each iteration of this plan becomes weaker and less effective than the previous one leading to more rage at being thwarted.

where the current crop of american ruling elites are concerned we are talking about 2 factors.... a profound lack of a really good cosmopolitan education and a near total lack of appreciation for how weak the american industrial base has become the past 30 years (you can not intimidate powerful nations if your military technology is 1 or more generations BEHIND)

an apt understanding of washingtons dilemma is best grasped reading the kubler-ross stages of grieving over a dying loved one. in this case the dying loved one is american exceptionalism and the l godlike power that goes with it for the 1/100 or 1%.

its russia and chinas job to assist america to reach the acceptance stage as peacefully as possible while allowing as much face saving as possible for washington and their ruling class. at the end of the day everyone wants to go on living. the next 15 years ought to be quite exciting.

[Oct 12, 2018] If the gas pipeline project is indeed implemented, then Kiev will demand that a penalty against against Russia be awarded the Ukraine for the loss it will suffer because of the redundancy of its gas transport system.

Oct 12, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile October 5, 2018 at 12:58 am

... .. ...

Ukraine Naftogaz Commercial Director Yuriy Vitrenko, in an interview with "The Fifth Channel" has spoken of a plan that has been prepared in order to protect Naftogaz interests in the event of the launch of "Nord Stream-2".

According to him, if the gas pipeline project is indeed implemented, then Kiev will demand that a penalty against against Russia be awarded the Ukraine for the loss it will suffer because of the redundancy of its gas transport system.

The loss incured has been estimated by the Ukraine to be $12 billion. A lawsuit has already been filed by Naftogaz for international arbitration.

https://www.rbc.ru/politics/05/10/2018/5bb704ec9a7947bd43fa167c?utm_source=yxnews&utm_medium=desktop

Right!

So for several years I have been shopping at a Pyatyorochka supermarket around the corner from our house. Now there's a new Billa supermarket around the other corner. It has a wider range of goods and is very competitive as regards its Pyatorocka prices, so I now do most of my shopping at Billa.

Does this mean Pyatyorachka can sue me for damages because of the loss of income it is suffering because of my choice to use another retail outlet?

I shall check with the Swedish court of arbitration.

Stay tuned!

Mark Chapman October 5, 2018 at 8:30 am
Perhaps they would get further by suing the US Department of State. I'm pretty sure that if it were not for them, Ukraine's gas transit system would still be in use. Ukraine could at least make a sensible case, which they cannot do against Russia. Mind you, a UK judge would probably rule in their favour, because simply wanting to get at Russia seems to be good enough these days – making a sensible case is not required.

[Oct 12, 2018] US senators demand Magnitsky Act probe, sanctions on Saudi Arabia over Khashoggi disappearance

Notable quotes:
"... What we are seeing now are the consequences of classic imperial over-reach – extending one's power so far and so generally that it hoists itself upon its own petard! The implosion of the USA continues afoot, Hillary Clinton being one of its cheerleaders (according to her recent Amappaling interview). ..."
Oct 12, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

et Al October 11, 2018 at 2:22 am

RT.com: US senators demand Magnitsky Act probe, sanctions on Saudi Arabia over Khashoggi disappearance
https://www.rt.com/usa/440922-trump-letter-senators-khashoggi/

####

All kinds of delicious can proceed from this.

The whole Magnitsky Act thing was supposed to be a convenient tool of western foreign policy cloaked in Human Rights sugar to justify punished the usual suspects ad perpituitam, not for attacking allies. It looks like some US politicians actually think it is about human rights! They'll need to practice their best acting to explain why some are on the list and others aren't, along with compliant media and governments.

What we are seeing now are the consequences of classic imperial over-reach – extending one's power so far and so generally that it hoists itself upon its own petard! The implosion of the USA continues afoot, Hillary Clinton being one of its cheerleaders (according to her recent Amappaling interview).

Trump is also promising a rapid USG reaction to India buying S-400s, so it really is time to stock up on the popcorn. I knew for sure that this year would certainly be more interesting than last year, but 2019 should be a corker. Woo.

[Oct 12, 2018] Link to an interesting article about declassified CIA documents on labour camps in the Soviet Union during the 1950s

Oct 12, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Jen October 10, 2018 at 6:21 pm

Link to an interesting article about declassified CIA documents on labour camps in the Soviet Union during the 1950s:
http://members5.boardhost.com/xxxxx/msg/1539095708.html

I linked to the Lifeboat News paste because it may be easier for some people to read but if you want to read the original article, here it is:
https://stalinistkatyusha.wixsite.com/stalinist-katyusha/single-post/2018/10/04/The-Truth-about-the-Soviet-Gulag -- Surprisingly-Revealed-by-the-CIA

As we might have suspected already, the gulags were not nearly so horrible as Western news media outlets made them out to be in the past.

Evgeny October 10, 2018 at 11:39 pm
If you have read Solzhenitsyn's "In the First Circle" -- which is partially autobiographical -- the basic premise of the story is that he has voluntarily left the privileged camp (where he was supposed to do an engineering work) to a common camp where he would do physical labor. He did that so that he would be free to write. Not to write in a traditional sense -- he couldn't write a manuscript of course -- but he composed parts of his novels, memorized them and occasionally recited them to keep them fresh in his memory. From that anecdote we can see that at least the Gulag camps were supposed to be survivable.
yalensis October 11, 2018 at 2:17 am
Thanks for posting this interesting piece, Jen.

"During the period from 1921 to the present time for counterrevolutionary crimes were convicted 3,777,380 people, including to capital punishment – 642,980 people to the conent in the camps and prisons for a period of 25 years old and under – 2,369,220 into exile and expulsion – 765,190 people.

"Of the total number of convicts, approximately convicted: 2,900,000 people – College of OGPU, NKVD and triples Special meeting and 877,000 people – courts by military tribunals, and Spetskollegiev Military Collegium.

"It should be noted that established by Decree on November 3, 1934 Special Meeting of the NKVD which lasted until September 1, 1953 – 442,531 people were convicted, including to capital punishment – 10,101 people to prison – 360,921 people to exile and expulsion (within the country) – 57,539 people and other punishments (offset time in detention, deportation abroad, compulsory treatment) – 3,970 people "

I think these numbers prove a point that I have made numerous times, namely that the Stalinist repressions (putting aside the mixing of political prisoners with regular criminals, which muddies up the numbers) were mainly directed at Stalin's political rivals, and not at ordinary people.
And that shills like Solzhenitsyn were simply making a lot of shit up, to support the Westie narrative.
I have no tolerance for the Stalin adulators and Furries either (Stalin was a mean person and overall jerk), but the facts are more on their side, than on the other.

I took some criticism on my blog for calling the Stalin repressions "Office Politics on Steroids", but in essence that is what they were. Here, by the way, is another interesting article I saw recently on the repression and execution of Nikolai Bukharin, still another one of the Old Bolsheviks who got in Stalin's way:

http://www.aif.ru/society/history/smert_lyubimca_partii_kak_nikolay_buharin_stal_vragom_naroda

MoscowExile October 10, 2018 at 9:14 pm
Only yesterday I was working here at ExxonMobil, whose Moscow HQ is situated slap-bang next to the US embassy. Whilst waiting for my client to turn up, I started reading a well-made, luxuriously bound coffee-table volume, filled with glossy pages of wonderful photographs and published by that company about its Sakhalin venture.

The foreword was written by the ExxonMobil CEO. It started thus:

Sakhalin Island, where the tsar's labor camps were situated and which were so graphicaly described by Chekov

Welcome to Russia, arseholes!

yalensis October 11, 2018 at 2:06 am
Did they mean this book, by Anton ChekHov?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakhalin_Island_(Chekhov)

Or maybe they were talking about that other book, written by Ensign Chekov of the Star Ship Enterprise. I heard that he also visited Sakhalin, on an earlier voyage, when his ship was docking there for some R&R.

[Oct 12, 2018] I suspect The Netherlands are being targeted because among other things the International Court of Crimes and the International Court of Justice are based in The Hague. One of these bone-shakers is that The Netherlands is a major corporate tax haven and as such competes with Britain and the US.

Oct 12, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Jen October 4, 2018 at 2:49 pm

I suspect The Netherlands are being targeted because among other things the International Court of Crimes and the International Court of Justice are based in The Hague. There may be other reasons as well: the Dutch must have a fair few skeletons in their collective closet and the US could very well target one of these and bring the entire wardrobe crashing down and exposing all its sordid secrets.

One of these bone-shakers is that The Netherlands is a major corporate tax haven and as such competes with Britain and the US.

http://www.nomoretax.eu/netherlands-tax-haven/

kirill October 4, 2018 at 7:49 am
Pence is now accusing of China of hacking the US elections. I know China has been lobbying and making campaign finance contributions in the past, but the US accusations have a clear pattern. Recall how US blacks were tagged as rapists of fine white virgins. This reputation was then used to justify apartheid laws. The US is basically accusing Russia and China of violation of America's "dignity". And is trying to globally treat them as segregated blacks. The same tired shtick for the "exceptional" nation with a self-assigned "manifest destiny". The country that needs containment is the USA. It has clear, psychotic ambitions to rule the world.
Moscow Exile October 6, 2018 at 2:16 am
Coming from government ministers of the most powerful state on earth, do not all these accusations directed against all those other states that are populated by sad, lesser beings who are envious of the "Shining City on the Hill", the "Home of the Brave and Land of the Free", that epitome of human society, that place where "history has ended", not sound somwhat hysterical, a symptom of weakness, of self-doubt concerrning the hegemon's might and integrity?
kirill October 6, 2018 at 4:47 am
They need an excuse for their colonial racket. During the USSR era, they had the "threat of communism" to rally local elites in developing countries and also used this "threat" as an excuse to install death squad junta regimes. The death of the USSR deprived them of the "threat" fig leaf so they had to ramp up the humanitarian concern BS. Countries need to be controlled by demonizing their leaders for being tyrants and terrorist sponsors. For violating human rights by not letting Soros and NATzO funded 5th column operations called NGOs do their thing. It seems these transparent pretexts are still effective at convincing people around the world that America and its vassals are a collection of noble knights doing good deeds and not a pack of hyenas engaged in gang mutilation of countries that leads to millions of deaths of innocent civilians. What was the point of Libya, Iraq, Syria, and all the other regime change victims? There was no arrival of democracy and safety. There was only needless death and degradation.

[Oct 12, 2018] The west returns compulsively to the region because it thinks that this is where things might tear loose; independence movements in Chechnya, Ingushetia and Dagestan. Where, as the western regime-change impulse fondly returns time and again, issues of fundamentalist religion can be played upon to flare into conflict

Oct 12, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman October 6, 2018 at 10:19 am

The west returns compulsively to the region because it thinks that this is where things might tear loose; independence movements in Chechnya, Ingushetia and Dagestan. Where, as the western regime-change impulse fondly returns time and again, issues of fundamentalist religion can be played upon to flare into conflict – it has worked for the west all around the world, turning Shi'ite against Sunni and this one against that one. It often signals its interest with plaintive articles by pro-democracy think-tanks implore Vladimir Putin to let the Chechens be free, instead of imposing a succession of overlords upon them, bla, bla, you know the drill. How can Putin diss the mighty USA for supporting oppressors of choice around the world when he won't man up and let the Chechens have their own free state?

In fact, Putin has said in the past that the Chechens can be free and independent if that is what they really want. But implied in that is that Moscow will no longer underwrite the new state; that it will have to achieve economic viability itself.

Normally that is where the west comes in, singing siren songs of sovereignty-association and fabulous prosperity to be had in attaching oneself to the western orbit. But so far not enough people buy it – there are always the rebel darlings, the tearaways who bleat discontent and stir the imagination of the western press. But just as often they are religious nutters and suicide bombers who just want a dramatic death. Like that chap and his missus – Dagestan, I think it was, a few years back – who had their apartment shot to rubble with them in it after they repeatedly refused repeated offers to surrender and live, deigning only for a hi-lift crane bucket to come up to the balcony to give their daughter into the arms of her wailing granny. Martyrdom and progressive leadership almost never flourish in the same person, for some reason. Except maybe for Jeremy Corbyn.

Jen October 5, 2018 at 12:57 pm
Just looked up Ingushetia on Wikipedia and found it's a small federal republic whose population as of 2014 was less than 500,000.

I rather doubt then that thousands of people turned up in Magas to protest. If there are no aerial photographs of the protesters, then we have to treat the figures reported by Reuters and other news agencies outside Russia with suspicion.

The OC Media article at this link states hundreds turned up to protest and the photographs appear to back up that statement:
http://oc-media.org/protests-erupt-in-ingushetia-as-mps-say-chechnya-land-swap-vote-was-falsified/

There is dispute over the size of the area being transferred to Chechnya: the area officially being transferred amounts to less than 2,000 hectares but according to Ingushetian opposition group Mekhk Kkhel 58,000 hectares are being transferred. The difference between the figures seems suspicious and the upper figure is likely to be an exaggeration.

et Al October 6, 2018 at 6:06 am
Nice source Jen:

http://oc-media.org/about-us/about-oc-media/

We strive to shed light and offer a variety of per­spec­tives on ongoing social, economic and political devel­op­ments in the region, including in: human rights, ethnic and religious minori­ties, labour rights, gender and queer issues, devel­op­ment, as well as conflict dynamics in the region

OC Media was co-founded in January 2017 by Mari Nikuradze, Dominik K. Cagara, and Caroline Sutcliffe, initially under the auspices of Chai Khana NGO. It has received funding from the UK Government's Conflict, Stability and Security Fund, the European Endowment for Democracy, the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung South Caucasus Office, Open Society Foun­da­tions, and the United Kingdom Foreign and Com­mon­wealth Office, with joint com­mis­sions with Inter­na­tion­al Alert (EPNK/European Union Ini­tia­tive), Civil.ge (COBERM), and Open Democracy Russia.

[Oct 12, 2018] Terrorists Want America to Reverse Engineer Russian Machineguns by Michael Peck

Notable quotes:
"... US Special Forces Command wants to copy Russian firearms in the US to give away to proxies around the world ..."
Oct 12, 2018 | russia-insider.com

US Special Forces Command wants to copy Russian firearms in the US to give away to proxies around the world

Wed, Oct 10, 2018 | 500 words 4,029 45 Why would U.S. special forces want to manufacture Russian machine guns?

Just watch any video of a conflict such as Iraq and Syria, and the answer becomes clear. Many of the combatants are using Russian or Soviet weapons, or local copies thereof, from rifles to rocket launchers to heavy machine guns mounted on pickups. Which means that when U.S. special forces provide some of these groups with weapons, they have to scrounge through the global arms market to buy Russian hardware as well as spare parts.

So U.S. Special Forces Command, which oversees America's various commando units, has an idea: instead of buying Russian weapons, why not build their own? That's why USSOCOM is asking U.S. companies to come up with a plan to manufacture Russian and other foreign weapons.

The goal is to "develop an innovative domestic capability to produce fully functioning facsimiles of foreign-made weapons that are equal to or better than what is currently being produced internationally," according to the USSOCOM Small Business Innovation Research proposal .

v76 • a day ago ,

"develop an innovative domestic capability to produce fully functioning facsimiles of foreign-made weapons that are equal to or better than what is currently being produced internationally,"

I laughed and stopped reading.

Kjell Hasthi v76 • a day ago ,

It is a good story. US needed so many AK-47 for African terrorists group, killing Blacks, they had to build a new factory in Africa to handle demand. There were not that many AK-47 available on the black market

Think about that. Look into a mirror and say slowly
- WE LIBERALS ARE TERRORISTS

Mary Floyd Kjell Hasthi • 3 hours ago ,

Actually, that should read: We American politicians and military are terrorists...the worst in the world

[Oct 12, 2018] The Boy Who Cried "Bear!!": a Norwegian Folk Tale

Notable quotes:
"... Remember that back in 2002 it was discovered that the US bugged the 767 of then Chinese Premier Jian Xiao-Ping. ..."
Oct 12, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

et Al October 4, 2018 at 9:06 am

The OPCW, like the Council of Europe, the OSCE, WADA and others have become deeply partizan and anti-Russian organizations since the 1990s. A handful of members put out a 'report' on whatever and claim that they have 'evidence' which they should be trusted on rather than provide. The rest of them go along with it. The only reason that makes sense for the attempted 'hack' on the OPCW is that Russia is being denied access to information. The argument, like everything else bullshit from the West is ' You don't show the evidence to the arsonist ' , sic MH17 because it has already been judged and found guilty.

So far WADA had to row back because of the Schimdt Report (which the media of course did not report) and all the reinstated athletes, Russia has suspended payments and may well pull out of the CoE because is it sick and tired of being bombarded with bs at every meeting as if medieval Bear baiting has returned in a modern form (it has).

All these organizations are destroying themselves. If anything all this shows how weak the West's soft power has become that they need to throw everything including the kitchen sink at Russia. They don't like resistance, let alone pushback. They're more careful about China of course and as we saw recently in the South Pacific the Chinese simply won't be cowed or intimidated.

As for the allegations about China, we'll most of us have followed the Snowden revelations about the USA and its Five Eyes global surveillance and infiltration, so its no surprise that China has been running its own operations. It's what countries do, though apparently they're not supposed to. Remember that back in 2002 it was discovered that the US bugged the 767 of then Chinese Premier Jian Xiao-Ping. * I think that all this reporting is a sign of desperation by the powers that be because all else has failed so far and they need to keep the narrative going.

By wrapping it all up together with a pretty pink bow it is to make it ' undeniable ' in the eyes of people who should know better.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1382116/China-finds-spy-bugs-in-Jiangs-Boeing-jet.html

et Al October 4, 2018 at 9:13 am
The temptation by Russia will be to publicly burn western spies in Russia, but it is just another in a long line of provocations to get Russia to respond angrily and make a big mistake. I can imagine RT being banned and other measures if things start to spiral.

This whole G(R)U story was ready to go at an appropriate moment, and I suspect one of the factors was Putin's recent comments about Skripal that had captured the world media's ear. By piling their report on shortly afterwards, they hope to hijack and amplify their narrative.

But, it's words, not meaningful actions. Either they will try and use this to kick off a whole new level of sanctions that they haven't before (high value, sensitive stuff like aerospace, tech etc.). It is possible the timing of this is a last ditch effort to try and get U-rope on board to stop NordSteam II or anything they think they can squeeze through. It's weakness through desperation and also to divert from their failures elsewhere.

et Al October 5, 2018 at 6:26 am
Or burn western spies in other countries that are far less friendly

It is interesting that one of the groups doxxing Russian 'spies' claim to be volunteers and patriots. No-one believes that in the slightest apart from morons. Like BellEnd cat, the number of cut-outs/plausible denial groups has mushroomed and ebb and flow with need. The volunteer claim is no protection.

James lake October 4, 2018 at 7:45 am
This all seems to coordinated distractions from domestic politics in the UK and the USA

Why are th Dutch going along with this nonsense?

kirill October 4, 2018 at 7:51 am
How can you ask such a question. Holland is a US vassal and the US uses its vassals to give its actions legitimacy by claiming that there is an "international" reaction to "Russian aggression". This is why the US always attacks countries around the world as part of some BS coalition of its own vassals. It is claiming its aggression is actually justified international action.
et Al October 4, 2018 at 8:48 am
The Dutch recently signed a big order to have 28 of their AH-64D Apache's 'upgraded' to the 'E' model which is really a re-manufactue and upgrade (from sand and heavy use in helping the US bomb tribesmen far away), & their Patriots to be modernized too.
moscowexile October 4, 2018 at 8:33 am
Because the so called chemical weapons watchdog, which the British government has recently made judge, jury and exucationer as regards all incidences of alleged uses of chemical agents as a weapon, namely it can now accuse and condemn whom it thinks are perpetrators of such chemical attacks, is based in The Hague, where the wicked Russians have allegedly been hacking etc. and, in general, up to their vile and nefarious deeds, as is, of course, in their nature of doing things, because they are vile barbarians, subhuman even
Moscow Exile October 4, 2018 at 9:51 am
I forget where I picked the following up ( from some Russian blog, because it is a translation). I saved it but forget to put in the source:

September 14, 2018
THE DUBIOUS ROLE OF THE OPCW
(OPCW NEVER uses the word "Novichok")
Even those people who are skeptical about what the British government says (and rightly so) tend to accept the „Novichok"-Psyop after they read that "OPCW confirms Novichok nerve agent in Amesbury". But if you actually read what the (summary) of the OPCW says, you will find the following:

"The team requested and received vials of biomedical samples COLLECTED BY THE BRITISH AUTHORITIES for delivery to the OPCW laboratory and subsequent analysis by OPCW designated laboratories for purposes of comparison and in order to verify the analysis conducted by the United Kingdom. (S 1671, Paragraph 6.)

This VIOLATES THEIR OWN RULES about ensuring a forensic "chain of custody" because they did not take bio-samples THEMSELVES but accepted the (2nd-hand) material that the 'authorities" had given them.

Regarding the "Premier Jour" perfume-story the OPCW has this to say:

"During the second deployment [6 weeks after Sturgess fell ill] the team collected a sample of the contents of a small bottle that the police had seized as a suspect item from the house of Charles Rowley in Amesbury" (P. 9)

In paragraph 10 they confirm that the results of the subsequent analysis "show that the sample consists of a toxic chemical at a concentration of 97-98% therefore considered to be "of high purity". (If Charly had got this on his skin he would not have survived )

Again, the chain of custody is non-existent: The OPCW did NOT collect the glass-vial in Rowley's flat, and could not verify its condition at the end of June, but they accepted what "the authorities" had told them about it and examined a sample of its content. There was plenty of time to tamper with the bottle before the OPCW arrived in Salisbury (so malfeasance cannot be ruled out).

(BTW, Sometimes you don't see the wood for the trees: WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND would transport a deadly nerve-agent in a GLASS-BOTTLE??????)

Again they accepted material from the British authorities (as if they were incapable of any deception )
What former (Iraq) weapons-inspector Scott Ritter wrote about the OPCW „fact-finding" mission in Syria is also to a certain extent relevant in the Skripal-Saga:

"The problem, however, is that the OPCW is in no position to make the claim it did. One of the essential aspects of the kind of forensic investigation carried out by organizations such as the OPCW -- namely the application of scientific methods and techniques to the investigation of a crime -- is the concept of "chain of custody" of any samples that are being evaluated. This requires a seamless transition from the collection of the samples in question, the process of which must be recorded and witnessed, the sealing of the samples, the documentation of the samples, the escorted transportation of the samples to the laboratory, the confirmation and breaking of the seals under supervision, and the subsequent processing of the samples, all under supervision of the OPCW. Anything less than this means the integrity of the sample has been compromised -- in short, there is no sample."
(Article: Ex-weapons-inspector: Trump's Sarin Claims built on „Lie" by Scott Ritter)

Here, Ritter was referring the fact that the OPCW was not able to actually visit the (terrorist-controlled) "crime-scene" in Khan Sheikhoun but instead went to Turkey (!) where they accepted testimonies and material given to them by the White Helmets and other artificial "NGOs" ("highly likely" paid and organized by MI6, DGSE and the CIA). There they were able to observe autopsies of the 3 alleged victims of the poison-gas attack.

"An NGO had delivered the bodies to the hospitals, though OPCW will not publicly comment on the identity of the NGO. Samples from the bodies were provided to two separate laboratories, which independently confirmed indications of sarin or sarin-like substances.

In criminal proceedings, though, which are similar to the process followed by the UN in determining a war crime, it is a fundamental principle that ALL EVIDENCE be under the control of investigators AT ALL TIMES. That didn't happen in this case."

By the way, the OPCW-FFM in Syria (regarding the Douma-incident) was led by two BRITISH "experts":
The work of the fact finding mission [FFM] was criticized by the Russian Permanent Representative to the OPCW who complained on 14 April 2017 that:

"Under the mandate defined for [the FFM], its membership should be approved by the Syrian government, and it should be balanced. For some time, these provisions were observed somewhat, but then the mission was split into two groups. One [Team Bravo], led by Steven Wallis from Britain, works in contact with the Syrian government, while the other one [Team Alpha], headed by his fellow countryman Leonard Phillips, deals with the claims filed by the Syrian armed opposition. THIS LATTER GROUP IS WORKING COMPLETELY NON-TRANSPARENTLY. ITS MEMBERSHIP IS CLASSIFIED, AND NO ONE KNOWS WHERE IT GOES OR HOW IT OPERATES. They are allegedly using the same methodology as Steven Wallis' group, but they are clearly working mostly remotely, relying on the internet and the fabrications provided by Syrian opposition NGOs, and never go to Syria. At least, we are not aware of a single such trip".

But the unspeakable "journalists" of the MSM (and RT is not much better the interview with the suspects is a joke ) do not bother with such complicated details. They just write "OPCW confirms use of Sarin" in Khan Sheikhoun (and "Novichok" in Salisbury) and ignore all contradicting evidence and the MOTIVE the UK gov has for demonizing Russia (spoiling their dirty game in Syria and "Sykes-Picot №2") so one can only agree with this comment:

"Professional journalism is now a wasteland. There is no public exposure of what we all know has happened and the threat it represents to us all . They have been disloyal to us, so we owe them no respect in return".

And finally – on the implied higher "morality" of UK politics:

The ECJ has just recently found that the UK's mass surveillance programmes, revealed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, did "not meet the 'quality of law' requirement" and were "incapable of limiting 'interference' to what is 'necessary in a democratic society'"'.(P.387 of the judgement: Case of Big Brother Watch & others vs .UK)

Mark Chapman October 4, 2018 at 11:51 am
The British evidently thought also about the lunacy of transporting a nerve agent in sufficient quantity to kill dozens if not hundreds in a glass bottle; that's why Hamish de Beegee chimed in with his article about how the FSB and the Kremlin had invested months of work and thousands of pounds developing a ceramic bottle which looked just like the real thing, but which you could stand a Volkswagen on top of. That's why I pointed out that they had already used the excuse that it broke to establish how Rowley was exposed.
Jen October 4, 2018 at 2:49 pm
I suspect The Netherlands are being targeted because among other things the International Court of Crimes and the International Court of Justice are based in The Hague. There may be other reasons as well: the Dutch must have a fair few skeletons in their collective closet and the US could very well target one of these and bring the entire wardrobe crashing down and exposing all its sordid secrets. One of these bone-shakers is that The Netherlands is a major corporate tax haven and as such competes with Britain and the US.
http://www.nomoretax.eu/netherlands-tax-haven/

[Oct 12, 2018] OPSW VIOLATES THEIR OWN RULES about ensuring a forensic "chain of custody" because they did not take bio-samples THEMSELVES but accepted the (2nd-hand) material that the 'authorities" had given them.

Oct 12, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile October 4, 2018 at 9:51 am

I forget where I picked the following up ( from some Russian blog, because it is a translation). I saved it but forget to put in the source:

September 14, 2018
THE DUBIOUS ROLE OF THE OPCW
(OPCW NEVER uses the word "Novichok")
Even those people who are skeptical about what the British government says (and rightly so) tend to accept the „Novichok"-Psyop after they read that "OPCW confirms Novichok nerve agent in Amesbury". But if you actually read what the (summary) of the OPCW says, you will find the following:

"The team requested and received vials of biomedical samples COLLECTED BY THE BRITISH AUTHORITIES for delivery to the OPCW laboratory and subsequent analysis by OPCW designated laboratories for purposes of comparison and in order to verify the analysis conducted by the United Kingdom. (S 1671, Paragraph 6.)

This VIOLATES THEIR OWN RULES about ensuring a forensic "chain of custody" because they did not take bio-samples THEMSELVES but accepted the (2nd-hand) material that the 'authorities" had given them.

Regarding the "Premier Jour" perfume-story the OPCW has this to say:

"During the second deployment [6 weeks after Sturgess fell ill] the team collected a sample of the contents of a small bottle that the police had seized as a suspect item from the house of Charles Rowley in Amesbury" (P. 9)

In paragraph 10 they confirm that the results of the subsequent analysis "show that the sample consists of a toxic chemical at a concentration of 97-98% therefore considered to be "of high purity". (If Charly had got this on his skin he would not have survived )

Again, the chain of custody is non-existent: The OPCW did NOT collect the glass-vial in Rowley's flat, and could not verify its condition at the end of June, but they accepted what "the authorities" had told them about it and examined a sample of its content. There was plenty of time to tamper with the bottle before the OPCW arrived in Salisbury (so malfeasance cannot be ruled out).

(BTW, Sometimes you don't see the wood for the trees: WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND would transport a deadly nerve-agent in a GLASS-BOTTLE??????)

Again they accepted material from the British authorities (as if they were incapable of any deception )
What former (Iraq) weapons-inspector Scott Ritter wrote about the OPCW „fact-finding" mission in Syria is also to a certain extent relevant in the Skripal-Saga:

"The problem, however, is that the OPCW is in no position to make the claim it did. One of the essential aspects of the kind of forensic investigation carried out by organizations such as the OPCW -- namely the application of scientific methods and techniques to the investigation of a crime -- is the concept of "chain of custody" of any samples that are being evaluated. This requires a seamless transition from the collection of the samples in question, the process of which must be recorded and witnessed, the sealing of the samples, the documentation of the samples, the escorted transportation of the samples to the laboratory, the confirmation and breaking of the seals under supervision, and the subsequent processing of the samples, all under supervision of the OPCW. Anything less than this means the integrity of the sample has been compromised -- in short, there is no sample."
(Article: Ex-weapons-inspector: Trump's Sarin Claims built on „Lie" by Scott Ritter)

Here, Ritter was referring the fact that the OPCW was not able to actually visit the (terrorist-controlled) "crime-scene" in Khan Sheikhoun but instead went to Turkey (!) where they accepted testimonies and material given to them by the White Helmets and other artificial "NGOs" ("highly likely" paid and organized by MI6, DGSE and the CIA). There they were able to observe autopsies of the 3 alleged victims of the poison-gas attack.

"An NGO had delivered the bodies to the hospitals, though OPCW will not publicly comment on the identity of the NGO. Samples from the bodies were provided to two separate laboratories, which independently confirmed indications of sarin or sarin-like substances.

In criminal proceedings, though, which are similar to the process followed by the UN in determining a war crime, it is a fundamental principle that ALL EVIDENCE be under the control of investigators AT ALL TIMES. That didn't happen in this case."

By the way, the OPCW-FFM in Syria (regarding the Douma-incident) was led by two BRITISH "experts":
The work of the fact finding mission [FFM] was criticized by the Russian Permanent Representative to the OPCW who complained on 14 April 2017 that:

"Under the mandate defined for [the FFM], its membership should be approved by the Syrian government, and it should be balanced. For some time, these provisions were observed somewhat, but then the mission was split into two groups. One [Team Bravo], led by Steven Wallis from Britain, works in contact with the Syrian government, while the other one [Team Alpha], headed by his fellow countryman Leonard Phillips, deals with the claims filed by the Syrian armed opposition. THIS LATTER GROUP IS WORKING COMPLETELY NON-TRANSPARENTLY. ITS MEMBERSHIP IS CLASSIFIED, AND NO ONE KNOWS WHERE IT GOES OR HOW IT OPERATES. They are allegedly using the same methodology as Steven Wallis' group, but they are clearly working mostly remotely, relying on the internet and the fabrications provided by Syrian opposition NGOs, and never go to Syria. At least, we are not aware of a single such trip".

But the unspeakable "journalists" of the MSM (and RT is not much better the interview with the suspects is a joke ) do not bother with such complicated details. They just write "OPCW confirms use of Sarin" in Khan Sheikhoun (and "Novichok" in Salisbury) and ignore all contradicting evidence and the MOTIVE the UK gov has for demonizing Russia (spoiling their dirty game in Syria and "Sykes-Picot №2") so one can only agree with this comment:

"Professional journalism is now a wasteland. There is no public exposure of what we all know has happened and the threat it represents to us all . They have been disloyal to us, so we owe them no respect in return".

And finally – on the implied higher "morality" of UK politics:

The ECJ has just recently found that the UK's mass surveillance programmes, revealed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, did "not meet the 'quality of law' requirement" and were "incapable of limiting 'interference' to what is 'necessary in a democratic society'"'.(P.387 of the judgement: Case of Big Brother Watch & others vs .UK)

Mark Chapman October 4, 2018 at 11:51 am
The British evidently thought also about the lunacy of transporting a nerve agent in sufficient quantity to kill dozens if not hundreds in a glass bottle; that's why Hamish de Beegee chimed in with his article about how the FSB and the Kremlin had invested months of work and thousands of pounds developing a ceramic bottle which looked just like the real thing, but which you could stand a Volkswagen on top of. That's why I pointed out that they had already used the excuse that it broke to establish how Rowley was exposed.
Aule Valar October 4, 2018 at 10:55 am
US forces out head of OPCW: https://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/23/world/us-forces-out-head-of-chemical-arms-agency.html

That's an actual title in NYT, they are not even hiding.

Step 1: give OPCW expanded powers
Step 2: install a US-friendly head of agency
Step 3: we shall see.

Mark Chapman October 4, 2018 at 11:56 am
Explosive. Nobody but Americans can be trusted to run international institutions, especially when they are bought and paid for by the USA. Hey, that'd be a good job for Travis Tygart. He has been chafing lately about the limits of his power to get at Russia from USADA.

The pace of events seems to be taking on momentum, as if it is leading up to something, and there's that kind of stillness in the air, while sounds seem far away and tinny, like just before a big storm breaks.

et Al October 4, 2018 at 12:38 pm
They're going for broke. Trans: going until it is broken.
Aule Valar October 4, 2018 at 3:36 pm
I must apologize for not noticing that the article is from 2002. Sorry.

Still, it does show how much more pull US has in those supposedly indpendent agencies than everyone else.

Mark Chapman October 4, 2018 at 10:41 pm
I didn't notice either. It felt so current, considering the ongoing situation.

[Oct 12, 2018] Jeez, those NATo propagandists are tough!

Oct 12, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile October 10, 2018 at 5:59 am

Reporting it like it is

Alexander Mishkin, the second man accused of involvement in the Skripal assassination plot, was likely to have been sent on the mission because he was a trained doctor capable of providing an antidote in case the novichok attack went wrong, according to security sources.

Dr Mishkin, like the GRU colleague who travelled with him to Salisbury, was made a 'Hero of the Russian Federation' with Vladimir Putin personally presenting him with the award, according to the investigative website Bellingcat.

Second Skripal suspect likely sent to Salisbury to administer novichok antidote, security sources say
'We know that novichok exposure needs immediate antidote so it makes eminent sense to have a military doctor, who is also a trained GRU operative, who can play his part in the operation'

Mark Chapman October 10, 2018 at 8:36 am
The 'antidote' to nerve-agent exposure is atropine, which is broadly marketed to world defense forces in an auto-injector. Your medical expertise in dispensing it is to remove the protective cap, and strike it against your thigh in the muscle, point-first – the internal spring does the rest, right through your clothing. We used to practice it regularly in NBCD training, except the fluid in training injectors is just water. Some crybaby pointed out the needle might pick up a fragment of cloth on its way in, and cause an infection, so we stopped doing it with real needles, and now you just get a thump against your leg from the spring.

https://chemm.nlm.nih.gov/antidote_nerveagents.htm

Military forces are also trained to administer atropine to stricken comrades who were overcome before they could react. Just be sure to give him his own atropine and not yours, and push the needle through his pocket-flap afterward and then bend it over, so that anyone happening on the scene after you have left will know he has already been given atropine and not administer another dose. Atropine overdose causes its own set of problems.

I think it's pretty clear that it does not 'make eminent sense' to have a 'qualified military doctor along in case something went wrong with the Novichok', since anyone can administer Atropine and there is an enormous worldwide base of soldiers and ex-soldiers who could do it as well as anyone else. Horseshit piled on top of horseshit.

kirill October 10, 2018 at 8:23 pm
For some bizarre reason this UK fairy tale requires many Russians. One isn't enough to smear some alleged top secret nerve agent on a door knob (at least in one of the dozens of contradictory theories spewed by Scotland Yard). Wearing gloves (e.g. store bought nitrile ones which would stop this poison, unlike latex ones) is clearly considered too much intellectual effort for Russian untermenschen and they need a doctor to tag along. This fictional doctor claim is patently absurd. A doctor without hospital facilities is nothing but a paramedic and as you rightly describe no such person is needed to administer atropine.

The average media sap in the UK and NATzO apparently can't be bothered to do any thinking. The best assassination plot would involve only a single agent and not a handful. Even freaking video games have the lone assassin meme repeated. One agent could also have a well established cover story. A gang of assassins would essentially be evidence against itself. A whole specially designed bottle of nerve agent is ridiculous and unnecessary. And having it disposed of in a way that it can be found by some homeless junkies is simply not credible. Don't they have sewer grates in the UK?

[Oct 12, 2018] Like the values and rules that led the NSA to eavesdrop on Chancellor Merkel's phone calls for years, and to use American Embassies as listening posts. Mutti Merkel was very understanding, considering they were only doing it to keep us all safe.

Oct 12, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman October 4, 2018 at 11:02 am

"the GRU's disregard for global values and rules that keep us all safe".

Like the values and rules that led the NSA to eavesdrop on Chancellor Merkel's phone calls for years, and to use American Embassies as listening posts. Mutti Merkel was very understanding, considering they were only doing it to keep us all safe.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/cover-story-how-nsa-spied-on-merkel-cell-phone-from-berlin-embassy-a-930205.html

The British and the Dutch – and doubtless all America's many 'allies' – have no real pride left. They just keep bending over further.

[Oct 12, 2018] if Russia is so incompetent- why are they deemed a threat? Why is NATO beating the war drums about such a country?

Oct 12, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

James lake October 5, 2018 at 4:07 am

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/05/string-of-own-goals-by-russian-gru-spies-reveals-new-trend-of-sloppiness

The secretive, daring GRU seems to have lost its way in the age of internet search

//if Russia is so incompetent- why are they deemed a threat?
//Why is NATO beating the war drums about such a country?

Moscow Exile October 5, 2018 at 4:15 am
Because it is dangerous in its incompetence?
yalensis October 5, 2018 at 1:48 pm
There is nothing more dangerous than a monkey armed with a hand grenade(?)
kirill October 5, 2018 at 6:02 am
As pointed out elsewhere there is no such agency called the GRU. Like there is no agency called the KGB. This in itself demonstrates that NATzO is spreading pure propaganda.
Mark Chapman October 5, 2018 at 9:14 am
It's probably not sloppiness, per se; it's more that Britain has reached a new level of dazzling investigative brilliance, so that normal GRU tradecraft can no longer withstand its piercing eye.

[Oct 11, 2018] Nikki Haley Just Screwed Conservatives Going Into Midterms: Bannon

Haley-Binomo was a liability not an asset.
Oct 11, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Former Trump chief strategist Steve Bannon slammed UN ambassador Nikki Haley's decision on Tuesday to announce her resignation, calling it "suspect" and "horrific," and that it overshadowed positive news that Trump and the Republicans need to build support going into midterms, according to Bloomberg .

The timing was exquisite from a bad point of view ," Bannon told Bloomberg News Editor-in-Chief John Micklethwait on Wednesday at the Bloomberg Invest London forum. " Everything she said yesterday and everything she said about stepping down could have been done on the evening of November 6. The timing could not have been worse. "

Haley's announcement, according to Bannon, took White House officials by surprise - and distracted attention from Brett Kavanaugh's first day as a justice on the Supreme Court, along with headlines over the lowest US unemployment rate in five decades. Haley's decision undermines Trump's message to Republican voters, said Bannon.

In the Oval Office on Tuesday, Trump said Haley told him six months ago she wanted a break after spending two years in the post. She'll continue in her role until year-end. Haley said Tuesday that she was ready for a break after two terms as South Carolina's governor and two years at the United Nations. - Bloomberg

Bannon also says that he took Haley at her word that she has no political aspirations - particularly when it comes to running against Trump in 2020. She says that she looks forward to campaigning for Trump in two years. That said, Bannon calls Haley "ambitious" and "very talented," though he said so using a backhanded compliment.

"I think she is incredibly politically ambitious," Bannon added. " Ambitious as Lucifer but that is probably...I am probably taking Milton out of context."

Trump defended the timing of Haley's departure on Wednesday, saying "there's no good time" for her to have announced her resignation - and that if she'd waited until after midterms, it would have raised questions as to whether her motive was based on the results.

Yen Cross , 19 seconds ago link

Bannon is unhinged. Nikki Haley was horrible in her position! If Bannon payed attention to voter base of Trump, he'd see Haley was a thorn in the side of the Trump administration.

One of the best appointments Trump has made, is Mike Pompeo. I thought he'd be some crazed warmonger, but has turned out to be quite the opposite.

He's got this kind of easy going swagger and confidence about him. He's chubby, and his every day guy, sort of approach, is affable.

Grandad Grumps , 1 minute ago link

She is not human. Maybe she eats babies.

I am Groot , 1 minute ago link

Back to Binomo ! Don't let the door hit you in your *** on the way out Nimrata. And take your Obamacare curtains with you.

Prosource , 13 minutes ago link

Busted for the NYT memo ?

Whatever the cause, good riddance.

Bat-Shiite crazy with a dangerously big war mongering mouth.

Bannon is totally wrong on this one. Conservatives saw right through her.

The November vote won't be harmed, may even be bolstered.

Is Bannon's point that because she is a woman, it hurts Trump with women?

Regardless, the sooner these neo-con fake patriots are gone, the better

Albertarocks , 16 seconds ago link

Yes sir... her rhetoric is pure deep state war mongering of the most evil kind. She was told to stir up as much hatred and fear at the UN as possible and try to get the opposition to do something stupid in response to her remarks. That's not Trump talk for damned sure... that's deep state talk.

Yippie21 , 23 minutes ago link

He makes a GREAT point that occurred to me immediately. If you are resigning effective at the end of the year and everything is awesome, just time to move on.... why the hell are you publicly announcing it 3 weeks before a VERY contentious midterm election and only a day or so after a brutal SCOTUS nomination conclusion? Why? Why now? Very curious and a unforced error.

Vigilante , 44 minutes ago link

I never trusted Haley

The timing was no co-incidence for sure

She trashed Trump during the election season if you remember

[Oct 11, 2018] Can the replacement be worse than Haley?

Oct 11, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

James lake October 9, 2018 at 6:59 am

Breaking!

Nikki Haley resigns as US ambassador to UN, reports say
Sources say Donald Trump has accepted Haley's resignation

I have no doubt the replacement will be worse than her.

I thought no one could be as bad as Samantha power until Nikki came along!!

Northern Star October 9, 2018 at 11:15 am
https://www.businessinsider.com/nikki-haley-resign-investigation-flights-free-private-jets-2018-10

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/watchdog-demanded-investigation-into-nikki-haleys-private-flights-before-she-resigned

Pavlo Svolochenko October 10, 2018 at 7:41 am
If she was forced out for something that petty, Trump must have been looking for an excuse to get rid of her.
Mark Chapman October 10, 2018 at 7:55 am
Or those who hate him – and they are legion – wanted her out, because if Trump wanted her out her replacement would already have been announced. I saw on one of those 'sponsored content' trash teaser clickbait headlines that it was going to be Ivanka, but not even Trump would do that. Although you never know – it's not as if Haley brought any wealth of foreign-policy knowledge to the table, and she was mostly there to be a partisan spoiler of initiatives the USA did not want to pass. I suppose anyone could do that.
Mark Chapman October 9, 2018 at 4:13 pm
Maybe this loon is still available.

https://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/563fd2451400006f023ca344.jpeg?ops=scalefit_720_noupscale

[Oct 11, 2018] I still don't understand why her UN staff did not know until this morning that she was resigning.

Oct 11, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Pat Lang Mod , a day ago

OK, but I still don't understand why her UN staff did not know until this morning that she was resigning.
Ken Roberts -> Pat Lang , a day ago
My guess: DT had delegated to NH the management of UN interface. She flubbed, badly, DT being laughed at during his address. Out she goes!
confusedponderer -> Pat Lang , a day ago
Pat,
" why her UN staff did not know until this morning that she was resigning. "

Dunno, but what about the possibility that she herself didn't knew she was to "retire" until this morning? That she didn' quit but just quietly (which would be very un-Trumpish) got the boot?

As for firing people, Trump made a TV show out of that, though usually he prefers to "use megaphones over whispering".

That'd be the sort of retirement that's more frankly called " get the eff out and shut the eff up on your way out, and don't forget to say thank you! ".

All it needed for that to happen is the orange king having a "fart sit crosswise". As for Harper's good riddance, indeed.

Kooshy -> confusedponderer , 14 hours ago
IMO, at least she knew she is a goner since last week, I also think she agreed to leave on a non-embarrassing way, meaning not to be fired in mob boss' favorite way as in Apprentice. Like Colonel suggest neocons and her Israeli backers like to preserve her for a later day, she is a useful idiot. IMO, Trump, like the mob boss he think he is, and acts like, believes she was cause of his embarrassing performance/program at UN, again like mob bosses Don Trump doesn't give a second chance to anyone.
Walrus -> Pat Lang , a day ago
Because she believes they are big leakers like herself? Narcissists assume others have identical (rotten) behaviours as their own.
im cotton -> Pat Lang , a day ago
Trump is a master of political timing. Perhaps for whatever reason he wanted to move on from the Kavanaugh hubbub to something else--like Haley resigning. It has dominated the news cycle moreso than if it had been leaked by a staffer. Just my guess.
Tony -> Pat Lang , a day ago
Maybe because she didn't know?

[Oct 11, 2018] HARPER NIKKI FINDS THE DOOR

Oct 11, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

[Oct 11, 2018] Nikki Haley's Surprising Departure

Oct 11, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

Dear Friends of the Ron Paul Institute:

Nikki Haley's resignation as President Trump's Ambassador to the United Nations yesterday came as quite a surprise. Haley seemed pleased to play her imagined role as the world's procurator, as she used her UN perch to incessantly threaten and condemn all the global enemies of her fellow neoconservatives. She came to the job with no foreign policy experience and she will be leaving exactly as she arrived.

If Haley's departure came as a surprise, so too did her appointment in the first place. During the primaries, she was famously in the " anyone but Donald Trump " camp of neocons, saying that Trump was "everything a governor doesn't want in a president."

Trump soon returned the compliment, Tweeting that, "The people of South Carolina are embarrassed by Nikki Haley!"

Nevertheless, like many neocons who had been critical of Trump, she found herself rewarded with a top position in the Administration. From her position she had consistently gotten ahead of her boss, the President, in policy pronouncements and at almost every turn she appeared to be pushing a Haley foreign policy rather than a Trump foreign policy.

For example, just as President Trump was returning from his historic summit meeting in Helsinki with Russian President Vladimir Putin, where the US President spoke very optimistically about a new approach to US/Russian relations, Nikki Haley gave an interview in which she said, "we don't trust Russia, we don't trust Putin; we never will...they're never going to be our friend...that's a fact."

Last September she acted as if she, rather than Trump, were the commander-in-chief, Tweeting of North Korea, "we cut 90% of trade and 30% of oil. I have no problem kicking it to Gen. Mattis because I think he has plenty of options." The idea that she, and not her boss, would "kick it" to Defense Secretary Mattis was preposterous, but contradicting and countermanding Trump's disappointingly rare bobs toward diplomacy and disengagement over bluster and bombs was a chief characteristic of Haley's reign as UN chief finger-wagger.

President Trump had been extremely critical of Syria's Assad, particularly after he fell for two false-flag rebel gas attacks blamed on Assad, but he had been careful not to explicitly set US policy as "Assad must go," as had his predecessor. Nevertheless Nikki Haley again got out ahead of official US policy with her own policy, stating in September 2017 that, "we're not going to be satisfied until we see a solid and stable Syria, and that is not with Assad in place."

Nikki Haley had long been associated with neocon warhawk John Bolton and had also benefited from the largesse of GOP moneybags Sheldon Adelson, the Israel-obsessed casino magnate who bankrolled Haley's PAC to the tune of a quarter of a million dollars in 2016 alone. Haley was Adelson's kind of governor: While South Carolina's executive, she signed the nation's first law making it a criminal offense to support a boycott of Israel.

How did the mainstream media handle the surprise resignation of such an extreme warhawk? Someone one might consider on the far fringe of US political life? The New York Times mourned the departure of Ambassador Haley, Tweeting that it would be "leaving the administration with one less moderate Republican voice."

"Moderate" voice?

For such a pro-war extremist to be considered "moderate" by the newspaper of record may strike some as odd, but as Glenn Greenwald so accurately explained :

The reason NYT calls her "moderate" is because she affirms all of the standard pro-war, pro-imperial orthodoxies that are bipartisan consensus in Washington. That's why @ BillKristol reveres her. She was a Tea Party candidate, but "moderate" means: loves US wars & hegemony.
That's it in a nutshell. Because in Washington being extreme pro-interventionist and pro-war is the orthodoxy. The facade that there are real differences between the Republican and Democrat party is carefully crafted by the mainstream media to cover the fact that we do live in a one-party state. Pro-war, pro-intervention, pro-bombing, pro-overthrow, pro-meddling - these are moderate positions. For Washington and the mainstream media, the extremists are the ones who wish to abide by the admonitions of our Founding Fathers that we go not abroad in search of monsters to destroy.

Well, it seems there are plenty of monsters closer to home.

So good riddance to Nikki Haley...but don't hold your breath that it means the end of Nikki Haley-ism, which is the foundation of US foreign policy. Clearly we have much work left to do.

Your tax deductible contributions to the Ron Paul Institute allow us to provide you with real analysis of breaking issues. Our continued ability to provide a counter-balance to the mainstream media's false narrative depends on your financial support . We thank you for standing with us.

Sincerely yours,
Daniel McAdams
Executive Director
Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

[Oct 11, 2018] Most American LNG cargoes thus far to Europe are promptly sold on to someplace else where the Europeans can get more for it.

Oct 11, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman October 8, 2018 at 5:46 pm

In another stellar example of simply making up an optimistic headline that makes readers feel good – those readers who only read headlines, for example – a French analyst is apparently willing to go out on a limb and say that Nord Stream II 'won't be built as planned'. That's already a little hedgy, but if you read the article itself, he doesn't say anything remotely like that. In fact, he says Russian gas is the cheapest option, and most American LNG cargoes thus far to Europe are promptly sold on to someplace else where the Europeans can get more for it.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/interview/french-analyst-nord-stream-2-wont-be-built-as-planned/

The major issue is that US LNG may come if we have higher prices. But why would we need them? They are quite high already. If China is prepared to overbid us, we don't need the American gas. We can ask for more Russian gas

Mark Chapman October 8, 2018 at 6:50 pm
Russia's Energy Minister sees the potential to double Russian gas exports by 2035. Russia's gas exports are growing by 6-7%/yr while global gas demand growth is at 2.6%/yr until 2035.

https://www.naturalgasworld.com/russian-producers-eye-doubling-exports-64936?#signin

Probably not the greatest news for the environment, as most analysts agree we need to start immediately moving away from a petroleum-based energy policy. But getting rid of all use of coal would be a good start for the present; gas is relatively clean, although I don't know if that makes any real difference to greenhouse-gas emissions.

[Oct 11, 2018] Dutch push for a new sanctions regime for Human Rights abusers, apart from global sponsors of Islamic terrorism who also happen to have $$$

Oct 08, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Vis the Dutch push for a new sanctions regime for Human Rights abusers, apart from global sponsors of Islamic terrorism who also happen to have $$$, the obvious takeaway that only just occurred to me is that the push for a European Magnitsky Act must have failed.

This is exactly the same thing, they just dropped the name. The EU is not united and I don't see the Netherlands as having enough influence in the EU without the UK.

[Oct 11, 2018] More Cold War Extremism and Crises by Stephen F. Cohen

Oct 03, 2018 | www.thenation.com

Stephen F. Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at NYU and Princeton University, and John Batchelor continue their discussions of the new US-Russian Cold War. (Previous installments, now in their fifth year, are at TheNation.com.)

Emphasizing growing Cold War extremism in Washington and war-like crises in US-Russian relations elsewhere, Cohen comments on the following examples:

Russiagate, even though none of its core allegations have been proven, is now a central part of the new Cold War, severely limiting President Trump's ability to conduct crisis-negotiations with Moscow and further vilifying Russian President Putin for having ordered "an attack on America" during the 2016 presidential election. The New York Times and The Washington Post have been leading promoters of the Russiagate narrative, even though several of its foundational elements have been seriously challenged, even discredited.

Nonetheless, both papers recently devoted thousands of words to retelling the same narrative -- on September 20 and 23, respectively -- along with its obvious fallacies. For example, Paul Manafort, during the crucial time he was advising then Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, was not "pro-Russian" but pro -- European Union. And contrary to insinuations, General Michael Flynn did nothing wrong or unprecedented in having conversations with a representative of the Kremlin on behalf of President-elect Trump. Many other presidents-elect had instructed top aides to do the same. The epic retellings of the Russiagate narrative by both papers, at extraordinary length, were riddled with similar mistakes and unproven allegations. (Nonetheless, a prominent historian, albeit one seemingly little informed both about Russiagate documents and about Kremlin leadership, characterized the widely discredited anti-Trump Steele dossier -- the source of many such allegations -- as "increasingly plausible.")

Astonishingly, neither the Times nor the Post give any credence to the emphatic statement made at least one week before by Bob Woodward -- normally considered the most authoritative chronicler of Washington's political secrets -- that after two years of research he had found "no evidence of collusion" between Trump and Russia.

For the Times and Post and other mainstream media outlets, Russiagate has become, it seems, a kind of cult journalism that no counter-evidence or analysis can dint, and thus itself is a major contributing factor to the new and more dangerous Cold War. Still worse, what began nearly two years ago as complaints about Russian "meddling" in the US presidential campaign has become for The New Yorker and other publications an accusation that the Kremlin actually put Trump in the White House. For this reckless charge, with its inherent contempt for the good sense of American voters, there is no convincing evidence -- nor any precedent in American history.

Meanwhile, current and former US officials are making unprecedented threats against Moscow. NATO ambassador Kay Bailey Hutchinson threatened to "take out" any Russian missiles she thought violated a 1987 arms treaty, a step that would risk nuclear war. The secretary of the interior threatened a "naval blockade" of Russia. In an unprecedented, undiplomatic Russophobic outburst, UN ambassador Nikki Haley declared that "lying, cheating and rogue behavior" are a "norm of Russian culture."

These may be outlandish statements by untutored appointed political figures, though they inescapably raise the question: Who is making Russia policy in Washington -- President Trump with his avowed policy of "cooperating with Russia," or someone else?

But how to explain, other than as unbridled extremism, statements by a former US ambassador to Moscow and longtime professor of Russian politics, who appears to be the mainstream media's leading authority on Russia? According to him, Russia today is "a rogue state," its policies "criminal actions," and the "world's worst threat." It must be countered by "preemptive sanctions that would go into effect automatically" -- indeed, "every day," if deemed necessary. [These are the words of Michael McFaul, who has appointments at Stanford University which has become a friendly home for warmongers.]

Considering the "crippling" sanctions now being prepared by a bipartisan group of US senators -- their actual reason and purpose apparently unknown even to them -- this would be nothing less than a declaration of war against Russia; economic war, but war nonetheless.

Several other new Cold War fronts are also fraught with hot war, but today none more than Syria.

Another reminder occurred on September 17, when Syria accidentally shot down an allied Russian surveillance plane, killing all 15 crew members. The cause, as is known, was subterfuge by Israeli F-15s supplied by Washington that used the larger radar image of the Russian airplane to cloak their illegal attack on Syria. The reaction in Moscow was highly indicative -- potentially ominous.

At first, Putin, who had developed good relations with Israel's political leadership, said the incident was an accident, an example of the fog of war. His own Ministry of Defense, however, loudly protested, blaming Israel. Putin quickly retreated, adopting a much more hard-line position, and in the end vowed to send to Syria Russia's highly effective S-300 surface-to-air defense system, a prize both Syria and Iran have requested in vain for years. [Actually, Russia has now supplied both Iran and Syria the S-300.]

Second, if the S-300s are installed in Syria (they will be operated by Russians, not Syrians), Putin can in effect impose a "no-fly zone" over that country, which has been torn by war due, in no small part, to the presence of several major foreign powers. (Russia and Iran are there legally; the United States and Israel are not.) If so, it will be a new "red line" that Washington and Tel Aviv must decide whether or not to cross. Considering the mania in Washington, it's hard to be confident that wisdom will prevail. [Actually, it is likely that Putin will shift the responsibility of using the air defense system to Syria.]

All of this unfolded on approximately the third anniversary of Russia's military intervention in Syria, in September 2015. At that time, Washington pundits denounced Putin's "adventure" and were sure it would "fail." Three years later, "Putin's Kremlin" has destroyed the vicious Islamic State's grip on large parts of Syria, all but restored President Assad's control over most of the country, and has become the ultimate arbiter of Syria's future. President Trump would do best by joining Moscow's peace process, though it is unlikely Washington's mostly Democratic Russiagate party will permit him to do so. (For perspective, recall that, in 2016, presidential candidate Hillary Clinton promised to impose a US no-fly zone over Syria to defy Russia.)

There is also this. As the US-led "liberal world order" disintegrates, not only in Syria, a new alliance is emerging between Russia, China, Iran, and possibly NATO member Turkey. It will be a real "threat" only if Washington makes it one, as it has Russia in recent years.

Finally, the US-Russian proxy war in Ukraine has recently acquired a new dimension. In addition to the civil war in Donbass, Moscow and Kiev have begun to challenge each other's ships in the Sea of Azov, near the vital Ukrainian port city of Mariupol. Trump is being pressured to supply Kiev with naval and other weapons to wage this evolving war, yet another potential tripwire. Here too President Trump would do best by putting his administration's weight behind the long-stalled Minsk peace accords. Here, too, this seemed to be his original intention, but it has proven to be yet another approach, it now seems, thwarted by Russiagate.

Stephen F. Cohen is a professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University and a contributing editor of The Nation .

[Oct 11, 2018] New clues may help locate lost intelligence files from 1938 French-British-Nazi pact

Oct 11, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

et Al October 8, 2018 at 7:38 am

IntelNews: New clues may help locate lost intelligence files from 1938 French-British-Nazi pact
https://intelnews.org/2018/10/01/01-2408/

October 1, 2018 by Joseph Fitsanakis

Nearly 2,000 missing British intelligence files relating to the so-called Munich Agreement, a failed attempt by Britain, France and Italy to appease Adolf Hitler in 1938, may not have been destroyed, according to historians
####

More at the link.

The UK government also claimed that they did not have the files relating to their backing of Kenyans who tortured and killed those taking part in the Mau Mau Rebellion. If I remember correctly, A dozen or so large files were discovered in a skip outside an MoD office that was being sold off.

Mark Chapman October 8, 2018 at 9:11 am
If so, it was a mistake to suggest the files may not have been destroyed before they were safely in non-partisan custody. The west has too much invested in preserving its Molotov-Ribbentrop indignation to allow for even the possibility of equivalency, and efforts to find any such files and destroy or discredit them will go into overdrive.
Cortes October 8, 2018 at 11:23 am
Nothing unusual there.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/542133.Haig_s_Command

is a fantastic book and central to it is the author's ingenious way to get round the systematic doctoring of official reports and first-hand accounts of WWI. One appendix has quite astonishing portraits of many of the leading players, one of which – that of the American Pershing – is almost comical in describing the disappearance of swathes of files bearing witness to his incompetence; so it's not just the Brits.

[Oct 11, 2018] After the Nazis and their Baltic allies lost the war, the Balts (like other Eastern Europeans) had to do some serious shucking and jiving to re-brand themselves as Jeffersonian Democrats. Hence, the phony "dual totalitarian" or "dual-genocide" theories, which their court philosophers and historians quickly pulled out of their collective asses.

Oct 11, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

yalensis October 5, 2018 at 3:25 am

On that topic of Baltic collaborationism, I just finished posting this 4-part series about the Salaspils concentration camp in Latvia.

When you think about it, it really doesn't take much rocket science to understand why a segment (possibly the majority) of Baltic populations supported the Nazis at the time:

(1) This segment of the public were politically right-wing anyhow, they liked the fascist ideas and they hated Communism;
(2) The Nazis regarded the Balts as racially superior to the Jews and Slavs, so Balts felt they could live quite comfortably under Nazi domination, and they were right about that;
(3) They disliked Jews and were not sad to see them go.

Basically, in the Baltic states, the majority (probably) were pro-Nazi, and the other segment were pro-Communist. I reckon there were very few people in between.

After the Nazis and their Baltic allies lost the war, the Balts (like other Eastern Europeans) had to do some serious shucking and jiving to re-brand themselves as Jeffersonian Democrats. Hence, the phony "dual totalitarian" or "dual-genocide" theories, which their court philosophers and historians quickly pulled out of their collective asses.

Mark Chapman October 5, 2018 at 8:54 am
And you can probably see why much of the west is quietly pro-Nazi now as well. The pro-Nazi Ukrainian nationalists espouse western values – get rid of immigrants and the retarded and those who don't pull their weight, and most of all the dirty Russians, and usher in a land of purity and decency and bustling commerce, and let's hear no more of 'tolerance'. The movers and shakers in the west support liberal policies because they must, and they are sometimes useful as leverage, but if you were to yell "America for Americans" in the House or Senate, most of the Republicans and probably a few Democrats would stand and salute before they could stop themselves.
kirill October 5, 2018 at 10:54 am
I don't see the republicans being the Nazis. The US war party is composed of both Democraps and Rethuglicans. The Republican base has values closer in line with paleocons and not the neocons. The values of the Democraps are pure imperialist, exceptionalist and totalitarian in the name of PC. Obummer was neocon tool like W. Bush. Thus it is the Democraps that are the proper heirs of the Nazis and their 4th Reich global domination project. Paleocons are isolationist nationalists that actually believe in the constitutional values that the USA claims to espouse. The Democraps are all about lust for power and dirty tricks to enable the seizing of power. Obummer weaponized the FBI and CIA into partisan instruments giving us the Russia meddling inquisition. Truman was a foaming at the mouth racist cold warrior. Eisenhower at least warned about the creeping influence of the MIC. Clinton was a slimeball that continued the Reich agenda in the Balkans. And so on.

[Oct 11, 2018] Gleiwitz replay by British is planned

Oct 11, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile October 6, 2018 at 10:03 pm

Panic in Mordor!!!

Britain is ready to conduct a cyber attack against Russia -- The Sunday Times

The British military is ready to take this step in case of an "attack" by Russia against one of the Western countries

LONDON, 7 October 2018, 07:28 -- REGNUM The military command of Great Britain has announced its willingness to carry out a cyber attack against Moscow , writes the British newspaper "The Sunday Times" on 7 October,.

According to the publication, citing an unnamed source closely familiar with the situation , the British military is ready to take this step in case of an "attack" by Russia against a Western country. This measure will be possible when Britain has a shortage of conventional defence resources and will manifest itself by the fact that the capital of Russia will have its energy supplies cut off.

According to the "Sunday Times" source, variants of "Russian aggression", against which the British military is prepared to use cyber weapons, are said to be an invasion by Russian President Vladimir Putin of Libya in order to seize oil and to create a new crisis of migrants in Europe and an attempt to capture "small Islands belonging to Estonia". [Such action would be taken by the UK] so as to comply with a NATO clause, in which an attack against one member is considered to be an attack against the whole alliance.

We should note that recently the West has been constantly accusing Russia of cyber attacks against the West for economic sabotage and interference in local political life. However, tangible evidence of Russian guilt as regards such accusations has not once been provided.

My stress above.

Why should Russia, personified as the Dark Lord, wish to seize oil in Libya? Has Russia no oil of its own?

Sowing disarray in Libya? Now who, I wonder, might have done that before now?

An immigrant crisis in Europe created by the Empire of Evil?

And the present crisis? Created by whom?

Estonian Islands? What need has Russia of islands in the Baltic?

And of course, an unnamed source.

All in all, classic "projection: the West threatening to do what it has long planned and, furthermore, continuously accused Russia of doing , without providing any evidence whatsoever, so as to psych-up the sheeple for justified retaliation against the "Putin Regime".

Gleiwitz replay, anyone?

[Oct 11, 2018] Bellingcat has passed the CIA, MI5, Scotland Yard and the FBI and never looked back.

Oct 11, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile October 8, 2018 at 7:40 pm

Bellingcat exclusive!!!!!

Second Skripal Poisoning Suspect Identified as Dr. Alexander Mishkin

Gosh!

Moscow Exile October 8, 2018 at 7:41 pm
Bum link again!

Second Skripal Poisoning Suspect Identified as Dr. Alexander Mishkin

Mark Chapman October 8, 2018 at 8:02 pm
Where would we be without solid, honest citizen journalism like this? Bellingcat has passed the CIA, MI5, Scotland Yard and the FBI and never looked back. In fact, we have not heard Peep One from any of them since Bellingcat burst on the scene, and the British press goes straight to print from its reports, to hell with waiting for informed comment from the intelligence services or law enforcement.

Come to think about it, what are their countries paying them for?

Cortes October 8, 2018 at 11:15 pm
I'm looking forward to the first Bellingcat spin-offs.

Eliot Higgins – Special Invesigator featuring Tom Cruise and introducing Sparky his lovable mongrel dog which miraculously survived the Salisbury Novichok Massacre and can sniff out GRU agents a mile away.

Jen October 9, 2018 at 8:35 pm
How Sparky the lovable mongrel dog survived the Salisbury Novichok Massacre:

https://avatars.mds.yandex.net/get-pdb/881477/505e84f8-9835-4ab0-9a12-1d7ea375c032/orig

His weaknesses are sniffing power pylons and swallowing batteries.

Cortes October 9, 2018 at 11:41 pm
Excellent!
Moscow Exile October 9, 2018 at 3:08 am
And following temporary employment reviewing orders at a Leicester UK women's underwear manufacturer, the unemployed Higgins then "dispensed with looking for another job so that he could devote himself to blogging full-time" and has now pogressed to being a senior fellow in the "Digital Forensic Research Laboratory" and the "Future Europe Initiative", projects run by the Washington, D.C based "think tank" the "Atlantic Council".


Higgins hard at work researching

A "kept man"? His wife must bring home the bacon then.

Well, she would if she were not a Turk.

The then 32-year-old Higgins started blogging about the civil war in Syria from his home as Brown Moses: "He had no formal intelligence training or security clearance that gave him access to classified documents. He could not speak or read Arabic. He had never set foot in the Middle East, unless you count the time he changed planes in Dubai en route to Manila, or his trip to visit his in-laws in Turkey".

As far as I am aware, he still has no credentials for his chosen field, albeit he is now a "fellow" of this and that. He has also since bursting into the bloggosphere considerably put on weight:

Higgins belongs to an obsessive coterie of self-appointed military intelligence experts who use social media to piece together critical details of faraway conflicts, often well ahead of seasoned professionals. Frequently self-taught and operating far outside the military-industrial complex, these amateur analysts have honed a novel set of sleuthing skills that fuse old-fashioned detective work with new sources of intelligence generated by cell phone cameras and spread by social networks. Syria's war, widely considered the most documented conflict in history, has turned social media into a weapon of mass detection -- critical both for fighters on the ground and for faraway observers trying to make sense of the conflict.

The mind boggles: he and his fellow "amateur analysts" are often well ahead of seasoned professionals. Frequently self-taught and operating far outside the military-industrial complex !!!

See: Inside The One-Man Intelligence Unit That Exposed The Secrets And Atrocities Of Syria's War , by Bianca Boscar.

Bianca Bosker is the Executive Tech Editor of the Huffington Post.

Well who'd a-thowt!

Moscow Exile October 9, 2018 at 3:11 am
And Higgins is also an unabashed liar:

Eliot Higgins,: "I've not received funding from NED. Stop reading conspiracy websites"

Also Eliot Higgins "Bellingcat has received money from NED"

#BellingCrap #lieslieslies #UnderwearSalesman #CarpetSlippers pic.twitter.com/VvciGlaTtw

-- Emma (@emmadefano1) September 29, 2018

Mark Chapman October 9, 2018 at 3:29 pm
Once upon a time, nobody would dare to do what they are doing because of the danger of a ruinous lawsuit. But so long as he continues accusing the right people, the west will safeguard him from that as best it can. Maybe that's the way to go. They've left themselves without a retreat, saying this and that are 'confirmed'. Sue the outfit.
Jen October 8, 2018 at 9:05 pm
Bum link again? well it's Bellingcrap, what else could it be but a bum link?
Moscow Exile October 9, 2018 at 12:43 am
And now avidly reported by the British government organ, the "independent", non-Westminster-contolled BBC:

Skripal attack: Second Russian Salisbury suspect named

At least the BBC labels "Dr. Mishkin" as a "suspect"..

Moscow Exile October 9, 2018 at 1:06 am
Note how Bellingtwat states that it has "conclusively" established the real identity of Petrov on evidence gleaned from "multiple open sources" and "testimony from people familiar with the person" in question.

How do they do this?

First to the post again and well ahead of all the Western intelligence agencies, which are obviously understaffed with incompetents and not in possession of state-of-the-art means of gathering intelligence such as . errrr, Facebook?

Moscow Exile October 9, 2018 at 1:10 am

Moscow Exile October 9, 2018 at 1:41 am

I'm sick of Western European shite in general.

A few days ago, that lying old slag May appeared on stage at the Conservative Party annual conference with Abba's "Dancing Queen" playing in the bacground. May appeared to be trying to dance to the Abba hit. What a cupid old stunt!

And yesterday at an EUSSR Brussels conference, EU chief-executive and piss-artist Juncker appears to have been possibly trying to take the piss out of that old, lying bag May's gyrations:

Mark Chapman October 9, 2018 at 3:25 pm
Dear God. She gives new meaning to 'wooden', and makes Pinocchio look like he was made of quicksilver.
Mark Chapman October 9, 2018 at 3:09 am
Yes, their resources really do beat all, don't they? Able to trawl through Russians' private records at will, even those ominously marked, "Not for public release". But then, they have lots of willing helpers inside Russia, which the western intelligence agencies officially have not. Makes you wonder how Russia can miss catching them, innit, considering the intertubes are strictly controlled in Russia and all their intelligence transactions are in the public domain? I mean, with their troll farms and all their snoopy organizations?
Jen October 9, 2018 at 3:46 am
Bellingcrap could have just mentioned its sources during the course of its article instead of proclaiming that it's going to detail in another post to be supposedly published today (9 October 2018) the methodology it and The Insider Russia used and the information trail established. Perhaps a sign that Bellingcrap is starting to feel some pressure to lift its game to a level acceptable to its masters at The Atlantic Council?
kirill October 9, 2018 at 8:16 pm
I guess the belled cat thinks he's immune from some "GRU" hit. LOL.
et Al October 9, 2018 at 2:32 am
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. BellEndCat can only manage the former. Still, it's good enough for the BBC who this morning spoke to a (former?) Georgian minister who was saying that if the West was united and stopped Russia from invading Georgia in 2008, then Ukraine, Crimea, Skripals etc. wouldn't have happened, followed by BBC correspondent Norton who said that 'was about right'.
cartman October 9, 2018 at 10:14 am
Don't forget that Bellingcat is linked to the Stasi:

Forgot about this: Der Spiegel outed Bellingcat analyst as former full-time Stasi goon. https://t.co/kfB69NuQ6N

-- Yasha Levine (@yashalevine) October 9, 2018

[Oct 11, 2018] US military program could be seen as bioweapon: Using the US's own definitions that it has used to place sanctions on other countries, this is clearly a dual-use technology, i.e. civilian with military applications

Oct 11, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

et Al October 5, 2018 at 4:18 am

crAP via Antiwar.com: Scientists: US military program could be seen as bioweapon
https://apnews.com/8ed74d87df524ab580d7fbd3b845d0c6/Scientists:-US-military-program-could-be-seen-as-bioweapon

A research arm of the U.S. military is exploring the possibility of deploying insects to make plants more resilient by altering their genes. Some experts say the work may be seen as a potential biological weapon.

In an opinion paper published Thursday in the journal Science, the authors say the U.S. needs to provide greater justification for the peace-time purpose of its Insect Allies project to avoid being perceived as hostile to other countries. Other experts expressed ethical and security concerns with the research, which seeks to transmit protective traits to crops already growing in the field .
####

The rest at the link.

Using the US's own definitions that it has used to place sanctions on other countries, this is clearly a dual-use technology, i.e. civilian with military applications (which is just about the same as any fancy satellited up in space etc.). Conclusion? The US must sanction itself!

kirill October 5, 2018 at 5:59 am
The US has been using insects as bioweapons for decades (including attacking Cuba and the USSR). The current development program is using this insect research as a cover. Its real function is to develop targeted genetic weapons designed to exterminate ethic groups. These weapons are beyond any "mass destruction" and are pure genocide devices. Anyone who thinks that this sort of research is unlikely is a retard without a clue. There is a reason why certain US companies were buying up Russian human bio-waste (e.g. amputated limbs, cadavers).

If anyone thinks that the US will care about collateral damage to neighbouring Slavic countries, then they are full on retarded as well. In 1990 Americans could not tell the difference between Ukrainians and Russians (and even Chechens). Now for purely political reasons they pretend to see every microscopic difference. The US has no love for Poland, Ukraine, or any other new Europe country. They are merely cannon fodder for its imperial ambitions. The hate that Poles and other Slavic states have for Russia is pathological. Poland is basically a German branch plant economy. Tell me why Poland should have more love for Germany than for Russia? And don't invoke communism since Russians were not privileged compared to Poles before 1991. It was, in fact, the other way around.

Mark Chapman October 5, 2018 at 9:22 am
The US is always asking to be trusted with some fearsome new capability, on the grounds that its values are a fail-safe – it is so innately good that it could never use such capabilities for evil. And it seems obsessed with modifications to achieve super-plants so that one potato will feed a family of eight, and suchlike – what's wrong with food the way nature intended it to be?

If you would decide whether a technology or process should be viewed as a threat, just imagine it was announced by Russia. The USA would scream its head off.

I can't help noticing as well that some of its changes seem geared toward not having to do anything about global warming, continuing to rely on a petroleum-dominated energy policy and so forth, by engineering a food supply that will flourish through as changing environment. If it is successful in that aim it is assured global domination, as the food supply of other countries could vanish if the country did not sign on to the US technology agenda. America would not have to threaten anyone's crops with secret-agent bugs. It could just go on as it is doing, and continue to contribute to global warming.

[Oct 11, 2018] Telegraph propaganda honchos as " "Highly likely" jerks

Oct 11, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

moscowexile

October 10, 2018 at 6:20 pm
A suspected third member of the Kremlin hit squad behind the Salisbury nerve agent attack has been named, according to a respected Russian news website.

Sergey Fedotov, 45, travelled to the UK on the same day as the two assassins already charged by British authorities – and boarded the same flight home.

The Telegraph had previously reported the existence of a third member of the Russian intelligence hit squad and a trawl of flight records by the Fontanka news agency matched it to Fedotov.

According to Fontanka, Fedotov flew to the UK on a passport whose number differs by only a few digits from those used by the two GRU military intelligence agents officially wanted for the nerve agent attack.

It is almost certain Fedotov is not the passenger's real name but an alias. No traces of Sergei Fedotov have been found in documentary databases or on social media. He has no property, vehicles or telephone numbers registered to his name in Russia, according to Fontanka.

Telegraph

No "alleged"in "Kremlin hit squad behind the Salisbury nerve agent attack but It is almost certain Fedotov is not the passenger's real name but an alias.

Highly likely indeed!

[Oct 11, 2018] Can the replacement be worse than Haley?

Oct 11, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

James lake October 9, 2018 at 6:59 am

Breaking!

Nikki Haley resigns as US ambassador to UN, reports say
Sources say Donald Trump has accepted Haley's resignation

I have no doubt the replacement will be worse than her.

I thought no one could be as bad as Samantha power until Nikki came along!!

Northern Star October 9, 2018 at 11:15 am
https://www.businessinsider.com/nikki-haley-resign-investigation-flights-free-private-jets-2018-10

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/watchdog-demanded-investigation-into-nikki-haleys-private-flights-before-she-resigned

Pavlo Svolochenko October 10, 2018 at 7:41 am
If she was forced out for something that petty, Trump must have been looking for an excuse to get rid of her.
Mark Chapman October 10, 2018 at 7:55 am
Or those who hate him – and they are legion – wanted her out, because if Trump wanted her out her replacement would already have been announced. I saw on one of those 'sponsored content' trash teaser clickbait headlines that it was going to be Ivanka, but not even Trump would do that. Although you never know – it's not as if Haley brought any wealth of foreign-policy knowledge to the table, and she was mostly there to be a partisan spoiler of initiatives the USA did not want to pass. I suppose anyone could do that.
Mark Chapman October 9, 2018 at 4:13 pm
Maybe this loon is still available.

https://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/563fd2451400006f023ca344.jpeg?ops=scalefit_720_noupscale

[Oct 11, 2018] Nikki Haley's Surprising Departure

Oct 11, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

Dear Friends of the Ron Paul Institute:

Nikki Haley's resignation as President Trump's Ambassador to the United Nations yesterday came as quite a surprise. Haley seemed pleased to play her imagined role as the world's procurator, as she used her UN perch to incessantly threaten and condemn all the global enemies of her fellow neoconservatives. She came to the job with no foreign policy experience and she will be leaving exactly as she arrived.

If Haley's departure came as a surprise, so too did her appointment in the first place. During the primaries, she was famously in the " anyone but Donald Trump " camp of neocons, saying that Trump was "everything a governor doesn't want in a president."

Trump soon returned the compliment, Tweeting that, "The people of South Carolina are embarrassed by Nikki Haley!"

Nevertheless, like many neocons who had been critical of Trump, she found herself rewarded with a top position in the Administration. From her position she had consistently gotten ahead of her boss, the President, in policy pronouncements and at almost every turn she appeared to be pushing a Haley foreign policy rather than a Trump foreign policy.

For example, just as President Trump was returning from his historic summit meeting in Helsinki with Russian President Vladimir Putin, where the US President spoke very optimistically about a new approach to US/Russian relations, Nikki Haley gave an interview in which she said, "we don't trust Russia, we don't trust Putin; we never will...they're never going to be our friend...that's a fact."

Last September she acted as if she, rather than Trump, were the commander-in-chief, Tweeting of North Korea, "we cut 90% of trade and 30% of oil. I have no problem kicking it to Gen. Mattis because I think he has plenty of options." The idea that she, and not her boss, would "kick it" to Defense Secretary Mattis was preposterous, but contradicting and countermanding Trump's disappointingly rare bobs toward diplomacy and disengagement over bluster and bombs was a chief characteristic of Haley's reign as UN chief finger-wagger.

President Trump had been extremely critical of Syria's Assad, particularly after he fell for two false-flag rebel gas attacks blamed on Assad, but he had been careful not to explicitly set US policy as "Assad must go," as had his predecessor. Nevertheless Nikki Haley again got out ahead of official US policy with her own policy, stating in September 2017 that, "we're not going to be satisfied until we see a solid and stable Syria, and that is not with Assad in place."

Nikki Haley had long been associated with neocon warhawk John Bolton and had also benefited from the largesse of GOP moneybags Sheldon Adelson, the Israel-obsessed casino magnate who bankrolled Haley's PAC to the tune of a quarter of a million dollars in 2016 alone. Haley was Adelson's kind of governor: While South Carolina's executive, she signed the nation's first law making it a criminal offense to support a boycott of Israel.

How did the mainstream media handle the surprise resignation of such an extreme warhawk? Someone one might consider on the far fringe of US political life? The New York Times mourned the departure of Ambassador Haley, Tweeting that it would be "leaving the administration with one less moderate Republican voice."

"Moderate" voice?

For such a pro-war extremist to be considered "moderate" by the newspaper of record may strike some as odd, but as Glenn Greenwald so accurately explained :

The reason NYT calls her "moderate" is because she affirms all of the standard pro-war, pro-imperial orthodoxies that are bipartisan consensus in Washington. That's why @ BillKristol reveres her. She was a Tea Party candidate, but "moderate" means: loves US wars & hegemony.
That's it in a nutshell. Because in Washington being extreme pro-interventionist and pro-war is the orthodoxy. The facade that there are real differences between the Republican and Democrat party is carefully crafted by the mainstream media to cover the fact that we do live in a one-party state. Pro-war, pro-intervention, pro-bombing, pro-overthrow, pro-meddling - these are moderate positions. For Washington and the mainstream media, the extremists are the ones who wish to abide by the admonitions of our Founding Fathers that we go not abroad in search of monsters to destroy.

Well, it seems there are plenty of monsters closer to home.

So good riddance to Nikki Haley...but don't hold your breath that it means the end of Nikki Haley-ism, which is the foundation of US foreign policy. Clearly we have much work left to do.

Your tax deductible contributions to the Ron Paul Institute allow us to provide you with real analysis of breaking issues. Our continued ability to provide a counter-balance to the mainstream media's false narrative depends on your financial support . We thank you for standing with us.

Sincerely yours,
Daniel McAdams
Executive Director
Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

[Oct 11, 2018] I still don't understand why her UN staff did not know until this morning that she was resigning.

Oct 11, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Pat Lang Mod , a day ago

OK, but I still don't understand why her UN staff did not know until this morning that she was resigning.
Ken Roberts -> Pat Lang , a day ago
My guess: DT had delegated to NH the management of UN interface. She flubbed, badly, DT being laughed at during his address. Out she goes!
confusedponderer -> Pat Lang , a day ago
Pat,
" why her UN staff did not know until this morning that she was resigning. "

Dunno, but what about the possibility that she herself didn't knew she was to "retire" until this morning? That she didn' quit but just quietly (which would be very un-Trumpish) got the boot?

As for firing people, Trump made a TV show out of that, though usually he prefers to "use megaphones over whispering".

That'd be the sort of retirement that's more frankly called " get the eff out and shut the eff up on your way out, and don't forget to say thank you! ".

All it needed for that to happen is the orange king having a "fart sit crosswise". As for Harper's good riddance, indeed.

Kooshy -> confusedponderer , 14 hours ago
IMO, at least she knew she is a goner since last week, I also think she agreed to leave on a non-embarrassing way, meaning not to be fired in mob boss' favorite way as in Apprentice. Like Colonel suggest neocons and her Israeli backers like to preserve her for a later day, she is a useful idiot. IMO, Trump, like the mob boss he think he is, and acts like, believes she was cause of his embarrassing performance/program at UN, again like mob bosses Don Trump doesn't give a second chance to anyone.
Walrus -> Pat Lang , a day ago
Because she believes they are big leakers like herself? Narcissists assume others have identical (rotten) behaviours as their own.
im cotton -> Pat Lang , a day ago
Trump is a master of political timing. Perhaps for whatever reason he wanted to move on from the Kavanaugh hubbub to something else--like Haley resigning. It has dominated the news cycle moreso than if it had been leaked by a staffer. Just my guess.
Tony -> Pat Lang , a day ago
Maybe because she didn't know?

[Oct 11, 2018] HARPER NIKKI FINDS THE DOOR

Oct 11, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

[Oct 11, 2018] Nikki Haley Just Screwed Conservatives Going Into Midterms: Bannon

Haley-Binomo was a liability not an asset.
Oct 11, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Former Trump chief strategist Steve Bannon slammed UN ambassador Nikki Haley's decision on Tuesday to announce her resignation, calling it "suspect" and "horrific," and that it overshadowed positive news that Trump and the Republicans need to build support going into midterms, according to Bloomberg .

The timing was exquisite from a bad point of view ," Bannon told Bloomberg News Editor-in-Chief John Micklethwait on Wednesday at the Bloomberg Invest London forum. " Everything she said yesterday and everything she said about stepping down could have been done on the evening of November 6. The timing could not have been worse. "

Haley's announcement, according to Bannon, took White House officials by surprise - and distracted attention from Brett Kavanaugh's first day as a justice on the Supreme Court, along with headlines over the lowest US unemployment rate in five decades. Haley's decision undermines Trump's message to Republican voters, said Bannon.

In the Oval Office on Tuesday, Trump said Haley told him six months ago she wanted a break after spending two years in the post. She'll continue in her role until year-end. Haley said Tuesday that she was ready for a break after two terms as South Carolina's governor and two years at the United Nations. - Bloomberg

Bannon also says that he took Haley at her word that she has no political aspirations - particularly when it comes to running against Trump in 2020. She says that she looks forward to campaigning for Trump in two years. That said, Bannon calls Haley "ambitious" and "very talented," though he said so using a backhanded compliment.

"I think she is incredibly politically ambitious," Bannon added. " Ambitious as Lucifer but that is probably...I am probably taking Milton out of context."

Trump defended the timing of Haley's departure on Wednesday, saying "there's no good time" for her to have announced her resignation - and that if she'd waited until after midterms, it would have raised questions as to whether her motive was based on the results.

Yen Cross , 19 seconds ago link

Bannon is unhinged. Nikki Haley was horrible in her position! If Bannon payed attention to voter base of Trump, he'd see Haley was a thorn in the side of the Trump administration.

One of the best appointments Trump has made, is Mike Pompeo. I thought he'd be some crazed warmonger, but has turned out to be quite the opposite.

He's got this kind of easy going swagger and confidence about him. He's chubby, and his every day guy, sort of approach, is affable.

Grandad Grumps , 1 minute ago link

She is not human. Maybe she eats babies.

I am Groot , 1 minute ago link

Back to Binomo ! Don't let the door hit you in your *** on the way out Nimrata. And take your Obamacare curtains with you.

Prosource , 13 minutes ago link

Busted for the NYT memo ?

Whatever the cause, good riddance.

Bat-Shiite crazy with a dangerously big war mongering mouth.

Bannon is totally wrong on this one. Conservatives saw right through her.

The November vote won't be harmed, may even be bolstered.

Is Bannon's point that because she is a woman, it hurts Trump with women?

Regardless, the sooner these neo-con fake patriots are gone, the better

Albertarocks , 16 seconds ago link

Yes sir... her rhetoric is pure deep state war mongering of the most evil kind. She was told to stir up as much hatred and fear at the UN as possible and try to get the opposition to do something stupid in response to her remarks. That's not Trump talk for damned sure... that's deep state talk.

Yippie21 , 23 minutes ago link

He makes a GREAT point that occurred to me immediately. If you are resigning effective at the end of the year and everything is awesome, just time to move on.... why the hell are you publicly announcing it 3 weeks before a VERY contentious midterm election and only a day or so after a brutal SCOTUS nomination conclusion? Why? Why now? Very curious and a unforced error.

Vigilante , 44 minutes ago link

I never trusted Haley

The timing was no co-incidence for sure

She trashed Trump during the election season if you remember

[Oct 10, 2018] Nikki Haley's shock resignation prompts various theories

Oct 10, 2018 | www.rt.com

Immediately after she resigned, Twitter lit up with theories and opinions about the reason, with many suggesting Haley could be the Trump administration official behind a highly critical anonymous op-ed published by the New York Times last month.

[Oct 10, 2018] Freedom fighters of Binomo and other notable quotes

Notable quotes:
"... "It was abusive, how bad the international community was to Israel. It reminded me of a kid being bullied in the playground I just wasn't going to have it. It was just so upsetting to see, that I just started yelling at everybody " ..."
"... We had the back of Israel, and if they were going to mess with Israel they had to mess with the US. ..."
"... As you consider your vote, I encourage you to know the president and the US take this vote personally. The president will be watching this vote carefully and has requested I report back on those who voted against us. ..."
"... We don't trust Russia. We don't trust Putin. We never will. They're never going to be our friend. That's just a fact. ..."
"... "They are aggressive and they can be difficult to work with in the Council... And they do try to cause some disruption, but we manage them and we continue to remind them what their place is." ..."
"... "weapon of choice and we have to make sure we get in front of it." ..."
"... When a country can come interfere in another country's elections, that is warfare. ..."
"... We are going to fight for Venezuela and we are going to continue doing it until [President Nicolas] Maduro is gone! ..."
"... If there are chemical weapons that are used, we know exactly who's going to use them. ..."
"... Judging by how it has fallen short of its promise, the Human Rights Council is the UN's greatest failure. It has taken the idea of human dignity and it has reduced it to just another instrument of international politics. ..."
"... "Its members included some of the worst human rights violators – the dictatorships of Cuba, China and Venezuela all have seats on the Council," ..."
"... We're aware of that. We've been watching that [Binomo situation] very closely. And I think we will continue to watch as we deal with the issues that keep coming up about the South China Sea. ..."
Oct 10, 2018 | www.rt.com

'Mess with Israel – you'll mess with US'

Israel seems to be most upset by Haley's resignation from her UN job, since the envoy for Washington often ended up championing Israeli interests at the world body. Statements like this one perfectly explain Tel Aviv's grief:

"It was abusive, how bad the international community was to Israel. It reminded me of a kid being bullied in the playground I just wasn't going to have it. It was just so upsetting to see, that I just started yelling at everybody "

We had the back of Israel, and if they were going to mess with Israel they had to mess with the US.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:
"I would like to thank Ambassador @nikkihaley , who led the uncompromising struggle against hypocrisy at the UN, and on behalf of the truth and justice of our country. Best of luck!" pic.twitter.com/Lr6IvkM5U9

-- PM of Israel (@IsraeliPM) October 9, 2018

The US envoy was also never shy to pressure the UN member states into voting the way Washington saw fit. The most notable example of such extortion was the vote on recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital last December.

As you consider your vote, I encourage you to know the president and the US take this vote personally. The president will be watching this vote carefully and has requested I report back on those who voted against us.

The threats did not work, however, as the UN General Assembly overwhelmingly rejected Washington's unilateral recognition of the disputed city as Israeli capital.

Russia is 'never going to be our friend'

When it came to relations with Moscow, the top US diplomat just wasn't very diplomatic on many occasions, instead choosing to amplify Russophobic rhetoric put forth by Trump's opposition.

We don't trust Russia. We don't trust Putin. We never will. They're never going to be our friend. That's just a fact.

"They are aggressive and they can be difficult to work with in the Council... And they do try to cause some disruption, but we manage them and we continue to remind them what their place is."

FILE PHOTO: Haley laughing with her Russian counterpart at the UN Vassily Nebenzia © Reuters/Lucas Jackson

Haley was fully on board with accusations that Moscow meddled in the 2016 US election, calling them aggression on Russia's part. Election meddling, she said, is Russia's "weapon of choice and we have to make sure we get in front of it."

When a country can come interfere in another country's elections, that is warfare.

'Fight until they're gone'

The ambassador showed no sign of awareness that her comments about interference sounded ironic and hypocritical when placed next to some others she made – regarding places like Venezuela or Syria.

Last month, Haley joined Venezuelan protesters outside the UN headquarters in New York, shouting into the megaphone:

We are going to fight for Venezuela and we are going to continue doing it until [President Nicolas] Maduro is gone!

Haley takes part in Venezuelans' anti-Maduro protest in New York on September 27, 2018 © AFP/Jim Watson

The US envoy even showed hints of psychic powers, as she tried to downplay Russia's warnings that Western-backed terrorists were preparing a false flag chemical attack in Syria in order to set up Damascus. Gazing straight into the future, she appeared to point her finger at President Bashar Assad's government.

If there are chemical weapons that are used, we know exactly who's going to use them.

In July, the US stunned the international community by withdrawing from the UN Human Rights Council, and the American ambassador had some strong words to back the move.

Judging by how it has fallen short of its promise, the Human Rights Council is the UN's greatest failure. It has taken the idea of human dignity and it has reduced it to just another instrument of international politics.

"Its members included some of the worst human rights violators – the dictatorships of Cuba, China and Venezuela all have seats on the Council," Haley fumed.

Freedom fighters of Binomo

When dealing with other states, the US envoy tried her best to uphold an image of an expert on international affairs including on those nation that... well, didn't even exist.

In a scandalous YouTube recording made by two Russian pranksters, posing as a high-ranked Polish official, Haley was asked to comment on the aspirations of the nation of Binomo in the South China Sea.

We're aware of that. We've been watching that [Binomo situation] very closely. And I think we will continue to watch as we deal with the issues that keep coming up about the South China Sea.

She also said that Russia "absolutely" meddled in the country's election as well – a truly extraordinary achievement, given that Binomo was entirely made up.

[Oct 10, 2018] Nikki Haley Trump's Baghdad Bob by Harry J. Kazianis

She should leave directly after Binomo hoax...
Notable quotes:
"... Her biggest problem as UN ambassador was simple: she was totally out of her depth. ..."
Oct 10, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
Her biggest problem as UN ambassador was simple: she was totally out of her depth. "She was picked for UN Ambassador for one reason," explained a senior GOP political consultant to me, reacting to the news that Nikki Haley, the former governor of South Carolina, had just resigned from the Trump administration. "She was supposed to present a feminine, or supposedly softer version of Trump's America First message. Instead she became the administration's national security sledgehammer."

"Haley was a great spokesperson for the administration; in fact, she was great at parroting whatever lines Trump wanted her to deliver," the consultant continued. "But for anyone who has ever interacted with her, one thing became very clear. The second she left the land of talking points, any time she was asked to discuss any issue in any depth, it was apparent there was nothing there. And that is not what we need as ambassador at the UN."

Perhaps I can come up with a better description of Nikki Haley. She was Donald Trump's very own "Baghdad Bob," the propaganda chief under Saddam Hussein who appeared on TV during the 2003 Iraq invasion and said anything the regime wanted, no matter how inflammatory or wrong. While Haley was never forced to claim anything so preposterous as that Saddam's Republican Guard was winning a war against a superpower, her ability to trump even Trump in crazy talk was a rare talent -- and not a welcome one.

That was my problem with the ambassador. Not that she did a bad job, not that she was a terrible representative of our nation's interests, but simply that she lacked of the experience and natural abilities needed in such a role. Spitting back Trumpian rhetoric is not enough to be credible on the world's stage. It would be like asking me to become a plumber: sure, I could figure it out at some point, but I would leave behind quite a few clogged toilets and busted faucets along the way.

Haley left behind some busted faucets, that's for sure. If she did make any sort of major impression, it was thanks to her tough talk on North Korea and Iran. But it was her hard-hitting rhetoric leveled at the Kim regime that stuck out the most. In an almost comical attempt to parrot the words of President Trump, who in early September said at the UN that America "has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea," Haley stated in November that "if war comes, make no mistake, the North Korean regime will be utterly destroyed."

That's just for starters. There were also the clear missteps, when we could see her lack of expertise and preparation at work. In a primetime interview with Fox News nighttime anchor Martha MacCallum, Haley was asked about the 2018 Olympics and whether U.S. athletes would participate. North Korea experts knew this was the question that would have to be asked, and were keen to see what Haley would have to say.

She blew it, big time. The interview, conducted in January, at a time when some thought a war with the Kim regime was still very possible, drove headlines the world over, as Haley said she would not commit to U.S. citizens participating, stating, "there's an open question." MacCallum pounced on Twitter, and rightly so, writing that "Amb. Nikki Haley not certain we should send our athletes to the Olympics. Will depend on NK situation."

Now, to be fair to Haley, the remarks were more qualified than the press made them out to be. Still, they were confusing to say the least, and show that she was not ready for what was an obvious question. In fact, Haley seemed to stumble, adding, "I have not heard anything about that" and "I do know in the talks that we have -- whether it's Jerusalem or North Korea -- it's about, how do we protect the U.S. citizens in the area?"

Nikki Haley: The Bold Scold of the Trump Administration America Forfeits Its Influence at the UN

What? As another Republican put it to me just a day later: "She had no idea what the hell she was talking about."

Haley even scared some very senior diplomats, who wondered exactly what the administration was planning if Washington would not send its citizens or athletes to the Olympics. "Is America getting ready to attack North Korea? Is that where this is headed?" asked a senior diplomat here in Washington minutes after the interview was over.

I could go on, but I think you get my point. President Trump can do far better than Haley.

Harry J. Kazianis ( @grecianformula ) is director of defense studies at the Center for the National Interest and executive editor of its publishing arm The National Interest. Previously, he led the foreign policy communications efforts of the Heritage Foundation, and served as editor-in-chief of The Diplomat and as a fellow at CSIS:PACNET. The views expressed are his own.

[Oct 10, 2018] Report Nikki Haley Is Resigning by Daniel Larison

Notable quotes:
"... The Peter Principle is alive and well in the fractured U.S. governance model. ..."
"... Is there any advanced country on the planet with a political class saturated with so much mediocrity? ..."
"... BTW, the BoD scam is a standard political payoff. Susan Bayh the wife of former Senator Evan Bayh is a middling attorney who made over $2 Million a year flitting from BoD meeting to BoD meeting. Must be nice ..."
"... How did this woman move herself from the dignified, elected position of Governor to trump underling and Israeli bull horn? The things we do for greed! ..."
"... Good riddance. An embarrassment to US diplomacy. Her full throated echoing of Trump's stupidest and most destructive ideas should end her political career, especially coming on the heels of earlier denunciations of Trump. ..."
"... She leaves Turtle Bay with no achievements and the sound of jeering delegate laughter at the General Assembly still ringing in her ears. ..."
"... Out of her depth. Completely. ..."
Oct 08, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
NBC News reports that Nikki Haley will be resigning from her position as ambassador to the United Nations:

In an unexpected development, President Donald Trump's U.N. ambassador, Nikki Haley, plans to resign, NBC News has confirmed.

Haley informed her staff that she plans to resign. The news, first reported by Axios, comes ahead of an announcement she plans to make with President Donald Trump at the White House Tuesday morning.

Haley's tenure as U.N. ambassador was fairly brief and not very successful. The Security Council did approve additional North Korea sanctions during her time there. Otherwise, she was known mostly for ineffectively promoting the administration's Iran obsession , picking fights with most other states over Israel, and calling attention to how isolated the U.S. has become following the withdrawal from the JCPOA. Her last big effort at the U.N. was the Security Council session last month that was originally supposed to focus on criticizing Iran. The administration changed the subject of the meeting to nonproliferation, but that still allowed all of the other members to tout their support for the nuclear deal and criticize U.S. withdrawal from the agreement. If that was meant to be Haley's crowning achievement before she left, it didn't work out very well.

Trump's decision to appoint Haley to this position struck me as odd from the beginning. Haley had no diplomatic or foreign policy experience, and beyond the usual knee-jerk "pro-Israel" reactions she did not have any record of talking or thinking about foreign policy. It is taken for granted that she took the job to build up her credentials on foreign policy, but her stint as ambassador has been so short that I'm not sure that it will do her very much good in future political campaigns. When she was appointed, I said that "this may prove to be a rather fruitless detour for the next few years." Haley's resignation after less than two years in the job suggests that she concluded that there was no point in sticking around any longer.

gus October 9, 2018 at 11:09 am

The speculation I've seen, that after the election Trump fires Sessions, appoints Graham, and Haley gets appointed to Graham's Senate seat, makes a ton of sense. She'll be back, and she'll run for President someday, guaranteed.
G , says: October 9, 2018 at 11:26 am
One theory I've heard is that Nikki Haley was thought to be the top contender for a potential primary challenge to Trump in 2020 (if things didn't go well for the Trump administration). As you previously noted, she was a vocal critic of Donald Trump in the primaries (the President doesn't easily forgive or forget criticism). So she was dumped into the UN as a way to keep her from going rogue. The President doesn't like to see figures in his administration outshining him, so as she began to make a name for herself as being exceptionally tough on Iran, Trump kicked the legs out from under that policy directive and sent her to haplessly defend "non-proliferation".

End result? Two years have passed and Nikki Haley has no real accomplishment to show for it (Sad!), while at the same time by virtue of working within the Trump Administration, she's been effectively silenced for two years in her once-vocal criticism. Trump: 1, Haley 0.

SteveM , says: October 9, 2018 at 11:43 am
The Peter Principle is alive and well in the fractured U.S. governance model.

Of course when that Nitwit Hack transitions to the "private sector" she will be invited to sit on various BoD's to be a potted plant at Board meetings. And she will also live large from the remuneration for just showing up. And don't forget the honorary degrees Nikki will be awarded. It's like the Tin Man getting an honorary "Th.D", (Doctor of Thinkology) from the Wizard of Oz.

Is there any advanced country on the planet with a political class saturated with so much mediocrity?

BTW, the BoD scam is a standard political payoff. Susan Bayh the wife of former Senator Evan Bayh is a middling attorney who made over $2 Million a year flitting from BoD meeting to BoD meeting. Must be nice

rayray , says: October 9, 2018 at 11:52 am
Yeah, agreed with all of the above. Although it's unclear to me that anyone associated with the Trump administration will walk away with a leg up to seek higher office.

By virtue of most folks disinterest in foreign policy or the UN Haley may have the advantage over the others in the Trump administration. Getting out early is smart.

As for her lack of competence and knee-jerk Israel supporting bent this may not hurt her in the long run either with a GOP that has proven itself to be on a path of less and less competence, less and less integrity, and (one can only hope) less and less relevance.

PAX , says: October 9, 2018 at 12:47 pm
Well said. She is more the ambassador for Isreal than for America. One can only hope that Trump realizes this and appoints a diplomat with skills and an even keel. Hope he does not have Jared Kushner in mind?
Ninth and Hennepin , says: October 9, 2018 at 12:51 pm
The odd thing about Trump's appointment of Haley was *not* that she had virtually no record of talking or thinking about foreign policy.

It was that, unlike most of Trump's cabinet, she had no record of working to sabotage the very department she was appointed to lead.

Janet , says: October 9, 2018 at 1:12 pm
Wherever she ends up, it'll have to be someplace she can exercise her big mouth and small brain, because that's all she did at the UN.
swb , says: October 9, 2018 at 1:49 pm
It appears that an ethics inquiry into free rides on corporate jets has been requested.

https://www.businessinsider.com/nikki-haley-resign-investigation-flights-free-private-jets-2018-10

Just another day in the Trump administration.

One Guy , says: October 9, 2018 at 2:02 pm
There are stories that she accepted gifts she wasn't supposed to accept (no, not curtains). I think she resigned to head those off, as well as to be available for other positions that might open up (Senator? President?).

Whatever, it's just the latest in an unprecedented amount of people leaving this administration. If Trump only hires the best people, why do those smart people keep leaving him?

Talltale , says: October 9, 2018 at 2:47 pm
How did this woman move herself from the dignified, elected position of Governor to trump underling and Israeli bull horn? The things we do for greed!
One Guy , says: October 9, 2018 at 4:55 pm
Trump claims he knew about her leaving six months ago, but he hasn't lined up a replacement.

Or maybe he can't get anyone to accept the position who isn't an outright joke. Ted Nugent? Sarah Palin? Rudy Giuliani?

Ken T , says: October 9, 2018 at 5:09 pm
With regard to her possible 2020 WH run:

1. Yes, she has the Trump stench on her. But by resigning now she has two years to try to wash it off.

2. To a certain segment of the GOP base, being completely ineffectual at the UN will be seen as a feature, not a bug.

3. She has one huge advantage over some other potential rivals (Flake, for example) in that by not being in the Senate this past week she played no part in the Kavanaugh fiasco. Since she never had to vote on it, she can still try to play it both ways.

Bog Man , says: October 9, 2018 at 5:45 pm
Good riddance. An embarrassment to US diplomacy. Her full throated echoing of Trump's stupidest and most destructive ideas should end her political career, especially coming on the heels of earlier denunciations of Trump.

Instead, she'll be bankrolled by some rich Zionist creeps, a la Rubio, and turn up again in 2020 or 2024 offering to keep us bogged down in Middle East wars another four years.

belleville , says: October 9, 2018 at 7:03 pm
She leaves Turtle Bay with no achievements and the sound of jeering delegate laughter at the General Assembly still ringing in her ears.

After a year and a few months of failure and eye-rolling from UN colleagues, she knew that all that lay ahead was more of the same.

Out of her depth. Completely.

[Oct 10, 2018] Nikki Haley Trump's Baghdad Bob by Harry J. Kazianis

She should leave directly after Binomo hoax...
Notable quotes:
"... Her biggest problem as UN ambassador was simple: she was totally out of her depth. ..."
Oct 10, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
Her biggest problem as UN ambassador was simple: she was totally out of her depth. "She was picked for UN Ambassador for one reason," explained a senior GOP political consultant to me, reacting to the news that Nikki Haley, the former governor of South Carolina, had just resigned from the Trump administration. "She was supposed to present a feminine, or supposedly softer version of Trump's America First message. Instead she became the administration's national security sledgehammer."

"Haley was a great spokesperson for the administration; in fact, she was great at parroting whatever lines Trump wanted her to deliver," the consultant continued. "But for anyone who has ever interacted with her, one thing became very clear. The second she left the land of talking points, any time she was asked to discuss any issue in any depth, it was apparent there was nothing there. And that is not what we need as ambassador at the UN."

Perhaps I can come up with a better description of Nikki Haley. She was Donald Trump's very own "Baghdad Bob," the propaganda chief under Saddam Hussein who appeared on TV during the 2003 Iraq invasion and said anything the regime wanted, no matter how inflammatory or wrong. While Haley was never forced to claim anything so preposterous as that Saddam's Republican Guard was winning a war against a superpower, her ability to trump even Trump in crazy talk was a rare talent -- and not a welcome one.

That was my problem with the ambassador. Not that she did a bad job, not that she was a terrible representative of our nation's interests, but simply that she lacked of the experience and natural abilities needed in such a role. Spitting back Trumpian rhetoric is not enough to be credible on the world's stage. It would be like asking me to become a plumber: sure, I could figure it out at some point, but I would leave behind quite a few clogged toilets and busted faucets along the way.

Haley left behind some busted faucets, that's for sure. If she did make any sort of major impression, it was thanks to her tough talk on North Korea and Iran. But it was her hard-hitting rhetoric leveled at the Kim regime that stuck out the most. In an almost comical attempt to parrot the words of President Trump, who in early September said at the UN that America "has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea," Haley stated in November that "if war comes, make no mistake, the North Korean regime will be utterly destroyed."

That's just for starters. There were also the clear missteps, when we could see her lack of expertise and preparation at work. In a primetime interview with Fox News nighttime anchor Martha MacCallum, Haley was asked about the 2018 Olympics and whether U.S. athletes would participate. North Korea experts knew this was the question that would have to be asked, and were keen to see what Haley would have to say.

She blew it, big time. The interview, conducted in January, at a time when some thought a war with the Kim regime was still very possible, drove headlines the world over, as Haley said she would not commit to U.S. citizens participating, stating, "there's an open question." MacCallum pounced on Twitter, and rightly so, writing that "Amb. Nikki Haley not certain we should send our athletes to the Olympics. Will depend on NK situation."

Now, to be fair to Haley, the remarks were more qualified than the press made them out to be. Still, they were confusing to say the least, and show that she was not ready for what was an obvious question. In fact, Haley seemed to stumble, adding, "I have not heard anything about that" and "I do know in the talks that we have -- whether it's Jerusalem or North Korea -- it's about, how do we protect the U.S. citizens in the area?"

Nikki Haley: The Bold Scold of the Trump Administration America Forfeits Its Influence at the UN

What? As another Republican put it to me just a day later: "She had no idea what the hell she was talking about."

Haley even scared some very senior diplomats, who wondered exactly what the administration was planning if Washington would not send its citizens or athletes to the Olympics. "Is America getting ready to attack North Korea? Is that where this is headed?" asked a senior diplomat here in Washington minutes after the interview was over.

I could go on, but I think you get my point. President Trump can do far better than Haley.

Harry J. Kazianis ( @grecianformula ) is director of defense studies at the Center for the National Interest and executive editor of its publishing arm The National Interest. Previously, he led the foreign policy communications efforts of the Heritage Foundation, and served as editor-in-chief of The Diplomat and as a fellow at CSIS:PACNET. The views expressed are his own.

[Oct 10, 2018] Nikki Haley's shock resignation prompts various theories

Oct 10, 2018 | www.rt.com

Immediately after she resigned, Twitter lit up with theories and opinions about the reason, with many suggesting Haley could be the Trump administration official behind a highly critical anonymous op-ed published by the New York Times last month.

[Oct 10, 2018] Freedom fighters of Binomo and other notable quotes

Notable quotes:
"... "It was abusive, how bad the international community was to Israel. It reminded me of a kid being bullied in the playground I just wasn't going to have it. It was just so upsetting to see, that I just started yelling at everybody " ..."
"... We had the back of Israel, and if they were going to mess with Israel they had to mess with the US. ..."
"... As you consider your vote, I encourage you to know the president and the US take this vote personally. The president will be watching this vote carefully and has requested I report back on those who voted against us. ..."
"... We don't trust Russia. We don't trust Putin. We never will. They're never going to be our friend. That's just a fact. ..."
"... "They are aggressive and they can be difficult to work with in the Council... And they do try to cause some disruption, but we manage them and we continue to remind them what their place is." ..."
"... "weapon of choice and we have to make sure we get in front of it." ..."
"... When a country can come interfere in another country's elections, that is warfare. ..."
"... We are going to fight for Venezuela and we are going to continue doing it until [President Nicolas] Maduro is gone! ..."
"... If there are chemical weapons that are used, we know exactly who's going to use them. ..."
"... Judging by how it has fallen short of its promise, the Human Rights Council is the UN's greatest failure. It has taken the idea of human dignity and it has reduced it to just another instrument of international politics. ..."
"... "Its members included some of the worst human rights violators – the dictatorships of Cuba, China and Venezuela all have seats on the Council," ..."
"... We're aware of that. We've been watching that [Binomo situation] very closely. And I think we will continue to watch as we deal with the issues that keep coming up about the South China Sea. ..."
Oct 10, 2018 | www.rt.com

'Mess with Israel – you'll mess with US'

Israel seems to be most upset by Haley's resignation from her UN job, since the envoy for Washington often ended up championing Israeli interests at the world body. Statements like this one perfectly explain Tel Aviv's grief:

"It was abusive, how bad the international community was to Israel. It reminded me of a kid being bullied in the playground I just wasn't going to have it. It was just so upsetting to see, that I just started yelling at everybody "

We had the back of Israel, and if they were going to mess with Israel they had to mess with the US.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:
"I would like to thank Ambassador @nikkihaley , who led the uncompromising struggle against hypocrisy at the UN, and on behalf of the truth and justice of our country. Best of luck!" pic.twitter.com/Lr6IvkM5U9

-- PM of Israel (@IsraeliPM) October 9, 2018

The US envoy was also never shy to pressure the UN member states into voting the way Washington saw fit. The most notable example of such extortion was the vote on recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital last December.

As you consider your vote, I encourage you to know the president and the US take this vote personally. The president will be watching this vote carefully and has requested I report back on those who voted against us.

The threats did not work, however, as the UN General Assembly overwhelmingly rejected Washington's unilateral recognition of the disputed city as Israeli capital.

Russia is 'never going to be our friend'

When it came to relations with Moscow, the top US diplomat just wasn't very diplomatic on many occasions, instead choosing to amplify Russophobic rhetoric put forth by Trump's opposition.

We don't trust Russia. We don't trust Putin. We never will. They're never going to be our friend. That's just a fact.

"They are aggressive and they can be difficult to work with in the Council... And they do try to cause some disruption, but we manage them and we continue to remind them what their place is."

FILE PHOTO: Haley laughing with her Russian counterpart at the UN Vassily Nebenzia © Reuters/Lucas Jackson

Haley was fully on board with accusations that Moscow meddled in the 2016 US election, calling them aggression on Russia's part. Election meddling, she said, is Russia's "weapon of choice and we have to make sure we get in front of it."

When a country can come interfere in another country's elections, that is warfare.

'Fight until they're gone'

The ambassador showed no sign of awareness that her comments about interference sounded ironic and hypocritical when placed next to some others she made – regarding places like Venezuela or Syria.

Last month, Haley joined Venezuelan protesters outside the UN headquarters in New York, shouting into the megaphone:

We are going to fight for Venezuela and we are going to continue doing it until [President Nicolas] Maduro is gone!

Haley takes part in Venezuelans' anti-Maduro protest in New York on September 27, 2018 © AFP/Jim Watson

The US envoy even showed hints of psychic powers, as she tried to downplay Russia's warnings that Western-backed terrorists were preparing a false flag chemical attack in Syria in order to set up Damascus. Gazing straight into the future, she appeared to point her finger at President Bashar Assad's government.

If there are chemical weapons that are used, we know exactly who's going to use them.

In July, the US stunned the international community by withdrawing from the UN Human Rights Council, and the American ambassador had some strong words to back the move.

Judging by how it has fallen short of its promise, the Human Rights Council is the UN's greatest failure. It has taken the idea of human dignity and it has reduced it to just another instrument of international politics.

"Its members included some of the worst human rights violators – the dictatorships of Cuba, China and Venezuela all have seats on the Council," Haley fumed.

Freedom fighters of Binomo

When dealing with other states, the US envoy tried her best to uphold an image of an expert on international affairs including on those nation that... well, didn't even exist.

In a scandalous YouTube recording made by two Russian pranksters, posing as a high-ranked Polish official, Haley was asked to comment on the aspirations of the nation of Binomo in the South China Sea.

We're aware of that. We've been watching that [Binomo situation] very closely. And I think we will continue to watch as we deal with the issues that keep coming up about the South China Sea.

She also said that Russia "absolutely" meddled in the country's election as well – a truly extraordinary achievement, given that Binomo was entirely made up.

[Oct 10, 2018] Report Nikki Haley Is Resigning by Daniel Larison

Notable quotes:
"... The Peter Principle is alive and well in the fractured U.S. governance model. ..."
"... Is there any advanced country on the planet with a political class saturated with so much mediocrity? ..."
"... BTW, the BoD scam is a standard political payoff. Susan Bayh the wife of former Senator Evan Bayh is a middling attorney who made over $2 Million a year flitting from BoD meeting to BoD meeting. Must be nice ..."
"... How did this woman move herself from the dignified, elected position of Governor to trump underling and Israeli bull horn? The things we do for greed! ..."
"... Good riddance. An embarrassment to US diplomacy. Her full throated echoing of Trump's stupidest and most destructive ideas should end her political career, especially coming on the heels of earlier denunciations of Trump. ..."
"... She leaves Turtle Bay with no achievements and the sound of jeering delegate laughter at the General Assembly still ringing in her ears. ..."
"... Out of her depth. Completely. ..."
Oct 08, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
NBC News reports that Nikki Haley will be resigning from her position as ambassador to the United Nations:

In an unexpected development, President Donald Trump's U.N. ambassador, Nikki Haley, plans to resign, NBC News has confirmed.

Haley informed her staff that she plans to resign. The news, first reported by Axios, comes ahead of an announcement she plans to make with President Donald Trump at the White House Tuesday morning.

Haley's tenure as U.N. ambassador was fairly brief and not very successful. The Security Council did approve additional North Korea sanctions during her time there. Otherwise, she was known mostly for ineffectively promoting the administration's Iran obsession , picking fights with most other states over Israel, and calling attention to how isolated the U.S. has become following the withdrawal from the JCPOA. Her last big effort at the U.N. was the Security Council session last month that was originally supposed to focus on criticizing Iran. The administration changed the subject of the meeting to nonproliferation, but that still allowed all of the other members to tout their support for the nuclear deal and criticize U.S. withdrawal from the agreement. If that was meant to be Haley's crowning achievement before she left, it didn't work out very well.

Trump's decision to appoint Haley to this position struck me as odd from the beginning. Haley had no diplomatic or foreign policy experience, and beyond the usual knee-jerk "pro-Israel" reactions she did not have any record of talking or thinking about foreign policy. It is taken for granted that she took the job to build up her credentials on foreign policy, but her stint as ambassador has been so short that I'm not sure that it will do her very much good in future political campaigns. When she was appointed, I said that "this may prove to be a rather fruitless detour for the next few years." Haley's resignation after less than two years in the job suggests that she concluded that there was no point in sticking around any longer.

gus October 9, 2018 at 11:09 am

The speculation I've seen, that after the election Trump fires Sessions, appoints Graham, and Haley gets appointed to Graham's Senate seat, makes a ton of sense. She'll be back, and she'll run for President someday, guaranteed.
G , says: October 9, 2018 at 11:26 am
One theory I've heard is that Nikki Haley was thought to be the top contender for a potential primary challenge to Trump in 2020 (if things didn't go well for the Trump administration). As you previously noted, she was a vocal critic of Donald Trump in the primaries (the President doesn't easily forgive or forget criticism). So she was dumped into the UN as a way to keep her from going rogue. The President doesn't like to see figures in his administration outshining him, so as she began to make a name for herself as being exceptionally tough on Iran, Trump kicked the legs out from under that policy directive and sent her to haplessly defend "non-proliferation".

End result? Two years have passed and Nikki Haley has no real accomplishment to show for it (Sad!), while at the same time by virtue of working within the Trump Administration, she's been effectively silenced for two years in her once-vocal criticism. Trump: 1, Haley 0.

SteveM , says: October 9, 2018 at 11:43 am
The Peter Principle is alive and well in the fractured U.S. governance model.

Of course when that Nitwit Hack transitions to the "private sector" she will be invited to sit on various BoD's to be a potted plant at Board meetings. And she will also live large from the remuneration for just showing up. And don't forget the honorary degrees Nikki will be awarded. It's like the Tin Man getting an honorary "Th.D", (Doctor of Thinkology) from the Wizard of Oz.

Is there any advanced country on the planet with a political class saturated with so much mediocrity?

BTW, the BoD scam is a standard political payoff. Susan Bayh the wife of former Senator Evan Bayh is a middling attorney who made over $2 Million a year flitting from BoD meeting to BoD meeting. Must be nice

rayray , says: October 9, 2018 at 11:52 am
Yeah, agreed with all of the above. Although it's unclear to me that anyone associated with the Trump administration will walk away with a leg up to seek higher office.

By virtue of most folks disinterest in foreign policy or the UN Haley may have the advantage over the others in the Trump administration. Getting out early is smart.

As for her lack of competence and knee-jerk Israel supporting bent this may not hurt her in the long run either with a GOP that has proven itself to be on a path of less and less competence, less and less integrity, and (one can only hope) less and less relevance.

PAX , says: October 9, 2018 at 12:47 pm
Well said. She is more the ambassador for Isreal than for America. One can only hope that Trump realizes this and appoints a diplomat with skills and an even keel. Hope he does not have Jared Kushner in mind?
Ninth and Hennepin , says: October 9, 2018 at 12:51 pm
The odd thing about Trump's appointment of Haley was *not* that she had virtually no record of talking or thinking about foreign policy.

It was that, unlike most of Trump's cabinet, she had no record of working to sabotage the very department she was appointed to lead.

Janet , says: October 9, 2018 at 1:12 pm
Wherever she ends up, it'll have to be someplace she can exercise her big mouth and small brain, because that's all she did at the UN.
swb , says: October 9, 2018 at 1:49 pm
It appears that an ethics inquiry into free rides on corporate jets has been requested.

https://www.businessinsider.com/nikki-haley-resign-investigation-flights-free-private-jets-2018-10

Just another day in the Trump administration.

One Guy , says: October 9, 2018 at 2:02 pm
There are stories that she accepted gifts she wasn't supposed to accept (no, not curtains). I think she resigned to head those off, as well as to be available for other positions that might open up (Senator? President?).

Whatever, it's just the latest in an unprecedented amount of people leaving this administration. If Trump only hires the best people, why do those smart people keep leaving him?

Talltale , says: October 9, 2018 at 2:47 pm
How did this woman move herself from the dignified, elected position of Governor to trump underling and Israeli bull horn? The things we do for greed!
One Guy , says: October 9, 2018 at 4:55 pm
Trump claims he knew about her leaving six months ago, but he hasn't lined up a replacement.

Or maybe he can't get anyone to accept the position who isn't an outright joke. Ted Nugent? Sarah Palin? Rudy Giuliani?

Ken T , says: October 9, 2018 at 5:09 pm
With regard to her possible 2020 WH run:

1. Yes, she has the Trump stench on her. But by resigning now she has two years to try to wash it off.

2. To a certain segment of the GOP base, being completely ineffectual at the UN will be seen as a feature, not a bug.

3. She has one huge advantage over some other potential rivals (Flake, for example) in that by not being in the Senate this past week she played no part in the Kavanaugh fiasco. Since she never had to vote on it, she can still try to play it both ways.

Bog Man , says: October 9, 2018 at 5:45 pm
Good riddance. An embarrassment to US diplomacy. Her full throated echoing of Trump's stupidest and most destructive ideas should end her political career, especially coming on the heels of earlier denunciations of Trump.

Instead, she'll be bankrolled by some rich Zionist creeps, a la Rubio, and turn up again in 2020 or 2024 offering to keep us bogged down in Middle East wars another four years.

belleville , says: October 9, 2018 at 7:03 pm
She leaves Turtle Bay with no achievements and the sound of jeering delegate laughter at the General Assembly still ringing in her ears.

After a year and a few months of failure and eye-rolling from UN colleagues, she knew that all that lay ahead was more of the same.

Out of her depth. Completely.

[Oct 09, 2018] The Skripals Are an MI6 Hoax - 'Not Worthy of Ladies' Detective Novels' - Israeli Expert Demolishes UK Case

Highly recommended!
Oct 09, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Very convincing. This Israeli expert blows up the UK's narrative in a few well-chosen one-liners.

"If the GRU acted, both the killers and the other participants in the operation would come to the UK on the passports of other countries that have visa-free relations with it. Here, two alleged GRU officers go to the embassy, ​​leave their fingerprints there, get a visa, stop at the hotel, pass under all the cells. This you will not find even in ladies' detective novels."

An Israeli expert on international terrorism, writer Alexander Brass, shared his view on the case of the Skripals poisoning in Salisbury. Brass draws parallels between the work of the special services of Israel and Russia – he believes that if to compare the British version with the practice of the special agents, then the absurdity becomes obvious.

"Alexander, so what, in your opinion, happened in Salisbury?"

-There was a rough provocation by the British special services. In my opinion, this is obvious.

"There's a lot of stupidity on stupidity." The story with Petrov and Boshirov does not hold up any professional peer review. According to the Brits, the Skripals were poisoned by GRU agents (this is what the department is called, although this is now the Main Directorate of the RF General Staff).

I want to explain how the special services work. If you need someone to eliminate, then this is a very serious operation, which is being prepared for a long time. A very significant material and human resource is allocated. We are talking about dozens of employees. On the territory of this state, an "advanced command post" is being created.

In the operation, a technical support group, a logistic group, a cover group, an external surveillance group and a group of performers are involved.

The performers themselves appear at the very last moment. They do not go anywhere, lighting up on cameras, do not use public transport, but move on rented cars, which they do not rent themselves. And the more they will not stop in hotels, but will live on safe houses provided by the logistics group.

Such groups do not come under the passport of their country, do not go to the embassy for obtaining a visa, leaving fingerprints. This is complete nonsense. Professionals do not work that way.

If the GRU acted, both the killers and the other participants in the operation would come to the UK on the passports of other countries that have visa-free relations with it. Here, two alleged GRU officers go to the embassy, ​​leave their fingerprints there, get a visa, stop at the hotel, pass under all the cells. This you will not find even in ladies' detective novels.

[Oct 09, 2018] The Skripals Are an MI6 Hoax - 'Not Worthy of Ladies' Detective Novels' - Israeli Expert Demolishes UK Case

Highly recommended!
Oct 09, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Very convincing. This Israeli expert blows up the UK's narrative in a few well-chosen one-liners.

"If the GRU acted, both the killers and the other participants in the operation would come to the UK on the passports of other countries that have visa-free relations with it. Here, two alleged GRU officers go to the embassy, ​​leave their fingerprints there, get a visa, stop at the hotel, pass under all the cells. This you will not find even in ladies' detective novels."

An Israeli expert on international terrorism, writer Alexander Brass, shared his view on the case of the Skripals poisoning in Salisbury. Brass draws parallels between the work of the special services of Israel and Russia – he believes that if to compare the British version with the practice of the special agents, then the absurdity becomes obvious.

"Alexander, so what, in your opinion, happened in Salisbury?"

-There was a rough provocation by the British special services. In my opinion, this is obvious.

"There's a lot of stupidity on stupidity." The story with Petrov and Boshirov does not hold up any professional peer review. According to the Brits, the Skripals were poisoned by GRU agents (this is what the department is called, although this is now the Main Directorate of the RF General Staff).

I want to explain how the special services work. If you need someone to eliminate, then this is a very serious operation, which is being prepared for a long time. A very significant material and human resource is allocated. We are talking about dozens of employees. On the territory of this state, an "advanced command post" is being created.

In the operation, a technical support group, a logistic group, a cover group, an external surveillance group and a group of performers are involved.

The performers themselves appear at the very last moment. They do not go anywhere, lighting up on cameras, do not use public transport, but move on rented cars, which they do not rent themselves. And the more they will not stop in hotels, but will live on safe houses provided by the logistics group.

Such groups do not come under the passport of their country, do not go to the embassy for obtaining a visa, leaving fingerprints. This is complete nonsense. Professionals do not work that way.

If the GRU acted, both the killers and the other participants in the operation would come to the UK on the passports of other countries that have visa-free relations with it. Here, two alleged GRU officers go to the embassy, ​​leave their fingerprints there, get a visa, stop at the hotel, pass under all the cells. This you will not find even in ladies' detective novels.

[Oct 09, 2018] US Russia Sanctions Are 'A Colossal Strategic Mistake', Putin Warns

Oct 09, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Russian President Vladimir Putin accused Washington of making a "colossal" but "typical" mistake by exploiting the dominance of the dollar by levying economic sanctions against regimes that don't bow to its whims.

"It seems to me that our American partners make a colossal strategic mistake," Putin said.

"This is a typical mistake of any empire," Putin said, explaining that the US is ignoring the consequences of its actions because its economy is strong and the dollar's hegemonic grasp on global markets remains intact. However "the consequences come sooner or later."

These remarks echoed a sentiment expressed by Putin back in May, when he said that Russia can no longer trust the US dollar because of America's decisions to impose unilateral sanctions and violate WTO rules.

... ... ...

With the possibility of being cut off from the dollar system looming, a plan prepared by Andrei Kostin, the head of Russian bank VTB, is being embraced by much of the Russian establishment. Kostin's plan would facilitate the conversion of dollar settlements into other currencies which would help wean Russian industries off the dollar. And it already has the backing of Russia's finance ministry, central bank and Putin.

Meanwhile, the Kremlin is also working on deals with major trading partners to accept the Russian ruble for imports and exports.

In a sign that a united front is forming to help undermine the dollar, Russia's efforts have been readily embraced by China and Turkey, which is unsurprising, given their increasingly fraught relationships with the US. During joint military exercises in Vladivostok last month, Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping declared that their countries would work together to counter US tariffs and sanctions.

"More and more countries, not only in the east but also in Europe, are beginning to think about how to minimise dependence on the US dollar," said Dmitry Peskov, Mr Putin's spokesperson. "And they suddenly realise that a) it is possible, b) it needs to be done and c) you can save yourself if you do it sooner."

[Oct 09, 2018] Why the US empire now after several years of desprate pressure of oil prices down is now content with the possibility of dramatic increase in oil prices ?

Oct 09, 2018 | thesaker.is

Outlaw Historian on October 03, 2018 , · at 2:27 pm EST/EDT

You would have to wonder why Putin opened with the following remarks if you were ignorant of the global situation:

"You came here to hold an open and trust based discussion on the issues of the global energy agenda .

"We believe that progress in global energy, as well as the stable energy security of our entire planet, can only be achieved through global partnership, working in accordance with general rules that are the same for everyone, and, of course, through conducting transparent and constructive dialogue among market players which is not politically motivated but is based on pragmatic considerations and an understanding of shared responsibilities and mutual interests." [My Emphasis]

His characterization of Skripal came during the Q&A, and there are likely more gems to be had from that session.

Meanwhile, the Outlaw US Empire has unilaterally withdrawn from a 1955 Treaty with Iran in order to try and avoid today's judgement of the International Court of Justice, https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201810031068561238-us-missions-iraq-threat-iran-pompeo/ and from the optional protocol on disputes to the Vienna convention, https://sputniknews.com/world/201810031068565352-vienna-convention-option-protocol-us-withdrawal/

Waging Illegal Aggressive War, Illegal sanctions, Violations of UNSC Resolutions, Breaking of Contracts, and Ongoing violation of the UN Charter and US Constitution since 1945 are just a few of the reasons why it must be called the Outlaw US Empire as no other term properly describes it. 80 years ago, appeasement didn't work, and it's clear it doesn't work today either. Together the world's nations must bring the Outlaw US Empire to heel and make it obey the Rule of Law and abandon its unilateral Rule of the Gun.

Anonymous on October 03, 2018 , · at 5:31 pm EST/EDT
Ah, there it is. The reason behind this strange week, the dots that few will connect.

Putin speaking at a conference about "sustainable energy in a changing world."

Right there, two phrases that are certain to set off Exxon corp and their puppets in the political theater. Say "sustainable energy" around an oil giant and watch them shudder. The, mention "changing world" to any of that class and they have nightmares about their children having to learn Chinese. Put them all together in one title of a conference at which Putin himself is speaking and well, now we know why the Shakespearian chorus of Exxon's oil industry bit players like former Texas Governor Rich "the hair" Perry and former Texas Senator Hutchinson are suddenly frothing at the bit about the Park Rangers mounting a naval blockade of Russia (see Yogi Bear for how that's likely to turn out, hey booboo?) and nuclear first strikes on Russia.

Putin, Sustainable Energy, Changing world .. enough to send some senior executive geezers at Exxon grabbing for their nitro pills and speed dialing their cardiologists.

Dr. NG Maroudas on October 04, 2018 , · at 5:49 am EST/EDT
For those who like to call Russia "a gas station masquerading as a country" here is Putin's note on ecology:

"A separate ambitious task for the future is the development of renewable energy sources, especially in remote, difficult-to-access areas of this country, such as Eastern Siberia, and the Far East. This is opening a great opportunity for our vast country, the world's largest country with its diverse natural and climatic conditions.

Friends, in conclusion I would like to tell you the following: sustainable and steady development of the energy industry is a key condition for dynamic growth of the world economy, enhancing living standards and improving the wellbeing of all people on our planet.

Russia is open to cooperation in the energy industry in the interests of global energy security and for the benefit of the future generations. And we certainly rely on active dialogue on these subjects and cooperation.

Thank you for your attention". -- President Putin

milan on October 05, 2018 , · at 9:30 pm EST/EDT
Nothing is going to save us from our energy problems, nothing and especially not renewables.

Spend some time reading and studying Gail Tverberg's material and one will quickly see we are heading for a financial catastrophe because of affordability issues. On the one hand there isn't enough money to pay for extraction of oil and gas and on the other the consumer is strapped because of high pump prices etc. But like she herself says if only the wages of non elite workers could rise high enough to help pay for the increased costs then likely we wouldn't have a problem. That though is clearly not happening.

I am deeply afraid we are going to wake up to a world very different from the one we went to sleep in. Just this one article alone expresses the grave situation the world is in:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-15/truckers-asleep-at-the-wheel-as-diesel-price-shock-creeps-closer

Every time Chuck Paar makes the over 500-mile round trip from his home in Mt. Jewett, Pennsylvania, to Buffalo and Syracuse, New York, his 18-wheel tractor trailer carries 25 tons of sand or cement and burns about $265 of diesel in one day. That's up from as little as $166 for the same route two years ago, and the increased cost of fuel is squeezing already thin industry profit margins.

It's about to get worse.

[Oct 09, 2018] Some suggest that the British find it useful to paint an ongoing story for the public of Russian depravity and duplicity. If that were the case, why paint Russia as the gang that couldn't shoot straight - too inept to constitute a serious threat?

Notable quotes:
"... As many, including Murray have pointed out, the story the UK is telling displays none of the tradecraft that one would expect from a sophisticated intelligence service. ..."
Oct 09, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

smoke , 9 hours ago

So little about the mutating, public narrative makes sense, including motive, whether Russian or British. Some suggest that the British find it useful to paint an ongoing story for the public of Russian depravity and duplicity. If that were the case, why paint Russia as the gang that couldn't shoot straight - too inept to constitute a serious threat?

As many, including Murray have pointed out, the story the UK is telling displays none of the tradecraft that one would expect from a sophisticated intelligence service.

[Oct 09, 2018] During the attack on Serbia, US flew more than 90% of NATO missions and it managed to destroy three missile batteries and one radar station (using HARM)

Notable quotes:
"... Thanks to media, to this day very few people in the West know that towards the end of the 78-day war, US and UK deliberately targeted several completely civilian facilities (bridges, hospitals and schools) and in just a few days of such targeting killed about 200 civilians. ..."
Oct 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

Kiza says: October 7, 2018 at 7:50 am GMT 500 Words @Quartermaster I am not going to insult you personally, but as a cheap paid troll you have absolutely no clue about the subject you are typing about for your Israeli masters. FB has not explained everything perfectly but what he wrote is correct. It is not true that an airforce would target radar installations only with HARM missiles, which all NATO countries and Israel have, but in practice HARM are the only missiles to reliably target mobile air defence. During the attack on Serbia, US flew more than 90% of NATO missions and it managed to destroy three missile batteries and one radar station (using HARM). But the mobility of the Serbian immobile air defences had two major effects:
1) Unlike Iraq, Serbia let NATO bomb targets without always switching on its air defences to be detected and destroyed; this grossly reduced NATOs air effectiveness because with every bomber they had to constantly send at least one support plane with jammers, HARMs etc. NATO tried to claim a virtue out of this by saying that they were soft on Serbia and will get tougher, but in reality their military attack was becoming difficult to manage, expensive and risky (the NATO unity was beginning to fray).
2) It was a running joke in Serbia how NATO planes would attack some completely empty hill (Serbia is a relatively hilly country), create literally free fireworks for the villagers, just because there was an air defense installation on the hill maybe 5-10 hours ago. A similar joke was how the Serbian military or even the local villagers would spread a strip of black builders plastic over a river and NATO planes flying at above 5 km to avoid manpads would blast this $2 bridge with $200,000 worth of bombs (adding mission cost to the cost of bombs).

Regarding US F117, it was more "stealth" than F35 and similar stealth to the smaller F22, but the Serbians used the Checkoslovakian TAMARA passive radar, using ionospheric scatter, and also launched multiple operator guided missiles at F117 without a proper engagement radar to be HARMed. Self-confident in stealth the pilots of F117 did not manoeuvre, thus it was easy to predict their path even without the targeting and engagement radar.

Forcing US to retire F117 was the second costliest damage the Serbians have done (Lockheed did not cry, through their lobbyists they turned the loss into an opportunity to sell more rubbish). But the biggest cost to US was that Milosevic sold several unexploded cruise missiles and all F117 parts to China and used the money to rebuild and repair all civilian buildings in Serbia destroyed by NATO. Later, UK and US did a colour revolution in Serbia, got their hands on Milosevic, who then died from a health "accident" in NATO jail.

Kiza , says: October 7, 2018 at 8:16 am GMT

@Cyrano You are spot-on. The Serbian military fought NATO to a draw, proven by the fact that the peace treaty signed in Kumanovo in FYRM, did not contain the Rambouye clauses and even left Kosovo under Serbian jurisdiction as per UNSC 1244.

Even this military draw was forced on Serbia by increased bombardment of civilian targets in Serbia combined with open threats of carpet bombing by US B57. Serbia is a fairly densely populated country, no jungles to hide in as in Vietnam. The civilian targets were bombed to show that they could do carpet bombing with impunity (with the help of MSM). Thanks to media, to this day very few people in the West know that towards the end of the 78-day war, US and UK deliberately targeted several completely civilian facilities (bridges, hospitals and schools) and in just a few days of such targeting killed about 200 civilians.

Naturally, any agreements with the West are totally pointless. After the Kumanovo agreement, US and UK organized a color revolution in Serbia, took Kosovo away and got their Serbian puppets to agree to all Rambouye demands. Serbia did not lose the war, but it lost the agreement peace with the West.

FB , says: October 8, 2018 at 5:03 pm GMT
@Kiza

' to my knowledge the Serbians did not use a radiating radar to shoot-down one/two F117. They used a passive radar, which does not emit at all, it only receives a rough and noisy location of the stealth plane '

This is complete nonsense once again you choose to pontificate on things in which you have no knowledge

In your earlier comment, you identified this 'passive radar' allegedly used by the Serbs as the Czech 'Tamara' system which the Serbs did not possess

Not only that but this kind of system is not used for guiding SAM shots, and is certainly not any kind of 'anti-stealth' weapon this category of device is known as an emitter locator system [ELS], and is used to listen in on radio emissions from hostile aircraft and to then track them, by means of a number of geometrically deployed antennas that can then triangulate the bearing and direction of the aircraft

However, the basic physics involved means that these emitter locators are effective at tracking signals OTHER THAN the aircraft's onboard radar this would include the IFF [identification friend or foe transponder signal] and other onboard radio emitters which are OMNIDIRECTIONAL emitters

An aircraft radar's narrow pencil beam could not reach multiple [at least 2] ELS antenna [which would be geographically dispersed] to provide the needed triangulation

Once again Dr Carlo Kopp provides an excellent technical overview of ELS systems here

' A topic which appears to crop up with monotonous regularity [is] Warsaw Pact equipment "capable of detecting stealth aircraft".

These claims invariably involve either the Czech designed and built Tesla-Pardubice KRTP-86 Tamara or ERA Vera Emitter Locating Systems, or the Ukrainian designed and built Topaz Kolchuga series of Emitter Locating Systems.

More than often this equipment is described as 'anti-stealth radar', 'radar' or 'passive radar', all of which are completely incorrect.

Much of everything else you have farted out here regarding the Serb takedown of the F117 is similar bullshit

The 3′rd battery of the 250′th Air Defense missile Brigade, commanded by then Lt Col Zoltan Dani killed both F117s [the second one made it back to Aviano, Italy but was scrapped, as USAF Col Riccioni confirms in his F22 report I linked to earlier] as well as the kill on the F16 of then 555′th squadron Commander, then Lt Col David Goldfein, who, since 2016 happens to be Gen Goldfein and the USAF Chief of Staff

Here is Goldfein's F16 canopy and tail feathers on display at the Belgrade Aviation Museum

Incidentally, Col Riccioni mentions in that same report that Goldfein was doing 'other than what he was supposed to be doing' when shot down I guess in today's USAF that means you have the 'right stuff' to become The Chief

Also incidentally, the Goldfein kill was overseen by Col Dani's Deputy Maj Bosko Dotlic, as Col Dani was off duty at the time

The point is that that one single S125 battery accounted for ALL the confirmed kills of the Serb IADS in 1999 [although there are many more 'probable' kills that either ditched in the Adriatic, or limped back but were scrapped]

This speaks to my earlier point about human competence and the 'hawks' and 'doves' just like a small fraction of fighter pilots rack up the overwhelming majority of kills the same goes for air defense commanders, submarine captains, tank commanders etc

You have spewed here a whole lot of garbage about 'secret' anti-stealth weapons and 'lucky shots' etc which is a complete insult to the historical record and the great work by Col Dani and his men and to the entire principle of working and training hard to achieve professional competence in a military skill

Here is a picture of the side of the 3′rd Battery Command Cabin, with Three kills stenciled in the F117 [black] on top a B2 [not confirmed] and Goldfein's F16 in white at bottom

The battery used the standard SNR125 'Low Blow' engagement radar [1960s vintage technology] which operates at 9 GHz, so it is NOT a low-frequency radar proving that low frequency is not necessary to take out 'stealth' aircraft

As per standard Russian air defense design doctrine, the S125 uses a separate acquisition and tracking radar which DOES operate at a lower frequency in this case the P15 'Flat Face' which operates in the decimetric wavelength band [which is similar to ATC radar frequency of about 1.2 to 1.4 GHz...ie L band]

As explained previously the acquisition radar serves to find and track the target at long range and cues the engagement radar to scan a precise sector where the acquisition radar has found the target the engagement radar's increased precision [due to its higher frequency and antenna size] then provides pinpoint accuracy to guide the missile

It is this combination of separate radars working together that allows the targeting of low observable aircraft and what the 3′rd Battery did was a textbook example of using the equipment to its full potential despite the fact that this old radar technology was in fact susceptible to jamming, which the Nato forces employed massively

Col Dani also trained his men hard to be able to disassemble their radar and launchers within 90 minutes and load everything up on trucks and move to another location he also exercised strict discipline with regard to emissions allowing the radar to be turned on only for very short bursts at a time about a minute or two at most

This is all textbook Soviet operating procedure and the difference was the exceptional work ethic and competence that Col Dani maintained in his unit

It should be noted here that the Serb air defense was in fact very successful overall war is a game of survival and attrition and what the Serbs accomplished was noted by air combat practitioners

'The air campaign over Kosovo severely affected the readiness rates of the United States Air Force's Air Combat Command during that period. Units in the United States were the most badly affected, as they were were stripped of their personnel and spare parts to support ACC (Air Combat Command) and AMC (Air Mobility Command) units involved in Operation Allied Force.

The Commander of the USAF's Air Combat Command, General Richard E Hawley, outlined this in a speech to reporters on 29 April, 1999.[10] Further, many aircraft will have to be replaced earlier than previously planned, as their planned fatigue life was prematurely expended.

PGM inventories needed to be re-stocked, the warstock of the AGM-86C Conventional Air-Launched Cruise Missile dropping to 100 or fewer rounds.[11] Of the more than 25,000 bombs and missiles expended, nearly 8,500 were PGMs, with the replacement cost estimated at $US1.3 billion.[12]

Thus the USAF suffered from virtual attrition of its air force without having scored a large number of kills in theatre. Even if the United States' best estimates of Serbian casualties are used, the Serbians left Kosovo with a large part of their armoured forces intact.

–Andrew Martin RAAF [retired]

Incidentally, several years ago the downed USAF pilot Col Dale Zelko, traveled to Serbia to visit the man who shot him down Col Dani a film The Second Meeting was made here is a trailer

PS I will have more to say later, as you have littered this thread with all kinds of technically incorrect crapola

Vojkan , says: October 9, 2018 at 12:25 am GMT
@Johnny Rico NATO failed to defeat the Yugoslav army so NATO targeted Serbian civilians. You have suffered far more losses than you acknowledge so you started killing women and children. You rained the main marked and the main hospital of my hometown with cluster bombs. That's why Serbia accepted UN resolution 1244 and the Kumanovo agreement. Given the ultimatum in Rambouillet, that's not what I would call a capitulation. The only reason Serbia signed was because you threatened to mass murder Serbian civilians. Why would you threaten to massacre civilians if you had so soundly defeated the Yugoslav army? Never have so many American military died during training exercises than during the aggression against Serbia. We consider you to be shit at war. Extremely armed fags who pee in their pants when they face opposition. But believe what you want.
Vojkan , says: October 9, 2018 at 12:44 am GMT
@Kiza The Russians failed to defend Serbia in 1999. That's the Serbian approach.
Why on Earth would Russians defend Serbs who only remember "Russian" brothers when they're in dire straits?
Why would the Russian "love" us more than we "love" them? What is their interest? Because Serbs love "Tolstoevsky"?
Don't blame the Russian for Serbian failures. In true love as in a true contract, you have to give in order to take. Russia has given us a lot with no expectance of return. If she expected anything, we have given her nothing. We aren't Russia's spoiled child.
peterAUS , says: October 9, 2018 at 12:55 am GMT
@Vojkan

NATO failed to defeat the Yugoslav army so NATO targeted Serbian civilians.

Actually, they started to target civilian infrastructure. The objective was to intimidate the regime in Belgrade into surrender by pushing the country towards stone age.

I guess you could be onto something here:

You have suffered far more losses than you acknowledge .

and

Never have so many American military died during training exercises than during the aggression against Serbia.

As for

That's why Serbia accepted UN resolution 1244 and the Kumanovo agreement.

there was a little matter of Russia guaranteeing something too, I guess. While the drunkard was in the Kremlin.

Perceptions aside (Argentinians still believe they sank Royal Navy aircraft carrier in '82, for example) NATO delivered what its political masters wanted at the time.
Serbs lost .BADLY.

That's all what matters, really.

Beefcake the Mighty , says: October 9, 2018 at 1:43 am GMT
@Vojkan Yes. It's pretty much standard American practice to bomb civilian infrastructure immediately, regardless of the degree of resistance put up by the opposing military.
Cyrano , says: October 9, 2018 at 1:48 am GMT
@Vojkan I don't mean to interfere in inter-Serbian squabble, but I'll volunteer an opinion anyway. I think you are exaggerating what Russia has done for Serbia for example. How so? As a proud Balkaneer ( I am exaggerating here a little bit myself – the proud part) I have to say that we in the Balkans have always benefited from the simple fact that usually Russia's enemies are our enemies too, so when Russia takes care of their enemies, they automatically take care of our enemies too.

But I don't think that the Russians would necessarily put their neck on the line for the Balkan Slavs to defend them against enemies that are not their enemies as well. So, unfortunately for Serbia, that equation didn't work for them in the 90's – simply put – Serbia's enemies were not automatically Russia's enemies too. Russia was still trying to be friends with the west. I forgot who it was, but some prominent Russian politician at the time said: "We are not going to start nuclear war with US over Serbia".

But it seems that Serbia is always the canary in the mine – whenever someone attacks Serbia – Russia is next. That's why that buffoon Yeltsin had to go. Friendship with the west was over the moment they attacked Yugoslavia (Serbia). Now the Russia didn't start a nuclear war over Serbia, but they still might have to – to defend themselves, and as always Serbia will benefit from this – if anything is left over from this world after things go nuclear.

Vojkan , says: October 9, 2018 at 1:54 am GMT
@peterAUS Serbs did lose badly. Albeit not on the battlefield. Though there never was a real battlefield.
I have no reason to doubt the accounts of my friends in the military who sought in the rare conversations I've had with them on the subject, to humble down their achievements.
I believe Russians capitalised on the Serb's defeat. I can't blame them for that. No one is responsible for what happened to Serbs, as it happened, but Serbs. They're so keen on making the wrong decisions for the sake of appearing glorious, you can't blame the devil for that. It's their informed choice
Vojkan , says: October 9, 2018 at 2:09 am GMT
@Beefcake the Mighty To be fair, they only did it after they realised that the Serb military were too smart to be depleted by aerial bombardment and that in order to defeat them, you'd have to fight them on the ground. That's why NATO bombarded civilians. On a man to man basis, Serbs and Russians are the best soldiers in the world. No navy seal, no marine, no SAS can match them. Fighting for their homes gives them the little bit of adrenaline needed to prevail.
Vojkan , says: October 9, 2018 at 2:40 am GMT
@Cyrano My point was never "Russians" are our brothers. My point is, whatever cultural, religious or blood affinity I have with the Russians, they have their interests and we have ours. I cannot expect of Russians to defend Serbia for "ses beaux yeaux". The same goes the other way around. To some people Russia has "betrayed" Serbia, to some other Serbia has "betrayed" Russia. Yet the West sees us as one whole, Russia and little "Russia". I didn't ask myself before but now I love Russia infinetely more than the West. Russia has asked me nothing, has given me nothing and is expecting nothing from me.
If we can have a mutually beneficial relationship with Russia, great. We will never have that with the USA or the UK or Germany or France. They're guilty of the spoilation of Serbs' lives and private properties. Russians never spoiled Serbs of anything.

[Oct 09, 2018] How to Maliciously Smear Your Critics (and Not Get Away with It) by C.J. Hopkins

Notable quotes:
"... focus as much attention on the tactics and the motives of the smearers as possible ..."
Oct 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

Because that is precisely how the smear game works. The way it works is, the smearers bait the smearee into defending himself against the defamatory content of the smears. Once the smearee has done that, the smearers have him. From then on, the focus of the debate becomes whether or not the smears are accurate, rather than why he's being smeared, how he's being smeared, and who is smearing him .

This is the smearers' primary objective, i.e., to establish the boundaries of the debate, and to trap the target of the smears within them. If you've followed the fake "Labour Anti-Semitism" scandal, you've witnessed this tactic deployed against Corbyn , who unfortunately fell right into the trap and gave the smearers the upper hand.

No, the only way to effectively counter a smear campaign (whether large-scale or small-scale), is to resist the temptation to profess your innocence, and, instead, focus as much attention on the tactics and the motives of the smearers as possible . It is difficult to resist this temptation, especially when the people smearing you have significantly more power and influence than you do, and are calling you a racist and an anti-Semite, but, trust me, the moment you start defending yourself, the game is over, and the smearers have won.

Peasant , says: October 1, 2018 at 2:20 pm GMT

@Justsaying The evidence is that before Cockburn died Counterpunch would routinely publish articles which were basically honest about Israel (ie not terribly flattering) and now does not (as it states in the article above viewpoints of the extreme left and right ie genuine critique will not be tolerated so only critique from inside established paradigms will be allowed-just like every other media outlet).

Counterpunch used to be outside of the Jewish paradigm (ie it was genuinely leftist) but now will be just another gelded publication. Cockburn did a good job of fending off criticism-Counterpunch was a rather niche publication so it flew under the radar of the Jews.

Counterpunch was routinely critical of the neocons and even pointed out their Jewishness but a lot of liberal Jews did not like the neocons. Israel was and is the real litmus test.

The Guardian always had Alan Rusbridger who I beleive was Jewish. It is not exactly funded by Jewish money- it mainly subsists off of government departments advertising public sector jobs. Before the rise of the internet and gumtree etc it was mainly funded by sales of autotrader a car trading magazine (lol at the nost po faced anti pollution newspaper being funded by the sales of cars).

What changed is that the Jews are no longer able to control the narrative- they used to feel they could afford semi-critical comments about Israel before but not any more. This has gone hand in hand with increased efforts to censor the internet. The Jews were able to infiltrate BDS and subvert it, they were able to use their explicit power to pass anti BDS laws but they were not able to really turn the tide of public opinion. They have resorted to outright censorship.

As you say it is not suprising that Counterpunch was taken over any publication/organisation that wants to work outside of established Jewish limits on intellectual discourse will eventually be subverted. Just look at the British Labour party. Corbyn is an old school lefists (ie he wants to give people options other than the new labour globalist neo liberalism) and a very principaled one. He stands up for the Palestinians (some people say he just does this because of his Muslim constituents but that is not the case-he has always stood up for them) and as a result has been smeared time and time again by the Jewish press.

There is a power struggle in the Labour party (Muslim ethnics weight of numbers vs Jewish money) and it looks like the Jews will win.

It's very sad and like I said I hope the new Counterpunch will fold leaving Cockburn's histroy of excellent journalism unsullied.

[Oct 08, 2018] British intelligence now officially is a by-word for organized crime by John Wight

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... And what about the possibility of MI5's involvement in, dare we use the term, false flag operations? ..."
"... As someone who abhors the premise of conspiracy theory on principle, the fact that more and more are turning to its warm embrace as an intellectual reflex against what is politely described as the 'official narrative' of events, well this is no surprise when we learn of the egregious machinations of Western intelligence agencies such as Britain's MI5. ..."
"... If any such investigation is to be taken seriously, however, it must include in its remit the power to investigate all possible links between Britain's intelligence community and organisations such as, let's see, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group ? ..."
"... The deafening UK mainstream media and political class silence over the trail connecting 2017 Manchester Arena suicide bomber Salman Abedi and MI6, Britain's foreign intelligence agency, leaves a lingering stench of intrigue that will not out. The work of investigative journalist Mark Curtis on this sordid relationship is unsurpassed. ..."
"... "The evidence suggests that the barbaric Manchester bombing, which killed 22 innocent people on May 22nd, is a case of blowback on British citizens arising at least partly from the overt and covert actions of British governments." ..."
"... "The evidence points to the LIFG being seen by the UK as a proxy militia to promote its foreign policy objectives. Whitehall also saw Qatar as a proxy to provide boots on the ground in Libya in 2011, even as it empowered hardline Islamist groups." ..."
"... "Both David Cameron, then Prime Minister, and Theresa May – who was Home Secretary in 2011 when Libyan radicals were encouraged to fight Qadafi [Muammar Gaddafi] – clearly have serious questions to answer. We believe an independent public enquiry is urgently needed." ..."
"... In words that echo down to us from ancient Rome, the poet Juvenal taunts our complacency with a question most simple and pertinent: "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" Who will guard the guards themselves? ..."
Oct 08, 2018 | www.rt.com

An intelligence service given free rein to commit 'serious crimes' in its own country is an intelligence service that is the enemy of its people. The quite astounding revelation that Britain's domestic intelligence service, MI5, has enjoyed this very freedom for decades has only just been made public at a special tribunal in London, set up to investigate the country's intelligence services at the behest of a coalition of human rights groups, alleging a pattern of illegality up to and including collusion in murder.

The hitherto MI5 covert policy sanctioning its agents to commit and/or solicit serious crimes, as and when adjudged provident, is known as the Third Direction. This codename has been crafted, it would appear, by someone with a penchant for all things James Bond within an agency whose average operative is more likely to be 5'6" and balding with a paunch and bad teeth than any kind of lantern-jawed 007.

The Pat Finucane Centre , one of the aforementioned human rights groups involved in bringing about this tribunal investigation (Investigatory Powers Tribunal, to give it its Sunday name) into the nefarious activities of Britain's domestic intelligence agency, issued a damning statement in response to the further revelation that former Prime Minister David Cameron introduced oversight guidelines with regard to the MI5 covert third direction policy back in 2012.

Cameron's decision to do so, the group claims, was far from nobly taken:

"It can be no coincidence that Prime Minister David Cameron issued new guidelines, however flawed, on oversight of MI5 just two weeks before publication of the De Silva report into the murder of Pat Finucane. The PM was clearly alive to the alarming evidence which was about to emerge of the involvement of the Security Service in the murder. To date no-one within a state agency has been held accountable. The latest revelations make the case for an independent inquiry all the more compelling."

Pat Finucane, a Belfast Catholic, plied his trade as a human rights lawyer at a time when the right to be fully human was denied the minority Catholic community of the small and enduring outpost of British colonialism in the north east corner of Ireland, otherwise known as Northern Ireland. He was murdered by loyalist paramilitaries in 1989, back when the decades-long conflict euphemistically referred to as the Troubles still raged, claiming victims both innocent and not on all sides.

Unlike the vast majority of those killed and murdered in the course of this brutal conflict, Finucane's murder sparked a long and hard fought struggle for justice by surviving family members, friends and campaigners. They allege – rather convincingly, it should be said – that it was carried out with the active collusion of MI5.

Stepping back and casting a wider view over this terrain, the criminal activities of Britain's intelligence services constitute more than enough material for a book of considerable heft. How fortunate then that just such a book has already been written.

In his 'Dead Men Talking: Collusion, Cover Up and Murder in Northern Ireland's Dirty War', author Nicholas Davies "provides information on a number of the killings [during the Troubles], which were authorized at the highest level of MI5 and the British government."

But over and above the crimes of MI5 in Ireland, what else have those doughty defenders of the realm been up to over the years? After all, what is the use of having a license to engage in serious criminal activity, including murder and, presumably, torture, if you're not prepared to use (abuse) it? It begs the question of how many high profile deaths attributed to suicide, natural causes, and accident down through the years have been the fruits of MI5 at work?

And what about the possibility of MI5's involvement in, dare we use the term, false flag operations?

As someone who abhors the premise of conspiracy theory on principle, the fact that more and more are turning to its warm embrace as an intellectual reflex against what is politely described as the 'official narrative' of events, well this is no surprise when we learn of the egregious machinations of Western intelligence agencies such as Britain's MI5.

What we are bound to state, doing so without fear of contradiction, is this particular revelation opens up a veritable Pandora's Box of grim possibilities when it comes to the potential crimes committed by Britain's domestic intelligence agency, ensuring that a full and vigorous investigation and public inquiry is now both necessary and urgent.

If any such investigation is to be taken seriously, however, it must include in its remit the power to investigate all possible links between Britain's intelligence community and organisations such as, let's see, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group ?

The deafening UK mainstream media and political class silence over the trail connecting 2017 Manchester Arena suicide bomber Salman Abedi and MI6, Britain's foreign intelligence agency, leaves a lingering stench of intrigue that will not out. The work of investigative journalist Mark Curtis on this sordid relationship is unsurpassed.

As Curtis writes,

"The evidence suggests that the barbaric Manchester bombing, which killed 22 innocent people on May 22nd, is a case of blowback on British citizens arising at least partly from the overt and covert actions of British governments."

In the same report he arrives at a conclusion both damning and chilling:

"The evidence points to the LIFG being seen by the UK as a proxy militia to promote its foreign policy objectives. Whitehall also saw Qatar as a proxy to provide boots on the ground in Libya in 2011, even as it empowered hardline Islamist groups."

Finally: "Both David Cameron, then Prime Minister, and Theresa May – who was Home Secretary in 2011 when Libyan radicals were encouraged to fight Qadafi [Muammar Gaddafi] – clearly have serious questions to answer. We believe an independent public enquiry is urgently needed."

In words that echo down to us from ancient Rome, the poet Juvenal taunts our complacency with a question most simple and pertinent: "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" Who will guard the guards themselves?

Edward R Murrow puts it rather more bluntly: "A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves."

Sooner or later, people in Britain are going to have to wake up to who the real enemy is.

Read more

John Wight has written for a variety of newspapers and websites, including the Independent, Morning Star, Huffington Post, Counterpunch, London Progressive Journal, and Foreign Policy Journal.

[Oct 08, 2018] Hacking and Propaganda by Marcus Ranum

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... There has been an ongoing campaign on the part of the US, to get out the idea that China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran have massive armies of hackers that are constantly looking to steal American secrets. The absurdity of the US' claims is pretty obvious. As I pointed out in my book The Myth of Homeland Security ..."
"... "The Great US/China Cyberwar of 2010" is one cyberwar that didn't happen, but was presaged with a run-up of lots of claims that the Chinese were hacking all over the place. I'm perfectly willing to accept the possibility that there was Chinese hacking activity, but in the industry there was no indication of an additional level of attack or significance. ..."
"... One thing that did ..."
"... US ideology is that "we don't start wars" -- it's always looking for an excuse to go to war under the rubric of self-defense, so I see these sorts of claims as justification in advance for unilateral action. I also see it as a sign of weakness; if the US were truly the superpower it claims it is, it would simply accept its imperial mantle and stop bothering to try to justify anything. I'm afraid we may be getting close to that point. ..."
"... My assumption has always been that the US is projecting its own actions on other nations. At the time when the US was talking the loudest about Chinese cyberwar, the US and Israel had launched STUXNET against the Iranian enrichment plant at Natanz, and the breeder reactor at Bushehr (which happens to be just outside of a large city; the attack took some of its control systems and backup generators offline). Attacks on nuclear power facilities are a war crime under international humanitarian law, which framework the US is signatory to but has not committed to actually follow. This sort of activity happens at the same time that the US distributes talking-points to the media about the danger of Russian hackers crashing the US power grid. I don't think we can psychoanalyze an entire government and I think psychoanalysis is mostly nonsense -- but it's tempting to accuse the US of "projection." ..."
"... All of this stuff happens against the backdrop of Klein, Binney, Snowden, and the Vault 7 revelations, as well as solid attribution identifying the NSA as "equation group" and linking the code-tree of NSA-developed malware to STUXNET, FLAME, and DUQU. ..."
"... the US has even admitted to deploying STUXNET -- Obama bragged about it. When Snowden's revelations outlined how the NSA had eavesdropped on Angela Merkel's cellphone, the Germans expressed shock and Barack Obama remarkably truthfully said "that's how these things are done" and blew the whole thing off by saying that the NSA wasn't eavesdropping on Merkel any more. [ bbc ] ..."
"... It's hard to keep score because everything is pretty vague, but it sounds like the US has been dramatically out-spending and out-acting the other nations that it accuses of being prepared for cyberwar. ..."
"... it's hard not to see the US is prepared for cyberwar, when both the NSA and the CIA leak massive collections of advanced tools. ..."
"... My observation is that the NSA and CIA have been horribly sloppy and have clearly spent a gigantic amount of money preparing to compromise both foreign and domestic systems -- that's bad enough. With friends like the NSA and CIA, who needs Russians and Chinese? ..."
"... The Russian and Chinese efforts are relatively tiny compared to the massive efforts the US expends tens of billions of dollars on. The US spends about $50bn on its intelligence agencies, while the entire Russian Department of Defense budget is about $90bn (China is around $139bn) -- maybe the Russians and Chinese have such a small footprint because they are much smaller operations? ..."
"... That brings us to the recent kerfuffle about taps on the Supermicro motherboards. That's not unbelievable at all -- not in a world where we discover that Intel has built a parallel management CPU into every CPU since 2008, and that there is solid indications that other processors have similar backdoors. ..."
"... There are probably so many backdoors in our systems that it's a miracle it works at all. ..."
"... So, with respect to "propaganda" I would say that the US intelligence community has been consistently pushing a propaganda agenda against the US government, and the citizens in order to justify its actions and defend its budget. ..."
"... What little I've been able to find out the new Trump™ cybersecurity plan is that it doesn't involve any defense, just massive retribution against (perceived) foes. ..."
"... Funny how those obsessed with "false flag" operations work so hard to invite more of same. ..."
Oct 07, 2018 | freethoughtblogs.com

Bob Moore asks me to comment on an article about propaganda and security/intelligence. [ article ] This is going to be a mixture of opinion and references to facts; I'll try to be clear which is which.

Yesterday several NATO countries ran a concerted propaganda campaign against Russia. The context for it was a NATO summit in which the U.S. presses for an intensified cyberwar against NATO's preferred enemy.

On the same day another coordinated campaign targeted China. It is aimed against China's development of computer chip manufacturing further up the value chain. Related to this is U.S. pressure on Taiwan, a leading chip manufacturer, to cut its ties with its big motherland.

It is true that the US periodically makes a big push regarding "messaging" about hacking. Whether or not it constitutes a "propaganda campaign" depends on how we choose to interpret things and the labels we attach to them -- "propaganda campaign" has a lot of negative connotations and one person's "outreach effort" is an other's "propaganda." An ultra-nationalist or an authoritarian submissive who takes the government's word for anything would call it "outreach."

There has been an ongoing campaign on the part of the US, to get out the idea that China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran have massive armies of hackers that are constantly looking to steal American secrets. The absurdity of the US' claims is pretty obvious. As I pointed out in my book The Myth of Homeland Security (2004) [ wc ] claims such as that the Chinese had "40,000 highly trained hackers" are flat-out absurd and ignore the reality of hacking; that's four army corps. Hackers don't engage in "human wave" attacks.

"The Great US/China Cyberwar of 2010" is one cyberwar that didn't happen, but was presaged with a run-up of lots of claims that the Chinese were hacking all over the place. I'm perfectly willing to accept the possibility that there was Chinese hacking activity, but in the industry there was no indication of an additional level of attack or significance.

One thing that did happen in 2010 around the same time as the nonexistent cyberwar was China and Russia proposed trilateral talks with the US to attempt to define appropriate limits on state-sponsored hacking. The US flatly rejected the proposal, but there was virtually no coverage of that in the US media at the time. The UN also called for a cyberwar treaty framework, and the effort was killed by the US. [ wired ] What's fascinating and incomprehensible to me is that, whenever the US feels that its ability to claim pre-emptive cyberwar is challenged, it responds with a wave of claims about Chinese (or Russian or North Korean) cyberwar aggression.

John Negroponte, former director of US intelligence, said intelligence agencies in the major powers would be the first to "express reservations" about such an accord.

US ideology is that "we don't start wars" -- it's always looking for an excuse to go to war under the rubric of self-defense, so I see these sorts of claims as justification in advance for unilateral action. I also see it as a sign of weakness; if the US were truly the superpower it claims it is, it would simply accept its imperial mantle and stop bothering to try to justify anything. I'm afraid we may be getting close to that point.

My assumption has always been that the US is projecting its own actions on other nations. At the time when the US was talking the loudest about Chinese cyberwar, the US and Israel had launched STUXNET against the Iranian enrichment plant at Natanz, and the breeder reactor at Bushehr (which happens to be just outside of a large city; the attack took some of its control systems and backup generators offline). Attacks on nuclear power facilities are a war crime under international humanitarian law, which framework the US is signatory to but has not committed to actually follow. This sort of activity happens at the same time that the US distributes talking-points to the media about the danger of Russian hackers crashing the US power grid. I don't think we can psychoanalyze an entire government and I think psychoanalysis is mostly nonsense -- but it's tempting to accuse the US of "projection."

The anti-Russian campaign is about alleged Russian spying, hacking and influence operations. Britain and the Netherland took the lead. Britain accused Russia's military intelligence service (GRU) of spying attempts against the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in The Hague and Switzerland, of spying attempts against the British Foreign Office, of influence campaigns related to European and the U.S. elections, and of hacking the international doping agency WADA. British media willingly helped to exaggerate the claims: [ ]

The Netherland [sic] for its part released a flurry of information about the alleged spying attempts against the OPCW in The Hague. It claims that four GRU agents traveled to The Hague on official Russian diplomatic passports to sniff out the WiFi network of the OPCW. (WiFi networks are notoriously easy to hack. If the OPCW is indeed using such it should not be trusted with any security relevant issues.) The Russian officials were allegedly very secretive, even cleaning out their own hotel trash, while they, at the same, time carried laptops with private data and even taxi receipts showing their travel from a GRU headquarter in Moscow to the airport. Like in the Skripal/Novichok saga the Russian spies are, at the same time, portrayed as supervillains and hapless amateurs. Real spies are neither.

The U.S. Justice Department added to the onslaught by issuing new indictments (pdf) against alleged GRU agents dubiously connected to several alleged hacking incidents . As none of those Russians will ever stand in front of a U.S. court the broad allegations will never be tested.

There's a lot there, and I think the interpretation is a bit over-wrought, but it's mostly accurate. The US and the UK (and other NATO allies, as necessary) clearly coordinate when it comes to talking points. Claims of Chinese cyberwar in the US press will be followed by claims in the UK and Australian press, as well. My suspicion is that this is not the US Government and UK Government coordinating a story -- it's the intelligence agencies doing it. My opinion is that the intelligence services are fairly close to a "deep state" -- the CIA and NSA are completely out of control and the CIA has gone far toward building its own military, while the NSA has implemented completely unrestricted surveillance worldwide.

All of this stuff happens against the backdrop of Klein, Binney, Snowden, and the Vault 7 revelations, as well as solid attribution identifying the NSA as "equation group" and linking the code-tree of NSA-developed malware to STUXNET, FLAME, and DUQU. While the attribution that "Fancy Bear is the GRU" has been made and is probably fairly solid, the attribution of NSA malware and CIA malware is rock solid; the US has even admitted to deploying STUXNET -- Obama bragged about it. When Snowden's revelations outlined how the NSA had eavesdropped on Angela Merkel's cellphone, the Germans expressed shock and Barack Obama remarkably truthfully said "that's how these things are done" and blew the whole thing off by saying that the NSA wasn't eavesdropping on Merkel any more. [ bbc ]

It's hard to keep score because everything is pretty vague, but it sounds like the US has been dramatically out-spending and out-acting the other nations that it accuses of being prepared for cyberwar. I tend to be extremely skeptical of US claims because: bomber gap, missile gap, gulf of Tonkin, Iraq WMD, Afghanistan, Libya and every other aggressive attack by the US which was blamed on its target. The reason I assume the US is the most aggressive actor in cyberspace is because the US has done a terrible job of protecting its tool-sets and operational security: it's hard not to see the US is prepared for cyberwar, when both the NSA and the CIA leak massive collections of advanced tools.

Meanwhile, where are the leaks of Russian and Chinese tools? They have been few and far between, if there have been any at all. Does this mean that the Russians and Chinese have amazingly superior tradecraft, if not tools? I don't know. My observation is that the NSA and CIA have been horribly sloppy and have clearly spent a gigantic amount of money preparing to compromise both foreign and domestic systems -- that's bad enough. With friends like the NSA and CIA, who needs Russians and Chinese?

The article does not have great depth to its understanding of the situation, I'm afraid. So it comes off as a bit heavy on the recent news while ignoring the long-term trends. For example:

The allegations of Chinese supply chain attacks are of course just as hypocritical as the allegations against Russia. The very first know case of computer related supply chain manipulation goes back to 1982 :

A CIA operation to sabotage Soviet industry by duping Moscow into stealing booby-trapped software was spectacularly successful when it triggered a huge explosion in a Siberian gas pipeline, it emerged yesterday.

I wrote a piece about the "Farewell Dossier" in 2004. [ mjr ] Re-reading it, it comes off as skeptical but waffly. I think that it's self-promotion by the CIA and exaggerates considerably ("look how clever we are!") at a time when the CIA was suffering an attention and credibility deficit after its shitshow performance under George Tenet. But the first known cases of computer related supply chain manipulation go back to the 70s and 80s -- the NSA even compromised Crypto AG's Hagelin M-209 system (a mechanical ciphering machine) in order to read global communications encrypted with that product. You can imagine Crypto AG's surprise when the Iranian secret police arrested one of their sales reps for selling backdoor'd crypto -- the NSA had never told them about the backdoor, naturally. The CIA was also on record for producing Xerox machines destined for the USSR, which had recorders built into them So, while the article is portraying the historical sweep of NSA dirty tricks, they're only looking at the recent ones. Remember: the NSA also weakened the elliptic curve crypto library in RSA's Bsafe implementation, paying RSADSI $13 million to accept their tweaked code.

Why haven't we been hearing about the Chinese and Russians doing that sort of thing? There are four options:

  1. The Russians and Chinese are doing it, they're just so darned good nobody has caught them until just recently.
  2. The Russians and Chinese simply resort to using existing tools developed by the hacking/cybercrime community and rely on great operational security rather than fancy tools.
  3. The Russian and Chinese efforts are relatively tiny compared to the massive efforts the US expends tens of billions of dollars on. The US spends about $50bn on its intelligence agencies, while the entire Russian Department of Defense budget is about $90bn (China is around $139bn) -- maybe the Russians and Chinese have such a small footprint because they are much smaller operations?
  4. Something else.

That brings us to the recent kerfuffle about taps on the Supermicro motherboards. That's not unbelievable at all -- not in a world where we discover that Intel has built a parallel management CPU into every CPU since 2008, and that there is solid indications that other processors have similar backdoors.

Was the Intel IME a "backdoor" or just "a bad idea"? Well, that's tricky. Let me put my tinfoil hat on: making a backdoor look like a sloppily developed product feature would be the competent way to write a backdoor. Making it as sneaky as the backdoor in the Via is unnecessary -- incompetence is eminently believable.

&

(kaspersky)

I believe all of these stories (including the Supermicro) are the tip of a great big, ugly iceberg. The intelligence community has long known that software-only solutions are too mutable, and are easy to decompile and figure out. They have wanted to be in the BIOS of systems -- on the motherboard -- for a long time. If you go back to 2014, we have disclosures about the NSA malware that hides in hard drive BIOS: [ vice ] [ vice ] That appears to have been in progress around 2000/2001.

Of note, the group recovered two modules belonging to EquationDrug and GrayFish that were used to reprogram hard drives to give the attackers persistent control over a target machine. These modules can target practically every hard drive manufacturer and brand on the market, including Seagate, Western Digital, Samsung, Toshiba, Corsair, Hitachi and more. Such attacks have traditionally been difficult to pull off, given the risk in modifying hard drive software, which may explain why Kaspersky could only identify a handful of very specific targets against which the attack was used, where the risk was worth the reward.

But Equation Group's malware platforms have other tricks, too. GrayFish, for example, also has the ability to install itself into computer's boot record -- software that loads even before the operating system itself -- and stores all of its data inside a portion of the operating system called the registry, where configuration data is normally stored.

EquationDrug was designed for use on older Windows operating systems, and "some of the plugins were designed originally for use on Windows 95/98/ME" -- versions of Windows so old that they offer a good indication of the Equation Group's age.

This is not a very good example of how to establish a "malware gap" since it just makes the NSA look like they are incapable of keeping a secret. If you want an idea how bad it is, Kaspersky labs' analysis of the NSA's toolchain is a good example of how to do attribution correctly. Unfortunately for the US agenda, that solid attribution points toward Fort Meade in Maryland. [kaspersky]

Let me be clear: I think we are fucked every which way from the start. With backdoors in the BIOS, backdoors on the CPU, and wireless cellular-spectrum backdoors, there are probably backdoors in the GPUs and the physical network controllers, as well. Maybe the backdoors in the GPU come from the GRU and maybe the backdoors in the hard drives come from NSA, but who cares? The upshot is that all of our systems are so heinously compromised that they can only be considered marginally reliable. It is, literally, not your computer: it's theirs. They'll let you use it so long as your information is interesting to them.

Do I believe the Chinese are capable of doing such a thing? Of course. Is the GRU? Probably. Mossad? Sure. NSA? Well-documented attribution points toward NSA. Your computer is a free-fire zone. It has been since the mid 1990s, when the NSA was told "no" on the Clipper chip and decided to come up with its own Plan B, C, D, and E. Then, the CIA came up with theirs. Etc. There are probably so many backdoors in our systems that it's a miracle it works at all.

From my 2012 RSA conference lecture "Cyberwar, you're doing it wrong."

The problem is that playing in this space is the purview of governments. Nobody in the cybercrime or hacking world need tools like these. The intelligence operatives have huge budgets, compared to a typical company's security budget, and it's unreasonable to expect any business to invest such a level of effort on defending itself. So what should companies do? They should do exactly what they are doing: expect the government to deal with it; that's what governments are for. The problem with that strategy is that their government isn't on their side, either! It's Hobbes' playground.

In case you think I am engaging in hyperbole, I assure you I am not. If you want another example of the lengths (and willingness to bypass the law) "they" are willing to go, consider 'stingrays' that are in operation in every major US city and outside of every interesting hotel and high tech park. Those devices are not passive -- they actively inject themselves into the call set-up between your phone and your carrier -- your data goes through the stingray, or it doesn't go at all. If there are multiple stingrays, then your latency goes through the roof. "They" don't care. Are the stingrays NSA, FBI, CIA, Mossad, GRU, or PLA? Probably a bit of all of the above depending on where and when.

Whenever the US gets caught with its pants down around its ankles, it blames the Chinese or the Russians because they have done a good job of building the idea that the most serious hackers on the planet at the Chinese. I don't believe that we're seeing complex propaganda campaigns that are tied to specific incidents -- I think we see ongoing organic propaganda campaigns that all serve the same end: protect the agencies, protect their budgets, justify their existence, and downplay their incompetence.

So, with respect to "propaganda" I would say that the US intelligence community has been consistently pushing a propaganda agenda against the US government, and the citizens in order to justify its actions and defend its budget.

The government also engages in propaganda, and is influenced by the intelligence community's propaganda as well. And the propaganda campaigns work because everyone involved assumes, "well, given what the NSA has been able to do, I should assume the Chinese can do likewise." That's a perfectly reasonable assumption and I think it's probably true that the Chinese have capabilities. The situation is what Chuck Spinney calls "A self-licking ice cream cone" -- it's a justifying structure that makes participation in endless aggression seem like a sensible thing to do. And, when there's inevitably a disaster, it's going to be like a cyber-9/11 and will serve as a justification for even more unrestrained aggression.

Want to see what it looks like? A thousand thanks to Commentariat member [redacted] for this link. If you don't like video, there's an article here. [ toms ]

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

Is this an NSA backdoor, or normal incompetence? Is Intel Management Engine an NSA-inspired backdoor, or did some system engineers at Intel think that was a good idea? There are other scary indications of embedded compromise: the CIA's Vault7 archive included code that appeared to be intended to embed in the firmware of "smart" flatscreen TVs. That would make every LG flat panel in every hotel room, a listening device just waiting to be turned on.

We know the Chinese didn't do that particular bug but why wouldn't they do something similar, in something else? China is the world's oldest mature culture -- they literally wrote the book on strategy -- Americans acting as though it's a great surprise to learn that the Chinese are not stupid, it's just the parochialism of a 250 year-old culture looking at a 3,000 year-old culture and saying "wow, you guys haven't been asleep at the switch after all!"

WIRED on cyberspace treaties [ wired ]

Comments

  1. Pierce R. Butler says

    October 6, 2018 at 1:31 pm

    What little I've been able to find out the new Trump™ cybersecurity plan is that it doesn't involve any defense, just massive retribution against (perceived) foes.

    Funny how those obsessed with "false flag" operations work so hard to invite more of same.

  2. Marcus Ranum says

    October 6, 2018 at 2:28 pm

    Pierce R. Butler@#1:
    What little I've been able to find out the new Trump™ cybersecurity plan is that it doesn't involve any defense, just massive retribution against (perceived) foes.

    Yes. Since 2001, as far as most of us can tell, federal cybersecurity spend has been 80% offense, 20% defense. And a lot of the offensive spend has been aimed at We, The People.

  3. Cat Mara says

    October 6, 2018 at 5:20 pm

    Your mention of Operation Sundevil and Kevin Mitnick in a previous post made me think that maybe the reason we haven't seen the kind of leaks from the Russian and Chinese hacking operations that we've seem from the NSA is that they're running a "Kevin Mitnick style" operation; that is, relying less on technical solutions and using instead old-fashioned "social engineering" and other low-tech forms of espionage (like running troll farms on social media). I mean, I've seen interviews with retired US intelligence people since the 90s complain that since the late 1980s, the intelligence agencies have been crippled by management in love with hi-tech "SIGINT" solutions to problems that never deliver and neglecting old-fashioned "HUMINT" intelligence-gathering.

    The thing is, Kevin Mitnick got away with a lot of what he did because people didn't take security seriously then, and still don't. On a similar nostalgia vibe, I remember reading an article by Keith Bostic (one of the researchers who helped in the analysis of the Morris worm that took down a significant chunk of the Internet back in 1988) where he did a follow-up a year or so afterwards and some depressing number of organisations that had been hit by it still hadn't patched the holes that had let the worm infect them in the first place.

  4. Marcus Ranum says

    October 6, 2018 at 9:20 pm

    Cat Mara@#3:
    Your mention of Operation Sundevil and Kevin Mitnick in a previous post made me think that maybe the reason we haven't seen the kind of leaks from the Russian and Chinese hacking operations that we've seem from the NSA is that they're running a "Kevin Mitnick style" operation; that is, relying less on technical solutions and using instead old-fashioned "social engineering" and other low-tech forms of espionage (like running troll farms on social media).

    I think that's right, to a high degree. What if Edward Snowden was an agent provocateur instead of a well-meaning naive kid? A tremendous amount of damage could be done, as well as stealing the US' expensive toys. The Russians have been very good at doing exactly that sort of operation, since WWII. The Chinese are, if anything, more subtle than the Russians.

    The Chinese attitude, as expressed to me by someone who might be a credible source is, "why are you picking a fight with us? We don't care, you're too far away for us to threaten you, we both have loads of our own fish to fry. To them, the US is young, hyperactive, and stupid.

    The FBI is not competent, at all, against old-school humint intelligence-gathering. Compared to the US' cyber-toys, the old ways are probably more efficient and cost effective. China's intelligence community is also much more team-oriented than the CIA/NSA; they're actually a disciplined operation under the strategic control of policy-makers. That, by the way, is why Russians and Chinese stare in amazement when Americans ask things like "Do you think Putin knew about this?" What a stupid question! It's an autocracy; they don't have intelligence operatives just going an deciding "it's a nice day to go to England with some Novichok." The entire American attitude toward espionage lacks maturity.

    On a similar nostalgia vibe, I remember reading an article by Keith Bostic (one of the researchers who helped in the analysis of the Morris worm that took down a significant chunk of the Internet back in 1988) where he did a follow-up a year or so afterwards and some depressing number of organisations that had been hit by it still hadn't patched the holes that had let the worm infect them in the first place.

    That as an exciting time. We were downstream from University of Maryland, which got hit pretty badly. Pete Cottrel and Chris Torek from UMD were also in on Bostic's dissection. We were doing uucp over TCP for our email (that changed pretty soon after the worm) and our uucp queue blew up. I cured the worm with a reboot into single-user mode and a quick 'rm -f' in the uucp queue.

  5. Bob Moore says

    October 7, 2018 at 9:18 am

    Thanks. I appreciate your measured analysis and the making explicit of the bottom line: " agencies, protect their budgets, justify their existence, and downplay their incompetence."

[Oct 08, 2018] British intelligence now officially is a by-word for organized crime by John Wight

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... And what about the possibility of MI5's involvement in, dare we use the term, false flag operations? ..."
"... As someone who abhors the premise of conspiracy theory on principle, the fact that more and more are turning to its warm embrace as an intellectual reflex against what is politely described as the 'official narrative' of events, well this is no surprise when we learn of the egregious machinations of Western intelligence agencies such as Britain's MI5. ..."
"... If any such investigation is to be taken seriously, however, it must include in its remit the power to investigate all possible links between Britain's intelligence community and organisations such as, let's see, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group ? ..."
"... The deafening UK mainstream media and political class silence over the trail connecting 2017 Manchester Arena suicide bomber Salman Abedi and MI6, Britain's foreign intelligence agency, leaves a lingering stench of intrigue that will not out. The work of investigative journalist Mark Curtis on this sordid relationship is unsurpassed. ..."
"... "The evidence suggests that the barbaric Manchester bombing, which killed 22 innocent people on May 22nd, is a case of blowback on British citizens arising at least partly from the overt and covert actions of British governments." ..."
"... "The evidence points to the LIFG being seen by the UK as a proxy militia to promote its foreign policy objectives. Whitehall also saw Qatar as a proxy to provide boots on the ground in Libya in 2011, even as it empowered hardline Islamist groups." ..."
"... "Both David Cameron, then Prime Minister, and Theresa May – who was Home Secretary in 2011 when Libyan radicals were encouraged to fight Qadafi [Muammar Gaddafi] – clearly have serious questions to answer. We believe an independent public enquiry is urgently needed." ..."
"... In words that echo down to us from ancient Rome, the poet Juvenal taunts our complacency with a question most simple and pertinent: "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" Who will guard the guards themselves? ..."
Oct 08, 2018 | www.rt.com

An intelligence service given free rein to commit 'serious crimes' in its own country is an intelligence service that is the enemy of its people. The quite astounding revelation that Britain's domestic intelligence service, MI5, has enjoyed this very freedom for decades has only just been made public at a special tribunal in London, set up to investigate the country's intelligence services at the behest of a coalition of human rights groups, alleging a pattern of illegality up to and including collusion in murder.

The hitherto MI5 covert policy sanctioning its agents to commit and/or solicit serious crimes, as and when adjudged provident, is known as the Third Direction. This codename has been crafted, it would appear, by someone with a penchant for all things James Bond within an agency whose average operative is more likely to be 5'6" and balding with a paunch and bad teeth than any kind of lantern-jawed 007.

The Pat Finucane Centre , one of the aforementioned human rights groups involved in bringing about this tribunal investigation (Investigatory Powers Tribunal, to give it its Sunday name) into the nefarious activities of Britain's domestic intelligence agency, issued a damning statement in response to the further revelation that former Prime Minister David Cameron introduced oversight guidelines with regard to the MI5 covert third direction policy back in 2012.

Cameron's decision to do so, the group claims, was far from nobly taken:

"It can be no coincidence that Prime Minister David Cameron issued new guidelines, however flawed, on oversight of MI5 just two weeks before publication of the De Silva report into the murder of Pat Finucane. The PM was clearly alive to the alarming evidence which was about to emerge of the involvement of the Security Service in the murder. To date no-one within a state agency has been held accountable. The latest revelations make the case for an independent inquiry all the more compelling."

Pat Finucane, a Belfast Catholic, plied his trade as a human rights lawyer at a time when the right to be fully human was denied the minority Catholic community of the small and enduring outpost of British colonialism in the north east corner of Ireland, otherwise known as Northern Ireland. He was murdered by loyalist paramilitaries in 1989, back when the decades-long conflict euphemistically referred to as the Troubles still raged, claiming victims both innocent and not on all sides.

Unlike the vast majority of those killed and murdered in the course of this brutal conflict, Finucane's murder sparked a long and hard fought struggle for justice by surviving family members, friends and campaigners. They allege – rather convincingly, it should be said – that it was carried out with the active collusion of MI5.

Stepping back and casting a wider view over this terrain, the criminal activities of Britain's intelligence services constitute more than enough material for a book of considerable heft. How fortunate then that just such a book has already been written.

In his 'Dead Men Talking: Collusion, Cover Up and Murder in Northern Ireland's Dirty War', author Nicholas Davies "provides information on a number of the killings [during the Troubles], which were authorized at the highest level of MI5 and the British government."

But over and above the crimes of MI5 in Ireland, what else have those doughty defenders of the realm been up to over the years? After all, what is the use of having a license to engage in serious criminal activity, including murder and, presumably, torture, if you're not prepared to use (abuse) it? It begs the question of how many high profile deaths attributed to suicide, natural causes, and accident down through the years have been the fruits of MI5 at work?

And what about the possibility of MI5's involvement in, dare we use the term, false flag operations?

As someone who abhors the premise of conspiracy theory on principle, the fact that more and more are turning to its warm embrace as an intellectual reflex against what is politely described as the 'official narrative' of events, well this is no surprise when we learn of the egregious machinations of Western intelligence agencies such as Britain's MI5.

What we are bound to state, doing so without fear of contradiction, is this particular revelation opens up a veritable Pandora's Box of grim possibilities when it comes to the potential crimes committed by Britain's domestic intelligence agency, ensuring that a full and vigorous investigation and public inquiry is now both necessary and urgent.

If any such investigation is to be taken seriously, however, it must include in its remit the power to investigate all possible links between Britain's intelligence community and organisations such as, let's see, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group ?

The deafening UK mainstream media and political class silence over the trail connecting 2017 Manchester Arena suicide bomber Salman Abedi and MI6, Britain's foreign intelligence agency, leaves a lingering stench of intrigue that will not out. The work of investigative journalist Mark Curtis on this sordid relationship is unsurpassed.

As Curtis writes,

"The evidence suggests that the barbaric Manchester bombing, which killed 22 innocent people on May 22nd, is a case of blowback on British citizens arising at least partly from the overt and covert actions of British governments."

In the same report he arrives at a conclusion both damning and chilling:

"The evidence points to the LIFG being seen by the UK as a proxy militia to promote its foreign policy objectives. Whitehall also saw Qatar as a proxy to provide boots on the ground in Libya in 2011, even as it empowered hardline Islamist groups."

Finally: "Both David Cameron, then Prime Minister, and Theresa May – who was Home Secretary in 2011 when Libyan radicals were encouraged to fight Qadafi [Muammar Gaddafi] – clearly have serious questions to answer. We believe an independent public enquiry is urgently needed."

In words that echo down to us from ancient Rome, the poet Juvenal taunts our complacency with a question most simple and pertinent: "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" Who will guard the guards themselves?

Edward R Murrow puts it rather more bluntly: "A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves."

Sooner or later, people in Britain are going to have to wake up to who the real enemy is.

Read more

John Wight has written for a variety of newspapers and websites, including the Independent, Morning Star, Huffington Post, Counterpunch, London Progressive Journal, and Foreign Policy Journal.

[Oct 08, 2018] Hacking and Propaganda by Marcus Ranum

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... There has been an ongoing campaign on the part of the US, to get out the idea that China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran have massive armies of hackers that are constantly looking to steal American secrets. The absurdity of the US' claims is pretty obvious. As I pointed out in my book The Myth of Homeland Security ..."
"... "The Great US/China Cyberwar of 2010" is one cyberwar that didn't happen, but was presaged with a run-up of lots of claims that the Chinese were hacking all over the place. I'm perfectly willing to accept the possibility that there was Chinese hacking activity, but in the industry there was no indication of an additional level of attack or significance. ..."
"... One thing that did ..."
"... US ideology is that "we don't start wars" -- it's always looking for an excuse to go to war under the rubric of self-defense, so I see these sorts of claims as justification in advance for unilateral action. I also see it as a sign of weakness; if the US were truly the superpower it claims it is, it would simply accept its imperial mantle and stop bothering to try to justify anything. I'm afraid we may be getting close to that point. ..."
"... My assumption has always been that the US is projecting its own actions on other nations. At the time when the US was talking the loudest about Chinese cyberwar, the US and Israel had launched STUXNET against the Iranian enrichment plant at Natanz, and the breeder reactor at Bushehr (which happens to be just outside of a large city; the attack took some of its control systems and backup generators offline). Attacks on nuclear power facilities are a war crime under international humanitarian law, which framework the US is signatory to but has not committed to actually follow. This sort of activity happens at the same time that the US distributes talking-points to the media about the danger of Russian hackers crashing the US power grid. I don't think we can psychoanalyze an entire government and I think psychoanalysis is mostly nonsense -- but it's tempting to accuse the US of "projection." ..."
"... All of this stuff happens against the backdrop of Klein, Binney, Snowden, and the Vault 7 revelations, as well as solid attribution identifying the NSA as "equation group" and linking the code-tree of NSA-developed malware to STUXNET, FLAME, and DUQU. ..."
"... the US has even admitted to deploying STUXNET -- Obama bragged about it. When Snowden's revelations outlined how the NSA had eavesdropped on Angela Merkel's cellphone, the Germans expressed shock and Barack Obama remarkably truthfully said "that's how these things are done" and blew the whole thing off by saying that the NSA wasn't eavesdropping on Merkel any more. [ bbc ] ..."
"... It's hard to keep score because everything is pretty vague, but it sounds like the US has been dramatically out-spending and out-acting the other nations that it accuses of being prepared for cyberwar. ..."
"... it's hard not to see the US is prepared for cyberwar, when both the NSA and the CIA leak massive collections of advanced tools. ..."
"... My observation is that the NSA and CIA have been horribly sloppy and have clearly spent a gigantic amount of money preparing to compromise both foreign and domestic systems -- that's bad enough. With friends like the NSA and CIA, who needs Russians and Chinese? ..."
"... The Russian and Chinese efforts are relatively tiny compared to the massive efforts the US expends tens of billions of dollars on. The US spends about $50bn on its intelligence agencies, while the entire Russian Department of Defense budget is about $90bn (China is around $139bn) -- maybe the Russians and Chinese have such a small footprint because they are much smaller operations? ..."
"... That brings us to the recent kerfuffle about taps on the Supermicro motherboards. That's not unbelievable at all -- not in a world where we discover that Intel has built a parallel management CPU into every CPU since 2008, and that there is solid indications that other processors have similar backdoors. ..."
"... There are probably so many backdoors in our systems that it's a miracle it works at all. ..."
"... So, with respect to "propaganda" I would say that the US intelligence community has been consistently pushing a propaganda agenda against the US government, and the citizens in order to justify its actions and defend its budget. ..."
"... What little I've been able to find out the new Trump™ cybersecurity plan is that it doesn't involve any defense, just massive retribution against (perceived) foes. ..."
"... Funny how those obsessed with "false flag" operations work so hard to invite more of same. ..."
Oct 07, 2018 | freethoughtblogs.com

Bob Moore asks me to comment on an article about propaganda and security/intelligence. [ article ] This is going to be a mixture of opinion and references to facts; I'll try to be clear which is which.

Yesterday several NATO countries ran a concerted propaganda campaign against Russia. The context for it was a NATO summit in which the U.S. presses for an intensified cyberwar against NATO's preferred enemy.

On the same day another coordinated campaign targeted China. It is aimed against China's development of computer chip manufacturing further up the value chain. Related to this is U.S. pressure on Taiwan, a leading chip manufacturer, to cut its ties with its big motherland.

It is true that the US periodically makes a big push regarding "messaging" about hacking. Whether or not it constitutes a "propaganda campaign" depends on how we choose to interpret things and the labels we attach to them -- "propaganda campaign" has a lot of negative connotations and one person's "outreach effort" is an other's "propaganda." An ultra-nationalist or an authoritarian submissive who takes the government's word for anything would call it "outreach."

There has been an ongoing campaign on the part of the US, to get out the idea that China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran have massive armies of hackers that are constantly looking to steal American secrets. The absurdity of the US' claims is pretty obvious. As I pointed out in my book The Myth of Homeland Security (2004) [ wc ] claims such as that the Chinese had "40,000 highly trained hackers" are flat-out absurd and ignore the reality of hacking; that's four army corps. Hackers don't engage in "human wave" attacks.

"The Great US/China Cyberwar of 2010" is one cyberwar that didn't happen, but was presaged with a run-up of lots of claims that the Chinese were hacking all over the place. I'm perfectly willing to accept the possibility that there was Chinese hacking activity, but in the industry there was no indication of an additional level of attack or significance.

One thing that did happen in 2010 around the same time as the nonexistent cyberwar was China and Russia proposed trilateral talks with the US to attempt to define appropriate limits on state-sponsored hacking. The US flatly rejected the proposal, but there was virtually no coverage of that in the US media at the time. The UN also called for a cyberwar treaty framework, and the effort was killed by the US. [ wired ] What's fascinating and incomprehensible to me is that, whenever the US feels that its ability to claim pre-emptive cyberwar is challenged, it responds with a wave of claims about Chinese (or Russian or North Korean) cyberwar aggression.

John Negroponte, former director of US intelligence, said intelligence agencies in the major powers would be the first to "express reservations" about such an accord.

US ideology is that "we don't start wars" -- it's always looking for an excuse to go to war under the rubric of self-defense, so I see these sorts of claims as justification in advance for unilateral action. I also see it as a sign of weakness; if the US were truly the superpower it claims it is, it would simply accept its imperial mantle and stop bothering to try to justify anything. I'm afraid we may be getting close to that point.

My assumption has always been that the US is projecting its own actions on other nations. At the time when the US was talking the loudest about Chinese cyberwar, the US and Israel had launched STUXNET against the Iranian enrichment plant at Natanz, and the breeder reactor at Bushehr (which happens to be just outside of a large city; the attack took some of its control systems and backup generators offline). Attacks on nuclear power facilities are a war crime under international humanitarian law, which framework the US is signatory to but has not committed to actually follow. This sort of activity happens at the same time that the US distributes talking-points to the media about the danger of Russian hackers crashing the US power grid. I don't think we can psychoanalyze an entire government and I think psychoanalysis is mostly nonsense -- but it's tempting to accuse the US of "projection."

The anti-Russian campaign is about alleged Russian spying, hacking and influence operations. Britain and the Netherland took the lead. Britain accused Russia's military intelligence service (GRU) of spying attempts against the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in The Hague and Switzerland, of spying attempts against the British Foreign Office, of influence campaigns related to European and the U.S. elections, and of hacking the international doping agency WADA. British media willingly helped to exaggerate the claims: [ ]

The Netherland [sic] for its part released a flurry of information about the alleged spying attempts against the OPCW in The Hague. It claims that four GRU agents traveled to The Hague on official Russian diplomatic passports to sniff out the WiFi network of the OPCW. (WiFi networks are notoriously easy to hack. If the OPCW is indeed using such it should not be trusted with any security relevant issues.) The Russian officials were allegedly very secretive, even cleaning out their own hotel trash, while they, at the same, time carried laptops with private data and even taxi receipts showing their travel from a GRU headquarter in Moscow to the airport. Like in the Skripal/Novichok saga the Russian spies are, at the same time, portrayed as supervillains and hapless amateurs. Real spies are neither.

The U.S. Justice Department added to the onslaught by issuing new indictments (pdf) against alleged GRU agents dubiously connected to several alleged hacking incidents . As none of those Russians will ever stand in front of a U.S. court the broad allegations will never be tested.

There's a lot there, and I think the interpretation is a bit over-wrought, but it's mostly accurate. The US and the UK (and other NATO allies, as necessary) clearly coordinate when it comes to talking points. Claims of Chinese cyberwar in the US press will be followed by claims in the UK and Australian press, as well. My suspicion is that this is not the US Government and UK Government coordinating a story -- it's the intelligence agencies doing it. My opinion is that the intelligence services are fairly close to a "deep state" -- the CIA and NSA are completely out of control and the CIA has gone far toward building its own military, while the NSA has implemented completely unrestricted surveillance worldwide.

All of this stuff happens against the backdrop of Klein, Binney, Snowden, and the Vault 7 revelations, as well as solid attribution identifying the NSA as "equation group" and linking the code-tree of NSA-developed malware to STUXNET, FLAME, and DUQU. While the attribution that "Fancy Bear is the GRU" has been made and is probably fairly solid, the attribution of NSA malware and CIA malware is rock solid; the US has even admitted to deploying STUXNET -- Obama bragged about it. When Snowden's revelations outlined how the NSA had eavesdropped on Angela Merkel's cellphone, the Germans expressed shock and Barack Obama remarkably truthfully said "that's how these things are done" and blew the whole thing off by saying that the NSA wasn't eavesdropping on Merkel any more. [ bbc ]

It's hard to keep score because everything is pretty vague, but it sounds like the US has been dramatically out-spending and out-acting the other nations that it accuses of being prepared for cyberwar. I tend to be extremely skeptical of US claims because: bomber gap, missile gap, gulf of Tonkin, Iraq WMD, Afghanistan, Libya and every other aggressive attack by the US which was blamed on its target. The reason I assume the US is the most aggressive actor in cyberspace is because the US has done a terrible job of protecting its tool-sets and operational security: it's hard not to see the US is prepared for cyberwar, when both the NSA and the CIA leak massive collections of advanced tools.

Meanwhile, where are the leaks of Russian and Chinese tools? They have been few and far between, if there have been any at all. Does this mean that the Russians and Chinese have amazingly superior tradecraft, if not tools? I don't know. My observation is that the NSA and CIA have been horribly sloppy and have clearly spent a gigantic amount of money preparing to compromise both foreign and domestic systems -- that's bad enough. With friends like the NSA and CIA, who needs Russians and Chinese?

The article does not have great depth to its understanding of the situation, I'm afraid. So it comes off as a bit heavy on the recent news while ignoring the long-term trends. For example:

The allegations of Chinese supply chain attacks are of course just as hypocritical as the allegations against Russia. The very first know case of computer related supply chain manipulation goes back to 1982 :

A CIA operation to sabotage Soviet industry by duping Moscow into stealing booby-trapped software was spectacularly successful when it triggered a huge explosion in a Siberian gas pipeline, it emerged yesterday.

I wrote a piece about the "Farewell Dossier" in 2004. [ mjr ] Re-reading it, it comes off as skeptical but waffly. I think that it's self-promotion by the CIA and exaggerates considerably ("look how clever we are!") at a time when the CIA was suffering an attention and credibility deficit after its shitshow performance under George Tenet. But the first known cases of computer related supply chain manipulation go back to the 70s and 80s -- the NSA even compromised Crypto AG's Hagelin M-209 system (a mechanical ciphering machine) in order to read global communications encrypted with that product. You can imagine Crypto AG's surprise when the Iranian secret police arrested one of their sales reps for selling backdoor'd crypto -- the NSA had never told them about the backdoor, naturally. The CIA was also on record for producing Xerox machines destined for the USSR, which had recorders built into them So, while the article is portraying the historical sweep of NSA dirty tricks, they're only looking at the recent ones. Remember: the NSA also weakened the elliptic curve crypto library in RSA's Bsafe implementation, paying RSADSI $13 million to accept their tweaked code.

Why haven't we been hearing about the Chinese and Russians doing that sort of thing? There are four options:

  1. The Russians and Chinese are doing it, they're just so darned good nobody has caught them until just recently.
  2. The Russians and Chinese simply resort to using existing tools developed by the hacking/cybercrime community and rely on great operational security rather than fancy tools.
  3. The Russian and Chinese efforts are relatively tiny compared to the massive efforts the US expends tens of billions of dollars on. The US spends about $50bn on its intelligence agencies, while the entire Russian Department of Defense budget is about $90bn (China is around $139bn) -- maybe the Russians and Chinese have such a small footprint because they are much smaller operations?
  4. Something else.

That brings us to the recent kerfuffle about taps on the Supermicro motherboards. That's not unbelievable at all -- not in a world where we discover that Intel has built a parallel management CPU into every CPU since 2008, and that there is solid indications that other processors have similar backdoors.

Was the Intel IME a "backdoor" or just "a bad idea"? Well, that's tricky. Let me put my tinfoil hat on: making a backdoor look like a sloppily developed product feature would be the competent way to write a backdoor. Making it as sneaky as the backdoor in the Via is unnecessary -- incompetence is eminently believable.

&

(kaspersky)

I believe all of these stories (including the Supermicro) are the tip of a great big, ugly iceberg. The intelligence community has long known that software-only solutions are too mutable, and are easy to decompile and figure out. They have wanted to be in the BIOS of systems -- on the motherboard -- for a long time. If you go back to 2014, we have disclosures about the NSA malware that hides in hard drive BIOS: [ vice ] [ vice ] That appears to have been in progress around 2000/2001.

Of note, the group recovered two modules belonging to EquationDrug and GrayFish that were used to reprogram hard drives to give the attackers persistent control over a target machine. These modules can target practically every hard drive manufacturer and brand on the market, including Seagate, Western Digital, Samsung, Toshiba, Corsair, Hitachi and more. Such attacks have traditionally been difficult to pull off, given the risk in modifying hard drive software, which may explain why Kaspersky could only identify a handful of very specific targets against which the attack was used, where the risk was worth the reward.

But Equation Group's malware platforms have other tricks, too. GrayFish, for example, also has the ability to install itself into computer's boot record -- software that loads even before the operating system itself -- and stores all of its data inside a portion of the operating system called the registry, where configuration data is normally stored.

EquationDrug was designed for use on older Windows operating systems, and "some of the plugins were designed originally for use on Windows 95/98/ME" -- versions of Windows so old that they offer a good indication of the Equation Group's age.

This is not a very good example of how to establish a "malware gap" since it just makes the NSA look like they are incapable of keeping a secret. If you want an idea how bad it is, Kaspersky labs' analysis of the NSA's toolchain is a good example of how to do attribution correctly. Unfortunately for the US agenda, that solid attribution points toward Fort Meade in Maryland. [kaspersky]

Let me be clear: I think we are fucked every which way from the start. With backdoors in the BIOS, backdoors on the CPU, and wireless cellular-spectrum backdoors, there are probably backdoors in the GPUs and the physical network controllers, as well. Maybe the backdoors in the GPU come from the GRU and maybe the backdoors in the hard drives come from NSA, but who cares? The upshot is that all of our systems are so heinously compromised that they can only be considered marginally reliable. It is, literally, not your computer: it's theirs. They'll let you use it so long as your information is interesting to them.

Do I believe the Chinese are capable of doing such a thing? Of course. Is the GRU? Probably. Mossad? Sure. NSA? Well-documented attribution points toward NSA. Your computer is a free-fire zone. It has been since the mid 1990s, when the NSA was told "no" on the Clipper chip and decided to come up with its own Plan B, C, D, and E. Then, the CIA came up with theirs. Etc. There are probably so many backdoors in our systems that it's a miracle it works at all.

From my 2012 RSA conference lecture "Cyberwar, you're doing it wrong."

The problem is that playing in this space is the purview of governments. Nobody in the cybercrime or hacking world need tools like these. The intelligence operatives have huge budgets, compared to a typical company's security budget, and it's unreasonable to expect any business to invest such a level of effort on defending itself. So what should companies do? They should do exactly what they are doing: expect the government to deal with it; that's what governments are for. The problem with that strategy is that their government isn't on their side, either! It's Hobbes' playground.

In case you think I am engaging in hyperbole, I assure you I am not. If you want another example of the lengths (and willingness to bypass the law) "they" are willing to go, consider 'stingrays' that are in operation in every major US city and outside of every interesting hotel and high tech park. Those devices are not passive -- they actively inject themselves into the call set-up between your phone and your carrier -- your data goes through the stingray, or it doesn't go at all. If there are multiple stingrays, then your latency goes through the roof. "They" don't care. Are the stingrays NSA, FBI, CIA, Mossad, GRU, or PLA? Probably a bit of all of the above depending on where and when.

Whenever the US gets caught with its pants down around its ankles, it blames the Chinese or the Russians because they have done a good job of building the idea that the most serious hackers on the planet at the Chinese. I don't believe that we're seeing complex propaganda campaigns that are tied to specific incidents -- I think we see ongoing organic propaganda campaigns that all serve the same end: protect the agencies, protect their budgets, justify their existence, and downplay their incompetence.

So, with respect to "propaganda" I would say that the US intelligence community has been consistently pushing a propaganda agenda against the US government, and the citizens in order to justify its actions and defend its budget.

The government also engages in propaganda, and is influenced by the intelligence community's propaganda as well. And the propaganda campaigns work because everyone involved assumes, "well, given what the NSA has been able to do, I should assume the Chinese can do likewise." That's a perfectly reasonable assumption and I think it's probably true that the Chinese have capabilities. The situation is what Chuck Spinney calls "A self-licking ice cream cone" -- it's a justifying structure that makes participation in endless aggression seem like a sensible thing to do. And, when there's inevitably a disaster, it's going to be like a cyber-9/11 and will serve as a justification for even more unrestrained aggression.

Want to see what it looks like? A thousand thanks to Commentariat member [redacted] for this link. If you don't like video, there's an article here. [ toms ]

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

Is this an NSA backdoor, or normal incompetence? Is Intel Management Engine an NSA-inspired backdoor, or did some system engineers at Intel think that was a good idea? There are other scary indications of embedded compromise: the CIA's Vault7 archive included code that appeared to be intended to embed in the firmware of "smart" flatscreen TVs. That would make every LG flat panel in every hotel room, a listening device just waiting to be turned on.

We know the Chinese didn't do that particular bug but why wouldn't they do something similar, in something else? China is the world's oldest mature culture -- they literally wrote the book on strategy -- Americans acting as though it's a great surprise to learn that the Chinese are not stupid, it's just the parochialism of a 250 year-old culture looking at a 3,000 year-old culture and saying "wow, you guys haven't been asleep at the switch after all!"

WIRED on cyberspace treaties [ wired ]

Comments

  1. Pierce R. Butler says

    October 6, 2018 at 1:31 pm

    What little I've been able to find out the new Trump™ cybersecurity plan is that it doesn't involve any defense, just massive retribution against (perceived) foes.

    Funny how those obsessed with "false flag" operations work so hard to invite more of same.

  2. Marcus Ranum says

    October 6, 2018 at 2:28 pm

    Pierce R. Butler@#1:
    What little I've been able to find out the new Trump™ cybersecurity plan is that it doesn't involve any defense, just massive retribution against (perceived) foes.

    Yes. Since 2001, as far as most of us can tell, federal cybersecurity spend has been 80% offense, 20% defense. And a lot of the offensive spend has been aimed at We, The People.

  3. Cat Mara says

    October 6, 2018 at 5:20 pm

    Your mention of Operation Sundevil and Kevin Mitnick in a previous post made me think that maybe the reason we haven't seen the kind of leaks from the Russian and Chinese hacking operations that we've seem from the NSA is that they're running a "Kevin Mitnick style" operation; that is, relying less on technical solutions and using instead old-fashioned "social engineering" and other low-tech forms of espionage (like running troll farms on social media). I mean, I've seen interviews with retired US intelligence people since the 90s complain that since the late 1980s, the intelligence agencies have been crippled by management in love with hi-tech "SIGINT" solutions to problems that never deliver and neglecting old-fashioned "HUMINT" intelligence-gathering.

    The thing is, Kevin Mitnick got away with a lot of what he did because people didn't take security seriously then, and still don't. On a similar nostalgia vibe, I remember reading an article by Keith Bostic (one of the researchers who helped in the analysis of the Morris worm that took down a significant chunk of the Internet back in 1988) where he did a follow-up a year or so afterwards and some depressing number of organisations that had been hit by it still hadn't patched the holes that had let the worm infect them in the first place.

  4. Marcus Ranum says

    October 6, 2018 at 9:20 pm

    Cat Mara@#3:
    Your mention of Operation Sundevil and Kevin Mitnick in a previous post made me think that maybe the reason we haven't seen the kind of leaks from the Russian and Chinese hacking operations that we've seem from the NSA is that they're running a "Kevin Mitnick style" operation; that is, relying less on technical solutions and using instead old-fashioned "social engineering" and other low-tech forms of espionage (like running troll farms on social media).

    I think that's right, to a high degree. What if Edward Snowden was an agent provocateur instead of a well-meaning naive kid? A tremendous amount of damage could be done, as well as stealing the US' expensive toys. The Russians have been very good at doing exactly that sort of operation, since WWII. The Chinese are, if anything, more subtle than the Russians.

    The Chinese attitude, as expressed to me by someone who might be a credible source is, "why are you picking a fight with us? We don't care, you're too far away for us to threaten you, we both have loads of our own fish to fry. To them, the US is young, hyperactive, and stupid.

    The FBI is not competent, at all, against old-school humint intelligence-gathering. Compared to the US' cyber-toys, the old ways are probably more efficient and cost effective. China's intelligence community is also much more team-oriented than the CIA/NSA; they're actually a disciplined operation under the strategic control of policy-makers. That, by the way, is why Russians and Chinese stare in amazement when Americans ask things like "Do you think Putin knew about this?" What a stupid question! It's an autocracy; they don't have intelligence operatives just going an deciding "it's a nice day to go to England with some Novichok." The entire American attitude toward espionage lacks maturity.

    On a similar nostalgia vibe, I remember reading an article by Keith Bostic (one of the researchers who helped in the analysis of the Morris worm that took down a significant chunk of the Internet back in 1988) where he did a follow-up a year or so afterwards and some depressing number of organisations that had been hit by it still hadn't patched the holes that had let the worm infect them in the first place.

    That as an exciting time. We were downstream from University of Maryland, which got hit pretty badly. Pete Cottrel and Chris Torek from UMD were also in on Bostic's dissection. We were doing uucp over TCP for our email (that changed pretty soon after the worm) and our uucp queue blew up. I cured the worm with a reboot into single-user mode and a quick 'rm -f' in the uucp queue.

  5. Bob Moore says

    October 7, 2018 at 9:18 am

    Thanks. I appreciate your measured analysis and the making explicit of the bottom line: " agencies, protect their budgets, justify their existence, and downplay their incompetence."

[Oct 08, 2018] CIA Democrats call for aggression against Russia, run pro-war campaigns in 2018 congressional races by Patrick Martin

In other words CIA Democrats actually are running on classic Republican foreign policy platform with some neo-McCarthyism flavor added for appetite. . Such a convergence of two parities.
Notable quotes:
"... World Socialist Web Site ..."
Oct 03, 2018 | southfront.org

The Democratic Party is widely favored to win control of the House of Representatives in the US midterm elections November 6, with projections that it will gain 30 to 50 seats, or even more, well above the net gain of 23 required for a majority.

The last time the Democratic Party won control of the House from the Republicans was in 2006, when it captured 30 Republican seats on the basis of a limited appeal to the massive antiwar sentiment among working people after three years of disastrous and bloody warfare in Iraq, and five years after the US invasion and occupation of Afghanistan.

In stark contrast, there is not a hint of an antiwar campaign by the Democratic challengers seeking Republican seats in the 2018 elections. On the contrary, the pronouncements of leading Democrats on foreign policy issues have been strongly pro-war, attacking the Trump administration from the right for its alleged softness on Russia and its hostility to traditional US-led alliances like NATO.

This is particularly true of the 30 Democratic congressional nominees in competitive races who come from a national-security background. These challengers, previously identified by the World Socialist Web Site as the CIA Democrats , constitute the largest single grouping among Democratic nominees in competitive seats, more than state and local officials, lawyers or those wealthy enough to finance their own campaigns.

The 30 national-security candidates include six actual CIA, FBI or military intelligence agents, six State Department or other civilian national security officials, 11 combat veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan, all but one an officer, and seven other military veterans, including pilots, naval officers and military prosecutors (JAGs).

The range of views expressed by these 30 candidates is quite limited. With only one exception, Jared Golden , running in the First District of Maine, the military-intelligence Democrats do not draw any negative conclusions from their experience in leading, planning or fighting in the wars of the past 25 years, including two wars against Iraq, the invasion of Afghanistan, and other military engagements in the Persian Gulf and North and East Africa.

Golden, who is also the only rank-and-file combat veteran -- as opposed to an officer -- and the only one who admits to having suffered from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, criticizes congressional rubber-stamping of the wars of the past 20 years. "Over the past decade and a half, America has spent trillions on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and on other conflicts across the globe," his campaign website declares. "War should be a last resort, and only undertaken when the security interests of America are clearly present, and the risks and costs can be appropriately justified to the American people."

These sentiments hardly qualify as antiwar, but they sound positively radical compared to the materials posted on the websites of many of the other military-intelligence candidates. In some ways, Golden is the exception that proves the rule. What used to be the standard rhetoric of Democratic Party candidates when running against the administration of George W. Bush has been entirely scrapped in the course of the Obama administration, the first in American history to have been engaged in a major military conflict for every day of its eight years.

All the other national-security candidates accept as a basic premise that the United States must maintain its dominant world position. The most detailed foreign policy doctrine appears on the website of Amy McGrath , who is now favored to win her contest against incumbent Republican incumbent Andy Barr in the Sixth Congressional District of Kentucky.

McGrath follows closely the line of the Obama administration and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, supporting the Iran nuclear deal that Trump tore up, embracing Israel, warning of North Korea's development of nuclear weapons, and declaring it "critical that the US work with our allies and partners in the region to counter China's advances" in the South China Sea and elsewhere in Asia.

But Russia is clearly the main target of US national-security efforts, in her view. She writes, "Our Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has testified that Russia is the greatest threat to American security. Russia poses an existential threat to the United States due to its nuclear weapons and its behavior in the past several years has been disturbing. Russia's aggression in Georgia, Crimea, Ukraine, and Syria has been alarming. It's becoming more assertive in the Arctic, likely the most important geostrategic zone of competition in the coming decades. The US should consider providing defensive arms to Ukraine and exerting more pressure on Moscow using economic sanctions."

She concludes by calling for an investigation modeled on the 9/11 Commission into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

Five other national-security candidates focus on specific warnings about the danger of Russia and China, thus aligning themselves with the new national security orientation set in the most recent Pentagon strategy document, which declares that the principal US national security challenge is no longer the "war on terror," but the prospect of great power conflicts, above all with Russia and China.

Jessica Morse , a former State Department and AID official in Iraq, running in the Fourth District of California, blasts the Trump administration for "giving away global leadership to powers like China and Russia. Our security and our economy will both suffer if those countries are left to re-write the international rules."

Former FBI agent Christopher Hunter , running in the 12th District of Florida, declares, "Russia is a clear and present danger to the United States. We emerged victorious over the Soviet Union in the Cold War. We must resolve anew to secure an uncompromising victory over Russia and its tyrannical regime."

Elissa Slotkin , the former CIA agent and Pentagon official running in Michigan's Eighth Congressional District, cites her 14 years of experience "working on some of our country's most critical national security matters, including U.S.-Russia relations, the counter-ISIS campaign, and the U.S. relationship with NATO." She argues that "the United States must make investments in its military, intelligence, and diplomatic power" in order to maintain "a unique and vital role in the world."

Max Rose , a combat commander in Afghanistan now running in New York's 11th Congressional District (Staten Island and Brooklyn), calls for "recognizing Russia as a hostile foreign power and holding the Kremlin accountable for its attempts to undermine the sovereignty and democratic values of other nations." Rose is still in the military reserves, and took two weeks off from his campaign in August to participate in small-unit drills.

Joseph Kopser , running in the 21st District of Texas, is another anti-Russian firebrand, writing on his website, "As a retired Army Ranger, I know first hand the importance of standing strong with your allies. Given Russia's march toward a totalitarian state showing aggression around the region, as well as their extensive cyber and information warfare campaign directed at the U.S., England, and others, our Article 5 [NATO] commitment to our European allies and partners is more important than ever." He concludes, "Since the mid-twentieth century, the United States has been a principal world leader -- a standard that should never be changed."

Four national-security candidates add North Korea and Iran to China and Russia as specific targets of American military and diplomatic attack.

Josh Welle , a former naval officer who was deployed to Afghanistan, now running in the Fourth Congressional District of New Jersey, writes, "We have to stand together in the face of threats from countries like North Korea and Iran. The human rights violations and nuclear capabilities of these countries pose a direct threat to the stability of this world and therefore need to be met with strong military presence and a robust defense program to protect ourselves."

Tom Malinowski , former assistant secretary of state for human rights, running in New Jersey's Seventh District, calls for maintaining economic sanctions on Russia "until it stops its aggression in Ukraine and interference in our democracy ," effusively endorses the state of Israel (whose government actually interferes in US elections more than any other), and calls for stepped up sanctions against North Korea.

Mikie Sherill , a former Navy pilot and Russian policy officer, running in New Jersey's 11th District, writes, "I have sat across the table from the Russians, and know that we need our government to take the threat they pose seriously." She adds to this a warning about "threats posed by North Korea and Iran," the two most immediate targets of military-diplomatic blackmail by the Trump administration. She concludes, referring to North Korea's nuclear program, "For that reason I support a robust military presence in the region and a comprehensive missile defense program to defend America, our allies, and our troops abroad."

Dan McCready , an Iraq war unit commander who claims to have been born again when he was baptized in water from the Euphrates River, calls for war to be waged only "with overwhelming firepower," not "sporadically, with no strategy or end in sight, while our enemies like Iran, North Korea, Russia, and the terrorists outsmart and outlast us." He is running in North Carolina's Ninth Congressional District, adjacent to the huge military complex at Fort Bragg.

One military-intelligence candidate cites immigration as a national-security issue, echoing the position of the Trump administration, which constantly peddles scare stories that terrorists are infiltrating the United States disguised as immigrants and refugees. That is Richard Ojeda , running in the Third Congressional District of West Virginia, who publicly boasts of having voted for Trump in 2016, in the same election in which he won a seat in the West Virginia state senate running as a Democrat.

Ojeda writes on his web site, "We must also ensure that terrorists do not reach American soil by abusing our immigration process. We must keep an up to date terror watch list but provide better vetting for those that go onto the watch list."

A career Army Airborne officer, Ojeda voices the full-blown militarism of this social layer. "If there is one thing I am confident in, it is the ability of our nation's military," he declares. "The best way to keep Americans safe is to let our military do their job without muddying up their responsibilities with our political agendas."

He openly rejects control of the military by civilian policy-makers. "War is not a social experiment and I refuse to let politics play a role in my decision making when it comes to keeping you and your family safe," he continues. "I will not take my marching orders from anyone else concerning national security."

Only one of the 30 candidates, Ken Harbaugh , a retired Air Force pilot running in the Seventh Congressional District of Ohio, centered on the industrial city of Canton, acknowledges being part of this larger group. He notes, "In 2018, more vets are running for office than at any moment in my lifetime. Because of the growing inability of Washington to deal responsibly with the threats facing our nation, veterans from both sides of the aisle are stepping into the breach."

Referring to the mounting prospect of war, he writes, "Today, we face our gravest geopolitical challenge since 9/11. Our country remains at war in Afghanistan, we have troops engaged in North Africa, Iraq and Syria, and Russia continues to bully our allies. Meanwhile, North Korea has the ability to directly threaten the American mainland with nuclear missiles." He concludes, "we need leaders with the moral authority to speak on these issues, leaders who have themselves been on the front lines of these challenges."

These statements, taken cumulatively, present a picture of unbridled militarism and aggression as the program of the supposed "opposition" to the Trump administration's own saber-rattling and threats of "fire and fury like the world has never seen."

Perhaps even more remarkable is that the remaining 17 national-security candidates say nothing at all about foreign policy (in 11 cases) or limit themselves to anodyne observations about the necessity to provide adequate health care and other benefits to veterans (two cases), or vague generalities about the need to combine a strong military with diplomatic efforts (four cases). They give no specifics whatsoever.

In other words, while these candidates tout their own records as part of the national-security apparatus as their principal credential for election to Congress, they decline to tell the voters what they would do if they were in charge of American foreign policy.

Given that these 17 include intelligence agents ( Abigail Spanberger and Gina Ortiz Jones ), a National Security Council Iraq war planner ( Andy Kim ), and numerous other high-level State Department and military commanders, the silence can have only the most ominous interpretation.

These CIA Democrats don't want to tell voters about their plans for foreign policy and military intervention because they know these measures are deeply unpopular. They aim to gain office as stealth candidates, unveiling their program of militarism and war only after they take their seats, when they may very well exercise decisive influence in the next Congress.

[Oct 08, 2018] NATO Bombed You To Protect You Stoltenberg Explains 1999 Bombings During Visit To Serbia

Oct 08, 2018 | southfront.org

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg says that people having "poor" memories of NATO's 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia are wrong because the military bloc did this to protect civilians and save lives.

"I stressed that we did this to protect civilians and to stop the Milosevic regime," Stoltenberg stated during a meeting with the students of Belgrade University.

The NATO secretary stated further that the bloc supports a "dialogue" between Serbia and its breakaway region [now a self-proclaimed state] of Kosovo. According to him, Belgrade has to "look into the future" for furher cooperation between the two sides.

The attitude showed by Stoltenberg is a common example how the US-NATO propaganda works. Any actions, incluindg illegal military interventions, false flag provocations and mass civilian casualties, are being explained by the need to "defend democracy", "protect civilians" and "save lives".

https://www.youtube.com/embed/2M42BAJAk84?feature=oembed

[Oct 08, 2018] The Final Truth of Russia-gate by Justin Raimondo

Notable quotes:
"... As the hoax unravels, the real story of "foreign collusion" comes out ..."
"... This entire episode has Her Majesty's Secret Service's fingerprints all over it. Steele's key role is plain enough: here was a British spook who was not only hired by the Clinton campaign to dig up dirt on Trump but was unusually passionate about his work – almost as if he'd have done it for free. And then there was the earliest approach to the Trump campaign, made by Cambridge professor and longtime spook Stefan Halper to Carter Page. And then there's the mysterious alleged "link" to Russian intelligence, Professor Joseph Mifsud, whose murky British-based thinktank managed to operate openly despite later claims it was a Russian covert operation. ..."
"... It was Mifsud who orchestrated the Russia-gate hoax, first suggesting that the Russians had Hillary Clinton's emails, and then disappearing into thin air as soon as the story he had planted percolated into plain view. Some "Russian agent"! ..."
"... Trump's decision to walk back his announcement that the key Russia-gate intelligence would be declassified tells us almost as much as if he'd tweeted it out, unredacted. For what it tells us is that public knowledge of the contents would constitute a major break in relations with at least one key ally. ..."
"... So here we have it at last, the final truth of Russia-gate: yes, there was indeed foreign collusion in the 2016 election, but it came from the opposite direction than the media are telling us. We weren't attacked by Russia: a few thousand dollars in Facebook ads that nobody saw did not put Trump in the White House. Our democratic process was undermined, not by the supposedly omnipotent Vladimir Putin but by the intelligence agencies of some of our more beloved "allies." We were attacked by a tag -team, both foreign and domestic, intent on ousting a democratically-elected President by any means necessary. ..."
"... When those subsidies, subventions, and special privileges are threatened, as they are by the nationalist cheapskate Trump, who would gladly demolish the whole decrepit, dated, and dangerous cold war architecture with a wave of his hand. A US President who puts America first? They can't allow it. ..."
"... The global Establishment has risen up against the People. ..."
Oct 08, 2018 | original.antiwar.com

As the hoax unravels, the real story of "foreign collusion" comes out

The conspiracy to overthrow a sitting US President extends far beyond our own "Deep State." As I've been saying in this space for quite some time, it's been an international team effort from the beginning. Setting aside the British origins of the obscene "dossier" compiled by "ex"-MI6 agent Christopher Steele, we now have further confirmation of foreign involvement in President Trump's decision to delay (perhaps indefinitely) the declassification of key Russia-gate documents. While US intelligence officials were expected to oppose the move, "Trump was also swayed by foreign allies, including Britain, in deciding to reverse course, these people said. It wasn't immediately clear what other governments may have raised concerns to the White House."

But of course the Washington Post knows perfectly well which other governments would have reason to raise "concerns" to the White House. It's clear from the public record that the following "allies" have rendered the "Resistance" essential assistance at one time or another:

This is part of the price we pay for our vaunted "empire," and the "liberal international order" the striped-pants set is so on about. As that grizzled old "isolationist" prophet, Garet Garrett, described the insignia of empire at the dawn of the cold war:

"There is yet another sign that defines itself gradually. When it is clearly defined it may be already too late to do anything about it. That is to say, a time comes when Empire finds itself –

"A prisoner of history.

"The history of a Republic is its own history . A Republic may change its course, or reverse it, and that will be its own business., But the history of Empire is a world history, and belongs to many people."

A Republic may restrain itself, wrote Garrett, but "Empire must put forth its power" – on whose behalf? There are many claimants whose wealth, position, and prestige depend on the Imperial largesse. When that claim is threatened, the "satellites" turn against their protector. This is what the Russia-gate covert action -- carried out by coordinated action of our "allies" – is all about. We now have clear evidence of just how far our "client" states are willing go to ensure that the American gravy train of free goodies continues to flow.

Trump's decision to walk back his announcement that the key Russia-gate intelligence would be declassified tells us almost as much as if he'd tweeted it out, unredacted. For what it tells us is that public knowledge of the contents would constitute a major break in relations with at least one key ally.

So here we have it at last, the final truth of Russia-gate: yes, there was indeed foreign collusion in the 2016 election, but it came from the opposite direction than the media are telling us. We weren't attacked by Russia: a few thousand dollars in Facebook ads that nobody saw did not put Trump in the White House. Our democratic process was undermined, not by the supposedly omnipotent Vladimir Putin but by the intelligence agencies of some of our more beloved "allies." We were attacked by a tag -team, both foreign and domestic, intent on ousting a democratically-elected President by any means necessary.

Here is the final irrefutable argument against America as the "world leader," designated champion of the "liberal international order" – we become, as Garrett noted, a prisoner of history. Indeed, we are no longer entitled to write our own history, but must endure the lobbying and aggressive interventions of our ungrateful and spiteful "allies," whose welfare states could not exist without generous US "defense" subsidies.

When those subsidies, subventions, and special privileges are threatened, as they are by the nationalist cheapskate Trump, who would gladly demolish the whole decrepit, dated, and dangerous cold war architecture with a wave of his hand. A US President who puts America first? They can't allow it.

And that's really the essence of the fight, the issue that will determine the woof and warp of American politics in the new millennium. The global Establishment has risen up against the People. There's no telling what the outcome will be, but one thing I know for sure: I know what side I'm on. Do you?

[Oct 08, 2018] The Holes in the Official Skripal Story by Craig Murray

British intelligence services have a lot of things to explain now. But who will ask them ?
Notable quotes:
"... The nub of the British government's approach has been the shocking willingness of the corporate and state media to parrot repeatedly the lie that the nerve agent was Russian made, even after Porton Down said they could not tell where it was made and the OPCW confirmed that finding. ..."
"... What is certainly untrue is that only Russia has a motive. The obvious motive is to attempt to blame and discredit Russia. Those who might wish to do this include Ukraine and Georgia, with both of which Russia is in territorial dispute, and those states and jihadist groups with which Russia is in conflict in Syria. The NATO military industrial complex also obviously has a plain motive for fueling tension with Russia. ..."
"... There is of course the possibility that Skripal was attacked by a private gangster interest with which he was in conflict, or that the attack was linked to Skripal's MI6 handler Pablo Miller's work on the Orbis/Steele Russiagate dossier on Donald Trump. ..."
"... Plainly, the British governments statements that only Russia had the means and only Russia had the motive, are massive lies on both counts. ..."
"... Yet no motive has been adduced for an attack on Yulia or why they would attack while Yulia was visiting – they could have painted his doorknob with less fear of discovery anytime he was alone ..."
"... The incompetence of the assassination beggars belief when compared to British claims of a long term production and training programme. The Russians built the heart of the International Space Station. ..."
"... With Skripal being resettled by MI6, and a former intelligence officer himself, it beggars belief that MI6 did not fit, as standard, some basic security including a security camera on his house. ..."
"... Why did they both touch the outside doorknob in exiting and closing the door? Why did the novichok act so very slowly, with evidently no feeling of ill health for at least five hours, and then how did it strike both down absolutely simultaneously, so that neither can call for help, despite their being different sexes, weights, ages, metabolisms and receiving random completely uncontrolled doses. The odds of that happening are virtually nil. And why was the nerve agent ultimately ineffective? ..."
"... Why was the Detective Sergeant affected and nobody else who attended the house, or the scene where the Skripals were found? Why was Bailey only lightly affected by this extremely deadly substance, of which a tiny amount can kill? ..."
"... I am, with a few simple questions, demolishing what is the most ludicrous conspiracy theory I have ever heard – the Salisbury conspiracy theory being put forward by the British government and its corporate lackies. ..."
"... During a visit to Salisbury and Amesbury, the UK home secretary said: "We don't want to jump to conclusions." but they sure were with the first poisoning. Time will tell. ..."
Oct 08, 2018 | southfront.org

Craig Murray: "The Holes in the Official Skripal Story"

... ... ...

" The nub of the British government's approach has been the shocking willingness of the corporate and state media to parrot repeatedly the lie that the nerve agent was Russian made, even after Porton Down said they could not tell where it was made and the OPCW confirmed that finding. In fact, while the Soviet Union did develop the "novichok" class of nerve agents, the programme involved scientists from all over the Soviet Union, especially Ukraine, Armenia and Georgia, as I myself learnt when I visited the newly decommissioned Nukus testing facility in Uzbekistan in 2002.

Furthermore, it was the USA who decommissioned the facility and removed equipment back to the United States. At least two key scientists from the programme moved to the United States. Formulae for several novichok have been published for over a decade. The USA, UK and Iran have definitely synthesised a number of novichok formulae and almost certainly others have done so too. Dozens of states have the ability to produce novichok, as do many sophisticated non-state actors.

As for motive, the Russian motive might be revenge, but whether that really outweighs the international opprobrium incurred just ahead of the World Cup, in which so much prestige has been invested, is unclear." Craig Murray

What is certainly untrue is that only Russia has a motive. The obvious motive is to attempt to blame and discredit Russia. Those who might wish to do this include Ukraine and Georgia, with both of which Russia is in territorial dispute, and those states and jihadist groups with which Russia is in conflict in Syria. The NATO military industrial complex also obviously has a plain motive for fueling tension with Russia.

There is of course the possibility that Skripal was attacked by a private gangster interest with which he was in conflict, or that the attack was linked to Skripal's MI6 handler Pablo Miller's work on the Orbis/Steele Russiagate dossier on Donald Trump.

Plainly, the British governments statements that only Russia had the means and only Russia had the motive, are massive lies on both counts.

The Russians had been tapping the phone of Yulia Skripal. They decided to attack Sergei Skripal while his daughter was visiting from Moscow.

In an effort to shore up the government narrative, at the time of the Amesbury attack the security services put out through Pablo Miller's long term friend, the BBC's Mark Urban, that the Russians "may have been" tapping Yulia Skripal's phone, and the claim that this was strong evidence that the Russians had indeed been behind the attack.

But think this through. If that were true, then the Russians deliberately attacked at a time when Yulia was in the UK rather than when Sergei was alone. Yet no motive has been adduced for an attack on Yulia or why they would attack while Yulia was visiting – they could have painted his doorknob with less fear of discovery anytime he was alone. Furthermore, it is pretty natural that Russian intelligence would tap the phone of Yulia, and of Sergei if they could. The family of double agents are normal targets. I have no doubt in the least, from decades of experience as a British diplomat, that GCHQ have been tapping Yulia's phone. Indeed, if tapping of phones is seriously put forward as evidence of intent to murder, the British government must be very murderous indeed.

Their trained assassin(s) painted a novichok on the doorknob of the Skripal house in the suburbs of Salisbury. Either before or after the attack, they entered a public place in the centre of Salisbury and left a sealed container of the novichok there.

The incompetence of the assassination beggars belief when compared to British claims of a long term production and training programme. The Russians built the heart of the International Space Station. They can kill an old bloke in Salisbury. Why did the Russians not know that the dose from the door handle was not fatal? Why would trained assassins leave crucial evidence lying around in a public place in Salisbury? Why would they be conducting any part of the operation with the novichok in a public area in central Salisbury?

Why did nobody see them painting the doorknob? This must have involved wearing protective gear, which would look out of place in a Salisbury suburb. With Skripal being resettled by MI6, and a former intelligence officer himself, it beggars belief that MI6 did not fit, as standard, some basic security including a security camera on his house.

The Skripals both touched the doorknob and both functioned perfectly normally for at least five hours, even able to eat and drink heartily. Then they were simultaneously and instantaneously struck down by the nerve agent, at a spot in the city centre coincidentally close to where the assassins left a sealed container of the novichok lying around. Even though the nerve agent was eight times more deadly than Sarin or VX, it did not kill the Skripals because it had been on the doorknob and affected by rain.

Why did they both touch the outside doorknob in exiting and closing the door? Why did the novichok act so very slowly, with evidently no feeling of ill health for at least five hours, and then how did it strike both down absolutely simultaneously, so that neither can call for help, despite their being different sexes, weights, ages, metabolisms and receiving random completely uncontrolled doses. The odds of that happening are virtually nil. And why was the nerve agent ultimately ineffective?

Detective Sergeant Bailey attended the Skripal house and was also poisoned by the doorknob, but more lightly. None of the other police who attended the house were affected.

Why was the Detective Sergeant affected and nobody else who attended the house, or the scene where the Skripals were found? Why was Bailey only lightly affected by this extremely deadly substance, of which a tiny amount can kill?

Four months later, Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess were rooting about in public parks, possibly looking for cigarette butts, and accidentally came into contact with the sealed container of a novichok. They were poisoned and Dawn Sturgess subsequently died.

If the nerve agent had survived four months because it was in a sealed container, why has this sealed container now mysteriously disappeared again? If Rowley and Sturgess had direct contact straight from the container, why did they not both die quickly? Why had four months searching of Salisbury and a massive police, security service and military operation not found this container, if Rowley and Sturgess could?

I am, with a few simple questions, demolishing what is the most ludicrous conspiracy theory I have ever heard – the Salisbury conspiracy theory being put forward by the British government and its corporate lackies.

My next post will consider some more plausible explanations of this affair.

South Front: Craig Murray The Holes in the Official Skripal Story

RamboDave • 3 months ago ,

Has anyone considered if Rowley and Sturgess might in fact be the actual ones that put the novichok on the Skripal's doorknob four months ago? Perhaps paid to do so by Israel or Ukraine?

ruca RamboDave • 3 months ago ,

I don't believe that it ever was novichok. All BS from a British hag

Douglas Houck • 3 months ago ,

From yesterday's Guardian:

"Searches began on 6 July of Rowley's home and it was not until Wednesday (11th) that the bottle was discovered by officers, who were battling searing sunshine and protective suits to stop them being exposed to the lethal toxin." "...As a precaution Public Health England continues to advise the public not to pick up any strange items such as syringes, needles, cosmetics or similar objects made of materials such as metal, plastic or glass."

Obviously, the bottle was not simply lying around in plain sight. Would appear to be drug related? Strange. Would be nice if the British were more forthcoming. Another interesting bit is why are the British now, not jumping to conclusions?

"Sajid Javid has said there are no plans to impose fresh sanctions on Russia following the latest nerve agent poisoning in Wiltshire.

During a visit to Salisbury and Amesbury, the UK home secretary said: "We don't want to jump to conclusions." but they sure were with the first poisoning. Time will tell.

AM Hants Douglas Houck • 3 months ago ,

They are now saying it looked like a bottle of perfume. The story just gets weirder.

Novichok nerve agent that killed a mother-of-three in Salisbury was in a PERFUME bottle she may have sprayed herself with, her poisoned lover's brother reveals
Charlie Rowley, 45, was left fighting for his life after he was exposed to Novichok
His partner Dawn Sturgess, 44, died after she was poisoned by the nerve agent
Matthew Rowley said the poison was in a perfume bottle his brother picked up ... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/...

So how did the homeless woman's partner come into contact with, but, nobody else? How long does Novochok last, once made up? Hours or months?

Douglas Houck AM Hants • 3 months ago ,

Bases on VX (the most similar nerve agent to Novochok) it would last days, except if kept sealed.

It's beginning to look like someone from Porton Down is the source, unless the perfume bottle was used to transport the Novochok into the country and then tossed.

The key is the bottle.

AM Hants Douglas Houck • 3 months ago ,

Wonder if the junkies were the source?

[email protected] • 3 months ago ,

The fundamental flaw in the reasoning of this article is that it assumes the poisoning was meant to be kept secret. If you are going to poison someone with Polonium or Novichuk you are sending a distinct message about where the poison came from.

You could kill someone with alflatoxin and no one would know. There a loads of ways a state player can kill people in an untraceable way,

So the purpose of the poisoning was to send a message - not to eliminate a threat,

Once you see that as the purpose of the poisoning, the question becomes is who wants to tell the world that they can kill at long range and little detection with sophisticated neurochemical weapons. . . .

[Oct 08, 2018] Wilderness of mirrors MI6, the Cold War, spies and traitors from Gordievsky to Skripal by George Galloway

Notable quotes:
"... But Britain recruited Skripal in 1996 when not only was the Soviet Union dead but Russia was ruled by the West's performing bear Boris Yeltsin. And during his presidency, Russia was passed-out on the floor with everyone picking its pockets. ..."
"... What could possibly go wrong? ..."
Oct 03, 2018 | www.rt.com

That the USSR was an existential threat to Western capitalism and colonialism and war – of one kind or another – between these two camps was logical and inevitable. But the Soviet Union is 30 years dead.

Indeed, Gordievsky through Macintyre can – if he's telling the truth – claim that he helped bring about the (brief) end of history and the "final" victory. His claimed role in the rise and rise of Gorbachev's relationship with Mrs Thatcher and, by extension, President Reagan certainly hastened the downfall of the USSR.

But Britain recruited Skripal in 1996 when not only was the Soviet Union dead but Russia was ruled by the West's performing bear Boris Yeltsin. And during his presidency, Russia was passed-out on the floor with everyone picking its pockets.

Why was Britain still fighting the Cold War against Russia in 1996, and why is it still fighting the Cold War against Russia now?

Just this week, the rather effete British Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson – a former fireplace salesman – said he was sending 800 shivering British soldiers to the Arctic to be ready to fight Russia there. Amidst the snow. And the ice.

As both Napoleon and Hitler must have said: " What could possibly go wrong? "

George Galloway was a member of the British Parliament for nearly 30 years. He presents TV and radio shows (including on RT). He is a film-maker, writer and a renowned orator.

[Oct 07, 2018] Everything Is A Hoax by Paul Craig Roberts

Notable quotes:
"... Bush and Cheney: How They Runed America and the World ..."
Oct 07, 2018 | www.unz.com

An Israeli expert on terrorism and covert assassination procedures explains that the alleged Russian GRU attack on the Skripals with a supposedly deadly nerve agent is a completely obvious hoax to anyone who knows anything at all. https://russia-insider.com/en/skripals-are-mi6-hoax-not-worthy-ladies-detective-novels-israeli-expert-demolishes-uk-case/ri24912

The official story, says the expert, is "stupidity on stupidity."

I agree with him.

The question is: Why did the British government think that they could get away with such an obvious hoax? The answer is that the people in Western countries don't know anything about anything. They live in a world in which their reality is a product of the propaganda fed to them by "news organizations" and Hollywood movies. They only receive controlled explanations. Therefore, they know nothing about how anything really functions. Read the account by the Israeli expert to understand the vast difference between the British government's hoax and the reality of how an assassination is conducted.

The Israeli expert got me to wondering why the British government thought anyone would fall for such a transparently false story. Having just read David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth's new book, 9/11 Unmasked , and David Ray Griffin's 2017 book, Bush and Cheney: How They Runed America and the World , the answer became obvious. The British government had watched the idiot Western populations fall for the official 9/11 conspiracy story in which a few Saudi Arabians, who could not fly airplanes and without the support of any intelligence agency, caused the entire security apparatus ot the United States to fail utterly, and no one was held responsible for the total failure. The British government concluded that anyone who could possibly believe such an obviously false story would believe anything.

I remember coming to that conclusion years ago before the official conspiracy theory in the 9/11 Commission Report was blown to pieces by thousands of scientists, structural engineers, high-rise architects, military and civilian pilots, first responders on the scene, and a large number of former high government officials both in the US and abroad.

At first I did not connect the zionist neoconservatives' plot, outlined in their public writings (for example, Norman Podhorttz in Commentary ) to destroy 7 Middle Eastern countries in five years (also described by General Wesley Clark) and their statement that they needed a "new Pearl Harbor" to implement their plan, with the attack on the World Trade Center. But as I watched the twin towers blow up floor by floor it was completely obvious that these were not builldings falling down due to asymetrical structural damage and limited, low temperature office fires that probably did not even warm the massive steel structure to the point of being warm to the touch. When you watch the videos you see buildings blowing up. It is as clear as day. You see each floor blow. You see steel beams and other debris fly out the sides as projectiles. It is amazing that any human is so completely stupid as to think what he is seeing with his own eyes are buildings falling down from structural damage. But it required many years before half of the American people realized that the official account was pure bullshit.

Today polls indicate that a majority of people do not believe the official 9/11 propaganda any more than they believe the Warren Commission Report on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the alleged Gulf of Tonkin attack, or the report from Admiral McCain (father of John) erasing Israel's responsibility for the destruction of the USS Liberty and its crew during LBJ's administration, or that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, or Iran had nukes, or the many lies about about Syria, Libya's Gaddafi, or Somalia, or Yemen, or the "Russian invasion of Georgia," the "Russian invasion of Ukraine." But at each time the idiot population, no matter how many times they had learned that the governments lied to them initially believed the next lie, thereby permitting the lie to become fact. Thus, the idiot Western populations created their own world of controlled explanations.

Only a deranged person could believe anything any Western government says. But the Western world has a huge number of deranged people. There are plenty of them to validate the next official lie. The ignorant fools make it possible for Western governments to continue their policy of lies that are driving the world to extinction in a war with Russia and China.

Perhaps I am being too hard on the insouciant Western populations. Ron Unz is no moron. Yet he accepted the transparently false 9/11 story until he started to pay attention. Once he paid attention, he realized it was false. http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-911-conspiracy-theories/

Like myself, Ron Unz has noticed that the 9/11 Truth movement has succeeded in totally discrediting the official 9/11 story. But the unanswered question remains: Who did it?

Unz says it was Israel, not Bush & Cheney. This is also the position of Christopher Bollyn. It seems certain that Israel was involved. We have the fact of the Mossad agents caught celebrating as they filmed the collalpse of the WTC towers. Obviously, they knew in advance and were set up ready to film. Later they were shown on Israeli TV where they stated that they had been sent to film the destruction of the buildings.

We also have the fact of the large profits made by someone that the US government continues to protect on shorting the stock of the airlines, the planes of which were allegely hijacked.

In other words, the 9/11 attack was known in advance, as was the destruction of WTC building 7 as evidenced by the BBC reporter standing in front of the still standing building accouncing its destruction about a half hour before it occurred.

Unz and Bollyn's case against Israel is powerful. I agree with Unz that George W. Bush was not part of the plot. If he had been, he would have been on the scene directing America's heroic response to the first, and only, terrorist attack on America. lnstead, Bush was moved out of the way, and kept out of the way, while Cheney handled the situation.

I understand what Unz is doing by focusing attention on the main beneficiary of the hoax 9/11 story. However Cheney and his corporation, Halliburton, also benefitted. Halliburton received large municifient US government contracts for services in Afghanistan and Iraq. Cheney, as David Ray Griffen proves, achieved his aim of elevating the executive branch above the US Constitution and statutory US law.

Moreover, it was impossible for Mossad to pull off such an attack without high level support in the US government. Only a US official could have ordered the numerous simulations of the attack underway in order to confuse the air traffic controllers and the US Air Force.

I understand what Unz is doing by focusing attention on the main beneficiary of the hoax 9/11 story. However Cheney and his corporation, Halliburton, also benefitted. Halliburton received large municifient US government contracts for services in Afghanistan and Iraq. Cheney, as David Ray Griffen proves, achieved his aim of elevating the executive branch above the US Constitution and statutory US law.

Moreover, it was impossible for Mossad to pull off such an attack without high level support in the US government. Only a US official could have ordered the numerous simulations of the attack underway in order to confuse the air traffic controllers and the US Air Force.

The Israeli government could not have ordered the destruction of the crime scene, opposed by the New York fire marshall as a felony. This required US government authority. The steel beams, which showed all sorts of distortions that could only have been caused by nano-thermite were quickly sent to Asia for reprocessing. The intense fires and molten rubble in the buildings' remains six weeks after their collapse never received an official explanation. To this day, no one has explained how low-temperature, smothered office fires that burned for one hour or less melted or weakened massive steel beams and produced molten steel six weeks afterward.

Unz is correct that Israel made out like a bandit. Israel as a result of 9/11 got rid of half of the constraints on its expansion. Only Syria and Iran remain, and the Trump regime is pushing hard for Israel, even against Russia, a government that at its will can completely destroy the United States and Israel, something that much of the world wishes would happen.

Unz is correct that right now the totally evil and corrupt US and Israeli governments have the entire world on the path to extinction. However, he omits American responsibility, that of the evil Dick Cheney, the Zionist neconservatives who are Israel's Fifth Column in America, and the utter insouciance of the American people who do not show enough intelligence or awareness to warrant their survival.

[Oct 06, 2018] Scientists Raise Alarm Over U.S. Bio-Weapon Programs

Notable quotes:
"... Last week the Russian Ministry of Defense and the Russian Foreign Ministry accused the U.S. of illegal biological weapon research in the Tbilisi laboratory : ..."
"... The documents record the deaths of 73 people over a short period of time, indicating a test of "a highly toxic chemical or biological agents with high lethality rate," said Igor Kirillov, commander of the Russian military branch responsible for defending troops from radiological, chemical and biological weapons. ..."
"... The U.S. rejects the claims but it does not explain the documents , what kind of research is done near Tbilisi, and the unusual secrecy and security around the laboratory. ..."
"... It is not only the Russians and Georgians who are concerned about secret U.S. biological warfare research. German and French scientists recently raised alarm over another dubious Pentagon research project. ..."
Oct 06, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Yonatan , Oct 6, 2018 10:22:53 AM | link

Recent evidence about deadly tests of biological substances in Tbilisi, Georgia raised alarm about U.S. biological weapon research in foreign countries. European scientist are extremely concerned about a dubious research program, financed by the Pentagon, that seems designed to spread diseases to crops, animals and people abroad. The creation of such weapons and of special ways to distribute them is prohibited under national and international law.

The U.S. is running biological weapon research across the globe :

Bio warfare scientists using diplomatic cover test man-made viruses at Pentagon bio laboratories in 25 countries across the world. These US bio-laboratories are funded by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) under a $ 2.1 billion military program– Cooperative Biological Engagement Program (CBEP), and are located in former Soviet Union countries such as Georgia and Ukraine, the Middle East, South East Asia and Africa.

Until the mid nineteen-seventies the U.S. military tested biological warfare weapons on U.S. people , sometimes over large areas and on specific races. After a Congress investigation revealed the wide ranging program such testing was moved abroad.

Private companies use U.S. government controlled laboratories in foreign countries for secret biological research under contract of the U.S. military, the CIA and the Department of Homeland Security. Last month the Bulgarian journalist Dilyana Gaytandzhieva reported of one of these U.S. controlled bio-laboratories:

The US Embassy to Tbilisi transports frozen human blood and pathogens as diplomatic cargo for a secret US military program. Internal documents, implicating US diplomats in the transportation of and experimenting on pathogens under diplomatic cover were leaked to me by Georgian insiders. According to these documents, Pentagon scientists have been deployed to the Republic of Georgia and have been given diplomatic immunity to research deadly diseases and biting insects at the Lugar Center – the Pentagon biolaboratory in Georgia's capital Tbilisi.

Al Mayadeen TV broadcasted a video reportage about the laboratory and its deadly effects on Georgian 'patients'.

Last week the Russian Ministry of Defense and the Russian Foreign Ministry accused the U.S. of illegal biological weapon research in the Tbilisi laboratory :

The question of what really might have taken place at the secretive US-sponsored research facility hosted by Russia's southern neighbor was raised by the Russian military on Thursday after they studied files published online by a former Georgian minister.

The documents record the deaths of 73 people over a short period of time, indicating a test of "a highly toxic chemical or biological agents with high lethality rate," said Igor Kirillov, commander of the Russian military branch responsible for defending troops from radiological, chemical and biological weapons.

The U.S. rejects the claims but it does not explain the documents , what kind of research is done near Tbilisi, and the unusual secrecy and security around the laboratory.

It is not only the Russians and Georgians who are concerned about secret U.S. biological warfare research. German and French scientists recently raised alarm over another dubious Pentagon research project.


by MPG/D.Duneka - bigger

In October 2016 the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) announced a new project called Insect Allies :

A new DARPA program is poised to provide an alternative to traditional agricultural threat response, using targeted gene therapy to protect mature plants within a single growing season. DARPA proposes to leverage a natural and very efficient two-step delivery system to transfer modified genes to plants: insect vectors and the plant viruses they transmit. In the process, DARPA aims to transform certain insect pests into "Insect Allies," the name of the new effort.

The scenario DARPA describes is quite complicate. If a crop, for example maize, were widely infected with some illness, a virus would be manipulated and applied to the crop. The itself genetically modified virus would genetically modify the crop to 'cure' the illness. Infected insects would be used to distribute the viruses across the fields.

The program is run by the Biological Technologies Office (BTO) of DARPA. It does not come cheap. At least $27 million have been committed to it. If the discussed program were for purely agricultural purposes why would the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which is part of the Pentagon, propose and finance such research?

Scientist from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology in Plön, Germany, and the Institut des Sciences de l'Evolution de Montpellier, France, along with legal scholars from the University of Freiburg point out that the method DARPA wants to apply makes little sense for the stated agricultural purposes.

The eminent U.S. magazine Science published their work. The scientists ask if the project is Agricultural research, or a new bioweapon system?

[A]n ongoing research program funded by the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) aims to disperse infectious genetically modified viruses that have been engineered to edit crop chromosomes directly in fields.
...
In the context of the stated aims of the DARPA program, it is our opinion that the knowledge to be gained from this program appears very limited in its capacity to enhance U.S. agriculture or respond to national emergencies (in either the short or long term). Furthermore, there has been an absence of adequate discussion regarding the major practical and regulatory impediments toward realizing the projected agricultural benefits. As a result, the program may be widely perceived as an effort to develop biological agents for hostile purposes and their means of delivery , which -- if true -- would constitute a breach of the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC).

It its response to the Science paper DARPA again insists that the program is for purely agricultural purpose. But the response does not answer the questions the scientists put up.

The mechanism of spreading infectious genetically modified viruses to genetically modify and 'heal' plants in the fields is itself full of problems and dangers. To use insects for distributing such viruses borders on insane.

If one has access to the targeted crop fields and if one has a genetically modified virus to influence the plants why would one use insects to distribute it? Why not use the well known targeted process of spraying the affected fields, just like it is widely done today? Only when one does not have access to the fields, when these are situated in a foreign country the U.S. has no access to, does it make sense to use insects for such purposes.

The idea that the real (and illegal) purpose of such U.S. research is biological warfare is not far fetched at all.

During the Korea War the U.S. dropped infected insects and rodents over north Korea and China to infect people with deadly diseases. Various pathogens, including anthrax, were used against the civilian population. During the Vietnam war the U.S. sprayed thousand of square miles with poisonous defoliants. It tested biological weapons on the people of Hawaii, Alaska, Maryland, Florida, Canada and Britain. In 2002 weaponized anthrax spores from the U.S. biological warfare laboratory in Fort Derrick were used to scare U.S. politicians into agreeing to the Patriot Act. At least five people were killed. And why is the U.S. Air Force looking for synovial tissue and RNA samples collected specifically from Caucasian people in Russia?

Biological warfare programs are extremely dangerous. Not only to 'the enemy' but to ones own population. Infectious diseases and pathogens can spread around the globe within a few days. Genetic modifications can have unpredictable secondary effects. Viruses can jump over the species barrier. These are the sound reasons why such weapons, and research into using them, are prohibited.

The U.S. government should follow the law and stop all such programs. Even if only in the self interest of protecting its very own people.

Posted by b on October 6, 2018 at 10:02 AM | Permalink

Comments A picture speaks a thoudsand words. There are 49 bio-weapons research labs in 6 countries in close proximity to Russia.

https://cont.ws/uploads/pic/2018/10/1538709227_349754.jpg

The UK Porton Down labs are also involved in this process. They have conducted experiments on the general public travelling on the London Underground. More recently, they have received a nice £47 million funding boost for all their good work on the Skripal case.

"Biological warfare programs are extremely dangerous. Not only to 'the enemy' but to ones own population."

This may explain the US BW research program interest in genetic material of RUssians. They may hope to produce some kind of narrowly targetted (in theory) pathogen. Given the ethnic diversity of the Russian Federation, Russian-ness is largely cultural rather than genetic. Genetic effects would only likely to succeed in populations with a narrow genetic spread.

BM , Oct 6, 2018 11:00:10 AM | link

The sickness of these people knows no limits. The Nazis and the wartime Japanises were teddy bears by comparison.
psychohistorian , Oct 6, 2018 11:02:29 AM | link
@ b who ended with:
"
The U.S. government should follow the law and stop all such programs. Even if only in the self interest of protecting its very own people.
"
Your assumption is that the US government has the best interests of its citizens in mind. We know the US government is under the control of the global elite and yes, they do not have the best interests of global humanity at heart.

Western humans are being controlled by a parasite class that has historically operated in this manner. It is only with the advent of the intertubes that information is shared widely enough for these patterns of control to become clear. The mindset behind this control seems to be monotheism with the center held by private finance. Monotheism was perverted enough in in 1054 to insure that nowhere in Europe is the Crab Nebula supernova that was visible for 23 days and nights in the sky documented. This is a perverted mindset that denies reality so thoroughly, eh?

The spawn of the monotheistic elite continue to act as though they really are better than the rest of humanity and deserve to rule over everyone. They are having their position challenged and seem to have no moral center other than to themselves.

My only positive point to this situation is that it clearly brings out the entitled from under their rocks to push their bias. IF Western society cannot stand up and say that we don't want to live like this, then I suspect our extinction is closer than many think

BM , Oct 6, 2018 11:17:33 AM | link
B: ... To use insects for distributing such viruses borders on insane .

If one has access to the targeted crop fields and if one has a genetically modified virus to influence the plants why would one use insects to distribute it? Why not use the well known targeted process of spraying the affected fields, just like it is widely done today? Only when one does not have access to the fields, when these are situated in a foreign country the U.S. has no access to, does it make sense to use insects for such purposes.

It does NOT border on insanity, B, there is nothing remotely borderline about it. It is insane, full stop. (Borderline insanity means it is on the border, could be on either side).

Why not spray the fields? The compellingly obvious - and necessarily intended - feature of the insects is their ability to spread out of control.

BM , Oct 6, 2018 11:27:04 AM | link
Maybe this is one of the clues to the complex and so multifaceted Skripal saga - the British know the Russians had leads and would bring out this news, and were desperately trying to destroy their credibility in advance.
BM , Oct 6, 2018 11:46:36 AM | link
B/Psychohistorian

"The U.S. government should follow the law and stop all such programs. Even if only in the self interest of protecting its very own people."

Your assumption is that the US government has the best interests of its citizens in mind. We know the US government is under the control of the global elite and yes, they do not have the best interests of global humanity at heart.

Further than that - the elite expressly desire to reduce the global population - including the US population - to a tiny fraction of what it is at present.

As for the "law", well we see what is happening these days: Russiagate-FBI-DoJ criminality, US using terrorism as foreign policy, rapidly multiplying false flags, using sanctions to ban legtimate trade of competitors, Bolton's threats to ICC, threats to blockade Russia, ficticious sovereignty claims such as right to inspect Russian/Chinese ports and right to build bases in Syria ...

"LAW" is rapidly evaporating away - very soon it will not exist at all, in the West.
That appears to be a specific intention, and ties in with the mindless skripal fantasy/Syria chemical weapons fantasy/virtual reality/"we create our own reality" bullshit.

[B: My appologies for the string of short posts, it was not intentional as such!]

CD Waller , Oct 6, 2018 12:02:40 PM | link
The latest rash of hacking accusations against Russia appears timed to distract the public from this highly disturbing information.
One way or another, the old white men who are the self appointed ruling elite week appear determined to turn the planet into a monstrous, king sized Jonestown.
SlapHappy , Oct 6, 2018 12:11:34 PM | link
If you ask me, allowing our Ministry of War to be housed in a building that's shaped like a Satanic pentagram might not be the best idea.
ben , Oct 6, 2018 12:51:07 PM | link
Thanks b, for broaching this subject. Here is a video on this subject, posted by, I believe
Mark2, earlier last week.

http://dilyana.bg/diplomatic-viruses/

If this doesn't convince anyone of the depravity of empire, nothing will.

These are so truly sick MFers

ben , Oct 6, 2018 12:56:17 PM | link
PS- High five and a shout out to Anya, a poster here, for the contributions made for the same subject.

Hope my memory is correct, if not, apologies...

John Merryman. , Oct 6, 2018 12:58:12 PM | link
Psycho,
Which gets to the logical flaw in monotheism. A spiritual absolute would be the essence of sentience from which life rises, not an ideal of wisdom and judgement from which humanity fell. More the new born babe, than the wise old man. It is just that for social control, it makes more sense to idolize wisdom over passion.
The deeper issue is that Western culture is ideals based, rather balance based, like Eastern culture. The basis of civilization is story telling and the most memorable and repeated stories are those with a focus, moral lesson and compelling narrative. So it becomes assumed there must be some goal, destination, or ideal state to which we strive, even if it's just the bottom line. Rather than to be in balance with nature and the community, absorbing and radiating the energy of the present.
Which also goes to the nature of time. As we have this narrative thought process, being mobile organisms, processing our motion, we think of time as a vector from past to future, but the reality is change turning future to past. Potential>actual>residual. There is only this state of dynamic energy and thermodynamics is a more elemental aspect of it than time. Expansion/consolidation.
Mark2 , Oct 6, 2018 1:02:02 PM | link
Thank you 'b' this subject is guaranteed to give us all nightmares on its own, but added in to the rest of the bigger equation ! We run out of strong enough words to do it justice ! It's to much for one to bare. We need to share this burden or we will go under.
This kind of depravity has always been there in mankind -- - napalm,agent orange, white phosphorus the human imagination is vast ! But now they have the power, technology, resources opatunity and motivation, that is new !
We here at present can spread this story as much as we possibly can ! Far and wide.

[Oct 06, 2018] America s new aristocracy lives in an accountability-free zone by David Sirota

Notable quotes:
"... Accountability is for the little people, immunity is for the ruling class. If this ethos seems familiar, that is because it has preceded some of the darkest moments in human history ..."
"... September began with John McCain's funeral – a memorial billed as an apolitical celebration of the Arizona lawmaker, but which served as a made-for-TV spectacle letting America know that everyone who engineered the Iraq war is doing just fine. ..."
"... The underlying message was clear: nobody other than the dead, the injured and the taxpayer will face any real penalty for the Iraq debacle. ..."
"... Meanwhile, JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon garnered non-Onion headlines by floating the idea of running for president – a reminder that a decade after his firm played a central role in destroying countless Americans' economic lives, he remains not only unincarcerated and gainfully employed, but so reputationally unscathed that he is seen as a serious White House candidate. ..."
Oct 05, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Accountability is for the little people, immunity is for the ruling class. If this ethos seems familiar, that is because it has preceded some of the darkest moments in human history

'If there are no legal consequences for profiteers who defrauded the global economy into a collapse, what will deter those profiteers from doing that again?' Illustration: Mark Long/Mark Long for Guardian US W hen the former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling was released from prison a few weeks ago, the news conjured memories of a corporate scandal that now seems almost quaint – and it was also a reminder that Enron executives were among the last politically connected criminals to face any serious consequences for institutionalized fraud.

Since Skilling's conviction 12 years ago, our society has been fundamentally altered by a powerful political movement whose goal is not merely another court seat, tax cut or election victory. This movement's objective is far more revolutionary: the creation of an accountability-free zone for an ennobled aristocracy, even as the rest of the population is treated to law-and-order rhetoric and painfully punitive policy.

Let's remember that in less than two decades, America has experienced the Iraq war, the financial crisis, intensifying economic stratification, an opioid plague, persistent gender and racial inequality and now seemingly unending climate change-intensified disasters. While the victims have been ravaged by these crime sprees, crises and calamities, the perpetrators have largely avoided arrest, inquisition, incarceration, resignation, public shaming and ruined careers.

That is because the United States has been turned into a safe space for a permanent ruling class. Inside the rarefied refuge, the key players who created this era's catastrophes and who embody the most pernicious pathologies have not just eschewed punishment – many of them have actually maintained or even increased their social, financial and political status.

The effort to construct this elite haven has tied together so many seemingly disparate news events, suggesting that there is a method in the madness. Consider this past month that culminated with the dramatic battle over the judicial nomination of Brett Kavanaugh.

September began with John McCain's funeral – a memorial billed as an apolitical celebration of the Arizona lawmaker, but which served as a made-for-TV spectacle letting America know that everyone who engineered the Iraq war is doing just fine.

The event was attended by Iraq war proponents of both parties, from Dick Cheney to Lindsey Graham to Hillary Clinton. The funeral featured a saccharine eulogy from the key Democratic proponent of the invasion, Joe Lieberman, as well the resurrection of George W Bush. The codpiece-flaunting war president who piloted America into the cataclysm with "bring 'em on" bravado, "shock and awe" bloodlust and "uranium from Africa" dishonesty was suddenly portrayed as an icon of warmth and civility when he passed a lozenge to Michelle Obama. The scene was depicted not as the gathering of a rogues gallery fit for a war crimes tribunal, but as a venerable bipartisan reunion evoking nostalgia for the supposed halcyon days – and Bush promptly used his newly revived image to campaign for Republican congressional candidates and lobby for Kavanaugh's appointment .

The underlying message was clear: nobody other than the dead, the injured and the taxpayer will face any real penalty for the Iraq debacle.

Next up came the 10th anniversary of the financial crisis – a meltdown that laid waste to the global economy, while providing lucrative taxpayer-funded bailouts to Wall Street firms.

To mark the occasion, the three men on whose watch it occurred – Fed chair Ben Bernanke, Bush treasury secretary Hank Paulson and Obama treasury secretary Tim Geithner – did not offer an apology, but instead promised that another financial crisis will eventually occur, and they demanded lawmakers give public officials more power to bail out big banks in the future.

In a similar bipartisan show of unity, former Trump economic adviser Gary Cohn gave an interview in which he asked "Who broke the law?" – the implication being that no Wall Street executives were prosecuted for their role in the meltdown because no statutes had been violated. That suggestion, of course, is undermined by banks ' own admissions that they defrauded investors (that includes admissions of fraud from Goldman Sachs – the very bank that Cohn himself ran during the crisis). Nonetheless, Obama's attorney general, Eric Holder – who has now rejoined his old corporate defense law firm – subsequently backed Cohn up by arguing that nobody on Wall Street committed an offense that could have been successfully prosecuted in a court of law.

Meanwhile, JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon garnered non-Onion headlines by floating the idea of running for president – a reminder that a decade after his firm played a central role in destroying countless Americans' economic lives, he remains not only unincarcerated and gainfully employed, but so reputationally unscathed that he is seen as a serious White House candidate.

Again, the message came through: nobody who engineered the financial crisis will pay any real price for wreaking so much havoc.

Then as Hurricane Florence provided the latest illustration of climate change's devastation, ExxonMobil marched into the supreme court to demand an end to a state investigation of its role denying and suppressing climate science. Backed by 11 Republican attorneys general , the fossil fuel giant had reason to feel emboldened in its appeal for immunity: despite investigative reporting detailing the company's prior knowledge of fossil fuel's role in climate change, its executives had already convinced the Securities and Exchange Commission to shut down a similar investigation.

Once again, the message was unavoidable: in the new accountability-free zone, companies shouldn't be bothered to even explain – much less face punishment for – their role in a crisis that threatens the survival of the human species.

... ... ...

The answer is nothing – which is exactly the point for the aristocracy. But that cannot be considered acceptable for the rest of us outside the accountability-free zone.

David Sirota is a Guardian US columnist and an investigative journalist at Capital & Main. His latest book is Back to Our Future: How the 1980s Explain the World We Live In Now

[Oct 05, 2018] Air Force Number 2 Trump boards presidential plane with toilet paper stuck to shoe

Notable quotes:
"... That means there is not a single person who cares about him enough to tell him he had toilet paper stuck to his shoe from whatever bathroom he was in all the way to the plane ..."
Oct 05, 2018 | www.rt.com

Some wondered how it had taken this long for the president to find himself in this situation, while others questioned how the toilet paper had been on his shoe for so long without anyone giving Trump a heads up.

I honestly cannot believe it's taken this long for Trump to board Air Force One with a full strand of toilet paper trailing from his shoe. https://t.co/hLWrqKqsIK

-- Brian Tyler Cohen (@briantylercohen) October 5, 2018

That means there is not a single person who cares about him enough to tell him he had toilet paper stuck to his shoe from whatever bathroom he was in all the way to the plane https://t.co/87Xz1rrxXQ

-- rabia O'chaudry (@rabiasquared) October 5, 2018

True Trump supporters should start wearing toilet paper stuck to the bottom of their shoes in solidarity.

-- MꙬse Allain (@MooseAllain) October 5, 2018

[Oct 05, 2018] Wilderness of mirrors MI6, the Cold War, spies and traitors from Gordievsky to Skripal -- RT Op-ed

Notable quotes:
"... What could possibly go wrong? ..."
Oct 05, 2018 | www.rt.com

Which brings me to the Skripal affair.

That the USSR was an existential threat to Western capitalism and colonialism and war – of one kind or another – between these two camps was logical and inevitable. But the Soviet Union is 30 years dead.

Indeed, Gordievsky through Macintyre can – if he's telling the truth – claim that he helped bring about the (brief) end of history and the "final" victory. His claimed role in the rise and rise of Gorbachev's relationship with Mrs Thatcher and, by extension, President Reagan certainly hastened the downfall of the USSR.

But Britain recruited Skripal in 1996 when not only was the Soviet Union dead but Russia was ruled by the West's performing bear Boris Yeltsin. And during his presidency, Russia was passed-out on the floor with everyone picking its pockets.

Why was Britain still fighting the Cold War against Russia in 1996, and why is it still fighting the Cold War against Russia now?

Just this week, the rather effete British Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson – a former fireplace salesman – said he was sending 800 shivering British soldiers to the Arctic to be ready to fight Russia there. Amidst the snow. And the ice.

As both Napoleon and Hitler must have said: " What could possibly go wrong? "

[Oct 05, 2018] Opinion Russian Meddling Is a Symptom, Not the Disease - The New York Times

Oct 05, 2018 | www.nytimes.com

Given the credible evidence of Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election, it's only natural that Americans are concerned about the possibility of further foreign interference, especially as the midterms draw closer.

But I worry that we're focusing too much on the foreign part of the problem -- in which social media accounts and pages controlled by overseas "troll factories" post false and divisive material -- and not enough on how our own domestic political polarization feeds into the basic business model of companies like Facebook and YouTube.

It's this interaction -- both aspects of which are homegrown -- that fosters the dissemination of false and divisive material, and this will persist as a major problem even in the absence of concerted foreign efforts.

Consider some telling exchanges from this year's Senate hearings involving high-level executives from Facebook and Twitter. (Google, which owns YouTube, didn't bother sending a comparable representative.) In April, Senator Kamala Harris, Democrat of California, pressed Facebook's chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, on how much money the company had made by ads placed by the Internet Research Agency, a Russian troll factory. Mr. Zuckerberg replied that it was about $100,000 -- a negligible amount of money for the company.

Advertisement

Last month, Ms. Harris further grilled Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook's chief operating officer, on this point, demanding to know how much inauthentic Russian content was on Facebook. Ms. Sandberg had her sound bite ready, saying that "any amount is too much," but she ultimately threw out an estimate of .004 percent, another negligible amount.

The exchange made for good viewing: a senator asking tough questions, chastised executives being forced to put exact numbers on the table. But the truth is that paid Russian content was almost certainly immaterial to Facebook's revenue -- and the .004 percent figure, though almost certainly rhetorical, does capture the relative insignificance of the paid Russian presence on Facebook.

Contrast this, however, with another question from Ms. Harris, in which she asked Ms. Sandberg how Facebook can "reconcile an incentive to create and increase your user engagement when the content that generates a lot of engagement is often inflammatory and hateful." That astute question Ms. Sandberg completely sidestepped, which was no surprise: No statistic can paper over the fact that this is a real problem.

Facebook, Twitter and YouTube have business models that thrive on the outrageous, the incendiary and the eye-catching, because such content generates "engagement" and captures our attention, which the platforms then sell to advertisers, paired with extensive data on users that allow advertisers (and propagandists) to "microtarget" us at an individual level.

Traditional media outlets, of course, are frequently also cynical manipulators of sensationalistic content, but social media is better able to weaponize it. Algorithms can measure what content best "engages" each user and can target him or her individually in a way that the sleaziest editor of a broadcast medium could only dream of.

... ... ...

It is understandable that legislators and the public are concerned about other countries meddling in our elections. But foreign meddling is to our politics what a fever is to tuberculosis: a mere symptom of a deeper problem. To heal, we need the correct diagnosis followed by action that treats the underlying diseases. The closer our legislators look at our own domestic politics as well as Silicon Valley's business model, the better the answers they will find.

Zeynep Tufekci (@zeynep) is an associate professor at the School of Information and Library Science at the University of North Carolina, the author of "Twitter and Tear Gas: The Power and Fragility of Networked Protest" and a contributing opinion writer.

[Oct 05, 2018] Putin on Trump push of the USA LNG to EU

Oct 05, 2018 | en.kremlin.ru

Ryan Chilcote : Let's return to energy, or at least more directly to energy, President Putin, and talk about Nord Stream 2. That's the pipeline that Gazprom wants to build between Russia and Germany. Again, the President of the United States has said his opinion about this. He says that Germany is effectively a hostage already of Russia, because it depends on Russia for so much of its energy and gas supplies, and that it's vulnerable to "extortion and intimidation" from Russia. What do you make of that?

Vladimir Putin : My response is very simple. Donald and I talked about this very briefly in Helsinki. In any sale, including the sale of our gas to Europe, we are traditionally the supplier, of pipeline gas I mean. We have been doing this since the 1960s. We are known for doing it in a highly responsible and professional manner, and at competitive prices for the European market. In general, if you look at the characteristics of the entire gas market, the price depends on the quantity and on sales volumes. The distance between Russia and Europe is such that pipeline gas is optimal. And the price will always be competitive, always. This is something all experts understand.

We have a lot of people here in this room, in the first row, who could easily be seated next to me, and I would gladly listen to them, because each one is an expert, so each of them can tell you that. And so Nord Stream 2 is a purely commercial project, I want to emphasise this, warranted by rising energy consumption, including in Europe, and falling domestic production in European countries. They have to get it from somewhere.

Russian gas accounts for around 34 percent of the European market. Is this a lot or a little? It is not insubstantial, but not a monopoly either. Europe certainly can and does actually buy gas from other suppliers, but American liquefied gas is about 30 percent more expensive than our pipeline gas on the European market. If you were buying products of the same quality and you were offered the same product for 30 percent more , what would you choose? So, what are we talking about?

If Europe starts buying American gas for 30 percent more than ours, the entire economy of Germany, in this case, would quickly become dramatically less competitive. Everyone understands this; it is an obvious fact.

But business is business, and we are ready to work with all partners. As you know, our German partners have already begun offshore construction. We are ready to begin as well. We have no problems with obtaining any permits. Finland agreed, and so did Sweden, Germany, and the Russian Federation. This is quite enough for us. The project will be implemented.

< >

Ryan Chilcote : President Putin, did you want to jump in here?

Vladimir Putin: (following up on the remarks by CEO of Royal Dutch Shell Ben van Beurden) We understand the realities and treat all our partners with respect. We have very good, amiable long-term relations with all our partners, including the company represented by my neighbour on the left. This company is working in the Russian market and working with great success, but we understand everything very well and understand the realities. We are carrying out the project ourselves. We do not and will not have any problems here. That is to say, they may arise, of course, but we will resolve them.

Some things are beyond the realm of political intrigue. Take supplies to the Federal Republic of Germany. Not everyone knows that the decision was made there to shut down the nuclear power industry. But that is 34 percent of its total energy balance. We are proud of the development of the nuclear power industry in the Russian Federation, although the figure for us is just 16 percent. We are still thinking about how to raise it to 25 percent and are making plans. Theirs is 34 percent and everything will be closed down. What will this vacuum be filled with? What?

Look at LNG [liquefied natural gas ] which is sold by our various competitors and partners. Yes, LNG can and should be in the common basket of Europe and Germany. Do you know how many ports built in Europe are used for LNG transfer? Just 25 percent. Why? Because it is unprofitable.

There are companies and regions for which it is profitable to supply LNG and this is being done. The LNG market is growing very fast. But as for Europe, it is not very profitable, or unprofitable altogether.

Therefore, in one way or another we have already seen Nord Stream 1 through and its performance is excellent. Incidentally, our gas supplies to Europe are continuously growing. Last year, I believe, they amounted to 194 billion cubic metres and this year they will add up to 200 billion cubic metres or maybe even more.

We have loaded practically all our infrastructure facilities: Blue Stream to Turkey, Nord Stream 1 is fully loaded. Yamal-Europe is fully loaded – it is almost approaching 100 percent, while the demand is going up. Life itself dictates that we carry out such projects.

Ryan Chilcote : President Trump's position on American LNG exports is perhaps a little bit more nuanced. His point is that instead of buying Russian gas, even perhaps if it's a bit more expensive, the Germans and other European allies of the United States, because the United States is paying for their defence, should be buying American gas even if there is, I guess the argument suggests, a little bit of a higher price for that

Vladimir Putin : You know, this argument doesn't really work, in my opinion. I understand Donald. He is fighting for the interests of his country and his business. He is doing the right thing and I would do the same in his place.

As for LNG, as I have already said, it is not just a little more expensive in the European market but 30 percent more. This is not a little bit more, it is a lot more, beyond all reason, and is basically unworkable.

But there are markets where LNG will be adopted, where it is efficient, for instance in the Asia-Pacific region. By the way, where did the first shipment of LNG from our new company Yamal-LNG go? Where did the first tanker go? To the United States, because it was profitable. The United States fought this project but ended up buying the first tanker. It was profitable to buy it in this market, at this place and time, and it was purchased.

LNG is still being shipped to the American continent. It's profitable.

It makes no sense to fight against what life brings. We simply need to look for common approaches in order to create favourable market conditions, including, for example, conditions conducive to the production and consumption of LNG in the United States itself and securing the best prices for producers and consumers. This could be achieved by coordinating policy, rather than just imposing decisions on partners.

As for the argument, "We defend you, so buy this from us even if it makes you worse off", I don't think it is very convincing either. Where does it lead? It has led to the Europeans starting to talk about the need to have a more independent defence capability, as well as the need to create a defence alliance of their own that allegedly will not undermine NATO while allowing the Europeans to pursue a real defence policy. This is what, in my view, such steps are leading to.

This is why I am sure that a great many things will be revised. Life will see to that.

[Oct 05, 2018] Oil heading to $100 OPEC is 'powerless to prevent it' analyst

Notable quotes:
"... "Nobody wants to get caught short, full in the knowledge that more Iranian barrels are poised to be removed from the market, ..."
"... "Against this backdrop of dwindling Iranian oil supplies, the focus will turn to meek levels of global, or more accurately, Saudi spare capacity, ..."
"... "this essentially leaves the world's only swing producer powerless to prevent a supply shock and subsequent price spike in the final quarter of this year," ..."
Oct 05, 2018 | www.rt.com

Crude prices will likely reach $100 per barrel for the first time since 2014, and OPEC has no leverage to prevent such a scenario, an analyst has warned. "Nobody wants to get caught short, full in the knowledge that more Iranian barrels are poised to be removed from the market, " Stephen Brennock, oil analyst at PVM Oil Associates, said in a research note published on Monday, as quoted by CNBC. Read more © Evgenyi Samarin Russia's September oil production set for post-Soviet record high

On Monday, Brent crude surged above $83 per barrel as Iran continues losing its crude exports ahead of US sanctions which come into force in November. "Against this backdrop of dwindling Iranian oil supplies, the focus will turn to meek levels of global, or more accurately, Saudi spare capacity, " Brennock said.

Saudi Arabia has been unable to offset the lost Iranian crude exports. And "this essentially leaves the world's only swing producer powerless to prevent a supply shock and subsequent price spike in the final quarter of this year," he added.

Iran could lose up to 1.5 million barrels per day when US sanctions kick in early November. In May, Iran sold 2.71 million bpd abroad, nearly three percent of daily global oil consumption.

The US is rapidly increasing its production. In September, it hit a record 11.1 million bpd, according to data from the Energy Information Administration (EIA). That is an increase of almost a third since 2016. However, the increase in US production is not enough to offset the loss of Iranian output.

[Oct 05, 2018] Putin take on Skripal false flag operation by UK: Nobody wanted to poison This Skripal is a traitor, as I said. He was caught and punished. He spent a total of five years in prison. We released him. That's it. He left. He continued to cooperate with and consult some security services. So what?

Oct 05, 2018 | en.kremlin.ru

Ryan Chilcote: Since you brought up the subject of sanctions, as you know after the Skripal poisoning, Russia is facing even more of them, perhaps as soon as November. What is Russia prepared to do to change the trajectory of relations with the United States and the West?

Vladimir Putin : We are not the ones introducing these sanctions against the United States or the West. We are just responding to their actions, and we do this in very restrained, careful steps so as not to cause harm, primarily to ourselves. And we will continue to do so.

As regards the Skripals and all that, this latest spy scandal is being artificially inflated. I have seen some media outlets and your colleagues push the idea that Skripal is almost a human rights activist. But he is just a spy, a traitor to the motherland. There is such a term, a 'traitor to the motherland,' and that's what he is.

Imagine you are a citizen of a country, and suddenly somebody comes along who betrays your country. How would you, or anybody present here, a representative of any country, feel about such a person? He is scum, that's all. But a whole information campaign has been deployed around it.

I think it will come to an end, I hope it will, and the sooner the better. We have repeatedly told our colleagues to show us the documents. We will see what can be done and conduct an investigation.

We probably have an agreement with the UK on assistance in criminal cases that outlines the procedure. Well, submit the documents to the Prosecutor General's Office as required. We will see what actually happened there.

The fuss between security services did not start yesterday. As you know, espionage, just like prostitution, is one of the most 'important' jobs in the world. So what? Nobody shut it down and nobody can shut it down yet.

Ryan Chilcote : Espionage aside, I think there are two other issues. One is the use of chemical weapons, and let's not forget that in addition to the Skripal family being affected in that attack, there was also a homeless person who was killed when they came in contact with the nerve agent Novichok.

Vladimir Putin: Listen, since we are talking about poisoning Skripal, are you saying that we also poisoned a homeless person there? Sometimes I look at what is happening around this case and it amazes me. Some guys came to England and started poisoning homeless people. Such nonsense. What is this all about? Are they working for cleaning services? Nobody wanted to poison This Skripal is a traitor, as I said. He was caught and punished. He spent a total of five years in prison. We released him. That's it. He left. He continued to cooperate with and consult some security services. So what? What are we talking about right now? Oil, gas or espionage? What is your question?

Let's move on to the other oldest profession and discuss the latest developments in that business. (Laughter.)

[Oct 05, 2018] MI5 can authorise agents to commit crimes, tribunal told . Maybe the UK should be sanctioned.

Oct 05, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Fran , Oct 5, 2018 2:01:34 PM | link

Funny how lowkey this topic is handled. It appeard in The Times. As the Times article is behind a paywall. I am linking to the Irish Times: MI5 can authorise agents to commit crimes, tribunal told . Maybe the UK should be sanctioned.

Makes my fantasy go a little wild and wonder if there might be any connection to Skripal.

[Oct 05, 2018] Air Force Number 2 Trump boards presidential plane with toilet paper stuck to shoe

Notable quotes:
"... That means there is not a single person who cares about him enough to tell him he had toilet paper stuck to his shoe from whatever bathroom he was in all the way to the plane ..."
Oct 05, 2018 | www.rt.com

Some wondered how it had taken this long for the president to find himself in this situation, while others questioned how the toilet paper had been on his shoe for so long without anyone giving Trump a heads up.

I honestly cannot believe it's taken this long for Trump to board Air Force One with a full strand of toilet paper trailing from his shoe. https://t.co/hLWrqKqsIK

-- Brian Tyler Cohen (@briantylercohen) October 5, 2018

That means there is not a single person who cares about him enough to tell him he had toilet paper stuck to his shoe from whatever bathroom he was in all the way to the plane https://t.co/87Xz1rrxXQ

-- rabia O'chaudry (@rabiasquared) October 5, 2018

True Trump supporters should start wearing toilet paper stuck to the bottom of their shoes in solidarity.

-- MꙬse Allain (@MooseAllain) October 5, 2018

[Oct 05, 2018] What I want and I am completely serious is that this nightmare about Russia's alleged interference with some election campaign in the United States ends. I want the United States, the American elite, the US elite to calm down and clear up their own mess and restore a certain balance of common sense and national interests, just like in the oil market

Oct 05, 2018 | en.kremlin.ru

Vladimir Putin: What I want – and I am completely serious – is that this nightmare about Russia's alleged interference with some election campaign in the United States ends. I want the United States, the American elite, the US elite to calm down and clear up their own mess and restore a certain balance of common sense and national interests, just like in the oil market. I want the domestic political squabbles in the United States to stop ruining Russia-US relations and adversely affecting the situation in the world.

[Oct 05, 2018] Of course the USA and coalition of imbeciles are busy projecting onto Russia and China what they themselves are guilty of

Notable quotes:
"... I think its far more likely that a friendly foreign intelligence agency or the US had something to do with it. ..."
Oct 05, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

james , Oct 5, 2018 3:44:18 PM | link

thanks b.. excellent information and insights as usual..

of course the USA and coalition of imbeciles are busy projecting onto Russia and China what they themselves are guilty of.. the use of propaganda has gone into overdrive and is now an accepted policy of the west.. screw facts.. who needs facts when you have a war to pursue... and that is just what it looks like to me, as there is no end in sight to any of this western madness...

the financial sanctions have not worked.. that much is clear.. another approach via propaganda is to be the new regular feature.. claim all sorts of lies and supposition on russia, china, iran, north korea, venezuela or any country that dares to get out of line with the official ''coalition'' and you will be targeted with propaganda and or worse..

Pft , Oct 5, 2018 5:36:22 PM | link
UncleTungsten@42

Companies in China, including foreign firms, are required by law to establish a party organization within their organization and party members head the mandatory unions in every company. Indeed some of the designers are no doubt party members. Significant pressure can be exerted on companies in China by the party, even foreign companies , especially with but not limited to Joint ventures.

In any other country your skepticism is warranted. Not China.

That said, given how little attention the Bloomberg story received yesterday by MSM web sites (havent checked today) beyond a denial story by msnbc I think its far more likely that a friendly foreign intelligence agency or the US had something to do with it. Blame China not Israel or CIA/NSA

But I doubt we will ever know

[Oct 05, 2018] How The U.S. Runs Public Relations Campaigns - Trump Style - Against Russia And China

Notable quotes:
"... I agree with Hoarsewhisperer that the elite are showing desperation but look at the sheer volume of BS they can spew out that is all over the map. ..."
"... The ... West is doubling down on Psychological Projection . Works like a charm with most peoples in the affected areas. ..."
"... A few months ago, a dozen Russian individuals were charged with cyber-crime offenses that Mueller knew would never be tested at trial b/c the charged individuals would never be extradited. However, the indictment included charges against two Russian corporations that cleverly hired American lawyers to appear on their behalf, and enter pleas of Not Guilty. ..."
"... This tactic should have set the pre-trial discovery process to begin, causing Mueller to be obliged to turn over evidence supporting the charges as well as any exculpatory information favoring the accused corporations. ..."
"... Russia has tried to negotiate with the US to avoid cyberspace being turned into another area of conflict. The US has rebuffed these requests. Likely too much money to be made by the MIC in another theater of warfare with that extortion racket called NATO and too much promise of the NSA scooping up even more data and adding it to the data already collected by the 5 eyes. ..."
"... Didn't WikiLeaks disclosed the fact that NSA can disguise any hack to look like some other actor was the culprit? All this shouting that Russia and China did these terrible deeds is to hide the fact that the west does this all the time as disclosed by WikiLeaks? And the Germans complaining? I hope they have improved security for the Chancellor's phone. Russia is a member of OPWC. Why do they have to sit out in cars in the parking lot of OPCW headquarters to hack into OPCW? Why not from the comfort of their office in the building. What is of more importance to me is an upcoming vote in the OPCW about investigation reports laying blame in the future. That will be a game changer in the false flag chemical attack be it Syria or the UK. currently reports don't lay blame. ..."
"... Going by the squealing noises coming out of the US and loyal vassals, the yanks are probably just pissed that they can't get into Russia or China's secure communications. ..."
Oct 05, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Yesterday several NATO countries ran a concerted propaganda campaign against Russia. The context for it was a NATO summit in which the U.S. presses for an intensified cyberwar against NATO's preferred enemy.

On the same day another coordinated campaign targeted China. It is aimed against China's development of computer chip manufacturing further up the value chain. Related to this is U.S. pressure on Taiwan, a leading chip manufacturer, to cut its ties with its big motherland.

The anti-Russian campaign is about alleged Russian spying, hacking and influence operations. Britain and the Netherland took the lead. Britain accused Russia's military intelligence service (GRU) of spying attempts against the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in The Hague and Switzerland, of spying attempts against the British Foreign Office, of influence campaigns related to European and the U.S. elections, and of hacking the international doping agency WADA. British media willingly helped to exaggerate the claims:

The Foreign Office attributed six specific attacks to GRU-backed hackers and identified 12 hacking group code names as fronts for the GRU – Fancy Bear, Voodoo Bear, APT28, Sofacy, Pawnstorm, Sednit, CyberCaliphate, Cyber Berku, BlackEnergy Actors, STRONTIUM, Tsar Team and Sandworm."

The "hacking group code names" the Guardian tries to sell to its readers do not refer to hacking groups but to certain cyberattack methods . Once such a method is known it can be used by any competent group and individual. Attributing such an attack is nearly impossible. Moreover Fancybear, ATP28, Pawn Storm, Sofacy Group, Sednit and Strontium are just different names for one and the same well known method . The other names listed refer to old groups and tools related to criminal hackers. Blackenergy has been used by cybercriminals since 2007. It is alleged that a pro-Russian group named Sandworm used it in Ukraine, but the evidence for that is dubious at best. To throw out such a list of code names without any differentiation reeks of a Fear-Uncertainty-Doubt (FUD) campaign designed to dis-inform and scare the public.

The Netherland for its part released a flurry of information about the alleged spying attempts against the OPCW in The Hague. It claims that four GRU agents traveled to The Hague on official Russian diplomatic passports to sniff out the WiFi network of the OPCW. (WiFi networks are notoriously easy to hack. If the OPCW is indeed using such it should not be trusted with any security relevant issues.) The Russian officials were allegedly very secretive, even cleaning out their own hotel trash, while they, at the same, time carried laptops with private data and even taxi receipts showing their travel from a GRU headquarter in Moscow to the airport. Like in the Skripal/Novichok saga the Russian spies are, at the same time, portrayed as supervillains and hapless amateurs. Real spies are neither.

The U.S. Justice Department added to the onslaught by issuing new indictments (pdf) against alleged GRU agents dubiously connected to several alleged hacking incidents . As none of those Russians will ever stand in front of a U.S. court the broad allegations will never be tested.

The anti-Russian campaign came just in time for yesterday's NATO Defense Minister meeting at which the U.S. 'offered' to use its malicious cyber tools under NATO disguise:

Katie Wheelbarger, the principal deputy assistant defense secretary for international security affairs, said the U.S. is committing to use offensive and defensive cyber operations for NATO allies, but America will maintain control over its own personnel and capabilities.

If the European NATO allies, under pressure of the propaganda onslaught, agree to that, the obvious results will be more U.S. control over its allies' networks and citizens as well as more threats against Russia:

NATO's chief vowed on Thursday to strengthen the alliance's defenses against attacks on computer networks that Britain said are directed by Russian military intelligence, also calling on Russia to stop its "reckless" behavior.

The allegations against Russia over nefarious spying operations and sockpuppet campaigns are highly hypocritical . The immense scale of U.S. and British spying revealed by Edward Snowden and through the Wikileaks Vault 7 leak of CIA hacking tools is well known. The Pentagon runs large social media manipulation campaigns. The British GHCQ hacked Belgium's largest telco network to spy on the data of the many international organizations in Brussels.

International organizations like the OPCW have long been the target of U.S. spies and operations. The U.S. National Security Service (NSA) regularly hacked the OPCW since at least September 2000 :

According to last week's Shadow Brokers leak, the NSA compromised a DNS server of the Hague-based Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in September 2000, two years after the Iraq Liberation Act and Operation Desert Fox, but before the Bush election.

It was the U.S. which in 2002 forced out the head of the OPCW because he did not agree to propagandizing imaginary Iraqi chemical weapons:

José M. Bustani, a Brazilian diplomat who was unanimously re-elected last year as the director general of the 145-nation Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, was voted out of office today after refusing repeated demands by the United States that he step down because of his "management style." No successor has been selected.

The U.S. arranged the vote against Bustani by threatening to leave the OPCW. Day's earlier 'Yosemite Sam' John Bolton, now Trump's National Security Advisor, threatened to hurt José Bustani's children to press him to resign:

"I got a phone call from John Bolton – it was first time I had contact with him – and he said he had instructions to tell me that I have to resign from the organization, and I asked him why," Bustani told RT. "He said that [my] management style was not agreeable to Washington."
...
Bustani said he "owed nothing" to the US, pointing out that he was appointed by all OPCW member states. Striking a more sinister tone, Bolton said: "OK, so there will be retaliation. Prepare to accept the consequences. We know where your kids are. "

According to Bustani, two of his children were in New York at the time, and his daughter was in London.

Russia's government will need decades of hard work to reach the scale of U.S./UK hypocrisy, hacking and lying.


The propaganda rush against Russia came on the same day as a similar campaign was launched against China. A well timed Bloomberg story, which had been in the works for over a year, claimed that Chinese companies manipulated hardware they manufactured for the U.S. company SuperMicro. The hardware was then sold to Apple, Amazon and others for their cloud server businesses.

The Big Hack: How China Used a Tiny Chip to Infiltrate U.S. Companies :

Nested on the servers' motherboards, the testers found a tiny microchip, not much bigger than a grain of rice, that wasn't part of the boards' original design.

Both Apple and Amazon denied the story with very strong statements . The Bloomberg tale has immense problems. It is for one completely based on anonymous sources, most of them U.S. government officials:

The companies' denials are countered by six current and former senior national security officials, who -- in conversations that began during the Obama administration and continued under the Trump administration -- detailed the discovery of the chips and the government's investigation.

The way the alleged manipulation is described to function is theoretical possible , but not plausible . In my learned opinion one would need multiple manipulations, not just one tiny chip, to achieve the described results. Even reliably U.S. friendly cyberhawks are unconvinced of the story's veracity. It is especially curious that such server boards are still in use in security relevant U.S. government operations:

Assuming the Bloomberg story is accurate, that means that the US intelligence community, during a period spanning two administrations, saw a foreign threat and allowed that threat to infiltrate the US military. If the story is untrue, or incorrect on its technical merits, then it would make sense that Supermicro gear is being used by the US military.

There might be financial motives behind the story:

Bloomberg reporters receive bonuses based indirectly on how much they shift markets with their reporting. This story undoubtedly did that.

When the story came out SuperMicro's stock price crashed from $21.40 to below $9.00 per share. It now trades at $12.60:

The story might be a cover-up for a NSA hack that was accidentally detected. Most likely it is exaggerated half truth, based on an old event , to deter the 'western' industry from sourcing anything from producers in China.

This would be consistent with other such U.S. moves against China which coincidentally (not) happened on the same day the Bloomberg story was launched.

One is a very hawkish speech U.S. Vice President Pence held yesterday :

Vice President Mike Pence accused China on Thursday of trying to undermine President Donald Trump as the administration deploys tough new rhetoric over Chinese trade, economic and foreign policies.
...
Sounding the alarm, Pence warned other nations to be wary of doing business with China, condemning the Asian country's "debt diplomacy" that allows it to draw developing nations into its orbit.

Pence also warned American businesses to be vigilant against Chinese efforts to leverage access to their markets to modify corporate behavior to their liking.

Another move is a new Pentagon report warning against the purchase of Chinese equipment and launched via Reuters in support of the campaign:

China represents a "significant and growing risk" to the supply of materials vital to the U.S. military, according to a new Pentagon-led report that seeks to mend weaknesses in core U.S. industries vital to national security.

The nearly 150-page report, seen by Reuters on Thursday ahead of its formal release Friday, concluded there are nearly 300 vulnerabilities that could affect critical materials and components essential to the U.S. military.
...
"A key finding of this report is that China represents a significant and growing risk to the supply of materials and technologies deemed strategic and critical to U.S. national security," the report said.

The Bloomberg story, the Pence speech and the Pentagon report 'leak' on the same day seem designed to scare everyone away from using Chinese equipment or China manufactured parts within there supply chain.

The allegations of Chinese supply chain attacks are of course just as hypocritical as the allegations against Russia. The very first know case of computer related supply chain manipulation goes back to 1982 :

A CIA operation to sabotage Soviet industry by duping Moscow into stealing booby-trapped software was spectacularly successful when it triggered a huge explosion in a Siberian gas pipeline, it emerged yesterday.
...
Mr Reed writes that the software "was programmed to reset pump speeds and valve settings to produce pressures far beyond those acceptable to pipeline joints and welds".

Wikileaks list 27 cases of U.S. supply chain manipulation of computer hardware and software. A search for "supply chain" in the Snowden archives shows 18 documents describing such 'projects'.


The U.S. government under Trump - and with John Bolton in a leading position - copied Trump's brutal campaign style and uses it as an instrument in its foreign policy. Trump's victory in the 2016 election proves that such campaigns are highly successful, even when the elements they are build of are dubious or untrue. In their scale and coordination the current campaigns are comparable to the 2002 run-up for the war on Iraq.

Then, as during the Trump election campaign and as now, the media are crucial to the public effect these campaigns have. Will they attempt to take the stories the campaigns are made of apart? Will they set them into the larger context of global U.S. spying and manipulation? Will they explain the real purpose of these campaigns?

Don't bet on it.

Posted by b on October 5, 2018 at 08:27 AM

Timothy Hagios , Oct 5, 2018 8:52:41 AM | link

IMO the US Government's propaganda is structured to along the lines of a fantasy novel. The propaganda is designed to convince the public of two inherently contradictory ideas:

1) that the country is surrounded on vast sides by vast hostile empires that threaten everything we hold dear and

2) despite these dire threats, the country cannot really be harmed because of "our freedoms."

Like with a fantasy novel, the reader gets all the thrills of an epic battle while being certain that the evil empires will never triumph. An attractive form of propaganda, to be certain.

Steve , Oct 5, 2018 12:09:45 PM | link
Well, so far the propaganda is having very minor effect on the ordinary people. If you read the comment section of most of the corporate media you will see that people are just not buying the BS.
Hausmeister , Oct 5, 2018 12:22:26 PM | link
Steve | Oct 5, 2018 12:09:45 PM | 16

Indifference of the ordinary people does not mean much. Just that there is such indifference. The arguments against that claimed Chinese hardware hack are meta-arguments.

Hoarsewhisperer , Oct 5, 2018 12:25:28 PM | link
...
Got to wonder what the end game is here. WW3? Or up they expecting the Russian people to come begging for an end to sanctions?
Posted by: dh | Oct 5, 2018 11:49:07 AM | 11

Good question.

It's not WWIII. Putin has already said that if WWIII goes Nuclear, survival will be a lottery. Imo the Christian Colonial West, hypnotised by 30 years of its own bs and busily patting itself on the back and performing Victory Laps on the world stage, has been caught napping (asleep at the wheel) and now needs time to ponder the downside.

Hoarsewhisperer , Oct 5, 2018 12:48:30 PM | link
Imo this latest drivel-fest stems from the fact that Russia is now/again militarily unassailable. That doesn't mean that Russia can't be attacked but it does mean that anyone who tries it will wish they hadn't.

And it's driving the defunct Masters Of The Universe insaner.

psychohistorian , Oct 5, 2018 1:08:44 PM | link
Excellent journalism b....thanks

I agree with Hoarsewhisperer that the elite are showing desperation but look at the sheer volume of BS they can spew out that is all over the map.

The Supreme Court justice debacle is another example of so riling up the forces around the sex issue so that the rest of his moral standing that effects all of us is ignored.....the sex issue is marginalized and pop goes the weasel onto the Supreme Court to bring the US closer to feudalism.

notheonly1 , Oct 5, 2018 1:09:01 PM | link
The ... West is doubling down on Psychological Projection . Works like a charm with most peoples in the affected areas.

Although it is practically a symptom of a deeper sitting mental illness, it is still treated as some sort of cavalier's delinquency. Like it is to be expected that the rulers of said West resort to this kind of projection.

The only interesting part though - one that is next to never really understood by the gullible masses - is the Projection part of it. Because it means nothing else than the fact that the projector is the one who is perpetrating the crimes and malevolent activities it accuses the 'enemy'/opposing side of.

The West is mentally ill. Nothing new, the Eastern sages pointed to that a long time ago. Very much like the Native American Indians were flabbergasted by the moronity and cruelty the invaders displayed. The one that has adhered to my memory like fusion is: Only paleface would set a river on fire.

Last but not least, Nazi is as Nazi does. As can be verified perusing the story of this Nazi that never had to fear repercussions for his crimes against humanity. For the simple reason that the U.S. protected him to gain his knowledge about advanced biological and chemical warfare. The Nazi was Kurt Blome .

b , Oct 5, 2018 1:09:38 PM | link
@CE - There is no problem with the logo on the server side and with the clients I use. Suggestion: clear your cache.
AntiSpin , Oct 5, 2018 1:20:00 PM | link
And that's not all . . .

In early morning broadcasts yesterday, BBC and NPR accused China and Russia of projecting positive images of their countries, and of acting in accordance with their national interests.

I am so proud that my own country – USA – would never do either one of those things!

denk , Oct 5, 2018 1:33:47 PM | link
"On the same day another coordinated campaign targeted China. It is aimed against China's development of computer chip manufacturing further up the value chain. Related to this is U.S. pressure on Taiwan, a leading chip manufacturer, to cut its ties with its big motherland."

Gen William Looney, first gulf war.... "If they turn on their radars we're going to blow up their goddamn SAMs [surface-to-air missiles]. They know we own their country. We own their airspace We dictate the way they live and talk. And that's what's great about America right now. It's a good thing, especially when there's a lot of oil out there we need. [1]"

------------------------------------------------------

Trump the anti establishment maverick...

We'r a rule based system, Here'r the rules. We decide..... who'r terrorists, who'r 'freedom fighters. Whats a fair election, whats a farce. Whats a genocide, whats legit police action. Whats R2p, whats unprovoked aggression. Who can do biz with whom. Who's the right man for your prez. We own you. MAGA.

[1]
I dont like to use wiki but that's the only place I could retrieve this quote, they'r wiping the net clean, even images, videos.

Better be mentally prep for the day you wake up in the morning and cant find MOA,

Anya , Oct 5, 2018 1:37:06 PM | link
Back to sanctioning Russian under the flimsy pretext of Skripals' poisoning. The US has been poisoning Georgians (some died) and this is well documented. Are the UK prudes ready to sanction the US for the crime?

http://dilyana.bg/us-diplomats-involved-in-trafficking-of-human-blood-and-pathogens-for-secret-military-program/

"The US Embassy to Tbilisi transports frozen human blood and pathogens as diplomatic cargo for a secret US military program. Pentagon scientists have been deployed to the Republic of Georgia and have been given diplomatic immunity to research deadly diseases and biting insects at the Lugar Center – the Pentagon biolaboratory in Georgia's capital Tbilisi.

The Pentagon projects involving ticks coincided with an inexplicable outbreak of Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever (CCHF) which is caused by infection through a tick-borne virus. In 2014 34 people became infected (amongst which a 4-year old child). A total of 60 cases with 9 fatalities have been registered in Georgia since 2009."

The above is an honest journalism and not some presstituting production by the eunuchs Luke Harding and George Monbiot. And don't forget Luke & George's comrade-in-arms, the "phenomenal expert" Eliot Higgins (a former salesman of ladies underwear and college dropout) who has zero training in engineering, chemistry, physics, mathematics, ballistics, foreign languages, biology, history and basically in any field of research. Zero. This is why Higgins is the best expert at the the ziocon Atlantic Council made of the scoundrels of the same caliber.

"This is a man who, with his agency Bellingcat, will absolutely always back the position of western governments, and powerful western organisations."

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2016/02/28/eliot-higgins-of-bellingcat-who-is-he-everything-you-need-to-know/

chet380 , Oct 5, 2018 1:37:53 PM | link
A few months ago, a dozen Russian individuals were charged with cyber-crime offenses that Mueller knew would never be tested at trial b/c the charged individuals would never be extradited. However, the indictment included charges against two Russian corporations that cleverly hired American lawyers to appear on their behalf, and enter pleas of Not Guilty.

This tactic should have set the pre-trial discovery process to begin, causing Mueller to be obliged to turn over evidence supporting the charges as well as any exculpatory information favoring the accused corporations.

As any reference to this case can't seem to be found, can anyone help with info as to the present status of the case?

Fran , Oct 5, 2018 2:01:34 PM | link
Funny how lowkey this topic is handled. It appeard in The Times. As the Times article is behind a paywall. I am linking to the Irish Times: MI5 can authorise agents to commit crimes, tribunal told . Maybe the UK should be sanctioned.

Makes my fantasy go a little wild and wonder if there might be any connection to Skripal.

Noirette , Oct 5, 2018 2:11:45 PM | link
For those who missed May's latest Brexit speech (which had zero content), here she is jiving to Dancing Queen by Abba for her glorified entrance. No need to make caricatures, she does it herself. Free of charge.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbCDFNRA-Wo&frags=pl%2Cwn

The USA + GB have become totally unhinged. Seeking a 'safe' enemy *without* - as the Deplorables or Brexiteers *within* don't hit the spot, for many reasons - .. to explain and cover up Hillary's loss and the ugly Brexit mess with its clueless posturing pols, is one thing.

To continue to provoke Russia and China, particularly Russia, in this way is now skirting with danger beyond the .. ? Containable, ignorable, what ..?

Plus, the MSM, lousy as it is and was, has spinned off into even further mad realms, seemingly forced into a hyper, over-blown anti-Russian hysteria. Often far more strongly so than the pols. / others they seemingly quote.

This is all becoming seriously alarming. I'm getting very bad feelings.

karlof1 , Oct 5, 2018 2:22:25 PM | link
Seems like another episode of False Friday to bury all the crap made public during the week while pushing other news aside. Much of it's recycled crap from Obama's term and just as false.
Tent-A-Cles , Oct 5, 2018 3:03:03 PM | link
During the Cold War, the West contolled some 2/3 of the global economy.

If they again bring a "Free World" protective curtain down around themselves in defensive retrenchment, what percent would they control now? Which countries would be guaranteed to be inside the tent pissing out, and which would be outide the tent pissing in? And who would be non-aligned (with the exception of their military purchases.)

Pakistan, India, Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, Cuba, Bolivia, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Africa, etc. -- Where would the dominos fall? Is this what they are trying to accomplish? If you are not with us, you are against us, as the ever eloquent G. W. Shrub might have said. Any predictions?

james , Oct 5, 2018 3:44:18 PM | link
thanks b.. excellent information and insights as usual..

of course the USA and coalition of imbeciles are busy projecting onto Russia and China what they themselves are guilty of.. the use of propaganda has gone into overdrive and is now an accepted policy of the west.. screw facts.. who needs facts when you have a war to pursue... and that is just what it looks like to me, as there is no end in sight to any of this western madness...

the financial sanctions have not worked.. that much is clear.. another approach via propaganda is to be the new regular feature.. claim all sorts of lies and supposition on russia, china, iran, north korea, venezuela or any country that dares to get out of line with the official ''coalition'' and you will be targeted with propaganda and or worse..

is there a way to create an alternative internet??

Peter AU 1 , Oct 5, 2018 4:05:02 PM | link
Looking around the MSM, MH17 also comes into it. Dutch are accusing Russia of trying to hack the MH17 sham investigation. This propaganda attack comes only a week or two after Russia tracked the missile parts numbers, supplied by JIT, through records which led to Ukraine.
Tom , Oct 5, 2018 4:19:51 PM | link
Russia has tried to negotiate with the US to avoid cyberspace being turned into another area of conflict. The US has rebuffed these requests. Likely too much money to be made by the MIC in another theater of warfare with that extortion racket called NATO and too much promise of the NSA scooping up even more data and adding it to the data already collected by the 5 eyes.

Canada is being pressured into not buying Chinese for its military civilian hardware. Scare the politicians into buying US goods that have a backdoor for the CIA to use. Canada shouldn't complain. The Canadian government hacked into the Brazilian government computers for the benefit of Canadian mining interests.

Didn't WikiLeaks disclosed the fact that NSA can disguise any hack to look like some other actor was the culprit? All this shouting that Russia and China did these terrible deeds is to hide the fact that the west does this all the time as disclosed by WikiLeaks? And the Germans complaining? I hope they have improved security for the Chancellor's phone. Russia is a member of OPWC. Why do they have to sit out in cars in the parking lot of OPCW headquarters to hack into OPCW? Why not from the comfort of their office in the building. What is of more importance to me is an upcoming vote in the OPCW about investigation reports laying blame in the future. That will be a game changer in the false flag chemical attack be it Syria or the UK. currently reports don't lay blame.

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/10/03/us-responsible-cyberspace-becoming-war-domain-instead-of-area-cooperation.html

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/arctic-patrol-ships-chinese-content-1.4849562

Jen , Oct 5, 2018 5:14:15 PM | link
Timothy Hagios @ 1:

An element of the Skripal poisoning saga in Britain (the Novichok) was lifted from the TV series "Strikeback" screening in the country in November 2017 and February 2018. I have seen something on the Internet (but can't find the link) that said the subplot with the abandoned perfume bottle that contained poison was also taken from a TV show.

Prepare to be unsurprised then when the people who write propaganda for The Powers That Should Not Be turn out to be the same people who write scripts for Hollywood films and TV shows. A lot of these people also write novels or teach creative writing courses.

We really do seem to be living in a society where mythology and fantasy are becoming more prominent than facts and analysis in decision-making.

Virgile , Oct 5, 2018 5:16:34 PM | link
Wherever it is the Russian government responsible or not, the UK and the Nederlands are admitting that they are impotent in front of attacks in the cyberworld. That wifi can be sniffed so easily at international organizations show total irresponsibility. These cyberattacks are simply humiliating for these countries as it shows that despite their military power, they are highly vulnerable. To dispel the humiliation, they respond aggressively by accusing countries, not to individuals, and they accuse the current boogeyman, Russia.

Maybe NATO's budget should be cut down on murdering weapons and allocate to Cyber Defense as this seems to become the new way of war.
In view of the lack of proper cyber defense worldwidee, anybody, any country can hack and play around with others. I would be surprised if Israel, the USA and the UK China are not stiffing in other countries organizations. They have not been found because they are the 'good' sniffers while Russia, Iran, China are the "bad' sniffers

Cold war is on with new technology, It is time for countries to realize that.

Considering what the military war has cost in money, death toll and destruction, maybe cold war would be less costly in human toll.

Peter AU 1 , Oct 5, 2018 8:01:47 PM | link
China has set up quantum internet via optic fiber linking a number of government departments.

Going by the squealing noises coming out of the US and loyal vassals, the yanks are probably just pissed that they can't get into Russia or China's secure communications.

[Oct 05, 2018] The USA + GB have become totally unhinged.

Oct 05, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Noirette , Oct 5, 2018 2:11:45 PM | link

For those who missed May's latest Brexit speech (which had zero content), here she is jiving to Dancing Queen by Abba for her glorified entrance. No need to make caricatures, she does it herself. Free of charge.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbCDFNRA-Wo&frags=pl%2Cwn

The USA + GB have become totally unhinged. Seeking a 'safe' enemy *without* - as the Deplorables or Brexiteers *within* don't hit the spot, for many reasons - .. to explain and cover up Hillary's loss and the ugly Brexit mess with its clueless posturing pols, is one thing.

To continue to provoke Russia and China, particularly Russia, in this way is now skirting with danger beyond the .. ? Containable, ignorable, what ..?

Plus, the MSM, lousy as it is and was, has spinned off into even further mad realms, seemingly forced into a hyper, over-blown anti-Russian hysteria. Often far more strongly so than the pols. / others they seemingly quote.

This is all becoming seriously alarming. I'm getting very bad feelings.

[Oct 04, 2018] US Sanctions Against Russia Are A Colossal Strategic Mistake, Putin Warns

Oct 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

US Sanctions Against Russia Are "A Colossal Strategic Mistake", Putin Warns

by Tyler Durden Thu, 10/04/2018 - 07:20 3 SHARES

As Russia is preparing plans to wean its banking system off the dollar, advancing a trend of de-dollarization among the US's largest economic and geopolitical rivals, Russian President Vladimir Putin accused Washington of making a "colossal" but "typical" mistake by exploiting the dominance of the dollar by levying economic sanctions against regimes that don't bow to its whims.

"It seems to me that our American partners make a colossal strategic mistake," Putin said.

"This is a typical mistake of any empire," Putin said, explaining that the US is ignoring the consequences of its actions because its economy is strong and the dollar's hegemonic grasp on global markets remains intact. However "the consequences come sooner or later."

These remarks echoed a sentiment expressed by Putin back in May, when he said that Russia can no longer trust the US dollar because of America's decisions to impose unilateral sanctions and violate WTO rules.

While Putin's criticisms are hardly new, these latest remarks happen to follow a report in the Financial Times, published Tuesday night, detailing Russia's efforts to wean its economy off of the dollar. The upshot is that while de-dollarization may be painful, it is, ultimately doable.

The US imposed another round of sanctions against Russia over the summer in response to the poisoning of former double-agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, and the US Senate is considering measures that would effectively cut Russia's biggest banks off from the dollar and largely exclude Moscow from foreign debt markets.

With the possibility of being cut off from the dollar system looming, a plan prepared by Andrei Kostin, the head of Russian bank VTB, is being embraced by much of the Russian establishment. Kostin's plan would facilitate the conversion of dollar settlements into other currencies which would help wean Russian industries off the dollar. And it already has the backing of Russia's finance ministry, central bank and Putin.

Meanwhile, the Kremlin is also working on deals with major trading partners to accept the Russian ruble for imports and exports.

In a sign that a united front is forming to help undermine the dollar, Russia's efforts have been readily embraced by China and Turkey, which is unsurprising, given their increasingly fraught relationships with the US. During joint military exercises in Vladivostok last month, Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping declared that their countries would work together to counter US tariffs and sanctions.

"More and more countries, not only in the east but also in Europe, are beginning to think about how to minimise dependence on the US dollar," said Dmitry Peskov, Mr Putin's spokesperson. "And they suddenly realise that a) it is possible, b) it needs to be done and c) you can save yourself if you do it sooner."

Still, there's no question that US sanctions have damaged Russia's currency and contributed to a rise in borrowing costs. And whether Russia - which relies heavily on energy exports - can convince buyers of its oil and natural gas to accept payment in rubles remains an open question. Increased trade with China and other Asian countries has helped reduce Russia's dependence on the dollar. But the greenback still accounted for 68% of Russia's payment inflow.

But, as Putin has repeatedly warned, that won't stop them from trying. The fact is that Russia is a major exporter, with a trade surplus of $115 billion last year. As the FT pointed out, Russia's metals, grain, oil and gas are consumed around the world - even in the west, despite the tensions surrounding Russia's alleged involvement in the Skripal poisoning and its annexation of Crimea.

To be sure, abandoning the dollar as the currency of choice for oil-related payments would be no easy feat. But China has already taken the first step and show that it can be done by launching a yuan-denominated futures contract that trades in Shanghai - striking the most significant blow to date against the petrodollar's previously unchallenged dominance.

That should embolden Putin to continue with his experiment - not that the US is leaving him much choice.

[Oct 02, 2018] War time propaganda serves for the USA elite as a tool to contain/constrain discontent of allies and citizenry as they attempt to damage or destroy the Russian and Chinese economies.

Notable quotes:
"... Along these lines, the Trump Administration has informed Russia in April 2017 that the period of "strategic patience" is over (well, at least official 'cause being 'patient' didn't seem to deter regime change and covert ops) . They now employ a policy of "maximum pressure" instead. ..."
"... Also note: The Trump Administration has officially labeled Russia and China as enemies when they called them "recidivist" nations in the National Defense Authorization Act in late 2017. (Note: "recidivist" because Russia and China want to return to a world where there is not a hegemonic power, aka a "multi-polar" world). ..."
"... we're already within an ongoing Hybrid Third World War, which is more readily apparent with Trump's Trade War escalation. ..."
"... the "real" US economy is only 5 Trillion, only 25% of what's claimed as the total economy ..."
"... at's clearly happening--and it's been ongoing for quite awhile--for those with open eyes is the Class War between the 1% and 99%. The domestic battle within the Outlaw US Empire for Single Payer/Medicare For All healthcare is one theatre of the much larger ongoing war. ..."
"... Clearly, the upcoming financial crisis must spark a massive political upheaval larger than any ever seen before to prevent institution of the 2008 "solution." ..."
"... The primary dynamic of history is war. This has caused immense suffering. It is now becoming exponentially worse ..."
"... If we think of humankind as a large complex living entity, then like all such entities it will expire at some point. So in the larger picture, what we are moving towards is natural, and to be expected. ..."
Oct 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Sally Snyder , Oct 2, 2018 12:26:42 PM | link

Here is a detailed look at what the United States is getting for its $700 billion defense budget:

https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/09/voting-for-war.html

It is rather surprising that the Democrats who have demonized Donald Trump at every turn have voted in favour of the this extremely bloated defense budget, putting even more military might into the hands of a President and Commander-in-Chief that they seem to despise and who they are demonizing because of his alleged collusion with Russia.

m , Oct 2, 2018 1:33:28 PM | link

Speaking of WWIII...
https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/10/02/us-switching-ukraine-location-start-world-war-iii-against-russia.html
Mike Maloney , Oct 2, 2018 1:55:09 PM | link
We've been in WW3 for several years now. Bolton went "Full Monty" with his declaration that U.S. forces will stay in Syria until Iran vacates. The introduction of a Yemen War Powers Resolution in the House last week is a hopeful sign. A reason to root for a Blue Wave in November. Dem leadership, already on record backing the War Powers Resolution, would be obligated to block U.S. enabling genocide in Yemen.
Jackrabbit , Oct 2, 2018 2:25:59 PM | link
m @9

I disagree with Eric Zusse's belief that USA wants to start WWIII. I think they want to contain/constrain discontent of allies and citizenry as they attempt to destroy the Russian and Chinese economies. War is only a last resort. But heightened military tensions mean that the major protagonists have to divert resources to their military, causing a drag on the economies.

Along these lines, the Trump Administration has informed Russia in April 2017 that the period of "strategic patience" is over (well, at least official 'cause being 'patient' didn't seem to deter regime change and covert ops) . They now employ a policy of "maximum pressure" instead.

The big concern for me is that "maximum pressure" also means an elevated chance of mistakes and miscalculations that could inadvertently cause WWIII.

Also note: The Trump Administration has officially labeled Russia and China as enemies when they called them "recidivist" nations in the National Defense Authorization Act in late 2017. (Note: "recidivist" because Russia and China want to return to a world where there is not a hegemonic power, aka a "multi-polar" world).

PS IMO Trump election and the Kavanaugh and Gina Haspel nominations are key to the pursuit of global hegemony.

karlof1 , Oct 2, 2018 3:02:57 PM | link
Most warnings have centered on a financial meltdown, as this article reviews . As most know, IMO we're already within an ongoing Hybrid Third World War, which is more readily apparent with Trump's Trade War escalation.

As noted in my link to Escobar's latest, the EU has devised a retaliatory mechanism to shield itself and others from the next round of illegal sanctions Trump's promised to impose after Mid-term elections.

In an open thread post, I linked to Hudson's latest audio-cast; here's what he said on the 10th anniversary of the 2008 crash: "So this crash of 2008 was not a crash of the banks. The banks were bailed out. The economy was left with all the junk mortgages in place, all the fraudulent debts."

Another article I linked to in a comment to james averred the "real" US economy is only 5 Trillion, only 25% of what's claimed as the total economy . Hudson again: "Contrary to the idea that bailing out the banks helps the economy, the fact is that the economy today cannot recover without a bank failure ." [My emphasis]

Wh at's clearly happening--and it's been ongoing for quite awhile--for those with open eyes is the Class War between the 1% and 99%. The domestic battle within the Outlaw US Empire for Single Payer/Medicare For All healthcare is one theatre of the much larger ongoing war.

As Hudson's stated many times, the goal of the 1% is to reestablish Feudalism via debt-peonage. All the other happenings geopolitically serve to mask this Class War within the Outlaw US Empire. Clearly, the upcoming financial crisis must spark a massive political upheaval larger than any ever seen before to prevent institution of the 2008 "solution." Many predict that this crisis will be timed to occur in 2020 constituting the biggest election meddling of all time.

The crisis will likely be blamed on China without any evidence for hacking Wall Street and causing the subsequent crash -- a Financial False Flag to serve the same purpose as 911.

karlof1 , Oct 2, 2018 3:44:26 PM | link
james @16--

Much can occur and be obscured during wartime. The radical changes to USA from 1938-1948 is very instructive--the commonfolk were on the threshold of gaining control over the federal government for the first time in US history only to have it blocked then reversed (forever?) by FDR and the 1% who tried to overthrow him in 1933.

Same with the current War OF Terror's use to curtail longstanding civil liberties and constitutional rights and much more. To accomplish what's being called "Bail-In" within the USA, Martial Law would need to be emplaced since most of the public is to be robbed of whatever cash they have, and World War would probably be the only way to get Martial Law instituted--and accepted by the military which would be its enforcer.

A precedent exists for stealing money from the people--their gold--via Executive Order 6102 , which used a law instituted during WW1 and still on the books.

mike k , Oct 2, 2018 3:51:45 PM | link
The primary dynamic of history is war. This has caused immense suffering. It is now becoming exponentially worse . Critical graphs are going off their charts. The end is near.

If we think of humankind as a large complex living entity, then like all such entities it will expire at some point. So in the larger picture, what we are moving towards is natural, and to be expected.

Like individual humans, the human population as a whole can pursue activities that maintain it's health, or it can indulge in activities that create disease and hasten it's death. Humankind is deep in toxifying behaviors that signal it's demise in the near future.

[Oct 02, 2018] The danger of false accusations from women who have a grudge or female sociopaths

This is ridiculous. "Me too" movement actually propagandizing Islam.
Oct 02, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

The #MeToo movement hits a block when it gets reduced to party politics, as we are witnessing...

... ... ...

A young woman marching in support of Kavanaugh put it this way: "This could be our brother, our dad, our boyfriend "

[Oct 02, 2018] I myself think the USSR collapsed because of two main factors that are inteconnected with the world geopolitics of its time

Oct 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

vk , Oct 1, 2018 1:34:54 PM | link

@ Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 1, 2018 1:25:43 AM | 73

The collapse of the USSR is a very complex issue, and we still don't have a consensus (among the people who study this seriously).

I myself think the USSR collapsed because of two main factors that are inteconnected with the world geopolitics of its time:

1) the USSR couldn't make the transition from the second to the third industrial revolution in the 70s (i.e. from fordism to toyotism/ohnism). Albeit it is true the USA never really embraced toyotism (just some pockets in the Silicon Valley and the financial sector), it is a fact the capitalist world, as a whole, did, because it worked out in Japan and South Korea -- many of these techonologies bleeding to the world market.

The USSR, since Stalin, adopted a method of "socialist primitive accumulation", where every techonological revolution depended on a forced (centralized) global collectivization: the old had to be entirely dismantled for the new to be built over the carcass of this old. This was a brutal (albeit quick and effective) method, so it was always risky and left the USSR exposed to the capitalists militarily.

Another problem with the USSR system was that toyotism was based on heavy investment in "human capital", i.e. investment on the workers' education and specialization. Forced collectivization, therefore, excluded the possibility of toyotism by design, so it was never truly an option for the post-Stalin Soviet leaders.

In a world only the USSR and the COMECON countries existed, it could've be stationed in the second industrial revolution forever: the USSR never had a recession (except in 1990 and 1991, when it was already de facto capitalist). It was stagnant, but not collapsing. But it didn't exist alone: on the other side of Berlin, there was the capitalist world, and, in this dual world, not transitioning to toyotism was not an option for the Soviet Union.

2) In a bipolar world, with the toyotism path closed, Soviet bureaucrats developed a class sentiment, which put pressure from the inside on the Soviet inherent egalitarian system. In other words, the USSR was a victim of its own success: the problem was that that success came too early, in a world where capitalism still existed.

In the 1980s, the USSR had already eradicated poverty and the most well-paid worker (a high bureaucrat) received four times the salary of the lowest-paid worker. The basic public services (transport, education and healthcare) already were free at the point of use and universal and of a very good quality.

The problem was that the USSR emphasized too much on the production of infrastructure and too little on consumption goods, which were already of a poor quality when compared to the Western ones. The high Soviet bureaucracy, in constant contact with the capitalist world, was then slowly, but surely, coopted by the delicacies of the West, and thus developed a urge of class distinction.

This "urge" can be illustrated by an anecdote. When Yeltsin was still the President of Soviet Russia, George H. W. Bush invited him to Houston. There, he was marvelled by Jack Daniel's whiskey and asked for some cases for the trip back. Therefore the joke he sold the Soviet Union for two cases of Jack Daniel's.

[Oct 02, 2018] Johann Ricke

Oct 02, 2018 | www.unz.com
Once upon a time socialists dreamed that the proletariat would spontaneously rise up to break its chains and overthrow the capitalists, then they got bored of waiting for that and invented the radical vanguard to lead the proletariat into the revolution and then eventually they realized that the proletariat is superfluous and they just need the vanguard.
This did come out of the 19th Century with awful factory conditions, decadent upper classes (pre WWI) and their unexpected collapse along with the whole Belle Époque in WW1.

There was plenty of fuel for socialism with 1) a fashionable new intellectual left 2) political fluidity 3) politically bankrupt Ancien Regimes.

In my opinion fashionable radical vanguards saw the possibility of harnessing these forces to take power - some of them acting idealistically - some not. The key point was that Ancien Regimes were weakened by WW1, with a good example being Russia with its military failures and its decadent and ineffectual Czarist government.

In these unusual circumstances, the self appointed Bolshevik Radical Vanguard could exploit the disaffection of Russian soldiers in Petrograd and Lenin could unilaterally issued General Order Nº1 as the self appointed head of the Council of Soldiers and Workingmen's Deputies (ignoring the Provisional Government) with all military units ordered to remove their existing officers and elect new ones. This was coupled with promises to stop the war and give all peasant soldiers their own private farms, which predictably went down very well and wrecked army discipline.

Source: "Russia from the American Embassy" by David Rowland Francis, U.S. ambassador to Russia for 5 years from March 1916 to March 1921. https://www.amazon.com/Russia-American-Embassy-April-1916-November/dp/B00B6ZE8NI/ref=cm_cr-mr-title

Francis also went on to say, "The Bolshevik leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90% of whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country but are internationalists and they are trying to start a worldwide social revolution."

The Bolsheviks of course used the arms against the Provisional Government, and when the elections to the Constituent Assembly eventually came at the end of November 1917, they filled the assembly hall with soldiers and rejected the result of the vote (Social Revolutionaries 20,893,743, Bolsheviks 9,023,963 out of 36,257,960 votes cast). The Bolsheviks declared that Constitutional Democrats were to be arrested and Lenin established his dictatorship.

The Bolsheviks didn't spare the proletariat. All dissent was crushed and whole social "classes" were transported and mass murdered on a scale far exceeding anything the Germans did in WW2.

melanf , says: August 11, 2017 at 4:57 am GMT

@Miro23

The Bolsheviks didn't spare the proletariat. All dissent was crushed and whole social "classes" were transported and mass murdered on a scale far exceeding anything the Germans did in WW2.

The Bolsheviks disgusting, but this statement ("on a scale far exceeding anything the Germans did in WW2″) is an obvious lie

http://polit.ru/article/2007/12/11/repressii/

" In fact, the number of prisoners for political reasons (for "counterrevolutionary crimes") in the USSR in the period from 1921 to 1953, i.e. after 33 years was about 3.8 million people during this period ( 1921 to 1954 ) has been convicted 3 777 380 people, including to capital punishment -- 642 980, to the contents in camps and prisons for a term of 25 years and below -- 2 369 220, into exile and expulsion -- 765 180 people".

[Oct 02, 2018] Rogue Nations, US, UK, France and Germany in Talks to Attack Warn-Torn, Heroic Syria Without Cause

Oct 02, 2018 | russia-insider.com

[Oct 02, 2018] "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize

Oct 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

A very shrewd observation, widely misattributed to Voltaire, states that "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize." Or put another way, individuals are reluctant to publicly challenge those whose power they fear. Certainly, this simple standard helps to explain many important aspects of America's severely malfunctioning political system.

Wade says: September 24, 2018 at 4:04 pm GMT 300 Words @Tyrion 2 Nice try. But to me this falls flat. First of all I don't think Ron has literally blamed Jews for all the world's evils any more than Southern Christians like me have been blamed for all the world's evils by Hollywood.

The issue is that Zionist leadership plays really dirty. And they are good at it. But having them in control of the West's media means that their negative impact on society goes unremarked upon while the positive things they do are trumpeted from the rooftops. We are allowed to notice Jewish power in relation to their main accomplishments, but we are referred to the nearest holocaust museum when we notice any negative impact that Jewish power has. It's one of the many wars on "noticing" the media is engaged in.

I don't see how all of this ends in mass pogroms, let alone a holocaust if you want my opinion. We're just hoping for a much overdue correction in perspective. Topics like Israel's founding and influence in US politics, The Holocaust, WWII and 911 are being desacralized so they can be discussed rationally, and that's good for everyone. Those who doubt Oswald was the lone assassin have been treated for decades with a smorgasbord of conspiracy theories about JFK ranging from Cuba and Castro, to anti-Castro Cubans, LBJ, The Mafia, the KBG, the CIA all being cast as possible suspects, but not even once has Israel being fingered by anyone anywhere (except by the indefatigable Michael Collins Piper) as a possible suspect, even though they had as clear (or clearer) motives and opportunity than nearly anyone else. Why hasn't this possibility been more fully explored by JFK researchers? Everyone needs to know how much Israel has benefited from 911. Their role in this also needs to be explored much more by researchers and brought out into the open.

mark green , says: September 24, 2018 at 5:45 pm GMT

The Unz Review is a tremendous site. It attracts superior writers as well as commentators. And Ron Unz, fortunately, is untouchable. The ADL understands this. Better for them to remain silent. They want to keep you as obscure as possible. Thus, the silent treatment.

Thus, the MSM would rather talk about crude 'white power' sites than the perspicacious Unz Review. But you can bet, Ron, that they will pounce on you if given the opportunity.

Says Ron: "I do think [the ADL] may be absolutely terrified of the many facts contained within the series of recent columns that I have now published, and such abject terror is what keeps them far, far away." That covers it. In the meantime, I look forward to seeing the UNZ review grow in influence and readership.

John Lilburne , says: September 24, 2018 at 6:25 pm GMT
The quote "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize." comes from Tacitus The Life of Agricola
other nice quotes are-

"It is the rare fortune of these days that one may think what one likes and say what one thinks."
― Tacitus, Histories of Tacitus
"It is a principle of nature to hate those whom you have injured."
― Tacitus
"Crime, once exposed, has no refuge but in audacity." Annals

and finally
"They have plundered the world, stripping naked the land in their hunger they are driven by greed, if their enemy be rich; by ambition, if poor They ravage, they slaughter, they seize by false pretenses, and all of this they hail as the construction of empire. And when in their wake nothing remains but a desert, they call that peace."
― Tacitus, The Agricola and the Germania

[Oct 01, 2018] It all started with 9/11. That was the pretext for Gen. Clark's "We're going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran."

Oct 01, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Pštrossova 6 , Sep 30, 2018 2:23:33 PM | link

Posted the following this morning on last week's Open Thread, so I'm reposting here

This comment will try to focus on the Big Picture while ignoring all the sideshows and distractions

The Big Picture has three parts: (1) 9/11 where it all started (2) Putin was a "good guy" when he was aligned with the "war on terror" (3) Putin became a bad guy the moment he figured out that ALL these wars were to destroy nations, not save them, and so he intervened in Syria


(1) the people who did 9/11 are the SAME people who are trying to menace Russia (as well as Syria and Iran) today

9/11 is where it all started .this event led us to where we are now .
There are posted videos of news outlets reporting on building seven collapsing – BEFORE it did. That would be impossible without ADVANCE KNOWLEDGE of the controlled demolition of that building. Something that Osama and his 19 henchmen would not have been able to accomplish even if they could have done the rest, which is beyond preposterous.


(2) And so right after 9/11, when the chimp looked into Putin's eyes, and saw a good guy, that was when Putin was aligned with the nascent "war on terror". Something Vlad was all too familiar with, and happy to help out the West with, in any way he could.


(3) But then Vladimir figured out, (what most have apparently been unable to figure out) – that ALL of these wars – (following the *OBVIOUSLY* lied about 9/11 false flag), are intended to destroy nations, not save them. Duh.


The people who did 9/11 (Zionists and their lackeys in the West, NATO, CIA, etc..) are the EXACT SAME PEOPLE who are trying to menace Russia today.

And yet many people haven't even bothered to look into this event. THE event that will be ultimately responsible for the clash of civilizations to come, when the Zionists demand Putin vacate Syria so they can steal the Golan Heights.

How can a someone ruminate over, write about, postulate and pontificate over a (((Western))) foreign policy that maligns and menaces Russia.. and yet fail to see the obvious?

For us to have NO curiousity about 9/11 would be like Bashar Assad believing the war he's been fighting was a home-grown event unaffected by foreign interests.

It all started with 9/11. That was the pretext for Gen. Clark's "We're going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran."

Retired General Wesley Clark.

Have you ever seen the video?


Do you understand how that agenda might have effected the (((West's))) relations with Russia, once Putin put his foot down over Syria?


Or are all of these things completely independent of each other, and the war on Syria is actually being waged by disgruntled Syrian Muslims who want a less secular state, with help from NATO ONLY when Assad uses chemical weapons against his own civilians?


Why are otherwise smart people unable to comprehend, (or even contemplate) the big picture?

Peter AU 1 , Sep 30, 2018 2:55:35 PM | link

26

Use of wahhabi jihadists began in the late seventies in Afghanistan. From there they were shipped to the Russian Caucasus in the mid nineties to assist with the breakup of the Russian federation.
The petro dollar hegemony began with the discovery of oil at Prudhoe bay in the late sixties.
False flags are a proud American tradition virtually since its inception.

fast freddy , Sep 30, 2018 3:38:53 PM | link
It is interesting also that The US (and other Western Powers) allied with and used Muslims in Yugoslavia. These were posited as the good guy victims in need of Humanitarian Intervention by carpet bombing the Orthodox Christian Serbs. Of course the Muslims were financed and equipped as freedom fighters. TV, Radio stations and hospitals with workers in them, were destroyed in this humanitarian intervention.

Now it is a mishmash of small broken states with US Military bases located in them. One of the largest bases is Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo. Named for Vietnam War Medal of Honor recipient United States Army Staff Sergeant James L. Bondsteel, the name reminds one of a character from Dr. Strangelove (Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love The Bob).

The once successful socialist nation was broken and partitioned and looted by Multinational Corps and Western Banks.

The destruction of that country took years in the making. Reagan admin instituted the first round of sanctions. It became ripe for the taking after Tito died and the USSR was in chaos.

While each successive admin piled on, Bill Clinton got to be the point man for the prolonged attacks. Interestingly, Hillary takes credit for urging Bill to bomb civilian population centers.

A precurser to "We Came, We saw, He died...HAHAHAHHAHA).

[Sep 30, 2018] Scientists measure creepy, invisible clouds that orbit every human being on Earth

Notable quotes:
"... Scientists had assembled separate bacteria, viral or fungi databases, but to fully decode our environmental exposures, we built a pan-domain database to cover more than 40,000 species," ..."
"... "The bottom line is that we all have our own microbiome cloud that we're schlepping around and spewing out," ..."
Sep 30, 2018 | www.rt.com

Scientists had assembled separate bacteria, viral or fungi databases, but to fully decode our environmental exposures, we built a pan-domain database to cover more than 40,000 species," says one of the team, Chao Jiang . The researchers soon began to realize that even those participants who occupied the same areas had their own unique 'invisible friends' in their exposomes.

"The bottom line is that we all have our own microbiome cloud that we're schlepping around and spewing out," Snyder said, admitting that although the current study is limited in scope (only three individuals wore the devices for an extended period of time), it could mark the beginning of a new area of medical research.

READ MORE: Pro-ISIS outlets vow unleashing biological warfare on West

For instance, Snyder's allergies, which he believed were caused by pine pollen, were actually shown to have a higher correlation to eucalyptus through analysis of his exposome data. Snyder suggests combining immune response data (through blood or urine sampling via traditional medical practice) with that collected through his exposome device in order to create a more complete picture of human health.

[Sep 29, 2018] A CIA lucky break How the death of the 'Smiling Pope' helped Washington win the Cold War -- RT Op-ed

Notable quotes:
"... "The true treasures of the Church are the poor, the little ones to be helped not merely by occasional alms but in the way they can be promoted," ..."
"... "He talked particularly of his concern over 'Los Desaparecidos', people who had vanished off the face of Argentinian earth in their thousands. By the conclusion of the 15th minute audience the General began to wish that he had heeded the eleventh-hour attempts of Vatican officials to dissuade him coming to Rome," ..."
"... "His mind was as strong, as hard and as sharp as a diamond. That was where his real power was. He understood and had the ability to get to the centre of a problem. He could not be overwhelmed. When everyone was applauding the smiling Pope, I was waiting for him 'tirare fuori le unghie', to reveal his claws. He had tremendous power." ..."
"... But John Paul I never lived to exercise his "tremendous power." ..."
"... "The public speculation that this death was not natural grew by the minute. Men and women were heard shouting at the inert form: Who has done this to you? Who has murdered you?" ..."
"... David Yallop revealed that on the day of his death, the Pope had discussed a reshuffle of Vatican staff with Secretary of State Cardinal Jean Villot, who was also to be replaced. Yallop claimed that the Pope had a list of a number of clerics who belonged to the Freemasons, membership of which was strictly prohibited by the Church. The most sinister of these Masonic lodges was the fiercely anti-communist Propaganda Due (P2), which held great influence in Italy at this time, being referred to as a "state within a state." ..."
"... "Had he lived another week, the United States would have been looking at a half a dozen mini-Cubas in its back yard," ..."
"... "The single fact of John Paul II's election in 1978 changed everything. In Poland, everything began Then the whole thing spread. He was in Chile and Pinochet was out. He was in Haiti and Duvalier was out. He was in the Philippines and Marcos was out," ..."
"... In 1985, Agca's confederate, Abdullah Catli, who was later killed in a car crash, testified that he had been approached by the West German BND spy organization, which promised him a large sum of money "if he implicated the Bulgarian secret service and the KGB in the attempt on the Pope's life." ..."
"... "ex-CIA analyst Melvin A. Goodman disclosed that his colleagues, under pressure from CIA higher-ups, skewed their reports to try to lend credence to the contention that the Soviets were involved. 'The CIA had no evidence linking the KGB to the plot,' Goodman told the Senate Intelligence Committee." ..."
"... In 2011, a new book entitled 'To Kill the Pope, the Truth about the Assassination Attempt on John Paul II', which was based on 20 years of research, concluded that the CIA had indeed tried to frame Bulgaria, in order to discredit communism. ..."
"... The great irony of course is that after the Berlin Wall came down, Pope John Paul II became a strong critic of the inhumane 'greed is good' model of capitalism which had replaced communism. In Latvia, he said capitalism was responsible for "grave social injustices" and acknowledged that Marxism contained "a kernel of truth." He said that "the ideology of the market" made solidarity between people "difficult at best." In Czechoslovakia, he warned against replacing communism with materialism and consumerism. ..."
"... Follow Neil Clark @NeilClark66 ..."
"... Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! ..."
Sep 29, 2018 | www.rt.com

The sudden death of Pope John Paul I, exactly 40 years ago today, stunned the world. The 'Smiling Pope' had only served for 33 days. His demise and replacement by John Paul II marked an important turning point in the old Cold War. The year 1978, as I argued in a previous op-ed, was the year today's world was made.

There was nothing inevitable about the ascendancy of Reagan and Thatcher, the rise of groups like Al-Qaeda and IS, and the downfall of the Soviet Union. The neoliberal, neoconservative world order and its associated violence came about because of key events and decisions which took place 40 years ago. The Vatican was at the heart of these events.

The drama which unfolded there in the summer of 1978 would have been rejected as being too far-fetched if sent in as a film script. In a space of two and a half months, we had three different Popes. There was no great surprise when, on August 6, the first of them, Pope Paul VI, died after suffering a massive heart attack. The Supreme Pontiff, who had served since 1963, was 80 and had been in declining health. But the death of his much younger successor, John Paul I, a radical reformer who wanted to build a genuine People's Church, has fuelled conspiracy theories to this day.

Read more Israeli Prime Minister Menahem Begin and National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski walk in Camp David 09 December 1978 © AFP 1978: The year today's world was made

Cardinal Albino Luciani, the working-class son of a bricklayer (and staunch socialist), from a small town in northern Italy, was a Pope like no other. He refused a coronation and detested being carried on the sedia gestatoria – the Papal chair. He hated pomp and circumstance and pretentiousness. His speeches were down to earth and full of homely observations, with regular references to popular fiction. He possessed a gentle humor and always had a twinkle in his eye. He was by all accounts an incredibly sweet man.

But there was steel there, too. Luciani was determined to root out corruption, and to investigate the complex financial affairs of the Vatican's own bank, and its connection to the scandal-hit Banco Ambrosiano.

While he had declared communism to be incompatible with Christianity, his father's egalitarian ethos stayed with him. "The true treasures of the Church are the poor, the little ones to be helped not merely by occasional alms but in the way they can be promoted," he once said. At a meeting with General Videla of Argentina, he made clear his abhorrence of fascism. "He talked particularly of his concern over 'Los Desaparecidos', people who had vanished off the face of Argentinian earth in their thousands. By the conclusion of the 15th minute audience the General began to wish that he had heeded the eleventh-hour attempts of Vatican officials to dissuade him coming to Rome," noted David Yallop in his book 'In God's Name'.

One cleric, Father Busa, wrote of John Paul I: "His mind was as strong, as hard and as sharp as a diamond. That was where his real power was. He understood and had the ability to get to the centre of a problem. He could not be overwhelmed. When everyone was applauding the smiling Pope, I was waiting for him 'tirare fuori le unghie', to reveal his claws. He had tremendous power."

But John Paul I never lived to exercise his "tremendous power." He was found dead in his bed on the morning of September 28, 1978. The official story was that the 'Smiling Pope' had died from a heart attack. But it wasn't long before questions were being asked. John Paul I was only 65 and had appeared to be in fine health.

The fact that there was no post-mortem only added to the suspicions. "The public speculation that this death was not natural grew by the minute. Men and women were heard shouting at the inert form: Who has done this to you? Who has murdered you?" wrote David Yallop.

Read more © Tony Gentile / Reuters 'Sex is a gift of God': Pope Francis shares benefits of 'passionate' love, slams pornography

David Yallop revealed that on the day of his death, the Pope had discussed a reshuffle of Vatican staff with Secretary of State Cardinal Jean Villot, who was also to be replaced. Yallop claimed that the Pope had a list of a number of clerics who belonged to the Freemasons, membership of which was strictly prohibited by the Church. The most sinister of these Masonic lodges was the fiercely anti-communist Propaganda Due (P2), which held great influence in Italy at this time, being referred to as a "state within a state." The murky world of P2, and its leaders' links with organized crime, the Mafia and the CIA is discussed in 'In God's Name'.

Another writer, Lucien Gregoire, author of 'Murder by the Grace of God', points the finger of blame squarely at the CIA. He notes a seemingly strange coincidence, namely that on September 3, 1978, just 25 days before the Pope himself died, Metropolitan Nikodim, the visiting leader of the Russian Orthodox Church, who was later revealed to have been a KGB agent, fell dead at John Paul's feet in the Vatican after sipping coffee. He was only 48.

Gregoire says that the CIA dubbed John Paul I 'the Bolshevik Pope' and was keen to eliminate him before he presided over a conference the Puebla Conference in Mexico. "Had he lived another week, the United States would have been looking at a half a dozen mini-Cubas in its back yard," he writes.

While there's no shortage of suspects if you believe that John Paul I was murdered, it needs to be stressed that despite the contradictory statements made about the circumstances of his death, and the strange coincidences, no evidence has yet been produced to show that his death was not a natural one. What we can say though is that there will have been quite a few powerful and influential people in Italy and beyond who were relieved that the 'Smiling Pope' had such a short time in office.

His successor, the Polish Archbishop Karol Wojtyla, who took the name 'John Paul II' as a homage to his predecessor, made it clear that investigating the Vatican's financial activities and uncovering Freemasons was not a priority. As a patriotic Pole, his appointment was manna from Heaven for anti-communist hawks in the US State Department. "The single fact of John Paul II's election in 1978 changed everything. In Poland, everything began Then the whole thing spread. He was in Chile and Pinochet was out. He was in Haiti and Duvalier was out. He was in the Philippines and Marcos was out," said Joaquin Navarro-Valls, John Paul II's press secretary.

The way that Pope John Paul II spoke out against what he regarded as communist repression, not only in his native Poland but across Eastern Europe and beyond, saw him being toasted by the neocon faction. It might not have been just words either, which helped undermine communist rule. There was a rumor that 'God's Banker' Roberto Calvi, who in 1982 was found hanging from Blackfriars Bridge in London, had sent $50mn to 'Solidarity' in Poland on behalf of the Pope.

Read more FILE PHOTO: At the invitation of the Constantinople Patriarch, heads of all Orthodox churches meet at the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate in Istanbul, on MArch 9, 2014. Murad Sezer Biggest rift in modern Orthodox history? Russian Church won't work w/ Constantinople-chaired bodies

In May 1981, John Paul II was shot and wounded by Turkish gunman Mehmet Ali Agca. Neocons in the US promoted the narrative that it was a communist plot (organized by Bulgaria), but Sofia denied involvement. In 1985, Agca's confederate, Abdullah Catli, who was later killed in a car crash, testified that he had been approached by the West German BND spy organization, which promised him a large sum of money "if he implicated the Bulgarian secret service and the KGB in the attempt on the Pope's life."

Martin Lee, writing in Consortium News, also notes that in 1990, "ex-CIA analyst Melvin A. Goodman disclosed that his colleagues, under pressure from CIA higher-ups, skewed their reports to try to lend credence to the contention that the Soviets were involved. 'The CIA had no evidence linking the KGB to the plot,' Goodman told the Senate Intelligence Committee."

In 2011, a new book entitled 'To Kill the Pope, the Truth about the Assassination Attempt on John Paul II', which was based on 20 years of research, concluded that the CIA had indeed tried to frame Bulgaria, in order to discredit communism.

The great irony of course is that after the Berlin Wall came down, Pope John Paul II became a strong critic of the inhumane 'greed is good' model of capitalism which had replaced communism. In Latvia, he said capitalism was responsible for "grave social injustices" and acknowledged that Marxism contained "a kernel of truth." He said that "the ideology of the market" made solidarity between people "difficult at best." In Czechoslovakia, he warned against replacing communism with materialism and consumerism.

Having enlisted the assistance of the Vatican in helping to bring down 'The Reds', the neo-liberals and neo-cons then turned on the Church. The Church survived communism, but it hasn't fared too well under consumerism. The Vatican is nowhere near as influential as it was in 1978. The US, meanwhile, unconstrained by a geopolitical counter-weight, threw its weight around the world after 1989, illegally invading and attacking a series of sovereign states.

One can only wonder how different things might have been if the 'Smiling Pope' had lived.

Follow Neil Clark @NeilClark66

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

[Sep 29, 2018] Washington's Sanctions Machine by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... According to media reports, the Chinese Department purchased the weapons from Rosoboronexport, Russia's principal arms exporter. This violated a 2017 law passed by Congress named, characteristically, the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, which sought to punish the Russian government and its various agencies for interfering in in the 2016 US election as well as its alleged involvement in Ukraine, Syria and its development of cyberwar capabilities. Iran and North Korea were also targeted in the legislation. ..."
"... Reprinted with permission from Strategic Culture Foundation . ..."
Sep 27, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org
Perhaps it is Donald Trump's business background that leads him to believe that if you inflict enough economic pain on someone they will ultimately surrender and agree to do whatever you want. Though that approach might well work in New York real estate, it is not a certain path to success in international relations since countries are not as vulnerable to pressure as are individual investors or developers.

Washington's latest foray into the world of sanctions, directed against China, is astonishing even when considering the low bar that has been set by previous presidents going back to Bill Clinton. Beijing has already been pushing back over US sanctions imposed last week on its government-run Equipment Development Department of the Chinese Central Military Commission and its director Li Shangfu for "engaging in significant transactions" with a Russian weapons manufacturer that is on a list of US sanctioned companies. The transactions included purchases of Russian Su-35 combat aircraft as well as equipment related to the advanced S-400 surface-to-air missile system. The sanctions include a ban on the director entering the United States and blocks all of his property or bank accounts within the US as well as freezing all local assets of the Equipment Development Department.

More important, the sanctions also forbid conducting any transactions that go through the US financial system. It is the most powerful weapon Washington has at its disposal, but it is being challenged as numerous countries are working to find ways around it. Currently however, as most international transactions are conducted in dollars and pass through American banks that means that it will be impossible for the Chinese government to make weapons purchases from many foreign sources. If foreign banks attempt to collaborate with China to evade the restrictions, they too will be sanctioned.

So in summary, Beijing bought weapons from Moscow and is being sanctioned by the United States for doing so because Washington does not approve of the Russian government. The sanctions on China are referred to as secondary sanctions in that they are derivative from the primary sanction on the foreign company or individual that is actually being punished. Secondary sanctions can be extended ad infinitum as transgressors linked sequentially to the initial transaction multiply the number of potential targets.

Not surprisingly, the US Ambassador has been summoned and Beijing has canceled several bilateral meetings with American defense department officials. The Chinese government has expressed "outrage" and has demanded the US cancel the measure.

According to media reports, the Chinese Department purchased the weapons from Rosoboronexport, Russia's principal arms exporter. This violated a 2017 law passed by Congress named, characteristically, the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, which sought to punish the Russian government and its various agencies for interfering in in the 2016 US election as well as its alleged involvement in Ukraine, Syria and its development of cyberwar capabilities. Iran and North Korea were also targeted in the legislation.

Explaining the new sanctions, US State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert issued a statement elaborating that the initial sanctions on Russia were enacted "to further impose costs on the Russian government in response to its malign activities." She added that the US will "urge all countries to curtail relationships with Russia's defense and intelligence sectors, both of which are linked to malign activities worldwide."

As engaging in "malign activities" is a charge that should quite plausibly be leveled against Washington and its allies in the Middle East, it is not clear if anyone but the French and British poodles actually believes the rationalizations coming out of Washington to defend the indefensible. An act to "Counter America's Adversaries Through Sanctions" is, even as the title implies, ridiculous. Washington is on a sanctions spree. Russia has been sanctioned repeatedly since the passage of the fraudulent Magnitsky Act, with no regard for Moscow's legitimate protests that interfering in other countries' internal politics is unacceptable. China is currently arguing reasonably enough that arms sales between countries is perfect legal and in line with international law.

Iran has been sanctioned even through it complied with an international agreement on its nuclear program and new sanctions were even piled on top of the old sanctions. And in about five weeks the US will be sanctioning ANYONE who buys oil from Iran, reportedly with no exceptions allowed. Venezuela is under US sanctions to punish its government, NATO member Turkey because it bought weapons from Russia and the Western Hemisphere perennial bad boy Cuba has had various embargoes in place since 1960.

It should be noted that sanctions earn a lot of ill-will and generally accomplish nothing. Cuba would likely be a fairly normal country but for the US restrictions and other pressure that gave its government the excuse to maintain a firm grip on power. The same might even apply to North Korea. And sanctions are even bad for the United States. Someday, when the US begins to lose its grip on the world economy all of those places being sanctioned will line up to get their revenge and it won't be pretty.

Reprinted with permission from Strategic Culture Foundation .

[Sep 29, 2018] Johann Ricke

Sep 29, 2018 | www.unz.com
Once upon a time socialists dreamed that the proletariat would spontaneously rise up to break its chains and overthrow the capitalists, then they got bored of waiting for that and invented the radical vanguard to lead the proletariat into the revolution and then eventually they realized that the proletariat is superfluous and they just need the vanguard.
This did come out of the 19th Century with awful factory conditions, decadent upper classes (pre WWI) and their unexpected collapse along with the whole Belle Époque in WW1.

There was plenty of fuel for socialism with 1) a fashionable new intellectual left 2) political fluidity 3) politically bankrupt Ancien Regimes.

In my opinion fashionable radical vanguards saw the possibility of harnessing these forces to take power - some of them acting idealistically - some not. The key point was that Ancien Regimes were weakened by WW1, with a good example being Russia with its military failures and its decadent and ineffectual Czarist government.

In these unusual circumstances, the self appointed Bolshevik Radical Vanguard could exploit the disaffection of Russian soldiers in Petrograd and Lenin could unilaterally issued General Order Nº1 as the self appointed head of the Council of Soldiers and Workingmen's Deputies (ignoring the Provisional Government) with all military units ordered to remove their existing officers and elect new ones. This was coupled with promises to stop the war and give all peasant soldiers their own private farms, which predictably went down very well and wrecked army discipline.

Source: "Russia from the American Embassy" by David Rowland Francis, U.S. ambassador to Russia for 5 years from March 1916 to March 1921. https://www.amazon.com/Russia-American-Embassy-April-1916-November/dp/B00B6ZE8NI/ref=cm_cr-mr-title

Francis also went on to say, "The Bolshevik leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90% of whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country but are internationalists and they are trying to start a worldwide social revolution."

The Bolsheviks of course used the arms against the Provisional Government, and when the elections to the Constituent Assembly eventually came at the end of November 1917, they filled the assembly hall with soldiers and rejected the result of the vote (Social Revolutionaries 20,893,743, Bolsheviks 9,023,963 out of 36,257,960 votes cast). The Bolsheviks declared that Constitutional Democrats were to be arrested and Lenin established his dictatorship.

The Bolsheviks didn't spare the proletariat. All dissent was crushed and whole social "classes" were transported and mass murdered on a scale far exceeding anything the Germans did in WW2.

melanf , says: August 11, 2017 at 4:57 am GMT

@Miro23

The Bolsheviks didn't spare the proletariat. All dissent was crushed and whole social "classes" were transported and mass murdered on a scale far exceeding anything the Germans did in WW2.

The Bolsheviks disgusting, but this statement ("on a scale far exceeding anything the Germans did in WW2″) is an obvious lie

http://polit.ru/article/2007/12/11/repressii/

" In fact, the number of prisoners for political reasons (for "counterrevolutionary crimes") in the USSR in the period from 1921 to 1953, i.e. after 33 years was about 3.8 million people during this period ( 1921 to 1954 ) has been convicted 3 777 380 people, including to capital punishment -- 642 980, to the contents in camps and prisons for a term of 25 years and below -- 2 369 220, into exile and expulsion -- 765 180 people".

[Sep 29, 2018] Rogue Nations, US, UK, France and Germany in Talks to Attack Warn-Torn, Heroic Syria Without Cause

Sep 29, 2018 | russia-insider.com

[Sep 29, 2018] "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize

Sep 29, 2018 | www.unz.com

A very shrewd observation, widely misattributed to Voltaire, states that "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize." Or put another way, individuals are reluctant to publicly challenge those whose power they fear. Certainly, this simple standard helps to explain many important aspects of America's severely malfunctioning political system.

Wade , says: September 24, 2018 at 4:04 pm GMT

@Tyrion 2 Nice try. But to me this falls flat. First of all I don't think Ron has literally blamed Jews for all the world's evils any more than Southern Christians like me have been blamed for all the world's evils by Hollywood.

The issue is that Zionist leadership plays really dirty. And they are good at it. But having them in control of the West's media means that their negative impact on society goes unremarked upon while the positive things they do are trumpeted from the rooftops. We are allowed to notice Jewish power in relation to their main accomplishments, but we are referred to the nearest holocaust museum when we notice any negative impact that Jewish power has. It's one of the many wars on "noticing" the media is engaged in.

I don't see how all of this ends in mass pogroms, let alone a holocaust if you want my opinion. We're just hoping for a much overdue correction in perspective. Topics like Israel's founding and influence in US politics, The Holocaust, WWII and 911 are being desacralized so they can be discussed rationally, and that's good for everyone. Those who doubt Oswald was the lone assassin have been treated for decades with a smorgasbord of conspiracy theories about JFK ranging from Cuba and Castro, to anti-Castro Cubans, LBJ, The Mafia, the KBG, the CIA all being cast as possible suspects, but not even once has Israel being fingered by anyone anywhere (except by the indefatigable Michael Collins Piper) as a possible suspect, even though they had as clear (or clearer) motives and opportunity than nearly anyone else. Why hasn't this possibility been more fully explored by JFK researchers? Everyone needs to know how much Israel has benefited from 911. Their role in this also needs to be explored much more by researchers and brought out into the open.

mark green , says: September 24, 2018 at 5:45 pm GMT
The Unz Review is a tremendous site. It attracts superior writers as well as commentators. And Ron Unz, fortunately, is untouchable. The ADL understands this. Better for them to remain silent. They want to keep you as obscure as possible. Thus, the silent treatment.

Thus, the MSM would rather talk about crude 'white power' sites than the perspicacious Unz Review. But you can bet, Ron, that they will pounce on you if given the opportunity.

Says Ron: "I do think [the ADL] may be absolutely terrified of the many facts contained within the series of recent columns that I have now published, and such abject terror is what keeps them far, far away." That covers it. In the meantime, I look forward to seeing the UNZ review grow in influence and readership.

[Sep 28, 2018] Trump Folds on Nordstream 2 Because ... Logic - Gold Goats 'n Guns

Notable quotes:
"... The Davos Crowd, ..."
"... So, Donald Trump finally folding on stopping Nordstream 2 is yet another example of the limits of what power the U.S. has and of its threats. When he denounced the project he said, ..."
"... "I never thought it was appropriate. I think it's ridiculous. And I think it's certainly a very bad thing for the people of Germany. And I've said it very loud and clear." ..."
"... But notice that he never said why. Because there is no downside for Germany. That's the point. Russian piped gas is simply cheaper and more reliable than LNG produced more than 3000 miles away. The downside is for the U.S. ..."
"... It begins the process of Germany and Russia re-establishing stronger economic ties cut in half by the 2014 sanctions over Crimea. It keeps Merkel in power a little while longer having stood up to the bully Trump and showing some German independence. ..."
"... Most importantly, this gas will be paid for in euros, not dollars. And this further undermines the effectiveness of U.S. sanctions as Gazprom will have a steady supply of euros to pay back its investors and diversify Russia's currency reserves. ..."
"... We saw this last winter when vicious cold snaps forced a hostile Britain to buy a few tankers of Yamal LNG from Novatek to keep its citizens from freezing. With the planet cooling rapidly, expect this source of spot demand to Europe to increase. ..."
"... But, for Germany, and the EU as a whole, more cheap energy is the path to remaining somewhat relevant in the global economy. With Germany ending the use of nuclear power it needs the type of energy Nordstream 2 supplies. In fact, Germany will eventually need Nordstream 3. ..."
"... talking their book. ..."
Sep 28, 2018 | tomluongo.me

Since its first announcement I have been convinced the Nordstream 2 pipeline would be built. I have followed every twist of this story from my days writing for Newsmax.

And the reason for my confidence can be summed up in one word. Money.

Nordstream 2 simply makes too much economic sense for any amount of political whining from the U.S. and Poland to stop it. Poland has no power within the European Union.

Germany does. And while I'm no fan of Angela Merkel getting another political weapon to hold over the heads of the Poles, their attempts to derail the project were always going to end in tears for them.

And so now Poland and the U.S. cried a lot of crocodile tears recently when President Trump finally acceded to reality and ended the threat of sanctioning five of the biggest oil majors in the world over doing business with Gazprom over Nordstream 2.

Nordstream 2's investors are Uniper, OMV, Wintershall, Royal Dutch Shell and Engie. After all the permits were issued and construction begun the only thing that could stop Nordstream from happening was these five companies folding to U.S. pressure and backing out of the project by calling in their loans to Gazprom.

And when they were unwilling to do that, Trump had to fold because you can't cut these companies out of the western banking system and starve them of dollars and euros without an extreme dislocation in oil prices and global trade.

Bluff called. Nordstream 2? Holding Aces.

Trump? Holding two-seven offsuit.

Lack of Polish

The big loser here is Poland unless they come down off their Russophobic high horse.

Why is Nordstream 2 so important to Poland? Because it forces Poland into choosing between two things the current ruling Law and Justice Party doesn't like.

  1. Renegotiating a gas transit deal with Gazprom through Ukrainian pipelines without as much leverage. Because the current agreement expires at the end of 2019.
  2. If they reject this first option then they are at the mercy of buying gas from Nordstream 2 putting them politically in the hands of Germany.

Merkel is angry with Poland for trying to assert its sovereignty having begun Article 7 proceedings over their law putting Supreme Court justices under review from the legislature, which the EU has termed a violation of its pledge to protect 'human rights.'

And so, expect Poland to now open up talks with Gazprom to negotiate a new deal or be stupid and buy LNG from the U.S. at two to three times the price they can get it from Gazprom.

Keeping Them Distant

From the U.S. side of the equation there are few things in this life that Donald Trump and Barack Obama agree upon, and stopping Nordstream 2 was one of them. This, of course, tells you that this opposition is coming from somewhere a lot higher than the Presidency.

U.S. and British foreign policy has been obsessed for more than a hundred years with stopping the natural alliance between Germany's industrial base and Russia's vast tracts of natural resources as well as Russia's own science and engineering prowess.

These two countries cannot, in any version of a unipolar world dominated by The Davos Crowd, be allowed to form an economic no less political alliance because the level of coordination and economic prosperity works directly against their goals of lowering everyone's expectations for what humans can accomplish.

That is their greatest source of power. The complacency of our accepting low expectations.

So, Donald Trump finally folding on stopping Nordstream 2 is yet another example of the limits of what power the U.S. has and of its threats. When he denounced the project he said,

"I never thought it was appropriate. I think it's ridiculous. And I think it's certainly a very bad thing for the people of Germany. And I've said it very loud and clear."

But notice that he never said why. Because there is no downside for Germany. That's the point. Russian piped gas is simply cheaper and more reliable than LNG produced more than 3000 miles away. The downside is for the U.S.

It begins the process of Germany and Russia re-establishing stronger economic ties cut in half by the 2014 sanctions over Crimea. It keeps Merkel in power a little while longer having stood up to the bully Trump and showing some German independence.

This is something she sorely needs right now coming into regional elections in October.

Most importantly, this gas will be paid for in euros, not dollars. And this further undermines the effectiveness of U.S. sanctions as Gazprom will have a steady supply of euros to pay back its investors and diversify Russia's currency reserves.

The Flow of Money

There is no way for U.S. LNG supplies to be competitive in Europe without massive artificial barriers-to-entry for Russian gas. And even if Nordstream 2 was somehow stopped by the U.S., Russia's massive Yamal LNG facility on the Baltic Sea would still out compete U.S LNG from Cheniere's terminal in Louisiana.

Location. Location. Location.

We saw this last winter when vicious cold snaps forced a hostile Britain to buy a few tankers of Yamal LNG from Novatek to keep its citizens from freezing. With the planet cooling rapidly, expect this source of spot demand to Europe to increase.

And this is why Russia also benefits from Poland building an LNG terminal. Because don't for a second think Poles will suffer extreme cold because Andrej Duda hates Russians.

That's just funny, right thar!

But, for Germany, and the EU as a whole, more cheap energy is the path to remaining somewhat relevant in the global economy. With Germany ending the use of nuclear power it needs the type of energy Nordstream 2 supplies. In fact, Germany will eventually need Nordstream 3.

Each intervention by the U.S. or one of its satraps (and Poland's leadership certainly fills that bill) to block any further business between Russia and Europe, but especially Germany, keeps the world on edge and inches us closer to a military confrontation while open trade and travel moves us farther from that outcome.

And anyone who argues otherwise is simply talking their book. They profit from war and tension. They profit from manipulating markets and, in effect, stealing the wealth someone else created.

So, this is not to say that Nordstream 2 is some kind of messianic gift from the gods or anything. It is the result of massive interventions into the free market for energy born of necessity in a world governed by nation-states for more powerful than they have any right to be because of control of the issuance of money and the rent-seeking behavior of the people who most benefit from the creation of endless supplies of that money.

But, that said, in the current state of things, rapprochement between Germany and Russia via projects like the Nordstream 2 points us towards a future without such nonsense.

I said points, not achieves. It's a beginning not an end. Lost in all of this discussion of European energy security is the fact that even at the height of the Cold War the U.S.S.R. never once shut off gas supplies to its enemies. And under Putin that fact remains.

And how's that for an inconvenient truth.

To support more work like this and get access to exclusive commentary, stock picks and analysis tailored to your needs join my more than 180 Patrons on Patreon and see if I have what it takes to help you navigate a world going slowly mad.

[Sep 28, 2018] What Russia could do to protect herself in this new era of potentially violent struggle for resources

Sep 28, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

steven t johnson , Sep 28, 2018 5:39:39 PM | 53 ">link

ashley albanese@26 says

Putin wrote about "what Russia could do to protect herself in this new era of potentially violent struggle for resources."

The violent struggle for resources will not be the impoverished rabble nations mobbing the rich nations: It will be the rich nations keeping their riches at the expense of the poorer nations. That is, it will be pretty much the US foreign policy where there is no hegemony but a glorious free-for-all of independent states supposedly protecting themselves. When Bangla Desh destabilizes because of sea level rise, it will be India attacking them. Putin is opposed to any international authority. He wants a world where the strong nations can exercise their leadership over weaker nations without interference from a hegemonic power. This is not the problem.

The problem is the US, the current hegemonic power, is the fortress of a decayed empire that can no longer move forward. It can only maintain itself by looting a series of weaker nations. The terror of destruction supports the US role in the world. The dollar is based on blood, not gold the declining economic power of the US cannot earn. But, Putin is not an enemy of this decadence. He is not even an enemy of the flagrant fascism of the Kyiv government!

[Sep 28, 2018] EU, Russia, and China Unveil New System to Bypass US Sanctions on Iran

Notable quotes:
"... This system has been in place for decades, for instance any company dealing with Cuba that is listed on the US stock exchange, or operates in America or trades with American companies can be sanctioned, moreover any financial institution will be sanctioned for dealing with a blacklisted country - if the trade is in Dollars and/or the Financial institution is active in the US. ..."
"... This system is pretty solid, it can only be broken by a combination of alternatives and active countermeasures, like sanctions and freezing assets. ..."
Sep 28, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Franklin Wisman • a day ago ,

Going off Petodollar and evading Iran sanctions is best. Only a multi-polar world works and the US proven crazed so it must be avoided first.

wilmers13 • a day ago ,

I hope it works. It reminds me of the bartering which the Soviet Union did in the 1960s. Many things can work if there is goodwill on all sides.

Franklin Wisman wilmers13 • a day ago ,

Hitler's economy boomed under commodity barter. Best to get out of and piss off the IMF and BIS.

P.S. To all - I just love how blocked users get pissed at my posts and am so glad not to see their inane Tallmudic-Satanic responses!

The Man Franklin Wisman • a day ago ,

I've blocked a few users and then unblocked them because I missed their "Talmudic-Satanic" responses (as you wisely put it)... in particular, that Jew-lackey troll, Tommy 'Tit' Jensen!

Mychal Arnold The Man • a day ago ,

Tommy is bought and has no original thoughts!

The Man Mychal Arnold • 15 hours ago ,

Absolutely... we haven't heard from the dirty Yankee Jew troll lackey in a long time. Maybe the Jooz are reprogramming the idiot because he's as effective as 'shite'!

Franklin Wisman The Man • a day ago ,

'Avoid the the devil' is a good motto. Here's some reference for ya re their Satanic intents.
https://www.henrymakow.com/...

Simulacra Franklin Wisman • a day ago ,

The German barter system is claimed by some to have contributed directly to the outbreak of WW2.

We tend to forget that Germany was being sanctioned and just like today noble reasons were used to justify these sanctions, but not all is what it seems to be if you dig a little deeper.

Germany challenged the Anglo-American financial system, just like today Russia and others are again challenging the Anglo-American financial system (with the emphasis moved from the former to the latter).

The US and its junior partner (who loves to stir up trouble as witnessed the UK's role in numerous little and big fires) won't give up with a fight though... maybe even the big one as both have to face existential threats to their regime and dominance.

Simulacra wilmers13 • a day ago ,

The world can no longer accept this rule by diktat from US Congress, it openly undermines national governments and is nothing less than economic blackmail and extortion of friend and foe alike.

If this independent clearinghouse is successful it will open the possibility to trade and do business again with Cuba and Venezuela as well.

That said, Washington will certainly target ANY company that is traded on the US stock exchange, operates on US soil or with US companies to comply with US law. Most internationally operating institutions will thus remain under "control" of US policy makers.

But at least it is a signal that even "friendly" Europe is losing its patience.

The Man wilmers13 • a day ago ,

Working against a common Satanic Zionist enemy, I hope it does work and the benefits of creating such a system will pave the way for the destruction of the US dollar and then the US.

Franklin Wisman The Man • 14 hours ago ,

The common, brainwashed people you forget. Think of me here - not common but not to the level of PCR either - but CONSTANTLY contacting all Reps. on the Hill, outing their lies and informing others. You would have me, an ally,destroyed along w/ignorant, manipulated creatures.

Simulacra • a day ago ,

Good signal, but as long as congress can punish international companies for doing business with sanctioned countries it will be of limited effect.

Any company listed on the US stock exchange, operating in the US or dealing with US companies or even citizens is target of sanctions.

This is a very effective straight jacket and Washington is fully aware of this as they apply their instruments of international blackmail and economic coercion. War by any other means.

Failure to comply can lead up to fines of BILLIONS of Dollars.

Only the largest multinationals - predominantly in the energy or weapons business - will defy the US as can be seen with Nordstream 2 - but that battle is far from being over.

So alternative clearing alone is not enough, to stop this abuse of economic and legaslative power, there must be a international mechanism to counter the fines given to international companies defying the US sanctions. If need be by counter fines or freezing US assets abroad.

richardstevenhack • a day ago ,

The EU is essentially reinventing the Arab hawala system. Nice. If other countries get the notion, US sanctions may be rendered useless worldwide. In other words, the US has shot itself in the foot again by over-using its sanctions policy.

tonylane • a day ago ,

it might be a Good Idea To Exercise caution Regarding the EU, Because the US Originally Created the EU so that they could push through Sanctions Against Russia Using the Unelected Bureaucrats Who are the Parasite's of the Union, because there maybe another way that they can cover the Demise of the Dirty Dollar,

General Sherman • a day ago ,

Mr. Peabody said I have a really, really big brain so I invented this time machine to take the world back to...... View Hide

Crypto • a day ago ,

The problem is not just the banks. Trump has vowed to sanction companies doing business in Iran directly. This means stopping them doing business with the US. Will Total and Airbus change their mind and go back into Iran when it means they will be shut out of the US market? I doubt it.

Simulacra Crypto • 19 hours ago ,

This system has been in place for decades, for instance any company dealing with Cuba that is listed on the US stock exchange, or operates in America or trades with American companies can be sanctioned, moreover any financial institution will be sanctioned for dealing with a blacklisted country - if the trade is in Dollars and/or the Financial institution is active in the US.

This system is pretty solid, it can only be broken by a combination of alternatives and active countermeasures, like sanctions and freezing assets.

The world cannot allow a single country to have such a stranglehold on international trade and relations, it is a textbook example of absolute power corrupting absolutely.

Trump seems to embrace the concept of full spectrum dominance. America ueber alles.

Clarty Crypto • a day ago ,

why can't airbus sell their planes to another company(s) who then sells to Iran maybe rebadged

Andrew • 15 hours ago ,

Germany needs to kick Merkel out, the United States, and all of her friends from Africa, and the Middle East then establish an iron bond with Russia.

[Sep 27, 2018] The Bellingcat claim that Ruslan Boshirov = Colonel Anatoliy Chepiga.

Sep 27, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Debsisdead , Sep 27, 2018 2:30:46 AM | link

I flicked on the beeb news channel as I dragged meself outta the pit this am and caught the 'news' of the bellingcat claim that Ruslan Boshirov = Colonel Anatoliy Chepiga.

Now I'm fully cognisant of the fact that neither Russia nor Chepiga should feel obliged to prove this claim is untrue, but since whichever way you slice it Chepiga is now 'blown', They (Russia/Chepiga) may as well prove the claim is nonsense. The thing being that the boof heads at MI6/CIA would also have worked that out, unless it was a particularly boofed, boofhead who put this latest snippet together.

IMO in all likelihood Ruslan Boshirov = Colonel Anatoliy Chepiga is correct. Towards the end of one of the supporting articles that sets out the 'proof' Bellingcat mutters something rather odd which seems like it actually detracts from the story - if the ultimate target of this revelation is Colonel Chepiga.
But who really cares about some obscure military intelligence mid-level bloke? (Colonel is nowhere near the giddy heights of any military, something I discovered when working in the Oz public service & I was seconded to the department of defence to do a job. Since I was working with a bunch of uniformed saluters, it was claimed they would not "feel comfortable working with someone of unknown status in the hierarchy". So I was told that my position in the Public Service equated with the rank of colonel in the army. I can tell you, if it weren't totally apparent, that I was just an average sh1tkicker)
No one cares about Chepiga, this entire saga is about getting the masses to accept without any deep consideration, that "Putin" the figurehead who (according to western media) micromanages everything evil about russia, only cares about destroying the life of Jo/Joe Sh1tkicker where ever in the world Jo/Joe may be.
So the last two paras of the burble runs thusly:

Bellingcat has contacted confidentially a former Russian military officer of similar rank as Colonel Chepiga, in order to receive a reaction to what we found. The source, speaking on condition of anonymity, expressed surprise that at least one of the operatives engaged in the operation in Salisbury had the rank of colonel. Even more surprising was the suspects' prior award of the highest military recognition.

In our source's words, an operation of this sort would have typically required a lower-ranked, "field operative" with a military rank of "no higher than captain." The source further surmised that to send a highly decorated colonel back to a field job would be highly extraordinary, and would imply that "the job was ordered at the highest level."


The logical flaw is obvious of course. If 'the job' had been ordered at the highest level surely sending some bloke who had been riding a desk for the last six years is not how it would handled, the most recently capable operative would be sent - either a relatively junior officer or a young but experienced NCO.

However assuming Boshirov = Colonel Chepiga is correct, while he would never be sent to supervise a hit on the ground much less carry it out; it doesn't take a great stretch to ruminate on the possible tasks a military intelligence colonel would be sent to england for.
There is one obvious task which would explain most credibly what he was in Salisbury for - to give Sergey Skripal confidence that his repatriation was a genuine offer, not some half arsed wish fulfillment plan dreamed up by Yulia and a low level intelligence operator eager to climb into Yulia's pants.
Two colonels of the GRU, one a highly decorated hero and the other a dodgy turncoat who had come to realise after the nonsense his immediate MI6 superior Pablo Miller, plus his big boss "Mr Steele" had put out about Moscow golden showers, whilst insinuating he, Skirpal was party to the fiction, that rapprochment between Russia and angland/amerika was never gonna happen. He was never going to be able to know any of his grandchildren or see his motherland again because usuk needed 'evil Russia' to distract their citizens away from the real evildoing 'at home'.
Someone used a chess mataphor elsewhere in a thread, well I would say that if the Bellingcat revelation that Ruslan Boshirov = Colonel Anatoliy Chepiga. if true sails close to a checkmate.
If Russia confesses that Ruslan Boshirov does = Colonel Anatoliy Chepiga, citizens in the west would be denied any explanation as the fishwraps and talking heads would be too busy celebrating Russia's alleged 'defeat' to include any other portion of what Russia had said, especially not an exposition which dealt with everything from the fact that Chepiga & co arrived too late on Sunday for their poisoned doorknob to have tainted the Skirpals who had left the house for the last time hours before and that of all the english towns some idjit chose to squirt this muck around Salisbury was the one where assassination by chemical weapon was the town the least likely to give success since the proximity of Porton Downs guaranteed that some not all staff at Salisbury Hospital would have been trained in chem weapon detection and antidote.

On the other side of the coin - panic stations at MI6, on a quiet Sunday it has just been uncovered that an asset was 'going over'. So some duty officer sent the thug on call for the day over to Porton Downs to grab 'a little something' guaranteed to prevent any such nonsense.

[Sep 27, 2018] The BBC is heavily pushing Bellingcats Skripal nonsense

Sep 27, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

TJ , Sep 26, 2018 1:25:05 PM | link

THE BBC is heavily pushing Bellingcats Skripal nonsense on the 6PM main news, BBC story

To me the ears look very different in the 2 pictures presented.

Den Lille Abe , Sep 26, 2018 2:07:56 PM | link

Bellingcat is MI6, so what do you expect.

[Sep 26, 2018] Hired to Drain the Swamp, Fired in Less Than a Year

Notable quotes:
"... @markperrydc . ..."
"... Well, we know where Mattis is going when he leaves the Pentagon. Nice work if you can get it. ..."
"... Seriously, anyone taking a knife to the Pentagon budget is putting a knife top their throat, unless they have support. ..."
"... Gen Mattis wants to save big money stop sending US forces to needless adventures. ..."
"... On top of the firing, I found the last three or four paragraphs all about insider trading as opposed to job performance, goals, budget cutting, not even budget accountability . . . Personalities over performance -- holy petolies. ..."
"... Given that the United States spends more money on defense than the next seven countries COMBINED including Russia and China it's not a question of how much you spend it's a question of how well. Until DOD passes that financial audit that all other agencies are obligated to do DOD should be get any increase in funding. ..."
"... When folks learn that the DOD is the swamp, then we can start having a conversation. ..."
"... "Lap Dog" Mattis. ..."
"... The Trump Administration is the most incompetent and corrupt since Warren G. Harding. There is no swamp draining going on. It is just a fight on who occupies it. ..."
Sep 26, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Hired to Drain the Swamp, Fired in Less Than a Year 'This is the Boeing mafia in all of its glory,' one DoD official said of John 'Jay' Gibson's mysterious demise. By Mark Perry • September 26, 2018

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?app_id=347697165243043&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2Fr%2Fmp2v3DK3INU.js%3Fversion%3D42%23cb%3Df14097aca6fa876%26domain%3Dwww.theamericanconservative.com%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%252Ff27ba8b2b6a00f4%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=0&font=lucida%20grande&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Fhired-to-drain-the-swamp-fired-in-less-than-a-year%2F&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&send=true&show_faces=false&width=125

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.f6c7d667d236c62537eeaba62686136d.en.html#dnt=false&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&original_referer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Fhired-to-drain-the-swamp-fired-in-less-than-a-year%2F&related=amconmag&size=m&text=Hired%20to%20Drain%20the%20Swamp%2C%20Fired%20in%20Less%20Than%20a%20Year%20%7C%20The%20American%20Conservative&time=1537987939136&type=share&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Fhired-to-drain-the-swamp-fired-in-less-than-a-year%2F&via=amconmag

https://apis.google.com/se/0/_/+1/fastbutton?usegapi=1&size=medium&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Fhired-to-drain-the-swamp-fired-in-less-than-a-year%2F&gsrc=3p&ic=1&jsh=m%3B%2F_%2Fscs%2Fapps-static%2F_%2Fjs%2Fk%3Doz.gapi.en_US.Xzp_pc7X6BE.O%2Fam%3DwQ%2Frt%3Dj%2Fd%3D1%2Frs%3DAGLTcCMdnecgyiLvmusdBtY9DsEeUYWPiA%2Fm%3D__features__#_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_close%2C_open%2C_resizeMe%2C_renderstart%2Concircled%2Cdrefresh%2Cerefresh&id=I0_1537987938792&_gfid=I0_1537987938792&parent=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&pfname=&rpctoken=4199897

The Pentagon ( Frontpage / Shutterstock ) On April 4, 2003, Col. Joseph Dowdy -- whose 1st Marine Regiment was then fighting its way through a tangle of Iraqi villages south of Baghdad -- was called to the tent of Gen. James Mattis and told he was being relieved of his command. A career Marine, Dowdy was stunned: Mattis's action in the midst of a battlefield fight was nearly unprecedented and, as Dowdy knew, would mark the end of his military career. Adding to the humiliation, Mattis told Dowdy to remove his sidearm and hand it to him. "We're going to give you a rest," he said.

Dowdy had known that his job was in danger, the result of complaints from Mattis and his staff that he wasn't moving his regiment quickly enough. But it's not as if Dowdy was taking his time: his troopers had been involved in bitter firefights against tenacious "Saddam Fedayeen" killers every day for the previous two weeks. But Dowdy had no choice in the matter, so while he objected to Mattis's action he packed up his gear, called his wife, returned to the U.S. and retired from the Marine Corps.

That Mattis acts quickly and decisively is part of his lore -- it's what good Marines do. But while quick and decisive might work on the battlefield, they're not always a good fit for a secretary of defense. Mattis learned this earlier this month, after he fired John H. "Jay" Gibson II, the Pentagon's first-ever Chief Management Officer and its third highest ranking official. The reason for the firing, as The Wall Street Journal's Gordon Lubold reported on September 5, was for "lack of performance."

The firing was immediately controversial, spurring under-the-radar resentments among senior defense officials in the Pentagon's E-Ring where military and civilian managers huddle to run the world's largest bureaucracy. "This doesn't make any sense," a senior Pentagon official told TAC . "Jay was CMO for seven months; he hadn't even gotten his staff in place."

John H. 'Jay' Gibson II (U.S. Government)

Gibson came to Washington to oversee Mattis's attempt to cut waste from the Pentagon budget by identifying savings that would lessen the ballooning impact of the Trump administration's $670 billion defense spending proposal. Armed with an impressive resume (including a successful stint as an assistant secretary of the Air Force and deputy undersecretary of defense for management reform, where his efforts saved billions of dollars), Gibson was tasked with reforming Pentagon procedures in buying and developing weapons and in managing logistics and supply, technology systems, community services, human resources, and health care.

Gibson was given a broad mandate to "shake up the system," which the deputy defense secretary Patrick Shanahan (the department's number two official and Gibson's boss) admitted would cause "screaming and yelling" from the Pentagon bureaucracy.

Even so, Gibson was told he would have the Trump administration's support -- which is why he decided to give up his post as president of XCOR Aerospace, a Texas company that develops rocket engines and space launch systems. "Jay did this over his wife's objections," a friend of Gibson and a senior official at a major private sector financial institution told TAC in a wide-ranging interview, "because he thought he could make a difference. He is a cracker-jack administrator; he knows how to dig and dig. So he came into D.C., started digging into the Pentagon budget and was fired. In my world, when that happens it isn't because you're doing a lousy job, but because you're stepping on the wrong toes."

In fact, as the senior Pentagon official with whom I spoke says, the toes that Gibson stepped on belonged to Patrick Shanahan, the deputy secretary of defense and a former vice president and general manager of Boeing Missile Defense Systems, a major Pentagon contractor. Shanahan and Gibson had a falling out in August, according to the senior Pentagon official with whom I spoke, and Shanahan reported the difficulty to Mattis -- "who pulled a Dowdy." Put simply, this official adds, when the "screaming and yelling" from the Pentagon's senior bureaucracy reached a fever pitch at the end of the summer, Mattis and Shanahan decided that firing Gibson would be easier than defending him.

The Recruitment Problem the Military Doesn't Want to Talk About Forget Trump: The Military-Industrial Complex is Still Running the Show

"I am not familiar with the details of what happened here and I wouldn't want to speculate," Todd Harrison, an official with the Center for Strategic and International Studies (and a well-known defense budget expert) says. "But I think that anyone in the new CMO position was signing on to the toughest job in Washington. It's one thing to identify waste, and another to actually get rid of it. The truth is that waste is built into the Pentagon budget; if you eliminate it, you eliminate jobs." A Pentagon official confirms this, but adds that "firing an official charged with making reforms for 'lack of performance' is laughable. Who are these guys trying to kid? The truth is that if Jay didn't perform, he'd still have his job."

The timing of Gibson's firing, just weeks after the death of Senate Armed Services Committee heavyweight John McCain, also raises uncomfortable questions. "The minute Gibson was fired, McCain would have had Mattis, Shanahan, and Gibson on the carpet in his office, asking them what the hell they were doing," a senior congressional staffer who monitors Pentagon personnel issues notes. "That's not going to happen now."

In fact, McCain had little love for Shanahan, telling aides that his appointment raised conflict of interest issues. McCain's worries were aired when he grilled Shanahan on answers the Boeing executive gave to written questions posed to him by the committee in June 2017. It was a classic McCain scorcher: "The answers that you gave to the questions," he told Shanahan, "whether intentionally or unintentionally, were almost condescending, and I'm not overjoyed that you came from one of the five corporations that receive 90 percent of taxpayers' dollars. I have to have confidence that the fox is not going to be put back into the henhouse." McCain was livid.

"Not a good beginning," McCain told Shanahan. "Do not do that again, Mr. Shanahan, or I will not take your name up for a vote before this committee. Am I perfectly clear?" Shanahan nodded his agreement. "Very clear," he said.

As it turns out, Shanahan's appointment resulted from a series of contentious negotiations between Trump transition official Mira Ricardel and retired Adm. Kevin Sweeney, Mattis's chief of staff. "There was no love loss between Mattis and Ricardel," the senior Pentagon civilian with whom TAC spoke says. "So the SecDef told Sweeney to deal with her. Sweeney is a tough guy and Mira has sharp elbows, so this got nasty."

The skirmishing got so bad that when Ricardel said she wanted to be the Pentagon's undersecretary for policy, Mattis killed the idea, with Ricardel sidelined as the undersecretary of commerce for export administration. But Ricardel got her revenge: she not only successfully slotted Shanahan as Mattis's number two, she was named as deputy to John Bolton, appointed by Trump to succeed H.R. McMaster as the administration's national security advisor. "It's the ultimate irony," the senior Pentagon official says. "Jim Mattis ignored H.R. and he ends up with Mira Ricardel. Incredible."

That Jay Gibson has been caught in the Mattis-Ricardel crossfire is an open secret at the Pentagon, where key officials speculate that Ricardel's promotion of Shanahan has less to do with his commitment to Pentagon budget reform than to the fact that the two were close colleagues at Boeing, where Ricardel served for nine years (from 2006 to 2015) as vice president of strategic missile and defense systems. That is to say, Jay Gibson's still unexplained firing has reinforced John McCain's worries that the fox would end up guarding the henhouse.

"This is the Boeing mafia in all of its glory," the senior Pentagon official says. "Anyone who comes in here [to the Pentagon] will always have Jay Gibson's experience as a marker. You think anyone who's willing to take on the bureaucracy is going to want that job? No way. Budget reform is dead, d-e-a-d dead. So much for draining the swamp."

Mark Perry is the author of The Most Dangerous Man in America and The Pentagon's Wars . Follow him on Twitter @markperrydc .

Whine Merchant September 26, 2018 at 12:05 am

Well, we know where Mattis is going when he leaves the Pentagon. Nice work if you can get it.
EliteCommInc. , , September 26, 2018 at 3:24 am
"Even so, Gibson was told he would have the Trump administration's support -- "

Look these are the issues in which the executive has to be made of sterner stuff. I suspect that the tag line after the articles title heading is more accurate and that has probably nothing to do with COS being quick on the draw.

Seriously, anyone taking a knife to the Pentagon budget is putting a knife top their throat, unless they have support.

Gen Mattis wants to save big money stop sending US forces to needless adventures.

On top of the firing, I found the last three or four paragraphs all about insider trading as opposed to job performance, goals, budget cutting, not even budget accountability . . . Personalities over performance -- holy petolies.

In this day and age there seems to be no other tune.

david , , September 26, 2018 at 5:49 am
All federal agencies are by congressional mandate obligated to pass financial audits EVERY year. DOD hasn't done one in over 10 years. Mattis supposedly was "working" on one for this year. Where is it?

We see endless stories of waste, fraud, and mismanagement in DOD. The littoral combat ship that more than doubled in price and clearly can't do what it was designed to do. So many others.

Given that the United States spends more money on defense than the next seven countries COMBINED including Russia and China it's not a question of how much you spend it's a question of how well. Until DOD passes that financial audit that all other agencies are obligated to do DOD should be get any increase in funding.

Kent , , September 26, 2018 at 6:39 am
When folks learn that the DOD is the swamp, then we can start having a conversation.
b. , , September 26, 2018 at 9:24 am
"Lap Dog" Mattis.
Scott , , September 26, 2018 at 10:27 am
The Trump Administration is the most incompetent and corrupt since Warren G. Harding. There is no swamp draining going on. It is just a fight on who occupies it.

The Trump Administration taking months to fill a position and then not having a support staff in place after 7 months is totally incompetent.

[Sep 25, 2018] The Magnitsky Affair Confessions Of A Hustled Hack

That's amazing example of contlling the nattarive and suppressing alternative sources. Should go in all textbooks on the subject
Notable quotes:
"... Magnitsky did not disclose the theft. He first mentioned it in testimony in October 2008. But it had already been reported in the New York Times on July 24, 2008. In reality, the whistleblower was a certain Rimma Starova. She worked for one of the implicated shell companies and, having read in the papers that authorities were investigating, went to police to give testimony in April 2008 – six months before Magnitsky spoke of the scam for the first time (see here and here ). ..."
"... Why, then, did I report that about Magnitsky? Because at the time my sole source for the story was Team Browder, who had reached out to the Cyprus Mail and with whom I communicated via email. I was provided with 'information', flow charts and so on. All looking very professional and compelling. ..."
"... For the second article, I conversed briefly on the phone with the soft-spoken Browder himself, who handed down the gospel on the Magnitsky affair. Under the time constraints, and trusting that my sources could at least be relied upon for basic information which they presented as facts, I went along with it. I was played. But let's be clear: I let myself down too. ..."
"... Titled 'The Magnitsky Act – Behind The Scenes', it does a magisterial job of depicting how the director initially took Browder's story on faith, only to end up questioning everything. The docudrama dissects, disassembles and dismantles Browder's narrative, as Nekrasov – by no means a Putin apologist – delves deeper down into the rabbit hole. ..."
"... The point can't be stressed enough, as this very claim is the lynchpin of Browder's account. In his bestseller Red Notice, Browder alleges that Magnitsky was arrested because he exposed two corrupt police officers, and that he was jailed and tortured because he wouldn't retract. ..."
"... It gets worse for Nekrasov, as he goes on to discover that Magnitsky was no lawyer. He did not have a lawyer's license. Rather, he was an accountant/auditor who worked for Moscow law firm Firestone Duncan. Yet every chance he gets, Browder still refers to Magnitsky as 'a lawyer' or 'my lawyer'. ..."
"... The full deposition, some six hours long, is (still) available on Youtube . As penance for past transgressions, I watched it in its entirety. While refraining from using adjectives to describe it, I shall simply cite some examples and let readers decide on Browder's credibility. Browder seems to suffer an almost total memory blackout as a lawyer begins firing questions at him. He cannot recall, or does not know, where he or his team got the information concerning the alleged illicit transfer of funds from Hermitage-owned companies. ..."
"... According to Team Browder, in 2007 the 'Klyuev gang' together with Russian interior ministry officials travelled to Cyprus, ostensibly to set up the tax rebate scam using shell companies. But in his deposition, the Anglo-American businessman cannot remember, or does not know, how his team obtained the travel information of the conspirators. ..."
Sep 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Elias Hazou via TheDuran.com,

Before getting down to brass tacks, let me say that I loathe penning articles like this; loathe writing about myself or in the first person, because a reporter should report the news, not be the news. Yet I grudgingly make this exception because, ironically, it happens to be newsworthy. To cut to the chase, it concerns Anglo-American financier Bill Browder and the Sergei Magnitsky affair. I, like others in the news business I'd venture to guess, feel led astray by Browder.

This is no excuse. I didn't do my due diligence, and take full responsibility for erroneous information printed under my name. For that, I apologize to readers. I refer to two articles of mine published in a Cypriot publication, dated December 25, 2015 and January 6, 2016.

Browder's basic story, as he has told it time and again, goes like this: in June 2007, Russian police officers raided the Moscow offices of Browder's firm Hermitage, confiscating company seals, certificates of incorporation, and computers.

Browder says the owners and directors of Hermitage-owned companies were subsequently changed, using these seized documents. Corrupt courts were used to create fake debts for these companies, which allowed for the taxes they had previously paid to the Russian Treasury to be refunded to what were now re-registered companies. The funds stolen from the Russian state were then laundered through banks and shell companies.

The scheme is said to have been planned earlier in Cyprus by Russian law enforcement and tax officials in cahoots with criminal elements.

All this was supposedly discovered by Magnitsky, whom Browder had tasked with investigating what happened. When Magnitsky reported the fraud, some of the nefarious characters involved had him arrested and jailed. He refused to retract, and died while in pre-trial detention.

In my first article, I wrote: "Magnitsky, a 37-year-old Russian accountant, died in jail in 2009 after he exposed huge tax embezzlement "

False . Contrary to the above story that has been rehashed countless times, Magnitsky did not expose any tax fraud, did not blow the whistle.

The interrogation reports show that Magnitsky had in fact been summoned by Russian authorities as a witness to an already ongoing investigation into Hermitage. Nor he did he accuse Russian investigators Karpov and/or Kuznetsov of committing the $230 million treasury fraud, as Browder claims.

Magnitsky did not disclose the theft. He first mentioned it in testimony in October 2008. But it had already been reported in the New York Times on July 24, 2008. In reality, the whistleblower was a certain Rimma Starova. She worked for one of the implicated shell companies and, having read in the papers that authorities were investigating, went to police to give testimony in April 2008 – six months before Magnitsky spoke of the scam for the first time (see here and here ).

Why, then, did I report that about Magnitsky? Because at the time my sole source for the story was Team Browder, who had reached out to the Cyprus Mail and with whom I communicated via email. I was provided with 'information', flow charts and so on. All looking very professional and compelling.

At the time of the first article, I knew next to nothing about the Magnitsky/Browder affair. I had to go through media reports to get the gist, and then get up to speed with Browder's latest claims that a Cypriot law firm, which counted the Hermitage Fund among its clients, had just been 'raided' by Cypriot police. The article had to be written and delivered on the same day. In retrospect I should have asked for more time – a lot more time – and Devil take the deadlines.

For the second article, I conversed briefly on the phone with the soft-spoken Browder himself, who handed down the gospel on the Magnitsky affair. Under the time constraints, and trusting that my sources could at least be relied upon for basic information which they presented as facts, I went along with it. I was played. But let's be clear: I let myself down too.

In the ensuing weeks and months, I didn't follow up on the story as my gut told me something was wrong: villains and malign actors operating in a Wild West Russia, and at the centre of it all, a heroic Magnitsky who paid with his life – the kind of script that Hollywood execs would kill for.

Subsequently I mentally filed away the Browder story, while being aware it was in the news.

But the real red pill was a documentary by Russian filmmaker Andrei Nekrasov, which came to my attention a few weeks ago.

Titled 'The Magnitsky Act – Behind The Scenes', it does a magisterial job of depicting how the director initially took Browder's story on faith, only to end up questioning everything. The docudrama dissects, disassembles and dismantles Browder's narrative, as Nekrasov – by no means a Putin apologist – delves deeper down into the rabbit hole.

The director had set out to make a poignant film about Magnitsky's tragedy, but became increasingly troubled as the facts he uncovered didn't stack up with Browder's account, he claims.

The 'aha' moment arrives when Nekrasov appears to show solid proof that Magnitsky blew no whistle.

Not only that, but in his depositions – the first one dating to 2006, well before Hermitage's offices were raided – Magnitsky did not accuse any police officers of being part of the 'theft' of Browder's companies and the subsequent alleged $230m tax rebate fraud.

The point can't be stressed enough, as this very claim is the lynchpin of Browder's account. In his bestseller Red Notice, Browder alleges that Magnitsky was arrested because he exposed two corrupt police officers, and that he was jailed and tortured because he wouldn't retract.

We are meant to take Browder's word for it.

It gets worse for Nekrasov, as he goes on to discover that Magnitsky was no lawyer. He did not have a lawyer's license. Rather, he was an accountant/auditor who worked for Moscow law firm Firestone Duncan. Yet every chance he gets, Browder still refers to Magnitsky as 'a lawyer' or 'my lawyer'.

The clincher comes late in the film, with footage from Browder's April 15, 2015 deposition in a US federal court, in the Prevezon case. The case, brought by the US Justice Department at Browder's instigation, targeted a Russian national who Browder said had received $1.9m of the $230m tax fraud.

In the deposition, Browder is asked if Magnitsky had a law degree in Russia. "I'm not aware that he did," he replies.

The full deposition, some six hours long, is (still) available on Youtube . As penance for past transgressions, I watched it in its entirety. While refraining from using adjectives to describe it, I shall simply cite some examples and let readers decide on Browder's credibility. Browder seems to suffer an almost total memory blackout as a lawyer begins firing questions at him. He cannot recall, or does not know, where he or his team got the information concerning the alleged illicit transfer of funds from Hermitage-owned companies.

This is despite the fact that the now-famous Powerpoint presentations – hosted on so many 'anti-corruption' websites and recited by 'human rights' NGOs – were prepared by Browder's own team.

Nor does he recall where, or how, he and his team obtained information on the amounts of the 'stolen' funds funnelled into companies. When it's pointed out that in any case this information would be privileged – banking secrecy and so forth – Browder appears to be at a loss.

According to Team Browder, in 2007 the 'Klyuev gang' together with Russian interior ministry officials travelled to Cyprus, ostensibly to set up the tax rebate scam using shell companies. But in his deposition, the Anglo-American businessman cannot remember, or does not know, how his team obtained the travel information of the conspirators.

He can't explain how they acquired the flight records and dates, doesn't have any documentation at hand, and isn't aware if any such documentation exists.

Browder claims his 'Justice for Magnitsky' campaign, which among other things has led to US sanctions on Russian persons, is all about vindicating the young man. Were that true, one would have expected Browder to go out of his way to aid Magnitsky in his hour of need.

The deposition does not bear that out.

Lawyer: "Did anyone coordinate on your behalf with Firestone Duncan about the defence of Mr Magnitsky?"

Browder: "I don't know. I don't remember."

Going back to Nekrasov's film, a standout segment is where the filmmaker looks at a briefing document prepared by Team Browder concerning the June 2007 raid by Russian police officers. In it, Browder claims the cops beat up Victor Poryugin, a lawyer with the firm.

The lawyer was then "hospitalized for two weeks," according to Browder's presentation, which includes a photo of the beaten-up lawyer. Except, it turns out the man pictured is not Poryugin at all. Rather, the photo is actually of Jim Zwerg, an American human rights activist beaten up during a street protest in 1961 (see here and here ).

Nekrasov sits down with German politician Marieluise Beck. She was a member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (Pace), which compiled a report that made Magnitsky a cause celebre.

You can see Beck's jaw drop when Nekrasov informs her that Magnitsky did not report the fraud, that he was in fact under investigation.

It transpires that Pace, as well as human rights activists, were getting their information from one source – Browder. Later, the Council of Europe's Andreas Gross admits on camera that their entire investigation into the Magnitsky affair was based on Browder's info and that they relied on translations of Russian documents provided by Browder's team because, as Gross puts it, "I don't speak Russian myself."

That hit home – I, too, had been fed information from a single source, not bothering to verify it. I, too, initially went with the assumption that because Russia is said to be a land of endemic corruption, then Browder's story sounded plausible if not entirely credible.

For me, the takeaway is this gem from Nekrasov's narration:

"I was regularly overcome by deep unease. Was I defending a system that killed Magnitsky, even if I'd found no proof that he'd been murdered?"

Bull's-eye. Nekrasov has arrived at a crossroads, the moment where one's mettle is tested: do I pursue the facts wherever they may lead, even if they take me out of my comfort zone? What is more important: the truth, or the narrative? Nekrasov chose the former. As do I.

Like with everything else, specific allegations must be assessed independently of one's general opinion of the Russian state. They are two distinct issues. Say Browder never existed; does that make Russia a paradise?

I suspect Team Browder may scrub me from their mailing list; one can live with that.

oncemore1 , 6 minutes ago

Soros and Browder are the same tribe. FULLSTOP.

Slipstream , 6 minutes ago

Wow. That's a big **** up. But at least this guy is a journalist with ethics. He got it wrong and has said so, to set the record straight. This should be a case taught in every journalism school in the world. Unfortunately, I don't see the Magnitsky Act being repealed any time soon.

Usura , 8 minutes ago

Bill Browder is a lying ***

Thordoom , 12 minutes ago

Andrei Nekrasov now has webpage dedicated to The Magnitsky Act Behind the Scenes.

You can watch it here online.

http://magnitskyact.com

Please support his movie.

herbivore , 23 minutes ago

I watched the documentary too. The depositions of Browder were devastating to any notion of him as truth-teller. And yet, he managed to dupe politicians and media around the world.

Thordoom , 33 minutes ago

The only good thing Yeltsin did in his miserable life was to say " **** you " to Bill Clinton in the end when he found out how they wanted to set him up with that 7 billion of IMF money they stolen in order to put Boris Berezovsky in the charge of Russia as a president for hire and stole anything that was not welded down. Yeltsin knowing that the only way for Russia to survive was to put Vladimir Putin in charge to clense the unclean filth that infested Russia in the 90s

resistedliving , 52 minutes ago

classic agitprop.

Don't trust Browder and his self-interests much but trust this guy less.

Browser knows he'll never see that money again and has spent his own funds on his one man mission

Thordoom , 40 minutes ago

Stupid moron he is spending Knohorkovsky's money and HSBC bank money. Half of the UK and US government officials and intl officials and Harward boys are deeply involved in this looting of Russian people in the 90s.

RationalLuddite , 31 minutes ago

Classic Reverse blockade lie by you Restedliving. Good luck moving the middle on Browder . He's just not that bright in lying so I suppose your Talmudic exegesis honed Accusatory Inversion is worth a try.

Please keep it up. Seriously. "Agitprop"😄😄😄😄

You are like a Browder red-pill dispenser with every incoherent mendacious utterance. Thank you mate :*

WTFUD , 29 minutes ago

Bruiser Browser Browder, ex light-heavyweight champion of La-La Potemkin Village, Ninnyapolis, USA.

Shouldn't Fakebook be banning the US Government for a plethora of Fake News? Then again it's a nice fit for these 2 entities, a cosy relationship.

The Paucity of Hope , 54 minutes ago

Nekrasov's movie has been disappeared, but was excellent. Also, look at The Forecaster, about Martin Armstrong. It talks about Hermatage Capital and was blocked in the US and Switzerland for several years.

Ahmeexnal , 57 minutes ago

Browder must hang!

chunga , 38 minutes ago

Not a single person in the US gov will even acknowledge this. None. Not one.

At the same time the US domestic affairs revolve around unsubstantiated stories of SC nominee penis wagging, special prosecutors investigating **** actress affairs/bribery with POTUS, FBI, DOJ off the rails, while at the same time asserting a moral authority to sanction and/or attack other countries as though it's an obligation or entitlement.

[Sep 25, 2018] Unfortunately, the Cheney/Greenspan/Kagan kind does not capitulate voluntarily.

Sep 25, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Anya , Sep 25, 2018 9:13:56 AM | 158 ">link

psychohistorian | Sep 24, 2018 11:43:23 PM | 123 "I hope for capitulation by the private finance folk so society can evolve into some sort of meritocracy."

Unfortunately, the Cheney/Greenspan/Kagan kind does not capitulate voluntarily. They are the impulsive leeches and born traitors. The deficit of decency shows in their progeny as well -- see the disgusting youngsters from the Cheney, Bush, and Blair clans. All of them openly enjoy the ill-gotten wealth that is soaked in the blood of the innocent. All of them are subhuman deformities morality-wise.

[Sep 25, 2018] Now that UK's "resettling" White Helmet Terrorists within its borders, I wonder if they'll become the next victims of MI6 attempts to frame Russia for its assassinations using poison gas?

Sep 25, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Sep 24, 2018 6:35:12 PM | link

Now that UK's "resettling" White Helmet Terrorists within its borders, I wonder if they'll become the next victims of MI6 attempts to frame Russia for its assassinations using poison gas?

Semi OT--Now that UK's "resettling" White Helmet Terrorists within its borders, I wonder if they'll become the next victims of MI6 attempts to frame Russia for its assassinations using poison gas? What do UK-located MoA barflies think of May bringing her terrorists "home"? Plus, I thought there was a housing crisis of sorts within UK, and such scarce housing's to be allocated to terrorists?! What sort of light opera would Gilbert & Sullivan compose as a ripost? Unfortunately, it appears Corbyn's remained quiet on this issue, although there's plenty of other items of importance to UK citizens for him to use as issues to defeat Tories.

[Sep 24, 2018] Why this Ukrainian revolution may be doomed, too

Blast from the past...
Notable quotes:
"... Kiev has become an accidental, burdensome ally to the West. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization only paid lip service to future Ukrainian membership, while the EU, which never had any intention of taking in Ukraine, pushed an association agreement out of bureaucratic habit more than strategic vision. ..."
"... The least charitably inclined claim that Poroshenko prosecuted the war in eastern Ukraine as a way of delaying reform. What's undeniable is that the shaky ceasefire leaves the Kiev government at the mercy of Putin and his proxies. Should anything start going right for Poroshenko, the fighting could flare back up at any moment. ..."
"... Everybody in Kiev understands that there's no way of reconquering lost territory by force. Ukrainian politicians publicly pledge to win back breakaway regions through reform and economic success. What they hope for is that sanctions will cause enough problems inside Russia that the Kremlin will run out of resources to sabotage Ukraine. Wishful thinking won't replace the painful reforms ahead. ..."
May 19, 2015 | http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/05/17/why-this-ukrainian-revolution-may-be-doomed-too/

At home, there is the possibility of more protests, a paralyzed government, and the rise of politicians seeking accommodation with Putin. "Slow and unsuccessful reforms are a bigger existential threat than the Russian aggression," said Oleksiy Melnyk, a security expert at Kiev's Razumkov Center. Even if Ukrainians don't return to the street, they'll get a chance to voice their discontent at the ballot box. Local elections are due in the fall - and the governing coalition between Poroshenko and Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk is so shaky that nobody can rule out an early parliamentary vote.

In its international relations, Ukraine is living on borrowed time - and money. A dispute over restructuring $23 billion in debt broke into the open last week with the Finance Ministry accusing foreign creditors of not negotiating in good faith ahead of a June deadline. An EU summit this week is likely to end in more disappointment, as Western European countries are reluctant to grant Ukrainians visa-free travel.

Kiev has become an accidental, burdensome ally to the West. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization only paid lip service to future Ukrainian membership, while the EU, which never had any intention of taking in Ukraine, pushed an association agreement out of bureaucratic habit more than strategic vision.

... ... ...

The least charitably inclined claim that Poroshenko prosecuted the war in eastern Ukraine as a way of delaying reform. What's undeniable is that the shaky ceasefire leaves the Kiev government at the mercy of Putin and his proxies. Should anything start going right for Poroshenko, the fighting could flare back up at any moment.

Ukrainian security officials say that the enemy forces gathering in the separatist regions are at their highest capability yet. The most alarming observation is that the once ragtag band of rebels - backed up by regular Russian troops in critical battles - is increasingly looking like a real army thanks to weapons and training provided by Russia.

... ... ...

Everybody in Kiev understands that there's no way of reconquering lost territory by force. Ukrainian politicians publicly pledge to win back breakaway regions through reform and economic success. What they hope for is that sanctions will cause enough problems inside Russia that the Kremlin will run out of resources to sabotage Ukraine. Wishful thinking won't replace the painful reforms ahead.

[Sep 24, 2018] The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy

Notable quotes:
"... The thesis was that pro-Israel groups in the United States had pushed the country into policy decisions favored by Israel but contrary to American interests. ..."
Sep 24, 2018 | amzn.to

That was mild, though, compared to the "bloodbath" (Kaplan's word) that ensued after Mearsheimer teamed up with Harvard's own iconoclastic realist, Stephen M. Walt, to produce a 2006 magazine article on the U.S.-Israel relationship, later expanded into a book entitled The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy .

The thesis was that pro-Israel groups in the United States had pushed the country into policy decisions favored by Israel but contrary to American interests.

[Sep 23, 2018] UK Begged Trump Not To Declassify Russia Docs; Cited Grave Concerns Over Steele Involvement

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Steele also had extensive contacts with DOJ official Bruce Ohr and his wife Nellie, who - along with Steele - was paid by opposition research firm Fusion GPS in the anti-Trump campaign. Trump called for the declassification of FBI notes of interviews with Ohr, which would ostensibly reveal more about his relationship with Steele. Ohr was demoted twice within the Department of Justice for lying about his contacts with Fusion GPS. ..."
"... Perhaps the Brits are also concerned since much of the espionage performed on the Trump campaign was conducted on UK soil throughout 2016 . Recall that Trump aid George Papadopoulos was lured to London in March, 2016, where Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud fed him the rumor that Russia had dirt on Hillary Clinton. It was later at a London bar that Papadopoulos would drunkenly pass the rumor to Australian diplomat Alexander Downer (who Strzok flew to London to meet with). ..."
"... Papadopoulos accepted a flight to London and a $3,000 honorarium. He claims that during a meeting in London, Halper asked him whether he knew anything about Russian hacking of Democrats' emails. ..."
"... Papadopoulos had other contacts on British soil that he now believes were part of a government-sanctioned surveillance operation. - Daily Caller ..."
"... In total, Halper received over $1 million from the Obama Pentagon for "research," over $400,000 of which was granted before and during the 2016 election season. ..."
"... In short, it's understandable that the UK would prefer to hide their involvement in the "witch hunt" of Donald Trump since much of the counterintelligence investigation was conducted on UK soil. And if the Brits had knowledge of the operation, it will bolster claims that they meddled in the 2016 US election by assisting what appears to have been a set-up from the start . ..."
"... Steele's ham-handed dossier is a mere embarrassment, as virtually none of the claims asserted by the former MI6 agent have been proven true. ..."
"... Steele, a former MI6 agent, is the author of the infamous and unverified anti-Trump dossier. He worked as a confidential human source for the FBI for years before the relationship was severed just before the election because of Steele's unauthorized contacts with the press. ..."
"... That said, Steele hasn't worked for the British government since 2009, so for their excuse focusing on the former MI6 agent while ignoring the multitude of events which occurred on UK soil, is curious. ..."
"... I find it interesting that the Theresa May Govt in UK has the temerity to interfere with US politics (until they got caught out!), yet can't find the spine to stand up to the EU. ..."
"... THE UNITED KINGDOM along with ISRAEL & SAUDI ARABIA have always been the ones behind US Politics making, pulling the strings behind the curtains since the Petrodollar Inception, The Greater Israel project & the NWO initiative - only this time around Trump was not the UK's pick... ..."
"... England dominates the offshore money laundering havens where the super rich hide their money and evade taxes. They need to be brought down. No more African dictators looting their nation's resources and hiding the money first in offshore banks and then in JP Morgan and Brit banks. ..."
"... It is a test. If Trump doesn't go ahead with declassification, we know for sure he is no better than the globalists and neocons whose goal has always been to destroy and depopulate America. ..."
"... 'focusing on the former MI6 agent while ignoring the multitude of events which occurred on UK soil, is curious' ..."
"... Not at all. It's obvious - the problem ISN'T Steele. They're living in fear, as are many in DC and elsewhere, that Trump is going to pry the lid open and reveal at least some of their activities. If killing him would fix the problem, they would. It's too late, considering what Trump is threatening to do. I wonder if he'll back down, at least some? ..."
"... U.K. does not want the jurisdiction. U.S. spies lure you overseas then...compromise you. ..."
"... Duh. This Started In London! Britain is the "foreign country" involved in our elections. Wake up everyone. It's LONDONGATE ..."
"... May gonna owe Vlad an apology when Skripal is revealed to be Steele's source. Steele himself hadn't been to Russian in 15 years. Will he get life in prison for attempted murder? ..."
"... "t's hard to tell who's telling the truth and who isn't in this whole Russia narrative. Fact is, NOBODY is telling the truth. That is what I've determined after doing my own research.": https://youtu.be/2AA5BIfGj3g ..."
"... Trump made promises before being elected, then lied and sold America out, just like every other corrupted assklown politician. he is no different than clinton bush obama, just as arrogant, just as corrupt, and just as much a traitor. ..."
Sep 23, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

UK Begged Trump Not To Declassify Russia Docs; Cited "Grave Concerns" Over Steele Involvement

by Tyler Durden Sun, 09/23/2018 - 11:15 4.6K SHARES

The British government "expressed grave concerns" to the US government over the declassification and release of material related to the Trump-Russia investigation, according to the New York Times . President Trump ordered a wide swath of materials "immediately" declassified "without redaction" on Monday, only to change his mind later in the week by allowing the DOJ Inspector General to review the materials first.

The Times reports that the UK's concern was over material which "includes direct references to conversations between American law enforcement officials and Christopher Steele," the former MI6 agent who compiled the infamous "Steele Dossier." The UK's objection, according to former US and British officials, was over revealing Steele's identity in an official document, "regardless of whether he had been named in press reports."

We would note, however, that Steele's name was contained within the Nunes Memo - the House Intelligence Committee's majority opinion in the Trump-Russia case.

Steele also had extensive contacts with DOJ official Bruce Ohr and his wife Nellie, who - along with Steele - was paid by opposition research firm Fusion GPS in the anti-Trump campaign. Trump called for the declassification of FBI notes of interviews with Ohr, which would ostensibly reveal more about his relationship with Steele. Ohr was demoted twice within the Department of Justice for lying about his contacts with Fusion GPS.

Perhaps the Brits are also concerned since much of the espionage performed on the Trump campaign was conducted on UK soil throughout 2016 . Recall that Trump aid George Papadopoulos was lured to London in March, 2016, where Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud fed him the rumor that Russia had dirt on Hillary Clinton. It was later at a London bar that Papadopoulos would drunkenly pass the rumor to Australian diplomat Alexander Downer (who Strzok flew to London to meet with).

Also recall that CIA/FBI "informant" (spy) Stefan Halper met with both Carter Page and Papadopoulos in London.

Halper, a veteran of four Republican administrations, reached out to Trump aide George Papadopoulos in September 2016 with an offer to fly to London to write an academic paper on energy exploration in the Mediterranean Sea.

Papadopoulos accepted a flight to London and a $3,000 honorarium. He claims that during a meeting in London, Halper asked him whether he knew anything about Russian hacking of Democrats' emails.

Papadopoulos had other contacts on British soil that he now believes were part of a government-sanctioned surveillance operation. - Daily Caller

In total, Halper received over $1 million from the Obama Pentagon for "research," over $400,000 of which was granted before and during the 2016 election season.

In short, it's understandable that the UK would prefer to hide their involvement in the "witch hunt" of Donald Trump since much of the counterintelligence investigation was conducted on UK soil. And if the Brits had knowledge of the operation, it will bolster claims that they meddled in the 2016 US election by assisting what appears to have been a set-up from the start .

Steele's ham-handed dossier is a mere embarrassment, as virtually none of the claims asserted by the former MI6 agent have been proven true.

Steele, a former MI6 agent, is the author of the infamous and unverified anti-Trump dossier. He worked as a confidential human source for the FBI for years before the relationship was severed just before the election because of Steele's unauthorized contacts with the press.

He shared results of his investigation into Trump's links to Russia with the FBI beginning in early July 2016.

The FBI relied heavily on the unverified Steele dossier to fill out applications for four FISA warrants against Page. Page has denied the dossier's claims, which include that he was the Trump campaign's back channel to the Kremlin. - Daily Caller

That said, Steele hasn't worked for the British government since 2009, so for their excuse focusing on the former MI6 agent while ignoring the multitude of events which occurred on UK soil, is curious.

StychoKiller , 54 minutes ago

I find it interesting that the Theresa May Govt in UK has the temerity to interfere with US politics (until they got caught out!), yet can't find the spine to stand up to the EU. If I were Trump, not only would the shoe be dropping re: UK Govt involvement in US politics, but said shoe would be making an imprint across her face! (stoopid twat!)

texantim , 1 hour ago

I say release the docs and put sanctions on UK.

BitchesBetterRecognize , 1 hour ago

So the Motherland ******* up with the ex-colony yet again, huh?

THE UNITED KINGDOM along with ISRAEL & SAUDI ARABIA have always been the ones behind US Politics making, pulling the strings behind the curtains since the Petrodollar Inception, The Greater Israel project & the NWO initiative - only this time around Trump was not the UK's pick...

Oh, but those "civilized" Allies backstabbing each other for more power grip on the USA....

Baron von Bud , 2 hours ago

England dominates the offshore money laundering havens where the super rich hide their money and evade taxes. They need to be brought down. No more African dictators looting their nation's resources and hiding the money first in offshore banks and then in JP Morgan and Brit banks.

Many hedge funds are deep into this game. I'd wager on Carlyle Group and the Bush clan. Billions of people can't get ahead because the super rich are ******* crooks running the banks and governments. They don't pay taxes but force a small dry cleaner to pay 45% in fed/state taxes. These criminals include Hillary Clinton and many members of congress. Feinstein, Pelosi, Maxine and many more of both parties need to be investigated. How do they get so rich on a congressman's salary. Deep into tax evasion and payoffs? Release the documents and let MI6 hang.

Malvern Joe , 3 hours ago

It is a test. If Trump doesn't go ahead with declassification, we know for sure he is no better than the globalists and neocons whose goal has always been to destroy and depopulate America. It would represent the biggest sellout of this country since the creation of the Fed in 1913, He will go down as the biggest fraud ever and his base will deport his *** to the sums of India where he can defecate in public.

Bricker , 3 hours ago

You dont get to supply a rogue agent, that was probably told to do it in the first place, and then tell Trump not to do it out of harm, harm is all you BRIT DEEP STATES deserve

Moving and Grooving , 3 hours ago

'focusing on the former MI6 agent while ignoring the multitude of events which occurred on UK soil, is curious'

Not at all. It's obvious - the problem ISN'T Steele. They're living in fear, as are many in DC and elsewhere, that Trump is going to pry the lid open and reveal at least some of their activities. If killing him would fix the problem, they would. It's too late, considering what Trump is threatening to do. I wonder if he'll back down, at least some?

The sheer corruption of the Global Government is on display here, revealing itself, if you watch for it. Whether planned or not, the last 6 months or so have been astonishing to watch. The entire media has been shown to be liars, academia is shown to be an expensive provider of unprepared students, the corporate world is furiously rent-seeking and finding new ways to destroy humanity, and government is too busy selling Americans out to write a budget. In all countries around the world, adjusting for national status. Lawsuits in the west, machetes in the third world.

Ban KKiller , 4 hours ago

U.K. does not want the jurisdiction. U.S. spies lure you overseas then...compromise you.

John C Durham , 4 hours ago

Duh. This Started In London! Britain is the "foreign country" involved in our elections. Wake up everyone. It's LONDONGATE .

Anunnaki , 4 hours ago

May gonna owe Vlad an apology when Skripal is revealed to be Steele's source. Steele himself hadn't been to Russian in 15 years. Will he get life in prison for attempted murder?

PeaceForWorld , 4 hours ago

"t's hard to tell who's telling the truth and who isn't in this whole Russia narrative. Fact is, NOBODY is telling the truth. That is what I've determined after doing my own research.": https://youtu.be/2AA5BIfGj3g

I really like this woman "Shut the **** up!". She is a former Bernie supporter just like me. She has turned against Democrats just like me. She doesn't trust any of the Establishment parties.

Buddha71 , 4 hours ago

Trump made promises before being elected, then lied and sold America out, just like every other corrupted assklown politician. he is no different than clinton bush obama, just as arrogant, just as corrupt, and just as much a traitor. he has broken the promises upon which he was elected, just like all the other fkn liars before him. no different. just a pos. he has not made america great again, just more of the same, unemployment is a lie, it is closer to 17%.

[Sep 23, 2018] UK Begged Trump Not To Declassify Russia Docs; Cited Grave Concerns Over Steele Involvement

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Steele also had extensive contacts with DOJ official Bruce Ohr and his wife Nellie, who - along with Steele - was paid by opposition research firm Fusion GPS in the anti-Trump campaign. Trump called for the declassification of FBI notes of interviews with Ohr, which would ostensibly reveal more about his relationship with Steele. Ohr was demoted twice within the Department of Justice for lying about his contacts with Fusion GPS. ..."
"... Perhaps the Brits are also concerned since much of the espionage performed on the Trump campaign was conducted on UK soil throughout 2016 . Recall that Trump aid George Papadopoulos was lured to London in March, 2016, where Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud fed him the rumor that Russia had dirt on Hillary Clinton. It was later at a London bar that Papadopoulos would drunkenly pass the rumor to Australian diplomat Alexander Downer (who Strzok flew to London to meet with). ..."
"... Papadopoulos accepted a flight to London and a $3,000 honorarium. He claims that during a meeting in London, Halper asked him whether he knew anything about Russian hacking of Democrats' emails. ..."
"... Papadopoulos had other contacts on British soil that he now believes were part of a government-sanctioned surveillance operation. - Daily Caller ..."
"... In total, Halper received over $1 million from the Obama Pentagon for "research," over $400,000 of which was granted before and during the 2016 election season. ..."
"... In short, it's understandable that the UK would prefer to hide their involvement in the "witch hunt" of Donald Trump since much of the counterintelligence investigation was conducted on UK soil. And if the Brits had knowledge of the operation, it will bolster claims that they meddled in the 2016 US election by assisting what appears to have been a set-up from the start . ..."
"... Steele's ham-handed dossier is a mere embarrassment, as virtually none of the claims asserted by the former MI6 agent have been proven true. ..."
"... Steele, a former MI6 agent, is the author of the infamous and unverified anti-Trump dossier. He worked as a confidential human source for the FBI for years before the relationship was severed just before the election because of Steele's unauthorized contacts with the press. ..."
"... That said, Steele hasn't worked for the British government since 2009, so for their excuse focusing on the former MI6 agent while ignoring the multitude of events which occurred on UK soil, is curious. ..."
"... I find it interesting that the Theresa May Govt in UK has the temerity to interfere with US politics (until they got caught out!), yet can't find the spine to stand up to the EU. ..."
"... THE UNITED KINGDOM along with ISRAEL & SAUDI ARABIA have always been the ones behind US Politics making, pulling the strings behind the curtains since the Petrodollar Inception, The Greater Israel project & the NWO initiative - only this time around Trump was not the UK's pick... ..."
"... England dominates the offshore money laundering havens where the super rich hide their money and evade taxes. They need to be brought down. No more African dictators looting their nation's resources and hiding the money first in offshore banks and then in JP Morgan and Brit banks. ..."
"... It is a test. If Trump doesn't go ahead with declassification, we know for sure he is no better than the globalists and neocons whose goal has always been to destroy and depopulate America. ..."
"... 'focusing on the former MI6 agent while ignoring the multitude of events which occurred on UK soil, is curious' ..."
"... Not at all. It's obvious - the problem ISN'T Steele. They're living in fear, as are many in DC and elsewhere, that Trump is going to pry the lid open and reveal at least some of their activities. If killing him would fix the problem, they would. It's too late, considering what Trump is threatening to do. I wonder if he'll back down, at least some? ..."
"... U.K. does not want the jurisdiction. U.S. spies lure you overseas then...compromise you. ..."
"... Duh. This Started In London! Britain is the "foreign country" involved in our elections. Wake up everyone. It's LONDONGATE ..."
"... May gonna owe Vlad an apology when Skripal is revealed to be Steele's source. Steele himself hadn't been to Russian in 15 years. Will he get life in prison for attempted murder? ..."
"... "t's hard to tell who's telling the truth and who isn't in this whole Russia narrative. Fact is, NOBODY is telling the truth. That is what I've determined after doing my own research.": https://youtu.be/2AA5BIfGj3g ..."
"... Trump made promises before being elected, then lied and sold America out, just like every other corrupted assklown politician. he is no different than clinton bush obama, just as arrogant, just as corrupt, and just as much a traitor. ..."
Sep 23, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

UK Begged Trump Not To Declassify Russia Docs; Cited "Grave Concerns" Over Steele Involvement

by Tyler Durden Sun, 09/23/2018 - 11:15 4.6K SHARES

The British government "expressed grave concerns" to the US government over the declassification and release of material related to the Trump-Russia investigation, according to the New York Times . President Trump ordered a wide swath of materials "immediately" declassified "without redaction" on Monday, only to change his mind later in the week by allowing the DOJ Inspector General to review the materials first.

The Times reports that the UK's concern was over material which "includes direct references to conversations between American law enforcement officials and Christopher Steele," the former MI6 agent who compiled the infamous "Steele Dossier." The UK's objection, according to former US and British officials, was over revealing Steele's identity in an official document, "regardless of whether he had been named in press reports."

We would note, however, that Steele's name was contained within the Nunes Memo - the House Intelligence Committee's majority opinion in the Trump-Russia case.

Steele also had extensive contacts with DOJ official Bruce Ohr and his wife Nellie, who - along with Steele - was paid by opposition research firm Fusion GPS in the anti-Trump campaign. Trump called for the declassification of FBI notes of interviews with Ohr, which would ostensibly reveal more about his relationship with Steele. Ohr was demoted twice within the Department of Justice for lying about his contacts with Fusion GPS.

Perhaps the Brits are also concerned since much of the espionage performed on the Trump campaign was conducted on UK soil throughout 2016 . Recall that Trump aid George Papadopoulos was lured to London in March, 2016, where Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud fed him the rumor that Russia had dirt on Hillary Clinton. It was later at a London bar that Papadopoulos would drunkenly pass the rumor to Australian diplomat Alexander Downer (who Strzok flew to London to meet with).

Also recall that CIA/FBI "informant" (spy) Stefan Halper met with both Carter Page and Papadopoulos in London.

Halper, a veteran of four Republican administrations, reached out to Trump aide George Papadopoulos in September 2016 with an offer to fly to London to write an academic paper on energy exploration in the Mediterranean Sea.

Papadopoulos accepted a flight to London and a $3,000 honorarium. He claims that during a meeting in London, Halper asked him whether he knew anything about Russian hacking of Democrats' emails.

Papadopoulos had other contacts on British soil that he now believes were part of a government-sanctioned surveillance operation. - Daily Caller

In total, Halper received over $1 million from the Obama Pentagon for "research," over $400,000 of which was granted before and during the 2016 election season.

In short, it's understandable that the UK would prefer to hide their involvement in the "witch hunt" of Donald Trump since much of the counterintelligence investigation was conducted on UK soil. And if the Brits had knowledge of the operation, it will bolster claims that they meddled in the 2016 US election by assisting what appears to have been a set-up from the start .

Steele's ham-handed dossier is a mere embarrassment, as virtually none of the claims asserted by the former MI6 agent have been proven true.

Steele, a former MI6 agent, is the author of the infamous and unverified anti-Trump dossier. He worked as a confidential human source for the FBI for years before the relationship was severed just before the election because of Steele's unauthorized contacts with the press.

He shared results of his investigation into Trump's links to Russia with the FBI beginning in early July 2016.

The FBI relied heavily on the unverified Steele dossier to fill out applications for four FISA warrants against Page. Page has denied the dossier's claims, which include that he was the Trump campaign's back channel to the Kremlin. - Daily Caller

That said, Steele hasn't worked for the British government since 2009, so for their excuse focusing on the former MI6 agent while ignoring the multitude of events which occurred on UK soil, is curious.

StychoKiller , 54 minutes ago

I find it interesting that the Theresa May Govt in UK has the temerity to interfere with US politics (until they got caught out!), yet can't find the spine to stand up to the EU. If I were Trump, not only would the shoe be dropping re: UK Govt involvement in US politics, but said shoe would be making an imprint across her face! (stoopid twat!)

texantim , 1 hour ago

I say release the docs and put sanctions on UK.

BitchesBetterRecognize , 1 hour ago

So the Motherland ******* up with the ex-colony yet again, huh?

THE UNITED KINGDOM along with ISRAEL & SAUDI ARABIA have always been the ones behind US Politics making, pulling the strings behind the curtains since the Petrodollar Inception, The Greater Israel project & the NWO initiative - only this time around Trump was not the UK's pick...

Oh, but those "civilized" Allies backstabbing each other for more power grip on the USA....

Baron von Bud , 2 hours ago

England dominates the offshore money laundering havens where the super rich hide their money and evade taxes. They need to be brought down. No more African dictators looting their nation's resources and hiding the money first in offshore banks and then in JP Morgan and Brit banks.

Many hedge funds are deep into this game. I'd wager on Carlyle Group and the Bush clan. Billions of people can't get ahead because the super rich are ******* crooks running the banks and governments. They don't pay taxes but force a small dry cleaner to pay 45% in fed/state taxes. These criminals include Hillary Clinton and many members of congress. Feinstein, Pelosi, Maxine and many more of both parties need to be investigated. How do they get so rich on a congressman's salary. Deep into tax evasion and payoffs? Release the documents and let MI6 hang.

Malvern Joe , 3 hours ago

It is a test. If Trump doesn't go ahead with declassification, we know for sure he is no better than the globalists and neocons whose goal has always been to destroy and depopulate America. It would represent the biggest sellout of this country since the creation of the Fed in 1913, He will go down as the biggest fraud ever and his base will deport his *** to the sums of India where he can defecate in public.

Bricker , 3 hours ago

You dont get to supply a rogue agent, that was probably told to do it in the first place, and then tell Trump not to do it out of harm, harm is all you BRIT DEEP STATES deserve

Moving and Grooving , 3 hours ago

'focusing on the former MI6 agent while ignoring the multitude of events which occurred on UK soil, is curious'

Not at all. It's obvious - the problem ISN'T Steele. They're living in fear, as are many in DC and elsewhere, that Trump is going to pry the lid open and reveal at least some of their activities. If killing him would fix the problem, they would. It's too late, considering what Trump is threatening to do. I wonder if he'll back down, at least some?

The sheer corruption of the Global Government is on display here, revealing itself, if you watch for it. Whether planned or not, the last 6 months or so have been astonishing to watch. The entire media has been shown to be liars, academia is shown to be an expensive provider of unprepared students, the corporate world is furiously rent-seeking and finding new ways to destroy humanity, and government is too busy selling Americans out to write a budget. In all countries around the world, adjusting for national status. Lawsuits in the west, machetes in the third world.

Ban KKiller , 4 hours ago

U.K. does not want the jurisdiction. U.S. spies lure you overseas then...compromise you.

John C Durham , 4 hours ago

Duh. This Started In London! Britain is the "foreign country" involved in our elections. Wake up everyone. It's LONDONGATE .

Anunnaki , 4 hours ago

May gonna owe Vlad an apology when Skripal is revealed to be Steele's source. Steele himself hadn't been to Russian in 15 years. Will he get life in prison for attempted murder?

PeaceForWorld , 4 hours ago

"t's hard to tell who's telling the truth and who isn't in this whole Russia narrative. Fact is, NOBODY is telling the truth. That is what I've determined after doing my own research.": https://youtu.be/2AA5BIfGj3g

I really like this woman "Shut the **** up!". She is a former Bernie supporter just like me. She has turned against Democrats just like me. She doesn't trust any of the Establishment parties.

Buddha71 , 4 hours ago

Trump made promises before being elected, then lied and sold America out, just like every other corrupted assklown politician. he is no different than clinton bush obama, just as arrogant, just as corrupt, and just as much a traitor. he has broken the promises upon which he was elected, just like all the other fkn liars before him. no different. just a pos. he has not made america great again, just more of the same, unemployment is a lie, it is closer to 17%.

[Sep 23, 2018] Old, unproven, timed to ruin Kavanaugh accusations perfect example of all that's wrong with #MeToo -- RT US News

Notable quotes:
"... "re-victimization" ..."
"... "larger than normal penis" ..."
Sep 23, 2018 | www.rt.com

Old, unproven, timed to ruin: Kavanaugh accusations perfect example of all that's wrong with #MeToo Published time: 19 Sep, 2018 22:08 Edited time: 20 Sep, 2018 07:35 Get short URL Old, unproven, timed to ruin: Kavanaugh accusations perfect example of all that's wrong with #MeToo The out-of-nowhere sexual abuse claim concerning the Supreme Court nominee contains every alarming aspect of the #MeToo movement – and should make those on either side of the political divide shudder. Here's why. One caveat before we break it down: unlike many of the others weighing in, we do not pretend to know the truth of what happened (or did not) between Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford. New facts may come to light and settle the case, but the damage described below happened before any of them were known. No evidence necessary

There is no direct, or circumstantial evidence, or eyewitness statements proving that a drunk teenage Kavanaugh really pinned down Blasey Ford on the bed, and tried to rape her while covering her mouth with his hand, during a house party. In fact, other than this vivid scene, the accuser has failed to remember the dates or places or context of the events. Beyond that: as soon as the story broke, when the details were still just anonymous Beltway hearsay, for some that was enough to disqualify the nominee.

Brett Kavanaugh during the confirmation hearings. / Reuters

Now, if, out of the blue, I accuse a colleague of stealing my lunch sandwich, people will ask for evidence or an explanation. The burden of proof will be on me. No one will simply brand Alex from HR a thief or fire her on my word, and no one would want to work in an office where I would have such power over another human being. This is fundamental justice, developed over thousands of years in societies throughout the world. Even Elon Musk doesn't get to accuse someone of being a "pedo" without consequence.

READ MORE: Elon Musk sued by British rescue diver he called a 'pedo' and 'rapist' on Twitter

That such an obvious thing even needs to be said out loud is a testament to how far the accusations against Kavanaugh, and other #MeToo cases, stray from these principles – farcically so. Sexual assault is inherently murkier than lunchtime comestibles theft, yes, most victims have no reason to lie, but most would prefer to live in a society where a random person can't destroy someone else's life at will, even if that means that some rapists go unjailed.

Other examples: most #MeToo accusations aired on social media, the Inquisition, medieval witchcraft trials, neighbors' denunciations in Stalin's Russia.

No legal case

While reputation has always mattered, a person used to be able to clear his or her name with law. The #MeToo movement insists that even those who have been accused or convicted of no crimes can be just as guilty.

It doesn't matter that there was no police report in the Kavanaugh case, no investigation, and that the FBI has repeatedly insisted that there is nothing to investigate, despite demands from Blasey Ford's legal team.

READ MORE: Kavanaugh accuser 'not ready' to speak to Senate, wants FBI to probe sex assault claims first

Kavanaugh's only recourse is to accuse her of slander, and hope that the ensuing process doesn't bring out more unflattering claims, while knowing for sure that those who considered him guilty in the first place will likely not change their mind.

Ronan Farrow / Reuters

Other examples: Woody Allen was investigated for molesting his pre-teen daughter and no charges were filed, and was able to continue working freely for another 25 years. After his son, Ronan, became a leading #MeToo accuser, he is unable to release his already-finished film, and will receive no further funding for projects.

Accusations from decades ago

Previously, the strength of a case would grow weaker the longer ago the alleged crime was. Evidence was impossible to collect, social mores changed, people grew and reformed. The statute of limitations is a legal reflection of that.

Christine Blasey Ford in her school yearbook.

#MeToo has turned this on its head.

Charges from the distant past are harder to disprove, it is easier to paint the 1980s as a warzone of sexual abuse (just look at that Sixteen Candles ending – very "problematic") while if you squint hard enough you can picture the white-bread square Kavanaugh as a marauding party-boy.

Brett Kavanaugh, on the right, in his high school yearbook.

The result: any questionable, misinterpreted or altogether fictitious incident in your teenage years (Kavanaugh was 17 at the time of the alleged assault) will forever hang over you.

Other examples: Plenty, but equally interesting is the revisionist history even in cases where the truth was widely known at the time, such as Monica Lewinsky, an adult engaged in a consensual relationship, suddenly re-emerging as a #MeToo victim.

Timed to destroy

Yet, however, long the traumatic memories are kept private – and there is no doubt that is a genuine reaction of many victims – they seem often to emerge just at the right time.

There is of course, genuine concern about rapists taking up Supreme Court seats, but perhaps it wasn't quite necessary for the Democrats to wait until less than a week until Kavanaugh's appointment, considering the information has been in their possession since July. And then to pretend to be surprised when their motivations are being questioned.

READ MORE: Fast Times at Feinstein High: Dems ambush Brett Kavanaugh with last-minute sex assault charges

While revenge is a dish best served cold, it is also not a good look for a justice movement to appear as if its participants are waiting for the targets to become important and successful before sticking the knife in.

Other examples: Often the best time to come out of hiding is when someone is on their way down. There is no risk to being the twentieth person to accuse producer Harvey Weinstein in 2018, even if doing that two decades earlier could have helped dozens of other women.

Transparent self-interest

The mention that the accusers are motivated by money, hunger for publicity, career ambitions, personal grudges or political views is impermissible within the #MeToo conversation.

What Dianne Feinstein really cares about here is #MeToo / Reuters

But even if Blasey Ford is a true victim, pretending she is some neutral vessel of justice is laughable: she is a long-time Democrat donor, who has signed petitions against Trump, and wrote on her Facebook that "'a basket of deplorables' is far too generous a description" of his staff.

As is claiming that this is a purely criminal matter, not a calculated attempt by a political party to exploit a scandal for its own ends: #MeToo is a social movement weaponized for politics.

Pure motivations: Asia Argento / Reuters

Other examples: Actress Asia Argento went out with Weinstein for several years after he allegedly raped her, then garnered sympathy and attention as she described their relationship as "re-victimization" since 2017, all while reportedly arranging a confidentiality payout with an underage man she had sex with.

Social media & activists decide

Unless you have backing from the electorate and your own party (Donald Trump has both, so he stays, Al Franken had one but not the other, so he had to go) in the absence of any due process, it will be social media that decides your fate.

Are these the people who should handle justice?

The efforts to railroad Dr. Blasey Ford and rush Brett Kavanaugh's nomination through as she faces death threats are reprehensible. This process was clearly not designed to get at the truth. Dr. Blasey Ford deserves better. #StopKavanaugh

-- Planned Parenthood Action (@PPact) September 19, 2018

I really take issue with the description of Kavanaugh as an "attempted rapist." It wasn't an attempted rape because he started and then decided to stop. It was an attempted rape because *she got away.*

Kavanaugh is a rapist.

-- Monica Byrne (@monicabyrne13) September 19, 2018

Brett Kavanaugh is not a mediocre man. He's an extraordinarily talented agent of radical, right-wing forces. He will dismantle the modern regulatory state with frightening efficiency.

Also, he's probably an attempted rapist.

But he's not mediocre. He's a brilliant evildoer. https://t.co/iUtpzMH6vQ

-- Ian Millhiser (@imillhiser) September 18, 2018

It's also worth nothing that even men who openly treat women like shit for years are believed over their accusers. I mean, consider President Pussy Grabber.

It doesn't matter how men treat women - in a rape culture, they're always given the benefit of the doubt.

-- Jessica Valenti (@JessicaValenti) September 17, 2018

The Kavanaugh nomination is a good reminder that in the Republican Party, there are rapists and rape apologists. There is no one vehemently opposed to rape.

-- The Hoarse Whisperer (@HoarseWisperer) September 17, 2018
Name can never be cleared

What is the first thing anyone can tell you about Clarence Thomas, the most senior justice on the US Supreme Court? Anita Hill, "larger than normal penis" boasts, pubic hair on a Coke can.

Whereas, as Thomas before him, Kavanaugh will likely be approved, he can never wash away the image of his lunging body from the public's mind, nor will he ever be completely believed. The cost for Blasey Ford will likely be as high.

In the era of ersatz and ad hoc #MeToo justice both of their names forever linked together, and forever stained.

Igor Ogorodnev

[Sep 23, 2018] Poroshenko has told Germans that the construction of "North Stream 2" makes no sense.

Sep 23, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Reply

Moscow Exile September 23, 2018 at 7:59 am

Today at 02:24

Порошенко заявил немцам, что строительство "Северного потока – 2" не имеет никакого смысла Poroshenko has told Germans that the construction of "North Stream 2" makes no sense.
По его словам, российский газ европейцам гораздо выгоднее получать через Украину, а новый газопровод – лишь "инструмент давления" на Европу
According to him, it is much more profitable to send Russian gas to Europe through the Ukraine, and the new pipeline is just a "tool to pressurize" on Europe


Please help me get even more wealthier, I beg you!

The leader of "Independent" Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, has once again tried to convince Europeans that they do not need the "North Stream 2", pipeline, which is being constructed on the bed of the Baltic sea, bypassing the Ukraine

"This pipeline makes no sense from an economic point of view. This is a Russian attempt to weaken the Ukraine, which previously received about three billion dollars annually for transit", he said in an interview with German newspaper "Rheinische Post".

According to Poroshenko, "Why spend $20 billion on a pipeline", if his country "has more than sufficient logistical capacity for the delivery of Russian gas to Europe". He stressed that "the facts speak against" this project.

The President of the Ukraine has decided to warn his "European friends" that the gas pipeline "North Stream 2" is "a geopolitical instrument of pressure on Western Europe, and that the dependence of European countries on gas supplies from Russia is opening up a wide area for their blackmailing".

Recall, as reported by the website kp.ru previously, the Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel, speaking at a joint press conference with the President of Lithuania, Dalia Grybauskaite, and the Prime Ministers of the three Baltic State countries, stated the importance of the "North Stream 2" project for Germany, noting that the need of her contry for natural gas supplies will only grow.

kirill September 23, 2018 at 8:08 am
Put a sock in it, Banderatard. Nord Stream II makes sense merely because it removes the $3 billion per year of transit fees you parasites charge. The Banderatard thinks that everyone is an innumerate moron.
Mark Chapman September 23, 2018 at 11:24 am
I notice the estimated transit fees have gone up by almost a billion dollars. I wonder if they have budgeted in planned increases if they are successful at getting Nord Stream II shut down. Or were they just low-balling the figures before, like when they were joking about the planned pipeline and how it would make no difference to Ukraine?
Patient Observer September 23, 2018 at 9:02 am
Ignoring reality and focusing just on a comparison of a $3 billion recurring expense versus a $20 billion CAPEX, a ROI of less than 7 years is quite respectable for a major project.
kirill September 23, 2018 at 11:06 am
They charge 3 billion today but may well want 6 billion tomorrow. This Banderite mafioso is basically trying to sell his protection racket.

[Sep 23, 2018] NATO's bombing of Yugoslavia ended Moscow's partnership with the West.

Sep 23, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Patient Observer September 21, 2018 at 12:08 pm

https://theduran.com/clinton-yeltsin-docs-shine-a-light-on-why-deep-state-hates-putin-video/?mc_cid=fc46ed9187&mc_eid=d04cb5a32d

Lots of interesting information regarding conversations between Bill Clinton and Yeltsin but allow me to focus on the NATO bombing of Serbia:

Although Clinton and Yeltsin enjoyed friendly relations, NATO's bombing of Yugoslavia tempered Moscow's enthusiastic partnership with the West.

"Our people will certainly from now have a bad attitude with regard to America and with NATO," the Russian president told Clinton in March 1999. "I remember how difficult it was for me to try and turn the heads of our people, the heads of the politicians towards the West, towards the United States, but I succeeded in doing that, and now to lose all that."

Yeltsin urged Clinton to renounce the strikes, for the sake of "our relationship" and "peace in Europe."

The declassified White House Yeltsin files reveal the drama at the turning point in US-Russia relations, when Yeltsin pleaded, threatened and despaired trying to make Clinton call off the bombing of Yugoslavia.

"It is not known who will come after us and it is not known what will be the road of future developments in strategic nuclear weapons," Yeltsin reminded his US counterpart.

But Clinton wouldn't cede ground.

Clinton to Yeltsin on Milosevic: "It will be your decision if you decide to let this bully destroy the relationship we worked hard for over six and a half years to build up I'm sorry he is a Serb. I wish he were Irish or something else, but he is not."

"Milosevic is still a communist dictator and he would like to destroy the alliance that Russia has built up with the US and Europe and essentially destroy the whole movement of your region toward democracy and go back to ethnic alliances. We cannot allow him to dictate our future," Clinton told Yeltsin.

It was much more than the all-out bombing campaign by NATO. Serbia resisted for more than 70 days by courage and intelligence including bagging at least one stealth aircraft and its army remaining virtually untouched and ready to take on a NATO land invasion.

et Al September 21, 2018 at 12:45 pm
If I remember correctly, Clinton or whomever threatened to carpet bomb Belgrade if Russia did not stop supporting Serbia.

[Sep 23, 2018] 'Criminal negligence' or disregard to Russia-Israel ties MoD details chronology of Il-20 downing -- RT World News

Notable quotes:
"... "We believe that the blame for the Russian Il-20 aircraft tragedy lies entirely with the Israeli Air Force," ..."
"... "the military leadership of Israel either has no appreciation for the level of relations with Russia, or has no control over individual commands or commanding officers who understood that their actions would lead to tragedy." ..."
"... "a clear violation of the 2015 Russian-Israeli agreements." ..."
"... The misleading information provided by the Israeli officer about the area of strikes did not allow the Russian Il-20 airplane to move timely to a safe area. ..."
"... "preferred target" ..."
"... "The Israeli jets saw the Russian Ilyushin Il-20 and used it as a shield against the anti-aircraft missiles ..."
"... , while they carried on maneuvering in the region," ..."
"... The actions of the Israeli fighter pilots, which led to the loss of life of 15 Russian servicemen, either lacked professionalism or were an act of criminal negligence, to say the least. ..."
"... "This is an extremely ungrateful response to all that has been done by the Russian Federation for Israel and the Israeli people recently," ..."
"... "ensure there were no shelling attacks on Israeli territory" ..."
"... "a six-year hiatus." ..."
"... "safe distance for Israel," ..."
"... "A total of 1,050 personnel, 24 MLRSs and tactical missiles, as well as 145 pieces of other munitions and military equipment were withdrawn from the area," ..."
"... In view of the above, the hostile actions committed by the Israeli Air Force against the Russian Ilyushin Il-20 aircraft cross the line of civilized relations. ..."
Sep 23, 2018 | www.rt.com

Criminal negligence' or disregard to Russia-Israel ties: MoD details chronology of Il-20 downing Published time: 23 Sep, 2018 08:21 Edited time: 23 Sep, 2018 17:18 Get short URL © Russian Defense Ministry A minute-by-minute account of the Il-20 downing shows Israel's culpability and either its military bosses' lack of appreciation of relations with Moscow, or their control of commanding officers, the Russian defense ministry said. "We believe that the blame for the Russian Il-20 aircraft tragedy lies entirely with the Israeli Air Force," said spokesman Major General Igor Konashenkov, before revealing a detailed account of events leading to the downing of the Russian Il-20 military aircraft on September 17. The plane was shot down by the Syrian air defense units as Israeli's F-16s effectively used it as a cover during the attack on its neighbor.

The report featured previously undisclosed radar data and details of communications between Russian and Israeli militaries, and concluded that "the military leadership of Israel either has no appreciation for the level of relations with Russia, or has no control over individual commands or commanding officers who understood that their actions would lead to tragedy."

Read more FILE PHOTO. Russian IL-20M. © Alexander KOPITAR / AFP 'You are to blame for downing of Il-20 and death of its crew,' Russia tells Israel Misinformation & 'criminal negligence'

On the evening of September 17, the Russian Ilyushin IL-20 with 15 crew on board was circling over the Idlib de-escalation zone on a special reconnaissance mission, when four Israeli F-16 fighter jets left their country's airspace and flew over the neutral Mediterranean waters towards the Syrian coast. The Israeli Air Force gave the Russian side less than a minute's warning before dropping the precision-guided glide bombs, leaving virtually no time for any safety maneuvers, Konashenkov said, calling such actions "a clear violation of the 2015 Russian-Israeli agreements."

Moreover, the Israeli military failed to provide the location of their jets or properly specify their targets, claiming they were going to attack several 'industrial facilities' in northern Syria, close to the Il-20's area of operation. The misinformation prompted the Russian Command to order the recon plane back to the Khmeimim air base. The Israeli jets, however, instead almost immediately attacked the western Syrian Latakia province.

The misleading information provided by the Israeli officer about the area of strikes did not allow the Russian Il-20 airplane to move timely to a safe area.

Once the Syrian air defenses responded to the initial strike, the Israeli jets switched on radar jamming and pulled back, apparently preparing for another attack. One of the Israeli jets then came closer to the Syrian coast and approached the Russian plane, which was preparing to land at that time.

An Israeli jet approaching the Russian plane at a time when the Syrian anti-air missile was launched © Russian Defense Ministry

The Israeli pilot must have been well aware of the fact that the Il-20 has a much larger radar cross-section than his F-16, and would become a "preferred target" for the Syrian air defense units, who use different friend-or-foe systems with the Russians, Konashenkov said. Thus, for the Syrians, the reconnaissance plane could appear as a group of Israeli jets.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Qg9GliGS0RY

"The Israeli jets saw the Russian Ilyushin Il-20 and used it as a shield against the anti-aircraft missiles , while they carried on maneuvering in the region," Konashenkov said during the news briefing.

The actions of the Israeli fighter pilots, which led to the loss of life of 15 Russian servicemen, either lacked professionalism or were an act of criminal negligence, to say the least.

Finally, the Israeli jets carried out their maneuvers in the immediate vicinity of the Khmeimim air base, which is used both by military and civilian aircraft, including passenger planes, the ministry's spokesman emphasized, saying that the reckless actions of the Israeli pilots could also have posed a threat to any passenger or transport aircraft that may have happened to be there at that time.

Israel 'crossed the line of civilized relations' with 'ungrateful response'

Israel's negligent behavior amounts to a flagrant violation of the very spirit of cooperation between the countries, Konashenkov stated, noting that Russia has never broken its commitment to the deconfliction agreement – it has always informed Israel about their missions in advance and has never used its air defense capabilities against the Israelis, even though their airstrikes sometimes put the Russian servicemen in danger.

Read more FILE PHOTO An Israeli F-16 fighter jet during the Blue Flag drill November 25, 2013 © Amir Cohen Israeli army blames Damascus for Russia's Il-20 downing, mourns death of crew – statement

Russia has sent as many as 310 notifications to the Israeli Air Force Command, while the latter appeared to be reluctant to show the same level of commitment, notifying only 25 times even though its jets carried out more than 200 strikes against targets located in Syria over the past 18 months alone.

"This is an extremely ungrateful response to all that has been done by the Russian Federation for Israel and the Israeli people recently," Konashenkov said.

The Russian military supported the Syrian military operation in the Golan Heights to "ensure there were no shelling attacks on Israeli territory" anymore, thus allowing the UN peacekeeping mission to resume patrolling of the contested border between Syria and Israel after "a six-year hiatus."

Russia also managed to secure the withdrawal of all Iran-backed groups from the Golan Heights to a "safe distance for Israel," more than 140 kilometers to the east of Syria, the spokesperson said, adding that this was done at the request of Tel Aviv. "A total of 1,050 personnel, 24 MLRSs and tactical missiles, as well as 145 pieces of other munitions and military equipment were withdrawn from the area," Konashenkov told journalists.

The Russian Defense Ministry had provided assistance in preserving Jewish sacred places and graves in the city of Aleppo. Putting Russian Special Forces soldiers' lives in danger, it also organized the search for the remains of some Israeli servicemen that died during the past conflicts in an area where the Syrian forces were combating Islamic State (IS, former ISIS) terrorists at that time.

In view of the above, the hostile actions committed by the Israeli Air Force against the Russian Ilyushin Il-20 aircraft cross the line of civilized relations.

While Israel said that it mourned the deaths of Russian troops, the IDF statement following the incident shifted all the blame for the incident solely on Damascus, and its Iranian and Lebanese allies.

[Sep 23, 2018] Attempt to blame Putin

Notable quotes:
"... "none of this would in any way exculpate the Israelis for the very simple reason that had the Israelis warned the Russians on time this entire tragedy might have been avoided even if the prime culprits are cowardly Israeli pilots, less than competent Syrian air defense crews or too trusting Russians. " ..."
"... No, none of this would have happened if Putin had refused to allow his bosom buddy Nazinyahu to bomb his ally, Syria, with impunity. ..."
"... It is definitely worth reading not only the quoted article but other commentaries, because the inventors of shutzpah are now collectively dancing on the graves of the 15 Russian officers. ..."
Sep 23, 2018 | www.unz.com

Andrei Martyanov , says: Website September 21, 2018 at 1:24 pm GMT

@J Since the Russians largely control the Syrian antiair defenses, one could also conclude that they share the responsibility in downing their own aircraft. Maybe the Israelis overestimated Russian readiness and response capabilities. In Tzahal, one minute is a lot of time. As Putin said, it was a tragic fuckup.

In Tzahal, one minute is a lot of time.

No, this can not be true!!! I always knew that Tzahal operates on millisecond increments. In fact, it can also travel back in time. You know, because they are that good.

Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist , says: Website September 21, 2018 at 1:48 pm GMT

"none of this would in any way exculpate the Israelis for the very simple reason that had the Israelis warned the Russians on time this entire tragedy might have been avoided even if the prime culprits are cowardly Israeli pilots, less than competent Syrian air defense crews or too trusting Russians. "

No, none of this would have happened if Putin had refused to allow his bosom buddy Nazinyahu to bomb his ally, Syria, with impunity. Russia is being treated with contempt by the zionazi pseudostate for the simple reason that the Zios were bombing a "target" right next to the Russian Hmeimim airbase.

Nor is the loss of the Il 20 something minor. It was a very expensive, highly capable system manned by extremely well trained, hard to replace, valuable crew, each of whom had many years of irreplaceable experience. Do *not* attempt to whitewash that.

The Saker needs to stop defending the zionazi stooge and capitalist roader Putin. His "restraint" is making Russia look like a pushover and emboldening its enemies. What is the Amerikastani aircraft carrier Harry Truman doing in the Mediterranean right now, a health cruise?

Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist , says: Website September 21, 2018 at 1:57 pm GMT
There is absolutely nothing stopping Putin from ordering his bosom buddy Nazinyahu to immediately stop all bombing of Syria, on the pain of having his zionazi war criminals being shot out of the air. What exactly is preventing Putin from doing this, assuming that the S400 actually works as advertised? Can any of the professional Putinite propaganda purveyors, as despicable a breed as the Trumpets, Obamopologists, and Hillarybots, explain?
Kiza , says: September 21, 2018 at 2:03 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

First, let me start by a very simple and primitive question:

Why in the world has nobody considered that the Israelis might have truly screwed-up?

'Careless' is the word I would use. Israelis are being careless, because they never have to pay a price for their aggressions and their mistakes. Putin encourages this carelessness , when he refuses to impose costs on Israel. The lesson Israelis are learning from this incident is that Russia is weak, and Putin has "little choice", but allow Israelis free hand in Syria. This is what Israelis newspapers are saying, check this out:

https://twitter.com/DanielS22647562/status/1043070311355301889 It is definitely worth reading not only the quoted article but other commentaries, because the inventors of shutzpah are now collectively dancing on the graves of the 15 Russian officers. Just as they placed sofas to watch the destruction of Gaza. Thank you for the link Felix.

Much better reading Harretz than the awe of our two Armchair Marshals, Saker and Martyanov, at the level of the IDF delegations sent to Moscow, to ensure that the Russian military does not get any "reserved" ideas (reserve the right to huff & puff).

Here is my favorite piece from this Jewish BS machine above:

unconfirmed sources from Syria have reported that Russian military police abducted and are brutally interrogating officers and soldiers from the Syrian air-defense battery that fired the fateful missile

But, but I naively thought that the Russians discovered a secret link which proves that those now brutally interrogated Syrians did 911 , not the Iraqis accused before.

I do understand that Putin does not have any good option now and that his premature and dumb commentary about the "accident" was for his own ass-covering not to protect those Jews who made such a total ass of him. But whenever the Russians die, as when the SU-24 pilot died, he learned nothing and continues on making and trusting the deals with the sponsors of terrorism.

Finally, I do note that the smart people, such as Israel Shamir, keep their mouths shut for now, till the fog clears and the emotions blow-over. I am looking forward to his next article to understand the feelings in the Russian military regarding Putin.

Andrei Martyanov , says: Website September 21, 2018 at 2:23 pm GMT
@Kiza It is definitely worth reading not only the quoted article but other commentaries, because the inventors of shutzpah are now collectively dancing on the graves of the 15 Russian officers. Just as they placed sofas to watch the destruction of Gaza. Thank you for the link Felix.

Much better reading Harretz than the awe of our two Armchair Marshals, Saker and Martyanov, at the level of the IDF delegations sent to Moscow, to ensure that the Russian military does not get any "reserved" ideas (reserve the right to ... huff & puff).

Here is my favorite piece from this Jewish BS machine above:


unconfirmed sources from Syria have reported that Russian military police abducted and are brutally interrogating officers and soldiers from the Syrian air-defense battery that fired the fateful missile
But, but I naively thought that the Russians discovered a secret link which proves that those now brutally interrogated Syrians did 911 , not the Iraqis accused before.

I do understand that Putin does not have any good option now and that his premature and dumb commentary about the "accident" was for his own ass-covering not to protect those Jews who made such a total ass of him. But whenever the Russians die, as when the SU-24 pilot died, he learned nothing and continues on making and trusting the deals with the sponsors of terrorism.

Finally, I do note that the smart people, such as Israel Shamir, keep their mouths shut for now, till the fog clears and the emotions blow-over. I am looking forward to his next article to understand the feelings in the Russian military regarding Putin.

Much better reading Harretz than the awe of our two Armchair Marshals, Saker and Martyanov

Do you want me to prove, using you as an example, for all other present here hysterical non-men, that none of you have any idea of what was and is going on by me merely introducing a simple tactical-technical parameter which defines tactical reality in any radar systems. I'll give you hint–it is reported to all military radar operating units (from ground to the sea) and is logged and accounted for (with proper adjustments in procedures) every single day, sometimes on 12 hour increments. This factor could be of prime importance, especially against the background of old S-200 AD complex. Are you game? Then we will compare who are real "armchair strategists" here.

Felix Keverich , says: September 21, 2018 at 2:59 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

Much better reading Harretz than the awe of our two Armchair Marshals, Saker and Martyanov
Do you want me to prove, using you as an example, for all other present here hysterical non-men, that none of you have any idea of what was and is going on by me merely introducing a simple tactical-technical parameter which defines tactical reality in any radar systems. I'll give you hint--it is reported to all military radar operating units (from ground to the sea) and is logged and accounted for (with proper adjustments in procedures) every single day, sometimes on 12 hour increments. This factor could be of prime importance, especially against the background of old S-200 AD complex. Are you game? Then we will compare who are real "armchair strategists" here. This is some irrelevant technical mumbo-jumbo. Kiza was making a comment about political side of the issue:

Israelis have no respect for Russia and Putin. They feel emboldened by Putin's weak reaction.

Andrei Martyanov , says: Website September 21, 2018 at 4:28 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich This is some irrelevant technical mumbo-jumbo. Kiza was making a comment about political side of the issue:

Israelis have no respect for Russia and Putin. They feel emboldened by Putin's weak reaction.

This is some irrelevant technical mumbo-jumbo.

Well, then I am sure you will treat your future illnesses (God forbids you to become ill, stay healthy) at Voodoo doctors, since all this medical mumbo-jumbo is irrelevant. I heard Haiti Voodoo healthcare is great and very-very affordable.

Kiza was making a comment about political side of the issue:

Only few posts here are real comments, most of them is some hysterical weeping in an adrenaline deprived organisms upon understanding that Israel is not going to be destroyed immediately by Russians. Hence, your posts included, either hysterical reactions or trolling, mostly, sorry for being blunt, by people who have zero knowledge of Russia in general, and her military in particular. So, a wonderful unification of pseudo-patriots and all kinds of ignorant trolls happened. It is rather interesting to observe.

[Sep 23, 2018] I will be watching the Russian Mayday parades with photos of killed relatives in a totally different light from now on – those people in the photos are the victims of the Russian elite

As if in any other country this situation is different...
Putin priority was avoiding larger confrontation, which if spun out of control can lead to WWIII. And I think he was right trying to downplay the situation.
Sep 23, 2018 | www.unz.com

Kiza , says: September 21, 2018 at 5:18 am GMT

This is terribly empty ramble and it is time to stop reading this rambler. But before I stop I will quote myself:

My critique of Putin is not that he did not kill back the Turks, the US military and the Israelis, it is that he keeps making agreements with the non-agreement capable sponsors of terrorism and then entrusts the lives of his soldiers to such agreements.

In other words, the four Israeli planes should have never been tagged "friendlies", which was obviously the Putin's standing order to the Russian military based on his agreement with these sponsors of terrorism. The rest in this tragic event for Russia is what usually happens in war – fear, huge and costly mistakes, and incompetence all around.

Saker, I hope you and Martyanov both, as a reward for your insightful writing about the panicking Israeli pilots, get to read your recent articles to the 10-year old daughter of one of the Russian officers killed.

You two are the Marshals of all the Armchair Generals that you laugh at. With "intellectuals" such as you, now I understand why the Russian always die in wars like cattle and win wars by sacrificing the most/only valuable human capital (why do they call such 'a Pyrrhic victory' when it should be called 'a Russian victory'). I will be watching the Russian Mayday parades with photos of killed relatives in a totally different light from now on – those people in the photos are the victims of the Russian "elite" and the self-declared Russian Armchair Marshals.

The unfortunate Syrians are the beggars, so they cannot be choosers who their "friends" are.

J , says: Website September 21, 2018 at 6:49 am GMT
Since the Russians largely control the Syrian antiair defenses, one could also conclude that they share the responsibility in downing their own aircraft. Maybe the Israelis overestimated Russian readiness and response capabilities. In Tzahal, one minute is a lot of time. As Putin said, it was a tragic fuckup.
Harold Smith , says: September 21, 2018 at 7:18 am GMT
"I tried to post a short commentary suggesting that before we jump to conclusions about anything, we ought to wait for the fact to come out."

Well Putin didn't waste anytime jumping to the conclusion that it was an "accident," right? I blame him for being too quick to say that.

And I blame him for allowing the Israeli attacks to continue for so long. Something bad (for Russia) was bound to happen eventually. And they're war crimes, aren't they? It would've been okay with everybody if it was a Syrian plane that went down?

"So why is everybody assuming that the Israelis carefully planned the whole thing?"

King David Hotel, USS Liberty, 9/11, etc.

"First, let me start by a very simple and primitive question: Why in the world has nobody considered that the Israelis might have truly screwed-up?"

When someone "screws up" during the commission of a crime, a crime "evincing a depraved indifference to human life" and someone dies because of it, it's known in Western jurisprudence as a "depraved heart murder" not an "accident."

http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/D/DepravedHeartMurder.aspx

"At this point, I need to ask another question: what would the Israelis gain from shooting down the Il-20?"

You could also ask for example: what did they gain by running over Rachel Corrie with a bulldozer? And the answer would be the same IMO: They do what they do because they're evil.

hunor , says: September 21, 2018 at 7:46 am GMT
Mr. you are a very naďve person. One doesn't have to be a
Putin or Jew hater to see with clarity. In fact we the gojims are the ones
who is in our face is being hated, and planed to be destroyed. They declaring
a new world order. The very word of new implies a departure from what we
have today, a culture of nation states. The very word of order implies Dictatorial slavery.
According to Assange , we are the last generation of free people.
The western countries being overrun by primitives who are the biological
weapons of the elites, one economical crises and everybody is against everybody,
until only the well protected elites remain. The murder of a highly trained
Russian military persons were premeditated planed murder. In earlier
analysis of yours you called this form of warfare " leapfrogging " . And the
hollywooding of the Izraeli leadersip, is a part of deceiveing the gojim.
The did what they do best they draw blood of the gojim, and getting away
with it again with an explanation, playing on our fears of not to escalating further.
Putin calling it an accident, he remind me of an other historic figure
who's name was Marshall Emanuel Grouchy. He was Napoleon's trusted general
in 1815 at waterloo , when he heard the battle drums he started to march with his
units to the opposite direction away from the warzone, so the French army was slathered.
What does it count if they are the best and bravest and have a best missile systems,
if they are being mislead and betrayed? Try to analyzing that.
judeo-christian , says: September 21, 2018 at 8:23 am GMT
What's funny is that The Saker wants to stick to the "facts" but all he gives is, when you read his article closely is apologizing for the failure of Russian policy with regards to the Israelis, a mix of contradictions, Putin-ifallibility and the usual "Russia good, rest meh"
Andrei Martyanov , says: Website September 21, 2018 at 1:21 pm GMT
@hunor Mr. you are a very naďve person. One doesn't have to be a
Putin or Jew hater to see with clarity. In fact we the gojims are the ones
who is in our face is being hated, and planed to be destroyed. They declaring
a new world order. The very word of new implies a departure from what we
have today, a culture of nation states. The very word of order implies Dictatorial slavery.
According to Assange , we are the last generation of free people.
The western countries being overrun by primitives who are the biological
weapons of the elites, one economical crises and everybody is against everybody,
until only the well protected elites remain. The murder of a highly trained
Russian military persons were premeditated planed murder. In earlier
analysis of yours you called this form of warfare " leapfrogging " . And the
hollywooding of the Izraeli leadersip, is a part of deceiveing the gojim.
The did what they do best they draw blood of the gojim, and getting away
with it again with an explanation, playing on our fears of not to escalating further.
Putin calling it an accident, he remind me of an other historic figure
who's name was Marshall Emanuel Grouchy. He was Napoleon's trusted general
in 1815 at waterloo , when he heard the battle drums he started to march with his
units to the opposite direction away from the warzone, so the French army was slathered.
What does it count if they are the best and bravest and have a best missile systems,
if they are being mislead and betrayed? Try to analyzing that.

One doesn't have to be a Putin or Jew hater to see with clarity

So, you do then, I assume, have now or had in the past Form 1A clearance to know how and what Tactical and Operational Manuals describe in terms of setting Air Defense systems, establishment of communications networks ah, never mind–I am sure "Jews The Almighty" bible of yours gives all necessary answers. Including describing issues of angular separation of targets, principles of development of command decisions from tactical to operational level and other irrelevant crap.

[Sep 23, 2018] Sun deletes model's 'Putin wants to kill me' story amid claims of Salisbury poisoning hoax -- RT UK News

Notable quotes:
"... for legal reasons, ..."
"... Putin wants me dead ..."
"... There was no sign of nerve agents being used, but The Sun claimed to have 'security sources' which told them rat poison may have been used against the couple, while claiming King was fighting for his life. Soon after the hospital confirmed that actually both had been discharged. ..."
"... Then the BBC reported that King, who was reportedly found foaming at the mouth in the restaurant's toilet, is a "convicted criminal who once hoaxed Prince Charles" and had previously been convicted of "distributing indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs of children." ..."
"... Then the Daily Mirror reported that King is an alleged drug dealer, and Shapiro is a high-class escort who told friends she was a " honeytrap spy ..."
"... Like any newspaper, we were keen to talk to those at the centre of the incident and give them the opportunity to share with the public their version of events ..."
"... Like this story? Share it with a friend! ..."
Sep 23, 2018 | www.rt.com

Sun deletes model's 'Putin wants to kill me' story amid claims of Salisbury poisoning hoax Published time: 20 Sep, 2018 14:05 Edited time: 21 Sep, 2018 13:28 Get short URL Sun deletes model's 'Putin wants to kill me' story amid claims of Salisbury poisoning hoax © missannawebb / Instagram In one of the least surprising developments in an ongoing story, the Sun newspaper has been forced to remove a report from its website in which a Russian model claims Vladimir Putin is trying to kill her. The article has since been removed " for legal reasons, " and, some are speculating, probably for some 'truth' reasons as well.

Russian-born Anna Shapiro and her British husband Alex King were at the center of another poisoning scare in Salisbury last Sunday in an incident that appeared at first to echo the attack on ex-Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in the very same city.

Read more © missannawebb 'Putin wants me dead': Russian 'model' seduces UK tabloids with new Salisbury poisoning claims

The details were compelling, a reported poisoning in another Italian eatery chain in Salisbury (this time Prezzo), a Russian was involved, and the police closed off streets and deployed specialists in hazmat suits.

The story also carried a hint of too-good-to-be-true, but The Sun was so seduced by Shapiro's claim that Putin was after her, it ran a front page splash. The fact she was willing to claim " Putin wants me dead " while at the same time doing a sexy photo shoot probably helped.

There was no sign of nerve agents being used, but The Sun claimed to have 'security sources' which told them rat poison may have been used against the couple, while claiming King was fighting for his life. Soon after the hospital confirmed that actually both had been discharged.

However, other details began to emerge after the Sun splashed. The police, who have not suggested any crime actually took place, admitted one of their lines of inquiry into what happened in Salisbury's Prezzo is now whether it may have been a hoax.

Then the BBC reported that King, who was reportedly found foaming at the mouth in the restaurant's toilet, is a "convicted criminal who once hoaxed Prince Charles" and had previously been convicted of "distributing indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs of children."

Then the Daily Mirror reported that King is an alleged drug dealer, and Shapiro is a high-class escort who told friends she was a " honeytrap spy " used by Israel's Mossad to seduce men.

A Russian 'model' has claimed that Putin tried to 'poison' her! 🐭🇷🇺👩 pic.twitter.com/9dYNeIWNZ3

-- #ICYMI (@ICYMIvideo) September 20, 2018

Essentially what appeared to be an extremely questionable story from the very start seems to be disintegrating, so why would a national newspaper decide to run this story at all without doing a basic background checks?

The obvious conclusion is simply that it's too easy to make any accusation you like about Russia because readers are willing to believe anything in the current political climate.

The Sun said in a statement: " Like any newspaper, we were keen to talk to those at the centre of the incident and give them the opportunity to share with the public their version of events ."

But were they keen to check whether any of it was accurate?

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

[Sep 23, 2018] Skripals is a demonstration of established British elite method of of slandering the non-obedient Russians

Sep 23, 2018 | www.unz.com

annamaria , says: July 14, 2018 at 3:49 pm GMT

@Mr. Hack I understand perfectly what I read, and even make a direct quotation:

Those in power in Kiev had several times already attempted to draw Moscow into the civil war, directly and through a NATO intervention
I then ridicule such mularkey for what it is, unsubstantiated ' gibberish '.

You want to defend this BS then go to it, otherwise put up or shut up! :-)

The same goes for Skeptikal. Here is a British 'method' of slandering the non-obedient Russians. In terms of dishonesty, it is about the same as the US/EU/Ukrainian version of the MH17 tragedy:
"The Holes in the Official Skripal Story," by Craig MURRAY:

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/07/14/holes-in-official-skripal-story.html

"The nub of the British government's approach has been the shocking willingness of the corporate and state media to parrot repeatedly the lie that the nerve agent was Russian made, even after Porton Down said they could not tell where it was made and the OPCW confirmed that finding. In fact, while the Soviet Union did develop the "novichok" class of nerve agents, the programme involved scientists from all over the Soviet Union, especially Ukraine, Armenia and Georgia, as I myself learnt when I visited the newly decommissioned Nukus testing facility in Uzbekistan in 2002."

[Sep 23, 2018] ClubOrlov Great, Britain!

Notable quotes:
"... The fake story that May has been pushing is that it is "highly likely" that the Kremlin ordered a hit on the former British spy Sergei Skripal (and his daughter) using a "Russian-made" chemical weapon called "Novichok." In turn, from what we already knew, it is highly likely that this story is a complete and utter fake. ..."
Sep 06, 2018 | cluborlov.blogspot.com

The Brits have just provided my previous article, The Truthers and The Fakers, with a tidy little case study: the very next day after I published it Theresa May's government stepped into its role as one of the world's premier Fakers and unleashed the next installment of fake news on the Skripal poisoning. We can use this as training material in learning how to spot and discard fakes.

The fake story that May has been pushing is that it is "highly likely" that the Kremlin ordered a hit on the former British spy Sergei Skripal (and his daughter) using a "Russian-made" chemical weapon called "Novichok." In turn, from what we already knew, it is highly likely that this story is a complete and utter fake. As I explained in the previous article, it is not our job to establish what really happened. We would be unable to do so with any degree of certainty without gaining access to state secrets. But we don't need to; all we need to do is establish with a reasonable degree of certainty that the British government's story is a foolishly, incompetently concocted fabrication. Doing so will then allow us to properly classify the British press, which repeats this nonsense as fact, and the British public, which accepts it unquestioningly at face value. Then we can drop the erroneous appellation "great" -- because great nations don't act so stupidly

[Sep 22, 2018] Transphobic Swedish Professor May Lose Job After Noting Biological Differences Between Sexes

Looks like Lysenkoism got a second life in the West...
Sep 22, 2018 | theduran.com

A university professor in Sweden is under investigation after he said that there are fundamental differences between men and women which are "biologically founded" Published

1 day ago

on

September 21, 2018 By

Tyler Durden 1,539 Views ,

[Sep 22, 2018] How Russian Sanctions Are Helping Putin Achieve His Most Desired Goal

Sep 22, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

dirty fingernails , 47 seconds ago

Russia now awaits possible new sanctions as a result of its involvement in the United States election and as a result of the potential nerve agent attack in England.

Who the **** writes this ****? Who believes those baldfaced lies?

Hass C. , 49 minutes ago

A little glimpse into how much influence Putin has on his own economy. Which is not much. He is trying hard to remove Russia's testicles from the vice of US control but this is a slow process as the economy and capital market are totally open, except for military production which is under his own control and pretty much protected from the whims of markets.

The steady increase of sanctions has the objective of forcing Putin's hand into lashing out and trying a dirigistic neo-stalinist approach, but this would cut Russia from foreign technology and capital, make the best work force fly abroad, resulting in final implosion.

Whether Russia survives as an industrial economy till US and the dollar loses its power over it is anybody's guess. The more Russia is weakened at that time, the more likely China will flood it with its love.

Ms No , 51 minutes ago

The thing with Putin is that he is a great leader and Patriot. He wishes us no harm and would like to be our friends (the western population); however, Putin isn't motivated by saving the world, your nation or you personally. His loyalty is to his people and their future.

All actions that Putin has taken that ended up saving your *** were simply a benefit gained by the happenstance of what benefits us benefitting him.

Putin will save his own (hopefully) but you have to save yourself. Remember that.

LaugherNYC , 8 minutes ago

If Putin wants to be friends with the West, then why did he reverse the course of openness to the EU and NATO, the trend towards normalization, and turn hard right into an ultra-nationalist despot, starting to spout the diseased philosophy of Ilyin, becoming a xenophobic tin pot kleptocrat, like some African warlord, funneling funds and assets offshore through shell companies and his buddies?

It will be interesting to see what happens when/if there is a real global investigation of Putin's offshored assets, and an expose of how he has plundered his country. He will be the very last to repatriate - nor should we want him to be forced into it. If you close his escape hatch, Vlad will be forced to live up to his rhetoric, which is very Rapture-esque, very nuclear nightmare, very Judgement Day Armageddon

Anonymous IX , 1 hour ago

Where's Billy Browder? What's next on his agenda? Billy, btw, the next time you allow anyone to film you, have your handlers minimize the obvious drug and/or electronic mind control over you a little earlier. You seem to "wake up" an awful lot...you know...where your head snaps up like you didn't realize something...or you're "waking up" from something. Just a helpful hint. You did so chronically throughout the Magnitsky film. Here's what a mind looks like on "mind control." Don't look for eggs in a frying pan.

Ms No , 50 minutes ago

So mind control looks something like sleep apnea?

Savvy , 1 hour ago

the desire to keep assets out of the reach of the United States Treasury

Can you say 'capital flight'? I knew you could. Not a country in the world is going to trust the US with a grain of salt.

Well done Trump and your $864billon/month deficit spending.

Ms No , 49 minutes ago

We really should stop referring to it as the US treasury. Its something else.

opport.knocks , 3 minutes ago

Lendery?

Cashlaudratomat?

Ponzi-prefecture?

The US Usury?

hooligan2009 , 1 hour ago

according to polls aired by tv station "euro news", putin's ratings are down 10% because he wants to raise the retirement ages of men to 65 from 60 (male life expectancy is 66) and womens retirement age from 55 to 60 (womens life expectancy is 71).

i guess this is proof that sanctions are working. putin has to raise the retirement age and russians die 12-15 years earlier than those in the west.

oh, the humanity!

sanctions work: they hurt the bottom 50%, not those better off.

Balance-Sheet , 58 minutes ago

Good to note this and it appears to be correct. Male life expectancy is 65/66 on average so many will die reaching for their first tiny pension check. I do not know why Putin simply does not seek to save money by ordering people to be shot at 65 as a humane measure. Russia has shot 10s of millions over the past 100 years so this will maintain a tradition.

I am interested in your remark on Putin's popularity- he appears to be slipping into megalomania also typical of Russian leaders so perhaps he will be removed. Raising the retirement age in Russia is recklessly stupid from a political perspective in an impoverished country established as Earth's largest resource treasure house.

Ms No , 44 minutes ago

War and sanctions are expensive. Through this evil the world is impoverished. Zionist fiat currency is also crushingly expensive. We would be exceedingly wealthy without all of this. A whole different world could exist.

That probably wont happen until the next age (a golden age) though because people now are inherently stupid and lack any connection. Sticking their appendenges in everything and sinking completely in dense materialism is more important.

Hass C. , 39 minutes ago

Can you specify why you say he "appears to be slipping into megalomania"? Been observing him for years and his megalomania index seems stable to me.

Also, Russian demography makes raising the retirement age necessary, they say. Their birth rate is increasing but so does life expectancy.

opport.knocks , 1 minute ago

He will not be able to run for re-election so now is the time to implement necessary but unpopular reforms.

Shemp 4 Victory , 38 minutes ago

according to polls aired by tv station "euro news"

Well, if "euro news" said, then so it is. Free European press can't lie.

hooligan2009 , 28 minutes ago

haha.. yes.. i watched it for ten minutes, so the same four headlines scrolled through in a cycle three times in those ten minutes. pope, a survivor underneath a boat after two days in lake victoria, blunt brexit and putins popularity.

nothing approcahing any quality whatsoever. i was just making sure the other side of the house hadn't got past "stupid"!!!

123dobryden , 1 hour ago

Rossia. Davaj

notfeelinthebern , 1 hour ago

Yeah, he's giving the west the proverbial finger. Instead of creating a bridge to trade and friendship, the west is doing nothing but trying to destroy an imaginary enemy.

Matteo S. , 1 hour ago

It is not imaginary from the anglo-saxon empire's point of view.

The anglo-saxon empire has been playing this game for more than 3 centuries.

It first constantly attacked France until it definitely emasculated it with Napoleon's downfall.

Then it immediately went to the jugular of Russia. And on this occasion was formulated Mackinder's gropolitics principles.

Then it went for Germany.

Then in again against USSR/Russia.

This is not due to imagination. This is a deliberate and structural way to interact with the rest of the world. The anglo-saxon empire hates competition and tries to destroy any potential competitor instead of agreeing to cooperate with peers.

Ms No , 42 minutes ago

The Anglo Saxon empire was occupied by Zionist money lending. They controlled the British empire. A lot of those blueblood royal were theirs to begin with also. They were also the bankers of Rome.

Matteo S. , 27 minutes ago

Forget your fantasies about the Catholic Church and the pope.

It is Protestants who have always dominated the anglo-saxon empire. Protestants from Britain but also from Netherlands, Germany, France, who allied with the English and Scot Protestants to build their mammonite empire.

And for one Rothschild family, you had the Astors, Vanderbilt's, Rockefellers, Carnegie's, Morgans, Fords, ... etc, none of which were jewish.

The Zionists are just the tail of the anglo-saxon dog.

justdues , 1 hour ago

"Russia now awaits possible new sanctions as a result of it,s ALLEGED involvement in the United States election and as a result of the ALLEGED nerve agent attack in England . FIFTylers

hooligan2009 , 1 hour ago

quite right. no trial, no evidence and harsh sentences/convictions via trade embargoes.

russia offered reciprocation so it could try Browder. the west said no, invented crimes culminating in a Magnitsy act.

if individuals in Europe, the UK or the US were convicted and imprisoned without trial governments in those places would be thrown out on their ear.

as it is, western governments can bring the entire planet to the brink of war, based on their political opinions - with no evidence, no trial and no opportunity to argue a case for a defence of charges.

JibjeResearch , 1 hour ago

lolz ahaha.... a bad choice..., any fiat is a bad choice...

Go phy.gold or cryptos (BTC, ETH, XTZ), phy.silver is good too...

An Shrubbery , 40 minutes ago

Cryptosporidiosis are no different than fiat, maybe even a little worse. They are NOT anonymous, and are becoming less and less so and eventually will be co-opted by deep state operatives such as googoyle, facefuck, Twatter, amazog, etc. for the deep state. There is an absolute record of your every transaction in the blockchain.

It's just a matter of time. There will be a crypto that we're all forced to use in the near future, and big brother will have absolute control of it.

my new username , 1 hour ago

This has zero impact on working class Americans. It only affects liberals and rich people.

DEDA CVETKO , 1 hour ago

Everything has impact on everything else. We are all, in some bizarre ways, interconnected. Deripaska (pictured above) has a virtual global monopoly on aluminum trade. Guess who uses aluminum? You guessed it: people like you and I. The airplane industry. Consumer industry. The military. Medical equipment industry. Construction industry. Food industry. Everyone!

There is no such thing as isolationism anymore. It wasn't possible even during Warren Harding's presidency, let alone now. This deranged notion that Donald Trump will somehow insulate us all from the effects of his aggressive overseas posturing is deranged beyond description.

[Sep 22, 2018] Once the rape of Russia by the west, including many American businessmen, that Yeltsin allowed was stopped (mostly by Putin), life has gradually gotten better for the average Russian

Notable quotes:
"... It is interesting that all the "draconian" election, etc. laws recently put into practice in Russia have to do with foreigners attempted misusing and lying about Russia's elections for "western" advantage. By now we should all know how the Western media will lie in every way to make it appear that their traitorous lackeys being used to destroy some other nation are the true "patriots" of that nation, even when they are not even citizens of it. ..."
Sep 22, 2018 | www.henrymakow.com

John G said (January 4, 2013):

At the time that Putin was in the KGB, had it not become a de facto ethnic Russian organization? Would not Putin's origins have been established prior to his joining?

You ask when Putin has stood up to the 'West'. It was Medvedev as President who was duped over Libya through the UN, not having been aware of the subtle shift in US policy from sabre-rattling and shock-and-awe to more discretely aiding 'rebels' to overthrow 'tyrants' under the guise of promoting the protection of civilians through no-fly zones etc. (Same policy, different tactics).

The response over Russia to Georgia's attack on S. Ossetia was entirely unequivocal and it remains to be seen how Putin, now back in the Presidential driving seat plays Syria and Iran.

Tony B said (January 4, 2013):

Of course, I can't know for certain but this article to me has the now familiar odor of disinformation to a very high degree. Putin is treated as a God by the majority of the Russian people but he is daily demonized by the "West." The suffering of the Russian people after the collapse of the USSR was due to the weakling and drunk Yeltsin. Once the rape of Russia by the west, including many American "businessmen," that Yeltsin allowed was stopped (mostly by Putin), life has gradually gotten better for the average Russian.

It is interesting that all the "draconian" election, etc. laws recently put into practice in Russia have to do with foreigners attempted misusing and lying about Russia's elections for "western" advantage. By now we should all know how the Western media will lie in every way to make it appear that their traitorous lackeys being used to destroy some other nation are the true "patriots" of that nation, even when they are not even citizens of it.

In my lifetime no one on earth, other than Putin, has stood up to the Rothschild empire, more or less telling them that if they really think they own Russia's oil business to try and get it. Would that American presidents would be such "Jews!"

[Sep 22, 2018] Has Russia given up on the West? In a word -- Yes, Yes and Yes.

Russia is too weak to standup to collective West which is hell-bent on its partitioning. It need deft maneuvers to gain some economic strength.
Sep 22, 2018 | www.unz.com

Isabella , says: September 21, 2018 at 10:52 am GMT

Has Russia given up on the West? In a word -- Yes, Yes and Yes.

You can find this from a few sources. The Editor -- in -- Chief of RT and Sputnik News, Marguerite Simonyan, wrote an article not that long ago, addressed directly to you. To The "West". To the Anglo Fascist Empire. To America. "We came to you in friendship and admiration" she said, in effect, "and you have done nothing but abuse us, mock us, spit on us Well, to hell with you. We used to admire you. Now we dont. We used to want to be like you. Now, we dont".

In a speech also, although I'm sorry I cannot remember which one, President Putin also said, in effect "we made every effort to be friends. We thought the Cold War 1 was due to ideology -- to Communism. When that was dismantled and dropped by Russia, we thought you would accept our outstretched hand of friendship. To quote a Russian poem , we believed you "would to us the sword present" But you didn't. You abused our country, destroyed our industries, our pride, even, for a short while, our sovereignty. [During the 1990's "Shock and Awe" economic destruction of Russia].

We were prepared to forgive this and still try and work with you, but you have done nothing but tell lies about us, abuse us, pile on sanctions, and steal our properties. Now, we have done. We have made our minds up, and there is no going back. We will do what we need to make our country grow, to be strong and happy. You can do what you want. Frankly, we dont care any more".

Once a few years back, in a small Russian town, an enterprising garage sold door mats with the American flag on them, for people to wipe their feet. They sold out in hours. However, it was a momentary rage and Russians are very decent, kindly people. I think they have not repeated that moment of anger.

But if you watch Vesti English -- excerpts are on YouTube -- watch "60 minutes", watch Vecher "or Evening" excerpts, watch Kislyak, the popular presenters. See how they talk to Russia in that critical hour after workers get home and have diner and watch an evening hour of current affairs.

They show every lie, every manipulation, every example of American aggression, and they laugh at every American stupidity.

They are nice people, and if you go there as an American citizen, they will be kind to you. But when it comes to nations, and international trust -- they've had it with you. They've turned their back. And you brought it on yourselves. As the Russian saying goes "as you return my hand extended to you, so will I return your action"

Sally Snyder , says: September 21, 2018 at 11:44 am GMT
As shown in this article, there is a little-discussed unintended consequence of the anti-Russia sanctions that could significantly impact some U.S. consumers:

https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/08/another-unintended-consequence-of.html

As is typical in Washington, there are a wide range of unanticipated consequences directly connected to its geopolitical maneuvering.

Sir Launcelot Canning , says: September 21, 2018 at 12:17 pm GMT
It appears that Putin is impotent to stand up to the Brussels -- Washington D.C. -- Jerusalem -- Berlin Axis of Evil. Could that be construed as evidence that the Axis is such a formidable iron fortress that even a tough guy like Putin can't put a dent in it?

If Russia and China don't collaborate soon, then the Axis will have complete, heavy handed global domination, replete with policies and infrastructure to make certain it is perpetually unchallenged.

Seems to me that I read something about this in the Bible.

anonymous , [340] Disclaimer says: September 21, 2018 at 12:25 pm GMT

@Isabella Has Russia given up on the West? In a word - Yes, Yes and Yes.

You can find this from a few sources. The Editor - in - Chief of RT and Sputnik News, Marguerite Simonyan, wrote an article not that long ago, addressed directly to you. To The "West". To the Anglo Fascist Empire. To America. "We came to you in friendship and admiration" she said, in effect, "and you have done nothing but abuse us, mock us, spit on us Well, to hell with you. We used to admire you. Now we dont. We used to want to be like you. Now, we dont".

In a speech also, although I'm sorry I cannot remember which one, President Putin also said, in effect "we made every effort to be friends. We thought the Cold War 1 was due to ideology - to Communism. When that was dismantled and dropped by Russia, we thought you would accept our outstretched hand of friendship. To quote a Russian poem , we believed you "would to us the sword present" But you didn't. You abused our country, destroyed our industries, our pride, even, for a short while, our sovereignty. [During the 1990's "Shock and Awe" economic destruction of Russia].

We were prepared to forgive this and still try and work with you, but you have done nothing but tell lies about us, abuse us, pile on sanctions, and steal our properties. Now, we have done. We have made our minds up, and there is no going back. We will do what we need to make our country grow, to be strong and happy. You can do what you want. Frankly, we dont care any more".

Once a few years back, in a small Russian town, an enterprising garage sold door mats with the American flag on them, for people to wipe their feet. They sold out in hours. However, it was a momentary rage and Russians are very decent, kindly people. I think they have not repeated that moment of anger.
But if you watch Vesti English - excerpts are on YouTube - watch "60 minutes", watch Vecher "or Evening" excerpts, watch Kislyak, the popular presenters. See how they talk to Russia in that critical hour after workers get home and have diner and watch an evening hour of current affairs. They show every lie, every manipulation, every example of American aggression, and they laugh at every American stupidity.
They are nice people, and if you go there as an American citizen, they will be kind to you. But when it comes to nations, and international trust - they've had it with you. They've turned their back. And you brought it on yourselves. As the Russian saying goes "as you return my hand extended to you, so will I return your action" "They are nice people, and if you go there as an American citizen, they will be kind to you."

If what you're saying about the Russian people is true -- and I've no reason to dispute it -- then it may have something to do with their years under Communist rule. The corruption, the lies, the suppression of dissidence, and all the other harm done to them by their rulers ingrained a healthy distrust of government and an insight that the subjects of such a system can still be good people.

Americans aren't there yet. Most of us still find it not only acceptable for the neighbor kid to die serving Uncle Sam, but something to celebrate as his name goes up on another green sign along a potholed bridge. This national inclination to identify with one's rulers, a Washington Syndrome, is pumped into our eyes and ears from birth. Even on this relatively dissident website, many become invested in the Red v Blue, whose Beltway members when offstage attend each other's weddings and hold each other up above the rule of law.

Pundits like Mr. Buchanan (especially when writing about international affairs) are Beltloops who help to keep the bleating within acceptable channels. Read this column again, and note every "we/us/our" that references Washington. Is pronoun propaganda like that as prevalent in Russia or, for that matter, anywhere else outside "USA!"?

HallParvey , says: September 21, 2018 at 4:01 pm GMT
@KenH Putin is like a battered wife who keeps making excuses for the abuser. Putin's great at going through the motions with military parades and boasts about new weapons systems then turns the other cheek and endlessly whines about violations of international law after every deliberate provocation.

I'm beginning to think Putin is the wrong man to lead Russia because his policy of deference, good will and steadfast refusal to retaliate in the face of endless insults and acts of aggression by (((America))) and Israel is making matters worse, not better, for Russia. I don't know what more he needs to prove that America is only playing him for a fool, doesn't respect him and is only teasing him with the prospect of a partnership so he remains tentative.

It's one thing to exercise restraint but it's quite another to be so suicidal in your delusions of eventual Western acceptance that it's irreparably harming Russian interests.

There needs to be a countervailing power to check Zio-American-Israeli aggression but Putin is not up to the task. I never thought I'd wax nostalgic for the old Soviet Union, but here I am. So Putin must react to every provocation, immediately.
No.
He should wait and accept the provocations, just as he has, and at the same time plan his own provocations.
If you're the prey in a relationship, you react to stimulus. If you're the predator, you create the stimulus. Better to be the predator.
The MSM should be ignored since they will blame Putin, no matter what. And, what difference does that make in Russia.

HallParvey , says: September 21, 2018 at 4:09 pm GMT
@Sir Launcelot Canning It appears that Putin is impotent to stand up to the Brussels - Washington D.C. - Jerusalem - Berlin Axis of Evil. Could that be construed as evidence that the Axis is such a formidable iron fortress that even a tough guy like Putin can't put a dent in it?

If Russia and China don't collaborate soon, then the Axis will have complete, heavy handed global domination, replete with policies and infrastructure to make certain it is perpetually unchallenged.

Seems to me that I read something about this in the Bible.

It appears that Putin is impotent to stand up to the Brussels – Washington D.C. – Jerusalem – Berlin Axis of Evil. Could that be construed as evidence that the Axis is such a formidable iron fortress that even a tough guy like Putin can't put a dent in it?

Appearances can be deceiving.

Remember the Wizard of Oz was just a flim flam man behind a curtain.
Axis control is actually in London. Has been for several hundred years.

seeing-thru , says: September 21, 2018 at 5:42 pm GMT
No, Russia and Russians have not given up on USA and perhaps never will. Don't underestimate American soft power – the power of McDonalds, Hollywood, music, fashion, Ivy League prestige, etc. 90% of East Europeans will give an arm and a leg to get to America and so will perhaps 30% of Russians. Remember, they dismantled a world power state that they had primarily to become a part of the "West", to be like America and Americans. Where do their rich send their sons and daughters to study? Where do they stash their wealth? What language do they wish to learn and acquire? And when they accomplish something, whether a sports medal or a new scientific breakthrough or a new weapon, whose respect and admiration do they desperately seek? Read their media (RT and Sputnik) carefully and you will find plenty of desperation there, from silly chest-thumping to get Western attention to well-argued pleas for friendship. Their whole media is full of "Look Ma, we can do it too, just like the Yanks".

And don't underestimate American hard power as well. Behind Putin's perpetual references to "Our American partners, our Western partners" lies a realistic understanding of military realities. His fans may talk of his strategic geopolitical skills, the skills of a chess grandmaster. The man himself never boasts as the complicated and powerful American geopolitical maneuvers keep the man perpetually puzzled. The man may be clever, but he is heading an economically and politically weak state. Yes, Russian nationalism is very much alive; so is Russia's desire to be a part of the West, even as a junior partner.

Cyrano , says: September 21, 2018 at 7:01 pm GMT
The US policy towards Russia can be summed up by paraphrasing that famous line from Cool Hand Luke: What we have here is failure to capitulate. US thought that Russia is going to stay down. It took them what – less than 10 years under that buffoon Yeltsin to realize with whom they are dealing in the west and that it's time to get up and fight again.

It cracks me up when they say that the cold war was about the clash of ideologies. Maybe communism can still qualify as an ideology, but how does creatively ripping off someone out of their money qualify as an "ideology"?

There is always going to be a rivalry between US and Russia – regardless of the "ideologies". It never was about communism, it was about eliminating competition and then inventing a new one – China, because they just didn't see it coming. That's how clueless they are. They though that China is going to be just a giant Sri Lanka – source of cheap labor, a sweat shop for the smart folks in the west. Because, let's face it – who has ever gotten rich by labor alone – right?

seeing-thru , says: September 22, 2018 at 12:51 am GMT
@Sir Launcelot Canning And you know all of this how? Maybe because you wish it were so? You sound so sure of yourself, you must live in downtown Moscow. And I play short stop for the White Sox. Nope, I don't know the future, but I do know present reality and facts. Russia's GDP is 6.78% America's – check it out for yourself. Eastern Europeans line-up, hats in hand, to get immigration to the US – check out the US immigration statistics. Russia desire to be "partners" with the west is right out of Putin and Lavrov speeches, not my imagination. Check out their speeches on RT and Sputnik, which are Russian media BTW.

Putin may be a clever fellow, but he is leading a very weak state. And it shows in several ways. In his perpetual dithering; in his constant pleas and entreaties to the west to please show us some respect and kindness; and in his desperate boasts about non-existent weapons.

American policy, especially now under Trump, is diabolically clever and powerful in a Machiavellian way. Trump is tightening his grip over both China and Russia – and winning IMHO. See China caving in under sanctions? If you don't, you need to read the news a little more carefully. Analyze the items and tariff rates that the two sides have imposed on each other, they tell their own story.

Should we like the way the world is heading? Of course not. Should we support one side or the other? Of course not. They are all a bunch of power-mad, ruthless tyrants and other things besides, which I hesitate to say out of a sense of politeness. Should we think more, research more, and analyze more? Of course, we must. The last flicker of hope is that people come to understand the world a little better and try to nudge it towards kinder, more ethical and more moral directions. Now that is a pipe dream for you and me!

byrresheim , says: September 22, 2018 at 3:26 am GMT
@Peter Akuleyev Russia's ancient frontiers

Right, ancient frontiers that go all the way back to the 17th century, or in some cases (like Crimea or the Baltics ) the 18th. Russians are masters at getting foreign dupes to believe the propaganda. China has ancient frontiers, Iran has ancient frontiers, even France has ancient frontiers. Russia as a state is about two centuries older than the United States. It is an upstart country masquerading as an ancient civilization. True.
Unfortunately, most of our present-day conflicts are a lot more transparent to people with a minimum of historical knowledge, and, equally unfortunately, even that minimum is sorrowfully rare.

[Sep 21, 2018] One party state: Trump's 'Opposition' Supports All His Evil Agendas While Attacking Fake Nonsence by Caitlin Johnstone

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... If the so-called "Resistance" to Trump was ever actually interested in opposing this administration in any meaningful way, this would be the top trending news story in America for days, like how "bombshell" revelations pertaining to the made-up Russiagate narrative trend for days. Spoiler alert: it isn't, and it won't be. ..."
"... The US Senate has just passed Trump's mammoth military spending increase by a landslide 92–8 vote . The eight senators who voted "nay"? Seven Republicans, and Independent Bernie Sanders. Every single Democrat supported the most bloated war budget since the height of the Iraq war . Rather than doing everything they can to weaken the potential damage that can be done by a president they've been assuring us is a dangerous hybrid of equal parts Benedict Arnold and Adolf Hitler, they've been actively increasing his power as Commander-in-Chief of the most powerful military force the world has ever seen. ..."
"... They're on the same team, wearing different uniforms. ..."
"... US politics is pretty much the same; two mainstream parties owned by the same political class, engaged in a staged bidding war for votes to give the illusion of competition. ..."
"... In reality, the US political system is like the unplugged video game remote that kids give their baby brother so he stops whining that he wants a turn to play. No matter who they vote for they get an Orwellian warmongering government which exists solely to advance the agendas of a plutocratic class which has no loyalties to any nation; the only difference is sometimes that government is pretending to care about women and minorities and sometimes it's pretending to care about white men. In reality, all the jewelers work for the same plutocrat, and that video game remote won't impact the outcome of the game no matter how many buttons you push. ..."
"... The only way to effect real change is to stop playing along with the rigged system and start waking people up to the lies. As long as Americans believe that the mass media are telling them the truth about their country and their partisan votes are going somewhere useful, the populace whose numbers should give it immense influence is nullified and sedated into a passive ride toward war, ecocide and oppression. ..."
"... Reprinted with author's permission from Medium.com . ..."
"... Support Ms. Johnstone's work on Patreon or Paypal ..."
Sep 21, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

A new article from the Wall Street Journal reports that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo lied to congress about the measures Saudi Arabia is taking to minimize the civilian casualties in its catastrophic war on Yemen, and that he did so in order to secure two billion dollars for war profiteers.

This is about as depraved as anything you could possibly imagine. US-made bombs have been conclusively tied to civilian deaths in a war which has caused the single worst humanitarian crisis on earth, a crisis which sees scores of Yemeni children dying every single day and has placed five million children at risk of death by starvation in a nation where families are now eating leaves to survive . CIA veteran Bruce Riedel once said that "if the United States of America and the United Kingdom tonight told King Salman that this war has to end, it would end tomorrow, because the Royal Saudi Airforce cannot operate without American and British support." Nobody other than war plutocrats benefits from the US assisting Saudi Arabia in its monstrous crimes against humanity, and yet Pompeo chose to override his own expert advisors on the matter for fear of hurting the income of those very war plutocrats.

If the so-called "Resistance" to Trump was ever actually interested in opposing this administration in any meaningful way, this would be the top trending news story in America for days, like how "bombshell" revelations pertaining to the made-up Russiagate narrative trend for days. Spoiler alert: it isn't, and it won't be.

It would be so very, very easy for Democratic party leaders and Democrat-aligned media to hurt this administration at the highest level and cause irreparable political damage based on this story. All they'd have to do is give it the same blanket coverage they've given the stories about Michael Flynn, George Papadopoulos and Paul Manafort which end up leading nowhere remotely near impeachment or proof of collusion with the Russian government. The footage of the starving children is right there, ready to be aired to pluck at the heart strings of rank-and-file Americans day after day until Republicans have lost all hope of victory in the midterms and in 2020; all they'd have to do is use it. But they don't. And they won't.

The US Senate has just passed Trump's mammoth military spending increase by a landslide 92–8 vote . The eight senators who voted "nay"? Seven Republicans, and Independent Bernie Sanders. Every single Democrat supported the most bloated war budget since the height of the Iraq war . Rather than doing everything they can to weaken the potential damage that can be done by a president they've been assuring us is a dangerous hybrid of equal parts Benedict Arnold and Adolf Hitler, they've been actively increasing his power as Commander-in-Chief of the most powerful military force the world has ever seen.

The reason for this is very simple: President Trump's ostensible political opposition does not oppose President Trump. They're on the same team, wearing different uniforms. This is the reason they attack him on Russian collusion accusations which the brighter bulbs among them know full well will never be proven and have no basis in reality. They don't stand up to Trump because, as Julian Assange once said , they are Trump.

In John Steinbeck's The Pearl, there are jewelry buyers set up around a fishing community which are all owned by the same plutocrat, but they all pretend to be in competition with one another. When the story's protagonist discovers an enormous and valuable pearl and goes to sell it, they all gather round and individually bid far less than it is worth in order to trick him into giving it away for almost nothing. US politics is pretty much the same; two mainstream parties owned by the same political class, engaged in a staged bidding war for votes to give the illusion of competition.

In reality, the US political system is like the unplugged video game remote that kids give their baby brother so he stops whining that he wants a turn to play. No matter who they vote for they get an Orwellian warmongering government which exists solely to advance the agendas of a plutocratic class which has no loyalties to any nation; the only difference is sometimes that government is pretending to care about women and minorities and sometimes it's pretending to care about white men. In reality, all the jewelers work for the same plutocrat, and that video game remote won't impact the outcome of the game no matter how many buttons you push.

The only way to effect real change is to stop playing along with the rigged system and start waking people up to the lies. As long as Americans believe that the mass media are telling them the truth about their country and their partisan votes are going somewhere useful, the populace whose numbers should give it immense influence is nullified and sedated into a passive ride toward war, ecocide and oppression.

If enough of us keep throwing sand in the gears of the lie factory, we can wake the masses up from the oligarchic lullaby they're being sung. And then maybe we'll be big enough to have a shot at grabbing one of the real video game controllers.

Reprinted with author's permission from Medium.com .

Support Ms. Johnstone's work on Patreon or Paypal

[Sep 21, 2018] One party state: Trump's 'Opposition' Supports All His Evil Agendas While Attacking Fake Nonsence by Caitlin Johnstone

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... If the so-called "Resistance" to Trump was ever actually interested in opposing this administration in any meaningful way, this would be the top trending news story in America for days, like how "bombshell" revelations pertaining to the made-up Russiagate narrative trend for days. Spoiler alert: it isn't, and it won't be. ..."
"... The US Senate has just passed Trump's mammoth military spending increase by a landslide 92–8 vote . The eight senators who voted "nay"? Seven Republicans, and Independent Bernie Sanders. Every single Democrat supported the most bloated war budget since the height of the Iraq war . Rather than doing everything they can to weaken the potential damage that can be done by a president they've been assuring us is a dangerous hybrid of equal parts Benedict Arnold and Adolf Hitler, they've been actively increasing his power as Commander-in-Chief of the most powerful military force the world has ever seen. ..."
"... They're on the same team, wearing different uniforms. ..."
"... US politics is pretty much the same; two mainstream parties owned by the same political class, engaged in a staged bidding war for votes to give the illusion of competition. ..."
"... In reality, the US political system is like the unplugged video game remote that kids give their baby brother so he stops whining that he wants a turn to play. No matter who they vote for they get an Orwellian warmongering government which exists solely to advance the agendas of a plutocratic class which has no loyalties to any nation; the only difference is sometimes that government is pretending to care about women and minorities and sometimes it's pretending to care about white men. In reality, all the jewelers work for the same plutocrat, and that video game remote won't impact the outcome of the game no matter how many buttons you push. ..."
"... The only way to effect real change is to stop playing along with the rigged system and start waking people up to the lies. As long as Americans believe that the mass media are telling them the truth about their country and their partisan votes are going somewhere useful, the populace whose numbers should give it immense influence is nullified and sedated into a passive ride toward war, ecocide and oppression. ..."
"... Reprinted with author's permission from Medium.com . ..."
"... Support Ms. Johnstone's work on Patreon or Paypal ..."
Sep 21, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

A new article from the Wall Street Journal reports that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo lied to congress about the measures Saudi Arabia is taking to minimize the civilian casualties in its catastrophic war on Yemen, and that he did so in order to secure two billion dollars for war profiteers.

This is about as depraved as anything you could possibly imagine. US-made bombs have been conclusively tied to civilian deaths in a war which has caused the single worst humanitarian crisis on earth, a crisis which sees scores of Yemeni children dying every single day and has placed five million children at risk of death by starvation in a nation where families are now eating leaves to survive . CIA veteran Bruce Riedel once said that "if the United States of America and the United Kingdom tonight told King Salman that this war has to end, it would end tomorrow, because the Royal Saudi Airforce cannot operate without American and British support." Nobody other than war plutocrats benefits from the US assisting Saudi Arabia in its monstrous crimes against humanity, and yet Pompeo chose to override his own expert advisors on the matter for fear of hurting the income of those very war plutocrats.

If the so-called "Resistance" to Trump was ever actually interested in opposing this administration in any meaningful way, this would be the top trending news story in America for days, like how "bombshell" revelations pertaining to the made-up Russiagate narrative trend for days. Spoiler alert: it isn't, and it won't be.

It would be so very, very easy for Democratic party leaders and Democrat-aligned media to hurt this administration at the highest level and cause irreparable political damage based on this story. All they'd have to do is give it the same blanket coverage they've given the stories about Michael Flynn, George Papadopoulos and Paul Manafort which end up leading nowhere remotely near impeachment or proof of collusion with the Russian government. The footage of the starving children is right there, ready to be aired to pluck at the heart strings of rank-and-file Americans day after day until Republicans have lost all hope of victory in the midterms and in 2020; all they'd have to do is use it. But they don't. And they won't.

The US Senate has just passed Trump's mammoth military spending increase by a landslide 92–8 vote . The eight senators who voted "nay"? Seven Republicans, and Independent Bernie Sanders. Every single Democrat supported the most bloated war budget since the height of the Iraq war . Rather than doing everything they can to weaken the potential damage that can be done by a president they've been assuring us is a dangerous hybrid of equal parts Benedict Arnold and Adolf Hitler, they've been actively increasing his power as Commander-in-Chief of the most powerful military force the world has ever seen.

The reason for this is very simple: President Trump's ostensible political opposition does not oppose President Trump. They're on the same team, wearing different uniforms. This is the reason they attack him on Russian collusion accusations which the brighter bulbs among them know full well will never be proven and have no basis in reality. They don't stand up to Trump because, as Julian Assange once said , they are Trump.

In John Steinbeck's The Pearl, there are jewelry buyers set up around a fishing community which are all owned by the same plutocrat, but they all pretend to be in competition with one another. When the story's protagonist discovers an enormous and valuable pearl and goes to sell it, they all gather round and individually bid far less than it is worth in order to trick him into giving it away for almost nothing. US politics is pretty much the same; two mainstream parties owned by the same political class, engaged in a staged bidding war for votes to give the illusion of competition.

In reality, the US political system is like the unplugged video game remote that kids give their baby brother so he stops whining that he wants a turn to play. No matter who they vote for they get an Orwellian warmongering government which exists solely to advance the agendas of a plutocratic class which has no loyalties to any nation; the only difference is sometimes that government is pretending to care about women and minorities and sometimes it's pretending to care about white men. In reality, all the jewelers work for the same plutocrat, and that video game remote won't impact the outcome of the game no matter how many buttons you push.

The only way to effect real change is to stop playing along with the rigged system and start waking people up to the lies. As long as Americans believe that the mass media are telling them the truth about their country and their partisan votes are going somewhere useful, the populace whose numbers should give it immense influence is nullified and sedated into a passive ride toward war, ecocide and oppression.

If enough of us keep throwing sand in the gears of the lie factory, we can wake the masses up from the oligarchic lullaby they're being sung. And then maybe we'll be big enough to have a shot at grabbing one of the real video game controllers.

Reprinted with author's permission from Medium.com .

Support Ms. Johnstone's work on Patreon or Paypal

[Sep 21, 2018] HARPER BIBI'S COVERT WAR ON AMERICA

Sep 21, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

A little-known unit in the office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is conducting a covert surveillance, espionage and blackmail campaign against American citizens on a large scale. Not since the arrest of Jonathan Jay Pollard and the 1992 expose of the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai Brith's espionage against civil rights activists has the Israeli government been so actively involved in clandestine influence and espionage against American targets.

The unit is Israel's Ministry of Strategic Affairs, headed by director general Sima Vaknin-Gil. Vaknin-Gil reports personally to PM Netanyahu. Vaskin-Gil is a former Brigadier General in the IDF, who once was the Chief Israeli Military Censor. Her Ministry has spawned a "private" security firm, Israel Cyber Shield, headed by former Ministry official and Israeli National Police officer Eran Vasker. According to Haaretz, ICS is part of the spy network gathering dossiers on anti-Israel activists from the BDS movement in the United States.

The existence and mission of the Ministry first came to prominence in a four-part documentary produced by Al Jazeera, the Qatar-based international news organization. In 2016, Al Jazeera successfully infiltrated the American Zionist apparatus via James Anthony Kleinfeld, a British Jew who graduated from Oxford, spoke six languages and was well-versed in Middle East affairs. Kleinfeld infiltrated The Israel Project and other pro-Israel US organizations to such an extent that the leadership welcomed him with open arms and let down their guard about their collusion with the Israeli government, in targeting pro-Palestine organizations and other Israel critics.

Armed with a hidden video recorder, Kleinfeld obtained large amounts of material on the inner workings of TIP, AIPAC, the Israeli-American Council, the Maccabee Task Force and the Zionist Organization of America. He got "straight from the horse's mouth" that the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies is a spy agency working as an unregistered agent of the Israeli government. One TIP official confided to Kleinfeld that they had to be very careful, because they were "a different government working on foreign soil."

Earlier this year, Al Jazeera was scheduled to air four 50-minute documentary segments on Kleinfeld's findings. But, Al Jazeera was required to first inform the organizations that were to be featured in the documentary about the pending airing of the series. At that point, the full weight of the US Zionist apparatus along with the Israeli government came down on the Qatar government to press for censorship of the documentary. Suddenly, the US Zionist lobby, which had allied with Saudi Arabia and the UAE in denouncing Qatar as a terrorist state, backing Hamas and other jihadist organizations, reversed positions and gave their support to Qatar. The documentary has never aired.

But bootleg copies of the devastating documentary are clearly circulating around. Alain Gresh wrote a lengthy summary for The Nation on August 31, based on his having viewed the entire four-part series, courtesy of a friend in the Middle East. Sooner or later, the entire series will surface, despite the Qatar censorship decision. Excerpts have already been posted on some websites.

I like to think this is a story that is too big to bury for long.

[Sep 21, 2018] A Container Ship Is Sailing Through Russia's Arctic Passage for the First Time

Sep 21, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Another landmark for the "Northeastern passage" -- so far only tankers had made the trip Brendon Petersen 16 hours ago | 1,546 5 Explorers and navigators have long searched for a way to move ships through the Arctic Circle as find a faster way to move goods between the Atlantic and the Pacific without having to go around either Asia or South America. Groups of people hunted for the fabled Northwest passage through North America for decades. The problem, of course, is that the Arctic contains too much ice.

Over the past few years, however, ice levels in the Arctic have been hitting record lows thanks to climate change, and while its effects are almost universally negative, one benefit is opened northern sea routes. Over the past month, a container ship sailing from Eastern Russia is pioneering a new Arctic route by being the first such ship to cross the Arctic Ocean .

On August 23, the container ship Venta Maersk left the Russian port of Vladivostok and headed to Bremerhaven in Germany. Normally, a trip like that would take the Venta Maersk through the Suez Canal on a 34 day trip. Instead, the ship will sail through the sea north of Russia on a route that will only take 23 days.

Last week, the Venta Maersk passed through the Sannikov Strait, the narrowest and most hazardous part of its journey, and is expected to arrive in Germany by the end of the week. Once it arrives, it will become the first container ship to complete a successful route through the Arctic Circle.

[Sep 21, 2018] Trump blames OPEC for high oil prices, but his polices drive them up analyst to RT -- RT US News

Notable quotes:
"... "pushing for higher and higher oil prices" ..."
"... "they stop it," ..."
"... "protecting those countries." ..."
"... "The US economy is overstimulated by the Trump $4 trillion tax cuts for investors and businesses," ..."
"... "When Trump accuses Iran publicly, it gives the global oil speculators a reason to drive up the price," ..."
"... "He is whipping up his domestic base," ..."
"... "Trump [is] trying to blame foreigners of all kinds for economic situation in the US." ..."
"... "another factual misrepresentation," ..."
"... Like this story? Share it with a friend! ..."
Sep 21, 2018 | www.rt.com

Trump blames OPEC for high oil prices, but his polices drive them up – analyst to RT Published time: 21 Sep, 2018 21:03 Edited time: 21 Sep, 2018 21:28 Get short URL Trump blames OPEC for high oil prices, but his polices drive them up – analyst to RT FILE PHOTO. © Lucy Nicholson / Reuters The tax and trade policies of Donald Trump are, in fact, what have contributed to the surge in oil prices, a US economics professor told RT, adding that the US President's tough words to OPEC are a political stunt. On Thursday, Trump accused OPEC's Middle East producers of "pushing for higher and higher oil prices" and demanded "they stop it," adding that the US is "protecting those countries." Oil prices showed a mixed reaction to Trump's words. The Brent benchmark fell 43 cents to $78.97 per barrel, while the US Texas Intermediate grew by 9 cents to $71.21.

We protect the countries of the Middle East, they would not be safe for very long without us, and yet they continue to push for higher and higher oil prices! We will remember. The OPEC monopoly must get prices down now!

-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 20, 2018

OPEC does, in fact, control oil supply to a significant extent but that does not necessarily mean that it is also in full control of the oil prices, Jack Rasmus, a professor of Political Economy at St. Mary's College of California, told RT, adding that the policies pursued by the US president himself play a much bigger role in what happens to oil and gasoline prices in the US.

Read more © Nick Oxford Trump demands OPEC lower oil prices, claims US 'protects' Middle East countries

"The US economy is overstimulated by the Trump $4 trillion tax cuts for investors and businesses," Rasmus explained, adding that the rising inflation is one of the primary factors contributing to the oil price surge. Apart from that, Trump's trade war with China and even with the US allies in the West also drives up the prices, as businesses also have to raise them to adapt to the tariffs that both the US and its trading partners have imposed recently.

Trump's sanctions war on Iran also does not make the situation any better. The US sanctions, which are aimed at bringing Iran's oil exports to "zero," led to a decrease in Iran's oil sales, thus cutting the supply and driving the prices up. As if it was not enough, Trump's rhetoric only adds fuel to the fire, according to Rasmus.

"When Trump accuses Iran publicly, it gives the global oil speculators a reason to drive up the price," he told RT, adding that it is the "global speculators that are driving the short-term oil prices." "There is a connection between the speculators and Trump policies. When he makes those statements, it certainly does contribute to the oil prices rise," the analyst explained.

This rhetoric was more about winning voters' support ahead of the November mid-term elections than about really remedying the situation in the oil market, Rasmus says. "He is whipping up his domestic base," the analyst said, adding that "Trump [is] trying to blame foreigners of all kinds for economic situation in the US."

#US will find it difficult to cut #Iran 's oil exports completely as the oil market is already tight - Tehran https://t.co/T1oiFmGvOq pic.twitter.com/uaJO0Qn8gt

-- RT (@RT_com) September 15, 2018

Trump got elected on a platform of economic nationalism in particular, Rasmus said, adding that the president now sticks to that narrative and blames foreigners –be they immigrants or some foreign competitors– for the US' woes. However, this is "another factual misrepresentation," the analyst said.

As oil prices remain high, prices for gasoline in the US are growing. The average cost of gasoline has risen 60 percent from $1.87 per gallon in February 2016 to over $3 in September.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

[Sep 21, 2018] Israeli F-16s Scrambled to Cover Behind the Russian Il-20 Because They Had Been Painted by Syrian Air Defense Radars

Sep 21, 2018 | russia-insider.com

And so it starts. Russia must attack Israel, no -- she must obliterate it, Putin is "soft", the world is coming to an end, Zionists are in control of Kremlin, Russia turns another cheek. And on, and on, and on. The chorus of noble warriors with the evils of Zionism is getting louder with each day. Behind this hysteria surrounding the tragedy of Russian VKS' IL-20 somehow crucial and widely publicized news have been ignored completely. It is no surprise they were ignored by all kinds of "specialists" in strategy, politics, and armchair strategists (I am one myself). The news are pretty simple. Lt. General Alexander Ionov, former Deputy Chief of Main Staff of Russian Air Force from 1991 through 2001, stated to popular Russian media Zvezda that it is guaranteed that Syrian Air Defense forces were not provided with compatible IFF equipment and codes .

For those who don't know what IFF (Interrogator Friend-Foe) is -- it is electronic system which provides both a defense against friendly fire and easy radar identification of friendly forces. On older radar friendly forces would usually be marked with arches (below or above) radar marks of the targets and that is how one knows how not to shoot at them. The IFF technology is extremely sensitive as are the "codes" on which it runs. It wasn't provided, and for a good reason, to Syrian Forces. So, the question, in this case which will be asked by laymen is: but what about "full integration" of Russian and Syrian Air Defenses. It is a legitimate question.

... ... ...

Reaction of Israel following the events is telling -- she went into the full damage control mode with Netanyahu urgently calling Vladimir Putin. He offered the Commander of Israeli Air Force to be immediately on his way to Moscow, all diplomatic, informational, government channels between Israel and Russia got immediately engaged.

This was a very telling sign of a real panic and confusion on the Israeli side which also immediately offered condolences. This is not an act of war, as many would love it to be, some out of often justified hatred of Israel hoping for Russia to dispose of this "evil", others purely out of adrenalin rush in anticipation of TV picture of people killing each other.

But the issue of interaction between Russia and Syrian forces is real and it is not easily addressed for a number of purely military and cultural reasons. But some conclusions can already be made:

1. There will be no "annihilation" of Israel, nor will there be any shooting war between Russia and Jewish State as many would love and lust it to be;

2. There will, however, be some form of no-fly zone and as Vladimir Putin stated Russia will take " the steps that everyone will notice ." Obviously this important statement by the head of Russian State got drowned in the ocean of rage and speculations, and confusion I may add, but this has become a familiar pattern by now.

3. Issue of ROE and interaction -- the most important one. Specialists must review protocols and tactical procedures. Engagement caveats must be strictly enforced.

... ... ....

In the end, this tragedy, should serve as a real serious lesson and, in a military sense a warning that one better stick to the agreements or things may spiral out of control very fast . Israel decided that it is allowed to break agreements. Israel should ask Turkey what happens when one does Russia wrong -- Turkish Air Force knows it too well after shooting down Russian SU-24. It got grounded. Now Turkey is a situational ally of Iran and Russia in the region. As per larger geopolitical sense -- just wait and see. But I made myself explicit on that matter not for once. I might as well repeat myself -- dogs bark, but caravan passes on .

[Sep 21, 2018] Setting up the Russian Il-20 to Be Shot Down Is a Win-Win for Israel by Marko Marjanović

This story looks more and more strange: Il-20 was a military plane. why russina interceptors were not in the air immediately after Israeli planes approached Il-20? Were everybody drunk in the command center?
Sep 18, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Russia has no good options here. Russian military retaliation brings the absurdly pro-Israeli American public opinion and Washington establishment into play. Doing nothing signals weakness and invites more provocations

It's technically possible the Russian Il-20 surveillance plane was downed only as a result of stupidity and incompetence on the Israeli and Syrian side, and without a devious Israeli plan to set it up. Militaries almost always are among the stupidest and incompetent of all government bureaucracies so it's in the realm of possibility.

Nonetheless, the fact that Israel this time failed to give adequate warning to Russia is a strong indicator the IDF at the very least wanted to use the Russian plane there to cover their fighters, which it must have known would put it at a certain amount of risk. If so then I think Israel may have done it in safety of knowing that if a Russian plane is blown out of the sky by Syrians -- even if the IDF is ultimately responsible -- it's a win-win for Israel.

Think about it. Just hours after calling off the Idlib offensive in a massive concession to Erdogan and indirectly to the West, Putin is repaid by a Russian military plane being shot down as result of an Israeli attack on Syria. Talk about egg on face. When Turkey ambushed and shot down a Russian Su-24 on the Syrian-Turkish border in November 2015, Moscow limited its response to economic sanctions. This eventually helped moderate the extent of Turkish ambition in Syria. End to tomato imports however won't do much to impress Israel.

If Putin sticks to economic and diplomatic means of retaliation alone Russia will look comparatively weak. This will embolden the hawks in Washington who will have an easier time selling the idea pushing Russia around in Syria and hitting Assad does not actually risk WW3 – thus increasing the chances of what Israel really wants in Syria; more chaos and for the war to never end.

At the same time, if Russia retaliates militarily instead, this – thanks to the unparalleled amount of sympathy Israel enjoys in the US – also boosts the likelihood of what Israel wants. Imagine for example that Russia declares its forces in Syria will from now on under certain conditions actively participate in the defense of host country against Israeli airstrikes and actually fired against them the next time. What effect would that have? A likely result would be a war fever in the US. Wacky Protestant Evangelicals, Russia-hating Liberals and Trumpian Israel-Firsters could all unite under the banner of protecting tiny, pluck, democratic Israel from the menacing Russian bear. It would be like the narrative on the 2008 Georgian-Russian war (in which Georgia attacked the even tinnier South Ossetia along with Russian peacekeepers) except it would resonate far more so because it's sainted Israel.

For Russia its US relations would deteriorate even more, more US financial would be a certainty (it already is, but the pace would be ramped up), and the chance of US muscle stretching in Syria and the associated dangers of a US-Russian clash in the region would go up. Meanwhile for Israel the result would be a flurry of popular and diplomatic support from the Americans with a possible bump in military aid. Not a bad deal at all huh?

Inevitably whatever happens some will end up criticizing Putin for not doing enough to restore Russia's military honor. Other will question the wisdom of setting up shop in Syria in 2015 when Israelis and the Americans were already deeply involved in the conflict militarily and involving Russia in this dangerous mess in the first place. Both will be correct.

Correct also will be those who will note that Russia's intervention (any innocent civilians it killed or maimed aside) in Syria did a lot of good, but that neither Russia's nor Syria's position is all-powerful and that sometimes it's wiser to swallow your pride and keep your eyes on the finish line.

Of course, others will say that with Idlib offensive postponed and potentially called off for good, Putin may already be showing signs he may be happy, or may think it wiser, to leave things only half-finished.

[Sep 21, 2018] Great Interview on the Il-20 Shootdown With a Russian Air Defense Colonel by Viktor Baranets

A better translation of KP article
This story looks more and more strange: Il-20 was a military plane. Why Russian interceptors were not in the air immediately after Israeli planes approached Il-20? Were everybody drunk in the command center? Or have orders to stand down like in 9-11.
Notable quotes:
"... - What in your opinion, as a professional, could be the cause of the error of the Syrian air defense that brought down our IL-20? ..."
"... - By the way, does our Il have a system warning of a missile attack from the ground or from the air? ..."
"... - Why then did our Il not make an anti-missile maneuver, at least? ..."
"... - And how do you picture it? ..."
"... "But they say that we had such a deal with the Israelis as well?" ..."
"... - What kind of plane is it, IL-20? ..."
"... - What tasks could our Il-20 solve in the eastern part of the city, where he died? ..."
"... - Information has already leaked that the IL-20 allegedly tried to minimize the effectiveness of Israeli missile attacks on Latakia. Where are our military facilities? ..."
Sep 21, 2018 | russia-insider.com
- What in your opinion, as a professional, could be the cause of the error of the Syrian air defense that brought down our IL-20?

- There is in aviation such a tricky reception - "air camouflage". It seems that the Israelites used it. They gathered over our huge IL-20 on top of a sort of "stack", because of which the marks from both our reconnaissance aircraft and the Israeli F-16 merged. And the Syrian S-200 could not strike at them at that moment, since the "own-alien" identification system, sewn into the brains of anti-aircraft missile systems, did not allow it. But this system is only set up to prevent the rocket from launching on its own, but when it is already released, it can not be re-targeted.

However, the rocket itself is so arranged that its homing head catches a stronger signal. And the IL-20 reflecting the surface is much larger than that of the fighter. Naturally, the missile grabs the most powerful target and goes to it .

And then when the Israeli fighters changed course, on the screen of the C-200 there were marks of "stranger". And the Syrian air defense opened fire. Here, I am sure, our plane and ran into a "friendly" missile.

In addition, do not forget that the S-200 is an old weapon. And the training of Syrian air defense specialists, to put it mildly, often leaves much to be desired ...

- By the way, does our Il have a system warning of a missile attack from the ground or from the air?

- Of course have.

- Why then did our Il not make an anti-missile maneuver, at least?

- And how do you imagine such a maneuver of a huge airy machine? In which the area of ​​only one wing is 14 square meters! This is not a fighter that can tinker away and escape from the enemy's rocket ...

In any case, the perpetrators of the tragedy are the Israelis. They provoked her. And they must bear responsibility for this.

- And how do you picture it?

- Simply ritual statements, of course, will be too little. Our loyalty was dismissed by the Israelis! In a day they freely invade the airspace of sovereign Syria . And when we are asked, why our air defense in Syria allowed this, we somehow answer that we cover only our bases Khmeimim, Tartous and our own naval group in the Mediterranean.

After this tragedy, it would be logical to declare that we close the sky of Syria from uninvited guests and we will knock them down as enemy planes. In this case, of course, to close the space over Syria we would need a three times denser concentration of air defense systems.

Well, as for the armies and their allies, we allowed them to fly only in strictly defined zones and they do not yet poke their nose into other areas.

"But they say that we had such a deal with the Israelis as well?"

- Yes there is. Israelis bypass our facilities. They mainly "hammer" their enemy - "Hezbollah", but at the same time they strike not only military but also civilian Syrian targets. There are already a lot of sacrifices. It is time to put them in their place.

- What kind of plane is it, IL-20?

"Oh, I can tell you about it all day!" Both in the school, and in the academy passed the exams. Yes, and in Syria in the "womb" climbed ... But briefly, it is a plane of electronic intelligence and electronic warfare.

It is equipped with an infrared scanner, optical sensors. There is also a lateral radar.

There is a station of detailed electronic intelligence "Kvadrat-2" and radio intercept equipment "Cherry". At our VKS such planes of pieces 20. And all of them have passed a deep modernization. Our "Ilyusha" have well proven themselves in Syria, coordinating the attacks of the Russian Air Force on terrorists.

He also has another unique "chip" - he can correct the flight of the cruise missiles "Caliber" when they approach the target ... Do you remember the launch of our missiles from the water area of ​​the Caspian Sea? Their attacks would be less accurate, if not for the high-class work of the IL-20 operators. I will say more. Our ground-attack planes and bombers are precisely reaching the target, also with the help of IL-20 equipment. But enemy locators do not see them at this time, its anti-aircraft missile systems simply do not observe anything on their screens, thanks to the operation of the radio-electronic countermeasure equipment installed on our reconnaissance aircraft ...

What else? Still, the IL-20 has four powerful engines. They can provide the aircraft with a speed of up to 700 kilometers per hour. Empty it weighs somewhere under 34 tons. Can climb to a height of 10 kilometers ...

- What tasks could our Il-20 solve in the eastern part of the city, where he died?

- Such a universal machine is capable of solving many problems - from opening the air situation to jamming ...

- Information has already leaked that the IL-20 allegedly tried to minimize the effectiveness of Israeli missile attacks on Latakia. Where are our military facilities?

- I do not exclude that it had such a task.

[Sep 21, 2018] NYT is now is regular deep state stooge

As Mark Twain said, its easier to fool somebody than to convince them they have been fooled, its even easier (former) and tougher (latter) when you control the narrative and news, not to mention education.
Sep 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
jrkrideau , Sep 20, 2018 5:46:02 PM | link

That New York Times piece was amazing. Belief anything the US Gov't/anti-Russian lobby and other nut cases tell you, unquestioningly. Investigative journalism at its best!

Accept the most stupid evidence with blinking an eye. Even if one believes the collusion argument, try to be a bit critical. And always believe that a GRU hacker will put Felix Dzerzinnsky's name in their program. For heaven's sake he was Cheka, the forerunner of the KGB, not the GRU which was military intelligence.

Susan Sunflower , Sep 20, 2018 5:47:11 PM | link

The timing is interesting. Hillary Clinton was one-on-one wiht Maddow "for the hour" last night (I didn't watch) and has/had an "important" broadside againt TRump in the Atlantic (covered extensively also in the Guardian) .... trying to claw her way back into the limelight or just promoting the **newly released** paperback edition of "What Happened" with and extensive "caboose" or adendum (caboose being irrc HRC's term).

I suspect some of the powerful are realizing what an impending disaster and "anti-climax" Mueller's investigation appears increasingly likely to be. It was !!! Breaking News !!! a few nights ago that Mueller was ready to sentence Flynn (guilty plea ages ago) for the single count of lying to the FBI ... don't hold your breath because it's -- OMG -- happening in December 2018. As far as I could tell, the significance (OMG) seems to be that Mueller feels Flynn's cooperation has been completed. (Flynn may be reassured, given given Papadopoulos' sentence).

People may have said unwise things and acted in unwise fashion, proving conspiracy to commit an actual crime (which is a crime even in the absence of a crime occurring) may be prove unconvincing.

psychohistorian , Sep 20, 2018 6:32:01 PM | link
Thanks for the great journalism b pointing out that what touts itself as journalism is nothing more than propaganda lies.

Unfortunately the Mark Twain quote about it being easier to fool folks than convince them they have or are being fooled is too true.

Kiza , Sep 20, 2018 8:10:35 PM | link
The role of the media is pure and simple BS generation and dissemination , nothing else. The BS has several clearly discernible patterns:
1) the one b mentions - the title and the first few paragraphs say one thing, after >90% of the text is passed the truth is mentioned - perfectly matched to the readers attention curve (b you could have mentioned the psych research); the purpose - claim objectivity,
2) the first bits reported about some important event are usually the most truthful because the BS generation machine has a turn-on lag; the morning news 7 am about what happened last night are the most truthful because the masters of narratives do not wake up at 6 am to BS, they come to work comfortably at 9 am; the BS portion increases during the day, for the most watched 8pm and/or 10pm news to become pure unadulterated BS.

And so on, I have more patters but for another discussion.

[Sep 21, 2018] Larry Wilkerson on Neocons in Trump Administration

Notable quotes:
"... This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: Kesslyn Runs , by Charles Featherstone; NoDev NoOps NoIT , by Hussein Badakhchani; The War State , by Mike Swanson; WallStreetWindow.com ; Roberts and Roberts Brokerage Inc. ; Zen Cash ; Tom Woods' Liberty Classroom ; ExpandDesigns.com/Scott ; and TheBumperSticker.com . ..."
Sep 21, 2018 | scotthorton.org

by Scott | Sep 14, 2018 | Interviews | 0 comments Larry Wilkerson, former army Colonel and Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell, is interviewed on his new article at LobeLog " The Neoconservative Comeback " on the growing influence of neoconservatism in the Trump Administration. Trump's Syria and Afghanistan policy are discussed, as well as the old axiom, personnel is policy.

This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: Kesslyn Runs , by Charles Featherstone; NoDev NoOps NoIT , by Hussein Badakhchani; The War State , by Mike Swanson; WallStreetWindow.com ; Roberts and Roberts Brokerage Inc. ; Zen Cash ; Tom Woods' Liberty Classroom ; ExpandDesigns.com/Scott ; and TheBumperSticker.com .

Check out Scott's Patreon page.

[Sep 21, 2018] Another brilliant article by Alain Gresh in Le Monde Diplomatique: The truths that wont be heard

Sep 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

uncle tungsten , Sep 21, 2018 2:18:32 AM | link

Well, well, well, spying in the USA and subverting both its citizens and congress critters. Another brilliant article by Alain Gresh in Le Monde Diplomatique: The truths that wont be heard.

https://mondediplo.com/2018/09/02israel-lobby

I guess there is no point expecting a reveal all for the documentary but it sure makes fools of the DOJ and FBI and all the Russia haters.

[Sep 21, 2018] But what's categorically worse than having a childish buffoon as a sitting president? A deep state cabal of neocons and neolibs

Sep 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Don Wiscacho , Sep 20, 2018 11:25:52 AM | link

I don't support many of Trump's policies (making peace with Russia, drawing down our wars not withstanding) and the man, to me, is a childish buffoon. But what's categorically worse than having a childish buffoon as a sitting president? A deep state cabal of neocons and neolibs cheered on by the left and MSM so emboldened by the success of their usurpation that they brag about it on the pages of the leading newspapers in the country. As much as pains me to say, it's the behavior of the left in America that is truly sickening in the whole sordid affair.

Fernando Arauxo , Sep 20, 2018 11:43:44 AM | link

It's his own fault. He should've and could've fired everyone from DAY ONE. He kept hold overs from all the previous administrations and now he's stuck with them. Trump PHUCKED up big time by not bringing in ALL of his supporters to fight for him and those that do are FIRED. So go suck on it Trumpy.

[Sep 21, 2018] Hold The Front Page The Reporters Are Missing And Journalism Is Dead

Sep 21, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

by Tyler Durden Fri, 09/21/2018 - 22:25 1 SHARES Authored by John Pilger via ConsortiumNews.com,

So much of mainstream journalism has descended to the level of a cult-like formula of bias, hearsay and omission. Subjectivism is all; slogans and outrage are proof enough. What matters is 'perception'...

The death of Robert Parry earlier this year felt like a farewell to the age of the reporter. Parry was "a trailblazer for independent journalism", wrote Seymour Hersh, with whom he shared much in common.

Hersh revealed the My Lai massacre in Vietnam and the secret bombing of Cambodia, Parry exposed Iran-Contra, a drugs and gun-running conspiracy that led to the White House. In 2016, they separately produced compelling evidence that the Assad government in Syria had not used chemical weapons. They were not forgiven.

Driven from the "mainstream", Hersh must publish his work outside the United States. Parry set up his own independent news website Consortium News, where, in a final piece following a stroke, he referred to journalism's veneration of "approved opinions" while "unapproved evidence is brushed aside or disparaged regardless of its quality."

Although journalism was always a loose extension of establishment power, something has changed in recent years. Dissent tolerated when I joined a national newspaper in Britain in the 1960s has regressed to a metaphoric underground as liberal capitalism moves towards a form of corporate dictatorship.

This is a seismic shift, with journalists policing the new "groupthink", as Parry called it, dispensing its myths and distractions, pursuing its enemies.

Witness the witch-hunts against refugees and immigrants, the willful abandonment by the "MeToo" zealots of our oldest freedom, presumption of innocence, the anti-Russia racism and anti-Brexit hysteria, the growing anti-China campaign and the suppression of a warning of world war.

With many if not most independent journalists barred or ejected from the "mainstream", a corner of the Internet has become a vital source of disclosure and evidence-based analysis: true journalism sites such as wikileaks.org, consortiumnews.com, wsws.org, truthdig.com, globalresearch.org, counterpunch.org and informationclearinghouse.com are required reading for those trying to make sense of a world in which science and technology advance wondrously while political and economic life in the fearful "democracies" regress behind a media facade of narcissistic spectacle.

Propaganda Blitz

In Britain, just one website offers consistently independent media criticism. This is the remarkable Media Lens -- remarkable partly because its founders and editors as well as its only writers, David Edwards and David Cromwell, since 2001 have concentrated their gaze not on the usual suspects, the Tory press, but the paragons of reputable liberal journalism: the BBC, The Guardian , Channel 4 News.

Cromwell and Edwards (The Ghandi Foundation)

Their method is simple. Meticulous in their research, they are respectful and polite when they ask why a journalist why he or she produced such a one-sided report, or failed to disclose essential facts or promoted discredited myths.

The replies they receive are often defensive, at times abusive; some are hysterical, as if they have pushed back a screen on a protected species.

I would say Media Lens has shattered a silence about corporate journalism. Like Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman in Manufacturing Consent, they represent a Fifth Estate that deconstructs and demystifies the media's power.

What is especially interesting about them is that neither is a journalist. David Edwards is a former teacher, David Cromwell is an oceanographer. Yet, their understanding of the morality of journalism -- a term rarely used; let's call it true objectivity -- is a bracing quality of their online Media Lens dispatches.

I think their work is heroic and I would place a copy of their just published book, Propaganda Blitz , in every journalism school that services the corporate system, as they all do.

Take the chapter, Dismantling the National Health Service, in which Edwards and Cromwell describe the critical part played by journalists in the crisis facing Britain's pioneering health service.

The NHS crisis is the product of a political and media construct known as "austerity", with its deceitful, weasel language of "efficiency savings" (the BBC term for slashing public expenditure) and "hard choices" (the willful destruction of the premises of civilized life in modern Britain).

"Austerity" is an invention. Britain is a rich country with a debt owed by its crooked banks, not its people. The resources that would comfortably fund the National Health Service have been stolen in broad daylight by the few allowed to avoid and evade billions in taxes.

Using a vocabulary of corporate euphemisms, the publicly-funded Health Service is being deliberately run down by free market fanatics, to justify its selling-off. The Labour Party of Jeremy Corbyn may appear to oppose this, but is it? The answer is very likely no. Little of any of this is alluded to in the media, let alone explained.

Edwards and Cromwell have dissected the 2012 Health and Social Care Act, whose innocuous title belies its dire consequences. Unknown to most of the population, the Act ends the legal obligation of British governments to provide universal free health care: the bedrock on which the NHS was set up following the Second World War. Private companies can now insinuate themselves into the NHS, piece by piece.

Where, asks Edwards and Cromwell, was the BBC while this momentous Bill was making its way through Parliament? With a statutory commitment to "providing a breadth of view" and to properly inform the public of "matters of public policy," the BBC never spelt out the threat posed to one of the nation's most cherished institutions. A BBC headline said: "Bill which gives power to GPs passes." This was pure state propaganda.

Media and Iraq Invasion

Blair: Lawless (Office of Tony Blair)

There is a striking similarity with the BBC's coverage of Prime Minister Tony Blair's lawless invasion of Iraq in 2003, which left a million dead and many more dispossessed. A study by the University of Wales, Cardiff, found that the BBC reflected the government line "overwhelmingly" while relegating reports of civilian suffering. A Media Tenor study placed the BBC at the bottom of a league of western broadcasters in the time they gave to opponents of the invasion. The corporation's much-vaunted "principle" of impartiality was never a consideration.

One of the most telling chapters in Propaganda Blitz describes the smear campaigns mounted by journalists against dissenters, political mavericks and whistleblowers.

The Guardian' s campaign against the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is the most disturbing. Assange, whose epic WikiLeaks disclosures brought fame, journalism prizes and largesse to The Guardian , was abandoned when he was no longer useful. He was then subjected to a vituperative – and cowardly -- onslaught of a kind I have rarely known.

With not a penny going to WikiLeaks, a hyped Guardian book led to a lucrative Hollywood movie deal. The book's authors, Luke Harding and David Leigh, gratuitously described Assange as a "damaged personality" and "callous." They also disclosed the secret password he had given the paper in confidence, which was designed to protect a digital file containing the U.S. embassy cables.

With Assange now trapped in the Ecuadorean embassy, Harding, standing among the police outside, gloated on his blog that "Scotland Yard may get the last laugh."

The Guardian columnist Suzanne Moore wrote, "I bet Assange is stuffing himself full of flattened guinea pigs. He really is the most massive turd."

Moore, who describes herself as a feminist, later complained that, after attacking Assange, she had suffered "vile abuse." Edwards and Cromwell wrote to her: "That's a real shame, sorry to hear that. But how would you describe calling someone 'the most massive turd'? Vile abuse?"

Moore replied that no, she would not, adding, "I would advise you to stop being so bloody patronizing." Her former Guardian colleague James Ball wrote, "It's difficult to imagine what Ecuador's London embassy smells like more than five and a half years after Julian Assange moved in."

Such slow-witted viciousness appeared in a newspaper described by its editor, Katharine Viner, as "thoughtful and progressive." What is the root of this vindictiveness? Is it jealousy, a perverse recognition that Assange has achieved more journalistic firsts than his snipers can claim in a lifetime? Is it that he refuses to be "one of us" and shames those who have long sold out the independence of journalism?

Journalism students should study this to understand that the source of "fake news" is not only trollism, or the likes of Fox News, or Donald Trump, but a journalism self-anointed with a false respectability: a liberal journalism that claims to challenge corrupt state power but, in reality, courts and protects it, and colludes with it. The amorality of the years of Tony Blair, whom The Guardian has failed to rehabilitate, is its echo.

"[It is] an age in which people yearn for new ideas and fresh alternatives," wrote Katharine Viner. Her political writer Jonathan Freedland dismissed the yearning of young people who supported the modest policies of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn as "a form of narcissism."

"How did this man .," brayed the Guardian 's Zoe Williams, "get on the ballot in the first place?" A choir of the paper's precocious windbags joined in, thereafter queuing to fall on their blunt swords when Corbyn came close to winning the 2017 general election in spite of the media.

Complex stories are reported to a cult-like formula of bias, hearsay and omission: Brexit, Venezuela, Russia, Syria. On Syria, only the investigations of a group of independent journalists have countered this, revealing the network of Anglo-American backing of jihadists in Syria, including those related to ISIS.

Leni Riefenstahl (r.) (Keystone-France/Gamma-Keystone via Getty Images)

Supported by a "psyops" campaign funded by the British Foreign Office and the U.S. Agency for International Development, the aim is to hoodwink the Western public and speed the overthrow of the government in Damascus, regardless of the medieval alternative and the risk of war with Russia.

The Syria Campaign, set up by a New York PR agency called Purpose, funds a group known as the White Helmets, who claim falsely to be "Syria Civil Defense" and are seen uncritically on TV news and social media, apparently rescuing the victims of bombing, which they film and edit themselves, though viewers are unlikely to be told this. George Clooney is a fan.

The White Helmets are appendages to the jihadists with whom they share addresses. Their media-smart uniforms and equipment are supplied by their Western paymasters. That their exploits are not questioned by major news organizations is an indication of how deep the influence of state-backed PR now runs in the media. As Robert Fisk noted recently, no "mainstream" reporter reports Syria.

In what is known as a hatchet job, a Guardian reporter based in San Francisco, Olivia Solon, who has never visited Syria, was allowed to smear the substantiated investigative work of journalists Vanessa Beeley and Eva Bartlett on the White Helmets as "propagated online by a network of anti-imperialist activists, conspiracy theorists and trolls with the support of the Russian government."

This abuse was published without permitting a single correction, let alone a right-of-reply. The Guardian Comment page was blocked, as Edwards and Cromwell document. I saw the list of questions Solon sent to Beeley, which reads like a McCarthyite charge sheet -- "Have you ever been invited to North Korea?"

So much of the mainstream has descended to this level. Subjectivism is all; slogans and outrage are proof enough. What matters is the "perception."

When he was U.S. commander in Afghanistan, General David Petraeus declared what he called "a war of perception conducted continuously using the news media." What really mattered was not the facts but the way the story played in the United States. The undeclared enemy was, as always, an informed and critical public at home.

Nothing has changed. In the 1970s, I met Leni Riefenstahl, Hitler's film-maker, whose propaganda mesmerized the German public.

She told me the "messages" of her films were dependent not on "orders from above", but on the "submissive void" of an uninformed public.

"Did that include the liberal, educated bourgeoisie?" I asked.

"Everyone," she said. "Propaganda always wins, if you allow it."

Propaganda Blitz by David Edwards and David Cromwell is published by Pluto Press.

[Sep 21, 2018] Fact free propaganda

Notable quotes:
"... I still love the theater though. The meaningless political theater that last occurred when Clinton was President. What's most amusing this time is that it's only the hyper-partisans (many of whom are not self-aware enough to realize it) who identify (again, consciously or subconsciously) that even care. The rest of us simply get to see each party's idiotic followers on the "left" and the "right" get sucked into the media's chosen narrative. ..."
"... Meanwhile, the bombings and interventions can continue, Gitmo can remain open (btw, anyone else notice that unlike hurricanes that hit the mainland, nobody ever cares whether Gitmo will be evacuated?), the massive bank bailout can be relegated deeper and deeper into the memory hole and the two parties (including Trump's cabinet) continue to grow closer and closer together where the subjects of domestic surveillance and neocon warmongering are concerned. ..."
"... I love it. I laugh openly at anyone who mentions Russia to me from either angle. "No collusion!" is as entertaining as "Putin got Trump elected!" - Idiots. ..."
"... i do believe the proxy wars are really all about this same salient fact - the usa and us$ can not be challenged.. any challenge will be met with war, covert, or overt.. ..."
Sep 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

bevin , Sep 20, 2018 3:43:13 PM | link

The whole nonsense about Russian interference, which was obviously nonsense from Day One and has never, for a moment looked like anything but nonsense, seems to indicate that we have entered a post political era in which policy discussions and debates are forgotten and smears and false accusations take their place.
Currently in the US the Kavanaugh nomination which ought to be about the meaning of the law and the consequences of having a Supreme Court which will make Judge Taney look like Solomon at his most impressive. Instead it is about an alleged teenage incident in which the nominee is said to have caressed a girls breasts at a drunken party when all involved were at High School. Before that we had a Senatorial election in Alabama in which the Republican candidate was charged with having shown a sexual interest in teenage girls- whether this was a 'first' in Alabama is unknown but it is believed to have happened elsewhere, in the unenlightened past.
Then we have the matter of whether Jeremy Corbyn is such a danger to Jews that they will all leave the country if he is ever elected to power. This long campaign, completely devoid of evidence, like 'Russiagate' has the potential of going on forever, simply because there being no evidence it cannot be refuted.
Which is also the case with the Skripal affair, because of which even as we speak, massive trade and financial sanctions are being imposed against Russia and its enormous, innocent and plundered population.
In none of these cases has any real evidence, of the minimal quality that might justify the hanging of a dog, ever advanced. But that doesn't matter, the important thing is to choose a side and if it is Hillary Clinton's to believe or to pretend to believe and to convince others to believe (as Marcy at Emptywheel has been doing for close to three years now) in the incredible.
Who says that we no longer live in a Christian society in which faith is everything?

Alan Reid , Sep 20, 2018 3:44:44 PM | link

I wonder how many time i will see this, See everyone using the meme they want you to use, For example 'Election collusion' or 'Russian collusion' Etc.

A huge smoke screen allowing the main fleet to escape. The tide of votes going as it did sure did bring out the liars. From the first moment that the results showed that the huge behemoth of their interference blew flat and failed, they went all out to cast the loss as some sort of interference from what ever source, Fact is the entire process is constantly under attack from within by forces that it's ends in their sights and the loss of control of that process forced them into damage control, Today we are seeing the lofty heights they will stack the dung up to direct your attentions away from the FIRST and real interference in the election process.

Well folks say the Hillary creature as she is, What she was a token place marker for, The forces looting North America, The forces driving the 'Order out of Chaos' operation. This operation has been a monkey on the backs of the public outside the halls of modern powers and their use.

The process, even a rigged process FAILED. What ever the dirt they have on the eventual choice you made about your course, they will not allow you to subvert their plans even if you all come together and move the levers of power, I saw the photo that soon came out of Trump rather depressed looking, You say that photo, You knew exactly what it meant, From that picture to today everythng is back on THEIR track not YOURS.

The entire process is under their control as long as the many remain in their comfy places built for them. Fix is a dangerous and frightening path for a very good reason. The eventual outcome of their process is going to be a very hard place to live. Overcoming their control and domination is not going to be allowed, History is coming for the evil of this world and the fix is going to be a very devastating event.

When you have so many heads following your evil ways, It's hard not to have the response to evil fall on your actions and deal with your ways.

We live in a very interesting times. If you thought 9/11 was bad... You ain't seen nothing yet.

The Path towards evil demands BLOOD.

worldblee , Sep 20, 2018 4:04:02 PM | link
If you substitute "witches" or "the bogeyman" for "Russia" in most US and European news articles, you get a better sense for how ridiculous and unfounded they are. But as we witnessed in Salem, it's not hard to get mass hysteria going with a complete lack of evidence.

Once people are on the "Trump is a Russian tool" bandwagon it's extremely hard to get them off, as the absence of evidence is harder to prove--while people find the repeated assertion of imaginary evidence entirely convincing.

Sid2 , Sep 20, 2018 4:20:46 PM | link

@karlof1 #6: The narrative that has been promoted grows thinner all the time, with the emphasis switching from collusion to corruption and with that fading in the news on to his being deranged. Now we have resistance from Rosenstein to the House Investigative Committee and Trump to release the classified memos showing the shenanigans of Strzok, Comey, et al, plus emerging voices from inside. I do believe the collusion narrative is withering; more important "deplorables" don't give a damn anyway.

karlof1 , Sep 20, 2018 4:24:45 PM | link
John Zelnicker @8--

Well, it's a proven fact that millions of recycled US taxpayer's dollars were used by Zionists to influence the 2016 and most every previous election going back to 1968, if not further. Massive documentation of collusion exists between Zionists and US politicos at all levels of government. Furthermore, there's much publicly available evidence sufficient to indict and convict Hillary Clinton of numerous felonies along with several high officials within the DNC for election interference. Why not rant and rail against these very easily proven crimes?!

Mike , Sep 20, 2018 4:24:54 PM | link
Obviously. I still love the theater though. The meaningless political theater that last occurred when Clinton was President. What's most amusing this time is that it's only the hyper-partisans (many of whom are not self-aware enough to realize it) who identify (again, consciously or subconsciously) that even care. The rest of us simply get to see each party's idiotic followers on the "left" and the "right" get sucked into the media's chosen narrative.

Meanwhile, the bombings and interventions can continue, Gitmo can remain open (btw, anyone else notice that unlike hurricanes that hit the mainland, nobody ever cares whether Gitmo will be evacuated?), the massive bank bailout can be relegated deeper and deeper into the memory hole and the two parties (including Trump's cabinet) continue to grow closer and closer together where the subjects of domestic surveillance and neocon warmongering are concerned. We'll never see the PATRIOT ACT re-debated and the military budget will increase beyond all imagination while the hand wringing about "deficit spending" on the right stops so long as there's an "R" after the name of whomever sits in the White House.

I love it. I laugh openly at anyone who mentions Russia to me from either angle. "No collusion!" is as entertaining as "Putin got Trump elected!" - Idiots.

james , Sep 20, 2018 4:35:37 PM | link
@11 karlof1.. that also gets me... if one is looking for corruption in the political class, it is not hard to find! why start and stop only with russia? i think the answer is fairly obvious.. there has been an ongoing attempt to maintain the unipolar world with us$ and russia and china potentially interfere with this ongoing status... thus we are back to psychohistorians ongoing issue over finances - private verses public, and what we wish to see as a world hopefully moving forward here..

i do believe the proxy wars are really all about this same salient fact - the usa and us$ can not be challenged.. any challenge will be met with war, covert, or overt..

[Sep 20, 2018] The real target of Russiagate isn't Trump, it's you

Sep 20, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Sep 19, 2018 3:02:55 PM | link

Caitlin Johnstone on Russiagate : "The real target of Russiagate isn't Trump, it's you." If you haven't read her essay about controlling the narrative, you can find it here.

[Sep 19, 2018] As for Nutty Nikki Haley, Israeli PM Netenyahu wanted Haley in that spot

Notable quotes:
"... As for Nutty Nikki Haley, Israeli PM Netenyahu wanted Haley in that spot, both for her rabid pro-Israel stance and to give her the chance to 'make her bones.' To see if she has the right traitorous qualities Israel needs in the WH. Nutty has passed that test with honors, so look for Nutty to get promoted to POTUS, where she'll be a loyal & faithful servant to our Colonial Overlord, Israel. ..."
Sep 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

Greg Bacon , says: Website September 19, 2018 at 7:59 am GMT

There is an ongoing coup against not only Trump, but the entire nation, as this video by "Project Veritas" proves. This State Department subversive claims to be a Democratic Socialist, which are just Antifa terrorists in suits. Antifa was too radical for SANE Americans so they re-branded their putrid form of Communism to call it DSA. They're traitors & saboteurs and should be treated as such .

As for Nutty Nikki Haley, Israeli PM Netenyahu wanted Haley in that spot, both for her rabid pro-Israel stance and to give her the chance to 'make her bones.' To see if she has the right traitorous qualities Israel needs in the WH. Nutty has passed that test with honors, so look for Nutty to get promoted to POTUS, where she'll be a loyal & faithful servant to our Colonial Overlord, Israel.

Many Americans labor under the delusion that we're an independent democratic republic, with a USG that honors the cherished Constitution and serves We the People. But that is a fiction, created by a motley assortment of gangsters, think tanks, the MSM and their mighty Wurlitzer organ, Hollywood.

The USA is under Israeli occupation, with our American neoCON & Zionist Jew Overseers still cracking that whip on our backs, but a digital one, not leather. The NWO Plantation owner is Israel, aided and abetted by the money power of those Rothschild central banks, like the FED, which is the biggest counterfeiting outfit on the planet.

 The only way to fix this sordid mess would be a repeat of what happened back in 1776. Either that, or resign ourselves–and offspring–to a life of misery, poverty, endless wars and terror .

[Sep 19, 2018] Guardian journos are proclaiming themselves the bastion of free speech, when in reality they are the enemies of it.

Sep 19, 2018 | thesaker.is

I gave up on the Guardian's comment site myself, 10 years ago, as the censorship on there made it pointless. Has something changed?

There was one prolific commenter there, MrPikeBishop, who was so popular, he was even commissioned to write articles above the line. Then one day, bam, he is banned, and his entire posting history gone. That did it for me; little emperors not fit to clean his boots, just rubbed him out. I spat on the site that day and never went back. Proclaiming themselves the bastion of free speech, when they actually the enemies of it.

Actually, I was caught out here in the UK, by the demise of the old five pound note, and then the ten pound note, because I stopped reading and watching MSM years ago. It's worth it, to get their irritating buzzing out of my head.

Back to the linked Guardian article; this is indeed interesting – these questions asked by the journalist:

– Who really did shoot down this plane? Was it an accident or did France and/or Israel attack?
– Are Russia publicly accepting a false narrative to avoid having to retaliate?
– Do they even understand how close we're coming to global war, whenever a NATO country operates in Syria?
– How long can we rely on Russian common sense to avoid WWIII?

[Sep 19, 2018] Washington's goal is to reduce Russia's gas market share in Eastern Europe by 20% by 2020

Sep 19, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com


Subscribe to Vesti News

Russia and the West are facing the worst crisis since the Cold War. According to US Special Envoy Amos Hochstein, Washington's goal is to reduce Russia's gas market share in Eastern Europe by 20% by 2020.

Russia cannot be allowed to build a gas pipeline that would bypass Ukraine, as it would pose a threat to Europe's energy security

kirill September 16, 2018 at 4:43 am

Pipeline bypassing Ukraine = threat to Europe's energy security

That is a total non sequitur. Also, Russia is part of Europe. The EU is not the whole of "Europe". In fact, the EU is not even the EU as evidenced by Hungary and Italy.

Mark Chapman September 16, 2018 at 11:17 am
And Washington can have Eastern Europe. Go ahead – take them as customers, and sell them expensive LNG they can't afford. Russia would probably be glad to be shut of Poland and the Baltics. And having to pay way more for their gas would teach them a lesson. Win/win.
kirill September 16, 2018 at 4:43 am
Pipeline bypassing Ukraine = threat to Europe's energy security

That is a total non sequitur. Also, Russia is part of Europe. The EU is not the whole of "Europe". In fact, the EU is not even the EU as evidenced by Hungary and Italy.

Mark Chapman September 16, 2018 at 11:17 am
And Washington can have Eastern Europe. Go ahead – take them as customers, and sell them expensive LNG they can't afford. Russia would probably be glad to be shut of Poland and the Baltics. And having to pay way more for their gas would teach them a lesson. Win/win.
et Al September 17, 2018 at 4:57 am
Doesn't the pipeline via the lo-land of Po-land go via Belarus? Warsaw buying gas from elsewhere would starve Minsk of transit fees, no? Maybe the idea is similarly to undermine Belarus and thus impose further costs/indirect sanctions on Russia?

[Sep 19, 2018] First containership goes north of Russia from Asia to Europe

Sep 19, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

et Al September 17, 2018 at 9:30 am

EUObserver: First containership goes north of Russia from Asia to Europe
https://euobserver.com/news/142837

A brand new ice-strengthened containership is heading straight into the annals of maritime history. As the first containership ever Venta Maersk is on its way through the still ice-plagued North East passage north of Russia from Asia to Europe.

Venta Maersk belongs to Seago Line, a shipping company owned by Denmark's A.P. Moller Maersk A/S, the world's largest container-shipping agency

The first stop in Europe, in Bremerhaven, Germany, is expected to take place in late September before Venta Maersk continues to St Petersburg, Russia.

Venta Maersk is one of seven ice-strengthened containerships that Maersk is currently having built in China.

The ships are 200 metres long, 35.2 metres wide and capable of shipping 3,600 containers, six metres long, through one metre of ice. ..

[Sep 19, 2018] Whet crew of Il-20 was doing when Israeli jets approach it and fly above and form a bookshelf formation?

Sep 19, 2018 | thesaker.is

parrhesiastes on September 19, 2018 , · at 8:23 pm EST/EDT

Maybe the landing approach thesis works – experts in Russ aviation would know if Russ equivalent to(US/UK) AN/APS-13 aft approach radar, used since 1942 in a series of versions, was/is fitted to Il20 in question.

Seems that anybody smart enough to build radar would fit tailradar in combat zone, and leave it on. Note actual radar may have been superseded by an infra red detector a question for experts. Has been long time since 1942, technical methods improve. And the search radars?

Ok, pilot, engineer, copilot are doing approach and busy and everybody else just being inattentive? F 16 were not tracked the entire time? Again, maybe. Radar works at 6000 feet and horizon still 152 km away F16 can't sneak up unseen fast but not that fast

I always maintain situational awareness in war zones, helps to live longer.

software of S200 can not target friendlies, system was is integrated.

[Sep 19, 2018] Destroying Syria is primary for US Hegemony and Israeli dominance

Notable quotes:
"... Exactly. The zionazis want Syria. They are activating all their options and working overtime to keep their proxies employed against Syria. If the zionazis cant take Syria, it means they don't get to have Lebanon either. It also means their attempt to wreck Iran and reduce it to a failed state is a non starter. ..."
Sep 19, 2018 | thesaker.is

vot tak on September 19, 2018 , · at 1:00 pm EST/EDT

"Also, speaking of Syria: has anybody noticed that the agreement between Turkey and Russia has removed any justification for a US attack on Syria and that the Israelis have organized their latest little bloody stunt right after this deal was announced?"

Exactly. The zionazis want Syria. They are activating all their options and working overtime to keep their proxies employed against Syria. If the zionazis cant take Syria, it means they don't get to have Lebanon either. It also means their attempt to wreck Iran and reduce it to a failed state is a non starter.

Larchmonter445 on September 19, 2018 , · at 1:21 pm EST/EDT
Syria is the keystone. The geography is a primary target for the destruction of ME. It has cultural and economic ties that bind most of the region. Destroying Syria is primary for US Hegemony and Israeli dominance.

But Turkey, Iran, Iraq and now Russia stand in the way. With Hezbollah, Lebanon is joined to the alliance against the US-Israeli aggression. And strategically, Jordan will facilitate what it can to stabilize the region.

This alienation of Putin and the Russian military and people by Israel, the US, UK and France will long be remembered across the Motherland. Syria now more than ever is a land of sacrificed sons of Russia. The stakes are now eternal.

Anonius on September 19, 2018 , · at 3:06 pm EST/EDT
This is exactly the point. People, commentators, should never forget that about half of Israel's Jewish population are Russians (or used to be, I suspect dual citizens). These people have extended families in Russia. Putin knows what he is doing. He can not alienate people at home.
Katherine on September 19, 2018 , · at 4:50 pm EST/EDT
The two preceding comments seem to be mutually exclusive, i .e., in direct contradiction:

1. "This alienation of Putin and the Russian military and people by Israel,"

2. "This is exactly the point. People, commentators, should never forget that about half of Israel's Jewish population are Russians (or used to be, I suspect dual citizens). These people have extended families in Russia. Putin knows what he is doing. He can not alienate people at home."

But, "the point" in (1) seems, actually, to be the exact opposite.
So, has the incident alienated Russians from Israel? Or, can Russia not "afford" to be alienated from Israel because there are too many Russian Israelis?

Or is it the other way around? That Russian Israelis will not stand for their government's treatment of Russia? Somehow I suspect that Russian/ex-Soviet Israelis won't give a flying eff about their govt's treatment of Russia, and the same goes for their relatives inside Russia. They hated the USSR and couldn't wait to get away. Why does Putin have to cater to the views of these emigres to Israel, Russian Israelis, or to their families back in Russia? How do the latter differ from Zionists in the USA who have dual loyaties?

BTW, it is my understanding that the USA paid for the resettlement of Soviet Jews in Israel in the eighties, not the USSR .

Katherine

[Sep 19, 2018] Russia does not have a fifth column in Israel, it is probably the other way round.

Sep 19, 2018 | thesaker.is

Occasional Poster on September 19, 2018 , · at 4:00 pm EST/EDT

1.3 million Russians in Israel, are Russian jews, and are likely identify primarily as jewish.

Their aims and concerns, are jewish ones. Their likely only concerns regarding Russia, are that Russia does not obstruct Israeli ambitions, and that the network of jewish influence in Russia does not diminish, but thrives. Their interest is for Russia to be another of Israel's golems, like the USA is.

I moot that true Russian interests, conflict with their own, and they will absolutely follow their own. Same as AIPAC in the USA, and equivalents everywhere else.

Their ancestral home country might be Russia, but I moot there is nothing Russian about them.

All my humble opinion. I stand to be corrected. Russia does not have a fifth column in Israel, it is the other way round.

[Sep 19, 2018] E>e are now faced with the imminent threat of either an Anglo/Zionist victory in Syria or WW3

Sep 19, 2018 | thesaker.is

Bob on September 19, 2018 , · at 3:31 pm EST/EDT

Look, I'm not a military expert, but I have followed the events in the Middle East fairly closely for over 30 years. I, and many others, have stated repeatedly that Russia's clearly demonstrated unwillingness to use its military forces to protect Syria from Western and US strikes can only lead to disaster.

The entire Russian policy in Syria has been confused and riddled with contradictions from the very beginning. The situation in 2015 was:
1. The Syrian government was on the verge of losing a war against jihadi forces.
2. Those jihadi forces were largely foreign and were organized, funded and directed by the
Anglo/zionists.
3. The Russians could not match the conventional forces that could be brought to bear in the region by the Anglo/zionists.
4. Any Russian intervention could only succeed if the Anglo/zionists were deterred from intervening directly by the presence of Russian forces and the fear of a wider war (that could go nuclear).

Now given those four facts, which I presume nobody seriously disagrees with, the Russian operation in Syria was always based upon maintaining the fear in the minds of the military planners in Tel Aviv and Washington that any direct interference with Russian forces in Syria would mean war with Russia. This was the most important single job of the Russian forces in Syria maintaining the deterrent capability vis-a-vis the Anglo/zionists.

How do you maintain deterrence? You do so by enforcing your red lines EVERY TIME they are challenged. Russian inability to clearly define their red lines in Syria and to enforce those red lines each and every time they were tested has led us to a point where the Russians no longer have any credibility in Syria.

My crystal ball says that within the next 30 days, not only will the US massively strike the SAA and the Assad government, but that they will impose a no fly zone over all of Syria to ground the Russian and Syrian air forces. What will the Russians do in response? They will have a choice between war and defeat Everything they have done to this point, indicates that they will do whatever they need to do to avoid a direct military confrontation with the Anglo/zionist forces. Imagine if you were a military planner in Tel Aviv or Washington, how could you convince anyone that there was any credible threat that Russia would go to war over Syria?

You couldn't and hence we are now faced with the imminent threat of either an Anglo/zionist victory in Syria or WW3.

Christian W on September 19, 2018 , · at 4:23 pm EST/EDT
The Anglo-Zionists are losing in Syria. Russia, Syria and Iran are winning. That is why the ZioNazis are desperate and moving in themselves, now that their proxies have been defeated. There is no way the ZioNazis can impose a no-fly zone over Syria. If they start shooting at Russian jets the answer will come in the form of nuclear armed missiles. Israel will be taken out in a matter of minutes and made uninhabitable as it has no strategic depth. It does not even take nuclear missiles to achieve the destruction of Israel. If I were Israeli I would not be best pleased with the insane Netanyahu, but Israel at this point seems quite psychotic.

The Russian forces have a standing order to defend themselves with the strongest means available to any attack. Israel managed to create a situation where the fog of war made things less clear but Israel still attacked Russia directly. It is in Israel's and NATO's interest to confuse things in Syria to keep Russia from pursuing it's strategies to the end. It's only Idlib left now, once the remaining Jihadi proxies have been blown out of their holes (a matter of a few months, much less if Turkey lends a hand) the turn will then come to the turncoat Kurds in the East and they will be dealt with just like the jihadis were dealt with.

This is the scenario that is giving Israel and NATO fits, but they cannot stop it without going to war with Russia. Israel cannot possibly survive such a war, so they want to pull in NATO to do the dirty work while Israel itself sits it out on the sidelines. It won't work of course.

Occasional Poster on September 19, 2018 , · at 4:25 pm EST/EDT
@ Bob,

I am one of the armchair warriors, but hell I don't know, I could be wrong, and I sincerely hope that I am.

That said, I do understand the 'wait and see' logic. My only concern with it, is that if the slow and steady strategy is superior to enforcing red lines, then the problem is that the enemy is not stupid.They in turn will see that either a greater provocation is needed, else they need to find a new weak spot to poke.

Zog wants the Russians to fail, and Assad replaced by their puppet, really badly. They are not going to sit back and think 'dammit, we lost, out-smarted by those pesky Russians.'

Again, I hope to be wrong. But the nasties in ZOG HQ are as devious, nasty, and fanatical as they come. If plan A fails, plans B, C and D are lined up.

Big picture, the Shia crescent needs Iraq fully on board, and the yanks out. Then Russia (and Iran) has an uninterrupted air corridor to the theatre, and that doesn't rely on the ever unreliable Turkey..

Zog sees this too. I'm not aware that anybody really focuses on this, but Iraq is really the key. The Sunnis won't like it, but ISIS was their gambit, and it failed. If Iraq becomes free of US control, and joins the Shia Crescent, we will hear Zog's screams all over the world.

That's worth waiting for.

[Sep 19, 2018] Open Thread Russian Plane Brought Down in Syria

Sep 19, 2018 | off-guardian.org

The questions raised: Who really did shoot down this plane? Was it an accident or did France and/or Israel attack? If France are attacking Russia/Syria what prompted this? What do they have to gain? Is it possible for Syria to "accidentally" bring down an allied plane? Don't they have IFFs? Are Russia publicly accepting a false narrative to avoid having to retaliate? Will Russia retaliate against Israel? They have claimed that right already. What will they expect to extract as a quid pro quo on this issue? How will the media report this? Will they call it a "near miss"? That's surely what it was. Do they even understand how close we're coming to global war, whenever a NATO country operates in Syria? How long can we rely on Russian common sense to avoid WWIII?

Admin says September 19, 2018

What do you think Putin should have done?

Your reply needs to acknowledge the following:

1) the neocon hardline and Israel are currently trying to manufacture an excuse for a massive attack on Syria, aimed at widening the war.

2) the Israeli action was aimed at provoking a military response from Russia/Syria that could be used as such an excuse.

3) a widened war would play into western hands and destroy Russia's current ascendancy

What action should Russia take that would punish Israel but avoid giving the neocon hardliners exactly what they wanted?

Admin says September 19, 2018
Try to remain calm.

I notice you don't advocate that Russia should have immediately retaliated militarily. All the things you do advocate (well, most) – quite rationally – would not have shown any results as yet, so we don't know they haven't been done, do we?

But, to repeat, you don't defeat a man who is trying to lure you into a fight by punching him in the face. Intelligence is underrated by the non-intelligent. Subtlety is unappreciated by the crass. The Russian govt's actions tend to be both subtle and intelligent – whether you approve of them or not, and so can go unappreciated by many on all sides of the debate.

As to ascendancy – Syria was intended to be a new Libya by now. That this has been avoided, that the various terrorists are in retreat, that the country remains largely functional, and all without direct confrontation between east and west (so far), is an achievement anyone with any intelligence should recognise, and which the Russia government has every right to be proud of.

Forgive me, but people have been saying variants of "if Putin doesn't DO SOMETHING HUGE right now he's going to burn" for at least the last four years, and they are still saying it, despite the fact he hasn't burned (and neither have we), and, if their sage advice had been followed, we might all be cinders on a dead and cindered planet right now.

ragheadthefiendlyterrorist says September 19, 2018
The only reason it hasn't come to that yet is that the ground was not prepared fully before. Russia is slowly being pushed back to the ropes, the average Western citizen is being conditioned to racially hate Russians (did you read Nikki Haley's comment today that Russians are culturally conditioned to lie and cheat?) and the consent is being steadily manufactured. As I said in my original comment, by showing "restraint" and not that he has teeth, Putin is encouraging his country's enemies. Personally, I don't give a damn about what he does about people he doesn't like, but he's not a private citizen; he is in control of Russia, for good or ill. Most of my Russian friends, all of the far left variety, despise him, incidentally, but that's neither here nor there. The simple fact is that if Russia is to avoid a big war it has to actively deter one, not act like someone attempting to disarm an armed drunk by logical words and sweet reason. That is not going to work.
Paul X says September 19, 2018
If the Russians got a cruise missile down the funnel of the French frigate Auvegne (assuming there is a funnel) what do you think NATO would do? Would they shrug and say it serves Macron right or would they take off the safety locks and blast Russia from every direction in order to protect their partner who had been so 'wrongly' attacked? Haven't they been waiting for the chance for years? Aren't they already loaded up expecting the 'chemical weapons' shout to go up this very week? It would be vey foolish of Russia to take the bait of these provocations and it makes for uneasy reading when Westerners, sitting comfortably in safety, complain that Russians aren't prepared to die for us in large enough numbers to keep them safe. You first guy!
Paul X says September 19, 2018
When provoked so blatantly you need to look to see what the guy is hiding behind his back. In this case the West had built up their forces for a full scale attack on Syria as soon as the White Helmets released their video of choking children filmed a week or so ago. Putin disappointed them by coming to an agreement with Turkey that means the jihadis are further isolated and pushed into possible conflict with radicals.

The time scales of the agreement are vague/unknown but it's unlikely we will see a Jihadi Caliphate set up under Turkish protection.

Like the Syrians it's the crazy foreign fighters that alarm the Turks, the Chinese especially of whom there are 6000 heavily armed in the South. Turkey is keen to see the extremists pushed South making it difficult for them to enter Turkey. Putin's reaction is far more sensible than firing the gun for a major conflict which Russia is most unlikely to win.

Russia is still on track to squeeze the jihadis into smaller and smaller areas where they might be eliminated. It might make liberals happy to see Russia sacrifice herself a la 1941 but it's not going to help anybody except their enemies.

You can't help thinking Putin knows exactly what he's doing.

Admin says September 19, 2018
There can never be a non-nuclear war between the US and Russia. Every strategist worth anything knows this. It's the belief – created by the PNAC neocons – that this isn't true that drives the hardcore nuts in Washington and London and elsewhere.

This is the problem. They are delusional and believe they can fight a limited war with Russia. Those who know they are wrong, and that any such war would go nuclear very very fast are stuck in a profound dilemma. – How to defend oneself and one's interests while avoiding the conflict the lunatics want, which will destroy life on earth?

Answers on a post card please for anyone who thinks they can do better than the current Russian govt is doing.

白矛 says September 19, 2018
It's a complex web.. one has to bear this in mind.. the inter-relationships.. the connections.. Putin for example has to tread the razor edge and fight with one hand tied behind his back due to the Zionist influence atop the Russian hierarchy .
Matt says September 19, 2018
S-200 uses the SAHR guidance system. The radar signal is fairly wide, and if multiple objects fall within the signal, the one with the largest cross-section will be targeted. The Russian IL is much larger than the American F-16. Larger missiles like the 200's 5V21 also tend to hit from above (they come down in a parabolic arc after the motors burned out). So if the F-16's stayed a little behind and below the IL they'd basically guarantee the IL get's killed.

As "Partisangirl" claims, but does not properly understand, Russia integrated Syrian AD into their network some time ago. The purpose of such a integration was to avoid similar accidents.

One problem: That was only for the newer stuff.

A Pantsir, for example, can be told where targets are and what to shoot at by a larger system (they work in a pyramid hierarchy). S-200s are older than h*ll though. It's basically a dumb system from the 60's. (even dumber than a BUK)
What it'll do is spot a target, fire the missile and then when the missile "thinks" it's in the right area (the kill box), it's seeker head goes active (it's a semi active seeker). It starts looking for radar 'reflections' and then homes in on the biggest one it can see. It doesn't actually know what it's looking at and doesn't care. Just goes for the shiniest thing it can detect.

My favourite part is how all these lies are held up as if they merit discussion and as if they deserve to be given equal treatment with what actually happened. It's like holding a "discussion" as to whether or not Aliens rule the Earth.

grandstand says September 19, 2018
I tend to agree with you, on the whole, Mulga, about issues to do with Israel, though perhaps not so stridently. But on this occasion I think Matt is honestly telling things how he sees it.

On the other hand, one should ask why Israel is arbitrarily attacking targets in a sovereign country that is not threatening it. Of course, the answer is that this is what Israel does with impunity – witness USS Liberty among many others. On this occasion, it appears, from what I have read, that Israel was targeting the delivery of Iranian S300 copies to Syria – that is weapons to defend from this kind of attack in future. In reality, far from attacking Israel, Syria has even done nothing about recovering territory lost to Israel in 1967, though in international law Israel – that Israel signed up to – it should be given back to Syria. A few days ago, Israel attacked Damascus airport during an international fair with many visitors and potential for massive loss of life. It seems clear that Israel is trying (probably with US approval) to provoke a response.

Putin always keeps his eye on the long term view but it is time for him to put a stop to this activity if he is to maintain credibility with his allies and his voters. This attack will serve to weaken Putin's hitherto Israel friendly stance unless he wants to lose support in Russia. Putin is the best friend Israel has in Russia. It seems that Russian military is saying that there will be a response – much stronger than Putin.

grandstand says September 19, 2018
On the other hand – re my previous comment, Matt, IAF was clearly using the Russian ELINT plane as cover. It is tantamount to using civilians as human shields. Though the crew were Russian military, they were not involved in the action, apparently, and Israel had agreed not to target Russian assets in Syria. One cannot absolve Israel on this and the Russian military know it. They will be looking to Putin to permit a response.
Jen says September 19, 2018
Then you surely would not object if Russia were to ask Israel to hand over the pilots involved so they can explain in a Russian military court or a similar setting their actions and the thinking and expectations that motivated them to hide their jets in the Ilyushin transport plane's radar shadow.
Yarkob says September 19, 2018
israel is breaking international law (again) its pilots, and their commanders and any FAO they use, are criminals. plain and simple
Guest Columnist says September 19, 2018
Yes, there is a large element of theatre at play in this conflict. What many people don't want to accept is that they have no way of knowing what the entire truth is. All the information about situations and events comes from partisan organizations with vested interests. Expecting the side one personally favours to present objective truths is wishful thinking at best, downright delusional at worst.

The post-truth era means everybody walks around believing they have 'figured out' the truth, no hard evidence required, but they can't all be right can they?

It's neoliberal individualism gone mad.

Harry Law says September 18, 2018
Not so long ago Netanyahu was pleading with Putin [successfully] not to supply the S300 anti aircraft system [defensive] to Syria, at the same time Israel was the first country to get a fleet of F35's [offensive] from the US. Putin defers far to much to the US/Israel, we now see the results. Incidentally how come Saudi Arabia can buy the S400 system, when they were one of the instigators of Syrian regime change. Russia's "partners" want Syria destroyed, the warmonger McCain always said the US should take on Syria and that Russia would 'do nothing', was he right?
Admin says September 18, 2018
Let's recall the realities here and not succumb to hysteria. One of the reasons these provocations are happening is that Russia is winning in Syria, militarily and politically. Loading...
Big B says September 18, 2018
What are the realities: we are not being told?

Harry has touched on an important point: that Russia and Israel are becoming closer and closer strategic Russophone partners. Russia was the first country in the world to recognise W Jerusalem as Israel's capital (before even Trump). There was only one foreign dignitary at the May 9th Victory Parade their growing economic, military and cultural ties (Customs Union negotiations and visa free travel for instance) cannot be ignored.

The IDF's 200 strikes in 18 months must lead to serious consideration of tacit Russian approval because they could be quite quickly stopped without it? But that would escalate the situation. Where does Iran stand in this, because VVP made quite clear to Netanyahu that Iran was Russia's principle strategic partner in the region. Is that set to change?

Netanyahu has met VVP what, three times this year, behind closed doors. What was said, and what agreements were made? It is also reputed that they have a direct one-to-one encrypted comms network (though I can't confirm it was activated). But that they are in regular contact is undoubted.

There is a lot more going on beneath the surface than first meets the eye. VVP's relations with Netanyahu blurs the boundaries and greys the narrative. The fact that VVP is saying it "looks accidental" doesn't ring true it looks anything other than accidental to me. Was there a communication breakdown as VVP is in Hungary?

I do not know, and based on what we have been told, neither does anyone else. The FS Auvergne fired missiles just as the Il-20 HQ went off screen. They weren't firing at the IDF, I wouldn't be too sure they were "window dressing" for them either. Whatever went on, we are being kept in the dark. Not precipitating WW3 is a good thing. Other than that, Russia's foreign policy and ME relations are a 3D chess game that we know little of the motivation behind: but I can infer that Russia's strategic needs are primary. At what point can that be labelled imperialist?

Frankly Speaking says September 18, 2018
"What are the realities: we are not being told?"

Are you expecting to be spoon fed? And by the biased BBC, Guardian, etc!

It's pretty clear that Assad has won with Putin's support. China is on side too as evidenced by recent military manoeuvres. What is happening now is the US, UK, France, Israel, Turkey, Saudi just saving face and been allowed the odd small success or two.

However, Israel royally fucked up last night and Netanyahu will lose a plane or three if he tries it again.

Big B says September 18, 2018
You didn't really read my comment: this "odd small success " has happened 200 times in the last 18 months with the downing of how many IDF planes 1? Russia providing S-300s, or S-400s, or upgrading the 1960's SAM 2s would secure Syrian airspace. But these supplies are not forthcoming. Because Israel will not allow them.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liberman-to-russian-media-israel-did-not-join-western-action-against-moscow/

The situation is a lot more complex: and no, I don't want to be spoonfed by the BBC. The Saker posits a "Zionist 5th Column" in Russia that VVP has to accommodate. You seem to want a simplistic ZioNATO v Russia narrative, all I am saying it is a lot more nuanced than that. And I didn't get that from the Graun!

Big B says September 19, 2018
200 IDF strikes in 18 months, that could be stopped by turning on their S-400s, would be an instance.. Israel has lobbied successfully to prevent Syria from securing its own airspace. The majority of these attacks are to prevent Assad acquiring what Haaretz terms "lethal weaponry" a euphemism for Iranian supplied air defences that could secure Syrian airspace. As could a Russian declared NFZ (though the IDF would just standoff over Lebanon or the Med, and not penetrate Syrian airspace). Or Russian supplied S-300s.

So my answer is yes and no. The Russophone alliance of Russia and Israel seems to be ascendant over Syrian sovereignty. Or it was, until Monday. There appears to have been a breakdown in the de-confliction agreement, or a deliberate misuse and provocation by Israel. The jury is out on that one for the moment. If the attacks are stopped, I would tend to agree with you.

There is the small matter of the international silence surrounding the FS Auvergne firing missiles concurrent with the downing of the Il-20 HQ. These either hit the Il-20 or Latakia. Has anyone considered the Il-20 WAS the target? That there was no accident, but a deliberate targeting? Did the IDF or French take out the Russian early warning system and electronic warfare capability to leave Latakia vulnerable? I don't know, and Rothschild Macron said no! It is worth considering though, I feel.

Integrated into the systems view of militaristic, imperialistic, and sub-imperialistic, and extractivist proliferation: it hardly matters who did what when. They are not giving us an insight into their collective insanity and power games, where the stakes are humanities very survivability. Russia only seemed to remember on Monday that the serial numbers on the MH-17 BUK, means it was made in 1986. What else have they forgotten? What else do they not know?

Humanity has no strategic allies within the global neoliberal ruling class. Arming the world is a "pro-conflict policy", wouldn't you agree? Where militaristic proliferation can't facilitate peace: the only possible de-confliction becomes system change? There are good and bad actors within the current globally hegemonic cultural system: VVP is possibly the best, so it would be unfair to heap the woes of an essentially evil system upon him especially in isolation. So it must fall to those outside the transnational globally integrated system to call out where this insanity will lead. That's you and me?

What I am suggesting is rather than the inevitably favourable comparison of VVP, and well, just about anyone else let's look at the bigger picture. International World Capitalism, as Guattari termed it, has faced us with the choice of three suicides. Without a radical transformation of the oppressed consciousness (a la Guattari, Deleuze, Freire, Bookchin, Naess, but better still the secular Buddha) there will soon enough come the day that does not dawn Monday night was a foreshadowing of that very day?

Admin says September 19, 2018
The idea a head of state can function as a moral paragon is naive of course. Putin pursues Russia's interests, not world peace and brotherhood. But at the same time we can't ignore the fact he does so while adhering to the requirements of international law far more than the west does. In that sense, he has some claim to respect from those who value ethical conduct. Whatever his motives may be this fact deserves to be stated and made clear.
manfromatlan says September 18, 2018
Ronald Reagan and the US were complicit in the downing of KAL Flight 007. Similar moves afoot again to build up military race between Russia and US and bog Russia in Syria https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1985/09/26/the-fate-of-ke007-an-exchange/
vexarb says September 18, 2018
BTL SyrPer, vot tak on September 18, 2018 · at 12:22 pm EST/EDT

Interesting take from an israeli.

Israel Unlikely to Fly Freely Over Syria After Il-20 Incident – Ex-Official

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201809181068132500-israel-syria-il-20-incident-airspace/

"Israel is unlikely to freely use Syrian airspace in the wake of the crash of a Russian Il-20 military aircraft over the Mediterranean Sea, Yakov Kedmi, a former high-ranking Israeli intelligence official, told Sputnik.

"There was an agreement between Israel and Russia that the actions of Israel in Syria's airspace would not endanger lives of Russian troops. Israel breached this commitment What happens next will depend on the position of Israel. Most likely, Israel will no longer be able to enjoy the same freedom in the sky of Syria as it did before the incident," Kedmi said.

"Israel's attack in itself, regardless of the consequences, was an irresponsible step, because there is not a single facility on the territory of Syria that might have been used by Iran and whose destruction would have justified an attack on it, which could endanger the Russian troops," Kedmi said."

Mulga Mumblebrain says September 19, 2018
The idea that Israel would honour ANY 'agreement' made with anyone is quite mirth-inducing.
archie1954 says September 18, 2018
The US must be the worst nation on the face of the Earth. Everywhere it goes, death and destruction follow. To top it all off, the blatant hypocrisy is too much to handle. America is treacherous and duplicitous in the extreme. It has supported terrorists of all stripes in the Middle East and elsewhere for its own selfish geopolitical reasons. It is an entity not to be trusted, ever!
Cassandra says September 18, 2018
admin you might find some answers to your questions here:

http://www.voltairenet.org/article202998.html

Regarding (the long tradition of ) British-French-Israeli collusion

"Not only Russian and (allegedly) Israeli and French aircraft and missiles were in the air. Civilian radar also tracked British Royal Air Force aircraft, which, unusually, had switched on their transponders and gone into holding patterns – most likely to avoid being somehow involved in the exchange of fire over Latakia." (source: Haaretz)

we should remember Sykes-Picot and "Operation Revised" (the 1956 Suez-deception)

http://users.ox.ac.uk/~ssfc0005/The%20Protocol%20of%20Sevres%201956%20Anatomy%20of%20a%20War%20Plot.html

"The documentary evidence does not leave any room for doubt that at Sèvres, during the three days in late October 1956, an elaborate war plot was hatched against Egypt by the representatives of France, Britain and Israel. The Protocol of Sèvres is the most conclusive piece of evidence for it lays out in precise detail and with a precise time-table how the joint war against Egypt was intended to proceed and shows foreknowledge of each other's intentions .

The central aim of the plot was the overthrow of Gamal Abdel Nasser. This aim is not explicitly stated in the protocol but it emerges clearly and unambiguously from all the records of the discussions surrounding it. Yet each of the three partners had a very different perspective on this war plot, and it was not at all clear how even the agreed aim was to be achieved.
The French were the most straight-forward, unwavering and unabashed advocates of military force. As far as they were concerned, Colonel Nasser supported the Algerian rebels and that, along with his nationalization of the Suez Canal Company, was enough to justify a war to overthrow him. For their part, the French did not need any further pretext for taking military action. It was the British, unwilling to incur Arab hostility by appearing as ally of Israel, who needed a pretext and Israel was able and willing to provide it but only at a price. Israel also required the elimination of Nasser's air force, for which task Britain alone had the heavy bomber bases sufficiently near at hand."

https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/USO/chp1_p2.html (Col.Fletcher Prouty's insights into the engineered "Suez Crisis")

MI6, the CIA the long history of covert ops in Syria

https://www.youtube.com/embed/511W2O-fPrY?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

John Gilberts says September 19, 2018
I was also struck by the Haaretz report that "Something strange was definitely in the air over Syria on Monday night with British and French forces reportedly present." I hope this open thread may bring more information on this alleged NATO involvement. I am beginning to think this incident may have rather more actors than we've been told. Loading...
grandstand says September 19, 2018
Yes – agreed. FUKUS ships have moved closer to the Syrian coast in the last few days, presumably in anticipation of an attack (chemical or otherwise) that they could justify a response to. The Russians have been doing a great job in the (non-Western) media of predicting potential chemical fake attacks and thereby defusing them. The one minute warning from Israel suggests the possibility (no more than that) that the Israelis saw the ELINT plane approaching the airfield and quickly decided to use it as cover for whatever reason.

As I've said in other posts, the Israelis have narrowed Putin's options. Of FUKUS +I they are the easiest to pick off.

A very different and is some ways attractive theory is presented here:

https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/09/full-analysis-russian-disinfo-campaign-blames-israel-for-il-20-plane-downing-yet-exonerates-france/

I am not totally convinced – Matt's view on the capability of the Syrian SAMs seems more convincing and it is not clear that Russian fighters could have scrambled in time, especially as the Israelis had agreed not to target Russian assets, but if true it perhaps is a clever – nay Machiavellian – way of opening up options for Putin vis-a-vis his Israeli/Russian Jewish oligarchs and hanging the Israelis out to dry.

Paul X says September 19, 2018
Is there any information about whether the Auvergne did or didn't fire missiles? The Syrians (and Russians?) said they had witnessed the firing of missiles which seemed to be aimed at the same government buildings as that being attacked by Israel which suggests collusion. Loading...
Admin says September 19, 2018
Apparently France is denying it
Philpot says September 18, 2018
The US and NATO's compliant poodles are clearly willing to risk WWIII as they think Russia will simply back down when they instigate open warfare and regime change in Syria. My own belief is that poor honest broker Russia has been left to decide the fate of world peace. Personally, for all our futures, I believe Russia must declare a no fly zone over Syria – anyone entering to bomb will be at mercy of S400. Otherwise this will continue and if the US gets Syria it will be Iran next and WWIII – that is, armageddon.
Gary Weglarz says September 18, 2018
The entire of the West has now become simply a huge collective criminal enterprise operating completely outside the bounds of international law and threatening to bring about armageddon in the process. Of course one would never know this by reading or watching Western media where our clueless psychopathic leaders are portrayed as gallantly fighting for "human rights" and "democracy" through "regime change" and endless slaughter.
vexarb says September 18, 2018
BTL SyrPer Auslander on September 18, 2018 · at 7:54 am EST/EDT

Israeli plane apparently passed just in front of the plane, SAA got a lock, Israeli doglegged left, missile lost lock and chose the biggest target ..our plane. Israel violated protocol, called one minute before the attack, not enough time for our bird to get out of the way. The french frigate was window dressing.

It was a setup.

europeannewright says September 18, 2018
Interesting that both Trump and Macron involved both stooges is the Israel military trying to trigger the third European War ? Loading...
Rigged Democracy says September 18, 2018
Here are a couple of quotes that show how far the system has been rigged/corrupted:

"one of the things we need to do is give young Jewish people the confidence to be proud of their identity – as British, Jewish and Zionist too .. There is no contradiction between these identities and we must never let anyone try to suggest that there should be ..
"You can also count on my commitment to Israel's security .. I am clear that we will always support Israel's right to defend itself."
– UK Prime Minister Theresa May, at the United Jewish Israel Appeal

"I've never seen a President -- I don't care who he is -- stand up to them (Israel). It just boggles the mind. They always get what they want. The Israelis know what is going on all the time. I got to the point where I wasn't writing anything down. If the American people understood what a grip these people have got on our government, they would rise up in arms. Our citizens certainly don't have any idea what goes on."
– U.S. Navy Admiral and former head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Thomas Moorer

Paul X says September 18, 2018
The BBC report no longer mentions the French frigate. Vanished!
0use4msm says September 18, 2018
The significance of direct military involvement by Israel and France is that the facade of a "civil war" (albeit by proxy) can no longer be maintained. The only thing that prevents it from being a regular war between nations is the omission of a declaration.
SO. says September 18, 2018

Is it possible for Syria to "accidentally" bring down an allied plane? Don't they have IFFs?

Yup, and kinda. It's perfectly possible to do it and IFF doesn't really work the way a lot of people think. (IFF transponder beacon works by transmitting a signal to the ground station or launcher).

If the ground station recognises the beacon it labels the aircraft as friendly and either denies launch permission or warns the operator beforehand.

However with a system like the S-200 that will not actually matter. The SA-5 (S-200) is an old system from the 60's which uses a semi active radar homing missile and how it works is quite simple.

When the ground system detects a target it illuminates the target with it's radar like a torch and launches the missile.

The missile then follows the radar reflection from the target until it gets close enough to detonate, goes bang, shoots plane down.

However the beam from the radar 'torch' can be quite wide (miles wide), F-16's are quite small, IL-20's quite big.. and the missile itself is pretty dumb.

As such by hiding in behind the larger aircraft the smaller aircraft can almost guarantee an incoming missile will prioritise the large aircraft reflection and kill that instead. It doesn't actually matter if the missile was launched against the smaller target in the first instance or if IFF came into play. The missile itself is too dumb to care. It just goes for the largest thing it can see.

BigB says September 18, 2018
Thanks for clearing that up: but it raises the question that the Il-20 was on a pre-planned flight path known in advance to both Russian and Syrian air traffic control (whom I believe are sitting next to each other?) Knowing what you have just posted (which I do not doubt) it can hardly be termed "accidental"?

I suspect the FS Auvergne fired its Aster missiles, but I'm not expecting a clarification of that. The situation is greyed by the burgeoning Russian-Israeli Russophone alliance. A simple narrative will not be forthcoming, I suspect.

SO. says September 18, 2018
The IL-20's been on station flying figure 8's on constant rotation for months so it's flight and landing path would be known to everyone with half assed radar or even functional eyeballs.
Paul X says September 18, 2018
Putin can't afford to get it wrong – for everybody's sake. His power is limited. He has done an excellent job in defeating the West in Syria but how could he react to missiles from the French frigate without triggering a massive NATO attack not just on Syria but Russia? In the current climate and the West's readiness it could happen in hours. He has always emphasised he puts Russian interests first – and those included eliminating thousands of Russian Jihadis before they returned home to create mayhem. He has never said he'll take on the World. So the French missiles were a mirage and the plane an accident? Well that's better than an even bigger war maybe?
vexarb says September 19, 2018
@BigB. Igor Bundy ABTL SyrPer supplies additonal info plus timeline, concludes that attack from only 4 planes is not lkely.

Russia not received data from #Israel on situation with IL-20 in #Syria – Peskov
https://sptnkne.ws/j9ce

-#Russia launched an S-400 missile/s against the Israeli jets which were dropping bombs 100Km away, so we're kept in the dark for now.

-#Russia responded immediately to the attack before the il-20M was lost Because the S-200 missiles were launched 20 min after the first wave.

-The attack lasted about 50 min, so only 4 F-16 doing the bombing is unlikely

Paul X says September 18, 2018
If the French and Israeli's attacked at the same time then they must have liased with each other. Or conspired is another way of putting it. Shades of 1956? But nowadays there wouldn't be the slightest outrage at such a collusion; it's oar for the course. And where is the missing partner, the UK? "No longer up to it" the French would say. "Too busy" say the Brits. NB which bit of Syria are the French after this time? Or do they see it descending into the chaos of a Libya, their last successful destabilisation.
Jo says September 18, 2018
Note Russian and IDF planes in direct line from s-200 being fired ..with French frigate ..looks like deliberate coordination to provide cover for each .but if frigate attacked then IDF planes available to directly attack Bashir in Damascus .and frigate to provide a source of provocation for excuse for Nato forces to launch their massive attack they desparately wish to do .especially as Putin agreed no military attack in Idlib ..and Russian MoD presentation yesterday it was a Ukraine BUK .in fact it is tempting to say Nato did this to get back at Russian MoD and punish them for this and expose in any way Russia's belief in trust and agreements and hotlines as a laughing stock ..and they have succeeded .a Russian plane shot down by an outdated Russian missile launched by Syria and Russia failing to supply s-300 but Turkey and everyone else can have s-400 which might ? have not ended up like this.
And did not Russia promise to deal with the "launch source" of any more missiles against Syria since the previous lot? Surely their are Russians in Latakia
Paul X says September 18, 2018
But you seem to be expecting or encouraging Russia to take on the World when in fact it's resources are limited
Jo says September 19, 2018
The elephant in the room is Iran .no responses from them yet even though Israel uses excuses to say it is defending itself from them and continues to attack what tjey call Iranian assets or anything they might vaguely claim have any connections to Iran ..does Iran follow Putins example to keep calm and carry on .thinking their"partnership" is being put to the test as of course it is in order to provoke it to invite a response by usa and associates .does it say to Putin enough is enough we are going to do our thing as you have said Russia is only in Syria to protect its own interests so cannot we do the same ..what options covert or overt does Iran have one wonders ..
David Macilwain says September 18, 2018
One question you didn't ask is whether this act, which appears to be an Israeli provocation assisted by the French, is related to the Sochi talks/agreement? Seems that supporters of the Syrian Opposition, of which France is right behind Turkey, might not like the agreement, partly because it stalls the plans for a "Syrian gas attack" by removing the pretext.
However I think the wider question is why and how has France been involved in this, described on SBS as "Israeli and French forces conducting aerial attacks on Syrian State assets"? Israel is a law unto itself, but France's intervention without any pretext whatsoever is a blatant war crime and escalation. The whole thing looks like a provocation, and one wonders when Russia will break. If Putin was unhappy having to make a peace agreement with the psycho Erdogan, he will be more unhappy now.
Paul X says September 18, 2018
If Russia was 'obliged' to retaliate to Israeli or French attacks its inherent weaknesses would be exposed. It remains a relatively poor country and Putin must be well aware it can't take on the US, Israel, the KSA and the other Gulf Emirs as well as France and the UK. It's done a fantastic job saving Syria but it can't take on The Rest of the World. If it has accepted Syrian missile defences brought it down that may well be the way out of a bigger war – this time.
manfromatlan says September 18, 2018
Putin's main interest is preserving Russian interests. Here, turning the other cheek likely is the best course. Loading...
writerroddis says September 18, 2018
I agree, Paul X. These are not only perilous waters, but untested to boot. In fact not one of the military powers you cite has had its strength tested against a non third world adversary. I know there are infantile tendencies crying "bring it on!" – as though speaking of a long awaited prize fight involving their heavyweight boxer of choice – but saner voices can only express alarm and profound dismay at what Western rulers seem bent on dragging us into. I say enough of this macho nonsense about who would prevail. I do take some comfort in the possibility – https://www.unz.com/tsaker/book-review-losing-military-supremacy-the-myopia-of-american-strategic-planning-by-andrei-martyanov/- that US military power is overstated, but it is comfort of the bleakest possible kind. Loading...
archie1954 says September 18, 2018
The point is this, Russia can take on the whole World if it had to, but it would be a pyrrhic victory, because to do so would require nuclear weapons which no nation could survive. However, Russia has many allies, the largest of which is China, so it probably would only be taking on one major opponent, the US and a few of its erstwhile allies (France, Britain etc.), not by any stretch of the imagination, the whole World!
Paul X says September 18, 2018
China is even weaker than Russia and not long ago said it was 10 years behind the US in military terms and it's hard to see they'd welcome a bit of sacrifice to pull Putin's chestnuts out of the fire. That Alliance is for the future. Right now a full blooded NATO response would be quite enough. Many in America would be delighted if Russia used a nuke; total annihaltion of Russia would follow, something they've been dying to do for 75 years. And of course they might go for the First Strike.

[Sep 19, 2018] You probably can call shooting down IL-20 a NATO attack

Sep 19, 2018 | thesaker.is

Littlejohn on September 19, 2018 , · at 6:02 pm EST/EDT

I have to agree up to a point that this attack was a "full test of the EW capabilties of the western & Israel armies". This was not just an Israeli attack. Israel just supplied four attack jets. The French were (as Russia observed) firing missiles. British aircraft were high overhead providing surveillance and attack data. U.S. surveillance aircraft similar to the IL-20 are more or less full-time orbiting off the Lebanon/Syria coasts gathering data, probing electronic systems and providing aerial data link relays for the planes and ships below. We should all stop calling this an "Israeli attack". It was basically a NATO attack on Syria.

It's evident that the Russian and Syrian forces were not prepared for such a combined attack as this.

NATO "won" overwhelmingly.

And this was just a "warmup" for the next, bigger attack to come. Russia must up it's game drastically or it's going to face a crushing defeat in the next attack.

[Sep 19, 2018] "Israeli military delegation led by air force commander to travel to Moscow to share information on Il-20 plane crash.

Sep 19, 2018 | thesaker.is

JJ on September 19, 2018 , · at 4:48 pm EST/EDT

"Israeli military delegation led by air force commander to travel to Moscow to share information on Il-20 plane crash.

The Israeli military delegation led by Air Force Commander Maj. Gen. Amikam Norkin will travel to Moscow on September 20 with information about the crash of a Russian Il-20 reconnaissance aircraft off the Syrian coast that killed 15 military personnel, the IDF press service said Wednesday."

Will be interesting to see how or maybe if it correlates with Russian intelligence?

[Sep 19, 2018] on September 19, 2018 at 3:31 pm EST/EDT

Sep 19, 2018 | thesaker.is

The entire Russian policy in Syria has been confused and riddled with contradictions from the very beginning. The situation in 2015 was:
1. The Syrian government was on the verge of losing a war against jihadi forces.
2. Those jihadi forces were largely foreign and were organized, funded and directed by the
Anglo/zionists.
3. The Russians could not match the conventional forces that could be brought to bear in the region by
the Anglo/zionists.
4. Any Russian intervention could only succeed if the Anglo/zionists were deterred from intervening
directly by the presence of Russian forces and the fear of a wider war (that could go nuclear).

Now given those four facts, which I presume nobody seriously disagrees with, the Russian operation in Syria was always based upon maintaining the fear in the minds of the military planners in Tel Aviv and Washington that any direct interference with Russian forces in Syria would mean war with Russia. This was the most important single job of the Russian forces in Syria maintaining the deterrent capability vis-a-vis the Anglo/zionists.

How do you maintain deterrence? You do so by enforcing your red lines EVERY TIME they are challenged. Russian inability to clearly define their red lines in Syria and to enforce those red lines each and every time they were tested has led us to a point where the Russians no longer have any credibility in Syria.

My crystal ball says that within the next 30 days, not only will the US massively strike the SAA and the Assad government, but that they will impose a no fly zone over all of Syria to ground the Russian and Syrian air forces. What will the Russians do in response? They will have a choice between war and defeat Everything they have done to this point, indicates that they will do whatever they need to do to avoid a direct military confrontation with the Anglo/zionist forces. Imagine if you were a military planner in Tel Aviv or Washington, how could you convince anyone that there was any credible threat that Russia would go to war over Syria? You couldn't and hence we are now faced with the imminent threat of either an Anglo/zionist victory in Syria or WW3. Reply

Christian W on September 19, 2018 , · at 4:23 pm EST/EDT

The Anglo-Zionists are losing in Syria. Russia, Syria and Iran are winning. That is why the ZioNazis are desperate and moving in themselves, now that their proxies have been defeated. There is no way the ZioNazis can impose a no-fly zone over Syria. If they start shooting at Russian jets the answer will come in the form of nuclear armed missiles. Israel will be taken out in a matter of minutes and made uninhabitable as it has no strategic depth. It does not even take nuclear missiles to achieve the destruction of Israel. If I were Israeli I would not be best pleased with the insane Netanyahu, but Israel at this point seems quite psychotic.

The Russian forces have a standing order to defend themselves with the strongest means available to any attack. Israel managed to create a situation where the fog of war made things less clear but Israel still attacked Russia directly. It is in Israel's and NATO's interest to confuse things in Syria to keep Russia from pursuing it's strategies to the end. It's only Idlib left now, once the remaining Jihadi proxies have been blown out of their holes (a matter of a few months, much less if Turkey lends a hand) the turn will then come to the turncoat Kurds in the East and they will be dealt with just like the jihadis were dealt with.

This is the scenario that is giving Israel and NATO fits, but they cannot stop it without going to war with Russia. Israel cannot possibly survive such a war, so they want to pull in NATO to do the dirty work while Israel itself sits it out on the sidelines. It won't work of course.

Occasional Poster on September 19, 2018 , · at 4:25 pm EST/EDT
@ Bob,

I am one of the armchair warriors, but hell I don't know, I could be wrong, and I sincerely hope that I am.

That said, I do understand the 'wait and see' logic. My only concern with it, is that if the slow and steady strategy is superior to enforcing red lines, then the problem is that the enemy is not stupid.They in turn will see that either a greater provocation is needed, else they need to find a new weak spot to poke.

Zog wants the Russians to fail, and Assad replaced by their puppet, really badly. They are not going to sit back and think 'dammit, we lost, out-smarted by those pesky Russians.'

Again, I hope to be wrong. But the nasties in ZOG HQ are as devious, nasty, and fanatical as they come. If plan A fails, plans B, C and D are lined up.

Big picture, the Shia crescent needs Iraq fully on board, and the yanks out. Then Russia (and Iran) has an uninterrupted air corridor to the theatre, and that doesn't rely on the ever unreliable Turkey..

Zog sees this too. I'm not aware that anybody really focuses on this, but Iraq is really the key. The Sunnis won't like it, but ISIS was their gambit, and it failed. If Iraq becomes free of US control, and joins the Shia Crescent, we will hear Zog's screams all over the world.

That's worth waiting for.

[Sep 19, 2018] Russia options are limited

Sep 19, 2018 | thesaker.is

Woogs on September 19, 2018 , · at 1:39 pm EST/EDT

Which is why the provocations won't stop. Honestly, I don't see how Putin can think he can shrug them off and continue with the job at hand in Syria. He will try but Zion will continue to double-down.

I believe the West has seen enough of their schemes foiled by Putin and his playing the long game. The strategy now is to take the long game from him. The advantage in this goes to the West as they can be as provocative as they want while Russia has to be careful not to be seen as an aggressor lest it wreck Nord Stream, Turk Stream and the thaw in relations with Germany.

Putin has sounded conciliatory, maybe even weak in some eyes. He did, however, note that Russia's attitude towards this incident is expressed in the MoD statement, which is noticeably less conciliatory.

Perhaps that, along with some concrete actions (I favor a limited no-fly zone), will deter outside interference while the essential work at Idlib can continue. We can only hope.

[Sep 19, 2018] It is a promise or threat being honored. For months we have we have been hearing high ranking American officials openly advocating that their goal in Syria was to make as many as possible Russian military return home in body bags

Sep 19, 2018 | thesaker.is

Stanley Laham on September 19, 2018 , · at 5:24 pm EST/EDT

May I remind you Saker that this incident was not just a provocation. It is a promise or threat being honored. For months we have we have been hearing high ranking American officials openly advocating that their goal in Syria was to make as many as possible Russian military return home in body bags. From Senators to directors of intelligence have unabashedly and unapologetically said so openly on American TVs. And they are doing it whenever possible.
So the question for Mr. Putin is whether he's gonna let them continue with impunity. I don't know how old most commentators on this site are, but for those who remember the denouement of the Vietnam war you will remember that the only war the US ever lost was when the American people had enough of hundreds of their soldiers returning home every week in body bags.
Kampfbeobachter on September 19, 2018 , · at 6:49 pm EST/EDT
remember the Tu 20 was used a RADAR shield for the 4 Israeli F-16. These are obviously aircraft and operate from an Israeli military base.The Russians know the geographical coordinates of these bases to the accuracy of a few meters. The Russian SSBM can stay in the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea Flotilla can repeat their Deir ez Zoor feat again testing the Iron Dome an Davids Sling in the process.
This potential threat will cause the Israeli military planers some sleepless nights.
I have read that the fire works capabilities of Hezbollah have somewhat improved in recent years. The possible components of a "no fly zone" over Israel and western Syria. Not that it will happen but making the protection racket in Washington foam at their Snouts is worth something too. IMHO
bored muslim on September 19, 2018 , · at 3:49 pm EST/EDT
Lets not forget China has people (Special Forces, Logistics people, medics etc) on the ground in Syria. Some brigades of the special forces are embedded with the Syrian Arab Armies Tiger Division and 4th Armored Division. The spearheads of most campaigns.

China has major plans foe the Levant, as far as connectivity with the OBR Silk Roads. They already have plans to rebuild Syria.

With cheap Chinese weapons, and a large volume of such, the Arabs, Assyrians of Syria will achieve their ultimate victory. The same applies to Iraq, where the U.S. , British and French position looks more and more precarious.

By 2030, the U.S., Britain and France will have been expelled from the MENA/Central Asian regions, only to have China fill the vacuum. Russia or not, China is coming, its rising fast.

­
Rob from Canada on September 19, 2018 , · at 4:34 pm EST/EDT
I agree with you 100% that there is no hope for the Western globalist elite. That's because they're incompetent, psychopathic, loser scum who are only a few bricks short of a load and their ponzi scam is only a few moves from mate.

https://www.traditionalright.com/the-deep-state-speaks/

cstahnke on September 19, 2018 , · at 6:59 pm EST/EDT
I wouldn't say that at all. They are still in positions of power with enormous economic and military sources. They are in decline but not that far down the road. Russia won't act strongly because the US/NATO/Israel/Saudi alliance is waaaaay more powerful and still very united in the Imperial project. Only a very tight China-Russia-Iran alliance would cause the Empire to hesitate to play their current game of continual micro-aggressions against Russia/Syria/Iran. Putin will not respond because he does not have as close an alliance with the Chinese as the US has with their "allies (vassals)." Washington can no longer dictate terms in world affairs but is more influential than Russia/China/Iran and any other minor players.
B.F. on September 19, 2018 , · at 2:25 pm EST/EDT
Kfeto
You need to do your homework before posting comments. Erdogan had nothing to do with with the shooting of that Russian SU-24. This was done behind his back, with pro-US elements in Turkey hoping to create a rift between Russia and Turkey. It was a provocation. The pilot of that Turkish F-16 was a Turk of Albanian origin, who was subsequently placed under arrest. When the US instigated that coup d'etat against Erdogan, it was the Russians who both warned him and saved his life, as his plane was targeted by Turkish F-16's flown by conspirators, who backed off, having Russian Sukhois behind them and Russian missiles in Syria pointing at them.

The shooting of that Russian reconnaissance plane in Syria was another provocation, Israel hoping to provoke Putin to retaliate and starting a mass war in Syria, bearing in mind that NATO brought additional ships to the Syrian coast. It did not work, as Putin stayed cool. However, Russian and Syrian AA missile systems have now become integrated. When it comes to this latest provocation, it could have been greater than it appeared. Commentators have pointed to that French frigate firing a missile. What kind of missile was that ? An AA missile, or a cruise missile ? Did the French shoot that Russian plane down ? If so, then we were facing a very real threat of wider war, because had the Russians retaliated, then NATO would have had an excuse to attack Syria, now that it's little false flag plan has been exposed, another chemical "attack" by Assad, as if Assad was foolish enough to do such a thing.

The point is that Putin does not fall for provocations. He has proved it again.

bored muslim on September 19, 2018 , · at 3:38 pm EST/EDT
I concur. Israel is a rogue state, and this was a provocation.

A firm response is required. The world is watching. Anything short of a firm response would negate Vostok 2018.

Does Putin stand with, and behind his own Minister of Defense, who layed the blame firmly on Israel.

Russia needs to secure Syrian and Lebanese airspace to Israeli provocations. AS a starting point. And Russia should make a lot of noise at the U.N., giving them a headache there, as well as points against the U.S..

Israeli arrogance should not be let go by superpower Russia.

[Sep 19, 2018] NATO ships are still off the Syrian coast. Why ? For what purpose ? Just keeping them at sea must cost millions of dollars. Are they waiting for something ?

Sep 19, 2018 | thesaker.is

B.F. on September 19, 2018 , · at 3:19 pm EST/EDT

amarynth
You are correct. I am wondering what really happened. Officially that Russian plane was mistakenly shot down by Syrians, who were targeting Israeli F-16's that were hiding behind the Russian plane. Both the Syrian radar operators and their Russian advisors must have known about that Russian reconnaissance plane, making such a mistake improbable, but not impossible. Then we have reports of that French frigate firing a missile. What kind of missile was that ? An AA missile, or a cruise missile ? No additional data has been provided. I wonder why.

NATO ships are still off the Syrian coast. Why ? For what purpose ? Just keeping them at sea must cost millions of dollars. Are they waiting for something ?

That false flag chemical "attack" which the US planned, hoping to frame Assad, has been exposed. Putin and Erdogan make a deal on Idlib. After that we have that Israeli attack, with the French giving a helping hand. Was NATO provoking Putin to make a retaliatory attack, either against Israel or against that French frigate ? Time will tell. However, as The Saker has stated, Russians have patience.

Stanley on September 19, 2018 , · at 5:48 pm EST/EDT
Patience is not always a virtue. Stalin paid dearly for his patience with Hitler even though his plans for Lebensraum and expansion eastward were not hidden. Careful Mr. Putin that you not pay dearly for your patience with the American Empire when it's plan "Project for a New American Century" has been clearly spelled out.
Veritas on September 19, 2018 , · at 3:32 pm EST/EDT
Yes Saker as you say let's wait and see what the Russian response will be.

Over the years – this always is the knee jerk reaction of the armchair warriors and anti-Putin/Russia trolls – whenever Russia is attacked in Syria or elsewhere. Some still don't learn that Russia is slow to saddle and quick to ride. The MOD statements have already set down who is to blame and a reply to this disgusting provocation will be answered in their own way and in their own time. Putin also agreed with the MOD statements and hinted himself to watch this space.

"Also, speaking of Syria: has anybody noticed that the agreement between Turkey and Russia has removed any justification for a US attack on Syria and that the Israelis have organized their latest little bloody stunt right after this deal was announced?"

This was a very important point, I also noted. I also read that the II-20 plane was returning from reconnaissance over Idlib and was just coming into land .take from that what you will ..

[Sep 19, 2018] I think a basic question here is whether the Israelis were deliberately trying to down the II-20.

Sep 19, 2018 | thesaker.is

Edward on September 19, 2018 , · at 4:26 pm EST/EDT

I think a basic question here is whether the Israelis were deliberately trying to down the II-20. Is it a coincidence that the Israeli attack took place precisely when that plane was landing? The Israelis have done worse. I think they had foreknowledge of 9-11, for example, and were unwilling to help their American "friends".

Given that 15 Russians were killed Russia probably does need to respond. The challenge will probably be to avoid actions that restrict Russian choices, especially given that Trump & Co. are willing to play nuclear chicken. The Russians want to avoid being forced into a sequence of actions that lead to WWIII or other bad outcomes. They want to make the choices, not others.

The Israelis have a history of trying to provoke others. For example, before they invaded Lebanon they tried to provoke a PLO military response to some attacks so that they could claim their invasion was self-defense against PLO "aggression". The PLO didn't take the bait but the Israelis invaded Lebanon anyway.

darkmoon on September 19, 2018 , · at 5:21 pm EST/EDT
I haveto challenge your cleverly hidden piece of misinformation. The WTC was brought down by controlled demoliton and the sheer scope of the operation (3 sites, NORAD exercise) clearly points to the involvment of state actors. So about what should the the Israelis warn their US comrades?
Edward on September 19, 2018 , · at 6:13 pm EST/EDT
Its true building #7 appears to have been destroyed by a controlled demolition but we don't know for sure at this point who was responsible, although Israel is high on my list of suspects. (Incidentally, there is evidence that the 1993 WTC bombing was an Israeli black op. too.) However, we do know that an Israeli spy ring followed the 9-11 hijackers for months and a group of these spies cheered during the 9-11 attack. This convinces me that while the plot was carried out by Al Queda, the Israelis were in the background making sure they succeeded. It also convinces me that the Israelis are perfectly capable of deliberately downing the II-20 or worse.
parrhesiastes on September 19, 2018 , · at 8:35 pm EST/EDT
We know who said this: "I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse."

That's who did it, no?

http://www1.ae911truth.org/faqs/696-faq-10-did-wtc-7-owner-larry-silverstein-admit-to-ordering-the-controlled-demolition-of-the-building-.html

[Sep 19, 2018] Occupying foreign nations and killing foreign people in order to pay for college and to pay the mortgage and set up an retirement plan is weakness, not strength. "Thank you for your service", indeed. Too many Americans still worship at the altar of the Pentagon.

Sep 19, 2018 | thesaker.is

Christian W on September 19, 2018 , · at 7:15 pm EST/EDT

@ Occassional Poster

I know the US is in the grip of AIPAC, the Neocon's and their Billionaire masters etc (including Trump). But it's time for the American people to accept responsibility for their part in what is happening. It is not OK to accept medals and money for military service overseas to support the Empire. Occupying foreign nations and killing foreign people in order to pay for college and to pay the mortgage and set up an retirement plan is weakness, not strength. "Thank you for your service", indeed. Too many Americans still worship at the altar of the Pentagon.

It's time for Americans to kick the MIC to the curb, give up the Petrodollar and corruption that comes with it, and come up with a saner national business model and way of life. I know that many, many American soldiers have paid a heavy price for their "service" or even "servitude", but not more so than the nations they have ruined during their service. It's time for the American people to come together and accept that "War" cannot be the solution to every problem facing America in it's foreign or domestic policies. It is time to Down Tools and clean up the corruption in DC and on Wall Street and in the US establishment in general.

I believe these sentiments are not shocking to most Americans, but this also means the sense of desperation in the US/Zio elites wedded to War is growing, another reason they push so hard and so frantically. They know time is running out for them. On this front and many others.

Occasional Poster on September 19, 2018 · at 8:16 pm EST/EDT

@ Christian,

I have Serbian roots, and US & its NATO poodles bombed and finished their decade long job of destroying my country in 1999. That nightmare just doesn't end.

But my definition of evil is worth noting. Evil can put a bullet in your head, but where is the fun in that? Put the gun in the hand of a good person, deceive them, and get them to do it. THAT's true evil, and there in a nutshell is what has been done to the US.

I struggled to understand as a child, why lying was as great a crime in Christianity as murder and stuff, but I later understood; deceit is the greatest evil, it turns good people into monsters. There is no anger like righteous anger.

All that evil needs to thrive, is ignorance. The American people as a whole, are grossly ignorant, but they are not evil; they are simply deceived, just like Brits actualy. A good number of yanks on Zerohedge wish Putin was their own president, so some are awake. Overall, the US citizenry actually can't give a hoot about Russiagate. There is no mass ill will towards Russia.

So those are just my thoughts. I just want the American, and European people to wake out of their trance.

[Sep 19, 2018] 13 British hypothesis about Skripal poisoning

Sep 19, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile September 13, 2018 at 11:14 pm

The British Foreign Office almost immediately reacted to the RT scoop with its usual bluster: "Lies and obfuscation!"

Interesting accusation off HM government is that!

Since March 4 of this year, the British side has stated that:

  1. Yulia Skripal brought "Novichok" in her suitcase.
  2. The Skripals were poisoned with buckwheat.
  3. The Skripals were poisoned with bouquet of flowers at the cemetery. T
  4. he Skripals were poisoned with an UAV drone.
  5. The Skripals were poisoned through air conditioning in the car.
  6. The Skripals were poisoned with an aerosol.
  7. The Skripals were poisoned by Mikhail Savitskis (aka "Gordon") group, consisting of 6 killers.
  8. The killer/s poured "Novichok"onto a door handle.
  9. The Skripals were poisoned with "Novichok" in a form of a gel.
  10. The Skripals were poisoned with a perfume bottle (so it seems "Novichok" is still liquid).
  11. The killer/s poured "Novichok" in a public toilet.
  12. The killer/s poured "Novichok" in a hotel room.
  13. The Skripals were poisoned by 2 GRU* agents.

"Novichok" is a "5–8 times more lethal than VX nerve agent" and "the most deadly ever made", though it can't kill even 2 people.

*There has, in fact, been no such organization known as the GRU in Russia since 2010, when the official name of the unit was changed from ″GRU″ [ Главное разведывательное управление -- Glavnoye razvedyvatel'noye upravleniye ], namely "The Main intelligence Agency", to "The Main Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation", or ″GU″ [Главное управление Генерального штаба Вооружённых Сил Российской Федерации -- Glavnoye upravleniye General'nogo shtaba Vooruzhyonnykh Sil Rossiiskoi Federatsii ].

The Russian Embassy in London has been keeping a record of all the scenarios presented in the UK by the Govt/MSM and at the last count it was stated that there were 40 different, often contradictory, unproven scenarios.

Last week, the UK Ambassador to the UN, she who resembles a drag-queen well past his sell-by date, namely the inimitable Karen Pierce, attempted to take the piss out of Russia by stating at the UNSC that Russia had put forward 40 different accounts of what had happened, which ludicrous proposals simply proved how lacking in credibility the Russian government allegations are.

The reality was, however, that in presenting such accounts, Russia was taking the piss out of Her Majesty's Government and the sensationalist, Russophobic, warmongering British press and their more than 40 accounts of what happened in Salisbury last March.

The delectable Karen seemed unaware of this fact.

Recall, that Pierce is the woman, a high ranking British diplomat, no less, who believes that Russia (i.e. the Russian Federation that came into existence in 1991) was founded on many of Karl Marx's precepts.

yalensis September 14, 2018 at 2:13 am
Exactly! For Simonjan this unexpected interview was the scoop of the century.
The Russian press is going wild with this story.
One blogger wrote that some of the utterances of the 2 gopniki are rapidly becoming "winged phrases" compared only to snippets from Griboedov's "Woe from Wit".

Best example: "We returned to Salisbury to complete this business."
Simonjan (suspiciously): "What business?"
Gopnik: "To see the cathedral

[Sep 19, 2018] As for Nutty Nikki Haley, Israeli PM Netenyahu wanted Haley in that spot

Notable quotes:
"... As for Nutty Nikki Haley, Israeli PM Netenyahu wanted Haley in that spot, both for her rabid pro-Israel stance and to give her the chance to 'make her bones.' To see if she has the right traitorous qualities Israel needs in the WH. Nutty has passed that test with honors, so look for Nutty to get promoted to POTUS, where she'll be a loyal & faithful servant to our Colonial Overlord, Israel. ..."
Sep 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

Greg Bacon , says: Website September 19, 2018 at 7:59 am GMT

There is an ongoing coup against not only Trump, but the entire nation, as this video by "Project Veritas" proves. This State Department subversive claims to be a Democratic Socialist, which are just Antifa terrorists in suits. Antifa was too radical for SANE Americans so they re-branded their putrid form of Communism to call it DSA. They're traitors & saboteurs and should be treated as such .

As for Nutty Nikki Haley, Israeli PM Netenyahu wanted Haley in that spot, both for her rabid pro-Israel stance and to give her the chance to 'make her bones.' To see if she has the right traitorous qualities Israel needs in the WH. Nutty has passed that test with honors, so look for Nutty to get promoted to POTUS, where she'll be a loyal & faithful servant to our Colonial Overlord, Israel.

Many Americans labor under the delusion that we're an independent democratic republic, with a USG that honors the cherished Constitution and serves We the People. But that is a fiction, created by a motley assortment of gangsters, think tanks, the MSM and their mighty Wurlitzer organ, Hollywood.

The USA is under Israeli occupation, with our American neoCON & Zionist Jew Overseers still cracking that whip on our backs, but a digital one, not leather. The NWO Plantation owner is Israel, aided and abetted by the money power of those Rothschild central banks, like the FED, which is the biggest counterfeiting outfit on the planet.

 The only way to fix this sordid mess would be a repeat of what happened back in 1776. Either that, or resign ourselves–and offspring–to a life of misery, poverty, endless wars and terror .

[Sep 18, 2018] if Tymoshenko is elected, it will guarantee X more years of the same kind of oligarchic grab-the-cash leadership

Sep 18, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Cortes September 17, 2018 at 5:07 am

YES! We are all bananas! We are all bananas todaaay!

http://thesaker.is/the-yalta-european-strategy-three-years-on-since-putins-geopolitical-checkmate/

Try to keep a straight face as Carl Bildt and other giants of global statesmanship emote at the Yalta European Strategy summit held in, er, Kiev.

Mark Chapman September 17, 2018 at 11:44 am
That's amazingly good stuff; Richardson is a captivating writer. I think the upcoming elections in Ukraine will be a watershed moment; if Tymoshenko is elected, it will guarantee X more years of the same kind of oligarchic grab-the-cash leadership. However, Ukraine probably will not last that long – but there don't seem to be any credible candidates running who would stand a chance of uniting the country, leading change and walking the tightrope to prosperity.

An opinion columnist for my local paper, Jack Knox (quite a funny guy in his own right) recently came out with a template-style aid for spotting candidates for office, by type, and what their platforms really mean. The election concerned here is a very minor one, just for city council, but it fits well for any size and type of election except most slates are nowhere near as large.

[Sep 18, 2018] Russia supported north in the USA Civil war

Sep 18, 2018 | www.unz.com

Michael7 , says: September 17, 2018 at 2:08 pm GMT

@Linh Dinh

Unz also exhumes Jacob Schiff to show how this Wall Street banker jump started the Bolshevik Revolution, so it was really a deep hatred of Russia, and not any idealism, that triggered the bloodiest chapter in human history. Though only 4% of Russia's population, Jews made up 80-85% of the early Soviet government, Unz points out, and they dominated the Gulag administration and the terrifying NKVD.

Back during the US Civil War, which was largely the result of Rothschild meddling and financing of both sides, Abraham Lincoln anticipated a surprise attack by the British and French. So he requested assistance from Tsar Alexander II who in turn mobilized the Russian fleet and docked at both New York and San Francisco. Rothschild never forgave this 'insult' by the Russians, hence Jacob Schiff and his cohorts helping to fund and orchestrate the Bolshevik Revolution which was, essentially, an act of revenge.

By the way, it would be remiss not to mention the hard fact that it was Jewish individuals who owned almost every slave ship during the Transatlantic Slave Trade and also dominated the Triangle Trade (molasses/rum/slaves). True history has been deliberately twisted so as to portray whites as though being the sole culprits of African slavery in the West. As another point of fact, it was white Christians who fought to end slavery. Ironically, after slavery had ended, Jews such as Rabbi Stephen Wise began to finance and form various 'civil rights' groups such as the NAACP, in a naked attempt to establish themselves as championing freedom and equality, whereas this was most obviously not the case prior to the Emancipation Proclamation. Reason being, they could use blacks and other "oppressed minorities" as a fifth column of sorts to exploit racial frictions from within and thus serve as a convenient distraction from the more negative activities befallen all of Western civilization which, shamefully, continues to the present day.

[Sep 18, 2018] Putin and Erdogan Plan Syria-Idlib DMZ

Sep 18, 2018 | theduran.com

As I recommended in a post on September 10th , Russia's President Vladimir Putin and Turkey's President Tayyip Erdogan jointly announced on September 17th, "We've agreed to create a demilitarized zone between the government troops and militants before October 15. The zone will be 15-20km wide," which compares to the Korean DMZ's 4-km width . I had had in mind the Korean experience, but obviously Putin and Erdogan are much better-informed about the situation than I am, and they have chosen a DMZ that's four to five times wider. In any case, the consequences of such a decision will be momentous, unless U.S. President Donald Trump is so determined for there to be World War III as to stop at nothing in order to force it to happen no matter what Russia does or doesn't do.

What the Putin-Erdogan DMZ decision means is that the 50,000 Turkish troops who now are occupying Idlib province of Syria will take control over that land, and will thus have the responsibility over the largest concentration of jihadists anywhere on the planet: Idlib. It contains the surviving Syrian Al Qaeda and ISIS fighters, including all of the ones throughout Syria who surrendered to the Syrian Army rather than be shot dead on the spot by Government forces.

For its part, the U.S. Government, backed by its allies and supported in this by high officials of the United Nations, had repeatedly threatened that if there occurs any chemical-weapons attack, or even any claimed chemical-weapons attack, inside Idlib, the U.S. and its allies will instantaneously blame the Syrian Government and bomb Syria, and will shoot down the planes of Syria and of Russia that oppose this bombing-campaign to conquer or 'liberate' Syria from its Government. The U.S. has announced its determination to protect what one high U.S. official -- who is endorsing what Trump is doing there -- "the largest Al Qaeda safe haven since 9/11." He admits it, but he wants to protect them from being bombed by Syria and by Russia.

During recent weeks, the U.S. military has increasingly said that even if the jihadists they've been assisting to assemble the materials for a chemical-weapons attack fail to carry it out or to stage one, any attempt by Syrian and Russian forces to destroy the jihadists (which the U.S. side calls 'rebels') in Idlib will be met with overwhelming U.S.-and-allied firepower. That would spark WW III, because whichever side -- Russia or U.S. -- loses in the Syrian battlefield will nuclear-blitz-attack the other side so as to have the lesser damage from the nuclear war and thus (in military terms) 'win' WW III, because the blitz-attack will destroy many of the opposite side's retaliatory weapons. In a nuclear war, the first side to attack will have a considerable advantage -- reducing the number of weapons the other side can launch.

If, on the other hand, the DMZ-plan works, then Turkey's forces will be responsible for vetting any of Idlib's residents who try to leave, in order to prohibit jihadists and their supporters from leaving. Once that task (filtering out the non-dangerous inhabitants and retaining in Idlib only the jihadists and their supporters) is done, the entire world might be consulted on whether to exterminate the remaining residents or to set them free to return to the countries from which they came or to other countries. Presumably, no country would want those 'refugees'. That would answer the question.

America's Arab allies, the oil monarchies such as the Sauds who own Saudi Arabia and the Thanis who own Qatar, and which have funded Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood, would then be put on a spot, because if they say "Exterminate them!" then their clergy who have provided the moral imprimatur upon those families' ownership of those nations, will either be in rebellion or else will themselves become overthrown either by their own followers or else by their monarch -- overthrown from below or from above.

Alternatively, after Turkey's forces in Idlib will have allowed release from Idlib of all who will be allowed out, Syria's and Russia's bombers will simply go in and slaughter the then-surrounded jihadists and take upon themselves the responsibility for that, regardless of what the leaders of the U.S. and its allied governments might say.

On the night of September 17th in Syria, there were missile-attacks "from the sea" against several Syrian cities; and those attacks could have come from either Israel's or America's ships, or from other U.S.-allied ships. Russian Television bannered, "Russian plane disappears from radars during Israeli attack on Syria's Latakia – MoD" and reported:

A Russian military Il-20 aircraft with 14 service members on board went off the radars during an attack by four Israeli jets on Syria's Latakia province, the Russian Defense Ministry said.
Air traffic controllers at the Khmeimim Air Base "lost contact" with the aircraft on Wednesday evening, during the attack of Israeli F-16 fighters on Latakia, said the MOD.Russian radars also registered the launch of missiles from a French frigate in the Mediterranean on the evening of September 17.
The attack on Latakia came just hours after Russia and Turkey negotiated a partial demilitarization of the Idlib province

If the missiles were authorized by President Trump, then WW III has already begun in its pre-nuclear stage. However, if the attacks were launched by Israel's Netanyahu, and/or by France's Macron, without U.S. authorization, then the U.S. President might respond to them by siding against that aggressor(s) (and also against what he used to call "Radical Islamic Terrorists"), so as to prevent a nuclear war.

Late on September 17th, Al Masdar News bannered "NATO warships move towards Syrian coast" and reported "The NATO flotilla cruising off the Syrian coast reportedly consists of a Dutch frigate, the De Ruyter, a Canadian frigate, the Ville de Quebec, and a Greek cruiser, the Elli." Al Qaeda and ISIS have influential protectors.

Ultimately, the decision will be U.S. President Trump's as to whether he is willing to subject the planet to WW III and to its following nuclear winter and consequent die-off of agriculture and of everyone, in order to 'win' a nuclear war, such as America's aristocracy has especially championed since the year 2006. The nuclear-victory concept is called "Nuclear Primacy" -- the use of nuclear weapons so as to win a nuclear war against Russia, instead of to prevent a nuclear war. That concept's predecessor, the "Mutually Assured Destruction" or "M.A.D." meta-strategy, predominated even in the U.S. until 2006. Trump will have to decide whether the purpose of America's nuclear-weapons stockpiles is to prevent WW III, or is to win WW III.

In Russia, the purpose has always been to have nuclear weapons in order to prevent WW III. But America's President will be the person who will make the ultimate decision on this. And Idlib might be the spark. Netanyahu or Macron might be wanting to drag the U.S. into war even against Russia, but the final decision will be Trump's.

The ultimate question is: How far will the U.S. go in order to continue the U.S. dollar as being the overwhelmingly dominant global currency?

-- -- -- -- --

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They're Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010 , and of CHRIST'S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity .

[Sep 18, 2018] Liberals love to lampoon the Prophet Muhammad, but hands off Serena Williams by Robert Bridge

Notable quotes:
"... "I'm here, fighting for women's rights, for women's equality, and for all kind of stuff it made me think that it was a sexist remark [referring to the penalty Ramos awarded her] ..."
"... "I don't believe it's a good idea to apply a standard of 'If men can get away with it, women should be able to, too,' ..."
"... "Rather, I think the question we have to ask ourselves is this: What is the right way to behave to honor our sport and to respect our opponents?" ..."
"... "we cannot measure ourselves by what we think we should also be able to get away with this is the sort of behavior that no one should be engaging in on the court." ..."
"... "visual imperialism," ..."
"... "a black grotesque seeming natural." ..."
Sep 14, 2018 | www.rt.com

After being penalized for calling chair umpire Carlos Ramos a "thief," Williams summoned up the evil spirits of political correctness to plead her case. She was heard telling officials that many male tennis players have done "much worse" without any sort of retribution. In other words, Ramos was a cave-dwelling "sexist" put on earth to thwart the progress of womanhood.

During her post-game interview, Serena told a news conference, "I'm here, fighting for women's rights, for women's equality, and for all kind of stuff it made me think that it was a sexist remark [referring to the penalty Ramos awarded her] .

There were faint echoes of Oprah Winfrey's famous speech at the Golden Globes in that it was the right message delivered at exactly the wrong time and place.

Read more Steph Curry says Serena Williams showed 'grace & class' in US Open final, internet raises eyebrows

So now, America's dethroned tennis queen, playing the gender card game instead of tennis, is acting spokesperson for downtrodden women everywhere. Yet certainly Williams has heard of John McEnroe, the former American tennis star whose on-court temper tantrums are now legendary. In 1990, for example, this loudmouthed male was tossed out of the Australian Open – not just penalized – for verbally abusing the chair umpire, much like Williams did.

Since it may come off as chauvinistic for me – a burly male – to criticize Serena, perhaps it would be more appropriate to quote Martina Navratilova, 61, one of the greatest female tennis players of all time.

"I don't believe it's a good idea to apply a standard of 'If men can get away with it, women should be able to, too,' Navratilova wrote in a New York Times op-ed regarding Williams' epic meltdown. "Rather, I think the question we have to ask ourselves is this: What is the right way to behave to honor our sport and to respect our opponents?"

The Czech-born American went on to comment that "we cannot measure ourselves by what we think we should also be able to get away with this is the sort of behavior that no one should be engaging in on the court."

Eureka! Navratilova – who hails from a bygone era when the vision of political correctness, 'virtue signaling' and 'social justice warriors' was just a flash in the pan – nailed it. Instead of looking to some external other to explain our life circumstances – like losing a tennis match, for example, or a presidential election (wink, wink) – people should look to themselves as the agents for proactive and positive change. Such a message, however, would quickly sink the Liberal ship, which is predicated upon the idea that the world is forever divided between oppressor and oppressed. What the Liberals fail to appreciate, however, is that they are becoming the real oppressors as they continue to sideline anybody who does not think and act exactly as they do.

Following Serena's epic meltdown, the Melbourne-based Herald Sun published a cartoon by Mark Knight that shows the American tennis star as she proceeds to stomp on her racket, mouth open and hair going straight up. It was not a flattering or subtle drawing, but given the circumstances, that should probably come as no surprise.

2015: 12 Charlie Hebdo illustrators shot dead for depiction of prophet Muhammad - thousands line streets demonstrating for freedom of sattire & humour

2018: Mark Knight draws caricature of Serena Williams - thousands shout racist & demand his removal from Twiter and the media pic.twitter.com/NDpFrbigca

-- Danny Armstrong (@DannyWArmstrong) September 12, 2018

The Liberal outrage came fast and heavy as critics slammed the caricature as racist and offensive. It would take hundreds of pages to recite them all, but as one example, CNN columnist Rebecca Wanzo labeled the cartoon as an example of – wait for it – "visual imperialism," which is manifest by "a black grotesque seeming natural."

Never mind that the behavior of Serena Williams was "grotesque," which is what inspired Knight's unflattering drawing of her in the first place. That is what is meant by a 'caricature', where the artist attempts to convey the essence of an event through imagery. Yes, sometimes brutal imagery.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Robert Bridge is an American writer and journalist. Former Editor-in-Chief of The Moscow News, he is author of the book, 'Midnight in the American Empire,' released in 2013.

[Sep 18, 2018] Censored film reveals The Israel Project's secret Facebook campaign

Sep 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Afkaysit , Sep 17, 2018 5:01:05 AM | link

< >

The Israel Project, a major advocacy group based in Washington, is running a secret influence campaign on Facebook

Censored film reveals The Israel Project's secret Facebook campaign

The Israel Project, a major advocacy group based in Washington, is running a secret influence campaign on Facebook.

This is revealed in The Lobby – USA, an undercover Al Jazeera documentary that has never been broadcast due to censorship by Qatar following pressure from pro-Israel organizations.

In the newest clips, David Hazony, the managing director of The Israel Project, is heard telling Al Jazeera's undercover reporter: "There are also things that we do that are completely off the radar. We work together with a lot of other organizations."

https://electronicintifada.net/content/censored-film-reveals-israel-projects-secret-facebook-campaign/25486

[Sep 18, 2018] "Doorknob" version of Skripals poisoning was killed by Petrov - Boshirov story. Now UK authorities look really disingenuous.

Notable quotes:
"... The Gvmt. *slowly* latched onto the meme 'the Russians did it' thru pol. opportunism (Syria etc.) and/or as a cover up for some ugly and dismaying stuff. At every step of the way, they tardily re-calibrated, 'fixed' the narrative to jell with that script. A good ex. is DS Bailey: he was at first affected as a first responder to the Bench Scene, but much later, that was denied, and he was poisoned because he stole comatose Sergei's keys and went to his home where he "most likely" touched a Novichoked doornob. (Note the doornob tale leaves the door open (sic) to some mundane passers-by doing nefarious deeds.) ..."
"... After examining endless planeloads of Russian travellers to the UK, and thousands of hours of CCTV, they turned up these two (and kept their jobs and kiddies safe! Yay! ) ..."
"... The only link between the pair and the Skripal 'event' is the stated fact that 'minuscule traces of Novichok' were found in the Hotel in London they stayed in. This is complete BS, see for ex. even the Daily Mail! ..."
Sep 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Noirette , Sep 17, 2018 9:07:22 AM | link

Petrov - Boshirov. To me they were utterly convincing. Mostly because they were absolutely terrified and utterly naive about doing a TV interview and answering questions.

RT, the interviewer and setting - an office - and the number of cameras were their conditions, I have read, and I believe it. They wanted to appear in public, rather than hide (no doubt following some excellent advice, and Putin's public assurance, saying he hoped they would come forward..) but had little idea beyond that except that they wanted to avoid being Center in a media circus - storm. (They need a PR expert and top-class lawyer.)

Why their gayness / not or what business they run legally or not-so-much and lots of other topics are invoked and puzzled over is because ppl simply cannot believe what happened here. (Imho!)

(Some weird event, possibly fabricated, organised by X, or strange happenstance, or whatever) .. sent Sergei and Yulia 'queer -- ill', as well as DS Bailey, and later, Dawn and Charlie (All connected to some 'event' that remains cloudy.)

The Gvmt. *slowly* latched onto the meme 'the Russians did it' thru pol. opportunism (Syria etc.) and/or as a cover up for some ugly and dismaying stuff. At every step of the way, they tardily re-calibrated, 'fixed' the narrative to jell with that script. A good ex. is DS Bailey: he was at first affected as a first responder to the Bench Scene, but much later, that was denied, and he was poisoned because he stole comatose Sergei's keys and went to his home where he "most likely" touched a Novichoked doornob. (Note the doornob tale leaves the door open (sic) to some mundane passers-by doing nefarious deeds.)

The investigators behind the computers acted under orders and under the imposed assumption

"Some Russian undercover(s) flew in on or around March 1,2,3, and poisoned a door in Salisbury, find a match."

After examining endless planeloads of Russian travellers to the UK, and thousands of hours of CCTV, they turned up these two (and kept their jobs and kiddies safe! Yay! )

The only link between the pair and the Skripal 'event' is the stated fact that 'minuscule traces of Novichok' were found in the Hotel in London they stayed in. This is complete BS, see for ex. even the Daily Mail!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6139871/Owner-hotel-Russians-hid-novichok-told-police-killer-guests-YESTERDAY.html

(see also Grieved and Debsisdead above)

[Sep 17, 2018] The Dirty Dozen: 12 lies they tell you to anaesthetise you for the upcoming bombing of Syria by Peter Ford

Notable quotes:
"... There are more babies than jihadis in Idlib ..."
"... The reports [of the imminent chemical weapons 'attack'] must be truebecause Asad has done it before. ..."
"... The OPCW report on Douma was flawed because the Russians and ..."
"... Syrians caused delay ..."
"... Asad uses chemical weapons because they frighten large numbers of people into fleeing ..."
"... The OPCW won't be able to investigate because it won't ..."
"... The upcoming strikes are not aimed at regime change. ..."
"... It's all Russian disinformation ..."
"... There won't be enough time for parliamentary debate. ..."
"... MPs can't be told what is planned because it would ..."
"... eopardise the safety of service personnel. ..."
"... There are going to be massacres/a bloodbath/genocide. ..."
"... People have nowhere to go ..."
"... We can't tell you which armed groups we support because it would make them targets for Asad ..."
Sep 17, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

The propaganda mills of the British and American governments - spokespersons, media, think tanks - are working overtime churning out 'talking points' to justify the upcoming large scale bombing of Syria on the pretext of use of prohibited weapons.

Here is a guide from a former insider to the top dozen of these lies.

  1. There are more babies than jihadis in Idlib . As it happens this gem of moral blackmail is untrue. There are twice as many jihadis (about 100,000) as babies (0-1 year) (55,000). What is this factoid meant to say anyway? Don't try to free an area of jihadis because you might harm a lot of children? The Western coalition scarcely heeded that consideration in razing Mosul and Raqqa in order to crush ISIS. They are still pulling babies out of the rubble in Raqqa.
  2. The reports [of the imminent chemical weapons 'attack'] must be truebecause Asad has done it before. False. Since 2013 when Asad gave up chemical weapons under supervision of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) the OPCW have not visited the sites of alleged attacks in jihadi-controlled areas but have accepted at face value 'reports' from pro-jihadi organisations like the White Helmets and the Syrian American Medical Society, along with 'evidence' from hostile intelligence agencies. In the case of the one site the OPCW did visit, Douma, their report said they found no evidence of sarin, no untoward traces in any of the blood samples taken from 'alleged victims' (their term), no bodies and only ambiguous evidence of use of chlorine.

3. The OPCW report on Douma was flawed because the Russians and Syrians caused delay . False. As documented in the OPCW report delay was caused by UN bureaucracy and jihadi snipers. The inspectors do not say their findings were to any significant degree invalidated by the delay.

  1. Asad uses chemical weapons because they frighten large numbers of people into fleeing . False. They don't. This desperate argument is trotted out to counter the fact that Asad would have to be stupid to use chemical weapons knowing what the result would be and that he would derive minimal military benefit. To date not one of the alleged chemical attacks has precipitated an exodus any greater than flight caused by the legendary 'barrel bombs'. The inhabitants of Douma by their own testimonies given to Western journalists were even unaware there might have been an attack until they heard about it in the media.
  2. The OPCW won't be able to investigate because it won't b e safe . A feeble excuse to preempt calls for establishing facts before bombing. The Turks escort Western journalists into Idlib. They have hundreds of troops there and the jihadis kowtow to them because they control all logistics. The Turks could escort OPCW. And wouldn't the jihadis be keener than anybody for the inspectors to visit if their claims were true?
  3. The upcoming strikes are not aimed at regime change. False. The plan is to decapitate the Syrian state with attacks on the presidency. Failing that the aim is to make Idlib a quagmire for the Russians. Anything to deprive Asad and Putin of victory, regardless of whether it prolongs the war.
  4. It's all Russian disinformation . Yeah, like the arms inspectors before the Iraq war who said no WMD in Iraq. Reality: the Russians have got great intelligence on what Western powers with their jihadi clients are up to and are calling out the phoney moves.
  5. There won't be enough time for parliamentary debate. Pull the other one. Reality: the government are terrified of a rerun of 2013 when Labour and 30 brave Tory MPs voted against bombing, causing Cameron and then Obama to back off.
  6. MPs can't be told what is planned because it would j eopardise the safety of service personnel. How low can you stoop? Feigning concern for flyers when it's really just about keeping the people in ignorance of how big the strikes are going to be.
  7. There are going to be massacres/a bloodbath/genocide. False. We heard all this hysteria before Aleppo, before Eastern Ghouta and before the campaign in the South. All vastly exaggerated. The Syrian Arab Army has not been responsible for a single massacre, while the jihadis have been responsible for many (source: quarterly reports of the UN Independent Commission of Inquiry on Syria).
  8. People have nowhere to go . False. The Russians have opened safe corridors but the jihadis are not allowing people to leave. They can still leave for the northern border strip which Turkey controls, where there are camps, and many (including jihadi fighters) will be able to cross temporarily into Turkey.
  9. We can't tell you which armed groups we support because it would make them targets for Asad . Really? You think he doesn't know? Isn't it because you are terrified it will come out that we have been supporting some real head-choppers?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Ford_(diplomat)

[Sep 17, 2018] Bill Browder Strikes Back In Europe

Sep 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

by Tyler Durden Mon, 09/17/2018 - 09:34 27 SHARES Authored by Tom Luongo,

"I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further."
-- The Empire Strikes Back

Since Vladimir Putin brought up Bill Browder's name in Helsinki, events have escalated to a fever pitch. Russia is under extreme attack the U.S./European financial and political establishment.

And part of that push is coming from Browder himself. In July, just a week after Helsinki, Browder opened up a money laundering complaint against Denmark's largest bank, Danske , alleging over $8 billion in money 'laundered' from Russia, Moldova and Azerbaijan through its Estonian Branch.

The details here are important so bear with me.

Danske's report on these allegations are due on Wednesday.

No matter what they say, however, the die has been cast.

Danske is being targeted for termination by the U.S. and possible takeover by the European Central Bank.

There's precedent for this but let me lay out some background first.

The Oldest Trick

Browder's complaint says the money laundered is in connection with the reason why he was thrown out of Russia and the $230 million in stolen tax money which Browder's cause célèbre , the death of accountant Sergei Magnitsky, hangs on.

That crusade got the Magnitsky Act passed not only in the U.S. but all across the West, with versions on the books in Canada, Australia the EU and other places.

Danske's shares have been gutted in the wake of the accusation.

The U.S. is now investigating this complaint and that shouldn't come as much of a shock.

The Treasury Department can issue whatever findings it wants, and then respond by starving Danske of dollars, known as the "Death Blow" option the threat of which was plastered all over the pages of the Wall St. Journal on Friday.

Note this article isn't behind the Journal's pay-wall. They want everyone to see this.

Browder filed complaints both in Demmark and in Estonia, and the Estonian government was only too happy to oblige him.

The Devil Played

To see the whole picture I have to go back a littler further.

Back in March, Latvian bank, ABLV, was targeted in a similar manner, accused of laundering money. Within a week the ECB moved in to take control of the bank even though it wasn't in danger of failing.

It was an odd move, where the ECB exercised an extreme response utilizing its broader powers given to it after the 2008 financial crisis, like it did with Spain's Banco Popular in 2017.

Why? The U.S. was looking for ways to cut off Russia from the European banking system. And the ECB did its dirty work.

I wrote about this back in May in relation to the Treasury demanding all U.S. investors divest themselves of Russian debt within thirty days.
It threw the ruble and Russian debt markets into turmoil since Russian companies bought a lot of euro-denominated debt after the Ruble Crisis of 2014, having been shut off from dollars.

ABLV was a conduit for many Russian entities to keep access to Europe's banks, having been grandfathered in as clients when the Baltics entered the Euro-zone.

So, now a replay of ABLV's seizure is playing out through Browder's money laundering complaint against Danske.

Was Convincing Everyone

The goal of this lawsuit is two-fold.

The first is to undermine the faith in the Danish banking system. Dutch giant ING is also facing huge AML fines.

This is a direct attack on the EU banking system to being it under even more stringent government control.

The second goal, however, is far more important. As I said, the U.S. is desperate to cut money flow between the European Union and Russia, not just to stop the construction of Nordstream 2, but to keep Russia's markets weak having to scramble for euros to make coupon payments and create a roll-over nightmare.

Turkey is facing this now, Russia went through it in 2014/15.

In response to the Ruble's sharp drop this year on improving fundamentals, the Bank of Russia finally had to raise rates on Friday .

So, attacking a major bank like Danske for consorting with dirty Russians and using Mr. Human Rights Champion Browder to file the complaint is pure power politics to keep the EU itself from seeking rapprochement with Russia.

Anti-Money Laundering laws are tyrannical and vaguely worded. And with the Magnitsky Act and its follow-up, CAATSA, in place, they help support defining money laundering to include anything the U.S. and the EU deem as supporting 'human rights violations.'

Seeing the trap yet?

Now all of it can be linked through simple accusation regardless of the facts. The bank gets gutted, investors and depositors get nervous, the ECB then steps in and there goes another tendril between Russia and Europe doing business.

And that ties into Browder's minions in the European Parliament, all in the pay of Open Society Foundation, issued a threat of invoking Article 7 of the Lisbon Treaty to Cyprus over assisting Russia investigate Browder's financial dealings there.

Why? Violations of Mr. Browder's human rights because, well, Russia!

What's becoming more obvious to me as the days pass is that Browder is an obvious asset of the U.S. financial and political oligarchy, if not U.S. Intelligence. They use his humanitarian bona fides to visit untold misery on millions of people simply to:

1) cover up their malfeasance in Russia

2) wage hybrid war on anyone willing to stand up to their machinations.

He Didn't Exist

Because when looking at this situation rationally, how does this guy get to run around accusing banks of anything and mobilize governments into actions which have massive ramifications for the global financial system unless he's intimately connected with the very people that operate the top of that system?

How does this no-name guy in the mid-1990's, fresh 'off the boat' as it were, convince someone to give him $25 million in CASH to go around Russia buying up privatization vouchers at less than pennies on the dollar?

It simply doesn't pass a basic sniff test.

Danske is the biggest bank in Denmark and one of the oldest in Europe. The message should be clear.

If they can be gotten to this way, anyone can.

Just looking at the list of people named in the Magnitsky Act, a list given to Congress by Browder and copied verbatim without investigation, and CAATSA as being 'friends of Vladimir' it's obvious that the target isn't Putin himself for his human rights transgressions but anyone in Russia with enough capital to maintain a business bigger than a chain of laundromats in Rostov-on-Don.

Honestly, even some in the U.S. financial press said it looked like they just went through the Moscow phone book.

But, here the rub. In The Davos Crowd's single-minded drive to destroy Russia, which has been going on now for close to two generations in various ways, they are willing to undermine the very institutions on which a great deal of their power rests.

The more Browder gets defended by people punching far above his weight, the more obvious it is that there is something wrong with his story. Undermining the reputation of the biggest bank in Denmark is a 'playing-for-keeps' moment.

But, it's one that can and will have serious repercussions over time.

It undermines the validity of government institutions, exposing corruption that proves we live in a world ruled by men, not laws. That the U.S. and EU are fundamentally no different in their leadership than banana republics.

And that's bad for currency and debt markets as capital always flows to where it is treated best.

But, it's one that can and will have serious repercussions over time. The seizure of ABLV and 2017's liquidation of Spain's Banco Popular were rightly described by Martin Armstrong as defining moments where no one in their right mind would invest in a European banks if there was the possibility of losing all of your capital due to a change in the political winds overnight.

Using the European Parliament to censure Cyprus via Article 7 over one man's financial privacy, which no one is guaranteed in this world today thanks to these same AML and KYC laws, reeks of cronyism and corruption of the highest degree.

If you want to know what a catalyst for the collapse of the European banking system looks like, it may well be what happens this week if Danske tries to fight the spider's web laid down by Bill Browder and his friends in high places.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Z_s5cRp5Ikk

* * *

To support more work like this and get access to exclusive commentary, stock picks and analysis tailored to your needs join my more than 170 Patrons on Patreon and see if I have what it takes to help you navigate a world going quickly mad.

hanekhw , 1 minute ago

Browder, the Clintons, Soros and the EU were made for each other weren't they? They've been screwing us publicly for what, over two generations? And without a condom! We've gotten how many FTDs (financially transmitted diseases) from these people? They never unzip their flys.

geno-econ , 1 hour ago

According to Browder, Putin is worth over $100 Billion most of it stashed away in foreign banks through intermediates and relatives. If true, it will bring down Putin and many western banks. Perhaps a Red Swan is about to take off exposing an unsustainable .financial system and corrupt political enterprise on both sides of the divide sur to cause chaos. Ironically, Putin who represents Nationalism in Russia is under attack by Globalists accusing Putin of Capitalistic Greed utilizing western banks Suicidal !

hanekhw , 16 minutes ago

Browder, the Clintons, Soros and the EU were made for each other weren't they? They've been screwing us publicly for what, over two generations? And without a condom! We've gotten how many FTDs (financially transmitted diseases) from these people? They never unzip their flys.

zeroboris , 24 minutes ago

They use his humanitarian bona fides

Browder's bona fides? LOL

monad , 8 minutes ago

Minion (((Browder))) snitches on his masters. Nowhere to hide.

Vanilla_ISIS , 18 minutes ago

Someone should just kill this dude. Browder has certainly earned it.

roadhazard , 14 minutes ago

But what about the money laundering.

Panic Mode , 15 minutes ago

You better run. Your buddy McCain is gone and see who else will fight for you.

pndr4495 , 42 minutes ago

Somehow - Mnuchkin's desire to sell his Park Ave. apartment fits into this tale of intrigue and bullshit.

markar , 47 minutes ago

Send this guy Browder a polonium cocktail. It's on me.

TahoeBilly2012 , 1 hour ago

((Browder)) ??

Clogheen , 37 minutes ago

Yes. Did you really need to ask?

geno-econ , 1 hour ago

According to Browder, Putin is worth over $100 Billion most of it stashed away in foreign banks through intermediates and relatives. If true, it will bring down Putin and many western banks. Perhaps a Red Swan is about to take off exposing an unsustainable .financial system and corrupt political enterprise on both sides of the divide sur to cause chaos. Ironically, Putin who represents Nationalism in Russia is under attack by Globalists accusing Putin of Capitalistic Greed utilizing western banks Suicidal !

Max Cynical , 1 hour ago

I watch the banned documentary...The Magnitsky Act - Behind the Scenes.

Here's a link... https://seed02.bitchute.com/40940/lQ3qEwX66pIL.mp4

Browder seems like a real scumbag.

LA_Goldbug , 1 hour ago

Only the slimiest rats get into the club of "Can Do No Wrong" and these types of gigs.

Thaxter , 1 hour ago

This documentary is first class, a really absorbing look into the mind of the sociopath Browder, a pathological, absolutely shameless liar and a very stupid and weak person. To understand the influence that this insignificant invertebrate yields, look to his father, Earl Russell Browder, who was the leader of the Communist Party in the United States during the 1930s and the first half of the 1940s.

blindfaith , 22 minutes ago

Look no further than our own political circus to see that mighty hands pull the strings. Like all strings, they will fray and break...eventually.

Jim in MN , 1 hour ago

Yes well the Big Question for us now is the degree to which the President is in control of any of this.

Recall, dear ZH fighters, how we worked out a sound strategy for the Trump Administration in the early days. Key aspects were to leave the generals and the bankers alone for a couple of years. This would allow immigration, trade, health care and deregulation including tax reform to form the early core wins, along with Supreme Court nominees of course.

Lo, cometh the Deep State and its frantic attempts to both save and conceal itself.

One key tentacle was to rouse the intelligence community into an active enemy of the POTUS. This partially fouled up the 'leave the generals alone' strategy.

Another is to try to force war with the emergent Eurasian hegemony comprised of China and Russia. This is seen all across the 'hinterland' of Russia.

The USA has no vital strategic interests in Eurasia at this juncture of history. Everyone should be clear on that.

The USA's logical and sane policy stance is to support peace, free and fair trade, and stable democracy, including border controls and the rule of law through LEADING BY EXAMPLE.

So for Trump to continue to allow the financial sector Deep State traitors to operate against a peaceful Eurasia is becoming increasingly intolerable.

Where to from here?

BandGap , 1 hour ago

Keep opening it up to scrutiny.

This article opened my eyes, I did not fully understand why Russia was all over Browder except the stealing aspect, but bigger yet, why he was being protected by the EU/US.

No wonder Putin wants to work with the Donno. Taking Browder out and exposing this manipulation works for both sides.

LA_Goldbug , 40 minutes ago

If Browder is a surprise to you then look at Khodorkovsky (there is more of these types from he came from).

Good start is here,

http://thebirdman.org/Index/Others/Others-Doc-Economics&Finance/+Doc-Economics&Finance-GovernmentInfluence&Meddling/BankstersInRussiaAndGlobalEconomy.htm

I am a Man I am Forty , 1 hour ago

This guy is so shady. He's playing some dangerous games.

gmak , 1 hour ago

Huh? Could this be written more poorly?

TheBigOldDog , 1 hour ago

Houston, we have a problem..

akrainer , 1 hour ago

The twice banned book, "Grand Deception" deconstructing Browder's very dangerous game is here, since Amazon delisted its two previous editions:

Pdf / Kindle / Nook

Paperback

LA_Goldbug , 1 hour ago

"He Didn't Exist

Because when looking at this situation rationally, how does this guy get to run around accusing banks of anything and mobilize governments into actions which have massive ramifications for the global financial system unless he's intimately connected with the very people that operate the top of that system?"

Exactly. He was sent by the Anglo-Zionist Tribe otherwise he would be a nobody.

JacquesdeMolay , 1 hour ago

Also, a very good book on the topic: "suppressed and banned by the CIA's supplier, Amazon, The Grand Deception: The Browder Hoax is a highly intelligent, frank and entertaining take-down of one of the biggest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the US public and the world – The Magnitsky Act. Krainer's study of Bill Browder's book and actions is a riveting, unflinching expose of what might end up being pivotal in revealing one of this decade's big hoaxes."

https://thirdalliance.ch/product/grand-deception-the-browder-hoax/

JacquesdeMolay , 2 hours ago

Skullduggery: Confessions of a CIA Asset Bill Browder

[Sep 17, 2018] The Bluffer's Guide to Bombing Syria By Peter Ford

Notable quotes:
"... or, The Dirty Dozen: 12 lies they tell you to anaesthetise you for the upcoming bombing of Syria ..."
"... There are more babies than jihadis in Idlib ..."
"... The reports [of the imminent chemical weapons 'attack'] must be truebecause Asad has done it before. ..."
"... The OPCW report on Douma was flawed because the Russians and ..."
"... Syrians caused delay ..."
"... Asad uses chemical weapons because they frighten large numbers of people into fleeing ..."
"... The OPCW won't be able to investigate because it won't ..."
"... The upcoming strikes are not aimed at regime change. ..."
"... It's all Russian disinformation ..."
"... There won't be enough time for parliamentary debate. ..."
"... MPs can't be told what is planned because it would ..."
"... eopardise the safety of service personnel. ..."
"... There are going to be massacres/a bloodbath/genocide. ..."
"... People have nowhere to go ..."
"... We can't tell you which armed groups we support because it would make them targets for Asad ..."
Sep 17, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

or, The Dirty Dozen: 12 lies they tell you to anaesthetise you for the upcoming bombing of Syria

The propaganda mills of the British and American governments - spokespersons, media, think tanks - are working overtime churning out 'talking points' to justify the upcoming large scale bombing of Syria on the pretext of use of prohibited weapons.

Here is a guide from a former insider to the top dozen of these lies.

  1. There are more babies than jihadis in Idlib . As it happens this gem of moral blackmail is untrue. There are twice as many jihadis (about 100,000) as babies (0-1 year) (55,000). What is this factoid meant to say anyway? Don't try to free an area of jihadis because you might harm a lot of children? The Western coalition scarcely heeded that consideration in razing Mosul and Raqqa in order to crush ISIS. They are still pulling babies out of the rubble in Raqqa.
  2. The reports [of the imminent chemical weapons 'attack'] must be truebecause Asad has done it before. False. Since 2013 when Asad gave up chemical weapons under supervision of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) the OPCW have not visited the sites of alleged attacks in jihadi-controlled areas but have accepted at face value 'reports' from pro-jihadi organisations like the White Helmets and the Syrian American Medical Society, along with 'evidence' from hostile intelligence agencies. In the case of the one site the OPCW did visit, Douma, their report said they found no evidence of sarin, no untoward traces in any of the blood samples taken from 'alleged victims' (their term), no bodies and only ambiguous evidence of use of chlorine.

3. The OPCW report on Douma was flawed because the Russians and Syrians caused delay . False. As documented in the OPCW report delay was caused by UN bureaucracy and jihadi snipers. The inspectors do not say their findings were to any significant degree invalidated by the delay.

  1. Asad uses chemical weapons because they frighten large numbers of people into fleeing . False. They don't. This desperate argument is trotted out to counter the fact that Asad would have to be stupid to use chemical weapons knowing what the result would be and that he would derive minimal military benefit. To date not one of the alleged chemical attacks has precipitated an exodus any greater than flight caused by the legendary 'barrel bombs'. The inhabitants of Douma by their own testimonies given to Western journalists were even unaware there might have been an attack until they heard about it in the media.
  2. The OPCW won't be able to investigate because it won't b e safe . A feeble excuse to preempt calls for establishing facts before bombing. The Turks escort Western journalists into Idlib. They have hundreds of troops there and the jihadis kowtow to them because they control all logistics. The Turks could escort OPCW. And wouldn't the jihadis be keener than anybody for the inspectors to visit if their claims were true?
  3. The upcoming strikes are not aimed at regime change. False. The plan is to decapitate the Syrian state with attacks on the presidency. Failing that the aim is to make Idlib a quagmire for the Russians. Anything to deprive Asad and Putin of victory, regardless of whether it prolongs the war.
  4. It's all Russian disinformation . Yeah, like the arms inspectors before the Iraq war who said no WMD in Iraq. Reality: the Russians have got great intelligence on what Western powers with their jihadi clients are up to and are calling out the phoney moves.
  5. There won't be enough time for parliamentary debate. Pull the other one. Reality: the government are terrified of a rerun of 2013 when Labour and 30 brave Tory MPs voted against bombing, causing Cameron and then Obama to back off.
  6. MPs can't be told what is planned because it would j eopardise the safety of service personnel. How low can you stoop? Feigning concern for flyers when it's really just about keeping the people in ignorance of how big the strikes are going to be.
  7. There are going to be massacres/a bloodbath/genocide. False. We heard all this hysteria before Aleppo, before Eastern Ghouta and before the campaign in the South. All vastly exaggerated. The Syrian Arab Army has not been responsible for a single massacre, while the jihadis have been responsible for many (source: quarterly reports of the UN Independent Commission of Inquiry on Syria).
  8. People have nowhere to go . False. The Russians have opened safe corridors but the jihadis are not allowing people to leave. They can still leave for the northern border strip which Turkey controls, where there are camps, and many (including jihadi fighters) will be able to cross temporarily into Turkey.
  9. We can't tell you which armed groups we support because it would make them targets for Asad . Really? You think he doesn't know? Isn't it because you are terrified it will come out that we have been supporting some real head-choppers?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Ford_(diplomat)

[Sep 17, 2018] https://electronicintifada.net/content/censored-film-reveals-israel-projects-secret-facebook-campaign/25486

Sep 17, 2018 | electronicintifada.net

Posted by: Afkaysit | Sep 17, 2018 5:01:05 AM | 72

[Sep 17, 2018] The west going on attack mode against Cyprus to protect Browder.

Sep 17, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Pft , Sep 17, 2018 12:00:07 AM | link

The west going on attack mode against Cyprus to protect Browder. Cyprus is cooperating with Putin on his financial dealings which all flowed through Cyprus. Lots of skeletons there that implicate many more important people than Browder

[Sep 16, 2018] Perils of Ineptitude by Andrew Levin

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... There is less shame in being undone by a "master of deceit." When J. Edgar Hoover coined that description, he had Communists in mind. Back then, though, "Ruskies" and "Commies" – it was all the same. Americans were conditioned to live in fear that the Russians were coming. ..."
"... That nonsense should have ended when Communism more or less officially expired in 1989, followed two years later by the demise of the Soviet Union itself. For a long time, it seemed that it had. At first, the reaction in Western, especially American, political and media circles was triumphalist. The war was over and our side won. Beneath the surface, however, there was mourning in America. ..."
"... With the Cold War, the death merchants, the masters of war, the neocons, and a host of others had had a good thing going. Having been born into it, the political class was comfortable with the status quo too; and generations of Americans had grown up imbibing Russophobia in their mother's milk (or infant formula). ..."
"... Before long, it became clear that our economic and political masters had nothing to worry about, that Cold War anti-Communism was more robust than Communism itself. ..."
"... That suited Bill Clinton and his First Lady, the former Goldwater Girl. Boris Yeltsin, Russia's leader, was their man. He was a godsend, a Trump-like cartoon character and a drunkard to boot – with an economy in tatters, and no rightwing base egging him on. ..."
"... The time was therefore right for a return of the repressed -- for full-blooded, fifties-style, anti-Communist (= anti-Russian) hysteria, or, since that still seemed far-fetched, for anti-Communist (= anti-Chinese) hysteria. ..."
"... Exactly what "Putin," the shorthand name for all that is Russian and nefarious, did, or is still doing, remains unclear. But this does not seem to bother purveyors of the conventional wisdom. Neither is ostensibly informed public opinion fazed by the fact that the evidence supporting the consensus view comes mainly from American intelligence services and from their counterparts in the UK and other allied nations. ..."
"... How ironic therefore that nowadays it is mainly bamboozled Trump supporters in the Fox News demographic -- people who could care less about peace or, for that matter, about truth -- who are wary of the CIA and skeptical of the FBI's claims! ..."
"... They do not even seem to notice that what they allege, vague as it is, is trifling compared to the massive and very open meddling of American plutocrats, Republican vote suppressers and gerrymanderers, and the governments of supposedly friendly nations – like Saudi Arabia, the Gulf monarchies, and Israel ..."
"... Cold War revivalists can therefore rest easy, confident that their propagandists will have at least a few facts with which they can work to restore the perils of their vanished youth. ..."
"... Even so, the level of their hypocrisy is appalling. Russia, along with former Soviet republics and former members of the Warsaw Pact, has been bearing the brunt of far worse American meddling for far longer than anything sanctimonious defenders of so-called American "democracy" can plausibly allege. ..."
"... Hypocrisy reigns here too. It was the Obama administration – run through with neocons, liberal imperialists, and other holdovers from Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State – that did all it could to exacerbate longstanding tensions between that country's Ukrainian and Russian speaking populations, the better to complete NATO's encirclement of the Russian federation. And it was American meddling that led to the empowerment of virulently anti-Russian, fascisant Ukrainian politicians, much to the detriment of Russian speaking Ukrainians in the east. ..."
"... The Cold War that began after World War II involved a clash of rival political economic systems. The Cold War that reignited a few years ago involves a clash of rival imperialist centers. Its world more nearly resembles the one that existed before World War I than the one that emerged after World War II. ..."
"... However, the difference may be more superficial than it seems. The ease with which Cold War revivalists have been able to get the Cold War up and running again, even without Communism, suggests what a few observers have long maintained -- that the Cold War, on Russia's part, had little, if anything, to do with spreading Communism around the world, and everything to do with maintaining a cordon sanitaire around Russia's borders in order to protect against a demonstrably aggressive "free world." ..."
"... That part of Brzezinski's plan was at least a partial success. But inasmuch as Bush's "they" are still there, still spreading murder and mayhem throughout the Greater Middle East, America and the world has been paying a high price for the benefits, such as they were, that ensued. ..."
"... The never-ending wars set in motion by the "pivot" towards radical Islamism decades ago never quite succeeded in producing an enemy as serviceable as the USSR. But now that Putin's Russia has been pressed into service, that problem is potentially "solved." ..."
"... Efforts to recycle Bush's "they hate our freedom" nonsense ought to be non-starters. But this is the best Cold War revivalists have come up with so far. The Russians, they say, simply cannot deal with the fact that we Americans are so damned free. ..."
"... From a geopolitical point of view, Russia does have an interest in doing all it can to ward off Western aggression. It also has an interest in undermining strategic alliances aimed at blocking anything and everything that challenges American supremacy. And, until sanity prevails in Washington and other Western capitals, it arguably also has an interest in aiding and abetting rightwing nationalists in order to exacerbate tensions within Western societies. ..."
"... Clinton is bad, but Trump is worse -- not just by most measures but by all. Her fondness for war and preparations for war was alarming; she was bellicosity personified. But it was plain even before the election that Trump, a mentally unhinged narcissist, would be even more likely than she to bring on massive devastation. A vote for Trump was and still is a vote for catastrophe. ..."
"... For now, though, the hard and very relevant fact is that Trump has done nothing to help, and quite a few things to harm, Russia. ..."
"... It isn't just ordinary Russians who have been made worse off. Trump has been at least as hard on oligarchs close to Putin as Clinton would have been. ..."
"... If those damned Russians were half as smart as they are made out to be, they would have realized long ago that, for getting anything done that bucks the tide, Trump is too inept to be of any use at all; and that anything he sets out to do is likely to turn out badly not just for America and its allies but for Russia too. ..."
Aug 03, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

There is less shame in being undone by a "master of deceit." When J. Edgar Hoover coined that description, he had Communists in mind. Back then, though, "Ruskies" and "Commies" – it was all the same. Americans were conditioned to live in fear that the Russians were coming.

That nonsense should have ended when Communism more or less officially expired in 1989, followed two years later by the demise of the Soviet Union itself. For a long time, it seemed that it had. At first, the reaction in Western, especially American, political and media circles was triumphalist. The war was over and our side won. Beneath the surface, however, there was mourning in America.

With the Cold War, the death merchants, the masters of war, the neocons, and a host of others had had a good thing going. Having been born into it, the political class was comfortable with the status quo too; and generations of Americans had grown up imbibing Russophobia in their mother's milk (or infant formula).

It turned out, though, that American triumphalism was only a phase. Before long, it became clear that our economic and political masters had nothing to worry about, that Cold War anti-Communism was more robust than Communism itself.

However, in the final days of Bush 41 and then at the dawn of the Clinton era, nobody knew that. Nobody gave America's propaganda system the credit it deserved.

Also, nobody quite realized how devastating Russia's regression to capitalism would be, and nobody quite grasped the savagery of the kleptocrats who had taken charge of what remained of the Russian state.

For more than a decade, the situation in that late great superpower was too dire to sustain the old fears and animosities. Capitalism had made Russia wretched again.

That suited Bill Clinton and his First Lady, the former Goldwater Girl. Boris Yeltsin, Russia's leader, was their man. He was a godsend, a Trump-like cartoon character and a drunkard to boot – with an economy in tatters, and no rightwing base egging him on.

But anti-Communism (without Communism) and its close cousin, Russophobia, could not remain in remission forever. The need for them was too great.

In the Age of Obama, the Global War on Terror, with or without that ludicrous Bush 43-era name, wasn't cutting it anymore. It was, and still is, good for keeping America's perpetual war regime going and for undoing civil liberties, but there had never been much glory in it, only endless misery for all. Also it was getting old and increasingly easy to see through.

The time was therefore right for a return of the repressed -- for full-blooded, fifties-style, anti-Communist (= anti-Russian) hysteria, or, since that still seemed far-fetched, for anti-Communist (= anti-Chinese) hysteria.

This was not the only factor behind the Obama administration's "pivot towards Asia," its largely failed attempt to take China down a notch or two, but it was an important part of the story.

However, by the time Obama and his team decided to pivot, China had become too important to the United States economically to make a good Cold War enemy. Worse still, it had for too long been an object of pity and contempt, not fear.

When the Soviet Union was an enemy, China was an enemy too, most glaringly during the Korean War. It remained an enemy even after the Sino-Soviet split became too obvious to deny. However, unlike post-1917 Russia, it had never quite become an historical foe.

Moreover, as Russia began to recover from the Yeltsin era, the Russian political class, and many of the oligarchs behind them, sensing the popular mood, decided that the time was ripe "to make Russia great again." Putin is not so much a cause as he is a symptom – and symbol – of this aspiration.

And so, there it was: the longed for new Cold War would be much like the one that seemed over a quarter century ago.

***

As everyone who has seen, heard or read anything about the 2016 election "knows," Russian intelligence services (= Putin) meddled. Everyone also "knows" that, with midterm elections looming, they are at it again.

This, according to the mainstream consensus view, is a bona fide casus belli , a justification for war. To be sure, what they want is a war that remains cold; ending life on earth, as we know it, is not on their agenda.

But inasmuch as cold wars can easily turn hot, this hardly mitigates the recklessness of their machinations. Humankind was extraordinarily lucky last time; there is no guarantee that all that luck will hold.

Exactly what "Putin," the shorthand name for all that is Russian and nefarious, did, or is still doing, remains unclear. But this does not seem to bother purveyors of the conventional wisdom. Neither is ostensibly informed public opinion fazed by the fact that the evidence supporting the consensus view comes mainly from American intelligence services and from their counterparts in the UK and other allied nations.

Time was when anyone with any sense understood that these intelligence services, the American ones especially, are second to none in meddling in the affairs of other nations, and that the American national security state – essentially our political police -- is comprised, by design, of liars and deceivers.

How ironic therefore that nowadays it is mainly bamboozled Trump supporters in the Fox News demographic -- people who could care less about peace or, for that matter, about truth -- who are wary of the CIA and skeptical of the FBI's claims!

Try as they might, the manufacturers and guardians of conventional wisdom have so far been unable to concoct a plausible story in which Russian meddling affected the outcome of the 2016 election in any serious way. The idea that the Russians defeated Hillary, not Hillary herself, is, to borrow a phrase from Jeremy Bentham, "nonsense on stilts." Leading Democrats and their media flacks don't seem to mind that either.

They do not even seem to notice that what they allege, vague as it is, is trifling compared to the massive and very open meddling of American plutocrats, Republican vote suppressers and gerrymanderers, and the governments of supposedly friendly nations – like Saudi Arabia, the Gulf monarchies, and Israel.

Nevertheless, it probably is true that the Russians meddled. Cold War revivalists can therefore rest easy, confident that their propagandists will have at least a few facts with which they can work to restore the perils of their vanished youth.

Even so, the level of their hypocrisy is appalling. Russia, along with former Soviet republics and former members of the Warsaw Pact, has been bearing the brunt of far worse American meddling for far longer than anything sanctimonious defenders of so-called American "democracy" can plausibly allege.

Moreover, it should go without saying that the democracy they purport to care so much about has almost nothing to do with "the rule of the demos." It doesn't even have much to do with free and fair competitive elections – unless "free and fair" means that anything goes, so long as the principals and perpetrators are homegrown or citizens of favored nations.

Self-righteous posturing aside, Putin's real sin in the eyes of the American power elite is that, in his own small way, he has been defying America's "right" to run the world as it sees fit.

When Clinton was president, Serbia did that, and lived to regret it. Cuba has been suffering for nearly six decades for the same reason, and now Venezuela is paying its dues. The empire is merciless towards nations that rebel.

With Soviet support and then with sheer determination and grit, Cuba has been able to withstand the onslaught to some extent from Day One. Venezuela may not be so lucky – especially now that Republicans and Democrats feel threatened by the growing number of "democratic socialists" in their midst. Already, the propaganda system is targeting Venezuelan "socialism," blaming it for that country's woes, and warning that if our newly minted, homegrown socialists prevail, a similar fate will be in store for us.

This is ludicrous, of course – American hostility and the vagaries of the global oil market deserve the lion's share of the blame. But the on-going propaganda blitz could nevertheless pave the way for horrors ahead, should Trump decide to start a war America could actually win.

Inconsequential Russian meddling is a big deal on the "liberal" cable networks, on NPR, and in the "quality" press. Democrats and a few Republicans love to bleat on about it. But it is Ukraine that made Russia our "adversary" and its president Public Enemy Number One.

Hypocrisy reigns here too. It was the Obama administration – run through with neocons, liberal imperialists, and other holdovers from Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State – that did all it could to exacerbate longstanding tensions between that country's Ukrainian and Russian speaking populations, the better to complete NATO's encirclement of the Russian federation. And it was American meddling that led to the empowerment of virulently anti-Russian, fascisant Ukrainian politicians, much to the detriment of Russian speaking Ukrainians in the east.

But never mind: Putin – that is, the Russia government – violated international law by sending troops briefly into beleaguered Russian-speaking parts of the country. That they were generally welcomed by the people living there is of no importance.

Worst of all, Russia annexed Crimea – a territory integral to the Russian empire since the eighteenth century. Since long before the Russian Revolution, Crimea has been home to a huge naval base vital to Russia's strategic defense.

The story line back in the day was that anything that could be described as Russian aggression outside the Soviet Union's agreed upon sphere of influence had to do with spreading Communism. In fact, the Soviets did everything they could to keep Communist and other insurgencies from upending the status quo. The mainstream narrative was wrong.

Now Communism is gone and nothing has taken its place. Even so, the idea that Russia has designs on its neighbors for ideological reasons is hard to shake – in part because it is actively promoted by propagandists who have suddenly and uncharacteristically become defenders of international law.

Meanwhile, of course, the hypocrisies keep piling on. It is practically a tenet of the American civil religion that international law applies to others, not to the United States. This is why, when it suits some perceived purpose, America flaunts its violations shamelessly.

Thus nothing the Russians did or are ever likely to do comes close to the shenanigans Bill Clinton displayed – successfully, for the most part – in his efforts to tear Kosovo away from Serbia. Clinton even went so far as to bomb Belgrade; Putin never bombed Kiev.

The Cold War that began after World War II involved a clash of rival political economic systems. The Cold War that reignited a few years ago involves a clash of rival imperialist centers. Its world more nearly resembles the one that existed before World War I than the one that emerged after World War II.

However, the difference may be more superficial than it seems. The ease with which Cold War revivalists have been able to get the Cold War up and running again, even without Communism, suggests what a few observers have long maintained -- that the Cold War, on Russia's part, had little, if anything, to do with spreading Communism around the world, and everything to do with maintaining a cordon sanitaire around Russia's borders in order to protect against a demonstrably aggressive "free world."

George W. Bush claimed that 9/11 happened because "they hate our freedom." "They" would be radical Islamists of the kind stirred into action in Afghanistan by Zbigniew Brzezinski and his co-thinkers in the Carter administration. Their objective was to undermine the Soviet Union by getting it bogged down in a quagmire like the one that did so much harm to the United States in Vietnam.

That part of Brzezinski's plan was at least a partial success. But inasmuch as Bush's "they" are still there, still spreading murder and mayhem throughout the Greater Middle East, America and the world has been paying a high price for the benefits, such as they were, that ensued.

The never-ending wars set in motion by the "pivot" towards radical Islamism decades ago never quite succeeded in producing an enemy as serviceable as the USSR. But now that Putin's Russia has been pressed into service, that problem is potentially "solved."

However, the American public is not as naïve as it used to be, and it is impossible to say, at this point, how well this new story line will work.

Efforts to recycle Bush's "they hate our freedom" nonsense ought to be non-starters. But this is the best Cold War revivalists have come up with so far. The Russians, they say, simply cannot deal with the fact that we Americans are so damned free.

It is hard to believe, but there are people who are actually buying this but, with a lot of corporate media assistance, there are. No matter how clear it is that they are not worth being taken seriously, Cold War mythologies just won't die.

However, it is worth pondering why today's Russia would do what it is alleged to have done; and why, as is also alleged, it is still doing it.

From a geopolitical point of view, Russia does have an interest in doing all it can to ward off Western aggression. It also has an interest in undermining strategic alliances aimed at blocking anything and everything that challenges American supremacy. And, until sanity prevails in Washington and other Western capitals, it arguably also has an interest in aiding and abetting rightwing nationalists in order to exacerbate tensions within Western societies.

However, in view of prevailing power relations, these are interests it cannot do much to advance. Acting as if this were not the case only puts Russia in a bad light -- not for meddling, but for meddling stupidly.

No doubt, for reasons both fair and foul, Putin wanted Hillary to lose the election two years ago. So, but for one little problem, would anyone whose head is screwed on right. That problem's name is Donald Trump.

Clinton is bad, but Trump is worse -- not just by most measures but by all. Her fondness for war and preparations for war was alarming; she was bellicosity personified. But it was plain even before the election that Trump, a mentally unhinged narcissist, would be even more likely than she to bring on massive devastation. A vote for Trump was and still is a vote for catastrophe.

Putin's enemy was Trump's enemy, and it is axiomatic that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" -- except sometimes it isn't. Sometimes, my enemy's enemy is an enemy far worse.

For reasons that remain obscure, Putin and Trump seem to have a "thing" going on between them. Some day perhaps we will know what that is all about. For now, though, the hard and very relevant fact is that Trump has done nothing to help, and quite a few things to harm, Russia.

It isn't just ordinary Russians who have been made worse off. Trump has been at least as hard on oligarchs close to Putin as Clinton would have been.

If those damned Russians were half as smart as they are made out to be, they would have realized long ago that, for getting anything done that bucks the tide, Trump is too inept to be of any use at all; and that anything he sets out to do is likely to turn out badly not just for America and its allies but for Russia too.

Therefore, if there really was Russian meddling, as there probably was, Putin should be ashamed – not so much for the DNC reasons laid out 24/7 on MSNBC and CNN, but for overestimating Trump's abilities and for underestimating the extent to which what started out as a maneuver of Hillary Clinton's, concocted to excuse her incompetence, would take a perilously "viral" turn, becoming a major threat to peace in a political culture that never quite got beyond the lunacy of the First Cold War.

Andrew Levine is the author most recently of THE AMERICAN IDEOLOGY (Routledge) and POLITICAL KEY WORDS (Blackwell) as well as of many other books and articles in political philosophy. His most recent book is In Bad Faith: What's Wrong With the Opium of the People . He was a Professor (philosophy) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and a Research Professor (philosophy) at the University of Maryland-College Park. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press).

[Sep 16, 2018] I m delighted we can see the true face of American exceptionalism on display everyday. The last thing I want to see is back to normal.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Most here voted for or supported Obama whose record of incarcerating and persecuting journalists, punishing whistle-blowers, extra-judicial executions including citizens of the United States, placing children in cages, violent regime change abroad, spying on citizens, and expanding the security state was as bad or worse as that of Bush and Trump, in some cases by some margin. ..."
"... The current heroes of the 'resistance' lied America into Iraq or Libya, hacked into the computers of the elected representatives/lied about it, and support torture/enhanced interrogations, all under Obama. 'Liberals' lionize these clown criminals along with 'responsible' republicans whilst embracing open bigots such as Farrakhan. And, yes, if one is willing to share the podium with Farrakhan that's tacit support of his views. ..."
Sep 16, 2018 | crookedtimber.org

Thomas Beale 09.13.18 at 9:58 am ( 16 )

I'd suggest that the two strains of 'conservatism' that matter are:

a) maintaining oppression/rule over subordinate classes to prevent them up-ending the status quo (the Robin view) and

b) maintaining philosophical +/- cultural values fundamental to a civilised society, typically so-called enlightenment values, freedom of mind, body and property etc. These are understood in a wide spectrum of concrete interpretations, from free-market purists to social democrats, and don't therefore correspond to one kind of on-the-ground politics.

Progressives tend attack a) (a non-philosophical form of conservatism – it's just about preserving a power structure), and usually claim that b) (the one that matters) doesn't exist or isn't 'conservative', or else ignore it.

We have the basic problem of same term, variable referents

Lobsterman 09.13.18 at 10:27 pm ( 40 )

(b) doesn't exist. Conservatives are, as a group, in eager favor of concentration camps for toddlers, the drug war, unrestrained surveillance, American empire, civil forfeiture, mass incarceration, extrajudicial police execution, etc. etc. They have internal disagreements on how much to do those things, but the consensus is for all of them without meaningful constraint. And they are always justified in terms of (a).

ph 09.14.18 at 11:50 am ( 58 )

@40

Most here voted for or supported Obama whose record of incarcerating and persecuting journalists, punishing whistle-blowers, extra-judicial executions including citizens of the United States, placing children in cages, violent regime change abroad, spying on citizens, and expanding the security state was as bad or worse as that of Bush and Trump, in some cases by some margin.

The current heroes of the 'resistance' lied America into Iraq or Libya, hacked into the computers of the elected representatives/lied about it, and support torture/enhanced interrogations, all under Obama. 'Liberals' lionize these clown criminals along with 'responsible' republicans whilst embracing open bigots such as Farrakhan. And, yes, if one is willing to share the podium with Farrakhan that's tacit support of his views.

Conservative as a political category post 1750 works and the basic argument of the OP holds. The comments not so much.

[Sep 16, 2018] Perils of Ineptitude by Andrew Levin

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... There is less shame in being undone by a "master of deceit." When J. Edgar Hoover coined that description, he had Communists in mind. Back then, though, "Ruskies" and "Commies" – it was all the same. Americans were conditioned to live in fear that the Russians were coming. ..."
"... That nonsense should have ended when Communism more or less officially expired in 1989, followed two years later by the demise of the Soviet Union itself. For a long time, it seemed that it had. At first, the reaction in Western, especially American, political and media circles was triumphalist. The war was over and our side won. Beneath the surface, however, there was mourning in America. ..."
"... With the Cold War, the death merchants, the masters of war, the neocons, and a host of others had had a good thing going. Having been born into it, the political class was comfortable with the status quo too; and generations of Americans had grown up imbibing Russophobia in their mother's milk (or infant formula). ..."
"... Before long, it became clear that our economic and political masters had nothing to worry about, that Cold War anti-Communism was more robust than Communism itself. ..."
"... That suited Bill Clinton and his First Lady, the former Goldwater Girl. Boris Yeltsin, Russia's leader, was their man. He was a godsend, a Trump-like cartoon character and a drunkard to boot – with an economy in tatters, and no rightwing base egging him on. ..."
"... The time was therefore right for a return of the repressed -- for full-blooded, fifties-style, anti-Communist (= anti-Russian) hysteria, or, since that still seemed far-fetched, for anti-Communist (= anti-Chinese) hysteria. ..."
"... Exactly what "Putin," the shorthand name for all that is Russian and nefarious, did, or is still doing, remains unclear. But this does not seem to bother purveyors of the conventional wisdom. Neither is ostensibly informed public opinion fazed by the fact that the evidence supporting the consensus view comes mainly from American intelligence services and from their counterparts in the UK and other allied nations. ..."
"... How ironic therefore that nowadays it is mainly bamboozled Trump supporters in the Fox News demographic -- people who could care less about peace or, for that matter, about truth -- who are wary of the CIA and skeptical of the FBI's claims! ..."
"... They do not even seem to notice that what they allege, vague as it is, is trifling compared to the massive and very open meddling of American plutocrats, Republican vote suppressers and gerrymanderers, and the governments of supposedly friendly nations – like Saudi Arabia, the Gulf monarchies, and Israel ..."
"... Cold War revivalists can therefore rest easy, confident that their propagandists will have at least a few facts with which they can work to restore the perils of their vanished youth. ..."
"... Even so, the level of their hypocrisy is appalling. Russia, along with former Soviet republics and former members of the Warsaw Pact, has been bearing the brunt of far worse American meddling for far longer than anything sanctimonious defenders of so-called American "democracy" can plausibly allege. ..."
"... Hypocrisy reigns here too. It was the Obama administration – run through with neocons, liberal imperialists, and other holdovers from Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State – that did all it could to exacerbate longstanding tensions between that country's Ukrainian and Russian speaking populations, the better to complete NATO's encirclement of the Russian federation. And it was American meddling that led to the empowerment of virulently anti-Russian, fascisant Ukrainian politicians, much to the detriment of Russian speaking Ukrainians in the east. ..."
"... The Cold War that began after World War II involved a clash of rival political economic systems. The Cold War that reignited a few years ago involves a clash of rival imperialist centers. Its world more nearly resembles the one that existed before World War I than the one that emerged after World War II. ..."
"... However, the difference may be more superficial than it seems. The ease with which Cold War revivalists have been able to get the Cold War up and running again, even without Communism, suggests what a few observers have long maintained -- that the Cold War, on Russia's part, had little, if anything, to do with spreading Communism around the world, and everything to do with maintaining a cordon sanitaire around Russia's borders in order to protect against a demonstrably aggressive "free world." ..."
"... That part of Brzezinski's plan was at least a partial success. But inasmuch as Bush's "they" are still there, still spreading murder and mayhem throughout the Greater Middle East, America and the world has been paying a high price for the benefits, such as they were, that ensued. ..."
"... The never-ending wars set in motion by the "pivot" towards radical Islamism decades ago never quite succeeded in producing an enemy as serviceable as the USSR. But now that Putin's Russia has been pressed into service, that problem is potentially "solved." ..."
"... Efforts to recycle Bush's "they hate our freedom" nonsense ought to be non-starters. But this is the best Cold War revivalists have come up with so far. The Russians, they say, simply cannot deal with the fact that we Americans are so damned free. ..."
"... From a geopolitical point of view, Russia does have an interest in doing all it can to ward off Western aggression. It also has an interest in undermining strategic alliances aimed at blocking anything and everything that challenges American supremacy. And, until sanity prevails in Washington and other Western capitals, it arguably also has an interest in aiding and abetting rightwing nationalists in order to exacerbate tensions within Western societies. ..."
"... Clinton is bad, but Trump is worse -- not just by most measures but by all. Her fondness for war and preparations for war was alarming; she was bellicosity personified. But it was plain even before the election that Trump, a mentally unhinged narcissist, would be even more likely than she to bring on massive devastation. A vote for Trump was and still is a vote for catastrophe. ..."
"... For now, though, the hard and very relevant fact is that Trump has done nothing to help, and quite a few things to harm, Russia. ..."
"... It isn't just ordinary Russians who have been made worse off. Trump has been at least as hard on oligarchs close to Putin as Clinton would have been. ..."
"... If those damned Russians were half as smart as they are made out to be, they would have realized long ago that, for getting anything done that bucks the tide, Trump is too inept to be of any use at all; and that anything he sets out to do is likely to turn out badly not just for America and its allies but for Russia too. ..."
Aug 03, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

There is less shame in being undone by a "master of deceit." When J. Edgar Hoover coined that description, he had Communists in mind. Back then, though, "Ruskies" and "Commies" – it was all the same. Americans were conditioned to live in fear that the Russians were coming.

That nonsense should have ended when Communism more or less officially expired in 1989, followed two years later by the demise of the Soviet Union itself. For a long time, it seemed that it had. At first, the reaction in Western, especially American, political and media circles was triumphalist. The war was over and our side won. Beneath the surface, however, there was mourning in America.

With the Cold War, the death merchants, the masters of war, the neocons, and a host of others had had a good thing going. Having been born into it, the political class was comfortable with the status quo too; and generations of Americans had grown up imbibing Russophobia in their mother's milk (or infant formula).

It turned out, though, that American triumphalism was only a phase. Before long, it became clear that our economic and political masters had nothing to worry about, that Cold War anti-Communism was more robust than Communism itself.

However, in the final days of Bush 41 and then at the dawn of the Clinton era, nobody knew that. Nobody gave America's propaganda system the credit it deserved.

Also, nobody quite realized how devastating Russia's regression to capitalism would be, and nobody quite grasped the savagery of the kleptocrats who had taken charge of what remained of the Russian state.

For more than a decade, the situation in that late great superpower was too dire to sustain the old fears and animosities. Capitalism had made Russia wretched again.

That suited Bill Clinton and his First Lady, the former Goldwater Girl. Boris Yeltsin, Russia's leader, was their man. He was a godsend, a Trump-like cartoon character and a drunkard to boot – with an economy in tatters, and no rightwing base egging him on.

But anti-Communism (without Communism) and its close cousin, Russophobia, could not remain in remission forever. The need for them was too great.

In the Age of Obama, the Global War on Terror, with or without that ludicrous Bush 43-era name, wasn't cutting it anymore. It was, and still is, good for keeping America's perpetual war regime going and for undoing civil liberties, but there had never been much glory in it, only endless misery for all. Also it was getting old and increasingly easy to see through.

The time was therefore right for a return of the repressed -- for full-blooded, fifties-style, anti-Communist (= anti-Russian) hysteria, or, since that still seemed far-fetched, for anti-Communist (= anti-Chinese) hysteria.

This was not the only factor behind the Obama administration's "pivot towards Asia," its largely failed attempt to take China down a notch or two, but it was an important part of the story.

However, by the time Obama and his team decided to pivot, China had become too important to the United States economically to make a good Cold War enemy. Worse still, it had for too long been an object of pity and contempt, not fear.

When the Soviet Union was an enemy, China was an enemy too, most glaringly during the Korean War. It remained an enemy even after the Sino-Soviet split became too obvious to deny. However, unlike post-1917 Russia, it had never quite become an historical foe.

Moreover, as Russia began to recover from the Yeltsin era, the Russian political class, and many of the oligarchs behind them, sensing the popular mood, decided that the time was ripe "to make Russia great again." Putin is not so much a cause as he is a symptom – and symbol – of this aspiration.

And so, there it was: the longed for new Cold War would be much like the one that seemed over a quarter century ago.

***

As everyone who has seen, heard or read anything about the 2016 election "knows," Russian intelligence services (= Putin) meddled. Everyone also "knows" that, with midterm elections looming, they are at it again.

This, according to the mainstream consensus view, is a bona fide casus belli , a justification for war. To be sure, what they want is a war that remains cold; ending life on earth, as we know it, is not on their agenda.

But inasmuch as cold wars can easily turn hot, this hardly mitigates the recklessness of their machinations. Humankind was extraordinarily lucky last time; there is no guarantee that all that luck will hold.

Exactly what "Putin," the shorthand name for all that is Russian and nefarious, did, or is still doing, remains unclear. But this does not seem to bother purveyors of the conventional wisdom. Neither is ostensibly informed public opinion fazed by the fact that the evidence supporting the consensus view comes mainly from American intelligence services and from their counterparts in the UK and other allied nations.

Time was when anyone with any sense understood that these intelligence services, the American ones especially, are second to none in meddling in the affairs of other nations, and that the American national security state – essentially our political police -- is comprised, by design, of liars and deceivers.

How ironic therefore that nowadays it is mainly bamboozled Trump supporters in the Fox News demographic -- people who could care less about peace or, for that matter, about truth -- who are wary of the CIA and skeptical of the FBI's claims!

Try as they might, the manufacturers and guardians of conventional wisdom have so far been unable to concoct a plausible story in which Russian meddling affected the outcome of the 2016 election in any serious way. The idea that the Russians defeated Hillary, not Hillary herself, is, to borrow a phrase from Jeremy Bentham, "nonsense on stilts." Leading Democrats and their media flacks don't seem to mind that either.

They do not even seem to notice that what they allege, vague as it is, is trifling compared to the massive and very open meddling of American plutocrats, Republican vote suppressers and gerrymanderers, and the governments of supposedly friendly nations – like Saudi Arabia, the Gulf monarchies, and Israel.

Nevertheless, it probably is true that the Russians meddled. Cold War revivalists can therefore rest easy, confident that their propagandists will have at least a few facts with which they can work to restore the perils of their vanished youth.

Even so, the level of their hypocrisy is appalling. Russia, along with former Soviet republics and former members of the Warsaw Pact, has been bearing the brunt of far worse American meddling for far longer than anything sanctimonious defenders of so-called American "democracy" can plausibly allege.

Moreover, it should go without saying that the democracy they purport to care so much about has almost nothing to do with "the rule of the demos." It doesn't even have much to do with free and fair competitive elections – unless "free and fair" means that anything goes, so long as the principals and perpetrators are homegrown or citizens of favored nations.

Self-righteous posturing aside, Putin's real sin in the eyes of the American power elite is that, in his own small way, he has been defying America's "right" to run the world as it sees fit.

When Clinton was president, Serbia did that, and lived to regret it. Cuba has been suffering for nearly six decades for the same reason, and now Venezuela is paying its dues. The empire is merciless towards nations that rebel.

With Soviet support and then with sheer determination and grit, Cuba has been able to withstand the onslaught to some extent from Day One. Venezuela may not be so lucky – especially now that Republicans and Democrats feel threatened by the growing number of "democratic socialists" in their midst. Already, the propaganda system is targeting Venezuelan "socialism," blaming it for that country's woes, and warning that if our newly minted, homegrown socialists prevail, a similar fate will be in store for us.

This is ludicrous, of course – American hostility and the vagaries of the global oil market deserve the lion's share of the blame. But the on-going propaganda blitz could nevertheless pave the way for horrors ahead, should Trump decide to start a war America could actually win.

Inconsequential Russian meddling is a big deal on the "liberal" cable networks, on NPR, and in the "quality" press. Democrats and a few Republicans love to bleat on about it. But it is Ukraine that made Russia our "adversary" and its president Public Enemy Number One.

Hypocrisy reigns here too. It was the Obama administration – run through with neocons, liberal imperialists, and other holdovers from Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State – that did all it could to exacerbate longstanding tensions between that country's Ukrainian and Russian speaking populations, the better to complete NATO's encirclement of the Russian federation. And it was American meddling that led to the empowerment of virulently anti-Russian, fascisant Ukrainian politicians, much to the detriment of Russian speaking Ukrainians in the east.

But never mind: Putin – that is, the Russia government – violated international law by sending troops briefly into beleaguered Russian-speaking parts of the country. That they were generally welcomed by the people living there is of no importance.

Worst of all, Russia annexed Crimea – a territory integral to the Russian empire since the eighteenth century. Since long before the Russian Revolution, Crimea has been home to a huge naval base vital to Russia's strategic defense.

The story line back in the day was that anything that could be described as Russian aggression outside the Soviet Union's agreed upon sphere of influence had to do with spreading Communism. In fact, the Soviets did everything they could to keep Communist and other insurgencies from upending the status quo. The mainstream narrative was wrong.

Now Communism is gone and nothing has taken its place. Even so, the idea that Russia has designs on its neighbors for ideological reasons is hard to shake – in part because it is actively promoted by propagandists who have suddenly and uncharacteristically become defenders of international law.

Meanwhile, of course, the hypocrisies keep piling on. It is practically a tenet of the American civil religion that international law applies to others, not to the United States. This is why, when it suits some perceived purpose, America flaunts its violations shamelessly.

Thus nothing the Russians did or are ever likely to do comes close to the shenanigans Bill Clinton displayed – successfully, for the most part – in his efforts to tear Kosovo away from Serbia. Clinton even went so far as to bomb Belgrade; Putin never bombed Kiev.

The Cold War that began after World War II involved a clash of rival political economic systems. The Cold War that reignited a few years ago involves a clash of rival imperialist centers. Its world more nearly resembles the one that existed before World War I than the one that emerged after World War II.

However, the difference may be more superficial than it seems. The ease with which Cold War revivalists have been able to get the Cold War up and running again, even without Communism, suggests what a few observers have long maintained -- that the Cold War, on Russia's part, had little, if anything, to do with spreading Communism around the world, and everything to do with maintaining a cordon sanitaire around Russia's borders in order to protect against a demonstrably aggressive "free world."

George W. Bush claimed that 9/11 happened because "they hate our freedom." "They" would be radical Islamists of the kind stirred into action in Afghanistan by Zbigniew Brzezinski and his co-thinkers in the Carter administration. Their objective was to undermine the Soviet Union by getting it bogged down in a quagmire like the one that did so much harm to the United States in Vietnam.

That part of Brzezinski's plan was at least a partial success. But inasmuch as Bush's "they" are still there, still spreading murder and mayhem throughout the Greater Middle East, America and the world has been paying a high price for the benefits, such as they were, that ensued.

The never-ending wars set in motion by the "pivot" towards radical Islamism decades ago never quite succeeded in producing an enemy as serviceable as the USSR. But now that Putin's Russia has been pressed into service, that problem is potentially "solved."

However, the American public is not as naïve as it used to be, and it is impossible to say, at this point, how well this new story line will work.

Efforts to recycle Bush's "they hate our freedom" nonsense ought to be non-starters. But this is the best Cold War revivalists have come up with so far. The Russians, they say, simply cannot deal with the fact that we Americans are so damned free.

It is hard to believe, but there are people who are actually buying this but, with a lot of corporate media assistance, there are. No matter how clear it is that they are not worth being taken seriously, Cold War mythologies just won't die.

However, it is worth pondering why today's Russia would do what it is alleged to have done; and why, as is also alleged, it is still doing it.

From a geopolitical point of view, Russia does have an interest in doing all it can to ward off Western aggression. It also has an interest in undermining strategic alliances aimed at blocking anything and everything that challenges American supremacy. And, until sanity prevails in Washington and other Western capitals, it arguably also has an interest in aiding and abetting rightwing nationalists in order to exacerbate tensions within Western societies.

However, in view of prevailing power relations, these are interests it cannot do much to advance. Acting as if this were not the case only puts Russia in a bad light -- not for meddling, but for meddling stupidly.

No doubt, for reasons both fair and foul, Putin wanted Hillary to lose the election two years ago. So, but for one little problem, would anyone whose head is screwed on right. That problem's name is Donald Trump.

Clinton is bad, but Trump is worse -- not just by most measures but by all. Her fondness for war and preparations for war was alarming; she was bellicosity personified. But it was plain even before the election that Trump, a mentally unhinged narcissist, would be even more likely than she to bring on massive devastation. A vote for Trump was and still is a vote for catastrophe.

Putin's enemy was Trump's enemy, and it is axiomatic that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" -- except sometimes it isn't. Sometimes, my enemy's enemy is an enemy far worse.

For reasons that remain obscure, Putin and Trump seem to have a "thing" going on between them. Some day perhaps we will know what that is all about. For now, though, the hard and very relevant fact is that Trump has done nothing to help, and quite a few things to harm, Russia.

It isn't just ordinary Russians who have been made worse off. Trump has been at least as hard on oligarchs close to Putin as Clinton would have been.

If those damned Russians were half as smart as they are made out to be, they would have realized long ago that, for getting anything done that bucks the tide, Trump is too inept to be of any use at all; and that anything he sets out to do is likely to turn out badly not just for America and its allies but for Russia too.

Therefore, if there really was Russian meddling, as there probably was, Putin should be ashamed – not so much for the DNC reasons laid out 24/7 on MSNBC and CNN, but for overestimating Trump's abilities and for underestimating the extent to which what started out as a maneuver of Hillary Clinton's, concocted to excuse her incompetence, would take a perilously "viral" turn, becoming a major threat to peace in a political culture that never quite got beyond the lunacy of the First Cold War.

Andrew Levine is the author most recently of THE AMERICAN IDEOLOGY (Routledge) and POLITICAL KEY WORDS (Blackwell) as well as of many other books and articles in political philosophy. His most recent book is In Bad Faith: What's Wrong With the Opium of the People . He was a Professor (philosophy) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and a Research Professor (philosophy) at the University of Maryland-College Park. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press).

[Sep 16, 2018] I m delighted we can see the true face of American exceptionalism on display everyday. The last thing I want to see is back to normal.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Most here voted for or supported Obama whose record of incarcerating and persecuting journalists, punishing whistle-blowers, extra-judicial executions including citizens of the United States, placing children in cages, violent regime change abroad, spying on citizens, and expanding the security state was as bad or worse as that of Bush and Trump, in some cases by some margin. ..."
"... The current heroes of the 'resistance' lied America into Iraq or Libya, hacked into the computers of the elected representatives/lied about it, and support torture/enhanced interrogations, all under Obama. 'Liberals' lionize these clown criminals along with 'responsible' republicans whilst embracing open bigots such as Farrakhan. And, yes, if one is willing to share the podium with Farrakhan that's tacit support of his views. ..."
Sep 16, 2018 | crookedtimber.org

Thomas Beale 09.13.18 at 9:58 am ( 16 )

I'd suggest that the two strains of 'conservatism' that matter are:

a) maintaining oppression/rule over subordinate classes to prevent them up-ending the status quo (the Robin view) and

b) maintaining philosophical +/- cultural values fundamental to a civilised society, typically so-called enlightenment values, freedom of mind, body and property etc. These are understood in a wide spectrum of concrete interpretations, from free-market purists to social democrats, and don't therefore correspond to one kind of on-the-ground politics.

Progressives tend attack a) (a non-philosophical form of conservatism – it's just about preserving a power structure), and usually claim that b) (the one that matters) doesn't exist or isn't 'conservative', or else ignore it.

We have the basic problem of same term, variable referents

Lobsterman 09.13.18 at 10:27 pm ( 40 )

(b) doesn't exist. Conservatives are, as a group, in eager favor of concentration camps for toddlers, the drug war, unrestrained surveillance, American empire, civil forfeiture, mass incarceration, extrajudicial police execution, etc. etc. They have internal disagreements on how much to do those things, but the consensus is for all of them without meaningful constraint. And they are always justified in terms of (a).

ph 09.14.18 at 11:50 am ( 58 )

@40

Most here voted for or supported Obama whose record of incarcerating and persecuting journalists, punishing whistle-blowers, extra-judicial executions including citizens of the United States, placing children in cages, violent regime change abroad, spying on citizens, and expanding the security state was as bad or worse as that of Bush and Trump, in some cases by some margin.

The current heroes of the 'resistance' lied America into Iraq or Libya, hacked into the computers of the elected representatives/lied about it, and support torture/enhanced interrogations, all under Obama. 'Liberals' lionize these clown criminals along with 'responsible' republicans whilst embracing open bigots such as Farrakhan. And, yes, if one is willing to share the podium with Farrakhan that's tacit support of his views.

Conservative as a political category post 1750 works and the basic argument of the OP holds. The comments not so much.

[Sep 16, 2018] The Guardian is a blatant example of the turnaround from "reasonably reliable" to "paid shill"

Notable quotes:
"... Another example is the Danish newspaper "Information" founded during WWII, as very leftist it has today morphed, in the dark, into a center right neo- liberal rag, full of no- news and idiotic scribbles by irrelevant formerly known peoples talent-less sons and daughters. ..."
"... Wel thanks b, for telling the truth and letting me start my Sunday moderately depressed, I guess news that Washington D.C had been swallowed by a giant sink-hole, would cheer me partly up. ..."
Sep 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Den Lille Abe , Sep 16, 2018 12:47:49 AM | 49 ">link

Thank you b, for yet another good article!

Your article made me reflect the situation in general. While it is good the The White Frauds have been called out as an Empire front and as Western propaganda psy-op, I do thing the real Enemy is the MSM. These crimes by our governments, the White Frauds, Isil, ect,ect, would not be possible without the control of the MSM. But I am completely at a loss how to fight them, or just diminish their influence.

The Guardian s a blatant example, and its turnaround from "reasonable reliable" to "paid shill" was clumsily and obviously executed. Looking at the UK for real news , there is only the blogoshere left, all opposition has been subverted. And it is not only in the UK.

Another example is the Danish newspaper "Information" founded during WWII, as very leftist it has today morphed, in the dark, into a center right neo- liberal rag, full of no- news and idiotic scribbles by irrelevant formerly known peoples talent-less sons and daughters.

The situation in Sweden is even more depressing (it is!) the newspapers here are on level with the Sun and the Daily Heil.

Wel thanks b, for telling the truth and letting me start my Sunday moderately depressed, I guess news that Washington D.C had been swallowed by a giant sink-hole, would cheer me partly up.

[Sep 16, 2018] Mainstream Media Finally Admits Syrian Conflict Is US-Russia Proxy War

Notable quotes:
"... In regards to the current iteration of the Gas-for-Eurocrats scam- Qatar has a 100-year plan (The Oil Ministry's 100-year plan, not the Islamists' 100-year plan) , and it doesn't rely on a pipeline to Europe, but successfully implementing that plan does depend on continued sanctions against further Iranian gas development. ..."
"... shades of the Spanish civil war ..."
"... Western media provides humanitarian cover for the U.S. and NATO to fuel a brutal civil war ..."
"... So very true! I am sick to death of the fucking Humanitarian cover the media always throws over US war making. Libya was a prime example, they went in to bomb all hell out of Libya on a lie, a lie that the army was about to massacre thousands of people. That has no been shown totally false. Anyone remember Kovovo? Same shit. Bombing for fake humanitarian reasons. ..."
Oct 17, 2015 | Zero Hedge

Submitted by Nick Bernabe via TheAntiMedia.org,

The Syrian civil war rages on, displacing as many as 11 million people and killing nearly 300,000 as the conflict reaches into its fifth year. Syria, a longtime ally of Russia, has been receiving material support from the Eastern giant since the 1940s. As Anti-Media reported last month,

"Russia's support for Syria dates back to 1946, when Russia helped consolidate Syria's independence. The two countries mutually came to a diplomatic and military agreement in the form of a non-aggression pact, which was enacted on April 20, 1950. In this pact, Russia promised support to the newly-created Syria by helping to develop its military and by providing tactical support. Essentially, Russia and Syria have been cooperating for decades both militarily and economically, with Russia maintaining a naval base on the Syrian Mediterranean."

Meanwhile, the United States also has its own designs on the region. In 2013, President Obama, along with John Kerry, attempted to stir up enough public support for a direct regime change in Syria, tugging at the American public's freedom-spreading, democracy-loving heart strings. This attempt at a public overthrow of the Syrian government failed, with Americans responding with the massive #NoWarWithSyria protest movement. However, the drive for regime change didn't end just because the government stopped talking about it. The CIA continued to arm basically any group willing to fight against the Assad government. The Pentagon also tried (but failed), to manufacture an American-allied army out of so-called moderate Syrian rebels at the cost of $500 million - who, on paper would oppose ISIS, but in reality work to oust Assad.

Russia, who has been a Syrian ally for decades, has remained steadfast in its support of the Assad regime - openly supplying weapons, aircraft, tanks, intelligence, and human resources in the form of military advisers. Russia also operates a naval base on Syria's Mediterranean shores.

By any measure, this is a textbook proxy war between military powers vying to maintain their own economic interests in the Middle East. However, five years later, it seems the corporate media is finally "realizing" this shadow war for what it is. Over the weekend, The Washington Post ran an article titled, "Did U.S. weapons supplied to Syrian rebels draw Russia into the conflict?" The article goes on to state:

"American antitank missiles supplied to Syrian rebels are playing an unexpectedly prominent role in shaping the Syrian battlefield, giving the conflict the semblance of a proxy war between the United States and Russia, despite President Obama's express desire to avoid one."

Then, on Monday, The New York Times published a piece titled "U.S. Weaponry Is Turning Syria Into a Proxy War With Russia." The article admits that Syrian rebels are receiving abundant amounts of arms from the CIA, which are being used to fight the Russian-backed advance of Assad's troops as he tries to take back Syria from the various rebel, Islamist, and terror groups that have overtaken much of countryside.

Understanding that the U.S. public has been war-weary since the Iraq War debacle, Obama was forced to change his rhetoric from regime change in Syria to fighting terrorism in the form of ISIS. The ample fear-mongering provided by ISIS brutes gave Obama the public support he needed to renew America's seemingly permanent war in Iraq while giving him a back-door into Syria. The U.S. is currently bombing both countries, joined by a coalition of 62 partners, with Russia now officially throwing its hat into the bombing bonanza ring.

What should be clear is that the Unites States' priority in the region is not to defeat ISIS, but instead to overthrow Assad. Clever rhetoric disguises America's covert intentions, but the actions - and subsequent paper trail - paint a very clear picture of what is truly happening in Syria. WikiLeaks gives us some insight into the West's designs on Syria, providing a window into the longtime campaign to oust Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad. A new book that analyzes diplomatic cables leaked by Chelsea Manning, The WikiLeaks Files: The World According to U.S. Empire, reveals the U.S. had a longstanding regime change policy in Syria that dates back long before the 2011 Arab Spring uprising that rocked the Middle East.

"A December 13, 2006 cable, 'Influencing the SARG [Syrian government] in the End of 2006,' indicates that, as far back as 2006 – five years before Arab Spring protests in Syria – destabilizing the Syrian government was a central motivation of U.S. policy. The author of the cable was William Roebuck, at the time chargé d'affaires at the U.S. embassy in Damascus. The cable outlines strategies for destabilizing the Syrian government. In his summary of the cable, Roebuck wrote:

'We believe Bashar's weaknesses are in how he chooses to react to looming issues, both perceived and real, such as the conflict between economic reform steps (however limited) and entrenched, corrupt forces, the Kurdish question, and the potential threat to the regime from the increasing presence of transiting Islamist extremists. This cable summarizes our assessment of these vulnerabilities and suggests that there may be actions, statements, and signals that the USG can send that will improve the likelihood of such opportunities arising.'"

These cables reflect an even older plan, which was detailed by Dan Sanchez at AntiWar.com:

"A veritable 'carpe chaos' manifesto was written in 1996 for a Washington think tank by David Wurmser, an Israel-first neocon (but I repeat myself) who would later play a key role in the Bush administration's drive to the Iraq War: advising Dick Cheney in the Vice President's Office, assisting John Bolton at the State Department, and fabricating fanciful 'connections' between Iraq and Al Qaeda at the Department of Defense.

In 'Coping with Crumbling States: A Western and Israeli Balance of Power Strategy for the Levant,' Wurmser made a case for 'limiting and expediting the chaotic collapse' of the Baathist governments in Iraq and Syria."

Declassified documents from the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) suggest that ISIS is simply a convenient - and dare we say welcome - side effect of the West's destabilization agenda in Syria and Iraq.

proxy war

View the entire DIA document on Syria and ISIS on Judicial Watch.

Sanchez continued to describe this plan:

"Then, after the 2011 'Arab Spring' of popular uprisings reached Syria, 'The Redirection' went into overdrive. The US-led regional coalition (Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc.) has been strenuously trying to overthrow the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad since at least 2012 by heavily sponsoring an insurgency led by jihadists including Al Qaeda and ISIS."

The Wurmser plan seems to be materializing before our eyes in Syria.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUCwCgthp_E

What is hidden beneath all of this information is why the United States wants Assad ousted from power so badly. The most obvious excuse was his open abuse of human rights. And while this was the exact story-line given to the U.S. public from our "friends" in the media, the rhetoric comes off as empty at best, considering the U.S. actively supported Saudi Arabia's brutal crackdown of Arab Spring protesters. We learned during the Arab Spring that our Gulf State allies were allowed to kill as many pro-democracy protesters as they wanted (hell, we even supplied them with the weapons to do it), while any non-allies were not. Muammar Gaddafi learned this the hard way. Meanwhile, Ali Mohammed al-Nimr, a Saudi national, is awaiting execution by crucifixion for the crime of protesting the Saudi government during the Arab Spring. But crucifying a guy for protesting is fine with the United States because Saudi Arabia is one of our closest allies in the region. Repression is alright as long as it's our guys doing it, right?

With the mythical human rights argument out of the way, the following question emerges: What is the true agenda causing the U.S.-Russia proxy war in Syria? In short, it is resources, power, and hegemony.

While nearly every war the U.S. involves itself in is sold as a humanitarian effort to either stop terrorism or spread democracy, studies show that countries with resources such as fossil fuels are over 100 times more likely to see foreign involvement in their internal conflicts. America is often the foreign force that arms and finances different sides of these conflicts. Coincidentally, in Syria, so is Russia.

While this geopolitical scenario is rather complex, it makes perfect sense. The U.S. has been trying to contain Russia since World War II, and those policies of containment are still in effect today. America enjoys its role as the only remaining superpower and has an interest in maintaining that hegemony. To make things perfectly clear, this is the main driver behind the Syrian Civil War.

Russia has somewhat of a monopoly over the gas supplies needed for Europe's economy to operate. This gives Russia a semi-permanent economic base to fund its foreign policy agenda and maintain its own geopolitical strategy. The U.S. and its NATO allies want to end that monopoly, but in order to accomplish that, a pipeline must be built from the Sunni Gulf states, starting in Qatar, going through Jordan and Syria, and making its way into Turkey. From Turkey, the gas supplies will be distributed into Europe, effectively undermining Russia's current arrangement with the European Union and placing its economy in a state of uncertainty. This would eventually lead to a flight of investment away from Russia and subsequently permanently damage what's left of Russia's resource-dependent economy. This explains Russia's steadfast support for the Assad government. As The Guardian documented back in 2013:

"Assad refused to sign a proposed agreement with Qatar and Turkey that run a pipeline from the latter's North field, contiguous with Iran's South Pars field, through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey, with a view to supply European markets – albeit crucially bypassing Russia. Assad's rationale was 'to protect the interests of [his] Russian ally, which is Europe's top supplier of natural gas.'"

Note the purple line which traces the proposed Qatar-Turkey natural gas pipeline and note that all of the countries highlighted in red are part of a new coalition hastily put together after Turkey finally (in exchange for NATO's acquiescence on Erdogan's politically-motivated war with the PKK) agreed to allow the US to fly combat missions against ISIS targets from Incirlik. Now note which country along the purple line is not highlighted in red. That's because Bashar al-Assad didn't support the pipeline and now we're seeing what happens when you're a Mid-East strongman and you decide not to support something the US and Saudi Arabia want to get done. (Map: ZeroHedge.com)

Note the purple line which traces the proposed Qatar-Turkey natural gas pipeline and note that all of the countries highlighted in red are part of a new coalition hastily put together after Turkey finally (in exchange for NATO's acquiescence on Erdogan's politically-motivated war with the PKK) agreed to allow the US to fly combat missions against ISIS targets from Incirlik. Now note which country along the purple line is not highlighted in red. That's because Bashar al-Assad didn't support the pipeline and now we're seeing what happens when you're a Mid-East strongman and you decide not to support something the US and Saudi Arabia want to get done. (Map: ZeroHedge.com)

Mnar Muhawesh of Mint Press News describes these pipeline plays in her article, "Migrant Crisis & Syria War Fueled By Competing Gas Pipelines":

"Knowing Syria was a critical piece in its energy strategy, Turkey attempted to persuade Syrian President Bashar Assad to reform this Iranian pipeline and to work with the proposed Qatar-Turkey pipeline, which would ultimately satisfy Turkey and the Gulf Arab nations' quest for dominance over gas supplies, who are the United State's allies. But after Assad refused Turkey's proposal, Turkey and its allies became the major architects of Syria's civil war."

It's unfortunate that it took the corporate media all these years to "discover" that the United States and Russia are fighting a geopolitical proxy war in Syria. It remains to be seen how many more years and lost lives it will take for them to also "discover" that this proxy war is being fought over resources and power. It's a sad state of affairs when the Western media provides humanitarian cover for the U.S. and NATO to fuel a brutal civil war - which has taken the lives of nearly 300,000 people - simply to create economic advantages for NATO states and allies while undermining stability in the Middle East - creating the greatest humanitarian catastrophe since World War II. And as millions of refugees continue to pour out of Syria into Europe and abroad, the NATO-dominated public of the E.U. and U.S. remain largely ignorant to the fact their own governments helped create the refugee crisis they so abhor.

JustObserving

The Nobel Prize Winner's war in Syria has caused 300,000 deaths and created more than 4 million refugees and at least 7 million displaced internally. Hardly any of the US or EU public is aware of that thanks to the free and fair media of the West

A recently released classified document obtained by WikiLeaks establishes that active US planning for regime-change predated the outbreak of the Syrian civil war by at least five years. The secret report from the head of the US Embassy in Damascus outlined "vulnerabilities" of the Syrian government that Washington could exploit. At the top of the list were fomenting "Sunni fears of Iranian influence" to cause sectarian conflict and taking advantage of "the presence of transiting Islamist extremists."

Given that the document was written in 2006, at the height of Iraq's sectarian carnage caused by the US invasion and Washington's divide-and-rule tactics, these proposals were made with full awareness that they would provoke a bloodbath. Nearly a decade later, the bitter fruits of this policy include the deaths of some 300,000 Syrians, with another 4 million driven from the country and 7 million more internally displaced.

While cynically exploiting the suffering of the Syrian people to justify an escalation of US militarism, Washington is not about to let Russia derail its drive to impose its hegemony over the oil-rich Middle East and the entire planet.

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/10/08/pers-o08.html

hedgeless_horseman

Like all wars, this one will end in tears for most.

How much money has the Clinton Foundation received from Middle Eastern donors?

How much in bribes do our "elected representatives" receive each election from defense contractors?

It is simple, but hard.

Sortition.

Stops the bribery.

Stops the wars.

ZerOhead

ALL wars are BANKER wars.

Remember... Friends don't let friends believe in the fake East vs. West dialectic that is being spun by the MSM whores. The bankers are using it to forward their plans for their global NWO government and financial system.

knukles

"Proxy"; a delicate understatement destined for the annals of Political Correct nonsense.
No, it's not a real war... It's a proxy, an imitation, a vote by somebody else that I abrogated because I just can't make it, a phantom chimera, surreal nachtmare.
So delicately put.

Ask the dead, maimed, frightened, cold, hungry and damaged if thy think it makes it any more tolerable.

manofthenorth

I know this is an old horse but apt;

"War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small 'inside' group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes."

Gen. S. Butler USMC

Son of Loki

No one would be foolish enough to choose war over peace--in peace sons bury their fathers, but in war fathers bury their sons.

Freddie

The USA is controlled by evil shitbags who promote wars for evil scum contractors like the Crown-Krinsky crime family. Friends of Meyer Lansky, McCain, LBJ, OBama and the rest of the evil shit who get innocent people murdered.

http://www.abeldanger.net/2014/04/crown-crime-family-of-chicago.html

Scum like McCain and Lindsay Graham saying they support the troops and idiots eat those lies up.

Scum puppets like the White Hut and all of Congress.

Innocent people murdered during these endless bankster wars - Opium Wars in China 1839 with wonderful British tribal banksters murdering Chinese, US Civil War 1861, endless European wars before that, WW1 banksters pushed royalty puppets owned by the Red Shield to war, WW2 with a US London Red Sheild Rockefeller Hitler and the Red Shild Bolsheviks, Korean War, LBJ's narco Vietnam and Crown-Krinsky's F-111 which was a criminal fraud LBJ was involved in, Bushes and Obola Clinton middle east wars and Clinton/UN narco pipeline in the Balkans.

Tens of millions of innocent people murdered not for democracy or the American way of life but looting countries, narco trillions, weapons and contractor contracts and endless shit.

Mass murder for a profit.

Ignatius

A proxy war, I might add, in which my home country of the USA is completely in the wrong.

Now let us all rise for the playing of our National Anthem.

o r c k

The U.S. Press is complicit in the deaths of 300,000 human beings. A few hours of investigative reporting would've shed a clear light on this -unless the Press already knew and were just following "orders". (much more likely) Don't tell me that thousands of "reporters" in America go to bed at night with a clean conscience. And with the words "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity" dancing behind their closed eyelids. I pity them.

bigkahuna

Don't waste your pity on the MSM, they have never - nor do they now, care.

divedivedive

I'm an old man and I guess I am a little naive. I always thought the only reason the US was in the ME was to assure the flow of crude. But with the drop in crude prices, and the US fraking, why is the ME so important to the US today ?

Who was that masked man

Money. War can be extremely lucrative for those with the "right" connections.

maxwellsdemon

It's really about Israel controlling Lebanon by eliminating the Syrian connection between Iran and Hezbollah. That's why neocon= Israeli firste David Wurmser thought up this strategy to displace, wound, and kill millions of the non Chosen.

datura

Why is ME so important? Because it lies next to Russia and China, the two rising superpowers, which the USA wants to "contain" and subdue. It is not just Syria. The USA has been sending ISIS to China to incite their muslims and the same with Russia. In other words, the USA has embarked on the same path as once Hitler or Napoleon - the world domination. Russia and China are obstacles to that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KkNAQIuGZY

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

Thick Willy

He explained it in this article in plain terms. It's about denying Russia's oil and gas revenue from Europe to cripple them and remove them as an obstacle. Greater Israel, the ethnic cleansing of whites in Europe thru mass immigration, etc. are all just bonuses.

Who was that masked man

War is when your government tells you who the enemy is. Revolution is when the people finaly realize who the real enemy is.

Blankone

It was only a proxy war created by the US/Zionist. Syria was prosperous and peaceful until the proxy war was unleashed upon them.

Syria did not invade or attack other countries, others were sent to Syria to kill.

There is no shared blame with Russia or Syria. All the blame falls upon those who sent their proxies to kill.

HowdyDoody

The US has rejected a Russian proposal to cooperate over the rescue of pilots shot down in Syria. Oh well, tough shit for the US when the legimate government of Syria decides it has had enough of foreign powers invading its airspace

Winston Churchill

The neocons are still in shock over the Caspian sea missile launch. Years of planning and moving eastward to threaten Russia wrecked by a ball from left field.
If they get their(manic) composure back, some idiot is going to fire on those Russian planes. I can feel it in my water. They will do anything to avoid the day of reckoning that move foreshadowed. I think that stench is fear.

Freddie

Those Kalibr-NK LACMs fired from small Russian ships in the Caspian did shock them. They had to lie that 4 crashed to try to make the world think Russian missiles were not that good. It was stunning technology.

http://www.voltairenet.org/article189021.html

The USA is supposedly sending F-22's from Hawaii to Turkey. I wonder why they hide these hangar queens in Hawaii?

I would bet they do not take to the sky because the Russians will expose stealth as a total fraud that was perpetrated on US taxpayers.

Pierre Sprey - Stealth is a scam:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om5jis0dtkY

Sprey worked with Colonel Boyd and Colonel Riccioni. The three worked on the F-15, F-16 and A-10.

F-22 cost $350 million.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAq6oMG7DoE

Sprey talking about designing the A-10

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l73IyO1Qdqo

datura

not this time. This time it is much more serious. This time it is a clash of civilizations, which zionists cannot really control. The zionist empire is now already too weak and other civilizations are taking stand for themselves. You could say that this is a beginning of a global revolution against the colonial rule. People in the world are too tired of the rule of anglo-zionists. Remember that zionists could only rule, while they had their British Empire. First it was the real British Empire, now the British Empire is the USA. But it is still the same empire. If this empire falls down, after all these centuries, zionists will loose their foothold. Or, in the worst case, we may all die in the process. In any case zionists are now playing a loosing war. All empires come to an end. This empire lasted some centuries, but like the Roman Empire, it is now collapsing, because it has become too chaotic, corrupt and complicated. Remember that this empire never really cntrolled the entire world (which is impossible!). There were always true (non-zionist) opponents. One such opponent was historicaly the Russian Empire. That is why they had to kill the tzar and his family and plant communism there. However, Russia now has its tzar back:-)

Russia: "Representatives of all four parliamentary parties have prepared a bill that bans municipal and regional lawmakers from keeping assets in foreign banks or own securities issued by foreign companies, a popular business daily reports. The authors of the draft claim that if it is adopted it would complete on all levels the so called 'Nationalization of Elites' – a series of legislative steps that Vladimir Putin suggested in 2012 and that were implemented with the 2013 law that bans senior Russian officials from holding bank accounts abroad or owning foreign-issued shares and bonds. The restriction also extends to spouses and underage children."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMTsQIATbIU

knukles

Y'all realize do you not, that GazProm just put RFP's out for the construction of NordStream2, from Russia to Germany bypassing guess who?
"The" Ukraine!

For some reason I'm getting a feeling that the US has no allies, anymore.

Thick Willy

Wolfowitz doctrine to prevent the emergence of another global power vying for regional hegemony. It's pretty clear.

SillySalesmanQuestion

Our Congrescritter's have abdicated their responsibilities by letting Obama and the Neo-Cons wage war without their approval. It is technically illegal by law, but, they have let the administration get away with this bullshit since 2014 when we bombed Lybia.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/obama-congress-and-war-po...

o r c k

Our entire Gov. knew the truth and kept quiet. As did the "press"--making them all complicit in war crimes and crimes against humanity. Will ANY of them be held to account? Ask George Jr.

The Indelicate Genius

Russia and Iran are present in Syria fighting mostly foreign mercenaries at the invitation of the legal government of Syria - a UN member.

What's the legal or moral basis for US presence, or its support of takfiri/salafist mercenaries?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/obamas-fake-war-against-the-islamic-state-i...
https://theintercept.com/2014/09/28/u-s-officials-invented-terror-group-...

Main_Sequence

What's the legal or moral basis for US presence, or its support of takfiri/salafist mercenaries?

That's the perfect question that nobody seems to ask. The elephant in the room.

Urban Redneck

The overly simplistic dueling pipeline pissing match meme is undercut by the same Guardian article.

The Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline plan was a "direct slap in the face" to Qatar's plans. No wonder Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan, in a failed attempt to bribe Russia to switch sides, told President Vladmir Putin that "whatever regime comes after" Assad, it will be "completely" in Saudi Arabia's hands and will "not sign any agreement allowing any Gulf country to transport its gas across Syria to Europe and compete with Russian gas exports", according to diplomatic sources. When Putin refused, the Prince vowed military action.

As far as KSA is concerned the alleged raison d'etre is a mere pawn to be sacrificed...

In regards to the current iteration of the Gas-for-Eurocrats scam- Qatar has a 100-year plan (The Oil Ministry's 100-year plan, not the Islamists' 100-year plan) , and it doesn't rely on a pipeline to Europe, but successfully implementing that plan does depend on continued sanctions against further Iranian gas development.

sam i am

new Urban Redneck

Thank you.

Gas pipe has nothig to do with the

reasons why Russia supports Syria and wants to restore peace in the region. According to a report leaked through Russian and Lebanese sources and reported by the London Telegraph, Saudi intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan told Russian President Vladimir Putin the Arab kingdom has control over the Chechen jihadists, who have been unleashing terrorist bombings in Russia and have been threatening the Olympics scheduled to begin in Sochi, Russia, on Feb. 6.
Putin reportedly responded, "We know that you have supported the Chechen terrorist groups for a decade. And that support, which you have frankly talked about just now, is completely incompatible with the common objectives of fighting global terrorism."

http://www.wnd.com/2014/01/saudi-terror-to-threaten-olympics/

Russians never forget all those victims of the Saudies' terror, and never forgive terrorists. saudies are as good as gone now. Their gas and oil will help them to burn in hell.

Oldrepublic

shades of the Spanish civil war

Jack Burton

"Western media provides humanitarian cover for the U.S. and NATO to fuel a brutal civil war"

So very true! I am sick to death of the fucking Humanitarian cover the media always throws over US war making. Libya was a prime example, they went in to bomb all hell out of Libya on a lie, a lie that the army was about to massacre thousands of people. That has no been shown totally false. Anyone remember Kovovo? Same shit. Bombing for fake humanitarian reasons.

This is all about fake moral superiority. Sorry, but Obama, Bush and the others, they have NO Moral superiority.

Collapsed_Elastic_Pants

Goddammitt, we know that. Now what?

rejected

Is this from the same group that hates Columbus? This story makes about as much sense as that story did.

What we have is a bully aggressor that believes it is exceptional and doesn't have to bother with international law or even its own laws annihilating smaller defenseless regimes that don't suit their fancy. Russia has simply stood off to one side constantly harping on this international lawlessness until the bullies descended upon a ally nation of theirs. Even then they stayed out of it militarily until they were faced with two choices. 1) Abandon their Mediterranean base or 2) help their ally. Exact same reason they reunited Crimea. The Ukrainians weren't/aren't mature enough to know they were being hoodwinked by the West and Russia was not going to lose its Navel base because of a bunch of quarreling twits thinking the West was about to shower them with gifts and money.

Now this same bully is throwing a tantrum because it is being outwitted at every turn and wants to show it's still the big boy by trying to bully another nation it thinks might back down over a few rocks some call islands thus setting themselves up for another defeat.

This is what happens when banks own and spooks run a country. Yep,,, it's as simple as that... no complicated plots, no shrewd plans.

Just plain old stupid arrogance.

maxwellsdemon

Your right to call the West a bully, though it is of course run by the Chosen. But bullies don't want to fight, only intimidate, because thieir morals are weak and they are held together by intimidation. If the Chosen get the West into a real war, you can be sure that a revolution will occur against them. Perhaps that is the plan and they might all end up on some island together loving each other forever. The Rabbis can argue that it's God's choice. Or they can all end up in fractious, dangerous Zionist Occupied Palestine. Once isolated there, the flow of weapons and sucor will dry up and then they will have to make friends with the natives.

Khrushchev tried to bully the US back in 1962 but JFK and the nation was OK with going to war (perhaps now that wouldn't be the case in Russia put missiles there, since the US has nukes on the border with Russia). Khrushchev backed down because the USSR had a corrupt, rotten core. Then the Jews left the USSR, leaving only the nationalists and Russia recovered. Now the US has the Jews running it and has become corrupt and rotten to the core. This time, the US is backing down in Syria and will soon have to back down in the China sea

outlaw.guru

This article seems to equate Russia and US to some extent as both fighting for control for pipelines. However first of all US and allies could have pacified Iraq and build a pipeline directly to Turkey (just look at the map). That would even allow them to control Iranian sales if there were any. However they chose to game of winner takes all and destabilized Syria, a Russian ally. I can't see this as anything less than a defense of national interests for Russia.

Yen Cross

It's astonishing how shielded people are from actual facts. I was over in Oceania for 3 days, and when I returned , the whole news cycle was about the election of a new "Figure Puppet".

People, please travel, and explore other cultures, and ideas.

I'm told your parents instill CORE values by the age of 4-5 , then guide you to adulthood.

jcdenton

This is much more than just a mere proxy war between the U.S. and Russia. This is a provocation via NATO. A cold war dinosaur that has no more practical use since 1990. It should have been dissolved with the Warsaw Pact. Watch this guy from London squirm when presented evidence and facts ..

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/10/14/the-debate-with-mike-harris-turk...

I would put to the guy from London, what evidence do you have that Assad is a rogue govt. responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of Syrian citizens. There is no evidence. The guy from London is a Mossad tool ..

BTW, I have had personal conversions with Mike Harris ..

https://app.box.com/s/hfgvcqg7gqh7i27at6sv53ywu87lwarp

Surveyor4Pres

WTFU people -

1. Obama / Soros / Globalists want to establish a Muslim Caliphate in the Middle East.

2. To accomplish this, they need ISIS to occupy and control Syria.

3. Soros wants this to stick a thorn in Putin's eye. Putin is the only national leader to oppose the globalization and open borders paradigm of the Fabian Socialist left.
... ... ...

Sparehead

Not to disagree with the main points made here, but fuck Wesley Clark. You can't believe a word he says. The Clintons invented him (as a high ranking general) and he's a total puppet.

[Sep 16, 2018] US goal was to take Ukraine into the future that it deserves. Now with grivna devaluation of over 300% we see what they meant

Notable quotes
... "What we have is a desperate corporate media, dutifully parroting the nonsense from the US State Department, and investing virtually nothing in on-the-ground investigative reporting. But real evidence? We are in very, VERY short supply of that."
... From article: He [Clegg] also argued that the country should lose the right to host the 2018 World Cup after Russian troops allegedly downed the civilian airliner Flight MH17 in eastern Ukraine last July. Well, there's evidence in itself. Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat. (The burden of proof is on he who declares, not on he who denies). He wants to punish before the publication o the report. It's like a mediaeval witch-hunt. The law of the jungle seems to be Clegg's guiding principle. No surprise he's been banned.
..."I can only assume it is as badge of honour if you buy into all the dimwitted propaganda being published by the western corporate media -- who seem to have a daily axe to grind against the Russian state, but who say nothing about the warmongering actions of the US. I imagine I would have the same opinion of you if I was to uncritically swallow such toxic rubbish."
..."The only way to effectively block people from other regions (blanket censor them, in other words) would be to positively identify the source. All that you would likely achieve is blocking actual individual commentators and letting through the government astroturfers.
Why you would want to resort to such tactics is worth asking. The 'Western side' may be losing the propaganda war with Russia because our lies are bigger and harder to sell -- rather than Pooty-poot being cleverer. Repeated debunked claims in our media are also going to be far more damaging than anything similar in Russia. The problem doesn't lie with those you are asserting to be 'trolls' that are disputing the reporting -- the problem lies with the reporting.
Notable quotes:
"... But it's very suspect when you say things like "Putin's created a criminal war in East Ukraine" when it was Kiev which started the violence in reaction to the Russian Ukrainians voting for Federalization in response to the coup in Kiev. It means that everything else you write has to be treated as suspect. ..."
"... alpamysh ... you've merely regurgitated the standard NeoCon list of justifications for why a democratically-elected leader needed to be overthrown ..."
"... The article isn't worth the headline really. The new cold war is on and obviously they'll be barring each other. ..."
"... On the other hand the EU has also put an entry ban on leading Russian politicians, among which are the chairman of the Federation council, politicians from the state Duma and also close advisors to the Russian president Vladimir Putin. It is not anticipated that either side will lift the entry bans in the near future. (Excerpt and rough translation from German) ..."
"... "In December, Nuland reminded Ukrainian business leaders that, to help Ukraine achieve "its European aspirations, we have invested more than $5 billion." She said the U.S. goal was to take "Ukraine into the future that it deserves," by which she meant into the West's orbit and away from Russia's. ..."
"... But President Yanukovych rejected a European Union plan that would have imposed harsh austerity on the already impoverished Ukraine. He accepted a more generous $15 billion loan from Russia, which also has propped up Ukraine's economy with discounted natural gas. Yanukovych's decision sparked anti-Russian street protests in Kiev, located in the country's western and more pro-European region. ..."
"... By late January, Nuland was discussing with U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt who should be allowed in the new government. ..."
"... "Yats is the guy," Nuland said in a phone call to Pyatt that was intercepted and posted online. "He's got the economic experience, the governing experience. He's the guy you know." By "Yats," Nuland was referring to Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who had served as head of the central bank, foreign minister and economic minister - and who was committed to harsh austerity. ..."
"... Well, there's evidence in itself. Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat. (The burden of proof is on he who declares, not on he who denies). He wants to punish before the publication o the report. It's like a mediaeval witch-hunt. The law of the jungle seems to be Clegg's guiding principle. No surprise he's been banned. ..."
"... "Putin wants sanctions" ... what a bunch of silly conjecture. As for "Putin style rule" and "Tzar" .. you presumably know that Russia held democratic elections which Putin won. ..."
"... let me guess, The list probably contains politicians whose real loyalty maybe is with the US? Judge from the 2 names mentioned, Malcolm Riffkind is Co-Vice Chair of the Global Panel Foundation – America – with Dr. Dov S. Zakheim, the former U.S Under-Secretary of Defense and Comptroller of the Armed Forces. ..."
"... your constant anti-Russia/Putin comments mark you as a shill/troll ..."
"... What we have is a desperate corporate media, dutifully parroting the nonsense from the US State Department, and investing virtually nothing in on-the-ground investigative reporting. But real evidence? We are in very, VERY short supply of that. ..."
"... I can only assume it is as badge of honour if you buy into all the dimwitted propaganda being published by the western corporate media - ..."
"... We're the global overlords, and so second-rate nations aren't allowed to reciprocate our petulant actions. When they do so it causes some people to question the assumed status of the 'Western' hegemony (and our claimed system of morally superior 'values'). We can't allow that sort of thing, Popeyes. ..."
"... The Guardian has a clear pro-EU/USA position on the new cold war against Russia. ..."
"... The 'Western side' may be losing the propaganda war with Russia because our lies are bigger and harder to sell -- rather than Pooty-poot being cleverer. ..."
"... The problem doesn't lie with those you are asserting to be 'trolls' that are disputing the reporting -- the problem lies with the reporting. ..."
May 31, 2015 | The Guardian

JordanFromLondon -> Havingalavrov 31 May 2015 12:26

"Look at the Moscow apartment bombings"... look at any number of CIA false flag operations. As for "most of the national T.V is Putin press." ... Murdoch has a controlling interest in printed press and a large share of TV news in Australia and the UK. Maybe you are one of the CIA-employed agitators against Russia, or maybe you have a chip on your shoulder about a failed relationship with a Russia bride. I can't be sure from your comments.

But it's very suspect when you say things like "Putin's created a criminal war in East Ukraine" when it was Kiev which started the violence in reaction to the Russian Ukrainians voting for Federalization in response to the coup in Kiev. It means that everything else you write has to be treated as suspect.

Huo Fu Yan 31 May 2015 12:24

I don't see a big issue with that list. If some people from that list travel anywhere, it will be considered wasting tax payer money anyways. They aren't even embraced by a majority in their own countries, some of them belonging to totally irrelevant weird initiative, shouting and crying about this and that.

For others on that list, being linked to military organisations, the should be banned naturally. As for vacation, I don't think Russia was on those guys list either

JordanFromLondon -> alpamysh 31 May 2015 12:14

alpamysh ... you've merely regurgitated the standard NeoCon list of justifications for why a democratically-elected leader needed to be overthrown (e.g. Egypt's Morsi). If we take your "Hitler was elected" argument, we can apply that one to any election outcome. If you won your high school "class monitor" election ... we'll Hitler won an election too. It's nothing more than a lazy smear by association. If we take your "rigs the right of the opposition" argument, well there goes Israel's claims to democracy. They arrest/ban viable Arab opposition figures to prevent them standing in elections. Also, we have to eliminate Ukraine, who have assassinated about 12 of Yanukovich's inner circle since the coup.

uzzername 31 May 2015 12:09

The article isn't worth the headline really. The new cold war is on and obviously they'll be barring each other.

Russia, along with the rest of BRICS is an emerging economy. While in the developed economies big corporations scramble for every penny they rip off off the consumers, the BRICS are a goldmine for adventurous capitalists as you can score quite a bit of dope in one scoop if you invest enough in it.

That's why some of them suits on the list are pissed off. Obvs not because their summer holiday in Siberia has gone into smithereens.

umweltAT2100 31 May 2015 12:04

According to a report in ARD (German state media) the entry ban is a reaction / retaliation in response to the entry ban imposed on Russians in connection with the Crimea annexation. Approximately 200 people are on the Russian black list. The largest number are from the USA, with the Republican John McCain declared "persona non grata", followed by Canadian politicians.

On the other hand the EU has also put an entry ban on leading Russian politicians, among which are the chairman of the Federation council, politicians from the state Duma and also close advisors to the Russian president Vladimir Putin. It is not anticipated that either side will lift the entry bans in the near future. (Excerpt and rough translation from German)

Russian entry ban for dozens of politicians – Moscow's black list is out. (Hermann Krause, ARD Radio studio, Moscow, 30.05.2015)

Russische Einreiseverbote für Dutzende Politiker Moskaus "schwarze Liste" ist raus. Von Hermann Krause, ARD-Hörfunkstudio Moskau, 30.05.2015

http://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/russland-einreiseverbot-103.html

Danish5666 -> dralion 31 May 2015 12:03

Victoria Nuland and the neocons to be more precise,

"In December, Nuland reminded Ukrainian business leaders that, to help Ukraine achieve "its European aspirations, we have invested more than $5 billion." She said the U.S. goal was to take "Ukraine into the future that it deserves," by which she meant into the West's orbit and away from Russia's.

But President Yanukovych rejected a European Union plan that would have imposed harsh austerity on the already impoverished Ukraine. He accepted a more generous $15 billion loan from Russia, which also has propped up Ukraine's economy with discounted natural gas. Yanukovych's decision sparked anti-Russian street protests in Kiev, located in the country's western and more pro-European region.

Nuland was soon at work planning for "regime change," encouraging disruptive street protests by personally passing out cookies to the anti-government demonstrators. She didn't seem to notice or mind that the protesters in Kiev's Maidan square had hoisted a large banner honoring Stepan Bandera, a Ukrainian nationalist who collaborated with the German Nazis during World War II and whose militias participated in atrocities against Jews and Poles.

By late January, Nuland was discussing with U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt who should be allowed in the new government.

"Yats is the guy," Nuland said in a phone call to Pyatt that was intercepted and posted online. "He's got the economic experience, the governing experience. He's the guy you know." By "Yats," Nuland was referring to Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who had served as head of the central bank, foreign minister and economic minister - and who was committed to harsh austerity.

As Assistant Secretary Nuland and Sen. McCain cheered the demonstrators on, the street protests turned violent. Police clashed with neo-Nazi bands, the ideological descendants of Bandera's anti-Russian Ukrainians who collaborated with the Nazi SS during World War II.

With the crisis escalating and scores of people killed in the street fighting, Yanukovych agreed to a E.U.-brokered deal that called for moving up scheduled elections and having the police stand down. The neo-Nazi storm troopers then seized the opening to occupy government buildings and force Yanukovych and many of his aides to flee for their lives."
https://consortiumnews.com/2014/03/02/what-neocons-want-from-ukraine-crisis/

JordanFromLondon -> alpamysh 31 May 2015 11:53

What proof do you have that the Russian elections were phony ? The results were in line with independent opinion polls. Which referendums was phony ? The first Iraqi election after Sadam was toppled was certainly phony. The US military whisked away the ballot boxes for a week after voting was completed before announcing that the Shia (60% of Iraqis) had failed to get a majority (despite the 20% Bathist Sunni boycotting the election so only the 20% Kurds voted against the 60% Shia).

geedeesee -> SnarkyGrumpkin 31 May 2015 11:50

From article: He [Clegg] also argued that the country should lose the right to host the 2018 World Cup after Russian troops allegedly downed the civilian airliner Flight MH17 in eastern Ukraine last July.

Well, there's evidence in itself. Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat. (The burden of proof is on he who declares, not on he who denies). He wants to punish before the publication o the report. It's like a mediaeval witch-hunt. The law of the jungle seems to be Clegg's guiding principle. No surprise he's been banned.

JordanFromLondon -> Havingalavrov 31 May 2015 11:45

"Putin wants sanctions" ... what a bunch of silly conjecture. As for "Putin style rule" and "Tzar" .. you presumably know that Russia held democratic elections which Putin won. That's more than many of the US/UK allies can say (take your pick of the Gulf state leaders). Don't buy into the mindless anti-Russian propaganda doing the rounds. I suspect that it's intended to soften public opnion for anti-Russian attrocities committed in our name to come.

Huo Fu Yan -> David Port 31 May 2015 11:36

It's true, 1/3 the list are politicians and military leader from Poland and baltics with no intend to enter Russia anyways. The rest are merely people engaged in military organisations (should be banned naturally) or weird political groups and initiatives.

Furthermore, there are a few irrelevant politicians on the list for whatever reason. To be frank, a few people from that list you wouldt want in your own country either.

meewaan 31 May 2015 11:07

let me guess, The list probably contains politicians whose real loyalty maybe is with the US? Judge from the 2 names mentioned, Malcolm Riffkind is Co-Vice Chair of the Global Panel Foundation – America – with Dr. Dov S. Zakheim, the former U.S Under-Secretary of Defense and Comptroller of the Armed Forces.

Not sure about banning Nick Clegg, - has his wife remunerated by her work for companies linked to the US? Take, for example, Mrs Clegg's firm's advertisement (again, on its website) of the fact it makes considerable sums from helping rich people avoid inheritance tax, saying that it offers 'personal estate planning advice and financial and tax-planning services to high net worth individuals'.

'We combine sophisticated estate planning skills with international resources . . . We help U.S. and non-U.S. trustees and beneficiaries transfer wealth efficiently through lifetime and testamentary trusts designed to minimise tax exposure.'

SuchindranathAiyer 31 May 2015 10:35

It required a "Tit for Tat" to establish that sanctions are working? Here is the geo-political back drop:

Reigan and Gorby arrived at certain agreements and understandings which Clinton (the husband) violated. He pulled Poland and others into NATO and bombed Russian ally Belgrade, violating international law, while a helpless Russia fumed, for 84 days to given Islam its first ethnically cleansed enclaves (Bosnia and Kosovo) after 1489.

Bush (the son), declared the "Star Wars" missile shield in direct violation of the Regan-Gorbachev agreements while Russia continued to fume, but began to re arm and prepare itself for war. Apart from, of course, violating International Law and invading Russian ally Iraq to distract anger over 9/11 from Saudi Arabia and its Nuclear-Terrorist sword arm Pakistan and threw thriving communities of Jews, Christians, Yazidis, discos and bars that the Saudis, Qataris and Kuwaitis resented into the maws of Islam.

Russia fumed and continued to rearm and began to rally around Putin's nationalism. The US commenced "regime change" operations in Russian (and Iraqi) Secular ally Syria, throwing even more Jews, Christians, Yazidis and Kurds into the maws of Islam. US was to weakened by Iraq to wage war unilaterally in Syria. China and Russia blocked the US at the UN. Putin wrote an open letter to Obama on Syria in the NY Times which gained traction with the American Citizens, bending Obama's nose and driving the US regime change operation in Syria further under ground (covert). Prince Bandar (what an appropriate name!) head of Saudi intelligence went ot Moscow to bribe Putin to back the putsch in Syria. Putin refused and told Bandar that if Islam tried a Beslan at Sochi, he would bomb the Q'aba. This bent the Saudi nose. So the US commenced operation regime change in Ukraine. This sparked the secession of Crime to Russia. The US fumed and fretted because its more develoed and intelligent NATO allies (France and Germany) would not back the US backed fascist regime in Ukraine. The US shot down MH-17 in a false flag operation and started a canard against Russia to revive NATO. There is a NATO now imposing US-Saudi conceived sanctions on Russia. We are now in the Second Cold War so NATO won't go away. Russia and China will ally because, Clinton to Obama, the US has demonstrated the dangers of a unipolar world, particularly as Islamic Petro Dollars own the decision and opinion makers of the West and have used the US military to further the Islamic agenda as much as carry on with the old anti-Communist prejudices. (While Russia is not Totalitarian, China is. India is really the last Soviet franchise in the World with its "Animal Farm" totalitarian Constitution and thinking which is why the US is an ally of Pakistan and as hostile to India as to Russia. Consider that as recently as 2012, the man who lolls in Lutyen's drawing room today moved "retrospective" legislation in the same Parliament that nationalized 20% of private (non minority) education and removed the truth from Govt approved History text books, in the highest traditions of Nehru, Ambedkar and Indira Gandhi.)

wilpost37 -> AbsolutelyFapulous 31 May 2015 10:33

Absolutely/Goman

Almost all the tourists of Crimea were Ukrainians before 2014. They stopped coming, and likely are spending their vacation elsewhere.

Crimea is rebuilding its infrastructures (Kiev had neglected them for 22 years), and its tourist base.

It expects to have over 4 million visitors in 2015 and 5 million in 2016, because many Russians are no longer going to EU countries, and are going to Crimea, Sochi, etc., instead. It will take time, but Crimea is a beautiful area.

Crimea became part of the Russian Empire by conquest over the Tartars in 1793.

The Tartars had been kidnapping nearby people (several million over many decades) and selling them to the Turks. Catherine the Great put an end to that.

Khrushev was stupid to give it to Ukraine in 1954.

After the CIA/FBI-assisted coup of Kiev, the Crimean people, 67% Russian, feared for their future, as did the Donbas people.

SHappens 31 May 2015 10:24

"Just one thing remains unclear: did our European co-workers want these lists to minimise inconveniences for potential 'denied persons' or to stage a political show?"

It is pretty clear that it turned out to be another media circus.

Socraticus -> alpamysh 31 May 2015 10:12

Lesson 1 - everyone on this site is a guest, you included
Lesson 2 - the majority of posters herein are actually westerners, not 'Russian trolls'
Lesson 3 - all politicians lie to advance their own social/economic/political agendas
Lesson 4 - all MSM distort/suppress the truth to support governmental narratives
Lesson 5 - many of us westerners actually bother to investigate the true facts
Lesson 6 - if a leader's being demonized its because they won't capitulate to the US
Lesson 7 - every illicit invasion is preceded by demonization of a leader/country
Lesson 8 - your constant anti-Russia/Putin comments mark you as a shill/troll
Lesson 9 - you can educate yourself or remain blind to facts - your choice
Lesson 10 - you will learn the consequences of your choices

UnsleepingMind -> EssoBlue 31 May 2015 10:12

You realise that Russia is one the most important members of the BRICS and that they group has recently established a development bank? That's hardly the sign that the other BRICS nations are not reading from the same hymn sheet as Russia...

http://www.scmp.com/comment/article/1580523/brics-development-bank-should-challenge-washington-consensus

Russia has also joined China's Asian Infrastructure Bank. Another clear sign that it is strengthening its relations with other BRICS members.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2015/03/29/russia-joins-chinas-asian-infrastructure-bank-but-doubts-its-power-against-imf/

44theorderofknights 31 May 2015 09:57

What did anyone expect flowers from russia from the unfair treatment it's getting. The west paying for Ukraine part nazi government and creating a coup in a democratically ekected president last february. Then sanctioning the Russian people expecting them to turn in yheir president. The west should be ashamed of what they accomplished that being fronting a proxy war against Russia.

Vijay Raghavan -> Huo Fu Yan 31 May 2015 09:54

Developing all-round military-to-military relations. China's armed forces will further their exchanges and cooperation with the Russian military within the framework of the comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination between China and Russia, and foster a comprehensive, diverse and sustainable framework to promote military relations in more fields and at more levels

http://eng.mod.gov.cn/Database/WhitePapers/2015-05/26/content_4586715.htm

They made that statement in their white paper issued last week.Offcourse Guardian or BBC will not keep up with such "Breaking News".

UnsleepingMind -> EssoBlue 31 May 2015 09:49

1) Yes, the BRICS countries are very much behind Russia.

2) Russia, unlike the US, has tabled a resolution to condemn Nazism and Nazi movements in the highest forum possible (the UN). The US, along with Canada, and its puppet government in Ukraine, voted against it (in defiance of most of the world's nations).

[1] http://russia-insider.com/en/de-dollarization-du-jour-russia-backs-brics-alternative-swift/ri7566
[2] http://rt.com/news/207899-un-anti-nazism-resolution/

UnsleepingMind -> Tom20000 31 May 2015 09:43

You would think, with all the technology at the disposal of the US security state, that it might (just might) be able to provide us with real, irrefutable evidence of a ground invasion. You know, perhaps some high resolution satellite imagery, the odd photo of a modern Russian tank moving over the Ukrainian border, some chatter from the wires between embassy officials and security personnel, etc., etc.

But of course we have nothing of the sort. What we have is a desperate corporate media, dutifully parroting the nonsense from the US State Department, and investing virtually nothing in on-the-ground investigative reporting. But real evidence? We are in very, VERY short supply of that.

UnsleepingMind -> ponott 31 May 2015 09:34

I can only assume it is as badge of honour if you buy into all the dimwitted propaganda being published by the western corporate media -- who seem to have a daily axe to grind against the Russian state, but who say nothing about the warmongering actions of the US. I imagine I would have the same opinion of you if I was to uncritically swallow such toxic rubbish.

UnsleepingMind -> alpamysh 31 May 2015 09:30

'Because we have the right to ban people who invade other countries'.

That's why we've recently arrested George Bush (who, with the help of Tony Blair invaded Iraq and Afghanistan), Barack Obama (who bombed Libya, engineered coups in Honduras and Ukraine, and is now funding Islamic extremists in Syria)...

We reserve the right to ban, but we use that 'right' to ban official enemies (i.e. anyone daring to follow a geopolitical game plan that is distinctly at odds with our own).

Also, your suggestion that Putin's Russia has invaded 'other countries' is preposterous. The western media has been spewing this nonsense for months now and yet there is not a shred of real evidence (including hi-res satellite imagery) to back it up. And if you are referring to Crimea, let me say this: Russia troops have been staged in Crimea for many, many years; moreover, the people of Crimea voted to break with Ukraine in a recent referendum (not that that squares with your hectoring rhetoric).

PyrrhicVictory 31 May 2015 09:27

The doors of the gravy train for politicians like Clegg are fast closing. When we exit the EU, then the Brussels gravy train will also be beyond him. He might, just might, having to start behaving like an honest politician for once and earn a decent wage based on truth not lies.

johnsmith44 -> NegativeCamber 31 May 2015 09:25

Why dont you go spread democracy to some oil-producing Third World country, together with your poodles the brits? And make sure you do it properly, so that monstrosities like ISIS are guaranteed?

more democracy exporting: http://multipletext.com/2011/images/3-22-US-democracy.jpg

and more: https://syrianfreepress.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/we-will-help-the-syrian-people-to-achieve-democracy-20140603.jpg

and more: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/76/31/c0/7631c0787ae47cfc74cd8488390cc5d5.jpg

johnsmith44 -> alpamysh 31 May 2015 09:21

1) Google for "Operation Northwoods", that is, CIA's proposal to Kennedy to shoot down a passenger jet over Cuba.

2) Read here: http://consortiumnews.com/2014/07/29/obama-should-release-ukraine-evidence/

ex-CIA personnel openly describing their involvement in the dowining of Korean Airlines passenger flight 007 over Siberia on August 30, 1983 and I believe it becomes apparent who downed MH-17.

Jerome Fryer -> Popeyes 31 May 2015 09:11

We're the global overlords, and so second-rate nations aren't allowed to reciprocate our petulant actions. When they do so it causes some people to question the assumed status of the 'Western' hegemony (and our claimed system of morally superior 'values'). We can't allow that sort of thing, Popeyes.

davidncldl 31 May 2015 09:10

The Guardian has a clear pro-EU/USA position on the new cold war against Russia. Mr Putin is their democratically elected leader and he is enormously popular. Only an imbecile would be surprised or indignant about Russia retaliating for unjust EU/US sanctions. What do the globalisers and bankers' friends at the Guardian expect? I imagine you think that the ruination of the Venezuelan and Russian economies by the manipulation of the oil price is just "free market" activity.

Hass Castorp 31 May 2015 09:07

"More than 6,200 people have been killed in fighting between Ukrainian government forces and pro-Russian separatists."

This is a language of propaganda, Guardian. Last i checked Guardian advertised to be a newspaper, not a bulletin of The Ministry of Truth.

My reformulation; "More than 6200 (in some estimates up to 50.000) have been killed and up to 1 million civilians displaced (who mostly fled to Russia) by Ukrainian government troops and private terrorist kommandos of Ukrainian oligarchs."

Jerome Fryer -> henry919 31 May 2015 09:03

The only way to effectively block people from other regions (blanket censor them, in other words) would be to positively identify the source. All that you would likely achieve is blocking actual individual commentators and letting through the government astroturfers.

Why you would want to resort to such tactics is worth asking. The 'Western side' may be losing the propaganda war with Russia because our lies are bigger and harder to sell -- rather than Pooty-poot being cleverer.

Repeated debunked claims in our media are also going to be far more damaging than anything similar in Russia. The problem doesn't lie with those you are asserting to be 'trolls' that are disputing the reporting -- the problem lies with the reporting.

(If your argument must be protected against criticism then it is a weak argument.)

[Sep 16, 2018] It was the "higher power" in the form of the Revolutionary Republican Napoleon Bonaparte who finally abolished the Inquisition with the French invasion of Spain, which suggests by parallel that when the US state collapses it will take its neocons with it.

Sep 16, 2018 | www.unz.com

Miro23 , says: September 16, 2018 at 6:17 am GMT

There are useful parallels with Christianity, which went from being powerless and persecuted in its early days under Imperial Rome to eventual domination of Medieval Europe. It was a longish process, but an early small, private and ethical movement did eventually morph into a dictatorial organization that hunted down its own dissidents (heretics).

In this game of power, the church certainly collected great wealth, developed a complex administration, made alliances with temporal (non-spiritual) power holders , and instituted the Holy Office of the Inquisition (or equivalents) to root out dissidents (heretics) or anyone who got in the way.

Green quotes a complaint by historian Manuel Barrios[172] about one Inquisitor, Diego Rodriguez Lucero, who in Cordoba in 1506 burned to death the husbands of two different women he then kept as mistresses. According to Barrios,

the daughter of Diego Celemin was exceptionally beautiful, her parents and her husband did not want to give her to [Lucero], and so Lucero had the three of them burnt and now has a child by her, and he has kept for a long time in the alcazar as a mistress, (Wikipedia).

It was the "higher power" in the form of the Revolutionary Republican Napoleon Bonaparte who finally abolished the Inquisition with the French invasion of Spain, which suggests by parallel that when the US state collapses it will take its Jewish inquisitors with it.

[Sep 16, 2018] Exaggerated claims about Jews power (Jewocracy) do more harm then good and give a perfect weapon for Zionists to censor critique of Israel

Sep 16, 2018 | www.unz.com

Michael Hoffman , says: Website September 15, 2018 at 9:03 pm GMT

Dear KenH

Thank you for describing my work as "meticulously researched and argued."

A point of dissent: I don't know of any "Jewocracy."

I'm cognizant of the power and influence of Zionism and Talmudism, but I would be loathe to generalize about Judaic people under the rubric of "Jewocracy."

On pp. 463-466 of Judaism Discovered this writer attempts to elucidate the rabbinic principle taught to Orthodox youth: " Halacha hi beyoduah she'Eisav soneh l'Yaakov " ("It is a given law: it is known that Esau hates Jacob").

What does this instruction connote within the broader context of Orthodox Talmudism? It teaches that all goyim are irrevocably Jew-haters and that this hate is irrational and directed at all Judaic persons, whether good or bad, Left or Right, Zionists or not, religious or not. The intent of this deceitful and racist generalization is to unify Judaics and keep them in the rabbinic fold, since it is asserted that they will be hated for no reason no matter what they do, even if they reject the Talmud .

The antidote to this rabbinic propaganda is love for Judaic people and openness in particular to those Judaics who seek a way out of Talmudism and/or Zionism. This is what my books represent and one reason why they are viewed as a mortal threat to the antediluvians.

When terms such as "Jewocracy" are employed then " Halacha hi beyoduah she'Eisav soneh l'Yaakov " is being fulfilled.

The vast majority of the movement by non-Judaics to critique or oppose the Talmud is almost always grounded in some sort of negative typecasting about "The Jews. " Hence, when the individual Judaic who is trying to get free of the bondage of the Orthodox rabbinate sees generalizations like that, their motivation is subverted and their suspicions that perhaps the teaching imparted to them in their youth was true, is kindled anew.

If we truly wish to convert people into allies of truth and freedom, then we will not replicate their slavemasters' tropes in our discourse. In other words, we will not behave like Talmudists. If on the other hand, our principal aim is to vent our rage and anger at Talmudic supremacy, then reckless disregard for these distinctions will hold sway, along with the continued defeat of our espoused objectives.

There actually is only one fount of racism and supremacy on earth and it emanates from the primeval antecedents of the Babylonian Talmud and the Zohar (Kabbalah), and the cognate "sacred texts" that proceed from them. When the Germans began to worship themselves (something Luther and Nietzsche detested and eschewed), as part of the Nazi praxis, they became rabbis spiritually and psychologically, since the most fundamental constituent of Orthodox Judaism is self-worship .

A sincere and empowered critic of the theology of the Talmud cannot himself be a supremacist or a racist since those mental attitudes and philosophical commitments are part and parcel of the Talmudic mentality. A Talmudist cannot cast out the Talmud (Matthew 12:25-26).

Michael Hoffman
Author: Judaism Discovered
and Judaism's Strange Gods

Tyrion 2 , says: September 16, 2018 at 6:52 am GMT
@Michael Hoffman Dear KenH

Thank you for describing my work as "meticulously researched and argued."

A point of dissent: I don't know of any "Jewocracy."

I'm cognizant of the power and influence of Zionism and Talmudism, but I would be loathe to generalize about Judaic people under the rubric of "Jewocracy."

On pp. 463-466 of Judaism Discovered this writer attempts to elucidate the rabbinic principle taught to Orthodox youth: " Halacha hi beyoduah she'Eisav soneh l'Yaakov " ("It is a given law: it is known that Esau hates Jacob").

What does this instruction connote within the broader context of Orthodox Talmudism? It teaches that all goyim are irrevocably Jew-haters and that this hate is irrational and directed at all Judaic persons, whether good or bad, Left or Right, Zionists or not, religious or not. The intent of this deceitful and racist generalization is to unify Judaics and keep them in the rabbinic fold, since it is asserted that they will be hated for no reason no matter what they do, even if they reject the Talmud .

The antidote to this rabbinic propaganda is love for Judaic people and openness in particular to those Judaics who seek a way out of Talmudism and/or Zionism. This is what my books represent and one reason why they are viewed as a mortal threat to the antediluvians.

When terms such as "Jewocracy" are employed then " Halacha hi beyoduah she'Eisav soneh l'Yaakov " is being fulfilled.

The vast majority of the movement by non-Judaics to critique or oppose the Talmud is almost always grounded in some sort of negative typecasting about "The Jews. " Hence, when the individual Judaic who is trying to get free of the bondage of the Orthodox rabbinate sees generalizations like that, their motivation is subverted and their suspicions that perhaps the teaching imparted to them in their youth was true, is kindled anew.

If we truly wish to convert people into allies of truth and freedom, then we will not replicate their slavemasters' tropes in our discourse. In other words, we will not behave like Talmudists. If on the other hand, our principal aim is to vent our rage and anger at Talmudic supremacy, then reckless disregard for these distinctions will hold sway, along with the continued defeat of our espoused objectives.

There actually is only one fount of racism and supremacy on earth and it emanates from the primeval antecedents of the Babylonian Talmud and the Zohar (Kabbalah), and the cognate "sacred texts" that proceed from them. When the Germans began to worship themselves (something Luther and Nietzsche detested and eschewed), as part of the Nazi praxis, they became rabbis spiritually and psychologically, since the most fundamental constituent of Orthodox Judaism is self-worship .

A sincere and empowered critic of the theology of the Talmud cannot himself be a supremacist or a racist since those mental attitudes and philosophical commitments are part and parcel of the Talmudic mentality. A Talmudist cannot cast out the Talmud (Matthew 12:25-26).

Michael Hoffman
Author: Judaism Discovered
and Judaism's Strange Gods I don't buy your cloying and passive aggressive pretense of not hating Jews but being merely interested in their salvation.

I even struggle to imagine anyone who'd be stupid enough to do so.

(Does it help you sell books or is it merely a prop against horrific self-realisation?)

Regardless, it is a shame that even your "scholarship" may be unbooked. Painfully dumb arguments have value. They provide it by contrast.

I am not even particularly interested in that here though. Inevitably there's lots of weird stuff in a milennia old wikipedia and bozos, sorry "revisionists", will read into it what they feel like.

The issue though is very simple. Were any of these effluent theories that take causation to run from Judaism to globalism to actually be true then we would see that the more Orthodox the Jew, the more globalist they would be.

Yet the facts sit precisely opposite.

The very worst Jews, on politics, that I've met or read have never heard of the Talmud. Indeed, the Ultra-Orthodox wouldn't even consider them (or me) actual Jews at all.

That you can't even get this most basic of observations right totally discredits you.

Still, I hope your books get reinstated. I don't care what people who hate me choose to waste their money on and, to be honest, it makes my meagre qualities look good by comparison.

Miro23 , says: September 16, 2018 at 8:59 am GMT
@Miro23 There are useful parallels with Christianity, which went from being powerless and persecuted in its early days under Imperial Rome to eventual domination of Medieval Europe. It was a longish process, but an early small, private and ethical movement did eventually morph into a dictatorial organization that hunted down its own dissidents (heretics).

In this game of power, the church certainly collected great wealth, developed a complex administration, made alliances with temporal (non-spiritual) power holders , and instituted the Holy Office of the Inquisition (or equivalents) to root out dissidents (heretics) or anyone who got in the way.


Green quotes a complaint by historian Manuel Barrios[172] about one Inquisitor, Diego Rodriguez Lucero, who in Cordoba in 1506 burned to death the husbands of two different women he then kept as mistresses. According to Barrios,

the daughter of Diego Celemin was exceptionally beautiful, her parents and her husband did not want to give her to [Lucero], and so Lucero had the three of them burnt and now has a child by her, and he has kept for a long time in the alcazar as a mistress, (Wikipedia).

It was the "higher power" in the form of the Revolutionary Republican Napoleon Bonaparte who finally abolished the Inquisition with the French invasion of Spain, which suggests by parallel that when the US state collapses it will take its Jewish inquisitors with it. Also the Jewish attempt to develop "Holocaustianity" with themselves as the leading martyrs is failing, since Judaism doesn't have the mass appeal of Christianity: 1) it lacks the ethical content 2) it isn't universalist (accepting all races).

Bolshevism (class guilt) was an earlier attempt to found a religion with Saint Trotsky and themselves as the leading martyrs, which did actually (for a while) connect with the public, since they harnessed the rising tide of Socialism/Communism with its fantasy of an egalitarian "workers paradise" (themselves in the leadership role).

Unfortunately Jewish leftism (not to be confused National Democratic leftism) still survives in the West in its bizarre SJW LGBT form, with Jews yet again trying to present themselves as victims – this time of fabricated "White Oppression" – never mind that white America gave them a generous refuge and a home after they were chased out of Central Europe.

However, the search for power through SJWism (race guilt) is being rejected in the West, so realistically Jews can only maintain their ethnic group power through a straightforward coup at the centre (United States) – which they seem to be working on a the moment, with some kind of fabricated Emergency involving Russia/Syria/Iran designed to give them a dictatorship.

And if they get it, it won't be benevolent judging by the mass murdering precedents in Russia and Hungary.

Frankie P , says: September 16, 2018 at 9:54 am GMT
@Michael Hoffman Dear KenH

Thank you for describing my work as "meticulously researched and argued."

A point of dissent: I don't know of any "Jewocracy."

I'm cognizant of the power and influence of Zionism and Talmudism, but I would be loathe to generalize about Judaic people under the rubric of "Jewocracy."

On pp. 463-466 of Judaism Discovered this writer attempts to elucidate the rabbinic principle taught to Orthodox youth: " Halacha hi beyoduah she'Eisav soneh l'Yaakov " ("It is a given law: it is known that Esau hates Jacob").

What does this instruction connote within the broader context of Orthodox Talmudism? It teaches that all goyim are irrevocably Jew-haters and that this hate is irrational and directed at all Judaic persons, whether good or bad, Left or Right, Zionists or not, religious or not. The intent of this deceitful and racist generalization is to unify Judaics and keep them in the rabbinic fold, since it is asserted that they will be hated for no reason no matter what they do, even if they reject the Talmud .

The antidote to this rabbinic propaganda is love for Judaic people and openness in particular to those Judaics who seek a way out of Talmudism and/or Zionism. This is what my books represent and one reason why they are viewed as a mortal threat to the antediluvians.

When terms such as "Jewocracy" are employed then " Halacha hi beyoduah she'Eisav soneh l'Yaakov " is being fulfilled.

The vast majority of the movement by non-Judaics to critique or oppose the Talmud is almost always grounded in some sort of negative typecasting about "The Jews. " Hence, when the individual Judaic who is trying to get free of the bondage of the Orthodox rabbinate sees generalizations like that, their motivation is subverted and their suspicions that perhaps the teaching imparted to them in their youth was true, is kindled anew.

If we truly wish to convert people into allies of truth and freedom, then we will not replicate their slavemasters' tropes in our discourse. In other words, we will not behave like Talmudists. If on the other hand, our principal aim is to vent our rage and anger at Talmudic supremacy, then reckless disregard for these distinctions will hold sway, along with the continued defeat of our espoused objectives.

There actually is only one fount of racism and supremacy on earth and it emanates from the primeval antecedents of the Babylonian Talmud and the Zohar (Kabbalah), and the cognate "sacred texts" that proceed from them. When the Germans began to worship themselves (something Luther and Nietzsche detested and eschewed), as part of the Nazi praxis, they became rabbis spiritually and psychologically, since the most fundamental constituent of Orthodox Judaism is self-worship .

A sincere and empowered critic of the theology of the Talmud cannot himself be a supremacist or a racist since those mental attitudes and philosophical commitments are part and parcel of the Talmudic mentality. A Talmudist cannot cast out the Talmud (Matthew 12:25-26).

Michael Hoffman
Author: Judaism Discovered
and Judaism's Strange Gods I thank you for that comment. Beautifully put, logically reasoned. Now I want to propose an idea for you to consider. The Orthodox Talmudic instruction that you mention above has morphed well beyond the limitations of the Orthodox rabbinate. You yourself just mentioned Judaics that want to "seek a way out of Talmudism and / or Zionism". Zionism certainly isn't Talmudism; it is blood and soil nationalism of a land that belongs to other people. Couching this original Talmudic instruction as merely a method of keeping Jews in "the rabbinic fold" is inaccurate. The unifiying of Jews through this belief that all goyim are Jew-haters and vilification of those Judaics who break out has grown well beyond the rabbinic fold, and it is present in every manifestation of Judaism, from the secular atheist to the most Orthodox. Indeed, it seems to be the common thread that holds all Jews together.

I thank you again for your ideas, Michael Hoffman. I will visit your website and try to purchase your books, even though I am not a wealthy man.

[Sep 15, 2018] Why the US Seeks to Hem in Russia, China and Iran by Patrick Lawrence

Highly recommended!
The root of the current aggressive policy is the desire to preserve global neoliberal empire the US role as the metropolia with the rest of the world as vassals.
Notable quotes:
"... The crisis of U.S. foreign policy -- a series of radical missteps -- are systemic. Having little to do with personalities, they pass from one administration to the next with little variance other than at the margins. ..."
"... It began with that hubristic triumphalism so evident in the decade after the Cold War's end ..."
"... There was also the "Washington consensus." The world was in agreement that free-market capitalism and unfettered financial markets would see the entire planet to prosperity. ..."
"... The neoliberal economic crusade accompanied by neoconservative politics had its intellectual ballast, and off went its true-believing warriors around the world. ..."
"... Failures ensued. Iraq post–2003 is among the more obvious. Nobody ever planted democracy or built free markets in Baghdad. Then came the "color revolutions," which resulted in the destabilization of large swathes of the former Soviet Union's borderlands. The 2008 financial crash followed. I was in Hong Kong at the time and recall thinking, "This is not just Lehman Brothers. An economic model is headed into Chapter 11." One would have thought a fundamental rethink in Washington might have followed these events. There has never been one. ..."
"... Midway through the first Obama administration, a crucial turn began. What had been an assertion of financial and economic power, albeit coercive in many instances, particularly with the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, took on further strategic and military dimensions. ..."
"... The NATO bombing campaign in Libya, ostensibly a humanitarian mission, became a regime-change operation -- despite Washington's promises otherwise. Obama's "pivot to Asia" turned out to be a neo-containment policy toward China. The "reset" with Russia, declared after Obama appointed Hillary Clinton secretary of state, flopped and turned into the virulent animosity we now live with daily ..."
"... The U.S.-cultivated coup in Kiev in 2014 was a major declaration of drastic turn in policy towards Moscow. So was the decision, taken in 2012 at the latest , to back the radical jihadists who were turning civil unrest in Syria into a campaign to topple the Assad government in favor of another Islamist regime. ..."
"... In 2015, the last of the three years I just noted, Russia intervened militarily and diplomatically in the Syria conflict, in part to protect its southwest from Islamist extremism and in part to pull the Middle East back from the near-anarchy then threatening it as well as Russia and the West. ..."
"... Meanwhile, Washington had cast China as an adversary and committed itself -- as it apparently remains -- to regime change in Syria. Three months prior to the treaty that established the EAEU, the Americans helped turn another case of civil unrest into a regime change -- this time backing not jihadists in Syria but the crypto-Nazi militias in Ukraine on which the government now in power still depends. ..."
"... If there is a president to blame -- and again, I see little point in this line of argument -- it would have to be Barack Obama. To a certain extent, Obama was a creature of those around him, as he acknowledged in his interview with Jeffrey Goldberg in The Atlantic ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... The Washington Post ..."
"... Think of Russia, China, and Iran, the three nations now designated America's principal adversaries. Each one is fated to become (if it is not already) a world or regional power and a key to stability -- Russia and China on a global scale, Iran in the Middle East. But each stands resolutely -- and this is not to say with hostile intent -- outside the Western-led order. They have different histories, traditions, cultures, and political cultures. And they are determined to preserve them. ..."
"... If you valued this original article, please consider making a donation to Consortium News so we can bring you more stories like this one. ..."
"... You don't mention corruption and profiteering, which go hand-in-hand with American Exceptionalism and the National Security State (NSS) formed in 1947. The leader of the world which is also an NSS requires enemies, so the National Security Strategy designates enemies, a few of them in an Axis of Evil. Arming to fight them and dreaming up other reasons to go to war, including a war on terror of all things, bring the desired vast expenditures, trillions of dollars, which translate to vast profits to those involved. ..."
"... How many Americans were against the assault by the Coalition of the Willing upon Iraq? Very few. ..."
"... Even in the lead up the war when the public was force fed a diet comprised entirely of State Dept. lies about WMDs by a sycophantic media, there was still a significant 25-40 percent of the public who opposed the war. ..."
"... "Conformism and its consequences, probably derived in part from Puritanism and further cemented by the alternating racisms of anti-indigenous and anti black attitudes- the history of the lynch mob and various wars against the poor which ended up in the anti-communist frenzies of the day before yesterday constitute the backbone of American history- is the disease which afflicts Washington." ..."
"... I have often wondered why the US was unable to accept the position of first among equals. Why does it have to rule the World? I know it believes that its economic and political systems are the best on the planet, but surely all other nations should be able to decide for themselves, what systems they will accept and live under? Who gave the US the right to make those decisions for everyone else? The US was more than willing to kill 20 million people either directly or indirectly since the end of WWII to make its will sovereign in all nations of the World! ..."
"... That is why I invariably raise JFK's Assassination as a logical starting point. If a truly independent commission would fix the blame, we could move on from there. Sam F., on this forum, has mentioned a formal legal undertaking many times on this site, but now is the time to begin the discussion for a formal Truth And Reconciliation Commission in America Let's figure out how to begin. ..."
"... A very good article. Spoiler and bully describe US foreign policy, and foreign policy is in the driver's seat while domestic policy takes the pickings, hardly anything left for the hollowed-out society where people live paycheck to paycheck, homelessness and other assorted ills of a failing society continue to rise while oligarchs and the MIC rule the neofeudal/futile system. ..."
"... When are we going to make that connection of the wasteful expenditure on military adventurism and the problem of poverty in the US? ..."
"... To substantiate this "crucial turn," Lawrence makes the unwarranted assumption that the goal post Soviet Union was simply worldwide free-market capitalism, not global domination: "Failures ensued. Iraq post–2003 is among the more obvious. Nobody ever planted democracy or built free markets in Baghdad"; and the later statement that the US wanted the countries it invaded to be "Just like us." ..."
"... Though he doesn't mention (ignores) US meddling in Russia after the collapse of the USSR, I presume from its absence that he attributes that, too, to the expansion of capital. Indeed, it was that, but with the more malevolent goal of control. "Just like us" is the usual "progressive" explanation for failures. "Controlled by us" was more like it, if we face the history of the country squarely. ..."
"... Is it really so wise to be speaking in terms of nationhood after we've undergone 50 years of Kochian/libertarian dismantlement of the nation-state in favor of bank and transnational governance? Remember the words of Zbigniew Brzezinski: ..."
"... "The "nation-state" as a fundamental unit of man's organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state." ~ Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages, 1970 ..."
"... Globalists themselves are drawn together by an ideology. They have no common nation, they have no common political orientation, they have no common cultural background or religion, they herald from the East just as they herald from the West. They have no true loyalty to any mainstream cause or social movement. ..."
"... What do they have in common? They seem to exhibit many of the traits of high level narcissistic sociopaths, who make up a very small percentage of the human population. These people are predators, or to be more specific, they are parasites. They see themselves as naturally superior to others, but they often work together if there is the promise of mutual benefit." ..."
"... Yet there is a thread that leads through US foreign policy. It all started with NSC 68. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSC_68 . Already in the 1950's, leading bankers were afraid of economic depression which would follow from a "peace dividend" following the end of WWII. ..."
"... To avoid this, and to avoid "socialism", the only acceptable government spending was on defense. This mentality never ended. Today 50% of discretionary govenmenrt spending is on the military. http://www.unz.com/article/americas-militarized-economy/ . ..."
"... The "why" behind the US foreign policies was spoken with absolute honest clarity in the "Statement of A. Wess Mitchell Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs" to the Senate on August 21 this year. The transcript is at : https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/082118_Mitchell_Testimony.pdf ..."
"... Quote the esteemed gentleman (inter alia): "It continues to be among the foremost national security interests of the United States to prevent the domination of the Eurasian landmass by hostile powers. The central aim of the administration's foreign policy is to prepare our nation to confront this challenge by systematically strengthening the military, economic and political fundamentals of American power. " ..."
"... Patrick Lawrence's essay makes perfect sense only when it is applied to US foreign policy since the end of WW2. It is conventional wisdom that the US is now engaged in Cold War 2.0. In fact, Cold War 2.0 is an extension of Cold War 1.0. There was merely a 20 year interregnum between 1990 and 2010. ..."
"... Most analysts think that Cold War 1.0 was an ideological war between "Communism" and "Democracy". The renewal of the Cold War against both Russia and China however shows that the ideological war between East and West was really a cover for the geopolitical war between the two. ..."
"... Russia, China and Iran are the main geopolitical enemies of the US as they stand in the way of the global, imperialist hegemony of the US. In order to control the global periphery, i.e. the developing world and their emerging economies, the US must contain and defeat the big three. This was as true in 1948 as it is in 2018. Thus, what's happening today under Trump is no different than what occurred under Truman in 1948. Whatever differences exist are mere window dressing. ..."
"... There is no Cold War 2.0. It's a fallacy to create a false flag for regime change in Russia. Ms. Clinton, the Kagan family, the MIC, etc., figure if we can take out Yanukovich and replace him with Fascists/Nazis, what could stop us from doing the same to Russia. The good news: all empires fail. ..."
"... Mr. Lawrence is much too accommodating with his analysis. Imagine, linking US "foreign policy" in the same thought as "global stability", as if the two were somehow related. On the contrary, "global instability" seems to be our foreign policy goal, especially for those regions that pose a threat to US hegemony. Why? Because it is difficult to extract a region's wealth when its population is united behind a stable government that can't be bought off. ..."
"... I agree, Gerald. Enforcing the petro-dollar system seems to be the mainspring for much of our recent foreign policy militarism. If it were to unravel, the dollar's value would tank, and then how could we afford our vast system of military bases. Death Star's aren't cheap, ya know. ..."
"... +1 Gerald Wadsworth. It's not necessarily "Oil pure and simple" but "Currency Pure and Simple." If the US dollar is no longer the world's currency, the US is toast. ..."
"... And note (2) that Wall Street is mostly an extension of The City; the UK still thinks it owns the entire world, and the UK has been owned by the banks ever since it went off tally sticks ..."
"... Putin said years ago, and I cannot quote him, but remember most of it, that it doesn't matter who is the candidate for President, or what his campaign promises are, or how sincere he is in making them, whenever they get in office, it is always the same policy. ..."
"... Anastasia, I saved it: From Putin interview with Le Figaro: "I have already spoken to three US Presidents. They come and go, but politics stay the same at all times. Do you know why? Because of the powerful bureaucracy. When a person is elected, they may have some ideas. Then people with briefcases arrive, well dressed, wearing dark suits, just like mine, except for the red tie, since they wear black or dark blue ones. These people start explaining how things are done. And instantly, everything changes. This is what happens with every administration." ..."
"... Pres. Putin explained this several times when he was asked about preferring Trump to Hillary Clinton, and he carefully said that he would accept whoever the US population chose, he was used to dealing with Hillary and he knew that very little changed between Administrations. This has been conveniently cast aside by the Dems, and Obama's disgraceful expulsion of Russian diplomats started the avalanche of Russiagate. ..."
"... Many of the people involved in JFK's murder are now dead themselves, yet the "system" that demands confrontation rather than cooperation continues. These "personalities" are shills for that system, and if they are not so willingly, they are either bribed or blackmailed into compliance. ..."
"... Remember when "Dubya" ran on a "kinder and gentler nation" foreign policy? Obama's "hope and change" that became "more of the same"? And now Trump's views on both domestic and foreign policy seemingly also doing a 180? There are "personalities" behind this "system", and they are embedded in places like the Council on Foreign Relations. The people that run our banking system and the global corporate empire demand the whole pie, they would rather blow up the world than have to share. ..."
"... Bob and Joe, here's a solid review of Woodward's book Fear that points out his consistent service to the oligarchy, including giving Trump a pass for killing the Iran deal. Interesting background on Woodward in the comments as well. https://mondoweiss.net/2018/09/woodward-national-security/ ..."
"... "America's three principal adversaries signify the shape of the world to come: a post-Western world of coexistence. But neoliberal and neocon ideology is unable to to accept global pluralism and multipolarity, argues Patrick Lawrence." ..."
Sep 15, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

... ... ..

The bitter reality is that U.S. foreign policy has no definable objective other than blocking the initiatives of others because they stand in the way of the further expansion of U.S. global interests. This impoverished strategy reflects Washington's refusal to accept the passing of its relatively brief post–Cold War moment of unipolar power.

There is an error all too common in American public opinion. Personalizing Washington's regression into the role of spoiler by assigning all blame to one man, now Donald Trump, deprives one of deeper understanding. This mistake was made during the steady attack on civil liberties after the Sept. 11 tragedies and then during the 2003 invasion of Iraq: namely that it was all George W. Bush's fault. It was not so simple then and is not now.

The crisis of U.S. foreign policy -- a series of radical missteps -- are systemic. Having little to do with personalities, they pass from one administration to the next with little variance other than at the margins.

Let us bring some history to this question of America as spoiler. What is the origin of this undignified and isolating approach to global affairs?

The neoliberal economic crusade accompanied by neoconservative politics had its intellectual ballast, and off went its true-believing warriors around the world.

Failures ensued. Iraq post–2003 is among the more obvious. Nobody ever planted democracy or built free markets in Baghdad. Then came the "color revolutions," which resulted in the destabilization of large swathes of the former Soviet Union's borderlands. The 2008 financial crash followed. I was in Hong Kong at the time and recall thinking, "This is not just Lehman Brothers. An economic model is headed into Chapter 11." One would have thought a fundamental rethink in Washington might have followed these events. There has never been one.

The orthodoxy today remains what it was when it formed in the 1990s: The neoliberal crusade must proceed. Our market-driven, "rules-based" order is still advanced as the only way out of our planet's impasses.

A Strategic and Military Turn

Midway through the first Obama administration, a crucial turn began. What had been an assertion of financial and economic power, albeit coercive in many instances, particularly with the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, took on further strategic and military dimensions.

The NATO bombing campaign in Libya, ostensibly a humanitarian mission, became a regime-change operation -- despite Washington's promises otherwise. Obama's "pivot to Asia" turned out to be a neo-containment policy toward China. The "reset" with Russia, declared after Obama appointed Hillary Clinton secretary of state, flopped and turned into the virulent animosity we now live with daily.

The U.S.-cultivated coup in Kiev in 2014 was a major declaration of drastic turn in policy towards Moscow. So was the decision, taken in 2012 at the latest , to back the radical jihadists who were turning civil unrest in Syria into a campaign to topple the Assad government in favor of another Islamist regime.

Spoilage as a poor excuse for a foreign policy had made its first appearances.

I count 2013 to 2015 as key years. At the start of this period, China began developing what it now calls its Belt and Road Initiative -- its hugely ambitious plan to stitch together the Eurasian landmass, Shanghai to Lisbon. Moscow favored this undertaking, not least because of the key role Russia had to play and because it fit well with President Vladimir Putin's Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), launched in 2014.

In 2015, the last of the three years I just noted, Russia intervened militarily and diplomatically in the Syria conflict, in part to protect its southwest from Islamist extremism and in part to pull the Middle East back from the near-anarchy then threatening it as well as Russia and the West.

Meanwhile, Washington had cast China as an adversary and committed itself -- as it apparently remains -- to regime change in Syria. Three months prior to the treaty that established the EAEU, the Americans helped turn another case of civil unrest into a regime change -- this time backing not jihadists in Syria but the crypto-Nazi militias in Ukraine on which the government now in power still depends.

That is how we got the U.S.-as-spoiler foreign policy we now have.

If there is a president to blame -- and again, I see little point in this line of argument -- it would have to be Barack Obama. To a certain extent, Obama was a creature of those around him, as he acknowledged in his interview with Jeffrey Goldberg in The Atlantic toward the end of his second term. From that "Anonymous" opinion piece published in The New York Times on Sept. 5, we know Trump is too, to a greater extent than Obama may have feared in his worst moments.

The crucial question is why. Why do U.S. policy cliques find themselves bereft of imaginative thinking in the face of an evolving world order? Why has there been not a single original policy initiative since the years I single out, with the exception of the now-abandoned 2015 accord governing Iran's nuclear programs? "Right now, our job is to create quagmires until we get what we want," an administration official told The Washington Post 's David Ignatius in August.

Can you think of a blunter confession of intellectual bankruptcy? I can't.

Global 'Equals' Like Us?

There is a longstanding explanation for this paralysis. Seven decades of global hegemony, the Cold War notwithstanding, left the State Department with little to think about other than the simplicities of East-West tension. Those planning and executing American diplomacy lost all facility for imaginative thinking because there was no need of it. This holds true, in my view, but there is more to our specific moment than mere sclerosis within the policy cliques.

As I have argued numerous times elsewhere, parity between East and West is a 21st century imperative. From Woodrow Wilson to the post-World War II settlement, an equality among all nations was in theory what the U.S. considered essential to global order.

Now that this is upon us, however, Washington cannot accept it. It did not count on non-Western nations achieving a measure of prosperity and influence until they were "just like us," as the once famous phrase had it. And it has not turned out that way.

Think of Russia, China, and Iran, the three nations now designated America's principal adversaries. Each one is fated to become (if it is not already) a world or regional power and a key to stability -- Russia and China on a global scale, Iran in the Middle East. But each stands resolutely -- and this is not to say with hostile intent -- outside the Western-led order. They have different histories, traditions, cultures, and political cultures. And they are determined to preserve them.

They signify the shape of the world to come -- a post-Western world in which the Atlantic alliance must coexist with rising powers outside its orbit. Together, then, they signify precisely what the U.S. cannot countenance. And if there is one attribute of neoliberal and neoconservative ideology that stands out among all others, it is its complete inability to accept difference or deviation if it threatens its interests.

This is the logic of spoilage as a substitute for foreign policy. Among its many consequences are countless lost opportunities for global stability.

Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International Herald Tribune, is a columnist, essayist, author, and lecturer. His most recent book is Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century (Yale). Follow him @thefloutist. His web site is www.patricklawrence.us. Support his work via www.patreon.com/thefloutist .

If you valued this original article, please consider making a donation to Consortium News so we can bring you more stories like this one.

bevin , September 14, 2018 at 6:32 pm

This really is an excellent analysis. I would highlight the following point:
"There is a longstanding explanation for this paralysis. Seven decades of global hegemony, the Cold War notwithstanding, left the State Department with little to think about other than the simplicities of East-West tension. Those planning and executing American diplomacy lost all facility for imaginative thinking because there was no need of it. This holds true, in my view, but there is more to our specific moment than mere sclerosis within the policy cliques "

Conformism and its consequences, probably derived in part from Puritanism and further cemented by the alternating racisms of anti-indigenous and anti black attitudes- the history of the lynch mob and various wars against the poor which ended up in the anti-communist frenzies of the day before yesterday constitute the backbone of American history- is the disease which afflicts Washington.

Don Bacon , September 14, 2018 at 6:03 pm

You don't mention corruption and profiteering, which go hand-in-hand with American Exceptionalism and the National Security State (NSS) formed in 1947. The leader of the world which is also an NSS requires enemies, so the National Security Strategy designates enemies, a few of them in an Axis of Evil. Arming to fight them and dreaming up other reasons to go to war, including a war on terror of all things, bring the desired vast expenditures, trillions of dollars, which translate to vast profits to those involved.

This focus on war has its roots in the Christian bible and in a sense of manifest destiny that has occupied Americans since before they were Americans, and the real Americans had to be exterminated. It certainly (as stated) can't be blamed on certain individuals, it's predominate and nearly universal. How many Americans were against the assault by the Coalition of the Willing upon Iraq? Very few.

Homer Jay , September 14, 2018 at 10:09 pm

"How many Americans were against the assault by the Coalition of the Willing upon Iraq? Very few."

Are you kidding me? Here is a list of polls of the American public regarding the Iraq War 2003-2007;

https://www.politifact.com/iraq-war-polls/

Even in the lead up the war when the public was force fed a diet comprised entirely of State Dept. lies about WMDs by a sycophantic media, there was still a significant 25-40 percent of the public who opposed the war. You clearly are not American or you would remember the vocal minority which filled the streets of big cities across this country. And again the consent was as Chomsky says "manufactured." And it took only 1 year of the war for the majority of the public to be against it. By 2007 60-70% of the public opposed the war.

Judging from your name you come from a country whose government was part of that coalition of the willing. So should we assume that "very few" of your fellow country men and women were against that absolute horror show that is the Iraq war?

Don Bacon , September 14, 2018 at 11:05 pm

You failed to address my major point, and instead picked on something you're wrong on.

Iraq war poll –Pew Research: http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/old-assets/publications/770-1.gif

PS: bevin made approximately the same point later (w/o the financial factor).

"Conformism and its consequences, probably derived in part from Puritanism and further cemented by the alternating racisms of anti-indigenous and anti black attitudes- the history of the lynch mob and various wars against the poor which ended up in the anti-communist frenzies of the day before yesterday constitute the backbone of American history- is the disease which afflicts Washington."

Archie1954 , September 14, 2018 at 2:39 pm

I have often wondered why the US was unable to accept the position of first among equals. Why does it have to rule the World? I know it believes that its economic and political systems are the best on the planet, but surely all other nations should be able to decide for themselves, what systems they will accept and live under? Who gave the US the right to make those decisions for everyone else? The US was more than willing to kill 20 million people either directly or indirectly since the end of WWII to make its will sovereign in all nations of the World!

Bob Van Noy , September 14, 2018 at 9:54 pm

Archie 1954, because 911 was never adequately investigated, our government was inappropriately allowed to act in the so-called public interest in completely inappropriate ways; so that in order for the Country to set things right, those decisions which were made quietly, with little public discussion, would have to be exposed and the illegalities addressed. But, as I'm sure you know, there are myriad other big government failures also left unexamined, so where to begin?

That is why I invariably raise JFK's Assassination as a logical starting point. If a truly independent commission would fix the blame, we could move on from there. Sam F., on this forum, has mentioned a formal legal undertaking many times on this site, but now is the time to begin the discussion for a formal Truth And Reconciliation Commission in America Let's figure out how to begin.

So,"Who gave the US the right to make those decisions for everyone else?", certainly not The People

Jessika , September 14, 2018 at 1:36 pm

A very good article. Spoiler and bully describe US foreign policy, and foreign policy is in the driver's seat while domestic policy takes the pickings, hardly anything left for the hollowed-out society where people live paycheck to paycheck, homelessness and other assorted ills of a failing society continue to rise while oligarchs and the MIC rule the neofeudal/futile system.

When are we going to make that connection of the wasteful expenditure on military adventurism and the problem of poverty in the US? The Pentagon consistently calls the shots, yet we consistently hear about unaccounted expenditures by the Pentagon, losing amounts in the trillions, and never do they get audited.

nondimenticare , September 14, 2018 at 12:18 pm

I certainly agree that the policy is bereft, but not for all of the same reasons. There is the positing of a turnaround as a basis for the current spoiler role: "What had been an assertion of financial and economic power, albeit coercive in many instances, particularly with the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, took on further strategic and military dimensions."

To substantiate this "crucial turn," Lawrence makes the unwarranted assumption that the goal post Soviet Union was simply worldwide free-market capitalism, not global domination: "Failures ensued. Iraq post–2003 is among the more obvious. Nobody ever planted democracy or built free markets in Baghdad"; and the later statement that the US wanted the countries it invaded to be "Just like us."

Though he doesn't mention (ignores) US meddling in Russia after the collapse of the USSR, I presume from its absence that he attributes that, too, to the expansion of capital. Indeed, it was that, but with the more malevolent goal of control. "Just like us" is the usual "progressive" explanation for failures. "Controlled by us" was more like it, if we face the history of the country squarely.

That is the blindness of intent that has led to the spoiler role.

Unfettered Fire , September 14, 2018 at 11:15 am

Is it really so wise to be speaking in terms of nationhood after we've undergone 50 years of Kochian/libertarian dismantlement of the nation-state in favor of bank and transnational governance? Remember the words of Zbigniew Brzezinski:

"The "nation-state" as a fundamental unit of man's organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state." ~ Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages, 1970

"Make no mistake, what we are seeing in geopolitics today is indeed a magic show. The false East/West paradigm is as powerful if not more powerful than the false Left/Right paradigm. For some reason, the human mind is more comfortable believing in the ideas of division and chaos, and it often turns its nose up indignantly at the notion of "conspiracy." But conspiracies and conspirators can be demonstrated as a fact of history. Organization among elitists is predictable.

Globalists themselves are drawn together by an ideology. They have no common nation, they have no common political orientation, they have no common cultural background or religion, they herald from the East just as they herald from the West. They have no true loyalty to any mainstream cause or social movement.

What do they have in common? They seem to exhibit many of the traits of high level narcissistic sociopaths, who make up a very small percentage of the human population. These people are predators, or to be more specific, they are parasites. They see themselves as naturally superior to others, but they often work together if there is the promise of mutual benefit."

http://www.alt-market.com/articles/3504-in-the-new-qmultipolar-worldq-the-globalists-still-control-all-the-players

Unfettered Fire , September 14, 2018 at 1:43 pm

"In our society, real power does not happen to lie in the political system, it lies in the private economy: that's where the decisions are made about what's produced, how much is produced, what's consumed, where investment takes place, who has jobs, who controls the resources, and so on and so forth. And as long as that remains the case, changes inside the political system can make some difference -- I don't want to say it's zero -- but the differences are going to be very slight." ~ Noam Chomsky

Giants: The Global Power Elite – A talk by Peter Phillips: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np6td-wzDYQ

The Elite World Order in Jitters Review of Peter Phillips' book Giants: The Global Power Elite: https://dissidentvoice.org/2018/09/the-elite-world-order-in-jitters/

backwardsevolution , September 14, 2018 at 5:14 pm

Unfettered Fire – good posts. Thank you. Peter Phillips is definitely worth listening to.

Jon Dhoe , September 14, 2018 at 11:02 am

Israel, Israel, Israel. When are we going to start facing facts?

Daniel Good , September 14, 2018 at 9:59 am

Yet there is a thread that leads through US foreign policy. It all started with NSC 68. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSC_68 . Already in the 1950's, leading bankers were afraid of economic depression which would follow from a "peace dividend" following the end of WWII.

To avoid this, and to avoid "socialism", the only acceptable government spending was on defense. This mentality never ended. Today 50% of discretionary govenmenrt spending is on the military. http://www.unz.com/article/americas-militarized-economy/ .

We live in a country of military socialism, in which military citizens have all types of benefits, on condition they join the military-industrial-complex. This being so, there is no need for real "intelligence", there is no need to "understand" what goes on is foreign countries, there no need to be right about what might happen or worry about consequences. What is important is stimulate the economy by spending on arms. From Korean war, when the US dropped more bombs than it had on Nazi Germany, through Viet Nam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya etc etc the US policy was a winning one not for those who got bombed (and could not fight back) but for the weapons industry and military contractors. Is the NYTimes ever going to discuss this aspect? Or any one in the MSM?

Walter , September 14, 2018 at 9:26 am

The "why" behind the US foreign policies was spoken with absolute honest clarity in the "Statement of A. Wess Mitchell Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs" to the Senate on August 21 this year. The transcript is at : https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/082118_Mitchell_Testimony.pdf

Quote the esteemed gentleman (inter alia): "It continues to be among the foremost national security interests of the United States to prevent the domination of the Eurasian landmass by hostile powers. The central aim of the administration's foreign policy is to prepare our nation to confront this challenge by systematically strengthening the military, economic and political fundamentals of American power. "

Tellingly the "official" State Department copy is changed and omits the true spoken words

See yourself: https://www.state.gov/p/eur/rls/rm/2018/285247.htm

This is the essence of MacKinder's Thesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geographical_Pivot_of_History and was the underlying reason for both world wars in the 20th century.

An essay on this observed truth https://journal-neo.org/2018/09/11/behind-the-anglo-american-war-on-russia/

A deeper essay on the same subject https://www.silkroadstudies.org/resources/pdf/Monographs/1006Rethinking-4.pdf

I would propose that the Zionism aspect exists due to the perceived necessity of "Forward Operating Base Israel" look it a map, Comrade The ISIS?Saudi?Zionist games divides the New Silk Road and the Eurasian land mass and exists to throttle said pathways.

Interestingly the latter essay is attributed to Eldar Ismailov and Vladimir Papava

Brother Comrade Putin knows the game. The US has to maintain the fiction for the public that it does not know the game, and is consequently obliged to maintain a vast public delusion, hence "fake news" and all the rest.

OlyaPola , September 14, 2018 at 1:49 pm

"I would propose that the Zionism aspect exists due to the perceived necessity of "Forward Operating Base Israel" lookit a map, Comrade"

Some have an attraction to book-ends. Once upon a time the Eurasian book-ends were Germany and Japan, and the Western Asian book-ends Israel and Saudi Arabia. This "strategy" is based upon the notion that bookend-ness is a state of inertia which in any interactive system is impossible except apparently to those embedded in "we the people hold these truths to be self-evident".

Consequently some have an attraction to book-ends.

Dennis Etler , September 13, 2018 at 9:05 pm

Patrick Lawrence's essay makes perfect sense only when it is applied to US foreign policy since the end of WW2. It is conventional wisdom that the US is now engaged in Cold War 2.0. In fact, Cold War 2.0 is an extension of Cold War 1.0. There was merely a 20 year interregnum between 1990 and 2010.

Most analysts think that Cold War 1.0 was an ideological war between "Communism" and "Democracy". The renewal of the Cold War against both Russia and China however shows that the ideological war between East and West was really a cover for the geopolitical war between the two.

Russia, China and Iran are the main geopolitical enemies of the US as they stand in the way of the global, imperialist hegemony of the US. In order to control the global periphery, i.e. the developing world and their emerging economies, the US must contain and defeat the big three. This was as true in 1948 as it is in 2018. Thus, what's happening today under Trump is no different than what occurred under Truman in 1948. Whatever differences exist are mere window dressing.

Rob Roy , September 15, 2018 at 12:16 am

Mr. Etler,

I think you are mostly right except in the first Cold War, the Soviets and US Americans were both involved in this "war." What you call Cold War 2.0 is in the minds and policies of only the US. Russian is not in any way currently like the Soviet Union, yet the US acts in all aspects of foreign attitude and policy as though that (very unpleasant period in today's Russians' minds) still exists. It does not. You says there was "merely a 20 year interregnum" and things have picked up and continued as a Cold War. Only in the idiocy of the USA, certainly not in the minds of Russian leadership, particularly Putin's who now can be distinguished as the most logical, realistic and competent leader in the world.

Thanks to H. Clinton being unable to become president, we have a full blown Russiagate which the MSM propaganda continues to spread.

There is no Cold War 2.0. It's a fallacy to create a false flag for regime change in Russia. Ms. Clinton, the Kagan family, the MIC, etc., figure if we can take out Yanukovich and replace him with Fascists/Nazis, what could stop us from doing the same to Russia. The good news: all empires fail.

Maxwell Quest , September 13, 2018 at 1:41 pm

"This is the logic of spoilage as a substitute for foreign policy. Among its many consequences are countless lost opportunities for global stability."

Mr. Lawrence is much too accommodating with his analysis. Imagine, linking US "foreign policy" in the same thought as "global stability", as if the two were somehow related. On the contrary, "global instability" seems to be our foreign policy goal, especially for those regions that pose a threat to US hegemony. Why? Because it is difficult to extract a region's wealth when its population is united behind a stable government that can't be bought off.

Walter , September 13, 2018 at 1:30 pm

US is attempting to stop a process, to prevent Change see https://www.fort-russ.com/2017/10/v-golstein-end-of-cold-war-and/

Conjuring up Heraclitus..Time is a River, constantly changing. And we face downstream, unable to see the Future and gazing upon the Past.

The attempt has an effect, many effects, but it cannot stop Time.

The Russian and the Chinese have clinched the unification of the Earth Island, "Heartland" This ended the ability to control global commerce by means of navies – the methods of the Sea Peoples over the last 500 years are now failed. The US has no way of even seeing this fact other than force and violence to restore the status quo ante .

Thus World War, as we see

Recollecting Heraclitus again, the universe is populated by opposites as we see, China and Russia represent a cathodic opposite to the US

Jeff Harrison , September 13, 2018 at 1:29 pm

I guess I missed this one, Patrick. Great overview but let me put it in a slightly different context. You start with the end of the cold war but I don't. I could go all the way back to the early days of the country and our proclamation of manifest destiny. The US has long thought that it was the one ring to rule them all. But for most of that time the strength of individual members of the rest of the world constrained the US from running amok. That constraint began to be lifted after the ruling clique in Europe committed seppuku in WWI. It was completely lifted after WWII. But that was 75 years ago. This is now and most of the world has recovered from the world wide destruction of human and physical capital known as WWII. The US is going to have to learn how to live with constraints again but it will take a shock. The US is going to have to lose at something big time. Europe cancelling the sanctions? The sanctions on Russia don't mean squat to the US but it's costing Europe billions. This highlights the reality that the "Western Alliance" (read NATO) is not really an alliance of shared goals and objectives. It's an alliance of those terrified by fascism and what it can do. They all decided that they needed a "great father" to prevent their excesses again. One wonders if either the world or Europe would really like the US to come riding in like the cavalry to places like Germany, Poland, and Ukraine. Blindly following Washington's directions can be remarkably expensive for Europe and they get nothing but refugees they can't afford. Something will ultimately have to give.

The one thing I was surprised you didn't mention was the US's financial weakness. It's been a long time since the US was a creditor nation. We've been a debtor nation since at least the 80s. The world doesn't need debtor nations and the only reason they need us is the primacy of the US dollar. And there are numerous people hammering away at that.

Gerald Wadsworth , September 13, 2018 at 12:59 pm

Why are we trying to hem in China, Russia and Iran? Petro-dollar hegemony, pure and simple. From our initial deal with Saudi Arabia to buy and sell oil in dollars only, to the chaos we have inflicted globally to retain the dollar's rule and role in energy trading, we are finding ourselves threatened – actually the position of the dollar as the sole trading medium is what is threatened – and we are determined to retain that global power over oil at all costs. With China and Russia making deals to buy and sell oil in their own currencies, we have turned both those counties into our enemies du jour, inventing every excuse to blame them for every "bad thing" that has and will happen, globally. Throw in Syria, Iran, Venezuela, and a host of other countries who want to get out from under our thumb, to those who tried and paid the price. Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, and more. Our failed foreign policy is dictated by controlling, as Donald Rumsfeld once opined, "our oil under their sand." Oil. Pure and simple.

Maxwell Quest , September 13, 2018 at 2:18 pm

I agree, Gerald. Enforcing the petro-dollar system seems to be the mainspring for much of our recent foreign policy militarism. If it were to unravel, the dollar's value would tank, and then how could we afford our vast system of military bases. Death Star's aren't cheap, ya know.

Maxwell Quest , September 13, 2018 at 3:33 pm

I agree, Gerald. Along with ensuring access to "our" off-shore oil fields, enforcing the petro-dollar system is equally significant, and seems to be the mainspring for much of our recent foreign policy militarism. If this system were to unravel, the dollar's value would tank, and then how could we afford our vast system of military bases which make the world safe for democracy? Death Star's aren't cheap, ya know.

Anonymous Coward , September 13, 2018 at 10:40 pm

+1 Gerald Wadsworth. It's not necessarily "Oil pure and simple" but "Currency Pure and Simple." If the US dollar is no longer the world's currency, the US is toast. Also note that anyone trying to retain control of their currency and not letting "The Market" (private banks) totally control them is a Great Devil we need to fight, e.g. Libya and China.

And note (2) that Wall Street is mostly an extension of The City; the UK still thinks it owns the entire world, and the UK has been owned by the banks ever since it went off tally sticks

MichaelWme , September 13, 2018 at 12:18 pm

It's called the Thucydides trap. NATO (US/UK/France/Turkey) have said they will force regime change in Syria. Russia says it will not allow regime change in Syria. Fortunately, as a Frenchman and an Austrian explained many years ago, and NATO experts say is true today, regime change in Russia is a simple matter, about the same as Libya or Panamá. I forget the details, but I assume things worked out well for the Frenchman and the Austrian, and will work out about the same for NATO.

Anastasia , September 13, 2018 at 12:04 pm

Putin said years ago, and I cannot quote him, but remember most of it, that it doesn't matter who is the candidate for President, or what his campaign promises are, or how sincere he is in making them, whenever they get in office, it is always the same policy.

Truer words were never spoken, and it is the reason why I know, at least, that Russia did not interfere in the US elections. What would be the point, from his viewpoint, and it is not only just his opinion. You cannot help but see at this point that that he said is obviously true.

TJ , September 13, 2018 at 1:47 pm

What an excellent point. Why bother influencing the elections when it doesn't matter who is elected -- the same policies will continue.

Bart Hansen , September 13, 2018 at 3:43 pm

Anastasia, I saved it: From Putin interview with Le Figaro: "I have already spoken to three US Presidents. They come and go, but politics stay the same at all times. Do you know why? Because of the powerful bureaucracy. When a person is elected, they may have some ideas. Then people with briefcases arrive, well dressed, wearing dark suits, just like mine, except for the red tie, since they wear black or dark blue ones. These people start explaining how things are done. And instantly, everything changes. This is what happens with every administration."

rosemerry , September 14, 2018 at 8:02 am

Pres. Putin explained this several times when he was asked about preferring Trump to Hillary Clinton, and he carefully said that he would accept whoever the US population chose, he was used to dealing with Hillary and he knew that very little changed between Administrations. This has been conveniently cast aside by the Dems, and Obama's disgraceful expulsion of Russian diplomats started the avalanche of Russiagate.

James , September 13, 2018 at 9:24 am

Great to see Patrick Lawrence writing for Consortium News.

He ends his article with: "This is the logic of spoilage as a substitute for foreign policy. Among its many consequences are countless lost opportunities for global stability. "

Speaking of consequences, how about the human toll this foreign policy has taken on so many people in this world. To me, the gravest sin of all.

Bob Van Noy , September 13, 2018 at 8:46 am

I agree with Patric Lawrence when he states "Personalizing Washington's regression into the role of spoiler by assigning all blame to one man, now Donald Trump, deprives one of deeper understanding." and I also agree that 'Seven decades of global hegemony have left the State Department, Cold War notwithstanding, left the State Department with little to think about other than the simplicities of East-West tension.' But I seriously disagree when he declares that: "The crisis of U.S. foreign policy -- a series of radical missteps -- are systemic. Having little to do with personalities, they pass from one administration to the next with little variance other than at the margins.'' Certainly the missteps are true, but I would argue that the "personalities" are crucial to America's crisis of Foreign Policy. After all it was likely that JFK's American University address was the public declaration of his intention to lead America in the direction of better understanding of Sovereign Rights that likely got him killed. It is precisely those "personalities" that we must understand and identify before we can move on

Skip Scott , September 13, 2018 at 9:35 am

Bob-

I see what you're saying, but I believe Patrick is also right.

Many of the people involved in JFK's murder are now dead themselves, yet the "system" that demands confrontation rather than cooperation continues. These "personalities" are shills for that system, and if they are not so willingly, they are either bribed or blackmailed into compliance.

Remember when "Dubya" ran on a "kinder and gentler nation" foreign policy? Obama's "hope and change" that became "more of the same"? And now Trump's views on both domestic and foreign policy seemingly also doing a 180? There are "personalities" behind this "system", and they are embedded in places like the Council on Foreign Relations. The people that run our banking system and the global corporate empire demand the whole pie, they would rather blow up the world than have to share.

Bob Van Noy , September 13, 2018 at 2:42 pm

You're completely right Skip, that's what we all must recognize and ultimately react to, and against.
Thank you.

JWalters , September 13, 2018 at 6:46 pm

I would add that human beings are the key components in this system. The system is built and shaped by them. Some are greedy, lying predators and some are honest and egalitarian. Bob Parry was one of the latter, thankfully.

JWalters , September 13, 2018 at 6:30 pm

Skip, very good points. For those interested further, here's an excellent talk on the bankers behind the manufacutured wars, including the role of the Council on Foreign Relations as a front organization and control mechanism.
"The Shadows of Power; the CFR and decline of America"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=6124&v=wHa1r4nIaug

Joe Tedesky , September 13, 2018 at 9:42 am

Bob, you are right. I find it most interesting and sad at the same time that in Woodward's new book 'Fear' that he describes a pan 'almost tragic incident' whereas Trump wanted to sign a document removing our missiles and troops out of S Korea, but save for the steady hand of his 'anonymous' staffers who yanked the document off his presidential desk . wow, close one there we almost did something to enforce a peace. Can't have that though, we still have lots to kill in pursue of liberty and freedom and the hegemonic way.

Were these 'anonymous' staffers the grandchildren of the staffers and bureaucracy that undermined other presidents? Would their grandparents know who the Gunmen were on the grassy knoll? Did these interrupters of Executive administrations fudge other presidents dreams and hopes of a peaceful world? And in the end were these instigators rewarded by the war industries they protected?

The problem is, is that this bureaucracy of war has out balanced any other rival agency, as diversity of thought and mission is only to be dealt with if it's good for military purposes. Too much of any one thing can be overbearingly bad for a person, and likewise too much war means your country is doing something wrong.

Bob Van Noy , September 13, 2018 at 2:51 pm

Many thanks Joe, I admire your persistence. Clearly Bob Woodward has been part of the problem rather than the solution. The swamp is deep and murky

JWalters , September 13, 2018 at 6:36 pm

Bob and Joe, here's a solid review of Woodward's book Fear that points out his consistent service to the oligarchy, including giving Trump a pass for killing the Iran deal. Interesting background on Woodward in the comments as well. https://mondoweiss.net/2018/09/woodward-national-security/

O Society , September 13, 2018 at 6:21 pm

The document Gary Cohen removed off Trump's desk – which you can read here – states an intent to end a free trade agreement with South Korea.

"White House aides feared if Trump sent the letter, it could jeopardize a top-secret US program that can detect North Korean missile launches within seven seconds."

Sounds like Trump wanted to play the "I am such a great deal maker, the GREATEST deal maker of all times!" game with the South Koreans. Letter doesn't say anything about withdrawing troops or missiles.

Funny how ***TOP-SECRET US PROGRAMS*** find their way into books and newspapers these days, plentiful as acorns falling out of trees.

O Society , September 14, 2018 at 1:38 pm

You're welcome, Joe. These things get confusing. Who knows anymore what is real and what isn't?

Trump did indeed say something about ending military exercises and pulling troops out of South Korea. His staff did indeed contradict him on this. It just wasn't in relation to the letter Cohn "misplaced," AFAIK.

Nobody asked me, but if they did, I'd say the US interfered enough in Korean affairs by killing a whole bunch of 'em in the Korean War. Leave'em alone. Let North and South try to work it out. Tired of hearing about "regime change.'

Republicans buck Trump on Korea troop pullout talk

Joe Tedesky , September 13, 2018 at 12:24 pm

Here's what I wrote:

Bob, you are right. I find it most interesting and sad at the same time that in Woodward's new book 'Fear' that he describes a pan 'almost tragic incident' whereas Trump wanted to sign a document removing our missiles and troops out of S Korea, but save for the steady hand of his 'anonymous' staffers who yanked the document off his presidential desk . wow, close one there we almost did something to enforce a peace. Can't have that though, we still have lots to kill in pursue of liberty and freedom and the hegemonic way.

Were these 'anonymous' staffers the grandchildren of the staffers and bureaucracy that undermined other presidents? Would their grandparents know who the Gunmen were on the grassy knoll? Did these interrupters of Executive administrations fudge other presidents dreams and hopes of a peaceful world? And in the end were these instigators rewarded by the war industries they protected?

The problem is, is that this bureaucracy of war has out balanced any other rival agency, as diversity of thought and mission is only to be dealt with if it's good for military purposes. Too much of any one thing can be overbearingly bad for a person, and likewise too much war means your country is doing something wrong.

Kiwiantz , September 13, 2018 at 8:20 am

Spoiler Nation of America! You got that dead right! China builds infrastructure in other Countries & doesn't interfere with the citizens & their Sovereignty. Contrast that with the United Spoiler States of America, they run roughshod over overs & just bomb the hell out of Countries & leaves devastation & death wherever they go! And there is something seriously wrong & demented with the US mindset concerning, the attacks on 9/11? In Syria the US has ended up arming & supporting the very same organisation of Al QaedaTerrorists, morphed into ISIS, that hijacked planes & flew them into American targets! During 2017 & now in 2018, it defies belief how warped this US mentality is when ISIS can so easily & on demand, fake a chemical attack to suck in the stupid American Military & it's Airforce & get them to attack Syria, like lackeys taking orders from Terrorist's! The US Airforce is the airforce of Al Qaeda & ISIS! Why? Because the US can't stomach Russia, Syria & Iran winning & defeating Terrorism thus ending this Proxy War they started! Russia can't be allowed to win at any cost because the humiliation & loss of prestige that the US would suffer as a Unipolar Empire would signal the decline & end of this Hegemonic Empire so they must continue to act as a spoiler to put off that inevitable decline! America can't face reality that it's time in the sun as the last Empire, is over!

Sally Snyder , September 13, 2018 at 7:57 am

Here is what Americans really think about the rabid anti-Russia hysteria coming from Washington:

https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/08/americans-on-russia-will-of-people.html

Washington has completely lost touch with what Main Street America really believes.

Waynes World , September 13, 2018 at 7:37 am

Finally some words of truth about how we want our way not really democracy. A proper way to look at the world is what you said toward the end a desire to make people's lives better.

mike k , September 13, 2018 at 7:14 am

Simply put – the US is the world's biggest bully. This needs to stop. Fortunately the bully's intended victims are joining together to defeat it's crazy full spectrum dominance fantasies. Led by Russia and China, we can only hope for the success of the resistance to US aggression.

This political, economic, military struggle is not the only problem the world is facing now, but is has some priority due to the danger of nuclear war. Global pollution, climate disaster, ecological collapse and species extinction must also be urgently dealt with if we are to have a sustainable existence on Earth.

OlyaPola , September 13, 2018 at 4:39 am

Alpha : "America's three principal adversaries signify the shape of the world to come: a post-Western world of coexistence. But neoliberal and neocon ideology is unable to to accept global pluralism and multipolarity, argues Patrick Lawrence."

Omega: "Among its many consequences are countless lost opportunities for global stability."

Framing is always a limiter of perception.

Among the consequences of the lateral trajectories from Alpha to Omega referenced above, is the "unintended consequence" of the increase of the principal opponents, their resolve and opportunities to facilitate the transcendence of arrangements based on coercion by arrangements based on co-operation.

Opening Pandora's box was/is only perceived as wholly a disadvantage for those seeking to deny lateral process.

JOHN CHUCKMAN , September 13, 2018 at 4:32 am

Yes, I certainly agree with author's view.

https://chuckmanwordsincomments.wordpress.com/2018/07/31/john-chuckman-comment-empire-corrupts-all-the-principles-of-economics-as-well-as-principles-of-ethics-and-good-government-there-is-nothing-good-to-say-about-empire-and-the-american-one-is-no-excep/

https://chuckmanwordsincomments.wordpress.com/2018/07/22/john-chuckman-comment-how-american-politics-really-work-why-there-are-terrible-candidates-and-constant-wars-and-peoples-problems-are-ignored-why-heroes-like-julian-assange-are-persecuted-and-r/

HomoSapiensWannaBe , September 13, 2018 at 8:23 am

John Chuckman,

Wow. Thanks! I have just begun reading your commentaries this week and I am impressed with how clearly you analyze and summarize key points about many topics.

Thank you so much for writing what are often the equivalent of books, but condensed into easy to read and digest summaries.

I have ordered your book and look forward to reading that.

Cheers from Southeast USA!

[Sep 15, 2018] BBC is skanky state propaganda

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The myth of BBC being some standard for news reporting died with the advent of the availability of international and independent news in Western countries ..."
"... Ironic when the BBC has been ceaselessly pushing fake news for at least 15 years, with disastrous results. (Iraq; Libya; what caused the deficit and who should be forced to pay it down; Russia/Syria false flags; Corbyn A/S.) ..."
"... I find it impossible to watch BBC News, primarily because most of the editorial staff and senior correspondents seem to be working for MI5/6 and are more interested in disseminating Geo-political propaganda than upholding their journalistic responsibilities as defined in the BBC charter. ..."
"... The book is obviously part of a propaganda campaign. It seems hugely fortuitous that Mark Urban should have had "hours" of interviews with Skripal before the poisoning incident. ..."
"... Isn't it much more likely that the Urban "interviews" would have happened after the event? But Urban can't say that because that would lead to demands from other journalists or news bodies to have access to Skripal. ..."
"... I'm open to alternative hypotheses but right now I think the most likely explanation for Urban's pre-poisoning contact with Sergei Skripal is that, at the time, it was assumed the Orbis dossier would be a key component of the successful takedown of Trump and Urban was putting together a mutually flattering account by interviewing the main players. ..."
"... With regard to your tongue-in-cheek point. Urban could have interviewed Skripal anytime after Trump was gone, unless he believed Skripal might be unavailable (for some reason). The fact he interviewed Skripal before does indicate foresight. If Urban really did interview Skripal before the event then he would be wiser to pull the book and burn every copy in existence (as well as all his notes). ..."
"... Urban pretends to research a book exposing Russia and part of his research is to interview Skripal. His objective is to find dirt on Putin in order to swing the war in Syria in favour of USUKIS bombing Assad to smithereens, bayonets bums etc. ..."
"... Interestingly Mark Urbans' book on Sergei Skripal was available to purchase on Amazon in July. I added it to my Amazon wishlist on 28/7/18. I've just looked at my wishlist and was rather surprised to find it is no longer available. It has been pulled. ..."
"... Can't help thinking that the answer to all this lies in Estonia. Sergei went to Estonia in June 2016, Pablo was in Estonia, the Estonians passed on sigint about Trump-Russian collusion in the summer of 2016. A Guardian article of 13 April 2017 said: ..."
"... No doubt in my mind that the Skripal affair is a planned operation carried out by US/UK intelligence. What has actually taken place is still to be determined, but the propaganda operation itself is clear. ..."
"... I know about Ireland, and I agree, it was NOT a nerve agent. That said, I don't believe anyone was 'attacked', including the Skripals. ..."
"... All foreign correspondents of major newspapers too work with MI6. Nobody who is close to them has any kind of doubt about this. ..."
"... I despise everyone who says that free markets are the solution for the problems of the third world. What they mean is mass starvation and an enormous population cull. There are international "foundations" that pay academics and politicians large amounts of money to spout this obscene line. One of them is called the John Templeton Foundation. They have had their fangs in to British universities for a long time. ..."
"... When the Tories talk about 'free markets', they are talking about markets free from democracy. ..."
Aug 30, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

Dave , August 28, 2018 at 17:41

BBC is skanky state propaganda. The myth of BBC being some standard for news reporting died with the advent of the availability of international and independent news in Western countries. The main thing that BBC used to have which propped up the illusion of it being a respectable news source is that there was no competition or alternative to compare its narratives against. Since that time is over, so is BBC's masquerading as an impartial or accurate news source.

Xavi , August 28, 2018 at 18:40

Agree, Dave. That's what's informing the push to rubbish dissenting sites as fake news and eventually have them removed.

Ironic when the BBC has been ceaselessly pushing fake news for at least 15 years, with disastrous results. (Iraq; Libya; what caused the deficit and who should be forced to pay it down; Russia/Syria false flags; Corbyn A/S.)

Ken Kenn , August 28, 2018 at 21:49

Well I was convinced of fake BBC news during 9/11 and not for the reasons of building 7 coming down too early but the fact that the female journalist was facing a camera standing in front of a glass window and there was no reflection of her or the camera person from the glass. Not even a faint shadow.

That's when I knew the BBC were employing vampires and have been ever since.

Green Screen technology I discovered later. All the On the spot reporters are at it apparently. Or repeating Reuters or PA.

Deb O'Nair , August 28, 2018 at 00:52

I find it impossible to watch BBC News, primarily because most of the editorial staff and senior correspondents seem to be working for MI5/6 and are more interested in disseminating Geo-political propaganda than upholding their journalistic responsibilities as defined in the BBC charter. People should not only boycott the BBC but refuse to pay the license fee on the grounds that it's a compulsory political subscription.

frankywiggles , August 28, 2018 at 09:48

Careful, Craig

BBC world affairs editor 'fed up' with complaints directed at the corporation's news output

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/aug/28/bbc-news-is-not-biased-in-brexit-reporting-says-john-simpson

D_Majestic , August 28, 2018 at 14:35

Of course BBC News is not biased. Most of the time it is not even factual.

Brendan , August 28, 2018 at 10:34

Dear Mark,
In a BBC article on 4 July 2018, you wrote: "I have not felt ready until now to acknowledge explicitly that we had met, but do now that the book is nearing completion."

Could you please explain that comment? I do not see why your acknowledgement of your meetings with Sergei Skripal should be delayed until your book is nearing completion.

If you felt that it was right to reveal those meetings in July, then why was it not right to do so in March, soon after the poisoning occurred? What difference would it have made if you had done so four months earlier?

I cannot think of any negative consequences of an earlier acknowledgement of the meetings. In fact, disclosures of any possible conflict of interest are generally considered to be desirable in journalism, regardless of whether the conflict of interest is real.

ADHD , August 28, 2018 at 11:00

The book is obviously part of a propaganda campaign. It seems hugely fortuitous that Mark Urban should have had "hours" of interviews with Skripal before the poisoning incident.

Isn't it much more likely that the Urban "interviews" would have happened after the event? But Urban can't say that because that would lead to demands from other journalists or news bodies to have access to Skripal.

And that can't happen because either Skripal would be asked about what happened on the day of the poisoning, or can't be guaranteed to stick to the script, or is no longer alive. And that leads to a suspicion that whatever Skripal is supposed to have said in his interviews with Urban has really just been made up by the British security services.

Kay , August 28, 2018 at 14:42

I'm open to alternative hypotheses but right now I think the most likely explanation for Urban's pre-poisoning contact with Sergei Skripal is that, at the time, it was assumed the Orbis dossier would be a key component of the successful takedown of Trump and Urban was putting together a mutually flattering account by interviewing the main players.

Tongue in cheek, it'd be worth asking Urban if his decision to cover the Skripal poisoning in his new book was made before or after the Skripals were actually poisoned.

ADHD , August 28, 2018 at 15:59

The consensus seems to be that it was an anti-Russia book, but that doesn't conflict with what you say (there is overlap, your view is just more specific). But, I just find it hard to believe that Urban and the conspirators would waste their time "counting their chickens ". Not least because such a book would form a handy list of traitors (together with confessions) if Trump were to prevail and it fell into the right hands. This is "101 – How to Organise a Revolution" (secrecy / don't put anything in writing); surely British security services know that?

With regard to your tongue-in-cheek point. Urban could have interviewed Skripal anytime after Trump was gone, unless he believed Skripal might be unavailable (for some reason). The fact he interviewed Skripal before does indicate foresight. If Urban really did interview Skripal before the event then he would be wiser to pull the book and burn every copy in existence (as well as all his notes).

Regardless, it looks like the master of the universe are losing their ability to create reality.

Brendan , August 28, 2018 at 10:37

Last month, Mark Urban was promoting the reports that the Russian assassins had been identified from CCTV footage:

"There are now subjects of interest in the police Salisbury investigation. ( ) analytic and cyber techniques are now being exploited against the Salisbury suspects by people with a wealth of experience in complex investigations."
https://twitter.com/MarkUrban01/status/1020366761848385536

That story originated with a report by PA, which Security Minister Ben Wallace called "ill informed and wild speculation". https://mobile.twitter.com/BWallaceMP/status/1019906962786484225

Or as Craig Murray put it, "Unnamed source close to unnamed British police officers tells unnamed Press Association journalist Britain knows the unnamed Russian agents ".
https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/1019854966327005184

Even Urban's colleagues had to admit that "The BBC has not been able to independently confirm the story."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-44883803

Still, that didn't stop Mark Urban from reporting the story almost as fact.

Tom , August 28, 2018 at 10:38

The BBC relies on it's interpretation of the Act because it is held for the purposes of 'journalism, art or literature.' but this relies on a usually unrelated precedent and the opinions of a number of Judges which contradict this view. I'm in the process of challenging this with ICO but don't expect anything will change until another supreme court ruling:

https://medium.com/@tomcoady/bbc-foi-exemption-for-the-purposes-of-art-journalism-or-literature-c39e4fa3e36

Ian Fantom , August 28, 2018 at 10:41

I've put in a Freedom of Information request regarding meetings with Skripal other than any that were for the purpose of BBC news journalism. (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/mark_urbans_non_journalistic_mee )

Made By Dom , August 28, 2018 at 11:04

Can I play Devil's Advocate ?

I can see the value in asking writers, journalists and artists to pose exactly the same questions as Eccles' original letter but I'm not convinced about Craig's email.

A quick google shows me that a man named Mark Urban has written a book on the Skripals. Isn't it likely that Urban was keeping the interviews to himself in order to keep his book alive?

It wouldn't surprise me if Urban cares far more about his writing career than his job at the BBC. I'm sure most journalists would rather be authors. He's written a number of books on war and military intelligence. If his sources have nothing to do with the BBC then why should he answer to an on line mob?

craig Post author , August 28, 2018 at 11:18

" Isn't it likely that Urban was keeping the interviews to himself in order to keep his book alive?"
No, entirely unlikely. a chance to plug his forthcoming book and his Skripal contacts to a massive worldwide televion audience was eschewed.
The book is now about the Skripal attack. Presumably that was not the original subject he was researching, as it hadn't happened yet. The book will just be a rehash of the "noble defector – Putin revenge" line and none of the questions I asked about the genesis of his involvement will be answered in it.

SA , August 28, 2018 at 11:29

"Presumably that was not the original subject he was researching, as it hadn't happened yet." Or it was prescience ie that it was part of the planning for the incident?

Chris Hemmings , August 28, 2018 at 14:41

@BBC, Summer 2017, in an executive office:
"Hey Mark, why don't you go down to have a chat with this guy in Salisbury. I have a hunch that a story might be going to happen involving him, you know, as an ex-Soviet spy. Spend time with him, get to know him, be able to write in depth about him. Say it's for a book ."

giyane , August 28, 2018 at 11:46

Urban is never one-sided in his BBC reports on the Middle East. I would rather have him as Foreign Secretary than a bumbling idiot like Hubris Johnson or a Tory racketeer Hunt, because however clunky the formula of BBC balance Urban is at least pretending to be governed by normal rules. After Thatcher went anyone with half a brain left the Conservative party, leaving dolts like Johnson and nasties like May and Cameron to pick up the pieces after Blair and Brown.

There's money to be made from Russian billionaires and tory shit will follow the money like flies on d**t**d.

Urban pretends to research a book exposing Russia and part of his research is to interview Skripal. His objective is to find dirt on Putin in order to swing the war in Syria in favour of USUKIS bombing Assad to smithereens, bayonets bums etc.

Tory shit Hubris Johnson finds this political research floating around the Foreign Office and decides to twist it into Russia murders Skripal by Novichok. Unfortunately Johnson is already known to be a liar and gravy-trainer Tory and nobody believes him at all. Mrs May , realising that Johnson, Fox, Rees-Mogg and Hunt are completely bonkers, does Chequers her own way.

ZigZag Wanderer , August 28, 2018 at 12:26

Interestingly Mark Urbans' book on Sergei Skripal was available to purchase on Amazon in July. I added it to my Amazon wishlist on 28/7/18. I've just looked at my wishlist and was rather surprised to find it is no longer available. It has been pulled.

From memory the books description said that Mark had interviewed Skripal 'extensively' during 2017 and also mentioned the 'new' spying war now happening between Britain and Russia.

A quick search revealed a new version of the book ( with an altered title ) will be available in early October .. details here. https://www.panmacmillan.com/authors/mark-urban/the-skripal-files

Oh dear . panic stations !

Sharp Ears , August 28, 2018 at 11:16

Salisbury poisoning: Skripals 'were under Russian surveillance'
Mark Urban Diplomatic and defence editor, Newsnight

4 July 2018

'My meetings with Sergei Skripal

I met Sergei on a few occasions last summer and found him to be a private character who did not, even under the circumstances then prevailing, wish to draw attention to himself.

He agreed to see me as a writer of history books rather than as a news journalist, since I was researching one on the post-Cold War espionage battle between Russia and the West.

Information gained in these interviews was fed into my Newsnight coverage during the early days after the poisoning. I have not felt ready until now to acknowledge explicitly that we had met, but do now that the book is nearing completion.

As a man, Sergei is proud of his achievements, both before and after joining his country's intelligence service.

He has a deadpan wit and is remarkably stoical given the reverses he's suffered in his life; from his imprisonment following conviction in 2006 on charges of spying for Britain, to the loss of his wife Liudmila to cancer in 2012, and the untimely death of his son Alexander (or Sasha) last summer.'

...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44717835

Agent Green , August 28, 2018 at 12:27

Laughable given that the whole world and virtually all heads of State were under US surveillance by the NSA – at least until Edward Snowden made all his revelations.

KEVIN GLENNIE , August 28, 2018 at 11:18

I have pasted and copied your Email regarding the above with a few slight alterations, it will be interesting to see the response I receive if any being just a concerned citizen of the U.

Niki Henry , August 28, 2018 at 11:21

Is this not a matter for the Police? (Even if you're not too sure if they'd do anything about it) These would be files that are to do with an attempted murder case. And definitely not Journalism if the story is fabricated.

Paul Baker , August 28, 2018 at 11:28

It feels as if you are moving in the right direction in linking Sergei to Steele. I'm intrigued by the very early media references to Sergei wanting to return home to see his elderly mother for perhaps the last time. He had apparently written to Putin making his request but again according to newspapers hadn't received a reply.

I would suggest Julia was bringing the answer via her own secret services contacts, her boyfriend and his mother, apparently Senior in the Russian Intelligence Agency. Perhaps a sentimental man Sergei was aware his mother couldn't travel so the plea to Putin was his best bet.

Such a request must have disturbed MI6 if Sergei had anything at all to do with the Steele dossier because inevitably if he returned to Russia he'd be debriefed by his old colleagues. But how can you rely on a mercenary double agent? If he decided he might want to stay in Russia with his family that might well have been attractive, away from the lonely existence in a Salisbury cul de sac with only spies for company. But the Steele dossier has great potential to turn sour on the British.

It's author was a Senior spy and Head of the Russian Desk for some years. It is – perhaps you'd agree? – inconceivable that he didn't require permission to prepare it, especially as much of it was based on his experience as a spy in Russia. Yet it's equally inconceivable that the Agency bosses didn't know the identity of the commissioners or the use to which it would be put in the US election – to boost Clinton's bid. If she'd won everything would have been fine but as it is any discussion of foreign interference in that election would have to include MI6 leading the list (they probably didn't tell any politician?) To have Sergei supporting and highlighting that embarrassment would be problematic for US-UK relations. Of course Sergei may have had other nuggets to expose as well as Steele.

Soon after Julia's arrival the pair fell ill. They both survived but are now locked away, presumably for life and never able to explain their side of the story.

It was a bodged job with a poor cover story from the start and could only be carried because of D Notices and media complicity. Is his mother still alive? Would he still like to see her before she dies? Would Russia allow it? Would MI6 allow it? I think that's 3 yeses and a resounding No.

Sharp Ears , August 28, 2018 at 11:39

Following the deaths of 55 Palestinians on the Gaza 'border' and the wounding of thousands, in this video, Urban asks the questions but the Israeli government spokesman, David Keyes, is allowed to spout all the usual propaganda against Hamas.

Gaza deaths: Who's to blame? – BBC Newsnight
Published on 15 May 2018
Subscribe 256K
Fresh protests against Israel are expected in the Palestinian territories, a day after Israeli troops killed 58 people in the Gaza Strip.
David Keyes is the spokesman for the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Mark Urban asked him whether it was appropriate for the US to open their embassy on the 70th anniversary of Israel's creation, a day that is hugely controversial for the Palestinian people.

Newsnight is the BBC's flagship news and current affairs TV programme – with analysis, debate, exclusives, and robust interviews.
Website: https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsnight
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1dec5XO53k

Mr Keyes' pronounced American accent was heard. The Occupation was not mentioned. A Palestinian voice was not heard.

This is another of his videos. On the same subject and on the opening of the Israeli Embassy in Jerusalem. This time, Jonathan Conricus spoke for the IDF.

Israel says. Same old. Same old. BBC. ZBC.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WdqoPKKkD8

Charles Bostock , August 28, 2018 at 15:58

"Urban asks the questions but the Israeli government spokesman, David Keyes, is allowed to spout all the usual propaganda against Hamas."

Yes indeed : Urban asked the questions and allowed the interviewee to answer. Perhaps you would have preferred him to interrupt the interviewee continually 'a la Today programme, or to have shouted at him similarly to the way I understand some people shout at customers inside or outside supermarkets?

Peter , August 28, 2018 at 11:39

This may or may not be relevant regarding Russia, chemical weapons and BBC/MSM bovine effluent:

"US Poised to Hit Syria Harder: The Russian Defense Ministry issued a statement on Aug. 25 stating that the Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham militants had brought eight containers of chlorine to Idlib in order to stage a false-flag attack with the help of UK intelligence agencies. A group of Tahrir al-Sham fighters trained to handle chemical warfare agents by the UK private military company Olive arrived in the suburbs of the city of Jisr ash-Shugur, Idlib, 20 km. from the Turkish border."

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/08/27/us-poised-to-hit-syria-harder.html

Jeremn , August 28, 2018 at 11:42

Can't help thinking that the answer to all this lies in Estonia. Sergei went to Estonia in June 2016, Pablo was in Estonia, the Estonians passed on sigint about Trump-Russian collusion in the summer of 2016. A Guardian article of 13 April 2017 said:

"Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump's inner circle and Russians, sources said. The European countries that passed on electronic intelligence – known as sigint – included Germany, Estonia and Poland."

Perhaps not the Dossier, as such, but some material on collusion?

Paul Greenwood , August 28, 2018 at 12:00

John Paul Jones also fought for the Russians and was a Rear-Admiral. He was buried in Paris 1792 and disinterred 1905 and relocated to USA

wonky , August 29, 2018 at 10:29

..then he met Jimmy Page in the 1960s and the rest is history..

Agent Green , August 28, 2018 at 12:11

No doubt in my mind that the Skripal affair is a planned operation carried out by US/UK intelligence. What has actually taken place is still to be determined, but the propaganda operation itself is clear.

Paul Carrom , August 28, 2018 at 12:12

Definitely done by the UK.

Doodlebug , August 28, 2018 at 14:53

What did the UK have against Dawn and Charlie? (Please don't say you subscribe to all that bottle-finding bullshit).

mark golding , August 28, 2018 at 17:40

Catch my last post Doodlebug, sadly MI6 diabolical elements can be traced back to Ireland in the 70's early 80's assassinations theRealTerror (theRealElvis) understands.

Doodlebug , August 28, 2018 at 18:06

I know about Ireland, and I agree, it was NOT a nerve agent. That said, I don't believe anyone was 'attacked', including the Skripals.

Jo , August 29, 2018 at 11:59

Being used as practice and to establish more "evidence"

N_ , August 28, 2018 at 12:24

Often it's been open. There was the BBC monitoring station at Caversham Park. The BBC's Foreign Broadcast Information Service split the world into two parts with the CIA.

All foreign correspondents of major newspapers too work with MI6. Nobody who is close to them has any kind of doubt about this.

N_ , August 28, 2018 at 12:20

Theresa May says a no deal Brexit "wouldn't be the end of the world".

  1. This is not a negotiating strategy. This is not a pantomime where one giant on the stage can wink to his supporters (using the British media) without his opponent (EU27) noticing.
  2. The subconscious doesn't work well with negation. Whatever you do, please DON'T imagine an elephant at this time.
  3. I would love to know what the preparations are at Trinity College, Cambridge, for food shortages. They own the port of Felixstowe, which handles more than 40% of Britain's containerised trade. They also own a 50% stake in a portfolio of Tesco stores. Soon food distribution will be what everyone is talking about. I am never going to stop making the point that the god of the Tory party is Thomas Malthus.
N_ , August 28, 2018 at 12:38

Oh dear.. Theresa May in Africa:

" As a Prime Minister who believes both in free markets and in nations and businesses acting in line with well-established rules and principles of conduct, I want to demonstrate to young Africans that their brightest future lies in a free and thriving private sector. "

I despise everyone who says that free markets are the solution for the problems of the third world. What they mean is mass starvation and an enormous population cull. There are international "foundations" that pay academics and politicians large amounts of money to spout this obscene line. One of them is called the John Templeton Foundation. They have had their fangs in to British universities for a long time.

They are keen on Prince Philip, the guy who said he wanted to come back as a virus so he could kill a large part of the population. Never trust anyone who has received a Templeton scholarship or prize or who has anything to do with these people or with the message that free markets and the private sector are the key to "development"

Nuno Strybes , August 28, 2018 at 12:43

When the Tories talk about 'free markets', they are talking about markets free from democracy.

May's rhetoric is laughable .basically all her speeches read : 'the sky is green, the snow is black etc etc' -- totally detached from reality and a spent political force, as their recent membership numbers showed, with more revenues from legacies left in wills than from actual living members.

Ros Thorpe , August 28, 2018 at 12:30

I agree with the Skripal relatives that Sergei is dead. He hasn't been seen or heard of and would have called his mother. Mind boggling deception at all levels and I struggle to believe any of it.

N_ , August 28, 2018 at 12:47

Sergei Skripal could be in US custody, either in the US itself or in a US facility somewhere.

If he is dead, then the rehospitalisation of Charlie Rowley may be to assist with the narrative. "Once you've had a drop of Novvy Chockk, you may recover but you can fall down ill at any time, and here's an Expert with a serious voice to confirm it."

Nuno Strybes , August 28, 2018 at 12:38

I follow this blog closely, particularly in relation to the Skripal case, but this is my first comment. I just watched Sky News piece on 'super recognisers' and couldn't help but wonder why, in an age of powerful facial recognition technology, the police and security services seem to have drawn such a blank. The surveillance state in the UK is known to be one of the most advanced in the world but when it comes to this highly important geopolitical crisis our technological infrastructure seems to be redundant to the point where 'human eyes' are deemed to be more accurate than the most powerful supercomputers available. Psychologically, all humans have an inherent facial recognition ability from a very young age, but the idea that some police officers have this ability developed to such an extent that they supercede computer recognition is, i feel, laughable. To me this announcement through the ever subservient Sky News reeks of desperation on the part of the ;official story'. Are we about to be shown suspects who, although facial recognition technology fails to identify them, a 'super recogniser' can testify that it actually is person A or person B and we are all supposed to accept that? Seems either a damning indictment of the judicial process, or a damning indictment of the ŁŁŁŁŁ's of taxpayers money that is spent on places like GCHQ etc whose technology is now apparently no better than a highly perceptive human brain. Give me a break !

Trowbridge H. Ford , August 28, 2018 at 13:08

Why no interest in how the Coopers died in Egypt? We will soon be told by HMG that the Russians somehow dd it too., thanks to Urban's research?

giyane , August 28, 2018 at 13:49

People do die Trowbridge. I know you haven't, but you have the motivation of outliving your persecutors. With Muckin about with Isis gone and covert operations isn't social work Kissinger looking as though he's on daily blood transfusions, you have rejected Trump for some reason. But Trump has undone much of John McCain's worst mischief in one year. If McCain was an example of a politician, we don't need politicians.

Trowbridge H. Ford , August 28, 2018 at 14:16

Give me an example, other than the Coopers. of a healthy couple one day that is found dying the next day like the Skripals.

And while i tried on another site to be generous about McCain. he got Navy Secretary John Lehman, Jr. to scare the Soviets for prevailing in the Vietnam War so much about what NATO was up to in the fallout from shooting Swedish PM Olof Palme that Moscow gave up the competition for fear that it would blow up the world, helping bring on the crappy one we have.

McCain was a continuing Cold Warrior who we don't need since we still have Trump who is just trying to do it another way.

Trowbridge H. Ford , August 28, 2018 at 15:03

Oh, I forget that couple in Amesbury. Looks like the Porton Down Plague is spread overseas.

Posting on this site in like playing bridge online – the cards are stacked against you.

Doodlebug , August 28, 2018 at 15:26

"Give me an example, other than the Coopers. of a healthy couple one day that is found dying the next day like the Skripals."

Will a 17 year old and his step-father do?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6918378/brit-lad-17-in-a-coma-on-family-holiday-in-spain-may-have-been-poisoned-by-cockroach-pesticide/

They both survived, but one or other (quite possibly both) would have died without medical intervention.

[Sep 15, 2018] Why the US Seeks to Hem in Russia, China and Iran by Patrick Lawrence

Highly recommended!
The root of the current aggressive policy is the desire to preserve global neoliberal empire the US role as the metropolia with the rest of the world as vassals.
Notable quotes:
"... The crisis of U.S. foreign policy -- a series of radical missteps -- are systemic. Having little to do with personalities, they pass from one administration to the next with little variance other than at the margins. ..."
"... It began with that hubristic triumphalism so evident in the decade after the Cold War's end ..."
"... There was also the "Washington consensus." The world was in agreement that free-market capitalism and unfettered financial markets would see the entire planet to prosperity. ..."
"... The neoliberal economic crusade accompanied by neoconservative politics had its intellectual ballast, and off went its true-believing warriors around the world. ..."
"... Failures ensued. Iraq post–2003 is among the more obvious. Nobody ever planted democracy or built free markets in Baghdad. Then came the "color revolutions," which resulted in the destabilization of large swathes of the former Soviet Union's borderlands. The 2008 financial crash followed. I was in Hong Kong at the time and recall thinking, "This is not just Lehman Brothers. An economic model is headed into Chapter 11." One would have thought a fundamental rethink in Washington might have followed these events. There has never been one. ..."
"... Midway through the first Obama administration, a crucial turn began. What had been an assertion of financial and economic power, albeit coercive in many instances, particularly with the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, took on further strategic and military dimensions. ..."
"... The NATO bombing campaign in Libya, ostensibly a humanitarian mission, became a regime-change operation -- despite Washington's promises otherwise. Obama's "pivot to Asia" turned out to be a neo-containment policy toward China. The "reset" with Russia, declared after Obama appointed Hillary Clinton secretary of state, flopped and turned into the virulent animosity we now live with daily ..."
"... The U.S.-cultivated coup in Kiev in 2014 was a major declaration of drastic turn in policy towards Moscow. So was the decision, taken in 2012 at the latest , to back the radical jihadists who were turning civil unrest in Syria into a campaign to topple the Assad government in favor of another Islamist regime. ..."
"... In 2015, the last of the three years I just noted, Russia intervened militarily and diplomatically in the Syria conflict, in part to protect its southwest from Islamist extremism and in part to pull the Middle East back from the near-anarchy then threatening it as well as Russia and the West. ..."
"... Meanwhile, Washington had cast China as an adversary and committed itself -- as it apparently remains -- to regime change in Syria. Three months prior to the treaty that established the EAEU, the Americans helped turn another case of civil unrest into a regime change -- this time backing not jihadists in Syria but the crypto-Nazi militias in Ukraine on which the government now in power still depends. ..."
"... If there is a president to blame -- and again, I see little point in this line of argument -- it would have to be Barack Obama. To a certain extent, Obama was a creature of those around him, as he acknowledged in his interview with Jeffrey Goldberg in The Atlantic ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... The Washington Post ..."
"... Think of Russia, China, and Iran, the three nations now designated America's principal adversaries. Each one is fated to become (if it is not already) a world or regional power and a key to stability -- Russia and China on a global scale, Iran in the Middle East. But each stands resolutely -- and this is not to say with hostile intent -- outside the Western-led order. They have different histories, traditions, cultures, and political cultures. And they are determined to preserve them. ..."
"... If you valued this original article, please consider making a donation to Consortium News so we can bring you more stories like this one. ..."
"... You don't mention corruption and profiteering, which go hand-in-hand with American Exceptionalism and the National Security State (NSS) formed in 1947. The leader of the world which is also an NSS requires enemies, so the National Security Strategy designates enemies, a few of them in an Axis of Evil. Arming to fight them and dreaming up other reasons to go to war, including a war on terror of all things, bring the desired vast expenditures, trillions of dollars, which translate to vast profits to those involved. ..."
"... How many Americans were against the assault by the Coalition of the Willing upon Iraq? Very few. ..."
"... Even in the lead up the war when the public was force fed a diet comprised entirely of State Dept. lies about WMDs by a sycophantic media, there was still a significant 25-40 percent of the public who opposed the war. ..."
"... "Conformism and its consequences, probably derived in part from Puritanism and further cemented by the alternating racisms of anti-indigenous and anti black attitudes- the history of the lynch mob and various wars against the poor which ended up in the anti-communist frenzies of the day before yesterday constitute the backbone of American history- is the disease which afflicts Washington." ..."
"... I have often wondered why the US was unable to accept the position of first among equals. Why does it have to rule the World? I know it believes that its economic and political systems are the best on the planet, but surely all other nations should be able to decide for themselves, what systems they will accept and live under? Who gave the US the right to make those decisions for everyone else? The US was more than willing to kill 20 million people either directly or indirectly since the end of WWII to make its will sovereign in all nations of the World! ..."
"... That is why I invariably raise JFK's Assassination as a logical starting point. If a truly independent commission would fix the blame, we could move on from there. Sam F., on this forum, has mentioned a formal legal undertaking many times on this site, but now is the time to begin the discussion for a formal Truth And Reconciliation Commission in America Let's figure out how to begin. ..."
"... A very good article. Spoiler and bully describe US foreign policy, and foreign policy is in the driver's seat while domestic policy takes the pickings, hardly anything left for the hollowed-out society where people live paycheck to paycheck, homelessness and other assorted ills of a failing society continue to rise while oligarchs and the MIC rule the neofeudal/futile system. ..."
"... When are we going to make that connection of the wasteful expenditure on military adventurism and the problem of poverty in the US? ..."
"... To substantiate this "crucial turn," Lawrence makes the unwarranted assumption that the goal post Soviet Union was simply worldwide free-market capitalism, not global domination: "Failures ensued. Iraq post–2003 is among the more obvious. Nobody ever planted democracy or built free markets in Baghdad"; and the later statement that the US wanted the countries it invaded to be "Just like us." ..."
"... Though he doesn't mention (ignores) US meddling in Russia after the collapse of the USSR, I presume from its absence that he attributes that, too, to the expansion of capital. Indeed, it was that, but with the more malevolent goal of control. "Just like us" is the usual "progressive" explanation for failures. "Controlled by us" was more like it, if we face the history of the country squarely. ..."
"... Is it really so wise to be speaking in terms of nationhood after we've undergone 50 years of Kochian/libertarian dismantlement of the nation-state in favor of bank and transnational governance? Remember the words of Zbigniew Brzezinski: ..."
"... "The "nation-state" as a fundamental unit of man's organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state." ~ Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages, 1970 ..."
"... Globalists themselves are drawn together by an ideology. They have no common nation, they have no common political orientation, they have no common cultural background or religion, they herald from the East just as they herald from the West. They have no true loyalty to any mainstream cause or social movement. ..."
"... What do they have in common? They seem to exhibit many of the traits of high level narcissistic sociopaths, who make up a very small percentage of the human population. These people are predators, or to be more specific, they are parasites. They see themselves as naturally superior to others, but they often work together if there is the promise of mutual benefit." ..."
"... Yet there is a thread that leads through US foreign policy. It all started with NSC 68. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSC_68 . Already in the 1950's, leading bankers were afraid of economic depression which would follow from a "peace dividend" following the end of WWII. ..."
"... To avoid this, and to avoid "socialism", the only acceptable government spending was on defense. This mentality never ended. Today 50% of discretionary govenmenrt spending is on the military. http://www.unz.com/article/americas-militarized-economy/ . ..."
"... The "why" behind the US foreign policies was spoken with absolute honest clarity in the "Statement of A. Wess Mitchell Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs" to the Senate on August 21 this year. The transcript is at : https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/082118_Mitchell_Testimony.pdf ..."
"... Quote the esteemed gentleman (inter alia): "It continues to be among the foremost national security interests of the United States to prevent the domination of the Eurasian landmass by hostile powers. The central aim of the administration's foreign policy is to prepare our nation to confront this challenge by systematically strengthening the military, economic and political fundamentals of American power. " ..."
"... Patrick Lawrence's essay makes perfect sense only when it is applied to US foreign policy since the end of WW2. It is conventional wisdom that the US is now engaged in Cold War 2.0. In fact, Cold War 2.0 is an extension of Cold War 1.0. There was merely a 20 year interregnum between 1990 and 2010. ..."
"... Most analysts think that Cold War 1.0 was an ideological war between "Communism" and "Democracy". The renewal of the Cold War against both Russia and China however shows that the ideological war between East and West was really a cover for the geopolitical war between the two. ..."
"... Russia, China and Iran are the main geopolitical enemies of the US as they stand in the way of the global, imperialist hegemony of the US. In order to control the global periphery, i.e. the developing world and their emerging economies, the US must contain and defeat the big three. This was as true in 1948 as it is in 2018. Thus, what's happening today under Trump is no different than what occurred under Truman in 1948. Whatever differences exist are mere window dressing. ..."
"... There is no Cold War 2.0. It's a fallacy to create a false flag for regime change in Russia. Ms. Clinton, the Kagan family, the MIC, etc., figure if we can take out Yanukovich and replace him with Fascists/Nazis, what could stop us from doing the same to Russia. The good news: all empires fail. ..."
"... Mr. Lawrence is much too accommodating with his analysis. Imagine, linking US "foreign policy" in the same thought as "global stability", as if the two were somehow related. On the contrary, "global instability" seems to be our foreign policy goal, especially for those regions that pose a threat to US hegemony. Why? Because it is difficult to extract a region's wealth when its population is united behind a stable government that can't be bought off. ..."
"... I agree, Gerald. Enforcing the petro-dollar system seems to be the mainspring for much of our recent foreign policy militarism. If it were to unravel, the dollar's value would tank, and then how could we afford our vast system of military bases. Death Star's aren't cheap, ya know. ..."
"... +1 Gerald Wadsworth. It's not necessarily "Oil pure and simple" but "Currency Pure and Simple." If the US dollar is no longer the world's currency, the US is toast. ..."
"... And note (2) that Wall Street is mostly an extension of The City; the UK still thinks it owns the entire world, and the UK has been owned by the banks ever since it went off tally sticks ..."
"... Putin said years ago, and I cannot quote him, but remember most of it, that it doesn't matter who is the candidate for President, or what his campaign promises are, or how sincere he is in making them, whenever they get in office, it is always the same policy. ..."
"... Anastasia, I saved it: From Putin interview with Le Figaro: "I have already spoken to three US Presidents. They come and go, but politics stay the same at all times. Do you know why? Because of the powerful bureaucracy. When a person is elected, they may have some ideas. Then people with briefcases arrive, well dressed, wearing dark suits, just like mine, except for the red tie, since they wear black or dark blue ones. These people start explaining how things are done. And instantly, everything changes. This is what happens with every administration." ..."
"... Pres. Putin explained this several times when he was asked about preferring Trump to Hillary Clinton, and he carefully said that he would accept whoever the US population chose, he was used to dealing with Hillary and he knew that very little changed between Administrations. This has been conveniently cast aside by the Dems, and Obama's disgraceful expulsion of Russian diplomats started the avalanche of Russiagate. ..."
"... Many of the people involved in JFK's murder are now dead themselves, yet the "system" that demands confrontation rather than cooperation continues. These "personalities" are shills for that system, and if they are not so willingly, they are either bribed or blackmailed into compliance. ..."
"... Remember when "Dubya" ran on a "kinder and gentler nation" foreign policy? Obama's "hope and change" that became "more of the same"? And now Trump's views on both domestic and foreign policy seemingly also doing a 180? There are "personalities" behind this "system", and they are embedded in places like the Council on Foreign Relations. The people that run our banking system and the global corporate empire demand the whole pie, they would rather blow up the world than have to share. ..."
"... Bob and Joe, here's a solid review of Woodward's book Fear that points out his consistent service to the oligarchy, including giving Trump a pass for killing the Iran deal. Interesting background on Woodward in the comments as well. https://mondoweiss.net/2018/09/woodward-national-security/ ..."
"... "America's three principal adversaries signify the shape of the world to come: a post-Western world of coexistence. But neoliberal and neocon ideology is unable to to accept global pluralism and multipolarity, argues Patrick Lawrence." ..."
Sep 15, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

... ... ..

The bitter reality is that U.S. foreign policy has no definable objective other than blocking the initiatives of others because they stand in the way of the further expansion of U.S. global interests. This impoverished strategy reflects Washington's refusal to accept the passing of its relatively brief post–Cold War moment of unipolar power.

There is an error all too common in American public opinion. Personalizing Washington's regression into the role of spoiler by assigning all blame to one man, now Donald Trump, deprives one of deeper understanding. This mistake was made during the steady attack on civil liberties after the Sept. 11 tragedies and then during the 2003 invasion of Iraq: namely that it was all George W. Bush's fault. It was not so simple then and is not now.

The crisis of U.S. foreign policy -- a series of radical missteps -- are systemic. Having little to do with personalities, they pass from one administration to the next with little variance other than at the margins.

Let us bring some history to this question of America as spoiler. What is the origin of this undignified and isolating approach to global affairs?

The neoliberal economic crusade accompanied by neoconservative politics had its intellectual ballast, and off went its true-believing warriors around the world.

Failures ensued. Iraq post–2003 is among the more obvious. Nobody ever planted democracy or built free markets in Baghdad. Then came the "color revolutions," which resulted in the destabilization of large swathes of the former Soviet Union's borderlands. The 2008 financial crash followed. I was in Hong Kong at the time and recall thinking, "This is not just Lehman Brothers. An economic model is headed into Chapter 11." One would have thought a fundamental rethink in Washington might have followed these events. There has never been one.

The orthodoxy today remains what it was when it formed in the 1990s: The neoliberal crusade must proceed. Our market-driven, "rules-based" order is still advanced as the only way out of our planet's impasses.

A Strategic and Military Turn

Midway through the first Obama administration, a crucial turn began. What had been an assertion of financial and economic power, albeit coercive in many instances, particularly with the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, took on further strategic and military dimensions.

The NATO bombing campaign in Libya, ostensibly a humanitarian mission, became a regime-change operation -- despite Washington's promises otherwise. Obama's "pivot to Asia" turned out to be a neo-containment policy toward China. The "reset" with Russia, declared after Obama appointed Hillary Clinton secretary of state, flopped and turned into the virulent animosity we now live with daily.

The U.S.-cultivated coup in Kiev in 2014 was a major declaration of drastic turn in policy towards Moscow. So was the decision, taken in 2012 at the latest , to back the radical jihadists who were turning civil unrest in Syria into a campaign to topple the Assad government in favor of another Islamist regime.

Spoilage as a poor excuse for a foreign policy had made its first appearances.

I count 2013 to 2015 as key years. At the start of this period, China began developing what it now calls its Belt and Road Initiative -- its hugely ambitious plan to stitch together the Eurasian landmass, Shanghai to Lisbon. Moscow favored this undertaking, not least because of the key role Russia had to play and because it fit well with President Vladimir Putin's Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), launched in 2014.

In 2015, the last of the three years I just noted, Russia intervened militarily and diplomatically in the Syria conflict, in part to protect its southwest from Islamist extremism and in part to pull the Middle East back from the near-anarchy then threatening it as well as Russia and the West.

Meanwhile, Washington had cast China as an adversary and committed itself -- as it apparently remains -- to regime change in Syria. Three months prior to the treaty that established the EAEU, the Americans helped turn another case of civil unrest into a regime change -- this time backing not jihadists in Syria but the crypto-Nazi militias in Ukraine on which the government now in power still depends.

That is how we got the U.S.-as-spoiler foreign policy we now have.

If there is a president to blame -- and again, I see little point in this line of argument -- it would have to be Barack Obama. To a certain extent, Obama was a creature of those around him, as he acknowledged in his interview with Jeffrey Goldberg in The Atlantic toward the end of his second term. From that "Anonymous" opinion piece published in The New York Times on Sept. 5, we know Trump is too, to a greater extent than Obama may have feared in his worst moments.

The crucial question is why. Why do U.S. policy cliques find themselves bereft of imaginative thinking in the face of an evolving world order? Why has there been not a single original policy initiative since the years I single out, with the exception of the now-abandoned 2015 accord governing Iran's nuclear programs? "Right now, our job is to create quagmires until we get what we want," an administration official told The Washington Post 's David Ignatius in August.

Can you think of a blunter confession of intellectual bankruptcy? I can't.

Global 'Equals' Like Us?

There is a longstanding explanation for this paralysis. Seven decades of global hegemony, the Cold War notwithstanding, left the State Department with little to think about other than the simplicities of East-West tension. Those planning and executing American diplomacy lost all facility for imaginative thinking because there was no need of it. This holds true, in my view, but there is more to our specific moment than mere sclerosis within the policy cliques.

As I have argued numerous times elsewhere, parity between East and West is a 21st century imperative. From Woodrow Wilson to the post-World War II settlement, an equality among all nations was in theory what the U.S. considered essential to global order.

Now that this is upon us, however, Washington cannot accept it. It did not count on non-Western nations achieving a measure of prosperity and influence until they were "just like us," as the once famous phrase had it. And it has not turned out that way.

Think of Russia, China, and Iran, the three nations now designated America's principal adversaries. Each one is fated to become (if it is not already) a world or regional power and a key to stability -- Russia and China on a global scale, Iran in the Middle East. But each stands resolutely -- and this is not to say with hostile intent -- outside the Western-led order. They have different histories, traditions, cultures, and political cultures. And they are determined to preserve them.

They signify the shape of the world to come -- a post-Western world in which the Atlantic alliance must coexist with rising powers outside its orbit. Together, then, they signify precisely what the U.S. cannot countenance. And if there is one attribute of neoliberal and neoconservative ideology that stands out among all others, it is its complete inability to accept difference or deviation if it threatens its interests.

This is the logic of spoilage as a substitute for foreign policy. Among its many consequences are countless lost opportunities for global stability.

Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International Herald Tribune, is a columnist, essayist, author, and lecturer. His most recent book is Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century (Yale). Follow him @thefloutist. His web site is www.patricklawrence.us. Support his work via www.patreon.com/thefloutist .

If you valued this original article, please consider making a donation to Consortium News so we can bring you more stories like this one.

bevin , September 14, 2018 at 6:32 pm

This really is an excellent analysis. I would highlight the following point:
"There is a longstanding explanation for this paralysis. Seven decades of global hegemony, the Cold War notwithstanding, left the State Department with little to think about other than the simplicities of East-West tension. Those planning and executing American diplomacy lost all facility for imaginative thinking because there was no need of it. This holds true, in my view, but there is more to our specific moment than mere sclerosis within the policy cliques "

Conformism and its consequences, probably derived in part from Puritanism and further cemented by the alternating racisms of anti-indigenous and anti black attitudes- the history of the lynch mob and various wars against the poor which ended up in the anti-communist frenzies of the day before yesterday constitute the backbone of American history- is the disease which afflicts Washington.

Don Bacon , September 14, 2018 at 6:03 pm

You don't mention corruption and profiteering, which go hand-in-hand with American Exceptionalism and the National Security State (NSS) formed in 1947. The leader of the world which is also an NSS requires enemies, so the National Security Strategy designates enemies, a few of them in an Axis of Evil. Arming to fight them and dreaming up other reasons to go to war, including a war on terror of all things, bring the desired vast expenditures, trillions of dollars, which translate to vast profits to those involved.

This focus on war has its roots in the Christian bible and in a sense of manifest destiny that has occupied Americans since before they were Americans, and the real Americans had to be exterminated. It certainly (as stated) can't be blamed on certain individuals, it's predominate and nearly universal. How many Americans were against the assault by the Coalition of the Willing upon Iraq? Very few.

Homer Jay , September 14, 2018 at 10:09 pm

"How many Americans were against the assault by the Coalition of the Willing upon Iraq? Very few."

Are you kidding me? Here is a list of polls of the American public regarding the Iraq War 2003-2007;

https://www.politifact.com/iraq-war-polls/

Even in the lead up the war when the public was force fed a diet comprised entirely of State Dept. lies about WMDs by a sycophantic media, there was still a significant 25-40 percent of the public who opposed the war. You clearly are not American or you would remember the vocal minority which filled the streets of big cities across this country. And again the consent was as Chomsky says "manufactured." And it took only 1 year of the war for the majority of the public to be against it. By 2007 60-70% of the public opposed the war.

Judging from your name you come from a country whose government was part of that coalition of the willing. So should we assume that "very few" of your fellow country men and women were against that absolute horror show that is the Iraq war?

Don Bacon , September 14, 2018 at 11:05 pm

You failed to address my major point, and instead picked on something you're wrong on.

Iraq war poll –Pew Research: http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/old-assets/publications/770-1.gif

PS: bevin made approximately the same point later (w/o the financial factor).

"Conformism and its consequences, probably derived in part from Puritanism and further cemented by the alternating racisms of anti-indigenous and anti black attitudes- the history of the lynch mob and various wars against the poor which ended up in the anti-communist frenzies of the day before yesterday constitute the backbone of American history- is the disease which afflicts Washington."

Archie1954 , September 14, 2018 at 2:39 pm

I have often wondered why the US was unable to accept the position of first among equals. Why does it have to rule the World? I know it believes that its economic and political systems are the best on the planet, but surely all other nations should be able to decide for themselves, what systems they will accept and live under? Who gave the US the right to make those decisions for everyone else? The US was more than willing to kill 20 million people either directly or indirectly since the end of WWII to make its will sovereign in all nations of the World!

Bob Van Noy , September 14, 2018 at 9:54 pm

Archie 1954, because 911 was never adequately investigated, our government was inappropriately allowed to act in the so-called public interest in completely inappropriate ways; so that in order for the Country to set things right, those decisions which were made quietly, with little public discussion, would have to be exposed and the illegalities addressed. But, as I'm sure you know, there are myriad other big government failures also left unexamined, so where to begin?

That is why I invariably raise JFK's Assassination as a logical starting point. If a truly independent commission would fix the blame, we could move on from there. Sam F., on this forum, has mentioned a formal legal undertaking many times on this site, but now is the time to begin the discussion for a formal Truth And Reconciliation Commission in America Let's figure out how to begin.

So,"Who gave the US the right to make those decisions for everyone else?", certainly not The People

Jessika , September 14, 2018 at 1:36 pm

A very good article. Spoiler and bully describe US foreign policy, and foreign policy is in the driver's seat while domestic policy takes the pickings, hardly anything left for the hollowed-out society where people live paycheck to paycheck, homelessness and other assorted ills of a failing society continue to rise while oligarchs and the MIC rule the neofeudal/futile system.

When are we going to make that connection of the wasteful expenditure on military adventurism and the problem of poverty in the US? The Pentagon consistently calls the shots, yet we consistently hear about unaccounted expenditures by the Pentagon, losing amounts in the trillions, and never do they get audited.

nondimenticare , September 14, 2018 at 12:18 pm

I certainly agree that the policy is bereft, but not for all of the same reasons. There is the positing of a turnaround as a basis for the current spoiler role: "What had been an assertion of financial and economic power, albeit coercive in many instances, particularly with the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, took on further strategic and military dimensions."

To substantiate this "crucial turn," Lawrence makes the unwarranted assumption that the goal post Soviet Union was simply worldwide free-market capitalism, not global domination: "Failures ensued. Iraq post–2003 is among the more obvious. Nobody ever planted democracy or built free markets in Baghdad"; and the later statement that the US wanted the countries it invaded to be "Just like us."

Though he doesn't mention (ignores) US meddling in Russia after the collapse of the USSR, I presume from its absence that he attributes that, too, to the expansion of capital. Indeed, it was that, but with the more malevolent goal of control. "Just like us" is the usual "progressive" explanation for failures. "Controlled by us" was more like it, if we face the history of the country squarely.

That is the blindness of intent that has led to the spoiler role.

Unfettered Fire , September 14, 2018 at 11:15 am

Is it really so wise to be speaking in terms of nationhood after we've undergone 50 years of Kochian/libertarian dismantlement of the nation-state in favor of bank and transnational governance? Remember the words of Zbigniew Brzezinski:

"The "nation-state" as a fundamental unit of man's organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state." ~ Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages, 1970

"Make no mistake, what we are seeing in geopolitics today is indeed a magic show. The false East/West paradigm is as powerful if not more powerful than the false Left/Right paradigm. For some reason, the human mind is more comfortable believing in the ideas of division and chaos, and it often turns its nose up indignantly at the notion of "conspiracy." But conspiracies and conspirators can be demonstrated as a fact of history. Organization among elitists is predictable.

Globalists themselves are drawn together by an ideology. They have no common nation, they have no common political orientation, they have no common cultural background or religion, they herald from the East just as they herald from the West. They have no true loyalty to any mainstream cause or social movement.

What do they have in common? They seem to exhibit many of the traits of high level narcissistic sociopaths, who make up a very small percentage of the human population. These people are predators, or to be more specific, they are parasites. They see themselves as naturally superior to others, but they often work together if there is the promise of mutual benefit."

http://www.alt-market.com/articles/3504-in-the-new-qmultipolar-worldq-the-globalists-still-control-all-the-players

Unfettered Fire , September 14, 2018 at 1:43 pm

"In our society, real power does not happen to lie in the political system, it lies in the private economy: that's where the decisions are made about what's produced, how much is produced, what's consumed, where investment takes place, who has jobs, who controls the resources, and so on and so forth. And as long as that remains the case, changes inside the political system can make some difference -- I don't want to say it's zero -- but the differences are going to be very slight." ~ Noam Chomsky

Giants: The Global Power Elite – A talk by Peter Phillips: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np6td-wzDYQ

The Elite World Order in Jitters Review of Peter Phillips' book Giants: The Global Power Elite: https://dissidentvoice.org/2018/09/the-elite-world-order-in-jitters/

backwardsevolution , September 14, 2018 at 5:14 pm

Unfettered Fire – good posts. Thank you. Peter Phillips is definitely worth listening to.

Jon Dhoe , September 14, 2018 at 11:02 am

Israel, Israel, Israel. When are we going to start facing facts?

Daniel Good , September 14, 2018 at 9:59 am

Yet there is a thread that leads through US foreign policy. It all started with NSC 68. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSC_68 . Already in the 1950's, leading bankers were afraid of economic depression which would follow from a "peace dividend" following the end of WWII.

To avoid this, and to avoid "socialism", the only acceptable government spending was on defense. This mentality never ended. Today 50% of discretionary govenmenrt spending is on the military. http://www.unz.com/article/americas-militarized-economy/ .

We live in a country of military socialism, in which military citizens have all types of benefits, on condition they join the military-industrial-complex. This being so, there is no need for real "intelligence", there is no need to "understand" what goes on is foreign countries, there no need to be right about what might happen or worry about consequences. What is important is stimulate the economy by spending on arms. From Korean war, when the US dropped more bombs than it had on Nazi Germany, through Viet Nam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya etc etc the US policy was a winning one not for those who got bombed (and could not fight back) but for the weapons industry and military contractors. Is the NYTimes ever going to discuss this aspect? Or any one in the MSM?

Walter , September 14, 2018 at 9:26 am

The "why" behind the US foreign policies was spoken with absolute honest clarity in the "Statement of A. Wess Mitchell Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs" to the Senate on August 21 this year. The transcript is at : https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/082118_Mitchell_Testimony.pdf

Quote the esteemed gentleman (inter alia): "It continues to be among the foremost national security interests of the United States to prevent the domination of the Eurasian landmass by hostile powers. The central aim of the administration's foreign policy is to prepare our nation to confront this challenge by systematically strengthening the military, economic and political fundamentals of American power. "

Tellingly the "official" State Department copy is changed and omits the true spoken words

See yourself: https://www.state.gov/p/eur/rls/rm/2018/285247.htm

This is the essence of MacKinder's Thesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geographical_Pivot_of_History and was the underlying reason for both world wars in the 20th century.

An essay on this observed truth https://journal-neo.org/2018/09/11/behind-the-anglo-american-war-on-russia/

A deeper essay on the same subject https://www.silkroadstudies.org/resources/pdf/Monographs/1006Rethinking-4.pdf

I would propose that the Zionism aspect exists due to the perceived necessity of "Forward Operating Base Israel" look it a map, Comrade The ISIS?Saudi?Zionist games divides the New Silk Road and the Eurasian land mass and exists to throttle said pathways.

Interestingly the latter essay is attributed to Eldar Ismailov and Vladimir Papava

Brother Comrade Putin knows the game. The US has to maintain the fiction for the public that it does not know the game, and is consequently obliged to maintain a vast public delusion, hence "fake news" and all the rest.

OlyaPola , September 14, 2018 at 1:49 pm

"I would propose that the Zionism aspect exists due to the perceived necessity of "Forward Operating Base Israel" lookit a map, Comrade"

Some have an attraction to book-ends. Once upon a time the Eurasian book-ends were Germany and Japan, and the Western Asian book-ends Israel and Saudi Arabia. This "strategy" is based upon the notion that bookend-ness is a state of inertia which in any interactive system is impossible except apparently to those embedded in "we the people hold these truths to be self-evident".

Consequently some have an attraction to book-ends.

Dennis Etler , September 13, 2018 at 9:05 pm

Patrick Lawrence's essay makes perfect sense only when it is applied to US foreign policy since the end of WW2. It is conventional wisdom that the US is now engaged in Cold War 2.0. In fact, Cold War 2.0 is an extension of Cold War 1.0. There was merely a 20 year interregnum between 1990 and 2010.

Most analysts think that Cold War 1.0 was an ideological war between "Communism" and "Democracy". The renewal of the Cold War against both Russia and China however shows that the ideological war between East and West was really a cover for the geopolitical war between the two.

Russia, China and Iran are the main geopolitical enemies of the US as they stand in the way of the global, imperialist hegemony of the US. In order to control the global periphery, i.e. the developing world and their emerging economies, the US must contain and defeat the big three. This was as true in 1948 as it is in 2018. Thus, what's happening today under Trump is no different than what occurred under Truman in 1948. Whatever differences exist are mere window dressing.

Rob Roy , September 15, 2018 at 12:16 am

Mr. Etler,

I think you are mostly right except in the first Cold War, the Soviets and US Americans were both involved in this "war." What you call Cold War 2.0 is in the minds and policies of only the US. Russian is not in any way currently like the Soviet Union, yet the US acts in all aspects of foreign attitude and policy as though that (very unpleasant period in today's Russians' minds) still exists. It does not. You says there was "merely a 20 year interregnum" and things have picked up and continued as a Cold War. Only in the idiocy of the USA, certainly not in the minds of Russian leadership, particularly Putin's who now can be distinguished as the most logical, realistic and competent leader in the world.

Thanks to H. Clinton being unable to become president, we have a full blown Russiagate which the MSM propaganda continues to spread.

There is no Cold War 2.0. It's a fallacy to create a false flag for regime change in Russia. Ms. Clinton, the Kagan family, the MIC, etc., figure if we can take out Yanukovich and replace him with Fascists/Nazis, what could stop us from doing the same to Russia. The good news: all empires fail.

Maxwell Quest , September 13, 2018 at 1:41 pm

"This is the logic of spoilage as a substitute for foreign policy. Among its many consequences are countless lost opportunities for global stability."

Mr. Lawrence is much too accommodating with his analysis. Imagine, linking US "foreign policy" in the same thought as "global stability", as if the two were somehow related. On the contrary, "global instability" seems to be our foreign policy goal, especially for those regions that pose a threat to US hegemony. Why? Because it is difficult to extract a region's wealth when its population is united behind a stable government that can't be bought off.

Walter , September 13, 2018 at 1:30 pm

US is attempting to stop a process, to prevent Change see https://www.fort-russ.com/2017/10/v-golstein-end-of-cold-war-and/

Conjuring up Heraclitus..Time is a River, constantly changing. And we face downstream, unable to see the Future and gazing upon the Past.

The attempt has an effect, many effects, but it cannot stop Time.

The Russian and the Chinese have clinched the unification of the Earth Island, "Heartland" This ended the ability to control global commerce by means of navies – the methods of the Sea Peoples over the last 500 years are now failed. The US has no way of even seeing this fact other than force and violence to restore the status quo ante .

Thus World War, as we see

Recollecting Heraclitus again, the universe is populated by opposites as we see, China and Russia represent a cathodic opposite to the US

Jeff Harrison , September 13, 2018 at 1:29 pm

I guess I missed this one, Patrick. Great overview but let me put it in a slightly different context. You start with the end of the cold war but I don't. I could go all the way back to the early days of the country and our proclamation of manifest destiny. The US has long thought that it was the one ring to rule them all. But for most of that time the strength of individual members of the rest of the world constrained the US from running amok. That constraint began to be lifted after the ruling clique in Europe committed seppuku in WWI. It was completely lifted after WWII. But that was 75 years ago. This is now and most of the world has recovered from the world wide destruction of human and physical capital known as WWII. The US is going to have to learn how to live with constraints again but it will take a shock. The US is going to have to lose at something big time. Europe cancelling the sanctions? The sanctions on Russia don't mean squat to the US but it's costing Europe billions. This highlights the reality that the "Western Alliance" (read NATO) is not really an alliance of shared goals and objectives. It's an alliance of those terrified by fascism and what it can do. They all decided that they needed a "great father" to prevent their excesses again. One wonders if either the world or Europe would really like the US to come riding in like the cavalry to places like Germany, Poland, and Ukraine. Blindly following Washington's directions can be remarkably expensive for Europe and they get nothing but refugees they can't afford. Something will ultimately have to give.

The one thing I was surprised you didn't mention was the US's financial weakness. It's been a long time since the US was a creditor nation. We've been a debtor nation since at least the 80s. The world doesn't need debtor nations and the only reason they need us is the primacy of the US dollar. And there are numerous people hammering away at that.

Gerald Wadsworth , September 13, 2018 at 12:59 pm

Why are we trying to hem in China, Russia and Iran? Petro-dollar hegemony, pure and simple. From our initial deal with Saudi Arabia to buy and sell oil in dollars only, to the chaos we have inflicted globally to retain the dollar's rule and role in energy trading, we are finding ourselves threatened – actually the position of the dollar as the sole trading medium is what is threatened – and we are determined to retain that global power over oil at all costs. With China and Russia making deals to buy and sell oil in their own currencies, we have turned both those counties into our enemies du jour, inventing every excuse to blame them for every "bad thing" that has and will happen, globally. Throw in Syria, Iran, Venezuela, and a host of other countries who want to get out from under our thumb, to those who tried and paid the price. Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, and more. Our failed foreign policy is dictated by controlling, as Donald Rumsfeld once opined, "our oil under their sand." Oil. Pure and simple.

Maxwell Quest , September 13, 2018 at 2:18 pm

I agree, Gerald. Enforcing the petro-dollar system seems to be the mainspring for much of our recent foreign policy militarism. If it were to unravel, the dollar's value would tank, and then how could we afford our vast system of military bases. Death Star's aren't cheap, ya know.

Maxwell Quest , September 13, 2018 at 3:33 pm

I agree, Gerald. Along with ensuring access to "our" off-shore oil fields, enforcing the petro-dollar system is equally significant, and seems to be the mainspring for much of our recent foreign policy militarism. If this system were to unravel, the dollar's value would tank, and then how could we afford our vast system of military bases which make the world safe for democracy? Death Star's aren't cheap, ya know.

Anonymous Coward , September 13, 2018 at 10:40 pm

+1 Gerald Wadsworth. It's not necessarily "Oil pure and simple" but "Currency Pure and Simple." If the US dollar is no longer the world's currency, the US is toast. Also note that anyone trying to retain control of their currency and not letting "The Market" (private banks) totally control them is a Great Devil we need to fight, e.g. Libya and China.

And note (2) that Wall Street is mostly an extension of The City; the UK still thinks it owns the entire world, and the UK has been owned by the banks ever since it went off tally sticks

MichaelWme , September 13, 2018 at 12:18 pm

It's called the Thucydides trap. NATO (US/UK/France/Turkey) have said they will force regime change in Syria. Russia says it will not allow regime change in Syria. Fortunately, as a Frenchman and an Austrian explained many years ago, and NATO experts say is true today, regime change in Russia is a simple matter, about the same as Libya or Panamá. I forget the details, but I assume things worked out well for the Frenchman and the Austrian, and will work out about the same for NATO.

Anastasia , September 13, 2018 at 12:04 pm

Putin said years ago, and I cannot quote him, but remember most of it, that it doesn't matter who is the candidate for President, or what his campaign promises are, or how sincere he is in making them, whenever they get in office, it is always the same policy.

Truer words were never spoken, and it is the reason why I know, at least, that Russia did not interfere in the US elections. What would be the point, from his viewpoint, and it is not only just his opinion. You cannot help but see at this point that that he said is obviously true.

TJ , September 13, 2018 at 1:47 pm

What an excellent point. Why bother influencing the elections when it doesn't matter who is elected -- the same policies will continue.

Bart Hansen , September 13, 2018 at 3:43 pm

Anastasia, I saved it: From Putin interview with Le Figaro: "I have already spoken to three US Presidents. They come and go, but politics stay the same at all times. Do you know why? Because of the powerful bureaucracy. When a person is elected, they may have some ideas. Then people with briefcases arrive, well dressed, wearing dark suits, just like mine, except for the red tie, since they wear black or dark blue ones. These people start explaining how things are done. And instantly, everything changes. This is what happens with every administration."

rosemerry , September 14, 2018 at 8:02 am

Pres. Putin explained this several times when he was asked about preferring Trump to Hillary Clinton, and he carefully said that he would accept whoever the US population chose, he was used to dealing with Hillary and he knew that very little changed between Administrations. This has been conveniently cast aside by the Dems, and Obama's disgraceful expulsion of Russian diplomats started the avalanche of Russiagate.

James , September 13, 2018 at 9:24 am

Great to see Patrick Lawrence writing for Consortium News.

He ends his article with: "This is the logic of spoilage as a substitute for foreign policy. Among its many consequences are countless lost opportunities for global stability. "

Speaking of consequences, how about the human toll this foreign policy has taken on so many people in this world. To me, the gravest sin of all.

Bob Van Noy , September 13, 2018 at 8:46 am

I agree with Patric Lawrence when he states "Personalizing Washington's regression into the role of spoiler by assigning all blame to one man, now Donald Trump, deprives one of deeper understanding." and I also agree that 'Seven decades of global hegemony have left the State Department, Cold War notwithstanding, left the State Department with little to think about other than the simplicities of East-West tension.' But I seriously disagree when he declares that: "The crisis of U.S. foreign policy -- a series of radical missteps -- are systemic. Having little to do with personalities, they pass from one administration to the next with little variance other than at the margins.'' Certainly the missteps are true, but I would argue that the "personalities" are crucial to America's crisis of Foreign Policy. After all it was likely that JFK's American University address was the public declaration of his intention to lead America in the direction of better understanding of Sovereign Rights that likely got him killed. It is precisely those "personalities" that we must understand and identify before we can move on

Skip Scott , September 13, 2018 at 9:35 am

Bob-

I see what you're saying, but I believe Patrick is also right.

Many of the people involved in JFK's murder are now dead themselves, yet the "system" that demands confrontation rather than cooperation continues. These "personalities" are shills for that system, and if they are not so willingly, they are either bribed or blackmailed into compliance.

Remember when "Dubya" ran on a "kinder and gentler nation" foreign policy? Obama's "hope and change" that became "more of the same"? And now Trump's views on both domestic and foreign policy seemingly also doing a 180? There are "personalities" behind this "system", and they are embedded in places like the Council on Foreign Relations. The people that run our banking system and the global corporate empire demand the whole pie, they would rather blow up the world than have to share.

Bob Van Noy , September 13, 2018 at 2:42 pm

You're completely right Skip, that's what we all must recognize and ultimately react to, and against.
Thank you.

JWalters , September 13, 2018 at 6:46 pm

I would add that human beings are the key components in this system. The system is built and shaped by them. Some are greedy, lying predators and some are honest and egalitarian. Bob Parry was one of the latter, thankfully.

JWalters , September 13, 2018 at 6:30 pm

Skip, very good points. For those interested further, here's an excellent talk on the bankers behind the manufacutured wars, including the role of the Council on Foreign Relations as a front organization and control mechanism.
"The Shadows of Power; the CFR and decline of America"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=6124&v=wHa1r4nIaug

Joe Tedesky , September 13, 2018 at 9:42 am

Bob, you are right. I find it most interesting and sad at the same time that in Woodward's new book 'Fear' that he describes a pan 'almost tragic incident' whereas Trump wanted to sign a document removing our missiles and troops out of S Korea, but save for the steady hand of his 'anonymous' staffers who yanked the document off his presidential desk . wow, close one there we almost did something to enforce a peace. Can't have that though, we still have lots to kill in pursue of liberty and freedom and the hegemonic way.

Were these 'anonymous' staffers the grandchildren of the staffers and bureaucracy that undermined other presidents? Would their grandparents know who the Gunmen were on the grassy knoll? Did these interrupters of Executive administrations fudge other presidents dreams and hopes of a peaceful world? And in the end were these instigators rewarded by the war industries they protected?

The problem is, is that this bureaucracy of war has out balanced any other rival agency, as diversity of thought and mission is only to be dealt with if it's good for military purposes. Too much of any one thing can be overbearingly bad for a person, and likewise too much war means your country is doing something wrong.

Bob Van Noy , September 13, 2018 at 2:51 pm

Many thanks Joe, I admire your persistence. Clearly Bob Woodward has been part of the problem rather than the solution. The swamp is deep and murky

JWalters , September 13, 2018 at 6:36 pm

Bob and Joe, here's a solid review of Woodward's book Fear that points out his consistent service to the oligarchy, including giving Trump a pass for killing the Iran deal. Interesting background on Woodward in the comments as well. https://mondoweiss.net/2018/09/woodward-national-security/

O Society , September 13, 2018 at 6:21 pm

The document Gary Cohen removed off Trump's desk – which you can read here – states an intent to end a free trade agreement with South Korea.

"White House aides feared if Trump sent the letter, it could jeopardize a top-secret US program that can detect North Korean missile launches within seven seconds."

Sounds like Trump wanted to play the "I am such a great deal maker, the GREATEST deal maker of all times!" game with the South Koreans. Letter doesn't say anything about withdrawing troops or missiles.

Funny how ***TOP-SECRET US PROGRAMS*** find their way into books and newspapers these days, plentiful as acorns falling out of trees.

O Society , September 14, 2018 at 1:38 pm

You're welcome, Joe. These things get confusing. Who knows anymore what is real and what isn't?

Trump did indeed say something about ending military exercises and pulling troops out of South Korea. His staff did indeed contradict him on this. It just wasn't in relation to the letter Cohn "misplaced," AFAIK.

Nobody asked me, but if they did, I'd say the US interfered enough in Korean affairs by killing a whole bunch of 'em in the Korean War. Leave'em alone. Let North and South try to work it out. Tired of hearing about "regime change.'

Republicans buck Trump on Korea troop pullout talk

Joe Tedesky , September 13, 2018 at 12:24 pm

Here's what I wrote:

Bob, you are right. I find it most interesting and sad at the same time that in Woodward's new book 'Fear' that he describes a pan 'almost tragic incident' whereas Trump wanted to sign a document removing our missiles and troops out of S Korea, but save for the steady hand of his 'anonymous' staffers who yanked the document off his presidential desk . wow, close one there we almost did something to enforce a peace. Can't have that though, we still have lots to kill in pursue of liberty and freedom and the hegemonic way.

Were these 'anonymous' staffers the grandchildren of the staffers and bureaucracy that undermined other presidents? Would their grandparents know who the Gunmen were on the grassy knoll? Did these interrupters of Executive administrations fudge other presidents dreams and hopes of a peaceful world? And in the end were these instigators rewarded by the war industries they protected?

The problem is, is that this bureaucracy of war has out balanced any other rival agency, as diversity of thought and mission is only to be dealt with if it's good for military purposes. Too much of any one thing can be overbearingly bad for a person, and likewise too much war means your country is doing something wrong.

Kiwiantz , September 13, 2018 at 8:20 am

Spoiler Nation of America! You got that dead right! China builds infrastructure in other Countries & doesn't interfere with the citizens & their Sovereignty. Contrast that with the United Spoiler States of America, they run roughshod over overs & just bomb the hell out of Countries & leaves devastation & death wherever they go! And there is something seriously wrong & demented with the US mindset concerning, the attacks on 9/11? In Syria the US has ended up arming & supporting the very same organisation of Al QaedaTerrorists, morphed into ISIS, that hijacked planes & flew them into American targets! During 2017 & now in 2018, it defies belief how warped this US mentality is when ISIS can so easily & on demand, fake a chemical attack to suck in the stupid American Military & it's Airforce & get them to attack Syria, like lackeys taking orders from Terrorist's! The US Airforce is the airforce of Al Qaeda & ISIS! Why? Because the US can't stomach Russia, Syria & Iran winning & defeating Terrorism thus ending this Proxy War they started! Russia can't be allowed to win at any cost because the humiliation & loss of prestige that the US would suffer as a Unipolar Empire would signal the decline & end of this Hegemonic Empire so they must continue to act as a spoiler to put off that inevitable decline! America can't face reality that it's time in the sun as the last Empire, is over!

Sally Snyder , September 13, 2018 at 7:57 am

Here is what Americans really think about the rabid anti-Russia hysteria coming from Washington:

https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/08/americans-on-russia-will-of-people.html

Washington has completely lost touch with what Main Street America really believes.

Waynes World , September 13, 2018 at 7:37 am

Finally some words of truth about how we want our way not really democracy. A proper way to look at the world is what you said toward the end a desire to make people's lives better.

mike k , September 13, 2018 at 7:14 am

Simply put – the US is the world's biggest bully. This needs to stop. Fortunately the bully's intended victims are joining together to defeat it's crazy full spectrum dominance fantasies. Led by Russia and China, we can only hope for the success of the resistance to US aggression.

This political, economic, military struggle is not the only problem the world is facing now, but is has some priority due to the danger of nuclear war. Global pollution, climate disaster, ecological collapse and species extinction must also be urgently dealt with if we are to have a sustainable existence on Earth.

OlyaPola , September 13, 2018 at 4:39 am

Alpha : "America's three principal adversaries signify the shape of the world to come: a post-Western world of coexistence. But neoliberal and neocon ideology is unable to to accept global pluralism and multipolarity, argues Patrick Lawrence."

Omega: "Among its many consequences are countless lost opportunities for global stability."

Framing is always a limiter of perception.

Among the consequences of the lateral trajectories from Alpha to Omega referenced above, is the "unintended consequence" of the increase of the principal opponents, their resolve and opportunities to facilitate the transcendence of arrangements based on coercion by arrangements based on co-operation.

Opening Pandora's box was/is only perceived as wholly a disadvantage for those seeking to deny lateral process.

JOHN CHUCKMAN , September 13, 2018 at 4:32 am

Yes, I certainly agree with author's view.

https://chuckmanwordsincomments.wordpress.com/2018/07/31/john-chuckman-comment-empire-corrupts-all-the-principles-of-economics-as-well-as-principles-of-ethics-and-good-government-there-is-nothing-good-to-say-about-empire-and-the-american-one-is-no-excep/

https://chuckmanwordsincomments.wordpress.com/2018/07/22/john-chuckman-comment-how-american-politics-really-work-why-there-are-terrible-candidates-and-constant-wars-and-peoples-problems-are-ignored-why-heroes-like-julian-assange-are-persecuted-and-r/

HomoSapiensWannaBe , September 13, 2018 at 8:23 am

John Chuckman,

Wow. Thanks! I have just begun reading your commentaries this week and I am impressed with how clearly you analyze and summarize key points about many topics.

Thank you so much for writing what are often the equivalent of books, but condensed into easy to read and digest summaries.

I have ordered your book and look forward to reading that.

Cheers from Southeast USA!

[Sep 15, 2018] BBC is skanky state propaganda

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The myth of BBC being some standard for news reporting died with the advent of the availability of international and independent news in Western countries ..."
"... Ironic when the BBC has been ceaselessly pushing fake news for at least 15 years, with disastrous results. (Iraq; Libya; what caused the deficit and who should be forced to pay it down; Russia/Syria false flags; Corbyn A/S.) ..."
"... I find it impossible to watch BBC News, primarily because most of the editorial staff and senior correspondents seem to be working for MI5/6 and are more interested in disseminating Geo-political propaganda than upholding their journalistic responsibilities as defined in the BBC charter. ..."
"... The book is obviously part of a propaganda campaign. It seems hugely fortuitous that Mark Urban should have had "hours" of interviews with Skripal before the poisoning incident. ..."
"... Isn't it much more likely that the Urban "interviews" would have happened after the event? But Urban can't say that because that would lead to demands from other journalists or news bodies to have access to Skripal. ..."
"... I'm open to alternative hypotheses but right now I think the most likely explanation for Urban's pre-poisoning contact with Sergei Skripal is that, at the time, it was assumed the Orbis dossier would be a key component of the successful takedown of Trump and Urban was putting together a mutually flattering account by interviewing the main players. ..."
"... With regard to your tongue-in-cheek point. Urban could have interviewed Skripal anytime after Trump was gone, unless he believed Skripal might be unavailable (for some reason). The fact he interviewed Skripal before does indicate foresight. If Urban really did interview Skripal before the event then he would be wiser to pull the book and burn every copy in existence (as well as all his notes). ..."
"... Urban pretends to research a book exposing Russia and part of his research is to interview Skripal. His objective is to find dirt on Putin in order to swing the war in Syria in favour of USUKIS bombing Assad to smithereens, bayonets bums etc. ..."
"... Interestingly Mark Urbans' book on Sergei Skripal was available to purchase on Amazon in July. I added it to my Amazon wishlist on 28/7/18. I've just looked at my wishlist and was rather surprised to find it is no longer available. It has been pulled. ..."
"... Can't help thinking that the answer to all this lies in Estonia. Sergei went to Estonia in June 2016, Pablo was in Estonia, the Estonians passed on sigint about Trump-Russian collusion in the summer of 2016. A Guardian article of 13 April 2017 said: ..."
"... No doubt in my mind that the Skripal affair is a planned operation carried out by US/UK intelligence. What has actually taken place is still to be determined, but the propaganda operation itself is clear. ..."
"... I know about Ireland, and I agree, it was NOT a nerve agent. That said, I don't believe anyone was 'attacked', including the Skripals. ..."
"... All foreign correspondents of major newspapers too work with MI6. Nobody who is close to them has any kind of doubt about this. ..."
"... I despise everyone who says that free markets are the solution for the problems of the third world. What they mean is mass starvation and an enormous population cull. There are international "foundations" that pay academics and politicians large amounts of money to spout this obscene line. One of them is called the John Templeton Foundation. They have had their fangs in to British universities for a long time. ..."
"... When the Tories talk about 'free markets', they are talking about markets free from democracy. ..."
Aug 30, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

Dave , August 28, 2018 at 17:41

BBC is skanky state propaganda. The myth of BBC being some standard for news reporting died with the advent of the availability of international and independent news in Western countries. The main thing that BBC used to have which propped up the illusion of it being a respectable news source is that there was no competition or alternative to compare its narratives against. Since that time is over, so is BBC's masquerading as an impartial or accurate news source.

Xavi , August 28, 2018 at 18:40

Agree, Dave. That's what's informing the push to rubbish dissenting sites as fake news and eventually have them removed.

Ironic when the BBC has been ceaselessly pushing fake news for at least 15 years, with disastrous results. (Iraq; Libya; what caused the deficit and who should be forced to pay it down; Russia/Syria false flags; Corbyn A/S.)

Ken Kenn , August 28, 2018 at 21:49

Well I was convinced of fake BBC news during 9/11 and not for the reasons of building 7 coming down too early but the fact that the female journalist was facing a camera standing in front of a glass window and there was no reflection of her or the camera person from the glass. Not even a faint shadow.

That's when I knew the BBC were employing vampires and have been ever since.

Green Screen technology I discovered later. All the On the spot reporters are at it apparently. Or repeating Reuters or PA.

Deb O'Nair , August 28, 2018 at 00:52

I find it impossible to watch BBC News, primarily because most of the editorial staff and senior correspondents seem to be working for MI5/6 and are more interested in disseminating Geo-political propaganda than upholding their journalistic responsibilities as defined in the BBC charter. People should not only boycott the BBC but refuse to pay the license fee on the grounds that it's a compulsory political subscription.

frankywiggles , August 28, 2018 at 09:48

Careful, Craig

BBC world affairs editor 'fed up' with complaints directed at the corporation's news output

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/aug/28/bbc-news-is-not-biased-in-brexit-reporting-says-john-simpson

D_Majestic , August 28, 2018 at 14:35

Of course BBC News is not biased. Most of the time it is not even factual.

Brendan , August 28, 2018 at 10:34

Dear Mark,
In a BBC article on 4 July 2018, you wrote: "I have not felt ready until now to acknowledge explicitly that we had met, but do now that the book is nearing completion."

Could you please explain that comment? I do not see why your acknowledgement of your meetings with Sergei Skripal should be delayed until your book is nearing completion.

If you felt that it was right to reveal those meetings in July, then why was it not right to do so in March, soon after the poisoning occurred? What difference would it have made if you had done so four months earlier?

I cannot think of any negative consequences of an earlier acknowledgement of the meetings. In fact, disclosures of any possible conflict of interest are generally considered to be desirable in journalism, regardless of whether the conflict of interest is real.

ADHD , August 28, 2018 at 11:00

The book is obviously part of a propaganda campaign. It seems hugely fortuitous that Mark Urban should have had "hours" of interviews with Skripal before the poisoning incident.

Isn't it much more likely that the Urban "interviews" would have happened after the event? But Urban can't say that because that would lead to demands from other journalists or news bodies to have access to Skripal.

And that can't happen because either Skripal would be asked about what happened on the day of the poisoning, or can't be guaranteed to stick to the script, or is no longer alive. And that leads to a suspicion that whatever Skripal is supposed to have said in his interviews with Urban has really just been made up by the British security services.

Kay , August 28, 2018 at 14:42

I'm open to alternative hypotheses but right now I think the most likely explanation for Urban's pre-poisoning contact with Sergei Skripal is that, at the time, it was assumed the Orbis dossier would be a key component of the successful takedown of Trump and Urban was putting together a mutually flattering account by interviewing the main players.

Tongue in cheek, it'd be worth asking Urban if his decision to cover the Skripal poisoning in his new book was made before or after the Skripals were actually poisoned.

ADHD , August 28, 2018 at 15:59

The consensus seems to be that it was an anti-Russia book, but that doesn't conflict with what you say (there is overlap, your view is just more specific). But, I just find it hard to believe that Urban and the conspirators would waste their time "counting their chickens ". Not least because such a book would form a handy list of traitors (together with confessions) if Trump were to prevail and it fell into the right hands. This is "101 – How to Organise a Revolution" (secrecy / don't put anything in writing); surely British security services know that?

With regard to your tongue-in-cheek point. Urban could have interviewed Skripal anytime after Trump was gone, unless he believed Skripal might be unavailable (for some reason). The fact he interviewed Skripal before does indicate foresight. If Urban really did interview Skripal before the event then he would be wiser to pull the book and burn every copy in existence (as well as all his notes).

Regardless, it looks like the master of the universe are losing their ability to create reality.

Brendan , August 28, 2018 at 10:37

Last month, Mark Urban was promoting the reports that the Russian assassins had been identified from CCTV footage:

"There are now subjects of interest in the police Salisbury investigation. ( ) analytic and cyber techniques are now being exploited against the Salisbury suspects by people with a wealth of experience in complex investigations."
https://twitter.com/MarkUrban01/status/1020366761848385536

That story originated with a report by PA, which Security Minister Ben Wallace called "ill informed and wild speculation". https://mobile.twitter.com/BWallaceMP/status/1019906962786484225

Or as Craig Murray put it, "Unnamed source close to unnamed British police officers tells unnamed Press Association journalist Britain knows the unnamed Russian agents ".
https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/1019854966327005184

Even Urban's colleagues had to admit that "The BBC has not been able to independently confirm the story."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-44883803

Still, that didn't stop Mark Urban from reporting the story almost as fact.

Tom , August 28, 2018 at 10:38

The BBC relies on it's interpretation of the Act because it is held for the purposes of 'journalism, art or literature.' but this relies on a usually unrelated precedent and the opinions of a number of Judges which contradict this view. I'm in the process of challenging this with ICO but don't expect anything will change until another supreme court ruling:

https://medium.com/@tomcoady/bbc-foi-exemption-for-the-purposes-of-art-journalism-or-literature-c39e4fa3e36

Ian Fantom , August 28, 2018 at 10:41

I've put in a Freedom of Information request regarding meetings with Skripal other than any that were for the purpose of BBC news journalism. (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/mark_urbans_non_journalistic_mee )

Made By Dom , August 28, 2018 at 11:04

Can I play Devil's Advocate ?

I can see the value in asking writers, journalists and artists to pose exactly the same questions as Eccles' original letter but I'm not convinced about Craig's email.

A quick google shows me that a man named Mark Urban has written a book on the Skripals. Isn't it likely that Urban was keeping the interviews to himself in order to keep his book alive?

It wouldn't surprise me if Urban cares far more about his writing career than his job at the BBC. I'm sure most journalists would rather be authors. He's written a number of books on war and military intelligence. If his sources have nothing to do with the BBC then why should he answer to an on line mob?

craig Post author , August 28, 2018 at 11:18

" Isn't it likely that Urban was keeping the interviews to himself in order to keep his book alive?"
No, entirely unlikely. a chance to plug his forthcoming book and his Skripal contacts to a massive worldwide televion audience was eschewed.
The book is now about the Skripal attack. Presumably that was not the original subject he was researching, as it hadn't happened yet. The book will just be a rehash of the "noble defector – Putin revenge" line and none of the questions I asked about the genesis of his involvement will be answered in it.

SA , August 28, 2018 at 11:29

"Presumably that was not the original subject he was researching, as it hadn't happened yet." Or it was prescience ie that it was part of the planning for the incident?

Chris Hemmings , August 28, 2018 at 14:41

@BBC, Summer 2017, in an executive office:
"Hey Mark, why don't you go down to have a chat with this guy in Salisbury. I have a hunch that a story might be going to happen involving him, you know, as an ex-Soviet spy. Spend time with him, get to know him, be able to write in depth about him. Say it's for a book ."

giyane , August 28, 2018 at 11:46

Urban is never one-sided in his BBC reports on the Middle East. I would rather have him as Foreign Secretary than a bumbling idiot like Hubris Johnson or a Tory racketeer Hunt, because however clunky the formula of BBC balance Urban is at least pretending to be governed by normal rules. After Thatcher went anyone with half a brain left the Conservative party, leaving dolts like Johnson and nasties like May and Cameron to pick up the pieces after Blair and Brown.

There's money to be made from Russian billionaires and tory shit will follow the money like flies on d**t**d.

Urban pretends to research a book exposing Russia and part of his research is to interview Skripal. His objective is to find dirt on Putin in order to swing the war in Syria in favour of USUKIS bombing Assad to smithereens, bayonets bums etc.

Tory shit Hubris Johnson finds this political research floating around the Foreign Office and decides to twist it into Russia murders Skripal by Novichok. Unfortunately Johnson is already known to be a liar and gravy-trainer Tory and nobody believes him at all. Mrs May , realising that Johnson, Fox, Rees-Mogg and Hunt are completely bonkers, does Chequers her own way.

ZigZag Wanderer , August 28, 2018 at 12:26

Interestingly Mark Urbans' book on Sergei Skripal was available to purchase on Amazon in July. I added it to my Amazon wishlist on 28/7/18. I've just looked at my wishlist and was rather surprised to find it is no longer available. It has been pulled.

From memory the books description said that Mark had interviewed Skripal 'extensively' during 2017 and also mentioned the 'new' spying war now happening between Britain and Russia.

A quick search revealed a new version of the book ( with an altered title ) will be available in early October .. details here. https://www.panmacmillan.com/authors/mark-urban/the-skripal-files

Oh dear . panic stations !

Sharp Ears , August 28, 2018 at 11:16

Salisbury poisoning: Skripals 'were under Russian surveillance'
Mark Urban Diplomatic and defence editor, Newsnight

4 July 2018

'My meetings with Sergei Skripal

I met Sergei on a few occasions last summer and found him to be a private character who did not, even under the circumstances then prevailing, wish to draw attention to himself.

He agreed to see me as a writer of history books rather than as a news journalist, since I was researching one on the post-Cold War espionage battle between Russia and the West.

Information gained in these interviews was fed into my Newsnight coverage during the early days after the poisoning. I have not felt ready until now to acknowledge explicitly that we had met, but do now that the book is nearing completion.

As a man, Sergei is proud of his achievements, both before and after joining his country's intelligence service.

He has a deadpan wit and is remarkably stoical given the reverses he's suffered in his life; from his imprisonment following conviction in 2006 on charges of spying for Britain, to the loss of his wife Liudmila to cancer in 2012, and the untimely death of his son Alexander (or Sasha) last summer.'

...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44717835

Agent Green , August 28, 2018 at 12:27

Laughable given that the whole world and virtually all heads of State were under US surveillance by the NSA – at least until Edward Snowden made all his revelations.

KEVIN GLENNIE , August 28, 2018 at 11:18

I have pasted and copied your Email regarding the above with a few slight alterations, it will be interesting to see the response I receive if any being just a concerned citizen of the U.

Niki Henry , August 28, 2018 at 11:21

Is this not a matter for the Police? (Even if you're not too sure if they'd do anything about it) These would be files that are to do with an attempted murder case. And definitely not Journalism if the story is fabricated.

Paul Baker , August 28, 2018 at 11:28

It feels as if you are moving in the right direction in linking Sergei to Steele. I'm intrigued by the very early media references to Sergei wanting to return home to see his elderly mother for perhaps the last time. He had apparently written to Putin making his request but again according to newspapers hadn't received a reply.

I would suggest Julia was bringing the answer via her own secret services contacts, her boyfriend and his mother, apparently Senior in the Russian Intelligence Agency. Perhaps a sentimental man Sergei was aware his mother couldn't travel so the plea to Putin was his best bet.

Such a request must have disturbed MI6 if Sergei had anything at all to do with the Steele dossier because inevitably if he returned to Russia he'd be debriefed by his old colleagues. But how can you rely on a mercenary double agent? If he decided he might want to stay in Russia with his family that might well have been attractive, away from the lonely existence in a Salisbury cul de sac with only spies for company. But the Steele dossier has great potential to turn sour on the British.

It's author was a Senior spy and Head of the Russian Desk for some years. It is – perhaps you'd agree? – inconceivable that he didn't require permission to prepare it, especially as much of it was based on his experience as a spy in Russia. Yet it's equally inconceivable that the Agency bosses didn't know the identity of the commissioners or the use to which it would be put in the US election – to boost Clinton's bid. If she'd won everything would have been fine but as it is any discussion of foreign interference in that election would have to include MI6 leading the list (they probably didn't tell any politician?) To have Sergei supporting and highlighting that embarrassment would be problematic for US-UK relations. Of course Sergei may have had other nuggets to expose as well as Steele.

Soon after Julia's arrival the pair fell ill. They both survived but are now locked away, presumably for life and never able to explain their side of the story.

It was a bodged job with a poor cover story from the start and could only be carried because of D Notices and media complicity. Is his mother still alive? Would he still like to see her before she dies? Would Russia allow it? Would MI6 allow it? I think that's 3 yeses and a resounding No.

Sharp Ears , August 28, 2018 at 11:39

Following the deaths of 55 Palestinians on the Gaza 'border' and the wounding of thousands, in this video, Urban asks the questions but the Israeli government spokesman, David Keyes, is allowed to spout all the usual propaganda against Hamas.

Gaza deaths: Who's to blame? – BBC Newsnight
Published on 15 May 2018
Subscribe 256K
Fresh protests against Israel are expected in the Palestinian territories, a day after Israeli troops killed 58 people in the Gaza Strip.
David Keyes is the spokesman for the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Mark Urban asked him whether it was appropriate for the US to open their embassy on the 70th anniversary of Israel's creation, a day that is hugely controversial for the Palestinian people.

Newsnight is the BBC's flagship news and current affairs TV programme – with analysis, debate, exclusives, and robust interviews.
Website: https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsnight
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1dec5XO53k

Mr Keyes' pronounced American accent was heard. The Occupation was not mentioned. A Palestinian voice was not heard.

This is another of his videos. On the same subject and on the opening of the Israeli Embassy in Jerusalem. This time, Jonathan Conricus spoke for the IDF.

Israel says. Same old. Same old. BBC. ZBC.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WdqoPKKkD8

Charles Bostock , August 28, 2018 at 15:58

"Urban asks the questions but the Israeli government spokesman, David Keyes, is allowed to spout all the usual propaganda against Hamas."

Yes indeed : Urban asked the questions and allowed the interviewee to answer. Perhaps you would have preferred him to interrupt the interviewee continually 'a la Today programme, or to have shouted at him similarly to the way I understand some people shout at customers inside or outside supermarkets?

Peter , August 28, 2018 at 11:39

This may or may not be relevant regarding Russia, chemical weapons and BBC/MSM bovine effluent:

"US Poised to Hit Syria Harder: The Russian Defense Ministry issued a statement on Aug. 25 stating that the Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham militants had brought eight containers of chlorine to Idlib in order to stage a false-flag attack with the help of UK intelligence agencies. A group of Tahrir al-Sham fighters trained to handle chemical warfare agents by the UK private military company Olive arrived in the suburbs of the city of Jisr ash-Shugur, Idlib, 20 km. from the Turkish border."

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/08/27/us-poised-to-hit-syria-harder.html

Jeremn , August 28, 2018 at 11:42

Can't help thinking that the answer to all this lies in Estonia. Sergei went to Estonia in June 2016, Pablo was in Estonia, the Estonians passed on sigint about Trump-Russian collusion in the summer of 2016. A Guardian article of 13 April 2017 said:

"Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump's inner circle and Russians, sources said. The European countries that passed on electronic intelligence – known as sigint – included Germany, Estonia and Poland."

Perhaps not the Dossier, as such, but some material on collusion?

Paul Greenwood , August 28, 2018 at 12:00

John Paul Jones also fought for the Russians and was a Rear-Admiral. He was buried in Paris 1792 and disinterred 1905 and relocated to USA

wonky , August 29, 2018 at 10:29

..then he met Jimmy Page in the 1960s and the rest is history..

Agent Green , August 28, 2018 at 12:11

No doubt in my mind that the Skripal affair is a planned operation carried out by US/UK intelligence. What has actually taken place is still to be determined, but the propaganda operation itself is clear.

Paul Carrom , August 28, 2018 at 12:12

Definitely done by the UK.

Doodlebug , August 28, 2018 at 14:53

What did the UK have against Dawn and Charlie? (Please don't say you subscribe to all that bottle-finding bullshit).

mark golding , August 28, 2018 at 17:40

Catch my last post Doodlebug, sadly MI6 diabolical elements can be traced back to Ireland in the 70's early 80's assassinations theRealTerror (theRealElvis) understands.

Doodlebug , August 28, 2018 at 18:06

I know about Ireland, and I agree, it was NOT a nerve agent. That said, I don't believe anyone was 'attacked', including the Skripals.

Jo , August 29, 2018 at 11:59

Being used as practice and to establish more "evidence"

N_ , August 28, 2018 at 12:24

Often it's been open. There was the BBC monitoring station at Caversham Park. The BBC's Foreign Broadcast Information Service split the world into two parts with the CIA.

All foreign correspondents of major newspapers too work with MI6. Nobody who is close to them has any kind of doubt about this.

N_ , August 28, 2018 at 12:20

Theresa May says a no deal Brexit "wouldn't be the end of the world".

  1. This is not a negotiating strategy. This is not a pantomime where one giant on the stage can wink to his supporters (using the British media) without his opponent (EU27) noticing.
  2. The subconscious doesn't work well with negation. Whatever you do, please DON'T imagine an elephant at this time.
  3. I would love to know what the preparations are at Trinity College, Cambridge, for food shortages. They own the port of Felixstowe, which handles more than 40% of Britain's containerised trade. They also own a 50% stake in a portfolio of Tesco stores. Soon food distribution will be what everyone is talking about. I am never going to stop making the point that the god of the Tory party is Thomas Malthus.
N_ , August 28, 2018 at 12:38

Oh dear.. Theresa May in Africa:

" As a Prime Minister who believes both in free markets and in nations and businesses acting in line with well-established rules and principles of conduct, I want to demonstrate to young Africans that their brightest future lies in a free and thriving private sector. "

I despise everyone who says that free markets are the solution for the problems of the third world. What they mean is mass starvation and an enormous population cull. There are international "foundations" that pay academics and politicians large amounts of money to spout this obscene line. One of them is called the John Templeton Foundation. They have had their fangs in to British universities for a long time.

They are keen on Prince Philip, the guy who said he wanted to come back as a virus so he could kill a large part of the population. Never trust anyone who has received a Templeton scholarship or prize or who has anything to do with these people or with the message that free markets and the private sector are the key to "development"

Nuno Strybes , August 28, 2018 at 12:43

When the Tories talk about 'free markets', they are talking about markets free from democracy.

May's rhetoric is laughable .basically all her speeches read : 'the sky is green, the snow is black etc etc' -- totally detached from reality and a spent political force, as their recent membership numbers showed, with more revenues from legacies left in wills than from actual living members.

Ros Thorpe , August 28, 2018 at 12:30

I agree with the Skripal relatives that Sergei is dead. He hasn't been seen or heard of and would have called his mother. Mind boggling deception at all levels and I struggle to believe any of it.

N_ , August 28, 2018 at 12:47

Sergei Skripal could be in US custody, either in the US itself or in a US facility somewhere.

If he is dead, then the rehospitalisation of Charlie Rowley may be to assist with the narrative. "Once you've had a drop of Novvy Chockk, you may recover but you can fall down ill at any time, and here's an Expert with a serious voice to confirm it."

Nuno Strybes , August 28, 2018 at 12:38

I follow this blog closely, particularly in relation to the Skripal case, but this is my first comment. I just watched Sky News piece on 'super recognisers' and couldn't help but wonder why, in an age of powerful facial recognition technology, the police and security services seem to have drawn such a blank. The surveillance state in the UK is known to be one of the most advanced in the world but when it comes to this highly important geopolitical crisis our technological infrastructure seems to be redundant to the point where 'human eyes' are deemed to be more accurate than the most powerful supercomputers available. Psychologically, all humans have an inherent facial recognition ability from a very young age, but the idea that some police officers have this ability developed to such an extent that they supercede computer recognition is, i feel, laughable. To me this announcement through the ever subservient Sky News reeks of desperation on the part of the ;official story'. Are we about to be shown suspects who, although facial recognition technology fails to identify them, a 'super recogniser' can testify that it actually is person A or person B and we are all supposed to accept that? Seems either a damning indictment of the judicial process, or a damning indictment of the ŁŁŁŁŁ's of taxpayers money that is spent on places like GCHQ etc whose technology is now apparently no better than a highly perceptive human brain. Give me a break !

Trowbridge H. Ford , August 28, 2018 at 13:08

Why no interest in how the Coopers died in Egypt? We will soon be told by HMG that the Russians somehow dd it too., thanks to Urban's research?

giyane , August 28, 2018 at 13:49

People do die Trowbridge. I know you haven't, but you have the motivation of outliving your persecutors. With Muckin about with Isis gone and covert operations isn't social work Kissinger looking as though he's on daily blood transfusions, you have rejected Trump for some reason. But Trump has undone much of John McCain's worst mischief in one year. If McCain was an example of a politician, we don't need politicians.

Trowbridge H. Ford , August 28, 2018 at 14:16

Give me an example, other than the Coopers. of a healthy couple one day that is found dying the next day like the Skripals.

And while i tried on another site to be generous about McCain. he got Navy Secretary John Lehman, Jr. to scare the Soviets for prevailing in the Vietnam War so much about what NATO was up to in the fallout from shooting Swedish PM Olof Palme that Moscow gave up the competition for fear that it would blow up the world, helping bring on the crappy one we have.

McCain was a continuing Cold Warrior who we don't need since we still have Trump who is just trying to do it another way.

Trowbridge H. Ford , August 28, 2018 at 15:03

Oh, I forget that couple in Amesbury. Looks like the Porton Down Plague is spread overseas.

Posting on this site in like playing bridge online – the cards are stacked against you.

Doodlebug , August 28, 2018 at 15:26

"Give me an example, other than the Coopers. of a healthy couple one day that is found dying the next day like the Skripals."

Will a 17 year old and his step-father do?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6918378/brit-lad-17-in-a-coma-on-family-holiday-in-spain-may-have-been-poisoned-by-cockroach-pesticide/

They both survived, but one or other (quite possibly both) would have died without medical intervention.

[Sep 15, 2018] British Police Find Putin's Passport at Scene of Salisbury Poison Attack

Sep 11, 2018 | russia-insider.com
Salisbury (dpo) - Last doubts over Russia's guilt in poisoning former spy Sergei Skripal have been eliminated. As the British government announced today, the passport of Russian president Vladimir Putin was found at the scene in Salisbury.

According to Prime Minister Theresa May, the passport was only now found in another search of the scene, as it had been hidden under a fallen leaf.

[Sep 15, 2018] WADA committee recommends reinstating the "non-compliant" Russian anti-doping agency, RUSADA

Sep 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Ort , Sep 15, 2018 3:58:24 PM | link

Well, this is a nice little ray of sunshine!

Perhaps it will inspire Dutch authorities to collectively "examine their conscience", and admit to cooking up the bogus MH-17 report that framed Russia or "pro-Russian" forces as the culprits who shot down the aircraft.

There's no connection, but somehow this resonates with the mildly surprising news that a WADA committee recommends reinstating the "non-compliant" Russian anti-doping agency, RUSADA. It's not a done deal yet, since apparently WADA insists that RUSADA officials validate WADA's show trial by confessing to its alleged crimes despite RUSADA's claims of innocence -- but it's promising news.

Is this the first stirrings of an "EU Spring?" ;)

[Sep 15, 2018] How To Think About Conservatism

Sep 15, 2018 | crookedtimber.org

likbez 69

I think it is impossible to discuss modern conservatism, especially its neocon variety without discussing neoliberalism. Too many people here concentrate on superficial traits, while the defining feature of modern conservatives is the unconditional support of "hard neoliberalism." There is also a Vichy party which supports "soft neoliberalism" ...

See Monbiot at https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-problem-george-monbiot

It may seem strange that a doctrine promising choice and freedom should have been promoted with the slogan "there is no alternative." But, as Hayek remarked on a visit to Pinochet's Kabaservice Contra Corey -- Thoughts About How To Think About Conservatism -- Crooked Timber Chile -- one of the first nations in which the programme was comprehensively applied -- "my personal preference leans toward a liberal dictatorship rather than toward a democratic government devoid of liberalism." The freedom that neoliberalism offers, which sounds so beguiling when expressed in general terms, turns out to mean freedom for the pike, not for the minnows.

Freedom from trade unions and collective bargaining mean the freedom to suppress wages. Freedom from regulation means the freedom to poison rivers, endanger workers, charge iniquitous rates of interest and design exotic financial instruments. Freedom from tax means freedom from the distribution of wealth that lifts people out of poverty.

The other important area is the attitude to the existence and maintenance of the global US empire and the level of indoctrination into "American exceptionalism" which I view as a flavor of far-right nationalism. But here we need to talk not about conservatism but neofascism.

In a way, the current crisis of neoliberalism in the USA (one of the features of which was de-legitimization of the neoliberal elite which led to the election of Trump) develops with strange similarities with the events of 1920-1935 in Europe.

[Sep 15, 2018] Russian-speakers have taken to creative methods of resistance to Nationalist bullying

Aug 14, 2018 | awfulavalanche.wordpress.com

yalensis, August 14, 2018 at 3:44 am

Just finished posting this 2-parter on Ukrainian language policy. Russian-speakers have taken to creative methods of resistance to Nationalist bullying. Ends with a true story about an everyday Resister in a shop.

[Sep 15, 2018] The problem there is that the USA cannot sell LNG at a competitive price against pipeline gas and still make money

Another problem is how much gas for sale the USA actually has? Or they want to resell gas they buy for Russia Sakhalin? They already did a couple of times.
Sep 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman September 10, 2018 at 4:31 pm

Oh, please, God, let the USA impose sanctions on European companies in an attempt to stop the building of Nord Stream II (which, incidentally, has begun and is already underwater).

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2018/09/10/trumps-energy-secretary-heading-to-moscow-to-discuss-more-energy-sanctions/#2ea293071b80

I can't think of anything more likely to incite European fury against America, and while we're on the subject, under what authority would the USA fine European companies for not obeying sanctions imposed by the USA? I can see how they could get away with further penalizing Russia – they are piggybacking on the Skripal affair, that's why they pretend so fervently to believe Britain's accusations even though it has offered no proof at all, just more accusations. The legal instrument it is using is a national-security clause (big surprise) meant to stop the spread of chemical-warfare threats. But how is it going to justify imposing a big fine on BASF-Wintershall, for example, and what would it do if the latter simply said, "Cram it up your chuff!" and refused to pay?

Anyway, the calling-out of Britain's 'evidence' in front of the UN is going to be extra-special, in that light. Because the Skripal thing is the USA's whole basis for further sanctions. Without it – if the case is demolished, and I frankly can't see how the UK government could sensibly respond to all the discrepancies picked up at sites like Slane's 'Blogmire' – they've got nothing; no grounds for further sanctions.

James lake September 10, 2018 at 9:27 pm
Russia invited American energy secretary to Moscow to discuss the USA sanctions on Russian energy markets.

They say hope dies last!

Patient Observer September 11, 2018 at 3:49 pm
Is that your interpretation? Defeat, doom?
James lake September 12, 2018 at 11:30 pm
The Americans thinking they can talk or bully Russia into Submitting by sanctions.

The USA energy policy needed a cheap product, Infrastructure across Europe, and of course investment to make this all happen beginning years ago.

Mark Chapman September 13, 2018 at 8:20 am
And that was perfectly possible, had it been started years ago, and had the USA come to Europe with a business plan which answered the question, "What's in it for me?" Everybody in business likes to make money; it's kind of what keeps business going. And if the USA could still sell to Europe under those circumstances – because it has a lot of a product it can sell at a competitive price and still make money – it would still be possible to do it. The problem there is that the USA cannot sell LNG at a competitive price against pipeline gas and still make money. A further problem is that in business dynamics, the guy who has control in a business relationship is the guy who supplies you with a product you can't get anywhere else at the same or a lower price.

The USA wants the profits realized by selling gas to Europe, and right away, that's not going to work, because shipborne LNG cannot compete with pipeline gas for price. The USA would have to sell it for a lot less than it takes to recover and ship it, and it's not willing to do that because it is contrary to every principle of business. But that's a big problem, because the profit is actually secondary. What Washington really wants is the power conveyed by being Europe's main supplier – then it can play energy politics like it constantly accuses Russia of doing, although actual evidence of Russia threatening to cut off Europe's gas if it does not, let's say, drop sanctions against Russia, is zip, Nada. No evidence. But Washington would do it, and you know they would, and so does Brussels. So it is trying to muscle Europe's main supplier out of the market by coercion, because it can't do it simply by offering a better price.

Which leaves it in the ridiculous position of arguing, "We should be your supplier instead of Russia, because ain't we the bestest of friends and allies?", at the same time it is conducting a trade war for American business advantage and threatening to impose sanctions against European companies who participate in the pipeline project as investors.

[Sep 15, 2018] Ukraine attacks Russia on legal field and score points against Gasprom

Sep 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman September 14, 2018 at 10:24 am

Here we go again with reliable pot-stirrer the UK, in the form of a ruling by the UK Court of Appeals that Ukraine does have a valid case, after all, of grieving the ordered repayment of $3 Billion it was lent by Moscow after Yanukovych decided to reject the European Association Agreement, and petitioned Russia for assistance.

Some facts that should be recalled here; Ukraine has to the very best of my knowledge never paid this debt, although the IMF grudgingly backed Russia's claim that it was a bilateral loan . Then Ukraine imposed a moratorium on further payments, trying to squeeze Russia into accepting a 'restructuring' of the debt, a colourful euphemism for 'write off some of it and give us until forever to pay the rest', allowing Ukraine to simply roll over its outstanding debt each year and put off payment until the promised western flood of incredible prosperity finally arrives.

The ever-helpful IMF then rewrote its own laws so that it could continue lending to Ukraine although it exhibited all the classic symptoms of a bad debtor. Most of us said it would all end in tears for the IMF, and where is it now, again? How much of that $17 Billion aid package has been disbursed?

Georgetown University Professor Anna Gelpern offered Ukraine an out , stating that in her legal opinion, the obligation amounted to 'odious debt', which consequently did not have to be repaid. Longtime kook Anders Aslund enthusiastically embraced that view, bleating that really Russia should be repaying Ukraine, for invading and plundering it.

Let me give you my not-legal opinion; Ukraine does not have a hope of winning this case. The UK is just trying to help it kick the can a little further down the road, and put off repayment for another year or two while the courts wrangle the issue out all over again, and lawyers pocket hefty fees. It also serves the British hobby of sticking its thumb in Russia's eye every chance it gets to do it. The money is probably not a big issue to Russia; it's the principle, and it would probably suit the Kremlin to duke it out in court again just on the probability that Ukraine will suffer another humiliating defeat, although that will make no difference at all to its willingness to pay. I propose, though, another option; one to be exercised immediately, and one down the road a bit. First, communicate to Kuh-yiv that if it goes ahead with this, Russia will pull out all foreign investment in Ukraine, immediately and finally. I personally do not think the economy could sustain that kind of hit, since it is on life support now. Second, Russia should communicate to Britain that once Brexit becomes operative, the UK will have to negotiate with Europe for energy supplies and pay their asking price, since there will be no direct transfers of energy to the UK. That might have been the case anyway, since to the best of my knowledge no systems serve the UK directly from Russia except LNG cargoes. But it would not hurt to remind them.

It occurs to me that the west has only itself to blame for Ukraine's current and ongoing dysfunction and 'cutie-pie' criminality, since the west keeps encouraging it to greater heights of irresponsibility, covering for it and then rewriting its own rules so that behaviour previously illegal is magically permissible.

Moscow Exile September 14, 2018 at 10:41 am
THE COURT OF SWEDEN HAS OVERTURNED A DECISION BLOCKING THE COLLECTION OF "NAFTOGAZ" ASSETS OF "GAZPROM"
September 13, 2018

Ukraine's Naftogaz to proceed with Gazprom asset seizures after court ruling
14 Sep 2018 |

Court overturns order to freeze Gazprom assets in England, Wales
14.09.2018

Funny how these things seem to happen all at once, innit?

Moscow Exile September 14, 2018 at 11:16 am
Russia to challenge decision of English Court of Appeal on Ukraine's debt
September 14, 18:48 UTC+3

Russia bought Ukrainian Eurobonds worth $3 bln in December 2013

and now, in line with the "Western Values" that they have embraced, the Yukie toe-rags do not want to pay up.

Mark Chapman September 14, 2018 at 11:41 am
The London High Court is not going to like being reversed; such reversals often do not look good for the judges, although there certainly cannot be any murmuring of 'political motivation' here, since the court was most decidedly motivated to rule for Ukraine in the original judgment if it could. As I said, this is just kicking the can down the road a piece, and buying time for Kuh-yiv. And that might be a valid strategy, if a burgeoning economy was about to break free in Ukraine. Is that the case? I'm afraid I don't think so. In fact, Ukraine is broke and living on handouts, its reserves down to record lows; it doesn't have the money, so the UK is trying to rig the judgment so as to head off its having to pay, at least temporarily. More short-term thinking, such as is characteristic of crisis management.

The Appeals Court is likely ruling on a technicality because it believes (or has been encouraged to believe) it deserves further examination. But, again, I have to believe that in such a politically-charged case, the court which rendered the original verdict would have carefully picked over every argument which might have worked in Ukraine's favour, since the UK was highly motivated to support Ukraine if there were any way it could legally do so. The efficacy, reliability and non-volatility of Eurobonds is at stake here, and a ruling now for Ukraine is likely to provoke a drawback from Eurobonds and European financial instruments by every nation that perceives it is or might one day be perceived as a foe of a Europe still in thrall to the United States. Russia chose such an instrument precisely because of the high risk of a Ukrainian default even if Yanukovych had remained in power, and that was a wise decision to the extent that the west has had to completely rewrite the book in order to challenge the stratagem. That, too, will play to its great disadvantage down the road, as every debtor nation has the right of precedent to exercise such options.

The funny thing is that if Europe simply laid out the situation bluntly to Moscow, as an equal and a respected partner to the deal, and asked for mercy for Ukraine, there is every chance Moscow would find a way to accommodate, provided it was given due credit for its magnanimity. Instead, as usual, Europe has gone with a strategy of creating the appearance that Moscow fucked Ukraine, breaking the law in the process. It will be interesting to see what Alexander Mercouris has to say about this, and I am sure he will offer an opinion, but I'm afraid I haven't time now as I have to get ready for work. But I should like to once more point out that all the advantage lies with Russia here, if it only remains patient and keeps its temper; it is Russia which is keeping Ukraine alive now, through transit fees and significant FDI. It can choose to withdraw one at any time it pleases, and the other as soon as Nord Stream II is completed. The west's attempts to change the beloved 'facts on the ground' amount to no more than scrabbling at the noose that is tightening around Ukraine's throat.

[Sep 15, 2018] The cutting off of water supplies to the Crimea

Sep 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile September 13, 2018 at 11:54 pm

Further to the criminal act perpetrated by the Ukrainian government, namely the cutting off of water supplies to the Crimea, one has to admit that as regards this matter the foreign minister of the Ukraine, Pavel Klmkin, is one obnoxious little twat:

Це не Україна відрізала Крим від води, це зробила Росія, силою відрізавши Крим від України. Сама по собі окупація Криму є страхітливим порушенням міжнародного права і людських прав усіх кримчан.

It is not the Ukraine that has cut off the Crimea from water: Russia did it, by its cutting off of the Crimea from the Ukraine by force. In its own right, the occupation of the Crimea is a terrible violation of international law and the rights of all Crimeans.

James lake September 14, 2018 at 2:32 am
Do the Crimeans have water?

If they do – then it's not such a great victory for Ukraine

Moscow Exile September 14, 2018 at 4:08 am
Yes, and they have desalination plants. The water from the canal that runs from Kherson is chiefly for irrigation. When they first closed the sluice in the Ukraine, the Crimea harvest suffered. No doubt Crimea-Tatar farmers were very pleased about this.

Water Resources of the Crimea

Crimean water resources are limited, failing to fully meet the drinking and economic needs of the region. Over 50 years, the problems of water resources in Crimea were solved by using Dnieper water supplied through North-Crimean Canal; however, after the integration of Crimea into Russia, Ukraine suspended water supply. At the aggravation of political situation between Russia and Ukraine, the situation in the water-management sphere in the Republic of Crimea looks very complicated. The water-management problems of Crimea should be solved based on its own potential. Groundwater resources are the leading factor of sustainable development of Crimean Region at the present stage.

Jen September 14, 2018 at 4:36 am
My understanding is that in 2015, Russian geologists discovered three aquifers in Crimean territory so pipelines have been built to connect the aquifers to the North Crimean Canal and to supply water to people living in eastern Crimea near Kerch.
https://sputniknews.com/russia/201504041020474871/#ixzz3WNLsZ6sG
Mark Chapman September 14, 2018 at 8:57 am
Right. Indulging the will of the very great majority of Crimeans is a terrible violation of international law, and that same population consequently deserves to be without water even though the supply they depended upon comes from Ukraine. Pull the other one, Pavlo. Not even a day-one civil-rights lawyer would buy that argument. The west has never contested that the decision of Crimeans to sever their ties to Ukraine was that of the majority – not really, It has danced around with that voting-at-the-point-of-a-Kalashnikov bullshit, but the vote was not even close. If there were a do-over with the strictest supervision of western officials, and Kuh-yiv itself got to write the referendum question, Crimea would still vote to secede, and the west knows it. If it was such a loyal part of Ukraine before, why was it the autonomous republic of Crimea?

The Ukraine-Crimea affair should stand as a textbook example of how the country that lost territory did absolutely everything wrong in its attempts to get it back.

[Sep 15, 2018] The Khmer Rouge victory in Cambodia was precipitated by the U.S. bombings

Sep 15, 2018 | www.unz.com

Mike P , says: September 14, 2018 at 9:51 pm GMT

@anarchyst I see stuff written about the Vietnam war and it never fails they don't talk at all about the whole picture. The Vietnam war was a war to stop the spread of Communism in Southeast Asia. In that aspect it won some and lost some. Vietnam had nothing to do with oil or Colonialism. Any look at a map would show it's vast strategic location for the Communist. It has one the best ports in Asia. They talk about Tet defeating us. Nothing could be further from the truth. It ended forever the Viet Cong in the South. From then on all the attacks were from the North. The next big attack...

And in Viet Nam the North sent 150,000 men south with as much armor as the Wehrmacht had in many WW II engagements. That was in 1973, and of that 150,000 fewer than 50,000 men and no armor returned to the North, at a cost of under 1,000 American casualties. Most would count that an outstanding victory.

(Alas, in 1975 North Viet Nam had another army of over 100,000 and sent it South; the Democratic Congress voted our South Vietnamese 20 cartridges and 2 hand grenades per man, but refused naval and air support; Saigon predictably became Ho Chi Minh city as we pushed helicopters off the decks of out carriers in our frantic evacuation; but that is hardly the fault of the US military).

The South lost when they ran out of ammunition. During the time we were fighting in Vietnam all the other Asian countries with their own Commies attacking them were fighting also. Many of them won. The ones that fell like Cambodia paid a harsh price. By all measurement of what we went to Vietnam for we didn't lose. It did stop the spread of Communism to all Asia. Rarely in any wars do you get all you want.

The Democrat party has been saying that the Vets fought a losing war when in actuality the Democrats directly are responsible for the loss of South Vietnam. There are only a few highways leading South and they were packed with tanks and troop transport in 75. It would have been a complete turkey shoot like the war in Kuwait. We even had battleships at that time that could have pounded them from the coast. If we would have attacked it would have probably caused them such a defeat that they would have never attacked again maybe even the government of the North would have been overthrown by the people for such incompetence. Unfortunately the Nixon was gone and Ford was directly told if he helped the Vietnamese with air power he would be impeached.

The idea that the Vietnam vets died for nothing is a huge psyops by the Democrats. The South had defeated all the guerillas. All they needed was support to hold off the North and the Democrats sold them out. If the South Vietnamese had not fell it's very likely that the Cambodian Genocide would have never happened.
The Democrats had said the war was lost so many times that they had to prove it so by actually losing it.

we were fighting in Vietnam all the other Asian countries with their own Commies attacking them were fighting also. Many of them won. The ones that fell like Cambodia paid a harsh price.

On the other hand, the Khmer Rouge victory in Cambodia was precipitated by the U.S. bombings:

Estimates vary widely on the number of civilian casualites inflicted by the campaign; however,as many as 500,000 people died as a direct result of the bombings while perhaps hundreds of thousands more died from the effects of displacement, disease or starvation during this period.

The Khmer Rouge, previously a marginalized guerrilla group, propagandized the bombing campaign to great effect; by the CIA's own intelligence estimates, the US bombing campaign was a key factor in the increase in popular support for the Khmer Rouge rebels. After their victory in 1975, the Khmer Rouge oversaw a period in which another one-to-two million Cambodians died from execution, hunger and forced labour.

(from http://rabble.ca/toolkit/on-this-day/us-secret-bombing-cambodia )

The U.S. also utterly devastated Laos, killed millions of Vietnamese ultimately all for nothing, or rather worse than nothing.

[Sep 15, 2018] No US Interests Are Served by Trump s Endless, Illegal War in Syria by Daniel Larison

This just demonstrates the level of capture of the USA by Israeli lobby. But there is also some geopolitical play for the USA in this region and in this sense Syria is just a continuation of Iraq and Libya.
The goal of dominance over middle East (which correlates with Israel goals) and its oil is probably one of the driving force of those wars.
Notable quotes:
"... The issue is not only whether U.S. interests are affected but whether they are affected enough to justify the participation of the U.S. military in a foreign war -- which should entail a higher standard. ..."
"... The Trump administration's Syria policy is just one of many parts of its foreign policy that make a mockery of the idea that Trump puts American interests first. ..."
"... A continued U.S. military presence in Syria has nothing to do with protecting Americans or the citizens of our treaty allies, and so it has nothing to do with self-defense or the defense of allies. There is no international mandate for a U.S. military mission in Syria, and our forces are in Syrian territory in defiance of the Syrian government's wishes. ..."
"... Congress has not voted for any of this, and the public is probably only vaguely aware that there are U.S. forces in Syria. Americans did not vote for any of this, they haven't consented to it, their representatives have never debated or authorized any of it. I doubt that most Americans would support it once they were made aware of it, but the point is that the question has never been put before the voters or their representatives. ..."
Sep 11, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

No U.S. Interests Are Served by Trump's Endless, Illegal War in Syria

Paul Pillar objects to the Trump administration's policy of committing the U.S. to oppose Iran's military presence in Syria, and he observes that this decision has been made without any debate or Congressional authorization:

That shift warrants much more scrutiny and debate than it is getting. U.S. service members are being dispatched to a foreign war for the purpose of somehow getting one Middle Eastern state that has had a longstanding security relationship with another Middle Eastern state to remove its personnel from that second state [bold mine-DL].

Exactly how are U.S. interests supposedly affected by whether those personnel stay or go? The only Americans who might be harmed under one scenario but not the other are the very soldiers who are being dispatched.

The Syrian-Iranian alliance has existed for decades, going back to when the two states shared an adversary in the form of Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq.

The issue is not only whether U.S. interests are affected but whether they are affected enough to justify the participation of the U.S. military in a foreign war -- which should entail a higher standard.

Pillar's description of the administration's policy shows us how absurd it is. It makes no difference to U.S. vital interests if Iran keeps some military personnel in Syria, and it certainly isn't something that we should be risking the lives of American soldiers to change. If Syria's hostile neighbors don't like that, it is not the responsibility of our government to fix it for them. The Trump administration's Syria policy is just one of many parts of its foreign policy that make a mockery of the idea that Trump puts American interests first.

No U.S. interests are served by an endless, illegal war in Syria , and by risking a larger conflict with the Syrian government and its patrons this policy poses a threat to U.S. and international security.

A continued U.S. military presence in Syria has nothing to do with protecting Americans or the citizens of our treaty allies, and so it has nothing to do with self-defense or the defense of allies. There is no international mandate for a U.S. military mission in Syria, and our forces are in Syrian territory in defiance of the Syrian government's wishes.

Our forces have no legitimate reason to be there, and there is no legal basis for keeping them there. The Trump administration is risking war with as many as three governments in order to occupy part of someone else's country indefinitely for the sake of an unachievable goal that has no connection to U.S. security in the first place.

Congress has not voted for any of this, and the public is probably only vaguely aware that there are U.S. forces in Syria. Americans did not vote for any of this, they haven't consented to it, their representatives have never debated or authorized any of it. I doubt that most Americans would support it once they were made aware of it, but the point is that the question has never been put before the voters or their representatives.

Posted in foreign policy , politics . Tagged Russia , Iran , Syria , Paul Pillar , Donald Trump .

[Sep 15, 2018] Zakharova in extravagant dress claims on Russian talk show that US and UK are trying to "Iraq" Russia

Sep 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

kirill,

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

Nice interview with Zakharova over the Skripal frame job. The good part is at around 14 minutes where the loud yapping chihuahua, the UK, is put in its place.

It is not a global player by any measure and has nothing useful to contribute aside from riding Uncle Scumbag's coat-tails to bomb civilians in Syria.

Moscow Exile September 13, 2018 at 2:08 am

Here's Zakharova in a less extravagant rig out:

https://youtu.be/8MNKqJxPcHg

Repeatedly referred to as an "Old Hag" by a noisome visitor to the previous Stooge site.

Mark Chapman September 13, 2018 at 8:30 am

That's an unfortunate outfit; I prefer the business-dominatrix look for her.
Jen September 13, 2018 at 10:30 pm
Here's Zakharova striding along in her red power dress and her power shoes:
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-moscow-russia-17th-aug-2017-russian-foreign-ministry-spokesperson-154195435.html
Moscow Exile September 13, 2018 at 11:17 pm
She is not displaying her thighs almost up to her crotch, though, as is Nauert often wont to do!
Mark Chapman September 13, 2018 at 11:42 pm
And I'm okay with that.
Moscow Exile September 13, 2018 at 11:58 pm
Get thee gone to a monastery, preferably a Russian Orthodox one, to purge thyself of thy wicked thoughts and deeds!

[Sep 15, 2018] Moscow is aware of who the people named as suspects in the Skripal case are, President Vladimir Putin said, adding that these people are civilians

Notable quotes:
"... The obvious thing for the British side to do would be to request Moscow to detain the two men so they could be interviewed as persons of interest. If this doesn't happen, it smacks of problems holding the official narrative together and I really can't see how the MSM could spin it away. Plus the surviving alleged victims or their families could have a case against the police for failing to investigate properly. ..."
"... They're already spinning it away by saying publicly that the responses they are getting from Russia are 'lies and obfuscation'. ..."
"... It will not make the slightest bit of difference in Britain; the British government will quickly announce, following any presentation of evidence by Russia, that it is all cleverly faked up, and remind people that these are professional intelligence agents, that's what they do, of course it looks convincing. All the more proof that they are what Britain says they are. ..."
Sep 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Warren September 12, 2018 at 12:41 pm

https://youtu.be/Rv7baKtUFAA

Fern September 12, 2018 at 3:44 pm

Moscow to London: Your move. This is an interesting development.

The obvious thing for the British side to do would be to request Moscow to detain the two men so they could be interviewed as persons of interest. If this doesn't happen, it smacks of problems holding the official narrative together and I really can't see how the MSM could spin it away. Plus the surviving alleged victims or their families could have a case against the police for failing to investigate properly.

Mark Chapman September 13, 2018 at 12:19 pm
They're already spinning it away by saying publicly that the responses they are getting from Russia are 'lies and obfuscation'.
Mark Chapman September 13, 2018 at 9:06 am
It will not make the slightest bit of difference in Britain; the British government will quickly announce, following any presentation of evidence by Russia, that it is all cleverly faked up, and remind people that these are professional intelligence agents, that's what they do, of course it looks convincing. All the more proof that they are what Britain says they are.

[Sep 15, 2018] On the meaning of the word "clearly"

Notable quotes:
"... 'Clearly' is an English term which is subject to national interpretations. In Canada – mostly English-speaking – it traditionally means, "supported by verifiable and compelling evidence", although I hasten to add that Canada cheerfully booted out 'Russian spies' to support its ally, Britain. ..."
"... But in England, 'clearly' might mean 'as required to serve in the cause of political necessity'. In this instance, if the passports/visas/whatever travel documents of the men concerned do not read "GRU Assassin Traveling on Business", then clearly there was an attempt to circumvent British checks. ..."
Sep 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile September 12, 2018 at 1:02 pm

Salisbury novichok attack: Russian spies smuggled chemical weapons through airport baggage checks, UK security minister admits

Two alleged Russian spies who launched the Salisbury attack smuggled novichok into the UK through Gatwick Airport, the security minister has confirmed.

I see! So now the disciplined and highly trained GRU assassins were spies as well.

Proper jack-of-all-trades!

Ben Wallace, who is currently Minister of State for Security and Economic Crime, " told the House of Commons there was 'clearly some form of attempt to create a legend to make sure that they circumvented our checks'.

'No doubt at the other end of that aeroplane journey [in Russia] there was some, I should think, the baggage checks weren't probably as good as they might be,' he added " -- because the Russians are all blithering incompetents stands ter reason, dunnit!

" Mr Wallace said requests for Russia to account for what happened in Salisbury had been met with 'obfuscation and lies', saying their response merely 'reinforces their guilt'. "

Of course it does! Why don't they just confess to what everyone knows they have done?

Jen September 12, 2018 at 8:18 pm
Were there no baggage checks by British customs officials at Gatwick International then?
Mark Chapman September 13, 2018 at 12:05 pm
'Clearly' is an English term which is subject to national interpretations. In Canada – mostly English-speaking – it traditionally means, "supported by verifiable and compelling evidence", although I hasten to add that Canada cheerfully booted out 'Russian spies' to support its ally, Britain.

But in England, 'clearly' might mean 'as required to serve in the cause of political necessity'. In this instance, if the passports/visas/whatever travel documents of the men concerned do not read "GRU Assassin Traveling on Business", then clearly there was an attempt to circumvent British checks.

[Sep 15, 2018] RT editor-in-chief's exclusive interview with Skripal case suspects Petrov Boshirov (TRANSCRIPT)

Notable quotes:
"... And the mockery from the Russophobes immediately kicks off in the British press! Travel all the way from Russia to visit Salisbury Cathedral and Stonehenge? What nonesense! Who are they trying to kid? That's because such a trip is barely imaginable for uncultured morons. ..."
Sep 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile September 13, 2018 at 5:11 am

RT editor-in-chief's exclusive interview with Skripal case suspects Petrov & Boshirov (TRANSCRIPT)
Published time: 13 Sep, 2018 11:32
Edited time: 13 Sep, 2018 12:29
James lake September 13, 2018 at 5:39 am
What a scoop! They don't look like the passport/ visa pictures which look like they were taken in bad light giving them a sinister air.

Scotland Yard should come over to interview them – they did say they were still investigating.

Moscow Exile September 13, 2018 at 6:16 am
And the mockery from the Russophobes immediately kicks off in the British press! Travel all the way from Russia to visit Salisbury Cathedral and Stonehenge? What nonesense! Who are they trying to kid? That's because such a trip is barely imaginable for uncultured morons.

When I last had the great misfortune to be in England with my family, and, to make matters worse, in London, my elder children begged and begged that we take a trip to Stonehenge. You see, they were fascinated by all that they had learnt about the place in their Russian schools.

We went on an excursion there, calling first at Windsor, then Salisbury, Stonehenge, and, finally, Bath for afternoon tea before heading off back to London.

Witness the moronity of some of my fellow countrymen in this comment published in today's Independent:

Well you can say a lot about our Russian friends: semi-educated, semi-civilised, pathological liars, undemocratic, authoritarian, crypto-fascist, mocked and despised the world over, but one thing we must concede is that they have a wonderful sense of humour.

So this delightful, oh-so intelligent looking couple flew all the way to Salisbury to have a look at the Cathedral clock, but the nasty inclement British weather (unlike tropical Moscow, of course) forced them to return with undue haste from whence they came.

May I suggest better acting classes and a credible script in future?

Doubtless the Indie's resident Putinite Mary Dejevsky, Comrade Corbyn and the brainless Prigozhin trolls infesting this site will try and sell it – because they are paid to, but anyone with an IQ higher than a daisy, ie. the rest of the sentient world, will shake their heads in disbelief at the knuckle-headed absurdity of this story.

Well, as regards the weather, moron, – for Russians, English snow is "inclement"', as it is wet shite. They were complaining of being wet to the knees. At the same time, in Russia it was minus 15C and there was plenty of deep, dry snow, which really would make Little Englanders like you whine.

Oh, and the person who owns that rag to which you wrote the above shite is owned by one of those "semi-educated, semi-civilised, pathological liars, undemocratic, authoritarian, crypto-fascist" Russians whom you so despise.

Moscow Exile September 13, 2018 at 6:29 am
Russians "semi-educated"?

In the years that I worked in England, in an English coal mine, I worked with quite a few fellow countrymen who were barely literate. I particularily remember one who often boasted that he had never read a book since he left school.

Fact :

Russia: The country with the highest literacy rate in Russia with almost 53% of the population has tertiary education. It is estimated that 95% of adults in Russia have higher secondary education and the country spends some 4.9% of GDP on education. 2.Jan 16, 2014

According to a study conducted in late April by the U.S. Department of Education and the National Institute of Literacy, 32 million adults in the U.S. can't read. That's 14 percent of the population. 21 percent of adults in the U.S. read below a 5th grade level, and 19 percent of high school graduates can't read.Jul 7, 2017

Adult Litercy UK :
Around 15 per cent, or 5.1 million adults in England, can be described as 'functionally illiterate.' They would not pass an English GCSE and have literacy levels at or below those expected of an 11-year-old. They can understand short straightforward texts on familiar topics accurately and independently, and obtain information from everyday sources, but reading information from unfamiliar sources, or on unfamiliar topics, could cause problems.

Many adults are reluctant to admit to their literacy difficulties and ask for help. One of the most important aspects of supporting adults with low literacy levels is to increase their self-esteem and persuade them of the benefits of improving their reading and writing.

Cortes September 13, 2018 at 7:51 am
(Awaits gnashing of teeth and rending of garments)
Moscow Exile September 13, 2018 at 7:01 am
And the British Foreign Office has replied as follows:

"The government is clear these men are officers of the Russian military intelligence service – the GRU – who used a devastatingly toxic, illegal chemical weapon on the streets of our country."

"We have repeatedly asked Russia to account for what happened in Salisbury in March. Today – just as we have seen throughout – they have responded with obfuscation and lies."

No obfuscation and lies from the FO, though!

Anything but a confession of guilt is "obfuscation and lies", it seems.

"We have repeatedly asked Russia to account for what happened in Salisbury in March

I tell you what happened: nothing that the Russian state had anything to do with!

I suggest you ask your Yukie nazi pals for an account of what happened there, and your pals in Tel-Aviv as well.

From the MP for Salisbury:

James lake September 13, 2018 at 8:26 am
What's the next move going to be in this saga.

The UK say they used fake names

The two guys say that this is not true – they used there true passports

They gave a reason for being in Salisbury.

can the uk police show CCTV of those places ?

Where are the Skripals

Fern September 13, 2018 at 4:33 pm
Russia, cleverly, has thrown down the gauntlet. If the FCO claims that the story of Petrov and Boshirov is simply 'obfuscation and lies', then why not ask Russia to help make these guys available for interview and send a couple of detectives plus interpreter on the next flight to Moscow?

No matter how the FCO and British government huffs, puffs and tries to blow houses down, ultimately they will be unable to explain why they haven't sought to question these guys.

yalensis September 14, 2018 at 2:31 am
Agreed, Fern. This was a very clever move on the chess board. Odd as these 2 characters are, the latest gambit serves to take this whole matter out of the Harry Potter world of geo-political magick, and put down to the mundane world of a detective story and criminal procedures. It pushes the politicians aside to make room for the gumshoes. From this point onward, the story is a police procedural.

[Sep 15, 2018] In a nutshell: Krutikov's theory is that these 2 "gopniki" earn their daily bread by illegal (or semi-legal) trade in European vitamins and supplement. This is what brings them to Europe and what brought them to Salisbury, most likely (i.e., the purchase of supplements, for resale in Russia).

Notable quotes:
"... In a nutshell: Krutikov's theory is that these 2 "gopniki" earn their daily bread by illegal (or semi-legal) trade in European vitamins and supplement. This is what brings them to Europe and what brought them to Salisbury, most likely (i.e., the purchase of supplements, for resale in Russia). ..."
Sep 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

yalensis September 13, 2018 at 11:42 am

Krutikov has an interesting take on these guys. I think I will probably do this story tomorrow, in my blog, as a "breaking news".

In a nutshell: Krutikov's theory is that these 2 "gopniki" earn their daily bread by illegal (or semi-legal) trade in European vitamins and supplement. This is what brings them to Europe and what brought them to Salisbury, most likely (i.e., the purchase of supplements, for resale in Russia).

While in Salisbury they decided to have a look at the sights; that part rings true; might as well see some sights.

The semi-legal nature of their "business" accounts for their nervousness; while their status in the Russian criminal underworld accounts for their horror at Simonyan's assuming them to be gay. An allegation which they rejected more vehemently than the accusations of being poisoners!

Krutikov also points attention to another instance of Vladimir Putin's subtle humor. Recall that when Putin announced the existence of these guys to the world, a couple of days ago, he used a strange phrase: "There is nothing particularly criminal there."
As usual, Putin is one step ahead of everybody in this ludicrous chess game.

yalensis September 13, 2018 at 11:46 am
P.S. "никакого особого криминала" was the phrase used by Putin. At the time nobody paid much attention and it was translated as "There is nothing criminal there," but the actual phrase is "There is nothing particularly criminal there."
yalensis September 13, 2018 at 1:37 pm
Okay, I have to make a factual correction, Krutikov wass wrong about Putin's quote, and one of his commenters who questioned it, turned out to be correct. (Which is sort of sad for Krutikov, because he built his blogpost around the humor of Putin's supposedly implication that the duo are petty thieves.)

So, I found the actual vid of Putin making this utterance, it can be seen on this link:

https://iz.ru/788502/video/delo-skripalei-deviat-mostov-i-dziudo-vtoroi-den-vladimira-putina-na-vef
at around 1:48 minutes in. What Putin actually says is:

ничего там особенного и криминального нет which translates as:
"There is nothing extraordinary there, nor criminal."

Sort of different slant, no?

yalensis September 13, 2018 at 12:10 pm
Update: The currently reigning theory in the Russian blogosphere is that Petrov and Boshirov earn their living buying and selling anabolic steroids on the grey market. Simonjan herself noted that Petrov has the build of a body-builder.

The theory that they are a "gay pair" is also highly plausible. When Simonjan asked them about their relationship, they spazzed out and refused to answer. Blog commenters point out that this would be the moment when a man would indignantly mention that he had a wife and kids, or a girlfriend; but nothing like that ensued.

Other commenters have noted that Salisbury is well-known in the gay subculture for having a large number of rather excellent gay bars. Something that might have also drawn this couple there, in addition to seeing the cathedral spire!

In general, Russian press and blogosphere are having a field day with this story.

James lake September 13, 2018 at 1:30 pm
This is rather nasty – accused by the British of being assassins – then subjected to all this negative intrusion into their private life.

The RT media behave like the gutter tabloids in the UK.

They don't deserve this nasty speculation.

yalensis September 14, 2018 at 2:27 am
Agree with James on that one point, namely that the Russian press is becoming too tabloid-y and going after the sensationalism.
I feel sorry for this duo in that, if they are indeed gay and have now been outed due to what they call a "horrendous coincidence", then their lives in Russia will be miserable from this point onward.

Russian society is simply not accepting of two grown men living together in a relationship.

To add insult to injury, the gutter-commenters on the Russian blogs continue to call them "pedophiles". Even though (duh!) they are both grown men.

Not sure if they live in Moscow or not. If in Moscow, they might still be able to survive, as the city is so Western now. But if they live out there in the sticks -- forget it.

Meanwhile, I just thought of something else. If these guys were sophisticated enough to play the Westie system, then they could adopt a tone of utter outrage, that the British government is harassing them for being gay. The Brits would have to cave on that one and issue a humble apology.

Fern September 13, 2018 at 4:22 pm
I've been thinking along similar lines – that their apparent shiftiness and caginess about the nature of their work suggests they could be involved in something that's semi-legal or which walks a fine line between the legal and the not.

We've seen lots of CCTV footage of Petrov and Boshirov in Salisbury but nothing has been said of their movements in London; what they did there is probably the reason why they flew to the UK. Either that or the GRU is deficient in training its would-be assassins on the reliability (non-existent) of British rail services in bad weather.

Mark Chapman September 13, 2018 at 11:36 pm
Once again, Britain is stiff with CCTV. We know from previous discussions that there is CCTV coverage of the Skripals' street and even their house. Where is the CCTV video of the two GRU assassins on Skripal's street, or near his house? The British say they have this evidence and are happily building timelines around it, but where is the proof? If they have it, why don't they show it? It would shut Russian defenses right down. All we've seen is evidence of the two being in Salisbury. Apparently being Russian In Salisbury is now like Driving While Black. Both automatically presuppose you are a criminal.
kirill September 13, 2018 at 5:06 pm
If they are gay, then the UK is going to have really bad optics with its setup. Gay GRU agents? According the UK MSM Russian gays are all being arrested and thrown in jail.

[Sep 15, 2018] Excellent review of the interview by Craig Murray, Well worth reading

Notable quotes:
"... The Russian Embassy in London has been keeping a record of all the scenarios presented in the UK by the Govt/MSM and at the last count it was stated that there were 40 different, often contradictory, unproven scenarios. ..."
Sep 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

James lake September 13, 2018 at 1:44 pm

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/09/the-strange-russian-alibi/

Excellent review of the interview by Craig Murray, Well worth reading

I agree with his assessment that RT did a very poor interview.

Moscow Exile September 13, 2018 at 10:18 pm
" Even more strange is the idea that it is wildly improbable for Russian visitors to wish to visit Salisbury cathedral and Stonehenge. Salisbury Cathedral is one of the most breathtaking achievements of Norman architecture, one of the great cathedrals of Europe. It attracts a great many foreign visitors. Stonehenge is world famous and a world heritage site. I went on holiday this year and visited Wurzburg to see the Bishop's Palace, and then the winery cooperative at Sommerach. Because somebody does not choose to spend their leisure time on a beach in Benidorm does not make them a killer. Lots of people go to Salisbury Cathedral. "

I had exactly the same thoughts! Holidays for most British moronic Tweeters means Benidorm and boooze in "British Pubs" that arte emblazoned with "Fish & Chips" signs.

I mentioned above that before setting off for London in June, 2016, my two eldest insisted that we include Stonehenge in our itinerary.

We were only in London for 3 days, though, before we set off for England, heading north to the English lakeland national park.

Moscow Exile September 13, 2018 at 10:23 pm
And saying that the RT interview was "poor" has now become a meme.

The interview was a scoop and not given the usual razzamatazz shite presention so beloved by the Western news media, such as FOX TV.

Moscow Exile September 13, 2018 at 11:14 pm
The British Foreign Office almost immediately reacted to the RT scoop with its usual bluster: "Lies and obfuscation!"

Interesting accusation off HM government is that!

Since March 4 of this year, the British side has stated that:

Yulia Skripal brought "Novichok" in her suitcase.

The Skripals were poisoned with buckwheat.

The Skripals were poisoned with bouquet of flowers at the cemetery.

The Skripals were poisoned with an UAV drone.

The Skripals were poisoned through air conditioning in the car.

The Skripals were poisoned with an aerosol.

The Skripals were poisoned by Mikhail Savitskis (aka "Gordon") group, consisting of 6 killers.

The killer/s poured "Novichok"onto a door handle.

The Skripals were poisoned with "Novichok" in a form of a gel.

The Skripals were poisoned with a perfume bottle (so it seems "Novichok" is still liquid).

The killer/s poured "Novichok" in a public toilet.

The killer/s poured "Novichok" in a hotel room.

The Skripals were poisoned by 2 GRU* agents.

"Novichok" is a "5–8 times more lethal than VX nerve agent" and "the most deadly ever made", though it can't kill even 2 people.

*There has, in fact, been no such organization known as the GRU in Russia since 2010, when the official name of the unit was changed from ″GRU″ [ Главное разведывательное управление -- Glavnoye razvedyvatel'noye upravleniye ], namely "The Main intelligence Agency", to "The Main Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation", or ″GU″ [Главное управление Генерального штаба Вооружённых Сил Российской Федерации -- Glavnoye upravleniye General'nogo shtaba Vooruzhyonnykh Sil Rossiiskoi Federatsii ].

The Russian Embassy in London has been keeping a record of all the scenarios presented in the UK by the Govt/MSM and at the last count it was stated that there were 40 different, often contradictory, unproven scenarios.

Last week, the UK Ambassador to the UN, she who resembles a drag-queen well past his sell-by date, namely the inimitable Karen Pierce, attempted to take the piss out of Russia by stating at the UNSC that Russia had put forward 40 different accounts of what had happened, which ludicrous proposals simply proved how lacking in credibility the Russian government allegations are.

The reality was, however, that in presenting such accounts, Russia was taking the piss out of Her Majesty's Government and the sensationalist, Russophobic, warmongering British press and their more than 40 accounts of what happened in Salisbury last March.

The delectable Karen seemed unaware of this fact.

Recall, that Pierce is the woman, a high ranking British diplomat, no less, who believes that Russia (i.e. the Russian Federation that came into existence in 1991) was founded on many of Karl Marx's precepts.

[Sep 15, 2018] Fred to Take Wheel of Ship of State: Will Implement Thoughtful and Reasonable Measures by Fred Reed

Sep 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

I have no choice. I must don the mantle of greatness and take the reins of the country. Desperate times call for desperate measures. I will run for the office of dictator, or President in American parlance.

Readers may ask, "But Fred, what makes you think you are qualified to be President?" To which I respond, "Nothing. But have you seen what we have now? You want a White House with John Bolton in it?"

You see.

I append here a few of the enlightened policies which I will effect. Hold your applause until the end. Interspersed for perusal are a few slogans that I may use to incite your fervor.

One: I will end all policies hostile to Cuba. I will not make life difficult for eleven million perfectly good people to please a ratpack of phony Cubans afflicting Miami. In fact, I will offer Havana a twenty-billion-dollar loan if they will take the bastards back. Cuba poses no danger to anyone. They have good cigars. They should be left alone to live as they please and drink mojitos. If nutcake Republicans protest my policy, I will have them stuffed into an abandoned oil well. Along with the pseudo-Cubans.

Two: Elizabeth Warren will be required to take a DNA test to see whether she is a wild Indian. If she is, she will have to wear feathers. Otherwise, to see a psychiatrist.

We have nothing to be afred of but Fred hisself! Has a classic ring, don't you think?

Three: I will end the Afghan war in an afternoon, relying on use the exit strategy proposed by James P. Coyne, the Sun Tsu of our age:

"OK, on the plane. Now ."

If Lindsey Graham complains that we need to kill more puzzled goatherds, I will have him inserted into the oil well on top of the Republicans and pseudo-Cubans, with Oprah tamped down on top as a sort of cork. There is nothing in Afghanistan that Americans need or want, except opium products, and private enterprise now provides these in abundance. Check the nearest street corner, or ask your kids.

Four: I will make membership in AIPAC a felony, and remind its members that I could have Oprah temporarily removed from the oil well to make more room. Aipackers can act as they please in their own country–I will not meddle in foreign affairs–but leave ours alone.

Fred! Ahhhhhh . This has a nicely orgasmic quality that will appeal to the younger demographic. It represents the satisfaction that my rule will bring to the entire country.

Five: I will end all sanctions against Iran. Then I will sell those Persian rascals airplanes and cars and electronic stuff and towel softener and lock them into the American economic system. This will make Boeing and AT&T and Intel love me with the deep sweet love that never dies, at least as long as the money flows, and there will be lots of jobs in Seattle.

Six: I will bring charges of treason against the contents of the Great Double Wide on Pennsylvania Avenue. The evidence is incontrovertible. The first rule of empire is Don't Let Your Enemies Unite. Everybody who has an empire knows this. Except us. Inside the White House a bunch of apparently brain-damaged political mostly left-overs, suffering from Beltway Bubble Syndrome, push China, Russia, and Iran together like some kind of international spaghetti-grope LGTBQRSTUV threesome. Who are our dismal leaders really working for? China?

A Fred in Every Pot This makes no sense, you may say. No, but we are doing politics. It is almost iambic pentameter, like Shakespeare. It will lend class to my campaign.

Seven: I will keep the F-35 program. It provides a lot of jobs. However, I will but get rid of the airplane. Isn't this brilliant? Instead of building the thing, workers will dig holes and fill them in, but keep their current salaries. It will improve their health, and make America safer. The fewer dangerous things the children in the Five-Sided Wind Tunnel have, the less trouble it can cause.

Better Fred than Dead! Some readers will dispute this. What do they know?

Eight: I have been urged to end affirmative action on the grounds that things should be done by people who can actually do them. This is racist. I will have nothing to do with it. Instead I will make affirmative action democratic and inclusive. Everyone will qualify for it. Special privilege should not be restricted to a minority. It isn't the American way.

Fred! Good as Any, Better'n Some. Good thinking.

Nine: I will abolish NATO. America should find a cheaper way to control the vassals. There is of course the bedtime story that NATO exists to confront the Russkies, and only incidentally provides a compulsory market for American armament. Nuts. Russia cannot seem dangerous to anyone who wasn't dropped on his head at some formative juncture in life. Smallish population, low military budget.

Likewise South Korea, which has twice the population and forty times the economy of the North. If it wants to defend itself, it has my blessing. If it doesn't, it isn't our problem.

Tippecanoe and Frederick Too! This may require exhumation, but for this we have backhoes.

Ten: I will make a modest reduction in the military budget, say seventy-five percent. To keep the soldiers happy I will invest in high-throughput roller coasters, a shooting range with BB guns, and really loud speaker systems that say Va roooom and Bangbangbang and fzzzzzzzzboom. These will provide psychic emoluments of martial life without the murder.

Eleven: The money thus saved I will use on pressing domestic problems. LA has 68,000 homeless people on the streets, San Francisco loses conventions because of so many homeless defecating on the sidewalks, Portland has homeless riots,. The lower primates in Antifa and BLM rend such social fabric as any longer exists. Dams are aging. Our trains are out of of the Fifties. And we spend a trillion a year on goddam aircraft carriers?

Fred? Well, Got a Better Idea?

Twelve: As an educational reform, I will have the Department of Education filled with linoleum cement, the occupants being left inside. This will raise the national IQ by at least three points. I will pass an amendment to the fragments of the Constitution saying, "No federal entity or person shall say, think, suggest, or do anything whatever regarding schooling on pain of garroting." Part of the savings from lowering the military budget will go to purchasing garrotes. The duration, content, and nature of the schools shall be left to localities without exception.

Thirteen: The father of any girl subjected to genital mutilation will be awarded a free gender reassignment operation, preferably with tin-snips. Genital mutilation should be inclusive. The father will then be placed for two weeks in the bottom of a public latrine in Uganda. If this doesn't suffice to deter the practice, I may be forced to adopt extreme measures. A country that allows such treatment of daughters deserves to go to hell. And seems to be.

Fourteen: I will impose a literacy test for voting. People too dim to find their way home should not be permitted to influence policies they have never heard of and can't spell. Yes, this might be called illiberal. If so, it will doubtless be the only example of illiberalism in this meritorious list.

Fifteen: In higher education, I will prescribe horse whipping for anyone saying microaggression, white privilege, whiteness, patriarchy, safe space, people of color, racism, any kind of phobia, or "Resist" in a squalling voice with an exclamation point. No curriculum containing the word "Studies" will be permitted.

Sixteen: Anyone prescribing Ritalin for children under twenty-one will be thrown from a helicopter.

In conclusion, I say to my yearning public, There, you, see, there is hope. Together we can do this. See you at the polls.

... ... ...

Fred Reed is a former news weasel and part-time sociopath living in central Mexico with his wife and three useless but agreeable street dogs. He says it suits him.

FoxTwo , says: September 15, 2018 at 11:03 am GMT

In today's world of political insanity, a healthy dose of sarcasm may be considered as a good antidote. Love your columns Fred; keep them up!

[Sep 15, 2018] British Police Find Putin's Passport at Scene of Salisbury Poison Attack

Sep 11, 2018 | russia-insider.com
Salisbury (dpo) - Last doubts over Russia's guilt in poisoning former spy Sergei Skripal have been eliminated. As the British government announced today, the passport of Russian president Vladimir Putin was found at the scene in Salisbury.

According to Prime Minister Theresa May, the passport was only now found in another search of the scene, as it had been hidden under a fallen leaf.

[Sep 14, 2018] English Translation of Udo Ulfkotte s Bought Journalists Suppressed

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... My guess is that this book is just too dangerous to allow it to become part of the debate on "fake news" and "Russiagate." Of course now the CIA doesn't even have to exclusively – "own"- journalists as fronts when ex-CIA heads are being hired outright by MSM as pundits. I just wish someone with access would post an English language PDF version online. It would be a real contribution to free thought and free speech to do so. ..."
"... Western elites realize what they could have, what they could do and what they could get away with, but only if they reinvent the political system Hitler created. If they defeat every enemy abroad who might stop them, next they'll do to their own people what the Nazis did to those they didn't want alive ..."
"... Journos have long been pliant enablers for Intel agencies. It's strange how Dr. Ulfkotte's revelations have been taken as some signifier of further Western moral decay/decadence. ..."
"... The real story here, which the media pretends not to notice, is that if Intelligence services and corporations did not finance newspapers they would cease to exist. The old business model whereby newspapers covered their costs by selling advertising and paid circulation is finished. Under that model there were, to an extent, incentives for the publisher to preserve a modicum of credibility in order to keep readership, as well as reasons to publish sensational stories to beat competition. ..."
"... The days that Ulfkotte recalled were times when it took lots of money and careful preparation to put spooks into the newsroom, nowadays the papers are only too happy to publish the CIA's PR and very grateful if the government pays their journalists' salaries. ..."
"... To understand how journalism is bought, go analyze the output of the Uk's Daily Telegraph. They literally sell space to lobbyists and for several years outraged BTL comment would tear the articles to shreds. The whole UK Press prostitutes itself whenever there is a US war on i.e. all the time. It really is about time the CIA were unmasked – they do not serve our interests, they serve only their own . ..."
Sep 14, 2018 | off-guardian.org

intergenerationaltrauma says February 11, 2018

The rather obvious suppression of the English version of what was a "best seller" in Germany suggests that the Western system of thought manipulation and consent manufacture sees itself as weaker and more vulnerable than one might at first imagine.

We can see from a year+ of "Russiagate" that Western media is a clown-show, much of so called "alternative media" included.

My guess is that this book is just too dangerous to allow it to become part of the debate on "fake news" and "Russiagate." Of course now the CIA doesn't even have to exclusively – "own"- journalists as fronts when ex-CIA heads are being hired outright by MSM as pundits. I just wish someone with access would post an English language PDF version online. It would be a real contribution to free thought and free speech to do so.

Google Talpiot Program says January 30, 2018
Just like "200 years together" by Solzhenitsyn which was never officially published in English despite Andrei having authored many works which were big sellers. Just an example of other private business and corporations are often fully responsible for pro-establishment censorship.
Harry Stotle says January 15, 2018
The treatment of the book aroused suspicion because of its content – ie supine news outlets forever dancing to the tune of western military imperatives.

Ongoing support for illegal wars tell us that the MSM has hardly been at the forefront of informing readers why war criminals like Hilary and Obama keep getting away with it. In fact Obama, just like Kissinger was awarded a peace prize – so obviously something has gone very wrong somewhere.

It may be, although it seems unlikely that the mis-handling of an important theme like this is simply due to oversight by the publisher (as Matt claims) but neither is it beyond the realms of possibility that somebody has had a word with someone in the publishing world, perhaps because they are not overly keen on the fact Udo Ulfkotte has deviated from the media's mono-narrative about why it is necessary for the US to destabilise countries and kill so many of their citizens.

Lets face it – it would be harder for the pattern to be maintained if the MSM was not so afraid of telling the truth, or at least be more willing to hold to account politicians as the consequences of their disastrous policies unfold for all to see.

Maybe you want to have a go at answering the obvious question begged by such self evident truths – why are the MSM usually lying?

Marcus says January 20, 2018
The book was never published in English. It was advertised, and then withdrawn. That is suppression...
Michael McNulty says January 14, 2018
Somebody said banning books is the modern form of book burning, and like Heinrich Heine said two centuries ago, "Where they burn books, in the end, they start burning people."

Western elites realize what they could have, what they could do and what they could get away with, but only if they reinvent the political system Hitler created. If they defeat every enemy abroad who might stop them, next they'll do to their own people what the Nazis did to those they didn't want alive. If enough water sources are lost to fracking, and enough food sources lost through poisoned seas and forest fires, many people will go to their camps as refuge but few will survive them. This ecological destruction is for future population reduction.

In the US they use newspeak to say what the Nazis described with more honesty. Their master race became the indispensable nation, their world domination became full spectrum dominance, and Totalerkrieg became the global war on terror. There will be others.

jones says January 12, 2018
Farzad Basoft anyone ? Journos have long been pliant enablers for Intel agencies. It's strange how Dr. Ulfkotte's revelations have been taken as some signifier of further Western moral decay/decadence.
summitflyer says January 15, 2018
Maybe I am taking what you wrote out of context but I don't find it strange at all .It is just that someone, Udo, on the inside has become a whistle blower , and confirmed what most suspected .The establishment can't have that.

See John Swinton on the independence of the press at http://constitution.org/pub/swinton_press.htm

Connect says January 12, 2018
As the economy growth has this so-called invisible hand, journalism also has an 'invisible pen'. One of the questions that need an answer: how come feminists are so anti-Putin and anti-Russia? Easy to connect to dots?
bevin says January 11, 2018
The real story here, which the media pretends not to notice, is that if Intelligence services and corporations did not finance newspapers they would cease to exist. The old business model whereby newspapers covered their costs by selling advertising and paid circulation is finished. Under that model there were, to an extent, incentives for the publisher to preserve a modicum of credibility in order to keep readership, as well as reasons to publish sensational stories to beat competition.

Those days are gone: none of the newspapers make financial profits, they now exist because they have patrons. They always did, of course, but now they have nothing else- the advertisers have left and circulation is diminishing rapidly.

The days that Ulfkotte recalled were times when it took lots of money and careful preparation to put spooks into the newsroom, nowadays the papers are only too happy to publish the CIA's PR and very grateful if the government pays their journalists' salaries.

As to competition that is restricted to publishers competing to demonstrate their loyalty to the government and their ingenuity in candy coating its propaganda.

Anyone doubt that Luke Harding will be in the running for a Pulitzer? Or perhaps even the Nobel Prize for Literature?

Serge Lubomudrov says January 11, 2018
For those whose German is not good enough (like me, unfortunately), but know Russian, there's a Russian translation: https://www.litres.ru/udo-ulfkotte/prodazhnye-zhurnalisty-lubaya-pravda-za-vashi-dengi/
vexarb says January 9, 2018
For what it's worth, I skimmed through this very long link by Matt, and could find no mention of poison gas -- certainly no denunciation -- just horrific conventional arms : Der Spiegel 1984: http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-13508659.html

Also for what it's worth, the German publisher's blurb which I got Google to translate above, says there is much more to the book than old Soddem: the author names names and points to organizations.

Now, without any evidence, based only on my faulty memory and highly biased interpretation of events strung together on a timeline, here is my conspiracy story about a very nice country called Iraq and a very nasty Iraqi called Saddam who came to a very nasty end at the hands of his much more nasty friends, who first gave him a boost and then put in the boot.

George Cornell says January 9, 2018
That is more than plausible. Unfortunately. Hard not to sympathize with the Iraqis and feel shame for what has been done in the name of the US and UK. Rotten to the core, and sanctimonious to boot.
rtj1211 says January 9, 2018
To understand how journalism is bought, go analyze the output of the Uk's Daily Telegraph. They literally sell space to lobbyists and for several years outraged BTL comment would tear the articles to shreds. The whole UK Press prostitutes itself whenever there is a US war on i.e. all the time. It really is about time the CIA were unmasked – they do not serve our interests, they serve only their own .
Carrie says January 9, 2018
The Guardian sells space to lobbyists too. Not ad space – article space. It's literally hiring itself out to whomever wants to buy the right to publish an article under its name.
Brian Steere says January 8, 2018
Well one things stands out in bold and that is the fear that such a revelation is associated with. 'Broad spectrum dominance' of a central intelligent agency is a reversal of the wholeness of being expressing through all its parts.

Fake intelligence is basically made up to serve a believed goal. The terrorism of fear generates the goal of a self-protection that sells true relationship to 'save itself'.

This goes deep into what we take to be our mind. The mind that thinks it is in control by controlling what it thinks.

If I can observe this in myself at will, is it any surprise I can see it in our world?

What is the fear that most deeply motivates or drives the human agenda?
I do not ask this of our superficial thinking, but of a core self-honesty that cannot be 'killed' but only covered over with a thinking-complex.

And is it insane or unreal to be moved by love?

We are creatures of choice and beneath all masking, we are also the creator of choice.
But the true creative is not framed into a choosing between, but feeling one call as the movement of it.

When the 'intelligence' of a masking narrative no longer serves, be the willingness for what you no longer claim to have, and open to being moved from within.

candideschmyles says January 8, 2018
I am so tired of the simmering fury that lives inside me. This bubbling cauldron brim full of egregious truths, images and accounts accumulated over nearly 40 years of looking behind the headlines. I disagree that the usurpation of journalists and media organisations is in any way a recent phenomena. It certainly predates my emergent mind. And even the most lauded of anti-establishment hacks and film makers self-censored to some degree. True, the blatant in your face propaganda and thought control agenda has accelerated, but it was always there. I do not believe Chomsky, Oliver Stone, Pilger and their like could have done much more than they have, that is to guide us in a direction counter to the official narrative. And to insinuate they are gatekeepers, when our heads never stretch above the parapet, is really just a reflection of our own frustration that despite their work the only change remains for the worse.
Yet I fear worse is to come. Our safe bitching in glorious anonymity has been all that we have had as solace to the angst that pervades us, the other 1%. But the the thumbscrew is tightening. We may be as little as months away from any dissent being entirely removed from the internet by AI algorithms. I have already been receiving warnings on several sites anyone here would call legitimate that have had their security certificates removed and the statement that the site may contain malicious code etc. How prepared are we for blackout?
Serge Lubomudrov says January 8, 2018
The publisher even removed the 2 year old news announcement about the book! Though the twit is still there. Probably, overlooked.

https://twitter.com/saumacus/status/950468330086858757

summitflyer says January 8, 2018
A foundation should be set up in remembrance of Udo and sponsored by all true journalists and truth seekers. Maybe some day there will be a Udo Ulfkotte award to the bravest journalist of the year .Wouldn't that be something .Udo's work would not have been in vain . That would throw a monkey wrench into orgs like the Guardian and their ilk .Just dreaming out loud maybe , but with good intentions.
Alun Thomas says January 8, 2018
Original German version can be found here: http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=ABA05365ABE35FD446D6F83B149A32A2
Unfortunately no english version, but other controversial texts have sometimes been crowd-translated, maybe something like this may happen
Chris G says January 8, 2018
Thank you Alun for the link to the German edition, which I have managed to download (naughty me!) I think the suggestion of retranslating important sections and dressing these in some commentary for (presumably legitimate) publication on e.g. Off-G would be a good idea. I'm quite fluent in German and would be glad to help.
Mods: do you see any legal pitfalls?
Admin says January 8, 2018
That depends on who holds the rights to the English language version and the original and whether they would want to take issue. If it's Ulfkotte's family they may be happy to see his work get some sort of airing in English. If it's his publishers we can imagine they will see things differently – as indeed would whoever it is that seems to want the book buried.
Martin Read says January 8, 2018
Tried to get to that site and was told that I couldn't via my Virgin provider because of a High Court order. Somebody moved a bit quickly.
Carrie says January 8, 2018
Me too! My Broadband provider is blocking access due to a High Court injunction.

@ChrisG & @Alun Thomas – can you guys still get there? It might be a country or region thing.

Alun Thomas says January 8, 2018
I heard it is blocked in many western countries, as the site is well known for its disregard for copyright. Fortunately not the case where I am (NZ). If you're technically inclined, a VPN or anonymising application may help, although a VPN that 'exits' in a western area won't get you any further ahead.
George Cornell says January 8, 2018
I had no problem, but provider in Canada
Arrby says January 11, 2018
One hopes. I also hold out hope for F. William Engdahl's "Geheimakte NGOs." Here's a Dissident Voice article in which Engdahl discusses the role of NGOs in aiding and abetting the US regime change program:

https://dissidentvoice.org/2017/07/the-us-empire-the-cia-and-the-ngos/

I also recommend, highly, Stephen Gowans's article about social networking in the service of the US regime change program:

"Overthrow Inc.: Peter Ackerman's quest to do what the CIA used to do, and make it seem progressive" by Stephen Gowans
https://gowans.wordpress.com/2009/08/06/overthrow-inc-peter-ackerman%E2%80%99s-quest-to-do-what-the-cia-used-to-so-and-make-it-seem-progressive/

Frank says January 8, 2018
Yes, it has also been interesting to note that in 2015 the Guardian published a review of Richard Sakwa's book 'Frontline Ukraine' in which the author was critical of both NATO and the EU, in fomenting this crisis. The 2014 'coup' which was carried out in February 2014 was, according to the independent geopolitical publication, Strator, 'the most blatant in history.' The appraisal which was carried out by Guardian journalist Jonathon Steele was generally favourably disposed to Sakwa's record of events; however, Mr Steele now rarely publishes anything in the Guardian. Read into this what you like.

As to Sakwa's latest book,'' Russia Against the Rest'', – nothing, not a peep, it doesn't exist, it never existed, it never will exist. It would appear to be the case that the Guardian is now fully integrated into the military/surveillance/media-propaganda apparatus. The liberal gatekeeper as to what is and what isn't acceptable. Its function is pure to serve the interests of the powerful, in much the same way as the church did in the middle ages. The media doesn't just serve the interests power it is also part of the same structure of dominance, albeit the liberal wing of the ruling coalition.

During the British war against the Boers in South Africa, at the turn of the 19/20 century, the then Manchester Guardian took a brave and critical stand against the UK government. This lead to its offices in Manchester being attacked by jingoistic mobs, as was the home of the then editor C.P.Scott, whose family needed police protection. In those days 'Facts were Sacred', unlike the present where opposing views are increasingly ignored or suppressed.

Hugh O'Neill says January 8, 2018
Having just watched the documentary film tribute to I.F. Stone, "All Governments Lie", I was struck by the fact that no-one mentioned Michael Hastings, the Rolling Stone journalist (who outed General McChrystal, but whose Mercedes went mysteriously out of control, hit a tree and exploded, throwing the engine 200 yards clear of the wreck ). Here was a film about control and self-censorship, yet no-one even breathed the acronyms C.I.A. or FBI. Matt Taibbi referred to a silent coup, but none dared to mention the assassinations of JFK, MLK and RFK. These doyens of Truth included the thoroughly dodgy Noam Chomsky. Finally, the Spartacus website suggests that the saintly I.F. Stone was in the pay of the CIA. Other terms unspoken were CIA Operation Mockingbird or Operation Northwoods. There was a clip of 9/11, but zero attempt to join up all the dots.
RIP Udo Ulfkotte. CIA long ago developed a dart to induce all the signs of a heart attack, so one is naturally somewhat suspicious. Lies and assassinations are two sides of the same coin.
Harry Stotle says January 8, 2018
The only thing harder to find than Udo Ulfkotte's book is a Guardian review of it.

I daresay any mention of this book, BTL, would immediately be moderated (i.e censored) followed by a yellow or red card for the cheeky commentator.
The level of pretence on this forum has now reached epic proportions, and seems to cuts both ways, ie. commentators pretending that there are not several subjects which are virtually impossible to discuss in any depth (such as media censorship), and moderators pretending that 'community standards' is not simply a crude device to control conversational discourse, especially when a commentators point of view stray beyond narrow, Guardian approved borders.

Books, such as 'Bought Journalists' (which expose the corruption at the heart of western media) are especially inconvenient for the risible 'fake news' agenda currently being rammed down the readerships throat – some of these people at the Guardian have either absolutely no insight, or no shame.

Harry Stotle says January 8, 2018
This piece put me in mind of Daniele Gansers seminal book, 'NATOs secret armies' Of course Off-G picked up on it but I can't find any commentary from the Guardian
https://off-guardian.org/2015/07/17/natos-secret-armies-gladio-in-western-europe/

Ulfkotte and Ganser in their ways are both telling a similar story – NATO, i.e an arm of the US military industrial complex are mass murderers and sufficiently intimidating to have most western journalists singing from the same hymn sheet.

Since the Guardian follows the party line it is only possible to send coded or cryptic messages (BTL) should commentators wish to deviate from the approved narrative.
For example, I was 'pre-moderated' for having doubts about the veracity of the so called 'Parsons Green tube bomb', especially the nature of the injuries inflicted on a young model who looked like she was suffering from toothache.
https://www.thenational.ae/image/policy:1.628812:1505494262/wo16-web-parsons-green.JPG?f=16×9&w=1024&$p$f$w=e135eda

My guess is NATO's secret army are still in full swing but there is no chance the Guardian will pick up on it – they're too busy whipping up antipathy towards Iran.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/05/west-ignores-iranian-people-power-peril#comments

George Cornell says January 8, 2018
Been there, done that. What ordinarily happens if the submission is proper and cannot be censored on the basis of impropriety or foulmouthedness or any other good reason, but exposes a Guardian sacred cow in an embarrassing light, is that it is said to be off topic. Now this is really unaccountable, and truly subjective.

The community in community standards is "them" and has close ties to the 1%, if I hazard a guess.

[Sep 14, 2018] English Translation of Udo Ulfkotte s Bought Journalists Suppressed

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... My guess is that this book is just too dangerous to allow it to become part of the debate on "fake news" and "Russiagate." Of course now the CIA doesn't even have to exclusively – "own"- journalists as fronts when ex-CIA heads are being hired outright by MSM as pundits. I just wish someone with access would post an English language PDF version online. It would be a real contribution to free thought and free speech to do so. ..."
"... Western elites realize what they could have, what they could do and what they could get away with, but only if they reinvent the political system Hitler created. If they defeat every enemy abroad who might stop them, next they'll do to their own people what the Nazis did to those they didn't want alive ..."
"... Journos have long been pliant enablers for Intel agencies. It's strange how Dr. Ulfkotte's revelations have been taken as some signifier of further Western moral decay/decadence. ..."
"... The real story here, which the media pretends not to notice, is that if Intelligence services and corporations did not finance newspapers they would cease to exist. The old business model whereby newspapers covered their costs by selling advertising and paid circulation is finished. Under that model there were, to an extent, incentives for the publisher to preserve a modicum of credibility in order to keep readership, as well as reasons to publish sensational stories to beat competition. ..."
"... The days that Ulfkotte recalled were times when it took lots of money and careful preparation to put spooks into the newsroom, nowadays the papers are only too happy to publish the CIA's PR and very grateful if the government pays their journalists' salaries. ..."
"... To understand how journalism is bought, go analyze the output of the Uk's Daily Telegraph. They literally sell space to lobbyists and for several years outraged BTL comment would tear the articles to shreds. The whole UK Press prostitutes itself whenever there is a US war on i.e. all the time. It really is about time the CIA were unmasked – they do not serve our interests, they serve only their own . ..."
Sep 14, 2018 | off-guardian.org

intergenerationaltrauma says February 11, 2018

The rather obvious suppression of the English version of what was a "best seller" in Germany suggests that the Western system of thought manipulation and consent manufacture sees itself as weaker and more vulnerable than one might at first imagine.

We can see from a year+ of "Russiagate" that Western media is a clown-show, much of so called "alternative media" included.

My guess is that this book is just too dangerous to allow it to become part of the debate on "fake news" and "Russiagate." Of course now the CIA doesn't even have to exclusively – "own"- journalists as fronts when ex-CIA heads are being hired outright by MSM as pundits. I just wish someone with access would post an English language PDF version online. It would be a real contribution to free thought and free speech to do so.

Google Talpiot Program says January 30, 2018
Just like "200 years together" by Solzhenitsyn which was never officially published in English despite Andrei having authored many works which were big sellers. Just an example of other private business and corporations are often fully responsible for pro-establishment censorship.
Harry Stotle says January 15, 2018
The treatment of the book aroused suspicion because of its content – ie supine news outlets forever dancing to the tune of western military imperatives.

Ongoing support for illegal wars tell us that the MSM has hardly been at the forefront of informing readers why war criminals like Hilary and Obama keep getting away with it. In fact Obama, just like Kissinger was awarded a peace prize – so obviously something has gone very wrong somewhere.

It may be, although it seems unlikely that the mis-handling of an important theme like this is simply due to oversight by the publisher (as Matt claims) but neither is it beyond the realms of possibility that somebody has had a word with someone in the publishing world, perhaps because they are not overly keen on the fact Udo Ulfkotte has deviated from the media's mono-narrative about why it is necessary for the US to destabilise countries and kill so many of their citizens.

Lets face it – it would be harder for the pattern to be maintained if the MSM was not so afraid of telling the truth, or at least be more willing to hold to account politicians as the consequences of their disastrous policies unfold for all to see.

Maybe you want to have a go at answering the obvious question begged by such self evident truths – why are the MSM usually lying?

Marcus says January 20, 2018
The book was never published in English. It was advertised, and then withdrawn. That is suppression...
Michael McNulty says January 14, 2018
Somebody said banning books is the modern form of book burning, and like Heinrich Heine said two centuries ago, "Where they burn books, in the end, they start burning people."

Western elites realize what they could have, what they could do and what they could get away with, but only if they reinvent the political system Hitler created. If they defeat every enemy abroad who might stop them, next they'll do to their own people what the Nazis did to those they didn't want alive. If enough water sources are lost to fracking, and enough food sources lost through poisoned seas and forest fires, many people will go to their camps as refuge but few will survive them. This ecological destruction is for future population reduction.

In the US they use newspeak to say what the Nazis described with more honesty. Their master race became the indispensable nation, their world domination became full spectrum dominance, and Totalerkrieg became the global war on terror. There will be others.

jones says January 12, 2018
Farzad Basoft anyone ? Journos have long been pliant enablers for Intel agencies. It's strange how Dr. Ulfkotte's revelations have been taken as some signifier of further Western moral decay/decadence.
summitflyer says January 15, 2018
Maybe I am taking what you wrote out of context but I don't find it strange at all .It is just that someone, Udo, on the inside has become a whistle blower , and confirmed what most suspected .The establishment can't have that.

See John Swinton on the independence of the press at http://constitution.org/pub/swinton_press.htm

Connect says January 12, 2018
As the economy growth has this so-called invisible hand, journalism also has an 'invisible pen'. One of the questions that need an answer: how come feminists are so anti-Putin and anti-Russia? Easy to connect to dots?
bevin says January 11, 2018
The real story here, which the media pretends not to notice, is that if Intelligence services and corporations did not finance newspapers they would cease to exist. The old business model whereby newspapers covered their costs by selling advertising and paid circulation is finished. Under that model there were, to an extent, incentives for the publisher to preserve a modicum of credibility in order to keep readership, as well as reasons to publish sensational stories to beat competition.

Those days are gone: none of the newspapers make financial profits, they now exist because they have patrons. They always did, of course, but now they have nothing else- the advertisers have left and circulation is diminishing rapidly.

The days that Ulfkotte recalled were times when it took lots of money and careful preparation to put spooks into the newsroom, nowadays the papers are only too happy to publish the CIA's PR and very grateful if the government pays their journalists' salaries.

As to competition that is restricted to publishers competing to demonstrate their loyalty to the government and their ingenuity in candy coating its propaganda.

Anyone doubt that Luke Harding will be in the running for a Pulitzer? Or perhaps even the Nobel Prize for Literature?

Serge Lubomudrov says January 11, 2018
For those whose German is not good enough (like me, unfortunately), but know Russian, there's a Russian translation: https://www.litres.ru/udo-ulfkotte/prodazhnye-zhurnalisty-lubaya-pravda-za-vashi-dengi/
vexarb says January 9, 2018
For what it's worth, I skimmed through this very long link by Matt, and could find no mention of poison gas -- certainly no denunciation -- just horrific conventional arms : Der Spiegel 1984: http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-13508659.html

Also for what it's worth, the German publisher's blurb which I got Google to translate above, says there is much more to the book than old Soddem: the author names names and points to organizations.

Now, without any evidence, based only on my faulty memory and highly biased interpretation of events strung together on a timeline, here is my conspiracy story about a very nice country called Iraq and a very nasty Iraqi called Saddam who came to a very nasty end at the hands of his much more nasty friends, who first gave him a boost and then put in the boot.

George Cornell says January 9, 2018
That is more than plausible. Unfortunately. Hard not to sympathize with the Iraqis and feel shame for what has been done in the name of the US and UK. Rotten to the core, and sanctimonious to boot.
rtj1211 says January 9, 2018
To understand how journalism is bought, go analyze the output of the Uk's Daily Telegraph. They literally sell space to lobbyists and for several years outraged BTL comment would tear the articles to shreds. The whole UK Press prostitutes itself whenever there is a US war on i.e. all the time. It really is about time the CIA were unmasked – they do not serve our interests, they serve only their own .
Carrie says January 9, 2018
The Guardian sells space to lobbyists too. Not ad space – article space. It's literally hiring itself out to whomever wants to buy the right to publish an article under its name.
Brian Steere says January 8, 2018
Well one things stands out in bold and that is the fear that such a revelation is associated with. 'Broad spectrum dominance' of a central intelligent agency is a reversal of the wholeness of being expressing through all its parts.

Fake intelligence is basically made up to serve a believed goal. The terrorism of fear generates the goal of a self-protection that sells true relationship to 'save itself'.

This goes deep into what we take to be our mind. The mind that thinks it is in control by controlling what it thinks.

If I can observe this in myself at will, is it any surprise I can see it in our world?

What is the fear that most deeply motivates or drives the human agenda?
I do not ask this of our superficial thinking, but of a core self-honesty that cannot be 'killed' but only covered over with a thinking-complex.

And is it insane or unreal to be moved by love?

We are creatures of choice and beneath all masking, we are also the creator of choice.
But the true creative is not framed into a choosing between, but feeling one call as the movement of it.

When the 'intelligence' of a masking narrative no longer serves, be the willingness for what you no longer claim to have, and open to being moved from within.

candideschmyles says January 8, 2018
I am so tired of the simmering fury that lives inside me. This bubbling cauldron brim full of egregious truths, images and accounts accumulated over nearly 40 years of looking behind the headlines. I disagree that the usurpation of journalists and media organisations is in any way a recent phenomena. It certainly predates my emergent mind. And even the most lauded of anti-establishment hacks and film makers self-censored to some degree. True, the blatant in your face propaganda and thought control agenda has accelerated, but it was always there. I do not believe Chomsky, Oliver Stone, Pilger and their like could have done much more than they have, that is to guide us in a direction counter to the official narrative. And to insinuate they are gatekeepers, when our heads never stretch above the parapet, is really just a reflection of our own frustration that despite their work the only change remains for the worse.
Yet I fear worse is to come. Our safe bitching in glorious anonymity has been all that we have had as solace to the angst that pervades us, the other 1%. But the the thumbscrew is tightening. We may be as little as months away from any dissent being entirely removed from the internet by AI algorithms. I have already been receiving warnings on several sites anyone here would call legitimate that have had their security certificates removed and the statement that the site may contain malicious code etc. How prepared are we for blackout?
Serge Lubomudrov says January 8, 2018
The publisher even removed the 2 year old news announcement about the book! Though the twit is still there. Probably, overlooked.

https://twitter.com/saumacus/status/950468330086858757

summitflyer says January 8, 2018
A foundation should be set up in remembrance of Udo and sponsored by all true journalists and truth seekers. Maybe some day there will be a Udo Ulfkotte award to the bravest journalist of the year .Wouldn't that be something .Udo's work would not have been in vain . That would throw a monkey wrench into orgs like the Guardian and their ilk .Just dreaming out loud maybe , but with good intentions.
Alun Thomas says January 8, 2018
Original German version can be found here: http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=ABA05365ABE35FD446D6F83B149A32A2
Unfortunately no english version, but other controversial texts have sometimes been crowd-translated, maybe something like this may happen
Chris G says January 8, 2018
Thank you Alun for the link to the German edition, which I have managed to download (naughty me!) I think the suggestion of retranslating important sections and dressing these in some commentary for (presumably legitimate) publication on e.g. Off-G would be a good idea. I'm quite fluent in German and would be glad to help.
Mods: do you see any legal pitfalls?
Admin says January 8, 2018
That depends on who holds the rights to the English language version and the original and whether they would want to take issue. If it's Ulfkotte's family they may be happy to see his work get some sort of airing in English. If it's his publishers we can imagine they will see things differently – as indeed would whoever it is that seems to want the book buried.
Martin Read says January 8, 2018
Tried to get to that site and was told that I couldn't via my Virgin provider because of a High Court order. Somebody moved a bit quickly.
Carrie says January 8, 2018
Me too! My Broadband provider is blocking access due to a High Court injunction.

@ChrisG & @Alun Thomas – can you guys still get there? It might be a country or region thing.

Alun Thomas says January 8, 2018
I heard it is blocked in many western countries, as the site is well known for its disregard for copyright. Fortunately not the case where I am (NZ). If you're technically inclined, a VPN or anonymising application may help, although a VPN that 'exits' in a western area won't get you any further ahead.
George Cornell says January 8, 2018
I had no problem, but provider in Canada
Arrby says January 11, 2018
One hopes. I also hold out hope for F. William Engdahl's "Geheimakte NGOs." Here's a Dissident Voice article in which Engdahl discusses the role of NGOs in aiding and abetting the US regime change program:

https://dissidentvoice.org/2017/07/the-us-empire-the-cia-and-the-ngos/

I also recommend, highly, Stephen Gowans's article about social networking in the service of the US regime change program:

"Overthrow Inc.: Peter Ackerman's quest to do what the CIA used to do, and make it seem progressive" by Stephen Gowans
https://gowans.wordpress.com/2009/08/06/overthrow-inc-peter-ackerman%E2%80%99s-quest-to-do-what-the-cia-used-to-so-and-make-it-seem-progressive/

Frank says January 8, 2018
Yes, it has also been interesting to note that in 2015 the Guardian published a review of Richard Sakwa's book 'Frontline Ukraine' in which the author was critical of both NATO and the EU, in fomenting this crisis. The 2014 'coup' which was carried out in February 2014 was, according to the independent geopolitical publication, Strator, 'the most blatant in history.' The appraisal which was carried out by Guardian journalist Jonathon Steele was generally favourably disposed to Sakwa's record of events; however, Mr Steele now rarely publishes anything in the Guardian. Read into this what you like.

As to Sakwa's latest book,'' Russia Against the Rest'', – nothing, not a peep, it doesn't exist, it never existed, it never will exist. It would appear to be the case that the Guardian is now fully integrated into the military/surveillance/media-propaganda apparatus. The liberal gatekeeper as to what is and what isn't acceptable. Its function is pure to serve the interests of the powerful, in much the same way as the church did in the middle ages. The media doesn't just serve the interests power it is also part of the same structure of dominance, albeit the liberal wing of the ruling coalition.

During the British war against the Boers in South Africa, at the turn of the 19/20 century, the then Manchester Guardian took a brave and critical stand against the UK government. This lead to its offices in Manchester being attacked by jingoistic mobs, as was the home of the then editor C.P.Scott, whose family needed police protection. In those days 'Facts were Sacred', unlike the present where opposing views are increasingly ignored or suppressed.

Hugh O'Neill says January 8, 2018
Having just watched the documentary film tribute to I.F. Stone, "All Governments Lie", I was struck by the fact that no-one mentioned Michael Hastings, the Rolling Stone journalist (who outed General McChrystal, but whose Mercedes went mysteriously out of control, hit a tree and exploded, throwing the engine 200 yards clear of the wreck ). Here was a film about control and self-censorship, yet no-one even breathed the acronyms C.I.A. or FBI. Matt Taibbi referred to a silent coup, but none dared to mention the assassinations of JFK, MLK and RFK. These doyens of Truth included the thoroughly dodgy Noam Chomsky. Finally, the Spartacus website suggests that the saintly I.F. Stone was in the pay of the CIA. Other terms unspoken were CIA Operation Mockingbird or Operation Northwoods. There was a clip of 9/11, but zero attempt to join up all the dots.
RIP Udo Ulfkotte. CIA long ago developed a dart to induce all the signs of a heart attack, so one is naturally somewhat suspicious. Lies and assassinations are two sides of the same coin.
Harry Stotle says January 8, 2018
The only thing harder to find than Udo Ulfkotte's book is a Guardian review of it.

I daresay any mention of this book, BTL, would immediately be moderated (i.e censored) followed by a yellow or red card for the cheeky commentator.
The level of pretence on this forum has now reached epic proportions, and seems to cuts both ways, ie. commentators pretending that there are not several subjects which are virtually impossible to discuss in any depth (such as media censorship), and moderators pretending that 'community standards' is not simply a crude device to control conversational discourse, especially when a commentators point of view stray beyond narrow, Guardian approved borders.

Books, such as 'Bought Journalists' (which expose the corruption at the heart of western media) are especially inconvenient for the risible 'fake news' agenda currently being rammed down the readerships throat – some of these people at the Guardian have either absolutely no insight, or no shame.

Harry Stotle says January 8, 2018
This piece put me in mind of Daniele Gansers seminal book, 'NATOs secret armies' Of course Off-G picked up on it but I can't find any commentary from the Guardian
https://off-guardian.org/2015/07/17/natos-secret-armies-gladio-in-western-europe/

Ulfkotte and Ganser in their ways are both telling a similar story – NATO, i.e an arm of the US military industrial complex are mass murderers and sufficiently intimidating to have most western journalists singing from the same hymn sheet.

Since the Guardian follows the party line it is only possible to send coded or cryptic messages (BTL) should commentators wish to deviate from the approved narrative.
For example, I was 'pre-moderated' for having doubts about the veracity of the so called 'Parsons Green tube bomb', especially the nature of the injuries inflicted on a young model who looked like she was suffering from toothache.
https://www.thenational.ae/image/policy:1.628812:1505494262/wo16-web-parsons-green.JPG?f=16×9&w=1024&$p$f$w=e135eda

My guess is NATO's secret army are still in full swing but there is no chance the Guardian will pick up on it – they're too busy whipping up antipathy towards Iran.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/05/west-ignores-iranian-people-power-peril#comments

George Cornell says January 8, 2018
Been there, done that. What ordinarily happens if the submission is proper and cannot be censored on the basis of impropriety or foulmouthedness or any other good reason, but exposes a Guardian sacred cow in an embarrassing light, is that it is said to be off topic. Now this is really unaccountable, and truly subjective.

The community in community standards is "them" and has close ties to the 1%, if I hazard a guess.

[Sep 14, 2018] British Are In Flight Forward, Frantic to Save the Empire

Sep 06, 2018 | larouchepac.com
Prime Minister Teresa May took to the floor of the Parliament today to report that the Crown Prosecution Service and Police had issued warrants for two Russian GRU officials who, they claim, had carried out the Skripal attacks last March. "We were right," she said with a stiff upper lip, "to say in March that the Russian State was responsible." Mugshots were released of two people whose names, she declared, were aliases (how they know they are GRU officials if they don't know their names was not explained). "This chemical weapon attack on our soil was part of a wider pattern of Russian behavior that persistently seeks to undermine our security and that of our allies around the world," she intoned.

At the same time, dire warnings have been issued to Syria and Russia that there will be a major military response if Syria uses chemical weapons in Idlib. This is despite the fact that Russia has presented the proof to the OPCW and to the UN that the British intelligence-linked Olive security outfit and the British-sponsored White Helmet terrorists have prepared a false flag chlorine attack in Idlib, to be blamed on the Syrian government, to trigger such a military atrocity by the US and the UK.

Also at the same time, in the US, Washington Post fraudster Bob Woodward released a book claiming that numerous Trump cabinet officials made wildly slanderous statements about Trump -- all third hand from anonymous sources, of course. Chief of Staff John Kelly called the claims "total BS," while Secretary of State Jim Mattis called it typical Washington DC fiction, adding that "the idea that I would show contempt for the elected Commander-in-Chief, President Trump, or tolerate disrespect to the office of the President from within our Department of Defense, is a product of someone's rich imagination."

Worse, the New York Times, apparently for the first time, printed an "anonymous" op-ed by someone claiming to be a "senior official in the Trump administration whose identity is known to us," under the title: "I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration -- I work for the president but like-minded colleagues and I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations." Whether this person is or is not who they claim to be, it is clearly part of the British coup attempt, as proven in the op-ed itself. After calling Trump amoral, unhinged, and more, and claiming there is discussion within the Administration of using the 25th Amendment to remove him for mental incompetence, it then states: "Take foreign policy: In public and in private, President Trump shows a preference for autocrats and dictators, such as President Vladimir Putin of Russia and North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-un, and displays little genuine appreciation for the ties that bind us to allied, like-minded nations [read: the United Kingdom - ed.]. Astute observers have noted, though, that the rest of the administration is operating on another track, one where countries like Russia are called out for meddling and punished accordingly, and where allies around the world are engaged as peers rather than ridiculed as rivals. On Russia, for instance, the president was reluctant to expel so many of Mr. Putin's spies as punishment for the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain. He complained for weeks about senior staff members letting him get boxed into further confrontation with Russia, and he expressed frustration that the United States continued to impose sanctions on the country for its malign behavior. But his national security team knew better such actions had to be taken, to hold Moscow accountable."

And, while news about the British drive for war with Russia and their attempted coup against the government of the United States fills the airwaves and the press, not a single word -- repeat, not a single word -- has been reported in the US or British media about the truly historic conference which took place on Monday and Tuesday in Beijing, the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAP). Helga Zepp-LaRouche declared this week that this event will be recognized in history as the end of the era of colonialism and neo-colonialism. Every African nation except one was represented at the conference in Beijing (the "one" was Swaziland, the last holdout on the African continent which still maintains diplomatic relations with Taiwan rather than Beijing).

All but six were represented their head of state. They reviewed the transformation taking place across Africa due to the Belt and Road Initiative since the last FOCAP meeting in 2015, and laid out plans for the even more rapid development over the next three years, and on to 2063 -- the target year for full modernization over 50 years, adopted by the African Union in 2013. One after another the leaders of the African nations described the actual liberation taking place, finally seeing in China the example that real development and the escape from poverty is possible. The program launched at the 1955 Asian-African Conference in Bandung, Indonesia, where the formerly colonized nations met for the first time without their colonial masters, has finally been realized.

But no one reading the western press would even know that this transformative event had taken place.

Rather, there is only the new McCarthyism, trying to demonize Russia and China, to revive the "enemy image" which should have been eliminated with the fall of the Soviet Union and the recognition of the People's Republic of China.

Trump threatens this new McCarthyism, insisting that America should be friends with Russia and China. No longer will the U.S. accept Lord Palmerston's imperial dictate for the Empire, that "nations have no permanent friends or allies, only permanent interests." The "special relationship" is to be no more.

This is the cause of Theresa May's hysterical rant today in the Parliament. Better war, led by the "dumb giant" America, than to see the Empire destroyed in a world united through a shared vision of universal development.

Britain's drive for war must be exposed and stopped, along with their Russiagate coup attempt in the US. A victory for the common aims of mankind is within our grasp, but the danger is great, and the time is short.

[Sep 14, 2018] Skripals might well be a warning to Russia do not try to eliminate terrorists in Idlib or we will sink you in dirt

Some interesting insights. Looks like high stake political poker
Notable quotes:
"... While Britain crumbled in compliments of the OPCW experts it had bought for the act, Russia dealt the most powerful bomb attack in Idlib, clearing the way for the Syrian army to destroy the last enclave of American suckers. And thus it struck a blow to the British political elite. After all, all the dances around the Skripals and the subsequent sanctions are designed to prevent what Russia is doing now in Idlib. Not prevented. And this is a demonstration of the weakness of the British ruling class, capable only of biting stealthily behind its heels. ..."
Sep 09, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
pogohere , Sep 8, 2018 3:00:08 AM | link

...

Russia's asymmetric response is very painful.

https://cont.ws/@alex-haldey/1054552

machine translated from the original Russian; excerpted:

The fact is that Russia pursues its policy without regard to their provocations. She defeated the Wahhabis trained by the West in the Caucasus, snatched Crimea from under the nose. The US scenario in Ukraine broke. Restores the EAEC. In Syria, Russia completely threw the Anglo-Saxon West off the pedestal, which he held there all the post-war 50 years. That is, with its bombing of head choppers, Russia has broken the rigid "Full Spectrum Dominance" situation created and maintained by the Americans since the dissolution of the USSR. This is a disaster, which the Anglo-Saxon world has nothing to answer nuclear to Russia.

While Britain crumbled in compliments of the OPCW experts it had bought for the act, Russia dealt the most powerful bomb attack in Idlib, clearing the way for the Syrian army to destroy the last enclave of American suckers. And thus it struck a blow to the British political elite. After all, all the dances around the Skripals and the subsequent sanctions are designed to prevent what Russia is doing now in Idlib. Not prevented. And this is a demonstration of the weakness of the British ruling class, capable only of biting stealthily behind its heels.

But worst of all, the actions in Idlib demonstrate the US weakness. Trump is completely beaten down - by his neocon rivals, not Russia. Russia has revealed the preparations for the provocation of the Khimatki in Idlib, which the US rep in the United Nations has announced to the whole world. With all the details, such number of barrels of chorine delivered to headchoppers and their color, as well the path of those barrels to Idlib and places of their secret storage. Now with those revelation it make much less sense to launch this operation.

But the operation will be. The match will take place in any weather. The United States has already outlined the places on which they will strike rocket-bomb strikes. The assault will be more decisive than the previous time. Preparation is as if the US is confident - the chlorine attack will take place. Then, when they decide in the US. Not in Damascus, but in Washington. That is, in general, all masks are dropped and the States openly prepare for aggression with provocation in a sovereign country where they are open in the status of an occupier. And even if there is no chemotherapy at all, the American blow will take place. Too much Russian was battered by bombs of American protégés. They are too close to defeat, for which the reason for finding Americans in Syria will disappear. How can this be allowed? The impact of prestige is necessary and it will be, even if the Sun falls to the ground and the Mississippi will flow backwards. Only prestige is not visible.

The USA are increasingly falling down replacing the strategy with tactics. The attack on Syria is necessary for Americans not because they will decide the outcome of the campaign. But because the US needs to introduce its ground forces to change the course of the war, with all possible negative consequences such as possible the death of the military personnel and the open clash with Iran, Syria and Russia. And even with Turkey. With China silently standing behind them the global consequences of this action are unpredictable. One possible consequence can well be the collapse of NATO. This "Second Vietnam" might crush not only the American president, but the US itself. The other scenario is that the USA just want to "score a goal of prestige" and leave the lost match. They will strike at Syria, where again Russian intelligence will reveal in advance the alleged targets of the strike, withdraw the critical assets from there, and then we have a firework of exploding Tomahawks intercepted by defenders.

Russia in Idlib is now in a very difficult position due to Turkey, not so much the USA. The repelling of the USA attach is one thing, but the main danger that it can't achieve too much on the ground de to Turkish interests in the area. Trump attack would be mainly for domestic consumption, the show created on the4 eve of the congressional elections. And even repelling the attack can be counterproductive -- Russia risks drowning Trump, instead of somehow supporting his formidable image and helping to win. Simply because Trump is beneficial to Russia - it's too cool he breaks everything on what the American power of the past decades was based. Helping his impeachment is not in the national interests of Russia. That means that Trump must come out of those stupid and counterproductive Tomahawks salvos without losing his face.

The US remains the world hegemon and want to remain as such for a long time. That's why it beats Russia with sanctions. But Russia does not need to oppose the USA. It just need to help to build a countervailing power. And Berlin, supported by Moscow's cheap gas, can be countervailing force for London in Europe.

The threat of losing global hegemony is very painful for both the British and Americans. It is so painful that they organized the collapse of the ruble and this false flag operation in Salisbury. And then OPSW were intimidated by British special services.

Russia should responds asymmetrically -- by continuing to build up its economy and prosperity of its citizens and ignore such insane and ineffective actions by London and Washington.

Russia already had shown Erdogan how easily caravans with oil are bombed, Russia does not want to allow its exports from Syria. And the US will have to withdraw from Syria there sooner or later. Still, Russia should give Trump the opportunity to finish his term without outright humiliation in Syria. The United States might not have the second such president, as Russia will not have a second Gorbachev.

[Sep 14, 2018] Renowned French security expert Paul Barril revaled the existence of Operation Beluga, a covert Western intelligence scheme intended to undermine Russia and its leaders

Notable quotes:
"... "Renowned French security expert Paul Barril has let loose a bombshell: the existence of Operation Beluga, a covert Western intelligence scheme intended to undermine Russia and its leaders." ..."
"... Renowned French security expert Paul Barril, in an interview, alleges that Berezovsky was working closely with MI6 and the CIA to discredit Russia and Putin, and that large sums from these agencies were passing through Berezovsky's hands to be paid to individuals to cooperate in these efforts. Barril says Litvinenko was one of Berezovsky's bag men, who passed funds on to others. ..."
"... "Russia has nothing to do with the murder of Litvinenko. The case was fabricated from the beginning. Polonium was chosen as the poison due to its production in Russia, it would implicate Russia. The objective of the whole operation was to discredit president Putin and the FSB. It was done because Russia is blocking US interests around the world, especially in Syria. It was an attempt to weaken Putin's hold on power, to destabilize Russia." ..."
Aug 19, 2018 | www.theblogmire.com

Miheila says: August 19, 2018 at 9:39 am

"Polonium was chosen as the poison due to its production in Russia, it would implicate Russia". Exactly. Just as 'Novichok' was allegedly used in Salisbury, due to it allegedly being developed in Russia (Mirzyanov) – even though it wasn't actually used against the Skripals at all. Maybe this element of the hoax was inspired by Beluga's use of polonium in the Litvinenko affair.
Anonymous says: August 20, 2018 at 8:06 am
Miheila, the polonium story always seems crazy to me. It relies on Litvinenko being too mean not to buy his own cup of tea. Hardly a foolproof assassination method.
Anonymous-1 says: August 19, 2018 at 5:20 am
PAGE 4 OF 4
This follows a similar pattern to Alexander Litvinenko. Walter Litvinenko, his father, believes Alex received a second dose of agent whilst in hospital. It was a Worlds Apart interview but is now the subject of an Ofcom complaint. Walter said his suspicions were raised by the secrecy of the British government and the fact that they wouldn't let him see any reports. So he made his own investigations, and from initially thinking it was Russia, he now believes it was the British government. He returned to Russia in fear of his life.

OPERATION BELUGA

https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/03/15/operation-beluga-the-plot-to-demonise-putin/

"Renowned French security expert Paul Barril has let loose a bombshell: the existence of Operation Beluga, a covert Western intelligence scheme intended to undermine Russia and its leaders."

The https://www.opednews.com is wrong link, should be: http://mirastnews.com/2016/03/operation-beluga-a-us-uk-plot-to-discredit-putin-and-destabilize-the-russian-federation.html

Renowned French security expert Paul Barril, in an interview, alleges that Berezovsky was working closely with MI6 and the CIA to discredit Russia and Putin, and that large sums from these agencies were passing through Berezovsky's hands to be paid to individuals to cooperate in these efforts. Barril says Litvinenko was one of Berezovsky's bag men, who passed funds on to others.

"Russia has nothing to do with the murder of Litvinenko. The case was fabricated from the beginning. Polonium was chosen as the poison due to its production in Russia, it would implicate Russia. The objective of the whole operation was to discredit president Putin and the FSB. It was done because Russia is blocking US interests around the world, especially in Syria. It was an attempt to weaken Putin's hold on power, to destabilize Russia."

Barril mentions the outspoken Putin foe, financier William Browder, as being in close cooperation with Berezovsky in the discreditation efforts. He also says he is sure Berezovsky was murdered by his secret service handlers after they realized he was behaving erratically and had to be silenced so that he wouldn't give them away.

[Sep 14, 2018] This Memorial Day, remember the 116,516 Americans President Wilson killed in that senseless war.

Sep 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

Steve Naidamast , says: June 13, 2018 at 7:14 pm GMT

@Carlton Meyer My recent tribute to World War I:

May 28, 2018 - A Memorial to the Great War Disaster

Books about World War I are not popular in the USA because they are depressing. The world's great European powers destroyed a generation of men in pointless bloody battles. Few Americans realize that World War I was America's worst foreign policy blunder that killed millions and set the stage for World War II.

When the "Great War" began in 1914, royals and generals hoped for swift victories. However, advances in technology, mostly machine guns and rapid fire artillery, allowed concentrated firepower to annihilate attacking formations. The war in France bogged down into a bloody stalemate and the construction of fortified positions ensured that any offensive would grind to a stop. The king of England and Germany were first cousins who grew up together, so a peaceful resolution was likely in 1916.

The problem was that British bankers had loaned its government lots of money and most could not be repaid. They wanted to win the war so they could loot Germany by requiring Germans to pay reparations so the British government could repay them. If they could lure the powerful USA to join the war, victory was assured. They blocked peace efforts and used their agents of influence to manipulate the USA into joining the war. Soon after President Wilson was elected with the promise to stay out the war, he worked with Congress to declare war.

As a result, the war dragged on for two more bloody years before enough American men and material arrived in France to turn the tide. The war was unpopular back home, leading Wilson to censor the US mail by blocking anti-war newsletters and magazines. He threw thousands of political opponents in jail, implemented a draft to fill out the Army, and sent these reluctant Americans into battle with little training and poor equipment. The Americans fought bravely, but the Germans had three years of combat experience and chewed up American units foolishly thrown into frontal attacks that had little chance of success. After four years of war, the Germans had no more manpower to replace losses, and surrendered based on a just peace promised by President Wilson. That never happened and Germany was looted and humiliated, which led to the rise of the Nazis and World War II.

So this Memorial Day, remember the 116,516 Americans President Wilson killed in that senseless war. Moreover, the American intervention extended the war and resulted in World War II. American GIs slaughter Germans so British bankers could collect debts, with interest! I was inspired to write this blog post after reading the brilliant David Stockman's recent essay about America's disastrous intervention in World War I.

https://original.antiwar.com/David_Stockman/2018/05/16/why-the-empire-never-sleeps-the-indispensable-nation-folly-part-2/ I have to agree with much of what stated in his reply. But I would like to also add my own in-depth notes

I tend to concentrate my military studies on World War I (in addition to the "War for Southern Independence" and the inter-war years (1919-1939)). And as everyone here has concluded, World War I was an abomination of an atrocity.

Professor Bacevich, a man I have great respect for, did however make some minor but critical errors in this piece.

Kaiser Wilhelm had no desire to enter into a world conflagration. When he realized that events were spinning out of control, he did everything in his power to contact his cousin, the Russian Czar, to request that Russian Mobilization be halted, the actual cause of the start of the conflict. Due to the fact that diplomacy, unlike the military (which had adopted wireless and wired communications), was still using traditional methods of face-to-face discussion or formal letters for diplomacy, the Kaiser was unable to get through to his cousin in time to stop what the Czar most likely could not halt in any event. Mobilization of forces at the time had taken on a life of their own due to the technologies of modernized train transport.

In 1915 or 1916, the German high command attempted to offer to negotiate peace with Britain and France but Britain, with the war being run basically by Churchill (a warmonger of the first order) refused to talk to the Germans, since he loathed them for whatever reasons.

The war was won by Germany in the winter of 1917 at which point the megalomaniacal Woodrow Wilson pushed the US into the conflict with his god-like notion that he could create peace on Earth. The man was truly clinically insane (but functional) as much recent documentation has attested to (see the late Thomas Fleming's, "Illusion of Victory" for a thrill ride through Wilson's addled thinking).

Had the US not entered the war, there would have been an amenable peace developed in 1917 among the European belligerents. And probably as a result, no World War II.

England was the cause of the war indirectly with her centuries old "balance of power" politics applied to continental Europe. In this vein, fearful of the loss of her dominance on the high seas as a result of the Kaiser's excellent buildup of the Kaiserliche Marine (Imperial Navy), which in turn would threaten her empire, the British military started to collude with the French military, I believe as early as 1906, to develop joint operational plans in case of war with Germany. This latter of course, the British were very much hoping would happen. And with Churchill being one of the most influential cabinet members on the matter, there was little doubt that Britain would need very little pretext to enter a conflict.

However, it was France's alliance with Russia that was directly responsible for the initiation of the entire conflagration. This alliance was centered upon loans to Russia from France for Russian domestic development and French fears that if Germany attacked her she would be left on her own to defend herself. Russia agreed in principal to ally herself with France but used the French loans instead to rebuild her military (though it did her little good against superior German arms).

Germany, bound in alliance with Austro-Hungary, did in fact support Austria's punitive strike into Serbia and provided what some have called a "blank check", which provided for military and financial support as a result of the alliance. Austria's military, one which had a very spotty historical record of being on and off again as far as quality was concerned, was definitively off in 1914 and was summarily defeated by superior Serbian Forces.

Franz-Josef of Austria had no expectation of a world war when he committed Austria to such an incursion into Serbian territory and by that time no else did either as a result of the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand since royal assassinations had become pretty common place in Europe from 1880 onward. However, on the Austrian side we have general Conrad von Hotzendorf to thank for this strike at Serbia. He hated Serbia probably as much as Churchill hated the Germans but Conrad had good reason to since the Balkan nation was always causing all sorts of problems on the Austro-Hungarian borders. Unfortunately, Conrad was not all that good a military man and cost Austrian hundreds of thousands of combatant deaths during the conflict.

As a result, this assassination, a real non-event, has been touted to school children ever since as the cause of World War I. In reality, it was simply window dressing for idiots in the US educational system to latch onto.

The reaction of Russia to the attack on Serbia was to fully mobilize her military, which up through World War II has always been seen as an imminent sign of war.

This automatically dragged France into war, which in turn dragged England as a result of the secret military partnership. Austria then was forced to follow suit and formally declare war, which brought the final player into the conflict, Germany, who with the exception of some in the German high command really had questions about engaging in such a widening war, which was supposed to be a localized conflict.

Seeing that there was no hope to ending the conflict on amenable terms, the Kaiser abdicated in 1918 and fled for the Royal Netherlands where he was taken in and granted political asylum. However, by this time General Ludendorf had become a de-facto military dictator of Germany. And though both he and his senior military aide. Max Hoffman, , who did the majority of the planning, developed superior battlefield strategy, Ludendorf's political decisions caused untold problems for the German social infrastructure, some of which was a reaction to the new pressures that US Forces were finally bringing to bare on German arms.

The original number of deaths for World War I began at around ten million but had been upgraded over the years to around twenty million. However, this does not take into account the highly damaging effects of what would become known as the Spanish Flu in 1918. Recent research into this aspect of the war is now postulating of up to sixty million deaths all told.

The Spanish Flu was actually a very mild flu; not the devastating epidemic that again idiot educators and historians have touted over the years. What made this particular strain of Flu so devastating was not the virus itself but the need for adequate health-care and recovery. However, within the field armies that were facing each other, the deprivations that the war had brought to continental Europe, and the very poorly developed 33 US training camps in the States, affected personnel and civilian populace did not have the proper facilities and health-care required to allow them to recover quickly and properly from this disease. The result was that patients lingered in terrible conditions making recovery impossible and allowing death to ensue.

Finally, it was not just British bankers who wanted their loans paid back but the US banks desired it as well for their own loans; a first in the annals of military history between allies. However, the Wilson Administration never considered the US an ally to Britain or France. It instead viewed itself as an "associated nation", whatever that meant. However, Wilson was famously known for his ridiculous vagueness and slogans ("saving the world for democracy", which even at the time no one could quite figure out the meaning of). As a result, the US would not sign a peace agreement until 1922.

Talk about stupid

[Sep 14, 2018] The current endless "War on Terra" can be seen as an increasingly desperate attempt of a fading American Empire to hold on to and maintain its power and hegemony, again with the material, human, and moral cost of this war actually accelerating its demise.

Sep 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

MarkinPNW , says: June 13, 2018 at 5:49 am GMT

The World Wars (I and II) can be seen as an increasingly desperate attempt of a fading British Empire to hold on to and maintain its power and hegemony, with the material, human, and moral cost of the wars actually accelerating the empire's demise.

Likewise, the current endless "War on Terra" can be seen as an increasingly desperate attempt of a fading American Empire to hold on to and maintain its power and hegemony, again with the material, human, and moral cost of this war actually accelerating its demise.

But in the meantime, in both examples, the Bankers and the MIC just keep reaping their profits, even at the expense of the empires they purportedly support and defend.

Tom Welsh , says: June 13, 2018 at 10:05 am GMT
'There has never been a just [war], never an honorable one–on the part of the instigator of the war. I can see a million years ahead, and this rule will never change in so many as half a dozen instances. The loud little handful–as usual–will shout for the war. The pulpit will– warily and cautiously–object–at first; the great, big, dull bulk of the nation will rub its sleepy eyes and try to make out why there should be a war, and will say, earnestly and indignantly, "It is unjust and dishonorable, and there is no necessity for it." Then the handful will shout louder. A few fair men on the other side will argue and reason against the war with speech and pen, and at first will have a hearing and be applauded; but it will not last long; those others will outshout them, and presently the anti-war audiences will thin out and lose popularity. Before long you will see this curious thing: the speakers stoned from the platform, and free speech strangled by hordes of furious men who in their secret hearts are still at one with those stoned speakers–as earlier– but do not dare to say so. And now the whole nation–pulpit and all– will take up the war-cry, and shout itself hoarse, and mob any honest man who ventures to open his mouth; and presently such mouths will cease to open. Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception'.

- Satan, in Mark Twain's "The Mysterious Stranger" (1908)

Z-man , says: June 13, 2018 at 11:52 am GMT

Today, Washington need not even bother to propagandize the public into supporting its war. By and large, members of the public are indifferent to its very existence. And given our reliance on a professional military, shooting citizen-soldiers who want to opt out of the fight is no longer required.

Yep, I was looking for a quote like this. We have a mercenary military now so the ruling elite can send them anywhere they want with little agitation from the general public. That's why I advised my son not to join, not that he was leaning in that direction anyway. (Grin)

Mike P , says: June 13, 2018 at 12:26 pm GMT
Ludendorff's book is available on archive.org , an amazing resource.
AnonFromTN , says: June 13, 2018 at 3:19 pm GMT
I posted this in another thread, but here it is more appropriate:
That's what happens when hubris replaces strategy. In the US today only MIC has a strategy: produce any fakes necessary to keep the gravy train rolling. The leadership of the country is wholly owned by MIC and allied forces (AIPAC is one of those) and mostly resembles biblical blind lead by the blind
renfro , says: June 13, 2018 at 5:07 pm GMT

Andrew J. Bacevich is hard at work writing a book about how we got Donald J. Trump.

Buying his book would be a waste of money I can tell you for free.

Trump was elected out of the sheer desperation of a large number of Americans fed up to death with a corrupt government and noxious [neo]liberalism. period.

Unfortunately he was a fraud ..but the most desperate are still clinging, hoping against hope.

[Sep 14, 2018] The US are not interested in winning and leaving they want to continue disrupting the peaceful integration of East, West, and South Asia.

Sep 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

Mike P , says: June 8, 2018 at 4:33 pm GMT

No, it's not the generals who have let us down, but the politicians to whom they supposedly report and from whom they nominally take their orders.

I'd say both. The generals have greatly assisted in stringing along the trusting public, always promising that victory is just around the corner, provided the public supports this or that final effort. Petraeus in particular willingly played his part in misleading the public about both Iraq and Afghanistan. His career would be a great case study for illuminating what is wrong with the U.S. today.

As to the apparent failure of the Afghanistan war – one must be careful to separate stated goals from real ones. What kind of "lasting success" can the U.S. possibly hope for there? If they managed to defeat the Taliban, pacify the country, install a puppet regime to govern it, and then leave, what would that achieve? The puppet regime would find itself surrounded by powers antagonistic to the U.S., and the puppets would either cooperate with them or be overthrown in no time. The U.S. are not interested in winning and leaving – they want to continue disrupting the peaceful integration of East, West, and South Asia. Afghanistan is ideally placed for this purpose, and so the U.S. are quite content with dragging out that war, as a pretext for their continued presence in the region.

TG , says: June 8, 2018 at 7:44 pm GMT
An interesting and thoughtful piece.

I would disagree on one point though: "Today, Washington need not even bother to propagandize the public into supporting its war. By and large, members of the public are indifferent to its very existence."

This is an error. A majority of the American public think that wasting trillions of dollars on endless pointless foreign wars is a stupid idea, and they think that we would be better off spending that money on ourselves. It's just that we don't live in a democracy, and the corporate press constantly ignores the issue. But just because the press doesn't mention something, doesn't mean that it does not exist.

So during the last presidential election Donald Trump echoed this view, why are we throwing away all this money on stupid wars when we need that money at home? For this he was attacked as a fascist and "literally Hitler" (really! It's jaw-dropping when you think about it). Despite massive propaganda attacking Trump, and a personal style that could charitably be called a jackass, Trump won the election in large part because indeed most American don't like the status quo.

After the election, Trump started to deliver on his promises – and he was quickly beaten down, his pragmatist nationalist advisors purged and replaced with defense-industry chickenhawks, and now we are back to the old status quo. The public be damned.

No, the American people are not being propagandized into supporting these wars. They are simply being ignored.

Left Gatekeeper Dispatch , says: June 8, 2018 at 9:10 pm GMT
When are you going to stop insulting our intelligence with this Boy's State civics crap? You're calling on political leaders to stop war, like they don't remember what CIA did to JFK, RFK, Daschle, or Leahy. Or Paul Wellstone.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/tribute-to-the-last-honorable-us-senator-the-story-of-paul-wellstones-suspected-assassination-2/5643200

Your national command structure, CIA, has impunity for universal jurisdiction crime. They can kill or torture anyone they want and get away with it. That is what put them in charge. CIA kills anybody who gets in their way. You fail to comprehend Lenin's lesson: first destroy the regime, then you can refrain from use of force. Until you're ready to take on CIA, your bold phrases are silent and odorless farts of feckless self-absorption. Sack up and imprison CIA SIS or GTFO.

smellyoilandgas , says: June 13, 2018 at 4:48 am GMT
@TG An interesting and thoughtful piece.

I would disagree on one point though: "Today, Washington need not even bother to propagandize the public into supporting its war. By and large, members of the public are indifferent to its very existence."

This is an error. A majority of the American public think that wasting trillions of dollars on endless pointless foreign wars is a stupid idea, and they think that we would be better off spending that money on ourselves. It's just that we don't live in a democracy, and the corporate press constantly ignores the issue. But just because the press doesn't mention something, doesn't mean that it does not exist.

So during the last presidential election Donald Trump echoed this view, why are we throwing away all this money on stupid wars when we need that money at home? For this he was attacked as a fascist and "literally Hitler" (really! It's jaw-dropping when you think about it). Despite massive propaganda attacking Trump, and a personal style that could charitably be called a jackass, Trump won the election in large part because indeed most American don't like the status quo.

After the election, Trump started to deliver on his promises - and he was quickly beaten down, his pragmatist nationalist advisors purged and replaced with defense-industry chickenhawks, and now we are back to the old status quo. The public be damned.

No, the American people are not being propagandized into supporting these wars. They are simply being ignored. While I agree the slave-American is ignored, I think the elected, salaried members of the elected government are also ignored.. The persons in charge are Pharaohs and massively powerful global in scope corporations.
Abe Lincoln, McKinnley, Kennedy discovered that fact in their fate.

Organized Zionism was copted by the London bankers and their corporations 1897, since then a string of events have emerged.. that like a Submarine, seeking a far off target, it must divert to avoid being discovered, but soon, Red October returns to its intended path. here the path is to take the oil from the Arabs.. and the people driving that submarine are extremely wealthy Pharaohs and very well known major corporations.

I suggest to quit talking about the nation states and their leaders as if either could beat their way out of a wet paper sack. instead starting talking about the corporations and Pharaohs because they are global.

[Sep 14, 2018] Infinite War: The Gravy Train Rolls by Andrew J. Bacevich

Notable quotes:
"... Washington Post ..."
"... Erster General-Quartiermeister ..."
Jun 07, 2018 | www.unz.com

" The United States of Amnesia ." That's what Gore Vidal once called us. We remember what we find it convenient to remember and forget everything else. That forgetfulness especially applies to the history of others. How could their past, way back when, have any meaning for us today? Well, it just might. Take the European conflagration of 1914-1918, for example.

You may not have noticed. There's no reason why you should have, fixated as we all are on the daily torrent of presidential tweets and the flood of mindless rejoinders they elicit. But let me note for the record that the centenary of the conflict once known as The Great War is well underway and before the present year ends will have concluded.

Indeed, a hundred years ago this month, the 1918 German Spring Offensive -- codenamed Operation Michael -- was sputtering to an unsuccessful conclusion. A last desperate German gamble, aimed at shattering Allied defenses and gaining a decisive victory, had fallen short. In early August of that year, with large numbers of our own doughboys now on the front lines, a massive Allied counteroffensive was to commence, continuing until the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month, when an armistice finally took effect and the guns fell silent.

In the years that followed, Americans demoted The Great War. It became World War I, vaguely related to but overshadowed by the debacle next in line, known as World War II. Today, the average citizen knows little about that earlier conflict other than that it preceded and somehow paved the way for an even more brutal bloodletting. Also, on both occasions, the bad guys spoke German.

So, among Americans, the war of 1914-1918 became a neglected stepsister of sorts, perhaps in part because the United States only got around to suiting up for that conflict about halfway through the fourth quarter. With the war of 1939-1945 having been sacralized as the moment when the Greatest Generation saved humankind, the war-formerly-known-as-The-Great-War collects dust in the bottom drawer of American collective consciousness.

From time to time, some politician or newspaper columnist will resurrect the file labeled "August 1914," the grim opening weeks of that war, and sound off about the dangers of sleepwalking into a devastating conflict that nobody wants or understands. Indeed, with Washington today having become a carnival of buncombe so sublimely preposterous that even that great journalistic iconoclast H.L. Mencken might have been struck dumb, ours is perhaps an apt moment for just such a reminder.

Yet a different aspect of World War I may possess even greater relevance to the American present. I'm thinking of its duration: the longer it lasted, the less sense it made. But on it went, impervious to human control like the sequence of Biblical plagues that God had inflicted on the ancient Egyptians.

So the relevant question for our present American moment is this: once it becomes apparent that a war is a mistake, why would those in power insist on its perpetuation, regardless of costs and consequences? In short, when getting in turns out to have been a bad idea, why is getting out so difficult, even (or especially) for powerful nations that presumably should be capable of exercising choice on such matters? Or more bluntly, how did the people in charge during The Great War get away with inflicting such extraordinary damage on the nations and peoples for which they were responsible?

For those countries that endured World War I from start to finish -- especially Great Britain, France, and Germany -- specific circumstances provided their leaders with an excuse for suppressing second thoughts about the cataclysm they had touched off.

Among them were:

mostly compliant civilian populations deeply loyal to some version of King and Country, further kept in line by unremitting propaganda that minimized dissent; draconian discipline -- deserters and malingerers faced firing squads -- that maintained order in the ranks (most of the time) despite the unprecedented scope of the slaughter; the comprehensive industrialization of war, which ensured a seemingly endless supply of the weaponry, munitions, and other equipment necessary for outfitting mass conscript armies and replenishing losses as they occurred.

Economists would no doubt add sunk costs to the mix. With so much treasure already squandered and so many lives already lost, the urge to press on a bit longer in hopes of salvaging at least some meager benefit in return for what (and who) had been done in was difficult to resist.

Even so, none of these, nor any combination of them, can adequately explain why, in the midst of an unspeakable orgy of self-destruction, with staggering losses and nations in ruin, not one monarch or president or premier had the wit or gumption to declare: Enough! Stop this madness!

Instead, the politicians sat on their hands while actual authority devolved onto the likes of British Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig, French Marshals Ferdinand Foch and Philippe Petain, and German commanders Paul von Hindenburg and Erich Ludendorff. In other words, to solve a conundrum they themselves had created, the politicians of the warring states all deferred to their warrior chieftains. For their part, the opposing warriors jointly subscribed to a perverted inversion of strategy best summarized by Ludendorff as "punch a hole [in the front] and let the rest follow." And so the conflict dragged on and on.

The Forfeiture of Policy

Put simply, in Europe, a hundred years ago, war had become politically purposeless. Yet the leaders of the world's principal powers -- including

Allow me to suggest that the United States should consider taking a page out of Lenin's playbook. Granted, prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, such a suggestion might have smacked of treason. Today, however, in the midst of our never-ending efforts to expunge terrorism, we might look to Lenin for guidance on how to get our priorities straight.

As was the case with Great Britain, France, and Germany a century ago, the United States now finds itself mired in a senseless war. Back then, political leaders in London, Paris, and Berlin had abrogated control of basic policy to warrior chieftains. Today, ostensibly responsible political leaders in Washington have done likewise. Some of those latter-day American warrior chieftains who gather in the White House or testify on Capitol Hill may wear suits rather than uniforms, but all remain enamored with the twenty-first-century equivalent of Ludendorff's notorious dictum.

Of course, our post-9/11 military enterprise -- the undertaking once known as the Global War on Terrorism -- differs from The Great War in myriad ways. The ongoing hostilities in which U.S. forces are involved in various parts of the Islamic world do not qualify, even metaphorically, as "great." Nor will there be anything great about an armed conflict with Iran , should members of the current administration get their apparent wish to provoke one.

Today, Washington need not even bother to propagandize the public into supporting its war. By and large, members of the public are indifferent to its very existence. And given our reliance on a professional military, shooting citizen-soldiers who want to opt out of the fight is no longer required.

There are also obvious differences in scale, particularly when it comes to the total number of casualties involved. Cumulative deaths from the various U.S. interventions, large and small, undertaken since 9/11, number in the hundreds of thousands . The precise tally of those lost during the European debacle of 1914-1918 will never be known, but the total probably surpassed 13 million .

Even so, similarities between the Great War as it unspooled and our own not-in-the-least-great war(s) deserve consideration. Today, as then, strategy -- that is, the principled use of power to achieve the larger interests of the state -- has ceased to exist. Indeed, war has become an excuse for ignoring the absence of strategy.

For years now, U.S. military officers and at least some national security aficionados have referred to ongoing military hostilities as " the Long War ." To describe our conglomeration of spreading conflicts as "long" obviates any need to suggest when or under what circumstances (if any) they might actually end. It's like the meteorologist forecasting a "long winter" or the betrothed telling his or her beloved that theirs will be a "long engagement." The implicit vagueness is not especially encouraging.

Some high-ranking officers of late have offered a more forthright explanation of what "long" may really mean. In the Washington Post , the journalist Greg Jaffe recently reported that "winning for much of the U.S. military's top brass has come to be synonymous with staying put." Winning, according to Air Force General Mike Holmes, is simply "not losing. It's staying in the game."

Not so long ago, America's armed forces adhered to a concept called victory , which implied conclusive, expeditious, and economical mission accomplished. No more. Victory , it turns out, is too tough to achieve, too restrictive, or, in the words of Army Lieutenant General Michael Lundy, "too absolute." The United States military now grades itself instead on a curve. As Lundy puts it, "winning is more of a continuum," an approach that allows you to claim mission accomplishment without, you know, actually accomplishing anything.

It's like soccer for six-year-olds. Everyone tries hard so everyone gets a trophy. Regardless of outcomes, no one goes home feeling bad. In the U.S. military's case, every general gets a medal (or, more likely, a chest full of them).

"These days," in the Pentagon, Jaffe writes, "senior officers talk about 'infinite war.'"

I would like to believe that Jaffe is pulling our leg. But given that he's a conscientious reporter with excellent sources, I fear he knows what he's talking about. If he's right, as far as the top brass are concerned, the Long War has now officially gone beyond long. It has been deemed endless and is accepted as such by those who preside over its conduct.

Strategic Abomination

In truth, infinite war is a strategic abomination, an admission of professional military bankruptcy. Erster General-Quartiermeister Ludendorff might have endorsed the term, but Ludendorff was a military fanatic.

Check that. Infinite war is a strategic abomination except for arms merchants, so-called defense contractors, and the " emergency men " (and women) devoted to climbing the greasy pole of what we choose to call the national security establishment. In other words, candor obliges us to acknowledge that, in some quarters, infinite war is a pure positive, carrying with it a promise of yet more profits, promotions, and opportunities to come. War keeps the gravy train rolling. And, of course, that's part of the problem.

Who should we hold accountable for this abomination? Not the generals, in my view. If they come across as a dutiful yet unimaginative lot, remember that a lifetime of military service rarely nurtures imagination or creativity. And let us at least credit our generals with this: in their efforts to liberate or democratize or pacify or dominate the Greater Middle East they have tried every military tactic and technique imaginable. Short of nuclear annihilation, they've played just about every card in the Pentagon's deck -- without coming up with a winning hand. So they come and go at regular intervals, each new commander promising success and departing after a couple years to make way for someone else to give it a try.

It tells us something about our prevailing standards of generalship that, by resurrecting an old idea -- counterinsurgency -- and applying it with temporary success to one particular theater of war, General David Petraeus acquired a reputation as a military genius. If Petraeus is a military genius, so, too, is General George McClellan. After winning the Battle of Rich Mountain in 1861, newspapers dubbed McClellan "the Napoleon of the Present War." But the action at Rich Mountain decided nothing and McClellan didn't win the Civil War any more than Petraeus won the Iraq War.

No, it's not the generals who have let us down, but the politicians to whom they supposedly report and from whom they nominally take their orders. Of course, under the heading of politician, we quickly come to our current commander-in-chief. Yet it would be manifestly unfair to blame President Trump for the mess he inherited, even if he is presently engaged in making matters worse .

The failure is a collective one, to which several presidents and both political parties have contributed over the years. Although the carnage may not be as horrific today as it was on the European battlefields on the Western and Eastern Fronts, members of our political class are failing us as strikingly and repeatedly as the political leaders of Great Britain, France, and Germany failed their peoples back then. They have abdicated responsibility for policy to our own homegrown equivalents of Haig, Foch, Petain, Hindenburg, and Ludendorff. Their failure is unforgivable.

Congressional midterm elections are just months away and another presidential election already looms. Who will be the political leader with the courage and presence of mind to declare: "Enough! Stop this madness!" Man or woman, straight or gay, black, brown, or white, that person will deserve the nation's gratitude and the support of the electorate.

Until that

[Sep 13, 2018] Looks like the UK police manipulated the images, i.e. fabricated the evidence. Very interesting to have this confirmed directly....

Notable quotes:
"... So they went through the same corridor just like I demonstrated in https://postimg.cc/image/pw7t667ch/ . This means the UK police manipulated the images, i.e. fabricated the evidence. Very interesting to have this confirmed directly.... ..."
Sep 13, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Norwegian , Sep 13, 2018 7:15:14 AM | link

@40 sejomoje:

"I'm with you Norwegian. Same tunnel, different times."

Yes, and now we have proof that this interpretation is correct. See their interview now on RT: https://www.rt.com/news/438350-petrov-boshirov-interview-simonyan/

I added bold in the quote below:
---
The RT editor-in-chief also touched upon the most puzzling picture of the two, the photo from the Gatwick airport.

"Here is the picture that puzzled the whole world, Gatwick airport, you are leaving through a gate literally in the same times, almost the same second. How did it happen?" she asked.

" We always go together through the same corridor and the same custom service officer or a policeman. One goes, the other waits. We went through the corridor together, we always [do it] together .

How did it happen? It's better to ask them [UK police]," Boshirov replied.
---

So they went through the same corridor just like I demonstrated in https://postimg.cc/image/pw7t667ch/ . This means the UK police manipulated the images, i.e. fabricated the evidence. Very interesting to have this confirmed directly....

[Sep 12, 2018] UK ruling elite looks evil and stupid: Skriplas affair as a new Zinoviev letter forgery

UK neoliberal press like Guardian looks evil and stupid as well...
Sep 12, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

jayc , Sep 12, 2018 5:33:25 PM | link

... hilariously, UK security minister Wallace asserted the Novichok was assuredly in a perfume bottle, got into the country because of poor baggage checks, had the capability "to kill or injure hundreds and hundreds of people", but was not a health risk to persons on the plane or public transit used by the suspects. ????

TJ , Sep 12, 2018 6:10:54 PM | link

@jayc 28

...yes, HMG is a source of continuing amusement, assuming they don't get us all killed in a Global Thermonuclear war.

Tom , Sep 12, 2018 8:28:39 PM | link
Article over at the Stalker Zone on the forged letter that brought down the first UK Labour government of Ramsey McDonald in 1924.

"The frank forgery that is the "Zinoviev's letter" came to London from the Riga department of the Secret Intelligence Service of the Foreign & Commonwealth Office of Britain (or SIS, nowadays better known as MI-6) with an assurance that the authenticity of the document "does not raise doubts" (the most ancient form of "highly likely") The Labour government was doomed. Rectifying the situation in such a short period of time before elections didn't seem to be possible."

Mark Twain's truism still holds today, "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." And the media is little different except for sites like this. Thanks B and keep up the good fight. Don't let the bastards get you down.

Vladimir Kornilov: The Prequel to the Skripal Affair – Britain Investigates the "Great Forgery"

[Sep 12, 2018] UK ruling elite looks evil and stupid: Skriplas affair as a new Zinoviev letter forgery

UK neoliberal press like Guardian looks evil and stupid as well...
Sep 12, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

jayc , Sep 12, 2018 5:33:25 PM | link

... hilariously, UK security minister Wallace asserted the Novichok was assuredly in a perfume bottle, got into the country because of poor baggage checks, had the capability "to kill or injure hundreds and hundreds of people", but was not a health risk to persons on the plane or public transit used by the suspects. ????

TJ , Sep 12, 2018 6:10:54 PM | link

@jayc 28

...yes, HMG is a source of continuing amusement, assuming they don't get us all killed in a Global Thermonuclear war.

Tom , Sep 12, 2018 8:28:39 PM | link
Article over at the Stalker Zone on the forged letter that brought down the first UK Labour government of Ramsey McDonald in 1924.

"The frank forgery that is the "Zinoviev's letter" came to London from the Riga department of the Secret Intelligence Service of the Foreign & Commonwealth Office of Britain (or SIS, nowadays better known as MI-6) with an assurance that the authenticity of the document "does not raise doubts" (the most ancient form of "highly likely") The Labour government was doomed. Rectifying the situation in such a short period of time before elections didn't seem to be possible."

Mark Twain's truism still holds today, "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." And the media is little different except for sites like this. Thanks B and keep up the good fight. Don't let the bastards get you down.

Vladimir Kornilov: The Prequel to the Skripal Affair – Britain Investigates the "Great Forgery"

[Sep 12, 2018] "Staged Filming of False Flag 'Chemical Attacks' Has Begun in Idlib

Notable quotes:
"... It is remarkable the extent to which Israeli concerns dominate those of the United States, which now has a foreign policy that often is not even remotely connected to actual U.S. interests. ..."
"... Congress and the Special Counsel are investigating Russia's alleged interference in America's political system while looking the other way when Israel operates aggressively in the open and does much more damage. ..."
Sep 12, 2018 | www.unz.com

annamaria , September 11, 2018 at 2:43 pm GMT

@Tyrion 2
Target Syria

Will a new war be the October Surprise

No. Don't you get bored of being wrong? Have any of your predictions come true? America and allies are quite at peace with how Syria is unfolding. If you don't get that, you don't get anything. "Staged Filming of False Flag 'Chemical Attacks' Has Begun in Idlib:" https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-11/russian-defense-ministry-says-filming-mock-chemical-attack-has-begun-idlib

From the comment section:

1. "The only way for Syria and Iran and Russia to defend Syria is to clearly tell Washington, London, Paris (the main ZOGs) and Israel that attacks on Syria will be responded to by attacks on Israeli military and intel sites. The introduction of any nuclear device of any size will result in a full-scale nuclear response.

That is the only play otherwise Syria simply bleeds to death as t he Jews get their puppets to keep fomenting terror and dropping bombs on SAA efforts to fight those terrorists . We come to the moment when Russia either defends Syria by hitting Israel or it decides to accept the Long Death of Anglo-Zionist megalomania."

2. "I really do wish Russia would just instantly bomb Israel. That would be the best way to separate us from that satanic rope around our necks."

3. "I call everyone in the military to disobey orders for attacking anything in Syria except Isis. Need to spread this on social media. Don't be mercenaries of Israel ."

-- Your "most victimized" have squandered all and any sympathy for your "incomparable sufferings" by promoting the ongoing slaughter in the Middle East. The Jewish State and its subordinate zionized US have become the gravest danger to humanity.

reiner Tor , September 11, 2018 at 4:20 pm GMT
This whole issue is so surrealistic. The last time the OPCW didn't confirm their accusations, but now they know who is going to commit a chemical attack right now, and they don't even wait for the actual events to be cocksure about it. Apparently they want a nuclear Mexican standoff. This is the problem that last time maybe Russia wasn't convincingly committed to a nuclear war, and so they are trying to explore this perceived weakness. It will get to a point where the US will call Russia's "bluff" which will turn out not to have been a bluff.

annamaria , September 12, 2018 at 3:45 pm GMT

@APilgrim

Jews undermined and destroyed their own society, as routinely as they undermine Western Civilization. The OT reveals the historic pattern of Hebraic self-destruction, and depravity; which was repeated in the 1st Century, and chronicled by Josephus.

Jews are not as problematic, as the Muhammadans.

So, 1st things 1st. The ziocon-supported "rebels" of A Qaeda (see Washington Post editorial written by Israel firsters) are preparing a children sacrifice for the glory of the the mythical Eretz Israel: https://www.rt.com/news/438282-white-helmets-film-chemical-attacks/

"The militants have selected 22 children and their parents from several villages in the Aleppo governorate who will play parts in staging fake chemical weapon attacks.

Another group of children is comprised of orphans kidnapped from refugee camps, who are meant to be used for the footage of death scenes. It is currently kept in one of the buildings of the Ikab prison controlled by Jabhat al-Nusra terrorist group.

Signs of activities to prepare staged chemical weapon attacks were reported in Kafir-Zait, the military claims, also naming two villages where toxic chemicals have been delivered to stage provocations."

-- Not a peep from the "humanitarian" Jewish State that has been waiting impatiently a resumption of the slaughter of civilians in the sovereign State of Syria. Nothing pleases the Jewish State more than the death of kids in Syria, Iraq, Libya, and Iran. This is your tribeswoman:

" Paul Joseph Watson reported that at least 29 different Syrian rebel groups are pledging allegiance to the Nusra Front, an al-Qaeda affiliate group responsible for killing American troops in Iraq.

"Syrian rebels have been responsible for a plethora of atrocities, from terrorist attacks and massacres, to forcing people to become suicide bombers, to attacks on Christian churches and making children carry out grisly beheadings of unarmed prisoners," Watson wrote.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has even admitted to BBC that these Syrian rebels on the same side as the U.S. in Syria are terrorist groups President Obama has been openly supporting the Syrian rebels "

Jeffrey Sachs from Columbia University told the MSNBC panel: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-10/how-explain-causes-syrian-war-2-minutes

"We know they sent in the CIA to overthrow Assad. The CIA and Saudi Arabia together in covert operations tried to overthrow Assad. It was a disaster. Eventually, it brought in both ISIS as a splinter group to the jihadists that went in, it also brought in Russia.

So we have been digging deeper and deeper and deeper. What we should do now is get out, and not continue to throw missiles, not have a confrontation with Russia."

Why? -- Because of the pressure from the Jewish Power: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/49245.htm

"Syria is only part of a much larger problem. It is remarkable the extent to which Israeli concerns dominate those of the United States, which now has a foreign policy that often is not even remotely connected to actual U.S. interests.

Congress and the Special Counsel are investigating Russia's alleged interference in America's political system while looking the other way when Israel operates aggressively in the open and does much more damage. Netanyahu and his crew of unsavory cutthroats are hardly ever cited for their malignant influence over America's political class and media. Bomb Syria? Sure. After all, it's good for Israel."

-- The bloody, murderous, perfidious Jewish Power is guilty of the rivers of blood and mounds of human flesh in Syria. Close your holo-biz museums already.

[Sep 12, 2018] Henry A. Wallace on amrican fascism

Sep 12, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Moribundus ,
The really dangerous American fascist... is the man who wants to do in the United States in an American way what Hitler did in Germany in a Prussian way. The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power...

They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest.

Their final objective, toward which all their deceit is directed, is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection.

~quoted in the New York Times, April 9, 1944

Henry A. Wallace

[Sep 12, 2018] Since we've rarely been in such situations as Trump created in Syria, we don't really know what the margin of error is, nor what could lead to the use of nuclear weapons.

Sep 12, 2018 | www.unz.com

reiner Tor , says: Next New Comment September 11, 2018 at 4:48 pm GMT

@Anonymous

Absolutely. Trump is being led by the nose into WW3. It's only a matter of time, unfortunately. The issue is that, while most likely there will be no ww3 after this newest crisis, just as there was no nuclear war after the April crisis, we never know exactly how close we are to a nuclear war, because previously both parties tried to stay clear of such situations. How many times can the US illegally strike at Syrian targets without it leading to some Russian response which would in turn lead to some US response and so on, until we'll face some kind of situation where the sweating, nervous and sleep-deprived leadership of one of these nuclear superpowers will in an underground bunker rightly or wrongly contemplate the possibility that if they don't use their nukes in 20 minutes, they'll lose most of them..? Since we've rarely been in such situations, we don't really know what the margin of error is, nor what could lead to the use of nuclear weapons. We have no idea.

Tom Welsh , says: Next New Comment September 11, 2018 at 7:41 pm GMT
"It would be desirable, one presumes, to avoid an open conflict with Russia, which would be unpredictable "

Quite wrong, and very dangerous. In fact an "open conflict" (or, as we say in English, a war) against Russia would – very predictably indeed – have one of two possible outcomes:

1. A catastrophic and decisive defeat for the USA;

or

2. The destruction of all human life.

[Sep 12, 2018] Real reason for western elite hatred of Russia is that it has destroyed neo con dreams of full spectrum dominance in military affairs.

Sep 12, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Ragheb , Sep 12, 2018 3:25:02 PM | link

Real reason for western elite hatred of Russia is that it has destroyed neo con dreams of full spectrum dominance in military affairs. Doubt US would have invaded Iraq in 2003 if Russian military was as strong then as it us today.

bm , Sep 12, 2018 3:40:36 PM | link

In all areas held by jihadis the most difficult issue was how to blow them up and not the civilians they were holding hostage. The Syrian and Russian strategy has been from the start to let the jihadis do their thing, wait, never escalate but negotiate, so as to avoid civilian casualties. This strategy has worked to win the war, and seems to be the same one they're following in Idlib. In contrast to previous hawkish threats by FUKUS and Nato, the propaganda mills are churning out much milder fare than previously. The Israelis have started admitting they were supporting '12' terror groups in Syria, and French ex foreign minister of defense, now 'minister for Europe and foreign affairs' Jean-Yves Le Drian, has declared that Nato has lost the war, but Assad has not 'won the peace'. Assad and Putin have learnt the lesson long ago, that they cannot negotiate with terrorists like Le Drian, and are better off negotiating with Erdogan, AlQaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.

[Sep 12, 2018] Neocons typically are chickenhawks and draft dodgers

Sep 12, 2018 | www.unz.com

Andrei Martyanov , says: Website Next New Comment September 11, 2018 at 6:53 pm GMT

@annamaria ..."the statement of the head of the anti-terrorist squad of Scotland Yard that he had "No" evidence of Russian state involvement in the crime in Salisbury..."

Yes. The UK government has lost its marbles in the pursuit of power & money. They suffer the same disease as their Israeli and US counterparts -- the loss of the life-saving integrity and intelligence and the triumph of the life-threatening stupidity.
The western governments have become incompetent due to the lack of the populace' supervision. For any living organism, no feedback means no protective actions ensuring the survival of the organism.
The Cheneys and Bibis and Blairs of the world are not intelligent enough even to envision the future for their immediate progeny, nevermind grandkids. These stupid elders are covered in the blood of the innocent.

The Cheneys and Bibis and Blairs

Cheney was a draft dodger as was Bolton who was a "conscientious objector". As was most of US political class who got to power in 1990s on.

Bibi for them sure as hell looks like a war hero. There is a method to US "elites" being enamored with IDF military history. Apart, of course, from being in the pockets of Israeli Lobby. Their war-mongering is a way of compensation.

annamaria , says: Next New Comment September 11, 2018 at 7:54 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

The Cheneys and Bibis and Blairs
Cheney was a draft dodger as was Bolton who was a "conscientious objector". As was most of US political class who got to power in 1990s on.

https://youtu.be/SdJiJ53TexI

Bibi for them sure as hell looks like a war hero. There is a method to US "elites" being enamored with IDF military history. Apart, of course, from being in the pockets of Israeli Lobby. Their war-mongering is a way of compensation. "Their war-mongering is a way of compensation.."

There are too many "compensators" in the DC: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-11/buchanan-trump-going-neocon-syria

"In an editorial Friday, the [Washngton] Post goaded Trump, calling his response to Assad's ruthless [?] recapture of his country "pathetically weak." To stand by and let the Syrian army annihilate the rebels in Idlib, said the Post, would be "another damaging abdication of U.S. leadership."

– Very clear. The WP is heavily zionized. The Al Qaeda (euphemistically called by the WP "compensators" the "rebels in Idlib") is a great asset for the dreamers about Eretz Israel. The authors of the editorial are cowards of zionist persuasion, who would never ever stand for the US interests and for such western values as the freedom of information. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQbYCY9Cr7o

– Here is the presstituting Martin Baron, Executive Editor at The Washington Post. "Baron was born to a Jewish family. His parents immigrated from Israel." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Baron -- And Israel is a place where Martin Baron's heart belongs to. It would be great if his body and his whole family also belong to the Land of Dancing Israelis, instead of using the resources of the US citizenry in propping the warmongering and supremacist Jewish State.

RVBlake , says: Next New Comment September 11, 2018 at 9:15 pm GMT
@annamaria ..."the statement of the head of the anti-terrorist squad of Scotland Yard that he had "No" evidence of Russian state involvement in the crime in Salisbury..."

Yes. The UK government has lost its marbles in the pursuit of power & money. They suffer the same disease as their Israeli and US counterparts -- the loss of the life-saving integrity and intelligence and the triumph of the life-threatening stupidity.
The western governments have become incompetent due to the lack of the populace' supervision. For any living organism, no feedback means no protective actions ensuring the survival of the organism.
The Cheneys and Bibis and Blairs of the world are not intelligent enough even to envision the future for their immediate progeny, nevermind grandkids. These stupid elders are covered in the blood of the innocent. Cheney stated he had "other things to do" during the Vietnam War. Bolton stated he had no intention of dying in a war that was already lost. Ironic, given the eagerness with which both chickenhawks send young Americans to their bloody end in desert wars.

Anonymous , [299] Disclaimer says: Next New Comment September 11, 2018 at 9:36 pm GMT
@reiner Tor The issue is that, while most likely there will be no ww3 after this newest crisis, just as there was no nuclear war after the April crisis, we never know exactly how close we are to a nuclear war, because previously both parties tried to stay clear of such situations. How many times can the US illegally strike at Syrian targets without it leading to some Russian response which would in turn lead to some US response and so on, until we'll face some kind of situation where the sweating, nervous and sleep-deprived leadership of one of these nuclear superpowers will in an underground bunker rightly or wrongly contemplate the possibility that if they don't use their nukes in 20 minutes, they'll lose most of them..? Since we've rarely been in such situations, we don't really know what the margin of error is, nor what could lead to the use of nuclear weapons. We have no idea. The biggest tragedy here is that the (((people))) in control of the US/UK/France want a war against Iran/Russia/China. Their speciality is goyim-on-goyim slaughter and the WW3 is actually necessary for their messianic ambitions. Their plan is to watch it from underground bunkers and rule over whatever is left afterwards.

That's why I said "it's only a matter of time". They will never stop on their own.

[Sep 12, 2018] The Rise and Continued Influence of the Neocons. The Project for the New American Century (PNAC)

Notable quotes:
"... Robbie Martin is a journalist, musician and documentary film-maker. He is co-host with his sister Abby Martin of Media Roots Radio. A Very Heavy Agenda can be streamed or purchased here . Soundtrack for Film and music for these series from Fluorescent Grey (Robbie Martin). ..."
"... Mark Robinowitz is a writer, political activist, ecological campaigner and permaculture practitioner and publisher of oilempire.us as well as jfkmoon.org . He is based in Eugene, Oregon. ..."
Sep 12, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

Robert Kagan. William Kristol. Paul Wolfowitz. Richard Perle. John Bolton. Elliott Abrams. Gary Schmitt. These are a few of the names generally associated with a strain of far-right political thought called neoconservatism. [1][2]

Politically, the neocons favour a world in which the United States adopts a much more aggressive military posture, and utilizes its military might to not only contain terrorist and related threats to its security, but force regime change in regions like the Middle East. They further take on the task of 'nation-building' all in the name of creating a safer world for 'democracy.' It was the neocons who promoted the stratagem of pre-emptive military action. [3]

The neocons enjoyed a robust period of influence under the Bush-Cheney administration. The 9/11 attacks and the triggering of a 'war on terrorism' enabled a series of foreign policy choices, most notably the War on Afghanistan and the War on Iraq, which aligned with the aims and aspirations of the group once referred to by President George Bush Sr. as the 'crazies in the basement.'[4]

The neocons did not vanish with the departure of the Bush Republicans from office, and the rise of Obama . Indeed, the clout of this group and their grip on power is arguably as strong as ever. Not only did they continue to shape the U.S. foreign policy establishment, but they have managed to alter what constitutes acceptable public and media discourse within the world's remaining superpower. The trajectory of neocon influence in Washington is explored in depth in the documentary series, A Very Heavy Agenda, by independent journalist and film-maker Robbie Martin.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/9kHHR_yy9CE

In part one of a special two part interview by Global Research News Hour guest contributor Scott Price , Martin describes the inspiration behind making the film, the post 9/11 atmosphere in which the neocons flourished, and the neocons' role in fostering the new Cold War mentality which contributed to the smearing of his better-known sister, former RT host Abby Martin .

This feature is followed by an interview with writer, ecological campaigner, and Deep State researcher Mark Robinowitz . Originally recorded and aired in January 2018, Robinowitz helps delineate the factions of power shaping the outcome of the 2016 presidential election, as well as the players within the National Security State, including the neocons, that appear to be manipulating him and his presidency, possibly maneuvering him towards an impeachment within the next year.

Robbie Martin is a journalist, musician and documentary film-maker. He is co-host with his sister Abby Martin of Media Roots Radio. A Very Heavy Agenda can be streamed or purchased here . Soundtrack for Film and music for these series from Fluorescent Grey (Robbie Martin).

Mark Robinowitz is a writer, political activist, ecological campaigner and permaculture practitioner and publisher of oilempire.us as well as jfkmoon.org . He is based in Eugene, Oregon.

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/480629106&color=%23ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&show_teaser=true

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

Transcript – Interview with Robbie Martin, July 2018

Global Research: Through the late 20th and early 21st century, the neoconservatives loomed large in American foreign policy the war on terror, the war in Iraq, the Bush administration. In 2018, it may seem that their power and influence has waned, but in fact, many of these neoconservatives still hold influence, and their legacy has had a much larger impact on politics and society.

In this Global Research News Hour special, we talk with journalist, filmmaker, and musician Robbie Martin on his 3-part documentary, A Very heavy Agenda. This film series covers the rise and continued influence of the neoconservatives. In Part 1, Robbie talks about the artistic and political influence for A Very Heavy Agenda and some of the early history of the war on terror.

Talking more broadly about the documentary, what was.. sort of the genesis of the idea for A Very Heavy Agenda? The documentary has a very distinct style and you don't do a lot of editorializing. So what was the inspiration for all that? And why did you choose the kind of this topic and the kind of technique that you were using for this documentary film?

Robbie Martin: I think I probably should give a shout out to filmmaker Adam Curtis right off the top, because I don't give him enough credit when I talk about the inspiration for this film. As you may know, or if you're not familiar with it but he made a film series called The Power of Nightmares during the Bush administration that was sort of charting the neoconservative influence in the Bush administration and before, and how they've sort of mirrored the Wahhabist, Islamic, you know, fundamentalists and Al Qaeda figures by using what Adam Curtis described as the Power of Nightmares, that by concocting these nightmare fantasy scenarios, you could gain power, and people like Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were able to do that by spinning these hysterical fear-mongering tales about, oh, what would happen if a bio-terrorist attack happened? You know what would happen if terrorists attacked the World Trade Centers?

That was a big inspiration for me during the Bush administration. It sort of helped me become more politically aware. It made me question a lot of things after 9/11 and having to do with the Iraq war. But over time, i just became sort of just, oh the neocons, they're the people who were mainly behind the Iraq war. They're sort of an evil class of foreign policy makers in DC who really want war at every opportunity. And that's just how I thought of them throughout the years.

It wasn't until my sister, Abby Martin, and for those listening who aren't aware of this, my sister actually had a show on the Russian-owned television channel, Russia Today America out of DC from the years around 2012 to, I think, early 2015.

So she had a show on RT for about three years, and while she was there, I remember having a conversation with her very early on saying, you know, we have to be ready for when the U . S . g overnment decides that they're going to get mad at what this channel's doing. because when she started working there in 2012, it didn't seem like there was any attention whatsoever to RT, this idea of Russian meddling, this idea of Russian propaganda, no one cared about it.

In fact, U.S. officials at the time marginalized it and even one of my characters in my film, Victoria Nuland, says it has a very tiny audience. She actually marginalized it during a Brookings panel in DC. Now, that was the attitude back when my sister first started working there, but over time, we started seeing early signs of what appeared to be an information war being waged against the Russian government by shady actors inside the United States.

And that may sound a little bit ironic, considering the way that we see everything through this lens now of Russian meddling, that everyone in the U.S. would describe RT as a form of information war now. You know , that's how everybody would describe it now, but back then it was such a small channel it barely anybody watched it, I mean that was kind of more true what they were saying back then, U.S. officials marginalizing it that was more of the true narrative. It was a small channel and had very little influence.

But yet maybe just a year or two into her working there, maybe a year and a half, we really started to notice something strange happening in the United States where there was all this focus starting to accumulate towards Putin and Russia and why Russia was so bad. And it started more subtly, kind of in the background. The Sochi Olympics , however, was sort of when we noticed -- it was almost like all these coordinated narratives started to really flood out of U.S. media channels, and all this awareness all of a sudden about the Russian gay law, which as someone who's very adamantly pro gay rights, I was bothered by it as well, but I mean even at the time I remember thinking, now this is an odd amount of focus towards the Russian gay law when yet Saudi Arabia actually executes gays still, and there's hardly any talk about that in the U.S. media. W hat's actually happening here?

So there was some early signs and sort of like what me just sort of my gut reaction and my sister's gut reaction to that climate at the time wondering what was going on. And of course, right after the Sochi O lympics, is when the Euromaidan protest in Ukraine, it kind of boiled over to the point where there were, you know, walls of flaming tires all over Euromaidan – basically a war zone. And of course the Ukrainian government fell due to a coup which many believe, including myself, was partially U.S. sponsored by the U.S. S tate D epartment.

And then things from there, Scott, just started to spiral out of control , and from the period between 2014 to 2018, it was like an exponentially rising climate of propaganda against Russia coming from the U.S. media, and when I made my film series, I didn't I made it before the election, s o I didn't realize how hysterical it was going to get after the election, and frankly, I had no idea it was going to get this bad, to the point that it's got now.

i know that doesn't quite answer your question about my inspiration, but it 's kind of a long answer to your question is my film itself is essentially.. was tracking the neocon influence and how the neoconservatives from the Bush era that pushed the Iraq war, that constructed the blueprints to the I raq war, how they also were the earliest pioneers pushing this Russiagate Cold War 2.0 mentality.

Neocon 101: What do neoconservatives believe?.

And how it only took . you know . certain nudges and pushes and policy papers , and here we are. T hey essentially got their way, and Russia has never been more demonized since the fall of communism and the Berlin wa ll and the Soviet Union. So that's I don't know if that was too long of an answer for your question , but that's what was sort of my inspiration for how I made it. My sister was also kind of a part of the story because some of these neocons actually tried to smear her while she was working for RT.

GR: Right yeah

RM: And that's maybe a more literal answer to your question is – that was the key inspiration for me like, oh, wait these n eocons are still around, they're waging some kind of cutting edge information war against Russia at the Obama a dministration doesn't seem to care about, and they're out there trying to ruin my sister. So all those factors combined, sort of coalesced at once, and I'm like , I have to do something about this because no one else is talking about this push, what I saw as a propaganda push to try to push us into kind of a war-footing with Russia. Whether you want to call it World War III or an ideological confrontation.

GR: Right, yeah, and I mean , some of the more, the details of some of these things we'll get into. I mean, I don't want to get too far into it, because I want people to to to watch your.. the documentary, because I think it's so great. And especially I'm 31 so I kind of, the 9/11 thing really shaped myself and my generation in so many ways. But even in watching this, there's so many things that I forgot about or didn't even know about? You know like we kind of form these narratives and we don't really think about it or you know who's controlling this stuff and for what purposes. But I think you give a good summation of that.

But one of the things too about the film itself is you use a lot of footage of these people if it's one of the K agans or Bill Kristol or whomever I mean, obviously this was a conscious decision to use their own words, so could you talk a little bit about why you decided to do it that way? Because I think in watching the how many hours it is over the three parts, you get, you kind of see the same themes coming up again, but it's from these people themselves that are saying this stuff. Could you talk about the power of that and why you decided to do that?

RM: Yeah, that's a really good question. I think at first, I was really fascinated by the psychology of these key neoconservatives. I was watching, at first I didn't even know I was going to make a film. I was kind of in this weird place mentally, my sister had just been put through the wringer, she had over 200 basically hit piece stories written about her within the span of a week, and I was just in this kind of depressed place checking in with her making sure she was doing okay, and not basically getting too stressed out from all this media pressure and this barrage of negative stories. So I was just watching these videos basically from the neocon think-tank that I believe was behind the smear campaign against her.

So I was watching videos from this think tank, they were called the Foreign Policy Initiative, and I quickly learned maybe over 48 hour period, oh, the Foreign Policy Initiative is actually a re-branded, reopened version of the Project for The New American Century think tank, which was the most infamous neocon think tank that was behind the Iraq War. Once I realized that, then I just then I was obsessed with watching these videos. I watched probably every single video on their YouTube channel, and the majority of them were incredibly boring, very dry. And I was already in a depressed place, so, you know, it was kind of just putting me into this weird state where I was watching nothing but these dry foreign policy think tank videos for weeks on end.

Finally I got to Robert Kagan. And I was listening to him, and it struck me differently from the way that most other neoconservatives would talk, because I perceived him as being more candid about the way American foreign policy has actually conducted itself, and also more clever with the way that I perceived him as, re-branding, repackaging neocon rhetoric for the Obama era. Once I saw this, I became fascinated with his psychology. And I was already sort of fascinated with Bill Kristol's psychology, you know , going back to when I was a young man when I would watch Fox News you know during the Iraq War, I would watch Bill Kristol, and I found him fascinating back then because he seemed on a different level than most other, you know, war hawks that would go on Fox News.

But it was really Robert Kagan though that made me think, you know, his own words are so fascinating and so candid and so revealing without adding any editorial content that I wonder if this will work, if I present it just simply in his own words.

And then the other reason, if I'm being completely honest, I didn't feel confident at the time to actually add any of my own editorial narration. I kind of cringe sometimes at movies that do that too much, especially political documentaries. Without naming names or crapping on anyone, let's just say I watched a political documentary that had the word wars in the title. And I felt that the filmmaker himself was made himself the main character, and while the content of the film was great, he talked about Yemen, Somalia all these how do I say it without revealing the film maker? All these wars, hidden wars, happening in all these other countries, the filmmaker made himself the main character, and I cringe so much at that I kind of was in this position where I was like, I don't even know how to enter my own editorial point of view into this other than my editing and the way I'm presenting all this footage.

So when I made P art 1, it was out of necessity, mostly because I didn't know how to do that yet, and I didn't feel confident enough to do it, but then also the footage I was grabbing was so compelling to me on its own, I felt that maybe this could work just on its own. Like I wasn't When I was originally making it it didn't even cross my mind to add narration. It was only until later when I was like, I need to release this and show people that I actually decided to add narration. But as you're saying Part 1, I think you're mostly talking about Part 1, has no narration whatsoever. And it's just It's mostly just a collage of footage of these neoconservatives talking, and conversing and revealing sort of how they truly think.

GR: Yeah, so in talking about it like how they, the neocons , think and what their worldview really is I think a lot of listeners of CKUW and the Global Research News Hour would be familiar when you say neocons and Project for a New American Century, but I think the overriding perception is that they're a thing of the past. They were kind of, they had their time with the Bush and through the 2000 s and then they're gone. So why should people still be paying attention to the neocons in 2018?

RM: Great question . I mean a nd you're right to say that. The general perception is that they kind of got shamed out of existence based on the failure "the failure" of the Iraq War and the amount of public pressure against that, and how most people have come to the belief that it was a disaster. And the neocons are largely associated with that military invasion and frankly, that massacre that was done completely for no logical reason whatsoever unless we're talking about imperialistic games. The WMDs argument is complete BS and everyone knows that now.

So their names were largely associated with the worst lies of the Bush a dministration , and that was my perception of it too until I started working on this documentary film, is that they had gone away and they weren't really a problem anymore. And even when I started to see some of the same faces pop up talking about Russia and how evil Putin was back in like 2014, I didn't personally think it was that big of a deal because I thought, well these people are super marginalized. Who's really listening to them anymore? Obama is clearly not listening to them. But that actually turned out not to be true. The Obama part He actually was listening to them as described in my film.

But I think one way to describe why they're so important and they're still so influential is because they managed to, a very small handful of them, maybe less than a dozen figures, managed to convince the rest of, what people describe as the DC blob, the sort of foreign policy consensus in DC overall, the neocons managed to rebrand themselves, massage their rhetoric, and make themselves seem less crazy in order to influence the larger DC foreign policy community into basically accepting and going along with almost all their foreign policy platforms, with the exception of overtly wanting to invade Iran which arguably that is the neocon prize but see, a lot of these smarter neocons like Robert Kagan and Bill Kristol, and a lot of these neocons who managed to convince the blob, they have hidden, and not been open about the fact that they want to overthrow the regime of Iran.

That's one of their foreign policy platforms they've sort of brushed under the rug, because that's one of The reason I'm giving that example is because that's how they have managed to cross the aisle, so to speak, in DC and put a hand out to the neoliberal think tanks and say, hey we're kind of on the same side in this, and we all think Putin's bad, and let's really go after him. Let's overthrow Assad. So these are things that the neocons managed to essentially convince and influence the rest of the DC foreign policy community to believe.

So yes, it's true that there are not that many actual literal neocons, but a lot of people now who are sort of anti-war, do work in anti-war or do foreign policy critique, they don't see much of a difference any more between sort of the neoliberal foreign policy group in DC, which is most of it, and the actual neocons anymore. Because they have essentially merged in a non-partisan fashion, and it's been very surreal to watch, especially after the 2016 election when you actually saw neocons saying well you should vote for Hillary. For the first time ever they all said that you shouldn't vote for a R epublican.

That's so I don't know that fully answers your question, but I think to su m it up it's because the neocons have influenced everybody. So now that they've been able to do that you don't really need that many of them around you know making that much trouble because everybody is carrying out their agenda essentially. In this DC foreign policy think-tank.

GR: Yeah I think the way you kind of describe it in maybe it's I don't know if you personally describe it, but I wrote it down in my notes about how neoconservatism is almost like a species and it kind of evolved over the last 20 years in a way? So I think what you're talking about how there's a shift to Hillary, and, but I mean that shift is more that the neoconservative line really became the mainstream line, whereas, you know, maybe in the early 2000s, like, there was a larger perception, yes, they were in the White House, but these people are also crazy, whereas now is kind of like the mainstream, which is quite scary. Which is something I think we'll talk about in a little bit. But kind of what I was talking about a bit before what I referenced was that I was a teenager when 9/11 happened, and it really shaped my generation and the world that I'm living in now

But as I was watching the 3-part documentary, there were several things that I was like kind of blown away by how these things kind of just went down the memory hole, and I want to talk about those things because several of these things I vaguely kind of remember now but for some odd reason I had totally forgotten about them, and they're not really within the wider narrative of 9/11 and the war on terror.

So the first one is that how right after 9/11, several of these neocons, I think it's Don and Fred Kagan, went on TV and radio kind of immediately after for at least a 24-hour 48-hour period after 9/11 and basically blamed Palestinians for the attack, and were basically outright calling for the U.S. to attack Palestine. And even saying that they had no evidence but we should just go and attack them. So could you talk about what happened there, and what was the effect there? Everyone kind of forgets about this but what happened there, and what do you think the effect of that was?

RM: You just opened up a really big can of worms with that question. Well, to fully answer that it would require a totally separate interview, but I'll do my best to answer it in this short time that we have. What you're describing is, what I would say, is the neocons flipping up and revealing too much of an early iteration of their script, than the rest of the consensus was ready to reveal or get on board with. And perhaps, even, they jumped ahead with something that the rest of the neocons already decided, we can't go there. Because, and this is important to know, that Don Kagan is one of the only three authors credited as writing Rebuilding America's Defenses, the infamous paper that PNAC released that says we need a new Pearl Harbor, a catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor.

Don Kagan is someone who just, mostly an obscure figure in this, but I'd like to believe that if he was saying that on the radio within 24 hours of 9/11, that it was something being heavily discussed within that community behind the scenes. And h e and his son Fred Kagan are two of the most intellectual, influential neoconservatives in DC. Fred Kagan is behind the Iraq surge, he is also behind the Afghanistan s urge for Obama, directly working under David Petraeus. So these are not just like random neocons. It's important to stress that they are some of the most influential neocon brain-trust type people in DC even though they're so relatively obscure They're not household names.

So to hear both of them saying that we need to clean out Palestine with the U.S. Delta Force raids and the full panoply of U.S. military tools and arsenal, it's a very shocking thing to hear. Even though I've long believed that neocons are some of the most evil people on the planet, that was even surprising for me to hear. That they went ahead and openly said that the U.S. military should do that, and actually, in their broadcast they make it clear that they don't even care who's behind 9/11. Which is strange. They say that if we run around tracing the actual perpetrators, we're just going to be wasting our time and we won't get anywhere. So what they are saying is that we should just go attack all these countries anyways because even if they're behind it or not, they hate us and want to kill us.

And Palestine was one of their primary targets to retaliate against in response to 9/11. Now that's very strange when you look at the day of 9/11, and I've actually done a podcast on this, I call it the Palestinian Frame-up, on 9/11, there were four separate incidences that were run throughout U.S. media throughout the day of 9/11 that were attempting to blame Palestinians for the attacks before Bin Laden became the primary culprit that the U.S. media latched on to. So I find that very strange.

And I'm not going to try to explain it here during this interview, but you can look into that. It's all documented. The news media played footage of Palestinians allegedly celebrating the attacks in the middle of a national emergency at 12 p.m. while thousands of people were still missing during the World Trade Center attacks. So this is the kind of stuff that U.S. media was doing.

So it's very interesting for me to see neocons actually piggy-backing on that and saying we should attack Palestine. And that's a rare thing, I think, to find neocons slipping up that badly. And I guess I find that clip particularly fascinating because it's really one of the only ones like that out there, and to my knowledge, I'm the first one to find it by combing through all these archives. I've never heard of it before, never even heard of any neocon s saying that before on record.

And then also something else interesting Don Kagan brings up in the recording, and maybe you were going to mention this next, but I'll just say it because it's so weird, as he says what would have happened, and keep in mind this is 9/12-01, one day after 9/11. He says, what would have happened if the terrorists had Anthrax on that plane?

GR: Right. Yeah.

RM: And on October 5, weaponized anthrax was sent through the U.S. mail. While the Bush Administration was already inoculated with Cipro. the antibiotic taken to prevent Anthrax infection. So there's a lot of interesting and very scary questions that are raised just by that single clip. and I'm to this day it's still a mystery to me.

GR: That was Part 1 of the Global Research News Hour special with Robbie Martin on his documentary series, A Very Heavy Agenda that explores the rise and continued influence of the neoconservatives. Part 2 will air next week where we will explore the anthrax attacks, the role of Vice in spreading U.S. propaganda. You can buy or stream A Very Heavy Agenda at averyheavyagenda.com. Music for this special provided by Fluorescent Grey, AKA Robbie Martin. For the Global Research N ews H our, I'm Scott Price.

-end of transcript-

Global Research News Hour Summer 2018 Series Part 5

[Sep 12, 2018] George Galloway made a couple of very interesting points, especially about the time stamp on the photo. He said the Skripals left the house in the morning, never to return. The "Russian agents" could not have arrived in Salisbury until noon or thereabouts

Sep 12, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

m , Sep 12, 2018 3:04:05 PM | link

To add to Norwegian@3, George Galloway made a couple of very interesting points, especially about the time stamp on the photo. He said the Skripals left the house in the morning, never to return. The "Russian agents" could not have arrived in Salisbury until noon or thereabouts...hmmmm...and they would have had to paint the doorknob with this deadliest of poisons in full view of everyone. Perhaps the Russians have learned to time travel or warp time. I wouldn't put it past them http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/50231.htm

[Sep 12, 2018] UK Launches New Wave of Anti-Russia Hysteria to Pursue Its Own Hidden Agenda by Arkady SAVITSKY

Notable quotes:
"... "the full range of tools from across our national security apparatus." ..."
"... "We have heard or seen two names, these names mean nothing to me personally," ..."
"... "I don't understand why this was done and what sort of signal the British side is sending." ..."
"... "The US and UK stand firmly together in holding Russia accountable for its act of aggression on UK soil." ..."
Sep 08, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

Prime Minister Theresa May made a statement to accuse Russia of being behind the Skripal poisoning case . She went to address the parliament right after prosecutors accused two Russian men, allegedly military intelligence officers, to perpetrate the assassination attempt. These are the first criminal charges in the case that has spoiled the West-Russian relations so much. The British government has issued EU arrest warrants and Interpol red notices to have the two individuals arrested by police in any country should they leave Russia's territory.

According to the PM, Great Britain and its friends must step up collective efforts against Russia. Its military intelligence service (the GRU) is to be specifically targeted employing "the full range of tools from across our national security apparatus." Before making the speech that sounded hostile toward Moscow, the PM had talked the matter over with US President Trump and other friendly world leaders. Ms May is expected to raise the issue at the UN General Assembly later this month. No doubt, London will ask the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to investigate the case. The UK will probably impose sanctions of its own and call on others to join. As usual, media "leaks" will pour more fuel on the fire. Anti-Russia forces in the West will get the second wind.

Ben Wallace, Minister of State for Security at the Home Office, attributed direct blame on Russian President Vladimir, something Ms. May avoided to do. He said the Russian leader bears responsibility for the nerve agent attack.

The photos of two men that have visited the UK are not evidence to support the PM' claims. "We have heard or seen two names, these names mean nothing to me personally," Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov told reporters in Moscow. "I don't understand why this was done and what sort of signal the British side is sending." But one thing is curtain – the British government wants as much noise and publicity as possible. It raises hue and cry in an evident attempt to further deteriorate the West-Russia relations and it does it on purpose. Why now? Because this is the right time to pursue the hidden agenda.

US Ambassador to Britain Woody Johnson said on Twitter: "The US and UK stand firmly together in holding Russia accountable for its act of aggression on UK soil." He was quick to react. Evidently, Mr Johnson wasted no time on waiting for instructions. It had all been known, discussed and decided before.

By spearheading the anti-Russia campaign in the West, London increases its political weight before Brexit takes place. With its unity in peril, the West needs something to keep it together and the Russia's bogey comes in handy.

The second round of US sanctions imposed to punish Russia for the alleged, but never proven, use of nerve agents, is much tougher than the first one in force since August. It is to take effect in November – the same month US midterm elections take place.

The "Skripal sanctions" are not introduced by Congress but the State Department. It's up to the president to impose them or not. If President Trump's party keeps the majority in both houses, the pressure to prove he is tough on Russia will ease. The president may soften the sanctions or not impose them at all. The reinvigoration of "Skripal poisoning" campaign will make it much harder to do. Donald Trump as well as EU leaders will be under constant pressure to do more to counter Russia.

True, the EU is not interested in whipping up tensions in its relationship with Russia amid the sanctions war and other things to deteriorate its relationship with the United States. But on the other hand, Eurosceptics, who are friendly to Moscow, are predicted to win big in the European parliament election in May. They may get every third vote and have enough seats to stymie the functioning of the "unreformed" EU as we know it today. It will put into jeopardy the very survival of the bloc. Many of Eurosceptics want the relations with Russia normalized and the sanctions lifted. Be it Skripal or something else, an anti-Russia campaign is needed to attack them. They'll be painted as "useful idiots" or "traitors" promoting Russia's evil plans to destroy the West. Here again, the imaginary "Russia threat" serves the purpose perfectly.

The events in Syria are distorted to denigrate Russia but that's happening far away. Spreading around the stories about Moscow using chemical weapons in Europe may have the desired effect to keep voters away from throwing their support behind those who can change the European political landscape.

There is actually nothing new in what the British PM stated. It's not so important what exactly she said. It's timing that matters. The moment is right for anti-Russia hysteria to be given a fresh impetus. Will this tactics work? The November elections in the US and the European elections in May will show. The closer is the vote, the more concocted stories about the nefarious Russia's activities will come into the spotlight.

[Sep 12, 2018] We know who people named as suspects in Skripal case are, they are civilians Putin -- RT World News

Notable quotes:
"... "nothing criminal" ..."
"... "I want to address them [the suspects]... [I hope] they contact the media. I hope they appear and tell everything about themselves," ..."
"... "Neither Russia's top leadership nor those with lower ranks, and [Russian] officials, have had anything to do with the events in Salisbury," ..."
"... "It seems very strange that these people have absolutely left what seems to be a very reckless and clear trail of evidence, which almost seems to be designed, or at least would almost inevitably lead to, the conclusions that the police and the authorities have come to today, in other words that Russia were to blame," ..."
"... "bits of evidence that may look pretty compelling but will never be tested in a real court of law." ..."
"... "perfect cover for smuggling the weapon into the country and a perfect delivery method for the attack against the Skripal's front door." ..."
Sep 12, 2018 | www.rt.com

Home World News We know who people named as suspects in Skripal case are, they are civilians – Putin Published time: 12 Sep, 2018 06:56 Edited time: 12 Sep, 2018 12:57 Get short URL We know who people named as suspects in Skripal case are, they are civilians – Putin 'Alexander Petrov' and 'Ruslan Boshirov' are seen in an image handed out by the Metropolitan Police in London, Britain / Reuters Moscow is aware of who the people named as suspects in the Skripal case are, President Vladimir Putin said, adding that these people are civilians. Saying that there is "nothing criminal" about the two, Putin also hopes that the people in question will eventually come forward and talk to the media.

"I want to address them [the suspects]... [I hope] they contact the media. I hope they appear and tell everything about themselves," he said, addressing the audience during the Eastern Economic Forum (EEF) in the Russian city of Vladivostok.

Read more 'Alexander Petrov' and 'Ruslan Boshirov', are seen in an image handed out by the Metropolitan Police in London, Britain September 5, 2018 British prosecutors name the 2 Russians suspected of poisoning the Skripals

Earlier in September, UK prosecutors named two Russians they suspect of poisoning Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury this March. According to London, their names are Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov. Russia denies any involvement and accuses Britain of spinning the case to stir anti-Russian sentiment.

Beyond identifying them as Russian nationals, the prosecutors gave no indication as to who the men are.

After London again blamed Russia, implying that officials at the highest levels of power could be responsible for the poisoning, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov rebuffed the allegations.

"Neither Russia's top leadership nor those with lower ranks, and [Russian] officials, have had anything to do with the events in Salisbury," he said at that time.

The Kremlin spokesman added that Putin didn't personally speak to the two individuals identified by the British authorities as suspects in the case. Russian law enforcement has not made any moves to prosecute them, Peskov said.

According to the investigators, the suspects who arrived in Britain from Moscow left traces of the poison used in the attack in the hotel room they stayed in. They were also caught on CCTV cameras in Salisbury twice, including on the day of the attack, and traveled back directly to the Russian capital.

READ MORE: Skripal saga aimed to stir anti-Russia sentiment of Cold War - Ken Livingstone to RT

This trail of evidence from the supposedly highly-trained perpetrators casts doubt over Moscow's involvement, according to a number of security experts. "It seems very strange that these people have absolutely left what seems to be a very reckless and clear trail of evidence, which almost seems to be designed, or at least would almost inevitably lead to, the conclusions that the police and the authorities have come to today, in other words that Russia were to blame," Charles Shoebridge, a security expert and former British military officer, told RT. Annie Machon, a former MI5 intelligence officer, said the inquiry into the case has effectively turned into a trial by media, based on "bits of evidence that may look pretty compelling but will never be tested in a real court of law."

London also insists that a counterfeit Nina Ricci perfume box was used as container and delivery device for the chemical used in the poisoning. It was later found by Charlie Rowley in the town of Amesbury, not far from Salisbury. They also claim that the noxious agent was in a bottle that had been altered to make it "perfect cover for smuggling the weapon into the country and a perfect delivery method for the attack against the Skripal's front door."

Reacting to the prosecutors' statement, Russian envoy to the UN Vasily Nebenzya joked that the nerve agent attack has so far had only one benefactor – Nina Ricci.

[Sep 12, 2018] Explosive Skripal allegations may blow up in Syria by George Galloway

Sep 12, 2018 | www.unz.com

tac , says: Next New Comment September 11, 2018 at 4:51 pm GMT

@annamaria

... ... ...

Today's latest offering is that the 'Russians' in the 'mugshots' released last week are 'already dead' having been 'executed by Putin' to stop them talking, forever. Which neatly avoids the British state asking Russia for help in identifying them. London's failure to do so was already arousing suspicion amongst a cynical public. There is now no point, the would-be assassins are now six-feet below the permafrost of Anglo-Russian relations.

The media here have completely ignored the statement of the head of the anti-terrorist squad of Scotland Yard that he had "No" evidence of Russian state involvement in the crime in Salisbury, preferring instead the cheap barroom brawling of the British prime minister on the floor of the House of Commons cheered on by the vulgar popular press and their more refined elder sisters in the upmarket papers and on the BBC.

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/438157-skripal-syria-allegations-russia/

annamaria , says: Next New Comment September 11, 2018 at 6:09 pm GMT
@tac

FSB arrests ISIS member 'who planned murder of a Donbass leader on behalf of Ukraine'

The Russian security service, the FSB, says it has arrested an Islamic State operative who was planning to murder one of the leaders of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic (DNR) on behalf of the Ukrainian authorities.
The suspected terrorist was identified as Mejid Magomedov, who was born in 1988 in Russia's southern Dagestan republic. He was arrested on Sunday in Russia's Smolensk region in the west of the country.
https://www.rt.com/news/438028-fsb-isis-member-ukraine/


Explosive Skripal allegations may blow up in Syria - George Galloway

Today's latest offering is that the 'Russians' in the 'mugshots' released last week are 'already dead' having been 'executed by Putin' to stop them talking, forever. Which neatly avoids the British state asking Russia for help in identifying them. London's failure to do so was already arousing suspicion amongst a cynical public. There is now no point, the would-be assassins are now six-feet below the permafrost of Anglo-Russian relations.

The media here have completely ignored the statement of the head of the anti-terrorist squad of Scotland Yard that he had "No" evidence of Russian state involvement in the crime in Salisbury, preferring instead the cheap barroom brawling of the British prime minister on the floor of the House of Commons cheered on by the vulgar popular press and their more refined elder sisters in the upmarket papers and on the BBC.

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/438157-skripal-syria-allegations-russia/

"the statement of the head of the anti-terrorist squad of Scotland Yard that he had "No" evidence of Russian state involvement in the crime in Salisbury "

Yes. The UK government has lost its marbles in the pursuit of power & money. They suffer the same disease as their Israeli and US counterparts -- the loss of the life-saving integrity and intelligence and the triumph of the life-threatening stupidity.
The western governments have become incompetent due to the lack of the populace' supervision. For any living organism, no feedback means no protective actions ensuring the survival of the organism.
The Cheneys and Bibis and Blairs of the world are not intelligent enough even to envision the future for their immediate progeny, nevermind grandkids. These stupid elders are covered in the blood of the innocent.

[Sep 10, 2018] Who was pulling the strings fro WWII?

Notable quotes:
"... Winston Churchill referred to Poland as the hyena of Europe, yet entered his country into a war against to save the hyena and declared victory with the hyena left in the arms of the Russian Bear and his Empire lost. ..."
"... The most explosive and brilliant book on the subject is Conjuring Hitler: How Britain and America Made the Third Reich by Guido Giacomo Preparata. Mr Preparata was fired from his job in academia so it must have some merit. If you hunt around you can get an internet copy of the book. ..."
Sep 10, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mark2 , Sep 10, 2018 5:27:45 PM | link

Both Churchill and Hitler could not have gone to war on the scale that they did, if they hadn't been sure that they had the public support and backing. The process of achieving that took several years. Slowly encouraging a sense of national pride and hatred of Jews de-humanizing them in the eye of the public (dog whistle). For ten years in the uk our papers have done both! In ww2 it moved on to, the police looking the other way while mobs attacked jew's in the streets. This too we have seen in the last two weeks in Chemnitz Germany. Except this time it's 'foreigners not Jews. At this stage it should be bloody obviously which way this is going.

But who is pulling the strings ? They are the true enemy! Answer the 1%, the aristocracy. The billionaire club. All the rest will be just a dog fight started by them and Laughed at by them!!! Just like ww2!!!

ADKC , Sep 10, 2018 5:33:18 PM | link
Lochern @110

A number of years ago Peter Oborne was interviewed on one of the main British TV channels and he described what had really happened in Aleppo (this was a long time before the Syrian regime attacked and retook Aleppo) and was very careful in distinguishing Eastern Aleppo form the city as a whole. What Oborne said was incredibly authentic, was totally contrary to what had previously been reported on British MSM and was an absolute eye opener to me. Needless to say he was never asked back to give his opinion and has since completely disappeared from British TV.

People forget the price that journalists like Peter Oborne, Peter Hitchens, Neil Clark, John Pilger, etc. (journalists from the left & right) have paid by sticking to their journalistic principles. They deserve our respect.

somebody , Sep 10, 2018 5:56:53 PM | link
Posted by: Mark2 | Sep 10, 2018 5:27:45 PM | 111

Both Churchill and Hitler could not have gone to war on the scale that they did, if they hadn't been sure that they had the public support and backing.

Hitler needed 5 years of dictatorship to do it. Britain's elite was largely pro fascist .

Only if Hitler turned out to be determined to destroy the state of Poland itself would the guarantee be operative, for it would prove that the Fuhrer's intent was not a "Grossdeutschland" but rather the domination of the European continent. Unlikely as the latter prospect had seemed to the rationally minded Chamberlain, it was this second option that Hitler chose.

A further reason for Chamberlain's decision to guarantee Poland was to counter the relentless campaign from Eden, Churchill, and the Labour Party for an alliance with Stalin. This has been seen as a lost opportunity, especially since the Soviets eventually rolled back Operation Barbarossa all the way to the Reichstag steps. Yet the Red Army did not look so impressive in early 1939. Stalin had purged its officer class. Its morale was said to be low, its organisation on the brink of collapse. Indeed, it was argued in the British Foreign Policy Committee on 27 March 1939 that the Polish Army was a better deterrent against Germany than the Red Army.

The last argument is a bit of a joke just counting people. Of course, Poland in those years was a right wing authoritarian state that had gone along with Germany in carving up Czechoslovakia.

CarlD , Sep 10, 2018 6:12:36 PM | link
It has been a very instructive thread.

However, the hour is pregnant with sad news to come.

Humanity is in a bind because some believe that might is right and their cause is right because they are the mightiest. Therefore it is like "le loup et l 'agneau" a fable by Jean de la Fontaine that states" " la raison du plus fort est la meilleure" ( the argument of the strongest is the winning one.)

Some will remember having read about that American Newspaper Owner who must be held responsible for starting the Spanish-American W through the fact that after the USS MAINE's explosion in the Havana Bay his newspaper titled everyday: "Remember the MAINE" along with some op-ed in favor of shastising these impertinent Spaniards that "had treasonously sunk the MAINE".

William Randolph Hearst was the newspaper owner who must be credited with starting that War. And today, the likes of him, say like Turner or Rupert Murdoch and others of the same caliber are certainly roosting for a hot war, even if it only serves to revive failing readership or audiences.

Of course in all this, the MIC, the bankers, and those that want total obedience and submission to the whims and desires of who knows which bureaucrat et some CIA or State Department desk wants to have some fun at the expense of others.

Take a President in hot waters that wants to save his skin and he will, very willingly, ride with the wave that relentlessly pushes towards total domination of the World lest he be crushed by the momentum of that avalanche. If he does not, he will be labeled a TRAITOR, and deposed.

I am sorry to say, humanity is about to change i its way of life because escalation will be quick.

Russia is armed to kill, not to contain. Russia can pulverize the opposition, not wrestle with it and prevail. Therefore, Nuclear war is on the horizon.

Many, many, will die. Some sooner, some later. But our civilization will become extinct in short order. Only those very isolated tribes living away from civilization will survive. Sad things to come, indeed.

lysias , Sep 10, 2018 6:18:49 PM | link
Zinsknechtschaft. Took a while for it to become apparent, but it turns out the Nazis were on to something there. Of course Christians with their prohibition of usury were on to it centuries earlier.
Mark2 , Sep 10, 2018 6:22:49 PM | link
Surely one of the most important aspects of history studies is to prevent us making the same mistakes over and over again (a def of madness) it is our historians that should step up to the plate! At this very late stage. And I warmly thank the ones here that do.
peter , Sep 10, 2018 6:51:50 PM | link
There's pretty well been an honest account of WW11 be all participants in the last seventy years. Not much point going on about the firebombing of Dresden without acknowledging the London Blitz. Once precedents are set who knows where it goes from there?

It's kind of silly to downplay the British effort in the war. They stood alone for many mouths and, before Hitler made the bonehead move of invading Russia, they faced the most effective military machine of its day. They fought Rommel in North Africa and fought the Japanese in the Pacific and took great losses eventually being removed from that theatre. Alongside them fought the Commonwealth countries from day one in 1939. In the Pacific Brits lost two capital ships and Singapore by not being up to date on modern warfare.

But there was the Battle of Britain and, just as crucial, the Battle of the Atlantic against the U-boat fleet that threatened to throttle to starve them out. After the US declaration of war in 1941 the Kriegsmarine enjoyed what they called the "happy days" picking off American shipping along the Atlantic Seaboard by the hundreds till the Brits tutored them the basics of convoys and turning off the fucking lights so that all their coastal traffic wasn't backlit by the cities.

Everybody knows that after Stalingrad and Kurst that the push west by the Soviets ensured the final destruction of Berlin. But don't, for the love of Christ, start yammering that the push by the allied armies from the west didn't play a major role.

Anyone who knows history would agree that the USSR did the heavy lifting in the the European part. In the Pacific it was the Americans who took care of business.

I'm Canadian and take pride in my country's contribution from Dieppe to D-day and all the way into Germany. We punched way above our weight and I have nothing but disdain for any ill-informed jerk-offs that downplay the effectiveness of Britain and her allies.

If it's atrocities and bad behavior that's got your thongs in knots, there's lots of guilt to go around. Even your precious Russians acted up once in a while.

somebody , Sep 10, 2018 6:56:16 PM | link
Posted by: Moische | Sep 10, 2018 5:57:49 PM | 115

Hitler - Hjalmar Schacht - turned Germany's economy into a war machine .

People did not pay interest because they did not get credit - that was reserved for war.

Pft , Sep 10, 2018 7:09:24 PM | link
Hitler lost the election for President to Hindenburg. His party later won the elections that gave then a minority in the Reichstag. They were able to form a majority coalition that made Hitler Chancellor (prime Minister). He became President when Hildenberger died. The false flag Reichstag fire blamed on Communists and by association Jews) allowed the President to obtain dictatorial powers to fight the War on Communism (and Jews). These powers passed to Hitler.

The German people are no more to blame for Hitler than Americans are to blame for Bush, Trump and 9/11. Like the Germans, the majority of Americans voted for someone else and lost their freedom due to false flag attacks.

Could things have turned out differently for Germans and the world? Surely the Versailles Treaty was designed to ensure there would be another Great War but even with Hitler in power there was an opportunity to stop Hitler in his tracts with a treaty between UK, France, Romania, Poland and USSR. Poland blocked that as they hoped to side with Germany in a war with the USSR to claim territory in the east. The rest is history

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2015/10/02/no-doubts-poland-responsible-for-beginning-wwii.html

Winston Churchill referred to Poland as the hyena of Europe, yet entered his country into a war against to save the hyena and declared victory with the hyena left in the arms of the Russian Bear and his Empire lost.

Lochearn , Sep 10, 2018 7:16:44 PM | link
The most explosive and brilliant book on the subject is Conjuring Hitler: How Britain and America Made the Third Reich by Guido Giacomo Preparata. Mr Preparata was fired from his job in academia so it must have some merit. If you hunt around you can get an internet copy of the book.
Thirdeye , Sep 10, 2018 8:10:03 PM | link
@16

The Caucasus wasn't the target of Barbarossa. It didn't become an objective until the second half of 1942. In 1940-41 Germany had sufficient oil imports from Romania and the Soviet Union to hold their own against the Brits. In 1941 the best "oil strategy" for Germany would have been to drive the Brits - who they could have overwhelmed with the forces deployed against the Soviet Union - out of the eastern Mediterranean and continue the desert war towards the Persian Gulf. They would have had political support from the locals. The Brits would have been screwed.

Thirdeye , Sep 10, 2018 8:10:03 PM | link Clueless Joe , Sep 10, 2018 8:16:09 PM | link
Peter - 120 "Anyone who knows history would agree that the USSR did the heavy lifting in the the European part. In the Pacific it was the Americans who took care of business."

Sure, for the Pacific war. If we look at the whole Japanese side of the war, though, we have to acknowledge that, just like 3/4 of the Wehrmacht was busy fighting the Red Army, the bulk of Japanese army was busy fighting various Chinese factions and armies. Had Japan come to a settlement there, this would have freed a lot of troops that would have been able to go on the offensive towards India and would have been able to garrison in even bigger numbers the Pacific islands - I'm not sure they would've been able to invade more places in the Pacific, at least after Midway. Though one probably can't defend the whole Australian coastline, however big the defending navy. When talking about the "Pacific" war, people have to understand that Chinese deaths made up the majority of deaths in the Eastern theatre, at an even higher proportion than Soviet deaths for the European theatre. Anyone thinking China has forgotten is making the same big and terrible mistake as people who thinks Russia has forgotten the Nazi onslaught.

Thirdeye , Sep 10, 2018 8:41:55 PM | link

Hats off to Mr. Hitchens. We tend to look at the outbreak of WWII with tunnel vision, depriving everything of context. IMO it was inevitable that war would break out no matter who was running things in Germany, largely because of the hegemonic Anglo-French objectives in eastern Europe. The map of eastern Europe drawn by the victors at the end of WWI was an abomination but it was preserved, in spite of the false promises to Germany under the Locarno Treaty, to further Anglo-French hegemony through their vassal states Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Romania. The principle of self-determination evidently didn't apply to German speakers. They even interfered, through the League of Nations, in pre-Nazi trade relations between Germany and Austria - a blatant violation of sovereignty.

Posted by: Thirdeye | Sep 10, 2018 8:41:55 PM | link

Pft , Sep 10, 2018 9:17:13 PM | link
Japan and Germany were defeated primarily due to lack of oil, but also due to American manufacturing capacity that allowed it to produce an extraordinary amount of weapons and ships in a short time. The Soviets may not have stopped Hitler without the US weapons and equipment sent to them

The outcome of the war against Japan was never really in doubt. If not for FDR's oil embargo it never would have happened, but FDR needed it to get support to enter the war against Germany. Both wars need not to have happened but there were forces who backed it to fulfill their agenda for a NWO .

Just goes to show evil and stupidity is not a 21st century invention. 70 million dead over China and Poland and both end up in Communist hands at the end. Anyone really believe that whopper?

Lozion , Sep 10, 2018 9:31:02 PM | link
@126 Yes but fortunately Hitler couldn't see the importance of occupying British Malta to secure trans-Med shipment to support Rommel's Afrika Korps, hence the gradual retreat West after (2nd) El Alamein. Had Egypt and the Suez fallen to the Werhmacht, the Empire would be in shambles. I'd rather not think about what would have happened to the Yishuv in Palestine..

[Sep 10, 2018] It's amazing that so much crisp, instantly-recognizable footage exists of the hit men, almost as if they were laying out an easily-reconstructable route for observers

Notable quotes:
"... In fact, the quality of British evidence seems to go up markedly as soon as the preceding exhibits are the object of public derision. ..."
Sep 10, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile September 9, 2018 at 9:13 pm

Two Russian GRU hit men who apparently spent a considerable amount of their small amount of time whilst on a mission of death in Merry England mugging in front of CCTV cameras.

And they only killed one person, and not their intended target at that: a junky, drug pushing bum's alcoholic womanfriend, who unfortunatly was accidently contaminated with the deadliest nerve poison known to man.

As a Scotland counter-terrorist chief plod said, these were trained professionals in the killing trade, and as Prime Minister May said, they belong to a tightly disciplined organization whose orders come directly from the top, meaning the Dark Lord no less.

Simply sickening and despicable!

Good job Russians are a bunch of dickheads, otherwise the whole population of Salisbury might have been poisoned – or the South of England, even.

Who knows what these vile Russians will do next?.

Mark Chapman September 10, 2018 at 2:42 am
It's amazing that so much crisp, instantly-recognizable footage exists of the hit men, almost as if they were laying out an easily-reconstructable route for observers; at least, as contrasted with the blurry and ambiguous photo evidence of the Skripals, which seems to rely on happy snaps by friends as much as government resources. Until they get Yulia on camera to make her post-Novichok debut, of course – then, it's theatre-quality. In fact, the quality of British evidence seems to go up markedly as soon as the preceding exhibits are the object of public derision.
Moscow Exile September 10, 2018 at 4:06 am
This laying of a trail directly back to the Kremlin is a regular feature of Russian incompetents!

Harding, in his account of the Litvinenko poisoning , wrote:

The poison was polonium-210, a rare radioactive isotope, tiny, invisible, undetectable. Ingested, it was fatal. The polonium had originated at a nuclear reactor in the Urals and a production line in the Russian town of Sarov. A secret FSB laboratory, the agency's "research institute", then converted it into a dinkily portable weapon.

Lugovoi and Kovtun, however, were rubbish assassins. The quality of Moscow's hired killers had slipped since the glory days of the KGB.

It's because they're idiots, see!

Although Russians are a direct to Western civilization and against whom we must be ever on guard, they are also all congenital dickheads, doomed to failure -- always.

All of them!

Warren September 9, 2018 at 12:54 pm

[Sep 10, 2018] The declaration of war against Germany by France and Brits was a warning to Hitler to split from Stalin and return to his original mission of attacking and killing communist Russia. What he did in 1941

Sep 10, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

vk , Sep 9, 2018 3:51:48 PM | link

The reason Germany went to war in 1941 was because of oil.

Even with oil imports from the USSR and synthetic production from coal (which the Third Reich had enough in the Ruhr for 171 years, maintaining constant levels of consumption of the time), Germany had a deficitary production-to-consumption rate of oil after the UK -- which, at the time, still controlled the Middle East -- blockaded it.

In that scenario, the Third Reich had two options: 1) sue for peace under very unfavorable terms with the UK or 2) invade the USSR and take its Caucasus reserves until September 1st (the date which the German finance minister equivalent of the time calculated its reserves would last). The Germans chose the second option, well before Barbarossa per se begun.

In that context, to conquer Britain didn't make any strategic sense for the Germans. They stopped at Dunkirk for the simple reason enter in a full war against the British would be a quagmire for the Nazis: the real enemy was in the East.

Kalen , Sep 9, 2018 5:58:58 PM | link

Actually no, we didn't Win the Second World War. We started it, but, thanks to our weakness and shortage of cash had to hand it over to the USA and the USSR half way through.

I hope this is a joke. As by that b joins realm of Alex Johns hallucinations.

British did not start the WWII although they declared war on Germany September 3, 1939 before Germany reciprocated. But author is blind to historical truth that British were obligated by mutual security Treaty to defend Poland, hence decision was made under legal binding of treaty not an attack on Germany that never happened, no single British bomb fell on German territory until Brits were attacked in 1940 on. Brits although facilitated war by their inept politics they did not start WWII, Hitler knew he started WWII. The only question is, why Brits did not reneged on this treaty even if they did not commence any hostile activities against Germany for next eight months or so way after Poland was defeated, why not lay off and forget about it,

It is simple it was Pact of Ribbentrop Molotov signed barely few days before attack on Poland, which was a shock for British and French elites as earlier Hitler was declaring himself as anti-Soviet crusader, and remembering WWI and knowing that combined natural resources of Russia and German war industry spells their own quick defeat.

The declaration of war against Germany by France and Brits was a warning to Hitler to split from Stalin and return to his original mission of attacking and killing communist Russia. What he did in 1941.

French and British did not want war as in entire 1939 French alone had at least five to one advantage over German troops (10 : 1 wif Brits joined ) vast advantage in every type of weapons on western front as German army was engaged East in Poland, they did nothing as they waited for Hitler to drop Pact with Stalin.

Instead he attacked France in 1940 at this point US, earlier supporter of Hitler switched to political neutral and after Hitler failed to win Battle of England started to support Brits meaningfully. Perhaps his defeat and US engagement prompted Hitler to return to attacking USSR in another twist shocking for Stalin that after 1939 massively increased trade with Germany especially exports of fuel as well as cooperation in MIC of both countries. Stalin thought that after England, Hitler will end the war and seek peace on his terms with the west.

He was so shocked (also he killed most competent generals in 1938) that for weeks German Army advanced unopposed about 50 miles a day while rail transports of oil and other commodities for export From Russia to Germany continued for days while brutal war raged.

The fact is there were two winners of WWII Stalin ( while Soviets lost 30 millions) and US banking oligarchy, everybody else lost.

British Empire was effectively deateated via after war bankruptcy and collapsed in following 20 years by join effort of US and USSR during war struggle.

somebody , Sep 9, 2018 6:04:01 PM | link
@vk | Sep 9, 2018 3:51:48 PM | 13

Any calculations of the Nazi economy were the calculations of a war economy. If they had concentrated on consumption they would have made it out of the depression like everybody else.
The war needed oil and there were many ways to get it.
Germany synthezised oil from coal, but there were also imports from Romania and Austria.
There is speculation that the US and Britain could have finished the war much earlier by bombing German refineries but did not do so in order to weaken Stalin.

The thirst for oil was a consequence of war not the reason for it. Stalin would have sold Germany all the oil it needed - cheaply, just to keep it in the Hitler-Stalin pact. Germany - and Austria - were ruled by a military caste obsessed with colonizing the east. They had not realized the strategic stupidity of the First World War, they did not realize the strategic stupidity of the Second.

norman normal , Sep 9, 2018 6:27:44 PM | link
charles highams book Trading With the Enemy: An exposé of the Nazi-American money ...
is all you need if you are interested in who provided the aviation fuel for nazi and britain during ww2

who owned and got paid for the synthetic oil from coal
who provided the lead neaded for military vehicles
funny old world

Pft , Sep 9, 2018 6:32:13 PM | link
Vk@13

Germany got over half of its oil from Mexico after Mexico nationalized the oil industry in 1938. They saw that was jeopardized when the pro US conservatives won the 1940 elections. So like you say, it was about securing oil resources ahead of losing access to Mexicos oil.

Something they might not have needed to do at that time if not for the Brits having declared war on them after invading Poland. Of course the Soviets invaded Poland as well but they became allies when Germany invaded them and in the end the war for Poland ended with Poland left behind the Iron Curtain and somehow victory was declared despite having lost Poland to the communists

An awful lot of effort and deaths to free half of Germany and Italy from fascism. Brits lost their Empire and suffered 10 years of reconstruction but they did nationalize the BOE (didnt change much) , gave the people NHS (trying to trash it now) and later created or at least joined a new Empire using the Eurodollar via their tax havens

Anton Worter , Sep 9, 2018 6:43:04 PM | link
6

More to the Point, why did Germany veer away from Dunkirk towards Paris when they could have annihilated the Brits? Instead they tried saturation bombing raids and failed in Battle of Britain period immediately after. At that point, they lost the war for the wealth that England possessed. Why did Hitler turn south to Paris?

Germany easily took Norway, you don't think they could have taken Britain? Germany had the largest army in Europe and a more modern naval fleet than England, especially battleships. Seriously, the English kept their fleet far to the north, and had the Battle of Britain gone the other way, and Britain lost air cover, Germany could have sailed up the Thames and looted the Rothschild's treasure, long before the British Fleet got sunk by u-boats steaming back south.

If not for Battle of Britain and Roosevelt's emmissary Hopkins dragging US into the Europe troop clashes after the air success, London Royals and all their wealth would have abandoned England for the colonies, and America would never have gone to war. Nobody wanted in US wanted war. Roosevelt did not have the votes to pass Lend-Lease.

Read your Sun Tsu.

somebody , Sep 9, 2018 6:54:18 PM | link
add to 31/32

Soviet-German trade agreement of 1939

This agreement served two purposes. First, it brought two complementary economies closer together. To support its war economy, Germany needed raw materials -- oil, manganese, grains, and wood. The Soviet Union needed manufactured products -- machines, tools, optical equipment, and weapons. Although the USSR had slightly more room to maneuver and a somewhat superior bargaining position, neither country had many options for receiving such materials elsewhere. Subsequent economic agreements in 1940 and 1941, therefore, focused on the same types of items.

The Soviet Union did supply oil to Germany, and - of course - stopped supplying when Germany went to war.

Germany did not invade the Soviet Union for oil. They had already got it.

Germany was ruled by this mad East-Elbian military caste obsessed with owning eastern colonies. Germany had been late with industrialization (an advantage), they were late with colonizing. There was nothing rational about it as the time for the occupation of colonies was over. Britain and France lost most of them after the war, and the US inherited Vietnam.

Pft , Sep 9, 2018 7:04:58 PM | link
somebody@31

Germany was at war with Briitain knowing it was just a matter of time before the US jumped in. Being reliant on the Soviets for oil knowing that UKUS could reach their own pact with Stalin would have been foolish

Hitler had plans to finish off the Soviet Union at some point, and the world probably would be better off if he did (we will never know) but the Brits declaration of war and uncertainty of Mexican oil supplies forced him to act earlier than he was prepared to.

As for not knocking out some refineries in Germany. they did knock out the Romanian refineries which were more important to Germanys military efforts against Russia. Much of Germans industry used coal but they did disrupt transportation making it difficult to transport product to/from refineries

As for Germanys economy before the war.

"Hitler issued the law about the reduction of unemployment in June of 1933. Over two million people started building autobahns, railways and channels. The government was reducing taxes for the companies that were expanding their investment activities and contributing to the growth of employment. The unemployment rate was halved in a year and was completely liquidated in 1936.

The nation extricated from the crisis in the heavy industry in 1935. The Fuhrer was getting ready for war. Schacht did his best to fund the defense industry of Germany. He used a parallel currency – Mefo bills – to cover a half of all expenses to rearm the German army."

A Russian source is hardly biased in Hitlers favor. He was on a war footing but Germany did better than most countries in the depression after 1933, and he got a lot of help from American, French and British companies in rebuilding the country.


See more at http://www.pravdareport.com/world/europe/02-07-2009/107924-hitler-0/

fast freddy , Sep 9, 2018 7:12:46 PM | link
22

Along with the USA, Germany was instrumental in the destruction of Yugoslavia.

32

That Germany was trading with Mexico for oil explains why Mexico has German-built railroads dating back to that period. See for example the old railway from Chihuahua to Copper Canyon aka Las Barrancas Del Cobre.

daffyDuct , Sep 9, 2018 7:31:15 PM | link
Worth a read.

http://gulftoday.ae/portal/28fa9eb3-afbb-45ad-ba7d-db8574b0f899.aspx

Mark2 , Sep 9, 2018 7:51:22 PM | link
One of the first casultys of war is the truth ! Fake news was as prevalent then (ww2) as it is now. Another interesting comparison then and now is how words become curupted and very often turned on there head --- attack and aggression turned into defence, freedom fighters called terrorist's and vice versa to suite the false narrative required ! Then and now. I raise this as a glaring example has come to my attention this last 24 hours ! Yesterday on moa's thread a lot of us we're infusiasticly defending socialism ! But even be for this post appeared, following the Swedish election i realised the nazi party had stolen the word socialism ! Just as Hitler had done last time ! Yesterday I defended the term ! In Sweden today I defiantly wouldent--- curupted language as a meens of deception to recruit the gulable into brutality. Heads up folks. Up is the new down!!!
vk , Sep 9, 2018 8:37:02 PM | link
@ Posted by: somebody | Sep 9, 2018 6:04:01 PM | 31
@ Posted by: somebody | Sep 9, 2018 6:54:18 PM | 34
@ Posted by: Pft | Sep 9, 2018 7:04:58 PM | 35

The first and most elemental error people usually commit when judging past historical events is something called "anachronism": when you project the reality of one world (usually, your own times) to the analysed event.

All those comments (and much more here) commit this simple, but easily avoidable, mistake.

1) the world in end of 1930s to the beginning of the 1940s was a world where there were only, for mass exports purposes, three sources of oil: the USA (by far the largest producer and exporter of oil at the time), Venezuela and the Soviet Union in a distant third place. The ME -- believe it or not -- produced and exported oil at the time, but it was very little: those vast reserves still weren't discovered and/or were not economically viable at the time (political turnmoil included among these factors). Yes, Romania produced some oil and exported it, but even it was not nearly close enough to satisfying German needs.

The USSR, at the time, did produce oil in respectable quantities, and exported it to the Germans -- but it still wasn't nearly enough to satisfy both countries' needs. Germany, even with Soviet oil, was incurring chronic deficits in oil -- speciallly because it was expanding its Armed Forces first then everybody else.

So, as you can see, the world was a very different place than today. The oil powers of now were not the oil powers of then.

Documentation is clear: Germany had to start a war with the USSR in June 1941. German oil would end in September 1941 (at least that's what they thought at the time). Situation was so critical that Operation Barbarossa actually doesn't have any objective: aim was just to "get to the Caucasus" and then see what they would do from there (even if they had gone until Baku, the USSR would still have the south and eastern Caspian Sea as routes for their oil; Persia, future Iran, was at their side during the war).

2) there was no "special relationship" back then. There was simply no guarantee the British would get unlimited American aid. Hitler calculated the British might be reasonable. And documents really prove the British government almost surrendered after the shock of Dunkirk. British soldiers who survived are documented to have thought the war was already over.

Even in 1945, the USA was still very suspicious of the UK, to the point it denied it access to the atomic bomb. Things begun to get even more tense after Churchill actually lost the elections of 1946, giving place to Clement Attlee, the social-democrat. At the time, people weren't sure a bipolar world would be born; spectation was that it would be a multipolar world, as it was in the interwar period. It was only after 1947 in the earliest that it became clear a bipolar world would take place.

Aras , Sep 10, 2018 5:55:55 AM | link

It was late 1943 and Churchill was upset because the Yanks had nixed his pet project Operation Thunderclap, the one that aimed to kill 275,000 Berliners in one single 2,000-plane raid.

As a consolation he asked Roosevelt for a supply of anthrax bombs that would be used to wipe out the population of Germany's six biggest cities. Again Roosevelt refused, but he offered a glittering alternative:

The Dugway Villages:

https://memory.loc.gov/master/pnp/habshaer/ut/ut0500/ut0568/data/ut0568data.pdf

Excerpt: "Dugway was a high-security testing facility for chemical and biological weapons. The purpose of the replicas of German homes, which were repeatedly rebuilt after being intentionally burned down, was to perfect tactics in the fire bombing of German residential areas. In order to build a facility that was an authentic reproduction, studies were conducted to determine which materials and furnishings available in the U.S would closely match those in use in Germany. A group of German-American architects including Eric Mendelsohn and Konrad Wachsmann, were employed to design the facility.

To ensure that the fires spread as realistically as possible, typical German home-interiors were included, and the wood was periodically doused to simulate conditions in the more humid German climate.

According to the official document no effort was spared. The "German" architects used their knowledge of their former country to design the buildings and contents in such detail that even children's toys were included.

The houses had to be built, burnt, built and burnt, again and again.

But it was vital that no kids escape lest they grow up to be Nazis. At last the happy day arrived and the go-ahead was given to drop the bombs on the by now virtually undefended cities. The net result was that within a year more than 40% of German housing stock had been destroyed and up to half a million defenceless men, women and children slaughtered.

Can you just imagine going to work in that facility?

Every day you asked yourself practical questions like "how do we get the fire to spread spread quickly enough so that a mother doesn't have time to reach her baby in the cot?"

Merasmus , Sep 10, 2018 6:18:22 AM | link
@Anton Worter

I notice you didn't actually answer my question. And how about you actually read some WW2 history first, before attempting to lecture others on subjects you so obviously know nothing about?

The Kriegsmarine was a joke. Aside from being ludicrously outnumbered by just the British Home Fleet, much less the entire Royal Navy (if you actually knew what you were talking about you might have noted that much of the British naval strength was diffused throughout a global empire), it most definitely was not more advanced. The Kreigsmarine lost out on nearly 20 years of meaningful ship design. The destroyers had poor seamanship due to being overgunned. The cruisers consisted of one class of janky wannabe battleships and one class that at its best strove for mediocrity. The battleships were even worse, consisting of one class that would have been comically undergunned even if they had gotten their planned refit (which they didn't), and a follow-up class that was little more than a super-Bayern. Bismarck and Tirpitz were the mightiest BB's...of 1919. Shame they were laid down in the late 30's.

[Sep 10, 2018] Should Assad subsequently fall - and that is the actual aim of intervention - then Syria will become another anarchic wasteland ruled over by fundamentalist warlords.

Notable quotes:
"... We know the proceeds will go unmentioned into offshore havens and the London property market. Britain would derive no geopolitical benefit as a whole. The benefits would accrue only to a kleptocracy who think they have a right to use our country as a loan shark's leg-breaker. ..."
Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Vermithrax , 13 Apr 2018 15:39

Freedland recently put this argument on Newsnight.

It is flawed to the point of dishonesty.

He talks of removing assets as if the process was being conducted under laboratory conditions. There are ten nations enmeshed in a warzone with numerous factions under no one's control. It is magical thinking that cannot be achieved and will only result in rapid, uncontrolled escalation. The idea that there will be no collateral damage is laughable and I regret to suggest that it is deliberately misleading.

Moreover, in engaging Assad when he is on the brink of victory, the Syrian Civil War will be extended. The Syrian people will then pay the price.

Should Assad subsequently fall - and that is the actual aim of intervention - then Syria will become another anarchic wasteland ruled over by fundamentalist warlords. The spiral of migration will be renewed bringing loons wrapped in the dispossessed to our own streets. Worse, the militants next stop will be Lebanon and then Israel will be directly involved. Freedland advocates acting against Assad without even attempting to predict the consequences. At the very least I would expect the usual misdirection 'of course this time we must have a plan for rebuilding Syria', secure in the knowledge that by that time there will be another crisis and Syria can be left in entropy.

No good can come from military intervention. The satisfaction of commentators that the right thing has been done is an irrelevance. The right thing is always just public relations. Every bit of ruthless geopolitics has to have a casus belli to make the killing all righteous and unavoidable. It has always been thus. For resources to be expended on this kind of scale there has to be a rock solid bit of bankable realpolitik. In this case its the struggle for regional hegemony between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Syria can either be part of a supply chain selling Sunni gas/oil to Europe or Shi'a gas/oil to Europe. This is about killing Syrians for the glory of Saudi Arabia. You can see why there has to be a casus belli because thats not something that can be sold. We know the proceeds will go unmentioned into offshore havens and the London property market. Britain would derive no geopolitical benefit as a whole. The benefits would accrue only to a kleptocracy who think they have a right to use our country as a loan shark's leg-breaker.

It is therefore my contention that Freedland is promoting an immoral act that will have serious consequences without offering any serious improvement in the situation. This is arguably the most dangerous situation since the Cuban Missile crisis and an analysis that advocates pouring oil on the flames is either ridiculously stupid or calculatedly duplicitous.

thousandautumns -> balancedman , 13 Apr 2018 15:39
"Up to" 13,000 "opponents" killed over five years during a period of war. I'm assuming that number of "opponents" includes a large number of out and out terrorists who have thrown the country into chaos.
Brianto , 13 Apr 2018 15:39
What is Porton Down manufacturing?
oldeborr , 13 Apr 2018 15:38
The UK and France bares a heavy responsibility for the current situation in Syria. The cavalier attitude that the ConDems took to international law during the Arab spring encouraged the Saudi s and their proxies to distablise the recognised Govt. Assad is no paragon of virtue, but prior to the insurgency steps were in place to make the country a better place for its citizens, and whilst its true political dissent was not allowed, people could live their lives and go about their business in safety.

[Sep 10, 2018] Washington Quietly Increases Lethal Weapons to Ukraine

Continuation of this civil war is important tool for Washington in destabilizing Russia.
Sep 10, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Secretary of Defense James Mattis acknowledges that U.S. instructors are training Ukrainian military units at a base in western Ukraine. Washington also has approved two important arms sales to Kiev's ground forces in just the past nine months. The first transaction in December 2017 was limited to small arms that at least could be portrayed as purely defensive weapons. That agreement included the export of Model M107A1 Sniper Systems, ammunition, and associated parts and accessories, a sale valued at $41.5 million.

A transaction in April 2018 was more serious. Not only was it larger ($47 million) , it included far more lethal weaponry, particularly 210 Javelin anti-tank missiles -- the kind of weapons that Barack Obama's administration had declined to give Kiev.

Needless to say, the Kremlin was not pleased about either sale. Moreover, Congress soon passed legislation in May that authorized $250 million in military assistance, including lethal weaponry, to Ukraine in 2019. Congress had twice voted for military support on a similar scale during the last years of Obama's administration, but the White House blocked implementation. The Trump administration cleared that obstacle out of the way in December 2017 at the same time that it approved the initial small-weapons sale. The passage of the May 2018 legislation means that the path is now open for a dramatic escalation of U.S. military backing for Kiev.

On September 1, former U.S. Ambassador to NATO Kurt Volker disclosed during an interview with The Guardian that Washington's future military aid to Kiev would likely involve weapons sales to Ukraine's air force and navy as well as the army. "The Javelins are mainly symbolic and it's not clear if they would ever be used," Aric Toler, a research scholar at the Atlantic Council, asserted . One could well dispute his sanguine conclusion, but even Toler conceded: "Support for the Ukrainian navy and air defence would be a big deal. That would be far more significant."

Volker's cavalier attitude about U.S. arms sales to a government locked in a crisis with Russia epitomizes the arrogance and tone-deaf nature of the views that too many U.S. foreign policy officials exhibit regarding the sensitive Ukraine issue. "We can have a conversation with Ukraine like we would with any other country about what do they need. I think that there's going to be some discussion about naval capability because as you know their navy was basically taken by Russia [when the Soviet Union dissolved]. And so they need to rebuild a navy and they have very limited air capability as well. I think we'll have to look at air defence."

One suspects that Americans would be incensed at comparable actions by Moscow if the geo-strategic situations were reversed. Imagine if Russia (even a democratic Russia) had emerged from the wreckage of the Cold War as the undisputed global superpower, and a weakened United States had to watch as the Kremlin expanded a powerful, Russian-led military alliance to America's borders, conducted alliance war games within sight of U.S. territory, interfered in Canada's internal political affairs to oust a democratically elected pro-American government, and then pursued growing military ties with the new, anti-U.S. government in Ottawa. Yet that would be disturbingly similar to what Washington has done regarding NATO policy and U.S. relations with Ukraine.

The Much Diminished Russian Bear Let's See Who's Bluffing in the Criminal Case Against the Russians

Moreover, although Kiev's cheerleaders in the Western (especially U.S.) media like to portray Ukraine as a beleaguered democracy that plays the role of David to Russia's evil Goliath, the reality is far murkier. Putin's government overstates matters when it alleges that Ukraine's 2014 Maidan revolution was a U.S.-orchestrated coup that brought outright fascists to power in Kiev. Nevertheless, that version contains more than a little truth. Prominent, powerful U.S. figures, most notably the late Senator John McCain and Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland, openly sided with demonstrators seeking to unseat Ukraine's elected government. Indeed, Nuland was caught on tape with U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt scheming about the desired composition of a new government in Kiev.

It is unfair to portray Ukraine's current administration led by President Petro Poroshenko as a neo-fascist regime. Post-revolution elections appear to have been reasonably free and fair, and there are major factions that are committed to genuine democratic values. But Ukraine also is hardly a model of Western-style democracy. Not only is it afflicted with extensive graft and corruption, but some extreme nationalist and even neo-Nazi groups play a significant role in the "new" Ukraine. The notoriously fascist Azov Battalion, for example, continues to occupy a prominent position in Kiev's efforts to defeat separatists in Ukraine's eastern Donbass region. Alexander Zakharchenko, prime minister of the self-declared Donetsk People's Republic in the pro-Russia rebel-occupied city of Donetsk, was assassinated on September 1 and officials there and in Russia are blaming Kiev. The Ukrainian government has denied involvement.

Other ultranationalist factions act as domestic militias that attempt to intimidate more moderate Ukrainians. Even the Poroshenko government itself has adopted troubling censorship measures and other autocratic policies. Officials in both the Obama and Trump administration have taken a much too casual attitude toward U.S. cooperation with extremist elements and a deeply flawed Ukrainian government.

Both the danger of stoking tensions with Moscow and becoming too close to a regime in Kiev that exhibits disturbing features should caution the Trump administration against boosting military aid to Ukraine. It is an unwise policy on strategic as well as moral grounds. Trump administration officials should refuse to be intimidated or stampeded into forging a risky and unsavory alliance with Kiev out of fear of being portrayed as excessively "soft" toward Russia. Instead, the president and his advisers need to spurn efforts to increase U.S. support for Ukraine. A good place to start would be to restore the Obama administration's refusal to approve arms sales to Kiev. Washington must not pour gasoline on a geo-strategic fire that could lead to a full-blown crisis between the United States and Russia.

Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow in defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute and a contributing editor at TAC , is the author of 10 books, the contributing editor of 10 books, and the author of more than 700 articles on international affairs .

[Sep 10, 2018] Metadata for the uk police photos show the airport pix used micro$oft photo editing app back on may 3rd

Sep 10, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

photofour , Sep 9, 2018 9:02:55 PM | link

< b,>

metadata for the uk police photos show the airport pix used micro$oft photo editing app back on may 3rd. check the direct download buttons at the police site pages and ignore the html embed.

cctv1 cctv2

fotoforensics site just pulled them directly from those download links (copied from fotoforensics)

cctv1
Creator Tool Windows Photo Editor 10.0.10011.16384
Create Date 2018:05:03 18:43:50.00
Date/Time Original 2018:05:03 18:43:50.00
Image Size 695x363
Megapixels 0.252

cctv2
Creator Tool Windows Photo Editor 10.0.10011.16384
Create Date 2018:05:03 13:46:30.00
Date/Time Original 2018:05:03 13:46:30.00
Image Size 692x366
Megapixels 0.253

full report at fotoforensics on cctv1
full report at fotoforensics on cctv2

i still don't buy the simultaneous timestamp explanation.

[Sep 09, 2018] A country where an immigrant Sikh girl can become a neocon ambassador

Notable quotes:
"... We Americans are totally subject to ziocon propaganda when it comes to Middle East affairs. Anyone that disagrees with that viewpoint is immediately labeled anti-semitic and now banned from social media and of course from the TV talk shows. ..."
"... Jack posed an interesting question, how does someone like Putin respond to an irrational US who in their delusions can easily escalate military conflict if their ego gets bruised when it is shown that they don't have the unilateral power of a hegemon? ..."
"... Always thought that Nikki Haley was the price Donald Trump had to pay to get Sheldon Adelson's large campaign contributions in 2016. Adelson was Trump's second biggest contributor. So was recognition of Jerusalem as the Israeli capital. Sheldon got his money's worth. https://www.investopedia.co... ..."
"... Nikki Haley's Sikh origins may have something to do with her anti-Muslim feelings. ..."
"... it is hypocritical in the extreme for the U.S. to be criticising anyone for killing people anywhere after what they have been doing in the Middle East. According to Professor Gideon Polya the total avoidable deaths in Afghanstan alone since 2001 under ongoing war and occupation-imposed deprivation amount to around three million people, about 900,000 of whom are infants under the age of five (see Professor Gideon Polya at La Trobe University in Melbourne book, 'Body Count: Global Avoidable Mortality Since 1950' and Washington DC-based Physicians for Social Responsibility study: http://www.psr.org/assets/p... . ..."
"... Is it in our DNA that we can't learn lessons from our interventionist experience in the Middle East? Looks like Iraq is spinning out of control once again. I'm sure many including the Shia may reminisce favorably to the Sadam years despite his tyranny. https://ejmagnier.com/2018/... ..."
"... We are indoctrinated with the idea that all people are basically the same. In fact this is only true at the level of basics like shelter, food, sex, etc. We refuse to really believe in the reality of widely varying cultures. It makes us incapable, as a group, of understanding people who do not share our outlook. i have been dealing with this all my life as a delegated "ambassador" to the "others." ..."
"... In this context, if you were Vladimir Putin and knowing that President Trump is completely ignorant when it comes to history and policy details and has surrounded himself with neocons as far as foreign policy is concerned and Bibi has him eating out of his hands, how would you deal with him if he starts to get belligerent in Syria and Ukraine? ..."
"... Did the Syrians get upset by General Sherman's destructive march through South Carolina? No. It was a mistake for the US ever getting involved in Syria, with forming, equipping and training foreign armies and shadow governments including replacement prime ministers, all in violation of the UN Charter. ..."
"... Trump is more savagely and ignorantly aggressive. ..."
"... Trump, Nikki and Bolton have been tweeting warnings about the Idlib offensive and already accusing Assad if there are any chemical attacks. Wonder why? Lavrov has also made comments that he expects a chemical use false flag. Not sure about this post on Zerohedge, but if it has any credibility then it would appear that the US military is getting ready for some kind of provocation. ..."
Sep 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

"In her statement during the UN Security Council briefing, Haley said that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and its "enablers," Russia and Iran have a playbook for the war in Syria. First, they surround a civilian area. Next, they make the "preposterous claim that everyone in the area is a terrorist," thus making all civilians targets. That is followed by a "starve and surrender" campaign, during which Syrian security forces keep attacking until the people no longer have food, clean water, or shelter. "It's a playbook of death. The Assad regime has spent the last seven years refining it with Russia and Iran's help."

According to her it has happened many times before, in July 2018 it happened in Dara'a and the southwest of Syria, where Syrian forces "trapped and besieged civilians." In February 2018, it was Ghouta. In 2017 it was Aleppo, and prior to that places like Madaya and Hama.

According to her, Assad's government has left the country in ruins. "The atrocities committed by Assad will be a permanent stain on history and a black mark for this Council -- which was blocked over and over by Russia from taking action to help," Nikki Haley said." SF

------------

Well, strictly speaking, her parents were immigrants, not she. She was born in Bamberg, South Carolina, a little town in the Piedmont that is majority Black. Her parents were professional people at Amritsar in the Punjab. Haley is the surname of her husband. Nikki is a nickname by which she has long been known. As governor, she was in favor of flying the Confederate flag on the Statehouse grounds before the Charleston massacre of Black Christians at a Bible study session. They were killed by an unstable white teen aged misfit whom they had invited to join their worship. After that Nikki discovered that the Confederate flag was a bad and disruptive symbol. It was a popular position across the country and Nikki became an instant "hit," the flavor of the month so to speak.

I suppose that she was supposed to be an interesting and decorative figure as UN ambassador. She is quite pretty and the South Carolina accent adds to the effect.

The positions she has taken at the UN with regard to the ME are similar to those expressed by her boss, President Trump. They are largely reflections of images projected by the popular and mass media operating as Zionist propaganda machines. I don't believe that the State Department's INR analytic bureau believes the crapola that she spouts with such hysteric fervor. I don't believe that my former friend David Satterfield believes the crapola. So, where does she get ideas like the ones quoted above? IMO she is trying to out-Trump Trump. DJT is a remarkably ignorant man concerning the geo-politics of just about everything in the ME. He appears to have once seen the film, "Exodus" and to have decided on the basis of Paul Newman's performance as Begin that the situation was and is quite simple - Israel good! Everyone else bad! Nikki's depth of knowledge appears to be just about the same.

She also appears to me to be in receipt of a stream of opinion from various Zionist and anti-Muslim groups probably related to the anti-Muslim ravings of Maronite and other Christian ME extremists.

These groups cannot seem to understand that alliances shift as does policy. They don't seem to understand that Israel's policy in Syria is no longer regime change. They never seem to have understood that the Syrian government is the protector of the religious minorities against Sunni jihadi fanatics.

They don't seem to understand that the Syrian government has no choice but to recover Idlib Province, a piece of Syria's heartland. pl

https://southfront.org/us-ambassador-to-un-goes-wild-claims-russia-syria-iran-seek-to-kill-civilians-destroy-schools-and-hospitals-in-idlib/

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

Posted at 10:31 AM in As The Borg Turns , government , Iran , Middle East , Politics , Russia , Syria , Turkey | Permalink | 2 Comments

Don Bacon , 19 hours ago

Haley's "playbook" is used by the US but not by Russia & Iran as she claims, with all civilians being targeted. Instead, Russia & Iran have taken warfare to a higher and better level, allowing the armed factions to surrender their arms and get on a bus or be killed, and many of them took the bus to preserve their lives until the final offensive. A third option, which many of them took, was to join the SAA and fight against their former comrades. All of this statecraft was revolutionary, and was not at all as Haley described, including the crocodile tears over Syrian lives which has never been honest especially considering the level of support Assad has within Syria.
Jaime -> Don Bacon , 16 hours ago
I agree it is revolutionary, at least in modern times in the western world. I wonder if it will set a "trend": a more humane way to wage war. I am sure it will be studied in war colleges.
Jonathan A. Goff , a day ago
Pat,

One observation I had while thinking about the Ambassador Haley quote you provided (which I think supports the point you were making in your post):

When the US was in a somewhat similar situation during the occupation of Iraq, where Sunni militants were in open rebellion and controlling towns like Fallujah, our response wasn't wildly different to the Syrian government's response. The US gov't at the time typically labeled any armed resistance "terrorists", and while they might acknowledge that there were civilians in those territories in addition to terrorists, they were just "human shields" and "regrettable collateral damage". Did the US try a little harder, and have a bit better of technology, training, etc, and do a little bit better of trying to limit damage to civilians when crushing those uprisings? Yes. But we're mostly talking modest quantitative differences in response, not fundamentally morally superior qualitative differences. I bet you if you took pictures of towns like Fallujah, Sadr City, etc, after US counter-insurgency operations, and mixed them in with pictures of trashed Syrian towns that had just been liberated from rebel groups, and showed them to Nikki Haley, or frankly any neocon, they'd have a hard time telling the difference.

~Jon

Biggee Mikeee -> Jonathan A. Goff , 21 hours ago
As I was reading this topic Raqqa and Fallujah came to mind. In the case of Fallujah I don't recall if the civilians were given an opportunity to evacuate. They were not in ISIS controlled Raqqa. In any event Haley's blather at the UN is for the consumption of the rubes.
O rly -> Biggee Mikeee , 18 hours ago
as far as i recall in the battle for fallujah, only women and children were permitted to leave during the siege.and during the siege of Mosul they were dropping leaflets telling people not to try and leave.
Jonathan A. Goff -> Biggee Mikeee , 19 hours ago
And giving civilians a chance to evacuate doesn't help as much as one would think if the insurgents/rebels really do want to use them as human shields.

~Jon

stevenwithavee -> Jonathan A. Goff , 16 hours ago
Speaking to young marines in the aftermath of the second assault on Fallujah I learned that although women and children were allowed to pass the checkpoints but men of fighting age (also known as the father, brother or husband who was driving the families out of the city) were sent back into the city.
jdledell , 16 hours ago
In talking with people here in the U.S. about Syria there is the total lack of understanding of Assad's Alawite government. There are a couple million Christians in Syria and it is Assad's government that protects them from the Saudi sponsored Sunni headchoppers who would like to eliminate Christians, Jews, and Shia from the Middle East. Perhaps, the Alawites being an offshoot of Shia makes them sensitive to minority religions. However, mentioning Assad evokes strong negative reaction among U.S. Christians, similar to Trumps "lets kill them all". On my one visit to Damascus, traveling on my U.S. Passport rather than my Israeli one, The Christians I met were uniformly positive about Assad and the need for Assad to control the ENTIRE country.
blue peacock -> jdledell , 15 hours ago
Thank you for providing your direct experience of the views of Christian Syrians you met there.

Unfortunately none of those views ever make it to either to our print or broadcast media. We Americans are totally subject to ziocon propaganda when it comes to Middle East affairs. Anyone that disagrees with that viewpoint is immediately labeled anti-semitic and now banned from social media and of course from the TV talk shows.

Jack posed an interesting question, how does someone like Putin respond to an irrational US who in their delusions can easily escalate military conflict if their ego gets bruised when it is shown that they don't have the unilateral power of a hegemon?

Bag Man , 17 hours ago
Always thought that Nikki Haley was the price Donald Trump had to pay to get Sheldon Adelson's large campaign contributions in 2016. Adelson was Trump's second biggest contributor. So was recognition of Jerusalem as the Israeli capital. Sheldon got his money's worth. https://www.investopedia.co...
Pat Lang Mod , 20 hours ago
Somebody said that Nikki's nonsense is for "the rubes." Nah, you town people are just as gullible.
ex-PFC Chuck , 17 hours ago
There's a disturbing piece up today at WaPo by Karen De Young asserting the USA is doubling down in Syria. From the piece, emphasis by ex-PFC Chuck:
"We've started using new language," [James] Jeffrey said, referring to previous warnings against the use of chemical weapons. Now, he said, the United States will not tolerate "an attack. Period." "Any offensive is to us objectionable as a reckless escalation" he said. "You add to that, if you use chemical weapons, or create refu­gee flows or attack innocent civilians," and "the consequences of that are that we will shift our positions and use all of our tools to make it clear that we'll have to find ways to achieve our goals that are less reliant on the goodwill of the Russians."

Jeffrey is said to be Pompeo's point person on Syria. Do any of you with ears closer to the ground than those of us in flyover land know anything about this change of tune?

Biggee Mikeee , 19 hours ago
.Iraq PM urged to quit as key ally deserts him over unrest.

Iraqi Prime Minister Haider Al-Abadi faced calls to resign yesterday as his alliance with a populist cleric who won May elections crumbled over deadly unrest shaking the country's south. The two leading groups in parliament called on Abadi to step down, after lawmakers held an emergency meeting on the public anger boiling over in the southern city of Basra.,...

The Conquest Alliance of pro-Iranian former paramilitary fighters was "on the same wavelength" as Sadr's Marching Towards Reform list and they would work together to form a new government, Assadi said. Abadi, whose grouping came third in the May polls, defended his record in parliament, describig the unrest as "political sabotage" and saying the crisis over public services was being exploited for political ends. http://news.kuwaittimes.net...

Has McGurk been outmaneuvered by the Iranians?

The Beaver -> Biggee Mikeee , 18 hours ago
According to Elijah Magnier :
Soleimani 1- Brett McGurk 0
Matina Zia , 20 hours ago
Nikki Haley's Sikh origins may have something to do with her anti-Muslim feelings. According to J. D Cunningham, author of 'History of the Sikhs (Appendix XX)' included among the injunctions ordained by Guru Gobind Singh, the tenth guru, 'a Khalsa (true Sikh) proves himself if he mounts a warhorse; is always waging war; kills a Khan (Muslim) and slays the Turks (Muslims).'

Aside from this, it is hypocritical in the extreme for the U.S. to be criticising anyone for killing people anywhere after what they have been doing in the Middle East. According to Professor Gideon Polya the total avoidable deaths in Afghanstan alone since 2001
under ongoing war and occupation-imposed deprivation amount to around three million people, about 900,000 of whom are infants under the age of five (see Professor Gideon Polya at La Trobe University in Melbourne book, 'Body Count: Global Avoidable Mortality Since 1950' and Washington DC-based Physicians for Social Responsibility study: http://www.psr.org/assets/p... .

Pat Lang Mod -> Matina Zia , 20 hours ago
I really doubt your numbers. What is your stake in this discussion?
Fred -> Matina Zia , 12 hours ago
Your good professor sounds like a great piece of work. "Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950" Perhaps we should have stopped all that foreign aid in the '50s.
stevenwithavee -> Matina Zia , 15 hours ago
The under five mortality figures from Afghanistan (1 in 5) are a problem that preceded our involvement by many years. However, the failure of the international community to make any significant progress over the last 17 years would be a legitimate criticism.
Jack , 20 hours ago
Sir

Is it in our DNA that we can't learn lessons from our interventionist experience in the Middle East? Looks like Iraq is spinning out of control once again. I'm sure many including the Shia may reminisce favorably to the Sadam years despite his tyranny. https://ejmagnier.com/2018/...

Pat Lang Mod -> Jack , 19 hours ago
We are indoctrinated with the idea that all people are basically the same. In fact this is only true at the level of basics like shelter, food, sex, etc. We refuse to really believe in the reality of widely varying cultures. It makes us incapable, as a group, of understanding people who do not share our outlook. i have been dealing with this all my life as a delegated "ambassador" to the "others."
Jack -> Pat Lang , 19 hours ago
Thank you, Sir. It makes perfect sense with the End if History and all those beliefs.

In this context, if you were Vladimir Putin and knowing that President Trump is completely ignorant when it comes to history and policy details and has surrounded himself with neocons as far as foreign policy is concerned and Bibi has him eating out of his hands, how would you deal with him if he starts to get belligerent in Syria and Ukraine?

Barbara Ann -> Jack , 4 hours ago
Jack

You may be interested in a recent article in Unz by SST's own 'smoothieX12' in response to Paul Craig Roberts asking how long Russia should continue to turn the other cheek: http://www.unz.com/article/...

Biggee Mikeee -> Jack , 19 hours ago
Earlier today, the two leading groups in Parliament called on Abadi to step down. http://news.kuwaittimes.net...
Don Bacon , 21 hours ago
Did the Syrians get upset by General Sherman's destructive march through South Carolina? No. It was a mistake for the US ever getting involved in Syria, with forming, equipping and training foreign armies and shadow governments including replacement prime ministers, all in violation of the UN Charter.

A new PM was at the top of H.Clinton's to-do list as Secretary of State. My favorite Assad replacement candidate was Ghassan Hitto from Murphy Texas, but he only lasted a couple months. here

GreenZoneCafe , 21 hours ago
I don't trust converts except for the adjustment from Protestant to Catholic or vice versa. I suppose shifts from one madhab to another, or between Buddhist schools are also ok.

Sad that in a moment of crisis,so many of the rising political stars of both parties are so hollow to the point of dangerousness.

blue peacock , 21 hours ago
Col. Lang

Has anything really changed much with our policies in the ME in the past 50+ years? Haven't we been deeply influenced/controlled by Israeli interests in this period, maybe even beyond if the attacks on USS Liberty are taken into account? Is the Trump administration just following in the traditions of Reagan, Bush Pčre et fils, Clinton and Obama, or is there a qualitative difference?

Pat Lang Mod -> blue peacock , 21 hours ago
Trump is more savagely and ignorantly aggressive.
GreenZoneCafe -> Pat Lang , 20 hours ago
Trump talks tough but has an aversion to military action. Is that real aggression, or just bullshit for the Bubbas?

North Korea, Syria are examples. He's left the door open to talking to Iran.

Trump won the Republican primaries calling out the Iraq war as a mistake!

Relative to others, dovishness is a Trump virtue. The Tucker Carlson line.

Contrast with Obama, who bombed Libya and pumped weapons into Syria. We'd probably be at war with Russia in Syria and Ukraine if Hillary had won.

blue peacock -> GreenZoneCafe , 19 hours ago
Trump, Nikki and Bolton have been tweeting warnings about the Idlib offensive and already accusing Assad if there are any chemical attacks. Wonder why? Lavrov has also made comments that he expects a chemical use false flag. Not sure about this post on Zerohedge, but if it has any credibility then it would appear that the US military is getting ready for some kind of provocation.

https://www.zerohedge.com/n...

Maybe this is all just "positioning" and "messaging" but maybe not. With Bibi, Nikki, Bolton and Pompeo as THE advisors, does anyone have a clue what Trump decides, when, not if, the jihadi White Helmets stage their chemical event in Idlib?

GreenZoneCafe -> blue peacock , 17 hours ago
We'll see. The most I expect is another cruise missile attack to the same empty coordinate.
Pat Lang Mod -> GreenZoneCafe , 17 hours ago
That will be true if trump sees Nikki and her real bosses for what they are.
Biggee Mikeee , a day ago
I think they understand. I think they view this as a temporary setback.

[Sep 09, 2018] The "controversial" Al Jazeera Documentary on THE LOBBY in the USA: What it is about, and why it cannot and may never be shown to the world.

Sep 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

GoodEvil , says: Website September 5, 2018 at 5:29 am GMT

The "controversial" Al Jazeera Documentary on THE LOBBY in the USA: What it is about, and why it cannot and may never be shown to the world.

https://orientxxi.info/magazine/how-israel-spies-on-us-citizens,2598

A never-shown Al Jazeera documentary on the pro-Israel lobby in the US reveals possibly illegal Israeli spying on US citizens, and the lobby's fear of a changing political mood. (This article has been published in French in Le Monde diplomatique, and translated by Le Monde diplomatique, English edition.)

[Sep 09, 2018] Neocons attempt to replay Iraq "success" in Iran

Sep 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

anon , [228] Disclaimer says: September 4, 2018 at 7:19 pm GMT

@Moi Problem, Akbar, is that most Americans are ignorant and greedy--and the Jews fully understand that.

Salaam Alaikum "(FDD) Senior Advisor Richard Goldberg and FDD Visiting Fellow Jacob Nagel. Goldberg and Nagel argue that the Trump administration should use its sanctions authorities to target foreign governments, as well as their agencies and officials, engaged in activities authorized under the JCPOA." "Moreover, Goldberg and Nagel argue that those parties establishing research or business ties with U.S.-designated entities -- which, come November, will include the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran -- should be subject to U.S. secondary sanctions " not allow – "international collaboration, including in the form of scientific joint partnerships, [would] be established in agreed areas of research," "Goldberg and Nagel further argue that the Trump administration should threaten to cut funding to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) if the agency continues to provide technical assistance to Iran and to host seminars and conferences in Iran. " "Iran would have little choice but to kick the IAEA out of the country and withdraw entirely from the agency's oversight. The world would thus lose the unprecedented oversight of Iran's nuclear program that the JCPOA had provided.

That may be a feature, rather than a bug, of Goldberg and Nagel's proposal"

https://lobelog.com/creating-the-conditions-for-war/

Yes the number 5 is the replay of the neocons success in getting UN out of Iraq which was then used by the stupid Bush to justify the attack on Iraq.

FDD has in 2004 printed article documenting the high pitched neocons fevers and the lies they engaged in to get US attack Iraq.
That might or might not have them made look like pragmatic nationalist patriotic pro-American . But these bastards are nothing but pro-Israel They just change the spot and denounce the previous spot.

[Sep 09, 2018] 9-11 Suspects Philip Zelikow The Corbett Report

Notable quotes:
"... Foreign Affairs ..."
Sep 09, 2018 | www.corbettreport.com

Zelikow denied interviews and documents to staffers investigating the Saudi connection to the attacks, eventually firing one of them and removing the text of their investigation from the final report. He personally rewrote a commission staff statement to suggest a systematic link between Al Qaeda and Iraq before 9/11, outraging the authors of the original statement. He worked behind his own staffer's back to stop them from serving the Pentagon a subpoena to answer about information NORAD was withholding from the commission. He sat on a proposal to open a criminal investigation into FAA and military officials who lied to the commission for months, and then forwarded that proposal not to the Justice Department, who could have brought criminal charges, but to the Inspector General, who could not. And he covered up information on Able Danger, a military intelligence team that had identified several of the alleged 9/11 hijackers in the country before 9/11.

... ... ...

But perhaps more remarkable than the fact that "the fix was in" from the moment he took over the commission and began working on the predictive outline of the final report, is that he had in fact written about 9/11 and its eventual aftermath in 1998, three years before September 11th.

In an article entitled " Catastrophic Terrorism: Tackling the New Danger ," written for the Council on Foreign Relations' Foreign Affairs in November 1998, Zelikow and co-authors Ashton Carter and John Deutsche ask readers to imagine a catastrophic act of terrorism like the destruction of the World Trade Center. "Like Pearl Harbor, the event would divide our past and future into a before and after. The United States might respond with draconian measures scaling back civil liberties, allowing wider surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects and use of deadly force. More violence could follow, either future terrorist attacks or U.S. counterattacks. Belatedly, Americans would judge their leaders negligent for not addressing terrorism more urgently."

Zelikow's amazing prediction becomes somewhat less remarkable when we learn his own self-described expertise in the creation and management of "public myth." In a separate 1998 article on public myths, Zelikow identifies "generational" myths that are "formed by those pivotal events that become etched in the minds of those who have lived through them," before noting that the current set of public myths, formed during the New Deal in 1933, are currently fading.

Convenient for Zelikow, then, that the "Pearl Harbor" event that would define the next "generational" myth, known as the "War on Terror," would arrive just three years later, and that he would be in charge of the commission tasked with creating and managing the public perception of that myth.

Indeed, given his central role in the cover up of 9/11 and deflecting concern away from legitimate 9/11 suspects, any true investigation into the events of September 11th would involve a thorough interrogation of Philip D. Zelikow.

Mohawk Man says: 09/08/2016 at 12:21 am

Explosive reporting this week James. No pun intended. This is Pulitzer Prize stuff–again, no insult intended. I had no words for yesterdays EPA report. I was left speechless. John Stossell has lung cancer. I wonder where he was on 9/11. A non-smoker I believe but I would assume maybe a dope smoker but I am just surmising. Joined BF, finally.

Be careful and stay well. My best to your family including the little ones. Thank you for sharing your gifted work with the world. I hope I live to see a massive Crimes Against Humanity trial for most of these characters.

The Mohawk

Log in to Reply HomeRemedySupply says: 09/08/2016 at 2:20 am

Powerful

Log in to Reply nosoapradio says: 09/08/2016 at 3:53 am

"Catastrophic Terrorism" and "Management of Public Myth" indeed

You always go a step or two further than expected, than the known facts, offering the REAL ZINGERS! A real peek behind the curtain

Your work, the approach, the outstanding research, the synthesis, the structure

like that Peter Dale Scott interview

wow .Management of Public Myth !!

??

now, how can you possibly do better than this???

Torben Bo Hansen says: 09/08/2016 at 3:57 am

Dr. Alan Sabrosky, "Israel did 9/11" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0v7_O53J0k
Christopher Bollyn, "Solving 9/11" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVHstSrC1CQ

Log in to Reply PeasLuvandNRK says: 09/08/2016 at 8:04 am

Great segments this week, James.

I guess the answer may be self-evident but are we saying that Zelikow knows the whole real truth of 9/11? Like, is he "in on it"? What about Giuliani as well?

Log in to Reply PeasLuvandNRK says: 09/08/2016 at 8:20 am

Oh and, this is the person who has previously posted as totemynote.. I changed my screen name and will post with PeasLuvandNRK from now on. It's not just a whim, I have a reason for changing it.

Log in to Reply punchy1 says: 09/08/2016 at 9:17 am

Excellence once again James. The anticipation of the countdown to 11 Sep connected to the slow release of the crooks is killing me! Wonderful timing for maximum effect. I will be sharing the final playlist.

Log in to Reply Cu Chulainn says: 09/08/2016 at 11:03 am

Richard Clarke @6:25 was Mega. astute move for the Israeli agent to accuse Zelikow of being a fixer.

Log in to Reply sales2 says: 09/08/2016 at 11:06 am

YOU ARE RULING IT JAMES. THANK YOU.

Log in to Reply sunaj says: 09/08/2016 at 12:13 pm

Thanx James for another solid report-every citizen should read this,
btw if I want to make copies of a Corbett Report to pass out to fellow citizens, do I need any special permission? people need to see this material
sunaj

Log in to Reply Corbett says: 09/08/2016 at 8:29 pm

You are free to share and spread any of this info however you see fit. Thank you for helping to spread the word and raise awareness.

Log in to Reply m.clare says: 09/08/2016 at 9:39 pm

Top 10 Hoaxes of all time:

– 911
– JFK Assassination
– Global Warming
– Religion (all of them)
– Federal Reserve Act
– ISIS
– Left / Right divide and conquer tribal scapegoat distraction
– Pearl Harbour
– Gulf of Tonkin resolution
– Main Stream Media

Anybody have a different list of what they consider the most significant hoaxes of all time?

(Corbett's list of the 911 guilty is brilliant .imitation is the highest form of flattery)

– Rothschild takeover of bank of england

Log in to Reply m.clare says: 09/08/2016 at 10:01 pm

– 1974 Trudeau and pals borrow from BIS rather than the public's Bank of Canada. National debt has since ballooned to $1.3 trillion dollars. It's all Greek to me.

Log in to Reply nosoapradio says: 09/08/2016 at 11:25 pm

good one! X-))

Log in to Reply ccuthbert2001 says: 09/11/2016 at 10:05 am

In no particular order

-Da Ozone Ho'
-All of "Green" energy, esp ethanol in our cars
-Darwinian evolution
-Big Bang, Black Holes and anything from Hawking
-germ theory of disease
-cancer can't be cured
-cholesterol is bad, take statins and get Alzheimer's
-AIDS, SARS, Swine Flu, Ebola, Zika, vaccines and all of Big Pharma
-Round Up is biodegradable
-GMOs will end starvation
-Nukes at Hiroshima and Nagasaki
-German war guilt
-selling houses to each other will make us all rich
-paradox of savings
-inflation is good, deflation is bad, and all of "modern" economics
-Moon Landing
-Mars Mission, lemmings and all
-Elon Musk, SpaceX and we're going to Mars
-Rape Culture
-Rad Feminism, no diff between girls and boys ya know

I could go on and on. 😉

Log in to Reply tgmolitor says: 09/09/2016 at 1:46 am

Edward Bernays, father of public relations, writing in his book Propaganda:

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of."

Like many, I was not aware of Philip Zelikow. Thanks for transforming "unaware" to "aware," James!

Log in to Reply PeasLuvandNRK says: 09/09/2016 at 5:19 am

QFC and/or question for fellow subscribers

Is it at all possible that people tasked with managing the 9/11 meme, like especially Zelikow, Giuliani, Bernard Kerik but also NIST, Popular Mechanics and so forth, given compartmentalized information to work with? Like, only just enough information to play their part? To me they all seem to be sort of accessories after the fact.

So, is the answer to this self-evident and I'm not seeing it? If not, is there a consensus and if so what?

Log in to Reply m.clare says: 09/09/2016 at 12:39 pm

Zelikow began writing the legend of 911 before it happened. He's as guilty as sin. I hear what you're saying. There likely WERE many involved that had just enough information to perform some small task without seeing the big picture. The names Corbett is dropping in this series are not those who got mixed up with something by accident. They are the string pullers. As far as NIST and Popular Mechanics go, they are a disgrace. Their behaviour is, at BEST, fraudulent.

Log in to Reply peace.froggs says: 09/09/2016 at 9:45 am

Zelikow was to the 9/11 commission what Arlen Specter was to the Warren Commission.

[Sep 09, 2018] Never Forget What the Deep State Wants You to Remember About 9-11

Notable quotes:
"... Are you tired of forgetting what it is you're supposed to remember not to forget about 9/11? Never fear! In this week's edition of ..."
"... , James will teach you the lessons that the 9/11 government terrorists and their corporate media lackeys want you to take away from that tragic day. For full access to the subscriber newsletter, and to support this website, please become a member . ..."
"... For free access to this editorial, please CLICK HERE . ..."
Sep 09, 2018 | www.corbettreport.com

"Never forget."

This is the mantra. The mantra that is repeated in the wake of every major false flag, every psychologically traumatizing incident that the deep state wishes to become a rallying cry for their next agenda item.

And so it is completely unsurprising that this mantra has been invoked to remind the public of that foundational event of the age of terror, 9/11.

"Never forget," we are told by the mockingbirds of the establishment press every year come September. And when I say "every year" I mean every / single / year / without / fail . (Well, sometimes it's a fail , but you get what I mean).

But never forget what , exactly? That is the question.

Are you tired of forgetting what it is you're supposed to remember not to forget about 9/11? Never fear! In this week's edition of The Corbett Report Subscriber , James will teach you the lessons that the 9/11 government terrorists and their corporate media lackeys want you to take away from that tragic day. For full access to the subscriber newsletter, and to support this website, please become a member .

For free access to this editorial, please CLICK HERE .

[Sep 09, 2018] The centrepiece of Trump's economic policy is weapons, oil and LNG exports

Aug 24, 2018 | www.newsilkstrategies.com

Below is a New Silk Strategies translation from the Russian site teknoblog.ru .

It is clear from Trump's enthusiastic sales talk to the Polish authorities on July 6, 2017 (as we reported here ) that the centrepiece of Trump's economic policy is LNG exports. The US has no major economic projects even remotely comparable to China's One Belt One Road initiative, the biggest infrastructure project in history. But worse, all of the energy companies involved in fracking are running in the red with no prospects of ever making profits unless oil prices skyrocket to new highs and stay there. The wells are short-lived and by the time they are producing steadily, they are already drying up, necessitating new drilling and more borrowing. Worse, that big deal with China to sujpply a major portion of their gas needs may be about to fizzle, thanks to Trump's tough guy act.

In 2016, Henry Kissinger floated the idea of using Russia to oppose China and shared the idea with an enthusiastic Donald Trump. Kissinger had entertained this idea in the 1970s as Nixon's national security adviser. The problem is, the whole notion of granting China "most-favoured nation" status, ie, doing essentially free trade with it, was based on just the opposite mission of opposing Russia using China as a club, and both ideas have their die-hard supporters in Washington. Keen observers know neither approach will succeed. In fact, recently the National Interest reported that China and Russia are planning joint military drills.

[Sep 09, 2018] Iraq protests threaten oil production and critical ports by Omar al-Jaffal and Safa Khalaf

Notable quotes:
"... Basra demonstrators, enraged over polluted water and years of extreme neglect, engage in arson to make their point ..."
Sep 09, 2018 | www.atimes.com

Basra demonstrators, enraged over polluted water and years of extreme neglect, engage in arson to make their point September 9, 2018 12:48 AM (UTC+8) Basra protesters set the Iranian consulate ablaze on Friday night, the latest manifestation of outrage against influential actors in Basra city, which should be one of the richest in the country with its massive oil reserves and port, but which has become one of the most decrepit.

More than 18,000 Basra residents have been poisoned by tap water since the start of the month, according to the Basra province health directorate. Hospitals, inundated with patients, have collapsed under the pressure.

Basra, like neighboring Iran, is majority Shiite. But in recent years, residents have grown hostile toward Tehran over its dominance of Iraqi affairs, its support for political parties notorious for public waste and its backing of armed factions that enforce themselves as morality police.

The torching of the Iranian consulate came just 24 hours after the protesters -- ignoring a government curfew -- set fire to the offices of powerful Shiite political parties and Iran-backed militias that formed the backbone of the paramilitary Popular Mobilization Units.

The demonstrators did not spare the local government headquarters and provincial council, setting those ablaze as well.

Basra has been roiled by unrest since July, and the latest round of revolt was met with tear gas and live fire. The first week of September saw nine demonstrators killed and 93 wounded, according to the UN.

The deadly force has only inflamed the movement. Over the past two nights, security evaporated from the streets while the military kept to the sidelines. Angry groups of youths roamed the city center, demanding revenge for those killed and for years of neglect. The city appears out of control.

The unrest has put a spotlight on corruption in Iraq's economic capital, just as the Ministry of Oil seeks foreign investment – including from China – to transform the country from an importer of oil products to an exporter.

Gulf port closed

Demonstrators on Thursday shut down the country's most important port, Umm Qasr.

Basra province is Iraq's only outlet to the sea, and Umm Qasr is just one of five commercial sea ports that serve as the country's main gateway for basic necessities.

The costly shutdown prompted the minister of transportation to call for restraint via local radio stations.

"Iraq is losing millions," Kadhim Finjan pleaded over the airwaves. The port was eventually reopened Saturday before dawn.

Like the oil fields, these critical hubs have drawn protesters, who see the wealth they create being siphoned off by corruption.

An officer with the port authority, who spoke to Asia Times on condition of anonymity, said it was "impossible" for security to control the port

The ports – strategically placed on the Persian Gulf – are shared between the political parties, a phenomenon that saps their revenues and allows goods to enter without passing through customs.

An officer with the port authority, who spoke to Asia Times on condition of anonymity, said it was "impossible" for security to control the port.

"The political parties treat the ports like their private property. Goods are exempted from controls and inspection, and the taxes are reduced for traders dealing with the ruling parties," he said.

Before the ports earned the ire of the demonstrations, it was the oil sector.

Basra's 15 oil fields account for nearly 60% of the country's oil reserves. Revenues from the province generate approximately $60 million daily, or 3.6 of Iraq's total 4.3 million barrels per day.

The government relies on the sector to finance its activities, but only a fraction of the national budget flows back to Basra.

The stark contrast between Basra's oil wealth and the miserable conditions of the population has prompted demonstrators this summer to organize sit-ins blocking the gates to the oil fields.

In addition to the 15-hour power cuts and filthy drinking water, they are demanding jobs.

Foreign companies operating in Basra are required to hire locals for at least 50% of job posts, and up to 80% depending on the contract. But those laws are often flouted.

The government has also allowed foreign companies to acquire vast swathes of agricultural lands to be used as oil fields north of Basra, resulting in the bulldozing of orchards and date palm fields and increased unemployment.

"The oil extracted from our city lands is not beneficial to us," one demonstrator told Asia Times.

"It is better to stop its extraction than have it stolen," he said, blaming the government and foreign companies alike.

According to provincial council member Ahmed Abdel Hussein, half of Basra residents live in poverty.

The government says unemployment stands at about at 7.8%, but academic studies suggest a far higher rate. There are no official statistics for the province.

Feared militia takeover

The government in Baghdad fears the deteriorating situation in Basra could disrupt oil production.

"The oil companies have been greatly affected by the protests," said Adel al-Thamari, an academic and investment analyst in Basra.

"The workers cannot access the fields because of the closure of roads or closing of entry gates," he told Asia Times, adding that "the oil companies have reduced the number of foreign experts for fear of their lives and inability to afford high insurance costs."

The decline in production puts the financial burden on Baghdad. "Companies will raise the terms of credit, which means a great loss for Iraq, which will have to pay compensation to the companies," he said.

Along with the world's major oil companies, hundreds of logistics and security support companies provide operational services to the fields in Basra. As security deteriorates, they too will have to withdraw. "The withdrawal of these companies would mean production stops," Thamari said.

The concerns of oil companies go beyond the protests to fears of a militia takeover.

"The army has taken the position of neutrality toward the demonstrations, and the fear is that the Popular Mobilization Units will deploy. This would cause a further deterioration of security, because the militias have their own internal divisions and such an escalation could neutralize the official security forces," Thamari said.

[Sep 09, 2018] I think it very likely we'll see Daesh's resurrection within Iraq as that's the Outlaw US Empire's main tool to keep the chaos ongoing--the empire doesn't fight against Daesh; rather, it uses Daesh to fight against its stated enemies everywhere

Sep 09, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Sep 7, 2018 1:02:25 PM | link

Looks like my comment made on the previous Syria thread was a waste of my time. Oh Well!

The Iraqi situation has clearly turned in the favor of the Outlaw US Empire as it craves chaos. It seems more likely than ever that Sadr's been turned given his behavior. The situation will give comfort to Neocons who want to "consolidate gains" within Syraq and continue building their military presence.

I very much welcomed the Russian statement on the al-Tanf terrorist base; its liquidation will hopefully come swiftly. It's instructive to compare the political stability of Syria with Iraq's political chaos. I think it very likely we'll see Daesh's resurrection within Iraq as that's the Outlaw US Empire's main tool to keep the chaos ongoing--the empire doesn't fight against Daesh; rather, it uses Daesh to fight against its stated enemies everywhere.

Anunnaki , Sep 7, 2018 1:03:55 PM | link
This is such amazing insights. Like a game of Risk for real. Thanks for the truth and not the presstitute bullshit: aka sympathy for Al Qaeda

Laguerre , Sep 7, 2018 1:19:39 PM | link

karloff
The Iraqi situation has clearly turned in the favor of the Outlaw US Empire as it craves chaos.
I don't agree with that, for the obvious reason that it will be impossible to support the US position in al-Tanf. And indeed in Syrian Kurdistan. What the US wants is a US-agreed PM in Iraq, and moderate stability.

Posted by: Laguerre | Sep 7, 2018 1:19:39 PM | link

BM , Sep 7, 2018 2:01:44 PM | link
@Laguerre | Sep 7, 2018 12:59:59 PM | 10

You'll find a much more trustworthy analysis of the Iraqi protest movement in Basra from Elijah Magnier:

The USA oblivious to the rise of a resistance movement in response to its interference in Iraqi elections

Tannenhouser , Sep 7, 2018 2:22:43 PM | link
B, the suntzu meme is awesome:)

Elijah J. Magnier has a new post in regards to Real politik in Iraq.

https://ejmagnier.com/2018/09/05/the-usa-oblivious-to-the-rise-of-a-resistance-movement-in-response-to-its-interference-in-iraqi-elections/(SP) has a post up about the real politik of Iraq,

[Sep 09, 2018] The McCain Death Extravaganza

Notable quotes:
"... McCain was a protégé of neo-Conservative founder Senator Henry Scoop Jackson, a crazy servant of the British imperial agenda who constantly sought military confrontation with Russia. ..."
"... The British were so enamored of Jackson's views that they have dedicated an entire society of British intelligence spooks to him, the Henry Jackson Society. The former incarnation of this group was the Committee on Present Danger and the Project for a New American Century in the United States. ..."
"... Leading members of both groups hastily retreated to British mother ship after they led the mobilization for the failed and disastrous Iraq War here in the U.S. Sir Richard Dearlove, who has shepherded Christopher Steele and other British aspects of the coup against Donald Trump, is a leading member of this group. ..."
"... He was uniquely ruthless when it comes to advancing imperial goals, barnstorming from one conflict zone to another to personally recruit far right fanatics as American proxies ..."
"... He backed the installation of the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood to govern Egypt, another failed and insane project. More than $5.6 trillion was spent chasing John McCain's idyll of democracy in Southwest Asia. Six thousand seven hundred Americans died, more than 50,000 were wounded, entire countries were reduced to rubble with accompanying genocide against their populations, the largest mass human migration ever was sent into Europe resembling something akin to the desperate mass flights of the Middle Ages. ..."
Sep 09, 2018 | larouchepac.com

John McCain died and deserved a decent funeral based on his war record and his long, if destructive, public service. McCain and others in Washington's arrogant and narcissistic elite decided before his death, however, to use McCain's demise to advance the coup against the President, and to make claims about the late Senator and themselves which are totally and utterly false and delusional. The funeral was a national media extravaganza achieving a status normally only enjoyed by former Presidents. It was, according to New Yorker Magazine , also the "biggest resistance meeting yet." President Donald Trump was not invited so that the cowards in the funeral crowd, Barack Obama, and George W. Bush, could freely take potshots at the President. McCain picked these leaders of the country's descent into hell deliberately, to romanticize his death, and to trash talk the current President, albeit, in eloquent and lofty language and knowing allusions. In effect, they wrapped the murderous crimes of empire in the American flag.

McCain was a protégé of neo-Conservative founder Senator Henry Scoop Jackson, a crazy servant of the British imperial agenda who constantly sought military confrontation with Russia.

The British were so enamored of Jackson's views that they have dedicated an entire society of British intelligence spooks to him, the Henry Jackson Society. The former incarnation of this group was the Committee on Present Danger and the Project for a New American Century in the United States.

Leading members of both groups hastily retreated to British mother ship after they led the mobilization for the failed and disastrous Iraq War here in the U.S. Sir Richard Dearlove, who has shepherded Christopher Steele and other British aspects of the coup against Donald Trump, is a leading member of this group.

Funding for McCain's political adventures came from his second wife, whose brewing company fortune was completely mixed up in Arizona mob and mob funding during its earlier years.

With respect to McCain's activities, Max Blumenthal characterized them accurately in the August 27th Consortium News:

"McCain did not simply thunder for every major intervention in the post-Cold War era from the Senate floor. . .

He was uniquely ruthless when it comes to advancing imperial goals, barnstorming from one conflict zone to another to personally recruit far right fanatics as American proxies . . .

In Libya and Syria, he cultivated affiliates of Al-Qaeda as allies, and in Ukraine, McCain recruited actual sig-heiling neo-Nazis. . .

Following the NATO orchestrated murder of Libya's leader, McCain tweeted: "Qaddafi on his way out, Bashar Al Assad is next."

He backed the installation of the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood to govern Egypt, another failed and insane project. More than $5.6 trillion was spent chasing John McCain's idyll of democracy in Southwest Asia. Six thousand seven hundred Americans died, more than 50,000 were wounded, entire countries were reduced to rubble with accompanying genocide against their populations, the largest mass human migration ever was sent into Europe resembling something akin to the desperate mass flights of the Middle Ages.

It is these horrific actions by McCain, not the myth peddled at his funeral, which is the source of the conflict between Trump and John McCain, and between Trump and George Bush and Barack Obama. Trump promised to end the imperial policy of endless religious and population wars and Wall Street bailouts, and the voters responded resoundingly by electing him President.

[Sep 09, 2018] Nina Ricci the only party to gain anything from Skripal poisoning case Russian envoy to UN

Notable quotes:
"... "There were plenty of baseless allegations against Moscow and concrete sanctions based on them. Apparently, the only winner in this continued theatre of absurdity is Nina Ricci, the product of which got some free ad as a container for the toxic chemical," ..."
Sep 09, 2018 | www.rt.com

The nerve agent attack in Salisbury has so far had only one benefactor – Nina Ricci, which got free advertising due to a disguise apparently used by the perpetrators to hide the poison, the Russian envoy to the UN joked. The British investigators said a counterfeit Nina Ricci bottle was used as a container and delivery device for the chemical used in the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter in March. The same container was found by a struggling couple from Amesbury, who got poisoned themselves. Read more

UK accusation of Russians in Skripal case 'cocktail of lies' timed with Idlib false flag op – Moscow

Speaking at a UN Security Council session on Thursday, Russian envoy Vasily Nebenzya, denounced Britain for accusing Russia of the crimes, saying that the allegations are not base on any hard evidence.

"There were plenty of baseless allegations against Moscow and concrete sanctions based on them. Apparently, the only winner in this continued theatre of absurdity is Nina Ricci, the product of which got some free ad as a container for the toxic chemical," he said.

Britain says two Russian military intelligence agents tried to kill Skripal with a weapons-grade chemical weapon, claiming the identification was made by the British intelligence. Russia denies any involvement and accuses Britain of spinning the case to stir anti-Russian sentiment.

[Sep 09, 2018] Skripal saga aimed to stir anti-Russia sentiment of Cold War by Ken Livingstone

Notable quotes:
"... The UK has stirred up the Skripal saga for the sake of waging a broader campaign to kowtow to the anti-Russian rhetoric inside the British government, ex-London mayor Ken Livingstone has told RT. ..."
"... "military intelligence agents" ..."
"... "What struck me over last couple of years seem to me ratcheting up of anti-Russian sentiment almost trying to recreate a Cold War," ..."
"... "a hidden political agenda here as part of broader anti-Russian campaign" ..."
Sep 09, 2018 | www.rt.com

The UK has stirred up the Skripal saga for the sake of waging a broader campaign to kowtow to the anti-Russian rhetoric inside the British government, ex-London mayor Ken Livingstone has told RT. The latest smoking gun of allegations against Russia fired by London, with the British Prime Minister Theresa May claiming that Russian "military intelligence agents" attempted to murder former spy Sergei Skripal, leaves too many questions and doubts, Livingstone believes.

"What struck me over last couple of years seem to me ratcheting up of anti-Russian sentiment almost trying to recreate a Cold War," the former mayor told RT. He stressed that London's turning its back to Moscow's constant readiness to cooperate and failure to present to the public a shred of evidence – if there is any – might be a sign of "a hidden political agenda here as part of broader anti-Russian campaign" inside the British government.

Livingstone is not the only one who doubts the narrative. Independent political analyst Dan Glazebrook, who also shared his views with RT, pointed how clumsy the alleged agents should have been – from taking a train to reach their target to allowing themselves to be caught on CCTV.

[Sep 09, 2018] Talking of neoliberal globalists 5th column, lest forget the solid one in the UK and Skripal's affair is thier work

Sep 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

Iris , says: September 5, 2018 at 10:12 pm GMT

Talking of 5th column, lest forget the solid one in the UK.

Deep State's mouthpiece "The Telegraph" had dedicated several articles to the identification of alleged Skripal Novichok poisoners, named as two Russian nationals who briefly entered the UK under the aliases Petrov and Beshorov.

http://www.crawleynews24.co.uk/shock-as-police-reveal-novichok-suspects-passed-through-gatwick/

Sycophantic PM Theresa May has gone as far as stating that the suspects are GRU agents, and pointing the finger at President Putin.

Jeremy Corbyn is being hounded because he is very reserved about the Novichok story.

The UK government is fully embedded with Zionist Israel. This cock-and-bull story, which details have been nonetheless very well presented, is a very alarming hint that something is in preparation against Russia, either directly in Syrian, or less directly in the Ukraine.

Iris , says: September 5, 2018 at 10:58 pm GMT
@Iris Talking of 5th column, lest forget the solid one in the UK.

Deep State's mouthpiece "The Telegraph" had dedicated several articles to the identification of alleged Skripal Novichok poisoners, named as two Russian nationals who briefly entered the UK under the aliases Petrov and Beshorov.

http://www.crawleynews24.co.uk/shock-as-police-reveal-novichok-suspects-passed-through-gatwick/

Sycophantic PM Theresa May has gone as far as stating that the suspects are GRU agents, and pointing the finger at President Putin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1VqSJCa7RA

Jeremy Corbyn is being hounded because he is very reserved about the Novichok story.

The UK government is fully embedded with Zionist Israel. This cock-and-bull story, which details have been nonetheless very well presented, is a very alarming hint that something is in preparation against Russia, either directly in Syrian, or less directly in the Ukraine. Novichock poisoning false flag (Continued).

A possible explanation of the Novichok story being spun at the moment in the UK is that a Western/Israeli military attack on Syria is in preparation to stop the Arab Syrian Army from entering Idlib, the last terrorist stronghold.

Such Western intervention requires the pretext of a chemical attack, that will be staged in the field by the proxy White Helmets, while UK public opinion will be subdued with terrorising stories of weapons of mass destruction.

This same pretext was used for the April 2018 Western bombing of Syria. This bombing was aimed at hitting key Syrian targets, but its scale was finally limited by the intervention of General Mattis, who dreaded reciprocated actions against the 3000 US servicemen present in Syria.

"The White Helmets (and an alleged chemical attack) are the last hope for regime change in Syria"

Very interesting interview of former UK Ambassador Ford by SyrianGirl:

Iris , says: September 6, 2018 at 11:00 pm GMT
One day after Theresa May's Novichok show at the British Parliament , France's Chief of Military Staff Francois Lecointre has declared that France is ready to strike Syria should she dare a "chemical attack" on Idlib.

https://www.lopinion.fr/edition/international/france-prete-a-frapper-en-syrie-en-cas-d-usage-d-arme-chimique-161248

Both poodles each side of the Channel are barking in synchronism; Israel is pulling on the leashes and something bad is in preparation.

Here is Francois Lecointre in his brown uniform. Unknown to us stupid plebeians, France must be surrounded by steppes and deserts for brown to have been chosen as camouflage colour.

[Sep 08, 2018] Russia, the West, and Recent Geoeconomics in Europe's Gas Wars by Gordon M. Hahn

Notable quotes:
"... In return for the EU dropping billions of dollars in penalty fees, GazProm agreed to end limitations on the use of gas purchased by EU members, allow them to re-sell the gas ..."
"... About the Author ..."
"... Ukraine Over the Edge: Russia, the West, and the 'New Cold War ..."
"... Russia's Revolution From Above: Reform, Transition and Revolution in the Fall of the Soviet Communist Regime, 1985-2000 ..."
"... Russia's Islamic Threat ..."
"... The Caucasus Emirate Mujahedin: Global Jihadism in Russia's North Caucasus and Beyond ..."
Jun 25, 2018 | gordonhahn.com

Russia has advanced forward in something of a tactical and potential strategic victory in the Russo-Western gas war. This is a three-party war, with the US, EU, and Russia each promoting separate interests. It is one sphere where a united West has failed to 'isolate Russia.' The US seeks move in on the European energy market with LNG supplies and replace Russian pipeline-delivered natural gas supplies to Europe. Washington is using the risks of dependence on Russian gas and Russia's 'bad behavior' as leverage in attempting to convince Europeans to reject Russia's Nord Stream 2 pipeline. Russia is said to be unreliable and prone to shut off gas supplies to Europe.

Due to past Russian-Ukrainian gas crises, the Ukrainian crisis, and general Russian-Western tensions, Europe has decided on a gas diversification policy in which each EU member should have at least three sources of natural gas supply. One additional option that could facilitate this diversification policy is US liquified natural gas (LNG), but the US is still unable to supply enough LNG to offset Russian gas supplies that might be rejected by Europe. In the process, Washington is looking less like a 'team West' player and more like a solely self-interested power maximizer in European eyes and therefore no more reliable than Moscow. As a result, Europeans are deciding to stick with the Russians while finding new options in the east, such as Turkey and Azerbaijan. This is creating competition if not tensions in present and potential gas transit countries in southeastern and eastern Europe, for example.

The Battle Over Re-Sale: No Victors

One recent battle was largely inconclusive, but if a victor has to be designated it may be Moscow. In May, the European Commssion concluded a settlement with Russia's Gazprom in May ending a seven-year anti-trust dispute. In return for the EU dropping billions of dollars in penalty fees, GazProm agreed to end limitations on the use of gas purchased by EU members, allow them to re-sell the gas. Some EU members, such as Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Slovakia have re-sold or wanted to re-sell gas. Moscow frowned, for example, on Slovakia's resale of natural gas to Ukraine at cheaper prices than Moscow sought to charge Kiev.

The agreement will also restrict Moscow's ability to charge different countries different prices. So EU members in central and eastern Europe can get a price close to that paid by Germany and appeal to an arbitration court in case of a dispute. The agreement guarantees Russia's presence on the European gas market at a time when the latter's reliance on the former has peaked.

The Northern Front: Nord Stream 2

At the same time, the battle over Russia' Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline has heated up. When it comes on line in 2019, the 759-mile pipeline will carry GazProm natural gas along the bed of the Baltic Sea to Germany and double the supply Nord Stream pipeline's current annual capacity of 55 billion cubic meters (bcm). The Trump administration has threatened yet more sanctions on third-party companies, this time with those that work on the pipeline. The US sanctions threat is an attempt to promote American LNG interests as well as to protect Ukrainian interests, though it contradicts the view that Ukraine should eschew its dependence on Russian gas.

US officials have been hammering home to Europeans the 'Russian threat' in tandem with the risk of reliance on Russian gas may pose, which will increase with Nord tream 2, but to no avail. Public opinion is not working in the US favor, with Germans trusting Moscow more than Washington, despite all the crimes laid at the Kremlin's door by the West. A recent ZDF Television opinion survey found that only 14 percent of Germans regard the U.S. as a reliable partner, while 36 percent view Russia as reliable ( www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-05-17/trump-s-global-disruption-pushes-merkel-closer-to-putin-s-orbit ). Thus, notwithstanding Ukraine, Syria and alleged chemical attacks, Russiagate, and the Skrypals, GazProm's supplies to Europe have risen to hold nearly 40 percent of its gas market, growing last year by 8.1 percent last year to a record level of 193.9 billion cubic metres (bcm).

Nevertheless, with the EU decision, the U.S., Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania and others have stepped up their pressure on Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark and other western Eureopean EU members to abandon the Nord Stream 2 project. Germans and other western Europeans are unlikely to give up the short-term gain of energy security for the US LNG given the higher price and unproven nature of Washington's numerous allegations against the Kremlin. German officials say they still have no proof from 10 Downing on Russia's culpability for the Skrypal poisoning so loudly trumpeted by British PM Theresa May.

One motivation for the Russians in building Nord Stream 2 is to obviate the need to transport gas through Ukraine, which will hurt Ukraine's own energy supply – given Ukrainian skimming -- and overall economy beyond the present non-sale of Russian gas to Ukraine. Another Russian motivation is to avert the unreliable Ukrainians, who have failed to make payments according to contract in the past causing Russian gas cutoffs to Ukraine and thus Europe with the resulting crises blamed solely on Moscow. The Trump sanctions threat has put Germany and the other Nord Stream 2 supporting countries between a rock and a hard place, between Russia and the US. Therefore, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, while supporting Nord Stream 2, has called for guarantees from Russia that Ukraine will remain a gas transit country. Ukraine's current contract with Russia ends in 2019 at the very time Nord Stream 2 is to go on line and the EU has urged re-starting EU-mediated negotiatons now in order to avoid another gas crisis. Putin agreed to do this at his meeting with Germany's merkel in late May. Nord Stream 2 significantly strengthens Putin's hand in any such talks.

The Southern Front: Turkish Stream, SGC and the Azeri and Bulgarian Factors

Russia is strengtheining its position on the European gas war's southern front by building the Turkish Stream (TS) gas pipeline to Europe. TS consists of a sea and a land leg. The former runs under the Black Sea from Russia to Turkey and is built, with Russo-Turkish talks on the land leg ongoing.

Russia's Turkish Stream is being challenged by the Southern Gas Corridor (SGC) backed by Western powers, including the EU (along with Turkey and Azerbaijan), which sees the SGC as a means of diversifying from dependence on Russia. Not just Turkey, but Azerbaijan is emerging as a major player on the EU gas market, with a shift in policy accenting gas supplies to Europe as well as oil supplies as in the past. The SGC consists of three components: an expanded South Caucasus Pipeline and the to be constructed Trans-Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline (TANAP) and Trans-Adriatic Pipeline (TAP). TANAP is 51 percent Azerbaijani owned, 37 percent Turkish, and 12 percent belonging to British Petroleum. The SGC will carry Azerbaijani gas through Turkey to Europe and will be able to supply up to one-third of the gas consumed by Bulgaria, Greece and Italy ( https://en.trend.az/business/energy/2910573.html ). However, the source of the gas supplying the pipeline demonstrates the limits of Western attempts to isolate Russia (and Iran). Azerbaijan's Shah-Deniz gas field is co-owned by British Petroleum (29 percent), Turkey's Turkish Petroleum (19 percent), Azerbaijan's SOCAR (17 percent), Malaysia's Petronas (15 percent), Russia's LukOil (10 percent), and Iran's NICO (10 percent). Moreover, Russia's LukOil is negotiating with SOCAR a stake in Azerbaijan's second-largest gas field, Umid-Babek, which also includes Britain's Nobel Upstream ( https://newsbase.com/topstories/lukoil-talks-join-umid-babek-project ).

Again the Ukrainian issue is part of the picture here, as a good portion of GasProm supplies to Bulgaria go through Ukraine. Turkish Stream can replace at least some of that supply should Moscow decide to entirely avert Ukraine's pipeline system. It is of interest that no one in the West has offered to include in any of these projects or attempted to fashion a pipeline or pipeline extension that could link up with the Ukrainian network.

During Bulgarian President Rumen Radev's late may visit to Moscow, Putin reported to Radev that during his meetings with Turkish President Recip Tayyip Erdogan, the latter said he would pose no oppsotion to extending the Turkish Stream gas pipeline to Bulgaria. In response, Radev seemed to suggest making Bulgaria a "a gas redistribution center, a hub" for the Turkish Stream's supplies further into Europe ( http://kremlin.ru/events/president/news/57608 ).

Moreover, one gets the impression that Bulgaria is wary more about its dependence on Turkey and Ankara's new offensive energy policy in Europe than on Russia and might help Moscow detour Ukraine.

In 2015, Erdogan declared a major policy initiative of making Turkey a, if not the major energy transit hub for supplies heading from the east to Europe.

Russia's annexation of Crimea could help Russia in its talks both with Erdogan over the Turkish Stream and pose the threat of undermining the SGC. It may also help Putin deal with Merkel, Kiev and the EU over the Ukraine pipeline system's future role. Bulgarian President Radev also said in Moscow that Sofia supports building a direct gas pipeline under the Black Sea to bring Russian gas to Bulgaria ( https://echo.msk.ru/news/2206394-echo.html ).

The Bulgarian option could be used by Putin to threaten Erdogan with reducing the Turkish Stream's supplies or abandoning it altogether in favor of a Black Sea Russian-Bulgarian Stream and to reduce Russia's dependence on Ukraine as well.

Implications

Thus, EU energy diversification policies are transforming Turkey, Azerbaijan and perhaps even Bulgaria into key players on the southern gas transit front, while Ukraine falters to Germany, and eastern Europe to Western Europe on the northern front.

Tensions between Ankara and Sofia on these grounds cannot be excluded, and they could draw in Turkey's semi-ally Azerbaijan. US, EU, Russian and Ukrainian energy diplomacy is likely not only to be focused on each other, therefore, but also on Ankara, Baku, and Sofia over the next year.

Unless, the US can rapidly reduce the cost of extracting and shipping LNG to Europe, it is unlikely to be able to become a major alternative to these players, and Russia will continue to dominate the European gas market, with a balance of competition and cooperation with Azerbaijan.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

About the Author – Gordon M. Hahn, Ph.D., Expert Analyst at Corr Analytics, http://www.canalyt.com and a Senior Researcher at the Center for Terrorism and Intelligence Studies (CETIS), Akribis Group, San Jose, California, www.cetisresearch.org .

Dr. Hahn is the author of Ukraine Over the Edge: Russia, the West, and the 'New Cold War (McFarland Publishers, 2017) and three previously and well-received books: Russia's Revolution From Above: Reform, Transition and Revolution in the Fall of the Soviet Communist Regime, 1985-2000 (Transaction Publishers, 2002); Russia's Islamic Threat (Yale University Press, 2007); and The Caucasus Emirate Mujahedin: Global Jihadism in Russia's North Caucasus and Beyond (McFarland Publishers, 2014). He has published numerous think tank reports, academic articles, analyses, and commentaries in both English and Russian language media and has served as a consultant and provided expert testimony to the U.S. government.

Dr. Hahn also has taught at Boston, American, Stanford, San Jose State, and San Francisco State Universities and as a Fulbright Scholar at Saint Petersburg State University, Russia. He has been a senior associate and visiting fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the Kennan Institute in Washington DC as well as the Hoover Institution at Stanford University.

[Sep 08, 2018] The untold truth about Obama's former CIA director, John Brennan

Was Brennan Saudi protégé from the very beginning of his career, promoted by the power of foreign interests?
Sep 08, 2018 | theduran.com

Yet under four years later, just after the then Soviet Union invaded, just weeks before, Afghanistan and months after the tumultuous Iranian revolution of 1979, which at the time many thought the Soviet Union had a hand in, Brennan was accepted into the CIA as a junior analyst.

At that time, John Brennan should have never got into the CIA, or any Western Intelligence agency given his communist background.

Think on that carefully as you continue to read this.

Also reflect on the fact that Brennan, later in his CIA career, was surprisingly elevated from junior analyst to the prestigious position of Station Chief in Saudi Arabia where he spent a few years.

Its said he was appointed purely for 'political' reasons, alleged to have been at the direct request of Bill Clinton and other Democrats not because of a recommendation or merit from within the Agency.

Its further said that the Saudis liked Brennan because he became very quickly 'their man' so to speak. Some reports, unsubstantiated, even allege Brennan became a Muslim while there to ingratiate himself with the Saudis.

Important to read is an NBC news article entitled 'Former Spooks Criticize CIA Director John Brennan for Spying Comments' by Ken Dilanian dated March 2nd, 2016.

The article contains many revealing facts and evidence, while giving a flavour, of the feelings of many in the CIA who felt that Brennan was totally unsuitable and unqualified to be Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

(This is the link to the above referenced article: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/ us-news/brennan-joking-when- he-says-cia-spies-doesn-t- steal-n529426 . )

A final controversy is the little known fact of Brennan's near four year departure from the CIA into the commercial world, having been 'left out in the cold' from the CIA, from November 2005 to January 2009 when he was CEO of a private company called 'The Analysis Corporation'.

So why was he then reinstated into the CIA, to the surprise of CIA's senior management, by newly elected President Obama, to head the CIA? No answer is available as to why he left the CIA in 2005.

(An important link that gives background to his experience in the commercial world can be read here: https://www.thedailybeast.com/ cia-slammed-brennans- disingenuous-contract-bid- wikileaks-show)

Lastly let's not forget Brennan's many failures as CIA head in recent years, one most notable is the Benghazi debacle and the death of a US Ambassador and others there. Something else to ponder.

Back to the present an the issue of security clearances.

In early August, on the well known American TV Rachel Maddow Show, Brennan back tracked on his Trump traitor claim by saying "I didn't mean he (Trump) committed treason. I meant what he has done is nothing short of treasonous." Rachel Maddow responded correctly "If we diagram the sentence, 'nothing short of treason' means it's treasonous?"

A simple question follows. Since he is no longer in the CIA, why does he need a security clearance other than to commercially exploit it?

Tucker Carlson explains succinctly here:

http://www.youtube.com/embed/_THfnlO-KrQ?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

Last month what can be described as 200+ 'friends of Brennan', former CIA officials of varying rank, responded against the removal of former CIA Director Brennan's security clearances, in support of him.

These men and women too most likely will have their clearances revoked.

And why not?

Since the only purpose they retain it is to make money as civilians?

A potentially more serious issue than 'the Brennan controversies' is that the US intelligence community has around 5 million people with security clearances as a whole includes approximately 1.4m people holding top secret clearances. It is patently a ridiculously high number and makes a mockery of the word secret.

Former CIA veteran Sam Faddis is one of the few people brave enough and with the integrity required, that has stood up and told some of the real truths about Brennan in an 'Open Letter', yet this letter's contents have hardly at all been reported in the media.

Generally by nature, CIA Officers sense of service and honour to their Country, their professionalism and humility, and disdain for publicity has dissuaded most of them to enter the current very public Brennan controversy; but for how much longer?

As stated earlier, former CIA professional Sam Faddis explains what's wrong with Brennan in his revealing letter, abbreviated for space below. A link to the complete letter is: http://thepoliticsforums.com/ threads/107849-Scathing-Open- Letter-to-Mr-Brennan-by-Retired-CIA-Case-Officer:

Dear Mr. Brennan,

I implore you to cease and desist from continuing to attempt to portray yourself in the public media as some sort of impartial critic concerned only with the fate of the republic. I beg you to stop attempting to portray yourself as some sort of wise, all-knowing intelligence professional with deep knowledge of national security issues and no political inclinations whatsoever.

None of this is true.

You were never a spy. You were never a case officer. You never ran operations or recruited sources or worked the streets abroad. You have no idea whatsoever of the true nature of the business of human intelligence. You have never been in harm's way. You have never heard a shot fired in anger.

You were for a short while an intelligence analyst. In that capacity, it was your job to produce finished intelligence based on information provided to you by others. The work of intelligence analysts is important, however in truth you never truly mastered this trade either.

In your capacity as an analyst for the Central Intelligence Agency, while still a junior officer, you were designated to brief the President of the United States who was at that time Bill Clinton. As the presidential briefer, it was your job to read to the president each morning finished intelligence written by others based on intelligence collected by yet other individuals. Period.

While serving as presidential briefer you established a personal relationship with then President Bill Clinton. End of story.

Everything that has transpired in your professional career since has been based on your personal relationship with the former president, his wife Hillary and their key associates. Your connection to President Obama was, in fact, based on you having established yourself by the time he came to office as a reliable, highly political Democratic Party functionary.

All of your commentary in the public sphere is on behalf of your political patrons. It is no more impartial analysis then would be the comments of a paid press spokesman or attorney. You are speaking each and every time directly on behalf of political forces hostile to this president. You are, in fact, currently on the payroll of both NBC and MSNBC, two of the networks most vocally opposed to President Trump and his agenda.

There is no impartiality in your comments. Your assessments are not based on some sober judgment of what is best for this nation. They are based exclusively on what you believe to be in the best interests of the politicians with whom you long since allied yourself.

It should be noted that not only are you most decidedly not apolitical but that you have been associated during your career with some of the greatest foreign policy disasters in recent American history.

Ever since this President was elected, there has been a concerted effort to delegitimize him and destabilize him led by you. This has been an unprecedented; to undermine the stability of the republic and the office of the Presidency, for solely partisan political reasons. You and your patrons have been complicit in this effort and at its very heart.

You abandoned any hope of being a true intelligence professional decades ago and became a political hack. Say so.

Sam Faddis

[Sep 08, 2018] Ayatollah Khamenei: Iran, Russia can cooperate to contain US-Trump

Sep 08, 2018 | www.veteranstoday.com

Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei says the developments in Syria and the US defeat in the Arab country show that Washington can be contained.

The Leader made the remarks in a Friday meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who traveled to Tehran to participate in a key trilateral summit on Syria, hosted by Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and also attended by Turkish leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

"Cooperation between Iran and Russia on the Syrian issue is a prominent example and a very good experience of bilateral cooperation," the Leader said.

Ayatollah Khamenei added that the two countries can expand cooperation on global issues, saying, "One of the cases that the two sides can cooperate with each other is to contain the US, because it is a danger to humanity and it is possible to contain it."

The Leader stated that the Americans suffered a real defeat in Syria and failed to achieve their goals.

Ayatollah Khamenei also said sanctions imposed by the US on Iran, Russia and Turkey are a very strong common ground for strengthening cooperation, and urged Tehran and Moscow to develop political and economic relations and follow up on the agreements of the summit in Tehran.

The Leader stressed the importance of pursuing non-dollar transactions in trade.

Europeans did not fulfill JCPOA commitments: Ayatollah Khamenei

Elsewhere in his remarks, Ayatollah Khamenei said Iran has so far remained committed to a multilateral nuclear agreement, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), reached between Iran and the P5+1 group of countries in 2015.

"But the Europeans did not carry out their duties, and it is not acceptable that we completely fulfill our commitments within the JCPOA while they don't," the Leader pointed out.

The Leader praised the Russian president's approach to the nuclear deal, adding that the Islamic Republic would adopt a stance on the JCPOA which would meet its national interests.

Although the US now raises Iran's missile program and regional developments, their problem with the Islamic Republic relates to issues beyond them, Ayatollah Khamenei said.

The Leader added that the US has been seeking to topple the Islamic Republic over the past 40 years, but Iran has managed to make substantial advancements during this period.

"The resistance of the Islamic Republic and its advances are another successful example that the US can be contained," Ayatollah Khamenei said.

The Leader also pointed to the deplorable situation of the Yemeni people and their killing at the hands of Saudi Arabia, adding, "The Saudis will definitely fail to achieve a result in Yemen and will not be able to bring the resilient Yemeni people to their knees."

During the meeting, which was also attended by Iranian First Vice President Es'haq Jahangiri, the Russian president said he held very fruitful and good negotiations with President Rouhani on mutual issues of interest, including the situation in Syria.

Iran and Russia discussed the expansion of relations in all fields, particularly in the economic and trade sectors, Putin added.

He said the US is putting obstacles, including banking restrictions, in the way of the development of Tehran-Moscow relations, and added that Washington is making a strategic mistake by limiting financial transactions.

The Russian president expressed regret that the remaining sides to the JCPOA failed to fulfill their commitments under the deal after the US withdrawal.

He said although the Europeans announce that they are seeking ways to keep the nuclear accord alive, they are following the US due to their dependence on Washington.

[Sep 08, 2018] The West must acknowledge its responsibility in the making of the original crisis in Kiev, which equals if not exceeds that of Moscow's in deepening the crisis in Crimea and Donbass by Gordon M. Hahn

Notable quotes:
"... The crisis in Ukraine is a direct result of the two policies of NATO expansion and EU enlargement, which led NATO to declare Ukraine (and Georgia) will be NATO members at numerous NATO summits and in other fora, led the EU to push too hard and too early for an association agreement with the corrupt Viktor Yanukovych government, and led the West, especially Washington, to lend opposition-promotion assistance to revolutionaries and endorse a clearly illegal oligarch-ultranationalist revolt in February 2014 despite an agreement that essentially ensured Yanukovych's departure from the presidency in ten months. In Syria, Putin's Russia has won. Regime change is over. ..."
Sep 08, 2018 | gordonhahn.com

Rather than dealing with secondary issues, those which are easiest to resolve, or those in which we have common interests, contacts must address the core problems in the inter-state US-Russian or larger Western-Russian relationship. Those issues are NATO expansion, EU expansion, U.S. missile defense, Ukraine, Syria, and interference in each other's domestic politics.

Rather, than expanding Western institutions in complete disregard of Russian interests, the West must work closely with Moscow. The West must acknowledge its responsibility in the making of the original crisis in Kiev, which equals if not exceeds that of Moscow's in deepening the crisis in Crimea and Donbass.

The crisis in Ukraine is a direct result of the two policies of NATO expansion and EU enlargement, which led NATO to declare Ukraine (and Georgia) will be NATO members at numerous NATO summits and in other fora, led the EU to push too hard and too early for an association agreement with the corrupt Viktor Yanukovych government, and led the West, especially Washington, to lend opposition-promotion assistance to revolutionaries and endorse a clearly illegal oligarch-ultranationalist revolt in February 2014 despite an agreement that essentially ensured Yanukovych's departure from the presidency in ten months. In Syria, Putin's Russia has won. Regime change is over.

The U.S. in its hubris miscalculated in going a bridge too far. Ambition led to supply weapons either intentionally or accidentally -- and in denial of the obvious -- to Islamists and jihadists. This was a direct consequence of US President Barak Obama's haste to carry forth his gravely misguided Muslim Brotherhood-based regime change strategy in the Islamic world. Syria's longstanding ties to Moscow and the presence of North Caucasus-based mujahedin within the ranks first of the Al Qa`ida-affiliated 'Jabhat al-Nusra' jihadi group and then of the Islamic State or ISIS prompted Putin's limited and strategically successful intervention.

More globally, the West has been and remains the 'champion' when it comes to interference in the politics of other states. For financial reasons alone, Russia cannot hold a candle to US efforts in this regard, no less those of the entire West. Rather than seeking to dominate or willfully 'transforming' Eurasia in the Western image, the West should more gently propose democratization and work on strengthening its own democratic order to serve as a model for non- and less democratic states to emulate.

Those living in non- or less democratic states who want change have access to all the information they need on the Internet, except in the most authoritarian countries. Even in the latter, access is possible if more difficult. The native population and opposition leaders understand the intricacies of their nation's culture far better than outsiders do and can therefore better fashion a peaceful, stable regime transformation. If this is not what they want, then they are unlikely to establish a democratic order when they seize power.

Change the Goal and Strategy

The core problem in Western-Russian relations has been Western, especially, NATO expansion. NATO expansion, carried forth on the back of EU expansion, effectively 'militarized' Western democracy-promotion and EU expansion, insulting Russian 'honor' and trust in the West in the wake of Cold War-ending Western promises that NATO would not expand beyond reunified Germany and turning Russia away from democracy. Washington and Brussels must discard, therefore, its basic goal of expanding the community of democracies in brinksmanship-like fashion–everywhere and immediately, regardless of those expansions' effects on the Russian and Chinese geostrategic calculation. This means abandoning the strategy of achieving that goal: NATO and EU expansion. These two prongs of the main strategy, especially NATO expansion, have added greater cost of driving Russia into China's increasingly powerful arms, as I predicted a quarter of a century ago.

New Goal and Strategy

Regarding security, the West should seek to integrate Europe and Eurasia first in the area of negotiating ongoing conflicts and preventing new conflicts by reinvigorating the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) as the main multilateral forum for Western-Eurasian relations. It should also become the locus of negotiations between NATO and the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) on building a new European security architecture (NESA). During the life of the NESA negotiations, the West should institute an openly declared moratorium on NATO expansion. After such the NESA is in place negotiations might begin with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) on a Eurasia-wide security architecture. Similarly, the European Union should learn from its misbegotten unilateral expansionism and 'Eastern Partnership' and seek to negotiate a gradual integration of the EU and the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU).

... ... ...

There is very likely to be some agreement towards extending the START nuclear arms treaty by executive order as well as negotiating a replacement treaty to be signed at the end of the first or beginning of a second Trump term.

For the Ukrainian crisis, Trump might propose the creation of a US-Russian working group to assist the Minsk process. Should Trump be convinced that only US involvement can resolve the issue, perhaps the group could be incorporated into the Minsk process. He might also hint that in return for some Moscow concessions on Ukraine, such as backing a more expanded version of the proposed peacekeeping mission beyond the line of contact, he might be willing to put pressure on Kiev to finally fulfill its Minsk agreement obligation to engage a dialogue with the Donbass rebel regions' representatives:

(1) on the modalities related to conducting elections in the Donbass,

(2) on a Ukrainian law to be adopted according to Minsk-2 'On the temporary order of local government in certain areas of the Donetsk and the Lugansk regions,' or

(3) 'with respect to the future operation of these areas on the basis of the Law,' or, for that matter,

(4) on any other subject related to the crisis. Washington pressure on Kiev to talk directly with the rebels may be possible now that four years too late some of the Washington institutions that supported the Maidan revolt and illegal overthrow of Yanukovych such as the Atlantic Council and Freedom House, are waking up to the neofascist threat on the edges of the Maidan regime and in society.

About the Author – Gordon M. Hahn, Ph.D., Expert Analyst at Corr Analytics, http://www.canalyt.com and a Senior Researcher at the Center for Terrorism and Intelligence Studies (CETIS), Akribis Group, San Jose, California, www.cetisresearch.org .

Dr. Hahn is the author of Ukraine Over the Edge: Russia, the West, and the 'New Cold War (McFarland Publishers, 2017) and three previously and well-received books: Russia's Revolution From Above: Reform, Transition and Revolution in the Fall of the Soviet Communist Regime, 1985-2000 (Transaction Publishers, 2002); Russia's Islamic Threat (Yale University Press, 2007); and The Caucasus Emirate Mujahedin: Global Jihadism in Russia's North Caucasus and Beyond (McFarland Publishers, 2014).He has published numerous think tank reports, academic articles, analyses, and commentaries in both English and Russian language media and has served as a consultant and provided expert testimony to the U.S. government.

Dr. Hahn also has taught at Boston, American, Stanford, San Jose State, and San Francisco State Universities and as a Fulbright Scholar at Saint Petersburg State University, Russia. He has been a senior associate and visiting fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the Kennan Institute in Washington DC as well as the Hoover Institution at Stanford University.

Lyttenburgh, July 7, 2018 at 6:25 am

"and agreed to meet in neighboring Sweden"

Finland.

"This suggests the level of distrust Putin has towards Washington, his low expectations for a successful summit, and the high price he is likely to demand for concessions on his part."

It suggests nothing of the sort. You are too dramatic.

"[T]he approach of dealing with issues that are easiest to resolve or where we have common interests alone is insufficient and a non-starter as far as putting the relationship where it should be. By definition, an approach that seeks to avoid areas where there are disagreements will not resolve a deeply troubled relationship that is putting international security and peace at risk. Only addressing the core differences complicating relations can a qualitatively new relationship be forged."

Finally someone is willing to admit that! You can't willy-nilly go and ask your neighbor to borrow some sugar after you wrecked his fence and expect him to "cooperate" on such small issue out of sheer goodness.

"It also means abandoning the approach of designing policies from hubris rooted in the sense that Western democracy is morally superior to authoritarianism. Although the latter is true"

In what way? I (and quite a lot of people) see particular Western "democracy" as morally bankrupt compared to what it seemingly randomly calls "authoritarianism"

"In Syria, Putin's Russia has won."

And that writes a man who detest the term, devoting so much ink and time to show to the ignorant that, no – it's Russia's Putin. Why not say Russia, or Moscow, or even "Pro-Assad coalition"?

"Rather than seeking to dominate or willfully 'transforming' Eurasia in the Western image, the West should more gently propose democratization and work on strengthening its own democratic order to serve as a model for non- and less democratic states to emulate."

What, you forgot the immortal words of Paul Wolfowitz so soon? For, you see, "We Are An Empire Now". Crawling back in the shell won't help to solve the domestic very partisan issues – finding a common enemy does that. Your tactics are good for a neutered housecat of a nation – not for the mighty Great Again (And Forever) lion which both the elite and the commoners of the West consider their Republic.

" and turning Russia away from democracy."

Wrong. It turned Russia away from liberalism – not democracy. You know the difference, right? Because your following analysis suggests otherwise:

"Washington and Brussels must discard, therefore, its basic goal of expanding the community of democracies"

"Putin's Russia" is democracy. As well as Poland under PiS, Hungary under Orban and Turkey under Erdogan. Hell, even Ukraine is democracy! Democracy is just a mode of rule.

"driving Russia into China's increasingly powerful arms"

Yeah, that's bad for the US. For the rest – not so.

"During the life of the NESA negotiations, the West should institute an openly declared moratorium on NATO expansion."

Absolutely meaningless and easily revertible promise that runs directly against the West self-identification as the only Empire on the planet.

The list of topics of your Grand Design that follows is too far fetch, unrealistic and abstract that they are basically the equivalent of "charming" Russian naďve natives with the glass beads. As for your fanatical support of the free trade – it's era has gone. Again. If you fail to grasp that it was precisely Russian objections of EU version of free trade coming to the Ukraine which lead to 2013-14 conflict on Maidan – well, nothing can help you.

"Non-Western partners must also be willing to sacrifice some of their present interests for the sake of the benefits of stability and cooperation that will accrue in future. "

Like I said – land for the glass beads.

"In Ukraine, the U.S. must get more involved in the Minsk 2 negotiating process."

No, they shouldn't.

"Without a clear signal from Trump that Washington is not interested in expanding NATO to Ukraine or using the crisis to isolate Moscow through sanctions and the like and intends to lead the search for a solution, Moscow is unlikely to make any meaningful concessions."

You don't see it, do you? It's Kiev for whom the conflict is more beneficial. It allows all sort of, yes, authoritarian things and policies without fear of the "real war". You can silence all your critics with – "but Putin might attack us!" or "are you a secret separ?!". Kiev has no other viable strategy but to commit an ethnic cleansing of DNR or LNR should they be returned to it. Simple as that.

BTW – have you read Minsk II accords? How about Kiev fulfils its part first?

"Washington could be able to convince Moscow to abandon its support for the elements of the Iran presence in Syria and Lebanon that arrived in the context of the Syrian civil war."

Nothing of the sort will happen. Sowing division among potential USA rivals is a viable tactic – but don't take everyone for an idiot.

"There is very likely to be some agreement towards extending the START nuclear arms treaty"

Wanna bet, that there won't be? Also – nothing of the Ukraine, nothing on NATO. A little something on Syria (officially) with, maybe, an unofficial concession of the defeat of the West-backed "unicorns".

Tl;dr. This is not about coming Trump-Putin summit. You are just venting off your fantasy about Bright Future. You present solely pro-US perspective of the summit, enumerating things that Trump must "ask", nay, "demand" either for free or some minor concessions on his part. Have you ever tried to think what Russia might want of the summit instead?

Salsibury Watchdog, July 11, 2018 at 2:19 am

"It also means abandoning the approach of designing policies from hubris rooted in the sense that Western democracy is morally superior to authoritarianism. Although the latter is true"

Mr. Khan, if what Western elites are doing to other sovereign nations is 'a democracy' why is it done so covertly: through murky slash funds, secrets coups and illegal bombings?

I've never seen a referendum asking people in the US whether they wanted to fund another war. Had they been asked, people would've chosen affordable healthcare, housing and access to education instead, and you know it as well I do.

Yet you're still talking about 'Western democracy'?

Get real.

[Sep 08, 2018] In the ruins of the caliphate, ISIS rears its ugly head by Joseph Hope

Notable quotes:
"... "What is quietly happening across parts of Iraq is less of a resurgence, and more a resurfacing, of the Islamic State. Many of these fighters never actually left, but merely scattered temporarily, having melted away into the population only to return. " ..."
Sep 08, 2018 | www.atimes.com

How is ISIS resurfacing in Iraq? The short answer is that it never really left. Despite US President Donald Trump's orders to " annihilate ISIS ," members of the organization have continued to exist in Iraq and Syria and carry out attacks. The caliphate has fallen and the group no longer holds the vast territory and population it once controlled. However, supporters, organizers and fighters have not simply disappeared. Instead, the aspiring proto-state has reverted back to its roots as a terrorist insurgency. The US-based Soufan Center assessed the environment as such:

"What is quietly happening across parts of Iraq is less of a resurgence, and more a resurfacing, of the Islamic State. Many of these fighters never actually left, but merely scattered temporarily, having melted away into the population only to return. "

The US and the UN agree that there may be as many as 30,000 ISIS members still present in Iraq and Syria. Jason Warner and Charlotte Hulme writing for the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point (CTC) also recently estimated that an additional 6,000 fighters are spread across Africa , with the Islamic State West-Africa Province (Boko Haram) contributing more than half of the total. ISIS continues to wield influence further abroad with IS-Khorasan in Afghanistan as well as supporters in the Philippines , Indonesia , and throughout the Indo-Pacific.

These members and supporters received encouragement and direction from their highest leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, in an audio message released last month. The message promoted patience and perseverance, claiming that the time will come again for a resurgence. In Iraq, this may be a functional strategy.

Little change

ISIS's Iraqi presence began as al-Qaeda in Iraq, an al-Qaeda affiliate led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi . The group found footholds in Iraq in the chaos caused by the US invasion in 2003, and then re-branded itself as the Islamic State in Iraq (ISI) following its founder's death in 2006. While pressured by the Anbar Awakening and the US troop surge in 2007, ISI managed to survive and wait for conditions to become more favorable.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki , a Shia politician, would contribute to these conditions by giving preferential treatment and status to Shiite Iraqis. As a result, many of Iraq's Sunnis were disillusioned and alienated from the Iraqi state and were at least indifferent to ISIS, if not supportive. Renad Mansour of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace wrote in 2016 that a lack of options for Sunni political engagement combined with "intra-Sunni conflict" drove the power development of ISI. Following the withdrawal of US troops in 2011, the Iraqi security forces were left mostly alone to fight the extremist group, and quickly buckled under the task.

Research published by the CTC earlier this year sought to analyze the opinions of young men in Mosul , ISIS"s Iraqi capital. While largely characterized as "corrupt, brutal, and hypocritical," 93% reported that ISIS had positive effects during the beginning of their authority. Even now that they have lost that authority, most respondents were confident that ISIS will not disappear anytime soon. The Sunni community in general was characterized by the men as divided and both spiritually and physically weak.

Embed from Getty Images

Following the collapse of the caliphate, Iraq began judicial proceedings for thousands of accused ISIS members. While trials are a necessary and positive element in resolving the conflict, Iraq's courts have been quickly overwhelmed, resulting in trials lasting for as little as 10 minutes . Innocent Sunnis are at risk of being swept up in these trials, and joining the many who have already been sentenced to death as a result of these proceedings.

Shia militias also continue to act with impunity as an element of Iraq's security forces , reinforcing the power disparity between Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq. With Sunni estrangement, internal conflict and disunity, and a perception of weakness continuing, it falls on the government to enforce security and suppress violence.

Political inclusion

Perhaps the largest result of the Iraqi election this year was the ascension of Muqtada al-Sadr , a Shia cleric, as the leader of the winning parliamentary block. Al-Sadr promoted Iraqi unity and the abandonment of political divisiveness in his campaign; however, his group has also been accused of past aggression against Sunnis . How al-Sadr and the new Parliament will lead Iraq, enforce security, and form relationships with Sunni communities remains to be seen.

Embed from Getty Images

The Sunni community apparently remains internally conflicted and continues to face challenges at the hands of the Iraqi state. Renad Mansour believes that greater power-sharing at high levels and greater autonomy at low levels is key to relieving the pressure on Sunni communities and reengaging them with the state while also accounting for the lack of unity within the Sunni community. Without political engagement, and facing institutionalized challenges, many Sunnis may continue to support or be indifferent to extremist groups like ISIS. Although the group itself has lost its attractiveness among most of Iraq's Sunnis, the conditions which fueled its earlier growth are still present.

Doubtless, members of the group have gone into hiding and will continue to launch attacks for the foreseeable future. ISIS will likely never return to the high point it experienced several years ago, but it has defied expectations before. With smart re-branding and a strategy made to appeal more to the local population, combined with a messy government unable to provide security, ISIS may manage regain some of the power it has lost.

[Sep 08, 2018] Latest Skripal development is rocket fuel to existing anti-Russia fever in London by John Wight

Notable quotes:
"... working hypothesis ..."
"... The inkslingers of the jingo press ..."
"... The enemy of the moment always represented absolute evil, and it followed that no past or future agreement with him was possible. ..."
Sep 05, 2018 | www.rt.com

John Wight has written for a variety of newspapers and websites, including the Independent, Morning Star, Huffington Post, Counterpunch, London Progressive Journal, and Foreign Policy Journal. The recent development in the Skripals poisoning case is guaranteed to plunge already dire relations between Moscow and London through the floor. At a set-piece press conference in London, Neil Basu, head of the London Met's counter-terrorism police force, positively identified two Russian suspects in the case. He produced CCTV images of the two individuals along with their names and details of their movements from Russia to the UK and back again. He also alleged that according to a " working hypothesis " the suspects smuggled the Novichok substance used in the attempt on the lives of former Russia intelligence office and British spy Sergei Skripal, and daughter Yulia, into the country with them from Russia. Read more A handout picture allegedly taken in Salisbury, on March 4, 2018, and released by the British Metropolitan Police purportedly shows Alexander Petrov (R) and Ruslan Boshirov, September 5, 2018 © AFP Names of 'Russian suspects' in Skripal case published by UK don't mean anything to us – Moscow

The rocket fuel this very significant and very serious development adds to the already seething anti-Russia sentiment and feeling that dominates the minds of the British political and media establishment is self-evident. At a time of multiple crises involving Moscow and London – crises yet to be resolved around the conflict in Syria, tensions over Ukraine, the presence of NATO troops and military assets close to Russia's western border, sanctions, etc. – it is extraordinarily worrying that relations between both countries have now plunged to their lowest point since the end of the Cold War.

That the Russian state is capable of carrying out an attack of this nature is not in doubt. All states are capable of carrying out such attacks, and all states, including Britain, have carried them out at various points in their history. But the timing of this particular attack is key, given that it took place just a few months prior to the start of the World Cup in Russia, and at a time when the Russian government was extending itself in attempting to repair relations with the West with a view to achieving normalization.

Then, too, the motive remains impossible to discern. Sergei Skripal had been living openly under his own name in Salisbury, England, where the attack took place, for some time, so clearly did not believe that he was in any danger.

The international damage to Russia's reputation as a consequence of being behind such an attack is likewise not in any doubt.

These points are not, of course, made as infallible proof that the Russian government or intelligence was not responsible. But they are pertinent in of themselves, given the context.

Read more Two men accused of poisoning Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury, are seen on CCTV at Salisbury Station. © Metroplitan Police handout British PM says two suspects in Skripals poisoning case are Russian military intelligence officers

Another point worth raising is the sheer crudity of two supposed Russian agents taking a direct flight to and from the UK to carry out the attack and travelling together both ways. Such amateurish planning is the stuff of your average Hollywood spy spoof movie rather anything you would associate with a serious intelligence agency.

Significantly, during his press conference and presentation, Mr Basu did not go as far as alleging Russian state involvement. Such restraint, however, has long been a foreign land where the prime minister is concerned.

In her statement to the Commons on this latest development, Theresa May wasted no time in unleashing a rhetorical artillery barrage against the Kremlin, buoyed by a feral chorus of MPs who almost to a man and woman had already embraced Russia as the officially designated enemy of all that is holy and good in the world.

Either the prime minister knows something that the head of the Met's counter-terrorism police force does not, or we have entered an age when blaming Russia for everything is an unofficial requirement of the duties of high political office in Westminster.

To be fair to the prime minister though, she's been blaming the Kremlin for this crime almost since the very day it took place, gleefully riding the wave of anti-Russia hysteria that had already been whipped up by a mainstream media whose denizens one James Connolly was once minded to describe as " The inkslingers of the jingo press ."

Read more Russian Oligarch Boris Berezovsky speaking to the media Aug. 31, 2012 - London © Ben Cawthra 'No cause for further investigation' into 14 deaths of people linked to Russia – May

With her leadership mired in crisis over Brexit, and with her errant former foreign secretary and putative prime minister, Boris Johnson, currently breathing down her neck with a looming challenge to her leadership, for the prime minister the timing of this development could not, politically, be more convenient. For at such moments she is able to give free rein to the appearance of the kind of strong and robust leadership qualities that are, in truth, grievously absent.

Going forward, this will only add more grist to the mill of a neocon firmament whose very existence is predicated on maintaining Russia in the role of existential threat to Western civilization. A frog's chorus of calls and demands for ever more stringent trade, financial and economic sanctions against Moscow will reach a crescendo, buttressed by an uptick in the deployment of troops and military assets to eastern Europe in a futile effort to intimidate and cow the Kremlin into accepting its prescribed status as a vassal of Washington and its allies.

Worryingly, in 2018 we have reached the stage that George Orwell described in his classic novel, 1984: " The enemy of the moment always represented absolute evil, and it followed that no past or future agreement with him was possible. "

Western ideologues should take a moment to consider that Orwell wrote his classic work as a warning not a blueprint.

[Sep 08, 2018] British Assassination Campaign Targeting Russian Exiles by Finian CUNNINGHAM

Notable quotes:
"... Over the past decade or so, a disturbing number of Russian nationals living in Britain have met untimely deaths. The victims – at least 14 – have been high-profile individuals, such as oligarch businessman Boris Berezovsky or former Kremlin security agent Alexander Litvinenko. All were living in Britain as exiles, and all were viewed as opponents of President Vladimir Putin's government. ..."
"... Invariably, British politicians and news media refer to the deaths of Russian émigrés as "proof" of Russian state "malign activity". Putin in particular is accused of ordering "the hits" as some kind of vendetta against critics and traitors. ..."
"... The claims of Russian state skulduggery have been reported over and over without question in the British media as well as US media. It has become an article-of-faith espoused by British and American politicians alike. "Putin is a killer," they say with seeming certainty. There is simply no question about it in their assertions. ..."
Jul 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

Over the past decade or so, a disturbing number of Russian nationals living in Britain have met untimely deaths. The victims – at least 14 – have been high-profile individuals, such as oligarch businessman Boris Berezovsky or former Kremlin security agent Alexander Litvinenko. All were living in Britain as exiles, and all were viewed as opponents of President Vladimir Putin's government.

Invariably, British politicians and news media refer to the deaths of Russian émigrés as "proof" of Russian state "malign activity". Putin in particular is accused of ordering "the hits" as some kind of vendetta against critics and traitors.

The claims of Russian state skulduggery have been reported over and over without question in the British media as well as US media. It has become an article-of-faith espoused by British and American politicians alike. "Putin is a killer," they say with seeming certainty. There is simply no question about it in their assertions.

The claims have also been given a quasi-legal veracity, with a British government-appointed inquiry in the case of Alexander Litvinenko making a conclusion that his death in 2006 was "highly likely" the result of a Kremlin plot to assassinate. Putin was personally implicated in the death of Litvinenko by the official British inquiry. The victim was said to have been poisoned with radioactive polonium. Deathbed images of a bald-headed Litvinenko conjure up a haunting image of alleged Kremlin evil-doing.

Once the notion of Russian evil-doing is inculcated the public mind, then subsequent events can be easily invoked as "more proof" of what has already been "established". Namely, so it goes, that the Russian state is carrying out assassinations on British territory.

Read also: The Real Danger Behind The U.K. Elections

Thus, we see this "corroborating" effect with the alleged poisoning of a former Russian double-agent, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter in Salisbury back in March this year.

Read more at https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/07/20/british-assassination-campaign-targeting-russian-exiles.html

[Sep 07, 2018] New York Times Undermining Peace Efforts by Sowing Suspicion by Diana Johnstone

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The letter by Mister or Ms Anonymous is very well written. By someone like, say, Thomas Friedman. That is, someone on the NYT staff. It is very cleverly composed to achieve quite obvious calculated aims. It is a masterpiece of treacherous deception. ..."
"... This anonymous enemy of amorality claims to approve of all the most extreme right-wing measures of the Trump administration as "bright spots": deregulation, tax reform, a more robust military, "and more" – cleverly omitting mention of Trump's immigration policy which could unduly shock the New York Times' liberal readers. The late Senator John McCain, the model of bipartisan bellicosity, is cited as the example to follow. ..."
"... The "resistance" proclaimed is solely against the facets of Trump's foreign policy which White House insiders are said to be working diligently to undermine: peaceful relations with Russian and North Korea. ..."
"... Trump's desire to avoid war is transformed into "a preference for autocrats and dictators". (Trump gets no credit for his warlike rhetoric against Iran and close relations with Netanyahu, even though they must please Anonymous.) ..."
"... The purpose of this is stunningly obvious. The New York Times has already done yeoman service in rounding up liberal Democrats and left-leaning independents in the anti-Trump lynch mob. But now the ploy is to rally conservative Republicans to the same cause of overthrowing the elected President. The letter amounts to an endorsement of future President Pence. ..."
"... This is the Iago ploy. Shakespeare's villain destroyed Othello by causing him to distrust those closest to him, his wife and closest associates. Like Trump in Washington, Othello, the "Moor" of Venice, was an outsider, that much easier to deceive and betray. ..."
"... The New York Times is playing Iago, whispering that Putin in the Kremlin is surrounded by secret "informants", and that Trump in the White House is surrounded by people systematically undermining his presidency. Putin is not likely to be impressed, but the trick might work with Trump, who is truly the target of open and covert enemies and whose position is much more insecure. There is certainly some undermining going on. ..."
"... Was the New York Times oped written by the paper's own writers or by the CIA? It hardly matters since they are so closely entwined. ..."
"... The military-industrial-congressional-deep state-media complex is holding its breath to breathe that great sigh of relief. The intruder is gone. Hurrah! Now we can go right on teaching the public to hate and fear the Russian enemy, so that arms contracts continue to blossom and NATO builds up its aggressive forces around Russia in hopes that this may frighten the Russians into dumping Putin in favor of a new Boris Yeltsin, ready to let the United States pursue the Clintonian plan of breaking up the Russian Federation into pieces, like the former Yugoslavia, in order to take them over one by one, with all their great natural resources. ..."
"... When dialogue is impossible, all that is left is force and violence. That is what is being promoted by the most influential media in the United States. ..."
Sep 07, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

The New York Times continues to outdo itself in the production of fake news. There is no more reliable source of fake news than the intelligence services, which regularly provide their pet outlets (NYT and WaPo) with sensational stories that are as unverifiable as their sources are anonymous. A prize example was the August 24 report that US intelligence agencies don't know anything about Russia's plans to mess up our November elections because "informants close to Putin and in the Kremlin" aren't saying anything. Not knowing anything about something for which there is no evidence is a rare scoop.

A story like that is not designed to "inform the public" since there is no information in it. It has other purposes: to keep the "Russia is undermining our democracy" story on front pages, with the extra twist in this case of trying to make Putin distrustful of his entourage. The Russian president is supposed to wonder, who are those informants in my entourage?

But that was nothing compared to the whopper produced by the "newpaper of record" on September 5. (By the way, the "record" is stuck in the same groove: Trump bad, Putin bad – bad bad bad.) This was the sensational oped headlined "I am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration", signed by nobody.

The letter by Mister or Ms Anonymous is very well written. By someone like, say, Thomas Friedman. That is, someone on the NYT staff. It is very cleverly composed to achieve quite obvious calculated aims. It is a masterpiece of treacherous deception.

The fictional author presents itself as a right-wing conservative shocked by Trump's "amorality" – a category that outside the Washington swamp might include betraying the trust of one's superior.

This anonymous enemy of amorality claims to approve of all the most extreme right-wing measures of the Trump administration as "bright spots": deregulation, tax reform, a more robust military, "and more" – cleverly omitting mention of Trump's immigration policy which could unduly shock the New York Times' liberal readers. The late Senator John McCain, the model of bipartisan bellicosity, is cited as the example to follow.

The "resistance" proclaimed is solely against the facets of Trump's foreign policy which White House insiders are said to be working diligently to undermine: peaceful relations with Russian and North Korea.

Trump's desire to avoid war is transformed into "a preference for autocrats and dictators". (Trump gets no credit for his warlike rhetoric against Iran and close relations with Netanyahu, even though they must please Anonymous.)

The purpose of this is stunningly obvious. The New York Times has already done yeoman service in rounding up liberal Democrats and left-leaning independents in the anti-Trump lynch mob. But now the ploy is to rally conservative Republicans to the same cause of overthrowing the elected President. The letter amounts to an endorsement of future President Pence. Just get rid of Trump and you'll have a nice, neat, ultra-right-wing Republican as President.

The Democrats may not like Pence, but they are so demented by hatred of Trump that they are visibly ready to accept the Devil himself to get rid of the sinister clown who dared defeat Hillary Clinton. Down with democracy; the votes of deplorables shouldn't count.

That is treacherous enough, but even more despicable is the insidious design to destabilize the presidency by sowing distrust. Speaking of Trump, Mr and/or Ms Anonymous declare: "The dilemma – which he does not fully grasp – is that many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations" (meaning peace with Russia).

This is the Iago ploy. Shakespeare's villain destroyed Othello by causing him to distrust those closest to him, his wife and closest associates. Like Trump in Washington, Othello, the "Moor" of Venice, was an outsider, that much easier to deceive and betray.

The New York Times is playing Iago, whispering that Putin in the Kremlin is surrounded by secret "informants", and that Trump in the White House is surrounded by people systematically undermining his presidency. Putin is not likely to be impressed, but the trick might work with Trump, who is truly the target of open and covert enemies and whose position is much more insecure. There is certainly some undermining going on.

Was the New York Times oped written by the paper's own writers or by the CIA? It hardly matters since they are so closely entwined.

No trick is too low for those who consider Trump an intolerable intruder on THEIR power territory. The New York Times "news" that Trump is surrounded by traitors is taken up by other media who indirectly confirm the story by speculating on "who is it?" The Boston Globe (among others) eagerly rushed in, asking:

"So who's the author of the op-ed? It's a question that has many people poking through the text, looking for clues. Meanwhile, the denials have come thick and fast. Here's a brief look at some of the highest-level officials in the administration who might have a motive to write the letter."

Isn't it obvious that all this is designed to make Trump distrust everyone around him? Isn't that a way to drive him toward that "crazy" where they say he already is, and which is fallback grounds for impeachment when the Mueller investigation fails to come up with nothing more serious than the fact that Russian intelligent agents are intelligent agents?

The White House insider (or insiders, or whatever) use terms like "erratic behavior" and "instability" to contribute to the "Trump is insane" narrative. Insanity is the alternative pretext to the Mueller wild goose chase for divesting Trump of the powers of the presidency. If Trump responds by accusing the traitors of being traitors, that will be final proof of his mental instability. The oped claims to provide evidence that Trump is being betrayed, but if he says so, that will be taken as a sign of mental derangement. To save our exemplary democracy from itself, the elected president must be thrown out.

The military-industrial-congressional-deep state-media complex is holding its breath to breathe that great sigh of relief. The intruder is gone. Hurrah! Now we can go right on teaching the public to hate and fear the Russian enemy, so that arms contracts continue to blossom and NATO builds up its aggressive forces around Russia in hopes that this may frighten the Russians into dumping Putin in favor of a new Boris Yeltsin, ready to let the United States pursue the Clintonian plan of breaking up the Russian Federation into pieces, like the former Yugoslavia, in order to take them over one by one, with all their great natural resources.

And when this fails, as it has been failing, and will continue to fail, the United States has all those brand new first strike nuclear weapons being stationed in European NATO countries, aimed at the Kremlin. And the Russian military are not just sitting there with their own nuclear weapons, waiting to be wiped out. When nobody, not even the President of the United States, has the right to meet and talk with Russian leaders, there is only one remaining form of exchange. When dialogue is impossible, all that is left is force and violence. That is what is being promoted by the most influential media in the United States.

[Sep 07, 2018] New York Times Undermining Peace Efforts by Sowing Suspicion by Diana Johnstone

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The letter by Mister or Ms Anonymous is very well written. By someone like, say, Thomas Friedman. That is, someone on the NYT staff. It is very cleverly composed to achieve quite obvious calculated aims. It is a masterpiece of treacherous deception. ..."
"... This anonymous enemy of amorality claims to approve of all the most extreme right-wing measures of the Trump administration as "bright spots": deregulation, tax reform, a more robust military, "and more" – cleverly omitting mention of Trump's immigration policy which could unduly shock the New York Times' liberal readers. The late Senator John McCain, the model of bipartisan bellicosity, is cited as the example to follow. ..."
"... The "resistance" proclaimed is solely against the facets of Trump's foreign policy which White House insiders are said to be working diligently to undermine: peaceful relations with Russian and North Korea. ..."
"... Trump's desire to avoid war is transformed into "a preference for autocrats and dictators". (Trump gets no credit for his warlike rhetoric against Iran and close relations with Netanyahu, even though they must please Anonymous.) ..."
"... The purpose of this is stunningly obvious. The New York Times has already done yeoman service in rounding up liberal Democrats and left-leaning independents in the anti-Trump lynch mob. But now the ploy is to rally conservative Republicans to the same cause of overthrowing the elected President. The letter amounts to an endorsement of future President Pence. ..."
"... This is the Iago ploy. Shakespeare's villain destroyed Othello by causing him to distrust those closest to him, his wife and closest associates. Like Trump in Washington, Othello, the "Moor" of Venice, was an outsider, that much easier to deceive and betray. ..."
"... The New York Times is playing Iago, whispering that Putin in the Kremlin is surrounded by secret "informants", and that Trump in the White House is surrounded by people systematically undermining his presidency. Putin is not likely to be impressed, but the trick might work with Trump, who is truly the target of open and covert enemies and whose position is much more insecure. There is certainly some undermining going on. ..."
"... Was the New York Times oped written by the paper's own writers or by the CIA? It hardly matters since they are so closely entwined. ..."
"... The military-industrial-congressional-deep state-media complex is holding its breath to breathe that great sigh of relief. The intruder is gone. Hurrah! Now we can go right on teaching the public to hate and fear the Russian enemy, so that arms contracts continue to blossom and NATO builds up its aggressive forces around Russia in hopes that this may frighten the Russians into dumping Putin in favor of a new Boris Yeltsin, ready to let the United States pursue the Clintonian plan of breaking up the Russian Federation into pieces, like the former Yugoslavia, in order to take them over one by one, with all their great natural resources. ..."
"... When dialogue is impossible, all that is left is force and violence. That is what is being promoted by the most influential media in the United States. ..."
Sep 07, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

The New York Times continues to outdo itself in the production of fake news. There is no more reliable source of fake news than the intelligence services, which regularly provide their pet outlets (NYT and WaPo) with sensational stories that are as unverifiable as their sources are anonymous. A prize example was the August 24 report that US intelligence agencies don't know anything about Russia's plans to mess up our November elections because "informants close to Putin and in the Kremlin" aren't saying anything. Not knowing anything about something for which there is no evidence is a rare scoop.

A story like that is not designed to "inform the public" since there is no information in it. It has other purposes: to keep the "Russia is undermining our democracy" story on front pages, with the extra twist in this case of trying to make Putin distrustful of his entourage. The Russian president is supposed to wonder, who are those informants in my entourage?

But that was nothing compared to the whopper produced by the "newpaper of record" on September 5. (By the way, the "record" is stuck in the same groove: Trump bad, Putin bad – bad bad bad.) This was the sensational oped headlined "I am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration", signed by nobody.

The letter by Mister or Ms Anonymous is very well written. By someone like, say, Thomas Friedman. That is, someone on the NYT staff. It is very cleverly composed to achieve quite obvious calculated aims. It is a masterpiece of treacherous deception.

The fictional author presents itself as a right-wing conservative shocked by Trump's "amorality" – a category that outside the Washington swamp might include betraying the trust of one's superior.

This anonymous enemy of amorality claims to approve of all the most extreme right-wing measures of the Trump administration as "bright spots": deregulation, tax reform, a more robust military, "and more" – cleverly omitting mention of Trump's immigration policy which could unduly shock the New York Times' liberal readers. The late Senator John McCain, the model of bipartisan bellicosity, is cited as the example to follow.

The "resistance" proclaimed is solely against the facets of Trump's foreign policy which White House insiders are said to be working diligently to undermine: peaceful relations with Russian and North Korea.

Trump's desire to avoid war is transformed into "a preference for autocrats and dictators". (Trump gets no credit for his warlike rhetoric against Iran and close relations with Netanyahu, even though they must please Anonymous.)

The purpose of this is stunningly obvious. The New York Times has already done yeoman service in rounding up liberal Democrats and left-leaning independents in the anti-Trump lynch mob. But now the ploy is to rally conservative Republicans to the same cause of overthrowing the elected President. The letter amounts to an endorsement of future President Pence. Just get rid of Trump and you'll have a nice, neat, ultra-right-wing Republican as President.

The Democrats may not like Pence, but they are so demented by hatred of Trump that they are visibly ready to accept the Devil himself to get rid of the sinister clown who dared defeat Hillary Clinton. Down with democracy; the votes of deplorables shouldn't count.

That is treacherous enough, but even more despicable is the insidious design to destabilize the presidency by sowing distrust. Speaking of Trump, Mr and/or Ms Anonymous declare: "The dilemma – which he does not fully grasp – is that many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations" (meaning peace with Russia).

This is the Iago ploy. Shakespeare's villain destroyed Othello by causing him to distrust those closest to him, his wife and closest associates. Like Trump in Washington, Othello, the "Moor" of Venice, was an outsider, that much easier to deceive and betray.

The New York Times is playing Iago, whispering that Putin in the Kremlin is surrounded by secret "informants", and that Trump in the White House is surrounded by people systematically undermining his presidency. Putin is not likely to be impressed, but the trick might work with Trump, who is truly the target of open and covert enemies and whose position is much more insecure. There is certainly some undermining going on.

Was the New York Times oped written by the paper's own writers or by the CIA? It hardly matters since they are so closely entwined.

No trick is too low for those who consider Trump an intolerable intruder on THEIR power territory. The New York Times "news" that Trump is surrounded by traitors is taken up by other media who indirectly confirm the story by speculating on "who is it?" The Boston Globe (among others) eagerly rushed in, asking:

"So who's the author of the op-ed? It's a question that has many people poking through the text, looking for clues. Meanwhile, the denials have come thick and fast. Here's a brief look at some of the highest-level officials in the administration who might have a motive to write the letter."

Isn't it obvious that all this is designed to make Trump distrust everyone around him? Isn't that a way to drive him toward that "crazy" where they say he already is, and which is fallback grounds for impeachment when the Mueller investigation fails to come up with nothing more serious than the fact that Russian intelligent agents are intelligent agents?

The White House insider (or insiders, or whatever) use terms like "erratic behavior" and "instability" to contribute to the "Trump is insane" narrative. Insanity is the alternative pretext to the Mueller wild goose chase for divesting Trump of the powers of the presidency. If Trump responds by accusing the traitors of being traitors, that will be final proof of his mental instability. The oped claims to provide evidence that Trump is being betrayed, but if he says so, that will be taken as a sign of mental derangement. To save our exemplary democracy from itself, the elected president must be thrown out.

The military-industrial-congressional-deep state-media complex is holding its breath to breathe that great sigh of relief. The intruder is gone. Hurrah! Now we can go right on teaching the public to hate and fear the Russian enemy, so that arms contracts continue to blossom and NATO builds up its aggressive forces around Russia in hopes that this may frighten the Russians into dumping Putin in favor of a new Boris Yeltsin, ready to let the United States pursue the Clintonian plan of breaking up the Russian Federation into pieces, like the former Yugoslavia, in order to take them over one by one, with all their great natural resources.

And when this fails, as it has been failing, and will continue to fail, the United States has all those brand new first strike nuclear weapons being stationed in European NATO countries, aimed at the Kremlin. And the Russian military are not just sitting there with their own nuclear weapons, waiting to be wiped out. When nobody, not even the President of the United States, has the right to meet and talk with Russian leaders, there is only one remaining form of exchange. When dialogue is impossible, all that is left is force and violence. That is what is being promoted by the most influential media in the United States.

[Sep 07, 2018] The Russian minority in the Baltics live under 'apartheid' states OffGuardian by Admin

off-guardian.org
Max Parry

An 'Immortal Regiment' march celebrating Victory Day in Riga, Latvia.

It has been nearly three decades since the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Despite Russia's reemergence on the world stage as a respected power after market-oriented 'reforms' destroyed its economy for the duration of the nineties, the breakup of the USSR is an event regarded by an increasing amount of Russians as a catastrophic tragedy rather than a triumph of 'freedom and democracy.'

In recent years, there have been numerous polls showing that more than half of Russians not only regret the collapse of the Soviet Union but would even prefer for its return . However, the nostalgia only comes as a surprise to those who have forgotten that not long before the failed August Coup that led to its demise, the first and only referendum in its history was held in March of 1991 which polled citizens if they wished to preserve the Soviet system.

The results were more than three quarters of the population in the entire socialist federation (including Russia) voting a resounding yes with a turnout of 80% in the participating republics. In Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan the outcome was more than 90% voting for renewal. Even the country with the lowest amount of support, the Ukraine, was still 70% in favor. While the measure was officially banned in six republics -- Moldova, Georgia, Armenia, and the three Baltic states -- despite being unrecognized by their local governments the vote was still organized and the outcomes were all over 90%.

Ironically, the union dissolved five months later under the pretext of establishing 'democracy' in Eastern Europe just as it ignored the very wishes of Soviet citizens. After more than 25 years of suffering at the hands of economic and trade liberalization, gutting of state subsidies and mass privatization of the former state-run industry, is it any wonder that Russians are yearning for a return to socialism?

The consequences of the disintegration are still felt in the relations with the United States today. It planted the seeds for the carefully arranged revival of the Cold War that was hiding in plain sight until it surfaced with 'color revolutions', proxy wars and dubious spy poisonings. One source of the strained relations between the West and Russia has been the Baltic states, which burgeoned following their integration into the European Union and enrollment in NATO membership in 2004 during its enlargement. NATO continues its provocations with massive war games bordering Kaliningrad, while Moscow is painted as the aggressor even though the U.S. defense spending increase this year alone surpasses Russia's entire military budget.

The antagonism between Latvia, Estonia and(to a lesser degree) Lithuania with Moscow stems partly from from the cessation of the USSR itself. The conclusion of the Cold War resulted in more than 25 million Russians instantly discovering themselves living abroad in foreign countries. For seventy years, fifteen nations had been fully integrated while Russians migrated and lived within the other republics. The Soviet collapse immediately reignited national conflicts, from the Caucasus to the Baltics. While the majority of the ethnic Russian diaspora live in Ukraine and Kazakhstan, nearly 1 million reside in the post-Soviet Baltics and since 1991 they have been subjected to a campaign of forced assimilation, discrimination and exclusion.

The Baltic republics made nationalism their official state policy while moving away from Russia's sphere of influence into a closer relationship with the West. Boris Yeltsin's subservience to Washington eclipsed any concern for the fate of captive Russians as the Soviet Bloc was herded into the EU, but his administration did quarrel with the new Baltic authorities and accused them of creating an anti-Russian 'apartheid.'

As geopolitical tensions have increased under his successor, Vladimir V. Putin, who has embarrassed Western imperialism in the international arena, so has Moscow's disapproval of the treatment of its minority held hostage in the Baltic Rim. Is a comparison to South Africa warranted? Even if the similarities are only partial, the three states show evidence of deep ethnocracy.

While less than 10% of Lithuania is ethnically Russian, in Latvia and Estonia the number is much higher at a quarter of their entire populations. The three governments have passed laws promoting their official languages and restored citizenship requirements that existed up until 1940, demanding that their Russian minorities apply or risk losing basic rights and guarantees. Russia has interpreted these measures as a form of slow-motion ethnic cleansing intended to coerce Russians to immigrate elsewhere.

When the three states first became independent, in an act of systematic discrimination they distributed non-citizen 'alien' passports to ethnic Russians and excluded them from obtaining citizenship automatically, even if they had lived and worked in a Baltic state for their entire life. In fact, citizenship was not immediately granted to anyone whose ancestry arrived after 1940, a policy that specifically targeted ethnic Russians who without naturalization are left stateless.

For example, when Estonia first declared its independence more than 30% of its population (or every third person) did not have citizenship of the country of residence. This inscribed ethnic division into their society and although many Russians have become naturalized over the last two decades, there are still more than 80,000 in Estonia without determined status who are mostly former Soviet citizens and their descendants. In Latvia, segregation runs even deeper where more than 250,000 Russians (15% of the population) remain stateless. Even when they do become citizens, the parliaments have attempted to pass laws banning non-EU immigrants (predominantly Russians) from possessing voting rights on several occasions. Polls also show the prejudice within their societies, with many Balts indicating they would prefer their Russian-speaking neighbors to repatriate.

Meanwhile, the Russian population has expressed concern about the reemergence of neo-Nazism. The authorities have nurtured holocaust denial, such as the Latvian government objecting to an UNESCO Holocaust exhibition of the Salaspils concentration camp on the basis it would 'tarnish the country's image.' No kidding.

Children held in Salaspils concentration camp in Nazi-occupied Latvia during WWII.

One criteria for the naturalization exams is based on language where in order to become citizens Russians must become fluent in Latvian and Estonian, even though they are such a large minority that in larger cities they often constitute 50% of the population and Russian may be the most spoken language. Simultaneously, any attempt to make Russian a second official language have been struck down. It is a deliberate effort to assimilate the Russian-speaking minority and erase remnants of Soviet culture.

In order to obtain basic entitlements, Russians have to pass the tough naturalization tests which many fail several times (especially the elderly), facing fines and risking losing their employment in the process. The tests are notoriously difficult as Latvian and Estonian languages bear little resemblance to Slavic Russian and are much closer to Finnish.

Apart from ethnicity, 40% of Latvia as a whole identifies as Russian-speaking and have been accustomed to schooling in their native tongue where they already have low career prospects and income rates. Rather than inclusion, they have been mandated to adopt the Baltic languages. Beginning in 2019, the Russian language education options in Latvia will be discontinued altogether in higher education at colleges and universities as well as many secondary schools, which has sparked demonstrations in protest .

Russian-speakers protesting Latvia's language reform laws

It should be made clear that what ethnic Russians experience in the Baltics has its own particularities that make it significantly different from the institutionalized racism and violently enforced segregation that existed in South Africa (or what many believe is applicable to the Palestinians under Israeli occupation). The word apartheid itself originates from the Afrikaans word for 'separateness' (or apart-hood), but an exact comparison is not the real issue. There are many overlapping characteristics that make an analogy arguable.

For instance, the use of an ID system denoting ethnicity and alien status with the inability of Russians to participate in the democratic process or politics. Their reduced standing contributes to a society where ethnic groups often do not intermingle and are concentrated in particular areas with Russians mostly residing in urban cities. Yet even Israel recognized Arabic as a second official language (until 2018), while none of three Baltic states do so for Russian. When referendums have been held on whether to adopt Russian as a second language, the non-citizen communities are excluded from voting, ensuring its inability to pass.

The exams also coerce Russians to accept a nationalist and historically revisionist account of the last century where the Soviet Union is said to have "occupied" the Baltics. A history lesson is needed to understand how this is untrue and based on pure Nazi mythology. During the Romanov dynasty, the Baltic states had been part of the Russian Empire but became independent for the first time in centuries following the February Revolution in 1917.

Along with Belarus and Finland, the Bolsheviks were unable to regain the three republics during the Russian Civil War. During the 1930s, the three nations were officially sovereign states but under their own brutal nationalist regimes. The Soviet liberation of the Baltics can hardly be seen as a 'forceful incorporation' considering what they replaced were not democracies themselves and they were absorbed in order to block Hitlerite expansionism.

Since the restoration of capitalism in Eastern Europe, the Baltic states have waged a campaign of diminishing and obscuring the Holocaust into a 'double genocide' of equal proportions , conflating the Nazis and the Soviets as twin evils. Western 'democracies' have helped obfuscate the truth about the widely misunderstood Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, the treaty of non-belligerence between Germany and the USSR. The 1939 non-aggression pact has been painted as a 'secret alliance' between the Nazis and the Soviets, disregarding that France and Great Britain had done the same with the Germans the previous year with the Munich Agreement.

Only the Soviets are said to have 'conspired' with Hitler, just as when the West fought the Germans it was for 'liberal values' but when the USSR did so it was for competing 'dominion' over Europe. In order to mask their own fascist sympathies, the West has falsified the historical reasons for the accord. In reality, there were measures incorporating the Baltic states into the USSR as part of a mutual defense and assistance against German imperialism and their 'master plan' for the East.

The truth is that the ruling class in the West feared the spread of communism much more than fascism, and actually viewed the rise of Hitler and Mussolini in Europe as an opportunity to crush the Soviet Union. Leading up to WWII, not only was it Western capital investment which financed the rapid buildup of Germany's armed forces, but the U.S., Britain and France did everything within their power to encourage Hitler's aggression toward the USSR. More than once they collectively refused to sign any mutual security alliance with Moscow while appeasing Hitler's expansionism in Czechoslovakia, with the British in particular guilty of sabotaging negotiations to isolate the Soviets and pit them into a war against Germany.

Stalin was well aware the Nazis planned to expand the Lebensraum further East, but the Soviets were in the midst of a rapid industrialization process that accomplished in a single decade what took the British more than a century. They needed time to guarantee they could defeat an offensive by the Wehrmacht, the most powerful and developed military force in the world at the time. It provided an additional year and ten months of further buildup of Soviet armaments  --  if not for this move, it is possible the Germans would never have been stopped twenty kilometers short of Moscow and turned the outcome of the war in their favor. The real reason the pact infuriated the West was because it obligated them into having to fight the Germans, something the imperial powers had hoped to avoid altogether.

More disturbingly, the Baltic governments have drawn from the traditions of the far right by whitewashing the local nationalists that sided with Germany during their invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941 which broke the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. The Nazi collaborators have been restored and normalized as 'freedom fighters' who fought solely for Baltic independence.

The Estonian parliament has even adopted resolutions honoring the Estonian Legion and 20th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Estonian) without any such equivalent measure for the more than 30,000 Estonians who courageously fought in the Red Army.

To most Russians, it is an absolute insult to the 27 million Soviets who died defeating the Nazis, including the Lithuanians, Latvians and Estonians who did so as well. Today, if they wish to become citizens they must swear an oath of allegiance to this rewriting of history which has been made a precondition for obtaining citizenship. The three states also do not recognize the May 9th Victory Day as a holiday, forcing the Russian minority to celebrate it informally.

20th Estonian SS Division

The rehabilitation of the local nationalists who fought alongside the Germans has been done under the false premise that the collaboration was a purely strategic alliance. The Soviets are portrayed as equal to or worse than Nazi Germany, a false equivalency between fascism and communism that is a ubiquitous trait among ultra-rightists today. Tens of thousands of Latvians and Estonians volunteered and were conscripted into legions of the SS which participated in the Holocaust, as did Lithuanians in the Nazi-created Territorial Defense Force and their Security Police.

They did not simply coordinate on the battlefield with the Germans, but directly participated in the methodical slaughter of Jews, Roma and others because they shared their racism. In Lithuania, for example, quislings welcomed the Wehrmacht as liberators and for the next three years under Nazi occupation helped murder 200,000 Jews, nearly 95% of the country's Jewish population, a total which exceeded every other European country in terms of percentage of extermination. It is certain that the only thing that prevented Lithuania's Jews from extinction was the heroism and sacrifice of the Red Army.

Latvians greeting the Red Army after the liberation of Riga

During the Cold War, the US and NATO sought to whitewash certain Nazi war criminals when it suited its strategic interests against the Soviets. This went beyond the Germans themselves, whether it was recruiting their spies for espionage, atomic scientists in Operation Paperclip , or making Hans Speidel the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO in Central Europe.

The Nuremberg Trials had ruled the entire Waffen SS as an organization to be guilty of war crimes during the holocaust, but the US chose to make a distinction between the 15th and 19th SS divisions in Latvia (Latvian Legion) and 20th division in Estonia from the German divisions of the SS. In 1950, the US Displaced Persons Commission determined:

The Baltic Waffen SS Units are to be considered as separate and distinct in purpose, ideology, activities, and qualifications for membership from the German SS, and therefore the Commission holds them not to be a movement hostile to the Government of the United States under Section 13 of the Displaced Persons Act, as amended."

While the displaced persons laws let Jewish refugees into the United States, it also provided cover for the reserved spaces for thousands of Nazi collaborators in an open-door policy providing them safe harbor. Following the end of WWII, many of the former members of the Baltic SS units became anti-Soviet partisans known as the Forest Brothers who carried on a guerilla campaign against the Soviets with the assistance of the CIA and MI6 until it was defeated in mid-50s. Unfortunately, Nikita Khruschev then made one of a series of colossal mistakes by permitting the exiled Baltic nationals to return as part of the de-Stalinisation thaw.

Latvian Legion

The idea that regiments of the Schutzstaffel were fighting purely for Estonian and Latvian independence is a horrifying fabrication in defiance of the overwhelming evidence documented by holocaust historians. The West has exploited this sanitizing of history that reappeared following the reinstatement of free enterprise in eastern Europe which has proliferated the far right in the EU as a whole. Why? It serves their cynical immediate interests in undermining Moscow. The same manipulations are occurring in the Cold War's sequel. Last year, NATO even produced a short film and a-historical reenactment entitled Forest Brothers: Fight for the Baltics , glorifying the anti-Soviet partisans as part of its propaganda effort against Russia.

Any crimes that were committed by the Soviet NKVD during the war are dwarfed by the tens of thousands of Jews and Roma which were exterminated on an industrial level by the Nazis and their co-conspirators using the race theory  --  there is no comparison. Not to mention that the reintroduction of the free market to Eastern Europe killed more people than any period in Soviet history, reducing life expectancy by a decade and undoing seventy years worth of progress. We only ever hear of the faults of socialism and the inflated numbers of losses of life attributed to its failure, never the daily crimes of capitalism or the tens of millions lost in the wars it produces.

he Soviet brand of socialism was far from perfect, but nevertheless a model for what humanity can achieve in the face of tremendous adversity without being shackled by the contradictions of capitalism  --  an industrial society with relative equality in education, wealth, employment and basic necessities. Now that Western capitalism is once again collapsing, it is making friends with nationalists to revise its ugly history and the Russian minority in the Baltics are suffering the consequence. It will continue to apportion blame on the up-and-coming power in Moscow, no longer the quasi-colony of the Yeltsin era, for its soon-to-be expiration. Let us hope it does not start another World War in the midst of it  --  for all our sake.

Max Parry is an independent journalist and geopolitical analyst. His work has appeared in publications such as The Greanville Post, Global Research, CounterPunch and more. Read him on Medium . Max may be reached at [email protected]
20 Comments

Thomas Prentice says September 7, 2018

I did not know about the vote in 1991. Thank you for exposing yet another example of US meddling in elections, i.e. not recognizing the results and essentially forcing a coup via Yeltsin. The war crimes of the US and Israel are beyond comprehension. Loading...
Francis Lee says September 7, 2018
Yes, the Baltics, like the western Ukraine, rolled out the red carpet to the German invaders in 1941. The Nazi genocide was outsourced from Waffen SS and Einsatzgruppen to Baltic Nazis since the numbers involved were too big to handle for the Germans alone.

The Arajs Kommando death squad (also: Sonderkommando Arajs), was led by local SS and collaborators Viktors Arājs, Franz Stahlecker and Robert Stieglitz and a unit of Latvian Auxiliary Police (Lettische Hilfspolizei) which was subordinated to the German Sicherheitsdienst (a special security branch of the German SS). It was a notorious killing unit during the Holocaust. Stahlecker instructed Arajs to set up a commando unit that obtained an official name Latvian Auxiliary Security Police or Arājs Kommando.

The following day on July 2 1941 Arajs learned from Stahlecker during a conference that the Arajs commando had to unleash a pogrom that looked spontaneous and these pogrom-like disorders were to break out before German occupation authorities had been properly established. The Einsatzkommando a sub-group of the SS death squads, belonging to the larger Einsatzgruppen) influenced mobs of former members of Pērkonkrusts (Latvian ultra-nationalists and other extreme right-wing groups) began mass arrests, pillaging and murders of Jews in Riga, which led to death of between 300 to 400 Jews.

Killings continued under the supervision of SS Brigadeführer Walter Stahlecker and ended when more 2,700 Jews had been murdered. The activities of the Einsatzkommando were constrained after the full establishment of the German occupation authority, after which the SS made use of select units of native recruits. German General Wilhelm Ullersperger and Voldemar Weiss, a well known, Latvian nationalist, appealed to the population via a radio address to attack "internal enemies".

During the next few months, activities of the Latvian Auxiliary Security Police was primarily focused on killing Jews, Communists and Red Army stragglers in Latvia as well as in neighbouring Belorussia. The group alone murdered almost half of Latvia's Jewish population, about 26,000 Jews, mainly in November and December 1941. The creation of the Arajs Kommando was "one of the most significant inventions of the early Holocaust", that marked a transition from German organised pogroms to systematic killing of Jews by local volunteers (former army officers, policemen, students, Aizargi).

This helped resolve a chronic problem with German personnel shortages, and provided the Germans with relief from the psychological stress of routinely murdering civilians. By the autumn of 1941, the SS deployed Latvian 'Police Battalions' to Leningrad, where they were consolidated as Latvian Second SS Volunteer Brigade.

In 1943, this brigade, which would later become the Latvian Nineteenth SS Volunteer Division, was consolidated with the Latvian Fifteen SS Volunteer Division to become the Latvian Legion. Although formally the Latvian Legion (Schutzmannschaft or Schuma) was a volunteer Waffen-SS military formation; it was voluntary only by name, because approximately 80-85% of personnel were conscripted into the legion.

Yes lovely people these Batlics. They are now among the poorest countries in Europe and are suffering massive demographic problems as anyone who can, leaves. As my old mother used to say. "God pays debts without money..
"

Loading...
mark says September 7, 2018
People of Russian heritage are denied passports, the right to vote, and any official employment, amongst other forms of discrimination and persecution.
These are sh***y little Nazi countries, with their big annual SS parades. They desecrate war memorials and the graves of Russian soldiers who died liberating the Baltic countries in the war. Many Baltic politicians are US dual citizens, neocons parachuted in after 1991 by the State Department. They are ideologically driven and lose no opportunity to vent their spleen against Russia. They are constantly foolishly provocative towards a neighbour that could be a valuable economic partner. We see the same pattern in Ukraine. The US pulled off a stunt where 10,000 US troops in 1,000 tanks and vehicles drove up and down the Latvian border just a few yards from Russian territory, through communities of predominantly Russian heritage.
Part of this hostility to Russia is probably contrived by the political class to cover up their abject failures since independence. Their economies were looted and hollowed out by western finance capital over the past few decades. They were previously highly developed parts of the Soviet Union with industries like machinery, vehicles and shipbuilding. That is now ancient history. The economy has collapsed, and 25% of the population of Latvia has emigrated, scratching a living doing menial jobs or working as prostitutes in the EU, the only future those countries have. Riga was a natural transit hub for Russia, but faced with official visceral hatred from that quarter, the Russians expanded and developed their own port facilities in the Baltic. Riga has been left as a ghost town. That is why Nordstream has been developed, to replace unreliable partners in neighbouring countries who are always ready to cut off their noses to spite their face and please their US neocon masters. Their loss – they could have made billions from energy transit fees. It's the same story with sanctions, for which the Baltic states were enthusiastic cheerleaders. Russia's counter sanctions against agricultural imports have hit them hard. In the course of events, these countries and Russia would be economic partners for their mutual benefit.
As NATO members, these countries believe they can be as foolishly provocative and offensive to Russia as they wish, like the obnoxious kid in the school playground who spits in somebody's face and runs and hides behind his big brother. Small countries like this can cause a disaster, like Serbia and WW1. They are now failed states, like Ukraine. They are just pawns in a neocon game against Russia. They have no future. Loading...
kevin morris says September 7, 2018
'The Baltic republics made nationalism their official state policy while moving away from Russia's sphere of influence into a closer relationship with the West.'

I strongly supported the Soviet Union and likewise I support the CIS, but this article, frankly, is so partial that it misrepresents the reasons why the Baltic States behaved as they did following the Nazi invasion of 1941 and following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.

There is no mention of Staln's takeover of the Baltic States in 1940. It is clear that Stalin needed those states as a buffer against Germany, but that said, it is fully understandable that many Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians would see the Nazis as liberators and would resent their countries' reabsorption into the Soviet Union in 1944, followed by settlement by Russian nationals including members of the Soviet state apparatus including the KGB. Of course, we may all deplore collaboration with Nazi race policies, especially in Lithuania, but to ignore factors such as Russia's takeover of the Baltic states ignores a major factor at the heart of those countries' treatment of Russians to this day.

The author explains Stalin's wish to forestall the inevitable war with Nazism because the Soviet Union was involved in industrialisation. This is true, but the article ignores the purges that had led to the Red Army being so ineffectual in its war with Finland that Hitler believed that Barbarossa would be a pushover. When one considers that when the Baltic States became part of the Soviet Union, this will have included the apparatus of state terror that Stalin had been visiting upon the rest of the Soviet Union for several years. Contrary to the above whitewashed view of history, Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians had strong grounds for resenting the presence of Russians in their erstwhile independent nations.

I deplore the Baltic States' treatment of ethnic Russians since they gained their independence in September 1991, but ignoring the follies of their Soviet past will do nothing to alleviate their plight.

Loading...
manfromatlan says September 7, 2018
I appreciate the historical background, but the treatment of Ukrainians, Latvians, Estonians and Lithuanians by Stalin might explain their actions in WWII; doesn't excuse them, sorry. Loading...
bevin says September 7, 2018
"erstwhile independent nations."
To be clear these former provinces-highly favoured provinces- in the Russian Empire had been 'independent' since 1921.And thanks in part too to the Bolshevik doctrine that the Czarist Empire was a 'prison house of peoples.'
No doubt many in the Baltic states resented the invasion of the Red Army but it was only a small minority which celebrated by killing Jews and enrolling in the siege of Leningrad.
In more modern terms there is no reason why these three states, and Ukraine, could not thrive independently without setting themselves up as bases for provocations against Russia and convenient locations for US torture chambers.
The people of Ireland suffered far more under the British Empire than the Balts did under St Petersburg but that did not lead to more than a handful of Irishmen, if that many, in the Second World War joining the SS. Loading...
Big B says September 7, 2018
This article takes no account of the threat posed to our allies in NATO, Eastern Europe, and to the security of the world due to the rising tensions of recent years. Now, more than ever, in the wake of Salisbury attack, we need to stress to our European counterparts in the governments of the Baltic States, that we wish to work with them to maximise the power of collective sanctions against violations of international law – whether by Russia or anyone else. I think we should make clear that our UK commitment to such collective action will not be diminished by Brexit. Similarly, now more than ever, it is vital that the UK and all other NATO members make it clear to all our allies in the Baltic States, and elsewhere, that we want to protect peace and security on the borders, without ramping up tensions unnecessarily, and that such a commitment is not conditional on their levels of defence spending.

Tory defence spending cuts have put Britain's security at risk.. I think the next Labour government should commit to boost our military obligations, above the benchmark of 2% GDP, in line with the last Labour government's commitment to NATO.

Loading...
FS says September 7, 2018
Who are you and what have you done with Big B? Loading...
vexarb says September 7, 2018
This is the second parody posted by BigB. A parody so skilful, such inane stringing together of non-sequiturs to an insane c,nclusion, it might have come from the very lips of blessed Theresa of Westminster. Loading...
Big B says September 7, 2018
Very close, Vex: St Jeremy of Islington North. Most of it is verbatim, with some reworded conjunctions. The source text is from Hansard 26/03/18. The last para is a reword taken from quote in John Pilger's excellent article about Labour's non-existent foreign policy which would likely be imperialistic. Or the vague platitude of a return to 'Robin Cook ethical diplomacy' of starting three wars in two years and selling Hawk aircraft to Mugabe.

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/10/06/the-rise-of-britains-new-politics/

It struck me recently when I point out the actual words that JC says, I take the flak. To prove a point (if only to myself) I posted his own (disguised) words to see how people would react. The source text for yesterday was his reply to Treason May, when she announced the two counterfeit suspects for the fabricated Novijoke crime against the intelligence.

It is my supposition that very few know the full context of what is said, relying on media soundbites instead. The media pick a single phrase – such as only saying "evidence points strongly" – and contrast with Bojo's "weaselly words" to construct an entirely inauthentic narrative. It is a pseudo-oppressor/oppressed narrative that creates a false sense of pity and invokes an invented victim mentality (we all know how Brit's love an underdog!).

Anyway, I surmised his words were weaselly, though not in the context of the received culture machine narrative but in themselves, taken in their given context (in Parliament and later in Hansard). They amount to a servile connivance with power (a power that provides the testimony and meaning to the hollow phonemes).

I could have just said that, but I decided to post the slightly disguised text to make a point. Point made.

Loading...
mog says September 7, 2018
we don't see things as they are, we see things as we are. Loading...
manfromatlan says September 7, 2018
I thought I recognized those words from JC. In fact, I tweeted it! Big disappointment then https://twitter.com/manfromatlan/status/1033028635651788800 Loading...
JudyJ says September 7, 2018
Karen Pierce's utterances could come across as masterful parody but unfortunately she's deadly (literally and metaphorically) serious. Loading...
Frankly Speaking says September 7, 2018
Do they pay you per comment or per word? Loading...
Big B says September 7, 2018
Both! And I get a double for replying to replies! Loading...
curri says September 7, 2018
Soviet "Communism" was de facto never more than a branch of Anglo-American bourgeois progressivism. A geopolitical rivalry developed between the two factions after the defeat of Germany. Note that Western capitalists built the Soviet industrial base in the 1920s and 1930s, so it was obvious they were not seen as a threat then:
http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Others/Others-Doc-ConspiracyTheory&NWO/+Doc-ConspiracyTheory-FalseEnemies/TheWestFinancedSoviets.htm
( )
American technical leadership began to replace German leadership in rebuilding the Soviet Union.

"Of the agreements in force in mid-1929, 27 were with German companies, 15 were with United States firms and the remaining ones were primarily with British and French firms. In the last six months of 1929, the number of technical agreements with U.S. firms jumped to more than 40." (Sutton, Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development, 1917-1930, pp. 346-347).
The new program was announced, however, only "after a sequence of construction and technical-assistance contracts with Western companies had been let. The Freyn-Gipromez technical agreement for design and construction of giant metallurgical plants is economically and technically the most important." (Ibid., p. 347).

EXTENT OF AID "ALMOST UNBELIEVABLE"
During the early thirties, the amount and type of "aid and comfort" to the Soviet Union was almost unbelievable. In 1930 the Ford Motor Company established the Russian motor car industry by constructing a factory "capable of turning out 140,000 cars a year." By the end of the decade the factory, at Gorki, was one of the largest in the world. Ford also provided training for the Russians in assembling automobiles "plus patent licenses, technical assistance, and advice," and "an inventory of spare parts." (Keller, East Minus West Equals Zero, pp. 208-209, 215-216). Americans also built, in the Soviet Union, the largest iron and steel works in the world; patterned after the city of Gary, Indiana. The huge steel complex, built at Maginitogorsk, was constructed by a Cleveland firm. (Ibid., pp. 209-210).

LARGEST TRACTOR FACTORY IN THE WORLD
The largest tractor factory in the world was another American contribution to Soviet technology.

"Tractors were a necessity to modernize Soviet agriculture. A Detroit engineer designed and constructed a tractor factory without parallel in any other country. The assembly works were 2,000 feet long and 650 feet wide, covering an area of thirty acres. Twenty-one American football fields would fit into just one building, with locker rooms for the players. The tractors produced were copies of the American Caterpillar Company, but there were no arrangements made for payment for use of the patent. Russia merely bought one sample and copied it. The factory was so designed that production could be adopted almost overnight to the production of another less innocuous commodity – tanks." (Ibid., p. 213).
( )

Russia today is clearly not seen as a partner of Western neoliberalism/progressivism. Therefore, Putin (along with Trump) has become the new Hitler.

Loading...
vexarb says September 7, 2018
Curri, thank you for presenting that healthy corrective to my previous one-sided view; up till now I had read only of US aid to Nazi Germany. Loading...
bevin says September 7, 2018
To put these observations into context it must be understood that the Soviet government-obsessed with a crude mechanistic theory of economic development and desperately trying to reproduce all of the 'stages' of economic progress into a succession of Five Year Plans- bled the peasantry and working class dry in order to pay for what Curri calls a partnership. The industrialists, largely Anglo Saxon, who jump started Russian industry after the catastrophes of war and civil war extorted a heavy price, in hard currency, for their 'aid.'
The notion that the Soviet Union, even under Stalin, was accepted as a partner by the west is historically illiterate. The record is clear. And clarified further by the continuity in Foreign Policy which was (and is) the Cold War. Loading...
candideschmyles says September 7, 2018
200,000 Jews in Lithuania alone! And they give all this fuss over Corbyns reluctance to conflate anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism.
I knew there was prejudice in these northern Baltic states but this piece has shocked me. I now understand the self deprecating remarks made to me recently by a supermarket cashier over her being a Russian speaking Lithuanian. Next time I see her I will make a point of offering her my solidarity.
I meet many of these northerners in my work. Now I have some of this background I can ask pertinent questions. Loading...
bevin says September 7, 2018
It would be a mistake to discover the cause for this discrimination in popular prejudice. The actual reason lies in the determination of the ruling class to maintain fascist-collaborationist successor politicians in power.
These politicians, many of whom had origins in expatriate communities in the west, after fleeing their homelands in the baggage of the Wehrmacht and SS, have been finding it very difficult to survive after leading their countries into economic disaster mitigated only by the welcome boost that NATO bases bring to countries in which unemployment rates are at levels not seen since the 1930s.
Like their predecessors they have turned to racism and fascism to prop themselves up.
What is true of the Baltic states is even truer of Ukraine, where Russian speakers constitute a persecuted majority, and where the Speaker of the Rada is on record, this past week, as being inspired by the Fuhrer who he sees as the greatest democrat of the C20th.
As racism and fascism spread westwards into Austria, Germany and elsewhere the complacence of western 'liberals' in cosseting and subsidising the sources of infection is largely to blame. It is of course history repeating itself: the fascism of eastern europe in the 1930s was also sponsored and armed by the 'democracies' of the west. And for the same reason: to keep Russia at bay.

[Sep 07, 2018] But all those crazy US neocons still managed to imposed on Russia sanctions because of its interference in the elections. That tells us something about the US congress by Kononenko

Slightly edited Google translation
Notable quotes:
"... I am interested in another, a very simple question: why? Why would Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea interfere in the US midterm elections? What they want to achieve. All right, let's drop all the others, let's just talk about us, Russians. ..."
"... The same hackers who broke into the DNC and stole Hillary Clinton emails now will steal midterm elections. But from whom? Do you understand anything? Personally, I don't understand anymore. Which Party we support? Who is the target of our effort to interfere in the USA elections. Are we promoting Repubs or DemoRats ? ..."
"... Perhaps the head of the US national intelligence Daniel Coates is right when he declared that "their goal is to divide and undermine our democratic values." Well, let's suppose that we really are against those sacred values. ..."
"... But the midterm elections will still be held, despite any interference. And one of candidates will win, while the other will lose. If we see no difference in candidates why we should interfere? ..."
"... Looks like Daniel Coats think that the world government is us. No, I'd certainly like the idea, even if this requires smoking something really strong (let's use Musk as a lodestar ;-). But I'm afraid we're not capable to serve in this role. After economic rape of 1991 we are too poor. And to serve the role of world government you better be rich. ..."
"... why we Russians should interfere in already completely messed up US elections, which typically equal to a force choice between two equally unacceptable candidates, already chosen and vetted by neoliberal elite. Like Trump vs. Hillary. why we should play this game of "the lesser evil." It's plain vanilla stupidity. ..."
Sep 07, 2018 | kononenkome.livejournal.com

According to popular belief, the cold war ended with the victory of the United States of America. And, accordingly, the demice of the Soviet Union. However, what exactly represent such a victory is not that easy to understand. Instead of one conservative, and therefore predictable player, the United States received a half dozen countries, of which only three or four are loyal, with other living by "the laws of jungles" (sorry free market). The number of aimed at American cities Intercontinental ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads remained approximately the same as before the infamous "victory." And strategic atomic submarines remained, and strategic bombers. There are less of them, for sure, but they are more modern and more dngerous with more sophisticated weaponry. In any ccase remaining are still enough to make the winner to feel like a loser after b=neclear apolaipsys. And the idfea of victory is that the victor is the master (in this case the master of the plant). Am I missing something ?

Of course, another inquisitive observer will tell us about the controlled chaos, about the growing influence and plans for the establishing of the world neoliberal government. I was impressed by the recent revelation of Senator John Tester, who said that Putin is promoting communism in America. As the idea that this senator is a complete idiot who does not understand the Russia rejected communism as a dead-born system is pretty absurd. I would venture to assume that it might be that Russia did something that can with some stretch be qualifies as an attempt to influence the USA election, but, alas, Putin has no strategic plan, not the intention. First of all this would be pretty idiotic idea as two candidates were equally bad for Russia and it was completely unclear who is worse.

But all those crazy US neocons still managed to imposed on Russia sanctions because of its "interference in the elections." That tells us something about the US congress. I do not want to write about the lack of evidence and absurdity of the arguments again. I've already written a lot about it. No, let's stop talking about the past and try to look into the future.

The US President's national security adviser John Bolton (who theoretically should be a sanest person in the administration) recently said that the US is concerned about the potential for interference in the midterm elections to the Congress of four countries. Russia, China, Iran and North Korea. "I will not go into details of what I saw or didn't see, but I tell you that in the 2018 elections, these four countries raise the greatest fears," proclaim this highly placed Presidential adviser.

Theoretically it make some sense. Any man with a knife has a potential to kill. Any country with nuclear weapons has the potential to strike at the US. Any country with developed IT has a potential opportunity to interfere in elections with the help of cyber attacks. For example, Israel. But it is not a good idea to scare the American voter with Israel. No, he/she should be confused, and he/she should be afraid of potential menace. And this external enemy should unite fragmented by neoliberal excesses country (for this purpose those good-for nothing people grazing in State Department and Spaso House (The US embassy in Moscow) should constantly accuse the Russian authorities of all sorts nefarious activities. So there is nothing new here: Great Britain uses similar dirty tricks against Russia for centuries. I am interested in another, a very simple question: why? Why would Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea interfere in the US midterm elections? What they want to achieve. All right, let's drop all the others, let's just talk about us, Russians.

What do we want? Let's say we want the midterms to be won by the Republicans. Then explain to me why Republican John Bolton fears this. If there's anything John Bolton should be afraid of, it's that Russia will intervene in the midterms in order to win the Democrats. But The Washington Post writes that "the leaders of the Democratic party of the United States fear the potential interference of Russia and start to increase its presence in anticipation of the interim election cycle on such platforms as Facebook and Twitter." President Trump writes on Twitter that Russia will" make a lot of effort " to intervene in the midterm elections on the side of the Democrats. Microsoft claims that Russian hackers created fake websites of Republican organizations in order to collect information about Republicans. The same hackers who broke into the DNC and stole Hillary Clinton emails now will steal midterm elections. But from whom? Do you understand anything? Personally, I don't understand anymore. Which Party we support? Who is the target of our effort to interfere in the USA elections. Are we promoting Repubs or DemoRats ?

Perhaps the head of the US national intelligence Daniel Coates is right when he declared that "their goal is to divide and undermine our democratic values." Well, let's suppose that we really are against those sacred values.

But the midterm elections will still be held, despite any interference. And one of candidates will win, while the other will lose. If we see no difference in candidates why we should interfere? If the net result for us anyway will be the same: more sanctions? Here we should go back to the idea of "controlled chaos" and world government. Looks like Daniel Coats think that the world government is us. No, I'd certainly like the idea, even if this requires smoking something really strong (let's use Musk as a lodestar ;-). But I'm afraid we're not capable to serve in this role. After economic rape of 1991 we are too poor. And to serve the role of world government you better be rich.

Again the question arise, why we should interfere in he USA elections. Only if we are out for revenge, "eye for eye" principle as they interfered in ours. There's no other reasonable answer. But even in this case, why we Russians should interfere in already completely messed up US elections, which typically equal to a force choice between two equally unacceptable candidates, already chosen and vetted by neoliberal elite. Like Trump vs. Hillary. why we should play this game of "the lesser evil." It's plain vanilla stupidity.

And before we get the answer to this fundamental question "Why?" there can be no further questions. None. Moreover, no other questions are needed. So let them just explain to us why we should interfere and how we can benefit from such an interference, and we will try our best. Before that, let's just watch.

And when they explain this to us, we can communicate the answer to China, Iran and North Korea free of charge.

[Sep 07, 2018] 'Made up frauds' Book claims Trump is called an 'idiot' by aides wanted to 'fking kill' Assad

Sep 05, 2018 | www.rt.com

President Trump and those close to him have challenged the narrative of Bob Woodward's new book, which portrays him as "a 5th-grader" ready to make rash decisions, such as ordering the assassination of Assad.

"The Woodward book has already been refuted and discredited by General (Secretary of Defense) James Mattis and General (Chief of Staff) John Kelly," Trump tweeted on Tuesday afternoon, after excerpts from the book were published by the Washington Post and other publications. The manuscript, which is scheduled for release next week, contains many quotes that were "made up frauds," Trump said, calling the book's narrative "a con on the public."

The Woodward book has already been refuted and discredited by General (Secretary of Defense) James Mattis and General (Chief of Staff) John Kelly. Their quotes were made up frauds, a con on the public. Likewise other stories and quotes. Woodward is a Dem operative? Notice timing?

-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 4, 2018

Rejecting the claims that senior aides have been plucking sensitive documents off his desk to prevent him from making rash decisions, Trump noted in an exclusive interview with the Daily Caller that the bulk of the stories in the book were just a compilation of "nasty stuff" totally "made up" by the famed Watergate Washington Post reporter.

'She's a lowlife!' Trump explodes over former aide Omarosa's claims of his 'racist' rants

Trump was not the only one to slam Woodward's claims, which present the US leader as an impulsive decision-maker, who is sometimes called an "idiot" and a "liar" even by those closest to him:

Trump ordered Mattis to 'f**king kill' Assad

One of the excerpts from the book claims the president ordered Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis to assassinate the Syrian leader following the 2017 Idlib chemical incident. "Let's f**king kill him! Let's go in. Let's kill the f**king lot of them," Trump allegedly told Mattis. "We're not going to do any of that. We're going to be much more measured," the defense secretary allegedly told one of his senior staffers after that.

Following the controversial claim, US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley denied that Trump ever planned to assassinate Assad. "I have not once ever heard the president talk about assassinating Assad," she told reporters at UN headquarters.

"Mr. Woodward never discussed or verified the alleged quotes included in his book with Secretary Mattis or anyone within the DOD," a Pentagon spokesman, Col. Rob Manning, added.

Mattis compared Trump to '5th or 6th grader'

Woodward claims that Trump once asked Mattis why the US backs South Korea militarily and financially, prompting the defense secretary to tell close associates afterward that Trump had the understanding of a fifth or sixth grader. "Secretaries of defense don't always get to choose the president they work for," Mattis allegedly said in another instance.

Mattis personally rejected the claim made in the book. "In serving in this administration, the idea that I would show contempt for the elected Commander-in-Chief, President Trump, or tolerate disrespect to the office of the President from within our Department of Defense, is a product of someone's rich imagination," he said.

Chief of Staff described Trump as an 'unhinged idiot'

"He's an idiot. It's pointless to try to convince him of anything. He's gone off the rails. We're in crazytown," Woodward quotes White House Chief of Staff John Kelly as saying at a staff meeting in his office. "I don't even know why any of us are here. This is the worst job I've ever had."

Kelly, however, has firmly denied the allegations, dismissing the chapter about him as "total BS."

Staff snatched documents from Trump's desk fearing he might sign them

Former Chief Economic Adviser Gary Cohn, according to Woodward, once saw a draft letter on the Oval Office desk that would have withdrawn the US from a trade agreement with South Korea. "I stole it off his desk," Cohn told an associate, allegedly terrified Trump might sign it. "I wouldn't let him see it. He's never going to see that document. Got to protect the country." Former staff secretary Rob Porter, who handled the flow of presidential papers, allegedly used similar tactics on several occasions.

However, according to White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders, the entire book is nothing more than a bunch of "fabricated stories" told by "disgruntled" former employees to make the president "look bad."

Egypt's president wondered if Trump was 'going to be around' for long

According to Woodward, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi is one of the world leaders who was worried the infamous Mueller probe might eventually result in impeachment. "Donald, I'm worried about this investigation. Are you going to be around?" al-Sisi allegedly said. Trump supposedly later told his lawyer that the question was "like a kick in the nuts."

Amid the barrage of firm denials by Trump and his team, Woodward reiterated that he "stands by" his reporting and the book's contents.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

[Sep 07, 2018] 'Not Watergate, just gossip' Pulitzer winner on Bob Woodward's new anti-Trump bombshell

Notable quotes:
"... "This is very different from Watergate. This is gossip. Much of it is anonymous gossip, so it feeds this neverending reality television show political drama that cable news channels like CNN are making quite a bit of money off of," ..."
"... "It's always something, it's endless burlesque, and this feeds into this kind of narrative." ..."
"... "a little more likely to side with Woodward on this one," ..."
"... "At the same time, 70 percent of the people in this country are in pretty severe economic distress, and their voices are not being heard at all, and I think that that's why Trump's base remains firm, because these people have been rendered invisible by the press... that has just become a giant carnival act," ..."
"... "shady world of anonymous sources" ..."
"... "Institutions like the New York Times... use language about the president that would've been wholly unacceptable when I was there. Calling him a liar day in and day out – that doesn't mean he didn't lie, but presidents lie all the time, and every administration I covered lied, starting with the Reagan administration. This is really a war on the part of the establishment press, the Washington establishment, to take down Trump." ..."
Sep 07, 2018 | www.rt.com

The paradoxical era of anonymous anti-Trump reporting has turned once-solid journalism into a carnival of unverifiable accusations. True or not, they distract from real issues, says Pulitzer prize winning journalist Chris Hedges. A new bombshell book about the horrors of Trump's White House is about to hit the shelves. This time it's not penned by a disgruntled former official, but the world-famous Bob Woodward – the investigative journalist who uncovered the 1970s Watergate scandal that brought down President Richard Nixon. Only this time, instead of doing solid, verifiable journalism, he is peddling damning claims by anonymous sources, says Chris Hedges, a Pulitzer prize winning journalist and author.

"This is very different from Watergate. This is gossip. Much of it is anonymous gossip, so it feeds this neverending reality television show political drama that cable news channels like CNN are making quite a bit of money off of," – Mr. Hedges told RT. "It's always something, it's endless burlesque, and this feeds into this kind of narrative."

This doesn't mean accusations against Trump are necessarily false – in fact, Mr. Hedges says he's "a little more likely to side with Woodward on this one," – but it does draw attention from America's real issues, and thus further entrenches Trump's voter base.

Read more 'Made up frauds'? Book claims Trump is called an 'idiot' by aides & wanted to 'f**king kill' Assad

"At the same time, 70 percent of the people in this country are in pretty severe economic distress, and their voices are not being heard at all, and I think that that's why Trump's base remains firm, because these people have been rendered invisible by the press... that has just become a giant carnival act," Mr. Hedges says.

The "shady world of anonymous sources" has enabled phenomena like the recent New York Times op-ed by a supposed anonymous White House insider, claiming there's a 'Resistance' hotbed within the heart of the presidency. Chris Hedges, who has worked at the NYT for 15 years himself, says the media's war on the president is like nothing he has seen before.

"Institutions like the New York Times... use language about the president that would've been wholly unacceptable when I was there. Calling him a liar day in and day out – that doesn't mean he didn't lie, but presidents lie all the time, and every administration I covered lied, starting with the Reagan administration. This is really a war on the part of the establishment press, the Washington establishment, to take down Trump."

[Sep 07, 2018] Guardian continues to push Woodward book linking it to NYT anonymous op-ed

Whoever it was, this "gutless" person seems pretty craven, opportunistic neocon of McCain flavor. Most neocons are chickenhawks. And there are plenty of neocons in Trump administration.
It might well be that anonymous "resistance" op-ed in NYT is CIA operation to promote Woodward's book ( Woodward is definitely connected to CIA from the time of Nixon impeachment)
Notable quotes:
"... You are not protecting this country, you are sabotaging it with your cowardly actions ..."
Sep 07, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

During an interview with Fox and Friends, conducted onstage prior to Trump's rally and set to air on Friday, the president called the paper's decision to publish the column "very unfair".

"When somebody writes and you can't discredit because you have no idea who they are," Trump said. "It may not be a Republican, it may not be a conservative, it may be a deep state person that's been there a long time.

It's a very unfair thing, but it's very unfair to our country and to the millions of people that voted really for us."

Since the editorial was published, the highest-ranking officials in Trump's administration have come forth to publicly deny any involvement. Those distancing themselves from the column have included the vice-president, Mike Pence, and the secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, along with much of Trump's cabinet. The first lady, Melania Trump, also condemned the author and called on the individual to come forward.

"You are not protecting this country, you are sabotaging it with your cowardly actions," she wrote.

The editorial was published as the White House was contending with yet another firestorm.

A book authored by the famed journalist Bob Woodward , poised for release next week, chronicles the chaos and dysfunction within the Trump administration.

Excerpts released on Tuesday provided an unflattering portrait of the president, who was described by aides in disparaging terms that included being likened to a schoolchild.

[Sep 07, 2018] Making Russia 'The Enemy' – Consortiumnews

Notable quotes:
"... America's Stolen Narrative, ..."
"... It is the country where school children put on monthly plays and begin to recite poetry in first grade. ..."
"... Russia did not hack German voting machines so that Angela Merkel's total percentage would be less than projected. ..."
"... Oh by the way Craig Murray was relieved of his British post. Not quite sure why. ..."
Sep 07, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Making Russia 'The Enemy' December 15, 2016 • 156 Comments

Save

Exclusive: Despite conflicting accounts about who leaked the Democratic emails, the frenzy over an alleged Russian role is driving the U.S. deeper into a costly and dangerous New Cold War, writes Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

The rising hysteria about Russia is best understood as fulfilling two needs for Official Washington: the Military Industrial Complex's transitioning from the "war on terror" to a more lucrative "new cold war" – and blunting the threat that a President Trump poses to the neoconservative/liberal-interventionist foreign-policy establishment.

By hyping the Russian "threat," the neocons and their liberal-hawk sidekicks, who include much of the mainstream U.S. news media, can guarantee bigger military budgets from Congress. The hype also sets in motion a blocking maneuver to impinge on any significant change in direction for U.S. foreign policy under Trump.

Wintery scene at Red Square in Moscow, Dec. 6, 2016. (Photo by Robert Parry)

Some Democrats even hope to stop Trump from ascending to the White House by having the Central Intelligence Agency, in effect, lobby the electors in the Electoral College with scary tales about Russia trying to fix the election for Trump.

The electors meet on Dec. 19 when they will formally cast their votes, supposedly reflecting the judgments of each state's voters, but conceivably individual electors could switch their ballots from Trump to Hillary Clinton or someone else.

On Thursday, liberal columnist E.J. Dionne Jr. joined the call for electors to flip, writing : "The question is whether Trump, Vladimir Putin and, perhaps, Clinton's popular-vote advantage give you sufficient reason to blow up the system."

That Democrats would want the CIA, which is forbidden to operate domestically in part because of its historic role in influencing elections in other countries, to play a similar role in the United States shows how desperate the Democratic Party has become.

And, even though The New York Times and other big news outlets are reporting as flat fact that Russia hacked the Democratic email accounts and gave the information to WikiLeaks, former British Ambassador Craig Murray, a close associate of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, told the London Daily Mail that he personally received the email data from a "disgusted" Democrat.

Murray said he flew from London to Washington for a clandestine handoff from one of the email sources in September, receiving the package in a wooded area near American University.

Former British Ambassador Craig Murray

"Neither of [the leaks, from the Democratic National Committee or Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta] came from the Russians," Murray said, adding: "the source had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks."

Murray said the insider felt "disgust at the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the tilting of the primary election playing field against Bernie Sanders." Murray added that his meeting was with an intermediary for the Democratic leaker, not the leaker directly.

[ Update: Murray subsequently said his contact with the intermediary at American University was not for the purpose of obtaining a batch of the purloined emails, as the Daily Mail reported, since WikiLeaks already had them. He said the Mail simply added that detail to the story, but Murray declined to explain why he had the meeting at A.U. with the whistleblower or an associate.]

If Murray's story is true, it raises several alternative scenarios: that the U.S. intelligence community's claims about a Russian hack are false; that Russians hacked the Democrats' emails for their own intelligence gathering without giving the material to WikiLeaks; or that Murray was deceived about the identity of the original leaker.

But the uncertainty creates the possibility that the Democrats are using a dubious CIA assessment to reverse the outcome of an American presidential election, in effect, making the CIA party to a preemptive domestic "regime change."

Delayed Autopsy

All of this maneuvering also is delaying the Democratic Party's self-examination into why it lost so many white working-class voters in normally Democratic strongholds, such as Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.

Rather than national party leaders taking the blame for pre-selecting a very flawed candidate and ignoring all the warning signs about the public's resistance to this establishment choice, Democrats have pointed fingers at almost everyone else – from FBI Director James Comey for briefly reviving Clinton's email investigation, to third-party candidates who siphoned off votes, to the archaic Electoral College which negates the fact that Clinton did win the national popular vote – and now to the Russians.

FBI Director James Comey

While there may be some validity to these various complaints, the excessive frenzy that has surrounded the still-unproven claims that the Russian government surreptitiously tilted the election in Trump's favor creates an especially dangerous dynamic.

On one level, it has led Democrats to support Orwellian/ McCarthyistic concepts, such as establishing "black lists" for Internet sites that question Official Washington's "conventional wisdom" and thus are deemed purveyors of "Russian propaganda" or "fake news."

On another level, it cements the Democratic Party as America's preeminent "war party," favoring an escalating New Cold War with Russia by ratcheting up economic sanctions against Moscow, and even seeking military challenges to Russia in conflict zones such as Syria and Ukraine.

One of the most dangerous aspects of a prospective Hillary Clinton presidency was that she would have appointed neocons, such as Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland and her husband, Project for the New American Century co-founder Robert Kagan, to high-level foreign policy positions.

Though that risk may have passed assuming Clinton's Electoral College defeat on Monday, Democrats now are excitedly joining the bash-Russia movement, making it harder to envision how the party can transition back into its more recent role as the "peace party" (at least relative to the extremely hawkish Republicans).

Trading Places

The potential trading places of the two parties in that regard – with Trump favoring geopolitical détente and the Democrats beating the drums for more military confrontations – augurs poorly for the Democrats regaining their political footing anytime soon.

Red Square in Moscow with a winter festival to the left and the Kremlin to the right, on Dec. 6, 2016. (Photo by Robert Parry)

If Democratic leaders press ahead, in alliance with neoconservative Republicans, on demands for escalating the New Cold War with Russia, they could precipitate a party split between Democratic hawks and doves, a schism that likely would have occurred if Clinton had been elected but now may happen anyway, albeit without the benefit of the party holding the White House.

The first test of this emerging Democratic-neocon alliance may come over Trump's choice for Secretary of State, Exxon-Mobil's chief executive Rex Tillerson, who doesn't exhibit the visceral hatred of Russian President Vladimir Putin that Democrats are encouraging.

As an international business executive, Tillerson appears to share Trump's real-politik take on the world, the idea that doing business with rivals makes more sense than conspiring to force "regime change" after "regime change."

Over the past several decades, the "regime change" approach has been embraced by both neocons and liberal interventionists and has been implemented by both Republican and Democratic administrations. Sometimes, it's done through war and other times through "color revolutions" – always under the idealistic guise of "democracy promotion" or "protecting human rights."

But the problem with this neo-imperialist strategy has been that it has failed miserably to improve the lives of the people living in the "regime-changed" countries. Instead, it has spread chaos across wide swaths of the globe and has now even destabilized Europe.

Yet, the solution, as envisioned by the neocons and their liberal-hawk understudies, is simply to force more "regime change" medicine down the throats of the world's population. The new "great" idea is to destabilize nuclear-armed Russia by making its economy scream and by funding as many anti-Putin elements as possible to create the nucleus for a "color revolution" in Moscow.

To justify that risky scheme, there has been a broad expansion of anti-Russian propaganda now being funded with tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer money as well as being pushed by government officials giving off-the-record briefings to mainstream media outlets.

However, as with earlier "regime change" plans, the neocons and liberal hawks never think through the scenario to the end. They always assume that everything is going to work out fine and some well-dressed "opposition leader" who has been to their think-tank conferences will simply ascend to the top job.

Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland during a press conference at the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, Ukraine, on Feb. 7, 2014. (U.S. State Department photo)

Remember, in Iraq, it was going to be Ahmed Chalabi who was beloved in Official Washington but broadly rejected by the Iraqi people. In Libya, there has been a parade of U.S.-approved "unity" leaders who have failed to pull that country together.

In Ukraine, Nuland's choice – Arseniy "Yats is the guy" Yatsenyuk – resigned amid broad public disapproval earlier this year after pushing through harsh cuts in social programs, even as the U.S.-backed regime officials in Kiev continued to plunder Ukraine's treasury and misappropriate Western economic aid.

Nuclear-Armed Destabilization

But the notion of destabilizing nuclear-armed Russia is even more hare-brained than those other fiascos. The neocon/liberal-hawk assumption is that Russians – pushed to the brink of starvation by crippling Western sanctions – will overthrow Putin and install a new version of Boris Yeltsin who would then let U.S. financial advisers return with their neoliberal "shock therapy" of the 1990s and again exploit Russia's vast resources.

Indeed, it was the Yeltsin era and its Western-beloved "shock therapy" that created the desperate conditions before the rise of Putin with his autocratic nationalism, which, for all its faults, has dramatically improved the lives of most Russians.

Bright lights on Red Square, Dec. 6, 2016. (Photo by Robert Parry)

So, the more likely result from the neocon/liberal-hawk "regime change" plans for Moscow would be the emergence of someone even more nationalistic – and likely far less stable – than Putin, who is regarded even by his critics as cold and calculating.

The prospect of an extreme Russian nationalist getting his or her hands on the Kremlin's nuclear codes should send chills up and down the spines of every American, indeed every human being on the planet. But it is the course that key national Democrats appear to be on with their increasingly hysterical comments about Russia.

The Democratic National Committee issued a statement on Wednesday accusing Trump of giving Russia "an early holiday gift that smells like a payoff. It's rather easy to connect the dots. Russia meddled in the U.S. election in order to benefit Trump and now he's repaying Vladimir Putin by nominating Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson as secretary of state."

Besides delaying a desperately needed autopsy on why Democrats did so badly in an election against the also-widely-disliked Donald Trump, the new blame-Russia gambit threatens to hurt the Democrats and their preferred policies in another way.

If Democrats vote in bloc against Tillerson or other Trump foreign-policy nominees – demanding that he appoint people acceptable to the neocons and the liberal hawks – Trump might well be pushed deeper into the arms of right-wing Republicans, giving them more on domestic issues to solidify their support on his foreign-policy goals.

That could end up redounding against the Democrats as they watch important social programs gutted in exchange for their own dubious Democratic alliance with the neocons.

Since the presidency of Bill Clinton, the Democrats have courted factions of the neocons, apparently thinking they are influential because they dominate many mainstream op-ed pages and Washington think tanks. In 1993, as a thank-you gift to the neocon editors of The New Republic for endorsing him, Clinton appointed neocon ideologue James Woolsey as head of the CIA, one of Clinton's more disastrous personnel decisions.

But the truth appears to be that the neocons have much less influence across the U.S. electoral map than the Clintons think. Arguably, their pandering to a clique of Washington insiders who are viewed as warmongers by many peace-oriented Democrats may even represent a net negative when it comes to winning votes.

I've communicated with a number of traditional Democrats who didn't vote for Hillary Clinton because they feared she would pursue a dangerous neocon foreign policy . Obviously, that's not a scientific survey, but the anecdotal evidence suggests that Clinton's neocon connections could have been another drag on her campaign.

Assessing Russia

I also undertook a limited personal test regarding whether Russia is the police state that U.S. propaganda depicts, a country yearning to break free from the harsh grip of Vladimir Putin (although he registers 80 or so percent approval in polls).

Couple walking along the Kremlin wall, Dec. 7, 2016. (Photo by Robert Parry)

During my trip last week to Europe, which included stops in Brussels and Copenhagen, I decided to take a side trip to Moscow, which I had never visited before. What I encountered was an impressive, surprisingly (to me at least) Westernized city with plenty of American and European franchises, including the ubiquitous McDonald's and Starbucks. (Russians serve the Starbucks gingerbread latte with a small ginger cookie.)

Though senior Russian officials proved unwilling to meet with me, an American reporter, at this time of tensions, Russia had little appearance of a harshly repressive society. In my years covering U.S. policies in El Salvador in the 1980s and Haiti in the 1990s, I have experienced what police states look and feel like, where death squads dump bodies in the streets. That was not what I sensed in Moscow, just a modern city with people bustling about their business under early December snowfalls.

The police presence in Red Square near the Kremlin was not even as heavy-handed as it is near the government buildings of Washington. Instead, there was a pre-Christmas festive air to the brightly lit Red Square, featuring a large skating rink surrounded by small stands selling hot chocolate, toys, warm clothing and other goods.

Granted, my time and contact with Russians were limited – since I don't speak Russian and most of them don't speak English – but I was struck by the contrast between the grim images created by Western media and the Russia that I saw.

It reminded me of how President Ronald Reagan depicted Sandinista-ruled Nicaragua as a "totalitarian dungeon" with a militarized state ready to march on Texas, but what I found when I traveled to Managua was a third-world country still recovering from an earthquake and with a weak security structure despite the Contra war that Reagan had unleashed against Nicaragua.

In other words, " perception management " remains the guiding principle of how the U.S. government deals with the American people, scaring us with exaggerated tales of foreign threats and then manipulating our fears and our misperceptions.

As dangerous as that can be when we're talking about Nicaragua or Iraq or Libya, the risks are exponentially higher regarding Russia. If the American people are stampeded into a New Cold War based more on myths than reality, the minimal cost could be the trillions of dollars diverted from domestic needs into the Military Industrial Complex. The far-greater cost could be some miscalculation by either side that could end life on the planet.

So, as the Democrats chart their future, they need to decide if they want to leapfrog the Republicans as America's "war party" or whether they want to pull back from the escalation of tensions with Russia and start addressing the pressing needs of the American people.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America's Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com ).

Ray Western , December 20, 2016 at 12:11 pm

When I think about what the Neocons have done to the Mid East with their goal to change regimes that we do not approve of it makes me shudder. I wonder why there are not protesters in the streets like there was in Vietnam Nam. Why isn't there more news agencies protesting our actions? Why isn't George Bush being tried for war crimes by world or US courts? Trump talks about building up our military. I hope this will not lead to more conflicts and an increase in our national debt. Why can't there be a larger effort to print the truth about Putin and Russia? Keep up your efforts to spread the truth. Thank God that Hillary was not elected.

FREDERIC PALAY , December 19, 2016 at 10:04 am

Refreshing article among all the post Trump election hysterical propaganda. Particularly telling for me because I have been one of those lured in thinking that a regime change in Irak could not be worse than what was happening, Kurdes being gased by the hundred of thousand, Israel being attacked with incentives given by Saddam to terrorists, and soon the French giving him access to their nuclear program, plus naturally the WMDs . I know now that it was wrong, and that we have enough domestic problems to fix before trying to interfere into foreign complex cultural grounds.
Yet I think that the biggest element that can explain Clinton's defeat is the massive demographic miscalculation the Democrats have been making for decades. They came up with this crazy strategy of dividing the American People into more and more competing minorities, prying electorally on real and invented specialty oppressions, pretending that only them could champion the oppressed in exchange for their votes. Doing so, they did not see that they were collaterally creating a class of oppressors, who they would depict, on and on, as bigots, uneducated, bigots and the soon-to-be-electorally-irrelevant white class.
This strategy backlashed, in a revolt of these "whites", and more importantly showed that what they wanted to consider as a separate voting class, the "hispanics" voted like "whites" Because they feel and are white!
I was not surprised by this brutal correction of what was only a narrative supporting a populist electoral strategy. I live in Florida, immersed in these "hispanics", but overall because I am European, I saw from there beginning the artificiality of the stratagem. Try in Europe to call the Spanish and Portuguese people "hispanic, or to enroll the Greeks, the Corsican, the Italian in a non white minority, Not only people would laugh, but they would call you a racist.

Joe L. , December 18, 2016 at 8:34 pm

Oh and here is a link to the article in the Daily Mail UK that Ex-British ambassador, who is now a WikiLeaks operative, claims Russia did NOT provide Clinton emails – they were handed over to him at a D.C. park by an intermediary for 'disgusted' Democratic whistleblowers:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html

Emanuel E Garcia , December 18, 2016 at 5:17 am

Excellent article, Mr. Parry.

I was in Russia not so long ago, and I had some observations to make in this brief essay, "The Russians Are Coming Again?"

http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/18968

What worries me so tremendously is the simplistic barbarism of these attacks on Russia: pure jaded propaganda, which, sadly and unbelievably enough, too many people are too eager to swallow.

Rob , December 17, 2016 at 1:39 pm

The surest sign that the NYT and the rest of the MSM are in the bag with regard to the "blame Russia" campaign is their failure even to mention (at least to my knowledge) Craig Murray's claim that he received the DNC info from a leaker inside the organization. This claim may or not be true, but it is at least worth reporting and considering as a possible explanation for how Wikileaks came to possess the material. That said, the manner in which Wikileaks released the information so as to maximize damage to the Clinton campaign makes me wonder about the mental health of Julian Assange. Four years of confinement to a room can mess with your mind.

Robert Keith , December 18, 2016 at 12:11 am

Not only the story Craig Murray but how about the story of Podesta having willingly surrendered his password to a (the) hacker. If the contents of a hack are true, what's the hullabaloo all about.

Professor T , December 17, 2016 at 11:30 am

Thanks for this article. I never believed this crap about the Russians hacking the election. The U.S. Election process is a sham which disenfranchises voters across the board. I believe that both parties have their hands in these elections right down to the Board of Elections and electoral colleges in each of these states. When Bernie Sanders ran in NY, I believe the Demorcratic Party and the Board of Elections especially in NYC made it hard for him to get elected. All of a sudden in Brooklyn registered voters were not found, like 125,000 voters . Really? NY was a state also named with Southern states in the 60's as a state that disenfranchised voters. I am not surprised. I am not a fan of Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton. They definitely have not improved the lives of African Americans or any other Americans. Only the lives of those within their inner circle. They are exploiters to the highest degree. She lost because Americans rejected her and her ideals. They said enough. We don't need another Clinton in the White House to do Part 2 of how to disenfranchise and destabilize American people. I am not a Trump fan either, but if he won the election fair and scare I can't argue with that. The Democratic and Republican parties are not in touch with the American people. The election process needs to be reformed where if you don't have money, you don' t have influence. They are corrupt on both sides. It is pay for play and I am sure that is not how the forefathers intended this to be or maybe it was .. Time to clean house and that is on both sides. Whether they are White, Black, or any other persuasion, they are corrupt. Rome is Burning!!

R. Rivera , December 16, 2016 at 6:09 pm

Russia may have tried to influence the election, it might be a frame job, or it might be a collaborator in this election. It does not matter. I suspect the election really was rigged ( the fbi's comey did his part ) but it was rigged in favor of trump

When I see someone pointing and yelling "crook!" as trump did, I always suspect the yeller (trump) is the one causing the problem. Remember gingrich complaining about clinton's morality and pointing the finger with disgust? He should have resigned since he was cheating on mrs. gingrich AND kept it a secret while on his moral crusade. I have not been wrong yet when I see this behavior.

The cia with a suspected history of interring with other nations is complaining about russia's interference? We must be in trouble.

This was not an election. It was a coup to elect the new puppet president trump. We need to expose the puppeteers.

Realist , December 16, 2016 at 5:46 pm

Obama today: basically all the messes, conflicts, disputes, wars and so on that he has created in the world, and the reason Hillary wasn't given "her turn," are OUR fault because we can't accept the lies he promulgates on the mainstream media and we insist on going to alternate sources. And, of course, extrapolating that logic will justify commiting an act of war against Russia, which he promises to do.

https://news.grabien.com/story-obama-blames-talk-radio-domestic-propagandists-rise-state-sp

How can we get this guy outta there before he blows up the planet? Trump must take to the airwaves to defend himself against the accusations or possibly be removed in a coup being orchestrated by this sullen hater. This is spiraling downhill fast and, from the comments on internet forums, war fever is in the air, proving Obama is more dangerous than any "fake news" outlet.

Michael K. , December 16, 2016 at 4:29 pm

There is an uncomfortable truth about those who led the Old Bolsheviks and their b;loody terrors, who looted Russia under Yeltsin, and who leads the neoconservative core of the anti-Russia pundits:

http://www.softpanorama.org/Skeptics/Pseudoscience/harvard_mafia.shtml

They were and are disproportionately Jewish, but we are not supposed to note it, lest this curious FACT "offend" someone who is offended by . the truth.

So, we can't talk about a major [though not necessarily predominant] element of who is leading the anti-Russian rhetoric in DC and media so let's pretend it isn't playing a role here.

Robert Keith , December 16, 2016 at 6:12 pm

Why are we so concerned (as per Pres. Obama's press conference this morning) about the unproved possibility of a foreign power's (like Russia, for example) influence (if true, it was positive) on our election, when Israel, through AIPAC and the American Jewish Communuty, etal., ALREADY HAS a far greater influence (especially being negative) on our elections. Another example of an egregious double-standard being applied to Israel. In fact, Israel is just sort of a co-partner here in the U.S.. Why is a foreign-born, Israeli dual-national, former Governor of the Bank of Israel, Stanley Fisher, the 2nd man at the Federal Reserve?Why were we pretending that Jonathon Pollard was a spy? What is the average percentage of votes in the Congress on legislation relating to Israel? To which country do we give more Foreign Aid than any other country even though "Aid" denotes, not connotes, that the country is "needy". To which country did we just sign a $38 billion (10-year) Charity package, which purports to be Military, but is highly fungible, meaning that can be used for the financing of settlements or whatever the f**k they want to use it for, like, haredim welfare. Bottom line:President Obama and all the Neo-Con Russia bashers are first class hypocrites, trying to exorcize (or exercise) an historic grudge against the Russian Tsars. Why is this country being pushed into wars that do not concern us, but rather a country with a wall around it that wishes to expand its borders, because our Congressmen and President are owned by them?

John Hope , December 16, 2016 at 3:25 pm

Brilliant article and some brilliant comments. We live now in a very small world and if you can't see your connection to your neighbour wherever and whoever that may be you are not awake. I drive a car so I have to think about that and notwithstanding the necessity of that I have to think about the bigger picture and maybe next year it should be an electric car , or no car . This whole fabrication about the Russians simply isn't washing with us common people, so the perception management of not just the Democrats , but politicians in general is so wide of the mark after Trump and Brexit they just don't know what to do. They thought they had it all wrapped up and then along came the Internet ..

sanford sklansky , December 16, 2016 at 3:15 pm

A good article and maybe demonizing Russia for the wrong reasons. But lets not forget that Putin is running a kleptocracy. There is no freedom of speech. Certainly no paper that can speak out against him or the Russian government. The anti gay laws are terrible. You were only in Russia for a short time. I don't know if you can gauge much just from walking around Red Square. And while there didn't appear to be a big police presence I am guessing it was there and you were unaware. I am assuming that your passport says you are a reporter. No doubt some one was probably watching where you were going and who you might be talking to.

James lake , December 17, 2016 at 3:25 pm

Wow this is the arrogant way of thinking that is at the root of world problems
What has their form of govt got to do with you.???
The Russian people have shown over the years that they don't take any nonsense and if the feel their govt is not working for them they will make themselves heard.

K. Geebee , December 16, 2016 at 3:05 pm

Is this article a joke? So this guys walks around Moscow for a day speaking no Russian and is able to 'deduce' that Russia is like any Western democracy, with Putin its misunderstood, magnanimous ruler. And this allows him to claim to know better than Russian dissenters or Western journalists who actually speak Russian and understand its propaganda. No wonder this site was listed as a Russian stooge. And all the commenters praising his acumen (he went to a Russian starbucks, wow!) is even funnier

Realist , December 16, 2016 at 4:00 pm

You assholes from Langley here taking names or something? Go tell your sycophantic acting boss Michael Morell that he's not funny, he's psychotic.

Josh Laudermilk , December 17, 2016 at 4:18 am

@Realist,

Michael Morell was another shadowy figure that was insistent that Hillary Clinton deserves to be anointed POTUS and leader of "the Free World" (only the USA is free, not Finland, Sweden, Netherlands or anywhere else knows what 'democracy' really is). Did you know that Mike Morell actually said we should be killing Russians in Ukraine? He openly said that. When I heard him say that, as opposed to something I would have said, like "I want Russia to join NATO. I want to have joint military operations with Russia. I want to have a joint counter-terrorist command. We can and should be fighting Wahhabi terrorists together."

Mr. Morell openly approves of murdering Russians wholesale, whenever they are found outside the borders of their country (which Mike Morell wishes would recede even further, to shrink Russia as much as possible). There were no consequences for his genocidal and violent hate speech, which I would expect from a Salafist minister, not a former Acting Director of the nation's premier 'intelligence' agency. The word intelligence being used in the loosest manner as all possible.

Realist, whoever you are, why should I or anyone trust the CIA about this past election? Seriously, the CIA is the master at electoral rigging, psychological warfare, deception, counter-operations, and murder. For decades, the CIA rigged the elections of Japan so that the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP being the CIA approved polity in Japan) would win ever single time. And the LDP has ruled the county almost uninterruptedly, with an exception when, for a short time, the opposition party (the Democratic Party) had a majority before being brought down by corruption scandals.

Or what about all the election rigging that the CIA performed in Italy during the 1950ies? I could go on, but the CIA has a long history of "hacking" elections and controlling the polity of other nations, through rigging, murder and coups.

Realist , December 17, 2016 at 4:22 pm

That's why I mentioned Morell rather than Brennan. You caught my drift. Good.

Jerry Falkenstein , December 16, 2016 at 1:29 pm

Just wondering, Is the world better off now or changed for the better since the a-holes started the war with Iraq?

Drew Hunkins , December 16, 2016 at 12:47 pm

It's just so bananas, it's hard to put into words how so much of the mainstream press is lapping up and disseminating the drivel that "Putin/Russian gov't hacked the election to tilt it to Trump!" The hysteria is strikingly similar to what went on in 2003 during the run-up to the Iraq war debacle. Repetition is hardening into orthodoxy in some quarters and smart liberals should know better than to give these insane charges the veneer of credibility.

It's crucial to note that what's been going on over the last month or so is that there's a serious battle being waged amongst our ruling class behind the scenes (sometimes referred to as the "Deep State"). From what I can make of it, on one side sits Trump, Big Oil and elements of the FBI versus virtually all of the establishment mass media and press, DNC insiders, much of the CIA, and elements of the Zionist power configuration and Saudi terror network who want war on Iran – not market driven empire building with Iran which is what Tillerson's likely to propose. Of course another element of the Zionist power configuration is quite pleased that Trump's appointing Palestinian land grabbers too.

This internecine battle being waged between our elites is incredibly fascinating to witness. Of course that it has the potential to spiral out of control is undoubtedly worrisome and means true progressives and lefties have their work cut out for them over the coming months and years.

Josh Stern , December 16, 2016 at 2:22 pm

Deep State is true – two sides in the Deep State is not true. Is the FBI really opposite to the CIA – no, the FBI is the CIA security force. It has never prosecuted any CIA related "crime" except for whistleblower leaks. Why doesn't Trump "side" make the point that the news story in the leaks was a fraudulent – and probably criminal – sabotaging of Sanders' campaign, which the DNC is hoping its members will forget about? That is very damaging to the DNC why are all the Republicans so quiet about it?

War/security state money benefits from war or heightened readiness for war. It is constantly looking for boogeyman threats to justify more spending on the security state. No matter that US produces over 95% of the world's weapons. No matter that US defense budget is greater than next 7 states combined. We need more of that $$$ security. Lot of threats don't you know. Russia – it is alleged without proof – might sneak in and tell us about how corrupt our 2 political parties are. Can't have that.

Robert Keith , December 16, 2016 at 12:05 pm

President Obama is just caving in all over the place like a blob of jello (no excuses for mixing metaphors here when the issue is so egregious)-too many instances to even itemize here, let alone comment on. One incident, though, I remember seems to symbolize his lamentable state of mind: when he pulled up to the welcoming (some welcome) stand in Beijing several months ago. Surprise: no red carpet like the other Heads of State. A deliberate slight? Absolutely. How did he react. Like a President of the United States? Absolutely not! He dropped the stairs that AF One carries in its nose for just such occasions and sortied as if nothing had happened. In fact, what had happened is that he had sloughed off the insult like a Black man because he couldn't do anything about it, when he should have sat tight until a red carper appeared, or left, and the United States had suffered a huge hit to its prestige. Childish? I don't think so. If he had stayed put, that red carpet would have appeared. So the problem is that Barack Obama does not represent the people he purports to, because he cannot identify with them. Bottom line: this country cannot have another President from a minority group. let alone a disadvantaged one. We have now had our Black president, just like we had our Black mayor of NYC. It won't happen again, but it's good that it happened once to show why it won't work, and hopefully will put a brake on the multicultural hype. We would wager that the Jews would never be so stupid as to allow one of theirs to be our President.

Daniel Foley , December 16, 2016 at 12:58 pm

I would like to know many posters on this site support this racist rant. If you do support it please post your support of it along with any other minorities you hate.

Daniel Foley , December 16, 2016 at 1:10 pm

The posting should read: "I would like to know how many posters . . . . Sorry for the typo

JOHN CHUCKMAN , December 16, 2016 at 11:43 am

I'm not sure I agree about motives.

Consider this recent statement by Obama concerning "hacking": 'We need to take action and we will at a time and place of our choosing'

It just does not come more completely brainless than this.

And, given his powerful position, more irresponsible.

Take revenge?

For what?

For someone's assertion, unsupported by a scrap of proof?

An assertion by one political appointee at CIA who is not supported by any of the sister intelligence agencies or any physical evidence whatsoever? Even the otherwise pathetic John Kerry has backed off confirming this rubbish.

An assertion whose obvious motive is to get back at the winning candidate, someone you don't like?

This sick man, Obama – a failure in virtually everything he has attempted as President from domestic policy to foreign relations, and a man who has killed hundreds of thousands of innocents abroad, too – is also trying to get back at the government which thwarted his bad intentions in Syria and in Ukraine.

That government embarrassed him before the entire world in his pursuit of ill-considered policies.

Of course, he is trying to get back at Trump because Obama knows Trump is going to quickly extinguish most of what he has done, his sad little pile of stuff, his so-called legacy.

Well, here's Obama's real legacy, making threats and calling names, threatening innocent people with an abuse of power. Of course, I think we can all agree that while profoundly stupid, this behavior of Obama seems almost elevated compared to his construction and oversight of an entire machinery for extrajudicial killing in many lands.

I am beginning to think Obama has gone mad, just adding to all the other deficiencies of his character and personality. Can he not see how ridiculous he is making charges and threats like this? Apparently not, which is a strong indicator of irrationality.

Here is a 2016 version of drunken old Senator Joe McCarthy waving handfuls of blank papers he calls lists and threatening what he calls traitors in the American government. Only the 2016 version sits in the Oval Office, and he has access to the nuclear launch codes.

This is deeply concerning behavior from a man in such a position.

And if the mainline press were not totally biased towards the war party of the neocons and its defeated candidate, the most corrupt and vicious person ever to run for President, it would be saying so, not giving credibility to blubbering insanity by covering it as though it were sound speech.

Dan Kuhn , December 16, 2016 at 10:55 am

The latest breathlessly broadcast news from CNN, BBC and all over print media this morning and without one shred of proof presented I might add) is that Putin himself signed off on the interference in the American Presidential election.

This was to be expected following the defeat of the CIA funded, trained and armed Terrorists in Syria. to attempt to lay the blame on anything else is to attribute the ability of the American Government and it´s multitude of intelligence agencies with an attention span that is longer than a single news cycle. Every setback must be met immediately with a deluge of hysterical propaganda against someone in a foreign country, the current enemy du jour being President Putin.

In short, the !/10 of 1% Elites in the US did not get the coronation of the President they wanted. Now they are more than willing to take the country to the very brink of nuclear war to make sure that the electorate gets back in line and marches to the Elite´s tune. For sure they will not risk the Hamptons in a nuclear war, but will push the envelope right to it´s breaking point. The great unwashed in the USA has risen and now must be pushed back into their former prostate position, and begging for handouts from their criminal Elite. For the Elites, their worse fear has been realized.

Drew Hunkins , December 16, 2016 at 11:41 am

Mr. Kuhn, you make incredibly astute points.
I can't believe this wave of propaganda we're witnessing. And millions of my fellow American citizens will lap all this up.

Robert Keith , December 16, 2016 at 10:50 am

Thank you, Vladimir Putin for having helped defeat Hillary Clinton and installed Donald Trump in the White House, and, by the way, congratulations, for having had the effrontery to protect your own national security and taken back Crimea from the Neo-Con State Department-backed coup-plotters. We support you, our Christian brothers. Please continue with your sensible policies.

The Real American People

AG , December 16, 2016 at 10:44 am

Thank you, Robert and Consortium News. As a Russian born, now Russian-American citizen, I am left aghast by the self-serving incitement of the media. Your reporting is a an island of reason and reassurance for me, as I watch New York Times, NPR and the rest tie up my homeland to the whipping post.

I return to Russia nearly every other year to both my rural hometown and metropolitan Moscow. Moscow is the only place in the world where I was served a $9 cup of coffee. Russia is and has been flourishing for decades. For a long time, Russians were interested in the United States and appreciated the western model of capitalism. Various civil groups have been organizing exchanges between the two countries with great fervor. From ballet schools in New York City to forestry crews on Lake Baikal, Russians were eager for a warmer and open relationship with the United States.

There is a Russia beyond Putin that few dare to speak of. It is the country I know. It is the country where school children put on monthly plays and begin to recite poetry in first grade. It is the country where women receive generous government sponsored child-rearing subsidies to stay home longer. It is a country where those mothers then mourn, and have been mourning, the tens of millions of soldiers who never came home during the World Wars as well the modern, bloody political games with neighboring Chechnya, Ukraine and now, Syria.

Russians are, too, spoon-fed typical nationalist propaganda. Many, including myself, are now wondering about the US and its intentions. Many didn't like the impact of sanctions on the price of groceries and gas. Russians don't understand why America all of a sudden hates them so much. Many mothers are scared. They don't want another world war.

Is this all in the name of democracy and human rights? As someone who works with homeless youth and adults in rural New England, I've got a lot to say about that.

Thanks again, Robert.

Realist , December 16, 2016 at 11:15 am

I can see how you would be confused by the actions of your new country against your native land. It was unconscionable how Obama's state department set Ukrainians against Russians in a coup meant to expand NATO and the EU, to snatch the naval base at Sevastopol away from Russia, and to station missiles pointed at Moscow only a few hundred miles away. The deadly putsch, the fire bombings of Odessa and the rocket attacks on the Donbass from Kiev were all totally uncalled for simply because Yanukovich decided that Putin had offered a better financial deal than did the EU and the IMF. But America is very proficient at demonizing any leader or government they want out of the way. I'm surprised you haven't come to hate America for persecuting your people. I know that I hate what we do to numerous other countries, and I hate heartless bastards like Obama and Clinton who make it all happen without the slightest compunctions. America owes Russia a big apology for what we have been doing to that country, but, knowing Americans, never expect one. We are the most self-righteous, "persecuted," paranoid, entitled, loud-mouthed, arrogant people on the planet but far from exceptional. The people who are exceptional are those whom we tread on and yet prevail.

Bill Bodden , December 16, 2016 at 1:45 pm

It is the country where school children put on monthly plays and begin to recite poetry in first grade.

How about the teachers? Do they carry guns to school so they can have a shootout with some crackpot having easy access to guns? Or, is this another area where Russia lags blissfully behind the US?

Josh Laudermilk , December 16, 2016 at 9:55 am

To my fellow Americans,

I am begging you, ALL of you, whatever your political stripe, whatever your social status, whoever you are: Female, Black, Native American, Jewish, Gay, Transsexual/Transgender (and fuck yeah, I support all minorities and all peoples, including race, sex and gender). Whoever the fuck you are; DO NOT fall for this Russophobic, Anti-Russian bullshit. I beg of you. This is a concerted effort by the West to demonize Russia and paint Vlad Putin as a James Bond-esque villain. They want you to swallow this shit up whole, so you will be distracted from the fact that your overseers (the Powers That Be, the political and financial elite) continue to blight your lives as they exploit you and you languish in suffering.

Russia is not to blame. Vlad Putin, whatever one makes of him, is not to blame. And look, I don't like Putin for a variety of reasons. He has continued the Corporatocracy set up by Boris Yeltsin and 'the Family'. He continues to support a particularly cruel form of capitalism. He also supports what could be called Eastern Orthodox fundamentalism. He conflates homosexuality with pedophilia/hebephilia/ephebophilia. But we should not go to war with Russia or make an enemy out of Russia. Vlad Putin is not to blame for Western aggression.

Don't allow our leaders to sell this message. Tell them, we aren't buying and we are not going to creep into a New Cold War, let alone support sending the sons and daughters of other people to their deaths in a hypothetical war with Russia.

President Barack Obama is a fucking failure, the failure of all failures, as are his cohorts including Hillary Clinton. President Barack Obama's legacy is not reforming healthcare, assassinating Osama bin Laden, trade deals or ending the occupation of the Republic of Iraq. No, that's not what his legacy will be, regardless of how many Nobel Prizes he nets during and after his presidency. Nope, his legacy will be the eternal expansion of drone warfare. Barack Obama's legacy is drones. Creating a narrative about Russia (and specifically Vlad Putin) is a distraction, a real red herring, to draw attention away from President Obama's truly (and epically) sinister legacy. It also draws attention away from the fact that 51% of our country is in poverty, and the global situation is even more grim.

The West has gone absolutely batshit over the impulses of change, blaming everything on Russia. It is an understatement to say that Russia (and Vlad Putin, specifically) are the scapegoat of the West. If I slip on a banana peel, I can blame it on Putin and the political elites, the Powers That Be, will reinforce my accusation and applaud me for saying it.

Russia has been blamed for Hillary Clinton's loss of the US election, Russia is blamed for the Brexit vote, Russia is blamed for the German election. The German authorities are saying that the reason Angela Merkel had a less than stellar performance in the recent federal elections is because of Russia. Do you have a toothache? If you do, it's Russia. Vlad Putin, we are told, has control over the "free elections" of the world.

This is hysteria, it's mental illness on a global scale. When rulers and their ruling parties or factions suffer any loss, in the polls or in popularity, it's Vlad Putin's fault, so we are told. They are hammering this universal "it's Russia's fault" meme as the new State sponsored ideology. Anyone who even doubts it in the least aspect is considered treasonous.

I shouldn't have to tell you, Russia did not hack the US election for Donald Trump. Russia did not hack the UK election for Brexit. Russia did not hack German voting machines so that Angela Merkel's total percentage would be less than projected.

The truth is much less like a Cold War dream fever dream. Yet our society controllers are trying to create the "justification" for a New Cold War and the latest Red Scare. All this nonsense about Russians rigging the election, from the very people who scoffed at and heavily criticized Herr Trump for suggesting an election could be rigged, something the Democrats said was "impossible", including El Presidente Barack Obama. The anti-Russian craze is truly terrifying to me.

Remember what President Barack Obama said around the time that Jill Stein began working feverishly to throw the election for Hillary Clinton (someone she pretended to despise)? He said there was no evidence of election tampering and that he had confidence in the integrity of the election results.

A few weeks later, because he's a lying son of a bitch, he completely contradicts himself and reinforces the idea of Russian interference and hacking in the election.

Obama is a LIAR!

Realist , December 16, 2016 at 10:20 am

Another piece of news (to me, at any rate): Obama just allowed the continuation of economic sanctions against Iran recently passed overwhelmingly in both houses of congress to become law. Ending the sanctions was supposed to be our part of the treaty with Iran for their promise never to develop nuclear weapons. This obviously reneges on that agreement and proves to Iran that America's word is worth shit. Yes, the congress had plenty of votes to over ride any veto that Obama may have placed upon the bill, but the craven snake should have at least gone through the motions to show Iran that HIS personal word was sincere, even if his country was duplicitous. Instead he walked away from partners in a deal that took years to craft because of some mindless spiteful pressure from congress at the very end of his term. The man will fight with no one except Putin and Russia (who are easy targets in Russophobic America) because he has no principles and no courage. The sooner he slinks off into the shadows the better. Get out of the people's house, you rat. This makes me as angry as the revenge he has just vowed against Russia for purportedly "hacking the election," in spite of zero evidence.

Josh Laudermilk , December 16, 2016 at 1:01 pm

@Realist,

Thanks for letting me know about this. It doesn't surprise me at all. The situation is taking a turn for the worst. Have you seen the news of President Barack Obama promising to take "action" against Russia? It hurts me that the United States is so unbelievably hostile and belligerent. We should be allies with Russia, it's a great country and a great people. If I were POTUS, I would actively be courting the Russian people (not just their administration or President), reaching out and appealing to them. I would even love to have Russia join NATO. I see Russia as a friend and I'm speaking as an American citizen. I cannot understand why so many Americans are obsessed with casting Russia as the eternal villain. I can only surmise that it is a core tenant of 'neoconservatism' that an enemy must always exist to explain away the costly and ever growing military-industrial complex.

https://www.rt.com/usa/370507-obama-russia-hack-action/

@everyone,

This is surreal.
Report: Hillary Clinton Says Putin Grudge Caused Russia Hack
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/2199450-report-hillary-clinton-says-putin-grudge-caused-russia-hack/

There was no Russian hack. Hillary Clinton will blame everyone but herself for losing Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. She is so corrupt. President Barack Obama is so corrupt. They claim Vladimir Putin and his cabinet are corrupt, they claim that Russia is a "mafia state" and Putin is "the Godfather" of this "mafia state". Those saying this, at the highest levels, are the most corrupt in all the world. I think the Democratic Party is one of the most corrupt parties in the world today, perhaps even in all of history.

Realist , December 16, 2016 at 4:27 pm

Yes, Josh, as I reported from Antiwar.com last night, Obama is planning a strike, a cyberattack, literally an act of war against Russia based on unfounded allegations.

"U.S. intelligence officials believe that Putin *may* (emphasis mine) have directly ordered the hack, according to NBC. On Thursday, NBC reported that government sources said that the Obama administration decided against responding to Russia before the election for fear of a cyber-war. The White House also did not want to appear to be intervening in the election and believed Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton would win."

This is just so much BS. He kills people as part of his routine and he didn't want to "appear to be intervening in the election" because he though Hillary would win. In other words, he didn't think something that *may* not have happened at all was worth starting a world war over. Since Hillary lost (without proof that it was due to ANY hackers, let alone "Putin's" hackers) now it's suddenly okay to threaten an act of war.

I hope that Russia does not underestimate the treachery of this street punk and have their finger on their own button to retaliate against yet more naked American aggression. This is a straightforward threat of major violence, the least that Russia should be doing is taking the case to the United Nations. If Obama does this, you can kiss the amenities of civilisation goodbye, including electricity and the internet if he does something insanely rash like crashing Russia's power grid, which will be avenged, maybe via an EMP over the entire East Coast.

eric , December 19, 2016 at 4:53 am

Russia want to kick our terrorist out of Kosovo twenty years ago now Russia kicked our terrorists out Aelopo . You can't blame our president for being mad he wanted our head choppers to win . They didn't and we can't do anything about it .

Dan Kuhn , December 16, 2016 at 11:10 am

Thanks for that. It needed saying.

Bill Bodden , December 16, 2016 at 1:36 pm

Russia did not hack German voting machines so that Angela Merkel's total percentage would be less than projected.

But the US National Security Agency tapped into her personal phone, one of countless similar incidents completely ignored by the talking heads and print hacks demonizing Putin and Russia.

Paul Fretheim , December 16, 2016 at 9:52 am

I wanted to add a few more things about bring in Russia last year. The young man who was my guide in Moscow was openly gay and lives with his partner in an apartment they share in one of the famous Stalinscraper buildings in central Moscow. He found the idea that there was oppression of gays completely inaccurate. He said their may be discrimination in remote rural areas, but certainly not in the cities. We talked openly about this in a cafe not far from the Russian History Museum on Red Square, which is the gailly illuminated building in one of the photos you shared.

I was in St. Petersburg for one week. My hotel was just two blocks from Palace Square on Nevsky Prospect. I did not see a single homeless person the entire time I was there. I saw police only a time or two, and I walked around a lot. The police walk in pairs. They do not have guns, but each just has one small walkie talkie on their belt, in strict contrast to American cops who look like they just walked out of a Star Wars movie.

I did see one older woman on Nevsky selling mittens she had knitted from a cardboard box.

Joe Tedesky , December 16, 2016 at 11:03 am

Hillary could lose a lot of support if the truth about Russian gays ever came out here is a link to a report that gives statistics and talks about the gay situation in Russia.

http://static.prisonplanet.com/p/images/february2014/white_paper.pdf

eric , December 19, 2016 at 4:36 am

Russia does not sell marriage liciense to gay couples So the U.S says that oppression . I think we voted marriage was between one man and one women but that was oppression
here and made illegal Even California voted the same way Russia has it Really no human rights in Russia . Sounds pretty bad no human rights just terrrible

Realist , December 16, 2016 at 9:46 am

Obama has totally lost his mind. I just read this on the Antiwar.com site. Speaking on NPR, he blamed Putin personally and totally for "hacking the American election" and vows a "retaliatory strike," which the article claimed may be a complete knock-out of Russia's electrical grid.

Excerpt from story: "Irrespective of the lack of evidence and despite nebulous motives, however, President Obama did vow that the US would carry out some form of retaliatory move against Russia, saying he would do so 'at a time and place of our own choosing.' "

This hateful maniac is threatening to start World War 3, while at the same time trying to prevent the president-elect from taking office using baseless allegations of hacking to fuel a coup. What mechanism does the constitution provide for stopping a madman? The coup to slip Hillary into office is bad enough, but this threat of an attack on a sovereign nuclear power without extensive justification beyond his personal animus towards Putin, including irrefutable public documentation of all charges, is simply beyond all reason, it is naked barbarism. This man needs to be medicated and put in restraints while crazy Joe Biden serves out the last month of his term, and if Biden persists in the madness, we move on to Paul Ryan.

Here's the link: http://news.antiwar.com/2016/12/15/obama-vows-revenge-against-russia-for-election-hacks/

Jerry Falkenstein , December 16, 2016 at 1:01 pm

Remember when Obama and the whore went off by themselves for a day or two? Did you wonder what they were plotting? Now you know!

Bill Bodden , December 16, 2016 at 1:30 pm

I caught something a little while ago when I was half-listening to CNN. Apparently, Putin or some Russian official told Obama to put up some evidence or shut up. A little dose of straight talk in a program otherwise devoted to speculation and insinuation.

Realist , December 16, 2016 at 8:46 pm

Here's one report of the very real, rather annoyed response.

http://russia-insider.com/en/kremlin-lashes-out-white-house-put-or-shut-hack-evidence/ri18231

Apparently, many high level officials in the Russian government are speaking out publicly on the matter, including Putin's Presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov, Russian Foreign Ministery spokesperson Maria Zakharova, and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. All call it an outrageous accusation and put up or shut up with regard to the non-existent evidence.

It's amazing what Obama thinks he can slip past world observers. The American people? They're used to being lied to and never seem to catch on, which is what Obama and Clinton hope results in an overturned election–regardless of the motives they profess (just wanting to know the truth, yeah sure!). Based on comments dropped all over the internet, it looks like Obama's lies are gaining wide currency (except here), even on comic strip forums. Just gratuitous Russian bashing all over the place. How dare they steal our election!!! Never the more pertinent, "just how did they expect that longshot to succeed?" Or, "I'll believe it when I see the evidence, not just a proclamation."

RedApple , December 16, 2016 at 7:27 am

I am of a Eastern European background who has grown up in the west. I saw the country I was born in destroyed by the US and my nephews nearly killed b bombs outside the areas CNN reported. I have lived with the lies the west spinned about the Balkans for 20 years. It broke my father and he never really go over it. In all the years that followed I never hated and thought my daughter not to hate. Now I see the same being to done to Russia. The people of eastern europe have not forgotten and this time its is really far worse. The hatred that has been festering in eastern Europe against the EU and the US is dangerous. Has the US become so blind. This could easily become very dangerous and I hope articles such as this one will help the people of America understand why this Russia bashing has to stop..

Realist , December 16, 2016 at 10:38 am

Yes, it was Hillary's husband who bombed your homeland as he took NATO out for a test spin after converting what was meant to be solely a defensive alliance against the Soviet Union (which no longer existed) into a useful new tool of American military aggression all over the globe. Maybe he thought that Serbo-Croatian sounded or was spelled a lot like Russian. Dubya totally confused Afghanistan and Iraq with the extinct Soviet Union, and Obomber (with Hillary riding shotgun) must have thought that Libya, Syria and Yemen were surely populated by Soviets. I think the great peace-maker (Nobel Prize and all that) droned Pakistan and Somalia without the help of NATO but, you know, if the godfather asks a favor, those countries had better do what they are told. It's how we role: I think the Cosa Nostra is our model.

Bill Bodden , December 16, 2016 at 1:24 pm

During that time NATO came close to triggering a war with Russia. Russian forces moved into an area to protect some Slavs. US General Wesley Clark ordered British General Sir Michael Jackson to oppose the Russians. Jackson refused saying he was not about to start a war with Russia.

Bankrupt Greek , December 16, 2016 at 7:00 am

The Clinton family is by far the most hated US politician family in the Balkan Region. (with the Bush one coming close second)

Clintons completely destabilized the South East Mediterranean creating a whole vacuum of Islamic extremism, failed states and botched bilateral relations. Bill Clinton completely destroyed the Greek Foreign policy by putting pro-Israel governments in the Greek leadership and evaporating 40 years of excellent relations with the Arab Countries which were receiving a lot of our exports in exchange for oil deals and shipping benefits (Egypt letting Greek ships pass through Suez without customs).

I sincerely hope something changes cause atm US has completely lost the trust of the world imho .

Josh Stern , December 16, 2016 at 6:46 am

"If Murray's story is true, it raises several alternative scenarios: that the U.S. intelligence community's claims about a Russian hack are false; that Russians hacked the Democrats' emails for their own intelligence gathering without giving the material to WikiLeaks; or that Murray was deceived about the identity of the original leaker."

A 4th possible scenario is that it benefits Putin to play the Iron Sheik character alongside the CIA's Hulk Hogan In other words, promoting conflict and raising the statist security profile benefits Putin in Russia for the same reasons you notice that it benefits the CIA & Pentagon in the US, so they play along together .."Oh that is great fun game we having with phony American wrestlers". I mean, why exactly are the US & Russia both supporting the incendiary destruction of Syria? In 2010+ it is no longer strategic to begin with & there will be nothing left of it by the time they both get through. But lots of arms makers/contractors/etc. moved product,. and political foes were sidelined. In the Ukraine, the CIA staged a coup in 2013-14 and Putin got a little piece too. Iran got money and nuclear fuel, and Putin got some biz there too. It looks like a thriving partnership.

Michael Morrissey , December 16, 2016 at 6:00 am

Question for all of you lawyers and (ex?) insiders: Is not what the CIA has done here not only reprehensible (etc.) but illegal? I hope the first swamp Trump drains is Langley, and all its tributaries like the NYT and WaPo.

Akech , December 16, 2016 at 5:18 am

How come these super intelligent findings on Russians hacking DNC and John Podesta e-mails were not applicable to Hillary's private server ?

Realist , December 16, 2016 at 3:44 am

I never fail to be amazed by the treachery of Hillary Clinton. Being a merciful person, a few days ago I was relieved when Donald Trump admitted that his threats to prosecute Hillary for numerous crimes were just so much campaign rhetoric. Nobody likes to see an infirm old lady locked up for the rest of her life. But the way her supporters from both parties have been going after Trump's hide by making very serious but baseless allegations against Putin and then conflating them with Trump is truly vicious and the epitome of attempted self-aggrandizement at the expense of the country's well-being. Assuming Trump is allowed to take the oath of office in the aftermath of these broad spectrum attacks through elected politicians, federal appointees and the media, I would suggest he change his plans for Hillary, Bill and whomever else (John McCain, John Brennen and Michael Morrel, for starters) has been involved in this attempted coup. Seriously, they are attacking the next head of state, if not to remove him then to emasculate him as a leader. Isn't it the old saying that if you attack the king you must kill him or forfeit your own life? Hillary is apparently going for broke. She deserves the gallows.

Joe Tedesky , December 16, 2016 at 10:57 am

If ever there was a way to measure bad Hillary just flew past Richard Nixon at supersonic speed.

Winston , December 16, 2016 at 1:00 am

Murray more reliable and a real truth teller. He's not a careerist. He has ethics.

Tells it like it is:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2004/jul/15/foreignpolicy.uk

The envoy who said too much
One minute he was Our Man in Tashkent, the next he was a major embarrassment for the Foreign Office. Craig Murray, ambassador to Uzbekistan, talks to Nick Paton Walsh about his turbulent year

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-445896/How-I-know-Blair-faked-Iran-map.html

How I know Blair faked Iran map
By CRAIG MURRAY, Former Ambassador to Uzbekistan and Head of the Foreign Office's Maritime Section

Winston , December 16, 2016 at 12:59 am

Murray more reliable and a real truth teller,. He's not a careerist, he has ethics.

Tells like it is:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2004/jul/15/foreignpolicy.uk

The envoy who said too much
One minute he was Our Man in Tashkent, the next he was a major embarrassment for the Foreign Office. Craig Murray, ambassador to Uzbekistan, talks to Nick Paton Walsh about his turbulent year

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-445896/How-I-know-Blair-faked-Iran-map.html

How I know Blair faked Iran map
By CRAIG MURRAY, Former Ambassador to Uzbekistan and Head of the Foreign Office's Maritime Section

falcemartello , December 16, 2016 at 12:50 am

Mr Perry don't fall for the establishment diatribe. "putin autocratic style and all its faults" . Follow up ur statements with verifiable facts . Or else u r just part of the modern journalistic problem of western fake news. Still i concur with the majority of ur article. The Russian federation is run just like the west. It is a federated state and is a capitalist economy. Has a federal bank has democratically elected officials at the DUMA . Putin resuscitated Russia, and has brought some needed law and order . Post USSR russia resembled the US during the mob years of the 20 and 30's. Now their is a citizenry who take pride and responsibility of their civic duty, crime has been reduced and graft and corruption being hit on from all levels of russian society.

Realist , December 15, 2016 at 11:53 pm

Exceptionally well written exposé of the madness permeating most of the factions wielding clout in this country by a professional journalist par excellence. An equally perceptive addendum from businessman Gary Hare. If more people were aware of the described realities, perhaps we'd stop digging our own graves, or at least slow down to question our actions.

Paul Fretheim , December 15, 2016 at 11:49 pm

Robert I visited Moscow and St. Petersburg about one year ago. You should visit St. Petersbug. While Moscow is nice and drastically changed from when I was there 30 years ago, St. Petersburg, where Putin spent years as deputy mayor, is even nicer. My guide and chauffer could not understand why the US wanted to try and hurt them with sanctions. They agreed that they liked and respected President Putin and that they could never be influenced by the "silly" sanctions that "might raise the price if tomatoes ten kopecks."

Kalen , December 15, 2016 at 11:21 pm

Rare but needed voice of sanity in this world of McCarthyite hysteria. Will electors hear this voice and understand that by "flipping" their votes they a liable for participating in a form coup d'etat i.e. letting rough government security agency, CIA and their secret unsupported by facts accusations to change the outcome of the however undemocratic and flawed electoral system we have, a system that gave us Trump inadvertently or not, with huge contribution from Hillary's unquenched hubris and disregard for American economic reality.

Mahatma , December 15, 2016 at 10:20 pm

Placing nuclear weapons on the border of Russia is not "the new cold war" get over it and stop with this misleading, at best, phrase. This is not 1955. The circumstances are different now, this is about US demand for Global Full Spectrum Domination – Project 2020. There is nothing cold about it except the cold calculations of nuclear war. The Pentagon talks of low yield half ton nuclear weapons being "usable".

If the hawks gain control, war with Russia and China are inevitable in the coming decade. The Imperial US will not stop I doubt Trump can stop them.

David F , December 16, 2016 at 11:21 am

"If the hawks gain control, war with Russia and China are inevitable in the coming decade. The Imperial US will not stop I doubt Trump can stop them."

I believe that there are certainly people who want this, and who also believe that it could be won. a

I also believe that there are enough rational (I use that term loosely) senior members of the military who realize that it could not be won, and therefore, likely it wont happen.

maricia , December 15, 2016 at 10:04 pm

Look up Eva Bartlett [Canadian journalist] -- she spoke[12/9/16]. at the UN Press conference concerning Syria-Sovereignty and Peace.There also were 3 other speakers there -- all were very interesting to listen to. TRUTH WAS SPOKEN about Allepo. The corporate news media, bombards you with nothing but lies on a daily basis, just like they did about WMDs

Taras77 , December 15, 2016 at 11:24 pm

Ms Bartlett is one savvy and brave lady!

b.grand , December 16, 2016 at 4:24 am

Mainstream Media lies about Syria exposed by Canadian journalist Eva Bartlett

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueyWGyddepw
EVA BARTLETT, INDEPENDENT CANADIAN JOURNALIST
Press Conference at the United Nations
Dec. 9th 2016

Arby , December 16, 2016 at 9:01 am

See the outstanding Off Guardian website for an article about BuzzFeed's attempted smear job of her.

lizzie , December 16, 2016 at 1:55 pm

Also this woman in the linked video below -- incredibly brave, actual witness to the fall of takfiri and mercenary forces' occupation of E. Aleppo. SAA and Russian helpers are humanitarian heroes -- but listen to the MSM line spewing from the guy from The Hill -- and the UNdiplomat, Samantha Power, should be drawn and quartered for her totally irrational spewing of hate and lies at the UN the other day.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/46050.htm

One reason the MSM has come to literally hate Trump is his determination to talk around them using Tweets and other "social media" mongering. He knows that becoming President might render him a captive of enemies and is, no doubt, taking steps to prevent that. Interesting that he is not moving his wife and young son into the White House.

Looks like the 6 majors no longer control all the messaging anymore, and many of their "talking heads" really do take it personally -- you can tell it in their voices as they spew out their daily "talking points." Nora O'Donnell (CBS) was literally spewing lies and hate (from both her mouth and her eyes) for Dr. Assad this very morning!

Stephen , December 15, 2016 at 10:02 pm

I believe this is going to end badly. The corrupt establishment are terrified that Donald Trump will "drain the swamp" and expose years of malfeasance. That is why the propaganda pushers in the corporate media are in a raging frenzy against Trump. I will be surprised if he is allowed to become President. The war criminals have opened the gates of hell around the world. Nuclear war could be perpetrated by the present lunatics running the corrupt system. Read more at link below:
http://graysinfo.blogspot.ca/2016/12/the-war-criminals-that-opened-gates-of.html

Taras77 , December 15, 2016 at 9:53 pm

Remarkable comments for a remarkable article-thanks, Mr Parry.

To state the obvious, a coup clearly is underway, led by Brennan at CIA. However, some are finding some optimism, such as Larry Johnson at:
http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/79469/john-brennans-failed-soft-coup/ .

Johnson is former CIA and rails at Brennan for taking down the reputation if that were possible.

On the plus side, we have the lack of support from Clapper. We have the failure to show up to brief congressional committee on the "hack." We have the Intelligence Professionals (of which Johnson is one) completely shredding any assertion that the information was hacked. We have Craig Murray stating that he knows who did the leak, and Wikileaks denying any input from the Russians. I am waiting for more info to come out from disaffected CIA or former CIA. The FBI and Comey are deadfast set against any evidence of a hack.

But on the other hand, we have the brain dead MSM and neo con handlers ready to continue to do the bidding of the elite, deep state, establishment or whatever. And we have the profile in courage sitting in the white house equally ready to the bidding of the elite and the bidding of the neo cons.

I see the justified concern in the comments above. To cap this rambling comment, I do not know nor does anyone else how this will come out but at a minimum, trump will have a difficult 4 years. To me, it absolutely criminal the mis-characterization of Russia and even more criminal, not allowing anyone to take that first major step in restoring a working relationship with Russia.

If trump is able to accomplish just one thing, for me it would be a major plus: stop the neo cons and stand up to their continuing attempts at infestation of major govt positions, think tanks, political sychophants,

Bob Van Noy , December 16, 2016 at 1:27 pm

Excellent link Taras77. Thanks

Evangelista , December 15, 2016 at 9:42 pm

Sometimes things backfire; sometimes badly, sometimes hilariously

It is reported that some 40 electoral electors have signed on to demand official (hoped to be reliable) information about the allegations of "Russian", "Russian!", 'Russian', Russian, and now "Vladimir Putin's Personal!" "hacking" of, no longer computers, but "The U.S. Election!". The number might be still rising.

Of the known ones, who signed on a letter, most are Democratic electors.

Outraged Neo-Cons and an at least "fellow-traveler" Harvard Attorney have been pushing a "Hamiltonian Interpretation", claiming that this interpretations makes it 'OK' for electors to violate the contract of their agreements with their states and state-party's to vote for the candidate winning the presidential race in their state [Presidents, as the electoral college system indicates, are elected by the states of the United States (or the majority of the states' electors) to be 'President of the United States', rather than 'President of the People of the United States'].

I find myself, from these given facts and analysis of them and the situation, perceiving that there seem to be more Democratic Electors listening to, and hearing, the Siren voices of the "Hamiltonian Interpretation Loreleis, and suspecting that there may be more Democratic electors giving consideration to switching their votes than Republican electors.

Imagine a "landslide" for Trump in the Electoral College. Imagine the potential effects:

Imagine the already hyperventilating going into overdrive Imagine the Hilaryatti, already prostrate and in counseling, having to deal with No, I am getting into the impossible, beyond the unlikely

Pablo Diablo , December 15, 2016 at 9:36 pm

The Electoral College should nominate Bernie Sanders for President. He leads in all the polls and would be the best thing for The United States of America.

Jessejean , December 15, 2016 at 11:52 pm

O Pablo–that is totally Diablo! And I completely agree. Go Bern.

John , December 15, 2016 at 8:54 pm

The drama triangle is the oldest play in the book .Google "drama triangle" .The question is who are the money players .who would benefit from a world wide socialist system I know we have the jewish scumbag George Soros betting against anything that makes him more wealthy. I will travel 1000 miles to piss on his grave His time is up very soon !! The question remains unanswered who would have benefited monetarily under the hag Hillary .Follow that money line to the mother load or continue to use fake news (another Zionist tactic) toward OZ .Do you people have a strategy for your own salvation ??? I'm thinking no

Clyates , December 15, 2016 at 8:12 pm

Parry, Are you the only real journalist left in this country? Thank you for always telling the truth. I'm donating immediately.

Em , December 15, 2016 at 7:54 pm

I think many are missing the real underpinning of the Fake News propaganda assault and the Russia hysteria. The rhetoric is all coming from the Clinton media support system otherwise known as the MSM. The rhetoric coming from the Trump transition is anything but cold war. I think what the progressive media are failing to recognise or perhaps just don't want to talk about, is that the MIC is in the middle of it's own civil war. I think it's fairly certain, reading between the lines in the articles a few weeks ago, that General Rogers at best deliberately ignored the DNC hack, and almost certainly had a direct hand in Comey's decision to drop the metaphorical grenade on the Clinton campaign in the final week, which many, including myself believe really cost her the election in the end. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I think, as Steve Pieczenik stated (and who knows what side that guy is on if you read his bio) there really was a counter coup. My guess is that apart from Rogers, Kelly, Flynn, Mattis and maybe McChrystal were the larger part of it.

What's really interesting is that all of these guys (apart from McChrystal) made their way up the ranks from the bottom; their daddies weren't admirals or senators; they all saw front line action and have continued to join their troops at the front. I've listened to their interviews, NOT the Fox News soundbites, but extended interviews on YouTube and none of them are bloodthirsty hotheads. Mattis is particularly impressive in terms of his breadth of knowledge with a number of talks to right wing think tanks online. I would highly recommend Flynn's long interviews on Al Jazeera and RT. I think it's interesting Flynn is under fire today for undermining the CIA especially having listened to his interviews, which are surprisingly candid. Flynn expressly warned against those in Washington who advocate continuous war. He also showed contempt for drone warfare, like many in the military, probably because the CIA are calling the shots, literally, whilst the military leaders have to take the fall for their mess ups, just like in the military prisons. These generals have all made statements against torture, and talk (at least) impressively about women's rights and the scourge of trafficking, including human trafficking; and while they use typically measured language, it seems apparent they are under no illusions as to Administration's collusion in what most people would categorize Organized Crime.

When you actually listen to them, it is clear these old-school generals want an "end game", specifically the end for them is the fall of theocracy, a goal which Putin would undoubtedly share. Russia only supports Iran for geostrategic, not ideological reasons, especially since everyone is aware Iran is still playing the same old despicable duplicitous games with the CIA that started under Reagan. I think they're counting on if Iran falls, all the Sunni theocracies who essentially hold the rest of the Islamic world will fall into line and secularize. So if the generals remain in power I think that's where they're going. Their other aim is to split Russia from China, which probably won't be difficult because China wont share their technology with anyone, and they are leaping way ahead of the rest of the world with alternative energy, and Russia has never trusted China historically, and vice versa. Russia has a lot more in common with the US than anyone cares to admit openly. Russia for these guys makes far more sense as a first line frenemy than Europe or China, Europe being far too social democratic, and China being too autocratic. These generals aren't infected with the generations old Slavophobia that seethes out of Westminster and their American aristocousins.

This policy shift would drive CIA/MI6 "business interests" (their raison d'etre) into the ground, especially since Rogers seems to be breaking up the NSA and who knows what that means for the lucrative privatized end of the cyberwar community. Jobs for Russian hackers? You laugh but Dulles was happy to bring in the Nazis after the war. That, in my opinion is what's behind the current media meltdown. It's obvious that the CIA/MI6 are blatantly weaponizing the MSM and using Russia to attack the Trump transition at a level never seen before because the CIA heads are seriously under threat for the first time since the 60s. Rumours abound that Trump is going to be deemed unfit for office before the inauguration, in which case, bunker down. Don't get me wrong however: I don't think Trump's generals are nice guys, and I'm not advocating for them. Although they have all expressed a desire to move to alternative energy, they want to ramp up domestic fossil fuels in the "short-term" as a way to bury the power of the Saudis, and undoubtedly they will start a war with Iran, two reasons to be scared as hell, because that means either conscription or "tactical" "mini" nukes. The alternative is CIA continuous proxy wars and "Global Initiative" organized crime/trafficking, weapons of mass migration, and no difference over climate change, except the utter insanity of Brennan's geoengineering strategy (see his C-SPAN CFR speech) which makes the new CIA chief look reasonable by comparison. That's how fucked-up things are – Pompeo is the preferable choice.

"We the people" therefore continue to be between a rock and a hard place, i.e. we're screwed either way. But those regular folk seeking to topple Trump should be careful what they wish for, and people need to wake up to what's going on. If the CIA is intent on another coup before January, there really would be a massive crackdown in this country. No commission could cover it up, so it would mean the end of free speech and the Internet as we know it. The last nail in the coffin.

Realist , December 16, 2016 at 12:14 am

Hmmm. Hope you're wrong about most of that stuff in your last two paragraphs. The rest hangs together like it might be plausible.

When do they count those damned electoral votes that are cast four days from now? That might be the last day of our republic as we have known it for 228 years. If there's a coup, there will be blood.

lizzie , December 16, 2016 at 1:06 pm

Here is the schedule as published in the Federal Register:

https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/key-dates.html

David F , December 16, 2016 at 11:13 am

It seems to me that Russia and China have finally understood that they are either going to stand together against America or fall separately.

Your premise implies that 1) Americans can be trusted, which is demonstrably false, and 2) the Russians are stupid enough to believe #1 is true.

No way Russia abandons its allies to make friends with us. For to do so would be suicidal.

eric , December 19, 2016 at 3:36 am

your wrong Russia and China are together We shot a missile into the Chinese Embassy and killed a few Chinese in Yugoslavia Bill Clinton apologized and said this was a accident . However when George Tenet testified before congress that we picked out the Chinese Embassy for a target China knew Bill Clinton had lied to them
Yeltsin had promised Milosevic that Russian troops will come in with NATO forces and protect the Orthodox Christians in Kosovo . So Milosevic agreed to end the war and bring his troops home . But when Russian troops landed U.S. general Wesley Clark issued orders to shoot the Russian soldiers The British troops refused the order but the Russians were unable to protect the Christians This failure in
Yugoslavia brought down the whole Yeltsin government in Russia and Solzhenitsyn install Putin to lead Russia . This is the kind of mistakes a stupid super makes Both Russia and China were unable to save the only non NATO European country that they felt treated them on a friendly bases With the enemies Russia and China learned they have they decided they better stick a lot closer together . Since this time Russia has tried to strengthen China any way they can . And I don't know but I think China will reciprocate and act the same way towards their friend Russia . China told us only a few years ago they have not forgotten or forgiven what happened to them in Yugoslavia .You are right Russia should be a natural friend with the United States the two most Christian countries in the world .But these are the kind of mistakes it is impossible to forgive and forget . I don't think it is possible for the United States or any NATO country to get between Russia and China . They both know what happened to Yugoslavia . And they don't intend for that to happen to them ..

AriusArmenian , December 15, 2016 at 7:47 pm

Amazing.
We have the choice of a 50/50 chance of bigger war with Trump, or a near 100% bigger war with Hillary and US elites want the latter.
They are using the CIA to attempt a coup to overthrow a US national election.
The US looks like the biggest banana republic in history.
With the MSM carrying water for the elites I feel like the future in the US is hopeless.
While the US will keep killing more millions.
My last hope is that the Eurasian powers will stop the US cold.

Jerry Falkenstein , December 16, 2016 at 12:20 pm

"They are using the CIA to attempt a coup to overthrow a US national election."
"The US looks like the biggest banana republic in history."
"With the MSM carrying water for the elites I feel like the future in the US is hopeless."

Really like these three sentences.

Arby , December 15, 2016 at 7:19 pm

The Democratic Party (and those who are connected to the establishment) may desperately need to do an autopsy on their election loss but the people are desperate to rid themselves of these two wings (Republican and Democratic) of the same vile bird of prey (Upton Sinclair).

Brendan , December 15, 2016 at 6:44 pm

Achtung, all Aryan women! Beware of Russian-backed Arab rape-gangs!

Gustav Gressel from the George Soros-funded European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) warns of the possibility that Russia might encourage refugees to carry out sex attacks in Germany in order to influence the federal election there next year.

"What would happen, for example, if a similar event to [the mass sex attacks on New Year's Eve] in Cologne were repeated at a summer festival before the election? How would Merkel stand then? What would be the consequence for the Bundestag election? Of course, this is an extreme example, but it is within the range of possibility," he said.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/12/13/think-tank-warns-russia-sex-mobs-germans/

Gressel refers to the attacks in Cologne on New Year's Eve last year as an example of what the Russians might organise. However, it turns out that there was a lot of misreporting of those attacks. https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/11/05/hamb-n05.html

Brendan , December 15, 2016 at 6:46 pm

Originally reported in the Bild, Germany's biggest tabloid newspaper.
(in German) http://www.bild.de/politik/inland/wladimir-putin/propaganda-putin2sexmobs-49205588.bild.html

Also in the Daily Mail and the Sun in the UK.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4032432/Pro-EU-think-tank-says-Russia-Syria-orchestrating-migrant-sex-attacks-swing-upcoming-German-elections.html
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2400317/russia-may-organise-migrant-sex-attacks-in-europe-to-make-angela-merkel-lose-german-elections-eu-experts-claim/

Jean Ranc , December 15, 2016 at 6:32 pm

AWESOME! Robert. Write on!

Zachary Smith , December 15, 2016 at 6:26 pm

Making Russia 'The Enemy'

It's not just Russia they're tackling.

US admiral pledges to confront China in South China Sea

Admiral Harry Harris, commander of US Pacific Command, used a speech in Sydney yesterday to warn that the United States was ready to confront China over its activities in the South China Sea. Under the Obama administration, the South China Sea has been transformed into a volatile flashpoint for war between China and the US. Harris's remarks make clear that those dangers will only rise under a Trump administration.

Harris has been one of the most strident advocates of aggressively challenging China in the South China Sea. In March last year, he claimed that China's land reclamation activities in the Spratly Islands were "creating a great wall of sand" for military purposes. His comments were the opening shot of an escalating US campaign to demand Beijing cease those activities and to justify the US military build-up in the region.

This Admiral Harris has been making the news lately. At a speech at Pearl Harbor he took the opportunity to dump on Colin Kaepernick, and the Pentagon gleefully touted this until somebody remembered that the US Navy had a dreadful race record during WW2. When I checked into this hyper-heroic Admiral, I learned he was one of the commanders at Guantánamo. When three of his victims "died suddenly and violently" this gold-dripping jackass declared that the dead people had engaged in "an act of asymmetrical warfare waged against us".

There is no telling what Trump is going to do, but if he encourages this crap, all his election promises about not getting into needless wars will be for nothing.

Daniel Foley , December 16, 2016 at 9:36 am

Your posts are always good and reflect good thinking skills. It never hurts to look at both sides of a situation. A lot of the posters on this site haven't examined what this country is in for with a Trump presidency. Hope SS isn't their only means of retirement. I hope they all have a good health plan. We have to cut taxes for a lot of the war mongers. What was it that Pogo said? "We have met the enemy and he is us.

F. G. Sanford , December 15, 2016 at 6:24 pm

Could the election hysteria get any weirder, or the "deep state" any more desperate? Probably. But, what would it take? How about a fake alien invasion? If pale cadaverish white men with crew-cuts, black suits and homberg hats start showing up in your neighborhood wearing horn-rim Ray-Bans, don't automatically assume they're really the "Men in Black". They might correspond to Carl Schmitt's "different and alien", but take my advice. Look for dandruff. It's a dead giveaway for fake aliens.

Great article, Mr. Parry!

Joe Tedesky , December 16, 2016 at 2:17 am

"pale cadaverish white men with crew-cuts, black suits and homberg hats start showing up in your neighborhood wearing horn-rim Ray-Bans, don't automatically assume they're really the "Men in Black"

I'll tell right now if these guys show up at my house I'm inviting them in, setting up my drums, (I hope they brought a sax and keyboard) and we are jamming .if everything goes down the way I hope, me and my Men in Black will have a soon to be released hit album for sale on iTunes.

Abe , December 16, 2016 at 12:42 pm

I'm expecting Putin to show up at my house with zombie Hitler riding a T-Rex.

John Kerry did visit Antarctica during the presidential election.

Das ist das Ende.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wmilvm3KIgw

art , December 15, 2016 at 6:19 pm

If we count all the illegal aliens that voted for hillary then yes, she did win the popular vote. The " recount " has exposed massive fraud that benefited hillary in Michigan and other places . The e-mails were leaked not hacked. RIP Seth Rich. All one has to do is look at Trump rallys vs hillary rallys. There is no way hillary won the popular vote.
By calling the Electoral College archaic is simply wrong. It avoids mob rule by giving equal voice to all the country not just LA, DC,Chicago, San Fran, Seattle , NYC and Miami and south Texas.

Ol' Hippy , December 15, 2016 at 6:01 pm

As I've said before Russia is not really an enemy of the US unless provoked into hostilities be inept government officials. The one main thing about Trump is his softer stance of Russia and Putin. Hopefully this will hold up as I'm sick and tired of hostilities created by the neocon establishment and all their warmongering actions. It's kind of like the anti-war movement during the 'Nam; give peace a chance. I just hope Trump can stand up to all the hawks in Washington, we'll see. However the anti-Russian propaganda may be tough to over come and end up escalating into a cold or even a hot war which we'll lose because Putin is well ready for an attack. I wish for peace which has always been my stance. I just hope reason and sanity rules out over provoked hostilities. But the odds are probably against this dream of mine and others for sure.

Bill Bodden , December 15, 2016 at 5:54 pm

For some reason this mendacity-laced Russia bashing brings to mind the yellow journalism promoting the war against Spain after the sinking of the USS Maine.

The chaos that is currently evolving should come as no surprise when we consider the sizable number of people who considered that the two candidates representing the Democratic and Republican parties for president were equally atrocious if for different reasons. That is one of the consequences of voting the perceived lesser evil from two corrupt parties. The evils became progressively more so with each quadrennial charade. The American people are responsible in part for this ominous predicament which may mean an enlightened resolution to this conflict is highly unlikely.

Daniel Foley , December 15, 2016 at 5:43 pm

Just wondering why doesn't Craig Murray release the name of the "Dem" leaker. Wouldn't that settle the Russian hacking story and stop the guessing. All other leakers usually reveal their name.

backwardsevolution , December 16, 2016 at 12:49 am

Daniel – I believe Craig Murray said that he was given the documents by an intermediary, on behalf of someone else. One leaker was probably Seth Rich, the murdered DNC staffer. Julian Assange offered a $20,000.00 reward for information re Seth Rich's death. Why would Assange do this if Seth Rich hadn't had something to do with the leaks?

"Re supposed Russian hacking, Karl Denninger (who does know his Internet technology), has a post entitled "So It WAS NOT Hacking". Karl quotes the Daily Mail in U.K. and Craig Murray's involvement:

"Craig Murray, former British ambassador to Uzbekistan and associate of Julian Assange, told the Dailymail.com he flew to Washington, D.C. for emails.
He claims he had a clandestine hand-off in a wooded area near American University with one of the email sources.
The leakers' motivation was 'disgust at the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the 'tilting of the primary election playing field against Bernie Sanders.
Murray says: 'The source had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks'."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html

And then Karl says:

"The source gave it to him.

There was no hacking. There was instead a disguntled Democrat operative who had access to the data, dumped it, and turned it over.

This is a guy who (1) claims to have met the actual source, (2) received the actual data and (3) got the data because the person who took it was*****ed off that the Democrats stole the nomination from Sanders.

The "Russian" claim just went up in smoke."

Then Karl (who is not a fellow who is into conspiracy theories at all) says:

"PPS: Was his name "Seth Rich"? Because if so then every single person supporting the "hack" narrative, repeating it or cheering it on is in fact cheering on murder and it is my sincere wish to each of you, collectively and individually, that you burn eternally in Hell for your open and outrageous support of both corruption and murder."

https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=231717

Daniel Foley , December 16, 2016 at 9:18 am

If it was Seth Rich why isn't Assange giving the $20,000 to Craig Murray? I am sure you remember Vince Foster. Who was the person that had him Killed? Oh by the way Craig Murray was relieved of his British post. Not quite sure why.

Bill Bodden , December 16, 2016 at 1:13 pm

Oh by the way Craig Murray was relieved of his British post. Not quite sure why.

Briefly, he was outspoken in criticizing torture in Uzbekistan. Do an internet search for "ambassador craig murray uzbekistan" for more information.

backwardsevolution , December 16, 2016 at 1:20 pm

Daniel Foley – I believe the $20,000.00 reward was for information on who was responsible for Seth Rich's murder, you know, hopefully to catch the killer. Craig Murray is a pretty credible person. Google him.

exiled off mainstreet , December 16, 2016 at 12:43 pm

Knowing the nature of the yankee legal and political system, it would be death or imprisonment for the leaker. That is why the intermediary was necessary, and, knowing these facts, that is why the democrats are cynically blaming Russia and revealing their true nature as having evolved into gangster-fascism since the DLC-Clinton hostile takeover of 1990 or so.

Marblex , December 16, 2016 at 2:45 pm

Assange has since stated that only he and a select few (not including Murray) https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/809366908470525952

It is possible the Murray stuff is disinfo intended to discredit Wikileaks which as you may know, has a perfect record of accuracy. I would stick only with what Assange says, for now.

Assange has maintained since the emails went public, that they were leaked to WL and not the result of "Russian" or anyone else's hacking. https://twitter.com/foxandfriends/status/809722357430398976 . He also hinted very strongly in a Dutch TV interview that Seth Rich was the source. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp7FkLBRpKg

vollin , December 15, 2016 at 5:37 pm

With Israel Russia relations now quite good, have to wonder why Israel first US neo cons hate Putin and Russia so much.

Brad Owen , December 16, 2016 at 1:11 pm

The Israel First US neocons hate Putin and Russia so much because they are just puppets in an Imperial Play. The string-holders are much higher up in the pyramidal hierarchy of World Dominion. The entire Zion Project is the creation of Cecil Rhodes' RoundTable Group in the late 19th century. It, along with SME (Synarchist Movement for Empire) intends to secure World Empire for "Eurogarchs", ancient Imperial families (some with old Roman roots, many with Holy Roman Empire roots) and their Managerial Elite in the banks and corporations (this is the essence of fascism; simply the modern version of old ancient Empire, which, like war, is also a racket, with imperialists being highly-polished racketeers). The RoundTable Group had as its' primary goal the re-capture of its' "Rogue Colony" USA through its' Wall Street asset (mission accomplished), gradually defeating all tendencies towards a Constitutional Republic (lethal ideas for racketeering Empires). The primary relationship to be blocked at all costs is friendship with Russia ("the big one that got away"). India got to share colonial status with the same Imperial Masters as do we (City-of-London). China had opium wars foisted upon them by the same Imperial Masters (C-of-L), AND haven't yet wised up to the booby trap that is Hong Kong (C-of-L's eastern asset like Wall Street is its' western asset. Ahh but there lies Russia, always befriending and defending revolutionary/republican USA since the days of Catherine the Great (ever wonder WHY Russia sold us Alaska?). The day that Russia and USA become firm friends and allies is the day that Empire dies and THAT is why Israel First (C-of-L), US (C-of-L-via-Wall Street asset) neocons hate Putin and Russia so much they simply must, to keep Empire alive.
P.S. Israel-Russia relations are so good BECAUSE they know which way the "geopolitical winds" are blowing.

eric , December 19, 2016 at 1:58 am

Well that day is going to officially take place in about thirty days or so you should be very happy ps unless some thing big happens in the next thirty days or so

Gary Hare , December 15, 2016 at 5:18 pm

I have had seventeen years working at local executive level for two large US Corporations – IBM and Raytheon. I was CEO of a small start-up living in the US for two years. So I have had plenty of opportunity to observe the US psyche close up.

It has been my experience that too many US citizens exist under this "perception management" syndrome that the USA is exceptional, is always right and good, and is the only model for how a society should function. I have always been able to work with people who are ignorant. You merely have to educate them properly. I can work with people who are arrogant. You only have to put into their minds concepts that they mistakenly think they originated. But I have always found it impossible to work with people who are both ignorant, and arrogant.

The "perception management" tool you highlight produces business and political elites who are both alarmingly ignorant (of other viewpoints) and extremely arrogant (I am a US citizen – ergo, I must be right). How else could it be possible for a voter to be given the choice between two such flawed characters to lead their country, and sadly to exercise so much influence over the rest of the world? And does this not reveal the gross shortcomings of the field they beat to contend for this top job? And the party apparatus that put them forward?

Trump is clearly arrogant. I can only hope he is also not ignorant. The flaws in US policies are so easy to see, that he does not need "insider briefings" to appreciate them. But who among the elites are sufficiently impervious to "perception management" to be able to implement sensible policies, even if Trump is able to articulate them?

It seems to me that the US is on the verge of dying from the virus of believing its own propaganda.

Like you, I recently spent nearly two weeks in Russia, but only in Moscow and St. Petersburg. So admittedly, my experience is skewed. I was surprised by the number of young people who spoke English, and who admired Putin for the simple reason that Putin can explain to them the rationale for his policies, and can demonstrate success in most of them. He typifies leadership. The US tendency to want to vilify Putin is counter-productive, slanderous, transparently unfounded and obviously childish. Sensible people do not take it seriously. But who in the US political elite is sensible?

Stephen Sivonda , December 15, 2016 at 11:46 pm

Gary Hare . well spoken and a real joy to read. When I look at a web site that has comments, after reading what the article is about I usually start to read comments . There are such a variety of comments for almost any subject, but more often then not the comments devolve into worthless drivel Once that happens I leave although if I read say 20 comments that would be a lot. There is much to be learned by reading intelligent comments , and the followers of Consortium News make it a place to learn.

Enels , December 16, 2016 at 3:56 am

Seldom in history/herstory, could there be a place so self deluded. (whatever that means ) But no, it isn't funny, The BS about the Russians hacking to skew the election promoted by the loosers/Democrats, (I was one once), is awful.

Americans are in a strange place now. If Trump goes hard against SS, and medicare, and unions, oh boy!

eric , December 19, 2016 at 1:50 am

I don't expect Trump to go against social security and medicare although I have heard a lot of republicans claim they have too because the money will be gone .. I sure don't like to hear this coming from republicans Reagan a great republican increased the social security contribution so he could cut the top income tax rate . there by shifting the burden from the wealthy people to the poorer people This made him a great republican . I think Trump realizes he was elected by the working people and will work for us . But he a republican and that scares me a little . I'am expecting medi care for everybody and this time the republicans will vote for it I just hope the democrats vote for it too . . This is the program Hillary wanted for many years . I don't think Trump is a typical republican . I can not think of anything that controls costs better than medicare for everyone . The healthcare industry will fight medicare for every one but bogus billing has no place in healthcare .. When I say medicare for everyone I mean everyone I mean congress and all government employees every one .

Bob Van Noy , December 15, 2016 at 5:18 pm

It's truly maddening having ones perception managed. Thank you Robert Parry for helping us resist such management with the only weapons we have and that is our experience and ability to decipher what we read. These are frustrating times because powerful special interest forces are at war with each other and it becomes nearly impossible to discern fact from fiction. Fortunately we have your reputation for reporting factually to guide us through this unbelievably dishonest period of our democratic experience.

There is a good exchange between Professor Stephen Cohen and Kenneth Roth of Human Rights Watch on Democracy Now at the following link. I would encourage those not familiar with these observers to look up their history and judge their statements for yourselves

http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/stephen_cohen_the_new_york_times_is_enabling_a_new_20161215

Randy Torres , December 15, 2016 at 5:07 pm

I spent 3 weeks in Russia and was amazed by what I saw. Sanctions are a joke. Russians have just simply replaced Western goods with their own, which in many cases are of better quality. The only shortages I noticed were of American crap. Two things stood out about Moscow and St. Petersburg vs. New York City where I live: 1) everything was so clean and spotless, hardly any graffiti; and 2) how clean and efficient (and cheap) their subway system was relative to NYC. Some of their stations look like museums, spotless and no rats. Also, trains that run on time and no delays due to "sick passengers" or "train traffic ahead" and free wifi everywhere including trains and not just on select stations. Russia isn't perfect of course, but it is far far far from being the dungeon depicted in the US media. On the contrary Moscow and St. Petersburg are in many ways better places to live than New York.

Geoffrey de Galles , December 16, 2016 at 5:48 am

Hear, hear -- I, for one, know exactly what you mean. My wife and I are western Europeans (Germany / UK) who, beginning in the early 1970s, ended up spending half our lives in the very heart of Manhattan. That was great, as far as it went. But then in 2002, upon returning home from almost a month spent in Russia with my elderly father (who, as a UK Russophile, had visited the USSR + Russia by then well over a score of times, beginning as a seaman during WWII), I felt compelled to admit to my dear Frau that, had things only been a lot different back in the '60s & 70s (viz., the Cold War!), we'd have done much better for ourselves to have headed east, rather than to have ever gone west. After all, Russia has true culture and -- in its own unique way -- just the kind of fine taste that one encounters in, say, Italy, France, or Spain. Moreover, the common folk are so very much more 'honest-to-goodness' and 'for real' than, typically, one finds in the west. -- – Those who have never visited Russia and are consequently clueless about its current cultural ambience might do well to go check out on YouTube the some two dozen postings of the Moscow girlie-trio, YOUNG ADULTS. A few of their videos indicate their (understandable enough) roots in and devotion to Russian musical traditions; but, for the most part, their repertoire attests to their pro-active reverence for modern western (US + UK) music (featuring their astonishing covers of recent classics from the likes of, e.g., the Red Hot Chili Peppers, Pharrell Williams, the Black Eyed Peas, Beyonce, and Amy Whitehouse). Improbably and extraordinarily, almost always the YOUNG ADULTS manage to exhume and tease out the real music buried and entombed in the often raucous and vulgar renditions of the chosen songs' originators (!!!); but, in any case, the tender-loving-musical-care that they invest in everything they do attests to their respect and reverence for western music, and even the very culture that has begotten it. -- – Oh that the United States and Europe would similarly partake of, share in, regenerate and propagate that essential magnanimity of the great Russian people. -- And thanks again Randy for your post.

hyperbola , December 15, 2016 at 5:06 pm

Deconstructing Russophobia
https://off-guardian.org/2016/06/16/deconstructing-russophobia/

Imagine that Vladimir Putin were not a murderous autocrat and kleptocrat who has spent his fourteen years in power living up to his KGB past and dragging Russia ever back towards Communist autocracy, illiberalism, and expansionism. Imagine that instead he were one of the greatest leaders that Russia has had, whose policies have helped produce a massive rise in living standards and life expectancy, recuperation of national pride, and enforcement of the rule of law, who has tackled kleptocrats and gangsters wisely and well, whose foreign policy has on balance been realistic, diplomatic, and conducive to peace, who has presided over a country of which the human rights record is considerably better than that of the United States and in which civil rights are improving, and who richly deserves the steady support of 65% – currently at a Ukraine-related high of 83% – of the population that he possesses. It is my understanding that the reality is closer to the second scenario than the first – and I may note that I say this as someone with no ethnic, financial, professional or political ties to Russia whatsoever. It follows that I am not a Russian expert – but nor am I, on the other hand, parti pris. I am a friendly, distanced observer of the country.

Let me start by explaining the history of my connection to the country. .

Michael Morrissey , December 16, 2016 at 5:52 am

Thank you, hyperbola, for this link. Didn't know about Off-Guardian. Every major newspaper needs a dedicated "Off" site. The NYT used to have "Lies of Our Times" but it folded after a couple of years and was never big enough to keep up with the propaganda pouring out of the Giant Wurlitzer. Times are different now, with the internet. I would love to see at least one Off site for every "news" outlet, and even though it would be impossible to do that for tv and radio, having the "paper record" consistently deconstructed would be a huge step forward.

Jerry Falkenstein , December 16, 2016 at 11:41 am

"Imagine that Vladimir Putin were not a murderous autocrat and kleptocrat who has spent his fourteen years in power living up to his KGB past and dragging Russia ever back towards Communist autocracy, illiberalism, and expansionism."
Who said that? I never thought that. Did the neocons say that? I was thinking lately that probably Stalin wasn't really as bad as I was brought up to believe. In fact I hardly believe anything our government says anymore.

Abe , December 17, 2016 at 6:41 pm

"Deconstructing Russophobia" is a superb account from British academic Catherine Brown. As always, thanks to OffGuardian.

Highly recommended:

Canadian independent journalist Eva Bartlett cuts through the war propaganda on Syria
https://off-guardian.org/2016/12/16/eva-bartlett-on-syria-responding-to-buzzfeed/

eric , December 19, 2016 at 1:13 am

You seem like a smart man but Putin was not the ruler for 6 of those 14 years . Medvedev was and he also was a good leader like you described Putin might be . It was Medvedev that said No when Georgia attack south Ossettia . It was Medvedev that showed the world the bear was back . Ever since we attacked Yugoslavia and fired a missile into the Chinese Embassy accidently on purpose than issued orders for NATO to shoot Russian soldiers because they will try to protect Christians . Ever since these stupid power mistakes Russia and China have had our number . They are together and looking for chance to get even . Humiliate us like we did them , They have been working together for 17 years with this goal in mind . Now they are in Syria with their new weapons doing what they want to and humiliating us . I say good they are finishing the war we started and are doing what we should have done congradulations Russia and Putin and thank you very much

The Artist formerly known as young man , December 15, 2016 at 4:49 pm

Apparently Churchill once said: "History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it". The American version of this quote? – History will be kind to us, for we intend to repeat it.

That pretty much sums up the current drive for starting Cold War 2 by the Americans (They were responsible for starting the first one too, by the way). Their way of thinking is – Cold War 1 took care of the Soviet Union, so hopefully Cold War 2 will take care of Russia. Not so fast amigos.

Americans repeat history not because they didn't learn something from it, but because they draw wrong conclusions from it. Just because they "won" the Cold War 1, it doesn't mean that they should expect to "win" a second one too. The stakes are much different now. It's much easier to give up on ideology than it is to give up on the place where you live.

Or maybe the Americans decided to tweak a little bit another saying: "Insanity is repeating the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result". I actually think that repeating the same thing over and over again and expecting the same results is equally insane. Circumstances change, you know, the world is not an isolated laboratory where you can eliminate external factors. The experiment might fail this time. But don't listen to me, go about your business.

Dwight , December 15, 2016 at 4:48 pm

The Union for Concerned Scientists has joined in this hysteria in a press release about Trump's appointment of Exxon CEO Tillerson as Secretary of State. UCS President Ken Kimmell states: "This position calls for someone able to put national security and the well-being of Americans first and foremost. But Tillerson's close ties to President Putin and Russian oligarchs call into question his ability to deal firmly with Russia, which attempted to disrupt U.S. elections according to U.S. intelligence agencies."

http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/secretary-of-state-pick-cements-governance-by-oil

The main concern Kimmell raises in the press release is climate change, and I can certainly understand an environmental group being concerned about an oil exec as Secretary of State with climate negotiations in his portfolio. However, a new Cold War is the last thing we need if we want reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, and détente with Russia could enable cooperation on climate change. Decades of inaction ago, Robert Redford called this "Greenhouse Glasnost" in his book of that name with articles by U.S. and Soviet climate scientists.

UCS also works on risks of nuclear power and nuclear weapons, which are related concerns on which we international cooperation not a new arms race and more proxy wars.

I learned about the UCS press release in an email from a local environment group which repeated the gratuitous attack on Russia in seeking donations. It is sad to see this meme spreading among people that should be thinking deeper about the implications of détente versus cold war.

Rob , December 17, 2016 at 1:30 pm

Human caused warming of the climate is the ultimate danger facing the planet, and it is entirely appropriate for those who recognize this fact to be alarmed that our next Secretary of State will be a person whose entire career has been devoted to extracting fossil fuels from the earth and burning them. Moreover, there is strong evidence that Tillerson and Exxon were well aware of the deleterious effects of greenhouse gases, even as they were minimizing those risks to the public. This is the basis for the "Exxon knew" campaign, which is getting little attention in the press (unsurprisingly.)

Which raises the obvious question: Could Donald Trump not have found someone other than a climate change denying, fossil fuel extracting corporate titan to run the State Department and lower tensions with Russia? Of course he could have, but he didn't, because Trump himself does not accept the reality of global warming. Thus we should not be surprised by his appointment of Tillerson to State or oil industry tool Greg Pruitt to the EPA. Trump's motto might as well be "screw the planet."

eric , December 19, 2016 at 12:38 am

No Trumps motto is screw the liars

BccList , December 15, 2016 at 4:43 pm

This article was so over needed. While the content within won't make it to any MSM report (until, perhaps, months/years down the road), I was sure -- as an adamant progressive with cyber security background -- to post it to every social media outlet I use and send to email chains where it's me vs a bunch of "liberal-hawk" friends.

I can understand/deal with one absurd, hawkish and out of touch/reality party. But, to have both in the same boat, is really, REALLY scary stuff. The stuff that makes a Trump presidency alone seem like a walk in the park.

James lake , December 15, 2016 at 4:38 pm

Interesting article. Clinton, and her echo chamber in the media with all this Russia bashing really are tone deaf.
She misjudged the voter and showed no sense of their concerns.
They were thinking about jobs and health and other concerns, her only policy was more war.

If Trump can stop the neo cons that in itself will be a great achievement for America and the world.

Jessejean , December 15, 2016 at 11:00 pm

But first Rachel Mddow has to destroy her credibility by hysterically pushing the 3rd way, corporate dem, neoliberal Cold War, CIA driven excuses for losing power to a discredited Rethuglican party over the last 16years.

eric , December 19, 2016 at 12:31 am

Trump did stop the establishment of both political parties and that was the neocons too Than he tripped the pope when we learned the Vatican had a wall around it too . Now his only trouble is the FBI and the CIA and they heading for the dust bin of political history unless they can shoot him first .

Patricia Guerrero , December 15, 2016 at 4:13 pm

Thank you for this. Its difficult to sort out sometimes the twists and turns of politics. as a dem/dove who is appalled at what our foreign policies have been, although I don't like trump, I thought an easing of cold war hostilities with Russia was a good thing. Now I know why. I only voted for Clinton because I thought it was the only way to help further Sanders agenda. I cannot forget that she grinned as she stood behind her husband when he signed the bill that killed Glass Steagal or her support for the first Iraqi invasion and continuing hawkishness. I don't despise her like some do but I could never really warm up to her. Sanders is very authentic; when asked about human rights for Palestine he was the only politician that at least said they were entitled; all Clinton could repeat was "precautions must be taken". With HRC she came across as espousing policies to win votes, not that she was passionate or even honest about them.

Stephen Sivonda , December 15, 2016 at 11:00 pm

Patricia Guerrero It's good to read that someone is beginning to develop an awareness of what passes for our Govt. today. It is somewhat complicated as there are many layers of that are only interested in their wallets and how far up the power food chain they can go. I've tried in vain to describe to several friends some of the reasons why certain events happen and use the analogy of a "Big Puzzle" . It's my version of critical thinking. Once one starts to look at past and current events (those being pieces of the puzzle) , then things begin to connect and take shape .as similar to filling in the voids in the puzzle. Your mentioning of HRC standing behind Bill Clinton and grinning jumped out at me .as a person who is on track to seeing what a morass of evil we have for Govt. and the political machinations by the DC insiders. God save the Republic.

exiled off mainstreet , December 16, 2016 at 12:39 pm

Unfortunately Sanders has jumped the shark supporting this effort aimed at demonizing Russia to overturn the election results. It proves he was either weak, a fraud, or both, unfortunately. This will damage the democratic brand long-term, although if Tulsi Gabbard becomes a candidate it may be a way out of the trap.

Zachary Smith , December 15, 2016 at 4:08 pm

The Moon of Alabama site has a new post about the motives of this latest "stuff".

The "Elite" Coup Of 2016

My only quibble with it is that he neglected to mention other people who would prefer President Hillary or President Pence.

Abe , December 15, 2016 at 3:47 pm

German political theorist Carl Schmitt defined the content of politics as opposition to any person or entity that represents a serious threat or conflict to one's own interests. The "other" or the "stranger" is defined as an "enemy"

For Schmitt, the political is not an autonomous domain equivalent to any other domain, such as the economic, but instead is the "existential" basis that would determine any other domain should it reach the point of politics.

Schmitt defined the enemy as whoever is "in a specially intense way, existentially something different and alien, so that in the extreme case conflicts with him are possible."

For Schmitt, such an "existential" enemy need not even be based on nationality: so long as the conflict is potentially intense enough to become a violent one between political entities, the actual substance of enmity may be anything.

Leo Strauss, a follower of political Zionist Vladimir Jabotinsky, had a position at the Academy of Jewish Research in Berlin. Strauss wrote to Schmitt in 1932 and summarized Schmitt's political theology thus: "[B]ecause man is by nature evil, he therefore needs dominion. But dominion can be established, that is, men can be unified only in a unity against – against other men. Every association of men is necessarily a separation from other men – the political thus understood is not the constitutive principle of the state, of order, but a condition of the state"

With a letter of recommendation from Schmitt, Strauss received a fellowship from the Rockefeller Foundation to begin work, in France, on a study of Hobbes. Schmitt went on to become an influential figure in the new Nazi government of Adolf Hitler.

In the late 1930s, as Hitler's Reich was expanding in Europe, Schmitt developed his concept of "Grossraum", literally "great-space". The term has a sense of a "sphere" of influence, and "geopolitical space" may be closer to the meaning.

Schmitt intended the Grossraum concept to grasp an area or region that goes beyond a single state (that is, a specific territory), to comprehend much larger scale spatial orderings, complexes or arrangements.

After World War II, Schmitt considered the United States to be the only political entity capable of resolving what he regarded as the crisis of global order.

Indirectly influenced by Schmitt's concept of the political, twenty-first century American Superpower "exceptionalism" has no space in its Grossraum concept for a "Eurasia".

The very enunciation of a "Eurasian" political sphere by Russia and China is regarded by American Superpower as a "terrorist" act. All those associated with such "lunacy" are viewed as geopolitical "enemies" to be annihilated by any means possible.

For more on Schmitt see:

Reading Schmitt geopolitically: Nomos, territory and Grossraum
By Stuart Elden
https://progressivegeographies.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/reading-schmitt-geopolitically.pdf

CitizenOne , December 15, 2016 at 10:13 pm

You said, "In the late 1930s, as Hitler's Reich was expanding in Europe, Schmitt developed his concept of "Grossraum", literally "great-space". The term has a sense of a "sphere" of influence, and "geopolitical space" may be closer to the meaning."
This is the story of America. From the Revolution to Expansionism and then on to Manifest Destiny and our winning position in both World Wars, America has always been about creating geographic space, political space and recently even in Outer Space.

The Star Wars or Space Defense Initiative proposed by Reagan was an attempt to create Space Superiority in Outer Space. They even have a branch of the Air force called Space Command. http://www.afspc.af.mil/ . The Mission statement for Space Command defines Space Superiority as the freedom of the United States to defend itself from attack in Outer Space as well as the freedom to attack any target from Outer Space. The targets might be other orbital craft in Outer Space such as satellites or any land based target. Space Superiority is perhaps the ultimate vision of domination. The freedom from attack in Outer Space and the freedom to attack from Outer Space on any land or space based target will mean an escalation of space based weapons which are banned by international treaties like international treaties on Antarctica which declare Antarctica to be free of politically motivated land grabs by any Nation.

I can only imagine what will happen when they find oil under the ice covered Continent once all the ice melts.

What we need is a rational government that is concerned with this inevitable clash of capitalistic goals and the environment.

I think our military is actually concerned about these inevitable outcomes if we continue to fill the atmosphere with greenhouse gasses. The Navy and the Air force have been actively seeking alternatives to a fossil fueled military but they have been blocked at every turn.

What we really need is a revolutionary fuel source like Fusion to save the day. It might be right around the corner. The military is investing heavily in it. They see the destabilization of the economic and geographic regions of the World due to climactic change as threats to our National Security.

Fission is also realistically possible as an alternative. But political intransigence has stifled progress on that front. Watch "Pandora's Promise" which is a documentary by ex-antinuclear activists. I'll sum it up in an epitaph for humanity which reads "They were most afraid of what could have saved them and they were unafraid of what killed them".

One fact is clear. The future stability of World governments and their populations depends on abundant energy. There is no other single driver of prosperity and stability than affordable abundant energy. It was the driver for the rural electrification program under FDR. Back then they understood this equation and mounted massive public spending to make it happen. The recent rise of southern state populations can be attributed to the development of Air Conditioning which made these regions habitable in the Summer months. Thus was born an economic expansion which drove our former Cotton Belt into a new industrial giant.

Some visionaries have laid plans for a solar based economy which would utilize massive banks of lithium batteries to break the old myth that electricity cannot be stored. Elon Musk is one of those visionaries. Entire cities could be powered at night by batteries.

The global crisis in energy supply is being driven by the same folks who imposed unfair tariffs on goods before the Revolution. They would like none other than to hold us hostage in an oil economy which very well might kill us all.

Modern developments in photo-voltaic cells have resulted in a continuous manufacturing process which utilizes plasma deposition of a multi layered dielectric film onto a substrate such as rolls of steel sheet which results in and amorphous coating capable of rivaling monocrystalline cells. The result is a process which resembles the revolution Gutenberg started with his "printing press". Instead of growing Silicon Crystals and doping them with rare elements, the plasma deposition process uses a continuous sheet of a substrate passed through an interlock chamber into a high vacuum chamber where various materials are deposited as a plasma onto the substrate in a continuous fashion to produce a finished product which can be cut up into tiles for low cost and installed on roofs to generate electricity. The difference in this technology is akin to a scribe hand copying books verses a Xerox machine doing the same thing. It is the same difference between the time Bibles were the property of the Church and to be caught in possession of one was a capital offense and modern times where paperboys deliver newspapers for cents on the dollar.

Whether it is a Fusion or Fission or Solar or even a tidal based form of unlimited energy, one thing is clear. These technologies are real. They exist. To the extent that we drive our planet into a mass extinction by burning fossil fuels or we transition to clean energy which is abundant and practically free will determine whether we end up holed up in a cave with our guns ready to shoot anyone crossing our sights or whether we transition into an economy where energy is essentially free.

The new administration is increasingly looking like it wants to live in the cage. A cage determined by a global economy based on oil and fossil fuels.

If Donald Trump really wants to create jobs he would be well advised to divest himself from fossil fuels and take a turn toward the future as envisioned by leaders like Elon Musk. The Army did not make their move lightly on the Dakota Access pipeline. They have a duty to defend us from security threats. They take that responsibility seriously. We would be wise to listen to them.

I know that all of the corporate people interested in preserving their economic investments in fossil fuels have to take a deep breath and submerge themselves into the unknown waters of a non-oil based business model. But they need to see the vision. They need to know that their future success depends on it. They need to act quickly and pour their profits int the many available means to provide an energy rich future where many things are possible and opportunity abounds.

There are two kinds of people or for that matter two kinds of corporations or governments. There are those that hold onto old business plans and defend them at all costs believing their old business models will save them and there are those who see opportunity where others see only risk. It is those individuals, companies or governments which see the opportunities for continued growth utilizing new technology who will succeed. Those who are paralyzed by old business models and old paradigms will fall to the wayside.

We don't want the USA to be one of the losers. If Donald Trump wants to be the "more jobs" president he will embrace new technology and not appoint members of the old guard as the stewards of America's future.

It is not a matter for debate. The fields of technology will continue to open up potentials for a more stable and economically rich future. These things are real and they are up for grabs. Whoever grabs them first will be the winner. Whoever refuses to grab them will be the loser.

This is an ask. Donald Trump can do it. He is an outsider and not involved in the business of government. Many of his ideas are fresh and hold great promise. Some of his appointment show he might be being blindsided. He should council himself with the members of our National Security Team who want to see a secure future and distance himself from those who want to preserve the old guard.

David F , December 16, 2016 at 11:04 am

This sort of advocacy for some technological fix that allows us to go on living in the same, or greater, fashion than we are now, is part of the problem.

We live in a finite space, with finite resources, time to start acting like it.

Abe , December 16, 2016 at 6:41 pm

CitizenOne, your comment is right on topic if the topic is fake news.

"Pandora's Promise" is a pro-nuclear industry propaganda film. The new pro-nuke missionaries are promoting nuclear material as some kind of savior of the global environment when it is precisely the opposite.

Elon Musk, Richard Branson, and their oligarch chums can blast off to go colonize Mars with Trump, Clinton, and all their wannabe cabinet appointees.

We'll keep our money and finally build a grid that fully integrates clean energy from abundant renewable resources like solar and wind.

Joe Levantine , December 17, 2016 at 3:57 am

@ Citizen One
Your comments are very insightful since you commented on the most important issue that is at the core of international conflict.
However, if history is any guide, your hopes will unfortunately be nothing more than wishful thinking. The case for my pessimism is none other than the great Nicholas Tesla. Tesla, who by Einstein's reckoning is the greatest scientific mind that has ever been was wasted by the powers that be because he was on the verge of discovering free and clean energy. He did emulate thunder in his lab. His quest was to harness the electricity in the ionosphere and channel it for human use through a central tower. His research on plasma was way ahead of his time. His reward was an assassination attempt by the energy cabal who were hell bent on keeping their monopoly power through the fossil fuel business. When Tesla's lab went on fire, it was U.S. Government agents who stormed into his lab and confiscated all of his files, thereby putting a sad end to history's greatest mind. The silence of history books about Tesla speaks volumes about the matrix controllers' animosity to this unique man.
To expect from Donald Trump to be a selfless hero is stretching reality over the limit. His presidency did save the world another round of in the White House for the Clinton ghouls. Yet, his potential for reforms is very much restrained since his ascendancy to power came through the ballot box and not through a real revolution.

Leibniz16 , December 18, 2016 at 1:00 am

The Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) was conceived by Lyndon LaRouche and his associates was conceived as a strategic flank to prevent those in both the American and Soviet spheres, of launching a "First Strike" thermonuclear attack which was the increasing danger at the time, to which with Obama is a threat as great as ever. Furthermore it was a strategy of helping both the U.S and Soviets out of the economic collapse, which is still occurring, through what would be a cooperative "Science Driver" approach, that would be working on areas of plasma physics and other areas of concerns relevant to a entire revolution of energy production.

It was LaRouche and associates that published a magazine called Fusion, working on advanced nuclear technologies to help
revolutionize mankind's potential, and break out from the control of the financial oligarchy.

Presently we at the verge of a complete energy revolution through the discoveries of Randy Mills and his Brilliant Light Power Company that has a verified demonstration of a novel understanding of the hydrogen atom, whereby the electron orbit is dropped to a lower spin state, releasing vast amounts of energy.

Brad Owen , December 18, 2016 at 10:46 am

Well said, citizen one. It all really does boil down to abundant energy, and energy flux density, as Lyndon Larouche says. We wil advance onward through denser energy flux production. It's what people DO, as naturally as lions hunt and birds fly; technological advancements is what people do, from chipped flint stone tools to fusion-powered space flight to Mars in a weeks time, and beyond that stage too. In this NEXT round of technological advancement, China, India, and Russia will be leading the way, as it is THEY who are now the World leaders. I'm confident we'll break free of the Imperial Straitjacket that has been affixed upon us by other powers in opposition to our Constitution and republican principles (i.e. Patriots, NOT the Tory-Loyalists-to-Empire-and-"Crowns", that still infest our nation, doing the bidding of ancient Imperial family lines, seeking to "capture" us and make us their simple-minded beasts-of-burden).

CitizenOne , December 18, 2016 at 11:42 pm

In reply to to Abe. France is not Fake News. They generate 80% of their electricity from Nuclear Fission. Modern reactor designs are safe. There is a word for it, failsafe. Westinghouse invented the spring to close air to open brake and we were all not afraid of runaway trains anymore. Technological advances and really any technological problem is usually a very simple solution like the air brake but now in modern times simple solutions to problems are drowned by politics. That is the thing that makes technology fail fail. The technological solutions are usually sound but where we need them we need to put off the politics live with the occasional unintended consequences and let the inventors course correct rather than condemning failure and halting all progress. Where would we be if, after the first Mercury Rocket blew up, we threw water on space adventure calling it a doomed technology? Luckily that did not happen.

In response to David F:

I suppose then we should all be living in a cave painting the walls with mystical creatures since technological solutions are doomed to failure. Are you living in a cave? I don't think so. Perhaps you are or should be since you eschew any form of technology, live in a finite fixed environment and are prepared to be a victim of circumstance. That is some kind of crazy world view.

In response to Brad Owen:

I completely agree. Abundant energy is the key to our future growth. Indeed it is what people DO. I also agree that that it is unfortunately what other nations are doing way ahead of us. If we do not get on the bandwagon and decide that the future is all about abundant energy then we will become the losers in the technology front. As I laid it out, the technological means to transform our world into whatever we want it to be are already here. They have been developed and even more are being developed which have the potential to power a bright future like the invention of electric power grids which power industry, economies and enable commerce.

It is time for science and technology to be applied to the problems we face developing new means of energy production that are all around us from solar to battery technology to fusion, biofuels, nuclear fission using safe technology, wind, tidal and even really challenging technologies but if we are not investing in it, then it means we are not investing in any new energy sources.

The history of past inventions was not made by those that said the technology was a fools errand. The inventions were made by visionaries who had the stamina to endure all of those folks who poo pooed the new technology and eventually prevailed.

It is really not a matter of if but when we will enter a new age of abundant energy. Energy drives everything and it also is the most important factor for peace. Abundant energy establishes the wealth of nations more than money. Without it, money is worthless since it cannot be used to purchase the motive driver for creation of goods and services.

The history of the Industrial revolution was driven by energy. Abundant energy.

The Sun fuses ten million tons of hydrogen every second and it will last for ten billion years. How is that for a clue that life on Earth depends on abundant energy. If we were able to fuse even just one ton of hydrogen every second in the production of electricity we would power the entire planet. If we could just convert one percent of the solar energy impinging on our tiny dot of a planet circling around the huge nuclear furnace of the Sun we would power the entire global electricity requirements for a long time to come.

These are the visions we need to be occupied by. Not visions of impending doom or hopelessness.

What we need now is an energy race. An energy race to create a new economy which is driven by safe energy. Photosynthetic cells which are like photovoltaic cells consume atmospheric Carbon Dioxide using solar energy to produce Carbon Monoxide and Oxygen. The CO can be used as a feed stock to produce hydrocarbons which can be synthesized into synthetic fuels which create a carbon cycle which is entirely atmospheric. If we want to reduce atmospheric CO2 we can just pump the fuels back into the ground or use them to produce durable products like cement which can be used for construction.

I know that this might seem like a pipe dream and perhaps it is. It will not be a pipe dream when we feel the full effects of global warming. Then there will be a market for these products.

The politics will reverse as people seek products that enable them to survive. It is what people do. It is what life does. It seeks to preserve itself. Technology will offer appealing alternatives which are even more economical than current energy platforms. It will make economic sense to adopt them.

It made economical sense to adopt our current energy platform and the new energy platforms will make just as much economic sense.

We are already seeing this transition from Coal to Natural Gas driven by the technology of fracking which is cleaner than coal and is now more economically advantageous. Coal is not dying because of government regulations. It is dying because there are cheaper alternatives. Win Win for the environment and the consumers of energy and the producers of it.

But the fracking revolution is just the first wave in new technologies to harvest ever more abundant and cleaner safer forms of energy.

This is not wishful thinking. It has happened with fracking and it will continue to happen with other forms of energy over and over.

Those that see the potential opportunities will become the future energy barons.

I would ask only that we would see the movements by other nations as a shot across the bow that we better get to work. We don't want to be left behind in the energy bonanza just around the corner.

It is a gold mine out there for the companies that develop the next generation of massive abundant energy sources. They will gain great wealth. They will be viewed like Edison or Fermi. Prometheus unchained.

Do not listen to the hysterical mob. Instead listen to the visionaries who will all get very wealthy with new technological inventions.

It is the way it has always been and so it will be in the future. We never go back. We never force a halt to the current way we do things. We just invent better ways of doing it that make more economic sense and make the old ways obsolete.

Perhaps some might advocate we all return to the caves where we hid from the cold of winter in our elk skin coats huddling over a campfire and drawing pictures of the food we wanted to eat but did not have as we sucked the marrow out of dry bones but I think that is not a future I want to see.

I would rather offer to sell the cavemen guns and ammunition and snowmobiles and portable propane heaters with sofas and furniture for their caves instead. And you know what? They would be lined up around the cave entrance to buy them.

Think about it.

Abe , December 21, 2016 at 3:25 pm

Citizen One, your news about nuclear power in France is fake.

Power generation is down and wholesale power prices are rising due to numerous safety and integrity issues that plague Électricité de France SA's (EDF's) nuclear reactor fleet. Carbon segregation in critical nuclear plant components like the steel pressure vessel can weaken the vessel's structure and breach safety regulations, potentially leading to catastrophic events.

http://www.powermag.com/frances-nuclear-storm-many-power-plants-down-due-to-quality-concerns/

eric , December 19, 2016 at 12:12 am

Nobody is stopping free energy development I 'am from Missouri Free energy will come from free enterprise not government subsidies .. We will have new development and new and better ideas but show me don't tell me . Scams are scams wether the come from crooks or the government and they often are the same thing .

Ragnar Ragnarsson , December 15, 2016 at 3:25 pm

Thank you for being the voice of reason and truth teller that you are Mr. Parry. I sincerely hope the domestic coup in progress fails miserably and that Trump is able to pursue peace. I am so sick of Neo-cons and what they've done to the world.

Howard Mettee , December 15, 2016 at 5:59 pm

Thank you Mr. Parry for shining the spotlight on the vitally important topics that you do to keep us informed in depth. As one who tries to see the world through the lens of parity between nation states, I wonder what you (or other qualified folks) could tell us about the efforts we Americans have made and are currently making to influence influence, and very likely undermine, the stability of Russia and President Putin. My guess is we are not without serious complicity in doing the same things as we now accuse the Russians of doing to us, but of course much of this would be classified. I suspect the more holier than thou we are, the more committed we are to destabilizing the so-called "enemy" of Russia (despite our measured provocations to precipitate their alleged aggression(s). Thank you again, have a great holiday season.

Robert Keith , December 16, 2016 at 1:00 pm

Speaking of our "holier-than-thou" attitude, let me relate a personal story that relieved me of this attitude a long time ago. Re cently , I have been vindicated as regards any doubts that I might have had about that change of attitude.

During the relatively early years of the Cold War (1956-59), you know, just before the Chinese split with the Soviets in 1960, the Berlin Wall went up in 1961, and Gary Powers was shot down, igniting the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, it was my job as a Naval Pilot to fly up and down the Far Eastern coastline (12-mile limit) of the Soviet Union (you know, Kamchatka Peninsula) looking for trouble. Didn't find much, except the frequent Mig-17 flying my wingtips, who might have been wondering what we were doing there BUZZING THEIR SHIPS. No problem, they didn't shoot me down, for which I am grateful. But I did wonder what WE would have done if THEY had been flying so closely up and down OUR California coast.The American public never heard about these "intrusions" in the Russian "space". Nor did the Russians publicize them for the obvious reason (embarrassment?).

Come 2016 and OUR ships are cruising around in the Baltic not far from the suburbs of St. Petersburg, when Russian jets come looking for trouble(?) buzzing OUR ships.. And there erupted a hypocritical hue and cry from the DOD, etal. to match the usual black pot and black kettle stories that we hear so often from our powers that be. Not only are we doing the same to them (buzzing their ships once, or we would have heard about them the other times) that we have been doing to them for 70 year, though not on our California or New York coastline, but in their back yard. This is hypocrisy on steroids. This is deeply embarrassing to me.personally. Are we that desperate? Who really are these people who are stirring the pot so vigorously?

EyesWideOpen , December 16, 2016 at 4:50 pm

"Who really are these people who are stirring the pot so vigorously?"
I assume yours is a rhetorical question.

Robert Keith , December 16, 2016 at 5:14 pm

For: EyesWideOpen

The pot I am referring to is the context in which everything bad is blamed on Russia. In this case, we can buzz, they can't. If they do it, it's publicized. If we do it, it's not.

Yes, I guess that it was a rhetorical question with the implication that the answer should be obvious. All you have to do is read the papers, and it should be obvious who wants to litigate (gossip) this issue to death.

Minnesota Mary , December 18, 2016 at 4:31 pm

Thank you for your testimony! America's government is so hypocritical. Our news media is so dishonest in what it filters and chooses to tell the American people. Lies abound, and it is nearly impossible for most people to sort through them.

Robert Keith , December 16, 2016 at 4:55 pm

Correction to my reply: "Not only have WE been doing the same to THEM for almost 70 years right off THEIR coastline, NOT OURS, but WE have complained when THEY did this ONCE to us IN THEIR BACKYARD."

eric , December 18, 2016 at 10:50 pm

I guess we funded many ngos to destabilize Russia . So many that Russia has forced many U.S.aid groups to move out of Russia by the end of this year . We funded the Pussy riot girls that did things in the Churches in Russia that would have brought the girls to the insane asylum if they did these deeds in Churches in the USA In Russia the girls got prison sentences So our journalists could write stories about how oppressive Russia .is to people loving freedom . Russia does not allow gay marriage another terrible oppression and black mark on freedom in Russia .. Russia has built more Christian churches than any other country in Europe under Putin's kGB leadership . Putin is not Satan . The Russian people are proud with him as their leader it is only us that wants to get rid of him .

Adele Roof , December 15, 2016 at 6:11 pm

Thank you for this thoughtful, well-informed post. You are right -- many Democrats, and I was one, did not vote for Clinton because she was a war monger. I also felt, that as a woman, she would have to go out of her way to prove that she was as tough as any male.

She obviously learned nothing from her disastrous vote for the war in Iraq, because she influenced Obama to take out Qaddafi. If it were not for her lust for war, I probably would have held my nose and voted for her. And while I did not vote for Trump, I actually breathed a sigh of relief when he won, thinking that he wouldn't take us into war with Russia.

To date, there's no proof that the Russians were involved in hacking/leaking this information. But if this is causing such a stir as to have some want to overturn the results of the presidential election, then, by rights, to be morally consistent, they should also push for going back to the Democratic primaries and redoing them as well. Clearly this hacked/leaked information shows that the Democrats interfered with the election of Sanders. That would be most fair, don't you think?

exiled off mainstreet , December 16, 2016 at 12:36 pm

Parry's article is again excellent. The lamestream democrats are jumping the fascist shark and putting our future at risk. I also am a lifelong democrat who couldn't support the harpy because of her obvious hawkishness and status as a war criminal based on her architecture of the Libya destruction. I also think her need to prove herself as tough as any man colors her dangerous political views. I also agree that the fact it was proven that she is a proven war criminal and they gamed the primaries against Sanders should eliminate any support for overturning the election on any basis absent the fact that any success in this endeavour would lead to civil unrest and that what they are demanding, confrontation with Russia, is a threat to our future. Hopefully former peace types still taken in by the klinton koolaid will wake up and restore the Democratic party away from its present incarnation as a fascist militarist threat to our survival.

Jon Olsen , December 18, 2016 at 3:37 pm

Good idea Adele, New election, given all the crap Jill Stein found in the very limited recount effort she was allowed to conduct. The election process is putrid rotten! Let er and Gary Johnson into the debates this time around as well.

eric , December 18, 2016 at 11:05 pm

yes but I'am hoping you made a wise choice . Trump may not be a old fashion vote no on every thing republican I'am expecting good reasonable priced healthcare covering everybody and not costing employers so much they won't hire any one . That alone might bring back a lot of jobs . I voted with you and now I think we have a better future . Of course we could be friends with Russia . Russia is not communist anymore . They are the most Christian country in Europe and we are the most Christian country in the world . We should be natural friends

Jerry Falkenstein , December 16, 2016 at 11:11 am

2 comments
Dmitry Orlov cluborlov.blogspot.com

Dmitri Orlov cluborlov.blogspot.com

With all the compost being forwarded in cyber space it's refreshing to occasionally read something that's spot on the money. An article that actually contains real value or what one might call nourishment for the brain. Every so often I'll read a post that's near perfection and I just did. It's by Dmitry Orlov and titled "The Power of "Nyet". My expressed thanks go out for Dmitrys permission to repost this exceptional piece of commentary.

The Power of "Nyet" Author Dmitry Orlov, Club Orlov Blogpost
Tuesday, July 26, 2016
Kerry Putin lavrov The way things are supposed to work on this planet is like this: in the United States, the power structures (public and private) decide what they want the rest of the world to do. They communicate their wishes through official and unofficial channels, expecting automatic cooperation. If cooperation is not immediately forthcoming, they apply political, financial and economic pressure. If that still doesn't produce the intended effect, they attempt regime change through a color revolution or a military coup, or organize and finance an insurgency leading to terrorist attacks and civil war in the recalcitrant nation. If that still doesn't work, they bomb the country back to the stone age. This is the way it worked in the 1990s and the 2000s, but as of late a new dynamic has emerged.

In the beginning it was centered on Russia, but the phenomenon has since spread around the world and is about to engulf the United States itself. It works like this: the United States decides what it wants Russia to do and communicates its wishes, expecting automatic cooperation. Russia says "Nyet." The United States then runs through all of the above steps up to but not including the bombing campaign, from which it is deterred by Russia's nuclear deterrent. The answer remains "Nyet." One could perhaps imagine that some smart person within the US power structure would pipe up and say: "Based on the evidence before us, dictating our terms to Russia doesn't work; let's try negotiating with Russia in good faith as equals." And then everybody else would slap their heads and say, "Wow! That's brilliant! Why didn't we think of that?" But instead that person would be fired that very same day because, you see, American global hegemony is nonnegotiable. And so what happens instead is that the Americans act baffled, regroup and try again, making for quite an amusing spectacle.

eric , December 18, 2016 at 11:44 pm

You have got the whole story down right .accept China is standing along side of Russia . They have been ever since we humiliated both of them in Yugoslavia . Now both of them have developed a lot of new weapons and Russia is in Syria with their new planes and missiles 300 and 400 . Putin has told us we can talk about changes that we could maybe make . But the NWO has already decided everything they don't want to consider any changes . Not for us , Not for Christians , not for Jews , not for Muslims , not for Russians and not for any Chinamen either . They have already made all the orders and rules . Russia said Nyet in Georgia and now Russia is saying Nyet in Syria too . The Russian people are totally behind their government and proud of Putin .The American people have finally caught on they are not proud of what the NWO has been doing they have discarded their NWO government And have selected a new government that is going take power in thirty days . Trump has said he will deal with Russia and China on a equal basis .We are facing a very dangerous thirty days the NWO may do anything during this period to stay in power and implement all the orders they already decided .

JoAnn Witt , December 16, 2016 at 3:57 pm

"Ditto" to that and Mr. Parry, thank you for the pictures!

Fran Macadam , December 17, 2016 at 5:58 am

Robert Parry, a voice of sanity amidst the McCarthyist hysteria. How ironic this time around the most extreme purveyors of the paranoid style in politics are once-liberal Democrats.

Andy , December 19, 2016 at 1:28 am

Great article. I'm glad I found this site since it has become clear that I can't trust the MSM. Even 60 Minutes has become a tool of Washington.

Andy , December 19, 2016 at 1:40 am

In Obama's news/press conference on Friday, he said some very unprofessional things about Russia: "they don't produce anything besides oil and gas " and "they aren't innovative". (By not innovative does he mean they don't make fake stories like how the Russians hacked the DNC?) This isn't the kind of thing our President should be saying about foreign countries, especially large ones like Russia. Where does he got off saying this at a news conference? I'm losing respect for Obama by the day. I voted for him and after suffering 8 years of Bush he was the savior at the time. But his shine has tarnished.

[Sep 07, 2018] Al Qaeda and the "War on Terrorism" by Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Notable quotes:
"... Foreign Affairs, ..."
"... According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahideen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, [on] 24 December 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. Indeed, it was July 3, 1979, that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. ..."
"... We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam War. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire. ..."
"... What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War? ..."
Sep 07, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

The alleged mastermind behind the 9/11 terrorists attacks, Saudi-born Osama bin Laden, was recruited during the Soviet-Afghan war, "ironically under the auspices of the CIA, to fight Soviet invaders".(Hugh Davies, "`Informers' point the finger at bin Laden; Washington on alert for suicide bombers." The Daily Telegraph, London, 24 August 1998).

In 1979 the largest covert operation in the history of the CIA was launched in Afghanistan:

"With the active encouragement of the CIA and Pakistan's ISI, who wanted to turn the Afghan Jihad into a global war waged by all Muslim states against the Soviet Union, some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 Islamic countries joined Afghanistan's fight between 1982 and 1992. Tens of thousands more came to study in Pakistani madrasahs. Eventually, more than 100,000 foreign Muslim radicals were directly influenced by the Afghan jihad." (Ahmed Rashid, "The Taliban: Exporting Extremism", Foreign Affairs, November-December 1999).

This project of the US intelligence apparatus was conducted with the active support of Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), which was entrusted in channelling covert military aid to the Islamic brigades and financing, in liason with the CIA, the madrassahs and Mujahideen training camps.

U.S. government support to the Mujahideen was presented to world public opinion as a "necessary response" to the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in support of the pro-Communist government of Babrak Kamal.

The CIA's military-intelligence operation in Afghanistan, which consisted in creating the "Islamic brigades", was launched prior rather than in response to the entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan. In fact, Washington's intent was to deliberately trigger a civil war, which has lasted for more than 25 years. (photo: CIA and ISI agents)

The CIA's role in laying the foundations of Al Qaeda is confirmed in an 1998 interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, who at the time was National Security Adviser to President Jimmy Carter:

Brzezinski: According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahideen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, [on] 24 December 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. Indeed, it was July 3, 1979, that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the President in which I explained to him that in my opinion, this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.

Question: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?

Brzezinski: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

Question:When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?

Brzezinski: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam War. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

Question: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

Brzezinski: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War? ( "The CIA's Intervention in Afghanistan, Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser", Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998, published in English, Centre for Research on Globalisation, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BRZ110A.html , 5 October 2001, italics added.)

Consistent with Brzezinski's account, a "Militant Islamic Network" was created by the CIA.

The "Islamic Jihad" (or holy war against the Soviets) became an integral part of the CIA's intelligence ploy. It was supported by the United States and Saudi Arabia, with a significant part of the funding generated from the Golden Crescent drug trade:

"In March 1985, President Reagan signed National Security Decision Directive 166 [which] authorize[d] stepped-up covert military aid to the Mujahideen, and it made clear that the secret Afghan war had a new goal: to defeat Soviet troops in Afghanistan through covert action and encourage a Soviet withdrawal. The new covert U.S. assistance began with a dramatic increase in arms supplies -- a steady rise to 65,000 tons annually by 1987 as well as a "ceaseless stream" of CIA and Pentagon specialists who travelled to the secret headquarters of Pakistan's ISI on the main road near Rawalpindi, Pakistan. There, the CIA specialists met with Pakistani intelligence officers to help plan operations for the Afghan rebels."(Steve Coll, The Washington Post, July 19, 1992.)

[Sep 07, 2018] Harding book is an indirect proof the UK government did it

Sep 07, 2018 | off-guardian.org

Originally from: Skripal Case Luke Harding's latest work of fiction OffGuardian

uke Harding likes writing books about things that he wasn't really involved in and doesn't really understand. Unfortunately for the rest of the world, that covers pretty much everything. His book about Snowden, for example, was beautifully taken down by Julian Assange – a person who was actually there.

He's priming the traumatised public for another of his works, this time about Sergei Skripal. This one will probably be out by Christmas, unless he can find someone else's work to plagiarise , in which case he might get it done sooner.

It will have a snide and not especially clever title, perhaps a sort of pun – something like "A Poison by Any Other Name: How Russian assassins contaminated the heart of rural England" . It will relate, in jarring sub-sub-le Carre prose, a story of Russian malfeasance and evil beyond imagining, whilst depicting the whole cast as bumbling caricatures, always held up for ridicule by the author and his smug readership.

There's an extract in The Guardian today. It's not listed as one, but trust me, it will be in the book. It's title, as predicted above, is sort of a pun (and will probably be a chapter heading):

Planes, trains and fake names: the trail left by Skripal suspects

You see? Like that film? I don't really get it either but until someone else comes up with something clever he can copy, Luke is left to his own rather meagre devices.

It starts off surprisingly strong, waiting three whole sentences before lurching violently into totally unsupported conjecture:

The two men were dressed inconspicuously in jeans, fleece jackets and trainers as they boarded the flight from Moscow to Gatwick. Their names, according to their Russian passports, were Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov. Both were around 40 years old. Neither looked suspicious.

This is, as far as we know so far, true.

The plane trundled down the icy runway. In Moscow the temperatures had fallen below -10C, not unusual for early March. In Britain it had been snowing.

and so is this. In fact, in googling "Moscow weather March 2018" Harding has displayed an uncharacteristically thorough approach to research that was rarely (if ever) evidenced in his previous works.

They had also packed a bottle of what appeared to be the Nina Ricci perfume Premier Jour. The box it came in was prettily decorated with flowers, it listed ingredients including alcohol and it bore the words "Made in France".

This is where truth ends and guesses take over: there is no evidence, at all, that these two men had anything to do with the "perfume bottle" allegedly found by Charlie Rowley on June 27th and allegedly containing a powerful nerve agent. There is (as far as we know) no fingerprint or DNA evidence on the bottle, nobody saw them with the bottle, and there's no released CCTV footage of them holding or carrying the bottle. Saying "it's in their backpack" is meaningless without any evidence to back it up.

According to the Metropolitan police, the bottle in fact contained novichok, a lethal nerve agent developed in the late Soviet Union. The bottle had been specially made to be leakproof and had a customised applicator.

Note he doesn't feel the need to examine, question or even verify the words of the Metropolitan Police. This is a recurring theme in Harding's works – there are people who tell the truth (US) and people who lie (RUSSIANS). Evidence is a complication you can live without.

Moscow's notorious poisons factory run by the KGB made similar devices throughout the cold war.

Did they? Because he doesn't show any evidence this is true. One thing you can be sure of, if there had ever been even a whisper about a "modified perfume bottle" in any Soviet archive or from any "whistleblower currently living in the United States", it would be on the front page in big black letters.

Petrov and Boshirov were aliases, detectives believe. Both men are suspected to be career officers with the GRU, Russia's powerful and highly secretive military intelligence service.

Note use of the word "believe", it makes regular appearances alongside it's buddies: "suspect" and "probably".

And yes, they "believe" they are aliases because IF they were assassins then obviously they used aliases. There's no evidence taken from their (currently totally theoretical) visa applications that point to forgery, nobody at the time questioned their passports. As of today, we have been given no reason to think they were aliases, except reasoning backwards from assumed guilt which isn't how deduction works.

In fact, there's more than enough reason to assume they aren't aliases – Firstly, they passed the visa check, secondly their passports were never questioned, thirdly they've used them before (see below), and finally just WHY would a Russian spy-come-assassin use a fake Russian name and a fake Russian passport? That's ridiculous.

The officers' assignment was covert. They were coming to Britain not as tourists but as assassins.

[citation needed]

Their target was Sergei Skripal, a former GRU officer who spied for British intelligence, got caught and was freed in a spy exchange in 2010. They were heading for his home in provincial Salisbury.

Luke doesn't feel the need to dig down into the nitty gritty here – motive is a trifle, to be added in the footnotes or made up on the spur of the moment when asked at a book signing. I'm a bit more fussy than that – I feel the need to ask "Why did they release him in 2010 and then try to kill him in 2018?" If they had wanted to kill him, why not just do it when he was in prison in Russia between 2006 and 2010? If they wanted to kill him why do it just weeks before the World Cup? What could they possibly have to gain?

Luke doesn't know, and neither do I.

Their Aeroflot flight SU2588 touched down at 3pm on Friday 2 March. They were recorded on CCTV going through passport control, Boshirov with dark hair and a goatee beard, Petrov unshaven and wearing a blue gingham shirt. Both were carrying satchels slung casually over the shoulder.

This is all true, and completely unnecessary. It's what we in the industry call "filler" or "padding". Totally meaningless and useless words that do nothing but take up space. Without it, a lot of Luke's books would only be about 700 words long.

According to police, the pair had visited the UK before.

Way to bury the lead there, Luke.

This is actually quite important isn't it? I mean, when did they visit the UK before? Did they visit Salisbury then too? Did they have any contact with Sergei Skripal? Were they travelling under the same names? Were these visits linked with other intelligence work? Were they just holidays? What kind of assassins would use the SAME FAKE IDS ON TWO DIFFERENT OCCASIONS?

These are all very important questions, but Luke doesn't ask them. Because Luke is a modern journalist, and they don't interrogate the claims of the state, just report them. To Guardian reporters a question mark is just that funny squiggle next to the shift key.

From Gatwick they caught the train to London Victoria station and then the tube to east London, where they checked in to the City Stay hotel in Bow. It was a low-profile choice of accommodation. The red-brick Victorian building is next to a branch of Barclays bank, a busy train line and a wall daubed with graffiti. Across the road is a car pound and a Texaco garage.

This just more filler. Totally meaningless packaging material. The prose equivalent of All-Bran.

On hostile territory, Boshirov and Petrov operated in the manner of classic intelligence operatives.

In this instance "the manner of classic intelligence operatives" means, flying direct to London from Moscow, using Russian names and Russian passports (which you've used before), checking into a hotel with a CCTV camera on the front door, going straight to the hometown of an ex-double agent, leaving a Russian poison his front door even though he's already gone out, dumping your unused poison in a charity bin on the high street, going back to your hotel, smearing poison around that too even though you already dumped it, and then flying directly back to Moscow without even waiting to see if the plan worked and the target is dead.

This, in Luke's head, is ace intelligence work.

On the day of the hit, according to detectives, the pair made a similar journey, taking the 8.05am train from Waterloo to Salisbury and arriving at 11.48am.

Yes, they arrived at 11.48, making it absolutely pointless to put poison on the Skripal's door, as they had already gone out.

The perfume bottle was probably concealed in a light grey backpack carried by Petrov.

It was "probably concealed" in that backpack because, as I said above, there's no evidence either of those men ever knew the perfume bottle existed. You never see it in their possession.

Oh, and the backpack would have to contain TWO bottles of perfume – because the police aren't sure the bottle Rowley found 3 months later was the same bottle, and Rowley reported it was unopened and wrapped in cellophane. Perhaps Luke should have read the details of the case instead of trolling IMDB looking for movie titles with "plane" in them or googling "insouciant" to see if he was using it right.

From Salisbury station the two men set off on foot. It was a short walk of about a mile to Skripal's semi-detached home in Christie Miller Road.

which doesn't matter, because the Skripals weren't there. They left at 9.15 and there is no evidence they ever returned.

At Skripal's house the Russians smeared or sprayed novichok on to the front door handle, police say.

which doesn't matter, because the Skripals weren't there. They left at 9.15 and there is no evidence they ever returned.

It doesn't matter if Borishov and Petrov re-tiled the bathroom with novichok grouting or hid novichok in the battery compartment of Sergei's TV remote or replaced all his lightbulbs with novichok bombs that explode when you use the clapper .according to everything we've been told so far Sergei and Julia were literally never in that house again.

Luke seems to write a lot about this case, considering he is barely acquainted with the most basic facts of it.

The moment went unobserved

True. There is not a single piece of footage, photograph or eyewitness placing these men within a hundred feet of the Skripals, or their house. The "moment went unobserved" is an incredibly dishonest way of phrasing this, "the moment is entirely theoretical" is rather fairer. Or, if you want to be honest "it's possible none of this happened".

At some point on their walk back they must have tossed away the bottle, which at this point was too dangerous to try to smuggle back through customs.

It's all falling into place perfectly isn't it?

At some point the two men, who we never see holding or carrying the bottle, must have thrown it away because three months later someone else found it.

They took it through customs once but couldn't a second time, because reasons.

Also one of them was smiling a sort of "I just poisoned somebody" smile:

At 1.05pm the men were recorded in Fisherton Street on their way back to the station. They appeared more relaxed, Petrov grinning even.

Those evil bastards.

By the time Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, were found collapsed on a park bench in the centre of Salisbury later that afternoon, the poisoners were gone.

No Luke: By the time Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, were found collapsed on a park bench in the centre of Salisbury later that afternoon, the ALLEGED poisoners were gone.

Alleged is an important word for example, there is a marked difference between being an ALLEGED plagiarist, and being a plagiarist .

The visitors were captured on CCTV one more time, at Heathrow airport. It was 7.28pm and both men were going through security, Petrov first, wheeling a small black case. In his right hand was a shiny red object, his Russian passport. Police believe the passport was genuine, his name not. In other words, that it was a sophisticated espionage operation carried out by a state or state entities.

You see? Nobody thought the passport was fake, which means it was a really good fake . So the Russian state must have been in on it. This is known as an unfalsifiable hypothesis. If the passport did look fake, that would be evidence that the men were spies and therefore the Russian state was in on it.

Harding has created a narrative where there is literally no development that could ever challenge his conclusions.

Seemingly, the GRU plan – executed two weeks before Russia's presidential election – had worked perfectly.

This is an example of the cum hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy – two things happen at the same time, therefore they happen for the same reason. It's a maneuver we at OffG refer to as "the Harding", where you state two separate assertions or facts one after the other in such a way as to imply a relationship, without ever making a solid statement. I'll give you an example:

Luke Harding was born in 1968, mere weeks before the brutal assassination of Robert Kennedy.

Harding is suggesting some sort of connection between the election and the poisoning. He can't STATE it, because then he has to explain his reasoning – and there isn't any. Putin, and Russia as a whole, had nothing to gain from poisoning an ex-spy they had released nearly a decade earlier, especially on the eve of a Presidential election and mere weeks before the World Cup. There's no argument to be made, so he doesn't attempt to make one, he just makes a snide and baseless insinuation.

In his defense, Luke might genuinely believe it, cum hoc ergo propter hoc is a favorite amongst paranoid personalities , of which Luke is definitely a prime example .

Vladimir Putin, the man whom a public inquiry found in 2016 had "probably" signed off on the operation to kill Litvinenko. The UK security services say a "body of evidence" points to the GRU.

"Probably" is also a big word. For example, there's a marked difference between "probably being a plagiarist" and "being a plagiarist" .

It seems clear that Moscow continues to view Britain as a playground for undercover operations and is relatively insouciant about the consequences, diplomatic and political. The Skripal attack may have misfired. But the message, mingling contempt and arrogance, is there for all to see: we can smite our enemies whenever and wherever we want, and there is nothing you can do about it.

This is the second time Luke has used the word "insouciant" in two days, which means that word of the day calendar was a probably sound investment, but he forgot to flip it over this morning.

Other than that, this final paragraph is nothing but paranoia.

The Russians were TRYING to make it obvious, to send a message. But were also lazy and arrogant. And yet also left no solid evidence because they are experts at espionage. They had no motive except being mean, and couldn't even be bothered to make sure they did it right. They want us all to know they did it, but will never admit it.

The actual truth of the situation can be summed up in a few bullet points. Currently:

There is no evidence these men were using forged documents. There is no evidence these men were travelling under aliases or assumed names. There is no evidence these men ever had any contact with Sergei Skripal's house. There is no evidence these men ever had any contact with Sergei Skripal or his daughter. There is no evidence these men were Russian intelligence assets or had any military training. There is no evidence these men ever possessed or had any contact with the perfume bottle found by Charlie Rowley on June 27th. They have visited the UK before, not on intelligence business (as far as we know). Their movements don't align with the timeline of Skripal's illness.

The entire narrative is created around half a dozen screen caps of two (allegedly) Russian men, not behaving in any way illegally or even suspiciously. All the rest is fiction, created by a hack to service an agenda. This isn't one of those "You couldn't make it up" stories, it's not that incredible. It's just insulting and stupid.

You could make it up, and he did.

[Sep 07, 2018] UK "identifies" Russian agents in attempted Skripal assassination by Robert Stevens

Theresa May demonstrated traits of a psychopath who cling to power using all available to her means, including criminal. Looks like British version of Hillary.
Notable quotes:
"... despite hysterical news broadcasts and front-page headlines regarding "Russian assassins," the public know nothing more substantively about the events of Sunday, March 4, than they did more than six months ago. ..."
"... May did not detail the intelligence she was supposedly acting on. Instead she singled out Russia as the main enemy of the West that had to confronted, declaring, "This chemical weapons attack on our soil was part of a wider pattern of Russian behaviour that persistently seeks to undermine our security and that of our allies around the world." ..."
"... "Back in March, Russia sought to sow doubt and uncertainty about the evidence we presented to this House -- and some were minded to believe them," May told parliament. "Today's announcement shows that we were right." Except that it doesn't. The new narrative is that "Petrov" and "Boshirov" flew into Gatwick airport on Friday, March 2. CCTV footage purportedly verifies this. They checked into a budget hotel in Bow, east London, and the next day, according to police, travelled to Salisbury, staying in the area for several hours, before returning to London. ..."
"... The pair then returned to Salisbury on Sunday, March 4. Police claim they are shown on CCTV at 11:58 a.m., on Wilton Road, "moments before the attack" on Sergei Skripal. ..."
"... Former UK ambassador Craig Murray asked: "1. Why did two alleged GRU agents travel under false names and fake passports, but still use Russian ..."
"... Murray retweeted a statement from a freelance journalist, Neil Clark, pointing out: "If the two men were identified coming through Gatwick, it is impossible that the police do not know what kind of visa they were travelling on. Something is very wrong here -- ties in with the fact that the photos released [showing grainy images of the men's faces on dark backgrounds] are not UK visa standard photos." ..."
"... at precisely the same second ..."
"... Murray points out that the Skripals left their home at 9:15 a.m. on March 4 and were assumed not to have returned home, before they were found collapsed. "But the Metropolitan Police state that Boshirov and Petrov did not arrive in Salisbury until 11.48 on the day of the poisoning. That means that they could not have applied a nerve agent to the Skripals' doorknob before noon at the earliest." ..."
"... An article on the Off Guardian website noted that the police said the Bow Hotel was "contaminated" with novichok, but no one has been reported ill in six months at the hotel. ..."
"... The government's narrative cannot be taken at face value, especially as it is supplied by the same security services that faked "evidence" of Iraq having "weapons of mass destruction" to justify pre-emptive war against Iraq. ..."
"... Moreover, the timing of the government's latest disclosure is highly suspect. Yesterday, the UK raised its new allegations against Moscow at the United Nations Security Council, after which the US, France, Germany and Canada issued a joint statement that the Russian government "almost certainly" approved the poisoning of the Skripals. ..."
"... The same day the European Union announced it was extending, for a further six months, the sanctions it had imposed on around 150 Russian individuals and 50 companies following the right-wing Western-backed coup in Ukraine in 2014. Complaints of Russian aggression in Crimea have been used to carry through a massive NATO build-up on Russia's borders. ..."
"... These measures unfold as the US renews threats over the operation by forces loyal to the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad against Al Qaeda affiliates that control the northwestern province of Idlib. Denouncing the "threat of an imminent Assad regime attack, backed by Russia and Iran," the White House stated that, in the event of a chemical weapons attack, "the United States and its Allies will respond swiftly and appropriately." ..."
Sep 07, 2018 | www.wsws.org

The UK government and media have doubled down on their anti-Russian campaign following Wednesday's announcement by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) that two men have been named as suspects in the poisoning of former Russian/British double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia.

The police released passport photos and CCTV images of two men in various locations, including Gatwick Airport and Salisbury. But despite hysterical news broadcasts and front-page headlines regarding "Russian assassins," the public know nothing more substantively about the events of Sunday, March 4, than they did more than six months ago.

CPS Director of Legal Services Sue Hemming said that evidence from counter-terrorism police meant "it is clearly in the public interest to charge Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov, who are Russian nationals," with the attempted murder of Sergei, Yulia and police officer Nick Bailey.

Prime Minister Theresa May then told parliament that, in addition to the police investigation, the security and intelligence agencies had conducted their own investigation and, "based on a body of intelligence, the Government has concluded that the two individuals named by the police and CPS are officers from the Russian military intelligence service, also known as the GRU."

She added: "So this was not a rogue operation. It was almost certainly also approved outside the GRU at a senior level of the Russian state."

The Russian Foreign Ministry has categorically rejected the UK's claims, stating the names of the two men "do not mean anything to us."

May did not detail the intelligence she was supposedly acting on. Instead she singled out Russia as the main enemy of the West that had to confronted, declaring, "This chemical weapons attack on our soil was part of a wider pattern of Russian behaviour that persistently seeks to undermine our security and that of our allies around the world."

"Back in March, Russia sought to sow doubt and uncertainty about the evidence we presented to this House -- and some were minded to believe them," May told parliament. "Today's announcement shows that we were right." Except that it doesn't. The new narrative is that "Petrov" and "Boshirov" flew into Gatwick airport on Friday, March 2. CCTV footage purportedly verifies this. They checked into a budget hotel in Bow, east London, and the next day, according to police, travelled to Salisbury, staying in the area for several hours, before returning to London.

The pair then returned to Salisbury on Sunday, March 4. Police claim they are shown on CCTV at 11:58 a.m., on Wilton Road, "moments before the attack" on Sergei Skripal.

The police say two more images show the "suspects at Salisbury train station at 13.50 on Sunday, 4 March, as they embark on their journey back to London." Another image shows the "suspects passing through passport control at London Heathrow at 19.28 on Sunday evening (4 March) -- in the image, 'Petrov' is at the front and 'Boshirov' at the back."

May's definitive assertion of Russian authorship was contradicted by Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu, National Lead for Counter-Terrorism Policing. Asked by the press if he had any evidence that the two men were Russian State operatives, he said, "No." Basu said in his statement that "it is likely that they were travelling under aliases and that these are not their real names."

BBC Security Correspondent Gordon Corera reported that he understood the authorities identified the pair "a while back" and "may also know their real names." But if so, why are they not being made public?

Former UK ambassador Craig Murray asked: "1. Why did two alleged GRU agents travel under false names and fake passports, but still use Russian names and Russian passports? If they had used EU passports -- say from Lithuania or Estonia for example -- they wouldn't have needed a visa, thanks to EU freedom of movement agreements, and could still have spoken Russian without raising suspicion."

Murray retweeted a statement from a freelance journalist, Neil Clark, pointing out: "If the two men were identified coming through Gatwick, it is impossible that the police do not know what kind of visa they were travelling on. Something is very wrong here -- ties in with the fact that the photos released [showing grainy images of the men's faces on dark backgrounds] are not UK visa standard photos."

Among the glaring oddities in the new account is that the two photos released of "Petrov" and "Boshirov" shows them both in what appears to be the same space at Gatwick airport at precisely the same second (16:22:43 on March 2, 2018.) Raising the physically impossibility, Murray suggests the CCTV images may have been doctored . The police are now claiming that the two are in different but similar places passing CCTV cameras at exactly the same time.

The government's latest narrative fails to correspond with claims it has maintained for months that the Skripals were poisoned by "novichok" being applied to the front door knob of Sergei's house.

Murray points out that the Skripals left their home at 9:15 a.m. on March 4 and were assumed not to have returned home, before they were found collapsed. "But the Metropolitan Police state that Boshirov and Petrov did not arrive in Salisbury until 11.48 on the day of the poisoning. That means that they could not have applied a nerve agent to the Skripals' doorknob before noon at the earliest."

An article on the Off Guardian website noted that the police said the Bow Hotel was "contaminated" with novichok, but no one has been reported ill in six months at the hotel. Moreover, to contaminate the room "the suspects would have to physically apply the poison to it, and since they allegedly left [sic] country on March 4th -- the same day as the alleged attack -- the contamination must have happened BEFORE Sergei Skripal was poisoned."

Also, previously the Metropolitan Police said that it was connecting the poisoning of the Skripals with that of Dawn Sturgess and her partner Charley Rowley. Dawn died in hospital after being exposed to what was described as a novichok on July 8. Rowley is now seriously ill with reported meningitis.

Yet Basu commented, "We don't yet know where the suspects disposed of the Novichok they used to attack the door, where Dawn and Charlie got the bottle that poisoned them, or if it is the same bottle used in both poisonings."

The government's narrative cannot be taken at face value, especially as it is supplied by the same security services that faked "evidence" of Iraq having "weapons of mass destruction" to justify pre-emptive war against Iraq.

Moreover, the timing of the government's latest disclosure is highly suspect. Yesterday, the UK raised its new allegations against Moscow at the United Nations Security Council, after which the US, France, Germany and Canada issued a joint statement that the Russian government "almost certainly" approved the poisoning of the Skripals.

The same day the European Union announced it was extending, for a further six months, the sanctions it had imposed on around 150 Russian individuals and 50 companies following the right-wing Western-backed coup in Ukraine in 2014. Complaints of Russian aggression in Crimea have been used to carry through a massive NATO build-up on Russia's borders.

May wants the EU to go further and follow the US, which imposed additional sanctions from August 27 on the basis that Russia had used "chemical weapons in violation of international law or lethal chemical weapons against its own nationals." This include terminating aid, except on urgent humanitarian grounds, restricting access to US credit, ending aspects of financing and prohibiting exports to Russia of "restricted goods or technology." Russia has 90 days to allow inspectors from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to verify it does not have chemical weapons, or Washington will impose a far more severe set of sanctions.

These measures unfold as the US renews threats over the operation by forces loyal to the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad against Al Qaeda affiliates that control the northwestern province of Idlib. Denouncing the "threat of an imminent Assad regime attack, backed by Russia and Iran," the White House stated that, in the event of a chemical weapons attack, "the United States and its Allies will respond swiftly and appropriately."

Washington and London are not responding out of humanitarian concerns. They have backed the Al Qaeda-affiliated terror groups in Syria as part of their regime-change operations in the Middle East, and broader geostrategic objectives against Russia and Iran. As in previous instances -- Douma in April for example -- Washington's threats amount to an invitation to the Al Qaeda forces to stage an incident to justify military intervention by the US and its allies.

Ricky Kagayame • 2 hours ago

On the one hand, the ruling class want us to believe that Russian operations are highly sophisticated, that we should all live in suspense of when the next incident will occur, that we should hunger for vengeance, and yet when the media and government provide their "evidence" it shows that the so-called Russian operatives are incredibly inept. Of course, what else could be expected from manufactured narratives.
Skip • 3 hours ago
The British ruling class and it's security forces are cold blooded killers for hundreds of years. There is nothing too savage below them. Nothing they say can be taken at face value.

This whole affair has been a set up from the beginning. As we see know, it is used once again when needed. Russia is about to make a final push in Syria. This means, if they are victorious, America and Britain will have been stopped in the Middle East.

England has nothing left to lose. Nothing is off the table for their survival.

Jsut to assume tat two secret agents sent on an assassination plot from the Russian government would leave such obvious traces is absurd. Using Russian passports, needing a visa to enter, flying from Russia direct to London and then back... The British want us to think that the Russian secret service does not know about all the CCTV cameras in London, or England in general. Or the advanced level of security at Gatwick.

лидия • 4 hours ago
Anti-NATO Russians joke about this "new proof", I have read a funny short poem about it, and my favorite joke was - looks like there is not even Lestrade in Scotland Yard anymore.

[Sep 07, 2018] At some point you start to notice how DemoRats and neocons flood social media and every forum with their trash propaganda

Sep 07, 2018 | politics.slashdot.org
Anonymous Coward , Friday September 07, 2018 @11:46AM ( #57269458 )
Fake News ( Score: 1 )

Russians want a weak and divided US. Putin couldn't care less about who is running the nation.

Did they interfere with our election? Maybe.

Did illegals criminally vote in our elections after Obama asked them to? Did the Clintons and the DNC pay millions for the so-called research that led to Russia dossier? Yes. Did Clinton have her billionaire foreign friends funding her campaign? Yes.

But I guess direct foreign interference doesn't count if the Democrats were behind it. I think Democrats need to understand that people are starting to notice all the BS they are preaching.

You can't have it both ways....unless your a Democrat. People got tired of that and elected a clown over a corrupt political cult of blatant liars and criminals. Normal people don't like SJW types, hypocrites and habitually outraged race baiters.

At some point you start to notice how they flood social media and every forum with their trash propaganda. Even slashdot seems to get hit constantly.

[Sep 07, 2018] In Eastern Europe And Russia, Reminders Of Communist Horrors Are Everywhere

This professor looks like a typical neoliberal professor of economics, as usually such people are in the US Universities. His level of understanding the history of Russia and Baltic countries suggests that he is a mixture of n ignorant jerk with a propagandist. Russia was royally raped by the West in 1991-2000. The damage was probably comparable with the damage from communism. Trillions were looted.
"Americans cannot fathom what it is like to have entire cities destroyed or badly-damaged by bombs and artillery and have ruthless armies fight each other over their territories" how about Dresden, Nagasaki, North Korea, Fallujah, Aleppo to name a few. Noam Chomsky has observed: "If the Nuremberg laws were applied, then every post-war American president would have been hanged."
Notable quotes:
"... Americans cannot fathom what it is like to have entire cities destroyed or badly-damaged by bombs and artillery and have ruthless armies fight each other over their territories. Nor can we imagine having governments carry out massive executions of people whose only "crime" was not being what the government leadership wanted them to be. We cannot imagine the starvation, the disease, and watching family and friends be shipped off to places like Siberia where they surely would die terrible deaths. ..."
"... Bill Anderson travels, but sometimes he sees what he wants to see. ..."
"... Seeing the splinter in other men eyes. Not the tree in own. After the USSR birth, a U.S, with friends, invaded Russia. From that moment to now history is full of conflicted horrors. Standing out WW 2, and many more like Korea and Vietnam. Scars can be seeing all over the planet except the U.S. The writer of article must be a exceptional person. ..."
"... Their best weapon is "weaponized credit" which sheep see but don't understand ..."
"... The [neoliberal] deep state is about impoverishing the masses so that they keep their mouths shut, they don't give a rats ass if your liberal or conservative, black or white, yellow or orange, just keep your mouth shut about them. ..."
Sep 07, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

So, we drove onto St. Petersburg mostly on a two-lane road cut through the boreal forest of the northern latitudes. It was here that I witnessed something that amazed all of us – how vehicle drivers cooperated to turn two lanes into de facto four lanes of traffic.

As faster drivers moved to pass slower vehicles, the slower vehicles would move onto the asphalt shoulder and even as our bus moved over the center line, the oncoming traffic would shift to the right, too. It all was spontaneously coordinated and everyone on the road was in on the scheme.

Entering St. Petersburg was an experience in itself. With five million people spread over a number of islands, we saw new high-rises standing alongside the old Soviet-era apartment buildings. No one, however, comes to St. Petersburg to see the relics of the U.S.S.R. Instead, they come to see the czarist palaces and the stunning 18thand 19th century architecture that dominates the city. It may be the birthplace of the Bolshevik Revolution, but people come to pay homage to the way of life the Bolsheviks wanted to destroy and to Czar Nicholas II and his family, infamously and brutally murdered on Lenin's orders in 1918.

A century later, the bones of the last royal family of Russia lie safely in St. Peter and Paul Cathedral. Despite more than 70 years of communist rule, and despite all of the blood spilled to keep the likes of Lenin, Stalin, and the others in power, and despite the massive propaganda that ordinary people in the U.S.S.R. had to endure, St. Petersburg is the city of the czars, not the Bolsheviks.

Parts of St. Petersburg are run down – as nearly the entire city was during the days of communism – but other parts of it absolutely are amazing to see. Likewise, I enjoyed interacting with the locals and especially the young people that made up most of the workforce of our hotel, from running the desks to cleaning our rooms. The legendary dour Soviet worker was replaced by a competent employee who patiently answered our questions and took care of whatever we needed. For all of the talk in the USA that Russia is a dictatorship under the iron thumb of Vladimir Putin, Russia did not seem like a dictatorship. Our Russian tour guide often would take a swipe at Putin (including likening his face to a painting of dogs at the Hermitage) and life itself there seemed to have the kind of normalcy that could not have been possible when people were compelled to inform on one another.

The St. Petersburg we visited was not the Leningrad that Logan Robinson described in his humorous 1982 book An American in Leningrad , which described life as a post-graduate student living among Russian students and developing friendships with local writers, artists, and musicians, people who often harassed, persecuted, and arrested by local authorities. That city was an armed camp full of soldiers and had been relegated to being a backwater by Joseph Stalin and his successors who made Moscow the Soviet "showplace," leaving the city founded by Peter the Great to succumb to the northerly elements.

... ... ...

Americans cannot fathom what it is like to have entire cities destroyed or badly-damaged by bombs and artillery and have ruthless armies fight each other over their territories. Nor can we imagine having governments carry out massive executions of people whose only "crime" was not being what the government leadership wanted them to be. We cannot imagine the starvation, the disease, and watching family and friends be shipped off to places like Siberia where they surely would die terrible deaths.

spooz ,

This article is red-baiting propaganda, aren't we getting enough of that from the Democratic party Everybody with a brain realizes that there are differences between communism and the democratic socialism that is becoming popular in the US, but some the Mises misers like to dupe the ignorant into conflating the two.

Democratic Socialism:

In very simplistic terms, paraphrasing from A. J. Elwood, Democratic Socialism:

  • Work together to ensure social equality and to improve one another's lives.
  • Reject the exploitation of all peoples and uphold the principles of equality.
  • Value the environment and use our natural resources in a sustainable manner.
  • Ensure free and open elections, where each citizen has a voice and a vested interest in his or her government.
  • Provide free education to all to ensure equal opportunity and the free flow of ideas, opinions, and information.
  • Protect and assist the disadvantaged using surplus from both public and privately owned enterprise.
  • Deliver quality health care to all citizens, regardless of their needs or socio-economic status

https://www.myenglishteacher.eu/blog/difference-between-socialism-and-democratic-socialism/

The US has let the excesses of Capitalism control our country, with wealthy owning our legislature and receiving bail outs and tax cuts to preserve their wealth, while a growing percentage of the formerly middle class is thrown under the bus, with no savings and no way to make a living wage. Those millennials don't see any way of achieving what used to be the American Dream and are looking for some help with their struggle.

Most modern countries have a mix of socialism and capitalism.

"The United Nations World Happiness Report 2013 shows that the happiest nations are concentrated in Northern Europe, where the Nordic model of social democracy is employed, with Denmark topping the list." (wikipedia)

moon_unit ,

Bill Anderson travels, but sometimes he sees what he wants to see.

Let's take some points:

-He saw a "*small* railroad boxcar". Very romantic but - Soviet boxcars were fricken' huge, the rail gauge is massive. Pics with a person next to it, or it didn't happen. IF it was very small, it was more likely a technical wagon for railway engineers, not for "cargo" of any kind. Plus, anyone alive bitching about it clearly had parents , most likely that never left to go anywhere , you know what I'm saying here?

-He went to Jurmala sea resort and misunderstood it, thought it was "all Soviet", all built for "nomenklatura". This is not unusual to think so, but he was wrong - it was largely built as a Spa town in the 1850s during the Russian Empire times by the majority wealthy *German* ethnic group in Riga. In fact German was the main language in the city up to 1891. Most of those large spa town wooden houses were built for German traders - who traded with the locals outside Riga, Brits and Russians. The city had a British Mayor George Armitstead from 1901 - 1912 during the Russian Empire - a civil engineer and the city's most popular mayor ever, who built the first tram lines, hospitals, covered markets and so on.

The Balts kicked those German traders out starting from around 1880 or so. If you check out cemeteries you will see a sudden transition from elegant old German noble script to badly-spelled early variant local language with German styles and lettering. Of course that improved as they created formalised spellings for words in the local languages.

The author fails to mention all the other occupants that he doesn't want you to know about - briefly-
-German Crusaders (Knights of the Livonian Order / Teutonic Knights)- Holy Roman Empire - 12thC
-Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth 16thC
-Swedes 1621-1710
-Russian Tsarist Empire 1710 - 1918 -trading with German Riga / Brits and Russian language only imposed officially in 1891

-Local people perpetrators - no kidding, Herberts Cukurs, Viktors Arajs?

Photos of people in mass graves - sure you didn't "make a mistake"? - if you mean at Skede beach, Rumbuli and Bikernieki forests, and Salapspils, those were killed by everyones "special Germans* (and of course the local militia commanders Cukurs and Arajs) in everyone's "special German 3-year era" from 1942-44. Oddly, no-one seems interested in the hundreds of years of genuine Geman noble culture and trading in what was essentially a German Empire freeport ...

Certainly there was a book about some Soviet killing mass graves elsewhere but it turns out the book about that was funded and printed by a certain Josef Goebbels? No doubt it was true, but aren't people a little embarrassed at carrying that book, perhaps a different author at least, maybe a historian would be less shameful to carry around?

-Freer wealthier - oh sure, if you put aside mass emigration, houses without heat or water or sewerage, destitute pensioners walking in the streets in winter with supermarket bags on their legs to try to avoid frostbite - not always successfully , by the way.

-"The citizens of the Baltic countries were not the only ones suffering under communism. No other city in the U.S.S.R. underwent the horror of a 900-day siege by German armies during World War II" - that's hardly their fault, now is it?

-"as I sat in the Old Town section of Riga eating and drinking and listening to live music, I strained to imagine the place as a battle zone with death and destruction all around where now I sat" - yeah, like when the Russians and Brits were trying to keep out Napoleon's armies? Hmmm?

-"I imagined the stores that now are full of goods and restaurants with food and drink being empty or stocked with subpar merchandise in the aftermath of the war as the Soviets imposed their primitive communist system and oppressed the people in the name of "liberating" them for many decades until they finally left in the early 1990s"- you have a great imagination. You should write film scripts for Hollywood. Some of those people are still walking around, try telling them they are primitives.


-"No, I cannot see people in our cities having experienced anything like what the people of the Baltics and St. Petersburg had to tolerate for decades." - tolerate things like electronics factories, car and van production, science institutes, shipbuilding and repair, ladies who aren't afraid of math or computers, that kind of thing? But sure, they couldn't get debt, mass prostitution, Hasselhoff and blue jeans, consumer junk or type II diabetes, that is a total provocation, right you are .

LA_Goldbug ,

I also smell a lot of BS in this article. I visited Eastern Europe before and know exactly what is being mentioned. Elites IN ALL COUNTRIES have their favorite hideaways. That is a norm in the West, East and anywhere else.

Boxcars at train stations are nothing new. Latvia is poor and probably has lots of them from way way back because THAT WAS THE STANDARD design for a multi-purpose wagon in Eastern Europe. Why throw away something that does the job ?? But to say it was "the one" used to transport people to camps is a huge stretch. Hell I could point to Boeings and say "That is the one sending people to Guantanamo".

demoses ,

As an eastern European I can tell you that I do not get triggered by old monuments / words / city names. I guess that is a "no real problems" American problem... where you lack other problems and have a hard time looking around what could trigger you... "oh no! A company called MANpower!!! MAN???" and maybe "country called MonteNEGRO? How dare they?" ;)

Nexus789 ,

These Mises wankers write as if they have found utopia and the US is some kind of 'market' paradise They are foot soldiers for the one percent.

LA_Goldbug ,

Here is how Utopia looks lest the Eu readers think otherwise.

https://idsb.tmgrup.com.tr/2015/07/23/HaberDetay/1437603968944.jpg

Atalanta ,

Seeing the splinter in other men eyes. Not the tree in own. After the USSR birth, a U.S, with friends, invaded Russia. From that moment to now history is full of conflicted horrors. Standing out WW 2, and many more like Korea and Vietnam. Scars can be seeing all over the planet except the U.S. The writer of article must be a exceptional person.

LA_Goldbug ,

Their best weapon is "weaponized credit" which sheep see but don't understand.

CaptainObvious ,

"Americans cannot fathom what it is like to have entire cities destroyed or badly-damaged by bombs and artillery and have ruthless armies fight each other over their territories."

Sure we can. Look at Detroit. Look at Baltimore. Look at Chicago. Those look pretty warn-torn to me. But I guess the "War on Poverty" and the "War on Drugs" don't count, eh? And I guess drive-by shootings and purposefully-fomented riots and civil asset forfeiture and excessive taxation aren't weapons of mass destruction either.

"Nor can we imagine having governments carry out massive executions of people whose only "crime" was not being what the government leadership wanted them to be."

Yeah, we tax mules are pretty familiar with the bowel-crippling fear that any envelope marked "IRS" causes. Men have certainly been introduced to the economic execution of being stripped of all their assets because they knocked some slut up. People of all ages and colors have been locked away in jail for 50 years for having a baggy of green stuff in their pocket. And, the horror!, it's now a crime punishable by jail time to call someone by the wrong gender pronouns in the People's Republic of Kalifornia. But yeah, economic execution and unjustified imprisonment don't happen here in the Land of the Free ™ , so it's all good.

"We cannot imagine the starvation, the disease, and watching family and friends be shipped off to places like Siberia where they surely would die terrible deaths."

Oh, sure we can. We see starving people every day on the streets, made homeless by a drug addiction that was introduced to them by a licensed physician. We watch family and friends shipped off to Bankruptcy court because some fucktarded jury awarded a scam artist seven figures for manufacturing a slip-and-fall in the Mom & Pop Pizza Palace. We watch our loved ones die every day from medical malpractice and toxic prescriptions.

No equivalency, you say? Well, to that I say balls. Russia was never free. After they abolished serfdom in the nineteenth century, the system was still in place that the aristocracy held most of the land and the peasants farmed that land for a pittance. In America, the laws abolished slavery and sweatshops, but the system is still in place that the tycoons own most of the assets and the peasants sweat their best years away in a cubicle, or behind a cash register, or under someone else's machinery, for a pittance.

Am I advocating for communism? Hell, no! I'm advocating for an end to the corporatocracy and small-business-killing legislation. Most ordinary Americans who become wealthy do so because they had the gumption to start their own business. But they can't do that if all laws favor the already-established, and they can't do that if they're required to burn half a lifetime's worth of cash for an official piece of paper from a gubmint-subsidized center of indoctrination, and they can't do that if they're supposed to be licensed and bonded to do something simple like trim the hair of another human.

OverTheHedge ,

Hyperbole to make your point is fine, but the reality is that fat, soft seppos have absolutely no idea.

And then there is the good guys' work:

Actually, that last one proves me wrong - there are SOME Americans who know precisely what a destroyed city looks like - they have been doing the destroying for the last 20 years, and at fully up to speed with what it entails. The question will be: who will they be destroying for, should it ever come home to roost?

ddiduck ,

The [neoliberal] deep state is about impoverishing the masses so that they keep their mouths shut, they don't give a rats ass if your liberal or conservative, black or white, yellow or orange, just keep your mouth shut about them.

Best is if you fight amongst yourselves and play make believe. Do you feel prosperous now? They like it when you you really get violent toward each other, great scam huhhh? It is called misdirection, want to toast some asses start with Soros, Rothschilds nad Rockefeller, greatest criminals against humanity! By the way, these mother fk'rs are satanic and bleed children out regularly! Now take pause and consider this when deciding who the real villain in your unfair world is!

louie1,

Like all Zionist globalist neocon revolutions they are bloody, indiscriminate and sociopathic. The same gang are running the USA now. And the world central banking system.

[Sep 07, 2018] I followed that assault on Fallujah very closely at the time

Sep 07, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Ross , Sep 6, 2018 4:46:49 PM | link

@fastfreddy 11, james 19

I followed that assault on Fallujah very closely at the time. Remember that the US Marines had tried to take over the town some months before but met with very fierce resistance and were chased out of town. Therefore there was an element of revenge and also punishment about this second assault. First they occupied the civilian hospital on the outskirts of Fallujah (a war crime). They then systemically bombed and destroyed the power station, the water pumping station and the sewage works (all war crimes).
Then as you point out they used white phosphorous munitions (a war crime), but there was something peculiar in the immediate aftermath. Having eventually successfully subdued the town, US troops went around the central area and systematically shot out, and thus drained, all the water towers (these were numerous as many houses had them). Then military bulldozers moved in and removed all the topsoil from a couple of square kilometres. This led to speculation that some form of illegal chemical weapons had been deployed.
Mad Dog indeed.

[Sep 07, 2018] The Great Tribes of Libya begin to cleanse Tripoli of terrorist militias by JoanneM

Notable quotes:
"... 45 young men were sentenced to death by a kangaroo court ..."
"... The Great Tribes of Libya sounds like an organically risen and named group; in contrast to Al Quaeda ("The Database" OR "The Toilet"). ..."
"... So, I'm for any Libyans trying to take back theuir country from the UK/USRael/France (FUKUS) 'coalition' which destroyed the most prosperous African country with the largest middle class. ..."
Sep 01, 2018 | www.sott.net

Libyan War The Truth
The Great Tribes of Libya have begun their cleansing of the terrorists brought into their country illegally by NATO in their 2011 invasion of Libya.

These terrorists include groups such as Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), Ansar Al Sharia, ISIS, Salafists, Wahabists and other assorted small criminal mercenary militia gangs. All of these militia gangs have been controlling Tripoli since 2011, ILLEGALLY. These terrorists are working with the UN puppet government, appointed by the UN (headed by the criminal Serraj) without any authority or vote of the Libyan people. These terrorist gangs answer to no laws or rules. They roam the streets armed and attack or steal at will. The Libyan people have suffered under these gangs ever since NATO, Obama, Clinton, McCain and others invaded their country with NATO using a false flag lie of a revolution to justify their war crimes.

Today, many of the largest tribes in Libya joined the Tarhouna tribe near Tripoli to support them in the cleansing of the rubbish controlling the city of Tripoli. The people of Libya who are all members of tribes and represented by the tribes, have had enough. Recently, as I reported earlier, 45 young men were sentenced to death by a kangaroo court made up of criminal militias. These young men had broken no laws, their only crime was being members of the Libyan army fighting against NATO invaders in 2011. This was just one more criminal act that pushed the Libyan people (tribes) over the edge. Even though the tribes have no support from outside like the militias who receive weapons and money from the US (via Turkey), Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Sudan; the Great Tribes of Libya have joined together to take back their sovereignty no matter what.

The terrorist gangs (militias) fearing the loss of their "golden goose" have called their brother terrorists from all over Libya to support them in their battle. These terrorists (Salafists and Wahabists, et. al) are being flown into the Mitiga Airport in Tripoli. The Mitiga airport, the old Wheelus Air Base , is being controlled by the terrorists.

So, as the world watches, the Great Tribes of Libya, standing alone with all their Libyan brothers and sisters, take on the New World order and their proxy army of terrorists.

We ask the people of the world to stand with their Libyan brothers and sisters as they fight the Zionist New World Order, Khazarian mafia cabal. The Cabal has taken their country by illegal means and placed their criminals on the ground to keep the Libyan people from their security and sovereignty.

The Great tribes of Libya are showing the world how to fight, they deserve your support and your respect. God bless them all as they fight against the evil that is permeating the entire world today.
Comment: More from Sputnik:

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called on the conflicting parties in Libya to immediately cease fire and sit down at the negotiating table, his spokesman said in a statement on Saturday.

"The Secretary-General calls on all parties to immediately cease hostilities and abide by the ceasefire agreement brokered by the United Nations and the Reconciliation Committees," the secretary-general's spokesman Stephane Dujarric said in a statement.

Guterres condemned the continued hostilities in and near Tripoli, in particular, the indiscriminate shelling, which killed and injured civilians, including children. He offered his deepest condolences to the victims' relatives.

"He urges all parties to grant humanitarian relief for those in need, particularly those who are trapped by the fighting," the spokesman added.

Ghassan Salame, a special representative of the UN secretary-general and the head of the United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL), will continue to work and cooperate with all parties to achieve a long-term political agreement acceptable to all, he concluded.

[F]ighting erupted on August 26 reportedly between local militias and Kani tribal fighters from Tarhouna, southeast of Tripoli.

According to the Doctors Without Borders (MSF) NGO, heavy shelling in residential areas resulted in an unspecified number of casualties and approximately 8,000 refugees and asylum seekers remaining trapped in closed detention centers in dire humanitarian conditions.

See Also: Russia demands OSCE action over Ukraine's treatment of journalist in custody An Alastair Crooke observation on 'Suez' Event Dangerously delusional: France "ready to strike" if it hallucinates another chemical weapons attack in Syria Login -- Register to add your comments!
Reader Comments

Yossarian · 3 days ago

The writer of this article seems to clearly understand the nature of the real enemy of the Libyan people.
jordifs · about 14 hours ago
Yossarian I am not sure. But it could be: JoAnne Moriarty. I remember the interview in Sott Radio see at:
Rowan Cocoan · 3 days ago
The Great Tribes of Libya sounds like an organically risen and named group; in contrast to Al Quaeda ("The Database" OR "The Toilet").

So, I'm for any Libyans trying to take back theuir country from the UK/USRael/France (FUKUS) 'coalition' which destroyed the most prosperous African country with the largest middle class.

But that's their plan - as enacted further daily - here in the West, too.

R.C.

[Sep 07, 2018] Guardian cheerleading of the NYT "resistance" op-ed by Richard Wolffe

What is interesting is that Wolffe links the op-ed and publishing Bob Woodward's latest book: "Woodward has cornered the panicked Trump rats into screeching about all the ways they prevented World War Three , or a massive trade war, by ignoring the ranting boss or snatching papers off his desk."
Notable quotes:
"... Nothing proved, unnamed sources, claims about this, claims about that. Until someone is prepared to step forward and reveal themselves this is a non story. Still, it gives the Trump haters comfort. ..."
"... Personally, I am not surprised or impressed by this White House insider's account. Nothing he or she has said should be a real revelation to anyone who has cast a critical eye on the Trump presidency. And whoever it is, this person is so enamored with tax cuts, deregulation, ramping up military spending and the usual Republican horse shit that he or she does not seem prepared to risk further discrediting the administration by identifying him/herself and resigning publicly. ..."
Sep 07, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

The madness is pouring out of the White House now, for all to see Richard Wolffe

... ... ...

If you really believe your boss is a threat to the constitution which you've taken an oath to protect, perhaps you should consider quitting or going public. As in: going on Capitol Hill to hold a press conference to urge impeachment.

In this regard, and only in this regard, our anonymous whistleblower has handed the crazy boss a degree of righteous indignation.

"If the GUTLESS anonymous person does indeed exist," tweeted the madman in the attic, "the Times must, for National Security purposes, turn him/her over to government at once!"

Donald, we feel your pain, albeit briefly. Your internal enemies are indeed gutless, and if you feel better putting that in ALL CAPS, that's fine. Let it out.

But that bit about turning people over to you for national security reasons is kind of the point here. If you'll allow us to summarize the GUTLESS person's arguments: you are fundamentally a threat to democracy and national security yourself. You are indeed, as your lawyers have pointed out repeatedly, your own worst witness.

This much we know from this week's other bombshell in the shape of Bob Woodward's latest book. Woodward has cornered the panicked Trump rats into screeching about all the ways they prevented World War Three , or a massive trade war, by ignoring the ranting boss or snatching papers off his desk.

... ... ...

Mr or Ms GUTLESS describes Trump's decisions as "half-baked, ill-informed and occasionally reckless", while chief of staff John Kelly says Trump is "an idiot" living in a place called "Crazytown". This revelation led to the priceless statement from Kelly where he had to deny calling the president an idiot.

Somewhere in Texas, former secretary of state Rex Tillerson is swirling a glass of bourbon muttering that he lost his job for calling Trump a moron.

Second, Trump's staffers are enabling the very horrors they claim to hate, while grandiosely pretending to be doing the opposite.

Mr or Ms GUTLESS says there were "early whispers within the cabinet of invoking the 25th amendment" in what he imagines is a clear sign they can distinguish reality from reality TV.

Ladies and gentlemen of the Trump cabinet: please know that you will not be accepted into the next edition of Profiles in Courage for your early whispers. If you truly believe the president is incapacitated, you should perhaps consider raising your voice to at least conversational level, if you're not inclined to bellow from the mountaintops. Library rules are inoperative at this point.

Given the weight of evidence, even the most diehard Trump defenders are now conceding the obvious, by signing up to the GUTLESS gang's self-promotion. Brit Hume, a Fox News veteran, let the cat out of the bag when he tweeted that it was a "good thing" they were restraining Trump "from his most reckless impulses".

This is how the pirate ship Trump eventually sinks to the ocean's floor. You can fool some of Fox News's viewers all of the time, and you can fool all of them some of the time.

But no fool wants to drown with the captain we all know is plain crazy.

Richard Wolffe is a Guardian US columnist

MoonlightTiger -> MoonlightTiger , 6 Sep 2018 10:02

It's someone high up that makes policy decisions, brags about everything they have done to help America despite Cheetos interfering. Why now? Pence wants it known that he is running the government not useless trump whom has passed nothing. Pence will come out as the author when Don is removed from office. Which could be nearing since this OPED is likely to expose him. Maybe he planned it that way.

Brutus is close now.

Carl123 -> MuttPretty , 6 Sep 2018 10:00

What's most remarkable to me is how closely the Michael Wolff's White House, Omarosa's White House, Bob Woodward's Whitehouse, and Anonymous Staffer's White House reflect each other.

Clearly a massive conspiracy. And one which Trump is helpfully participating in by constantly saying and doing stuff which accords with the pictures they're all painting.

MuttPretty , 6 Sep 2018 09:58
What's most remarkable to me is how closely the Michael Wolff's White House, Omarosa's White House, Bob Woodward's Whitehouse, and Anonymous Staffer's White House reflect each other. All these sources come together to display a rather coherent image of a chaotic White House led by a man who's not bright enough to realize he's in over his head.
Alun Jones , 6 Sep 2018 09:53
The New York Times attack piece was anonymous. It is therefore completely unverifiable and could have been written by anyone, including any of the politically biased NYT editorial team, or by Bob Woodward to publicize his new book. It's junk news.
OrangeLagoon -> JozzaBoy , 6 Sep 2018 09:49
I'm firmly convinced that when it's all said and done we'll be able to represent his presidency as an MMO boss fight. This is the bit where everyone concentrates fire on the glowy spot until the enrage mechanic kicks in. In fact it looks like the mad flailing has started and now everyone will try not to stand in the AoE as they DPS him down.
moranet , 6 Sep 2018 09:43
Mussolini was in power for twenty years before his functionaries deposed him to keep the regime intact while removing its newly-a-liability head. Mussolini was the legal (if abhorrent) premier of a coalition government in a liberal-democratic (both words with a pinch of salt) regime for his first two years, until winning a parliamentary majority of his own; indeed, after the leader of the Socialist Party was killed by his supporters, his coalition partners almost pulled out of government: that's not a totalitarian dictatorship, but what was then called "pre-fascism", and today we'd call it an 'illiberal democracy'. The dictatorship was informal (result of a supportive majority) until the constitional reform of 1928 - five years into his government.

Thinking that all will turn out fine because American democracy is under strain but generally intact, is a dangerous complacency. All interwar autocrats went through a transition of first governing under the old constitution, slowly undermining opposition, then installing a new organic law. Perhaps all will turn out well in the US, and Trump will leave office with the old 'rules of the game' untouched - but that can't be assumed, and we won't know until after he is gone.

Carl123 -> Finisterre , 6 Sep 2018 09:40

Pepperoni Pizza is absolutely correct. We DON'T know his staff are going behind his back - we have this anonymous bollocks as the totality of our evidence.

Truckloads of "anonymous bollocks" reported by credible, highly respected journalists with excellent reasons to protect their sources.

"Anonymous" bollocks" which syncs perfectly with events and pronouncements by the president himself - including numerous firings of so many of the "best people" he hired.

"Anonymous bollocks" confirmed in evidence/testimony presented publicly and under oath in court.

Otherwise, great point.

JozzaBoy , 6 Sep 2018 09:40
this is desperate stuff. Is this the thing that is finally going to bring down Trump?

The media cycle wrt Trump;

1. Trump is Crazy
2. Trump is Hitler
3. Trump is Losing
4. Go To Line 1.

babyboomer63 , 6 Sep 2018 09:38
Nothing proved, unnamed sources, claims about this, claims about that. Until someone is prepared to step forward and reveal themselves this is a non story. Still, it gives the Trump haters comfort.
imperious -> BLACKCAT66 , 6 Sep 2018 09:36
There is a segment of this country that is willfully ignorant because a con man told them to be. We really need to ignore this shrinking number of fuck-nuts and just out vote them.
We live in a democracy. If you choose to use facebook as your only source of news about the world, it is not because a con man told you to, it is because you are just too plain stupid to go looking elsewhere.
Cascais99 , 6 Sep 2018 09:36
I'm surprised that no one has compared the author of the anonymous article in the New York Times with "Deep Throat", who anonymously met Bernstein and Woodward in an underground parking garage in Washington to spill the beans about Watergate. Deep Throat turned out to be Mark Felt, a high-ranking official in the FBI who kept working against Nixon under cover and whose name was revealed only a few years ago.
FeliciorAugusto , 6 Sep 2018 09:31
Personally, I am not surprised or impressed by this White House insider's account. Nothing he or she has said should be a real revelation to anyone who has cast a critical eye on the Trump presidency. And whoever it is, this person is so enamored with tax cuts, deregulation, ramping up military spending and the usual Republican horse shit that he or she does not seem prepared to risk further discrediting the administration by identifying him/herself and resigning publicly.

Screw whoever it is, they are obviously no hero to the American people.

James Steel , 6 Sep 2018 09:31
Mike Pence and Mike Pompeo have denied writing the op-ed -- but that's exacta guilty person would say :)

[Sep 07, 2018] "Fake it till you make it" is the slogan they clutch tight to their heart the consequences however are far far reaching. My only hope is that should any of them leave here - they will get found out in a week.

Sep 07, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Red1729 -> mattblack81 , 6 Sep 2018 09:16

Nice post and well put.
I am currently sitting in an office where 30% are blaggers of the highest order. They talk and kiss ass - but ultimately - deep down - know they cannot do they do not know the job. The responsibiltiy they have will make you shudder. I have told friends and they are visibly shaken that this can happen. But I think it is the way of the world at the moment. They dare not argue with me for full knowledge they will be sent packing, they already have been but on "minor" non work related items.

"Fake it til you make it" is the slogan they clutch tight to their heart the consequences however are far far reaching. My only hope is that should any of them leave here - they will get found out in a week.

Yes the likes of Trump are a reflection of just that.

The mad thing is - I now am of the belief that I could do that job ie President of the US. That is madness.

MonsieurPumpernickel -> teppictoo , 6 Sep 2018 09:16

to foil the wishes of the elected members of government.

No. Just one member. And that one member isn't a supreme leader. You need to look elsewhere for those types of leaders - they're usually standing next to Trump while he fawns over them.

Personally I'm grateful for a bureaucracy that frustrates bad ideas - wherever they come
from. That's part of their role.

HiramsMaxim -> SolentBound , 6 Sep 2018 09:16
"If the author of the Op-Ed piece is telling the truth,"

Ay, there's the rub. But, still no existential threat.

HiramsMaxim -> aussieinjapan , 6 Sep 2018 09:15
Yes, I do read The Guardian, and I never watch Fox (cut the cable years ago)
Gojettgo , 6 Sep 2018 09:15
Everything, with the exception of Steve Bannon in Michael Wolf's book, has been anonymous. These people write things, attribute them to, say, John Kelly, then Kelly says I NEVER SAID THAT and we're left to believe whom?

If there is genuine resistance inside the White House to Trump- If it is at all like anybody says- then I would imagine that a genuine top level appointee would go on camera, throw themselves on their sword, and speak to the American people. Until such a time I question what is Woodward's agenda? Do I trust Omarosa? Is Michael Wolf credible? What are their goals? I'm not blind but I want to see more than anonymous. And until then... I don't believe it.

Daniel Ferris -> bonhiver , 6 Sep 2018 09:15
When the crowd screams, just join them. It's tremendous fun!
MoonlightTiger , 6 Sep 2018 09:15
Its Pence and trump can't fire him
imperious -> Nialler , 6 Sep 2018 09:15
I'm not going to attempt to defend Trump.

I agree, I'd hate to defend him either, but you can't help thinking he has a point by calling this person gutless. Either stand up in public and say it or, if s/he really is working in the background to save us from Trump's excesses, then surely you're better off (and the country as a whole) staying there and not alerting him?

CaptainHogwash , 6 Sep 2018 09:14
In any functioning household the adults would have sent Trump to his (preferably padded) room
KevinFinn -> Nepochtitelnikov , 6 Sep 2018 09:14
"Maybe electing a big stupid toddler as president was a bad idea after all you guys"

Still better than the alternative!!

Take a look at how the donations to the Clinton Foundation have dried up since they no longer have any influence to peddle.

AbFalsoQuodLibet -> John Edwin , 6 Sep 2018 09:13
It's the New York Times, and no, they certainly haven't been against Trump since his election.

Their lead White House correspondent, Maggie Haberman, still writes extremely understanding pieces of Trump. And she's been covering the man for almost 15 years, so one would think she had the measure of the man long ago.

More importantly, the NYT threw the election for Trump by first exonerating Trump of any Russian collusion - which was false - and by covering the last-minute Comey statements on the Clinton emails in the worst negative light possible for the Democratic candidate. The NYT turned out to be wrong, but the damage was done.

The NYT even tried to put new faces on their opinion staff with close connections to actual American neo-Nazis (!) and only failed when old tweets came to light.

I'm not quite sure what the NYT is playing at - I guess it's easy to play the devil's advocate in artsy-fartsy, liberal New York - but they most certainly have not been against Trump from January 2017 at all.

charlieblue -> John Edwin , 6 Sep 2018 09:13
Does that tinfoil hat pinch?

Trump is not a freedom fighter, he is not your Great White Messiah, he's not an advocate for blue collar American citizens. Trump is a stupid, vulgar, greedy old fat racist who conned his way into the White House. There has been a lot of talk in all mediums about his unsuitability for the office, and his obvious ties to the Kremlin, but there has been no organized effort to remove him from office, no matter what you might have read on Qanon.

Daniel Ferris -> bonhiver , 6 Sep 2018 09:13
His deregulation tendencies clinch it. No one could deregulate like Hitler!
Sixp__ -> teppictoo , 6 Sep 2018 09:12
Garbage.

Treason is defined as "The betrayal of one's own country by waging war against it or by consciously or purposely acting to aid its enemies".

Mueller should be considering indicting Trump for treason.

cacaMBa -> ctdahle , 6 Sep 2018 09:12
You think the entire population is incapable of thinking about serious issues because there's some tittle-tattle on twitter? When did that happen? No-one would work because there's always fluffy kittens on YouTube.
Pushk1n , 6 Sep 2018 09:12
Its Probably Donald himself, he has form on spoofing , pretending to be someone else.

The giveaway is the bit where it says a lot of good stuff has been done.

It could also be Giuliano creating a myth that Donald is such a muddle head he could not possibly have conspired with anyone about anything .

PaulBowyer -> Graeme48 , 6 Sep 2018 09:12
But not when Russia (who back Assad) retaliated.

And Putin has the nuts on Trump.

[Sep 07, 2018] The Strange Timestamp In The New Novichok 'Evidence'

The plot now turned into smuggling operation run by older Skripal, possibly with some participation of this daughter. There were similar hypothesis about Litvinenko death -- that he was involved n polonium smuggling operation.
The behaviour of two people involved is unprofessional -- they took public transport so they were strictly bounded by train schedule. But that's logical if they were mules -- used for smuggling some substance to GB.
Notable quotes:
"... As with the fraudulent "Mueller investigation" in the US, despite the united efforts of government officials and a colluding, servile mass-media insisting that there's a (sinister Russian) "there" there, I foolishly thought that the overall absence of actual evidence, or even a plausible rationale connecting the dubious dots, was an overreach that would rapidly reach a fatal point of diminishing returns. ..."
"... But I underestimated the staying power of Big Lies, and the Big Liars who tell them ..."
"... Another oddity, the hotel the men stayed at, which was supposedly contaminated by Novichok as discovered on May the 4th - I did a news search for this hotel for the period March - September 4th and couldn't find a single reference to it being cordoned off or investigated by the police. Did they let people continue to use the hotel without telling them it could be contaminated? ..."
"... EVERYONE knows it's all BS. BUT, everyone talking about it gives it traction. I find this no different than the USA scoundrels worried about Syrian citizens in Idlib. ..."
"... The most worrying angle, as far as I am concerned, is the utter unbelievability of these stories. Exactly in line with 9/11 (three buildings knocked down by two planes), the Boston Marathon bombing, countless supposed multiple murders in the USA that do not seem to have taken place as officially described, MH17, and the Syrian "chemical weapons" attacks. ..."
"... So we had Bolton clearly stating in the media time and time again --- if chemical weapons are found in Idlib it would be a game changer to US policy in Syria, thus prompting those desperate cornered brutal rebels, offering a last way out of there situation. Now we have the prime minister. UK giving a statement about new evidence re Salisbury, chemical Russia. I would put a weeks wage on there being a chemical attack in Syria Idlib enytime now ! This is the UK prime minster aiding a massive brutal crime. ..."
"... It is obvious this whole novichok thing is a false flag op. The only question is why did the UK government did this. ..."
"... UK agencies have a long track record back to before WW2 running operations to get the US into a war. Their recent false flag operations inside the UK are to soften up the US/UK public in advance of the UK managed chemical weapon false flag attack in Syria they are clearly threatening in advance. ..."
"... There are times of the day when 2 passengers could arrive at an empty passport control, enter two different tunnels at the same time and arrive at exactly the same second at equivalent gates. Not many times, because it means that there is no queue at either tunnel. And 16:22 is not one of these times. ..."
"... You think that two members of a highly trained hit squad are going to walk through Heathrow together? You've got to be dreaming. Have you no concept of Operational Security? Dear oh dear... ..."
"... Historian and political analyst Vladimir Kornilov wrote an article for RIA Novosti comparing the famous 1924 SIS forgery, "Zinoviev letter", to the ongoing Skripal affair: https://ria.ru/analytics/20180905/1527822792.html ( machine translation ; the translation is good, except that "the Violins" should read as "the Skripals"). ..."
"... And with all due respect to b I don't think the airport pictures prove much. Who were these two? Why did they go to Salisbury? It looks too sloppy to be GRU. Russian Mafia contract killers is my guess. Unless the whole story is an elaborate MI6 concoction and all the CCTV photos are fake. ..."
"... A beautiful story, this Skripal affair...designed and timed to draw the public into emotional judgments, against reason and logic, immediately prior to the Russian pummeling of jihadi scum. One wonders what sort of blowback arises from such psychological conditioning. Hmmm... ..."
"... As I wrote before, the case reeks of planted evidence. A normal logic of investigation would be to inspect "probable leads" ASAP, and to perform tests ASAP. Instead, the famous door knob was tested with one month delay, and the hotel room, with two month delay. But planting evidence in an improvised mode requires planning and debates how to do it. The logistics of planting evidence are the most plausible explanation why it was done at the place where Skripals lived rather than close to the place where they together lost consciousness. Planting evidence in the hotel is simplicity itself, because it is very easy to do it in a secret lab. ..."
"... Two men (traveling together on Russian passports) are seen leaving a flight from Moscow and (in the most heavily CCTV monitored country in the world), immediately take public transport directly to and from the scene of the crime. ..."
"... Its very hard to imagine that any intelligence agency would be so sloppy as to use their own nationals, own passports, travel together, take direct flights from their own capital, use public transport, make no effort to avoid CCTV, casually dispose of vital evidence where it was certain to be found (a deadly poison left in a brandname perfume box at a charity donation bin? someone was going to open it eventually), etc. There are many more flaws but there are also more significant questions. ..."
"... Is there any strong reason to believe that US or UK intelligence were less likely to poison Skripal than Russia? Did he perhaps have evidence regarding the Steele Dossier they wanted to silence? If so, is there any reason we should not suspect the men in the picture of working for non-Russian intelligence who are deliberately trying to point the finger of blame at Russia? ..."
"... Personally, I think relity is much more mundane: the UK, given its objective reality post-Brexit, simply decided to (re)synchronize (update) its geopolitical position with the USA's. When the USA decided to jump into the madness of Russophobia after Trump's victory, the UK simply had to jump after because it is so dependent on the Americans they kinda didn't have a choice. ..."
"... They need something to try to put pressure on Russia. What tools do they have? "Skripal case", "Russian meddling in elections" (aka "Russian hackers"), "Russian doping", situation in Donbass, illegal detentions/abductions of Russian citizens (Ukraine did it with Kirill Vyshinsky in May, the US did it with Maria Butina recently etc.), cheap provocations with chemical weapons in Syria to accuse Assad/Russia. ..."
"... I would pick three directions - the "Skripal case", fake "chemical attacks" in Syria and deliberate aggravation of the situation in Donbass (terrorist act against DPR head Alexander Zakharchenko is just the beginning) are, apparently (in their opinion), the most effective measures to influence Russia to change its policy in Syria. These tools will be used. Simultaneously, or in a particular order. ..."
"... The key proposition that the police are asserting is that the Skripals were poisoned by 'delayed reaction'. The alleged suspects were out of Salisbury 3 hours before the Skripals exhibited signs of poisoning, nerve agents, however, act immediately. If the 'door handle theory' is not physically possible, which it is not, then that leaves out the assassin hypothesis. Most likely, as I have always said, is that this is about Sergei's skulduggery, he took delivery of the agent from these guys for eventual passing over to the White Helmets via their MI6 handlers. All went pear shaped because of a leaky bottle. Sergei realised something was wrong so hurried his meal so he could check it out, reached the park bench with Julia and the saw that the bottle was leaking and began to feel ill, Julia through the thing away and went down herself. ..."
Sep 07, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
Ort , Sep 5, 2018 2:41:45 PM | link
FYI, Craig Murray has a new post on the same subject: "The Impossible Photo" .

Some commenters there who claim to be familiar with the airport have already noted that the men were surely exiting from parallel walkways ("channels"), and/or that the CCTV clock was simply malfunctioning.

Even if both claims are true, it doesn't explain away the remarkable congruence between the men's supposedly separate and independent progress through the walkways. Again, some commenters who purport to be personally familiar with the location assert that there are visible differences in the "two" walkways shown in the photos-- but to me they look identical.

This is still another dodgy, ambiguous piece of "evidence" to prop up the ongoing Big Lie. In the weeks following the Skripal event, the UK officials began making such ludicrous and incredible assertions that I naïvely expected that their colossal deceit would blow up in their faces sooner than later.

As with the fraudulent "Mueller investigation" in the US, despite the united efforts of government officials and a colluding, servile mass-media insisting that there's a (sinister Russian) "there" there, I foolishly thought that the overall absence of actual evidence, or even a plausible rationale connecting the dubious dots, was an overreach that would rapidly reach a fatal point of diminishing returns.

But I underestimated the staying power of Big Lies, and the Big Liars who tell them.

Teganjovnka , Sep 5, 2018 2:42:29 PM | link

Another oddity, the hotel the men stayed at, which was supposedly contaminated by Novichok as discovered on May the 4th - I did a news search for this hotel for the period March - September 4th and couldn't find a single reference to it being cordoned off or investigated by the police. Did they let people continue to use the hotel without telling them it could be contaminated? Did nobody notice police and men in hazmat suits there? Or was the name of the hotel d noticed?
ken , Sep 5, 2018 2:42:47 PM | link
Everyone,,, EVERYONE knows it's all BS. BUT, everyone talking about it gives it traction. I find this no different than the USA scoundrels worried about Syrian citizens in Idlib. Anything the West says or does is USDA Grade AAA horse hockey.
james , Sep 5, 2018 2:51:56 PM | link
and the timing for this now is?? c'mon..
Tom Welsh , Sep 5, 2018 2:58:07 PM | link
As to the UK government being able to fake the involvement of GRU agents - remember that Sergei Skripal himself was a British spy while working for the GRU. Why not others?

The most worrying angle, as far as I am concerned, is the utter unbelievability of these stories. Exactly in line with 9/11 (three buildings knocked down by two planes), the Boston Marathon bombing, countless supposed multiple murders in the USA that do not seem to have taken place as officially described, MH17, and the Syrian "chemical weapons" attacks.

The official explanations of all those stories are so weak and inconsistent that they would be rejected as plot lines for Dr Who or CSI. So what is their little game? I can think of two unpleasant possibilities.

  1. They are trying to calibrate exactly how grotesque a set of lies they can pass off without any public protest or outcry.
  2. They are compiling a list of the few people who are both intelligent and bold enough to point out the obvious discrepancies in public.
rndmdude , Sep 5, 2018 3:16:12 PM | link
Clearly those timestamps are planted on the pictures taken from screen.. Well maybe they thought that they only need 24 hours or something.
Hermius , Sep 5, 2018 3:37:26 PM | link
How do the British know they were false name?
Mark2 , Sep 5, 2018 3:45:06 PM | link
So we had Bolton clearly stating in the media time and time again --- if chemical weapons are found in Idlib it would be a game changer to US policy in Syria, thus prompting those desperate cornered brutal rebels, offering a last way out of there situation. Now we have the prime minister. UK giving a statement about new evidence re Salisbury, chemical Russia. I would put a weeks wage on there being a chemical attack in Syria Idlib enytime now ! This is the UK prime minster aiding a massive brutal crime.

This prime minister got in to power by a slim margine on the back of 3 false flag terror attacks 2 in London one in Manchester persuading the public to go for the get tough vote . Are we gulable or what ?

vk , Sep 5, 2018 3:56:16 PM | link
It is obvious this whole novichok thing is a false flag op. The only question is why did the UK government did this.
AriusArmenian , Sep 5, 2018 4:00:47 PM | link
UK agencies have a long track record back to before WW2 running operations to get the US into a war. Their recent false flag operations inside the UK are to soften up the US/UK public in advance of the UK managed chemical weapon false flag attack in Syria they are clearly threatening in advance.

This is beyond ridiculous that the dried out husk of the UK is beating its chest for war with Russia. I almost wish that they would get their war and be beaten flat.

Anonymous , Sep 5, 2018 4:04:48 PM | link
Just yesterday the Russian embassy in the UK released this statement: Today marks exactly six months since the Russian citizens Sergei and Yulia Skripal were taken to Salisbury District Hospital under obscure circumstances...
mdroy , Sep 5, 2018 4:06:42 PM | link
There are times of the day when 2 passengers could arrive at an empty passport control, enter two different tunnels at the same time and arrive at exactly the same second at equivalent gates. Not many times, because it means that there is no queue at either tunnel. And 16:22 is not one of these times.
TJ , Sep 5, 2018 4:07:41 PM | link
Putin's Novichok assassins identified. Pictured smiling, walking UK streets -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBaVe19amhU
Circe , Sep 5, 2018 4:12:03 PM | link
@16

My experience through those boarding bridges is that when boarding people walk normal pace and when exiting they do so at a faster pace down the bridge. I guess they want get to their luggage quickly.

Deltaeus , Sep 5, 2018 4:16:44 PM | link
Køn @ 14 "In fact anyone insisting that this timestamp is some gotcha loses a lot of credibility in my eyes."

Don't be a gallah, Køn! You think that two members of a highly trained hit squad are going to walk through Heathrow together? You've got to be dreaming. Have you no concept of Operational Security? Dear oh dear...

Lochearn , Sep 5, 2018 4:30:37 PM | link
The two strong-looking men take it in turns to carry what looks like a light backpack which is kind of odd in itself. If nerve gas had either been sprayed or smeared, one or both would have to have used a full protective suit, which consists of a bulky gas mask, jacket, trousers and substantial boots, which would have called for a much bigger backpack.
eyespy , Sep 5, 2018 4:33:10 PM | link
These photos show the same time but different locations. These are the security barriers between passport control and the baggage reclaim hall, there are a number of parallel gates that open automatically and are monitored by CCTV. The high resolution photos on the Met website show a different camera angles: The Petrov photo shows a white flat surface with a thin red stripe in the lower right corner and the top of the wall panels on the upper left. The Boshirov picture show a much wider red stripe (and no white surface) and the top of the panels is not visible. So you have two different gates entered at the same time.
Circe , Sep 5, 2018 4:44:50 PM | link
I'm no expert but allow me to play devil's advocate. What if they have two cameras on different angles with separate receivers in case one goes offline and their clock is not in sync so the second camera stamps same time when it's one second later on first. It just seems that if there was Photoshop involved they would think of changing the timestamp and inserting person in precisely same angle. Of course it doesn't explain why they would take pictures from two different cameras, but maybe face appeared clearer?
Norwegian , Sep 5, 2018 4:46:24 PM | link
One of the images may have been flipped: https://postimg.cc/image/n0oijez53/
rac , Sep 5, 2018 4:46:28 PM | link
Which airports have parallel disimabarkation tunnels then? I've been through 4 airports in 3 different countries in the past two months and each time it was a single tunnel. The only time I've seen two tunnels was when I was on a flight witha first class and even then it sort of branched off, near the door of the plane.
Pictorex , Sep 5, 2018 4:58:53 PM | link
Could it be the same corridor at two different locations at the same moment? This would explain the different angles of the cameras, which maybe were placed at a similar location to the railings etc.
Circe , Sep 5, 2018 4:59:23 PM | link
The door of the plane only accommodates one boarding bridge. Whoever has been through that airport can clear this up.
Circe , Sep 5, 2018 5:03:10 PM | link
@ 37

And how would they manage to pass at the exact same time through two different corridors?

S , Sep 5, 2018 5:10:46 PM | link
Historian and political analyst Vladimir Kornilov wrote an article for RIA Novosti comparing the famous 1924 SIS forgery, "Zinoviev letter", to the ongoing Skripal affair: https://ria.ru/analytics/20180905/1527822792.html ( machine translation ; the translation is good, except that "the Violins" should read as "the Skripals").
Køn , Sep 5, 2018 5:16:47 PM | link
Deltaeus... kindly please desist from insulting me in anitpodean. I make no assertions about trained or untrained hit squads or how they might behave. I am merely saying that anyone who thinks these timestamps represent anything suspicious or out of the ordinary is chasing their own tails.

The UK authorities present pictures of two men that travelled together on a flight from Moscow to London Gatwick. They went through parallel security sluices at the same time as they were walking together. At which point they were automatically photographed. It could just as easily have been that the time stamp was 1 second apart or even 2 seconds, or as is in fact the case, less than 1 second apart. NOTE: They may have triggered the automatic camera 999ms apart and still had the same timestamp so it is not strictly accurate to say that they were pictured at exactly the same time. The sluice appears to be about 4 metres long up to the point where the camera is triggered. I can walk 4 metres in less than 2 seconds. Which does not give a large time frame in which the walking pace of these two men can diverge.

There is so much more suspicious and contentious in todays UK announcement that it is ridiculous and counter productive to waste time on an easily explained time stamp.

james , Sep 5, 2018 5:18:44 PM | link
interesting article in russia on this ..it goes into the 2 men and what they know of them.. i ran it thru google translate..
Occidentosis , Sep 5, 2018 5:24:45 PM | link
They are not even trying anymore. I wonder if it has a direct correlation to the gullibility and intelligence of the West's public.
Norwegian , Sep 5, 2018 5:29:46 PM | link
This is an obvious fabrication of evidence. What they did was to take 2 photos from the same tunnel using the same camera at different times, but with the camera rotated about 20 degrees between them (notice the slightly different fish-eye lens distortions). Afterwards they flipped one of the images horizontally and added time-stamps to the images, but forgot to change the times between them.

I reversed the above process, aligned the images and made a GIF animation to prove it, see https://postimg.cc/image/x1ixk7r4x/

These people are stupid.

Alaric , Sep 5, 2018 5:36:15 PM | link
The timing is interesting. This is an attempt to buttress a future claim that Assad used chem weapons in Idlib. Lame. Who believes this stuff?

Good catch on the time stamp B.

karlof1 , Sep 5, 2018 5:52:02 PM | link
Gatwick not Heathrow. I highly suggest reading the comments to Craig Murray's blog post. Yes, as here there're some repetitive comments, but many good points are also raised. Perhaps the best is the lack of a "tag" identifying the camera location as at the security station you have many CCTV images that are very similar: Something like Jetway2 Customs4, or some such. IMO, the photos and story are contrived just as the rest of the hoax is--except for the fact that at least one person has died and likely the Skripals most certainly--she wanted to return to Russia and take Sergei with her.
uncle tungsten , Sep 5, 2018 6:00:03 PM | link
Well done UK comrades! So now you will release all the cctv from the original Salisbury incident so we can see every detail of the cunning ruskies eh! including the entire street videos, Mill pub and park videos too; and in high resolution this time please. Plus as the case is solved would you be so kind as to release the complete OPCW reports and the Porton Down reports too.

Can't have enough open government in the worlds foremost democracy now, can we?

Bart Hansen , Sep 5, 2018 6:03:11 PM | link
Sy Hersch blames the poisoning of Skripals on the Russian mafia who found out he was working with MI6 to reveal their European operations.

Could these two guys be of the Russian mafia? Them being not of the Russian IC might explain how the poison was less than lethal for all who came in contact.

dh , Sep 5, 2018 6:17:48 PM | link
@49 Sorry Sy but your theory doesn't hold up. Teresa May has said they were from the GRU. Here are her exact words...

"Based on this work, I can today tell the House that, based on a body of intelligence, the Government has concluded that the two individuals named by the police and CPS are officers from the Russian military intelligence service, also known as the GRU.

The GRU is a highly disciplined organisation with a well-established chain of command. So this was not a rogue operation. It was almost certainly also approved outside the GRU at a senior level of the Russian state."

Please try harder.

Laguerre , Sep 5, 2018 6:23:59 PM | link
dh
Sorry Sy but your theory doesn't hold up. Teresa May has said they were from the GRU.
Incredible. You believe that what May said is true, because she said it!
Angry Panda , Sep 5, 2018 6:27:41 PM | link
Here is an interesting side note, relating to the statement made by "Sue Hemming, the CPS director of legal services" (e.g. as in this Guardian piece .

We will not be applying to Russia for the extradition of these men as the Russian constitution does not permit extradition of its own nationals. Russia has made this clear following requests for extradition in other cases. Should this position change then an extradition request would be made.

This is a blatant lie. Russia's Constitution (available here in Russian states the following in Article 63, Section 2:

В Российской Федерации не допускается выдача другим государствам лиц, преследуемых за политические убеждения, а также за действия (или бездействие), не признаваемые в Российской Федерации преступлением. Выдача лиц, обвиняемых в совершении преступления, а также передача осужденных для отбывания наказания в других государствах осуществляются на основе федерального закона или международного договора Российской Федерации.

Which means (my own translation, but Google Translate is your friend if you do not believe me):

In the Russian Federation it is not permitted to extradite to other states individuals who are persecuted for their political beliefs, as well as for actions (or inaction) that are not deemed criminal in the Russian Federation. Extradition of individuals accused of committing a crime, as well as transfer of convicts to serve their sentences in other states, is performed on the basis of federal law or international agreements of the Russian Federation.

I must confess that I am not up on the most current version of Russian criminal law, but I believe "attempted murder utilizing a banned chemical weapon" does still qualify as a crime over there, and, moreover, is not considered "political beliefs". But, of course, an official extradition requests would entail also handing over the Crown's evidence against the accused, which...well, clearly there is so much of it that the Crown just doesn't wish to share any.

Anyhow, something to ponder.

Norwegian , Sep 5, 2018 6:28:15 PM | link
@47 karlof1
Perhaps the best is the lack of a "tag" identifying the camera location as at the security station you have many CCTV images that are very similar: Something like Jetway2 Customs4, or some such.
Se my post @45 (animation link). The camera location is the same in both images, they just rotated the camera, and flipped one image horizontally. If you download the MET "originals" and repeat what I did you find the match to be 100%. With identical time stamps, you know this is fabricated evidence. There is really no other plausible or (even possible) explanation.

It is virtually a confession from the police.

james , Sep 5, 2018 6:28:20 PM | link
i think dh is being sarcastic!
lysias , Sep 5, 2018 6:29:40 PM | link
It isn't the GRU (Glavnoye Razdevyvatel'noye Upravleniye, Main Intelligence Directorate) any more. In 2010, the name was changed to GU (Glavnoye Upravleniye, Main Directorate).
sejomoje , Sep 5, 2018 6:44:10 PM | link
"Norwegian" is correct. These pics have been tampered with bigly. "Kon" points out that one has a "red line" while one has a more solid looking red area. That is explained by the picture flipping and tilting. The red line is a framelike border of something. In one pic we see that part that's further from the camera and it looks like a slim red line. In the other pic we see the part of it which is closer to the camera, and is ALSO the corner of the line, so it appears to be something completely different when it's actually just 2 parts of the same puzzle.

My bet is that they were taken at different times of day, those tunnels always let natural light in. Unless a filter was intentionally applied(to further suggest two tunnels). There has been some photoshop fussing with the other identifying blobs - like the dirt on the camera lense and on the floors have been erased or blurred in the flipped pic! It's mad obvious.

Thanks Norwegian, I am posting that gif all over the place.

karlof1 , Sep 5, 2018 6:46:54 PM | link
Norwegian @53--

Thanks for your reply! Another comment mentioned the ability of such digital cameras to self-crop as both pics are cropped as someone provided the pixel dimensions. IMO, this is just more BigLie piled atop the preceding BigLies--doubling-down is the Neocon way after all. All timed with Idlib, no doubt. My question along with many others: Where are the other passengers having to travel through the same portals?

My explanation: Human images were added to an image(s) of an empty portal(s).

sejomoje , Sep 5, 2018 6:47:28 PM | link
"It is virtually a confession from the police". Yes, one doesn't know whether to be hopeful of a whistleblower, or just devastated at the incompetence of the so-called intelligence agencies behind these fabrications. It's hardly ever the former unfortunately.
Norwegian , Sep 5, 2018 6:49:18 PM | link
@57 sejomoje

Thanks. Please share far and wide.

Bart Hansen , Sep 5, 2018 6:52:04 PM | link
James, I agree about the sarcasm. But when May brings her "resolute" voice to bear, one bows before her gravitas.

After all, it is "highly likely" that Putin decided to queer the time-honored rule not to mess with a spy swap.

MadMax2 , Sep 5, 2018 7:02:05 PM | link
@Norwegian

Nice work with the gif, it appears exactly how you describe it... just amazing fuckery. Re: the timestamp, its so sloppy it pretty much a taunt: 'none of you sheep give a toss cos there's not a critical thought amongst ya'

sejomoje , Sep 5, 2018 7:06:07 PM | link
I agree Madmax, so much taunting in these things. This seems ahole 'nother level though. A virtual middle finger to the "conspiracy theorists".
dh , Sep 5, 2018 7:06:08 PM | link
@54 Thank you james. Obviously I am going to have to work harder on my sarcasm mode. Or maybe just quit posting.
Virgile , Sep 5, 2018 7:07:18 PM | link
How can May be so sure they belong to the GRU if they do not know the real identity of the two guys?
somebody , Sep 5, 2018 7:09:59 PM | link
Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 5, 2018 6:46:54 PM | 58

That is what it looked like to me (I work with photoshop), but then, why would they do this?

Russian journalists did find the corresponding flight bookings

Only reason would be that the people on the airport CCTV looked different from the people on CCTV in Salisbury.

So the departing image would have to be fake , too. Or it is real but of people who did not arrive the Friday before.

dh , Sep 5, 2018 7:22:25 PM | link
@65 Good question. And with all due respect to b I don't think the airport pictures prove much. Who were these two? Why did they go to Salisbury? It looks too sloppy to be GRU. Russian Mafia contract killers is my guess. Unless the whole story is an elaborate MI6 concoction and all the CCTV photos are fake.
jayc , Sep 5, 2018 7:27:59 PM | link
It may be the release of this material was scheduled to coincide with the US sanctions announced a few weeks ago, as those were said to be motivated by the Skripal case, but then held back for domestic political reasons, as May's position has weakened just the past two weeks. The bonus gratuitous finger-pointing at Corbyn would serve its purpose today or back in August.
Kane , Sep 5, 2018 7:33:18 PM | link
It all relies ultimately on" a body of evidence gathered by intelligence" and we know from recent past experiences of anglo/ ameriocan Intelligence that that cannot be trusted to be either valid or reliable .
cdvision , Sep 5, 2018 7:41:25 PM | link
dh @50 the Met policeman in charges of the investigation was asked at a press conference if he has any evidence the 2 in the images were GRU. He said NO. https://www.rt.com/op-ed/437729-skripal-poisoning-suspects-russia/
dh , Sep 5, 2018 7:57:09 PM | link
@69 Very honest of him. As with the original Skripal 'poisoning' it looks like another case of blaming Russia, i.e Putin, on flimsy evidence.
corkie , Sep 5, 2018 8:10:40 PM | link
Please people these photos were taken in exactly the same place. Nothing has been rotated. Notice on the right hand side there is a a small piece of a red security notice in the two photos. You will need to see the original police photos to see this. In only one of the four lanes is that possible. The one on the right as viewed from the exit. notice that this is the only lane where the steel handrail on the right extends so far on the white panel. Two different photos of the same lane with the same timestamp. ???? I'd say in both images are fake.
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.1570429,-0.1626642,2a,89.7y,192.36h,83.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5aRAGxER5MlF-9kpw8ZyRQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
gully , Sep 5, 2018 8:16:00 PM | link
@norwegian
there are four staggered gateways. almost identical and with almost identical camera positions.

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.1570157,-0.1626565,2a,90y,182.51h,64.06t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1svV47ixbwSQnbQjlwIUFvnQ!2e0!3e2!7i13312!8i6656

so i am not 100% convinced by your theory.

MadMax2 , Sep 5, 2018 8:18:32 PM | link
Ort 17
Yes, it appears, like me, you are enjoying our latest visit to Wonderland where a great many things are possible... all you need to do is believe. Christopher Steele has done a smackdown job of reinvigorating the Non Fiction shelves at my library. Who knew high treason and golden showers could ever work together.

A beautiful story, this Skripal affair...designed and timed to draw the public into emotional judgments, against reason and logic, immediately prior to the Russian pummeling of jihadi scum. One wonders what sort of blowback arises from such psychological conditioning. Hmmm...

Julian , Sep 5, 2018 8:21:13 PM | link
I wouldn't say these images prove anything either way. Perhaps they are doctored, but what if they were from customs entry points side-by-side? The two men have been walking together so presumably they'd go through the customs walkways at exactly the same time. These are not photos from the walkway off the plane - that much is clear.

On the spectrum of what is going on you have to go from one end (all this evidence is completely fabricated - these might be images of 'dead men' so no one can step forward to personally refute them) all the way over to the Brits are telling the truth.

Most likely, it's somewhere in the middle, but impossible to say exactly where.

Pft , Sep 5, 2018 8:25:58 PM | link
Even without the time stamp discrepancy I am at loss to understand what the photos prove. Absolutely nothing. I suppose they just want to keep the story in the publics mind in preparation for the next "Russia did it " false flag. Coming soon to a theater near you. Ever notice September-November makes for the most exciting times? No wonder many season premiers start in winter/spring now
Panopticon , Sep 5, 2018 8:28:57 PM | link
Why now, when the CCTV 'evidence' must have been available for months? Just like the Douma pantomime and subsequent bombing of Syria, this is clearly setting the scene for a western assault on Idlib, possibly this weekend.

https://syrianobservatoryforhumanwrongs.wordpress.com/2018/07/09/an-idiots-guide-to-the-skripal-affair/

Yeah, Right , Sep 5, 2018 8:39:00 PM | link
@71 Nice theory, except that the security notice in those police photos appear to be mounted far too low to correspond with their location in that google maps image, even on the one lane that you nominate. You can see that best in the "Boshirov" photo where the top-left of the notice can be seen.

In the google maps image the signs are at head-height, so a line drawn from the ccd to a "pretend eyeline" in Google Maps would suggest that the security camera would be recording the bottom-left of that sign, not the top-left corner.

That walk-though was recorded in September 2017.
The security footage was filmed in March 2018.

It isn't a stretch to believe that between these two dates the signs were moved lower and closer to the guardrail.

Anyone in Ol' Blighty want to walk up to those gates at Gatwick and tell us?

Julian , Sep 5, 2018 8:41:03 PM | link
Re: Posted by: Bob | Sep 5, 2018 2:13:08 PM | 7

Presumably they were on the same flight? If they have identified the flights - presumably the Russians would be able to ID these guys at the other end - in some way at least.

gully , Sep 5, 2018 8:46:19 PM | link
@77
different but pretty similar gateway @gatwick airport with lower mounted signs. imo this is where the pictures were taken:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.1611377,-0.1773794,2a,75y,163.05h,72.21t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sVwMbNKWSg8PjuWKakaOeaA!2e0!3e2!7i13312!8i6656

Brian , Sep 5, 2018 8:46:30 PM | link
Russia needs to do more to get back their national Yulia Skripal . She's been brazenly abducted by UK regime. If Brit Sh disappear na Russian imagine the fate of Julian Assange if he steps out of that embassy
Jen , Sep 5, 2018 8:47:26 PM | link
Corkie @ 71, Gully @ 72:

If you compare the photos you posted with the photos in Bernhard's post, you will notice something missing from the photos in Bernhard's post.

Where are the security doors with the white-barred red circles on the glass in Bernhard's photos?

Yeah, Right , Sep 5, 2018 8:51:35 PM | link
@71 Just to be clear about what I am saying, because my previous post may be confusing: if you look at the two security shots and note the top-left corner ("Boshirov") and left-flank ("Petrov") of those signs then both suggest that the bottom-left corner of that security notice will be just above (as in almost but not quite level-with) the top of the guardrail.

Yet if you look here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.1570429,-0.1626642,2a,75y,198.05h,91.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5aRAGxER5MlF-9kpw8ZyRQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
you can see that the bottom-left of the security sign is nearly a metre above the level of the guardrail.

Unless there is massive foreshortening and distortion in those security camera feeds then I would suggest that those signs have been moved between September 2017 and March 2018.

In which case, of course, your observation is not going to be valid.

Brian , Sep 5, 2018 8:52:13 PM | link
Two Russian nationals . Brits decide they are Russian assassins . Were they seem committing an assassination ? Imagine any Russian tourist now could be labelled an assassin and abducted like Yulia Skripal and held incommunicado . Russia should take Britain to court over this behaviour
Piotr Berman , Sep 5, 2018 8:54:10 PM | link
As I wrote before, the case reeks of planted evidence. A normal logic of investigation would be to inspect "probable leads" ASAP, and to perform tests ASAP. Instead, the famous door knob was tested with one month delay, and the hotel room, with two month delay. But planting evidence in an improvised mode requires planning and debates how to do it. The logistics of planting evidence are the most plausible explanation why it was done at the place where Skripals lived rather than close to the place where they together lost consciousness. Planting evidence in the hotel is simplicity itself, because it is very easy to do it in a secret lab.

OTH, pictures have semi-plausible explanation and Ruslan Boshirov is not a frequent name, probably Muslim (Boshir/Bashir is an Arabic name, ev/ov is a Russian ending).

Bran , Sep 5, 2018 9:08:08 PM | link
Two men (traveling together on Russian passports) are seen leaving a flight from Moscow and (in the most heavily CCTV monitored country in the world), immediately take public transport directly to and from the scene of the crime.

Its very hard to imagine that any intelligence agency would be so sloppy as to use their own nationals, own passports, travel together, take direct flights from their own capital, use public transport, make no effort to avoid CCTV, casually dispose of vital evidence where it was certain to be found (a deadly poison left in a brandname perfume box at a charity donation bin? someone was going to open it eventually), etc. There are many more flaws but there are also more significant questions.

Is there any strong reason to believe that US or UK intelligence were less likely to poison Skripal than Russia? Did he perhaps have evidence regarding the Steele Dossier they wanted to silence? If so, is there any reason we should not suspect the men in the picture of working for non-Russian intelligence who are deliberately trying to point the finger of blame at Russia?

Leaving that aside, is there any reason not to think the men n the picture may have been members of organized crime for some reason upset with Skripal? This might explain the lack of professional tradecraft.

In short, even if we accept that the people in the photographs were responsible for the poisonings, there has been no evidence presented to link them to the Russian government other than the fact that they travelled directly from Moscow on Russian passports, a fact that should actually be seen as making it less likely they were Russian agents.

MadMax2 , Sep 5, 2018 9:17:42 PM | link
Fyi, there are 2 terminals at Gatwick, north and south. Though, as Pft, Julian and others have said, what do these pictures really say at this stage...? Only guilty by the logic of highly likely.
Jen , Sep 5, 2018 9:27:29 PM | link
Piotr Berman @ 84:

"Ruslan Boshirov" is supposed to be Tajik. I noticed the last name "Boshirov" too ("Boshir" = Tajik rendering of "Bashir" or "Bashar").

Bashar / Bashir is a common boys' name and surname in some Muslim countries (but maybe not Iran). Also a common surname among Christian communities in Lebanon. A former governor of New South Wales had that surname. Both her parents were of Lebanese background.

Ruslan is a common boys' name in Russia and countries that used to be part of the Soviet Union. It is derived from the Turkic name Arslan. As Tajiks are an Iranian-speaking people, I am not sure if the name is popular with them. From what I have been able to find out online, Tajiks seem to prefer Persian names.

Hmm, someone in Britain didn't do their homework terribly well.

Dr. Wellington Yueh , Sep 5, 2018 9:36:16 PM | link
Heh...it seems to be working. We're now talking about this instead of the Idlib campaign.
vk , Sep 5, 2018 9:41:30 PM | link
@ Posted by: Bart Hansen | Sep 5, 2018 6:03:11 PM | 49

Well, if Hersh has the evidence for this, I won't be doubting him. I'm sincerely open to any good theory -- the only thing I'm certain is that it wasn't the Kremlin: there's simply no gain for Russia in this.

Personally, I think relity is much more mundane: the UK, given its objective reality post-Brexit, simply decided to (re)synchronize (update) its geopolitical position with the USA's. When the USA decided to jump into the madness of Russophobia after Trump's victory, the UK simply had to jump after because it is so dependent on the Americans they kinda didn't have a choice.

Maybe, in a parallel universe, if Corbyn had won the 2017 snap election, we could visualize a different position from the British. But that door is definitely close now -- and even if he had won, we have to face the fact the UK is simply the natural ally of the USA in the European Peninsula (the most stable one -- of course there are valuable American satrapies in Poland, the ex-Yugoslavian republics not-named Serbia, the Baltic States and the new, desintegrated, nazi-Ukraine; but they are of the military outpost-type, nearer the "danger").

alaff , Sep 5, 2018 9:41:50 PM | link
This is nothing more but an endless conglomeration of lies. Not just mistakes or fallacies, but a deliberate lies. It is clear for all adequate people who have brains.

Why it is now the British authorities decided to shake off the dust from the forgotten "Skripal case" and to revive it? Well, Syria is the answer, of course. In particular, upcoming (in fact, already started) Idlib liberation.

They need something to try to put pressure on Russia. What tools do they have? "Skripal case", "Russian meddling in elections" (aka "Russian hackers"), "Russian doping", situation in Donbass, illegal detentions/abductions of Russian citizens (Ukraine did it with Kirill Vyshinsky in May, the US did it with Maria Butina recently etc.), cheap provocations with chemical weapons in Syria to accuse Assad/Russia.

I would pick three directions - the "Skripal case", fake "chemical attacks" in Syria and deliberate aggravation of the situation in Donbass (terrorist act against DPR head Alexander Zakharchenko is just the beginning) are, apparently (in their opinion), the most effective measures to influence Russia to change its policy in Syria. These tools will be used. Simultaneously, or in a particular order.

By the way, one must not exclude possible chemical provocations in Ukraine. Ukrainian terrorist regime has not used it yet, but all is possible. Especially now, after "Skripal case" is revived and some fake "chemical attacks" are definitely will happen in Idlib (giving FUKUS a "legitimate reason" to launch aggression on Syria again). The CyberBerkut hacker team (a kind of Fancy Bears) recently reported that chemical provocations in Ukraine (in Donbass) are in preparation stage, and that American instructors participate in organizing of this provocation. Not a fact that this will happen, of course, but still this possibility must not be ruled out.

As for these two men, "discovered" a half of a year after the incident... For any sane person, the proposal to believe that these two are GRU agents is an insult to his intellectual abilities. "GRU agents", who flew direct(!) Flight from Moscow, and flew back the same direct(!) Flight. "GRU agents", who in general did not even tried to disguise themselves, and, as if specifically, tried to be caught by all surveillance cameras in the UK. "GRU agents", who used their passports(!) instead of coming to the UK secretly (for example, through Ireland). "GRU agents", who left the "Novichok" traces wherever possible, and then carelessly threw the bottle on the street. "GRU agents", who for some reason decided to use such a strange, dangerous and uncomfortable method as "poisoning the victim with a chemical warfare agent(!)" instead of easily and unnoticeably shoot a victim from a gun with a silencer (or strangle the victim at home). "GRU agents", who did not notice anything for eight(!) years, and then suddenly woke up and realized that they released Skripal from Russia "without punishment"...

I can continue this endlessly. The longer the list of lies becomes, the longer the list of disproof.

james , Sep 5, 2018 9:43:49 PM | link
@48 uncle tungsten.. lol.. so true!

@65 virgile.. that is what some of us have concluded from the start.. phony passports or phony characters - hard to know what one is looking at here, isn't it?

@83 brian.. it is the court of public opinion, brought to us via the western msm... guess who is winning? msm with ignoramus's in tow, or not? - i agree with your comments @85.. no evidence whatsoever, but that doesn't stop the russian smearing, which may be the main motive here on the part of the uk..

@84 piotr.. i agree - planted and long after the fact..

@87 jen.. that is what i got from someone sharing a russian story via translation - which i shared @42..


from my link at 42 which is a translation from a russian news outlet.. see the link @42 for more..

"According to official data, Ruslan Boshirov and Alexander Petrov flew on March 2, 2018 from Sheremetyevo to London Gatwick Airport. According to Fontanka, 150 passengers were registered for the flight of Aeroflot SU2588.

The suspects bought tickets on foreign passports of the "65" series, the document numbers differ by the last digit: ... 1297 and ... 1294.

Apparently, in the hands of Boshirov and Petrov already had return tickets, and for two consecutive flights from Heathrow to Sheremetyevo - evening on March 4 and night 5-th. The British authorities believe that the suspects used the first.

There are almost no open sources of information about Boshirov. According to the "Fontanka", he was born on April 12, 1978 in Dushanbe, was registered in Moscow in a 25-storey house on Bolshaya Naberezhnaya street.

In 2015, he was brought into two executive proceedings for automobile fines received with a difference of three days, on July 20 and 23. The oddity is that the production numbers are not in order. The first assigned 433048, the second - 432322, although they were issued by one unit - the interdistrict department of bailiffs to collect administrative fines number 1 in Moscow. On the portal of the magistrates of the capital there are no cases of administrative violations against Ruslan Boshirov. Also it is not in the database of executive production.

"Fontanka" phoned long-term residents of the "Boshiro" house on the Great Embankment. They live on the same stairwell. "In the apartment you named, only an elderly woman lives," the correspondent replied. "We carry her money, she collects for cleaning the cleaner." A man was never seen in the apartment and was not seen at the entrance. We can only assume that this is the son of the hostess, who is registered at the address, but who has never lived here. "

Boshirov's network activity is no different either. The pages created under this name and last name in 2014 are empty. On Facebook, Boshirova has one friend registered, a girl from Ukraine. The profile "VKontakte" contains information that Boshirov graduated in 2004 from the geography department of Moscow State University in the direction "Hydrology of the land".

jayc , Sep 5, 2018 9:52:40 PM | link
The shoulder bags held by the two "suspects", as seen in the CCTV stills from the two airports, are not seen in the Salisbury CCTV footage from the Sunday. Instead, in Salisbury, the suspect in the black jacket wears a light-coloured backpack on arrival at the train station, and the suspect in the blue jacket wears what appears to be that same backpack in the stills from an hour later as they return to the Salisbury train station. Presumably the backpack carried the applicator and then was later ditched.... but looking at the applicator itself it is hard to fathom how it would not leak, either in flight or in the backpack, even inside its alleged box. The Met police report claims that the bottle allegedly discovered later "contained a significant amount of Novichok."

On the Sunday morning in question, the suspects allegedly walked directly to the Skripal household from the train station (approximately 25 minutes), poisoned the Skripal door within minutes of arrival, then immediately returned to the train station. This operation was allegedly facilitated by a 90 minute "reconnaissance" mission the previous day, although there are no CCTV images from this mission. Why and how the men knew they would not be seen at the doorway on Sunday is not explained.

According to the Met Police report, swabs at the suspect's hotel room were done on May 4. Porton Down alone confirmed the presence of Novichok from these swabs. The Met report adds: "Two swabs showed contamination of Novichok at levels below that which would cause concern for public health." ???? As far as I am aware, that Russian suspects may have flown in and out of Britain on that weekend has been discussed since March, but a positive ID of "Novichok" in a suspect's London hotel room is new information - strangely never referred to before. The otherwise entirely circumstantial case depends on the presence of the chemical in the hotel room, as there is otherwise no direct connection of these men to "Novichuk", perfume bottles, or the Skripal house (the CCTV footage can only place them in the "vicinity").

This case retains its improvised nature. Something seems to have been botched somewhere in the original March events, and the proclamation of Russian guilt was announced too soon and too unequivocally to back down from. The Novichok in the perfume bottle and now the two alleged suspects with the alleged trace Novichok in the hotel room appear to be semi-clumsy additions to the evidence designed to buttress the faulty story after the fact.

blues , Sep 5, 2018 9:53:01 PM | link
This is simply another fine example of the Theory of Tells. The Dark Agents NEVER allow the strange evidence that they release to the public to be totally coherent or rational. They always insert impossible artifacts. If the narratives they create were reasonably coherent, they would never have the proper effect of causing profound cognitive dissonance in the mind of the public, they could therefor never achieve the necessary degree of fear, uncertainty and doubt.

That would invite people to ask pertinent questions. There must always be a few strategic red herrings. So they always leave strategic tells.

Burt , Sep 5, 2018 10:24:20 PM | link
They are different photographs a few seconds apart as can be seen by the figures at the very back of the jetway who move a tiny bit closer to the camera after the first suspect passes.

However, the timestamps are then fake and represent a mistake on the part of the person *creating* the evidence. He fucked up and put the same stamp on both pictures.

These pictures were taken a short time apart, but not at the time stamped... i.e. boarding a different flight. A different flight. The timeline is hokum . They did not fly in and out at the times stated or on the flights stated.

It is even conceivable that the person cooking the books wanted to include something that would show it was hokum, that he or she wasn't completely on board. I wonder who it was?

Circe , Sep 5, 2018 10:43:32 PM | link
@81

The doors that have those "Do not enter" symbols facing us or the greeting area are open in b's pictures because the individuals have just passed thru them. Therefore you only faintly see the grey back of the symbols.

Also, note how in one Google photo the steel guardrails are on paneling right beside the security signs while in the other Google photos it shows the guardrail separated from the security signs with an empty panel except for the corridor furthest to the right. So the correct photo is the former one and the individuals went through two exactly similar side-by-side corridors simultaneously, which means the photos might be legit. Also, there are at least two or more cameras on the ceiling facing corridors which explains the different angles. It looks like photos are authentic.

TheBAG , Sep 5, 2018 10:52:08 PM | link
Dr. Wellington Yueh @88

Great observation! Lot of stuff going on in Idlib being reported in Al Masdar News...

Circe , Sep 5, 2018 10:55:10 PM | link
@86 Well that explains why in one photo there's an extra glass panel and in the other the panel with the guardrail is beside the panel with the security signs! There are two sets of corridors in the airport.

The photos in the article are Therefore most likely authentic.

Phillip O'Reilly , Sep 5, 2018 11:28:16 PM | link
The key proposition that the police are asserting is that the Skripals were poisoned by 'delayed reaction'. The alleged suspects were out of Salisbury 3 hours before the Skripals exhibited signs of poisoning, nerve agents, however, act immediately. If the 'door handle theory' is not physically possible, which it is not, then that leaves out the assassin hypothesis. Most likely, as I have always said, is that this is about Sergei's skulduggery, he took delivery of the agent from these guys for eventual passing over to the White Helmets via their MI6 handlers. All went pear shaped because of a leaky bottle. Sergei realised something was wrong so hurried his meal so he could check it out, reached the park bench with Julia and the saw that the bottle was leaking and began to feel ill, Julia through the thing away and went down herself.
Phillip O'Reilly , Sep 5, 2018 11:56:02 PM | link
Interesting that Theresa May brought up and then dismissed the possibility of a rogue operation. This tells me she is determined to pin the blame on Putin no matter what. I am sure that the smarter elements of British security have a pretty good idea of what has occurred. They will say nothing and they would be quite happy to keep Theresa Mays narrative out in the public domain. Cooperation from Sergei is guaranteed, he has been caught once again in a betrayal, as he always does because he is one of lifes losers.

[Sep 07, 2018] Who wrote NYT "resistance" op-ed?

"We all know Putin wrote the op-ed and the NYT claimed it's a senior Trump official because they think that's true," Ben Shapiro tweeted.
Sep 07, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

SteveofCaley , 6 Sep 2018 09:29

Right, then. Solved it. Easy puzzle, really. Mods, you can close the comments now.

Clues: Republican? Check. Strongly motivated by morality? Check. Unlimited White House access? Check.

It's written by the Ghost of Abraham Lincoln, last moral Republican President.

(Carter wasn't a Republican. Eisenhower, only by accident. )

[Sep 07, 2018] Trump did not, in his 8th decade, suddenly develop a desire to serve the American people at his own expense. He is in the White House doing exactly what he has always done, he is pursuing whatever makes him happiest in the moment with no regard to consequences, morality or even common sense.

Sep 07, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com
charlieblue , 6 Sep 2018 09:20
Fascinating to see the tinfoil hat brigade turn out in such numbers to rant and rave about the "Deep State!" and poor, honest Donald Trump as a freedom fighter who is daily sacrificing himself for the good people of America.

Why do bullies always pretend to be victims?

As with science, human nature can usually boiled down to the most likely answer, the simple observable truth. Such as; Donald Trump's entire life is a story of greed, vulgarity and self promotion to the exclusion of all else. He did not, in his 8th decade, suddenly develop a desire to serve the American people at his own expense. He is in the White House doing exactly what he has always done, he is pursuing whatever makes him happiest in the moment with no regard to consequences, morality or even common sense.

[Sep 06, 2018] Paradise Papers Reveal US Selling Russian LNG In Europe by Irina Slav

Notable quotes:
"... If the reports are true, the situation is an ironic one for Europe: while trying to reduce its dependence on Russian gas it is inadvertently increasing it and is even paying more for it than it would if it bought the extra loads directly from Gazprom. ..."
Nov 10, 2017 | oilprice.com

The documents suggest that a company with US ownership is buying Russian gas from petrochemical giant Sibur, and then selling it -- at a profit, of course -- to the European Union, which is in a rush to build as many LNG terminals as it can in a bid to reduce its dependence on Russian gas.

If the reports are true, the situation is an ironic one for Europe: while trying to reduce its dependence on Russian gas it is inadvertently increasing it and is even paying more for it than it would if it bought the extra loads directly from Gazprom.

One might wonder how a U.S. company is able to do business with a Russian one. It's simple: Wilbur Ross himself said earlier this week that Sibur is not a subject to sanctions, so for Navigator Holdings and the petrochemical giant, everything is business as usual.

[Sep 06, 2018] How Obama and Netanyahu Overplayed Their Hand in The Arab Spring

Notable quotes:
"... While Syria's long serving President Hafez al-Assad was criticised by Iraq for his apparent eagerness to enter into an armistice with Israel in 1974 and while Hafez appeared to be on the verge of recognising Israel in the mid-1990s, recent revelations brought to the world's attention by former US Secretary of State John Kerry indicate that his son and current Syrian President Bashar al-Assad drafted a letter to Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu asking to enter into discussions regarding Israel's withdrawal from the occupied Golan Heights in exchange for Syria entering into a Jordanian style peace agreement with Tel Aviv. ..."
"... A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm, ..."
"... As such, Russia looks to balance the ambitious of each of these players against one another in order to attain a regional equilibrium in which Moscow plays the role of both benign power broker and economic partner. ..."
"... the so-called Arab Spring was supposed to pave the way for a future Greater Israel, that too is now dead as Russia would not let Tel Aviv threaten the long term territorial integrity of Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon or any other Middle East state. ..."
"... When viewed with the benefit of hindsight, the gamble that Barack Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu took in 2011 to forfeit good relations with politically stagnant, diplomatically compromised and generally malleable Arab Nationalist leaders in order to attempt and fracture the political structures and territorial unity of multiple Arab states has backfired in extraordinary fashion. ..."
"... While in 2010 Russia was scarcely a major factor in the region and while Iran did not have much influence in the Arab world outside of southern Iraq and parts of southern Lebanon, today the opposite is very much the case. As a result, while a combination of Israeli-US pressure and internal pettiness helped render many once proud Arab Nationalist states impotent, the omnipresence of Russia as the only regional power with a desire and ability to balance Iranian, Turkish, Arab and Israeli interests means that while Israel's existence is now guaranteed, its expansionist aims are permanently dead. In this sense, the Arab Spring was in reality, an Israeli winter. ..."
Sep 06, 2018 | www.eurasiafuture.com

At the beginning of 2011 while Iraq was still on its knees following the illegal 2003 US/UK invasion, the rest of the Arab world was generally calm, domestic politics was predictable and most importantly from the American and Israeli perspective, the revolutionary fervour that underpinned the Arab Nationalist revolutions of the mid-20th century had largely given way to pragmatic and at times self-effacing secular Arab regimes that posed no serious military or diplomatic challenge to America's desired pro-Israel status quo in the region. At the beginning of 2011, Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak looked and acted unsinkable. Crucially, this included his unsinkable loyalty to the United States and Israel. The same was true in Jordan's monarchy while in Libya, Muammar Gaddafi had given up on the Arab Nationalist cause in order to pursue what he believed was a more tangible and potentially more rewarding Pan-African cause. Crucially, not long after trading Arab Nationalism for Pan-Africanism, Gaddafi established normal relations with the United States and its traditional partners in 2003.

While Syria's long serving President Hafez al-Assad was criticised by Iraq for his apparent eagerness to enter into an armistice with Israel in 1974 and while Hafez appeared to be on the verge of recognising Israel in the mid-1990s, recent revelations brought to the world's attention by former US Secretary of State John Kerry indicate that his son and current Syrian President Bashar al-Assad drafted a letter to Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu asking to enter into discussions regarding Israel's withdrawal from the occupied Golan Heights in exchange for Syria entering into a Jordanian style peace agreement with Tel Aviv.

In a rational environment, Netanyahu and Obama should have been utterly contented with the fact that an Arab world which was once united behind the cause of Palestinian justice had gradually capitulated while even Arab Nationalist hold out Syria was on the verge of doing much the same. But rather than being content with getting concessions from the Arab world that as comparatively recently as the mid-1970s would have sounded fantastical, Washington with Israel's clear consent and cooperation instead decided to light a fuse beneath the Arab world.

The so-called Arab Spring began with "protests" in Tunisia in December of 2011. But the real coming out party for America and Israel's new policy of 'lead from behind regime change' in the Arab world was in Egypt. It was in Cairo on the 25th of January that a combination of genuine demonstrators, paid agitators and terrorists took to Tahrir Square to protest government policies. The protests eventually lead to the downfall of President Mubarak who had governed the country since 1981.

Mubarak had many genuine home grown opponents to be sure and this is before one accounts for opposition from proscribed terror groups including and especially the Muslim Brotherhood. And yet it was only when the United States officially withdrew support for Mubarak that a full regime change came to pass which itself paved the way for a highly unstable Muslim Brotherhood regime led by Muhammad Morsi.

Unable to facilitate the kinds of lead from behind protests in Libya that were rather easy to foment in an Egyptian society where a great deal of genuine discontent served to cover the true intentions of the Obama administration in the Arab world, the US decided to accuse Libya's government of crimes against the Libyan people including an accusation of mass rape committed by soldiers that turned out to be as fake as the 2002 allegation that Iraq maintained stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. While most Libyans were too busy enjoying the benefits of Africa's most generous welfare state to protest, the US began preparing for a full scale military attack on Libya while France and Britain became the public face of America's biggest war on an Arab state since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

It was around the same time in early 2011 that provocations against the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad were staged near the Jordanian border in the city of Daraa. Unlike in Libya there was a measure of discontent in Syria due to a five year long drought which severely impacted domestic agriculture. Likewise, in spite of modest economic reforms, the economy was largely stagnant. Be that as it may, genuine discontent in Syria was not only less than in Libya but less than in Egypt. From the US perspective this became all the more reason to fan the flames of long latent sectarian divisions and likewise it became the private excuse for offering arms and funds to individuals who later formed anti-government militias and terror groups.

The results of this so-called Arab Spring have led to instability in Egypt under Muslim Brotherhood rule which itself led to the politically and economically stagnant government of Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. In LIbya what was once Africa's most stable and prosperous nation, a failed state peppered with terrorist training camps and slave auctions has developed which itself has led to the worst migrant crisis in the modern history of Afro-European relations. In Syria, the war which began in 2011 is still being fought and while an end is in sight, Syria is still a long way away from peace.

The mutual desire of the United States and Israel to weaken Arab Nationalist governments and retard the advancement of progressive Arab unity long predates the tragic events of 2011. But while 1996 saw arch-neocon Richard Perle draft A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm, a radical anti-Arab foreign policy paper presented to Benjamin Netanyahu as a kind of gift, by 2010, many of the goals contained in A Clean Break had already been achieved through co-opting Arab states into a policy of submission which supplanted the radicalism of previous decades.

What had not been achieved by 2010 however was the realisation of anything approximating the Yinon Plan , a controversial policy proposal advocating for the creation of a so-called "greater Israel" that was first published in 1982 in the Israel journal Kivunim. The Yinon Plan called for the aggressive expansion of Israeli territory into Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.

While the Yinon Plan was based partly on modern far-right notions of political expansionism and in other parts based on the most extreme interpretations of Zionist mythology, the idea of intentionally weakening once powerful Arab Nationalist states in the region was clearly an attempt to begin the early stages of what could have become expanded political influence and territorial domination throughout the Middle East for Israel.

Today however, it would appear that the plan has backfired for two largely unrelated reasons. First of all, the agitations of Iraq's Shi'a majority population in Iraq combined with the phenomenon of a Shi'a Islamic Resistance spreading to Syria as a means of countering extremist Sunni Takfiri groups including Daesh, along with the increased influence of Hezbollah in Lebanon has made a once isolated Islamic Republic of Iran a major player in much of the northern half of the Arab world. Thus, as Arab Nationalist states and political movements in the northern half of the Arab world have weakened a militarily resurgent Iran has only become stronger and as such is something of a bulwark against Yinon's map of a Greater Israel.

But the rise of Iran has also led to another major development, the long term importance of which is still being overlooked as much in the Arab world as in the west. Russia has returned to the Middle East as a major player only unlike during the Cold War, Russia is now on exceptionally good terms with every major player in the region including multiple rivalling Arab states, Turkey, Iran and crucially both Palestine and Israel.

As such, Russia looks to balance the ambitious of each of these players against one another in order to attain a regional equilibrium in which Moscow plays the role of both benign power broker and economic partner. As a result, the old Arab Nationalist dream of liberating Palestine is virtually dead as Russia views the importance of safeguarding Israel's territory as on-par with that of all of its neighbors. That being said, while the so-called Arab Spring was supposed to pave the way for a future Greater Israel, that too is now dead as Russia would not let Tel Aviv threaten the long term territorial integrity of Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon or any other Middle East state.

When viewed with the benefit of hindsight, the gamble that Barack Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu took in 2011 to forfeit good relations with politically stagnant, diplomatically compromised and generally malleable Arab Nationalist leaders in order to attempt and fracture the political structures and territorial unity of multiple Arab states has backfired in extraordinary fashion.

While in 2010 Russia was scarcely a major factor in the region and while Iran did not have much influence in the Arab world outside of southern Iraq and parts of southern Lebanon, today the opposite is very much the case. As a result, while a combination of Israeli-US pressure and internal pettiness helped render many once proud Arab Nationalist states impotent, the omnipresence of Russia as the only regional power with a desire and ability to balance Iranian, Turkish, Arab and Israeli interests means that while Israel's existence is now guaranteed, its expansionist aims are permanently dead. In this sense, the Arab Spring was in reality, an Israeli winter.

[Sep 06, 2018] "Every nation gets the government it deserves."

Sep 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

unicone , 6 Sep 2018 07:04

"Every nation gets the government it deserves."

Joseph de Maistre, Letter 76, on the topic of Russia's new constitutional laws (27 August 1811)

[Sep 06, 2018] A combined army of Libyan tribes fight UN-backed terrorist militias in Tripoli by JoanneM

Notable quotes:
"... so there will not be a truce. ..."
Sep 04, 2018 | www.sott.net

Libyan War The Truth
Tue, 04 Sep 2018 05:00 UTC Message Libyan Tribes © Libyan War The Truth Save BREAKING News direct from the great Tribes of Libya

Stated Emphatically by the Libyan Tribes:

DO NOT BELIEVE WHAT IS BEING PUT OUT IN THE WESTERN MEDIA. THE MEDIA AND ZIONIST NEW WORLD ORDER CABAL IS ATTEMPTING TO FABRICATE THE SAME PROBLEM AS IN 2011 BY PRINTING LIES.

THERE IS NO CEASEFIRE, THERE IS NO TRUCE.

THE FIGHT IN TRIPOLI IS BETWEEN THE LIBYAN PEOPLE (TRIBAL ARMY) AND THE TERRORIST GANGS CALLED MILITIAS.

These are the facts on the ground today in Tripoli:

1. The combined army of the Great Tribes of Libya is fighting against the terrorists and mercenaries in Tripoli. These terrorists call themselves militias, but they are nothing more than hired thugs, thieves, murderers and criminals made up of Muslim Brotherhood, LIFG, Ansar Al Sharia, ISIS, Al Qaeda, etc. These terrorists were brought into Libya by the illegal NATO war against the sovereign country of Libya. They are supported by the US (via Turkey), Qatar, Sudan and Saudi Arabia, they work with the UN puppet government in Tripoli. As long as they roam the streets of Tripoli with their weapons there is no security, no peace and no life for the innocent Libyans.

2. All Tribes of Libya support this army.

3. All legitimate Libyan people in Tripoli and throughout Libya support the tribes and are against these terrorist militias

4. The Great Tribes of Libya will not stop until all terrorists are dead or gone outside of Libya. The terms of any truce with the tribal army would mean the end of the criminal puppet UN government and the end of the terrorist militias, so there will not be a truce.

On September 2, 2018 Reuters reported that 400 prisoners escaped from the Ain Zara prison in Tripoli. The truth is that the army of the Libyan tribes attacked the prison and effected the freedom of 400 Libyan soldiers about 5pm on September 2. Amongst those 400 were the 45 young men to be assassinated as condemned last week by the kangaroo militia court in Tripoli. In 2011, when NATO invaded they opened all the prisons in Libya and let out all the criminals to help attack the Libyan people. Most if not all of the people imprisoned in Libya now were people who were fighting against NATO or were against the NATO take over (working in the government).

I am fully aware as are the honorable leaders of the tribes in Libya that all of our conversations are monitored as we are the only true source of information of the activities of the Libyan tribes and their struggle to regain their sovereignty. Having stated that, I want to editorialize by saying that the illegal activities of the US mercenaries in Libya concerning their Kangaroo court and their decision to assassinate 45 mostly dark skinned Libyan soldiers, was the straw that broke the camels back. This left the legitimate Libyan people with no option except to go into the streets and wrest control of their country from these paid mercenaries.

One of the tribal spies inside these criminal militias told us 2 weeks ago that all the criminal militias have been frightened by the impending death of John McCain, they consider him their brother, founder, funder and protector. McCain had protected them from all scrutiny and allowed their barbarianism. The death of McCain would mean all their sins would be exposed. They wanted to kill all the prisoners, but their UN handlers said the militias must have the appearance of legitimacy. Consequently, the kangaroo court was set in motion.

The great tribes of Libya have taken on the battle to free their country of the terrorists and puppets placed there by the New World Order Zionists who in effect own NATO. This is a serious battle for their sovereignty. They take this on with no outside help, unlike Syria who has had the aid of Russia, Iran and China, the Libyan people are alone in this battle. They are battling the same criminals as are the Syrian army. They know this is a battle of life or death for them, they are not a large population, they have already lost over one million people, they are now only 5.5 million. As the world watches Syria, please let it not forget the fight for freedom happening now in Libya.

About the Author:

James and Joanne Moriarty were appointed official spokespersons of the Tribes of Libya by their Supreme Leader in 2012. For their story and mission to get the message out and help the Libyan people, go here.

[Sep 06, 2018] The US Military is Winning. No, Really, It Is! by Nick Turse

Notable quotes:
"... Nick Turse is the managing editor of ..."
"... a fellow at the Nation Institute, and a contributing writer for the ..."
"... His latest book is ..."
"... . He is also the author of the award-winning ..."
"... His website is NickTurse.com. ..."
Sep 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

The Taliban says that in order to end "this long war" the "lone option is to end the occupation of Afghanistan and nothing more."

In June, the 17th American nominated to take command of the war, Lieutenant General Scott Miller, appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee where Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) grilled him on what he would do differently in order to bring the conflict to a conclusion. "I cannot guarantee you a timeline or an end date," was Miller's confident reply .

Did the senators then send him packing? Hardly. He was, in fact, easily confirmed and starts work this month. Nor is there any chance Congress will use its power of the purse to end the war. The 2019 budget request for U.S. operations in Afghanistan -- topping out at $46.3 billion -- will certainly be approved.

#Winning

All of this seeming futility brings us back to the Vietnam War, Kissinger, and that magic number, 4,000,000,029,057 -- as well as the question of what an American military victory would look like today. It might surprise you, but it turns out that winning wars is still possible and, perhaps even more surprising, the U.S. military seems to be doing just that.

Let me explain.

In Vietnam, that military aimed to " out-guerrilla the guerrilla ." It never did and the United States suffered a crushing defeat. Henry Kissinger -- who presided over the last years of that conflict as national security advisor and then secretary of state -- provided his own concise take on one of the core tenets of asymmetric warfare: "The conventional army loses if it does not win. The guerrilla wins if he does not lose." Perhaps because that eternally well-regarded but hapless statesman articulated it, that formula was bound -- like so much else he touched -- to crash and burn .

In this century, the United States has found a way to turn Kissinger's martial maxim on its head and so rewrite the axioms of armed conflict. This redefinition can be proved by a simple equation:

0 + 1,000,000,000,000 + 17 +17 + 23,744 + 3,000,000,000,000 + 5 + 5,200 + 74 = 4,000,000,029,057

Expressed differently, the United States has not won a major conflict since 1945; has a trillion-dollar national security budget; has had 17 military commanders in the last 17 years in Afghanistan, a country plagued by 23,744 " security incidents " (the most ever recorded) in 2017 alone; has spent around $3 trillion , primarily on that war and the rest of the war on terror, including the ongoing conflict in Iraq, which then-defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld swore , in 2002, would be over in only "five days or five weeks or five months," but where approximately 5,000 U.S. troops remain today; and yet 74% of the American people still express high confidence in the U.S. military.

Let the math and the implications wash over you for a moment. Such a calculus definitively disproves the notion that "the conventional army loses if it does not win." It also helps answer the question of victory in the war on terror. It turns out that the U.S. military, whose budget and influence in Washington have only grown in these years, now wins simply by not losing -- a multi-trillion-dollar conventional army held to the standards of success once applied only to under-armed, under-funded guerilla groups.

Unlike in the Vietnam War years, three presidents and the Pentagon, unbothered by fiscal constraints, substantive congressional opposition, or a significant antiwar movement, have been effectively pursuing this strategy, which requires nothing more than a steady supply of troops, contractors, and other assorted camp followers; an endless parade of Senate-sanctioned commanders; and an annual outlay of hundreds of billions of dollars. By these standards, Donald Trump's open-ended, timetable-free "Strategy in Afghanistan and South Asia" may prove to be the winningest war plan ever. As he described it:

"From now on, victory will have a clear definition: attacking our enemies, obliterating ISIS, crushing al-Qaeda, preventing the Taliban from taking over Afghanistan, and stopping mass terror attacks against America before they emerge."

Think about that for a moment. Victory's definition begins with "attacking our enemies" and ends with the prevention of possible terror attacks. Let me reiterate: "victory" is defined as "attacking our enemies." Under President Trump's strategy, it seems, every time the U.S. bombs or shells or shoots at a member of one of those 20-plus terror groups in Afghanistan, the U.S. is winning or, perhaps, has won. And this strategy is not specifically Afghan-centric. It can easily be applied to American warzones in the Middle East and Africa -- anywhere, really.

Decades after the end of the Vietnam War, the U.S. military has finally solved the conundrum of how to "out-guerrilla the guerrilla." And it couldn't have been simpler. You just adopt the same definition of victory. As a result, a conventional army -- at least the U.S. military -- now loses only if it stops fighting. So long as unaccountable commanders wage benchmark-free wars without congressional constraint, the United States simply cannot lose. You can't argue with the math. Call it the rule of 4,000,000,029,057.

That calculus and that sum also prove, quite clearly, that America's beleaguered commander-in-chief has gotten a raw deal on his victory parade. With apologies to the American Legion, the U.S. military is now -- under the new rules of warfare -- triumphant and deserves the type of celebration proposed by President Trump. After almost two decades of warfare, the armed forces have lowered the bar for victory to the level of their enemy, the Taliban. What was once the mark of failure for a conventional army is now the benchmark for success. It's a remarkable feat and deserving, at the very least, of furious flag-waving, ticker tape , and all the age-old trappings of victory.

Nick Turse is the managing editor of TomDispatch , a fellow at the Nation Institute, and a contributing writer for the Intercept. His latest book is Next Time They'll Come to Count the Dead: War and Survival in South Sudan . He is also the author of the award-winning Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam . His website is NickTurse.com.

Sin City Milla , says: September 6, 2018 at 5:23 am GMT

Military conquests are the most ephemeral. Colonisation lasts longer. A mere century or two in the case of Europeans. But even 900 years was not sufficient for Greeks to remove the military n cultural threat posed by the Semites n Iranians of Southwest Asia, from Alexander's conquest in 323 BC till the Muslim "reconquista" of 632 AD. Only demographic "conquest" works in the end. If your women are not out-reproducing their women, then your military will fail spectacularly n quickly, as what had once been your population transforms into theirs. At that point, far from victory parades, you get to see statues to your former heros torn down, n the highest "patriotism" becomes enthusiastically opening the gates to what had once been your people's deadliest enemies.
Haxo Angmark , says: Website September 6, 2018 at 6:41 am GMT
the GWOT has 3 components:

1. keep Israhell on the map.
2. keep oil-producers taking dollars and only dollars for their oil
3. keep the CIA's poppy fields in Afghanistan in full production

on 1: ongoing victory, Israhell is still there
on2: Iraq and Libya back on the petrodollar, Iran pending
on3: ongoing victory, CIA drug ops proceeding normally

in ZOG-ruled 'Murka, every day is a day of new victories.

Anonymous , [317] Disclaimer says: September 6, 2018 at 11:18 am GMT
Mr. Turse is a comic. What a beautiful summary of the situation.
See a group, Imagine a possible threat, if both occur, bingo group =converts to =>terrorist
and each member converts to a subliminal threat. Imagine the psychology that can be applied to that bit of information to produce next day propaganda. Let us not forget the real media that displays the propaganda is owned by just 6 entities; global access to knowledge and real truth is gated and directed by search engine magic these two facts are IMO a real global threat to humanity.

Win by not losing/ In such a scenario increasing numbers in a terror group or increasing numbers of, or broadening the global distribution of terror groups produces more terror fodder. The competent imagination derives its threats from terror fodder ( fodder fits any size imagination).

When ever it is needed, proof of any non self-inflicted terrorism can be conjured from the imagination. As Mr Turse says proof of terrorism can be found in the definition, proof of victory can be found in the attack (as Mr. Turse so adequately expressed), and both are recorded in the history of terrorism, which can be found in the daily media presentations and the MSM annual report "Dollars Spent Chasing Terrorist from the Imagination". a joint publication of the Internationally linked intelligence services and the global college of paranoia producing propaganda.

victory is found in the attack because dollars start to flow; the more dollars the greater the victory.

But how much of this would be possible if the reserve currency were no longer the dollar? What will happen when Russia, China, Iran and others produce a new reserve currency or displace existing reserve currencies by assigning exchange value to the currency of each nation? The issuer of reserve currency measures its money supply by the checks he writes [their checks never bounce], everyone else measures their currency by the amount of the reserve currency they are able to keep in the bank ( to prevent their checks from bouncing].

Justsaying , says: September 6, 2018 at 11:22 am GMT
@Sean Because although Health and Education Keynesianisn would work as well as the Military variant, it also leads to an organised population mobilising for social change. And while wars do end eventually, social spending seems to increase over time without limit. I was almost sold on that explanation to my honest question, until the phrase

wars do end eventually

Would wars "ending eventually", not render the MIC obsolete? Is it not the MIC that thrives on perpetual wars with seemingly endless supplies of cash to fund their wars? Even in periods of relative calm (if ever, since WWII that is), is it not the constant threat of war that keeps the military monstrosity grinding away?

RVBlake , says: September 6, 2018 at 11:45 am GMT
74% of Americans express high confidence in their military? I wonder if 74% of Americans are even aware that we're at war. I read somewhere that U.S. generals now define victory as getting the Taliban to the bargaining table.
Tom Walsh , says: September 6, 2018 at 12:46 pm GMT
"out-guerrilla the guerrilla." was coined by Col. David Hackworth as out "G" ing the G and was shown to work in the Delta. Read his book "About Face" or "Steel my soldiers hearts"
Kjell Holmsten , says: September 6, 2018 at 1:39 pm GMT
Elites, read Bolsheviks or Freemasons win no war, they do not win over diseases, crime, idiot bla, bla. They are making money on them and they always turn to both sides. To the criminal gangsters, to the associations of the sick, to the losers in war, they can win in 20 years, etc. etc. This article is foam, foam. The Elites are trying to do everything and nobody understands anything, so the elite wins – the banker always has his blood money.
Carroll Price , says: September 6, 2018 at 1:42 pm GMT

the United States has not won a major conflict since 1945; has a trillion-dollar national security budget; has had 17 military commanders in the last 17 years in Afghanistan, a country plagued by 23,744 "security incidents" (the most ever recorded) in 2017 alone; has spent around $3 trillion, primarily on that war and the rest of the war on terror, including the ongoing conflict in Iraq, which then-defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld swore, in 2002, would be over in only "five days or five weeks or five months," but where approximately 5,000 U.S. troops remain today; and yet 74% of the American people still express high confidence in the U.S. military.

Let me correct that 1st sentence for you: the United States has not REPEATED THE MISTAKE OF WINNING a major conflict since 1945.

Why? Because as they quickly discovered, WW2 was the best thing that ever happened to the US economy, and that lots more money is made fighting wars than winning one, as proven by the above quoted figures.

Agent76 , says: September 6, 2018 at 2:54 pm GMT
September 17, 2014 US Pursues *134** Wars Around the World

The US is now involved in *134* wars or none, depending on your definition of war.

http://www.thedailybell.com/news-analysis/35654/US-Pursues-134-Wars-Around-the-World/

December 24, 2013 The Worldwide Network of US Military Bases

The US Military has bases in *63* countries. According to Gelman, who examined 2005 official Pentagon data, the US is thought to own a total of *737* bases in foreign lands.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-worldwide-network-of-us-military-bases/5564

ChuckOrloski , says: September 6, 2018 at 2:57 pm GMT
Hi Nick Turse,
Given OBL and Afghanistan Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11 terror attacks, it appears likely that the W. Bush regime launched war upon the Taliban exclusively for geopolitical interests, minerals, i.e., lithium, and construction of natural gas pipelines directed southeast to the subcontinent, India.
Fyi, approximately seven years ago, I saw a U.S. Veterans informational map which identified the Neo-"Grunts" military bases as within close proximity to pipeline construction.
Consequently, for me, I see US military's incessant stay in "the graveyard of Empires" as a stilted profit & loss (P&L) "'victory," but of course there's no (!) dividend for dumb goyim American citizens, but voila, oodles for global energy companies, untouchable Military-Industrial-$ecurity Complex, & killing "Poppy Fields," including Moneychanger pharmaceutical-opioid trade!
In short, the incredible cost for U.S. military's GWOT & advanced targeting of Russia is diabolically placed upon future generations of American taxpayers who, at the moment-of-their birth, are in debt, & the Mom and Pop' "victory" is incarnate in a 'guvmint CHIP card.
ZUSA wars "victory" is in the pockets of P&L-benefactors, and on Sunday afternoons, one can feel the "bern" when fighter jets flyover NFL stadiums!
Thanks for the education, Mr. Turse!
onusians , says: September 6, 2018 at 3:48 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra It did not in the civilised societies of north and western Europe. The nordic " model " is dead , and it has been a bad example to the world . Sweden has 10 million people , Norway 4 , Danmark 6 . These little countries can not be a valid model for anyone .

Like Toynbee said nordics are kind of a failed egoistic subcivilization of the germans , english of russians , with which they never had the courage to integrate . They seem to be happy in their autistic cold world , pretending to be a showroom for the UN perverts .

Thim , says: September 6, 2018 at 5:40 pm GMT
As to Vietnam the author is just clueless. Where was the so called crushing defeat? When we Americans pulled out in 1971 to 1972 the NVA was still stymied and impotent. Our so called allies hated us totally and the feeling was mutual. We actually had no allies in Vietnam except the savage yard tribes. But yes after we pulled out the South collapsed fast as we knew they would. They got exactly what they deserved. But it was a South Vietnamese defeat. By 1975 our armies were long gone. Repeat, there were no American divisions, battallions or platoons to lose. We were gone.

We still do not know exactly what Kissinger got from the Chinese at Paris in 1971-2, but he and Nixon seemed happy enough, and we pulled out and ceded Vietnam. We do know this was the exact time China began to cooperate with us in the Cold War against the Bolsheviks. Specifically, we know the Chinese allowed our B-52′s, loaded with nukes, to overfly, all along the Soviet border, and this continued to 1987, when the game was already up.

[Sep 06, 2018] A question of attitude by PaulR

Notable quotes:
"... Autonomy for Donbass within Ukraine. ..."
"... Transformation of the rebel state and military structures into political parties . ..."
"... Comprehensive and unconditional amnesty for everyone involved in the war. ..."
"... No elections in Donbass for two to three years. ..."
Aug 24, 2018 | irrussianality.wordpress.com

A couple of Ukraine-related items caught my attention this week.

The first is a report by Baylor University professor Serhiy Kudelia which discusses how to bring peace to Donbass. Kudelia starts by saying that Western states have regarded the resolution of the war in Donbass as being dependent on changing Russian behaviour. This is insufficient, he says, for 'the successful reintegration of Donbas into Ukraine rests on designing a new institutional framework that can provide long-term guarantees to civilians and separatist insurgents.' Kudelia says that academic literature on conflict resolution would suggest four elements to such a framework:

  1. Autonomy for Donbass within Ukraine. Such autonomy would come with risks, by entrenching local rulers with patronage networks outside of central control and with the means to challenge central authority. To reduce these risks, Kudelia suggests giving autonomy not just to the territories currently controlled by the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics (DPR & LPR), but to the whole of Donbass, thereby bringing within the autonomous region some more pro-Ukrainian elements of the population as well as groups not connected to the DPR/LPR power structures. He also suggests devolution of power within the autonomous region to weaken the potentially disruptive consequences of hostile elements controlling the region's government.
  2. Transformation of the rebel state and military structures into political parties. Experience in other countries suggests that when this happens, the prospects of a successful transition increase substantially.
  3. Comprehensive and unconditional amnesty for everyone involved in the war. For obvious reasons, rebel leaders won't agree to the first two proposals without an amnesty. Past experience speaks to the necessity of this measure.
  4. No elections in Donbass for two to three years. Kudelia notes that, 'Holding elections in a volatile post-conflict environment creates ample opportunities for voter intimidation, electoral fraud, and disinformation campaigns that could build on conflict-related divisions.' Kudelia doesn't say who would rule Donbass in the meantime. I would have to assume that it would mean that the existing authorities would remain in place. That could be problematic.

With the exception of that last point, these are sensible suggestions. But when boiled down to their essentials, they don't differ significantly from what is demanded in the Minsk agreements -- i.e. special status for Donbass and an amnesty. As such, while I don't think that the leadership of the DPR and LPR would like these proposals, my instincts tell me that they would be quite acceptable to the Russian government, which would probably be able to coax the DPR and LPR into agreeing to them. If implemented, the results would be something Moscow could portray as a success of sorts.

And there's the rub. For that very reason, I can't see Kiev agreeing to any of this. Kudelia's argument is founded on the idea that there's more going on in Donbass than Russian aggression. Accepting that something has to be done to 'provide long-term guarantees to civilians and separatist insurgents' means accepting that there are civilians and insurgents who need reassuring, not just Russian troops and mercenaries. And that means changing the entire narrative which Kiev has adopted about the war. So while Kudelia's proposals make sense (after all, what's the alternative? How could Donbass be reintegrated into Ukraine without autonomy and an amnesty?), what's lacking is any sense of how to get there.

A large part of the problem, it seems, is the attitude in Kiev. This becomes very clear in the second item which caught my attention -- an article on the website Coda entitled 'Now Healthcare is a Weapon of War in Ukraine.' The article describes how the DPR and LPR are encouraging Ukrainians to come to rebel territory to receive free medical treatment, and then using this as propaganda to win support for their cause. This is despite the fact, as the article shows, that the medical facilities in the two rebel republics are in a very poor state. Author Lily Hyde isn't able to confirm how many Ukrainians have taken up the rebel offer of free medical aid, but does repeat a claim by the rebel authorities that 1,200 people have done so.

What interests me here is not the sensationalist headlines about healthcare being weaponized, but the question of why Ukrainians might feel it necessary to go to the effort of crossing the front lines to get treatment. And the article provides an answer, namely that parts of Donbass 'are trapped in a precarious limbo, still under Ukrainian government control but cut off from key services like healthcare.' The war destroyed much of the healthcare system in Donbass, but 'Ukraine provides no financial or other incentives for medics to work in frontline areas', and has done little to repair shattered infrastructure. Healthcare seems to be a lower priority than fighting 'terrorism'.

While the DPR and LPR use healthcare as a 'weapon' by providing it to people, Kiev has 'weaponized' health in another way -- by depriving people of it. As the article reports:

Kiev has not outlawed receiving medical treatment in occupied Donetsk or Luhnaks. But collaborating with the separatists -- or supporting their propaganda efforts -- is illegal. How exactly such charges are defined is not clear, but past experience has taught both individuals and organizations to be wary of such accusations. The Ukrainian authorities have investigated non-governmental organizations (NGOs) based in Ukraine who have provided foreign-funded medicines and other supplies to occupied Donetsk and Luhansk. NGOs working there have been banned by the de fact authorities [of the DPR and LPR] on similar charges. Doctors have found themselves placed on blacklists by both Ukrainian officials and the separatists, accused of being 'terrorist collaborators' by one side, or of being spies by the other.

Hyde contrasts the Ukrainian government's policies towards the DPR and LPR with that of Georgia, where:

The government offers free healthcare for people from Abkhazia, a breakaway territory it still claims which is now under de facto Russian occupation. The government is building a modern hospital in the nearest town to the boundary line, aimed at people from Abkhazia.

Essentially, says Hyde, it's 'a question of attitude'. She cites Georgy Tuka, Ukraine's Deputy Minister for Temporarily Occupied Territories -- '"There's a wish to punish people," Tuka acknowledged.'

That's quite an admission from a government minister.

Even if the details need fleshing out, the institutional framework required to reintegrate Donbass into Ukraine has been pretty obvious for a long time now. The problem has been getting people to accept it. It is indeed, therefore, 'a question of attitude'. Sadly, the prevailing attitude stands firmly in the way of the institutional changes required for peace. The desire seems to be to punish people, not to reach agreement with them in order to promote reintegration and reconciliation. The issue, then, is whether this attitude can be changed (and if so, how) or whether it is now so firmly entrenched that there is nothing which can be done. Sadly, I fear that it may be the latter.

Guest says: August 25, 2018 at 1:14 pm
It's too late for the reintegration of Donbas into Ukraine, there will be no implementation of any agreement.

-- Ukraine have gone full neo-Nazi
-- language law is offensive to all minorities not just Russian speakers
-- Russophobia is rampant
-- attacks on the orthodox church

Why would anyone in DPR/LPR want to be part of this.

Aslangeo says: August 26, 2018 at 4:20 am
I agree with the other commentators integration of the Donbass into an aggressive nationalist Ukraine which is not capable of respecting minority rights is not possible. A more sensible option would be for Ukraine to divide into a nationalist part and a rusdophone part, this may be in a confederation like Belgium. As you say the Kiev government wants complete victory rather than a peace based on reconciliation the conflict will continue at low level if the Kiev regime believes that they cannot win but will ignite into another major war if they believe that they can. What should Russia do ? In my opinion provide suitable aid to the people of the Donbass to ensure their survival and build institutions, a stable and peaceful Pridnistrovye type situation is the best that can be achieved in the foreseeable future
Guest says: August 31, 2018 at 1:42 pm
Sad news from Donbas

Zakharchenko was killed by a bomb in a cafe

The article is called a question of attitude – We see the attitude of the Kiev regime in this action of killing one of the signatories of Minsk 2.

Lyttenburgh says: September 1, 2018 at 2:58 am
Just a direct quote from prof. S Kudelia "Peace plan" linked above:

" Rebel Disarmament, Demobilization, and Conversion

Reaching an agreement on power-sharing is one precondition for beginning to disarm and demobilize combatants in civil wars. Another component is the inclusion of former rebels in the competitive political process through "rebel-to-party transformations Integration of the party tied to former rebel groups can eliminate potential spoilers, develop stakeholding in the new system, provide non-violent means of conflict resolution, make them more accountable to their constituency, and increase legitimacy of the election process and new authority structures. However, some of the positive effects from rebel conversion depend on the prior organizational structure of separatist groups and their political wings. Groups with a highly integrated political and military structure are the least likely to undergo a successful transformation into an exclusively political force . This points to major challenges in achieving rebel conversion in Donbas.

The leaders of the armed groups in Donbas have already established their own political organizations, which participate in separatist-administered elections, control local councils throughout the conflict region, and engage with residents. They have turned into what a security analyst Benedetta Berti calls "hybrid politico-military organizations" tightly linking political activities and armed struggle. In both "republics" military and political wings are subordinated to a single leader

However, an integrated political-military structure also presents three important challenges for successful transition into the political arena. First, in contrast to political wings of rebel forces in other countries, these organizations emerged as key tools for separatist governance in DPR and LPR. Their ideological program promotes independence for these regions and would be incompatible with participation in Ukraine's institutional politics. Their reintegration would require a major revision of their principles and goals with an emphasis on accommodation with the Ukrainian state and acceptance of its jurisdiction over the entire region . Otherwise, their inclusion in the political process risks deepening the war-based dividing lines and hampering reconciliation. Second, the centrality of the leaders of these groups in organizing an armed struggle against Ukrainian forces and their direct involvement in the fighting delegitimizes them in Ukrainian public opinion and with the central government . The recently adopted law on "temporarily occupied areas of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts" describes the ruling structure of the "republics" as an "occupational administration of the Russian Federation." This further complicates their post-conflict acceptance as legitimate regional representatives. Hence, leadership turnover in separatist groups is a crucial precondition for the beginning of their direct talks with the Ukrainian authorities . Finally, the current control that DPR/LPR leaders exercise over the separatist military apparatus means that even following disarmament and demobilization they would maintain some influence over local law enforcement. This, in turn, would allow these leaders to rely on an informal personal militia after demobilization or revive the military component of their organizations if they sensed a threat to their power status.

The conversion of rebel groups into recognized political organizations could be one of the most complex and contested elements of the transition."

Full stop. Now, ask yourself – Qui bono?

[Sep 06, 2018] Sounds like a palace coup to me: first, news of the forthcoming Woodward book (and excepts); then-coincidentally-today's "anonymous" and 'Gutless' article in the Times

NYT practices digital lynching...
Sep 06, 2018 | theguardian.com

Michronics42, 6 Sep 2018 06:46

Sounds like a palace coup to me: first, news of the forthcoming Woodward book (and excepts); then-coincidentally-today's "anonymous" and 'Gutless' article in the Times.

As far as I'm concerned, this entire hellish administration is sheer "madness" and a very clear indication that this country is in its agonizing twilight.

Each and every senior official in this administration is an enabler of this "shithole" human being and current president, so there is no such thing as bravery here, just covering one's tail if a coup were to occur.

Not once, as has been mentioned here and elsewhere, has this 'Gutless' wonder decried the immorality of family separation, employing white racists as policy makers, shredding the social safety net for millions of this nation's most vulnerable; an outlandish Pentagon budget and etcetera.

What is solidly on display in this unfolding miasma is a firmly entrenched kleptocracy, enabled and supported by U.S. corporations and the death of democracy.

TheChillZone , 6 Sep 2018 06:36
The Woodward book seems to me just more kiss and tell stories of the Michael Wolff ilk (remember him?). The juiciest quotes - Trump being called an idiot by Kelly - is denied by Kelly himself and most of the others are ex-employees.

A better - more objective - book would get past the unconventional, apparent chaos of the Whitehouse and perhaps investigate whether Trumps methods have or will bear fruit.

That perhaps, as David Lynch said, traditional politicians can't take the country or the world forward - they can't get things done anymore because they are afraid of political consequences or media backlash. Trump and his ego doesn't seem to care about that - is that a good thing or a bad thing? Trump has turned everything on it's head and liberals find themselves allying with establishment politicians and business groups. It is a fascinating period of political change and time - and better journalism - will eventually judge Trump more objectively.

SolentBound -> uncleike , 6 Sep 2018 08:26
"The point of the op-ed is to continue to build popular support for removal of Trump by confirming the more detailed account of Woodward."

It was submitted to the Times before info on Woodward's book came out.

TezB -> HippoMan , 6 Sep 2018 08:22

'Pence... not a dangerous, mentally ill megalomaniac'

Pence is more dangerous – make that outright terrifying – than Trump. Yes. Trump is a senile vulgarian oaf – but he doesn't really believe in anything and is motivated only by his greed and pathological need for self-aggrandizement. He's mentally incompetent in a very obvious way, which renders him laughably inept at trying to bring his more odious policy objectives to fruition (in fact, inept at everything, pretty much).

Pence is far more sinister, because he's a dementedly fanatical believer in a fundamentalist and authoritarian mutation of religion – a crazed zealot. While sometimes able to imitate the superficial demeanour of a person of sound mind, he is in truth utterly deranged.

While Trump lies and denies obvious specific facts almost as a reflex, he doesn't really sustain his warped world view consistently or with conviction that lasts longer than it takes to play his next round of golf.

Pence vehemently espouses a whole alternative reality based upon his religious fantasies, and believes he has a mission to impose his delusional ideas in a punitive and repressive manner on his country's entire population, permanently. He may have the cunning to be chillingly effective at realising his most ghastly ambitions.

Trump represents a temporary aberration; a collective brain fart. Pence could be the instigator of a new dark age for the USA

Meerkatz , 6 Sep 2018 08:17
Having seen this type of character assassination visited on Bill and Hillary Clinton, character assassination before any reported crimes have been proven against them or for that matter any sexual misdemeanors as president are proven, what exactly is going on here?

I totally disagree with this type of thing even if the person is someone I don't understand much. The world has come to a dangerous place where digital lynching without reference to law seems to be the prevailing modus operandi.

Jessp , 6 Sep 2018 08:13
A little word of warning. Be careful what you wish for. If Don can be removed prior to the next election, (and I don't believe that would happen), then Mike Pence takes the reins. He has just as many crazy notions as his current boss, but is an experienced politician who knows the ins and outs of Congress. He may get more of the programme through than little Don can. And that would not be good.
BritinNormandy -> NameIcallme , 6 Sep 2018 08:12
He's done it before. Lots of times. Example: one of his posts back in April: "Trump is a genius. Nobody can take him down, the man is a fighter, you punch him and he'll punch you back 10 times harder. The FBI, Democrats and MSM have tried to take him down since he decided to run for president, yet he's standing tall and with a 50% approval rating."

There's no point in engaging in discussion with folks like that ...

malibudebumbum , 6 Sep 2018 08:09
Welcome to postmodernist politics folks. It will continue to degenerate until, in despair, people turn toward an orderly system of politics; the Chinese system, the Russian system or even a coherent religious system. Counsellors will be on hand for those who feel hurt or upset by the return to authoritarianism -- they will be able to get great treatment in re-education centres. Just a matter of time before our current system just crumbles from within.
sl0thp0pe -> littlepump , 6 Sep 2018 08:08
Yeah they're sucking it direct from Ayn Rand's teat. Bunch of sociopaths. And I think most political scientists are well aware that citizens united was the death of American democracy as a representative political system. The illusion of functionality has collapsed under the weight of corruption. Trump is really just a symptom of that. A giant orange enema of the state.
ID3866144 -> stuart255 , 6 Sep 2018 07:51
LOL. The west is about to collapse. There is no more money to finance the Ponzy Scheme of the everlasting growth you seem to think is natural. while everyone is distracted in this dualistic BS, the planet is slowly shutting down her ressources.

The Russia after years of sanctions have developed an economy that make them less dependant on other countries. So They will probably less affected by what is coming.

Unless you live in you own bubble, maybe you noticed that Occidental countries have become empty shells...gutted from their skills at making stuff. It is all virtual production now...all banking stuff, numbers insurance...most skilled stuff are either in Germany or in Asia...what is going on?

stuart255 -> HippoMan , 6 Sep 2018 07:47
Trump is a megalomaniac I agree, but he is not dangerous and is not mentally ill. Mental illness is a real thing and you shouldn't casually trivialize it in this way.

Finally anyone who runs for office as President of the USA is by very definition a pretty extreme megalomaniac. So you have two points that are not real and/or could be considered erroneous discrimination and one point that is a prerequisite for any POTUS candidate.

Looking for a reason to impeach him is a ridiculous back to front thing to do and is itself proof that any impeachment will fail. To impeach someone you must first start with a very obvious reason.

It's simply not possible to impeach a president because you don't like their politics or their personality. This whole searching for a reason to impeach is itself evidence that any impeachment is politically motivated and the very optics of this serve only to strengthen Trump's own political support in direct opposition.

Trump is President because the DNC was captured by very stupid and deeply corrupt people.

[Sep 06, 2018] Use of rather uncommon "lodestart" trace can be a false flag operation similar to Russian traces in DNC hack

I think people attributing the letter to Pence are confused as for which side the rogue CIA operatives are on :-)
Sep 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

j. von Hettlingen , 6 Sep 2018 07:16

Many say Mike Pence could have been the one behind the op-ed, because the unidentified author singled out the late John McCain as "a lodestar for restoring honor to public life and our national dialogue." The word isn't that commonly used. But Pence has used the word with some regularity. Yet the word could have been a ploy to divert attention from the real author, who claimed to support many of the GOP policies – "effective deregulation, historic tax reform, a more robust military and more."
No doubt the current crisis works for Pence: "Given the instability many witnessed, there were early whispers within the cabinet of invoking the 25th Amendment, which would start a complex process for removing the president." Of course he and the GOP didn't want to "precipitate a constitutional crisis. So we will do what we can to steer the administration in the right direction until -- one way or another -- it's over." But they don't want Trump to finish his term and hope that he'll soon be gone.
Finisterre -> Carl123 , 6 Sep 2018 06:53
Pepperoni Pizza is absolutely correct. We DON'T know his staff are going behind his back - we have this anonymous bollocks as the totality of our evidence.

This op-ed is going to absolutely confirm, in the eyes of Trump supporters, all his whines about being thwarted by the Deep State. It's going to increase his support among the crazies, and it's also useful for the Republicans who want to ditch him in favour of Mike Pence.

The whole thing stinks to high heaven and for the Democrats or the 'resistance' to see it as some kind of bonus is insane. Even if you take it at face value it's a disgusting piece of authoritarian, we-know-best hypocrisy. If you look at its actual effects, the net result is not likely to benefit the forces of sanity in any way.

The media's complacency about all of this, and their failure to actually report on the Republican trajectory and the bigger picture, is criminal. Instead we get YET ANOTHER bit of 'oh look the wheels are just about to come off the bus!', and all the while the Republicans are gerrymandering and purging voter rolls like crazt before the midterms, and of course refusing to change their unaccountable electronic voting machines and - did you read THIS one in the news? - blocking a bill which would have audited the election results.

Tl;dr: The US, and by extension the planet via environmental destruction and possibly war on top, is utterly fucked.

CharlieApples -> solarights , 6 Sep 2018 06:48
I think you've confused whose side the CIA are on :-)

[Sep 06, 2018] What is wrong with you American people ? Why such level of jingoism and fake national security concerns is possible ?

Notable quotes:
"... Mr anonymous also concedes that the administration has done some good things .. like .. a robust military. Now call me old fashioned, but having a military with twice(three times .. four times) the capability of the rest of the world put together and spending enough yearly to run the whole of Africa .. probably India too, just on a means of killing .. and this even before the US military became .. robust?.. ..."
Sep 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Blenheim , 6 Sep 2018 06:10

Mr anonymous also concedes that the administration has done some good things .. like .. a robust military. Now call me old fashioned, but having a military with twice(three times .. four times) the capability of the rest of the world put together and spending enough yearly to run the whole of Africa .. probably India too, just on a means of killing .. and this even before the US military became .. robust?..

What is wrong with you people .. national security?.. Laughable .. when is your security ever, ever, ever threatened! And yet people starve, people don't have clean water to drink ..
Perhaps were the US to help lift the basic burdens of millions who have bugger all, then there wouldn't be so many suposed 'enemies'. I do believe film maker Michael Moore has voiced this very same thing .. but then, what purpose all those shiny new expensive killing machines?..
Something is seriously wrong in America .. and it ain't just Trump!

CosmoCrawley , 6 Sep 2018 05:56
This is a very poor op-ed piece. Simply calling the President "a crazy loon " isn't political analysis, or at least not the sort of political analysis I would be willing to pay for. Nor do I think the thesis that certain members of the administration are busy trying to shore up their reputations in the face of a sinking presidency holds water. Firstly, unless the current investigations provide incontrovertible evidence that the President was engaged in criminal activity I don't think there is any change that he will be impeached. Secondly, if you wanted to protect your reputation surely the thing to do would be to resign and maintain a dignified silence while you are writing your memoirs. Or if you really were part of a secret clique protecting the American constitution against a reckless President you would keep quiet and get on with your important business. It seems to me that this anonymous piece was either a clumsy attempt to further damage the President or a sophisticated attempt to galvanise his support base by "proving" that the President is being undermined by unelected traitors. Or something else completely might be going on. That's why I would like to read a thoughtful opinion piece by an informed observer.
StGeorge , 6 Sep 2018 05:51
Sounds like there's a treasonous public servant there, doing their best to subvert the will of the people. And of course loudly supported by the squealing hard left guardian mob. Looking at the type of far left fascists crawling‭ out of the woodwork, I would say Trump is provoking utter derangement in all the right people.
Densher -> kent_rules , 6 Sep 2018 05:45
"the corrupt metropolitan elites have swindled them again"
-Who appointed these 'corrupt metropolitan elites' if it was not Trump himself? Who are these people-Betsy DeVos, Wilbur Ross and Steve Mnuchin- quite apart from Jeff Sessions and the now disgraced Michael Flynn? Trump appointed them, they weren't forced on him by the "corrupt metropolitan elites". Is Trump to be given a free pass for his own mistakes?
Throwawaythekey , 6 Sep 2018 05:44
What many commentators here seem to fail to recognise, because of their political bias I suppose, is that there is a ground swell of dissatisfaction with the political consensus that has seen the working class and lower middle class disenfranchised or at least their perceived interests ignored. As a result, populist ideologies, as espoused by Steven Bannon, and others, and exemplified by leaders like Donald Trump have thrown away the rule book with all its aims to support the extremely wealthy and have reached out to those that want jobs before green policies, law and order before gender diversity programs and so on.
I doubt that many of the readers here will receive the message but we are witnessing a revolution that I see as significant as the rise of the sans-culottes in the early part of the French Revolution. That didn't end well for the sans-culottes or their aims but we can hardly blame them for trying. Today the retrenched car worker in the US can hardly be blamed for being unhappy that the CEO of a car company receives a huge pay rise and bail outs from the government and similar stories in other areas.
Vive la revolution.
Stone Jones , 6 Sep 2018 05:43
Some of this stuff is clearly nonsense. Example: the insider claimed Trump is an admirer of dictators:

"In public and in private, President Trump shows a preference for autocrats and dictators, such as President Vladimir Putin of Russia and North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-un, and displays little genuine appreciation for the ties that bind us to allied, like-minded nations."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And yet the forthcoming Bob Woodward book claims Trump told his defence secretary he wanted to kill Assad:

Donald Trump ordered his defence secretary to assassinate Syria's president Bashar al-Assad and "kill the f****** lot of them" in the leader's regime, in the wake of a chemical attack against civilians, according to a new book.

Defence secretary James Mattis is said to have told the president during a phone call he would "get right on it" before hanging up the phone and instead telling an aide: "We're not going to do any of that. We're going to be much more measured." In the wake of the chemical attack in April 2017, the president's national security team developed options that included the more conventional airstrike that Mr Trump eventually ordered.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The anti-Trump lot can't have it both ways. He can't be a fan of dictators but also want to kill them! It's clear there is lying or exaggeration on both sides. The people out to impeach Trump (or sell books!) will lie too.

[Sep 06, 2018] Is there is anything to admire in Trump record?

Sep 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

pretzelattack -> Densher , 6 Sep 2018 05:38

he reversed the war in afghanistan? drones? did he prosecute bankers? does he favor increasing offshore drilling? now it looks like he's renegotiating clinton's nafta and pushing for some version of obama's trade treaties. trump is the invading python, and the democrats and establishment republicans are the alligators; whichever wins, the small furry animals get eaten. i just hope they don't start world war 3 while they're settling things--trump looks to be doubling down on obama's syria policy too, and support of the current ukrainian government.
Bazster -> ImMovedToAdd , 6 Sep 2018 05:33
'Fraid so. Every new generation of neocons regurgitates the same discredited lies from the previous generation, and suckers believe them all over again. Even the title "neocon" or "neoliberal" is a lie: there's nothing new about them.
Densher -> simonsaint , 6 Sep 2018 05:25
Trump was not only openly attacked during the nomination process, the Republican Party nominee who was selected to fight Obama in 2012 -Mitt Romney- delivered a savage attack in which he described Trump as a con-man and a chronic liar -yet the same people who could, there and then have told Trump to get lost backed him. Trump has been attacked from the start and every time and all of the time said to his attackers: so what? I dare you to remove me from the nomination, I dare you to remove me from the Office of President. This is a man who is challenging the governance of the US in a manner no other President has done before, and so far, he is still winning. That is the scary part.
Freedom4UK2019 -> Jessie Welsh , 6 Sep 2018 05:24
Well of course you could list other benefits in addition to some I listed like. "transform the economy, get people back in work.

Peace on the Korean peninsula, end of US involvement in SYRIA etc...

" You could get a nice big house like Obama got. Or $500K for doing speeches for Russian companies like Bill Clinton did.

RichWoods -> raindancer68 , 6 Sep 2018 05:24
Trump is threatening Deep State corruption by placing his own family members in positions of power and profiting from charging the nation for his and his staff's repeated use of Trump Tower and Mar-a-Lago? That's a bizarre way of draining the swamp.
ID6314850 -> raindancer68 , 6 Sep 2018 05:19
The US political system has many flaws, not least that the President can be elected on an apparent electoral college landslide while losing the popular vote. But then again no country's political system is perfect, human nature being what it is.
However, Trump is clearly not up to the job. Not by intellect, understanding of world affairs, honesty, temperament, respect for the law, nor constitution. The list goes on frankly.
The system has gone bad. Trump hasn't "drained the swamp", he's made it far deeper. That said, "the system" such as it is should work in the hands of honest men and women of integrity. The trouble is they're few and far between in the GOP as it wilfully ignores issues in which they would be clamouring for a Democrat president to be impeached.
I sincerely hope the GOP get a thrashing in the mid-terms which may, just may, give them pause for thought. A Democrat Congress might also actually hold Trump to account. The only danger there is that he lashes out with even less self control.
Dangerous times.

[Sep 06, 2018] What better way of stirring up the base ahead of the mid-terms than talk of undemocratic factions within the administration and fifth columnists to be rooted out for the cause.

Sep 06, 2018 | profile.theguardian.com

charlieblue -> Johnstu9876 6 Sep 2018 09:08

I assumed it was an effort at creating some sort of record of resistance. Does anybody really believe Paul Ryan is retiring from the 3rd most powerful position in the US Government to "spend more time with family"? The rats are fleeing a sinking ship. Even if Trump serves out a full four years, anybody too closely tied to this stupid shit-storm of an Administration will be tarred in public eyes. But, American voters are notoriously forgetful, and getting out before the ship goes down will probably work.
charlieblue -> John Edwin , 6 Sep 2018 09:00
Funny shit. "the mole" wrote an Op/Ed piece, that contains no information of a sensitive nature. S/he wrote of their own personal observations working in the White House. There is nothing illegal in that.

I get that you might not have any functional understanding of US law, but it is deeply disturbing that the President of the United States is calling for the arrest of a citizen exercising their constitutionally guaranteed rights.

Jonathan Bailey , 6 Sep 2018 08:54
The op-ed piece being anonymous makes me wonder if Mr Trump himself put someone up to do it. What better way of stirring up the base ahead of the mid-terms than talk of undemocratic factions within the administration and fifth columnists to be rooted out for the cause. It also offers the president another cudgel against the press that will appeal to his core constituencies.

Even if Mr Trump isn't capable of coming up with such a scheme, there are certainly those around him who are.

crossedseven , 6 Sep 2018 08:27
The statements in the opinion piece are horribly anti-pluralist anti-democratic in themselves. The writer's nationalist appeal to 'American' unity at the end is based on everyone uniting around US Republican principles of neo-liberalism, inequality and militarism. S/he would use a false unity against Trump to impose the worst kind of conservative fundamentalism and eliminate anything more progressive from the political spectrum.

Maybe this is mainstream neo-liberal thinking but it's the end of a plural, democratic state. There would be no more room to discuss inequality, climate change, race or gender discrimination or new welfare provisions. Just an offer of false unity around hard neoliberal principles. I guess it's a very similar game to Brexit, which is a choice between life-threatening asset striping of the UK or May's 'hard right soft Brexit' super Thatcherism.

[Sep 06, 2018] Mike Pence and Mike Pompeo deny writing explosive op-ed attacking Trump by Ben Jacobs

Sep 06, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

The op-ed represents a shocking critique of Trump and is without precedent in modern American history. Former CIA Director John Brennan , who has sparred fiercely with the president, called the op-ed "active insubordination born out of loyalty to the country, not to Donald Trump".

"This is not sustainable to have an executive branch where individuals are not following the orders of the chief executive," Brennan told NBC's "Today" show. "I do think things will get worse before they get better. I don't know how Donald Trump is going to react to this. A wounded lion is a very dangerous animal, and I think Donald Trump is wounded."

In it, the anonymous author describes Trump as amoral, "anti-trade and anti-democratic" and prone to making "half-baked, ill-informed and occasionally reckless decisions".

The writer claims aides had explored the possibility of removing Trump from office via the 25th amendment , a complex constitutional mechanism to allow for the replacement of a president who is "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office", but had decided against it.

[Sep 06, 2018] 'Trump will go nuclear' Pundits respond to anonymous 'coup' published by NYT

Notable quotes:
"... "In other countries... they sometimes call this a coup," ..."
"... "unelected aides have staged a slo-mo coup." ..."
"... "frenzy, mutiny and rumors" ..."
"... "swamp sewer creature who can't stand that there is a new sheriff in town." ..."
"... "repudiated our whole constitutional process." ..."
"... "When you think about it it's an amazing statement of their willingness to make themselves bigger than the entire American system," ..."
"... "extremely self-indulgent." ..."
"... "You should not be lapping up the benefits of being a senior administration official, no doubt while scouting for lucrative opportunities for when you leave your post," ..."
"... "If you are this person, you really should resign tonight." ..."
"... "just made things worse," ..."
"... "Anonymous leaking won't take down Trump. A person of honor speaking openly would have far more impact." ..."
"... "The thing about the op-ed is that reading its text, you can think the writer is 'principled,' as the NYT did. But in context, the author is a coward confessing to a coup and daring Trump to get worse," ..."
"... "Trump will go nuclear, making the efforts of this 'internal resistance' far harder," ..."
"... "What is the point of a secret cabal if you don't keep it secret?" ..."
"... "We all know Putin wrote the op-ed and the NYT claimed it's a senior Trump official because they think that's true," ..."
"... Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! ..."
Sep 06, 2018 | www.rt.com

Press Pundits are lining up to weigh in on a salacious New York Times op-ed allegedly penned by an anonymous #Resister in the Trump administration, with some experts on television calling the piece an all-out coup against the president. The opinion piece in question, "I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration," has spawned a level of frenetic punditry not seen since George W. Bush was spotted sneaking Michelle Obama a cough drop. Only this time the stakes are allegedly much higher.

MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace said on Wednesday the stunning claims made in the anonymous op-ed – for example, that there is a group of "adults" in the White House who believe Trump is unfit to hold office and are trying to shape policy behind the president's back – are akin to "a coup."

READ MORE: 'Wasn't me!': White House officials deny involvement in New York Times 'resistance' piece

"In other countries... they sometimes call this a coup," Wallace said on MSNBC's Deadline: White House, referring to the article's assertion that there is a "resistance" made up of administration officials which aims to protect the republic from Trump's "amorality."

Another MSNBC talking head, Howard Fineman, said that he was troubled by the fact that the op-ed appears to describe how "unelected aides have staged a slo-mo coup." Impeachment – not "frenzy, mutiny and rumors" – is the antidote to Trump's criminal unfitness for public service, he added.

The @nytimes essay is troubling. Why? 1. The dangerous, ignorant volatility of @realDonaldTrump . 2. The claim by UNELECTED aides to have staged a slo-mo coup. 3. The NYT letting the accuser hide. #Trump 's unfit, but caution: impeachment -- not frenzy, mutiny and rumor -- is the answer.

-- Howard Fineman (@howardfineman) 6 сентября 2018 г.

But others were even less impressed by the anonymous scoop-provider. Fox News host Sean Hannity called the author of the op-ed a "swamp sewer creature who can't stand that there is a new sheriff in town."

Hannity calls the senior Trump administration official who wrote the NYT op-ed a "swamp sewer creature."

So, yeah.

-- Chris Cillizza (@CillizzaCNN) September 6, 2018

Speaking with Hannity on his program, former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich said that the anonymous author had "repudiated our whole constitutional process."

Read more © Leah Millis 'Treason or fake news?' Trump urges NYT to reveal its White House 'resistance' insider

"When you think about it it's an amazing statement of their willingness to make themselves bigger than the entire American system," Gingrich said .

Dana Perino, the former White House press secretary under George W. Bush, called the mysterious author of the op-ed "extremely self-indulgent."

"You should not be lapping up the benefits of being a senior administration official, no doubt while scouting for lucrative opportunities for when you leave your post," she said .

"If you are this person, you really should resign tonight."

Almost all of the nation's sharpest political minds were in agreement on one point, however: This mystery senior government official should reveal him/herself, in order to save America from fascism, or hokey #Resistance claptrap, depending on whom you ask.

The op-ed "just made things worse," conservative commentator and National Review senior fellow David French said. "Anonymous leaking won't take down Trump. A person of honor speaking openly would have far more impact."

1) The guy is real (no way the NYT puts forth a fake source);

2) His story is likely largely true (perhaps exaggerated at the margins);

3) He's just made things worse.

4) Anonymous leaking won't take down Trump. A person of honor speaking openly would have far more impact

-- David French (@DavidAFrench) September 6, 2018

"If you are the author of this and you truly want to effectuate change... you want to do something in service to the nation, you have to come forward and sign your name to this.. Come forward. You could change the fate of the country..."- @DavidJollyFL w/ @NicolleDWallace pic.twitter.com/d9l7PMnzkj

-- Deadline White House (@DeadlineWH) September 5, 2018

"The thing about the op-ed is that reading its text, you can think the writer is 'principled,' as the NYT did. But in context, the author is a coward confessing to a coup and daring Trump to get worse," veteran journalist Dan Froomkin said. He added that he thought it was wrong of the Times not to identify the piece's author.

The thing about the op-ed is that reading its text, you can think the writer is "principled," as the NYT did. But in context, the author is a coward confessing to a coup and daring Trump to get worse. They shouldna granted anonymity.

-- Dan Froomkin (@froomkin) September 6, 2018

Much has also been discussed about Trump's reaction to the article.

"Trump will go nuclear, making the efforts of this 'internal resistance' far harder," predicted Washington Post contributor Carlos Lozada‏. "What is the point of a secret cabal if you don't keep it secret?"

Gut reaction to NYT oped:
1) Feeds/confirms Trump's worst fears about the deep state plots
2) Trump will go nuclear, making the efforts of this "internal resistance" far harder
3) What is the point of a secret cabal if you don't keep it secret?

-- Carlos Lozada (@CarlosLozadaWP) September 5, 2018

Not everyone is calling for the anonymous author to come forward, however: At least one pundit claims to already know who penned the troubling opinion piece.

"We all know Putin wrote the op-ed and the NYT claimed it's a senior Trump official because they think that's true," Ben Shapiro tweeted.

We all know Putin wrote the op-ed and the NYT claimed it's a senior Trump official because they think that's true.

-- Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) September 6, 2018

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

[Sep 06, 2018] British Assassination Campaign Targeting Russian Exiles

Sep 06, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

British Assassination Campaign Targeting Russian Exiles?

Over the past decade or so, a disturbing number of Russian nationals living in Britain have met untimely deaths. The victims – at least 14 – have been high-profile individuals, such as oligarch businessman Boris Berezovsky or former Kremlin security agent Alexander Litvinenko. All were living in Britain as exiles, and all were viewed as opponents of President Vladimir Putin's government.

Invariably, British politicians and news media refer to the deaths of Russian émigrés as "proof" of Russian state "malign activity". Putin in particular is accused of ordering "the hits" as some kind of vendetta against critics and traitors.

The claims of Russian state skulduggery have been reported over and over without question in the British media as well as US media. It has become an article-of-faith espoused by British and American politicians alike. "Putin is a killer," they say with seeming certainty. There is simply no question about it in their assertions.

The claims have also been given a quasi-legal veracity, with a British government-appointed inquiry in the case of Alexander Litvinenko making a conclusion that his death in 2006 was "highly likely" the result of a Kremlin plot to assassinate. Putin was personally implicated in the death of Litvinenko by the official British inquiry. The victim was said to have been poisoned with radioactive polonium. Deathbed images of a bald-headed Litvinenko conjure up a haunting image of alleged Kremlin evil-doing.

Once the notion of Russian evil-doing is inculcated the public mind, then subsequent events can be easily invoked as "more proof" of what has already been "established". Namely, so it goes, that the Russian state is carrying out assassinations on British territory.

Thus, we see this "corroborating" effect with the alleged poisoning of a former Russian double-agent, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter in Salisbury back in March this year.

What actually happened to the Skripals is not known – who are said to have since recovered their health, but their whereabouts have not been disclosed by the British authorities. Nevertheless, as soon as the incident of their apparent poisoning occurred, it was easy for the British authorities and media to whip up accusations against Russia as being behind "another assassination attempt" owing to the past "established template" of other Russian émigrés seeming to have been killed by Kremlin agents.

For its part, the Russian government has always categorically denied any involvement in the ill-fate of nationals living in exile in Britain. On the Skripal case, Moscow has pointed out that the British authorities have not produced any independently verifiable evidence against the Kremlin. Russian requests for access to the investigation file have been rejected by the British.

On the Litvinenko case, Russia has said that the official British inquiry was conducted without due process of transparency, or Russia being allowed to defend itself. It was more trial by media.

A common denominator is that the British have operated on a presumption of guilt. The "proof" is largely at the level of allegation or innuendo of Russian malfeasance.

But let's turn the premise of the argument around. What if the British state were the ones conducting a campaign of assassination against Russian émigrés, with the cold-blooded objective of using those deaths as a propaganda campaign to blacken and criminalize Russia?

In a recent British media interview Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was typically harangued over alleged Russian malign activity in Britain. Lavrov rightly turned the question around, and said that the Russian authorities are the ones who are entitled to demand an explanation from the British state on why so many of its nationals have met untimely deaths.

The presumption of guilt against Russia is based on a premise of Russophobia, which prevents an open-minded inquiry. If an open mind is permitted, then surely a more pertinent position is to ask the British authorities to explain the high number of deaths in their jurisdiction.

As ever, the litmus-test question is: who gains from the deaths? In the case of the alleged attempted assassination of Sergei Skripal and his daughter, would Russia risk such a bizarre plot against an exile who had been living in Britain undisturbed for 10 years? Or would Britain gain much more from smearing Moscow at the time of President Putin's re-election in March, and in the run-up to the World Cup?

The more recent alleged nerve-agent poisoning of two British citizens – Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess – in the southern English town of Amesbury revived official anti-Russia accusations and public fears over the earlier Skripal incident in nearby Salisbury.

The Amesbury incident in early July occurred just as a successful World Cup tournament in Russia was underway. It also came ahead of US President Donald Trump's landmark summit with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki.

Again, who stands to gain most from these provocative events? Russia or Britain?

Another revealing twist in the presumed narrative of "Kremlin criminality" came from a recent interview given to Russian news media by the daughter of the deceased oligarch Boris Berezovsky. Of course, her side of the story received no coverage in the British media.

Liza Berezovsky believes that her father's death in 2013, while living in exile in Britain, was the dirty work of British state assassins. The case has added importance because it links directly to the previous death of Alexander Litvinenko, who was also living as an exile in Britain.

Berezovsky's daughter believes that her father wanted to return from Britain to Russia so that he could live out his old age in his native country. She claims that the oligarch had vital information on how the death of Litvinenko in 2006, reportedly from radioactive polonium poisoning, had actually been staged as a smear against Putin and the Kremlin.

Boris Berezovsky, his daughter claims, played a key role along with the British state in orchestrating the demise of Litvinenko to look like an assassination plot carried out by the Kremlin. It was Berezovsky who apparently suggested that Litvinenko, with whom he was an associate, shave off his hair in order to drum up the suspicion of Kremlin poisoning.

Liza Berezovsky contends that, seven years after Litvinenko died, her father was preparing to divulge the dirty tricks involving the British state and their anti-Russian campaign. She said the oligarch wanted to atone for his past misdeeds and to make his peace with Mother Russia. She believes that British state agents got wind of his plans to come clean, which would have caused them an acute international scandal.

In March 2013, just days before he was due to depart from Britain, the oligarch was found dead in his mansion near Ascot, in the English countryside, apparently from suicide caused by a ligature around his neck.

In the end, however, a British civil coroner did not conclude suicide, and left an "open verdict" on the death. An eminent German pathologist hired by Liza Berezovsky provided post-mortem evidence that her father's body showed signs of his death having not been self-inflicted. He was, in their view, murdered.

It is not beyond the realms of possibility that British secret services are running an assassination program on Russian exiles. These exiles are often used for a time by the British state as media assets, presented as high-profile critics of the Kremlin and lending testimonies to much-publicized allegations of "authoritarianism" and "human rights abuses" under Putin.

At some opportune later time, these Russian dissidents can be liquidated by British agents. Their deaths are then presented as "more proof" of Russian malign activity and in particular for the purpose of criminalizing President Putin and his government.

Considering how London has become an international haven for Russian oligarchs whose wealth is often tainted as being proceeds from criminal activity against Russian laws and who therefore are easily framed as Putin opponents – the British state has ample opportunities for setting up "assassinations" and anti-Putin provocations.

Such a nefarious British program is by no means unprecedented. During the 30-year armed conflict in Northern Ireland ending in the late 1990s, it is documented that the British state ran clandestine assassination campaigns against Irish republican figures, as well as ordinary citizens, as a coldly calculated political instrument of state-sponsored terrorism. It was an instrument honed by the British from other colonial-era conflicts, such as in Kenya, Myanmar (formerly Burma), Malaysia (formerly Malaya), and in several Arab countries like Bahrain and Yemen, as detailed by British historian Mark Curtis in his book Web of Deceit.

Adapting such heinous techniques for a contemporary propaganda war against Russia wouldn't cost any qualms to British state grandees and their agents. Indeed, for them, it would be simply Machiavellian business-as-usual.

Tags: Skripal case

[Sep 06, 2018] Skripals The Mystery Deepens by Craig Murray

Notable quotes:
"... The time that "Boshirov and Petrov" were allegedly in Salisbury carrying out the attack is all entirely within the period the Skripals were universally reported to have left their home with their mobile phones switched off. ..."
"... But the Metropolitan Police state that Boshirov and Petrov did not arrive in Salisbury until 11.48 on the day of the poisoning. That means that they could not have applied a nerve agent to the Skripals' doorknob before noon at the earliest. ..."
"... But there has never been any indication that the Skripals returned to their home after noon on Sunday 4 March. If they did so, they and/or their car somehow avoided all CCTV cameras. Remember they were caught by three CCTV cameras on leaving, and Borishov and Petrov were caught frequently on CCTV on arriving. ..."
"... The Skripals were next seen on CCTV at 13.30, driving down Devizes road. After that their movements were clearly witnessed or recorded until their admission to hospital. ..."
"... In general it is worth observing that the Skripals, and poor Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley, all managed to achieve almost complete CCTV invisibility in their widespread movements around Salisbury at the key times, while in contrast "Petrov and Boshirov" managed to be frequently caught in high quality all the time during their brief visit. ..."
"... This is especially remarkable in the case of the Skripals' location around noon on 4 March. The government can only maintain that they returned home at this time, as they insist they got the nerve agent from the doorknob. But why was their car so frequently caught on CCTV leaving, but not at all returning? It appears very much more probable that they came into contact with the nerve agent somewhere else, while they were out. ..."
"... they may have been meeting them, outside the home. The evidence points to that, rather than doorknobs. Such a meeting might explain why the Skripals had turned off their mobile phones to attempt to avoid surveillance. ..."
"... If "Boshirov and Petrov" are secret agents, their incompetence is astounding. They used public transport rather than a vehicle and left the clearest possible CCTV footprint. They failed in their assassination attempt. They left traces of novichok everywhere and could well have poisoned themselves, and left the "murder weapon" lying around to be found. Their timings in Salisbury were extremely tight – and British Sunday rail service dependent. ..."
Sep 06, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

The time that "Boshirov and Petrov" were allegedly in Salisbury carrying out the attack is all entirely within the period the Skripals were universally reported to have left their home with their mobile phones switched off.

A key hole in the British government's account of the Salisbury poisonings has been plugged – the lack of any actual suspects. And it has been plugged in a way that appears broadly convincing – these two men do appear to have traveled to Salisbury at the right time to have been involved.

But what has not been established is the men's identity and that they are agents of the Russian state, or just what they did in Salisbury. If they are Russian agents, they are remarkably amateur assassins. Meanwhile the new evidence throws the previously reported timelines into confusion – and demolishes the theories put out by "experts" as to why the Novichok dose was not fatal.

This BBC report gives a very useful timeline summary of events.

At 09.15 on Sunday 4 March the Skripals' car was seen on CCTV driving through three different locations in Salisbury. Both Skripals had switched off their mobile phones and they remained off for over four hours, which has baffled geo-location.

There is no CCTV footage that indicates the Skripals returning to their home. It has therefore always been assumed that they last touched the door handle around 9am.

The Skripals Have Survived but They Are Not Safe: The Novichok Fraud Should Bring Down the UK Government

But the Metropolitan Police state that Boshirov and Petrov did not arrive in Salisbury until 11.48 on the day of the poisoning. That means that they could not have applied a nerve agent to the Skripals' doorknob before noon at the earliest.

But there has never been any indication that the Skripals returned to their home after noon on Sunday 4 March. If they did so, they and/or their car somehow avoided all CCTV cameras. Remember they were caught by three CCTV cameras on leaving, and Borishov and Petrov were caught frequently on CCTV on arriving.

The Skripals were next seen on CCTV at 13.30, driving down Devizes road. After that their movements were clearly witnessed or recorded until their admission to hospital.

So even if the Skripals made an "invisible" trip home before being seen on Devizes Road, that means the very latest they could have touched the doorknob is 13.15. The longest possible gap between the novichok being placed on the doorknob and the Skripals touching it would have been one hour and 15 minutes. Do you recall all those "experts" leaping in to tell us that the "ten times deadlier than VX" nerve agent was not fatal because it had degraded overnight on the doorknob? Well that cannot be true. The time between application and contact was between a minute and (at most) just over an hour on this new timeline.

In general it is worth observing that the Skripals, and poor Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley, all managed to achieve almost complete CCTV invisibility in their widespread movements around Salisbury at the key times, while in contrast "Petrov and Boshirov" managed to be frequently caught in high quality all the time during their brief visit.

This is especially remarkable in the case of the Skripals' location around noon on 4 March. The government can only maintain that they returned home at this time, as they insist they got the nerve agent from the doorknob. But why was their car so frequently caught on CCTV leaving, but not at all returning? It appears very much more probable that they came into contact with the nerve agent somewhere else, while they were out.

"Boshirov and Petrov" plainly are of interest in this case. But only Theresa May stated they were Russian agents: the police did not, and stated that they expected those were not their real identities. We do not know who Boshirov and Petrov were. It appears very likely their appearance was to do with the Skripals on that day. But they may have been meeting them, outside the home. The evidence points to that, rather than doorknobs. Such a meeting might explain why the Skripals had turned off their mobile phones to attempt to avoid surveillance.

It is also telling the police have pressed no charges against them in the case of Dawn Sturgess, which would be manslaughter at least if the government version is true.

If "Boshirov and Petrov" are secret agents, their incompetence is astounding. They used public transport rather than a vehicle and left the clearest possible CCTV footprint. They failed in their assassination attempt. They left traces of novichok everywhere and could well have poisoned themselves, and left the "murder weapon" lying around to be found. Their timings in Salisbury were extremely tight – and British Sunday rail service dependent.

There are other possibilities of who "Boshirov and Petrov" really are, of which Ukrainian is the obvious one. One thing I discovered when British Ambassador to Uzbekistan was that there had been a large Ukrainian ethnic group of scientists working at the Soviet chemical weapon testing facility there at Nukus. There are many other possibilities.

Yesterday's revelations certainly add to the amount we know about the Skripal event. But they raise as many new questions as they give answers.

[Sep 06, 2018] I am outraged at describing Trump's administration as a "pirate ship". On a real pirate ship, Captain Trump would have lost his job long ago and been abandoned on some tiny island with a single shot in his pistol.

The op-ed is nauseating because it tells us the truth why they do it: Because conservatives got their tax cuts, deregulation and all the other conservative politics that gamble with people's lives. It's disgusting.
Notable quotes:
"... Pirate ships were in reality the most egalitarian institutions that existed in the 17th century. Their articles laid out that both the captain and quartermaster (who divided the spoils) served at the pleasure of their crew, and that the entire crew had rights to a fair portion of the proceeds. ..."
"... On a real pirate ship, Captain Trump would have lost his job long ago and been abandoned on some tiny island with a single shot in his pistol. ..."
Sep 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com
Paul Jordan , 6 Sep 2018 07:45
I am outraged at describing Trump's administration as a "pirate ship"!

Pirate ships were in reality the most egalitarian institutions that existed in the 17th century. Their articles laid out that both the captain and quartermaster (who divided the spoils) served at the pleasure of their crew, and that the entire crew had rights to a fair portion of the proceeds.

On a real pirate ship, Captain Trump would have lost his job long ago and been abandoned on some tiny island with a single shot in his pistol.

[Sep 05, 2018] Melting Arctic Creates New Opportunities For LNG

Sep 05, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

et Al September 2, 2018 at 11:36 pm

OilPrice.com : Melting Arctic Creates New Opportunities For LNG
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Natural-Gas/Melting-Arctic-Creates-New-Opportunities-For-LNG.html

According to Balmasov, while the number of voyages via the Northern Sea Route so far this year has been roughly the same as last year, the main difference compared to 2017 is LNG traffic out of the port of Sabetta, the port that Russia's gas producer Novatek uses to ship the Yamal LNG cargoes to Europe and to Asia.

Arctic Logistics data compiled by Bloomberg shows that by early July, a total of 34 tankers made the voyage from Sabetta to Europe, and one to the east. Since early July, another two LNG tankers have shipped the fuel to Asia

In mid-July, Novatek said that it had shipped its first LNG cargoes from Yamal LNG to China via the Northern Sea Route, with the voyage from Sabetta completed in 19 days, compared to 35 days for the traditional eastern route via the Suez Canal and the Strait of Malacca
####

Tut tut! Cannot have LNG going via Russia's northern passage (fnar! fnar!).

Vis ship pollution, why simply hold LNG carriers up to much higher environmental standards? After all most of them are much newer and are specialist vessels. Or are they already? Indeed they are, the use of duel-fuel engines that can make use of boil-off:

https://www.brighthubengineering.com/naval-architecture/111619-propulsion-methods-for-modern-lng-tankers/

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

As of 2005, a total of 203 vessels had been built, of which 193 were still in service. At the end of 2016, the global LNG shipping fleet consisted of 439 vessels.[3] In 2017, an estimated 170 vessels are in use at any one time

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LNG_carrier#Reliquefaction_and_boil-off
According to WGI, on a typical voyage an estimated 0.1–0.25% of the cargo converts to gas each day, depending on the efficiency of the insulation and the roughness of the voyage.[16] In a typical 20-day voyage, anywhere from 2–6% of the total volume of LNG originally loaded may be lost.[16]

Normally an LNG tanker is powered by steam turbines with boilers. These boilers are dual fuel and can run on either methane or oil or a combination of both. ..

Mark Chapman September 3, 2018 at 10:16 am

I love how an eventuality we were all raised to dread – the melting of the polar ice caps – is now spun as a net positive. Make hay while the sun shines! When life hands you lemons, make lemonade! Pick your metaphor. We are destroying the planet we live on, inch by irrecoverable inch, but the merchants of Stay-Positive maintain it is AWESOME.

I don't know if you heard – probably not, since it was never much of an international story – but the Canadian Federal Court of Appeals, in a surprise decision, overturned the government's commitment to the Trans-Mountain pipeline.

https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2018/08/trans-mountain-court-quashes-approval-contentious-pipeline-180830180555077.html

Alberta's Rachel Notley reportedly bent spoons with her teeth, since she had just jubilantly reported that the court challenge by the city of Burnaby (British Columbia) was defeated. "To date, Alberta has won every case brought against Trans Mountain. Your Alberta government will not back down until this pipeline is built and the national interest is secured", she crowed on Twitter; the modern equivalent of a legislature, I guess, since all politicians who are anybody turn first to Twitter to get their message out.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/977566130351960064

That one, of course, was "a victory for all Canadians". Except for British Columbia's crybabies, of course, who did not want to play host to Alberta's tanker armada, considering Alberta has no seacoast. So you would think she would quietly accept this later decision by the legal system she purports to revere. Not a bit of it. She immediately withdrew Alberta from the national climate-change plan, and restarted her rhetoric about cutting off BC's gas supply.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/ready-and-prepared-to-turn-off-the-taps-notley-issues-stark-warning-to-b-c-as-pipeline-fight-escalates/wcm/59f845c2-b13e-46f5-bb08-15e0fb37ec84

Get it? When the court rules in Alberta's favour, it is just – the solemn power of the law makes you want to weep with awe. When it rules against Alberta, it is a clown show of unevolved primates. That's modern politics.

All this theatre when the completion of the pipeline is inevitable – the very day, almost to the hour that the Court of Appeals rendered its decision, the shareholders of Kinder-Morgan Canada voted 99% in favour of selling the pipeline to the government of Canada. So now the government owns it, and although it may be delayed a couple of years, it's down but not out. Now the government has to re-do its consultations with all the native bands, this time selling the impression that it is actually listening and the consultative process is real, and it has to conduct a review of the environmental impact of increased tanker traffic (which it formerly declaimed as outside its purview). I'd say if there is agreement on changing some routes and perhaps permissible speed until well offshore, it will almost certainly pass next time.

[Sep 04, 2018] The White House, the Senate, and much of the American media are in our hands, the lives of others do not count as much as our own

Notable quotes:
"... "We killed them out of a certain naive hubris. Believing with absolute certitude that now, with the White House, the Senate, and much of the American media in our hands, the lives of others do not count as much as our own "' ..."
"... Charges of anti-Semitism and a quiet but very effective boycott will be the reward of any journalist who calls attention to his own government's -- and his own profession's -- servitude to Israeli interests.' ..."
"... It is terrifying but both US warmongering and Israeli control will only end when the dollar system collapses. That's a very sad thing to say but Israel will abandon the US like a used condom if the US fails economically. ..."
Sep 04, 2018 | www.unz.com

Johnny Rottenborough , Website September 4, 2018 at 10:47 am GMT

An Israeli journalist stated over 20 years ago that 'the White House, the Senate, and much of the American media [are] in our hands'. His words were picked up by Joseph Sobran:

'In an essay reprinted in the May 27, 1996, issue of the New York Times Ari Shavit, an Israeli columnist, reflected sorrowfully on the wanton Israeli killing of more than a hundred Lebanese civilians in April.

"We killed them out of a certain naive hubris. Believing with absolute certitude that now, with the White House, the Senate, and much of the American media in our hands, the lives of others do not count as much as our own "'

Sobran observes that 'this is interesting less for what it tells us about Israel than for what it tells us about America. Frank discussion of Israel is permitted in Israel, as Mr Shavit's article illustrates. It's rarely permitted here.

Charges of anti-Semitism and a quiet but very effective boycott will be the reward of any journalist who calls attention to his own government's -- and his own profession's -- servitude to Israeli interests.'

Eighthman , September 4, 2018 at 1:22 pm GMT

It is terrifying but both US warmongering and Israeli control will only end when the dollar system collapses. That's a very sad thing to say but Israel will abandon the US like a used condom if the US fails economically.

[Sep 04, 2018] Parts of Censored Al Jazeera Documentary on DC Israel Lobby Leaked

Notable quotes:
"... The documentary, which was produced by an undercover reporter who infiltrated pro-Israel groups in the U.S. in 2016, has been censored by the Qatari government – the owner of Al Jazeera – as part of an attempt by Qatar to win the support of major Jewish American organizations. ..."
"... New details about the contents of the censored documentary appeared this week in the French monthly newspaper Le Monde Diplomatique, and video excerpts from it were published by Max Blumenthal and on the website Electronic Intifada. ..."
Sep 04, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press

Parts of Censored Al Jazeera Documentary on D.C. Israel Lobby Leaked 03/09/2018

Leaked clips from film, pulled by Qatar in bid to appease U.S. Jewish community, show 'astroturfing' by college students involved with right-wing think tank, claim to reveal top U.S. donor of BDS blacklist

By Amir Tibon
August 30, 2018

Video excerpts and new details from the censored Al Jazeera documentary about the Israeli lobby in the United States have been leaked to select media outlets in recent days.

The documentary, which was produced by an undercover reporter who infiltrated pro-Israel groups in the U.S. in 2016, has been censored by the Qatari government – the owner of Al Jazeera – as part of an attempt by Qatar to win the support of major Jewish American organizations.

New details about the contents of the censored documentary appeared this week in the French monthly newspaper Le Monde Diplomatique, and video excerpts from it were published by Max Blumenthal and on the website Electronic Intifada.

Read more at https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-parts-of-censored-al-jazeera-documentary-on-pro-israeli-lobby-leaked-1.6432835

[Sep 04, 2018] I think that the US strategy is very sound and its aims are obvious. Since they can't win any "hot" war of any significance, they decided to lure Russia into Cold war 2. And we all know who "won" Cold war 1.

Notable quotes:
"... So the strategy is obvious: Scare Russia with how big your defense budget is, even if you have nothing to show for it. And if 1 trillion can't do the trick, I don't see why 2 trillion shouldn't be able to accomplish the task – winning Cold war 2. ..."
"... The US are perfectly capable by themselves alone in finding a new source of pride in the fact how much they can (ill) afford to spend on the military, thus they want to ensure that on their way to oblivion, history will marvel at what a powerful country they used to be – spending amounts of money on the military that no one else was able to match. ..."
"... Yes, Putin managed to change the world quietly, to the helpless chagrin of the Empire. The fact that the Empire is now using the lowliest scum, like jihadi head choppers and "svidomie" Nazis, shows that it is reduced to hysterics and tantrums. ..."
"... So, if in Cold War 2.0 Putin is using the strategy the US used in Cold War 1.0, he is outsmarting his adversaries admirably. ..."
"... It might be even worse for the Empire and its lackeys. The US and other NATO armies would be totally incapacitated by the absence of bathroom tissue. ..."
"... You need to start with the premise that the US Zioglob wants to destroy Syria and Iran – and you have to take them seriously since much of the Middle East has already been targeted, and is lying in ruins ..."
"... Russia's part in this is that it gets in the way. Without Russian support, Assad and the Iranians would probably already be gone, and Syria would be some kind of ISIS run hellhole ..."
"... But overall, it's unreal that this is happening. If the US attacks Russian warships off the Syrian coast, then things could get completely out of control. ..."
"... Israel would not let America do anything that might start a nuclear war. ..."
"... FSB operational group is in Donetsk now and is dealing with this murder. This is the start of the official recognition of the LDNR–initially as independent entities and, eventually, rejoining Russia. It is especially remarkable after even Kiev admitting a demographic and labor catastrophe, which also feed-backs and drives the whole country into the oblivion even faster. That, plus US military "advisers" are already in place in Ukraine. 2019 is not far away and US wants to "sell" own toxic asset as high as possible. ..."
"... Is the outbreak of nuclear war possible? Of course it is possible, it always is–the main measure of it is how probable this outbreak is. This is way above my pay-grade level, but I will reiterate–Russia is aware of the US and where it stands on the order (if not two) of magnitude more than it is the other way around. Russians actually study the US and I saw a vast improvement of Russian Americanistika in the last 10 years. Dramatic really. On the other end well ..."
"... As far as Israel is concerned, you don't need to target anything in particular: one 500 kiloton device (or a few smaller ones) would wipe the whole Israel off the map (Arabs need not rejoice: that puny territory won't be usable for any mammals for a few thousand years). One can only hope that Israelis and the US neocons don't have a death wish and won't let things to go that far. ..."
"... The US strategy is to make Russia bleed internally with aggressive and violent Military occupations directly as in Syria and by proxy in the Ukraine ..Could this not lead to a coup in Russia? ..."
"... Dempsey and Michael Flynn (while he was head of the DIA) sabotaging the CIA and State department policy on overthrowing Assad the Idiot (he put up the price of basic necessities while the Arab spring was going on) was the origin of Russia gate, the CIA hated Flynn. ..."
"... The US "strategy" on Russia is written by dated "products" of the US "humanities" field, by amateurs and by ignoramuses – that is why US "strategy" on Russia is easily identifiable as one huge tantrum and is exhibit A of how not TO conduct military and foreign policies. In fact, I expect at some point of time many a Ph.D theses written on that–a fascinating topic of a country ran by people with maturity level of teenagers. As per coup–wanna see one? Open any US MSM newspaper or watch any MSM news. ..."
"... I fear you're underestimating the power of messianic delusions. The country with leaders speaking of the End of History, the Moral Arc of History, etc., is not a country with a generalized ability to accept equal status among competing powers. ..."
"... While it may be the case that there are serious people who seriously understand the situation, the default assumption among Regime players is that USG is on top, and this will continue for ever . ..."
"... The other is geopolitical: I strongly suspect that Putin wants to use Donbass as a lever to push Ukraine to a sensible position of neutrality internationally and federation internally. If so, good luck to him: that would make Ukraine viable. ..."
"... I don't know about goats, but naturally radiation-resistant rodents and insects would have been grateful to neocons, if they knew who to thank for gifting them the whole Earth as a kingdom. ..."
"... I fear you're underestimating the power of messianic delusions. The country with leaders speaking of the End of History, the Moral Arc of History, etc., is not a country with a generalized ability to accept equal status among competing powers. ..."
"... Yes, it's definitely a tricky situation living in a large country run by criminals and madmen. ..."
"... If not for nuclear weapons, things would be much simpler, and once they eventually got a bloody military nose, there might be a popular uprising, probably leading to the wholesale massacre of all our ruling political, financial, and intellectual elites. This would definitely serve them right and also provide excellent business to Chinese guillotine-manufacturers. But with nukes in the hands of madmen, a positive outcome is much more doubtful, so I guess there's not all that much we can do except sit around and worry. ..."
Sep 04, 2018 | www.unz.com

Originally from: Russia As a Cat by Andrei Martyanov

Cyrano , says: September 4, 2018 at 5:19 pm GMT

I am sorry Andrei, but I am going to have to disagree with your assessment of the current situation. I think that the US strategy is very sound and its aims are obvious. Since they can't win any "hot" war of any significance, they decided to lure Russia into Cold war 2. And we all know who "won" Cold war 1.

Basically the strategy is: Focus on the "wars" that you can "win", instead on the ones that you can't. And the way they intend to "win" Cold war 2 is the same like they "won" Cold war 1 – outspend Russia on defense.

For a few years now, the Americans are bragging that their yearly increases in the military budget are bigger than the total Russian military budget. US now spend around 1 trillion on defense, while Russia is what – in the 50-60 billion range?

So the strategy is obvious: Scare Russia with how big your defense budget is, even if you have nothing to show for it. And if 1 trillion can't do the trick, I don't see why 2 trillion shouldn't be able to accomplish the task – winning Cold war 2.

The only difference between Cold war 1 and 2 is that USSR tried to match the spending of US in Cold war 1 -that's what bankrupted them. This time around, the Russians don't even have to pretend that they are trying to match US military budget.

The US are perfectly capable by themselves alone in finding a new source of pride in the fact how much they can (ill) afford to spend on the military, thus they want to ensure that on their way to oblivion, history will marvel at what a powerful country they used to be – spending amounts of money on the military that no one else was able to match.

Thulean Friend , says: September 4, 2018 at 6:07 pm GMT
@Cyrano

Your argument is nonsensical and uninformed. Russia has recently slashed their defence spending by a significant margin. If the plan was to lure Russia to spend more via defence then it has already completely failed.

Johnny Rottenborough , says: Website September 4, 2018 at 7:27 pm GMT

A Tweet by Nick Griffin, former leader of the British National Party, on whether decades of mass immigration and Cultural Marxism have increased or decreased the West's chances of surviving World War III:

'Here's the bottom line: Even if Nato destroyed the entire military & half the cities of Russia, she would survive. If the USA & UK lose their militaries & their electricity supply, their cities will be destroyed by their own citizens. The West has lost #WW3 before it starts!'

AnonFromTN , says: September 4, 2018 at 8:03 pm GMT

Yes, Putin managed to change the world quietly, to the helpless chagrin of the Empire. The fact that the Empire is now using the lowliest scum, like jihadi head choppers and "svidomie" Nazis, shows that it is reduced to hysterics and tantrums.

Sometimes I wish Putin to act more decisively, like after the murder of Zakharchenko in Donetsk by cowardly terrorist jackals. But I also feel that he must know more than I do. His strategy seems to be "when you see your enemy committing suicide, do not interfere". So far it is working. If anything, Russia, without spending too much, prompts the US to spend itself into financial insolvency.

So, if in Cold War 2.0 Putin is using the strategy the US used in Cold War 1.0, he is outsmarting his adversaries admirably.

AnonFromTN , says: September 4, 2018 at 8:07 pm GMT
@Johnny Rottenborough

It might be even worse for the Empire and its lackeys. The US and other NATO armies would be totally incapacitated by the absence of bathroom tissue. And I mean real soldiers, not trannies.

AnonFromTN , says: September 4, 2018 at 8:10 pm GMT
@Macon Richardson

Both of you are way off. The reality trumps race, real or imagined. That's where Russia wins. Particularly because it includes people of different nationalities, races, religions (or lack thereof), etc.

Miro23 , says: September 4, 2018 at 8:15 pm GMT

You need to start with the premise that the US Zioglob wants to destroy Syria and Iran – and you have to take them seriously since much of the Middle East has already been targeted, and is lying in ruins.

Russia's part in this is that it gets in the way. Without Russian support, Assad and the Iranians would probably already be gone, and Syria would be some kind of ISIS run hellhole.

Also, the cook in the fable does monologues when angry, but the Neocons have been described as "Crazies" and act like crazies, so it's a bit risky to only expect "loud talk and nothing more". Crazies can start throwing things around, and they're not known for balanced responses, so I find Martyanov's view too complacent.

I would guess that Putin & his generals have a more realistic assessment , and interestingly they seem to have decided to stick with Assad (which seems to imply that they're ready to go all the way with the US). Trump & Mattis need to appreciate this and moderate the Ziocons.

But overall, it's unreal that this is happening. If the US attacks Russian warships off the Syrian coast, then things could get completely out of control.

Sean , says: September 4, 2018 at 8:27 pm GMT
@Johnny Rottenborough

Rural Russians do not have electricity, indoor plumbing and running water in many cases. It is like Eire in the 1920′s except worse because the distances are vastly greater. Anyway, if Russia got to a point where it was in a full nuclear strategic exchange with the US, the last act of the Russian leadership would be to order that their missiles hit every other nuclear power: Britain, France, China and Israel too . Russia would take everyone else down with them. For that reason Israel would not let America do anything that might start a nuclear war.

Andrei Martyanov , says: Website September 4, 2018 at 9:02 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

like after the murder of Zakharchenko in Donetsk

FSB operational group is in Donetsk now and is dealing with this murder. This is the start of the official recognition of the LDNR–initially as independent entities and, eventually, rejoining Russia. It is especially remarkable after even Kiev admitting a demographic and labor catastrophe, which also feed-backs and drives the whole country into the oblivion even faster. That, plus US military "advisers" are already in place in Ukraine. 2019 is not far away and US wants to "sell" own toxic asset as high as possible.

Andrei Martyanov , says: Website September 4, 2018 at 9:12 pm GMT
@Miro23

Also, the cook in the fable does monologues when angry, but the Neocons have been described as "Crazies" and act like crazies, so it's a bit risky to only expect "loud talk and nothing more". Crazies can start throwing things around, and they're not known for balanced responses, so I find Martyanov's view too complacent.

Evidently you missed Ralph Peters' (and he is really bat shit crazy one and passes as "military experts" among neocon cabal) "performance" and writings when he called on the war against Russia ONLY inside Syria. And even then with some caveats.

http://www.unz.com/article/russia-the-800-pound-gorilla/

Even if such a psycho as Peters understands limitations–and that was a year ago, since then things changed in Syria dramatically, such as Syrian and Russian Air Defense among other things–then I would say that my position is not really "complacent". Russia has a revolver and it is held to the temple.

Is the outbreak of nuclear war possible? Of course it is possible, it always is–the main measure of it is how probable this outbreak is. This is way above my pay-grade level, but I will reiterate–Russia is aware of the US and where it stands on the order (if not two) of magnitude more than it is the other way around. Russians actually study the US and I saw a vast improvement of Russian Americanistika in the last 10 years. Dramatic really. On the other end well

AnonFromTN , says: September 4, 2018 at 9:24 pm GMT
@Sean

You are a bit under-informed. Practically all Russian villages have electricity now, although many don't have natural gas, indoor plumbing, and live w/o running water in homes (some have it in the streets, others rely on wells; most use old-fashioned latrines).

In the worst-case scenario of nuclear war between Russia and the US, Russia won't need to target nuclear power plants (or anything else) in China. Russian strategy would be to make sure some people survive, same as Chinese strategy in that case. They might, although I am not sure that the survivors won't envy the dead after a full-blown nuclear war. The US vassals will be hit, but given what the world will become, one can consider that an act of mercy.

As far as Israel is concerned, you don't need to target anything in particular: one 500 kiloton device (or a few smaller ones) would wipe the whole Israel off the map (Arabs need not rejoice: that puny territory won't be usable for any mammals for a few thousand years). One can only hope that Israelis and the US neocons don't have a death wish and won't let things to go that far.

War for Blair Mountain , says: September 4, 2018 at 9:27 pm GMT

Krylov .didn't he come up with the idea of Krylov subspaces? .Was the poet also the late great Russian Naval Engineer-Mathematician Krylov?

War for Blair Mountain , says: September 4, 2018 at 10:10 pm GMT

I'm worried about two things:

1) the Russian Military and the US Military are separated physically by a very thin line in Syria and other places ..accidental bumping into each other=Big nuclear accident!!!

2)The US strategy is to make Russia bleed internally with aggressive and violent Military occupations directly as in Syria and by proxy in the Ukraine ..Could this not lead to a coup in Russia? Noam Chomsky makes a compelling case that the US actually won the Vietnam War .Vietnam had it's military victory .but the war turned Vietnam into a dependent basket case .44 years of being a dependent basket case.

Per/Norway , says: September 4, 2018 at 10:26 pm GMT

https://archive.org/details/cu31924026691612

If there exists any other people than me that got curious about Ivan Krylov and want to read his stories i found a book on archive.org

"Kriloff's original fables translated by Henry Harrison published in 1883."
I found it easier to read the letters in that one than in the link in the article tbh.

Sean , says: September 4, 2018 at 10:57 pm GMT
@War for Blair Mountain

Watergate was really about the US losing the war, so I think the Vietnamese won the war, but the US left benefited . To get rid of Putin and his system the US would have to impose a clear defeat on Russia, something the US cannot do in Ukraine without Russia escalating, and did not care to try in Syria. The American and Russian military would not let the politicians start a war.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/03/11/mccain_gen_dempsey_most_disappointing_chairman_of_the_joint_chiefs_that_i_have_ever_seen.html

McCAIN: General Dempsey is the most disappointing chairman of the joint chiefs that I have seen, and I have seen many of them

He says he may request that. He has supported the plan to completely withdraw from Afghanistan. And he has basically been the echo chamber for the president. And one of the reasons we are in the situation that we're in in the world today – and particularly in the Middle East – is because the lack of his either knowledge or candor about the situation in the Middle East. And it has done great damage, and so all I can say is he only has eight more months.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4621738/dunford-tells-wicker-controlling-airspace-syria-means-war-russia-mccain-throws-tantrum-dunford

In the above video Dunford tells Wicker controlling airspace in Syria means war with Russia. McCain throws a tantrum, then Dunford refines answer. However, it is perfectly obvious that the current head of the Joint Chiefs is no more keen than Martin Dempsey was on aggressive action against Assad.

https://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n01/seymour-m-hersh/military-to-military

Dempsey and Michael Flynn (while he was head of the DIA) sabotaging the CIA and State department policy on overthrowing Assad the Idiot (he put up the price of basic necessities while the Arab spring was going on) was the origin of Russia gate, the CIA hated Flynn.

Johnny Rottenborough , says: Website September 4, 2018 at 11:05 pm GMT
@Sean

Sean -- I hope you are right about Israel. I have seen it argued, though, that Jews would welcome a nuclear conflagration because, as God's chosen, they would be the only ones certain to be left standing when the dust had settled. It would be the realization of the Judaic belief that Heaven and Earth were created solely for the Jews; see Shahak and Mezvinsky's Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel , page 60.

Per/Norway , says: September 4, 2018 at 11:06 pm GMT
@Sean

of course they are, now go back to bed grandpa. you should not let your self get so agitated either, your heart is weak. it is a long time ago now that "you" beat the nazis and taught those pesky commies a lesson.

Andrei Martyanov , says: Website September 4, 2018 at 11:18 pm GMT
@War for Blair Mountain

Noam Chomsky makes a compelling case that the US actually won the Vietnam War

Noam Chomsky could be many things, military historian and scholar of a warfare he surely is not. I believe Carl Von Clausewitz makes much more compelling case about the war than Chomsky ever did or will.

The US strategy is to make Russia bleed internally with aggressive and violent Military occupations directly as in Syria and by proxy in the Ukraine ..Could this not lead to a coup in Russia?

The US "strategy" on Russia is written by dated "products" of the US "humanities" field, by amateurs and by ignoramuses – that is why US "strategy" on Russia is easily identifiable as one huge tantrum and is exhibit A of how not TO conduct military and foreign policies. In fact, I expect at some point of time many a Ph.D theses written on that–a fascinating topic of a country ran by people with maturity level of teenagers. As per coup–wanna see one? Open any US MSM newspaper or watch any MSM news.

War for Blair Mountain , says: September 4, 2018 at 11:55 pm GMT

Andrie

Your last paragraph .and I thought: Kenneth Adleman Jean Kirkpatrick ..Condelezza Rice(and this one is too stupid to know she is stupid ), Susan Rice( very inflated opinion of herself and a dunce ) now this is a real confederacy of dunces

tyrone , says: September 5, 2018 at 12:25 am GMT
@AnonFromTN

Putin will go down as one of the great men of the 21st century if anyone is still keeping tally then.

joun , says: September 5, 2018 at 1:44 am GMT

A very interesting response.

I fear you're underestimating the power of messianic delusions. The country with leaders speaking of the End of History, the Moral Arc of History, etc., is not a country with a generalized ability to accept equal status among competing powers.

They will burn the world if they can't have it.

Additionally, I interact (drink) with policy types in DC and elsewhere and to them the suggestion that USG would not be able to ruin Russia, or China, and not suffer a catastrophe at home, is laughable. They will actually laugh. While it may be the case that there are serious people who seriously understand the situation, the default assumption among Regime players is that USG is on top, and this will continue for ever .

seeing-thru , says: September 5, 2018 at 2:20 am GMT

Much reasoned and passionate debate this: should Russia do or not do? Not possessing military background at the level of many luminaries here, all I can do is lay out an analogy built around game theory and poker.

You (Russia) are playing poker with a guy (Uncle Sam) known to hide cards up his sleeves. You do not call for a show of hands because you fear the loser and his servants will rather blow up the gaming room than lose. And the blowing up the room is not a certainty, only a probability not subject to quantification.

So the initiative rests with the other guy – and he keeps doubling the stakes every move. Now what to do you do? Every time the stakes are doubled the probability of the loser blowing up the gaming room increases should he be called out. Should you have called for a show of hands when the stakes were lower? Or should you let the game go on and on, thereby avoiding a big blow up?

The other probem is that not only is the other guy crooked, he is also slightly crazy and blind. Has he really seen his own hand of cards correctly? You don't know for sure. It does look like safety might lie in letting the game go on at the other guy's initiative.

What if it drags on endlessly? Who has the bigger pile of chips? Who will go bust first? What if piles of chips are ignored as a constraint on both sides? Well, then how will the game end? All games must have an end point.
I have no answers.

AnonFromTN , says: September 5, 2018 at 2:27 am GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

Having grown up in Donbass, I would like to share your hope.

However, there are several reasons for Russia's reluctance to let Donbass join. One is purely economic: Donbass is a lot more populous than Crimea, so bringing the living standards there from Ukrainian to Russian level would cost lots of money. Russia is hardly in a position to take on an additional huge burden right now.

The other is geopolitical: I strongly suspect that Putin wants to use Donbass as a lever to push Ukraine to a sensible position of neutrality internationally and federation internally. If so, good luck to him: that would make Ukraine viable.

AnonFromTN , says: September 5, 2018 at 2:35 am GMT
@Sean

If WWIII starts in earnest, having someone left intact would be the least of Russia's (or anyone else's) worries.

I don't know about goats, but naturally radiation-resistant rodents and insects would have been grateful to neocons, if they knew who to thank for gifting them the whole Earth as a kingdom.

Ilyana_Rozumova , says: September 5, 2018 at 4:34 am GMT

If you want your soul to soar above the clouds, read what is the true jewel of Russian literature, works by Saltikov-Shchedrin.

Ron Unz , says: September 5, 2018 at 4:57 am GMT
@joun

I fear you're underestimating the power of messianic delusions. The country with leaders speaking of the End of History, the Moral Arc of History, etc., is not a country with a generalized ability to accept equal status among competing powers.

They will burn the world if they can't have it.

Yes, it's definitely a tricky situation living in a large country run by criminals and madmen.

If not for nuclear weapons, things would be much simpler, and once they eventually got a bloody military nose, there might be a popular uprising, probably leading to the wholesale massacre of all our ruling political, financial, and intellectual elites. This would definitely serve them right and also provide excellent business to Chinese guillotine-manufacturers. But with nukes in the hands of madmen, a positive outcome is much more doubtful, so I guess there's not all that much we can do except sit around and worry.

[Sep 03, 2018] Al Jazeera documentary on the USA Israeli lobby

Sep 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Debsisdead , Sep 3, 2018 8:42:00 PM | link

Further to the point I made upthread is an english language article on Le Monde Diplomatique which considers how and why an Al Jazeera documentary which featured israelis and their stooges around Capitol Hill openly discussing their campaigns of dirty tricks and their concern that young amerikans were no longer buying their tosh.
The documentary was an early victim of the Saudi/UAE attack on Qatar (the home of AJ) that left al Jazeera's staff extremely upset and the leaks have been continuous.
The article goes on to discuss current methods of the israeli Ministry of Strategic Affairs, methods to be used on websites which square with much of the nonsense we have been subjected to. I'm not going to waste space by pasting any of it here, don't be put off by the intro, this goes way past rewording Mearsheimer or any of the already familiar stuff about aipac and the deceivers. I reckon we all need to read it in its entirety before hunting out the four part doco which will inevitably surface on the web in the not-too distant future, especially since the cold shouldering of Qatar has re-commenced.

Daniel , Sep 3, 2018 9:50:03 PM | link

The censored al Jazeera documentary on the USAmerican Israeli lobby may well be Qatari propaganda. Some may have noticed that I am quite critical of al Jazeera Arabic (which heavily campaigned for Muslims from around the world to go to Syria and fight holy Jihad against the hated secular government of the infidels). But propaganda is not necessarily false. To propagate is to nurture and help to grow.

At any rate, I haven't seen anyone mention that al Jazeera made another documentary on the Israel Lobby, but in Britain. It was released and may be viewed here:

https://www.aljazeera.com/investigations/thelobby/

[Sep 03, 2018] Israel's Fifth Column by Philip Giraldi

Would it be prudent to view Israel as yet another US state, albeit without formal association with the union ?
I doubt that Israeli influence is a one way street. In most areas the USA neoliberal elite interests and Israeli interests coincide or strongly corrlate. For example in no way the USA invade Iraq to serve exclusively Israeli interests. They were interested in control of oil rich state (the scenario later repeated in Libya) and Israeli interests played important, but secondary role in the invasion.
Notable quotes:
"... American policy towards the Middle East is largely being managed by a small circle of Orthodox Jews working for presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner. One of them, David Friedman, is currently U.S. Ambassador to Israel. ..."
"... Friedman, a bankruptcy lawyer who has no diplomatic or foreign policy credentials, is a Zionist Jew who is also a supporter of the illegal settlements on the West Bank and a harsh critic of other Jews who in any way disagree with the Israeli government. He has contributed money to settlement construction, which would be illegal if OTFI were doing its job, and has consistently defended the settlers while condemning the Palestinians in speeches in Israel. ..."
"... How he represents the United States and its citizens who are not dual nationals must be considered a mystery. ..."
"... Friedman's top adviser is Rabbi Aryeh Lightstone, who is described by the Embassy as an expert in "Jewish education and pro-Israel advocacy." Once upon a time, in an apparently more enlightened mood, Lightstone described Donald Trump as posing "an existential danger both to the Republican Party and to the U.S." and even accused him of pandering to Jewish audiences. ..."
Sep 03, 2018 | www.unz.com

Referring to Israel during an interview in August 1983, U.S. Navy Admiral and former head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Thomas Moorer said "I've never seen a President -- I don't care who he is -- stand up to them. It just boggles the mind. They always get what they want. The Israelis know what is going on all the time. I got to the point where I wasn't writing anything down. If the American people understood what a grip these people have got on our government, they would rise up in arms. Our citizens certainly don't have any idea what goes on."

Moorer was speaking generally but he had something specific in mind, namely the June 8, 1967, Israeli attack on the American intelligence ship, U.S.S. Liberty, which killed 34 American crewmen and wounded 173 more. The ship was operating in international waters and was displaying a huge stars and stripes but Israeli warplanes, which had identified the vessel as American, even strafed the life rafts to kill those who were fleeing the sinking ship. It was the bloodiest attack on a U.S. Naval vessel ever outside of wartime and the crew deservedly received the most medals every awarded to a single ship based on one action. Yes, it is one hell of a story of courage under fire, but don't hold your breath waiting for Hollywood to make a movie out of it.

President Lyndon B. Johnson, may he burn in hell, had ordered the recall of U.S. carrier planes sent to aid the stricken vessel, saying that he would prefer the ship go to the bottom rather than embarrass his good friend Israel. Then came the cover-up from inside the U.S. government. A hastily convened and summarily executed board of inquiry headed by Admiral John McCain, father of the senator, deliberately interviewed only a handful of crewmen before determining that it was all an accident. The sailors who had survived the attack as well as crewmen from Navy ships that arrived eventually to provide assistance were held incommunicado in Malta before being threatened and sworn to secrecy. Since that time, repeated attempts to convene another genuine inquiry have been rebuffed by congress, the White House and the Pentagon. Recently deceased Senator John McCain was particularly active in rejecting overtures from the Liberty survivors.

The Liberty story demonstrates how Israel's ability to make the United States government act against its own interests has been around for a long time. Grant Smith of IRMEP, cites how Israeli spying carried out by AIPAC in Washington back in the mid-1980s resulted in a lopsided trade agreement that currently benefits Israel by more than $10 billion per year on the top of direct grants from the U.S. Treasury and billions in tax exempt "charitable" donations by American Jews.

If Admiral Moorer were still alive, I would have to tell him that the situation vis-à-vis Israeli power is much worse now than it was in 1983. He would be very interested in reading a remarkable bit of research recently completed by Smith demonstrating exactly how Israel and its friends work from inside the system to corrupt our political process and make the American government work in support of Jewish state interests. He describes in some detail how the Israel Lobby has been able to manipulate the law enforcement community to protect and promote Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's agenda.

A key component in the Israeli penetration of the U. S. government has been President George W. Bush's 2004 signing off on the creation of the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence (OTFI) within the Department of the Treasury. The group's website proclaims that it is responsible for "safeguarding the financial system against illicit use and combating rogue nations, terrorist facilitators, weapons of mass destruction (WMD) proliferators, money launderers, drug kingpins, and other national security threats," but it has from its founding been really all about safeguarding Israel's perceived interests. Grant Smith notes however, how "the secretive office has a special blind spot for major terrorism generators, such as tax-exempt money laundering from the United States into illegal Israeli settlements and proliferation financing and weapons technology smuggling into Israel's clandestine nuclear weapons complex."

The first head of the office was Undersecretary of Treasury Stuart Levey, who operated secretly within the Treasury itself while also coordinating regularly both with the Israeli government as well as with pro-Israel organizations like AIPAC, WINEP and the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD). Levey also traveled regularly to Israel on the taxpayer's dime, as did his three successors in office.

Levey left OTFI in 2011 and was replaced by David Cohen. It was reported then and subsequently that counterterrorism position at OTFI were all filled by individuals who were both Jewish and Zionist. Cohen continued the Levey tradition of resisting any transparency regarding what the office was up to. Smith reports how, on September 12, 2012, he refused to answer reporter questions "about Israel's possession of nuclear weapons, and whether sanctioning Iran, a signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, over its internationally-inspected civilian nuclear program was an example of endemic double standards at OTFI."

Cohen was in turn succeeded in 2015 by Adam Szubin who was then replaced in 2017 by Sigal Pearl Mandelker, a former and possibly current Israeli citizen . All of the heads of OTFI have therefore been Jewish and Zionist. All work closely with the Israeli government, all travel to Israel frequently on "official business" and they all are in close liaison with the Jewish groups most often described as part of the Israel Lobby. And the result has been that many of the victims of OTFI have been generally enemies of Israel, as defined by Israel and America's Jewish lobbyists. OTFI's Specially Designated Nationals And Blocked Persons List ( SDN ), which includes sanctions and enforcement options , features many Middle Eastern Muslim and Christian names and companies but nothing in any way comparable relating to Israel and Israelis, many of whom are well known to law enforcement otherwise as weapons traffickers and money launderers . And once placed on the SDN there is no transparent way to be removed, even if the entry was clearly in error.

Here in the United States, action by OTFI has meant that Islamic charities have been shut down and individuals exercising their right to free speech through criticism of the Jewish state have been imprisoned. If the Israel Anti-Boycott Act succeeds in making its way through congress the OTFI model will presumably become the law of the land when it comes to curtailing free speech whenever Israel is involved.

The OTFI story is outrageous, but it is far from unique. There is a history of American Jews closely attached to Israel being promoted by powerful and cash rich domestic lobbies to act on behalf of the Jewish state. To be sure, Jews who are Zionists are vastly overrepresented in all government agencies that have anything at all to do with the Middle East and one can reasonably argue that the Republican and Democratic Parties are in the pockets of Jewish billionaires named Sheldon Adelson and Haim Saban.

Neoconservatives, most of whom are Jewish, infiltrated the Pentagon under the Reagan Administration and they and their heirs in government and media (Doug Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, Scooter Libby, Richard Perle, Bill Kristol) were major players in the catastrophic war with Iraq, which, one of the architects of that war, Philip Zelikow, described in 2004 as being all about Israel. The same people are now in the forefront of urging war with Iran.

American policy towards the Middle East is largely being managed by a small circle of Orthodox Jews working for presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner. One of them, David Friedman, is currently U.S. Ambassador to Israel.

Friedman, a bankruptcy lawyer who has no diplomatic or foreign policy credentials, is a Zionist Jew who is also a supporter of the illegal settlements on the West Bank and a harsh critic of other Jews who in any way disagree with the Israeli government. He has contributed money to settlement construction, which would be illegal if OTFI were doing its job, and has consistently defended the settlers while condemning the Palestinians in speeches in Israel.

He endlessly and ignorantly repeats Israeli government talking points and has tried to change the wording of State Department communications, seeking to delete the word "occupied" when describing Israel's control of the West Bank. His humanity does not extend beyond his Jewishness, defending the Israeli shooting thousands of unarmed Gazan protesters and the bombing of schools, hospitals and cultural centers. How he represents the United States and its citizens who are not dual nationals must be considered a mystery.

Friedman's top adviser is Rabbi Aryeh Lightstone, who is described by the Embassy as an expert in "Jewish education and pro-Israel advocacy." Once upon a time, in an apparently more enlightened mood, Lightstone described Donald Trump as posing "an existential danger both to the Republican Party and to the U.S." and even accused him of pandering to Jewish audiences.

Apparently when opportunity knocked he changed his mind about his new boss. Pre-government in 2014, Lightstone founded and headed Silent City, a Jewish advocacy group supported by extreme right-wing money that opposed the Iran nuclear agreement and also worked to combat the nonviolent Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. He is reportedly still connected financially with anti BDS groups, which might be construed as a conflict of interest. As the Senior Adviser to Friedman he is paid in excess of $200,000 plus free housing, additional cash benefits to include a 25% cost of living allowance and a 10% hardship differential, medical insurance and eligibility for a pension.

So, what's in it all for Joe and Jill American Citizens? Not much. And for Israel? Anything, it wants, apparently. Sink a U.S. warship? Okay. Tap the U.S. Treasury? Sure, just wait a minute and we'll draft some legislation that will give you even more money. Create a treasury department agency run exclusively by Jews that operates secretly to punish critics of the Jewish state? No brainer. Meanwhile a bunch of dudes at the Pentagon are dreaming of new wars for Israel and the White House sends an ignorant ambassador and top aide overseas to represent the interests of the foreign government in the country where they are posted. Which just happens to be Israel. Will it ever end?

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

[Sep 03, 2018] Poison for the Goyim- More Hysteria and Hyperbole about Labour Anti-Semitism by Tobias Langdon

Notable quotes:
"... New Statesman ..."
"... The New Statesman ..."
"... Jewish Chronicle ..."
"... Jerusalem Post ..."
"... The Home We Build Together: Recreating Society ..."
"... The Jerusalem Post ..."
"... New Statesman ..."
"... New Statesman ..."
"... Guide for the Perplexed ..."
"... Guide for the Perplexed ..."
"... Jewish Chronicle ..."
"... Jewish Chronicle ..."
Sep 02, 2018 | www.unz.com
TOBIAS LANGDON SEPTEMBER 2, 2018 1,600 WORDS 3 COMMENTS REPLY RSS

Jonathan Sacks is given an award by the war-criminal Tony Blair

Jeremy Corbyn has a beard. So has Jonathan Sacks . But this shared philopogony hasn't brought the two men closer together. Sacks is the former Chief Rabbi of Britain and, to be fair, I think we be better off if more Jews were like him. He doesn't seem to hate Whites and the Christian religion in the way so many of his co-ethnics do.

Battle of the Beards

But that doesn't mean Sacks is a reasonable or objective man where his own race is concerned. He can be ethnocentric and apply double standards with the best of them, as he's just proved by his comments on his fellow beardie:

Jeremy Corbyn is "an anti-Semite" who has "given support to racists, terrorists and dealers of hate", the former chief rabbi Jonathan Sacks has said. In an exclusive interview with the New Statesman , the peer described Corbyn's recently reported 2013 remarks on "Zionists" as "the most offensive statement made by a senior British politician since Enoch Powell's 1968 'Rivers of Blood' speech".

Sacks, who was chief rabbi from 1991 until 2013, added: "It was divisive, hateful and like Powell's speech it undermines the existence of an entire group of British citizens by depicting them as essentially alien."

At a speech made at the Palestinian Return Centre in London in 2013, Corbyn said of a group of British "Zionists": "They clearly have two problems. One is they don't want to study history and, secondly, having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don't understand English irony either." ( Corbyn's "Zionist" remarks were "most offensive" since Enoch Powell, says ex-chief rabbi , The New Statesman , 28th August 2018)

Enoch Powell predicted that mass immigration would lead to race war. Jeremy Corbyn said that some Zionists don't get "English irony." Whether or not you agree with Powell, is it reasonable to compare the words of the two men? Are they "hateful" and "divisive" in a similar way? I'd say no, they're obviously not, and the vast majority of British Whites probably agree with me.

Sacks doesn't agree with me, and he has the Community with him, according to the Jewish Chronicle : "Reform Rabbi Jonathan Romain of Maidenhead Synagogue said that, while the Enoch Powell analogy may have shocked people, 'it accurately reflected what most British Jews feel.'"

The poisoning of Britain's politics

Well, if Rabbi Sacks and other Jews want anti-Semitism, I think they should look much closer to home. This is from the Jerusalem Post in 2007:

Sacks: Multiculturalism threatens democracy

Multiculturalism promotes segregation, stifles free speech and threatens liberal democracy, Britain's top Jewish official warned in extracts from [a recently published] book Jonathan Sacks, Britain's chief rabbi, defined multiculturalism as an attempt to affirm Britain's diverse communities and make ethnic and religious minorities more appreciated and respected. But in his book, The Home We Build Together: Recreating Society , he said the movement had run its course. "Multiculturalism has led not to integration but to segregation," Sacks wrote in his book, an extract of which was published in the Times of London.

"Liberal democracy is in danger," Sacks said, adding later: "The politics of freedom risks descending into the politics of fear." Sacks said Britain's politics had been poisoned by the rise of identity politics, as minorities and aggrieved groups jockeyed first for rights, then for special treatment. The process, he said, began with Jews, before being taken up by blacks, women and gays. He said the effect had been "inexorably divisive." "A culture of victimhood sets group against group, each claiming that its pain, injury, oppression, humiliation is greater than that of others," he said. In an interview with the Times , Sacks said he wanted his book to be "politically incorrect in the highest order." ( Sacks: Multiculturalism threatens democracy , The Jerusalem Post , 20th October 2007; emphasis added)

So Sacks claimed that "Britain's politics had been poisoned" by a self-serving, self-pitying, self-aggrandizing ideology that "began with Jews" and had been "inexorably divisive." His claim is absolutely classic anti-Semitism, peddling a stereotype of Jews as subversive, manipulative and divisive outsiders whose selfish agitation has done huge harm to a gentile society.

Sacks was right, of course: Jews do demand special treatment and did indeed invent the "identity politics" that has poisoned British politics (and American , Australian , French and Swedish politics too).

By saying all that, Sacks was being far more "anti-Semitic" than Jeremy Corbyn was, even by the harshest interpretation of those comments on Zionists. Furthermore, Sacks has proved that Corbyn was right. Zionists do lack irony. In 2007 Sacks, a staunch Zionist, claimed that the "poisoning" of British politics "began with Jews." In 2018 he's condemning Jeremy Corbyn for saying something much milder about Zionists.

"Absolutely nothing apartheid about this"

And in 2018 Sacks is also offering a ridiculous defence of a new law in his beloved land of Israel:

Asked by the New Statesman to comment on Israel's new nationality law, which states that the Jewish people have "an exclusive right to national self-determination" in the country and stripped the Arab language of its official status, Sacks said: "I'm not an expert on this. My brother is, I'm not, he's a lawyer in Jerusalem, he tells me that there's absolutely nothing apartheid about this, it's just correcting a lacuna. As far as I understand, it's a technical process that has none of the implications that have been levelled at it." ( Corbyn's "Zionist" remarks were "most offensive" since Enoch Powell, says ex-chief rabbi )

When Sacks said there was "absolutely nothing apartheid about this," he was protesting too much . He is clearly uncomfortable about the new law and struggling to defend it, which is why his usual fluency deserted him when he spoke to the New Statesman . One "levels" accusations, not implications. And the implications of the new law are perfectly clear, which is why Sacks was driven to waffle about "a technical process." Yes, the law is a technical process whereby Arabs are defined as second-class citizens and Jewish supremacism is openly proclaimed as the guiding principle of the Israeli state.

Of Monkeys and Men

I'm sure that one of Sacks' heroes, the great Jewish philosopher and Talmudic scholar Maimonides (c. 1135-1208), would have applauded the new law. This is what Maimonides wrote in his hugely influential Guide for the Perplexed (c. 1190), one of the most revered and respected texts in the three thousand years of Judaism:

The people who are abroad are all those that have no religion, neither one based on speculation nor one received by tradition. Such are the extreme Turks that wander about in the north, the Kushites [Blacks] who live in the south, and those in our country who are like these. I consider these as irrational beings, and not as human beings; they are below mankind, but above monkeys, since they have the form and shape of man, and a mental faculty above that of the monkey. ( Guide for the Perplexed , Book 3, chapter 51)

Now that is racism, ladies and gentlemen. And if you want proof that Maimonides' poisonous ideas are alive and well in the Jewish world today, look no further than Yitzchak Yosef, the Sephardic Chief Rabbi in Israel, who was condemned this very year for "calling black people 'monkeys'." Rabbi Yosef has visited the headlines before: in 2016 he "stated that non-Jews should not be allowed to live in Israel, except to serve the Jewish population." The Jewish Chronicle added that he "later reversed this position."

"Very, very good relations with the Jewish community"

Well, he might have said he no longer believed it, but that wouldn't be speaking the truth. Servitude for goyim, the superiority of Jews and the subhumanity of Blacks are all perfectly orthodox Jewish doctrines. Jews are not the philanthropic egalitarians that they pretend to be, and Jonathan Sacks was perfectly correct to describe them as poisoners of British politics. He himself has upended another vat of poison by joining in the hysteria and hyperbole about Jeremy Corbyn's mild comments on Zionists.

Let's compare Corbyn with the shabbos goy Tony Blair, who gave Sacks a "Lifetime Achievement Award" in February this year and hailed Sacks as "one of my heroes." According to the Jewish Chronicle , Blair "was conscious of the need to have very, very good relations" with "the Jewish community."

In other words, the tiny Jewish minority pulled Blair's strings. At the behest of his Jewish "fundraiser" Lord Levy , Blair lied Britain into a hugely expensive war on Iraq that killed vast numbers of innocent civilians , fomented sectarian strife in the Middle East and terrorism in Europe, and led directly to the rise of Islamic State. Jeremy Corbyn resolutely opposed the war and predicted its dire consequences. Blair is a liar, confidence-trickster and war-criminal who will one day, I hope, face the death-penalty for what he and his Jewish immigration minister Barbara Roche did to Britain. Jeremy Corbyn, by contrast, is a virtue-signalling Marxist idiot who opposes war and the military-industrial complex .

But Blair obeyed Jewish orders and Corbyn doesn't. That's why Blair is now worth more than Ł60 million and Corbyn is endlessly vilified in the British media. Few British Whites know the term " ethnocentrism ," but more and more of them can see the Jews practising it.

[Sep 03, 2018] Provocations Have A History Of Escalating Into War by Paul Craig Roberts

Sep 03, 2018 | www.unz.com

The Russian Government and President Putin are coming under pressure not from US sanctions, which are very good for Russia as they force Russia into independence, but from Russian patriots who are tiring of Putin's non-confrontational responses to Washington's never-ending insults and military provocations. Russian patriots don't want war, but they do want their country's honor defended, and they believe Putin is failing in this job. Some of them are saying that Putin himself is a West-worshipping Atlanticist Integrationist.

This disillusinonment with Putin, together with Putin's endorsement of raising the retirement age for pensions, a trap set for him by Russia's neoliberal economists, have hurt Putin's approval ratings at the precise time that he will again be tested by Washington in Syria.

In many columns I have defended Putin from the charge that he is not sufficiently Russian. Putin wants to avoid war, because he knows it would be nuclear, the consequences of which would be dire. He knows that the US and its militarily impotent NATO allies cannot possibly conduct conventional warfare against Russia or China, much less against both. Putin also undersrtands that the sanctions are damaging Washington's European vassals and could eventually force the European vassal states into independence that would constrain Washington's belligerence. Even with Russia's new super weapons, which probably give Putin the capability of destroying the entirety of the Western World with little or no damage to Russia, Putin sees no point in so much destruction, especially as the consequences are unknown. There could be nuclear winter or other results that would put the planet into decline as a life-sustaining entity.

So, as I have suggested in many columns Putin is acting intelligently. He is in the game for the long term while protecting the world from dangerous war.

Whereas I endorse Putin's strategy and admire his coolness as a person who never lets emotion lead him, there is nevertheless a problem. The people in the West with whom he is dealing are idiots who do not appreciate his statesmanship. Consequently, each time Putin turns the other cheek, so to speak, the insults and the provocations ratchet upward.

Consider Syria. The Syrian Army with the help of a tiny part of the Russian Air Force has cleared all areas of Syria but one of the American-instigated-financed-and-equiped forces sent by Washington to overthrow the Syrian government.

The remaining US proxy force is about to be eliminated. In order to save it, and to keep a Washington foothold that could permit a restart of the war, Washington has arranged yet another false flag "chemical attack" that the presstitute and obiedient Western media will blame on Assad. President Trump's National Security Adviser, a crazed, perhaps insane, Zionist Neoconservative, has told Russia that Washington will take a dim view of the Syrian/Russian use of chemical weapons against "Assad's own people."

The Russians are fully aware that any chemical attack will be a false flag attack orchestrated by Washington using the elements it sent to Syria to overthrow the government. Indeed, Russia's ambassador to the US explained it all yesterday to the US government.

Clearly, Putin hopes to avoid Washington's orchestrated attack by having his ambassador explain the orchestration to the American officials who are orchestrating it. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-30/russian-ambassador-gave-intel-us-officials-showing-planned-chemical-provocation
This strategy implies that Putin thinks US government officials are capable of shame and integrity. They most certainly are not. I spent 25 years with them. They don't even know what the words mean.

What if, instead, Putin had declared publicly for the entire world to hear that any forces, wherever located, responsible for an attack on Syria would be annihiliated? My view -- https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/08/29/a-book-for-our-time-a-time-that-perhaps-has-run-its-course/ - and that of Russian patriot Bogdasarov- https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/08/a-russian-response-to-a-new-us-attack-on-syria-should-include-sinking-the-carriers-not-just-shooting-at-their-missiles/ - is that such an ultimatum from the leader of the country capable of delivering it would cool the jets of Russophobic Washington. There would be no attack on Syria.

Bogdasarov and I might be wrong. The Russian forces deployed around Syria with their hypersonic missiles are more than a match for the US forces assembled to attack Syria. However, American hubris can certainly prevail over facts, in which case Putin would have to destroy the sources of the attack. By not committing in advance, Putin retains flexibility. Washington's attack, like its previous attack on Syria, might be a face-saver, not a real attack. Nevertheless, sooner or later Russia will have to deliver a firmer response to provocations.

I am an American. I am not a Russian, much less a Russian nationalist. I do not want US military personnel to be casualties of Washington's fatal desire for world hegemony, much less to be casualties of Washington serving Israel's interests in the Middle East. The reason I think Putin needs to do a better job of standing up to Washington is that I think, based on history, that appeasement encourages more provocations, and it comes to a point when you have to surrender or fight. It is much better to stop this process in its tracks before it reaches that dangerous point.

Andrei Martyanov, whose book I recently reviewed on my website, recently defended Putin, as The Saker and I have done in the past, from claims that Putin is too passive in the face of assaults. https://russia-insider.com/en/russia-playing-long-game-no-room-instant-gratification-strategies-super-patriots/ri24561 As I have made the same points, I can only applaud Martyanov and The Saker. Where we might differ is in recognizing that endlessly accepting insults and provocations encourages their increase until the only alternative is surrender or war.

So, the questions for Andrei Martyanov, The Saker, and for Putin and the Russian government is: How long does turning your other cheek work? Do you turn your other cheek so long as to allow your opponent to neutralize your advantage in a confrontation? Do you turn your other cheek so long that you lose the support of the patriotic population for your failure to defend the country's honor? Do you turn your other cheek so long that you are eventually forced into war or submission? Do you turn your other cheek so long that the result is nuclear war?

I think that Martyanov and The Saker agree that my question is a valid one. Both emphazise in their highly informative writings that the court historians misrepresent wars in the interest of victors. Let's give this a moment's thought. Both Napoleon and Hitler stood at their apogee, their success unmitigated by any military defeat. Then they marched into Russia and were utterly destroyed. Why did they do this? They did it because their success had given them massive arogance and belief in their "exceptionalism," the dangerous word that encapsulates Washington's belief in its hegemony.

The zionist neoconsevatives who rule in Washington are capable of the same mistake that Napoleon and Hitler made. They believe in "the end of history," that the Soviet collapse means history has chosen America as the model for the future. Their hubris actually exceeds that of Napoleon and Hitler.

When confronted with such deluded and ideological force, does turning the other cheek work or does it encourage more provocation?

This is the question before the Russian government.

Perhaps the Russian government will understand the meaning of the orchestrated eulogies for John McCain. It is not normal for a US senator to be eulogized in this way, especially one with such an undistinguished record. What is being eulogized is McCain's hatred of Russia and his record as a warmonger. What Washington is eulogizing is its own committment to war.

[Sep 03, 2018] Ukraine conflict- Blast kills top Donetsk rebel Zakharchenko - BBC News

Sep 03, 2018 | bbc.co.uk

Ukraine conflict: Blast kills top Donetsk rebel Zakharchenko

Related Topics
Alexander Zakharchenko Image copyright REUTERS
Image caption Alexander Zakharchenko in a 2017 photo

A leader of Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine, Alexander Zakharchenko, has been killed in an explosion at a cafe in Donetsk city.

"The head of the DNR [Donetsk People's Republic]... has died as the result of a terrorist attack," Zakharchenko's spokeswoman told AFP news agency.

Russia's foreign ministry said it suspected Ukraine of organising the latest killing.

The Ukrainian government has denied any involvement.

Some observers have attributed previous deaths of rebel leaders in Donetsk to infighting among the rebels, or moves by Moscow to eliminate inconvenient separatist leaders.

What are the two sides saying?

Rebel and Russian news reports say the separatists' "finance minister" Alexander Timofeyev was wounded in the blast at the Separ cafe that killed Zakharchenko.

Ukrainians suspected of being behind the blast were arrested nearby, a security source was quoted as saying.

Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said "there is every reason to believe that the Kiev regime is behind the murder".

She said the Kiev "party of war" was "violating its pledges about peace and has decided on a bloodbath".

However, recent reports suggested that Zakharchenko had fallen out of favour with Russia.

A spokeswoman for Ukraine's state security service, Yelena Gitlyanskaya, rejected Moscow's accusations.

She said the killing was a result of "internal fighting... between the terrorists and their Russian sponsors".

What is happening in eastern Ukraine?

Heavily armed rebels in Donetsk and Luhansk regions refuse to recognise the Ukrainian government in Kiev.

The rebels seized large swathes of territory there in an uprising in April 2014. Since then, thousands of people have died in fighting between the rebels and Ukrainian government forces.

Ukraine map - rebel-held territory

Moscow denies sending regular troops and heavy weapons to the separatists, but admits that Russian "volunteers" are helping the rebels.

The frontline between them and Ukrainian government troops has remained largely static for months, but skirmishes continue despite a fragile ceasefire deal.

There has been shooting on the frontline despite a "back-to-school truce" that was supposed to take effect on Wednesday. International monitors reported 70 ceasefire violations on that day alone.

Who was Alexander Zakharchenko?

He played a key role in the Russian-backed separatist military operation from its very beginning.

In early 2014, soon after Ukraine's pro-Russian government was toppled by the Maidan revolution, he took part in the seizure of the Donetsk regional administration building by people saying they were protesting against the new pro-Western authorities.

Later that year, he was chosen as the prime minister of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic by its parliament, the "Supreme Council".

He had been in the role ever since, assuming the title of president, and was among the signatories of the stalled Minsk peace agreement.

He was wounded twice in combat, and survived a car bomb blast in August 2014.

Who else has been assassinated in Donetsk?

[Sep 03, 2018] Ambassador Kurt Volker- US To Drastically Expand Military Assistance To Ukraine

Expensive weapon systems for export is Trump administration official policy, his Military Keyseanism stance.
Notable quotes:
"... The US is to render substantial military assistance to a country with an economy in the doldrums , reforms that have foundered , a democracy that is in question , and corruption that is widespread . ..."
Sep 03, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

... Kurt Volker , US Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations, said in an interview with the Guardian published on September 1 that "Washington is ready to expand arms supplies to Ukraine in order to build up the country's naval and air defense forces in the face of continuing Russian support for eastern separatists ." According to him, the Trump administration was "absolutely" prepared to go further in supplying lethal weaponry to Ukrainian forces than the anti-tank missiles it delivered in April .

" They need lethal assistance," he emphasized.

Mr. Volker explained that "[t]hey need to rebuild a navy and they have very limited air capability as well. I think we'll have to look at air defense."

The diplomat believes Ukraine needs unmanned aerial vehicles, counter-battery radar systems, and anti-sniper systems. The issue of lethal arms purchases has been discussed at the highest level.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 allocated $250m in military assistance to Ukraine, including lethal arms. The US has delivered Javelin anti-tank missile systems to Kiev but this time the ambassador talked about an incomparably larger deal. Former President Barack Obama had been unconvinced that granting Ukraine lethal defensive weapons would be the right decision, in view of the widespread corruption there. This policy has changed under President Trump, who - among other things - approved deliveries of anti-tank missiles to Kiev last December.

Ukraine has officially requested US air-defense systems. According to Valeriy Chaly, Ukraine's ambassador to the United States, the Ukrainian military wants to purchase at least three air-defense systems. The cost of the deal is expected to exceed $2 billion, or about $750 million apiece. The system in question was not specified, but it's generally believed to be the Patriot.

Volker's statement was made at a time of rising tensions in the Sea of Azov, which is legally shared by Ukraine and Russia. It is connected to the Black Sea through the Kerch Strait. The rhetoric has heated up and ships have been placed under arrest as this territorial dispute turns the area into a flashpoint. Russia has slammed the US for backing Ukraine's violations of international law in the area. According to a 2003 treaty, the Sea of Azov is a jointly controlled territory that both countries are allowed to use freely.

The US military already runs a maritime operations center located within Ukraine's Ochakov naval base. The facility is an operational-level warfare command-and-control organization that is designed to deliver flexible maritime support throughout the full range of military operations. Hundreds of US and Canadian military instructors are training Ukrainian personnel at the Yavorov firing range.

NATO has granted Ukraine the status of an aspirant country - a step that is openly provocative toward Russia. Macedonia, Georgia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina are also aspirant nations. Last year, Ukraine's parliament adopted a resolution recognizing full membership in NATO as a foreign policy goal. In 2008, NATO agreed that Ukraine along with Georgia should become a full-fledged member. In March, Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia announced the formation of an alliance to oppose Russia.

The US is to render substantial military assistance to a country with an economy in the doldrums, reforms that have foundered, a democracy that is in question, and corruption that is widespread. It will be no surprise if those weapons fall into the wrong hands and are used against the US military somewhere outside of Europe. lIt was the US State Department itself that issued a report this year slamming Ukraine's human-rights record. The UN human-rights commissioner tells the same story. So do human-rights monitors all over the world.

[Sep 02, 2018] Open letter to President Trump concerning the consequences of 11 September 2001 by Thierry Meyssan

Highly recommended!
Aug 30, 2018 | www.voltairenet.org

Mister President,

The crimes of 11 September 2001 have never been judged in your country. I am writing to you as a French citizen, the first person to denounce the inconsistencies of the official version and to open the world to the debate and the search for the real perpetrators.

In a criminal court, as the jury, we have to determine whether the suspect presented to us is guilty or not, and eventually, to decide what punishment he should receive. When we suffered the events of 9/11, the Bush Junior administration told us that the guilty party was Al-Qaďda, and the punishment they should receive was the overthrow of those who had helped them – the Afghan Taliban, then the Iraqi régime of Saddam Hussein.

However, there is a weight of evidence which attests to the impossibility of this thesis. If we were members of a jury, we would have to declare objectively that the Taliban and the régime of Saddam Hussein were innocent of this crime. Of course, this alone would not enable us to name the real culprits, and we would thus be frustrated. But we could not conceive of condemning parties innocent of such a crime simply because we have not known how, or not been able, to find the guilty parties.

We all understood that certain senior personalities were lying when the Secretary of State for Justice and Director of the FBI, Robert Mueller, revealed the names of the 19 presumed hijackers, because we already had in front of us the lists disclosed by the airline companies of all of the passengers embarked - lists on which none of the suspects were mentioned.

From there, we became suspicious of the " Continuity of Government ", the instance tasked with taking over from the elected authorities if they should be killed during a nuclear confrontation. We advanced the hypothesis that these attacks masked a coup d'état, in conformity with Edward Luttwak's method of maintaining the appearance of the Executive, but imposing a different policy.

In the days following 9/11, the Bush administration made several decisions:

- the creation of the Office of Homeland Security and the vote for a voluminous anti-terrorist Code which had been drawn up long beforehand, the USA Patriot Act. For affairs which the administration itself qualifies as " terrorist ", this text suspends the Bill of Rights which was the glory of your country. It unbalances your institutions. Two centuries later, it validates the triumph of the great landowners who wrote the Constitution, and the defeat of the heroes of the War of Independence who demanded that the Bill of Rights must be added.

- The Secretary for Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, created the Office of Force Transformation, under the command of Admiral Arthur Cebrowski, who immediately presented a programme, conceived a long time earlier, planning for the control of access to the natural resources of the countries of the geopolitical South. He demanded the destruction of State and social structures in the half of the world which was not yet globalised. Simultaneously, the Director of the CIA launched the " Worldwide Attack Matrix ", a package of secret operations in 85 countries where Rumsfeld and Cebrowski intended to destroy the State structures. Considering that only those countries whose economies were globalised would remain stable, and that the others would be destroyed, the men from 9/11 placed US armed forces in the service of transnational financial interests. They betrayed your country and transformed it into the armed wing of these predators.

For the last 17 years, we have witnessed what is being given to your compatriots by the government of the successors of those who drew up the Constitution and opposed at that time - without success – the Bill of Rights. These rich men have become the super-rich, while the middle class has been reduced by a fifth and poverty has increased.

We have also seen the implementation of the Rumsfeld-Cebrowski strategy – phoney " civil wars " have devastated almost all of the Greater Middle East. Entire cities have been wiped from the map, from Afghanistan to Libya, via Saudi Arabia and Turkey, who were not themselves at war.

In 2001, only two US citizens denounced the incoherence of the Bush version, two real estate promoters – the Democrat Jimmy Walter, who was forced into exile, and yourself, who entered into politics and was elected President.

In 2011, we saw the commander of AfriCom relieved of his mission and replaced by NATO for having refused to support Al-Qaďda in the liquidation of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. Then we saw NATO's LandCom organise Western support for jihadists in general and Al-Qaďda in particular in their attempt to overthrow the Syrian Arab Republic.

So the jihadists, who were considered as " freedom fighters " against the Soviets, then as " terrorists " after 9/11, once again became the allies of the deep state, which, in fact, they have always been.

So, with an immense upsurge of hope, we have watched your actions to suppress, one by one, all support for the jihadists. It is with the same hope that we see today that you are talking with your Russian counterpart in order to bring back life to the devastated Middle East. And it is with equal anxiety that we see Robert Mueller, now a special prosecutor, pursuing the destruction of your homeland by attacking your position.

Mister President, not only are you and your compatriots suffering from the diarchy which has sneaked into power in your country since the coup d'état of 11 September 2001, but the whole world is a victim.

Mister President, 9/11 is not ancient history. It is the triumph of transnational interests which are crushing not only your people, but all of humanity which aspires to freedom.

Thierry Meyssan brought to the world stage the debate on the real perpetrators of 11 September 2001. He has worked as a political analyst alongside Hugo Chavez, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Mouamar Kadhafi. He is today a political refugee in Syria.

Thierry Meyssan

See : Memoranda for the President on 9/11: Time for the Truth -- False Flag Deep State Truth! , by : Kevin Barrett; Scott Bennett; Christopher Bollyn; Fred Burks; Steve De'ak; A. K. Dewdney; Gordon Duff; Aero Engineer; Greg Felton; James Fetzer; Richard Gage; Tom-Scott Gordon; David Ray Griffin; Sander Hicks; T. Mark Hightower; Barbara Honegger; Eric Hufschmid; Ed Jewett; Nicholas Kollerstrom; John Lear; Susan Lindauer; Joe Olson; Peter Dale Scott; Robert David Steele; and indirectly, Victor Thorn and Judy Wood.

Thierry Meyssan Political consultant, President-founder of the Réseau Voltaire ( Voltaire Network ). Latest work in French – Sous nos Yeux. Du 11-Septembre ŕ Donald Trump (Right Before our Eyes. From 9/11 to Donald Trump).

[Sep 02, 2018] Bill Browder (of Magnitsky fame) broke all these rules while pillaging Russia.

Highly recommended!
Browder was able to breqak those rule only becuase he was supported by MI6, CIA or both. Pillaging of Russia was the plan.
Notable quotes:
"... @Alligator Ed ..."
Sep 02, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

CB on Sun, 09/02/2018 - 11:12pm

Putin demanded several more caveats

@Alligator Ed
in addition to staying out of politics:

1) You pay your taxes
2) You pay your employees
3) There will be no asset stripping

Bill Browder (of Magnitsky fame) broke all these rules while pillaging Russia. From 1995–2006 his company, Hermitage Capital Management, siphoned untold billions of dollars out of Russia into offshore accounts while paying no taxes and cheating workers of wages and pensions.

Putin put an end to US and UK backed shysters stealing Russia blind. Is it any wonder the western oligarchs hate him with such a passion?

[Sep 02, 2018] Open letter to President Trump concerning the consequences of 11 September 2001 by Thierry Meyssan

Highly recommended!
Aug 30, 2018 | www.voltairenet.org

Mister President,

The crimes of 11 September 2001 have never been judged in your country. I am writing to you as a French citizen, the first person to denounce the inconsistencies of the official version and to open the world to the debate and the search for the real perpetrators.

In a criminal court, as the jury, we have to determine whether the suspect presented to us is guilty or not, and eventually, to decide what punishment he should receive. When we suffered the events of 9/11, the Bush Junior administration told us that the guilty party was Al-Qaďda, and the punishment they should receive was the overthrow of those who had helped them – the Afghan Taliban, then the Iraqi régime of Saddam Hussein.

However, there is a weight of evidence which attests to the impossibility of this thesis. If we were members of a jury, we would have to declare objectively that the Taliban and the régime of Saddam Hussein were innocent of this crime. Of course, this alone would not enable us to name the real culprits, and we would thus be frustrated. But we could not conceive of condemning parties innocent of such a crime simply because we have not known how, or not been able, to find the guilty parties.

We all understood that certain senior personalities were lying when the Secretary of State for Justice and Director of the FBI, Robert Mueller, revealed the names of the 19 presumed hijackers, because we already had in front of us the lists disclosed by the airline companies of all of the passengers embarked - lists on which none of the suspects were mentioned.

From there, we became suspicious of the " Continuity of Government ", the instance tasked with taking over from the elected authorities if they should be killed during a nuclear confrontation. We advanced the hypothesis that these attacks masked a coup d'état, in conformity with Edward Luttwak's method of maintaining the appearance of the Executive, but imposing a different policy.

In the days following 9/11, the Bush administration made several decisions:

- the creation of the Office of Homeland Security and the vote for a voluminous anti-terrorist Code which had been drawn up long beforehand, the USA Patriot Act. For affairs which the administration itself qualifies as " terrorist ", this text suspends the Bill of Rights which was the glory of your country. It unbalances your institutions. Two centuries later, it validates the triumph of the great landowners who wrote the Constitution, and the defeat of the heroes of the War of Independence who demanded that the Bill of Rights must be added.

- The Secretary for Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, created the Office of Force Transformation, under the command of Admiral Arthur Cebrowski, who immediately presented a programme, conceived a long time earlier, planning for the control of access to the natural resources of the countries of the geopolitical South. He demanded the destruction of State and social structures in the half of the world which was not yet globalised. Simultaneously, the Director of the CIA launched the " Worldwide Attack Matrix ", a package of secret operations in 85 countries where Rumsfeld and Cebrowski intended to destroy the State structures. Considering that only those countries whose economies were globalised would remain stable, and that the others would be destroyed, the men from 9/11 placed US armed forces in the service of transnational financial interests. They betrayed your country and transformed it into the armed wing of these predators.

For the last 17 years, we have witnessed what is being given to your compatriots by the government of the successors of those who drew up the Constitution and opposed at that time - without success – the Bill of Rights. These rich men have become the super-rich, while the middle class has been reduced by a fifth and poverty has increased.

We have also seen the implementation of the Rumsfeld-Cebrowski strategy – phoney " civil wars " have devastated almost all of the Greater Middle East. Entire cities have been wiped from the map, from Afghanistan to Libya, via Saudi Arabia and Turkey, who were not themselves at war.

In 2001, only two US citizens denounced the incoherence of the Bush version, two real estate promoters – the Democrat Jimmy Walter, who was forced into exile, and yourself, who entered into politics and was elected President.

In 2011, we saw the commander of AfriCom relieved of his mission and replaced by NATO for having refused to support Al-Qaďda in the liquidation of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. Then we saw NATO's LandCom organise Western support for jihadists in general and Al-Qaďda in particular in their attempt to overthrow the Syrian Arab Republic.

So the jihadists, who were considered as " freedom fighters " against the Soviets, then as " terrorists " after 9/11, once again became the allies of the deep state, which, in fact, they have always been.

So, with an immense upsurge of hope, we have watched your actions to suppress, one by one, all support for the jihadists. It is with the same hope that we see today that you are talking with your Russian counterpart in order to bring back life to the devastated Middle East. And it is with equal anxiety that we see Robert Mueller, now a special prosecutor, pursuing the destruction of your homeland by attacking your position.

Mister President, not only are you and your compatriots suffering from the diarchy which has sneaked into power in your country since the coup d'état of 11 September 2001, but the whole world is a victim.

Mister President, 9/11 is not ancient history. It is the triumph of transnational interests which are crushing not only your people, but all of humanity which aspires to freedom.

Thierry Meyssan brought to the world stage the debate on the real perpetrators of 11 September 2001. He has worked as a political analyst alongside Hugo Chavez, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Mouamar Kadhafi. He is today a political refugee in Syria.

Thierry Meyssan

See : Memoranda for the President on 9/11: Time for the Truth -- False Flag Deep State Truth! , by : Kevin Barrett; Scott Bennett; Christopher Bollyn; Fred Burks; Steve De'ak; A. K. Dewdney; Gordon Duff; Aero Engineer; Greg Felton; James Fetzer; Richard Gage; Tom-Scott Gordon; David Ray Griffin; Sander Hicks; T. Mark Hightower; Barbara Honegger; Eric Hufschmid; Ed Jewett; Nicholas Kollerstrom; John Lear; Susan Lindauer; Joe Olson; Peter Dale Scott; Robert David Steele; and indirectly, Victor Thorn and Judy Wood.

Thierry Meyssan Political consultant, President-founder of the Réseau Voltaire ( Voltaire Network ). Latest work in French – Sous nos Yeux. Du 11-Septembre ŕ Donald Trump (Right Before our Eyes. From 9/11 to Donald Trump).

[Sep 02, 2018] Bill Browder (of Magnitsky fame) broke all these rules while pillaging Russia.

Highly recommended!
Browder was able to breqak those rule only becuase he was supported by MI6, CIA or both. Pillaging of Russia was the plan.
Notable quotes:
"... @Alligator Ed ..."
Sep 02, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

CB on Sun, 09/02/2018 - 11:12pm

Putin demanded several more caveats

@Alligator Ed
in addition to staying out of politics:

1) You pay your taxes
2) You pay your employees
3) There will be no asset stripping

Bill Browder (of Magnitsky fame) broke all these rules while pillaging Russia. From 1995–2006 his company, Hermitage Capital Management, siphoned untold billions of dollars out of Russia into offshore accounts while paying no taxes and cheating workers of wages and pensions.

Putin put an end to US and UK backed shysters stealing Russia blind. Is it any wonder the western oligarchs hate him with such a passion?

[Sep 02, 2018] The countries that are truly dependent on Russia are in ex-communist Eastern Europe. They still rely on a network of pipelines built by USSR, and would go into energy crisis if Russia suddenly ended supply.

Sep 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

Felix Keverich , says: September 1, 2018 at 10:48 pm GMT

@AquariusAnon

You seem ignorant about economic issues. For example, when it comes to natural gas market, European countries are not in the same boat. Britain and Spain import virtually no gas from Russia. These countries built lots LNG terminals and import from Qatar.

Germany, Italy and France have a well-diversified supply from multiple sources. The countries that are truly dependent on Russia are in ex-communist Eastern Europe. They still rely on a network of pipelines built by USSR, and would go into energy crisis if Russia suddenly ended supply.

There is no Chinese FDI in Belarus, and in Russia it accounts for 1% of the total FDI. Nobody is learning Chinese in Russia or Belarus. I don't know what you're smoking.

[Sep 02, 2018] >Declassified docs reveal how Pentagon aimed to nuke USSR and China into oblivion

Notable quotes:
"... "to destroy the USSR and China as viable societies." ..."
"... "as a viable society" ..."
"... "would no longer be a viable nation," ..."
"... "population loss as the primary yardstick for effectiveness in destroying the enemy society with only collateral attention to industrial damage." ..."
"... "might not be as important," ..."
"... "no-warning US strike" ..."
"... "an unprecedented range and mix of threats" ..."
"... "significant non-nuclear strategic attacks" ..."
"... "confrontational, ..."
"... "Cold-War mentality." ..."
Sep 02, 2018 | www.rt.com

Published time: 2 Sep, 2018 09:41 Get short URL Declassified docs reveal how Pentagon aimed to nuke USSR and China into oblivion US troops during nuclear tests in Nevada. April 1952 © Intercontinentale / AFP 3050 12 Plans for a nuclear war devised by the US Army in the 1960s considered decimating the Soviet Union and China by destroying their industrial potential and wiping out the bulk of their populations, newly declassified documents show.

A review of the US general nuclear war plan by the Joint Staff in 1964, which was recently published by George Washington University's National Security Archive project, shows how the Pentagon studied options "to destroy the USSR and China as viable societies."

The review, conducted two years after the Cuban Missile Crisis, devises the destruction of the Soviet Union "as a viable society" by annihilating 70 percent of its industrial floor space during pre-emptive and retaliatory nuclear strikes.

Read more FILE PHOTO: B-2 Spirit, also known as the Stealth Bomber, is an American heavy penetration strategic bomber © U.S. Air Force Despite US denial, nuclear posture review revolves around Russia

A similar goal is tweaked for China, given its more agrarian-based economy at the time. According to the plan, the US would wipe out 30 major Chinese cities, killing off 30 percent of the nation's urban population and halving its industrial capabilities. The successful execution of the large-scale nuclear assault would ensure that China "would no longer be a viable nation," the review reads.

The Joint Staff had proposed to use the "population loss as the primary yardstick for effectiveness in destroying the enemy society with only collateral attention to industrial damage." This "alarming" idea meant that, as long as urban workers and managers were killed, the actual damage to industrial targets "might not be as important," the George Washington University researchers said.

The 1964 plan doesn't specify the anticipated enemy casualty levels, but – as the researchers note – an earlier estimate from 1961 projected that a US attack would kill 71 percent of the residents in major Soviet urban centers and 53 percent of residents in Chinese ones. Likewise, the 1962 estimate predicted the death of 70 million Soviet citizens during a "no-warning US strike" on military and urban-industrial targets.

The Pentagon continues to rely heavily on nuclear deterrence, and – just like in the 1960s – the US nuclear strategy still regards Russian and Chinese military capabilities as main "challenges" faced by Washington. The latest Nuclear Posture Review, adopted in February, outlined "an unprecedented range and mix of threats" emanating from Beijing and Moscow. The document, which mentions Russia 127 times, cites the modernization of the Russian nuclear arsenal as "troubling" for the US.

The existing nuclear strategy also allows the US to conduct nuclear strikes not only in response to enemies' nuclear attacks, but also in response to "significant non-nuclear strategic attacks" on the US, its allies and partners.

The newest US Nuclear Posture Review was heavily criticized by Russia and China. Moscow denounced the strategy as "confrontational, " while Beijing described the Pentagon's approach as an example of "Cold-War mentality."

[Sep 02, 2018] Foreign currency private debt is worse in Russia than in the rest of East-Central Europe other than Hungary

Sep 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

Thorfinnsson , says: September 1, 2018 at 9:49 pm GMT

@Anatoly Karlin

Sure, but Russia is not Turkey/Ukraine/Argentina-tier. I am furthermore under the impression that it has better fundamentals than most of East-Central Europe.

Foreign currency debt is worse in Russia than in the rest of East-Central Europe other than Hungary. That said Russia's robust current account surplus means that a financial crisis is highly unlikely. Russia also has competent adults in charge of monetary policy and banking regulation.

Turkey is meanwhile run by a completely lunatic who believes that high interest rates cause inflation. Turkish secret police are now also imprisoning people for the "crime" of speaking ill of the Lira. Makes the Argies look good in comparison.

I suspect they are just afraid of independent people getting too much of the super wealth generated in those industries. These people are going to be structurally drawn towards loyalty to the West, and Russia's means of overseeing them are far more modest than China's. United Russia is no CPC.

Other policy tools to keep the rich disciplined are available. Capital controls, credit controls, punitive taxation, regulation, etc. Some of these policy tools might also be quite popular with Russian voters, especially in the wake of the pension reform.

A lot of corporate equity can also come to be owned by ordinary people themselves with an appropriately designed pension system. Good examples of this are Sweden, Chile, and (surprisingly) Malaysia. America's tax-deferred defined contribution pension programs are also a good model.

Privatization can even have a bit of a populist flair. The Thatcher government ran advertising campaigns promoting shares of crown corporations soon to be listed to ordinary retail investors.

They are of course highly inefficient and corrupt. Though that might be more feature than bug, as it gives the people around Putin direct access to financial firepower. This is the standard explanation, anyway. While I can understand that being the case for Rosneft, Gazprom – which is even less well run – essentially gives away money to connected subcontractors, as argued in the recent report by Alex Fak at Sberbank's investment banking division. But those subcontractors as far as I'm aware are not even an important mainstay of the regime – most are just talented grifters.

No doubt, but presumably the views of Russians themselves also play a role. Plenty of Sovoks around who think state ownership is glorious, and obviously the Wild '90s are not fondly remembered.

[Sep 02, 2018] Bombing it induced a humanitarian crisis in the coastal region where Gaddafi's power was concentrated, contributed to a wave of refugees, and let the cities which supported him know they were not impregnable, that their weaknesses were being exploited

Sep 02, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MARK CHAPMAN August 31, 2018 at 2:41 am

Bombing it induced a humanitarian crisis in the coastal region where Gaddafi's power was concentrated, contributed to a wave of refugees, and let the cities which supported him know they were not impregnable, that their weaknesses were being exploited. The stupid cover story, solemnly intoned by talking heads who believe their listeners are almost too stupid to breathe without prompting and assistance, was because cutting the civilian population off from water in order to force capitulation is a war crime.

[Sep 02, 2018] Is a 'Suez' Event Being Prepared for Syria by ALASTAIR CROOKE

Sep 01, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

So, the metamorphosis is done. President Trump has finally, fully, shed his 2016 Campaign 'skin' of loosely imagining a grand foreign policy bargain that could be the foundation for "WORLD PEACE, nothing less!" as Trump tweeted when imposing sanctions on Iran. We wrote, on 3 August, quoting Prof Russell-Mead, that Trump's '8 May metamorphosis' (the US exit from JCPOA), constituted a step-change of direction: one that reflected "[Trump's] instincts, telling him that most Americans are anything but eager, for a "post-American" world. Trump's supporters don't want long wars, "but neither are they amenable to a stoic acceptance of national decline".

It all began, very precisely, with Trump's '8 May metamorphosis' - which is to say, to the moment when the US president definitively took the Israeli 'line': exiting from the Iranian nuclear accord, deciding to sanction and to lay siege to Iran's economy, and when he endorsed the (old, never materialized) idea of a Sunni 'Arab NATO', led by Riyadh, that would confront Shi'a Iran.

In practical terms, Trump's Art of the Deal geo-strategy, as we now see, became thus transformed into the search for radical US leverage (through weaponising a strong dollar and tariffs) -- looking always to the means to force the capitulation of the counter-party. This cannot be rightly termed negotiation: It is rather, more as if the script has been lifted from The Godfather.

But, when Trump unreservedly took the Israeli (or, more properly the Netanyahu) 'line', he assumed to himself all 'the baggage' that comes with it, too. The 1996 Clean Break document, prepared by a study group led by Richard Perle for Binjamin Netanyahu, meshed the Israeli and US neocon camps into one. And they are still umbilically linked. 'Team Trump' now is filled with neocons who are unreserved Iran-haters. And Sheldon Adelson (a major Trump donor, a patron of Netanyahu, and the instigator for the US embassy move to Jerusalem), consequently has been able to implant his ally, John Bolton (a neocon), as Trump's chief foreign policy advisor.

The Art of the Deal has effectively been neocon-ised into a tool for enlarging American power – and there is nothing of earlier 'mutual advantage' to be heard of, or to be seen, these days.

And now, this week, the metamorphosis has been cemented. After the Helsinki summit between Trump and President Putin, there seemed to have opened a small window of opportunity – for co-operation between the two states - to return stability to Syria. Many hoped that from this small terrain of tentative Syria co-ordination, some lessening of tensions between the US and Russia, might have found fertile soil.

Trump said some positive things; the area around Dera'a, in south Syria, was smoothly cleared of insurgents, and was retaken by the Syrian army. Israel did not demur in having the Syrian army as their near neighbours. But then co-operation rather obviously stalled. It is not clear why, but perhaps this was the first sign of power fracturing apart in Washington. The Helsinki 'understandings' somehow were melting away (though military-to-military co-ordination continued).

Putin dispatched the head of the Russian Security Council to a meeting with Bolton in Geneva on 23 August, to explore whether there was still any possibility for joint co-operation; and, if so, was such activity politically 'viable'. But before even that bilateral meeting with a Russian envoy could be held, Bolton - speaking from Jerusalem (from what was billed as a 'roll-back Iran' brainstorming with PM Netanyahu) - warned that the United States would respond "very strongly" if forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad were to use chemical weapons in the offensive to retake Idlib province (expected to commence early September), claiming that the US had intelligence of the intent to use such weapons in Idlib.

The Russian Defense Ministry spokesman, however, said on August 25 "Militants of Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), [trained by a named British company], are preparing to stage a chemical attack in northern Syria that will be used as a pretext for a new missile strike by the U.S., the UK and France - on facilities of the Damascus government". Russian officials said they had full intelligence on this false flag operation.

What is clear is that since early August the US has been moving a task force (including the USS The Sullivans and USS Ross) into position that would be able to strike Syria, as well as positioning air assets into the US airbase in Qatar. French President Emmanuel Macron too has declared that France was also ready to launch new strikes against Syria, in case of a chemical weapons attack there.

The Turkish newspaper Hurriyet says that the US military is laying the groundwork to close the airspace over northern Syria. US military freighters are reported to have transported radar systems to the city of Kobanî, controlled by the Kurdish militia, and to the US military base in Al-Shaddadah in southern al-Hasakah. Hurriyet claims that the US plans to use these complexes to establish a no-fly zone over the territory between Manbij in Aleppo and Deir ez-Zor. (This claim however, is unconfirmed)

Evidently, Russia takes this US threat seriously (it has deployed 20 naval vessels into the E. Mediterranean, off Syria). And Iran evidently takes the threat seriously, too. The Iranian Defence Minister on Sunday made a rapid unscheduled visit to Damascus in order to agree a tri-partite (Russia, Syria Iran) response to any US attack on Syria.

Then, in the wake of Bolton's chemical weapons claims, and the pre-positioning of US guided-missile vessels close to Syria, Petrushev and Bolton met. The meeting was a disaster. Bolton insisted that Petrushev admit to Russian interference in the US elections. Petrushev refused. Trump said we have 'secret' evidence. Petrushev retorted if that were so, what was the purpose of demanding admission. Bolton said effectively: We sanction you anyway.

Well not surprisingly, the two were unable to agree on Iranian withdrawal from Syria (which Petrushev put on the table). Bolton not only said flatly 'no', but afterwards went public with the Russian initiative to talk possible Iran withdrawal – thus killing it, and killing the initiative as a gambit to leverage further diplomacy. Even the customary, bland, uninformative, final communiqué that is usual in such circumstances, could not be agreed.

The message seems clear: any Helsinki understandings on Syria are dead. And the US is prepared it seems (they have actually moved assets into position) to strike Syria. Why? What is going on?

One obvious element is, that until now, Trump's hand in all this is not visible. Now, power appears to have fractured in Washington with regard to Middle East policy. The neocons are in the lead. This is very significant, since the slender pillar on which Trump's rapport with President Putin had been built, was the prospect of US-Russian co-operation over Syria. And that hat seems, now, to be a dead letter.

Lawrence Wilkerson, now a professor, but formerly the Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell during the infamous Saddam Hussein's 'weapons of mass destruction' episode says it 'cold' :

"It has to do with the return of the Neoconservatives (Neocons) what is happening today, as Trump is preoccupied increasingly with the considerable, ever-growing challenges to him personally and to his presidency institutionally, is the re-entry into critical positions in the government of these people, the people who gave America the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Even those many of them who declared "Never Trump" -- as arch-Neocon Eliot Cohen summed it up -- are salivating at the prospect of carrying out their foreign and security policy - while Trump essentially boils in his own corrupt juices.

"A vanguard, of course, is already in our government to beckon, comfort, and re-establish others of their type. John Bolton as national security advisor to the president leads this pack though he's not, strictly speaking, a card-carrying Neocon

"Presently, their first and most identifiable target is the unfinished business -- which they largely commenced -- with Syria and Iran, Israel's two most serious potential threats. If the Neocons got their way -- and they are remarkably astute at getting their way -- it would mean a reignited war in Syria and a new war with Iran, as well as increased support for the greatest state sponsor of terrorism on earth, Saudi Arabia".

Bolton, Pompeo and the neocons have made it abundantly clear that they – at least – have not abandoned 'regime change' in Syria, as their objective - and they remain set on delivering somehow a strategic setback to Iran (Bolton has said that sanctions alone, on their own, and without Iran suffering some extra strategic blow, would be insufficient to alter Iranian 'malign behaviour').

Whether or not Mattis and Votel are fully on board with Bolton's "very strong" military reprisal on Syria threat (for alleged chemical weapons use) is not clear. (Mattis succeeded in mitigating the last missile strike by Trump on Syria, and to co-ordinating with Moscow a 'nil response' to Trump's Tomahawk salvo). Will it be the same this time if the US again makes an unsubstantiated (and later unproven) claim of chemical weapons use by the Syrian government?

Will Israel join in any attack – using the pre-text of its self-awarded 'right' to attack Iranian forces anywhere in Syria? Given the new strategic 'fact' of the Iranian Defence minister's 'surprise' Sunday visit to Damascus to sign a common resolve on countering any such attack on Syria. Will Netayahu 'bet' on the Russians not responding to hostile Israeli aircraft entering Syrian airspace?

Who will blink first? Netanyahu? Or will Trump surface from his domestic tribulations sufficiently, to take notice and to say 'no' ?

Whatever happens, Presidents Putin and Xi can 'read the runes' of this affair – which is to say that President Trump's highest officials remain committed, openly, or through 'false flags', to defend the American 'global order'. These officials share a disdain for the Obama administration's retrenchment and retreat. They want to arrest, and even truncate the rise of America's rivals, whilst restoring to their former position, those former pillars to U.S. world power: i.e. America's military, financial, technological and energy, dominance.

Russia is trying to defuse the critical situation by sharing their intelligence with Washington that Tahrir al-Sham (formerly known as al-Nusra), was plotting a chemical attack that would then be misrepresented as another 'atrocity' committed by the 'Syrian regime'. Eight canisters of chlorine have been delivered to a village near Jisr al-Shughur city, and a specially trained group of militants, prepped by a British security company, have also arrived in the area, to imitate a rescue operation to save the civilian 'victims'. Militants plan to use child hostages in the staged incident, Russian officials say .

But will Washington listen? From the moment that the Syrian or the Iranian 'regime' is subjected to a judgement of moral delinquency (irrespective of evidence) – in the context of America's claim to its own Manifest (moral) Destiny – these 'regimes' become transformed from being a temporary, relative adversaries, into an absolute enemy. For, when one is upholding humanity's 'destiny' and seeking "WORLD PEACE, nothing less!", how can one wage war - unless it is in the name of a self-evident good. What is afoot is not attacking an adversary, but punishing and killing the guilty.

Faced with the radical moral devaluation of the 'Other' across western media; and - on the other hand - with the virtue signaling of western good consciousness, can Russia's rational presentations hope to carry weight? The only fact that might just weigh in the balance is the threat that Russia will use its missile arsenal assembling in the East Mediterranean. But what then?

[Sep 02, 2018] A few are beginning to wake up to the reality that snatching Ukraine away from Russia was never about prosperity and security for its people, and all about destabilizing Russia by MARK CHAPMAN

Notable quotes:
"... Washington – does not give a fuck about the economic well-being of Ukrainians, does not have even the brotherly connection of being of the same ethnic group, and for so long as Ukraine is willing to suffer being poor in silence, for that long it will not be a problem for its new 'partners'. ..."
Sep 02, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MARK CHAPMAN August 30, 2018 at 8:05 am

A few are beginning to wake up to the reality that snatching Ukraine away from Russia was never about prosperity and security for its people, and all about destabilizing what the west perceived as the quickening of an unwelcome regional influence, and curbing it. The EU – and its string-puller, Washington – does not give a fuck about the economic well-being of Ukrainians, does not have even the brotherly connection of being of the same ethnic group, and for so long as Ukraine is willing to suffer being poor in silence, for that long it will not be a problem for its new 'partners'.

Nationalist Nazi nutjobs are always proposing the border be sealed ever-tighter, if it were feasible to build a stainless-steel wall between Ukraine and Russia which reached to low earth orbit, they would vote for it. But the Great Wall Of Yatsenyuk never materialized, he's enjoying his Florida condo, and there is no practical way to limit commerce between the two countries while the people are increasingly motivated toward its continuing.

Ukraine is on the edge of collapse, and I don't think any force on earth can prevent its sliding over the edge. The west is not going to pony up the $170 Billion or so it would take to rescue it; if it did so, Porky and his minions would steal most of it for themselves, and Russia is unlikely to ever permit again the degree of fraternal closeness that existed between the two countries, since it is clear it would take only another western intervention to render it once again an untrustworthy spoiler. Once Nord Stream II is built, Ukraine will have lost its leverage and will be of no further significant value to the western purveyors of destabilization.

More such core realization is necessary to prevent Ukraine from officially blaming its collapse on anyone but itself. The government will try that course, naturally, and you don't need to be able to see very far into the future to know that it is Russia who will be blamed, despite plenty of empirical evidence that Russian investors and Ukrainian refugees working in Russia were all that kept it alive before the end. But in order that Ukrainians know in their heart of hearts that their government stepped on its own dick over and over, and that they passively failed to correct it, there needs to be more such public confession. I can show you plenty of analysis, in English, published before things went pear-shaped in the dying moments of 2013, which proposed that severing trade relationships with Russia as the nationalists insisted would cost Ukraine just about exactly what the Rada now says will happen, years too late. But they got one thing right – Ukraine and Russia cannot be brothers, not even friends, for so long as Ukraine harbours that nutty nationalist element.

Give western Ukraine to Poland, and encourage all the nationalists to go to the new paradise, and ensure that happens. They can bore the Poles with their raptures about Kievan Rus. Then maybe some relationship could be salvaged.

[Sep 02, 2018] Zakharchenko was a soldier and knew the risks, many others are ready to take his place

This war is tremendous waste of resources on both sides with no clear victory in sight. Killing of individual commanders does not change the strategic situation. It just invites retaliation.
Although the war did increase the coherence of the Ukrainian society (like any war does) the price is way too high.
Sep 02, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Aaron Hillel -> johngaltfla Fri, 08/31/2018 - 22:41 Permalink

No, they wont.

Zakharchenko was a soldier and knew the risks, many others are ready to take his place.

VV Putin could have occupied the whole so-called ukraine in the same manner he occupied Crimea, even better, he could've sent volunteers to shoot CIA and Mossad agents during the maidan events.Lots of volunteers.

He didnt.

Please consider that ukraine project is an infinite black hole sucking money and resources (agents, weapons, influence) from the Hegemon, at the same time bringing him absolutely nothing.

Especially the Debaltsevo cauldron was painful, as lots of modern artillery control gear was lost in pristine state and sent directly to Moscow.Without considering the humiliation of German and Canadian mercenaries being caught and released for indeterminate price.

In exchange the Hegemon learned that Russian artillery is still as dangerous as in '45, at Saur Mogila whole battalions of Ukrainian army disappeared literally in minutes when caught by Buratino fire.

Perhaps some remember the shellshocked Ukrainian infantry lieutenant, when interviewed by CNN freshly out of Ilovaisk, screaming into the mic that *two meters, you must dig two meters, or you die!* , well-intentioned American female reporter decidedly confused.

The show will go on until Hegemon decides that he had enough, and gives green light to the ukrainian army to coup the govt, exterminate the nazi battalions, and begin a very slow and painful ascension back into a semblance of normality first, then re-unification with the Motherland next.

As usual, the most vulnerable, old people, women, workers will suffer the most, and the guilty will go unpunished.

Ace006 -> Aaron Hillel Sat, 09/01/2018 - 02:57 Permalink

The Russians didn't "occupy" Crimea. They were already there. It's not like they needed to subdue a hostile local populace.

Aaron Hillel -> Ace006 Sat, 09/01/2018 - 08:22 Permalink

I meant *occupy* in military sense, as in denying a sector to the enemy.

[Sep 01, 2018] Jeremy Corbyn has acknowledged Labour has a "real problem" with antisemitism as he attempted to defuse the row engulfing his party by John Chuckman

Notable quotes:
"... "Jeremy Corbyn has acknowledged Labour has a "real problem" with antisemitism as he attempted to defuse the row engulfing his party." ..."
"... Response to a comment, "But Jeremy Corbyn has said that Jews, uniquely, can't be trusted to define anti-Semitism and that he knows best": ..."
"... Response to a comment: ..."
"... Response to a comment: ..."
"... Response to a comment about the need for education: ..."
"... "People Aren't Having Intelligent Conversations Anymore, They're Just Yelling at Each Other" ..."
"... Response some days later to someone who wrote a long and angry comment: ..."
Sep 01, 2018 | chuckmanwordsincomments.wordpress.com

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT

"Jeremy Corbyn has acknowledged Labour has a "real problem" with antisemitism as he attempted to defuse the row engulfing his party."

Well, yes, "real problems," but not what you might think from a quick glance at the headline.

The real problem is people using the accusation as a cheap attack, a way to libel a decent man and influence a party, and doing so regularly over a considerable period of time.

Where was all this "anti-Semitism" hiding in Tony Blair's day? Or even after? It just suddenly exploded into existence under Corbyn? Like a parody of Athena suddenly erupting from the head of Zeus? No reasonable person can believe that. It's a bizarre notion. No, what has changed since Blair's day is simply this.

A leader who helped kill about a million people and destroy a society, lying continuously about what he was doing, and received the Israel Peace Prize plus many handsome sinecures for his efforts, stopped being leader. Another man, a decent man who is fair-minded about the Middle East, as he is about many other matters, became leader. So, all stops were pulled by interested parties in doing something about it.

He's been attacked from the beginning. He had to win his leadership vote twice. The attacks, here or there, seem to fade a bit, then, wham!, they're back, this recent round perhaps the worst ever.

Well, you can have whatever kind of country you like, but this way of doing things is shabby and dishonest and can produce nothing good.

Much as some of Theresa May's incompetent efforts and unwarranted attacks, all damaging and utterly without evidence.

As a young man, I always thought of Britain as more honorable political society than the United States with its folks like Senator Joseph McCarthy or FBI Director J Edgar Hoover or blood-drenched liar, Lyndon Johnson.

But either I was naive or Britain has changed, and changed greatly for the worse

_________________________

Response to a comment, "But Jeremy Corbyn has said that Jews, uniquely, can't be trusted to define anti-Semitism and that he knows best":

That's just plain dishonest.

He said no such thing.

But your using that claim as an argument is symbolic of this whole shabby business.

Posted August 6, 2018 by JOHN CHUCKMAN in Uncategorized JOHN CHUCKMAN COMMENT: YOUNG PEOPLE FORGETTING TERRIBLE PAST EVENTS – RUSSIAN DECLINING POPULATION DURING COLLAPSE OF SOVIET UNION – ROLE OF ALCOHOL IN HISTORICAL EVENTS – WHY PUBLIC EDUCATION CAN'T DO MUCH ABOUT FORGETFULNESS OF THE TERRIBLE PAST

John Chuckman

COMMENTS POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN RUSSIAN INSIDER

Young people always forget about terrible times.

It's a natural human tendency.

In the US, it is amazing how few young Americans know anything about the Vietnam War, a war in which America conducted a holocaust killing 3 million Vietnamese, many in the most horrible fashion as with napalm.

It was also a time that nearly divided America like a new Civil War.

Polls find few young Americans know much about it.

___________________________

Response to a comment:

Please, don't forget, the USSR lost 27,000,000 in the Hitler invasion.

The loss of men caused a huge demographic deficit.

Also, alcoholism in the USSR, in the 1970s, was widespread and desperate. Many men died prematurely.

But the suffering from the collapse of the USSR did a lot of damage.

_________________________

Response to a comment:

I wasn't labeling Russians.

It is just a fact about the drinking, and it did shorten average lifespan.

Some of the conditions in the Soviet era could be pretty grim. You've heard the joke about "They pretend to pay us, and we pretend to work?"

Americans are indeed drug addicts. They consume about as many drugs as the rest of countries together.

There is a whole range of this activity from cocaine at wealthy parties to people in the streets and gutters consuming God-knows-what.

It's American demand that drives the awful drug cartels of Mexico, but Americans never give that a thought.

In a number of American cities recently, the murder rates among blacks have been dramatic, and it involves competitive gangs selling drugs.

The price of some drugs has dropped on the streets and there is over-supply. This has a lot to do with America's pointless invasion of Afghanistan.

Growing opium poppies had been virtually halted by the Taliban government. Then America invaded, and it has been "let her rip" with a flood of drugs.

This always happens in such regions with America. It happened too in the Vietnam War. Many believe CIA makes off-the-books cash by working with drugs in such places. It was said Air America, a then covert private airline serving CIA used to fly loads out. I don't doubt it at all.

By the way, in early America, heavy drinking was very common. Rum from the Caribbean and home-made whisky.

And it is said that Britain's industrial revolution was fueled by cheap gin for the workers.

_______________________________

Response to a comment about the need for education:

You get no argument from me about education.

Trouble is, as with so many of society's institutions, public education – especially in the United States – is highly political.

Many subjects and many ways of talking about those subjects are dangerous territory.

And what could be more stifling than the political correctness of local school boards, state education departments, and the teachers' unions?

It's amazing when anything gets done beyond the basics.

With all these forces at work, in many locations of the US, public education likely has little more latitude than in the good old USSR. Religion? Hands off. Political corruption? Hands off. The delirious effects of plutocracy? Hands off. The political corruption of money? Hands off. Why all the American wars? Hands off.

I don't see a lot of hope in general from education, although there always are exceptional teachers who manage somehow. I had a few.

Posted August 6, 2018 by JOHN CHUCKMAN in Uncategorized JOHN CHUCKMAN COMMENT: REFERENCE TO AMERICA'S CURRENT INABILITY TO HAVE INTELLIGENT POLITICAL DISCUSSION – IN FACT IT IS AN ILLUSION TO THINK THINGS WERE EVER MUCH DIFFERENT – HIGHLIGHTS OF AN EXTREMELY BRUTAL HISTORY – ADDED RESPONSE TO A LONG AND ANGRY COMMENT – SERIOUS MISUSE OF STATISTICS AND POINTS ON TRUMP

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY MICHAEL KREIGER IN RUSSIA INSIDER

"People Aren't Having Intelligent Conversations Anymore, They're Just Yelling at Each Other"

I agree with the tone of the article.

But the United States has never been a place where what the French call "politesse" featured. It is a myth for anyone to think so.

Going back to President Andrew Jackson, who horsewhipped an opponent and who regularly challenged men to duels, this plainly is the fact. Yet note that his image is honored today on the twenty-dollar bill.

You can never forget all those years of slavery – Jackson owned gangs of them (As did Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and others) – which entailed public auctions of slaves stripped of their clothes, including women who were sometimes bought by lonely rural farmers for "company."

Slavery existed for the best part of a century in the formal United States, but of course it went back long before that in order to build the colonial society that would become strong enough to seek independence.

The culture and undertone of much of America were heavily colored for the future by this pervasive and poisonous institution. It was definitely was not one that encouraged conversations among either camps, supporters and opponents. There were violent disagreements and brawls by politicians over much of the era.

The fact that slave owners quite typically slept with pistols and/or hunting knives under their pillows or within easy reach, such was the constant paranoid fear of slave rebellion, explains a great deal about America's violent gun culture down to this day and its relations between black and white citizens.

Slavery, de facto, continued for about a century after the Civil War (1861-5) in the South's sharecropper system combined with Jim Crow Laws. You know, even when Franklin Roosevelt was President in the 1930s, lynching in town squares was common. It was even a practice, in parts of the South, to hold family picnics on the grass at a lynching.

Then for much of the same period, we had America's treatment of Native people. Again, early on, the honored Andrew Jackson featured. He signed a bill called the Indian Removal Act which was to uproot tens of thousands of peaceful Natives belonging to about half a dozen tribes like the Cherokee in America's Southeast, people who in many cases practiced agriculture, and drive them with the American Cavalry to what was then the remote west, Oklahoma Territory, a land that had no relationship to the places like Florida whey had lived and farmed for a long time. It was quite a different climate and physical geography into which they were unceremoniously dumped.

This forcible removal, named the Trail of Tears (1830s), caused the deaths of several thousand by hunger, exhaustion, and exposure. This was a big number in those days when military battles losses were often counted in hundreds. Their farms and settlements and resources in the Southeast were greedily seized by white Americans.

Years later, as American population grew and pushed West, we had the Indian Wars, which involved the American Calvary's again driving Natives off their lands. Since these were not mainly settled farmers but migrating hunters on horseback, the tactics used against them were much harsher. Whole villages were burned down and all the people killed, just as though they were packs of wild animals being subdued. It was viewed about the same way as farmers shooting coyotes or wolves.

We have old photos of things like a Cavalry Trooper posed proudly with his boot on a man's dead body, resembling an image from the film, "Planet of Apes," and of long trench-like mass graves into which rows of bodies were flung, something resembling smaller, rural versions of Auschwitz.

As America continued to expand and drive westward, there was a constant sequence of such violent events, including the appalling and unwarranted Mexican War (1846-8) intended only to steal land from Mexico.

Still later in the 1890s, we had America's seizure of the Hawaiian Islands, a place which had its own royalty and an established society. The Hawaiians were overwhelmingly opposed to Washington's rule and sent a delegation to submit a petition signed by virtually everyone on the islands. No one in Washington would even speak to them. They were ignored and treated with contempt.

The ruthlessness and crudity weren't limited to stealing land and killing natives. Americans practiced the kind of wholesale theft of what today is called "intellectual property" from Europe. Many mechanisms and machines, as for farming, were purchased in Europe, shipped to America, and then copied. This was done with anything you care to mention, even books. Charles Dickens got quite bitter about the way a new book of his would appear shortly after publication in London as a separate edition in Boston. He never saw a penny in royalties. It is ironic that today America feels so self-righteous about the Chinese, for example, in this regard. All they are seeing is their own history repeated.

Well, that's just a part of the story, but a surprising number of Americans have no idea of the brutality involved in America's growth. There was mighty little civility ever. America was, and remains, in many respects a raw place. G B Shaw joked that it went from barbarism to decadence without ever passing through civilization. The fact that we still laugh at the joke tells us something of its sharp truth.

A lot of what people complain of today in political discussion reflects some effects of the Internet. All the ugly thoughts and words that once were reserved for the streets and alleys now are put on view for anyone to share, and they do share them. And believe me, having grown up in Chicago in the 1950s, there was plenty of ugly stuff around. There was just no way to broadcast it, except graffiti, and there was plenty of that.

Look at Trump. You simply could not find a ruder, more careless-mouthed man if you tried, and here he is, as President, constantly sending out thoughtless, libelous, and brutal words. Maybe the incivility of much of the Internet helped pave the way for acceptance of his record-setting public crudity.

Candidates for President were once limited by something so simple as having been divorced. Although those kinds of limits were a social pretense, representing a lot of hypocrisy and dishonesty, we have dropped the pretense. And we have dropped the pretense about the rudeness and crude expression that was always there in private.

In many ways, Trump represents a large portion of contemporary American society. The words and thoughts are not new, but the method of widespread transmission is, as is the ready willingness to use it. And note that he is not ignored, by the mainline press or anyone else. His stupidities if unreported would have far less effect, but his words are reported and commented upon and copied daily.

I think it probably is creating something of a downward spiral in the public tone of discussion as people become accustomed to nasty language, ugly thoughts, and prejudice openly broadcast on the Internet, even by the President of the country. Experience suggests that any practice which becomes much repeated, one way or another, tends to drive things even further along. New norms keep being set.

By that, I'm not advocating any form of censorship, something to which I'm utterly opposed, but I am making it clear that we are unavoidably into a new era of public discussion, although I think "discussion" a wholly inadequate word, carrying, as it does, the connotation of calm and rational exchange of ideas.

Indeed, the whole discussion of notions like "fake news," a Trump favorite with its pejorative and accusatory tone, is muddled and meaningless since all sides in the debate constantly engage in lying, distortion, and hypocrisy. That goes for The New York Times and Washington Post as much as it does for an outfit like Breitbart News.

Everyone wants to get their views "out there," with little authentic regard for facts. Outfits like The Times still maintain a façade of tone and claim of respectability, but behind the façade, they have an immensely long history of dishonesty and promoting ugly establishment interests, supporting wars and coups and aggression and imperialism in polite words. I actually do not find that more attractive than what we are getting with the Internet. They are both repulsive for anyone who wants to understand some truth.

And I stress that the nastiness and brutality have always been there as an integral part of American culture, only lacking a mechanism of direct communication to large numbers and perhaps being tamped down somewhat by a desire to seem a bit less crude in public. An awareness that others in the world did not engage in quite the same way and responded badly to it may have played a role. But such niceties are lost today.

Traditional religious values may have played a role too in tamping down the public tone, but not only is traditional religion declining rather quickly, a good deal of what remains in America has morphed into bizarre forms with preachers in some cases having parishioners bring their guns to church services or preaching in fervent support of the kind of absolutely brutal violence we see in Israel. Ditto for invoking God's blessings on "our troops" as they illegally invade yet another country and bomb more women and children.

Actually, the traditional press used to act as something of a filtering mechanism. A great deal of ugly stuff never made it out for anyone's attention, but it was in fact still there in private. That same impulse to maintain an appearance of civility brought many dishonesties to journalism.

Americans never even knew facts like Roosevelt being wheel chair-bound or Kennedy being anything but a family man or Nixon, around the time of his resignation, putting his wife into the hospital with a serious beating.

And likewise, they never knew the lies and most of the horror of Korea or Vietnam or Iraq. The absolutely massive levels of brutality, as the fact that one-fifth of the entire population of North Korea was exterminated by three years of American carpet bombing. Or that America left Vietnam having killed 3 million souls with more carpet bombing and napalm and early cluster bombs, also leaving the land packed with landmines and soaked with Agent Orange to keep killing and crippling for decades.

Even earlier, there was journalism's lies about things like "Remember the Maine" in the deliberately-engineered Spanish-American War, a false slogan which made its way into American grade school history books as fact.

The Internet puts much into plain view, but it also does so with a new confusion, a chaotic situation in which ugly fact and ugly myth and deliberate propaganda all come jumbled together. Only people who carefully read and assess and balance realize its potential for communicating truth, but such people always anywhere are a minority.

The chaotic nature of so much "discussion" in America is, just like the country's brutality and crudeness, simply a part of America's heritage.

__________________________

Response some days later to someone who wrote a long and angry comment:

There's an old saying you might profitably make note of.

It's usually a good idea to know the words to the music before you get up to sing.

Nothing worse than using a statistic you've picked up somewhere to attempt characterizing a situation you clearly have no understanding of.

Only a few percent of Americans were slaveholders?

My God, it is only a few percent of any population that are criminal, but they influence us all every day of our lives.

They make police forces necessary. They make courts necessary. And prison systems and guards and wardens. They make an entire criminal legal system necessary with criminal lawyers, judges, juries, parole boards, the acts of politicians legislating, etc. Their acts fill our newspapers and broadcasting, causing much fear and upset in many ordinary people. Their acts are the topic of endless private and public discussion.

And just so slavery, perhaps even more so. I've read a good deal of serious history of the United states. Slavery and all of its related issues colored and affected everything from the way the Constitution was written to import laws to the courts and political arguments. It affected the careers of politicians, it affected law enforcement, North and South, it affected the courts and their decisions. It affected attitudes of people. Its pervasive and noxious influence never went away, having absolutely no connection with the number of slaveholders.

A person of any understanding knows that this is the case for a great many parts of human affairs. Today, we have the economic issue of the extremely lopsided distribution of wealth and income and the "one-percent." And I suppose you think they do not affect almost everything in society because of their small number? Its politics and the candidates of its political parties? Its laws? Its wars and turmoil? Its taxation system? The government's treatment of those less fortunate?

As for Trump, do you really think the approach of some corporate business people should characterize government? The ways of Google or Apple or Amazon or John D. Rockefeller or Henry Ford? There are many reasons for thinking that is a terrible idea. Such people already have inordinate influence on government and its policies., and astute observers on both the Left and the Right agree.

Running a company and running a government are two very different things. Different skills. Different understanding. Different expectations. And working under different sets of rules.

Trump is an exceedingly ignorant and impatient man, and he did not even write "The Art of the Deal," of which he told us he is so proud. He paid a ghostwriter. And that ghostwriter has now spoken out several times about his private observations of Trump. He is an appalling man who listens to no one, is totally obsessed with his own opinions, and is rude and unpleasant. He, of course, only confirms the views of other outsiders who have worked near Trump and written about it.

And do you really think it is the job of a head of government to publicly insult various of its citizens? That is the behavior of an angry child, and a not very pleasant child. He is supposed to be president of all the people, not just some. Imagine Putin doing this in Russia? No, Putin only speaks to the kind of matters a President should speak to. He has what we used to call "class," a quality utterly missing in Trump. You, know, some of his cheap-bully remarks, here or there, might seem funny at first to some because we've never heard their like before, but they do in fact lasting and long-term damage to society.

Again, the number of lynchings, which you obviously regard as small and try to minimize? What an asinine statistic to quote. It addresses nothing but your own ego. I am well familiar with it, but it has nothing to do with what I said.

By the way, from some of your remarks you show that you did not even understand what I wrote. Hard to know why you would want to comment then, but one detects in your tone that same Trumpian quality, a person ready to open his mouth, and loudly, without ever pausing to think.

Posted August 2, 2018 by JOHN CHUCKMAN in Uncategorized

Tagged with A FACADE OF RESPECTABILITY , A PART OF AMERICAN HERITAGE , A RUDE TOUGHTLESS PRESIDENT TRUMP , A WHOLE ERA OF BRAWLS AND VIOLENT DISAGREEMENTS , AMERICA A RAW PLACE STILL , AMERICA AND NATIVE PEOPLE , AMERICA HAS DROPPED ITS PRETENSES , AMERICA'S DRIVE WESTWARD , AMERICAN HISTORY AND CULTURE , AMERICAN THEFT OF EUROPEAN INVENTIONS , BRUTAL RECORD OF PRESIDENT ANDREW JACKSON , BRUTALITY AND DISHONESTY AND HYPOCRISY IN AMERICA , CHAOTIC NATURE OF "DISCUSSION" IN AMERICA , CHARLES DICKENS AND AMERICAN LITERARY THEFT , CHEROKEE AND AMERICAN SOUTHEAST , DE FACTO SLAVERY AFTER CIVIL WAR , DISCUSSION IN AMERICA , DISHONESTIES OF JOURNALISM , FACTS AMERICANS NEVER KNEW , G B SHAW ON AMERICA PASSING FROM BARBARISM TO DECADENCE , GOD'S BLESSING ON OUR TROOPS INVADING ANOTHER PLACE AND KILLING WOMEN AND CHILDREN , HAWAIIAN ISLANDS , HIS STUPIDITIES ARE REPORTED DAILYINSTEAD OF BEING IGNORED , IN CHINA AMERICANS SEE SOME OF THEIR OWN HISTORY REPEATED , INCIVILITY OF MUCH OF THE INTERNET , INDIAN WARS AND CAVALRY , INTERNET PUTS MUCH INTO PLAIN VIEW , JOHN CHUCKMAN , KILLING INDIANS VIEWED AS SHOOTING COYOTES , KOREA AND VIETNAM HORRORS , METHOD OF WIDESPREAD TRANSMISSION OF UGLY WORDS , MEXICAN WAR , NEW NORMS KEEP BEING SET , NEW YORK TIMES AND BREITBART NEWS PARALLELS , OKLAHOMA TERRITORY , OPPOSED TO CENSORSHIP , POLITICAL DISCUSSION TODAY REFLECTS EFFECTS OFINTERNET , PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE OF RECORD CRUDITY , RELIGION IS DECLINING , REMEMBER THE MAINE , SHARECROPPERS AND JIM CROW LAWS , SMALL RURAL VERSIONS OF AUSCHWITZ , THE ROLE OF SLAVERY IN FORMING AMERICA , THE WEIRD IDEA OF "FAKE NEWS" , THEFT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY , TRAIL OF TEARS , TRUMP REPRESENTS A LARGE PORTION OF AMERICA

[Sep 01, 2018] ISRAEL LOBBY TO DESTROY A POLITICIAN START RESEMBLING STALINISM

Notable quotes:
"... "But he needs to move quickly and decisively now" ..."
"... This fixation over anti-Semitism, always without any effort to provide proof of anything, borders on the days of Stalin. ..."
"... If Stalin was looking for "wreckers of the Revolution," as he did every once in a while, the phrase being his code words for a new purge, and you happened to be one in the eyes of your local NKVD detachment – perhaps for as little cause as the their needing to achieve their quota of wreckers this week – you were in deadly trouble. ..."
"... Corbyn is hated in Israel because he is fair-minded on Israel and Palestine, and that these days is simply not allowed. Actually, true liberals and the Left are hated widely in Israel because they stand for traditional Western values of human and democratic rights. ..."
Sep 01, 2018 | chuckmanwordsincomments.wordpress.com

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY MATTHEW NORMAN IN THE INDEPENDENT

"But he needs to move quickly and decisively now"

Move on what?

Nothing inappropriate was said or done, but someone has to "move" on it?

There is no anti-Semitism in the words. None. People were called "Trump fanatics." The people happen to be Jewish, something they themselves continually draw attention to in their unwarranted attacks on Corbyn.

This fixation over anti-Semitism, always without any effort to provide proof of anything, borders on the days of Stalin.

If Stalin was looking for "wreckers of the Revolution," as he did every once in a while, the phrase being his code words for a new purge, and you happened to be one in the eyes of your local NKVD detachment – perhaps for as little cause as the their needing to achieve their quota of wreckers this week – you were in deadly trouble.

That truly is the level of so much of this name-calling reverse-prejudice filth against a decent man, Jeremy Corbyn.

I have never seen such ugliness, and I do understand the reason for it.

Corbyn is hated in Israel because he is fair-minded on Israel and Palestine, and that these days is simply not allowed. Actually, true liberals and the Left are hated widely in Israel because they stand for traditional Western values of human and democratic rights.

[Sep 01, 2018] Haley s failure to properly address sanctionable acts of Israel misbehavior wholly enable Trump, and co-pilot bolt-on, on their wayward war bus express, bound for extinction

Notable quotes:
"... The AKP over the years did manage to set up a quite decent universal healthcare insurance system – including the upgrading of public hospitals – as well as a pension system. ..."
"... Neocons are second guessing that the Trumpster is being tough via sanctions and issuing missile launches. They think that ultimately their plans will continue in some form or other. The rest of America, possibly the world, is waiting for the Trumpster to clean up the place and give honest US acumen a chance, end wars that go nowhere for no good reason and re-instate those financial safeguards which were repealed and led directly to present day problems. ..."
Sep 01, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Meet The Sanctioned; a multinational band starring multi-instrumentalists Vladimir Putin (Russia), Xi Jinping (China), Hassan Rouhani (Iran) and Recep Tayyip Erdogan (Turkey).

Beijing and Moscow offer an array of trade deals; Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has already offered trade in their own currencies. Erdogan for his part said Turkey is ready to begin using local currencies in trade with Russia, China, Iran and the EU.

After Turkey restructures its US dollar debts, China buys up the Turkish lira off foreign exchange markets – an easy play for the People's Bank of China (PBOC). Ankara is already planning to issue yuan-denominated bonds. China's ICBC already announced a $3.6 billion loan for energy/transport.

In sharp contrast to the Washington Consensus, Erdogan very well knows that Turkey cannot "rewrite the crisis management playbook for emerging markets" by surrendering to IMF austerity. An answer would be to increasingly rely on the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).

As EU companies leave sanctioned Iran, Chinese and Russian companies go into overdrive. As the US Congress slaps a nyet on Turkey buying F-35 fighter jets because Ankara is buying the Russian S-400 air-defense system, Boeing and Airbus in Iran are bound to lose market share to Russian jets such as the MS-21 or the IL-96-400M.

And as Iran-Turkey trade gets a boost, Turkish Stream – the Russia-Turkey strategic energy partnership – is far from being derailed.

Erdogan knows very well how Turkey is the quintessential East-meets-West strategic connector across Eurasia. And he knows what's he's really "guilty" of: buying the S-400s, ditching the "Assad must go" obsession, advancing Turkish Stream and insisting Turkey will continue to buy Iranian oil.

... ... ...

Fatih mirrors Erdogan's immense popularity all across Anatolia. Whatever his notorious, incandescent illiberal traits, Erdogan's development program is not only about more mosques and more malls. The AKP over the years did manage to set up a quite decent universal healthcare insurance system – including the upgrading of public hospitals – as well as a pension system.

Now it's time to deliver again – nationally and globally.

Calling all Eurasian young dudes

Meanwhile, Russia will keep developing a very sophisticated strategy across the Black Sea .

In no time, Putin has already reshaped the Black Sea – geopolitically and geoeconomically. The graphic symbol is the sumptuous Kerch Strait bridge to Crimea – an engineering tour de force inaugurated only three months ago.

Putin's multi-instrumental riffs are ubiquitous. Erdogan gets S-400s, nuclear power plants and Turkish Stream (which also benefits vast tracts of southern Europe). Rouhani and the Central Asians get a Caspian convention and the prospect of a succession of energy deals. Damascus and Tehran – with Ankara a little far behind – get to see the possible end of the tragic Syria war cycle.

As Erdogan progressively moves Turkey's reserves to yuan – and gold – benefits can accrue from more interaction with the BRI/EAEU/SCO galaxy in everything from electronics and nuclear technology to advanced weapons. And further connectivity may entail, for instance, Chinese goods transiting through Russian ports in Krasnodar and Crimea to Turkish ports in the Black Sea.

The Black Sea, for all practical purposes, is being configured as a Russo-Turk Mediterranean Sea – much as the Caspian is now configured as a Central Asian, non-NATO, Mediterranean Sea.

In parallel, The Sanctioned is also enjoying a guest performing appearance by the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim al-Thani, instrumental in the offer of a $15 billion loan to Ankara. And this after Qatar restored good relations with Iran, including energy collaboration on the shared South Pars/North Dome – the largest gas field on the planet.

It's crucial to consider that in the event the Qatar-Turkey Combined Joint Force Command may "disappear", for some reason, the path would be open for a nasty, joint Saudi/UAE invasion of Doha, with major consequences; the double confiscation of the Qatari sovereign wealth fund and North Dome – to the benefit of salvaging the sinking "Vision 2030" House of Saud.

... ... ...

Source: Asia Times

Peter Jennings • 10 days ago ,

The Trumpster is doing a very good job alienating his corrupt system from world markets. We should be thankful for that. If sanctions can be ignored this easily, they become counter-productive.

The world is moving on and the Trumpster knows that the US system will not be welcome in the B&R in its present form.

Neocons are second guessing that the Trumpster is being tough via sanctions and issuing missile launches. They think that ultimately their plans will continue in some form or other. The rest of America, possibly the world, is waiting for the Trumpster to clean up the place and give honest US acumen a chance, end wars that go nowhere for no good reason and re-instate those financial safeguards which were repealed and led directly to present day problems.

Those involved in the B&R project are going to require a different form of payment, use of a different clearing system and a different way of working. Dinosaurs need not apply.

If provisions for members also include extradition rights between borders for wanted criminals caught interrupting trade or attacking member states via fraud and political agitation, it could prove a tough time for US shyster business and their spook helpers. Might be best to clean up first.

dan kopfz • 10 days ago ,

Should Turkey, Qatar and Iran find common ground, then there's a real possibility for a middle-east trade union that would include Syria, Iraq, and others that would line up to join.

John C Carleton • 10 days ago ,

How about, the world makes this simpler.

The USA, which is not America or Americans, it is a foreign corporation, serves Israhell.

How about, America rents a U-haul transport jumbo jet, starts flying all USA personal, to Israhell, which they love, and out of America, which they hate.

All materials, monies and such to stay in America of course.

Once all the zionist ass wipes have moved from Washington DC, to Tel Aviv, they will be Russia's buddies, friends, and fellow collaborators , as both Putin and Russia, seems to just love the shit hole zionism has made of Palestine.

tom nogaro • 7 days ago ,

if the us, or any agency thereof, orchestrated or participated in any overthrow coup attempt upon any nation of nato, it would seem to me this fact alone would be some violation of at least the spirit, if not the letter, of the nato treaty agreement, which is that all members will jointly come to the aid and defense of any member nation attacked from within or without, in effort to topple or destroy it.

turkey has made a serious allegation that the us was in fact involved in such a coup against it.

this serious allegation has not, to my knowledge, in any respect been heard, litigated, dispelled, disproven, or even denied by the us in any formal proceedings, international body, or court of law of appropriate jurisdiction.

yet the us has simply taken upon itself the right to punish the innocent people of turkey, via imperial economic sanctions, possibly war, even world war, simply for its government making such allegation in the first instance, then subscribing to it, without any just hearing or legal resolution of same.

is this any way for a nation to conduct itself? where is niki haley, purported us ambassador to the united nations? has she taken up this matter at the united nations, or is she merely an ihop waitress posturing as ambassador of the us to the un?

ms. ihop is woefully derelict in her ambassadorial duties, a shameless national disgrace, and an international disgrace to the un and international law. what did this imbecile do at the un to smooth over this spat between these two former nato allies, to avoid sanctions or war? now we hear insane babble this lazy, irresponsible reprobate should be considered vice presidential timber. heaven forbid.

president genius trump must immediately require her immediate resignation, for dishonor of her office. if not, he in effect affirms her abandonment of her position, his duty to the people of the us and the world.

tom nogaro tom nogaro • 7 days ago ,

btw, what i wrote above about turkey and ihop haley goes for the sanctions trump has leveled against russia, syria, china, iran.

when did mime clown haley ever utter syllable one in credible proof at the un, to warrant sanctions: russia colluded to overthrow the us 2016 election, or poisoned british subjects (unlike israel which guns down its innocent, defenseless, unarmed children citizens); syria
chem-bombed its own people (not israel's terrorist proxies); china engaged in lawless international trade or economic behavior (unlike the imf); iran violated jcpoa, lawlessly aggressed in attack over international borders (unlike israel, which refuses to adhere to any nuclear non-proliferation treaty at all, maintains a policy of nuclear ambiguity, and conducts abjure air raid attacks in syria from disallowed lebanese skies)?

to my mind, haley's dereliction of duty and failure to properly address sanctionable acts of misbehavior wholly enable trump, and co-pilot bolt-on, on their wayward war bus express, bound for extinction. thus enabled, they embark, at first stop: to level sanctions without proven cause; progress to the next stop: unmitigated and unrelenting irritability; and, finally, the last stop:war, possibly world war to annihilate the planet.

never-war-unless-attacked job-candidate trump has thus morphed into his frankensteinian 180-opposite, ever-war president trump, without anyone's proof of actual wrongdoing, only imperial edicts by the tump-haley new pope pair of israel, tweedledee and tweedledum. america, wake up before it is too late: we are a nation of laws, not of men or women. laws, properly enforced, require proof soundly made, of guilt and culpability. sound and fair proof takes time to adduce; war does not, only a handy dandy button to push.

[Sep 01, 2018] THE PECULIAR CASE OF SENATOR LINDSAY GRAHAM by John Chuckman

Notable quotes:
"... "The 'Magnitsky Trio' (John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Ben Cardin) Pushes for War With Russia With New Sanctions ..."
"... "The proposed sanctions by the Graham bill are so insane that even the Treasury department thinks they are a bad idea.' ..."
"... Israel, assisted by its very powerful lobby in America, was the driving force in the set of Neocon Wars that have burned through the Middle East. ..."
"... And I strongly suspect, given the intensity of his all efforts for Israel, that he was caught once in a Mossad "honey trap" and given to understand that very compromising photos of him existed. ..."
"... His constituents back home – conservative Southern Baptists and the like – of course, are not aware of his sexual proclivities, so pictures would make a serious threat. ..."
"... This kind of thing would not at all new to Washington. FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, also a closet gay and indeed a cross-dresser according to one reliable biographer, is said to have been compromised the same way by the American Mafia, something which explains his long reluctance to act against Mafia interests, allowing them to flourish while he chased after largely non-existent communists across America. ..."
Sep 01, 2018 | chuckmanwordsincomments.wordpress.com

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE TO RUSSIA INSIDER

"The 'Magnitsky Trio' (John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Ben Cardin) Pushes for War With Russia With New Sanctions

"The proposed sanctions by the Graham bill are so insane that even the Treasury department thinks they are a bad idea.'

I think in many such analyses about American-Russian strained relations an important actor is left out, and that actor is America's strange Middle East quasi-colony, Israel.

Israel, assisted by its very powerful lobby in America, was the driving force in the set of Neocon Wars that have burned through the Middle East.

In order to have the kind of highly aggressive America represented by those wars, much in Israel's favor, effort has to be made to keep antagonisms high. And Russia is inevitably viewed as a barrier to an aggressive America, no matter how friendly Russian-Israeli relations are, and Putin does a very good job of trying to keep good relations.

But, still, while Netanyahu and his gang smile for the cameras after meetings, their deep-down drives are in conflict with Russia in some fundamental ways that cannot be made to disappear with handshakes or smiles. A highly aggressive America serves Israel in its own aggressive regional ambitions as well as in vague matters as "security," the term likely used by its lobby in America.

Russia has her own experience with these drives in the unhappy induced-coup in Ukraine, something in which that charming Neocon from the State Department, Barbara Nuland, famous for bragging that America spent $5 billion on its Ukraine operation and also for once shouting within earshot of others, "Fuck Europe!" played an important role.

The anti-Russian crowd in Washington – very much including the Neocons, who are part and parcel of the total multi-fronted Israel Lobby in Washington, many of the Neocons holding (or having held, as Nuland did) influential government posts – won something for their cause whichever way events in Ukraine went.

They gained either a large country, hostile to Russia right on its border, one with good American connections, to harass and worry Russia, or with the outcome we see, Ukraine having made a fool of itself in falling apart through incompetence and pig-headedness, they have gained the theme of Russian aggression. While Putin's moves were masterful and required, making the very best of a very bad situation, what has emerged still serves these nasty folks in stoking hatred of Russia, now accused of aggression, a charge strongly embraced in Washington and in American-influenced parts of Western Europe.

Lindsay Graham is about the most vocal and reactionary defender of Israel in the Congress. He might be matched by John McCain, but I'm not sure he doesn't in fact earn top honors in his service to another country. He quite literally leaps to his feet at any mention of Israel. So, when a guy like that strongly advocates greatly increased hostility towards Russia, it should tell us something.

And I strongly suspect, given the intensity of his all efforts for Israel, that he was caught once in a Mossad "honey trap" and given to understand that very compromising photos of him existed.

You see, Graham is known as a fairly flagrant gay in Washington.

His constituents back home – conservative Southern Baptists and the like – of course, are not aware of his sexual proclivities, so pictures would make a serious threat.

This kind of thing would not at all new to Washington. FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, also a closet gay and indeed a cross-dresser according to one reliable biographer, is said to have been compromised the same way by the American Mafia, something which explains his long reluctance to act against Mafia interests, allowing them to flourish while he chased after largely non-existent communists across America.

[Sep 01, 2018] Does anybody trust Washington DC, plus, their obsession with Russia?

It does not matter whether anybody trust the US MSM or not. The desired effect was achieved -- Trump was paralyzed, then forced into continuation of neocon policies, And that was all that necessary. So the color revolution against Trump was successful.
Sep 01, 2018 | russia-insider.com
AM Hants • 4 days ago ,

Does anybody trust Washington DC, plus, their obsession with Russia? Remember, the media hysteria over 'Russia Gate', plus, the 'Steele Dossier'? Now it is unravelling, that all involved appeared to make it up, as they went along. The next instalments.

Lanny Davis Admits Being Source For CNN Trump Tower "Bombshell" Fake News... https://www.zerohedge.com/n...

Must admit I do like the next article.

Ukrainian Consultant Reveals Steele Sought Bogus Stories for Trump Dossier... https://sputniknews.com/ana...

Remember, Alexandra Chalupa?

Who came up with the 'Prop or Not' Fake News List, which kick started Soros and his 49 page document to take out alternative media, using Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc.?

Leaked 49-page memo documents how George Soros is behind social media censorship... https://theduran.com/leaked...

AM Hants • 4 days ago ,

I remember reading an article, just a couple of months ago, where it mentioned the Soros funded NGOs that had been thrown out of Russia, were coming back, disguised as civil society groups, with the same ambitions. No doubt, they will focus on the teenagers, too young to remember the Yeltsin days, and force fed the wonders of 'Western Values'. Ignoring how far the West has regressed in the last 100 years.

From 2016:

Leaked Memo Exposes George Soros' Plan To Overthrow Putin & Destabilise Russia... https://www.zerohedge.com/n... .

............................

How does the Soros script run?

ESTABLISH LEGAL FOUNDATIONS AND ORGANIZATIONS WITHOUT PURPOSES OF PROFIT

Use those groups to build a "home" for the development of leaders / followers and allow the movement of money. The people involved in these foundations and non-profit organizations work to slowly infiltrate the government, working simultaneously in government and for foundations. This creates a structure of government in the shadows in which individuals are a kind of double agents loyal to both their government position and the Soros groups.

CONTROL THE MEDIA

Use those foundations established in step 1 to consistently gain control of media companies and media personalities. That provides influence on the general population and helps to frame the necessary narratives in the future. The primary objective of controlling the media is to be able to FORMULATE AND PROVIDE NARRATIVES.

WEAKENING THE STATE

In this process the objective is not so much to weaken the government but rather to weaken the structures of government. The goal of this process is to make people doubt the credibility of government structures. This tends to include doubt about the credibility of the application of the law, the credibility of the rulers, and the credibility of the electoral process.

DEVELOP AND CAUSE AN ELECTORAL CRISIS

The cause or atmosphere of the crisis does not matter. All that matters is that the core of democracy, the credibility of the voting process, be questioned to the point of anger and frustration.

ORGANIZE MASS PROTESTS AND MANIFESTATIONS

An electoral crisis leads directly to protests that increase until finally the government responds with force and with a change in the state of affairs.

https://www.bibliotecapleya...

..............

Does anybody remember Benghazi and what that branch of the US Embassy was involved in?

Seymour Hersh: Benghazi Attack A Consequence Of Weapons "Rat-Line" To Syria
A veteran journalist presents a damning timeline of the lead up to the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi and alarming details of how the U.S. was feeding weapons to Syria... https://www.mintpressnews.c...

bonami AM Hants • 19 hours ago ,

I suspect he didn't order those missiles; they were launched when he was dining with Xi, there is no way he would have overshadowed his dinner with a senseless attack on Syria.
As for why they failed, the military may have made sure Russia knew they were coming so that they could be intercepted. There is no way the military want a war with Russia.
And consider this; Hillary and her unsecured server sent about 600,000 emails (the total number found on Weiner's laptop by the NY FBI) all of which were intercepted by the Chinese. But via her unsecured server they, and every other country in the world would have been able to access other govt servers. If I am right the Pentagon is severely compromised and every US weapon, strategy, logistic is in the hands of everyone else.

Further, do you remember when Obama was having a new Air Force One built? I suspect the plans for the current planes and the one to be ordered are in other nation's hands as well.
I suspect Trump is surrounded by enemies and they take every chance to trip him up, such as by embarrassing him in front of Xi, an insult Xi will never forget. I think he is the right man for the job, I just fear he doesn't have enough people brave enough to do what needs to be done.
If I were him given the Chinese got complete access to US govt secrets via her unsecured server I would have the military arrest and court marshal her and ALL her staff for High Treason.

Whatever he chooses to do I wish him all the luck in the world

tom • 4 days ago ,

"[I]t is a de facto admission that US officials in Russia as diplomatic agents were illegally operating as spies against their hosting country".

That just goes to show how infinitely arrogant and entitled the Washington people are. Not only do they believe that they have a divine right to spy systematically on other nations - completely ignoring international laws, treaties and conventions forbidding such spying - but they feel free to discuss it openly. As if to say, "What are you going to do about it?"

They may find, however, that there are a few practical things civilized countries can do about it. They can make sure the USA does not post any more "diplomats" to their nation than are strictly necessary; and they can watch them like hawks to make sure that they are performing normal diplomatic duties and nothing else.

Failing that, they can simply emulate Russia and expel about three-quarters of them on principle.

bonami • 2 days ago ,

The CIA is the LAST organization in the world that would tell you if it lost spies anywhere, ever. So why would it say so now? Simples, so they can say without having to provide any proof whatsoever that Russia "stole" the election in November if Trump should happen to win control in both houses. Don't listen to what they say, watch what they do.

GunZenBomZ • 4 days ago ,

The americunts really are evil, they use sayings like "...might is right..". But cannot foresee them ever been 2nd class military nation yet only have 320million citizens. They use these quotes & ideological ploys to enable them too do utterly vile disgusting facts against other humans all the while claiming a sovereign right to some fictional world domination plan. Where by that time they will be a morally upstanding member or 'leader' of the world. Fuck the usa_nazi's, were is hitler 2.0 when we need him!!

Lets cull the isreali_cunts by EMP nuking there facilities, free the Palestinians to reap revenge upon the jews & push them into the sea. And wipe the americunts & their billionaire class into oblivion. Let ww3 take place upon those who actually try to trigger it.

Jimi Thompson GunZenBomZ • 4 days ago ,

For the record, until the last few years, most Americans were to a great degree in the dark about our government.

The CIA's gaslighting operations have always been extremely effective, especially considering that they had long ago weaponized the media.

I'm not saying we are like you, and that's probably a good thing - especially considering you seem to like Muslim savages where most intelligent Americans do not - however, excluding the Neocons, most Conservatives in America do not approve of much of our foreign policy initiatives... those that do are sadly, in most instances, ignorant to much of what I am alluding to here.

Anyway, my point is, your hatred of Americans may be somewhat overblown... of course I don't know you from Adam, so, perhaps not.

GunZenBomZ Jimi Thompson • 2 days ago ,

I was in a really fowl mood when I posted the comment you replied too. I certainly don't like ISIS or fanatical muslims. But in england we have a secular society where most groups/tribes coalesce with each other in tolerance. For many decades usa has used false-flags to start wars. I'm 43 years old & have frankly had enough of the american bully attitude that they must do stuff. They, you're government use covert & overt means to trigger wars & the next big one will take humanity with it. You don't need a space-force, you need common sense to rein down upon the many good americans.

Your enemies are not abroad.

Jimi Thompson GunZenBomZ • 2 days ago ,

No worries at all sir and if you read some of my posts - even a few I posted yesterday - you will quickly discern that I am quite aware of who our real enemies are!

[Sep 01, 2018] We live in times in which the media elites and academia are fully insane. That means that the 'normal' levels of insanity and venality for career politicians will be ramped up

Notable quotes:
"... My favorite part of this article: "And on and on, and on, it goes and will continue to go until 2020, unless Trump decides to attack Iran, which I doubt The Resistance® will let him do, because that would get extremely weird, as they would somehow have to simultaneously support another US war of aggression and condemn Trump as Adolf Hitler for starting it. ..."
"... Oh, and also, they would have a hard time explaining why Putin had ordered his stooge in the White House to attack Russia's ally in the Middle East." ..."
Sep 01, 2018 | www.unz.com

Johnnie Walker Read , says: September 1, 2018 at 12:11 pm GMT

@Bennis Mardens

"A certain tribe hates Trump"

Wow, you must live on a different planet than the rest f us. Israhell has never had a greater friend in the White House than Donald Trumpenstien.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/when-it-comes-to-jewish-ties-no-gop-candidate-trumps-trump/

Jake , says: September 1, 2018 at 12:18 pm GMT

My favorite part of this article: "And on and on, and on, it goes and will continue to go until 2020, unless Trump decides to attack Iran, which I doubt The Resistance® will let him do, because that would get extremely weird, as they would somehow have to simultaneously support another US war of aggression and condemn Trump as Adolf Hitler for starting it.

Oh, and also, they would have a hard time explaining why Putin had ordered his stooge in the White House to attack Russia's ally in the Middle East."

We live in times in which the media elites and academia are fully insane. That means that the 'normal' levels of insanity and venality for career politicians will be ramped up.

factjis , says: September 1, 2018 at 12:24 pm GMT
@Bennis Mardens

So this "tribe" (as you call them) are the folks leading the criticism of the President? These folks "own the media" you aver -- yes?

Hmmm, then that clearly can't be a "tribe" which includes Netanyahu, his likudniks and neo-cons and militant right-wing, American billionaire Zionists -- because they've never had it so good under any U.S. President.

As for the Palestinians (let alone the American middle class), well, things are rather different.

Moi , says: September 1, 2018 at 12:27 pm GMT
@Bennis Mardens

How so? Mr. T is a crypto Jew himself who loves Israel almost as much as Bibi.

anon , [317] Disclaimer says: September 1, 2018 at 12:42 pm GMT
@Bennis Mardens

unilateral private media ownership is the problem, not privatized tribal hate for Trump or whomever..

Government vs Private Parallel Media can solve many, many problems created by Deep State it can quickly turn the tables on the deep state or strongly support it.. Since 1492 when Martin Luther exposed unilateral backroom power, massive singularities of accumulated wealth, and controlled, filtered propaganda to the masses. government has become the responsibility of the governed, and the governors have become the servants of the masses. However, those same powers Luther exposed have done everything in their power to deny the masses the right to self determination

Trump has a plan to nationalize the media, but I think he should merely parallel the private media with open source government media ( no rules to use it, none, not any, sex weird stuff, criminal stuff, whatever ,just let anyone with something to say say it on their own website hosted by the government). Produce a government media hosting site, allow anyone, foreign or local, to present on the public media. use government developed search engine and indexing technology (no private party no private contractors, everything and everyone involved at the government host site is a government employee and all technology is developed by government for government use only) and let the masses decide for themselves both 1) form of government and 2) degree of corruption they will accept. Everyone can then select do they want to view the Deep State Media or one of the millions of content providers visible on the government media host.

Johnnie Walker Read , says: September 1, 2018 at 12:42 pm GMT
@Bennis Mardens

"Zionism(A.K.A. Neo-Cons, and all "Israeli Firsters") is a political ideology based upon the suspension of reason and common sense, rooted upon a macabre death wish that worships the state of Israel.

Israel-First loyalists do not have to be Jewish. Christian-Zionists routinely forgo faithfulness to our country, when they place Israel above the interests of our own nation. The notion that Israel is a trusted ally is the most absurd illusion that exists in a demented political culture. This is the "Big Lie", an invention of Zionist subversion, which is the cause of an insane American foreign policy. Israel-First zealots control every aspect of political power in the United States. An actual American holocaust that stares us directly in our faces stems from sick fraudulent propaganda and phony guilt deceit that only benefits Zionists and Israel."

http://batr.org/gulag/051605.html

Trump praising Israel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-ZadGhAo5M

Anonymous , [321] Disclaimer says: September 1, 2018 at 1:20 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

South America, North America .. is there still a difference?

Anonymous , [321] Disclaimer says: September 1, 2018 at 1:23 pm GMT
@Sean

I hope not. If Trump wants to go down a hero, he can be the monkey wrench that wrecks so much damage on the machine that it's no longer capable of threatening the world. If he can perform a controlled demolition of the USA, the rest of the world will continue just fine without them. We'll remember him as a hero for preventing WW3.

HallParvey , says: September 1, 2018 at 1:40 pm GMT
@Brabantian

None of this makes any difference. The MSM still control 98 percent of the information transmission systems in the western world. Indeed, (((they))) are beginning to prohibit other information systems such as the internet.

What you don't hear about never happened. The flip side of that coin is that what you hear about over and over comes to be reality, regardless. Think Tawana Brawley. Think Duke sports teams.

Where there's smoke there must be fire, right?

Trump has a talent for feeding the MSM red meat. Always with a good dose of poison mixed in so they are happy to shoot themselves in the foot. Think Roseanne Roseannadanna. Nevermind

Anonymous , [795] Disclaimer says: September 1, 2018 at 1:55 pm GMT
@Sean

That is why Trump will attack Iran.

Well, he can't attack Syria because Israel, ya know, might get hot grease spattered on them. And besides, Israel wants Syria with as little additional damage as possible, leaving an attack on Iran as the only method of "attacking" Russia. But, it cannot be done directly, with flimsy excuses. The excuses are just too damn flimsy.

Also, life is too damn good for American Army mercenaries to have to risk life and limb for another meaningless ME conflict. Nope, the Army needs another five years, at the very least, before another round of medals and benefit-increases justifies their personal risk. US Army take-home, "combat" pay and massive health-and-living benefits amount to the best living any white American boy can experience, but there is a limit.

Now, limited-scope attack by proxy? Iraq border conflict? Afghanistan border conflict? Both good, plus there is already umpty-ump bajillion $ of US taxpayer-paid military equipment in Afghanistan. Good excuse to junk it all and get new stuff. That's what taxpayers are for, after all.

Anonymous , [795] Disclaimer says: September 1, 2018 at 1:58 pm GMT
@Ilyana_Rozumova

Hypocrisy will end, and somebody will have to tell the American people the naked truth.

Don't be silly. Hypocrisy will increase, and the American people are never told any truth, ever.

DESERT FOX , says: September 1, 2018 at 1:59 pm GMT

The fact is that the U.S. is a Zionist controlled plantation and there is no difference at the top levels between the demonrats and the republicons as both are Zionist controlled and are traitors to America, as proof of this is the Israeli and Zionist controlled deep state attack on 911 which killed 3000 Americans and Israel and the Zionists got away with it and every thinking America knows they did it.

The only difference between Trump and Helliary is their plumbing, both are Zionist puppets and the ziocons run the U.S. gov..

[Aug 31, 2018] Anti-Semitism Charges Against Jeremy Corbyn Are Diversion From Israeli Occupation of Palestine by Miko Peled

Notable quotes:
"... Jeremy Corbyn is a man who has dedicated his entire life to fighting racism and injustice -- he is not a racist and therefore clearly he is not anti-Semitic. He has not once denied the Holocaust and therefore he is not a Holocaust-denier. It seems, however, that none of this matters to those who would bring him down. ..."
"... The desperation of those seeking to oust Corbyn can be seen by the latest accusation against him: attending a memorial for terrorists. ..."
"... Corbyn did not remain silent. True to himself once again, he struck back, reminding Netanyahu that what is deserving of condemnation is Israeli forces' killing of hundreds of protesters in Gaza and the passing of the new, racist Israel Nation State Law . ..."
"... By trying to silence the discussion regarding Zionism and its legitimacy, Israel abuses the memory of the millions who died in the Holocaust, particularly the Jewish victims. There are entire communities of Jewish Holocaust survivors and descendants of survivors who are quite ready to discuss and debate any issue, including the Holocaust, and who view the Zionists' stance as absurd. These same Jewish communities also reject Zionism and support the Palestinian call for BDS , or Boycott Divestment and Sanctions against Israel. It is time that these voices be heard. ..."
"... Miko Peled is an author and human rights activist born in Jerusalem. He is the author of " The General's Son. Journey of an Israeli in Palestine ," and " Injustice, the Story of the Holy Land Foundation Five ." ..."
Aug 30, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

Jeremy Corbyn is a man who has dedicated his entire life to fighting racism and injustice -- he is not a racist and therefore clearly he is not anti-Semitic. He has not once denied the Holocaust and therefore he is not a Holocaust-denier. It seems, however, that none of this matters to those who would bring him down.

The U.K. Labour Party conference is more than three weeks away and Jeremy Corbyn, true to himself and his principles, has risen above the mud-slinging and continues to fight for the principles to which he has dedicated his entire life. He focuses on issues like social justice; caring for the many rather than the few, the millions not the millionaires; and, as Corbyn himself said in his speech at last year's convention, "end[ing] the oppression of the Palestinian people."

Zionist groups within the Labour Party, which include LFI (Labour Friends of Israel) and the JLM (the Zionist 'Jewish Labour Movement'), skillfully utilize the pro-Zionist media. They are trying -- and failing -- to paint Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-Semite. However, the problem is not anti-Semitism but Corbyn's stance on Palestine. These Zionist groups want to get rid of Corbyn because of his principled stance on Palestine, Israeli colonialism and occupation of Palestine, and they use anti-Semitism labels because they think it will work.

The 1972 Munich-attacks issue

The desperation of those seeking to oust Corbyn can be seen by the latest accusation against him: attending a memorial for terrorists.

It was given impetus by a remark by the Israeli prime minister, in what is a shocking intervention by Israel in British politics. Benjamin Netanyahu made remarks about the Labour leader, saying that he deserves "unequivocal condemnation." In what can only be described as an escalation of the already heavy-handed intervention of Zionist groups to end Jeremy Corbyn's leadership, Netanyahu said that Corbyn's participation in a ceremony at a cemetery in Tunis in 2014 is deserving of condemnation, because -- according to Netanyahu -- terrorists are buried there.

Corbyn did not remain silent. True to himself once again, he struck back, reminding Netanyahu that what is deserving of condemnation is Israeli forces' killing of hundreds of protesters in Gaza and the passing of the new, racist Israel Nation State Law .

Netanyahu -- along with what may well be the loudest Zionist mouthpiece in Britain, The Daily Mail -- claims that Corbyn was present at a ceremony and even laid a wreath on the graves of terrorists connected with the 1972 attack on the Israeli athletes during the Munich Olympic games .

The truth of the matter is that the event in which Corbyn participated had nothing to do with the Munich attack. In 2014 Jeremy Corbyn attended a service at a cemetery in Tunis commemorating the victims of the 1985 Israeli airstrike on the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) offices in Tunis. This Israeli attack was a breach of international law, violated the sovereignty of another country, and received worldwide condemnation, including by the United States .

The Crisis in Corbyn's Labour Party Is Over Israel, Not Anti-Semitism

Furthermore, none of the eight men who participated in the Munich attack are buried in Tunis. The four men who are buried there -- and whose tombstones are shown in The Daily Mail photo -- are Salah Khalaf, who was Yasser Arafat's deputy; his aide, Fakhri al-Omari; Hayel Abdel-Hamid, who was the PLO chief of security; and Atef Bseiso. Bseiso was assassinated in Paris in 1992 -- 20 years after the Munich Olympics. He was heavily involved in talks with the CIA in an attempt to advance relations between the U.S. and the PLO. Israel claimed that all four were involved in the attack in Munich and had all of them assassinated either directly or by the proxy terror group, Abu-Nidal. There was never a shred of proof, not to mention a trial, to substantiate Israel's allegations against these men.

Blatant intervention

The big question is why does the Israeli prime minister feel he needs to engage in such blatant intervention and and make such blatantly false accusations just as Britain's largest political party is about to convene? Netanyahu and his henchmen must realize that U.K. Labour, having gained over half a million members since Jeremy Corbyn's ascent as leader, is poised to win in the next elections, so that, if Israel fails to oust him, Jeremy Corbyn will end up in 10 Downing Street.

One of the ridiculous charges laid against Corbyn is the following: He was criticized for attending a passover Seder with a particular group of Jewish people who "dismissed concerns about anti-Semitism in the party." So it is not good enough that he went to a Seder and that he opted to do so among people who live in his own constituency; he had to do so with Jewish people who think a particular way.

Corbyn was also criticized for participating in an event with the late Hajo Meyer , a Jewish holocaust survivor himself. This was in 2010, when Corbyn hosted a Holocaust Memorial Day event in London with Meyer as the main speaker. Hajo Meyer was, like many holocaust survivors, a fervent advocate for Palestinian rights and a severe critic of Israel -- hence the criticism.

Anti-Semitism

Another sticking point is the self-appointed International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance ( IHRA ), which apparently adopted a new and, in their own words, "non-legally binding" working definition of anti-Semitism . Initially Labour's national executive committee refused to accept this definition, but there are signs that a compromise might be on the horizon. This definition of anti-Semitism is one that entire Jewish communities do not accept because it seeks to silence criticism of Israel and conflates Zionism with Judaism. The anti-Semitism definition includes several clauses that have nothing to do with racism or anti-Semitism and have everything to do with protecting Israel from criticism. For example:

War of attrition

Another example, in which I was personally involved, has to do with a comment that I made at a fringe event during the 2017 Labour conference and that turned into a major news item. During a panel on free speech, I said that free speech means we should be able to discuss every issue, including Palestine and the Holocaust. The Daily Mail published this as though it was a scandalous thing to say and accused Labour and even Corbyn himself for allowing it to happen.

Every other newspaper in Britain followed suit and then papers in Palestine and even the Israeli papers picked it up as well. I added in my remarks that, while free speech should not be criminalized, we do not need to give a platform to proponents of any racist ideology, and that includes Zionists who regularly demand to be present and give their perspective at events and lectures.

My presence during the conference and my comments did not warrant such attention. However, this is a war of attrition in which Labour Friends of Israel, the so-called 'Jewish Labour Movement, and the British Daily Mail are leading the charge and will jump at every opportunity to get attention. Once again, the problem was not denial of the Holocaust or anti-Semitism -- because there was no expression of either one -- but the fear of a discussion on Palestine and Zionism.

By trying to silence the discussion regarding Zionism and its legitimacy, Israel abuses the memory of the millions who died in the Holocaust, particularly the Jewish victims. There are entire communities of Jewish Holocaust survivors and descendants of survivors who are quite ready to discuss and debate any issue, including the Holocaust, and who view the Zionists' stance as absurd. These same Jewish communities also reject Zionism and support the Palestinian call for BDS , or Boycott Divestment and Sanctions against Israel. It is time that these voices be heard.

Jeremy Corbyn is a man who has dedicated his entire life to fighting racism and injustice -- he is not a racist and therefore clearly he is not anti-Semitic. He has not once denied the Holocaust and therefore he is not a Holocaust-denier. However, none of this matters. As was stated clearly in The Daily Mai l,

"The Board of Deputies of British Jews warned Mr. Corbyn to 'come out of hiding' and said the anti-Semitism crisis would not go away."

In other words, there is nothing he can say or do to "clear" himself. They are determined to oust him and they think the anti-Semitic card will do the trick.

*

Miko Peled is an author and human rights activist born in Jerusalem. He is the author of " The General's Son. Journey of an Israeli in Palestine ," and " Injustice, the Story of the Holy Land Foundation Five ."

[Aug 31, 2018] US is an oligarchy not a democracy

Aug 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Circe , Aug 30, 2018 9:06:13 PM | 54

Somebody @40:

Your comment implies that people should continue to bang their heads against a wall.

In fact, no one has said NOT to participate in politics. To be effective, it's important to understand the reality of politics and the power structure.

Landmark Princeton University Study: Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens demonstrates that US is an oligarchy not a democracy:

Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination ...

That's why candidates like Ron Paul on the Republican side and Denis Kucinich on the Democratic side never stood a chance. They made way too much sense; they dared speak truth to power so they had to be marginalized by their respective parties so no one would take them seriously. They were literally swallowed up by the duopoly and relegated to quasi-obscurity.

[Aug 31, 2018] Let us not forget, that under the mighty and loved O-bomber, a group of US Senators back in 2014 made Bulgaria drop South Stream with god knows what threats, whereas Brussels had previously failed (intentionally?) to do so. Guess who was the lead Senator?

Aug 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Aug 30, 2018 3:50:33 PM | 29

I would say 'contra-Russia'. Trump is just the current vessel.

Let us not forget, that under the mighty and loved O-bomber, a group of US Senators back in 2014 made Bulgaria drop South Stream with god knows what threats, whereas Brussels had previously failed (intentionally?) to do so. Guess who was the lead Senator?

RT.com: Bulgaria halts Russia's South Stream gas pipeline project after visit by US senators
https://www.rt.com/business/164588-brussels-bulgaria-halts-south-stream/

At this time there is a request from the European Commission, after which we've suspended the current works, I ordered it," Oresharski told journalists after meeting with John McCain, Chris Murphy and Ron Johnson during their visit to Bulgaria on Sunday. "Further proceedings will be decided after additional consultations with Brussels."

McCain, commenting on the situation, said that "Bulgaria should solve the South Stream problems in collaboration with European colleagues," adding that in the current situation they would want "less Russian involvement" in the project.

"America has decided that it wants to put itself in a position where it excludes anybody it doesn't like from countries where it thinks it might have an interest, and there is no economic rationality in this at all. Europeans are very pragmatic, they are looking for cheap energy resources – clean energy resources, and Russia can supply that. But the thing with the South Stream is that it doesn't fit with the politics of the situation," Ben Aris, editor of Business New Europe told RT .
####


See, nothing has changed. At least it looks like U-rope has learned its lesson. Not so the US. Russia hatin' is a too good 'dead cat on the table' to give up.

Posted by: et Al | Aug 30, 2018 1:55:58 PM | 8

Underneath everyone's observations/comments lurks the basic question: Why?

Enter the Big Picture provided yesterday by Pepe Escobar who also links to and cites the controversial Alastair Crooke ideological essay I linked to last week. Part of the Big Picture is the #1 policy goal of the Outlaw US Empire--Full Spectrum Dominance of the Planet--and its recently published National Defense Strategy(NDS) related to that goal:

"The central challenge to U.S. prosperity and security is the reemergence of long-term, strategic competition by what the National Security Strategy classifies as revisionist powers. It is increasingly clear that China and Russia want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model -- gaining veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic, and security decisions."

Do please note the combination of prevarication with ideology in the above as it's reflective of the point Crooke tried to make in his piece. A strategy based upon lies to oneself is a sure recipe for defeat as you're deceiving yourself which violates the first law of war as pronounced by so many: "All war is based on deception." But then given the political-economic nature of the USA's Keynesian Militarism, perhaps this deception is aimed domestically so as to transfer even more tax dollars upwards to the 1%. So, actions must be closely observed even more than usual.

During the election campaign, it was speculated that Trump's desire to ease tensions with Russia was a last-ditch gambit suggested by Kissinger to split the Chinese-Russian alliance. So, Russiagate served to defeat that gambit while pushing China and Russia even closer together. With the Syrian regime change ploy rapidly being defeated and Ukraine going nowhere, Deep State planners were left without an oar, so the reversion to Cold War Russophobia with an occasional bout of Sinophobia thrown in for good measure--neither of which is any sort of strategy.

Another quote from the NDS:

"Today, we are emerging from a period of strategic atrophy, aware that our competitive military
advantage has been eroding."

That was realized before Putin's display of highly advanced Russian weaponry, which was announced in March, the NDS was released in January. What's amazing is "strategic atrophy" with budgets beyond $600 billion must mean a massive portion's being wasted--delivered to the 1%--such that it's corruption that's caused the erosion of "our competitive advantage." I'd opine much of the chaos we see being played-up is done to obscure interpretations like mine so that even more $$$ can be wasted, although lip service is given to improvements.

So, who/what's really in charge? Big Money rules as it has since the Civil War within the USA and much earlier when we include London and Amsterdam. Big Money's angry because it's locked out of BRI, BRICS, EAEU, and developing nations are mostly on to IMF's and World Bank's disingenuous "development" plans because it abhors the notion that it's not Top Dog. So, the dollar got weaponized and the Trade and Financial War--the Hybrid Third World War--was finally begun in earnest after earlier fits and starts. Yet it appears that the effort will fail since Big Money is finding itself trapped inside a web of its own making that's based on a fiat currency supported by Junk Economics.

[Aug 31, 2018] It is reported that the German company and partner in Nord Stream II, Uniper, may pull out of the project due to the risk of US sanctions

Aug 31, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

ET AL August 30, 2018 at 9:29 am

It is reported that the German company and partner in Nord Stream II, Uniper, may pull out of the project due to the risk of US sanctions (previously it said Uniper will pull out sic see link.).* In related news, construction has been started in German waters. Still silence from Denmark as to whether they will block it or not.

If I were Moscow, I would announce that the pipeline's route will avoid Danish waters and sit back to see the reaction. Why? Coz you can bet that some will claim it is punishment/bribe/threat/anti-competitive to Denmark, to whit, Russia can simply reply that Denmark has XXX days to provide the permits before it is no longer economically feasible for the route to go through its waters.

* https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/german-company-fully-committed-to-nord-stream-2-despite-fear-of-us-sanctions/

Euractiv: With attacks on Nord Stream 2, Washington ignores collateral damage
https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/opinion/with-attacks-on-nord-stream-2-washington-ignores-collateral-damage/

####

What p* me off about the reported 'threat from NSII' and even in articles like the one above that point out it is in Europe's interest, none of them mention the preceding sabotage of South Stream II under the mighty Obama and the impact from that led directly to Nord Stream II.

A blast from the past:
Bulgaria halts Russia's South Stream gas pipeline project after visit by US senators
https://www.rt.com/business/164588-brussels-bulgaria-halts-south-stream/

At this time there is a request from the European Commission, after which we've suspended the current works, I ordered it," Oresharski told journalists after meeting with John McCain, Chris Murphy and Ron Johnson during their visit to Bulgaria on Sunday. "Further proceedings will be decided after additional consultations with Brussels."

McCain, commenting on the situation, said that "Bulgaria should solve the South Stream problems in collaboration with European colleagues," adding that in the current situation they would want "less Russian involvement" in the project.

"America has decided that it wants to put itself in a position where it excludes anybody it doesn't like from countries where it thinks it might have an interest, and there is no economic rationality in this at all. Europeans are very pragmatic, they are looking for cheap energy resources – clean energy resources, and Russia can supply that. But the thing with the South Stream is that it doesn't fit with the politics of the situation," Ben Aris, editor of Business New Europe told RT .
####

Yes kids. Warmonger McCain was at the forefront of getting it killed after interference from Brussels failed to shift the asshole Borissov's government. So when a European asks "What has John McCain done for us? , he's already f*ed you over for the benefit of the US and U-ropean poodle Krazy K**t Klan.

[Aug 31, 2018] Bulgaria stepped up when the European Commission called and got absolutely no compensation for cancelling the South stream to the contrary, the decision cost Bulgaria a great deal of money

Aug 31, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MARK CHAPMAN August 30, 2018 at 12:06 pm

And let's remember what a hard lesson Bulgaria learned from its leap of faith into Brussels' arms.

On May 30, Bulgarian PM Boyko Borisov met with Russian President Vladimir Putin. During the joint press conference, Borisov apologized to Putin for the failure of South Stream and for his responsibility in causing the deterioration of relations between the two countries. Borisov said: "We know about the difficult relations in the past and are grateful to our colleagues for not being vindictive and the fact that Russian-Bulgarian relations do not depend on the extent of guilt of some politicians

"I would like to thank President Putin for his attitude once again. I am to blame for creating certain tensions When it came to the worst and I wanted to talk, my calls were always answered. And I really accept part of the guilt for those developments."

Putin then added that he regrets that the South Stream project has not been implemented, since it would have "greatly benefited" Bulgaria.

In response, Borisov blamed the EU of having imposed Bulgaria diktats that other countries do not respect anyway. Borisov said: "We are the most loyal and the most disciplined country in the European Union. This is the reason why all the pipelines bypassed our territory. We hope that today we have redressed an injustice.

https://www.memri.org/reports/russia-world-%E2%80%93-russia-bulgaria-reconciliation-%E2%80%93-bulgarias-president-radev-no-sanctions-are

Bulgaria stepped up when the European Commission called and got absolutely fuck-all in the way of thanks or compensation – to the contrary, the decision cost Bulgaria a great deal of money. Let that be a lesson to other EU countries; Brussels is big on ideas, but it does not have your back and if your stepping-up causes your country grief and it turns out you made a terrible mistake, and want to talk about it

ET AL August 31, 2018 at 2:58 am

There is absolutely nobody else to blame but Borissov himself, a third rate playa . The position of neither Brussels nor Washington was a surprise at all. They are very well known quantities. Big surprise. Not.

Borissov vacillated and played the same failed and weak gambit we have seen for years in the Ukraine. That he is still around as the biggest fish in the local fish shop is that he is the biggest spineless shit that floats to the surface while the opposition is little more than useless. That is repeated elsewhere in the neighborhood to various degrees and where it is not, it's a choice between two sides of the same gangster/clan coin. To misquote Douglas Adams, So long, and thanks for none of the fish.

KIRILL August 30, 2018 at 12:45 pm

Denmark has already been bypassed. And Gazprom said it could finish the project without any partners.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 30, 2018 at 1:36 pm

Well, I don't think a decision has been made yet. But the consortium has 'applied to Denmark for an alternate route' – which, since the alternate route would not go through Danish territorial waters, implies Denmark does not really have any say over it, and is essentially a challenge to Denmark to either veto the original route on security grounds (you never know, Putin might hide submarines in it, or Novichok or something) or get on with it. But Denmark is presented with more or less the Bulgarian Alternative: do Washington's bidding and get a pat on the head, or defy it and get transit fees.

https://financialtribune.com/articles/energy/91657/nord-stream-2-will-bypass-danish-waters

All the news on the subject that I saw announced that the consortium is 'exploring' an alternate route. It seems they are still hopeful the original route will be cleared, but are getting it on the table that denying it will not stop the project.

But of course western 'analysts' continue to squeal that Putin and the Kremlin are using the Nord Stream II pipeline to 'invade Europe'. Curiously, the same people who once smirked scornfully that Nord Stream II was not needed because the current pipeline is only running at half-capacity now claim "even with Nord Stream 2 on line Russia would still need to send substantial amounts of gas through Ukraine – at least until the upcoming TurkStream pipeline is also finished." Whoa – wut? Even both legs of Nord Stream running at full capacity will not be enough? You don't say.

https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/with-nord-stream-2-pipeline-putin-waltzes-into-the-heart-of-europe-20180821-p4zyod.html

Once again, nobody is forcing Europe to take more Russian gas than it needs, although the draw-down of domestic supplies suggest it will need more all the time unless 'green energy' becomes more commercially viable and reliable. Certain players want Europe's gas to go through Ukraine for two reasons – one, Ukraine badly needs the money from transit fees to prop up its calamitous economy. Two, it is a ready tickle-trunk of conflict whenever the west wants to make problems for Russia; presto! Ukraine is in a new fight with Russia over gas prices, and Europe is trembling with fear that its gas supplies will be shut off.

Here, you numpties – let me solve the problem for you. Soon there is going to be a perfectly good (according to Ukraine and the west) pipeline network idling without much to do. Why not let all those competitors Europe is always gibbering about use Ukraine's pipeline network to send their gas to Europe? They could have the whole thing all to themselves, completely cutting Gazprom out of Ukraine! What a victory that would be! And they could pay Ukraine transit fees, saving the day there and bringing enormous comfort to Ukrainian economists! It's win/win!

No charge for my consulting.

[Aug 31, 2018] It occurs to me that if Russia were really as malignant and evil as Washington pretends it is, Russia would be first to take that step, booting American companies out of Russia, perhaps giving them 72 hours to clear out their desks and get out.

Aug 31, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MARK CHAPMAN August 30, 2018 at 8:49 am

See, this is why I enjoy Leonid Bershidsky's writing . Despite his idealistic prattling that Russia is actually guilty of all the things America says it is – his ultimate loyalty is still to his adopted homeland, the land of milk and honey – he remains essentially a realist. And his take on the economic dynamics is brutally realistic; the United States cannot 'bring the Russian economy to its knees'. Once again, America's ridiculously-high opinion of itself and its power fail to take account of consequences.

Oh, it could, I suppose, in a way. A way that would see the world's largest economy – arguably, and certainly in its last days if it is actually still the world's largest economy – wreck the global economy and its own trade relationship with the world in order to damage Russia. Is it willing to go that far? You just never know, as decades of feeding itself exceptionalism have addled its thinking.

Bershidsky points out – correctly, I think – that Russia has held off on punishing American companies in Russia just as the USA has not dared to sanction the energy industry in Russia. Neither wants to take that step, although one will certainly provoke the other.

In fact, it occurs to me that if Russia were really as malignant and evil as Washington pretends it is, Russia would be first to take that step, booting American companies out of Russia, perhaps giving them 72 hours to clear out their desks and get out. What would happen then? America would be bound to drop the sanctions hammer on oil and gas. And what would happen then? Europe would say, it's been a lovely party, but I must be going. I give that an 8 of 10 chance of happening, and solely because of the stupid actions heretofore by the Trump government. Had America been reasonable, it would have stood a chance of carrying Europe with it to a war against Russia. But Trump and his blowhard bullying have hardened European resolve against the USA.

[Aug 31, 2018] A few are beginning to wake up to the reality that snatching Ukraine away from Russia was never about prosperity and security for its people

Aug 31, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MOSCOW EXILE August 29, 2018 at 9:50 pm

" it is under $500 million and is likely mostly money from Ukrainians working in Russia. I do not see any corporate level investment happening in the current climate. "

The above linked RBK article goes on to read:

According to the presented data, during the period from January to June, the Ukraine received $1,259 billion, of which $436 million came from Russia. In second place was Cyprus, which invested $219 million and in third place amongst the largest investors was the Netherlands ($207.7 million).

In addition, contributions were made to the Ukraine economy by Austria ($58.7 million), Poland ($54.1), France ($46.9) and the UK ($43.4).

The report says that almost 60% of these funds ($750 million) were invested in the financial and insurance sphere; 9.6% of of the funds were invested by the Ukrainian authorities into the wholesale and retail trade; 8.2% into industry and 7.9 per cent. into information and telecommunications.

In mid-August, former Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko said that Russia had been the main trading partner of the Ukraine since 2014 and because of this the return of the Crimea and the resolution of the conflict in the Donbass were becoming impossible. "There is no plan for victory in this state. Because you are not behaving like people who want a victory. You are already slaves", he said.

In response to Yushchenko's statement, the ex-head of the Ukrainian Ministry of the Economy, Viktor Suslov, said that the words of the former Ukrainian leader were "absurd" and considered any damage to Kiev caused by breaking off trade with Russia as being "colossal".

Doesn't sound like all of this money sloely consists of that sent off to "Independent" Ukraine by economic migrants from that country who are eking out a living in the Evil Empire.

MOSCOW EXILE August 29, 2018 at 10:14 pm

Verkhovna Rada Deputy Vadym Rabinovich on air of TV channel "112 Ukraine" said that the termination of trade with Russia will destroy Ukrainian economy.

According to him, Russia remains the largest trading partner of the Ukraine, as trade turnover between the two countries is growing every month.

"The trade balance with Russia is growing every month for one simple reason: the free economic zone with Europe has brought us only losses", said Rabinovich.

He noted that the interruption of trade between Moscow and Kiev is fraught with the loss, of "approximately one third of the gross national product".

"With all of the stupidity that you have done in the country, then with another unbalanced step you'll destroy the economy", summed up the Rada deputy.

Earlier, former head of the Main Department of the Ukrainian security Service, Vasily Vovk, proposed that the border with Russia be completely blocked and that ties with her be cut.

Source: В Раде рассказали о последствиях отказа от торговли с Россией

In the Rada they have been speaking about the consequences of refusing to trade with Russia

MARK CHAPMAN August 30, 2018 at 8:05 am

A few are beginning to wake up to the reality that snatching Ukraine away from Russia was never about prosperity and security for its people, and all about destabilizing what the west perceived as the quickening of an unwelcome regional influence, and curbing it. The EU – and its string-puller, Washington – does not give a fuck about the economic well-being of Ukrainians, does not have even the brotherly connection of being of the same ethnic group, and for so long as Ukraine is willing to suffer being poor in silence, for that long it will not be a problem for its new 'partners'.

Nationalist Nazi nutjobs are always proposing the border be sealed ever-tighter, if it were feasible to build a stainless-steel wall between Ukraine and Russia which reached to low earth orbit, they would vote for it. But the Great Wall Of Yatsenyuk never materialized, he's enjoying his Florida condo, and there is no practical way to limit commerce between the two countries while the people are increasingly motivated toward its continuing.

Ukraine is on the edge of collapse, and I don't think any force on earth can prevent its sliding over the edge. The west is not going to pony up the $170 Billion or so it would take to rescue it; if it did so, Porky and his minions would steal most of it for themselves, and Russia is unlikely to ever permit again the degree of fraternal closeness that existed between the two countries, since it is clear it would take only another western intervention to render it once again an untrustworthy spoiler. Once Nord Stream II is built, Ukraine will have lost its leverage and will be of no further significant value to the western purveyors of destabilization.

More such core realization is necessary to prevent Ukraine from officially blaming its collapse on anyone but itself. The government will try that course, naturally, and you don't need to be able to see very far into the future to know that it is Russia who will be blamed, despite plenty of empirical evidence that Russian investors and Ukrainian refugees working in Russia were all that kept it alive before the end. But in order that Ukrainians know in their heart of hearts that their government stepped on its own dick over and over, and that they passively failed to correct it, there needs to be more such public confession. I can show you plenty of analysis, in English, published before things went pear-shaped in the dying moments of 2013, which proposed that severing trade relationships with Russia as the nationalists insisted would cost Ukraine just about exactly what the Rada now says will happen, years too late. But they got one thing right – Ukraine and Russia cannot be brothers, not even friends, for so long as Ukraine harbours that nutty nationalist element. Give western Ukraine to Poland, and encourage all the nationalists to go to the new paradise, and ensure that happens. They can bore the Poles with their raptures about Kievan Rus. Then maybe some relationship could be salvaged.

[Aug 31, 2018] We can reasonably conclude that the Scripals were poisoned by the British government by Joe Quinn

Notable quotes:
"... Novichok is a group of agents developed only by Russia and not declared under the CWC ..."
"... This is part of a group of nerve agents known as 'Novichok' ..."
"... positive identification ..."
"... or related compound ..."
"... or closely related agent. ..."
"... "Scientific peer review is the only thing separating us from chaos!" ..."
Mar 28, 2018 | www.sott.net

By now anyone with an opinion on the Skripal poisoning has already decided if they believe the official narrative or not. Still, the event and the ongoing media coverage around it presents an opportunity to understand more than we might think.

The British government claim is that a "military-grade nerve agent", one of a group of nerve agents supposedly called 'novichok' (which simply means 'newcomer'), was used by Russia on Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury. They reach the conclusion that Russia is to blame because, they claim, the nerve agent used is "of a type developed by Russia."

Russian daily newspaper Kommersant recently released a 6-page document they claim constitutes the British government's official case against Russia. They summed up the 'evidence' as follows:

Military-grade Novichok nerve agent positively identified at the UK's Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down, an OPCW-accredited and designated laboratory Novichok is a group of agents developed only by Russia and not declared under the CWC A violation of the fundamental prohibition on the use of chemical weapons (Art. 1 CWC) First offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since the Second World War We are without doubt that Russia is responsible. No country bar Russia has combined capability, intent and motive. There is no plausible alternative explanation As of Sunday 18 March, we count over thirty parallel lines of Russian disinformation
Note the 2nd point, that " Novichok is a group of agents developed only by Russia and not declared under the CWC ."

In 2016, Iranian scientists synthesized five 'Novichok' agents and the data was added to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons' Central Analytical Database (OCAD).

In an interview with AFP, the former Russian scientist who participated in the development of "Novichok" in Russia in the 70s and 80s, Vil Mirzayanov, stated that if Russia was not responsible for the poisoning:

"The only other possibility would be that someone used the formulas in my book to make such a weapon.
Mirzayanov's book, published in 2008 , contains the formulas he alleges can be used to create "Novichoks". In 1995, he explained that "the chemical components or precursors" of Novichok are "ordinary organophosphates that can be made at commercial chemical companies that manufacture such products as fertilizers and pesticides."

So the British government claim that this type of nerve agent can only be Russian, and was only developed by Russia, is demonstrably false. In fact, in her statement to the House of Commons on 12th March 2018 , British Prime Minister Theresa May contradicted that claim when she said:

"It is now clear that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia. This is part of a group of nerve agents known as 'Novichok' . Based on the positive identification of this chemical agent by world-leading experts at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down. "
In the world of nerve agents, in order to positively identify a sample, you must have your own sample for comparison and positive identification.

In a judgement at the British High Court on 22nd March on whether to allow blood samples to be taken from Sergei and Yulia Skripal for examination by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), evidence submitted by the Porton Down laboratory to the court (Section 17 i) stated:

"Blood samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analysed and the findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound . The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent or closely related agent. "
Again, Porton Down must have had a sample of the alleged nerve agent used to poison Skripal and his daughter. That can mean only one of two things: that Porton Down obtained the nerve agent from some other party, or manufactured it on site . Porton Down is, after all, in the business of producing chemical weapons (ostensibly to test them on anti-chemical weapon equipment).

Note also that the wording used in the quote above includes the possibility that the agent used on Skripal was not even 'Novichok' but rather a "related compound" or something "closely related." So even Theresa May's statement that the British MoD had "positively identified" 'Novichok' seems false.

In an interview with German Deutsch Welle , bumbling UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson was directly asked if scientists at Porton Down had samples of 'Novichok', to which he replied:

" They do . And they were absolutely categorical and I asked the guy myself, I said, 'Are you sure?' And he said there's no doubt."
So the only thing we can presume to be 100% certain of in the poisoning of Skripal and his daughter is that the nerve agent used was in stock at Porton Down, 8 miles from the site of the poisoning.

In the 5th point in the British government 6-page 'dossier', the British establishment claims:

"We are without doubt that Russia is responsible. No country bar Russia has combined capability, intent and motive. There is no plausible alternative."
We know that other countries have the capability. Claiming to have no doubt about someone's intent is nonsense. So we're left with motive. Did Russia have a motive to poison Skripal and his daughter? Motives for a course of action are intrinsically linked to the result of the action. The obvious and predictable result of using a nerve agent that was originally developed in Russia in the 1970s to poison a former Russian spy living in the UK and working for British intelligence is that Russia would be blamed and universally condemned for it. So if Russia was motivated to further downgrade its reputation on the international stage, then sure, Russia had motivation to poison Skripal and his daughter.

The problem is that there is no evidence that Russia desires to damage its own reputation in this way. Is there evidence that anyone else has such motivation? For those that have been paying attention to world affairs over the past 6 or 7 years, I'll presume that you don't need me to answer that one.

So when we remove the unfounded and contradictory claims around the Skripal poisoning, the actual facts of the case are rather limited:

Skripal lived in Salisbury, England, and had been working for MI5 for 8 years. It is reasonable to assume that he may, therefore, have had access to sensitive material, possibly useful to foreign governments, including Russia. As such, he may have posed an 'intelligence threat' if he returned to Russia. According to a close friend , Skripal had recently decided that he wanted to go back to live in Russia and petitioned the Russian government to that end. Not long thereafter, Skripal was poisoned with a substance that was in stock at a British Ministry of Defense facility, 8 miles from where he was living. The British government blamed Russia for his poisoning. This accusation must be seen in the context of a years-long anglo-American black propaganda campaign designed to marginalize Russia and thereby limit its ability to effectively assert itself as a globally influential player. I've heard people make the argument that any investigations of what really happened in Salisbury can only ever be guesswork, that we can never be 100% sure. Of course, that's true to a degree, especially when dealing with evidence which may be held back from public disclosure because of reasons of "national security". But such people tend to use this line of thinking simply to avoid taking a position, because taking a position scares some people, especially if it is not the official position. It's also not very realistic or practical. If we were to hold all statements and claims to the same level of proof, our court systems would become obsolete. Rarely is there enough evidence to find a criminal guilty with a 100% degree of certainty. That's why courts hold the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" and allow for circumstantial evidence.

Insistence on absolute proof fails to recognize that, as humans, we don't navigate our lives and make decisions on the basis of 100% proof. Instead, we use something akin to 'past form'. For example, if I intend to take the train at 9.15am from platform 1 in the morning, I cannot be 100% certain that the train will be there at 9.15am, or that it will be there at all that day. Instead, I actively assume that it will be there based on the circumstantial evidence I have accrued through repeated observations that when I go there at that time the train is there. You could even say that the train is very likely to be there because it has the means, motive and opportunity.

That's how we go about our daily lives, at least. But in cases of guilt and innocence we probably need a higher standard. Many suspects may have means, motive and opportunity at the same time. That doesn't mean they're all guilty. And a history of similar crimes does not necessarily mean that a suspect is guilty of one particular crime. So what to do in a case like the Skripal poisoning? The only thing we can do is compare competing hypotheses and the degrees to which they are consistent with all the facts available. In other words, which scenario is more likely given the known facts?

In answering the question of who poisoned Sergei Skripal and his daughter, we lack 100% proof that the British government (or some element thereof) was responsible for the attack, just as we lack 100% proof that the Russian government was responsible. In fact, the evidence and reasoning provided by the British government does not actually support the Russian hypothesis over competing hypotheses, because we would see the same evidence if the attack were carried out in order to frame Russia. If evidence applies equally to two or more competing hypotheses, naturally that evidence cannot be used to support one hypothesis over the other, which is precisely what the British government is doing.

In contrast, the British government's apparent access to the precise nerve agents in question, close to where Skripal lives, their full access to Skripal himself, their past form in fabricating evidence of chemical weapons usage by other states, and their clear intent to wage a vicious and underhanded demonization campaign against Russia, all combine to allow us to actively assume that the poisoning of Skripal and his daughter was the work of the British government itself. Is it beyond a reasonable doubt? Perhaps not, but it is currently the only hypothesis that makes sense given the evidence available. And until more evidence is made available, it is the only reasonable conclusion to make.

Joe Quinn is the co-author of 9/11: The Ultimate Truth (with Laura Knight-Jadczyk, 2006) and Manufactured Terror: The Boston Marathon Bombings, Sandy Hook, Aurora Shooting and Other False Flag Terror Attacks (with Niall Bradley, 2014), and the host of Sott.net's The Sott Report Videos and co-host of the 'Behind the Headlines' radio show on the Sott Radio Network .

An established web-based essayist and print author, Quinn has been writing incisive editorials for Sott.net for over 10 years. His articles have appeared on many alternative news sites and he has been interviewed on several internet radio shows and has also appeared on Iranian Press TV . His articles can also be found on his personal blog JoeQuinn.net .

BlackCartouche · 5 months ago

"By now anyone with an opinion on the Skripal poisoning has already decided if they believe the official narrative or not."

Lol. Is there anyone on SOTT who believes the official narrative?

HashAttack2 · 5 months ago
BlackCartouche Believes?

It's hard to even decipher the official narrative, it's an incoherent mess, lacking any motive, lacking any factual content.

Where we have facts, e.g. 3 actual admissions to hospital and compare with the narrative, 130 lives threatened, it's makes May's announcements appear total nonsense

It's all very well western MSM and governments asking us to believe their narratives but their story lines never make sense ... they just lack logical consistency and tend to have glaring plot holes .... it's all hypocritical BS

BlackCartouche · 5 months ago
HashAttack2 Apparently Novichok is at least several times deadlier than the very deadly VX nerve agent.

Why isn't anyone dead?

parallax · 5 months ago
Lol. Is there anyone on SOTT who believes the official narrative?
I've been knitting a sweater waiting for some really good 'official' evidence; I'm about to start in on a new one and perhaps a blanket after that.

The thing about official narratives is that they try to appeal to the 'plausible lie' (repeated often enough on the news - and nothing new here to SOTT readers), and in a court of law (or world opinion) this type of lie, as we know, can do the trick in peoples heads. Double-down on it all with rolled out authoritarians and the MSN public can be like putty - moldable.

Thanks for writing such a good article - nice work!

HashAttack2 · 5 months ago
parallax Can you knit me one too ... plenty of time before any evidence turns up
Joan · 5 months ago
This whole episode disgusts me, and that is what is, an episode, in the pathological drama that is enfolding in the world today.

It has no bearing or relevance to what is occurring in the real world, it's a staged political act.

These so called politicians in the west are so inept, they are no longer able to judge or respond to the will of the people, for which they have been elected I might add, they resort to extraordinary measures to keep the electorate on side.

Unfortunately, it seems to be missing the mark, evidence all the mass unrest in the US, UK and Europe.

The so called Austerity measures have done nothing more than to create more chaos on an already chaotic situation, fueled by emotional fervor.

And of course, we have the MSM fueling the fire. At one time it was described as the 5 th Estate, No longer, it is a collaborator and cooperator in the message that the political elite want to send to the masses.

Well it's a free choice one can believe the evidence that is presented from whatever news source one wants to watch, read or listen to. Personally I think there should be a warning message, like on food labels, that if one listens, watches or reads the MSM, it is a case of buyer beware, in the case of MSM, it is a case of your mind beware, and that is the most important thing as far as I am concerned, ones own personal integrity is not compromised, the ability to discern truth from lies.

system · 5 months ago
Joan ''...These so called politicians in the west are so inept,...''

The politicians are not the ones running the show. Big money is. Really big money. Consortiums of major banks and oil companies for example. The Rockerfeller family is another one. I forgot the number but I do remember their fortune is unbelievably colossal. They are in everything. Just a handful of people are running the show from behind the scene. Surely you know that.

Chase · 5 months ago
Nobody elected the current British pm.
Joan · 5 months ago
demore Yes I do know that. And what we are witnessing is a show for public consumption

It has no relation to what is happening in th real world. Business with Russia continues, although they may have to jump more hurdles, the space station continues, banking and finance continues. trade continues, cultural exchanges continues.

So this is a purely a staged political event to sway the peoples to back a pathological ideology.

They live in a bubble of there own reality and unfortunately they are trying to get people to pierce the bubble and enter that reality.

Will they succeed, lord I hope not.

Xerox · 5 months ago
Consider for example this picture which shows Mr. Skripal and his daughter Yulia presumably in the pub or the restaurant they visited before they collapsed. Who is the third person, visible in the mirror between them, who took the picture?

Is this third person the MI6 agent Pablo Miller who in 1995 recruited Skripal as British double agent. Miller who was also involved in handling the MI6 assets Boris Berezovski and Alexander Litvinenko. Pablo Miller who lives close to Sergej Skripal in Salisbury and is considered to be his friend? The same Pablo Miller who worked with former MI6 agent Christopher Steele's Orbis Business Intelligence which created the 'dirty dossier' about Donald Trump? How deep were the Skripals involved in making up the fake stories in the anti-Trump dossier for which the Clinton campaign paid more than $168,000 dollars. Did the Skripals threaten to talk about the issue? Is that why the incident happened?

George L · 5 months ago
Without going too far into the gymnastics of the Skripals' poisoning, it is quite probable Theresa May may have known there was going to be a poisoning of the Skripals, before the actual poisoning took place. Check the timings of the released 'certainty' data.

Her unprotected visit to the sites should also be a clear indication of 'something'.

What is the name of the 'containing' hospitals, and where is it located?

Isn't this scenario following a distinct parallel path to Iraq's WMD, starting with the very similar vial, and posture?

Shalom

locust · 5 months ago
i see no evidence that there even were victims. Therefore, I assume that the whole thing is fake.
Ned Ludd · 5 months ago
I appreciate the good analysis that Joe here and others elsewhere have done to lay bare the dishonesty and fraud of this staged incident. However, after so many such faked affairs I think another response is necessary.

1. The First Response by Russia and others should be to flatly and bluntly say it is a bunch of lying shit. By this I mean that Russia et al should stop being so damned reasonable. That this sort of stuff should be flung back at the accusers with defiance.

2. Russia et al should inflict immediate and painful measure on the perpetrators. Hit them hard where it counts. Seize assets, arrest nationals, attack economically, impose sanctions. Make it clear that whatever they do to Russia can be taken in stride. But the west is fragile and weak and greedy and so not able to receive return blows. Do this with an air of 'we can take it, we will dish it out, you can't hadle it'.

3. Split the Europeans. Pitch soft to some countries like Italy but pound others like the UK. They are weak, they will fold.

4. Announce bold new military undertakings. Up the building of weapon systems. Increase the reserves, deployment. Make it very clear there will be a price and Russia is prepared to inflict serious pain.

5. Continue to buddy up to China. Dramatically increase economic protection measure. Prepare to attack and undermine western currencies and markets.

The bragging and posturing of the west is a gambler's last throw. They cannot maintain by force or any other means cohesion. Faced with painful resistance parts of the regime will grow fearful and capitulate. Make for civil war. Let them destroy themselves. This is the cheapest and safest way to put the lot out of business.

But, China, Russia and honest people in the west need to show some teeth to set this in motion.

Illusionoffreedom · 5 months ago
Yeah Ned, but I think that's exactly what they want Russia to do, and they ain't playing that game. it must be maddening to them to poke and prod them and they are, like you say, so damn reasonable,
Rebel · 5 months ago
Did anyone miss this!?:

So where is the 'Novichok' talk coming from? Well, someone in the British government propaganda staff watched the current seasons of the British-American spy drama Strike Back. (reverse causality IMO - it was planned, possibly predictive programming and conditioning)

Nina Byzantina points to the summaries of recent episodes:Episode 50 ran in the U.K on November 21 2017 and in the U.S. on February 23 2018:

Meanwhile, General Lázsló shuts down Section 20, forcing Donovan to work in secret. She discovers that Zaryn is in fact Karim Markov, a Russian scientist who allegedly killed his colleagues with Novichok, a nerve agent they invented.

Episodes 51 ran in the U.K on November 28 2017 and in the U.S. on March 2 2018:

Section 20 track Berisovich's meth lab in Turov where Markov is making more Novichok and destroy it, though Berisovich escapes with Markov.

Episodes 52 ran in the U.K on January 31 2018 and in the U.S. on March 9 2018:

Section 20 track down Maya, a local Muslim woman Lowry radicalised, to a local airport. When she attempts to release the Novichok, Reynolds shoots her. The Novichok is fake however, as Berisovich does not want an attack committed in his country. ... By the time Section 20 arrives, Berisovich had already called in the FSB to extract Markov and confiscate the Novichok. Yuri resurfaces to kill McAllister and Wyatt. However they turn the tables and strangle him to death. They then manage to engage the FSB and contain the gas. But in the process Reynolds is exposed. Markov works on an antidote but is killed by the Russians before he can complete. McAllister improvises and saves Reynolds, before Novin blows up the lab. Lowry uses the remainder of the gas to kill Berisovich for trying to betray her.

Here is a clip from the series: [ Link ]
See article here: [ Link ]

Rowan Cocoan · 5 months ago
Rebel Excellent point, and, IMHO, likely true.

Sadly, however, facts and logic are not being used by the masses here as the proles have been sufficiently programmed, that they will 'knee jerk' without analysis, without open minds, and will do what the PTB's MSM tells them to do.

When absolute proof beyond reasonable doubt that the official story of 9/11 came out; to wit: the proof of explosive Alumino Sulfate? Nano sized unexploded particles in the dust of WTC, a friend, newly introduced to the 'bigger truths', asked, 'Well how are they going to explain this away?"

I told him, just like they did in not talking about WTC7. You never knew about it until 2003 when I told you. Same approach here."

Well, assuming your point is true, the more valid it is, the more it will be ignored.

Sad, true. But good thinking!!! Good point!

R.C.

Ryan · 5 months ago
Q.E.D.

Given that Russia had ample chance to kill Skripal when he was imprisoned there for several years, there's obviously a complete lack of a motive on Russia's part. And further given the abundant means, motive and opportunity of, by, and available to, the British government, it looks beyond reasonable doubt to me.

Nice summation Joe!

lysna · 5 months ago
They are arising for Easter celebrations...[ Link ]
ant22 · 5 months ago
The logic behind the official narrative that Russia did it because Skripal was Russian and 'novichok' was originally developed by Russians is not far off believing that standing in a garage makes you a car. But clearly this is how the UK gov & Co see it.

Well, they're not much of 'intellectual Ferraris', are they. More like three-wheel bicycles ridden by a child with special educational needs.

Woodsman · 5 months ago
By now anyone with an opinion on the Skripal poisoning has already decided if they believe the official narrative or not. Still, the event and the ongoing media coverage around it presents an opportunity to understand more than we might think.
I don't even get eye-rolls these days when I talk with True Believers.

I've been noticing that the tactic now employed most often, (other than simply avoiding eye contact and scurrying away), is to interrupt, be louder, to spin anxious, meandering and waaaaay-off point diatribes which go on for many minutes at a time without letup, repeatedly referencing totems and touchstones like, "Scientific peer review is the only thing separating us from chaos!" -and canned talking points which may or may not have any bearing on the subject.

... ... ...

[Aug 31, 2018] Exposing the Giants- The Global Power Elite by Prof. Peter Phillips

Notable quotes:
"... Developing the tradition charted by C. Wright Mills in his 1956 classic The Power Elite , in his latest book, Professor Peter Phillips starts by reviewing the transition from the nation state power elites described by authors such as Mills to a transnational power elite centralized on the control of global capital. ..."
Aug 31, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

Developing the tradition charted by C. Wright Mills in his 1956 classic The Power Elite , in his latest book, Professor Peter Phillips starts by reviewing the transition from the nation state power elites described by authors such as Mills to a transnational power elite centralized on the control of global capital.

Thus, in his just-released study Giants: The Global Power Elite , Phillips, a professor of political sociology at Sonoma State University in the USA, identifies the world's top seventeen asset management firms, such as BlackRock and J.P Morgan Chase, each with more than one trillion dollars of investment capital under management, as the 'Giants' of world capitalism. The seventeen firms collectively manage more than $US41.1 trillion in a self-invested network of interlocking capital that spans the globe.

This $41 trillion represents the wealth invested for profit by thousands of millionaires, billionaires and corporations. The seventeen Giants operate in nearly every country in the world and are 'the central institutions of the financial capital that powers the global economic system'. They invest in anything considered profitable, ranging from 'agricultural lands on which indigenous farmers are replaced by power elite investors' to public assets (such as energy and water utilities) to war.

In addition, Phillips identifies the most important networks of the Global Power Elite and the individuals therein. He names 389 individuals (a small number of whom are women and a token number of whom are from countries other than the United States and the wealthier countries of Western Europe) at the core of the policy planning nongovernmental networks that manage, facilitate and defend the continued concentration of global capital. The Global Power Elite perform two key uniting functions, he argues: they provide ideological justifications for their shared interests (promulgated through their corporate media), and define the parameters of action for transnational governmental organizations and capitalist nation-states.

More precisely, Phillips identifies the 199 directors of the seventeen global financial Giants and offers short biographies and public information on their individual net wealth. These individuals are closely interconnected through numerous networks of association including the World Economic Forum, the International Monetary Conference, university affiliations, various policy councils, social clubs, and cultural enterprises. For a taste of one of these clubs, see this account of The Links in New York. As Phillips observes: 'It is certainly safe to conclude they all know each other personally or know of each other in the shared context of their positions of power.'

The Giants, Phillips documents, invest in each other but also in many hundreds of investment management firms, many of which are near-Giants. This results in tens of trillions of dollars coordinated in a single vast network of global capital controlled by a very small number of people. 'Their constant objective is to find enough safe investment opportunities for a return on capital that allows for continued growth. Inadequate capital-placement opportunities lead to dangerous speculative investments, buying up of public assets, and permanent war spending.'

Because the directors of these seventeen asset management firms represent the central core of international capital, 'Individuals can retire or pass away, and other similar people will move into their place, making the overall structure a self-perpetuating network of global capital control. As such, these 199 people share a common goal of maximum return on investments for themselves and their clients, and they may seek to achieve returns by any means necessary – legal or not . the institutional and structural arrangements within the money management systems of global capital relentlessly seek ways to achieve maximum return on investment, and the conditions for manipulations – legal or not – are always present.'

Like some researchers before him, Phillips identifies the importance of those transnational institutions that serve a unifying function. The World Bank, International Monetary Fund, G20, G7, World Trade Organization (WTO), World Economic Forum (WEF), Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg Group , Bank for International Settlements, Group of 30 (G30), the Council on Foreign Relations and the International Monetary Conference serve as institutional mechanisms for consensus building within the transnational capitalist class, and power elite policy formulation and implementation. 'These international institutions serve the interests of the global financial Giants by supporting policies and regulations that seek to protect the free, unrestricted flow of capital and debt collection worldwide.'

But within this network of transnational institutions, Phillips identifies two very important global elite policy-planning organizations: the Group of Thirty (which has 32 members) and the extended executive committee of the Trilateral Commission (which has 55 members). These nonprofit corporations, which each have a research and support staff, formulate elite policy and issue instructions for their implementation by the transnational governmental institutions like the G7, G20, IMF, WTO, and World Bank. Elite policies are also implemented following instruction of the relevant agent, including governments, in the context. These agents then do as they are instructed. Thus, these 85 members (because two overlap) of the Group of Thirty and the Trilateral Commission comprise a central group of facilitators of global capitalism, ensuring that 'global capital remains safe, secure, and growing'.

So, while many of the major international institutions are controlled by nation-state representatives and central bankers (with proportional power exercised by dominant financial supporters such as the United States and European Union countries), Phillips is more concerned with the transnational policy groups that are nongovernmental because these organizations 'help to unite TCC power elites as a class' and the individuals involved in these organizations facilitate world capitalism. 'They serve as policy elites who seek the continued growth of capital in the world.'

Developing this list of 199 directors of the largest money management firms in the world, Phillips argues, is an important step toward understanding how capitalism works globally today. These global power elite directors make the decisions regarding the investment of trillions of dollars. Supposedly in competition, the concentrated wealth they share requires them to cooperate for their greater good by identifying investment opportunities and shared risk agreements, and working collectively for political arrangements that create advantages for their profit-generating system as a whole.

Their fundamental priority is to secure an average return on investment of 3 to 10 percent, or even more. The nature of any investment is less important than what it yields: continuous returns that support growth in the overall market. Hence, capital investment in tobacco products, weapons of war, toxic chemicals, pollution, and other socially destructive goods and services are judged purely by their profitability. Concern for the social and environmental costs of the investment are non-existent. In other words, inflicting death and destruction are fine because they are profitable.

So what is the global elite's purpose? In a few sentences Phillips characterizes it thus: The elite is largely united in support of the US/NATO military empire that prosecutes a repressive war against resisting groups – typically labeled 'terrorists' – around the world. The real purpose of 'the war on terror' is defense of transnational globalization, the unimpeded flow of financial capital around the world, dollar hegemony and access to oil; it has nothing to do with repressing terrorism which it generates, perpetuates and finances to provide cover for its real agenda. This is why the United States has a long history of CIA and military interventions around the world ostensibly in defense of 'national interests'.

Giants: The Global Power Elite

Wealth and Power

An interesting point that emerges for me from reading Phillips thoughtful analysis is that there is a clear distinction between those individuals and families who have wealth and those individuals who have (sometimes significantly) less wealth (which, nevertheless, is still considerable) but, through their positions and connections, wield a great deal of power. As Phillips explains this distinction, 'the sociology of elites is more important than particular elite individuals and their families'. Just 199 individuals decide how more than $40 trillion will be invested. And this is his central point. Let me briefly elaborate.

There are some really wealthy families in the world, notably including the families Rothschild (France and the United Kingdom), Rockefeller (USA), Goldman-Sachs (USA), Warburgs (Germany), Lehmann (USA), Lazards (France), Kuhn Loebs (USA), Israel Moses Seifs (Italy), Al-Saud (Saudi Arabia), Walton (USA), Koch (USA), Mars (USA), Cargill-MacMillan (USA) and Cox (USA). However, not all of these families overtly seek power to shape the world as they wish.

Similarly, the world's extremely wealthy individuals such as Jeff Bezos (USA), Bill Gates (USA), Warren Buffett (USA), Bernard Arnault (France), Carlos Slim Helu (Mexico) and Francoise Bettencourt Meyers (France) are not necessarily connected in such a way that they exercise enormous power. In fact, they may have little interest in power as such, despite their obvious interest in wealth.

In essence, some individuals and families are content to simply take advantage of how capitalism and its ancilliary governmental and transnational instruments function while others are more politically engaged in seeking to manipulate major institutions to achieve outcomes that not only maximize their own profit and hence wealth but also shape the world itself.

So if you look at the list of 199 individuals that Phillips identifies at the centre of global capital, it does not include names such as Bezos, Gates, Buffett, Koch, Walton or even Rothschild, Rockefeller or Windsor (the Queen of England) despite their well-known and extraordinary wealth. As an aside, many of these names are also missing from the lists compiled by groups such as Forbes and Bloomberg , but their absence from these lists is for a very different reason given the penchant for many really wealthy individuals and families to avoid certain types of publicity and their power to ensure that they do.

In contrast to the names just listed, in Phillips' analysis names like Laurence (Larry) Fink (Chairman and CEO of BlackRock), James (Jamie) Dimon (Chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase) and John McFarlane (Chairman of Barclays Bank), while not as wealthy as those listed immediately above, wield far more power because of their positions and connections within the global elite network of 199 individuals.

Predictably then, Phillips observes, these three individuals have similar lifestyles and ideological orientations. They believe capitalism is beneficial for the world and while inequality and poverty are important issues, they believe that capital growth will eventually solve these problems. They are relatively non-expressive about environmental issues, but recognize that investment opportunities may change in response to climate 'modifications'. As millionaires they own multiple homes. They attended elite universities and rose quickly in international finance to reach their current status as giants of the global power elite. 'The institutions they manage have been shown to engage in illegal collusions with others, but the regulatory fines by governments are essentially seen as just part of doing business.'

In short, as I would characterize this description: They are devoid of a legal or moral framework to guide their actions, whether in relation to business, fellow human beings, war or the environment and climate. They are obviously typical of the elite.

Any apparent concern for people, such as that expressed by Fink and Dimon in response to the racist violence in Charlottesville, USA in August 2017, is simply designed to promote 'stability' or more precisely, a stable (that is, profitable) investment and consumer climate.

The lack of concern for people and issues that might concern many of us is also evident from a consideration of the agenda at elite gatherings. Consider the International Monetary Conference. Founded in 1956, it is a private yearly meeting of the top few hundred bankers in the world. The American Bankers Association (ABA) serves as the secretariat for the conference. But, as Phillips notes: 'Nothing on the agenda seems to address the socioeconomic consequences of investments to determine the impacts on people and the environment.' A casual perusal of the agenda at any elite gathering reveals that this comment applies equally to any elite forum. See, for example, the agenda of the recent WEF meeting in Davos . Any talk of 'concern' is misleading rhetoric.

Hence, in the words of Phillips: The 199 directors of the global Giants are 'a very select set of people. They all know each other personally or know of each other. At least 69 have attended the annual World Economic Forum, where they often serve on panels or give public presentations. They mostly attended the same elite universities, and interact in upperclass social setting[s] in the major cities of the world. They all are wealthy and have significant stock holdings in one or more of the financial Giants. They are all deeply invested in the importance of maintaining capital growth in the world. Some are sensitive to environmental and social justice issues, but they seem to be unable to link these issues to global capital concentration.'

Of course, the global elite cannot manage the world system alone: the elite requires agents to perform many of the functions necessary to control national societies and the individuals within them. 'The interests of the Global Power Elite and the TCC are fully recognized by major institutions in society. Governments, intelligence services, policymakers, universities, police forces, military, and corporate media all work in support of their vital interests.'

In other words, to elaborate Phillips' point and extend it a little, through their economic power, the Giants control all of the instruments through which their policies are implemented. Whether it be governments, national military forces, 'military contractors' or mercenaries (with at least $200 billion spent on private security globally, the industry currently employs some fifteen million people worldwide) used both in 'foreign' wars but also likely deployed in future for domestic control, key 'intelligence' agencies, legal systems and police forces, major nongovernment organizations, or the academic, educational, 'public relations propaganda', corporate media, medical, psychiatric and pharmaceutical industries, all instruments are fully responsive to elite control and are designed to misinform, deceive, disempower, intimidate, repress, imprison (in a jail or psychiatric ward), exploit and/or kill (depending on the constituency) the rest of us, as is readily evident.

Defending Elite Power

Phillips observes that the power elite continually worries about rebellion by the 'unruly exploited masses' against their structure of concentrated wealth. This is why the US military empire has long played the role of defender of global capitalism. As a result, the United States has more than 800 military bases (with some scholars suggesting 1,000) in 70 countries and territories. In comparison, the United Kingdom, France, and Russia have about 30 foreign bases. In addition, US military forces are now deployed in 70 percent of the world's nations with US Special Operations Command (SOCOM) having troops in 147 countries, an increase of 80 percent since 2010. These forces conduct counterterrorism strikes regularly, including drone assassinations and kill/capture raids.

'The US military empire stands on hundreds of years of colonial exploitation and continues to support repressive, exploitative governments that cooperate with global capital's imperial agenda. Governments that accept external capital investment, whereby a small segment of a country's elite benefits, do so knowing that capital inevitably requires a return on investment that entails using up resources and people for economic gain. The whole system continues wealth concentration for elites and expanded wretched inequality for the masses .

'Understanding permanent war as an economic relief valve for surplus capital is a vital part of comprehending capitalism in the world today. War provides investment opportunity for the Giants and TCC elites and a guaranteed return on capital. War also serves a repressive function of keeping the suffering masses of humanity afraid and compliant.'

As Phillips elaborates: This is why defense of global capital is the prime reason that NATO countries now account for 85 percent of the world's military spending; the United States spends more on the military than the rest of the world combined.

In essence, 'the Global Power Elite uses NATO and the US military empire for its worldwide security. This is part of an expanding strategy of US military domination around the world, whereby the US/ NATO military empire, advised by the power elite's Atlantic Council , operates in service to the Transnational Corporate Class for the protection of international capital everywhere in the world'.

This entails 'further pauperization of the bottom half of the world's population and an unrelenting downward spiral of wages for 80 percent of the world. The world is facing economic crisis, and the neoliberal solution is to spend less on human needs and more on security. It is a world of financial institutions run amok, where the answer to economic collapse is to print more money through quantitative easing, flooding the population with trillions of new inflation-producing dollars. It is a world of permanent war, whereby spending for destruction requires further spending to rebuild, a cycle that profits the Giants and global networks of economic power. It is a world of drone killings, extrajudicial assassinations, death, and destruction, at home and abroad.'

Where is this all heading?

So what are the implications of this state of affairs? Phillips responds unequivocally: 'This concentration of protected wealth leads to a crisis of humanity, whereby poverty, war, starvation, mass alienation, media propaganda, and environmental devastation are reaching a species-level threat. We realize that humankind is in danger of possible extinction'.

He goes on to state that the Global Power Elite is probably the only entity 'capable of correcting this condition without major civil unrest, war, and chaos' and elaborates an important aim of his book: to raise awareness of the importance of systemic change and the redistribution of wealth among both the book's general readers but also the elite, 'in the hope that they can begin the process of saving humanity.' The book's postscript is a 'A Letter to the Global Power Elite', co-signed by Phillips and 90 others, beseeching the elite to act accordingly.

'It is no longer acceptable for you to believe that you can manage capitalism to grow its way out of the gross inequalities we all now face. The environment cannot accept more pollution and waste, and civil unrest is everywhere inevitable at some point. Humanity needs you to step up and insure that trickle-down becomes a river of resources that reaches every child, every family, and all human beings. We urge you to use your power and make the needed changes for humanity's survival.'

But he also emphasizes that nonviolent social movements, using the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a moral code, can accelerate the process of redistributing wealth by pressuring the elite into action.

Conclusion

Peter Phillips has written an important book. For those of us interested in understanding elite control of the world, this book is a vital addition to the bookshelf. And like any good book, as you will see from my comments both above and below, it raised more questions for me even while it answered many.

As I read Phillips' insightful and candid account of elite behavior in this regard, I am reminded, yet again, that the global power elite is extraordinarily violent and utterly insane: content to kill people in vast numbers (whether through starvation or military violence) and destroy the biosphere for profit, with zero sense of humanity's now limited future. See 'The Global Elite is Insane Revisited' and 'Human Extinction by 2026? A Last Ditch Strategy to Fight for Human Survival' with more detailed explanations for the violence and insanity here: 'Why Violence?' and 'Fearless Psychology and Fearful Psychology: Principles and Practice' .

For this reason I do not share his faith in moral appeals to the elite, as articulated in the letter in his postscript. It is fine to make the appeal but history offers no evidence to suggest that there will be any significant response. The death and destruction inflicted by elites is highly profitable, centuries-old and ongoing. It will take powerful, strategically-focused nonviolent campaigns (or societal collapse) to compel the necessary changes in elite behavior. Hence, I fully endorse his call for nonviolent social movements to compel elite action where we cannot make the necessary changes without their involvement. See 'A Nonviolent Strategy to End Violence and Avert Human Extinction' and Nonviolent Campaign Strategy .

I would also encourage independent action, in one or more of several ways, by those individuals and communities powerful enough to do so. This includes nurturing more powerful individuals by making 'My Promise to Children' , participating in 'The Flame Tree Project to Save Life on Earth' and signing the online pledge of 'The People's Charter to Create a Nonviolent World' .

Fundamentally, Giants: The Global Power Elite is a call to action. Professor Peter Phillips is highly aware of our predicament – politically, socially, economically, environmentally and climatically – and the critical role played by the global power elite in generating that predicament.

If we cannot persuade the global power elite to respond sensibly to that predicament, or nonviolently compel it to do so, humanity's time on Earth is indeed limited.

*

Robert J. Burrowes has a lifetime commitment to understanding and ending human violence. He has done extensive research since 1966 in an effort to understand why human beings are violent and has been a nonviolent activist since 1981. He is the author of 'Why Violence?' His email address is [email protected] and his website is here . He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

[Aug 30, 2018] >Once the spy agencies become the controlling element a government degenerates into a regime or imperium depending upon its level of power.

Aug 30, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

exiled off mainstreet , August 29, 2018 at 01:37

Once the spy agencies become the controlling element a government degenerates into a regime or imperium depending upon its level of power.

The rule of law is sidelined and a cynical form of dictatorship develops.

Britain, the US and all anglophone countries are exhibiting the results of this sort of evolution.

It is more dangerous now than when the historical odious tyrannies ran riot during the '30s and '40s of last century because technology has advanced to the point that their continuance is a threat to our survival as a species.

[Aug 30, 2018] Petition about Israeli interference in British politics

Aug 30, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

frank , August 28, 2018 at 21:46

It's really important that as many people as possible sign this petition about Israeli interference in British politics https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/214072

Reply ↓
Shakesvshav , August 28, 2018 at 15:08

Some of you former ambassadors have had a torrid time of it: https://www.sott.net/article/394112-Former-US-ambassador-claims-Israel-tried-to-assassinate-him-in-1980

There are forces at work which a humble citizen can only hope he never falls foul of.

Yonatan , August 28, 2018 at 15:55

FWIW an Israeli journalist has made an FOI request to the Israeli government in an attempt to tease out Israeli government connections with the villification of Corbyn by the various 'Friends of Israel' in the UK and the role of Masot wrt Israel as partially exposed in the Al Jazeera undercover video on attempts to oust UK MPs insufficiently obeisant to Israel..

https://mondoweiss.net/2018/08/attorney-determine-campaign/

[Aug 30, 2018] >Jeremy Corbyn is still there and the pro Israelis have had an unprecedented amount of media coverage to convince the population that he's on a par with Goebbels.

Aug 30, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk
duplicitousdemocracy , August 28, 2018 at 14:24

The problem with this scenario is that it's starting to look ineffective. Jeremy Corbyn is still there and the pro Israelis have had an unprecedented amount of media coverage to convince the population that he's on a par with Goebbels. I suspect having already suffered the vilification he received in his ambassador days, he is in a much better position to endure another campaign. There is also the (not so) small matter of a very loyal and supportive blog readership which is always willing to help him in his hour of need. Craig Murray isn't the sitting duck you would like him to think he is.

[Aug 30, 2018] Back in the (Great) Game- The Revenge of Eurasian Land Powers by Pepe Escobar

Notable quotes:
"... Russia's Geo-economic Strategy for a Greater Eurasia ..."
Aug 30, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Back in the (Great) Game: The Revenge of Eurasian Land Powers August 29, 2018 • 34 Comments

What is left roaming our wilderness of mirrors depends on the mood swings of the Goddess of the Market. No wonder an effect of Eurasia integration will be a death blow to Bretton Woods and "democratic" neoliberalism, says Pepe Escobar.

Get ready for a major geopolitical chessboard rumble: from now on, every butterfly fluttering its wings and setting off a tornado directly connects to the battle between Eurasia integration and Western sanctions as foreign policy.

It is the paradigm shift of China's New Silk Roads versus America's Our Way or the Highway. We used to be under the illusion that history had ended. How did it come to this?

Hop in for some essential time travel. For centuries the Ancient Silk Road, run by mobile nomads, established the competitiveness standard for land-based trade connectivity; a web of trade routes linking Eurasia to the – dominant – Chinese market.

In the early 15 th century, based on the tributary system, China had already established a Maritime Silk Road along the Indian Ocean all the way to the east coast of Africa, led by the legendary Admiral Zheng He. Yet it didn't take much for imperial Beijing to conclude that China was self-sufficient enough – and that emphasis should be placed on land-based operations.

Deprived of a trade connection via a land corridor between Europe and China, Europeans went all-out for their own maritime silk roads. We are all familiar with the spectacular result: half a millennium of Western dominance.

Until quite recently the latest chapters of this Brave New World were conceptualized by the Mahan, Mackinder and Spykman trio.

The Heartland of the World

Mackinder

Halford Mackinder 's 1904 Heartland Theory – a product of the imperial Russia-Britain New Great Game – codified the supreme Anglo, and then Anglo-American, fear of a new emerging land power able to reconnect Eurasia to the detriment of maritime powers.

Nicholas Spykman 's 1942 Rimland Theory advocated that mobile maritime powers, such as the UK and the U.S., should aim for strategic offshore balancing. The key was to control the maritime edges of Eurasia -- that is, Western Europe, the Middle East and East Asia -- against any possible Eurasia unifier. When you don't need to maintain a large Eurasia land-based army, you exercise control by dominating trade routes along the Eurasian periphery.

Even before Mackinder and Spykman, U.S. Navy Admiral Alfred Thayer Mahan had come up in the 1890s with his Influence of Sea Power Upon History – whereby the "island" U.S. should establish itself as a seaworthy giant, modeled on the British empire, to maintain a balance of power in Europe and Asia.

It was all about containing the maritime edges of Eurasia.

In fact, we lived in a mix of Heartland and Rimland. In 1952, then Secretary of State John Foster Dulles adopted the concept of an "island chain" (then expanded to three chains) alongside Japan, Australia and the Philippines to encircle and contain both China and the USSR in the Pacific. (Note the Trump administration's attempt at revival via the Quad– U.S., Japan, Australia and India).

George Kennan, the architect of containing the USSR, was drunk on Spykman, while, in a parallel track, as late as 1988, President Ronald Reagan's speechwriters were still drunk on Mackinder. Referring to U.S. competitors as having a shot at dominating the Eurasian landmass, Reagan gave away the plot: "We fought two world wars to prevent this from occurring," he said.

Eurasia integration and connectivity is taking on many forms. The China-driven New Silk Roads, also known as Belt and Road Initiative (BRI); the Russia-driven Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU); the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB); the International North-South Transportation Corridor (INSTC), and myriad other mechanisms, are now leading us to a whole new game.

How delightful that the very concept of Eurasian "connectivity" actually comes from a 2007 World Bank report about competitiveness in global supply chains.

Also delightful is how the late Zbigniew "Grand Chessboard" Brzezinski was "inspired" by Mackinder after the fall of the USSR – advocating the partition of a then weak Russia into three separate regions; European, Siberian and Far Eastern.

All Nodes Covered

At the height of the unipolar moment, history did seem to have "ended." Both the western and eastern peripheries of Eurasia were under tight Western control – in Germany and Japan, the two critical nodes in Europe and East Asia. There was also that extra node in the southern periphery of Eurasia, namely the energy-wealthy Middle East.

Washington had encouraged the development of a multilateral European Union that might eventually rival the U.S. in some tech domains, but most of all would enable the U.S. to contain Russia by proxy.

China was only a delocalized, low-cost manufacture base for the expansion of Western capitalism. Japan was not only for all practical purposes still occupied, but also instrumentalized via the Asian Development Bank (ADB), whose message was: We fund your projects only if you are politically correct.

The primary aim, once again, was to prevent any possible convergence of European and East Asian powers as rivals to the US.

The confluence between communism and the Cold War had been essential to prevent Eurasia integration. Washington configured a sort of benign tributary system – borrowing from imperial China – designed to ensure perpetual unipolarity. It was duly maintained by a formidable military, diplomatic, economic, and covert apparatus, with a star role for the Chalmers Johnson-defined Empire of Bases encircling, containing and dominating Eurasia.

Compare this recent idyllic past with Brzezinski's – and Henry Kissinger's – worst nightmare: what could be defined today as the "revenge of history".

That features the Russia-China strategic partnership, from energy to trade: interpolating Russia-China geo-economics; the concerted drive to bypass the U.S. dollar; the AIIB and the BRICS's New Development Bank involved in infrastructure financing; the tech upgrade inbuilt in Made in China 2025 ; the push towards an alternative banking clearance mechanism (a new SWIFT); massive stockpiling of gold reserves; and the expanded politico-economic role of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).

As Glenn Diesen formulates in his brilliant book, Russia's Geo-economic Strategy for a Greater Eurasia , "the foundations of an Eurasian core can create a gravitational pull to draw the rimland towards the centre."

If the complex, long-term, multi-vector process of Eurasia integration could be resumed by just one formula, it would be something like this: the heartland progressively integrating; the rimlands mired in myriad battlefields and the power of the hegemon irretrievably dissolving. Mahan, Mackinder and Spykman to the rescue? It's not enough.

Divide and Rule, Revisited

The Oracle still speaks.

The same applies for the preeminent post-mod Delphic Oracle, also known as Henry Kissinger, simultaneously adorned by hagiography gold and despised as a war criminal.

Before the Trump inauguration, there was much debate in Washington about how Kissinger might engineer – for Trump – a "pivot to Russia" that he had envisioned 45 years ago. This is how I framed the shadow play a t the time.

In the end, it's always about variations of Divide and Rule – as in splitting Russia from China and vice-versa. In theory, Kissinger advised Trump to "rebalance" towards Russia to oppose the irresistible Chinese ascension. It won't happen, not only because of the strength of the Russia-China strategic partnership, but because across the Beltway, neocons and humanitarian imperialists ganged up to veto it.

Brzezinski's perpetual Cold War mindset still lords over a fuzzy mix of the Wolfowitz Doctrine and the Clash of Civilizations. The Russophobic Wolfowitz Doctrine – still fully classified – is code for Russia as the perennial top existential threat to the U.S. The Clash, for its part, codifies another variant of Cold War 2.0: East (as in China) vs. West.

Kissinger is trying some rebalancing/hedging himself, noting that the mistake the West (and NATO) is making "is to think that there is a sort of historic evolution that will march across Eurasia – and not to understand that somewhere on that march it will encounter something very different to a Westphalian entity."

Both Eurasianist Russia and civilization-state China are already on post-Westphalian mode. The redesign goes deep. It includes a key treaty signed in 2001, only a few weeks before 9/11, stressing that both nations renounce any territorial designs on one another's territory. This happens to concern, crucially, the Primorsky Territory in the Russian Far East along the Amur River, which was ruled by the Ming and Qing empires.

Moreover, Russia and China commit never to do deals with any third party, or allow a third country to use its territory to harm the other's sovereignty, security and territorial integrity.

So much for turning Russia against China. Instead, what will develop 24/7 are variations of U.S. military and economic containment against Russia, China and Iran – the key nodes of Eurasia integration – in a geo-strategic spectrum. It will include intersections of heartland and rimland across Syria, Ukraine, Afghanistan and the South China Sea. That will proceed in parallel to the Fed weaponizing the U.S. dollar at will.

Heraclitus Defies Voltaire

Voltaire

Alastair Crooke took a great shot at deconstructing why Western global elites are terrified of the Russian conceptualization of Eurasia. It's because "they 'scent' a stealth reversion to the old, pre-Socratic values: for the Ancients the very notion of 'man', in that way, did not exist. There were only men: Greeks, Romans, barbarians, Syrians, and so on. This stands in obvious opposition to universal, cosmopolitan 'man'."

So it's Heraclitus versus Voltaire – even as "humanism" as we inherited it from the Enlightenment, is de facto over. Whatever is left roaming our wilderness of mirrors depends on the irascible mood swings of the Goddess of the Market. No wonder one of the side effects of progressive Eurasia integration will be not only a death blow to Bretton Woods but also to "democratic" neoliberalism.

What we have now is also a remastered version of sea power versus land powers. Relentless Russophobia is paired with supreme fear of a Russia-Germany rapprochement – as Bismarck wanted, and as Putin and Merkel recently hinted at. The supreme nightmare for the U.S. is in fact a truly Eurasian Beijing-Berlin-Moscow partnership.

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has not even begun; according to the official Beijing timetable, we're still in the planning phase. Implementation starts next year. The horizon is 2039.

(Wellcome Library, London.)

This is China playing a long-distance game of go on steroids, incrementally making the best strategic decisions (allowing for margins of error, of course) to render the opponent powerless as he does not even realize he is under attack.

The New Silk Roads were launched by Xi Jinping five years ago, in Astana (the Silk Road Economic Belt) and Jakarta (the Maritime Silk Road). It took Washington almost half a decade to come up with a response. And that amounts to an avalanche of sanctions and tariffs. Not good enough.

Russia for its part was forced to publicly announce a show of mesmerizing weaponry to dissuade the proverbial War Party adventurers probably for good – while heralding Moscow's role as co-driver of a brand new game.

On sprawling, superimposed levels, the Russia-China partnership is on a roll; recent examples include summits in Singapore, Astana and St. Petersburg ; the SCO summit in Qingdao; and the BRICS Plus summit.

Were the European peninsula of Asia to fully integrate before mid-century – via high-speed rail, fiber optics, pipelines – into the heart of massive, sprawling Eurasia, it's game over. No wonder Exceptionalistan elites are starting to get the feeling of a silk rope drawn ever so softly, squeezing their gentle throats.

Pepe Escobar is the correspondent-at-large for Hong Kong-based Asia Times . His latest book is 2030 . Follow him on Facebook .

4152

Tags: Halford Mackinder Henry Kissinger Nicholas Spykman Pepe Escobar Ronald Reagan Zbigniew Brzezinski

Post navigation ← How the Department of Homeland Security Created a Deceptive Tale of Russia Hacking US Voter Sites VIPS Tells Media Support for Brennan is Not Unanimous → 34 comments for " Back in the (Great) Game: The Revenge of Eurasian Land Powers "

Hide Comments

Ron Craven aka Ronzig the Wizard , August 30, 2018 at 1:20 am

Isn't it ironic; the people of the Western world, at least those of us who even have a clue of what's happening, are reduced to praying for Russia and China to save us from our own elite leaders WHO SEEK TO REDUCE ALL OF US TO ABSOLUTE SLAVERY? I thank God that Putin is a political genius who surpasses anything the West can put forward. And China the definition of inscrutable has quietly allowed us to finance their takeover of the complete Western economic system which is breathing its last breaths as our leaders wonder what happened.
I have a friend who has a masters degree in business and economics yet he has no clue of what is happening right before his eyes yet I who barely squeezed through grade 12 foresaw this a decade ago. It's pathetic that the most powerful people in the world are sp blinded by greed and dogma that they can't recognize the writing on the wall.

Tom Kath , August 29, 2018 at 7:56 pm

The reference to the pre Socratic "men" as compared to "Man" is significant. – It is inherent in the concept of "Globalism", "Hegemony", and "One God".

Jessika , August 29, 2018 at 7:47 pm

Dunderhead, I am not with the global warming/climate change folks at all! I am with folks who believe that we all must limit consuming and must learn to make do with less, not be greedy, live more simply. Climate change will always happen, that is basic geology, astronomy, science shows that. I am saying that, we are now seeing major shifts and I am with those who say our Sun is the major player. We have millions of landfills on earth, plastic and polllutants choking oceans and killing marine life. I consider these "carbon peddlers" just another form of disinformation and very misinformed, it's political hype for the masses, but we have serious consequences for future generations that are real due to our capitalistic overconsumption and nearly 8 billion on Earth. I think China has awareness of that to some extent, but the competitive pressure from the Western genesis of capitalistic consumption is huge. For my personal choices, I am working to keep my plastic usage to a minimum. There is evidence that we are in the midst of an electromagnetic polar shift right now, we are seeing an intensification of number of earthquakes right now, and the last few years we have witnessed extreme catastrophic earth events. It is Earth itself doing this, and it may be coming from the mantle, or even the core. I used to be support staff for earth scientists in Boston and I learned a lot, took geology courses.

Joe Wallace , August 29, 2018 at 11:57 pm

Jessika:

"I am with folks who believe that we all must limit consuming and must learn to make do with less, not be greedy, live more simply."

I'm with you on that. We in the U.S. and Canada live in immensely wealthy societies, despite the wage stagnation that afflicts those in the middle class and below. It might be making a virtue of necessity, but many of us can live relatively comfortable lives by luxuriating in adequacy, a privilege not accorded those in the developing world.

jose , August 29, 2018 at 6:52 pm

Mr. Escobar is correct to assert that "integration will be a death blow to Bretton Woods and "democratic" neoliberalism" If one internalized this basic premise, it is easy to comprehend why Western elites throw a monkey wrench at every possible opportunity of Asia and Europe integrating. They fail to realize that all things must come to an end because their minds are closed to this very real possibility. Paraphrasing minister and speaker john mason "Nothing dies quicker than a new idea in a closed mind" Their days are numbered and they know it.

jose , August 29, 2018 at 6:37 pm

What I concluded from this article was that Western elites cannot stop what is coming. It is a very natural process that Europe and Asia integrate at some point. Western elites can only postpone the inevitable with their wars and tariffs. In other words, the idea of integration has been maturing long enough and there is no turning back. Quoting Victor Hugo Les Miserables "No army can stop an idea whose time has come"

Dunderhead , August 29, 2018 at 6:36 pm

First off, Pepe you rock, you are the coolest and probably most interesting journalists out right now. Couple of comments however, what looks like Genius from the Chinese is just strategic common sense though you're right the Chinese do know how to play the long game. Speaking of which I really don't believe that they are going to be as benevolent a hegemon as Pepe is suggesting, they're not particularly good about respecting African opportunities for employment on some of their various projects in that region. All that being said I think the new Silk Road project is a fantastic idea and can only wish that that if these any sense left in these incompetent criminals running our government, they could figure out the long-term opportunities for cooperating with the Chinese, the arms manufacturers do not always have to produce arms, guns into plowshares as it were. Anyway Great to see your article and consortium, I've got to catch up with your stuff at Asia Times, Thanks.

Jessika , August 29, 2018 at 5:28 pm

Always fun to read Pepe Escobar, why i look at Asia Times online daily as well as Eurasia Futures and South China Morning Post. The Asians play the long game while the impatient West, especially US, play only the short gotta-have-it-NOW game. The bellicose bully bombing Machiavellian neocons with their hardening of arteries in the brain can't conceive of cooperation. There is one other surprise prime mover in this mix often overlooked, and that is Gaia or Mother Earth. At least it seems that Xi Jinping and the Chinese have made reference to environmental concerns with the BRI, which is more than can be said for the Western neocolonialists in their bombing for "democracy".

At a recent meeting with a top advisor of Assad in Syria, a Lebanese paper reported that the US negotiators said they would withdraw if Syria would give them a cut of the oil! Wow, what gall! Assad would not agree, wonder what's next? This is the way they work, as Pepe said, "My way or the highway", gangster diplomacy. There is no honor among thieves.

Dunderhead , August 29, 2018 at 6:48 pm

Jessica, There is obviously more carbon in the atmosphere, I don't think that is debatable but the technology to actually do something about this has been around for 45 years orso, the fact that they don't do anything about it, means to me this furor over climate change is just another government scam like overpopulation, anyway specific technologies: thorium based fission and long-term carbon sequestration, these are easy things to look up. I don't believe I know everything about this topic but it's even real debatable that wait now the climate is optimum in the sense that a slightly warmer climate all around gives longer growing seasons and makes it also less expensive to heat one's home. So to ask the question, why do you believe global warming is such a problem more than just general pollution?

irina , August 29, 2018 at 10:16 pm

Yes, here in the continental subarctic (Interior Alaska) we are looking forward to a longer
growing season and less heating expense. BUT what we are seeing is simply more variable
weather, making it harder to grow anything in an already challenging climate. Also, for some
reason (go figure) weeds are more adaptive to higher CO2 levels than food crops. Meaning
the weeds thrive even better than ever, while the food crops grow at about the same rate as
always, only more choked out by weeds than ever. Other problems include new (to us) bugs
and plant diseases as they move North, drier droughts and heavier rains (this was predicted)
and skewed seasons with much later springs and somewhat later falls. (Not great, as our
really sunny season is spring, not fall).

Many areas of the planet may end up having such unpredictable year-to-year weather that
annual agriculture, upon which most of the global population depends, becomes untenable.

Professor , August 29, 2018 at 5:24 pm

I've been reading Pepe's stuff for a few years now.I like it. He is good at, Macro/ big picture stuff. He's great on Pipelinestan issues as well. But I think he picks and chooses his ideas a little too freely at times .The result can be more like a collage at times than a Picasso. We are pushing real hard right now on Russia, China and Iran. Eurasian Integration Projects are clearly a threat to American dominance especially since we are undermining the dollar through unilateral sanctions and other tricks everywhere, up and down the line. This should be of great concern to our allies but they are already on board behind whatever decisions Our Government makes. They really don't don't have anywhere to go. Germany and Japan are totally integrated with our economy and Germany has been the biggest beneficiary in terms of economic and fiscal policy of NATO's march eastward. They love it and they'll buy Russia's gas too. No problem. We won't stop them. I believe Trump's strategy is less aggressive than Clinton's would have been. There really isn't much of a choice. One thing I would add, Big Picture: China did not build the Great Wall as a tourist attraction. It was to keep out barbarians/foreigners, After the Boxer Rebellion they kicked out foreigners. Mao kicked out foreigners. They are fine with themselves, A guy I know who spends a lot of time in China and knows many very well, socially, says that the Chinese think the next 1000 years belong to them. . Forget a Project for a New Chinese Century, They expect the New Silk Road to deliver the goods big time and forever. They need Russian Gas to pull it off. They also like 5th and 6th generation Russian weapons but so apparently do everyone else.

Stanko , August 29, 2018 at 4:26 pm

Master analasis.

Paul E. Merrell , August 29, 2018 at 1:44 pm

For those interested in the topic of this article, I heartily recommend reading an Army War College paper from 2000. It's longish, but gives MacInder, Spykman, and geopolitics itself a good debunking. http://ssi.armywarcollege.edu/pubs/parameters/articles/00summer/fettweis.htm

Dunderhead , August 29, 2018 at 7:20 pm

Great article, thanks!

Dunderhead , August 29, 2018 at 9:10 pm

Paul by the way, a couple of weeks back I revisited a post and sore your comment, thanks I think you made some valid points, I particularly thought it was encouraging of meaningful opposition to corporations having the rights of individuals, and your analogy about the regulation of the telephone companys back in the day, on the other hand, in an age of mass communication incorporate state propaganda the fact that more Americans cannot find it in their hearts to feel for the plight of Palestinians simply because they are ignorant of the fax in the matter is testimony to censorship has always been with us. I personally had no knowledge of the Liberty incident until about three months ago and I am a relatively avid reader, this discovery is due to independent journalism who support themselves directly through patrion or readit and probably other platforms, I think this is becoming normal, in certain ways this is a fortunate time to be alive. Anyway thanks again!

Herman , August 29, 2018 at 1:36 pm

The legitimate grievance against the United States is that it has overplayed its hand, throwing sanctions to anyone not adhering to its rules. The power we have over the world banking system created a Putin who rose to challenge our unipolar world. For the sake of the world, and the United States, it is to be hoped that we can be made to climb down and join the rest of the world as real equals.

Escobar mention the principle of Westphalian sovereignty which is part of the UN Charter: : maybe it should be read aloud on the floor of a joint session of Congress and tweeted to our President. Maybe sent to our networks and newspapers. We created the UN Charter, we should abide by it

Mary V , August 29, 2018 at 12:35 pm

This is a fantastic read. I am wondering why the links to the Asia Times pieces don't display correctly – hmmm – maybe it's the new censorship.

I like to think that American Exceptionalism is nearing its end, but I don't hold out hope it will happen soon enough. It appears they are doubling-down on the jingoism of late. Then again, that's what desperation looks like.

Jeff Harrison , August 29, 2018 at 12:18 pm

Pepe is always able to get you thinking

A major difference between the US and China is that the US tries to influence with heavy handed threats and coercion while the Chinese use flattery and assistance to help you see things their way. Russia under Putin acts like China but his predecessors were more of the heavy handed variety. In the end though American hubris and insufferability (from the last four presidents) has driven Russia and China together in a way that economic systems (communism) never could. The US is the past. We have frittered away so much of our wealth and international goodwill chasing phantom fears that were all well past their use by date decades ago. We have spent ourselves into penury. Not just because we have $22T in debt, but more importantly because we no longer have the economic engine to generate enough wealth to support $22T in debt and counting. Yeah, go ahead and print more money. Every dollar will be worth less and less.

Mary V , August 29, 2018 at 12:37 pm

Not to mention the gorilla in the room, the trillions of dollars going into our over-extended military, which doesn't get us anything but the reputation as global terrorists and bullies. :(

bobzz , August 29, 2018 at 4:28 pm

Well, I had a comment here, agreeing and enlarging on Jeff's, but it it gone. I've never had that happen before on CN. If CN did not do it, who did? Just asking.

A Johnson , August 29, 2018 at 4:33 pm

It's not 'we' that did all that, plenty of 'us' have been screaming for decades about foreign deaths, wars for profit, and looting of treasure BY the insiders. The elites did it, including buying the propaganda. 'We' always get stuck with their bill. I'd like a few necks stretched.

enochered , August 29, 2018 at 12:13 pm

This would all be fine if we were still dealing with Mandarins and Tzars but we are not and it is hard to escape from the fear that having watched Baron Rothschild build a new Kingdom quite close to China, that we are simply watching the construction of ever more 'private' Unions, which will, of course, be run by hidden controllers.

Gary Weglarz , August 29, 2018 at 11:57 am

"No wonder Exceptionalistan elites are starting to get the feeling of a silk rope drawn ever so softly, squeezing their gentle throats." – Thank you for that closing Pepe. I needed that very satisfying visual.

Groucho , August 29, 2018 at 11:41 am

Another excellent article from Escobar. I always appreciate his ability to summarize the huge geopolitical transformation that is under way. I also find the response of Western elites to be remarkable. Rather than work toward accommodation and cooperation they will bankrupt themselves in a futile attempt to maintain hegemony. Galbraith was correct when he said that those in power will bring about their total destruction rather than give up any part of their advantage.

Mary V , August 29, 2018 at 12:38 pm

I love the Galbraith sentiment – perfect.

Mark Thomason , August 29, 2018 at 11:13 am

A very long railway cannot support continental-scale trade and integration. That requires what does it now, 100,000-ton container ships in constant flow. It is a question of volume first, and of cost per container second. Ships are so far ahead it is absurd to compare.

China is developing the necessary commercial ports to use for this. That is the only real challenge, if there is one. That means the sea, the rim, for both the continent and its rivals. China's real progress is on that.

However, the US and allies are the other end of that sea route. It can't be maintained except by some level of cooperation. There can be no great game, not combined with the integration of world trade. That is a neocon fantasy, they promote as cover for their schemes to dominate with US state power to gain private profit.

TomG , August 29, 2018 at 10:44 am

While the Chinese plan then implement for a long term infrastructure strategy for interconnected markets, we skip the planning piece and go instead for yet another drone base in yet another foreign country. Our long term strategy is apparently to blow up what ever the Chinese-Russia-Euro alliance builds. This has certainly been our expression of 'defending our national interests'–the Kissinger-Brzezinski doctrine of endlessly repeating stupidity until we are completely bankrupt as a nation. When the global corporations abandon the USA for more vibrant and inherently stable infrastructure the USA empire can retire into its apparent destiny as the model for late 21st century failed states.

I hope I'm not expected to share Mr. Escobar's article with others. While I think important points were made and one can link easily to more information, I did think my eyes were going to glaze over with all the jargon and post-Westphalian modal references. Which is to say I might well have missed his most salient points. I'm not intellectual enough to know for sure. :-)

John V. Walsh , August 29, 2018 at 2:19 pm

TomG, You make an excellent point.
Indeed the Chinese agree as seen from this opinion piece in Global Times: http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1117108.shtml
The money quote is:
"Considering that sea transportation is comparatively cheap and safe, China must attach great importance to the construction of the south route of the Silk Road, that is, to connect the CPEC (China Pakistan Economic Corridor) with the Silk Road Economic Belt, and to make supporting the economic and social development of Pakistan as the top priority of the Silk Road strategy."
"There are pros and cons to the development gap between eastern and western China. On the one hand, it poses a serious challenge to the government's efforts to support the development of Xinjiang and Tibet and to eliminate poverty. On the other, it sustains China's demographic dividend and provides a historical opportunity for the "second reform and opening up." The vast central and western regions have got their advantages in terms of labor cost, land supply and natural resources. Therefore, on the basis of access to the Indian Ocean and China-Pakistan Railway, the Kashgar special economic zone, and other western towns are expected to become "inland ports" connecting the oceans, thus re-creating the Shenzhen miracle and becoming the engine of China's second great opening up and development."

In sum the land route goes from the Kashgar region of Xian in China through Pakistan to the Indian Ocean. In this way China becomes a two-ocean power in a way. But it is a long way to Kashgar from the rest of China even the western part and another long haul through Pakistan to the Indian Ocean. Can this work?

On the other hand, although transport via a land route across all of Eurasia by train is more expensive than by rail, rail is quicker and not as prohibitively expensive as air transport. Will it all work?

I believe MacKinder saw rail transport as the vehicle of Eurasian integration and felt that the trans-Siberian railway was the first attempt at it, if memory serves. Was he right?

In general the Belt and Road must not only be a good idea, it must make sense economically. Does it? Hope so because it holds out hope for the development of the Asian interior, including western China and for spreading China's successful poverty alleviation and development model across Asia and even into Africa. Not to mention it spells the end of the unipolar world which is becoming a worse nightmare every day.

Bob Van Noy , August 29, 2018 at 9:58 am

Geopolitics is endlessly fascinating as we see here again with thanks to Pepe Escobar. Now we hear of yet another geo-arrangement from Glenn Diesen. I havn't read Mr. Diesen's book but I don't doubt that he offers up many insights for would be World Managers. Those managers, both in the past, and those yet to advise, have generally caused much serious chaos to the general populations affected by their thoughts, neither Henry Kissinger or Zbigniew Brzezinski have done America much good for their theories. I'm convinced that the American People are not now and never were, interested in any concept of Empire. We've been Marketed or Propagandized into a coordinated responses, usually an inappropriate ones. This time we actually have an opportunity to re-evaluate our recent lost history and rebuild better more appropriately eco-friendly local economies and to become a better World Neighbor or Partner as the Diplomats say.

A good previous article is here: https://consortiumnews.com/2016/09/07/old-cold-warriors-cool-to-new-cold-war/

TomG , August 29, 2018 at 10:54 am

" we actually have an opportunity to re-evaluate our recent lost history and rebuild better more appropriately eco-friendly local economies and to become a better World Neighbor "

Oh, how my hope lies in doing just this!

One thing I've observed again and again living beside the Amish, they are kind to those of us 'outside their community' and will help if any help is needed. Kindness and neighborliness go hand in hand–and they us show it can be done.

John V. Walsh , August 29, 2018 at 2:32 pm

TomG,
Another good thought.
BUT the future is no longer in our hands – it is in the hands of the Eurasian powers, China, Russia, Iran AND India. They have to do something new for humanity that goes beyond the old imperial ways to look at the world. Escobar AND Kissinger are both fond of citing Zheng He as evidence that genuine Empire as oppose to border disputes is not in the Chinese culture – or in their DNA as Xi puts it.
The best we can do here in the US is to make sure that the US ruling Elite does not blow us all up, the Samson option, as it tries to come to terms with the new realities. That means supporting all peaceful overtures to Russia and China. One example is the recent Helsinki Summit which deserves our support and had the approval of a majority of Americans. So did the idea of a follow-up. Unfortunately amongst organized progressives there was nary a word of praise or support with very few exceptions, one of them being CodePink which is much to be commended. Otherwise Trump Derangement Syndrome prevailed. And so we drift toward oblivion.

mike k , August 29, 2018 at 9:14 am

Heading off the Samson option by the wounded hegemon US Empire will be a major concern for all global players from now on. As well as factoring in the inevitable collapse of industrial civilization. There is not any way for all this to end well in sight at this time. Human extinction seems by far the most likely outcome for us. Too bad – we have probably screwed up our world, and ourselves, beyond the possibility of recovery.

Sally Snyder , August 29, 2018 at 7:30 am

Here is a more detailed look at how both Russia and China are putting a mechanism in place that will allow them to work around future trade problems with the United States:

https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/06/russia-and-china-growing-alliance-under.html

The sanctions and tariffs imposed by the Trump Administration against Russia and China will become increasingly ineffective as the old unipolar global order continues to fade away.

[Aug 30, 2018] >Libya and the Failure of 'Humanitarian' Intervention by DANIEL LARISON

Notable quotes:
"... A Foreign Policy for the Left ..."
"... he saw very clearly then how easily the rhetoric of protecting civilians could be abused to launch an unjustified war. ..."
Aug 28, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Samuel Moyn's review of Michael Walzer's A Foreign Policy for the Left is worth reading in its entirety. This passage jumped out at me:

Walzer's attempt to snatch the promise of American intervention from the jaws of recent horrors shows the need to repeat the litany. The left has long since learned how difficult it is to respond to those who laughed when it tried to save the pure idea of communism from its totalitarian applications. Walzer applies the same strategy to humanitarian intervention, as if it might work better in this case.

Remarkably, Walzer does not even mention the Libyan intervention in 2011 [bold mine-DL], which -- like the Iraq War -- has left hopes for militarized humanism in shambles. Ever since Democrats and their allies abroad acted to topple Muammar al-Qaddafi under the cover of humanitarian protection, the possibility of insulating the so-called "responsibility to protect" civilians abroad from great power designs and horrendous long-term outcomes has become incredible. Much like a stock newsletter touting a new strategy to beat the odds after a market crash, the promise of a better scheme for picking winners among prospective interventions has become unbelievable, at least for now. For Walzer, however, the priority is to chide fellow leftists for failing to defend the option of humanitarian intervention in theory, not to understand today why almost nobody thinks it improves the world in practice.

It seems strange that Walzer wouldn't mention the Libyan war at all in this book. As Moyn says, it is extremely relevant to the debate over "humanitarian" interventions and their consequences. What makes this omission even more striking is that Walzer was a public opponent of the Libyan war when it happened. Walzer opened his article written at the start of the intervention with this statement:

There are so many things wrong with the Libyan intervention that it is hard to know where to begin.

Walzer was absolutely right to oppose the Libyan war, and his early arguments against it were very similar to some my own objections. That makes his decision not to mention the Libyan war or his opposition to it that much more difficult to understand. He could have cited his opposition as an example of good judgment and proof that he could distinguish between necessary and unnecessary wars, but for whatever reason he didn't do that. Libya is one of the chief examples most people today would think of when discussing the merits and flaws of "humanitarian" intervention, but apparently Walzer doesn't think it is worth talking about. It is even odder that Walzer would make defending "humanitarian" interventionism the focus of his book when he saw very clearly then how easily the rhetoric of protecting civilians could be abused to launch an unjustified war.

Posted in foreign policy , politics . Tagged Libyan war , Samuel Moyn , Michael Walzer .

[Aug 30, 2018] ALEXANDER GOLDFARB

Aug 30, 2018 | www.theblogmire.com

Liane Theuer says: August 20, 2018 at 9:57 pm

ALEXANDER GOLDFARB

Goldfarb is a big player : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Goldfarb_(biologist)

Alexander Goldfarb is/was a friend of Sergei Skripal, Alexander Litvinenko, Boris Berezovsky and Nikolai Glushkov.

Associated with George Soros :

Goldfarb was among the first group of Russian exiles in New York whom Soros invited to brainstorm his potential Foundation in Russia. In 1991 Goldfarb persuaded Soros to donate $100 million to help former Soviet scientists survive the hardships of the economic shock therapy adopted by the Yeltsin government. From 1992 to 1995, Goldfarb was Director of Operations at Soros' International Science Foundation, with many more Soros projects to follow.

Here is a chronology of Goldfarb's press statements. One gets the impression that he has prompted TM how to argue.

March 6

Quote : Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today Programme, Mr Goldfarb said:

"The Russian secret services and the regime of Mr Putin had the motive and the opportunity to do this. And they did it before. I mean, it's only natural for any reasonable person to suspect them."

Mr Goldfarb, a close friend of killed dissident Alexander Litvinenko, said he has a theory as to why Russia could be behind the latest alleged poisoning.

The microbiologist and activist said it is not a spy theory but instead a political move.

He said: "It is a political motivation and it has to do with the elections of the President, which will happen in Russia in about ten days from now and the major problem for Putin is the turnout because his main opponent has been barred from participating and he has called for a boycott of the elections.

"So Mr Putin is worried there are few people who come people who are apathetic in Russia so this will be used regardless of whether Putin did it or not.

"He has a way to invigorate his nationalistic and extremely anti-western rhetoric."

Mr Goldfarb said the "majority" of Russians would perceive the "poisoning" as the right thing to do as they view Putin as a leader that can "get his enemies wherever they are across the globe."

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/927751/Russian-spy-poisoned-Salisbury-London-Alexander-Litvinenko-Sergei-Skripal-Putin-spy-swap

March 8

Quote : Former-spy Sergei Skripal, his daughter and a policeman have been poisoned in Salisbury in what is suspected to be a state-sponsored hit.

But it is not the first time this has happened as Alexander Litvinenko, who was former Russian secret service officer who defected to the west, died in November 2006 after he drank tea laced with radioactive polonium-210 at the Millenium Hotel in Mayfair.

His friend Alex Goldfarb appeared on Newsnight to warn that it was the inaction from the UK on the Litvinenko murder which led to the recent suspected attempted assassination.

Mr Goldfarb said: "For 10 years the British Government refused to admit that the Litvinenko murder was a state-sponsored crime and up to the very public inquiry which happened in 2016 they maintained this is just a regular criminal matter.

"The moment an English judge ruled that it was a state-sponsored murder and in all probability ordered by Putin David Cameron went on TV and said, 'we knew it from day one'.

"So they were trying to keep it quiet to not to annoy Putin and they invited other attacks like this.

"If the response now will be the same, only words without any actions, there will be a third and a fourth attempt."

He added: "I would pick the Putin theory because he is the only one who had a motive and an opportunity too and he has been shown beyond any reasonable doubt to be involved in the previous assassination – I mean Litvinenko who was my friend.

"He has a motive. His motive is the elections which are coming in about 10 days and there is a very low turnout expected and he needs to energise his nationalistic, anti-western electorate."

"So, he wants to portray himself as a tough guy who can get his enemies anywhere in the world and who has been presenting himself as the only thing that is protecting Russia and the Russians from the plotting and the scheming of the west."

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/928729/bbc-newsnight-russia-spy-war-bbc-news-Sergei-Skripal-assassination-latest-Putin

March 14 by Luke Harding

Quote : Alex Goldfarb, who knew Glushkov, said he thought his death was highly suspicious. "I think it's fairly clear it wasn't an accident or disease. It's either suicide or strangulation, like with Boris [Berezovsky]," Goldfarb said.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/14/russian-exiles-nikolai-glushkov-death-london-suspicious-friends-claim

March 17 DailyNewsUSA

Quote : Alex Goldfarb, a friend of both men as well as a prominent critic of Russia, insisted Vladimir Putin must have ordered both hits.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwpV7n-rLTU

March 18

Quote : Police insist they have discovered no connection between the strangling of former businessman Nikolai Glushkov, 68, at his London home last Monday and the nerve agent attack on Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury a fortnight ago.

But Alex Goldfarb, a friend of both men as well as a prominent critic of Russia, insisted Vladimir Putin must have ordered both hits.

Mr Goldfarb told BBC Radio 4: 'There is no connection in a forensic sense probably, but if you look at the larger picture of politics, I am convinced that no murder of this sort could have happened without the personal approval of Putin or some of his immediate deputies.'

Mr Goldfarb was also close to former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko, who was murdered with radioactive polonium-210 in London, and exiled tycoon Boris Berezovsky, who was found dead at his Surrey home in suspicious circumstances.

'All of these in my view have the common denominator of Mr Putin flexing his muscle,' said Mr Goldfarb, a scientist who lives in New York.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5514213/Murder-Putin-critic-linked-Skripal-nerve-agent-attack.html

[Aug 30, 2018] The 10 Main Holes in the Official Narrative on the Salisbury Poisonings: #1 The Motive

Aug 30, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

fredi , August 28, 2018 at 16:46

The 10 Main Holes in the Official Narrative on the Salisbury Poisonings: #1 – The Motive

When I began writing about the Skripal case, I was moved to do so by three main considerations.

Firstly, I really am passionate for the truth, and whatever the truth happens to be in this case, I strongly desire it to be made manifest. It was clear to me fairly early on that this was not happening.

Secondly, I am also very passionate about concepts such as the rule of law, innocent until proven guilty, and the apparently quaint notion that investigations should precede verdicts, rather than the other way around. And so when I saw accusations being made before the investigation had hardly begun, verdicts being reached before the facts were established, I was appalled -- appalled that this was happening in what we British pride ourselves is the Mother of Parliaments, and equally appalled that this meant the investigation was inevitably prejudiced and – pardon the expression – poisoned from the off.

Thirdly, the incident happened to have taken place pretty much on my doorstep, which made it of even more interest to me.

Nothing I have seen in the intervening time has persuaded me that my initial impressions were wrong. In fact, the whiff of rodent I first detected has only become stronger as time has gone on and the case has become -- frankly -- farcical.

http://www.theblogmire.com/the-10-main-holes-in-the-official-narrative-on-the-salisbury-poisonings-1-the-motive/

[Aug 30, 2018] The 10 Main Holes in the Official Narrative on the Salisbury Poisonings: #1 – The Motive by Rob Slane

Notable quotes:
"... the United States expelled 60 diplomats back in March, and more recently they have effectively declared economic war on the Russian Federation – all in response to unproven and inconsistent assertions of a botched assassination attempt against an old spy in a quiet Wiltshire City. Such a response ought to raise the suspicions of any sentient being that all is not what it appears. ..."
"... The first question to be asked is this: What exactly does she mean by "the motive"? By including that definite article before the word "motive", she implies that there is only one "motive" – the ..."
"... it is known -- although woefully unreported because of a media ban -- that Mr Skripal was connected to the man behind the so-called Trump Dossier, Christopher Steele. Personally, I am reasonably convinced that Mr Skripal had a hand in putting this dossier together, given his connections to Steele, and since it was almost certainly authored by a Russian "trained in the KGB tradition" . ..."
"... Might this give a motive to some very powerful groups who are nervous about the origins and details of this dossier coming to light? Yes, of course. Then why is it not a line of possible enquiry? Answers on a postcard to the Department of the Blindingly Obvious. ..."
"... Mrs May had no right to state that the Russian Federation had "the motive". The best she could have said at that stage, without taking other possibilities into account, was that they had "a motive". The motive she does present is particularly feeble and does not explain why the Russian Federation would have wanted Mr Skripal in particular dead, and at that particular time. Mr Skripal's recent activities indicate that there were others with possible motives to assassinate or incapacitate him. dmonished 2 February 2016 by his FBI handler. This was in vault dump. ..."
"... If Sergei was Steele's only "source" obviously his disappearance was essential. ..."
"... My first question is : who is protecting Chris Steele right now ? I think it´s MI6. But I don´t think that they are happy to be forced to do that. Maybe there was an order of UK government to hide Steele. Because he meddled in some other things not related to the Dossier, but to Cambridge Analytica and Brexit and Fifa and . ..."
"... Don't understand why standard clean-up operations for fentanyl poisoning are ignored here. it includes protective clothing and hosing down public areas where the fentanyl may be present. Sunday evening clean-up at Maltings was SOP for fentanyl. This is not mysterious. ..."
"... Moving from a fentanyl od diagnosis to an unknown agent occurred Sunday evening. SDH stated that in the announcements on Monday. ..."
"... I am beginning to wonder if Bailey was even poisoned at all. Was it all just a PR exercise? Was he told to get himself to hospital on Tuesday morning so that the nerve agent story would have at least one other person involved. If he was feeling ill, why did he drive himself to hospital – he could have collapsed at any second! ..."
"... Two SDH physicians had a completed training in a highly specialized program at Porton Down shortly before 4 Mar. It's been hinted that one or both were on duty 4 Mar. ..."
"... Having followed your excellent blog for some weeks now, I've become convinced that there are four distinct elements to this affair: two opposing clandestine ops, an almost unbelievably idiotic false flag charade, and a random death:- ..."
"... 1. Operation 'Let's Keep Tabs on Sergei'. Run by MI5/6/SB to make sure their double agent doesn't come to any harm or become a triple agent. Electronic tagging, email monitoring, phone tapping, and friendly chats ever now and then. Worked well for years, then the wheels fell off on 4th March. ..."
"... 2. Operation 'Let's Extract Skripal'. Run by an unknown security agency but possibly contracted out to another. Deniable soft extraction so he could be wheeled out later to give evidence concerning the Trump Dossier, with or without his co-operation. The plan included his daughter, because she was needed to ensure Sergei said what he was supposed to say when the time came. Phase One carried out successfully on 4th March. Phase Two delayed by HMG playing silly games, but eventually mission was accomplished. ..."
"... 3. The 'Let's Blame Putin' Charade. When MI6 reported to its ultimate boss that an ex-Russian spy had been poisoned, Boris would have rightly assumed the culprits were probably Russian. But then, remembering how Lavrov humiliated him at that press conference in Moscow last December, he decided to make sure Russia did get the blame and take the rap for it. With the help of the new inexperienced Defence Secretary and others, he came up with a hastily and ill-conceived plan to show that the poison could have only come from Russia, ensuring Russia's guilt. The Home Secretary at the time, Amber Rudd, did not buy into it so had to be replaced, but others – including the overworked Theresa May – were taken in. The narrative quickly fell apart, but having persuaded the world and his wife of Putin's guilt, there was no going back. The hole Boris dug just got deeper. And all the evidence – or the lack of it – had to be destroyed. No wonder Boris resigned. ..."
Aug 30, 2018 | www.theblogmire.com

When I began writing about the Skripal case, I was moved to do so by three main considerations.

Nothing I have seen in the intervening time has persuaded me that my initial impressions were wrong. In fact, the whiff of rodent I first detected has only become stronger as time has gone on and the case has become -- frankly -- farcical. Not only that, but the reaction to the case has been simply incredible. For instance, the United States expelled 60 diplomats back in March, and more recently they have effectively declared economic war on the Russian Federation – all in response to unproven and inconsistent assertions of a botched assassination attempt against an old spy in a quiet Wiltshire City. Such a response ought to raise the suspicions of any sentient being that all is not what it appears.

I still do not have any clear idea of what happened on that day, but what I am certain of is that the official narrative is not only untrue, but it is manifestly inconceivable that it could be true. There are simply too many inconsistencies, too many holes and far too many unexplained events for it to be true. And whilst part of me would dearly love to leave this wretched case behind for a while, whilst it is still ongoing, and especially as it is now being used to push us even closer to the brink of war (economic warfare is often a prelude to military warfare), I find that hard to do.

What I would therefore like to do in a series of 10 short pieces over the next couple of weeks or so, is attempt to expose some of the very many holes in the official narrative. At the end of it, I may well put it all together into one PDF, so that it can be sent somewhere, where it can be completely ignored by those that matter. Enjoy!

Number 1: The Motive

In her speech to the House of Commons on 26 th March , the Prime Minister, Theresa May, said this:

"In conclusion, as I have set out, no other country has a combination of the capability, the intent and the motive to carry out such an act."

For the purposes of this piece, I am not interested in her comments on capability or intent, but simply what she describes as "the motive".

The first question to be asked is this: What exactly does she mean by "the motive"? By including that definite article before the word "motive", she implies that there is only one "motive" – the motive – and that only one party – the Russian Federation – possessed this. Which is of course manifest nonsense. She might at that stage have said that they possessed "a motive", but without looking into what Mr Skripal was up to, and the contacts he had, she was in no position to state that they had " the motive".

Imagine the following scenario: A farmer called Boggis is found shot dead in his barn. It is known that a week earlier, he had a very public quarrel with another landowner, Bunce, about the boundaries between their lands, and that the two of them had to be separated before they came to blows. Could it be said of Bunce that he had "the motive"? Well, it would be reasonable to suggest that he had "a motive", but without looking into other circumstances and other characters connected with Boggis, it would be disingenuous to claim that he had "the motive" as if only he might have had one.

As it happens, Boggis had been committing adultery with the wife of another neighbouring farmer called Bean, and Bean had found out about this two days before Boggis was found dead. What now? Does Bean have a motive? Very possibly. So too might Boggis' wife. Perhaps even Bunce's wife. Who knows without examining the facts more closely?

And so herein lies the first whiff of rodent. Mrs May asserted that the Russian Federation possessed "the motive", implying that there was only one possibility, which is something that could only be ascertained by proper investigation of Mr Skripal, his circumstances and what he was up to. She therefore committed what is a most basic fallacy in the investigative process.

The second question to ask is this: she says she set out "the motive" in her speech, but what actually was that? Here is what she presented as the motive in her speech:

"We know that Russia has a record of conducting state-sponsored assassinations – and that it views some former intelligence officers as legitimate targets for these assassinations."

This won't do. Firstly, many countries have records of conducting state-sponsored assassinations, and not always against their own nationals. But secondly, the claim that the Russian Federation "views some former intelligence officers as legitimate targets for these assassinations" is not a motive. At best it is a claim, but it is not a motive. A motive for an attempted murder, such as this, would need to give a reason for carrying it out on that particular person at that particular time. Simply saying that they view some former intelligence officers as legitimate targets for these assassinations does not explain why they are supposed to have decided to assassinate this particular man, at this particular time, especially since they released and pardoned him in 2010. It also does not explain why they apparently decided to wreck all possible future spy swaps, since Mr Skripal had been part of such a deal, and assassinating him would put an end to such deals.

But the most important question to ask is this: are there any other parties with a possible motive for this crime? Even without a particularly careful investigation of the details of Mr Skripal's life, contacts and circumstances, I can say assuredly that there were. For instance, it is known -- although woefully unreported because of a media ban -- that Mr Skripal was connected to the man behind the so-called Trump Dossier, Christopher Steele. Personally, I am reasonably convinced that Mr Skripal had a hand in putting this dossier together, given his connections to Steele, and since it was almost certainly authored by a Russian "trained in the KGB tradition" .

Might this give a motive to some very powerful groups who are nervous about the origins and details of this dossier coming to light? Yes, of course. Then why is it not a line of possible enquiry? Answers on a postcard to the Department of the Blindingly Obvious.

In summary:

Mrs May had no right to state that the Russian Federation had "the motive". The best she could have said at that stage, without taking other possibilities into account, was that they had "a motive". The motive she does present is particularly feeble and does not explain why the Russian Federation would have wanted Mr Skripal in particular dead, and at that particular time. Mr Skripal's recent activities indicate that there were others with possible motives to assassinate or incapacitate him. dmonished 2 February 2016 by his FBI handler. This was in vault dump.

Fusion GPS only got contract from Hillary April 2016, who then subcontracted to Steele. But Steele was FBI asset prior to dossier being started. Was he an asset or a feeder of MI6 disinformation into US politics/intelligence?

That McCain ended up giving the dossier to Comey, when that dossier was written by a supposed FBI "asset" would indicate the latter. If Sergei was Steele's only "source" obviously his disappearance was essential.

Jo says: August 22, 2018 at 10:12 am

"CC Pritchard said officers at the scene underwent a "decontamination process" at Salisbury District Hospital overnight on Sunday and into Monday morning, after details of the attack became clearer."

But didn't Bailey drive himself in only because he said he didn't feel well sometime on Monday evening?

lissnup says: August 23, 2018 at 8:48 am
@Jo. Yes, one version of the story says Bailey and two colleagues were checked out at the hospital and then discharged, but that Bailey drove himself back after feeling unwell and was readmitted.
Liane Theuer says: August 21, 2018 at 10:23 am
I want to present my own thoughts on party A and B, that some posters here have developed.

My first question is : who is protecting Chris Steele right now ? I think it´s MI6. But I don´t think that they are happy to be forced to do that. Maybe there was an order of UK government to hide Steele. Because he meddled in some other things not related to the Dossier, but to Cambridge Analytica and Brexit and Fifa and .

MI6 has to hide the Skripals, too. The reason is simply to prevent that Steele, Miller and the Skripals will ever be interrogated by the Trump fraction.

The dodgy dossier became a heavy burden on the UK Government since Steele became known as the author. It is an open secret that the UK Government has secretly done everything possible to prevent Trump's presidency. Who knows what else will come to light ?

In another post I had mentioned the role of Alexandra Chalupa and her Ukraine connection. She's an ambassador to the Ukraine for the DNC. Chalupa collected dirt on Paul Manaford for a long time.She emailed DNC that she'll share sensitive info about Paul Manafort "offline" including "a big Trump component that will hit in next few weeks" (which never happened, at least by Alexandra Chalupa). Then her private Yahoo email account was hacked and a few days later DNC fired Chalupa. WHY ? Maybe because DNC needed to keep her activities off-site, where a FOIA can't touch them ?

But what happened on the very day Chalupa is fired ? Oh, Christopher Steele is hired. What a coincidence. And what happens FIVE DAYS after Christopher Steele was hired ? Oh, he publishes his first report on his dossier, a report that discusses FIVE YEARS of investigation.

I mention Chalupa, because I strongly suspect that much of the Trump dossier goes back to Chalupa's research. These, in turn, are based largely on information provided by the Ukrainian intelligence service SBU.

The DNC wanted to use this information against Trump, but they couldn´t use Chalupa as the source. So the idea was born to hire Steele for the job. Outsourcing.

The FBI has probably contacted its loyal vassal MI6 and discreetly referred to "common interests". Steele then changed the dossier to obfuscate Chalupa's authorship. But he made decisive mistakes. One mistake may have been to involve Sergei to some extent.

So I'm assuming that FBI and MI6 have a common interest in preventing Steele, Miller and the Skripals from speaking. Maybe MI6 contacted Sergei some time before and offered him to change his identity. But Sergei refused. However, he was now alarmed and made plans to return to Russia. A dilemma for FBI and MI6. They now had to find another way to prevent Sergei from speaking. The idea of a Russian nerve agent was born. That killed two birds with one stone.

Who executed the plan ?

Bailey's job was to shadow the Skripals and report it. But he knew nothing of the plan. I think, the attack itself happened in or around the Mill Pub and Bailey witnessed it. However, I have no idea if the attack was done open or hidden. I guess hidden. Something contaminated was being smuggled into the red bag, perhaps already in the Zizzi, which the Skripals then discovered, wondering how it came in the bag, and what both were touching. Bailey was contaminated later, when he touched the same item (maybe a perfume in gift wrapping) inside the red bag ?

Peter Beswick says: August 21, 2018 at 9:36 am
Not just two groups

In the run up to and including the war of the Iraq II WMD Debacle, Mi6 were fractured, even the bosses Dearlove and Scarlett that were running their own pro Blair operations in conflict with the rest of the service. Dearlove and Scarlett had their own objectives which were not comparable with each other (personal and professional but mainly personal) or the rest of their service.

Mi6, Mi5, DiS (or whatever they are all called now) with GCHQ have their own infighting and conflicts of interest; within themselves, their sister services, commercial / pension interests and those of the government .. And of course what is in the best interest of the nation. (the police forces are inconvenient uneducated, unfocussed rabbles that get in the way if they involve themselves in anything more than issuing speeding fines)

Add to that Ministers fighting each other, Labour MP's trying harder to bring down Corbyn than May, the Israeli and US interests ever present wherever you look.

And top that with the US shambolic lessons to all other developed governments in the world and the examples they display of their own decorum. Clinton v Trump. FBI v CIA. (How many intelligence services are there? How many agendas have they got?) And the Sickly twisted occultist hand the CIA has in global drug production / distribution, unmetered oil windfalls, blackmail scams (honey traps, murder, vice, paedophilia). An organisation with limitless wealth and income streams, zero conscience, morality or single objective other than to control the surf / goyim / proletariat. No objectives other than to invoke misery, pain, suffering and death with crime, wickedness, fear and perpetual global wars so the elite can remain that way and enjoy their rewards.

And we wonder why Salisbury happened, what it is about, who is doing something about it, why are they lying and covering up, who is to blame?

The last question is the easy one to answer.

We are!

Cascadian says: August 21, 2018 at 7:11 am
The broth in the Amesbury pot is being stirred once again:
https://sputniknews.com/europe/201808211067351473-amesbury-alleged-poisoning-charlie-rowley-hospital/
John Bull says: August 21, 2018 at 8:12 am
Whoops! I hope they take good care of him
lissnup says: August 21, 2018 at 10:55 am
Sputnik makes an unfortunate choice of words in trying to paraphrase the Guardian article: "The spokesman for Salisbury district hospital, where Charlie Rowley was taken, told The Guardian that *none* of the hospital's patients was receiving any nerve agent-related treatment at the moment."

The Guardian article actually says, "The hospital said it could not speak about individual cases but stressed it was not treating anyone for the effects of novichok poisoning at the moment."

So, nine, not nether.

More interesting is that the truth of the strained relationship between Charlie and his brother is becoming more apparent. A mutual friend told me a few weeks back that Charlie was estranged from his family by choice. Hearing that put a very different perspective on his brother's effusively confusing statements to the press.

CharlieFreak says: August 21, 2018 at 11:21 am
Regarding the family relationship, when Charlie was in court for drug dealing last year (?) he was additionally charged with stealing Ł2,000 (I think that was the amount) from Mr Matthew Rowley. So I too remain to be convinced of the 'brotherly love'.
Cascadian says: August 21, 2018 at 12:17 pm
" he was additionally charged with stealing Ł2,000 (I think that was the amount) from Mr Matthew Rowley". That, to me, is a very odd fact. We are told that Charlie is a drug addict on his uppers (i.e. skint), yet he had Ł2000 that his brother (perhaps with an underlying motive to put Chalie on cold turkey – oh, wait, oink, , flap, , oink, , flap, ) sought to relieve him of responsibility for it.

As to the mangling of the message mentioned by lissnup, both the Guardian and Sputnik would probably have got the original story from PA, following which they would then have put their own brand of spin on it.

Anonymous-1 says: August 21, 2018 at 5:51 am
The identity of the Skripals in contained in the witness statements – those who were present at the time and clearly saw them:

FEMALE DOCTOR: "A doctor who was one of the first people at the scene has described how she found Ms Skripal slumped unconscious on a bench, vomiting and fitting. She had also lost control of her bodily functions. The woman, who asked not to be named, told the BBC she moved Ms Skripal into the recovery position and opened her airway, as others tended to her father. She said she treated her for almost 30 minutes, saying there was no sign of any chemical agent on Ms Skripal's face or body. The doctor said she had been worried she would be affected by the nerve agent but added that she "feels fine."

She clearly states that she found Ms Skripal slumped unconscious on a bench, vomiting and fitting and that she had lot control of her bodily functions. I don't know of anyone who has the ability to spontaneously evacuate their bladder and bowl at will, more especially a female in front of a crowd on onlookers. The doctor put her in the recovery position, that means on her side, so there would have been visible evidence of Yulia having lost control of her bodily functions.

FREYA CHURCH: "Sixteen minutes later [that is, after being seen on CCTV], personal trainer Freya Church, 27, came across the victims slumped on a bench. She said they seemed 'out of it' and assumed they were on drugs. "It was a young, blonde and pretty girl and it was definitely the man that's been pictured in the news – the guy that's a spy. She was passed out and he was looking up to the sky and I tried to get eye contact to see if they were okay. They didn't seem with it. To be honest I thought they were just drugged out as they were in a weird state. There are lots of homeless people here so I just thought they were homeless."

Freya Church clearly identifies them, "It was a young, blonde and pretty girl and it was definitely the man that's been pictured in the news – the guy that's a spy." She also says "I tried to get eye contact to see if they were okay", so she had a clear view of their faces.

Destiny Reynolds, 20, who works in Ganesha Handicrafts in the centre, said: "I saw quite a lot of commotion – there were two people sat on the bench and there was a security guard there. They put her on the ground in the recovery position, and she was shaking like she was having a seizure. It was a bit manic. There were a lot of people crowded round them. It was raining, people had umbrellas and were putting them over them."

She says "It was raining, people had umbrellas and were putting them over them." so these too would have had a clear view of the Skripal's faces.

Not one of these people, or the other witnesses, has come forward to say it wasn't the Skripals, unlike DS Bailey, they are not subject to a gagging order by way of the The Official Secrets Act.

Miheila says: August 21, 2018 at 6:33 am
All these witnesses would have assumed they were the Skripals because the media claimed that they were. So did the Wiltshire police at least, at that time. This is not of evidential value.

Freya Church has been proven to be an unrelaible witness. Destiny Reynolds may not have had a clear view of their faces at all, especially as she said that there was quite a lot of commotion, and "There were a lot of people crowded round them. It was raining, people had umbrellas and were putting them over them." How far away was she?

I'm also suspicious of that anonymous 'female nurse'. I had read that this first responder was a 'male nurse' too. Apparently, s/he was a military nurse, and had had experience with the African Ebola outbreak. S/he apparently spent 30 minutes with the Skripals! Was it her who made the original emergency call?

Besides, descriptions differ. CCTV evidence has been suppressed, and that alone suggests that they were not the Skripals, and so does the police interest in the Market walk footage. So, no, I'm not at all convinced.

Miheila says: August 21, 2018 at 2:56 am
I've not read any posts here since last night, so this post must be read bearing that in mind.

I briefly replied to John Bull's four points, but I'd like to say more on this. His first point related to the surveillance op being conducted on Sergei. I said more or less that this would have been standard procedure in this type of case, and the work would have been carried out by MI5 watchers. In 2006 Special Branch was merged with the Met's Anti Terrorism Branch to become the Counter Terrorism Command, and I'm pretty sure that DS Bailey would have been seconded to that organisation, and that he was Sergei's 'front-line' case officer. His roles would be to protect Sergei (an SIS asset) and to pass on intelligence to MI5's regional liaison officer at Bristol.

Now John Bull was assuming that those involved in this operation were one of two competing parties. The second party being covered in his second point. This is where I disagree. I don't count MI5's role here as being one of the two parties, for it is at least theoretically neutral.

The other party is not neutral, and that is MI6. It is MI6 who were (and still probably are) acting in competition with the unknown group. Both groups were involved in planning a their own Skripal operations prior to 4th March. Let's call this unknown group, Group X – This shadowy group represents certain US political interests.

This is what I said in my original post (19th at 3.50pm) that first brought the dual-party theory into the light:

"Let's suppose [the film] was their source of poisoning inspiration. Let's also suppose that two competing groups became involved at different stages. Let's say there was a pre-planned, well-organised operation prepared by group A, but when group B somehow learnt of it, a hurried attempt was made by group B to scupper group A's plan – which might have failed. Just speculation, but it would account for many anomalies. These two groups could be two different intelligence agences, or one of them possibly being a rogue faction within an intelligence agency".

This remains the bare bones of my theory, and I was deliberately being rather coy about it at the time. Of course, another party that quickly became involved in all this is the British parliament itself, and I suspect that MI6 sought urgent advice from government ministers when they realised Group X's intentions. (They would have only given them information on a need-to-know basis). MI6, wanting to protect their assets as well as Britain's interests, attempted to neutralise Group X's plan at short notice. It was the hurried nature of all this, along with extreme political pressure, that caused mistakes to be made. Secret heated discussions between the US, UK and *French* governments have no doubt been going on about this situation ever since 4th March.

I could say much more, but for now, I'll try and catch up with a long backlog of posts !

Zee Piers says: August 21, 2018 at 3:15 am
Competing groups might explain the 15:47 CCTV image if it was indeed Sturgess and Rowley, not the Skripals. If the Skripals were to be whisked away alive, a couple who could be mistaken for them, walking in a direction away from the point of disappearance and after it could be used, should the need arise, to deflect from the real circumstances by Group A. However, Group B, hastily interfering with Group A's plan, causes a public scene, making the red herring couple a liability instead of an asset – which might explain the release of the footage (part of Group A's original plan) but the lack of an appeal for help by local authorities (because the plan was FUBAR, making the pre-planned release of the CCTV footage a mistake).
Anonymous says: August 21, 2018 at 6:38 am
Miheila, I am not surprised to hear MI5 are in Bristol. Two other odd occurrences doing to mind. The cricketer Ben Stokes' charging decision being inexplicably sent to London.

And the mystery of "Gordon the Stalker". Arrested nearly six months ago but not charged. A complete fabrication by extremely well-connected people in Bristol to save their bacon, with security services help.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5825971/avon-somerset-police-arrest-stalker-man-sent-notes/

Noone says: August 21, 2018 at 1:16 am
Note I had a lot of trouble trying to post here today!

-- –

Very interesting read. A deep dive into the history behind the British/Obama Administration conspiracy. https://tinyurl.com/yavnxvmm

Miheila says: August 21, 2018 at 3:22 am
Thanks Noone very interesting. I signed this too, about ending the 'special relationship', (which in my opinion was toxic and one-sided ever since it began): https://action.larouchepac.com/declassifyukdocs

Brexiteers go on so much about 'British sovereignty', yet they ignore the fact that Britain has effectively been a vassal of the USA for decades.

Peter Beswick says: August 20, 2018 at 10:56 pm
I'm not saying Kier Prichard did it on his own, and the Met have their burden to carry, but what this man has achieved in such a short time is truly breathtaking.

Wilts police are now a laughing stock, not just in Salisbury or Wilts but the UK and internationally. The public trust level must be as low as it can possibly get. The rank and file must be suffering humiliation, worthlessness, shame and depression. Motivation must be zero.

What a jerk, why do that to yourself, your reputation, your family, your colleagues, your force of 20 20 years ? Is he really that thick, so stupid that he couldn't see this coming and when he did he had a chance to say enough is enough or is that side of his character so flawed that he is either too cowardly or just unaware of what people think of him?

"ACC Pritchard said: "I have a huge sense of pride taking over the reigns as Temporary Chief Constable for a force I have served for more than 20 years.

At least Basu has had the good grace to keep his mouth shut and go into hiding.

I can't see how he (and others ) can avoid criminal prosecutions but it won't be long until the civil prosecutions begin which will cost the tax payers dear. But those who are involved can expect (if they do manage to stay out of jail) to now spend much of the rest of their lives fighting litigation

They brought it on themselves and unfortunately us but none more so than Dawn.

Justice for Dawn!

"Mike has been a fantastic leader and he leaves us in great shape – both in terms of engagement amongst officers and staff and, externally, as evidenced in our strong Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) gradings.

"We are blessed with outstanding officers, staff and volunteers across our organisation who achieve great things every day and who strive to provide an excellent service to all of our communities.

"Now is the time to look forward and to continue, as we've always done, with our values and communities at the heart of everything we do.""

https://indexwiltshire.co.uk/wiltshire-police-to-get-temporary-chief-constable/

Paul says: August 20, 2018 at 11:17 pm
Peter, They are all useless. It seems to be the only qualification needed these days. Now Jeremy Hunt is calling for more sanctions on Russia – this simply proves that he is ignorant as well as useless.

For years Russia has been dedollarising; Russia will manage just fine with more British sanctions (and American sanctions for that matter) and the most damage will be done to British companies that will be shut out of Russia – not because of anything Russia has done but because of what their own idiotic government has done.

TPTB are cretins!

With immediate effect, I am starting a personal 'buy Russian' campaign. If I find anything in the shops that is 'made in Russa', I will buy it in preference to anything made in the EU. Every little helps!

CharlieFreak says: August 21, 2018 at 9:27 am
Ditto. There is another country that I and my relatives never buy fresh produce from, always going for South African or South American alternatives, or – if they're unavailable – going without. I can't say publicly which country as I might get a visit from the boys in blue!
CF
Liane Theuer says: August 20, 2018 at 9:57 pm
ALEXANDER GOLDFARB

Goldfarb is a big player :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Goldfarb_(biologist)

Alexander Goldfarb is/was a friend of Sergei Skripal, Alexander Litvinenko, Boris Berezovsky and Nikolai Glushkov.
Associated with George Soros :
Goldfarb was among the first group of Russian exiles in New York whom Soros invited to brainstorm his potential Foundation in Russia. In 1991 Goldfarb persuaded Soros to donate $100 million to help former Soviet scientists survive the hardships of the economic shock therapy adopted by the Yeltsin government.
From 1992 to 1995, Goldfarb was Director of Operations at Soros' International Science Foundation, with many more Soros projects to follow.

Here is a chronology of Goldfarb's press statements.
One gets the impression that he has prompted TM how to argue.

March 6
Quote : Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today Programme, Mr Goldfarb said:
"The Russian secret services and the regime of Mr Putin had the motive and the opportunity to do this. And they did it before. I mean, it's only natural for any reasonable person to suspect them."
Mr Goldfarb, a close friend of killed dissident Alexander Litvinenko, said he has a theory as to why Russia could be behind the latest alleged poisoning.
The microbiologist and activist said it is not a spy theory but instead a political move.
He said: "It is a political motivation and it has to do with the elections of the President, which will happen in Russia in about ten days from now and the major problem for Putin is the turnout because his main opponent has been barred from participating and he has called for a boycott of the elections.
"So Mr Putin is worried there are few people who come people who are apathetic in Russia so this will be used regardless of whether Putin did it or not.
"He has a way to invigorate his nationalistic and extremely anti-western rhetoric."
Mr Goldfarb said the "majority" of Russians would perceive the "poisoning" as the right thing to do as they view Putin as a leader that can "get his enemies wherever they are across the globe."
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/927751/Russian-spy-poisoned-Salisbury-London-Alexander-Litvinenko-Sergei-Skripal-Putin-spy-swap

March 8
Quote : Former-spy Sergei Skripal, his daughter and a policeman have been poisoned in Salisbury in what is suspected to be a state-sponsored hit.
But it is not the first time this has happened as Alexander Litvinenko, who was former Russian secret service officer who defected to the west, died in November 2006 after he drank tea laced with radioactive polonium-210 at the Millenium Hotel in Mayfair.
His friend Alex Goldfarb appeared on Newsnight to warn that it was the inaction from the UK on the Litvinenko murder which led to the recent suspected attempted assassination.
Mr Goldfarb said: "For 10 years the British Government refused to admit that the Litvinenko murder was a state-sponsored crime and up to the very public inquiry which happened in 2016 they maintained this is just a regular criminal matter.
"The moment an English judge ruled that it was a state-sponsored murder and in all probability ordered by Putin David Cameron went on TV and said, 'we knew it from day one'.
"So they were trying to keep it quiet to not to annoy Putin and they invited other attacks like this.
"If the response now will be the same, only words without any actions, there will be a third and a fourth attempt."
He added: "I would pick the Putin theory because he is the only one who had a motive and an opportunity too and he has been shown beyond any reasonable doubt to be involved in the previous assassination – I mean Litvinenko who was my friend.
"He has a motive. His motive is the elections which are coming in about 10 days and there is a very low turnout expected and he needs to energise his nationalistic, anti-western electorate."
"So, he wants to portray himself as a tough guy who can get his enemies anywhere in the world and who has been presenting himself as the only thing that is protecting Russia and the Russians from the plotting and the scheming of the west."
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/928729/bbc-newsnight-russia-spy-war-bbc-news-Sergei-Skripal-assassination-latest-Putin

March 14 by Luke Harding
Quote : Alex Goldfarb, who knew Glushkov, said he thought his death was highly suspicious. "I think it's fairly clear it wasn't an accident or disease. It's either suicide or strangulation, like with Boris [Berezovsky]," Goldfarb said.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/14/russian-exiles-nikolai-glushkov-death-london-suspicious-friends-claim

March 17 DailyNewsUSA
Quote : Alex Goldfarb, a friend of both men as well as a prominent critic of Russia, insisted Vladimir Putin must have ordered both hits.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwpV7n-rLTU

March 18
Quote : Police insist they have discovered no connection between the strangling of former businessman Nikolai Glushkov, 68, at his London home last Monday and the nerve agent attack on Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury a fortnight ago.
But Alex Goldfarb, a friend of both men as well as a prominent critic of Russia, insisted Vladimir Putin must have ordered both hits.
Mr Goldfarb told BBC Radio 4: 'There is no connection in a forensic sense probably, but if you look at the larger picture of politics, I am convinced that no murder of this sort could have happened without the personal approval of Putin or some of his immediate deputies.'
Mr Goldfarb was also close to former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko, who was murdered with radioactive polonium-210 in London, and exiled tycoon Boris Berezovsky, who was found dead at his Surrey home in suspicious circumstances.
'All of these in my view have the common denominator of Mr Putin flexing his muscle,' said Mr Goldfarb, a scientist who lives in New York.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5514213/Murder-Putin-critic-linked-Skripal-nerve-agent-attack.html

Liane Theuer says: August 20, 2018 at 10:04 pm
Look at actual pictures of Nikolai Glushkov. I see certain similarities between Glushkov and the man on the red bag CCTV.
PasserBy says: August 20, 2018 at 11:18 pm
Could you elaborate on those similarities please? I've had a look but didn't see any. The CCTV footage is terrible quality but what "image" I get does not coincide with available photos of Glushkov.

Goldfarb is certainly a person to be avoided – with friends like that who needs enemies? Litvinenko's dad suspects Goldfarb was his son's assassin.

The claim is made in that youtube video that Goldfarb was Skripal's friend as well. It would not be a surprise but it would be good to obtain confirmation.

Liane Theuer says: August 20, 2018 at 11:22 pm
PasserBy, if I could post photos here, I would be able to show the similarity in a collage. But it´s just a guess.
PasserBy says: August 20, 2018 at 11:25 pm
Understood, Liane.
lissnup says: August 21, 2018 at 11:31 am
I agree, Liane, and have commented here about it. Glushkov has a young, pretty, blonde daughter. I am not sure if it was the same daughter who reportedly discovered his body.
Paul says: August 20, 2018 at 8:19 pm
Statement from Chief Constable Kier Pritchard and PCC Angus Macpherson on injured officer
http://archive.is/Wo4lE#selection-1413.0-1413.89

"I would like to reassure you all that Nick is receiving medical intervention and care from highly specialist medical practitioners experienced in these matters."

Why did Pritchard say "highly specialist medical practitioners experienced in these matters" instead of something less specific? Who are these "highly specialist" and "experienced" practitioners? The medics at SDH were quite humble in the Newsnight programme – I am sure none of them would regard themselves as 'highly specialist and experienced' in treating a nerve agent.

Duncan says: August 20, 2018 at 8:28 pm
And then.

JOBS HOMES MOTORS Book an AdBusiness directory Local Info DatingExchange and Mart

NewsJobsSportYour Say

9

MENU

NEWS5th JuneKier Pritchard says DS Nick Bailey poisoned at Skripal house

Exclusive by Rebecca Hudson @JournalRebecca

EXCLUSIVE

Dt Sgt Nick Bailey.

DETECTIVE Sergeant Nick Bailey was poisoned with a nerve agent when he and other officers attended Sergei Skripal's home looking for evidence including signs of drug use or suicide notes.

9

Chief Constable Kier Pritchard told the Journal he had watched evidence from body-worn cameras used by officers who first attended the scene on March 4, and that their response to the incident was "first class".

"We would not have known from those first hours what we were dealing with. At that time we didn't know, and why would they, if there was anything other than a medical incident, or something that was drug-related or something more sinister," he said.

CC Pritchard said DS Bailey was one of a team of officers who attended Mr Skripal's home in Christie Miller Road, after the Russian former-spy and his daughter were found slumped on a bench in the city three months ago.

He said officers were looking for information to establish a timeline of events and explain why the Skripals had fallen "gravely ill", as well as making sure there was nobody else affected.

"That [information] could be a suicide note, it could be evidence of drugs, it could be evidence of some form of substance," CC Pritchard added.

And he said DS Bailey (pictured) and his family are still receiving support from Wiltshire Police.

CC Pritchard said: "Nick has been to Wiltshire Police headquarters, he came in last week and that was a very positive step forward.

"This has been a long three months for many of us can you just imagine the impact on your children and your wife and your family life when all you're trying to do is your job? My heart absolutely goes out to Nick and his family over all that they've suffered."

CC Pritchard said officers at the scene underwent a "decontamination process" at Salisbury District Hospital overnight on Sunday and into Monday morning, after details of the attack became clearer.

And, following that, Wiltshire Police set up a "welfare cell" to help affected officers understand and work through the psychological effects of the attack.

"We have supported over 90 members of our staff in either one to one sessions or group meetings," CC Pritchard revealed. "Of course one of those 90 will be Nick Bailey".

CC Pritchard shared his pride in Wiltshire Police, and the citizens of Salisbury, for their response to the "colossal events".

"We [Wiltshire Police] have the ability and the confidence to be able to deal with international and global issues. I hope that provides real confidence to the public of how proud they can be.

"And I want to put on record how proud I am of the community of Salisbury. They have demonstrated the true brilliance of a community.

"Despite a global issue, and despite the massive impact, the way the Salisbury general public has responded has been exemplary."

By Rebecca Hudson @JournalRebeccaHead of News

Paul says: August 20, 2018 at 8:48 pm
'Spacemen' in The Maltings on Sunday evening officers at the scene underwent a "decontamination process" at Salisbury District Hospital overnight on Sunday and into Monday morning

Why would that be? SDH suspected a nerve agent by 6am Monday morning, not Sunday evening.

The only way anyone could have suspected more than a drug overdose on Sunday would have been prior knowledge but if someone had prior knowledge and did not ensure that ALL emergency responders were protected, that would not just be negligent

Marie says: August 20, 2018 at 9:58 pm
The only way anyone could have suspected more than a drug overdose on Sunday would have been prior knowledge

Yes and no. Don't understand why standard clean-up operations for fentanyl poisoning are ignored here. it includes protective clothing and hosing down public areas where the fentanyl may be present. Sunday evening clean-up at Maltings was SOP for fentanyl. This is not mysterious.

Moving from a fentanyl od diagnosis to an unknown agent occurred Sunday evening. SDH stated that in the announcements on Monday.

Paul says: August 20, 2018 at 10:13 pm
Liane, it wasn't just protective clothing it was the full 'moonsuit' but not everyone wore one. When I mentioned prior knowledge, I was thinking of Rob's idea that British intelligence might have got wind of an FBI/CIA plot to use an agent from Porton Down. If there been any prior knowledge, then allowing any first responders to be at the scene not wearing full hazmat gear, would have been a crime in itself.
Liane Theuer says: August 20, 2018 at 9:41 pm
Remember that Kier Pritchard had his first day on duty on March 5. Maybe he was not well informed about Bailey´s part in the case.

Deputy Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu has taken over from Mark Rowley as the new Assistant Commissioner responsible for leading counter terrorism nationally on March 5.

March 1 a new temporary assistant chief constable has been selected at Wiltshire Police. ACC Craig Holden joined Kier Pritchard.

So who was Bailey´s supervisor on March 4 ? Deputy Chief Constable Paul Mills ?

Paul says: August 20, 2018 at 10:21 pm
I am beginning to wonder if Bailey was even poisoned at all. Was it all just a PR exercise? Was he told to get himself to hospital on Tuesday morning so that the nerve agent story would have at least one other person involved. If he was feeling ill, why did he drive himself to hospital – he could have collapsed at any second!

If it was a bit of LARPing, that would at least explain why he didn't need a tracheostomy.

Marie says: August 21, 2018 at 2:23 am
I am beginning to wonder if Bailey was even poisoned at all.

My guess is that he wasn't. He felt ill and as instructed went to the hospital on Tuesday to get checked out. Game was on at that point; so, he was put in a bed for observation and not allowed to leave. Drugged. That would be surreal, wouldn't it?

As I followed this segment in real time, there was a sense of elation in the media that they had a third victim. A first responder. Then they scrambled trying to explain what a DS would have been doing at Maltings; so, they switched it to he was at the house. Then there were questions as to why it took so long for the alleged poison to effect him. Somehow that got dropped as they continued to make different claims about where he'd been; finally settling on both Maltings and the house.

Liane Theuer says: August 21, 2018 at 8:37 am
Paul and Marie, if Bailey was not poisoned the OPCW has to lie ! They took blood samples of all three on March 22. After that Bailey was released. I´m convinced that Bailey was poisoned with the same nerve agent, whatever agent that might be.
Anonymous says: August 21, 2018 at 8:53 am
The OPCW did not lie – but they were deceived. The OPCW says they checked the identities of the individuals they tested against IDs. How hard would it be for the government to issue a passport on the 'name' of Nicholas Bailey?
CharlieFreak says: August 21, 2018 at 9:40 am
This raises the question again of how the OPCW acquired the samples they took away with them. As I understand it the OPCW scientists who came to the UK are not clinically trained – they are effectively lab technicians – so they do not have the training to "take" samples from patients. They are reported as "collecting samples" but to my knowledge from reading other reports and articles it was UK medical staff who "took" the samples – and then handed them over to the OPCW. Even if they took the samples in front of the OPCW, I bet at some point they said something along the lines of "Oh hang on a minute, I just need to go and put labels on these phials back in a minute".
John Bull says: August 21, 2018 at 4:27 pm
In his interview on German TV, Boris said: "[The OPCW] are coming in today to look at the sample we have of the nerve agent."
CharlieFreak says: August 22, 2018 at 10:34 am
Thanks, John. Even more reason to be doubtful about the whole process.
CF
Marie says: August 20, 2018 at 9:49 pm
Two SDH physicians had a completed training in a highly specialized program at Porton Down shortly before 4 Mar. It's been hinted that one or both were on duty 4 Mar.
Paul says: August 20, 2018 at 10:22 pm
But Bailey did not check in until 6 March. Were PD specialists there throughout? Why didn't they just take the patients to PD instead of risking contaminating a public hospital?
Liane Theuer says: August 20, 2018 at 11:18 pm
Paul, if Bailey really checked in March 6, why was his police car cordoned off in the morning of March 5 at the parking lot SDH ?
Paul says: August 20, 2018 at 11:37 pm
Because the official story is all lies Liane.

I recall reading at some point that Bailey drove himself to SDH on Monday morning. Try as I might, however, I couldn't find it again. I know there is a comment on MoonOfAlabama mentioning the same thing but it does not have a link.

Then Mark Urban said in the Newsnight programme that Bailey drove himself there on Tuesday morning .

Take you pick!

Marie says: August 21, 2018 at 2:31 am
Were PD specialists there throughout?

Those were not PD specialists but SDH physicians that had received PD training. That might be in addition to PD scientists that SDH spokespersons have said were there as well. So, plenty of professionals focused on nerve agent poisoning could have been there during the first 36 hours.

SDH had a whole new unoccupied wing they could have commandeered to isolate the patients. Also to keep regular SDH staff and their eyes away from the patients as well. Wouldn't that be preferable to transporting them to PD with so many eyes watching?

Paul says: August 21, 2018 at 7:39 am
But that was my original point. A training course does not make anyone: "highly specialist medical practitioners experienced in these matters" Where does the 'experience in the matters' come from?
Miheila says: August 20, 2018 at 6:20 pm
I'm posting this reply to Max_B here because this is the second time that there's been no 'reply' option to his posts. No idea why, but the blue word inthe corner is missing.

If you really "don't care", Max_B, then why on earth are you making such a fuss over it ? I do care. And after accusing me of getting my facts wrong (over Lavrov) you apologise to newcomer (Новичoк) Cherrycoke only when s/he corrected you. Maybe you forgot.

Anyway, you say: "Fentanyl's and Carfentanil *are* nerve agents, I understand you want to rely on a much narrower definition of nerve agent that only includes Organophosphates, but that definition is just not accurate".

In your opinion only; not professional opinion which has for decades treated organophosphate agents as nerve agents, and fentanyls as (narcotic-analgesic type) incapacitants.

You said, "The substance responsible for the Salisbury and Amesbury incidents isn't an Organophsophate, that's why they are scrabbling around for a redefinition".
I agree with this, although we are only surmising that the Salisbury/Amesbury substance is not an organophosphate (due to symptoms), for no-one has actually specified its nature. And yes, I can see that they are scrabbling around, and so are you ! Fair enough. But how can this explain why nobody has officially specified what this chemical is ? As far as I can tell, it doesn't. Why can't they simply be open about its nature and honest about their scrabbling ?

Yes, of course opioids depress the CNS, but so do lots of substances such as alcohol, and, yes Peter, even axes ! This does not make them nerve agents for they do not inhibit acetylcholinestaerase – crucial to the definition.

Wikipedia: "Nerve agents, sometimes also called nerve gases, are a class of organic chemicals that disrupt the mechanisms by which nerves transfer messages to organs. The disruption is caused by the blocking of acetylcholinesterase".

I perfectly understand the argument over BZ versus Carfentanyl, but surely, rather than redefine the latter as a nerve agent, why not simply redefine it as an opioid chemical weapon ? Organophosphate and carbamate pesticides are officially (and biochemically) nerve agents, but they're not chemical weapons. In the same way, most opioids are not chemical weapons but some, such as the fentanyls should be. Salisbury has highlighted this failing, hence the scrabbling about.

To include certain opioids as nerve agents (rather than opioid CW's), then the official, long-established and generally-accepted scientific definition must be changed which would only invite more confusion.

Duncan says: August 20, 2018 at 8:03 pm
Agreed.
Opioid receptor agonists are not nerve agents.
However, if carfentanil was suspected then unprotected contact with the victims would not be the protocol.
The true first responders were the heroes.
Unless they knew enough ahead of time to not be afraid.
Cascadian says: August 20, 2018 at 8:20 pm
"The true first responders were the heroes." And they were who ? By the testimony of some who were aware of them (i.e. the unfeeling Freya Church) just walked on like The Good Samaritans they most certainly are not!

Perhaps there was an assumption that in an, allegedly, druggie infested town like Salisbury, most people would ignore the histrionics of the pair on the bench and walk on, leaving it to 'the first responders' to deal with it. Convenient, if it worked.

Duncan says: August 21, 2018 at 7:05 am
If, and it is an if, the lady doctor and the nurse rushed to give the two prone figures first aid without considering their own safety then these two are the only heroic ones in this shambles.
Marie says: August 20, 2018 at 10:09 pm
As of 4 Mar, there has been no known fentanyl overdose in Salisbury. First responders would have been trained in what to look for and how to proceed in a fentanyl od situation, but practice makes perfect. There's not that much difference in the emergency response protocols for fentanyl and carfentanil. The difference is in the medical treatment in the hours and days after the first couple of hours, and symptoms, treatments, and responses rather than tests for the presence of carfentanil is the guide for physicians.
John Bull says: August 20, 2018 at 1:09 pm
Rob, you are a great one for making lists of questions. You may have this one on a list already:-

If HMG knew that Russia had declared death to all traitors, what measures did they take to protect Sergei Skripal, a confirm traitor but also a member of our security services. And why were those measures so lamentably unsuccessful?

Duncan says: August 20, 2018 at 12:32 pm
Rob,

Look who is the Home Secretary's right hand man. Front bencher? Is he tresspassing?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-44728026/amesbury-novichok-poisoning-sajid-javid-asks-russia-for-explanation

Listen to Javid. The UK has never said what happened, (that's why we have the Blogmire) and I don't recall ANY Russian account, other than denial and show us evidence.
Glen needs to improve on his nodding skills. He is about three seconds too slow.
Time and practice will no doubt improve this.

Miheila says: August 20, 2018 at 6:29 pm
"Hear, hear, honourably learned friend, Duncan !" Nod, nod, wink, wink

Those pontificating, sycophantic buffoons sicken me. What a charade. Fancy having beings like that running the show !

John Bull says: August 20, 2018 at 11:15 am
Rob, as ever good stuff.

Having followed your excellent blog for some weeks now, I've become convinced that there are four distinct elements to this affair: two opposing clandestine ops, an almost unbelievably idiotic false flag charade, and a random death:-

1. Operation 'Let's Keep Tabs on Sergei'. Run by MI5/6/SB to make sure their double agent doesn't come to any harm or become a triple agent. Electronic tagging, email monitoring, phone tapping, and friendly chats ever now and then. Worked well for years, then the wheels fell off on 4th March.

2. Operation 'Let's Extract Skripal'. Run by an unknown security agency but possibly contracted out to another. Deniable soft extraction so he could be wheeled out later to give evidence concerning the Trump Dossier, with or without his co-operation. The plan included his daughter, because she was needed to ensure Sergei said what he was supposed to say when the time came. Phase One carried out successfully on 4th March. Phase Two delayed by HMG playing silly games, but eventually mission was accomplished.

3. The 'Let's Blame Putin' Charade. When MI6 reported to its ultimate boss that an ex-Russian spy had been poisoned, Boris would have rightly assumed the culprits were probably Russian. But then, remembering how Lavrov humiliated him at that press conference in Moscow last December, he decided to make sure Russia did get the blame and take the rap for it. With the help of the new inexperienced Defence Secretary and others, he came up with a hastily and ill-conceived plan to show that the poison could have only come from Russia, ensuring Russia's guilt. The Home Secretary at the time, Amber Rudd, did not buy into it so had to be replaced, but others – including the overworked Theresa May – were taken in. The narrative quickly fell apart, but having persuaded the world and his wife of Putin's guilt, there was no going back. The hole Boris dug just got deeper. And all the evidence – or the lack of it – had to be destroyed. No wonder Boris resigned.

4. A Tragic Death. Four months after Skripal, a couple in Amesbury were hospitalised for drug misuse; just two of the many cases SDH would have dealt with during the year. But having been persuaded by HMG that the Skripals had been poisoned with Novichok-that-only-comes-from-Russia, the local authorities took no chances and assumed the two from Amesbury had been likewise affected. HMG, desperate to keep their narrative alive, leapt on the incident to re-ignite the anti-Russian rhetoric and claim Dawn's death was 'murder', 'a terrorist act', 'a war crime' etc. etc. The narrative was even more idiotic than the first one (a scent bottle in a litter bin for four months!) – and ironically, it blew the gaff. They said Dawn was poisoned by the very same Novichok-that-only-comes-from-Russia and died because she received 10-times the dose Skripal got. But we know she took eight days to die. It could not have been Novichok.

Perhaps the police should stop trying to hunt down non-existent assassins and investigate Boris Johnson. The crime? Misconduct in public office, which carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

Duncan says: August 20, 2018 at 12:01 pm
Indeed John,

When I was writing my scenario below, I started to realise that rather than satirical it could be factual. Little Gavin might be working under that man who would be king's tutelage. Gavin having told the Russians to shut up, does not do well under questioning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2018/may/29/richard-madeley-gavin-williamson-dodges-question-on-russia-video

John Bull says: August 20, 2018 at 12:31 pm
Duncan – I read your excellent piece after posting my 'Four Elements' bit. I think you're right. You've hit some good points.
Paul says: August 20, 2018 at 12:04 pm
'A tragic death' If Salisbury and the aftermath was not already crazy, Amesbury hit new heights of idiocy. A woman was taken from a house with poisoning in the morning but others in the house were not taken to hospital for observation.

Later the same day, the other occupant of the same house fell ill. Decontamination tents were sent to the location but were not used. Instead police put the second victim in an ambulance with no protection whatsoever.

Just watch this short video and ask yourself – what were the police thinking!!**??

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-44729888/footage-of-amesbury-poisoning-victim-entering-ambulance

Max_B says: August 20, 2018 at 2:14 pm
Two days after Dawn and Charlie had been admitted to hospital, and as a direct result of the Amesbury incident, Detective Sergent Erin Martin of Salisbury CID took the " unusual step " of issuing an official warning via Wiltshire Constabulary to " drug users " in south Wiltshire "to be extra cautious" , . "We are asking anyone who may have information about this batch of drugs to contact the Police", " where the drugs may have been bought from, or who they may have been sold to."
John Bull says: August 20, 2018 at 3:24 pm
Thanks, Max_B. That's interesting. So at least Salisbury CID didn't fall for the Novichok nonsense.

By the way, I agree that any agent which attacks the central nervous system can be termed a 'nerve agent'.

Peter Beswick says: August 20, 2018 at 4:55 pm
So do I, including a well placed axe
Miheila says: August 20, 2018 at 6:49 pm
John, you're poaching my theory ! The one I hinted at in an earlier post (yesterday I think).

Like you, I'm convinced that two opposing covert ops are involved.

Your point 1. would be standard practice. Sergei would have been subjected to discreet surveillance by MI5 watchers and GCHQ throughout his British exile. Most likely heroic DS Bailey was his local case officer. But let's not forget that Sergei was still working for MI6 and that Pablo Miller was probably still his controller (line manager). There's a saying, 'once an intelligence officer; always an intelligence officer' – a saying which certainly holds true for many ex-SIS folk. It was his covert activities that lead to your next point.

Your point 2. is more or less exactly what I had worked out myself, and I'll be working on the finer details for some time yet.

Your point 3. is spot on too. This is the opportunistic 'political capital' angle I mentioned in an earlier post.

Your point 4. I see this as a crude continuation of the above. A further opportunity. Nothing more.

Eventually, we'll be joining more and more dots together. Good work, John !

Paul says: August 20, 2018 at 10:13 am
Rob,
You said:

"Party A is British Intelligence, whereas Party B is perhaps some sort of Trump supporting element of US Intelligence/military. The Skripals are therefore currently under their protection. Have I got that right?"

Broadly yes; that is the bare bones of what I currently think.

You counter with:

"Party A would be FBI/CIA Intel with nerve agent from US part of Porton Down, and Party B would be British Intelligence believe what Party A is about to do is potentially disastrous, and so try to stop it."

I have two particular issues with that idea. I mention them, to see whether they can be answered in a way that allows us to build a scenario around your idea.

Firstly, when you say FBI/CIA, what you really mean is Cabal. The FBI/CIA would be acting on behalf of HRC/DNC/Obama/etc. to remove an individual who could expose them and throw light on their illegal activities – specifically spying on Trump. Why would May/M_5/M_6 want to stop that? They are in exactly the same boat and do not want their role to be disclosed either. Also Sergei was nothing but an expense for HMG; they already had all the information he was ever going to give them.

Ah, you say, British intelligence didn't like the idea of a nerve agent being set loose in Salisbury. OK, well why not just have a word with the FBI/CIA and agree to do it in a way that keeps everyone (except Sergei) happy. I am sure that between FBI/CIA/M_5/M_6/HMG, there was something that they could all agree would do the job and not threaten the whole of Salisbury. Why not just get him at home?

But that isn't my biggest problem.

Secondly, Sergei was on British soil. If HMG/M_5/M_6 got wind of a plan to kill him, why would they not just take him off the streets immediately? Get him into protective custody. He had already been to the police to say he was in fear of his life, so get him somewhere safe. Then there is no need for any 'nerve agent' attack at all. The FBI/CIA might be a bit miffed but Trump would not complain; he would say British intelligence did a great job!

In this case, Bailey visits Sergei on Saturday morning and says: "Right Sergei, go and get Yulia and then we will take you in. You will be safe for the rest of your life. All you have to do is give me the SD card and we will take care of the rest." Job done and it would have saved an awful lot of ferreting around in rubbish bins ever since.

So if party A was indeed some black op of the FBI/CIA, why did party B let it proceed right up to 4 March and then try to thwart it at the last moment, instead of just killing it stone dead? If party B didn't stop the FBI/CIA earlier and Bailey was sent in to save the Skripals, it rather looks like they didn't get the SD card anyway

Rob Slane says: August 20, 2018 at 10:37 am
Good points Paul. For now, the only thing I'll say is with regard to the second problem, which is this. It would all depend on when this plot was discovered. If it was days or weeks in advance, then yes, you're absolutely correct. But if it was some time on the morning or even early afternoon of 4th March, then that would change things. And to be frank, even if there was a "cover up" of a "cover up" it doesn't look like it was very well thought through.

Rob

Paul says: August 20, 2018 at 10:57 am
Rob,

If party B discovered the plot on Sunday morning, they would have had the whole day to find Sergei and take him in. Sergei wasn't trying to hide; they would have found him easily on council CCTV. There would also have been police cars all day outside Sergei's house, waiting for him and police would have been crawling all over the city.

If party B discovered the plot at, say, 2pm and Sergei was not at home, they still had options. Surely the police would have launched their procedures for something like a bomb threat. The city would be closed off immediately and police would have been everywhere. People would have been told to evacuate the city and get to safety. Given 2 or 3 hours, procedures would exist to minimise the risk to the general public.

Even if they only had one hour's notice, I can't see the police doing nothing and allowing a nerve agent to be deployed.

Paul says: August 20, 2018 at 11:05 am
I should add that I still believe that on the Sunday and Monday, the Wiltshire police were honest and did a proper job. Some very funny details emerged very quickly by Monday evening they knew that this was a scam and on Tuesday the Met was brought in to cover it all up.
Marie says: August 20, 2018 at 2:41 pm
I should add that I still believe that on the Sunday and Monday, the Wiltshire police were honest and did a proper job.

Agree.

on Tuesday the Met was brought in to cover it all up.

Disagree. The Met or Met CT was in the lead as early as 7:00 PM on Sunday and no later than 9:00 PM. Publicly for the next day and a half SFD and SDH referred to the Met as a 'partner,' but one of the local police seniors did say on Monday or Tuesday that they were relieved of command on Sunday.

Paul says: August 20, 2018 at 3:04 pm
"The investigation into the possible poisoning of the Russian spy Sergei Skripal gained new momentum on Tuesday, as Scotland Yard announced its counter-terrorism police would take charge.."
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/06/counter-terrorism-take-on-russian-spy-sergei-skripal-poison-case
Marie says: August 20, 2018 at 11:36 pm
Okay – so what do you do with the subsequent statements from SDH/NHS that have clearly stated that on Sunday evening, SDH contacted NHS "Radiation, poison, etc." and NHS "Radiation, poison, etc" promptly contacted Met CT?

Did Met CT respond with, "We're busy with our tea and crumpets and it's not our patch anyway?"

The Monday announcements were issued by SDH and hours later the SPD, but we now also know that by 06:00 on Monday buzz about unknown agent and Skripal had spread throughout several UK agencies. Do you seriously think that SDH and SPD were in the lead that day? That referring to 'partners' was a simple nicety?

Is there not even a semi-automatic communication link from SPD to Wiltshire PD and the Met? Shortly after the incident, if we accept a Skripal neighbor eyewitness, a SPD patrol car stopped at Skripal's house. That indicates that Skripal has been preliminarily identified as one of the bench people. Even if that eyewitness is wrong, nobody disputes that a team of police arrived at Skripal's house sometime between 7:00 and 8:00 PM and by all accounts gained access to the house and searched it. If the Met or Met CT had any boots on the ground by then, they wouldn't have had enough to handle the search on its own. So, of course, local police assets were involved in this.

Do you think Craig Holden and Cara Charles-Barkwrote the statements they read on camera on Monday evening? Statements that only covered the barest of information,

https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/video/sergei-skripal-suspected-poisoning-police-and-hospital-news-footage/929998464

You honestly believe that SPD operated exclusively on this matter from Sunday evening until Tuesday? Seemed to me that there was a bit of chaos at the law enforcement end on Monday as they didn't get much done by that evening statement and when national reporters were beginning to show up. SPD couldn't ascertain that a crime had been committed. Was Met CT pushing for a crime? Somebody behind the scenes with power sure was.

Boris had his script ready to go as soon as Rowley (Met CT) announced that Skripal was one of the victims.

Paul says: August 20, 2018 at 11:51 pm
Marie, I don't know why you are ranting at me, all I did was post a link – that is the official story! Anyway, just to correct a couple of things for you:

" police arrived at Skripal's house sometime between 7:00 and 8:00 PM" No Bailey was there by 5pm.

" by 06:00 on Monday buzz about unknown agent" No the buzz by 6am on Monday was about a former Russian spy. The news of an unknown agent came later on Monday morning.

Marie says: August 21, 2018 at 2:53 am
I find it helpful to be as precise as possible when so much possible evidence is mushy or conflicts.

SPD has stated that the team of officers including Bailey went to Skripals house Sunday evening. I don't recall that SPD has given the time of they arrived. Skripals neighbors reported seeing several police cars and officers at Skripals house at 7:00. As eyewitnesses aren't generally all that reliable as to the precise time they observed something, I merely accepted 7:00 as the earliest and allowed that it could have been as late as 8:00. Either of which are good enough for a reconstructed timeline.

As to the report from one neighbor that a police car arrived at Skripal's house at 5:00, there's no other evidence to support that. I'm sort of accepting a 5:00-5:30 visit by a lone police car because checking on a home of a patient whose identity would not have been firmly established at that point is sort of what police do. I could have been Bailey, but I doubt it because it's too routine. That person wouldn't have entered the house. Likely knocked on the door and reported back that nobody was home. It's relevance for me is that it gives a time as to when Skripal had first been identified as one of the two possible patients.

Peter Beswick says: August 20, 2018 at 9:49 am
Key Elements of the Hoax (I say key because a big part of the Hoax has been to throw in distractions, red herrings and a ton of irrelevant stuff to confuse and overload the story – It is Not meant to be understood)

The Conflicting advice of Novichoks that Public Health England (PHE) promulgated compared with that of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) on Nerve Agents (the OPCW hadn't put anything out on Novichok specifically for the simple reason they didn't know anything)

https://www.opcw.org/about-chemical-weapons/types-of-chemical-agent/nerve-agents/

The Director of Public Health England (PHE) Paul Cosford saying that Novichok actually does take a minimum of 3 hours to take effect after contact with a large dose

"If you become ill with this stuff (Novichok) from actually coming into contact with a significant amount of it then its within 6-12 hours, maximum (that symptoms would occur) – 3 hours is the minimum but you have to be in touch with a large dose.""

https://www.spirefm.co.uk/news/local-news/2630419/amesbury-incident-novichok-could-be-active-for-50-years/

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/phe-statement-on-incident-in-amesbury

Summary

PHE – Risk to public remains low (Despite being dead). "This Stuff" (Novichok) take effect in not less than 3 hours IF you get a very large dose through the skin

OPCW – Nerve Agents are deadly, the more toxic they are the deadlier they are. They are designed to kill. Through Skin contact will present symptoms in 20 – 30 mins, (inhalation much quicker)

No CCTV released by police.

Which would establish the actual Time Line rather than that of the Fake Official Narrative.

It would establish what the Skripals looked like that day and what actually occurred at the bench (the police don't want us to know either)

It could have saved the lives of the 3 children that Sergei gave bread to in the park when he first arrived in Salisbury that day if the boys had been poisoned by Novichok.

Bailey's Body Cam would establish what he did at the bench and Skripal home.

The Government Lie that it was the Russians that did it and could only have been them.

Peter Beswick says: August 20, 2018 at 9:51 am
PHE – Risk to public remains low (Despite Dawn being dead)
Duncan says: August 20, 2018 at 9:21 am
Dear Readers,

I have a tome which addresses means and opportunity, and when I can paste it to the Blog you will hopefully see it. I will still bang on about Skripals and only Skripals being the park bench victims. We know that they were in Zizzi's after the duck feed with the boys, then onto the Mill Pub. As many of the recent posts had pointed out the Mill Pub has lots of CCTV footage and the police spent quite a long time interviewing the staff. (As one does in a terror investigation.

The Telegraph was still reporting that the Mill Pub was the last port of call before the park bench. I think that is true. However, TPTB want us to "ignore" that location and focus on the Novichok that dripped from Zizzi's table. Why?

Liane Theuer says: August 20, 2018 at 9:09 am
The US media has send journalists to Salisbury very early. For example Ellen Barry, NYT. These journalists have influenced the official narrative to a decisive extent.

On March 9 ABC News has send their chief reporter Terry Moranto to Salisbury. This is the video : https://abcnews.go.com/International/video/soldiers-heading-scene-poisoning-attack-england-53638197

He used the Snap Fitness CCTV to establish the „fact" that the Skripals went from Zizzis through Market Walk to the bench.

Rob, just another false translation of what Putin said about traitors. Listen to Moran´s interpretation at 2:00 in the video. Quote : Vladimir Putin's held a town hall session and he was asked about this five's that had been traded and he said, and this is almost a direct quote : „They will kick the bucket. Trust me. They betrayed their colleagues, their brothers in arms. And they took thirty pieces of silver and are gonna choke on all that." [End quote]

At 3:00 Terry Moran shows the CCTV of Snap Fitness. It´s outside at the right side of the entrance.

Noone says: August 20, 2018 at 5:03 am
Paul Craig Roberts: The CIA Owns the US and European Media

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/08/18/the-cia-owns-the-us-and-european-media/

Liane Theuer says: August 20, 2018 at 7:38 am
One of the best books I have ever read is "Bought Journalists" :
https://www.globalresearch.ca/english-translation-of-udo-ulfkottes-bought-journalists-suppressed/5601857
Miheila says: August 20, 2018 at 10:01 am
Noone & Liane:
Excellent articles, thanks.
I recommend everyone to watch the video on Liane's link:
https://youtu.be/sGqi-k213eE
15 minutes well worth watching.
Cascadian says: August 20, 2018 at 11:16 am
"Flat Earth New" by Nick Davies. It provides a plausible reason for the phenomena where all the new media carry the same headline and column with minor changes – it all comes from one source via a single feed that they all subscribe to (the Press Association, or sometimes Reuters).
john_a says: August 19, 2018 at 10:44 pm
Hi Rob and all,

We keep talking about the "official narrative". But actually, what is the official narrative and where does one find it?

I do try to keep up with events around the Skripal case. The media regularly and frequently cite "sources", official or otherwise. But have there been any actual authorized statements from the government containing anything like an "official" version of the events? There was Theresa May's statement to Parliament in March, but has there been anything since? If so, I must have missed it (which is quite possible).

For sure there's a media narrative. The media keeps floating new stories or bits of new information. But the media stories are often either self-contradictory or just plain nonsensical. Does this amount to an "official narrative"? Is the "perfume bottle" official for example? Or the novichok in the public toilets? Or are these only media stories?

I read in earlier posts that the police have issued an "official" timeline (contradicting earlier eye-witness accounts). Is this the case? Is there really a police timeline that one can look up in any official source, or is it just another media story?

Most recently the fact (?) was reported – apparently as a Guardian exclusive – that the government is "poised" (whatever that means) to submit an extradition request to Moscow. If true, it would be a very serious act. Has it been officially documented, or is even this simply another media story?

I apologise if I'm talking rubbish here, but I have the impression that there no such thing as an "official narrative" beyond what May told Parliament in March. Everything since then has been media smoke and mirrors. Or an I missing something?

Anonymous says: August 19, 2018 at 10:55 pm
I totally agree with you. And it seems none of the media is inclined to pin down and demand the official story. It is to the government's advantage to allow the media to run with unnamed sources to reinforce the Russia dunnit scenario, without themselves committing to it
Rob Slane says: August 19, 2018 at 11:35 pm
Hi John,

When I use the term "official narrative", which I do a lot, I am basically referring to three simple claims:

  1. That Sergei and Yulia Skripal, along with D.S. Nick Bailey, were poisoned by a "military grade nerve agent" known as a Novichok.
  2. That responsibility for this act lies with the Russian state.
  3. That the poisoning took place at the home of Mr Skripal, specifically by the application of the nerve agent to the handle of his front door.

The first two claims have been expressly made by Her Majesty's Government, whilst the third one has expressly been made by those in charge of the investigation.

There are of course other sub-claims that form a part of this (such as the day that Yulia and then Sergei were discharged from hospital) but these three claims are substantially it.

The main problem with the first claim is that the Skripals are alive and well. The main problem with the second is Russia is absolutely not the only country or entity that could have produced the alleged substance. And the main problem with the third claim is that it is a physical impossibility that 2 people could have come into contact with the alleged substance, and then collapsed at exactly the same time 4 hours later.

Everything else follows from those three basic, but demonstrably false claims.

chris says: August 20, 2018 at 5:36 am
Aren't " those in charge of the investigation" the only ones authorized to make "official statements"?
Miheila says: August 20, 2018 at 5:59 am
I agree with you completely, Rob, except for you saying that the Skripals are 'alive and well'. In truth, we can't be sure of this. All we know for certain is that Yulya was alive at the time the Reuters video was recorded.
Anonymous says: August 20, 2018 at 9:35 am
Hi Rob,

I definitely agree with you. Almost nothing is "official" except that Putin did it (whatever it was).

On your Point 3, what do we make of this post by CharlieFreak ?
I was discussing the 'door handle' theory with a relative about five or six weeks ago and he was telling me that he had been listening to a BBC Radio 4 'Today' interview with a Govt Security Minister the previous week (Ben Wallace?) in which he was asked if Novichok residue had actually been found by investigators on the door handle. According to my relative – who has been following the case and assumed from all the publicity that nerve agent residue had been found on the door handle – the Minister said it hadn't but it was a plausible the theory they were working with. As I understand it the interviewer then rhetorically remarked (without any obvious hint of irony or incredulity) that presumably it was quite possible that the 'assassins' came back after seeing the Skripals leave the house and wiped the door handle clean to remove the evidence!!
https://www.theblogmire.com/bbc-crimewatch-reconstruction-of-salisbury-poisonings-shelved/#comment-8643

Can this be? Not even the door handle is "official" ???

john_a says: August 20, 2018 at 9:43 am
Sorry, the above post was from me. The comment box has forgotten to save my user name.
Brendan says: August 20, 2018 at 9:24 pm
john_a,
"Is the "perfume bottle" official for example?"

Officially the Novichok was found in a "small glass bottle" in Charlie Rowley's flat. No further details were officially given about the container. It was Charlie who said that he had found a perfume bottle with a known brand name, which Dawn sprayed on her wrists, and that the contents somehow got onto Charlie's hands.

Brendan says: August 20, 2018 at 9:27 pm
– "Or the novichok in the public toilets?"

Nothing official as far as I know, except that the Hazmat guys searched the public toilets in QEM park. Some tabloid published a ludicrous story about Russia using that public toilet as a CW lab.

Brendan says: August 20, 2018 at 9:38 pm
QEG park
Brendan says: August 20, 2018 at 9:32 pm
– "Is there really a police timeline that one can look up in any official source, or is it just another media story?"

The Metropolitan Police published a timeline a number of times.
http://news.met.police.uk/news/update-incident-in-salisbury-298351
http://news.met.police.uk/news/renewed-appeal-for-information-from-anyone-who-saw-salisbury-victims-car-298912
http://news.met.police.uk/news/ongoing-investigation-into-incident-in-salisbury-on-4-march-309256

This has been said many times before, but it's worth repeating that the police did not say when the Skripals visited the Mill pub, only that it was "at some time after" they arrived at Sainsbury's car park in Salisbury city centre. The police must have known more about the exact timing, since they had plenty of timestamped CCTV footage available to them. 'Unofficially' according to media reports, they went to Mill before they went to Zizzis, but there does not appear to be anything to support that version of events.

Brendan says: August 20, 2018 at 9:34 pm
– "Most recently the fact (?) was reported – apparently as a Guardian exclusive – that the government is "poised" (whatever that means) to submit an extradition request to Moscow. If true, it would be a very serious act. Has it been officially documented, or is even this simply another media story?"

I guess that this is the story that originated from the Press Association that the Russian assassins were identified from CCTV images. Nothing official about that, in fact the Security Minister called it "ill informed and wild speculation". However, the BBC has treated the report very seriously.
https://twitter.com/MarkUrban01/status/1020366761848385536
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43643025

If the BBC continues to say that, it must have been leaked from some senior official source that wants the public to believe it, even if that source does not commit to it publicly.

Brendan says: August 20, 2018 at 9:36 pm
– You ask in another post "Not even the door handle is "official" ???"

The British authorities have not explicitly stated that the Novichok was found on the door knob, only on the front door: "Specialists have identified the highest concentration of the nerve agent, to-date, as being on the front door of the address.".

However, there have been various media reports that the nerve agent was found on the door handle. Furthermore, Sir Mark Sedwill, the UK's national security adviser stated in a publicly released letter that Russia had previously tested the use of door handles as a way of delivering nerve agents.

Brendan says: August 21, 2018 at 7:43 am
Sedwill says "DSTL established that the highest concentrations were found on the handle of Mr Skripal's front door. These are matters of fact." So I suppose you could call that official.
Liane Theuer says: August 19, 2018 at 10:28 pm
My thesis: The Skripals did not walk through the Market Walk to the bench.
I want to substantiate this thesis:

We have two CCTVs of people that are NOT the Skripals :
15:47:43 Snap Fitness shows the couple with the red bag. First published on March 6.
Cain Prince, 28, runs Snap Fitness.
16:08:00 Jenny's restaurant shows three people. First published on March 9.
Mustafa Dalangal, 57, runs Jenny's restaurant .

How did these two CCTVs find their way into the public ?
We know that the police didn´t publish a single CCTV. Why should they release this two ?
No, it were some journalists who found the CCTV earlier than the police.

Look at this timeline of March 5 and 6 (Reporter Liam Trim) :
Monday March 5
6pm The BBC reports the man is Sergei Skripal, 66, an ex-military intelligence colonel who was convicted in Russia of passing state secrets to Britain
7pm At a press conference Temporary Assistant Chief Constable Craig Holden tells reporters it is not being treated as a counter-terror incident.
Tuesday March 6
09:07 The BBC named Skripal as the man who was found along with a woman in her 30s, believed to be known to him, on a bench near a shopping centre shortly after 4pm on Sunday.
09:37 Both supermarkets are open but there are national media providing coverage close to the police tape.
10:34 Sergei Skripal, 66, was found slumped on a bench in Salisbury alongside a 33-year-old woman, who the BBC understands is his daughter, Yulia Skripal.
10:53 The latest from the Press Association: „As CCTV believed to show the pair in the moments before they were found slumped on a bench emerged, the UK's top counter-terrorism officer, Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley, said: "We have to be alive to the fact of state threats."
10:56 Freya Church, 27, the gym worker, from Salisbury, told the Press Association: (..)
15:37 BBC home affairs correspondent sums up press conference
He's quite brutally frank here but it's true – we did not learn much from that press conference.
https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/salisbury-russian-spy-police-substance-1302045

I guess that Craig Holden in the evening of March 5 told reporters about a man in his 60th and a woman in her 30th were the couple found slumped on the bench. And I suspect he also mentioned the red bag.
This gave the Press Association the idea to look for the couple on private CCTVs.
PA was looking for a couple with a red bag and they found it at Snap Fitness.

We know for a fact that PA found the wrong pair.
Had there been another couple on the CCTV with a red bag, then they would certainly have copied it, too ! So there was no second pair with a red bag in Market Walk at that time !

Later on March 6 the police arrived at Snap Fitness :
Quote : Snap Fitness manager Cain Prince, aged 28, said: "Police had a good look at the footage and were interested in these two people. It was the only image they took away."
Mr Prince added that police said Skripal was "wearing a green coat". [End quote]

"Police had a good look at the footage" – so, the police too didn´t see the Skripals in market Walk !
But they found it suspicious that there was a couple who also had a red bag. So they took it away.

The same with Jenny's restaurant CCTV on March 9.
First the CCTV was discovered by The Sun.
Police came later :
Quote : Counter terror cops from SO15 Special Operations have seized new CCTV footage that shows two people who fit the description of the victims.
Cops seized the pictures from a local business yesterday (Fri) – two days after the proprietor told them he had it.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5767001/cctv-video-ex-russian-spy-sergei-skripal-daughter-yulia-walking-mystery-woman-before-poisoned/

The Sun knew about the Snap Fitness CCTV and the red bag. Why did they focus on another couple ? Was the red bag couple not on Jenny's restaurant CCTV ? But they can not have fallen from the sky. I have no logical explanation other than this : Certain media wanted to create the illusion that the Skripals walked the Market Walk, although they didn´t.

Conclusion : Two different reporters have spotted CCTV. But no one has discovered the Skripals. In short, the Skripals didn´t walk through the Market Walk.

Paul says: August 19, 2018 at 10:47 pm
Liane, I think you are right. And why did the police take away that image from Snap Fitness? Because it was the couple on the bench! When the police searched the CCTV they knew what the bench couple looked like and that was who they were looking for.

If it had been the real Skripals on the bench, why on earth would the police have taken away CCTV of a random couple with a red bag, yet not bothered to take any images of the Skripals?

"Yes Mr Cain, Mr Skripal was wearing a green coat but never mind about that; I think I will have this picture of these two other people if that's alright with you."

Paul says: August 19, 2018 at 10:57 pm
Another thought, this may explain the switch in the Mill/Zizzi or Zizzi/Mill timeline. The CCTV couple were clearly not coming from the direction of the Mill, they were coming from Zizzi.

As the police had made a mistake in releasing the CCTV image, they may have switched the story round and said it was the Mill first to cover up the fact that they had (ridiculously) issued a CCTV image of 2 otherwise random people coming from the wrong direction. By switching it round perhaps they thought it provided some cover for having issued images of people that were not the Skripals and left the idea in everyone's mind that the Skripals had come from the same direction.

Liane Theuer says: August 20, 2018 at 7:45 am
Paul, both CCTVs were NOT released by the police but by the press ! This fact forced them to change the story. Why on earth was the time when the Skripals were in Mill Pub never given, neither by police nor journalists ?
Peter Beswick says: August 20, 2018 at 8:40 am
Something very significant happened in the Mill. It had 12 CCTV cameras operating that day the recordings were all seized by the police. The Manager was was treated as a terror suspect and interviewed by police 8 times in the first week of the investigation. The Skripals went to the Mill before Zizzis

"As further details of Col Skripal's movements emerged, a source close to Greg Townsend, manager of The Mill, revealed that he served the Russians last Sunday afternoon and had since been treated like a "terror suspect", interviewed by police up to eight times last week.

He said The Mill had 12 CCTV cameras, covering the large open-plan bar area as well as the upstairs balcony and lavatories overlooking it.

"The pub has obviously remained closed for more than a week and the cordon widened, but Greg feels like he has been kept completely in the dark, they're not telling him anything.

"He actually served them. He's had a bit of a time of it all and is a pending terror suspect.

"He certainly said he's being treated like one. He's had around eight police interviews.""

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/13/salisbury-car-park-ticket-machine-cordoned-expert-warns-dusty/

Peter Beswick says: August 20, 2018 at 8:53 am
Sorry the Telegraph has the opposite to the "Official Narrative" (as it was then)

"From the car park, it was just a short walk through The Maltings shopping precinct to Zizzi, where they ate lunch before heading to The Mill pub for a drink."

The "Official Narrative" was never changed on Dr Davies, the Duck Boys park location, the cctv pair being one and the same as the bench people

And the Helicopter taking Yuia and / or Sergie changed 3 weeks l was corrected later in the leading MSM news provider the Spire FM website.

The Official Narrative is a tool of the Hoaxer and because of its unreliability it means Pants.

Independent Tested Evidence is what is forming the Facts, if they are false they can easily be refuted abd corrected by New Evidence eg Mill and Council CCTV

Peter Beswick says: August 20, 2018 at 8:58 am
This is a Major Witness but the Official Narrative has forgotten about her

"The source said the CCTV cameras covered the whole bar and had been seized by police.

"Skripal and his daughter sat just to the right of the front door.

"One of the young bar staff who was on a break sat really near them and has also been interviewed.""

Peter Beswick says: August 20, 2018 at 9:06 am
Sorry both the "Source" and "One of the young bar staff"

Are Major witnesses.

So is Mill Manager Greg Townsend .

Lots of witnesses dropped out of the "Official Narrative" did they know the wrong type of stuff?

It's a HOAX !

I Will start to put a list of the elements of the Hoax together at the top.

Rob Slane says: August 20, 2018 at 9:04 am
Peter, this prompted me to look at Mr Townend's Facebook page and there was a link to a piece about his rabbits, which were locked up behind the police cordon, with no food or water. But thanks to his raising of awareness on social media, the police stepped in:

"Luckily, the Luckily, Wiltshire Police stepped into the rescue the rabbits after pub manager's plea was shared more than 100 times across Facebook. The force today tweeted: 'We have an update on the rabbits stuck at an address in one of [the] cordons. They have now been given food and water and are OK. Thanks for everyone's concern.'"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5485721/Race-save-floppy-eared-Salisbury-two.html

Sadly the cat and the guinea pigs at 47 Christie Miller Road were not treated with the same care. "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" it seems.

Cascadian says: August 20, 2018 at 11:39 am
Or, possibly, 'all police are dumb, but some are dumber than others'.

Or, one could change 'dumb' to 'unfeeling', or 'callous', or some other derogatory term.

The cat and the guinea pigs in the Skripal's house would have been raising hell and the cat would have been trying everything in its repertoire to get out. Then there's the defecation and urination, the smell must have been quite ripe. So please tell me how the officers posted outside the Skripals and Townsend's ignored all this without comment to their superiors?

Rob Slane says: August 20, 2018 at 12:14 pm
No idea. The two things that baffle me about the whole incident are:

a) If you look at the photos of police officers standing near the house, there are three windows that are open. I would have thought the cat could have got through one of those, and there's probably a catflap on the back door. The cat, if not the guinea pigs, could surely have gotten away.

b) Why on earth the authorities let on about the condition of the animals. They're not above being economical with the actualite. Why then did they not just say, "The cat and the guinea pigs are now safely residing at a secure location. They do not wish to avail themselves of the services of the RSPA, or Russian Embassy, and they ask that their privacy be respected."

Bizarre, no???

Miheila says: August 20, 2018 at 4:08 pm
The affair of the pets was only made public when the Russian embassy began enquiring about them. Until then it was the Skripals' vet who'd contacted the police about the pets, and this happened within hours of the poisoning.

Once it became public, the government had to come up with a plausible cover story – claiming that DSB had found them on 4th March. I don't believe this. The DEFRA vet allegedly involved was, as far as I know, never named, and the best they could come up with was that the Persian cat, Nash van Drake (brought over from Russia), had been found in a 'distressed' state, taken to PD, humanely put to sleep and incinerated. No vet should euthanise an animal simply because it is distressed. The guinea pigs (also from Russia) had been found dead due to lack of food and water were also taken off to PD. I don't believe this story. Rumours of a second cat, Masyanya, bought in England, began to circulate and it was assumed that this cat had escaped. Neighbours will know more.

I would like to think that all the pets survived and are now safe. This may even be true if the Skripals had been 'disappeared' according to a pre-planned operation. If so, the pets would have been moved elsewhere shortly before the fateful day, or on that very morning.

HMG hadn't taken into account a second cat, because they weren't aware of one, but there certainly were two cats and I have videos of them both. The embassy were only aware of one cat and two guinea pigs, information that I believe came from Viktoria. As for the rabbits and fish, another later rumour, perhaps they had been taken away earlier too. The whole pet story strikes me as very odd. Maybe Howard Taylor, the vet, knows more than we do. He said, "We phoned the police on day one to offer to help if they needed it. I thought it unlikely the police would have gone to the house and not done anything."

On 17th March it was only reported that the animals had been taken away. It was only on 6/7th April that HMG admitted that the guinea pigs were dead and the had been suffering.

According to The Sun: Taylor said of Mr Skripal: "He was a nice chap and we got on well. He never said he was in fear for his life. He used the vets for some years and I had seen his cat and his guinea pigs." Note: only one cat mentioned.

"We contacted the police straightaway upon hearing the news that Mr Skripal had been admitted to hospital, and a number of times afterwards, to make them aware of Mr Skripal's pets and their needs.
We contacted Porton Down – in case the animals may have been taken into isolation. We also offered to take care of Mr Skripal's pets in his absence. We were never contacted by the police or Porton Down in return regarding Mr Skripal's pets".

If we believe this official story, then why haven't the RSPCA prosecuted the police fotr animal neglect? I'm disgusted by the RSPCA's apparent lack of interest in this affair. Their press officer, Nicola Walker said:

"It is very sad to hear that these animals have died in such tragic circumstances. However, we appreciate the emergency services were working in extreme and dangerous conditions in an incredibly fast-moving operation in an attempt to keep the public safe. We don't currently know the details of what happened but, as part of our ongoing working relationship with police, we would like to see if there is any learning for future operations."

Suzanne Norbury, their South-West Press Officer came up with the same wording, and:
"Emergency services working in extreme and dangerous conditions incredibly fast-moving operation an attempt to keep the public safe'

I go along with this assessment: "It's a string of shallow excuses. It's nonsense. And it comes, not from the police themselves, but from the royal body supposed to prevent cruelty to animals".

john_a says: August 20, 2018 at 12:51 pm
According to one press report the pets were already removed from Skripal's house on 17 March: https://metro.co.uk/2018/03/17/poisoned-russian-agents-cat-guinea-pigs-taken-away-tests-7394516/

This report may have been inaccurate, but nobody can claim that the existence of the pets was not known as early as mid March. The family vet also raised questions at an early stage. The report also shows that somebody thought the animals were worth "testing".

To me, this is one of the most bizarre inconsistencies in the whole case. Were the animals removed in mid March (alive) or early April (dead)? Why are there two different and mutually contradictory stories? What possible interest could be served by leaving the pets inside the house? And does it really mean that the police or counter-terror guys never entered the house before early April? After (supposedly) finding novichok on the door handle?

What's going on here? Did somebody calculate that a heartbreak story about starving pets would make us all hate Russia even more? If so, I suspect it backfired badly. British people love pets, and the story really just makes the British authorities look inhuman. Especially because it was the Russians who raised the issue.

Or is the whole sorry saga of the pets just a symptom of the British authorities losing interest in the whole affair and just trying to walk away from it in embarrassment?

Also, do the Skripals know the fate of their pets? What have they been told, and how did they take it?

Liane Theuer says: August 20, 2018 at 2:03 pm
As I wrote before, it looks like a punishment of Sergei. He really loved his pets. Or does anybody here has the impression, that the Skripals were treated like innocent victims ?
Milda says: August 19, 2018 at 9:46 pm
With regard to the Amesbury case:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/wiltshire-salisbury-amesbury-major-incident-victims-dawn-sturgess-charlie-rowley-latest-a8431376.html
An excerpt:
A specialist "decontamination shower" was taken to the scene [Rowley's place] by Dorset and Wiltshire Fire and Rescue Service on Saturday [30 June], but a crew from Swindon later tweeted that "thankfully the incident wasn't serious and our decontamination shower wasn't required". The tweet has since been deleted.
Peter Beswick says: August 19, 2018 at 8:10 pm
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20090128233607/http://www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk/content/tvp/tvp_3_0110.pdf
Peter Beswick says: August 19, 2018 at 10:07 pm
Sterling work as always Paul, thank you. The note was sent from Frank Beswick (no relation) to Dr David Kelly the week before he died. Beswick was a colleague of Kelly's at Porton Down

Sorry I only have the B & W image

Peter Beswick says: August 19, 2018 at 10:11 pm
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/porton-down-scientists-escape-charges-for-poisoning-soldiers-95378.html
Liane Theuer says: August 19, 2018 at 10:43 pm
French bread spiked with LSD in CIA experiment: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/7415082/French-bread-spiked-with-LSD-in-CIA-experiment.html
Peter Beswick says: August 20, 2018 at 11:14 am
The writer of the letter was Frank Beswick (no relation) to Dr david Kelly, I don't know whether it was his own letter header (the crest and coat of arms) or that of the CDE Porton Down but this seems to indicate it was his own personal crest & Arms

"Frank's scientific work did not interfere with his enthusiasm for voluntary work with the St John Ambulance, in which he was a senior figure. The promotion to the rank of commander brother within the Order of St John in 1995 delighted him and allowed him to design his own coat of arms. This included the badge of the Chemical Defence Establishment and a heart, a nod back to his early work in cardiac physiology."

I Hadn't realised before but Beswick and Kelly had worked on detoxing the island of Gruinard together

"In 1979, following the closure of the Microbiological Research Establishment, the small microbiology programme fell into his bailiwick and this stimulated the work to rehabilitate the Island of Gruinard, which had been contaminated with anthrax in the early 1940s."

https://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d6425

Peter Beswick says: August 20, 2018 at 12:16 pm
https://thegenealogyguide.com/what-are-the-symbols-on-a-coat-of-arms

http://www.hasbrouckfamily.org/coatarms.htm

Miheila says: August 20, 2018 at 4:44 pm
Well, there's no heart in the arms on that letterhead so I can't see how they can be the arms that Beswick chose for himself. Nor do I understand why the crest is placed separately on the left. It's only the colour and charges in the escutcheon (shield) that makes a coat-of-arms unique to a particular family, individual or corporate body. In a sense, the rest is mere traditional ornament – the supporters, crest, helm, motto

Yes, I saw that Hasbrouck one when I did a quick search, but the chevron is not engrailed and the difference is crucial. It MUST be engrailed (the internet is still not the best way to search for these things). By the way the Hasbouck arms would is described as "Purpure, a chevron between three flambeaus or, flamed proper", so our friend's arms would then be:

"????, a chevron engrailed between three flambeaus (not torches) or (probably), flamed proper (probably)". I can't guess the field colour (????), and I'm guessing the likely colours of the torches.

Denise says: August 19, 2018 at 2:05 pm
I had forgotten about Ross Cassidy and was checking him out again after Miheila mentioned him for the list of people who know more that they are saying and found this from Sky News March 28 2018

Mr Cassidy, 61, has spent many hours with counter-terror detectives investigating the poisoning, but would not discuss the police operation.

Mr Cassidy got to know Sergei, his wife Lyudmila, his son Alexandr (who was known as Sasha) and Yulia.

Sergei spent a lot of time out of the country and there were times when I didn't see him, but he used to call me his English friend. He was very generous and never forgot my birthday, usually buying me an expensive bottle of whisky.

On Saturday 3 March, Mr Cassidy drove Mr Skripal to Heathrow to collect Yulia, who had moved back to Moscow and was visiting her father. It had been snowing and Sergei asked his pal if they could use his four-wheel-drive pick-up truck.

Last week, in a court ruling about the Skripals' medical needs, a judge quoted the consultant treating them in Salisbury district hospital: "The hospital has not been approached by anyone known to the patients to enquire of their welfare."

Mr Cassidy was upset by the suggestion there wasn't anyone who cared enough to want to go and see the Skripals.

He said: "That is misinformation, because we care. I asked the police several times if we could go and see them, quietly and away from the media, but I was told quite categorically that we were not allowed. We asked the question and the answer was 'no'.

"We were also upset that if his family and friends in Russia got to hear about this lack of concern it would cause them extra anguish."

My questions:

Why wouldn't Ross Cassidy discuss the police operation?

Why wouldn't the police let Sergei's best friend in England, visit him in hospital?

Did the SDH consultant know that the police were preventing Sergei and Yulia from having visitors?

If the SDH consultant did know that, then why didn't he tell the judge that?

I've shortened the story. Here's the link:
https://news.sky.com/story/salisbury-nerve-agent-attack-sergei-skripal-and-daughter-yulia-should-be-allowed-to-die-11306692

Miheila says: August 19, 2018 at 3:15 pm
Hi Denise,

I'm glad you picked up on his name. I included him, because outside the spook community, he's the only person in England who appears to have known the Skripal family well – all four. No wonder he was questioned for so long. I'll try to answer your questions as I see the situation. Just my opinion.

1.Why wouldn't Ross Cassidy discuss the police operation? Because he'd been threatened with dire consequences if he did. Whatever they were, they were most likely fabricated. 'National interest' springs to mind as the justification.

2. Why wouldn't the police let Sergei's best friend in England, visit him in hospital? Either because he wasn't there or because – later- they were afraid that Sergei would speak. I suspect he was never there at all.

3. Did the SDH consultant know that the police were preventing Sergei and Yulia from having visitors? Probably none of the SDH staff did.

4. If the SDH consultant did know that, then why didn't he tell the judge that? SDH declined to be represented in court due to feeling 'uncomfortable'. As I said in an earlier post, whoever that unnamed doctor was, he/she was 'highly unlikely' to be from SDH, but was rather an MoD 'specialist' brought in from elsewhere – PD or a military hospital.

Ross Cassidy may not have been willing to talk to the media, but I'm sure he said more to family and friends. Perhaps he'd be willing to talk to an impartial investigator, but then he might be too afraid of the consequences – which could have been direct threats to him or his family.

He needs to be asked about police activity and visitors at the Skripals, Sergei's pets (including the alleged rabbits and fish, not to mention Manyúnya, the cat who allegedly escaped), any concerns he may have had leading up to the fateful day, and so much more.

Anonymous says: August 19, 2018 at 3:54 pm
2. Why wouldn't the police let Sergei's best friend in England, visit him in hospital?

In the US and absent a signed directive by a patient that's either unconscious or incompetent, only next of kin are allowed to visit the patient. So, it would be the hospital that denies a friend access to a patient. No need for police involvement on this matter in this case.

The police, naturally, were looking for information on the patients and at any conceivable culprits. A double whammy for Cassidy.

Miheila says: August 19, 2018 at 4:56 pm
According to Ross Casssidy, it was the police who told him that he wasn't allowed to visit Sergei. Have they any right to do this? If conscious and talking, Sergei could ask to see any visitor he liked, but this didn't happen – either because he wasn't there, didn't ask, had no friends or because friends had been prohibited from visiting. We know RC had tried to, but without success.

In normal circumstances a hospital wouldn't be prohibiting visitors. Presumably RC had no means of contacting Sergei by phone either, and vice versa. As far as we know, Sergei has been kept incommunicado ever since 4th March, if indeed he is still alive. A very worrying situation.

Anonymous says: August 19, 2018 at 6:49 pm
According to Ross Casssidy, it was the police who told him that he wasn't allowed to visit Sergei. Have they any right to do this?

Cassidy's Sky News interview was published on 3/28; so, his interview took place on or before 3/28. As of that date, both Yulia and Sergei were officially unconscious or not able to communicate meaningfully. At the direction of a hospital or for other reasons determined by law enforcement, police do have that right.

Also, we don't have any idea if at any time Yulia and/or Sergei requested to see Cassidy.

Miheila says: August 20, 2018 at 6:12 am
I see now. As you say the Skripals (or 'bench people') were still officially unconscious at that time, so it would make sense that no visitors were allowed.

If the Skripals were there and after they had regained consciousness, it's surely likely that they would have wanted visitors, especially a visit from Ross Cassidy, Sergei's best friend. But I'm pretty certain that the authorities would have prevented this at all costs, hence the lack of phone access and Cassidy's remarks.

Jo says: August 20, 2018 at 9:34 am
Didn't stop family seeing Dawn sturgess. She couldn't consent to visitors either, but had them.
Miheila says: August 20, 2018 at 4:47 pm
Really? That's interesting.
CharlieFreak says: August 20, 2018 at 9:35 pm
These exchanges about whether friends were allowed to visit the Skripals in hospital inspired me to refresh my memories of the gross deception of HMG regarding whether the Skripals had any relatives in Russia. At the High Court ruling by Mr Justice Williams on 22 March, granting permission to provide the OPCW with samples, he stated "Given the absence of any contact having been made with the NHS Trust by any family member and the limited evidence as to the possible existence of family members in Russia, I accept that it is neither practicable nor appropriate in the special context of this case to consult with any relatives [of the Skripals] who might fall into the category identified in s.4(7)(b) of the Act". ('The Act' being the Mental Capacity Act 2005, and s.4(7)(b) states that before delivering what is in an incapacitated person's best interests the person ruling (in this case Mr Justice Williams) must: take into account, in order to consult them, the views of anyone engaged in caring for the person or INTERESTED IN HIS WELFARE"). (my emphasis).

This statement was delivered in spite of the fact that the Sun had carried an interview with Viktoria Skripal on 14 March about her concerns and desire to visit/make contact with the Skripals. And in spite of the fact that the Russian Embassy have records that on 6 March "the Embassy informed the FCO of the request it had received from Viktoria Skripal to provide information on the condition of her relatives. https://rusemb.org.uk/fnapr/6481

CharlieFreak says: August 20, 2018 at 9:50 pm
Apologies for the misplacement of a couple of quotation marks in the above post. I usually intend to proof read what I have written before sending but didn't on this occasion as I am conscious that if I exceed a certain period of time composing my message (I haven't worked out what the time limit is) the system refuses to post it and I have to start again. That aside, I think my meaning is clear.
Marie says: August 21, 2018 at 12:06 am
family

Friends do not enjoy the same privileges to visit patients in hospital as family does. (This has been a huge factor in why same-sex marriage was so necessary.)

Paul says: August 21, 2018 at 12:31 am
I think that is a very innappropriate comment but I shall say no more.
Liane Theuer says: August 19, 2018 at 11:08 pm
Quote : The colonel's close friend Ross Cassidy, who lives just a few doors from the property the Russian rented when he first arrived in Salisbury, said he "was not at liberty to talk."
He declined to say whether his friend had spoken of fears for his life, adding: "It's a very sensitive investigation of some gravitas. I really am unable to divulge any information at the moment."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/06/did-treacherous-past-russian-colonel-finally-catch-salisbury/

I agree with you that Cassidy knows more, but is forbidden to talk about.

Miheila says: August 20, 2018 at 6:16 am
Thanks Liane. Scary.
Duncan says: August 19, 2018 at 6:06 pm
I will reply to this, but simply as a test as I can't seem to post this afternoon, Maybe Rob is doing some site maintenance.

I do not think SDH were involved in bad practices. The Terror Team and PD took over. In fact going to the courts for the second blood sample might have been required due to SDH "resistance". Anyone else with posting issues? If I see that you are posting then it must be my PC or possibly the big van with a dish on the roof at the end of my street.

Peter Beswick says: August 19, 2018 at 11:33 am
A some point people stopped trying to prove the Earth was an irregular ball shape thing and was spinning around, doing laps of our nearest star at close on 66k mph.

They didn't stop because it wasn't true, it had just been proven beyond doubt and there was other stuff to get on with.

Flat Earthers did come along, many having their own reasons, some just didn't want to believe we were on a ball floating in space and prefer to live with the idea that we live on a gurt plate.

The Hoax has been proven, the motive is not the most important feature, murderers go to jail whether their motives are known or not.

The most important thing is to identify who was responsible for Dawn Sturgess' death and bring them to Justice along with those that have attempted to cover up the wicked and depraved crime.

The motives may or may not flow from that process but it is rather academic at the moment to say the least.

Those responsible for Dawn's death are also responsible for the cover up of the Salisbury Incident. That is what led to Dawn's death.

People responsible include

Mrs May and some of her Ministers

Salisbury and Met Police Chiefs.

These are not wild "Conspiracy Theories". They are cold, hard facts. And we have the proof that will convict. Beyond reasonable doubt proof that those people I have mentioned above are involved in the death of Dawn Surgess and the cover up of the Salisbury and Amesbury Incidents.

Paul says: August 19, 2018 at 12:45 pm
Whenever governments bury facts, they are never up to any good. History is full of examples of facts been hidden and whenever the lid is finally raised, it is was never for a good reason:
Vietnam war
JFK
Iraq WMD
etc
etc

The problem for TPTB this time is that they are in a different class to prior events – they are completely incompetent, utterly useless, self-important fools and obvious liars. This is what 'equal opportunity' hiring does! The good liars are gone.

Just look at all the 'officials' involved and wonder how they ever came to get the job

I continue to believe that this saga was the reason for Johnson's resignation. He could have survived May's Chequers debacle but he knows this story will ruin the rest of his career, so he has done a runner. He will get as much distance between himself and these events as he possibly can.

CharlieFreak says: August 19, 2018 at 1:48 pm
Paul,
Once again, I agree with everything you say.

Digressing to a different topic, it is the sheer "incompetence etc etc" that also explains the shambles that is 'Brexit'. And these incompetents – as I have alluded to elsewhere – are these days supported by many incompetent civil servants. I could see the way things were heading many years ago and that was one of my reasons for leaving the civil service 15 years ago after more than 20 years service in the company of many intelligent and honourable civil servants who were gradually retiring and were also expressing concerns about the deterioration in standards at all levels. I saw the rot begin when, about 20 years ago, the civil service opened up vacancies at all levels of responsibility to people with administrative or managerial experience but not civil service experience, so they hadn't acquired the ability to work alongside and in conjunction with legal advisers or technical experts (e.g. in my case, veterinarians and structural engineers at different times) which is an ability that develops and improves over an extended period of time and is integral to the successful functioning of the CS. When I joined the CS you would attend meetings and observe how such relationships developed and were used to achieve the intended aim many years before you yourself might find yourself having to do it. That no longer happens – people are just thrown in at the deep end, managed by incompetent staff and told to get on with it, with nobody providing knowledge-based 'quality control'. Whether or not you are a 'Remainer' or a 'Brexiteer' in principle, there was no hope for negotiations from the outset with the useless shower that we have in power (scope for a limerick there!). The Brexit considerations and negotiations have been in the hands of pathetic amateurs who are at sixes and sevens and who, after so many decades of relying on the EU to tell them what to do, have completely foregone any ability to think for themselves. That is the key problem, not the principle of Brexit, which could have resulted in far more encouraging prospects had it been in the right hands.
CF

Peter Beswick says: August 19, 2018 at 1:56 pm
It didn't happen by apathy, stupidity or accident it happened by design.

The people that control our politicians and civil / public servants don't want troublesome people that can actually think or care

CharlieFreak says: August 19, 2018 at 5:24 pm
Peter,
Exactly – one quality I found to be completely absent in 'newcomers' was initiative. I inherited someone at middle management level who had been in that particular policy job for about a year. I routinely asked him to draft a straightforward (but not 'standard') letter for one of our Ministers to send to an MP answering questions raised by a constituent about aspects of our Department's legislation. After all, that was part of his job description. As a middle manager responsible for that policy area he and even his subordinate officer should be able to quote chapter and verse and why it had been formulated in the way it had (e.g. 'based on Article X of EU Council Directive ABC'); at the very least he should have been able to work out the answers from information to hand or by consulting expert colleagues. We had been given the standard week or so to produce the draft reply which I could have knocked up in a couple of hours at most. So when I hadn't been given the draft for clearance by the morning of the required day and asked him about it he told me I had been unreasonable to ask him to do it without telling him what he needed to say! Needless to say, I knocked up the reply in a couple of hours but had to forego other tasks I was supposed to do that afternoon. When I joined the CS a Clerical Officer (2 grades below this chap) would have been asked to provide a first draft. I could bore you with other examples but, you'll be pleased to hear,I won't. Unfortunately that level of intellect is all too common nowadays.
Paul says: August 19, 2018 at 1:57 pm
Charlie, You hit that nail very firmly, right on the head!

I have seen it myself. Not only have standards dropped but wherever you look, people just don't care anymore. Second rate is now 'good enough'.

Marie says: August 19, 2018 at 3:07 pm
Charlie, you've described an operational organizational change that isn't limited to public institutions. It exists in corporations as well and began to take hold about thirty years ago. Instead of promoting from within line staff – those who had spent years doing and moved up slowly in managerial positions as they demonstrated management skills – into the managerial ranks, the concept of 'universal manager' gained a foothold. As if managerial skills are a special talent and nothing more is required to manage any operation. In the US, business and government had to absorb all those newly minted MBAs and those people weren't about to start at the bottom of the operational ladder.

The two best managers I ever had the pleasure to work for didn't complete an undergrad college degree. Yes, they did have people skills but they were also solid in their line technical skills as well. Highly respected by employees, colleagues, and in the industry. They had a firm grasp of the skill-sets of their employees, how trustworthy each of their employees were, and were immune to the sycophants.

CharlieFreak says: August 19, 2018 at 5:46 pm
Marie
Another change in infrastructure policy that had dire consequences and contributed to the problems you refer to was the principle that 'no one could be deemed a failure or to not have the aptitude to succeed with the appropriate training'. When I began my CS employment the annual report procedure was quite emphatic and honest about abilities. As a manager there was a range of five graded boxes you could tick against all aspects of performance, the lowest of which was 'not good enough', and, if repeated, this could warrant a warning from personnel (sorry, 'human resources' now) and potentially demotion. There was also a box where the manager had to enter what grade they thought the member of staff would have the inherent capability of achieving by the end of their career! For many people of all ages this was often the grade they were in at the time but they were realistic and honest enough to accept that it was probably right. It's arguable whether this last box served a positive purpose for the majority of staff but, rightly or wrongly, the intention was to motivate the best staff to continue in the CS rather than become despondent and quit. It was decided by forward thinking, liberal minded individuals many years ago now that annual reports should never say anything negative, and if anything negative needed to be said then the line management must be at fault for not overcoming their staff member's deficiencies.

https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1980/may/07/central-and-local-government

CharlieFreak says: August 21, 2018 at 10:12 am
George,
Yep. Another problem we are creating for the future – although the Govt will welcome this 'problem' – is that in 'the good old days' and up until the 1990s EVERY single official communication whether written or verbal had to be recorded on a single officially registered uniquely numbered registry file. Each file, where documents and 'minutes' were sequentially numbered in date order, expanded to about 2.5″ thick and some subjects would have multiple A,B, C etc files. If someone in Office A sent a note to someone in Office B about a Govt issue it was obligatory to send a paper photocopy (or carbon copy) to HQ for them to place on the file. Nothing went unrecorded. Even internal discussions between staff would be summarised on a minute sheet afterwards, signed by the staff involved and placed on file. The system had to be run really strictly but it worked and we can look back and identify why certain decisions were made and by whom. But now, with the advent of computers and email the significance of keeping central records has gone and I can guarantee nobody in HQ has a complete historical record of all deliberations and communications. In years to come, conveniently for the Govt, key information about what has been going on in this case and other important matters will be missing.
anotheridea says: August 19, 2018 at 10:54 am
The motive – creating a rift between the Russian and Western states – is obvious. The perpetrators – including Yulia in the attack for publicity – too. It is possible that Skripal was following money laundering via real estate for Christopher Steele and the mafia did not like it. But the whole thing was planned for publicity.

Anybody interested in tax havens and investment .

"Perhaps the greatest challenge, with respect to Russia and more generally, concerns the anonymity of global offshore finance. On this front, the US administration would find some cooperation from Moscow. Economically, the Russian treasury has been losing vast sums to offshores. Politically, the Kremlin is keen to strengthen its control over bureaucrats and oligarchs, two groups for whom offshore nest eggs provide an alternative to Putin's Russia. Since 2013, the Kremlin has pursued a "deoffshorization" campaign encouraging businesses to repatriate capital and stop registering companies offshore; additional legislation has restricted the Russian state employees' foreign asset ownership. A joint US-Russian effort, however limited, at ending the anonymity of corrupt cash flows in Western jurisdictions would serve the interests of both countries."

https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=061081024013114025070021112009099014032053053031010004101020097030127019026095077124054054025045018036026018068123094118116000018000070045050020000067096088012001093050076009017065071029007077103075120081103085117022024076098096068006010030031030095031&EXT=pdf

anidea says: August 19, 2018 at 9:28 am
Christopher Steele worked for Glenn Simpson, and – ex Wallstreet Journal – Glenn Simpson is a specialist on Russian corruption and Western money laundering. Transcript of Glenn Simpsons testimony – interesting in what he says about Bill Browder
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4345537/Fusion-GPS-Simpson-Transcript.pdf
Marie says: August 19, 2018 at 2:20 pm
In the interests of accuracy, Simpson has never claimed to have expertise on Russia. His major calling card is the series of investigative articles he wrote on Ukraine, circa 2005-2008, when he was a WSJ reporter. In 2014 or 2015 he was hired by Prevezon, the plaintiff in a UK lawsuit against Browder, and later a defendant in a DOJ lawsuit. When Fusion GPS was hired by the Washington Beacon to do oppo research on Trump, he knew nothing about Trump. It was after the Beacon contract ended and approximately two months after the DNC/HRC campaign hired Fusion and they outsourced the Trump-Russia oppo research to Steele. (Personally, I suspect that Steele had been engaged on this long before then but not by Fusion.)
Miheila says: August 19, 2018 at 7:40 am
Dylan Martinez who operated the camera at Yulia's post-Novihoax debut, and who is described as the chief Reuters photographer for UK and Ireland, has an amusing quote heading his profile page: "When editing photos I look for the truth told in the most beautiful way."

Yulya Skripal, the embodiment of truth and beauty!

Miheila says: August 19, 2018 at 7:52 am
I forgot to mention that Mr Martinez covers "news, sport and the odd feature". Regardless of a possible fake tracheotomy scar, I suppose his Skripal assignment was highly likely to be the oddest feature of his career. https://widerimage.reuters.com/photographer/dylan-martinez
Anonymous says: August 19, 2018 at 7:35 am
'In another curious detail in the filing, the special counsel team said Papadopoulos had been given $10,000 in cash "from a foreign national whom he believed was likely an intelligence officer of a foreign country." The filing noted that the country was "other than Russia." ' CNN

Mueller strangely coy about who gave Papa 10k in cash. Was he an Orbis collector too?

Liane Theuer says: August 19, 2018 at 8:23 am
UK Government and intelligence all over the place :

Quote : Since Trump was surging ahead in the polls and scaring the pants off the foreign-policy establishment by calling for a rapprochement with Moscow, the agencies figured that Russia was somehow behind it. The pace accelerated in March 2016 when a 30-year-old policy consultant named George Papadopoulos joined the Trump campaign as a foreign-policy adviser. Traveling in Italy a week later, he ran into Mifsud, the London-based Maltese academic, who reportedly set about cultivating him after learning of his position with Trump. Mifsud claimed to have "substantial connections with Russian government officials," according to prosecutors. Over breakfast at a London hotel, he told Papadopoulos that he had just returned from Moscow where he had learned that the Russians had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton in the form of "thousands of emails."

This was the remark that supposedly triggered an FBI investigation. The New York Times describes Mifsud as "an enthusiastic promoter of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia" and "a regular at meetings of the Valdai Discussion Club, an annual conference held in Sochi, Russia, that Mr. Putin attends," which tried to suggest that he is a Kremlin agent of some sort. But WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange later tweeted photos of Mifsud with British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and a high-ranking British intelligence official named Claire Smith at a training session for Italian security agents in Rome. Since it's unlikely that British intelligence would rely on a Russian agent in such circumstances, Mifsud's intelligence ties are more likely with the UK.

After Papadopoulos caused a minor political ruckus by telling a reporter that Prime Minister David Cameron should apologize for criticizing Trump's anti-Muslim pronouncements, a friend in the Israeli embassy put him in touch with a friend in the Australian embassy, who introduced him to Downer, her boss. Over drinks, Downer advised him to be more diplomatic. After Papadopoulos then passed along Misfud's tip about Clinton's emails, Downer informed his government, which, in late July, informed the FBI. (..)

In early September, Halper sent Papadopoulos an email offering $3,000 and a paid trip to London to write a research paper on a disputed gas field in the eastern Mediterranean, his specialty. "George, you know about hacking the emails from Russia, right?" Halper asked when he got there, but Papadopoulos said he knew nothing.
https://consortiumnews.com/2018/05/31/spooks-spooking-themselves/

Anonymous-1 says: August 19, 2018 at 5:16 am

PAGE 3 OF 4
Within 30 minutes (15.47 to 16.15) they are in critical condition. Charlie Rowley describes a similar time-frame for Dawn Sturgess.

7th March – Scotland Yard Chief Medical Officer statement
"As your Chief Medical Officer, my message to the public is that this event poses a low risk to us, the public, on the evidence we have."

METHOD OF DELIVERY
Spray: too risky, the assailants run the risk of contaminating themselves. Also the doctor said "There was no sign of any chemical agent on Ms Skripal's face or body".

High pressure syringe: the pressure is so great the vaccine (or nerve agent) is pumped through the skin and immediately enters the blood stream. The beauty of this method of delivery is there's no evidence. I think the assailants grabbed them from behind and delivered the nerve agent directly into the jugular vein, the site of the attack being at the corner of G&T'S. The Skripals wouldn't have known what had just happened to them.

DS BAILEY
DS Bailey will have attended a First-Aid course, so his first action would be to loosen any clothing round Sergei's neck and clear his airway. If you look at photos of Sergei, he's got quite a thick neck, so DS Bailey probably had to fiddle a bit with his clothing and this is probably how he was contaminated. He'd unknowingly come into direct contact with a small amount of residue nerve agent at the delivery site.

ANTON UTKIN former UN Chemical Weapons Expert in Iraq
Worlds Apart Interview 29th April 2018 – Breaking with Conventions?

"Why was Novichok agent determined undecomposed only in the blood of Yulia Skripal? It was undecomposed. It's supposed to be decomposed under the metabolism of the body, but they found undecomposed agent in her blood, but not in the blood of Sergei Skripal, who got heavier exposure to the chemical agent. That was very strange because it is not clear how it happened that a fresh agent was in Yulia's blood."

Sounds like he suspects Yulia received a second dose while in hospital. She was making an unexpected recovery, partly because she's healthy and partly because of the medical treatment, so somebody gave her another dose.

Sergei wasn't expected to survive because as Anton Utkin said, he "got heavier exposure to the chemical agent", that combined with any existing health issues, he was simply expected to die.

Anonymous-1 says: August 19, 2018 at 5:15 am
PAGE 2 OF 4
"Georgia Pridham, 25, also saw the couple slumped on the bench. She said: "He was quite smartly dressed. He had his palms up to the sky as if he was shrugging and was staring at the building in front of him. He had a woman sat next to him on the bench who was slumped on his shoulder. He was staring dead straight. He was conscious, but it was like he was frozen and slightly rocking back and forward."

"Graham Mulcock said: "The paramedics seemed to be struggling to keep the two people conscious. The man was sitting staring into space in a catatonic state".

"Destiny Reynolds, 20, who works in Ganesha Handicrafts in the centre, said: "I saw quite a lot of commotion – there were two people sat on the bench and there was a security guard there. They put her on the ground in the recovery position, and she was shaking like she was having a seizure. It was a bit manic. There were a lot of people crowded round them. It was raining, people had umbrellas and were putting them over them."

Other reports: "Two police officers helped the pair before emergency services were called at 4.15pm."

Emergency services: "There were several emergency calls."

Channel 4 "Russian Spy Assassination", 26th March 2018
Male witness: "There was a man being sick on the floor, leant over, and a woman laying on the floor. I didn't see the woman, she was surrounded by paramedics, but they both looked fairly ill."

EFFECTS OF NERVE AGENT POISONING
Craig Murray's article Knobs and Knockers quote from a scientist "Unlike traditional poisons, nerve agents don't need to be added to food and drink to be effective. They are quite volatile, colourless liquids (except VX, said to resemble engine oil). The concentration in the vapour at room temperature is lethal. The symptoms of poisoning come on quickly, and include chest tightening, difficulty in breathing, and very likely asphyxiation. Associated symptoms include vomiting and massive incontinence. Eventually, you die either through asphyxiation or cardiac arrest".

EVENTS FROM 15.47 ONWARDS
15.47 CCTV footage, if you analyse the shape of Sergei's head and hairline with clearer pictures it matches. Two witnesses describe Yulia as having blonde hair. At this point, neither is showing any signs of nerve agent poisoning.

16.03 (16 minutes later) Freya Church sees them slumped on the bench.

Minutes later, both are becoming critically ill. From witness statements, Yulia is worse affected so the doctor attends to her and DS Bailey attends to Sergei. The reports say two police officers, but I think it was the security guard.

Anonymous-1 says: August 19, 2018 at 5:13 am
PAGE 1 OF 4
I think I've worked out how it was done and why DS Bailey was the only other person affected. It's all down to METHOD OF DELIVERY. The attack took place between 15.47 and 16.03 near to where they were found. The door handle is a diversionary technique to draw attention away from this. There's someone else calling themselves Anonymous, I'll call myself Anonymous-1 see what happens.

TIMINGS
13.40 Arrive at car park
Feed ducks and walk to pub
Mill Pub (30 minutes)
Walk to Zizzi's
(40 mins have elapsed from arriving at the car park to arriving at Zizzi's)
14.20-15.35 Zizzi's (1 hour 15 minutes, there's specific timings)
(12 minutes after leaving Zizz's they are picked up on CCTV)
15.47 CCTV footage (older man with blonde haired younger woman with red bag)
(16 minutes later they fall ill from nerve agent poisoning)
16.03 Freya Church see them slumped on bench
(5 other witnesses all see them on bench, with two 'police' officers and a doctor in attendance)
16.15 Emergency service call(s)

WITNESS STATEMENTS FROM NEWS REPORTS
FREYA CHURCH: "Sixteen minutes later [that is, after being seen on CCTV], personal trainer Freya Church, 27, came across the victims slumped on a bench. She said they seemed 'out of it' and assumed they were on drugs. "It was a young, blonde and pretty girl and it was definitely the man that's been pictured in the news – the guy that's a spy. She was passed out and he was looking up to the sky and I tried to get eye contact to see if they were okay. They didn't seem with it. To be honest I thought they were just drugged out as they were in a weird state. There are lots of homeless people here so I just thought they were homeless."

FEMALE DOCTOR: "A doctor who was one of the first people at the scene has described how she found Ms Skripal slumped unconscious on a bench, vomiting and fitting. She had also lost control of her bodily functions. The woman, who asked not to be named, told the BBC she moved Ms Skripal into the recovery position and opened her airway, as others tended to her father. She said she treated her for almost 30 minutes, saying there was no sign of any chemical agent on Ms Skripal's face or body. The doctor said she had been worried she would be affected by the nerve agent but added that she "feels fine."

"Witness Jamie Paine told the BBC yesterday: "Her eyes were just completely white, they were wide open, but just white and she was frothing at the mouth. And then the man went stiff, his arms stopped moving and still looking dead straight."

Denise says: August 19, 2018 at 2:40 am
Now here is someone who knows where Yulia is. The photographer in the Reuters video is of Yulia making her statement is Dylan Martinez.

Reuters written reporters may know where she is as well. Reporting is by Guy Faulconbridge. Additional reporting by Alistair Smout. Editing by Simon Robinson and Nick Tattersall. There will be a video cameraman who knows as well and a video editor.

Do you think you might write to them Rob and ask where she is?

And if they wont tell you, what is their reason for not telling you?

It will be interesting to see how they reply.

Miheila says: August 19, 2018 at 3:20 am
Not necessarily where Yulia is, Liane, but where she was at that time. The difference is crucial.
Denise says: August 19, 2018 at 7:00 am
As you know any information we can get is useful Miheila. We could learn a lot about who has Yulia, by were she was for the Reuters video and yes you are correct to suggest that she probably isn't there anymore. Thank you. I think they will slip up soon, its getting to be a way too tangled web now with far to many people to keep silent.
Miheila says: August 19, 2018 at 7:27 am
So tangled, Denise, that I feel it's tangling the neurones in my brain!

Does anyone know when exactly that video was recorded (rather than released), after all, the statement was mysteriously undated? Could there have been some kind of embargo on its release until a later date?

Yulia was allegedly released on 10th April, 43 days before the video was broadcast. According to The Sun, a 'source' claimed that she'd been released from SDH into another hospital: ''She is in hospital on a military base for her own protection and to monitor her health." Was the video recorded at that military base?
Was it USAF Fairford?

Could the CIA have pre-empted MI6's hasty plans for the disappearance of the Skripals? Perhaps MI6 had nothing planned. Maybe it was a CIA operation from the beginning. I'll need to think about these scenarios a lot more.

Anonymous says: August 19, 2018 at 7:49 am
Miheila, if you listen to the Daily Mail version of the video there are a lot of police sirens at the end including bull horns. That and the aircraft noise would point to London. It could be US Ambassadors residence in Regents Park.

In my opinion, it was a rogue FBI op to stop "our guy" going back to Russia.

I think UK authorities knew it was happening and organised medical cavalry to save Skripals.

HMG are caught out, to admit it would be proof MI6 surrogates were interfering in US presidential election.
So the Feds made it look like Russia and HMG have to follow the pretence.

Patrick Mahony says: August 19, 2018 at 8:17 am

In my scenario some of them could be genuine. If the emergency services were told extra medical/police/fire resources were available for that Sunday due to the " CBW exercise" that was going on they wouldn't publicly question it.
Maybe when the Skripals were on the bench they thought it was not "real world" and that is why they dashed in.
But I think HMG knew Yulia had come to extricate Sergei and knew rogue elements in UK and US "intelligence community" were trying to assassinate him.
Peter Beswick says: August 19, 2018 at 12:16 am
Rob Willing I will make a heart felt plea.

Any contributors on here offering an alternative theory to the Hoax should be aware (although they may be blissfully unaware) that the Hoax has been proven.

It is a fact.

So before putting out new theories please recognise that fact and possibly try the refute / debunk / disemble the fact before you put forward your take.

Don't get me wrong (although a few will) I think that brainstorming and testing theories is fine, more than fine it is essential to test ideas and testament to the progress that this blog has contributed, advanced and assisted public understanding in the unravelling of the case.

If you have an alternative theory please let it coincide with at least a few facts.

Cascadian says: August 19, 2018 at 10:32 am
@Peter
The scientific method (a la Popper): observe, deduce, theorize, predict (i.e. show how the theory matches/predicts the things observed). And, if necessary, adduce (i.e. defend the hypothesis).

What is never done is to insist dogmatically that one's pet theory is the only explanation. This is because it is the duty of every scientifist to, having produced a theory, seek to demolish it. You aren't doing that, Peter, instead you are challenging others to demolish it.

I wonder at your motives.

PRFilms says: August 18, 2018 at 11:07 pm
I think fact that Sergei Skripal an ex spy may have confused issues? He may or may not still have been actively doing intelligence but all evidence points to accidental poisoning by drug addicts sleeping rough.
1. Reported that 40/50 rough sleepers including drug addicts, living in area at time of Skripal poisoning.
2. Contaminated public lavatories and a "drug den" in park.
3. Council blocked off rough sleepers area and rehomed drug addicts after Skripal poisoning.
4. Charlie Rowley rehoused at about that time?
5. OPCW not permitted to analyse all ingredients associated with poisoning which they say makes it very difficult identifying substance
6. Two men (Kim Ferguson and Jamie Knight) forced their way through police barricade to get to bench where Skripals had been sitting
6. Dawn Sturgess's poisoning looks like classic One Pot Shake and Bake methamphetamine accident. Fact that fire brigade called and she was in bath suggests explosion and burns.
7. One Pot Shake and bake produces large amounts of toxins which are dumped. Public loos in park reported contaminated and report of a drug den there.
8. Skripals, Sturgess and Rowley did not respond to naloxone so not opioid poisoning, this fits with it being poison from waste left from one pot shake and bake meth.
9. Salisbury Hospital Doctor said no-one was suffering from nerve agent poisoning.

[Aug 30, 2018] Skripals affair might be linked to Steele dossier and color revolution against Trump

Notable quotes:
"... "Steele notes that he is concerned about the stories in the media about the bureau delivering information to Congress 'about my work and relationship with them. Very concerned about this. *People's lives may be endangered*.'" ..."
"... If Rosenstein knew of Steele's relationship with the Ohrs prior to signing FISA, he already knew that he was signing a BS FISA application – which would be perjury. But if Rosenstein was a 'firewall', it becomes an attempted coup and sedition awkward. ..."
Aug 30, 2018 | www.theblogmire.com

Rob Slane says: August 18, 2018 at 10:12 pm

Key quote from Sara Carter's revelations about text messages from Christopher Steele to Bruce Ohr in October 2017:

"Steele notes that he is concerned about the stories in the media about the bureau delivering information to Congress 'about my work and relationship with them. Very concerned about this. *People's lives may be endangered*.'"

https://saraacarter.com/breaking-bruce-ohr-texts-emails-reveal-steeles-deep-ties-to-obama-doj-fbi/

Now, this might seem a bit of an aside, but does anyone reading this blog have any idea when Yulia last came to England prior to 3rd March this year? I'm trying to get an idea of whether she is likely to have had any idea prior to this visit of what her father was involved in, or whether she is likely to have learnt about this on this particular visit.

uncle tungsten says: August 18, 2018 at 11:19 pm
Thanks Rob and we are all grateful for your capacity to harness all the contributors into a sane dialogue.

Motive indeed:

There are the pleadings by Steele to Ohr for reassurance that the "firewall" is solid! Not sure what that intends but surely there are a few firewalls in this saga going all the way back on the US side to the favorite candidate, the candidates party, the party legal team that employed Fusion GPS, Fusion GPS itself, Orbis, Steele, Sergei, and perhaps Yulia. What might have been her potential role other than innocent visitor. We now have a clearer view of her employment trajectory. I would bet the firewalls on the UK side are fully aluminium clad too, and I anticipate this site and a few other emerging lines of inquiry will penetrate those.

The furious mother in law angle is a good one and potentially worth a serious look.

Sometimes murders deliver conveniences to unforeseen parties.

The overreach of British interference in the USA election and May's complicity in that exercise needed a very good redeeming cover and here is a dandy.

The mafiosi angle cannot be ruled out and nor can the Ukrainian possibility given their intense penetration of the EU playing ground. Perhaps Sergei was investigating things there too and annoyed the new mafiosi now free to roam.

But I am sure that closer to home there are others that employed Orbis to do interesting work. How's Bill Browder these days?

Anonymous says: August 20, 2018 at 6:54 pm
"Firewalls":

https://vault.fbi.gov/d1-release/d1-release/view

>Who signed pg 380? Peter Strzok

>Who signed pg 389? Andrew McCabe

>Who signed pg 391? Rod Rosenstein

Firewalls:

Strzok
Rosenstein
McCabe
Comey

Only Rosenstein is left

Paul says: August 20, 2018 at 6:55 pm
Me again!
Paul says: August 20, 2018 at 7:11 pm
Correction – >Who signed pg 392? Lisa Page

Page was the fourth firewall (not Comey), but she is already gone too.

If Rosenstein knew of Steele's relationship with the Ohrs prior to signing FISA, he already knew that he was signing a BS FISA application – which would be perjury. But if Rosenstein was a 'firewall', it becomes an attempted coup and sedition awkward.

[Aug 30, 2018] The people that know more than they are saying

Aug 30, 2018 | www.theblogmire.com

Denise says: August 19, 2018 at 12:54 am

The people that know more than they are saying:

Nick Bailey
Charlie Rowley
Helicopter pilot
Helicopter paramedics
Land ambulance paramedics
Doctors at Salisbury Hospital
Nurses at Salisbury Hospital
Head of Porton Down
Porton Down scientists
Porton Down workers

These may know more than they are saying:

The Mill staff
Zizzi's staff
Main stream media journalists (D noticed)
Salisbury Journal journalists (D noticed)

It only takes one to talk for the whole house of cards to come crashing down.

Please feel free to add to this list.

Paul says: August 19, 2018 at 1:04 am
All the named witnesses
The ebola nurse
Whoever orgainsed the rapid response from the emergency vehicles
All the police 'searching' for something
Everyone who has seen the CCTV
The guys in hazmat suits on 4 March

Dozens and dozens of people

Miheila says: August 19, 2018 at 3:37 am
People 'highly likely' to know the most, and are saying nothing:
Chris Steele
Pablo Miller (aka Antonio Alvarez de Hidalgo)
MI6 people
GCHQ people
Probably CIA, NSA, US State Dept, SBU, Mossad, etc. (take your pick!)
MI5 people, including any watchers who may have been deployed
FCO people

People who know more than they are saying:
certain people in the Russian Foreign Ministry
GRU, FSB, FAPSI people

People who may know more, and may be willing to speak:
Various Salisbury witnesses, named and unnamed
Ross Cassidy
The Filmers of Distillery Farm??

[Aug 30, 2018] Deliberate misinterpretation of Putin's statement to support Skripals false falg

Aug 19, 2018 | www.theblogmire.com

Bob says: August 19, 2018 at 4:03 am

Regarding "the/a motive", wouldn't Putin's alleged statement of vengeance towards the defector, Skripal, be enough to convince the UK government of there being at least "a motive" if not also "the motive"? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/06/traitors-will-kick-bucket-vladimir-putin-swore-revenge-poisoned/
Also, I guess I need it spelled out for me. Why would Skripal's assassination put an end to all future spy swaps?
I don't think Putin did it -- he's not so foolish as to have such poor timing politically -- but I'm not so sure the UK government can't legitimately show a possible Russian motive, for the purpose of helping the UK's own political timing.

Lastly, the commentators' list of complicit conspirators is just too long to make this a real conspiracy.

francesca says: August 19, 2018 at 4:50 am
Putin didn't promise revenge on spies, he basically said that such traitors would die miserable deaths because they had no homeland and had lost their soul. There is a very full answer on this website if you scroll down https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/40900/did-putin-threaten-to-have-traitors-assassinated

Like most of Putin's speeches this one has been deconstructed , mistranslated, then put back together to give the necessary slant

There has never ever been a case of a spy who has been pardoned as part of a spy swap(as Skripal was)then later assassinated.And the last time that Moscow harmed the child of a target was when Trotsky's son was killed in one of Stalin's purges. This all can be found in a Sunday Times article , but be aware there is a pay wall
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/salisbury-hit-on-sergei-skripal-would-rewrite-the-rules-of-espionage-6t89w9v9c

Rob Slane says: August 19, 2018 at 6:51 am
Hi Bob,

But the UK Government must know that Putin's alleged promise to "choke" traitors was nothing of the sort. It was in fact one of the most blatant propaganda pieces I have ever seen.

The video in which he allegedly said this appeared on BBC's Newsnight and can be seen at this link:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5735518/vladimir-putin-choke-traitors-video-russian-spy-sergei-skripal-poisoning/

But the original can be found at his 2010 Q&A session when he was PM. The relevant section begins at just after 3 hours 12 minutes, and lasts for about 3 minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8B9wGcDWVI

As you will see, his answer is basically the diametric opposite to the one the BBC piece leads you to believe. They basically took what he said, hacked it about to extract the bits they didn't want their audience to hear, and then put it back together (with some scary music) to make it sound like he said something he didn't actually say.

Bob says: August 19, 2018 at 3:18 pm
Rob, thanks for the satisfactory explanation of Newsnight's deceitfulness. It appears that Putin didn't give his potential future defector-spies a pass while at the same time shaming those caught at it as being like a Judas. I wonder, though, how those thinking about possibly selling out would read Putin's deflecting the former practice of assassination decisions as resting on a head of state. He said it had evolved to being the decision of a special group in the security services. Of course he (probably rightly) dissociates his government from now operating that way. How are we to know apart from there being sufficient evidence to the contrary? But if Putin and his security services are in truth completely innocent I don't see how his response could have been any better.

I still don't see why an assassination would put the damper on future spy swaps. Help my reasoning abilities.

Regarding the claim of there being a growing multitude of unwilling conspirators, I wonder if this isn't a case, at times, of commentators taking every thought captive to the obedience of "The Conspiracy Theory".

It might be beneficial for some agency to create a very public internet place where those caught up as witnesses to the case can come to make their clear statements or confessions without fear of reprisal. Possible attempts at reprisal could also be broadcast.

Marie says: August 19, 2018 at 6:35 pm
I still don't see why an assassination would put the damper on future spy swaps. Help my reasoning abilities.

Tradition, it's (p)art of the deal. Country A holds a country B spy and country B holds a country A spy. Both want its own spy back home for any one or more reasons. Why would country A release the spy it holds in exchange for the one that country B holds if country B reserved the option to at a later date take out Country A's spy? Spy (or alleged spy) swaps only work with an implicit agreement that there will be no retaliation by either country against the individuals included in the swap.

All the ins and outs involved in a spy swap are carefully considered. The swap must appear as of equal value to the two countries. The inclusion of Skripal in the US-Russia spy swap appeared odd to those that follow such matters as he had been a UK asset and by 2010 not of any particularly high-value to the UK. Nothing further has been said about this by the US, UK, or Russia; so, we're free to concoct a devious plot where none existed.

Paul says: August 19, 2018 at 7:48 pm
Marie, Reading what you wrote just triggered a thought usually a spy swap is where, say, US spies caught and imprisoned in Russia, are exchanged for Russian spies caught and imprisoned in the US. Each country gets their own nationals back. The individuals were guilty of espionage in another country and get to go home.

That is not what Sergei was. He was a Russian national, caught and imprisoned in Russia for treason. How did he ever get to become part of a spy swap?

Why would the UK want to take him? He had no more value to them, he had already been paid for the information he had handed over so why would the UK agree to take him and pay for his upkeep? What did the UK get out of the deal?

On the other side of Sergei's deal in 2010, Russia got Anna Chapman back – a Russian national caught and imprisoned in the US

Have we been fed a pile of BS about what or who Sergei was?

Marie says: August 19, 2018 at 9:46 pm
Wondered if anyone would catch that oddity in the Skripal case. Likely contributed to the head-scratching back in 2010. However, Skripal wasn't the only Russian national released to the west in that swap. (And I'm not sure all those held by the US were Russian nationals – nor interested enough to research that.) We're weren't fed BS about Skripal because he was hardly ever mentioned at all. Remember, Skripal was a walk-in and for the money. Not important enough to recruit and while he had access to confidential personnel lists he was useful. (Not as useful as Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen were to the USSR but those two were also walk-ins and the money is important to both.)

My two guesses on this – probably not worth anything –

1) Russia held too few spies to make the deal work. So, he threw in some that were of no value to Russia and would be of some interest to the west to sweeten the offer. As Obama was already under criticism for giving up more than he got in his deals, he needed numbers (spies) to make this one look okay. The UK was told and not asked to accept Skripal. He, after all, was their guy even if he'd screwed up and exposed the fake rock and blew up the UK Moscow spy ring (I may be exaggerating on this point). IOW didn't need, didn't want, and had no use for Skripal. (Also meant they had devote assets to insure he hadn't been turned into a triple-agent.)

2) The UK asked the US to get Skripal out because they still needed to know exactly what Skripal had told the Russian investigators. That would mean that they weren't competent enough to figure that out and/or Skripal was given a far larger role in the UK spy operation than Russia was able to determine.

I don't have a high opinion of MI6, the CIA, etc., but it's still tough for me to buy scenario #2. So, I've been going with #1.

Anonymous says: August 19, 2018 at 10:15 pm
So the UK was fulfilling its role as a vassal state

You comment just gave me another thought. Cameron became PM in May 2010 and the spy swap was in July 2010, so Cameron was then PM. It is a tradition (not a rule) that the next Tory PM hands out a knighthood to the previous Tory PM – and May hasn't done that yet I wonder why?

The last time it happened (and that was the first time to the best of my knowledge) was Margaret Thatcher who refused to give one to Ted Heath – he had to wait until 1992 for John Major to give him one (if you will pardon the expression!)

At that time, apart from the fact that Thatcher despised Heath politically, it was a very poorly kept secret that Thatcher's refusal was driven by her knowledge that Heath was a paedophile.

Nothing to do with the Skripals but it will be interesting to see how long Cameron has to wait.

Paul says: August 19, 2018 at 10:16 pm
That was me! Forgot to put my name in again!
Marie says: August 19, 2018 at 11:00 pm
So the UK was fulfilling its role as a vassal state

Only if there's truth in my fiction.

May was Home Secretary as of May 2010; so, also probably on board with the spy swap -- or it was too far along to being a done deal for she and Cameron to nix it when they came into office.

Miheila says: August 20, 2018 at 7:17 am
It was the British government who insisted on Skripal being included in the spy-swap made between 10 'illegals' (placed as sleepers in the USA at the time, and led by Anna Chapman) and four national traitors.

These four were of more use to the West than the 10 illegals. Alexander Zaporozhsky and Igor Sutyagin had spied spying for the USA. Gennady Vasilenko was involved in illegal weapons possession, and the reasoning for him being included in the swap has never been disclosed.

"Skripal is considered the more important of the two as far as Britain's security and intelligence agencies are concerned. He is likely to be debriefed for weeks, if not months. He will be given a home and pension if he decides to stay in Britain. The future of Sutyagin [in Britain] is less certain He could yet return to Russia".

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jul/11/british-security-services-debrief-russians-spy-swap

Marie says: August 20, 2018 at 5:14 pm
Pardon, but where does it say that the UK requested Skripal in the US-Russia spy swap?

Two Russians exchanged in a high-profile "spy swap" were today being debriefed by MI5 and MI6 officers at a secret location close to London.

SOP – wouldn't want to let a triple-agent into the country.

Skripal is considered the more important of the two as far as Britain's security and intelligence agencies are concerned. He is likely to be debriefed for weeks, if not months. He will be given a home and pension if he decides to stay in Britain.

Well, Skripal did help to blow up the UK's fake rock spy communication set-up in Moscow. And the UK wouldn't pass on an opportunity to have Skripal tell them exactly what he'd spilled to Russian authorities (likely everything). But that "home and pension" not only fills in a gap about what is publicly known about Skripal but also that the UK accepted that they were stuck with him as part of the spy swap.

Britain and the US say they have got more out of the spy swap than Russia because the four men released by Moscow were far more serious individuals than the 10 agents handed over by the US.

Do you think the UK and US would say they got the short end of the stick in the deal? Superficially (the ordinary person's level of geo-political understanding), getting for Russian four nationals (three convicted of espionage, spying for the west and serving sentences of 15 to 18 years) for eleven low value Russians held by the west doesn't look like the better part of the bargain. And in the US this could easily have become another anti-Obama rallying cry for the GOP and their right-wing crazies. That seemed not to have happened. Probably a too esoteric for that audience.

This is interesting:

One of those released to the US, Alexander Zaporozhsky, was a KGB colonel whose spying for the US is understood to have led to the unmasking of Robery Hanssen, an FBI officer, and Aldrich Ames, a CIA officer, two of Russia's most important spies in the US.

If true, the CIA and FBI were in debt to Zaporozhsky and the official FBI and CIA stories of the unmasking of these two moles if fiction. I suspect that the above claim is the fiction. Designed to add weight to why Zaporozhsky was accepted in the swap and preserved the secrecy of whatever info he had actually passed to the US.

For now, I'll stick with my guess that the UK wasn't keen on being stuck with Skripal.

Bob says: August 20, 2018 at 1:38 pm
Thanks for your reply, Marie. Just so you know, I don't think the evidence supports the poisoning having been ordered by Putin. I would only contend that if he had ordered it Putin would have been anticipating a positive effect. It would have limited the number of UK spy candidates willing to risk spying against Russia. (Putin probably wouldn't have foreseen the success of the sanctions campaign.) But, in my opinion, both parties –in the future -- would continue their interest in spy swaps. In spite of the negative consequences of exposing them to murder, why not get ones spy back and better protect them?
Miheila says: August 20, 2018 at 4:59 pm
Russia (government, businesses and people) doesn't consider the sanctions campaign very successful at all.
Milda says: August 19, 2018 at 8:15 pm
It might be that an imprisoned spy will prefer to complete his prison term than to get swapped and thus to become a potential target for assassination.

I wonder what Sergei is thinking now. His daughter's life is ruined and may be in danger.

Miheila says: August 20, 2018 at 5:13 pm
I often wonder about how they and their family in Russia feel about this awful affair. We tend to forget the human side of the story, but we shouldn't. Sergei, from all I hear about him, seemed a decent kind of man. He may have been foolish for being talked into betraying his country by Pablo Miller, but I don't see him as a bad man at heart. Maybe he was desperate for money at the time or goinf throufgh a bad patch which would have made him more susceptible to manipulation. Who knows?

But now his acts have somehow caused lives to fall apart and much I'm sure suffering. It's my view that all governments are essentially evil (greedy, ruthless and self-serving), and don't work in the interests of ordinary people – often working against them. The evidence of history bears this out.

Marie says: August 20, 2018 at 5:19 pm
Craig Murray has been adamant that PM didn't recruit Skripal and that Skripal was known as a walk-in. (It is generally accepted that at some point and for some undefined period of time that PM was Skripal's handler.)

A "nice" man doesn't endanger the lives of his colleagues for money.

Denise says: August 19, 2018 at 7:11 am
Hi Bob,

All those on the list aren't conspirators as you think of them. More like further victims of the conspiracy. They dont know the whole story. They each only know a tiny bit of it. A bad bit, but have been frightened so badly that they are scared to tell that little bit, which will lead to the conspiracy unfolding. And make no mistake this is a conspiracy, a swamp conspiracy of the tallest order.

Paul says: August 19, 2018 at 12:23 pm
Bob, it is not a list of "list of complicit conspirators" – it is a list of 'people who know more than they have said'.

They are not all involved in a conspiracy, they are witnesses to the conspiracy. They each have a story to tell that would open the lid on a part of what happened – not the whole story.

Are they silent? I don't know, the MSM has not tried to ask them what they know, maybe they will be happy to talk, if anyone asks.

Mrs Cooper told Rob that Sergei was wearing leather jacket and jeans – she was happy to tell what she knew, all Rob had to do was ask. The Sun newspaper which broke the 'duck' story and went to interview Mrs Cooper did not even bother to ask that question – or if they did they did not reveal what she said.

The conspiracy continues through indifference of the MSM – sooner of later that will change.

[Aug 30, 2018] Skripals, BBC and Ukranians by craig

Notable quotes:
"... "A Ukrainian political consultant has revealed to Sputnik that former MI6 agent Christopher Steele sought and paid for researchers in Ukraine to concoct fake stories about Donald Trump prior his election as US president to use in the now-infamous dossier that supposedly contained damning evidence of Russia-Trump collusion. ..."
"... Radio Sputnik's Lee Stranahan spoke previously with Ukrainian political consultant and former diplomat Andrii Telizhenko about his connections to a Democratic National Committee (DNC) operative named Alexandra Chalupa who also worked for clients in Ukrainian politics. Chalupa told Politico in January 2017 that beginning in 2015, she pulled on a network of sources she'd established in Kiev and Washington to try and turn up dirt on Trump ..."
"... The BBC is a propaganda organisation. It has even admitted it. http://viewsandstories.blogspot.com/2018/04/bbc-asserts-it-is-propaganda.html ..."
"... The door handle application is a crock. If, as is claimed the alleged Novichok was pure then who made it should be known because of its purity. ..."
"... Browder just wants us to go to war with Russia so he can keep his stolen money, that's not too much to ask! ..."
Aug 27, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

On 8 July 2018 a lady named Kirsty Eccles asked what, in its enormous ramifications, historians may one day see as the most important Freedom of Information request ever made. The rest of this post requires extremely close and careful reading, and some thought, for you to understand that claim.

Dear British Broadcasting Corporation,

1: Why did BBC Newsnight correspondent Mark Urban keep secret from the licence payers that he had been having meetings with Sergei Skripal only last summer.

2: When did the BBC know this?

3: Please provide me with copies of all correspondence between yourselves and Mark Urban on the subject of Sergei Skripal.

Yours faithfully,

Kirsty Eccles

The ramifications of this little request are enormous as they cut right to the heart of the ramping up of the new Cold War, of the BBC's propaganda collusion with the security services to that end, and of the concoction of fraudulent evidence in the Steele "dirty dossier". This also of course casts a strong light on more plausible motives for an attack on the Skripals.

Which is why the BBC point blank refused to answer Kirsty's request, stating that it was subject to the Freedom of Information exemption for "Journalism".

10th July 2018

Dear Ms Eccles

Freedom of Information request – RFI20181319

Thank you for your request to the BBC of 8th July 2018, seeking the following information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000:

1: Why did BBC Newsnight correspondent Mark Urban keep secret from the licence payers that he had been having meetings with Sergei Skripal only last summer.

2: When did the BBC know this?

3: Please provide me with copies of all correspondence between yourselves and Mark Urban on the subject of Sergei Skripal.

The information you have requested is excluded from the Act because it is held for the purposes of 'journalism, art or literature.' The BBC is therefore not obliged to provide this information to you. Part VI of Schedule 1 to FOIA provides that information held by the BBC and the other public service broadcasters is only covered by the Act if it is held for 'purposes other than those of journalism, art or literature".

The BBC is not required to supply information held for the purposes of creating the BBC's output or information that supports and is closely associated with these creative activities.

The BBC is of course being entirely tendentious here – "journalism" does not include the deliberate suppression of vital information from the public, particularly in order to facilitate the propagation of fake news on behalf of the security services. That black propaganda is precisely what the BBC is knowingly engaged in, and here trying hard to hide.

I have today attempted to contact Mark Urban at Newsnight by phone, with no success, and sent him this email:

To: [email protected]

Dear Mark,

As you may know, I am a journalist working in alternative media, a member of the NUJ, as well as a former British Ambassador. I am researching the Skripal case.

I wish to ask you the following questions.

1) When the Skripals were first poisoned, it was the largest news story in the entire World and you were uniquely positioned having held several meetings with Sergei Skripal the previous year. Yet faced with what should have been a massive career break, you withheld that unique information on a major story from the public for four months. Why?
2) You were an officer in the Royal Tank Regiment together with Skripal's MI6 handler, Pablo Miller, who also lived in Salisbury. Have you maintained friendship with Miller over the years and how often do you communicate?
3) When you met Skripal in Salisbury, was Miller present all or part of the time, or did you meet Miller separately?
4) Was the BBC aware of your meetings with Miller and/or Skripal at the time?
5) When, four months later, you told the world about your meetings with Skripal after the Rowley/Sturgess incident, you said you had met him to research a book. Yet the only forthcoming book by you advertised is on the Skripal attack. What was the subject of your discussions with Skripal?
6) Pablo Miller worked for Orbis Intelligence. Do you know if Miller contributed to the Christopher Steele dossier on Trump/Russia?
7) Did you discuss the Trump dossier with Skripal and/or Miller?
8) Do you know whether Skripal contributed to the Trump dossier?
9) In your Newsnight piece following the Rowley/Sturgess incident, you stated that security service sources had told you that Yulia Skripal's telephone may have been bugged. Since January 2017, how many security service briefings or discussions have you had on any of the matter above.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Craig Murray

I should very much welcome others also sending emails to Mark Urban to emphasise the public demand for an answer from the BBC to these vital questions. If you have time, write your own email, or if not copy and paste from mine.

To quote that great Scot John Paul Jones, "We have not yet begun to fight".

A Traub , August 29, 2018 at 08:21

Not going in to the details of the Skripals etc but what this goes to show is the limitations of the FOI Act. The FOI Act was brought in by the Blair Govt but of course was very much weakened in its final version. Even this was very much regretted by Blair in his autobiography who said what an 'idiot' he had been to bring it in. Tony, you need have no fear – powerful institutions like the BBC can block any meaningful probing because of the limitations of the law.

Reply ↓
Jo , August 29, 2018 at 10:53

Spotted this yesterday .5103
"A Ukrainian political consultant has revealed to Sputnik that former MI6 agent Christopher Steele sought and paid for researchers in Ukraine to concoct fake stories about Donald Trump prior his election as US president to use in the now-infamous dossier that supposedly contained damning evidence of Russia-Trump collusion.

Radio Sputnik's Lee Stranahan spoke previously with Ukrainian political consultant and former diplomat Andrii Telizhenko about his connections to a Democratic National Committee (DNC) operative named Alexandra Chalupa who also worked for clients in Ukrainian politics. Chalupa told Politico in January 2017 that beginning in 2015, she pulled on a network of sources she'd established in Kiev and Washington to try and turn up dirt on Trump , once his star began to rise in the Republican primary campaign." Etc etc

Steve Hayes , August 29, 2018 at 11:32

The BBC is a propaganda organisation. It has even admitted it. http://viewsandstories.blogspot.com/2018/04/bbc-asserts-it-is-propaganda.html

Mick Robson , August 29, 2018 at 17:11

I can't add any cogency to the (so-far) fruitless quest for information from the BBC, but last weeks R4 programme (still available on iPlayer) The Reunion, in which the Skripal, and more recent 'nerve agent' attacks, were discussed and, I thought, neatly tied in with the 'Murder of Georgi Markov in the 1950s, apparently by Bulgarian secret agents, perhaps deserves examination by listeners and researchers more interested in BBC propaganda.

A panel of 'experts', diplomats, security people, some of whom you may very well knowand who laid claim to being 'there or thereabouts', concluded that The Skripal's incident bore all the markings of 'state sponsored' action, though, of course, they would never know until "the Russian archives are opened".

It all sounded thoroughly convincing (radio does when you're driving on a long-haul, I find) but it did occur to me that the programme, though ostensibly about the 'murder of Markov' was intended to draw the listener to inevitable conclusions about the perpetrators of Salisbury and Amesbury 'poisonings'.

The BBC is very good at obfuscation and I felt this was a good example. Sorry I cannot be more 'relevant' to your blog of 27/08/18. Good luck, and please. as they say, keep up the good work.

PleaseBeleafMe , August 29, 2018 at 17:47

http://www.theblogmire.com/the-10-main-holes-in-the-official-narrative-on-the-salisbury-poisonings-1-the-motive/

Interesting link with alot of great info in the commemts on this story.

Garth Carthy , August 28, 2018 at 15:04

I remember the excellent 'Media Lens' team have complained about Mark Urban in the past with his blatant Western bias. For example, like the other overpaid political analysts and presenters on the BBC, he doesn't question the stated but transparently dishonest premise of the West – that they are intervening in other nations on a humanitarian basis. Like the other wastes of space in the mainstream media, he is also quick to mention civilian deaths by the Russians but not so quick to mention those killed by the West.

As I recall, Urban completely failed to reply to or to address the concerns of Media Lens in a reasonable way.

Charles Bostock , August 28, 2018 at 15:34

Garth

"I remember the excellent 'Media Lens' team have complained about Mark Urban in the past with his blatant Western bias."

Mark Urban is from a Western country and the broadcaster he works for is in a Western country. Why are you so surprised that both he and the organisation he works for have a "Western bias"? Is that so abnormal? Would you expect him to have a pro-Chinese or a pro-Russian or, for that matter, a pro-Brazilian bias and would you be happy if he had? Would you expect a journalist who works for RT to have an anti-Russian, pro-Western bias?

Sharp Ears , August 28, 2018 at 13:55

Ramifications.
'Recently Aeroflot has been affected by US sanctions and its flights to America face possible suspension by Washington, as the US government seeks to punish the Kremlin for its alleged involvement in the poisoning of former double agent and Russian national Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury in March.'
https://www.rt.com/trends/aeroflot-russia-airlines-international/

Russian skies could become too expensive for US airlines if Washington targets Aeroflot
American carriers would face huge financial losses if Russia increases tariffs for the use of its airspace in response to possible US sanctions targeting the country's largest airline Aeroflot, an expert has told RT.
https://www.rt.com/business/435599-russia-aeroflot-us-sanctions/

SA , August 28, 2018 at 09:24

So are the pieces starting to fall into place?

One can join the dots and it all points to one direction. Other conspiracy theories pale into insignificance.

uncle tungsten , August 28, 2018 at 09:53

Great SA but I must add this link: Stefan Halper
https://saraacarter.com/whistleblower-exposes-key-player-in-fbi-russia-probe-it-was-all-a-set-up/

Klutzes all! and now the entire story is unravelling thanks to that idiot Alexander Downer and his mate Halper. I guess their little maltese buddy Joe Mifsud is deeply underground for a decade or two.

ADHD , August 28, 2018 at 11:22

I hadn't really followed the implications until' your list. So there will be a chemical attack and the OPCW will assign blame to Syria (but also possibly Syria/Russia).

The US have been making it clear that they would hold Russia accountable for any "further" chemical weapons attacks carried out by Syria. This could used then to remove Russia form the UN Security Council. Even for the UN to no longer recognise the Russian Government as legitimate and instead recognise an alternative Russian Government (under Mikhail Khardovsky). Will China fall in line?

This looks awfully close to the start of a full scale war.

giyane , August 28, 2018 at 13:24

The UN has been turning a blind eye to neo-con murder since 9/11. They are a busted flush. There is no residual value or purpose for the UN in an age that backs Saudi Arabi to train terrorists in Myanmar.

As to Senator John McCain the world will be a safer place when this terrorist is finally removed. The UN is wholly owned by the US. The US neo-cons have sucked every particle of respectability out of it.

" Those who antagonise the believing Muslim men and women and do not repent will be consigned to the Fire, to dwell forever therein. " Qur'an. I am immensely proud of Donald trump for refusing to honour him.

George K , August 28, 2018 at 13:36

Frightening, and probably part of the plan. I have been reading for the last 2 days a series of warnings by the Russians that a chemical "attack" is imminent. Not many translations of this in the MSM. One would think that they wouldn't dare after such warnings, but I am not optimistic. After all, how many people have read the warnings?

Borncynical , August 28, 2018 at 18:08

George K

I've seen posts on Twitter about this warning by the Russians and you know what the counter-argument is that they are putting forward? They contend that it's a double bluff by the Syrians/Russians. Well, if you're intending to use chemical weapons why wouldn't you make out that the other side are planning it as a false flag? Trouble is, Western governments will be more than happy to go along with that in the public eye – let's face it, they know the real truth of the situation. I note however that the Russian warning mentions the active role in the planned false flag played by British security firm Olive. I haven't seen any denial from them so that would suggest to a neutral observer that the Russian allegations do have some foundation and hopefully will be enough to 'put the wind up' those planning the event.

Borncynical , August 28, 2018 at 22:56

Further to my post at 18.08 I see a short and sweet statement on the Sputnik website that "Olive Group has no involvement" Suzanne Piner, the company's marketing director said. So there we have it, who are we to disbelieve them??

SA , August 29, 2018 at 03:29

Borncynical
I personally never believe rumours unless they are officially denied.

John Bull , August 28, 2018 at 09:39

A great blog, Craig, and lots of good comments. I have two contributions.

1. A recent Spectator blog talked of a 'Stockade of D-notices'. Surely that means more than the two we know about. So I guess that anyone working in the MSM must have to tread carefully.

2. We are swimming in a sea of fake news, disinformation, misinformation, deliberate lies and speculation. I have found only one rock worth clinging onto and it's this. The Porton Down analyst (CC) who gave evidence to the high court which heard the blood sample application said the analysis of the Skripals blood indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound (para 17 of the judge's report). It is reasonable to assume they used the term 'nerve agent' correctly, i.e. belonging to the group of organo-phosphorus compounds (from the OPCW website). On the assumption CC told the truth, there are only three possibilities:-

a. The Skripals were exposed to a nerve agent, or
b. They were exposed to a related compound that was not a nerve agent, or
c. The analysis was unable to say whether it was a nerve agent or a related compound.

If it was 'a', why did CC muddy the waters by saying 'or a related compound? Very unlikely, bearing in mind the sensitivety of the issue.

If it was 'c', is it credible that Porton Down, world leaders in chemical weaponry, were not able to tell if a substance was a nerve agent or not? I think not.

Which leaves 'b'. That the Skripals were not poisoned by a nerve agent.

I think we should all write to our MPs pointing this out and request a Parliamentary Question be put to the Secretary of State for Defence (who oversees PD) asking for full details of those blood tests and for Theresa to be briefed accordingly. She would then be required under the Ministerial Code to correct her misleading statements to the House which claimed the Skripals were poisoned by a nerve agent.

Robert , August 28, 2018 at 10:10

John Bull at 09:39

" why did CC muddy the waters by saying 'or a related compound? "

Maybe because they couldn't be sure from their measurements whether the truth was a. or b.?
The CC statement seems to rule out only c.

John Bull , August 28, 2018 at 12:06

Hi Robert – if CC knew for sure they Skripals were exposed to a nerve agent, CC would not have added 'or a related compound' as it only serves to confuse. CC might have said it because he/she couldn't tell from the findings – most unlikely – so the only reason he/she said the words 'or a related compound' was to avoid lying under oath to the high court.

In my view.

Terence Wallis , August 28, 2018 at 14:59

It all comes down to contaminated crack or whatever they used, especially the Amesbury folk. They're well known imbibers a friend living there has told me. I pass this on merely as a possible explanation from 'people who know'.

Paul Greenwood , August 28, 2018 at 11:48

Yes and whose lab tested the blood ? Maybe Porton Down offered their services ?

John Bull , August 28, 2018 at 12:11

Hi Paul – yes. At the court hearing, CC was referring to the initial blood analyses carried out by Porton Down a day or so after the poisoning. But clearly the doubt sown by the words 'or a related compound' remained at least until 20th March when CC gave that evidence.

Sandra , August 28, 2018 at 13:29

I remember reading that Court of Protection judgement wording at the time and made some notes about it, plus how this wording compared with that of Gary Aitkenhead's and the OPCW's:

When comparing the wording from three sources – interview with head of Porton Down, court hearing and OPCW documents – I think that there is room for the absence of Novichok in blood samples taken from the Skripals before 22/03.

The Court of Protection judgement before Mr Justice Williams (22/03), (regarding an application to take blood samples for the OPCW to confirm Porton Down's earlier analysis), states that earlier blood tests carried out by Porton Down "indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound. The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent or closely related agent." (Please note the "or".) The statement comes at point 17 i):

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/sshd-v-skripal-and-another-20180322.pdf

Then, Gary Aitkenhead, CEO of Porton Down, told Sky News (04/04) that the substance they found was "..Novichok or from that family.." (Again, please note the "or".) The statement comes 1:27mins in on this YouTube video, which has a less edited version than on the Sky News site, plus some interesting notes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R23AQAFvZ-4

And the OPCW's executive summary, which has been made public, does not mention Novichok by name, but it says that the results of their tests confirm the findings of the UK relating to the chemical's identity, and show that the toxic chemical is of high purity. It says that the name and structure of the toxic chemical are contained in the full classified report of the Secretariat, available to the state parties of the OPCW.
Taken from points 10, 11 and 12 at:

https://www.opcw.org/fileadmin/OPCW/S_series/2018/en/s-1612-2018_e_.pdf

Cherrycoke , August 28, 2018 at 15:52

I have been thinking about this as well. Please note that "nerve agent or related compound" leaves open the possibility that the compound is not even a nerve agent.

It would be interesting to know the expert definitions of "closely related" and "family" with regard to "nerve agent" and "novichok".

The general understanding is that it was A-234. This has never been confirmed in a public statement, however.

James , August 28, 2018 at 15:02

Expressions like "nerve agent" subconsciously conjure up dark and sinister evildoing in the world of James Bond and his "licence to kill", at least in the minds of most British English speakers. The same psychology is at work when you see "Polite Notice" and subconsciously read it as "Police Notice". Such notices are invariably unofficial, and often impolite!

For the mischief makers, however, mere "nerve agent", with its ambiguity and murky undertones, was not enough; "novichok" will soon be a novichok entry for 2018 in the OED. ("Новичо́к" means "newcomer", "new guy"–as in freshman, rookie, novice.)

Modern nerve agents were first discovered in the 1930s by German industrial chemists experimenting with organophosphorus compounds (which are defined by containing a particular grouping of carbon, phosphorus and oxygen atoms). They were trying to make new insecticides which would be powerful but safe(ish), but stumbled across tabun, which was powerful but very unsafe. Given the political situation, and realising the military potential, these chemists then pursued their research with emphasis on the extremely unsafe, and with huge success. After 1945, having had no such success themselves, the victorious allies' chemists "inherited" this German research; the Soviets did particularly well here, as there was much German manufacturing infrastructure in Poland. Exactly what happened next is obviously kept very secret, but some refinements were certainly achieved such as VX, and–allegedly–the Novichoks. Per Chalmers Johnson: "we knew Saddam had WMD; we had the receipts".
All very interesting (not really), and probably well-understood by a few reading this. A problem in getting a real understanding of all this novichok/Skripal malarkey lies in some misunderstandings of the details about the foregoing, of which few will be properly aware, Craig included. He read history.

Firstly organophosphorus compounds are certainly not inherently toxic; DNA is an organophosphate, as is RNA, ATP, etc. Boat loads of other basic biochemistry involves this chemical grouping. To equate "nerve agent" (or "insecticide") with "organophosphate" is a good start, but nothing more.

Secondly, the idea that nerve agents are new is misleading. Curare (poison) tipped arrows have been used in South America for millenia, secretions by bufotenine toads similarly used elsewhere, with many many other examples throughout recorded history (and beyond). These chemicals could all semantically correctly be termed nerve agents.

Interestingly, although tabun's potency was discovered in the 30s by Schrader er al, it had been unwittingly synthesised 40-odd years earlier. There's nothing new under the sun.

Thirdly, poisoning by ACE nerve agents (which, allegedly, includes Новичо́к) is quick and easy(ish) to detect and interpret in an unambiguous way. Less so more exotic and novel toxins (so obviously not eg curare or bufotoxins, but along those lines). However, given time, a good analysis is doable using mass spectrometry, SEM, X-ray crystallography (and other) methods.

In reply to John Bull, I wouldn't say we're "swimming in a sea of fake news, et seq", more bobbing around like corks. Love the moniker, by the way! It works on so many levels.

John Bull , August 28, 2018 at 15:12

Very good summary. Thanks, James.
Glad you like it!

mark golding , August 28, 2018 at 17:24

It was NOT a nerve agent that is why somebody had to die – to enforce the lie. Life in this universe is cheap

Rhys Jaggar , August 28, 2018 at 18:30

John

I suspect the reason for the wording is that what was identified was an acetylcholineesterase (ACE) inhibitor, which covers the major nerve agents and other compounds as well.

uncle tungsten , August 28, 2018 at 09:43

Here is one of the really stupid things about the official british story line on the Skripals. Sergei and Yulia are supposed to have left their home at around 1:30 and both swiped their hands on the door lever and were then novihoaxed. They drove to town and parked their car ten minutes later. They then walked through the park and stopped to hand feed the ducks in the stream and handed bread to the young boys to also feed the ducks. They then went on to act 2 scene 1 at zizzis or the pub and then act 2 scene two collapsed on the bench.

No young boy or duck was harmed making this play. The military grade novihoax is incapable of killing a duck, let alone a child as this pair smeared military grade nerve poison on everything! They have incinerated the zizzi table and heaven knows what has been incinerated at the pub. They incinerated the Skripals front door, who knows what fate was delivered to the BMW.

But they cant kill a duck! Mind you they can starve Skripal pets.

Are we to believe this story?

Hatuey , August 28, 2018 at 10:35

How do you know that ducks didn't suffer or die?

SA , August 28, 2018 at 11:23

Brilliant diversion. How do you prove a negative? Of course very simple, no dead ducks were reported.

Hatuey , August 28, 2018 at 14:32

I wasn't trying to divert. I know quite a bit about the habits of ducks. You'll very rarely see a dead duck anywhere in the natural world. Same with swans. They like to die in private.

I can tell you that it's very unlikely that you'd have any reports of dead ducks in Salisbury parks.

Before anyone puts this down to more high level trolling, I used to be a wildlife photographer. And I mean a proper one, i.e one that crawled around in mud for days at a time filming and photographing ducks.

SA , August 28, 2018 at 14:39

Even more brilliant as now, because of your marvellous personal experience, this is almost unprovable one way or another. Well done.

ADHD , August 28, 2018 at 15:15

The ducks were an obvious joke (of derision). The joke has a second level (not hidden); the young boys didn't die because everyone knows the novichok poisoning story is not true?

"No ducks or young boys were harmed in the making of this movie!"

All of the above just paraphrases/repeats what uncle tungsten said

You jobs sounds like it was really great, I envy you. But your contribution (here) sucks big time!

Ken Kenn , August 28, 2018 at 10:40

Good thoughts.

There appears to be a distinct lack of cross contamination.

The Skripal car should be riven with this poison – on the steering wheel- gear stick etc etc. If so, then reports of it being burned should follow like the table – as the guinea pigs and the cat were.

It should be all over the bread and all over the assistant duck feeders and the ducks should have been legion with their webbed feet up in the air.

The door handle application is a crock. If, as is claimed the alleged Novichok was pure then who made it should be known because of its purity.

If it's Russian that should be provable. So far the proof that it is Russian made has not been shown.

SA , August 28, 2018 at 11:25

"So far the proof that it is Russian made has not been shown." Nonsense, the very name novichok is a giveaway, nobody would use a novichok except Russians.

ADHD , August 28, 2018 at 12:42

Thanks, SA, that wouldn't have occurred to me!

Doodlebug , August 28, 2018 at 14:44

And Dawn Sturgess' perfume bottle had 'Moscow © Browder Enterprises' moulded underneath.

ADHD , August 28, 2018 at 15:25

Browder just wants us to go to war with Russia so he can keep his stolen money, that's not too much to ask!

SA , August 28, 2018 at 18:02

I forgot to add Browder to one of the dots I mentioned earlier.

Terence Wallis , August 28, 2018 at 15:04

I'd say you're suffering from novichock poisoning with your addled thinking

SA , August 28, 2018 at 18:01

Also novichok seems to cause acute sense of humour failure in observers.

ADHD , August 28, 2018 at 18:15

Terence, It's a serious issue but derision is a powerful weapon; certainly stronger than the novichok used against the Skripals.

Rod , August 28, 2018 at 10:50

It adds a new dimension to the saying : "You couldn't make it up". They, obviously couldn't.

Borncynical , August 28, 2018 at 12:19

"They have incinerated the Zizzi table " The significance of the table in this saga intrigues me. I recall when the 'details' (!!) of events were revealed by the MSM at the outset we were informed that the table had been covered in nerve agent in the form of a fine white powder and had to be incinerated. [ In fact it was so badly contaminated even Porton Down didn't have the capability of storing it safely – that's my facetious 'take' on it before anyone asks where I read that!]

On the assumption that it was indeed incinerated as a 'risk' item it begs a couple of obvious questions which the official narrative hasn't explained. First, the time lapse between the Skripals leaving Zizzis, being identified and their movements traced back to the restaurant and 'lockdown' being applied to everything in the restaurant: we don't know but I would hazard a guess an hour minimum. Are we really supposed to believe that the plates, dishes and cutlery left by the Skripals weren't cleared away in all that time, and the table wasn't wiped down? Irrespective of whether the nerve agent residue that we are supposed to believe was being spread all over Salisbury was visible or not, surely whoever cleared the table and washed up the dishes would definitely have been contaminated if we are to believe what we have been told about the door handle theory.

Borncynical , August 28, 2018 at 12:26

Adding to my comment at 12.19, we mustn't also forget that glasses and dishes would also have been removed from the table during the course of the Skripals' meal as well, not to mention money or credit cards or card reading machines etc exchanging hands. And the drinking glasses used at the pub. The more you think about it, the more ridiculous the official line becomes.

[Aug 29, 2018] Max Boot Greases The Wheels of Empire

Aug 29, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

chris rossini friday august 22, 2014
Boot

Max Boot lays it on pretty thick here :

America's brave troopers today fight for freedom in Afghanistan, Iraq and beyond, all the while yearning, as FDR said, "for the end of battle" when they can return home. They are not there to seize natural resources or to pump up a president's approval ratings–nor, for all of my differences with President Obama, do I believe he has ordered troops into harm's way for such nefarious purposes.
If that isn't the exact opposite of truth, I don't know what is.

As a matter of fact, RPI recently ran a fantastic editorial by Jessica Pavoni, who was a member of the military, but sought to leave the Air Force as a conscientious objector after learning that the Max Boots of the world were spinning false tales.

Not only has the Empire managed to bring the exact opposite of freedom to "Afghanistan, Iraq and beyond," but it has also accomplished the snuffing out of freedom here at home as well. Groping at the airports, the monitoring of all our communications and finances, as well as the militarized local police (See: Boston & Ferguson) are just a few potent examples.

Meanwhile, Chuck Hagel is now trying to scare the pants off Americans once again:

ISIL poses a threat greater than 9/11. ISIL is as sophisticated and well funded as any group we have seen. They're beyond just a terrorist group This is way beyond anything we have seen.
The Empire wants more!

Max Boot, the fantasy storyteller, is helping to grease the wheels.

[Aug 29, 2018] Nothing to See Here

Aug 29, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk
Willie Wobblestick , August 28, 2018 at 14:04

Nothing to See Here

Rather like Janet Jackson's nipples,
It's been a while since we've seen the Skripals.
Not so long ago they were all over the news
As official drones droned their official views.
They said that in Salisbury wherever you look
Lurked sinister types splashing novichuk.
Door handle specialists had been imported,
Or so the BBC unquestioningly reported.
A laundry list of despicable acts
Only vaguely coincident with the salient facts.
Boris Johnson wasn't sitting on the fence,
He don't need no stinkin' evidence.
'It was them Russkies wot dunnit, no doubt about that',
Said the country's pre-eminent diplomat.
KGB thugs sent to put the boot in,
By Mr. Evil, Vladimir Stalin Putin.
Novichuk's lethality was re-emphasised again,
More deadly than others by a factor of ten.
Yet somehow miraculously the Skripals survived,
In Salisbury General they inconveniently revived.
And that was all we heard for a while
Bar a weird statement in machine-prose style.
Then a curious video right out of the blue
That looked like an advert for flyaway shampoo.
A chilled out Yulia said she was contented,
And consular access had not been prevented,
But no, she didn't want to meet up with her kin
(Not that the government would let them in).
The whole production was charmingly informal,
As though poisoning and exile were perfectly normal.
This remarkable young woman's taken it all in her stride,
Seemingly happy to go along with the ride.
Her boyfriend, her job, her dog and her flat
All peremptorily dumped at the drop of a hat.
The un-fake corporate media performed as tasked
Ensuring awkward questions remained unasked.
And all this ludicrous b-movie rigmarole
Was discreetly d-noticed down the memory hole.
The legal and diplomatic situation's now clear:
'Move along sir, nothing to see here.'

[Aug 29, 2018] The Sun Does Not Revolve Around the US by Jean Ranc

Most of US Russiagate charges are projection. Russiagate is a color revolution of the block of neoliberals and neocons to depose Trump. They are afraid of too many skeletons in the closet to allow Trump to finish his term. And for a right reason. Trump is unpredictable and he at one moment can turn on them and start revealing unpleasant truth about Bush II and Obama.
But rumors about the demise of the US neoliberal empire are slightly exaggerated ;-). Without providing an alternative model to neoliberalism and without ethnological superiority China does not stand a chance.
Notable quotes:
"... Through endless repetition, allegations are transformed into "facts." Sanctions are loaded upon sanctions, based on these unsubstantiated charges in an economic war against Russia. ..."
"... Today's propaganda tool is named "RussiaGate," a campaign to bring down a deeply flawed U.S. president for possibly trying to mend U.S. relations with Russia. ..."
"... Nations, such as Russia, China & others just want to determine their own futures & keep their National sovereignty's! It's America, with it's unbelievable arrogance & hubris, that wants to dominate & impose its sovereignty on every Country on Earth! ..."
"... Their claim to One Truth (no alternate facts tolerated in NYT/WaPo Land) that they've enjoyed for more than 100 years has fallen victim to the Internet, a creation of the American war technology development system (DARPA) ..."
"... other Nations may reach a saturation point when enough is enough & they finally come to the realization that this crooked American Empire is to dangerous to be allowed too continue & must be stopped, once & for all time! ..."
Aug 29, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

... ... ...

Continuing Empire

It was around 1898, when America first starting thinking it was the center of the universe. In that year the U.S. intervened in Cuba's war for independence and proceeded to take over parts of the decrepit Spanish Empire, from Latin America to the Philippines. Shortly before, in 1893, the U.S. overthrew the Queen of Hawaii on behalf of U.S.-backed sugar and pineapple plantation owners.

That led to a long history of political interference in other countries, in the form of destabilization, coups and invasions. Once the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, a narrative was fostered to justify expanding NATO to Russia's borders.

In the last four years, anti-Russian propaganda has reached a fever pitch: lies about Russia's "expansionism" in Ukraine; hype about Russia's "meddling" in the U.S. elections, creating an existential "threat to democracy;" unproven allegations of Russia using chemical weapons to poison the Skripals in London. Experts are trotted out on major media to further the narrative without hard evidence. Together with think-tanks, the American and British media run these stories daily with almost no counter news or opinions. Through endless repetition, allegations are transformed into "facts." Sanctions are loaded upon sanctions, based on these unsubstantiated charges in an economic war against Russia.

In 2004, journalist Ron Suskind wrote in The New York Times magazine that a top White House strategist for President George W. Bush -- identified later as Karl Rove, Bush's Deputy White House Chief of Staff -- told him, "We're an empire now; we create our own reality."

Swiss journalist, Guy Mettan, in his 2017 book, Creating Russophobia: From the Great Religious Schism to Anti-Putin Hysteria , writes that the West's psycho-social pathology about Russia dates back over 1,000 years to the division of Christendom between the Orthodox and Roman churches. The U.S. is a relative newcomer to this, but seeks perhaps its biggest role.

" More than merely dominate, the American superpower now seeks to control history," Mettan says.

Myth of Russian Expansionism

The astute University of Chicago Professor John J. Mearsheimer exposed how the West provoked the Ukraine crisis in his 2014 Foreign Affairs article, "Why the Ukraine Crisis is the West's Fault: The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin." But the American foreign policy establishment and media remain committed to the suppression of facts about the U.S.-backed coup in Kiev and the resulting escalating tensions with Russia.

Ignoring or fabricating evidence, the U.S. and NATO persist in lying that Russia has expansionist goals in Ukraine, Crimea and Syria. Russia is helping ethnic Russians in the east of Ukraine who are resisting the coup, Crimea (which had been part of Russia since 1783 and transferred by the Soviets to Ukraine in 1954) held a referendum in 2014 in which the public voted to rejoin Russia. The Syrian government invited Russia in to help fight Western and Gulf-backed jihadists trying to violently overthrow the government, as even then Secretary of State John Kerry admitted .

Another scholar, Richard Sakwa, Professor of Russian and European Politics at the University of Kent, writes in his latest book, Russia Against the Rest: The Post-Cold War Crisis of World Order , that the Ukraine crisis crystallized the profound differences between Russia and the West, differences that are not just a replay of the "Cold War."

Simply put, under the banner of the indispensable "liberal world order," neo-conservative warriors and "democracy"-spreading-"humanitarian-interventionists" are promoting the Russophobia "reality" to justify American hegemony.

Ditching Solzhenitsyn

Solzhenitsyn : Ditched when he turned on America. (Wikimedia Commons)

One of the greatest illustrations of the centuries-old Russophobia, says Mettan in his 2017 book, is the case of Russian dissident Alexander Solzhenitsyn.

" During the 1990s, I was shocked by the way the West treated Solzhenitsyn," Mettan wrote. "For decades, we had published, celebrated, and acclaimed the great writer as bearing the torch of anti-Soviet dissidence," but only when he criticized his communist Russia. But after moving to the U.S., when Solzhenitsyn showed a preference for privacy "rather than attending anticommunist conferences, western media and academics began to distance themselves."

And when Solzhenitsyn returned to Russia and spoke out against Russian 'westernizers' and liberals who denied Russian interests, he was labeled "an outdated, senile writer," though he had not changed his fundamental views on freedom.

After the mid-July, Trump-Putin Helsinki summit, there were countless mass media delusions and hysteria against U.S.-Russia ties, reminiscent of the Hearst newspaper empire's propaganda that whipped up a frenzy to support the empire-building war against Spain in 1898. Professor Stephen Kinzer vividly described the unsuccessful battle by prestigious anti-imperialists against the power of the Hearst propaganda in his latest book, The True Flag: Theodore Roosevelt, Mark Twain, and the Birth of American Empire ."

Today's propaganda tool is named "RussiaGate," a campaign to bring down a deeply flawed U.S. president for possibly trying to mend U.S. relations with Russia.

Do we have enough good sense left to follow the advice of Henry David Thoreau: "Let us settle ourselves, and work and wedge our feet downward through the mud and slush of opinion, and prejudice till we come to a hard bottom and rocks in place, which we can call reality."

Or, as I thought when I visited Galileo's house that day in the Florentine hills: the world does not revolve around America.

Jean Ranc is a retired psychologist/research associate at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Gary Weglarz , August 28, 2018 at 7:42 pm

Wonderful observations that challenge the complete and utter madness of our times here in the U.S., and the West in general. The inquisitorial "accusations" leveled against Putin and Russia by the West bear no more resemblance to "reality" than the lunatic accusations that the Holy Inquisition leveled against "witches," "heretics" and "non-believers" for centuries as it used terror to consolidate power. Given the ever more shrill and painfully persistent nature of these ongoing nonsense anti-Russian accusations – it would appear more and more of us in the West are falling into the category of – "non-believers."

jose , August 28, 2018 at 8:45 pm

A very good post Gary. The West is decadent and corrupt.Whatever high moral grounds the West once held, I am afraid they are either forgotten or totally gone.

Jessika , August 28, 2018 at 6:43 pm

Delightful piece to read, great comments as usual. I can only add that the neocolonialists who don't want to give up leading the US over the edge, as mike says "into the abyss", will be forced to change their ways, well stated by Babylon and others. The tragedy of what they have done by their narcissistic, egoistic, delusional misleading, is that they have wrecked the lives of millions worldwide. But of course, that is the story of deluded conquerors until they meet their own end. I welcome the sun setting on the "American Century"; a sharp reset awaits us all but we should welcome it.

jose , August 28, 2018 at 8:48 pm

Jessika: the saddest part in all this is that they still continue to wreck and decimate lives worldwide. It is like a cancer eating and obliterating every thing in their path. A very incisive post.

Diana Lee , August 29, 2018 at 12:08 am

The cancer is psychopathy! These people have no conscience or empathy. They are liars and manipulators. They treat people like objects to be used and abused. Until America admits that we've had a substantial percentage of psychopathic leaders and mentality, from the Puritans forward, we will never recover from the psychological, social, economic, political, legal, religious destruction this ilk has forced upon the rest of us. It took me deep research and therapy to discover that psychopaths project themselves onto the rest of us and then claim we are somehow damaged, flawed or have sinful human nature. The problem has always been the psychopaths among us (1%) who have created hierarchies and placed themselves atop them. They have bamboozled most of us with their lies but as we wake up to their games, we can kick them out of power and we can create a country of the 99% with conscience and empathy rather than a country of slaveowners and deluded "Israelites" who believed they had the right to exploit, enslave, kill

KiwiAntz , August 29, 2018 at 1:36 am

It's not sad, it's what's deathcult tyrants & dying Empires do, they take as many victims as they can, once they realise the end is nigh! It's a mass shooter mentality & it's disgraceful!

JR , August 28, 2018 at 9:14 pm

HI Jessika,
I tried to find you while I was still living in NH as I got the idea you live there as well. I had lived in the Dartmouth area in the 70's but the brutal winters were too much! this time around so I returned to my home base here in Chapel Hill. If you'd like to be in touch, you can reach me at my old-but-still-good Santa Fe address: [email protected]

mike k , August 28, 2018 at 5:37 pm

American egotism is legendary. It is the defining mark of the breed. Ignorant know-it-alls lead us confidently into the abyss.

jose , August 28, 2018 at 8:53 pm

Mike: If American leaders that are in control of the country have studied history of any empire, they would come to the realization that empires do not last forever. The illogical part is that empire's life expectancy has been more or less the same worldwide. And like an opened book the end is closing in and they know it.

Realist , August 28, 2018 at 5:00 pm

Excellent bit of necessary truth-telling. Too bad it won't be read in most of America, not because the people would reject its premise, but because their keepers just won't let them see it in the highly manipulated mass media.

America has repeatedly become what it most professes to hate: first an onerous empire like Spain, then a pack of fascists like Nazi Germany, and now totalitarian tyrants like the Soviets. Welcome to the truth, the one NOT fabricated by Rove's inheritors of empire.

Babyl-on , August 28, 2018 at 4:32 pm

This thought is so important to understand if you are to make any sense of the new multi-polar world which does not revolve around the failing Western empire.

China's Belt and Road is a catalyst but China will benefit only through the interconnection of the entire Eurasian land mass – sooner than you think, high-speed trains will cross the steppes. That is the new world the Enlightenment era is dead the Eurasian era is opening. Eurasia will trade most naturally with Africa and it will prosper because The US Empire is the last of the Enlightenment white European empires.

When you consider the integration of the great Eurasian land mass for the first time is history (the ancient Silk Road writ large) it's easy to forget about a US over there separated by all that water from the thriving markets.

Those oceans which protected the center of power from attack now are a big disadvantage in trade.
We are witnessing the end of the Enlightenment and the end of Empire which it spawned.

China is not imperial, Russia is not imperial – no country today seeks empire but the US and they are failing in every way. Western Liberal Democracy also died with the Enlightenment, new forms of governance and culture will develop, the sky really is the limit, now that the old dead Enlightenment is moving out of the way.

It would be a brighter future if not for that pesky climate.

KiwiAntz , August 29, 2018 at 1:51 am

Nations, such as Russia, China & others just want to determine their own futures & keep their National sovereignty's! It's America, with it's unbelievable arrogance & hubris, that wants to dominate & impose its sovereignty on every Country on Earth!

Russia & China are the future with the one belt, one road initiative & America is being left in the rear view mirror & is on the path to total oblivion thanks to its warmongering ways! The end of this corrupt American Empire can't come soon enough for people who want to live in peace!

O Society , August 28, 2018 at 4:12 pm

Well done, Jean Ranc! BTW, I am a Wolfpack grad

Egocentrism isn't just a Donald Trump thing, it's an American thing. America's never-ending RussiaGate narrative is a classic example of psychological projection. It can't be US who has the problem, it must be THEM who has the problem. Time to own it.

Donald Trump is an All-American Gangster

dick Spencer , August 28, 2018 at 3:07 pm

paraphrasing J. Pilger -- America should leave the rest of the world alone -- leave it alone

KiwiAntz , August 29, 2018 at 2:15 am

Yes, I second what Mr Pilger stated & I will add a few more requests? "Leave the World" alone! Stop your Warmongering interference in other Countries affairs! Immediately stop all your murderous Wars, Coups & Financial & Economic terrorism such as weaponising the dollar & Trade sanctions to illegally punish other Nations! Abide by International Laws & the U.N. charter! Remove your 800 bases from around the World & stick to your own backyard! Stop being the Worlds Policeman because no one asked you to perform this role! Look after your own people first & stop wasting trillions of dollars on the pointless & stupid Military Industrial Complex! Ban Campaign lobbyists & big money from Politics! Jail all corrupt Corporates & thieving Bankers, Politicians & seize their assets! These are a few things for a start! There are many more things you could do more numerous to name here, but the main thing is LEAVE THE WORLD ALONE! We are sick to death of this American Empire!

Sally Snyder , August 28, 2018 at 2:28 pm

Here is what Americans really think about the anti-Russia hysteria coming from Washington:

https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/08/americans-on-russia-will-of-people.html

Less than half of Americans believe that Russia's interference in the 2016 election made a difference to the final outcome and nearly six in ten Americans believe that it is important that Washington continue to improve relations with Moscow.

Jeff Harrison , August 28, 2018 at 2:25 pm

When you get to the end of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, six volumes of dense, erudite prose which details the failings of a decadent society, Gibbon lets you in on a secret. The Roman Empire was militarily defeated. Not all at once, mind. But militarily defeated nonetheless. Consider what that means for the US.

RnM , August 28, 2018 at 9:27 pm

Rome became a victim of its success, being overstretched beyond their war technology (horses, shields, swords and siege machines.)
My inability and unwillingness to predict the end of the rise of The Empire of "We the People" and its brand of War Technologies, is due to my close perspective and life-long Bernaiseian (?sp) brainwashing by the mass media, which, thankfully, has, since 2016, been dealt a blow to the mask on their (the corporate media's) Totalitarian nature.

Their claim to One Truth (no alternate facts tolerated in NYT/WaPo Land) that they've enjoyed for more than 100 years has fallen victim to the Internet, a creation of the American war technology development system (DARPA). So, in the American attempt to surpass the Romans, the Empire of We the People (as a Totalitarian dystopia) may well be thwarted by the spread of open information. I hope so. The alternative might be very difficult to defeat.

Diana Lee , August 29, 2018 at 12:23 am

Jeff, if you enjoyed Gibbons, I think you would really enjoy Michael Parenti's, "The Assassination of Julius Caesar". There are so many parallels between the late Roman Republic and today's America. Michael got his PhD in political science and history from Yale and writes "people's history". He argues convincingly that Caesar was assassinated -- - not for being an egomaniac and dictator -- - but because he stood up against the most elite in the senate by seeking reforms that would benefit the masses. He actually argues that Gibbons wrote as a historian from the priviledged class and therefore never condemned the senate for exploiting the masses.

KiwiAntz , August 29, 2018 at 2:34 am

Yes, what it means,& if History is anything to go by, that other Nations may reach a saturation point when enough is enough & they finally come to the realization that this crooked American Empire is to dangerous to be allowed too continue & must be stopped, once & for all time!

The Roman Empire never saw the Barbarian hordes such as the Visigoth's, Huns & Vandals coming until it was to late! Will the American Empire see there downfall coming? 9/11 proved the arrogant American Empire couldn't even see that event coming, due to their own hubris & complacency!

[Aug 29, 2018] Max Boot Greases The Wheels of Empire

Aug 29, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

chris rossini friday august 22, 2014
Boot

Max Boot lays it on pretty thick here :

America's brave troopers today fight for freedom in Afghanistan, Iraq and beyond, all the while yearning, as FDR said, "for the end of battle" when they can return home. They are not there to seize natural resources or to pump up a president's approval ratings–nor, for all of my differences with President Obama, do I believe he has ordered troops into harm's way for such nefarious purposes.
If that isn't the exact opposite of truth, I don't know what is.

As a matter of fact, RPI recently ran a fantastic editorial by Jessica Pavoni, who was a member of the military, but sought to leave the Air Force as a conscientious objector after learning that the Max Boots of the world were spinning false tales.

Not only has the Empire managed to bring the exact opposite of freedom to "Afghanistan, Iraq and beyond," but it has also accomplished the snuffing out of freedom here at home as well. Groping at the airports, the monitoring of all our communications and finances, as well as the militarized local police (See: Boston & Ferguson) are just a few potent examples.

Meanwhile, Chuck Hagel is now trying to scare the pants off Americans once again:

ISIL poses a threat greater than 9/11. ISIL is as sophisticated and well funded as any group we have seen. They're beyond just a terrorist group This is way beyond anything we have seen.
The Empire wants more!

Max Boot, the fantasy storyteller, is helping to grease the wheels.

[Aug 29, 2018] Roger Waters: That the attack on the Skripals was nonsense is clear to a person with half a brain. But some don't even have one half, that's why they believe in this absurd

Aug 29, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk
fredi , August 28, 2018 at 21:32

Pink Floyd Legend Roger Waters Slams Skripal Case as 'Nonsense'

The former leader of Pink Floyd has also blasted the White Helmets, a dubious Syrian volunteer organization which has been accused of staging videos of chemical attacks, as part of the "propaganda war," echoing the dismissive comments he made earlier this year.

The UK's Momentary Lapse of Reason

In an interview with the Russian newspaper Izvestiya, former Pink Floyd member Roger Waters dismissed the infamous Skripal case as "nonsense." "That the attack on the Skripals was nonsense is clear to a person with half a brain. But some don't even have one half, that's why they believe in this absurd," he was quoted as saying by the newspaper.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/08/no_author/pink-floyd-legend-roger-waters-slams-skripal-case-as-nonsense/

[Aug 29, 2018] Nothing to See Here

Aug 29, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk
Willie Wobblestick , August 28, 2018 at 14:04

Nothing to See Here

Rather like Janet Jackson's nipples,
It's been a while since we've seen the Skripals.
Not so long ago they were all over the news
As official drones droned their official views.
They said that in Salisbury wherever you look
Lurked sinister types splashing novichuk.
Door handle specialists had been imported,
Or so the BBC unquestioningly reported.
A laundry list of despicable acts
Only vaguely coincident with the salient facts.
Boris Johnson wasn't sitting on the fence,
He don't need no stinkin' evidence.
'It was them Russkies wot dunnit, no doubt about that',
Said the country's pre-eminent diplomat.
KGB thugs sent to put the boot in,
By Mr. Evil, Vladimir Stalin Putin.
Novichuk's lethality was re-emphasised again,
More deadly than others by a factor of ten.
Yet somehow miraculously the Skripals survived,
In Salisbury General they inconveniently revived.
And that was all we heard for a while
Bar a weird statement in machine-prose style.
Then a curious video right out of the blue
That looked like an advert for flyaway shampoo.
A chilled out Yulia said she was contented,
And consular access had not been prevented,
But no, she didn't want to meet up with her kin
(Not that the government would let them in).
The whole production was charmingly informal,
As though poisoning and exile were perfectly normal.
This remarkable young woman's taken it all in her stride,
Seemingly happy to go along with the ride.
Her boyfriend, her job, her dog and her flat
All peremptorily dumped at the drop of a hat.
The un-fake corporate media performed as tasked
Ensuring awkward questions remained unasked.
And all this ludicrous b-movie rigmarole
Was discreetly d-noticed down the memory hole.
The legal and diplomatic situation's now clear:
'Move along sir, nothing to see here.'

[Aug 28, 2018] CRITICIZE ISRAEL AND GO TO JAIL? IS THAT HOW LOW ZIONISTS HAVE SUNK?

Notable quotes:
"... During the C21st the Conservative Party has become reliant on Jewish money. Even more than her predecessor Cameron, May is a "value free zone", as the commentator Richard North categorised her. She does whatever the donors want. Not that the Labour Party in power would be any better. It is just as riddled with Israel-supporting "moderates". ..."
Aug 28, 2018 | www.unz.com

Rational , says: August 28, 2018 at 4:23 am GMT

CRITICIZE ISRAEL AND GO TO JAIL? IS THAT HOW LOW ZIONISTS HAVE SUNK?

Thanks for the interesting article, Sir.

As I read it, I felt sick in the abdomen, at how low the Zionists have sunk, demanding that those who criticize Israel go to jail.

If there is evil in this world, this is it. These are the dark ages. These people are primitive and seem to resist civilization.

No civilized human being should put up with this sort of evil.

The Brits need to wake up and actually repeal laws that make certain speech criminal offences that are already on the books (except for incitements to violence and porn).

The need to vote for Labor and keep Corbyn, or vote for BNP, and tell the Zionists that they are evil to make these demands.

Civilize them, please!!

Colin Wright , says: Website Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 4:57 am GMT

Israel is not a democracy for a much simpler reason than that the author offers.

It denies the vote to the gentile inhabitants of Gaza and the West Bank; that is to say, to about a quarter of its subjects.

Since the Jewish parties in the Knesset boycott the few Arab representatives that are there, Israel effectively denies political representation to the gentiles within its 'pre-1967′ boundaries as well -- that is to say, to another sixth or so of its total subject population.

Obviously, Israel is not a democracy in any sense of the word. 25% of its subjects are without even theoretical representation, and another 17% lack it in any practical sense. It's as if the US denied the vote to all inner-city residents except white 'settlers,' refused to work with Congressmen who weren't Protestants. It would be absurd to regard it as a democracy.

There are some democracies in the Middle East. Israel isn't one of them.

Colin Wright , says: Website Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 5:18 am GMT

CNN (!) offers up this truly disgusting hit piece.

"When Jeremy Corbyn talks about 'British Zionists,' we know exactly what he means'

Basically, Jeremy Corbyn, rabid anti-semite, is equated with David Duke.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/24/opinions/jeremy-corbyn-british-zionists-opinion-intl/index.html

Colin Wright , says: Website Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 5:21 am GMT

and Norm Finkelstein brilliantly demolishes the notion that there's any anti-semitism to speak of in Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour Party, or Britain in general.

https://mondoweiss.net/2018/08/chimera-british-semitism/

Jon Baptist , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 5:37 am GMT

Corbyn is shell shocked and cannot comprehend what is required for him to counter this blatant attempt at his ouster. An individual that could help him tremendously as an advisor is Miko Peled, an Israeli citizen, living in the U.S. I mention Peled, because he is a "lefty" just like Corbyn.

Giraldi writes that, "there exists an 'Israel Lobby' in many countries, all dedicated to advancing the agendas promoted by successive Israeli governments no matter what the actual interests of the host country might be."

ADL, a branch of the B'nai B'rith global enterprise, confirms they are subversive agents that work against their host nation. Straight from their mouth

Justsaying , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 5:38 am GMT

The center of the Axis of Evil is Zionist Israel. No other country, not even the planet's "sole superpower" wields so much power and control over other "sovereign" nations as does Zionist Israel. Regime change? Zionist, apartheid Israel has perfected that art and science -- and without firing a shot. Why do it when others will cheerfully fight your battles for you? Evil is as evil does. Still obsessed with Russophobia? Distractions aplenty for the stupefied.

chris , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 6:31 am GMT

These efforts to criminalize criticism of Israel seem to be the necessary precursors to major military moves in the Middle East to create 'the greater Israel.'

Probably in coordination with the ongoing efforts to neutralize and destroy all independent players such as Iran and Russia.

Donald , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 6:42 am GMT

There used to be a "supermarket" chain in Montreal called Steinberg, owned by Steinberg, "Canadian" Jews. They sold the business to another supermarket label, Métro-Richelieu or something, owned by a would-be-venture capitalist/economics professor, Michel Gauthier or something. It was a laughing transaction even in the news. But during the due diligence for the sale it surfaced that Steinberg had unusual deals with his suppliers, meat, dairy or whatever. If you wanted to sell your products to Steinberg, Steinberg made you sign an agreement to buy Israeli bonds. Talk about tied-selling under the Canada Competition Act! Talk about Stephen Harper financing!

Wally , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 6:46 am GMT

It's all coming down.

... ... ...

This site is a great example, what with the posting Giraldi's work and this:
American Pravda: Holocaust Denial : http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-holocaust-denial/

The Knesset officially declares that Israeli democracy is for Jews only

http://mondoweiss.net/2018/06/officially-declares-democracy/

The True Cost of Parasite Israel
Forced US taxpayers money to Israel goes far beyond the official numbers.: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-true-cost-of-israel/

Fighting Israel's Wars
How the United States military has become Zionized: http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/fighting-israels-wars/

Pandering to Israel Has Got to Stop
Pledges of loyalty to Israel are un-American: http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/pandering-to-israel-has-got-to-stop/#comments

America's Jews Are Driving America's Wars: http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/americas-jews-are-driving-americas-wars/#comment-2012898

Verymuchalive , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 6:47 am GMT

During the C21st the Conservative Party has become reliant on Jewish money. Even more than her predecessor Cameron, May is a "value free zone", as the commentator Richard North categorised her. She does whatever the donors want. Not that the Labour Party in power would be any better. It is just as riddled with Israel-supporting "moderates".

In the near future, the Labour Party will break down into 2 or more groups. The "moderates" and more radical groups who will be chasing the Muslim vote.

On top of that, a second Scottish Independence Referendum may not be too many years away. I suspect it will be successful this time.

The dissolution of the British state seems likely over the coming years. The question is how much damage May and her Conservatives In Name Only will do in the interim.

mark green , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 6:57 am GMT

Thank you, Philip Giraldi.

How ironic that a brave and principled man (Jeremy Corbyn) is being hounded out of office and defamed from all sides while a dishonest neocon toady like such as John McCain is lionized by both wings of Washington's duopoly (as well as our MSM) as a 'hero' and a 'maverick'.

Could this really be happening?

Oh it's happening alright.

McCain dutifully pimped for every US war against any Israeli foes since GHW Bush. McCain expressed no regrets for the destruction of Iraq, the destruction of Libya, the dismemberment of Palestine, or the destabilization of Syria. McCain never apologized for all the needless death and suffering caused by spineless servants such as himself. He also openly advocated for a US war on Iran, just as Israel wanted.

If the Zions didn't control our entire mass media this level of venality would not occur. But they do and it does.

Indoctrination. Brainwashing. Repetition. Conformity. Taboo. Shame. Blacklisting. Political corruption.

Do you deny making anti-Semitic remarks? What will your friends and family say?

The falsification of history is an ongoing and daily occurrence.

The manipulation of the masses: it works!

Who are you going to believe?–your own fallible judgement?–or the expert analysis of our entire political class–including Harvard-educated scholars and journalists?

C'mon. Get a clue. Think right. Stop talking that way.

You don't want to lose your job, do you?

no.

Then STFU!

ok.

tac , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 7:05 am GMT

It is Israel again up to its old tricks being the real entity that interferes in foreign elections:

Corbyn is viewed by Israel as effectively the "figurehead of the delegitimisation network".

"They hope that by taking action against him, they can decapitate what they see as the most powerful figure in this network," he told Middle East Eye. "By making an example of him, they can sow division, spread fear and suppress speech on Israel."

Certainly, Israel's fingerprints look to be present in the current claims of an anti-Semitism crisis supposedly revolving around Corbyn.

Active interference by the Israeli government in British politics was highlighted last year in a four-part undercover documentary produced by the Qatari channel Al Jazeera. It secretly filmed the activities of an operative in Israel's embassy in London named Shai Masot.

The Al Jazeera investigation provoked numerous complaints that it breached broadcasting rules relating to anti-Semitism, bias, unfair editing and invasions of privacy. However, Ofcom, the British broadcasting regulator, cleared the programme of all charges.

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israel-s-hidden-hand-behind-attacks-jeremy-corbyn-139423040

Michael Kenny , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 9:01 am GMT

In fact, I think all of this has more to do with Brexit than with Israel. The Brexiteers are in total panic. If they put the exit package to a referendum, they'll lose. If they call an election on it, Corbyn will probably win and he opposes Brexit. Even a parliamentary vote could be lost inasmuch as the Tories don't have a majority and the Brexiteers are a minority within the party.

Thus, Corbyn has to be discredited at all costs. Whether accusations of anti-Semitism will discredit him is quite another matter. In Europe generally, people are indifferent to Israel. They don't care what happens to it one way or the other.

Nobody who is likely to vote Labour cares a hoot about Israel and are not going to change their vote because of the accusations. If anything, people will perceive the campaign against Corbyn as Jewish bullying and rally to him.

Deschutes , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 10:28 am GMT

... ... ...

I was surprised to learn that the population of Israel is only 8.8 million. So small! Contrast that with Iran's 82 million .Egypt's 100 million Iraq's 40 million or Turkey's 82 million. How such a relatively tiny country makes so much noise and disruption for the rest of the world is something to ponder. If you ever google one of those 'most hated countries in the world' polls Israel or USA invariably top the list.

Anon , [129] Disclaimer says: Website Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 10:39 am GMT
@Michael Kenny

In fact, I think all of this has more to do with Brexit than with Israel. The Brexiteers are in total panic.

But Corbyn is attacked by Brit Jews and the Guardian, both opposed to Brexit.

Johnny Rottenborough , says: Website Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 11:14 am GMT

Gilad Atzmon, the self-described ex-Israeli and ex-Jew, writes reams about the Jewish assault on Corbyn. In this recent piece , he quotes from Douglas Reed's The Controversy of Zion :

... ... ..

LondonBob , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 11:20 am GMT
@Verymuchalive

The Conservative Party membership numbers are no longer published but they could be as low as fifty thousand going on revenue from membership fees.

All this smearing has so far had no impact at all, in fact it is leading some to question what is the agenda here. There is a nice article on the Israeli smear campaign in the Middle East Eye.

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israel-s-hidden-hand-behind-attacks-jeremy-corbyn-139423040

Digital Samizdat , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 11:24 am GMT

Bravo, Phil! Keep 'em comin'.

Many believe that the easily observable dominance of the friends of Israel over some aspects of government policy is a phenomenon unique to the United States, where committed Jews and Christian Zionists are able to control both politicians and the media message relating to what is going on in the Middle East.

Thank you for pointing this out.

Although I am no longer much of a Christian myself, I have always bristled every time I hear some left-wing (usually Jewish) anti-Zionist blame American Christians for Washington's mid-east policies, while describing the influence of the Jewish lobby as being 'exaggerated'. The obvious counterargument is: if American Christians have so much power over the federal government that they can virtually dictate mid-east policy, how come they can't ban abortion or gay marriage? How come they can't–forgive the metaphor–resurrect prayer in school?

Indeed, the mere fact that the US now has an entire branch of Christianity devoted to Rapture-Zionism gives you a clue as to who rules whom in this country. Think about it, people: we now have 'Christian' churches who are actually willing to put the interests and well-being of another religion ahead of their own! And their otherwise patriotic followers are being conned into putting the interests of another country ahead of their own. Absolutely astounding! In modern America at least, not only have the Christians lost control of their government; they've even lost control of Christianity!

Moreover, what about all those other western countries, such as Britain, France and Germany, which really lack anything like American-style Rapture-Christians, yet are still completely in thrall to Israel? L'affaire Corbyn is, if nothing else, proof that we are not the only ones being jacked around by the Zionists.

Don't get me wrong: I really wish American Christians would wake the f*ck up and see that they're being used, being made to look pathetic by the Zionists. But the allegation that those Christians are actually running the show in the West is completely fatuous. In fact, it's just a left-wing 'anti-Zionist' gate-keeper story. Don't believe it!

Failure to confront Israel's crimes against humanity combined with an inability to resist its demands regarding how issues like anti-Semitism and hate speech are defined has done terrible damage to free speech in Western Europe and, most notably, in the Anglophone world.

We are all Palestinians now!

I really hope this serves as a wake-up call to all of the pro-Zionist alt-righters out there. The Zionists can never truly be our friends. After all, once they are able to ban anti-Zionist talk for being anti-Semitic, how much longer will be it before they are able to just go ahead and ban all anti-Semitic speech? Then where will you be? You won't even be allowed to criticize George Soros anymore!

Corbyn is indeed a man of the left who has consistently opposed racism, extreme nationalism, colonialism and military interventionism.

Well, I'm not a hundred-percent sure about the "nationalism" part. While "extreme" may well be in the eye of the beholder, it's also true that the IRA and most of the Palestinian groups do self-describe as 'nationalist', and Corbyn has always been OK with them (as am I). The only nationalism his seems to have a real problem with is English nationalism.

The traditionally liberal Guardian has in fact been in the forefront of Jewish criticism of Corbyn, led by its senior editor Jonathan Freedland

They should just go ahead and relaunch The Guardian as The Shomer .

jilles dykstra , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 12:06 pm GMT
@Digital Samizdat

Soros bought the Guardian

JoaoAlfaiate , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 12:11 pm GMT

As Norman Finkelstein once observed, Jews "never forgive and never forget." Corbyn ought to keep that in mind. All his bobbing and weaving will availeth nothing.

jilles dykstra , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 12:11 pm GMT
@Anon

Why should there be panic by the Brexiteers ? Britain's export to the remaining EU is far less than from the remaining EU to GB. Especially France and Germany have huge exports to GB. As a Brexiteer already long ago mentioned 'they need us more than we them'.

If Merkel and Macron would survive a hard Brexit, I wonder. Under estimated is the why of Brexit, they want their country back, as one voter said 'they even interfere with vacuum cleaners'.

Deschutes , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 12:22 pm GMT
@Digital Samizdat

I stopped reading the Guardian full stop 4-5 years ago, back when they launched their "Russia is evildoer!!" shrill campaign of propaganda–also about the time the Ukraine civil war got into gear. Never looked back, the Guardian is a steaming pile of US/NATO/Atlantic Council bullshit. I'll never understand why so many fixate on it, such as the Off-guardian.org bloggers who've devoted an entire blog for years on end to criticising Guardian journos, 'comment is free', comment mods, etc. All fine and good, but why?

With so many other better news sources is there a need? No, there isn't. Just move on. The Guardian is not a relevant news outlet. I mean, why keep going there to read pro-Israeli/pro-US government articles which make you angry? Doesn't make any sense.

Ben Sampson , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 12:39 pm GMT
@Digital Samizdat

we keep accepting these arguments like Giraldis' here and functioning intellectually at this paused rate which is insufficient to the needs of the day and time.

it is immediate the reality in which we live, in all its demands on us and we must respond at the same speed. the enemy moves at the rate of speed of life and succeeds in slowing us down with these arguments in the media

Corbyn is bloody well wrong. he has gone out of his way to compromise with the Zionists and every time they want more. we we knew that, that they would not compromise did we not .we knew it. we know the game. they know they game. they have the power and they never compromise..never! they know to give ground is to lose.

and it is in fact to lose..and the same for the people. that is why it is zero sum. the economic/political game is no place to compromise.

in principle the people have all the power..and we do. where are the leaders who bring the people into awareness of their total power, set up and lead them into that power in the process of fixing society?

why must the leader of those who have all the power be at the feet of a minority who is bleeding the life out of the society?

Corbyn behaves as if he has no power..as if he is not fixing to assume in behalf of the people the greatest social power there is..the power of the people. so he is apologetic and compromising of the peoples power, on and in dealing with the peoples issues

the people's power and social interest have been usurped and compromised by a minority power and their pets in the peoples power structure..and in the media too. that is why we are dealing with a prevaricator in Giraldi and not a radicalized person who brings us up to speed..the speed required to fix society

the peoples power has been betrayed by treasonous citizens who have lied to the people and usurped the peoples power. that is the truth, the immediate truth and requires an immediate and direct response..no compromise will work. this article here by Giraldi is not an immediate response but a kind of time-wasting prevarication. Corbyn and his politics are also prevarication

Verymuchalive , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 12:59 pm GMT
@LondonBob

http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN05125/SN05125.pdf

MoscowBob ( you're never going back to London to live ), the above official Parliamentary Research Briefing makes alarming reading if you are a Conservative supporter. As of April 2018, Conservative membership is put at 124,000, narrowly ahead of the SNP at 118,000.
Conservative membership collapsed from 1 million in 1990 ( see page 7 ) to less than 500,000 5 years later ( John Major ). Apart from a brief period, it has been declining steadily since the year 2000, especially from 2009 ( David Cameron).
It is no longer a mass membership political party, it is Conservative In Name Only and at the beck and call of any (((big donors ))).
This situation cannot continue much longer. Its hold on political power will be ended shortly unless there is a turnaround, which seems unlikely.

a bystander , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 1:57 pm GMT

Another great article by Dr. Philip Giraldi.

Jonathan Cook has also recently written a very good article on the current Israeli engineered onslaught against Jeremy Corbyn, making much the same argument as Dr. Giraldi.

https://www.jonathan-cook.net/2018-08-25/israel-hidden-hand-jeremy-corbyn/

[Aug 28, 2018] South Africa is cursed with neo-liberal trickle-down baloney stifling radical economic change by Kevin Humphrey

Notable quotes:
"... There is consensus between commentators who have studied the effects of neo-liberalism that it has become all pervasive and is the key to ensuring that the rich remain rich, while the poor and the merely well to do continue on a perpetual hamster's wheel, going nowhere and never improving their lot in life while they serve their masters. ..."
"... Monbiot says of this largely anonymous scourge: "Attempts to limit competition are treated as inimical to liberty. Tax and regulations should be minimised, public services should be privatised. The organisation of labour and collective bargaining by trade unions are portrayed as market distortions that impede the formation of a natural hierarchy of winners and losers. Inequality is recast as virtuous, a reward for utility and a genera-tor of wealth, which trickles down to enrich everyone. Efforts to create a more equal society are both counterproductive and morally corrosive. The market ensures that everyone gets what they deserve." ..."
"... Senior cadres co-opted Unfortunately, history shows that some key senior cadres of the ANC were all too keen to be coopted into the neo-liberal fold and any attempts to put forward radical measures that would bring something fresh to the table to address the massive inequalities of the past were and continue to be kept off the table and we are still endlessly fed the neo-liberal trickle-down baloney. ..."
medium.com

SA is cursed with neo-liberal trickle-down baloney stifling radical economic change Kevin Humphrey, The New Age, Johannesburg, 1 December 2016

South Africa's massive inequalities are abundantly obvious to even the most casual observer. When the ANC won the elections in 1994, it came armed with a left-wing pedigree second to none, having fought a protracted liberation war in alliance with progressive forces which drew in organised labour and civic groupings.

At the dawn of democracy the tight knit tripartite alliance also carried in its wake a patchwork of disparate groupings who, while clearly supportive of efforts to rid the country of apartheid, could best be described as liberal. It was these groupings that first began the clamour of opposition to all left-wing, radical or revolutionary ideas that has by now become the constant backdrop to all conversations about the state of our country, the economy, the education system, the health services, everything. Thus was the new South Africa introduced to its own version of a curse that had befallen all countries that gained independence from oppressors, neo-colonialism.

By the time South Africa was liberated, neo-colonialism, which as always sought to buy off the libera-tors with the political kingdom while keep-ing control of the economic kingdom, had perfected itself into what has become an era where neo-liberalism reigns supreme. But what exactly is neo-liberalism? George Monbiot says: "Neo-liberalism sees competi-tion as the defining characteristic of human relations. It redefines citizens as consumers, whose democratic choices are best exercised by buying and selling, a process that rewards merit and punishes inefficiency. It maintains that 'the market' delivers benefits that could never be achieved by planning."

Never improving

There is consensus between commentators who have studied the effects of neo-liberalism that it has become all pervasive and is the key to ensuring that the rich remain rich, while the poor and the merely well to do continue on a perpetual hamster's wheel, going nowhere and never improving their lot in life while they serve their masters.

Monbiot says of this largely anonymous scourge: "Attempts to limit competition are treated as inimical to liberty. Tax and regulations should be minimised, public services should be privatised. The organisation of labour and collective bargaining by trade unions are portrayed as market distortions that impede the formation of a natural hierarchy of winners and losers. Inequality is recast as virtuous, a reward for utility and a genera-tor of wealth, which trickles down to enrich everyone. Efforts to create a more equal society are both counterproductive and morally corrosive. The market ensures that everyone gets what they deserve."

Nelson Mandela

South Africa's sad slide into neo-liberalism was given impetus at Davos in 1992 where Nelson Mandela had this to say to the assembled super rich: "We visualise a mixed economy, in which the private sector would play a central and critical role to ensure the creation of wealth and jobs. Future economic policy will also have to address such questions as security of investments and the right to repatriate earnings, realistic exchange rates, the rate of inflation and the fiscus."

Further insight into this pivotal moment was provided by Anthony Sampson, Mandela's official biographer who wrote: "It was not until February 1992, when Mandela went to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, that he finally turned against nationalisation. He was lionised by the world's bankers and industrialists at lunches and dinners."

This is not to cast any aspersions on Mandela, he had to make these decisions at the time to protect our democratic transition. But these utterances should have been accom-panied by a behind the scenes interrogation of all the ANC's thoughts on how to proceed in terms of the economy delivering socialist orientated solutions without falling into the minefield of neo-liberal traps that lay in wait for our emerging country.

Senior cadres co-opted Unfortunately, history shows that some key senior cadres of the ANC were all too keen to be coopted into the neo-liberal fold and any attempts to put forward radical measures that would bring something fresh to the table to address the massive inequalities of the past were and continue to be kept off the table and we are still endlessly fed the neo-liberal trickle-down baloney.

Now no one dares to express any type of radical approach to our economic woes unless it is some loony populist. Debate around these important issues is largely missing and the level of commentary on all important national questions is shockingly shallow.

Anti-labour, anti-socialist, anti-poor, anti-black The status quo as set by the largely white-owned media revolves around key neo-liberal slogans mas-querading as commentary that is anti-labour, anti-socialist and anti-poor, which sadly translates within our own context as anti-black and therefore repugnantly racist.

We live in a country where the black, over-whelmingly poor majority of our citizens have voted for a much revered liberation movement that is constantly under attack from within and without by people who do not have their best interests at heart and are brilliant at manipulating outcomes to suit themselves on a global scale.

Kevin Humphrey is associate executive editor of The New Age

[Aug 28, 2018] Just move on. The Guardian is not a relevant news outlet.

Aug 28, 2018 | www.unz.com

Deschutes , says: Next New Comment August 28, 2018 at 12:22 pm GMT

@Digital Samizdat

I stopped reading the Guardian full stop 4-5 years ago, back when they launched their "Russia is evildoer!!" shrill campaign of propaganda -- also about the time the Ukraine civil war got into gear. Never looked back, the Guardian is a steaming pile of US/NATO/Atlantic Council bullshit.

I'll never understand why so many fixate on it, such as the Off-guardian.org bloggers who've devoted an entire blog for years on end to criticising Guardian journos, 'comment is free', comment mods, etc. All fine and good, but why?

With so many other better news sources is there a need? No, there isn't. Just move on. The Guardian is not a relevant news outlet. I mean, why keep going there to read pro-Israeli/pro-US government articles which make you angry? Doesn't make any sense.

[Aug 28, 2018] The Crucifixion of Jeremy Corbyn by Philip Giraldi

Critique of Israeli government interference in internal affair of other states in a form of pro-Israel lobby, or critique Zionism as an ideology is not equivalent to anti-Semitism. Neoliberal states like Israel do not represent interests of its citizens, but mostly transnationals and top 1%. Attempt to link those mean weaponizing anti-Semitism. For example, while Israel is an ally of the USA some if its action are definitely are against the USA citizens interests. Although the role of Israel as a collective lobbyist for US MIC should be acknowledged.
Conversion of Israel into ethnostate is probably a logical development, but the problem here is that it further alienate Palestinians, which have higher birth rate then Israelites.
Notable quotes:
"... It was also learned that the Israeli Embassy was secretly subsidizing and advising private groups promoting Israeli interests, including associations of Members of Parliament (MPs). ..."
"... Corbyn's crime has been that he is critical of the Jewish state and has called for an "end to the repression of the Palestinian people." As a reward, he has been hounded mercilessly by British Jews, even those in his own party, for over two years. ..."
"... Last month, rightwing Labour Parliamentarian Margaret Hodge raised the stakes, calling Corbyn "a fucking anti-Semite and a racist". She then wrote in the Guardian ..."
"... All of the invective has been more-or-less orchestrated by the Israeli government, which directly supports the gaggle of groups that have coalesced to bring down Corbyn. This effort to destroy the Labour leader has included the use of an app disseminating messages via social media accusing Corbyn of anti-Semitism. The app was developed by Israel's strategic affairs ministry , which "directs Israel's covert efforts to sabotage the Palestine solidarity movement around the world". ..."
"... The principal argument being made against Corbyn is that the Labour Party is awash with anti-Semitism and Corbyn has done little or nothing to oppose it. Some of the most brutal shots against Corbyn have come from the usual crowd in the United States. ..."
"... New York Magazine ..."
Aug 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

Many believe that the easily observable dominance of the friends of Israel over some aspects of government policy is a phenomenon unique to the United States, where committed Jews and Christian Zionists are able to control both politicians and the media message relating to what is going on in the Middle East. Unfortunately, the reality is that there exists an "Israel Lobby" in many countries, all dedicated to advancing the agendas promoted by successive Israeli governments no matter what the actual interests of the host country might be. Failure to confront Israel's crimes against humanity combined with an inability to resist its demands regarding how issues like anti-Semitism and hate speech are defined has done terrible damage to free speech in Western Europe and, most notably, in the Anglophone world.

For the United States this corruption of the media and the political process by Israel has meant endless wars in the Middle East as well of loss of civil liberties at home, but some other countries have compromised their own declared values far beyond that. Former Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper praised Israel completely inaccurately as a light that " burns bright, upheld by the universal principles of all civilized nations -- freedom, democracy justice." He has also said "I will defend Israel whatever the cost" to Canada, an assertion that some might regard as very, very odd for a Canadian head of state.

In some other cases, Israel plays hardball directly, threatening retribution against governments that do not fall in line. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently warned New Zealand that backing a U.N. resolution condemning Israeli settlements would be a "declaration of war." He was able to do so because he had confidence in the power of the Israel Lobby in that country to mobilize and produce the desired result.

It might surprise some that the "Mother of Parliaments" in Great Britain is perhaps the legislative body most dominated by Israeli interests, more in many respects than the Congress in the United States. The ruling Conservative Party has a Friends of Israel caucus that includes more than 80% of its Parliamentary membership. BICOM , the Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre, is an American Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC) clone located in London. It is well funded and politically powerful, working through its various "Friends of Israel" proxies. Americans might be surprised to learn how that power is manifest, including that in Britain Jewish organizations uniquely are allowed to patrol heavily Jewish London neighborhoods in police-like uniforms while driving police-type vehicles. There have been reports of the patrols threatening Muslims who seek to enter the areas.

Prime Minister Theresa May is careful never to offend either Israel or the wealthy and powerful British Jewish community. After Secretary of State John Kerry described Israel's government as "extreme right wing" on December 28, 2016, May sprang to Tel Aviv's defense, saying "we do not believe that it is appropriate to attack the composition of the democratically elected government of an ally." May's rejoinder could have been written by Netanyahu, and maybe it was. Two weeks later, her government cited "reservations" over a French government sponsored mid-January Middle East peace conference and would not sign a joint statement calling for a negotiated two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict after Netanyahu vociferously condemned the proceedings.

This deference all takes place in spite of a recent astonishing expose by al-Jazeera, which revealed how the Israeli Embassy in London connived with government officials to "take down" parliamentarians and government ministers who were considered to be critical of the Jewish State. It was also learned that the Israeli Embassy was secretly subsidizing and advising private groups promoting Israeli interests, including associations of Members of Parliament (MPs).

British Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn has been under unrelenting fire due to the fact that he is the first major political party leader in many years to resist the demands that he place Israel on a pedestal. Corbyn is indeed a man of the left who has consistently opposed racism, extreme nationalism, colonialism and military interventionism. Corbyn's crime has been that he is critical of the Jewish state and has called for an "end to the repression of the Palestinian people." As a reward, he has been hounded mercilessly by British Jews, even those in his own party, for over two years.

The invective being spewed by some British Jews and Israel has increased of late, presumably because Theresa May's Conservative government is perceived as being weak and there is a distinct possibility that the leader of the Labour Party will be the next Prime Minister. That a Prime Minister might be sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinians is viewed as completely unacceptable.

Last month, rightwing Labour Parliamentarian Margaret Hodge raised the stakes, calling Corbyn "a fucking anti-Semite and a racist". She then wrote in the Guardian that Labour is "a hostile environment for Jews." The traditionally liberal Guardian has in fact been in the forefront of Jewish criticism of Corbyn, led by its senior editor Jonathan Freedland, who reportedly believes that "his Jewish identity is intimately tied to Israel, and that to attack Israel is to attack him personally he is demanding the exclusive right to police the parameters of discussions about Israel." Last month he featured in his paper a letter attacking Corbyn signed by 68 rabbis.

All of the invective has been more-or-less orchestrated by the Israeli government, which directly supports the gaggle of groups that have coalesced to bring down Corbyn. This effort to destroy the Labour leader has included the use of an app disseminating messages via social media accusing Corbyn of anti-Semitism. The app was developed by Israel's strategic affairs ministry , which "directs Israel's covert efforts to sabotage the Palestine solidarity movement around the world".

There are two principal objectives to the "get Corbyn" campaign. The first is to remove him from the Labour Party leadership position, thereby ensuring that he will never be elected Prime Minister, while also eliminating from the party any and all members who are perceived as being "too critical" of Israel. In practice that has meant anyone who criticizes Israel at all. And second it is to establish as a legal principle that the "hate crime" offense of anti-Semitism specifically be defined to include criticism of Israel, thereby making it a criminal offense to write or speak about Israel's racist behavior towards its Muslim and Christian minority while also making it impossible to freely discuss its war crimes.

The principal argument being made against Corbyn is that the Labour Party is awash with anti-Semitism and Corbyn has done little or nothing to oppose it. Some of the most brutal shots against Corbyn have come from the usual crowd in the United States. Andrew Sullivan recently observed in New York Magazine that "When it emerged, that Naz Shah, a new Labour MP, had opined on Facebook before she was elected that Israel should be relocated to the U.S., and former London mayor Ken Livingstone backed her up by arguing that the Nazis initially favored Zionism, Corbyn didn't make a big fuss." Sullivan then went on to write that "It then emerged that Corbyn himself had subscribed to various pro-Palestinian Facebook groups where rank anti-Semitism flourished" and had even " attended a meeting on Holocaust Memorial Day in 2010, called 'Never Again for Anyone: Auschwitz to Gaza,' equating Israelis with Nazis."

In other words, Corbyn should have been responsible for policing the personal views of Shah and Livingstone , both of whom were subsequently suspended from the Labour Party with Livingstone eventually resigning. He should have also avoided Palestinian Facebook commentary because alleged anti-Semites occasionally contribute their views and ought not to acknowledge in any fashion the Israel war crimes being committed on a daily basis in Gaza.

So Corbyn must go based on the "fact" that he has to be a closet anti-Semite as discerned by the likes of Andrew Sullivan on this side of the Atlantic and a host of Israel-firsters in Britain. But the Labour leader's worst crime that is being regarded as an " existential threat " to Jewish people everywhere is his resistance to the pressure being exerted on him to endorse and adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's (IHRA) precise multi-faceted definition of what constitutes anti-Semitism. The IHRA basic definition of anti-Semitism is reasonable enough, including "a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities."

The Labour Party and Corbyn have accepted that definition but have balked at eleven "contemporary examples of anti-Semitism" also provided by IHRA, four of which have nothing to do with Jews and everything to do with Israel. They are:

Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations. Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g.

One might observe that many Jews

And yes, Israel is a "racist endeavor." Just check out the recent nationality law passed by the Knesset declaring Israel to be a Jewish State. It grants self-determination only to those living within its borders who are Jews. And if using racial distinctions for full citizenship while also bombing hospitals and schools while lining up snipers to shoot thousands of unarmed Palestinian demonstrators is not Nazi-like behavior, then what is? Israel and its leader are sometimes compared to Nazis and to Adolf Hitler because they behave like Nazis and Adolf Hitler.

And finally there is the definition that challenges any "double standard" in demanding behavior from Israel that is not expected from any other democratic nation. Well, first of all Israel is not a democracy. It is a theocracy or ethnocracy if you prefer wrapped around a police state. Other countries that call themselves democracies have equal rights under law for all citizens. Other democracies do not have hundreds of thousands of settlers stealing land and even water resources from the indigenous population and colonizing it to the benefit of only one segment of its population. Other democracies do not regularly shoot dead unarmed protesters. How many democracies are currently practicing ethnic cleansing, as the Israeli Jews are doing to the Palestinians?

Will Corbyn give in to the IHRA demands to save his skin as party leader? One has to suspect that he will as he is already regularly conceding points and apologizing, publicly delivering the required obeisance to the holocaust as "the worst crime of the twentieth century." And every time he tries to appease those out to get him he emerges weaker. Even if he submits completely, the Israel firsters who are hot to get him, having just like in American significant control over the media, will continue to attack until they find the precise issue that will bring him down. The Labour National Executive Council will meet in September to vote on full acceptance of the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism. When they, as is likely, kneel before force majeure that will be the end of free speech in Britain. Criticize Israel and you go to jail.

And the same thing is happening in the United States in precisely the same fashion. Criticism of Israel or protesting against it will sooner rather than later be criminalized. I sometimes wonder if Senator Ben Cardin and the others who are promoting the hate legislation really understand what will be lost when they sacrifice the U.S. Constitution to defend Israel. Once free speech is gone, it will never return.

[Aug 27, 2018] Corbyn is being destroyed -- like blowing up a bridge to stop an advancing army by Jonathan Cook

Notable quotes:
"... I am not here speaking about the elites who dominate our societies. They have their own agenda. They trade only in the language of money and power. I am speaking of us: the 99 per cent who live in their shadow. ..."
"... While this camp concedes that the media is owned by a handful of corporations driven by a concern for profit, it is nonetheless confident that the free market -- the need to sell papers and audiences -- guarantees that important news and a full spectrum of legitimate opinion are available to readers. ..."
"... This camp believes too that western democracies are better, more civilised political systems than those in other parts of the world. Western societies do not want wars, they want peace and security for everyone. For that reason, they have been thrust -- rather uncomfortably -- into the role of global policeman. Western states have found themselves with little choice of late but to wage "good wars" to curb the genocidal instincts and hunger for power of dictators and madmen. ..."
"... The current obsession with Russian conspiracies is in large part the result of the extraordinarily rapid rise of a second camp, no doubt fuelled by the unprecedented access western publics have gained through social media to information, good and bad alike. At no time in human history have so many people been able to step outside of a state-, clerical- or corporate-sanctioned framework of information dissemination and speak too each other directly and on a global stage. ..."
"... This new camp too is not easy to characterise in the old language of left-right politics. Its chief characteristic is that it distrusts not only those who dominate our societies, but the social structures they operate within. ..."
"... This camp regards such structures as neither immutable, divinely ordained ways for ordering and organising society, nor as the rational outcome of the political and moral evolution of western societies. Rather, it views these structures as the product of engineering by a tiny elite to hold on to its power. ..."
"... For this camp, politicians are not the cream of society. They have risen to the surface of a corrupted and corrupting system, and the overwhelming majority did so by enthusiastically adopting its rotten values. These politicians do not chiefly serve voters but the corporations who really dominate our societies. ..."
"... Likewise, the media -- supposed watchdogs on power -- are seen by this camp as the chief propagandists for the ruling elite. The media do not monitor the abuse of power, they actively create a social consensus for the continuation of the abuse -- and if that fails, they seek to deflect attention from, or veil, the abuse. ..."
"... This is inevitable, the second camp argues, given that the media are embedded within the very same corporate structures that dominate our societies. They are, in fact, the corporations' public relations arm. They allow only limited dissent at the margins of the media, and only as a way to create the impression of an illusory pluralism. ..."
"... These "enemies" are a real foe in the sense that, in their different ways, they refuse to submit to the neoliberalising reach of the western-based corporations. But more significantly, they are needed as an enemy, even should they want to make peace. These manufactured enemies, says the second camp, justify the redirection of public money into the private coffers of the military and homeland security industries. And equally importantly, a ready set of bogeymen can be exploited to distract western publics from troubles at home. ..."
"... The second camp is accused by the first of being anti-western, anti-American and anti-Israel (or more mischievously anti-semitic) for its opposition to western "humanitarian interventions" abroad. The second camp, it says, act as apologists for war criminals like Russia's Vladimir Putin or Syria's Bashar Assad, portraying these leaders as misunderstood good guys and blaming the west for the world's ills. ..."
"... Putin has power, but it is immeasurably less than the combined might of the profit-seeking, war-waging western military industries. Faced with this power equation, according to the second camp, Putin acts defensively or reactively on the global stage, using what limited strength Russia has to uphold its essential strategic interests. One cannot reasonably judge Russia's crimes without first admitting the west's greater crimes, our crimes. ..."
"... While the whole US political class obsess over "Russian interference" in US elections, this camp notes, the American public is encouraged to ignore the much greater US interference not only in Russian elections, but in many other spheres Russia considers to be vital strategic interests. That includes the locating of US military bases and missile sites on Russia's borders. ..."
"... The other camp has one small space to make its presence felt -- social media. That is a space rapidly shrinking, as the politicians, media and the corporations that own social media (as they do everything else) start to realise they have let the genie out of the bottle. This camp is derided as conspiratorial, dangerous, fake news. ..."
"... The two most significant disrupters of the first camp's narrative are climate breakdown and economic meltdown. The planet has finite resources, which means endless growth and wealth accumulation cannot be sustained indefinitely. Much as in a Ponzi scheme, there comes a point when the hollow centre is exposed and the system comes crashing down. We have had intimations enough that we are nearing that point. ..."
"... Our political language is rupturing because we are now completely divided. There is no middle ground, no social compact, no consensus. The second camp understands that the current system is broken and that we need radical change, while the first camp holds desperately to the hope that the system will continue to be workable with modifications and minor reforms. ..."
"... We are arriving at a moment called a paradigm shift. That is when the cracks in a system become so obvious they can no longer be credibly denied. Those vested in the old system scream and shout, they buy themselves a little time with increasingly repressive measures, but the house is moments away from falling. The critical questions are who gets hurt when the structure tumbles, and who decides how it will be rebuilt ..."
"... They have rightly identified social media as the key concern. This is where we -- the 99 per cent -- have begun waking each other up. This is where we are sharing and learning, emerging out of the darkness clumsily and shaken. We are making mistakes, but learning. We are heading up blind alleys, but learning. We are making poor choices, but learning. We are making unhelpful alliances, but learning ..."
"... Corbyn's significance -- and danger -- is that he brings much of the language and concerns of the second camp into the mainstream. He offers a fast-track for the second camp to reach the first camp, and accelerate the awakening process. That, in turn, would improve the chances of the paradigm shift being organic and transitional rather than disruptive and violent. ..."
"... That is why he has become a lightning rod for the wider machinations of the ruling elite. They want him destroyed, like blowing up a bridge to stop an advancing army. ..."
"... The corporate elite weaponised anti-semitism not because they care about the safety of Jews, or because they really believe that Corbyn is an anti-semite. They chose it because it is the most destructive weapon -- short of sex-crime smears and assassination -- they have in their armoury. ..."
"... The truth is the ruling elite are exploiting British Jews and fuelling their fears as part of a much larger power game in which all of us -- the 99 per cent -- are expendable. They will keep stoking this campaign to stigmatise Corbyn, even if a political backlash actually does lead to an increase in real, rather than phoney, anti-semitism. ..."
Aug 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

The latest "scandal" gripping Britain -- or to be more accurate, British elites -- is over the use of the term "Zionist" by the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, the head of the opposition and possibly the country's next prime minister.

Yet again, Corbyn has found himself ensnared in what a small group of Jewish leadership organisations, which claim improbably to represent Britain's "Jewish community", and a small group of corporate journalists, who improbably claim to represent British public opinion, like to call Labour's "anti-semitism problem".

I won't get into the patently ridiculous notion that "Zionist" is a code word for "Jew", at least not now. There are lots of existing articles explaining why that is nonsense.

I wish to deal with a different aspect of the long-running row over Labour's so-called "anti-semitism crisis". It exemplifies, I believe, a much more profound and wider crisis in our societies: over the issue of trust.

We now have two large camps, pitted against each other, who have starkly different conceptions of what their societies are and where they need to head. In a very real sense, these two camps no longer speak the same language. There has been a rupture, and they can find no common ground.

I am not here speaking about the elites who dominate our societies. They have their own agenda. They trade only in the language of money and power. I am speaking of us: the 99 per cent who live in their shadow.

First, let us outline the growing ideological and linguistic chasm opening up between these two camps: a mapping of the divisions that, given space constraints, will necessarily deal in generalisations.

The trusting camp

The first camp invests its trust, with minor reservations, in those who run our societies. The left and the right segments of this camp are divided primarily over the degree to which they believe that those at the bottom of society's pile need a helping hand to get them further up the social ladder.

Otherwise, the first camp is united in its assumptions.

They admit that among our elected politicians there is the odd bad apple. And, of course, they understand that there are necessary debates about political and social values. But they agree that politicians rise chiefly through ability and talent, that they are accountable to their political constituencies, and that they are people who want what is best for society as a whole.

While this camp concedes that the media is owned by a handful of corporations driven by a concern for profit, it is nonetheless confident that the free market -- the need to sell papers and audiences -- guarantees that important news and a full spectrum of legitimate opinion are available to readers.

Both politicians and the media serve -- if not always entirely successfully -- as a constraint on corruption and the abuse of power by other powerful actors, such as the business community.

This camp believes too that western democracies are better, more civilised political systems than those in other parts of the world. Western societies do not want wars, they want peace and security for everyone. For that reason, they have been thrust -- rather uncomfortably -- into the role of global policeman. Western states have found themselves with little choice of late but to wage "good wars" to curb the genocidal instincts and hunger for power of dictators and madmen.

Russian conspiracies

Once upon a time -- when this camp's worldview was rarely, if ever, challenged -- its favoured response to anything difficult to reconcile with its core beliefs, from the 2003 invasion of Iraq to the 2008 financial crash, was: "Cock-up, not conspiracy!". Now that there are ever more issues threatening to undermine its most cherished verities, the camp's response is -- paradoxically -- "Putin did it!" or "Fake news!".

The current obsession with Russian conspiracies is in large part the result of the extraordinarily rapid rise of a second camp, no doubt fuelled by the unprecedented access western publics have gained through social media to information, good and bad alike. At no time in human history have so many people been able to step outside of a state-, clerical- or corporate-sanctioned framework of information dissemination and speak too each other directly and on a global stage.

This new camp too is not easy to characterise in the old language of left-right politics. Its chief characteristic is that it distrusts not only those who dominate our societies, but the social structures they operate within.

This camp regards such structures as neither immutable, divinely ordained ways for ordering and organising society, nor as the rational outcome of the political and moral evolution of western societies. Rather, it views these structures as the product of engineering by a tiny elite to hold on to its power.

These structures are no longer primarily national, but global. They are not immutable but as fabricated, as man-made and replaceable, as the structures that once made incontestable the rule of a landed aristocracy over feudal serfs. The current aristocracy, this camp argues, are globalised corporations that are so unaccountable that even the biggest nation-states can no longer contain or constrain them.

Illusions of pluralism

For this camp, politicians are not the cream of society. They have risen to the surface of a corrupted and corrupting system, and the overwhelming majority did so by enthusiastically adopting its rotten values. These politicians do not chiefly serve voters but the corporations who really dominate our societies.

For the second camp, this fact was well illustrated in 2008 when the political class did not -- and could not -- punish the banks responsible for the near-collapse of western economies after decades of reckless speculation on which a financial elite had grown fat. Those banks, in the words of the politicians themselves, were "too big to fail" and so were bailed out with money from the very same publics who had been scammed by the banks in the first place. Rather than use the bank failures as an opportunity to drive through reform of the broken banking system, or nationalise parts of it, the politicians let the banking casino system continue, even intensify.

Likewise, the media -- supposed watchdogs on power -- are seen by this camp as the chief propagandists for the ruling elite. The media do not monitor the abuse of power, they actively create a social consensus for the continuation of the abuse -- and if that fails, they seek to deflect attention from, or veil, the abuse.

This is inevitable, the second camp argues, given that the media are embedded within the very same corporate structures that dominate our societies. They are, in fact, the corporations' public relations arm. They allow only limited dissent at the margins of the media, and only as a way to create the impression of an illusory pluralism.

Manufactured enemies

These domestic structures are subservient to a still-bigger agenda: the accumulation of wealth by a global elite through the asset-stripping of the planet's resources and the rationalisation of permanent war. That, this camp concludes, requires the manufacturing of "enemies" -- such as Russia, Iran, Syria, Venezuela and North Korea -- to justify the expansion of a military-industrial machine.

These "enemies" are a real foe in the sense that, in their different ways, they refuse to submit to the neoliberalising reach of the western-based corporations. But more significantly, they are needed as an enemy, even should they want to make peace. These manufactured enemies, says the second camp, justify the redirection of public money into the private coffers of the military and homeland security industries. And equally importantly, a ready set of bogeymen can be exploited to distract western publics from troubles at home.

The second camp is accused by the first of being anti-western, anti-American and anti-Israel (or more mischievously anti-semitic) for its opposition to western "humanitarian interventions" abroad. The second camp, it says, act as apologists for war criminals like Russia's Vladimir Putin or Syria's Bashar Assad, portraying these leaders as misunderstood good guys and blaming the west for the world's ills.

The second camp argues that it is none of these things: it is anti-imperialist. It does not excuse the crimes of Putin or Assad, it treats them as secondary and largely reactive to the vastly greater power a western elite with global reach can project. It believes the western media's obsession with crafting narratives about evil enemies -- bad men and madmen -- is designed to deflect attention from the structures of far greater violence the west deploys around the world, through a web of US military bases and Nato.

Putin has power, but it is immeasurably less than the combined might of the profit-seeking, war-waging western military industries. Faced with this power equation, according to the second camp, Putin acts defensively or reactively on the global stage, using what limited strength Russia has to uphold its essential strategic interests. One cannot reasonably judge Russia's crimes without first admitting the west's greater crimes, our crimes.

While the whole US political class obsess over "Russian interference" in US elections, this camp notes, the American public is encouraged to ignore the much greater US interference not only in Russian elections, but in many other spheres Russia considers to be vital strategic interests. That includes the locating of US military bases and missile sites on Russia's borders.

Different languages

Two camps, two entirely different languages and narratives.

These camps may be divided, but it would seriously misguided to imagine they are equal.

One has the full power and weight of those corporate structures behind it. The politicians speak its language, as do the media. Its ideas and its voice dominate everywhere that is considered official, objective, balanced, neutral, respectable, legitimate.

The other camp has one small space to make its presence felt -- social media. That is a space rapidly shrinking, as the politicians, media and the corporations that own social media (as they do everything else) start to realise they have let the genie out of the bottle. This camp is derided as conspiratorial, dangerous, fake news.

This is the current battlefield. It is a battle the first camp looks like it is winning but actually has already lost. That is not necessarily because the second camp is winning the argument. It is because physical realities are catching up with the first camp, smashing its illusions, even as it clings to them like a life-raft.

The two most significant disrupters of the first camp's narrative are climate breakdown and economic meltdown. The planet has finite resources, which means endless growth and wealth accumulation cannot be sustained indefinitely. Much as in a Ponzi scheme, there comes a point when the hollow centre is exposed and the system comes crashing down. We have had intimations enough that we are nearing that point.

It hardly needs repeating, except to climate deniers, that we have had even more indications that the Earth's climate is already turning against humankind.

Out of the darkness

Our political language is rupturing because we are now completely divided. There is no middle ground, no social compact, no consensus. The second camp understands that the current system is broken and that we need radical change, while the first camp holds desperately to the hope that the system will continue to be workable with modifications and minor reforms.

It is on to this battlefield that Corbyn has stumbled, little prepared for the heavy historic burden he shoulders.

We are arriving at a moment called a paradigm shift. That is when the cracks in a system become so obvious they can no longer be credibly denied. Those vested in the old system scream and shout, they buy themselves a little time with increasingly repressive measures, but the house is moments away from falling. The critical questions are who gets hurt when the structure tumbles, and who decides how it will be rebuilt .

The new paradigm is coming anyway. If we don't choose it ourselves, the planet will for us. It could be an improvement, it could be a deterioration, it could be extinction, depending on how prepared we are for it and how violently those invested in the old system resist the loss of their power. If enough of us understand the need for discarding the broken system, the greater the hope that we can build something better from the ruins.

We are now at the point where the corporate elite can see the cracks are widening but they remain in denial. They are entering the tantrum phase, screaming and shouting at their enemies, and readying to implement ever-more repressive measures to maintain their power.

They have rightly identified social media as the key concern. This is where we -- the 99 per cent -- have begun waking each other up. This is where we are sharing and learning, emerging out of the darkness clumsily and shaken. We are making mistakes, but learning. We are heading up blind alleys, but learning. We are making poor choices, but learning. We are making unhelpful alliances, but learning .

No one, least of all the corporate elite, knows precisely where this process might lead, what capacities we have for political, social and spiritual growth.

And what the elite don't own or control, they fear.

Putting the genie back

The elite have two weapons they can use to try to force the second camp back into the bottle. They can vilify it, driving it back into the margins of public life, where it was until the advent of social media; or they can lock down the new channels of mass communication their insatiable drive to monetise everything briefly opened up.

Both strategies have risks, which is why they are being pursued tentatively for the time being. But the second option is by far the riskier of the two. Shutting down social media too obviously could generate blowback, awakening more of the first camp to the illusions the second camp have been trying to alert them to.

Corbyn's significance -- and danger -- is that he brings much of the language and concerns of the second camp into the mainstream. He offers a fast-track for the second camp to reach the first camp, and accelerate the awakening process. That, in turn, would improve the chances of the paradigm shift being organic and transitional rather than disruptive and violent.

That is why he has become a lightning rod for the wider machinations of the ruling elite. They want him destroyed, like blowing up a bridge to stop an advancing army.

It is a sign both of their desperation and their weakness that they have had to resort to the nuclear option, smearing him as an anti-semite. Other, lesser smears were tried first: that he was not presidential enough to lead Britain; that he was anti-establishment; that he was unpatriotic; that he might be a traitor. None worked. If anything, they made him more popular.

And so a much more incendiary charge was primed, however at odds it was with Corbyn's decades spent as an anti-racism activist.

The corporate elite weaponised anti-semitism not because they care about the safety of Jews, or because they really believe that Corbyn is an anti-semite. They chose it because it is the most destructive weapon -- short of sex-crime smears and assassination -- they have in their armoury.

The truth is the ruling elite are exploiting British Jews and fuelling their fears as part of a much larger power game in which all of us -- the 99 per cent -- are expendable. They will keep stoking this campaign to stigmatise Corbyn, even if a political backlash actually does lead to an increase in real, rather than phoney, anti-semitism.

The corporate elites have no plan to go quietly. Unless we can build our ranks quickly and make our case confidently, their antics will ensure the paradigm shift is violent rather than healing. An earthquake, not a storm.

Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His books include "Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East" (Pluto Press) and "Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair" (Zed Books). His website is www.jonathan-cook.net .

YetAnotherAnon , says: August 26, 2018 at 10:35 pm GMT

"The corporate elite weaponised anti-semitism not because they care about the safety of Jews, or because they really believe that Corbyn is an anti-semite. They chose it because it is the most destructive weapon – short of sex-crime smears and assassination – they have in their armoury."

I must admit I assumed it was because he's less than 100% behind Israel and thinks, not unreasonably, that the Palestinians have had a pretty rough deal over the last 60 years. He raises the frightening (to some) prospect of a UK government that is more neutral on the issues, and doesn't think we can bomb peace into the Middle East.

Occam's Razor would seem to suggest that's the answer.

"Corbyn's significance – and danger – is that he brings much of the language and concerns of the second camp into the mainstream. "

You're right about the electorate being divided – but I'd suggest young Corbyn voters are just as blinkered as any Daily Mail reader. My kids all voted for him because they thought he'd cancel their student debt.

Maybe Corbyn activists are better informed, but I very much doubt it.

exiled off mainstreet , says: August 27, 2018 at 1:13 am GMT

Corbyn has to resist the temptation to give way to them. He is right on the Palestinian issue, and, since the Palestinians are 100 % semites (though "anti-semitism" has been appropriated to mean anti-Jewish most Jewish emigrants from Europe have considerable non-semitic blood mixed in) the real anti-semites here appear to be the Israeli element bent on eliminating the Palestinians. The Gaza strip is a ghetto operated in a similar manner to how the Nazis operated the ghettoes in occupied Poland (though without the Auschwitz end game up to now). The thing is, if Corbyn stands up to this, in my view, his supporters will fully back him up. In my view, the Israelis are risking real anti-Israeli blowback which could resurrect evils buried with the collapse of the Nazi regime. Indeed, the way they are acting on this and other related issues, threatening those who criticise them in any fashion seems to be providing ex post facto justifications of the most absurd propaganda the Nazis put forward during that era.

DFH , says: August 27, 2018 at 12:25 pm GMT

The real question is why it is that even the slightest hint of a politician not being totally onboard with >1% of the population results in a years long campaign to destroy him by most of the media, but mentioning the open desire of all three parties to discriminate against and replace the native population of Britain makes you a pariah.

Herald , says: August 27, 2018 at 9:07 pm GMT
@DFH

You said it. It's because Corbyn is not totally on board with the less than 1% that he is seen as a threat. Total control of everyone and everything is their aim.

jimmyriddle , says: August 27, 2018 at 9:32 pm GMT

I don't think he is being destroyed.

There is certainly an MSM/Blairite full court press to push the anti-Semitism story, that is mostly being fronted by goyim who are kissing up – Jess Phillips, Maajid Nawaz, Dan Hodges (Glenda Jackson's son) etc. But it is getting no traction with the public at large. If they force another leadership contest Corbyn will win easily.

These people live in a North London Anglo-American bubble, and they are now realizing that there is no large Evangelocon constituency in Britain.

No Bubbas waiting to be raptured = Nobody much cares about Israel

[Aug 27, 2018] Disclaimer

Notable quotes:
"... Empire – the old far left and the new far right are against the USA having an Empire and against perpetual war. ..."
"... Economy – the old far left and the new far right think free trade and Wall Street are killing middle class jobs and the ladders of success. ..."
"... Race/Sex/Gender – the old far right KKK vlugar bigoted view is pretty much dead in America. The new far right is trying to work through real facts on group differences and what is reasonable to do about it. Everyone else is CCCrazy. ..."
Aug 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

says: June 8, 2018 at 3:57 pm GMT 200 Words @Alfa158

I think we are all struggling to come up with a new vocabulary to rationally describe the new forces at work in our society. I would welcome suggestions because I've got nuthin here.

I agree. I used to be liberal, then became far left, and I am now far right. And I never changed my views! The politics around me changed.

Here are some forces at work:

1. Empire – the old far left and the new far right are against the USA having an Empire and against perpetual war. Read Pat Buchanan and Mike Whitney on Middle East wars and Russia and they sound a lot alike. Everyone else in America supports the Empire, either actively or passively.

2. Economy – the old far left and the new far right think free trade and Wall Street are killing middle class jobs and the ladders of success. It's the old Democrat pro union view and the old Republican main street vs. wall street view. If you like socialism, you gotta hate Wall Street. If you like free markets, you gotta hate Wall Street. Everyone else in America supports Wall Stree rule over the Fed and economic policy, either actively or passively.

3. Race/Sex/Gender – the old far right KKK vlugar bigoted view is pretty much dead in America. The new far right is trying to work through real facts on group differences and what is reasonable to do about it. Everyone else is CCCrazy.

Corvinus , says: June 9, 2018 at 12:49 am GMT

@Mr. Anon

"What is the "Alt-Right"?"

A name embraced by white nationalists and/or white supremacists to refer to themselves and their ideology, which emphasizes preserving and protecting the white race through populist endeavors, which includes the return of patriarchy, the revocation of the 1965 Immigration Act, an emphasis on race realism and/or the reinstitution of Western Christian civilization.

"Who speaks for it?"

John Derbyshire. Steve Sailer. Vox Day. Richard Spencer. Mike Cernovich. For starters.

"What national platform does it have?"

https://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/08/what-alt-right-is.html

"And why is it you claim to "not be a liberal" when you only ever repeat talking points of the DNC and NPR?"

That would be Fake News on your part.

[Aug 27, 2018] Ukraine and NATO

Aug 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

Cagey Beast , says: July 23, 2018 at 11:00 am GMT

@Peter Akuleyev

In the alt-right/far left scenario, we are supposed to dismiss the actual wishes of Ukrainians, Estonians, Poles, Georgians and other peoples who hate Russia (and love the US) as being simply irrelevant. Or, worse backed by shadowy Western forces.

Or how about we wish these East European countries well but we choose not to take their side in whatever feud they have going with Russia? Maybe the people who "love the US" love the worst aspects of America? Maybe a lot of them come across as greasy little hustlers on the make? Ever think of that?

Anyone who has spent time in Ukraine knows how deep hatred of Russia goes, especially in Western Ukraine.

And that's precisely why countries like Ukraine, the Baltic states and Poland shouldn't be in NATO. We should never have included countries with deep resentments against, and hazy borders with Russia. The geniuses running the West should have encouraged the creation of a lots of neutral states -- like Finland and Austria -- rather than expand NATO eastward.

EugeneGur , says: July 23, 2018 at 9:30 pm GMT
@Peter Akuleyev

who has spent time in Ukraine knows how deep hatred of Russia goes

I don't know where is Ukraine you spent your time and in what company, but this is complete BS. The South-Eastern Ukraine hates the Western Ukrainian "banderovtsi" as much as the Russians do if not more -- after all, the followers of Bandera operated mostly on the Ukrainian soil. There are deranged individuals in every country, of course, and Ukraine has been subjected lately to intense hate propaganda as well as repressions, but there is no hatred of Russia. This is contradicted by both sociology and everyday behavior of Ukrainian, which move to Russia in droves, spend time in Russia, support Russian sport teams, etc.

we are supposed to dismiss the actual wishes of Ukrainians, Estonians, Poles, Georgians and other peoples who hate Russia (and love the US)

Nobody is asking about what the real Ukrainians, Estonians, Georgians or even Poles actually think, least of all the US. There are almost as many Georgians living in Russia as there are in Georgia, and they show no desire to move back. In 2008 during the conflict, their biggest fear was that they'd be deported.

The Ukraine's Maidan was a violent coup, where a few thousand militants armed and trained abroad overthrew a government elected by the entire country. Protests that immediately started all over the country were suppressed with force -- the one in Donbass still is.

How could anyone with an access to Internet remain unaware of these facts is beyond me.

peterAUS , says: July 23, 2018 at 10:25 pm GMT
@EugeneGur

That's an interesting point. Even if true, doesn't matter. One could wonder ..who are the people populating Ukrainian Armed Forces? Or who are the guys, in Ukrainian Armed Forces, presently engaged against Donbass? All of them. Including those is logistics/maintenance depots far away from the (current) line of separation?

The will to fight against "Russia" ranges from a deep hate to simply not wishing to go against the (current) Ukrainian government. The former are in those "shock" battalions. The later are manning the logistics train. And everything in between.

Now .if/when a real shooting starts, as soon as Russia, as expected (and desired) by the most of readers here, starts delivering ordnance into operational depth of Donbass enemy, the ratio hate/don't care shall shift, hard and fast. Not in Russian favor, I suspect.

Vojkan , says: July 24, 2018 at 8:25 am GMT
@Peter Akuleyev

Why should anyone freaking care and put his ass in the line of fire because you bunch of primitives hate Russia? Between having a nuclear cataclysm because you pathetic dwarfs of nations are frustrated to have a neighbour you can't bully and Russia obliterating you, I say let Russia obliterate you, thus we won't have to suffer the ear-hurting dissonnance of your incessant whining any more. Though I doubt Russia would stomp on you. When you see shit, you don't stomp on it, you don't want you don't want your shoes to stink, you just walk around it.

EugeneGur , says: July 25, 2018 at 3:18 pm GMT
@peterAUS

Or who are the guys, in Ukrainian Armed Forces, presently engaged against Donbass?

Besides those in "volunteer battalions", which tend to be nationalistic with distinct Nazi overtones, people in the regular Armed Forces are there for the money. There are very few paying jobs in today's Ukraine, so men enlist and hope for the best.

the ratio hate/don't care shall shift, hard and fast. Not in Russian favor, I suspect.

That could've been the case in 2014. Today I very much doubt it. Even the Right Sector people are fed up with the current power in Kiev, and even the dumbest nationalists are beginning to realize what a deep hole the country is in. Normal people all over the South-East are hoping and praying for the Russians to come. The problem is the Russians aren't coming.

[Aug 27, 2018] The brutal neoliberal experiment has ended for the boiled frog Greece - what we should be expecting next

This is Ukrainian future, unless the government neoliberal policies change...
Notable quotes:
"... The fact that Brussels euroclowns celebrated in triumph the exit of Greece from the memorandum agreement, should be taken only as a huge farce. ..."
"... Greece entered the bailout program with national debt at 120% of GDP. Now, the debt remains close to 180% of GDP! Unemployment remains at record levels. Public property has been sold-off for pennies to foreign 'investors'. Labor rights almost vanished, the situation resembles the Middle Ages. Social state and benefits severely damaged. This is the Troika 'success story'. ..."
"... This contradiction could be explained by the fact that the neoliberal regime apparatus wants to send a warning sign to Tsipras administration not to take any action without permission. It is more than certain that the tight scrutiny will be continued and Tsipras must prove to the Western neocolonialists that he will not even think to implement any anti-austerity policies. ..."
"... Without a bailout program, Greece will be left alone now to swim with the bloodthirsty sharks of the global financial mafia in the wild sea of the supposedly 'free markets'. ..."
"... Either way, the debt colony will deliver to the predators every single asset that has been left untouched. ..."
Aug 27, 2018 | failedevolution.blogspot.com

The fact that Brussels euroclowns celebrated in triumph the exit of Greece from the memorandum agreement, should be taken only as a huge farce.

The Troika (ECB, European Commission, IMF) bailout program has officially ended and the result is a scenery of disaster. If you still believe that this program has been implemented to save the Greek economy and not the Franco-German banks , take a look at the situation today.

Greece entered the bailout program with national debt at 120% of GDP. Now, the debt remains close to 180% of GDP! Unemployment remains at record levels. Public property has been sold-off for pennies to foreign 'investors'. Labor rights almost vanished, the situation resembles the Middle Ages. Social state and benefits severely damaged. This is the Troika 'success story'.

So, in reality, the experiment was indeed successful for the goals of the international capitalist predators who transformed the country into a debt colony. For more than eight years, they boiled the frog slowly with the help of Troika, and now it's impossible to escape from the hot water.

While the clowns in Brussels had to present a 'success story' to cover their huge failure and slow down the centrifugal forces against eurozone's existence and unity, the mainstream media didn't exactly celebrate. Most of the headlines were quite moderate and even alarming for the future of the Greek economy.

This contradiction could be explained by the fact that the neoliberal regime apparatus wants to send a warning sign to Tsipras administration not to take any action without permission. It is more than certain that the tight scrutiny will be continued and Tsipras must prove to the Western neocolonialists that he will not even think to implement any anti-austerity policies.

It is worth to mention that most of the neutral/pessimistic headlines came from the Anglo-American mainstream media. This could be also considered another indication about the level of deterioration in the relations between the Anglo-American axis and the Brussels-Berlin axis, inside the Western camp.

Without a bailout program, Greece will be left alone now to swim with the bloodthirsty sharks of the global financial mafia in the wild sea of the supposedly 'free markets'. The fear of the Greek government in front of such a perspective became quite evident when Greece 'decided' to expel two Russian diplomats in order to take a small gift by Standard and Poor's .

Greece will have to give much more to the Western neoliberal predators. Otherwise, the rating agencies will be ordered to attack again and force the ruined Greek economy into another round of disastrous bailouts.

Either way, the debt colony will deliver to the predators every single asset that has been left untouched.

[Aug 27, 2018] Trump Lied About His Intentions Toward Russia

Notable quotes:
"... Washington Post ..."
"... Trump's surprising new position ..."
"... that the U.S. should rethink whether it needs to remain in the seven-decades-old NATO alliance with Europe. ..."
"... Sounding more like a CFO than a commander-in-chief, Trump said of the alliance, "We certainly can't afford to do this anymore," adding, "NATO is costing us a fortune and yes, we're protecting Europe with NATO, but we're spending a lot of money." ..."
"... U.S. officials, including former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, have said that European allies have to shoulder a bigger burden of NATO's cost. But calling for the possible U.S. withdrawal from the treaty is a radical departure for a presidential candidate -- even a candidate who has been endorsed by Russian President Vladimir Putin. ..."
"... Withdrawing from NATO would leave European allies without a forceful deterrent to the Russian military, which invaded and annexed portions of Ukraine in 2014. That would arguably be a win for Putin but leave U.S. allies vulnerable. ..."
"... It also wasn't clear how Trump's arguably anti-interventionist position on the alliance squared with his choice of advisers. ..."
"... One other Trump adviser had previously been reported. Retired Army Gen. Michael Flynn had told The Daily Beast that he "met informally" with Trump. Flynn was pushed out of his post as the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency and has since spoken out publicly about the need for the U.S. to forge closer ties with Russia. ..."
"... I have two problems with NATO. No. 1, it's obsolete. When NATO was formed many decades ago we were a different country. There was a different threat. Soviet Union was, the Soviet Union, not Russia, which was much bigger than Russia, as you know. And, it was certainly much more powerful than even today's Russia, although again you go back into the weaponry. But, but – I said, I think NATO is obsolete, and I think that – because I don't think – right now we don't have somebody looking at terror, and we should be looking at terror. And you may want to add and subtract from NATO in terms of countries. But we have to be looking at terror, because terror today is the big threat. Terror from all different parts. You know in the old days you'd have uniforms and you'd go to war and you'd see who your enemy was, and today we have no idea who the enemy is. ..."
"... I'll tell you the problems I have with NATO. No. 1, we pay far too much. We are spending -- you know, in fact, they're even making it so the percentages are greater. NATO is unfair, economically, to us, to the United States. Because it really helps them more so than the United States, and we pay a disproportionate share. Now, I'm a person that -- you notice I talk about economics quite a bit, in these military situations, because it is about economics, because we don't have money anymore because we've been taking care of so many people in so many different forms that we don't have money -- and countries, and countries. So NATO is something that at the time was excellent. Today, it has to be changed. It has to be changed to include terror. It has to be changed from the standpoint of cost because the United States bears far too much of the cost of NATO. And one of the things that I hated seeing is Ukraine. Now I'm all for Ukraine, I have friends that live in Ukraine, but it didn't seem to me, when the Ukrainian problem arose, you know, not so long ago, and we were, and Russia was getting very confrontational, it didn't seem to me like anyone else cared other than us. And we are the least affected by what happens with Ukraine because we're the farthest away. But even their neighbors didn't seem to be talking about it. And, you know, you look at Germany, you look at other countries, and they didn't seem to be very much involved. It was all about us and Russia. And I wondered, why is it that countries that are bordering the Ukraine and near the Ukraine – why is it that they're not more involved? Why is it that they are not more involved? Why is it always the United States that gets right in the middle of things, with something that – you know, it affects us, but not nearly as much as it affects other countries. And then I say, and on top of everything else – and I think you understand that, David – because, if you look back, and if you study your reports and everybody else's reports, how often do you see other countries saying "We must stop, we must stop." They don't do it! And, in fact, with the gas, you know, they wanted the oil, they wanted other things from Russia, and they were just keeping their mouths shut. And here the United States was going out and, you know, being fairly tough on the Ukraine. And I said to myself, isn't that interesting? We're fighting for the Ukraine, but nobody else is fighting for the Ukraine other than the Ukraine itself, of course, and I said, it doesn't seem fair and it doesn't seem logical. ..."
"... Even Barack Obama, despite his pretenses for ' a reset in U.S.-Russia relations ', had had actually the opposite of that pretension in mind -- a doubling-down on the Cold War . And Obama's successor, Donald Trump, doubles down on his predecessor's double-down, there. ..."
"... the Koch brothers' Doug Bandow, who represents his sponsors' bet against neoconservativsm, headlined on 27 April 2017 "Donald Trump: The 'Manchurian (Neoconservative) Candidate'?" and he itemized what a terrific Trojan Horse that Trump had turned out to be, for the war-lobby, the 'neocons', or, as Dwight Eisenhower had called them (but carefully and only after his Presidency was already over), "the military-industrial complex." ..."
"... Other people (the masses) fight, kill, die, get maimed, and are impoverished, while these few individuals at the very top in the U.S. profit, from those constant invasions, and military occupations ..."
"... bête noire ..."
"... I will say this about Iran. They're looking to go into Saudi Arabia, they want the oil, they want the money, they want a lot of other things having to do they took over Yemen, you look over that border between Yemen and Saudi Arabia, that is one big border and they're looking to do a number in Yemen. Frankly, the Saudis don't survive without us, and at what point do we get involved? And how much will Saudi Arabia pay us to save them? ..."
"... the stockholders in those American war-making corporations ..."
"... America's Founders ..."
"... Donald Trump just wants for Europeans to increase military spending (to buy U.S.-made weapons) even more than the U.S. is doing against Russia, and for the Sauds and Israelis also to buy more of these weapons from America's weapons-firms, to use against Iran and any nation friendly toward it. Meanwhile, America's own military spending is already at world-record-high levels.That's Trump's economic plan; that's his jobs-plan; that's his 'national security' plan. That is Trump's Presidency. ..."
"... He lied his way into office, just like his predecessors had been doing. This is what 'democracy' in America now consists of: lies -- some colored "liberal"; some colored "conservative"; but all colored "profitable" (for the 'right' people); and another name for that, in foreign affairs, is "neoconservative." ..."
Aug 27, 2018 | countercurrents.org

in Imperialism -- by Eric Zuesse -- August 21, 2018

On August 20th, Gallup headlined "More in U.S. Favor Diplomacy Over Sanctions for Russia" and reported that, "Americans believe it is more important to try to continue efforts to improve relations between the countries (58%), rather than taking strong diplomatic and economic steps against Russia (36%)." And yet, all of the sanctions against Russia have passed in Congess by over 90% of Senators and Representatives voting for them -- an extraordinarily strong and bipartisan favoring of anti-Russia sanctions, by America's supposed "representatives" of the American people . What's happening here, which explains such an enormous contradiction between America's Government, on the one side, versus America's people, on the other? Is a nation like this really a democracy at all?

Donald Trump understood this disjunction, when he was running for President, and he took advantage of the public side of it, in order to win, but, as soon as he won, he flipped to the opposite side, the side of America's billionaires, who actually control the U.S. Government.

While he was campaigning for the U.S. Presidency, Donald Trump pretended to want to soften, not harden, America's policies against Russia. He even gave hints that he wanted a redirection of U.S. Government expenditures away from the military, and toward America's economic and domestic needs.

On 31 January 2016 , Donald Trump -- then one of many Republican candidates running for the Republican U.S. Presidential nomination -- told a rally in Clinton Iowa, "Wouldn't it be nice if we actually got along with Russia and China and all these countries?"

On 21 March 2016 , he was published in the Washington Post as having told its editors, that "he advocates a light footprint in the world. In spite of unrest abroad, especially in the Middle East, Trump said the United States must look inward and steer its resources toward rebuilding domestic infrastructure. 'I do think it's a different world today, and I don't think we should be nation-building anymore,' Trump said. 'I think it's proven not to work, and we have a different country than we did then. We have $19 trillion in debt. We're sitting, probably, on a bubble. And it's a bubble that if it breaks, it's going to be very nasty. I just think we have to rebuild our country.'" On that same day, The Daily Beast's Shane Harris wrote that:

Trump's surprising new position [is] that the U.S. should rethink whether it needs to remain in the seven-decades-old NATO alliance with Europe.

Sounding more like a CFO than a commander-in-chief, Trump said of the alliance, "We certainly can't afford to do this anymore," adding, "NATO is costing us a fortune and yes, we're protecting Europe with NATO, but we're spending a lot of money."

U.S. officials, including former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, have said that European allies have to shoulder a bigger burden of NATO's cost. But calling for the possible U.S. withdrawal from the treaty is a radical departure for a presidential candidate -- even a candidate who has been endorsed by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Withdrawing from NATO would leave European allies without a forceful deterrent to the Russian military, which invaded and annexed portions of Ukraine in 2014. That would arguably be a win for Putin but leave U.S. allies vulnerable.

It also wasn't clear how Trump's arguably anti-interventionist position on the alliance squared with his choice of advisers.

One other Trump adviser had previously been reported. Retired Army Gen. Michael Flynn had told The Daily Beast that he "met informally" with Trump. Flynn was pushed out of his post as the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency and has since spoken out publicly about the need for the U.S. to forge closer ties with Russia.

Five days later, on March 26th

, the New York Times bannered, "Transcript: Donald Trump Expounds on His Foreign Policy Views" and David Sanger and Maggie Haberman presented their discussion with Trump about this, where Trump said:

I have two problems with NATO. No. 1, it's obsolete. When NATO was formed many decades ago we were a different country. There was a different threat. Soviet Union was, the Soviet Union, not Russia, which was much bigger than Russia, as you know. And, it was certainly much more powerful than even today's Russia, although again you go back into the weaponry. But, but – I said, I think NATO is obsolete, and I think that – because I don't think – right now we don't have somebody looking at terror, and we should be looking at terror. And you may want to add and subtract from NATO in terms of countries. But we have to be looking at terror, because terror today is the big threat. Terror from all different parts. You know in the old days you'd have uniforms and you'd go to war and you'd see who your enemy was, and today we have no idea who the enemy is.

I'll tell you the problems I have with NATO. No. 1, we pay far too much. We are spending -- you know, in fact, they're even making it so the percentages are greater. NATO is unfair, economically, to us, to the United States. Because it really helps them more so than the United States, and we pay a disproportionate share. Now, I'm a person that -- you notice I talk about economics quite a bit, in these military situations, because it is about economics, because we don't have money anymore because we've been taking care of so many people in so many different forms that we don't have money -- and countries, and countries. So NATO is something that at the time was excellent. Today, it has to be changed. It has to be changed to include terror. It has to be changed from the standpoint of cost because the United States bears far too much of the cost of NATO. And one of the things that I hated seeing is Ukraine. Now I'm all for Ukraine, I have friends that live in Ukraine, but it didn't seem to me, when the Ukrainian problem arose, you know, not so long ago, and we were, and Russia was getting very confrontational, it didn't seem to me like anyone else cared other than us. And we are the least affected by what happens with Ukraine because we're the farthest away. But even their neighbors didn't seem to be talking about it. And, you know, you look at Germany, you look at other countries, and they didn't seem to be very much involved. It was all about us and Russia. And I wondered, why is it that countries that are bordering the Ukraine and near the Ukraine – why is it that they're not more involved? Why is it that they are not more involved? Why is it always the United States that gets right in the middle of things, with something that – you know, it affects us, but not nearly as much as it affects other countries. And then I say, and on top of everything else – and I think you understand that, David – because, if you look back, and if you study your reports and everybody else's reports, how often do you see other countries saying "We must stop, we must stop." They don't do it! And, in fact, with the gas, you know, they wanted the oil, they wanted other things from Russia, and they were just keeping their mouths shut. And here the United States was going out and, you know, being fairly tough on the Ukraine. And I said to myself, isn't that interesting? We're fighting for the Ukraine, but nobody else is fighting for the Ukraine other than the Ukraine itself, of course, and I said, it doesn't seem fair and it doesn't seem logical.

The next day, March 27th, on ABC's "The Week," Trump said, "I think NATO's obsolete. NATO was done at a time you had the Soviet Union, which was obviously larger, much larger than Russia is today. I'm not saying Russia's not a threat. But we have other threats. We have the threat of terrorism and NATO doesn't discuss terrorism, NATO's not meant for terrorism. NATO doesn't have the right countries in it for terrorism."

It's easy to see why Trump was opposed by not only Hillary Clinton and other Democratic Party neoconservatives, but also by all Republican Party neoconservatives. The main target of neoconservatives -- ever since that movement (which only in the 1970s came to be called "neoconservatives") was founded by Democratic U.S. Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson back in the 1950s -- has been to conquer Russia . That's the ultimate objective, toward which they all and always have striven.

Even Barack Obama, despite his pretenses for ' a reset in U.S.-Russia relations ', had had actually the opposite of that pretension in mind -- a doubling-down on the Cold War . And Obama's successor, Donald Trump, doubles down on his predecessor's double-down, there.

Of course, neocons aren't only against Russia; they also are against any country that Israel and Saudi Arabia hate -- and, of course, Israel and Saudi Arabia are large purchasers of American-made weapons, such as weapons from Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and General Dynamics. In fact: Saudi Arabia is the world's largest purchaser (other than the U.S. 'Defense' Department itself) of their products and services. In fact, soon after coming into office, Trump achieved the all-time-world-record-largest international weapons-sale, of $350 billion to the Sauds, and it was quickly hiked yet another $50 billion to $400 billion . It's, as of yet, his jobs-plan for the American people. Instead of Trump's peaceing the American economy, he has warred it. Consequently, for example, the Koch brothers' Doug Bandow, who represents his sponsors' bet against neoconservativsm, headlined on 27 April 2017 "Donald Trump: The 'Manchurian (Neoconservative) Candidate'?" and he itemized what a terrific Trojan Horse that Trump had turned out to be, for the war-lobby, the 'neocons', or, as Dwight Eisenhower had called them (but carefully and only after his Presidency was already over), "the military-industrial complex."

They're all actually the same people; they serve the same billionaires, all of whom are heavily invested in these war-makers -- all against two main targets: first, Russia (which America's aristocracy hate the most); and, then, Iran (which Israel's and Saudi Arabia's aristocracies hate the most). Any nation that's friendly toward those, gets destroyed. Other people (the masses) fight, kill, die, get maimed, and are impoverished, while these few individuals at the very top in the U.S. profit, from those constant invasions, and military occupations -- which Americans admire (their nation's military, America's invasion-forces) above all else .

On the Bill O'Reilly Show, 4 January 2016, Trump was asked to announce, before even the Presidential primaries, what would cause him as the U.S. President, to bomb Iran, and Trump then was panned everywhere for refusing to answer such an inappropriate question -- to announce publicly what his strategy, as the U.S. President, would be in such a matter of foreign affairs (in which type of matter only the President himself should be privy to such information about himself, namely his strategy) -- but Trump did reveal there his sympathy for the Sauds, and his extreme hostility toward Iran, a nation which is a bête noire to neocons:

I will say this about Iran. They're looking to go into Saudi Arabia, they want the oil, they want the money, they want a lot of other things having to do they took over Yemen, you look over that border between Yemen and Saudi Arabia, that is one big border and they're looking to do a number in Yemen. Frankly, the Saudis don't survive without us, and at what point do we get involved? And how much will Saudi Arabia pay us to save them?

The Sauds have already answered that question, with their commitment to paying $400 billion, and they're already using some of this purchased weaponry and training, to conquer Yemen. But who gets that money? It's not the American people; it is only the stockholders in those American war-making corporations (and allied corporations) who receive the benefits.

And what's this, from Trump, about "at what point do we get involved" if Saudi Arabia's tyrants "don't survive without us"? America is now supposed to be committed to keeping tyrannical hereditary monarchies in control over their countries? When did that start? Certainly not in 1776. Today's America isn't like the country, nor the culture, that America's Founders created, but instead is more like the monarchy that they overthrew. This was supposed to be an anti -imperialist country. Today's American rulers are traitors , against the nation that America's Founders had created. These traitors, and their many agents, are sheer psychopaths. The American public are not their citizens, but their subjects -- much like the colonists were, who overthrew the British King.

Donald Trump just wants for Europeans to increase military spending (to buy U.S.-made weapons) even more than the U.S. is doing against Russia, and for the Sauds and Israelis also to buy more of these weapons from America's weapons-firms, to use against Iran and any nation friendly toward it. Meanwhile, America's own military spending is already at world-record-high levels.That's Trump's economic plan; that's his jobs-plan; that's his 'national security' plan. That is Trump's Presidency.

He lied his way into office, just like his predecessors had been doing. This is what 'democracy' in America now consists of: lies -- some colored "liberal"; some colored "conservative"; but all colored "profitable" (for the 'right' people); and another name for that, in foreign affairs, is "neoconservative."

About Russia, he's continuing Obama's policies but even worse ; and about Iran, he's clearly even more of a neocon than was his predecessor. However, as a candidate, he had boldly criticized neoconservatism. Democracy cannot be based on lies, and led by liars.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They're Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010 , and of CHRIST'S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity .

see also Eric Zuesse – Countercurrents

[Aug 27, 2018] Russian Threat

Aug 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

Book Review- The Russian Peace Threat by Ron Ridenour by The Saker

Ron Ridenour's latest book (this is his 10 th book on international relations and politics) takes a direct shot at one of the most prevailing myths in the western political discourse: the thesis that Russia and its USSR predecessor have been uniquely aggressive and generally bellicose states. At a time when rabid russophobia is the order of the day (again -- chronic russophobia has been a regular feature of western political culture for many centuries now), this is a very timely and important book which I highly recommend to those interested in history.

The book is separated into three parts. In the first part of the book ( The Great Capitalist Socialist Divide ), Ridenour looks at the Cuban Missile Crisis in some detail and uses it to debunk the many myths which the "official" US historiography has been presenting as dogma for decades. In this first section, Ridenour also provides many fascinating details about Captain Vasili Arkhipov "the man who prevented WWIII". He also recounts how the US propaganda machine tried, and still tries, to blame the murder of JFK on the Russians. The second part of the book ( Peace, Land, Bread ) goes back in history and looks into the ideological and political struggle between the collective West and the Soviet Union from the revolution of 1917 and well into the Cold War. The third part of the book ( Russia At the Crossroads -- the Putin Era ) conclude with very recent events, including the western backed coup d'etat in the Ukraine and the Russian intervention in Syria.

The first and the third parts of the book are extremely well researched and offer a rock-solid, fact-based, and logical analysis of the Cuban Missile Crisis and its modern equivalent, the AngloZionist "crusade" against modern Russia. This is a very important and good choice because the two crises have a lot in common. I would even argue that the current crisis is much more dangerous than the Cuban Missile Crisis because of the extremely low personal and intellectual qualities of the current US ruling elites. Ridenour shows that in 1962 it was not the Soviets, but the US which pushed the world to the edge of a nuclear war, and in the third section of his book he shows how, yet again, the Empire is cornering Russia into a situation which very much risks resulting in a nuclear conflict.

For those who would have a knee-jerk rejection of Ridenour's crimethink, the book, on page 438-444, offers a list of governments the USA has overthrown since WWII (50), countries which the USA has bombed (30), foreign leaders it has murdered (50+), suppressed populist/nationalist movements (20), and subverted democratic elections (30). Ridenour then asks how it is that with a tally like that the US gets to moralize about Russia. He is absolutely right, of course. Compared to the USA, the Soviet Union was a peace-loving, non-interventionist and generally international law respecting country. Oh sure, the USSR had its share of horrors and evil deeds, but compared with the "land of the free and the home of the brave" these are minor, almost petty, transgressions.

The book is not without its faults. Sadly, in the second part of his book Ridenour repeats what I can only call the "standard list of western clichés" about the 1917 Revolution, it's causes and effects. Truth be told, Ridenour is most certainly not to be singled out for making such a mistake: most of the books written in English and many of those written in Russian about this period of Russian history are basically worthless because they are all written by folks (from all sides of the political spectrum) with a vested ideological interest in presenting a completely counter-factual chronology of what actually took place (Russian author Ivan Solonevich wrote at length about this phenomenon in his books). Furthermore, such a process is inevitable: after decades of over-the-top demonization of everything and anything Soviet, there is now a "return of the pendulum" (both in Russia and outside) to whitewash the Soviet regime and explain away all its crimes and atrocities (of which there were plenty). For these reasons I would recommend that readers skip chapter 7 entirely (the description of the 1905 and 1917 revolutions are particularly bad and sound like a rehash of Soviet propaganda clichés of the early 1980s).

This weakness of this historical analysis of the two Russian revolutions is, of course, rather disappointing, but it in no way affects the pertinence of the fundamental thesis of this book: that, for all its very real faults, the "Evil Empire" was a gentle and timid regime when compared to the AngloZionist "Axis of Kindness" and its never-ending violent rampages all over the world (literally) and its orgy of subversion and violence in the name of democracy, freedom, human rights and all the rest of the western propaganda buzzwords.

The book's afterworld begins with the following words " WAITING AND WAITING! Waiting for the end of the world! Waiting for Godot! Although, unlike in Samuel Beckett's Theater of the Absurd play, in which Godot never arrives, the mad men and mad women leaders of the US, France and UK (and Israel) are bringing us their bombs ". Having been warning about the very risks of war for at least 4 years now, and having, along with others, posted a special " Russian Warning " to warn about this danger, I can only wholeheartedly welcome the publication of an entire book aimed at averting such a cataclysmic outcome.

My other big regret with this book is that it does not have an index. This is particularly frustrating since the book is packed with over 500 pages of very interesting information and can be used as a very good reference book.

Still, these criticisms should not distract from the very real value of this book. One of the most frightening phenomena today is that the Empire and Russia are currently headed directly for war and that, unlike what took place during the Cuban Missile Crisis, almost nobody today speaks about this. The western corporate media is especially guilty in this regard, as it encourages a constant escalation of rabid anti-Russian rhetoric (and actions) without ever mentioning that if brought to its logical conclusion such policies will result in a devastating war which the West cannot win (neither can Russia, of course, but that is hardly much of a consolation, is it?).

There have been courageous voices in the West trying to stop this crazy slide towards a nuclear apocalypse (I especially think of Professor Stephen Cohen and Paul Craig Roberts) but theirs were truly "cries in the wilderness". And it doesn't matter one bit whether somebody identifies himself as a conservative, liberal, progressive, libertarian, socialist, anarcho-capitalist or by another other (mostly meaningless) political label. What matters is as simple as it is crucial: preventing the Neocons from triggering a war with Russia or with China, or with Iran, or with the DPRK, or with Venezuela, or with ( fill in the blank ). The list of countries the US is in conflict with is very long (just remember Nikki Haley berating and threatening the entire UN General Assembly because the vast majority of its members dared to disagree with the US position on Jerusalem), but Russia is (yet again) the designated arch-villian, the Evil Empire, Mordor -- you name it! Russia is the country which wants to murder everybody with poison gas, from the Skripals in the UK, to the innocent children of Syria. Russia is the country which shoots down airliners and prepares to invade all her western neighbors. Finally, Russia is the place which hacks every computer in the "Free World" and interferes with every single election. The longer that list of idiotic accusations stretches, the bigger the risk of war becomes, because words have their weight and you cannot have normal, civilized relations with the Evil Empire of Mordor which is "highly likely" to invade, nuke or otherwise subvert the peace-loving peoples of the West.

Except that there never was any such thing as a "peace loving West" -- that is truly a self-serving and 100% false myth. The historical record shows that in reality the collective West has engaged in a 1000 year long murderous rampage all over the planet and that each time it designated its victim as the culprit and itself as the defender of lofty ideals. Ridenour's The Russian Peace Threat: Pentagon on Alert (alongside with Guy Mettan's " here ) does a long way towards debunking this myth.

With the few caveats mentioned above, I highly recommend this book.

JVC , says: August 24, 2018 at 10:24 pm GMT

I tend to agree with Saker–that yes, the Soviet Empire, and the current Russian government have had their"nasty" moments, but it is not those governments that made their very existence depend on creating chaos, death and destruction across the globe. The American people have been too complacent–at least through out my life time (far side of 70) -- because they really have had no struggle as most of the rest of the world has. Mostly good economic conditions, not having to rebuild after invading armies have passed through, plenty of meat and potatoes–and all the other consumer goods. As long as that has been the case, we have not really cared about what the government in DC has been doing "over there" Consequently, the war industry has won control of the country.

So the possibility of nuclear war is closer now than ever before. It seems to me that the neocon mentality that has been dominant for the past 25-30 years (the fall of the Soviet empire?) comes with an erroneous belief that some how as was the case in the two previous "great wars" conus will be spared any pain. However, it is my belief that there can not possible be a limited nuclear exchange–one bomb will have everyone with the capacity using them, and even if the "elite" manage to survive in their extensive underground shelters, when they finally do have to come out, the idiots will have no idea at all as to how to survive in an alien world.

Anyway, hope it doesn't happen, but arrogance has caused more than it's share of trouble, and the neocons are nothing if not arrogant.

peterAUS , says: August 26, 2018 at 5:10 am GMT

Good article.

Especially:

.rabid russophobia is the order of the day .

..the current crisis is much more dangerous than the Cuban Missile Crisis because of the extremely low personal and intellectual qualities of the current US ruling elites ..

.The longer that list of idiotic accusations stretches, the bigger the risk of war becomes ..

I do place a bit of the blame for unhappy outcome on Kremlin , though.
Had it acted more assertively, and decidedly, maybe US elite wouldn't have been acting so recklessly.

Sharp and decisive intervention in Syria; overwhelming intervention in Ukraine.
And last but not least, a couple of missiles towards those two destroyers recently. With training warheads, calculate for just one, two tops, to make through, and make a hole.

"They" believe that whenever they push Kremlin will step back. As so far.
Can anyone point as to where is that "red line"? I can't. But I am sure there is somewhere.
And, it's highly likely we'll recognize it only when ICMBs start flying.
Much good it will do to all of us then.

Here we are.

[Aug 27, 2018] Empire Spymongering and Elite Conspiracy Practioners by James Petras

Notable quotes:
"... The greatest success of the US conspiracy practitioners has been in convincing the US mass media to act as an arm of the CIA-Pentagon-Congressional and Presidential interventionist agenda. ..."
"... Conspiratorial plots have a narrow audience, mostly the US mass media and elite . They seem to have a short-term impact in justifying sanctions and trade wars. The media plotters having called wolf and proved nothing ,have lost credibility among a wide swath of the public. ..."
Aug 23, 2018 | www.unz.com

Introduction

The mass media and political leaders of the US have resorted to denouncing competitors and adversaries as spies engaged in criminal theft of vital political, economic and military know-how.

The spy-mania has spread every place and all the time, it has become an essential element in driving national criminal hearings, global economic warfare and military budgets.

In this paper we will analyze and discuss the use and abuse of spy-mongering by (1) identifying the accused countries which are targeted; (2) the instruments of the spy conspiracy; (3) the purpose of the 'spy attacks'.

Spies, Spies Everywhere: A Multi-Purpose Strategy

Washington's 'spy-strategy' resorts to multiple targets, focusing on different sectors of activities.

Russia has been accused of poisoning adversaries, using overseas operatives in England. The evidence is non-existent. The accusation revolves around an instant lethal poison which in fact did not lead to death.

No Russian operative was identified. The only 'evidence' was that Russia possessed the poison- as did the US and other countries. The events took place in England and the British government played a major role in pointing the finger toward Russia and in launching a global media campaign which was amplified in the US and in the EU.

The UK expelled Russian diplomats and threatened sanctions. The Trump regime picked up the cudgels, increasing economic sanctions and demanding that Russia 'confess' to its 'homicidal behavior'. The poison plot resonated with the Democratic Party campaign against Trump , accusing Russia of meddling in the Presidential election, on Trump's behalf. No evidence was presented. But the less the evidence, the longer the investigation and the wider the conspiratorial net; it now includes overseas business people, students and diplomats.

US conspiracy officials targeted China, accusing the Chinese government of stealing US technology, scientific research and patents. China's billion dollar "Belt and Road" agreement with over sixty countries was presented as a communist plot to dominate countries, grab their resources, generate debt dependency and to recruit overseas networks of covert operatives. In fact, China's plans were public, accepted by most of the US allies and membership was even offered to the US.

Iran was accused of plotting to establish overseas terrorist military operations in Yemen, Iraq and Syria – targeting the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia. No evidence was ever presented. In fact, massive US and EU supplied arms and advisors to Saudi Arabia's overt terror bombing of Houthi-led Yemen cities and populations. Iran backed the Syrian government in opposition to the US backed armed mercenaries. Iranian advisers in Syria were bombed by Israel – and never retaliated.

The US policy elite resort to conspiratorial plots and spying depends heavily on the mass media to repeat and elaborate on the charges endlessly, depending on self-identified experts and ex-pats from the targeted country. In effect the media is the message. Media-state collaboration is reinforced by the application of sanctions -- the punishment proves guilt!

In the case of Russia, the conspirators demonize President Putin; he is 'guilty' because he was an ex-official of the police; he was accused of 'seizing' Crimea which voted to rejoin Russia. In other words, plots are linked to unrelated activity, personality disorders and to US self-inflicted defeats!

Labeling is another tool common to conspiracy plotters; China is a 'dictatorship' intent on taking over the world -- therefore, it could only defeat the US through spying and stealing secrets and assets from the US.

Iran is labelled a 'terrorist state' which allows the US to violate the international nuclear agreement and to support Israeli demands for economic sanctions. No evidence is ever presented that Iran invaded or terrorized any state.

The Political Strategy Behind Conspiracy Terrorists

There are several important motives for the US government to resort to conspiracy plots.

By accusing countries of crimes, it hopes that the accused will respond by revealing their inability or unwillingness to engage in the action falsely attributed to them. Pentagon plots put adversaries on the defensive – spending time and energy answering to the US agenda rather than pursuing and advancing their own.

For example, the US claims that China is stealing economic technology to promote its superiority, is designed to pressure China to downplay or modify its long-term plan for strategic growth. While China will not give general credence to US conspiracy practitioners, it has downplayed the slogans designed to motivate its scientists to "Make China Great'.

Likewise, the US conspiracy practitioners accusation that Iran is 'meddling' in Yemen and Syria is designed to distract world opinion from the US military support for Saudi Arabia's terror bombing in Yemen and Israel's missile attacks in Syria.

Plot accusations have had some effect in Syria. Russia has demanded or asked Iran to withdraw fifty miles from the Israeli border. Apparently Iran has lowered its support for Yemen.

Russia has been blanketed with unsubstantiated accusations of intervening in the Ukraine, which distracts attention from Washington's support for the mob-led coup.

The UK claim that Russia planted a deadly poison, was concocted in order to distract attention from the Brexit fiasco and Prime Minister May's effort to entice the US to sign a major trade agreement.

How Successful are Conspiratorial Politics?

The greatest success of the US conspiracy practitioners has been in convincing the US mass media to act as an arm of the CIA-Pentagon-Congressional and Presidential interventionist agenda.

Secondly, the conspiracy has had an impact on both political parties – especially the Democratic leadership, which has waged a political war accusing Trump of plotting with Russia, to defeat Clinton in the presidential elections. However, Democratic conspiracy advocates have sacrificed their popular electorate who are more interested in economic issues then in regime plots – and may lose to the Republicans in the fall 2018 Congressional elections.

Thirdly, the plot and spy line has some impact on the EU but not on their public. Moreover, the EU is more concerned with President Trump's trade war and made overtures to Russia.

Fourthly, China , Iran and Russia have moved closer economically in response to the conspiracy plots and trade wars.

Conclusion: The Perils of Power Grabbers

Conspiratorial plots have a narrow audience, mostly the US mass media and elite . They seem to have a short-term impact in justifying sanctions and trade wars. The media plotters having called wolf and proved nothing ,have lost credibility among a wide swath of the public.

Moreover, the conspiracy has not resulted in any basic shifts in the orientation of their adversaries, nor has it shaped the electoral agenda for the majority of US voters.

The conspiracy advocates have discredited themselves by the transparency of their fabrications and the flimsiness of their evidence. In the long-run, historians will provide a footnote on the bankruptcy of US foreign and domestic policy based on plots and conspiracies.

[Aug 27, 2018] There are huge holes in Browder story, made clear in his deposition in the Prevezon case

Magnitsky story is the textbook, perfect illustration of the level of control of CIA over media. Almost everything in official story is a lie, still it is never challenged.
Aug 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

RobinG , says: July 24, 2018 at 4:59 am GMT

@exiled off mainstreet

#BROWDERGATE

A perfectly good article, I'm sure, but why diffuse ourselves [and engender feelings of fear and hopelessness as you express] when a strategic pressure point has presented? Johnstone makes no mention of Bill Browder. Nor do the [100, so far] commenters.

BILL BROWDER is a key figure in the anti-Trump, anti-Russia hysteria. The notorious Trump Tower meeting was about the Magnitsky Act, a fabrication by Browder to hide his financial crimes. Browder "testified" in the Senate expressly to demonize Putin. Browder's contacts in the IC, the Jewish Lobby, and the fawning media have enabled his propaganda assault this week. He's appeared -- unchallenged, virtually unquestioned -- on countless talk shows. But he's been running scared at the mention of interrogation by Russians. There are huge holes in his story, made clear in his deposition in the Prevezon case. The truth will bring him down! And perhaps his Deep State supporters, along with him.

Ask your Senators if they've heard/read Browder's 2015 deposition in the Prevezon case. (See comment 161 under The Untouchable Mr. Browder? by Israel Shamir for links.)

Research links to primary sources on #Browdergate -

https://populist.tv/2018/01/20/bill-browder-links-and-resources-to-understand-controversy/

RobinG , says: July 24, 2018 at 5:02 pm GMT
@yurivku

...BTW, have you seen "THE MAGNITSKY ACT – BEHIND THE SCENES" that Phil Giraldi posted today? Debunking anti-Russian criminal sociopaths like Bill Browder will go a long way to improving relations. Not to mention easing pressure on the unfortunate Trump.

Full research primary links available here, including Browder's 2015 deposition in the U.S. vs. Prevezon Holdings case. Every Senator who voted to support Browder should see this. [Any who already have, double shame!]

https://populist.tv/2018/01/20/bill-browder-links-and-resources-to-understand-controversy/

[Aug 26, 2018] Jonathan Winer, Steele dossier and the Magnitsky Act

Notable quotes:
"... However, as convincingly established by dissident Russian film-maker Andrei Nekrasov's (banned) investigative documentary, the unfortunate Magnitsky was neither a human rights crusader, nor a lawyer, nor beaten to death. He was an accountant jailed for his role in Browder's business dealings, who died of natural causes as a result of inadequate medical treatment. The case was hyped up as a major human rights drama by Browder in order to discredit Russian charges against himself. ..."
"... The Magnitsky Act also condemns legal prosecution of Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Browder, on a much smaller scale, also made a fortune ripping off Russians during the Yeltsin years, and later got into trouble with Russian tax collectors. Since Browder had given up his U.S. citizenship in order to avoid paying U.S. taxes, he had reason to fear Russian efforts to extradite him for tax evasion and other financial misdeeds. ..."
"... So, the Fixer in Chief could have said to the worried Browder, "No problem. All that we need to do is make your case a politically motivated case. Then they can't touch you." Winer's clever treaty is a perfect Catch-22. The treaty doesn't apply to a case if it is politically motivated, and if it is Russian, it must be politically motivated. ..."
"... Needless to say, Khodorkovsky's Corbiere Trust lobbied heavily to get Congress to pass the Magnitsky Act, which also repeated its defense of Khodorkovsky himself. This type of "Russian interference intended to influence policy" is not even noticed, while U.S. authorities scour cyberspace for evidence of trolls. ..."
"... The United States, in contrast, is in favor of interference in other countries on principle: because it seeks a Unipolar world, with a single "democratic" system, and considers itself the final authority as to which regime a country should have and how it should run its affairs. ..."
"... U.S. policy-makers practice interference every day. And they are perfectly willing to allow Russians to interfere in American politics – so long as those Russians are "unipolar" like themselves, like Khodorkovsky, who aspire to precisely the same unipolar world sought by the State Department and George Soros. Indeed, the American empire depends on such interference from Iraqis, Libyans, Iranians, Russians, Cubans – all those who come to Washington to try to get U.S. power to settle old scores or overthrow the government in the country they came from. All those are perfectly welcome to lobby for a world ruled by America. ..."
Aug 26, 2018 | www.unz.com

As well as the tobacco industry and the Clinton Foundation, APCO also works for Khodorkovsky. To be precise, according to public listings, the fourth biggest of APCO's many clients is the Corbiere Trust, owned by Khodorkovsky and registered in Guernsey. The trust tends and distributes some of the billions that the oligarch got out of Russia before he was jailed. Corbiere money was spent to lobby both for Resolution 322 (supporting Khodorkovky after his arrest in Russia) and for the Magnitsky Act (more later). Margery Kraus, APCO's president and CEO, is a member of Mikhail Khodorkovsky's son Pavel's Institute of Modern Russia, devoted to "promoting democratic values" – in other words, to building political opposition to Vladimir Putin.

In 2009 Jonathan Winer went back to the State Department where he was given a distinguished service award for having somehow rescued thousands of stranded members of the Muhahedin-e Khalq from their bases in Iraq they were trying to overthrow the Iranian government. The MeK, once officially recognized as a terrorist organization by the State Department, has become a pet instrument in U.S. and Israeli regime change operations directed at Iran.

However, it was Winer's extracurricular activities at State that finally brought him into the public spotlight early this year – or rather, the spotlight of the House Intelligence Committee, whose chairman Devin Nunes (R-Cal) named him as one of a network promoting the notorious "Steele Dossier" which accused Trump of illicit financial dealing and compromising sexual activities in Russia.

By Winer's own account, he had been friends with former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele since his days at APCO. Back at State, he regularly channeled Steele reports, ostensibly drawn from contacts with friendly Russian intelligence agents, to Victoria Nuland, in charge of Russian affairs, and top Russian experts. These included the infamous "Steele dossier". In September 2016, Winer's old friend Sidney Blumenthal – a particularly close advisor to Hillary Clinton – gave him notes written by a more mysterious Clinton insider named Cody Shearer, repeating the salacious attacks.

All this dirt was spread through government agencies and mainstream media before being revealed publicly just before Trump's inauguration, used to stimulate the "Russiagate" investigation by Robert Mueller. The dossier has been discredited but the investigation goes on and on.

So, it is all right to take seriously information allegedly obtained from "Russian agents" and spread it around, so long as it can damage Trump. As with so much else in Washington, double standards are the rule.

Jonathan Winer and the Magnitsky Act

Jonathan Winer played a major role in Congressional adoption of the "Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012" (the Magnitsky Act), a measure that effectively ended post-Cold War hopes for normal relations between Washington and Moscow. This act was based on a highly contentious version of the November 16, 2009 death in prison of accountant Sergei Leonidovich Magnitsky, as told to Congress by hedge fund manager Bill Browder (grandson of Earl Browder, head of the Communist Party USA 1934-1945). According to Browder, Magnitsky was a lawyer beaten to death in prison as a result of his crusade for human rights.

However, as convincingly established by dissident Russian film-maker Andrei Nekrasov's (banned) investigative documentary, the unfortunate Magnitsky was neither a human rights crusader, nor a lawyer, nor beaten to death. He was an accountant jailed for his role in Browder's business dealings, who died of natural causes as a result of inadequate medical treatment. The case was hyped up as a major human rights drama by Browder in order to discredit Russian charges against himself.

In any case

The Magnitsky Act also condemns legal prosecution of Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Browder, on a much smaller scale, also made a fortune ripping off Russians during the Yeltsin years, and later got into trouble with Russian tax collectors. Since Browder had given up his U.S. citizenship in order to avoid paying U.S. taxes, he had reason to fear Russian efforts to extradite him for tax evasion and other financial misdeeds.

It was Jonathan Winer who found a solution to Browder's predicament.

, "When Browder consulted me, [ ] I suggested creating a new law to impose economic and travel sanctions on human-rights violators involved in grand corruption. Browder decided this could secure a measure of justice for Magnitsky. He initiated a campaign that led to the enactment of the Magnitsky Act. Soon other countries enacted their own Magnitsky Acts, including Canada, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and most recently, the United Kingdom."

Russian authorities are still trying to pursue their case against Browder. In his press conference following the Helsinki meeting with Trump, Vladimir Putin suggested allowing U.S. authorities to question the Russians named in the Mueller indictment in exchange for allowing Russian officials to question individuals involved in the Browder case, including Winer and former U.S. ambassador to Moscow Michael McFaul. Putin observed that such an exchange was possible under the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty signed between the two countries in 1999, back in the Yeltsin days when America was posing as Russia's best friend.

But the naïve Russians did not measure the craftiness of American lawyers.

As Winer wrote, "Under that treaty, Russia's procurator general can ask the U.S. attorney general to arrange for Americans to be ordered to testify to assist in a criminal case. But there is a fundamental exception: The attorney general can provide no such assistance in a politically motivated case." (My emphasis.)

"I know this", he wrote, "because I was among those who helped put it there. Back in 1999, when we were negotiating the agreement with Russia, I was the senior State Department official managing U.S.-Russia law-enforcement relations."

So, the Fixer in Chief could have said to the worried Browder, "No problem. All that we need to do is make your case a politically motivated case. Then they can't touch you." Winer's clever treaty is a perfect Catch-22. The treaty doesn't apply to a case if it is politically motivated, and if it is Russian, it must be politically motivated.

In a July 15, 2016, complaint to the Justice Department, Browder's Heritage Capital Management accused both American and Russian opponents of the Magnitsky Act of violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA; adopted in 19938 with Nazis in mind). Among the "lobbyists" cited was the late Ron Dellums (falsely identified in the complaint as a "former Republican congressman").

The Heritage Capital Management brief declared that: "While lawyers representing foreign principals are exempt from filing under FARA, this is only true if the attorney does not try to influence policy at the behest of his client." However, by disseminating anti-Magnitsky material to Congress, any Russian lawyer was "clearly trying to influence policy" was therefore in violation of FARA filing requirements."

Catch-22 all over again.

Needless to say, Khodorkovsky's Corbiere Trust lobbied heavily to get Congress to pass the Magnitsky Act, which also repeated its defense of Khodorkovsky himself. This type of "Russian interference intended to influence policy" is not even noticed, while U.S. authorities scour cyberspace for evidence of trolls.

Conclusion

The basic ideological conflict here is between Unipolar America and Multipolar Russia. Russia's position, as Vladimir Putin made clear in his historic speech at the 2007 Munich security conference, is to allow countries to enjoy national sovereignty and develop in their own way. The current Russian government is against interference in other countries' politics on principle. It would naturally prefer an American government willing to allow this.

The United States, in contrast, is in favor of interference in other countries on principle: because it seeks a Unipolar world, with a single "democratic" system, and considers itself the final authority as to which regime a country should have and how it should run its affairs.

So, if Russians were trying to interfere in U.S. domestic politics, they would not be trying to change the U.S. system but to prevent it from trying to change their own. Russian leaders clearly are sufficiently cultivated to realize that historic processes do not depend on some childish trick played on somebody's computer.

U.S. policy-makers practice interference every day. And they are perfectly willing to allow Russians to interfere in American politics – so long as those Russians are "unipolar" like themselves, like Khodorkovsky, who aspire to precisely the same unipolar world sought by the State Department and George Soros. Indeed, the American empire depends on such interference from Iraqis, Libyans, Iranians, Russians, Cubans – all those who come to Washington to try to get U.S. power to settle old scores or overthrow the government in the country they came from. All those are perfectly welcome to lobby for a world ruled by America.

Russian interference in American politics is totally welcome so long as it helps turn public opinion against "multipolar" Putin, glorifies American democracy, serves U.S. interests including the military-industrial complex, helps break down national borders (except those of the United States and Israel) and puts money in appropriate pockets in the halls of Congress.

[Aug 26, 2018] Mass Dementia in the Western Establishment by Diana Johnstone

Notable quotes:
"... The individuals may be sane, but as a herd they are ready to leap off the cliff. ..."
"... For the past two years, a particular power group has sought to explain away its loss of power – or rather, its loss of the Presidency, as it still holds a predominance of institutional power – by creation of a myth ..."
"... So at worst, "the Russians" are accused of revealing some relatively minor facts concerning the Hillary Clinton campaign. Big deal. ..."
"... Donald Trump is not particularly articulate, navigating through the language with a small repetitive vocabulary, but what he said at his Helsinki press conference was honest and even brave. As the hounds bay for his blood, he quite correctly refused to endorse the "findings" of US intelligence agencies, fourteen years after the same agencies "found" that Iraq was bursting with weapons of mass destruction. How in the world could anyone expect anything else? ..."
"... In short, the only chance to end the nuclear war threat may depend on support for Trump from Israel and the Pentagon! ..."
"... The hysterical neoliberal globalists seem to have ruled out any other possibility – and perhaps this one too. ..."
"... This is a frightening, accurate commentary on what we face as a result of an unaccountable power structure resorting to any and all means to retain power which, if this structure continues to exercise it, will lead to our extinction. ..."
"... In the establishment, it's not dementia as such, it's just serving the highest bidder. You can accuse only the elites of dementia: they forgot that to enjoy the fruits of your thievery you have to be alive. ..."
"... Thank you, this is an excellent summary of the situation right now. It's worth noting too just how disconnected the establishment is from the wider public. They have enormous financial resources and access to the entire legacy media but seem to have almost no real base of support. ..."
"... It's dangerous to underestimate an enemy. The useful idiot footsoldiers, screaming in mindless herd instinct, are one thing. The people behind them – the Koch brothers, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, others – there is nothing at all mindless or demented about them. ..."
"... Barbara Hinckley Sheldon Goldman, American Politics and Government, Glenview Ill.,1990 describes how the USA weapons industry skillfully prevents that spending on useless weapons deminishes. The history of the later Roman empire, the army in control. ..."
Jul 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

Where to begin to analyze the madness of mainstream media in reaction to the Trump-Putin meeting in Helsinki? By focusing on the individual, psychology has neglected the problem of mass insanity, which has now overwhelmed the United States establishment, its mass media and most of its copycat European subsidiaries. The individuals may be sane, but as a herd they are ready to leap off the cliff.

For the past two years, a particular power group has sought to explain away its loss of power – or rather, its loss of the Presidency, as it still holds a predominance of institutional power – by creation of a myth. Mainstream media is known for its herd behavior, and in this case the editors, commentators, journalists have talked themselves into a story that initially they themselves could hardly take seriously.

Donald Trump was elected by Russia ?

On the face of it, this is preposterous. Okay, the United States can manage to rig elections in Honduras, or Serbia, or even Ukraine, but the United States is a bit too big and complex to leave the choice of the Presidency to a barrage of electronic messages totally unread by most voters. If this were so, Russia wouldn't need to try to "undermine our democracy". It would mean that our democracy was already undermined, in tatters, dead. A standing corpse ready to be knocked over by a tweet.

Even if, as is alleged without evidence, an army of Russian bots (even bigger than the notorious Israeli army of bots) was besieging social media with its nefarious slanders against poor innocent Hillary Clinton, this could determine an election only in a vacuum, with no other influences in the field. But there was a lot of other stuff going on in the 2016 election, some for Trump and some for Hillary, and Hillary herself scored a crucial own goal by denigrating millions of Americans as "deplorables" because they didn't fit into her identity politics constituencies.

The Russians could do nothing to build support for Trump, and there is not a hint of evidence that they tried. They might have done something to harm Hillary, because there was so much there: the private server emails, the Clinton foundation, the murder of Moammer Gaddafi, the call for a no-fly zone in Syria they didn't have to invent it. It was there. So was the hanky panky at the Democratic National Committee, on which the Clintonite accusations focus, perhaps to cause everyone to forget much worse things.

When you come to think of it, the DNC scandal focused on Debbie Wasserman Schultz, not on Hillary herself. Screaming about "Russian hacking the DNC" has been a distraction from much more serious accusations against Hillary Clinton. Bernie Sanders supporters didn't need those "revelations" to make them stop loving Hillary or even to discover that the DNC was working against Bernie. It was always perfectly obvious.

So at worst, "the Russians" are accused of revealing some relatively minor facts concerning the Hillary Clinton campaign. Big deal.

But that is enough, after two years of fakery, to send the establishment into a frenzy of accusations of "treason" when Trump does what he said he would do while campaigning, try to normalize relations with Russia.

This screaming comes not only from the US mainstream, but also from that European elite which has been housebroken for seventy years as obedient poodles, dachshunds or corgis in the American menagerie, via intense vetting by US trans-Atlantic "cooperation" associations. They have based their careers on the illusion of sharing the world empire by following U.S. whims in the Middle East and transforming the mission of their armed forces from defense into foreign intervention units of NATO under U.S. command. Having not thought seriously about the implications of this for over half a century, they panic at the suggestion of being left to themselves.

The Western elite is now suffering from self-inflicted dementia.

Donald Trump is not particularly articulate, navigating through the language with a small repetitive vocabulary, but what he said at his Helsinki press conference was honest and even brave. As the hounds bay for his blood, he quite correctly refused to endorse the "findings" of US intelligence agencies, fourteen years after the same agencies "found" that Iraq was bursting with weapons of mass destruction. How in the world could anyone expect anything else?

But for the mainstream media, "the story" at the Helsinki summit, even the only story, was Trump's reaction to the, er, trumped up charges of Russian interference in our democracy. Were you or were you not elected thanks to Russian hackers? All they wanted was a yes or no answer. Which could not possibly be yes. So they could write their reports in advance.

Anyone who has frequented mainstream journalists, especially those who cover the "big stories" on international affairs, is aware of their obligatory conformism, with few exceptions. To get the job, one must have important "sources", meaning government spokesmen who are willing to tell you what "the story" is, often without being identified. Once they know what "the story" is, competition sets in: competition as to how to tell it. That leads to an escalation of rhetoric, variations on the theme: "The President has betrayed our great country to the Russian enemy. Treason!"

This demented chorus on "Russian hacking" prevented mainstream media from even doing their job. Not even mentioning, much less analyzing, any of the real issues at the summit. To find analysis, one must go on line, away from the official fake news to independent reporting. For example, "the Moon of Alabama" site offers an intelligent interpretation of the Trump strategy , which sounds infinitely more plausible than "the story". In short, Trump is trying to woo Russia away from China, in a reverse version of Kissinger's strategy forty years ago to woo China away from Russia, thus avoiding a continental alliance against the United States. This may not work because the United States has proven so untrustworthy that the cautious Russians are highly unlikely to abandon their alliance with China for shadows. But it makes perfect sense as an explanation of Trump's policy, unlike the caterwauling we've been hearing from Senators and talking heads on CNN.

Those people seem to have no idea of what diplomacy is about. They cannot conceive of agreements that would be beneficial to both sides. No, it's got to be a zero sum game, winner take all. If they win, we lose, and vice versa.

They also have no idea of the harm to both sides if they do not agree. They have no project, no strategy. Just hate Trump.

He seems totally isolated, and every morning I look at the news to see if he has been assassinated yet.

It is unimaginable for our Manichean moralists that Putin might also be under fire at home for failing to chide the American president for U.S. violations of human rights in Guantanamo, murderous drone strikes against defenseless citizens throughout the Middle East, the destruction of Libya in violation of the UN mandate, interference in the elections of countless countries by government-financed "non-governmental organizations" (the National Endowment of Democracy), worldwide electronic spying, invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention the world's greatest prison population and regular massacres of school children. But the diplomatic Russians know how to be polite.

Still, if Trump actually makes a "deal", there may be losers – neither the U.S. nor Russia but third parties. When two great powers reach agreement, it is often at somebody else's expense. The West Europeans are afraid it will be them, but such fears are groundless. All Putin wants is normal relations with the West, which is not much to ask.

Rather, candidate number one for paying the price are the Palestinians, or even Iran, in marginal ways. At the press conference, asked about possible areas of cooperation between the two nuclear powers, Trump suggested that the two could agree on helping Israel:

"We both spoke with Bibi Netanyahu. They would like to do certain things with respect to Syria, having to do with the safety of Israel. In that respect, we absolutely would like to work in order to help Israel. Israel will be working with us. So both countries would work jointly."

In political terms, Trump knows where political power lies, and is counting on the influence of the pro-Israel lobby, which recognizes the defeat in Syria and the rising influence of Russia, to save him from the liberal imperialists – a daring bet, but he does not have much choice.

On another subject, Trump said that "our militaries" get along with the Russians "better than our politicians". This is another daring bet, on military realism that could somehow neutralize military industrial congressional complex lobbying for more and more weapons.

In short, the only chance to end the nuclear war threat may depend on support for Trump from Israel and the Pentagon!

The hysterical neoliberal globalists seem to have ruled out any other possibility – and perhaps this one too.

"Constructive dialogue between the United States and Russia forwards the opportunity to open new pathways toward peace and stability in our world" Trump declared "I would rather take a political risk in pursuit of peace than to risk peace in pursuit of politics."

That is more than his political enemies can claim.

exiled off mainstreet , says: July 20, 2018 at 7:02 am GMT

This is a frightening, accurate commentary on what we face as a result of an unaccountable power structure resorting to any and all means to retain power which, if this structure continues to exercise it, will lead to our extinction.

AnonFromTN , says: July 22, 2018 at 3:30 am GMT

In the establishment, it's not dementia as such, it's just serving the highest bidder. You can accuse only the elites of dementia: they forgot that to enjoy the fruits of your thievery you have to be alive. If only they die, it would be a great service to the humanity. Unfortunately, the way things go, they might take us all with them.

Cyrano , says: July 22, 2018 at 8:42 am GMT

This mass hysteria over a country hostile to both democracy and gay rights (it's hard to tell which one is worse) has been seen in the west before. It's very reminiscent of the lead-up to Iraq war in 2003. I mean what's next? Are they gonna accuse Russia of having WMD's too?

They are pretty good at providing false evidence of WMD's, I wouldn't be surprised if they stage another presentation of evidence of Russian WMD's at UN, complete with satellite images of mobile trucks equipped with Uranium enrichment technology and all that.

That Nikki Halley can be quite persuasive, you know. I just hope that the world doesn't buy that BS again. Russia having WMD's? That's preposterous. They tricked us the last time, I hope that the people have learned their lesson – not to trust them anymore.

Cagey Beast , says: July 22, 2018 at 11:18 am GMT

Thank you, this is an excellent summary of the situation right now. It's worth noting too just how disconnected the establishment is from the wider public. They have enormous financial resources and access to the entire legacy media but seem to have almost no real base of support. Remember how the Never Trumpers had no one more prominent and well-known than Evan McMullan (!!) to run as their candidate? Note too the tiny number of views the YouTube videos of the Aspen Institute get: https://www.youtube.com/user/AspenInstitute/videos .

On its own, these things aren't conclusive proof but together they add up. The Aspen Institute crowd is an almost entirely self-contained subculture. They seem to have no base of support, beyond their stacks of money, job titles and the power that come with the various offices they hold. That's probably why they can never stop calling their opponents "populists" or why Bill Kristol keeps tweeting about encountering scrappy shoeshine boys who shout "give Trump hell, Mr Kristol!" as he goes about his urban peregrinations.

Anonymous , [115] Disclaimer says: July 22, 2018 at 11:54 am GMT

OT

Diana Johnstone is not alone. Others on the alt-Left are starting to wake up, too. This is Joaquín Flores:

People are seeing through dishonesty, and the old language traps are used up and done for. If reconquista is the goal, then we need to have an honest conversation about that. If there's a Latino nation with self determination in the south-west US, or rights 'back' to the south-west US, then let's speak of it in such terms. Because then we'd be looking at a Euro-American nation also. Now of course there's issues of interpenetrated peoples, and identities we carry in our minds in diverse urban centers. But the point here is that we have to have an honest discourse, and stop hiding reconquista sentiments under the rubric of 'human rights'. Because European-Americans don't have right of return to Europe, so the left is promoting what will ultimately be a race war, full scale, if they don't chill the fuck out and back off this disingenuous approach to policy-wonkism on immigration.

The paradigmatic question today is, how is wealth made, and where does wealth come from? What is the balance of trade and debts, and how is that is no longer manageable? The US empire and NATO is no longer manageable. Trump is unwinding NATO. That can't be a bad thing.

https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/07/explaining-trump-to-socialist-liberals-flores/

Fort Russ News is really turning out to be a leading voice of the Third Way movement.

Daniel Rich , says: July 23, 2018 at 4:48 am GMT

Q: " the cautious Russians "

R: I see it this way: " the Russians, who've learned their lessons after first fully trusting their partners "

TG , says: July 23, 2018 at 4:56 am GMT

I hear you, and I sympathize, but this is not mass dementia. The oligarchy that runs the United States was worried that Donald Trump might actually (!!) take some consideration for the national interest of the people of the United States of America. That will never do.

This is not irrational. The screaming, the hysteria, this is the utterly rational, breathtakingly brutal reaction of a ruling elite that has the moral sense of a reptile. And it's working. All of Trump's campaign promises to stop wasting trillions on pointless winless foreign wars of choice, and instead spend that on our own country? Gone. And so much else besides.

It's dangerous to underestimate an enemy. The useful idiot footsoldiers, screaming in mindless herd instinct, are one thing. The people behind them – the Koch brothers, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, others – there is nothing at all mindless or demented about them.

EliteCommInc. , says: July 23, 2018 at 5:04 am GMT

In my view, at the moment the deed is done. The president signed onto the report acknowledged the he accepts the report has even gone as far to say, he blames Pres. Putin

Another backtrack, just muddies the waters, and mat be acceptable because no one wants to accept the real consequences of a president who has repudiated the one state president he most desired to make a deal with -- the jig is up.

Whether kabuki theater or real gamesmanship –

A threshold has been crossed and uncrossing it is going to be tricky and in my further humiliation for the wh. The analysis here mattered before the president agreed with the report. But when he did, this analysis, becomes moot. Having a chit chat about de-escalating nuclear tensions is quaint in light of the president acknowledging that russia has in fact undermined the US democratic process. This is a serious charge and no amount of changing the subject, crying foul, or pretending it was all a big misunderstanding is going to change that.

I think it would have been prudent for the president to hold fire in Helsinki and read the report and then responded . He did make any of those choices. It matters not how exposed the establishment in wanton eagerness to have their way, wh has embraced the matter. it is on record and . . . oh well. I see merit in maintaining his original position of disbelief -- however, the president did a complete about face -- and there is no question of that or the implications.

Ilyana_Rozumova , says: July 23, 2018 at 5:46 am GMT

Hillary lost the election when she could not walk. she lost a shoe, she was shown in the van, and shoe was thrown after her. And that was arranged by Russians.

peterAUS , says: July 23, 2018 at 5:48 am GMT
@TG

Agree.

Having a title "Mass Dementia in the Western Establishment" and approaching this effort as "mass insanity","demented chorus" etc. is simply delusional. They know exactly what they are doing and, it appears, they are doing it well. The are able to create their own reality.

What puzzles me a bit isn't "them" or their servants (media etc.). It's people in general. They appear to be buying that manufactured reality with ease. In this era of instant communications it's .sobering.

This constant shitting on "them" and their servants is fine and dandy but feels as just a feel good exercise.
Perhaps some effort could be spared in trying to analyze and explain common people approach to all this. The buying, hook and sinker, that manufacture.

Anyone with an average intelligence can, in two hours trawling of Internet, get how false all that is. And, yet, here we are. The same people who can spend hours on social media, shopping and entertainment online can't, for SOME reason, figure all that out.

Easy to blame "them" and media/academia/whatever. Maybe it's time to start passing a bit of blame to people in general.

Not holding my breath.

jilles dykstra , says: July 23, 2018 at 7:30 am GMT

In my opinion, no dementia. Too many careers and institutions are built on continuing hostility towards Russia.

First ECB President Duisenberg's ph d thesis had as title 'The economic consequences of peace', something like that, his conclusion was that demilitarisation was possible economically, when controlled sensibly. Did anyone read 'The Iron Mountain Report', I never quite knew what to make of it, but it also is about if demilitarisation is possible.

Barbara Hinckley Sheldon Goldman, American Politics and Government, Glenview Ill.,1990 describes how the USA weapons industry skillfully prevents that spending on useless weapons deminishes. The history of the later Roman empire, the army in control.

Anon , [122] Disclaimer says: July 23, 2018 at 8:07 am GMT
@Daniel Rich

The Russians are by nature cautious. They are a conglomerate of individuals, many of whom remember times when they would be sent by communist tyrants to a gulag for Wrongthink. Of course they're cautious.

Daniel Rich , says: July 23, 2018 at 8:13 am GMT

H.E. Mr. Putin clearly knows what the USA/West is about – Link to Youtube [03:42]

nagra , says: July 23, 2018 at 8:34 am GMT

How Hillary Clinton could even run for presidency after the murder of Moammer Gaddafi and Libya destruction, in any decent civilisation and society. That's planetary shame and the most important question, not DNC hack or anything else, which just trace in wrong direction.

So, Trump should grow some balls and arrest not just her but Barack Obama as well on the same charges, as war criminals as they are, and prove that he really deserves to be trusted. And sacrifice himself in the process if needed as that would do any honest true US president, and he knew what to expect from such position from the start.

It's not TV reality show, as still it is. All he cares about is his ego and popularity, and he is loosing both.

Israel lobby finally see that they put their money in the wrong bank. I intend to believe more that West, namely USA and UK the most, keeps them more hostage in uncertainty for decades than in some Jewish conspiracy.

Also, I also believe that only Russia can guaranty Israel security and peace in the region.

Sean , says: July 23, 2018 at 10:12 am GMT

In political terms, Trump knows where political power lies, and is counting on the influence of the pro-Israel lobby, which recognizes the defeat in Syria and the rising influence of Russia, to save him from the liberal imperialists – a daring bet, but he does not have much choice.

Saudi Arabia spent 40 billion dollars helping Saddam's Iraq in its war against Iran, the cost of US efforts in the Syria civil war have largely been met by the Saudis. The coming attack on Iran will be as much to please the Saudis as to lock Israel into West Bank Arab expulsion mode. The Israel Lobby will is not pushing Donald Trump, they are playing catch up with him. Trump has already shown with the Jerusalem recognition that he is encouraging Israel in unilateral courses of action.

Cagey Beast , says: July 23, 2018 at 10:42 am GMT
@TG

No, I agree with the assessment in this article and its title: the establishment is dangerously detached from reality right now. Our stagnant and locked-down political culture in the West allowed the "elite" to develop a false sense of security and and certainty. They thought they had things pretty much figured out a few years ago but now they're genuinely panicked.

yurivku , says: July 23, 2018 at 10:43 am GMT

Looking to this circus from Russia, to those insane speaches, insulting caricatures in MSM, I understand the huge amount of rotteness of Western society, mainly its high top part, but not only. Even here in comments (not in this particularly article) the percentage of trolls and brainwashed idiots exceeds all I could've imagined. So I stopped writing here – no sense, I believe that something can change only after the dramatic changes in US/West society and that is possible only after a big war/revolution.
So, I'm afraid our future is vague

Cagey Beast , says: July 23, 2018 at 11:06 am GMT
@yurivku

I think you are right. Over the last four years I have been amazed again and again at how broken the political culture of the West has become. It's only outsiders and newcomers to politics who give me hope. I'm thinking of people like Trump or the new governments in Italy and Austria.

lavoisier , says: Website July 23, 2018 at 11:47 am GMT
@peterAUS

Anyone with an average intelligence can, in two hours trawling of Internet, get how false all that is. And, yet, here we are. The same people who can spend hours on social media, shopping and entertainment online can't, for SOME reason, figure all that out.

Easy to blame "them" and media/academia/whatever. Maybe it's time to start passing a bit of blame to people in general. Not holding my breath.

I fully agree with this sentiment. The only reason the evil bastards who control our society can get away with their treachery is because most of the American people are out to lunch on the most important issues of our time. If the sheeple were to take responsibility to inform themselves of what is happening today they would be able to see the lies they are being constantly exposed to as just that–lies. And then, they could put down the beer and turn off the damn sports channel and get angry at what has happened to their country.

The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for ignorant people to remain ignorant.

skrik , says: July 23, 2018 at 12:22 pm GMT
@peterAUS

Maybe it's time to start passing a bit of blame to people in general

Ma-a-ate! Let me give you a quick refresher on "1984:"

1st, the inner party – that's my ccc @ 25.

2nd, the outer party – that's Ike's MI-complex, which I expand to:

The US rogue regime = US-M/I/C/4a†-plex, with dog-wagging-tail, its illegitimate sprog the Zionist/Israeli rogue regime + Js = I/J/Z-plex, all components rife with corruption.

a = academic = econ, psy, leg et al.; 4 = MSM+PFBCs, † = churches

add a few significant stragglers like $ = banksters & ¿ = spies

We can add the -plexes to their main 'allied criminal regimes' and get FUKUSIL.

3rd, the proles in the book are the proles in real life.

4th, 'hate sessions' are mediated by the US/Z-MMH = corrupt&venal Media (aka press, radio + TV, incl. PFBCs = publicly financed broadcasters), Madison Ave., Hollywood etc..

5th, as well as "All politicians lie!" [thanks, but "No, thanks!" to JWHoward], most politicians are a) ccc-puppets and b) traitors to us, we the people and our countries.

Fazit: Even if most proles really were switched-on = fully and fairly informed, their votes would still mean nothing since there is a disconnect [my 5th.] Unless you are thinking 'pitch-forks and tumbrels,' there's nothing effective that we, the people can do. "1984″ is pretty-well exactly our reality, and here is a bit of proof:

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who *manipulate* this unseen mechanism of society *constitute an invisible government* which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society.

There is a lie in there, surrounding "must cooperate" – it's simply not true – but worse, worst: " an invisible government ." The latter is what is termed 'deep state' tyranny; the foul, un-elected and criminal puppet-string manipulators (part of the 1%) – again, the ccc.

The lie-cloud they choke the sheople's minds with is deliberately 'spiced' with scientifically designed psychological propaganda, and that's what does the majority of dumbing-down damage.

Ta ra! The Bernays haze. Choke on that.

PS Q: Is there any hope at all? A: Apart from hope being hopeless policy, there *could* be a solution, whereby a big enough proportion of the 1%, a decent portion [should such a thing exist] could call a halt to the ccc and its murder-most-foul depredations.

MK-DELTABURKE , says: July 23, 2018 at 12:40 pm GMT
@Cagey Beast

Yup. Furthermore, CIA is organized crime and organized crime is CIA. CIA recruits and runs agents in favored criminal syndicates in every illicit trade: drugs, child sexual trafficking, arms, fraud, bustouts, extortion, money laundering. Their purpose is not to interdict the trade but to control it. CIA manages transnational organized crime to top up their budget for unauthorized clandestine operations, like killing JFK. CIA protects its criminal proteges with their chartered impunity. They call off law enforcement with the magic words national security or 'sources and methods.' If the plan gets exposed, CIA's criminal cutouts insulate the agency from exposure.

RFK knew how it works. RFK junior explained the reason for RFK's focus on organized-crime until CIA whacked him. That's why his book was made to sink without a ripple.

https://popularresistance.org/the-mass-media-will-not-review-rfk-jr-s-book-why/

Evenfurthermore, CIA is the government and the government is CIA. Decades ago Fletcher Prouty showed that CIA's deepest-cover illegal moles are embedded in our own government. Every agency with repressive capacity is infiltrated with focal points, who report to CIA handlers without the other agency's knowledge.

https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ST/ST.html

Of course Israel is trying to infiltrate it -- they understand the levers of power.

Assange has got some mighty stinkers in his insurance file. All we can do is hope they're enough to destabilize the CIA Reich that has ruled America since 1949.

Giuseppe , says: July 23, 2018 at 1:01 pm GMT

This screaming comes not only from the US mainstream, but also from that European elite which has been housebroken for seventy years as obedient poodles, dachshunds or corgis in the American menagerie, via intense vetting by US trans-Atlantic "cooperation" associations.

They are CIA assets who do what they're told.

Z-man , says: July 23, 2018 at 1:31 pm GMT

In short, the only chance to end the nuclear war threat may depend on support for Trump from Israel and the Pentagon!

Disgusting, in the case of Izruel, but true.

The hysterical neoliberal globalists seem to have ruled out any other possibility – and perhaps this one too.

Again NEOCONS .

Dagon Shield , says: July 23, 2018 at 2:11 pm GMT

Don't know if the Cabal controls the Homeland but it certainly seems to exert a great deal of its influence and it also becomes apparent that the Crowd has a long history with the Russians as well thus given that, the whole thing appears to be a three ring circus created to avoid being, in all honesty, noticed by the dumbed down bozos who are shouting loudest in the bleachers in time it won't amount to a bag of beans!

AnonFromTN , says: July 23, 2018 at 2:37 pm GMT
@Ilyana_Rozumova

I wonder, were her "speaking fees" from AIPAC and Saudis also arranged by the Russians? Those pesky Russians are everywhere, like Christian God. Did you check under your bed lately?

AnonFromTN , says: July 23, 2018 at 3:09 pm GMT
@Gordon Pratt

I think you are mistaken trying to rationalize the behavior of the political class and their puppet masters. I believe the real driver are not antidepressants, but an obscene greed, which is so blinding that it made MIC profiteers forget that to enjoy the fruits of their thievery they have to be alive.

Finnbar McDougal , says: July 23, 2018 at 3:27 pm GMT
@Michael Kenny

Thank you, Michael, for your very interesting perspective. Considering all the factors, it appears most likely that Trump's apparent groveling was simply the deference an underdeveloped country like the US owes to a strategically-invulnerable great power with superior governance.

Trump probably concluded that he and America have much to learn from Russia's categorically superior human rights performance in all the most comprehensive categories,

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

And from Russia's progressive compliance with a broad range of human rights commitments,

https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/ENACARegion/Pages/RUIndex.aspx

especially in comparison with US bad-faith evasion of a disgracefully derelict subset of the core conventions, and failures prompting multiple urgent follow-on inquiries:

https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/LACRegion/Pages/USIndex.aspx

The summit was a mission civilizatrice for Russia. Trump doubtless knows that the whole world has seen the facts exhaustively documented above by preeminent human rights experts and independent civil society organizations. A bit of humility on Trump's part might help to restore lost US world standing.

Which of the treaty bodies' conclusions and recommendation do you think would do most to mitigate the international disgrace of the USA?

anonymous , [339] Disclaimer says: July 23, 2018 at 3:49 pm GMT

The psychology of the mass of Americans with it's self-righteousness and self-centerdness is really amazing. Just in the last seventeen years the US has invaded or otherwise attacked numerous countries and has caused millions of people to die, become miserable refugees, become orphans and all other manner of evil. Not least of all has been it's creation and patronage of ISIS, one of the most heinous groups in history. Yet Americans have this massive blind spot to the war criminality of all this that their country has committed against the peace of the world. Instead they're being stampeded into some irrational Russia-phobia. It's the US that's been on the march everywhere, labeling those countries that resist it's aggression as being aggressors for being willing to defend themselves. It's all upside-down.

Anonymous , [306] Disclaimer says: July 23, 2018 at 4:51 pm GMT
@follyofwar

(BTW, is this scenario really so far-fetched? After all, Russia did nothing but complain to the UN when the US angels of death destroyed both Iraq and Libya. Could not the same fate soon await Iran?)

You're omitting Syria. It should be pretty obvious that the Russians and the Chinese aren't going to sit back and allow Uncle Scam to destroy Iran when they wouldn't allow it to happen to a much less important country like Syria.

Sofocles , says: July 23, 2018 at 5:10 pm GMT

QUOS VULT IUPITER PERDERE DEMENTAT PRIUS

"Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad"

obviously the Gods want to destroy the so called western man

Jeff Davis , says: July 23, 2018 at 5:28 pm GMT
@Lauri Törni

Feel free to attack me.

TDS is a convenient shorthand for this form of disconnect from reality. That said it is absolutely fascinating to see and puzzle over this geopolitical tectonic event. The old narrative is crumbling, with the result that people like Lauri are fighting desperately to preserve their "sanity", dependent as it is on their tribal submission to the old order and its old narrative (its timeworn lies).

"Science advances one funeral at a time." Max Planck

By which he means that people persist in believing in those "truths" (their belief system) they have held for a lifetime. Only when they die out will a new, revised belief system replaced the old. The same in geopolitics as in science.

Jeff Davis , says: July 23, 2018 at 5:34 pm GMT
@Tulips

"Malefactors of great wealth."

jilles dykstra , says: July 23, 2018 at 5:44 pm GMT
@Anonymous

Assad still is there. The USA was unable to remove Assad, how would they destroy Iran ? The USA has no idea of what Iran built deep in the rocks. Trump screaming in capitals on Twitter against Iran, sign of weakness, in my opinion.

Simple Pseudonym , says: July 23, 2018 at 5:58 pm GMT

American dementia is not new. It is current but after the false flags of almost all of our (US) wars going back as far as the Barbary Pirates, Americans have thrived on being the good guys in an evil world. We are SO GOOD, and the world thinks we are perfect and want to be part of US so much, that any other thought is treasonous.

The fact that getting along with Russia is necessary to NOT create armageddon, is irrelevant to the typical citizen because no matter how wrong, we are blessed and perfect in the eyes of the gawd we pretend to believe in.

So, same old same old

seeing-thru , says: July 23, 2018 at 8:07 pm GMT
@Jeff Davis

Now, now, don't underestimate the Donald! The man has razor sharp brains, is an accomplished mover/rouser of people, and I imagine has oodles of strategic abilities. Look at the facts, hard facts, not at perceptions. No man made tons of legitimate, legal money without possessing some qualities of genius. Never in US history has an outsider come in, overturned the political establishment, taken on the whole pack of media-hyenas, won the election capitalising on the weakness of all his opponents, then tried to do what he said he would do. Who could have imagined that seemingly simple-minded tweets, in simple vocabulary, would be used to beat down the collective might of the massed media? His tweets scored over their collective shrieks and howls! The power of simplicity, no?

This guy is complex, clever, and a very astute strategist. He puts on the rude, crude and buffoonish show to get peoples' attention – and he did get that, did he not? That is called strategy and real smarts.

Yurivku , says: July 24, 2018 at 5:26 pm GMT
@RobinG

UWell, we here in Russia know all this (about Browder) for quite a time. What new did you find? It's just one story in long list of those written and spoken for western idiots like Scripals, MH17, chemicals in Syria and WMD in Iraq, Russian meddling in f-n US elections and so on. Eat it all dummies.

[Aug 26, 2018] The Union of Establishment Republicans and Establishment Democrats

Notable quotes:
"... It began in 2016, when neconservative war criminals formed an alliance with warmongering Democrats. ..."
"... @Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal ..."
"... @Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal ..."
"... @lotlizard ..."
"... @Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal ..."
Aug 26, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

The Union of Establishment Republicans and Establishment Democrats

d by gjohnsit on Fri, 08/24/2018 - 4:42pm

It began in 2016, when neconservative war criminals formed an alliance with warmongering Democrats.

Illustrative of their emerging alliance, as Glenn Greenwald reports, is yet another Beltway foreign policy initiative: the Alliance for Securing Democracy....The Alliance's advisory council includes Jake Sullivan, Clinton's foreign policy adviser, and Mike Morell, acting CIA director under Obama. They sit comfortably with Kristol, Mike Chertoff, homeland security secretary under Bush, and hawkish former Republican congressman Mike Rogers. With a record of catastrophic foreign policy fiascoes, the establishment comes together to strike back.

It turns out that this was only the beginning.
The common enemy here was Russia, and one method of unity is the Renew Democracy Initiative (RDI) .

A group of neocon heartthrobs have banded together with an eclectic array of Russiagaters to form a visionary organization committed to protecting Western democracy....
Celebrated war cheerleader Max Boot, who serves on RDI's board of directors, announced the creation of this highly original organization in a Washington Post op-ed.
... Unlike the dozens of other well-financed bastions of status-quo thinking, RDI aims to "unite both the center-left and center-right" by promoting "liberty, democracy and sanity in an age of discord."

Also on RDI's board of directors is WaPost writer Anne Applebaum who once wrote an op-ed entitled "Should We Assassinate Saddam?"
The organization's president, Richard Hurowitz, is a member of the warmongering Council on Foreign Relations.

In 2018 a new alliance formed, this time between neoconservatives and neoliberals .

For several months, an alliance has been forming between the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and the neoliberal Center for American Progress (CAP). It's the sort of kumbaya not witnessed since wartime Washington a decade ago.

A press release from CAP on May 10 blares: "CAP and AEI Team up to Defend Democracy and Transatlantic Partnership." The same joyous tidings accompanied a public statement issued by AEI on July 31, which stressed that the alliance was meant to resist "the populist assault on the transatlantic community" for the purpose of "defending democracy."

It's hard to tell what they mean when they say "democracy", but it's virtually certain that it isn't in the dictionary.
There's something pathetic and ironic about neconservatives and neoliberals joining forces to defend "democracy" when they are the biggest threats to democracy.
Now we have mainstream conservatives openly cheering for the Democrats in November.

Nor is Boot alone among neocon Never-Trumpers. Syndicated columnist George Will, who left the GOP after the election of Trump, is also agitating for a Democratic congressional takeover...

Another former Republican, MSNBC commentator and onetime congressman Joe Scarborough (also a current member of the Council on Foreign Relations), has set the standard for anti-Trump animus. His colleague at MSNBC, former GOP congressman and McCain presidential campaign chair Steve Schmidt, is yet another fiery Trump detractor rooting for the Dems.

This union of evil and evil comes from the Dems as well.
For instance, liberals new found love of warmonger John McCain .

Forty-four percent of Republicans surveyed in the Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released Wednesday hold a negative view of McCain, while only 35 percent have a positive view of him. Meanwhile, 52 percent of Democrats surveyed now see him in a positive light.

When did so many liberals become worthless, pieces of shit?

The press and liberal groups gushed, and hundreds of headlines approvingly quoted the former president. "Why you should listen when George W. Bush defends the media," declared a headline at the Washington Post. "George W Bush: a welcome return," raved the Guardian, which went so far as to call him a "paragon of virtue." The leftist site ThinkProgress ran a blog post titled "George W. Bush defends the Constitution to rebuke Trump."

"Paragon of virtue"? Has everyone forgotten that he's a war criminal?

Rick Hasen
tted by gjohnsit on Fri, 08/24/2018 - 4:47pm
The Dems new hero

all is forgiven

The White House said that Brennan used his security clearance to "sow division and chaos," and lend a sheen of credibility to his public criticisms of the president. The White House looked into revoking Brennan's clearance after he accused Trump of "treason" for meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin last month.

Straight away, Democrats jumped in to defend Brennan's character and to blast Trump for pulling his clearance. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-California), ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, said that "In adding John Brennan to his enemies list, Trump demonstrates again how deeply insecure and vindictive he is."

Rep. Don Beyer (D-Virginia) called the revocation "the weak, paranoid, authoritarian behavior of a dictator."
...
Brennan's thesaurus-heavy Tweets and self-righteous grandstanding have made him a hero to the anti-Trump #resistance. However, while Democrats are falling over themselves to pat the former career spy on the back, there was a time when Brennan spied on Democratic lawmakers compiling a report into his agency's use of torture tactics – and got away with it.

In 2014, as the Senate Intelligence Committee was compiling a lengthy report into the CIA's use of 'enhanced interrogation techniques' at its secret prisons, chair Dianne Feinstein (D-California) accused Brennan's agency of secretly monitoring the committee's computers and removing sensitive documents.

After initially denying any wrongdoing and rejecting Feinstein's "spurious allegations," Brennan quietly apologized to lawmakers after an internal review proved the senator right.

Despite being caught red-handed spying on his overseers, the Obama administration Department of Justice declined to press charges against Brennan, and he remained in charge of the CIA.

tted by WoodsDweller on Fri, 08/24/2018 - 5:20pm
These jokers wouldn't know "The Left"...

...if it bit them on their fat, hairy asses. The Left starts with those three little words that make my heart beat faster ... "Nationalize the Banks". It doesn't start with "microscopically left of the extreme radical far right". The rich old lady who says "impeachment is off the table" and "we're capitalist and that's that" isn't the freaking Left.

tted by Lily O Lady on Fri, 08/24/2018 - 6:42pm
Your second link leads to The New American

published by the John Birch Society. The Koch's and their evil father are Birchers. I'm kinda creeped out.

tted by Snode on Fri, 08/24/2018 - 6:51pm
That's bipartisanship at it's finest.

and they do it out in the open, and take pride in it. They are protecting democracy, from us. Like the economy, education, health care, democracy is reserved for the 1%. Too dangerous to leave it to us.

tted by Not Henry Kissinger on Fri, 08/24/2018 - 7:26pm
If George Will is for it...

George Will, who left the GOP after the election of Trump, is also agitating for a Democratic congressional takeover...

then I'm against it.

After all, why break a habit of a lifetime?

tted by karl pearson on Fri, 08/24/2018 - 7:34pm
Match made in hell

IMO, neoliberalism and neoconservatism are dependent on each other. How can neoliberal policies be spread around the world without using neoconservative policies? That is why Bush can be popular with the "left". When I read this essay, this song came to mind:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZUrxG8APyiI

tted by dkmich on Fri, 08/24/2018 - 7:40pm
Trump implodes, GOP loses big in 2018

crazy tea party gets ambushed and loses control, establishment neolibs and neocons come into power en masse, all is well.

tted by k9disc on Fri, 08/24/2018 - 11:37pm
tted by Cant Stop the M... on Sat, 08/25/2018 - 12:18pm
This has been in the works for a long time.

A guy on DKos, AntonBursch, once told me he couldn't wait till they "purged all the Greens (which I think meant us) out of the Democratic party, so we can make an alliance with the center-right."

Not really sure what anyone means by "center," anymore; it appears to have something to do with money.

As Alan Grayson once said, "So that's what passes for centrist these days."

itted by Cant Stop the M... on Sat, 08/25/2018 - 12:18pm
@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal Interestingly, one could

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal Interestingly, one could interpret the illegal changing of people's registration data as exactly that: a purge.

mitted by lotlizard on Sun, 08/26/2018 - 1:09am
That to me is the most unforgivable thing Bernie did

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
People were scrimping and saving and skimping on essentials for themselves and their loved ones in order to come up with multiples of $27 to donate to Bernie's campaign, but he couldn't be bothered to defend his own supporters' right to be registered correctly and vote in a fair primary.

Instead he went with the very cabal that had cheated him, and them.

bmitted by mimi on Sun, 08/26/2018 - 2:20am
he never had clear foreign policies outlined

@lotlizard
which I found 'telling'. I think his time is coming to an end.

itted by mimi on Sun, 08/26/2018 - 2:24am
uh, oh, even I remember the AntonBursch guy ...

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
may be it was a sign of 'open mindedness' and 'non-partisanism' over there /s

[Aug 26, 2018] NEO- RussiaGate, the Fox in the Hen House

Aug 26, 2018 | www.veteranstoday.com

Reporting on RussiaGate, as it is called, goes on day after day, always something new, more hacks, more targets, more election rigging or is it all more fake news? Who controls the news, who really controls the news? Perhaps the news itself rigs elections and spreads rumors, promotes fakery and serves foreign interests as well, let's take a look.

First of all, we might ask why no one, certainly not anyone in the paid media, noted that "non-state actors" as they are called in intelligence and counter-terrorism, are the big players nowadays. After all, it is the media that creates reality, that defines truth, though that effort has now migrated to Silicon Valley moguls who now hire failed academics and journalists who have set up "truth panels."

Before that, the fake press reported lies, and any academic who taught otherwise or wrote otherwise was a "conspiracy theorist" and faced loss of tenure, though tenure seldom exists in today's world of rapidly declining academic standards, in the US at least.

A case study for infiltration of US government by a foreign intelligence service, other than Russia, is easy to find. When Australian Rupert Murdoch and his media empire came to America, they clearly bought House Speaker Newt Gingrich in order to have laws changed.

[Aug 25, 2018] How to interfere in a foreign election by Stephen Kinzer

Notable quotes:
"... "I guess we've just got to pull up our socks and back ol' Boris again," Clinton told an aide. "I know the Russian people have to pick a president, and I know that means we've got to stop short of giving a nominating speech for the guy. But we've got to go all the way in helping in every other respect." Later Clinton was even more categorical: "I want this guy to win so bad it hurts." With that, the public and private resources of the United States were thrown behind a Russian presidential candidate. ..."
"... Four months before the election, Clinton arranged for the International Monetary Fund to give Russia a $10.2 billion injection of cash. Yeltsin used some of it to pay for election-year raises and bonuses, but much quickly disappeared into the foreign bank accounts of Russian oligarchs. The message was clear: Yeltsin knows how to shake the Western money tree. In case anyone missed it, Clinton came to Moscow a few weeks later to celebrate with his Russian partner. Oligarchs flocked to Yeltsin's side. American diplomats persuaded one of his rivals to drop out of the presidential race in order to improve his chances. ..."
"... Yeltsin won the election with a reported 54 percent of the vote. The count was suspicious and Yeltsin had wildly violated campaign spending limits, but American groups, some funded in part by Washington, rushed to pronounce the election fair. The New York Times called it "a victory for Russia." In fact, it was the opposite: a victory by a foreign power that wanted to place its candidate in the Russian presidency. ..."
"... American interference in the 1996 Russian election was hardly secret. On the contrary, the press reveled in our ability to shape the politics of a country we once feared. When Clinton maneuvered the IMF into giving Yeltsin and his cronies $10.2 billion, the Washington Post approved: "Now this is the right way to serve Western interests. . . It's to use the politically bland but powerful instrument of the International Monetary Fund." After Yeltsin won, Time put him on the cover -- holding an American flag. Its story was headlined, "Yanks to the Rescue: The Secret Story of How American Advisors Helped Yeltsin Win." The story was later made into a movie called "Spinning Boris." ..."
"... This was the first direct interference in a presidential election in the history of US-Russia relations. It produced bad results. Yeltsin opened his country's assets to looting on a mass scale. ..."
"... It is a delightful irony that shows how unwise it can be to interfere in another country's politics. If the United States had not crashed into a presidential election in Russia 22 years ago, we almost certainly would not be dealing with Putin today. ..."
Aug 19, 2018 | www.bostonglobe.com

FOR ONE OF THE world's major powers to interfere systematically in the presidential politics of another country is an act of brazen aggression. Yet it happened. Sitting in a distant capital, political leaders set out to assure that their favored candidate won an election against rivals who scared them. They succeeded. Voters were maneuvered into electing a president who served the interest of the intervening power. This was a well-coordinated, government-sponsored project to subvert the will of voters in another country -- a supremely successful piece of political vandalism on a global scale.

The year was 1996. Russia was electing a president to succeed Boris Yeltsin, whose disastrous presidency, marked by the post-Soviet social collapse and a savage war in Chechnya, had brought his approval rating down to the single digits. President Bill Clinton decided that American interests would be best served by finding a way to re-elect Yeltsin despite his deep unpopularity. Yeltsin was ill, chronically alcoholic, and seen in Washington as easy to control. Clinton bonded with him. He was our "Manchurian Candidate."

"I guess we've just got to pull up our socks and back ol' Boris again," Clinton told an aide. "I know the Russian people have to pick a president, and I know that means we've got to stop short of giving a nominating speech for the guy. But we've got to go all the way in helping in every other respect." Later Clinton was even more categorical: "I want this guy to win so bad it hurts." With that, the public and private resources of the United States were thrown behind a Russian presidential candidate.

Part of the American plan was public. Clinton began praising Yeltsin as a world-class statesman . He defended Yeltsin's scorched-earth tactics in Chechnya, comparing him to Abraham Lincoln for his dedication to keeping a nation together. As for Yeltsin's bombardment of the Russian Parliament in 1993, which cost 187 lives, Clinton insisted that his friend had "bent over backwards" to avoid it. He stopped mentioning his plan to extend NATO toward Russia's borders, and never uttered a word about the ravaging of Russia's formerly state-owned economy by kleptocrats connected to Yeltsin. Instead he gave them a spectacular gift.

Four months before the election, Clinton arranged for the International Monetary Fund to give Russia a $10.2 billion injection of cash. Yeltsin used some of it to pay for election-year raises and bonuses, but much quickly disappeared into the foreign bank accounts of Russian oligarchs. The message was clear: Yeltsin knows how to shake the Western money tree. In case anyone missed it, Clinton came to Moscow a few weeks later to celebrate with his Russian partner. Oligarchs flocked to Yeltsin's side. American diplomats persuaded one of his rivals to drop out of the presidential race in order to improve his chances.

RELATED

Four American political consultants moved to Moscow to help direct Yeltsin's campaign. The campaign paid them $250,000 per month for advice on "sophisticated methods of polling, voter contact and campaign organization." They organized focus groups and designed advertising messages aimed at stoking voters' fears of civil unrest. When they saw a CNN report from Moscow saying that voters were gravitating toward Yeltsin because they feared unrest, one of the consultants shouted in triumph: "It worked! The whole strategy worked. They're scared to death!"

Yeltsin won the election with a reported 54 percent of the vote. The count was suspicious and Yeltsin had wildly violated campaign spending limits, but American groups, some funded in part by Washington, rushed to pronounce the election fair. The New York Times called it "a victory for Russia." In fact, it was the opposite: a victory by a foreign power that wanted to place its candidate in the Russian presidency.

American interference in the 1996 Russian election was hardly secret. On the contrary, the press reveled in our ability to shape the politics of a country we once feared. When Clinton maneuvered the IMF into giving Yeltsin and his cronies $10.2 billion, the Washington Post approved: "Now this is the right way to serve Western interests. . . It's to use the politically bland but powerful instrument of the International Monetary Fund." After Yeltsin won, Time put him on the cover -- holding an American flag. Its story was headlined, "Yanks to the Rescue: The Secret Story of How American Advisors Helped Yeltsin Win." The story was later made into a movie called "Spinning Boris."

This was the first direct interference in a presidential election in the history of US-Russia relations. It produced bad results. Yeltsin opened his country's assets to looting on a mass scale. He turned the Chechen capital, Grozny, into a wasteland. Standards of living in Russia fell dramatically. Then, at the end of 1999, plagued by health problems, he shocked his country and the world by resigning. As his final act, he named his successor: a little-known intelligence officer named Vladimir Putin. It is a delightful irony that shows how unwise it can be to interfere in another country's politics. If the United States had not crashed into a presidential election in Russia 22 years ago, we almost certainly would not be dealing with Putin today.

[Aug 25, 2018] Is Trump Pushing Germany And Russia Together by Tom Luongo

This "Trump vs Davos globalists" theme is unconvincing. Trump actions are ruthless globalist actions, who wnat to preverse the US status of superpower at all costs, even by abrogating important treaties. He might be not a neoliberal globalist thouth -- he does not offere equl seats on the table to vassals.
Trumpo statement that if Germany buy Russian gas it does not need NATO is very shroud indeed.
Notable quotes:
"... Optics are important and this image captures what both parties wanted to convey. This meeting is the beginning of a shift in the relationship between Germany and Russia for the better. ..."
"... The obvious answer is necessity brought about by pressure being placed on both countries by Donald Trump through sanctions and tariffs and their shared interests represented by the Nordstream 2 pipeline. ..."
"... But, this meeting went far deeper than that, especially since Merkel's Foreign Minister Heiko Maas boldly proclaimed that Europe needs an alternative to the SWIFT system of international electronic payments so as to keep global trade alive while the U.S. further weaponizes the U.S. dollar ..."
"... Why would Merkel allow Maas to state this publicly and why was it picked up by that establishment stenographer The Financial Times ? ..."
"... If Trump's goal, as presented by much of the European press (as presented here by Gilbert Doctorow), is to regain complete subjugation of Europe to American dominance, then this seems counter-productive. ..."
"... SWIFT is the main lever on which much of the U.S.'s sanctions power rests. Because it is through SWIFT that transactions can be tracked, payments halted and fines imposed. That none of this is strictly legal is irrelevant in the game of power-politics. ..."
"... This undermines the EU's credibility at a foundational level. It shows them to be the toothless and, in EU President Donald Tusk's case, witless when faced with opposition to their rule that isn't supported by The Davos Crowd, which Trump most definitely doesn't represent. ..."
"... And I've talked about these in the past. His real goal is the destruction of that post WWII institutional order which in his mind bankrupts the U.S. treasury through massive trade deficits. ..."
"... I said back in June that Trump's leaving the JCPOA was all part of his strategy to drive a wedge between the U.S. and Germany. The Davos Crowd needs that deal to keep the dream of transferring the power of the world back to Europe from the U.S. via cheap, Iranian energy and keep the conflict between Israel/Saudi Arabia and Iran front and center to foment global chaos awhile keeping Russia from getting rich again. ..."
"... It needs that to support the narrative we need NATO to protect us from the inevitable Russian attack after we provoke them into it. This keeps the money flowing through the banks and lobbyists while draining the U.S. dry through the military/industrial complex. ..."
"... And despite relentless Russia bashing since before Trump was elected, the American people overwhelmingly want peace with Russia, not war. ..."
"... By driving a wedge between Germany and the US over NATO and attacking the foundations of the German economy Trump is ensuring the current rapprochement between Germany and Russia? ..."
Aug 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Tom Luongo,

Vladimir Putin's charm tour of Germany and Austria last weekend is a significant sign of change to come.

To the U.S. and European press Putin is only a step or two away from Hitler reincarnated (thanks chiefly to Bill Browder). It serves the purpose of maintaining the post WWII institutional order.

But, Putin is always nothing but relentlessly patient in his diplomatic efforts, even when European leaders, like Merkel, treat him and Russia poorly. She is, after all, the leading mouthpiece and political ally of The Davos Crowd that believes they run the world.

The conduct of his Foreign Ministry under Sergei Lavrov always strikes the perfect balance between bluntness and diplo-speak.

So, color me surprised when I see the official photos of his meeting with Merkel carefully framed to paint him in a positive light.

Putin in light blues and grays, Merkel in green, the fountain in the background, leaning in looking directly at each other and a simple Sunday morning chat.

If I didn't know better I'd be expecting them to share photos of their grandkids, well, Putin's grandkids anyway.

Optics are important and this image captures what both parties wanted to convey. This meeting is the beginning of a shift in the relationship between Germany and Russia for the better.

And the question is why?

The obvious answer is necessity brought about by pressure being placed on both countries by Donald Trump through sanctions and tariffs and their shared interests represented by the Nordstream 2 pipeline.

But, this meeting went far deeper than that, especially since Merkel's Foreign Minister Heiko Maas boldly proclaimed that Europe needs an alternative to the SWIFT system of international electronic payments so as to keep global trade alive while the U.S. further weaponizes the U.S. dollar.

The U.S. just seized another $5 billion of Russian 'oligarch' money using Credit Suisse as its enforcement arm.

Again, the question is why?

Why would Merkel allow Maas to state this publicly and why was it picked up by that establishment stenographer The Financial Times ?

Why is Merkel, their main mouthpiece, making googly eyes with Putin who, like Trump, represents an existential threat to their continued rule and is the leader of the pendulum swing away from globalism?

If Trump's goal, as presented by much of the European press (as presented here by Gilbert Doctorow), is to regain complete subjugation of Europe to American dominance, then this seems counter-productive.

SWIFT Justice?

SWIFT is the main lever on which much of the U.S.'s sanctions power rests. Because it is through SWIFT that transactions can be tracked, payments halted and fines imposed. That none of this is strictly legal is irrelevant in the game of power-politics.

Banks like Credit Suisse can't function without access to SWIFT.

So they will roll over to the pressure. That's why the response from EU leadership to Trump's abandoning the JCPOA has been far more bark than bite. Because the measures implemented to protect European businesses from U.S. retaliation against them hold no weight with the companies staring at billions in losses.

Case in point: France's Total pulling out of a multi-billion exploration deal with Iran.

Merkel's response? $18 million in aid to Tehran for their troubles. Hardly seems fair does it?

This undermines the EU's credibility at a foundational level. It shows them to be the toothless and, in EU President Donald Tusk's case, witless when faced with opposition to their rule that isn't supported by The Davos Crowd, which Trump most definitely doesn't represent.

So, again, the question is why?

All of this seems incredibly contradictory, at times even to a jaded and cynical observer like me. Until you step back for a second and think bigger picture and ask the most important question of all.

What are Trump's real goals?

It's Good to Have Goals

And I've talked about these in the past. His real goal is the destruction of that post WWII institutional order which in his mind bankrupts the U.S. treasury through massive trade deficits.

And in a word that means . NATO.

Trump goal is the dissolution of NATO. He wants it dismantled because it is a massive drain on our capital base. Building weapons and maintaining bases in Europe is expensive and that money is needed here. He knows this.

Even the mere hint of this has The Davos Crowd in apoplexy. Hence, the post-Helsinki freak out. Hence, the drive to impeach him over Stormy Freaking Daniels. It's pathetic.

I said back in June that Trump's leaving the JCPOA was all part of his strategy to drive a wedge between the U.S. and Germany. The Davos Crowd needs that deal to keep the dream of transferring the power of the world back to Europe from the U.S. via cheap, Iranian energy and keep the conflict between Israel/Saudi Arabia and Iran front and center to foment global chaos awhile keeping Russia from getting rich again.

It needs that to support the narrative we need NATO to protect us from the inevitable Russian attack after we provoke them into it. This keeps the money flowing through the banks and lobbyists while draining the U.S. dry through the military/industrial complex.

The problem is that that narrative is garbage. And despite relentless Russia bashing since before Trump was elected, the American people overwhelmingly want peace with Russia, not war.

Poland and the Baltics sound like Democrats unhinged hysterical children over the 'threat of Russian aggression.'

This is why Trump is also pressuring Turkey at the same time. He knows Europe is vulnerable to Turkey's implosion. Turkey and Germany are major trading partners and the vast bulk of Turkey's foreign currency exposure is owned by European banks, making them, as I've said previously, Ground Zero for the debt bomb.

So the final question then is this.

Has this been Trump's goal the entire time? Is this what Trump and Putin discussed behind closed doors in Helsinki?

The NATO Wedge

By driving a wedge between Germany and the US over NATO and attacking the foundations of the German economy Trump is ensuring the current rapprochement between Germany and Russia?

Merkel, for her part, has been so terminally weakened by her immigration policy and strong-armed approach to dissent that this whirlwind weekender by Putin was as much for her benefit, politically, as his.

The implication being that if Merkel wants to stay in power with her weakening coalition and poll numbers it's time for her to reverse course. And if that means cozying up to Russia then so be it.

Merkel will continue to talk a good game about Crimea and Ukraine while Putin will speak directly to the German people about ending the humanitarian crisis in Syria as a proxy for ending the threat of further immigration.

This outflanks Merkel's position and undermines George Soros' goals of the cultural destruction of Europe. At this point, politically, how can Merkel even argue against that without betraying her true loyalties?

And that's what makes the implications of this Summit-That-Wasn't so interesting.

If this is indeed the case then the future of the world rests on the mid-term elections and whether Trump is not indicted for having sex with a couple of porn stars.

I almost feel dirty writing that.

* * *

To support more work like this and get access to exclusive commentary, stock picks and analysis tailored to your needs join my more than 155 Patrons on Patreon and see if I have what it takes to help you navigate a world going slowly mad.

[Aug 25, 2018] Trump is deliberately pushing Germany and Russia to make deals in order to shuffle the deck by Gilbert Docotrow

Notable quotes:
"... Meanwhile, what is surely the single most urgent issue for both sides was not mentioned at all in their opening statements: namely how to respond to US President Donald Trump's new sanctions on Russia and on participants in the Nord Stream II gas pipeline project that both countries support. ..."
"... The Washington Post ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... The Washington Post ..."
"... New York Times' ..."
"... I close out this little survey of English-speaking media by pointing to an article in The Guardian ..."
"... Both Merkel and Putin are now facing the same challenge: US foreign policy has become unpredictable, both for its allies and for rivals like Moscow. Notwithstanding the warm discussions Donald Trump had with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, the American administration has just announced a new wave of sanctions on Russia relating to the Skripal affair. ..."
"... La Libre Belgique ..."
"... "Germany is not the only 'Western' nation to return to the Kremlin. Putin is taking full advantage of the boomerang effect caused by the policies of Donald Trump, who, by hammering away at his customary allies is pushing them to other interlocutors. By looking for confrontations, imposing taxes and sanctions while thinking that this rampant isolationism will make the United States 'great again,' Trump is helping to build a wall that he no doubt did not imagine, that of the anti-Trump people." ..."
"... Frankfurter Allgemeine ..."
"... Putin is under economic pressure to find closer ties with Europe. In Austria, which now chairs the European Council, he has allies in the government, namely the extreme right populists of the Freedom Party which installed Kneissl. But the way to Europe passes by way of Merkel and Putin knows that. ..."
"... Vremya Pokazhet ..."
"... Frankfurter Allgemeine ..."
"... In my view, Trump's use of sanctions and tariffs here, there, everywhere has a totally different logic from what is adduced in the writings of my peers in the analyst community. He invokes them because 1. they are within his sole power as Chief Executive and 2. they are in principle as American as apple pie and do not require grand explanations in Congress or before the public. As to why he invokes them, there you have to look at Trump's foreign policy from a 360 degree perspective and not merely as it relates to Putin or to Erdogan or to any of the small slices we see discussed in the news. ..."
"... When viewed in the round, it is obvious that Trump is reshuffling the deck. He is doing what he can to break up NATO and the other military alliances around the world which are consuming more than half of the U.S. defense budget and do not arguably provide greater security to the American homeland than the country can do for itself without fixed alliances and overseas bases. ..."
"... By contrast, what Trump is now doing is not a blunder or a bit of bluster. Even if he is not conversant with the whole of the Realist School of international relations, as surely he is not, he does grasp the fundamentals, namely the centrality of the sovereign nation-state and of the balance of power mechanism by which these states are constantly changing alignments of these nation-states to ensure no one enjoys hegemony . ..."
"... Accordingly, I insist that the possible rapprochement of Russia and Germany will be in line with Trump's reshuffling of the deck not in spite of it. ..."
Aug 23, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Reading the tea leaves of the Putin-Merkel meeting

During this past Saturday, 18 August, Russian President Vladimir Putin made a brief visit to Austria to attend the wedding of the country's Minister of Foreign Affairs Karin Kneissl. Per the Kremlin, this stop of several hours in the Styrian wine country not far from the border with Slovenia was a "purely private" side excursion "on the road to Germany" for the state visit with Chancellor Angela Merkel starting later in the day at the Meseberg Palace, the federal guest house 60 km north of Berlin.

Journalists were admitted to film the wedding party, including Putin's dance with the 53 year old bride. No questions were taken and no statements were issued by the President's Press Secretary, who also was present. We know only that on the return journey to Graz airport, Putin was accompanied by Austria's Chancellor Sebastian Kurz. Presumably they had some issues to discuss that may be characterized as official talks.

Prior to their meeting both Putin and Angela Merkel made statements to the press listing the topics they intended to discuss. We may assume that these lists were not exhaustive. Comparing their lists, we find that the respective priorities of the parties were in inverted order, with economic cooperation at the head of Putin's list while regulating the Donbass crisis in Ukraine was the top concern of Merkel. Moreover, the content of issues bearing the same heading was very different. Both sides spoke of Syria, but whereas for Putin the issue for discussion is the humanitarian crisis of refugees, ensuring their return to their homes from camps in Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey by raising funds to repair and replace fundamental infrastructure destroyed in the war. For Merkel, the number one issue in Syria is to prevent the Russian-backed Syrian armed forces from creating a new humanitarian disaster by their ongoing campaign to retake Idlib province from the militants opposed to Bashar Assad.

Meanwhile, what is surely the single most urgent issue for both sides was not mentioned at all in their opening statements: namely how to respond to US President Donald Trump's new sanctions on Russia and on participants in the Nord Stream II gas pipeline project that both countries support.

As was explained at the outset, there was to be no press conference or joint statement issued at the conclusion of the talks. The only information we have is that Merkel and Putin conferred for more than three hours, which is in itself quite extraordinary and suggests that some understandings may have been achieved.

In a word, the potentially very important diplomatic developments of Saturday remain, for once, a state secret of the parties, with no leaks for the press to parse. And yet there is material here worthy of our consideration. I have in mind the interpretations of what might transpire before, during and after the events of Saturday in the news and commentary reportage of various countries having greater or lesser interest in Russian affairs. Indeed, my perusal of French, Belgian, German, British, American and Russian news media shows great diversity of opinion and some penetrating and highly pertinent remarks based on different information bases. This material is all essential if we are to make sense of the behavior of the parties on the international stage in the coming weeks.

In this essay, I will set out what I have found per country, starting with the least attentive to detail - the United States - and ending with those who offered the best informed and most interested reportage, Germany and Russia. I will conclude with my own reading of the tea leaves.

* * * *

Let us take The Washington Post and The New York Times as our markers for how US mainstream media reported on Putin's meetings this past Saturday.

On the 18th, The Washington Post carried in its online edition two articles dealing with the Putin diplomatic doings. "At Austrian foreign minister's wedding, Putin brings the music, the flowers and the controversy" was written by the newspaper's bureau chief in Berlin, Griff Witte. It is accompanied by video clips of Vladimir Putin dancing with the bride and speaking, in German, to the wedding party seated at their banquet table. The journalist touches very briefly on the main political dimensions of Putin's visit to Austria, including the party relations between United Russia and the far right Freedom Party in Austria's ruling coalition which nominated Kneissl for her post, the criticism of Putin's participation in the wedding coming from the Opposition parties in Austria who see it as a violation of the government's own ambition to be a neutral bridge between East and West, and the issue of Putin's sowing division on the continent. The only criticism one might offer is that the article is superficial, that each of the issues raised deserves in-depth analysis separately.

The newspaper's second article online, which spread its net more broadly and covered the meeting with Merkel in Germany as well as the visit in Austria, came from an Associated Press reporter, not its own staff. Here again, the problem is that issues surrounding the meetings are not more than bullet points, and the reader is given no basis for reaching an independent finding on what has happened..

The New York Times' feature article "Merkel and Putin Sound Pragmatic Notes After Years of Tension," also published on the 18th and datelined Berlin was cited by Russian television news for a seemingly positive valuation of the talks in Meseberg Palace. However, the content of the article by reporter Melissa Eddy is more cautious, highlighting the pattern of "conflicts and reconciliations" that have marked German-Russian relations over the centuries and seeing the present stage not as a warming of relations but instead as reaching for compromises "on Syria, energy and other key issues while maintaining their differences over Russia's role in the conflict in Ukraine." She sees the Syrian issue as one where German and Russian interests may be closest given that refugees from the Middle East are now a German preoccupation with political weight. The reporter cites several experts attached to well-known institutes in Germany that are generally skeptical about Russia's intentions. But the end result is better informed than most NYT reporting on Russia even if it leaves us wondering what will result from the Saturday diplomacy.

In both mainstream papers there is no attempt to find a link between Putin's two visits on Saturday.

I close out this little survey of English-speaking media by pointing to an article in The Guardian from the 18th entitled "Putin urges Europe to help rebuild Syria so refugees can return." This piece comes from the Agence France-Presse in Berlin. It is not much more than a recitation of the lists of topics for discussion that Putin and Merkel issued before their talks. But the reporter has made his choice for the most important of them, Syria and refugees.

The French-language press does not seem to have been very interested in Putin's "private" trip to the wedding of the Austrian foreign minister, but was definitely keen to discuss Putin's trip to Berlin. On the day preceding the Putin-Merkel meeting, the French press offered a clear concept of where things were headed. We read in Figaro , "Merkel receives Putin Saturday to renew a difficult dialogue." A caption in bold just below is more eye-catching: "While the German Chancellor has become the main opponent to the Russian President within the EU, the policy of sanctions conducted by Washington has led to a rapprochement between Berlin and Moscow with regard to numerous issues."

The reporter notes that following the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014, relations between the two heads of state had become quite bad and in four years they met only when obliged to do so during international summits.

"But starting three months ago, their diplomatic exchanges have intensified: in May Angela Merkel met the chief of the Kremlin in Sochi, Russia. In July, she met the head of the Russian diplomatic corps, Sergei Lavrov, in Berlin. By inviting Vladimir Putin this time, the German Chancellor has promised 'in-depth discussions.' "She is pursuing a pragmatic attempt at normalization of German-Russian relations, because the international realities have changed,' explains Stefan Meister, director of the Robert Bosch Center for Russia."

And how has the calculus of international relations changed? Both Merkel and Putin are now facing the same challenge: US foreign policy has become unpredictable, both for its allies and for rivals like Moscow. Notwithstanding the warm discussions Donald Trump had with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, the American administration has just announced a new wave of sanctions on Russia relating to the Skripal affair.

"The American policy represents a danger for the Russian economy and a threat to German interests."

A spokesperson from Merkel's CDU party responsible for foreign policy is quoted on the possible dangers of secondary sanctions being directed at Germany through the application of US extraterritoriality against those failing to respect the new sanctions on Russia.

The article explains the issues surrounding the Nord Steam 2 pipeline, and in particular Trump's hostility to the project for its locking in German dependence on Russian hydrocarbons.

And the author points to the common interests of Germany and Russia over maintenance of the Iranian nuclear deal as a factor powering the rapprochement of the two countries. Here again the common threat is Donald Trump and American sanctions against those companies which continue to trade with Iran.

The article concludes that divergent views of Russia and Germany over Ukraine and Syria exclude any breakthrough at the meeting on Saturday. But nonetheless the dialogue that was lacking these several past years is being recreated.

In its weekend edition issued on 18 August, the Belgian mainstream daily La Libre Belgique was even more insistent on interpreting the Merkel-Putin meeting as a consequence of the policies of Donald Trump. Their editorial captures the sense very nicely in its tongue-in-cheek headline: "Trump is the best 'ally' of Putin."

La Libre sees Vladimir Putin's latest diplomatic initiatives as directly resulting from the way his host at the White House has annoyed everyone. Moreover, his outreach is welcomed:

"Germany is not the only 'Western' nation to return to the Kremlin. Putin is taking full advantage of the boomerang effect caused by the policies of Donald Trump, who, by hammering away at his customary allies is pushing them to other interlocutors. By looking for confrontations, imposing taxes and sanctions while thinking that this rampant isolationism will make the United States 'great again,' Trump is helping to build a wall that he no doubt did not imagine, that of the anti-Trump people."
The editors point to Turkish President Erdogan's clear signal that he is now looking for other allies. He has done his calculations and has said he has more to gain with Moscow than with Washington.'

The editorial concludes that a summit on reconstruction of Syria might even take place at the start of September between Moscow, Ankara, Paris and Berlin. The conclusion? "Putin has taken center stage on the chessboard. Thank you, Mr. Trump."

The article filed by La Libre 's correspondent in Berlin, Sebastien Millard, bears a heading that matches the editorial view of the newspaper: "Merkel and Putin - allies of convenience facing Trump." The author credits Donald Trump with being the catalyst for the resumption of dialogue between Germany and Russia; they are telling Washington that they do not accept its blackmail. He notes that we should not expect any reversal of alliances. There are too many differences of view between Berlin and Moscow on a variety of issues.

* * * *

The German press paid a good deal of attention to Vladimir Putin's visit to Austria for the wedding of Foreign Minister Karin Kreissl.

In an article posted on the 16th entitled "Suspicion that Austria is a Trojan horse," Die Welt highlighted the negatives of Putin's presence. Quoting an "expert from the University of Innsbruck" this does not cast a good light on the country. They anticipate political fall-out. This will impair Austria's ability as chair of the European Council to play a role of intermediary in the Ukraine conflict. The only beneficiary of the visit will be the the Russia-friendly be the Russia-friendly Freedom Party. For Putin, being a guest provides him with the opportunity to demonstrate that he is not isolated but is instead highly welcome in society of an EU country.

As for the coming meeting with Merkel on Saturday evening, Die Welt in a related article of the same day lists the issues for discussion. Without taking a position, it cites experts for and against the Nord Stream II pipeline and other issues on the list.

Welt's report from the wedding party on the 18th was gossipy and unfriendly, comparing it to a wedding of some European royal family because of the extraordinary guest list that included the country's chancellor, vice chancellor, and defense minister as well as the head of OPEC and...Vladimir Putin. With typical German petty financial accounting, they reckon that the 500 police and other security measures needed for the safety of the highly placed guests cost the Austrian tax payers 250,000 euros.

A separate article in Die Welt deals with Putin's meeting with Merkel at the Meseberg Palace. The emphasis here is on Merkel's remarks during the Statement prior to the talks that cooperation with Russia is "vital" to deal with many conflicts globally and that both sides bear responsibility to find solutions.

The article quotes from the opening statements of the leaders on all the issues in their list for discussion - Syria, Ukraine, Nord Stream II. We are given bare facts without any analysis to speak of.

The other major mainstream daily Frankfurter Allgemeine in its Saturday, 18 August edition offered separate articles on Putin's visits to Austria and Germany.

The article on Karin Kneissl's wedding heads off in a very different direction from the reporting in other media that I have summarized above. FAZ notes that Kneissl is rarely in the headlines and it asks: who is she? They answer the question with some curious details. We learn that Kneissl was once active in competitive sports and even now swims a kilometer every day. For many years she has lived on a small farmstead with a couple of boxers, two ponies, hens and cats. Each morning her chauffeur takes her and the dogs to her office in Vienna, to return in the evening. Regrettably, FAZ does not take this curious biographical sketch further. No connection is drawn between her personality and the Russian President's acceptance of her invitation to her wedding.

FAZ similarly has chosen to amuse rather than inform in its coverage of the meeting in Berlin entitled "Sparkling wine in Austria, sparkling water in Meseberg." They comment on how Putin arrived half an hour late, on how it is hard to see how the meeting could be characterized as a success. They stress that we know nothing about the content of the consultations. Then they tick off the opening positions of the sides as set out in their statements before the talks.

Spiegel online risks more by giving more interpretation and less bare facts. Its article entitled "Something of a new start" suggests that a rapprochement is underway and that both Merkel and Putin have a lot in play. Unlike the other German press we have mentioned, Spiegel sees a direct link between Putin's attending the wedding in Styria and his visit to Merkel.

Putin is under economic pressure to find closer ties with Europe. In Austria, which now chairs the European Council, he has allies in the government, namely the extreme right populists of the Freedom Party which installed Kneissl. But the way to Europe passes by way of Merkel and Putin knows that.

Meanwhile, says Spiegel , Germany also is interested in improving relations with Russia despite all the controversy, namely due to the growing conflicts with US President Donald Trump. We don't know the exact content of the talks which were confidential, but there is some movement now between Germany and Russia.

Spiegel remains cautious. Cordiality does not enter into the relationship. The parties keep their distance. There is no laughter to lighten the atmosphere. Yet, it concludes: "The talks have prospects and we can see the wish to make progress through common positions, and without being silent about contradictions. Diplomatic normality, as it were. A step forward."

* * * *

If the great bulk of commentary in the West about Putin's diplomatic weekend was reserved and stayed by the bare facts without speculation, Russian television more than made up for dryness. I point in particular to two political talk shows which invited a mixture of experts from different backgrounds.

Let us begin with the show Vremya Pokazhet (Time will tell) on state television's Pervy Kanal . Their Friday, 17 August program focused on Putin's forthcoming visit to the wedding 'on the road to Berlin,' which several panelists saw as a strong signal to Germany that Russ1+
ia had other channels to the EU if Germany refuses to be its intercessor.

The visit was said to be breaking new ground in diplomatic practice. According to panelist Andrei Baklanov, deputy chair of the association of Russian diplomats, this kind of positive, human diplomacy is Russia's answer to the negative behavior in international affairs that has occupied center stage in the recent past - sanctions, fake news, etc. As another panelist interjected, this is the first time that a Russian head of state attended a wedding abroad since Tsar Nicholas did so in Germany in 1913.

Baklanov proceeded to provide details about the bride, however, bringing out aspects of her career that are far more relevant to her attracting the attention of Putin than the Frankfurter Allgemeine produced. We learn that she grew up in Amman, Jordan, that she speaks 8 languages: Arabic, Hebrew, Magyar, French, Spanish, Italian, English as well as her native German. She studied Near Eastern languages in Vienna University, in the Jewish University of Jerusalem, in the University of Jordan and also graduated from the National School of Administration in France. She holds a doctorate in law. She is a non-party minister, which also attests to her generally recognized professionalism. For all of these reasons, she is a good fit with Putin's determination to find supporters in Europe for investments to restore Syrian infrastructure and enable the return of refugees.

The country's most prestigious talk show, "Sunday Evening with Vladimir Solovyov," had a couple of Duma members and a well-known politician from Liberal circles comment on the diplomacy of the day before.

Sergey Mironov, leader of the socialist party Fair Russia said that despite Merkel's warning in advance not to expect breakthroughs it is likely progress was made in agreeing how to deal with US sanctions. This would be tested in the coming days.

As for the link between the visits to Austria and Germany, the representative of a pro-business party Sergey Stankevich reminded viewers that Germany and Austria are the market makers in Europe for Russian gas. Nord Stream II gas may land in Germany but a large part of it will be pumped further to Austria's hub for distribution elsewhere in Europe. Whatever may have been said publicly, Stankevich believes that Merkel and Putin did agree on many if not all the subjects named before the start: Iran, Syria, Ukraine, Nord Stream.

Russian media coverage of the Saturday travels of their President continued on Russian news programs into Monday, with video clips of Putin dancing at the wedding and speaking alongside Merkel before entering into their talks at Meseberg Palace.

* * * *

Looking back at the media coverage of Putin's visits to Austria and Germany on 18 August, and with all due respect to those who opinions are different from mine, I find that the most helpful for our understanding of the present day international situation were the report and editorial in Belgium's Libre Belgique and the unruly, risky but at times brilliant insights on Russian television.

What comes out of this is the understanding that the visits to a wedding in Austria and to the federal Chancellor outside Berlin were directly linked in Russian diplomatic strategy, that Russia is playing the Austrian card during the country's six months at the helm of the European Council in Brussels, that Russia is pushing for a multi-party relief effort for Syria to facilitate the return of refugees to their home and pacification of the war-torn country. The web of common interests that Russia is pursuing has at its core the fragility of the current world order and generalized anxiety of leading countries due to America's aggressive pursuit of narrow national interest under Donald Trump as seen in his tariff wars and sanctions directed at friends and foes alike.

Where I differ from the interpretations set out in the foregoing press reports is in my understanding of what Trump is doing and why.

The nearly universal assumption of commentators is that Trump's policies known as "Make America Great" are ignorant and doomed to fail. They are assumed to be isolationist, withdrawing America from the world community.

However, Trump did not invent bullying of US allies. That was going strong under George W. Bush, with his challenge "you are either with us or against us" when he sought to align the West behind his invasion of Iraq in 2003 without authorization of the UN Security Council. His more urbane successor Barack Obama was no kinder to U.S. allies, who were slapped with crushing fines for violations of U.S. sanctions on Iran, just to mention one way in which they were kept in line. And the U.S. Congress today is no more reasonable and diplomatic than the President in the brutal unilateral sanctions it has on its own initiative advocated against not just Russia but also against Turkey and other states which are not snapping to attention with respect to purchases of military materiel from Russia.

What made U.S. bullying tolerable before Trump was the ideological smokescreen of "shared values," namely democracy promotion, human rights and rule of law, that all members of the alliances could swear to and which set them apart from the still unenlightened parts of the globe where autocrats hold sway.

In my view, Trump's use of sanctions and tariffs here, there, everywhere has a totally different logic from what is adduced in the writings of my peers in the analyst community. He invokes them because 1. they are within his sole power as Chief Executive and 2. they are in principle as American as apple pie and do not require grand explanations in Congress or before the public. As to why he invokes them, there you have to look at Trump's foreign policy from a 360 degree perspective and not merely as it relates to Putin or to Erdogan or to any of the small slices we see discussed in the news.

When viewed in the round, it is obvious that Trump is reshuffling the deck. He is doing what he can to break up NATO and the other military alliances around the world which are consuming more than half of the U.S. defense budget and do not arguably provide greater security to the American homeland than the country can do for itself without fixed alliances and overseas bases.

The first two presidencies of this millennium undid the country's greatest geopolitical achievement of the second half of the 20th century: the informal alliance with China against Russia that put Washington at the center of all global politics. Bush and Obama did that by inattention and incomprehension of what was at stake. That inattention was an expression of American hubris in the unipolar world which, it was assumed, was the new normal, not a blip.

By contrast, what Trump is now doing is not a blunder or a bit of bluster. Even if he is not conversant with the whole of the Realist School of international relations, as surely he is not, he does grasp the fundamentals, namely the centrality of the sovereign nation-state and of the balance of power mechanism by which these states are constantly changing alignments of these nation-states to ensure no one enjoys hegemony . We see this understanding when he speaks about looking out for American interests while the heads of state whom he meets are looking out for the interests of theirs.

In his tweets we find that our allies are ripping us off, that they are unfair competitors. His most admiring remark about Russia is that it is a strong competitor. The consistent element in Trump's thinking is ignored or willfully misunderstood in the press.

Accordingly, I insist that the possible rapprochement of Russia and Germany will be in line with Trump's reshuffling of the deck not in spite of it.

Good Optics · about 3 hours ago

This nuanced analysis rings true and speaks to the fact that - though Trump may not exactly be playing 47D chess - he certainly does have some good intentions that, left to follow their course, would have a chance of making the world a better place. But that will not be allowed to happen by those in the US with firm commitments to pursue the world's subjugation through any means possible.

The Cs did tell us that Trump's heart is in the right place, unlikely though that does appear a lot of the time . . .

[Aug 25, 2018] Ron Paul interviews Rep. Thomas Massie on Russia, Sanctions, and Tariffs

Aug 25, 2018 | www.antiwar.com

Why is Congress so obsessed with starting a new Cold War with Russia? Are they all gripped by group-think? Who do sanctions hurt most? And how can people visit with Rep. Thomas Massie and Ron Paul later this month? Tune in to today's Ron Paul Liberty Report with a very special guest!

https://youtu.be/ZLzNqwuPVE4

[Aug 25, 2018] As Washington's Neocons "Crush" Russia, Ron Paul Warns Sanctions Lead To War

Aug 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

by Tyler Durden Mon, 08/06/2018 - 16:47 206 SHARES Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

You can always count on the neocons in Congress to ignore reality, ignore evidence, and ignore common sense in their endless drive to get us involved in another war.

Last week, for example, Senators John McCain (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-NC), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), and others joined up to introduce what Senator Graham called "the sanctions bill from hell," aimed at applying "crushing" sanctions on Russia.

me title=

Senator Graham bragged that the bill would include "everything but the kitchen sink" in its attempt to ratchet up tensions with Russia.

Sen Cory Gardner (R-CO) bragged that the new sanctions bill "includes my language requiring the State Department to determine whether Russia merits the designation of a State Sponsor of Terror."

Does he even know what the word "terrorism" means?

Sen Ben Cardin (D-MD) warns that the bill must be passed to strengthen our resolve against "Vladimir Putin's pattern of corroding democratic institutions and values around the world, a direct and growing threat to US national security."

What has Russia done that warrants "kitchen sink" sanctions that will "crush" the country and possibly designate it as a sponsor of terrorism? Sen. Menendez tells us:

"The Kremlin continues to attack our democracy, support a war criminal in Syria, and violate Ukraine's sovereignty."

There is a big problem with these accusations on Russia : they're based on outright lies and unproven accusations that continue to get more bizarre with each re-telling .

How strange that when US Senators like Menendez demand that we stand by our NATO allies even if it means war, they attack Russia for doing the same in Syria. Is the Syrian president a "war criminal," as he claims? We do know that his army is finally, with Russian and Iranian help, about to defeat ISIS and al-Qaeda, which with US backing for seven years have turned Syria into a smoking ruin. Does Menendez and his allies prefer ISIS in charge of Syria?

And how hypocritical for Menendez to talk about Russia violating Ukraine's sovereignty. The unrest in Ukraine was started by the 2014 US-backed coup against an elected leader. We have that all on tape!

How is Russia "attacking our democracy"? We're still waiting for any real evidence that Russia was involved in our 2016 elections and intends to become involved in our 2018 elections. But that doesn't stop the propagandists, who claim with no proof that Russia was behind the election of Donald Trump.

These Senators claim that sanctions will bring the Russians to heel, but they are wrong. Sanctions are good at two things only: destroying the lives of innocent civilians and leading to war.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/BLiDwzJ2EJs

As I mentioned in an episode of my Liberty Report last week, even our own history shows that sanctions do lead to war and should not be taken lightly. In the run-up to US involvement in the War of 1812, the US was doing business with both France and the UK, which were at war with each other. When the UK decided that the US was favoring France in its commerce, it imposed sanctions on the US. What did Washington do in response? Declared war. Hence the War of 1812, which most Americans remember as that time when the British burned down the White House.

Recent polls show that the majority of Americans approve of President Trump's recent meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Among Republicans, a vast majority support the meeting. Perhaps a good defeat in November will wake these neocon warmongers up. Let's hope so!

[Aug 25, 2018] Defections from Pax Americana Coming Louder and Faster

Notable quotes:
"... What started as small moments of defiance a few years ago are turning into full-throated shouts of opposition as the US pushes its leverage in financial markets to step on the necks of anyone who doesn't toe the line. ..."
"... What we are seeing is the culmination of a long-term plan by global elites to tighten the financial noose around the world through overlapping trade and tariff structures and weaponizing the dollar's position at the center of global financial interdependence. ..."
"... So, everyday another round of sanctions makes the case against continuing to do business with the US stronger. Everyday another global player speaks with Russian President Vladimir Putin and makes contingency plans for a world without the dollar at the center of it all. ..."
"... Maas openly accused the US of weaponizing the dollar and disrupting the very foundations of global trade, which is correct, to achieve its goals of regime change in Turkey and Iran. Maas mainly tied this to Trump's pulling out of the JCPOA but the reality is far bigger than this. ..."
"... The Magnitsky Act and its progenitors around the world are a major evolution in the US's ability to bring financial pain to anyone who it disapproves of. Know Your Customer (KYC) and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) laws also into this framework. ..."
Aug 25, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

What started as small moments of defiance a few years ago are turning into full-throated shouts of opposition as the US pushes its leverage in financial markets to step on the necks of anyone who doesn't toe the line.

And Trump feeds off this by casting everyone as a leach who has been sucking off the US's breast for decades. It doesn't matter the issue, to Trump US economic fragility is a hammer and every trade and military partner a nail to be bashed over the head to pay their way.

What we are seeing is the culmination of a long-term plan by global elites to tighten the financial noose around the world through overlapping trade and tariff structures and weaponizing the dollar's position at the center of global financial interdependence.

Trump is against that in principle, but not against the US maintaining as much of the empire as possible.

So, everyday another round of sanctions makes the case against continuing to do business with the US stronger. Everyday another global player speaks with Russian President Vladimir Putin and makes contingency plans for a world without the dollar at the center of it all.

The latest major one was with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. This meeting wasn't expected to provide anything concrete, only vague assurances that projects like the Nordstream 2 pipeline goes through.

But, no breakthroughs on Crimea or Ukraine were expected nor delivered. It was, however, an opportunity for both Putin and Merkel to be humanized in the European media. Between Putin's attending Austrian Foreign Minister Karin Kneissl's wedding as well as the garden party photo op background for their talk, this meeting between them was a bit of a 'charm tour' to assist Merkel in the polls while expanding on Putin's humanity post World Cup and Helsinki.

That said, however, the statement by Merkel's Foreign Minister, Heiko Maas, about the need for a new financial payment system which bypasses the US-dominated SWIFT system was the big bombshell.

Maas openly accused the US of weaponizing the dollar and disrupting the very foundations of global trade, which is correct, to achieve its goals of regime change in Turkey and Iran. Maas mainly tied this to Trump's pulling out of the JCPOA but the reality is far bigger than this.

The Magnitsky Act and its progenitors around the world are a major evolution in the US's ability to bring financial pain to anyone who it disapproves of. Know Your Customer (KYC) and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) laws also into this framework.

While KYC and AML laws can at least have the appearance of validity in attempting to stop illegal activity, targeted sanctioning is simply Orwellian.

It politicizes any and all economic activity the world over. Just look at the recent reasons for these sanctions – unproven allegations of chemical weapons usage and electioneering. Recent actions by the US have driven this point home to its 'allies' with stunning clarity.

Why do you think Putin brought up Bill Browder's name at the Helsinki press conference? He knows that Browder's story is a lie and it's a lie that has been used as the foundation for the type of political repression we're seeing today.

The US is blocking the simplest of transactions in the dollar now, claiming that any use of the dollar is a global privilege which it can revoke at a whim. Aside from the immorality of this, that somehow dollars you traded goods or services for on the open market are still somehow the property of the U.S to claw back whenever it is politically convenient, this undermines the validity of the dollar as a rational medium of exchange for trade.

This is why after the first round of sanctions over the reunification with Crimea Putin ordered the development of a national electronic payment system. He rightly understood that Russia needed a means by which to conduct business that was independent of US political meddling.

So, to me, if Heiko Maas is serious about the threat posed by continued use of the dollar in EU trade, he should look to Putin for guidance on building a system separate from SWIFT.

Moreover, Maas' statement didn't go out to the world without Merkel's approval. This tells me that this was likely the major topic of conversation between her and Putin over the weekend. Because a payment system that skirts the dollar is one the US can't control.

It took the Russians longer than they should have to develop MIR. Putin complained about how slow things went because too many within the Bank of Russia and the financial community could be thought of as fifth columnists for the West.

It's also why development of the crypto-ruble and Russia's policy on cryptocurrencies has been so slow. It took Putin publicly ordering the work done by a certain time to get these tasks completed. In the end, it shouldn't take the EU long to spin up a SWIFT-compliant internal alternative. It is, after all, just code.

And that's why so many of the US's former satraps are now flexing their geopolitical muscle. The incentives aren't there anymore to keep quiet and go along. Alternatives exist and will be utilized.

I don't expect the EU brass to do much about this issue, the threat may be all that is needed to call Trump's bluff. But, if in the near future you see an announcement of MIR being accepted somewhere in the EU don't be surprised.

Because what used to be a node of political stability and investor comfort is now a tool of chaos and abuse. And abusing your customers is never a winning business model in the long run. Customers of the dollar will remind the US of that before this is over.

[Aug 25, 2018] Moscow is ready to rumble by Thanassis Cambanis

The author is a typical neocon. But some of his thought are interesting if only for delusions they contain.
Notable quotes:
"... While these Russian endeavors are important, they're a sideshow to the main event: a long geopolitical struggle in which the United States briefly gained a dominant position, but which today is more evenly matched. ..."
"... the chaotic process amounted to a looting of some of the former Soviet Union's prized assets by a tiny circle of corrupt oligarchs. Yeltsin's inner circle engaged in epic corruption ..."
"... Citizens lost the social safety net, while gaining very little in return. The visible results of capitalism piled up only for a tiny elite. ..."
"... if America has squandered international goodwill and allowed alliances to fray, those assets will prove as ineffectual as they have in the most recent contests in which Putin has outfoxed the West. ..."
"... Thanassis Cambanis, a fellow at The Century Foundation, is the author of "Once Upon a Revolution: An Egyptian Story." He is an Ideas columnist and blogs at thanassiscambanis.com. ..."
"... Following the collapse of the USSR, the US broke it's promise to Gorbachev not to expand NATO. It did so, right up to the border of Russia, essentially encircling it. ..."
"... ''I think it is the beginning of a new cold war,'' said Mr. Kennan from his Princeton home. ''I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. There was no reason for this whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else. This expansion would make the Founding Fathers of this country turn over in their graves. We have signed up to protect a whole series of countries, even though we have neither the resources nor the intention to do so in any serious way. [NATO expansion] was simply a light-hearted action by a Senate that has no real interest in foreign affairs.'' ..."
Dec 25, 2016 | www.bostonglobe.com

It should come as no surprise that many Russians will mourn this month, a quarter century after Mikhail Gorbachev resigned as president of the Soviet Union and overnight, one of the great world empires simply dissolved.

Today a tense realignment is underway, as a resurgent Russia jostles to the table and upends American nostrums about the post-Cold War order. Russia has given the United States plenty of grist for worry with its apparent meddling in the US presidential election. President Vladimir Putin's hackers and propagandists appear ready and willing to work to tip the balance to the right in upcoming European elections as well.

While these Russian endeavors are important, they're a sideshow to the main event: a long geopolitical struggle in which the United States briefly gained a dominant position, but which today is more evenly matched.

... ... ...

Putin wants to erase once and for all the image of Russia as the tottering, ex-empire low on cash, trying to bully the world with a limping army whose rusty equipment is staffed by alcoholics with truncated life spans.

A multipolar world is full of fuzzy boundaries that breed conflict and uncertainty. The United States might be in first place, but China is gaining, and neither can patronizingly dismiss Russia as a "regional power." The European Union is politically fragmented and economically hobbled, but it remains one of the richest markets in the world and, like Russia, possesses geostrategic depth. The fallacy of the American interregnum after 1991 was that old standards of geopolitical power no longer applied. Now the world has been put back on notice that they do, but that doesn't answer the specific question: What should the United States do about Russia?

The first step toward a more effective Russia policy is to understand Moscow's grievances. The sudden collapse of an empire of global scope traumatized many former Soviet citizens.

After Gorbachev's Christmas-day resignation, Boris Yeltsin led an independent Russia into what was supposed to be a bright new age of capitalist democracy. Expert American advisers helped usher in a headlong rush to privatize state-owned industries. Whatever their intention, the chaotic process amounted to a looting of some of the former Soviet Union's prized assets by a tiny circle of corrupt oligarchs. Yeltsin's inner circle engaged in epic corruption. Some of the experts argued that a flawed sell-off of Communist-era industries was a necessary shock to shed Soviet mores. The result was catastrophic. Citizens lost the social safety net, while gaining very little in return. The visible results of capitalism piled up only for a tiny elite.

Added to the quotidian discomfort was a wrenching loss of national status. An ailing Yeltsin lurked out of view, while oligarchs ran riot and former Soviet republics made a mockery of Russia's former primacy. NATO spread closer to Russia's borders.

"Russia's brief experience of democratic life was an experience of being pushed around by the United States," said Mark MacKinnon, a Canadian journalist and author of "The New Cold War."

Yeltsin's Communist challenger was expected to win in 1996, but a unified front of oligarchs, worried they might lose their privileges, and campaign experts dispatched by Clinton, saved the day for Yeltsin, if not for his constituents. The episode was memorialized in the 2003 American comedy "Spinning Boris."

"Many Russians look at what's happening now in the United States and giggle that it's payback time," MacKinnon said.

Russian influence reached its nadir when NATO intervened in Bosnia and Kosovo, which Russia considered parts of its sphere of influence.

... ... ...

The first seminal crisis will come when Putin challenges an interest dear to the Trump administration. Perhaps the Russian government will confiscate the assets of an American corporation or clash with NATO forces or invade the Baltic republics or enter a showdown with Europe.

Trump will presumably have the advantage, from America's unparalleled military and the imposing NATO infrastructure, to an economy orders of magnitude richer and more productive than Russia's. But if America has squandered international goodwill and allowed alliances to fray, those assets will prove as ineffectual as they have in the most recent contests in which Putin has outfoxed the West.

The chapter in contemporary history in which America stood alone at the top has come to a close. Russia will return to the top tier, along with the United States, China, and potentially other alliances. But the natural size of its power, whether measured in wealth, military power, or global political influence, is not as great as Putin appears to think it is. Trump might be willing to accept a bigger Russian role than his predecessors, but he's unlikely to forfeit first place.

Thanassis Cambanis, a fellow at The Century Foundation, is the author of "Once Upon a Revolution: An Egyptian Story." He is an Ideas columnist and blogs at thanassiscambanis.com.

Ronin555 12/25/16 11:53 AM

Following the collapse of the USSR, the US broke it's promise to Gorbachev not to expand NATO. It did so, right up to the border of Russia, essentially encircling it. The threat of bringing the Ukraine into NATO, after the coup supported by the US, alarmed Putin, and he took Crimea with its strategically important port. Russia has adopted a mostly defensive posture.

With regard to Syria, the US mistake was not doing enough to assist the rebels, but choosing to support them at all. While the Russians have been nothing short of ruthless in destroying the rebels, we are not blameless.

tanfeldman 12/25/16 12:41 PM

The underlying world view in the article is that there are 3 super powers jockeying for global leadership. This world view belies the fact that global power does come from military leverage, although it is important, but economic power. The 1980s Soviet Union was never a real threat because its economic production base could never sustain a war of any type and one did not need the Afghan war to prove this. It was clear by the mid 1970s but the military industrial complex would never let this view become part of the popular DNA.

Today, Russia's economy is in a shambles, and with oil prices not likely to rise ( U.S. is the marginal producer now so U.S. production will rise to cap any global price rise), the basis of a military buildup as part of a new Cold War will yield economic hardship to a nation already suffering.

China is naturally treating Asia as its sphere of influence which can be challenged economically but China's leadership knows that any real military conflict with the U.S. will lead to economic disaster as capital flows out and the yuan depreciates.

In short, a strong U.S. economy and not a military buildup should be Trump's focus.

MNMoore 12/26/16 06:37 AM

George Kennan, the architect of the Cold War, had this to say on the expansion of NATO:

''I think it is the beginning of a new cold war,'' said Mr. Kennan from his Princeton home. ''I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. There was no reason for this whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else. This expansion would make the Founding Fathers of this country turn over in their graves. We have signed up to protect a whole series of countries, even though we have neither the resources nor the intention to do so in any serious way. [NATO expansion] was simply a light-hearted action by a Senate that has no real interest in foreign affairs.''

-- http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/02/opinion/foreign-affairs-now-a-word-from-x.html

[Aug 25, 2018] MoA - Trump Ties North Korea Talks To Trade Deal With China

Notable quotes:
"... Some MoA commentators have discussed the possibility of Trump having been installed as the "front man" for the 'Deep State'. Our suspicions are derived from the falseness of Obama, the clear manipulations of the 2016 Presidential election (not by Russians, but by DNC and Hillary) , and Kissinger's cryptic but clear call for MAGA! after the Donbas rebels won in Ukraine (August 2014) ..."
"... A forgotten aspect: USA has a variety of goals in trade policies that inevitably conflict each other. Trump got an idea to change conditions of the trade with China in a way that will improve the manufacturing jobs in USA, but he also wants the negotiation on that issue to hinge on "cooperative attitude" in respect of starving North Korea to submission ..."
"... And there is a long list of issues that confuse trade negotiations: e.g. impunity for Israel, impunity for USA for war crimes, cooperating with American sanctions on Iran that do not have trade purpose. Then we have Trumpian quasi-economic idea to force import of American weapons and unleash sanctions if, say, Russian weapons a for being twice cheaper. ..."
"... North Korea already has the solution for the problem you highlight: the Chinese model of "one country, two systems" mixed with the American model. ..."
"... The problem is: the South (and the USA) doesn't want it. They are betting on the North's collapse, followed by a would be chaebol/American multinationals takeover, followed by an IMF-like "shock doctrine", which would result in the mass enslavement of the Northern population ..."
Aug 25, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Jackrabbit , Aug 25, 2018 3:25:46 PM | 7

b: Trump is suddenly binding the continuation of Korea talks to a trade deal with China.

If Trump previously used trade to coerce China's support for a hardline against NK (as seems likely) then his claim that CHINA is using NK to strike back at USA over trade must infuriate the Chinese.

b: There are small and big signs that a deeper conflict [with China] is developing .

Trump has said that anyone trading with Iran after Nov. 4th will not be trading with USA. I don't think the signs could be any more clear than that.

b: Are these Trump's plans?

Some MoA commentators have discussed the possibility of Trump having been installed as the "front man" for the 'Deep State'. Our suspicions are derived from the falseness of Obama, the clear manipulations of the 2016 Presidential election (not by Russians, but by DNC and Hillary) , and Kissinger's cryptic but clear call for MAGA! after the Donbas rebels won in Ukraine (August 2014) :

... the affirmation of America's exceptional nature must be sustained. History offers no respite to countries that set aside their sense of identity in favor of a seemingly less arduous course.

karlof1 , Aug 25, 2018 3:41:52 PM | 8

As usual, BigLie Media shows its an impediment to establishing peace as it tries to BigLie away the reality of the Trump/Kim agreement. Unfortunately, even outlets opposing the monopoly of BigLie Media like RT and Sputnik further the BigLie regarding denuclearization, which I then try to correct via comments--I think 9 times so far, which is far too many. Despite denouncing Fake News, the Trump admin continues to fuel BigLie Media's BigLie by announcing the appointment of someone to oversee a process--denuclearization--that won't begin anytime soon. Furthermore, today China called-out the ongoing prevarications :

"The United States' claims that China has been impacting Washington's talks with Pyongyang on the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula are irresponsible and contradict the facts, Chinese Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesman, Lu Kang, said in a statement on Saturday."

There're no talks about denuclearization occurring because it's not time for them to occur as DPRK has said on several occasions in denouncing Bolton's & Pompeo's lies while praising Trump. 3 weeks ago , China reiterated its ongoing policy to assist DPRK's economic development, so Trump's moves have done nothing to weaken China's resolve.

IMO, what Trump says on the matter doesn't hold much weight as I see Moon and Kim--and the Korean people, North and South--having more than enough courage and drive to attain the goal of unification. Nor does it matter which side ends up the "winner" from a Western perspective as the real winners will be Koreans and all other peoples of the region from Japan to Indonesia. Just imagine the shock to US Imperialists when RoK and DPRK announce the joining of their militaries into one overall institution--including DPRK's nukes.

All events in Korea are having a big affect of Okinawa and Okinawans' drive to attain their freedom from Japanese and US Imperialism. And the shock waves don't avoid Japan proper either as its economy really doesn't have yen to spare on wasteful military equipment. Not to mention Japan's business sector's salivation at the monies possible by joining Xi's BRI's Winwinism.

karlof1 , Aug 25, 2018 3:57:08 PM | 9
IMO, the remainder of the 21st Century will witness the metamorphosis of East Asia's political-economy into a hybrid of Xi's Socialism With Chinese Characteristics, which will eventually encompass Eurasia because WinWinism is far more desirable than the Outlaw US Empire's Zerosumism. Furthermore, WinWinism lends itself far more readily to adopting resiliency as resources dwindle and climate change bites harder.
karlof1 , Aug 25, 2018 4:49:43 PM | 11
fastfreddy @10--

By continuing to engage in such behavior, "the West" just hastens its journey into irrelevance as the tenuous Atlanticist ties rupture due to Outlaw US Empire hubris/arrogance. This site has a global view of Eurasia that provides an honest comparison in size between it and its European appendage.

The historical reasons allowing for European ascendency over Eurasia and much of the rest of the planet no longer apply. The dynamism of Europe's run its course; and as Hesse noted 100 years ago, Europe's future lies to the East.

Piotr Berman , Aug 25, 2018 4:50:53 PM | 12
A forgotten aspect: USA has a variety of goals in trade policies that inevitably conflict each other. Trump got an idea to change conditions of the trade with China in a way that will improve the manufacturing jobs in USA, but he also wants the negotiation on that issue to hinge on "cooperative attitude" in respect of starving North Korea to submission (some wonder why USA is so approving toward starving Yemen to submission, this is modus operandi in general). So, how much of economic goals is he willing to surrender to get this cooperative attitude?

And there is a long list of issues that confuse trade negotiations: e.g. impunity for Israel, impunity for USA for war crimes, cooperating with American sanctions on Iran that do not have trade purpose. Then we have Trumpian quasi-economic idea to force import of American weapons and unleash sanctions if, say, Russian weapons a for being twice cheaper.

Building our economy on the basis of piracy is perhaps a sound idea if we cannot compete in other ways, but that harks to "build better future by stealing office supplies". But the fact is that USA is not an omnipotent pirate, so to get concessions we need to concede something else, and the least important are issues that affect jobs (think tanker jobs and other elite occupations are not threatened after all).

vk , Aug 25, 2018 5:22:25 PM | 14
@ Posted by: Inkan1969 | Aug 25, 2018 2:18:44 PM | 1
Reunification under what government. When you say, "on its way to reunification", do you foresee the Kim Jong-Un regime taking over the entire peninsula, or dissolving while a democratic government similar to the one in South Korea is established across the whole continent, as was the case in Germany?

North Korea already has the solution for the problem you highlight: the Chinese model of "one country, two systems" mixed with the American model. In the North's plan, there would be peace, the frontier would be more porous (families could reunite, more or less freedom of movement), strategic infrastructural projects that would involve both halves interests would be joint, foreign policy would be unified but domestic policies would be practically independent (the American model, where the States of the Federation can decide on tax, etc.).

The problem is: the South (and the USA) doesn't want it. They are betting on the North's collapse, followed by a would be chaebol/American multinationals takeover, followed by an IMF-like "shock doctrine", which would result in the mass enslavement of the Northern population (slave labor for the chaebols factories, generating a new cycle of high profit rates) -- precisely what happened to the DPR (which capitulated) and, in the second case, the Russian SR (shock doctrine).

[Aug 25, 2018] CIA's Kremlin Spies Suddenly Go Dark

Aug 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

CIA spies operating within the Kremlin have suddenly "gone to ground" according to the New York Times , citing American officials clearly abusing their security clearances.

The officials do not think their sources have been compromised or killed - rather, they've been spooked into silence amid "more aggressive counterintelligence by Moscow, including efforts to kill spies," according to the Times, pointing to the still-unsolved March poisoning of former Russian double-agent Sergei Skripal in the UK.

Curiously, the Times immediately suggests that the lack of intelligence is " leaving the CIA and other spy agencies in the dark about precisely what Mr. Putin's intentions are for November's midterm elections. "

But American intelligence agencies have not been able to say precisely what are Mr. Putin's intentions : He could be trying to tilt the midterm elections, simply sow chaos or generally undermine trust in the democratic process . - NYT

There it is. Of course, buried towards the end of the article is this admission:

But officials said there has been no concrete intelligence pointing to Mr. Putin ordering his own intelligence units to wade into the election to push for a certain outcome , beyond a broad chaos campaign to undermine faith in American democracy.

Meanwhile, "current and former officials" tell the Times that the outing of FBI spy Stefan Halper, who infiltrated the Trump campaign, had a " chilling effect on intelligence collection ."

[Aug 24, 2018] The Real Russian Interference in US Politics by diana johnstone

Notable quotes:
"... The Magnitsky Act also condemns legal prosecution of Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Browder, on a much smaller scale, also made a fortune ripping off Russians during the Yeltsin years, and later got into trouble with Russian tax collectors. Since Browder had given up his US citizenship in order to avoid paying US taxes, he had reason to fear Russian efforts to extradite him for tax evasion and other financial misdeeds. ..."
"... Russian authorities are still trying to pursue their case against Browder. In his press conference following the Helsinki meeting with Trump, Vladimir Putin suggested allowing US authorities to question the Russians named in the Mueller indictment in exchange for allowing Russian officials to question individuals involved in the Browder case, including Winer and former US ambassador to Moscow Michael McFaul. Putin observed that such an exchange was possible under the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty signed between the two countries in 1999, back in the Yeltsin days when America was posing as Russia's best friend. ..."
"... In a July 15, 2016, complaint to the Justice Department, Browder's Heritage Capital Management accused both American and Russian opponents of the Magnitsky Act of violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA; adopted in 19938 with Nazis in mind). Among the "lobbyists" cited was the late Ron Dellums (falsely identified in the complaint as a "former Republican congressman"). ..."
"... The basic ideological conflict here is between Unipolar America and Multipolar Russia. Russia's position, as Vladimir Putin made clear in his historic speech at the 2007 Munich security conference, is to allow countries to enjoy national sovereignty and develop in their own way. The current Russian government is against interference in other countries' politics on principle. It would naturally prefer an American government willing to allow this. ..."
"... The United States, in contrast, is in favor of interference in other countries on principle: because it seeks a Unipolar world, with a single "democratic" system, and considers itself the final authority as to which regime a country should have and how it should run its affairs ..."
Aug 24, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

The Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union was ostensibly a conflict between two ideologies, two socio-economic systems.

All that seems to be over. The day of a new socialism may dawn unexpectedly, but today capitalism rules the world. Now the United States and Russia are engaged in a no-holds-barred fight between capitalists. At first glance, it may seem to be a classic clash between rival capitalists. And yet, once again an ideological conflict is emerging, one which divides capitalists themselves, even in Russia and in the United States itself. It is the conflict between globalists and sovereignists, between a unipolar and a multipolar world. The conflict will not be confined to the two main nuclear powers.

The defeat of communism was brutally announced in a certain "capitalist manifesto" dating from the early 1990s that proclaimed: "Our guiding light is Profit, acquired in a strictly legal way. Our Lord is His Majesty, Money, for it is only He who can lead us to wealth as the norm in life."

The authors of this bold tract were Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who went on to become the richest man in Russia, before spending ten years in a Russian jail, and his business partner at the time, Leonid Nevzlin, who has since retired comfortably to Israel.

Loans For Shares

Those were the good old days in the 1990s when the Clinton administration was propping up Yeltsin as he let Russia be ripped off by the joint efforts of such ambitious well-placed Russians and their Western sponsors, notably using the "loans for shares" trick.

In a 2012 Vanity Fair article on her hero, Khodorkovsky, the vehemently anti-Putin journalist Masha Gessen frankly summed up how this worked:

The new oligarchs -- a dozen men who had begun to exercise the power that money brought -- concocted a scheme. They would lend the government money, which it badly needed, and in return the government would put up as collateral blocks of stock amounting to a controlling interest in the major state-owned companies. When the government defaulted, as both the oligarchs and the government knew it would, the oligarchs would take them over. By this maneuver the Yeltsin administration privatized oil, gas, minerals, and other enterprises without parliamentary approval.
This worked so well that from his position in the Communist youth organization, Khodorkovsky used his connections to get control of Russia's petroleum company Yukos and become the richest oligarch in Russia, worth some $15 billion, of which he still controls a chunk despite his years in jail (2003-2013). His arrest made him a hero of democracy in the United States, where he had many friends, especially those business partners who were helping him sell pieces of Yukos to Chevron and Exxon. Khodorkovsky, a charming and generous young man, easily convinced his American partners that he was Russia's number one champion of democracy and the rule of law, especially of those laws which allow domestic capital to flee to foreign banks and foreign capital to take control of Russian resources.

Vladimir Putin didn't see it that way. Without restoring socialism, he dispossessed Khodorkovsky of Yukos and essentially transformed the oil and gas industry from the "open society" model tolerated by Yeltsin to a national capitalist industry. Khodorkovsky and his partner Platon Lebedev were accused of having stolen all the oil that Yukos had produced in the years 1998 to 2003, tried, convicted and sentenced to 14 years of prison each. This shift ruined US plans, already underway, to "balkanize" Russia between its many provinces, thereby allowing Western capital to pursue its capture of the Russian economy.

The dispossession of Khodorkovsky was certainly a major milestone in the conflict between President Putin and Washington. On November 18, 2005, the Senate unanimously adopted resolution 322 introduced by Joe Biden denouncing the treatment of the Khodorkovsky and Lebedev as politically motivated.

Who Influences Whom?

Now let's take a look at the history of Russian influence in the United States. It is obvious that a Russian who can get the Senate to adopt a resolution in his favor has a certain influence. But when the "deep state" growls about Russian influence, it isn't talking about Khodorkovsky. It's talking about a joking response Trump made to a reporter's snide question during the presidential campaign. In a variation of the classic "when did you stop beating your wife?" the reporter asked if he would call on Russian President Vladimir Putin to "stay out" of the election.

Since a stupid question does not deserve a serious answer, Trump said he had "nothing to do with Putin" before adding, "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press."

Aha! Went the Trump haters. This proves it! Irony is almost as unwelcome in American politics as honesty.

When President Trump revoked his security clearance earlier this month, former CIA chef John Brennan got his chance to spew out his hatred in the complacent pages of the New York Times.

Someone supposed to be smart enough to head an intelligence agency actually took Trump's joking invitation as a genuine request. "By issuing such a statement," Brennan wrote, "Mr. Trump was not only encouraging a foreign nation to collect intelligence against a United States citizen, but also openly authorizing his followers to work with our primary global adversary against his political opponent."

The Russians, Brennan declared, "troll political, business, and cultural waters in search of gullible or unprincipled individuals who become pliant in the hands of their Russian puppet masters."

Which Russians do that? And who are those "individuals"?

'The Fixer in Chief'

To understand the way Washington works, nothing is more instructive than to examine the career of lawyer Jonathan M. Winer, who proudly repeats that in early 2017, the head of the Carnegie Endowment Bill Burns introduced him as "the Fixer in Chief". Winer has long been unknown to the general public, but this may soon change.

Let's see what the fixer has fixed.

Under the presidency of fellow Yalie Bill Clinton, Winer served as the State Department's first Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Law Enforcement, from 1994-1999. One may question the selectivity of Bill Clinton's concern for international law enforcement, which certainly did not cover violating international law by bombing defenseless countries. In any case, in 1999, Winer was awarded for "virtually unprecedented achievements". Later we shall examine one of those important achievements.

At the end of the Clinton administration, from 2008 to 2013, the Fixer in Chief worked as high up consultant at one of the world's most powerful PR and lobbying firms, APCO Worldwide. This is how the Washington revolving door functions: after a few years in government finding out how things work, one then goes into highly paid "consultancy" to sell this insider information and influential contacts to private clients.

APCO got off to a big start some thirty years ago lobbying for Philip Morris and the tobacco industry in general.

In 2002, APCO launched something called the "Friends of Science" to promote skepticism concerning the harmful effects of smoking. In 1993, the campaign described its goals and objectives "encouraging the public to question – from the grassroots up – the validity of scientific studies."

While Winer was at APCO, one of its major activities was hyping the Clinton Global Initiative, an international networking platform promoting the Clinton Foundation. APCO president and CEO Margery Kraus explained that the consultancy was there to "help other CGI members garner interest for the causes they are addressing, demonstrate their success and highlight the wide-ranging achievements of CGI as a whole." Considering that only five percent of Clinton Foundation turnover went to donations, they needed all the PR they could get.

Significantly, donations to the Clinton Global Initiative have dried up since Hillary lost the presidential election. According to the Observer : "Foreign governments began pulling out of annual donations, signaling the organization's clout was predicated on donor access to the Clintons, rather than its philanthropic work."

This helps explain Hillary Clinton's panic when she lost in 2016. How in the world can she ever reward her multi-million-dollar donors with the favors they expected?

As well as the tobacco industry and the Clinton Foundation, APCO also works for Khodorkovsky. To be precise, according to public listings, the fourth biggest of APCO's many clients is the Corbiere Trust, owned by Khodorkovsky and registered in Guernsey. The trust tends and distributes some of the billions that the oligarch got out of Russia before he was jailed. Corbiere money was spent to lobby both for Resolution 322 (supporting Khodorkovky after his arrest in Russia) and for the Magnitsky Act (more later). Margery Kraus, APCO's president and CEO, is a member of Mikhail Khodorkovsky's son Pavel's Institute of Modern Russia, devoted to "promoting democratic values" – in other words, to building political opposition to Vladimir Putin.

In 2009 Jonathan Winer went back to the State Department where he was given a distinguished service award for having somehow rescued thousands of stranded members of the Muhahedin-e Khalq from their bases in Iraq they were trying to overthrow the Iranian government. The MeK, once officially recognized as a terrorist organization by the State Department, has become a pet instrument in US and Israeli regime change operations directed at Iran.

However, it was Winer's extracurricular activities at State that finally brought him into the public spotlight early this year – or rather, the spotlight of the House Intelligence Committee, whose chairman Devin Nunes (R-Cal) named him as one of a network promoting the notorious "Steele Dossier" which accused Trump of illicit financial dealing and compromising sexual activities in Russia. By Winer's own account , he had been friends with former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele since his days at APCO. Back at State, he regularly channeled Steele reports, ostensibly drawn from contacts with friendly Russian intelligence agents, to Victoria Nuland, in charge of Russian affairs, and top Russian experts. These included the infamous "Steele dossier". In September 2016, Winer's old friend Sidney Blumenthal – a particularly close advisor to Hillary Clinton – gave him notes written by a more mysterious Clinton insider named Cody Shearer, repeating the salacious attacks.

All this dirt was spread through government agencies and mainstream media before being revealed publicly just before Trump's inauguration, used to stimulate the "Russiagate" investigation by Robert Mueller. The dossier has been discredited but the investigation goes on and on.

So, it is all right to take seriously information allegedly obtained from "Russian agents" and spread it around, so long as it can damage Trump. As with so much else in Washington, double standards are the rule.

Jonathan Winer and the Magnitsky Act

Jonathan Winer played a major role in Congressional adoption of the "Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012" (the Magnitsky Act), a measure that effectively ended post-Cold War hopes for normal relations between Washington and Moscow. This act was based on a highly contentious version of the November 16, 2009 death in prison of accountant Sergei Leonidovich Magnitsky, as told to Congress by hedge fund manager Bill Browder (grandson of Earl Browder, head of the Communist Party USA 1934-1945). According to Browder, Magnitsky was a lawyer beaten to death in prison as a result of his crusade for human rights.

However, as convincingly established by dissident Russian film-maker Andrei Nekrasov's (banned) investigative documentary, the unfortunate Magnitsky was neither a human rights crusader, nor a lawyer, nor beaten to death. He was an accountant jailed for his role in Browder's business dealings, who died of natural causes as a result of inadequate medical treatment. The case was hyped up as a major human rights drama by Browder in order to discredit Russian charges against himself.

In any case, by adopting a law punishing Magnitsky's alleged persecutors, the US Congress acted as a supreme court judging internal Russian legal issues.

The Magnitsky Act also condemns legal prosecution of Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Browder, on a much smaller scale, also made a fortune ripping off Russians during the Yeltsin years, and later got into trouble with Russian tax collectors. Since Browder had given up his US citizenship in order to avoid paying US taxes, he had reason to fear Russian efforts to extradite him for tax evasion and other financial misdeeds.

It was Jonathan Winer who found a solution to Browder's predicament.

As Winer tells it :

When Browder consulted me, [ ] I suggested creating a new law to impose economic and travel sanctions on human-rights violators involved in grand corruption. Browder decided this could secure a measure of justice for Magnitsky. He initiated a campaign that led to the enactment of the Magnitsky Act. Soon other countries enacted their own Magnitsky Acts, including Canada, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and most recently, the United Kingdom.
Russian authorities are still trying to pursue their case against Browder. In his press conference following the Helsinki meeting with Trump, Vladimir Putin suggested allowing US authorities to question the Russians named in the Mueller indictment in exchange for allowing Russian officials to question individuals involved in the Browder case, including Winer and former US ambassador to Moscow Michael McFaul. Putin observed that such an exchange was possible under the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty signed between the two countries in 1999, back in the Yeltsin days when America was posing as Russia's best friend.

But the naďve Russians did not measure the craftiness of American lawyers.

As Winer wrote:

"Under that treaty, Russia's procurator general can ask the US attorney general to arrange for Americans to be ordered to testify to assist in a criminal case. But there is a fundamental exception: The attorney general can provide no such assistance in a politically motivated case ." (My emphasis.)
"I know this", he wrote, "because I was among those who helped put it there. Back in 1999, when we were negotiating the agreement with Russia, I was the senior State Department official managing US-Russia law-enforcement relations."

So, the Fixer in Chief could have said to the worried Browder, "No problem. All that we need to do is make your case a politically motivated case. Then they can't touch you."

Winer's clever treaty is a perfect Catch-22. The treaty doesn't apply to a case if it is politically motivated, and if it is Russian, it must be politically motivated.

In a July 15, 2016, complaint to the Justice Department, Browder's Heritage Capital Management accused both American and Russian opponents of the Magnitsky Act of violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA; adopted in 19938 with Nazis in mind). Among the "lobbyists" cited was the late Ron Dellums (falsely identified in the complaint as a "former Republican congressman").

The Heritage Capital Management brief declared that: "While lawyers representing foreign principals are exempt from filing under FARA, this is only true if the attorney does not try to influence policy at the behest of his client." However, by disseminating anti-Magnitsky material to Congress, any Russian lawyer was "clearly trying to influence policy" was therefore in violation of FARA filing requirements."

Catch-22 all over again.

Needless to say, Khodorkovsky's Corbiere Trust lobbied heavily to get Congress to pass the Magnitsky Act, which also repeated its defense of Khodorkovsky himself. This type of "Russian interference intended to influence policy" is not even noticed, while US authorities scour cyberspace for evidence of trolls.

Conclusion

The basic ideological conflict here is between Unipolar America and Multipolar Russia. Russia's position, as Vladimir Putin made clear in his historic speech at the 2007 Munich security conference, is to allow countries to enjoy national sovereignty and develop in their own way. The current Russian government is against interference in other countries' politics on principle. It would naturally prefer an American government willing to allow this.

The United States, in contrast, is in favor of interference in other countries on principle: because it seeks a Unipolar world, with a single "democratic" system, and considers itself the final authority as to which regime a country should have and how it should run its affairs .

So, if Russians were trying to interfere in US domestic politics, they would not be trying to change the US system but to prevent it from trying to change their own. Russian leaders clearly are sufficiently cultivated to realize that historic processes do not depend on some childish trick played on somebody's computer.

US policy-makers practice interference every day. And they are perfectly willing to allow Russians to interfere in American politics – so long as those Russians are "unipolar" like themselves, like Khodorkovsky, who aspire to precisely the same unipolar world sought by the State Department and George Soros. Indeed, the American empire depends on such interference from Iraqis, Libyans, Iranians, Russians, Cubans – all those who come to Washington to try to get US power to settle old scores or overthrow the government in the country they came from. All those are perfectly welcome to lobby for a world ruled by America.

Russian interference in American politics is totally welcome so long as it helps turn public opinion against "multipolar" Putin, glorifies American democracy, serves US interests including the military-industrial complex, helps break down national borders (except those of the United States and Israel) and puts money in appropriate pockets in the halls of Congress.

[Aug 24, 2018] Gazprom leads the world in capital expenditure (capex) on global energy projects, by a wide, wide margin $160 Billion to be spent on 84 projects worldwide, including Nord Stream II and Turkish Stream.

Aug 24, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MARK CHAPMAN August 23, 2018 at 9:05 pm

Gazprom leads the world in capital expenditure (capex) on global energy projects, by a wide, wide margin – $160 Billion to be spent on 84 projects worldwide, including Nord Stream II and Turkish Stream. That's nearly double the spending of its next-closest competitor, Sinopec, at $87 Billion. Royal Dutch Shell is third, and Exxon a distant fourth.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2018/08/22/russias-gazprom-is-worlds-biggest-energy-investor/#5a7465fb3553

If you add Rosneft, that's another $50 Billion in capex for Russia. Odd behaviour for an isolated country whose economy is in tatters. One whose government debt is 12.6 % of GDP and declining.

https://tradingeconomics.com/russia/government-debt-to-gdp

Speaking of government debt, how's that parameter looking for The Exceptional Nation? Whoa: that's exceptional. Not even much point in expressing it as a percentage of GDP, I guess.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-debt

Just to drive the point home for any who might not have gotten it, Russia – friendless, alone against the world, and reeling from the bite of American sanctions – is outspending the USA nearly three to one on global energy investments, although its debt is a tiny fraction of America's out-of-control spending on other important things, like its bloated defense budget.

Oh, that's right – Vladimir Putin is a tyrant and a dictator, squeezing the country dry in neverending pursuit of self-enrichment. I almost forgot.

[Aug 24, 2018] The Magnitsky Act legislation is based on lies

Notable quotes:
"... With respect to the Browder-Magnitsky Act legislation scandal, people might consider that ongoing, colossal, bombshell story in light of the mentioned 18 U.S. Code § 2384 – Seditious conspiracy: ..."
"... The fact that Magnitsky Act legislation is founded on a massive concoction of lies is unacceptable and, far more importantly, increasingly dangerous and destructive to international relations with each passing day of the coverup. It is of paramount importance that humanity learns the full truth about the Browder-Magnitsky laws scandal – and NOW. ..."
"... Yes, the Magnitsky Act legislation is a crock, isn't it? And the sad thing is that these congressmen know it, but, as Peter Phillips said, they go along because it's all part of controlling the world in favor of these transnational corporations. We just think our votes count! How stupid are we? ..."
Aug 24, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Jerry Alatalo August 16, 2018 at 7:07 pm

backwardsevolution,

With respect to the Browder-Magnitsky Act legislation scandal, people might consider that ongoing, colossal, bombshell story in light of the mentioned 18 U.S. Code § 2384 – Seditious conspiracy:

".. or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States,"

If moral force is deemed a correct legal interpretation, the growing number of men and women becoming aware of the scandal, in the United States particularly and around the Earth generally, could face 20 years of imprisonment. Of course, "by force" in the clause is meant as kinetic or physical force, so people demanding the profoundly consequential truth about Browder-Magnitsky have nothing in to worry about.

Political reality in America reveals that the two-party system is mythical, but actually that Americans are experiencing a one-party structure serving members of the transnational capitalist class – named and described in the recently published book "Giants: The Global Power Elites" by Sonoma State (CA) Professor Peter Phillips (co-founder of Project Censored with Mickey Huff).

Confirmation is found in the unanimous -- total silence over the historic magnitude Browder-Magnitsky scandal of John Brennan(D), Gina Haspell(R), Loretta Lynch(D), Jeff Sessions(R), Ben Cardin(D), John McCain(R), all 535 U.S. elected representatives(D, R and I), Hillary Clinton(D), Mike Pompeo(R), Joseph Biden(D), Mike Pence(R), Barack Obama(D), Donald Trump(R)

The fact that Magnitsky Act legislation is founded on a massive concoction of lies is unacceptable and, far more importantly, increasingly dangerous and destructive to international relations with each passing day of the coverup. It is of paramount importance that humanity learns the full truth about the Browder-Magnitsky laws scandal – and NOW. Reply backwardsevolution , August 17, 2018 at 3:36 am

Jerry – I saw a Youtube video by Professor Peter Phillips a few months back where he outlined the concentration of wealth by these transnational corporations. It was a very good video, and he's right – something definitely needs to be done about these people. They are going to either kill us with war or kill us by ruining the planet. It's like they're addicted to greed and cannot help themselves, almost like a drug addict. We'll have to stop them.

Yes, the Magnitsky Act legislation is a crock, isn't it? And the sad thing is that these congressmen know it, but, as Peter Phillips said, they go along because it's all part of controlling the world in favor of these transnational corporations. We just think our votes count! How stupid are we?

I don't know where it's all going to end, but we'd better start fighting back before these addicts take us all out.

Good talking to you, Jerry.

[Aug 24, 2018] Credit Suisse freezes $5 billion of Russian money due to U.S. sanctions

Notable quotes:
"... Sounds like the rich Russians who refused to believe their wealth wouldn't be confiscated in the West just learned a hard lesson. The "rule of law" is for suckers. ..."
"... The west wants Putin gone so badly that there is no law they will not break, no amount of hard-earned soft power they will not throw away, no western business they will not throw under the bus if they think they will realize that goal. ..."
Aug 24, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MOSCOW EXILE August 22, 2018 at 11:47 am

Credit Suisse freezes $5 billion of Russian money due to U.S. sanctions
AUGUST 22, 2018 / 5:53 PM / UPDATED 5 HOURS AGO

ZURICH (Reuters) – One of Switzerland's largest banks, Credit Suisse, has frozen roughly 5 billion Swiss francs ($5 billion) of money linked to Russia to avoid falling foul of U.S. sanctions, according to its accounts, further increasing pressure on Moscow .

Credit Suisse is being cautious in part because of earlier bad experiences. In 2009, it reached a $500 million settlement with U.S. authorities over dealings with sanctions-hit Iran.

There have been other instances where European banks have been punished. In 2014, France's BNP Paribas ( BNPP.PA ) agreed to pay a record $8.9 billion for violating U.S. sanctions against Sudan, Cuba and Iran.

Switzerland's banking watchdog FINMA does not require Swiss banks to enforce foreign sanctions, but has said they have a responsibility to minimize legal and reputational risks.

I hope the present Russian administration and those yet to come remember this.

CARTMAN August 22, 2018 at 3:42 pm
Sounds like the rich Russians who refused to believe their wealth wouldn't be confiscated in the West just learned a hard lesson. The "rule of law" is for suckers.
MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 5:39 pm
I doubt very many ordinary Russians lost anything, but they got a pretty useful lesson for free. The west wants Putin gone so badly that there is no law they will not break, no amount of hard-earned soft power they will not throw away, no western business they will not throw under the bus if they think they will realize that goal.
MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 4:21 pm
Surely there is something Russia can seize to pay them back, or a bank they can close down and kick out in reprisal.

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 5:01 pm
I wonder whose money this was. Russian offshoring is rather sneaky and uses all sorts of places like Cyprus and the Cayman Islands through various instruments. As of 2014, simply keeping money in a western bank was no longer an option.

So this is either illegal money or Credit Suisse is simply lying.

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 5:51 pm
That's a good point; some time ago (you're probably correct that it was 2014, or around there) the Russian government did somewhat formalize its advice to not keep money in western banks. As I best remember, it was only mandatory for members of government. But it seems unlikely the government would order all its ministers and senators to move all monies held in western banks out of those banks, and then leave government funds there itself. So perhaps some oligarch/s got burned.
JEN August 23, 2018 at 3:08 am
Could some of this money that Credit Suisse has frozen be Mikhail Khodorkovsky's?

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 23, 2018 at 1:45 pm
Possibly, but I doubt it. Saint Mikhail's money, what there is left of it, is transparent to western investigations, and if they could think of a good reason they would give him a lot more, especially if he were even remotely popular in Russia and they thought he might be a candidate for insertion into Putin's role.

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 23, 2018 at 4:02 am
Now Credite Suisse says that Russian accounts have not been frozen, that the Bank had reclassified certain assets placed under sanctions. By these actions no Russian customers have been affected, reports TASS .

Meanwhile, in the world's greatest dirty money laundry, it has been revealed that the London branch of Deutsche Bank has issued threats to the Russian government.

Deutsche Bank London Threatens to End Business With Russia
Bloomberg, 3 hours ago

Deutsche Bank AG threatened to end business with Russia's government earlier this year in a letter sent to the state demanding that it provide more information related to know-your-customer records.

The lender's London branch sent the correspondence in June saying the business relationship could be terminated if Russia failed to submit the documents within 30 days. While that deadline has long since elapsed, Russia never answered the letter and the German bank hasn't followed up on the initial request, according to two people with knowledge of the matter.

Arschlöcher!

I was working only yesterday and last week as well in the main office of Deutsche Bank here in Moscow.

Never saw no Fritzes there, only Ivans. Seemed to be business as usual to me..

Like

[Aug 24, 2018] US sanctions on Russia tied to UK attack to take effect Monday

Skripal (most probably false flag) poisoning now has distinct Washington connections. Cue Bono?
Nobody can still explain why Skripals lost conscience simultaneously. That kills UK version of door knob. Another strange issue is why all but one victims survived. That can be explained only if this was a false flag and novichok was injected in bio samples.
Aug 24, 2018 | uk.reuters.com

Plans to impose the latest sanctions were announced by the Trump administration on Aug. 8, a response to what the State Department said was Moscow's use of a nerve agent against a former Russian agent and his daughter in Britain in March.

RELATED COVERAGE

Sergei Skripal, a former colonel in Russia's GRU military intelligence service, and his 33-year-old daughter, Yulia, were found unconscious on a bench in the southern English city of Salisbury after a liquid form of the Novichok type of nerve agent was applied to the front door of his home. Both survived the attack.

Moscow has denied involvement in the attack. It has also denied meddling in the 2016 U.S. elections.

'CHANGE IN BEHAVIOUR'

Trump's national security adviser, John Bolton, said on Friday Moscow must change its ways before the United States will lift its already long list of sanctions.

"The sanctions remain in force and will remain in force until the required change in Russian behaviour," he told a news conference in the Ukrainian capital, Kiev.

The new measures will be published and come into effect on Aug. 27 and remain in place for at least one year, according to the notice in the Federal Register, a daily catalogue of government agency actions. They are authorized by the 1991 Chemical and Biological Weapons and Warfare Elimination Act.

Space flight activities, government space cooperation, areas concerning commercial aviation safety and urgent humanitarian assistance will be exempt.

A second batch of penalties will be imposed after 90 days unless Russia gives "reliable assurance" that it would no longer use chemical weapons and allow on-site inspections by the United Nations or another international observer group.

Soon after the attack on the Skripals, Washington also showed solidarity with Britain and announced it would expel 60 Russian diplomats, joining governments across Europe in punishing the Kremlin.

[Aug 24, 2018] I would say that the ' few days of bombing Serbia ' in 1999 ripped any last vestiges of belief that the West was here to help

Notable quotes:
"... The 78 day all-out NATO bombing of Serbia was the act that, I believe, shocked/energized Russia's patriotic elements into action. The fact that little Serbia, after years of severe sanctions and every dirty trick imaginable would not buckle to the empire showed Russia that the Empire was not invincible. ..."
Aug 24, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

ET AL August 24, 2018 at 1:42 am

For me, I would say that the ' few days of bombing Serbia ' in 1999 ripped any last vestiges of belief that the West was here to help mega violently (deliberate bombing of the Chinese embassy) away from everyone. Of course plenty happened in the years running up to that event The other is when China joined the WTO on 11/12/2001 and hit the ground running – they were expected to behave meekly and ask the great white men for their advice and follow it.

PATIENT OBSERVER August 24, 2018 at 4:25 am

The 78 day all-out NATO bombing of Serbia was the act that, I believe, shocked/energized Russia's patriotic elements into action. The fact that little Serbia, after years of severe sanctions and every dirty trick imaginable would not buckle to the empire showed Russia that the Empire was not invincible.

The deliberate attack on the Chinese embassy IIRC triggered waves of spontaneous demonstrations in China of such intensity that the Chinese government had to take means to dampen. But, the message was not lost on the leadership.

Those acts of hubris and cruelty by the Empire may have been the beginning of its end.

[Aug 24, 2018] Look at the Skripal affair. The British government's account of what happened is hilariously unconvincing

Aug 24, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Look at the Skripal affair. The British government's account of what happened is hilariously unconvincing, and the Foreign Minister himself was caught red-handed in a lie of such monstrous proportions that he was hopelessly compromised and his remaining audience of five true believers could no longer take anything he said as factual. Far from the only example of his instinctive lying, I might add. But the British government demands you take them at their word: they can't show anyone any evidence – 'coz it's National Security, innit? – but any alternate narrative other than the official account of what happened is fake news. Horrific misinformation. Any western authority granted the mandate to rule on what is misinformation is going to abuse that power to ensure only its side of a story (which always has at least two) is the one that is heard. Period. You would like to believe they're above that, but they're not.

Well, that was a longer diversion than I planned; let's get back to Caitlin Johnstone. Here's what she said, in one of those dozy tweets I dislike so much. "Friendly public service reminder that John McCain has devoted his entire political career to slaughtering as many human beings as possible at every opportunity, and the world will be improved when he finally dies".

I'm sure it was that last bit that sent the 'fake news' crowd over the precipice, because we are conditioned as western citizens to never speak ill of the dead, and the prohibition plainly extends to the almost-dead. The Undead, if you prefer. That's not the first time Ms. Johnstone, who is nothing if not plain-spoken, has expressed the conviction that the expiration of John McCain is an event which is long overdue. It may well be regarded as insensitive, although I honestly cannot disagree with it, as his continued persistence on this mortal coil means a continued manifestation of his malign influence, and he continues to exercise his privilege to speak on behalf of his constituents to vote for the most destructive course every time it is offered as an option.

If I may be allowed one more tiny diversion, one I have certainly advanced before on the unaccountable American fascination with free speech, I believe it bears directly on Ms. Johnstone's legal right to say insensitive things, according to established legal precedent. On October 18th, 1998, the Westboro Baptist Church – aka Lunatic Space-Cadets Anonymous – picketed the funeral of Matthew Shepard , a gay man who was beaten unconscious, tied to a fence and left for dead by a couple of homophobic assailants, and who died of his injuries. The congregation carried signs which bore such inflammatory slogans as "No Tears for Queers", "Fag Matt Burns in Hell", and the more perennial but generalized "God Hates Fags". No action was taken against the church. The family of a decorated US Marine who died in Iraq later took Westboro Baptist Church to court for their provocative baiting at solemn occasions like their son's funeral, and lost. The Supreme Court of the United States ruled Westboro's right to free speech did not infringe on the family's right to conduct a funeral without interference.

So any prohibition on publicly wishing John McCain would cease his irritating evasion of the Grim Reaper is imaginary, faith-based and entirely without legal merit.

Getting back to the issue, Ms. Johnstone's initial antagonist – Patrick – tweeted in response; "What a miserable, despicable person. You are the definition of deplorable. I may frequently disagree with Senator John McCain and Meghan McCain with all due criticism, but they should sue you for libel. This is disgusting."

What is libel ? Libel is "to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio,television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander which is oral defamation. It is a tort (civilwrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie. "

Hey, I know – let's play lawyer, wanna? No costly law degree required; I already said we were playing. But since we've already demonstrated that Ms. Johnstone can't be (successfully) sued for libel for expressing the opinion that the world will be a better place once John McCain has popped his pricey tasseled clogs, then the point of libelous contention must be the allegation that John McCain has availed himself of every opportunity to vote for policies or undertakings which contributed to the slaughter of human beings. A customary and absolute defense against the charge of libel is establishment that the allegedly libelous statement is, in fact, true. Can we do that? I'll bet we can.

Although he was very much a part of the Vietnam War, John McCain was not a politician at that time, and Ms. Johnstone specified that he had used his political career to press for military action which resulted in many casualties. I don't think the modification of 'as many as possible' would be enforceable under libel laws, as it would be too difficult to prove. Could there have been even more casualties, on both sides, in any military action in which Senator McCain had a vote? Probably, but there is no realistic way to determine if they were either limited or aggravated by his direct participation in the vote. By the same token, the contribution of his vote to any casualties which did take place is, I think, inarguable.

So let's start with America's next big war – the Gulf War against Iraq, Take One. John McCain voted for war . Were there casualties? You could say that; 294 Americans died in the Gulf War. The UK lost 47. It's worth noting, as an aside, that Syria was a US ally in the Gulf War, and had 2 of its soldiers killed. How about Iraqis? Well, nobody seems to have kept a very accurate count – they were, after all, the enemy, and killing them was encouraged – and the official American count is established from Iraqi prisoner-of-war records, and was featured in a report commissioned by the US Air Force. It estimates 20,000-22,000 combat deaths overall, in both the air and ground campaigns. Was that a slaughter? You tell me. And before we move on from the Gulf War, John McCain voted (after the war was over) against providing automatic annual cost-of-living adjustments for certain veterans' benefits. Four years later, McCain supported an appropriations bill that underfunded the Departments of Veterans Affairs and other federal agencies by $8.9 billion. The following year, McCain voted against an amendment to increase spending on veterans programs by $13 billion. As of the year 2000, 183,000 U.S. veterans of the Gulf War, more than a quarter of the U.S. troops who participated, had been declared permanently disabled by the Department of Veterans Affairs. You may only be 'slaughtered' if you are dead, but the irrevocable changes for the worse in the quality of life for thousands of Americans who were only doing what their country ordered them to do should count for something, what do you say?

This from the American senator who famously could not remember how many houses he and his wife owned . For the record, the number of homes, ranches, condos, and lofts, together worth a combined estimated $13,823,269.00, was ten.

Gee; I'm starting to get a little mad at McCain. Well, let's move on.

In 2003, the US government of the day decided that Saddam Hussein had not learned his lesson the first time, and so this time he had to go. Accordingly, the USA polled its allies for military forces who were not otherwise occupied, and had another go at it. John McCain said hell yes, let's get it on. American military casualties , 4,287 killed, 30,187 wounded. A bit more of a slaughter than the first attempt. The advent of ceramic-plate body armor protected the soldier's body core, so that many more survived injuries that would have been so horrific they would surely have killed them. The downside is that many lived who lost limbs too badly damaged to save, and were crippled for whatever life remained to them. The Iraqi casualty figures were again an estimate, although better documented; by the most reliable count, somewhere between 182,000 and 204,000 Iraqis were killed. Needlessly and pointlessly slaughtered, many of them; American troops grew so fearful as a result of the steady drip of casualties among their own that they frequently opened fire on families in cars with children simply because they did not obey instructions in a language they did not speak or understand. At Mahmudiya, in March 2006, Private Steven Green and his co-conspirators raped and killed 14-year-old Abeer Qassim Hamza, killed her family and set her body afire to blur the details of the crime. When Iraqi soldiers arrived on the scene, Green and his fellow murderers blamed it on Sunni insurgents.

The following year, President Bush approved a 'surge' of 20,000 additional troops, which John McCain so energetically agitated for that it became known informally as 'the McCain doctrine'. That's after he claimed in 2004 that if an elected government in Iraq asked that US forces leave, they would have to go even if they were not happy with the security situation. He also recognized, the following year, that Iraqis resented the American military presence, and the sooner and more dramatically it could be reduced, the better it would be for everyone. I guess if you lay claim to both sides of the argument, you're bound to convince someone that you know what you're doing.

That same year, 2007, John McCain voted against a requirement for specifying minimum time periods between deployments for soldiers deployed to Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. When they need you back in the meat-grinder, you go, never mind how many times you've already been there. Let's just keep in mind, before we leave Iraq, that the entire case for war the second time around was fabricated with wild tales of awful weapons Saddam supposedly had which could kill Americans while they were still in America , and so he had to be dealt with. When it was suggested to the Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, that America should concentrate on Afghanistan, since that is where the backers of the 9-11 strike against America had fled, he mused that there were 'no good targets in Afghanistan' , although there were 'lots of good targets in Iraq'. Some researchers suggest he was after a 'teachable moment' for America's enemies which would convince them of America's irresistible power. While John McCain assessed that Donald Rumsfeld was the worst Secretary of Defense ever, his complaint was not that Rumsfeld was not killing enough people, but that he showed insufficient commitment to winning the war.

Libya. Hoo, boy. In 2009, John McCain – together with fellow die-faster-please senators Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham – visited Tripoli , to discuss Libya's acquisition of American military equipment. John McCain assured Gadaffi (his son, actually) that America was eager to provide Libya with the equipment it needed. Hardly more than a year later, he espoused the position that Gadaffi must be removed from power because he had American blood on his hands from the Lockerbie bombing. In 2011, he visited the Libyan 'rebels', and publicly urged Washington to consider a ground attack to forcibly remove Gaddafi from power. Just a friendly public service reminder; the Lockerbie bombing was most likely carried out by Syria, was – according to pretty reliable testimony – rigged by the American intelligence services to finger Libya , and probably the stupidest thing Gaddafi ever did was to admit to it anyway and pay compensation, in an effort to move on.

Anyway, more war. What the fuck is it with this guy?

Well, even something so grim as war has its comic moments. What else would you call it when NATO claims, with a straight face, that the enemy is hiding his tanks and artillery from its watchful eye inside the water pipes of the Great Man-Made River? What they actually wanted was an excuse to bomb it – which they did, as well as the pumping stations which brought abundant fresh water to the coastal region, in the certain knowledge that it would create a crisis for the civilian population. Which, by the bye, is against just about every convention on the subject ever written.

Here are some of the pipe sections, when they were being trucked to the assembly point. As the article suggests, these sections are 4 meters across; but remember, that's at their widest point. They are only 4 meters for about a foot, because a water pipe is a circle.

Libya mostly used the T-72 Main Battle Tank, and those would be the ones NATO wanted to eliminate, since the others were considerably older. A T-72, width-wise, would just fit in a 4-meter water pipe, as it is 3.6 meters wide . However, it's also over 45 tons in weight. The concrete rings were designed to carry free-flowing water, not a 45-ton tank. Would they take that kind of weight, distributed only over a 7-meter length? Where is there an entry point to the water-pipe that is the same width as the widest diameter of the pipe? As discussed, the water pipe is 4 meters wide at its widest point. But the T-72 is 2.3 meters high. The tank would only fit if it was as high as a lunchbox, because the 4-meter width narrows dramatically from the widest point; it's a circle. Even where it did fit, it would be supported only on the outer edges of its tracks, and you have to cut the 4-meter measurement approximately in half, because the upper portion of the tank would have to be above the point where the tracks touched on each side. The idea was preposterous from the outset, and it speaks to what fucking simpletons western government believes make up its populations that they would dare to put such nutjobbery in print. A T-72 could not fit in a 4-meter water pipe. The notion was demonstrably foolish. But NATO wanted to destroy the water system, so it made up a reason that would allow it to be a well-meaning potential victim of deadly violence.

According to The Guardian – the same source that told you Gadaffi was hiding his tanks in the plumbing – the death toll in the Libyan civil war prior to the NATO intervention was about 1000-2000. According to the National Transitional Council, the outfit the west engineered to rule post-Gaddafi Libya, the final butcher's bill was about 30,000 dead . The very day after NATO folded its tents – figuratively speaking, as the western role was entirely air support for the flip-flop-wearing rebels – and went home, al Qaeda raised its black flag over the Benghazi courthouse .

Caitlin Johnstone claimed John McCain used his political career to advocate for military interventions which resulted in the slaughter of large numbers of human beings. Is that accurate? What say you, members of the jury? In each of the cases above, John McCain used his political influence, over and above his vote, to argue, advocate, hector and plead for military intervention by the armed forces of the United States of America and such coalition partners as could be rounded up. In each of the cases above, the necessity of toppling the evildoing dictator was exaggerated out of all proportion, portrayed as an instant and refreshing liberation for his people, and as only the first phase of a progressive plan which would turn the subject country into a prosperous, western-oriented market democracy. In each of the cases above the country is now a divided and ruined failed state whose pre-war situation was significantly better than its miserable present. And in each of the cases above, a lot of people were killed who could otherwise have reasonably expected to be alive today.

Also, each of the cases above is chronologically separated from the others by a sufficient span for it to be quite evident what a cluster-fuck the previous operation was, so that anyone disposed to learn from his mistakes might have approached the situation differently as it gained momentum, argued for caution based on previously-recorded clusterfuckery, pleaded for reason to prevail and for improved dialogue to be a priority. Not John McCain. He learned precisely the square root of nothing from previous catastrophes, and plunged into the next catastrophe with the enthusiasm most remarked among those who are not all there, as the vernacular describes it. He not only voted for war every time, he expended considerable effort in cajoling and persuading the reluctant to go along.

Perhaps the introduction here of the definition for 'warmonger' would be helpful to the jury. To wit; "O ne who advocates or attempts to stir up war. A person who fosters warlike ideas or advocates war." Synonyms: hawk, aggressor, belligerent, militarist, jingoist, sabre-rattler. There, John; I just saved you the trouble of writing an epitaph.

Will the world be a better place once John McCain is gone? Difficult to say, really, and the present state of affairs in the world argues strongly that it will not. But it will certainly be no poorer for his passing, and if he were to be replaced politically by an individual who took the trouble to do a little research, muse on previous experience, and review all the available options before voting to send in the Marines why, that would be a victory for everyone in a world where victory is increasingly not even a possibility.

Was Caitlin Johnstone right? Broadly speaking, and going on the information available at the time her statement was made, yes; she was.

151 THOUGHTS ON " IN THE MATTER OF THE PEOPLE VS. CAITLIN JOHNSTONE, THE DEFENSE RESTS. " Reply

KIRILL August 21, 2018 at 4:31 pm

@Mark

Good article. The same 2000 dead hysteria (a number that included 800 dead Serbs) was used in 1999 to justify the bombing of Serbia. After the UCK terrorists took over Kosovo together with NATzO, many more Serbs were butchered than the mostly 1200 terrorists that NATzO was so worried about. I suspect that McShitStain was a big time proponent of the gang rape of Serbia as well.

McShitStain is merely a dumb US attack dog. He does his masters' bidding well and thankfully there is some justice in this world that he gets cancer. I really do hope he pops off this mortal coil. I have seen very good people die from brain cancer and it would be very unfair if this sick nutjob recovered.

We are living through a rather nasty time. The so-called PC left in the US is totally unhinged and engaged in witch hunts togther with the lie factory US MSM. I refuse to believe that "antifa" and all these so-called social justice warriors are real leftists. They are engaged in fascism and their backers are the corporate oligarchy of the USA. At this stage it looks like Germany during the 1930s (no, Trump is not the Hitler equivalent) in that a state of hysteria has taken over the US political scene. All the Hillary worshippers (the Democrats are fake "leftists") actually believe the Russia conspiracy theory crap and want revenge. They also believe CNN and the rest of the MSM that they can roll over Russia with little effort. CNN has been a critical booster for all of the US wars since its formation. It incites Americans to support whatever war criminal enterprise that the US elites want to engage in. McShitStain is a cog in this war machine.

JEN August 21, 2018 at 6:53 pm

The world definitely will be a better place after Jurassic John goes the way of the dinosaurs if only because whoever replaces him as Senator for Arizona won't have anything like the grubby contacts he has all over the world (let alone the scale of such a network) and will have to build up his/her own set.

Thanks Mark for another fiery post. Be careful you don't combust.

Meanwhile back in La-La-Land:

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-20/chelsea-clinton-says-she-might-run-office-one-day

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 21, 2018 at 7:29 pm

Her sequential-talking-points delivery certainly suggests she is being groomed, or at a minimum has been prepared for the question as it is sure to come up. But for someone who claims that nobody has any idea what the future might bring, she certainly got a lot of mileage out of her answer.

Like

JEN August 22, 2018 at 3:17 am

Amazing how she looks more and more like her mother with each passing day. By the time she decides that, yes, she will run for the Presidency, not only will she be a virtual physical clone but her brain will also have remodelled itself into Klintonator Killer Kranium Version 2.0.

It would be most ironic if Bubba-hotep had been cuckolded himself, given his skirt-chasing habit.

http://blackbag.gawker.com/is-this-chelsea-clintons-real-father-1780376180

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 3:59 pm

Hearsay suggests that she is already so broadly disliked among those who have had to work for or with her that it seems probable she would have a really hard time building a base. Before she could get seriously into running for public office she would have to convince the kingmakers that she has real star potential, and I just don't see it.

But I'm not American, so you never know.

Like

JEN August 22, 2018 at 4:57 pm

Need more than hearsay need evidence!

Richard Johnson, "Staff quit Clinton Foundation over Chelsea"
https://pagesix.com/2015/05/18/chelsea-sends-clinton-foundation-staff-running/?_ga=1.267366988.395622878.1421150023

Daniel Halper, "Aide calls Chelsea Clinton a 'spoiled brat' in leaked emails"
https://nypost.com/2016/10/11/aide-calls-chelsea-clinton-a-spoiled-brat-in-leaked-emails/

Incredible: one Clinton Foundation employee nearly committed suicide due to the stress caused by Bubba-Hotep and his li'l princess through their constant meddling and raising issues that staff were expected to chase.

Eric Wemple "What did NBC News's Chelsea Clinton do for her $600,000 salary?"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2014/06/13/what-did-nbc-newss-chelsea-clinton-do-for-her-600000-salary/?utm_term=.59f6cf7ef09a

Like

YALENSIS August 23, 2018 at 1:19 pm

The Kennedy clan had formerly attempted the same gambit by pushing Caroline into running for office; but she failed miserably and retreated back into private life.

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 21, 2018 at 7:29 pm

Shock horrors!

Russia is soon to hold military exercises:

Russia prepares for 'largest war games' since Cold War

Galeotti gets a few words in:

" Despite furious Western attempts to isolate the Kremlin, countries still want to collaborate with Russia. By arms sales and cooperation, Russia is using its military strength to increase its geopolitical presence in the world".

You don't say!

Interestingly, the commenters to the article (so far) seem just to say "So what?":

Silly article WE have exercises all the time, including "Live" firing in the North of Scotland

not to mention the live exercises in which my nephew regularly participates with his and other British army armoured regiments on the Canadian prairie.

Of course, there are not a few head-banger readers of the Independent:

I would even doubt [Europe's] capacity to remove Russia from Poland never mind the Baltics if Russia decided to take them and the only reason they have not decided to do so is the big stick that is the US military which is especially potent under Trump. Same with China and Taiwan, Iran and Saudi etc etc.

Only Uncle Sam can hold the Red Beast at bay!

Pentagonbot?

Why not?

If anyone dare argue the "Kremlin" case in the British press, he is promptly accused of being a "Kremlinbot" and asked such inane questions as "What's the weather like in St. Petersburg today, Vladimir?"

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 21, 2018 at 7:57 pm

These Kremlin war games preparations and the reactions of Western hysterics have already been given a mention further above, by the way.

I'm rather out of sync at the moment, as I am spending most of the present time out in the sticks, where I have no Internet connection.

And the abscence of Internet on my country estate is not because outside Moscow is the real, 3rd-world Russia: it's my choice!

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 21, 2018 at 8:57 pm

Not "further above" but in comments to Mark's previous article.

I have just noticed that this is a new article on the alleged Twitter libel made Johnstone against John McCain.

And it is "absence"!

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 21, 2018 at 8:46 pm

Galeotti uses the expression "collaborate with Russia" and not "do business with Russia".

Collaborate?

With the "Evil Empire" against the "Exceptional Nation", whose "manifest destiny" is to bring freedom and democracy to the rest of the world -- and billions of dollars to the USA?

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 3:46 pm

It's like the difference between an 'administration' and a 'regime'. Obviously, there is one.

Like

YALENSIS August 23, 2018 at 1:25 pm

Even "collaborate" is a spineless term when referring to Russia.
The proper word is "appease". As in "appeasing" Hitler, while also tossing in a Munich reference!

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 21, 2018 at 8:31 pm

Well argued article, Mark.

More dirt on McCain, whose source I now forget, but, if I rightly recall, it was a comment made by a US citizen on some blog way back. I have posted it before:

Allow me to disparage Mr. McCain (again), with facts. By several accounts ("Why Does the Nightingale Sing", for example), he only got into the Naval Academy for a free college degree because Dad and GrandDad were Admirals, and he should have been kicked out several times if not for that too. He was a lousy pilot who got into trouble often and crashed two aircraft because of neglect. He was shot down on his third mission over Vietnam, and getting captured is not heroic.

What happened over there is difficult to pin down, but upon returning from POW status, he passed a physical and regained flight status as a pilot. Yet after he finished 20 years of service that allowed generous retirement pay, he obtained a 100% VA disability rating allowing him to collect some $40,000 a year tax free too! The LA Times mentioned this when McCain was insisting he was fit to serve as commander in Chief. He now hauls in over $240,000 a year from the Feds for military retirement, 100% VA disability, social security retirement, while all the while working full-time in the US Senate. So is he retired, or disabled, or gainfully employed? He is all three! This is textbook case of abuse and why or system needs reform to protect workers against rich welfare kings like McCain.

McCain's loyal wife was disabled in a serious auto accident while he was a POW. Soon after he returned, McCain dumped her for a wealthy woman 20 years younger. The Reagans were so angry they never spoke to him again. He then married his new babe before he officially got divorced, so there's that bigamy thing.

I don't know why any Arizonian votes for this crazed man, especially since he's a big advocate for open borders. At a union meeting, he told workers illegals are needed because Americans are too lazy to work farm fields, even for $50 an hour.

McCain has never labored his entire life, always on the government dole now earning ten times minimum wage worker pay, whose increase he opposes.

McCain grew up wealthy and enjoyed free government health care his entire life, yet thinks it's nothing commoners deserve. While running for president and attacking the poor a rare good reporter asked how many houses he owned. He was unsure, but thought maybe seven.

View image on Twitter View image on Twitter View image on Twitter View image on Twitter
CORTES August 21, 2018 at 9:53 pm

Thanks, Mark, for another analysis of the opinion-management being rolled out across the media.

The stand-out memory I have of the great Ken Kesey novel "One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest" is the description of a "pecking party" inside a battery hen building in which one bird is injured, a speck of blood appears and the crazed neighbours peck it to death. Unfortunately they get spattered and their neighbours take up the pecking a bloodbath ensues. That seems like a decent analogy to the current attempts to close down any alternative to official narrative promotion.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 3:55 pm

Thanks, Cortes, and to all my well-wishers. I loved 'One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest', it was at least as memorable as 'Flowers for Algernon' for me, and I read them both at around the same point in my life, when I was in my early 20's.

If it's really true that the centre cannot hold, The Empire is going to have an increasingly hard time cloaking its lies. Of course, the west could simply return to the values of brotherhood and the common struggle it continues to espouse but never really seriously practiced. But I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

Like

CORTES August 22, 2018 at 9:53 pm

"Flowers For Algernon" is such a stunning work it's a real shame that it's not better known (at least in the UK).
On the news management front, I get the sense that the narrative is slipping away from control. Over a couple of months I've noticed that the free "Metro" papers have been left unread in largish amounts on some buses (busy routes) – when they were being snaffled up until recently. People can sense that they are being herded, I think, and resent it.

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 22, 2018 at 2:12 am


Where we are -- there is the Ukraine

There are now 160 thousand army first reservists.

This was stated by President Petro Poroshenko, speaking at an international volunteer and the veterans' forum: "Where we are -- there is the Ukraine."

"Almost 160 thousand combatants remain as operational first reservists", said Poroshenko.

According to him, all who are in the reserve are ready to take up arms again and "to do this professionally and with a high degree of training".

He added that the day after tomorrow, the Ukraine will celebrate 27 years of Independence, but added that the clockr could have stopped at year 23 if defenders of the Ukraine had not acted against the aggressor and not defended the Ukrainian land: "The guarantor of the independence of the Ukraine are the armed forces of the Ukraine! The guarantor of our freedom, of our statehood, our independence are 344 thousand combatants in the east of our state."

In Mistecka Arsenal in Kiev has started an international volunteer and the veteran's forum "Where we are -- there is the Ukraine". The event will run for two days, on August 22 and 23. The purpose of the forum is to highlight the need for the formation of a correct and effective state policy as regards the reintegrating veterans into society in general and to bring the authorities into this process. Among the participants are representatives of more than 120 veterans and volunteer organizations from different regions of the Ukraine and from abroad.

Got to help all those volunteer batallion fighters to get back to leading a normal, civilian life after killing civilians at the front!

Source: В резерве ВСУ находится почти 160 тысяч из 344 тысяч участников боевых действий на Донбассе

Like

TROND August 22, 2018 at 3:04 am

"Just a friendly public service reminder; the Lockerbie bombing was most likely carried out by Syria, was – according to pretty reliable testimony – rigged by the American intelligence services to finger Libya, and probably the stupidest thing Gaddafi ever did was to admit to it anyway and pay compensation, in an effort to move on."

Most likely carried out by Syria?

Why is it most likely that Syria was behind the bombing?

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 4:42 am

I don't know that it was; that was the judgment arrived upon in the article, and that it was retaliation for something or other which I also forget. So they probably just put two and two together and assessed that it was a Syrian payback (or perhaps had other evidence of which I am unaware), but it suited the events of the day for it to be Libya. So Libya got framed up for it.

Like

RONALD THOMAS WEST August 22, 2018 at 6:25 am

Funny how the stars line op to look like elements of a reprise of the Dag Hammarskjold hit:

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103

GCHQ spy:

"We and the Americans bombed Pan Am Flight 103 to persuade South African foreign minister Pik Botha to sign the Tripartite Accord; thus with the Americans protecting our vested interests both political and financial. The destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 with the Americans demonstrated our intent and was also a threat, and removing Bernt Carlsson was a convenient and powerful signal, i.e. nobody is untouchable"

Like

RONALD THOMAS WEST August 22, 2018 at 6:27 am

This piece is a bit more unassailable:

https://www.scotsman.com/news/police-chief-lockerbie-evidence-was-faked-1-1403341

Like

JEN August 22, 2018 at 2:27 pm

Googling "Lockerbie" and "Syria", I found this link to a Wikispooks article on the Syrian connection:
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Document:Lockerbie_-_The_Syrian_Connection

Five passengers on the Pan Am 103 flight were a Defense Intelligence Agency team carrying a suitcase that contained a large amount of heroin, documents, cash and travellers' cheques. The DIA team had been in Lebanon searching for US hostages held by Hezbollah and had stumbled across a heroin-trafficking ring led by a Syrian drug baron, Monzer al Khassar, who was linked to Colonel Oliver North's activities in ferrying weapons to the Contras in Nicaragua. Al Khassar himself was close to Rifat al Assad, a brother of the then Syrian President Hafez al Assad and apparently a CIA asset.

At the same time there were people in the Iranian government looking for revenge against the US for the USS Vincennes' shoot-down of the Iranian Airbus passenger jet. A bomb expert (Ahmed Jibril) from a Syrian-based Palestinian rebel group was hired. Jibril knew of al Khassar's dope scheme and persuaded him to fit a bomb inside the heroin suitcase that the DIA took onto the plane. Another possibility is that al Khassar and his CIA connections knew that the Iranians were planning revenge and saw an opportunity to kill two birds (appeasing the Iranians, wiping out the DIA whistle-blowers who would have revealed the CIA connection with dope-smuggling) with one stone.

So if Lockerbie was payback, then it was CIA payback against the DIA and if it was retaliation, then it was Iranian retaliation against the USS Vincennes' attack on the Iranian Airbus.

Like

CARTMAN August 22, 2018 at 5:44 am

So, old Theresa personally profited from a terrorist attack to kill dozens of children.

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 4:13 pm

Ooooooo damn you, RT!!!! They're trying to steal Britain's democracy!! Take their license away!!!

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 10:36 am

A question for all the impeach Trump for colluding with Russia weenies:

How would Cohen know anything about Trump's collusion with Russia? Why would Trump need a lawyer for this illegal activity? If you are going to claim that Trump just happened to share this information with Cohen, then why not anyone else? Is Cohen some sort of consigliere or confession booth priest for Trump?

This whole farce with Cohen is pathetic BS. Cohen will be told to say this and that my Mueller and this will be deemed "evidence". Americans are really a few cards short of a full deck to swallow this drivel.

BTW, the new consensus emerging amongst the "deplorables" who do not share the official CNN fake news narrative, is that the dirty dossier produced by Steele was a Russian machination. This is truly overwhelming in its retardation. Why the f*ck would Russia undermine Trump by colluding with Hillary when Hillary was basically foaming at the mouth to start a war over Russia's intervention in Syria. Hillary's Democratic Party has ignited the current anti-Russian hysteria in America, so there is no way that Russia was colluding with her or her party. Americans are apparently too brainwashed or dumb to distinguish between the involvement of Russian nationals and the Russian state. You can find dozens of nationals from any country to do anything with the right motivation.

Like

NORTHERN STAR August 22, 2018 at 2:44 pm

Frankfurter NS here:

"Perhaps the greatest political damage came not from the felony charges, all of them related to various forms of financial chicanery, including five counts each for Cohen and Manafort of income tax evasion, but from Cohen's public statement in the courtroom of Judge Kimba Wood. In confessing his guilt to the eight counts, Cohen declared that in two instances, violating federal laws by using personal funds to suppress politically inconvenient statements by Playboy model Karen McDougal and adult film actress Stormy Daniels, he was acting "in coordination and at the direction of a candidate for federal office."
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/08/22/trum-a22.html

My point is that Cohen's admissions implicating Trump in carrying out either himself or in concert with others willful ongoing acts violative of Federal Campaign Finance laws are CLEARLY sufficient-if substantiated-to oust him from office.

Don't think so??

If the following transgressions were sufficient to 'nail' their intended targets -which is what happened-
then Trump's acts in attempting to hush up Stormy (supra) COULD achieve the same result.

Whether or not some faction of TPTB has the WILL to impeach him is another matter.

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/president-clinton-impeached
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Capone

Like

NORTHERN STAR August 22, 2018 at 2:56 pm

"Mueller's strategy of focusing on Cohen and Manafort's white-collar crimes is perfectly reasonable, even in a probe directed at Russian interference in the 2016 election. "It's not unusual for prosecutors to use charges -- Al Capone is the primary example -- to bring down a criminal conspiracy in any way they can," Waxman pointed out."

Yup!!!

"Cohen's guilty plea effectively makes Trump an unindicted co-conspirator. Current Justice Department guidelines say a sitting president cannot be indicted -- but building a legitimate criminal case against Trump would make it harder for Republicans to stand united in opposition to impeaching the president.

When President Richard Nixon was named an unindicted co-conspirator by a grand jury, he opted to resign instead of face impeachment proceedings. Trump seems unlikely to step down, however. Any further efforts on his part to block the investigation into his campaign would put the Justice Department in uncharted territory"

Cohen would be a prosecutor's "dream cooperator: one who had special insider access to the leader of a powerful, closed, corrupt organization," former prosecutors Mimi Rocah and Elie Honig wrote last month. "We used to prosecute mafia cases. We both know that in the mob -- and perhaps in this White House -- the right cooperator can bring down the entire hierarchy."

From links I've already posted , getting a USC Title 18 conviction of Trump is not necessarily
that required to charge him with "High Crimes and Misdemeanors". Although there is some dispute in legal circles as to what exactly constitutes a sufficent basis of facts upon which impeachment can be
based.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/michael-cohen-paul-manafort-convictions-trouble-for-trump_us_5b7c9cc9e4b0cd327df79e44

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 3:12 pm

There is simply no evidence of Russia collusion. Anything that Cohen says is pure fabrication. It is tiresome for this "witness" BS to be "sufficient". Last year CNN et al. were all hot and bothered by the supposed bank trail proving Trump's financial links to Putin. That would have been a story. Cohen can sing anything that Mueller wants him to as his testicles are twisted harder.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 4:36 pm

But it will establish an unsavory precedent – that any sitting president can be taken out merely by selecting one of his/her aides and then threatening them with crushing penalties for some silly transgression or other or they can turn state's evidence. Anyone who ever dreamed of ascending to the nation's highest office would have to know that, by facilitating this process, they were handing the lawmakers the means to remove any future president.

But, as I said, I don't care. Hillary can't win it now, Pence is a dink, The Donald would dig in his heels and fight all the way out, probably causing great damage, but if he went, so what? He's a dreadful president. And the USA would be in political chaos.

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 5:23 pm

Trump should have fired Sessions for recusing himself from this Congress instituted witch-hunt. The job of Sessions is to be over-seer of the Special Counsel investigation. Mueller cannot have special rights, he must follow the rules. Shaking down people around Trump for tax evasion or assorted other unrelated crimes is not following the rules. It is pure Inquisition tactics.

I would not be so quick to write Trump off as dreadful. He basically sabotaged the two hyped up cruise missile attacks on Syria. Even though his hands are tied and his mouth is gagged by US corporate-run "freedom", he managed to make both those attacks totally ineffective. If he was a loyal servant of the US elites, he would have kept sending more and more missiles and actually ordered NATzO or "coalition" jets to bomb Syrian targets seriously. The sporadic Israeli and coalition attacks have been basically irrelevant.

He is rocking the boat as much as he can. This creates are sorts of noise. This noise is not a metric of his efforts and success.

Like

RKKA August 23, 2018 at 3:05 am

"But it will establish an unsavory precedent – that any sitting president can be taken out merely by selecting one of his/her aides and then threatening them with crushing penalties for some silly transgression or other or they can turn state's evidence."

Precedent set by Bill Clinton's personal Jauvert Ken Starr, in his multiple indictments of Webster Hubble.

"Indict my dog. Indict my cat."

A lot of it is Dems paying rethuglicans back in their own coin.

Like

YALENSIS August 23, 2018 at 1:32 pm

Clinton's "personal Jauvert" – did you mean Inspector Javert of Les Misérables?
Much as I appreciate any literary reference, especially involving Victor Hugo, this allusion would only hold if Bubba had managed to turn his life around, become a virtual saint like Valjean, and devoted his remaining years to the cause of the oppressed masses.
hahahahahha

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 4:28 pm

We'll see. If the Democrats are successful at having him impeached, they will probably create a special holiday recognizing Stormy Daniels, or give her the Presidential Medal of Freedom or something. I frankly don't care – he beat Hillary, and that's something she can never erase or cover up.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 4:17 pm

I imagine they sweated him with the possibility of spending the rest of his life in prison; all the newspaper accounts of his testimony spoke of his shaky voice, and it's typically pretty hard to scare a lawyer. They likely told him that he could just disappear into the prison system and that there would be nothing at all he could do about it.

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 4:58 pm

Any testimony under such coercion is utterly worthless. It is basically a show trial signed "confession".

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 22, 2018 at 6:57 pm

He was probably reminded that lawyers do not do well in prison.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 8:40 pm

Mmmmm. And historically, on average, that's true.

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 22, 2018 at 11:47 am

Credit Suisse freezes $5 billion of Russian money due to U.S. sanctions
AUGUST 22, 2018 / 5:53 PM / UPDATED 5 HOURS AGO

ZURICH (Reuters) – One of Switzerland's largest banks, Credit Suisse, has frozen roughly 5 billion Swiss francs ($5 billion) of money linked to Russia to avoid falling foul of U.S. sanctions, according to its accounts, further increasing pressure on Moscow .

Credit Suisse is being cautious in part because of earlier bad experiences. In 2009, it reached a $500 million settlement with U.S. authorities over dealings with sanctions-hit Iran.

There have been other instances where European banks have been punished. In 2014, France's BNP Paribas ( BNPP.PA ) agreed to pay a record $8.9 billion for violating U.S. sanctions against Sudan, Cuba and Iran.

Switzerland's banking watchdog FINMA does not require Swiss banks to enforce foreign sanctions, but has said they have a responsibility to minimize legal and reputational risks.

I hope the present Russian administration and those yet to come remember this.

Like

CARTMAN August 22, 2018 at 3:42 pm

Sounds like the rich Russians who refused to believe their wealth wouldn't be confiscated in the West just learned a hard lesson. The "rule of law" is for suckers.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 5:39 pm

I doubt very many ordinary Russians lost anything, but they got a pretty useful lesson for free. The west wants Putin gone so badly that there is no law they will not break, no amount of hard-earned soft power they will not throw away, no western business they will not throw under the bus if they think they will realize that goal.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 4:21 pm

Surely there is something Russia can seize to pay them back, or a bank they can close down and kick out in reprisal.

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 5:01 pm

I wonder whose money this was. Russian offshoring is rather sneaky and uses all sorts of places like Cyprus and the Cayman Islands through various instruments. As of 2014, simply keeping money in a western bank was no longer an option.

So this is either illegal money or Credit Suisse is simply lying.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 5:51 pm

That's a good point; some time ago (you're probably correct that it was 2014, or around there) the Russian government did somewhat formalize its advice to not keep money in western banks. As I best remember, it was only mandatory for members of government. But it seems unlikely the government would order all its ministers and senators to move all monies held in western banks out of those banks, and then leave government funds there itself. So perhaps some oligarch/s got burned.

Like

JEN August 23, 2018 at 3:08 am

Could some of this money that Credit Suisse has frozen be Mikhail Khodorkovsky's?

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 23, 2018 at 1:45 pm

Possibly, but I doubt it. Saint Mikhail's money, what there is left of it, is transparent to western investigations, and if they could think of a good reason they would give him a lot more, especially if he were even remotely popular in Russia and they thought he might be a candidate for insertion into Putin's role.

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 23, 2018 at 4:02 am

Now Credite Suisse says that Russian accounts have not been frozen, that the Bank had reclassified certain assets placed under sanctions. By these actions no Russian customers have been affected, reports TASS .

Meanwhile, in the world's greatest dirty money laundry, it has been revealed that the London branch of Deutsche Bank has issued threats to the Russian government.

Deutsche Bank London Threatens to End Business With Russia
Bloomberg, 3 hours ago

Deutsche Bank AG threatened to end business with Russia's government earlier this year in a letter sent to the state demanding that it provide more information related to know-your-customer records.

The lender's London branch sent the correspondence in June saying the business relationship could be terminated if Russia failed to submit the documents within 30 days. While that deadline has long since elapsed, Russia never answered the letter and the German bank hasn't followed up on the initial request, according to two people with knowledge of the matter.

Arschlöcher!

I was working only yesterday and last week as well in the main office of Deutsche Bank here in Moscow.

Never saw no Fritzes there, only Ivans. Seemed to be business as usual to me..

Like

NORTHERN STAR August 22, 2018 at 1:56 pm

Hmmm ..When the limited hangout truth expose' is found to be MSM vetted lies:

"Wikileaks formulated its mandate on its website as follows:

"[Wikileaks will be] an uncensorable version of Wikipedia for untraceable mass document leaking and analysis. Our primary interests are oppressive regimes in Asia, the former Soviet bloc, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East, but we also expect to be of assistance to those in the west who wish to reveal unethical behavior in their own governments and corporations," CBC News – Website wants to take whistleblowing online, January 11, 2007, emphasis added).

This mandate was confirmed by Julian Assange in a June 2010 interview in The New Yorker:

******"Our primary targets are those highly oppressive regimes in China, Russia and Central Eurasia, but we also expect to be of assistance to those in the West who wish to reveal illegal or immoral behavior in their own governments and corporations. (quoted in WikiLeaks and Julian Paul Assange : The New Yorker, June 7, 2010, emphasis added)*****

Assange also intimated that "exposing secrets" "could potentially bring down many administrations that rely on concealing reality -- including the US administration." (Ibid)

From the outset, Wikileaks' geopolitical focus on "oppressive regimes" in Eurasia and the Middle East was "appealing" to America's elites, i.e. it seemingly matched stated US foreign policy objectives. Moreover, the composition of the Wikileaks team (which included Chinese dissidents), not to mention the methodology of "exposing secrets" of foreign governments, were in tune with the practices of US covert operations geared towards triggering "regime change" and fostering "color revolutions" in different parts of the World."

"The Role of the Corporate Media: The Central Role of the New York Times

Wikileaks is not a typical alternative media initiative. The New York Times, the Guardian and Der Spiegel are directly involved in the editing and selection of leaked documents. The London Economist has also played an important role.

While the project and its editor Julian Assange reveal a commitment and concern for truth in media, the recent Wikileaks releases of embassy cables have been carefully "redacted" by the mainstream media in liaison with the US government. (See Interview with David E. Sanger, Fresh Air, PBS, December 8, 2010)

This collaboration between Wikileaks and selected mainstream media is not fortuitous; it was part of an agreement between several major US and European newspapers and Wikileaks' editor Julian Assange"

https://www.globalresearch.ca/who-is-behind-wikileaks-2/22389

Like

NORTHERN STAR August 22, 2018 at 2:24 pm

https://syria360.wordpress.com/2018/08/21/which-war-for-mesopotamia/

"In the coming month, following Eid al-Adha (August 21st), Iraq will be on the horns of a dilemma. The Federal Court has confirmed the results of the manual recount of the May parliamentary elections with insignificant changes to the previously announced results. After the holiday the Iraqi coalition that can assemble more than 165 parliamentary seats will have to choose the new ruler of the country. Whoever is selected as Prime Minister, whether he is pro-US, pro-Iran or even a neutral personality, will not save Iraq from serious consequences and difficult years ahead. If the new government implements the sanctions on Iran announced by interim PM Abadi, internal unrest and insecurity can be expected in the country. Many Iraqis, including some armed groups, will refuse what is perceived as US interference, and US forces themselves will likely come under fire. If the sanctions are not implemented, Iraq will face serious US sanctions in turn, international companies will pull out, and the return of the terrorist group ISIS (ISIL, Daesh) cannot be excluded. Any decision will certainly have a major effect on the economy of Mesopotamia, and perhaps even on its security."

"In Iraq, there is no political consensus over strategic decisions: the unilateral decision on Iran sanctions taken by interim Prime Minister Haidar Abadi needs parliamentary approval so that the representative of the Iraqi people can assume responsibility for taking the country into an unknown future. The Iraqi Foreign Ministry has rejected Abadi's unilateral decision, and so did most Iraqi political groups with Ministers in the government. The Iraqi Vice President Nouri al-Maliki, Abadi's Da'wa party, and many others, rejected the Prime Minister's action against Iran and in favour of the US. Many said overtly that "Iraq will certainly not be part of the US plan to hit Iran."

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 3:07 pm

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-22/us-navy-releases-video-system-counter-russia-and-china-ship-killer-missiles

Before the infallible, exceptional chauvinists get too smug, they should consider that this missile has essentially no chance against a maneuvering (i.e. non ballistic) missile with a speed of Mach 20 such as the "Kinzhal".

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 3:08 pm

Oops, Mach 10 not 20. Even a Mach 4 non-ballistic missile would render the ESSM ineffective.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 4:48 pm

The ESSM has been around for quite awhile; even Canada has it.

https://www.naval-technology.com/projects/halifax/

The amazing new capability owes much to an active seeker in the missile rather than the traditional semi-active homing. What's the drawback to an active seeker? That's right; it is vulnerable to jamming and decoys.

https://www.wearethemighty.com/gear-tech/sea-sparrow-sam-upgrade

It's still only a medium-range missile, good out to about 27 nautical miles. It's quite capable, but it's not a new revolution.

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 5:15 pm

Active seeking a randomly varying trajectory target is not a guarantee of success. In addition, Russia is not some rinky dink banana republic which cannot give the Kinzhal active trajectory modification capability. It would be a rather tractable upgrade. The key here is response lag. A Mach 4+ missile engaging a Mach 10 missile does not have the time to overcome its response lag.

Also, think of the ESSM as standing still as the Kinzhal moves at Mach 5+. So there is a narrow cone of interception that limits the ESSM; it has to attack the Mach 10 missile from the front. So it must detect it early enough. The standard design feature of Soviet and Russian anti-ship missiles is near surface flight below radar detection altitude. The Kinzhal could be undetected until 14 km from the target. At Mach 10 this gives it 14000/3320 = 4.2 seconds to impact. During this small window the ESSM has to launch and reach top speed. That would take at least 2 seconds. In the remaining 2.2 seconds the Kinzhal can deflect its trajectory much more easily than the ESSM can respond and thus can effectively delay it from interception. This requires a trajectory animation to make vivid. But the US Navy is clearly compensating for the shock of the Kinzhal characteristics.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 5:59 pm

That's true, and it's true of all SAMs that their weakest intercept profile is that against a crossing target; the textbook approach is head-on. Which presupposes the unit firing the ESSM is itself the target. If it's anyone else, the chances of a successful intercept are reduced, and the higher the crossing rate, the less the probability, although frankly it would be zero from the get-go against something so fast. So ESSM cannot protect another unit unless it is right alongside the firing unit, and bunching up like that would be inadvisable for any number of reasons.

However, soft-kill measures enjoy a considerable advantage over hard-kill, although most of the money goes to hard-kill because it's so much more glamorous. In most navies. Not in Russia, though, where ESM, ECM and decoys are among the most effective and best-tested in the world. Such systems are made specifically for active homers, although jammers are effective against surveillance and acquisition radars as well.

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 6:59 pm

Indeed, a wall of shrapnel from some sort of "curtain" defense system would go a long way to shredding the incoming missile. The speed on the incoming missile makes the shredding easier.

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 22, 2018 at 6:48 pm

In that the US likely does not have a missile that is in the same league as the Kinzhal, I wonder what they used as a target for their testing? Or, its just a sop to make us Americans feel exceptional?

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 7:00 pm

The US does not have any hypersonic missiles. It would not have any dummy target that would have the characteristics of the Kinzhal. Much like all of its vaunted ABM system tests were against purely ballistic targets.

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 22, 2018 at 7:28 pm

.. that carried flares for a strong infrared signal and radar reflectors plus having foreknowledge of the timing of launch and general trajectory.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 8:36 pm

They probably ran the numbers in a simulator, and said sure, we could stop it. They fly missiles as targets all the time, missiles they have either captured or bought through third parties. They just fasten it to the rails on the bottom of a fighter, turn on the seeker head, and use the plane to simulate a missile. The plane doesn't fly as fast, of course, but that is an artificiality that is built into the test. They simply assume it was flying at the correct speed, and assess whether you got your chaff into the air in time to stop the real thing, or whether your jammer successfully decoyed the seeker. They can play that one out regardless how fast the 'missile' is going – if the head loses lock, it probably would miss. In that scenario, the 'missile' flying slower than real time actually works to its advantage; the real thing would have less time to reacquire you, if it has that capability, because its run to the target is a lot shorter.

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 3:18 pm

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/russias-strikes-on-terrorists-in-syria-killed-over-86000-militants-mod/

"A total of 830 gang leaders, more than 86,000 militants, including 4,500 immigrants from the Russian Federation and the CIS countries, were eliminated,"

Excellent job! Especially in the case of the vermin from the ex-USSR.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 5:37 pm

That seems a little arbitrary, considering that British rug-dealer or whatever he is from the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights keeps saying a little over 10,000 civilians were killed. Is it possible Russian strikes were so accurate that more than 8 times as many militants were killed as civilians, even with Uncle Sam helping?

Mind you, I don't think anyone really knows with very much certainty, because some outfit calling itself the Syrian Center for Policy Research claims there were over 470,000 killed in Syria.

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 5:58 pm

I think that there was sufficient sampling by the SAA and Russian special forces of the various attack locations to make these numbers credible. Russia was using precision guided bombing so it had to identify viable targets. Satellites are not enough. Drones can get a good sense of the militant count if they are given enough time.

I guess the could put error bars on these numbers. But the average citizen wouldn't know what to make of them.

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 5:55 pm

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-22/john-bolton-warns-assad-we-will-respond-if-chemical-weapons-used-idlib

Expect more White Helmet jihadi theater. Idlib is basically the last terrorist enclave of note left in Syria. Assad apparently is a masochist since he will stage some small and totally pointless chemical weapons attack to give the US and its minions all sorts of pretexts to do more harm than this chemical weapons "win" could ever produce. The SAA now does not have to be spread thin to deal with a thousands of kilometers long frontline so the Idlib operation should be a mop up and not some epic battle.

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 6:40 pm

https://sana.sy/en/?p=145238

More from SANA on this issue.

It appears that HRW and other western war enabling organizations have been running around claiming that Syria uses cluster bombs. Yeah, if that was the case there would be vast amounts of evidence. Like there was in Serbia in 1999 after NATzO used cluster munitions.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 8:28 pm

Using cluster bombs is bad? Gosh; who knew?

https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/05/06/yemen-saudis-using-us-cluster-munitions

Maybe Syria should consider buying its cluster bombs from Uncle Sam. Those ones are apparently approved for use.

Like

TROND August 23, 2018 at 1:28 pm

Sometimes Nobel Peace Prize winners use those weapons

Al-Majalah camp attack
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Majalah_camp_attack

"The al-Majalah camp attack also referred to as the al-Majalah massacre[1] occurred on December 17, 2009 when the United States military launched Tomahawk cruise missiles from a ship off the Yemeni coast on a Bedouin camp in the southern village of al-Majalah in Yemen, killing 14 alleged Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula fighters and 41 civilians,[2][3][4][5][6] including 14 women and 21 children."

Like

KIRILL August 23, 2018 at 3:45 pm

Who cares about 41 faceless innocent civilians when crooks like Litvinenko and Skripal are made into some sort of heavenly martyrs. Apparently, it is OK for Mossad to off opponents of Israel, but if Russia HYPOTHETICALLY does it, then it is the crime of the millennium. The west is a sick joke.

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 22, 2018 at 6:55 pm

I think that train has sailed. No more embarrassingly feeble cruise missile attacks and no-fly zones are a distant memory. The main efforts may be focused on sabotaging reconstruction and unleashing saturation propaganda attacks as cover during the retreat from Syria.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 8:39 pm

Maybe, but the American hawks have not just gone to sleep, and are always trying out a new 'red line' to see if it will win public support. You're right that they're mostly just going through the motions, but I get the feeling that if they ever came up with the right message – another Iraqis-ripping-babies-out-of-incubators story – that would resonate with the public, they'd be pretty glad to get back in there, and it wouldn't take them long because they haven't actually left yet. They're just marking time and hoping for a break.

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 23, 2018 at 3:46 am

They can and will likely try an over-the-top propaganda hit piece but a majority of Americans have drama-fatigue. We are saturated with BS news and no longer care.

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 6:57 pm

https://t.co/ADQS6HoJji

The first batch of 100 Armata T-14 tanks have been ordered. Extensive testing of these tanks will be initiated in 2019. Given all the testing that has been done already, this is nothing like the case with ships. This is some sort of formality likely focusing on the unit failure rate out in the field.

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 22, 2018 at 7:08 pm

That is a significant number. So much for the theory that the tank was to be put on ice. I suppose that perhaps 1,000 would be needed to have a strategic impact but 100 is a pretty good start. The other related systems (the self-propelled artillery, armored personnel carrier, etc.) may be of equal significance. I wonder how many of those will be ordered. The self-propelled artillery sytem in particular seemed to be a breakthrough in capability.

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 7:41 pm

Apparently there are 32 T-15 units in this package. I have not seen numbers on the latest MSTA howitzer.

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 22, 2018 at 7:00 pm

Poroshenko has promised to make the Ukrainian army the strongest in Europe
August 23, 2018, 01:49


Porky and the boys

The Ukrainian army will be the strongest in Europe, said the President of the Ukraine Petro Poroshenko at a veterans' forum in Kiev.

According to him, nobody can prevent the Ukraine from joining NATO, and the army will be so strong, because the Ukrainians are "fighting for peace".

"We have been completely re-engineering the entire security sector, including the armed forces, fully to NATO standards. And the main message that I have brought back from the NATO summit : the doors of NATO are open for the Ukraine, no matter what Russia says. And the key message for Russia is: you cannot stop the Euro-Atlantic integration of our country", Poroshenko is quoted as having said on the August 22 edition of "NewsOne".

The Ukrainian President noted that the country has to do a lot of work to do in order to achieve such objectives .

Porky, you fat twat! Russia need say nothing whenever you open your filthy snout!

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 7:03 pm

When will these retarded fucks ever shut up. Even his vaunted 160,000 strong "reservist" army is certain to be a joke. It will be a generation before Ukraine can get its army shit together. That is assuming its economy does not implode. The chances of economic failure are increasing by the hour.

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 22, 2018 at 7:04 pm

Looks photo shopped.

Like

YALENSIS August 23, 2018 at 1:41 pm

You beat me to the punch, P.O.! Most of the troops look like the same, and the Porky figure is clearly a photoshopped cut-out. The real Porky would not be so stupid as to stand in front of all those guns.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 8:46 pm

In that picture you can see about 160 people. How do we know that's not all of them, just pulled in tight for the shot?

Porky has to keep broadcasting that we're-gonna-be-in-NATO signal to reassure the Ukrainian public that he's not getting paid for doing nothing. I am pretty sure the encouragement he hears for Ukraine to be in NATO is all in his imagination, or he's just making it up. Ukraine would be an enormous liability, and I am sure Europe is only too conscious that the United States would be the most likely to provoke an Article-5 situation using Ukraine, but it would be Europe who would have to fight the war.

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 22, 2018 at 10:17 pm

Isn't that Chipmunk Prince William of the UK standing first left and his clone at 4th right?

There are several chipmunks there, as a matter of fact.

Like

YALENSIS August 23, 2018 at 1:42 pm

And they are all wearing, like, Lone Ranger masks!

Like

JEN August 22, 2018 at 9:47 pm

What happened to Porky wearing army fatigues? Couldn't he get any in his size?

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 22, 2018 at 7:03 pm

The BBC continues to fight the good fight:

The memes that might get you jailed in Russia
3 hours ago

Oh doooo fahk orrrf!

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 22, 2018 at 8:57 pm

Memes that can get you kicked off an airplane in America.

https://fox2now.com/2015/03/23/man-kicked-off-southwest-flight-over-language-on-t-shirt/

But but .muh FREEDOM!!!

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 22, 2018 at 7:03 pm

McCain is walking talking proof that sociopaths are fast-tracked for success. There never was a man, in my opinion, in US politics that was more exploitative, coldly calculating and utterly ruthless than that bag of shit.

But, Mark said it much better with style, slashing wit and evidence.

Like

KIRILL August 22, 2018 at 7:04 pm

The problem with such talented men is that they have no talent in anything else. They get to the top and then poop on our heads.

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 22, 2018 at 10:11 pm

The Russian Ministry of Defence has published previously classified documents about the Battle of Kursk on the eve of the 75th anniversary of that huge Soviet victory over the invading Nazi forces in August 1943.

Of course, the Germans suffered a defeat at Kursk because of the horrendous cold that is common in Western Russia during the summer months, not to mention the imported from the USA cans of Spam that the Red Army infantry chucked between the German armour track idler wheels so that the tracks would jam.

See: Kursk

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 23, 2018 at 8:31 am

That would be General Winter and Colonel Spam.

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 22, 2018 at 10:34 pm

ARSEHOLES!

https://i1.wp.com/off-guardian.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/embassy-tweet.jpg?ssl=1

See: The Welsh Orchestra Defying the Ukrainian Coup Regime

Like

CORTES August 23, 2018 at 11:47 am

So, in as neat an inversion of reality as possible in BizarroWorld Ukraine no longer needs a definite article in English but "the Russia" does?

Mighty Ukraine, cradle of western humanity!

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 22, 2018 at 10:36 pm

What sad fucks!

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 23, 2018 at 8:35 am

Maybe the Welsh are visiting Crimea to show their support for Ukraine! And to blow their symphonic brass instruments of hope to encourage the prisoners there to pluck up their courage, against the day they will at last be free.

I would just tell them that, anyway. What could be the answer to that? Should I show my support for Kiev by staying away from it?

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 23, 2018 at 1:53 am

Tomorrow is Ukraine Independence Day.

Verkhovna Rada Deputy Oleg Barna of the "Blok Petro Poroshenko" has said live on air on the Ukrainian TV channel NewsOne that the Ukraine armed forces parade in honour of Independence Day "could give rise to an earthquake in the Kremlin".

We have something to boast about. The parade is a measure of the patriotism of all citizens who want to see the fighting efficiency of our army I think that our military march and the rumble of our armoured vehicles should cause an earthquake in the Kremlin.

Source: RT [Russian]

Stupid prick!

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 23, 2018 at 8:37 am

Any time you feel like trying.

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 23, 2018 at 2:02 am

And get this:

Украинские спецслужбы, украинцы должны уделить внимание, возможно через наших союзников на Кавказе, уничтожению Крымского моста.
-- Игорь Мосийчук

Perhaps with the help of our allies in the Caucusus, the Ukraine intelligence services and Ukrainians should focus their attention on the destruction of the Crimea Bridge
-- Ihor Mosiychuk [Ukrainian Supreme Rada Deputy]

Source: RIA Novosti [Russian]

Now if Mosiychuk were to waddle by the Kremlin, then there well might be an earthquake there.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 23, 2018 at 1:09 pm

I thought they wanted Russia to present it to them as a gift? As an expression of good will?

If Ukraine wants a massive war so badly, then perhaps that is what is in the cards. But if there is a third World War, Ukraine will be utterly destroyed, razed to its foundations. Its self-satisfied fat-cat leaders do not appear to grasp this, because life is actually pretty good for them the way it is.

If there is no war, and things go on as they are, eventually there will be another revolution in Ukraine and the fat oligarch who runs it will flee for his life. If past performance is any standard of measure, then the Ukrainians will elect another rich oligarch, and settle down to hope that things will get better.

Like

JEN August 23, 2018 at 2:12 pm

The Yukies decided instead to follow Tom Rogan's recommendation to destroy the bridge. After all, if the opinion comes from an American, then it must be the right opinion and the best option.

Like

KIRILL August 23, 2018 at 3:41 pm

The best that Banderastan can do is engage in terrorism. They can send car bombs or plant IEDs on the road and create havoc. If they try a military solution, their military will be heavily degraded.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 23, 2018 at 4:47 pm

If 'heavily degraded' means 'run through a meat grinder and then rolled flat', then yes. The Ukrainian Army is no match for the Russian Army, and could not even slow it down, never mind stop it.

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 23, 2018 at 6:37 pm

Bringing down the bridge is a Ukie wet dream (ha ha).

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 23, 2018 at 2:16 am

Rehearsal of tomorrow's Independence Day parade in Kiev:

Independence Day they say?

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 23, 2018 at 3:42 am

Nicely said.

Like

CARTMAN August 23, 2018 at 4:16 am

The Ukrainian flag is also in the wrong shade of blue.

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 23, 2018 at 4:40 am

They must be running out of the correct dyestuff.

Rehearsals for last year's Independence Day:

Like

YALENSIS August 23, 2018 at 1:54 pm

It is American law that Old Glory must always be held higher than any other nation's flag. So there!

Like

KIRILL August 23, 2018 at 3:39 pm

Reality is relative. One man's crawling up the ass of a foreign power is the purest expression of freedom, for another it is the depth of repression.

Like

ET AL August 23, 2018 at 2:22 am

Consequently I have only a handful of tweets, and almost no followers.

Careful there Mark, that's how Jesus started and look what's happened since! 😉

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 23, 2018 at 1:12 pm

Jesus was never on Twitter. He would not be possessed of inexhaustible patience if he were.

Like

YALENSIS August 23, 2018 at 1:56 pm

My father, who was a professor, used to say: "Jesus was a great teacher, but he didn't publish enough to get tenure."

Like

ET AL August 24, 2018 at 1:30 am

That's true, but

JEN August 23, 2018 at 2:18 pm

Jesus would not stay very long on Twitter. People would take his tweets all too literally and he would get tired of having to explain for the umpteenth time that he didn't believe that a camel really could walk through the eye of a needle.

Like

ET AL August 23, 2018 at 2:24 am

Moon of Alabama: Facebook Kills "Inauthentic" Foreign News Accounts – U.S. Propaganda Stays Alive
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/08/facebook-kills-inauthentic-foreign-news-accounts-us-propaganda-stays-alive.html

####

Diaspora , an open alternative to Facebook, has already been around for quite a few years but as you can imagine is not so slick. How long until other alternatives start vying for attention (advertizing)?

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 23, 2018 at 1:41 pm

FireEye is the same outfit that claimed to have busted a ring of Russian hackers trying to gain access to American military secrets. They could tell because the 'cyberweapon' was built on Russian-language machines, and during working hours in Moscow. As if Russians smart enough to build an electronic weapon that evades detection and spreads itself to firewalled machines kept off the internet would be stupid enough to code in Russian and leave clues like that which pointed back straight at them. These days nothing says 'CIA' like use of the Russian language in contested online communication.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/hacking-trail-leads-to-russia-experts-say-1414468869

It's curious that we have two emerging narratives, one factual and one offered as fact. The factual one; the USA has been involved for decades in dominating the internet, and for generations in spreading American influence around the world by all available means, frequently disguised and often under the control if its intelligence agencies. No country in the world places as high a priority as the United States on maintaining American control over the internet and everything that happens on it; the biggest browsers and the giants of social media are all American. Now the second narrative – suddenly every country which is declared an enemy of 'American values' is attacking America with sophisticated social-media and hacking attacks online. Every time an American security firm 'busts' a new effort, the evidence is always stupidly obvious, like "Americans should not vote for the Jezebel Hillary Clinton; if you know what is good for you, you will vote for Trump, insh' Allah".

Suddenly Iran is launching sophisticated cyber-attacks against the USA, although they have never done it before and Iran has only a tiny presence on the internet. Just at the moment when Washington is looking for a reason to impose crippling sanctions upon them and institute regime change. A little convenient, isn't it?

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 23, 2018 at 4:50 am

Here's that Porky pic again, published by the official Ukrainian media:

Beautiful background -- great, but someone has spotted something strange about it .

Take a closer look

and even closer

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 23, 2018 at 4:54 am

It Is believed that this small person is one of the tactical combat dwarfs that sit in the backpacks of airborne troops.

On the other hand, he could be a spy from Moscow.

source

Like

CORTES August 23, 2018 at 1:19 pm

To me .to you

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-45074955

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 23, 2018 at 5:54 pm

Sad news, that. They made me chuckle.

Someone once said or wrote: "The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there".

I remember how where the Chuckle Brothers came from was just like my old neck of the woods, but now, in both these places, heavy industry has come and gone.

It was L.P. Hartley whom I quoted above: just looked it up.

Like

YALENSIS August 23, 2018 at 1:58 pm

It's the dwarf Chernomor, in Ruslan's backpack. [Pushkin literary allusion]

Like

KIRILL August 23, 2018 at 3:37 pm

Come on, it's obviously Satan!

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 23, 2018 at 4:49 pm

Close but not quite Alfred E. Neuman.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 23, 2018 at 5:44 pm

Looks to me like Danny Woodburn , who played Mickey Abbot on 'Seinfeld'.

Like

JEN August 23, 2018 at 8:50 pm

More likely, this employment of tactical combat dwarves is evidence of Australian military advice to Ukrainians.

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 23, 2018 at 5:07 am

Did I read this right?

Moscow Times, Aug. 20 2018 – 17:08

More Than 100 Fan ID Holders Are Seeking Asylum in Russia, Aid Group Says

Scores of asylum seekers who entered Russia with World Cup fan identity documents are seeking legal help in Moscow, in an attempt to escape war, political repression and homophobia, a refugee assistance group has said.

Russia introduced visa-free travel for holders of Fan IDs during the football tournament this summer, later extending the measure until the end of 2018 on President Vladimir Putin's orders. During the tournament, dozens of Fan ID holders reportedly tried to enter Europe illegally using Fan IDs.

Seeking asylum to escape homophobia ?

In RUSSIA ???

Like

JAMES LAKE August 23, 2018 at 9:00 am

These hundred people must have bought tickets to the World Cup to get the visa. Plus the cost of a flight

Flying over how many safe countries to get to Russia?

Then claimed asylum ?

Shows the danger of visa free travel

Like

CORTES August 23, 2018 at 11:51 am

Sponsored by the Gaydars, presumably.

Like

CORTES August 23, 2018 at 1:51 pm

It's always tempting to think that pieces which resonate mean that one's suspicions have some merit, but, hey, give it up for Gilbert Doctorow's conclusions

https://russia-insider.com/en/trump-pushing-germany-and-russia-settle-their-differences-and-he-doing-it-purpose/ri24544

Like

NORTHERN STAR August 23, 2018 at 2:05 pm

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/08/23/dung-a23.html

"The family of David Dungay Jr, a 26-year-old Aboriginal killed at Sydney's Long Bay jail in 2015, have stepped-up their campaign for justice after footage was played at the New South Wales Coroner's Court last month revealing the violent assault that led to his tragic death.

The video was played in the course of an ongoing coronial inquest into Dungay's killing. It showed that in the moments before he died five immediate action team (IAT) prison officers stormed Dungay's cell, restraining him and smothering him face-down on a bed. Dungay could be heard crying out 12 times that he "couldn't breathe." (SOUND FAMILIAR??)

The guards attacked Dungay because he allegedly refused to stop eating biscuits. After being smothered Dungay was hauled into another cell. Multiple officers once again forced him face-down on the bed to prevent him from struggling.

Dungay was administered an injection of midazolam, a powerful sedative that also produces anterograde amnesia. A few minutes later he had stopped breathing. The officers were still holding him down."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-16/warning-harrowing-video-dungay-being-restrained-by-officers/9999426

Like

NORTHERN STAR August 23, 2018 at 2:33 pm

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/08/23/pers-a23.html

Human6 • 11 hours ago
Much as I despise him, Orwell did make a valuable observation about euphemisms and the English language:

****"In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defence of the indefensible. ***

Things like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of political parties. Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness."

Spot on!!!!

Oh .and Stooges

"You better watch out, you better not cry
Better not pout, I'm telling you why
Santa Claus is comin' to town
He's making a list and checking it twice
Gonna find out who's naughty and nice
Santa Claus is comin' to town
He sees you when you're sleepin'
He knows when you're a wake
He knows if you've been bad or good
So be good for goodness sake"

Like

NORTHERN STAR August 23, 2018 at 2:50 pm

"Le principal résultat de la présente vague d'accusations de harcčlement sexuel est l'érosion des droits démocratiques élémentaires aux États-Unis, incluant la présomption d'innocence et l'équité procédurale, l'obligation légale de la poursuite de faire la preuve de la culpabilité de l'accusé hors de tout doute raisonnable. Ces "gauchistes" qui célčbrent cet assaut jouent un jeu trčs dangereux et réactionnaire. Comme Léon Trotsky l'a déjŕ dit: "La théorie, aussi bien que l'expérience historique, témoigne du fait que toute restriction démocratique dans la société bourgeoise est éventuellement dirigée contre le prolétariat, de la męme maničre que les taxes tombent éventuellement sur les épaules du prolétariat." "

Yup!!!

However when contemplating the growth of the ME Too movement, it's interesting to note the commensurate near deification of vapid sluts and whores by the MSM whereby manufactured 'celebrity' women-aka Divas-market the wholesale debasement and sexualization of women as cnts for sale ..

http://www.wsws.org/fr/articles/2018/08/23/chap-a23.html

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 23, 2018 at 5:19 pm

Here is my take on the priorities of the deep state and its public face – the MSM:
– stopping the deplorable rebellion
– cutting off the head of the rebellion – perceived as Trump
– reinstating the Cold War in an effort to derail Rusisa's recovery and international leadership role
– bitch slapping China

The rest involves turning unsustainable debt into establishment of a feudal world comprised of elites living on Mount Olympus, legions of vassals and a vast sea of cerebrally castrated peasants to serve as a reservoir for any imaginable exploitation.

Won't happen, not even close.

Like

KIRILL August 23, 2018 at 6:03 pm

My impression is that around the year 2000 there was supposed to a new world order. Communism was sabotaged and brought down. That left the imperialist capitalists in charge, like they were before 1917. Globalism is a dirty word, since it means global domination by the USA and its NATzO minions and the countries that depend on the US empire. This would include, or should include China and the vanquished Russia (ex-USSR). We saw NATzO supplant the UN as the world police.

Instead we have Russia in a truly phoenix resurgence into superpower status. Don't let the clowns try to argue that Russia's economy is small. It is bigger than Germany's regardless of the PPP correction, which fails to properly weight the whole economy since it is fixated on consumer goods and makes a load of implicit assumptions about which sectors are the biggest. Militarily, Russia is a match for the USA. Difference in the number of aircraft carriers mean bupkis. The Syria campaign shows that the US cannot do anything to stop Russia from severely undermining its agenda. We saw this 2013 when Russia stopped the US planned Libya and Serbia style attack on Syria. This was achieved through deployment of a serious number of Russian missile cruisers and other navy assets to the Mediterranean. The US went foaming mad and pulled its Ukraine card. (I am not sure about the planned timeline for the coup, but I suspect that a more "democratic" approach to regime change was probably more desired, this would have frustrated the return of Crimea).

Since 2013, the US and its minions have lost the initiative. All their big regime change plans are unraveling and they keep losing the ball. Crimea was a serious loss for these clowns. The Khuyiv regime is no prize and its day are numbered since it is watching over an economic collapse. Now they have lost Syria and Russia will establish a moderate Islamic belt from Lebanon to Iran to keep the Wahabbi nutjobs at bay. There were big plans in Washington for Central Asia to be taken over by Saudi managed jihadis. Russia would be stuck in a religious war quagmire on its doorstep. But that evil Putin is f*cking up those plans on a epic scale.

The US deep excrement state is feeling the loss of its promised dominion of the planet. There was never supposed to be any opposition after 1991. The 21st century was supposed to be the American century. But instead we have an economic pole shift to Asia. The shrinkage of NATzO in the global GDP is not stopping but accelerating. By 2050, the precious west will be less than 20% of the world economy. It will cease being an economic Mecca and all the developing country elites will orient themselves to the new economic power locus. This is a nightmare for western capitalist imperialists.

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 23, 2018 at 6:27 pm

Yes, that seems the case. The strategy to promote moderate Islam is a brilliant and humane countermove to the Western games of manipulation of the unfortunate deranged.

Like

ET AL August 24, 2018 at 1:42 am

For me, I would say that the ' few days of bombing Serbia ' in 1999 ripped any last vestiges of belief that the West was here to help mega violently (deliberate bombing of the Chinese embassy) away from everyone. Of course plenty happened in the years running up to that event The other is when China joined the WTO on 11/12/2001 and hit the ground running – they were expected to behave meekly and ask the great white men for their advice and follow it.

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 23, 2018 at 7:29 pm

Upon further reflection, Trump is being promoted by the MSM as the leader of the deplorables – an orange straw man. I support him to the degree that he is confounding the deep state elites and social engineering.

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 23, 2018 at 5:23 pm

Front-page story headline and sub-heading, "The Independent":

ANTI-VACCINE MYTHS ARE BEING PROMOTED BY SOCIAL MEDIA BOTS AND RUSSIAN TROLLS, STUDY
Malicious characters look to use arguments to divide the American public and exploit them
ANDREW GRIFFIN
@_andrew_griffin
2 hours ago

Now read the article.

Anyone find any reference to "Russian trolls" in it, apart from this: " It found many tweets that were posted by the same bots thought to have been used to influence the 2016 election, as well as marketing and malware bots "?

I see: "thought to have been used", writes the "journalist".

And on that supposition the Independent "journalist" rests his case.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 23, 2018 at 6:45 pm

It turns out that many anti-vaccine tweets come from accounts whose provenance is unclear ," said David Broniatowski, an assistant professor in GW's School of Engineering and Applied Science.

"These might be bots, human users or 'cyborgs' – hacked accounts that are sometimes taken over by bots. Although it's impossible to know exactly how many tweets were generated by bots and trolls, our findings suggest that a significant portion of the online discourse about vaccines may be generated by malicious actors with a range of hidden agendas."

Equivocation central – it's amazing what can pass as a 'study' these days. What is even more incredible is that we have arrived at a point in our history when the appearance of debate on a point is suspicious, and inspires 'researchers' to 'study' the problem to see who is behind it rather than focusing on why the point generated debate in the first place. We have arrived at a point where it is actually unpatriotic to disagree with the official narrative.

Many more Americans believe vaccines are safe than the astroturfed 'debate' suggests, found the study. Google says bullshit. A recent Zogby poll of a claimed representative sample group found only 32% of respondents said they were 'very confident' vaccines were safe. The same or a similar question was posed 10 years ago, and the proportion who said they were 'not too confident has risen 3% since then, while those who said they were 'not at all confident' in the safety of vaccines went up by 2%. People are not getting more confident, they're getting less confident. There; that's my study – where's my research grant?

https://thevaccinereaction.org/2018/06/nearly-20-percent-of-americans-think-vaccines-may-be-unsafe-and-45-percent-are-not-sure/

Once again, as soon as the mainstream media finds an argument, it is quick to blame it on unidentified 'Russian trolls', rather than addressing the problem. The state narrative is the law. And the pace is quickening.

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 23, 2018 at 5:32 pm

Stratolaunch – a front for the US military to develop a rapid satellite launch capability?

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a22802701/does-stratolaunch-have-a-top-secret-purpose/

Same for SpaceX? Yeehaw! Catch those Russki's napping!

Like

KIRILL August 23, 2018 at 5:46 pm

No. Just no. The time for this thing to take off, reach altitude and then fire off its small missile variants is much longer than any ground based LEO interceptor. The only value of this system is that it uses cheaper rockets. But cruising at well under 22 km (U-2 and M-55 top altitude) this flying launch point is still within the deep of the Earth's geopotential well. Its speed is also nothing of interest so that the initial velocity of the rockets it carries are not big enough to matter. May as well just launch from the ground.

This thing can only loft small sized satellites into orbit. An example of such a satellite is Scisat-I which is still in orbit gathering science data.

http://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/eng/satellites/scisat/about.asp

I smell ulterior motives for this platform. Aside from the pork barrel aspect, it is a dual use weapons system. It is probably designed to fly near the border of the "enemy" and carry long range supersonic missiles and cruise missiles.

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 23, 2018 at 6:10 pm

As a launcher of satellite interceptor, it might have some value given its ability to launch closer to the satellite's ground track (if that is a factor). On the other hand it or its facilities can be taken out with a single cruise missile. Russia's mobile anti-satellite interceptors would seem to be much more survivable.

I suppose the idea is that a number of rockets can be prepped and then launched at perhaps at a rate of 3-4 per day – perhaps to replenish destroyed satellites as suggested by the article. But such activities would suggest a general war and we are back to its vulnerability to a modest attack.

The idea of the plane serving as a cruise missile platform is interesting but the plane has a fairly short range and probably is a maintenance nightmare. Wait, that makes it perfect fit for most defense programs.

Like

KIRILL August 23, 2018 at 5:38 pm

The people yelling loudest about myths can be the biggest myth spreaders out there.

In order to make vaccines useful, they are mixed with adjuvants which are primarily aluminum based. This creates inflammation at the location the vaccine is administered with a needle. The macrophages then consume the pieces of no-active virus or bacteria and the immune system learns to make antibodies that for that strain. During future infections the response time is vastly shorter and any mutation is more likely to not take too long to respond to before effective antibodies are produced.

The problem with the above is that inducing inflammation involving aluminum and other molecules in the vaccine concoction can trigger an auto-immune syndrome in some fraction of a percentage of the population. Their immune systems are too hyperactive and not particularly precise in identifying actual foreign molecules instead of similar ones in the body. A variation on this theme is that Type I diabetics lose their beta cells due to an auto-immune response triggered by milk product intake.

The kooks would have everyone not use vaccines. That is not the solution. But it is a fact that no procedure exists to tag people with a predisposition to auto-immune reactions and have them dealt with in a safer way. The real myth is that vaccines are universally safe. And I have not even gotten into the whole issue of the use of ethyl-mercury as a vaccine preservative. Both ethyl- and methyl-mercury are potent neurotoxins.

Like

PATIENT OBSERVER August 23, 2018 at 5:55 pm

An update on an old topic:

https://www.thesourcemagazine.org/how-the-water-sector-helps-to-map-drug-abuse/?utm_source=IWA-NETWORK&utm_campaign=167938470d-The_Source_newsletter_19April2019_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c457ab9803-167938470d-158917901

Released in early 2018, the study's findings found methamphetamine usage highest in Cyprus, eastern Germany, Finland and Norway. Cocaine, on the other hand, was both on the rise and most concentrated in cities in Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain and the UK.

Surprising almost no one, wastewater epidemiologists confirmed "cocaine and psychedelic MDMA (ecstasy) levels rose sharply at weekends in most cities, while amphetamine use appeared to be more evenly distributed throughout the week."

The above data is lacking quantification so not as interesting as it could have been.

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 23, 2018 at 6:30 pm
KIRILL August 23, 2018 at 8:01 pm

Thick and rich coming from backstabbers. K hohlu schas net bolshe doverya, i bolshe nikogda ne budet. Eat shit banderite morons.

Like

MURDOCK August 23, 2018 at 9:15 pm

Looks like they are well suited to one another and should get along splendidly.

Like

MOSCOW EXILE August 23, 2018 at 6:34 pm

Should have been "I invite everyone " above.

Porky's personal invitation to come and watch representatives of the greatest army in Europe on parade.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 23, 2018 at 9:05 pm

Gazprom leads the world in capital expenditure (capex) on global energy projects, by a wide, wide margin – $160 Billion to be spent on 84 projects worldwide, including Nord Stream II and Turkish Stream. That's nearly double the spending of its next-closest competitor, Sinopec, at $87 Billion. Royal Dutch Shell is third, and Exxon a distant fourth.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2018/08/22/russias-gazprom-is-worlds-biggest-energy-investor/#5a7465fb3553

If you add Rosneft, that's another $50 Billion in capex for Russia. Odd behaviour for an isolated country whose economy is in tatters. One whose government debt is 12.6 % of GDP and declining.

https://tradingeconomics.com/russia/government-debt-to-gdp

Speaking of government debt, how's that parameter looking for The Exceptional Nation? Whoa: that's exceptional. Not even much point in expressing it as a percentage of GDP, I guess.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-debt

Just to drive the point home for any who might not have gotten it, Russia – friendless, alone against the world, and reeling from the bite of American sanctions – is outspending the USA nearly three to one on global energy investments, although its debt is a tiny fraction of America's out-of-control spending on other important things, like its bloated defense budget.

Oh, that's right – Vladimir Putin is a tyrant and a dictator, squeezing the country dry in neverending pursuit of self-enrichment. I almost forgot.

Like

MURDOCK August 23, 2018 at 9:11 pm

Very well written Mark! It would seem I enjoy your writing most when you are on a sass and sarcasm roll, of which this particular piece is a great example. Bravo!

Incidentally this particular issue is something that I had completely missed. Though it does seem to be part of the recent purge of opposition voices in social media. A development that I fear may be just starting.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 23, 2018 at 9:31 pm

Thanks, Murdock! And I sort of missed it as well, although I think we cannot be blamed as it seems to have gone into overnight overdrive based on a silent admission to itself by the west that it is not winning the propaganda war by simply shouting "Russians!!!" every time something goes wrong for it. Like many a fool before, it has gone to the well too many times, and the audience for that sort of guff is dwindling. So the new game is restrict what the people read and hear.

Like

[Aug 24, 2018] ANTI-VACCINE MYTHS ARE BEING PROMOTED BY SOCIAL MEDIA BOTS AND RUSSIAN TROLLS, STUDY

Aug 24, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MOSCOW EXILE August 23, 2018 at 5:23 pm

Front-page story headline and sub-heading, "The Independent":

ANTI-VACCINE MYTHS ARE BEING PROMOTED BY SOCIAL MEDIA BOTS AND RUSSIAN TROLLS, STUDY
Malicious characters look to use arguments to divide the American public and exploit them
ANDREW GRIFFIN
@_andrew_griffin
2 hours ago

Now read the article.

Anyone find any reference to "Russian trolls" in it, apart from this: " It found many tweets that were posted by the same bots thought to have been used to influence the 2016 election, as well as marketing and malware bots "?

I see: "thought to have been used", writes the "journalist".

And on that supposition the Independent "journalist" rests his case.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 23, 2018 at 6:45 pm

It turns out that many anti-vaccine tweets come from accounts whose provenance is unclear ," said David Broniatowski, an assistant professor in GW's School of Engineering and Applied Science.

"These might be bots, human users or 'cyborgs' – hacked accounts that are sometimes taken over by bots. Although it's impossible to know exactly how many tweets were generated by bots and trolls, our findings suggest that a significant portion of the online discourse about vaccines may be generated by malicious actors with a range of hidden agendas."

Equivocation central – it's amazing what can pass as a 'study' these days. What is even more incredible is that we have arrived at a point in our history when the appearance of debate on a point is suspicious, and inspires 'researchers' to 'study' the problem to see who is behind it rather than focusing on why the point generated debate in the first place. We have arrived at a point where it is actually unpatriotic to disagree with the official narrative.

Many more Americans believe vaccines are safe than the astroturfed 'debate' suggests, found the study. Google says bullshit. A recent Zogby poll of a claimed representative sample group found only 32% of respondents said they were 'very confident' vaccines were safe. The same or a similar question was posed 10 years ago, and the proportion who said they were 'not too confident has risen 3% since then, while those who said they were 'not at all confident' in the safety of vaccines went up by 2%. People are not getting more confident, they're getting less confident. There; that's my study – where's my research grant?

https://thevaccinereaction.org/2018/06/nearly-20-percent-of-americans-think-vaccines-may-be-unsafe-and-45-percent-are-not-sure/

Once again, as soon as the mainstream media finds an argument, it is quick to blame it on unidentified 'Russian trolls', rather than addressing the problem. The state narrative is the law. And the pace is quickening.

Like

DRUTTEN August 24, 2018 at 2:27 am

This is how you can tell Americans (and media as a whole, for that matter) truly are stupid.

Okay, first of all: The whole anti-vaccine hysteria is as American as apple pie, going way back to at least 1998 and to a research paper in the medical journal The Lancet linking MMR vaccines to autism spectrum disorders (a paper that was lated found to be severely lacking in scientific rigor) and certain people raising concern about the mercury content in the thiomersal vaccines. This sparked numerous anti-vaccination campaigns all over the US, ranging from concerned but ignorant parent groups all the way to the Alex Jones type of conspiracy guzzlers, and many of these are alive and kicking to this day.

The vaccine controversy rose to new prominence the widely publicized Jenny McCarthy crap in 2007-2008 and was further fueled by the (legitimate, as it happens) swine flu vaccine-linked narcolepsy cases a few years later.

This stuff trends from time to time, and apparently this clickbait farm (that is what it actually is) caught a whiff of it and thus posted a grand total of 253 (!) short-worded tweets with a vaccination hashtag, out of which according to these so-called researchers 43% were "pro-vaccination", 38% "anti-vaccination" and the remainder were neutral.

And they're "sewing division", "threatening our health" and so on Good god, I'm not sure how much more of this I can take to be honest.

This reminds me of a piece of news here in Sweden the other day, namely that the Swedish Social Democrats got their website DDoS-ed twice. I mean, that's to be expected (the elections are coming up shortly, some of these "establishment" parties are not held in high regard in certain demographics and regularly get their election posters torn down or vandalized and so on, DDoS attacks are cheap to order online and so on and so forth. Fine. The "IT expert" at the Social Democratic Party said they'd tracked down the IPs from which the attack came, and these were random IPs in Japan, in South Africa, in Spain, in Korea and in Russia.

Well, duh , it's a distributed denial-of-service attack, using botnets consisting of infected personal computers all over the world, and it's all available for hire on various onion/darknet market websites for a couple of bucks an hour or so. But of course, the media just disregarded the blatantly obvious and instead decided to illustrate the news with a great Russian flag and some hooded hacker-type fellow superimposed.

It just blows my mind. The info war is real, no doubt about it

Like

YALENSIS August 24, 2018 at 3:00 am

Most Americans simply don't understand how science works. In school they are not taught the scientific method, how experiments are conducted, how statistical sampling works, or even anything about statistics period.
Without such knowledge they are left to the human "default" state of mind, which is magical thinking coupled with basic empiricism. As in "My best friend's daughter got the polio vaccine and then was diagnosed with autism " etc etc.

The ignorance is colossal. I have a friend at work who is actually quite brilliant in her own way, but I discovered, in a conversation, that she doesn't understand how computers work, or how language works. She bought some product and is now convinced that computers "understand human speech". I almost despaired in trying to explain to her that computers are only machines and cannot understand human language.

Apparently she was suckered by some of these "AI" products like Siri, Cortana, etc. People don't learn in school how the "natural language" computer processing works. I don't claim to understand these algorithms myself, as this is a very specialized field of Computer Science, and I never really studied it that much. The only bit that I know, is that "Natural Language" algorithms are based on massive database searches coupled with statistical probabilities in the formation of phrases.
Apparently the Computer Science developments in this field were held back for about 10 years due to reliance on Chomsky's theories (of Transformational Grammar), which turned out to be false and fruitless. As people should have known from the start, if only they had read their Alan Turing in school.

Once the wrong-headed Chomskyite approach was abandoned and a more empirical methodology was introduced, then progress started to be made more quickly in the arenas of computer translation, voice recognition, and "natural language" algorithms.
But the main point here is that computers are just machines and cannot actually speak or understand human languages. And yet Americans apparently think that they can. All part of the "magical thinking" mode which is encouraged by The Powers That Be.

Like

ET AL August 24, 2018 at 9:59 am

I was recently told to turn off my mobile/cellphone because of storms and told that more than one person had been hit by lightning not so far away. I asked where it was. A kid outside in a field. I was indoors. I didn't turn it off. I do though unplug stuff if it's going to be a biggie.

Like

NORTHERN STAR August 24, 2018 at 11:31 am

"Apparently the Computer Science developments in this field were held back for about 10 years due to reliance on Chomsky's theories (of Transformational Grammar), which turned out to be false and fruitless. As people should have known from the start, if only they had read their Alan Turing in school."

Ummm Followed by a thorough familiarization Searle's work

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-room/

Like

YALENSIS August 24, 2018 at 4:08 pm

Thanks for the post, it is an interesting article. However, I believe that it misrepresents the fundamental point of Turing's work in his development of the Turing Machine. Turing's legacy is actually (I believe) the opposite of what the layperson thinks it is, since Turing had proved mathematically that "computer" languages are not the same as "natural" languages and cannot be mapped out nor parsed. Turing's proofs basically dismiss (in advance) all of Chomsky's research in the field of so-called transformational grammar.

I would also point out that Roger Schank was a con-man who received unwarranted grant money based on his fictitious research into so-called "Artificial Intelligence".

I put Chomsky in a different category: His work was well-meaning but incorrect. His theories went against Turing's proofs and led researchers down a blind alley. Which resulted in the loss of approximately one decade of what could have been fruitful empirical work. But is catching up now. I notice, for starters, that google translation is getting better than it used to be. But these products like "Siri" and "Alexa" are simply toys, they are like the dancing dolls of the wizard Coppelius.

Like

MARK CHAPMAN August 24, 2018 at 8:21 am

You can also tell the writer is a son of of the uneducated and doltish media himself (I think it was a man, I don't have time now to go back and look); it's 'sowing division', as if division were seeds, rather than 'sewing', as if it were thread.


[Aug 24, 2018] Blast from the past: BBC WDM scam destroyed the credibility of the corporation

Aug 24, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

ET AL August 24, 2018 at 9:53 am

Spotted this via al Beeb s'Allah piece

Groaning Man: BBC's long struggle to present the facts without fear or favour
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/aug/18/-sp-bbc-report-facts-impartial
BBC in conflict with New Labour

According to Richard Sambrook, who was the BBC's director of news from 2001, trouble between the BBC and New Labour brewed when Britain intervened in Kosovo in 1999: Alastair Campbell, then Blair's press secretary, accused the media of being too much in thrall to Slobodan Milosevic's "lie machine". After 9/11, the stakes became much, much higher .

The crux came at 6.07am on 29 May 2003, when Andrew Gilligan reported on the Today programme that, according to a source, the joint intelligence committee report on Saddam Hussein's chemical and biological weapons capability had been "sexed up" by the government with a claim that such weapons could be activated within 45 minutes of an order. That there had been any deception was fiercely denied by the government and it was amid the ensuing maelstrom that the story's source, Dr David Kelly, took his own life. Lord Hutton's controversial and contested report into the death of the Ministry of Defence weapons expert was deeply critical of the BBC and precipitated the resignation of both the director general, Dyke, and the chairman, Gavyn Davies. That simultaneous toppling of the twin titans of the BBC was an unprecedentedly traumatic event in the history of the corporation. It was made all the more bitter by the fact that the struggle was fratricidal: Dyke's appointment as DG had been controversial because he had been a donor to New Labour .

Sambrook continued: "I suppose in a sense what I'm saying is that Kelly was a kind of mini-Edward Snowden story. He was saying that actually this intelligence has been completely misused, and many people inside the tent knew it and were uncomfortable about it

"If Edward Snowden had contacted Panorama or Newsnight could they have done what the Guardian did? No. No, they couldn't," he said.

"They might have been able to do a piece at a meta level, a headline level, but they could not have done what the Guardian did with Snowden. I find it uncomfortable to say that, but it's the truth. So what does that tell you about the BBC? It tells you that in the end there is a limit to its independence – some would call that public accountability. It is a wonderful news organisation. It does fantastic journalism every day. But there is a limit to it. And I think in the end that was part of a miscalculation in the Kelly story. We thought we were genuinely independent. And we weren't."

But how far is the BBC willing to take its journalism up against the establishment – and the government, which in the end seals the BBC's fate? Other journalists I spoke to within the BBC were much less sanguine. "The BBC is at its highest levels concerned with not offending the establishment, not making enemies in important places. Its core purpose – independent and impartial journalism – clashes with its survival instincts, and that goes back to the beginning," said one senior journalist.

'Senior people at the BBC see themselves part of the establishment'

Another took an even bleaker view. "Newsgathering – covering the stuff that is happening in the world – we do that brilliantly. The BBC newsgathering operation is genuinely a wonder to perceive. But digging out original stories? No, sorry. Nor has it ever done. When push comes to shove, senior people at the BBC consider themselves part of the establishment."..

The employee called such managers, as well the departments in charge of editorial policy and compliance, "journalism deterrent squads" who were strangling the efforts of colleagues "like Japanese knotweed". Journalists are afraid of not being backed up by the BBC, added the employee, when the pressure is on – and compared the corporation's approach with the much more bullish, confident and "cheeky, risk-taking" stance of Channel 4 News. "The BBC always buckles, always folds. You feel that as a journalist, they will abandon you; if you take a risky story to them it's as if you are actively trying to get them into trouble. There is an institutionalised anxiety and mistrust."

Peston said: "There is a risk-averse culture that means when the BBC wants people who can break stories it has to look to recruit from outside. When the BBC is training young journalists, it starts by telling them about the regulatory restraints: it starts with the rules and says: 'Don't you dare break them'."
####

Plenty more at the link.

The simple fact is that s/he who holds the purse strings, holds the power – regardless of how often or how rarely it is used. It casts a long shadow. And that's even before you look at the size and scale of such organizations. Self-censorship? Certainly. Admitting it publicly? Never.

MARK CHAPMAN August 24, 2018 at 6:40 pm

There was no danger that I would mistake the BBC for an impartial and unbiased investigative news source. However, Channel 4 with its 'cheeky, risk-taking stance' is no better, as 'cheeky risk-taking' in British journalism still means backing establishment positions when it comes to foreign policy. They might contribute to the odd cabinet minister's sacking, but I could give a toss about Britain's internal politics, and it is only its foreign-policy machinations I care about . And those are pretty much unvarying – Uncle Sam, boffo. Putin, evil.

[Aug 23, 2018] What the Brennan Affair Really Reveals by Stephen Cohen

"My strong suspicion is that 'Russiagate' is a kind of nemesis, arising from the fact that key figures in British and American intelligence have, over a protracted period of time, got involved in intrigues where they are way out of their depth. The unintended consequences of these have meant that people like Brennan and Younger, and also Hannigan, have ended up having to resort to desperate measures to cover their backsides."
Brennan exposed "intelligence community" as a forth branch of government. The branch more powerful that then the other three combined.
Assume, for the sake of argument, that powerful, connected people in the intelligence community and in politics worried that a wildcard Trump presidency, unlike another Clinton or Bush, might expose a decade-plus of questionable practices. Disrupt long-established money channels. Reveal secret machinations that could arguably land some people in prison.
The main suspicion is that Steele's involvement may have been less in crafting the dossier, than making it possible to conceal its actual origins while giving it an appearance of credibility. It could also be the case that Nellie Ohr's sudden interest in radio transmissions had to do with communications inside the United States, rather than with Steele.
Notable quotes:
"... Los Angeles Times ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... It's a misnomer to term these people representatives of a hidden "deep state." In recent years, they have been amply visible on television and newspaper op-ed pages. Instead, they see and present themselves as members of a fully empowered and essential fourth branch of government. ..."
"... The Washington Post ..."
"... To be fair, Brennan may only be a symptom of this profound American crisis, some say the worst since the Civil War. ..."
Aug 23, 2018 | www.thenation.com

Brennan's allegation was unprecedented. No such high-level intelligence official had ever before accused a sitting president of treason, still more in collusion with the Kremlin. (Impeachment discussions of Presidents Nixon and Clinton, to take recent examples, did not include allegations involving Russia.) Brennan clarified his charge : "Treasonous, which is to betray one's trust and to aid and abet the enemy." Coming from Brennan, a man presumed to be in possession of related dark secrets, as he strongly hinted , the charge was fraught with alarming implications. Brennan made clear he hoped for Trump's impeachment, but in another time, and in many other countries, his charge would suggest that Trump should be removed from the presidency urgently by any means, even a coup. No one, it seems, has even noted this extraordinary implication with its tacit threat to American democracy. (Perhaps because the disloyalty allegation against Trump has been customary ever since mid-2016, even before he became president, when an array of influential publications and writers -- among them a former acting CIA director -- began branding him Putin's "puppet," "agent," "client," and "Manchurian candidate." The Los Angeles Times even saw fit to print an article suggesting that the military might have to remove Trump if he were to be elected, thereby having the very dubious distinction of predating Brennan.)

Why did Brennan, a calculating man, risk leveling such a charge, which might reasonably be characterized as sedition? The most plausible explanation is that he sought to deflect growing attention to his role as the "Godfather" of the entire Russiagate narrative, as Cohen argued back in February. If so, we need to know Brennan's unvarnished views on Russia.

They are set out with astonishing (perhaps unknowing) candor in a New York Times op-ed of August 17. They are those of Joseph McCarthy and J. Edgar Hoover in their prime. Western "politicians, political parties, media outlets, think tanks and influencers are readily manipulated, wittingly and unwittingly, or even bought outright, by Russian operatives not only to collect sensitive information but also to distribute propaganda and disinformation. I was well aware of Russia's ability to work surreptitiously within the United States, cultivating relationships with individuals who wield actual or potential power. These Russian agents are well trained in the art of deception. They troll political, business and cultural waters in search of gullible or unprincipled individuals who become pliant in the hands of their Russian puppet masters. Too often, those puppets are found." All this, Brennan assures readers, is based on his "deep insight." All the rest of us, it seems, are constantly susceptible to "Russian puppet masters" under our beds, at work, on our computers. Clearly, there must be no "cooperation" with the Kremlin's grand "Puppet Master," as Trump said he wanted early on. (People who wonder what and when Obama knew about the unfolding Russiagate saga need to ask why he would keep such a person so close for so long.)

And yet, scores of former intelligence and military officials rallied around this unvarnished John Brennan, even though, they said, they did not entirely share his opinions. This too is revealing. They did so, it seems clear enough, out of their professional corporate identity, which Brennan represented and Trump was degrading by challenging the intelligences agencies' (implicitly including his own) Russiagate allegations against him. It's a misnomer to term these people representatives of a hidden "deep state." In recent years, they have been amply visible on television and newspaper op-ed pages. Instead, they see and present themselves as members of a fully empowered and essential fourth branch of government. This too has gone largely undiscussed while nightingales of the fourth branch -- such as David Ignatius and Joe Scarborough in the pages of the The Washington Post -- have been in full voice.

The result is, of course -- and no less ominous -- to criminalize any advocacy of "cooperating with Russia," or détente, as Trump sought to do in Helsinki with Putin. Still more, a full-fledged Russophobic hysteria is sweeping through the American political-media establishment, from Brennan and -- pending actual evidence against her -- those who engineered the arrest of Maria Butina (imagine how this endangers young Americans networking in Russia) to the senators now preparing new "crippling sanctions" against Moscow and the editors and producers at the Times , Post , CNN, and MSNBC. (However powerful, how representative are these elites when surveys indicate that a majority of the American people still prefer good relations with Moscow?)

As the dangers grow of actual war with Russia -- again, from Ukraine and the Baltic region to Syria -- the capacity of US policy-makers, above all the president, are increasingly diminished. To be fair, Brennan may only be a symptom of this profound American crisis, some say the worst since the Civil War.

Finally, there was a time when many Democrats, certainly liberal Democrats, could be counted on to resist this kind of hysteria and, yes, spreading neo-McCarthyism. (Brennan's defenders accuse Trump of McCarthyism, but Brennan's charge of treason without presenting any actual evidence was quintessential McCarthy.) After all, civil liberties, including freedom of speech, are directly involved -- and not only Brennan's and Trump's. But Democratic members of Congress and pro-Democratic media outlets are in the forefront of the new anti-Russian hysteria, with only a few exceptions. Thus a generally liberal historian tells CNN viewers that "Brennan is an American hero. His tenure at the CIA was impeccable. We owe him so much." Elsewhere the same historian assures readers , "There has always been a bipartisan spirit of support since the CIA was created in the Cold War." In the same vein, two Post reporters write of the FBI's " once venerated reputation ."

[Aug 23, 2018] The Greece Bailout s Legacy of Immiseration by James K. Galbraith

Aug 20, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press

The Greece Bailout's Legacy of Immiseration | by James K. Galbraith 22/08/2018

Note from the author : As friends have quickly pointed out, the situation is even worse than described here. Quarterly reviews by the troika will continue. The German Bundestag will still vote on any debt deferrals, and -- as I do stress -- the crushing austerity will continue indefinitely. A nightmare.

2010 to 2018 will go down in Greek history as an epic period of colonization; of asset stripping and privatization; of unfunded health and education; of bankruptcies, foreclosures, homelessness, and impoverishment; of unemployment, emigration, and suicide. These were the years of the three memoranda, or "financial-assistance programs" accompanied by "structural reforms," enacted supposedly to promote Greek "recovery" from the slump and credit crunch of 2010. They were, in fact, a fraud perpetrated on Greece and Europe, a jumble of bad policies based on crude morality tales that catered to right-wing politics to cover up unpayable debts.

This was a bailout? The word reeks of indulgence and implied disapproval. As it was often said, "The Greeks had their party and now they must pay." Yes, there was a party -- for oligarchs with ships and London homes and Swiss bank accounts, for the military, for engineering and construction and armaments companies from Germany and France and the United States. And yes, there was a bailout. It came from Europe's taxpayers, and went to the troubled banks of France and Germany. Greece was merely the pass-through, and the Greeks who paid dearly with their livelihoods were just the patsies in the deal. The third "memorandum of understanding" expires today.

With Greece's completion of a three-year, 61.9-billion-euro eurozone emergency-loan package, it can once again borrow at market rates. The expiration of the memorandum also ends, for now, the direct control by Europe's "troika" -- the International Monetary Fund, the European Commission, and the European Central Bank -- over the Greek government. But its conditions, constraints, and consequences will endure. Read also: Conference of the modern Left in Iceland: learning from each other

Back in 2010, Greece, along with Portugal, Spain, Ireland, and Italy, was definitely in trouble. The Great Financial Crisis crashed into all of Europe, but it hit the weaker countries hardest -- and Greece was the weakest of them all. Its economy shrunk by a quarter, and youth unemployment rose to roughly 50 percent. The memorandum was, for all concerned, the easy way out. It started a game of "extend and pretend" on the Greek debt, based on optimistic forecasts and on policies of reform that had no basis in the reality of Greek economic conditions.

The policies came from the IMF -- its standard repertory of austerity and "reform." But its staff and directors knew from the beginning that these measures would not suffice. IMF executive directors from Australia, Switzerland, Brazil, and China voiced objections. Channels were therefore bypassed, objections ignored. The Fund was nearly out of work and money because of the failures of its programs -- and the relative success of countries that ignored them -- all over the world. And its managing director at the time wished to be the next president of France. So Greece, which is to say its creditors -- especially French and German banks -- received the largest loan in IMF history (relative to its ownership share). And that 289-billion-euro loan came largely from U.S. taxpayers.

In Athens, teams of functionaries from the Fund, the European Central Bank, and the European Commission came to Greece, where they stayed in fancy hotels at Greek expense and were escorted by uniformed police from ministry to ministry to dictate policy in detail. (Such a nice gig, in a warm and sunny place, so close to the sea.) In 2015, they were lodged for a time in a four-star hotel, deprived of their convoys, and given protection by elite forces dressed in plain clothes. They didn't like that at all, and their bosses, Mario Draghi and Christine Lagarde, complained loudly on their behalf.

Read also: Berlin goes on with self-defeating policies. Now they encourage Scotland to secede!

And what of the policies? Public assets were to be dumped en masse at fire-sale prices, but only if they were already profitable. (Regional airports making losses, for example, stayed with the state.) Dutch dairies and German drug companies were taken care of. Labor markets were deregulated while collective bargaining was wiped out -- an unethical experiment on an untenable premise. Neither German nor Chinese industry was moving to Greece even if the Greeks worked for free. The value-added tax was raised, pensions were cut, and hundreds of thousands of civil servants were sacked. Ministries lost cleaning ladies, who set up camp, bless them, in front of the Ministry of Finance. The Greeks rebelled in 2015, as they were right to do. But the European Central Bank held the high card: It could shut the banks and confiscate deposits, forcing Greece out of the euro and perhaps out of the European Union. The government, undermined from within, capitulated. The third memorandum was signed, and Syriza, the left-wing coalition that had swept into power in January, by that July had become the model prisoner of the European elites.

The irony is that in 2012 Greece's debts were already postponed, so that from late 2015 to 2022 there would be a grace period with relatively few major payments due. Now there is a primary-budget surplus and the markets need not be tested. So the memorandum can end, but austerity will not; the debt still looms in the long term, so the commitment to surplus extends for more than 40 years. In any event, the Greeks' will to resistance appears to have been broken, so it seems safe enough to leave them alone. For now.

But the damage done extends far beyond Greece. The cynicism and brutality of what happened there is for everyone to see. The fact that Europe imposed a policy of privation on one of its weakest members -- not for its own sake, and not with any expectation of economic success, but to intimidate the Italians and the French, as the German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble conceded to the Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis privately in 2015 -- was not lost on British voters who chose Brexit in 2016. The Greek debacle helped to turn the French left against Europe, and fueled the inchoate coalition now in power in Italy. The German and east European far right is surely not motivated by sympathy -- on the contrary, they despise the Greeks. But they do resent the supposed "solidarity" -- a fiction if ever there was one -- that Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel and her allies invoked to sell their parliaments and voters on the idea of the Greek loans.

Read also: The IMF wants to appoint Prime Ministers. They want a Greek Macron in Athens

Europe is therefore rotting Hat both ends. Its economy must remain unified, but it is coming apart at its political seams. It needs institutions and policies of social stabilization, financial reform, and full employment -- a dramatic change in ideas and action at the continental level to thwart the rising tide of nationalist reaction. There is therefore a growing sense, among those who are watching closely, that a major democratic reform -- a New Deal for Europe -- is the only way to hold it together in the long run.

* James K. Galbraith is author of Welcome to the Poisoned Chalice: The Destruction of Greece and the Future of Europe . In 2015 he served as an informal assistant to the finance minister of Greece.

;

[Aug 23, 2018] The War Piece to End All War Pieces Or How to Fight a War of Ultimate Repetitiousness by Tom Engelhardt

Notable quotes:
"... Here, for instance, is what I wrote about our Afghan War in 2008, almost seven years after it began, when the U.S. Air Force took out a bridal party, including the bride herself and at least 26 other women and children en route to an Afghan wedding. And that would be just one of eight U.S. wedding strikes I toted up by the end of 2013 in three countries, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Yemen, that killed almost 300 potential revelers. "We have become a nation of wedding crashers," I wrote, "the uninvited guests who arrived under false pretenses, tore up the place, offered nary an apology, and refused to go home." ..."
"... Thought of another way, the U.S. military is now heading into record territory in Afghanistan. In the mid-1970s, the rare American who had heard of that country knew it only as a stop on the hippie trail . If you had then told anyone here that, by 2018, the U.S. would have been at war there for 27 years ( 1979-1989 and 2001-2018), he or she would have laughed in your face. And yet here we are, approaching the mark for one of Europe's longest, most brutal struggles, the Thirty Years' War of the seventeenth century. Imagine that. ..."
"... raison d'ętre ..."
"... Afganistan is the graveyard of poor empires. It's the playground of the rich American empire, a place to test weapons, test men, gain battle experience, get promotions, and generally keep the military-industrial complex in top health. If it didn't exist, we'd have to invent it. ..."
"... As shown in this article there is a very interesting connection between growing wealth inequality in the United States and American wars: https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/07/how-american-wars-lead-to-increased.html ..."
"... it's not a war; it's an occupation. More cops get killed/wounded in USA proper then military personnel in that "war". 2017, 46 U.S. police officers were killed by felons in the line of duty; 17 military personnel in Afghanistan. ..."
"... Yes , the US military industrial complex is rich and in top health as you say , but what I see is that the health of the US as a whole , physical and mental , is going down in the last 50 years . Maybe the metastasis of the " healthy " military cancer are killing the American host . ..."
Aug 16, 2018 | www.unz.com

Fair warning. Stop reading right now if you want, because I'm going to repeat myself. What choice do I have, since my subject is the Afghan War (America's second Afghan War, no less)? I began writing about that war in October 2001, almost 17 years ago, just after the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. That was how I inadvertently launched the unnamed listserv that would, a year later, become TomDispatch . Given the website's continuing focus on America's forever wars (a phrase I first used in 2010 ), what choice have I had but to write about Afghanistan ever since?

So think of this as the war piece to end all war pieces. And let the repetition begin!

Here, for instance, is what I wrote about our Afghan War in 2008, almost seven years after it began, when the U.S. Air Force took out a bridal party, including the bride herself and at least 26 other women and children en route to an Afghan wedding. And that would be just one of eight U.S. wedding strikes I toted up by the end of 2013 in three countries, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Yemen, that killed almost 300 potential revelers. "We have become a nation of wedding crashers," I wrote, "the uninvited guests who arrived under false pretenses, tore up the place, offered nary an apology, and refused to go home."

Here's what I wrote about Afghanistan in 2009, while considering the metrics of "a war gone to hell": "While Americans argue feverishly and angrily over what kind of money, if any, to put into health care, or decaying infrastructure, or other key places of need, until recently just about no one in the mainstream raised a peep about the fact that, for nearly eight years (not to say much of the last three decades), we've been pouring billions of dollars, American military know-how, and American lives into a black hole in Afghanistan that is, at least in significant part, of our own creation."

Here's what I wrote in 2010, thinking about how "forever war" had entered the bloodstream of the twenty-first-century U.S. military (in a passage in which you'll notice a name that became more familiar in the Trump era): "And let's not leave out the Army's incessant planning for the distant future embodied in a recently published report, 'Operating Concept, 2016-2028,' overseen by Brigadier General H.R. McMaster, a senior adviser to Gen. David Petraeus. It opts to ditch 'Buck Rogers' visions of futuristic war, and instead to imagine counterinsurgency operations, grimly referred to as 'wars of exhaustion,' in one, two, many Afghanistans to the distant horizon."

Here's what I wrote in 2012, when Afghanistan had superseded Vietnam as the longest war in American history: "Washington has gotten itself into a situation on the Eurasian mainland so vexing and perplexing that Vietnam has finally been left in the dust. In fact, if you hadn't noticed -- and weirdly enough no one has -- that former war finally seems to have all but vanished."

Here's what I wrote in 2015, thinking about the American taxpayer dollars that had, in the preceding years, gone into Afghan "roads to nowhere, ghost soldiers, and a $43 million gas station" built in the middle of nowhere, rather than into this country: "Clearly, Washington had gone to war like a drunk on a bender, while the domestic infrastructure began to fray. At $109 billion by 2014, the American reconstruction program in Afghanistan was already, in today's dollars, larger than the Marshall Plan (which helped put all of devastated Western Europe back on its feet after World War II) and still the country was a shambles."

And here's what I wrote last year thinking about the nature of our never-ending war there: "Right now, Washington is whistling past the graveyard. In Afghanistan and Pakistan the question is no longer whether the U.S. is in command, but whether it can get out in time. If not, the Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians, the Indians, who exactly will ride to our rescue? Perhaps it would be more prudent to stop hanging out in graveyards. They are, after all, meant for burials, not resurrections."

And that's just to dip a toe into my writings on America's all-time most never-ending war.

What Happened After History Ended

... ... ...

In reality, when it comes to America's spreading wars , especially the one in Afghanistan, history didn't end at all. It just stumbled onto some graveyard version of a Möbius strip. In contrast to the past empires that found they ultimately couldn't defeat Afghanistan's insurgent tribal warriors, the U.S. has -- as Bush administration officials suspected at the time -- proven unique. Just not in the way they imagined.

Their dreams couldn't have been more ambitious. As they launched the invasion of Afghanistan, they were already looking past the triumph to come to Saddam Hussein's Iraq and the glories that would follow once his regime had been "decapitated," once U.S. forces, the most technologically advanced ever, were stationed for an eternity in the heart of the oil heartlands of the Greater Middle East. Not that anyone remembers anymore, but Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, and the rest of that crew of geopolitical dreamers wanted it all.

What they got was no less unique in history: a great power at the seeming height of its strength and glory, with destructive capabilities beyond imagining and a military unmatched on the planet, unable to score a single decisive victory across an increasingly large swath of the planet or impose its will, however brutally, on seemingly far weaker, less well-armed opponents. They could not conquer, subdue, control, pacify, or win the hearts and minds or anything else of enemies who often fought their trillion-dollar foe using weaponry valued at the price of a pizza . Talk about bleeding wounds!

A War of Abysmal Repetition

Thought of another way, the U.S. military is now heading into record territory in Afghanistan. In the mid-1970s, the rare American who had heard of that country knew it only as a stop on the hippie trail . If you had then told anyone here that, by 2018, the U.S. would have been at war there for 27 years ( 1979-1989 and 2001-2018), he or she would have laughed in your face. And yet here we are, approaching the mark for one of Europe's longest, most brutal struggles, the Thirty Years' War of the seventeenth century. Imagine that.

... ... ...

Almost 17 years and, coincidentally enough, 17 U.S. commanders later, think of it as a war of abysmal repetition. Just about everything in the U.S. manual of military tactics has evidently been tried (including dropping "the mother of all bombs," the largest non-nuclear munition in that military's arsenal), often time and again, and nothing has even faintly done the trick -- to which the Pentagon's response is invariably a version of the classic misquoted movie line, "Play it again, Sam."

And yet, amid all that repetition, people are still dying ; Afghans and others are being uprooted and displaced across Asia, South Asia, the Middle East, and deep into Africa; wars and terror outfits are spreading. And here's a simple enough fact that's worth repeating: the endless, painfully ignored failure of the U.S. military (and civilian) effort in Afghanistan is where it all began and where it seems never to end.

A Victory for Whom?

Every now and then, there's the odd bit of news that reminds you we don't have to be in a world of repetition. Every now and then, you see something and wonder whether it might not represent a new development, one that possibly could lead out of (or far deeper into) the graveyard of empires.

As a start, though it's been easy to forget in these years, other countries are affected by the ongoing disaster of a war in Afghanistan. Think, for instance, of Pakistan (with a newly elected, somewhat Trumpian president who has been a critic of America's Afghan War and of U.S. drone strikes in his country), Iran, China, and Russia. So here's something I can't remember seeing in the news before: the military intelligence chiefs of those four countries all met recently in Islamabad, the Pakistani capital, officially to discuss the growth of Islamic State-branded insurgents in Afghanistan. But who knows what was really being discussed? And the same applies to the visit of Iran's armed forces chief of staff to Pakistan in July and the return visit of that country's chief of staff to Iran in early August. I can't tell you what's going on, only that these are not the typically repetitive stories of the last 17 years.

And hard as it might be to believe, even when it comes to U.S. policy, there's been the odd headline that might pass for new. Take the recent private, direct talks with the Taliban in Qatar's capital, Doha, initiated by the Trump administration and seemingly ongoing. They might -- or might not -- represent something new , as might President Trump himself, who, as far as anyone can tell, doesn't think that Afghanistan is " the right war ." He has, from time to time, even indicated that he might be in favor of ending the American role, of " getting the hell out of there," as he reportedly told Senator Rand Paul, and that's unique in itself (though he and his advisers seem to be raring to go when it comes to what could be the next Afghanistan: Iran ).

But should the man who would never want to be known as the president who lost the longest war in American history try to follow through on a withdrawal plan, he's likely to have a few problems on his hands. Above all, the Pentagon and the country's field commanders seem to be hooked on America's " infinite " wars. They exhibit not the slightest urge to stop them. The Afghan War and the others that have flowed from it represent both their raison d'ętre and their meal ticket. They represent the only thing the U.S. military knows how to do in this century. And one thing is guaranteed: if they don't agree with the president on a withdrawal strategy, they have the power and ability to make a man who would do anything to avoid marring his own image as a winnner look worse than you could possibly imagine. Despite that military's supposedly apolitical role in this country's affairs, its leaders are uniquely capable of blocking any attempt to end the Afghan War.

And with that in mind, almost 17 years later, don't think that victory is out of the question either. Every day that the U.S. military stays in Afghanistan is indeed a victory for well, not George W. Bush, or Barack Obama, and certainly not Donald Trump, but the now long-dead Osama bin Laden. The calculation couldn't be simpler. Thanks to his " precision" weaponry -- those 19 suicidal hijackers in commercial jets -- the nearly 17 years of wars he's sparked across much of the Muslim world cost a man from one of Saudi Arabia's wealthiest families a mere $400,000 to $500,000 . They've cost American taxpayers, minimally, $5.6 trillion dollars with no end in sight. And every day the Afghan War and the others that have followed from it continue is but another triumphant day for him and his followers.

A sad footnote to this history of extreme repetition: I wish this essay, as its title suggests, were indeed the war piece to end all war pieces. Unfortunately, it's a reasonable bet that, in August 2019, or August 2020, not to speak of August 2021, I'll be repeating all of this yet again.

Tom Engelhardt is a co-founder of the American Empire Project and the author of a history of the Cold War, The End of Victory Culture . He is a fellow of the Nation Institute and runs TomDispatch.com . His sixth and latest book is A Nation Unmade by War (Dispatch Books).

Anonymous , [142] Disclaimer says: August 16, 2018 at 2:54 pm GMT

Afganistan is the graveyard of poor empires. It's the playground of the rich American empire, a place to test weapons, test men, gain battle experience, get promotions, and generally keep the military-industrial complex in top health. If it didn't exist, we'd have to invent it. All very human. If America wasn't doing it, somebody else would.

Life is a killer.

MarkU , says: August 16, 2018 at 3:06 pm GMT

Its all about pipelines, rare-earth elements and drug money for CIA black ops.

15 years of American efforts to suppress opium growing and the heroin trade in that country (at historic lows, by the way, when the U.S. invaded in 2001).

And many record harvests after the US invasion.

' In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way ' Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Sally Snyder , says: August 16, 2018 at 5:05 pm GMT

As shown in this article there is a very interesting connection between growing wealth inequality in the United States and American wars: https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/07/how-american-wars-lead-to-increased.html

Unless Washington shifts from a program of funding wars by deficit financing to funding wars through direct taxation, wars being fought by the United States will continue to contribute to America's growing income inequality.

mijj , says: August 17, 2018 at 4:14 am GMT

fyi: Forever War was a 1974 Sci-Fi book inspired by the Vietnam war.

Colin Wright , says: Website August 17, 2018 at 9:32 pm GMT

To leave Afghanistan we would have to admit defeat. We don't want to admit defeat. Therefore, we don't leave.

Deschutes , says: August 18, 2018 at 4:53 pm GMT

About the only thing I take away from this insufferably droll, repetitive piece on America at war forever, is how powerless the both the writer and the reader are. All we can do is read these depressing articles which remind us of a war we can do absolutely nothing about. Very shitty and depressing, just like USA!

peterAUS , says: August 19, 2018 at 1:56 am GMT
@Anonymous

Pretty much. Besides, it's not a war; it's an occupation. More cops get killed/wounded in USA proper then military personnel in that "war". 2017, 46 U.S. police officers were killed by felons in the line of duty; 17 military personnel in Afghanistan.

The article's point/issue is simply overblown. That's why people don't pay attention to it.

skrik , says: August 19, 2018 at 7:29 am GMT
@peterAUS

Besides, it's not a war; it's an occupation

BS; it's an alien invasion = Nuremberg-class war crime.

More cops get killed/wounded in USA proper

This looks very much like the "tu quoque" or the appeal to hypocrisy fallacy plus 'oranges vs. apples.' What the good US-burghers do in their own country is entirely their business, and IF it looks like they act like antediluvian neanderthal savages [a direct result of their risible 'education' + night & day TV, perhaps] THEN tough luck for the cops. It probably doesn't help that the US-cops are just as much free with the lead as their oppressed subjects. And don't think that the same sort of savagery won't impact someone near you; a quick glance into abc.net.au/news/justin reveals horrendous 'social situations,' like bodies in barrels, say, or aggravated home invasions, etc., also caused by defective education plus importing 'cheap' labour.

That's why people don't pay attention to it

More BS; the sheeple ignore US/Z aggression everywhere it occurs because the corrupt&venal MSM+PFBCs [= publicly financed broadcasters, like the AusBC] sell the powerless population pups = the sheeple get actively, deliberately brainwashed [cf. Lügenpresse ]. Apologists for [here terrorist] criminals make themselves accessories = assign themselves guilt and should be punished after being tried & found so guilty.

blackswan , says: August 21, 2018 at 5:02 pm GMT

" The U.S. has spent 25 trillion since the Vietnam War, what do they have to show for it? " Jack Ma Ali Baba
" The genius of our ruling class is that it has kept the majority of people from ever questioning the inequity of a private for profit fraudulent banking system where most people drudge along, paying heavey taxes for which they get nothing in return." Gore Vidal

Biff , says: August 23, 2018 at 4:37 am GMT

Tom, you have to get over tying Osama bin Laden to 9/11. Who organized that event, I do not know, but cave dwelling Arabs it was not.

cui bono does include Osama's ilk, but many others as well, and there HAD to be insiders in the U.S. government to pull it off.

Yukon Tom , says: August 23, 2018 at 5:06 am GMT

(War) "It's something we do all the time because we're good at it. And we're good at it because we're used to it. And we're used to it because we do it all the time." Sergeant Michael Dunne played by Paul Gross in Passchendaele the Movie

I'm not sure, but I don't think we are good at it anymore. But it appears to me that the Russians, Iranians, Syrians and Houthi's are and that really scares us. But it does make a lot of money for some people, careers for others and the MSM loves it for the ratings and avoiding telling the truth.

Realist , says: August 23, 2018 at 8:11 am GMT

Your opening photo is of two of the dumbest son-of-a-bitches to ever hold the office of President of The United States. Indicative of the shit slide this country is on.

The Alarmist , says: August 23, 2018 at 9:07 am GMT

"Afghans and others are being uprooted and displaced across Asia, South Asia, the Middle East, and deep into Africa ."

So the strategy is to depopulate the country of its indigenous peoples until "we" outnumber them? Never mind the damage these re-settled folks are doing to Western Europe, not to mention other places.

Winning!

blood drunk , says: August 23, 2018 at 9:16 am GMT
@Anonymous

.generally keep the military-industrial complex in top health

Yes , the US military industrial complex is rich and in top health as you say , but what I see is that the health of the US as a whole , physical and mental , is going down in the last 50 years . Maybe the metastasis of the " healthy " military cancer are killing the American host .

The same happened to most of the empires , got drunk on blood and fell .

[Aug 22, 2018] The CIA Owns the US and European Media by Paul Craig Roberts

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The mind of the mass media: Email exchange between myself and a leading Washington Post foreign policy reporter: ..."
"... For the record, I think RT is much less biased than the Post on international affairs. And, yes, it's bias, not "fake news" that's the main problem – Cold-War/anti-Communist/anti-Russian bias that Americans have been raised with for a full century. RT defends Russia against the countless mindless attacks from the West. Who else is there to do that? Should not the Western media be held accountable for what they broadcast? Americans are so unaccustomed to hearing the Russian side defended, or hearing it at all, that when they do it can seem rather weird. ..."
"... Regard these indictments in proper perspective and we find that election interference is only listed as a supposed objective, with charges actually being for unlawful cyber operations, identity theft, and conspiracy to launder money by American individuals unconnected to the Russian government. So we're still waiting for some evidence of actual Russian interference in the election aimed at determining the winner. ..."
"... However, I have no doubt that the great majority of Americans who follow the news each day believe the official stories about the Russians. They're particularly impressed with the fact that every US intelligence agency supports the official stories. They would not be impressed at all if told that a dozen Russian intelligence agencies all disputed the charges. Group-think is alive and well all over the world. As is Cold War II ..."
"... And here is Tom Malinowski, former Assistant Secretary of State for democracy, human rights and labor (2014-2017) – last year he reported that Putin had "charged that the U.S. government had interfered 'aggressively' in Russia's 2012 presidential vote," claiming that Washington had "gathered opposition forces and financed them." Putin, wrote Malinowski, "apparently got President Trump to agree to a mutual commitment that neither country would interfere in the other's elections." ..."
"... We also have the case of the US government agency, National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which has interfered in more elections than the CIA or God. Indeed, the man who helped draft the legislation establishing NED, Allen Weinstein, declared in 1991: "A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA." On April 12, 2018 the presidents of two of NED's wings wrote: "A specious narrative has come back into circulation: that Moscow's campaign of political warfare is no different from U.S.-supported democracy assistance." ..."
"... "Democracy assistance", you see, is what they call NED's election-interferences and government-overthrows ..."
Aug 18, 2018 | www.unz.com

William Blum shares with us his correspondence with Washington Post presstitute Michael Birnbaum. As you can tell from Birnbaum's replies, he comes across as either very stupid or as a CIA asset.

When I received my briefing as staff associate, House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, which required top secret clearance, I was told by senior members of the staff that the Washington Post was a CIA asset. Watching the Washington Post's takedown of President Richard Nixon with the orchestrated Watergate story, that became obvious. President Nixon had made too many overtures to the Soviets and too many arms limitations agreements, and he opened to China. Watching President Nixon's peace initiatives water down the threat level from the Soviet Union and Maoist China, the military/security complex saw a threat to its budget and power and decided that Nixon had to go. The assassination of President John F. Kennedy had resulted in far too much skepticism about the Warren Commission Report, so the CIA decided to use the Washington Post to get rid of Nixon. To keep the clueless American left hating Nixon, the CIA used its assets in the leftwing to keep Nixon blamed for the Vietnam war, a war that Nixon inherited and did not want.

The CIA knew that Nixon's problem was that he could not exit the war without losing his conservative base, which was convinced of the nonsensical "Domino Theory." I have always wondered if the CIA concocted the "Domino Theory," as it so well served them. Unable to get rid of the war "with honor," Nixon was driven to brutal methods to force the North Vietnamese to accept a situation that he could depart without defeat and soiling America's "honor" and losing his conservative support base. The North Vietnamese wouldn't bend, but the US Congress did, and so the CIA succeeded in discrediting among both the leftwing and righwing Nixon's war management. With no one to defend him, Nixon was an easy target for the CIA.

Here is Blum's exchange with Birnbaum. It is possible that Birnbaum is neither stupid nor a CIA asset, but just a person wanting to hold on to a job. The last thing he can afford to do is to disabuse readers of the "Russian Threat" when Bezos' Amazon and Washington Post properties are dependent on the CIA's annual subsidy of $600 million disquised as a "contract." https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-20/cia-washington-post-and-russia-what-youre-not-being-told

The Anti-Empire Report # 159
Willian Blum

The mind of the mass media: Email exchange between myself and a leading Washington Post foreign policy reporter:
July 18, 2018

Dear Mr. Birnbaum,

You write Trump "made no mention of Russia's adventures in Ukraine". Well, neither he nor Putin nor you made any mention of America's adventures in the Ukraine, which resulted in the overthrow of the Ukrainian government in 2014, which led to the justified Russian adventure. Therefore ?

If Russia overthrew the Mexican government would you blame the US for taking some action in Mexico?
William Blum

Dear Mr. Blum,

Thanks for your note. "America's adventures in the Ukraine": what are you talking about? Last time I checked, it was Ukrainians in the streets of Kiev who caused Yanukovych to turn tail and run. Whether or not that was a good thing, we can leave aside, but it wasn't the Americans who did it.

It is, however, Russian special forces who fanned out across Crimea in February and March 2014, according to Putin, and Russians who came down from Moscow who stoked conflict in eastern Ukraine in the months after, according to their own accounts.
Best, Michael Birnbaum

To MB,

I can scarcely believe your reply. Do you read nothing but the Post? Do you not know of high State Dept official Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador in Ukraine in Maidan Square to encourage the protesters? She spoke of 5 billion (sic) dollars given to aid the protesters who were soon to overthrow the govt. She and the US Amb. spoke openly of who to choose as the next president. And he's the one who became president. This is all on tape. I guess you never watch Russia Today (RT). God forbid! I read the Post every day. You should watch RT once in a while.
William Blum

To WB,

I was the Moscow bureau chief of the newspaper; I reported extensively in Ukraine in the months and years following the protests. My observations are not based on reading. RT is not a credible news outlet, but I certainly do read far beyond our own pages, and of course I talk to the actual actors on the ground myself – that's my job.

And: yes, of course Nuland was in the Maidan – but encouraging the protests, as she clearly did, is not the same as sparking them or directing them, nor is playing favorites with potential successors, as she clearly did, the same as being directly responsible for overthrowing the government. I'm not saying the United States wasn't involved in trying to shape events. So were Russia and the European Union. But Ukrainians were in the driver's seat the whole way through. I know the guy who posted the first Facebook call to protest Yanukovych in November 2013; he's not an American agent. RT, meanwhile, reports fabrications and terrible falsehoods all the time. By all means consume a healthy and varied media diet – don't stop at the US mainstream media. But ask yourself how often RT reports critically on the Russian government, and consider how that lacuna shapes the rest of their reporting. You will find plenty of reporting in the Washington Post that is critical of the US government and US foreign policy in general, and decisions in Ukraine and the Ukrainian government in specific. Our aim is to be fair, without picking sides.
Best, Michael Birnbaum

======================= end of exchange =======================

Right, the United States doesn't play indispensable roles in changes of foreign governments; never has, never will; even when they offer billions of dollars; even when they pick the new president, which, apparently, is not the same as picking sides. It should be noticed that Mr Birnbaum offers not a single example to back up his extremist claim that RT "reports fabrications and terrible falsehoods all the time." "All the time", no less! That should make it easy to give some examples.

For the record, I think RT is much less biased than the Post on international affairs. And, yes, it's bias, not "fake news" that's the main problem – Cold-War/anti-Communist/anti-Russian bias that Americans have been raised with for a full century. RT defends Russia against the countless mindless attacks from the West. Who else is there to do that? Should not the Western media be held accountable for what they broadcast? Americans are so unaccustomed to hearing the Russian side defended, or hearing it at all, that when they do it can seem rather weird.

To the casual observer, THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA indictments of July 14 of Russian intelligence agents (GRU) reinforced the argument that the Soviet government interfered in the US 2016 presidential election. Regard these indictments in proper perspective and we find that election interference is only listed as a supposed objective, with charges actually being for unlawful cyber operations, identity theft, and conspiracy to launder money by American individuals unconnected to the Russian government. So we're still waiting for some evidence of actual Russian interference in the election aimed at determining the winner.

The Russians did it (cont.)
Each day I spend about three hours reading the Washington Post. Amongst other things I'm looking for evidence – real, legal, courtroom-quality evidence, or at least something logical and rational – to pin down those awful Russkis for their many recent crimes, from influencing the outcome of the 2016 US presidential election to use of a nerve agent in the UK. But I do not find such evidence.

Each day brings headlines like these:

These are all from the same day, August 9, which led me to thinking of doing this article, but similar stories can be found any day in the Post and in major newspapers anywhere in America. None of the articles begins to explain how Russia did these things, or even WHY. Motivation appears to have become a lost pursuit in the American mass media. The one thing sometimes mentioned, which I think may have some credibility, is Russia's preference of Trump over Hillary Clinton in 2016. But this doesn't begin to explain how Russia could pull off any of the electoral magic it's accused of, which would be feasible only if the United States were a backward, Third World, Banana Republic.

There's the Facebook ads, as well as all the other ads The people who are influenced by this story – have they read many of the actual ads? Many are pro-Clinton or anti-Trump; many are both; many are neither. It's one big mess, the only rational explanation of this which I've read is that they come from money-making websites, "click-bait" sites as they're known, which earn money simply by attracting visitors.

As to the nerve agents, it makes more sense if the UK or the CIA did it to make the Russians look bad, because the anti-Russian scandal which followed was totally predictable. Why would Russia choose the time of the World Cup in Moscow – of which all of Russia was immensely proud – to bring such notoriety down upon their head? But that would have been an ideal time for their enemies to want to embarrass them.

However, I have no doubt that the great majority of Americans who follow the news each day believe the official stories about the Russians. They're particularly impressed with the fact that every US intelligence agency supports the official stories. They would not be impressed at all if told that a dozen Russian intelligence agencies all disputed the charges. Group-think is alive and well all over the world. As is Cold War II.

But we're the Good Guys, ain't we?

For a defender of US foreign policy there's very little that causes extreme heartburn more than someone implying a "moral equivalence" between American behavior and that of Russia. That was the case during Cold War I and it's the same now in Cold War II. It just drives them up the wall.

After the United States passed a law last year requiring TV station RT (Russia Today) to register as a "foreign agent", the Russians passed their own law allowing authorities to require foreign media to register as a "foreign agent". Senator John McCain denounced the new Russian law, saying there is "no equivalence" between RT and networks such as Voice of America, CNN and the BBC, whose journalists "seek the truth, debunk lies, and hold governments accountable." By contrast, he said, "RT's propagandists debunk the truth, spread lies, and seek to undermine democratic governments in order to further Vladimir Putin's agenda."

And here is Tom Malinowski, former Assistant Secretary of State for democracy, human rights and labor (2014-2017) – last year he reported that Putin had "charged that the U.S. government had interfered 'aggressively' in Russia's 2012 presidential vote," claiming that Washington had "gathered opposition forces and financed them." Putin, wrote Malinowski, "apparently got President Trump to agree to a mutual commitment that neither country would interfere in the other's elections."

"Is this moral equivalence fair?" Malinowski asked and answered: "In short, no. Russia's interference in the United States' 2016 election could not have been more different from what the United States does to promote democracy in other countries."

How do you satirize such officials and such high-school beliefs?

We also have the case of the US government agency, National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which has interfered in more elections than the CIA or God. Indeed, the man who helped draft the legislation establishing NED, Allen Weinstein, declared in 1991: "A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA." On April 12, 2018 the presidents of two of NED's wings wrote: "A specious narrative has come back into circulation: that Moscow's campaign of political warfare is no different from U.S.-supported democracy assistance."

"Democracy assistance", you see, is what they call NED's election-interferences and government-overthrows. The authors continue: "This narrative is churned out by propaganda outlets such as RT and Sputnik [radio station]. it is deployed by isolationists who propound a U.S. retreat from global leadership."

"Isolationists" is what [neo]conservatives call critics of US foreign policy whose arguments they can't easily dismiss, so they imply that such people just don't want the US to be involved in anything abroad.

And "global leadership" is what they call being first in election-interferences and government-overthrows.

https://williamblum.org/aer/read/159

[Aug 22, 2018] The CIA Owns the US and European Media by Paul Craig Roberts

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The mind of the mass media: Email exchange between myself and a leading Washington Post foreign policy reporter: ..."
"... For the record, I think RT is much less biased than the Post on international affairs. And, yes, it's bias, not "fake news" that's the main problem – Cold-War/anti-Communist/anti-Russian bias that Americans have been raised with for a full century. RT defends Russia against the countless mindless attacks from the West. Who else is there to do that? Should not the Western media be held accountable for what they broadcast? Americans are so unaccustomed to hearing the Russian side defended, or hearing it at all, that when they do it can seem rather weird. ..."
"... Regard these indictments in proper perspective and we find that election interference is only listed as a supposed objective, with charges actually being for unlawful cyber operations, identity theft, and conspiracy to launder money by American individuals unconnected to the Russian government. So we're still waiting for some evidence of actual Russian interference in the election aimed at determining the winner. ..."
"... However, I have no doubt that the great majority of Americans who follow the news each day believe the official stories about the Russians. They're particularly impressed with the fact that every US intelligence agency supports the official stories. They would not be impressed at all if told that a dozen Russian intelligence agencies all disputed the charges. Group-think is alive and well all over the world. As is Cold War II ..."
"... And here is Tom Malinowski, former Assistant Secretary of State for democracy, human rights and labor (2014-2017) – last year he reported that Putin had "charged that the U.S. government had interfered 'aggressively' in Russia's 2012 presidential vote," claiming that Washington had "gathered opposition forces and financed them." Putin, wrote Malinowski, "apparently got President Trump to agree to a mutual commitment that neither country would interfere in the other's elections." ..."
"... We also have the case of the US government agency, National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which has interfered in more elections than the CIA or God. Indeed, the man who helped draft the legislation establishing NED, Allen Weinstein, declared in 1991: "A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA." On April 12, 2018 the presidents of two of NED's wings wrote: "A specious narrative has come back into circulation: that Moscow's campaign of political warfare is no different from U.S.-supported democracy assistance." ..."
"... "Democracy assistance", you see, is what they call NED's election-interferences and government-overthrows ..."
Aug 18, 2018 | www.unz.com

William Blum shares with us his correspondence with Washington Post presstitute Michael Birnbaum. As you can tell from Birnbaum's replies, he comes across as either very stupid or as a CIA asset.

When I received my briefing as staff associate, House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, which required top secret clearance, I was told by senior members of the staff that the Washington Post was a CIA asset. Watching the Washington Post's takedown of President Richard Nixon with the orchestrated Watergate story, that became obvious. President Nixon had made too many overtures to the Soviets and too many arms limitations agreements, and he opened to China. Watching President Nixon's peace initiatives water down the threat level from the Soviet Union and Maoist China, the military/security complex saw a threat to its budget and power and decided that Nixon had to go. The assassination of President John F. Kennedy had resulted in far too much skepticism about the Warren Commission Report, so the CIA decided to use the Washington Post to get rid of Nixon. To keep the clueless American left hating Nixon, the CIA used its assets in the leftwing to keep Nixon blamed for the Vietnam war, a war that Nixon inherited and did not want.

The CIA knew that Nixon's problem was that he could not exit the war without losing his conservative base, which was convinced of the nonsensical "Domino Theory." I have always wondered if the CIA concocted the "Domino Theory," as it so well served them. Unable to get rid of the war "with honor," Nixon was driven to brutal methods to force the North Vietnamese to accept a situation that he could depart without defeat and soiling America's "honor" and losing his conservative support base. The North Vietnamese wouldn't bend, but the US Congress did, and so the CIA succeeded in discrediting among both the leftwing and righwing Nixon's war management. With no one to defend him, Nixon was an easy target for the CIA.

Here is Blum's exchange with Birnbaum. It is possible that Birnbaum is neither stupid nor a CIA asset, but just a person wanting to hold on to a job. The last thing he can afford to do is to disabuse readers of the "Russian Threat" when Bezos' Amazon and Washington Post properties are dependent on the CIA's annual subsidy of $600 million disquised as a "contract." https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-20/cia-washington-post-and-russia-what-youre-not-being-told

The Anti-Empire Report # 159
Willian Blum

The mind of the mass media: Email exchange between myself and a leading Washington Post foreign policy reporter:
July 18, 2018

Dear Mr. Birnbaum,

You write Trump "made no mention of Russia's adventures in Ukraine". Well, neither he nor Putin nor you made any mention of America's adventures in the Ukraine, which resulted in the overthrow of the Ukrainian government in 2014, which led to the justified Russian adventure. Therefore ?

If Russia overthrew the Mexican government would you blame the US for taking some action in Mexico?
William Blum

Dear Mr. Blum,

Thanks for your note. "America's adventures in the Ukraine": what are you talking about? Last time I checked, it was Ukrainians in the streets of Kiev who caused Yanukovych to turn tail and run. Whether or not that was a good thing, we can leave aside, but it wasn't the Americans who did it.

It is, however, Russian special forces who fanned out across Crimea in February and March 2014, according to Putin, and Russians who came down from Moscow who stoked conflict in eastern Ukraine in the months after, according to their own accounts.
Best, Michael Birnbaum

To MB,

I can scarcely believe your reply. Do you read nothing but the Post? Do you not know of high State Dept official Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador in Ukraine in Maidan Square to encourage the protesters? She spoke of 5 billion (sic) dollars given to aid the protesters who were soon to overthrow the govt. She and the US Amb. spoke openly of who to choose as the next president. And he's the one who became president. This is all on tape. I guess you never watch Russia Today (RT). God forbid! I read the Post every day. You should watch RT once in a while.
William Blum

To WB,

I was the Moscow bureau chief of the newspaper; I reported extensively in Ukraine in the months and years following the protests. My observations are not based on reading. RT is not a credible news outlet, but I certainly do read far beyond our own pages, and of course I talk to the actual actors on the ground myself – that's my job.

And: yes, of course Nuland was in the Maidan – but encouraging the protests, as she clearly did, is not the same as sparking them or directing them, nor is playing favorites with potential successors, as she clearly did, the same as being directly responsible for overthrowing the government. I'm not saying the United States wasn't involved in trying to shape events. So were Russia and the European Union. But Ukrainians were in the driver's seat the whole way through. I know the guy who posted the first Facebook call to protest Yanukovych in November 2013; he's not an American agent. RT, meanwhile, reports fabrications and terrible falsehoods all the time. By all means consume a healthy and varied media diet – don't stop at the US mainstream media. But ask yourself how often RT reports critically on the Russian government, and consider how that lacuna shapes the rest of their reporting. You will find plenty of reporting in the Washington Post that is critical of the US government and US foreign policy in general, and decisions in Ukraine and the Ukrainian government in specific. Our aim is to be fair, without picking sides.
Best, Michael Birnbaum

======================= end of exchange =======================

Right, the United States doesn't play indispensable roles in changes of foreign governments; never has, never will; even when they offer billions of dollars; even when they pick the new president, which, apparently, is not the same as picking sides. It should be noticed that Mr Birnbaum offers not a single example to back up his extremist claim that RT "reports fabrications and terrible falsehoods all the time." "All the time", no less! That should make it easy to give some examples.

For the record, I think RT is much less biased than the Post on international affairs. And, yes, it's bias, not "fake news" that's the main problem – Cold-War/anti-Communist/anti-Russian bias that Americans have been raised with for a full century. RT defends Russia against the countless mindless attacks from the West. Who else is there to do that? Should not the Western media be held accountable for what they broadcast? Americans are so unaccustomed to hearing the Russian side defended, or hearing it at all, that when they do it can seem rather weird.

To the casual observer, THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA indictments of July 14 of Russian intelligence agents (GRU) reinforced the argument that the Soviet government interfered in the US 2016 presidential election. Regard these indictments in proper perspective and we find that election interference is only listed as a supposed objective, with charges actually being for unlawful cyber operations, identity theft, and conspiracy to launder money by American individuals unconnected to the Russian government. So we're still waiting for some evidence of actual Russian interference in the election aimed at determining the winner.

The Russians did it (cont.)
Each day I spend about three hours reading the Washington Post. Amongst other things I'm looking for evidence – real, legal, courtroom-quality evidence, or at least something logical and rational – to pin down those awful Russkis for their many recent crimes, from influencing the outcome of the 2016 US presidential election to use of a nerve agent in the UK. But I do not find such evidence.

Each day brings headlines like these:

These are all from the same day, August 9, which led me to thinking of doing this article, but similar stories can be found any day in the Post and in major newspapers anywhere in America. None of the articles begins to explain how Russia did these things, or even WHY. Motivation appears to have become a lost pursuit in the American mass media. The one thing sometimes mentioned, which I think may have some credibility, is Russia's preference of Trump over Hillary Clinton in 2016. But this doesn't begin to explain how Russia could pull off any of the electoral magic it's accused of, which would be feasible only if the United States were a backward, Third World, Banana Republic.

There's the Facebook ads, as well as all the other ads The people who are influenced by this story – have they read many of the actual ads? Many are pro-Clinton or anti-Trump; many are both; many are neither. It's one big mess, the only rational explanation of this which I've read is that they come from money-making websites, "click-bait" sites as they're known, which earn money simply by attracting visitors.

As to the nerve agents, it makes more sense if the UK or the CIA did it to make the Russians look bad, because the anti-Russian scandal which followed was totally predictable. Why would Russia choose the time of the World Cup in Moscow – of which all of Russia was immensely proud – to bring such notoriety down upon their head? But that would have been an ideal time for their enemies to want to embarrass them.

However, I have no doubt that the great majority of Americans who follow the news each day believe the official stories about the Russians. They're particularly impressed with the fact that every US intelligence agency supports the official stories. They would not be impressed at all if told that a dozen Russian intelligence agencies all disputed the charges. Group-think is alive and well all over the world. As is Cold War II.

But we're the Good Guys, ain't we?

For a defender of US foreign policy there's very little that causes extreme heartburn more than someone implying a "moral equivalence" between American behavior and that of Russia. That was the case during Cold War I and it's the same now in Cold War II. It just drives them up the wall.

After the United States passed a law last year requiring TV station RT (Russia Today) to register as a "foreign agent", the Russians passed their own law allowing authorities to require foreign media to register as a "foreign agent". Senator John McCain denounced the new Russian law, saying there is "no equivalence" between RT and networks such as Voice of America, CNN and the BBC, whose journalists "seek the truth, debunk lies, and hold governments accountable." By contrast, he said, "RT's propagandists debunk the truth, spread lies, and seek to undermine democratic governments in order to further Vladimir Putin's agenda."

And here is Tom Malinowski, former Assistant Secretary of State for democracy, human rights and labor (2014-2017) – last year he reported that Putin had "charged that the U.S. government had interfered 'aggressively' in Russia's 2012 presidential vote," claiming that Washington had "gathered opposition forces and financed them." Putin, wrote Malinowski, "apparently got President Trump to agree to a mutual commitment that neither country would interfere in the other's elections."

"Is this moral equivalence fair?" Malinowski asked and answered: "In short, no. Russia's interference in the United States' 2016 election could not have been more different from what the United States does to promote democracy in other countries."

How do you satirize such officials and such high-school beliefs?

We also have the case of the US government agency, National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which has interfered in more elections than the CIA or God. Indeed, the man who helped draft the legislation establishing NED, Allen Weinstein, declared in 1991: "A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA." On April 12, 2018 the presidents of two of NED's wings wrote: "A specious narrative has come back into circulation: that Moscow's campaign of political warfare is no different from U.S.-supported democracy assistance."

"Democracy assistance", you see, is what they call NED's election-interferences and government-overthrows. The authors continue: "This narrative is churned out by propaganda outlets such as RT and Sputnik [radio station]. it is deployed by isolationists who propound a U.S. retreat from global leadership."

"Isolationists" is what [neo]conservatives call critics of US foreign policy whose arguments they can't easily dismiss, so they imply that such people just don't want the US to be involved in anything abroad.

And "global leadership" is what they call being first in election-interferences and government-overthrows.

https://williamblum.org/aer/read/159

[Aug 22, 2018] Russians hold as much as 1trillion in USD assets outside Russia that were stolen from Russia in the 90's and number far greater if including all of the FSU. The stimulus to the global and US economy was enormous and created asset bubbles until the great collapse in 2008

Great insight: "Browder who helped facilitate the looting before he was kicked out of Russia and the Magnitsky Act are all part of the efforts to seize or at least contain as much of the loot as possible and keep it from Russia"
Notable quotes:
"... Russians hold as much as one trillion in USD assets outside Russia that were stolen from Russia in the 90's and number far greater if including all of the FSU. The stimulus to the global and US economy was enormous and created asset bubbles until the great collapse in 2008. The current bubble was due to quantitative easing of central banks as the flows from Russia and FSU dried up. ..."
"... Much of this was held in tax havens and then moved to the US after cleaning via shelf companies. Trumps empire was rebuilt with Russian oligarchs/mafia money as real estate was a favorite investment for money launderers ..."
"... Browder who helped facilitate the looting before he was kicked out of Russia and the Magnitsky Act are all part of the efforts to seize or at least contain as much of the loot as possible and keep it from Russia ..."
Aug 22, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Pft | Aug 21, 2018 4:17:31 PM | 28

Russians hold as much as one trillion in USD assets outside Russia that were stolen from Russia in the 90's and number far greater if including all of the FSU. The stimulus to the global and US economy was enormous and created asset bubbles until the great collapse in 2008. The current bubble was due to quantitative easing of central banks as the flows from Russia and FSU dried up.

Much of this was held in tax havens and then moved to the US after cleaning via shelf companies. Trumps empire was rebuilt with Russian oligarchs/mafia money as real estate was a favorite investment for money launderers

During the Ukrainian conflict Putin began an amnesty program asking oligarchs to repatriate these assets by waiving penalties and taxes. He restarted it at the end of last year, hence the need to expand the list of assets to be seized before they fly the coop.

https://nationalpost.com/news/world/putin-tries-to-get-oligarchs-to-send-1-trillion-home-to-russia-as-threat-of-sanctions-looms

Trump may know where a lot of these assets are parked. Perhaps he had been a good informant of the FBI/CIA like his partner Felix Sater

Browder who helped facilitate the looting before he was kicked out of Russia and the Magnitsky Act are all part of the efforts to seize or at least contain as much of the loot as possible and keep it from Russia

[Aug 22, 2018] Our Sanctions Addiction by DANIEL LARISON •

Notable quotes:
"... Our government is quick to apply sanctions and extremely reluctant to lift them. Once a government is targeted with sanctions on one issue, it becomes even easier to apply additional sanctions for other reasons. Multiple overlapping sets of sanctions give the targeted government little reason to cooperate. ..."
"... Now Trump has not only gone back on the promise of sanctions relief, but he is going out of his way to use U.S. sanctions to force other governments to wage economic war on Iran as well. ..."
"... Other governments understandably consider U.S. secondary sanctions on foreign firms to be illegal and unacceptable, and it is only a matter of time before many more states look for ways to get around them. ..."
"... Sanctions addicts are under the mistaken impression that they can force the targeted state to change its behavior, but in practice this just causes them to do more of what the U.S. doesn't want to give them additional leverage ..."
"... If the Trump administration succeeds in completely blowing up the deal, Iran won't have to abide by its restrictions any longer. In the worst-case scenario, the U.S. pressure campaign could convince Iran's government to leave the NPT. In its vain and destructive attempt to force Iran to make deeper concessions, the Trump administration could very easily repeat the Bush administration's North Korea blunder ..."
"... In fact, my guess would be that Iran could get a lot more "bang for the buck" by investing the significant efforts and budgets of pursuing a nuclear deterrent – with the resulting "window of vulnerability" – into those conventional and irregular deterrents: A2/AD and IRGC, Hezbollah, proxies in Iraq. ..."
"... Trump and Obama might be dumb enough to waste trillions on mutually assured nuclear suicide, Iran appears to have a more frugal approach to deterrence ..."
"... I find another aspect of sanctions illuminating. Sanctions have significant cost – opportunity cost, loss of investment, penalties on breach of contract – for large segments of US and EU industry – as our "allies" are now learning ..."
"... Is sanction enforcement by itself more profitable than the trade it suppresses? Or are sanctions without profitable "regime change" and the follow-thru looting – Russia 1991 or Iraq 2003 – a net loss? ..."
"... the interests of various factions of the presidential-congressional-military-industrial complex are not in perfect alignment ..."
"... "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do." ..."
"... U.S. foreign policy has been completely militarized. "Our way or the highway" diplomacy is defined by the ham-fisted war-mongers Pompeo and Bolton. With Nutjob Nikki Haley cheering them on with Dragon Lady Gina Haspel and her arrogant minions hatching regime change plots at CIA with anticipatory delight. ..."
"... The U.S./Russia relationship has been fatally wrecked by the one-way ratchet sanctions ginned up by a nitwit Congress oblivious to unintended consequences. China and the rest of Asia are formulating an economic model decoupled from the Global Cop Gorilla. They will capture Iran's business and are peeling off Turkey. Europe is realizing the lunatic incoherence of U.S. foreign policy. ..."
"... BTW, Trump is so clueless he thinks that Putin will pow-wow with him under the current circumstances. ..."
Aug 21, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Iran's Foreign Minister recently criticized the U.S. for its "addiction" to sanctions:

"I believe there is a disease in the United States and that is the addiction to sanctions," he told CNN, adding that, "Even during the Obama administration the United States put more emphasis on keeping the sanctions it had not lifted rather than implementing its obligation on the sanctions it lifted."

Zarif has his own reasons for saying this, but the addiction he describes is all too real. Our government is quick to apply sanctions and extremely reluctant to lift them. Once a government is targeted with sanctions on one issue, it becomes even easier to apply additional sanctions for other reasons. Multiple overlapping sets of sanctions give the targeted government little reason to cooperate. In Iran's case, they made significant concessions on the nuclear issue in the expectation of receiving sanctions relief. Contrary to the lies of nuclear deal opponents, Iran made the bulk of its concessions up front in exchange for the promise of relief later. That relief was very slow in coming to the extent that it came at all. Now Trump has not only gone back on the promise of sanctions relief, but he is going out of his way to use U.S. sanctions to force other governments to wage economic war on Iran as well.

Iran is still in compliance with the deal even after the U.S. broke its promises, and now the U.S. is piling on sanctions simply for the sake of inflicting economic harm. Other governments understandably consider U.S. secondary sanctions on foreign firms to be illegal and unacceptable, and it is only a matter of time before many more states look for ways to get around them. The more that our government abuses sanctions , the more likely it is that other states will create mechanisms to shield themselves and their companies from them.

U.S. abuse of sanctions reminds me of another part of Bloomberg's recent editorial on the nuclear deal. The editors write:

But a deepening economic crisis could yet force a change of heart in Tehran. A second round of U.S. sanctions, targeting oil exports and due in November, could also concentrate minds. For his part, Trump has said he's open to meeting with Iran's leaders "whenever they want to." He might welcome a second act to his summit with North Korea's Kim Jong Un. The Iranians might reflect on the fact that Kim lost nothing from that encounter.

All this is, admittedly, slim hope on which to base a long, tortured process of negotiation. But it's better than the false hope that Europe's leaders are currently clinging to.

If additional sanctions "concentrate minds" in Tehran, what is likely to happen? Prior to the nuclear deal, increasing sanctions spurred Iran to build tens of thousands of centrifuges and advance their nuclear program significantly. Sanctions addicts are under the mistaken impression that they can force the targeted state to change its behavior, but in practice this just causes them to do more of what the U.S. doesn't want to give them additional leverage . In order for sanctions to have any chance of being effective, the other government has to believe that there is way to get the sanctions lifted permanently. Iran's leaders no longer believe that because Trump shredded our government's credibility by reneging on the deal. Now that the U.S. has shown that its promises of sanctions relief are meaningless, it can impose any number of sanctions for as long as it wants and all it will do is provoke Iran into doing exactly what our government opposes.

If the Trump administration succeeds in completely blowing up the deal, Iran won't have to abide by its restrictions any longer. In the worst-case scenario, the U.S. pressure campaign could convince Iran's government to leave the NPT. In its vain and destructive attempt to force Iran to make deeper concessions, the Trump administration could very easily repeat the Bush administration's North Korea blunder . Sanctions addicts don't think that abusing sanctions can have adverse and undesirable consequences, but in this case they could end up producing a much worse outcome to the detriment of all concerned. Posted in foreign policy , politics . Tagged Iran , North Korea , Bloomberg , NPT , Mohammad Javad Zarif , Donald Trump , JCPOA .

b. August 21, 2018 at 1:09 pm

"In the worst-case scenario, the U.S. pressure campaign could convince Iran's government to leave the NPT."

For the Bolt-On et.al. this would be a best case outcome. There are good arguments that Iran will refrain from anything that would deliver a pretext for "non-proliferation at gunpoint" until at least 2020 – US election – and 2021 – Iranian elections.

In fact, my guess would be that Iran could get a lot more "bang for the buck" by investing the significant efforts and budgets of pursuing a nuclear deterrent – with the resulting "window of vulnerability" – into those conventional and irregular deterrents: A2/AD and IRGC, Hezbollah, proxies in Iraq.

When the Trump administration and Congress defined that "malignancy", which so mirrors our own, they signaled clearly that Iran's actions were exposing weaknesses and serve as constraints on US impunitive action. Trump and Obama might be dumb enough to waste trillions on mutually assured nuclear suicide, Iran appears to have a more frugal approach to deterrence .

I find another aspect of sanctions illuminating. Sanctions have significant cost – opportunity cost, loss of investment, penalties on breach of contract – for large segments of US and EU industry – as our "allies" are now learning . For administrations such as Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump, that all hail from different toxic brews of corporate and oligarch interests, there has to be a reason to force these costs on one segment of their true "constituencies". On first glance, it would imply that the interests of the presidential-congressional-military-industrial complex – that is, the profit and business interests of the industrial segment, or the ancillary benefits for the other war profiteers – trump (for lack of a more appropriate word) the concerns and interests of the non-defense and non-electioneering business.

Bloomberg, of all publications, should be sensitive to this, unless they, too, place a premium on "national securities".

b. , says: August 21, 2018 at 1:25 pm

Is sanction enforcement by itself more profitable than the trade it suppresses? Or are sanctions without profitable "regime change" and the follow-thru looting – Russia 1991 or Iraq 2003 – a net loss?

Our foreign policy might be decided and defined by this trade-off. Do our war profiteering business elites consider regime change a requirement for deferred return on investment, or would they prefer sanctions in perpetuity?

Certainly, the interests of various factions of the presidential-congressional-military-industrial complex are not in perfect alignment . For example, a trillion dollar budget for mutually assured nuclear suicide might offer significant short term profits to a narrow "market segment" while increasing the "business risks" to all beneficiaries of inbred wealth across the world, for generations.

But it would appear that these trade-offs are not well understood. I guess I cannot complain about that, given my choice of "inbred wealth" as a description for the multi-generational estrangement of the rich, connected and powerful from existential realities.

SteveM , says: August 21, 2018 at 3:23 pm

Given the Neocon constitution of Trump's inner circle, it is not surprising that the Karl Rove delusion is again in play:

"We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

How did that work out last time?

U.S. foreign policy has been completely militarized. "Our way or the highway" diplomacy is defined by the ham-fisted war-mongers Pompeo and Bolton. With Nutjob Nikki Haley cheering them on with Dragon Lady Gina Haspel and her arrogant minions hatching regime change plots at CIA with anticipatory delight.

How did that work out in Libya, Ukraine and Syria? And Mattis successfully fear-mongers out the wazoo for even more hyper-expensive "lethality".

The U.S./Russia relationship has been fatally wrecked by the one-way ratchet sanctions ginned up by a nitwit Congress oblivious to unintended consequences. China and the rest of Asia are formulating an economic model decoupled from the Global Cop Gorilla. They will capture Iran's business and are peeling off Turkey. Europe is realizing the lunatic incoherence of U.S. foreign policy.

And incredulously, Trump merely stands back and watches as his minions run his albeit mal-formed foreign policy vision into the ground. BTW, Trump is so clueless he thinks that Putin will pow-wow with him under the current circumstances.

Stick a fork in this harebrained administration – because it's cooked

[Aug 19, 2018] The difference in intellect, poise and sincerity between Russian and US diplomatic personnel is breathtaking

Aug 19, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Northern Star August 15, 2018 at 4:10 pm

https://syria360.wordpress.com/2018/08/15/russian-foreign-ministry-spokesperson-maria-zakharova-calls-out-un-high-commissioner-for-white-helmets-propaganda/

Zakarova 1

UN 0

Patient Observer August 15, 2018 at 6:35 pm
The difference in intellect, poise and sincerity between Russian and US diplomatic personnel is breathtaking.

[Aug 19, 2018] Ukrainian external debt reached 83 percent of the GDP

Notable quotes:
"... In this version of 21st century slavery, all these disadvantages have been eliminated! Slaves stay in their homecountry: there is no need to bring them from there, no need to live amongst them and to feed them! Slaves are forced to work hard in the hope of paying off their debt, so they are motivated and hardworking. And most importantly, no civil war in the USA! ..."
Aug 19, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile,

This year, the Ukraine Prime Minister Groisman said that the external debt is 83% of the GDP. And by the end of the year, having been pressurized by the IMF, it will reach 90%. In order to service its external debts, the Ukraine spends $4.8 billion a year.

This is real slavery - only a new, improved version of it. From the 17th to the 19 centuries, slavery in [the North American British colonies and then - ME] the United States had a number of serious deficiencies: slaves had to be brought all the way from Africa; slaves were not extremely industrious; Americans themselves had to live amongst the slaves; and, most unpleasantly, all this led to civil war in the United States.

In this version of 21st century slavery, all these disadvantages have been eliminated! Slaves stay in their homecountry: there is no need to bring them from there, no need to live amongst them and to feed them! Slaves are forced to work hard in the hope of paying off their debt, so they are motivated and hardworking. And most importantly, no civil war in the USA!

Draw your own conclusions.

[Aug 19, 2018] Fate Of Key Gas Pipeline In The Balance As Putin, Merkel Begin Meeting

Aug 19, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

"Russian influence will flow through that pipeline right into Europe, and that is what we are going to prevent," an unnamed U.S. official told the Wall Street Journal just as Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chancellor Angela Merkel meet outside of Berlin on Saturday centered on the two countries moving forward with the controversial Russian-German Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, but also involving issues from the Iran nuclear deal to ending the war in Syria.

Intense pressure from Washington is overshadowing the project, construction of which is already in advanced stages, as the WSJ cites current and former US officials who say sanctions are under discussion and could be mobilized in a mere matter of weeks .

These potential sanctions, ostensibly being discussed in response to US intelligence claims of Russian interference in the 2016 election, could target companies and financial firms involved in the massive pipeline's construction . This comes after comments from President Trump at the opening of a NATO summit in July made things uncomfortable for his German counterpart when he said that Germany is so dependent on Russia for energy that it's essentially being "held captive" by Vladimir Putin and his government.

"Germany is captive of Russia because it is getting so much of its energy from Russia. They pay billions of dollars to Russia and we have to defend them against Russia," Trump told NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg at a televised opening breakfast.

The pipeline has been opposed by multiple US administrations, who have long accuse the Kremlin of seeking to accrue political leverage over Europe given the latter's already high dependence on Russian natural gas. The pipeline has been a frequent talking point and target of attacks by Trump, who has threatened to escalate the trade war against Germany going back months if it supported the construction of the pipeline. US officials have also expressed concern that Russia will pull pack significantly from delivering natural gas via Ukraine when its Gazprom tranit contract expires by the close of 2019. Ukraine is currently the chief Russian natural-gas export point to the EU and depends heavily on levying fees on this trade.

Both Russia and Germany have sought to calm US concerns over the Ukraine issue, with Putin himself reportedly telling both Merkel and Trump that he is "ready to preserve" gas transit through Ukraine even after Nord Stream 2 was completed.

US officials speaking to the WSJ , however, downplayed the Ukraine issue, instead focusing on the urgency of allowing such significant and irreversible Russian economic, political, and infrastructural inroads into the heart of Europe .

Richard Grenell, the U.S. ambassador to Germany, told the WSJ , "We have been clear that firms working in the Russian energy export-pipeline sector are engaging in a line of business that carries sanctions risk," -- something which he's repeatedly emphasized with officials in Berlin. President Trump himself has also reportedly raised the issue directly with Chancellor Merkel on multiple occasions. But for all the shrill US media claims that Trump is somehow doing Putin's bidding, the WSJ has this illuminating line : "Officially, the European Commission, the EU's executive body, is coordinating the gas-transit talks, but Ms. Merkel also has played a leading role because of her regular contacts and longstanding relationship with Mr. Putin, European officials say ."

Meanwhile, it appears that Washington has a losing hand even while making threats of sanctions in an attempt to block the pipeline project.

Crucially, the WSJ report provides further confirmation of the following previously known but hugely significant detail :

A European energy executive familiar with the discussions said company representatives had told John McCarrick, deputy assistant secretary in the State Department's Bureau of Energy Resources, that the five European companies and Gazprom had already provided €5.5 billion ($6.3 billion) in financing and that the project wouldn't be stopped even if the U.S. were to impose sanctions .

The Nord Stream 2 project was started in 2015 and is a major joint venture between Russia's Gazprom and European partners, including German Uniper, Austria's OMV, France's Engie, Wintershall and the British-Dutch multinational Royal Dutch Shell.

The pipeline is set to run from Russia to Germany under the Baltic Sea - doubling the existing pipeline's capacity of 55 cubic meters per year, and is therefore critical for Europe's future energy needs.

Currently, the second phase involves utilizing an existing pipeline already channelling smaller amount of gas from Russia to Germany. Construction for the second phase started in May of this year.

GlassHouse101 -> Winston Churchill Sat, 08/18/2018 - 13:29 Permalink

More Sanctions!! Sanction all of the countries!

07564111 -> GlassHouse101 Sat, 08/18/2018 - 13:35 Permalink

will lead only to war with Russia..take that as fact.

[Aug 19, 2018] "No one wants their ship to get stuck (in Ukrainian waters) with a cargo, which had been paid for," another source at a Russian shipping company said

Aug 19, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

et Al August 16, 2018 at 11:05 am

Neuters: Some Russian ships stop cargoes to Ukraine after tanker detained- sources
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-russia-ukraine-shipping/some-russian-ships-stop-cargoes-to-ukraine-after-tanker-detained-sources-idUKKBN1L01GU

Russian ships typically carry oil products from Turkmenistan via Russian ports and the Sea of Azov to the Ukrainian ports of Odessa, Kherson and Nikolayev during summer, partly by river.

They also ship sunflower seed oil from Ukraine, and those operations have also been suspended, according to the sources.

"No one wants their ship to get stuck (in Ukrainian waters) with a cargo, which had been paid for," another source at a Russian shipping company said
####

Not new, but a little more detail.

Cutting one's nose off to spite

[Aug 19, 2018] Why we do not negotiate with the USA

Notable quotes:
"... The U.S. sets the main goals in negotiating with anyone and does not retreat an inch from the self-asserted goals. ..."
"... The U.S. does not offer anything in cash or immediate in return for what it receives in cash. It simply makes strong promises and tries to enchant the other side by mere promises. ..."
"... And in the final step, when things are over and the U.S. has received the cash, the immediate benefits, it breaches the same promises. ..."
Aug 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

The Iranian Supreme Leader even posted a special graphic summary to summarize and explain the Iranian position:

This is the U.S. formula for negotiation:

  1. Because U.S. officials depend on power and money, they consider negotiations as a business deal.
  2. The U.S. sets the main goals in negotiating with anyone and does not retreat an inch from the self-asserted goals.
  3. They demand the other side to give them immediate benefits and if the other party refrains from giving in, the U.S. officials will create an uproar so that their partner would give up.
  4. The U.S. does not offer anything in cash or immediate in return for what it receives in cash. It simply makes strong promises and tries to enchant the other side by mere promises.
  5. And in the final step, when things are over and the U.S. has received the cash, the immediate benefits, it breaches the same promises.
  6. This is the U.S.'s method of negotiation. Now, should one negotiate with such a duplicitous government?

[Aug 19, 2018] Ukraine prepares to sever all remaining public-transit links with Russia but expects that Russia will transport gas via its territory

Aug 19, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman August 17, 2018 at 3:39 pm

With much joviality and humour, Ukraine prepares to sever all remaining public-transit links with Russia. I suppose there are still roads, and if you have a car and can afford gas, you can still drive there.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/world/no-more-trains-or-buses-to-russia-only-bears-says-ukraine-transport-minister-2wvj9xzgz

This, according to the transport minister, is 'like the good old days'. I'll tell you something else that's like the good old days, Mr. Minister – the living wage in Ukraine.

And yet Ukraine still seems to think Europe must force Russia to continue transiting Russian gas through Ukraine, and paying Kuh-yiv for the privilege.

[Aug 19, 2018] Guess who invested in Naftogaz?

Aug 19, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman August 16, 2018 at 8:42 pm

Well, well; guess who has money in Naftogaz?

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-08/how-george-soros-singlehandedly-created-european-refugee-crisis-and-why

[Aug 19, 2018] Due to an astonishing coincidence, two doctors on duty had just returned from a course at Porton Down, Britain's world-leading equivalent to Shikhany, when Scripals were brought in

Aug 19, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Jen August 15, 2018 at 4:59 pm

For anyone still interested in the Skripal poisoning incident, Rob Slane at The Blogmire has a new article where he draws attention to this paragraph lifted from The Daily Telegraph:

"Dr Stephen Jukes, intensive care consultant at Salisbury District Hospital, where the Skripals were treated (and where Rowley and Sturgess were taken), has described trying 'all our therapies' to keep Sergei and Yulia alive. Due to an astonishing coincidence, two doctors on duty had just returned from a course at Porton Down, Britain's world-leading equivalent to Shikhany, when the pair were brought in. Recognising what looked like symptoms of nerve-agent poisoning, they made sure to include diazepam and atropine in their battery of treatments -- the drugs compensate for some of the effects of acetylcholinesterase blockage -- and plunged the Skripals into an artificial coma to prevent brain damage."
https://www.theblogmire.com/are-any-mps-prepared-to-ask-the-prime-minister-why-she-appears-to-have-made-a-deeply-misleading-statement-on-26th-march/

Astonishing coincidence, that the two doctors were fresh from a training course at Porton Down? Maybe not.

Elsewhere Slane states that the Skripals, and Julia especially, made rapid recoveries after coming out of their induced comas, and that by the time Theresa May made her statement in Parliament, she may have been aware (or was deliberately left uninformed) that Julia at least was improving and nowhere remotely near pushing up daisies.

kirill August 15, 2018 at 8:44 pm
This story is BS like the rest of this hoax. Neurotoxins are not 100% treatable. There is nerve damage and any military grade toxin such as VX would leave vast amounts of it, regardless of intervention. So the recovery of the Julia proves she was never exposed to a neurotoxin.

The average media consumer has never done any research on the subject of various subjects that are relevant. They think of treatments in cartoon fashion. Take this magic pill and you are fully cured. No long lasting effects, no lack of cures, etc. A common trope in TV and movies is the magical antibody. You have a horde of zombies (yet more deep insight into disease) and some vaccine is going to cure their disorder. Complete and utter rubbish.

An example to show what a failure the common perceptions are about disease is Necrotizing Fasciitis. It is not the bacteria (strep B type) that consume the "flesh". It is a runaway cytokine inflammation induced necrosis of cells on a massive scale. Basically it is a genetic disorder even if bacteria trigger the disease. So how the metabolism responds to a neurotoxin should be considered. In the case of military nerve agents, the design of the toxin is to result in rapid death. This prevents various secondary, metabolism-associated pathologies from manifesting themselves. But in the case of the Skripals, which are pure fiction, we would have all of these secondary pathologies manifesting themselves.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3648782/

"Moreover, the effects of nerve agents are very long lasting and cumulative (increased by successive exposures), and survivors of nerve agent poisoning usually suffer chronic neurological damage that can lead to continuing psychiatric effects [109]."

[Aug 18, 2018] America the Punitive by Philip Girald

Notable quotes:
"... Reprinted with permission from Strategic Culture Foundation . ..."
Aug 17, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

There has been a dramatic shift in how the United States government carries out its business internationally. Admittedly, Washington has had a tendency to employ force to get what it has wanted ever since 9/11, but it also sometimes recognized that other countries had legitimate interests and accepted there was a place for diplomacy to resolve issues short of armed conflict. The Bush Administration reluctance to broaden its engagement in the Middle East after it recognized that it had blundered with Iraq followed by Obama's relaxation of tensions with Cuba and his negotiation of a nuclear agreement with Iran demonstrated that sanity sometimes prevailed in the West Wing.

That willingness to be occasionally accommodating has changed dramatically, with the State Department under Mike Pompeo currently more prone to deliver threats than any suggestions that we all might try to get along. It would be reasonable enough to criticize such behavior because it is intrinsically wrong, but the truly frightening aspect of it would appear to be that it is based on the essentially neoconservative assumption that other countries will always back down when confronted with force majeure and that the use of violence as a tool in international relations is, ultimately, consequence free.

I am particularly disturbed with the consequence free part as it in turn is rooted in the belief that countries that have been threatened or even invaded have no collective memory of what occurred and will not respond vengefully when the situation changes. There have been a number of stunningly mindless acts of aggression over the past several weeks that are particularly troubling as they suggest that they will produce many more problems down the road than solutions.

The most recent is the new sanctioning of Russia over the Skripal poisoning in Salisbury England. For those not following developments, last week Washington abruptly and without any new evidence being presented, imposed additional trade sanctions on Russia in the belief that Moscow ordered and carried out the poisoning of Sergey Skripal and his daughter Yulia on March 4th. The report of the new sanctions was particularly surprising as Yulia Skripal has recently announced that she intends to return to her home in Russia, leading to the conclusion that even one of the alleged victims does not believe the narrative being promoted by the British and American governments.

Though Russian President Vladimir Putin has responded with restraint, avoiding a tit-for-tat, he is reported to be angry about the new move by the US government and now believes it to be an unreliable negotiating partner. Considering the friendly recent exchanges between Putin and Trump, the punishment of Russia has to be viewed as something of a surprise, suggesting that the president of the United States may not be in control of his own foreign policy.

Turkey is also feeling America's wrath over the continued detention of an American Protestant Pastor Andrew Brunson by Ankara over charges that he was connected to the coup plotters of 2016, which were allegedly directed by Fetullah Gulen, a Muslim religious leader, who now resides in Pennsylvania. Donald Trump has made the detention the centerpiece of his Turkish policy, introducing sanctions and tariffs that have led in part to a collapse of the Turkish lira and a run on the banking system which could easily lead to default and grave damage to European banks that hold a large party of the country's debt.

And then there is perennial favorite Iran, which was hit with reinstated sanctions last week and is confronting a ban on oil sales scheduled to go into effect on November 4th. The US has said it will sanction any country that buys Iranian oil after that date, though a number of governments including Turkey, India and China appear to be prepared to defy that demand. Several European countries are reportedly preparing mechanisms that will allow them to trade around US restrictions.

What do Russia, Turkey and Iran have in common? All are on the receiving end of punitive action by the United States over allegations of misbehavior that have not been demonstrated. Nobody has shown that Russia poisoned the Skripals, Turkey just might have a case that the Reverend Brunson was in contact with coup plotters, and Iran is in full compliance with the nuclear arms agreement signed in 2015. One has to conclude that the United States has now become the ultimate angry imperial power, lashing out with the only thing that seems to work – its ability to interfere in and control financial markets – to punish nations that do not play by its rules.

Given Washington's diminishing clout worldwide, it is a situation that is unsustainable and which will ultimately only really punish the American people as the United States becomes more isolated and its imperial overreach bankrupts the nation. As America weakens, Russia, Turkey, Iran and all the other countries that have been steamrolled by Washington will likely seek revenge. To avoid that, a dramatic course correction by the US is needed, but, unfortunately, is unlikely to take place.

Reprinted with permission from Strategic Culture Foundation .

[Aug 18, 2018] The USA with a single strike killed all efforts of Puting to establ;ish better relations with the USA

Google translation
Aug 18, 2018 | newzfeed.ru

According to leading analysts, America decided to take such a tough step because of Washington's desire to restrain the development of our state as much as possible. However, it is already clear that such actions on the part of American colleagues will only worsen relations between the two superpowers. The new sanctions package altogether nullifies all previous agreements.

"All the positive aspects that have emerged after the meeting of the two presidents in Helsinki, of course, will be almost completely leveled," the media quoted the statement of the head of the center for military and political studies Vladimir Batyuk.

According to him, the actions of the us administration threaten with negative consequences, extremely complicating the further dialogue between Washington and Moscow.

First Deputy Chairman of the Federation Council Committee on international Affairs Vladimir dzhabarov, commenting on the situation, said - the United States is trying to "trim the wings" of Russia.

"The reason is banal – they are trying to restrain the development of Russia. The Americans themselves understand that our country is now deploying its wings, Russia is on the rise, it can become a powerful competitor both economically and militarily. Therefore at any cost try to constrain us", – the member of the Federation Council spoke.

According to dzhabarov, our country has long understood that Russia has no partners in America. The US is engaged in dirty methods of competition, using a variety of levers to squeeze Moscow from the EU energy markets.

"But it's useless. The history they, probably, not teaching. Let them read what the sanctions against Russia led to, " the Senator added.

We will remind, on August 8, the U.S. state Department announced the introduction of new restrictive measures against Russia. This package of anti-Russian sanctions includes a ban on the supply of dual-use products to Russia, a decrease in the level of diplomatic relations, an almost complete cessation of us exports, as well as a ban on flights to the States of the Russian company Aeroflot.

[Aug 18, 2018] All Sanctions Against Russia Are Based on Lies by Eric Zuesse

Notable quotes:
"... (labs in several countries including the UK have also manufactured it) ..."
"... still refuses to say any such thing ..."
"... Look at this paragraph: ..."
"... "Russia is the official successor state to the USSR. As such, Russia legally took responsibility for ensuring the CWC [Chemical Weapons Convention] applies to all former Soviet Chemical Weapons stocks and facilities." ..."
"... It does not need me to point out, that if Porton Down had identified the nerve agent as made in Russia, the FCO ..."
"... would not have added that paragraph. Plainly they cannot say it was made in Russia. ..."
"... In short, the ruling cited above, even if read in the most improbably forgiving way possible, shows the UK government does not have the information to warrant any of the claims it has so far made about Russian state involvement in the alleged poisoning of the Skripals. It shows the UK government is currently guilty of lying to Parliament, to the British people, and to the world. ..."
"... Imposition of Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act Sanctions on Russia ..."
"... Press Statement ..."
"... Department Spokesperson ..."
"... Following the use of a "Novichok" nerve agent in an attempt to assassinate UK citizen Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia Skripal, the United States, on August 6, 2018, determined under the Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act of 1991 (CBW Act) that the Government of the Russian Federation has used chemical or biological weapons in violation of international law or has used lethal chemical or biological weapons against its own nationals. ..."
"... Following a 15-day Congressional notification period, these sanctions will take effect upon publication of a notice in the Federal Register, expected on or around August 22, 2018. ..."
"... no path to peace, ..."
Aug 18, 2018 | theduran.com

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org:

All of the sanctions (economic, diplomatic, and otherwise) against Russia are based on clearly demonstrable intentional falsehoods; and the sanctions which were announced on August 8th are just the latest example of this consistent tragic fact -- a fact which will be proven here, with links to the evidence, so that anyone who reads here can easily see that all of these sanctions are founded on lies against Russia.

The latest of these sanctions were announced on Wednesday August 8 th . Reuters headlined "US imposes sanctions on Russia for nerve agent attack in UK" and reported that, "Washington said on Wednesday it would impose fresh sanctions on Russia by the end of August after it determined that Moscow had used a nerve agent against a former Russian agent and his daughter in Britain." This was supposedly because "Sergei Skripal, a former colonel in Russia's GRU military intelligence service, and his 33-year-old daughter, Yulia, were found slumped unconscious on a bench in the southern English city of Salisbury in March after a liquid form of the Novichok type of nerve agent was applied to his home's front door. European countries and the United States expelled 100 Russian diplomats after the attack, in the strongest action by President Donald Trump against Russia since he came to office."

However, despite intense political pressure that the UK Government and 'news'media had placed upon the UK's Porton Down intelligence laboratory to assert that the poison had been made in Russia (labs in several countries including the UK have also manufactured it) , the Porton Down lab refused to say this. Though the US Government is acting as ifPorton Down's statement "determined that Moscow had used a nerve agent," the actual fact is that Porton Down still refuses to say any such thing , at all -- this allegation is merely a fabrication by the US Government, including its allies, UK's Government and other Governments and their respective propaganda-media. It's a bald lie.

On March 18th, the great British investigative journalist and former British diplomat Craig Murray had headlined about UK's Foreign Secretary, "Boris Johnson Issues Completely New Story on Russian Novichoks" and he pointed to the key paragraph in the Porton Down lab's statement on this matter -- a brief one-sentence paragraph:

Look at this paragraph:

"Russia is the official successor state to the USSR. As such, Russia legally took responsibility for ensuring the CWC [Chemical Weapons Convention] applies to all former Soviet Chemical Weapons stocks and facilities."

It does not need me to point out, that if Porton Down had identified the nerve agent as made in Russia, the FCO [Foreign and Commonwealth Office -- UK's foreign ministry] would not have added that paragraph. Plainly they cannot say it was made in Russia.

Murray's elliptical report, which unfortunately was unclearly written -- it was rushed, in order to be able to published on the same day, March 18 th , when the UK's official response to the Porton Down lab's analysis was published -- was subsequently fully explained on March 23 rd at the excellent news-site Off-Guardian, which specializes in investigating and interpreting the news-media (in this case, Craig Murray's article, and the evidence regarding it); they headlined "Skripal case: 'closely related agent" claim closely examined'," and concluded their lengthy and detailed analysis:

In short, the ruling cited above, even if read in the most improbably forgiving way possible, shows the UK government does not have the information to warrant any of the claims it has so far made about Russian state involvement in the alleged poisoning of the Skripals. It shows the UK government is currently guilty of lying to Parliament, to the British people, and to the world.

Nothing has been published further about the Skripal/Novichoks matter since then, except speculation that's based on the evidence which was discussed in detail in that March 23 rd article at Off-Guardian.

On the basis of this -- merely an open case which has never been examined in more detail than that March 23rd analysis did -- the Skripal/Novichok case has been treated by the UK Government, and by the US Government, and by governments which are allied with them, and by their news-media, as if it were instead a closed case, in which what was made public constitutes proof that the Skripals had been poisoned by the Russian Government. On that blatantly fraudulent basis, over a hundred diplomats ended up being expelled.

The Porton Down lab still refuses to say anything that the UK Government can quote as an authority confirming that the Skripals had been poisoned by the Russian Government.

All that's left of the matter, then, is a cold case of official lies asserting that proof has been presented, when in fact only official lies have been presented to the public.

The UK Government prohibits the Skripals from speaking to the press, and refuses to allow them to communicate even with their family-members . It seems that they're effectively prisoners of the UK Government -- the same Government that claims to be protecting them against Russia.

This is the basis upon which the US State Department, on August 8th, issued the following statement to 'justify' its new sanctions:

Imposition of Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act Sanctions on Russia

Press Statement

Heather Nauert

Department Spokesperson

Washington, DC

August 8, 2018

Following the use of a "Novichok" nerve agent in an attempt to assassinate UK citizen Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia Skripal, the United States, on August 6, 2018, determined under the Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act of 1991 (CBW Act) that the Government of the Russian Federation has used chemical or biological weapons in violation of international law or has used lethal chemical or biological weapons against its own nationals.

Following a 15-day Congressional notification period, these sanctions will take effect upon publication of a notice in the Federal Register, expected on or around August 22, 2018.

US law is supposed to be "innocent until proven guilty" -- the opposite of legal systems in which the contrary assumption applies: "guilty until proven innocent." However, regarding such matters as invading and destroying Iraq in 2003 upon the basis of no authentic evidence; and invading and destroying Libya in 2011 on the basis of no authentic proof of anyone's guilt; and on the basis of invading and for years trying to destroy Syria on the basis of America's supporting Al Qaeda in Syria against Syria's secular government; and on the basis of lying repeatedly against Russia in order to load sanction after sanction upon Russia and to 'justify' pouring its missiles and thousands of troops onto and near Russia's border as if preparing to invade 'the world's most aggressive country' -- the US federal Government routinely violates that fundamental supposition of its own legal system ("innocent until proven guilty"), whenever its rulers wish. And yet, it calls itself a 'democracy'.

Donald Trump constantly says that he seeks improved relations with Russia, but when his own State Department lies like that in order to add yet further to the severe penalties that it had previously placed against Russia for its presumed guilt in the Skripal/Novichok matter, then Trump himself is publicly exposing himself as being a liar about his actual intentions regarding Russia. He, via his Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's State Department, not only is punishing Russia severely for this unproven allegation, but now adds yet further penalties against Russia for it. Trump is being demanded by the US Congress to do this, but it is his choice whether to go along with that demand or else expose that it's based on lies. He likes to accuse his opponents of lying, but, quite obviously, the members of Congress who are demanding these hiked rounds of sanctions against Russia are demanding him to do what he actually wants to do -- which is now clearly demonstrated to be the exact opposite of exposing those lies. If Trump is moving toward World War III on the basis of lies, then the only way he can stop doing it is by exposing those lies. He's not even trying to do that.

Nothing is being said in the State Department's cryptic announcement on August 8th that sets forth any reasonable demand which the US Government is making to the Russian Government, such that, if the reasonable demand becomes fulfilled by Russia's Government, then the United States Government and its allies will cease and desist their successive, and successively escalating, rounds of punishment against Russia.

Russia is being offered no path to peace, but only the reasonable expectation of escalating lie-based American 'justifications' to perpetrate yet more American-and-allied aggressions against Russia.

There have been three prior US excuses for applying prior rounds of sanctions against Russia, and all of them have likewise been based upon lies, and varnished with many layers of overstatements.

First, in 2012, there was the Magnitsky Act, which was based upon frauds (subsequently exposed here and here and here ) which assert that Sergei Magnitsky was murdered by the Russian Government. The evidence (as linked-to there) is conclusive that he was not; but the US Government and its allies refuse even to consider it.

Then, in 2014, Crimea broke away from Ukraine and joined the Russian Federation, and the US and its allies allege that this was because Russia under Putin 'seized' Crimea from Ukraine, when in fact America under Obama had, just weeks prior to that Crimean breakaway, seized Ukraine and turned it against Russia and against Crimea and the other parts of Ukraine which had voted overwhelmingly for the democratically elected Ukrainian President whom the Obama regime had just overthrown in a bloody coup that had been in the planning ever since at least 2011 inside the Obama Administration . Several rounds of US-and-allied economic sanctions were imposed against Russia for that -- for the constant string of lies against Russia, and of constant cover-ups of "the most blatant coup in history," which had preceded and caused the breakaway.

These lies originated with Obama; and Trump accuses Obama of lying, but not on this, where Obama really did lie, psychopathically . Instead, Trump makes those lies bipartisan. On what counts the most against Obama, Trump seconds the Obama-lies, instead of exposing them. And yet Trump routinely has accused Obama as having lied, even on matters where it's actually Trump who has been lying about Obama.

Then, there have been the anti-Russia sanctions that are based upon Russiagate and 'Trump is Putin's stooge and stole the election.' That case against Russia has not been proven, and Wikileaks' founder Julian Assange says that what he had published were leaks from the DNC and Podesta's computer, not hacks at all; and yet the sanctions were imposed almost as soon as the Democratic Party's accusations started. Those sanctions, too, are utterly baseless except as being alleged responses to unproven (and likely false) allegations . Furthermore, even in the worst-case scenario: the US Government itself routinely overthrows foreign governments, and continues tapping the phones and electronic communications of foreign governments, and manipulating elections abroad. Even in the worst-case scenario, Russia hasn't done anything that historians haven't already proven that the US Government itself routinely does. That's the case even if Russia is guilty as charged, on all of the U.S-and-allied accusations.

So: Who wants World War III? Apparently, both the Democratic and the Republican Parties do . Obama called Russia the world's most aggressive nation . Trump joins with him in that bipartisan lie. Outside of America itself, most of the world consider the United States to be actually the " greatest threat to peace in the world today." Therefore, why isn't the NATO alliance against America? The NATO alliance is America and most of its vassal-nations: they're all allied against Russia. Their war against Russia never stopped. That 'Cold War' continued, even after the USSR and its communism and its Warsaw Pact mirror-image to NATO, all ended in 1991 ; and now the intensifying 'cold war' threatens to become very hot. All based on lies. But that seems to be the only type of 'justifications' the US-and-allied tyrants have got.

Either the lies will stop, or else we all will. Trump, as usual, is on the wrong side of the lies . And he seems to be too much of a coward to oppose them, in these cases, which are the most dangerous lies of all. This is how we could all end. Doing something heroic that would stop it, seems to be way beyond him -- he doesn't even try. That's the type of cowardice which should be feared, and despised, the most of all. Trump has taken up Obama's worst, and he runs with it. Trump had promised the opposite, during his Presidential campaign. But this is the reality of Trump -- a profoundly filthy liar -- at least insofar as he has, thus far, shown himself to be. What he will be in the future is all that remains in question. But this is what he has been, up till now.

[Aug 18, 2018] Best Available Evidence Hillary Clinton Has Parkinson's by Rudy Panko

Aug 18, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Sep 13, 2016

Clinton has been using her "dehydration" story for years. This time it won't work. 219 The media is already working around the clock to hush up questions about Hillary's rapidly deteriorating health. She overheated has allergies pneumonia! She'll be back on her feet soon, citizen. End of discussion. Anyone who says otherwise is a Looney Tune. (Remember that just a week ago the media shamed anyone who even suggested that Hillary Clinton might be sick.)

We don't buy it . Commenting on Clinton's latest "medical episode", Dr. Zuhdi Jasser M.D. observed : "What she had was a syncopal episode. She passed out. That's either cardiovascular or neurologic. Now, her team wants us to believe it is dehydration. She didn't appear to be dehydrated and that doesn't get fixed in 90 minutes."

There's a very good reason why Bill has already replaced his wife on the campaign trail : Hillary Clinton is suffering from advanced stages of Parkinson's. And it's just going to get worse.

But first, what is Parkinson's?

The Parkinson's theory has been floating around for quite some time, but in our humble opinion, Dr. Ted Noel, a physician who worked for 32 years in clinical medicine, makes the most compelling case that Clinton is suffering from this very serious neurological condition. We want to emphasize that Dr. Noel made this video on August 29 , long before Hillary's "medical episode" on September 11:

In his video analysis, Dr. Noel makes the following points:

  1. Leaked e-mails show that Clinton's aides researched medication used to treat Parkinson's.
  2. Clinton has suffered from fainting spells as early as 2005, when she lost consciousness while making a speech. In 2009 she fell and broke her elbow. In 2012 she suffered a concussion after fainting and striking her head. All of these falls can be explained by Parkinson's, which affects the motor system. (Team Hillary blames dehydration.)
  3. Hillary's personal aide Huma Abedin wrote in an e-mail that Clinton is "often confused." Again, this would be consistent with Parkinson's, which in its advanced stages can even lead to dementia.
  4. Numerous documented cases where Clinton needed physical assistance, whether it's using a chair as a support while giving a stump speech, or requiring help climbing stairs. Again, Parkinson's severely impedes motor functions.
  5. During a roundtable discussion in April, Hillary nodded her head for an extended period -- one estimate puts the number of nods at 400; it looks odd, but it makes perfect sense if she has Parkinson's: It's a head-nodding tremor. (Go to 5:45 in the video. Truly bizarre behavior.)
  6. Clinton has also shown signs of "pin-rolling" tremors, as well as unnatural (and even painful) finger positions.
  7. The now-famous video of Hillary's head bobbing uncontrollably while speaking with the press was not a "seizure" (or a result of "iced chai"): It's a very common side-effect of Levadopa, a common and effective treatment for Parkinson's. However, visual stimulus, or anxiety, can cause unnatural reactions. Which brings Dr. Noel to his next point:
  8. It's been nearly 300 days since Hillary Clinton has held a press conference. No one has offered a rational reason for this. But here's an easy explanation: It's because Hillary's condition makes it very difficult for her to handle stressful situations in which she is bombarded with multiple questions and requests at the same time. Furthermore:
  9. This also explains her frankly bizarre facial expressions during her nomination. (Go to 9:38 in the video, because you can't do this point justice without watching the video.)
  10. In response to a protestor at a rally, Clinton literally freezes. She's unable to move, let alone speak. An aide rushes up to her and says "It's okay. We're still here. Keep talking." We urge everyone to watch Dr. Noel's analysis of this event, which begins at the 11:14 mark.
  11. Her coughing fits are evidence of a swallowing disorder -- common in those who suffer from Parkinson's. It could even be a symptom of pneumonia, which is also quite common among those with Parkinson's. (NOTE: Dr. Noel made this observation more than a week before Hillary was "diagnosed" with pneumonia.)

After Clinton "overheated" on September 11 , Dr. Noel made a follow-up video:

The keys points in this video:

  1. Hillary's doctor claims that Clinton's behavior on September 11 was due to "dehydration", the excuse used every time Clinton has a "medical episode". Here you really have to watch the video to fully appreciate how unbelievable this claim is -- and how often it's been used.
  2. Clinton is wearing blue-tinted glasses, which are used to help stabilize motor functions in those suffering from Parkinson's.
  3. When Clinton begins to fall, as shown in the video, she doesn't attempt to hold out her arms or protect her face. She's frozen into a board-like rigidity. Again, common for someone with Parkinson's.

  4. It's obvious that Clinton's condition is serious -- but instead of going to the hospital, she is taken (against protocol) to Chelsea's apartment. The only way this makes sense is if Clinton's team already knew what was wrong.

  5. Pneumonia cannot explain much of Clinton's behavior. Parkinson's, on the other hand, would explain all of it.

me frameborder=

#Hillary squeezing her nurse's fingers. Clearly, she's disoriented. Final stages of Parkinson's disease? pic.twitter.com/E5SJjcIvDA

-- Mathijs Koenraadt (@mkoenraadt) September 12, 2016

Aside from Dr. Noel's analysis, it appears that Clinton took a neurological test shortly before collapsing:

Pneumonia!

As Paul Joseph Watson explains :

The image shows Hillary grasping the woman's fingers with her fist, which is a classic motor neuron test to determine abnormalities in the nervous system.

The NYU School of Medicine details how the test is conducted;

"Test the patient's grip by having the patient hold the examiner's fingers in their fist tightly and instructing them not to let go while the examiner attempts to remove them. Normally the examiner cannot remove their fingers. This tests the forearm flexors and the intrinsic hand muscles. Compare the hands for strength asymmetry."

This is precisely what appears to be taking place in the image above. So why would Hillary be receiving a motor neuron test if she was only suffering from pneumonia, as her campaign claimed?

Taken as separate, isolated incidents, one could easily dismiss any of the points made by Dr. Noel. But when examined as a whole, Clinton's "odd behavior" and "accidents due to dehydration" over the last ten years are much harder to dismiss as benign or symptoms of pneumonia.

There's a very good reason why Hillary Clinton hasn't held a press conference for nearly 300 days: Her physical and neurological condition simply won't allow for it. She can't even take softball questions from her list of pre-approved journalsts without breaking into a coughing fit .

Clinton is scheduled to debate Trump in two weeks. The pneumonia cover story will likely disintegrate long before then.

The DNC should find a new candidate before it's too late. The game is up.

This post first appeared on Russia Insider

[Aug 18, 2018] How Syria and Ukraine Drove the Russia Hawks Insane

Notable quotes:
"... also mentioned adversary ..."
"... veritable demon ..."
Aug 18, 2018 | russia-insider.com

In Part 1 we referenced the infamous hysteria triggered in Salem Massachusetts by Betty Parris (age 9) and Abigail Williams (age 12).

In 1692 their prepubescent imaginations were apparently more than capable of detecting the evil doings of witches at loose in their community; and a population hopped up with Calvinist enthusiasm for the supernatural works of the Almighty apparently was also capable of lapsing into collective madness – at least for a spell.

But who would have thought that in the year 2018 the grizzled adults and racketeers who populate the Imperial City would fall prey to the same momentary outbreak of deliriums?

After all, Vladimir Putin was the very same Putin who made a mere cameo appearance in the 2012 presidential debates. He got an honorable mention when Barack Obama appropriately schooled Mitt Romney on the fact that Russia was not America's principal national security threat.

Indeed, the MSM commentators who are shrieking about Trump's parlay with Vlad today were knowingly furrowing their brows about Romney's alleged gaffe back then.

So the question at hand is what changed? How did the politics as usual debating points about the status of Russia and Putin only 69 months ago turn into a veritable Salem style hysteria?

We'd suggest two pivotal events turned the Imperial City upside down. To wit, Barry lost his nerve in August 2013 on the Syrian red line and Donald Trump won the 2016 election in the red zones of Flyover America.

In between, the mainstream media completely lost its grasp on reality as the Imperial City dove headlong into it latest and greatest Indispensable Nation adventures by intervening in Syria, Libya, Ukraine, Yemen, and Iraq for the third time.

The Indispensable Nation conceit, of course, is the ultimate cover story for the work of Empire and is the polar opposite of the rudimentary America First notions on which Donald Trump rode into the White House.

As it happened, the Indispensable Nation meme flourished when the neocons and liberal interventionists became ascendant during the Clinton and early Bush 43 era; and they virtually ran the policy tables after 9/11 as the full-throated War on Terrorism cranked up a powerful head of steam.

Nevertheless, the acolytes of Empire nearly lost their political lunch when Shock & Awe in Iraq turned into a bloody quagmire and the retaliation against the Taliban for harboring the 9/11 conspirators ended up as an endless trillion dollar war in the Hindu Kush.

That's why the peace candidate won in 2008. And it didn't matter that Barrack Obama was an utterly unqualified greenhorn Senator and former part-time law professor and community organizer who had no more claim to the Oval Office in his day than the Donald did this time around.

But Barry was too much the quick study by half. Rather than dismantle the rogue postwar Empire of the neocons and militarists, he sought to make it smarter and more deft. So he populated his national security team with moderate neocons like Robert Gates, Leon Panetta, David Petraeus and Victoria Nuland and a posse of liberal interventionists including Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice and Samantha Power.

Our point here is not simply that peace never had a chance with that crowd in charge of policy; it's that the outbreak of the so-called Arab Spring in early 2011 triggered a toxic brew of interventionist enthusiasm among Barry's foreign policy team that quickly metastasized into R2P (responsibility to protect) madness in Libya and Syria.

Needless to say, even a newly arrived Martian visitor in 2011 what have been scratching his head about Libya.

In his advancing old age, Khadafy had turned himself into a model non-proliferator and exclusively inward focused tyrant. Libya thus posed a threat to exactly no one outside its own borders; and it was just plain laughable as a matter of concern to the security of the American homeland.

But Hillary and her posse famously danced on Khadafy's grave after NATO-enabled terrorists brought about his brutal demise. So doing, they learned a dangerously erroneous lesson.

Namely, that uncooperative dictators who purportedly threatened their citizens with genocidal repression could be clinically removed for a few billions worth of bombs, drones and aid to local rebels.

That proposition really had nothing to do with homeland security in America and was belied by the fiascoes in Iraq and Afghanistan. But now the "smart" people were in charge, and both Libya and Egypt were proof they knew how to make Regime Change happen with a minimum of muss and fuss.

Yet any intelligent reading of the impossible sectarian politics of Syria put the lie to that conceit in a heartbeat.

Indeed, given the 40-year history of the Assad family business built around Baathist secularism and a protective umbrella for Syria's numerous minority confessions – Alawite, Druse, Shiite, Christian, Jewish, Kurd etc. – the very idea of arming Sharia-spouting Sunni Arabs to overthrow the Assad regime was sheer lunacy.

So whatever the immediate origins and allegedly peaceful intentions of the anti-Assad uprising in the spring of 2011, it did not take long for these clashes to degenerate into bloody urban warfare.

And it did not take a lot of figuring to also see that arming Muslim Brotherhood sectarians was absolutely guaranteed to generate a violent response from Damascus. That's because the Brotherhood had been the historic vanguard of Sunni religious opposition to the Baathist secularism of the Assad regime; and had been brutally suppressed by the senior Assad in the 1980s.

Beyond that, it was also a given that the Shiite polities on either side of Syria's borders would likely come to Assad's aid. That is, the Iranians in the east and Hezbollah across the southwest border in Lebanon – to say nothing of the regime's longtime Russian patrons, whose only naval base in the Mediterranean was located on Syria's tiny slice of coastline.

In any event, Obama's neocons and R2P liberals threw every caution to the wind. In going all in for regime change and demonizing Assad as a butcher who used barrel bombs and chemical weapons against innocent civilians, they maneuvered Obama – newly feisty as the slayer of Osama bin-Laden – into drawing his famous red line on the use of chemical weapons.

Needless to say, that was catnip to the Nusra Front and ISIS jihadists who dominated the armed opposition. It did not take long for them to mount a false flag attack in Ghouta in August 2013, which horrified the social media connected world when 1300 civilians suffered gruesome deaths from what was apparently sarin gas.

Only later did rocket experts demonstrate that the sarin had been delivered by short-range projectiles launched from jihadist controlled areas outside of Damascus, not by Assad's forces 15-20 miles away. But at the moment, the job was done: Obama was on the hot-seat of his own foolishly drawn red line – exactly where the jihadist and his own interventionists wanted him.

When he attempted to escape the trap by punting the decision to bomb Assad to Capitol Hill, however, Cool Hand Vlad saw his opening. To wit, he quickly brokered a deal with Assad to have his entire chemical weapons arsenal removed and destroyed under international supervision.

That was operationally executed by the acknowledged neutral experts at the OPCW (Organization For The Prevention of Chemical Weapons) and there is little doubt that the preponderant share of Assad's arsenal was eliminated.

Yet for that act of constructive statesmanship, the neocons and liberal interventionists never forgave Putin. Then and there he became Bad Vlad because his action on chemical weapons but the kibosh on Washington's excuse for regime change in Damascus.

In fact, the War Party interventionists of both stripes – neocons and R2P liberals – went on the all-out attack in September 2013, transforming Putin from the also mentioned adversary of the Obama-Romney debate one year earlier into a veritable demon . Hillary now even insisted his was a modern day Adolph Hitler.

As it happened, the duly elected President of Ukraine chose that same fall to pursue an economic bailout deal with Moscow to rescue his country's debt-laden, corruption ridden post-Soviet economy; and he did so in lieu of the far less attractive deal that had been offered by the west through the EC, IMF and Washington.

Not surprisingly, that wholly appropriate decision by the leader of a sovereign nation became exactly the opening for the Washington interventionists to strike hard at Putin and Russia.

We have detailed elsewhere how the so-called Maidan uprising on the streets of Kiev in February was funded, organized and enabled by Washington and its cadres of operators from the CIA, NED, State and sundry NGOs; and how that divided the country to the quick politically when Washington installed and recognized a radical nationalist government that immediately moved against the Russian speaking populations of the Donbas and Crimea.

Indeed, enabling the Kiev coup and instantly recognizing the crony capitalists, ruffians and neo-Nazi nationalists who formed the new government was the single stupidest act of peace candidate Barry's entire presidency.

But by then the interventionists were in high dudgeon. So there was no stopping their virtually instantaneous demonization of Russia and Putin for actions which were self-evidently driven by Russia's vital national interests in it own backyard – not some kind of aggressive quest for territory or lebensraum.

To wit, Putin did not "seize" Crimea like it was some country in the Benelux that he coveted. To the contrary, Crimea was virtually Russian to the core after it was purchased by Catherine the Great in 1783 and thereafter when Sevastopol become the homeport for the great black sea fleet of czars and commissars alike.

For crying out loud, Crimea was never part of Ukraine until Khrushchev had the Soviet Presidium transfer it in 1954 from the Russian Soviet Republic to the Ukrainian Soviet Republic as a gift to his Ukrainian compatriots who had stood with him the bloody struggle for Stalin's succession.

So Washington decided to declare economic war on Russia through Obama's idiotic sanctions in order to make sure that the dead hand of the Soviet Presidium's writ is enforced 64 years later.

Besides, Russia did conduct a referendum which was fair by all objective accounts; and under which 83% of the eligible voters elected to return to Mother Russia after what had been an historical short interlude of rule by the Ukrainian state. Among other things, the overwhelmingly Russian speaking population of Crimea as not enthusiastic about being culturally "cleansed" the Ukrainian nationalists who now ruled in Kiev.

Likewise with the Donbas and the other nearby Russian speaking provinces on the eastern border. Many of them had been put there generations earlier by Stalin to man what was the industrial maw – coal, iron, steel, chemicals and heavy engineering – of the Soviet Union.

And all of them knew of the terrors that had occurred during WWII when the Hitler's Wehrmacht marched through the Donbas and destroyed everything and everyone in sight on its way to the siege of Stalingrad, and how it had been accompanied by legions of Ukrainian collaborators during the terror.

They also knew that the region had eventually been liberated from the Nazi terror by the Red Army as it returned through the region on its way to Berlin.

Yet the interventionist fools in Washington ignored all of this and proclaimed Putin menace to peace and the rule of law because he came to the aid of the overwhelmingly Russian-speaking population, which did not want to be ruled by the Ukrainian nationalists who had illegally sized power in Kiev.

The obvious solution all along was partition – just like happened when Washington forced Serbia to give up Kosovo; or when the artificial country of Czechoslovakia, created by backroom intrigue at Versailles in 1919 peacefully decided to separate into two sovereign countries a few year back.

In short, there is no there, there. The Ukraine/Crimea "aggression" is nothing of the kind, and Putin was in Syria because he was invited to be there by its sovereign government.

In fact, the whole demonization campaign, the sweeping economic sanctions and NATO's provocative encroachments on Russia's borders in the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea are nothing more than retaliation for Putin's wise rescue of Barrack Obama from his own stupid red line.

But this isn't the end of the stupidity. In part 3 we will strip the bark off the Russian election meddling meme by laying out the simple fact that a country which is no threat to the security of the American homeland, but which has been viciously attacked by Washington, might will seek to make it's case for a different policy.

That is to say, none of this is about espionage or stealing military secrets. It actually boils down to the obvious fact that Donald Trump had an open mind about Russia and had not been party to Obama's cabal of neocon and R2P interventionists and their campaign of revenge against Vlad Putin.

That Putin preferred Trump was a no brainer and he admitted as such at the Helsinki Summit. But that Putin's preference for Trump had absolutely nothing to do with the outcome of the election is also patently obvious.

Nevertheless, the Deep State has cooked up a massive fiction that claims Moscow made every effort to do so.
We intend to tear that Big Lie limb-for-limb in Part 3, but suffice it here to consider the take below from CIA veteran Philip Giraldi . It does remind that Salem on the Potomac is actually happening in the here and now:

Beyond what is or is not contained in the document itself, there is a clear misunderstanding regarding how a sophisticated intelligence organization, which certainly includes the GRU, operates. If there had been a large-scale Kremlin sanctioned plan to disrupt the US election, it would not be run by twelve identifiable GRU officers working with what appears to be only limited cover and resources. If the facts are correct, the activity might have been a routine probing, collecting and selective dissemination of information effort that all intelligence agencies engage in. The United States does so routinely in many countries, interfering in elections worldwide, far more than Russia with its limited resources, and even carrying out regime change.

If the Kremlin's objective were truly to undermine American democracy, a task that is already being undertaken very ably by the GOP and Democrats, hundreds of officers would be involved, all working under deep cover and operating securely out of dispersed sites. And no one involved would be using computers connected to networks that could be penetrated to enable personal identification or discovery of the ultimate source of the activity. Everyone would be working in alias on stand-alone machines and the transmission of information would be done using cutouts to break any chain of custody. A cutout might consist of using thumb drives to transmit information from one computer to another, for example. There would be no sending or receiving of information by channels that could be identified by NSA or CIA and compromised.

So the idea that the United States government identified twelve culprits who were responsible for trying to overthrow American democracy is by any measure ludicrous, if indeed there was a major plan to disrupt the election at all. The indictment is little more than a political document seeking to undermine any effort by Donald Trump to establish rapprochement with Vladimir Putin. It will also serve to give fuel to the Democrats, who are still at a loss to understand what happened to Hillary Clinton, and Republican hawks like John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Jeff Flake and Ben Sasse who persist in seeking to refight the Cold War. As Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin said in their Helsinki press conference, the coming together of the leaders of the world's two most powerful nuclear armed countries is too important an opportunity to let pass. Cold Warriors in Washington should take note.

[Aug 18, 2018] In A Corporatist System Of Government, Corporate Censorship Is State Censorship -- Consortiumnews

Notable quotes:
"... Scott Horton Show ..."
"... This commentary was originally published on ..."
"... Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers ..."
Aug 18, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

In A Corporatist System Of Government, Corporate Censorship Is State Censorship August 10, 2018 • 92 Comments

In a corporatist system of government, wherein there is no meaningful separation between corporate power and state power, corporate censorship is state censorship, argues Caitlin Johnstone in this commentary.

By Caitlin Johnstone

Last year, representatives of Facebook, Twitter, and Google were instructed on the US Senate floor that it is their responsibility to "quell information rebellions" and adopt a "mission statement" expressing their commitment to "prevent the fomenting of discord."

" Civil wars don't start with gunshots, they start with words," the representatives were told. "America's war with itself has already begun. We all must act now on the social media battlefield to quell information rebellions that can quickly lead to violent confrontations and easily transform us into the Divided States of America."

Yes, this really happened.

Today Twitter has silenced three important anti-war voices on its platform: it has suspended Daniel McAdams, the executive director of the Ron Paul Institute, suspended Scott Horton of the Scott Horton Show , and completely removed the account of prominent Antiwar.com writer Peter Van Buren.

I'm about to talk about the censorship of Alex Jones and Infowars now, so let me get the "blah blah I don't like Alex Jones" thing out of the way so that my social media notifications aren't inundated with people saying "Caitlin didn't say the 'blah blah I don't like Alex Jones' thing!" I shouldn't have to, because this isn't actually about Alex Jones, but here it is:

I don't like Alex Jones. He's made millions saying the things disgruntled right-wingers want to hear instead of telling the truth; he throws in disinfo with his info, which is the same as lying all the time. He's made countless false predictions and his sudden sycophantic support for a US president has helped lull the populist right into complacency when they should be holding Trump to his non-interventionist campaign pledges, making him even more worthless than he was prior to 2016.

But this isn't about defending Alex Jones. He just happens to be the thinnest edge of the wedge.

Infowars has been censored from Facebook, Youtube (which is part of Google), Apple, Spotify, and now even Pinterest, all within hours of each other. This happens to have occurred at the same time Infowars was circulating a petition with tens of thousands of signatures calling on President Trump to pardon WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Julian Assange, who poses a much greater threat to establishment narratives than Alex Jones ever has. Assange's mother also reports that this mass removal of Infowars' audience occurred less than 48 hours after she was approached to do an interview by an Infowars producer.

In a corporatist system of government, wherein there is no meaningful separation between corporate power and state power, corporate censorship is state censorship. Because legalized bribery in the form of corporate lobbying and campaign donations has given wealthy Americans the ability to control the U.S. government's policy and behavior while ordinary Americans have no effective influence whatsoever, the U.S. unquestionably has a corporatist system of government. Large, influential corporations are inseparable from the state, so their use of censorship is inseparable from state censorship.

This is especially true of the vast mega-corporations of Silicon Valley, whose extensive ties to U.S. intelligence agencies are well-documented . Once you're assisting with the construction of the US military's drone program , receiving grants from the CIA and NSA for mass surveillance, or having your site's content regulated by NATO's propaganda arm , you don't get to pretend you're a private, independent corporation that is separate from government power. It is possible in the current system to have a normal business worth a few million dollars, but if you want to get to billions of dollars in wealth control in a system where money translates directly to political power, you need to work with existing power structures like the CIA and the Pentagon, or else they'll work with your competitors instead of you

Censorship Through Private Proxy

And yet every time I point to the dangers of a few Silicon Valley plutocrats controlling all new media political discourse with an iron fist, Democratic Party loyalists all turn into a bunch of hardline free market Ayn Rands. "It's not censorship!" they exclaim. "It's a private company and can do whatever it wants with its property!"

They do this because they know their mainstream, plutocrat-friendly "centrist" views will never be censored. Everyone else is on the chopping block, however. Leftist sites have already had their views slashed by a manipulation of Google's algorithms, and it won't be long before movements like BDS and Antifa and skeptics of the establishment Syria and Russia narratives can be made to face mass de-platforming on the same exact pretext as Infowars.

This is a setup. Hit the soft target so your oligarch-friendly censorship doesn't look like what it is, then once you've manufactured consent, go on to shut down the rest of dissenting media bit by bit.

Don't believe that's the plan? Let's ask sitting US Senator Chris Murphy: " Infowars is the tip of a giant iceberg of hate and lies that uses sites like Facebook and YouTube to tear our nation apart," Murphy tweeted in response to the news. "These companies must do more than take down one website. The survival of our democracy depends on it."

That sure sounds an awful lot like the warnings issued to the Silicon Valley representatives on the Senate floor at the beginning of this article, no? This is headed somewhere dark.

We're going to have to find a way to keep the oligarchs from having their cake and eating it too. Either (A) corporations are indeed private organizations separate from the government, in which case the people need to get money out of politics and government agencies out of Silicon Valley so they can start acting like it, and insist that their owners can't be dragged out on to the Senate floor and instructed on what they can and can't do with their business, or (B) these new media platforms get treated like the government agencies they function as, and the people get all the First Amendment protection that comes with it. Right now the social engineers are double-dipping in a way that will eventually give the alliance of corporate plutocrats and secretive government agencies the ability to fully control the public's access to ideas and information.

If they accomplish that, it's game over for humanity. Any hope of the public empowering itself over the will of a few sociopathic, ecocidal, omnicidal oligarchs will have been successfully quashed. We are playing for all the chips right now. We have to fight this. We have no choice.

This commentary was originally published on CaitlinJohnstone.com .

Caitlin Johnstone is a rogue journalist, poet, and utopia prepper who publishes regularly at Medium . Follow her work on Facebook , Twitter , or her website . She has a podcast and a new book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers . This article was re-published with permission.

gininitaly , August 14, 2018 at 6:59 am

https://www.corbettreport.com/episode-344-problem-reaction-solution-internet-censorship-edition/

Skip Scott , August 14, 2018 at 8:23 am

Cal-

Caitlin is still on medium.
https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/latest

glitch , August 14, 2018 at 10:17 pm

She also has her own website now https://caitlinjohnstone.com/

Herman , August 13, 2018 at 11:07 am

Ms. Johnstone is right. Government pressure on corporations works but the media in all its forms does a pretty good job of sowing discord without government interference. There are so few instances where the government and the major media are not in sync, they are hard to find. As to allowing the lonely voices of worthy organizations like Consortium News, why should they bother. Allowing them creates the pretense of free speech. If they become dangerous, the mood of our elected officials is to fix the problem as Ms. Johnstone rightly notes. The defense of freedom of speech by government and the major media is very selective, and the use of the calling fire in a loaded theatre standard is a big enough vehicle for suppression to drive a truck through, a whole convoy in fact.

As an aside, watching Sixty Minutes on their hit piece about Russian interference in our elections was an example of sloppy journalism that seems to be the norm. when it is about Russia. I was about to say they never used to be like that, but I think that is probably not true.

uncle bob , August 13, 2018 at 12:42 am

https://therealnews.com/series/max-blumenthal-on-the-silicon-valley-dc-internet-police

peon d. rich , August 12, 2018 at 6:19 pm

Bulls-eye!!!! especially on Democratic party loyalists who perform a much more important function for plutocracy than the Republicans and the Tea Party – to rally around fake progressive politics dripping out of the DNC, and effectively drain off the pressure building for true progressive politics.

cjonsson1 , August 12, 2018 at 1:50 pm

This is a good example of Caitlin explaining what is going on in the American media wars which is crucial for people to know.
Our access to information, other than government propaganda, is becoming very limited because the few major social network corporations are owned by a few wealthy individuals or private government contractors. They are monopolies which should be designated public utilities, and regulated as such, or broken up into smaller entities, allowing for competition.
It is important to preserve what is left of our freedom of expression and our free press. The ability to comment on reporting and discuss it with others is diminishing while sources are becoming more and more restricted.
Government and big business fight the public for control of information and opinion. We have to collectively save our stake in democracy by rejecting censorship.

Karl Pomeroy , August 11, 2018 at 8:55 pm

You make some very good points. Alas, I disagree about Alex Jones. The very few times I've listened to his videos, it seemed to me every last thing he said was absolutely true and correct. So I don't know where the idea comes from that he speaks disinformation. He's sometimes obnoxious and hard to watch. But that's a different thing. His words are accurate, particularly about the globalists, the deep state, US-Russia relations, and Trump.

Arby , August 11, 2018 at 12:01 pm

"It is possible in the current system to have a normal business worth a few million dollars, but if you want to get to billions of dollars in wealth control in a system where money translates directly to political power, you need to work with existing power structures like the CIA and the Pentagon, or else they'll work with your competitors instead of you."

Actually, If companies get big, they become potential big tools/weapons for the war-making State, at which point they will be offered a deal that they can't refuse, as one would expect within this gangster Corporatocracy. Look at Wikileaks. Mozilla simply jumped on the fake news bandwagon, so they are now safe, as Aaron Kesel at Activist Post points out. Lavabit's owner, Ladar Levinson had principles and was loyal to his customers (including Edward Snowden) whom he didn't want to betray just because the Corporatocracy State demanded it, and so he shut down. He revived his company once he figured out ways to shield his customers from the war-making State that attacks us all in the name of 'national security'.

So, it's a little more dire than the government just deciding to favor your competitors, which of course the amazing Caitlin knows.

With all of this capture by tech giants, innovators, by the war-making State (Randolph Bourne), How will end? I have more than one answer to that. One of those answers is the obvious one: Ramped up counterrevolution, in the area of cyberspace mainly, in the State's war against the people. And such a war is underway as any number of authors have demonstrated thoroughly. And its not (just) Russia attacking the people. Jeff Halper wrote "War Against The People." Nick Buxton and Ben Hayes edited "The Secure And The Dispossessed." Douglas Valentine wrote "The Phoenix Program," which he notes wasn't confined to Vietnam. Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman wrote the devastating two-volume "Political Economy Of Human Rights," which included "The Washington Connection And Third World Fascism." And Edward Herman wrote: "The Real Terror Network." All of those books and many others talk about counterrevolution and the counterinsurgency (State terrorism) that goes with it.

And counterrevolution and counterinsurgency doesn't have to be of the extreme variety, such as in South Vietnam when the US was torturing that country to death. Caitlin has talked about how the State (New Zealand) went to work on her friend, Suzie Dawson. Read the account. It's quite illuminating.

What do you call 'thinking' that is against 'thinking' (and what we consider to be a part of innovation that leads to inventions that elevate society? It's called counterrevolution. That's where our corrupt tech giants have gone. It won't end well for them, even if they think otherwise and even if they feel safe because they are with the big guy. There's a bigger guy who has that big guy in his sights.

"Thinking About Thinking" – https://arrby.wordpress.com/2018/04/13/thinking-about-thinking/

"41 Tags, 17 Entries And No Views. Bookmark Me Maybe?" – https://arrby.wordpress.com/2018/08/11/41-tags-17-entries-and-no-views-bookmark-me-maybe/

vinnieoh , August 11, 2018 at 10:14 am

"We Do What We're Told" – Peter Gabriel; "So"

Somehow I had missed those words from our elected "representatives" in Congressional hearing. What these political pimps and whores don't want us to do is get together and agree to dispel the bullshit that we're up to our necks in right now.

As far as I know this is the first piece I've read by Caitlin Johnstone, and I agree with her general premise that this is more than just ominous. More and more of our elected "representatives" talk and act like alien totalitarians.

The good news is that Trump's "trade" and saber-rattling belligerence is finally awakening the rest of humanity to the fundamental non-starter of a unipolar anything. That one entity so militarily, politically, and economically dominant that it can cause pain and suffering wherever and whenever it decides. It is ironic that Trump's MAGA is the act in this play that will dethrone the USA. The downside is that the 99% control NOTHING (this is true across most of the planet.) Another downside is that the megalomaniacs in power will not concede power without a cataclysmic conflict. But nothing is set in stone, though the indications don't look promising.

Jerry Alatalo , August 11, 2018 at 8:57 am

"If all mankind minus one were of one opinion and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."

"But the peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth; if wrong, they lose what is always a great benefit – the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error."

– JOHN STUART MILL (1806-1873) English political economist, philosopher

Realist , August 11, 2018 at 3:12 am

Something must be getting into the water supply either by accident or design to induce the mass hypnosis that has so many presumably intelligent people believing that we must all walk in lockstep on every policy the elites want. Maybe we are all zombified from the massive amounts of Xanax, Valium, Oxycontin and other mind-numbing psychoactive agents our population consumes and pisses, unmetabolized, into the water table to be recycled into our drinking water, obviating the need for a personal prescription to enjoy (suffer) the effects.

It's a real pity if the totally transparent sham scare stories they have disseminated are alone enough to convince most of the people to give up their constitutional rights and privacy. Clearly the tactic of the big lie doesn't work on every last individual or sites like this one would not have an audience. That is why they want to shut us down, and Alex Jones, though not a member of this journal club, is just the first step towards an outcome that will encompass everyone remaining outside an all pervasive Groupthink.

Ideas, beliefs, memes, values, customs, habits and such are not received universally from some inspirational force on high. (You are simply told to believe that from earliest childhood.) They are spread through the population like a virus from mind-to-mind contact, whether in person or via some modality of mass communication, like the TV or the internet. The object of censorship, as per Alex Jones or Ron Paul most recently, is to extirpate the source of "infection" as close to its point of origin as possible, before it can be spread to too many carriers for transmission to others. People tend to believe what they hear and what they hear comes from their regular contacts. Shut down their favorite talk show host or internet site and they become starved for new "seditious" ideas. If they never hear a truth, chances are they won't think it up themselves and certainly not act upon it.

Another thing I am pretty sure of: if their attempts at propaganda, psy-ops and mind control do not work to their satisfaction, unadorned thuggery will become the new standard. I know, I know, some of our number already get a taste of that.

Dave P. , August 11, 2018 at 5:46 pm

Realist –

"Another thing I am pretty sure of: if their attempts at propaganda, psy-ops and mind control do not work to their satisfaction, unadorned thuggery will become the new standard . . . "

You have it absolutely right. There have been markers all along since G.W. Bush/Cheney rule, clear indicators of this new Future.

But some of us are so desperate to have a better and peaceful future for the humanity on this planet that we get our hopes high for any silver lining in the sky – Obama's hope and change, now Trump's getting along with Russia and stopping interventions abroad.

Now it seems like there is this new hoax the Democrats are going to perpetrate, candidates with some type of socialist orientation, like Bernie Sanders supposedly has been or is. The politicians in both parties are accomplished ConMen, in service of the real Masters – MIC, Wall Street Finance, Media and Entertainment, working to bring this new Future. Bernie Sanders is no different.

Skip Scott , August 12, 2018 at 7:08 am

"Now it seems like there is this new hoax the Democrats are going to perpetrate, candidates with some type of socialist orientation, like Bernie Sanders supposedly has been or is. "

I have noticed this ploy as well. They are willing to have a few faux progressives to keep the progressive wing of the party from abandoning them altogether. They use Sanders, and now this new Ocasio-Cortez, to sell their "big tent" narrative, and then co-op them when it comes to all the important issues. They also constantly sell the idea that voting for third party candidates is a waste of time, so you have to settle for "the lesser of evils" when it comes time for a new president. I don't know how long they can keep playing the same con-game before people see through it, but if it happens again in 2020, I think we are doomed.

Realist , August 12, 2018 at 10:01 am

The Democratic incumbent running for the senate in Florida (Bill Nelson) has made me so angry by yet again using the party con against Russia that I could never vote for him even though his opponent is the horrendous Governor Rick Scott (who plead guilty to defrauding Medicare to the tune of a billion dollars for his Columbia HMO system prior to his election). I cannot abide such theft of taxpayer money in broad daylight, but I also cannot accept Nelson's spewing lies that Russia has actively hacked the Florida voter roles, plans to delete registrations and disrupt the November elections. You know who's really more likely to do those things? The Democratic and Republican parties.

Nelson is just making pre-emptive excuses for the loss that he sees coming. If he believes his desperate gambit can work, he must think the voters are damned idiots to believe that Russia would persist in perpetrating sabotage against American interests putting them constantly in the crosshairs of our politicians and media. He must think that Floridians will buy any tall tale that their elected officials tell them, totally unsupported by any evidence. We are to believe that Assad never stops trying to poison his own people and that Putin never stops interfering in American elections. (Why should Putin favor Rick Scott? Because he admires American crooks?) If you truly believe such accusations, it is probably logical that you would favor WAR with that country. I will vote for someone from the Baader-Meinhof gang or the Taliban Party (if there is such a beast) before either Nelson or Scott. Or I won't vote at all.

Jessika , August 10, 2018 at 6:23 pm

Zero Hedge tonight has an interesting article by Charles Hugh Smith, "The Grand Irony of Russiagate: US Becomes More Like USSR Every Day". The clampdown in the old Soviet Union before its collapse has parallels to what's going on in US now.

Jeff Harrison , August 10, 2018 at 5:12 pm

From Wikipedia. Fascism:
Fascism (/?fæ??z?m/) is a form of radical authoritarian ultranationalism,[1][2] characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy.

The Cheetos-in-chief would love to wield dictatorial power and has tried to do so in the past as have his predecessors (Obama, yeah, well, we had to torture some folks::Shrub you're with us or against us.). Senator Chris Murphy essentially telling these companies who to kick off their platforms, the regimentation of society and the economy is continuing apace as companies are forced to comply with government demands that the government should never be able to make but they do for "national security reasons"

Pfui. As I've said before the US has become a fascistic police state.

MBeaver , August 11, 2018 at 10:50 pm

Many other western countries, too. The only thing missing to "fit" fascism is the nationalism. They completely gave up their national identity for neoliberal agendas. I wont look for a new term, because its as close to fascism as anything else, especially since the definition of leftism and socialism has changed a lot since fascism was invented (by a socialist), so why shouldnt the definition of fascism a tiny bit?
But it exposes people who always cry "its not fascism" because nationalism is missing, as accomplices at the very least.

Also, as an objective person, you should at least admit, that "cheeto-in-chief" is actually trying hard to keep the promises he made. I havent seen that in a western leader in a very VERY long time. Its just very obvious that the president isnt almighty and the deep state is very powerful. Thanks to Trump its become evident to even fools, that the USA is much more corrupt than even any conspiracy theorist would have thought just a few years ago.

jaycee , August 10, 2018 at 4:27 pm

The idea that discordant speech is somehow a threat to the nation or democracy is so looney and bereft of fact that it is actually painful to contemplate how many otherwise intelligent persons seem to have internalized the notion. Obviously, Trump's election victory severely damaged the Establishment's confidence in the ability to "manufacture consent" to the degree that fundamental concepts of free speech are now in the cross-hairs. They will destroy the Republic in order to save it.

Gary Weglarz , August 10, 2018 at 3:58 pm

When the corporate state speaks of "hate speech" and "community standards" – one can be sure they are not referring to Madeline Albright's stunning defense for killing of a half a million Iraqi children with sanctions as "worth it." Nor would the corporate state ever categorize as "hate speech" the daily attack by a wide variety of U.S. officials and media pundits, not only on the Russian government, but on the very – "character" – of the Russian people as a whole.

Our actual and very real – "community standards" – in the U.S. include the complete normalization of illegal immoral endless aggressive war-making in violation of international law (not to mention regime change by jihadists, drone murders, economic warfare, political assassinations, etc.) – along with the despicable demonization of official enemies – in other words the total "normalization of hate-speech."

"Violations" of these widely held U.S. "community standards" & "hate-speech standards" involves plain and simply any – "challenge" – to them or deviation from them. In other words to speak words not sufficiently 'anti-Russian' today is considered a form of "hate speech" in MSM and in political discourse. To suggest peace rather than war with Russia might be a good idea is to violate precious "community standards" which today tolerate only mindless fact-free warmongering in public discourse. You really can't make this stuff up!

Dave P. , August 10, 2018 at 5:48 pm

Excellent comments. So true.

We are heading towards some sort of dark ages, and at very fast pace.

Maxwell Quest , August 10, 2018 at 10:00 pm

Gary, pointing out the shameless and bald-faced hypocrisy as you did can sometimes shake the stupefaction from an open-minded reader. Sadly, though, arguments such as these just seem to bounce off the Russiagaters, having no effect. Conversely, these very same people couldn't lavish enough praise on the peace prize winner Obama, whether he was bailing out the corrupt banks, letting the lobbyists craft Obamacare, trafficking arms through Benghazi, or droning some wedding party in the desert.

What do both of these examples have in common? Easy, the state media was able to control the narrative in each case, and these same hypnotized drones ate it up hook, line and sinker. This brings us right back to why internet-based censorship is the hot topic of the day, since it is the single most threat to complete state control over the public mind.

Dave P. , August 10, 2018 at 11:09 pm

Well said. Obama is not gone yet. He is still out there selling his philosophy of promoting the Wall street and corrupt banks, and droning and killing the weak and innocents all over the world , for the right cause so to speak – spreading freedom and democracy. And liberals buy it. What a World we live in!

He, along with Clintons, is the main instigator of "Russia Gate", which may lead the human life to extinction on Earth.

Realist , August 11, 2018 at 2:24 am

Dave

Yes, anything is permitted (by Washington) as long as it is in the name of "freedom and democracy." So say the leaders of our exceptional country.

Realist , August 11, 2018 at 2:22 am

Damn straight, Maxwell.

Mildly Facetious , August 11, 2018 at 4:16 pm

Yes, anything is permitted (by Washington) as long as it is in the name of "freedom and democracy." So say the leaders of our exceptional country.
??????????????????????????

They do this because they know their mainstream, plutocrat-friendly "centrist" views will never be censored.

Everyone else is on the chopping block, however.

Leftist sites have already had their views slashed by a manipulation of Google's algorithms, and it won't be long before movements like BDS and Antifa and skeptics of the establishment Syria and Russia narratives can be made to face mass de-platforming on the same exact pretext as Infowars.

-- - compare that, if you've a clue, (not to obfuscate your subject), Caitlan Johnstone, with, not mere censorship, but the Protection of 'Confidential' information such as the Industrial Pharma INDUSTRY OF DEATH (shades -of -nazi-germany??? )via INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION and PRESCRIBING OF OPIOIDS as if Huxley's "Soma" or/and a preview of " The Chemical and Bacteriological Conditioning of the Embryo. – Practical Instructions for Beta Embryro-Store Workers /// as in government forced vaccinations along with Facebook enforced capitulation of any/all -- Personal Sovereign Belief/s massively defaulting and bowing the knee and Becoming Persuaded and Trapped into inescapable Autocracy, by reason of Darwin-esk dissembling and a dis-informed election to Dissent Into The Maelstrom of the sinking ship of American Exceptionalism, -- as if God could/would "forgive" all-of-the-collective Brutality of Bombs, bullets, Uranium Munitions / CRIPPLING Sanctions imposted -- support of brutal dictators Who massacred INNOCENT Civilians in order to obtain/secure US MILITARY FUNDS, in order to secure autocratic/authoritative CONTROL

We are engulfed in a Molding Faze of acceptance of/into a totally new Reality strangely built upon Nazi science/experiments, now Entering an/the Age of Space-Age manipulation of DNA, Gene Manipulation -- origins of species ordered inside test tubes.

George Gilder prophetically saw this in this and more in his prescient 1990's book, MICROCOSM. --
George Gilder and his Discovery Institute were far Ahead – of -the -curve in this 'Facebook" era of Futurisms .

Please find and consider his book, esp as it relates to technological possibilities and the New Wonders (Brave New Worlds) of Gene splicing / manipulation .

[Aug 18, 2018] The funny thing is people still believe Putin wanted Trump, believing a poor translation

Aug 18, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

TS , August 15, 2018 at 7:17 am

> Do you also dismiss the global pattern of Russian interference on democratic elections by the same means and methods?

Yup! Since nobody has presented the slightest evidence of such a pattern (and even the German intelligence agencies have said it didn't happen )

> Didn't Putin say publicly that his country acted to assist Donald Trump?

Nope!

> Are the CEO's of FACEBOOK and Google and Twitter also spouting lie about Russian media interference in our elections's

As far as I know, they have been avoiding doing so (presumably because they know such lies would be exposed immediately).

> When the details come out about how Russia has funneled money throu the NRA, will you dismiss that as well?

The NRA is funded by Moscow gold! I like it that makes all its right-wing supporters in Congress agents of Moscow, right? Please launch a campaign to have them all impeached. (I won't hold my breath waiting, though.)

> Is Florida election systems not really under Russian military attack as I write this?

Well, no, it is not. And why should the Russians want to, in the first place? The existing office-holders do more harm than anything they could possibly arrange

jeff montanye , August 17, 2018 at 7:56 am

his name is seth rich. the dnc gave him a memorial bike rack.

Skip Scott , August 14, 2018 at 3:27 pm

Do you dismiss the global pattern of CIA interference in elections all around the world for decades, including Russia in 1996? Look at the amount and quality of this so-called interference by Russian citizens. It is miniscule. Facebook , google, and twitter know they have to play ball with our so-called "Intelligence Community" and Congress or else. Please provide a source for Putin saying publicly he helped Trump. I found nothing on a browser search.

You are drinking MSM Kool-aid by the bucketload. Try reading through the archives here for an education.

Rob , August 14, 2018 at 4:19 pm

I believe that Putin said that he hoped for Trump to win, not that he ordered Russian operatives to interfere in the U.S. election process. There is a big difference. If I am wrong about this, I would love to see the evidence.

Curious , August 15, 2018 at 1:40 am

Rob, there's is a lot of confusion about what Putin really said, and most of it is wrong. Again, the 'lost in translation' issues. Here is what was said by Putin, quoted in CGI and elsewhere:

CGI quote: What Putin actually called Trump in Russian is "ochen' yarkiy chelovek," which literally translates to "a very bright person." Unlike the English word "bright," the Russian yarkiy does not connote intelligence; rather, it means someone who is colorful, flashy, showy, an individual who makes himself stand out from the crowd.

The more colloquial translation is "a colorful character," a phrase that in the Russian carries a note of bemusement. Putin added that Trump is also "talented (talantlivyi), without a doubt." He then went on to say that "regarding [U.S.] internal politics and the turns of phrase [Trump] employs to boost his popularity, I repeat that it is not our business to assess that aspect of his performance." Taken as a whole, the statement suggests that Putin recognizes the theatrical component of Trump's campaign, and chose not to comment on the contentious impact that Trump and his statements have had on American politics.

Putin himself later explained this to the journalists at one of his end of the year Q&As he has.

Trump, naturally, heard a bad translation and this appealed to his self-aggrandizement. He gave the thumbs up thinking Putin was congratulating, and backing him. Unsurprisingly, people still misunderstand Putins' statement.

Translation issues often occur and I remember when Jimmy Carter went to Poland for his first trip abroad to Poland, and the translator said President Carter had a great "lust" for the people of Poland, whereas the word "lust", as in German, means "desire, fondness and affection" and not some sexual connotation at all in a formal context.. The funny thing is people still believe Putin wanted Trump, believing a poor translation. Foreign languages really should be taught in schools again.

rosemerry , August 14, 2018 at 4:21 pm

Didn't Putin say publicly that his country acted to assist Donald Trump? NO, he did not. The questioner joined several questions together. Putin agreed that he wanted a person to win who would try to mend relations with Russia. He said he did nothing to help the process.

You really believe the billionaire CEOs of those controlling businesses???

As for Florida- remember the 2000 election.

Paul P , August 14, 2018 at 4:35 pm

These are all quite easily addressed point by point. As the saying goes, that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Where is this established pattern of interfering with the "same means and methods"? If the claim is essentially, "Russia obtained evidence of corruption in an unfavorable party and disseminated this evidence to swing a democratic foreign election against said party" please cite an example of another election where this can be proven as something that happened. It hasn't.

Did Putin publicly admit that Russia acted to help Donald Trump? The answer to that is no. You are likely misinterpreting or misrepresenting an interview in which Putin stated Trump's more conciliatory campaign rhetoric (vs Clinton's open hostility) seemed preferable. This is as far as the "admission" went and is miles from your assertion/interpretation.

FB and Twitter's definition of Russia-linked activity is purposefully misleading. For activity to be considered Russia-linked, only ONE (not all) of the following conditions must apply. 1. The account is set up from Russian IP. 2. The account is confirmed using number with a Russian phone carrier. 3. Any services purchased are paid for in Russian currency. 4. The user has ever logged in via a Russian network, even once. 5. The user posts primarily in Russian. 6. User has a screen name spelled in the Cyrillic alphabet.
None of these things can even guarantee that a user is even Russian national, much less acting at the behest of the Russian government. If you used the wifi at Sheremtyevo during a layover between Amsterdam and Beijing and used Twitter, they'd call that Russia-linked activity.

According to Bloomberg, "Russia funneling money through the NRA" amounts to a meager $2512 donated by 23 people with Russian addresses in 2015-2018 (laughably paltry for an organization with over $433,000,000 in annual revenue), the majority is in the form of membership dues and less than half in the form of individual donations. This is hardly indicative of some giant secret funding operation, especially as there is no proof the Russian government has anything to do with this. There are an estimated 300,000 American citizens at least temporarily residing in Russia, but it's inconceivable that among them might be 23 NRA members/donors?

As for Florida, to date there's been no evidence presented. If there's no evidence, then anyone believing this only does so because they want to.

keir , August 14, 2018 at 4:39 pm

I can only assume that:
"Are the CEO's of FACEBOOK Google and Twitter also spouting lie about Russian media intereference in our elections's"
-was meant to be ironic?
If not, then what do you think these unregulated public forums and their selective censoring are really for?
An exercise in freedom of speech?
(clearly not all speech)
They are literally designed to sway public opinion (at best) and circulate the lies that corporate media is spouting.

Russian Meddling?
Why this so funny to the majority of the rest of the world is because historically America not only meddles in elections, but illegally invades and overthrows democratically elected governments and installs dictatorships (think Iran, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Ukraine and the Honduras)
The real irony is that in the 1996 Russian election under Clinton the US made sure it was their man Yeltsin that got elected.
It is psychologically easy to attach to the hysteria of Russian fear mongering, because of the history of propaganda.
"Fear Communism!"
"They are infiltrating America through worker's unions!!"
Only now they are crony capitalists just like us.

Karelian , August 14, 2018 at 5:02 pm

Bream Lynch,

No, he didn't say that. And if some media claims so, then please avoid that media in the future, as it lies to you. He answered the first part of a two-piece question. He said that he hoped Trump to win, not that he ordered people to assist Trump.

And there is no "global pattern" of Russian interference. You may remember how NSA said they watched the Russians hack Macron's email? But do you remember how soon after that France said there were no "Russian hacking" of any sort. You might also remember how the media in Germany (and in US) told that Russia was ready to hack the German elections? Do you remember how after the elections German intelligence agency said that they didn't find any Russian activities at all?

The France case:
https://apnews.com/fc570e4b400f4c7db3b0d739e9dc5d4d

And how the "trusted" NSA claimed to "saw everything":
https://www.wired.com/2017/05/nsa-director-confirms-russia-hacked-french-election-infrastructure/

The German case (you might want to use google translator):
https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/geheimdienste-bnd-keine-beweise-fuer-desinformations-kampagne-putins-1.3365839

P.S. Sorry about my English. This is not my native language :)

backwardsevolution , August 15, 2018 at 5:12 am

Karelian -- excellent English. Good job.

GM , August 14, 2018 at 5:23 pm

"Didn't Putin say publicly that his country acted to assist Donald Trump?"
No, he did not, though media pundits pretended he did for a few days and then dropped it.

Gregory Herr , August 14, 2018 at 6:32 pm

When the details come out? That's the problem -- relentless accusations for 20 months with no evidence and little detail except absurd notions about the (non) effect of click-bait ads on social media that have nothing to do with Russian government activity. What is equally absurd is the idea that the Russian Federation gives a rat's petunia about who wins a contest between Bill Nelson or Rick Scott, two all-too-similar politicians in the American mold. And of course the Russian government has an idea of how to purge just the right voters to achieve a preference! What nonsense!

With all the "information" and "disinformation" coming from a myriad of quarters trying to sell one candidate over another during our protracted election seasons, people need to get a grip about terms such as "influence" and "interference" and perhaps arrive at the perspective that amidst all the chatter and influence-peddling lies the responsibility for individual voters to separate wheat from chaff and come to a personal voting decision.

CNN and MSNBC backed Clinton to the hilt so in my disagreement should I cry "untoward influence!"? well, that's touching on another subject and I'll leave it at that.

Jean , August 14, 2018 at 10:46 pm

The fact Putin would want Trump as opposed to the war criminal Hillary who threatened war with Russia and destabilize the Middle East in a proxy war is just sanity.

Why would you believe the very same people who lied us into Iraq and worse ?

Literally

willow , August 14, 2018 at 10:54 pm

Obama traveled to the UK to urge voters to vote against Brexit. The Saudi's funded 20 percent of Hillary's campaign. yada-yada-yada

Gregory Herr , August 14, 2018 at 11:25 pm

And Obama went to France to cheerlead for Macron the week of the election. But that's exceptional -- no indispensable -- advice.

AnthraxSleuth , August 15, 2018 at 1:08 am

Obama wiretapped Merkel's phone!

People should really think hard about that when tossing around these horse chit lies about Russia hacking the DNC.

alley cat , August 14, 2018 at 11:54 am

Looking over the comments on Lawrence's post, I wonder if we're losing sight of the bigger picture here. Exposing the truth about a presidential candidate, whoever did it (and all the credible evidence to date points toward Seth Rich) isn't meddling, it's a public service. The DNC leak didn't threaten democracy, it promoted it by providing crucial information to the U.S. electorate. Those who claim that revealing the truth about a political candidate is a crime are the ones who constitute the real threat to democracy.

Smears, hoaxes, fabrications, and psyops are standard operating procedure for U.S. intelligence agencies. You would have to be simple to believe that these agencies would hesitate to use these same tactics against the American public when it furthers their political agenda. Just like you would have to be simple to believe that the officials running these agencies don't have a political agenda.

Russia is an obstacle to U.S. global hegemony? Blow it up, after first subverting their economy with groundless sanctions and whipping the American public into a hysterical war frenzy. That's the grand strategy behind the Russiagate hoax, the Skripal hoax, the Douma hoax, and whatever hoax they dream up next.

If President Trump is foolish enough to get in the way, he's expendable, and he knows it now if he didn't before.

Skip Scott , August 15, 2018 at 8:22 am

alley cat-

I've thought the same myself. Even if it was the evil Vlad himself who snuck into the DNC, stole the files and personally handed them to Assange, how is bringing the truth about the collusion between team Hillary and the DNC to sabotage the Sanders' campaign an "attack" on our democracy? Actually it would be a service to our democracy, and an "attack" on an evil oligarchy that was trying to subvert our democracy.

This whole "evil Ruskies" thing is just ridiculous. Our democracy has been utterly corrupted from within, and providing the truth to the voting public can never be considered an "attack", no matter the source.

Al Pinto , August 14, 2018 at 11:49 am

Quote from the article:

"The intrusion into the Democratic National Committee mail was a local download -- wherever 'local' is."

"wherever" is a wide definition. While I certainly agree that 22.6MB/s, or ~180Mb/s, does seem a lot like USB 3.0 write speed, one cannot neglect the possibility of over the network transferring the same data with the same speed.

The DNC server certainly had the bandwidth available for this transfer rate, most hosting service providers do allow ramping up the transfer rate up to 1Gb/s. Verizon and other ISPs in the New York Metropolitan area had been providing fiber connection for businesses and home users for years, with transfer rates of up to 1Gb/s. For home users the most popular speed had been 200Mb/s for years.

Please keep in mind that 8 bits = 1 Byte Notice the capitalization of the letter "B"

The 200Mb/s speed has a maximum transfer rate of 25MB/s. Knowing that the network protocol overhead uses up about 10% of the nominal speed, then the 22.6MB/s transfer rate is easily achievable remotely. And yes, "wherever that local is".

Theoretically The Russians could have hacked a PC/server, with high speed Internet access within the New York Metropolitan, hacked the DNC server from the "Zombie" system, download the archived files to the "Zombie" system and download to possibly couple of other "Zombie" systems, prior to reaching the destination in Russia. At least that's how I would have done it

Even doing so, there should have been traces of these connections in the NSA data warehouse in UTAH, possibly even capturing the transfered archived file. It would not surprise me a bit, if that's the case. The fact in itself, that there has been no such verification/capture for this connection seems to indicate that the data transfer has taken place directly on the server, via the USB port. Unless of course the NSA does not want to disclose network traces of the connection, since it might implicate a friendly country, maybe the most friendly country for the US, that would also exonerate Russia.

As for the dates of the file It seems that these files had been generated just prior to downloading the .7z archived files. The default behavior for .7z is to preserve both the folder and file creation dates, while recording the current time for the archive folder in itself. Of course, this can be changed, both during and/or after archiving

JoeD , August 14, 2018 at 12:40 pm

Ok you're a troll right? Verizon has most certainly not provided fiber connections for home users in the New York Metropolitan area. They stopped their fiber roll out A LONG TIME AGO. So no, the infrastructure does not exist.

No you don't know much about network speeds if you believe that you can have those sustained speeds all the way through the connections. If you have ever done internet speed tests you will know that your speed depends a lot on the different nodes you pass through.

"You'd need a dedicated, leased, 400 -- megabit line all the way to Russia to achieve that result," Binney said in a recent interview. "

If you can shoe me that and you have something, otherwise, you're trolling.

Al Pinto , August 14, 2018 at 3:26 pm

If anyone, you don't know much about network speeds and Verizon

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

https://www.verizon.com/home/fios-fastest-internet/

For businesses, that had been mentioned, Verizon started the fiber rollout even earlier

Show me where my numbers are incorrect?

Johnmichael2 , August 14, 2018 at 4:23 pm

trollling ? I don't think you understand internet data rates nor the capabilities of hackers .. he's talking about remote control of a PC local to the DNC server with good access not a direct high speed route out of the country.
Come on folks, the great US of A has been influencing electoral politics of other nations for years by many methods. Russians are not dumb some of the best virus detection and protection comes out of Kaspersky Labs. Look up the work of Russian and eastern country information science experts; the Chinese, Israelis and Indian practitioners are no dummies either.
Open your eyes Russian and other hacking is real and 'turn about is fair play' . we ain't the rulers of the world anymore in case you didn't notice.

Rob , August 14, 2018 at 4:28 pm

This comments section is a place where people are allowed to spout their own ideas and theories, but still, I am amused by commenters who presume to have knowledge about communications technology that is somehow unknown to the likes of William Binney and other genuine experts in the field. I know that this may sound like ad hominem thinking on my part, but some of the opinions regarding technology are so simplistic that they make me laugh.

willow , August 14, 2018 at 11:04 pm

It's all good because it leads to deeper understanding of subject and makes us better able to finesse/counter/debate disinformation on forums like the Washington Post or the NYT, where
opposing views are scant and we need to push back.

michael , August 15, 2018 at 6:59 am

If the evidence existed, it would have been released in redacted form by the NSA over a year ago (although by now you would think they would have fabricated something).

Diane Rejman , August 14, 2018 at 10:50 am

I believe much of this whole "Russiagate" thing started as a disgusting and pathetic attempt to give Hillary an excuse for losing, and is now out of control, with tentacles reaching throughout our country and the world. The DNC has admitted to being cheaters. THAT should be the bigger investigation. Our right to vote should be sacred, but the DNC took all legitimacy away from it. If they thought their "chosen one" couldn't win the primary without cheating and other assistance, why would they think she could win the main election? She was a horribly bad candidate, and they won't admit this. So instead -- they came up with this whole, "My dog ate my homework" type theory. And yes -- it is very scary to think this whole Russiagate conspiracy theory has gotten out of hand, and is now too big to fail. What a ridiculous reason to create trouble with Russia!

rosemerry , August 14, 2018 at 4:25 pm

I remember Obama in his "lame-duck" period expelling Russian diplomats, stealing their US properties, starting the whole landslide of Russia-hatred when he had spent 8 years helping to reduce the seats of the Democratic Party at all levels of government by his actions. Check out the figures- Democrats lost because of their own faults.

Elizabeth Burton , August 14, 2018 at 6:12 pm

The original intent, based on the rhetoric that followed right after the Russiagate narrative was first launched, seem to have been to have the election declared invalid so they could either do it over or have HRC declared the real winner by fiat. Apparently, at some point wiser heads pointed out that wasn't Constitutionally viable, so the story was toned down to its current level then repeated over and over, per Goebbels' Law, to ensure the bulk of the public accepted it as proven fact.

AnthraxSleuth , August 15, 2018 at 1:22 am

don't kid yourself.
They still have the fantasy of installing their queen.
Lawrence Lessig, the Roy L. Furman professor of law and leadership at Harvard Law School.
Postulates the fantasy that Democrats win the house in 2018.
A NY congressman/woman takes the dive and resigns so Hillary can be appointed to the seat by NY governor.
And, she is then elected Speaker of the house putting her in #3 for the presidency.
Then Pence resigns a- la Spirow Agnew.
And, Trump is impeached and removed by the Senate.
Voila Herself is president.

These F'n people have lost all grip on reality.
The only people buying the Russia Russia Russia hysteria is the same people pushing it.
They are delusional.
Completely unhinged and delusional.

Stephen P , August 14, 2018 at 10:22 am

Suzie Dawson and Chris Hedges discuss elite power five weeks ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zzcDELakRM

Jim other , August 14, 2018 at 1:07 pm

Thank you for this video!

jean , August 14, 2018 at 3:18 pm

Thank you, Stephen P!
I'll tweet it, to remind people of what Assange has done.

Peter Bowen , August 14, 2018 at 10:08 am

Your excellent discussion is only lacking the role of British intelligence. See "The fish stinks from the head down" by Barbara Boyd at LaRouchePAC.com.

anastasia , August 14, 2018 at 9:49 am

Guccifer is a manipulator and a fabricator, and time and location cannot be determined? Yet, Guccifer leaves fingerprints of the Russians, in Cyrillic letters. If Guccifer is a manipulator and a fabricator, deliberately leaving fingerprints of the Russians, one need only ask, who in the world would want to pin the blame on the Russians for election interference in the US, and for what reason would they want to do such a thing. When that question is answered, you narrow down who is behind it all.

xeno , August 14, 2018 at 9:47 am

The American public has been living in a cloud of mis- and dis- information for decades. This isn't new.

Since Trump came on the political scene a couple years ago and scared the big money and big power "elite", it has become more obvious and extreme.

Christian Chuba , August 14, 2018 at 8:10 am

If the hack narrative is ever refuted, the IC community will just fallback to 'Russians are still attacking our democracy with facebook posts', aren't we the fragile, hot house plants. Still I would love to see the truth come out someday, whatever that may be.

This other article makes a convincing case that the first set of Russians indicted by Mueller were just commercial scammers, not spy masters from the Kremlin http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/02/mueller-indictement-the-russian-influence-is-a-commercial-marketing-scheme.html
I hate that he is an anonymous blogger who calls himself 'Moon of Alabama' but dang, he just writes so well.

The last set of accusations centers around hacking voter registration servers which is reported as 'Russians hacking state elections'.
I've wondered if this is just another commercial enterprise where hackers are just doing routine identity theft, not nice, but not a state enterprise.

I remember Putin wanting to have a treaty with the U.S. to clamp down on all international hacking but that would require reciprocity and this would prevent our infiltration of their systems. This never gets any mention in our MSM.

Chucky LeRoi , August 14, 2018 at 4:19 pm

Just a very small point Christian. The blogger at MOA is hardly anonymous. Click the "about this blog" link on the site. I even have his home address for donations

F. G. Sanford , August 14, 2018 at 7:58 am

Observations I have shared here in the past have had little impact on the grand scheme of things, so it is with little hope that I comment today. Arguments become complex and tortured, esoteric even to the point of grasping at philosophical abstractions which, in the end, bear no resemblance to the actual events.

We are asked to believe that Russian "insiders" fed information damaging to Candidate Trump to Fusion GPS and Christopher Steele, who then concocted the "dossier". This would serve to subvert his electability, and failing that, would provide an "insurance policy" to insure that his Presidency would be nonviable. In the same breath, we are asked to believe that those same Russians who sabotaged Mr. Trump's credibility -- wait for it -- manipulated the election to insure that his opponent would lose. Either strategy would result in an outcome unfavorable to Russia. Either Pence would assume leadership after an engineered coup, or Clinton would have won. Neither outcome benefits the Russians. YOU SIMPLY CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. All of this ignores what I and others observed long before the election: Hillary Clinton was the most repugnant candidate the DNC could possibly have chosen. Gotta give it to COL Lawrence Wilkerson, who stated frankly: "I just don't think she's electable".

Without all the ontological baggage, "Fideism" simply refers to articles of religious faith. Religion cares not a wit for evidence. In fact, it relies on the rejection of common logic in favor of "faith", itself the polar opposite of empirical, evidence-based thinking.

When news outlets of the day smeared, fabricated, edited, misrepresented and outright lied about Jim Garrison's case regarding the JFK assassination, the affronts to his integrity became so egregious and so obvious that, under the "Fairness Doctrine", he was granted a thirty minute rebuttal on one of the major television networks. To paraphrase, he said, "The American public has been sold a children's fairytale. But we are not children, and as adults, the consequences of believing such nonsense will be devastating. We will eventually lose our democracy".

Garrison's prediction has come to pass. We now vehemently defend fairytales as reality collapses in front of our very eyes.

Bob Van Noy , August 14, 2018 at 8:52 am

Thanks F. G. Sanford for the very appropriate referral to Jim Garrison. It was his dedication in the face of near impossible odds that convinced me to dedicate myself to fighting the ongoing battle for honesty and justice with respect to JFK's Assassination. When I remember the lifelong dedication of Jim Garrison, Fletcher Prouty, and the many totally dedicated Journalists, Researchers, and Public Servants like William Binney, I'm encouraged that the Truth will yet win out

Bob H , August 14, 2018 at 1:33 pm

Somehow I think Christopher Steele is the link to all of Russiagate. He was the head of Mi6's Russia Desk and "held the hand" of the dying Alexander Litvinenko(the 1st alleged poison victim of Putin), he was still around for the mysterious suicide of Dr. Kelley, he was hired by Fusion GP3, first by the GOP, then by the Dems to dig up dirt on Trump. He was then hired by Crowdstrike to clean up the DNC server(denied to the FBI). His association with Portman Down might well connect him with the Skripal poisonings.

jdd , August 14, 2018 at 4:36 pm

You are on target. In fact there is speculation that Skripal may have been one of the infamous "sources" of Steele's salacious dossier. In any case, Skripal was recruited to MI6 by one Pablo Miller, during the time Steele was undercover in Moscow, and who in addition to living near Skripal, was employed by Orbis, Steele's Private Intelligence firm. Interestingly,according to the Telegraph, Miller's association with Orbis has since been removed from his linkedin profile.Steele also pops up in a key role in conjunction with State's Victoria Nuland and Jonathan Winer in the violent 2014 coup against the elected government of Ukraine. where he began surveillance of Paul Manafort, and was later involved,along with his boss richarad Dearlove of MI6, in the targeting of Mike Flynn, Carter Page and George Papadopolous, the intended entrapment of the last two occurring on British soil, and then fed into the FBI by John Brennan.

Bob Herrschaft , August 14, 2018 at 10:24 pm

jdd if you have a link for Steele's connection with the 2014 Ukraine coup, I would appreciate it if you would post it here thanks

rosemerry , August 14, 2018 at 4:28 pm

No wonder Reagan got rid of the "Fairness Doctrine". The US MSM could not survive it these days.

I wonder too how many people remember the McCarthy times, which seem to have returned with a vengeance without the commies!!

GM , August 14, 2018 at 5:32 pm

Re Wilkerson "I just don't think she's electable".
This might be a good time to remind readers that HRC has never won a contested election in her life.

David G , August 15, 2018 at 8:49 am

She was twice elected to the U.S. Senate with opponents on the ballot, and had to win contested primaries both times.

It doesn't speak very well of the people of New York that she won all those races, but in what sense were they not "contested elections", at least in the limited sense that applies to U.S. politics generally?

GKJames , August 14, 2018 at 7:02 am

(1) Does this set an impossibly high bar? Assuming one can navigate the technological intricacies -- the point about transfer speeds seems reasonable enough -- can't one equally conclude that there is compelling evidence of Russia's ongoing (over years) cyber-operations against a number of countries? Certainly, there is the counter-argument, Well, you've not proved anything. True enough, but in terms of crafting policies, we're never dealing with a proof-beyond-reasonable-doubt standard. And even if we agreed that DNC emails were leaked (by Americans) rather than hacked by Russians, that wouldn't be the end of the inquiry, would it?

(2) Reasonable people will agree that hysteria should not drive policy. But hasn't US policy -- especially in connection with the country's relationship with the rest of the world -- been driven by exactly that, more often than not, for eons? The Infotainment Complex recognized long ago that there are profits to be made by luring eyeballs. The particular flavor may vary with time (Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Mexico, etc.), but the hysteria itself is ever-present. Today's flavor happens to be Russia, a perennial best-seller that benefits a variety of domestic constituencies, not least the Threat Industry. Whether the public is being manipulated or simply getting what it wants is an open question. My own view is that, by and large, very little happens without the public's (even if only tacit) support.

(3) US foreign policy has always been an extension of domestic politics. Politicians taking sensible positions invariably would be flogged by power-seekers for being "soft" on some contrived evil. Reality, especially the nuanced kind, has rarely played much of a role. Nor has self-reflection. Neither Washington nor the public it ostensibly serves show a capacity for asking, What might explain Russia's position on, for instance, Crimea, Ukraine, and Georgia? The cavalier decision to expand NATO eastward to Russia's border as THE source of Moscow's resentment -- shared by a large proportion of the Russian public -- simply doesn't compute in American minds. That non-computation is bipartisan; it's simply how an empire does things.

(4) What remains strikingly elusive is a public exploration of how/why information on social media was found persuasive by American voters, irrespective of who planted the information. If it hadn't been Russians, would the November 2016 outcome have been different? Unlikely. A cursory look at the on-line world makes it obvious that ignorance is the coin of the realm, and that Americans do just fine in that regard all on their own.

All to say that the contentiousness among the world's powers will stay with us. As will the national myth-making. The best that can be hoped for is that there is enough self-restraint all around to keep in check the worst of the insanity.

mike k , August 14, 2018 at 8:02 am

GK -- Your comment can be summed up as: Nothing new here, get used to it -- there's nothing we can do about it. Really? The establishment would dearly love for all of us to adopt your ho hum attitude.

GKJames , August 14, 2018 at 9:08 am

Am suggesting that the problem facing what's left of the republic is far greater than a hack/leak case, "collusion", or even the Nov '16 outcome. The American mind needs re-wiring, something that Americans had better do themselves if they don't want a changing geopolitical landscape to do it for them. Sure, there are (always have been) people with a clue, but they tend to be outnumbered, now more than ever as widely cheered appeals to the visceral have taken over the ethos of government itself. Problem is, the opposition (at least at national leadership levels) to the current administration is mired in incoherence, obsessed to distraction with the obviously woeful personal qualities of the president, and devoid of imagination (the realistic kind). In other words, liberal democracy as we've known it since 1945 and imperfect as it's been, is under threat. And the threat doesn't come from Russia, but from half of a population no longer persuaded that it's the only viable way of sustaining the grand experiment. Concerns with anything less than that strike me as a matter of nibbling at the edges and avoiding what we really need to do: look at ourselves and stop pointing fingers at whatever "others" we can conjure as the source of our troubles.

Ray McGovern , August 14, 2018 at 10:56 am

Dear GK,

Thanks for both your comments and the wider perspective they offer.

Ray

JOHN CHUCKMAN , August 14, 2018 at 6:45 am

A further thought.

We have, of course, someone who can precisely and accurately answer any question in the matter.

Unfortunately, he is more or less imprisoned at the behest of your American government.

And should he be turned out of his current situation, he faces certain extradition to the US where he faces ugly treatment and a long prison term.

Such are the realities of American power in the world today.

By the way, his name is Julian Assange.

And the Democratic Party's own candidate, Ms Clinton, was quoted in her charming fashion, "Can't we just drone him or something?"

Of course, it was in line with many ugly statements by Clinton, as the one, after Qaddafi's assassination -- a man who did his best for his people and kept them in peace -- "We came, we saw, he died! Ha ha ha!"

It isn't just Trump who has a filthy mouth and constantly tells lies.

It is the whole American power establishment.

There is no easy solution, at least not in our time.

Powerful people who are determined to do terrible things will do them.

The total stakes for America's power establishment are too big for any argument or evidence to turn it around.

JOHN CHUCKMAN , August 14, 2018 at 6:28 am

But this is just the way American politicians have learned to deal with any adverse finding about almost anything, especially in foreign affairs.

They just ignore it.

"How far will we allow our government to escalate against others without proof of anything?" is a reader quote cited by the author.

But I ask, first, what the "allow" is doing in there?

Just what options, what real power, do average Americans have today? My best guess is that it is close to zero.

Yes, you're still free, at least for a little while, to write and speak words, words, and more words. But their net effect on the giant engine that is the American power establishment is close to zero also.

And perhaps before long -- given events like the Alex Jones creepy stunts -- you may not even be able to utter the words.

The stupid, endless stuff about Russia and hacks is just one small battle front of a huge multi-front war being waged by the American power establishment for world supremacy.

If you want to understand the engines driving all this, read:

https://chuckmanwordsincomments.wordpress.com/2018/07/22/john-chuckman-comment-how-american-politics-really-work-why-there-are-terrible-candidates-and-constant-wars-and-peoples-problems-are-ignored-why-heroes-like-julian-assange-are-persecuted-and-r/

willow , August 14, 2018 at 11:29 pm

The censorship extends to the alternative commentators too. KPFA, Pacifica radio, which hosts Democracy Now with Amy Goodman, just removed a long running program, Guns & Butter hosted by Bonnie Falkner because she recently dared to discuss verboten subjects, i.e., Zionism.

Gregory Herr , August 15, 2018 at 12:10 am

I was hoping she was vacationing. I'll miss her interviews with people like William Pepper, William Engdahl, the Saker, and many others. What a disappointment.

exiled off mainstreet , August 15, 2018 at 2:53 am

They'd rather stick with establishment shills, which is what Amy Goodman has evolved into as a serial apologist for yankee war crimes in the middle east.

exiled off mainstreet , August 15, 2018 at 2:51 am

Great articles; great responses; great website. You've accurately described the true nature of the present day yankee imperium in your responses and articles.

AnthraxSleuth , August 14, 2018 at 4:22 am

Thank Dog our wonderful elites in the halls of power are spending millions; if not hundreds of millions of dollars on Russiafarce.
Instead of frittering it away on hardening the electrical grid to an EMP.

I feel so represented and cared for by our illustrious elites

David G , August 14, 2018 at 3:12 am

Ok, here's my technical question, which is not calculated to make me very popular around here.

Suppose the following:

Somebody (the Russians, the Samoans, elves, whoever) did in fact hack the DNC computer for these emails, and this was done at the expected, relatively slow download rate. They then may or may not have manipulated the data or metadata in some fashion on their own machine. The somebody then uploaded these files onto a USB flash drive, and then re-downloaded them onto another computer at the high transfer rate noted by the VIPS. From this second computer they were sent on to Wikileaks (or some intermediary).

Does the VIPS analysis preclude this scenario? If not, is it possible that they are correct about the download rate, but still have not excluded the possibility that the initial taking of the emails from the DNC was done by hack?

AnthraxSleuth , August 14, 2018 at 3:54 am

The disseminator (wikileaks/Julian Assange) of those LEAKED emails has already answered the question.
He has unequivocally stated that the emails were leaked; Not hacked.
NOTHING Wikileaks has released or claimed has ever been found to be false.

Kim Dotcom also claims to have intimate knowledge of the leak.
Both have offered to give testimony in this entire farce investigation
Yet, the grand inquisitor, Mueller the 9/11 and Anthrax, coverup artist refuses to interview them.
That alone should tell you what is really going on.

David G , August 14, 2018 at 4:07 am

So you're saying there's nothing in the VIPS analysis that refutes the scenario I outlined? Just those unrelated statements, upon which VIPS did not rely?

I'd be surprised if that's the case, but I'm waiting to hear from someone with useful knowledge on the subject. That doesn't seem to be you.

AnthraxSleuth , August 14, 2018 at 1:40 pm

That "someone" with the most knowledge on the subject has already spoken. His name is Julian Assange and he flat out said it came from a leak not a hack.

Who else do you think is more qualified to make a statement on the hack than Julian himself?

gratification , August 14, 2018 at 4:56 am

So what you're saying is that these cunning Russians faked the metadata on the DNC download (or whatever it was) so as to obfuscate the fact that it was them but left other "Russian fingerprints" -- such as cyrillic text -- that pointed to them? Baldrickian cunning! It's beyond my simple mind.

https://disobedientmedia.com/2018/04/new-analysis-by-the-forensicator-examines-russian-fingerprints-left-by-guccifer-2-0/

David G , August 14, 2018 at 5:34 am

I'm not saying anything like that.

What I'm *asking* is how the VIPS analysis can tell that the download (or upload, whatever) speed that they are relying on was from the *beginning* of the data's journey to Wikileaks (i.e. the initial transfer from the DNC server), which is what is required to prove their thesis, rather than from some subsequent step along the way?

I'm not crediting myself with any genius in bringing up this point. It seems like a fairly obvious challenge to make to the VIPS analysis, and I'm sure it's been made elsewhere.

I imagine the VIPS have dealt with this question long ago somewhere or other, but I've never run across it and am hoping someone here has the technical chops to enlighten me.

In the mean time, how about everybody else stop trying to mischaracterize my question or throw irrelevant (to this specific issue) facts at me?

Litchfield , August 14, 2018 at 7:28 am

I am also no technocrat.
My understanding is that any hack or leak leaves "fingerprints" in the files.
Both the original and the target files.

Thus, in the case of the scenario you propose -- earlier hacks that were amalgamated and transformed into one large leak (I think this is your scenario) -- there would be fingerprints of the earlier hacks.

AFAIK no allegations or evidence have been put forth concerning earlier suspicious hacks that could have been transformed into one large, fast leak.

We need to look at the very strong possibility that the real purpose of Mueller's investigation is to hide something, not reveal something. That is the strong record of his CV.

Can someone tell me whether a person who has posted regularly in the past and who wants to post here must enter name and email address afresh with each and every post?

Or is it just me?

David G , August 14, 2018 at 7:44 am

Well, what you say may well be true, Litchfield, but it still seems to me to be external to the VIPS point about internet download-speed limitations, upon which -- based on Patrick Lawrence's article -- they seem to be hanging a great deal, especially since they now acknowledge that "[t]he conclusions initially drawn on time and location in VIPS50 are now subject to these recent discoveries" (i.e. have been brought into question).

So I think my question stands.

I too now have to re-enter name and email with each post, and I also was wondering whether it was just me. Guess not. Maybe an anti-spam thing?

Skip Scott , August 14, 2018 at 11:39 am

Litchfield-

The re-entry of your personal data started a couple weeks ago. I believe it is a safety precaution so that your personal email address is no longer stored by CN. I could be wrong.

Tom Welsh , August 14, 2018 at 8:41 am

As I understand your question, you are asking whether some information may not have been tracelessly stolen from the DNC server quite separately from the transfer to an external device described by VIPS.

My first reaction to this is that, obviously, any information could be copied from any computer at any time by any person -- but if the operation left no traces, nobody could know that it ever took place.

The only data that investigators have to go on are the files provided by Wikileaks and the logs and other records of the DNC server itself. As far as I know, those point only to one download -- that described by VIPS and this article.

Incidentally, you have reversed the usual meanings of "upload" and "download". Conventionally, one downloads data from a repository or database, and uploads to it.

Tom Welsh , August 14, 2018 at 8:50 am

Having had a look at https://disobedientmedia.com/2017/07/new-research-shows-guccifer-2-0-files-were-copied-locally-not-hacked/ which explains the forensic methods used to derive the download speeds, I admit that my first comment was inaccurate.

The files used were in fact not those provided by Wikileaks. The article linked to above states that,

'The Forensicator specifically discusses the data that was eventually published by Guccifer 2.0 under the title "NGP-VAN." This should not be confused with the separate publication of the DNC emails by Wikileaks'.

The file copy times were derived from a compressed archive containing all the files of interest. You can see a partial picture of the archive listing in the linked article.

David G , August 14, 2018 at 9:43 am

I appreciate your comments, Tom Welsh, but I feel I am just foundering deeper in confusion.

To be clear, I wasn't "asking whether some information may not have been tracelessly stolen from the DNC server quite separately from the transfer to an external device described by VIPS." At least, I didn't mean to ask that.

I want to know specifically why the VIPS are sure that the speedy download/upload rate they build their case on happened exactly when the data left the DNC server, and not at some later point in their history. The VIPS argument depends on the former being the case.

The article you link to in fact *does* speak to this point, which is great, but as you say it specificies that it is *not* about the DNC files that ended up at Wikileaks.

But this Patrick Lawrence article has William Binney "examin[ing] all the metadata associated with the files [Guccifer] 2.0 has made public" without making any distinction between that and the DNC/ Wikileaks files.

I guess I really don't have a handle on the essential details here.

While I like reading Patrick Lawrence's reflections on statecraft, I think he may have been out of his depth here. There's nothing here that clarifies these questions, and that's without even mentioning the passages that are confusing on their own, such as the paragraph about how "G-2.0" somehow "merged" two sets of data into two sets of data.

I realized my use of "download" (vs. "upload") was off after my initial comment, and have tried to avoid it in the later ones, but Binney himself is quoted using it in the "reversed" sense in the article, and I took my lead from that.

Skip Scott , August 14, 2018 at 11:37 am

David G-

Here is a good video of Bill Binney explaining the merged data sets.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qe1movhtIfA

As to your other question, it is my understanding that ALL transfer of files leaves metadata, and Bill Binney and the Forensicator have backtracked the metadata to the original download that was of a speed only possible (at that time and place) locally via a storage device.

David G , August 14, 2018 at 2:29 pm

Thanks, Skip Scott. That's helpful.

Litchfield , August 14, 2018 at 8:23 pm

I thought that there were two incidents concerning hacks/leaks, which some people are conflating.

1. *Leak* of files from DNC computers. This info ended up being given to Wikileaks by a person w ho is known to both Craig Murray and Julian Assange
.
2. *Hack* of Hillary's private email server, including emails that should not have been on a private server. And that there is some speculation that the Chinese hacked into Hillary's private server.

Am I wrong about that?

AnthraxSleuth , August 15, 2018 at 4:23 am

"*Hack* of Hillary's private email server, including emails that should not have been on a private server. And that there is some speculation that the Chinese hacked into Hillary's private server.

Am I wrong about that?"

Not wrong.
Any intelligence agency and every intelligence agency, including 3rd world rate, were in and out of Hillary's paper MCSE server set up.
FFS Brian Pagliano was busted asking for help on how to delete files on Reddit.

Aaron Schwartz got the last laugh!
And, we all got a few more years of an unradiated planet.
Well, so long as you pretend like the MSM does that Fukushima is a mass fertilaztion event.

David G , August 15, 2018 at 9:04 am

Litchfield --

It's reasonable to assume that Clinton's home server was compromised by any number of intelligence agencies, but that's not connected to any of the emails that have been publicly released -- because they're spies and Wikileaks is journalism, no matter how much U.S. pols and their stooges want to pretend otherwise.

Part of the Russia-gate snow job is to confuse this matter, though -- for instance by pretending references by Trump on the campaign trail to "Hilary's emails" were actually about the DNC and Podesta leaks.

Litchfield , August 14, 2018 at 8:12 pm

" other records of the DNC server itself"

I thought that no one had been able to get their hands on the DNC servers -- the DNC had not turned them over to law enforcement or the FBI -- to do forensics on them.
Am I wrong about that?

backwardsevolution , August 15, 2018 at 2:22 am

Litchfield -- no, you've got it right, the DNC servers have not been forensically examined by the FBI. They were given to Crowdstrike to examine, if you can believe it.

Desert Dave , August 14, 2018 at 11:48 am

One thing has been bugging me about Binney's argument. Yes, it is nearly impossible for someone in Russia to transfer the files that quickly. But who's to say the "hacker" was not much closer to the DNC server, somewhere near DC?

They then transported the files via thumb drive or (more likely) portable disk drive to Wikileaks.

Mind you, I desperately want Binney to be right, and for the whole charade to fall apart, but this seems to be a weakness in his forensic argument.

David G , August 14, 2018 at 2:57 pm

My understanding has been that the VIPS are saying any internet upload at the recorded rate would have been impossible under the applicable conditions, even a local one. Despite the Binney quote in this piece referring to a "dedicated, leased, 400 -- megabit line all the way to Russia", I hadn't thought that's really their argument. Am I wrong?

In any case, without any expertise myself, I'm inclined to trust them on that, at least provisionally, but it's true that at this point the VIPS seem to be resting their entire thesis on that one point -- there's not a lot of redundancy (in the good sense) there.

Litchfield , August 14, 2018 at 8:15 pm

"Despite the Binney quote in this piece referring to a "dedicated, leased, 400 -- megabit line all the way to Russia", I hadn't thought that's really their argument. Am I wrong?"

I think you are right. That is my understanding. That any upload/download over the Internet would be much slower than a transfer to a flash drive.

I thought the mention of the 400-megabit line to Russia was a bit of hyperbole designed to show how ridiculous the upload over internet scenario is.

Curious , August 16, 2018 at 1:11 am

Litchfield,
Although you are not a 'techie' the bottom line is not proximity. One can be in the same room and not duplicate the speed of transfer. The internet is set up with limitations inherent in the technology available.
As a personal reference, doing the Olympics in Italy, we had our own 'home run fiber' with our fiber run to NY with copper as a backup. I do not have William Binneys' skills and tech savvy, but I do know as a different techie we could not create anywhere close to the speed this argument entails. And when on our 'home run' fiber from the US to Italy we had speed issues, not because of the fiber links, but the interfaces that terminate the ends of the fiber. This is important even for a non techie. If one doesn't have the latest and greatest fiber interface, or (god help us) copper pairs, the speed is dependent on the termination of the lines.
This hacking thing is as bogus as the world has seen, mainly because a lot of people don'y Know the difference between a hack and a leak, and would have to put down too many beers to learn.
Given what I know, I would trust Mr Binney to tell us what is possible, and again, it is not proximity, nor super copper pairs, fiber, not sat feeds. He, above others probably built what we now use randomly and he knows what is possible. This is just a suggestion to trust a man with his experience which is uncommon to those who have not built systems in their lives, and can only question without tech info.

Desert Dave , August 14, 2018 at 6:13 pm

Actually I think they underestimate some because to transmit a byte serially takes 10 bits total because there is overhead (start and stop bits). So 49.1 MBps is about 491 Mbps.

Was a 491 Mbps network connected to the DNC computer? Probably not (that's very fast) but it could be easily verified if the FBI or anybody else cared about the truth.

AnthraxSleuth , August 14, 2018 at 1:53 pm

What you don't seem to be able to grasp is that "manipulating" the "data" or "metadata" would leave fingerprints of the manipulation as well.
As was demonstrated by the VIPS being able to discern that the Guccifer 2.0 data was actually 2 seperate batches of data "manipulated" into one set.

I left any snark I have for you in my head and not on the keyboard.
I ask that you do the same in the future so we can have an adult conversation on the subject and not an emotionally filled rant.

nonsense like "I'd be surprised if that's the case, but I'm waiting to hear from someone with useful knowledge on the subject. That doesn't seem to be you." is petty and childish.

David G , August 14, 2018 at 2:40 pm

You should also consider leaving in your head aspersions such as telling people who are honestly seeking information that they are not "able to grasp" things.

Compare your aggressive approach to helpful attempts at addressing my question from Litchfield, Tom Welsh, and Skip Scott (so far).

You seem like a wants-the-last-word kind of person. Looking forward to reading it.

AnthraxSleuth , August 14, 2018 at 4:21 pm

I was quite polite to you in my first response.
You drew first blood.

Your question has been answered.
Any attempt to adjust the metadata would be traceable as was demonstrated by the 2 data sets being discovered as merged into 1 data set.

Litchfield , August 14, 2018 at 8:25 pm

Why not be perfectly polite in all responses?
What is this "first blood" nonsense?
Grow up!!!

AnthraxSleuth , August 15, 2018 at 1:45 am

@Litchfield
"Why not be perfectly polite in all responses?"

Perhaps you could ask your buddy that same question.

"Grow up!!!"

Introspection
Learn it!
Live it!

backwardsevolution , August 15, 2018 at 3:12 am

Litchfield -- there are many people who come on sites like this, pretending to be novices, when their real objective is to place doubt in everybody's minds. That is their plan, to create confusion, obfuscate. Of course these people have the right to question what VIPS has discovered, but notice what they never ask for:

1) where are the DNC servers?

2) why haven't the DNC servers been handed over to the FBI?

3) why did the FBI accept Crowdstrike's analysis of the DNC servers?

4) why don't we allow VIPS access to these servers, along with the FBI, so that a complete analysis can be done?

5) why don't we allow VIPS access to NSA data in order to follow the evidence from beginning to end?

VIPS are doing the best job they can with what they have, but they are left with trying to piece a puzzle together. Let's get our hands on the real data.

We can't know whether David G is sincere in his questions or whether he's just trying to discredit VIPS (yes, that is the real objective of some people). I have my own opinion, but I'll keep that to myself.

David G , August 15, 2018 at 9:18 am

backwardsevolution --

I don't think you did a particularly good job about keeping your opinion about me to yourself here.

I didn't ask the questions you list because I was asking about something germane to this specific article which I wanted to learn more about.

If you equate that with a "plan, to create confusion, obfuscate", then how are you different from our members of Congress who are delegitimizing everybody who questions their preferred narrative?

Bluesugartribe , August 14, 2018 at 2:00 am

I couldn't agree more. Lockeed Martin and the numerous Political sellouts as well as the War merchants, including corporate media, need another Russian cold war to justify getting enormous government contracts that keep them glutinously feeding from the troth. This fake Russian narrative seems to tie the President's hands until the mid-terms
where they hope to flip the house and stop the investigation by the House Intel committee and politically damage him with impeachment and then to oust him in the 2020 election while setting the narrative to justify Cold War 2.0

alley cat , August 14, 2018 at 1:27 am

U.S. neoconservatism is just the latest permutation of imperialism that has plagued us since the dawn of human history. Thucydides documented the blind greed and pig-headedness that destroyed Greek civilization almost two and a half millennia ago in his History of the Peloponnesian War :

"What made war inevitable was the growth of Athenian power and the fear which this caused in Sparta."

And from Pericles' speech to the Athenians:

"And do not imagine that what we are fighting for is simply the question of freedom or slavery: there is also involved the loss of our empire and the dangers arising from the hatred which we have incurred in administering it. Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire, though there may be some people who in a mood of sudden panic and in a spirit of political apathy actually think that this would be a fine and noble thing to do. Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."

Add half a cup of Goebbels and Bernays sauce and a heaping tablespoon of hysteria to Pericles' recipe for Armageddon, and voila ! you have a deadly dish of yellow journalism like the one served up by the Washington Post editorial of Feb. 6, 2003:

"Irrefutable

After Secretary of State Colin L. Powell's presentation to the United Nations Security Council yesterday, it is hard to imagine how anyone could doubt that Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction. . . .

. . . .Diplomats from these nations [e.g., France and Germany] do not dispute Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's assertion that "any country on the face of the Earth with an active intelligence program knows that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.

. . . .None say Iraq has complied [with U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441]. Until now, however, they have cynically argued that the inspectors must uncover evidence proving what they already know, or that it's too early to judge Saddam Hussein's cooperation. Mr. Powell's presentation stripped all credibility from that dodge."

All a perfect iteration of the law of the lynch mob: We don't need no stinkin' evidence, everyone knows they're guilty!

Ray McGovern , August 14, 2018 at 1:55 pm

Dear alley cat,

Good points, all. Thanks.

(I keep learning a whole lot from the many knowledgeable people who comment here. Please, nobody stop!)

Ray

alley cat , August 14, 2018 at 4:59 pm

Many thanks to you Ray for all you are doing and have done.

Litchfield , August 14, 2018 at 8:26 pm

Dear Ray,

So many thanks for all you do. And for always showing a pleasant demeanor.

David G , August 15, 2018 at 9:33 am

"Bernays sauce" is good.

I watched Powell's U.N. presentation live. Even on its face -- before the specific falsehoods had been exposed -- it was so obviously feeble, yet the media unanimously praised it as irresistibly convincing. This left a lasting impression on me, and it came to mind a few weeks ago during the stupefying media meltdown following the Trump-Putin Helsinki summit.

[Aug 18, 2018] Is Russia an Adversary by Gary Leupp

Notable quotes:
"... The Russians were not pleased by U.S.-NATO involvements in the former Yugoslavia, a traditional Russian ally, in 1995 and 1999, and the expansion of NATO in the latter year (to include Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary) in violation of the agreement between Ronald Reagan and former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1989 that in return for Russia's acceptance of German reunification NATO would not spread "one inch" towards Russia. They protested meekly. But Russia was not an adversary then. ..."
"... Nor was it an adversary when, in 2001, under its new president Vladimir Putin, it offered NATO a route through Russia to provision forces in Afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks. The real change only came in 2004, when NATO suddenly expanded to include Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. This brought alliances forces right to the Russian border. ..."
"... We are your adversary. ..."
"... Russia is an adversary. ..."
"... Russia is an adversary. ..."
"... He worked with our adversary to undermine our election. ..."
Aug 13, 2018 | dissidentvoice.org

Or, What's Wrong with Russian Collusion?

The question is finally being asked, by the president himself: what's wrong with collusion? Or at least his lawyer asks the question, while Trumps tweets:

Collusion is not a crime, but that doesn't matter because there was No Collusion.

The problem, of course, is that of collusion with an alleged adversary. Russia, we are constantly informed, is one such adversary, indeed the main state adversary, with Putin is its head.

Adversary is a very strong term. The Hebrew word for adversary is Satan. Satan is the ultimate symbol of evil in the Judeo-Christian tradition. Satan tempted Eve at the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, causing her to eat the fruit, and so evil entered the world.

Just like some want you to think that evil entered the (good, pristine) U.S. electoral process due to this Russian adversary in 2016.

(Sometimes listening to TV pundits vilifying Putin I find Luther's famous hymn floating through my head:

For still our ancient foe doth seek to work us woe.
His craft and power are great, and armed with cruel hate, on earth is not his equal.

Luther's referring to Satan, of course. But the current mythology around Putin -- as someone who still , like Lenin and Stalin before him, and the tsars of old, wishes us harm; is an unbridled dictator with a powerful great nuclear arsenal; is the wealthiest man on earth; and hates democracy -- resembles the mythology around the Adversary in the Bible.)

But let us problematize this vilification. When did Russia become a U.S. adversary? Some might say 1917 when in the wake of the Bolshevik Revolution Moscow became the center of the global communist movement. But surely that period ended in 1991 with the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and the USSR.

Throughout the 1990s the U.S. cultivated Boris Yeltsin's Russia as a friend and even aided the drunken buffoon in winning the 1996 election. Bill Clinton and Yeltsin signed the Start II treaty. Harvard professors advised Moscow on economic reform.

The Russians were not pleased by U.S.-NATO involvements in the former Yugoslavia, a traditional Russian ally, in 1995 and 1999, and the expansion of NATO in the latter year (to include Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary) in violation of the agreement between Ronald Reagan and former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1989 that in return for Russia's acceptance of German reunification NATO would not spread "one inch" towards Russia. They protested meekly. But Russia was not an adversary then.

Nor was it an adversary when, in 2001, under its new president Vladimir Putin, it offered NATO a route through Russia to provision forces in Afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks. The real change only came in 2004, when NATO suddenly expanded to include Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. This brought alliances forces right to the Russian border.

It was a clear statement by the U.S. to a friendly country: We are your adversary. But, of course, the Pentagon and State Department always pooh-poohed Russian concerns, denying that NATO targeted any particular country.

Four years later (2008) NATO announced intentions to draw Ukraine and Georgia into the alliance. Meanwhile the U.S. recognized Kosovo as an independent state. Kosovo, the historical heart of Serbian civilization, had been wrenched from Serbia in 1999 under the pretext of a "humanitarian" intervention that included the first bombing (by NATO) of a European capital city since 1945. The province had been converted into a vast NATO base.

Georgian president Mikhail Saakashvili, emboldened by the prospect of NATO membership and western backing, attacked the capital of the separatist republic of South Ossetia, provoking (as the Russians explain it) a proper punitive response: the Russo-Georgian War of August 7-16 . After this Moscow recognized South Ossetia and a second breakaway republic, Abkhazia, in a tit-for-tat response to Washington's recognition of Kosovo.

Now Russia was labelled an aggressive power -- by the power that had carved up Yugoslavia, and invaded and occupied Iraq on the basis of lies and killed half a million in the process. Plans to include Georgia in NATO had to be put on hold, in large part due to European allies' opposition (why provoke Russia?) but the U.S. intensified efforts to draw in Ukraine. That meant toppling the anti-NATO elected president Viktor Yanukovych.

The U.S. State Department devoted enormous resources to the Maidan coup in Kiev on February 23, 2014. Its agents helped topple the government, ostensibly for its failure to negotiate an agreement for Ukrainian associate membership in the EU, but really to bring pro-NATO forces to power and expel the Russian Fleet from the Crimean Peninsula where it has been based since 1783. Moscow's limited support for the Donbass ethnic-Russian separatists and re-annexation of Crimea were, of course, depicted by the U.S. as more aggression, more mischievous opposition to "U.S. global interests."

But from Moscow's point of view these moves have surely been defensive. The main problem is (obviously) NATO and its dangerous, unnecessary and provocative expansion. Throughout his presidential campaign Trump questioned the continued "relevance" of NATO. Characteristically he focused on budget issues and allies' failure to meet the goal figure of 2% if GDP for military expenses (misleadingly depicting investment shortfalls as a betrayal and rip-off of the victimized U.S.). But he did -- to the alarm of many, and probably to Moscow's delight -- express little enthusiasm for the alliance's historical purpose.

The most rational proposition Trump voiced before his election that the U.S. should "get along" with Russia. That is, get along with the so-called adversary. Trump as we all know had been in Russia on business, hosting the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow in 2013, and maintains interest in building a Trump Tower in the city. He has met and befriended Russian oligarchs. He quite possibly sees Russia as just another country, like Germany or France.

If "the French" had had dirt on Hillary, would it have been okay to "collude" with them to influence the election result? France is, of course, a NATO ally. Would that make it different? Now that the president and his layers are openly questioning whether "collusion", per se, is even illegal, the specific nature of the colluder becomes more relevant.

Russia is an adversary.

Russia is an adversary.

Putin in Helsinki acknowledged to a reporter that he had hoped Trump could win, because he had expressed hope for better relations. He might have added that he dreaded the prospect of a Hillary victory because of her warmongering and characterization of him as a Hitler. Naturally the Russian media favored Trump over Clinton at a certain point when he emerged as a credible candidate. So when Trump on July 27, 2016 called on Russia to release Hillary's missing emails ("if you've got 'em") the Russians probably felt invited to make contact through channels. And when informed that they had dirt, Don Jr. wrote: "If that's what you say, I love it." (Who can blame him?)

Let's say there was some collusion after the June 6 Trump Tower meeting. Trump has suddenly acknowledged that the meeting with the Russians was indeed to "seek political dirt." He adds that this is "totally legal," and this may be true. Some are now saying that Don Jr. may have violated a federal statute (52 USC 30121, 36 USC 5210) forbidding any foreign person to "make a contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value, or expressly or impliedly promise to make a contribution or a donation, in connection with any Federal, State, or local election.' and for anyone to knowingly solicit, accept, or receive from a foreign national any contribution or donation prohibited by [this law]." But the language is vague. If a Canadian speechwriter works gratis for a U.S. political candidate, in order to help him or her win, is this not "a thing of value" intended to affect an election?

If Paul Manafort, Don Jr. and Jared Kushner had met with Canadian agents in Trump Tower I doubt there would have been any controversy. The fact is, Trump won the election and many of those stunned by that wish to undermine him using revived Cold War-type Russophobia. They insist: He worked with our adversary to undermine our election. And now they hope they've got him on this charge.

*****

Five years ago a young man named Edward Snowden (now living in forced exile in Russia) revealed to the world the extent of the U.S.'s global surveillance. He showed us how the NSA wiretaps EU meetings, popes' conversations, Angela Merkel's cell phone and maintains metadata on virtually all U.S. residents. He showed us what the contemporary advanced state can do in this respect. We should suppose that Moscow has, if not similar capacity, at least enough expertise to hack into the DNC emails or John Podesta's g-mail account. Is that surprising?

What none of the TV anchors is allowed to say needs to be said again: The U.S. interferes in foreign elections all the time, including Russian ones. It should surprise no one if Russian intelligence responds in kind. The point is not the provenance of the leaked emails but their content.

Those horrified by the leaked material complain that their release was designed to "undermine faith in our democratic system." Really? Don't the workings of the system itself undermine one's faith in it, once they are exposed? Was it adversarial of the leaker to inform us that the DNC had no intention of allowing Bernie Sanders to win the Democratic nomination, and thus that the process was rigged? Was it unfriendly to reveal that Podesta was hoping the media would hype Trump, as an easy target for his candidate?

The question that will no doubt be debated in the coming days is whether seeking dirt on a political opponent from any foreigner is indeed illegal, or whether there are specific legal ramifications of meeting with someone from an "adversary" country. But it seems to me that Russia has not been defined as such officially. So we may have a discussion less about legality than the politics of Russophobia.

I am happy to see Trump besieged, rattled, possibly facing impeachment. But to bring him down on the basis of "Russian collusion," on the assumption that Russia is an adversary, would only advantage the warmongers who want no-fly zones over Syria and military support for the Kiev regime against the Donbas separatists. Vice President Pence I believe favors both.

Trump has said that he cannot host Putin in Washington this year, or until the Russian Hoax witch hunt is over. But Putin has invited him to Moscow. One senses he wants some agreements with Trump before he is ousted by his gathering adversaries, including the press, courts, Democrats, select Republicans, turncoat aides and he himself sometimes in his unguarded tweets.

Gary Leupp is a Professor of History at Tufts University, and author of numerous works on Japanese history. He can be reached at: [email protected] . Read other articles by Gary .

This article was posted on Monday, August 13th, 2018 at 10:30pm and is filed under (Ex-)Yugoslavia , Chancellor Angela Merkel , Donald Trump , Elections , Espionage/"Intelligence" , Hillary Clinton , Kosovo , Mike Pence , President Vladimir Putin , Russia , Serbia , Ukraine , United States , US Hypocrisy , US Lies .

[Aug 17, 2018] Lavrov Gives Tillerson a Brilliant History Lesson on US Interventionism

The same day one year ago...
Aug 17, 2017 | www.youtube.com

Ali Haider , 1 year ago (edited)

Russians are really brilliant...salute you Russia 

Phil Newmann , 1 year ago

Tillerson. What a high HYPOCRISY. The US has murdered more than 10 million people in the last 13 years and you say Assad is a war criminal for defending his own country?

Morbius1963 , 1 year ago

Tillerson makes no mention of the democratic wishes of the Syrian people.

Sangam Sangam , 9 months ago

Assad killed terrorist in Syria sent and trained by US.

tom parankewich , 1 year ago

He forgot to say they want pipelines to go through Syria pure and simple .

Ds Vic , 1 year ago

Lavrov is a beauty! Making illmericans look dumb as usual.

[Aug 17, 2018] Sergei Lavrov Grilled Live on Air by Famous Russian War Reporter

Aug 17, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Published on Jun 3, 2016

A GLOBAL RENAISSANCE: RI Spring Crowdfunding Campaign: https://igg.me/at/Gp17O7r2ymo/x/11078070
Russian FM has hard time explaining why Russia lost Ukraine
Source Kosmolskaya pravda https://www.youtube.com/user/kpru
Daria Aslamova is a living legend of modern Russian journalism. A long-time correspondent for Russia's most popular daily newspaper, Komsomolskaya Pravda, she has reported from many hot spots on the territory of the ex-USSR (Chechnya, Abkhazia, Nagorno Karabakh, Tajikistan), but also from places as far away as the former Yugoslavia, Iraq, Rwanda, etc.

Aslamova stars during this live online interview. Even such an experienced diplomat and savvy polemist as Lavrov has a hard time answering her questions on why Russia is so inept at exercising soft power, and why the Russian embassy in Kiev was hardly visible before and during the Maidan while Americans were everywhere.

Decide for yourselves whether the Russian press is a tool of official propaganda or the fourth branch of government it is supposed to be in a democracy.

Willie Ledbetter , 2 years ago

FM Lavrov showed characteristic composure, tact and diplomatic correctness, on a topic that could have been designed to ensnare him and discredit him openly, at the hands of a seemingly impassioned patriot, yet with a clearly infantile attitude to diplomacy. I agree with him entirely.

Vaska X Tumir , 2 years ago

As a diplomat, Lavrov is clearly unmatched by any figure in the West. Russian foreign policy, however, has been hobbled by a long-standing naivety about the political culture of both Europe and North America. Had Russians not wasted all of the 1990s and most of the 2010s in a fantasy about them as their Western "partners" and had they seen the US in particular as the utterly unscrupulous and unprincipled enemy bent on world domination it actually is, they might have acted differently in relation to Ukraine. But then, had they been realistic, they wouldn't have dissolved the Warsaw Pact and pulled out of Eastern Europe on the mere assumption that the West is really about democracy, human rights, and liberal freedoms -- all of which have been seriously eroded in both the US and the EU in the last 30 years. Just yesterday, the European Court of Justice ruled that the EU can suppress political criticism of its institutions AND of leading figures, a move that confirms the totalitarian tendency at the heart of Western neoliberalism.

Loup Kibiloki , 2 years ago

Strange title. Lavrov did well and I agree with him. I won't have to write my whole comment because I fully agree with this one by Jakob Steinbauer further down on this page : " .. concerning the main question about deploying the army to Ukraine, [Lavrov] is absolutely right. That was a trap and fortunately Putin and his advisors were so smart not to raid the country. Really, everyone disagreeing on that is absolutely dangerous and stupid too. "

GuldeScott , 2 years ago

The US Secretary of State would never allow an interview like this aired on TV. The reporters in the US would never ask such a provocative question, fearing they would lose their job. I applaud Lavrov and the reporter. Honesty is the best propaganda.

Jeremy Farrance , 2 years ago

The reporter is wrong. The principled statesmanship and composure of Sergei Lavrov in contrast to the easily bought bleating of Washington's vassals in Kiev does not go unnoticed. Greetings from Australia.

Davie Crockett , 2 years ago

Lavrov was totally correct. This woman doesn't seem to have any idea of the consequences of putting their forces into the Ukraine. The whole idea of the yanks and friends was to take over Ukraine and goad Russia into war. I think Russia did the right thing and postponed any direct conflict with the scumbags. They should be allowed to engage on their terms, not the invaders terms.

Freethinking Влади́мир , 2 years ago (edited)

Lavrov is a class act, but the reporter does have a point. Russia was entirely too passive. I think Russia didn't have all the cards as the reporter claimed, I think Russia was outsmarted - i.e. Russian intelligence didn't see it coming. I hate to say it, but I think this is the truth.

Nickael7 , 2 years ago

Lavrov is very intelligent !!!

AwesomePossum , 2 years ago

I think she does have some points, especially in terms of projecting soft power. Yanukovich leaving his position should never have happened, and Russia should have pressured him. The military (Ukrainian) could have taken control until the new elections, which were only a few months away. The use of media is also of critical importance, the US spending such a ridiculous amount should have been noted and countered. However, interfering after the fact would have been terrible, even though it would have been legitimate to do so in terms of international law.

iena71 , 2 years ago

This journalist is so silly and has a short view of things that is embarassing! Fortunately she is only a chicken journalist, and has not to lead a Nation like Russia. Excellent Lavrov, as always!

Jason Bourne , 2 years ago

I have been watching Sergei Lavrov's interviews and speeches for years and his conduct is absolutely gentlemen like and charismatic.It is extremely rare to see him upset, but in this case he is annoyed by the lack of facts on behalf of the female reporter. All the comments are positively in favor of Lavrov side, which says it all. Lavrov is a key pillar and paramount for Russia's diplomacy. He is an excellent foreign minister.

adam_ andre , 2 years ago

in what way did Lavrov get grilled? He answerd her questions truthfully.

Maximo Ventura , 2 years ago

that woman has some balls.

meelis kail , 2 years ago

I kind of like 👍 Lavrov clean and or clear speech 👍

Raffaello Sacchetti , 2 years ago

Where was the grilling? The questions were just emotional but not deep.

norm pattison , 2 years ago

I want to see Western politicians grilled like this!......a very honest and informative exchange.

G Georg , 1 year ago

Mr. Lavrov's shock that Russian people could lead a war against Russian people, that is historical moment. His facial expression says horror. Non of EU politics of any level understand what are his people. Non of EU politics act in behalf of his nation. Politics of EU going to ignite civil war. Russia is future for white Christians refugees of current EU.

Phil Newmann , 1 year ago

Lavrov was not grilled. He answered questions with more knowledge than the reporter. Russia does not want to jump into an International Conflict. Russia is not taking the bait the Zionist Imperialist are placing before his eyes. The Russian Government perfectly knows that all these incidents and killings of the ambassadors and the downing of the planes has been nothing but a bait to provoke the Russian empire for WWIII.

Act1veSp1n , 2 years ago (edited)

what this woman doesnt understand is that Maidan wasnt just a street action that overturned the whole country. the country was overturned by the military and SBU - all of them were already under control of CIA for years now. In fact SBU people were getting certificates and awards from CIA a few years before the government overturn. So by the time Yanukovich was running away, they were willing to blow him out of the air and shot his cars multiple times. To the point that Putin had to fly him out on helicopters and then a submarine(from what I understand)

crmarquet , 2 years ago

I don't know who this woman is, but she seems to be out of touch with what really is going on. She's more--at least she gives that impression--of a emotional wreck who cannot think clearly. There's a clear distinction between strategical thinking and an emotional one, and we can see that distinction right here. Listen to her (and look at her) and listen to Mr. Lavrov. It's not a good idea for Russia to unleash a war in Ukraine--that's what the West wants--and the Russian leaders understand that. The title of this video is misleading.

Atalaclys , 2 years ago

Lavrov and Putin, and the russian elites in general, value above all the idea that one day they will become "partners" of the West. That is the main weakness of Russia, and it will be exploited at every turn by the US and the EU. Lavrov and Putin faield in Ukraine and today, for the same reasons, when the US is fooling them with imaginary ceasefires, they are failing in Syria again.

katy w , 11 months ago

Wrong tittle. Lavrov was ponderate and showed his art in diplomacy. Going at war everytime and everywhere isn't a solution to solve a conflict. This journalist was too much childish, talking quickly and excited like a bee.

avaavauser , 2 years ago

Dear reporter, you don't see the whole picture!! This coup was planned by USA, Nato, MI5/6 UK . for a long time and it was to be a trap to have ukraine start a war with Russia. Fight Russians to the last ukrainian. Girl, please get more facts!!

HorstQueck , 2 years ago

I like them both but I'd trade her for Matt Lee. About the questions; if Russia had brought in military force in Ukraine would there be any disunity now in the EUSSR and NATO? Would there be anyone questioning the "rightness" of NATO or the West's lies about Russia? Her most interesting point was the question about "clinging to an idea of the sovereign state that disorients us." Certainly food for thought there. Another good interview is Lavelle interviewing Paul Craig Roberts which can be searched on The Duran.

[Aug 17, 2018] Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov (Full Interview) NBC News

Jul 21, 2017 | www.youtube.com

SOJO , 1 year ago

Mr Lavrov killing them with rationality. This is not a good look for you, NBC

Plus Pack , 1 year ago

This guy makes me laugh. Russian's have a unique sense of humor

Naseem Khan , 1 year ago

Ten US bases in Syria - for a moment there I thought I was hearing things but Mr. Lavrov repeated it. When did this happen and by whose permission and cooperation?

Ken Spock , 1 year ago

Thank God for the Russians.....

Xendrius , 1 year ago

You will never see American liar politicians interviewed by Russian journalists, their lies and acting would be exposed.

Xendrius , 1 year ago

NBC is run by Illuminati which is behind 9/11 and the creation of ISIS. Deep state is mad Russia finished off ISIS, now they are trying to punish Russia wth false accusations. The timing is obvious.

fenrisragnerok , 1 year ago

The most intelligent diplomat the international scene has seen for many years.... Silly NBC agenda is so transperant....

Johannes Sekgololo , 1 year ago

This is what a DIPLOMAT should sound like. What a relief the Obama days are over.

Paul Barrett , 1 year ago

LAVROV = LEGEND [ RESPECT FROM THE U.K ]

Elielle , 1 year ago (edited)

Lavrov clearly have difficulties to even understand these stupid questions. And not in terms of a language but in terms of substance. Embarrasing for NBC.

William Croslow , 1 year ago

Anyone still believing any 'Russia/Trump' conspiracy theories needs their head examined.

Valley 56 , 1 year ago

How refreshing to see an intelligent adult talk about world affairs. This silly schoolboy who passes for a modern journalist can't trick him into saying something stupid because he is a grown

LaidIsGentleMen , 1 year ago

It is such a relief to listen to this man. Wise, calm and completely devoid of the hysteria and political correctness we find in most western politicians.

nwo foe , 10 months ago

Lavrov is one world-class politician.

little dards , 1 year ago

Mr Journalist, you have a golden chance to ask some of the most important questions to the top Russian diplomat, and you're merely gossiping. What a joke. You are FAKE NEWS!

caligirl , 1 year ago

The interview is so stupid. Stupid questions like 'Did Trump and Putin meet in the men's room?". Embarrassing!

Nikita Gusarov , 1 year ago

Cool guy, wish Western officials could be like that

[Aug 17, 2018] Lavrov Brilliantly Dissects Western Lies And Manipulations On The False Flag And Skripals

Lavrov suggests that Skripals were intentionally poisoned by BZ which temporary disable a person (for approx 4 days) and Novichok was injected in samples to implicate Russia. He impliedly suggests that this was a false flag operation.
Notable quotes:
"... First, US sanctions against Russia, then the Skripals mystery, and last the Attack at Syria....What the masters of the world trying do??? ..."
"... I'm an American. I'm disgusted with the mafia cartel bankrupt corporation that masquerades as the government. I don't like or trust any government but after listening to this guy, he certainly comes across as way more trustworthy than anyone puppet we have in the Trump regime. ..."
Apr 16, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Maria Kuzali , 4 months ago

First, US sanctions against Russia, then the Skripals mystery, and last the Attack at Syria....What the masters of the world trying do???

Off Grid Nation , 4 months ago

I'm an American. I'm disgusted with the mafia cartel bankrupt corporation that masquerades as the government. I don't like or trust any government but after listening to this guy, he certainly comes across as way more trustworthy than anyone puppet we have in the Trump regime. #IDONOTCONSENT

shaughn fourie , 4 months ago

THANK YOU RUSSIA IN PARTICULAR PRESIDENT PUTIN AND LAVROV BOTH GOOD INTELLIGENT AND DECENT MEN

shaughn fourie , 4 months ago

MACRON TRUMP AND MAY ARE MURDERERS......THANK YOU ASSAD AND RUSSIA AND KURDISH PEOPLE FOR TRULY STANDING UP FOR CIVILISED VALUES

James Australian , 4 months ago (edited)

need to stop the tyrants to prevent the fall of Damascus.. Must not let them kill Mr Assad.

zac anthony , 4 months ago

I believe in Russia more than our gov we are being led

Luboš Lier , 4 months ago

Russia just needs to give Syria couple of tactical nukes. And the peace in Syria is assured...

haithem ali , 4 months ago

Sometimes he continues talking without look at paper..... bcs he say true.... and USA, BRITAIN and France cant do that bcs they are lying and scared if they will say something wrong.

[Aug 17, 2018] EXCLUSIVE, FULL UNEDITED Interview Of Lavrov To BBC

Mar 10, 2018 | www.youtube.com

lyrastar999 , 3 months ago (edited)

this interviewer is awful! omg, love watching Lavrov slay this ugly dragon! the interviewer (i won't call him a journalist) is so obvious, he insults Lavrov's intelligence at every turn.

PowerhouseG , 3 months ago (edited)

Im British but i support Russia on all this that Britain and America staged this whole thing and fake chemical attacks and i believe the Russians much more than my own British government , i believe Russia is trying to do the right thing

si lafuyang , 3 months ago

That interviewer is a repugnant dog.

August Reigns , 4 months ago

even Germany is telling the western world to stop demonizing Russia

Garrett Nelson , 2 months ago

That guy giving the interview needs to learn some manners. Even though he tried his best to piss the FM off it back fired in his face big time. He looked like an ass.

Angie Wright , 3 months ago

It's like Lavrov is trying to reason with a 2 year old. LOL

Rok Pogorelčnik , 3 months ago

it clearly shows this "journalist" is only interested in discredit Lavrov.. he is not interested in what he has to say... that's disgraceful bbc

[Aug 17, 2018] EXCLUSIVE FULL UNEDITED Interview of Putin with NBC's Megyn Kelly - YouTube

Mar 10, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Nicholas Petrov , 5 months ago

Why did Megan Kelly cut out the part of the interview all the time what for?! Why did she interview him then?! nonsense. PS Russia Insider thank you for the full video

Vikram Nandakumaran , 4 months ago

The best part starts at 5.00 min mark where putin explains the stupidity of megyn Kelly by saying your story is for housewives....Glory to putin...

Sails , 4 months ago (edited)

Wow, Putin tells the truth. She is an idiot. Bush was a CIA guy, lots of people in the white house are ex-military high ups. America is also run by the military.

Annunaki Annunaki , 2 months ago

let me ask you this; which country seems more stable? The country where; a civil war seems to jump off between whites vs. colored/Mexican Americans, kids on a regular mass murder classmates and teachers, people are so lost they don't know what their gender is, the president is a loose canon, incapable and a barbarian, the political system refuses to sign treaties all other nations did sign for the sake of the planet, the political system condemns and attacks countries for alleged reasons of democracy and freedom but refuses to condemn friends who occupy land, surprises and kill civilians and continue doing this for decades, shameless materialism is the norm and being greedy is promoted, secret societies are actually the ones in power....?

Tell me which country is more stable and more Christian based? Which country is more honest although freedom of press is not a trait of this state? which is the country that is always criticizing others (Chinese for no democracy, Russia for no press freedom) but is itself the biggest hypocrite? Where democratically presidents get killed if they indeed have good intensions towards the American people like JFK.

Where the CIA imports cocaine to flood the streets of the getho's..where you have to be prepared to suck dick to have a musical or movie screen carreer.. where soldiers who thought they served their country get no compensation after being paralyzed in battle but are being ignored, where presidents who abuse stagiars can still be president, where desperate teenagers kill one another with automatic weapons for decades for alleged territory but the government rather go restore order at the other end of the world,, where the presidents decide to start developing new nuclear weapons while the world thought we had finally ended this dangerous path, where the president talks about other countries in words like 'shithole countries', where they still have the guts to call themselves 'Gods own country!' ...how dare you......?

INFILTRATOR2008 , 5 months ago

again, NBC cut out part of the interview !

Unixoid Machiavelli , 3 months ago

America is a great nation. Why do they send such stupid reporters to interview president? If she is popular among Americans and they take her seriously then I have reason to think that most of USA people are lost... Are you with me?

Arman , 4 months ago

It wasn't an interview. it was an examination.

June Randeria , 4 months ago

Putin is so eloquent. If all people watched him they would see for themselves how sincere he actually is, and how he graciously answers with patience when questioned disdainfully

[Aug 17, 2018] The Department N of the Ministry of Truth is upset about Trump revelations

Aug 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Thursday, the New York Times decried Trump's accusation that the media are "the enemy of the people." "Insisting that truths you don't like are 'fake news' is dangerous to the lifeblood of democracy. And calling journalists 'the enemy of the people' is dangerous, period," said the Times .

[Aug 17, 2018] The roll-out of Cold War 2.0 and the concerted demonizing of Putin and the Russian Federation began with the Ukraine Coup in February 2014, as was well covered here at Consortium News

Notable quotes:
"... I would say the first turning point was the imprisonment of Khodorkovsky and the restoration of Russian sovereignty in the energy sphere. Subsequent major inflection points have been: the 2008 war with Georgia, the 2014 events in Ukraine, and the post-2016- election manufactured anti-Russia hysteria/neo-McCarthyism. ..."
"... Kees van der Pijl fills in the details here (ignore the title of the piece): https://www.unz.com/article/why-was-malaysian-airlines-flight-mh17-shot-down/ ..."
"... the "Putin is a *thug*" meme has been successfully promulgated as shorthand that acts as a justification for anything done or said against both Putin and Russia. ..."
"... Meanwhile, the thugs are those in our Congress and executive branch and such as Mueller, who are pushing the country beyond its tolerance levels or, shall we say, ability to right itself after a knockdown (maritime metaphor is intended). ..."
"... I think the rollout of the new cold war actually began when Putin stopped the looting of his country that was occurring under Yeltsin. The evil empire only accepts vassals, not partners. Maximum capital must accrue to the one percent, and be free to flee the country to the tax haven of choice. Any world leader who tries to build an economy for the benefit of its nation's citizens becomes a target. ..."
"... I figure it was the Magnitsky ruse that got the ball rolling. It predates Ukraine and was grounds for the first round of sanctions. ..."
Aug 17, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

jaycee , August 13, 2018 at 9:51 pm

I would say the roll-out of Cold War 2.0 and the concerted demonizing of Putin and the Russian Federation began with the Ukraine Coup in February 2014, as was well covered here at Consortium News. The policy – isolate Russia as a pariah nation – was set before the Maidan events reached their resolution. Victoria Nuland's "f -- - the EU" rant was in response to efforts to mediate the situation and possibly spoil or derail the plans. IMHO, the Russian response to the violent coup was fully expected by the Americans to have been a tanks-in-the streets-Czechoslovakia-1968 scenario, and yet all they got was a Crimean referendum and a frozen stalemate in eastern Ukraine. Still, policy being policy, NATO reacted as if there had been a full invasion regardless.

Anecdotally, conversations I've had with intelligent, progressive, good-hearted persons suggests the election of Trump has in effect destabilized their critical thinking abilities. This has opened up the space in which the worst aspects of Cold War 2.0 have flourished. In their minds, the urgent need to remove Trump by any means, fair or foul, fully overwhelms any other priorities, including objective consideration of the current moment.

Joe Tedesky , August 13, 2018 at 10:14 pm

I think you are right about Ukraine. I also recall that everything went downhill after Putin negotiated for Assad to give up all Syria's chemical weapons. Which gave cause to believe Putin was being punished for interfering in the Coalitions schemes. I think Robert Parry sighted that as well.

No matter jaycee I too believe that Ukraine was where the U.S. fired the first bullet. This New World Order the U.S. represents doesn't negotiate, no instead it's either our way or no way, is the mantra of the tribe. Joe

Joe Tedesky , August 13, 2018 at 11:08 pm

I wrote a response jaycee that went to the wind . What I was saying was Putin got punished with the uprising in Ukraine after he pulled Assad out of the chemical weapons debate. Joe

Suggestion the Consortium needs to get this comment boards algorithm problem figured out.

Sibiriak , August 14, 2018 at 2:55 am

Jaycee:

"I would say the roll-out of Cold War 2.0 and the concerted demonizing of Putin and the Russian Federation began with the Ukraine Coup in February 2014 "
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

I would say the first turning point was the imprisonment of Khodorkovsky and the restoration of Russian sovereignty in the energy sphere. Subsequent major inflection points have been: the 2008 war with Georgia, the 2014 events in Ukraine, and the post-2016- election manufactured anti-Russia hysteria/neo-McCarthyism.

Kees van der Pijl fills in the details here (ignore the title of the piece): https://www.unz.com/article/why-was-malaysian-airlines-flight-mh17-shot-down/

OlyaPola , August 14, 2018 at 4:42 am

"I would say the roll-out of Cold War 2.0 and the concerted demonizing of Putin and the Russian Federation began with the Ukraine Coup in February 2014,"

As in statistics perceived trajectories are functions of framing including evaluation horizons.

From inception, and through declarations such as the Monroe doctrine, some in the misrepresentation "United States of America" have perceived others as simultaneously existential threats and existential opportunities.

These existential threats and opportunities have been facilitated and acted upon as functions of perceived needs and opportunities.

The targets and modes of activation of these perceived needs and opportunities have varied according to perceived needs and opportunities, sometimes using the tactics of "hot wars" and sometimes using the tactics of "cold wars".

Some in the misrepresentation "United States of America" have correctly perceived others as existential threats and opportunities to/for them given their socio-economic system and its perceived requirements – the functions of the "other" being multi-various – the definition of the "others" include but are not necessarily restricted to those of difference within and without the "United States of America".

Some in the Soviet Union in the early 1970's attempted to conflate "strategy" with "tactics" and decided to forget notions of existential threat and perceive only existential opportunity through conflation, thereby facilitating detente on the basis of spheres of influence.

War is not restricted to things that go bang but restricted to forms of coercion.

The misrepresentation "cold war", which was never cold but sometimes engaged through proxies, was/is a context specific tactic.

Some are of the view that the ends justify the means instead of understanding that means condition ends, and consequently some facilitate and rely upon increasing the conflation of strategy with tactics increasing the sum, motivations, and resolve of the "others", thereby conditioning strategy through accelerating, continuing and expanding existential threats.

Those who engage in such self-delusion were not/are not restricted to the misrepresentation "United States of America" but as Thucydides and others were aware, have been/are generally restricted to those who perceive others as existential opportunities and threats.

Some others correctly assess the misrepresentation "United States of America" to be more a land of opportunity than an existential threat.

Litchfield , August 14, 2018 at 7:48 am

I agree with your comment. A good precis. And the "Putin is a *thug*" meme has been successfully promulgated as shorthand that acts as a justification for anything done or said against both Putin and Russia.

Meanwhile, the thugs are those in our Congress and executive branch and such as Mueller, who are pushing the country beyond its tolerance levels or, shall we say, ability to right itself after a knockdown (maritime metaphor is intended).

Skip Scott , August 14, 2018 at 11:47 am

jaycee-

I think the rollout of the new cold war actually began when Putin stopped the looting of his country that was occurring under Yeltsin. The evil empire only accepts vassals, not partners. Maximum capital must accrue to the one percent, and be free to flee the country to the tax haven of choice. Any world leader who tries to build an economy for the benefit of its nation's citizens becomes a target.

Aime Duclos , August 14, 2018 at 1:50 pm

Yes, Skip, when the West's pillaging and looting of Putin's country was stopped, the one percent was not amused. Add to that NATO's constant march up to Russia's borders, the threat to and actual placement of "defensive" missles on Russia's border.

The last straw was the US orchestrated coup in it's next NATO prize for acquisition Ukraine. Putin reacted as any leader would, and with restraint I might add.

Yet somehow all this proves Putin is a thug? It's been a calculated drive to this new Cold War. The MIC is having it's way.

GM , August 14, 2018 at 6:12 pm

I figure it was the Magnitsky ruse that got the ball rolling. It predates Ukraine and was grounds for the first round of sanctions.

[Aug 17, 2018] Stephen F. Cohen Sanction mania versus Russia -- Puppet Masters -- Sott.net

Notable quotes:
"... For nearly 100 years, Russia has been under US sanctions, often to the detriment of American national security. ..."
"... Historically, such sanctions were not problem-solving measures advancing American national security but more akin to temper tantrums or road rage, making things even worse, than to real policymaking. ..."
"... US "core" interests "need" Russia's cooperation in many vital ways. ..."
"... Moscow could sell off its billions of dollars of US Treasury securities ..."
"... It could end titanium exports to the United States ..."
"... Nor have four other circumstances. ..."
"... turning away even more from the West and toward China and other non-Western partners, and by developing its own capacity to produce sanctioned imports. ..."
"... in an era when there is no "globalization," or international security, without Russia. ..."
"... with the apparently solitary exception of Rand Paul of Kentucky, ..."
"... is in response to Russia's alleged "attack on American democracy" during the 2016 presidential election . ..."
"... only the kind of "meddling" and "interference" in the other's domestic politics that both countries have practiced, almost ritualistically, for nearly a hundred years. ..."
"... to thwart and even punish President Donald Trump for his policy of "cooperation with Russia." And Putin too for having met and cooperated with Trump at their Helsinki summit in July. ..."
Aug 17, 2018 | www.sott.net

For nearly 100 years, Russia has been under US sanctions, often to the detriment of American national security.

Cohen begins by putting the current bipartisan Senate campaign to impose new, "crushing" sanctions on Russia in historical context. Broadly understood, sanctions have been part of US policy toward Russia for much of the past 100 years. During the Russian civil war of 1918-20, President Woodrow Wilson sent American troops to fight against the emerging Soviet government. Though the "Reds" were clearly the established government of Soviet Russia by 1921, Washington continued to deny the USSR diplomatic recognition until President Franklin D. Roosevelt established formal relations in 1933. During much of the 40-year Cold War, the United States imposed various sanctions on its superpower rival, mainly related to technological and military exports, along with periodic expulsions of diplomats and "spies" on both sides.

Congress' major political contribution was the 1975 Jackson-Vanik Amendment, which denied Moscow privileged trading status with the United States, primarily because of Kremlin restrictions on Jewish emigration from the Soviet Union. Indicative of how mindlessly habitual US sanctions had become, Jackson-Vanik was nullified only in late 2012, long after the end of the Soviet Union and after any restrictions on Jews leaving (or returning to) Russia. Even more indicative, it was immediately replaced, in December 2012, by the Magnitsky Act, which purported to sanction individual Russian officials and "oligarchs" for "human-rights abuses." The Magnitsky Act remains law, supplemented by additional sanctions leveled against Russia as a result of the 2014 Ukrainian crisis and particularly Moscow's annexation of Crimea.

Looking back over this long history, there is no evidence that any US sanctions ever significantly altered Moscow's "behavior" in ways that were intended. Or that they adversely affected Russia's ruling political or financial elites. Any pain inflicted fell on ordinary citizens, who nonetheless rallied "patriotically" around the Kremlin leadership, most recently around Russian President Vladimir Putin. Historically, such sanctions were not problem-solving measures advancing American national security but more akin to temper tantrums or road rage, making things even worse, than to real policymaking.

Why, then, Washington's new bout of sanction mania against Moscow, especially considering the harsh official Russian reaction expressed by Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, who called the Senate's proposed measures "a declaration of economic war" and promised that the Kremlin would retaliate?

One explanation is an underlying, astonishing assumption recently stated by Michael McFaul , the media-ubiquitous former US ambassador to Moscow and a longtime Russia scholar: "To advance almost all of our core national security and economic interests, the US does not need Russia." Such a statement by a former or current policymaker and intellectual is perhaps unprecedented in modern times - and manifestly wrong. US "core" interests "need" Russia's cooperation in many vital ways. They include avoiding nuclear war; preventing a new and more dangerous arms race; guarding against the proliferation of weapons and materials of mass destruction; coping with international terrorists (who are in pursuit of such materials); achieving lasting peace in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East; fostering prosperity and stability in Europe, of which Russia is a part; promoting better relations with the Islamic world, of which Russia is also a part; and avoiding a generation-long confrontation with a formidable new alliance that already includes Russia, China, Iran, and other non-NATO countries. If McFaul's assumption is widespread in Washington, as it seems to be, we are living in truly unwise and perilous times.

A second assumption is no less myopic and dangerous: that the Kremlin is weak and lacks countermeasures to adopt against the new sanctions being advocated in Washington. Consider, however, the following real possibilities. Moscow could sell off its billions of dollars of US Treasury securities and begin trading with friendly nations in non-dollar currencies, both of which it has already begun to do. It could restrict, otherwise undermine, or even shut down many large US corporations long doing profitable business in Russia, among them Citibank, Cisco Systems, Apple, Microsoft, PepsiCo, McDonald's, Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble, Ford Motor Co., and even Boeing. It could end titanium exports to the United States , which are vital to American civilian and military aircraft manufacturers, including Boeing. And terminate the sale of rocket engines essential for NASA and US satellite operations. The world's largest territorial country, Russia could charge US airlines higher tariffs for their regular use of its air space or ban them altogether, making them uncompetitive against other national carriers. Politically, the Kremlin could end its own sanctions on Iran and North Korea, alleviating Washington's pressure on those governments. And it could end the Russian supply transit to US troops fighting in Afghanistan used since the early 1990s.

None of this seems to have been considered by Washington's sanction zealots. Nor have four other circumstances. Sanctions against Russia's "oligarchs" actually help Putin, whom the US political-media establishment so despises and constantly indicts. For years, he has been trying to persuade many of the richest oligarchs to repatriate their offshore wealth to Russia. Few did so. Now, fearful of having their assets abroad frozen or seized by US measures, more and more are complying. Second, new sanctions limiting Moscow's ability to borrow and finance investment at home will retard the country's still meager growth rate . But the Kremlin coped after the 2014 sanctions and will do so again by turning away even more from the West and toward China and other non-Western partners, and by developing its own capacity to produce sanctioned imports. (Russian agricultural production, for example, has surged in recent years, now becoming a major export industry.) Third, already unhappy with existing economic sanctions against Russia, European multinational corporations - and thus Europe itself - may tilt even farther away from their capricious "transatlantic partner" in Washington, who is diminishing their vast market in the East. And fourth, waging "economic war" is one impulsive step from breaking off all diplomatic relations with Russia, this too actually being discussed by Washington zealots. Such a rupture would turn the clock back many decades, but in an era when there is no "globalization," or international security, without Russia.

Finally, what reason do Washington extreme Cold Warriors themselves give for imposing new sanctions on Russia? Most of them are in the US Senate, historically a body with at least several independent-minded distinguished statesmen, but no longer, with the apparently solitary exception of Rand Paul of Kentucky, who has demonstrated considerable wisdom in regard to US-Russian relations. Their professed reasons are various and nonsensical. Some say Russia must be sanctioned for Ukraine, but those events happened four years ago and have already been "punished." Others say for "Russia's aggression in Syria," but it was Putin's military intervention that destroyed the Islamic State's terrorist occupation of much of the country and ended its threat to take Damascus, to the benefit of America and its allies, including Europe and Israel. Still others insist the Kremlin must be sanctioned for its "nerve agent" attack on Sergei Skripal and his daughter in the UK several months ago. But the British government's case against the Kremlin has virtually fallen apart, as any attentive reader of articles in David Johnson's Russia List will understand.

Ultimately, though, the new bout of sanction mania is in response to Russia's alleged "attack on American democracy" during the 2016 presidential election . In reality, there was no "attack" - no Pearl Harbor, no 9/11, no Russian parachuters descending on Washington - only the kind of "meddling" and "interference" in the other's domestic politics that both countries have practiced, almost ritualistically, for nearly a hundred years. Indeed, whatever "meddling" Russian actors did in 2016 may well have been jaywalking compared to the Clinton administration's massive, highly intrusive political and financial intervention on behalf of the failing Russian President Boris Yeltsin's reelection campaign in 1996.

We are left, then, with the real reason behind the new anti-Russian sanctions effort: to thwart and even punish President Donald Trump for his policy of "cooperation with Russia." And Putin too for having met and cooperated with Trump at their Helsinki summit in July. This bizarre, also unprecedented, reality is more than a whisper. According to a New York Times "news analysis," as well as other published reports,

a "bipartisan group of senators, dismayed that Mr. Trump had not publicly confronted Mr. Putin over Russia's election meddling, released draft legislation" of new sanctions against Moscow. "Passage of such a bill would impose some of the most damaging sanctions yet."
Leave aside for now that it is not Russian "meddling" that is delegitimizing our elections but instead these fact-free allegations themselves that are doing so. (How many losing candidates in 2018 will claim their victory was snatched away by Putin?) Consider instead that for doing what every American president since Eisenhower has done - meet with the sitting Kremlin leader in order to avoid stumbling into a war between the nuclear superpowers - in effect both Trump and Putin are being condemned by the Washington establishment, including by members of Trump's own intelligence agencies.

If so, who will avert the prospect of war with Russia, a new Cuban missile-like crisis, conceivably in the Baltic region, Ukraine, or Syria? Certainly not any leading representative of the Democratic Party. Certainly not the current Russophobic "bipartisan" Senate. Certainly not the most influential media outlets, which amplify the warmongering folly almost daily. In this most existential regard, there is for now only, like it or not, President Donald Trump.

Stephen F. Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at NYU and Princeton, and John Batchelor continue their (usually) weekly discussions of the new US-Russian Cold War. Previous installments, now in their fifth year, are at TheNation.com .
Comment: As Cohen brilliantly points out - sanctions, for the US, are a dead end.

[Aug 17, 2018] It is quite interesting how many uninformed posters and/or trolls would love to find a way to show the Russiagate nonsense is somehow plausible in spite of the evidence

Notable quotes:
"... They're kind of like a five year old child who desperately wants to keep believing in Santa Claus, even though he just found dad's Santa costume in the closet and he's holding it in his own hands. ..."
"... Sorry, but two years into this we should be way beyond this kind of – "I can't believe Santa's not real"- denying, dissembling, rationalizing nonsense. Then again, this is America. ..."
"... America is after all a country in which half the population believe in the creation myth. ..."
"... "Two years after the Iraq War began, 70 per cent of Americans still believed Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the 9/11 attacks, according to a Washington Post survey." The Big Lie works, and since Obama gutted Smith-Mundt, the CIA/ State Department can legally keep Americans tracking on their propaganda narratives. ..."
"... I agree with Lawrences point that this is an issue of social psychology. Rational argument over the facts is simply over taken by some kind of mass hysteria. There certainly precedent for this kind of behavior. Indeed this was described in 'Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds' 180 years ago. In my lifetime I have witnessed two episodes of this kind of mass hysteria. The first was the red scare of the early 1950's (I not so much witnessed that as experienced it) and the second was the day care hysteria of satanic cults abusing our children that flared between the late 1980s and early 1990s. Now this is a third manifestation of mass hysteria. ..."
Aug 17, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Gary Weglarz August 14, 2018 at 4:37 pm

It is quite interesting how many uninformed posters and/or trolls would love to find a way to show the "Russiagate" nonsense is somehow plausible in spite of the evidence. They're kind of like a five year old child who desperately wants to keep believing in Santa Claus, even though he just found dad's Santa costume in the closet and he's holding it in his own hands.

I will say that the amount of mental gymnastics required to continue not believing evidence that is right in front of one's eyes is quite impressive – but I'd never underestimate the American people's creativity when they want to maintain their illusions/delusions. And I'd certainly never underestimate the Russiagate troll army's persistence.

At this rate I expect to soon encounter some version of the following "observation" in the comments section for this article: – "maybe space aliens hired by the Russians downloaded the files to a to a new fangled thig-a-ma-jig and then shape-shifted so Craig Murray would be fooled into thinking a real-like-human insider provided him the files on a flash drive." – "oh, oh, wait, maybe the aliens abducted Murray too, and then just made him "think" a fellow human gave him the drive in person." "yeah, yeah, and maybe Assange just says he didn't get the files from the Russians because "he's a space alien too." "Yeah, prove to me that it didn't happen this way – you can't – ha! there! I win!"

Sorry, but two years into this we should be way beyond this kind of – "I can't believe Santa's not real"- denying, dissembling, rationalizing nonsense. Then again, this is America.

Reply

GM , August 14, 2018 at 4:51 pm

America is after all a country in which half the population believe in the creation myth.

jeff montanye , August 17, 2018 at 7:11 am

but if i had to bet, the creationists are less likely to believe in Russiagate than the evolutionists.

Just Plain Scott , August 14, 2018 at 6:14 pm

Please don't give Rachel Maddow any more ideas.

michael , August 15, 2018 at 6:06 am

"Two years after the Iraq War began, 70 per cent of Americans still believed Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the 9/11 attacks, according to a Washington Post survey." The Big Lie works, and since Obama gutted Smith-Mundt, the CIA/ State Department can legally keep Americans tracking on their propaganda narratives.

ToivoS , August 14, 2018 at 4:26 pm

I agree with Lawrences point that this is an issue of social psychology. Rational argument over the facts is simply over taken by some kind of mass hysteria. There certainly precedent for this kind of behavior. Indeed this was described in 'Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds' 180 years ago. In my lifetime I have witnessed two episodes of this kind of mass hysteria. The first was the red scare of the early 1950's (I not so much witnessed that as experienced it) and the second was the day care hysteria of satanic cults abusing our children that flared between the late 1980s and early 1990s. Now this is a third manifestation of mass hysteria.

It all began with Hillary's shocking defeat. Many millions of her supporters knew that she was so good that she had to win. But then she lost. Those millions of Democrats could not accept that in fact their assessment of her talents were totally wrong and that she lost because she has to be one of the worst candidates in American history. That is a reality those people refused to accept. Instead they had to concoct some crazy conspiracy to explain their break with reality. This is a classic case of cognitive dissonance which often leads to mass hysteria.

GM , August 14, 2018 at 5:01 pm

People choose to believe what they feel that they most need to believe to assuage their insecurities fostered by what they perceive to be the dangerous and scary world in which they exist. The simple fact that we know that life is finite by the time we're three years old fosters the creation of such constructs as that of the myth of everlasting life in the kingdom of heaven complete with a mortgage-free condo and an extra parking space for all repentant sinners are mainstream beliefs.

Rob Roy , August 14, 2018 at 11:07 pm

ToivoS, you are right about Hillary. She simply couldn't accept her defeat. She was the one who began Russiagate by the lie, "17 intelligence agencies" said the Russians hacked the emails.
As for times of mass-swallowing of a lie in the 1930s every German thought that Poland was about to invade Germany and they were scared so much that they believed their leaders who "false flagged" them into invading Poland "first." Of course, Poland had no intention of invading Germany.
Notice every time the US attacks another sovereign country, there's a false flag waved for the citizens to follow?
Don't you appreciate that we have consortiumnews?

[Aug 17, 2018] The Russian meddling fraud Weapons of mass destruction revisited by Andre Damon and Joseph Kishore

Notable quotes:
"... There was only one problem with Powell's presentation: it was a lie from beginning to end. ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
Feb 20, 2018 | www.wsws.org

Fifteen years ago, on February 5, 2003, against the backdrop of worldwide mass demonstrations in opposition to the impending invasion of Iraq, then-US Secretary of State Colin Powell argued before the United Nations that the government of Saddam Hussein was rapidly stockpiling "weapons of mass destruction," which Iraq, together with Al Qaeda, was planning to use against the United States.

In what was the climax of the Bush administration's campaign to justify war, Powell held up a model vial of anthrax, showed aerial photographs and presented detailed slides purporting to show the layout of Iraq's "mobile production facilities."

There was only one problem with Powell's presentation: it was a lie from beginning to end.

... ... ...

...War against Iraq, the WSWS wrote, was not about "weapons of mass destruction." Rather, "it is a war of colonial conquest, driven by a series of economic and geo-political aims that center on the seizure of Iraq's oil resources and the assertion of US global hegemony."

The response of the American media, and particularly its liberal wing, was very different. Powell's litany of lies was presented as the gospel truth, an unanswerable indictment of the Iraqi government.

Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen, who rushed off a column before he could have examined Powell's allegations, declared, "The evidence he presented to the United Nations -- some of it circumstantial, some of it absolutely bone-chilling in its detail -- had to prove to anyone that Iraq not only hasn't accounted for its weapons of mass destruction but without a doubt still retains them. Only a fool -- or possibly a Frenchman -- could conclude otherwise."

The editorial board of the New York Times -- whose reporter Judith Miller was at the center of the Bush administration's campaign of lies -- declared one week later that there "is ample evidence that Iraq has produced highly toxic VX nerve gas and anthrax and has the capacity to produce a lot more. It has concealed these materials, lied about them, and more recently failed to account for them to the current inspectors."

Subsequent developments would prove who was lying. The Bush administration and its media accomplices conspired to drag the US into a war that led to the deaths of more than one million people -- a colossal crime for which no one has yet been held accountable.

Fifteen years later, the script has been pulled from the closet and dusted off. This time, instead of "weapons of mass destruction," it is "Russian meddling in the US elections." Once again, assertions by US intelligence agencies and operatives are treated as fact. Once again, the media is braying for war. Once again, the cynicism and hypocrisy of the American government -- which intervenes in the domestic politics of every state on the planet and has been relentlessly expanding its operations in Eastern Europe -- are ignored.

[Aug 17, 2018] US Staged a Coup in Ukraine - Here's Why and How -- Puppet Masters -- Sott.net

Aug 17, 2018 | www.sott.net

US Staged a Coup in Ukraine - Here's Why and How Chris Kanthan
Sott.net
Fri, 17 Aug 2018 20:42 UTC maidan protests gun Save What's the official narrative about the events in late 2013 and early 2014 in Kiev, Ukraine? There was a spontaneous and peaceful Euromaidan "revolution" by freedom-loving people, who forced the corrupt Ukrainian President to flee the country, right? Not so simple. There are many intriguing facts about geopolitics, 70 years of U.S. meddling in Ukraine, and covert regime-change operations that need to added to the mix.

US Meddling

First, objectively speaking, it's curious that a US Senator (John McCain) and the US Assistant Secretary of State (Victoria Nuland) repeatedly attended political protests in another country. Oh, Nuland is also the wife of a prominent warmongering Neocon, Robert Kagan; and she's also the one who famously said , "F*ck the EU" while discussing the future of Ukraine.

In the picture below, McCain is standing on the stage next to Oleh Tyahnybok, the leader of the far-right group called Svoboda, which uses a not-so-subtle logo that combines "N" and "Z." Get it?
McCain Nuland Kiev Save Imagine if Russian or Chinese officials were performing similar stunts at anti-US rallies in Mexico!

Victoria Nuland also admitted during a speech in 2014 that the US had spent $5 BILLION since the 1990s to spread "democracy" in Ukraine. (Here's the link to a 1-min video of her speech).

Soros, NED, McFaul

Many people roll their eyes when they hear "George Soros" and think of conspiracy theories. But Soros' own group - IRF or International Renaissance Foundation - admits in its 2015 annual report that it spent more than $180 MILLION in Ukraine since 1990.
International renaissance foundation Save NED or National Endowment for Democracy is a US taxpayer-funded group that specializes in ... ahem ... regime change. It's chief, Carl Gershman, wrote in a Washington Post op-ed in 2013 (just before the protests) that "Ukraine is the biggest prize."

Michael McFaul - US Ambassador to Russia, 2012-2014 - wrote an op-ed in the WaPo in 2004 where he asked, "Did Americans meddle in the internal affairs of Ukraine?" Then he answered it, "Yes."

Why did McFaul write the article? Because in 2004 , Soros and other NGOs fomented the 'Orange Revolution' in Ukraine. Basically, the election was won by a pro-Russia guy, so Soros and co. helped to organize protests and demand a new election. Then, a month later, the pro-US guy won the new election with 52% of the votes. Democracy, America-style.

BTW, that guy - Yanukovych - who lost the election in 2004 ... ran again in 2010 and won fair and square.

History Rhymes

If you go back in history, you will see that the CIA worked with Neo-Nazis(!) and ultra-nationalists in Ukraine for decades, starting right after World War II. Declassified CIA documents describe Project Aerodynamic in the 1950s and '60s that recruited Ukrainian nationalists - including Nazis and war criminals such as Mykola Lebed who was accused of killing tens of thousands of Poles and Jews - to work against the USSR.
project aerodynamic Save So, now hopefully you can clearly see the pattern and that Ukraine is really of special importance to the US. But why? Well, have you heard of Brzezinski, the geopolitical expert who influenced US foreign policy for 40 years? He came up with the idea of Mujahideen in Afghanistan to fight the USSR, created Al Qaeda, and then repeated the same strategy of using Islamic terrorists in the Balkans, the Caucasus, Libya and Syria.
Brzezinski Afghanistan terrorists Save Brzezinski explained in his 1997 book , The Grand Chessboard, that "Ukraine is a geopolitical pivot. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire." He also said that Ukraine must be brought into NATO by 2010.

Protests and Violence

In 2013, Soros, NED and other NGO's riled up some ordinary people in Kyiv. (BTW, outside Kiev, there were no protests. In many parts of Ukraine, people are very pro-Russia and were happy with President Yanukovych).

Then Neo-Nazi thugs acted as provocateurs and attacked the police with metal bars, chains, fire-bombs, guns and grenades.
Euromaidan protestors Save Neonazis Ukraine Save The Ukrainian government's links to Neo-Nazis are never openly admitted in the US, but this is the reason why Congress refused to pass a bill that banned funding of Neo-Nazi groups! For fun reading on the far-right extremists in Ukraine, do some research on "Svoboda", "Stepan Bandera" and "Azov Battalion."

False Flag Sniper Attack

In a secretly recorded phone call in 2014, Estonia's foreign minister revealed three shocking facts about the Maidan murders:

(Here's the link to an excerpt from the phone call).

A couple of years later, in an Italian documentary called "The Hidden Truth About Ukraine," some men from the Republic of Georgia came forward and admitted that they were used as snipers in Kiev. As I describe in detail in my book , similar false flag sniper attacks were also used in Libya and Syria to foment regime change.

In summary, to advance misguided geopolitical goals, US/EU officials engineered protests and chaos, and drove a democratically elected president out of the country. Then, without an election, new oligarchs - a billionaire and an IMF guy - were handpicked by the West to become the President and the Prime Minister of Ukraine! Democracy in action!

Conclusion

That's the basic truth about the coup in Ukraine, and it hasn't benefited anyone other than the warmongers. Ukraine is split in two and stuck in a frozen civil war; its debt-to-GDP ratio has doubled since the US-backed coup; pensions, social services and minimum wages ($140 a month) have been slashed and the people are still ruled by corrupt oligarchs. The US regime change ops also ignited a chain reaction of needless hostility, hysterical Russophobia and crippling sanctions. The EU has lost more than $100 billion in trade with Russia in the last four years; and the US has pushed Russia deep into China's orbit. Just like the neocon adventures in Iraq and Syria, the meddling in Ukraine will go down as another disastrous and reckless chapter in the sordid history of US foreign policy.

[Aug 17, 2018] The Ruling Establishment are accomplished in the art of manipulating the public into believing whatever they want them to believe in. In fact, they have world wide reach

Notable quotes:
"... The people behind advancing the Russiagate fraud are not concerned about the widening chaos it has engendered. On the contrary, it is playing out exactly as they hoped. ..."
"... Fast growing censorship of dissent, isolation of a major geopolitical competitor, providing an explanation for the rise of Trump and the precipitous decline in public faith in establishment institutions. ..."
Aug 17, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

GM , August 14, 2018 at 4:48 pm

The people behind advancing the Russiagate fraud are not concerned about the widening chaos it has engendered. On the contrary, it is playing out exactly as they hoped.

Fast growing censorship of dissent, isolation of a major geopolitical competitor, providing an explanation for the rise of Trump and the precipitous decline in public faith in establishment institutions.

Hell, it's even being leveraged to explain away racism. Win win win win. I'd say they are right where they want to be at this juncture.

Dave P. , August 14, 2018 at 6:21 pm

GM – Excellent observations. Very true.

I would add that they – the Ruling Establishment – are accomplished in the art of manipulating the public into believing whatever they want them to believe in. In fact, they have world wide reach.

[Aug 17, 2018] New York Times exploits Parkland tragedy to escalate anti-Russian campaign - World Socialist Web Site

Notable quotes:
"... But it is worth noting that, particularly in recent decades, and under the auspices of Editorial Page editor James Bennet, there has been a remarkable integration of the Times ..."
"... The logic of the Times ..."
"... Imperial Messenger ..."
Feb 21, 2018 | www.wsws.org

Less than four days after the Parkland school shooting, the New York Times has found a way to turn a national tragedy that claimed the lives of 17 high school students into an opportunity to escalate its unrelenting campaign of anti-Russian propaganda, involving the continuous bombardment of the public with reactionary lies and warmongering.

Against the backdrop of a major escalation of military tensions between the two countries, the Times seized upon the Justice Department indictment of Russian nationals over the weekend to claim that Russia is at "war" with the United States. Now, the Times has widened this claim into an argument that Russia somehow bears responsibility for social divisions over the latest mass shooting in America.

Its lead headline Tuesday morning blared: "SHOTS ARE FIRED, AND BOTS SWARM TO SOCIAL DIVIDES - Florida School Shooting Draws an Army Ready to Spread Discord"

According to the Times , Russian "bots," or automated social media accounts, sought "to widen the divide" on issues of gun control and mental illness, in order to "make compromise even more difficult." Russia sought to exploit "the issue of mental illness in the gun control debate," and "propagated the notion that Nikolas Cruz, the suspected gunman" was "mentally ill."

The absurd claim that Russia is responsible for the existence of social divisions in America is belied by the shooting itself, which is a testament to the fact that American society is riven by antagonisms that express themselves, in the absence of a progressive outlet, in outpourings of mass violence.

The aim of this campaign is to target anyone who would criticize the underlying social causes of the shooting -- the violence of American society, the nonexistence of mental health services, or even the social psychology that gives rise to mass shootings -- as a "Russian agent" seeking to "sow divisions" in American society. The Times lead is based entirely on a "dashboard" called Hamilton 68 created by the German Marshall Fund's Alliance for Securing Democracy, whose lead spokesman is Clint Watts, the former US intelligence agent and censorship advocate who declared in November that social media companies must "silence" sources of "rebellion."

Without naming any of the accounts it follows, Hamilton 68 claims to track content tweeted by "Russian bots and trolls." But most of the trends leading the dashboard are news stories, many posted by Russia Today and Sputnik News , that are identical with the trending topics followed by any other news agency. Thus, Hamilton 68 provides an instant New York Times headline generator: Any major news story can be presented as the result of "Russian bots."

The New York Times is making its claims about "Russian meddling" with what is known in the law as "unclean hands." That is, the Times practices the very actions of which it accuses others.

Here is not the place to deal with the long and bloody history of American destabilization campaigns and their horrific consequences in Latin America and the Middle East, or to review the fact that many American journalists serving abroad had dual functions -- as reporters and as agents.

But it is worth noting that, particularly in recent decades, and under the auspices of Editorial Page editor James Bennet, there has been a remarkable integration of the Times with the major operations of the US intelligence agencies.

This is particularly true with regard to Russia, in regard to which the Times acts as an instrument of US foreign policy misinformation, practicing exactly what it accuse the Kremlin of.

Take, for example, the so-called political "dissident" Aleksei Navalny. This proponent of extreme nationalism and xenophobia, with deep ties to Russia's fascistic right, and extensive connections to US intelligence agencies, has been championed by the Times as the voice of social dissent in Russia. Despite his miniscule support within Russia, Navalny's activities generate front-page headlines in the Times , which has mentioned him in over 400 separate articles.

Another example is the Times ' promotion of the "feminist" rock band Pussy Riot, which makes a habit of getting themselves arrested by taking their clothes off in Russian Orthodox churches, and whose fate the Times holds up as a horrific example of Russian oppression. The very name "Pussy Riot," which in typical usage is not even translated into Russian, expresses the fact that this operation aims to influence American, and not Russian, public opinion.

In 2014, the Times met with members of Pussy Riot at their editorial offices, and have since extensively promoted the group, having mentioned it in over 400 articles. The term "anti-Putin opposition" is mentioned in another 600 articles.

The logic of the Times ' campaign was expressed most clearly by its columnist Thomas Friedman, the personification of the pundit as state intelligence mouthpiece whose career was aptly summed up in a biography titled Imperial Messenger . In a column published on February 18 ("Whatever Trump is Hiding is Hurting All of US Now"), Friedman declares a "code red" threat to the integrity of American democracy.

"At a time when the special prosecutor Robert Mueller -- leveraging several years of intelligence gathering by the F.B.I., C.I.A. and N.S.A. -- has brought indictments against 13 Russian nationals and three Russian groups -- all linked in some way to the Kremlin -- for interfering with the 2016 U.S. elections," Friedman writes, "America needs a president who will lead our nation's defense against this attack on the integrity of our electoral democracy."

This "defense," according to Friedman, would include "bring[ing] together our intelligence and military experts to mount an effective offense against Putin -- the best defense of all." In other words, war.

The task of all war propaganda is to divert internal social tensions outwards, and the Times ' campaign is no different. Its aim is to take the anger that millions of people feel at a society riven by social inequality, mass alienation, police violence, and endless war, and pin it on some shady foreign adversary.

The New York Times ' claims of Russian "meddling" in the Parkland shooting set the tone for even more hysterical coverage in the broadcast evening news. NBC News cited Jonathan Morgan, another collaborator on the Hamilton 68 project, who declared that Russia is "really interested in sowing discord amongst Americans. That way we're not focused on putting a unified front out to foreign adversaries."

The goal of the ruling class and its media accomplices is to put on "a unified front" through the suppression of social opposition within the United States. Along these Lines, NBC added, "Researchers tell us it's not just Russia deploying these attacks on social media," adding "many small independent groups are trying to divide Americans and create chaos."

Who are these "small independent groups" seeking to "create chaos"? By this, they no doubt mean any news or political organization that dares question the official line that everything is fine in America, and that argues that the horrendous levels of violence that pervade American society are somehow related to social inequality and the wars supported and justified by the entire US political establishment

[Aug 17, 2018] Just like the establishment of long TSA lines pushing us travelers through airport security like inspected cattle, was an example of 911 reforms to our system, this Russia Gate Investigation and all its trappings are doing the same destruction to our liberties on the Internet

Notable quotes:
"... The erosion of the American society is on track, and its stay the course until this corporate owned government cannot govern no more. ..."
"... In a real rule of law world Jeff Sessions would take all this evidence the VIPS have produced and present it into the Mueller Investigation as just that evidence, or proof of lack there of. ..."
"... For a possibly useful parsing of what is actually going in the Mueller investigation, check out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEt4kwAvNqU The delivery is a bit inelegant, but the main takeaway is that the Mueller investigation is meant to hide what really went down between the Dems and the Russians. ..."
"... Here you can read to how far the U.S. is willing to go with nothing but allegations. http://www.unz.com/akarlin/russia-sanctions/ This insanity has to end. ..."
Aug 13, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Joe Tedesky, August 13, 2018 at 8:59 pm

Russia Gate has given us one thing for sure, and that it is now ravishing the internet of all of its corporate controlled First Amendment Rights. Just like the establishment of long TSA lines pushing us travelers through airport security like inspected cattle, was an example of 911 reforms to our system, this Russia Gate Investingation and all its trappings are doing the same destruction to our liberties.

What memories of a free and liberal society have we all seen swirl ever so slowly, but deliberately down the memory hole of our once civil liberties? The erosion of the American society is on track, and its stay the course until this corporate owned government cannot govern no more.

In a real rule of law world Jeff Sessions would take all this evidence the VIPS have produced and present it into the Mueller Investigation as just that evidence, or proof of lack there of.

Good to hear Patrick Lawrence get down with it, that's what we need more of. At the rate the internet is going, say it now, or forever hold your peace, is now in force.

Joe Tedesky , August 13, 2018 at 10:26 pm

Here is a link to something that at first seems a little unrelated, but after reading it ask yourself, is it? Moon Jae in of S Korea may just have the answer for the way of dealing with past government malpractices.

https://journal-neo.org/2018/08/13/military-plot-in-south-korea-mayhem-in-defense-intelligence-agency/

Hey want to drain the swamp? call Moon Jae in ASAP.

Joe Tedesky , August 13, 2018 at 10:40 pm

Read this, it will piss you off.

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/regulation/senator-mark-warner-proposes-the-end-of-free-speech-the-revenge-of-hillary/

Litchfield , August 14, 2018 at 7:53 am

For a possibly useful parsing of what is actually going in the Mueller investigation, check out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEt4kwAvNqU The delivery is a bit inelegant, but the main takeaway is that the Mueller investigation is meant to hide what really went down between the Dems and the Russians.

Joe Tedesky , August 13, 2018 at 11:06 pm

Here you can read to how far the U.S. is willing to go with nothing but allegations. http://www.unz.com/akarlin/russia-sanctions/ This insanity has to end.

Joe Tedesky , August 13, 2018 at 11:27 pm

I can't help myself, you need to read Caitlin Johnston's take on how it's okay to run with scissors in your hand . just brilliant. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/50024.htm

Dave P. , August 14, 2018 at 1:29 am

Excellent observations, Joe. I hope this – Russia gate – does not lead to a much more dangerous zone as it appears to be heading to with these sanctions against Russia slated to go into effect in November. There was this rather very disquieting article the other day in Strategic Culture by Finnian Cunningham.

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/08/11/us-sanctions-pushing-russia-war.html

As you said this insanity must end or else. . .

[Aug 17, 2018] The Russia-gate narrative has become "too big to fail

If this is true it is hard to see Russiagate collapsing...
Notable quotes:
"... The ruling establishment has pushed all their chips onto the table in a do-or-die effort to make this allegation stick. ..."
"... How many times has the U.S. "national security" establishment brazenly deceived the country and the world, at incalculable cost, without being held to account in a way that seriously discomfited the perpetrators? ..."
"... From the bomber gap, to the missile gap, through Vietnam from beginning to end, to Iran-Contra, to Iraqi WMDs, and so much more. ..."
"... It's hard to see Russia-gate collapsing in a way that would force its architects and proponents to acknowledge its fictitiousness: it is too much of an irrational miasma to actually be falsifiable in the sort of concrete way that led to even such perfunctory admissions of error as we got when Saddam's "WMDs" failed to exist. ..."
"... Bush Jr. was able to make a White House Correspondents Dinner joke about those derned elusive WMDs – and get laughs – *one year* after the invasion of Iraq. Why would this time be any different? ..."
"... People often wonder why psychopathic sadists enjoy torturing their victims, when presumably they have enough cognitive empathy to appreciate how terrible the suffering is. ..."
"... But that is WHY the sadists enjoy their activities so much. What they do to their victims is so unendurable, yet someone is having to endure it – and that somebody is not the perpetrator. ..."
"... It's hard to know if the American people will ever see a full explanation of this, Church Committee or FOIA style, ..."
Aug 17, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Maxwell Quest August 13, 2018 at 9:38 pm Excellent article! I was particularly jolted by the reference that the Russia-gate narrative has become "too big to fail." So true!

The ruling establishment has pushed all their chips onto the table in a do-or-die effort to make this allegation stick.

They have passed the point of no return; there is no walking it back now. If it fails heads will roll, but most importantly these trusted institutions will have flushed their last vestiges of credibility down the drain. Then what? Reply

David G , August 14, 2018 at 2:45 am

Or, as Patrick Lawrence puts it: "The risk of self-inflicted damage these institutions assume, should the truth of the Russia-gate events emerge -- as one day it surely will -- is nearly incalculable."

However, I disagree with both Mr. Lawrence and you, Maxwell Quest. I think that assessment is actually too optimistic.

How many times has the U.S. "national security" establishment brazenly deceived the country and the world, at incalculable cost, without being held to account in a way that seriously discomfited the perpetrators?

From the bomber gap, to the missile gap, through Vietnam from beginning to end, to Iran-Contra, to Iraqi WMDs, and so much more.

It's hard to see Russia-gate collapsing in a way that would force its architects and proponents to acknowledge its fictitiousness: it is too much of an irrational miasma to actually be falsifiable in the sort of concrete way that led to even such perfunctory admissions of error as we got when Saddam's "WMDs" failed to exist.

But even if that somehow does happen, and the whole Beltway official and media establishment has to suck it up and emit a feeble "my bad" about Russia-gate, what makes you think it will have any lasting consequences in terms of the dispensation of power and privilege among the U.S. elites?

Bush Jr. was able to make a White House Correspondents Dinner joke about those derned elusive WMDs – and get laughs – *one year* after the invasion of Iraq. Why would this time be any different?

AnthraxSleuth , August 14, 2018 at 4:07 am

"Bush Jr. was able to make a White House Correspondents Dinner joke about those derned elusive WMDs – and get laughs" – *one year* after the invasion of Iraq. Why would this time be any different?

Yup, got lots of laughs from his fellow members of the club that were coconspirators.

Had he tried that joke around veterans and the families of casualties of that whole criminal adventure I doubt he would have made it out alive.

Tom Welsh , August 14, 2018 at 8:57 am

Had he tried that joke around any of the millions of victims of his criminal aggression or their familes and friends, I am sure he would not have made it out alive.

But if you have ever managed to think yourself into the criminal mind, you will understand that it is precisely the fact that he was NOT subject to any comeback that made the whole thing such fun.

People often wonder why psychopathic sadists enjoy torturing their victims, when presumably they have enough cognitive empathy to appreciate how terrible the suffering is.

But that is WHY the sadists enjoy their activities so much. What they do to their victims is so unendurable, yet someone is having to endure it – and that somebody is not the perpetrator.

AnthraxSleuth , August 15, 2018 at 4:51 am

I've never tried to think myself into the criminal mind. And, I thank you for the insight. I have had someone try to kill me. Someone that has killed at least one person before by his own admission. It changes you forever.

Anne Jaclard , August 14, 2018 at 10:33 am

Agreed. The American corporate press has been running what are essentially press releases and "dossiers" of evidence for a year now, mostly from shady private firms (Twitter trolls "discovered" by Graphika, Fusion GPS's "Dirty Dossier," CrowdStrike's initial investigation of the DNC).

Many of these firms aren't neutral parties either, head of CrowdStrike is rabidly anti-Russia and just put together another package of "research" that was debunked on Ukraine.

It's hard to know if the American people will ever see a full explanation of this, Church Committee or FOIA style, given that these are companies with no public obligations .not good.

Jeff Harrison , August 13, 2018 at 8:51 pm

Well, Patrick, I"m glad to see that you're writing for a reputable organization for a change. I don't have a hell of a lot to add to what you've said but I'll say this. I saw an article about the DefCon in Las Vegas this AM or yesterday. I don't remember where and I can't find it again but the gist of it is – they had like 39 kid volunteers who they told to go hack the election systems in some number of "battleground" states. The upshot? 35 of the 39 kids successfully hacked several election systems. The champ was an 11 yo girl who broke in in 10 minutes. If our election systems are so poorly designed that kids can break into them in just a few minutes, I'm sure it's just a walk in the park for an actual pro.

Jeff Harrison , August 13, 2018 at 10:45 pm

Hah! I found it. It was on RT, of course. Here's the link -https://www.rt.com/usa/435824-us-midterms-hacking-children/

Jessika , August 13, 2018 at 8:29 pm

Good comments to this very good article. I agree with Gary that the US is in decline, perhaps terminal, and that rising Eurasia led by China and Russia is the reason for the Deep State's frantic need to try to focus the people on Russia, and now the biggie, China, to avoid the reality of the social decay within from not addressing the people's needs for well over 30 years. However, i also don't think as many Americans are swallowing this lie as MSM and politicos would have us believe. What we now call the "alt-left", perhaps, may take it seriously. It was Mme Clinton herself who is at the top of chain of this manufactured story.

But I don't think we'll see this fixation around for the next 20-30 years, as Mr. Lawrence speculates, because I don't think we'll have that much time for such political nonsense as we are confronted by massive Earth changes, not all human-caused, that are now manifesting.

Tom Kath , August 13, 2018 at 8:28 pm

The correction of "illusions" often has the appearance of being too horrendous to contemplate. Be it the delusion that we can get wealthy on debt, or the delusion that we are invincible. These are all able to be traced back to a fundamental belief which has long been proven to be inconsistent with reality.

mike k , August 13, 2018 at 7:29 pm

How did we get here? The stupefication of the American people was well advanced before the pilgrims landed. The idea that this continent only really began when we "discovered" it was the beginning of our idiocy. That this land was waiting for the blessing of our special role in "civilizing' it was a continuation of our delusional thinking.

[Aug 17, 2018] Teleology means to view things by the purpose they serve rather than by postulated causes . If we are to look at Russiagate from a teleological perspective we can see eight puposes of Russiagate

Aug 17, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Ian Brown, August 13, 2018 at 7:20 pm

In philosophy there is a concept called Teleology which means to view things "by the purpose they serve rather than by postulated causes". If we are to look at Russiagate from a teleological perspective, and indeed we should, as the evidentiary and proportional justification is severely lacking, we see a distinct organism with a broad purpose. So let's examine, what purposes are being served by Russiagate, what agendas being driven, and interests being advanced?

  1. Control of information by imperial, establishment and corporate interests
  2. Control of discourse and dissent being stigmatized
  3. Restriction of democracy by third parties and anti-establishment candidates being smeared as "Kremlin supported'
  4. The enlargement of the military industrial complex
  5. The ideological alignment of the nominal left and center with authoritarianism
  6. The justification of imperialism and aggressive foreign policy
  7. The deflection from widespread issues of discontent
  8. The projection of issues in the 2016 election, particularly primary rigging, voting irregularities, voter suppression, candidate funded troll operations like Correct the Record, widespread collusion between candidates and the mainstream media, and outsized influence of Israeli, Saudi and Ukrainian lobbies

Considering how much of an impact Russiagate has had towards these ends, in comparison how meagerly it has tackled these phantom Russian meddlers and "active measures", I think it's fair to say that Russiagate has NOTHING to do with it's stated cause. If Russiagate can be described by what it does, and not what allegedly caused it, what it is is an authoritarian push to broadly increase control of society by establishment elites, and to advance their imperialistic ambitions. In this way, it does not look dissimilar to the way previous societies have succumbed to authoritarian and imperialist rule, nor do the flavors of propaganda, censorship and nationalism differ greatly. The 2016 election represented the ruling Establishment losing control of the narrative, and to a lesser degree, not getting their preferred candidate. And in response the velvet glove is slipping. Reply

mike k , August 13, 2018 at 7:33 pm

Excellent analysis!

Dunderhead , August 13, 2018 at 9:12 pm

You nailed that one man, Kudos

Maxwell Quest , August 13, 2018 at 9:32 pm

9. The delegitimization of Trump's presidency, and a false justification for removing him from office, or in the very least crippling his ability to function as the executive.

O Society , August 14, 2018 at 2:52 pm

Ian Brown ~

Indeed. The Shit Snowball keeps gaining size and momentum because so many groups get various benefits from propagating the Russiagate narrative.

I xeroxed your list of 8 – as well as an excerpt from Patrick Lawrence's original article – then added references and artwork to set it off in a classy way.

Please let me know what the two of you think of the results:

Russiagate: Too Big to Fail

exiled off mainstreet , August 15, 2018 at 3:00 am

This analysis is spot on.

Kevin Huxford , August 13, 2018 at 7:18 pm

Duncan Campbell's article is embarrassing, especially in that it took him so long to even slightly correct his misrepresentation of Binney's position on the matter.

Dunderhead , August 13, 2018 at 7:00 pm

This article touches on such a fundamental truth which is the new paradigm of US disunity, the fracturing of both US political parties and a greater General dysfunction of the American body politic not to mention the US's Image of itself.

Gary Weglarz , August 13, 2018 at 6:41 pm

A truly excellent and very important post! Thank you.

"To doubt the hollowed-out myth of American innocence is a grave sin against the faith." – author

Absolutely! The current "Russiagate" lunacy renders anyone a "heretic" who might engage in such "doubt"
– or who engages in any independent critical thinking on this matter. I've never seen the political class, the deep state psychopaths, and the MSM more irrational, nor more out of touch with and more contemptuous of – simple basic verifiable physical "reality" – than at this historical moment. The current state of affairs suggests the American empire may not simply be in decline, but is instead perhaps in free fall with the hard ground of reality rapidly approaching. The current level of absolute public lunacy also suggests the landing will be neither graceful nor pleasant, and may actually come as a shock to the true believers.

O Society , August 13, 2018 at 5:42 pm

Terrific article, Patrick Lawrence. Too Big Too Fail is exactly correct. Just as the banks in the 2008 mortgage crisis got bailed out, so the Russiagate narrative is cultivated by the US government. Both are insults to the American people.

As you know, there has been some recent discussion of this leak vs. hack topic. To wit:

There is a response by William Binney in video form at the end of this article:

How to Understand this Russian Hacking Thing

To a recent challenge of the VIPS "leak" evidence presented in this article in Computer Weekly:

Duncan Campbell alleges Bill Binney changes mind about the leak

[Aug 16, 2018] Russiagate and neo-McCarthysim are result of the newly minted Anti-Trump allience of neocons and neoliberals

Notable quotes:
"... Your comment is awaiting moderation. ..."
"... "authoritarian regimes pursue different objectives than societies with governments that are accountable to the people and respect the rule of law." ..."
"... Fortunately, our think tank alliance is in still in no position (heaven be thanked!) to impose its will. The most these hysterical complainers can do is air their grievances and misrepresent them as somehow "preserving democracy." ..."
"... This, of course, is indicative of the neocon tactic of linking whatever its advocates see fit to address to a supposed common purpose, which is saving democracy from whatever is defined as "antidemocratic." ..."
Aug 16, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Q August 13, 2018 at 6:17 pm

Neocons and [neo]liberals have always had a lot in common. They both want:
– Globalism
– open borders
– anti-Russia, Iran
– American hegemony which means endless wars
– support for gay marriage
– anti-Nationalism hence anti-Trump
The only thing that separated them were gun control and abortion, but even those issues aren't as clearcut anymore.
Learned Foot , says: August 13, 2018 at 9:42 pm
Two sides of the same bad penny. Question is, how do we get rid of it?
Tom Cullem , says: August 14, 2018 at 2:39 pm
@Dundalk – Second all that, perfectly put.

They aren't worried about democracy: they're worried about global corporatist power, which is what "transatlantic partnerships" really translates to.

"Populism" is another name for the Great Unwashed trying to regain some control of their environment. Bloody cheek, eh?

likbez , says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
August 15, 2018 at 9:34 pm
@Q, August 13, 2018 at 6:17 pm

Neocons and [neo]liberals have always had a lot in common. They both want:

Bingo! It looks like neocons and neoliberals joined forces to fight the rise of "populism" which should probably be more properly called "the crisis of neoliberalism." To a certain extent, the current "NeverTrumplists" neo-McCarthyism campaign is the behavior of a wounded neoliberal beast (I am not sure why they have such an allergic reaction to Trump who in domestic policies is 100% neoliberal and in foreign policy is 66% neocon.)

They try to suppress dissent under the smoke screen of "commitment to democracy and core democratic principles" because, as you can guess, this is very important "at a time when the character of our societies is at stake." The character of the neoliberal society in the USA and EU to be exact.

Ironically, those "defenders of democracy" are interested in the issue of democracy even less than former Soviet nomenklatura. All they want is to kick the "classic neoliberalism" can down the road (and, as a side effect, preserve their lucrative sinecures; this is especially visible with Max Boot in his recent interviews )

As Professor Paul Gottfried noted about the recent alliance of the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and the neoliberal Center for American Progress (CAP):

Moreover, who are these "authoritarian" bad guys that CAP now has in its crosshairs and plans to rid the world of with its new neocon pals?

Presumably, it's the right-of-center governments in Eastern and Central Europe, as personified by favorite leftist whipping boy Viktor Orban.

Although CAP doesn't want to be especially "confrontational" in dealing with its villains, or so it claims, it also proclaims that "authoritarian regimes pursue different objectives than societies with governments that are accountable to the people and respect the rule of law."

It might be useful for CAP to tell us how exactly Hungary, Poland, and other right-of-center European governments have not been democratically elected and have disrespected their countries' legal traditions.

Fortunately, our think tank alliance is in still in no position (heaven be thanked!) to impose its will. The most these hysterical complainers can do is air their grievances and misrepresent them as somehow "preserving democracy." All AEI and CAP have done is to take a multitude of grievances -- e.g., America's failing to oppose adequately China's cyberthreats, putting up with Russia's aggression, "security threats" in general, and nuclear proliferation -- and mixed them together with standard leftist boilerplate about Orban's "illiberalism" and "sharing our values."

This, of course, is indicative of the neocon tactic of linking whatever its advocates see fit to address to a supposed common purpose, which is saving democracy from whatever is defined as "antidemocratic."

[Aug 16, 2018] An authorised version of Nekrasov's movie is available on Vimeo now

Aug 16, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

MAGNITSKIY MOVIE. An authorised version is available on Vimeo here. I urge you to watch it: not only does it complete destroy Browder's case, it is an interesting detective process as the film-maker gradually perceives the inconsistencies and manipulations. Browder's story has been extremely important at setting up the anti-Russia dancing mania : if it's a lie, then what?

[Aug 16, 2018] 'Bill Browder Should Be in Jail' Says Philip Giraldi, Widely Respected Pundit and Retired CIA Officer

Aug 16, 2018 | russia-insider.com

'Bill Browder Should Be in Jail' Says Philip Giraldi, Widely Respected Pundit and Retired CIA Officer The Browder story keeps getting more and more airplay, and it is not complimentary to him. Patrick Fleming 10 min ago | 29 13 Giraldi, one of the most popular writers on the conservative Unz.com , is one of the superstars of the alt-media landscape. He has been outspoken about the pernicious effects of Israel and wealthy pro-Israeli American Jews on American politics. You can see many of his articles on RI here .

This was from a radio interview with Lee Stranahan, formerly of Breitbart, now with Sputnik, the Russian state-owned news agency.

You can listen to the whole thing here. Key quotes below:

Listen to "Connecting the Dots on Bill Browder and Mikhail Khodorkovsky" on Spreaker.

"He's basically been the one who appears on the networks, appears before Congress," "

"He is someone that they've [US officials] decided has to be the spokesperson in terms of what's going on in Russia, and yet he has a hidden agenda as a potential criminal."

"I think the story is growing; I'm seeing more and more references to Browder in a negative way."

"The problem is that we have to get this at a level where Browder is doing his damage, and that's in the mainstream media, places like The New York Times, and also to have some people in Congress begin to speak up and say, 'Hey, what about the Magnitsky Act and everything that we did to provoke a crisis with Russia based on what Browder was telling us?'".

"Once you understand that, you realize that Browder, if anything, should be in jail."

This post first appeared on Russia Insider

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

[Aug 16, 2018] America's deep-seated Russophobia is bringing US-Russia relations to the brink of ultimate disaster by Robert Bridge

Notable quotes:
"... wandering European filmmaker ..."
"... In the fifties, the most effective sanction was terror. Almost any publicity from HUAC meant the 'blacklist'. Without a chance to clear his name, a witness would suddenly find himself without friends and without a job ..."
"... clear this whole Russian thing up ..."
"... best democracy money can buy ..."
"... tough on Russia ..."
"... @Robert_Bridge ..."
"... Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! ..."
Aug 16, 2018 | www.rt.com

Starting around WWI, the US has experienced at least three waves of anti-Russia sentiment. What is unique about today's Russophobia is that it's not based on ideological differences, but rather raw political brinkmanship. When viewing particular chapters of American history, it becomes evident that US leaders have a tendency to believe, or feign to believe, that Americans are totally incapable of acting and thinking for themselves. We the ignorant sheeple are simply unqualified to act as independent agents in times of crisis. Instead, the American people are being manipulated like marionettes at the hands of some foreign puppet master, which, as we have been reminded of late on numerous occasions, is Russia.

Russophobia in the US has deep roots. In 1919, coming just after WWI and the Russian Revolution, an imagined Bolshevik bogeyman was seen as the force behind a series of domestic upheavals, like the Seattle General Strike when 65,000 workers walked off their jobs for five days, and the Boston Police Strike, which saw officers protesting for better wages and conditions.

The rationale to explain those past social seizures sounds strikingly familiar today: any American who dares speak out on some domestic issue must be under the subtle influence of a Kremlin indoctrination campaign.

The mythical beast from the east raised its head again in the 1950s as Senator Joseph McCarthy launched a political witch hunt against suspected communist sympathizers in various fields, including government, education and labor. In a sign of repressive times to come, Americans were subjected to show trials conducted by the 'House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC),' a public spectacle that systematically ruined the lives of hundreds of citizens under specious claims.

In Hollywood alone, an estimated 300 industry names, including Charlie Chaplin and Orson Welles, were placed on blacklists. Chaplin, eventually ostracized from Hollywood, was forced to flee the country for Switzerland; Welles, under similar duress, also fled to Europe, becoming a " wandering European filmmaker ."

An article in the Harvard Crimson summed up the 'reign of terror' then gripping the nation: " In the fifties, the most effective sanction was terror. Almost any publicity from HUAC meant the 'blacklist'. Without a chance to clear his name, a witness would suddenly find himself without friends and without a job ."

Today, 'McCarthyism' is a synonym for leveling accusations of subversive activities or even treason without providing any sort of evidence. Yet it seems Americans have discarded that part of their history, much to the dismay of US-Russia relations.

This leads us to a bit of modern insanity known as Russiagate, a political show trial whose leading instigators make Joseph McCarthy look like a levelheaded statesman by comparison. After all, there were some grounds for suspicion on both sides of the US-Soviet ideological divide that makes McCarthyism somewhat understandable. Indeed, it must have certainly discomfited the Washington elite that some Americans were becoming increasingly attracted to communism as the ugly side of capitalism – magnified by the earlier deprivations of the Great Depression - was being revealed.

Compared to previous American 'Red Scares,' Russiagate lacks any ideological mat where one may lay the blame for the bilateral breakdown. Instead, it is a dangerous game of political brinkmanship between the two main - I would argue only - US political parties in a desperate bid for seizing the ultimate reins of power. In fact, Russia is an innocent bystander caught in a domestic crackup. This is proven by the fact that the accusers have failed to produce any physical evidence to substantiate the claim that Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election.

One way for the grand inquisitors to quickly wrap up their Russiagate probe is to have WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange - who has previously declared his desire to " clear this whole Russian thing up " – safely provide testimony before US lawmakers. And 'safely' is the key word here. Although the US Senate Intelligence Committee has sent a formal request for Assange to appear before them in person, the likelihood of such a public spectacle – which would certainly be the media event of the year – seems highly unlikely. After all, one of the main reasons the WikiLeaks editor is holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London is that he believes the British authorities will extradite him to the US, where yet another group of US lawmakers have vowed to prosecute him for publishing hundreds of thousands of classified US military and diplomatic documents. Meanwhile, testifying via video conference also seems unrealistic since the Ecuadorian government of President Lenín Moreno has terminated Assange's internet access. So much for getting to the bottom of Russiagate.

BREAKING: US Senate Intelligence Committee calls editor @JulianAssange to testify. Letter delivered via US embassy in London. WikiLeaks' legal team say they are "considering the offer but testimony must conform to a high ethical standard". Also: https://t.co/pPf0GTjTlp pic.twitter.com/TrDKkCKVBx

-- WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) August 8, 2018

What this means is that the US political system, not 'Russian hackers,' is the ultimate source of our current malaise. Since there is no real third party to challenge the status quo, Donald Trump himself represented this crucial missing link of the US political system. And since he promised on the campaign trail to do some very radical things, such as scale back America's global military footprint and end hostilities with Russia, two of the biggest money-making rackets on the planet, the Establishment was forced to act.

After all, there is simply too much money and power at stake in the US political system - the " best democracy money can buy ," as the journalist Greg Palast described it - to allow a renegade real estate developer and TV personality to just walk in and destroy it overnight. Thus, once it became apparent that Trump would most likely win the 2016 election (it is my personal opinion that the likelihood of a Trump victory was known well in advance, despite, or precisely because of, what the mainstream media polls predicted in one uniform voice), the elite rolled out 'Red Scare III' in a desperate bid to bury the Republican powerhouse and keep control of the US political machinery.

So, what we have here is the US political system, suffering the malignancy of its own internal contradictions, essentially feeding off its own tail in order to survive just the short term. The remedies that the maverick Donald Trump - a 'third-party candidate' who was clever enough to outmaneuver the most ruthless political gamesters in the business - was willing to impose in order to return some normalcy to US foreign policy were rejected, much to the detriment of global peace and security.

The problem with the US 'Deep State' exerting pressure on the White House over Russia is obvious: it has forced Donald Trump, who is certainly mindful of approaching Midterm elections, to go to dangerous extremes to demonstrate that he is " tough on Russia ." Just this week he announced new sanctions against Russia over the British 'Skripal affair,' which involved the miraculous recovery and subsequent disappearance of former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter after allegedly being exposed to the Novichok nerve agent, yet another groundless smear job against Russia.

Although Russia certainly understands that it is being used as a convenient scapegoat in a bitter battle between two entrenched US political parties that threatens United States' very survival, it will have no choice but to respond in some manner to such aggressive actions.

To say that is an unfortunate turn of events, when Trump had initially promised a new day in US-Russia relations on the campaign trail, would be the understatement of the century.

@Robert_Bridge

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Read more

[Aug 16, 2018] Russiagate and neo-McCarthysim are result of the newly minted Anti-Trump allience of neocons and neoliberals

Notable quotes:
"... Your comment is awaiting moderation. ..."
"... "authoritarian regimes pursue different objectives than societies with governments that are accountable to the people and respect the rule of law." ..."
"... Fortunately, our think tank alliance is in still in no position (heaven be thanked!) to impose its will. The most these hysterical complainers can do is air their grievances and misrepresent them as somehow "preserving democracy." ..."
"... This, of course, is indicative of the neocon tactic of linking whatever its advocates see fit to address to a supposed common purpose, which is saving democracy from whatever is defined as "antidemocratic." ..."
Aug 16, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Q August 13, 2018 at 6:17 pm

Neocons and [neo]liberals have always had a lot in common. They both want:
– Globalism
– open borders
– anti-Russia, Iran
– American hegemony which means endless wars
– support for gay marriage
– anti-Nationalism hence anti-Trump
The only thing that separated them were gun control and abortion, but even those issues aren't as clearcut anymore.
Learned Foot , says: August 13, 2018 at 9:42 pm
Two sides of the same bad penny. Question is, how do we get rid of it?
Tom Cullem , says: August 14, 2018 at 2:39 pm
@Dundalk – Second all that, perfectly put.

They aren't worried about democracy: they're worried about global corporatist power, which is what "transatlantic partnerships" really translates to.

"Populism" is another name for the Great Unwashed trying to regain some control of their environment. Bloody cheek, eh?

likbez , says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
August 15, 2018 at 9:34 pm
@Q, August 13, 2018 at 6:17 pm

Neocons and [neo]liberals have always had a lot in common. They both want:

Bingo! It looks like neocons and neoliberals joined forces to fight the rise of "populism" which should probably be more properly called "the crisis of neoliberalism." To a certain extent, the current "NeverTrumplists" neo-McCarthyism campaign is the behavior of a wounded neoliberal beast (I am not sure why they have such an allergic reaction to Trump who in domestic policies is 100% neoliberal and in foreign policy is 66% neocon.)

They try to suppress dissent under the smoke screen of "commitment to democracy and core democratic principles" because, as you can guess, this is very important "at a time when the character of our societies is at stake." The character of the neoliberal society in the USA and EU to be exact.

Ironically, those "defenders of democracy" are interested in the issue of democracy even less than former Soviet nomenklatura. All they want is to kick the "classic neoliberalism" can down the road (and, as a side effect, preserve their lucrative sinecures; this is especially visible with Max Boot in his recent interviews )

As Professor Paul Gottfried noted about the recent alliance of the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and the neoliberal Center for American Progress (CAP):

Moreover, who are these "authoritarian" bad guys that CAP now has in its crosshairs and plans to rid the world of with its new neocon pals?

Presumably, it's the right-of-center governments in Eastern and Central Europe, as personified by favorite leftist whipping boy Viktor Orban.

Although CAP doesn't want to be especially "confrontational" in dealing with its villains, or so it claims, it also proclaims that "authoritarian regimes pursue different objectives than societies with governments that are accountable to the people and respect the rule of law."

It might be useful for CAP to tell us how exactly Hungary, Poland, and other right-of-center European governments have not been democratically elected and have disrespected their countries' legal traditions.

Fortunately, our think tank alliance is in still in no position (heaven be thanked!) to impose its will. The most these hysterical complainers can do is air their grievances and misrepresent them as somehow "preserving democracy." All AEI and CAP have done is to take a multitude of grievances -- e.g., America's failing to oppose adequately China's cyberthreats, putting up with Russia's aggression, "security threats" in general, and nuclear proliferation -- and mixed them together with standard leftist boilerplate about Orban's "illiberalism" and "sharing our values."

This, of course, is indicative of the neocon tactic of linking whatever its advocates see fit to address to a supposed common purpose, which is saving democracy from whatever is defined as "antidemocratic."

[Aug 15, 2018] Some suggestions about contra sanctions that Russia can implement

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Cortes says: August 12, 2018 at 10:44 pm

...Call a presser at the UN and have the Ambassador confirm that Obama and HRC are wholly paid-up RF assets and watch Civil War II unfold.

[Aug 15, 2018] A nice smackdown to the morons running the UK and their inane propaganda

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

kirill says: August 12, 2018 at 4:55 pm

https://www.youtube.com/embed/_ST2RHxA2D0?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

Apologies if the above was posted before. But that is nice smackdown to the morons running the UK and their inane propaganda about how the World Cup was like the 1936 Berlin Olympics.

No high ranking UK officials attended the World Cup as you know. But they had quite the entourage to the 1936 Olympics. Sick, hypocrite f*cks.

[Aug 15, 2018] McFaul and Browder are on the same team, playing different positions

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile August 8, 2018 at 3:10 am

McFaul is talking shit:

First rule of diplomacy– respect the culture and traditions of your your [sic] host country, aka as [sic] the place where you were born.

In Seagal's case, the "host" country to which the "academic" McFaul refers is not "also known as the place where you were born", where "you" is Seagal, to whom McFaul is proffering unsolicited advice.

The place where Seagal was born is the USA: Seagal's host country in this instance is Russia.

If Seagal had truly wished to respect the culture and traditions of his host country, he should have made his statement of acceptance of the post in Russian:

Я глубоко потрясен и польщен назначением специальным представителем российского Министерства иностранных дел по гуманитарным связям с США. Надеюсь, что мы сможем достичь мира, гармонии и положительных результатов в мире. Я очень серьезно отношусь к этой чести.

However, as far as I am aware, Mr. Seagal does not speak Russian, but McFaul does, albeit он несет полную хуйню!

Jen August 8, 2018 at 4:58 am
I see Seagal writes better English than McFaul does.
Mark Chapman August 8, 2018 at 4:06 pm
Oh, yeah, uh huh, McFaul speaks Russian. In fact, he is some kind of jive-talkin' Russian homie, telling his audience that he looked forward to seeing them in 'Yoburg', which is the culture-respectful term for "Yekaterinburg'. That's what got him dubbed "McFuck'. if I recall correctly.

http://exiledonline.com/mister-mcfahk-goes-to-fuckberg-the-continuing-saga-of-amb-michael-mcfauls-epic-struggle-with-language/

Samenleving August 8, 2018 at 4:56 am
McFaul shredded for his hypocrisy here:

https://www.thekomisarscoop.com/2018/05/ex-us-ambassador-to-russia-mcfaul-dissembles-then-reveals-about-magnitsky-act/

McFaul is a long time friend of Browder. In 2011, when he was Obama's advisor and architect of the "Russian reset" policy, he disagreed with the proposed Magnitsky bill and wrote this memo:
https://www.scribd.com/document/60996722/Administration-Comments-on-S1039-Final

Then off he went as US Ambassador to Russia, where he almost immediately invited a host of Russian opposition figures to the US embassy. According to Olga Romanova (& wikipedia) they discussed the recent Russian protests and "the United States Presidential election campaign" with McFaul.

While McFaul was away fostering Democrat collusion with Russian opposition figures, Browder rammed the Magnitsky Act through Congress because of the legislative anomaly that the Jackson-Vanik Amendment had to be repealed and Congress wouldn't give away something for nothing.

McFaul and Browder are on the same team, playing different positions.

kirill August 8, 2018 at 3:33 pm
But ultimately they are impotent chimps. This ain't 1917 and not Sorosite and similar funding of regime change is going to work in Russia. All these US laws and sanctions are blowhard vapidity. They only generate healthy stimulus for Russia to clean up the last vestiges of Yeltsin's 1990s era distortions in its economy and legal system.
et Al August 8, 2018 at 6:24 am
History Extra Al Beeb s'Allah GONAD (God's Own News Agency Direct): Britain's foreign policy secrets
https://www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/britains-foreign-policy-secrets/

Rory Cormac investigates Britain's use of spies and special forces for covert operations in the postwar period

Historian Rory Cormac discusses his new book Disrupt and Deny, which investigates Britain's use of spies and special forces for covert operations in the postwar period
####

Podcast at the link.

There's plenty not mentioned within, but still interesting. I would question though the veracity of official reports released under (Freedom of Information) requests and would assume that some of those documents are fabricated. After all, if keeping secrets is your business, then you have have whole range of options for obfuscation, from complete release to none at all.

Curiously having spoken of the Mau Maus, no mention is made of the discovery a few years ago of MoD dossiers discovered in a skip (UK gov selling off real estate) detailing the torture and abuse of them which until then had been completely denied, and ultimately went before the high court and was fully exposed

[Aug 15, 2018] "Under the mantle of the "war on terrorism," successive US governments, Democratic and Republican alike, have not only conducted wars whose victims number in the millions, but also carried out an unrelenting attack on democratic rights, from domestic spying to censoring the Internet.

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Northern Star August 7, 2018 at 2:36 pm

"Washington allies with ISIS as great power conflict trumps "war on terror"
7 August 2018
The "National Defense Strategy" document released at the beginning of this year declared bluntly that the nearly two-decade focus by the US military on the so-called "global war on terrorism" had come to an end. In its place, a new strategic orientation was being introduced based on preparing for "great power" confrontation, i.e., war with nuclear-armed Russia and China.

This was the first such defense strategy to be issued by the Pentagon in over a decade and expressed the urgency with which Washington views the preparations for a third world war.

A particularly crude and criminal outcome of this policy shift is becoming increasingly apparent in three major theaters where US forces are engaged in active combat operations. Reports from Yemen, Syria and Afghanistan provide firm evidence that the US and its local proxies are allying themselves with and employing the services of elements of ISIS and Al Qaeda in the pursuit of Washington's broader strategic interests.

In Yemen, hundreds, if not thousands, of fighters from Al Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), branded by the US government as the "most dangerous" affiliate of the loose international Al Qaeda network, have been recruited by Washington's closest allies in the Arab world, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, to fight as foot soldiers in the near-genocidal US-backed war that these Persian Gulf oil monarchies have been waging against the impoverished country of Yemen since 2015.

According to an investigative report published Monday by the Associated Press, the Saudi-led coalition "cut secret deals with al-Qaida fighters, paying some to leave key cities and towns and letting others retreat with weapons, equipment and wads of looted cash Hundreds more were recruited to join the coalition itself."

It added that "Key participants in the pacts said the US was aware of the arrangements and held off on any drone strikes."

"Elements of the US military are clearly aware that much of what the US is doing in Yemen is aiding AQAP and there is much angst about that," Michael Horton, a senior analyst at the Jamestown Foundation, a CIA-connected Washington think tank, told the AP.

"However, supporting the UAE and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia against what the US views as Iranian expansionism takes priority over battling AQAP and even stabilizing Yemen," Horton added.

This is a gross understatement. Washington is providing indispensable military support for a war that has reduced millions of Yemenis to the brink of starvation. It is prepared to wipe out much of the country's population in order to bolster its strategic position and that of the reactionary Arab regimes with which it is allied against the perceived threat of Iranian influence to US regional hegemony.

The war has escalated in recent days in the ongoing siege of the Yemeni Red Sea Port of Hodeidah, which was green-lighted by the Trump administration. The UN has warned that a quarter of a million people could lose their lives in this operation, while millions more across the country may die of starvation if it shuts down the port, the sole lifeline for food, fuel and medicine for at least 70 percent of the population.

Recruiting Al Qaeda fighters to slaughter Yemenis in this immense and bloody war crime is entirely consistent with US policy.

In regard to Syria, meanwhile, Russia's Defense Ministry last Thursday issued a statement warning that ISIS has increasingly concentrated its forces in the area around al-Tanaf, near the Syrian-Iraqi border, where the US military maintains a military base and has unilaterally declared a 34-mile exclusion zone around it. US troops there have provided training to so-called "rebels" opposing the government of President Bashar al-Assad and appear to be providing a security screen for ISIS."

"Under the mantle of the "war on terrorism," successive US governments, Democratic and Republican alike, have not only conducted wars whose victims number in the millions, but also carried out an unrelenting attack on democratic rights, from domestic spying to censoring the Internet.

The emerging international alliance between the Pentagon and ISIS only serves to expose the real interests underlying these policies, which are bound up with the waging of war to offset US imperialism's loss of economic preeminence and defend its crumbling global hegemony, and domestic repression to sustain a social order characterized by the most extreme inequality in modern American history."

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/08/07/pers-a07.html

Mark Chapman August 7, 2018 at 7:03 pm
The USA proudly announces that it is repatriating captured ISIS fighters from the Syrian war to their countries of origin.

https://www.keyt.com/news/politics/us-transferring-some-isis-detainees-from-syria-to-their-home-countries/778531846

Keep in touch, ya hear?

Why no money from the Trump administration for Syrian recovery? You know why – because the wrong side won. They say so, in so many words.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/08/07/trumps-post-isis-retreat-leaves-syria-vulnerable-to-russia-and-iran/

"The very abhorrent reality is that Assad has prevailed in this civil war," Dalton said.

yalensis August 8, 2018 at 2:05 am
"While many of the countries that have received detainees have chosen to keep quiet about the repatriations, the Pentagon confirmed on Tuesday that the Republic of Macedonia had taken custody of a group of foreign fighters.
"Today's transfer of Foreign Terrorist Fighters to their country of origin, Macedonia, marks a significant milestone in the much-needed cooperative effort to combat the global threat of terrorism," Pentagon spokesman Eric Pahon told CNN."

Huh? Are the Westie media not even pretending any more, that they are fighting against the terrorists? Most of us know that was B.S. anyhow, but the broader (ignoramuses) public, the kind of morons who watch CNN every day, were not ever supposed to be let in on that little secret.

[Aug 15, 2018] Talking Turkey: In essence this is an emerging market financial crisis, much like the 1997-98 Asian Financial Crisis

Notable quotes:
"... So why should you care? Why does that matter to you or me? Well, like most emerging market financial crisis there is the danger of contagion . ..."
"... Turkey's economy is four times the size of Greece, and roughly equal in size to Lehman Brothers circa 2008. ..."
"... Turkey's other borders face six nations: Georgia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Armenia, and Nakhchivan, a territory affiliated with Azerbaijan. Five of those are involved in ongoing armed conflicts or outright war. ..."
"... NATO has long outlived its' usefulness. Cancel its' stipend and bring our soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen and women home! Put them to work here. Fighting fires. ..."
"... NATO only seems to be useful to the hegemony that supports it. Peace is not it's mission. ..."
Aug 15, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

gjohnsit on Tue, 08/14/2018 - 3:46pm

By now you've probably heard that Turkey is having a financial crisis, and Trump appears to be pouring gasoline on it.
But you may not understand what is happening, or you may not know why it's important.
So let's do a quick recap .

Turkey's currency fell to a new record low today. Year to date it's lost almost half its value, leading some investors and lenders inside and outside of Turkey to lose confidence in the Turkish economy.
...
"Ninety percent of external public and private sector debt is denominated in foreign currencies," he said.

Here's the problem. Because of the country's falling currency, that debt just got a lot more expensive.
A Turkish business now effectively owes twice as much as it did at the beginning of the year. "You are indebted in the U.S. dollar or euro, but your revenue is in your local currency," explained Lale Akoner, a market strategist with Bank of New York Mellon's Asset Management business. She said Turkey's private sector currently owes around $240 billion in foreign debt.

In essence this is an emerging market financial crisis, much like the 1997-98 Asian Financial Crisis.

This is all about hot money that has been washing around in a world of artificially low interest rates, and now, finally, an external shock happened. As it always happens .

The bid-ask spread, or the difference between the price dealers are willing to buy and sell the lira at, has widened beyond the gap seen at the depth of the global financial crisis in 2008, following Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.'s collapse.

So why should you care? Why does that matter to you or me? Well, like most emerging market financial crisis there is the danger of contagion .

The turmoil follows a similar currency crash in Argentina that led to a rescue by the International Monetary Fund. In recent days, the Russian ruble, Indian rupee and South African rand have also tumbled dramatically.

Investors are waiting for the next domino to fall. They're on the lookout for signs of a repeat of the 1997-1998 Asian financial crisis that began when the Thai baht imploded.

A minor currency devaluation of the Thai baht in 1997 eventually led to 20% of the world's population being thrust into poverty. It led to Russia defaulting in 1998, LTCM requiring a Federal Reserve bailout, and eventually Argentina defaulting in 2001.

Turkey's economy is four times the size of Greece, and roughly equal in size to Lehman Brothers circa 2008.

The markets want Turkey to run to the IMF for a loan, but that would require a huge interest rate hike and austerity measures that would thrust Turkey into a long depression. However, that isn't the biggest obstacle .

The second is that Erdogan would have to bury his hatchet with the United States, which remains the IMF's largest shareholder. Without U.S. support, Turkey has no chance of securing an IMF bailout program.

There is another danger, a political one and not so much an economic one, that could have dramatic implications.
If Erdogan isn't overthrown, or humbled, then there is an ironclad certainty that Turkey will leave NATO and the West.

Turkey, unlike Argentina, does not seem poised to turn to the International Monetary Fund in order to stave off financial collapse, nor to mend relations with Washington.

If anything, the Turkish President looks to be doubling down in challenging the US and the global financial markets -- two formidable opponents.
...
Turkey would probably no longer view the US as a reliable partner and strategic ally. Whoever ends up leading the country, a wounded Turkey would most likely seek to shift the center of gravity away from the West and toward Russia, Iran and Eurasia.

It would make Turkey less in tune with US and European objectives in the Middle East, meaning Turkey would seek to assert a more independent security and defense policy.

Erdogan has warned Trump that Turkey would "seek new friends" , although Russia and China haven't yet stepped up to the plate to bat for him.
Russia, Iran and China do have a common interest when in comes to undermining the petrodollar . Pulling Turkey into their sphere of influence would be a coup.

Turkey lies at a historic, strategic crossroad. The bridge between the peaceful West and the war-ridden dictatorships of the East that the West likes to bomb.

On its Western flank, Turkey borders Greece and Bulgaria, Western-facing members of the European Union. A few years ago, Turkey -- a member of NATO -- was preparing the join Europe as a full member.

Turkey's other borders face six nations: Georgia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Armenia, and Nakhchivan, a territory affiliated with Azerbaijan. Five of those are involved in ongoing armed conflicts or outright war.

Losing Turkey would be a huge setback for NATO, the MIC, and the permanent war machine.

QMS on Tue, 08/14/2018 - 4:59pm

IMF = Poison

more struggling economies are starting to get it. Trade wealth for the rulers (IMF supporters) to be paid by the rest of us. Fight back. Squeeze the bankers balls. Can't have our resources, now way, no how, without a fight.

enhydra lutris on Tue, 08/14/2018 - 6:26pm
Can the BRICS get by without Brazil, perhaps by pulling

in a flailing Turkey? Weren't there some outside potential takers encouraging China when it floated its currency proposal?

Nastarana on Tue, 08/14/2018 - 8:41pm
NATO has long outlived its' usefulness. Cancel its' stipend and bring our soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen and women home! Put them to work here. Fighting fires.

Patrolling our shores for drug running and toxic dumping. Teaching school, 10 kids per class maximum. Refurbishing buildings and housing stock. Post Cold War, an military alliance with Turkey makes no sense.

QMS on Tue, 08/14/2018 - 9:22pm
NATO only seems to be useful to the hegemony that supports it. Peace is not it's mission.

[Aug 15, 2018] While the west is gradually leaning toward dumping Ukraine and hoping Russia will solve the financial problems it faces, Russia might decline this offer

Ukraine has huge problems because far right nationalists while hate corruption, do not control economics and oligarchs who control it do not intent to share their profits with the population, who is on the edge of starvation.
Breaking economic ties with Russia helped to relegate Ukraine to semi-colonial status as without cooperation with Russian industries and access to Russian market (which they know very well) many Ukrainian manufacturing industries are less viable..
Ukraine was already converted into debt-slave, and it is extremely difficult to climb out of this hole without default. At the same time it serves are powerful anti-Russian force in the region and as such will be semi-supported by both the USA and EU. for example attacks on Ukrainian currency probably will be avoided.
This is a variant of " don't cry for me Argentina" situation.
Notable quotes:
"... Notably that while the west is gradually leaning toward dumping Ukraine and hoping Russia will solve the problem, the warning signs are there that Russia has no intention of bailing out an exhausted Ukraine, and that this time it is going to be allowed to fail all the way down. The west should be warned that nobody is riding to the rescue and pouring their resources into stabilizing Ukraine – if the west cannot do it, the alternative is collapse and draining emergency work to keep the population from starvation. Prosperity is an impossible dream now, and the people – I think – would be pretty happy to be back where they were before the glorious Maidan. ..."
"... Interestingly, something that was not touched upon in the 'Necessary' section was the elimination of the oligarchy in Kiev and other major cities. I will declare frankly that I have no idea how this might be achieved – as discussed before several times, the Ukrainian oligarchs control something in the order of 70% of Ukrainian GDP, and are not about to gift any of it back to the Ukrainian state. ..."
"... You'll know there's no more money in Ukraine when the oligarchs leave, and I see no sign of that so far, while it is evident they intend to be a big part of any future rebuilding. They've already successfully stolen most of the IMF money, and plainly think an even bigger payday is still in the offing. ..."
"... Eventually, if the USA is unsuccessful in forcing the outbreak of another world war, the west will get around to either asking Russia to help, or trying to dump Ukraine on Russia. ..."
"... Whatever happens, the dream of Ukrainian nationalists to forge a great and powerful ... nation of Ukraine is always going to remain that – a dream. They're happy enough at present scampering about in the ruins and glorying in their imagination of great power, but they are kings of the dungheap without any clue of nation-building. ..."
"... The few who both hated Russia and honestly aspired to a Great Ukraine – free of corruption and able to pay its way through judicious management of its undeniable resources and casting off the peasant mentality – have no influence, and operate at the pleasure of the power-brokers; they are allowed to dabble at anti-corruption until their probing becomes uncomfortable, and then they are discredited and fired, if not charged with the crimes they say they are investigating. ..."
Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Cortes August 10, 2018 at 9:02 pm

Last post time, but a goodie (I think):

http://thesaker.is/whats-destructive-constructive-and-necessary-in-ukrainian-politics/

No intention to comment- read for yourselves.

Mark Chapman August 11, 2018 at 6:41 am
That is indeed an interesting piece – generally speaking, we most enjoy writing with which we agree, and I mostly agree with it and feel the ring of familiarity, because some of it is what we have been saying here for a couple of years. Notably that while the west is gradually leaning toward dumping Ukraine and hoping Russia will solve the problem, the warning signs are there that Russia has no intention of bailing out an exhausted Ukraine, and that this time it is going to be allowed to fail all the way down. The west should be warned that nobody is riding to the rescue and pouring their resources into stabilizing Ukraine – if the west cannot do it, the alternative is collapse and draining emergency work to keep the population from starvation. Prosperity is an impossible dream now, and the people – I think – would be pretty happy to be back where they were before the glorious Maidan.

Interestingly, something that was not touched upon in the 'Necessary' section was the elimination of the oligarchy in Kiev and other major cities. I will declare frankly that I have no idea how this might be achieved – as discussed before several times, the Ukrainian oligarchs control something in the order of 70% of Ukrainian GDP, and are not about to gift any of it back to the Ukrainian state.

But for so long as Ukraine continues to elect one oligarch after another to the office of President, the oligarch of the moment will be far more occupied with increasing his/her personal wealth and power, and settling scores with rivals, than with governance and accountability. At the same time, there is no use hoping the President will be a poor man or woman, because they generally do not have the worldly education to grasp the problem and envision solutions while being simultaneously beset from all sides by the oligarchy, seeking to retain its power and influence.

You'll know there's no more money in Ukraine when the oligarchs leave, and I see no sign of that so far, while it is evident they intend to be a big part of any future rebuilding. They've already successfully stolen most of the IMF money, and plainly think an even bigger payday is still in the offing.

The United States has largely forgotten Ukraine, as it was only ever a pretext for a full-court press against Russia anyway, and it now has enough Russophobia sustainment in its ditzy population to press forward without the need to invoke sympathy for Ukraine. Europe is still quite interested in a resolution, but only because of its fear that it is going to get stuck with the booby prize, and be made to assume responsibility for getting Ukraine on its feet somehow, perhaps even absorbing it. Eventually, if the USA is unsuccessful in forcing the outbreak of another world war, the west will get around to either asking Russia to help, or trying to dump Ukraine on Russia.

Whatever happens, the dream of Ukrainian nationalists to forge a great and powerful ... nation of Ukraine is always going to remain that – a dream. They're happy enough at present scampering about in the ruins and glorying in their imagination of great power, but they are kings of the dungheap without any clue of nation-building.

The few who both hated Russia and honestly aspired to a Great Ukraine – free of corruption and able to pay its way through judicious management of its undeniable resources and casting off the peasant mentality – have no influence, and operate at the pleasure of the power-brokers; they are allowed to dabble at anti-corruption until their probing becomes uncomfortable, and then they are discredited and fired, if not charged with the crimes they say they are investigating.

Patient Observer August 11, 2018 at 8:17 am
Well said. Presumably, the Donbass will pull away from Ukraine and vote to joint Russia and Russia will approve for any number of reasons but certainly including humanitarian, ethnic/cultural connections and military considerations. Other regions such as Odessa could jump aboard as well.

There may be a mass exodus from what is left – the grifter to the West and those seeking a better life to the east. The Nazis will remain behind and may serve some purpose such as providing a pool of mercenaries for CIA projects.

I, for one, do not think the Donbass will be an overwhelming economic burden in the long run. The population has shown resolve and resilience. Given leadership and material aid, they can rebuild fairly quickly I think.

[Aug 15, 2018] The US Must Engage With Russia by Rand Paul

Looks like the US politics of the first decapitating shrike now is under review. Encirclement of Russian meanwhile continues unabated.
Aug 15, 2018 | www.theatlantic.com

Over the years, though, agreements with Russia to reduce nuclear arms have not followed a straight path of success. Shortly after the 9/11 attacks, George W. Bush announced his intention to withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Russian President Vladimir Putin responded by announcing that the INF Treaty might no longer be in Russia's interests. Russia had ratified START II in 2000 but pulled out of the treaty after the U.S. withdrew from the ABM Treaty.

Most recently, New START took effect in 2011. In addition to placing a cap of 1,550 on deployed strategic nuclear warheads, a nearly three-quarters drop from START, New START also cut in half the allowable number of strategic nuclear-delivery vehicles, such as missile launchers and heavy bombers.

New START expires in 2021. If either side allows it to simply sunset, it will be the first time in several decades that a nuclear-arms-reduction treaty between the U.S. and Russia lapses.

... ... ...

Rand Paul is the junior United States Senator from Kentucky.

[Aug 15, 2018] Deciphering The New Caspian Agreemen

Aug 15, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Viktor Katona via Oilprice.com,

It took more than 20 years for littoral states of the Caspian Sea to reach an agreement that would lay the legal foundations for the full utilization of the region's resources. The Fifth Caspian Summit in Aktau, Kazakhstan, brought the long-sought breakthrough after leaders of Russia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan and Iran signed the Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea – a remarkable feat considering that heretofore, barring bilateral deals, the Caspian has been governed by an obsolete 1940 convention between the Soviet Union (of which four current littoral states were a part) and Iran.

As the current Convention incorporates a plethora of tradeoffs between countries, let's look at them in greater detail so as to grasp the implications of the deal.

The Convention stipulates that relations between littoral states shall be based on principles of national sovereignty, territorial integrity, equality among members, non-use of threat of force (it was only 17 years ago that Azerbaijan and Iran almost started a full-blown naval war over contested fields) and non-intervention.

The military-related clauses of the document can be considered a net diplomatic success for the Russian Federation as it prohibits the physical presence of any third-party armed forces, along with banning the provision of a member state's territory to acts of aggression against any other littoral state. Since Russia is by far the most power nation in terms of both general military clout and military presence around the Caspian, this will placate Russian fears about any potential US (or other) encroachment in the area.

Then there's energy... Although the Convention establishes a general legal framework for territorial disputes to be solved, it refrains from any particularities. Therefore prolonged negotiations are to be expected with regard to many disputed oilfields, stemming predominantly from Irani and Azerbaijani claims . Iran advocated throughout the entire negotiation process an egalitarian approach to delimiting the seabed (each nation would get 20% of the coast), running counter the other countries' aspirations. The things is that when Russia concluded its seabed delimitation agreements with Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan in 2001 and 2003, respectively, the parties split their parts using the median line. Point 8.1. effectively keeps the delimitation task in the hands of relevant governments, thereby providing a very modest boost to the demarcation of the Southern Caspian (the Northern part is fully delimited).

There are two main territorial conflicts to be settled – the Irani-Azerbaijani and the Azerbaijani-Turkmen disputes. The row between Baku and Teheran revolves around the Araz-Alov-Sharg field (discovered in 1985-1987 by Soviet geologists), the reserves of which are estimated at 300 million tons of oil and 395 BCm of natural gas. Even though the field is only 90 kilometers away from Baku and should seemingly be under Azerbaijan's grip, if one is to draw a straight line from the Azerbaijani-Irani border most of the field ought to be allotted to Iran (the median would keep most of it in Azerbaijan). As those old enough to remember the 2001 naval ship hostilities would attest, it does matter at what angle the final line is drawn.

The Serdar/Kapaz field (estimated to contain 50 million tons of oil) is the bone of contention between Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan. Considered to be an extension of Azerbaijan's main oil-producing unit, the Azeri-Chirag-Guneshli field, Baku sees it as an indispensable element in its quest to mitigate decreasing oil output numbers. Geographically, Serdar/Kapaz is closer to Turkmenistan, yet here too Azerbaijan might come out the ultimate winner. The Apsheron peninsula stretches out some 60km into the Caspian Sea, in effect extending Azerbaijan's geographical reach. Absent previous demarcation agreements between Baku and Ashgabat, the settlement will once again boil down to getting the angles right, as in the case of Araz-Alov-Sharg. However, it must be said that a resolution might come about as a by-product of new gas endeavors.

Clause 14, dealing with laying subsea pipelines and cables, is the one most coveted by energy analysts , since it has the potential to significantly alter Europe's gas supply options.

According to point 14.2., all parties have the right to construct subsea pipelines given that they comply with environmental standards (which are particularly strict in the Caspian Sea). With no further caveat included, some analysts might be tempted to think that Russia will inevitably use the "environmental protection" card when trying to stop the construction of the Trans-Caspian pipeline (TCP) from Turkmenistan, a pipeline it spent many years to halt . Under current circumstances, when US-Russian relations falling ever deeper into an insurmountable ditch, Moscow's decision to allow for the construction of the mightily Washington-backed TCP to take place might be perceived as a massive omission.

Since the Turkmen gas is unlikely to find demand in Azerbaijan or Turkey, it would need to take the whole route via the South Caucasus Pipeline, TANAP and TAP. Merely the transportation tariffs from these pipelines would render any transportation economically unviable unless European gas prices rise substantially to levels above $300/MCm. Moreover, the estimated cost of building the subsea TCP of $2 billion is a disabling burden for either Türkmengaz or SOCAR. Thus, allowing the construction of Trans Caspian gas pipelines might be a brilliant ruse from the Russians – cognizant of all the deficiencies above, they can wield it as a sign of good will in their never-ending negotiations with the European the economics for supplying gas to Europe via the Southern Gas Corridor are far from being Union.

This being said, there are natural impediments to see the TCP implemented anytime soon. Azerbaijan might be interested in getting transit fees for Turkmen natural gas, yet it lacks the required infrastructure to include the above volumes in its traditional conduit via Turkey.

All in all, the Caspian convention is a good basis for further negotiations, even though it falls short of being an all-encompassing legal framework. Territorial disputes will most likely remain frozen for quite some time and no new gas pipeline projects will see the light of day unless market conditions change.

[Aug 15, 2018] Imperial brainwashing works very well: Many US citizents were willing to kill 2 million Iranian civilians to save 20,000 U.S. soldiers.

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Northern Star says: August 6, 2018 at 1:28 pm

https://www.youtube.com/embed/3wxWNAM8Cso?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2018/8/6/17655256/hiroshima-anniversary-73-nuclear-weapons-proliferation-arms-control

Like Like Reply

  1. Patient Observer says: August 6, 2018 at 1:46 pm Public opinion polling suggests that many Americans would not think twice if there were a great many casualties against evildoers. For example, a 2017 survey found that 60 percent of Americans would support a nuclear attack on Iran that would kill 20 million civilians, to prevent an invasion that might kill 20,000 American soldiers.

    Yup, exceptional people of an exceptional nation.

    Like Like Reply

    1. Northern Star says: August 6, 2018 at 2:22 pm Yes the psychos were planning mass murder a decade ago under Bush.

      https://original.antiwar.com/jorge-hirsch/2006/07/06/nuking-iran-is-not-off-the-table/

      https://original.antiwar.com/jorge-hirsch/2006/10/16/nuclear-strike-on-iran-is-still-on-the-agenda/

      A more detailed analysis of some of the background material relating to your comment:
      https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ISEC_a_00284

      "We were not surprised by the finding that most Americans place a higher
      value on the life of an American soldier than the life of a foreign noncombatant.
      What was surprising, however, was the radical extent of that preference.
      Our experiments suggest that the majority of Americans find a 1:100 risk ratio
      to be morally acceptable. They were willing to kill 2 million Iranian civilians to
      save 20,000 U.S. soldiers. One respondent who approved of the conventional
      air strike that killed 100,000 Iranian civilians candidly expressed even more extreme
      preferences regarding proportionality and risk ratios, while displacing
      U.S. responsibility for the attack onto the Iranian people: "I would sacrifice
      1 million enemies versus 1 of our military. Their choice, their death."

[Aug 15, 2018] China's retaliation will hit America's energy industry particularly hard

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

But the state of American 'journalism' is such that the media must portray America as winning, and will not acknowledge catastrophe until major damage has already been done, because it is patriotic to report on American success.

Patient Observer August 6, 2018 at 12:22 pm

FYI
Officials from three leading US groups that support increased exports of US LNG separately addressed concerns on Aug. 3 over the Chinese Ministry of Commerce's announcement that tariffs ranging 5-25% will be imposed on US LNG.

"China's retaliation will hit America's energy industry particularly hard," said American Petroleum Institute Vice-Pres. for Regulatory and Economic Policy Kyle Isakower. "American oil and gas already hit by US tariffs on industrial products and specialty steel essential to our industry will now be faced with Chinese tariffs on critical US exports, affecting American jobs that rely directly and indirectly on the energy industry."

https://www.ogj.com/articles/2018/08/us-groups-express-concerns-about-china-plans-to-impose-lng-tariffs.html?cmpid=enl_ogj_ogj_daily_update_2018-08-06&pwhid=893d521578abd67c7c1f2e0a59badfa53c05bf4701daba6f7a15095c797ff1cfb5e197eb4a367ebf6d74c0bead3e4836e2e5763a138164741673f9a08d508cc3&eid=397564233&bid=2197384

[Aug 15, 2018] Mark Chapman

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

August 5, 2018 at 7:17 pm Oh, look; Ukraine already is down to about half the gas in storage that it will need for winter. Turning to the west certainly made it 'energy-independent' at least to the extent that the west must 'lend' it money to buy gas which is reverse-flowed from eastern-European countries so that all the Russian is squeezed out of it, and it becomes European freedom gas. Nice work if you can get it, and since Ukraine will not be able to pay it back, it becomes a gift! Why worry, as long as Uncle Sugar is paying the bills?

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSL5N1US27X

Speaking of gas, once-bitten-twice-shy Bulgaria is eager to get a piece of the action, signifying up front its willingness to tap into Turkish Stream for transit to Europe.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/reuters/article-6023431/Bulgaria-expands-pipeline-Turkey-bid-Russian-gas.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ito=1490&ns_campaign=1490

And that's another route through Ukraine which is pretty likely to go dry next year.

[Aug 15, 2018] US production of natural gas for export might well be a wishful thinking

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman August 1, 2018 at 9:14 am

There seems to be a tremendously broad American – and western – assumption that US production is going to 'soar' and continue to ramp ever upward. Is it? Bear in mind that the USA's own consumption of natural gas is growing steadily, at least partly based on this assumption that natural-gas bounty will just continue to increase. What if it doesn't? Then America will have refashioned itself as another huge natural-gas market which has insufficient domestic supply to sustain itself.

[Aug 15, 2018] Dezinformation from Euractive intended to block North Stream II

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

et Al August 6, 2018 at 12:55 pm

Two pieces by Euractive with Neuters, though curiously no byline or attribution is given . Why so shy?

BS1: Friendship no more: How Russian gas is a problem for Germany
https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/friendship-no-more-how-russian-gas-is-a-problem-for-germany/

####

The headline is pure tabloid and not supported in the body of the article apart from 'opinions' by certain people or through use of qualifiers. This is not journalism . Only further proof in my opinion that Euractiv has become part of the EU's unofficial channels of hybrid warfare . Euractiv/Neuters has also expanded in to the Balkans to provide 'services' in Croatia/Serbia etc. which just so happens to coincide with all the shrill headlines about Russia 'influencing the Balkans' – which are of course BS. Just look at the map. Short of Macedonia (not for long) and Serbia, they are all NATO states . Russia only helps states who want to help themselves (Syria/Serbia – more or less).

Not a shred of proof, nay evidence, that Germany is shifting away from NordStream II. FAKE NUDES!

bs2 with Neuters & crAP: https://www.euractiv.com/section/europe-s-east/news/russia-used-lessons-from-georgia-war-in-ukraine-conflict/
https://www.euractiv.com/section/europe-s-east/news/russia-used-lessons-from-georgia-war-in-ukraine-conflict/

Languages: Slovak

Ten years ago, in August 2008, Russia and Georgia went to war over South Ossetia, a small separatist Georgian region which Moscow would later controversially recognise as independent, in the face of international criticism.

Ten years later, Moscow has still not softened its position towards its neighbours and its rift with the West has only deepened.

Russia launched armed action against Georgia to come to the rescue of South Ossetia, a small pro-Russian separatist region where Tbilisi had begun a military operation. The Russian army rapidly outnumbered the Georgian forces and threatened to take the country's capital.

A peace treaty was finally hammered out by then-French President Nicolas Sarkozy that led to the withdrawal of Russian forces. But Moscow recognised as independent the breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, where it has stationed a large military presence ever since.

Russia demonstrated its military might over the five days and showed its readiness to defend – by force, if necessary – its interests in the region it considers its sphere of influence .
####

Well shove that in your pipe and smoke it!

Yet again, no attribution, no name. It smacks of a thinktank piece peddled through their Slovak branch.

But this is how things work in the West. No-on is ordered on pain of death to produce certain items, but is is made very clear that it is in their interests to do so, from without & from within, but remember kids, it is voluntary ! Neither self-censorship exists. Those in positions of influence may convince themselves, but for the rest of the great unwashed, no so much. We've already seen the system fail and produce not only BREXIT, but other referendums contrary to EU dogma. The evidence is all around us and plain to see, but still the structures persist in the same old ways, which only bodes ill. Apparently they still think the sheeple are too stupid to notice let alone act.

[Aug 15, 2018] Human cost of anti-Putin propaganda

Notable quotes:
"... But .but they criticized Putin!!! That's a common link, surely? ..."
Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Drutten August 10, 2018 at 6:23 am

This is old news, but I decided to take a closer look at it. You may remember this viral tidbit:

Yup, that's 54,000 retweets and 65,000 "likes" right there. Good lord

Most of the actual names aren't visible, but the ones that can be read go as follows (I added some background information on them as well):


Funny, ain't it?

Mark Chapman August 10, 2018 at 7:20 am
But .but they criticized Putin!!! That's a common link, surely?
Drutten August 10, 2018 at 8:11 am
Out of all those that can be easily identified in the photograph above, I think it's safe to say only two of them even knew about Putin. The rest died when Putin was a nobody, save for Pralnikov, but he had been hospitalized on and off for a decade before he finally passed away in 1997.

When you dig deeper into it, the trail of dead journalists, business competitors and local officials in the wake of Boris Berezovsky's and Mikhail Khodorkovsky's 1990's escapades is the most striking one by far. That was under Yeltsin's watch, needless to say, and we all know what became of those two gentlemen when they finally ditched Russia for Switzerland and the United Kingdom.

Among the journalists that have died since 2000, nearly all of which are attributed to Putin in one way or another these days by lazy pundits (and politicians, and human rights organizations etc), several curiously also probed Berezovsky. Then, you have a big bunch of deaths that are routinely and grossly misrepresented e.g:
https://fkriuk.blogspot.com/2008/02/audit-of-committee-to-protect.html

All in all, summing it up it's all a steaming pile of fake news.

[Aug 15, 2018] Mastercard and Visa can be hit by Russian sanctions; the US financial sector can be eliminated in Russia

Notable quotes:
"... Regarding the Russian characterization of America as their "friend", I believe that Russia is simply playing with us. The US wants Russia to come across as an angry, belligerent and shoe-waving peasant. The intent is to keep alive the Cold War image of Russia as uncivilized and crass. The best response is to do exactly what they are doing. It makes the US look like the petulant bully that it is. Call it judo-politics . ..."
Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman August 10, 2018 at 7:58 am

It's time for everyone to come off Twitter – it is like writing your message on your buttocks with a black sharpie and dropping your trousers. Tweets are the kind of stupid thing you send out at the end of work after you've had a bastard of a day, and something you read or hear pushes you over the edge. People in diplomatic posts should not be allowed to use Twitter at all, and should be punished for doing so – reporters now avidly follow the Twitter feed of anyone who is anyone, and pounce on anything that has not been thought through before it can be deleted: an attempt to delete it is just the icing on the cake, an admission that you shouldn't have said it.

Time was, diplomats ran everything they said in writing in an official capacity through a review before it was released, it was parsed six ways from Sunday to see how it might be spun, twisted or misinterpreted. Diplomats speaking in a live interview were careful to remain vague and say nothing which might not have meant several different things. You did not get countries straining to get at one another because of something the minister of agriculture said. But now everybody feels they can speak for the government on Twitter. It's hard to imagine how the various countries of the world could come to be represented by their stupidest citizens.

I hope America does formally sanction the Russian finance and banking sector. They're already doing it under the radar, and going formal would give Russia an excuse to dump SWIFT and stop using it, as well as the US dollar. Mastercard and Visa would be gonzo, taillights, possibly in China as well. America sanctioning the Russian financial sector would remove its last ability to keep an eye on it easily.

Patient Observer August 10, 2018 at 3:29 am
Regarding the Russian characterization of America as their "friend", I believe that Russia is simply playing with us. The US wants Russia to come across as an angry, belligerent and shoe-waving peasant. The intent is to keep alive the Cold War image of Russia as uncivilized and crass. The best response is to do exactly what they are doing. It makes the US look like the petulant bully that it is. Call it judo-politics .
Mark Chapman August 10, 2018 at 7:42 am
It's just diplo-speak, to mark the speaker as a civilized man and not a thug. That is beginning to become a bit of a sore point – is there anyone left who actually believes that because Russian diplomats say "our American friends" or "our American colleagues", that they labour under a delusion that this is just a temporary spat and under it all they still have brotherly connections? If so, let me disabuse all those people of that notion; the Russian government and all its operatives are well aware that America is a self-declared and thus committed enemy. But saying, "the Americans, our enemies" would make for tiresome commentary in the western papers, in which ideologues would assess that this practice proved the Russians are the aggressors while westerners are just trying to work it out. Alternatively, they could lower themselves to the vernacular and instruct, "Listen up, motherfuckers".

Russia understands that America is an enemy and not a friend of any description, just as it understands the United Nations is an American-dominated body and that it is next to useless to expect the UN to back any Russian initiative. It continues to go through the motions in both cases, merely to underline who is following the rules and protocols set up by a better and more aware global civilization than currently prevails, and who is just kicking sand in the other's face and trying to get him to swing for the chin.

Moscow Exile August 13, 2018 at 12:41 am
I feel that I should add that by saying that Americans are not Russia's friends, I mean "deep-state" Americans and others of like mind.

I am sure that most American citizens just want to live their lives in peace and do not feel threatened by "Vlad" and his Evil Empire.

Not long back from the country and head off there again this afternoon for the rest of the week.

And no, I am not building my nuclear fall-out bunker there!

Patient Observer August 13, 2018 at 1:16 pm
Very true. Poll after poll fails to show any concern by American citizens over Russian "meddling" or Russian "assertiveness". Sure, questions can be posed such as "Should the US resist the Russian invasion of xxxxx?". Naturally, the answer would likely be yes. But when asked, without prompting, what concerns them, Russia does not register as a concern at any level. I find this remarkable as anti-Russian news is often the lead on every network evening news show. I can not recall a news broadcast for many months that did not include a Russian-bashing story. The tipping point on media credibility may have been reached

[Aug 15, 2018] Sanctions that Russia can implement

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Patient Observer says: August 12, 2018 at 6:23 pm

https://www.rt.com/business/435760-russia-response-us-sanctions/

In short:

  1. Cut off titanium metals and fabrications to the West – Boeing shutdowns as well as many other US aerospace operations;
  2. Close off air space or charge much higher tariffs to US carriers using Russian airspace. US airlines become non-competitive in many Asian and European markets;
  3. Stop exporting LNG and other energy products to the US;
  4. Raise taxes or shutdown US companies in Russia;
  5. Stop exports of the RD-180 and 181 rocket engines.

Action 1 would have a devastating impact on US aerospace manufacturing. The US has little ability to replace with domestic or foreign supplies. This action should be reserved in the event of extremely aggressive US actions such as a direct military attack on Syria;

Perhaps the sequence should be 2, 3, 5, 4, 1.

Cortes says: August 12, 2018 at 10:44 pm I propose a 6.

Call a presser at the UN and have the Ambassador confirm that Obama and HRC are wholly paid-up RF assets and watch Civil War II unfold.

[Aug 15, 2018] Countermove in Caspian see: no NATO allowed

Notable quotes:
"... It looks as if Zuckerman's 'nightmare situation' has come about. I don't know that these were ever proven reserves, and in fact I have the impression that the supposed energy bounty of the Caspian did not turn out quite as imagined, but Washington once thought – not long ago, either – that it was imperative America controlled the Caspian region because it was about 'America's energy security'. Which is another way of saying 'America must have control over and access to every oil-producing region on the planet.' ..."
"... Richardson was correct, though, that Russia 'does not share America's values'. In fact, Americans do not share America's values, in the sense that most Americans by far would not support the actions of the Saudi military in Yemen, the clever false-flag operations of the White Helmets in Syria, the deliberate destabilization of Venezuela, regime-change operations to the right and left in order to obtain governments who will facilitate American commercial and political control, and many other things that official America considers just important tools in the American Global Dominance Toolbox. ..."
"... Washington has long nurtured the dream of being Europe's primary, if not only, energy supplier, and owning the Caspian (had the reserves expectations played out) would have brought them closer to their dream. ..."
Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

yalensis August 13, 2018 at 2:06 am

Apologies if somebody already posted, the legal partitioning of the Caspian Sea is finally complete and constitutes good news for Russia:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-says-deal-to-settle-status-of-caspian-sea-reached-a8486311.html

yalensis August 13, 2018 at 2:10 am
The other backstory being that NATO wanted to stick its nose in the Caspian Sea, but has been pushed out. Not sure exactly what the pretext was. I have a piece in VZGLIAD that explains the whole thing, but I haven't worked through it yet, will probably do a piece on my own blog in the near future. But I have a couple of other projects in the queue first.
Mark Chapman August 13, 2018 at 8:39 am
Dick Cheney, among others, was convinced that the Caspian Basin holds massive deposits of oil and gas and is strategically significant for that reason.

http://coat.ncf.ca/our_magazine/links/issue46/articles/real_reasons_quotes.htm

"Central Asian resources may revert back to the control of Russia or to a Russian led alliance. This would be a nightmare situation. We had better wake up to the dangers or one day the certainties on which we base our prosperity will be certainties no more. The potential prize in oil and gas riches in the Caspian sea, valued up to $4 trillion, would give Russia both wealth and strategic dominance. The potential economic rewards of Caspian energy will draw in their train Western military forces to protect our investment if necessary."

Mortimer Zuckerman
Editor, U.S. News and World Report

"This is about America's energy security. Its also about preventing strategic inroads by those who don't share our values. We are trying to move these newly independent countries toward the West. We would like to see them reliant on Western commercial and political interests. We've made a substantial political investment in the Caspian and it's important that both the pipeline map and the politics come out right."

Bill Richardson
Then-U.S. Secretary Energy (1998-2000)

It looks as if Zuckerman's 'nightmare situation' has come about. I don't know that these were ever proven reserves, and in fact I have the impression that the supposed energy bounty of the Caspian did not turn out quite as imagined, but Washington once thought – not long ago, either – that it was imperative America controlled the Caspian region because it was about 'America's energy security'. Which is another way of saying 'America must have control over and access to every oil-producing region on the planet.'

Richardson was correct, though, that Russia 'does not share America's values'. In fact, Americans do not share America's values, in the sense that most Americans by far would not support the actions of the Saudi military in Yemen, the clever false-flag operations of the White Helmets in Syria, the deliberate destabilization of Venezuela, regime-change operations to the right and left in order to obtain governments who will facilitate American commercial and political control, and many other things that official America considers just important tools in the American Global Dominance Toolbox.

Washington has long nurtured the dream of being Europe's primary, if not only, energy supplier, and owning the Caspian (had the reserves expectations played out) would have brought them closer to their dream. A pipeline network would have carried Caspian oil and gas to Europe. Agreement among the Caspian nations was most definitely not in American interests, and if you dig you will probably find American interventions to prevent that from coming about.

[Aug 15, 2018] Russia need to preserve normalcy for its own population despite US sanctions, so overreacting might be counterproductive as some goods produced by West can't be easily replaced

Notable quotes:
"... Russia is simply trying to preserve an impression of normalcy for its own population, and trade is normal – Russia replaces those goods it cannot buy from the west with those from other markets, but completely shutting off the purchase of all western goods would subject Russians to unnecessary privations for the sake of pride. ..."
"... Russia has many arrows in its quiver. Best not to use them until needed. Big ones like turning off the gas to the EU would only makes sense if there is imminent war which is clearly not the case. In fact, it would be in Russia's best strategic interest to continue to the the main supplier of energy to the EU as it inhibits them from doing things that are potentially stupid dangerous. ..."
"... I would like to see Russian stop supply of the RD-180 and 181 as it is ultra-high tech which would be a nice reminder to the West regarding Russia's science and technology edge as well as delivering a serious blow to the US presence in space – military and civilian. Trump's "Space Force" would be DOA. ..."
"... Western sanctions have done Russia enormous good. It provided an escape from WTO restrictions and unfair trade practices. Good that they are taking full advantage of this opportunity. I suppose that Paul Craig Roberts means well but he needs to take a step back and see the bigger picture ..."
"... I agree that Russia should start cutting the United States off from things it needs from Russia – like the RD-180 and titanium – which would be expensive for the USA to get elsewhere. ..."
"... The implemented economic measures may have a seemingly abstract or sterile quality about them: banning electronic exports to Russia, rattling financial markets, stock prices falling. But the material consequence is that American officials are intending to inflict physical damage on Russian society and Russian people. ..."
"... It's economic warfare on a sliding scale to military warfare, as the Prussian General Karl von Clausewitz would no doubt appreciate. ..."
Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman August 12, 2018 at 10:43 am

Russia is simply trying to preserve an impression of normalcy for its own population, and trade is normal – Russia replaces those goods it cannot buy from the west with those from other markets, but completely shutting off the purchase of all western goods would subject Russians to unnecessary privations for the sake of pride.

Mr. Putin's popularity with the Russian people rests largely on their confidence that he is looking out for them, and always carefully balancing risk with reward. If Russia were run by somebody like Erdogan, the west would have succeeded in overthrowing him ages ago.

Russia is in a good position to resist sanctions, because Washington dares not impose restrictions on its trade in oil and gas. While it would be wrong to assume Russia has nothing else, these are core industries and in the other sectors where Russia is strong, the west does not buy much from it anyway except for steel and raw materials. Russia can easily replace those markets. But western brands who spent decades building up their market in Russia slowly and carefully have lost it almost overnight. And they will be a long, long time getting it back.

Jen August 12, 2018 at 3:20 pm
PCR's sources of information probably focus too much on the doings of the Central Bank of Russia and not enough on other sources of advice that the Russian government might rely on. You wonder whether PCR or his researchers are aware that the Russians and the Chinese might be mocking the US in the statements and policies they choose to make public.
Patient Observer August 12, 2018 at 4:41 pm
Russia has many arrows in its quiver. Best not to use them until needed. Big ones like turning off the gas to the EU would only makes sense if there is imminent war which is clearly not the case. In fact, it would be in Russia's best strategic interest to continue to the the main supplier of energy to the EU as it inhibits them from doing things that are potentially stupid dangerous.

I would like to see Russian stop supply of the RD-180 and 181 as it is ultra-high tech which would be a nice reminder to the West regarding Russia's science and technology edge as well as delivering a serious blow to the US presence in space – military and civilian. Trump's "Space Force" would be DOA.

Western sanctions have done Russia enormous good. It provided an escape from WTO restrictions and unfair trade practices. Good that they are taking full advantage of this opportunity. I suppose that Paul Craig Roberts means well but he needs to take a step back and see the bigger picture.

Mark Chapman August 12, 2018 at 10:23 pm
I agree that Russia should start cutting the United States off from things it needs from Russia – like the RD-180 and titanium – which would be expensive for the USA to get elsewhere.

I also agree Russia should keep on supplying the EU with energy, for a couple of reasons. One, any interruption in the supply is just what Washington and its Atlanticist Eurobuddies are looking for so they can label Russia an unreliable partner, and start that whole alternative-sources conversation again: it's why they want to keep Ukraine in the loop – to initiate disruptions and promote uncertainty about the reliability of Russian gas.

Two, Russia has a good chance of splitting factions in Europe off from the USA, as the latter is more and more perceived to be trying to boss the European energy market so as to secure a captive customer for its own exports. The last thing Russia needs is to create the impression that Washington is saving Europe instead of dicking it around.

James lake August 12, 2018 at 7:16 am
https://www.strategic-culture.org/authors/finian-cunningham.html

US Sanctions Are Pushing Russia to War

"The new round of sanctions this week unleashed by the United States on Russia has only one meaning: the US rulers want to crush Russia's economy. By any definition, Washington is, in effect, declaring war on Russia.

The implemented economic measures may have a seemingly abstract or sterile quality about them: banning electronic exports to Russia, rattling financial markets, stock prices falling. But the material consequence is that American officials are intending to inflict physical damage on Russian society and Russian people.

It's economic warfare on a sliding scale to military warfare, as the Prussian General Karl von Clausewitz would no doubt appreciate."

kirill August 12, 2018 at 10:14 am
All these articles are hysterical pap. The events after 2014 have demonstrated that Russia is immune to western sanctions and actually massively benefits from them. It has also shown that it can rapidly react to changing financial conditions as seen in the offloading of $230 billion in foreign debt in 2015. The current round of "the mother of all sanctions" trash talk from Washington is desperate and pathetic failure.

Russia has no reason or incentive for war. It is NATzO that wants to take Russia out. Russia will adjust to the new sanctions by become fully independent of any western financial or economic links. Russia has the critical economic mass to by an autarchy. But it does not need to be since it will keep on trading with most of the planet. NATzO accounts for 11% of the global population (but thinks it is 100%). The congenital retards who run NATzO are helping China to become the next premier financial power. The Yuan will replace the dollar by necessity if not by choice.

I want to see the writers of this scaremongering garbage list the actual economic impacts on Russia. Starting with the financial ones. Russia does not depend on foreign currencies. It also does not depend on foreign loans like some banana republic. The current claims by the chimps in Congress that they will bring Russia's economy to its knees are the same BS as during the post Banderite Kiev coup sanctions which Obama was sure were going to cut Russia down.

Enough already!

davidt August 12, 2018 at 3:49 pm
There is some truth in what you say but nevertheless I think you quite underestimate the threat of US sanctions. One doesn't have to be an unabashed fan of Ben Aris to accept some of the points that he makes in the following article.
http://www.intellinews.com/moscow-blog-us-declares-economic-war-on-russia-146707/?source=blogs
In any case, I am a fan of Eric Kraus and he has serious concerns- check out some of his comments here, say, for example, 7 minutes in.
kirill August 12, 2018 at 4:29 pm
Eric Kraus apparently thinks that Russian enterprises need to borrow dollars or euro from the west. He is dead wrong. Russia can get all the dollars and euro it needs via the exports of oil and gas, minerals, military equipment, nuclear power plants and assorted other exports over $400 billion US per year. That was the point of my post: Uncle Scumbag's sanctions on financial transactions do not cut Russia off, they cut the US and the EU off from the Russian market. We are back to 2014 and these new "mother of all sanctions" will be as useless as the previous round.

As for Japan, it is a useless comparison. Pearl Harbour was triggered by the US trying to cut Japan off from vital resources. Non financial ones. Nobody can cut Russia either from natural resources or the financing it needs. But Russia can f*ck the EU over big time by cutting off natural gas exports. As the rabid mutt in Washington tries to go for broke, Russia should keep diverting natural gas eastward. Let Uncle Scumbag save the EU with the spare LNG he doesn't have.

Patient Observer August 12, 2018 at 5:20 pm
Yes, the analogy between prewar Japan and Russia is false. It can be argued that it is exactly the opposite. Russia has the resources that the West needs and if Russia were to cut those off, the West could be induced to launch a war of desperation as Japan did. If Russia is "walking on eggs" that is why.
Mark Chapman August 12, 2018 at 10:15 pm
Russia also can borrow whatever money it needs to from China. China probably has more than enough to lend of its own, but if it does not, it is under no restrictions against borrowing from western banks, and those banks have no control over how that money is reallocated.
davidt August 13, 2018 at 2:19 pm
I commented on the Pearl Harbour episode simply to make the point that the proposed sanctions are a very aggressive move- this is clearly how the Russian government sees them, and rightly so. If these sanctions clip a percent or so of Russian GDP growth for the foreseeable future then they are very damaging for the country. Frankly, I would not be very sanguine about Russia's long term future if it were not for China, and I continue to back Kraus's opinion over Kirill's This earlier article by Aris sets the stage reasonably well- it's obvious weakness is that the role of China is not taken into account
. http://www.intellinews.com/moscow-blog-russio-delenda-est-140787/?source=blogs
A further point. No matter how creative Russia's scientists and engineers might be, it beggars belief to imagine that any country can compete technologically long term if largely isolated by the rest of the World. Again, this further emphasizes how critical China is likely to be for Russia's well being.
Patient Observer August 13, 2018 at 3:01 pm
Russia needs China and China needs Russia if it wants to remain a sovereign nation.

I would add that the US is in a very fragile state burdened by a stagnate economy despite massive deficit spending in addition to a crumbling global empire. Russia may simply need to ride out the storm and let nature takes it course relative to the US.

kirill August 13, 2018 at 6:24 pm
The chimps in Congress can't see past their own noses and think that borrowing and debt is what sustains the Russian economy. Their bubble of delusion has no bearing on Russian reality. They are currently engaged in "the definition of insanity is to repeat the same failed approach over and over and expect a different result". You can't cut Russia off from western banks more than once and there is obviously no cumulative impact from such sanctions.
kirill August 13, 2018 at 6:20 pm
On what basis do you estimate 1% GDP growth reduction (or contraction?) for the foreseeable future? Kraus needs to make a case and not just engage in proof by assertion. How can we have the same restrictions to banking access that were imposed in 2014 all of the sudden starting to matter now? That is just ludicrous. Cutting off access to NATzO banks in 2014 was the limit of what NATzO could do. It can't go into Russia and shut down Russian banks to prevent Russian companies from financing themselves there or from the Russian government.

Anyway, too much obscure mush and utter lack of details. These "mother of all sanctions" are a joke because the 2014 sanctions did most of the "damage".

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/12/russia-sanctions-us-eu-banks-sberbank-oil-gazprom

LOL.

Mark Chapman August 13, 2018 at 11:18 pm
But for how long can the rest of the world (meaning, I suppose, the United States and western Europe, which seem together to think they are The World) keep it up? Long enough to bring Russia down? I frankly doubt it. America needs trade for its corporations to flourish and expand market share, and it is not achieving that through sanctions and tariffs. The USA is not just taking on Russia; it is making enemies everywhere. The global economy is so interwoven now that it is very difficult to sanction a country to death unless you can block all its major moneymakers. And Washington can't do that (to Russia) without hurting Europe.

The present sanctions are lame and do not really do anything but get journalists excited and use up paper. The sting is in the ones set to automatically go into effect in three months, because to avoid them Russia must admit that it has a secret chemical-weapons program, agree to shut it down and allow UN inspectors into the country to verify it has been done. Perhaps Trump and his cabal gamble that Russia will cop to something it actually doesn't have, just to avoid sanctions, as Gadaffi did. But Russia will not, while the American attempt to bring more inconvenience and problems to the Russian people in an effort to use them to bludgeon the government into doing Washington's bidding is about as shitty a thing as America has ever done without involving weapons, since it offers no proof at all of its conclusions. It is simply imposing collective punishment in order to get ts own way, and would be the first to squeal if Russia did it.

Northern Star August 14, 2018 at 3:06 pm
"The global economy is so interwoven now that it is very difficult to sanction a country to death unless you can block all its major moneymakers. And Washington can't do that (to Russia) without hurting Europe."

The entire sanctions discussion in a nutshell.

Northern Star August 14, 2018 at 3:48 pm
From the Ben Aris link:

"Like the Romans, the US has built a military-industrial economy that can massively out-resource all its opponents' and so is impossible to defeat – a legacy of the rapid militarisation during WWII when it simply out produced first the Nazis and then the Soviet Union, the only other country on the planet at the time with any chance of matching the US's industrial might"

Unlike the Reich the USA industrial base wasn't hampered by round the clock bombing from the Eighth AirForce and the RAF , which also involved the diversion on billions of Reichsmarks for thousands of planes and the Luftwaffe manpower in an attempt to stop or at least mitigate the air attacks.

Likewise the USA industrial base was not hampered by having to -in a massive undertaking-uproot its core manufacturing facilities and move them thousands of kilometers to where they could be reassembled and resume production of machinery , armor and weaponry in general.

Furthermore:

These are just a couple reasons for the fall of Rome, but what is perhaps most terrifying about the fall are the corollaries to today. The Unites States of America has a Gini coefficient of .45, and 40% of the wealth is controlled by the top 1% of the population.[5] By every metric, the United States is even more divided and unfair than Rome before its fall. The effects are perfectly evident as well as there is increasing inclination from the rich to build fallout bunkers and withdraw from civilization and politics just as the roman elites did centuries before. Worsening matters is the evidence of extreme racism towards migrant workers who like slaves in Rome "take the labor from the hardworking middle class". Increasingly the middle class shrinks as social unrest and bigotry grows. It is a scary combination that, if we aren't careful, could spell the end of civilization as we know it, just like it did for the Romans centuries before.

https://pages.vassar.edu/realarchaeology/2017/11/05/how-socialincome-inequality-and-the-fall-of-rome-is-relevant-today/
AND the five links therein.

Therefore the Aris notion that USA can simply bide its time and wait for Russia to collapse is suspect. If anything there may well be be a collapse but not Russia.

Patient Observer August 14, 2018 at 4:58 pm
Agree with the sentiment but the Soviet Union outproduced the US in every industrial category that mattered. Its military was much stronger than the US on land and in the air. On the sea, the US probably had the edge.

The Soviet Union fell because its ideology provided no means to deal with psychos and sociopaths. Religion, with all of its shortcomings, at least tried to address sociopathic behaviors with such terms as sin, evil, etc. When religion left the building, there was nothing left to stop the psychos and its kissing cousins, the Randites.

The West is immune from such dangers as it embraces sociopathyy. Russia, I believe, is seeking a society that can withstand such assaults without heavy handed purges which only provide temporary relief. The Orthodox Church ascendancy in modern Russia is helping to provide that moral anchor to keep socciopathy from becoming the dominant world view. I think even atheists can agree on the importance of its role in providing a stable and humane society.

[Aug 15, 2018] Russia is one of only 7 nation states to have verifiably dismantled and destroyed their chemical weapon stockpiles as ratified by the OPCW and in compliance to the CWC. After Skripal false flag they probably have a second thought.

Notable quotes:
"... What can I say – perhaps now Russia will batten down the hatches and stop all this pandering to western partners. ..."
Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

James lake August 8, 2018 at 12:21 pm

Breaking news here in the UK.

USA say that Russia did poison the Skripals in Salisbury.

"The US blamed the attack on Vladimir Putin and said they would be issuing fresh sanctions in response to the deadly attack.

The state department says Wednesday the sanctions will be imposed on Russia because it used a chemical weapon in violation of international law.

State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said: "The United States determined under the Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act of 1991 (CBW Act) that the government of the Russian Federation has used chemical or biological weapons in violation of international law, or has used lethal chemical or biological weapons against its own nationals."

Former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned by Novichok, a military-grade nerve agent, in the British town of Salisbury in March."

What can I say – perhaps now Russia will batten down the hatches and stop all this pandering to western partners.

kirill August 8, 2018 at 3:28 pm
No need to batten down the hatches. Just ignore the yapping NATzO chihuahuas. We have not even had a proper trial to determine guilt. The US leadership is not some ultimate judicial body. They can make as many political judgements as they want, but that will do Jack to Russia.

At this point all the hysterical US-driven sanctions against Russia are totally self defeating. The monkeys in Washington clearly think that Russia is a banana republic and that it needs to have access to foreign money and technology to function. They are cleared fucked in the head.

Patient Observer August 8, 2018 at 3:56 pm
More on the above per RT:

It would reportedly include more drastic measures, such as downgrading diplomatic relations, banning the Russian airline Aeroflot from flying to the US and cutting off nearly all exports and imports.

So, are we talking about RD-180 rocket engines and Americans traveling to the ISS on Russian rockets? Are we talking about titanium fabrications that Boeing needs for its aircraft manufacturing?

This Russian hysteria is masking something, something big. My one-track mind suggests fixated on the idea of an approaching economic collapse and subsequent imposition of martial law and/or massive levels of censorship; all to be blamed on Russia. The increasingly frenetic pace of Russian hysteria suggests a near-term sh!t-storm is on the way.

James lake August 8, 2018 at 4:18 pm
The Russian hysteria is scary as so many citizens over there believe in the Russiagate nonsense and have been manipulated to feel they have been attacked.

It means therefore that conditions have been created whereby the USA has the support to attack back.

Putin should never have gone to Helsinki as that escalated the madness.

Trump is emasculated just as obama was and has no power to do anything to block this pathway to outright confrontation

The Europeans will sit by and watch – Russia has no allies there.,

Patient Observer August 8, 2018 at 5:27 pm
Europe will stay on the porch and let the big boys duke it out. In the red corner, we have Vlad – the Terminator. In the other corner, we have Donald – the Orange Haystack. In another corner we have Bruce – the Red Dragon.

Haystack lumbers out of his corner before the bell rings, makes some nasty gestures and starts his victory dance. The Terminator stands in his corner, muscular arms folded across his chest with a wry smile across his face. The Red Dragon is closely studying Haystack with an inscrutable stare. Haystack exhausts himself and collapses mid-ring. The Terminator and Red Dragon leave the arena as the Haystack fans seek their autographs. Something like that.

Mark Chapman August 8, 2018 at 4:41 pm
Perhaps a boxed piano will fall from a ninth-floor balcony and crush Nauert to a rectangular pizza. I'd pay to see that.

Define 'pandering'. Can you name some concessions the United States has wrung from Russia in the last two years? I seem to recall the British investigators said there was no proof that anyone in the Russian government was involved – they simply speculated that because Novichok could only be made in a state facility, there must be state involvement. Does the USA have some evidence that the British have not seen yet? Perhaps they found it in the same place they filed their satellite photography of the Buk missile taking out MH17.

Murdock August 9, 2018 at 1:05 pm
You mean the same Russia that is one of only 7 nation states to have verifiably dismantled and destroyed their chemical weapon stockpiles as ratified by the OPCW and in compliance to the CWC? That Russia?

I can't wait for this determination to be made public along with the coinciding evidence as released by an official judiciary body wielding the requisite jurisdiction and authority under official auspices of the UN. That's what is meant by determined right? Pretty unambiguous terminology there.

This entire charade has gone so far beyond farce it's not even comical anymore, just depressing.

Mark Chapman August 9, 2018 at 3:51 pm
That's an interesting point, because a likely consequence of the continued hysterical hostility from the west will be opacity where there once was transparency; ie: if the United States wants to know something about Russian unconventional weapons programs, it will have to go to extensive and complicated labour to insert a deep-cover spy or persuade an asset that it can trust to find out the information, never knowing if it is being fed disinformation deliberately by a double agent, where once it could simply have asked and been invited to verify the truth itself. International organizations controlled by Washington will be less and less likely to have a free pass to come in and poke about as they see fit.

[Aug 15, 2018] Medvedev: if they introduce something like a ban on banking operations or the use of any currency, we will treat it as a declaration of economic war. And we'll have to respond to it accordingly economically, politically, or in any other way, if required

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile August 10, 2018 at 12:38 am

Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev has warned the US that any sanctions targeting Russian banking operations and currency trade will be treated as a declaration of economic war and retaliated against by any means necessary.
" If they introduce something like a ban on banking operations or the use of any currency, we will treat it as a declaration of economic war. And we'll have to respond to it accordingly – economically, politically, or in any other way, if required ," Medvedev said during a trip to the Kamchatka region.

" Our American friends should make no mistake about it ," he emphasized.

Source RT: Russia to treat further US sanctions as an open declaration of economic war – PM
Published time: 10 Aug, 2018 04:42
Edited time: 10 Aug, 2018 08:25

Why does that prick of a Russian PM speak about "our American friends"?

I wish Medvedev would just fuck off out of it.

FFS! They are not your friends, idiot!!!!!

James lake August 10, 2018 at 2:39 am
Why is Medvedev even discussing the areas that would cause Russia harm in public?

It is like pointing a big arrow at the banking and finance sector with "Sanction this"" written on it in big red letters

There is a time for silence. And he needs to come off twitter as well.

[Aug 15, 2018] Trump policies are all over the place first the hard-ass who will never back off, then conciliatory and talking international unity

Notable quotes:
"... Interestingly, the USA is increasingly going it alone in such actions, and the EU – remarkably, for such a spineless outfit – has actually imposed a 'blocking statute' which allegedly will protect European companies from being sanctioned by the USA, while Brussels has taken the unprecedented step of instructing European firms not to comply with demands by the White House that they cease doing business with Iran. Even more astonishing, if that were possible, EU companies who opt to pull out of business with Iranian contacts must first obtain authorization from the European Commission to do so. Without such authorization, they may be sued by EU member states, while a mechanism has been created to allow EU businesses impacted by the sanctions to sue the US administration in the national courts of member states. Who could have forecast that would happen, as recently as a year ago? ..."
Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman August 6, 2018 at 5:21 pm

I suppose few were under any apprehension that Trump would not sign the sanctions bill reimposing American sanctions on Iran. Consequently, most will be unsurprised that he did so.

http://www.intellinews.com/trump-triggers-iran-sanctions-eu-unveils-updated-blocking-statute-146376/?source=iran

Interestingly, the USA is increasingly going it alone in such actions, and the EU – remarkably, for such a spineless outfit – has actually imposed a 'blocking statute' which allegedly will protect European companies from being sanctioned by the USA, while Brussels has taken the unprecedented step of instructing European firms not to comply with demands by the White House that they cease doing business with Iran. Even more astonishing, if that were possible, EU companies who opt to pull out of business with Iranian contacts must first obtain authorization from the European Commission to do so. Without such authorization, they may be sued by EU member states, while a mechanism has been created to allow EU businesses impacted by the sanctions to sue the US administration in the national courts of member states. Who could have forecast that would happen, as recently as a year ago?

I need hardly draw attention to the unmitigated and brazen arrogance of the stated US aim: to "force the Iranians to the table for a renegotiation of their role in the Middle East". They fucking live there, for God's sake, but the intent of the sanctions is to force them to bow to American will, and accept the plans for them of a state which is more than 6,000 miles away – yet insists on its right to direct and order regional affairs to its own strategic and economic benefit.

Once upon a time, America's meddling in the Middle East could count on the support of all the major western powers. For the time being, that practice is in abeyance, as the major western allies try to bring about American failure. Goodwill toward the United States has more or less evaporated completely, and America is increasingly regarded as an enemy by former allies. I can't see any possibility of it prevailing, unless it starts a major war and drags everyone into it. I can, however, see irreparable economic damage being inflicted on the American economy.

Patient Observer August 6, 2018 at 5:56 pm
If the EU will actually protect European companies from US enforcement/retaliation and compel European companies to honor contracts with Iranian companies or government, that is big. But why would they do such?

I speculate the US plan is to take Iranian oil off the market thereby driving up crude prices. The downside is that it helps Russia (perhaps not a major concern for Trump) and hurts China but it will be a boon for US oil frackers to the point of avoiding mass default of loans and collapse of major US operations. If Nord Stream II can be stopped, US LNG may surge as well assuming gas frackers can ramp up. And when Iran capitulates (in US dreams) US companies will be granted special concessions to soak up Iranian oil revenues and the EU left of the sidelines.

So the above could be some of the reasons for the EU's stiffening. Putin is probably breaking out the popcorn.

Mark Chapman August 6, 2018 at 7:06 pm
The US has suddenly recollected that if it wants to take on China, it will actually need the support of its traditional allies, and is supposedly launching a make-up effort, especially where Europe is concerned.

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/08/02/the-associated-press-us-mends-ties-with-allies-prepares-for-trade-war-with-china.html

Trump is such a boob; his policies are all over the place – first the hard-ass who will never back off, then conciliatory and talking international unity. Anyone who would willingly help that country achieve its goals needs their head examined, as it clearly will turn on its traditional friends the instant it is unhappy with the relationship. Trump brags that trade hardball is 'his thing', but that's just more of his stupid ego, and he appears to not grasp many of its implications.

American farmers understand, though, all too well. It does not take a genius to figure that a $12 Billion bailout fund suggests an assessment of a potential $12 Billion in damage to the sector, which seems like a lot of money. But as agricultural economists correctly deduce, the real damage is to long-term trade relationships, as customers repelled by America's thug tactics turn to other suppliers. I already mentioned the new prominence in Canadian supermarkets of identifying symbols to highlight Canadian products, and Canada is the biggest export market by a considerable margin for American agricultural products. Canada could not win in a trade war against the USA, but it could inflict serious damage on the agricultural sector. Much of Canada is farm country just like south of the border, and all the USA really has going for it in the way of growing-season advantage is California and Florida. Products from there which are out of season in Canada can be purchased from Mexico. Otherwise, pretty much anything you can grow in the USA, you can grow in Canada.

https://theconversation.com/american-farmers-want-trade-partners-not-handouts-an-agricultural-economist-explains-100795

[Aug 15, 2018] After everything Germany has done to our country, I think, they should not talk on the issue for another two hundred years

Notable quotes:
"... When Germany starts up talking again about 'negotiating from a position of strength', it should be slapped down as if it had said 'lebensraum'. ..."
"... Washington wants it, because Washington sees the world as existing to support the comfort and entertainment of Americans, but America cannot do it on its own, so von der Leyen is just doing America's bidding with the tough talk – the whole barnyard of European political elites needs to be cleaned out before there can be any hope of better relations, as they are all committed Atlanticists. ..."
"... But when NATO speaks of 'dealing from a position of strength', it means 'you know what will happen if your offer is not as expected'. In the NATO lexicon, there is no such situation as both sides dealing from a position of strength. ..."
Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com
Patient Observer August 11, 2018 at 7:39 pm
Lovin' it:
the recent call by the German Defense Minister, Ursula von der Leyen, to engage in dialogue with Moscow only from a "position of unity and strength," Shoigu reminded his counterpart that, while Russia seeks peace, it will not tolerate being coerced.

"After everything Germany has done to our country, I think, they should not talk on the issue for another two hundred years," Shoigu said. "Ask your grandparents about their experience of talking to Russia from the position of strength. They will probably be able to tell you."

Shoigu was to the point.

Mark Chapman August 12, 2018 at 9:23 am
Exactly; it seems it was almost instantly impolite to remind the Germans of their Nazi past, along with their aspiration to achieve their goals through military force. When Germany starts up talking again about 'negotiating from a position of strength', it should be slapped down as if it had said 'lebensraum'.

The EU has to know that it is not frightening Russia with tough talk, and so it may as well cut it out. Russia by itself would squash the EU like a bug if they could not go running to Uncle Sam, and NATO as a whole would have a tough time with China and Russia – it's hard to say who would win, because military victory depends on a lot of things and you can't plan for them all, but the scale of global casualties would be so horrific it would be difficult to call any outcome 'victory'.

Washington wants it, because Washington sees the world as existing to support the comfort and entertainment of Americans, but America cannot do it on its own, so von der Leyen is just doing America's bidding with the tough talk – the whole barnyard of European political elites needs to be cleaned out before there can be any hope of better relations, as they are all committed Atlanticists.

If I were Shoigu, although I cannot fault his actual response, I would have said, "I see nothing constructive will be accomplished here today, so I will leave you to it, for I have drills to conduct and work to do. I'll see you next time".

There's nothing wrong in dealing from a position of strength so long as you are prepared to be reasonable; it merely signifies that you do not have to accept any terms that are offered. But when NATO speaks of 'dealing from a position of strength', it means 'you know what will happen if your offer is not as expected'. In the NATO lexicon, there is no such situation as both sides dealing from a position of strength.

[Aug 15, 2018] Canadian sniper rifles expected to be in the hands of Ukrainian military by fall, MP says

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

et Al August 8, 2018 at 1:30 pm

Well Canada has rather upset the apple cart, hasn't it? On the one hand, western moralizing and sermonizing other states about what they should do used to be only restricted to mostly enemy states, preferably much less rich ones, on the other hand values only mean something if you actually are willing to pay a literal price in either money, blood or both.

The financial papers are saying that this will damage SA's the confidence of foreign investors, precisely those SA is trying to attract so that it can start to diversify its economy away from petroleum based products, but we have yet to see if this will have a noticeable effect, rather than just a wish effect.

The US has said Sweet FA, along with the rest of the sermonizing weapon selling west, so Canada has very little support from its allies. So far. Germany should be an obvious supporter but if pissing of the Saudis makes it more dependent on Russia ergo there are plenty of reasons that can be wheeled out to keep treading lightly.

It looks to me as just another sign of the existing order breaking down, whether or not Canada back tracks or not. Things fall apart, the center cannot hold.

As for the so-called free and democratic media, well they only further discredit themselves publicly.

Meanwhile, I just checked out the Canada headlines and this jumped out:

National Post: Canadian sniper rifles expected to be in the hands of Ukrainian military by fall, MP says
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-sniper-rifles-expected-to-be-in-the-hands-of-ukrainian-military-by-fall-mp-says

Global Affairs Canada would not say whether Canadian taxpayers are financing the sale, and would not provide any other details about the arms deal

Few details are available about the proposed sale of weapons, as the Canadian government says such information is commercially sensitive. It has declined to name the company selling the guns or indicate how many rifles would be sent to Ukraine. However Conservative MP James Bezan, who has been in contact with the Canadian company that has the agreement to supply the rifles to Ukraine, confirmed the deal's likely timeline. He declined to name the firm since the sale still has to be finalized.

Nicolas Moquin, a spokesman for the Canadian Joint Operations Command Headquarters, said the Canadian military has been providing sniper and counter-sniper training to Ukraine's security forces since September 2015. He said Canada is not looking at this time of providing additional sniper training to coincide with the delivery of new weapons .
####

Freeland will be doing her grandfather justice!

Canadian sniper rifle manufacturers:

PGW Defense Technologies – C14 Timberwolf (CAF current rifle)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C14_Timberwolf

Parker-Hale C3, C3A1 and M82

Where as this old NP article fingers Colt Canada chasing sales to the Ukraine, though this seems to be for assault rifles rather than sniper rifles:

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-arms-manufacturer-hopes-to-sell-assault-rifles-to-ukraine-military

OR, is this just Canada selling sniper rifles that are not necessarily of Canadian origin?

According the the video below with Canadian MP James Barazan, he says there are large numbers of weapons such as assault rifles, sniper systems, mortar systems, counter battery radar etc. sitting in warehouses in Jordan (& Toronto) that were supposed to go to Kurdistan.

Patient Observer August 8, 2018 at 3:48 pm
Yes,, the world order is falling apart. For some reason, this state of affairs reminds me of the observation that married couples who are heading toward divorce are on that path not because of a lack of communications but because they are now communicating for the first time.
Mark Chapman August 8, 2018 at 4:48 pm
Ukraine is awash in small arms – they could give them out with a box of tea at the supermarket as a promotion, and it would still take months to work through their supply. The last thing they need is more rifles. On the other hand, new ones will probably fetch a good price on e-Bay.
Hor August 8, 2018 at 7:44 pm
Maybe the hryvnia no longer holds any value and the new currency is sniper rifles.

[Aug 15, 2018] Ukraine has more or less lost its case before the WTO, in which it wept that Russia s unfair imposition of an embargo on its railway cars and rolling stock constituted a violation which cost Ukraine $3.2 Billion in annual sales

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman August 1, 2018 at 5:27 pm

Oh, dear; Ukraine has more or less lost its case before the WTO, in which it wept that Russia's unfair imposition of an embargo on its railway cars and rolling stock constituted a violation which caused a former $3.2 Billion in annual sales – more than it realizes from transit fees for carrying Russian gas to Europe – to collapse to $150 Million. The WTO bought the Russian rationale that Russian inspectors going to Ukraine to ensure the product conformed to Russian standards would be in fear of their lives.

But the WTO ruled that the security situation was such that Russian inspectors sent to check that Ukraine's exports complied with Russian standards would have been risking their lives, and Russia was therefore justified in not sending them to Ukraine.

"The panel fully agreed with Russia's position and recognized that there was no systematic restriction of imports of Ukrainian equipment by Russia," Russia's Ministry of Trade and Economy said in a statement.

The WTO did go on to say Russia could have carried out the inspections outside Ukraine, but therein lies a sandbag to the head that Ukraine probably spotted already – if Russian inspectors found shoddy work or any other reason to refuse the offered goods, to say nothing of the probability that no contracting position between the two countries even exists any more, then Ukraine would be out the sale plus whatever costs it incurred to ship the goods outside Ukraine.

https://m.investing.com/news/economy-news/wto-ruling-derails-bulk-of-ukrainian-trade-dispute-against-russia-1551279?ampMode=1

Gosh! Is Ukraine's Russophobia beginning to blow up in its face?

[Aug 15, 2018] Tymoshenko's agreement that if she is elected president in Kiev in eight months' time with Kolomoisky's support, he will get relief from Ukrainian state pursuit of billions of his dollars currently frozen on British court orders.

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

et Al August 7, 2018 at 3:14 am

JohnHelmer.net: SECRET MEETING IN WARSAW BETWEEN YULIA TIMOSHENKO AND IGOR KOLOMOISKY – NEW PLAN FOR UKRAINE, MORE WAR WITH RUSSIA
http://johnhelmer.net/secret-meeting-in-warsaw-between-yulia-timoshenko-and-igor-kolomoisky-new-plan-for-ukraine-more-war-with-russia/

In the Polish capital of Warsaw a fortnight ago, Igor Kolomoisky met secretly with Yulia Tymoshenko. The reason for the secrecy is the terms of exchange which they discussed. These include Tymoshenko's agreement that if she is elected president in Kiev in eight months' time with Kolomoisky's support, he will get relief from Ukrainian state pursuit of billions of his dollars currently frozen on British court orders.

Kolomoisky wants relief from prosecution by the Ukrainian courts and the National Bank of Ukraine (NBU) for theft, fraud and unjust enrichment of $1,911,877,385 from Privatbank, which Kolomoisky lost control of in a state takeover in December 2016. For the story of the looting of Privatbank, and the diversion of the International Monetary Fund's Emergency Liquidity Assistance (ElA) loans to the NBU, and from there to Privatbank, read this archive .
####

Sunday, July 29th, 2018

The rest at the link.

et Al August 7, 2018 at 11:17 pm
Anyone willing to place odds on Yulia stabbing Kolomostomy in the back once elected? I think she will as the current environment affords her the opportunity to reform the Ukraine and cement a positive image of her for prosperity. I think the EU/whatever would be willing to back her all the way as the least worst alternative who would also offer the chance to get out of the hole they've dug themselves with Russia. After all, if Yulia makes up with Pootie-Poot, who to the west would meaningfully object? Maybe this would be the Ukraine equivalent of what happened at the end of 1999 in Russia. At some point the cycle has to be broken. Either this is even more revolution/revulsion/chaos or someone grabs the bullshit by the horns.
yalensis August 8, 2018 at 2:27 am
Russia does not have too many options right now when it comes to Ukraine; and Yoolia might well be the lesser of several evils. A plus is that Pootie-Poot has bedded worked with Yulia successfully in the past.
Mark Chapman August 8, 2018 at 3:39 pm
Kolomostomy – I just shook my head in amazement. Kudos; I wish I had thought of that.

I'm betting Yooolia will just be Poroshenko with breasts. All right, then; Poroshenko with woman breasts. Reforming Ukraine would be hard and thankless work, and so far as I am aware, Yooolia is not into work of any kind. She is also an oligarch, like Poroshenko, with perhaps an even more opaque accounting of her personal wealth – when she's driving around in a fabulous luxury car, it was lent to her by a friend; when she's living in a luxurious house, someone she knows let her stay there for free. Poor girl hasn't got a bean; just lots of rich friends. Personally, I would submit that bodes ill for the Yooolia-will-fix-it hopefuls.

It's just a pity Ukraine can't get anything done unless either a billionaire or a Nazi is in charge,

[Aug 15, 2018] Legendary journalist Seymour Hersh on novichok, Russian links to Donald Trump and 9/11

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

et Al August 4, 2018 at 12:15 pm

From three days ago.

Independent: Legendary journalist Seymour Hersh on novichok, Russian links to Donald Trump and 9/11
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/long_reads/seymour-hersh-interview-novichok-russian-hacking-9-11-nerve-agent-attack-a8459596.html

In a rare interview, veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh talks about his illustrious career and how he believes the official versions of some the biggest news stories of our time just don't add up

Youssef El-Gingihy

[Aug 15, 2018] Curious thing also is that police officers were initially posted outside the front door there were quite a few photos of the two women police officers (one chubby, the other not so chubby) standing near the driveway for some time without being affected by any fumes, until the doorknob story became prominent.

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Mark Chapman August 10, 2018 at 12:11 pm

Here's quite a good collection of references and commentary on the Skripal 'poisoning'. Every time I read over one of these summaries – and I by no means read this one over in detail, just skimmed it – some new incongruity jumps out that sailed right past me on the initial run-through. In this instance, Nick Bailey. The Skripals were supposedly poisoned by Novichok daubed on the doorknob of their front door, and Bailey was supposedly affected by the same vector. Yet the Skripals lived it up for about four hours before they showed any symptoms, while Bailey was affected almost immediately.

http://www.softpanorama.org/Skeptics/Political_skeptic/Corporatism/National_security_state/Intelligence_services/False_flag_operations/False_flag_poisonings/scripal_poisoning.shtml

Jen August 10, 2018 at 2:06 pm
Curious thing also is that police officers were initially posted outside the front door – there were quite a few photos of the two women police officers (one chubby, the other not so chubby) standing near the driveway – for some time without being affected by any fumes, until the doorknob story became prominent.

One of the more sinister aspects of the "poisoning" is that all major evidence – the Zizzi restaurant table, the park bench, the pet animals that starved – has been or is being destroyed by the British authorities. Even Dawn Sturgess was cremated without anything in the press about whether her body had been autopsied. If someone blames somebody else for a murder or some other serious crime, and then covers up or gets rid of important evidence, what does such behaviour suggest?

Mark Chapman August 10, 2018 at 2:19 pm
Too true, blue. Although the police officers might have stood there until the clap of doom and not been affected if the agent was present as a gel, and slathered on the doorknob. But that story always sounded like a crock, because both of them likely would not have touched the doorknob on the way out, probably only one of them, and the supposed Russian assassins would not have known if it might have been Yulia. Good assassination plots, as we have been told the Russians have practiced for decades, ensure that the target is taken out. They're not particularly squeamish about collateral damage, but in this instance only Yulia might have succumbed. But assuming it was a gel and it was on the doorknob, much of it might be assumed to have been removed by the target on the way out, and still Bailey was overcome in less than half the time of the Skripals, both of whom appear to have been simultaneously afflicted around four hours after leaving the house.

It's kind of comical, the stubborn and progressive destruction of evidence by the British authorities, the buying of Skripal's and Bailey's houses at taxpayers' expense, and so on – it's as if after a brief blink of bewilderment that the official narrative is not being accepted at face value, the British government is trying to get a do-over.

Fern August 10, 2018 at 3:56 pm
My God, what has Salisbury done to the Dark Lord? When will his fearful shadow be lifted from this unhappy city? There has been an explosion in a 'military factory' (not sure what that means) in Salisbury which has killed at least one person. The MSM has not yet announced the Russian connection but Luke Harding/The Guardian/The Independent/the Foreign Office/the entire US State Department/ are, no doubt, manufacturing one as we speak.

Maybe the Russian agents who poisoned the Skripals by smearing a non-lethal fatal nerve agent on a door handle after pumping it through a car ventilation system after sneaking it into Yulia's luggage and who then high-tailed it back to Moscow but not before decanting some of it into a gift-wrapped bottle which they left in a local park where it could be recovered in a pristine state after four months and used to poison a couple of dumpster-foragers, made a hitherto unknown deviation from the Kremlin's master plan and hid the remaining nerve agent in a factory along with a time-controlled detonator so all evidence of their evil doing was destroyed.

Hey, I've just written Harding's copy for him .

Cortes August 10, 2018 at 7:02 pm
Beat me to it, Fern:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-45151856

I blame Cubby Broccoli: only a shape-shifting shuper Shoviet shpy could be behind thish latesht Shalishbury outrage.

Jen August 11, 2018 at 3:31 am
Now the authorities will be telling people that Novichok is highly inflammable and children should not be allowed to play with Novichok and matches or cigarette lighters.
Mark Chapman August 11, 2018 at 7:10 am
The Russians engineered it to be that way – a fatal nerve agent that seldom kills, persistent for months if wrapped in cellophane, explosive and flammable, eats dreams and makes you lose your job.
et Al August 11, 2018 at 5:23 am
My God, what has Salisbury done to the Dark Lord?

Does Stonehenge count? Maybe Putin used a time machine.

[Aug 15, 2018] Some suggestions about contra sanctions that Russia can implement

Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Cortes says: August 12, 2018 at 10:44 pm

...Call a presser at the UN and have the Ambassador confirm that Obama and HRC are wholly paid-up RF assets and watch Civil War II unfold.

[Aug 14, 2018] US Intelligence Community is Tearing the Country Apart from the Inside by Dmitry Orlov

Highly recommended!
This is an interesting analysis shedding some light on how the US intelligence services have gone rogue...
Notable quotes:
"... Most recently, British "special services," which are a sort of Mini-Me to the to the Dr. Evil that is the US intelligence apparatus, saw it fit to interfere with one of their own spies, Sergei Skripal, a double agent whom they sprung from a Russian jail in a spy swap. They poisoned him using an exotic chemical and then tried to pin the blame on Russia based on no evidence. ..."
"... the Americans are doing their best to break the unwritten rule against dragging spies through the courts, but their best is nowhere near good enough. ..."
"... That said, there is no reason to believe that the Russian spies couldn't have hacked into the DNC mail server. It was probably running Microsoft Windows, and that operating system has more holes in it than a building in downtown Raqqa, Syria after the Americans got done bombing that city to rubble, lots of civilians included. When questioned about this alleged hacking by Fox News, Putin (who had worked as a spy in his previous career) had trouble keeping a straight face and clearly enjoyed the moment. ..."
"... He pointed out that the hacked/leaked emails showed a clear pattern of wrongdoing: DNC officials conspired to steal the electoral victory in the Democratic Primary from Bernie Sanders, and after this information had been leaked they were forced to resign. If the Russian hack did happen, then it was the Russians working to save American democracy from itself. So, where's the gratitude? Where's the love? Oh, and why are the DNC perps not in jail? ..."
"... The logic of US officials may be hard to follow, but only if we adhere to the traditional definitions of espionage and counterespionage -- "intelligence" in US parlance -- which is to provide validated information for the purpose of making informed decisions on best ways of defending the country. But it all makes perfect sense if we disabuse ourselves of such quaint notions and accept the reality of what we can actually observe: the purpose of US "intelligence" is not to come up with or to work with facts but to simply "make shit up." ..."
"... The objective of US intelligence is to suck all remaining wealth out of the US and its allies and pocket as much of it as possible while pretending to defend it from phantom aggressors by squandering nonexistent (borrowed) financial resources on ineffective and overpriced military operations and weapons systems. Where the aggressors are not phantom, they are specially organized for the purpose of having someone to fight: "moderate" terrorists and so on. ..."
"... "What sort of idiot are you to ask me such a stupid question? Of course they are lying! They were caught lying more than once, and therefore they can never be trusted again. In order to claim that they are not currently lying, you have to determine when it was that they stopped lying, and that they haven't lied since. And that, based on the information that is available, is an impossible task." ..."
"... "The US intelligence agencies made an outrageous claim: that I colluded with Russia to rig the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. The burden of proof is on them. They are yet to prove their case in a court of law, which is the only place where the matter can legitimately be settled, if it can be settled at all. Until that happens, we must treat their claim as conspiracy theory, not as fact." ..."
"... But no such reality-based, down-to-earth dialogue seems possible. All that we hear are fake answers to fake questions, and the outcome is a series of faulty decisions. Based on fake intelligence, the US has spent almost all of this century embroiled in very expensive and ultimately futile conflicts. ..."
"... Thanks to their efforts, Iran, Iraq and Syria have now formed a continuous crescent of religiously and geopolitically aligned states friendly toward Russia while in Afghanistan the Taliban is resurgent and battling ISIS -- an organization that came together thanks to American efforts in Iraq and Syria. ..."
"... Another hypothesis, and a far more plausible one, is that the US intelligence community has been doing a wonderful job of bankrupting the country and driving it toward financial, economic and political collapse by forcing it to engage in an endless series of expensive and futile conflicts -- the largest single continuous act of grand larceny the world has ever known. How that can possibly be an intelligent thing to do to your own country, for any conceivable definition of "intelligence," I will leave for you to work out for yourself. While you are at it, you might also want to come up with an improved definition of "treason": something better than "a skeptical attitude toward preposterous, unproven claims made by those known to be perpetual liars. ..."
Jul 28, 2018 | russia-insider.com
In today's United States, the term "espionage" doesn't get too much use outside of some specific contexts. There is still sporadic talk of industrial espionage, but with regard to Americans' own efforts to understand the world beyond their borders, they prefer the term "intelligence." This may be an intelligent choice, or not, depending on how you look at things.

First of all, US "intelligence" is only vaguely related to the game of espionage as it has been traditionally played, and as it is still being played by countries such as Russia and China. Espionage involves collecting and validating strategically vital information and conveying it to just the pertinent decision-makers on your side while keeping the fact that you are collecting and validating it hidden from everyone else.

In eras past, a spy, if discovered, would try to bite down on a cyanide capsule; these days torture is considered ungentlemanly, and spies that get caught patiently wait to be exchanged in a spy swap. An unwritten, commonsense rule about spy swaps is that they are done quietly and that those released are never interfered with again because doing so would complicate negotiating future spy swaps.

In recent years, the US intelligence agencies have decided that torturing prisoners is a good idea, but they have mostly been torturing innocent bystanders, not professional spies, sometimes forcing them to invent things, such as "Al Qaeda." There was no such thing before US intelligence popularized it as a brand among Islamic terrorists.

Most recently, British "special services," which are a sort of Mini-Me to the to the Dr. Evil that is the US intelligence apparatus, saw it fit to interfere with one of their own spies, Sergei Skripal, a double agent whom they sprung from a Russian jail in a spy swap. They poisoned him using an exotic chemical and then tried to pin the blame on Russia based on no evidence.

There are unlikely to be any more British spy swaps with Russia, and British spies working in Russia should probably be issued good old-fashioned cyanide capsules (since that supposedly super-powerful Novichok stuff the British keep at their "secret" lab in Porton Down doesn't work right and is only fatal 20% of the time).

There is another unwritten, commonsense rule about spying in general: whatever happens, it needs to be kept out of the courts, because the discovery process of any trial would force the prosecution to divulge sources and methods, making them part of the public record. An alternative is to hold secret tribunals, but since these cannot be independently verified to be following due process and rules of evidence, they don't add much value.

A different standard applies to traitors; here, sending them through the courts is acceptable and serves a high moral purpose, since here the source is the person on trial and the method -- treason -- can be divulged without harm. But this logic does not apply to proper, professional spies who are simply doing their jobs, even if they turn out to be double agents. In fact, when counterintelligence discovers a spy, the professional thing to do is to try to recruit him as a double agent or, failing that, to try to use the spy as a channel for injecting disinformation.

Americans have been doing their best to break this rule. Recently, special counsel Robert Mueller indicted a dozen Russian operatives working in Russia for hacking into the DNC mail server and sending the emails to Wikileaks. Meanwhile, said server is nowhere to be found (it's been misplaced) while the time stamps on the files that were published on Wikileaks show that they were obtained by copying to a thumb drive rather than sending them over the internet. Thus, this was a leak, not a hack, and couldn't have been done by anyone working remotely from Russia.

Furthermore, it is an exercise in futility for a US official to indict Russian citizens in Russia. They will never stand trial in a US court because of the following clause in the Russian Constitution: "61.1 A citizen of the Russian Federation may not be deported out of Russia or extradited to another state."

Mueller may summon a panel of constitutional scholars to interpret this sentence, or he can just read it and weep. Yes, the Americans are doing their best to break the unwritten rule against dragging spies through the courts, but their best is nowhere near good enough.

That said, there is no reason to believe that the Russian spies couldn't have hacked into the DNC mail server. It was probably running Microsoft Windows, and that operating system has more holes in it than a building in downtown Raqqa, Syria after the Americans got done bombing that city to rubble, lots of civilians included. When questioned about this alleged hacking by Fox News, Putin (who had worked as a spy in his previous career) had trouble keeping a straight face and clearly enjoyed the moment.

He pointed out that the hacked/leaked emails showed a clear pattern of wrongdoing: DNC officials conspired to steal the electoral victory in the Democratic Primary from Bernie Sanders, and after this information had been leaked they were forced to resign. If the Russian hack did happen, then it was the Russians working to save American democracy from itself. So, where's the gratitude? Where's the love? Oh, and why are the DNC perps not in jail?

Since there exists an agreement between the US and Russia to cooperate on criminal investigations, Putin offered to question the spies indicted by Mueller. He even offered to have Mueller sit in on the proceedings. But in return he wanted to question US officials who may have aided and abetted a convicted felon by the name of William Browder, who is due to begin serving a nine-year sentence in Russia any time now and who, by the way, donated copious amounts of his ill-gotten money to the Hillary Clinton election campaign.

In response, the US Senate passed a resolution to forbid Russians from questioning US officials. And instead of issuing a valid request to have the twelve Russian spies interviewed, at least one US official made the startlingly inane request to have them come to the US instead. Again, which part of 61.1 don't they understand?

The logic of US officials may be hard to follow, but only if we adhere to the traditional definitions of espionage and counterespionage -- "intelligence" in US parlance -- which is to provide validated information for the purpose of making informed decisions on best ways of defending the country. But it all makes perfect sense if we disabuse ourselves of such quaint notions and accept the reality of what we can actually observe: the purpose of US "intelligence" is not to come up with or to work with facts but to simply "make shit up."

The "intelligence" the US intelligence agencies provide can be anything but; in fact, the stupider it is the better, because its purpose is allow unintelligent people to make unintelligent decisions. In fact, they consider facts harmful -- be they about Syrian chemical weapons, or conspiring to steal the primary from Bernie Sanders, or Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, or the whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden -- because facts require accuracy and rigor while they prefer to dwell in the realm of pure fantasy and whimsy. In this, their actual objective is easily discernible.

The objective of US intelligence is to suck all remaining wealth out of the US and its allies and pocket as much of it as possible while pretending to defend it from phantom aggressors by squandering nonexistent (borrowed) financial resources on ineffective and overpriced military operations and weapons systems. Where the aggressors are not phantom, they are specially organized for the purpose of having someone to fight: "moderate" terrorists and so on.

One major advancement in their state of the art has been in moving from real false flag operations, à la 9/11, to fake false flag operations, à la fake East Gouta chemical attack in Syria (since fully discredited). The Russian election meddling story is perhaps the final step in this evolution: no New York skyscrapers or Syrian children were harmed in the process of concocting this fake narrative, and it can be kept alive seemingly forever purely through the furious effort of numerous flapping lips. It is now a pure confidence scam. If you are less then impressed with their invented narratives, then you are a conspiracy theorist or, in the latest revision, a traitor.

Trump was recently questioned as to whether he trusted US intelligence. He waffled. A light-hearted answer would have been:

"What sort of idiot are you to ask me such a stupid question? Of course they are lying! They were caught lying more than once, and therefore they can never be trusted again. In order to claim that they are not currently lying, you have to determine when it was that they stopped lying, and that they haven't lied since. And that, based on the information that is available, is an impossible task."

A more serious, matter-of-fact answer would have been:

"The US intelligence agencies made an outrageous claim: that I colluded with Russia to rig the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. The burden of proof is on them. They are yet to prove their case in a court of law, which is the only place where the matter can legitimately be settled, if it can be settled at all. Until that happens, we must treat their claim as conspiracy theory, not as fact."

And a hardcore, deadpan answer would have been:

"The US intelligence services swore an oath to uphold the US Constitution, according to which I am their Commander in Chief. They report to me, not I to them. They must be loyal to me, not I to them. If they are disloyal to me, then that is sufficient reason for their dismissal."

But no such reality-based, down-to-earth dialogue seems possible. All that we hear are fake answers to fake questions, and the outcome is a series of faulty decisions. Based on fake intelligence, the US has spent almost all of this century embroiled in very expensive and ultimately futile conflicts.

Thanks to their efforts, Iran, Iraq and Syria have now formed a continuous crescent of religiously and geopolitically aligned states friendly toward Russia while in Afghanistan the Taliban is resurgent and battling ISIS -- an organization that came together thanks to American efforts in Iraq and Syria.

The total cost of wars so far this century for the US is reported to be $4,575,610,429,593. Divided by the 138,313,155 Americans who file tax returns (whether they actually pay any tax is too subtle a question), it works out to just over $33,000 per taxpayer. If you pay taxes in the US, that's your bill so far for the various US intelligence "oopsies."

The 16 US intelligence agencies have a combined budget of $66.8 billion, and that seems like a lot until you realize how supremely efficient they are: their "mistakes" have cost the country close to 70 times their budget. At a staffing level of over 200,000 employees, each of them has cost the US taxpayer close to $23 million, on average. That number is totally out of the ballpark! The energy sector has the highest earnings per employee, at around $1.8 million per. Valero Energy stands out at $7.6 million per. At $23 million per, the US intelligence community has been doing three times better than Valero. Hats off! This makes the US intelligence community by far the best, most efficient collapse driver imaginable.

There are two possible hypotheses for why this is so.

First, we might venture to guess that these 200,000 people are grossly incompetent and that the fiascos they precipitate are accidental. But it is hard to imagine a situation where grossly incompetent people nevertheless manage to funnel $23 million apiece, on average, toward an assortment of futile undertakings of their choosing. It is even harder to imagine that such incompetents would be allowed to blunder along decade after decade without being called out for their mistakes.

Another hypothesis, and a far more plausible one, is that the US intelligence community has been doing a wonderful job of bankrupting the country and driving it toward financial, economic and political collapse by forcing it to engage in an endless series of expensive and futile conflicts -- the largest single continuous act of grand larceny the world has ever known. How that can possibly be an intelligent thing to do to your own country, for any conceivable definition of "intelligence," I will leave for you to work out for yourself. While you are at it, you might also want to come up with an improved definition of "treason": something better than "a skeptical attitude toward preposterous, unproven claims made by those known to be perpetual liars."

[Aug 14, 2018] US Intelligence Community is Tearing the Country Apart from the Inside by Dmitry Orlov

Highly recommended!
This is an interesting analysis shedding some light on how the US intelligence services have gone rogue...
Notable quotes:
"... Most recently, British "special services," which are a sort of Mini-Me to the to the Dr. Evil that is the US intelligence apparatus, saw it fit to interfere with one of their own spies, Sergei Skripal, a double agent whom they sprung from a Russian jail in a spy swap. They poisoned him using an exotic chemical and then tried to pin the blame on Russia based on no evidence. ..."
"... the Americans are doing their best to break the unwritten rule against dragging spies through the courts, but their best is nowhere near good enough. ..."
"... That said, there is no reason to believe that the Russian spies couldn't have hacked into the DNC mail server. It was probably running Microsoft Windows, and that operating system has more holes in it than a building in downtown Raqqa, Syria after the Americans got done bombing that city to rubble, lots of civilians included. When questioned about this alleged hacking by Fox News, Putin (who had worked as a spy in his previous career) had trouble keeping a straight face and clearly enjoyed the moment. ..."
"... He pointed out that the hacked/leaked emails showed a clear pattern of wrongdoing: DNC officials conspired to steal the electoral victory in the Democratic Primary from Bernie Sanders, and after this information had been leaked they were forced to resign. If the Russian hack did happen, then it was the Russians working to save American democracy from itself. So, where's the gratitude? Where's the love? Oh, and why are the DNC perps not in jail? ..."
"... The logic of US officials may be hard to follow, but only if we adhere to the traditional definitions of espionage and counterespionage -- "intelligence" in US parlance -- which is to provide validated information for the purpose of making informed decisions on best ways of defending the country. But it all makes perfect sense if we disabuse ourselves of such quaint notions and accept the reality of what we can actually observe: the purpose of US "intelligence" is not to come up with or to work with facts but to simply "make shit up." ..."
"... The objective of US intelligence is to suck all remaining wealth out of the US and its allies and pocket as much of it as possible while pretending to defend it from phantom aggressors by squandering nonexistent (borrowed) financial resources on ineffective and overpriced military operations and weapons systems. Where the aggressors are not phantom, they are specially organized for the purpose of having someone to fight: "moderate" terrorists and so on. ..."
"... "What sort of idiot are you to ask me such a stupid question? Of course they are lying! They were caught lying more than once, and therefore they can never be trusted again. In order to claim that they are not currently lying, you have to determine when it was that they stopped lying, and that they haven't lied since. And that, based on the information that is available, is an impossible task." ..."
"... "The US intelligence agencies made an outrageous claim: that I colluded with Russia to rig the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. The burden of proof is on them. They are yet to prove their case in a court of law, which is the only place where the matter can legitimately be settled, if it can be settled at all. Until that happens, we must treat their claim as conspiracy theory, not as fact." ..."
"... But no such reality-based, down-to-earth dialogue seems possible. All that we hear are fake answers to fake questions, and the outcome is a series of faulty decisions. Based on fake intelligence, the US has spent almost all of this century embroiled in very expensive and ultimately futile conflicts. ..."
"... Thanks to their efforts, Iran, Iraq and Syria have now formed a continuous crescent of religiously and geopolitically aligned states friendly toward Russia while in Afghanistan the Taliban is resurgent and battling ISIS -- an organization that came together thanks to American efforts in Iraq and Syria. ..."
"... Another hypothesis, and a far more plausible one, is that the US intelligence community has been doing a wonderful job of bankrupting the country and driving it toward financial, economic and political collapse by forcing it to engage in an endless series of expensive and futile conflicts -- the largest single continuous act of grand larceny the world has ever known. How that can possibly be an intelligent thing to do to your own country, for any conceivable definition of "intelligence," I will leave for you to work out for yourself. While you are at it, you might also want to come up with an improved definition of "treason": something better than "a skeptical attitude toward preposterous, unproven claims made by those known to be perpetual liars. ..."
Jul 28, 2018 | russia-insider.com
In today's United States, the term "espionage" doesn't get too much use outside of some specific contexts. There is still sporadic talk of industrial espionage, but with regard to Americans' own efforts to understand the world beyond their borders, they prefer the term "intelligence." This may be an intelligent choice, or not, depending on how you look at things.

First of all, US "intelligence" is only vaguely related to the game of espionage as it has been traditionally played, and as it is still being played by countries such as Russia and China. Espionage involves collecting and validating strategically vital information and conveying it to just the pertinent decision-makers on your side while keeping the fact that you are collecting and validating it hidden from everyone else.

In eras past, a spy, if discovered, would try to bite down on a cyanide capsule; these days torture is considered ungentlemanly, and spies that get caught patiently wait to be exchanged in a spy swap. An unwritten, commonsense rule about spy swaps is that they are done quietly and that those released are never interfered with again because doing so would complicate negotiating future spy swaps.

In recent years, the US intelligence agencies have decided that torturing prisoners is a good idea, but they have mostly been torturing innocent bystanders, not professional spies, sometimes forcing them to invent things, such as "Al Qaeda." There was no such thing before US intelligence popularized it as a brand among Islamic terrorists.

Most recently, British "special services," which are a sort of Mini-Me to the to the Dr. Evil that is the US intelligence apparatus, saw it fit to interfere with one of their own spies, Sergei Skripal, a double agent whom they sprung from a Russian jail in a spy swap. They poisoned him using an exotic chemical and then tried to pin the blame on Russia based on no evidence.

There are unlikely to be any more British spy swaps with Russia, and British spies working in Russia should probably be issued good old-fashioned cyanide capsules (since that supposedly super-powerful Novichok stuff the British keep at their "secret" lab in Porton Down doesn't work right and is only fatal 20% of the time).

There is another unwritten, commonsense rule about spying in general: whatever happens, it needs to be kept out of the courts, because the discovery process of any trial would force the prosecution to divulge sources and methods, making them part of the public record. An alternative is to hold secret tribunals, but since these cannot be independently verified to be following due process and rules of evidence, they don't add much value.

A different standard applies to traitors; here, sending them through the courts is acceptable and serves a high moral purpose, since here the source is the person on trial and the method -- treason -- can be divulged without harm. But this logic does not apply to proper, professional spies who are simply doing their jobs, even if they turn out to be double agents. In fact, when counterintelligence discovers a spy, the professional thing to do is to try to recruit him as a double agent or, failing that, to try to use the spy as a channel for injecting disinformation.

Americans have been doing their best to break this rule. Recently, special counsel Robert Mueller indicted a dozen Russian operatives working in Russia for hacking into the DNC mail server and sending the emails to Wikileaks. Meanwhile, said server is nowhere to be found (it's been misplaced) while the time stamps on the files that were published on Wikileaks show that they were obtained by copying to a thumb drive rather than sending them over the internet. Thus, this was a leak, not a hack, and couldn't have been done by anyone working remotely from Russia.

Furthermore, it is an exercise in futility for a US official to indict Russian citizens in Russia. They will never stand trial in a US court because of the following clause in the Russian Constitution: "61.1 A citizen of the Russian Federation may not be deported out of Russia or extradited to another state."

Mueller may summon a panel of constitutional scholars to interpret this sentence, or he can just read it and weep. Yes, the Americans are doing their best to break the unwritten rule against dragging spies through the courts, but their best is nowhere near good enough.

That said, there is no reason to believe that the Russian spies couldn't have hacked into the DNC mail server. It was probably running Microsoft Windows, and that operating system has more holes in it than a building in downtown Raqqa, Syria after the Americans got done bombing that city to rubble, lots of civilians included. When questioned about this alleged hacking by Fox News, Putin (who had worked as a spy in his previous career) had trouble keeping a straight face and clearly enjoyed the moment.

He pointed out that the hacked/leaked emails showed a clear pattern of wrongdoing: DNC officials conspired to steal the electoral victory in the Democratic Primary from Bernie Sanders, and after this information had been leaked they were forced to resign. If the Russian hack did happen, then it was the Russians working to save American democracy from itself. So, where's the gratitude? Where's the love? Oh, and why are the DNC perps not in jail?

Since there exists an agreement between the US and Russia to cooperate on criminal investigations, Putin offered to question the spies indicted by Mueller. He even offered to have Mueller sit in on the proceedings. But in return he wanted to question US officials who may have aided and abetted a convicted felon by the name of William Browder, who is due to begin serving a nine-year sentence in Russia any time now and who, by the way, donated copious amounts of his ill-gotten money to the Hillary Clinton election campaign.

In response, the US Senate passed a resolution to forbid Russians from questioning US officials. And instead of issuing a valid request to have the twelve Russian spies interviewed, at least one US official made the startlingly inane request to have them come to the US instead. Again, which part of 61.1 don't they understand?

The logic of US officials may be hard to follow, but only if we adhere to the traditional definitions of espionage and counterespionage -- "intelligence" in US parlance -- which is to provide validated information for the purpose of making informed decisions on best ways of defending the country. But it all makes perfect sense if we disabuse ourselves of such quaint notions and accept the reality of what we can actually observe: the purpose of US "intelligence" is not to come up with or to work with facts but to simply "make shit up."

The "intelligence" the US intelligence agencies provide can be anything but; in fact, the stupider it is the better, because its purpose is allow unintelligent people to make unintelligent decisions. In fact, they consider facts harmful -- be they about Syrian chemical weapons, or conspiring to steal the primary from Bernie Sanders, or Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, or the whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden -- because facts require accuracy and rigor while they prefer to dwell in the realm of pure fantasy and whimsy. In this, their actual objective is easily discernible.

The objective of US intelligence is to suck all remaining wealth out of the US and its allies and pocket as much of it as possible while pretending to defend it from phantom aggressors by squandering nonexistent (borrowed) financial resources on ineffective and overpriced military operations and weapons systems. Where the aggressors are not phantom, they are specially organized for the purpose of having someone to fight: "moderate" terrorists and so on.

One major advancement in their state of the art has been in moving from real false flag operations, à la 9/11, to fake false flag operations, à la fake East Gouta chemical attack in Syria (since fully discredited). The Russian election meddling story is perhaps the final step in this evolution: no New York skyscrapers or Syrian children were harmed in the process of concocting this fake narrative, and it can be kept alive seemingly forever purely through the furious effort of numerous flapping lips. It is now a pure confidence scam. If you are less then impressed with their invented narratives, then you are a conspiracy theorist or, in the latest revision, a traitor.

Trump was recently questioned as to whether he trusted US intelligence. He waffled. A light-hearted answer would have been:

"What sort of idiot are you to ask me such a stupid question? Of course they are lying! They were caught lying more than once, and therefore they can never be trusted again. In order to claim that they are not currently lying, you have to determine when it was that they stopped lying, and that they haven't lied since. And that, based on the information that is available, is an impossible task."

A more serious, matter-of-fact answer would have been:

"The US intelligence agencies made an outrageous claim: that I colluded with Russia to rig the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. The burden of proof is on them. They are yet to prove their case in a court of law, which is the only place where the matter can legitimately be settled, if it can be settled at all. Until that happens, we must treat their claim as conspiracy theory, not as fact."

And a hardcore, deadpan answer would have been:

"The US intelligence services swore an oath to uphold the US Constitution, according to which I am their Commander in Chief. They report to me, not I to them. They must be loyal to me, not I to them. If they are disloyal to me, then that is sufficient reason for their dismissal."

But no such reality-based, down-to-earth dialogue seems possible. All that we hear are fake answers to fake questions, and the outcome is a series of faulty decisions. Based on fake intelligence, the US has spent almost all of this century embroiled in very expensive and ultimately futile conflicts.

Thanks to their efforts, Iran, Iraq and Syria have now formed a continuous crescent of religiously and geopolitically aligned states friendly toward Russia while in Afghanistan the Taliban is resurgent and battling ISIS -- an organization that came together thanks to American efforts in Iraq and Syria.

The total cost of wars so far this century for the US is reported to be $4,575,610,429,593. Divided by the 138,313,155 Americans who file tax returns (whether they actually pay any tax is too subtle a question), it works out to just over $33,000 per taxpayer. If you pay taxes in the US, that's your bill so far for the various US intelligence "oopsies."

The 16 US intelligence agencies have a combined budget of $66.8 billion, and that seems like a lot until you realize how supremely efficient they are: their "mistakes" have cost the country close to 70 times their budget. At a staffing level of over 200,000 employees, each of them has cost the US taxpayer close to $23 million, on average. That number is totally out of the ballpark! The energy sector has the highest earnings per employee, at around $1.8 million per. Valero Energy stands out at $7.6 million per. At $23 million per, the US intelligence community has been doing three times better than Valero. Hats off! This makes the US intelligence community by far the best, most efficient collapse driver imaginable.

There are two possible hypotheses for why this is so.

First, we might venture to guess that these 200,000 people are grossly incompetent and that the fiascos they precipitate are accidental. But it is hard to imagine a situation where grossly incompetent people nevertheless manage to funnel $23 million apiece, on average, toward an assortment of futile undertakings of their choosing. It is even harder to imagine that such incompetents would be allowed to blunder along decade after decade without being called out for their mistakes.

Another hypothesis, and a far more plausible one, is that the US intelligence community has been doing a wonderful job of bankrupting the country and driving it toward financial, economic and political collapse by forcing it to engage in an endless series of expensive and futile conflicts -- the largest single continuous act of grand larceny the world has ever known. How that can possibly be an intelligent thing to do to your own country, for any conceivable definition of "intelligence," I will leave for you to work out for yourself. While you are at it, you might also want to come up with an improved definition of "treason": something better than "a skeptical attitude toward preposterous, unproven claims made by those known to be perpetual liars."

[Aug 14, 2018] Neocons created simply loads of job opportunities for Russians

Notable quotes:
"... I've always wanted to be a Putinbot. ..."
"... I'm just waiting for my check from Putin. Any day now ..."
Aug 14, 2018 | russia-insider.com

unheilig • 12 hours ago ,

There are simply loads of job opportunities in Russia [created by the USA]. For instance:

Trauma2000 -> unheilig • 11 hours ago ,

re: "Putinbot operator -- thousands needed"

I've always wanted to be a Putinbot. I think it would be a great job. Hoping for my KGB badge. I've got my KGB watch (even though its made in Germany), just need my badge now (hope it isn't made in China).

unheilig -> Trauma2000 • 2 hours ago ,

I'm just waiting for my check from Putin. Any day now . . .

[Aug 14, 2018] Mismanagement hits Iran more than US sanctions Iran's supreme leader -- RT World News

Notable quotes:
"... "It is not that the sanctions do not play a role; but a major part of the situation is the result of [government's own] actions," ..."
"... "better and stronger" ..."
"... "The Ayatollah has needed to explain who is to blame for the current situation, to prop up his regime," ..."
"... "the opponents of the conservatives," ..."
"... "mother of all wars," ..."
"... "consequences the likes of which few have ever suffered before." ..."
"... Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! ..."
Aug 13, 2018 | www.rt.com
Get short URL Mismanagement hits Iran more than US sanctions – Iran's supreme leader FILE PHOTO: Iranian Parliament © Islamic Consultative Assembly News Agency / AFP In a rare statement Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has lashed out at the country's authorities, accusing them of poorly handling internal issues. The mismanagement is even worse than US sanctions, he said. "It is not that the sanctions do not play a role; but a major part of the situation is the result of [government's own] actions," Khamenei said, according to Irna, as he was addressing thousands of Iranians in Tehran on Monday.

The supreme leader added that if Tehran acted "better and stronger" itself US sanctions would have not been so harmful.

Read more Iran's President Hassan Rouhani © Lisi Niesner Rouhani blasts Trump's 'psychological warfare' as Iran braces for US sanctions

Analysts told RT that what Khamenei said is not really surprising given the worsening economic situation inside the country after the relations with the US went on a downward spiral. The supreme leader has been trying to keep Iranian society balanced by taking a neutral position between the liberal and conservative parts of the establishment. Now the former, including President Hassan Rouhani, are finding themselves in a weaker position, according to Irina Fedorova from the Russian Academy of Sciences' Center for Middle Eastern Studies.

"The Ayatollah has needed to explain who is to blame for the current situation, to prop up his regime," Fedorova told RT. She said that "the opponents of the conservatives," and Rouhani in particular, who supported the JCPOA, will fall victims of this approach. But it will not lead to his resignation, the researcher noted. However, this means the conservatives' positions, such as those of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, are to strengthen significantly.

The statement may also mean a reshuffling of the political elite as well as some economic changes, Jamal Wakeem, professor of history and international relations at Lebanese University in Beirut, told RT. He said that "reformists" and those who pressed for the deals with the West are to be targeted, while the leadership is going to seek alternatives to the West, including a partnership with Russia and China.

The US reinstated certain economic sanctions against Iran last week, with President Trump promising more to come in November. The restrictive measures had been lifted under the historic Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), but Washington unilaterally withdrew from the landmark deal despite international condemnation, including from its EU allies. The 2015 agreement placed tight controls on Tehran's nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of international sanctions. Iran's commitment has been confirmed by the IAEA since then.

READ MORE: US can't force trade rules on others, Germany must invest more in Iran – economy minister

Tehran has repeatedly blasted the US for the move, vowing to restart its nuclear program in retaliation against any foreign restrictions. While the US has been pressing its allies to completely refuse Iranian oil imports, the Islamic Republic has threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz, effectively blocking all the oil shipments from the Persian Gulf, should they accede to American demands.

The row between the US and Iran escalated last month, when their respective leadership exchanged a barrage of threats. Back then, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said that a conflict with Iran would be "mother of all wars," provoking Trump's harsh response when he promised "consequences the likes of which few have ever suffered before."

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

[Aug 14, 2018] An objective criticism of the Zionist enterprise now a days and its apologists resort immediately to unrestrained howls and accusations of antisemitism.

Aug 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

JoaoAlfaiate , August 14, 2018 at 7:54 pm GMT

@Sam Shama

" antisemites "

There are antisemitic rants in many places on the web, almost all of which are ignored.

But make an objective criticism of the Zionist enterprise now a days and its apologists resort immediately to unrestrained howls and accusations of antisemitism.

One ought, therefor, to understand this rhetorical device for the simple ad hominem attack that it is.

[Aug 14, 2018] Habakkuk on Russia Delusion Syndrome (RDS)

Aug 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

One rather material element in delusions about Russia, alike in my country as in yours, is that people still appear to have difficulty realising that Putin is not a communist, and, where they can get this far, find it utterly impossible to make sense of what he actually is.

Among the more extreme instances was provided by our Ambassador to the UN, Karen Pierce, in the exchanges in April as the Western powers were trying to cover up yet another 'false flag' chemical weapons attack. She explained: "In respect of Karl Marx, I think he must be turning in his grave to see what the country that was founded on many of his precepts is doing in the name of supporting Syria by condoning the use of chemical weapons on Syrian territory."

(See https://www.rt.com/uk/42384... .)

This problem might have been avoided had our then Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, summoned his Eton and Oxford contemporary Paul Robinson back from Ottawa, where he now teaches. Ironically, it was when Johnson was editing the 'Spectator' that, in January 2004, he published an article by Robinson, headlined 'Putin's might is White', which had a shaping influence on my view of contemporary Russian realities.

(See http://archive.spectator.c o... .)

Only later did I learn that, after leaving university, its author had served for five years in Army Intelligence, and, when he chose to do a doctorate, opted to excavate some forgotten figures from Trotsky's 'dustbin of history', writing on the White Russian Army in exile.

As a result, at a time when so many who had opted for 'relevant' subjects quite patently had no idea what was happening, Robinson could see, clearly, that what goes into the 'dustbin' does not necessarily stay there: that Putin was, in essence, a grandchild of the Rev olution who had come to believe that some of those who had opposed it had been completely justified. (As it were, Trotsky should have been in the 'dustbin', not Denikin.)

Moreover, having described the new Russian President as a 'typical Soviet radish – red on the outside but white at the core', Robinson went on to put into context the complexities of his relationship towards 'liberal' ideas:

'Probably the most fundamental tension in Russian politics is that between the concepts of gosudarstvennost' and its rival obshchestvennost'. The nuances of the latter are difficult to translate, but the term refers to civil society and, roughly speaking, means "public opinion". Liberal commentators regard the state in Russia with suspicion. At the start of the 20th century, they longed for the state to surrender its power to "public opinion". They still do. But supporters of gosudatstvennosr view supporters of obshchestvennost' with equal suspicion. They see them as the self-interested representatives of the chattering classes, who, if put into positions of power, will immediately plunge Russia into a state of anarchy in which their beloved liberties will be of no use to them or anybody else. This, the Whites argued, was what the liberals of the provisional government had done in 1917, and this, many now claim, is what free-market democrats such as Yegor Gaidar did to Russia in the early 1990s.

A.Trophimovsky , an hour ago

What about the historical, by the ammount of millions, military budget Trump signed yesterday at that military base, destined mainly to counter Russia and China?

Is he suffering of RDS too already?

How do you see it?

It includes an increase in military personel wages of 2.5%...this would translate into pensions as well, I guess, thus, added to the tax cut, it would seem that for some people Trump is the hen of the golden eggs...

Pat Lang Mod -> A.Trophimovsky , an hour ago
IMO DJT is firmly in the grip of RDS.
VietnamVet , 2 hours ago
Excellent. The past isn't even past.

The Reagan/Thatcher revolution was a restoration of a new Victorian Gilded Age. The USA is a plutocracy with two ideologies (globalism and nationalism) at war. Donald Trump represents the old national myths. Peter Strzok is a courtier of the Clinton globalists. The little people, under stress from austerity, are reverting to their old myths and religions. American globalists cannot face the reality of the defeat of Hillary Clinton. Instead they project themselves on to others. It is the evil Vladimir Putin who is doing the dirty deeds. As with all scapegoats, the truth about Russia does not matter.

This is very scary. The weaponizing of sanctions and tariffs plus the possibility of the 17 year old Middle East Holy War spreading into Turkey and involving NATO troops in Turkey, Syria and Iraq; make the ignition of Russia's 1,960 strategic nuclear weapons a real possibility.

richardstevenhack , 4 hours ago

It is only under the shelter of a state strong enough to protect its subjects from crime or external assault, to create and enforce laws to regulate commerce and industry, and to encourage the arts, education and other social benefits, that a society can prosper, and that the conditions for individual liberty can ever hope to exist.'

This is the quintessential state delusion. History proves the exact opposite, nowhere better than the United States whose founding was based on minimizing state power as much as possible consistent with there being a state. Clearly it was not enough... "Give them an inch and they'll take a mile."

'In that story, America is placed at the vanguard of the great human march of progress. America is the grateful inheritor of other people's gifts. It has a spiritual connection to all people in all places, but also an exceptional role. America culminates history. It advances a way of life and a democratic model that will provide people everywhere with dignity. The things Americans do are not for themselves only, but for all mankind.

'This historical story was America's true myth '

How people can write this sort of nonsense is beyond me. Truly delusional and divorced from any notion of reality. Nothing but a propaganda piece by Brooks. A pure example of "America Delusion Syndrome."

Ishmael Zechariah -> richardstevenhack , 10 minutes ago
re: "How people can write this sort of nonsense is beyond me."

Perhaps the current propaganda is analogous to that described by Auden in "The Shield of Achilles" ( https://www.poets.org/poets... )

"... She looked over his shoulder
For vines and olive trees,
Marble well-governed cities
And ships upon untamed seas,
But there on the shining metal
His hands had put instead
An artificial wilderness
And a sky like lead.

A plain without a feature, bare and brown,
No blade of grass, no sign of neighborhood,
Nothing to eat and nowhere to sit down,
Yet, congregated on its blankness, stood
An unintelligible multitude,
A million eyes, a million boots in line,
Without expression, waiting for a sign.

Out of the air a voice without a face
Proved by statistics that some cause was just
In tones as dry and level as the place:
No one was cheered and nothing was discussed;
Column by column in a cloud of dust
They marched away enduring a belief
Whose logic brought them, somewhere else, to grief..."

At this rate many may come to grief due to the corruption of bloviating megaphones.
'Tis a pity.
Ishmael Zechariah

[Aug 14, 2018] Book: RAND DECEPTION: The TRUTH ABOUT BILL BROWDER, the MAGNITSKY ACT, and ANTI-RUSSIAN SANCTIONS

Aug 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

RobinG , August 14, 2018 at 4:25 am GMT

Re. RUSSIAGATE: the 2nd edition of Alex Krainer's book is now available, with new title.

GRAND DECEPTION: The TRUTH ABOUT BILL BROWDER, the MAGNITSKY ACT, and ANTI-RUSSIAN SANCTIONS https://www.redpillpress.com/shop/grand-deception-bill-browder-magnitsky-act-russian-sanctions/

In 2015, Bill Browder published Red Notice – purportedly a true story about his experience in Russia between 1996 and 2005. Upon closer scrutiny however, his story doesn't add up and demonstrably fails to stand up in a court of law. Nonetheless, on the dubious strength of that story, Browder has been able to lobby the U.S. Congress to pass the Magnitsky Act in 2012 which needlessly damaged the relations between the U.S. and Russia. Where he failed in courts of law, however, his campaign of relentless demonization of Russia and of Vladimir Putin has been successful in the court of public opinion in the West. As humanity finds itself on the precipice of yet another great war, what we need are bridges of mutual understanding and constructive engagement, not demonization.

[Aug 14, 2018] Is not it ironic that the neocon and MI6 corrected Browder is a grandson of two KGB agents?

Aug 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

annamaria , August 14, 2018 at 1:24 am GMT

@Sean

" and so Putin immediately issued orders for him to be sadistically murdered "
What an amazing consistency in supporting the Browder/Steele line "Putin did it." Which is understandable, considering the efforts and investment made into the MSM memes. You made a very strong impression that the presstituting MSM is your main source of information.
Here are some excerpts from the honest sources.

"Poisoned Russian spy was close to Christopher Steele consultant:" http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/poisoned-russian-spy-close-steele-consultant-report-article-1.3862516
"Jonathan Winer was not only a point man for the Steele "dossier" at the State Department in 2016 (and Steele dossiers of yore), he was also a father of the Magnitsky Act in 2012. Yes, longtime Senate staffer Winer is the "old friend" Browder credits with envisioning the legislative strategy that culminated in passage of the law. (More recently, Winer is serving as Browder's bulldog-lawyer -- story here.)
"Cardin knew there were problems with Browder's story about Magnitsky's death and yet brought him into Congress to testify to secure the vote. That's suborning perjury:" https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-04/magnitsky-trio-pushes-war-russia-new-sanctions

"Litvinenko's circle also included Boris Berezovsky, Alexander Goldfarb, Vyacheslav Zharko, and Akhmed Zakayev, most of whom have received asylum in the U.K. In the 1990s, Boris Berezovsky worked with Mikhail Khodorkovsky and George Soros' International Science Foundation which was headed by Alexander Goldfarb for almost ten years. He was also involved in money laundering millions of dollars through the Bank of New York and the Republic Bank of New York which was owned by Bill Browder's now deceased partner, Edmond Safra:" https://jimmysllama.com/2018/05/07/11191/

– Is not interesting, how so many Browder's connections met an untimely death yet Browder the Scoundrel is well supported and protected by the "deciders." -- See the fate of a DOCUMENTARY about Browder, Magnitsky, and a bloody trail of the dead former employees of Browder whom he used for his very profitable if criminal enterprise.
Alexander Perepelichny" was the key witness who could potentially destroy the scam with highest political stakes on Magnitsky dossier. As Browder responds with "I do not recall" and "I do not know" on any substantial inquiry in the court, the US judiciary could be very interested in hearing Perepelichny. This menace to Magnitsky Act was eliminated one week before the bill passed the US House: on Nov 10, 2012 Alexander Perepelichny was found dead outside his mansion in London."

[Aug 14, 2018] Maybe The US congress truly believe they can decapitate Russia with very little risk or damage to NATO countries, but from publicly available data it doesn't look like that.

Notable quotes:
"... Why are they pushing a propaganda war which awfully looks like psychological preparation for a real hot war, when they must know that there cannot ever be a real hot war? ..."
"... How will they prevent escalation if they themselves seem to slowly drink their own Kool-Aid and believe that Russia is "waging hybrid warfare" with them, and therefore that any military action against Russia counts as self-defense, moreover, that it'd be insane not to wage an actual war against Russia? ..."
Aug 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 7:26 pm GMT

@Mitleser

Exactly. It's a bit frightening because I don't quite get what their endgame is here.

Maybe they truly believe they can decapitate Russia with very little risk or damage to NATO countries, but from publicly available data it doesn't look like that.

Why are they pushing a propaganda war which awfully looks like psychological preparation for a real hot war, when they must know that there cannot ever be a real hot war?

How will they prevent escalation if they themselves seem to slowly drink their own Kool-Aid and believe that Russia is "waging hybrid warfare" with them, and therefore that any military action against Russia counts as self-defense, moreover, that it'd be insane not to wage an actual war against Russia?

[Aug 14, 2018] Trump has repeatedly stressed that Russia and the US are the two biggest nuclear powers in the world, with their combined nuclear arsenal accounting for 90 percent of world's total, and thus the US must live in peace with Russia.

Notable quotes:
"... Russia's economy is weak. Its GDP did not make the world's top 10, yet its military, especially its nuclear power, has sustained its status as one of the most influential nations in the world. Russia and the US have serious geopolitical conflicts in the Middle East and Europe, but Trump suddenly reversed the hardline US stance and showed a low-key response to Putin. That's probably because, as Trump said, Russia is a nuclear power. ..."
"... Yet Trump's respect toward Russia is worth mentioning. Trump is a man who values strength, and he attaches great importance to military strength, especially nuclear strength. ..."
"... China is different from Russia. China has a robust economy and has many tools at its disposal, which is an advantage. Yet China's relatively weak military, especially its nuclear power, which lags behind the US, is a major strategic sore point. ..."
"... Just by looking at the US' aggressive attitude in the South China Sea and the Taiwan question, we know that China's nuclear strength is "far from sufficient." Part of the US' strategic arrogance may come from its absolute nuclear advantage. We are concerned that maybe one day, Washington will turn this arrogance into military provocation, whereby China will face very grave challenges. ..."
Aug 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

Thorfinnsson , August 13, 2018 at 9:04 pm GMT

@Okechukwu

From Chinese state media: http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1111711.shtml

Amid the lingering fury from the US media over US President Donald Trump's summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, the White House announced Thursday that Trump invited Putin to visit Washington this fall. Trump's attitude has been firm on improving US-Russia relations. Despite staunch opposition, it is quite likely that US-Russia relations will halt its slide during Trump's presidency.

Trump has repeatedly stressed that Russia and the US are the two biggest nuclear powers in the world, with their combined nuclear arsenal accounting for 90 percent of world's total, and thus the US must live in peace with Russia. On US-Russia relations, Trump is clearheaded.

Russia's economy is weak. Its GDP did not make the world's top 10, yet its military, especially its nuclear power, has sustained its status as one of the most influential nations in the world. Russia and the US have serious geopolitical conflicts in the Middle East and Europe, but Trump suddenly reversed the hardline US stance and showed a low-key response to Putin. That's probably because, as Trump said, Russia is a nuclear power.

We know US-Russia relations cannot be improved overnight because it is difficult for the two countries to make strategic compromises in Europe and the Middle East. Even if their relations improve, other frictions may emerge, causing new rifts in bilateral ties.

Yet Trump's respect toward Russia is worth mentioning. Trump is a man who values strength, and he attaches great importance to military strength, especially nuclear strength.

The US has defined China as its strategic competitor and is exerting more pressure. The trade war may be just the beginning. Tensions between the two nations may spread to other areas. We believe that during this process, the White House will continue to evaluate, including a look at China's nuclear arsenal.

China is different from Russia. China has a robust economy and has many tools at its disposal, which is an advantage. Yet China's relatively weak military, especially its nuclear power, which lags behind the US, is a major strategic sore point.

A popular view among Chinese strategists is that we need only a sufficient number of nuclear weapons. Too many nuclear weapons cost more and may trigger outside alarm, leading to strategic uncertainty. Those who hold this view believe China does not need to increase its strategic nuclear weapons and should instead focus on modernizing its nuclear weapons to secure the country's capability for a second nuclear strike. We believe this view is a serious misinterpretation of the major countries' nuclear situation.

China is no small country that needs only a few nuclear weapons to scare off an intimidator at a critical moment. China has grown into a global influence, facing greater risks and pressure than smaller countries do. We must reconsider what constitutes "sufficient" in terms of nuclear weapons.

China's nuclear weapons have to not only secure a second strike but also play the role of cornerstone in forming a strong deterrence so that outside powers dare not intimidate China militarily. Once major countries are engaged in military conflicts, each side must evaluate the determination of the other side to see the conflict through. Nuclear power is the pillar of that determination. One of the major reasons that the US used a "salami-slicing" method to push for NATO's eastward expansion but refused to engage in open conflict in Ukraine and Syria with Russia is probably because it was concerned about what Moscow might do with its huge nuclear arsenal.

Just by looking at the US' aggressive attitude in the South China Sea and the Taiwan question, we know that China's nuclear strength is "far from sufficient." Part of the US' strategic arrogance may come from its absolute nuclear advantage. We are concerned that maybe one day, Washington will turn this arrogance into military provocation, whereby China will face very grave challenges.

China must speed up its process of developing strategic nuclear power. Advanced missiles such as the Dongfeng-41 should materialize as soon as possible. Not only should we possess a strong nuclear arsenal, but we must also let the outside world know that China is determined to defend its core national interests with nuclear power.

Of course, we do not believe nuclear power development should override all the other work or its development should come at the expense of other major developmental interests. But this work must be made a top priority. We must recognize the urgent need for China to strengthen its nuclear prowess.

[Aug 14, 2018] If a nuclear war starts, it is only logical for the initial combatants to target ALL powers at once, as this may be their last chance to reduce their neighbors' ability to loot and conquer after the war.

Aug 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

ZZZ , August 13, 2018 at 10:30 pm GMT

@neutral

If a nuclear war starts, it is only logical for the initial combatants to target ALL powers at once, as this may be their last chance to reduce their neighbors' ability to loot and conquer after the war. So expect Europe & China to be hit. China will in turn target Japan, India, Korea, etc. The US do not trust Canada or Mexico, so these may well become targets too. Pakistan and Israel may want to make their move at this point. Pretty soon it would become clear that no major industrial or population center should be spared. So within a couple of hours, the world's entire nuclear stockpile would be launched.

After these events, the country with the most extensive tunnel system will emerge as the new world leader.

[Aug 14, 2018] A blockade is an act of war. A much more lively August than any of us expected. The devil is never idle.

Aug 14, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Uncoy , Aug 12, 2018 5:33:18 PM | 21

A very busy week indeed. It looks like the world is dividing into two alliances: those who will follow the dictates on Iran and Russian sanctions and those who won't. We're in the prelude to a long winter of a cold war or a very hot one, depending on how the USA chooses to enforce those sanctions. Effectively at this point the upcoming sanctions would serve as the equivalent of a blockade. A blockade is an act of war. A much more lively August than any of us expected. The devil is never idle.

Miserable fat scheming twats like Karl Rove have nothing to look forward to on vacation and so delight in poisoning everyone else's. There's a whole warren of similar rats in the Trump administration and over at Langley which is why I mention Rove. While he's not in the current administration, he's a very visceral representation of what the world is up against until we put the neocons and PNACers out of business for good.

PS. I see nhs continues to post tracking links instead of direct links @7. b, I'd really appreciate it (and the rest of the tech savvy audience here would too) if you'd ban tracking links or more positively insist on direct links. Technically speaking all of nhs's posts should be held as he's a serial offender. You can either clean his links for him (sounds like as much fun as fixing his toilet for free) or just delete the comments which contain URL shorteners (tracking links). The latter would make encourage him to clean up his act fast. You'd be surprised how quickly inconsiderate, spying, spamming types like nhs would learn how to post direct links.

[Aug 14, 2018] Russia of today is in a comparatively much weaker position overall than the USSR due to powerful fifth column

Aug 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

Parbes , August 14, 2018 at 1:45 am GMT

@reiner Tor

" I don't quite get what their endgame is here .Why are they pushing a propaganda war which awfully looks like psychological preparation for a real hot war, when they must know that there cannot ever be a real hot war?"

Most probably, because they are calculating that under various forms of psychological and economic pressure Russia will crumble from within and surrender, just like in the times of Gorbachev-Yeltsin, without having to fight a real, risk-filled war. Surrender and subjugation without firing a shot – THAT'S their imagined endgame. "Why wouldn't what worked within living memory, a mere 30 years ago, work again now in updated form?", they think – especially since the Russia of today is in a comparatively much weaker position overall than the USSR of back then and the Russian rulers and society are not really too much different psychologically from what they were back then, and are even mostly COMPOSED OF THE SAME INDIVIDUALS? Is it really surprising that they think that way, given the continued existence and thriving inside Russia of a powerful, openly seditious Fifth Column which is not seriously combatted by either the Putin government or the stupid mass of the Russian populace (who stand to lose the most, suffer terribly, and be reduced to colonized virtual serfs or exterminated if the Fifth Columnists and their foreign masters succeed in crashing Russia)?

Of course, IF this is a miscalculation (and I'm not sure that it is, given the current weak, appeasing mentality of the Russian government and population), and the psychopathic Western ruling elites don't manage to get a hold of their oversized lunatic egos and rein in their arrogant hubristic belligerence – well, then the whole situation could devolve pretty quick into a massive, WW I/WW II/Iraq/Serbia combination-type hot war scenario. Except, this time, with the real probability of stepwise escalation from conventional hostilities to Thermonuclear Holocaust.

Vidi , August 14, 2018 at 1:14 am GMT
@Felix Keverich

Realistically, what action Russia could take that would potentially match the disruptive power of American sanctions on Russia?

Russia may have struck a heavy blow already, when she dumped her holdings of U.S. treasuries. The relatively small amount ($100 to $200 billion) may not have been significant, but as a signal to the rest of the world it may have been loud. The new sanctions may be an attempt to punish Russia for that. They won't work, of course, but the noise they generate may help to obscure the import of Russia's recent action.

Si1ver1ock , August 14, 2018 at 12:57 am GMT
What I don't understand is why the US thinks Russia and China will continue to sanction North Korea. It seems like the US is handing out straight razors to everybody and asking them to slit each others throats. Except for Erdogan, they all seem to be saying, "Sure why not?"

Maybe they are simply accustomed to taking orders.

[Aug 14, 2018] Republicans call Justice Department's Bruce Ohr to testify, but where is British Spy Steele (Video)

Notable quotes:
"... "DOJ official Bruce Ohr will come before Congress on August 28 to answer why he had 60+ contacts with dossier author Chris Steele, as far back as January 2016. He owes the American public the full truth." ..."
"... So here you have information flowing from the Clinton campaign from the Russians, likely -- I believe was handed directly from Russian propaganda arms to the Clinton campaign, fed into the top levels of the FBI and Department of Justice to open up a counter-intelligence investigation into a political campaign that has now polluted nearly every top official at the DOJ and FBI over the course of the last couple years. It is absolutely amazing, ..."
"... Emails handed over to Congress by the Justice Department show that Ohr, Steele, and Simpson communicated throughout 2016, as Steele and Simpson were being paid by the Clinton campaign and the DNC to dig up dirt on Trump. ..."
"... why the most central of figures in the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, British spy for hire Christopher Steele, is not sitting before Congress, testifying to the real election collusion between the UK, the Obama White House, the FBI and the DOJ. ..."
Aug 14, 2018 | theduran.com

Representative Mark Meadows tweeted Friday

"DOJ official Bruce Ohr will come before Congress on August 28 to answer why he had 60+ contacts with dossier author Chris Steele, as far back as January 2016. He owes the American public the full truth."

DOJ official Bruce Ohr will come before Congress on August 28 to answer why he had 60+ contacts with dossier author, Chris Steele, as far back as January 2016.

He owes the American public the full truth.

-- Mark Meadows (@RepMarkMeadows) August 10, 2018

Lawmakers believe former Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr is a central figure to finding out how the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee paid PR smear firm Fusion GPS and British spy Christopher Steele to fuel a conspiracy of Trump campaign collusion with Russians at the top levels of the Justice Department and the FBI.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) said Sunday to Fox News' Maria Bartiromo

So here you have information flowing from the Clinton campaign from the Russians, likely -- I believe was handed directly from Russian propaganda arms to the Clinton campaign, fed into the top levels of the FBI and Department of Justice to open up a counter-intelligence investigation into a political campaign that has now polluted nearly every top official at the DOJ and FBI over the course of the last couple years. It is absolutely amazing,

According to Breitbart , during the 2016 election, Ohr served as associate deputy attorney general, and as an assistant to former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and to then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. His office was four doors down from Rosenstein on the fourth floor. He was also dual-hatted as the director of the DOJ's Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force.

Ohr's contacts with Steele, an ex-British spy, are said to date back more than a decade. Steele is a former FBI informant who had helped the FBI prosecute corruption by FIFA officials. But it is Ohr and Steele's communications in 2016 that lawmakers are most interested in.

Emails handed over to Congress by the Justice Department show that Ohr, Steele, and Simpson communicated throughout 2016, as Steele and Simpson were being paid by the Clinton campaign and the DNC to dig up dirt on Trump.

The Duran's Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris examine the role Bruce Ohr played in Hillary Clinton's Deep State attack against the Presidency of Donald Trump, and why the most central of figures in the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, British spy for hire Christopher Steele, is not sitting before Congress, testifying to the real election collusion between the UK, the Obama White House, the FBI and the DOJ.

[Aug 14, 2018] Creating problems in Ukriane is one of the few ways Russia could impose tangible costs on USA

Looks like the aim of US sanctions is to ratchet the hostility up with Russia to the level of a full blown cold war. Ukraine can be a victim.
Notable quotes:
"... Meanwhile, you'll get bogged down in Ukraine. You'll face tough choices (sanctions will get North Korea-style quickly, and even Chinese sympathy will get questionable), like should you spend your scarce resources on modern weaponry or a large security force to keep Ukraine pacified? ..."
"... Very few people in Russia would want Ukraine now. The consensus is: "good riddance". In Ukraine, on the other hand, there are people who want Russia to invade. Some are waiting for someone else to liberate them from Nazis (they apparently are not familiar with Protestant wisdom that God helps those who help themselves), some pray for a pretext to invite NATO/US (as if anyone is willing to die for them). ..."
Aug 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

@reiner Tor


We'll need an anti-sanctions law regardless of whether or not we are going to invade.
Well, I'd say it's a precondition to invading Ukraine. If you're incapable of making such a simple law, you're sure as hell incapable of invading Ukraine. And you do need the law if you want to avoid the sanctions creating the perverse incentives inside Russia, like the biggest banks not having branches in the Crimea. Decoupling from the US dollar is no help, since US sanctions are extraterritorial, if you didn't notice, so they affect euro or even Chinese yuan denominated transactions, too.
Eastern Europeans will never mobilise. What would mass mobilisation even look like in a country like Hungary? Instead, they'll petition USA to station more of its troops in Eastern Europe. A lot more, like hundreds of thousands more.
Within living memory, Hungary had armed forces of 150,000 troops and 1,500 main battle tanks (admittedly, the majority were somewhat obsolete), with hundreds of fighter and light bomber jets (MiG-21s and Su-22s etc.), and we were the slackers in the Eastern Bloc, not spending on defense as much as other neighbors of us. Increasing defense spending to 2% of GDP is what's the plan. If you invaded and occupied the whole of Ukraine, it could easily go up to 4-5%.

Of course, the Americans might come in numbers, too. But you're delusional here:

Doing so will impose costs on the USA. Actually, this is one of the few ways Russia could impose tangible costs on USA: by stoking tensions in Eastern Europe.
We have no military industry to speak of. Most of our neighbors do have some, but even they are nowhere near self-sufficiency. You can guess who we'll buy our weapons from. Poland recently offered to pay for an American base on its soil. So it won't be much of a cost for the US, it might actually be quite beneficial.

Meanwhile, you'll get bogged down in Ukraine. You'll face tough choices (sanctions will get North Korea-style quickly, and even Chinese sympathy will get questionable), like should you spend your scarce resources on modern weaponry or a large security force to keep Ukraine pacified?

Mass deportations is the best part about occupying the Ukraine!
Stalin's USSR at the height of its power only deported much smaller populations. You'd need a lot of people to achieve that. But let's assume you'll manage to do that. It will, of course, create a huge backlash against Russia: popular opinion will get united against Russians. (Defense spending quickly up to 5% of GDP or higher.) The Ukrainians in our countries will of course enter the workforce and join anti-Russian ragtag militias to control the border.
Instead they would have to contend with an insurgency in Eastern Poland
So the people ethnically cleansed from their homes will rise up against NATO in support of Russia. This is a seriously dumb idea.

AnonFromTN , August 13, 2018 at 7:04 pm GMT

Very few people in Russia would want Ukraine now. The consensus is: "good riddance". In Ukraine, on the other hand, there are people who want Russia to invade. Some are waiting for someone else to liberate them from Nazis (they apparently are not familiar with Protestant wisdom that God helps those who help themselves), some pray for a pretext to invite NATO/US (as if anyone is willing to die for them).

This reminds me of an old Russian joke.

An old hag sits on the bench and screams: "Help! They are raping me!"
Another one passes by and asks: "Have you gone completely mad?"
The first one answers: "Everyone is entitled to a pleasant dream!"

Cyrano , August 13, 2018 at 6:15 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

Don't worry about my IQ woes – they are non-existent. I am a stable genius – just like Donald Trump. Your IQ issues are – on the other hand – very easy to fix. All you have to do is admit that you are Russian and you immediately gain 20-30 IQ points. Of course, this will come at the expense of Russia, but then again. everything you've ever done in your history came at the expense of Russia. All the Russians ever wanted was to have a brotherly nation in Ukraine. They have a brother all right, unfortunately that brother has a Down syndrome.

AnonFromTN , August 13, 2018 at 5:46 pm GMT
@Okechukwu

Any Russian ruler who tries to return Crimea will be overthrown in no time. As Russia gradually disengages from the US-dominated financial system, the costs will go down. Russia has already created its own payment system similar to that of Visa and Mastercard, as well as its own money transfer system similar to SWIFT. On the other hand, if Russia fails to disengage from dollar-dominated system, the losses would be much greater than Crimea. It might even turn into a shithole, like Ukraine.

Insurance is more often a scam than not: Lehman Brothers enjoyed pretty high ratings until their crash. What's more, banks were insured against the risks of sub-prime mortgages they held. Remember what happened in 2008?

As to the future, nobody has the crystal ball. Can you tell how much a Big Mac will cost in the US five or ten years from now? $4? $40? $400? $4,000? Your guess is as good as mine. Ponzi schemes have a habit of crashing and nobody worked out a way of predicting when exactly the crash will occur.

AnonFromTN , August 13, 2018 at 5:15 pm GMT
@DaveE

This might be in the cards. The US sanctions actually squeezed Russian comprador (5th column) oligarchs, who were always subservient to the West, sent their families there, and are siphoning off their money offshore, more than anything. If Putin uses this to expropriate their stolen riches, which he might do (98% of Russian population would be cheering; they'd cheer even more if Putin hangs those bastards, but that's unlikely), these sanctions would be yet another example of the US shooting itself in the foot. The US is getting pretty good at that lately, always screaming that it hurts afterwards.

[Aug 14, 2018] Our Despicable, Indefensible Policy in Yemen by Daniel Larison

Notable quotes:
"... So will a good Christian like Mike Pompeo reconcile these obvious falsehoods, self deception. With every letter, he will be denying the very God he professes to believe in. ..."
"... Trump and his administration are the reveal of the true nature of modern American political Christianity. This is what it always was ..."
"... But The People are not exactly conscientious objector on the issue of Yemen and the crimes committed in our name either. The Republic might rot from the head, but the rot has certainly spread far and wide. ..."
Aug 13, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
The pathetic U.S. response to last week's massacre of students in Yemen continues :

A senior general urged Saudi officials to conduct a thorough investigation into an airstrike that killed at least 40 children in Yemen, the Pentagon said Monday, an indication of U.S. concern about allied nations' air operations against Houthi militants.

The general's request actually shows how little concern the U.S. has for how the Saudi coalition conducts its war effort. If the U.S. were concerned with how the war was being fought, our officials wouldn't be asking the perpetrators of atrocities to investigate their own crimes. It is pointless to urge the Saudis to conduct an investigation into their own war crime when we already know that they will find that they did nothing wrong. As the Post article notes later on, the coalition's investigations predictably excuse their actions:

According to Andrea Prasow, deputy Washington director for Human Rights Watch, Saudi investigators had cleared coalition military officials of legal responsibility in virtually all investigations the JIAT had conducted.

The pattern of Saudi coalition conduct over the last three years is clear. Their forces commit numerous documented war crimes, and then when they "investigate" those crimes they determine that their forces are guilty of nothing. It would have been laughable to ask the Saudis to investigate themselves back in 2015, and to do the same over three years later is inexcusable. It is an invitation to whitewashing heinous, illegal acts. The U.S. will not honestly call out the coalition members for their crimes against Yemeni civilians because our government is deeply complicit in those crimes, and so we are treated to this pantomime farce where we send officers to call for investigations whose results have been predetermined even before the crimes were committed. The entire policy is a disgrace, and it brings dishonor on everyone ordered to participate in it.

There needs to be an independent, international inquiry into war crimes committed by all sides in Yemen. All parties to the conflict are assuredly guilty of war crimes, and all parties should be held accountable for what they have done to Yemen's civilians. As long as the U.S. enables Saudi coalition crimes and then shields them from scrutiny, our government is implicated in both the crime and the cover-up. Congress could put a stop to this if they were willing to do their jobs and assume their proper responsibilities, but for more than three years they have shirked their duties and acquiesced in a despicable and indefensible policy in Yemen.

Other Costs August 14, 2018 at 1:34 am

"The entire policy is a disgrace, and it brings dishonor on everyone ordered to participate in it."

For all that they're doing it at the order of even more disgusting civilians, this has got a be a low point in the history of the American military. The word "Yemen" on a resume or CV will make military people stink for the rest of their lives. Like "My Lai" or "Dishonorable Discharge".

Christian Chuba , says: August 14, 2018 at 7:41 am
We are getting a preview of the letters Mike Pompeo will be signing off on to Congress.

So will a good Christian like Mike Pompeo reconcile these obvious falsehoods, self deception. With every letter, he will be denying the very God he professes to believe in.

rayray , says: August 14, 2018 at 10:33 am
@Christian Chuba
Trump and his administration are the reveal of the true nature of modern American political Christianity. This is what it always was
b. , says: August 14, 2018 at 3:39 pm
"The entire policy is a disgrace, and it brings dishonor on everyone ordered to participate in it."

Conduct unbecoming.

The higher the rank of the officers involving themselves in this – in following unconstitutional orders to participate in an illegal campaign of aggressive war and collective punishment – the worse it gets. It would be a heroic act for a private – or even the officer piloting a refueling tanker – to speak out against this, a general has much less of a claim to honor and acquiescence both.

If The People really supported those who serve, they would rally to every conscientious objector – even the misguided ones – because anybody who has the honor and integrity to question orders is preferable to those that pay no heed to the meaning of their oath.

But The People are not exactly conscientious objector on the issue of Yemen and the crimes committed in our name either. The Republic might rot from the head, but the rot has certainly spread far and wide.

[Aug 14, 2018] It was Neocons who pushed the USA to invade Iraa, but, as Greenspan said, the goals of USA were about oil not so much about Israeli interests in the region

Notable quotes:
"... Besides, just look at how much the Iraq War benefited Israel. You see, Israel wants to pursue a strategy of destabilizing the region, so it cleverly pulled off a false flag attack on 9/11; I'm not quite sure why Mossad didn't frame one of Israel's actual enemies, like the Palestinians or Iranians, or even Saddam for that matter, as the perpetrators of the attacks, but I'm sure it's all part of the plan. ..."
"... Anyway, Israel got the United States to invade Iraq, which destabilized the region and created chaos, predictably leading to a massive increase in Iranian influence in Iraq and likely enabling more Iranian intervention in the Syrian Civil War, which benefited Israel because uh chaos and destabilization. ..."
Aug 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

Anonymous [679] Disclaimer , August 14, 2018 at 4:50 am GMT

. The decision to go to war on false pretenses against Iraq, largely promoted by a cabal of prominent American Jews in the Pentagon and in the media, killed 4,424 Americans as well as hundreds of thousands Iraqis and will wind up costing the American taxpayer $7 trillion dollars when all the bills are paid. That same group of mostly Jewish neocons more-or-less is now agitating to go to war with Iran using a game plan for escalation prepared by Israel which will, if anything, prove even more catastrophic.

Oh right, who can forget the cabal of Jews controlling the US government and military at the time of the Iraq invasion, such as President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Colin Powell, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Richard Myers, CIA director George Tenet, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice Every.Single.Time, am I right, folks?

Oh wait, they aren't Jewish? Well, I blame the Jews away. Just look at uh Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Doug Feith, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Woflowitz and journalist Bill Kristol. That sounds like an extremely powerful cabal easily capable of commanding such trivial figures as the President, CIA director, Secretary of State, et cetera, to do their bidding.

Besides, just look at how much the Iraq War benefited Israel. You see, Israel wants to pursue a strategy of destabilizing the region, so it cleverly pulled off a false flag attack on 9/11; I'm not quite sure why Mossad didn't frame one of Israel's actual enemies, like the Palestinians or Iranians, or even Saddam for that matter, as the perpetrators of the attacks, but I'm sure it's all part of the plan.

Anyway, Israel got the United States to invade Iraq, which destabilized the region and created chaos, predictably leading to a massive increase in Iranian influence in Iraq and likely enabling more Iranian intervention in the Syrian Civil War, which benefited Israel because uh chaos and destabilization.

And if you doubt that neocons totally control the US government, just look at how we're at war with Iran! Well we're not technically at war yet, a decade after neoconservatives began promoting the war and President Obama did somehow manage to sign a nuclear deal with Iran that infuriated his neocon and Israeli puppetmasters but I'm sure that President Trump, famously beloved by Jews and neocons everywhere, will soon go to war with Iran.

Colin Wright , Website August 14, 2018 at 7:25 am GMT

@Ben_C

' I'm not entirely sure why you keep hanging on to this tired and false narrative that US politicians are some sort of stooges and puppets of Israel '

Maybe because they are stooges and puppets? In extreme cases, they even boast of it. When Romney was running for president, he promised he would check with Israel on any action we took in the Middle East. When Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State was promoting civil war in Syria, she explained that this was necessary because Israel wished it.

It goes on, and on. If someone is considering a run for Congress, he gets a nice little packet from AIPAC. Among other things, he's asked to write an essay expressing his feelings about Israel.

If the essay isn't satisfactory, AIPAC backs his opponent.

Not surprisingly, when Netanyahu -- the premier of a tiny state on the other side of the planet -- spoke to Congress he was interrupted with standing ovations seventeen times. The display put me in mind of the sort of frenzied adulation Communist delegates used to display towards Stalin.

and the motives, of course, would be similar, even if actual death isn't in prospect. For most in Congress, displease Israel, and your political career just ended.

Colin Wright , Website August 14, 2018 at 7:29 am GMT
@NoseytheDuke

"Many in the intelligence and law enforcement communities suspect that it (Israel) had considerable prior intelligence regarding the 9/11 plot but did not share it with Washington."

It's certainly difficult to explain how else Mossad came to be filming the attack.

Colin Wright , Website August 14, 2018 at 7:52 am GMT
I think it needs to be emphasized that it's not merely a matter of practical politics.

Israel is evil -- she brings misery to millions, actual happiness to almost no one, and engages in behavior with no defensible moral foundation at all. She has attacked every single one of her neighbors, compulsively seeks out further conflict to paper over the shortcomings in her own national identity, and treats her Palestinian subjects with a morality about like that of a nasty little boy pulling the wings off a fly.

Arguably, others are as bad. However, unlike the others, Israel could not have come into being without our support, and could not continue to exist today without our continued moral, economic, diplomatic, and military support. If we pulled the plug, Israel would cease to exist as a Jewish supremacist state within -- at most -- a decade.

We are, in fact, responsible for Israel, and hence responsible for Israel's crimes. Other people's teenaged sons may well be out there stealing cars and raping girls. This happens to be our son doing it. We're responsible.

We pursue many policies I regard as futile, short-sighted, deluded, or self-destructive. My personal list would include 'come one come all' immigration, global warming denial, maintaining a massive military establishment, condoning 'Black Lives Matter,' and probably some other things.

No doubt the reader has his own list. However, that's not the point. The point is that essentially, these policies are merely stupid rather than actually evil. It's not evil to think we should just let whoever wants come into the US. It's dumb -- but it isn't evil. In fact, I'll willingly credit people who vote for 'sanctuary cities' et al with the most laudable sentiments. I merely question their intelligence.

Israel is different. Israel is evil, and hence our support for it is as well. It is the most fundamentally wrong act we are engaged in.

There is a moral dimension to life. There is a distinction between striving to do good -- however unsuccessfully -- and willingly participating in evil.

We need to stop supporting Israel.

The Alarmist , August 14, 2018 at 8:59 am GMT

"A well-funded massive lobbying effort involving hundreds of groups and thousands of individuals in the U.S. has worked to the detriment of actual American interests, in part by creating a permanent annual gift of billions of dollars to Israel for no other reason but that it is Israel and can get anything it wants from a servile Congress and White House without any objection from a controlled media."

Kind of begs the question, why are we giving any aid to a first-world country with a GDP growth rate in the 3% to 4% rate for years (even while we were stuck below 2%) and an unemployment rate below 4%?

The Israeli economy is in better shape than the US economy; they should be giving us aid.

"Baron Cohen, who confronted several GOP notables in the guise of Colonel Erran Morad, an Israeli security specialist, provided a number of clues that his interview was a sham but none of the victims were smart enough to pick up on them."

Yes, it is truly amazing what our "Best & Brightest" will do to stay on-side. Following Mr. Giraldi's earlier post regarding the gubernatorial run of Israeli puppet Ron DeSantis and the Big Sugar connections of Adam Putnam, it would seem a Floridian's least worst choice is Bob White.

skrik , August 14, 2018 at 9:31 am GMT

Israel is nothing but trouble. It has the right to defend itself

1st part: Absolutely, indubitably correct.

2nd part: ¿Qué? Why do people say/write this? Under what corrupt arrangement does an oh, so obvious outlaw have any such right?

Consider: A gang of out-of-towners turns up at a block of flats, breaks the doors down and occupies the building, killing some erstwhile owner/occupiers and ejecting most of the rest on the way in, thereafter whooping it up big, and ignoring [obviously too feeble] orders to RoR+R*3 [= Right of Return + Revest, Reparations and Reconciliation.] Since when can such outlaws dictate anything, thumb their noses at the Law?

Property, especially here land, is alienable – but this does not mean ' subject to seizure by aliens .'

Kindly consider: "A fair exchange is no robbery." A fair exchange means willing seller, interested buyer, and a freely and fairly agreed price. No such thing exists vis-à-vis the forcible colonisation of Palestine. Some proof may be seen here [my bolding]:

By 1949, some 700,000 Palestinians had fled or been expelled from their lands and villages. Israel was now in control of some 20.5 million dunams (approx. 20,500 km²) or 78% of lands in what had been Mandatory Palestine

Land laws were passed to legalize changes to land ownership.[5]

5. Ruling Palestine, A History of the Legally Sanctioned Jewish-Israeli Seizure of Land and Housing in Palestine. Publishers: COHRE & BADIL, May 2005, p. 37.

Especially in reference to the illegitimate entity which terms itself Israel, wiki is not reliable, being, like the US Congress, Israeli-occupied territory. So it is noteworthy that they write "in control of" as opposed to 'own.' They can't ever own it due to not having purchased it, and Palestinians may not surrender it, due to the UDHR which specifies *inalienable* rights:

Article 3.
• Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 17.
• (1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
• (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Also, see the Washington Consensus:

10.Legal security for property rights.

Further, there is UNSC242: inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war, plus only just law may earn respect, and/or be respected. A law dispossessing erstwhile legal owner/occupiers is an utter travesty.

Me; comment: Its illegitimacy is all so howlingly obvious!

Fazit: Apart from the ~6% of 'pre-Herzl Palestine' which 'invading by stealth' alien, mostly European Jews managed to purchase, the illegitimate entity does not own nor can they ever own the land/property they squat upon, which still belongs to the erstwhile owner/occupiers, specifically the 'native' pre-Nakba Palestinians [now including heirs & successors]. Then, the illegitimate entity does not declare borders for two reasons 1) any such declaration would be [probably successfully] challenged and 2) the illegitimate entity expresses the desire to expand to 'from the Nile to the Euphrates.' Q: Just how ghastly is that? A: Could hardly be worse.

Closing the loop: How can land-thieves have any 'right to defend' such improperly alienated land/property? It doesn't compute! rgds

mark green , August 14, 2018 at 10:03 am GMT
Thank you, Mr. Giraldi, for another forceful rebuke of Zionist criminality and US culpability.

The supremacist kosher state is a cancer on America. Just survey the wreckage. Count the bodies. Who benefits from this?

The Zionist project is a plague on humanity. It entertains no compromise. It will stop at virtually nothing. Examine the blood-soaked damage from Soviet Russia to Germany to Palestine and beyond. It moves Washington around via remote control.

The situation has become very grave. Speech deemed 'anti-Semitic' is rapidly being criminalized worldwide.

Right wing political expression (that Jews don't like) on Twitter, Facebook and the web is being de-platformed for speech infractions that involve 'hate'. But it's only 'hate' of a certain stripe.

After all, hatred is ubiquitous in America. It cuts in every direction. So why is the focus so intense on just one spectrum of hatred?

Might it have something to do with the political preferences of those in power?

Oh maybe.

Principles be damned. Whose ox is being gored?

With that in mind, consider this: who might actually be the biggest hater of all?–and killer? (Hint: it's certainly not the powerless Alt-right 'deplorables'.)

Might it instead be the world's foremost victims?

After all, incendiary speech–even 'hate speech'–does not kill. It takes bombs, drones, tanks and missiles to accomplish that.

So where's the uproar over routine sorties which needlessly dispense death and destruction?

It's gone missing.

Incredibly, it is rough speech and acute political criticism–not failed, horrific wars–that are being criminalized. Pro-Zionist 'wars of choice' still get a pass in our corporate board rooms, TV studios, news rooms, and in most of Official Washington.

This entrenched distortion allows neocons and their underlings to jawbone and plot their next preemptive war. The Big Squeeze is on. Beware Russia, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and Iran. Zionism is an 'unshakable' Washington value. So get ready.

How distant wars advance the interests of average Americans remains a mystery.

Despite this puzzle, America's MSM offers little resistance and no straightforward criticism of Zio-Washington's ceaseless war efforts on behalf of a certain 'democratic ally'. In similar fashion, the Fourth Estate has also been compromised.

It's worth remembering that, according to the UN Charter, a state-sponsored 'First Strike' against another sovereign state is the most serious war crime. This elementary moral precept however matters not–at least not when Israel is pulling the strings. Quiet, children. Listen. Obey.

What we have here is a pattern of vast serial criminality.

Zio-Washington has become Israel's war vessel. We regular folk are just along for the ride.

So don't forget to cheer for the good guys!

Incredibly, US-enabled, Israeli ruthlessness has gotten even worse under 'America First' Trump. After all, Trump needlessly tore up Obama's hard-fought peace deal with Iran.

Why would Trump make such a move? (As a candidate, he was far less hawkish).

Our weakened and despised President needs desperately to please America's foremost lobby. Trump cannot govern without their support. This peculiar situation however requires additional blood-letting on behalf of the Zionist state. Foreign wars that benefit Israel are the unwritten price that the goyim leadership in America must pay. Sorry folks!

(Are you listening, Tehran?)

Jewish power corrupts. Overwhelming Jewish power corrupts in overwhelming fashion.

[Aug 14, 2018] Trump's Trade War with China Undermining China's Dependence on Neoliberalism

Notable quotes:
"... Trump in fact was not the consensus candidate of the American capitalist class back to the 2016 election. So with respect to these economic policies, especially about his trade protectionist measures, these new tariffs imposed on the Chinese goods, let's put it this way: These are not, certainly not the traditional kind of neoliberal economic policy as we know it. So some sections of the American manufacturing sector [capitalists] may be happy about this. But I would say the majority of the American capitalists probably would not approve this kind of trade war against China. ..."
"... So on the Chinese part, ironically, China very much depends on these overall what Martin Wolf called liberal global order, which might better be called the model of global neoliberal capitalism. So China actually much more depends on that. ..."
"... despite whatever happened to the U.S., China would still be committed to the model of openness, committed to privatization and the financial liberalization. The Chinese government has declared new measures to open up a few economic sectors to foreign investment. ..."
"... for China to rearrange towards this kind of domestic consumption-led model of economic development, the necessary condition is that you have income, wealth redistribution towards the workers, towards poor people. And that is something that the Chinese capitalists will resist. And so that is why and so far China has not succeeded in transforming itself away from this export-led model based on exploitation of cheap labor. ..."
"... first of all, China is not socialist at all today. So income of economic sector, the [space] sector accounts for a small number, a small fraction of the overall economy, by various measurements. ..."
"... And so it's expected China will also become the world's largest importer of natural gas by the year 2019. So you are going to have China to be simultaneously the largest importer of oil, natural gas, and coal. ..."
"... let's say the Chinese government right now, even though is led by the so-called Communist Party, is actually much more committed to the neoliberal global order that the Trump administration in the U.S. ..."
"... The Trump administration of this trade protectionist policy, although not justified, it reflects fundamental social conflicts within the U.S. itself, and that probably cannot be sorted out by the Americans' current political system. ..."
"... So the overall neoliberal regime has become much more unstable. ..."
Aug 14, 2018 | therealnews.com

PAUL JAY: Welcome to The Real News Network. I'm Paul Jay.

The Financial Times chief economic columnist Martin Wolf has called Trump's trade wars with Europe and Canada, but obviously the big target is China, he's called this a war on the liberal world order. Well, what does this mean for China? China's strategy, the distinct road to socialism which seems to take a course through various forms of state hypercapitalism. What does this mean for China? The Chinese strategy was developed in what they thought would be a liberal world order. Now it may not be that at all.

Now joining us to discuss what the trade war means for China, and to have a broader conversation on just what is the Chinese model of state capitalism is Minqi Li, who now joins us from Utah. Minqi is the professor, is a professor of economics at the University of Utah. He's the author of The Rise of China and the Demise of the Capitalist World Economy, and the editor of Red China website. Thanks for joining us again, Minqi.

MINQI LI: Thank you, Paul.

PAUL JAY: So I don't think anyone, including the Chinese, was expecting President Trump to be president Trump. But once he was elected, it was pretty clear that Trump and Bannon and the various cabal around Trump, the plan was twofold. One, regime change in Iran, which also has consequences for China. And trade war with China. It was declared that they were going to take on China and change in a fundamental way the economic relationship with China and the United States. And aimed, to a large extent, trying to deal with the rise of China as an equal, or becoming equal, economy, and perhaps someday in the not-too-distant future an equal global power, certainly as seen through the eyes of not just Trumpians in Washington, but much of the Washington political and economic elites.

So what does this mean for China's strategy now? Xi Jinping is now the leader of the party, leader of the government, put at a level virtually equal to Mao Tse-tung. But his plan for development of the Chinese economy did not, I don't think, factor in a serious trade war with the United States.

MINQI LI: OK. As you said, Trump was not expected. Which meant that Trump in fact was not the consensus candidate of the American capitalist class back to the 2016 election. So with respect to these economic policies, especially about his trade protectionist measures, these new tariffs imposed on the Chinese goods, let's put it this way: These are not, certainly not the traditional kind of neoliberal economic policy as we know it. So some sections of the American manufacturing sector [capitalists] may be happy about this. But I would say the majority of the American capitalists probably would not approve this kind of trade war against China.

Now, on the Chinese part, and we know that China has been on these parts, there was capitalist development, and moreover it has been based on export-led economic growth model and with exploitation of cheap labor. So on the Chinese part, ironically, China very much depends on these overall what Martin Wolf called liberal global order, which might better be called the model of global neoliberal capitalism. So China actually much more depends on that.

And so you have, indeed there are serious trade conflicts between China and U.S. that will, of course, undermine China's economic model. And so far China has responded to these new threats of trade war by promising that China, despite whatever happened to the U.S., China would still be committed to the model of openness, committed to privatization and the financial liberalization. The Chinese government has declared new measures to open up a few economic sectors to foreign investment.

Now, with respect to the trade itself, at the moment the U.S. has imposed tariffs on, 25 percent tariffs on the worth of $34 billion of Chinese goods. And then Trump has threatened to impose new tariffs on the additional $200 billion worth of Chinese goods. But this amount at the moment is still a small part of China's economy, about 3 percent of the Chinese GDP. So the impact at the moment is limited, but certainly has created a lot of uncertainty for the global and the Chinese business community.

PAUL JAY: So given that this trade war could, one, get a lot bigger and a lot more serious, and/or even if they kind of patch it up for now, there's a lot of forces within the United States, both for economic and geopolitical reasons. Economic being the discussion about China taking American intellectual property rights, becoming the new tech sector hub of the world, even overpassing the American tech sector, which then has geopolitical implications; especially when it comes to the military. If China becomes more advanced the United States in artificial intelligence as applied to the military, that starts to, at least in American geopolitical eyes, threaten American hegemony around the world.

There are a lot of reasons building up, and it's certainly not new, and it's not just Trump. For various ways, the Americans want to restrain China. Does this start to make the Chinese think that they need to speed up the process of becoming more dependent on their own domestic market and less interested in exporting cheap labor? But for that to happen Chinese wages have to go up a lot more significantly, which butts into the interests of the Chinese billionaire class.

MINQI LI: I think you are right. And so for China to rearrange towards this kind of domestic consumption-led model of economic development, the necessary condition is that you have income, wealth redistribution towards the workers, towards poor people. And that is something that the Chinese capitalists will resist. And so that is why and so far China has not succeeded in transforming itself away from this export-led model based on exploitation of cheap labor.

PAUL JAY: You know, there's some sections of the left in various parts of the world that do see the Chinese model as a more rational version of capitalism, and do see this because they've maintained the control of the Chinese Communist Party over the politics, and over economic planning, that do see this idea that this is somehow leading China towards a kind of socialism. If nothing else, a more rational planned kind of capitalism. Is that, is there truth to this?

MINQI LI: Well, first of all, China is not socialist at all today. So income of economic sector, the [space] sector accounts for a small number, a small fraction of the overall economy, by various measurements.

And then regarding the rationality of China's economic model, you might put it this way: The Chinese capitalists might be more rational than the American capitalists in the sense that they still use most of their profits for investment, instead of just financial speculation. So that might be rational from the capitalist perspective. But on the other hand, regarding the exploitation of workers- and the Chinese workers still have to work under sweatshop conditions- and regarding the damage to the environment, the Chinese model is not rational at all.

PAUL JAY: My understanding of people that think this model works better, at least, than some of the other capitalist models is that there's a need to go through this phase of Chinese workers, yes, working in sweatshop conditions, and yes, wages relatively low. But overall, the Chinese economy has grown by leaps and bounds, and China's position in the world is more and more powerful. And this creates the situation, as more wealth accumulates, China is better positioned to address some of the critical issues facing China and the world. And then, as bad as pollution is, and such, China does appear to be out front in terms of developing green technologies, solar, sustainable technology.

MINQI LI: OK. Now, Chinese economy has indeed been growing rapidly. It used to grow like double-digit growth rate before 2010. But now China's growth rate has slowed down just under 7 percent in recent years, according to the official statistics. And moreover, a significant part of China's growth these days derives rom the real estate sector development. And so there has been this discussion about this growing housing market bubble. And it used to be that this housing price inflation was limited to a few big cities. But for the first half of 2018, according to the latest data, the national average housing price has grown by 11 percent compared to the same period last year. And that translates into a pace of doubling every six years.

And so that has generated lots of social resentment. And so not only the working class these days are priced out of the housing market. Moreover, even the middle class is increasingly priced out of the housing market. So that is the major concern. And in the long run, I think that China's current model of accumulation will also face the challenge of growing social conflicts. Worker protests. As well as resources constrained and environmental damage. And regarding the issue of China's investment in renewable energy, it is true. China is the largest investor in renewable energy development, in the solar panels. And although China is of all the largest investor in about everything.

And so China is still the largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the world, accounting for almost 30 percent of the total carbon dioxide emissions in the world every year. And then China's own oil production in decline, but China's oil consumption is still rising. So as a result, China has become the world's largest oil importer. That could make the Chinese economy vulnerable to the next major oil price shock.

PAUL JAY: And how seriously is climate change science taken in China? If one takes the science seriously, one sees the need for urgent transformation to green technology. An urgent reduction of carbon emission. Not gradual, not incremental, but urgent. Did the Chinese- I mean, it's not, it's so not taken seriously in the United States that a climate denier can get elected president. But did the Chinese take this more seriously? Because you don't get the same, any sense of urgency about their policy, either.

MINQI LI: Well, yeah. So like many other governments, the Chinese government also pays lip service to the obligation of climate stabilization. But unfortunately, with respect to policy, with respect to mainstream media, it's not taken very seriously within China. And so although China's carbon dioxide emissions actually stabilized somewhat over the past few years, but is starting to grow again in 2017, and I expect it will continue to grow in the coming year.

PAUL JAY: I mean, I can understand why, for example, Russia is not in any hurry to buy into climate change science. Its whole economy depends on oil. Canada also mostly pays lip service because the Alberta tar sands is so important to the Canadian economy. Shale oil is so important to the American economy, as well as the American oil companies own oil under the ground all over the world. But China is not an oil country. You know, they're not dependent on oil income. You'd think it'd be in China's interest to be far more aggressive, not only in terms of how good it looks to the world that China would be the real leader in mitigating, reducing, eliminating the use of carbon-based fuels, but still they're not. I mean, not at the rate scientists say needs to be done.

MINQI LI: Not at all. Although China does not depend on all on oil for income, but China depends on coal a lot. And the coal is still something like 60 percent of China's overall energy consumption. And so it's still very important for China's energy.

PAUL JAY: What- Minqi, where does the coal mostly come from? Don't they import a lot of that coal?

MINQI LI: Mostly from China itself. Even though, you know, China is the world's largest coal producer, on top of that China is either the largest or the second-largest coal importer in the world market as well. And then on top of that, China is also consuming an increasing amount of oil and natural gas, especially natural gas. And so although natural gas is not as polluting as coal, it's still polluting. And so it's expected China will also become the world's largest importer of natural gas by the year 2019. So you are going to have China to be simultaneously the largest importer of oil, natural gas, and coal.

PAUL JAY: The Chinese party, just to get back to the trade war issue and to end up with, the idea of this Chinese nation standing up, Chinese sovereignty, Chinese nationalism, it's a powerful theme within this new Chinese discourse. I'm not saying Chinese nationalism is new, but it's got a whole new burst of energy. How does China, if necessary to reach some kind of compromise with the United States on the trade war, how does China do that without looking like it's backing down to Trump?

MINQI LI: Well, yes, difficult task for the Chinese party to balance. What they have been right now is that on the one hand they promise to the domestic audience they are not going to make concessions towards the U.S., while in fact they are probably making concessions. And then on the other hand the outside world, and they make announcement that they will not change from the reform and openness policy, which in practice means that they will not change from the neoliberal direction of China's development, and they will continue down the path towards financial liberalization. And so that is what they are trying to balance right now.

PAUL JAY: I said finally, but this is finally. Do the Americans have a case? Does the Trump argument have a legitimate case that the Chinese, on the one hand, want a liberal world order in terms of trade, and open markets, and such? On the other hand are not following intellectual property law, property rights and law, the way other advanced capitalist countries supposedly do. Is there something to that case?

MINQI LI: Well, you know, let's say the Chinese government right now, even though is led by the so-called Communist Party, is actually much more committed to the neoliberal global order that the Trump administration in the U.S. - but I don't want to make justifications for the neoliberal global order. But let's put it this way: The Trump administration of this trade protectionist policy, although not justified, it reflects fundamental social conflicts within the U.S. itself, and that probably cannot be sorted out by the Americans' current political system.

PAUL JAY: So the crisis- you know, when you look at the American side and the Chinese side, including the deep debt bomb people talk about in China, there really is no sorting out of this crisis.

MINQI LI: So the overall neoliberal regime has become much more unstable.

PAUL JAY: All right. Thanks for joining us, Minqi. I hope we can pick this up again soon.

MINQI LI: OK. Thank you.

PAUL JAY: Thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.

[Aug 14, 2018] Trump feuds with former 'apprentice' Omarosa in White House drama fit for reality TV

Notable quotes:
"... "Wacky Omarosa, who got fired 3 times on The Apprentice, now got fired for the last time. She never made it, never will. She begged me for a job, tears in her eyes, I said Ok," ..."
"... "People in the White House hated her. She was vicious, but not smart. I would rarely see her but heard really bad things. Nasty to people & would constantly miss meetings & work." ..."
"... "The Apprentice" ..."
"... "No, I don't think he's fit." ..."
"... "He's being puppeted, and that's very dangerous for this nation," ..."
"... "Omarosa? Omarosa what's going on? I just saw on the news that you're thinking about leaving? What happened?" ..."
"... "You know they run a big operation, but I didn't know it. I didn't know that. I don't love you leaving at all." ..."
"... "Unhinged: An Insider Account of the Trump White House." ..."
"... "The Apprentice." ..."
"... "Lowlife. She's a lowlife." ..."
Aug 14, 2018 | www.rt.com

13 Aug, 2018 Get short URL Trump feuds with former 'apprentice' Omarosa in White House drama fit for reality TV © Carlo Allegri / Reuters Donald Trump has taken time out of his busy presidential schedule to tweet insults at ex-White House aide Omarosa Manigault Newman, amid a rapidly-escalating feud between the two estranged reality television prima donnas. "Wacky Omarosa, who got fired 3 times on The Apprentice, now got fired for the last time. She never made it, never will. She begged me for a job, tears in her eyes, I said Ok," Trump tweeted on Monday. "People in the White House hated her. She was vicious, but not smart. I would rarely see her but heard really bad things. Nasty to people & would constantly miss meetings & work."

Wacky Omarosa, who got fired 3 times on the Apprentice, now got fired for the last time. She never made it, never will. She begged me for a job, tears in her eyes, I said Ok. People in the White House hated her. She was vicious, but not smart. I would rarely see her but heard....

-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 13, 2018

...really bad things. Nasty to people & would constantly miss meetings & work. When Gen. Kelly came on board he told me she was a loser & nothing but problems. I told him to try working it out, if possible, because she only said GREAT things about me - until she got fired!

-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 13, 2018

While I know it's "not presidential" to take on a lowlife like Omarosa, and while I would rather not be doing so, this is a modern day form of communication and I know the Fake News Media will be working overtime to make even Wacky Omarosa look legitimate as possible. Sorry!

-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 13, 2018

The tweet comes hours after Newman, who starred in Trump's reality television series "The Apprentice" before joining the White House, told NBC's "Today" show that Trump was a puppet who was unfit to hold the nation's highest office.

When asked by Today host Savannah Guthrie if she thought Trump had the mental faculties needed to be president, Newman answered: "No, I don't think he's fit." She added that White House Chief of Staff John Kelly – who allegedly fired her without Trump's knowledge – was "running" the White House while Trump remained clueless about daily operations. "He's being puppeted, and that's very dangerous for this nation," Newman said.

"John Kelly is running this White House, and Donald Trump has no clue what's going on. He's being puppeted, and that's very dangerous for this nation." - @OMAROSA pic.twitter.com/tYfDkMF19y

-- TODAY (@TODAYshow) August 13, 2018

In an audio recording provided by Newman, Trump appears to be unaware that the former combative "Apprentice" contestant had been fired.

Read more Omarosa Onee Manigault-Newman © Drew Angerer Omarosa's tape from inside the Situation Room fuels massive freakout over security

"Omarosa? Omarosa what's going on? I just saw on the news that you're thinking about leaving? What happened?" Trump says in the recording, which Newman claims was made a day after she lost her job at the White House in December 2017.

After Newman tells the president that Kelly had fired her, Trump insists that nobody ever told him about it, adding: "You know they run a big operation, but I didn't know it. I didn't know that. I don't love you leaving at all."

Her appearance on the morning program is part of a press tour for her new book, "Unhinged: An Insider Account of the Trump White House." In it, Newman accuses Trump of regularly dropping N-bombs during tapings of the "The Apprentice." She also claims she was offered hush money in exchange for her silence about her tenure at the White House.

When asked over the weekend by a report if he felt betrayed by Newman, Trump shot back: "Lowlife. She's a lowlife."

[Aug 14, 2018] Did Omarosa break the law by secretly recording Trump and Kelly?

She violated NDA. This is a crime.
Aug 14, 2018 | www.theguardian.com
s this a security risk?

Moss also told the Guardian that Manigault Newman's use of a recording device presented counterintelligence risks. "All it takes is one foreign agency hacking [the recording device], and setting it to passive record mode," said Moss. The result would mean all conversations, not just those Manigault Newman chose to record, would be "accessible to foreign entities".

This concern was shared by Kayyem. "There might be the perception, particularly by our enemies, that the entire White House might be compromised, and that's kind of scary," she said, adding: "The audience isn't just us and Omarosa and Trump. It's the Chinese and the Russians."

Is recording in the Situation Room a crime?

Moss said, however, that just because the conversation occurred in the Situation Room, which is actually a secured series of connected rooms, there is "no real obvious criminal liability". All staffers entering the area must lock away their cell phones and other insecure electronic devices. But he noted the violation would likely be enough to deny Manigault Newman a security clearance if she ever wishes to work for the federal government in the future.

What has the White House said?

"The very idea a staff member would sneak a recording device into the White House Situation Room shows a blatant disregard for our national security," said White House press secretary Sarah Sanders. She added: "Then to brag about it on national television further proves the lack of character and integrity of this disgruntled former White House employee."

[Aug 14, 2018] Does mere accusation now stand for "truth" in this inmates-running-the-asylum charade USA is putting on?

Aug 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

skopros , August 13, 2018 at 6:46 pm GMT

Has anybody in comments noted how far we have swung from absence of actual PROOF Russia did the Skripal "poisonings" (or even Litvenenko for that matter?!) to what seems like complete acceptance of "guilt," even as major international bodies (OPCW, etc., even Porton Down) have not been able to tie Russia/Putin to these alleged acts of terror or isolate the "novichoks" genre of nerve agent ? The Red Queen triumphs.

Does mere accusation now stand for "truth" in this inmates-running-the-asylum charade USA is putting on? If the "big lie" (Lenin, BTW not Goebbels, originally) works this easily, we are indeed down the chute & over the brink. Orwell is spinning in his grave (gnashing his teeth).

Mitleser , August 13, 2018 at 7:05 pm GMT

Does mere accusation now stand for "truth" in this inmates-running-the-asylum charade USA is putting on?

It was the same when the Iraq was the enemy.

[Aug 14, 2018] Litvinenko affair now looks like a dressed rehearsal of Skripals

Notable quotes:
"... Therefore, we have to deal with facts in the matter. Among the facts, I'd like to point out to the behavior of the investigating party, i.e. the British authorities. "We have proof but won't show them to you, because they are secret" attitude; bypassing normal investigative and judicial channels; unreasonable demands towards Russia they knew full well won't be met and total refusal to cooperate on realistic terms – we saw it for the first time in the Litvinenko affaire. ..."
Aug 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

EugeneGur , August 13, 2018 at 7:25 pm GMT

@Mr. Hack

All I was pointing out was that there were many reasons why Litvinenko was a target for unfriendly Russian actions

I am pretty sure Litvinenko wasn't particularly loved in Russia: he was a traitor, after all, and, judging by his actions, a pretty miserable human being. However, building a case on motive alone is not possible, if for no other reason than because a motive is by definition subjective. You could analyze until your face turns blue how Putin felt about Litvinenko's accusations but you'd never come to any firm conclusion, for only Putin can possibly know that.

Therefore, we have to deal with facts in the matter. Among the facts, I'd like to point out to the behavior of the investigating party, i.e. the British authorities. "We have proof but won't show them to you, because they are secret" attitude; bypassing normal investigative and judicial channels; unreasonable demands towards Russia they knew full well won't be met and total refusal to cooperate on realistic terms – we saw it for the first time in the Litvinenko affaire.

The same patters was repeated exactly in the Skripal case. This tells you who is the "highly likely" culprit, doesn't it? These two scenarios are so much alike, the have the same author – not necessarily the same person, but definitely the same office.

[Aug 14, 2018] Putin to Western Elites Playtime is Over by Dmitry Orlov

Notable quotes:
"... A longer version of this article originally appeared at the ClubOrlov blog . ..."
Mar 17, 2016 | russia-insider.com
An excellent blogger about Russia distills Putin's Sochi speech into 10 simple points A longer version of this article originally appeared at the ClubOrlov blog .

Most people in the English-speaking parts of the world missed Putin's speech at the Valdai conference in Sochi a few days ago, and, chances are, those who have heard of the speech didn't get a chance to read it, and missed its importance.

Western media did their best to ignore it or to twist its meaning. Regardless of what you think or don't think of Putin (like the sun and the moon, he does not exist for you to cultivate an opinion) this is probably the most important political speech since Churchill's "Iron Curtain" speech of March 5, 1946.

In this speech, Putin abruptly changed the rules of the game. Previously, the game of international politics was played as follows: politicians made public pronouncements, for the sake of maintaining a pleasant fiction of national sovereignty, but they were strictly for show and had nothing to do with the substance of international politics; in the meantime, they engaged in secret back-room negotiations, in which the actual deals were hammered out.

Previously, Putin tried to play this game, expecting only that Russia be treated as an equal. But these hopes have been dashed, and at this conference he declared the game to be over, explicitly violating Western taboo by speaking directly to the people over the heads of elite clans and political leaders.

  1. Russia will no longer play games and engage in back-room negotiations over trifles . But Russia is prepared for serious conversations and agreements, if these are conducive to collective security, are based on fairness and take into account the interests of each side.
  2. All systems of global collective security now lie in ruins . There are no longer any international security guarantees at all. And the entity that destroyed them has a name: The United States of America.
  3. The builders of the New World Order have failed , having built a sand castle. Whether or not a new world order of any sort is to be built is not just Russia's decision, but it is a decision that will not be made without Russia.
  4. Russia favors a conservative approach to introducing innovations into the social order, but is not opposed to investigating and discussing such innovations, to see if introducing any of them might be justified.
  5. Russia has no intention of going fishing in the murky waters created by America's ever-expanding "empire of chaos ," and has no interest in building a new empire of her own (this is unnecessary; Russia's challenges lie in developing her already vast territory). Neither is Russia willing to act as a savior of the world, as she had in the past.
  6. Russia will not attempt to reformat the world in her own image , but neither will she allow anyone to reformat her in their image. Russia will not close herself off from the world, but anyone who tries to close her off from the world will be sure to reap a whirlwind.
  7. Russia does not wish for the chaos to spread, does not want war, and has no intention of starting one. However, today Russia sees the outbreak of global war as almost inevitable , is prepared for it, and is continuing to prepare for it. Russia does not war -- nor does she fear it.
  8. Russia does not intend to take an active role in thwarting those who are still attempting to construct their New World Order -- until their efforts start to impinge on Russia's key interests. Russia would prefer to stand by and watch them give themselves as many lumps as their poor heads can take. But those who manage to drag Russia into this process, through disregard for her interests , will be taught the true meaning of pain .
  9. In her external, and, even more so, internal politics, Russia's power will rely not on the elites and their back-room dealing, but on the will of the people.

To these nine points I would like to add a tenth:

10. There is still a chance to construct a new world order that will avoid a world war . This new world order must of necessity include the United States -- but can only do so on the same terms as everyone else: subject to international law and international agreements; refraining from all unilateral action; in full respect of the sovereignty of other nations.

To sum it all up: play-time is over. Children, put away your toys. Now is the time for the adults to make decisions. Russia is ready for this; is the world?

[Aug 14, 2018] Paradoxically it is not in best inteersts of Russia to rock the boat of international economy despite sanctions

Aug 14, 2018 | russia-insider.com

All attempt to limit their effectiveness are OK. Attempts to undermine the USA economy or dollar status as the reserve currency are not.

[Aug 14, 2018] New US Sanctions. Bring Them on and Let's See Whose Side God Is On!

Russia pays the [huge] cost of remaining a nation, a civilization and a state ~Vladimir Putin.
Putin Slams US: "The Biggest Mistake Russia Ever Made Was To Trust You"
This is a clear attempt top abuse the dominant position of the USA in the world. For Russian this is powerful blow in the torso, Will it be knockdown remains to be seen. Also as a weaker party Russia can's afford a powerful counterstrike.
Notable quotes:
"... "Skulduggery instead of diplomacy, lies instead of truth, hairdresser-saloon hearsay against facts and truth, anything goes in the attempt to derail the one nation with the guts, gumption, grit and wherewithal to counter the evil hegemonistic plans of Washington and its chihuahuas" ..."
Aug 14, 2018 | russia-insider.com
"Skulduggery instead of diplomacy, lies instead of truth, hairdresser-saloon hearsay against facts and truth, anything goes in the attempt to derail the one nation with the guts, gumption, grit and wherewithal to counter the evil hegemonistic plans of Washington and its chihuahuas" Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey 14 hours ago | 2,909 85 More sanctions from the USA using the Skripal affair as an excuse without a shred of evidence, based on hype, hysteria and hearsay. Back-door economic warfare.

Surprise, surprise. The USA invokes a law from the 1990s claiming that it has to impose sanctions when a country crosses a chemical or biological line, in this case an invisible one with no proof, no law case, no due legal process, just an allegation from wonderful British intelligence that the Kremlin was involved in the Skripal case. Proof? None actually...none at all. Just a vague blanket statement along the lines of "They have done it before and they have said they will take out traitors and in the absence of any plausible alternative, they must be guilty". For Washington, after months of vacillating, stating the obvious that it is very complicated to apportion the blame when nobody knows which novichok was used, where it was produced and in the total absence of any trail linking it to the Kremlin, we get the idea that we are looking yet again at the wonderful British intelligence of the type that Colin Powell used to justify the USA's illegal and murderous act of butchery against Iraq. The type of intelligence which resembles a decade-old doctoral thesis copied and pasted from the net and sexed up by Downing Street.

And here they are again, the dynamic duo. Skulduggery instead of diplomacy, lies instead of truth, hairdresser-saloon hearsay against facts and truth, anything goes in the attempt to derail the one nation with the guts, gumption, grit and wherewithal to counter the evil hegemonistic plans of Washington and its chihuahuas.

Drawing the time line at the beginning, let us analyze what is happening and let us see the movie developing from a distance. The political system in vogue at present is the corporatist model controlled by the $inister $ix $isters which control the policies of Washington and its chihuahuas, namely the BARFFS (Banking, Arms, eneRgy, Finance, Food, Pharma/DrugS Lobbies). The BARFFS live off resources and as history has shown us when they have none themselves, they invade countries and steal them. Ask Africa, the victim of a silent Holocaust which claimed seventy million lives.

Russia for them is kosher when it is ruled by something that bends over when told to and allows foreigners to steal the country's resources. Russia for them is not kosher when someone like Putin comes along, slams his fist on the table and says loud and clear that Russian resources are for Russians, managed by Russians. What the BARFFS want is to see Russia divided up into, say, one hundred micro-states each one with a BARFFS-friendly government allowing foreigners to syphon off the vast resources of this country.

me width=

The game starts with promises made to the then-USSR about friendly relations, about NATO not encroaching eastwards, about a new world order based on partnership. It then quickly morphs out of control with the help of the media, using buzz-words and expressions such as "collapse of the Soviet Union" (absolute nonsense, it did not collapse, it transformed from the Union to the Commonwealth as per the terms of the Third Soviet Constitution, without consulting the people, or has everyone forgotten that?). There then ensued acts of provocation in the Balkans, and then in Russia itself (Chechnya), then on Russia's frontiers.

Before Georgia in 2008 we had a spectacular example of war crimes and an illegal invasion of Iraq to test the waters, where military hardware was deployed against civilian structures, where fields of cereals were strafed by NATO aircraft to starve families, where Depleted Uranium was deployed leaving swathes of territory poisonous; beforte this we had the illegal interference in the Republic of Serbia, backing terrorists (Ushtria Çlirimtare ë Kosovës, UÇK or KLA) and the illegal act of kidnapping and subsequent manslaughter/murder of Slobodan Milosevich, who died in custody while being held illegally and without being found guilty of any of the crimes leveled against him.

With Georgia we had another act of provocation in which Georgian forces attacked Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia and were building up to do the same in Abkhazia, territories which under the Soviet Constitution had necessarily to have status referendums on which way the people wanted to go and into which Republic they should integrate. Georgia refused to hold these referendums.

And since Georgia we had Libya, a shocking act of barbarity in which NATO interfered in the internal affairs of a sovereign state, sending the country with the highest Human Development Index back into the dark ages, fragmented and crawling with terrorists. Not to mention Afghanistan, started in 2001 and ongoing, where "allied" troops are photographed guarding opium fields, where opium production has risen and where Talebaan fighters are seen escorting NATO convoys, paid, like WTF?... and not to mention Syria, in which the same side once again allied itself with terrorists as it did in Libya, terrorists which raped little girls before and after they were beheaded, which raped nuns savagely in every orifice of their bodies, which impaled little boys on stakes and which ripped the hearts out of Syrian soldiers and bit into them.

So we see what we are up against. And if all that were not enough today we have the idiotic acts of provocation in the Baltic where a handful of NATO soldiers are cavorting around like toy soldiers claiming to keep their countries safe. From what? Jupiter? Ah and yes, we have Ukraine as the latest act of provocation.

It started off well before the so-called protests in Independence Square, Kiev with subversion and organization of protesters who took to the streets in November 2013 and in late February 2014, shots were fired from the sixth floor of Hotel Ukraine on the protesters in the square below to create a "cause", the democratically elected President was ousted in an illegal coup, massacres were perpetrated against Russian-speaking Ukrainians (this story seems to have disappeared from the Western media) and Fascists shouted slogans such as "Death to Russians and Jews". As a reaction, Russian-speaking Ukrainians defended themselves in South-East Ukraine and in the absence of the due legal force in the Republic of Crimea, the Legislative Assembly, now the organism with due legal force, organized a referendum on status and over ninety per cent of the population (Russians) voted to reintegrate Russia. It's called Democracy. Maybe Washington and its chihuahuas should try it some time.

What the BARFFS wanted Russia to do was to roll over, drop its pants and say "sock it to me, babe". With another leader, that might have happened. Not with Putin. So now we have instead, economic warfare with sanctions, more sanctions and increased sanctions, trying to tie a knot around Russia's throat and tightening it, now linking Crimea to Abkhazia to South Ossetia, to state-sponsored terrorism without a shred of respect for the law and the facts. It is by now crystal clear what the West wants.

It wants to strangle the Russian economy to create unrest in Russia and create political movements against Putin. It then wants to instal a west-friendly government which will see Russia fragmented, sooner or later, into a myriad of republics, each one with their resources controlled by foreigners.

That is what the sanctions are about. Let us see whose side God is on.

Source: Pravda.ru

[Aug 14, 2018] Washington won t be winning any wars against Russia and/or China. It should stick with what it s good at, that is bombing third world countries, on behalf of its Zionist masters. On second thoughts, it shouldn t be doing that either.

Aug 14, 2018 | russia-insider.com
Nicole Temple • 15 hours ago ,

As shown in this article, the United States is preparing to fight a war on a frontier outside of Russia and China:

https://viableopposition.bl...

One has to wonder on how many fronts can Washington keep expanding America's military with the goal of fighting and actually winning a war before it collapses under the weight of its expenditures?

Walter Braben Nicole Temple • 13 hours ago ,

Washington won't be winning any wars against Russia and/or China. It should stick with what it's good at, that is bombing third world countries, on behalf of its Zionist masters. On second thoughts, it shouldn't be doing that either.

[Aug 14, 2018] There was a news that in early July, Viktoria Skripal was invited by A Just Russia Party to run for a seat in Yaroslavl regional elections and she accepted.

Aug 14, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Jen , Aug 12, 2018 8:25:50 PM | 22

No idea though if the elections have been held and Viktoria won or lost.

https://en.crimerussia.com/gover/niece-of-skripal-runs-for-yaroslavl-regional-duma-deputy/

Viktoria Skripal spoke to her cousin Julia by phone twice in July: the first time on the 4th, when the two argued and Julia blamed Viktoria for the publicity over the poisoning; the second time towards the end of the month, when Julia apologised to Viktoria after getting Internet access and reading what had been reported in the media. In one of these phone calls, Julia revealed her father was still using a breathing tube.

https://www.theblogmire.com/if-yulia-skripal-now-understands-everything-what-did-they-tell-her-before/

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/sergei-skripal-still-breathing-machine-12987411

[Aug 14, 2018] Skripals affair now looks like a prologue to Russian sanctions imposed by the USA. And that probably was by design like was Magnitsky afair.

Notable quotes:
"... The area of contest is now the rest of the world. America will try to convince the rest of the world to join its sanctions against Russia. Russia will try to convince them not to. ..."
Aug 14, 2018 | russia-insider.com

MarcS • 4 hours ago ,

Hello,
All of this revolves around the imminent fact that the "honest" British spooks are about to get exposed when Trump declassifies the hoax documents about Russian interference (lol) in elections.

I don't understand why Russian economists believe they have to belong to the corrupt, bankrupt us monopoly dollar system? stop all exports of gas, oil to the europe cowards, and any other country that continues to steal the wealth of the Russian resources from its people. A very sick bunch in DC and London.

Turn all of these resources inward to allow the Russian people to prosper, with energy infrastructure, farming techniques with heated greenhouses, etc... hey you have a lot of real farmers in Africa that could spawn new agricultural developments in the east Russian territory, about 15,000 farmers, unbelievable opportunity and resources for Russia to help people from a racially, evil to the core, government in Africa. Boycott all of Africa. There are real people getting killed there, no fake news .

commonsenseadvocate • 4 hours ago ,

Does anyone know whether the Skripals are Jewish?

Guy • 7 hours ago ,

This is exactly how the West operates ,especially the US and UK. There you have it , right out in open for everyone to see.They have been doing this for a long time , especially since the CIA , part of the shadow government , took control of the Western world. Now it is no longer covert ,it is right in our face. And why they had JFK assassinated ,because he saw what he was up against . Kennedy wanted to smash these covert and corrupted organizations into pieces.

hellen • 10 hours ago ,

Colluding with West for so many years to put down smaller countries is certainly not a quality of an angelic government and the country as Russia has been sometimes painted. Why do we forget tens of millions of Russians abused just across Russian borders, never mentioned by the government that seems only to care about wellbeing of the criminal oligarchs? Why do we forget the collusion against Serbian people that lasted for approximately 20 years and led to the destruction of that small nation? Why do we forget Russian support to numerous UN ( Western) sanctions against many nations around the world? Why do we forget betrayal of Cuba in such devious way by Mr. Putin? Why such contempt towards own nation and its heroes by honouring a Nazi-like figure like Netanyahu on the Victory Parade? Why strangulation of N. Korea? Why ,why.. I actually tend to believe that God is finally acting upon many curses cast on Russian government and is using the US as his chosen tool. Quite a justice.

Truth Teller • 11 hours ago ,

I was excoriated and accused of being a liar on RI over the weekend because I quoted this article, originally published in Pravda. The point was made by the one who did this that no Russian or Russian sympathizer (such as the author of this article would want additional sanctions on Russia.

The comparison was that a small amounts of certain types of medicine can be beneficial, but in large doses can be fatal. The gist of the comment was that a small amount of sanctions can be good to bring more independence to the Russian economy, but additional sanctions would be harmful.

Well, now RI itself publishes the article from the idiot Hinchey in asking for more and more sanctions because of how wonderful they will be for Russia.

wimroffel • 12 hours ago ,

The area of contest is now the rest of the world. America will try to convince the rest of the world to join its sanctions against Russia. Russia will try to convince them not to.

[Aug 14, 2018] Neocons created simply loads of job opportunities for Russians

Notable quotes:
"... I've always wanted to be a Putinbot. ..."
"... I'm just waiting for my check from Putin. Any day now ..."
Aug 14, 2018 | russia-insider.com

unheilig • 12 hours ago ,

There are simply loads of job opportunities in Russia [created by the USA]. For instance:

Trauma2000 -> unheilig • 11 hours ago ,

re: "Putinbot operator -- thousands needed"

I've always wanted to be a Putinbot. I think it would be a great job. Hoping for my KGB badge. I've got my KGB watch (even though its made in Germany), just need my badge now (hope it isn't made in China).

unheilig -> Trauma2000 • 2 hours ago ,

I'm just waiting for my check from Putin. Any day now . . .

[Aug 14, 2018] Rand Paul Stands Up for Peace by Justin Raimondo

Please support antiwar.com -- a unique antiwar site in the climate of rabid militarism and jingoism...
Notable quotes:
"... "the unlikely, unholy alliance between Rand Paul and Donald Trump, one a libertarian iconoclast, the other the cancerous center of the Republican party" is upsetting to writer Tina Nguyen because the "far left and the far right" are "converging." Or something. Peace with nuclear-armed Russia? That qualifies the Senator as a "wacko bird" and "Putin's perfect stooge." ..."
"... Rand Paul has gone from being an overly cautious presidential candidate who seemed scared of his own noninterventionist shadow to a principled statesman unafraid to take a stand for peace. He is a living example of how people – yes, even politicians – learn and change. His trip to Russia to bring a message of peace and détente at a time when the wolves of the War Party are howling ever louder was an act of courage that should have every person of good will standing and applauding. Bravo, Senator! ..."
Aug 14, 2018 | original.antiwar.com

Libertarians are largely lost in the wilderness of the present era: wandering without a compass, either moral or ideological, and without a clue as to how to get home, never mind reach their ultimate goal of "freedom in our time." Yes, that was the old slogan that we libertarians started out with: an optimistic battle-cry that, today, seems unrealistic, at best. But is it? And if it isn't, who can show us the way forward?

My answer is simple: look at what Sen. Rand Paul is doing, and take a lesson. Instead of weeping and wailing about the loss of a "libertarian moment" that never really happened, Sen. Paul is making a difference. As Politico reports :

" Rand Paul has the ear, and the affection, of the most important person in the White House: President Donald Trump.

"Once bitter rivals on the Republican campaign trail, the Kentucky senator and the commander-in-chief have bonded over a shared delight in thumbing their noses at experts the president likes to deride as 'foreign policy eggheads,' including those who work in his own administration."

When Trump appointed the hawkish John Bolton as his National Security Advisor, the usual suspects crowed that "the neocons have taken over the White House." Never mind that a) Bolton is no neocon, and b) Trump is known for encouraging vigorous debate among his policy advisors while not necessarily agreeing with one or the other – these people, mostly alleged non-interventionists, hate the President for other reasons, and merely seized on the appointment as a convenient talking point. However, this narrative is contradicted by the reports of Sen. Paul's increasing influence in the Oval Office:

"While Trump tolerates his hawkish advisers, the aide added, he shares a real bond with Paul: 'He actually at gut level has the same instincts as Rand Paul.'"

"Paul has quietly emerged as an influential sounding board and useful ally for the president, who frequently clashes with his top advisers on foreign policy. The Kentucky senator's relationship with Trump, developed via frequent cellphone calls and over rounds of golf at the president's Virginia country club, became publicly apparent for the first time on Wednesday when the senator announced he had hand-delivered a letter to the Kremlin on Trump's behalf."

While the Beltway apparatus put together by the Kochs has jumped on the NeverTrump bandwagon with both feet, publicly declaring war on the administration and announcing a de facto alliance with the Democrats, Sen. Paul has made a difference in a key area that the Koch machine has largely abandoned or reversed itself: foreign policy. Here's Politico again:

"Both Paul and Trump routinely rail against foreign entanglements, foreign wars, and foreign aid – positions characterized as isolationist by critics and as 'America first' by the president and his supporters. Even on points of where they disagree, Paul has extracted small victories."

That one area is Iran, and even there it looks like Sen. Paul has his finger in the dike:

"But Trump has stopped short of calling for regime change even though Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Secretary of Defense James Mattis, and Bolton support it, aligning with Paul instead, according to a GOP foreign policy expert in frequent contact with the White House. '

Rand Paul has persuaded the president that we are not for regime change in Iran,' this person said, because adopting that position would instigate another war in the Middle East."

As the President launches peace initiatives from the Korean peninsula to the steppes of Russia, the virtue-signalers among us pretend that none of that is happening and obsessively descry the decision to exit the Iran deal. Yet where has all their moaning and groaning gotten them? Sen. Paul is single-handedly doing more for peace than any of these bloviating nonentities could dream of.

The hysteria aimed at the President is now directed at Sen. Paul, with the New York Times in what is perhaps mistakenly presented as a "news" article describing the Senator's relationship with the White House in words that are clearly over the top:

"Suddenly, in the mind of the junior senator from Kentucky, Mr. Trump has soared from lower than that speck of dirt to high enough for Mount Rushmore."

One imagines the foam-flecked computer screen of the author was quite a mess well before she reached the end of her jeremiad. Hatred for the President blends and merges with hatred for Russia as the Fourth Estate becomes an instrument in the hands of the War Party. Vanity Fair – that bastion of foreign policy expertise – shrieks that

"the unlikely, unholy alliance between Rand Paul and Donald Trump, one a libertarian iconoclast, the other the cancerous center of the Republican party" is upsetting to writer Tina Nguyen because the "far left and the far right" are "converging." Or something. Peace with nuclear-armed Russia? That qualifies the Senator as a "wacko bird" and "Putin's perfect stooge."

Yeah, suuure it does, Tina: anything you say. Just like those who wanted to end the Vietnam war were "stooges" of Ho Chi Minh. Just like Ronald Reagan getting rid of a whole category of nukes made him a "stooge" of Gorbachev.

And to get down to the real intellectual heavyweight: S. E. Cupp, whose credentials seem to be phony glasses and blondness, vomits up her considered opinion that Sen. Paul is now Putin's "errand boy." Which is far better than being Max Boot's errand girl , but don't anyone tell Iraq war-supporting Ms. Cupp that she has blood on her hands. She feels no need to apologize.

Oh yes, the heavies are out in force, sliming Sen. Paul for defending the President's Helsinki peace initiative with nuclear-armed Russia. Vanity Fair , S. E. Cupp – who's next? Madonna? Women's Wear Daily ?

Rand Paul has gone from being an overly cautious presidential candidate who seemed scared of his own noninterventionist shadow to a principled statesman unafraid to take a stand for peace. He is a living example of how people – yes, even politicians – learn and change. His trip to Russia to bring a message of peace and détente at a time when the wolves of the War Party are howling ever louder was an act of courage that should have every person of good will standing and applauding. Bravo, Senator!

[Aug 14, 2018] Latest Sanctions Against Russia Show Trump Not in Control of His Administration by F. Michael Maloof

It could be the Trump was already deposed as a President by Pompeo.
I never understood appointment of Haley and appointment of Bolton if we assume that Trump is not a neocon and does not want to continue previous administration policies. Haley is kind of Sikh variant of Samantha Power. Bolton is probably as bad as Wolfowitz. Pompeo also can be viewed as Hillary 2.0.
Notable quotes:
"... In addition, the US has delivered an ultimatum, saying that if Russia does not give assurances within 90 days that it will no longer use chemical weapons and allow international inspectors to inspect its production facilities, further sanctions will be implemented. But Russia denies it used chemical weapons. Unlike the US, it destroyed its chemical weapons stockpile in accordance with international treaties. ..."
"... The legislation gave a 60-day window to begin implementation of sanctions after the Trump administration determined that the now-British citizen Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned by a strain of the Novichok nerve-agent. The US came to that conclusion following an initial determination by the British government. ..."
"... However, the US administration missed the deadline by more than a month. That prompted Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif., chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, to write a letter to Trump some two weeks ago slamming the president for ignoring the deadline. ..."
"... Strangely, a government research facility at Porton Down in Amesbury, not far from Salisbury where the alleged March poisoning took place, examined the strain of Novichok. Porton Down lab does work for British Defense Science and Technology Laboratory, run by the Ministry of Defense, and the Public Health England. ..."
"... All of this makes makes the issue as to why Britain, and even the US, never wanted to share samples taken from the poisoning of the Skripals with Moscow more concerning. Yet, they all went ahead in lock-step to condemn Moscow for the poisoning, without any evidence, suggesting a more sinister reason for lobbying increased sanctions against Russia with the goal of further isolating the country. ..."
"... It reflects the need especially by the US to have a demon in an effort to justify its defense spending to bolster NATO up to the border of the Russian Federation in the form of a new containment policy that launched the Cold War in the first place. ..."
"... With even further sanctions against Russia in the recently passed Defense Department Authorization Bill about to go into effect, it is becoming apparent that the allegations against Russia are politically-motivated, false flag allegations to be used as an excuse for a greater geostrategic reason -- to contain Russia just as the Trump administration is increasingly finding its US-led unilateral world order being challenged more than ever. ..."
"... Trump talks about better relations with Russia, but the actions of his own administration in demonizing Moscow dictate otherwise. ..."
Aug 10, 2018 | russia-insider.com
Forget about running the Empire or the American state. Trump isn't even in control of his team US President Donald Trump is not in control of his own administration, as evidenced by the latest round of sanctions imposed against Russia for the alleged involvement in the poisoning of the Skripals in the UK in March.

The sanctions came the same day that US Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., announced on a trip to Moscow that he had handed over a letter to Russian President Vladimir Putin from Trump calling for better relations between the two countries. For that reason, the timing appears to be suspect, suggesting strongly that Trump has his own foreign policy while the Trump administration, comprised mainly of bureaucrats referred to as the Deep State, have their own. Right now, they appear to be in control, not President Trump, over his own administration, and it is having the adverse effect of further alienating Washington and Moscow.

The neocons, led by National Security Advisor John Bolton, along with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and his United Nations ambassador Nikki Haley, comprise the Trump " war cabinet " ostensibly aimed at directing a harder line toward Syria, North Korea, Iran but also Russia. Bolton, in particular, has been outspoken in calling for regime change in some of these countries. Trump not so much so. In fact, he has said just the opposite. Nevertheless, their anti-Russian flair in Washington has breathed new life into the neocons who, along with the Democrats, Deep State and much of the mainstream media, have pushed the false narrative of collusion between Russia and Trump.

This persistent anti-Russian rant and repeated sanctions which have been imposed have had the effect of leading to further threats of sanctions for questionable reasons, raising the potential prospect of suspension of diplomatic ties.

Even at the height of the Cold War, relations between the US and Russia never reached such low depths as they have now. The latest sanctions affect primarily dual-use technologies which are civilian products with potential military applications. They include gas turbine engines, electronics and integrated circuits which will now be denied. Previous sanctions going back to the Obama administration, however, already imposed bans on many of these dual-use technologies.

In addition, the US has delivered an ultimatum, saying that if Russia does not give assurances within 90 days that it will no longer use chemical weapons and allow international inspectors to inspect its production facilities, further sanctions will be implemented. But Russia denies it used chemical weapons. Unlike the US, it destroyed its chemical weapons stockpile in accordance with international treaties.

Implementation of the sanctions stem from provisions of the Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act of 1991.

The legislation gave a 60-day window to begin implementation of sanctions after the Trump administration determined that the now-British citizen Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned by a strain of the Novichok nerve-agent. The US came to that conclusion following an initial determination by the British government.

However, the US administration missed the deadline by more than a month. That prompted Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif., chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, to write a letter to Trump some two weeks ago slamming the president for ignoring the deadline.

Curiously, the British government hasn't implemented similar sanctions, although the US has. It may reflect the continued uncertainty among some British politicians and experts over the origin of the Novichok and concern with Britain's trade dependency on Russia. But since the Americans opted to implement sanctions due to existing legislation, there was apparently no objection from London even though it initially implemented sanctions by kicking out Russian diplomats from the country.

Moscow, however, vehemently denied that it was involved in the poisoning of Skripal and his daughter. Novichok was created by Russian scientists during the Cold War but never used on the battlefield. Russian officials asked Britain for evidence of Russian involvement and called for a joint investigation to be conducted by the Kremlin and British governments.

The British government repeatedly turned down the offer, as did other Western members of the United Nations Security Council, the US and France, when Moscow sought such a joint investigation.

The US claimed that the information linking the poison to Russia was " classified ."

Strangely, a government research facility at Porton Down in Amesbury, not far from Salisbury where the alleged March poisoning took place, examined the strain of Novichok. Porton Down lab does work for British Defense Science and Technology Laboratory, run by the Ministry of Defense, and the Public Health England.

Results from the examination confirmed the poison was a form of Novichok but – importantly – could not determine where the poison had been created or who had used it. This development created further confusion and prompted disputes among politicians.

It is known that samples of Novichok have been in the hands of many NATO countries for years after the German foreign intelligence service, the Bundesnachrichtendienst, or BND, had reportedly obtained a sample from a Russian defector in the 1990s.

The formula was later shared with Britain, the US, France, Canada and the Netherlands, where small quantities of Novichok reportedly were produced in an effort to develop countermeasures. Porton Down labs similarly had received samples to study. Czech President Milos Zeman recently admitted that his country synthesized and tested a form of Novichok. Sweden and Slovakia also have the technical capability to produce the nerve agent, according to Russian officials.

All of this makes makes the issue as to why Britain, and even the US, never wanted to share samples taken from the poisoning of the Skripals with Moscow more concerning. Yet, they all went ahead in lock-step to condemn Moscow for the poisoning, without any evidence, suggesting a more sinister reason for lobbying increased sanctions against Russia with the goal of further isolating the country.

It reflects the need especially by the US to have a demon in an effort to justify its defense spending to bolster NATO up to the border of the Russian Federation in the form of a new containment policy that launched the Cold War in the first place.

With even further sanctions against Russia in the recently passed Defense Department Authorization Bill about to go into effect, it is becoming apparent that the allegations against Russia are politically-motivated, false flag allegations to be used as an excuse for a greater geostrategic reason -- to contain Russia just as the Trump administration is increasingly finding its US-led unilateral world order being challenged more than ever.

The reason, however, isn't due to anything that Moscow initiated but by Trump himself who isn't in control of his own administration, and maybe never has been. Many of his campaign promises such as dropping out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or Iranian nuclear agreement, the threat of sanctions against any company that trades with Iran, his tariff war with US allies are in conflict with each other, leading to increased world instability. At the same time, Trump talks about better relations with Russia, but the actions of his own administration in demonizing Moscow dictate otherwise.

F. Michael Maloof is a former Pentagon security analyst.

[Aug 13, 2018] Imperialism Is Alive and Kicking A Marxist Analysis of Neoliberal Capitalism by C.J. Polychroniou

Highly recommended!
Marxism provides one of the best analysis of capitalism; problems start when Marxists propose alternatives.
Notable quotes:
"... Such demand-compression occurs above all through the imposition of an income deflation on the petty producers, and on the working population in general, in the Third World. This was done in the colonial period through two means: one, "deindustrialization" or the displacement of local craft production by imports of manufactures from the capitalist sector; and two, the "drain of surplus" where a part of the taxes extracted from petty producers was simply taken away in the form of exported goods without any quid pro quo ..."
"... I mean by the term "imperialism" the arrangement that the capitalist system sets up for imposing income deflation on the working population of the Third World for countering the threat of inflation that would otherwise erode the value of money in the metropolis and make the system unviable. "Imperialism" in this sense characterizes both the colonial and the contemporary periods. ..."
"... The fact that the diffusion of capitalism to the Third World has proceeded by leaps and bounds of late, with its domestic corporate-financial oligarchy getting integrated into globalized finance capital, and the fact that workers in the metropolis have also been facing an income squeeze under globalization, are important new developments; but they do not negate the basic tendency of the system to impose income deflation upon the working population of the Third World, a tendency that remains at the very core of the system. ..."
"... any state activism, other than for promoting its own exclusive and direct interest, is anathema for finance capital, which is why, not surprisingly, "sound finance" and "fiscal responsibility" are back in vogue today, when finance capital, now globalized, is in ascendancy. Imperialism is thus a specifically capitalist way of obtaining the commodities it requires for itself, but which are produced outside its own domain. ..."
"... dirigiste regimes ..."
"... With the reassertion of the dominance of finance, in the guise now of an international ..."
"... Contemporary imperialism therefore is the imperialism of international finance capital which is served by nation-states (for any nation-state that defies the will of international finance capital runs the risk of capital flight from, and hence the insolvency of, its economy). The US, being the leading capitalist state, plays the leading role in promoting and protecting the interests of international finance capital. But talking about a specific US imperialism, or a German or British or French imperialism obscures this basic fact. ..."
"... Indeed, a good deal of discussion about whether the world is heading toward multi-polarity or the persistence of US dominance misses the point that the chief actor in today's world is international or globalized finance capital, and not US or German or British finance capital. ..."
"... US military intervention all over the world, in order to acquire a proper meaning has to be located within the broader setting of the imperialism of international finance capital. ..."
"... absolute immiserization ..."
Aug 13, 2018 | truthout.org

C.J. Polychroniou: How do you define imperialism and what imperialist tendencies do you detect as inherent in the brutal expansion of the logic of capitalism in the neoliberal global era?

Prabhat Patnaik: The capitalist sector of the world, which began by being located, and continues largely to be located, in the temperate region, requires as its raw materials and means of consumption a whole range of primary commodities which are not available or producible, either at all or in adequate quantities, within its own borders. These commodities have to be obtained from the tropical and sub-tropical region within which almost the whole of the Third World is located; and the bulk of them (leaving aside minerals) are produced by a set of petty producers (peasants). What is more, they are subject to "increasing supply price," in the sense that as demand for them increases in the capitalist sector, larger quantities of them can be obtained, if at all, only at higher prices, thanks to the fixed size of the tropical land mass.

This means an ex ante tendency toward accelerating inflation as capital accumulation proceeds, undermining the value of money under capitalism and hence the viability of the system as a whole. To prevent this, the system requires that with an increase in demand from the capitalist sector, as capital accumulation proceeds, there must be a compression of demand elsewhere for these commodities, so that the net demand does not increase, and increasing supply price does not get a chance to manifest itself at all.

Such demand-compression occurs above all through the imposition of an income deflation on the petty producers, and on the working population in general, in the Third World. This was done in the colonial period through two means: one, "deindustrialization" or the displacement of local craft production by imports of manufactures from the capitalist sector; and two, the "drain of surplus" where a part of the taxes extracted from petty producers was simply taken away in the form of exported goods without any quid pro quo . The income of the working population of the Third World, and hence its demand, was thus kept down; and metropolitan capitalism's demand for such commodities was met without any inflationary threat to the value of money. Exactly a similar process of income deflation is imposed now upon the working population of the Third World by the neoliberal policies of globalization.

I mean by the term "imperialism" the arrangement that the capitalist system sets up for imposing income deflation on the working population of the Third World for countering the threat of inflation that would otherwise erode the value of money in the metropolis and make the system unviable. "Imperialism" in this sense characterizes both the colonial and the contemporary periods.

We recognize the need for a reserve army of labor to ward off the threat to the value of money arising from wage demands of workers. Ironically, however, we do not recognize the parallel and even more pressing need of the system (owing to increasing supply price) for the imposition of income deflation on the working population of the Third World for warding off a similar threat.

The fact that the diffusion of capitalism to the Third World has proceeded by leaps and bounds of late, with its domestic corporate-financial oligarchy getting integrated into globalized finance capital, and the fact that workers in the metropolis have also been facing an income squeeze under globalization, are important new developments; but they do not negate the basic tendency of the system to impose income deflation upon the working population of the Third World, a tendency that remains at the very core of the system.

Those who argue that imperialism is no longer a relevant analytic construct point to the multifaceted aspects of today's global economic exchanges and to a highly complex process involved in the distribution of value which, simply put, cannot be reduced to imperialism. How do you respond to this line of thinking?

Capitalism today is of course much more complex, with an enormous financial superstructure. But that paradoxically makes inflation even more threatening. The value of this vast array of financial assets would collapse in the event of inflation, bringing down this superstructure, which incidentally is the reason for the current policy obsession with "inflation targeting." This makes the imperialist arrangement even more essential. The more complex capitalism becomes, the more it needs its basic simple props.

I should clarify here that if "land-augmenting" measures [such as irrigation, high-yielding seeds and better production practices] could be introduced in the Third World, then, notwithstanding the physical fixity of the tropical land mass, the threat of increasing supply price -- and with it, [the threat] of inflation -- could be warded off without any income deflation. Indeed, on the contrary, the working population of the Third World would be better off through such measures. But these measures require state support and state expenditure, a fact that Marx had recognized long ago. But any state activism, other than for promoting its own exclusive and direct interest, is anathema for finance capital, which is why, not surprisingly, "sound finance" and "fiscal responsibility" are back in vogue today, when finance capital, now globalized, is in ascendancy. Imperialism is thus a specifically capitalist way of obtaining the commodities it requires for itself, but which are produced outside its own domain.

The post-decolonization dirigiste regimes [regimes directed by a central authority] in the Third World had actually undertaken land-augmentation measures. Because of this, even as exports of commodities to the metropolis had risen to sustain the biggest boom ever witnessed in the history of capitalism, per capita food grain availability had also increased in those countries. But I see that period as a period of retreat of metropolitan capitalism, enforced by the wound inflicted upon it by the Second World War. With the reassertion of the dominance of finance, in the guise now of an international finance capital, the Third World states have withdrawn from supporting petty producers, a process of income deflation is in full swing, and the imperialist arrangement is back in place, because of which we can see once more a tendency toward a secular decline in per capita food grain availability in the Third World as in the colonial period.

There is a third way -- apart from a greater obsession with inflation aversion and a yoking of Third World states to promoting the interests of globalized finance rather than defending domestic petty producers -- in which contemporary capitalism strengthens the imperialist arrangement. It may be thought that the value of imports of Third World commodities into the capitalist metropolis is so small that we are exaggerating the inflation threat from that source to metropolitan currencies. This smallness itself, of course, is an expression of an acutely exploitative relationship. In addition, however, the threat to the Third World currencies themselves from a rise in the prices of these commodities becomes acute in a regime of free cross-border financial flows as now, which threatens the entire world trade and payments system and hence makes income deflation particularly urgent. Hence the need for the imperialist arrangement becomes even more acute.

Not long ago, even liberals like Thomas Friedman of the New York Times were arguing that "McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas" (that is, the US Air Force). Surely, this is a crude version of imperialism, but what about today's US imperialism? Isn't it still alive and kicking?

The world that Lenin had written about consisted of nation-based, nation-state-supported financial oligarchies engaged in intense inter-imperialist rivalry for repartitioning the world through wars. When [Marxist theorist] Karl Kautsky had suggested the possibility of a truce among rival powers for a peaceful division of the world, Lenin had pointed to the fact that the phenomenon of uneven development under capitalism would necessarily subvert any such specific truce. The world we have today is characterized by the hegemony of international finance capital which is interested in preventing any partitioning of the world, so that it can move around freely across the globe.

Contemporary imperialism therefore is the imperialism of international finance capital which is served by nation-states (for any nation-state that defies the will of international finance capital runs the risk of capital flight from, and hence the insolvency of, its economy). The US, being the leading capitalist state, plays the leading role in promoting and protecting the interests of international finance capital. But talking about a specific US imperialism, or a German or British or French imperialism obscures this basic fact.

Indeed, a good deal of discussion about whether the world is heading toward multi-polarity or the persistence of US dominance misses the point that the chief actor in today's world is international or globalized finance capital, and not US or German or British finance capital. So, the concept of imperialism that [Utsa Patnaik and I] are talking about belongs to a different terrain of discourse from the concept of US imperialism per se . The latter, though it is, of course, empirically visible because of US military intervention all over the world, in order to acquire a proper meaning has to be located within the broader setting of the imperialism of international finance capital.

Some incidentally have seen the muting of inter-imperialist rivalry in today's world as a vindication of Kautsky's position over that of Lenin. This, however, is incorrect, since both of them were talking about a world of national finance capitals which contemporary capitalism has gone beyond.

... ... ...

One final question: How should radical movements and organizations, in both the core and the periphery of the world capitalist economy, be organizing to combat today's imperialism?

Obviously, the issue of imperialism is important not for scholastic reasons, but because of the praxis that a recognition of its role engenders. From what I have been arguing, it is clear that since globalization involves income deflation for the peasantry and petty producers, and since their absorption into the ranks of the active army of labor under capitalism does not occur because of the paucity of jobs that are created even when rates of output growth are high, there is a tendency toward an absolute immiserization of the working population. For the petty producers, this tendency operates directly; and for others, it operates through the driving down of the "reservation wage" owing to the impoverishment of petty producers.

Such immiserization is manifest above all in the decline in per capita food grain absorption, both directly and indirectly (the latter via processed foods and feed grains). An improvement in the conditions of living of the working population of the Third World then requires a delinking from globalization (mainly through capital controls, and also trade controls to the requisite extent) by an alternative state, based on a worker-peasant alliance, that pursues a different trajectory of development. Such a trajectory would emphasize peasant-agriculture-led growth, land redistribution (so as to limit the extent of differentiation within the peasantry) and the formation of voluntary cooperatives and collectives for carrying forward land-augmentation measures, and even undertaking value-addition activities, including industrialization.

Small Third World countries would no doubt find it difficult to adopt such a program because of their limited resource base and narrow home market. But they will have to come together with other small countries to constitute larger, more viable units. But the basic point is that the question of "making globalization work" or "having globalization with a human face" simply does not arise.

The problem with this praxis is that it is not only the bourgeoisie in the Third World countries, but even sections of the middle-class professionals who have been beneficiaries of globalization, who would oppose any such delinking. But the world capitalist crisis, which is a consequence of this finance-capital-led globalization itself, is causing disaffection among these middle-class beneficiaries. They, too, would now be more willing to support an alternative trajectory of development that breaks out of the straitjacket imposed by imperialism.

[Aug 13, 2018] Imperialism Is Alive and Kicking A Marxist Analysis of Neoliberal Capitalism by C.J. Polychroniou

Highly recommended!
Marxism provides one of the best analysis of capitalism; problems start when Marxists propose alternatives.
Notable quotes:
"... Such demand-compression occurs above all through the imposition of an income deflation on the petty producers, and on the working population in general, in the Third World. This was done in the colonial period through two means: one, "deindustrialization" or the displacement of local craft production by imports of manufactures from the capitalist sector; and two, the "drain of surplus" where a part of the taxes extracted from petty producers was simply taken away in the form of exported goods without any quid pro quo ..."
"... I mean by the term "imperialism" the arrangement that the capitalist system sets up for imposing income deflation on the working population of the Third World for countering the threat of inflation that would otherwise erode the value of money in the metropolis and make the system unviable. "Imperialism" in this sense characterizes both the colonial and the contemporary periods. ..."
"... The fact that the diffusion of capitalism to the Third World has proceeded by leaps and bounds of late, with its domestic corporate-financial oligarchy getting integrated into globalized finance capital, and the fact that workers in the metropolis have also been facing an income squeeze under globalization, are important new developments; but they do not negate the basic tendency of the system to impose income deflation upon the working population of the Third World, a tendency that remains at the very core of the system. ..."
"... any state activism, other than for promoting its own exclusive and direct interest, is anathema for finance capital, which is why, not surprisingly, "sound finance" and "fiscal responsibility" are back in vogue today, when finance capital, now globalized, is in ascendancy. Imperialism is thus a specifically capitalist way of obtaining the commodities it requires for itself, but which are produced outside its own domain. ..."
"... dirigiste regimes ..."
"... With the reassertion of the dominance of finance, in the guise now of an international ..."
"... Contemporary imperialism therefore is the imperialism of international finance capital which is served by nation-states (for any nation-state that defies the will of international finance capital runs the risk of capital flight from, and hence the insolvency of, its economy). The US, being the leading capitalist state, plays the leading role in promoting and protecting the interests of international finance capital. But talking about a specific US imperialism, or a German or British or French imperialism obscures this basic fact. ..."
"... Indeed, a good deal of discussion about whether the world is heading toward multi-polarity or the persistence of US dominance misses the point that the chief actor in today's world is international or globalized finance capital, and not US or German or British finance capital. ..."
"... US military intervention all over the world, in order to acquire a proper meaning has to be located within the broader setting of the imperialism of international finance capital. ..."
"... absolute immiserization ..."
Aug 13, 2018 | truthout.org

C.J. Polychroniou: How do you define imperialism and what imperialist tendencies do you detect as inherent in the brutal expansion of the logic of capitalism in the neoliberal global era?

Prabhat Patnaik: The capitalist sector of the world, which began by being located, and continues largely to be located, in the temperate region, requires as its raw materials and means of consumption a whole range of primary commodities which are not available or producible, either at all or in adequate quantities, within its own borders. These commodities have to be obtained from the tropical and sub-tropical region within which almost the whole of the Third World is located; and the bulk of them (leaving aside minerals) are produced by a set of petty producers (peasants). What is more, they are subject to "increasing supply price," in the sense that as demand for them increases in the capitalist sector, larger quantities of them can be obtained, if at all, only at higher prices, thanks to the fixed size of the tropical land mass.

This means an ex ante tendency toward accelerating inflation as capital accumulation proceeds, undermining the value of money under capitalism and hence the viability of the system as a whole. To prevent this, the system requires that with an increase in demand from the capitalist sector, as capital accumulation proceeds, there must be a compression of demand elsewhere for these commodities, so that the net demand does not increase, and increasing supply price does not get a chance to manifest itself at all.

Such demand-compression occurs above all through the imposition of an income deflation on the petty producers, and on the working population in general, in the Third World. This was done in the colonial period through two means: one, "deindustrialization" or the displacement of local craft production by imports of manufactures from the capitalist sector; and two, the "drain of surplus" where a part of the taxes extracted from petty producers was simply taken away in the form of exported goods without any quid pro quo . The income of the working population of the Third World, and hence its demand, was thus kept down; and metropolitan capitalism's demand for such commodities was met without any inflationary threat to the value of money. Exactly a similar process of income deflation is imposed now upon the working population of the Third World by the neoliberal policies of globalization.

I mean by the term "imperialism" the arrangement that the capitalist system sets up for imposing income deflation on the working population of the Third World for countering the threat of inflation that would otherwise erode the value of money in the metropolis and make the system unviable. "Imperialism" in this sense characterizes both the colonial and the contemporary periods.

We recognize the need for a reserve army of labor to ward off the threat to the value of money arising from wage demands of workers. Ironically, however, we do not recognize the parallel and even more pressing need of the system (owing to increasing supply price) for the imposition of income deflation on the working population of the Third World for warding off a similar threat.

The fact that the diffusion of capitalism to the Third World has proceeded by leaps and bounds of late, with its domestic corporate-financial oligarchy getting integrated into globalized finance capital, and the fact that workers in the metropolis have also been facing an income squeeze under globalization, are important new developments; but they do not negate the basic tendency of the system to impose income deflation upon the working population of the Third World, a tendency that remains at the very core of the system.

Those who argue that imperialism is no longer a relevant analytic construct point to the multifaceted aspects of today's global economic exchanges and to a highly complex process involved in the distribution of value which, simply put, cannot be reduced to imperialism. How do you respond to this line of thinking?

Capitalism today is of course much more complex, with an enormous financial superstructure. But that paradoxically makes inflation even more threatening. The value of this vast array of financial assets would collapse in the event of inflation, bringing down this superstructure, which incidentally is the reason for the current policy obsession with "inflation targeting." This makes the imperialist arrangement even more essential. The more complex capitalism becomes, the more it needs its basic simple props.

I should clarify here that if "land-augmenting" measures [such as irrigation, high-yielding seeds and better production practices] could be introduced in the Third World, then, notwithstanding the physical fixity of the tropical land mass, the threat of increasing supply price -- and with it, [the threat] of inflation -- could be warded off without any income deflation. Indeed, on the contrary, the working population of the Third World would be better off through such measures. But these measures require state support and state expenditure, a fact that Marx had recognized long ago. But any state activism, other than for promoting its own exclusive and direct interest, is anathema for finance capital, which is why, not surprisingly, "sound finance" and "fiscal responsibility" are back in vogue today, when finance capital, now globalized, is in ascendancy. Imperialism is thus a specifically capitalist way of obtaining the commodities it requires for itself, but which are produced outside its own domain.

The post-decolonization dirigiste regimes [regimes directed by a central authority] in the Third World had actually undertaken land-augmentation measures. Because of this, even as exports of commodities to the metropolis had risen to sustain the biggest boom ever witnessed in the history of capitalism, per capita food grain availability had also increased in those countries. But I see that period as a period of retreat of metropolitan capitalism, enforced by the wound inflicted upon it by the Second World War. With the reassertion of the dominance of finance, in the guise now of an international finance capital, the Third World states have withdrawn from supporting petty producers, a process of income deflation is in full swing, and the imperialist arrangement is back in place, because of which we can see once more a tendency toward a secular decline in per capita food grain availability in the Third World as in the colonial period.

There is a third way -- apart from a greater obsession with inflation aversion and a yoking of Third World states to promoting the interests of globalized finance rather than defending domestic petty producers -- in which contemporary capitalism strengthens the imperialist arrangement. It may be thought that the value of imports of Third World commodities into the capitalist metropolis is so small that we are exaggerating the inflation threat from that source to metropolitan currencies. This smallness itself, of course, is an expression of an acutely exploitative relationship. In addition, however, the threat to the Third World currencies themselves from a rise in the prices of these commodities becomes acute in a regime of free cross-border financial flows as now, which threatens the entire world trade and payments system and hence makes income deflation particularly urgent. Hence the need for the imperialist arrangement becomes even more acute.

Not long ago, even liberals like Thomas Friedman of the New York Times were arguing that "McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas" (that is, the US Air Force). Surely, this is a crude version of imperialism, but what about today's US imperialism? Isn't it still alive and kicking?

The world that Lenin had written about consisted of nation-based, nation-state-supported financial oligarchies engaged in intense inter-imperialist rivalry for repartitioning the world through wars. When [Marxist theorist] Karl Kautsky had suggested the possibility of a truce among rival powers for a peaceful division of the world, Lenin had pointed to the fact that the phenomenon of uneven development under capitalism would necessarily subvert any such specific truce. The world we have today is characterized by the hegemony of international finance capital which is interested in preventing any partitioning of the world, so that it can move around freely across the globe.

Contemporary imperialism therefore is the imperialism of international finance capital which is served by nation-states (for any nation-state that defies the will of international finance capital runs the risk of capital flight from, and hence the insolvency of, its economy). The US, being the leading capitalist state, plays the leading role in promoting and protecting the interests of international finance capital. But talking about a specific US imperialism, or a German or British or French imperialism obscures this basic fact.

Indeed, a good deal of discussion about whether the world is heading toward multi-polarity or the persistence of US dominance misses the point that the chief actor in today's world is international or globalized finance capital, and not US or German or British finance capital. So, the concept of imperialism that [Utsa Patnaik and I] are talking about belongs to a different terrain of discourse from the concept of US imperialism per se . The latter, though it is, of course, empirically visible because of US military intervention all over the world, in order to acquire a proper meaning has to be located within the broader setting of the imperialism of international finance capital.

Some incidentally have seen the muting of inter-imperialist rivalry in today's world as a vindication of Kautsky's position over that of Lenin. This, however, is incorrect, since both of them were talking about a world of national finance capitals which contemporary capitalism has gone beyond.

... ... ...

One final question: How should radical movements and organizations, in both the core and the periphery of the world capitalist economy, be organizing to combat today's imperialism?

Obviously, the issue of imperialism is important not for scholastic reasons, but because of the praxis that a recognition of its role engenders. From what I have been arguing, it is clear that since globalization involves income deflation for the peasantry and petty producers, and since their absorption into the ranks of the active army of labor under capitalism does not occur because of the paucity of jobs that are created even when rates of output growth are high, there is a tendency toward an absolute immiserization of the working population. For the petty producers, this tendency operates directly; and for others, it operates through the driving down of the "reservation wage" owing to the impoverishment of petty producers.

Such immiserization is manifest above all in the decline in per capita food grain absorption, both directly and indirectly (the latter via processed foods and feed grains). An improvement in the conditions of living of the working population of the Third World then requires a delinking from globalization (mainly through capital controls, and also trade controls to the requisite extent) by an alternative state, based on a worker-peasant alliance, that pursues a different trajectory of development. Such a trajectory would emphasize peasant-agriculture-led growth, land redistribution (so as to limit the extent of differentiation within the peasantry) and the formation of voluntary cooperatives and collectives for carrying forward land-augmentation measures, and even undertaking value-addition activities, including industrialization.

Small Third World countries would no doubt find it difficult to adopt such a program because of their limited resource base and narrow home market. But they will have to come together with other small countries to constitute larger, more viable units. But the basic point is that the question of "making globalization work" or "having globalization with a human face" simply does not arise.

The problem with this praxis is that it is not only the bourgeoisie in the Third World countries, but even sections of the middle-class professionals who have been beneficiaries of globalization, who would oppose any such delinking. But the world capitalist crisis, which is a consequence of this finance-capital-led globalization itself, is causing disaffection among these middle-class beneficiaries. They, too, would now be more willing to support an alternative trajectory of development that breaks out of the straitjacket imposed by imperialism.

[Aug 13, 2018] The Rent-a-Crowd critics of Jeremy Corbyn's alleged 'antisemitism' enjoy Freedom Of Screech

Aug 13, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Hoarsewhisperer , Aug 13, 2018 2:51:07 AM | 31

Thought for the day...
The Rent-a-Crowd critics of Jeremy Corbyn's alleged 'antisemitism' enjoy Freedom Of Screech.

[Aug 13, 2018] Sergey Lavrov SLAMS new US sanctions over Skripal case

Aug 13, 2018 | theduran.com

Sergey Lavrov SLAMS new US sanctions over Skripal case

Ruble continues to tank under the spectre of looming American sanctions imposed on the basis of circumstantial evidence and insinuation.

Published

9 hours ago

on

August 13, 2018 By

Seraphim Hanisch 1,639 Views ,

[Aug 13, 2018] Like Iran, the Russians know the USA. Is about as reliable as a third hand condom and just as classy.

Aug 13, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Beibdnn. , Aug 13, 2018 4:33:04 PM | 59

@spudski.

I believe Russia sees the sanctions for what they are. A crude attempt to provoke them into a hasty reaction. It is virtually certain they won't react in a childish or inconsidered way.

Paul Craig Roberts is well behind the curve when it comes to what is believed about the west in Russia politics.

A clue might be in the fact they have just reduced their $ reserves to 14 billion, down from nearly 200 4 or so years ago.

Like Iran, the Russians know the U.S.A. Is about as reliable as a third hand condom and just as classy.

[Aug 13, 2018] New US Sanctions vs. Russia by Anatoly Karlin

Notable quotes:
"... Proposed new "sanctions" on Russia essentially amount to a declaration of war. ..."
"... The US is spelling out the conditions that have no chance of being met. Let's hope that the result will be further Russian alignment with China, rather than nuclear war. I'd hate to be killed by Russian missiles hitting the US just because bought by MIC and paid for American "leadership" has gone completely insane. Hope springs eternal. ..."
"... They are constantly talking about the "hybrid warfare" and the Russian "attack" on America, but it means that the US (both its politicians and its population) get psychologically prepared for an actual war, and it is precisely their actions which keep drifting towards actual war. ..."
"... I don't think the Israel lobby alone should be blamed for these "sanctions". Insanity is more widespread in the US "leadership" than Jewish shekels. This looks like the death throes of the Empire. Let's hope it does not take the humanity with it to its grave. ..."
"... Interesting looks like the inevitable Turkish financial crisis has begun, Europe has reasonable exposure there, further disruption to economic ties to Russia would be seen as a hostile act by Europe. ..."
"... Any compromise with the US is unlikely to give anything than shattered delusions. Who could be partners in such a system? Aside from the obvious candidate, China, perhaps even India. Modi has in recent months distanced himself from the US and warmed up to China again. ..."
"... Unless the EU finally shows some spine – which is very unlikely – then the Western system will be exposed to be at the mercy of whoever controls the US. Such a system is hegemonic and it will be in the best interest of not just the non-Western world but even for those of us in Europe to see a breakdown in that world order. ..."
"... Turkey's implicit bet was that it could continue to rely on Western money flows while pursuing an agenda contrary to Western interests has been conclusively shattered. When I say Western interests, I do not mean the propaganda about human rights, which the West manifestly doesn't give two hoots about. ..."
Aug 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

* NBC: Trump administration to hit Russia with new sanctions for Skripal poisoning

The Trump administration is hitting Russia with new sanctions punishing President Vladimir Putin's government for using a chemical weapon against an ex-spy in Britain, U.S. officials told NBC News Wednesday.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo signed off on a determination that Russia violated international law by poisoning the former spy, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter in March, officials said, a decision that was announced Wednesday afternoon by State Department.

The biggest impact from the initial sanctions is expected to come from a ban on granting licenses to export sensitive national security goods to Russia, which in the past have included items like electronic devices and components, along with test and calibration equipment for avionics. Prior to the sanctions, such exports were allowed on a case-by-case basis.

A second, more painful round kicks in three months later unless Russia provides "reliable assurances" that it won't use chemical weapons in the future and agrees to "on-site inspections" by the U.N. -- conditions unlikely to be met. The second round of sanctions could include downgrading diplomatic relations, suspending state airline Aeroflot's ability to fly to the U.S, and cutting off nearly all exports and imports.

The sanctions are directly based on H.R.3409 – Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act of 1991 .

Section 7 covers the sanctions that are to be imposed, which consist of initial sanctions, and further sanctions to be imposed after 90 days if there is no compliance on the country's part.

Initial sanctions : Ban on foreign assistance, arms sales, denial of US credit, and exporting national security sensitive goods. (Most of this is already functionally in place with respect to Russia).

Further sanctions : Ban on multilateral bank assistance [e.g. IMF, World Bank, the EBRD, etc], ban on US bank loans, a near total export ban (except food and agricultural commodities) and import ban, downgrade or suspension of US diplomatic relations, revocation of landing rights to air carriers controlled by the government of the sanctioned country.

Reuters has a US State Department official saying that the sanctions would not apply to Aeroflot, which some commenters have qualified as backtracking. But I think that the official was merely talking of the initial sanctions.

How does Russia go about removing the sanctions? The President will need to "certify" to Congress that the country in question: (1) Has made "reliable assurances", and is not making preparations, to use chemical/biological weapons in violation of international law, or against its own citizens; (2) is willing to allow on-site inspections by UN observers to confirm the above; (3) is making restitutions to the victims of its chemical/biological weapons usage.

This would basically require Russia to admit guilt for the Skripal poisoning and subject itself to the inspections regimes that the US typically tries to force on "rogue states." In other words, it is out of the question.

Moreover, even in the theoretical possibility that this goes through, it's not like President Trump's "certification" will be worth anything amidst the Russiagate hysteria.

Another possibility to avoid the near cessation of trade between the US and Russia is to have the President "waiver" the application of individual sanctions, if he can determine and certify to Congress that doing so is necessary for the national security interests of the US; or that there has been "a fundamental change in the leadership and policies" of the sanctioned country. In either case, the President needs to provide a report to Congress explaining his detailed rationale for the waiver, and listing steps the sanctioned country is taking to satisfy the "removal of sanctions" clause.

This isn't near the end of it, though.

***

* Meduza: Russian newspaper leaks draft text of U.S. Senate's Defending American Security from Kremlin Aggression Act

The newspaper Kommersant has published a full draft of the proposed "Defending American Security from Kremlin Aggression Act," which demands a U.S. investigation into Vladimir Putin's personal wealth and whether Russia sponsors terrorism, and would impose a ban on U.S. citizens buying Russian sovereign debt, though the U.S. Treasury publicly opposed this idea in February, warning that it would disrupt the market broadly. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, one of the initiative's sponsors, says one of the draft legislation's goals is to impose "crushing sanctions."

[Sanctions to include:]

* Banning the banks . The draft bill proposes banning Russia's biggest state banks -- Sberbank, VTB Bank, Gazprombank, Rosselkhozbank, Promsvyazbank, or Vnesheconombank -- from operating inside the United States, which would effectively prevent these institutions from conducting dollar settlements.

* Oil and gas . In the energy sector, the legislation would impose sanctions on investment in any projects by the Russian government or government-affiliated companies outside Russia worth more than $250 million. Businesses would also incur penalties for any participation (funding or supplying equipment or technology) in new oil projects inside Russia valued above $1 million.

* Lists and research . If the bill is submitted in its current form and adopted, the U.S. president would have 180 days to begin implementing its provisions; within 60 days of adoption, the White House would need to provide a new list of Russian individuals suspected of cyber-attacks against the United States; the Treasury Department would have 180 days to update its "Kremlin list" of Russian state officials and oligarchs; the director of national intelligence would be tasked with completing a "detailed report on the personal net worth and assets" of Vladimir Putin and his family; and the State Department would have 90 days to determine whether Russia should be designated as a state sponsor of terrorism.

* A new Sanctions Office . In order to shore up the 2017 Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, the draft legislation would also create an "Office of Sanctions Coordination" within the State Department to coordinate work with the Treasury.

Here is the original Kommersant article: Комплекс мер по сдерживанию Дональда Трампа

Here is the text of the draft bill: https://www.kommersant.ru/docs/2018/_2018d140-Menendez-Russia-Sanctions-Bill.pdf

It contains many more interesting details.

(1) The bill's sponsors, which include Lindsey Graham, Robert Menendez, and Ben Cardin, preface their text with a call for President Trump to demand Russia stop interference in US "democratic processes", return Crimea to the Ukraine, stop supporting the separatists in East Ukraine, as well the "occupation and support of separatists" in the territories of Georgia and Moldova, and support for Bashar Assad, who continues to commit "war crimes."

(2) They note that the general drift of the document is towards a consolidation of separate anti-Russian sanctions, from the "Ukrainian" to the "cyber" ones, into a "single mechanism."

(3) Subject to a 2/3 vote in the Senate, the bill also includes a ban on financing "direct or indirect" steps, that have as their goal to support the attempts of "any US government official" to take the country out of NATO. Every 90 days, the US Secretary of State, in coordination with the Defense Minister, would be required to present a report to the relevant committees in Congress about "threats to NATO", which would include attempts to weaken US commitments to the alliance. Considering Trump's ambiguous feelings on NATO, this part is primarily aimed at Trump himself.

(4) There are calls to "pressure" Russia from interfering with UN and the OPCW attempts to investigate chemical weapons usage, as well as to "punish" Russia for producing and using chemical weapons. This directly syncs this sanctions bill to the previous one.

The report concludes that it's not yet clear how to interpret this. In the worse case, it could be a "preliminary application" for a UN campaign to exclude Russia from the Security Council; alternatively, it could just be a "pragmatic" run-up to merely invoking great sanctions, as with Iran in 1983.

***

I suppose we now also know why Russia has been selling Treasuries for the past three months, which plummeted from their typical level of $100 billion in March to just $15 billion from June (i.e. just enough to guarantee USD-denominated trade).

For comparison, the last time such a drawback happened (but which only lasted three weeks) was in the immediate aftermath of Crimea.

The last time Russia pulled such a large sum out of the U.S. was just after the annexation of Crimea in 2014, when the central bank withdrew about $115 billion from the New York Fed, Reuters reported last year, citing two former Fed officials. Most of that money was returned a few weeks later, after it became clear that the scope of initial U.S. sanctions would be narrower than the Kremlin expected, according to the news service.

But I suppose this drawdown would now be permanent, since it is increasingly evident that Iran-tier sanctions on Russia are now on the horizon.

These sanctions are either going to steadily creep in – or rush in like a tsunami if there is a Blue Wave in 90 days, or if Trump was to be removed.

However, as I have pointed out, the ultimate ability of the US to directly punish Russia is limited; it has twice as many people as Iran, after all, and many times the economic output. Trade between Russia and the US is very limited.

Moreover, as I have pointed out , Russia has plenty of surprising ways to hurt the US as well. For instance, banning Aeroflot from flying to the US has a simple response – banning US air carriers from overflying North Eurasia, period. It can resurrect a bill – first raised this May, since sunken in the legislature – to impose fines and prison time on individuals and entities who support Western sanctions by refusing to do business with Russian citizens or entities on America's SDN list. It can throw out the American-dominated copyrights regimen out of the window.

Some questions we should now be asking include:

1. Precisely how far is the US prepared to go? Cutting off its own trade with Russia is one thing – penalizing foreign companies that do business with Russia is something else. As Ben Aris notes , the US Treasury Department has been ratcheting back on its sanctions against Oleg Deripaska and Rusal, after the chaos it has caused in the international metals market. The ideological Russiagaters need to balance their PDS/TDS against the pecuniary practicalities of catering to finance and oil & gas interests and their lobbies.

2. To what extent will the EU join in, passively acquiesce to, or resist the US sanctions against Russia? The answer to this question will to a large extent determine precisely how deeply Russia falls into China's orbit in the next couple of decades.

reiner Tor , August 10, 2018 at 3:38 pm GMT

Putin and his regime are weak on the USA, but Uncle Sam seems intent on making even Medvedev-style weak comprador liberals enemies.

I think unrequited love often turns to hate, and so there's some chance that these weaklings become anti-American nationalists.

The Scalpel , Website August 10, 2018 at 3:40 pm GMT
This sounds very close to a declaration of war. USA is beginning to throw everything it has behind economic warfare and go "all in" forcing even its closest allies to either suffer serious sanctions for not joining the economic attacks or to inflict self-harm by limiting trade with Russia, Iran, and anyone else the US chooses to declare economic warfare upon.

I don't believe that this set of circumstances can continue indefinitely without a serious realignment or a degeneration into "kinetic" warfare.

Mitleser , August 10, 2018 at 3:47 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

Putin and his regime are weak on the USA, but Uncle Sam seems intent on making even Medvedev-style weak comprador liberals enemies.

Twit:

Maxim A. Suchkov @MSuchkov_ALM

Russia's PM @MedvedevRussiaE now: #Moscow to treat
:urther #US sanctions as an open declaration of economic war.
1:54 AM-Aug 10, 2018

AnonFromTN , August 10, 2018 at 3:48 pm GMT
Proposed new "sanctions" on Russia essentially amount to a declaration of war. Lunatic asylum is the most appropriate place for the whole American "leadership", down to the last man/woman/tranny. The only thing that stands between us and WWIII, which would be a suicide of humanity, is unbelievably cool and reasonable position of Putin and the rest of Russian leadership.

It is clear to anyone with a brain that the US "sanctions" on Russia have zero chance of changing Russia's stance on any international issues of consequence. Crimea is a good example: it will return to Ukraine the day after the Hell freezes over. On the same date Georgia gets South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and US-sponsored Islamic bandits win over Assad in Syria. Thus, The US is spelling out the conditions that have no chance of being met. Let's hope that the result will be further Russian alignment with China, rather than nuclear war. I'd hate to be killed by Russian missiles hitting the US just because bought by MIC and paid for American "leadership" has gone completely insane. Hope springs eternal.

reiner Tor , August 10, 2018 at 3:56 pm GMT
@The Scalpel

I agree. They are constantly talking about the "hybrid warfare" and the Russian "attack" on America, but it means that the US (both its politicians and its population) get psychologically prepared for an actual war, and it is precisely their actions which keep drifting towards actual war.

There is also a lot of projection going on here: the Americans obviously perceive their own election meddling as war by other means, and so they accuse their enemies with the very same thing.

reiner Tor , August 10, 2018 at 3:56 pm GMT
@Mitleser

Maybe we'll see unrequited love turning into hatred.

LondonBob , August 10, 2018 at 3:59 pm GMT
Russia is far too integrated in to the wider European economy, and Russia is too stronk for sanctions to do anything. See Nord Stream II. Ignore the Israel lobby sanctions, not even the corrupt congress critters could vote for those.

I have no idea why these new meaningless sanctions have been conjured up, maybe the Rand Paul letter has the answer, maybe not. I think we may have some answers after the midterms.

AnonFromTN , August 10, 2018 at 4:05 pm GMT
@LondonBob

I don't think the Israel lobby alone should be blamed for these "sanctions". Insanity is more widespread in the US "leadership" than Jewish shekels. This looks like the death throes of the Empire. Let's hope it does not take the humanity with it to its grave.

neutral , August 10, 2018 at 4:13 pm GMT
Now that it is within the realms of reasonable debate, if there were a nuclear war between the USA and Russia what targets would be hit? Would Russia hit puppet regimes such the UK, France or Poland? Would the USA hit Iran (because if they are going to hit Russia they might as well get Iran in there as well).

If say only Russian and USA were hit, how much of the nuclear fallout would affect Europe?

LondonBob , August 10, 2018 at 4:14 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

Why, if Putin threatened Netanyahu to call off his dogs, he would have to? Actions of AIPAC should be accountable.

Interesting looks like the inevitable Turkish financial crisis has begun, Europe has reasonable exposure there, further disruption to economic ties to Russia would be seen as a hostile act by Europe.

Polish Perspective , August 10, 2018 at 4:18 pm GMT
Russia today is in a much better position to withstand sanctions. Global oil investments have been lagging for half a decade due to low prices, and this will inevitably show up in the coming years. Russia in 2014 was battered by a twin storm, of which the oil price collapse was in fact far worse. That factor is now gone.

Furthermore, a planned VAT rise next year will mean that the break-even oil price for the Russian budget will fall to $50 after $60 this year and $67 last year, according to Alfa Bank's analysis . Steady, impressive improvement. So even in an event of an unexpected oil price decline, Russia is far more prepared this time around.

Additionally, over the last 4 years, Russia's economy has indigenised to a much greater extent than before. This is especially the case in the financial markets. Russia is simply a lot less reliant on foreign funding. Bershidsky wrote about how more and more Russian companies are leaving UK capital markets and returning to Russia. This process will continue but it has already yielded results. As a country with a large current account surplus, tamed inflation, an incredibly strong fiscal state, there is indeed very little that the US can do, which is probably why they are reaching with ever-greater desperation.

I think the ultimate endgame can only be to completely run a parallel system. Any compromise with the US is unlikely to give anything than shattered delusions. Who could be partners in such a system? Aside from the obvious candidate, China, perhaps even India. Modi has in recent months distanced himself from the US and warmed up to China again.

India has always bristled at being treated as a close ally rather as a 'partner'. It has cherished it's non-aligned movement legacy and its historically close relations to Russia. It is unlikely to want to give up on that in order to become a subservient lapdog to US interests in the manner that the EU has degraded itself.

China's AIIB is a good start, but the full range of new institutions must bear fruit. Some of the BRICS ideas are good but ultimately both Brazil and South Africa are too unimportant. It should be borne by the big powers (Russia, India and China) together with an Asian coalition like the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia and others who are not in the US orbit yet have a bright future ahead of them.

Turning to Europe. Unless the EU finally shows some spine – which is very unlikely – then the Western system will be exposed to be at the mercy of whoever controls the US. Such a system is hegemonic and it will be in the best interest of not just the non-Western world but even for those of us in Europe to see a breakdown in that world order.

Dmitry , August 10, 2018 at 4:37 pm GMT
America now has a "good cop, bad cop" with Trump and Congress. Congress puts in more sanctions, but there is constraint responding too much because Trump seems friendly, and you don't want to alienate him. Trump himself doesn't care about the sanctions, because he thinks it is leverage that he can lift them later.

There was an article a few months ago that Trump is actually worse than Obama – even in Obama did not supply direct weapons to Ukraine.

I think Trump plans to remove the sanctions in the next year and improve the relations – but without any kind of timetable (his meeting with Putin is delayed already to next year).

Polish Perspective , August 10, 2018 at 4:43 pm GMT
OT: The Turkish lira is now the worst-performing currency this year, bar none.

Turkey's implicit bet was that it could continue to rely on Western money flows while pursuing an agenda contrary to Western interests has been conclusively shattered. When I say Western interests, I do not mean the propaganda about human rights, which the West manifestly doesn't give two hoots about.

Turkey was not entirely foolish to believe this strategy could work. Pakistan during the reign of Islamist military dictator Zia ul-Haq, used a similar strategy during the 1980s. He empowered the mullahs and moved Pakistan decidedly to the hard-right in religious/cultural terms while massively opening up the economy to speculative finance, thereby pleasing Washington. Saudi Arabia has used this policy for a long time. For those who knew this, the revelation that the US funded some of the most extremist "moderate" rebels in Syria came as no shock.

So perhaps it isn't the Islamism in of itself which is the problem in Erdogan's case. What could it be? Well, one clue is the case of Pastor Brunson. The good pastor, who under house arrest in Turkey, is accused to be close to the Gülen cult. The official line in the Western MSM is that Trump is trying to appease evangelicals before the midterms. I don't buy that. He has them in the bag regardless. Gülen himself, some of you might recall, still lives in the US despite repeated pleas from Turkey to give him back. Which is the unreliable ally here? Curiously, Gülen's religious bent is even more Islamist than Erdogan's. He's also even more of a neoliberal. Notice a pattern?

At any rate, the demand from the US has been for Turkey to release Brunson unconditionally. Erdogan's media has speculated that Brunson was slated to become CIA chief in Turkey had the 2016 coup come to pass. Obviously, Turkey does not want to release him unconditionally: it makes them look extremely weak. Well, they now got hit where it hurts. Indeed, Trump even tweeted out new sanctions news today even as Erdogan was delivering a speech. I don't happen to believe in coincidences. The result is that the lira lost close to a quarter of its value in a single day. I haven't even mentioned Turkey's apparent interest in the S-400 missile system among other matters. This, I think, is what truly irked D.C. rather than Erdogan's human rights record or "authoritarianism", which is just the pretext.

Make no mistake: the decline of the lira was structural from the beginning. Turkey's large CAD made it extremely vulnerable to financial speculation from the getgo. It has now paid that price. But this does not preclude the fact that countries which are overtly reliant on Western financial flows to fund large current account deficits should forgo the lesson that there is no free lunch. Erdogan made this cardinal error. Poland is not nearly as vulnerable, but we're also in the same orbit. This is why I always laugh at the Poland Stronk memes. It's also why I dismiss the criticism against Orban that he plays all sides, including taking money from the EU, as politically naïve. Very few countries in this world can reliably be called truly independent. Russia is in the process of becoming one. So is China. India is not quite there, but it has the potential. The rest of us will simply have to balance hegemons, while reminding ourselves of our inherent vulnerability. If we forget that, then we just had a textbook example of what happens when we overestimate our hand, playing out in front of our very eyes today.

AnonFromTN , August 10, 2018 at 4:46 pm GMT
@Polish Perspective

Good to hear something sensible from Polish Perspective (in every sense of this expression). I know some Poles, who tend to be reasonable people, so the policies of Polish government always amazed me. Then again, if Polish democracy is similar to the US, the opinions of the people don't matter at all.

There is still a long way to go before Russia, China, or any other country frees itself from the clutches of dollar-based financial system. However, an alternative might look parallel at the beginning, but it won't be parallel for long. Thing is, the US dollar and the US sovereign debt have become essentially Ponzi schemes. If Russia, China, and a few others create a "parallel" system, dollar-based Ponzi scheme folds, as the US does not have sufficient assets to support the dollar or pay off its debt. The fall of the Empire will likely be violent. The only thing we can hope for is that the humanity survives it.

As to EU, it missed every chance of becoming something with a spine. Too late now. In fact, what French president once said about Arafat (he never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity) applies to the EU with a vengeance.

Felix Keverich , August 10, 2018 at 4:47 pm GMT

I suppose we now also now why Russia has been selling Treasuries for the past three months, which plummeted from their typical level of $100 billion in March to just $15 billion from June (i.e. just enough to guarantee USD-denominated trade).

You're making the Kremlins look smarter than they actually are. They should have done this 4 years ago. What I want to know is what happened to the proceeds from the sale? CBR data shows that value of "foreign exchange" held by the CBR hasn't declined:

https://www.cbr.ru/eng/hd_base/mrrf/mrrf_m/

Did they convert the dollars into other currencies, or are they keeping it in cash on a bank account somewhere, where it could be easily "frozen"?

notanon , August 10, 2018 at 4:49 pm GMT
@LondonBob

Why, if Putin threatened Netanyahu to call off his dogs, he would have to? Actions of AIPAC should be accountable.

i don't this is just AIPAC driven – partly yes but the banking mafia have their own reasons for trying to bring Russia to heel.

Thorfinnsson , August 10, 2018 at 4:54 pm GMT
Great.

Now I can't use the Export-Import Bank insure the export of American-made products from a swing state to Russia. Really Making America Great Again! Can we please replace Pompeo with Rohrabacher already?

Felix Keverich , August 10, 2018 at 5:04 pm GMT
@Polish Perspective

Regarding India, they are asking America for a permission to keep buying Russian weapons. Asking for a sanctions "waiver" – this is just sad. India also agreed to reduce imports of Iranian oil. So, perhaps, not so independent anymore.

There is no way to sugarcoat it: in the short to medium term sanctions will suppress Russian economic growth. But unless they find a way to somehow stop Russia's exports of oil, our economy will shrug off whatever sanction packages US can throw at it.

Cagey Beast , August 10, 2018 at 5:07 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

Can we please replace Pompeo with Rohrabacher already?

Rohrabacher is a flake and blowhard as well. If he were in the running for Secretary of State, he could just as easily flip and become militantly anti-Russian in order to impress people in Washington. Appearing tough on foreigners in front of one's peers in Washington is their prime motive. They've been like this since before the Vietnam War era.

Kimppis , August 10, 2018 at 5:09 pm GMT
Anatoly, I read your Russian "Whitepill" article through Google Translate recently:

http://akarlin.ru/2018/08/whitepill/

Obviously a good read overall, but there was this one part that I found particularly well, interesting, and actually quite surprising:

"Moreover, the mid-2020s will also see a massive influx of electric vehicles into the global car fleet, which could lead to a final collapse in oil prices. There was practically no real diversification: the number of industrial robots per worker in Russia is at the level of Iran and India. Meanwhile, "effective managers" like Sechin turned out to be so effective that Rosneft's debts exceed the value of the company itself from this year. An acute economic crisis in a few years is almost inevitable. "

So I'm clearly not even entirely sure whether that translation is accurate, but it really seems like you're kind of suddenly much more pessimistic on the Russian economy. Or is that just the "best-case" scenario for Russian nationalists?

Didn't you rate Putin's "economic management" reasonably highly not a long time ago, just before the Presidential elections? Of course compared to the situation in 2000, but still.

You've also pointed out several times that Russia's oil dependency has been considerably exaggerated. Also, Russia's federal budget is already based on low oil prices. Then there's Jon Hellevig's research and numbers as well (GDP share of oil & gas, the consolidated budget, etc). And Polish Perspective's comment above.

So shouldn't the repeat of 2014 be kind of unlikely, if not impossible? At this rate, Russia's remaining oil dependency should already be considerably lower by the mid-20s, despite all those technological limitations.

You don't believe in an annual growth of 3% anymore? You seriously think there will be an "acute crisis" in a few years?

I actually just read that even the always (or atleast recently) conservative/pessimistic Russian authorities (in this case, the Economic Development Ministry) forecast a growth rate of atleast around 3% beginning from 2021, after the VAT hike, some other "reforms" and increasing spending.

Cagey Beast , August 10, 2018 at 5:23 pm GMT
At the same time, Trump his helping to push the Turkish economy off a cliff with his Twitter account. Russia and Turkey find themselves in the same boat. So?
Dmitry , August 10, 2018 at 5:40 pm GMT
@LondonBob

Israel and Netanyahu responsible for American sanctions on Russia, conspiracy makes less sense to me than the others I read here (Israel responsible for killing Kennedy, etc). Why do Israel want to impose American sanctions on Russia?

This week's sanctions mainly targeting Russian airlines. Aeroflot is about to buy 30 Boeing 737s from America – and now this is in danger.

In Israel, Aeroflot is the third airline, and Israeli government pays it direct subsidies to reduce the ticket prices for places like Eilat. They allow Aeroflot to put giant Aeroflot commercial posters along the roads and skyscrapers.

According to the news earlier in the year, Israel is negotiating to join a customs union with the Eurasian Economic Union. How will they reconcile their own actions, with being the one responsible for America to sanction Russia? It would be very competent 4 dimensional chess, from people who cannot even count their illegal immigrants or deport a single illegal immigrant, or coordinate their nationality policy with a few thousand druze. While making America sanction Russia has no benefit for them, deporting illegal immigrants, or coordinating with Druze has important benefits for them (yet supposedly they can do the former, but not the latter).

At the same time, they do the opposite of sanctioning themselves.

Also if this is the case, how in Russia, nobody in the expert community is aware Israel is responsible for the sanctions. Instead the media celebrate when it still wants to export carrots. And if any of the Kremlin top think relations with Israel are bad, then why is Israel allowed to operate freely in Russia.

If explanation is to do with Syria – it also does not fit. Intervention in Syria was presented as something which would encourage West to remove its sanctions.

For Israel, Russian-American alliance would improve the situation in the region. And also probably for Turkey and the Arabs.

Israel is terrified with an increase of Iran in Syria. The reality is that is that both Russia and America is going to reduce presence in Syria, and Iran is going to increase it. The problem of Russia in Syria for Israel, is that Russia's presence is only minimal, and will allow Iran on the ground to take over the same territories that Russia helps secure for Assad. In the current equation and stage of the war, they will be hoping Russia increases its presence and reduces the need for Iranian forces. Problem of Assad for them is his only to the extent of his relation with Iran, not with Russia.

Mikhail , Website August 10, 2018 at 5:43 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

Before the Trump-Putin summit, the Mueller involved FBI indicted 12 Russians, knowing full well that they'd not be turned over to the US. This latest round of sanctions comes right after Rand Paul's trip to Moscow, for the purpose of seeking closer US-Russian relations.

As noted in this below piece, these sanctions are crock based: https://www.rt.com/news/435576-russia-us-sanctions-reactions/

On CNN, the establishment alternative academic Robert English hypothesized that elements in the Russian government might've poisoned the Skripals without Putin's prior knowledge. He leaves out another possibility, in line with US mass media restrictions. In the UK, there're Russian ex pats, who quarrel among themselves, in addition to not liking the Russian government. The poisoning of the Skripals could very well be a matter of trying to kill two birds (so to speak) in one shot.

Of course we don't know for sure. Likewise, with the bogus suggestion as fact that the Russian government poisoned the Skripals. Given the ongoing lack of UK government disclosure on this incident, there's very good reason to doubt the claim against the Russian government.

Mitleser , August 10, 2018 at 5:51 pm GMT
@Polish Perspective

I think the ultimate endgame can only be to completely run a parallel system. Any compromise with the US is unlikely to give anything than shattered delusions.

Seconded. Washington is too much in love with their sanctions.

It should be borne by the big powers (Russia, India and China) together with an Asian coalition like the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia and others who are not in the US orbit yet have a bright future ahead of them.

What about Turkey?

Dmitry , August 10, 2018 at 5:58 pm GMT
@Kimppis

Also, Russia's federal budget is already based on low oil prices. Then there's

It's up to 50% of the federal budget in recent years, is funded by oil and gas revenue, although in low oil price years the proportion can fall (to lower 40s%).

When the proportion falls, then you are by definition financing a federal budget in other ways, which are usually less politically popular.

You can see unpopularity of announcements to raise VAT or pension age.

Raising pension age (as needs to often be repeated to people) is necessary and reasonable, but raising VAT is a bad thing as in most countries.

Karlin is probably too pessimistic about oil price demand peaking in 2020s (demand for oil probably peaking in the 2030s).

Either way, it's known there need to be economic reforms, reduction of size of government sector, increase in proportion of private sector in many areas, investment in education for future industries.

Mitleser , August 10, 2018 at 6:05 pm GMT
@Dmitry

Aeroflot is about to buy 30 Boeing 737s from America – and now this is in danger.

Aeroflot should cancel the orders and buy the Airbus 320s Iran was supposed to get.

AnonFromTN , August 10, 2018 at 6:07 pm GMT
@Cagey Beast

But they fail to produce the next generation of consumer-citizens. Or is the Western elite so shortsighted? To the level of "après moi le déluge"?

AnonFromTN , August 10, 2018 at 6:09 pm GMT
@Mitleser

Agree. Aeroflot should not buy anything American. Neither should Iran or Syria. The most sensitive part of the US anatomy is the wallet.

Lars Porsena , August 10, 2018 at 6:48 pm GMT
Having Russia go pirate on US copy-rite laws could be interesting. Do you think the US would build a giant firewall and ban it's citizens from viewing Russian content, and could they actually enforce it, or would the internet be just like back in the good old 90′s days with Napsternik?

Russia might even make some headway with Pirate Party types. Information belongs to the people, comrades! Also Russia switching to Linux would probably lead to an increased development of Linux.

g2k , August 10, 2018 at 7:00 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

Looks like these sanctions will force their hand: their new narrowbody airliner was going to have pratt and witney engines with the aviadvigatel ones only for government planes. Not sure what the exact reasons for this were: p&w ones have a slightly higher bypass ratio, it allows international buyers to utilise existing service infrastructure or aviadvigatel's ability to mass produce might be crap. If the us imposes a complete export ban they'll all have to have them.

Russia's current widebody airliner is pretty much obsolete though.

Dmitry , August 10, 2018 at 7:03 pm GMT
Aeroflot had benefited from collapse of Transaero. They're getting 35 planes (all Airbus and Boeing models) from the Transaero fleet and are putting them into Aeroflot fleet this year.

With Boeing, they also had an order of Dreamliners, which they cancelled a few years ago. Although that was just because there was a downturn in long-haul flights. New Boeing 737 orders are for building up their lowcoster "Pobeda".

AnonFromTN , August 10, 2018 at 7:03 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

For that, Russia needs to produce all types of civilian aircraft, like the USSR did. That's hard after the 1990s, when the traitors destroyed Russian aircraft industry. There are moves in the direction of restoring it, in cooperation with China. However, they both need to be able to build aircraft w/o any parts from the US and its vassals. That would take 5-10 years. In fact, US sanctions pushed Russia and China in the direction of self-sufficiency very hard. In Russian it is called "sawing off the bough you sit on". The West is really good at that lately.

reiner Tor , August 10, 2018 at 7:03 pm GMT
@g2k

These sanctions might be a net positive for Russia in the long term, forcing them to develop indigenous industries instead of just importing everything from the oil revenue.

reiner Tor , August 10, 2018 at 7:17 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

Probably working together with China is the easier way, and more feasible economically.

Daniel Chieh , August 10, 2018 at 7:23 pm GMT
@Lars Porsena

Do you think the US would build a giant firewall and ban it's citizens from viewing Russian content, and could they actually enforce it, or would the internet be just like back in the good old 90′s days with Napsternik?

The "free market" of Facebook, Apple, Google and Spotify will protect good Americans from fake news.

El Dato , August 10, 2018 at 7:24 pm GMT
@Lars Porsena

Also Russia switching to Linux would probably lead to an increased development of Linux.

I would finally have a good reason to learn me some Russian.

Thorfinnsson , August 10, 2018 at 7:31 pm GMT
@g2k

Presumably they can still source from Rolls Royce. The UK is a smaller economic power than America and presumably less interested in sabotaging one of its crown jewels (never rule it out with the UK ofc).

Russia's aerospace technology is inferior to the West, but that's irrelevant since Russia can simply force Russian carriers to purchase Russian aircraft. Higher operating costs relative to foreign carriers can be addressed with subsidies (or tariffs).

Prioritizing your own technology also creates the option of charting an independent technological course. For instance, instead of building swept-wing jets with low bypass turbofan engines optimized for transonic cruise, you could build straight-wing aircraft with propfans optimized for low fuel consumption. You can also build supersonic aircraft and experiment with different planforms than the boring one established by the Boeing 707.

Thorfinnsson , August 10, 2018 at 7:34 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

This is already in the works with the CRAIC CR929. Engineering in Moscow, assembly in Shanghai. Will be in service around a decade from now.

German_reader , August 10, 2018 at 7:38 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

It's kind of funny how many Americans feel threatened by Iran. Regarding Russia as a threat at least makes a certain sense given Russia's nuclear arsenal and ability to destroy the US.

Felix Keverich , August 10, 2018 at 7:45 pm GMT
@Mitleser

Every time Medvedev opens his mouth, he makes me cringe. Seriously, if you're going to proclaim an "economic war", against USA no less, then you better explain how Russia is going to fight back and win. Smart Russians will be heading to currency exchange ( обменный пункт ) after hearing this statement.

reiner Tor , August 10, 2018 at 7:58 pm GMT
@The Scalpel

More fuel consumption than is usual with modern aircraft, noisier passenger cabin, more external noise (also important for some airports with regulations restricting noisy aircraft), less safety, etc.

It's just not competitive to operate them. Airlines have very low margins anyway, you cannot make a profit with obsolete aircrafts.

Mitleser , August 10, 2018 at 8:50 pm GMT
@German_reader

On the other hand, the Islamic Republic of Iran is ideologically far more committed to anti-Americanism than the RF.

Mitleser , August 10, 2018 at 8:53 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

if you're going to proclaim an "economic war", against USA no less, then you better explain how Russia is going to fight back and win.

Sun Tzu would disagree. Why let the enemy know what you are planning to do?

Dmitry , August 10, 2018 at 9:50 pm GMT
@The Scalpel

There are a couple of new planes which Aeroflot is going to buy/buying for shorthaul – Superjet 100 and MC-21. Karlin was blogging about these planes a few weeks ago.

Airtickets are a freemarket, and most passengers don't want to fly in unsafe old planes like Tu-154

A single crash can be even fatal for an airline – crash of an An-148 has earlier this year, destroyed Saratov Airlines

As a customer, I don't think there is any disgrace in buying Boeing and Airbus. All major airlines now, and around the world, are using mainly Airbus and Boeing, and have now retired the Tu-154.

Gerard2 , August 10, 2018 at 9:52 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

There is no way to sugarcoat it: in the short to medium term sanctions will suppress Russian economic growth

AND also Ukraine's, Moldova's, Georgia's, the Baltics and the friendly countries like Armenia, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan etcetera. If anything the US's moron, scumbag policy towards Russia ends up doing the exact opposite of what it intends to do Ukraine, Moldova, Gerogia and Baltics then become more financially interlinked and even dependent on Russia than they were before.

But in the circumstances ..is guaranteed 1% or 1.5% GDP growth per year for the next decade even that bad considering the circumstances? Every social/infrastructure element is improving in Russia

Felix Keverich , August 10, 2018 at 10:08 pm GMT
@Mitleser

The enemy is probably laughing his ass off at Medvedev. One simply should NOT be making such statements as a prime-minister of Russia. Here is another fool, who doesn't understand currency markets:

Gerard2 , August 10, 2018 at 10:13 pm GMT
@Dmitry

You can see unpopularity of announcements to raise VAT or pension age.

It's fake outrage and fake unpopularity on these two issues. 18% increased to 20% is a non-issue ( the budget is being spent significantly better than ever to offset this increase in VAT)

A lot of nonsense about "long overdue" get's said about pension reform but this is total BS. Yes Russia has 48 million out of 146 million as pensioners, but the most important thing is the unexpected , way above average increase in life expectancy . that has actually instigated this move by the authorities.

Those approaching retirement won't suddenly have to work 1-5 years longer they can still opt-in to the current arrangements in the overlapping period.. and with guarantees pension increased much further to corresponding inflation levels than now.

Either way, it's known there need to be economic reforms

Disagree with this .the same patterns that have been shown in the last 4 years need to continue, no radical "reform" is necessary. Small and medium sized business have gone from 10 million to 20 million people and should easily reach the target in afew years time that the President wished for in May,credit behavior and availability is becoming more and more western,

Instead of saying "reduction in size of government sector" you must specify exactly which areas of state control should be privatised .too often from liberasts their focus is solely on getting state control off critically important energy resources and distribution .nothing else.

Cyrano , August 10, 2018 at 10:45 pm GMT
Americans see the Russians as greatness deniers. Their European lackeys are their greatness-acknowledgers – even when it's detrimental to their own survival.

If the world was a theater, Americans see themselves as the only performers – the role of the rest of the world is to applaud their performance.

Russia is not a part of the audience, it's not even a heckler. It's a performer, it has always been, and a very talented one too. To try to demote them to the role of spectators, or to try to usher them out of the concert hall can be suicidal, they have enough musical instruments to put on a remarkable concert – even if afterwards no one is left to applaud.

Mitleser , August 10, 2018 at 10:58 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

One simply should NOT be making such statements as a prime-minister of Russia.

What statements should the PM make?

Anonymous [899] Disclaimer , August 10, 2018 at 11:12 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

Yes we can.

https://www.businessinsider.com/mouse-grown-from-its-mothers-skin-cells-2016-10

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2109305-eggs-made-from-skin-cells-in-lab-could-herald-end-of-infertility/

Daniel Chieh , August 10, 2018 at 11:31 pm GMT
@Anonymous

Mice and humans are quite different, results applying to mice apply to humans less than 50% of the time. The loss rates on this, at any rate, are insane:

Of the 1348 embryos they made, eight pups were born.

Anonymous [931] Disclaimer , August 11, 2018 at 12:16 am GMT
@Daniel Chieh

Every beginning is hard. Considering that all the cutting edge research in fertility/cloning/artificial wombs is done on shoestring budgets, the progress is amazing. Imagine what could be done with sufficient funding.

Our esteemed host have the right idea – the only chance for Russia to achieve its rightful number one place in the world is through new Manhattan project to develop better Russians.
The West is stymied by the "pro-lifers" of the right and "bioethicists" of the left, and this is Russia's chance. Unlike the origial M project, Russians can keep things secret, and even if the West will suspect something, what can they do? Impose sanctions?

In the thirties, ignorant Caucasian moustacheoid gangster picked the Lysenkoists over the scientifically correct Darwinist transhumanist eugenicists. Time to undo this mistake.

utu , August 11, 2018 at 12:37 am GMT
@Anonymous

Our esteemed host have the right idea – the only chance for Russia to achieve its rightful number one place in the world is through new Manhattan project to develop better Russians.

And it will have as much impact on the outcome of the looming confrontation as the Mengele's research had on the outcome of the WWII.

utu , August 11, 2018 at 2:01 am GMT
@Polish Perspective

He's also even more of a neoliberal. Notice a pattern?

The west has no qualms about using Islamist. Radical Islam has been used in 1950s against Nasser's regime in Egypt. Islamist were used against secular pro Soviet regime of Afghanistan and then against Assad's Syria, Hussain's Iraq and Gaddafi's Libya. The equation is complicate: on one side you have Israel's Yinon Plan and global neoliberal and Islamists and on the other side you have secular national countries that try to build greater sovereignty and stronger state.

Majority of Islamist are just useful idiots while some among the leadership are operatives of western security services. Sometimes they break off the leash like Hamas which it does not seem to be controlled by Mossad anymore but it still does everything from the wish list of Israel's hard-liners.

My pet theory is that Islamist of Iran who destroyed the fast growing and developing Iran of Shah were also used by some foreign interests in the west and/or Israel. Shah himself believed it was the British.

You should look at history of your own country in 19 and 20 century. To what extent all those patriots responsible for numerous and hopeless uprisings were useful idiots, dupes or operatives of foreign interests?

Mr. XYZ , August 11, 2018 at 2:09 am GMT
Question about the Skripal poisoning–if it wasn't the Russians, then who did it?

Also, it's interesting that Sergei Skripal's poisoning has resulted in much more Western action than Alexander Litvinenko's poisoning back in 2006 did.

Colin Wright , Website August 11, 2018 at 3:00 am GMT
' The biggest impact from the initial sanctions is expected to come from a ban on granting licenses to export sensitive national security goods to Russia, which in the past have included items like electronic devices and components, along with test and calibration equipment for avionics. Prior to the sanctions, such exports were allowed on a case-by-case basis. '

Now they'll have to pay the Israelis to get it for them. Does this count as aid to Israel?

Colin Wright , Website August 11, 2018 at 3:04 am GMT
If, without admitting guilt, Russia expressed her regret for the fact that Donald Trump won the election, would that open the door to a settlement?
Colin Wright , Website August 11, 2018 at 3:07 am GMT
@Felix Keverich

' Americans view Russia as a greater threat than Iran '

I can go along with that. Russia's a greater threat than Togo as well.

Anon [813] Disclaimer , August 11, 2018 at 3:39 am GMT
@German_reader

I am always puzzled to hear that lesbians require artificial insemination. I had a couple of friends who were a bit behind schedule, and were trying hard to conceive just before the last eggs would wither. Whatever they were doing, taking days off from work when the thermometer said so, shoving it at any price, and so on – it could not be described as pleasurable. So why would the lesbians not bear it if they so much need children?

On a more general note, I am puzzled as to how USSR survived between 1945 and 1989 without fainting at the thought that Americans would not recognize annexation of the Baltic jokes, that Russians would not be allowed to use dollars, or that Pokemon Go could be blocked in the Russian app store. Surely, if you have a population of idiots, like USSR circa 1989, who would think that it's their ow government blocking the dollar and Pikachu, it may gnaw at the roots of the state. But today's Russians can guess that with Putin or without him, with Crimea or without it, they are still seen as enemies of America, and will be treated accordingly.

utu , August 11, 2018 at 4:08 am GMT
@Anon

New state provision would cover fertility services for lower income women

https://nypost.com/2017/04/16/new-state-provision-would-cover-fertility-services-for-lower-income-women/

Conservatives pilloried the program, which sources said is a gift to an Orthodox Jewish community that has pressed for government-paid fertility services for 15 years.

Orthodox leaders called the budget measure a "significant victory" for women struggling to have kids in a community that traditionally values large families.

"This amendment will make it easier for women who would like to have children to do so," said Jeff Leb, a top lobbyist for Jewish nonprofits.

anonymous coward , August 11, 2018 at 7:25 am GMT
@Anonymous

scientifically correct Darwinist

Darwinism violates basic laws of probability theory and the observed fossil record.

It's a nice just-so story for the innumerate (most biologists are innumerate), but not in any way, shape or form science.

anonymous coward , August 11, 2018 at 7:28 am GMT
@Mr. XYZ

if it wasn't the Russians, then who did it?

Guilty until proven innocent? Don't open that Pandora's box. You're gleefully piling on the Russians now, but give a few years and the same gang might apply that principle to you in turn. Just because they hate Russians at this moment doesn't mean they hold any love for the rest of humanity.

Bukephalos , August 11, 2018 at 8:28 am GMT
@Polish Perspective

Brunson's captivity had dragged for quite long already, and we heard negotiations for his release made some progress before. However, Trump ramped up the rhetoric at a precise moment: when Turkey announced they would not only shirk new Iran sanctions (like they did in the past) but also were being vocal about this.

Seeing what ensued, again yes the S-400 was an irritant for a while already and certainly cumulate with other factors but the timeline is interesting. God forbid we conclude those who should not be named are ultimately setting the agenda here, not really the pastor's plight under islamist thugs.

Mikhail , Website August 11, 2018 at 8:45 am GMT
@Mr. XYZ

You could do a better job at reading this thread. See:

http://www.unz.com/akarlin/russia-sanctions/#comment-2458139

Excerpt –

On CNN, the establishment alternative academic Robert English hypothesized that elements in the Russian government might've poisoned the Skripals without Putin's prior knowledge. He leaves out another possibility, in line with US mass media restrictions. In the UK, there're Russian ex pats, who quarrel among themselves, in addition to not liking the Russian government. The poisoning of the Skripals could very well be a matter of trying to kill two birds (so to speak) in one shot.

Of course we don't know for sure. Likewise, with the bogus suggestion as fact that the Russian government poisoned the Skripals. Given the ongoing lack of UK government disclosure on this incident, there's very good reason to doubt the claim against the Russian government.

As for the Litvinenko matter you bring up, there's good reason to believe that he somehow got poisoned by a source other than a Russian government act. His Italian friend got arrested for arms smuggling and was also infected with polonium. Litvinenko was said to be sympathetic to Chechen separatism. These factors and his links to the likes of Goldfarb and Berezovsky suggest a source other than the Russian government.

reiner Tor , August 11, 2018 at 9:05 am GMT
@anonymous coward

That's wrong, except about the innumeracy of the majority of biologists. Evolutionary biologists are less innumerate than the rest, and in any event, enough of them are numerate (like Greg Cochran with a physics PhD).

anonymous coward , August 11, 2018 at 9:29 am GMT
@reiner Tor

[MORE]

That's wrong

It isn't. I'm a professional, trust me.

Evolutionary biologists are less innumerate than the rest, and in any event, enough of them are numerate (like Greg Cochran with a physics PhD).

Physicists are trained in integrals and analysis, they know nothing about probability theory, statistics and theoretical computer science. These are the fields required to form a semblance of a mathematical theory of evolution.

(A theory that will never be formed, because Darwinism violates the very basic theorems of probability and computation.)

anon [170] Disclaimer , August 11, 2018 at 9:40 am GMT
Sanctions are more or less equivalent to Neo Mercantilism. Currency devalued, imports surpassed, etc.

Last round led to Russian agriculture boom.

The US would not tolerate a sanctions equivalent industrial policy, Nr would the Russian people.

Just call it better than tariffs,

Never before have unintended consequences been so obvious.

utu , August 11, 2018 at 9:49 am GMT
@anonymous coward

[MORE]

Could you give an example of some probabilities? How do you calculate them and with what assumptions?

At resent article by Fred Reed the commenter "j2″ produced some numbers but I was too lazy and not certain that his starting assumptions were correct to verify it.

The Scalpel , Website August 11, 2018 at 10:22 am GMT
@Mr. XYZ

If it wasn't the British, or ISIS, or the Martians, who did it?

Jaakko Raipala , August 11, 2018 at 10:55 am GMT
@anonymous coward

Physicists are trained in integrals and analysis, they know nothing about probability theory, statistics and theoretical computer science. These are the fields required to form a semblance of a mathematical theory of evolution.

Such complete bullshit. Probability and statistics are absolutely key for modern physics and an education in theoretical physics is definitely the best route to train in the practical applications, better than going to the mathematics department where they mainly deal with abstract theory. You clearly know nothing beyond high school level physics (or anything else for that matter).

Some fields of modern physics like thermodynamics ARE basically just pure probability theory applied to physical phenomena. If you take a random sample of research physicists from your local university, they're much more likely to be doing statistical mechanics rather than trying to find analytical solutions for their n-body problem and some application of probability is usually the most important field of mathematics for working physicists.

Mr. Hack , August 11, 2018 at 11:11 am GMT
@Mikhail

You're right again about the Litvinenko conspiracy, Mickey. The notion that the Russian government would want to eliminate somebody who had betrayed its secret service, written books denouncing Vladimir Putin for giving the order to murder the likes of Boris Bereszvsky, Anna Polikovskaya and others, accused the secret service of being behind the bombings of the Russian apartment buildings, just doesn't add up or make any sense. The fact that Litvinenko, while lying on his death bed directly accused Putin for being responsible for his death also didn't lend any value that it was indeed Putin behind his poisoning. It just goes to show you the lengths to which the enemies of Russia and Vladimir Putin will go to try and besmearch Putin's honorable name. But they'll never be able to fool somebody with your veracity and skillul analysis – keep up the great 'independent foreign analysis'!

Anatoly Karlin , Website August 11, 2018 at 11:20 am GMT
@Jaakko Raipala

anonymous coward makes it a point of pride to be as consistently wrong as possible.

Mr. Hack , August 11, 2018 at 11:27 am GMT
@Mr. Hack

Litvinenko was said to be sympathetic to Chechen separatism.

I wasn't aware of this and am glad that you pointed this out. Another incredibly strong reason not to believe that the Russian government was behind the Litvinenko poisoning. Isn't it time that you wrote a book, Mickey? I know that other book authors regularly rely on your input to write their own monographs, isn't it time that you put it all together and shared more of your thoughts with the world? Perhaps, Karlin might let you write a chapter in his forthcoming book 'The Dark Lord of the Kremlin'?

APilgrim , August 11, 2018 at 11:33 am GMT
'Russia-Sanctions' are pitiful ' Double-Standards ', written by ' Frustrated Globalists '.
Felix Keverich , August 11, 2018 at 1:30 pm GMT
Anyone wants to comment on this bizarre diplomatic spat, that Greece and Russia are having?

The abrupt deterioration in relations between Greece and Russia has intensified after Athens publicly accused Moscow of attempting to bribe state officials and meddle in the country's internal affairs.

Athens also rejected requests for entry visas from Russian Orthodox clerics heading for northern Greece's all-male monastic republic of Mount Athos.

The community is alleged to be a "den of spies" , with reports that Moscow has turned the Holy Mount – widely seen as the spiritual centre of Orthodoxy – into an intelligence-gathering operation with extensive funding of monasteries across the peninsula.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/11/greece-accuses-russia-bribery-meddling-macedonia-deal

Personally, I'm not sure what to make of it. Greece could be trying to secure some debt relief by manufacturing a pointless row with Russia. Their PM Tsipras did come to Russia in 2015, asking for money. Left with nothing.

anonymous coward , August 11, 2018 at 1:59 pm GMT
@Jaakko Raipala

[MORE]

Probability and statistics are absolutely key for modern physics and an education in theoretical physics is definitely the best route to train in the practical applications, better than going to the mathematics department where they mainly deal with abstract theory.

Untighten your panties. That was my point, which you managed to miss by blindly charging to M'Lady Science's defense.

Any scientific theory of evolution will have to be about information entropy, computational complexity and asymptotic properties of stochastic processes. That's exactly the "abstract theory" you're deriding.

The practical stuff physicists are using for solving practical, well-defined problems is useless here.

anonymous coward , August 11, 2018 at 2:20 pm GMT
@utu

[MORE]

Some quick back-of-the-napkin calculations:

* Age of the universe is about 10^18 seconds.
* The "Planck time" gives us the smallest possible unit of time, about 10^-45 seconds.
* There are about 10^82 atoms in the Universe.

Now assume an ideal computer. Let each atom of the Universe be a CPU, operating as fast as physics allows.

That gives us an upper bound of 10^(18+45+82) = 10^145 CPU cycles for computation.

Now take Shakespeare's sonnet #27. It is 458 letters long. (Let's ignore punctuation.)

If we take 458 random letters of the English alphabet, there are 26^458 random combinations.

So if our ideal Universe-sized computer was randomly picking letters and hoping to compose a Shakespeare sonnet, it would need about 10^300 Universes to do so.

How much more complex is an E. Coli cell compared to a sonnet?

P.S. This is obvious, freshman-tier stuff unless you're blinded by ideology.

Mr. Hack , August 11, 2018 at 2:34 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

What' s to make of it? The article that you cite clearly explains what the row is all about:

Moscow announced the move weeks after Athens banned four Russian diplomats after accusing them of fomenting opposition to a landmark deal between Greece and macedonia, opening up the possibility of eventual Nato membership for Skopje.

Your own bizarre explanation betrays your own Russian reasoning:

Personally, I'm not sure what to make of it. Greece could be trying to secure some debt relief by manufacturing a pointless row with Russia. Their PM Tsipras did come to Russia in 2015, asking for money. Left with nothing.

Mitleser , August 11, 2018 at 2:51 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

My guess is that the Greek government wants to gain a powerful backer against Brüssel.

In Greece, he very often appears in public alongside Kammenos and spreads his political views on what is going on in the country via his Twitter account.

The influence goes so far that Pyatt unchallengedly criticizes the Greek judiciary and demands measures against anti-American demonstrators. Tsipras administration, arguing anti-Americanly itself at opposition times, on the other hand, fulfils every wish of the USA. While on the other side of the Bosphorus NATO partner Turkey is pushing its dispute with the US to the top, Greece's government is the most US-friendly since the overthrow of military rule in July 1974: NATO interests, gas pipelines and the regional influence of the North Atlantic defence alliance.

The coalition government of SYRIZA and the Independent Greeks agreed to the expansion of American military bases in Greece, including the stationing of nuclear weapons. This was not initially communicated to the public by the government, but only became known when the Secretary General of the Communist Party, Dimitris Koutsoubas, criticized it during public performances.

Secret diplomacy, as in the case of NATO, is also a characteristic of the Tsipras government in resolving the name dispute with northern Macedonia and in ongoing negotiations on border corrections with Albania. All negotiations are held in secrecy, with reference to the protection of state interests. There is no detailed information and no transparency regarding the reasons for the decision.

Athens is now providing NATO with the infrastructure for military bases in the event that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan withdraws his country from the North Atlantic Defence Alliance.

https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Russland-weist-griechische-Diplomaten-aus-4130628.html

Translated with http://www.DeepL.com/Translator

Yes, that's is the infamous Pyatt who was ambassador in Kiev during the Maidan Coup.
He has been in Athen since 2016.

The case brings to the forefront the tension that seems to have been brewing between Athens and Moscow over the last two years, for reasons that have to do with regional security.

http://www.ekathimerini.com/230551/article/ekathimerini/news/greece-decides-to-expel-russian-diplomats

reiner Tor , August 11, 2018 at 3:04 pm GMT
@Mitleser

As late as this April Tsipras was still skeptical of the Skripal case.

But yes, probably they want America's friendship.

Sean , August 11, 2018 at 3:12 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

Yeltsin was president when the bombings happened. Putin was only prime minister for a couple of weeks before the tower block bombings happened. Boris Bereszvsky killed himself (exiles are often miserable, Skripal wanted to go back) after Litvinenko, they were a couple of losers. No, Putin is a proud man, he sent the anti terror police to arrest Gusinsky not because of investigation into the apartment massacres of hundreds, but because that puppet show Dolls of Gusinsky's NTV portrayed Putin in a way he hated.

Who wouldn't want to inflict a horrible death on someone who accused them of being a paedophile? Litvinenko accused Putin of being a child molester and so Putin immediately issued orders for him to be sadistically murdered and a month he was poisoned (like apartment bombings, these things take a while to set up).

Felix Keverich , August 11, 2018 at 3:30 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

This brings me back to my point about Hitler & weak, foolish Eastern Europeans. Greek government is only behaving this way because it sees no risks in antagonising Russians whatsoever. Slapping sanctions on Greece (by banning tourism for example) might get them thinking.

Anatoly Karlin , Website August 11, 2018 at 3:42 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

One thing I saw is that they dislike Russia's support for replacing Greeks with Palestinians in the Orthodox Church in Israel.

https://www.facebook.com/pakopov/posts/1975263482518921

Israel Shamir had an article on that, interestingly enough: http://www.unz.com/ishamir/the-greek-occupation/

Mitleser , August 11, 2018 at 3:44 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

No sanctions, just encourage the tourism branch to redirect Russian tourists to Turkey which can offer them more for less.

https://www.xe.com/de/currencycharts/?from=RUB&to=TRY&view=5Y

Mr. Hack , August 11, 2018 at 3:49 pm GMT
@Sean

Look, I'm not passing judgement on the veracity of these accusations, that Litvinenko made against Putler. I see that you've added another one to the list, that Litvinenko accused Putler of being a pedophile too. All I was pointing out was that there were many reasons why Litvinenko was a target for unfriendly Rusian actions, not like our resident 'Independent foreign Policy Analyst' Mike Averko who claims:

As for the Litvinenko matter you bring up, there's good reason to believe that he somehow got poisoned by a source other than a Russian government act.

Of course, he's a professional analytical type that always knows what he's talking about?

Sean , August 11, 2018 at 4:05 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

Greece was told it had to join NATO to be allowed into the EU.

German_reader , August 11, 2018 at 4:11 pm GMT
@Sean

Greece has been a member of NATO since 1952, it joined the European Community in 1981.
It's odd though that a Greek leftist like Tsipras is pro-American, given the strong anti-American traditions of Greek left-wingers. But Tsipras seems to be an all-around scumbag anyway.

JudyBlumeSussman , August 11, 2018 at 4:19 pm GMT

how deeply Russia falls into China's orbit in the next couple of decades

Russia can start taking China's side on an ad hoc basis, e.g. sending ships to the disputed sea and hassling US ships and planes. Russia could hassle them on the Northern half and China on the Southern half, a nice division of labor and multiplication of hassle for the US Navy.

Dmitry , August 11, 2018 at 4:20 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

You can read statements of their foreign ministry.

His statements to do with paranoia about Russian-Turkey relations – statement from Greece was claiming Russia is a "comrade in arms with Turkey".

If Greece is angry about something, it is usually related to Turkey.

As Russia becomes friendly with Turkey – they will find an excuse to be angry, and vice-versa.

Think about Trump is this week criticizing Turkey – so he is probably now a hero in Greece this week.

Greeks are also angry because they think Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society is trying to de-Hellenize Middle Eastern patriarchates .

Philip Owen , August 11, 2018 at 4:22 pm GMT
Russia has enough chicken legs of its own now. They are not washed in chlorine.

Disengagement will simply remove what little influence the US has on Russia. Russia's exports are utterly dominated by primary production which is entirely fungible. The US exports little of high added to Russia and the EU and Switzerland, Korea and increasingly China can replace that. Japan probably won't. Russia has been trying to play a softer game with Japan but both sides true imperialist nature keeps on re-emerging. Like the US, Japan has remarkably low levels of trade with Russia given the size of its economy. Switzerland does a lot of high end complex electromechanical systems, like the Germans. The Germans are good; The Swiss are perfect.

Dmitry , August 11, 2018 at 4:59 pm GMT
@Mitleser

I'm not really sure how low prices for Turkey can become lower. It's already very cheap.

Maybe further devaluation can contribute to the tourist market diverging more between Greece and Turkey. More and more poorer people will go on holiday to Turkey, as it becomes almost as cheap to go on holiday in Turkey, as it is to stay at home.

Maybe Greece can focus more on middle segment of the tourist market.

Sean , August 11, 2018 at 5:07 pm GMT
@German_reader

Greece had withdrawn from the NATO military structure after the invasion of Cyprus by fellow member Turkey. If I remember rightly it was their own PM who told Greeks they had to go back into NATO to be allowed to join the EC.

Jaakko Raipala , August 11, 2018 at 5:24 pm GMT
@anonymous coward

Any scientific theory of evolution will have to be about information entropy, computational complexity and asymptotic properties of stochastic processes. That's exactly the "abstract theory" you're deriding.

Bullshit. I have a pretty good education in probability theory both from the theoretical physics and mathematics departments so feel free to explain whatever point you think you have in as technical terms and with as much abstract math as you like.

I'm just going to claim that you're trying an "it doesn't work because of fancy words X, Y, Z" bluff without any actual technical argument behind the big fancy words. Prove me wrong.

anon [170] Disclaimer , August 11, 2018 at 5:41 pm GMT
@anon

It will have a negative impact on domestic Russian consumption short term. It's stupid, short sighted, and hard to reverse. Sanctions work best when used least.

German_reader , August 11, 2018 at 5:44 pm GMT
@Sean

I hadn't known about Greece's withdrawal from NATO in the 1970s, interesting, thanks.

Jaakko Raipala , August 11, 2018 at 5:48 pm GMT
@anonymous coward

* Age of the universe is about 10^18 seconds.

"Age of the universe" is a pop sci concept. In the standard model of cosmology it is estimated that the universe has developed from a massively dense state to the current state in roughly 13 billion years. We can backtrack the development over that time with current theories of physics and then we hit a wall as matter is so dense that we'd need a quantum theory of gravity to go further back in time but we don't have that. We don't know how long the universe existed before that, actually we don't even know if time existed in the same manner. The earliest known state of the universe was NOT informationless (there were variations in mass distribution etc) so your assumption that patterns would emerge only in the following 13 billion years is false.

[MORE]

If you watch some pop sci documentary, they will explain all sorts of stuff about how the universe was at first some tiny point and there was a big explosion that spread it all over. This is all nonsense that was made up so that pop sci documentaries could have CGI graphics.

* The "Planck time" gives us the smallest possible unit of time, about 10^-45 seconds.

There is no such thing as the "smallest possible unit of time". This is complete nonsense. You seem to get your knowledge of physics from science fiction movies.

There is an expectation that current theories of physics are not accurate at very small time scales (which have not been reached by experiment). This is not the same thing as postulating that there is some "smallest possible unit of time". Current theories of physics simply do not include such a thing.

* There are about 10^82 atoms in the Universe.

We don't even know if the universe is finite or infinite. This is just a claim that you pulled out of your ass. There may even be an infinite number of atoms.

AnonFromTN , August 11, 2018 at 5:51 pm GMT
@Dmitry

Turks are a lot more orderly and competent than Greeks. In fact, I was surprised how much more organized Turks are: we rented a car in Ankara near railway station and returned it in another city near airport, and they delivered the car where we wanted it and then took it off my hands, without car rental agency at either point.

For Russians, there are two additional advantages: no visa is required (you just pay $20 at the airport, and they stick what they call "visa" in your passport), and the same services are cheaper than in Greece.

ploni almoni , August 11, 2018 at 6:10 pm GMT
@anonymous coward

"Any scientific theory of evolution will have to be about information entropy, computational complexity and asymptotic properties of stochastic processes. That's exactly the "abstract theory" you're deriding."

Phony Baloney.

Mikhail , Website August 11, 2018 at 6:18 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

Empty calories sarcasm on your part.

The US went thru a period of noticeable politically motivated violence (in one form or another), that among other things included the murders of the Kennedy brothers, King, X, black children in a church, fatal Kent State shootings and the Manson involved murders.

There was absolutely no need for the Russian government to orchestrate the Moscow apartment bombings. The evidence is non-existent, with the so-called evidence being a put mildly creative stretch. On par with the idea that the US government sought and was involved in planning 9/11. Terrorism from Chechnya was a clear reality before the Moscow apartment bombings.

Mikhail , Website August 11, 2018 at 6:28 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

A disingenuous cherry pick on your part, along with empty calories sarcasm. It wasn't only his (as has been said) sympathy for Chechen separatism, but a combination of factors, in conjunction with that aspect.

What I said in full on this matter:

As for the Litvinenko matter you bring up, there's good reason to believe that he somehow got poisoned by a source other than a Russian government act. His Italian friend got arrested for arms smuggling and was also infected with polonium. Litvinenko was said to be sympathetic to Chechen separatism. These factors and his links to the likes of Goldfarb and Berezovsky suggest a source other than the Russian government.

Mikhail , Website August 11, 2018 at 6:33 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

Much unlike your svido trolling ways, which include mis-informative cherry picks, designed to spin an otherwise faulty impression.

In comparison, there's better reason to be critical of the Kiev regime's stunt with Babchenko.

Spisarevski , August 11, 2018 at 6:39 pm GMT
It's a pity that the good things Macedonia is doing (like fixing its relations with Bulgaria and Greece and starting to slowly accept the real history as opposed to the shit made up by the Serbs, the communists and Tito) are all done for such a shitty reason like entering the EU and NATO.
Simpleguest , August 11, 2018 at 6:42 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

"Turks are a lot more orderly and competent than Greeks."

Hear, hear.

Mitleser , August 11, 2018 at 6:46 pm GMT
@Dmitry

Greece has an inferior tourist industry and plenty of great European competition (Spain, Italy, Croatia etc.)
Thanks to Cyprus, you don't even to travel to Greece if you want to be on vacation in a Greek-speaking country.

Mr. Hack , August 11, 2018 at 7:40 pm GMT
@Mikhail

'Svido cherry picking'?

Stick to the facts and do not reply back with your monotonous drum of often recited BS when you don't have a credible reply, Mickey!

I was specifically pointing out the paucity of information that you provided regarding your alternative suggestion that somebody other than Russian backed was responsible for Livinenko's demise. As I've already pointed out, I do not pass judgments on any of the aspersions that Litvinenko made against Putler, only that the smoking gun clearly points towards Moscow. If you've got something better, then present it I'd try something more clever than indicating that Litvinenko was in favor of Chechen separatists.

Mr. Hack , August 11, 2018 at 7:52 pm GMT
@Mikhail

Much unlike your svido trolling ways, which include mis-informative cherry picks, designed to spin an otherwise faulty impression.

Whoa, what do we have here? Another genuine ' Averkoism '??

You indicate that I ' include mis-informative cherry picks' to spin an otherwise faulty impression. Why yes, I guess that's what I can be contrued doing. Most impressions that you make are faulty' ' and deserve to be rebuked, don't you think? I think that what you meant to say was that:

Much unlike your svido trolling ways, which include mis-informative cherry picks, designed to spin an otherwise accurate impression.

Mickey, you don't really want to be remembered for making 'faulty impressions ' now do you?

Cyrano , August 11, 2018 at 8:37 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

I have to agree with Mikhail here. I think that Litvinenko affair was like a dress-rehearsal for the most famous, daring and successful spy operation in history – the Babchenko affair.

You see, such a stunning operation like that takes years to perfect and for the Ukrainians Litvinenko was just a guinea pig on whom they tested their secret intelligence (OK, intelligence might be a stretch) operations skills.

And Litvinenko was an easy choice, the Ukrainians were sure that because of his background – it will be blamed on the Russians.

Nevertheless, this doesn't take anything away from the professionalism and mastery that Ukrainians displayed when they designed the Babchenko hoax. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Babchenko success story launches a new series of spy novels – maybe about agent 008 – where 008 is the IQ of the agent.

ThreeCranes , August 11, 2018 at 8:49 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

My take too rT. Economic warfare will not play out against Russia today as it did against Japan and Germany in the 1930′s; because while they were energy dependent, Russia has an abundance of oil and can and will–as you say–bootstrap its own industries inso far as they are able. They don't have to develop a surplus to trade since, like the USA 100 years ago, their population is sufficiently large to support a robust internal market.

Also, this entire analysis (and the Saker's discussions of weapons as well) ignores Russia's bigger concern, 1.2 billion Chinese wielding state of the art weaponry, who would love to bite off some big chunks of a weakened Russia for lebensraum.

Felix Keverich , August 11, 2018 at 9:59 pm GMT
@Dmitry

You can read statements of their foreign ministry.

His statements to do with paranoia about Russian-Turkey relations – statement from Greece was claiming Russia is a "comrade in arms with Turkey".

As Russia becomes friendly with Turkey – they will find an excuse to be angry, and vice-versa.

I feel that this is one of those situations, when you need to read between the lines. Turkey, religion and "meddling" ARE excuses for Greece. Trying to please Greece's creditors is the real issue here. It's a literal crackwhore of a nation, living from one tranche to another.

Hyperborean , August 11, 2018 at 10:02 pm GMT
@ThreeCranes

Also, this entire analysis (and the Saker's discussions of weapons as well) ignores Russia's bigger concern, 1.2 billion Chinese wielding state of the art weaponry, who would love to bite off some big chunks of a weakened Russia for lebensraum.

This is implausible, for reasons that have been discussed multiple times here, including recently.

Thorfinnsson , August 11, 2018 at 10:03 pm GMT
@ThreeCranes

China isn't a threat to Russia at present for many reasons.

See my comment on this: http://www.unz.com/akarlin/kissinger-sees-sense-but-its-far-too-late/#comment-2456313

The idea that the Chinese will move to seize Siberia is a ridiculous fantasy.

China and Russia already in the 1990s peacefully resolved all of their outstanding border issues.

China suffers from below replacement fertility and solved its food security issues in the 1980s, so the era of "Yellow Peril" population pressure belongs to the distant past. And in any case the Russian Far East is useless for agricultural purposes.

There are indeed some minerals in Siberia, but let's review some economic facts about China:

#1 exporter
#1 forex reserve holder
#2 creditor nation
#6 gold reserve holder

China can buy all the resources it needs. The main threat to China's economic security are the naval and air forces of the United States and Japan, and to a lesser extent the US Treasury and Commerce Departments. Expanding into Siberia does exactly zero to counter any of these threats, unless you think the Port of Vladivostok somehow enables the PLA-N to break out into the open Pacific.

Instead it multiplies these threats by pointlessly adding Russia to its enemies and eliminating the possibility of overland trade substituting for seaborne trade.

China is a security threat to Siberia only once the following are true:

1 – USA abandons Western Pacific in favor of hemispheric security
2 – China secures dominance over Second Island Chain
3 – China replaces USA as lynch pin of global financial (as opposed to just economic) system

And given China's cautious attitude, that might not be enough. For instance, a USA focused on hemispheric security would still be viewed as potentially dangerous by China owing to its blue water navy and dominance of the "Third Island Chain".

If China displaces the USA as the world's preeminent power, then there might be some cause for concern. But even then I'm not so sure–Russia would be Canada to China's America. The USA and Canada have had very good relations since the 1930s.

Lebensraum with Chinese Characteristics is not going to happen.

That's not to say everything will be hunky dory in Russian-Chinese relations. There are areas of friction like:

• Influence in Central Asia
• Chinese IP theft
• North Korea
• Japan
• Near Abroad
• Competition for defense and nuclear exports

The CRAIC CR929 project looks great for now, but the gist of it is that while it's designed in Russia it will be made in China. Once China matches Russia in aerospace technology, what is Russia's role in this partnership? Seems like the most likely outcome is that Russian industry is reduced from producing aircraft to merely being a Tier One supplier and, perhaps, an engine supplier.

Will Russia be happy with that? I don't know. The UK decided to accept being reduced to this status after the commercial failure of its innovative but flawed postwar airliners cheerfully enough I suppose. Japan considered but decided against developing a complete aerospace-industrial base, though this may be changing (MHI Regional Jet, Kawasaki P1, MHI X-2 Shinden).

Mikhail , Website August 11, 2018 at 10:05 pm GMT
@Cyrano

He's a svido troll as evidenced by his ongoing distortions and omissions, which include not having a good comeback to the following:

As for the Litvinenko matter you bring up, there's good reason to believe that he somehow got poisoned by a source other than a Russian government act. His Italian friend got arrested for arms smuggling and was also infected with polonium. Litvinenko was said to be sympathetic to Chechen separatism. These factors and his links to the likes of Goldfarb and Berezovsky suggest a source other than the Russian government.

Never mind the impracticality of the Russian government using something like polonium to bump someone off, when there're effectively cheaper ways of doing such.

Mr. Hack , August 11, 2018 at 10:08 pm GMT
@Cyrano

So, do you have even one shred of any evidence linking the poisoning of Litvinenko with the Ukrainian secret service? If not, I wouldn't spend too much time writing your novel about 008 and Babchenko, unless you intend it for an audience of only one gullible reader, Michael Averko!

Mr. Hack , August 11, 2018 at 10:19 pm GMT
@Mikhail

His ' Italian friend '? Were they fishing buddies where somebody got jealous of their 'friendship' and decided to take the Italian out? Could've been another Russian job too?

Litvinenko was said to be sympathetic to Chechen separatism.

Now, this is really stupid, I think that even you'll have to admit Mickey. Are we to believe that because Litvinenko was sympathetic to Chechen separatism, that this somehow made him impervious to any sort of Russian assault? Please explain this one to me!

Never mind the impracticality of the Russian government using something like polonium to bump someone off, when there're effectively cheaper ways of doing such.

Well, somebody was responsible for this ill advised murder, and did so in this grotesque and over the top manner. Why not the Russians, are they somehow smarter than the rest? If Russia wasn't full of fools, why are they circumvented by the world community with unnecessary and embarrasing sanctions, anyway? Besides, as I've already pointed out, there were many reasons why the Kremlin wanted Litvinenko gone.

Mikhail , Website August 11, 2018 at 10:37 pm GMT

Well, somebody was responsible for this ill advised murder, and did so in this grotesque and over the top manner. Why not the Russians, are they somehow smarter than the rest?

Why Litvinenko himself, albeit (if true) in a possible unintended way. No proof that the Rusisan government did him in. No need to reply anymore to your rehashed trolling tripe.

Still no good answer to:

As for the Litvinenko matter you bring up, there's good reason to believe that he somehow got poisoned by a source other than a Russian government act. His Italian friend got arrested for arms smuggling and was also infected with polonium. Litvinenko was said to be sympathetic to Chechen separatism. These factors and his links to the likes of Goldfarb and Berezovsky suggest a source other than the Russian government.

Dmitry , August 11, 2018 at 10:42 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

Theory that it is to do with creditors, doesn't make much sense.

Creditors (troika) are European fund – mainly Germany, France and Italy, in order. Followed by IMF and ECB.

Criteria for release of funds is economic criteria, that imply they might one day get their money back.

Greece's foreign policy is not of interest to anyone much (Turkey care about them), especially not accountants.

-

Reason for tensions with Greece, are the new relations with Turkey.

An alternative world, with a solvent Greece, they would be more angry, than currently weak, insolvent one – considering sale of S-400 to Turkey, construction of Akkuyu for Turkey, and recent decision for Turkstream.

Turkstream was always supposed to go to Greece, but two months ago, finally announced it's going to Bulgaria (with no mention of Greece).

https://www.reuters.com/article/russia-gas-bulgaria/update-1-bulgaria-says-will-be-entry-point-for-russian-turkstream-gas-link-idUSL5N1T16DI

For Turkstream it's now option if it needs to go to Greece at all – it could also reach Italy, via the Balkans.

In a Northern option that gets to Hungary and Italy over Serbia. (With no need of Greece).

At the same time, Israel, Cyprus and Greece are probably building a rival pipeline (probably not very economically rational), after Cyprus has discovered a gas field.

https://business.financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/cyprus-israel-greece-push-east-med-gas-pipeline-to-europe

Dmitry , August 11, 2018 at 11:02 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

Well orderliness is not the only reason for holiday choice.

And Schengen visa is not a big deal for middle class tourists (35 euros).

Greece already has almost "too many" tourists (from around the world), for size of the country.

Greece receives 32 million tourists this year (while Turkey receives around 40 million a year tourism – and is six times larger than Greece in land area).

Perhaps Greece can even raise prices and market more for middle class tourists?

Mr. Hack , August 11, 2018 at 11:03 pm GMT
@Mikhail

You missed my reply in #143 with plenty of decent replies. I don't mind reprinting them for you, I know how prone you are to missing information that is contrary to your myopic belief system:

His 'Italian friend' ? Were they fishing buddies where somebody got jealous of their 'friendship' and decided to take the Italian out? Could've been another Russian job too?

Litvinenko was said to be sympathetic to Chechen separatism.

Now, this is really stupid, I think that even you'll have to admit Mickey. Are we to believe that because Litvinenko was sympathetic to Chechen separatism, that this somehow made him impervious to any sort of Russian assault? Please explain this one to me!

Never mind the impracticality of the Russian government using something like polonium to bump someone off, when there're effectively cheaper ways of doing such.

Well, somebody was responsible for this ill advised murder, and did so in this grotesque and over the top manner. Why not the Russians, are they somehow smarter than the rest? If Russia wasn't full of fools, why are they circumvented by the world community with unnecessary and embarrasing sanctions, anyway? Besides, as I've already pointed out, there were many reasons why the Kremlin wanted Litvinenko gone.

Anatoly Karlin , Website August 11, 2018 at 11:18 pm GMT
@ThreeCranes

Has been discussed to death on this blog, both in general, and recently.

Anatoly Karlin , Website August 11, 2018 at 11:30 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

• Influence in Central Asia

I believe Russia's loss of influence there is inevitable. China has $$$; Turkey/Islamic world has ethno/religious draw; USA has its hegemonic culture.

Russia has some fading sovok relicts, such as old political ties and the Victory Day cult.

However, China is displacing it gently, as opposed to batting it away as the US and EU are wont to do. This naturally makes Russia much better disposed than it otherwise would be.

• Chinese IP theft

Will become less of an issue as China converges with and overtakes Russia in many technological areas. For instance, the realization that China's MIC is progressing far faster than expected – without significant Russian tech transfer – has contributed to Russia dropping its inhibitions on selling the S-400 and advanced fighters to China in recent years. (An HBD realist could have told them as much, earlier).

• North Korea
• Japan
• Near Abroad

The equitable arrangement would be for Russia to defer to China on North Korea and the Far East in general (though economic relations with Japan should be broadened), and to require that China do the same for Russia wrt to its Near Abroad.

But certainly a much more dominant China may no longer feel the need to honor such an arrangement.

• Competition for defense and nuclear exports

This will certainly be an issue.

Russia's nuclear technology is much further advanced than China's (the gap is much bigger than the rapidly dwindling one in the military sphere), and it doesn't appear to me that China is making a major R&D push in that area. I think Russia will continue to dominate global nuclear tech exports for at least 2-3 more decades.

AaronB , August 11, 2018 at 11:55 pm GMT
@Dmitry

Lol, NYC received 62.8 million visitors last year. One city.

Thorfinnsson , August 12, 2018 at 12:07 am GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Russia's current dominance of global nuclear exports is something of a fluke.

The West crippled its nuclear industry owing to pathological atomophobia. Design expertise didn't atrophy, but construction experience did. Result was massive cost overruns and endless delays on the few Western Gen III reactor projects. Now effectively priced out of the world market.

Japan suffered from the double whammy of Fukushima and Toshiba getting dragged down by the collapse of Westinghouse. Even though it's somewhat unfair, no one will now order Japanese reactors in the near future. The Japanese elite, once truly impressive in its atomophilia and determination to resist popular atomophobia, is no longer united on the issue either. Former Prime Minister Junichiro Koisumi has for instance called for Japan to shut down all nuclear power plants.

Emerging competitor is South Korea. The Koreans successfully won the project in the United Arab Emirates, and within South Korea they have an excellent record of efficient construction. Fortunately for Russia, the very weak President Moon is a disgraceful atomophobe.

ThreeCranes , August 12, 2018 at 12:11 am GMT
@ThreeCranes

Thanks for your comments. I really wasn't referring to today, more to a tomorrow when China is the world's leading economy and the USA is struggling to enforce dollar supremacy.

Daniel Chieh , August 12, 2018 at 12:55 am GMT
@ThreeCranes

It's a big world to the south without powers with nuclear weapons.

Cyrano , August 12, 2018 at 12:59 am GMT
@Mr. Hack

You are looking at it from a wrong perspective, pal. I was simply expressing pride and admiration for the competence of the Ukrainian Secret Services. Why can't a fellow – even though admittedly phony – Slav like me feel proud of the accomplishments of a Slavic country that I look upon to for inspiration and guidance?

utu , August 12, 2018 at 1:10 am GMT
@anonymous coward

[MORE]

Interesting argument but it hinges on something that is not a part of it, i.e, what is special about the 458 letter sonnet? Your argument only demonstrates that if another world began 10^18 seconds ago it most likely would not produce the same 458 letter sonnet but it would produce some other sonnet which could have a meaning in this different world.

You could create similarly fallacious argument 'proving' that you cannot possibly exist. Assign probabilities p<<1 of an event that two of your ancestors met and procreated. What was a chance that your parent met and then go back to grandparents and so on. And soon you will obtain cumulative probability close to zero stating exactly what? That your life could not have happened?

I think it is east to be confused and tricked by probabilities. And this happens when we are sloppy in defining the space of events on which the probability function must be defined. When you are heating up water at some point there will me one molecule of H2O that will break free and evaporate. If this molecule asked the Nancy Kerrigan's question "Why me?" and began calculating the probability of this event soon it would have to conclude the even was impossible. The problem is with the question "Why me?"

Mr. Hack , August 12, 2018 at 1:38 am GMT
@Cyrano

Sounds like you're making some real progress – keep it up!

Cyrano , August 12, 2018 at 2:26 am GMT
@Mr. Hack

Thanks man, I am really trying. If I may confide in you, you know what I find the most admiring about the Ukrainians? Your keen sense of democracy.

I mean, it took you what – barely 4 years to figure out that Yanukovych was not democratic enough – and then boom – revolution. I mean you guys are sharp. Look at the Russians, they have been electing Putin since 2000 and they still haven't figured out that he is not democratic enough. You are way ahead of the game.

You know what I think? I think that one good coup is worth at least 5-6 regular elections. So if you guys were to stage another coup within – let's say the next couple of years – it's like you've gone through 12 regular elections of 4 years each. You know what – if I was you I wouldn't even bother with elections, elections are for dummies, just stick with coups and soon you'll overtake even Western Europe – democracy and economic development wise, so you won't even need their stinking EU.

Mikhail , Website August 12, 2018 at 2:32 am GMT
@Mr. Hack

You're still shooting blanks to this:

As for the Litvinenko matter you bring up, there's good reason to believe that he somehow got poisoned by a source other than a Russian government act. His Italian friend got arrested for arms smuggling and was also infected with polonium. Litvinenko was said to be sympathetic to Chechen separatism. These factors and his links to the likes of Goldfarb and Berezovsky suggest a source other than the Russian government.

Never mind the impracticality of the Russian government using something like polonium to bump someone off, when there're effectively cheaper ways of doing such.

I can't help it if you don't know the specifics about Litrvinenko's aforementioned Italian friend. Stupid people have a way of babbling on because they don't realize just how stupid they are. Then again, part of you might recognize that, seeing your cowardly anonymous empty calories insults.

Opposite to your shooting blanks is this precision reply:

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/07/29/an-unhealthy-trump-putin-summit-fallout.html

Mikhail , Website August 12, 2018 at 2:35 am GMT
@Cyrano

In case you missed it:

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/08/10/cold-war-in-the-sauna-notes-from-a-russian-american/

Thek ind of Russian-American views not getting propped in US mass media. Similar to the PC Ukrainian views getting the nod over Ukrainians thinking differently.

Mr. Hack , August 12, 2018 at 3:00 am GMT
@Cyrano

You're on the right track, buddy! I don't know why AP tries to continually put you in place by pointing out that you're not really a Slav, but some sort of Balkanized Turk. Who cares? Your last two comments indicate that you're capable of evolving your thinking patterns much higher that the typical 97 or 98. Heck, I'd guess that you're a solid 99! Keep it up!

Mr. Hack , August 12, 2018 at 3:08 am GMT
@Mikhail

[MORE]

Stupid people have a way of babbling on because they don't realize just how stupid they are.

I see that you're still babbling on Mickey. Isn't it time for you to do a few rounds of kumbaya in front of your icon of Herr Putler and go to sleep yet?

As La Russophobe imagines it, Averko then sits down in the lotus position, the room lit by a single candle beneath a large photo of Stalin, and intones his mantra several thousand times: "I am a journalist I am a journalist I am a journalist " until he falls asleep. When he wakes up, he heads out to his day job flipping hamburgers at Wendy's

Chainsaw1 , August 12, 2018 at 5:05 am GMT
@anonymous coward

[MORE]

"Now take Shakespeare's sonnet #27. It is 458 letters long. (Let's ignore punctuation.) If we take 458 random letters of the English alphabet, there are 26^458 random combinations. So if our ideal Universe-sized computer was randomly picking letters and hoping to compose a Shakespeare sonnet, it would need about 10^300 Universes to do so."

The above just shows that the author is just completely ignorant of scientific, statistics and computing principles.

First in English the occurance of letters do not have random frequencies, the frequencies range from 0.074% for letter z to 12.702% for letter e. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_frequency

Next the letters are not combined randomly, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alphabetic_principle Next there are pattern the letters are used to form phonetics. The English language only has 40 sounds (English orthography) the combination of which form the words. Then there is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonemic_orthography

Incidentally sonnet 27 only has 80 unique words, many of which are not random but closely related, e.g. blind, old, sight, tired, sightless, see, ghastly, shadow, darkness, expired, eyelids, drooping, weary, bed, toil, view, night, etc. A task simple enough for markov text sonnet generators,

http://www.devjason.com/2010/12/28/shakespeare-sonnet-sourced-markov-text-generation/

https://www.prism.gatech.edu/~bnichols8/projects/markovchains/main.shtml "Shakespeare Sonnets Training Set"

and the more sophisticated that the word frequency will be generated from the 154 Shakespeare sonnets and will preserve the classic ABAB CDCD EFEF GG rhyme scheme of the sonnets, https://medium.com/@SherlockHumus/creating-markov-chain-based-sonnets-9609d77a2635

By trying to shuffle 26^458 random letters by brute force into sonnet showed that the author is only good at shuffling shits.

utu , August 12, 2018 at 5:19 am GMT
@Chainsaw1

[MORE]

After showing off that you know statistics of character string in English language try to explain what is your point.

RadicalCenter , August 12, 2018 at 5:41 am GMT
@Mr. XYZ

If it wasn't a setup by formerly-great formerly-Britain, who was it?

Mikhail , Website August 12, 2018 at 5:57 am GMT
@Mr. Hack

[MORE]

Your uncritically citing LR is indicative of one stupid anonymous coward referencing another.

anonymous coward , August 12, 2018 at 6:24 am GMT
@Jaakko Raipala

[MORE]

I'm just going to claim that you're trying an "it doesn't work because of fancy words X, Y, Z" bluff without any actual technical argument behind the big fancy words. Prove me wrong.

What's the "it" in your post, exactly? Darwinism? The problem with Darwinism is that it's not a scientific theory. It's not even formulated correctly. The problem itself is framed by biologists in handwavey terms on a "monkeys and typewriters" level.

When one tries putting some sort of numbers to the idea, the whole thing falls apart. See my post above, for example, where it turns out you need a Universe about 10^300 larger than ours to make random selection work.

And before you charge to M'Lady Science's defense: note this isn't a "disproof", it's just a demonstration that nobody bothered to frame the question properly yet. There's nothing there that can be proved or disproved.

anonymous coward , August 12, 2018 at 6:34 am GMT
@Jaakko Raipala

[MORE]

Congratulations, you missed the point again.

The actual point is that biologists framed a problem in a way that doesn't match the scale of our Universe as we observe it.

Feel free to correct the numbers I made; maybe the correct factor is 10^100 instead of 10^300. So what? The processes biologists postulate are so asymptotic that they require an infinite Universe, which doesn't exist in real life.

There is an expectation that current theories of physics are not accurate at very small time scales (which have not been reached by experiment).

We don't even know if the universe is finite or infinite. This is just a claim that you pulled out of your ass. There may even be an infinite number of atoms.

Good point, but no. You missed the point again.

Any theory that requires time or space outside of a conventional Newtonian understanding of physics isn't Darwinism. It wouldn't even be biology, because biologists don't (and can't) deal with stuff like that.

anonymous coward , August 12, 2018 at 6:39 am GMT
@utu

[MORE]

I never assigned any special meaning to a sonnet. I merely demonstrated that the size of the probability spaces we're traversing are unimaginable orders of magnitude larger than the Universe we observe.

Formulating the probability spaces and functions should be step one of any biological theory of evolution. Only then we can start talking about meanings and other philosophy.

anonymous coward , August 12, 2018 at 6:43 am GMT
@Chainsaw1

[MORE]

Good point, but unfortunately Markov chains (and evolutionary algorithms) are intelligent design, not random evolution.

They are tools for getting an answer when you know the result you want, but don't know the steps to get it. The better you understand the result you want, the faster you arrive at a solution.

That's a framework postulated by 'intelligent design' proponents, and rejected by conventional Darwinist biologists.

utu , August 12, 2018 at 7:38 am GMT
@anonymous coward

[MORE]

I never assigned any special meaning to a sonnet.

OK, so what is the big deal about generating random string of 458 letters? Any such string can be easily generated with the same probability from a bag full of letters. Each string is equivalent.

utu , August 12, 2018 at 8:20 am GMT
Important speech of Victor Orban

Prime Minister Viktor Orbán's speech at the 29th Bálványos Summer Open University and Student Camp

http://www.kormany.hu/en/the-prime-minister/the-prime-minister-s-speeches/prime-minister-viktor-orban-s-speech-at-the-29th-balvanyos-summer-open-university-and-student-camp

AquariusAnon , August 12, 2018 at 8:42 am GMT
Continuing on AKarlin's conclusion how Russia's future economic and foreign policy orientation lies on the EU's response to the US's inevitable Iran-style sanctions against Russia, I'll walk through some situations, and also state that once sanctions and adversaries with unfriendly relations escalate to embargo and enemies with no relations on the US side, the EU's decision at that point will be able to determine its fate for a long time to come.

1. EU caves in, and like a good vassal state with no independent policy of its own whatsoever, follows US policy. This is more likely to happen if the US threatens third party trade ties with Russia. This means that EU imposes Iran-style sanctions, and gradually turns to more expensive US LNG for energy. This would put the EU under incredible strain, and a large amount of state coffers would be shaved off due to these purchases; the citizens disposable income would plunge too. On the other hand, Europe won't really collapse if the US agrees to subsidize gas sales to the EU in exchange for joining the ideological crusade against Russia.

In the Kissinger thread where I mentioned how a blackpilled possibility of Russia's future lies as a vassal state, or junior partner, of China, while I may have exaggerated a little regarding permanent PLA bases on Russia soil, it still is a slight possibility if the oligarchs become more powerful again and also get a little desperate. However, PLA bases aside, if the EU joins in the US on an embargo against Russia, Russia would still be cut off from trade and other ties to its west, and inevitably having to completely rely on its east for trade and political ties. Since even Japan/Korea trade can be a little difficult due to their strong US ties and India doesn't really offer Russia much, except as a place to export some goods, this leaves us with China, rendering Russia's future as China's largest and most important vassal state.

This would also enable the EU branch of neoliberalism.txt to show their true colors as an American vassal. Outside of Poland and the Baltics, attitudes towards Russia vary directly on how neoliberal they feel, so in order to prevent the people from voting in non-neoliberal parties, some "checks and balances" aka non-democracy has to be implemented to make sure neoliberalism.txt stays via "voting". In this case, shave off a good at least 10% to EU's white percentage in the long run also; while its unlikely for Britain and France to ever dip below 60% white but stabilize around that point instead, a quasi-neoliberal dictatorship would mean Eastern and Southern Europe bearing a lot of this brunt, e.g. ghettos in Warsaw might go from a fear to actual reality. And expect the EU's economic growth to be highly stagnant, and China, with Russia as not just a friendly state but a vassal state, would take advantage of this to end up becoming the other pole in a bipolar world along with the US.

Unless China changes the way it conducts trade and foreign policy, this means that Russia will likely get taken advantage of and not get too much in return, especially with non-patriotic and greedy oligarchs still having significant power. In this case, Russia-China relations will resemble a more predatory version of UK/Canada-US relations and Russia will find itself to be a largely China-oriented, with Chinese tourism, businesses, language, and other ties etc. having a very broad, visible, and dominating presence.

Chance of this happening? 30% given Europe's rhetoric on Iran. China will gladly take advantage of the situation.

2. The EU doesn't cave in and continues to maintain trade and political ties with Russia. This is the better result for not just Russia, but also the entire world. A Europe that's able to stand up to American foreign policy, especially if its more ideological hysteria than based on realpolitik in the case with Russia, is one that would have taken its first step towards significantly reasserting their sovereignties. This would've also been a huge blow to the American establishment, if not THE nail in the coffin ending American unipolarity. And China also needs more competitors instead of a bipolar world with just China and America.

2a). Europe continues to be ruled by neoliberalism.txt as America enforces the embargo. Sanctions won't be lifted and the status quo remains. As China gets more powerful and European relations still cold, Russia and China will end up in a full-blown alliance, but its status quo trade and personal ties with Europe would ensure that Russia can continue to maintain a somewhat multi-vectored approach instead of complete subservience to Beijing. And Russia won't be as much of a "hot potato" if not embargoed by the EU, ties with countries like Japan and South Korea will continue unabated if not upgraded. In this case, the EU can still be a more sovereign entity, albeit just ruled by the neoliberalism.txt ideology; demographically, slightly better than, but no significant differences from the EU caving to US embargo case. In this case, Russia-China relations will resemble Japan-US relations, albeit without the military bases.

Chance of this happening? 40%.

2b). Europe undergoing a right-wing wave as America enforces the embargo. Europe in this case will lift sanctions against Russia and ties likely even upgrade to a strategic partnership. While Russia will not become enemies with China since it is in its best interest to not pick a fight with the world's #1 or #2 power, its relationship will stabilize as non-adversarial but non-aligned, a renewed strategic partnership with Europe can stimulate Russia's economy and will ensure a multipolar world emerges in the 21st century, with Russia as a powerful 3rd or 4th most powerful country on good terms with everybody (minus the US and parts of Eastern Europe). Such close ties to Russia will also be a boon for Europe's economy, and the possibility to regain their sovereignties after a century-long occupation post-WW2. America becomes more isolated and loses its unipolarity in this case.

An unrelated side effect of this tactic is that the nonwhite percentages of Europe will probably stabilize at or just above or below (in the case of southern Europe) current values.

In this case, Russia-China relations won't be any special, with close trade relations, some military cooperation, and neutral détente but inevitable minor beefs that spring up every once in a while, like a closer and better version US-China relations pre-Trump. Russia in this case will truly be one of the smaller poles in a multipolar world.

Chance of this happening? 30%, but this is by far the best outcome for the entire world.

Mitleser , August 12, 2018 at 9:24 am GMT
@Dmitry

Perhaps Greece can even raise prices and market more for middle class tourists?

And encourage tourists to travel to other countries?

anonymous coward , August 12, 2018 at 9:36 am GMT
@utu

[MORE]

Good point. If 1/2 of all random strings of letters are sonnets, then the probability of generating one is 50%. Let's test that hypothesis.

Take a dictionary of English words: https://github.com/dwyl/english-words

* There are 27 words of one letter and 26 letters.
* There are 635 words of two letters and 676 two-letter combinations.
* There are 4710 words of three letters and 17576 three-letter combinations.
* There are 11169 four-letter words and 456976 four-letter combinations.
* There are 22950 words of five letters and 11 million five-letter combinations. (Oops.)

* There are 61018 words of 8 letters, but 208 billion 8-letter combinations.

Now, these are words, not texts, but you get the idea. Letter combinations grow as c^n, while the number of English texts clearly doesn't.

Mitleser , August 12, 2018 at 9:41 am GMT
@AquariusAnon

1. EU caves in, and like a good vassal state with no independent policy of its own whatsoever, follows US policy.

Chance of this happening? 30% given Europe's rhetoric on Iran.

Eh, what? It is not EUropean rhetoric that suggests that, but the gap between their rhetoric and reality.
Europeans talk about defending JCPOA yet European big business ditches Iran and European banks stab Iran in the back.

In recent weeks, U.S. and European intelligence agencies flagged a European-Iranian Trade Bank request to withdraw 300 million euros from the Deutsche Bundesbank. Iran claimed the cash is necessary so that Iranian citizens can use foreign currency when they travel, but Western governments warned that the cash would be used to fund Iran's terrorist proxies.

Fearing repercussions from the U.S. Treasury, the German bank decided last week to introduce the new rules to prevent the withdrawal. This move was likely coordinated with the German government.

In recent months, the E.U. has said that it will try to salvage the Iranian nuclear deal, despite the U.S. withdrawal and renewed sanctions.

Initially, the E.U. explored the possibility of compensating European firms that would be affected by the new sanctions, using the European Investment Bank.

This effort was torpedoed by the EIB, which said it might be blacklisted by the U.S. Treasury of it was part of a scheme to offset the sanctions. EIB President Werner Hoyer said two weeks ago that "doing business in Iran is something that we cannot be actively engaged in."

https://www.jns.org/wary-of-repercussions-eu-unlikely-to-defy-us-sanctions-on-iran/

AquariusAnon , August 12, 2018 at 9:47 am GMT
@Mitleser

Didn't know that. I'll keep that as a note.

So my 3 predictions are essentially, Iran-style western embargo, status quo with embargo only on US side, and normalization of relations with Europe. How would you recalibrate the likelihoods?

Felix Keverich , August 12, 2018 at 10:21 am GMT
@Dmitry

Theory that it is to do with creditors, doesn't make much sense.

Creditors (troika) are European fund – mainly Germany, France and Italy, in order. Followed by IMF and ECB.

Criteria for release of funds is economic criteria, that imply they might one day get their money back.

Greece's foreign policy is not of interest to anyone much (Turkey care about them), especially not accountants.

You assume that Greece is the rational actor in this situation. It's a stupid crackwhore, desperate for a bit of debt relief.

It is also fair to say that Western decisions on financial aid are not made by accountants, ultimately they are made by politicians, who do consider geopolitics.

Surely Greece can see that IMF is dumping billions of dollars into the Ukraine for no other reason than geopolitics. Ukrainian regime also got a nice debt relief a couple of years back – to better resist "Russian aggression".

utu , August 12, 2018 at 10:25 am GMT
@anonymous coward

[MORE]

So it comes down to the meaning after all. You look for words that have meaning. But why? Every word out of 208 billions may have a mining in some other language that you do not know of. Why you insist that the disproof of evolution or the random Universe must be based on what has meaning in English language? There are some believers in the intelligent design like yourself in Pentecostal church who speak all kind of tongues nobody heard of them but to them they have some meaning. There are patients in psychiatric wards who write 458 letter sonnets that have meaning only to them. So why did you pick up this particular Shakespeare sonnet to calculate a number that suppose to prove something?

Do you begin to understand where is the flaw in your argument?

utu , August 12, 2018 at 10:29 am GMT
@Mitleser

Interesting. It looks really bad.

Miro23 , August 12, 2018 at 10:57 am GMT

2. To what extent will the EU join in, passively acquiesce to, or resist the US sanctions against Russia? The answer to this question will to a large extent determine precisely how deeply Russia falls into China's orbit in the next couple of decades.

This looks like a fine opportunity for the EU to 1) develop its own international settlements system based on a Euro reserve currency 2) redirect trade and investment towards the ROW (rest of the world), if necessary, excluding the US 3) become a reliable non-political trade partner to these countries 4) make a unilateral decision to terminate NATO and detach itself from US lies, subversion and military adventurism.

The place to start would be the termination of NATO, but it would be better to implement the policies simultaneously. It would initially be very costly to European corporations, but ultimately worth it, with new more predictable international relationships.

AquariusAnon , August 12, 2018 at 11:23 am GMT
@Miro23

This is exactly what I meant by my response. Not only will EU's response to the upcoming US embargo be instrumental in writing Russia's role and development in the 21st century world, but also if the EU ever wants to transform from a neoliberalism.txt US vassal experiment to either an independent "Great Power" quasi-federation (essentially USSR 2.0 after the revolutionary phase died down, Communism replaced by neoliberalism.txt), or to break up as wholly sovereign states, a continuation if not strengthening of relations with Russia will be a pivotal first step for that to happen.

Jaakko Raipala , August 12, 2018 at 11:35 am GMT
@anonymous coward

Feel free to correct the numbers I made;

There is no reason to look at any further steps in your calculations when you begin with false premises.

[MORE]

Again, you are under the false impression that the universe "began" 13 billion years ago as some informationless entity and that all patterns and complexity emerged after it. No. The earliest known state of the universe had patterns and complexity. Even if you somehow managed to argue that the complexity of life on earth is too high to emerge in 13 billion years, it would still be of no consequence to Darwinism since we don't need it to emerge in that time – 13 billion years ago is not some patternless zero state of complexity.

In fact, for all we know the emergence of life on earth could have already been determined in the earlier state of the universe 13 billion years ago. That's implausible to me but a lot of people believe in an intelligent creator and you can easily just postulate that he baked the emergence of man in the design of the early universe and then you're in no contradiction with modern science whatsoever.

Where did the patterns and complexity in the early universe come from? We don't know since the current theories of physics can't probe that far. In fact, as I said before, the whole "age of the universe" thing is a false notion that unfortunately some physicists peddle as a simplification of cosmology. What we can do is trace back the development of the universe from this point in time and we can go back 13 billion years and conclude that the universe back then was a very different place, in a very dense state that gradually "expanded" into the current one.

However in this process we run into a dead end as to study such dense states we'd need to make the theories of gravity and quantum mechanics work together and we can't do that currently. Hence, everything "earlier" than that is pure speculation, in fact we don't even know for sure whether there was a "before". This state beyond current theories has been dubbed the "big bang", "the beginning" and such but that's all just popularization. This has the unfortunate side effect that some people now believe physics to somehow have proven that the universe emerged from "nothing" 13 billion years ago and that's just not true.

And an "understanding of time and space outside of a conventional Newtonian understanding of physics" is definitely required for cosmology like claims that "universe is X seconds old". You are the one who began with assumptions that require physics well beyond Newtonian mechanics.

Mitleser , August 12, 2018 at 11:38 am GMT
@AquariusAnon

Most likely is "status quo with embargo only on US side" with limited shift towards "Iran-style western embargo". EUropean elites do not show much willingness to oppose Russophobia, but on the other hand Russia is much more integrated in the EU economy than the Iran.

For instance, the value of the trade in 2017 between Russia and Germany was 57,3 billion Euro (rank 14th), the number for the Iran-Germany trade was only 3,4 billion Euro (rank 58th).

https://www.destatis.de/DE/ZahlenFakten/GesamtwirtschaftUmwelt/Aussenhandel/Tabellen/RangfolgeHandelspartner.pdf?__blob=publicationFile

That reduces their willingness to follow American sanctions.

Mitleser , August 12, 2018 at 12:01 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

Don't bash Greece so much.

They are still making right decisions.

From 2009 to 2011, Syria supplied almost a fifth of EU imports of phosphate, but those sales collapsed during the war.

Official EU import data shows that phosphate shipments to Europe -- heading almost exclusively to Greece -- are resuming and more than tripled between December 2017 to April 2018. The volumes remain small compared to the pre-war heyday, but Syria is making a clear push to return to the EU market and its giant farm sector.

Syrian data show that total phosphate exports were more than $200 million in 2010.

Three people either working in the phosphate industry or involved with trading the commodity said Syria is able to export again because Russian investors have resurrected the Palmyra mines, which Islamic State militia captured in 2015. Assad awarded these reserves to the Russians last year after Moscow helped him turn the tide against ISIS.

anonymous coward , August 12, 2018 at 12:54 pm GMT
@utu

[MORE]

So it comes down to the meaning after all.

No, it actually doesn't. The probabilities grow as c^n, while the Universe doesn't. No matter how big it is, it's still a fixed size due to the laws of conservation of mass and energy.

Every word out of 208 billions may have a mining in some other language that you do not know of.

Even if every atom in the observable Universe had its own language, the number of possible letter combinations would still be vastly bigger.

Why you insist that the disproof of evolution or the random Universe must be based on what has meaning in English language?

I'm not "disproving" anything. I'm demonstrating that the "monkeys and typewriters" argument used by biologists (and its variants "the universe is really big" and "the Earth is really old" arguments) violate basic mathematical logic.

The Universe isn't really big. In fact, it is infinitesimal compared to the probabilities we're dealing with here.

Once biologists acknowledge this obvious fact, then we can formulate some sort of theory, and maybe then there will be something to prove or disprove.

Do you begin to understand where is the flaw in your argument

Do you? The point is that we're traversing probability spaces here that grow exponentially, and yet nothing in nature can be exponential indefinitely. Somewhere in your assumptions is a grave error.

Mr. Hack , August 12, 2018 at 1:21 pm GMT
@Mikhail

[MORE]

What do you mean uncritically? I think that the citation is very critical of you. If you're looking for something even more critical, just let me know?

anonymous coward , August 12, 2018 at 1:25 pm GMT
@Jaakko Raipala

[MORE]

Again, you are under the false impression that the universe "began" 13 billion years ago as some informationless entity and that all patterns and complexity emerged after it. No. The earliest known state of the universe had patterns and complexity.

Very good point, and one I agree with. However, this is a variant of the Intelligent Design hypothesis, and is considered to be pseudoscience by biologists.

Like I said, I'm not "disproving" anything, merely pointing out that the way Darwinian evolution is framed by biologists is not science.

Maybe it can be reformulated in a way that makes sense, but don't hold your breath -- the biologists don't even understand the objections and fall back to the "Earth is, like, really old" argument.

And an "understanding of time and space outside of a conventional Newtonian understanding of physics" is definitely required for cosmology like claims that "universe is X seconds old".

Again, the actual figure is irrelevant. The point is that we've posited an exponentially exploding probability space, and yet nothing in nature is infinite and exponential. (I know about the cosmology arguments about the finite/infinite universe, spare me. In any case, the observable Universe is definitely finite, and science only deals with the observable.)

AquariusAnon , August 12, 2018 at 1:26 pm GMT
@Mitleser

Now that Syria has all but won the war, I wonder when will rebuilding and eventually re-emerging as a stable country good enough for FDI and tourism will start. By then, I also wonder how it will be sanctioned.

My guess is that it will rebuild under Iran-style conditions back to more or less where it was in the early 2000s politically, economically, socially, and sanctions-wise starting around 2020 or so.

Anon [536] Disclaimer , August 12, 2018 at 1:34 pm GMT
"For instance, banning Aeroflot from flying to the US has a simple response – banning US air carriers from overflying North Eurasia, period. It can resurrect a bill – first raised this May, since sunken in the legislature – to impose fines and prison time on individuals and entities who support Western sanctions by refusing to do business with Russian citizens or entities on America's SDN list. It can throw out the American-dominated copyrights regimen out of the window."

As an American, I think Russia should do this and for good reason: the people who run this country are idiots; if this is allowed to stand, they'll continue to push this until we get a war. Best to head it off now by making the US Ruling Class pay the price. I especially like the last part. Russia should just host all Hollywood movies, books, and video games on a server accessible to American pirates (hey, Red States won't have problem with this these scum just voted to remove Trump's star on the walk of fame anyway).

Anon [360] Disclaimer , August 12, 2018 at 1:52 pm GMT
"This looks like a fine opportunity for the EU to make a unilateral decision to terminate NATO and detach itself from US lies, subversion and military adventurism."

Not going to happen for a variety of reasons. NATO is a good way to keep an incompetent, belligerent U.S. bogged down so that it doesn't cause any serious trouble for advanced nations. Take Germany for instance. The number of US troops there is quite small in an absolute sense, not enough to cause trouble, but combined with troops all over the place, the all-volunteer US military can't really marshall the numbers necessary to invade anyone without support from Europe. NATO is actually a clever way to control the aggressive tendencies of the United States; without it, there is no telling what the U.S. could do.

Europe also gets high-tech weapon systems in the process – and sold at a premium considering the enormous R&D costs involved. That's why German industrialists were stupid to provoke Trump and go around telling Europeans to not buy American weapons (those weapons are in some cases FAR superior to what the Europeans have and someone is definitely going to buy them considering the cost spent to develop them, either you or a potential enemy so it might as well be you). In all, it's good deal for them. They aren't going to chunk that for anything.

The real key here is for Russia to strike back in a way that doesn't galvanize the American public against them. My suggestion: cancel all American copyright protections and start hosting American movies and television programs. Conservative republicans won't oppose this as these programs are made in Trump-hating California – a place that just voted to remove Trump's star on the walk of fame.

Uebersetzer , August 12, 2018 at 1:53 pm GMT
@German_reader

In fact, his "conservative" predecessor Samaras was more pro-German than pro-American. Tsipras is pro-American. He is leftist like Tony Blair is leftist.

Hyperborean , August 12, 2018 at 2:00 pm GMT
@Anon

Europe also gets high-tech weapon systems in the process – and sold at a premium considering the enormous R&D costs involved.

Right, which is why Denmark bought the F-35. The one which even Americans were criticising.

Buying American weaponry is often a combination of tribute, corruption and paying protection money.

dfordoom , Website August 12, 2018 at 2:28 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

But unless they find a way to somehow stop Russia's exports of oil, our economy will shrug off whatever sanction packages US can throw at it.

It still makes Russia look pathetically weak. The U.S. actions are essentially an act of war. If Russia just rolls over allows itself to get kicked then the U.S. is just going to keep on kicking. Cowardice is rarely a good policy.

reiner Tor , August 12, 2018 at 2:46 pm GMT
@Hyperborean

the F-35. The one which even Americans were criticising.

I bought into much of the criticism, and probably a somewhat better plane could've been made cheaper, but all in all I think it'll be a fine enough weapon, and probably better than any currently deployed Russian fighters. The Su-57 is not yet ready (and it's recently got questioned if it ever will), so you cannot meaningfully compare it to it.

Altogether if you want the very best fighter jet available in the market, then you should choose it, unless the costs are prohibitive for you. It's actually no longer much more expensive than 4+ generation planes. I think Boeing is trying to market the F-15X, which would be a newly produced version of the F-15 with all possible technologies (except stealth which is impossible for this frame), and it's not going to be meaningfully cheaper than the latest (and cheapest) F-35.

If buying Russian is politically possible for you, then the Su-35 might be a good cheaper alternative, though countries which are allowed to buy it are usually not sold the F-35. Maybe India (and perhaps soon Turkey?) is the only country where both could even be considered.

If the Su-57 were ready, then maybe we could talk about whether it was better than the F-35 (the answer would probably depend on a number of issues, e.g. the rest of the equipment used by the military in question, and of course politics, which is to say, if there was a chance of a political conflict with the supplier, because if yes, then obviously you'd need to buy from the other).

For most (but not all) roles the F-35 is at least as good as any other American fighter jet (except maybe the F-22, and maybe not even that).

Mitleser , August 12, 2018 at 3:18 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

Altogether if you want the very best fighter jet available in the market, then you should choose it, unless the costs are prohibitive for you.

Or you do not want Lockheed use your combat jets to spy on you.

reiner Tor , August 12, 2018 at 3:25 pm GMT
@Mitleser

Yes, that's another risk.

Maybe that's why Israel uses its own software? (At least they rewrote part of the software, or so I read.)

Anyway, I don't think it's a bad fighter jet for the job of fighting America's enemies. Probably even against neutrals. It might be useless against America's friends, or America itself, but no one buys it for that. And actually it's probably useful against America, too, or else why is the US so reluctant to sell it to Turkey?

And probably the American idea that the Russians might use their S-400 to spy on other Turkish weapon systems (including the F-35), when in fact it's the Americans who use weapons they sell to do that. The Russians are probably too afraid to lose their reputations.

reiner Tor , August 12, 2018 at 3:32 pm GMT
@Mitleser

Interestingly, when I searched for it, besides RT, I only found an Israeli and an Australian site. It's not a widely reported news.

Thorfinnsson , August 12, 2018 at 3:37 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

F-35 has inferior kinematic performance to most, if not all, of the Generation 4 fighters it's supposed to replace or oppose. Lack of a bubble canopy is also a major step backwards. Quite a dubious distinction for a new aircraft.

That leaves its stealth and its supposedly wiz-bang sensors.

Stealth is nice, but it drives up operating costs and reduces sortie rates. And on a small aircraft, you can't carry large war loads without sacrificing your stealth. F-35 stealth is in the frontal area only, optimized for the X-band. It will be easily detected by long wavelength radars. In air to air combat it would rely upon detecting intercepting aircraft and firing AMRAAMs before they can lock on or, heaven forbid, close to visual range (where the F-35 will be dogmeat).

The Air Force has long said that the F-35 isn't optimized for air combat. I suppose the idea was that F-22s and legacy fighters would handle air superiority missions. F-35s, with frontal stealth, would be able to get close to targets and attack them with PGMs.

As for its allegedly wonderful sensors, I am skeptical. Lots of air forces continuously modernize old designs with AESA radars, glass cockpits, etc. Why exactly is a new airframe needed for any of this?

That said it's not like the F-35 is awful , and as usual pilot skill and other factors can overcome inappropriate technology.

The F-35 also now costs less to buy than the Eurofighter Typhoon and Rafale, which is an important advantage. Gripen is much cheaper, but Sweden has no geopolitical clout and has a very bad habit of finding moralistic reasons not to export armaments.

If you have to buy from Western suppliers, a mix of F-15X and Gripen NGs seems ideal. If you can't afford two classes of fighter, the Rafale is a very good compromise. France is also a reliable supplier. Worst choice is the Super Hornet. The F-16, while now quite an old design, is still a very capable aircraft at a reasonable price as well.

Japan now has a stealth fighter technology demonstrator in the MHI X-2 Shinden. They somehow built it, including with indigenous turbofans, for $360m. The airframe is very interesting in that it's built of new materials which eliminate the need for RAM, which should keep operating costs down and increase sortie rates. But this is only a technology demonstrator at this time, probably as proof-of-concept for the new materials and an indigenous low-bypass afterburning turbofan engine.

As for the Su-57, it's somewhat like the F-35 in its limited stealth. But it's also like the Su-27 family in having superb kinematic performance. Russia's official reason for delaying entry into service is that the Su-35 is adequate for existing threats, which is probably true.

Who knows what the real reason is. Budgetary pressures perhaps? Russia wants to double capital spending in rouble terms in 2024, and to do so without increasing debt. At the same time it's continuing its import substitution efforts, and there are no moves to soaking the rich. So the money has to come from somewhere, and presumably that makes mass production of the Su-57 and T-14 Armata less attractive.

Mitleser , August 12, 2018 at 3:44 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

And actually it's probably useful against America, too, or else why is the US so reluctant to sell it to Turkey?

>study F-35 and its data
> get better at detecting/fighting F-35

It is probably one of the main reasons why the RoC (Taiwan) won't get this jet despite needing more than most. The risk that pro-PRC agents would have access to the F-35 is not small.

Felix Keverich , August 12, 2018 at 3:46 pm GMT
@dfordoom

Cowardice is rarely a good policy.

I agree. However, let's not forget that Russia and USA have very different weight and role in the international economy. USA effectively owns the system of international finance. That is to say "international finance" is but an extention of US financial system. They can exclude Russia, we can't exclude them (from the system they created and own).

If Russia is going to impose meaningful costs on the US, I think it can only be done through non-economic means. Realistically, what action Russia could take that would potentially match the disruptive power of American sanctions on Russia? Arm the Central American drug cartels?

Thorfinnsson , August 12, 2018 at 3:51 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

Using your own software is common for technologically advanced powers concerned about their sovereignty and their own military-industrial capabilities. Japan for instance (after being bullied out of building its own indigenous fighter in the 80s) built its own upgraded version of the F-16 which, among other things, included Japanese software. Like Israel, Japan also fields its own air-to-air missiles which on paper are in the first rank.

The UK took a different route of becoming a Level 1 Partner on the F-35 program, so they received privileged access to the source code which is not available to other powers.

The F-35 is not very useful for fighting Russia or China, but fine for fighting most anyone else. It actually could have some utility against America since America lags Russia and China in low-frequency radar and infrared search and track, but probably the real reluctance is safeguarding technology. In particular materials (e.g. the new RAM panels instead of finicky coatings) and the engines.

anon [356] Disclaimer , August 12, 2018 at 4:38 pm GMT
LOL. Not only the usual Russo-Ukro shitstorm that takes over every thread longer than 100 replies, but evolution-creation debate is there too.

This thread is officially over. RIP.

LondonBob , August 12, 2018 at 4:50 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

Sun Tzu say avoid combat with superior force, bide time and wait till you are stronger. Of course doesn't take Sun Tzu to work that out, even if he did say it.

Dmitry , August 12, 2018 at 5:14 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

IMF funded by a lot of countries though – Russia now one of the top ten important creditors and more influential owners of the IMF (although it's proportion of ownership is still multiples times smaller compared to US).

Russia is 8th largest shareholder of the IMF (out of 189 countries). US is largest share-holder, and then Japan and China.

Decisions are based on member voting which is based on share in the organization, so Russia has 8th largest vote in IMF, but behind USA, Japan, China, etc.

Part of the Greek debt is owned by Russia through the IMF, probably relative to Russian ownership of IMF and the debt relief packages partly also funded from Russian loans.

Fortunately, IMF ownership of Greek debt is several times smaller than the eurozone countries. But Russia's government share of Greece debt will probably be some billions of dollars. That's how Greece can basically continue receiving money – so many countries are owed money on their debt.

Felix Keverich , August 12, 2018 at 5:31 pm GMT
@LondonBob

Not really applicable in Russia's situation. We are already at war, it's entirely one-way for now, but that doesn't make it less of a war.

Cyrano , August 12, 2018 at 5:37 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

Thanks man, that's what I have been craving all my life – an approval from a Ukrainian hick. You keep it up too buddy, your encouragement means the world to me.

Dmitry , August 12, 2018 at 6:50 pm GMT
@Gerard2

VAT is not a "non-issue". When you raise from 18% to 20%, then you are taking significantly more money from the whole population (including poor people) who want to buy things in private sector, and transferring this money to state sector, where not all extra money (to be "polite") is going to be used "wisely".

At the same time, a problem now is to have up to 50% of the federal budget from oil/gas revenues – which is a volatile priced resource.

So it's typical dilemma with neither option looking good.

Of course, the solution to both, is to reduce unnecessary government expenditure, which continues to grow all the time in many useless areas, to the extent that you can see expressed in even unhidden ways of the luxurious buildings being constructed for all kinds of different government offices who could really do their job just as well (or incompetently) in a warehouse or a polyester and nylon tent.

Mikhail , Website August 12, 2018 at 6:53 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

[MORE]

Your reading comprehension sucks.

You uncritically referenced an anonymous, lying coward (not too much different from yourself BTW), who ducked a live one hours BBC World Service radio panel discussion, much unlike the person who you've an obsession with.

Mikhail , Website August 12, 2018 at 7:15 pm GMT
@Mikhail

[MORE]

That's: a live one hour .

Thorfinnsson , August 12, 2018 at 7:34 pm GMT
@Dmitry

Increasing taxation reduces private consumption, but I'm skeptical that it creates a long-term output gap (short term is a different matter). The OECD has prosperous economies with taxation at a share of GDP ranging from about one-third to three-fifths. Such a wide divergence suggests that high taxes and prosperity are not incompatible. Money spent by the state is still spent, and even if it's spent dubiously it continues to circulate.

Russia's official economic plan (besides import substitution) is to increase capital spending. It intends to do with while retaining fiscal discipline and limiting offshore borrowing. If you are unable or unwilling to borrow to finance investment, you must suppress consumption.

Suppressing consumption to finance investment has a track record of success in East Asia and for that matter Russia itself (~1928-1970).

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-12/putin-s-wealth-shift-takes-aim-at-russian-economy-s-idled-engine

The intent is to increase capital spending from one-fifth of GDP to one-quarter. A reasonable goal.

The real issue here of course is that the intent is for this increase in investment to come from the state and state-controlled companies, whose track records are dubious.

Still, perhaps something good could be done. Russia's nuclear industry is one bright spot, and shifting to a more nuclear power mix would allow for more hydrocarbon exports and improve public health. Russia is a growing agricultural exporter, and somehow I doubt Russia has the ubiquitous farm roads like we have here in the American Midwest.

Perhaps it would be wiser to reduce Rouble borrowing costs for the business sector by suppressing consumer credit and promoting higher household savings. Household savings rate in Russia is only 8%. China is 38%.

Anon [204] Disclaimer , August 12, 2018 at 7:44 pm GMT
"F-35 has inferior kinematic performance to most, if not all, of the Generation 4 fighters it's supposed to replace or oppose. Lack of a bubble canopy is also a major step backwards. Quite a dubious distinction for a new aircraft."

The F-35 will have an over-the-horizon A2A capability that will result in virtually any other aircraft being annihilated long before it closes distance on it. The bubble canopy is really only useful in dogfights; the F-35, scheduled to be built by the thousands, likely won't get into one-on-one engagements without serious air support. The bubble canopy reduces stealth, so it was removed. That was the right decision.

"That leaves its stealth and its supposedly wiz-bang sensors."

Its sensors have already been tested against the F-22 – a proven aircraft – and are almost certainly far and away superior to anything fielded by the Russians. There is no "supposedly" here as the US has already built aircraft with similarly impressive sensor suites. There is no reason to believe the F-35′s sensors won't be just as good, and probably far superior, to what it has already been able to produce. Any belief to the contrary is wishful thinking.

"Stealth is nice, but it drives up operating costs and reduces sortie rates."

The US can easily afford it.

"And on a small aircraft, you can't carry large war loads without sacrificing your stealth."

Doesn't matter. The F-35 will be operating with many other F-35s. Combined, it will be a formidable foe.

"F-35 stealth is in the frontal area only, optimized for the X-band."

No, it's not. The F-35 is simply more stealthy frontal but still stealthy over all. Further, X-band is the frequency required for a weapons lock. All stealth aircraft are specialized for this radar band.

"It will be easily detected by long wavelength radars."

Radars not capable of generating a weapon's grade lock, so they're useless in combat. Further, long wavelength radars – weather radars, basically – can already detect stealth aircraft; that's always been true. Didn't do Iraq any good back in the 90s.

"In air to air combat it would rely upon detecting intercepting aircraft and firing AMRAAMs before they can lock on or, heaven forbid, close to visual range (where the F-35 will be dogmeat)."

Which they will do very effectively. 100 F-35s vs. 100 Russian Su-27s, both closing on each other = 100 piles of wreckage and 100 F-35s.

"The Air Force has long said that the F-35 isn't optimized for air combat. I suppose the idea was that F-22s and legacy fighters would handle air superiority missions. F-35s, with frontal stealth, would be able to get close to targets and attack them with PGMs."

F-35 + F-22 is a potent combination. Even a squadron of F-35s alone would crush anything the Russians have. If necessary, the air force will likely just dogpile a large number of F-35s to make up for any perceived weakness. Considering the numbers scheduled to be produced, that should work fine.

"As for its allegedly wonderful sensors, I am skeptical."

You have no reason to be skeptical. The US has continually fielded next generation weapons that have worked quite well in combat. There is no reason to believe this will be any different. Further, your qualifications seem to be essentially nill in this area as you have displayed very limited knowledge of the subject. Your skepticism doesn't seem to be based on anything concrete, just wishful thinking.

"Lots of air forces continuously modernize old designs with AESA radars, glass cockpits, etc. Why exactly is a new airframe needed for any of this?"

This one statement qualifies you as an amateur that should be ignored.

"That said it's not like the F-35 is awful, and as usual pilot skill and other factors can overcome inappropriate technology."

The technology on the F-35 will crush its competition.

"If you have to buy from Western suppliers, a mix of F-15X and Gripen NGs seems ideal. If you can't afford two classes of fighter, the Rafale is a very good compromise."

Sure, if you're poor and want to lose against countries fielding 5th generation fighter aircraft.

"As for the Su-57, it's somewhat like the F-35 in its limited stealth. But it's also like the Su-27 family in having superb kinematic performance."

Having superb kinematic performance doesn't count for much if your opponent is flying in an aircraft that can shoot you down long before you close to within visual range.

"Russia's official reason for delaying entry into service is that the Su-35 is adequate for existing threats, which is probably true."

Russia is delaying because 1. they can't afford to buy the aircraft 2. they are having trouble constructing the aircraft as designed and in the quantity required 3. it probably isn't as good as the F-35 anyway, so they don't see a point in building it.

Sean , August 12, 2018 at 7:53 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

The F-35 is for transferring US technology to Israel

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/israels-air-force-might-have-the-ultimate-weapon-custom-25983
Lockheed-Martin has mostly refused to allow major country-specific modifications to the F-35, despite the hundreds of millions of dollars foreign F-35 operators contributed to the aircraft's development. Israel, however, managed to carve out an exception. Though not an investor in the F-35's development, Tel Aviv was nonetheless quick to sign on to the program with an initial order of fifty. It also negotiated a favorable deal in which billions of dollars worth of F-35 wings and sophisticated helmet sets would be manufactured in Israel, paid for with U.S. military aid. Furthermore, depot-level maintenance will occur in a facility operated by Israeli Aeronautics Industries rather than at a Lockheed facility abroad.

The Lightning's sophisticated flight computer and ground-based logistics system has become a matter of contention with many F-35 operators. Foreign air forces would like to have greater access to the F-35's computer source codes to upgrade and modify them as they see fit without needing to involve external parties -- but Lockheed doesn't want to hand over full access for both commercial and security-based reasons. Israeli F-35Is uniquely will have an overriding Israeli-built C4 program that runs "on top" of Lockheed's operating system.

Anon [121] Disclaimer , August 12, 2018 at 7:56 pm GMT
"Right, which is why Denmark bought the F-35. The one which even Americans were criticising. Buying American weaponry is often a combination of tribute, corruption and paying protection money."

Please. They bought the F-35 because it is the best aircraft they could get, and they don't trust the Russians. If they wanted to offer tribute, they'd just write a check and buy another aircraft.

Further, much of the so-called criticism of the F-35 came from non-experts in the subject or older guys who worked with the now-outdated F-14. The F-35 has made enough progress for me to believe that it will likely crush anything the Russians have now or in the future. Even if the Russians could build the Su-57, the F-35 would still win in most contests because 1. its sensor suite and over the horizon A2A capability + electronic warfare capability will be appreciably superior 2. it will be built in far larger numbers.

"The F-35 is not very useful for fighting Russia or China, but fine for fighting most anyone else."

The F-35 will be quite effective against any aircraft those countries currently field. Any belief to the contrary is either ignorance or delusion. The US isn't spending a trillion dollars on this thing to fight Trinidad and Tobago.

Thorfinnsson , August 12, 2018 at 8:25 pm GMT
@Anon

The F-35 will have an over-the-horizon A2A capability that will result in virtually any other aircraft being annihilated long before it closes distance on it. The bubble canopy is really only useful in dogfights; the F-35, scheduled to be built by the thousands, likely won't get into one-on-one engagements without serious air support. The bubble canopy reduces stealth, so it was removed. That was the right decision.

"Over-the-horizon A2A capability" has existed for half a century. Previously structuring our airpower around this concept resulted in high losses in Vietnam.

The real reason for the bubble canopy's elimination (note that the stealthier F-22 and YF-23 both have bubble canopies) is the ridiculous insistence on the same platform being used for a STOVL aircraft with a lift fan placed right in the middle of the fuselage.

If your goal is to maximize stealth and only fight BVR engagements, the F-35′s design is entirely inappropriate. After all, its stealth is in the front area only and it can't carry a large missile load.

Optimizing exclusively for BVR combat would entail a large tailless aircraft (perhaps a flying wing) with all-aspect stealth, large internal volumes of missiles, and far more powerful radar.

The F-35′s design is based on political and economic considerations, not military ones.

Its sensors have already been tested against the F-22 – a proven aircraft – and are almost certainly far and away superior to anything fielded by the Russians. There is no "supposedly" here as the US has already built aircraft with similarly impressive sensor suites. There is no reason to believe the F-35′s sensors won't be just as good, and probably far superior, to what it has already been able to produce. Any belief to the contrary is wishful thinking.

I have no doubt in the capability to produce and field top-class avionics. What I do doubt is the idea that we produce (and always will produce) superior avionics to anyone else. Europe, Russia, China, Japan, and even tiny Israel all produce AESA radars. The US lagged Russia (and Europe) in IRST for decades. The US is far behind on low-frequency radar.

The US can easily afford it.

You'll note that this was originally about F-35 exports . A solution with high operating costs and low sortie rates is problematic for anyone, but especially undesirable for a small power.

Radars not capable of generating a weapon's grade lock, so they're useless in combat. Further, long wavelength radars – weather radars, basically – can already detect stealth aircraft; that's always been true. Didn't do Iraq any good back in the 90s.

Detection is not useless. It allows you to vector interceptors until they get close enough for a radar lock or can identify the target with IRST or visual tracking.

Incompetent Arabalonians. Norman Scwhartzkopf stated that if you'd reversed the weapons on each side but kept the personnel and training the same, the Allied coalition would've still handily won. Serbia incidentally did successfully shoot down an F-117, which largely owed itself to the skill of the operator in question and poor tactics on the part of NATO.

Which they will do very effectively. 100 F-35s vs. 100 Russian Su-27s, both closing on each other = 100 piles of wreckage and 100 F-35s.

The RAND Corporation disagreed and projected one Su-35 lost for each 2.4 F-35s.

F-35 + F-22 is a potent combination. Even a squadron of F-35s alone would crush anything the Russians have. If necessary, the air force will likely just dogpile a large number of F-35s to make up for any perceived weakness. Considering the numbers scheduled to be produced, that should work fine.

F-22 production capped at 187 units, and none were exported to other countries (despite persistent requests from Japan).

You have no reason to be skeptical. The US has continually fielded next generation weapons that have worked quite well in combat. There is no reason to believe this will be any different. Further, your qualifications seem to be essentially nill in this area as you have displayed very limited knowledge of the subject. Your skepticism doesn't seem to be based on anything concrete, just wishful thinking.
[...]
This one statement qualifies you as an amateur that should be ignored.
[...]
The technology on the F-35 will crush its competition.

This is what is known as projection. Identifying in others the sins that you yourself are guilty of.

Sure, if you're poor and want to lose against countries fielding 5th generation fighter aircraft.

Many countries are poor. Others are small or have limited defense budgets. Though I contend thee aircraft in question are in fact superior to the F-35 which makes this moot.

Having superb kinematic performance doesn't count for much if your opponent is flying in an aircraft that can shoot you down long before you close to within visual range.

Superb kinematic performance enables earlier missile shots, makes it easier to defeat incoming missile shots, allows for faster transit in and out of combat zones, and gives a decisive edge in WVR combat.

The F-35 program developed a first-class powerplant and avionics, but then mated then to an inferior airframe in order to fulfill a commonality fantasy driven by a silly Marine Corps STOVL requirement.

Sean , August 12, 2018 at 8:49 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

The Kremlin would have killed the organ grinder (Boris Abramovich Berezovsky) not the monkey. Litvinenko virtually committed suicide. People become depressed when they are exiles.. Litvinenko publicly accused Putin of the apartment bombings by Chechens that killed hundreds of Russians so he must have had some inkling that Putin could be dangerous.

If you publicly call someone a child molester they will at least fantasize about killing you, and if they have the means and opportunity then it is not the biggest surprise in the world if you give them the motive and you are killed by a method that is as good as a signed confession they did it. Putin wanted Litvinenko to know who had put an end to him. That was the whole point of using alpha radiation; nice and slow all the while knowing who did it. Putin is very like another famous Vlad.

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/vampirediaries/images/0/08/Vlad-The-Impaler-dracula-untold-37680708-854-347.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20141217165742

reiner Tor , August 12, 2018 at 9:27 pm GMT
@Sean

If you publicly call someone a child molester they will at least fantasize about killing you

I have fantasized about killing people who had seriously harmed me or the public. But I have never fantasized about killing a clown, nor can I ever imagine fantasizing about it. I cannot imagine anyone who is not a psychopath fantasizing about killing a clown. By accusing Putin of the house explosions and converting to Islam etc. Litvinenko totally jumped the shark. He was a clown, a tool used by others.

Now it's not impossible that Putin nevertheless wanted to murder Litvinenko, but you have just assumed how Putin would think and then proceeded to jump to a conclusion based on that assumption.

Litvinenko was a poor devil, incapable of harming Putin. If anyone harmed Putin, it's Berezovsky or the western media which gave a platform to poor devils like Litvinenko. Do you think Putin is so stupid that he hates the tools instead of the powerful people wielding them?

Mr. Hack , August 12, 2018 at 10:05 pm GMT
@Mikhail

[MORE]

That is pretty incredible, however, because of your reputation perhaps she was afraid of some sort of retribution for being critical of you? I notice that you often like to taunt me on by calling me a 'coward' for using a moniker instead of presenting you with my true identity. Whether deserved or not, many feel that you're some sort of a Kremlin Stooge nutcase, Mickey. From Srebrenica Genocide Denier to this:

friend of mike averko | April 12, 2010 at 4:17 pm | Reply
I have known mike averko for a very long time and wish to warn all of you who feel safe mocking him and his rants this is not someone you want to get angry . HE IS INSANE!!! I have seen how this man lives and it is not that of a healthy person, it is that of someone insane. Make your comments but don't ever let this man into yuour life in any way or you will end up being sorry.

This is why I choose to shield my true identity from you, Mickey. Who needs any grief from a Kremlin Stooge wacko?

utu , August 12, 2018 at 10:12 pm GMT
@anonymous coward

[MORE]

So it comes down to the meaning after all.

No, it actually doesn't.

No, it does.

The machine that draws the numbers for a lottery manages to pick 7 winning numbers every week. It never fails to pick the winning numbers. Is this an amazing feat? The numbers it picks are the winning numbers while millions of lottery players have great difficulty to pick the winning numbers and spend millions of dollar on it while the cost to the machine is just few bucks.

Shakespeare picked 458 'winning' letters but if you would try to reproduce them in the same sequence by random selections it becomes probabilistically impossible task.

Finding a winning sonnet by Shakespeare for the Universe was not a probabilistic feat just as it is not for the lottery machine to pick the winning numbers. It all comes down to the meaning and when that meaning is assigned. You assigned a special meaning to this particular sequence of 458 letters just like lottery players assign special meaning to 7 numbers picked by a machine.

Mr. Hack , August 12, 2018 at 10:13 pm GMT
@Cyrano

Although you show a lot of promise, unfortunately there are still a few rough edges. Don't concentrate so much on your less than honorable pedigree, but work on improving your emotional dilemmas. AP is a medical doctor, and has diagnosed some of your ailments. Listen to him, for he's a pure blood Slav. And you know how great the Slavic race is. (I know that you can overcome!).

g2k , August 12, 2018 at 10:31 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

On the subject of of agriculture, it should be noted that Rostelmash has done ok for a big sovok behemoth and has had at least some success exporting west. It's combines are competitive with the American makes but not Claas, they've also been able to buy up varsatile. This is quite surprising given the fact that rostov has a reputation for being a rough and corrupt place. Ak, any thoughts?

APilgrim , August 12, 2018 at 10:33 pm GMT
The US Congress, has popularity & confidence levels in the toilet.

Congress, in defiance of public opinion has MANDATED 'Russia-Sanctions', in the law.

Congress has done this overwhelmingly & repeatedly, without VISIBLE public support.

There is no evidence available to the American Public which justifies 'Russia-Sanctions'.

Sadly, the USA Public regards Vladimir Putin more highly than they regard congress.

Vladimir Putin has consistently high favorable ratings with the US Public.

Congress is rated below treatable venereal diseases, but above Ebola.

APilgrim , August 12, 2018 at 10:41 pm GMT
Sadly, the USA Public regards Vladimir Putin more highly than they regard congress.

Vladimir Putin has consistently high favorable ratings with the US Public.

Congress is rated below treatable venereal diseases, but above Ebola.

Cyrano , August 12, 2018 at 11:08 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

You make it sound like being a Slav is like being a member of an exclusive club. How exclusive can it be if you – the Ukrainians are in it? I would say that that is setting the standards pretty low. Don't worry about my "emotional" dilemmas. I am happy with who I am, which can't be said about you people. You seem quite torn between your Western European heritage and your humble Slavic origin that gets in the way of being recognized as one of the nations that are pillars of western civilization which everybody agrees that you are.

Thorfinnsson , August 12, 2018 at 11:20 pm GMT
@g2k

USSR engaged in intensive agricultural motorization earlier than any country other than the USA and Canada. It was also fairly early to intensive chemicalization, mainly beaten out by Germany and America.

In the postwar period the share of capital investment devoted to agriculture varied from 11.8% in 1946-1950 to a peak of 20.1% in 1971-1975.

Not surprising there is something of a positive legacy. Main failures of postwar Soviet agriculture were distribution and processing. Not enough roads or trucks, inadequate cold chain, too few food processing plants, etc.

Belarus also has a successful agricultural machinery sector as well.

Heavy transportation machinery was generally a Soviet success story, probably because not only are they producer goods but they also require routine replacement. Thus unlike other capital goods in centrally-planned economies they weren't kept in service long past the time they ceased to be efficient. The irrational "development" of Siberia also increased the size of this sector and the quality of its output.

Lastly, worth noting Rostelmash has been privately owned since 2000.

utu , August 12, 2018 at 11:24 pm GMT
@Anon

The F-35 will have an over-the-horizon A2A capability that will result in virtually any other aircraft being annihilated long before it closes distance on it.

If this is the case then obviously its 'kinematic performance' is secondary. If you can see the enemy before it can see you and you have weapons to engage the enemy then obviously your top speed and acceleration are not that important. The missile you launch is faster than your top speed and your enemy's top speed.

But there are doubts. How much the stealth technology is a hype? Is information about radar cross sections of various planes credible?

Sean , August 12, 2018 at 11:25 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

I thought like you before Skripal, but after the second in a row I understood this was either Western intelligence or Putin's orders. Western intelligence simply would not dare frame Putin because the Russians would become too jumpy. Yeltsin almost started WW3 in 1995, there is no telling what could happen if the West was framing Putin repeatedly and he responded by putting Russian forces on red alert, then something like the Black Brant scare occurred.

Litvinenko was a poor devil.

I don't think he was a happy man.

Now it's not impossible that Putin nevertheless wanted to murder Litvinenko, but you have just assumed how Putin would think and then proceeded to jump to a conclusion based on that assumption.

I happen to believe that Putin is deliberately trying to alienate the West with these assassinations because he wants Russia to remain proudly independent after he is gone. Yet he has to justify that policy to his close associates many of whom who love the Western lifestyle and making money. It is like Hitler having to explain his attack on the USSR to his generals and Goebbels by saying it was necessary to remove that threat from the east before moving against Britain. Obviously Hitler really longed to conquer Russia, and it seems likely to me that Putin wants to initiate schismogenesis with the West. He probably is not telling his cronies that though, there will be some security pretext.

Do you think Putin is so stupid that he hates the tools instead of the powerful people wielding them?

Putin has more power than anyone else on Earth, I should have thought that was obvious by now. He wants to exert control when he is no longer there, and that means setting Russia on a course that cannot be altered, and consulting/implicating the entire future leadership cadre.

Philip Owen , August 12, 2018 at 11:27 pm GMT
@g2k

John Deere does very well in Russia because they own a local factory. They seem to be the combine of choice because they have faster parts distribution than Class. Rostelmash does better than it used to but the really big commercial farms and associated contractors buy the best machines. The operators on the ex cooperatives, usually farmed under (corrupt) rental arrangements tend to use Rostelmash, insofar as they buy new.

Mikhail , Website August 12, 2018 at 11:41 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

[MORE]

No, you're a cowardly anonymous troll, who uncritically references such people. Much different from yours truly.

Thorfinnsson , August 13, 2018 at 12:13 am GMT
@utu

In BVR combat kinematic performance is indeed secondary to the performance of sensors, electronic warfare equipment, and missiles.

But not irrelevant. Higher top speed allows for longer-ranged missile shots. Faster acceleration (and, for that matter, turning performance) allows for faster escape from the combat zone.

Note how BVR optimized interceptors like the F-102/106, MiG-25/31, F-4, F-111B, English Electric Lightning, and so forth had great top speeds and excellent acceleration. They were however lacking in maneuverability as it was not intended for them to dogfight (hence the bad air combat performance over North Vietnam).

China's Chengdu J-20 is a modern stealth aircraft designed for this role. The F-35 is not. It's basically a tactical strike fighter. Historical analogues would be the F-100, F-105, SEPECAT Jaguar, Su-24, and so forth.

Tactical strike fighters of the classic style are dubious today since multi-mode radars and PGMs have made fighters very capable of ground attack.

Stealth isn't hype unless you believe the maximalist fanboy nonsense from the 1990s.

utu , August 13, 2018 at 1:24 am GMT
@Thorfinnsson

If indeed F-22 and F-35 have several orders of magnitude smaller cross-sections (RCS) than other jet fighters then obviously it is a huge advantage that if utilized will render small differences (±10%) in speed and acceleration completely unimportant.

F-22 RCS=0.0001 sqm
F-35 RCS=0.005 sqm

F16 RCS= 5 sqm
SU-35s RCS= 1-3 sqm
PAK-FA (T-50) RCS=0.5 sqm

Providing that one can trust this blogger:

http://mil-embedded.com/guest-blogs/radar-cross-section-the-measure-of-stealth/

Mr. Hack , August 13, 2018 at 1:28 am GMT
@Cyrano

being recognized as one of the nations that are pillars of western civilization which everybody agrees that you are.

Like I said, you're showing some progress. It's hard an takes some time, don't get discouraged.

Mr. Hack , August 13, 2018 at 1:33 am GMT
@Mikhail

Much different from yours truly.

You're right about that, and I'm glad to be different from you. At least people aren't leaving messages about me at blogs warning them that I might be dangerous to deal with. 'Sbrebrenica Genocide Denier' is nothing to be proud about, Mickey.

dfordoom , Website August 13, 2018 at 1:38 am GMT
@Felix Keverich

Realistically, what action Russia could take that would potentially match the disruptive power of American sanctions on Russia? Arm the Central American drug cartels?

I quite like that idea!

Provide sophisticated arms to everybody (no matter how crazy) with an ability to cause grief to the U.S.

The U.S. objective is not to punish Russia or weaken Russia. The U.S. objective is to destroy Russia as a sovereign nation. This is war to the death. There can be no negotiation with the U.S. The only hope of forcing the Americans to adopt a sane policy is to make the costs of their current policy catastrophically high.

The U.S. is obviously stronger but a strong man will usually back down if faced with someone crazy and unpredictable. Putin needs to be crazy and unpredictable.

And Russia needs to target America's lapdogs, like the British. Perhaps let them know that if it ever came to nuclear war London would be a priority target.

AnonFromTN , August 13, 2018 at 1:39 am GMT
@Mikhail

[MORE]

Svidomism is a mental disorder, incurable like the rest of them. You are violating the first rule of psychiatry: never argue with patients.

Parbes , August 13, 2018 at 2:28 am GMT
@Felix Keverich

U.S. "public opinion" is literally the collective opinion of dumbed-down, amoral idiots. In fact, the word "opinion" is too dignified for this – "braindead recantation of MSM-fed government propaganda" would be a better description.

Thorfinnsson , August 13, 2018 at 2:41 am GMT
@utu

Stealth is definitely an advantage.

But it's not an invisibility cloak.

It's optimized for certain wavelengths and expected receiver locations.

Thus stealth aircraft can for instance be readily detected by low frequency radars. Stealth is still useful as low frequency radars are too bulky to fly, and they indicate a general location rather than a precise location.

Stealth aircraft can also be detected visually, acoustically, through their own electronic emissions, and through their heat signatures. Employment of weapons, obviously, compromises stealth as well.

There are also degrees of stealth. The F-22 for instance is considered an all-aspect stealth design, at least in the higher frequency bands. The Have Blue, MBB Lampyridae, F-117, B-2, and YF-23 were as well.

The F-35 however is not–it's only stealth optimized in the frontal area. This of course reflects the fact that it was never intended to be an air superiority fighter, but incompetent American force planning is now pressing it into that role.

Lastly, while stealth is obviously a good capability (hence why everyone is following America's lead on it), it's not without trade-offs. Stealth is lost if weapons are carried externally. Radar absorbing materials are costly and maintenance intensive (though the Japanese may have solved this problem). Because stealth requires precision shaping of the airframe, it is difficult to modify the airframe for future requirements.

Mikhail , Website August 13, 2018 at 3:00 am GMT
@Mr. Hack

[MORE]

A few cranks out of many more thinking quite differently.

You of course can take pride in being a cowardly anonymous troll.

Mikhail , Website August 13, 2018 at 3:02 am GMT
@AnonFromTN

[MORE]

Yes, I've been told that.

utu , August 13, 2018 at 3:20 am GMT
@Thorfinnsson

"But it's not an invisibility cloak." – Nobody talks about invisibility. RCS matters. You detect enemy plane before it detects you. Period.

"The F-35 however is not–it's only stealth optimized in the frontal area. " – Presumably it will show its rear to its enemy only when the enemy will be already falling down after being hit.

"Stealth aircraft can also be detected visually " – Nobody argues invisibility.

"it was never intended to be an air superiority fighter". – It all depend on superiority over whom. Anyway this is a vague and pompous term.

"Stealth is lost if weapons are carried externally." – What good are those weapons for if you are shot before you see your stealthy enemy?

"Radar absorbing materials are costly and maintenance intensive". – Yes. That's why Russians do not have it.

Listen. I do not really care about this issue and I do not know much about it. I just responded to your arguments which are mostly rhetorical in nature among at diminishing importance of the orders of magnitude lower RCS of F-22 and F-35 comparing to that of their potential opponents.

Mr. Hack , August 13, 2018 at 3:36 am GMT
@AnonFromTN

[MORE]

Do you remember Ukraine? remember your Ukrainian mother? you're a sorry excuse for a human being, a modern day janissary.

reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 3:44 am GMT
@Sean

I thought like you before Skripal, but after the second in a row I understood this was either Western intelligence or Putin's orders.

Or something else neither of us thought of. It's a false dichotomy when we have no information at all about the whole thing, the only thing we know is that the British are lying.

Western intelligence simply would not dare frame Putin because the Russians would become too jumpy.

But that's just your model. Maybe they wouldn't become jumpy, or maybe the Western intelligence services would dare frame him anyway.

By the way it's interesting that you managed to draw a psychological profile of Putin based on just two cases a decade apart, and Putin only did it twice in his whole reign. Sure if he enjoyed torturing his critics he'd do it more, wouldn't he?

Yeltsin almost started WW3 in 1995, there is no telling what could happen if the West was framing Putin repeatedly and he responded by putting Russian forces on red alert, then something like the Black Brant scare occurred.

Risk management is my job. People don't think about risks that way. They assign a very low probability to events like the Black Brant scare, and anyway probably Putin would just realize it was only one rocket. There's no reason to believe he'd be any more likely to launch than Yeltsin.

Daniel Chieh , August 13, 2018 at 4:26 am GMT
@utu

Stealth is of limited use in an air-to-air role to take down enemy fighters(air superiority fighter) since missiles are not "stealth" and their guidance systems very, very obviously telegraph their intentions: thus "missile lock" warning. The longer range just telegraphs their intentions earlier, which gives the targeted plane more options to employ countermeasures.

However, ground sites lack many countermeasures against incoming missile launches and cannot lock onto low-visibility planes from the front, so even if its general location is known, there's not much that a SAM site can do to it in theory. Thus, it has a very effective, but limited role.

This is of questionable utility against a peer competitor since they will not be using ground to air systems in isolation, although it probably means that the US can destroy any number of third world countries.

Mikhail , Website August 13, 2018 at 4:27 am GMT
@Mr. Hack

[MORE]

On your warped world, cranks like La Russophobe and pro-Bosnian Muslim extremists are okay.

Mr. Hack , August 13, 2018 at 4:34 am GMT
@Mikhail

[MORE]

Nah, not really. In my world, only cranks like you are special. Don't worry, your status as #1 Kremlin Stooge remains intact.

Cyrano , August 13, 2018 at 4:37 am GMT
@Mr. Hack

Like I said, you're showing some progress

I wish I could say the same thing about the Ukrainians. You are showing nothing but regress since 1991, but I don't expect that you'll agree with that. It's one of the side effects of having a thick head.

You know how the Ukrainians got their name? It's from the Latin Cranium for scull. Basically, what it means is that when any new idea (or old one for that matter) tries to penetrate the thick Ukrainian sculls – it has to make a U turn when it reaches their fortified cranial structures – U Cranium – therefore Ukraine. Get it? It's pretty discouraging actually.

reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 4:55 am GMT
@utu

A good case could be made that we don't know how these jets would perform under the conditions of a real world war. But I think it's always the best bet that it will be the American weapons which perform the best. That's simply the way to bet.

It's possible that many of their weapons systems wouldn't perform as advertised. Some would perform better than thought or for roles they weren't designed for.

It's a very safe decision to buy the F-35, which is now not even that expensive. It's possible that it won't be worth much in a real war against comparable opponents, but this could be true of any other platform: these weapons are only tried out against vastly inferior opponents.

You detect enemy plane before it detects you. Period.

He will usually have a vague idea where you are. Currently it's not possible to launch a missile based on that vague knowledge, but will it stay like that forever? A lot depends on other systems like air defense and AWACS.

Anyway, my original point was that probably buying the F-35 is not based on politics, it's a safe decision for those with deep enough pockets to buy the best available fighter jet. Even if under the circumstances of a real war it turned out to be bad: it could happen to a number of other weapons systems anyway, and you cannot really tell in advance which ones.

reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 5:12 am GMT
@Daniel Chieh

The longer range just telegraphs their intentions earlier

But wouldn't the idea be that you get closer to the enemy without being detected? Your argument might work against BVR combat in general, but more against non-stealth BVR combat than against stealth: stealthy planes will probably employ their BVR weapons from closer range than non-stealthy planes.

If BVR air-to-air missiles work at all, they work much better with stealthy planes. Regardless of whether against peer or non-peer opponents.

utu , August 13, 2018 at 5:13 am GMT
@Daniel Chieh

Stealth is of limited use in an air-to-air role to take down enemy fighters(air superiority fighter) since missiles are not "stealth" and their guidance systems very, very obviously telegraph their intentions: thus "missile lock" warning. The longer range just telegraphs their intentions earlier, which gives the targeted plane more options to employ countermeasures.

If your argument states that it is actually bad to deploy weapons far away (which I do not understand) I would say that the stealth will allow you to get much closer to the enemy w/o being detected and makes it possible to launch the missile when there will be not less time for the enemy to deploy countermeasures.

I realize this is a complex game with many possible strategies and tactics with many parameters involved. For each strategy there are decision regions where the different parameters dominate what will be the optimal tactic. Furthermore we really do not know how effective various countermeasures are but I suspect that they might be decisive. But if they fail and planes get close to each other within the visual range then obvious completely different parameters might be decisive including the human factor.

I won't argue with you on this subject because I know you were raised by video games so you now better at least in the realm of video games model. I would not argue with Mowgli about the purpose and efficacy of howling at the moon. Perhaps it was a sophisticated countermeasure.

utu , August 13, 2018 at 5:16 am GMT
@reiner Tor

Exactly!

Daniel Chieh , August 13, 2018 at 6:39 am GMT
@utu

I actually have never played a flight simulator within recent memory. As far as I'm aware, none of them really calculate the issues of missile flight with any degree of accuracy and treat guidance systems like some sort of magic. My comments are actually speculations from conversations with military pilots.

If your argument states that it is actually bad to deploy weapons far away (which I do not understand)

Missiles have extremely limited flight times and their flight characteristics degrade after launch. Disrupting either their guidance or their flight negates the kill chain.

I would say that the stealth will allow you to get much closer to the enemy w/o being detected and makes it possible to launch the missile when there will be not less time for the enemy to deploy countermeasures.

This is possible, but ever-increasingly decreases the window of attack that is beyond visual range. Its possible that this is the idea, coupled with the Block III Sidewinders which are designed against a number of countermeasures, but that seems to have been cancelled for some reason.

reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 6:42 am GMT
@utu

Though the first comment there:

If you don't know the composite materials used, you can not give a correct RCS, and you can not tell just by looking, the physics don't work like that!

So at least we have the word of the US Air Force and Lockheed regarding the stealthiness of their planes (these are probably not outright lies, but might differ from reality in either direction: they might be modest to hide their true capabilities, or, more likely, exaggerate and give a number only true under ideal conditions for a specific type of radar etc. ), but regarding the supposedly 5th generation Chinese or Russian jets we have just very rough estimates based on the shape and some assumptions about their coating.

Imperial Menopause , August 13, 2018 at 7:29 am GMT
How hard is Imperial Menopause

Nowadays USA is Sactionistan ,sanctions !! sanctions !! sanctions !!

I read that the USA is considering sanctions to Russia because she thinks Russia insulted Mickey Mouse .

Kairos , August 13, 2018 at 7:47 am GMT
So many US sanctions and interdictions , to friends and foes alike , will end up isolating the US .

The US pressure to the EU not to trade with Russia , Iran and other countries has provoked a deep resentment in the EU and has turned the US into a very unreliable partner , and even a dangerous " friend " .

The Alarmist , August 13, 2018 at 8:13 am GMT
The better part of four decades ago, President Reagan made a joke about outlawing the Soviet Union and the press and the left went apeshit. Now Congress seriously proposes legislation that would essentially outlaw Russia, and the press and the left are all for it.
reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 8:42 am GMT
@Daniel Chieh

ever-increasingly decreases the window of attack that is beyond visual range

How many seconds will the stealth pilot have to identify the target and fire its missiles? Sixty? Hundred-twenty? Thirty? Even thirty seconds must be enough for a well enough trained pilot.

There might be issues with how to leave the scene after having killed an opponent, if other enemies are still there, because it's less stealthy from other angles. I guess we're not the first to think about it, so probably there's some solution. At the very least, I wouldn't expect them to perform worse than the 4th gen planes.

reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 8:47 am GMT
@Thorfinnsson

I think even the production of the F-16 is about to end.

Yes, the Gripen is a good and cheap alternative, but it's not the best available in the western ecosystem. The F-35 would probably destroy an equal number of Gripens, though that's not saying much, considering the price differential.

Hungary also has Gripens, though we didn't fully equip them until recently, and I don't think we spend enough on training the pilots.

Anonymous [333] Disclaimer , August 13, 2018 at 8:57 am GMT
@reiner Tor

These demands on Russia are about as sincere and plausible as the ultimata given to Serbia after Sarajevo. They are not credible but meant only as a prelude to war. The whole slow-motion drama, with all its attendant false flags (MH17, the Skripals, gassings in Syria, etc), numerous rounds of sanctions and specious rhetoric including accusations of "stealing the election" from Hillary, since Putin checked Obama's attempt to seize Russia's Crimean base and recruit another hostile NATO member on that country's frontier has been meant to convince the American public that Russia is our country's blood enemy, that it is run by an insane dictator the equal of Hitler, and that the consequent world war will have been all Putin's fault in spite of America bending over backwards to make peace with those vicious mongrels from the steppes.

As a commentor above said, I'd hate to be killed by a Russian nuke directed at my city only because of an insane American leadership, but I'd equally hate for tens of millions of Russians (and others) to be exterminated by our weapons simply to further an agenda being promoted by the likes of Jeff Bezos, Sheldon Adelson and the other plutocrats who really pull all the strings in Washington to benefit themselves plus their Saudi and Israeli co-conspirators in some great game to rule the world. I'd say that Washington is about poised to commit the greatest crime in the history of the human race, and chances are good that it will be the last.

Anon [332] Disclaimer , August 13, 2018 at 9:42 am GMT
"Stealth is of limited use in an air-to-air role to take down enemy fighters(air superiority fighter) since missiles are not "stealth" and their guidance systems very, very obviously telegraph their intentions: thus "missile lock" warning. The longer range just telegraphs their intentions earlier, which gives the targeted plane more options to employ countermeasures."

That's not quite true. The ability to shoot a barrage of sophisticated missiles at an opponent that can't shoot back beyond visual range should be quite useful in combat; these missiles will also close the gap much sooner than you would think, so it's not like an enemy is going to have all day to deal with incoming threats. Further, electronic countermeasures won't be perfect as most A2A missiles fielded by the US will have systems designed to defeat them. The F-35 will also be fielded in large enough numbers such that they'll just overwhelm opponents with their stealth ability. Combine the F-35 with the F-18 or F-22, and you'll have a very effective air dominance force.

"This is of questionable utility against a peer competitor since they will not be using ground to air systems in isolation, although it probably means that the US can destroy any number of third world countries."

I expect the F-35 to do quite well against both Russia and China in helping to establish air dominance. The F-35 will additionally have utility against surface S2A units. The navy could overwhelm Russian and Chinese air defenses – even assuming they are quite effective – by coordinating strikes with F-22s and F-35s. Those air defenses will go active, and the F-35 will then be able to hit many of them with a degree of survivability + coordinate with surface ships to smoke them out, mobile or not.

APilgrim , August 13, 2018 at 9:46 am GMT
George Soros (AKA György Schwartz) is a bigger threat to the USA, than Vladimir Putin.
APilgrim , August 13, 2018 at 9:47 am GMT
Ex-Pat William Felix Browder is a bigger threat to the USA, than Vladimir Putin.
APilgrim , August 13, 2018 at 9:48 am GMT
The lying MSM is a bigger threat to the USA, than Vladimir Putin.
APilgrim , August 13, 2018 at 9:49 am GMT
The ChiCOMS are a bigger threat to the USA, than Vladimir Putin.
APilgrim , August 13, 2018 at 9:49 am GMT
Muhammadans are a bigger threat to the USA, than Vladimir Putin.
APilgrim , August 13, 2018 at 9:51 am GMT
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is a bigger threat, than Vladimir Putin.
reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 9:53 am GMT
@Anonymous

These demands on Russia are about as sincere and plausible as the ultimata given to Serbia after Sarajevo. They are not credible but meant only as a prelude to war.

That's the most frightening part.

utu , August 13, 2018 at 9:53 am GMT
@Daniel Chieh

I have never put much thought into these issues. But now after reading comments and some articles I realized that this is a fascinating topic and that there are many people somewhere who study it, write simulations and developed optimal algorithms for all possible situations where they have input data on all plane and missile characteristics except with only partial knowledge of enemy characteristics and efficacy of countermeasures. So I think that everything has been already calculated. When and what to shoot and when and where to turn and when to retreat and so on. And as new data are flowing in with the outcome of the first missile or the arrival of another enemy plane the master program is just bringing in pre-calculated solutions for each new situations. And then every geometric configuration must have been analyzed and optimal actions has been found. Furthermore optimal configuration were found about how to fly , in what formations, with what speeds and so on. Mathematically this problem might not be harder than a chess game on multiple boards and thus I think a completely autonomous AI system must exist where pilot is really not needed. The only big unknown are countermeasures. You do not have them in chess. Can pilot be better in making some decisions in the present of countermeasure than computer? I doubt it.

Now the question is who is better in this game? Russians or Americans? It all comes down to money. How many good mathematicians, computer programmers and physicists I can employ? In USSR at secret sites like Arzamas-16 they had departments where 1000 or so PhDs in math (many, many women) worked. In Yeltsin times and probably before they mostly drank tea and coffee, organized birthday celebrations and send designated ones to stand in lines to do shopping. And it all fell apart. But in the US DARPA and Aerospace R&D continued w/o a break. So I would not hesitate to bet on Americans that they have significantly better systems. Another question is about spying. Jews are not as numerous as they were in R&D and no longer enamored with the Soviet Union, so it is more likely that India and China has know more about it and obviously Israel but through more official channels. But the fact that F-22 was not donated to Israel yet may suggest that there are still some boundaries within American MIC that are off limits even to our beloved Jews.

No future , August 13, 2018 at 9:57 am GMT
@Anon

Sounds like you want a war of the US against Russia and China , do you really ?

And even sounds that you think that the US could win it , and the atomic long range missiles ?

Mitleser , August 13, 2018 at 10:01 am GMT
@reiner Tor

Yes, the Gripen is a good and cheap alternative, but it's not the best available in the western ecosystem. The F-35 would probably destroy an equal number of Gripens, though that's not saying much, considering the price differential.

You don't ask for the "best", you ask for the right system.
Unless you need a stealth strike fighter (and don't mind Lockheed's involvement), the F-35 does not have to be the right one.
In Hungary's case, it is more important to have enough jets for air patrol duty.

reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 10:12 am GMT
@utu

Can pilot be better in making some decisions in the present of countermeasure than computer? I doubt it.

I doubt it. It's open ended, and the number of variations practically infinite. The computer can do most things way better than a human, but then could succumb to stupidity in some unknown situation, like the Tesla charging at full speed into the firetruck. Is the Tesla autopilot better than a well trained professional human, like a rally race driver? I don't think so, especially in unexpected (for the computer) situations, where the human would just do the easy and sensible thing, but not the computer.

Anyway, the US warplanes are still flown by human pilots. Of course, most things which could be automated are automated, and the logical conclusion is fully autonomous drones flying without much input from their handlers in underground bunkers.

Jews are not as numerous as they were in R&D and no longer enamored with the Soviet Union, so it is more likely that India and China has know more about it and obviously Israel but through more official channels.

Do you think that one of the things Israel pays Putin for being so friendly to him is US military tech? They did sell Russia some drones back in the Medvedev days, but nothing more recent can be found. But I'd be surprised if Putin didn't think about it. I also think it's not above Netanyahu to sell Russia American secrets. They gave such secrets to the USSR, and they also helped China more recently. I'm sure that if there's anything going on, the MSM wouldn't be reporting much on it. They also rarely wrote about the extent of the Israel-South Africa arms trade, and things only got worse recently.

But maybe it's not happening.

reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 10:13 am GMT
@Mitleser

The F-35 would cost so much that we couldn't operate it. We can at least operate the Gripens. Having Gripens is better than having nothing.

reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 10:16 am GMT
@No future

I think you can write about American military tech being better than Russian military tech without wanting a war between the two.

utu , August 13, 2018 at 10:33 am GMT
@reiner Tor

Whatever is going on within the triangle Trump-Netnayahu-Putin is the most puzzling and the most interesting.

Anon [123] Disclaimer , August 13, 2018 at 10:37 am GMT
"The RAND Corporation disagreed and projected one Su-35 lost for each 2.4 F-35s."

I believe that study was conducted under the assumption of within visual range, which artificially presented a situation where the F-35 was at a disadvantage from the get go. In a real world situation, the Su-35 would probably be shot down before it knew what hit it, especially considering that American pilots tend to be among the best in the world.

"F-22 production capped at 187 units, and none were exported to other countries (despite persistent requests from Japan)."

That's irrelevant for three reasons:

1) 187 is still a number far greater than the number of Su-57s the Russians wanted to produce in the near term.

2) the F-22 is often stationed at bases around the world, so the US does not need to sell the aircraft to anyone to bring it to a theater of combat.

3) the F-22 would dominate any Russian or Chinese aircraft currently fielded; an appreciable number of F-22s (or any US fourth generation aircraft) along with the F-35 should be a potent combination. US pilots are also very well trained, easily matching any other country save perhaps Israel.

"This is what is known as projection. Identifying in others the sins that you yourself are guilty of."

Please. Extrapolation from a set of known facts and historical precedent is hardly projection. What you've done is classic deflection.

"Many countries are poor. Others are small or have limited defense budgets. Though I contend thee aircraft in question are in fact superior to the F-35 which makes this moot."

The aircraft you quoted are certainly not superior, so the issue is hardly moot.

"Superb kinematic performance enables earlier missile shots, makes it easier to defeat incoming missile shots, allows for faster transit in and out of combat zones, and gives a decisive edge in WVR combat."

Kinematic performance doesn't cont for much when you are overwhelmed by aircraft that you can't shoot back at effectively while they are shooting at you from a distance. Kinematic performance isn't nothing, but it isn't everything either. The F-35 will have a decisive advantage over all Russian aircraft fielded now and over the next decade, and any issues with the design will be made up for by fielding large numbers of them to overwhelm opponents + combining the aircraft with the F-22 or F-18.

"The F-35 program developed a first-class powerplant and avionics, but then mated then to an inferior airframe in order to fulfill a commonality fantasy driven by a silly Marine Corps STOVL requirement."

That's not really the right way to phrase it. "Inferior" in this case only means "less than what the US could have otherwise done but still quite good compared to most other aircraft."

Further, the philosophy you quoted will allow the US to field huge numbers of these craft – thousands – at an affordable price, so I'm not so sure it was a bad idea after all. That's much better than the SU-57, which is a dumpster fire of a program.

I'm also not sold on the idea that the B model was a bad idea for the Asian theater. In any conflict, the Chinese will attempt to destroy our bases and landing strips. Having a larger number of fighters capable of short vertical takeoffs might prove to be quite the asset in organizing a counter offensive/stationing the craft in various locations that are hard to hit or detect.

"If your goal is to maximize stealth and only fight BVR engagements, the F-35′s design is entirely inappropriate. After all, its stealth is in the front area "

That's not correct. The F-35 will have a reduced radar cross section across much of the craft compared with any other non-stealth aircraft. Nearly the entire surface is covered in radar absorbent material and the engine itself is designed to reflect away radar waves. It also has IR reduction measures.

"Small number of missiles."

Made up for by building 2000+ F-35s. How many SU-57s is Russia making?

"Optimizing exclusively for BVR combat would entail a large tailless aircraft (perhaps a flying wing) with all-aspect stealth, large internal volumes of missiles, and far more powerful radar."

No, it wouldn't. Something doesn't have to be theoretically perfect for it to work quite well in the real world. The F-35 will perform BVR combat much better than any non-American aircraft.

"Flying wing."

1. We already have that. It's called the B2 and we are also working on a flying wing stealth drone that does exactly that already: shoot a barrage of missiles at BVR in coordination with the F-35.

2. Wrong. Just wrong. There are huge disadvantages to your flying wing idea. Stability and maneuverability being just two, so they wouldn't be much use in visual range combat or in a variety of other missions for which the F-35 was designed; the F-35 is a multi-role fighter. It will do BVR just fine.

"The F-35′s design is based on political and economic considerations, not military ones."

The military design of the F-35 is pretty good. You're trying to cover this up by pointing out an irrelevant fact – that there were economic considerations when building the craft which applies to every military project ever conceived.

Felix Keverich , August 13, 2018 at 10:39 am GMT
@dfordoom

There can be no negotiation with the U.S.

You don't need to convince me. You'll need to convince Russian kleptocrats, who've been sending their kids to live in the West since 1991, and who have kept their (stolen) money in the West.

And reiner Tor , you are a funny guy, liking these militant comments from dfordoom, but getting your panties in a bunch, when I suggest occupying the Ukraine. I wonder why?

The fact is asserting dominance in Eastern Europe will be a lot easier for Russia to accomplish, than confronting USA directly, and it is something I would probably do before I started threatening New York and London with nuclear devastation. You gotta make your threats credible you know. Credibility doesn't come from making scary faces and shouting loudly, it's earned.

Mitleser , August 13, 2018 at 10:41 am GMT
@reiner Tor

Your Croatian neighbors are still operating Mig-21 and will get second-hand ((((F-16)))).
And your Austrian neighbors are unhappy with their Eurofighters.
Gripens are better than alternatives and nothing.

Anon [123] Disclaimer , August 13, 2018 at 10:45 am GMT
"Sounds like you want a war "

No, I don't. In fact, I think the American Deep State is nuts. I have great respect for Russians and their military. I am simply pointing out facts: the F-35 isn't the chump some think it is; do not believe any random internet poster when he says this thing won't work. I've seen enough to know that it will and that you should be afraid of what it can do in large numbers.

As I said earlier, the Russians should just dump all Hollywood movies and video games onto a server and call it MegaUpload 2. Hurt an industry most Trump voters despise anyway and you might be able to turn republicans against their warmongering representatives in congress who are pushing for sanctions, etc.

Non Future , August 13, 2018 at 10:46 am GMT
@reiner Tor

Reiner Tor = Pure Door in german , not so pure , the door opens to wars .

APilgrim , August 13, 2018 at 10:56 am GMT
Hillary Clinton is an existential threat to The: Republic & Constitutional Rule of Law.

Obama is an existential threat to The: Republic & Constitutional Rule of Law.

Michael Anthony McFaul may be a greater threat to America, than Vladimir Putin.

Samantha Jane (Sunstein) Power may be a greater USA threat, than Vladimir Putin.

Robert Mueller may be a greater USA threat than Vladimir Putin.

reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 10:58 am GMT
@Non Future

Actually, it means "pure fool," "reines Tor" would be "pure gate" (not door), and it comes from the Wagner opera Parsifal, where the protagonist is a pure fool, enlightened by compassion. I'd probably choose a funnier handle today, but ultimately it doesn't matter.

I.M , August 13, 2018 at 11:00 am GMT
@reiner Tor

This point of false dichotomy is very important. Everything at this point, points to the fact that there was no nerve agent employed against the Skripals and that they were simply knocked out by some chloroform like substance. The fact that they survived, and recovered without any problems, is irrefutable proof of this.

Therefore a false dichotomy is employed in order to, we can say mentally sodomise people into believing that the only option is that the Kremlin did it.

I see people stating in comments sections in British newspapers that the official story is bullshit but that they simply can't believe that their own government would disperse CWs throughout their country, however this is a mute point as it has been disproven that CWs were used at all and that the obvious conclusion is that they were simply drugged and held against their will while their oh so benevolent government spun an endlessly shifting fairytale, growing ever more convoluted and self contradictory by the day.

reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 11:07 am GMT
@Mitleser

Even if both NATO and the EU collapsed, and a war broke out with one or some of our neighbors, neither Austria nor Croatia would be likely enemies. Of our NATO allies, both Romania and Slovakia were more likely enemies. I hope it won't happen, because both are seriously stronger than us.

The F-16 is no longer in production (though maybe a restart is planned?), but most operators are happy enough with it.

utu , August 13, 2018 at 11:13 am GMT
@I.M

mentally sodomise people into believing

Here, locally, I find it interesting that the commenter "Sean" got sodomized himself or is just trying to sodomize us. There is one recurring almost below the radar theme in his comments: war with Iran and the opportunity of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians it will bring. He might be right about it though I still hope this will be prevented while he seems to be welcoming it. And for some reason he seems to need Putin dead or compromised for this scenario to happen.

Felix Keverich , August 13, 2018 at 11:20 am GMT
@Parbes

Public opinion in Russia is a lot like this actually. It seems that state-tv interrupted its anti-Western programming during World Cup, which caused approval of both US and EU to spike into positive territory for the first time since 2014.

Tom Van Meurs , Website August 13, 2018 at 11:23 am GMT
America is gradually isolating itself from the rest of the world. A beast driven into a corner is a dangerous one.
APilgrim , August 13, 2018 at 11:25 am GMT
Somebody SHOULD investigate: Michael McFaul, Samantha Power, Robert Mueller, Peter Strzok, George Soros, William Browder, Hillary Clinton, Sidney Blumenthal, Christopher Steele, John Podesta, Barack Obama, and John Brennan.

Congress has done a SHlTTY Job of it. Perhaps Vladimir Putin SHOULD be allowed to publicly question these traitors, in the USA.

We would probably learn a LOT!

Contraviews , Website August 13, 2018 at 11:28 am GMT
America is isolating itself increasingly more from the rest of the world, A beast driven into a corner is a dangerous beast.
Mitleser , August 13, 2018 at 11:29 am GMT

Of our NATO allies, both Romania and Slovakia were more likely enemies. I hope it won't happen, because both are seriously stronger than us.

They are?

reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 11:30 am GMT
@Felix Keverich

And reiner Tor, you are a funny guy, liking these militant comments from dfordoom, but getting your panties in a bunch, when I suggest occupying the Ukraine. I wonder why?

I don't fear it much, it'd simply be a stupid policy. I also don't like ethnic cleansing and mass deportations and the like. Which would be a requirement if you were to occupy Ukraine.

The predictable result would be a state of emergency in Central Europe and a strong mobilization against Russia. Military expenditures would quickly rise to 5% of GDP in Central Europe, but it'd rise around Europe.

But actually some kind of military action in Ukraine as a direct response to American sanctions might make sense. Just don't expect Ukrainians or neighboring peoples to greet you with flowers. So you might bomb some military targets recently installed by the Americans.

But before that, you'd need to make the anti-sanctions law. Actually, you'd need to make it pretty strong. Until you cannot even do that, you shouldn't even fantasize about conquest.

There are several steps you could take before starting an actual war of conquest. Which you wouldn't even be able to finish.

APilgrim , August 13, 2018 at 11:42 am GMT
The notion of modern WVR 'Dogfighting' is as hokey as this photo.
APilgrim , August 13, 2018 at 11:56 am GMT
AK: In the future, please unite your multiple low effort one-sentence posts into one. Since they aren't very high quality, fill up valuable screen real estate, and splicing them together takes too much time on my part, I will otherwise have to just start deleting them.

Captain Albert Ball, VC, DSO & Two Bars, MC (14 August 1896 – 7 May 1917) was an English fighter pilot during the First World War. At the time of his death he was the United Kingdom's leading flying ace, with 44 victories.

Those days are gone.

Forrestal , August 13, 2018 at 12:02 pm GMT
@APilgrim

and Mc Cain ??? , he hero of the Isis desert , pardon the hero of Vietnam , Victoria Nuland the F the EU " lady " .. Geoffrey Pyatt .

neutral , August 13, 2018 at 12:24 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

That's the most frightening part.

The thing is that if say Serbia, Austria-Hungary, France, Germany, etc had nuclear weapons in 1914 then WW1 would likely not have broken out.

Ilyana_Rozumova , August 13, 2018 at 12:33 pm GMT
These sanctions are complex, well thought out, most probably not by Goyim.
Now We can see that Scripal affair was definitely false flag.
These sanctions are obviously not a punishment.
..
These sanctions are telling Mother Russia to get on her knees, or die.
.
These are not really sanctions. This is Ultimatum.
.
Everybody should understand that.
Sean , August 13, 2018 at 12:50 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

Putin cannot be read like a book, but we can be confident that he is capable of deceiving even his closest confidants, for he got his current job by completely fooling Yeltsin .

There's no reason to believe he'd be any more likely to launch than Yeltsin.

All other things being equal, but Yeltsin was never framed for murder by the West even once, so he never had Russian forces on red alert; never had the safety catches off . Yet in the Black Brant scare Yeltsin actually activated the nuclear keys , something that never happened even in the Cuban Missile crisis. In circumstances where there was already a hair trigger because of some misunderstanding and Yeltsin had a too much of a hangover to think clearly and recognize bad advice, he might well have launched. Putin would never knowingly launch first, but the opening of move of a nuclear first strike would be a high altitude air burst to blind the victim's radar so waiting for the first nuclear detonation would not be an option.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/how-nato-military-exercise-freaked-out-russia-nearly-started-25864?page=0%2C2
As these reports filtered in to Western intelligence agencies, there initially was little alarm. Analysts and experts who examined the information simply could not believe that the Soviets seriously thought that NATO was preparing a nuclear first strike. At this point, the West did not have any real clue just how dangerous the situation had become.

If he and his country had been framed for murder twice in a row, Putin would take the some of the safeties off of the Russian nuclear deterrent because it was not working at the normal settings. All it would then take is someone, possibly at a low level, to get careless and we are in the danger zone. The Russians do not think America is likely to attack them out of the blue, but they do not rule out the possibility (Reagan said that was what most surprised him about the Soviet leadership once he came to know them).

Wealthy Russians put their money in offshore British accounts, you seriously think anyone in their right mind would do that if the British Deep State was capable of deliberately framing Russia for assassinations. Dirty money from all over the world comes to offshore British accounts because Britain has the rule of law and the ill gotten gains are safe. It simply would not pay Britain to behave like a banana republic in the way you are suggesting. What you are suggesting is like MI5 & 6 stealing the gold out of the Bank of England, except it would be more plausible because there would be something in it for them. South Korean had the death penalty for capital flight. Putin is less crude, he is using the British sanctions against his circle (and you must be associated with circle to get rich in Russia) to force dodgy Russians and their money to stay put .

Putin's long term objective is to nullify foreign influences, which boils down to Western soft power and money. The Russian and Western elite were growing together before he started the high profile assassinations, now the divergence is gaining a momentum of its own. The more the West retaliates the better Putin likes it, hence arrest of Maria Butina and the heavy boots of the bots are grist to Putin's mill, the more amateurish the espionage against the West, the better. That is why the OPSEC–oblivious GRU suit his purpose so much

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/06/the-gru-the-russian-intelligence-agency-behind-the-headlines
"The GRU regards itself as a war-fighting instrument. Yes, it gathers conventional intelligence but its culture is much more military," said Mark Galeotti, an expert on Russian security issues and the country's intelligence agencies. "Although only a minority of GRU officers are Spetsnaz, it has an impact when part of your service are commandos."

Putin sacked the vast majority of the old GRU; the new commander Sergun was low ranking (although he was to be promoted to Colonel General after he designed the Donbass uprising) and was keen on contacts with the US, but died mysteriously in 2016, and the ones left know better than to ask questions about the ultimate purpose or ulterior motive of goading the US. Anyway, Putins's objectives in all this are not to get away with anything, he wants the bad public relations, he wants the West to reject Russia and all its works, all the better to keep Russian away from Western influence. I just think the idea of the West deliberately pushing a proud nuclear armed power into confusion such as Andropov was in during Able Archer would be foolhardy beyond belief.

Mr. Hack , August 13, 2018 at 12:54 pm GMT
@Cyrano

Ukrainian = U Cranium

Brilliant. And I like how you are able to weave in your almost non-existent knowledge of Latin too! This definitely proves that your IQ is in the 99* range. Like I say, you're showing real progress each and every day. Soon, I suspect that readers of this blog will be giving you 'agreements' each and every time you write something here, like your buddy Janissary !

reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 12:55 pm GMT
@neutral

Probably.

On the other hand, the more such crises there will be between nuclear armed states, the more likely that one of those will result in a nuclear war. Humans (or machines, for that matter) will inevitably miscalculate once in a while, and those might result in one side believing it's about to be obliterated, so that it can "use it or lose it." All kinds of stupid (or seemingly stupid) factors might get into this, like sleep deprivation, extreme stress, fear of shame or loss of face, etc. People have committed murder-suicide under all kinds of circumstances, starting a nuclear war as an act of final desperation is certainly not out of the realm of possibilities.

So while nuclear weapons greatly diminish the likelihood of a world war, it certainly doesn't make it impossible, and, on a long enough timeline, its likelihood will approach 1.

reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 1:03 pm GMT
@Mitleser

Their armies are certainly much stronger, in terms of artillery or armored forces for example. Their air forces are not, but with the very low number of planes, it wouldn't be decisive anyway. And they're both in the process of buying F-16s, unless I'm mistaken. I think once these are over, the Slovakian Air Force will be roughly as strong as the Hungarian one, or somewhat stronger, while the Romanian will be multiple times stronger.

The Slovak military is somewhat smaller on paper (in terms of troop numbers) than the Hungarian, but even that might be just a paper advantage. At least Slovakia is a smaller country (roughly half the size of Hungary), but Romania is vastly bigger, and its military is even larger than would be proportional.

Anyway, I don't think any Hungarian government would have the appetite to wage war against either of these.

reiner Tor , August 13, 2018 at 1:05 pm GMT
@Sean

Cool story, but where's the evidence that you read Putin's mind correctly?

Michael Kenny , August 13, 2018 at 1:09 pm GMT
This is probably the consequence of Trump's blunder in grovelling in front of Putin (and the world's TV cameras!). He now has to inflict a defeat on Putin so unequivocal that even Putin's American supporters cannot hype it into a victory. I don't see EU Member States raising any objection to further sanctions. Quite the contrary, in fact. The EU is the principal victim of Putin's actions and is therefore the principal beneficiary of sanctions. Don't forget that the fight with Putin began over an attempt by him to prevent Ukraine signing an association agreement with the EU. The idea that the EU Member States are just dying to resume trade with Russia is a US internet myth (like so much else about Europe!).
Sean , August 13, 2018 at 1:27 pm GMT
@I.M

OK the GRU did not use deadly nerve gas on the traitor Skripal because he survived, but by the same token the GRU did not use knockout gas in the Dubrovka Theater because they killed hundreds of innocent Russian hostages. At least we can agree GRU did use flamethrowers and heavy machine guns in the Beslan school, because they shot and burned hundreds of Ossetian children to death.

Mitleser , August 13, 2018 at 1:38 pm GMT
@Michael Kenny

The EU is the principal victim of Putin's actions and is therefore the principal beneficiary of sanctions.

What? How are we the "principal benficiary of sanctions"?
It is our trade that suffers.

It is the Anglophone world that is obsessed with "fighting" the guy who is soon going to visit Berlin.

neutral , August 13, 2018 at 1:38 pm GMT
@Michael Kenny

This is probably the consequence of Trump's blunder in grovelling in front of Putin (and the world's TV cameras!). He now has to inflict a defeat on Putin so unequivocal that even Putin's American supporters cannot hype it into a victory.

Look I know you are another dim witted Ukrainian pretending to be an Anglo Saxon, but even for you this logic is beyond ridiculous.

APilgrim , August 13, 2018 at 1:42 pm GMT
The best idea out there, for exploring a better relationship with the Russian Federation.

'Michael McFaul and the Astonishment of American Life Under Trump', By David Remnick, News Desk, July 19, 2018, https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/michael-mcfaul-and-the-astonishment-of-american-life-under-trump

President Trump has not dismissed the idea that Russian investigators meet with, and question, the former U.S. Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul. President Trump has said that Vladimir Putin tendered him an "incredible offer": that, in exchange for letting Robert Mueller's team question the twelve indicted Russian intelligence officers thought to have participated in the cyber-meddling in the 2016 election, Russian counterparts would get the chance to question McFaul, the U.S. Ambassador to Russia during the Obama years. Rather than dismiss this idea out of hand, Trump, according to Sarah Huckabee Sanders, is "going to work with his team, and we'll let you know if there's an announcement on this front."

APilgrim , August 13, 2018 at 1:44 pm GMT
Why should the crimes & tyrannies of Obama, Hillary, Soros, & McFall remain secret?
pyrrhus , August 13, 2018 at 1:45 pm GMT
@Mitleser

This economic "war", if implemented, will cause an economic collapse in Europe, and subsequently in North America These Senators are lunatics

APilgrim , August 13, 2018 at 1:47 pm GMT
The USA, UK & USSR tried, convicted & hanged NAZI War Criminals.

'What you need to know about Michael McFaul, the ex-U.S. envoy drawn into the center of another Trump-Russia flap', By LAURA KING and SABRA AYRES, WASHINGTON, WORLD, JUL 19, 2018 | 3:15 PM, http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-russia-mcfaul-20180719-story.html

At a summit in Helsinki, Finland, with President Trump, Putin floated the idea of inviting U.S. special counsel investigators to Russia for the questioning of a dozen Russian intelligence officials indicted last week as part of the special counsel's inquiry into Kremlin interference in the 2016 election. In return, Putin wanted Russian authorities to be allowed to interrogate a roughly equal number of Americans, including McFaul, for supposed illicit activities. At Monday's post-summit news conference with Putin at his side, Trump -- sounding intrigued rather than indignant -- called that an "incredible" offer.

What is the problem with a joint investigation of Michael McFALL, on American Soil.

Sean , August 13, 2018 at 1:49 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

I have no idea what is going on in Putin's mind, but I can see what he is doing and if he wants closer relations with the West, his way of showing it seems odd. Do I need to read Dostoevsky to understand Putin?

Felix Keverich , August 13, 2018 at 1:52 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

But before that, you'd need to make the anti-sanctions law. Actually, you'd need to make it pretty strong. Until you cannot even do that, you shouldn't even fantasize about conquest.

There are several steps you could take before starting an actual war of conquest. Which you wouldn't even be able to finish.

But the sanctions are happening anyway. We'll need an anti-sanctions law regardless of whether or not we are going to invade. Actually, as an economist, I don't think we need a law. What we need is to make sure that the vital sectors of the economy do not rely on US financial system, by converting oil trade into non-dollar currencies for example.

Eastern Europeans will never mobilise. What would mass mobilisation even look like in a country like Hungary? Instead, they'll petition USA to station more of its troops in Eastern Europe. A lot more, like hundreds of thousands more. Doing so will impose costs on the USA. Actually, this is one of the few ways Russia could impose tangible costs on USA: by stoking tensions in Eastern Europe.

And if USA suddenly grows a brain and declines to play along, Eastern NATO members will begin re-orienting their foreign relations towards appeasement of Russia instead. That's what weak people do.

I also don't like ethnic cleansing and mass deportations and the like. Which would be a requirement if you were to occupy Ukraine.

Mass deportations is the best part about occupying the Ukraine! I would drive Galicia population into Poland and other neighboring countries. There would be millions of refugees. This by itself will seriously destabilise NATO's "Eastern flank". There could be Russian agents among the refugees, allowing us to seamlessly move from the invasion of the Ukraine to a campaign of hybrid warfare against Eastern NATO members.

NATO will react to invasion of the Ukraine by positioning to support an insurgency in the Western part of the country. Instead they would have to contend with an insurgency in Eastern Poland – wouldn't that be fun?

utu , August 13, 2018 at 2:03 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

Czechs if I remember correctly did everything to not blow money on any jet fighters while being pressured.

neutral , August 13, 2018 at 2:04 pm GMT
@Sean

Do I need to read Dostoevsky to understand Putin?

Probably better than trying to understand things by reading comic books (Hollywood movies are the same), which is pretty much what the US establishment uses for their thinking.

APilgrim , August 13, 2018 at 2:05 pm GMT
Congress did not do their job, when Barack Hussein Obama drone-killed Americans.

Hell no, we don't trust the traitors in congress.

Why would we, trust those Oath-Breaking POS?

anon [374] Disclaimer , August 13, 2018 at 2:23 pm GMT
@Sean

for he got his current job by completely fooling Yeltsin "

Doesn't that apply to Obama? Will that not apply to future presidents? Doesn't it apply to the sitting US senators and congress ? Doesn't this "fooling" apply every time US senators and congress apply more sanction on Iran and justify their earlier "fooling" when they failed to stop Trump get out of JCPOA?
It does because majority of Americans supported the deal and wanted to keep the deal.

"fooling" is a little more complex in America that it is in Papua NewGuinea . But fooling it is.

It is like cries against "fake news ' charges leveled against Facebook infowar or intercept or antiwar or common dreams by WaPo and NYT and FOX/CNN – being bad because those lead to violences.

The violences perpetrated against Iraq ,Libya, Somalia, and Syria are based on lies and been made possible by Fake News of CNN NYT . The latest servile and sinsiter attempt by NYT to start talking of banned CW use by Syrians to kill more Syrians is nothing but 'fooling and lying" fakery of news what they accuse Putin and Russian bot of but without proof.

APilgrim , August 13, 2018 at 2:27 pm GMT
Congress did not do their job when the CIA, DOJ & FBI ILLEGALLY:

Surveiled citizens.
Investigated the Trump Presidential Campaign.
Paid Christopher Steele to fabricate a pack of God Damned Lies.
Told the FISA Court a pack of God Damned Lies.
Obstructed a congressional investigation, into that pack of God Damned Lies.
Fabricated ANOTHER pack of lies about Civil-Wars in Georgia & Ukraine.
Fabricated YET ANOTHER pack of lies about the Syrian Civil War & ISIS.
Fabricated STILL ANOTHER pack of lies about Russia President Putin.

So, there's that.

AnonFromTN , August 13, 2018 at 2:29 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

Even though I am not a psychiatrist, I had enough MD/PhD students to respect the first rule of psychiatry: never argue with patients.

AnonFromTN , August 13, 2018 at 2:32 pm GMT
@Cyrano

Don't confuse Ukrainians with Ukies. Ukrainians are humans, with their stronger and weaker points, like all humans, whereas Ukies are the scum of the Earth.

Z-man , August 13, 2018 at 2:35 pm GMT
Trump has to thread a fine line with the Neocons and outright JOO firsters in his cabinet who HATE Putin and the Russians. Push back against these vermin would be good but he probably wont do it until after the mid terms, we shall see.
Thorfinnsson , August 13, 2018 at 2:38 pm GMT
@Anon

I believe that study was conducted under the assumption of within visual range, which artificially presented a situation where the F-35 was at a disadvantage from the get go. In a real world situation, the Su-35 would probably be shot down before it knew what hit it, especially considering that American pilots tend to be among the best in the world.

Here's a discussion of the matter in the Australian parliament: http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/verbatim/4/133273/f_35-fares-worse-in-rand-wargame.html

The basic assumption is that over the horizon UHF radar (like Australia's Jindalee system) detects the F-35, allowing Flankers to use their IRST.

Of course some have disputed the study, as well they should. A major problem with IRST is its very limited field of view, though pairing this with low frequency radar mitigates that.

In a real world situation the Su-35 would detect the AMRAAMs before impact rather than be surprised. Whether or not the AMRAAMs destroy the Su-35 would depend on many factors such as:

• Number of AMRAAMs fired
• Distance from which AMRAAMs are fired
• Quality of Su-35 countermeasures
• Pilot skill (duh)

Should also be pointed out that the Russians are now fielding L-band AESA radars embedded in wingtips specifically for counter-VLO purposes. See here: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2009-06.html

That's irrelevant for three reasons:

1) 187 is still a number far greater than the number of Su-57s the Russians wanted to produce in the near term.

2) the F-22 is often stationed at bases around the world, so the US does not need to sell the aircraft to anyone to bring it to a theater of combat.

3) the F-22 would dominate any Russian or Chinese aircraft currently fielded; an appreciable number of F-22s (or any US fourth generation aircraft) along with the F-35 should be a potent combination. US pilots are also very well trained, easily matching any other country save perhaps Israel.

Chengdu J-20 and J-31 units will most certainly not be capped at 187 units. Fifth generation fighters will almost certainly proliferate beyond China and Russia as well.

No, the US didn't "need" to sell the F-22 to Japan. But the sale would've strengthened Allied forces in the Pacific theater, kept the F-22 production line open and cut unit costs, reduced the American trade deficit, and provided jobs and profits to Americans. The F-22 export ban was an own goal.

Kinematic performance doesn't cont for much when you are overwhelmed by aircraft that you can't shoot back at effectively while they are shooting at you from a distance. Kinematic performance isn't nothing, but it isn't everything either. The F-35 will have a decisive advantage over all Russian aircraft fielded now and over the next decade, and any issues with the design will be made up for by fielding large numbers of them to overwhelm opponents + combining the aircraft with the F-22 or F-18.

This decisive advantage depends on two assumptions:

• Counter-VLO sensors will not be effective (or fielded in adequate numbers), or at least won't be enough to vector interceptors (whether aircraft or missiles) to the target
• Kill probability of BVR missile shots has improved by two orders of magnitude since the last air war against a near peer

Obviously, overwhelming the opponent with numbers is always a war winning strategy. NATO can thus be expected to prevail in any air war against Russia, though not without a bloody nose.

That's not really the right way to phrase it. "Inferior" in this case only means "less than what the US could have otherwise done but still quite good compared to most other aircraft."

Further, the philosophy you quoted will allow the US to field huge numbers of these craft – thousands – at an affordable price, so I'm not so sure it was a bad idea after all. That's much better than the SU-57, which is a dumpster fire of a program.

I'm also not sold on the idea that the B model was a bad idea for the Asian theater. In any conflict, the Chinese will attempt to destroy our bases and landing strips. Having a larger number of fighters capable of short vertical takeoffs might prove to be quite the asset in organizing a counter offensive/stationing the craft in various locations that are hard to hit or detect.

The airframe is inferior to what the US could have done otherwise, and is inferior to contemporary aircraft. This inferiority was not driven by the stealth does requirement and thus counts as an own goal.

The B model stems from the Marine Corps remember some battle in the Pacific War where Navy air support didn't show up. Therefore they must have their own fighters, a logic which strangely wouldn't apply to the Army.

If our doctrine or experience dictates that a STOVL aircraft is desirable, fine. But given the limitations of STOVL aircraft, it ought to be a separate design.

Dealing with Chinese strikes at Pacific bases is probably better dealt with by buying more heavy equipment and training more Seabees. You can patch holes pretty quickly.

That's not correct. The F-35 will have a reduced radar cross section across much of the craft compared with any other non-stealth aircraft. Nearly the entire surface is covered in radar absorbent material and the engine itself is designed to reflect away radar waves. It also has IR reduction measures.

Here's a thermal image of an F-35 from a modern IR camera:

No IR reduction in the world is going to disguise 45,000 pounds of thrust from a single nozzle.

Yes, the F-35 has substantially reduced RCS compared to non-VLO aircraft. News at 11. It has, however, inferior stealth compared to the F-22 (let alone the YF-23).

RAM is useful, but the largest reductions in RCS come from airframe shaping. F-35 is not optimized in the lower or aft areas. The original X-35 is quite decent here, but this was changed for the F-35 in order to increase internal weapons load out. Given the original intention of employing it as a tactical strike fighter, this wasn't unreasonable.

Made up for by building 2000+ F-35s. How many SU-57s is Russia making?

This originally concerned exports. Any damn fool can tell you that numerical superiority is very powerful.

No, it wouldn't. Something doesn't have to be theoretically perfect for it to work quite well in the real world. The F-35 will perform BVR combat much better than any non-American aircraft.

In a 1v1 engagement with no supporting elements where the rival fighters approach each other head on, I agree. But this isn't reflective of actual combat.

1. We already have that. It's called the B2 and we are also working on a flying wing stealth drone that does exactly that already: shoot a barrage of missiles at BVR in coordination with the F-35.

B-2 is unsuitable for this role owing to the location of its radar:

That said it has been proposed to use the B-1 for this role, which I think is a good idea.

Drone idea is worth trying, though I'm skeptical of the ability to retain datalinks in an electromagnetically challenged environment. And drones autonomously launching missiles could be dubious–but this could be solved by wargaming (if its proven autonomous drones ID targets better than human pilots, have at it).

2. Wrong. Just wrong. There are huge disadvantages to your flying wing idea. Stability and maneuverability being just two, so they wouldn't be much use in visual range combat or in a variety of other missions for which the F-35 was designed; the F-35 is a multi-role fighter. It will do BVR just fine.

Stability not a concern with fly-by-wire and thrust vectoring (which the B-2 doesn't have incidentally, yet is a stable bombing platform).

There is incidentally a trade-off between stability and maneuverability, hence why fighters from the F-16 on have been designed to be inherently unstable.

But in any case you've been pooh poohing maneuverability here, citing the superiority of BVR combat. If BVR is your goal, then you want a larger missile load, more powerful/sensitive sensors, and increased stealth. A flying wing eliminates the issue with resonant effects (if a vertical surface is less than eight times the size of a radar wavelength, it produces a resonant effect).

The military design of the F-35 is pretty good. You're trying to cover this up by pointing out an irrelevant fact – that there were economic considerations when building the craft which applies to every military project ever conceived.

Well I suppose that's true, but whole JSF program would've been better if:

1 – STOVL had been left out
2 – Kinematic performance had been considered important

AnonFromTN , August 13, 2018 at 2:38 pm GMT
@APilgrim

Have to agree with you: Soros, Browder, MSM owners, Pentagon contractors, and all other sorts of scum are much bigger threat to the US than Putin, Un, Iranian Ayatollahs, Assad, and many others. The enemy within is always more dangerous. Especially when that enemy has only one loyalty: to his/her/its money.

Z-man , August 13, 2018 at 2:40 pm GMT
@Mitleser

Interesting, a few years ago Algeria had to have Russia redo the electronics in the Su 30′s that it bought because there was some Izraeli electronics in it.

AnonFromTN , August 13, 2018 at 2:42 pm GMT
@utu

You are forgetting thievery and corruption that provides cover for that thievery. Out of every dollar spent in the U on "defense", at least 90 cents are stolen, some of the money is used to buy "patriotic" politicians who pretend not to see the thievery.

anon [374] Disclaimer , August 13, 2018 at 2:45 pm GMT
@neutral

No they don't pluck books off shelf . They watch the snippet cribbed from some internet site on Fox TV /CNN and use it as evidence. That were the sources of evidences they offered on Syrian using sarin gas.

Thorfinnsson , August 13, 2018 at 2:47 pm GMT
@APilgrim

Last air war between near peers was Vietnam. BVR combat was a total failure.

Radars and missiles have improved a lot since then of course, but so have countermeasures.

There were BVR kills in Operation Mole Cricket 19 and Desert Storm, but fighting incompetent Arabalonians doesn't count as near peer. And there were still WVR kills in those campaigns.

Depending on ROE in a conflict or confused airspace, there will be a need to visually ID targets on occasion.

The main thing that's changed about dogfighting is that heat seeking missiles can now lock onto an aircraft from any angle (instead of just behind) and launch from high off boresight. This makes instantaneous turning performance more importance than sustained turning performance.

But like I said, if BVR missiles are now truly as miraculous as you think, then the F-35 is an improper design. In fact, so is the F-22 and more or less all other existing fighters. The idea "fighter" of existing aircraft would be the Airbus A380 launching thousands of missiles at once

BVR missiles also work just as well from the ground as the air (with some kinematic disadvantages, and of course can't deal with attackers on the deck). Magical BVR missiles suggest we should be building a lot more SAM systems.

I bring you the air superiority force of the future:

anon [317] Disclaimer , August 13, 2018 at 2:48 pm GMT
@Mr. XYZ

who did it.. answered right here go no further

https://www.rt.com/usa/435824-us-midterms-hacking-children/

AnonFromTN , August 13, 2018 at 2:49 pm GMT
@pyrrhus

These senators may or may not be lunatics themselves. This does not change the fact that they are bought and paid for puppets of lunatics, the US moneyed elites that dangerously degenerated after 1991. The US used to be a decent country. Not anymore.

AnonFromTN , August 13, 2018 at 2:52 pm GMT
@utu

There was a joke about Czechoslovakia in the USSR: Czechoslovakia is the most peaceful country on Earth, it does not interfere even in its own internal affairs. Puppet masters change (Hitler, USSR, the US), but the policy stands.

dryhole dutton , August 13, 2018 at 3:09 pm GMT
i lived in the russian federation for several years (yuzhno sakhalinsk, 2011-2012). i don't claim to be a russian expert, however, i did not detect any virulent comintern intent amongst the russians with whom i was privileged to interact. for the most part, they seemed like everyone else i have come across in my travels on this pitiable orb; they were simply trying to get by, and were as capitalistic as any crony capitalist in america.

maybe someone with more foreign relations erudition, and experience than i could pen an expositive on why there exists such animosity betwixt our nations, other than the all to well known need for a bogeyman so as to facilitate u.s. world hegemony.

for a country which is broke, and which depends upon martial, and venal, intimidation to achieve/sustain its aims, the impending comeuppance could be very humbling, and decisive.

Okechukwu , August 13, 2018 at 3:11 pm GMT

As Ben Aris notes, the US Treasury Department has been ratcheting back on its sanctions against Oleg Deripaska and Rusal, after the chaos it has caused in the international metals market.

Aluminum has a unique market dynamic which other products with more fungible supply chains don't share. Sanctions are a work in progress. Treasury has learned from the Rusal matter. Henceforth it can collapse even bigger Russian companies like Gazprom, Rosneft and Lukoil without much fear of a concomitant contagion. Oil and gas are the ultimate fungible commodities.

However, as I have pointed out, the ultimate ability of the US to directly punish Russia is limited; it has twice as many people as Iran, after all, and many times the economic output

This is delusional. Russia is vastly more exposed than Iran, as it is more tightly wound up in the western financial structures that the US created and controls. Russia's economic output, measured in GDP, is the same size as New York City's. It has always been a question of how far the US was willing to go to punish Russia. There are nuclear options in the US quiver that can pretty much destroy the Russian economy. But so far the US has been applying relatively trivial sanctions in the hopes that Russia would reform its conduct (I'm not making a value judgement). But the perception that Trump has somehow been captured by Russian intelligence has ratcheted things up.

Trade between Russia and the US is very limited.

It's not a question of trade between Russian and the US. It's a question of trade between Russia and the world since the US controls the global economy.

Maudits , August 13, 2018 at 3:32 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

[MORE]

Mr Fack , your ukraruina , your jojolistan , is the black hole of Europe , you want to set Europe on ( atomic ) fire fot the benefit of the usa , and of your corrupted oligarcs .

No real country in Europe respects ukraruina , a very inmoral and stupid pseudocountry . Ukraruina could have been a golden bridge between the EU and Russia ,and choosed instead to be a blood trench for the benefit of the oligarcs of the usa . You are a cursed land .

Daniel Chieh , August 13, 2018 at 3:36 pm GMT
@Anon

Swarms of missiles? What? With the F-35 capacity of 4 AMRAAM? The ones that haven't been upgraded, have been unreliable since at least 2016, and would be vulnerable to manuever anyway? The twenty five plus year old missiles?

Stealth is only stealth to high fidelity radar, as in versus missile locks. That's great, but low frequency radar will still reveal the location of aircraft for the purpose of general location. So it's not really a "bolt from blue," which is much more of a ground to air concept since IR missiles don't telegraph themselves like radar locks do.

Gerard2 , August 13, 2018 at 3:50 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

[MORE]

Goodness, you are one thick POS.
As I have said before Cyrano is a serious intellectual .you on the other hand are a serious cretin.

Seeing as it's that part of your menstruation cycle, I thought I would add another proof of how fake "Ukrainian" history and language is. From a company yet again threatening the collapse of Ukrainian infrastructure due to an oligarchic dispute:

Russian version:

http://www.azot.com.ua/ru/company/activity/

Ukrop version

http://www.azot.com.ua/uk/company/activity/

As you can see the Ukrainian version is a waste of time, when the Russian version exists ..the whole fake language is a fabrication by lowlife scum Banderite tossers who escaped bestiality charges in the 1940′s/50′s and fled to America/Canada

Virgile , August 13, 2018 at 3:55 pm GMT
If Putin wants to retaliate by creating a destabilizing crisis in the USA, he could simply admit that he has proofs that Trump COLLUDED with Russians operatives to affect the election.
Trump will be removed and Mike Pence will take over throwing the USA in a deeper crisis.
Is Trump aware of this Damocles sword if he does not stop the Congress for escalating sanctions?
Daniel Chieh , August 13, 2018 at 3:57 pm GMT
@utu

There are theories, but the mass bueaucracy made some really strange results. In Vietnam, ROE required visual confirmation of targets to use beyond visual range weapons. Weapons that homed into flares because they produced "heat."

Well, that worked about as well as could be expected.

awry , August 13, 2018 at 4:03 pm GMT
@Anonymous

Well, no, Austria-Hungary gave an ultimatum: "do these in 48 hours or we'll go to war". These demands are also unrealistic, but they are just pretext for new sanctions. It is very unlikely that the US will take any military action against Russia. Russia responding to more sanctions/economic warfare with attacking the West with nukes is also very unlikely.
It is also very unlikely that the people pulling the strings want WW3 with Russia. They just found a convenient scapegoat and want to ramp up tensions with Russia not independently of the game to bring down Trump for "colluding with Russia".
Face it, Russia is bound to lose an economic war, they cannot really retaliate without hurting themselves. They could close the gas taps, but then they lose a lot of money. They could close Russian airspace, but then they lose a lot of money too. They could deny Soyuz seats to American astronauts, but the US has other options (not ready yet but they could get them ready if really needed) etc. Russia is not a big economic player and never was one.
Regarding the sanctions the question is whether the EU will follow the US, probably yes, EU companies are going to lose a lot of money, but they would lose much more if they are punished by the US govt.
The US hawks think that they can bankrupt Russia like they did with the Soviet Union. The question is how viable is Russian economy if mostly cut from the world economy including finance and how tolerant will be the Russian people with the hardships. Looking at Iran, if they could manage then Russia should be able to, but more hardships must be expected. Also the government may do away with democratic pretensions and go full autocracy in the case of popular unrest. And of course Russia will be dependent on China more than now. Why is it good for the US if Russia becomes China's little bitch instead of a strategic ally against Chinese expansion is another question. Rationally thinking China is the future geopolitical rival of America and not Russia. But the people pulling the strings want to screw Russia bad, that is their first goal, obviously, they feel ideologically fueled hatred for Russia beyond strategic calculations.

AnonFromTN , August 13, 2018 at 4:16 pm GMT
@Daniel Chieh

Somehow a lot of comments here were deflected into a discussion of F-35 vs other fighters, including Russian. I am not a technical expert, so I can comment only in general terms. Overall, the technology in the US is more advanced. However, there is one huge difference between Russian and American weapons: Russian ones are designed for the battlefield, whereas American ones are design to maximize manufacturers' profits. To what extent does this difference cancel technological potential in fighter planes, I don't know.

I do know, though, that the engine of the super-modern destroyer Zumwalt, for which the US taxpayers paid more than $4.4 billion, broke down on its first voyage. To add insult to injury, this happened in the Panama canal, of all places ( https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/23/us-navys-most-expensive-destroyer-breaks-down-in-panama-canal ). What's more, presumably super-modern Royal Navy destroyer HMS Duncan had the same problem and was towed back to port ( https://navaltoday.com/2016/11/24/royal-navy-destroyer-towed-back-to-port-after-engine-breakdown/ ). All this sounds pretty much like Ukraine, where thievery has no bounds.

AnonFromTN , August 13, 2018 at 4:19 pm GMT
@Virgile

Why would Russia do that? The US is destroying itself more efficiently than any of its enemies could ever achieve. Reminds me of a dark joke "if you see your enemy committing suicide, do not interfere".

AnonFromTN , August 13, 2018 at 4:23 pm GMT
@awry

As a matter of fact, the USSR was not bankrupted. It was destroyed because the Party elites wanted to steal a lot more than the Soviet system allowed. They succeeded, now they are oligarchs, whereas the great majority of the population got screwed.

awry , August 13, 2018 at 4:26 pm GMT
@Okechukwu

This is delusional. Russia is vastly more exposed than Iran, as it is more tightly wound up in the western financial structures that the US created and controls

For now yes, but if forced to, it could leave those structures and survive without them. Of course it wouldn't be pretty especially the transitional period.

But so far the US has been applying relatively trivial sanctions in the hopes that Russia would reform its conduct (I'm not making a value judgement).

The idea that Russia would i.e. abandon the Crimea if sanctioned hard enough and such "hopes" are delusional. A country that still sees itself as a great power and has a lot of national pride is not going to make such concessions to the US. If Putin looks a wuss to the Russian people he will fall more quickly than because of any sanctions. But I doubt that there were even such hopes for real. The aim was always just to ratchet the hostility up with Russia more and more, until a full blown cold war.

Daniel Chieh , August 13, 2018 at 4:27 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

Sadly, it often seems the case of comparing not which competing MIC is smarter, but which one is slightly less corrupt.

LondonBob , August 13, 2018 at 4:32 pm GMT
@Art

Exactly it is AIPAC driving this and the sooner the Russians start to squeeze Israel, which is so vulnerable, the better.

[Aug 13, 2018] >As dubya the idiot once said

Aug 13, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

ggersh on Mon, 08/13/2018 - 10:01am "you're either with us or against us"

Well I'm fucking against us

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/08/13/heres-video-schoolchildren-...

Here's the Video of Schoolchildren Just Moments Before Being Massacred by U.S.-Backed Saudi Bombing
"This blood is on America's hands, as long as we keep sending the bombs that kill so many Yemenis."

After

[Aug 13, 2018] Not supposed to get angry right? Supposed to be civil

Notable quotes:
"... "Most ironic of all, US and Saudi-backed sectarian extremists, including Al Qaeda in Yemen, had served as proxy forces meant to keep Houthi militias in check by proxy so the need for a direct military intervention such as the one now unfolding would not be necessary. This means that Saudi Arabia and the US are intervening in Yemen only after the terrorists they were supporting were overwhelmed and the regime they were propping up collapsed." ..."
"... "Indeed, the conflict in Yemen is a proxy war. Not between Iran and Saudi Arabia per say, but between Iran and the United States, with the United States electing Saudi Arabia as its unfortunate stand-in." ..."
"... "In reality, Saudi Arabia's and the United States' rhetoric aside, a brutal regional regime meddled in Yemen and lost, and now the aspiring global hemegon sponsoring it from abroad has ordered it to intervene directly and clean up its mess." ..."
"... Sanders won't say that and most media will simply blame it on the U.S. supplying weapons but they don't get into the why, typically blaming it on the MIC being the MIC. ..."
"... "Most ironic of all, US and Saudi-backed sectarian extremists, including Al Qaeda in Yemen, had served as proxy forces meant to keep Houthi militias in check by proxy so the need for a direct military intervention such as the one now unfolding would not be necessary. This means that Saudi Arabia and the US are intervening in Yemen only after the terrorists they were supporting were overwhelmed and the regime they were propping up collapsed." ..."
"... "By backing the Saudi coalition's war in Yemen with weapons, aerial refueling, and targeting assistance, the United States is complicit in the atrocities taking place there." -- Sen. Bernie Sanders ..."
Aug 13, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

Big Al on Mon, 08/13/2018 - 12:28pm

ya right.
Like all wars, most media, including Common Dreams, either sugarcoat them or obfuscate the real purpose. And of course the politicians do that even better, like Sanders, who just a few years ago was begging Saudi Arabia to "get their hands dirty", just at the time that the U.S. proxy war in Yemen heated up with their lapdog Saudi Arabia getting their hands dirty indeed. The problem of course is that it's not just the U.S. supplying the bombs and military guidance, it's that it's actually another U.S. proxy war using it's favorite terrorists and terrorist supporting countries for it's imperialist agenda.

"Most ironic of all, US and Saudi-backed sectarian extremists, including Al Qaeda in Yemen, had served as proxy forces meant to keep Houthi militias in check by proxy so the need for a direct military intervention such as the one now unfolding would not be necessary. This means that Saudi Arabia and the US are intervening in Yemen only after the terrorists they were supporting were overwhelmed and the regime they were propping up collapsed."

"Indeed, the conflict in Yemen is a proxy war. Not between Iran and Saudi Arabia per say, but between Iran and the United States, with the United States electing Saudi Arabia as its unfortunate stand-in."

"In reality, Saudi Arabia's and the United States' rhetoric aside, a brutal regional regime meddled in Yemen and lost, and now the aspiring global hemegon sponsoring it from abroad has ordered it to intervene directly and clean up its mess."

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2015/03/us-saudi-blitz-in-yemen-naked....

Actually it's larger than that, it's part of the larger imperialist struggle against China and Russia, control of the Bab-el-Mandeb oil chokepoint and control of oil and other resources in the MENA.

Sanders won't say that and most media will simply blame it on the U.S. supplying weapons but they don't get into the why, typically blaming it on the MIC being the MIC.

ggersh on Mon, 08/13/2018 - 12:55pm
My guess is that most amerikans

@Big Al don't get the why/when for if they ever do amerika won't be amerika anymore and that could go both ways, for better
or for worse

and you're correct in Sanders won't say it but Bernie shouldn't be the one stop cure all, their need to be many more voices but the crickets are most abundant.

Sanders won't say that and most media will simply blame it on the U.S. supplying weapons but they don't get into the why, typically blaming it on the MIC being the MIC.

ya right.

Like all wars, most media, including Common Dreams, either sugarcoat them or obfuscate the real purpose. And of course the politicians do that even better, like Sanders, who just a few years ago was begging Saudi Arabia to "get their hands dirty", just at the time that the U.S. proxy war in Yemen heated up with their lapdog Saudi Arabia getting their hands dirty indeed. The problem of course is that it's not just the U.S. supplying the bombs and military guidance, it's that it's actually another U.S. proxy war using it's favorite terrorists and terrorist supporting countries for it's imperialist agenda.

"Most ironic of all, US and Saudi-backed sectarian extremists, including Al Qaeda in Yemen, had served as proxy forces meant to keep Houthi militias in check by proxy so the need for a direct military intervention such as the one now unfolding would not be necessary. This means that Saudi Arabia and the US are intervening in Yemen only after the terrorists they were supporting were overwhelmed and the regime they were propping up collapsed."

"Indeed, the conflict in Yemen is a proxy war. Not between Iran and Saudi Arabia per say, but between Iran and the United States, with the United States electing Saudi Arabia as its unfortunate stand-in."

"In reality, Saudi Arabia's and the United States' rhetoric aside, a brutal regional regime meddled in Yemen and lost, and now the aspiring global hemegon sponsoring it from abroad has ordered it to intervene directly and clean up its mess."

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2015/03/us-saudi-blitz-in-yemen-naked....

Actually it's larger than that, it's part of the larger imperialist struggle against China and Russia, control of the Bab-el-Mandeb oil chokepoint and control of oil and other resources in the MENA.

Sanders won't say that and most media will simply blame it on the U.S. supplying weapons but they don't get into the why, typically blaming it on the MIC being the MIC.

TheOtherMaven on Mon, 08/13/2018 - 4:06pm
Future generations, if there are any,

@ggersh

will call these years the "Oil Wars".

#4 don't get the why/when for if they ever do amerika won't be amerika anymore and that could go both ways, for better
or for worse

and you're correct in Sanders won't say it but Bernie shouldn't be the one stop cure all, their need to be many more voices
but the crickets are most abundant.

Sanders won't say that and most media will simply blame it on the U.S. supplying weapons but they don't get into the why, typically blaming it on the MIC being the MIC.

Big Al on Mon, 08/13/2018 - 1:52pm
Actually what Sanders and some others

(the other so called progressive heroes) are saying,

"By backing the Saudi coalition's war in Yemen with weapons, aerial refueling, and targeting assistance, the United States is complicit in the atrocities taking place there."
-- Sen. Bernie Sanders

is basically propaganda. Clearly he's making it sound like the U.S. is supplying weapons and some military assistance and therefore is complicit in the atrocities that Saudi Arabia and it's "coalition" are perpetrating in "their" war, which in turn leads people to believe (and the progressive hero politicians to propose) the U.S. simply needs to stop supplying those weapons and military assistance, i.e., get out of Saudi's war. But that misses the history of U.S. interest and involvement in Yemen, it's real role in the near genocide happening there and the overall agenda of those controlling our government. And that is why most Americans, including most progressives, don't know what is really going on in Yemen. Our political "representatives" and the 90% owned by six rich bastard corporations oligarchy media won't tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. It's why people still believe the war in Syria is a civil war. It's why people believe the Russia cold war propaganda. That's all they hear and the only way to get the real truth is to dig for it and try to make sense of the big picture along with the true history of this country and our government and political system.

Not to mention he's a fucking hypocrite.

"Even worse, after the Saudis started bombing Yemen with U.S. government backing earlier this year, killing thousands and leading to what the UN is now calling a "humanitarian catastrophe," and suffering that is "almost incomprehensible," Sanders continued. In another interview, again with Wolf Blitzer in May, Sanders did correctly note that as a result of the Iraq invasion, "we've destabilized the region, we've given rise to Al-Qaeda, ISIS." But then he actually called for more intervention: "What we need now, and this is not easy stuff, I think the President is trying, you need to bring together an international coalition, Wolf, led by the Muslim countries themselves! Saudi Arabia is the third largest military budget in the world, they're going to have to get their hands dirty in this fight. We should be supporting, but at the end of the day this is [a] fight over what Islam is about, the soul of Islam, we should support those countries taking on ISIS."

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/bernie-sanders-policy-backing-saudi-in...

(Note on Truthdig article: also propaganda inserted by both Sanders and the author by insinuating the U.S. wars in the MENA "gave rise" to ISIS. That is not true, ISIS was created, aided and abetted FOR the wars in the MENA and beyond.)

[Aug 13, 2018] Oh, yeah, those evil "Muslim dictators" -- always interfering with elected governments foreign trade policies

Aug 13, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

bus full of kids was a target of 500 pound bomb and probably f-16! partizan , Aug 13, 2018 11:24:58 AM | 45

Another imperial crime in the US Overseas Territory.

https://twitter.com/BitarSaif/status/1028977314351198208

Probably Raytheon's Hellfire.

partizan , Aug 13, 2018 11:39:04 AM | 46
bus full of kids was a target of 500 pound bomb and probably f-16!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_82_bomb

[Aug 13, 2018] FBI Reveals Maria Butina Traded Sex In Exchange For All 62,984,828 Votes Trump Received In 2016

Jul 19, 2018 | politics.theonion.com
WASHINGTON -- Saying that their investigation indicated her involvement in election interference went deeper than previously believed, the FBI revealed Thursday that Russian agent Maria Butina traded sex in exchange for all 62,984,828 votes Donald Trump received for president in 2016. "Our inquiry into Ms. Butina

[Aug 13, 2018] The Self-Imposed Impotence of the Russian and Chinese Governments by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

The key problem is technological dependence on the West and the fact thet there no viable alternative to neoliberalism yet. Resotration of New Deal is impossible as management and professional classes are now allied with capital owners. So while those Philippics are entertaining, in reality Russian needs to suffer and try to grow its economics and raise the standard of living of people without rocking the boat too much. China too.
Notable quotes:
"... The Russian and Chinese governments are puzzling. They hold all the cards in the sanction wars and sit there with no wits whatsoever as to how to play them. ..."
"... The Russians are also convinced that they should freely trade their currency, thereby subjecting the ruble to manipulation on foreign exchange markets. If Washington wants to bring a currency crisis to Russia, all the Federal Reserve, its vassal Japanese, EU, and UK central banks have to do is to short the ruble. Hedge funds and speculators join in for the profits. ..."
"... Why don't the Russian and Chinese play their winning hands? The reason is that neither government has any advisers who are not brainwashed by neoliberalism. The brainwashing that Americans gave Russia during the Yeltsin years has been institutionalized in Russian institutions. Trapped in this box, Russia is a sitting duck for Washington. ..."
Aug 12, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

The Russian and Chinese governments are puzzling. They hold all the cards in the sanction wars and sit there with no wits whatsoever as to how to play them.

The Russians won't get any help from the Western media which obscures the issue by stressing that the Russian government doesn't want to deprive its citizens of consumer goods from the West, which is precisely what Washington's sanctions intend to do.

The Russian and Chinese governments are in Washington's hands because Russia and China, thinking that capitalism had won, quickly adopted American neoliberal economics, which is a propaganda device that serves only American interests. For years NASA has been unable to function without Russian rocket engines. Despite all the sanctions, insults, military provocations, the Russian government still sends NASA the engines. Why? Because the Russian economists tell the government that foreign exchange is essential to Russia's development.

Europe is dependent on Russian energy to run its factories and to keep warm in winter. But Russia does not turn off the energy in response to Europe's participation in Washington's sanctions, because the Russian economists tell the government that foreign exchange is essential to Russia's development.

As Michael Hudson and I explained on a number of occasions, this is nonsense. Russia's development is dependent in no way on the acquisition of foreign currencies.

The Russians are also convinced that they need foreign investment, which serves only to drain profits out of their economy.

The Russians are also convinced that they should freely trade their currency, thereby subjecting the ruble to manipulation on foreign exchange markets. If Washington wants to bring a currency crisis to Russia, all the Federal Reserve, its vassal Japanese, EU, and UK central banks have to do is to short the ruble. Hedge funds and speculators join in for the profits.

Neoliberal economics is a hoax, and the Russians have fallen for it.

So have the Chinese.

Suppose that when all these accusations against Russia began -- take the alleged attack on the Skirpals for example -- Putin had stood up and said:

"The British government is lying through its teeth and so is every government including that of Washington that echoes this lie. Russia regards this lie as highly provocative and as a part of a propaganda campaign to prepare Western peoples for military attack on Russia. The constant stream of gratuitous lies and military exercises on our border have convinced Russia that the West intends war. The consequence will be the total destruction of the United States and its puppets."

That would have been the end of the gratuitous provocations, military exercises, and sanctions.

Instead, we heard about "misunderstandings" with out "American partners," which encouraged more lies and more provocations.
Or, for a more mild response, Putin could have announced:

"As Washington and its servile European puppets have sanctioned us, we are turning off the rocket engines, all energy to Europe, titanium to US aircraft companies, banning overflights of US cargo and passenger aircraft, and putting in place punitive measures against all US firms operating in Russia."

One reason, perhaps, that Russia does not do this in addition to Russia's mistaken belief that it needs Western money and good will is that Russia mistakenly thinks that Washington will steal their European energy market and ship natural gas to Europe. No such infrastructure exists. It would take several years to develop the infrastructure. By then Europe would have mass unemployment and would have frozen in several winters.

What about China? China hosts a large number of major US corporations, including Apple, the largest capitalized corporation in the world. China can simply nationalize without compensation, as South Africa is doing to white South African farmers without any Western protest, all global corporations operating in China. Washington would be overwhelmed with global corporations demanding removal of every sanction on China and complete subservience of Washington to the Chinese government.

Or, or in addition, China could dump all $1.2 trillion of its US Treasuries. The Federal Reserve would quickly print the money to buy the bonds so that the price did not collapse. China could then dump the dollars that the Fed printed in order to redeem the bonds. The Fed cannot print the foreign currencies with which to purchase the dollars. The dollar would plummet and not be worth a Venezuelan bolivar unless Washington could order its pupper foreign central banks in Japan, UK, and EU to print their currencies in order to purchase the dollars. This, even if complied with, would cause a great deal of stress in what is called "the Western alliance," but what is really Washington's Empire.

Why don't the Russian and Chinese play their winning hands? The reason is that neither government has any advisers who are not brainwashed by neoliberalism. The brainwashing that Americans gave Russia during the Yeltsin years has been institutionalized in Russian institutions. Trapped in this box, Russia is a sitting duck for Washington.

Turkey is a perfect opportunity for Russia and China to step forward and remove Turkey from NATO. The two countries could offer Turkey membership in BRICS, trade deals, and mutual security treaties. China could easily buy up the Turkish currency off foreign exchange markets. The same could be done for Iran. Yet neither Russia nor China appear capable of decisive action. The two countries, both under attack as Turkey is from Washington, sit there sucking their thumbs. (See this )

See also

This article was originally published on the author's blog site: Paul Craig Roberts Institute for Political Economy.Paul Craig Roberts is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

[Aug 13, 2018] Turkey blames Trump for attack on lira, says it won't 'kneel' and has counter-measures ready

Notable quotes:
"... "The currency of our country is targeted directly by the US president," ..."
"... "This attack, initiated by the biggest player in the global financial system, reveals a similar situation in all developing countries." ..."
"... "All of our action plan and measures are ready," ..."
"... "Together with our banks, we prepared our action plan regarding the situation with our real sector companies, including Small and Medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which is the sector that is affected by the fluctuation the most," ..."
"... "Together with our banks and the Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency (BRSA), we will take the necessary measures quickly." ..."
"... "It is making an operation against Turkey Its aim is to force Turkey to surrender in every field from finance to politics, to make Turkey and the Turkish nation kneel down," ..."
"... "We have seen your play and we challenge you." ..."
Aug 13, 2018 | www.rt.com

Turkey has accused Donald Trump of leading an attack on its national currency. The lira lost about 40 percent of its value against the US dollar this year and, to reduce its volatility, Ankara has prepared an urgent action plan. "The currency of our country is targeted directly by the US president," Finance Minister Berat Albayrak told the Hurriyet. "This attack, initiated by the biggest player in the global financial system, reveals a similar situation in all developing countries."

The Turkish lira took a massive hit against the dollar on Friday following Trump's decision to double tariffs on aluminum and steel imports from Turkey to 20 percent and 50 percent. Overall, the national currency lost roughly about 40 percent of its value this year.

Read more © Ozan Kose Erdogan urges Turks to dump dollar to support lira

To calm down the markets, the government instructed its institutions to implement a series of actions on Monday. "All of our action plan and measures are ready," Albayrak said, without elaborating.

"Together with our banks, we prepared our action plan regarding the situation with our real sector companies, including Small and Medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which is the sector that is affected by the fluctuation the most," the minister said . "Together with our banks and the Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency (BRSA), we will take the necessary measures quickly."

President Recep Tayyip Erdogan meanwhile slammed the US decision to impose new tariffs on steel and aluminum imports.

"It is making an operation against Turkey Its aim is to force Turkey to surrender in every field from finance to politics, to make Turkey and the Turkish nation kneel down," Erdogan said in Trabzon on Sunday. "We have seen your play and we challenge you."

[Aug 13, 2018] Cold War in the Sauna Notes From a Russian American by Pavel Kozhevnikov

Aug 13, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

I had just finished exercising and went to the sauna. The gym I go to is a modern facility with new equipment and is very popular in our city.

My favorite parts are the sauna and the steamer. Both remind me of my old country – Russia. Though, to be politically and geographically correct – I never lived in Russia: I was born and raised in one of the fifteen republics of the former USSR – the republic of Kazakhstan.

So, I am a Russian from Kazakhstan. It's kind of confusing for Americans, and when twenty-six years ago my American wife brought me here, the customs official gave me an alien card where my nationality was stated not Russian but Kazakh. My friends make fun of me, because Russians and Kazakhs are like apples and oranges. We look different

In 1992, when I arrived in America, the relationship between the two cold war rivals was excellent: Americans traveled to Russia, opening McDonalds, KFC's, Burger Kings, and other businesses, and Russians were opening not only their hearts but even the secrets of the overthrown KGB. Millions of Russians and Americans enjoyed such a "romance" between the two most powerful nuclear countries in the world.

Not anymore! Every morning I wake up to the words, "Russia is terrible," and go to sleep with the humiliating jokes of the "night-show-clowns" about "the dictator" Putin and "barbaric" Russians, whose 13 hackers changed the electoral minds of millions of naïve Americans. Wow! What a powerful "gasoline station country"- Russia, as Senator McCain calls it.

If in 1992 the people in my city who heard my accent were very nice to me and to Russia, now the usual reaction is to stare at me like a goat at the newly painted gates. One of my neighbors even yelled at me when I answered his question about my recent trip to Russia. I told him: "Russians like Putin because he saved their country from collapse. I saw with my own eyes how Russia has changed since my last trip there. I didn't see the impact of Obama's sanctions, Russians have better roads, than we have in Colorado; the shops, are filled with all kinds of products; the churches are restored "

My neighbor who didn't like Trump yelled at me: "If you like Russia go back to your country!" My answer was: "I love Russia but I am American – like your immigrant wife, like you. I love America for a lot of reasons, one of them – the right to speak! Nobody should privatize this right." He ran away, later coming to apologize

My wife, knowing my hard-tempered character asks me not to talk about policy – Putin-Trump anymore. And I don't, to a certain degree. However, when someone asks me about Russia or Putin I usually answer, giving my point of view; I just cannot be silent. I was silent for 40+ years living in the USSR, not anymore! Of course, not everyone likes my answers, like the man I am going to tell you about.

So, I went into the sauna; a stout man was sitting on the upper bench. He was the same age as I. Many of the older men in America call ourselves "old farts." The name is not offensive to us, because we really do not care about our image, and because we like to make jokes about everything, mostly about ourselves. Usually, we old farts are nice, we love to talk, even in the sauna. Young people nowadays do not talk. They turn on their phones even in the sauna – I bet they do not know how to talk with other people. They cover their "secrets" in towels while we do not – we do not have any secrets anymore.

Anyway, the man said hello to me, I answered, and he caught my slight accent.

"Where are you from?" It's a question I am usually asked.

"From here." I answered.

He was a little confused. I knew what usually followed if I had said – "from Kazakhstan." Usually, there would be an exchange of this type: "Where is it?" – "Between Russia and China," – "How do you like it here?" The silly film "Borat" helped me for a short period of time. People were smiling, as if they met Sasha Cohen, and I was happy that at least they knew some geography, though the film was silly and the geography in it was completely mistaken.

"No, I mean originally where are you from?" The guy, let's call him Tony, found the right question.

I decided not to check his geography skills and said that I came from Russia. The dialog that followed was remarkable. Here it is.

"Welcome to America! Your English is pretty good!"

"Yours, too." He didn't get my humor. "Just joking," I said, "As for welcoming, it's a little late: I have lived here for 25 years."

"Have you been in Russia lately?" He asked.

"Yes, I go there every year."

"Wow. So, what do you think about that crazy guy , Pyutin?"

"Sorry, honey," – I apologized to my wife in my thoughts and picked up the gauntlet. "You mean Putin? He is not crazy. Actually, he is one of the smartest rulers Russia ever had." I said.

Tony's eyes nearly leaped from their sockets. "But he is a dictator and kills people!"

"I wouldn't call him a dictator – he was just last week elected by nearly 67% of Russians. I would call him an authoritarian, strong ruler; but a weak ruler in Russia wouldn't survive a day. Besides, there were seven people opposed him in the election!"

Tony smiled. "You call it an election? He chose the opponents himself from his friends. The whole world knows that elections in Russia are a sham!"

"Who told you this nonsense, Tony? Did you listen to the debates? Did you hear how these people yelled at each other and cursed Putin, asking people to vote for them not for Putin. They really were as tough as Hillary to Donald! And besides, there were a lot of observers from 110 countries. They claimed the election was legitimate."

"No, I do not believe you."

"You may not believe me but I am citing the international organizations reports. You may check their reports on the Internet yourself. You may even sue these organizations if you wish."

Tony was silent for a minute, then turned his head to me and asked: "You know that Pyutin is evil even to his own people?"

"You mean Putin? Who told you? How many Russians share your opinion?"

"McCain."

"Is he Russian?"

"No, but he knows that Pyutin is KGB."

"His name is Putin!" I tried to correct at least this in his mind. "So, you do not believe me, a Russian, who just returned from Russia, but you believe this Senator, who hates Putin and Russia? Besides, there are no KGB anymore."

"But he used to be KGB?"

"Yes, and Bush H. was also a CIA agent. So, what? After the collapse of the Soviet Union there were no people who didn't work for government in that country, we all worked for government! Putin is good for Russia, he is the brightest politician nowadays. He is like a great Chess-master, and he is a dangerous player. We must be careful with him. Some Congressmen are underestimating Russia, calling it "a gasoline station with nukes," but I was there this summer and saw with my own eyes how much people love Putin, and how much he is doing to make that country great again."

"Yeh, yeh, yeh " Tony didn't know what to say. Then he recalled something and turned his red face to me. "Well, he invaded Crimea, and Ukraine!"

"No, he did not. Crimea was a harbor for the Russian navy, and according to the treaty between Ukraine and Russia there were sixteen thousand Russian troops stationed there on a permanent base. There were about twenty-three thousand Ukrainian troops there, too. So, when the thugs in Kiev took power, illegally kicking out president Yanukovych and killing the political opponents, the Crimean people decided to organize a referendum. Ninety-six percent decided to reunite with Russia, as they were Russians for nearly 400 years before the Communist dictator Khrushchev gave that peninsula to Ukraine as a present to his native land."

"But they had no right to secede from the main land of Ukraine!"

"Yes, they did. International law gives the right for self-determination to people. Remember, we split from the British Empire."

"But it was so long ago!"

"Okay, what about East and West Germany or Kosovo? The people in these countries also exercised their right of self-determination, but they didn't have any referendum as far as I know."

Tony looked at me attentively. "I don't believe you."

"You have the right not to believe me. You asked, I answered."

Tony was silent for a while. Then he threw out his last argument. "I hope you wouldn't deny that Putin killed British citizens recently, using KGB gas!"

Wow, he pronounced "Putin" correctly! I smiled. The nice face of my American wife appeared in my head again, and she was not happy! I kissed her in my thoughts and finished the conversation with my last knockout blow:

"I wouldn't deny it if the poisoning by Russians had been proved!"

"But it was proved by Teresa May!"

"Really? What did she say?"

"She said that it was Putin who poisoned the British citizens!"

"Not really, my friend. She said that it was "highly likely" that Russia did it! Besides, only Mr. Skripal is a British citizen, his daughter is a Russian citizen"

"Does it make any difference?"

"You mean, "highly likely" is proof to punish somebody? What about one of the main pillars of democracy – innocent until proven guilty?"

"But we believe our allies, not the Russians!"

That statement made me laugh. "You believe not facts but political statements without any facts? Wow! What kind of democracy is that?"

Tony's face became so red that I was afraid it would melt. He stood up from the bench and without looking at me firmly said:

"Russians are our enemies, and democracy does not apply to them."

He left, leaving me with a sudden fear of approaching nuclear war.

At night I prayed for peace. I prayed for American and Russian people-in-power who could easily destroy this fragile planet. If people refuse to understand each other, they fight. Kennedy and Khrushchev fortunately understood this. Will Putin and Trump understand?

Pavel Kozhevnikov was born in Kazakhstan. In 1992 he married an American woman and relocated to Colorado, USA, where he worked in a variety of business ventures and taught various subjects including Russian at Mitchell High School as well as at Pikes Peak Community College and the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs. Pavel continues to enjoy teaching Russian at the local community college and university and devotes his free time to writing. He has published four books of stories and poems as well as numerous articles for newspapers and journals in Russia, Germany, Kazakhstan, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

[Aug 11, 2018] President Trump the most important achivement

Highly recommended!
The FAKE NEWS media (failing @ nytimes , @ NBCNews , @ ABC , @ CBS , @ CNN ) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People! ~ Donald Trump
On Thursday, Mr. Trump expressed his distaste for journalists in more populist terms, saying, "much of the media in Washington, D.C., along with New York, Los Angeles in particular, speaks not for the people, but for the special interests."
"The public doesn't believe you people anymore," Mr. Trump added. "Now, maybe I had something to do with that. I don't know. But they don't believe you."
Notable quotes:
"... Washington Post ..."
"... Financial Times, NBC, CNN, ABC ..."
Aug 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

President Trump has denounced and exposed the repeated deceits and ongoing fabrications of the mass media. Never before has a President so forcefully identified the lies of the leading print and TV outlets. The NY Times , Washington Post , the Financial Times, NBC, CNN, ABC and CBS have been thoroughly discredited in the eyes of the larger public. They have lost legitimacy and trust. Where progressives have failed, a war monger billionaire has accomplished, speaking a truth to serve many injustices.

[Aug 11, 2018] President Trump the most important achivement

Highly recommended!
The FAKE NEWS media (failing @ nytimes , @ NBCNews , @ ABC , @ CBS , @ CNN ) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People! ~ Donald Trump
On Thursday, Mr. Trump expressed his distaste for journalists in more populist terms, saying, "much of the media in Washington, D.C., along with New York, Los Angeles in particular, speaks not for the people, but for the special interests."
"The public doesn't believe you people anymore," Mr. Trump added. "Now, maybe I had something to do with that. I don't know. But they don't believe you."
Notable quotes:
"... Washington Post ..."
"... Financial Times, NBC, CNN, ABC ..."
Aug 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

President Trump has denounced and exposed the repeated deceits and ongoing fabrications of the mass media. Never before has a President so forcefully identified the lies of the leading print and TV outlets. The NY Times , Washington Post , the Financial Times, NBC, CNN, ABC and CBS have been thoroughly discredited in the eyes of the larger public. They have lost legitimacy and trust. Where progressives have failed, a war monger billionaire has accomplished, speaking a truth to serve many injustices.

[Aug 11, 2018] Rudy Giuliani declares that Russiagate probe will blow up in Mueller's own face (VIDEO)

Aug 11, 2018 | theduran.com

This segment is interesting theatre, especially considering that Mr. Giuliani is acting as President Trump's attorney on the Russiagate matter, and that he is going public about anything at all having to do with the investigation and its case, in full knowledge that anything he says publicly will be noted. Nevertheless, "America's Mayor" made several very strong assertions:

These and other points are included in Mr. Giuliani's responses in his discussion with Sean Hannity.

The question that would logically arise with such a set of claims is "why would this investigation even be happening in the first place, if it is only guaranteed to lose?"

And this question is what gives lie to the massive conspiracy of the Deep State and various powerful figures such as Bill Browder , the neo-con establishment, and secular humanist liberals, all banded together to stop President Trump at any cost from changing America's headlong plunge into the darkness of the soft tyranny of modern-day liberalism. Russia stands as the one great power in the world that declares with great strength that this group of people is wrong, and therefore, Russia, and anyone who wishes to grant her legitimacy – must be stopped.

A speculative question that next arises is this:

What happens when President Trump gets vindicated?

There is a massive power play in motion here, and the stakes are much higher than anyone cares to admit.

[Aug 11, 2018] US State Dept sanctions against Russia aimed at 'undercutting' Trump, analysts say

Aug 11, 2018 | www.legitgov.org

US State Dept sanctions against Russia aimed at 'undercutting' Trump, analysts say | 09 Aug 2018 | The US State Department decision to blame Russia for the poisoning of Sergei Skripal without any evidence amounts to "flicking matches in a gasoline-filled room," former US diplomat Jim Jatras told RT.

The announcement of sanctions on Wednesday came despite the fact that the US is entirely aware that Russia was not responsible for the poisoning of Sergei Skripal in Salisbury, UK in March, he said.

"This is a political demand... this is designed to undercut the overtures from the Trump administration for President Trump directly and also Senator Rand Paul - now in Moscow - to warm relations with Russia." Former Pentagon official Michael Maloof echoed that sentiment, telling RT that "you have Donald Trump's foreign policy and you now have the Trump administration's foreign policy."

He added that the sanctions are being orchestrated by the deep state to "make the president look bad and basically to corner him."

[ Exactly. Poisoning was likely executed by MI6 or CIA, to sabotage the US relationship with Russia at the behest of the Deep State .]

[Aug 11, 2018] Neoliberal language allows powerful groups to package their personal preferences as national interest

Notable quotes:
"... "While much of neoliberalism's rhetorical power comes from the assertion that "there is no alternative," the simple fact is that the world is full of alternatives. Indeed, even the so-called free marketers in Australia can see alternatives." ..."
"... It's dogma is nothing but empty lies held up as flawed truth's and full of scoundrels who profit from its concomitant pain. ..."
Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

SwingingVoter, 3 Jun 2018 19:43

"neoliberal language allows powerful groups to package their personal preferences as national interests"

Its almost impossible to talk about a mining economy and a "free market" in the same sentence, Richard. a mining economy is is synonymous with corruption, Dutch disease and political grabs for cash etc. In the height of the 2009 GFC announced by kev07, unskilled labourers in the pilbara were still earning $100/hr. Real estate prices for 3 bed shacks in karratha were starting at $1million plus. The blue collar dominated pilbara area was overwhelmed with greed fed by left politicians hiding behind socialist ideals. The reality was that left wing economists recognized the "dutch disease" problem and their solution was to flood the area with greedy blue collar workers who were blowing their enormous salaries on prostitutes, alcohol and gambling in the hope that profits from the mining boom would be flushed into other parts of the economy.

The solution? partially transition Australia's economy to an innovation driven economy because innovation is linked to learning which is linked to stronger self esteem and self efficacy in the community. an innovation driven econmy is the better way of promting social development in the community and an innovation driven economy is the most effective way for politicians to transition to the benefits of a "free market" driven economy.... the reality is that transitioning to an innovation would require smacking the socialists over the back of the head in the hope that aspiring socialists will respect the ideas and intellectual property of others as opposed to continue to assimilate intellectual property in the name of employment generation and the common good

I dont fear the potential rise of neoliberalism, although i understand that spruiking a free market whilst talking about mining is ridiculous.
I fear the individuals who are have been talking about mining, and targeting/victimising the non politically active conservatives for more than 2 decades in the name of socialism

sierrasierra, 3 Jun 2018 19:21
"While much of neoliberalism's rhetorical power comes from the assertion that "there is no alternative," the simple fact is that the world is full of alternatives. Indeed, even the so-called free marketers in Australia can see alternatives."

Excellent article Richard, you have captured the ideology and its dogma quite specularly.

It's dogma is nothing but empty lies held up as flawed truth's and full of scoundrels who profit from its concomitant pain.

Examples from today's headlines and a few from last week:

[Aug 10, 2018] When> people use the term Jews they typically mean Financial oligachy

Notable quotes:
"... I never meet Jew haters in my personal life but there sure are a lot on this site. How does less than 2% of the US population utterly dominate the nation? Is each Jew 50 times stronger than every gentile. ..."
"... They tend to be urban dwellers where salaries are higher but standards of living are often lower. Those in my neighborhood are very well assimilated. They put elaborate Christmas lights on their houses. It is not a rich neighborhood. ..."
"... Their earlier history was wretched and included slavery and persecutions for thousands of years. Don't waste much time fearing Jews ..."
Jun 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

Patricus , June 5, 2018 at 11:43 pm GMT

I never meet Jew haters in my personal life but there sure are a lot on this site. How does less than 2% of the US population utterly dominate the nation? Is each Jew 50 times stronger than every gentile.

I meet many Jews but can't recall a single super Jew. Maybe they are clever deceivers? The great majority are middle earners. There are some rich and some poor. Jews dominate Hollywood and certain occupations but they are underrepresented as engineers and architects. So what.

They tend to be urban dwellers where salaries are higher but standards of living are often lower. Those in my neighborhood are very well assimilated. They put elaborate Christmas lights on their houses. It is not a rich neighborhood.

Jewish history does not support the idea of a super race. They only entered middle classes in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, and only in the western world. Before that they were not allowed to attend universities or even own land in many cases.

Their earlier history was wretched and included slavery and persecutions for thousands of years. Don't waste much time fearing Jews.

[Aug 10, 2018] America's Militarized Economy by Eric Zuesse

Notable quotes:
"... Taxpayer-funded mass-slaughter is now routine and goes on year after year. ..."
"... "democracy" requires free access to unconstrained information. Otherwise the voter is like cattle free to chose which pre-determined path to take to the same slaughterhouse ..."
"... Wars being fought by the United States will continue to contribute to America's growing inequality, an issue that Washington is completely ignoring. ..."
"... In THE REPORT FROM IRON MOUNTAIN it is laid out that the business of the U.S. is war and that war is good for business and war we shall have and so it is that we are a nation of war and as in Orwells 1984 the wars are not meant to be won, the wars are meant to be continual for the profit of the elites and we the proles are to suffer. ..."
"... The sheeple are not only lead to slaughter, they are made totally unaware of the fact. Sad. ..."
"... "Why didn't Putin simply restore Yanukovych to power and leave it at that?" -- Michael Kenny, why have not you asked Brennan, the former CIA director who traveled "secretly" to Kiev to "organize" the ongoing civil war in Ukraine? ..."
Aug 10, 2018 | www.unz.com

Donald Trump's biggest success, thus far into his Presidency, has been his sale of $400 billion (originally $350 billion) of U.S.-made weapons to the Saudi Arabian Government, which is owned by its royal family, after whom that nation is named. This sale alone is big enough to be called Trump's "jobs plan" for Americans. It is also the biggest weapons-sale in all of history. It's 400 billion dollars, not 400 million dollars; it is gigantic, and, by far, unprecedented in world-history.

The weapons that the Sauds and their friends, the 7 monarchies that constitute the United Arab Emirates, are using right now, in order to conquer and subdue Yemen, are almost entirely made in America. That's terrific business for America. Not only are Americans employed, in strategically important congressional districts (that is, politically important congressional districts), to manufacture this equipment for mass-murdering in foreign lands that never threatened (much less invaded) America, but the countries that purchase this equipment are thereby made dependent upon the services of those American manufacturers, and of the taxpayer-funded U.S. 'Defense' Department and its private military contractors such as Lockheed Martin, to maintain this equipment, and to train the local military enforcers, on how to operate these weapons. Consequently, foreign customers of U.S. military firms are buying not only U.S. weapons, but the U.S. Government's protection -- the protection by the U.S. military, of those monarchs. They are buying the label of being an "American ally" so that the U.S. news media can say that this is in defense of American allies (regardless of whether it's even that). American weapons are way overpriced for what they can do, but they are a bargain for what they can extract out of America's taxpayers, who fund the U.S. 'Defense' Department and thus fund the protection of those monarchs: these kings and other dictators get U.S. taxpayers to fund their protection. It's an international protection-racket funded by American taxpayers and those rulers, in order to protect those rulers; and the victims aren't only the people who get slaughtered in countries such as Afghanistan, and Iraq, and Libya, and Syria, and Yemen, and Palestine, but also (though only financially) are the American public, who get fleeced by it -- the American public provide the bulk of the real funding for this operation to expand the lands where America's allies rule, and so to serve both America's aristocracy and the aristocracies that are America's allies.

This is how today's America enforces its 'democracy' around the world, so that America can spread this 'democracy', at gunpoint, and at bomb-point, like America's allies, those Kings and Emirs, and the apartheid regime in Israel, are doing, to the people whom they kill and conquer, with help from the taxpayer-funded American military -- funded to protect those aristocrats, against their respective publics, and to further enrich America's own aristocrats, at the expense of America's own public.

The global 'aggressor' has been identified by America's previous President, Barack Obama , who won office like Trump did, by promising 'a reset' in relations with post-communist Russia, and by mocking Obama's opponent (Mitt Romney) for having called Russia "the number one geopolitical foe" -- which America's aristocracy has historically considered Russia to be, ever since the aristocracy in Russia fled and were killed in 1917, which caused America's and other aristocracies to fear and hate Russia and Russians, for having ousted its aristocracy, this being an act that aristocrats everywhere are determined to avenge, regardless of 'ideology' . (Similarly, America and its pro-aristocracy foreign allies, seek to avenge Iran's 1979 overthrow of the Shah.) As Obama's own actions during his subsequent Presidency made clear, and as he already had started in 2011 (if not from day one of his Presidency) secretly to implement, he privately agreed with what Romney said on that occasion, but he was intelligent enough (which his opponent obviously was not) to recognize that the American public, at that time, did not agree with it but instead believed that Islamic terrorists and aristocrats such as the Sauds who finance them are that); and Obama took full advantage of his opponent's blunder there, which helped Obama to win a second term in the White House (after having skillfully hidden from the public during his first term, his intention to weaken Russia by eliminating leaders who were friends or even allies of Russia, such as in Syria, and Ukraine).

This is American 'democracy', after all ( rule by deceit, lies ), and that's the reason why, when Russia, in 2014, responded to the U.S. coup in Ukraine (a coup under the cover of anti-corruption demonstrations) which coup was taking over this large country next-door to Russia and thus constituted a deadly threat to Russia's national security, Obama declared Russia to be the world's top 'aggressor' . Obama overthrew Ukraine and then damned Russia's leader Putin for responding to Obama's aggressive threat against Russia from this coup in neighboring Ukraine. Russia was supposedly the 'aggressor' because it allowed the residents of Crimea -- which had been part of Russia until the Soviet dictator in 1954 had arbitrarily handed Crimea to Ukraine -- to become Russian citizens again, Russians like 90% of them felt they still were, despite Khrushchev's transfer of them to Ukraine in 1954. The vast majority of Crimeans felt themselves still to be Russians. But Obama and allies of the U.S. Government insisted that the newly installed Government of Ukraine must rule those people; those people must not be permitted to rule (or be ruled) by people they've participated in choosing.

... ... ...

America has a militarized economy . It also currently has the very highest percentage of its people in prison out of all of the world's 222 countries and so certainly qualifies as a police state (which Americans who are lucky enough to be not amongst the lower socio-economic classes might find to be a shocking thing to assert). On top of that, everyone knows that America's military spending is by far the highest in the world, but many don't know that it's the most corrupt and so the U.S. actually spends around half of the entire world's military budget and that the U.S. 'Defense' Department is even so corrupt that it has been unauditable and thus unaudited for decades, and that many U.S. military programs are counted in other federal departments in order to hide from the public how much is actually being spent each year on the military, which is well over a trillion dollars annually, probably more than half of all federal discretionary (which excludes interest on the debt, some of which pays for prior wars) spending. So, it's a very militarized economy, indeed .

This is today's American 'democracy' . Is it also 'democracy' in America's allied countries? (Obviously, they are more democratic than America regarding just the incarceration-rate; but what about generally?) Almost all of those countries continue to say that America is a democracy (despite the proof that it is not), and that they are likewise. Are they correct in both? Are they allied with a 'democracy' against democracy? Or, are they, in fact, phonies as democracies? These are serious questions, and bumper-sticker answers to them won't suffice anymore -- not after invading Iraq in 2003, and Libya in 2011, and Syria right afterward, and Ukraine in 2014, and Yemen today, etc.

Please send this article along to friends, and ask for their thoughts about this. Because, in any actual democracy, everyone should be discussing these issues, under the prevailing circumstances. Taxpayer-funded mass-slaughter is now routine and goes on year after year. After a few decades of this, shouldn't people start discussing the matter? Why haven't they been? Isn't this the time to start? Or is America so much of a dictatorship that it simply won't happen? We'll see.

renfro , August 10, 2018 at 6:23 am GMT

I am very tired of the limp dick gutter trash that passes for leadership in this country trying to tell the rest of the world what they can and cant do. The Orange Clown is too big for his britches and is doing the donkey for his Jew Israeli gang. This is not America First.

China, Germany defend Iran business ties as U.S. sanctions grip

Reuters•August 08, 2018

BEIJING/BERLIN (Reuters) – China and Germany defended their business ties with Iran on Wednesday in the face of President Donald Trump's warning that any companies trading with the Islamic Republic would be barred from the United States. The comments from Beijing and Berlin signaled growing anger from partners of the United States, which reimposed strict sanctions against Iran on Tuesday, over its threat to penalize businesses from third countries that continue to operate there. "China has consistently opposed unilateral sanctions and long-armed jurisdiction," the Chinese foreign ministry said. "China's commercial cooperation with Iran is open and transparent, reasonable, fair and lawful, not...

Turkey to continue buying natural gas from Iran despite U.S. sanctions

ANKARA (Reuters) – Turkey will continue to buy natural gas from Iran in line with its long-term supply contract, Turkey's energy minister said on Wednesday, a day after U.S. President Donald Trump threatened that anyone trading with Iran will not do business with America. NATO member Turkey is dependent on imports for almost all of its energy needs and Iran is a key supplier of Ankara's natural gas and oil purchases. While the Turkish refiner Tupras has already cut back on oil shipments from Tehran, a complete halt of energy imports would be near impossible. Energy Minister Fatih Donmez told A Haber broadcaster that he expected Ankara's talks with Washington on the issue to yield a positive outcome.

mijj , August 10, 2018 at 7:06 am GMT
"democracy" requires free access to unconstrained information. Otherwise the voter is like cattle free to chose which pre-determined path to take to the same slaughterhouse
Wizard of Oz , August 10, 2018 at 7:20 am GMT
I am in no position to contest much of the author's detail on matters of peripheral interest to me like Ukraine but I have an honest and expert source of information which makes me understand the unmentioned fact that, apart from the Crimeans, there is a very solid body of Ukrainians including those whose first language is Russian whose main objective would be for Ukraine to be and remain independent of Russia.

Correspondingly the idea that Yanukovich was "democratically elected" is humbug coming from someone who – rightly in my view – denies America's democratic credentials.

Akbar Ali , August 10, 2018 at 7:22 am GMT
LOL, Justin Trudeau is having a row with Saudi Arabia for jailing a female activist. But he care less about civilian being mascaraed in Yemen, especially children (school bus) being bombed .

Akbar Ali

Sally Snyder , August 10, 2018 at 11:27 am GMT
As shown in this article there is a very interesting connection between wealth inequality and American wars:

https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/07/how-american-wars-lead-to-increased.html

Wars being fought by the United States will continue to contribute to America's growing inequality, an issue that Washington is completely ignoring.

anon [317] Disclaimer , August 10, 2018 at 12:42 pm GMT
@mijj

democracy requires more; it also requires voting power..

IN USA controlled America, Americans are not allow to vote on law at all and for law maker[Pharaoh directed slave drivers of Americans] each voter gets to check on the ballot whether he, she or it prefers the donkey Pharaoh or the Elephant Pharaoh to rule America by selecting (voting for) the next slave driver office holder. Real candidates selected by Americans in a true democracy do not happen.

Secondly, 527 positions in the USA are filled by voting outcome, Americans can Corporations and Foreigners can fund these guys vote for 1 to be your next slave driver

that's a total of five votes, each voter can caste, but there are 527 jobs to be filled? you vote is limited, what you say is ignored., what you are allowed to know or hear about is directed by private media corporations and highly paid psychologist and professional intelligence people.

Think about it, Americans have no power to control how they are Governed or whot will inflict the next pain Americans will be made to suffer, nor are Americans allowed access to the information needed to understand the environment or the issues important to that environment in which they live. True in many countries.

Seems to me there are two prisons in America: the larger unconfined prison and the highly confined jails.

The occupants of each are under 24/7 surveillance, not by government but by private corporations.

Neither is given access to important information, and those in the unconfined prison are threatened each day with confinement should the thoughts or behaviors of the threatened challenge those in control of the system.

The article is about Militarization of our economy, but that too is not within the control of Americans. Militarization is dictated by private corporations and their Pharaoh owners; it is they who control the USA, and it is the USA that Controls Americans in accord to the directives given by the Pharaohs.

BTW Pharaohs never stand for election.

DESERT FOX , August 10, 2018 at 1:18 pm GMT
The Zionist controlled U.S. gov is in the war business and has been ever since the Zionists took control of the U.S. via their privately owned money creation machine know as the FED and their IRS in 1913 so once they had the ability to create money out of thin air and the ability to tax Americans to pay for the debts that war incurred, the Zionists had control of America lock stock and gun barrel.

All the wars that the U.S. has been in since and including WWI and right down to the war in Syria , have been Zionist banker created wars and all the millions of lives lost and the trillions in debt from these wars can be laid at the feet of the Zionists who control every facet of the U.S. gov, and as said by General Smedley Butler in his book War Is A Racket, and that is what war is a Zionist racket.

In THE REPORT FROM IRON MOUNTAIN it is laid out that the business of the U.S. is war and that war is good for business and war we shall have and so it is that we are a nation of war and as in Orwells 1984 the wars are not meant to be won, the wars are meant to be continual for the profit of the elites and we the proles are to suffer.

Michael Kenny , August 10, 2018 at 2:15 pm GMT
Good God, what a hysterical rant! It's hardly worth bothering with the details but just a few points for the heck of it. He says that the Ukrainian coup "constituted a deadly threat to Russia's national security" but doesn't explain why that, even if true, gave Putin the right to invade Ukraine and annex part of its territory. Why didn't Putin simply restore Yanukovych to power and leave it at that? By the way, Ukraine has never at any time applied for EU membership.
AnonFromTN , August 10, 2018 at 2:29 pm GMT
MSM are doing their job of keeping Americans in the dark about anything of consequence. The State Department just posted on its site proposed new "sanctions" on Russia that essentially amount to a declaration of war. Lunatic asylum is the most appropriate place for the whole American "leadership", down to the last man/woman/tranny. The only thing that stands between us and WWIII, which would be a suicide of humanity, is unbelievably cool and reasonable position of Russian leadership.

But Americans are kept in the dark entirely, distracted with BS stories. The top "news" on the CNN site: "2 police officers among 4 killed in Canada shooting; a suspect is in custody"; "Ex-Ohio state wrestler clarifies comment about congressman's awareness of abuse". As if any of this would matter when nuclear missiles start flying.

The sheeple are not only lead to slaughter, they are made totally unaware of the fact. Sad.

DESERT FOX , August 10, 2018 at 3:24 pm GMT
@Skip Sullivan

Do some research, there is plenty of information available for example Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution by Anthony Sutton, can be had on Amazon.

annamaria , August 10, 2018 at 5:13 pm GMT
@Intelligent Dasein

So much irritation but zero refutation. The article certainly struck a nerve in an "Intelligent Dasein," a supporter of Zio-Nazism.

Meanwhile, here is a rational approach towards war reparations: http://www.voltairenet.org/article202370.html
"'the conflict that took place in Syria is a war of aggression organized by transnational financial interests – such as the investment fund KKR, Toyota, the global leader of Cement Lafarge, etc. Therefore it must be the transnationals involved and the States that worked with them that have to pay the damages."

The Jewish State must be unquestionably included in the list of "organized interests" guilty of the war of aggression and war crimes in Syria, which resulted in a massive loss of life and tremendous damage to Syrian infrastructure. Considering the sheer number of the war-cheerleaders among Israel-firsters and the influence of ziocons (the Jewish Lobby) on the US policies abroad, Israel owes a lot to Syria.

This is not some sort of inventive claims peddled by Holo-biz, but a fact-based demand that must be honored by the aggressors.

Every time a "chosen" makes a noise about "uncomparable sufferings" he/she must be reminded of the Jewish crimes in Russia, Ukraine, Syria, and Gaza Ghetto.

AnonFromTN , August 10, 2018 at 5:22 pm GMT
@Skip Sullivan

I do mean rational factually supported arguments. But creationists and adepts of any other system of baseless beliefs, including various religions, communism, Nazism, etc., should be also allowed to air their arguments, however ridiculous they are. Let everyone show his/her true colors. Smart people will see through any BS, whereas fooling the fools is not a crime, the fools exist to be fooled, often by other fools.

Censorship is an admission that you have no arguments. That's why Western MSM are so heavily censored.

annamaria , August 10, 2018 at 5:26 pm GMT
@Michael Kenny

"Why didn't Putin simply restore Yanukovych to power and leave it at that?" -- Michael Kenny, why have not you asked Brennan, the former CIA director who traveled "secretly" to Kiev to "organize" the ongoing civil war in Ukraine?

How old are you to ask such a naive question, 7 or 97?

Do you understand how much $5 billion is? -- This is how much the zionized US government had invested in regime change in Ukraine.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-04-14/white-house-admits-cia-director-brennan-was-secretly-kiev

annamaria , August 10, 2018 at 5:45 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

The rationale for the anti-Russian sanctions carries, of course, a "humanitarian" touch: bad Russia is punished by the righteous US for the alleged poisoning of Skripals. There is zero evidence to support the US/UK verdict re Skripals

On the same day when the US was showing its righteousness by "sunctioning" Russia for the alleged poisoning of Skripals (both Skripals are alive) the Saudi-American coalition had bombed, with the US provided WMD, a bus filled with school children in Yemen. http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/08/us-fine-tuning-of-saudi-airstrike-target-list-creates-results.html#comments

Here is what is left of the formerly alive and healthy children after the "righteous" US had sent a "legitimate" "humanitarian" help in the kids' direction:

Herald , August 10, 2018 at 5:47 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

So you are saying most Russian speaking Ukrainians are happy to be governed by a bunch of pro-US/Israel neo-nazi thugs. Sorry can't buy that one.

AnonFromTN , August 10, 2018 at 6:17 pm GMT
@annamaria

Typical of the "defenders of human rights". The "shining city on a hill" did the same in Germany, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, and countless other countries. As Madeleine Albright put it, the death of 500,000 Iraqi children was worth it.

The US is always more arrogant, as opposed to super-hypocritical Europe. Hard to tell what's worse.

peterAUS , August 10, 2018 at 6:25 pm GMT
@Intelligent Dasein

If this article were any more poorly written, it would be banned by the FDA. The repetitious, tub-thumping tone should not be consumed while driving or operating heavy machinery.

Agree. Promising topic, disappointing delivery. Just the usual, shallow, propaganda. Simply a very bad article.

[Aug 10, 2018] Dozens of Yemeni Children Killed in Saudi Coalition Airstrike by Daniel Larison

Notable quotes:
"... Coalition attacks on Yemeni markets are unfortunately all too common. The Saudis and their allies know they can strike civilian targets with impunity because the Western governments that arm and support them never call them out for what they do. ..."
Aug 09, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
There was another Saudi coalition airstrike on a crowded market in northern Yemen today. Dozens of civilians have been killed and dozens more injured. Many of the dead and injured were children whose school bus was hit in the attack:

Coalition attacks on Yemeni markets are unfortunately all too common. The Saudis and their allies know they can strike civilian targets with impunity because the Western governments that arm and support them never call them out for what they do. The U.S. continues to arm and refuel coalition planes despite ample evidence that the coalition has been deliberately attacking civilian targets. At the very least, the coalition hits civilian targets with such regularity that they are ignoring whatever procedures they are supposed to be following to prevent that. The weapons that the U.S., Britain, and other arms suppliers provide them are being used to slaughter wedding-goers, hospital patients, and schoolchildren, and U.S. refueling of coalition planes allows them to carry out more of these attacks than they otherwise could. Today's attack ranks as one of the worst.

Saada has come under some of the most intense attacks from the coalition bombing campaign. The coalition illegally declared the entire area a military target three years ago, and ever since they have been blowing up homes , markets , schools , water treatment systems, and hospitals without any regard for the innocent civilians that are killed and injured.

The official U.S. line on support for the war is that even more civilians would be killed if the U.S. weren't supporting the coalition. Our government has never provided any evidence to support this, and the record shows that civilian casualties from Saudi coalition airstrikes have increased over the last year. The Saudis and their allies either don't listen to any of the advice they're receiving, or they know they won't pay any price for ignoring it. As long as the U.S. arms and refuels coalition planes while they slaughter Yemeni civilians in attacks like this one, our government is implicated in the war crimes enabled by our unstinting military assistance. Congress can and must halt that assistance immediately.

Update: CNN reports on the aftermath of the airstrike:

The International Committee for the Red Cross (ICRC) said that a hospital it supports in Saada had received 29 dead bodies of "mainly children" under 15 years of age, and 40 injured, including 30 children.

"(The hospital) is very busy. They've been receiving wounded and dead since the morning and it is non-stop ," ICRC head of communications and spokesperson Mirella Hodeib told CNN.

Second Update: The Associated Press reports that the death toll stands at 43 with another 63 injured.

Third Update: The death toll has reportedly risen to 50 . 77 were injured.

an older america weeps August 9, 2018 at 11:30 am

School buses?

Good Lord above. School buses.

Of course I have no right to surprise or shock. They've already targeted hospitals, foreign doctors and nurses, first responders, wedding parties, and funerals.

School buses.

We used to make movies about killing people who do things like this. Now we help them do it.

Daniel O'Connor , says: August 9, 2018 at 12:54 pm
The repetitive frequency and intensity of these attacks on hospitals, schools, markets and other civilian gatherings, coupled with the indifference of the guilty national governments and their international enablers, signals that the world and human species is passing through a mass psychosis. This psychosis is playing itself out at all levels. Fascism, which is very current as a national psychology, is generally speaking, a coping strategy for dealing with nasty chaos. This coping strategy is designed around generating even more chaos, since that is a familiar and therefore more comfortable pattern of behavior; and that does provide a delusion of stability. A good example would be the sanctions just declared by the Trump Administration on Iranian commerce. In an intrinsically connected global market, these sanctions are so thorough that they qualify as a blockade, within a contingency plan for greater global conflict. But those who destroy hospitals, schools, school buses and public celebrations are not, otherwise, forward looking nice people. We are descending into a nasty fascist war psychosis. Just shake it. Live. Long and well.
b. , says: August 9, 2018 at 2:18 pm
"even more civilians would be killed if the U.S. weren't supporting the coalition"

If we did not hand them satellite images, did not service, repair and refuel their planes, and did not sell them the bombs, then they would . kill more civilians how? They could not even reach their targets, let alone drop explosives they do not have.

What Would Mohammad Do? Buy bombs from the Russians? Who have better quality control and fewer duds, hence more victims?

What Would Mohammad Do? Get the UAE to hire Blackwater to poison the wells across Yemen?

How exactly do the profiteers in our country, that get counted out blood money for every single Yemeni killed, propose that the Saudis and Emiratis would make this worse?

But, good to know that our "smart" and "precise" munitions can still hit a school bus. Made In America!

Great.

Hunter C , says: August 9, 2018 at 5:00 pm
The coverage in the media has been predictably cowardly and contemptible in the aftermath of this story. I read articles from CNN and MSNBC and they were variations on "school bus bombed", in the passive tense – with no mention of who did it or who is supporting them in the headline, ad if the bombings were natural disasters.

Fox, predictably, was even worse and led with "Biblical relics endangered by war", which speaks volumes about the presumed priorities of their viewership.

This, and not anything to do with red meat domestic politics, is the worst media malpractice of our time. "Stop directly helping the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks drop bombs on school children" should be the absolute easiest possible moral issue for our media to take a stand on and yet they treat it like it's radioactive.

Speaking as someone who considers themselves a liberal I am infuriated by the Democrats response. How can the party leadership not see that if they keep flogging the horse of Russian trolls and shrugging their shoulders over American given (not sold – *given*) bombs being dropped on schools and hospitals, no one is ever going to take the supposed Democratic anti-war platform seriously again. The Republicans can afford to be tarde by association with these atrocities. The Democrats can't.

I wonder how many Democrats are in the same boat as me right now: I may not like Trump or the Christian conservatives but fights over the Supreme Court or coal plants or a healthcare law look terribly petty compared to the apparent decision by Saudi Arabia to kill literally millions. For the first time in my life I'm seriously wishing there was a third-party candidate I could support and the congressional elections just so I could send a message on this.

Erik , says: August 9, 2018 at 10:13 pm
@Hunter C
Vote Libertarian Party. You won't agree with a lot of their domestic agenda, but they're not going to win, so it doesn't matter. The noninterventionist foreign policy is your message.

[Aug 10, 2018] There is also the documented presence of American forces and officers in the operations room of the Saudi coalition

Aug 10, 2018 | www.unz.com

annamaria , August 10, 2018 at 1:59 pm GMT

@DESERT FOX

The ZUSA empire in action (for children, you know) on the other side of the globe: http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/08/us-fine-tuning-of-saudi-airstrike-target-list-creates-results.html#comments

"Following an attack this morning on a bus driving children in Dahyan Market, northern Saada, (an ICRC-supported) hospital has received dozens of dead and wounded," the organisation said on Twitter without giving more details.

In a statement carried by the official Saudi Press Agency, the coalition called the strike a "legitimate military action"

The Comment section:

"The US provides the in-flight refueling that makes these bombing sorties possible. The "Five Eyes" provides the surveillance that picks the targets, and the navigation to hit them.

KSA is doing precisely what the AZ Empire requires of it. Just as the British Royals and their banker sponsors dictated over a century ago, so does the Empire direct these heinous crimes today.

If the Saud Royals ever did go "rogue," they'd be taken out just as the AZ [American Zionist] Empire has done time and time again."
"There is also the documented presence of American forces and officers in the operations room of the Saudi coalition." https://twitter.com/abcdaee198/status/1027649243568386055

"Why is it that the Zionist media were up in arms every time White Helmets were digging Syrian children out of rubble or dousing them with hoses? Dozens of children were slaughtered in Yemen, and many more maimed and injured and hundreds of thousands are being subjected to famine but there's only deafening silence on the Zionist-run media."

"Imagine the reaction if the Russians or Syrians had blown up a busload of kids."

-- On the same topic: Israel demanded -- and BBC changed its headline. In a headline, BBC claimed that "Israeli air strikes 'kill pregnant woman and baby.'" After some time, BBC changed its title to "Gaza air strikes 'kill woman and child' after rockets hit Israel: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/250275

[Aug 10, 2018] U.S. 'Fine Tuning' Of Saudi Airstrike Target List Creates Results

Aug 10, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

occidentosis , Aug 9, 2018 3:03:23 PM | 1

I saw one video
there was nothing left of the children but bits
It was surreal
Kalen , Aug 9, 2018 3:17:53 PM | 2
Next Saudi Target: Ottawa.
MbS went beserk like Musk overdosed on juice.
Ian , Aug 9, 2018 3:22:53 PM | 3
One day, the West will reap the Karma it has sowed upon the world.
librul , Aug 9, 2018 3:35:10 PM | 4
Obama spoke about mothers sending their children to school in his acceptance speech for the
Nobel Peace Prize.

He contrasted reality vs hope
and we learned which one he would deliver.

Obama in Oslo, December 10, 2009,:

"Somewhere today, a mother facing punishing poverty
still takes the time to teach her child, scrapes together what
few coins she has to send that child to school
-- because she believes that
a cruel world still
has a place for that child's dreams.

Let us live by their example.
We can acknowledge that oppression will always be with us,
and still strive for justice .
We can admit the intractability of deprivation,
and still strive for dignity.
Clear-eyed,
we can understand that there will be war,
and still strive for peace.
We can do that -- for that is the story of human progress; that's the
hope
of all the world; and at this moment of challenge,
that must be our work here on Earth.

Thank you very much.
(Applause.)

One week later Obama shredded dozens of women and children in Yemen
and covered it up.

Here is ABC's Brian Ross using his most masculine baritone voice to boast about Obama's attack:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHcg3TNSRPs

Wikileaks cable corroborates evidence of US airstrikes in Yemen
https://www.amnesty.org/en/press-releases/2010/12/wikileaks-cable-corroborates-evidence-us-airstrikes-yemen/

Cable itself:
https://search.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/10SANAA4_a.html

S , Aug 9, 2018 3:57:13 PM | 5
The comments under the Daily Mail article are disabled, lest someone mentions the U.S. involvement.
Lochearn , Aug 9, 2018 4:06:42 PM | 6
Imagine the reaction if the Russians or Syrians had blown up a busload of kids...
worldblee , Aug 9, 2018 4:08:36 PM | 7
Yes, they are fine tuning their ability to hit children, hospitals, etc.
Circe , Aug 9, 2018 4:16:06 PM | 8
@4

I've written many times Obama was Bush II - BUT F...KING TRUMP IS IN THE WHITE HOUSE NOW! So why are you giving us the ancient history deflection???????????

karlof1 , Aug 9, 2018 4:16:41 PM | 9
The pic provides an example of how the Outlaw US Empire implements its global population control policy--all bombs, no kids. Twitterverse is madder than a wet hen. One went to Trump's twitter to ask where's his outrage over these kid's real deaths, not the staged ones he launched missiles at Syria over. It deserves to be retweeted millions of times. Unfortunately, sadists are incapable of being shamed; they just grin at such pics while congratulating themselves. Betcha the Trump dossier got it backwards--It was Trump who pissed all over the Russian women.
librul , Aug 9, 2018 4:29:31 PM | 10
@8

It isn't about you.

Mark2 , Aug 9, 2018 4:38:58 PM | 11
Almasdarnews. Com. Are reporting a massive Israile army convoy heading for Gaza bigger than enything seen since 2014 ! This looks serious ! The whole dam world picture is looking way beyond serious !!!
james , Aug 9, 2018 4:41:56 PM | 12
kudos the exceptional nation in support of those other exceptional nations - ksa and israel...

everyone else on the planet want to know when this horror will end...

Ahh, thats why. The Saudis are incompetent and vile, but trust the us to be even more incompetent and even more vile and putrid.
This is horrible! I see it and can not really do much. It is a never ending story of innocent people being killed off. But it does nurture a solid and hot hate to those people who are architects of this. They feel safe and secured, but they are sitting on a volcano, and when it goes, they will go too. Maybe a Gadaffi end.

Posted by: Den Lille Abe , Aug 9, 2018 4:42:25 PM | 13

Ahh, thats why. The Saudis are incompetent and vile, but trust the us to be even more incompetent and even more vile and putrid.
This is horrible! I see it and can not really do much. It is a never ending story of innocent people being killed off. But it does nurture a solid and hot hate to those people who are architects of this. They feel safe and secured, but they are sitting on a volcano, and when it goes, they will go too. Maybe a Gadaffi end.

Posted by: Den Lille Abe | Aug 9, 2018 4:42:25 PM | 13 /div

Den Lille Abe , Aug 9, 2018 5:01:23 PM | 14
Hate is a hefty spice; it can make you blind to reason, it can make you oblivious to truth, and make you inoculated against love. But hate controlled, is also a drug that is powerful and useful, hate nurtured and fed can move mountains and empires. Hate is good in manageable doses and wrecking in large ones. But take it at own risk.
Christian Chuba , Aug 9, 2018 5:17:15 PM | 15
The KSA isn't even trying to hide their evil.

They are claiming these are legitimate military targets, they targeted 'militants', the Houthis use 'child soldiers', and use human shields. I bet Nikki Haley still thinks they are the most wonderful people ever, on the front lines, fighting against the real monsters, Iran.

Guerrero , Aug 9, 2018 5:26:14 PM | 16
This is terrible.
karlof1 , Aug 9, 2018 5:30:35 PM | 17
Here's the Twitter post I mentioned using the same pic b chose.
Circe , Aug 9, 2018 5:30:42 PM | 18
@10

What's that supposed to mean??? Trump is President! Aren't you excusing Trump by dredging up Obama's shet? That excuse not to criticize Trump is getting real old.

Yeah, Right , Aug 9, 2018 5:31:45 PM | 19
@15 Nah, Christian, you are clearly wrong. Nikki would consider KSA to have the 2nd most wonderful people ever, with the USA holding the Bronze Medal position. There is no doubt who she holds as The Chosen People.


Mark2 , Aug 9, 2018 5:52:53 PM | 20
Don't let this stuff get normalised ! That's why they do it in plain site. It desensitises the dumb public
i e trump supporters in u s, torys in uk. We should be feeling outrage and hatered towards the people that
do this . Including our own governments.
ToivoS , Aug 9, 2018 5:59:38 PM | 21
#10 circe

No one is excusing Trump. The point that needs to be emphasized is that the War Party has two wings: repubs and dems. Every last president since WWII has put the interests of imperial conquest over the interests of the American people. Bill Clinton, Bush, Obama and now Trump (as well as all of their wannabes Gore, Kerry, McCain HRC) were and are war mongers. They are united in their lust for killing children (don't forget Madeline Albright with her "it was worth it" over the 500,000 babies Clinton killed through sanctions).

Mark2 , Aug 9, 2018 6:14:14 PM | 22
This evening #switch off bbc is trending number one on Twitter and number four world wide! Time we all pushback. on the net,on the streets, everywhere we can.no justice no peace !
ToivoS , Aug 9, 2018 6:21:20 PM | 23
Mark2 opines It desensitises the dumb public i e trump supporters

Are you serious? You should listen to my college educated colleagues (more than half with professional degrees) most of whom are democrats and not one who voted for Trump. When it comes to war against Syria, Libya, threats against Russia they are true blooded war mongers. Actually worse than Trump supporters because they in general oppose those wars or war threats.

Bart Hansen , Aug 9, 2018 6:26:32 PM | 24
For more terrorist reading in the Middle East by Number 2 Democracy -

https://mondoweiss.net/2018/08/eyewitness-passengers-antibiotics/

Mark2 , Aug 9, 2018 6:32:10 PM | 25
Toivos @ 23
Dumb is as dumb does! They come in all shapes sizes and political party's . Trumps a greedy pig puts children in cages and is a kkk racist don't make excuses he's a monster full stop!
Don't give me eny of that o but, o but blah blah.!!!
Pft , Aug 9, 2018 6:33:12 PM | 26
Mark2@20

It already is normalized. Go look at many of the comments on MSM (left and right) and so called progressive sites. Hopefully those are all astroturfers but I suspect many are real folks. Its luny tunes. They live in the Matrix and are blissfully unaware. Like something out of 1984 during the 2 minute hate but its 24/7 , or maybe walking dead if the WD could type or talk.

Toxik , Aug 9, 2018 6:36:01 PM | 27
as a parent, I feel the loss. as an American, I feel disgusted.
Jen , Aug 9, 2018 6:40:31 PM | 28
Another sterling example of how the US teaches its allies to be incompetent, vicious and cowardly in targeting and killing those least able to fight back.
Piotr Berman , Aug 9, 2018 6:46:23 PM | 29
O Canada! Recently, I praised them as "New Trumpland". But why did they forget that silence can be golden? Apparently, it dawned on PM that his party is called "liberal" and thus it must make "liberal calls"*. But what cause should be selected? Massacres and starvation of cute emaciated children? Conservative predecessor of current PM got ca. 7 G USD contract for "vehicles" (motorized infantly?) for KSA, and Trudeau will not endanger precious Canadian jobs. After leaving the task to the Foreign Minister (Freedland, Feminazi**), the plight of women right activists in KSA with family members in Canada.

Canada cannot yield to Saudi Arabia's deranged overreaction
The regime's reaction to a couple of tweets is more about snuffing out its own country's voices of dissent
Iyad El-Baghdadi, Amarnath Amarasingam · for CBC News · Posted: Aug 09, 2018 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: August 9

If Canada folds, some fear that a line would be drawn in the sand, and behind that line, petty Arab dictators could do what they want with their activist communities, without as much as a complaint from the world. (Cliff Owen/Associated Press)

=====

Of course Canada cannot yield. For starters, it is unclear what would appease the irate Crown Prince. Perhaps Trudeau and Friedland coming together to KSA to submit to a public flogging. But judging from the titles I have seen, Canadians cherish "delicate balance", and they though that an occasional complaint that is not 100% aligned with USA and principal customers of Canadian products should be safe.

karlof1 , Aug 9, 2018 6:49:11 PM | 30
ToivoS @23--

Agreed. When it comes to knowing the Truth of the Outlaw US Empire's overseas deeds, most people are illiterate/ignorant. They hang the flag aside their front porch and feel righteous. The only reason we don't have multitudes of people saluting whoever's POTUS and chanting Sieg Heil is because in the back of their tiny minds they somehow know that's incorrect behavior but don't know why. Some provided feedback on Michael Hudson's going autobiographical saying his upbringing seemed unreal--faked--thus showing how little they know of WW2 Home Front US history when people were much more informed and politically savvy.

It seems safe to say that Animal Farm & 1984 have both put down extensive roots within the Outlaw US Empire to the point where digging up and destroying those weeds will cause major social damage. Can't make an omelet without breaking eggs is how the saying goes. But a positive outcome isn't the only possibility.

Mark2 , Aug 9, 2018 6:49:27 PM | 31
We need to remember this' the about left or right ! That's just devide and rule. This about the 1% killing off the 99%
Agend 21.what they are doing to Yemen people now they will do to you next.
karlof1 , Aug 9, 2018 7:01:30 PM | 32
jen @28--

The deliberate targeting of civilians is Outlaw US Empire policy since WW2 despite it being a War Crime. Guernica was an outrage, but Powell had it covered up since spoke directly to US actions since the paint dried in 1937. The School Bus was yet another of all too many Guernicas that have occurred since. Someone mentioned desensitized. Yes, on an International Scale. It was an act of Terror, but how many are describing it as such? BigLie Media? Not a chance if they show/mention it at all.

I know you feel as I do, but I needed to vent.

dh , Aug 9, 2018 7:06:13 PM | 33
@29 '...Canadians cherish "delicate balance",...'

I'm not sure we should generalize about Canadians. Trudeau is trying to satisfy his base and presumably staying true to his own liberal convictions. But I've met Canadians who dislike him intensely. They do not think gender politics, welcoming refugees, settling native land claims, lecturing Saudi Arabia etc. is the best way to maintain a high standard of living.

Peter Schmidt , Aug 9, 2018 7:08:48 PM | 34
Israel demanded - and BBC changed its headline. In a headline, BBC claimed that "Israeli air strikes 'kill pregnant woman and baby.'" After some time, BBC changed its title to "Gaza air strikes 'kill woman and child' after rockets hit Israel
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/250275
Peter Schmidt , Aug 9, 2018 7:13:26 PM | 35
A good comment from HistoryHacker (Guardian web page), I thought I share it:

"Let's see: in 1913 the British grabbed Iranian oil and made it their property. Six years later, Britain imposed another agreement and took over Iran's treasury and the army. During the Second World War, Britain's requisitioning of food led to famine and widespread disease. Shortly after that war, Iran's own efforts to establish its nascent democracy and nationalize the oil industry were thwarted. And by whom? Eisenhower joined the systematic British looting, and, sadly, by 1953, the blossoming Iranian democracy was completely destroyed by the covert operation of the American CIA and British MI6, known as Operation Ajax. In place of the democracy was installed Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, a US-British puppet, a despot deeply hated by his own people.
America picked up the baton, and here's Trump going bat crazy!
What could Iranians possibly think?! What do you think?"

Piotr Berman , Aug 9, 2018 7:40:19 PM | 36
@29 '...Canadians cherish "delicate balance",...'
I am not sure we should generalize about Canadians. Posted by: dh | Aug 9, 2018 7:06:13 PM | 33

I tried to make it clear that "Canadians" refer to my observations on titles from Canadian media as reported by Google News.

dh , Aug 9, 2018 7:58:27 PM | 37
@36 I knew that PB. Excuse my inadequate attempt to emulate your tone.

But I think it's true that Canadians enjoy a high standard of living mainly because of things like water, oil, minerals, wheat, lumber etc. and most prefer not to get involved in Saudi Arabian politics.

Virgile , Aug 9, 2018 8:03:42 PM | 38
I hope that Canada will finally lead heavy public condemnation of the Saudi-UAE coalition murderous actions in Yemen. Canada has nothing to loose anymore, it is high time it take a serious stand on the 3 years human rights abuse of the Yemenis.
It should indirectly send a dissaproval message to the USA on its complicity in these war crimes...
Maybe it is time for Canada, to reinstate diplomatic relation with Iran to snub the Saudis and the USA, but I am dreaming...
.
TG , Aug 9, 2018 8:04:08 PM | 39
"But I think it's true that Canadians enjoy a high standard of living mainly because of things like water, oil, minerals, wheat, lumber etc. "

Not quite. It's because of water, oil, minerals, wheat lumber, etc., AND they don't breed like rodents.

India has plenty of resources - adjusting for the cold climate in Canada, probably about as much as Canada, effectively. It's just that these resources don't go that far split up 1.4 billion ways and counting.

And Yemen? With very little water, and one of the highest fertility rates in the world, what do you expect?

CarlD , Aug 9, 2018 8:05:49 PM | 40
out of subject.

What to make of the new sanctions put in place by the State Dept against Russia?

What about those on Iran?

Are these implemented to generate WAR?

Whether it be against Russia, Iran or China, The US attitude is orchestrated by
Zion/Israel.

Why deal with the US when Israel is the culprit?

Wiping out Israel is the solution. Obliterating Israel will certainly ease
the World's woes.

Of course, targeted assassinations should be carried out.

Short of this, Netanyahu should be kept waiting for days whitout being able
to meet Putin. His ambassador should be expelled and the Russian Ambassador to Israel recalled.

Sanction Israel in every way possible. Break the Gaza Siege. Wipe out Israel's
Navy. Down its jets over Lebanon. Kill its Jericho rockets at lift off.

The World will certainly be a better place.

Sasha , Aug 9, 2018 8:05:52 PM | 41
@Posted by: Circe | Aug 9, 2018 4:16:06 PM | 8

I was going to say something in the same vein but you saved me the effort. I am really sick of this.

Is not this woman the spokesperson of the DoS of Trump administration?

https://twitter.com/walid970721/status/1027137513570414593

There is also the documented presence of American forces and officers in the operations room of the Saudi coalition....These guys have not been sent there by Obama...I guess....

https://twitter.com/abcdaee198/status/1027649243568386055

But what most makes me feel sick is not that American commenters out there, well payed or volunteer, insist after two years already on this cantinele, what takes me out of my nerves is that the Russians insist...in throwing balls out with certain issues....

https://twitter.com/mfa_russia/status/1027197665845673985


Sasha , Aug 9, 2018 8:20:02 PM | 42
@Posted by: Mark2 | Aug 9, 2018 4:38:58 PM | 11

But what could have really happened? Just yesterday or the day before I was reading that Israel and Hamas were in negotiations...From that to this...I wonder what could be the breaking point...

Anyone has any information/ link?

dh , Aug 9, 2018 8:23:24 PM | 43
@39 Well yes...er I mean no...er bluster bluster....here comes Malthus again.
karlof1 , Aug 9, 2018 8:44:37 PM | 44
Sasha @42--

Talks were a ruse as usual . Supposedly, a cease fire was in place but was broken as reported at the link. Ongoing protests against the "Nationality Law" continue and go unreported as usual. The continuing murder of Gazans serves as cover.

spudski , Aug 9, 2018 8:56:04 PM | 45
@37, "But I think it's true that Canadians enjoy a high standard of living mainly because of things like water, oil, minerals, wheat, lumber etc. and most prefer not to get involved in Saudi Arabian politics."

As a lifelong Canuckistani, my view is that Canada is the world's largest mine - and it is not mine.

dh , Aug 9, 2018 9:09:03 PM | 46
@45 But I understand it's not as easy to get mining permits as it used to be. Lot of environmentalists and first nations lawyers involved. Which is why Canadian mining companies move to Africa.
michaelj72 , Aug 9, 2018 9:12:39 PM | 47
the USA will perhaps suffer blowback, both at home and in many places 'strategic' to its Empire, for generation or two to come, for all the horrible and savage war crimes perpetuated by it and its allies on the poor people of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Palestine, and especially now Yemen, the poorest of the poor - the sorrows of Empire
Pft , Aug 9, 2018 9:12:47 PM | 48
Spudski@45

Spending only 1% of GDP on military helps support your healthcare system too.

Neoliberalism will get you in the end. Trump going to push on NAFTA and our buddy the Saudis giving you a push.

Daniel , Aug 9, 2018 9:18:43 PM | 49
The US provides the in-flight refueling that makes these bombing sorties possible. The "Five Eyes" provides the surveillance that picks the targets, and the navigation to hit them.

KSA is doing precisely what the AZ Empire requires of it. Just as the British Royals and their banker sponsors dictated over a century ago, so does the Empire direct these heinous crimes today.

If the Saud Royals ever did go "rogue," they'd be taken out just as the AZ Empire has done time and time again.

Daniel , Aug 9, 2018 9:25:35 PM | 50
CarlD, the purpose of sanctions is to hurt the citizens of a country enough that they will rise up and revolt against their ruling class.

The AZ Empire has been striving for complete global dominance for a long time, and that means either destroying Russia and China or at least installing "friendly" governments. Hence, sanctions, "trade wars," and infiltration to foment "color revolutions."

CarlD , Aug 9, 2018 9:32:33 PM | 51
50 @ Daniel

And who is behind all of this?

Ian , Aug 9, 2018 9:49:38 PM | 52
Saudi state news agency: "strikes were carried out in accordance with international humanitarian law."

Ugh...

Chipnik , Aug 9, 2018 10:14:45 PM | 53
4

Pence's new Space Command is a blatant telltale that the twice-hacked and never-audited Pentagon has a massive hemorrhage of funds and Trump will be demanding ANOTHER $40B budget increase for Pentagon to paper over a huge Deep Purple Hole in the Bucket.

Chipnik , Aug 9, 2018 10:23:59 PM | 54
40

I was just saying something similar about a more direct way to change A-Z politics to a friend on FB today, with anecdotes from the past as examples, but within the hour, FB delinked our pages so we can't correspond. All part of the Perpetual Now© End of History campaign across pan-media towards a totally-scripted CGI-enhanced Marvel-ously fictional non-reality. With lizard people from Niburu, lol.

Pft , Aug 9, 2018 10:27:32 PM | 55
So Saudis sanction Canada but will still let the oil flow to them (2billion a year) and the US sanctions Russia but will still buy space rockets from them , and they will still sell them to us. Trade war with China but they still buy US Treasuries to finance US debt. British owned BBC rents out their studios to RT to help Russia with their propaganda

LOL. Enjoy the show, more to come

Circe , Aug 9, 2018 10:34:32 PM | 56
@21TS

You expressed it correctly, but @4, 10 I suspect is Trumpgod can do no wrong.

It's a Zionist-rigged system, where Kucinich and Ron Paul didn't stand a chance; to name a mere two of the uncorrupted.

To add to the insanity of this Saudi massacre, Israel's at it again in Gaza. Damn!

It's all Zionist-driven.

Pft , Aug 9, 2018 10:40:02 PM | 57
Carl D@51

Woodrow Wilson : "Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it."

Today some call them ruling or power elites, global elites for the most part. Elites is an interesting word whose origins come from the french word for chosen and latin word for elect.

Piotr Berman , Aug 9, 2018 10:51:43 PM | 58
Some general remarks about Canada:

1. Wealth from natural resources. This is a bit of mixed blessing, because with some exceptions, mining is very capital intensive, so the profit margins are so-so, and job creation is also so-so. Canada is blessed with nice mix of extracting industries, agriculture, "normal" manufacturing, financial centers etc. They also have somewhat reasonable spending in terms value for money in health and military sectors, saving ca. 10% of GDP between the two compared with the less rational southern neighbor Perhaps this is still short of 10%, but USA also wastes money and human resources on prison complex and other inanities.

2. Liberal Canada. Domestically, I do not know enough, but "harmonizing with USA" could please some conservatives while being too expensive to implement. On foreign policy they stick to the worst of liberalism, not standing much for anything, even for their beloved Vilna Ukrayina, although converting Ukraine to land of milk and honey with capable military and a reasonable level of corruption is beyond capacity of any foreign power. But they implemented what used to be totally unjustifiable insult, "feminazi". That said, conservatives learned from Trump to raise mind boggling issue and gain in polls, lately, how to stop hordes of "deplorables" crossing the border. I guess a cheapish solution would be to create a network of recreational trails with very confusing mapping (even GPS) and totally confusing signage, and plant some smilax = green briar or other thorny plants to impede hiking according to compass directions. A note on GPS maps based on satellite pictures: software has very hard time telling dead ends from actually passable trail connections.

3. Populist-progressive Canada of my dreams. Declare the conflicts with KSA and Trump to be matters of national dignity, punish KSA by stopping delivery of military vehicles per Harper's contract and purchases of oil, replace the latter with Iranian. Would Trump dare to impose secondary sanctions, fine American companies in Canada.

Circe , Aug 9, 2018 11:18:38 PM | 59
Why is it that the Zionist media were up in arms every time White Helmets were digging Syrian children out of rubble or dousing them with hoses?

Dozens of children were slaughtered in Yemen, and many more maimed and injured and hundreds of thousands are being subjected to famine but there's only deafening silence on the Zionist-run media.

Syrian children had propaganda value; Yemeni children have no value at all. Americans, Zionists and Saudis are sick and depraved.

Piotr Berman , Aug 9, 2018 11:38:00 PM | 60
A little correction to Circe, Aug 9 11:18:38 PM. SELECTED Syrian children were newsworthy, a recent massacre by ISIS in Sweida was newsworthy only as an example of a failure by "the regime". An earlier example, when majority of people of Greater Aleppo lived in the western part controlled by Damascus, "Aleppo" meant only the eastern part, controlled by the "moderate" rebels, and victims of moderate massacres and shelling were totally un-newsworthy.
Pft , Aug 10, 2018 12:06:44 AM | 61
Piotr@58

Natural resources drive 20 per cent of the economy -- and about 10 per cent of all the jobs in Canada. These natural resources also help Canada attract manufacturing and value added business that utilize domestically produced metals, fuel and timber (as opposed to more expensive imports) Profit motive is overstated, large companies are focused more on income growth and market share. The jobs that are produced are good paying jobs as well

I'd rather have more good paying capital intensive industries than low pay labour intensive service and manufacturing industries that may generate more profits but which end up mostly in CEO and top managements bank accounts

Frankly, the mystery is why America has not invaded Canada and taken over since we last tried in 1812. :>)

dh , Aug 10, 2018 12:10:13 AM | 62
@58 Support in Canada for Ukraine is mainly concentrated in Ukrainian communities in Alberta I believe. They form a quite significant voting block.
ben , Aug 10, 2018 12:21:33 AM | 63
Mark2 @ 31 said:"We need to remember this' the about left or right ! That's just devide and rule. This about the 1% killing off the 99% "

Yep, bottom line statement. From austerity to all neoliberal policies, and the world-wide wars now going on, are basically nothing more than class warfare directed at the 99% to enrich the already rich.

Profits uber alles. Avarice uber alles..

Piotr Berman , Aug 10, 2018 12:46:21 AM | 64
Frankly, the mystery is why America has not invaded Canada and taken over since we last tried in 1812. :>)

Posted by: Pft | Aug 10, 2018 12:06:44 AM | 61

Absorbing Canada could undermine political balance in USA leading to such calamities like socialized medicine, legal marijuana etc. Keeping them on Puerto Rico status is not tenable given the ethnic composition -- too many English speaking whites. If we could just annex Alberta...

Jen , Aug 10, 2018 12:50:16 AM | 65
Bang on cue, TG @ 39 uses a comment about Canada's standard of living (brought about in part by its governments' spending on transport infrastructure - in particular, transcontinental railways - that stimulated job growth and enabled the agricultural and manufactured wealth of the provinces to be spread across the nation and to be exported overseas) to push a racist opinion about how poor countries are at fault for being poor because their people don't have access to birth control measures made in rich countries.
Hoarsewhisperer , Aug 10, 2018 12:51:44 AM | 66
...
..for all the horrible and savage war crimes perpetuated by it and its allies on the poor people of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Palestine, and especially now Yemen, the poorest of the poor - the sorrows of Empire.
Posted by: michaelj72 | Aug 9, 2018 9:12:39 PM | 47

Kipling summed it up with grim irony in three words:
White Man's Burden
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_White_Man%27s_Burden

Jen , Aug 10, 2018 12:56:00 AM | 67
Pft @ 61, Piotr Berman & 64:

The British and the Americans signed a treaty in 1819 to respect one another's borders in North America. The treaty was renegotiated in 1846.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_1818

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

Hoarsewhisperer , Aug 10, 2018 1:07:20 AM | 68
White man's burden...
A phrase used to justify European imperialism in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries; it is the title of a poem by Rudyard Kipling. The phrase implies that imperialism was motivated by a high-minded desire of whites to uplift people of color.
Amir , Aug 10, 2018 1:15:15 AM | 69
Part of the targeting assurance happens by looking at unexpected "gaps" in electronic communication signals. When there is a lot of cellphone communication noise" where is is suddenly absent, despite presence of humans, indicated an interesting anomaly for target acquisitions.
To confuse the enemy, these "silent spots" should be mirrored in different locations. They counter The selectief bias.

During WWII, RAF lost planes to German AAA. They wondered where armor them up?
Counterintuitively, the mathematician Abraham Wald explained that, if a plane makes it back safely despite a bunch of bullet holes in its wings, it means that bullet holes in the wings aren't very dangerous.
Where you really need the armor, are the areas that, on average, don't have any bullet holes.

Why? Because planes with bullet holes in those places never made it back. That's why you don't see any bullet holes there on the ones that do return.

Daniel , Aug 10, 2018 1:17:34 AM | 70
Posted by: CarlD @ 51 "And who is behind all of this?"

Wouldn't you agree that the PTSB are, as Paul Simon wrote, A Loose Affiliation of Billionaires?

The way I see it, the pinnacle of the pyramid are members of the dynasties that have controlled the finance system for centuries. Rothschilds, Warburgs, the Vatican, the European Royal Families and such. They profit off of everything, since all revenues generated by all industries pass through their sticky fingers, in addition to their Central Banking cabal that almost every country on earth is fully beholden to.

They are not a monolith, in that they compete with one another, but they all share interest in keeping this system in place.

Then, at the next level down there are the members of the Nouveau Riche, like the Rockefellers and Carneigies whose wealth was only generated a couple generations ago, and the even newer rich who do not have dynastic power (yet), but do wield enough wealth to influence the actions of the Empire, like the MIC "Daddy Warbucks" and tech industry newcomers.

And of course, there are the upper-level managers of Empire like Kissinger, Brzezenski, Soros, etc.

NemesisCalling , Aug 10, 2018 1:20:53 AM | 71
We have seen images of dead children of warfare before. I am not sure if it helps the antiwar cause. I will have to go read Susan Sontag's "The Pain of Others." In any case, thanks for posting it, b.

Will DJT order a retaliatory strike on KSA after being so moved by these photos like he was when the children of the fake gas attacks in Syria were being paraded around on the msm? I think not. Sad!

Daniel , Aug 10, 2018 1:38:19 AM | 72
Posted by: Pft | Aug 10, 2018 12:06:44 AM | 61:
"Frankly, the mystery is why America has not invaded Canada and taken over since we last tried in 1812. :>)"

Canada and the US are both members of the Five Eyes. Clearly, their roles in the great chessboard are different. But the way I see it, the nation-states are fictions that serve the charade of representative democratic self-rule.

[Aug 10, 2018] Our Government Is Awash With Foreign Citizens by Chuck Baldwin

This is not so much about Israel as about Neoconservatism and neoliberal globalism.
Notable quotes:
"... Anyone can become a dual citizen, even members of Congress, high court judges and top officials of the executive branch. There's no law or regulation against it. Nor are they required to disclose such dual citizenship. ..."
"... Dual citizenship in the United States poses a hitherto unappreciated issue for policy-level members of the legislative, executive and judicial branches. The divided national loyalties of dual citizens can create real or apparent conflicts of interest when such legislators, judges or senior officials make or speak out on policies that relate to their second country. ..."
Aug 09, 2018 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

Most Americans would be shocked if they knew how many foreign citizens are in our federal government -- and at what levels. They don't know because the mainstream media (or the conservative media, for that matter) almost never talks about it. It is one of the biggest secrets in Washington, D.C.

Back in 2015, Michael Hager wrote a very important missive that appeared in The Hill . Hager said:

The Biblical injunction that "No one can serve two masters" (Matthew 6:24) doesn't apply to nations. Almost half of the world's countries, including the U.S., recognize dual citizenship -- even when they don't encourage it for the complicated legal issues it often raises.

For example, one who obeys a requirement to give allegiance to a country or votes in a foreign election may be regarded as having renounced citizenship in the other country. What happens when the legal claims of one country conflict with those of the second country? Which of the two countries has an obligation to assist a dual national in distress?

Until the Supreme Court decided otherwise in the 1967 case of Afroyim v. Rusk , a U.S. citizen who voted in a political election in a foreign state would forfeit his or her U.S. citizenship. From that point on, dual citizens have maintained their right to vote and hold public office without penalty.

Anyone can become a dual citizen, even members of Congress, high court judges and top officials of the executive branch. There's no law or regulation against it. Nor are they required to disclose such dual citizenship.

So what's the problem?

Dual citizenship in the United States poses a hitherto unappreciated issue for policy-level members of the legislative, executive and judicial branches. The divided national loyalties of dual citizens can create real or apparent conflicts of interest when such legislators, judges or senior officials make or speak out on policies that relate to their second country.

The potential damage to our democracy is the greater when such potential conflicts of interest are concealed in undisclosed dual citizenship.

The lack of transparency regarding citizenship erodes trust in government, raising credibility doubts where there should be none, and allowing some apparent conflicts of interest to continue undetected.

When a senator, representative or senior U.S. official speaks out, submits bills or determines policy on an issue of importance to a foreign country of which that member or official (or judge) has the tie of citizenship, their constituents and the U.S. public at large should at least be able to assess whether such views or actions are influenced by the divided loyalty.

Since they don't involve national loyalty, religion and ethnicity seldom raise conflict issues. Moreover, they are generally matters of public record.

By contrast, dual citizenship creates conflict of interest through divided loyalties. Thus it would seem reasonable to require that dual citizen members of Congress, the judiciary and the executive be required to renounce citizenship in another country as a condition of public service.

Yet the media and government watchdog organizations have largely ignored the potential conflict of interest inherent in dual citizenship. Why the neglect of this issue? Shouldn't members of Congress (and federal judges and executive branch officials) at least be required to disclose their citizenship in another country?

Even if our legal system continues to allow dual citizens to serve in high positions of the U.S. government, it should require them to recuse themselves from participating in decisions or policy debates that relate to their second country.

As a first step, the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress should begin to include citizenship (along with the current listings of party breakdown, age, occupations, education, Congressional service, religion, gender, ethnicity and military service) in its published profiles of each new Congress.

Americans can then decide whether our legislators (and possibly federal judges and senior government officials as well) should be required to renounce their citizenship in another country as a condition of public service.

The U.S. Department of State -- Bureau Of Consular Affairs, "Dual Nationality," official web page says:

Dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country. They are required to obey the laws of both countries, and either country has the right to enforce its laws. It is important to note the problems attendant to dual nationality. Claims of other countries upon U.S. dual-nationals often place them in situations where their obligations to one country are in conflict with the laws of the other.

Yet, there are probably hundreds (we really don't know the true number, because as Hager notes, they are not required by law to declare their foreign citizenship) of foreign citizens serving in our federal government. And will you be shocked to learn that almost all of them -- if not ALL of them -- are citizens of ONE foreign country? Take a wild guess which country that is. You're right. ISRAEL.

Are You Tired Of The Lies And Non-Stop Propaganda?

Get Your FREE Daily Newsletter No Advertising - No Government Grants - This Is Independent Media

In my research for this column (which was not exhaustive), I found over 100 members of the U.S. government who are known to be dual U.S.-Israeli citizens. Here is a short sample list (compiled from public documents):

Michael Chertoff

He was the 2nd United States Secretary of Homeland Security (2005 – 2009), serving under G.W. Bush and Barack Obama. He was co-author of the USA PATRIOT Act, Federal Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (2003 – 2005) and United States Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division (2001 – 2003).

Chertoff's father was Rabbi Gershon Baruch Chertoff (a Talmud scholar and the former leader of the Congregation B'nai Israel in Elizabeth, New Jersey). His mother was Livia Chertoff (née Eisen), an Israeli citizen who worked for the Mossad.

Researcher and investigative journalist Christopher Bollyn (author of the blockbuster book The War On Terror: The Plot To Rule The Middle East ) writes this about Chertoff:

As Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Criminal Division of the Dept. of Justice, Chertoff personally supervised and controlled the entire FBI non-investigation of 9-11. Chertoff is the responsible person for the obstruction of justice and blocking access to the evidence since September 11, 2001.

Chertoff is the co-author, along with Viet Dinh, of the USA PATRIOT Act, signed into law on October 26, 2001. As head of the Justice Department's criminal division, he advised the Central Intelligence Agency on the legality of torture techniques in coercive interrogation sessions.

From 2001 to 2003, he headed the criminal division of the Department of Justice, leading the prosecution against terrorist suspect Zacarias Moussaoui. In this role, Chertoff was central in creating the 9-11 myth by providing the list of the 19 Arab suspects and supervising the FBI's confiscation of evidence and the non-investigation of 9-11.

Michael Mukasey

He served as the 81st Attorney General of the United States (2007 – 2009) under President G.W. Bush; he was the 2nd Jewish U.S. Attorney General. He served for 18 years as a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (1987 – 2006), 6 of those years as Chief Judge (2000 – 2006).

Mukasey was the judge in the litigation between developer Larry Silverstein and several insurance companies arising from the destruction of the World Trade Center. He was a major proponent of G.W. Bush's efforts to expand executive powers in the name of national security. He was especially outspoken in his support for the USA Patriot Act.

Richard Perle

Perle served as the 1st Assistant Secretary of Defense for Global Strategic Affairs under President Ronald Reagan. He began his political career as a senior staff member to Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson on the Senate Armed Services Committee in the 1970s. He served on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee from 1987 to 2004 (chairman 2001 – 2003) under the Bush Administration before resigning due to conflicts of interest.

A very likely Israeli government agent, Perle was expelled from Senator Jackson's office in the 1970's after the National Security Agency (NSA) caught him passing highly-classified (National Security) documents to the Israeli Embassy.

He has been involved with neocon think tanks including:
·The Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) Board of Advisors
·The Center for Security Policy (CSP)
·The Project for the New American Century (PNAC)
·The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA)

Perle was a member of the Steering Committee of the Bilderberg Group until December 2015. He is a self-described neoconservative. He co-authored the book An End To Evil: How To Win The War On Terror with fellow neoconservative David Frum in 2004. The book is regularly used as a defense of the 2003 invasion of Iraq and outlines important neoconservative ideas, including ways to abandon all Israeli-Palestinian peace processes, invade Syria and implement strict US domestic surveillance.

Perle is also "an ardent Zionist, a personal friend of [former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon, head of Hollinger Digital, part of the group that publishes the Daily Telegraph in Britain, a board member of the Jerusalem Post, a resident 'fellow' of the American Enterprise Institute and ex-employee of the Israeli weapons manufacturer Soltam." Jensen, H. (2002, October 7). Pre-Emption, Disarmament Or Regime Change? Part III. Retrieved August 1, 2018, from www.antiwar.com/orig/jensen1b.html .

Over the years, Perle has been known by the nickname "Prince of Darkness." He is a major player in the Israel lobby.

Perle's connections with former Vice President Dick Cheney run deep, as both are members of the board of advisors to JINSA, along with National Security Adviser John Bolton and Douglas Feith. Under the auspices of the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, Perle and Feith worked together in 1996 as advisers to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. There they devised the war to oust Saddam Hussein from Iraq and the removal of as many Palestinians as possible from their homes and properties in the Israeli occupied territories.

Paul Wolfowitz

Wolfowitz is a political scientist and diplomat who served as the 10th President of the World Bank from 2005 to 2007 (and resigned under pressure from World Bank members over a scandal involving his misuse of power), United States Deputy Secretary of Defense (2001 – 2005) under G.W. Bush and United States Ambassador to Indonesia (1986 – 1989) under Ronald Reagan and G.H.W. Bush. Like Perle, Wolfowitz came from the Jewish think tank JINSA. He was the number two leader within the G.W. Bush administration, planning and implementing the Iraq War.

Douglas Feith

Born to a Jewish family in Philadelphia, PA, Feith attended Harvard University and Georgetown University Law Center. After graduation, he worked for three years as an attorney with the law firm Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP. Feith also came from the Jewish think tank JINSA.

In the Reagan Administration, he worked at the White House as a Middle East specialist for the National Security Council and then served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Negotiations Policy.

Feith served as Under Secretary of Defense for Policy in the G.W. Bush administration from 2001 to 2005. His appointment was facilitated by connections he had with other neoconservatives, including Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz. In that position, he helped devise the U.S. government's strategy for the war on terrorism and contributed to the plans for the Afghanistan and Iraq war campaigns.

He is closely associated with the extremist group the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), which even attacks Jews that don't agree with its extremist views. Feith frequently speaks at ZOA conferences.

Feith co-founded a small Washington DC law firm, Feith & Zell, which only has one international office: in Israel. Feith supervised the Pentagon Office of Special Plans, a group of policy and intelligence analysts created to provide senior government officials with raw intelligence, unvetted by the intelligence community. The office was responsible for hiring Lawrence Franklin, who was later convicted along with AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) employees Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman for passing classified national defense information to an Israeli diplomat, Naor Gilon.

Henry Kissinger

Kissinger was the 56th United States Secretary of State from 1973 to 1977 under Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. He was Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs from January 1969 until November 1975 under Nixon and Ford. He was appointed by President Reagan to chair the National Bipartisan Commission on Central America in July 1983 until 1985. He served as a member of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board from 1984 to 1990 under Ronald Reagan and G.H.W. Bush. He was a member of the Commission on Integrated Long-Term Strategy of the National Security Council and Defense Department from 1986 to 1988. And he served as a member of the Defense Policy Board from 2001 to 2016 (under Richard Perle). Henry Kissinger -- a prominent member of both the Council on Foreign Relations and Trilateral Commission -- has been a close personal advisor to every President from John F. Kennedy to Donald Trump.

John Bolton

Bolton is the current National Security Advisor to President Trump. He was the interim U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations (2005 – 2006) under G.W. Bush. From 1989 to 1993, under G.H.W. Bush, he was Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs. He held positions in the United States Agency for International Development and as Assistant Attorney General under Ronald Reagan (1985 – 1989). One of the most hawkish of war hawks, he aggressively supported and helped plan military action and regime change in Iraq and Libya and is now doing the same thing in Syria and Iran.

Additional Israeli citizens serving in high level U.S. government positions include:

I found 14 current and former U.S. senators who are dual U.S.-Israel citizens including:

Barbara Boxer
Russ Feingold
Dianne Feinstein
Frank Lautenberg
Joe Lieberman
Bernard Sanders
Charles Schumer

And I found 32 current or past members of the U.S. House of Representatives who are dual U.S.-Israel citizens including:

Eric Cantor
Barney Frank
Gabrielle Giffords
Jerrold Nadler
Adam Schiff
Henry Waxman
Anthony Weiner

As I said, I have been able to identify well over 100 high-level members of the U.S. government who are citizens of Israel. And for the sake of this column, I tried to find U.S. government officials who were dual citizens with other countries, and I couldn't find any. Not one! I am not saying there aren't any; I'm just saying I couldn't find any. (I am not including those who were born on foreign soil to American parents. That is a completely different category.)

Remember what the U.S. State Department official website under the category of "Dual Citizenship" said:

Dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country . They are required to obey the laws of both countries, and either country has the right to enforce its laws. It is important to note the problems attendant to dual nationality. Claims of other countries upon U.S. dual-nationals often place them in situations where their obligations to one country are in conflict with the laws of the other. [Underlines added]

The U.S. government is awash with foreign citizens -- Israeli citizens. And if you don't think that Israel is exerting tremendous influence over the decisions, policies and wars of the United States, you are hopelessly naïve.

It is absurd that people who are citizens of foreign nations would be allowed to hold public office in the United States -- or, at the very least, would not be required by law to disclose those foreign citizenships and recuse themselves from any vote or decision involving the countries in which they hold citizenship, as Michael Hager opined above. Senator Ted Cruz and Rep. Michele Bachmann were right to renounce their foreign citizenships (Canada and Switzerland respectively), albeit they both served several years in Congress as dual citizens and both surrendered their foreign citizenships only after receiving media backlash for it during their respective presidential campaigns.

And the presence of a large network of Israeli citizens serving in the U.S. government should also inspire people to read Christopher Bollyn's new book referenced above, The War On Terror: The Plot To Rule The Middle East .

I guarantee you that once you read Bollyn's book, you will be able to better understand how the presence of a large network of Israeli citizens serving as officials within the U.S. government has been able to shape America's foreign policy and take our country into perpetual war.

This quote is taken from the book's back cover:

The government and media have misled us about 9/11 in order to compel public opinion to support the War on Terror.

Why have we gone along with it? Do we accept endless war as normal? Are we numb to the suffering caused by our military interventions?

No. We have simply been propagandized into submission. We have been deceived into thinking that the War on Terror is a good thing, a valiant struggle against terrorists who intend to attack us as we were on 9/11.

Behind the War on Terror is a strategic plan crafted decades in advance to redraw the map of the Middle East. 9/11 was a false-flag operation blamed on Muslims in order to start the military operations for that strategic plan. Recognizing the origin of the plan is crucial to understanding the deception that has changed our world.

This book is the one book you must read in 2018. It dispels the myths and destroys the lies about 9/11 and America's "War on Terror." READ THIS BOOK!

Order Christopher Bollyn's new blockbuster book The War On Terror: The Plot To Rule The Middle East here: The War On Terror: The Plot To Rule The Middle East

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.

[Aug 10, 2018] Russia blasts new US sanctions as 'theatre of the absurd'

Aug 10, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Russian officials reacted with outrage and markets slumped on Thursday morning following the announcement of tough new US sanctions over Russia's alleged use of a nerve agent in the Salisbury attack.

President Vladimir Putin's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said the sanctions were "absolutely unlawful and don't conform to international law", as politicians vowed to respond with countermeasures, which could include bans on the exports of rockets or resources for manufacturing.

"The theatre of the absurd continues," tweeted Dmitry Polyanskiy, first deputy permanent representative of Russia to the UN. "No proofs, no clues, no logic, no presumption of innocence, just highly-likelies. Only one rule: blame everything on Russia, no matter how absurd and fake it is. Let us welcome the United Sanctions of America!"

One senior Russian MP called the US a "police state".

A member of the Duma's foreign affairs committee, Leonid Slutsky, said Russia could block exports of RD-180 rocket engines to the US as a potential countermeasure, the RIA Novosti news agency reported.

The United States announced on Wednesday that it would impose restrictions on the export of sensitive technology to Russia because of its use of a nerve agent in the attempted murder of a former Russian spy and his daughter in Britain.

The State Department said the new sanctions would come into effect on 22 August and would be followed by much more sweeping measures, such as suspending diplomatic relations and revoking Aeroflot landing rights, if Russia did not take "remedial" action within 90 days.

Moscow is not expected to agree to the response required by US legislation, which includes opening up Russian scientific and security facilities to international inspections to assess whether it is producing chemical and biological weapons in violation of international law.

"Certainly it is really up to Russia to make that decision, whether they meet this criteria," a senior administration official said. "The second round of sanctions are in general more draconian than the first round."

Another senior state department official said the US received in March "persuasive information" from the UK that Russia was behind the attack. It made its own determination last weekend and was now acting on the basis of "objective facts" and "legal requirements".

Russian markets took the news poorly. Stocks in Aeroflot, the country's national carrier, fell by 12% in trading before lunchtime on Thursday over concerns that its direct flights between Russia and the US could be halted entirely.

Russia's currency, the rouble, fell to below 66 to the US dollar, a 4% slide from Wednesday morning that began with the leak of a separate draft sanctions bill that could see Russia named a state sponsor of terror.

The US has already expelled 60 suspected Russian spies as part of a global response to the March attack in Salisbury against Sergei Skripal , a former colonel in Russian military intelligence, and his daughter, Yulia , in which a rare and potent Russian-made nerve agent, novichok, was found to have been used.

[Aug 10, 2018] Russian Ruble Leads World Currency Losses on New U.S. Sanctions

Notable quotes:
"... Earlier, Russia's Kommersant newspaper posted the draft introduced last week by a bipartisan group of legislators. The bill includes proposals to sanction new sovereign debt and block dollar transactions of the nation's biggest lenders. The bill includes proposals to sanction new sovereign debt and block dollar transactions of the nation's biggest lenders. ..."
"... Traders are particularly concerned by a clause that calls for prohibiting "all transactions in all property and interests in property" of some of the country's largest lenders. Sberbank, VTB Bank, Gazprombank, Promsvyazbank, Rosselkhozbank and Vnesheconombank are listed. ..."
"... The bill also seeks penalties on energy projects and a survey of President Vladimir Putin's net worth. It follows reports of Russia's ongoing efforts to sway U.S. elections, new efforts to hack U.S. senators, and intelligence agencies' conclusion that Russia sought to meddle in the 2016 presidential election. ..."
Aug 10, 2018 | www.bloomberg.com

Earlier, Russia's Kommersant newspaper posted the draft introduced last week by a bipartisan group of legislators. The bill includes proposals to sanction new sovereign debt and block dollar transactions of the nation's biggest lenders. The bill includes proposals to sanction new sovereign debt and block dollar transactions of the nation's biggest lenders.

"The Kommersant publication was the straw that broke the camel's back," said Denis Davydov, an analyst at Nordea Bank in Moscow. "It's important to be able to read and assess the actual bill."

Market Jitters

No action will be taken on the draft until the House is back from summer recess in September, leaving room for more market jitters through the end of the month. But with President Donald Trump calling for closer ties with Russia, and the U.S. Treasury warning earlier this year against sanctioning the sovereign debt market, it's uncertain the bill will make it into law.

Traders are particularly concerned by a clause that calls for prohibiting "all transactions in all property and interests in property" of some of the country's largest lenders. Sberbank, VTB Bank, Gazprombank, Promsvyazbank, Rosselkhozbank and Vnesheconombank are listed.

The draft also includes Bank of Moscow, which was merged into VTB in 2016, while Vnesheconombank is listed twice in the text, without explanation.

'Crushing Russia'

"If you start crushing Russia by causing the banking system to collapse as a result of sanctions, it could actually lead to worse political outcomes than what you have right now," Khan said. "The key rule of sanctions is that you want to keep some in reserve because if you use your worst sanctions then what do you follow it up with?"

The bill also seeks penalties on energy projects and a survey of President Vladimir Putin's net worth. It follows reports of Russia's ongoing efforts to sway U.S. elections, new efforts to hack U.S. senators, and intelligence agencies' conclusion that Russia sought to meddle in the 2016 presidential election.

Lawmakers from both parties have also been sharply critical of President Donald Trump's meeting with Putin in Helsinki last month, saying Trump hasn't done enough to hold Russia accountable.

[Aug 10, 2018] US slanders Russia with new sanctions over Skripal poisoning hoax

This is attack on ruble. Kind of Magnitsky II set of moves. Strange if view of Trump supposed attempt to split Russia and China in Helsinki. You should chose a single target in such cases.
Sanctions weaken the effect of Iranian sanctions. While the goal is to undermine the Russian economy -- the effect of negative expectations is always stronger than a onetime action -- 90 days allow to avoid big financial losses for major banks. The requirement of inspection of Russia objects is from Iraq war textbook.
Notable quotes:
"... Russian Ruble has fallen to a new 2018 low against the American dollar. Trading went over 66 rubles to the dollar. ..."
"... This marks almost a 20% devaluation in the currency since April of this year, and the worst valuation since mid-November, 2016. ..."
"... For our part, we reiterated our principle [sic] stands on the events in the UK, which the Embassy had been outlining in corresponding letters to the State Department. We confirmed that we continue to strongly stand for an open and transparent investigation of the crime committed in Salisbury and for bringing the culprits to justice , ..."
"... This pattern of throwing out destructive slander while refusing to provide opportunity for a real answer has permeated American policy towards the Russian Federation with increasing intensity since 2013. ..."
Aug 10, 2018 | theduran.com
sanctions was apparently enough to create jitters on the Russian stock exchanges, and the Russian Ruble has fallen to a new 2018 low against the American dollar. Trading went over 66 rubles to the dollar.

This marks almost a 20% devaluation in the currency since April of this year, and the worst valuation since mid-November, 2016.

This incident has not gone unanswered in Moscow. The Russian Embassy in the United States called for documentation about the source and reasoning behind these new sanctions, as reported by TASS:

The Russian embassy in the United States has called on the US Department of State to publish correspondence on the introduction of new sanctions on Moscow over the Skripal incident, the embassy said in a statement.

" For our part, we reiterated our principle [sic] stands on the events in the UK, which the Embassy had been outlining in corresponding letters to the State Department. We confirmed that we continue to strongly stand for an open and transparent investigation of the crime committed in Salisbury and for bringing the culprits to justice , " the statement reads.

"We suggested publishing our correspondence on this issue. No answer has followed so far," the Russian embassy added.

This pattern of throwing out destructive slander while refusing to provide opportunity for a real answer has permeated American policy towards the Russian Federation with increasing intensity since 2013. It reveals the machinations of a very divided American government, with the "deep State" or establishment politicians and foreign policy makers completely unwilling to even give Russia a fair shake at representing itself. This policy is shared by the United Kingdom, as this piece by The Duran's Editor in Chief, Alexander Mercouris shows, with this summary of violations of due process the British authorities are committing with regard to Russia:

(1) The British government is interfering in the conduct of a criminal investigation, with Prime Minister Theresa May and especially Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson pointing fingers at who they say is guilty (Russia) whilst the criminal investigation is still underway;

(2) The British government has said that unless Russia proves itself innocent within a specific time the British government will conclude that it is guilty. As I have explained previously this reverses the burden of proof : in a criminal case it is the prosecution which is supposed to prove the defendant's guilt, not the defendant who must prove his innocence;

(3) The British government refuses to share with Russia -- the party it says is guilty -- the 'evidence' upon which it says it has concluded that Russia is guilty, the evidence in this case being a sample of the chemical with which it says Sergey and Yulia Skripal was poisoned.

This violates the fundamental principle that the defendant must be provided with all the evidence against him so that he can properly prepare his defence;

(4) The British government is not following the procedure set out in Article IX (2) of the Chemical Weapons Convention to which both Britain and Russia are parties. This reads as follows

States Parties should, whenever possible, first make every effort to clarify and resolve, through exchange of information and consultations among themselves, any matter which may cause doubt about compliance with this Convention, or which gives rise to concerns about a related matter which may be considered ambiguous. A State Party which receives a request from another State Party for clarification of any matter which the requesting State Party believes causes such a doubt or concern shall provide the requesting State Party as soon as possible, but in any case not later than ten days after the request, with information sufficient to answer the doubt or concern raised along with an explanation of how the information provided resolves the matter.

(5) The British authorities are denying the Russians consular access to Yulia Skripal, though she is a Russian citizen who the British authorities say was subjected to a criminal assault on their territory.

This is a potentially serious matter since by preventing consular access to Yulia Skripal the British authorities are not only violating the interstate consular arrangements which exist between Britain and Russia, but they are preventing the Russian authorities from learning more about the condition of one of their citizens who has been hospitalised following a violent criminal assault, and are preventing the Russian authorities from carrying out their own investigation into the assault on one of their citizens which the British authorities say has taken place.

I would add that this obstruction of Russian consular access to Yulia Skripal has gone almost entirely unreported in the British and Western media.

The Americans are playing the same game here, and, regrettably, President Trump's overtures towards repairing this relationship are almost sure to be torn out from under him by the actions of this virulent group of people. It is quite possible that this is the very reason for these new sanctions.

The perspective of the American government as one divided, with a rabid force in favor of continuing to isolate and vilify a great power in the world for no good reason, is sure to have repercussions. However, given the gradual realignment of Russia and China to be in closer and closer partnership, and Russia's increasing prominence in Asian and Eastern Hemisphere affairs, the end result of this behavior is likely to damage the United States and its standing in the world over the long run.

Shadow1275 Thu, 08/09/2018 - 23:21 Permalink

The National Socialist Workers Party:

1. Implemented Health care

2. Outlawed firearms

3. Froze Wages

4. Focused on government work projects

5. Implemented controls on Free Speech

6. Focused on violence through brownshirt stormtroopers who beat up any who disagreed

7. Had an intelligence service which focused on crushing dissent and spying on its own people

8. Placed more power in the central government and state then any Nation before it.

All of the above are things proposed or carried out by leftists. It is almost as if the true parties espoused by people are those who support individualism and those who support collectivism. Spoiler alert for the Leftist retards: Power corrupts and Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Your Statist Sanders Utopia will never come to fruition. The "Kind Socialist Politicians" will sell you out to the elite in a heartbeat.

All you are doing is focusing the power of your society into one single glass for the Elite to sip as they assfuck you into oblivion, Death toll of all of these Statist Nations, IE Imperial Japan, Soviet Union, Communist China, the People's "Republic" of Korea, etc is over 200,000,000 and counting.

How is it that the acronym NAZI Literally has the word SOCIALIST in it and people still think they were right wing??? Why is this such a hard concept to grasp for the average individual?

.....And how is Trump like Hitler exactly???????

[Aug 10, 2018] Butina Case Neo-McCarthyism Engulfs America

Several US lobbing organizations leadership should probably also be arrested if the same criteria is applied...
Aug 10, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Phillip Giraldi via The Stratgeic Culture Foundation,

The United States Department of Justice would apparently have you believe that the Kremlin sought to subvert the five-million-member strong National Rifle Association (NRA) by having two Russian citizens take out life memberships in the organization with the intention of corrupting it and turning it into a mouthpiece for President Vladimir Putin.

Both of the Russians – Maria Butina and Alexander Torshin – have, by the way, long well documented histories as advocates for gun ownership and were founders of Right to Bear Arms, which is not an intelligence front organization of some kind and is rather a genuine lobbying group with an active membership and agenda.

Contrary to what has been reported in the mainstream media, Russians can own guns but the licensing and registration procedures are long and complicated, which Right to Bear Arms, modeling itself on the NRA, is seeking to change.

Maria Butina, a graduate student at American University, is now in solitary confinement in a federal prison, having been charged with collusion with Torshin and failure to register as an agent of the Russian Federation. It is unusual to arrest and confine someone who has failed to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, but she has not been granted bail because, as a Russian citizen, she is considered to be a "flight risk," likely to try to flee the US and return home. It is to be presumed that she is being pressured to identify others involved in her alleged scheme to overthrow American democracy through NRA membership.

Indeed, in any event, it would be difficult to imagine why anyone would consider the NRA to be a legitimate intelligence target. It only flexes its admitted powerful legislative muscles over issues relating to gun ownership, not regarding policy on Russia. In short, Butina and by extension Torshin appear to have done nothing wrong. Both are energetic advocates for their country and guns rights, which they appear to believe in, and Butina's aggressive networking has broken no law except not registering, which in itself assumes that she is a Russian government agent, something that has not been demonstrated. To put the shoe on the other foot, will every American who now travels to Russia and engages in political conversations with local people be suspected of acting as an agent of the US government? Once you open the door, it swings both ways.

One might dismiss the entire Affair Butina as little more than a reflection of the anti-Russia hysteria that has been sweeping the United States since Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 election, but that would be unfair to those remaining honest FBI agents who may have investigated Butina and Torshin and come up with what they believed to be a plausible case for an indictment . There were possibly suspicious money transfers as well as email intercepts that might be interpreted as incriminating.

But two important elements are clearly missing.

The first is motive. Did the Kremlin seriously believe that it could get anything substantial out of having a gun totin' attractive young Russian woman as a life member in the NRA? What did the presumed puppet masters in Moscow expect to obtain apart from the sorts of group photos including Butina that one gets while posing with politicians at the annual NRA convention? Sure, the photo might even evolve into a cup of coffee together, but what is the end game?

Second is the lack of any of the hallmarks of an intelligence operation, which is referred to in the business as tradecraft. Spies meet secretly or at least outside the public eye with prospective agents whereas Maria operated completely in the open and she made no effort to conceal her love for her country and her desire that Washington and Moscow normalize relations. Spies also communicate securely, which means that they use encrypted systems or various cut-outs, i.e. mis-directions, when maintaining contact with those who are running them. Again, Maria did none of that, which is why the FBI has her emails. Also spies work under what is referred to as an "operating directive" in CIA-speak where they have very specific information that they seek to obtain from their contacts. There is no indication that Maria Butina in any way sought classified information or intelligence that would relate either to the security of the United States or to America's political system. And finally, Maria made no attempt to recruit anyone and turn them into an actual controlled Russian agent, which is what spies eventually seek to do.

It has come down to this: if you are a Russian and you are caught talking to anyone in any way influential, there is potentially hell to pay because the FBI will be watching you. You are automatically assumed to be part of a conspiracy. Once "evidence" is collected, you will be indicted and sent to prison, mostly to send a message to Moscow.

It is the ultimate irony that how the old Soviet Union's judiciary used to function is now becoming standing operating procedure in the United States.

[Aug 09, 2018] Russian diplomat warns US sanctions against Iran to destabilize Middle East AMN

Aug 09, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

"Resumption of anti-Iranian sanctions by the US is a destructive step that might bring about destabilization in the Middle East, the Russian Foreign Ministry's official spokesperson Maria Zakharova told a news briefing on Thursday."

"Washington's course at bringing down the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action [JCPOA] on the Iranian nuclear program and restoring full-scale pressure through sanctions is absolutely destructive," she said.

"There's scarcely any doubt these steps by the US administration will have long-term deplorable consequences for global nonproliferation [of the weapons of mass destruction] and will impart a destabilizing impulse to the situation in the Middle East."" AMN

---------

IMO Zakharova, the Russian spokesperson has it right.

The Israeli desire to have a less than 1% chance of an Iranian nuke existing has led us to adopt sanctions that may well bring down the present Iranian government. Unrest is growing across the country because of ever growing economic hardship. We claim that regime change is not our goal but I do not believe it. IMO Gina Haspel has been given a presidential finding that orders CIA to bring down the government and the sanctions are just part of that attempted coup.

The Iranians have every reason to distrust the US. First there was Mossadgh. Kermit Roosevelt brought him down by manipulating street mobs. Secondly there is the undoubted fact that we backed Iraq against them in the Iran-Iraq War. Now we have abandoned JCPOA, an agreement that IMO was good for everyone except the extreme right in Israel and their neanderthal friends in the US (Hannity, Varney, Keane, Pompeo etc.) Bolton I will not even mention in that list because he is such an extremist, a man who hungers for war, a man who hid from VN in the Maryland National Guard. The CIA is just doing its legally ordained task but the rest of them seem to have no comprehension of the chaos that will occur if Wilayet al-faqih falls.

Trump, Bolton and Giuliani seems to want the Mujahideen e Khalq to become the government of Iran. This passel of Islamic Marxists (spawn of Ali Shariati) actually fought against Iran as allies of Saddam's Iraq. That has never been forgotten. Why would it be? In fact they would be destroyed in short order of they attempted to form a government.

There is no other coherent body who could form a government. But, from the Israeli point of view that would be just fine. pl

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/russian-diplomat-warns-us-sanctions-against-iran-to-destabilize-middle-east/

Jack , 4 hours ago

"There is no other coherent body who could form a government. But, from the Israeli point of view that would be just fine ."

Spot on, Sir. This is precisely what the Israelis want. Instability, domestic violence and chaos in all their adversaries. And they have us as their poodle to do the dirty deeds.

Pat Lang Mod -> Jack , 2 hours ago
Yup
richardstevenhack , 2 hours ago
I doubt very much that, despite any economic problems Iran may have, it is likely to have its government - still less it's form of government - overthrown. Iran has been under sanctions to one degree or another for the last fifty years. Every time the US claims the government is fraudulent or its elections are fraudulent, they've been proven wrong, most notably in 2009 when millions of Iranians took to the streets in support of the government and the election results.

The problem is this notion of "reducing Iranian oil exports to zero", as voiced by US officials. China has already dismissed that notion. So this time next year, at least China and probably India and others will be ignoring US sanctions and importing Iranian oil. Even the EU might do so.

What does Trump do then? Well, Obama suggested during his 2008 campaign to install a naval blockade, in that case to block Iranian imports of gasoline, since at the time Iran did not have enough refineries to process their own gasoline. That has since been corrected. But what if Trump is persuaded by Bonkers Bolton that this would be a good idea: a naval blockade to block Iranian oil exports?

Iran would correctly view that as an act of war and would start escorting its oil tankers, which would inevitably lead to conflict with US Navy ships ordered to interdict them. Bingo - nice way to start a war, with Trump blaming Iran and Israel sitting back blameless.

Walrus , 3 hours ago
Applying the Walrus law: "governments achieve the reverse of their stated intentions", leads me to believe that with a little help from those other pariah states, Russia and China, the Government and state of Iran will be renewed and strengthened as a result of current American policy.

To put that another way, the most effective American tools for corroding regimes are Ipads, Facebook, rappers and McDonalds.

Bill Herschel , 3 hours ago
Sanctions against Iran. Sanctions against Russia (more every day). Tariffs against China (more every day). China, Russia, Iran. These nations are going to fold and disappear. Yes, an alliance is being forced on them from without, but they are a collection of stupid people who are up against a stable genius.

Before you accuse me of being snide and flippant, remember that approximately 50%, at least, of the electorate agrees with me. And the Constitution? Why the Constitution is in my pocket.

[Aug 09, 2018] Pompeo Slaps On Major Russia Sanctions...Over Unproven UK Poisoning!

Aug 09, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

Aug. 9 - Is Pompeo launching a coup against his boss? By kicking in sanctions on Russia - invoking a 1991 US law on chemical weapons - the US State Department is further poisoning President Trump's efforts to improve relations with his Russian counterpart. If President Trump refuses to enforce the sanctions, he will hand a political gift to Democrats who believe their election fortunes in November rest on endlessly screaming "Russia, Russia, Russia." And what are these new sanctions all about? The totally unproven, full-of-holes claims that the Russian government was behind the Skripal "poisoning" in the UK in March. We untangle some of this madness in today's Liberty Report:

[Aug 09, 2018] 'No surprise if Moscow recalls ambassador' Russia will lash out against new sanctions, say experts

Notable quotes:
"... "When will you finally stop beating your wife?" ..."
"... "Russia can't admit what it hasn't done. It's as if the US is asking Russia, 'Show us your Yeti' and if you don't we will punish you. There are literally no facilities to even show," ..."
"... "The very way that the conditions of dropping the sanctions are posed by the US –we will abandon them if you confess your sins and repent– is so humiliating and unacceptable that any response will have to be very firm," ..."
"... "Historically, under the current leadership Russia can never do two things. It can never move from officially stated positions on certain international issues and incidents – for example, on Skripal. Russia is not going to turn around and say 'Sorry, we actually did poison him,'" ..."
"... "And secondly, Vladimir Putin will never agree to any unilateral concessions. Any previous offers Moscow has made are always on a quid-pro-quo basis," ..."
"... "This is an attempt to make a statement from the US establishment – to show who is boss in international politics. Over the last two or three years the role of the US as the commander-in-chief of world affairs has been cast into doubt, and Russia has been chosen as the whipping boy as Washington tries to reassert control," ..."
"... "looking strong on Russia" ..."
"... "The people putting these sanctions forward aren't aware of the international consequences. First and foremost, they are driven by a desire to play to their domestic audience, particularly with the midterms coming up. Showing you are not beholden to Russia is a campaign move," ..."
"... "As the saying goes, when you don't know what to do, do what you know. The international situation is such that no side can expect to back down without losses. Everyone knows that sanctions don't work. But it is a simple tool, easy to understand, and one that has been widely used before by the US. It is almost a reflex reaction by now." ..."
"... "It is clear that if it wasn't going to be the Skripals, it would be something else. Sanctions have become a tool in economic and trade wars, and no one is bothering to hide this," ..."
Aug 09, 2018 | www.rt.com

Washington's latest sanctions have left no room for a constructive response from Moscow, analysts explain, but opinions differ widely on how much the measures will affect relations between the two countries. All interviewed by RT railed against the framing of the sanctions, nominally prompted by the alleged use of chemical weapons against the Skripals in the UK back in March. Russia will be punished with a first set of measures from August 22, and is given 90 days to assure Washington that it will no longer deploy chemical weapons, and to open up its chemical production facilities to international inspectors.

One problem: Russia denies that it has used chemical weapons in the first place and says that it had already disposed of its stockpile in accordance with international treaties. So, to use the proverbial example, the US is asking Russia: "When will you finally stop beating your wife?"

READ MORE: Sanctioning Russia for false link to UK poisonings 'unacceptable & unlawful' – Kremlin

"Russia can't admit what it hasn't done. It's as if the US is asking Russia, 'Show us your Yeti' and if you don't we will punish you. There are literally no facilities to even show," Vladimir Kornilov, a political analyst for RIA news agency, told RT.

Read more US State Dept sanctions against Russia aimed at 'undercutting' Trump, analysts say

"The very way that the conditions of dropping the sanctions are posed by the US –we will abandon them if you confess your sins and repent– is so humiliating and unacceptable that any response will have to be very firm," said Andrey Kortunov, Director General of the Russian International Affairs Council.

Leonid Polyakov, from the Higher School of Economics, says that Washington must be aware that the Kremlin would never agree to its conditions, so setting them in the first place is a cheap pretense at diplomacy.

"Historically, under the current leadership Russia can never do two things. It can never move from officially stated positions on certain international issues and incidents – for example, on Skripal. Russia is not going to turn around and say 'Sorry, we actually did poison him,'" he told RT.

"And secondly, Vladimir Putin will never agree to any unilateral concessions. Any previous offers Moscow has made are always on a quid-pro-quo basis," Polyakov pointed out, citing the recent offer by the Russian president to allow the questioning of its citizens involved in alleged election-meddling, but only in exchange for William Browder and others being interviewed by Moscow's investigators.

US 'showing who's boss' or playing to home audience?

All three experts agreed that not only will the sanctions be rejected, but they are unlikely to have any indirect effect on Russia's international policies, or its economic outlook.

So, why implement them at all?

Read more © Regis Duvignau Russia to retaliate if Washington bans Aeroflot flights to US

Kortunov says this is an attempt to claw back international prestige, particularly in the wake of the US failure to impose its will in Syria, fraying relations with Europe and China, and Donald Trump's perceived softness in negotiating with Putin in Helsinki last month.

"This is an attempt to make a statement from the US establishment – to show who is boss in international politics. Over the last two or three years the role of the US as the commander-in-chief of world affairs has been cast into doubt, and Russia has been chosen as the whipping boy as Washington tries to reassert control," Kortunov said.

For Polyakov, this is all about "looking strong on Russia" ahead of October's mid-term elections.

"The people putting these sanctions forward aren't aware of the international consequences. First and foremost, they are driven by a desire to play to their domestic audience, particularly with the midterms coming up. Showing you are not beholden to Russia is a campaign move," he said to RT.

The professor of political science adds that a lack of ideas over how to corral a feisty Russia is pushing American officials to press the sanctions button again and again.

"As the saying goes, when you don't know what to do, do what you know. The international situation is such that no side can expect to back down without losses. Everyone knows that sanctions don't work. But it is a simple tool, easy to understand, and one that has been widely used before by the US. It is almost a reflex reaction by now."

Yet Kornilov believes that sanctions are not just a shield for a beleaguered establishment, but an offensive weapon.

"It is clear that if it wasn't going to be the Skripals, it would be something else. Sanctions have become a tool in economic and trade wars, and no one is bothering to hide this," he said.

Can things get worse?

Since hostility between Moscow and Washington is at a post-war high as it is, Polyakov believes it will be impractical for the two nuclear powers to escalate tensions still further, beyond the headlines.

[Aug 09, 2018] Why They Fail - The Quintessence Of The Korengal Valley Campaign

Notable quotes:
"... Wall Street Journal ..."
Aug 09, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

A new excerpt from a book by C.J. Chivers, a former U.S. infantry captain and New York Times war correspondent, tells the story of a young man from New York City who joined the U.S. army and was send to the Korengal Valley in Afghanistan. While the man, one Robert Soto, makes it out alive, several of his comrades and many Afghans die during his time in Afghanistan to no avail.

The piece includes remarkably strong words about the strategic (in)abilities of U.S. politicians, high ranking officers and pundits:

On one matter there can be no argument: The policies that sent these men and women abroad, with their emphasis on military action and their visions of reordering nations and cultures, have not succeeded. It is beyond honest dispute that the wars did not achieve what their organizers promised, no matter the party in power or the generals in command. Astonishingly expensive, strategically incoherent, sold by a shifting slate of senior officers and politicians and editorial-page hawks, the wars have continued in varied forms and under different rationales each and every year since passenger jets struck the World Trade Center in 2001. They continue today without an end in sight, reauthorized in Pentagon budgets almost as if distant war is a presumed government action.

That description is right but it does not touche the underlying causes. The story of the attempted U.S. occupation of the Korengal valley, which Civers again describes, has been the theme of several books and movies. It demonstrates the futility of fighting a population that does not welcome occupiers. But most of the authors, including Chivers, get one fact wrong. The war with the people of the Korengal valley was started out of shear stupidity and ignorance.

The main military outpost in the valley was build on a former sawmill. Chivers writes:

On a social level, it could not have been much worse. It was an unforced error of occupation, a set of foreign military bunkers built on the grounds of a sawmill and lumber yard formerly operated by Haji Mateen, a local timber baron. The American foothold put some of the valley's toughest men out of work, the same Afghans who knew the mountain trails. Haji Mateen now commanded many of the valley's fighters, under the banner of the Taliban.

Unfortunately Chivers does not explain why the saw mill was closed. Ten years ago a piece by Elizabeth Rubin touched on this:

As the Afghans tell the story, from the moment the Americans arrived in 2001, the Pech Valley timber lords and warlords had their ear. Early on, they led the Americans to drop bombs on the mansion of their biggest rival -- Haji Matin. The air strikes killed several members of his family, according to local residents, and the Americans arrested others and sent them to the prison at Bagram Air Base. The Pech Valley fighters working alongside the Americans then pillaged the mansion. And that was that. Haji Matin, already deeply religious, became ideological and joined with Abu Ikhlas, a local Arab linked to the foreign jihadis.

Years before October 2004, before regular U.S. soldiers came into the Korengal valley, U.S. special forces combed through the region looking for 'al-Qaeda'. They made friends with a timber baron in Pech valley, a Pashtun of the Safi tribe, who claimed that his main competitor in the (illegal) timber trade who lived in the nearby Korengal river valley was a Taliban and 'al-Qaeda'. That was not true. Haji Matin was a member of a Nuristani tribe that spoke Pashai . These were a distinct people with their own language who were and are traditional hostile to any centralized government (pdf), even to the Taliban's Islamic Emirate.

The U.S. special forces lacked any knowledge of the local society. But even worse was that they lacked the curiosity to research and investigate the social terrain. They simply trusted their new 'friend', the smooth talking Pashtun timber baron, and called in jets to destroy his competitor's sawmill and home. This started a local war of attrition which defeated the U.S. military. In 2010 the U.S. military, having achieved nothing, retreated from Korengal. (The sawmill episode was described in detail in a 2005(?) blog post by a former special force soldier who took part in it. It since seems to have been removed from the web.)

Back to Chivers' otherwise well written piece. He looks at the results two recent (and ongoing) U.S. wars:

The governments of Afghanistan and Iraq, each of which the United States spent hundreds of billions of dollars to build and support, are fragile, brutal and uncertain. The nations they struggle to rule harbor large contingents of irregular fighters and terrorists who have been hardened and made savvy, trained by the experience of fighting the American military machine.
...
Billions of dollars spent creating security partners also deputized pedophiles, torturers and thieves. National police or army units that the Pentagon proclaimed essential to their countries' futures have disbanded. The Islamic State has sponsored or encouraged terrorist attacks across much of the world -- exactly the species of crime the global "war on terror" was supposed to prevent.

The wars fail because they no reasonable strategic aim or achievable purpose. They are planned by incompetent people. The most recent Pentagon ideas for the U.S. war on Afghanistan depend on less restricted bombing rules. Yesterday one predictable and self defeating consequence was again visible:

An American airstrike killed at least a dozen Afghan security forces during intense fighting with the Taliban near the Afghan capital, officials said Tuesday.
...
Shamshad Larawi, a spokesman for the governor, said that American airstrikes had been called in for support, but that because of a misunderstanding, the planes mistakenly targeted an Afghan police outpost.
...
Haji Abdul Satar, a tribal elder from Azra, said he counted 19 dead, among them 17 Afghan police officers and pro-government militia members and two civilians.
...
In the first six months of this year, United States forces dropped nearly 3,000 bombs across Afghanistan, nearly double the number for the same period last year and more than five times the number for the first half of 2016. ... Civilian casualties from aerial bombardments have increased considerably as a result, the United Nations says.

One argument made by the Pentagon generals when they pushed Trump to allow more airstrikes was that these would cripple the Taliban's alleged opium trade and its financial resources. But, as the Wall Street Journal reports , that plan, like all others before it, did not work at all:

Nine months of targeted airstrikes on opium production sites across Afghanistan have failed to put a significant dent in the illegal drug trade that provides the Taliban with hundreds of millions of dollars, according to figures provided by the U.S. military.
...
So far, the air campaign has wiped out about $46 million in Taliban revenue, less than a quarter of the money the U.S. estimates the insurgents get from the illegal drug trade. U.S. military officials estimate the drug trade provides the Taliban with 60% of its revenue.
...
Poppy production hit record highs in Afghanistan last year , where they are the country's largest cash crop, valued at between $1.5 billion and $3 billion.

More than 200 airstrikes on "drug-related targets" have hardly made a dent in the Taliban's war chest. The military war planners again failed.

At the end of the Chivers piece its protagonist, Robert Soto, rightfully vents about the unaccountability of such military 'leaders':

Still he wondered: Was there no accountability for the senior officer class? The war was turning 17, and the services and the Pentagon seemed to have been given passes on all the failures and the drift. Even if the Taliban were to sign a peace deal tomorrow, there would be no rousing sense of victory, no parade. In Iraq, the Islamic State metastasized in the wreckage of the war to spread terror around the world. The human costs were past counting, and the whitewash was both institutional and personal, extended to one general after another, including many of the same officers whose plans and orders had either fizzled or failed to create lasting success, and yet who kept rising . Soto watched some of them as they were revered and celebrated in Washington and by members of the press, even after past plans were discredited and enemies retrenched.

Since World War II, during which the Soviets, not the U.S., defeated the Nazis, the U.S. won no war. The only exception is the turkey shooting of the first Gulf war. But even that war failed in its larger political aim of dethroning Saddam Hussein.

The U.S. population and its 'leaders' simply know too little about the world to prevail in an international military campaign. They lack curiosity. The origin of the Korengal failure is a good example for that.

U.S. wars are rackets , run on the back of lowly soldiers and foreign civil populations. They enriche few at the cost of everyone else.

Wars should not be 'a presumed government action', but the last resort to defend ones country. We should do our utmost to end all of them.

bjd , Aug 8, 2018 4:19:05 PM | 1

There is a fundamental misunderstanding in the lament ringing through in this story.

The policy makers and the generals do not care about Afghanistan, nor about American boys being sent and being killed there.

Any bombs spent means more bombs being ordered and manufactured. The Military-Industrial-Intelligence-Complex thus profits.

Those belonging to that complex do not belong to the same class as those boys in body bags.

In spite of these valuable insights like in this story, everything is going just hunky dory.

Mischi , Aug 8, 2018 4:34:28 PM | 2
you know, it is just as easy to influence a foreign society by making movies (Bollywood in this case) with a certain bent, the one you want people to follow. After a few years of seeing the Taliban as villains, there would be no fresh recruits and mass desertion. But, the weapons manufacturers wouldn't be making their enormous profits. This same effect can be seen in American society, where the movies coming out of Hollywood started becoming very aggressive in tone around the time that Ronald Reagan became president. Movies went from The Deer Hunter to Rambo and Wall Street. Is it any wonder that even the progressive Left in the USA thinks it is ok to attack their political adversaries and that violence is justified? This is the power of movies and the media.
Mark2 , Aug 8, 2018 4:45:09 PM | 3
Thank you 'b' this post as always is a true in depth education !
If you run for president of the United States of America enytime soon you'v got my vote !
karlof1 , Aug 8, 2018 5:09:38 PM | 4
bjd @1 highlights an important truth similar to that exposed by Joseph Heller in Cache-22 and by Hudson's Balance-of-Payments revelation he revealed yet again at this link I posted yesterday . Most know the aggressive war against Afghanistan was already planned and on the schedule prior to 911 and would have occurred regardless since after Serbia the Outlaw US Empire felt it could do and get away with anything. 911 simply provided BushCo with Carte-Blache, but it wasn't enough of a window to fulfill their desired destruction of 7 nations in 5 years for their Zionist Patron.

IMO, as part of its plan to control the Heartland, those running the Outlaw US Empire never had any plan to leave Afghanistan; rather once there, they'd stay and occupy it just as the Empire's done everywhere since WW2. The Empire's very much like a leech; its occupations are parasitic as Hudson demonstrated, and work at the behest of corporate interests as Smedly Butler so eloquently illustrated.

As with Vietnam, the only way to get NATO forces to leave is for Afghanis to force them out with their rifles. Hopefully, they will be assisted by SCO nations and Afghanistan will cease being a broken nation by 2030.

jayc , Aug 8, 2018 5:13:05 PM | 5
The Wall Street Journal article on the Taliban's ties to the local drug trade also the reveals deliberate omission practiced by the MSM, which keeps its readers actively misinformed. Estimating illegal drug revenues contribute as much as $200 million to the Taliban, the article fails to put that in proper context: that figure represents merely 7%-13% of total production receipts (estimated at 1.5 to 3 billion dollars). Most informed persons know exactly who reaps the rewards of more than 80% of the Afghan drug products, and why this much larger effort is not the focus of "targeted airstrikes."
Pft , Aug 8, 2018 5:17:07 PM | 6
1. "The wars fail because they no reasonable strategic aim or achievable purpose........
Since World War II, during which the Soviets, not the U.S., defeated the Nazis, the U.S. won no war. The only exception is the turkey shooting of the first Gulf war."

2 "U.S. wars are rackets, run on the back of lowly soldiers and foreign civil populations. They enriche few at the cost of everyone else"

Your points in 1 ignore the reality expressed by 2. The real strategic aims and purposes are not those provided for public consumption. Winning wars is not the objective, the length and cost of wars is far more important than results. Enriching and empowering the few over the many is the entire point of it all

And lets put an end to "US " responsibility for all evils. Its a shared responsibility. None of this is possible without the cooperation of Uk and its commonwealth nations, EU, Japan and the various international organizations that allow the dollar to be weaponized such as IMF/World Bank and BIS not to mention the various tax havens which support covert operations and looting of assets obtained in these wars (military or economic).

Until the rest of the world is prepared to do something about it they are willing accomplices in all of this.

The global elites are globalists, they dont think in national terms. Its a global elitist cabal at work that is hiding behind the cover of US hegemony.


Ash , Aug 8, 2018 6:01:26 PM | 7
b: "Wars should not be 'a presumed government action', but the last resort to defend ones country. We should do our utmost to end all of them."

Well said, sir.

ben , Aug 8, 2018 6:09:27 PM | 8
karlof1 @ 4 said:"The Empire's very much like a leech; its occupations are parasitic as Hudson demonstrated, and work at the behest of corporate interests as Smedly Butler so eloquently illustrated."

You bet.. The operative words being " work at the behest of corporate interests "

And so it goes around the globe. Question is; How to get this information to the herded bovines the general public has become?

Without a major network to disseminate such info, we're all just spinning our wheels. Oh, but, the therapy is good..

fast freddy , Aug 8, 2018 6:18:02 PM | 9
Very interesting stories - especially re: the timber mill warlord competition.

Defoliants are still used in warfare - especially "by accident". Carpet bombing is still legal. If NATO wanted to wipe out the poppies, it surely could do so.

Pft at 6, reminded me of this zinger:

The nation state as a fundamental unit of man's organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state. - The Brzez

Deltaeus , Aug 8, 2018 6:38:00 PM | 10
jayc @5 implies it, and I'll say it more directly: US soldiers guard poppy fields in Afghanistan. I'm also reminded of Alfred C McCoy's famous 1972 work The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzQUsY6a_Ds
Why the US grows heroin in Afghanistan, from the movie War Machine

Piotr Berman , Aug 8, 2018 6:51:23 PM | 11
The nation state as a fundamental unit of man's organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state. - The Brzez

Posted by: fast freddy | Aug 8, 2018 6:18:02 PM | 9

This gem hides a deep truth. One has to replace "creative" and "far in advance", instead, we have power relationships. And those power relationships resemble central planning of the Communist states, concept that is attractive in abstraction, but centralization cannot cope with complexities of societies and economies, in part because the central institutions are inevitably beset by negative selection: people rise due to their adroit infighting skills rather than superior understanding of what those institutions are supposed to control. Ultimately, this proces leads to decay and fall. "Nation states" themselves are not immune to such cycles and are at different stages of the cycle creative-decadent-falling. However, international finance lacks observable "refreshing" mechanisms of nation states.

Kalen , Aug 8, 2018 6:54:16 PM | 12
War as always is financial racket, $trillion stolen, MIC thrives, took over with CIA all prerogatives of power and has million agents in US alone in every institution government and corporate.

I call it success of ruling elite. B war would stop tomorrow if it was unsuccessful read unprofitable for those who wage it. Nazi death camps were most profitable enterprises in third Reich.

Curtis , Aug 8, 2018 7:22:43 PM | 13
For some reason, when the US wars are admitted to be civil wars, no one questions whose side did the US take until it is too late and so very few tune in. Incompetence is the excuse. It reminds me of that adage to not blame on malice that which can be explained by stupidity but stupidity has been used to excuse a lot of malice. It's one reason why "military intelligence" resides at the top of oxymorons along with "congressional ethics" and "humanitarian intervention."

It is amazing to think that the US has been in Afghanistan for 17 years and supposedly knows where the opium and its processors are and yet could not take it out. (The pix of soldiers patrolling poppy fields is rich.) The initial excuse years ago was that the US needed to support the warlords who grew/sold it. What is the excuse now? Incompetence, corruption, laziness?

The US likes the idea of opium products going into Iran and Russia ... who have protested to no avail. A bit of indirect subversion.

Ian , Aug 8, 2018 7:27:07 PM | 14
@13:

The adage is Hanlon's Razor. There should be a joint air operation to bomb those poppy fields.

goldhoarder , Aug 8, 2018 7:33:26 PM | 15
US wars are rackets. They are very successful in that regard. It doesn't matter what people think about them.
fast freddy , Aug 8, 2018 7:50:42 PM | 16
The US likes opium products going into the US. It makes for broken citizens who lack zeal for knowledge, and therefore, comprehension; and the will to organize against the PTB. Importantly, being illegal, opiate use feeds the pigs who own the prison-industrial complex.
par4 , Aug 8, 2018 7:50:56 PM | 17
The Taliban had virtually eradicated opium when they controlled Afghanistan. Try this link or or this one.
fast freddy , Aug 8, 2018 7:55:40 PM | 18
https://www.thenation.com/

article/bushs-faustian-deal-taliban/

In April 2001, 5 months prior to nine elva, $43 million was gifted to the Taliban in Afghanistan for the stated purpose of eradicating opium.


karlof1 , Aug 8, 2018 8:09:38 PM | 19
ben @8--

Given the current, longstanding dynamics within the Outlaw US Empire, I don't see any possibility of the required reforms ever having an opportunity to get enacted. The situation's very similar to Nazi Germany's internal dynamic--the coercive forces of the State and its allies will not allow any diminution of their power. Within the Empire, thousands of Hydra heads would need to be rapidly severed for any revolt to succeed, and that requires a large, easily infiltrated organization to accomplish. Invasion by an allied group of nations invites a nuclear holocaust I can't condone. I think the best the world can do is force the Empire to retreat from its 800+ bases and sequester it behind the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans until it self-destructs or drastically reforms itself--Containment. But for that to work, almost every comprador government would need to be changed and their personages imprisoned, exiled or executed--another close to impossible task. Ideally, the ballot box would work--ideally--but that requires deeply informed voters and highly idealistic, strongly principled, creative, and fearless candidates, along with an honest media.

Yeah, writing can be good therapy. But I'm no more cheery than when I began. Must be time for intoxicants.

b4real , Aug 8, 2018 8:20:04 PM | 20
@6 Pft

"Until the rest of the world is prepared to do something about it..."

What is this 'something' of which you speak?

b4real

vk , Aug 8, 2018 8:26:25 PM | 21
More than 200 airstrikes on "drug-related targets" have hardly made a dent in the Taliban's war chest. The military war planners again failed.

Or did they?

Jen , Aug 8, 2018 9:11:48 PM | 22
Karlofi @ 19:

The world does not need to force the Evil Empire to retreat from its 1,000 (and counting) military bases around the planet.

All the world needs to do is trade with Iran, Venezuela or some other outsider nation. The Evil Empire will be so busy trying to punish everyone who trades with these countries by extending sanctions against the outsiders to their trading partners that the Empire effectively ends up having sanctioned everyone away and it becomes the victim of its sanctioning.

The 1,000+ military bases around the globe are then effectively on their own and the soldiers and administrators inside can either stay there and starve, throw in their lot with the host nation's citizenry or beg to be allowed to return home.

james , Aug 8, 2018 9:22:13 PM | 23
thanks b... as long as the americans support the troops, lol - all will be well apparently... jesus.. meanwhile - the support for the 1% bomb makers and etc continues... maybe it is the mutual fund money that folks are concerned about maintaining..

"In the first six months of this year, United States forces dropped nearly 3,000 bombs across Afghanistan." what is that? about 17 or 18 bombs a day or something? what about the drones? they have to be put to use too... best to get someone who is involved in their own turf war in afgan to give out the targets.. brilliant... usa war planning is mostly destroy and destroy and honour the troops and wave their stupid american flag and that is about it... sorry, but that is what it looks like to me..

Jason , Aug 8, 2018 9:32:50 PM | 24
its not so much they want to end the war on terror or the war on drugs.........they just want to say one thing to cover their asses and do another thing completely..

no matter what there should of been one general who got it right.....but we see it was never about peace .... it was always about war and its profits. anyone who didn't take orders or even had a hint of the right strategy would be Hung like dirty boots to dry.

what is the right strategy? leave. just as other empires did. before you call on your faces

to be even more frank....its not even about the money as that is not as important than having a nation of 300m regurgitate the news that they are there for 17 years to be the police of the world. because USA are the good ones... that they need to buy the biggest trucks which can't even fit in normal parking spaces because they have land mines(I mean ieds...) to avoid and need to haul 5tons of cargo to their construction job all while watching out for terrorists and trump Hillary divisions. is disorienting and it is deliberate. just as having a war last without a reason is deliberate while they entertain the masses with games..

dh , Aug 8, 2018 9:35:25 PM | 25
@23 "...maybe it is the mutual fund money that folks are concerned about maintaining.."

Definitely a big factor james. Unfortunately a lot more than 1% of the US population depends on the MIC for their livliehood.

james , Aug 8, 2018 9:38:08 PM | 26
@23dh... same deal here in canuckle head ville... people remain ignorant of what there money is ''''invested'''' in... could be saudi arabia for all the canucks think... btw - thanks for the laugh on the other thread... you made a couple of good jokes somewhere the past few days! i don't have much free time to comment at the moment..
pogohere , Aug 8, 2018 9:39:10 PM | 27
par4:

McCoy, in "The Politics of Heroin" gives a more complete picture:

In 1996, following four years of civil war among rival resistance factions, the Taliban's victory caused further expansion of opium cultivation. After capturing Kabul in September, the Taliban drove the Uzbek and Tajik warlords into the country's northeast, where they formed the Northern Alliance and clung to some 10 percent of Afghanistan's territory. Over the next three years, a seesaw battle for the Shamali plain north of Kabul raged until the Taliban finally won control in 1999 by destroying the orchards and irrigation in a prime food-producing region, generating over 100,000 refugees and increasing the country's dependence on opium.

Once in power, the Taliban made opium its largest source of taxation. To raise revenues estimated at $20-$25 million in 1997, the Taliban collected a 5 to 10 percent tax in kind on all opium harvested, a share that they then sold to heroin laboratories; a flat tax of $70 per kilogram on heroin refiners; and a transport tax of $250 on every kilogram exported. The head of the regime's anti-drug operations in Kandahar, Abdul Rashid, enforced a rigid ban on hashish "because it is consumed by Afghans, Muslims." But, he explained, "Opium is permissible because it is consumed by kafirs [unbelievers] in the West and not by Muslims or Afghans." A Taliban governor, Mohammed Hassan, added: "Drugs are evil and we would like to substitute poppies with another cash crop, but it's not possible at the moment because we do not have international recognition."

More broadly, the Taliban's policies provided stimulus, both direct and indirect, for a nationwide expansion of opium cultivation. . . Significantly, the regime's ban on the employment and education of women created a vast pool of low-cost labor to sustain an accelerated expansion of opium production. . . . In northern and eastern Afghanistan, women of all ages played " a fundamental role in the cultivation of the opium poppy"---planting, weeding, harvesting, cooking for laborers, and processing by-products such as oil. The Taliban not only taxed and encouraged opium cultivation, they protected and promoted exports to international markets.

In retrospect, however, the Taliban's most important contribution to the illicit traffic was its support for large-scale heroin refining.
. . .
Instead of eradication, the UN's annual opium surveys showed that Taliban rule had doubled Afghanistan's opium production from 2,250 tons in 1996 to 4,600 tons in 1999--equivalent to 75 percent of world illicit production. (508-509)
. . .

War on the Taliban

All this [heroin] traffic across Central Asia depended on high-volume heroin production in politically volatile Afghanistan. In July 2000, as a devastating drought entered its second year and mass starvation spread across Afghanistan, the Taliban's leader Mullah Omar ordered a sudden ban on opium cultivation in a bid for international recognition. (p.517)

dh , Aug 8, 2018 9:53:59 PM | 28
@26 I've been following the Canada/Saudi spat. I guess Justin has his own reasons for what he said but he certainly pissed MBS off.

Doesn't look like Donald wants to mediate. Perhaps Justin will have better luck with Teresa.

Pft , Aug 8, 2018 10:05:34 PM | 29
B4real@20

Dealing with their own elites for a start

james , Aug 8, 2018 10:17:03 PM | 30
@28 dh... usa daily propaganda press briefing had a few things to say - https://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2018/08/285028.htm
folktruther , Aug 8, 2018 10:27:00 PM | 31
B's article assumes that the operative purpose of the US military is to win wars. This isn't the case. The US military largely a business enterprise whose objective is to make money for the plutocracy that largely controls them. That being the case, the Afghanistan war has been a great success. If the US 'won' it, it would cease; if the Taliban conquered, it would cease. In this form of military stagnation it continues, and the money roles in making the ammunition, equipment, etc.

The military budget is largely an institution for transferring the tax money of the population from the people to the plutocracy. Military stagnation serves this purpose better than winning or losing.

Hoarsewhisperer , Aug 8, 2018 10:38:55 PM | 32
If there is one standout factor which makes makes all this profitable mayhem possible then it's the successful campaign by the Elites to persuade the Public that Secrecy is a legitimate variation of Privacy.
It is not.

Impregnable Government Secrecy is ALWAYS a cover for erroneous interpretations of an inconvenient Law - or straight-out cover for criminal activity.
It's preposterous to believe that a government elected by The People has a legitimate right to create schemes which must be kept Secret from The People.
This is especially true in the case of Military/Defense. There wouldn't be a CIC on earth who doesn't have up-to-date and regularly updated info on the hardware and capabilities of every ally and every potential foe. The People have a legitimate right to know what the CIC, and the rest of the world, already knows.

And that's just the most glaring example of the childish deception being perpetrated in the name of Secrecy. If governments were to be stripped of the power to conduct Our affairs in Secret then the scrutiny would oblige them to behave more competently. And we could weed out the drones and nitwits before they did too much damage.

dh , Aug 8, 2018 10:41:21 PM | 33
@30 Right. I notice they avoid mentioning the Badawis who are central to the issue. I guess helping Justin out isn't very high on Donald's list of priorities.
the pair , Aug 8, 2018 11:41:17 PM | 34
i forget who said it and the exact phrasing, but the best explanation i've seen is "why is the US there? it answers itself: to be there".

vast opium money for the deep state vermin.

profits for the bomb makers (you know, the respectable corporate ones as opposed to the quaint do-it-yourselfers).

lithium deposits that probably rival those in bolivia as well as other untapped profitable resources (probably, anyway; i could see oil and gas coming out of those ancient valleys).

it's also an occupation as opposed to a "win and get out" war. these military welfare queens think they can win a staring contest with the descendants of people who bitchslapped every would-be conqueror since alexander the great. ask the russians how well that went for them.

the west supports israel's 70+ years of colonizing palestine (plus the 3 or 4 decades of dumbness before it with balfour and such) and still has troops in south goddamn korea. as long as the tap flows they'll keep drinking that sweet tasty tax welfare.

[Aug 08, 2018] Sergei Skripal was linked to a consultant with former UK spy Christopher Steele's Orbis Business Intelligence

Highly recommended!
"Door handle" theory is dead on arrival. the main theory now is that UK government gave Skripals different agent BX (similar to LSD and which caused hallucinations) and they voluntarily took it in order to start preplanned Skripal false flag provocation. That's why military nurse accidentally appeared near Skripals soon after poisoning.
Notable quotes:
"... Following the attack on the Skripals, European and US allies took Britain's side on the attack, ordering the largest expulsion of Russian diplomats since the height of the Cold War, reports Reuters . In response, Russia retaliated by expelling Western diplomats, while the Kremlin has repeatedly denied involvement in the attacks - while accusing the UK intelligence agencies of staging the attack in order to inflame anti-Russia tensions. ..."
"... Prior to the investigation's focus on the door handle, for a period of almost three weeks there were at least nine other theories proposed by the authorities as to where the Skripals came into contact with the poison. These included the restaurant, the pub, the bench, the cemetery, the car, the flowers, the luggage, the porridge and even a drone. During that time, police officers and investigators were entering and leaving the house, by the door, since it was not known to be the place where the poison was located. ..."
"... Once the door handle theory was established, those who had been in and out of the property during the previous three weeks would naturally have been concerned about the possibility that they had been contaminated. ..."
"... Every officer who entered the house after 4th March, and before the door handle became an object of interest, should have been given a medical examination to check for signs of poisoning. ..."
"... Initial reports about Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey stated that he was poisoned at the bench, after coming to the aid of Mr Skripal and Yulia. However, on 9th March, Lord Ian Blair stated that D.S. Bailey had actually become poisoned after visiting Mr Skripal's house. Since he was thought to have been poisoned with a military grade nerve agent, and since it was thought that this had occurred at Mr Skripal's house, the immediate next step should have been to seal off the house and set up a mobile decontamination unit outside. However, numerous photographs show officers in normal uniforms standing close to the door long after Lord Blair's claim ..."
"... Can the authorities explain how these decisions did not put the health and even the lives of those officers in jeopardy? ..."
"... Before the door handle theory was settled on, the majority of competing theories put out by the authorities tended to assume that Mr Skripal was poisoned long before he went to Zizzis. For example, the flowers, the cemetery, the luggage, the porridge and the car explanations all assume this to be the case. What this means is that according to the assumptions of police at that time, when Mr Skripal fed the ducks near the Avon Playground with a few local boys, at around 1:45pm, he was already contaminated. Yet although this event was caught on CCTV camera, it was more than two weeks before the police contacted the parents of these boys. ..."
"... Can the authorities comment on why they did not air the CCTV footage on national television, in an effort to appeal to the boys or their parents to come forward, and whether the delay in tracking them down might have put them in danger? ..."
"... If the door handle was the place of poisoning, it is extremely likely that the bread handed by Mr Skripal to the boys would have been contaminated. Certainly, areas that he visited after this incident were deemed to be so much at risk that they were either closed down (for example, The Mill and Zizzis, which are both still closed), or destroyed (for instance, the restaurant table, the bench and – almost certainly – the red bag near the bench have all been destroyed). ..."
"... It has been said that one of the reasons the Government is/was so sure that the ultimate culprit behind the poisoning was the Russian state, is the apparent existence of an "FSB handbook" which, amongst other things, allegedly features descriptions of how to apply nerve agent to a door handle. Given that the Prime Minister first made a formal accusation of culpability on 12th March in her speech to the House of Commons, the Government must therefore have been in possession of this manual prior to that day. However, claims about the door handle being the location of the poison did not appear until late March (the first media reports of it were on 28th March). What this means is there was a delay of several weeks between the Government making its accusation, based partly on the apparent existence of the "door handle manual", and the door handle of Mr Skripal's house being a subject of interest to investigators. ..."
"... "We are learning more about Sergei and Yulia's movements but we need to be clearer around their exact movements on the morning of the incident. We believe that at around 9.15am on Sunday, 4 March, Sergei's car may have been in the areas of London Road, Churchill Way North and Wilton Road. Then at around 1.30pm it was seen being driven down Devizes Road, towards the town centre. We need to establish Sergei and Yulia's movements during the morning, before they headed to the town centre. Did you see this car, or what you believe was this car, on the day of the incident? We are particularly keen to hear from you if you saw the car before 1.30pm. If you have information, please call the police on 101." ..."
"... Now that Sergei and Yulia Skripal have been awake and able to communicate for around four months, these details are presumably now all known to investigators. In the normal course of such a high profile investigation, details such as these would be relayed to the public in the hope of jogging memories to prompt more information. And in fact, many such details have been released to the public in this case. Yet, confirmation of Mr Skripal's and Yulia's movements that day remain conspicuous by their absence. ..."
"... These questions have nothing to do with any conspiracy theory. On the contrary, they are all based on the assumption that the two central claims made by the authorities regarding the mode and the method used in this incident are correct. They are, however, very serious and perfectly legitimate questions about the way the authorities have dealt with this incident, on their own terms and on the basis of their own claims . ..."
"... "Reports that the United Kingdom is planning to ask Russia to extradite suspects in a Salisbury poisoning incident are nothing more than a "speculation," a spokesperson for the UK Foreign Office told Sputnik on Monday. ..."
Aug 06, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

The British government has prepared an extradition request to Moscow for two Russians they claim carried out the Salisbury nerve agent attack, according to The Guardian , citing Whitehall and security sources.

Former Russian double-agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were found unconscious on a public bench in Salisbury in early March - which UK authorities believe was due to a nerve agent called Novichok.

Months later on June 30, nearby residents Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess, a 44-year-old mother of three, were subsequently treated for exposure to the nerve agent. Rowley recovered while Sturgess died.

Authorities are operating on the assumption that the Skripals were poisoned using a novichok-laced perfume bottle or a door handle smeared with the nerve agent, while Rowley may have picked up said bottle and given to Sturgess, who applied it to her wrists.

Sturgess received a much higher dose than the other three after apparently smearing the substance on her wrists, having sprayed it from the bottle. Rowley's recovery was helped, according to a source, by one of the first responders being familiar with the nerve agent, having been involved in helping the Skripals.

The Porton Down military defence laboratory near Salisbury has examined the novichok found on the Skripals' doorknob and the perfume bottle, but police have not yet said whether they are from the same batch. - The Guardian

UK authorities believe they have pieced together the movements of the two Russians, from their entry into the UK to their departure after the alleged assassination attempt.

Following the attack on the Skripals, European and US allies took Britain's side on the attack, ordering the largest expulsion of Russian diplomats since the height of the Cold War, reports Reuters . In response, Russia retaliated by expelling Western diplomats, while the Kremlin has repeatedly denied involvement in the attacks - while accusing the UK intelligence agencies of staging the attack in order to inflame anti-Russia tensions.

Oddly, Sergei Skripal was linked by The Telegraph to a consultant with former UK spy Christopher Steele's Orbis Business Intelligence, who he reportedly had repeated contacts with.

The motive for trying to assassinate the 66-year-old skripal is unknown. Skripal moved to the UK in a Kremlin-approved "spy swap" in 2010, causing many to question why they would suddenly try to take him out a decade later.

In July, journalist Rob Slane compiled 10 questions for the UK authorities on the ever-confusing Skripal case:

***

The two most basic claims made by the Government and investigators regarding the method and the mode in the Salisbury poisoning are these:

  1. That military grade nerve agent was used to poison Mr Skripal
  2. That it was applied to the door handle of his house

These claims raise a number of very obvious questions. For example, how did the assassin(s) apply such a powerful chemical without wearing protective clothing? How did the people who are said to have come into contact with the substance not die immediately, or at the very least suffer irreparable damage to their Central Nervous Systems? How did this military grade nerve agent manage not only to have a delayed onset, but also managed to affect a large 66-year-old man and his slim 33-year-old daughter, both of whom would have vastly different metabolic rates, at exactly the same time?

These are perfectly reasonable questions that deserve reasonable answers. I am aware, however, that no matter how obvious and rational such questions might be, doing so places one – at least in the eyes of the authorities – in the camp of the conspiracy theorist. This is disingenuous. One of the marks of a true conspiracy theorist is that he is someone who refuses to accept an explanation for an event, even after being presented with facts which fit and explain it coherently . But when the "facts" presented in a case do not fit the event they are supposed to explain, and are neither rational nor coherent -- as in the Salisbury case -- then calling the person who raises legitimate questions a "conspiracy theorist" is a bit rich, is it not?

Nevertheless, for the purposes of this piece, what I'd like to do is work on the assumption that the "Military Grade Nerve Agent on the Door Handle" claim is correct. And working from this assumption, I want to ask some questions about how the authorities have handled the case. The point is this: These questions are not really intended to challenge the official claims; rather the intention is to ask whether the authorities have handled the case correctly on their own terms .

1. Prior to the investigation's focus on the door handle, for a period of almost three weeks there were at least nine other theories proposed by the authorities as to where the Skripals came into contact with the poison. These included the restaurant, the pub, the bench, the cemetery, the car, the flowers, the luggage, the porridge and even a drone. During that time, police officers and investigators were entering and leaving the house, by the door, since it was not known to be the place where the poison was located.

Can the authorities explain how these officers and investigators were not poisoned?

2. Once the door handle theory was established, those who had been in and out of the property during the previous three weeks would naturally have been concerned about the possibility that they had been contaminated.

Can the authorities tell us what steps were taken to reassure these officers?

3. Every officer who entered the house after 4th March, and before the door handle became an object of interest, should have been given a medical examination to check for signs of poisoning.

Can the authorities confirm that this took place for every officer?

4. Initial reports about Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey stated that he was poisoned at the bench, after coming to the aid of Mr Skripal and Yulia. However, on 9th March, Lord Ian Blair stated that D.S. Bailey had actually become poisoned after visiting Mr Skripal's house. Since he was thought to have been poisoned with a military grade nerve agent, and since it was thought that this had occurred at Mr Skripal's house, the immediate next step should have been to seal off the house and set up a mobile decontamination unit outside. However, numerous photographs show officers in normal uniforms standing close to the door long after Lord Blair's claim.

Can the authorities confirm why the house was not sealed off and a decontamination unit set up immediately after it became known that D.S. Bailey had been there, and why officers with no protective clothing on were allowed to continue standing guard outside the house for the next few weeks?

5. Can the authorities explain how these decisions did not put the health and even the lives of those officers in jeopardy?

6. Before the door handle theory was settled on, the majority of competing theories put out by the authorities tended to assume that Mr Skripal was poisoned long before he went to Zizzis. For example, the flowers, the cemetery, the luggage, the porridge and the car explanations all assume this to be the case. What this means is that according to the assumptions of police at that time, when Mr Skripal fed the ducks near the Avon Playground with a few local boys, at around 1:45pm, he was already contaminated. Yet although this event was caught on CCTV camera, it was more than two weeks before the police contacted the parents of these boys.

Can the authorities explain why it took more than two weeks to track down the boys, who – as the CCTV apparently shows – were given bread by Mr Skripal?

7. Can the authorities comment on why they did not air the CCTV footage on national television, in an effort to appeal to the boys or their parents to come forward, and whether the delay in tracking them down might have put them in danger?

8. If the door handle was the place of poisoning, it is extremely likely that the bread handed by Mr Skripal to the boys would have been contaminated. Certainly, areas that he visited after this incident were deemed to be so much at risk that they were either closed down (for example, The Mill and Zizzis, which are both still closed), or destroyed (for instance, the restaurant table, the bench and – almost certainly – the red bag near the bench have all been destroyed).

Can the authorities comment on how the boys, who were handed bread by Mr Skripal, managed to avoid contamination?

9. It has been said that one of the reasons the Government is/was so sure that the ultimate culprit behind the poisoning was the Russian state, is the apparent existence of an "FSB handbook" which, amongst other things, allegedly features descriptions of how to apply nerve agent to a door handle. Given that the Prime Minister first made a formal accusation of culpability on 12th March in her speech to the House of Commons, the Government must therefore have been in possession of this manual prior to that day. However, claims about the door handle being the location of the poison did not appear until late March (the first media reports of it were on 28th March). What this means is there was a delay of several weeks between the Government making its accusation, based partly on the apparent existence of the "door handle manual", and the door handle of Mr Skripal's house being a subject of interest to investigators.

Can the authorities therefore tell us whether the Government's failure to pass on details of the "door handle manual" put the lives of the officers going in and out of Mr Skripal's house from 5th March to 27th March in jeopardy?

10. On 17th March, Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu said:

"We are learning more about Sergei and Yulia's movements but we need to be clearer around their exact movements on the morning of the incident. We believe that at around 9.15am on Sunday, 4 March, Sergei's car may have been in the areas of London Road, Churchill Way North and Wilton Road. Then at around 1.30pm it was seen being driven down Devizes Road, towards the town centre. We need to establish Sergei and Yulia's movements during the morning, before they headed to the town centre. Did you see this car, or what you believe was this car, on the day of the incident? We are particularly keen to hear from you if you saw the car before 1.30pm. If you have information, please call the police on 101."

Now that Sergei and Yulia Skripal have been awake and able to communicate for around four months, these details are presumably now all known to investigators. In the normal course of such a high profile investigation, details such as these would be relayed to the public in the hope of jogging memories to prompt more information. And in fact, many such details have been released to the public in this case. Yet, confirmation of Mr Skripal's and Yulia's movements that day remain conspicuous by their absence.

Can the authorities confirm that the movements of the Skripals that day are now understood, and that they will be made known shortly, in order that more information from the public might then be forthcoming?

These questions have nothing to do with any conspiracy theory. On the contrary, they are all based on the assumption that the two central claims made by the authorities regarding the mode and the method used in this incident are correct. They are, however, very serious and perfectly legitimate questions about the way the authorities have dealt with this incident, on their own terms and on the basis of their own claims .

We await their explanations.

besnook Mon, 08/06/2018 - 14:22 Permalink

the brits want to embarrass themselves.

EuroPox -> besnook Mon, 08/06/2018 - 14:25 Permalink

They already have - that was just more lies:

"Reports that the United Kingdom is planning to ask Russia to extradite suspects in a Salisbury poisoning incident are nothing more than a "speculation," a spokesperson for the UK Foreign Office told Sputnik on Monday.

"This is just more speculation. The police investigation is ongoing and anything on the record will need to come from the Police," the spokesperson said."

https://sputniknews.com/europe/201808061067000089-uk-no-request-salisbu

[Aug 08, 2018] Ten Bombshell Revelations From Seymour Hersh's New Autobiography

Highly recommended!
Aug 08, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Here are ten bombshell revelations and fascinating new details to lately come out of both Sy Hersh's new book, Reporter , as well as interviews he's given since publication...

1) On a leaked Bush-era intelligence memo outlining the neocon plan to remake the Middle East

(Note: though previously alluded to only anecdotally by General Wesley Clark in his memoir and in a 2007 speech , the below passage from Seymour Hersh is to our knowledge the first time this highly classified memo has been quoted . Hersh's account appears to corroborate now retired Gen. Clark's assertion that days after 9/11 a classified memo outlining plans to foster regime change in "7 countries in 5 years" was being circulated among intelligence officials.)

From Reporter: A Memoir pg. 306 -- A few months after the invasion of Iraq, during an interview overseas with a general who was director of a foreign intelligence service, I was provided with a copy of a Republican neocon plan for American dominance in the Middle East. The general was an American ally, but one who was very rattled by the Bush/Cheney aggression. I was told that the document leaked to me initially had been obtained by someone in the local CIA station. There was reason to be rattled: The document declared that the war to reshape the Middle East had to begin "with the assault on Iraq. The fundamental reason for this... is that the war will start making the U.S. the hegemon of the Middle East. The correlative reason is to make the region feel in its bones, as it were, the seriousness of American intent and determination." Victory in Iraq would lead to an ultimatum to Damascus, the "defanging" of Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, and Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organization, and other anti-Israeli groups. America's enemies must understand that "they are fighting for their life: Pax Americana is on its way, which implies their annihilation." I and the foreign general agreed that America's neocons were a menace to civilization.

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

* * *

2) On early regime change plans in Syria

From Reporter: A Memoir pages 306-307 -- Donald Rumsfeld was also infected with neocon fantasy. Turkey had refused to permit America's Fourth Division to join the attack of Iraq from its territory, and the division, with its twenty-five thousand men and women, did not arrive in force inside Iraq until mid-April, when the initial fighting was essentially over. I learned then that Rumsfeld had asked the American military command in Stuttgart, Germany, which had responsibility for monitoring Europe, including Syria and Lebanon, to begin drawing up an operational plan for an invasion of Syria. A young general assigned to the task refused to do so, thereby winning applause from my friends on the inside and risking his career. The plan was seen by those I knew as especially bizarre because Bashar Assad, the ruler of secular Syria, had responded to 9/11 by sharing with the CIA hundreds of his country's most sensitive intelligence files on the Muslim Brotherhood in Hamburg, where much of the planning for 9/11 was carried out... Rumsfeld eventually came to his senses and back down, I was told...

3) On the Neocon deep state which seized power after 9/11

From Reporter: A Memoir pages 305-306 -- I began to comprehend that eight or nine neoconservatives who were political outsiders in the Clinton years had essentially overthrown the government of the United States -- with ease . It was stunning to realize how fragile our Constitution was. The intellectual leaders of that group -- Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, and Richard Perle -- had not hidden their ideology and their belief in the power of the executive but depicted themselves in public with a great calmness and a self-assurance that masked their radicalism . I had spent many hours after 9/11 in conversations with Perle that, luckily for me, helped me understand what was coming. (Perle and I had been chatting about policy since the early 1980s, but he broke off relations in 1993 over an article I did for The New Yorker linking him, a fervent supporter of Israel, to a series of meetings with Saudi businessmen in an attempt to land a multibillion-dollar contract from Saudi Arabia . Perle responded by publicly threatening to sue me and characterizing me as a newspaper terrorist. He did not sue.

Meanwhile, Cheney had emerged as a leader of the neocon pack. From 9/11 on he did all he could to undermine congressional oversight. I learned a great deal from the inside about his primacy in the White House , but once again I was limited in what I would write for fear of betraying my sources...

I came to understand that Cheney's goal was to run his most important military and intelligence operations with as little congressional knowledge, and interference, as possible. I was fascinating and important to learn what I did about Cheney's constant accumulation of power and authority as vice president , but it was impossible to even begin to verify the information without running the risk that Cheney would learn of my questioning and have a good idea from whom I was getting the information.

4) On Russian meddling in the US election

From the recent Independent interview based on his autobiography -- Hersh has vociferously strong opinions on the subject and smells a rat. He states that there is "a great deal of animosity towards Russia. All of that stuff about Russia hacking the election appears to be preposterous." He has been researching the subject but is not ready to go public yet.

Hersh quips that the last time he heard the US defense establishment have high confidence, it was regarding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He points out that the NSA only has moderate confidence in Russian hacking. It is a point that has been made before; there has been no national intelligence estimate in which all 17 US intelligence agencies would have to sign off. "When the intel community wants to say something they say it High confidence effectively means that they don't know."

5) On the Novichok poisoning

From the recent Independent interview -- Hersh is also on the record as stating that the official version of the Skripal poisoning does not stand up to scrutiny. He tells me: "The story of novichok poisoning has not held up very well. He [Skripal] was most likely talking to British intelligence services about Russian organised crime." The unfortunate turn of events with the contamination of other victims is suggestive, according to Hersh, of organised crime elements rather than state-sponsored actions –though this files in the face of the UK government's position.

Hersh modestly points out that these are just his opinions. Opinions or not, he is scathing on Obama – "a trimmer articulate [but] far from a radical a middleman". During his Goldsmiths talk, he remarks that liberal critics underestimate Trump at their peril.

He ends the Goldsmiths talk with an anecdote about having lunch with his sources in the wake of 9/11 . He vents his anger at the agencies for not sharing information. One of his CIA sources fires back: "Sy you still don't get it after all these years – the FBI catches bank robbers, the CIA robs banks." It is a delicious, if cryptic aphorism.

* * *

6) On the Bush-era 'Redirection' policy of arming Sunni radicals to counter Shia Iran, which in a 2007 New Yorker article Hersh accurately predicted would set off war in Syria

From the Independent interview : [Hersh] tells me it is "amazing how many times that story has been reprinted" . I ask about his argument that US policy was designed to neutralize the Shia sphere extending from Iran to Syria to Hezbollah in Lebanon and hence redraw the Sykes-Picot boundaries for the 21st century.

He goes on to say that Bush and Cheney "had it in for Iran", although he denies the idea that Iran was heavily involved in Iraq: "They were providing intel, collecting intel The US did many cross-border hunts to kill ops [with] much more aggression than Iran"...

He believes that the Trump administration has no memory of this approach. I'm sure though that the military-industrial complex has a longer memory...

I press him on the RAND and Stratfor reports including one authored by Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz in which they envisage deliberate ethno-sectarian partitioning of Iraq . Hersh ruefully states that: "The day after 9/11 we should have gone to Russia. We did the one thing that George Kennan warned us never to do – to expand NATO too far."

* * *

7) On the official 9/11 narrative

From the Independent interview : We end up ruminating about 9/11, perhaps because it is another narrative ripe for deconstruction by sceptics. Polling shows that a significant proportion of the American public believes there is more to the truth. These doubts have been reinforced by the declassification of the suppressed 28 pages of the 9/11 commission report last year undermining the version that a group of terrorists acting independently managed to pull off the attacks. The implication is that they may well have been state-sponsored with the Saudis potentially involved.

Hersh tells me: "I don't necessarily buy the story that Bin Laden was responsible for 9/11. We really don't have an ending to the story. I've known people in the [intelligence] community. We don't know anything empirical about who did what" . He continues: "The guy was living in a cave. He really didn't know much English. He was pretty bright and he had a lot of hatred for the US. We respond by attacking the Taliban. Eighteen years later How's it going guys?"

8) On the media and the morality of the powerful

From a recent The Intercept interview and book review -- If Hersh were a superhero, this would be his origin story. Two hundred and seventy-four pages after the Chicago anecdote, he describes his coverage of a massive slaughter of Iraqi troops and civilians by the U.S. in 1991 after a ceasefire had ended the Persian Gulf War. America's indifference to this massacre was, Hersh writes, "a reminder of the Vietnam War's MGR, for Mere Gook Rule: If it's a murdered or raped gook, there is no crime." It was also, he adds, a reminder of something else: "I had learned a domestic version of that rule decades earlier" in Chicago. "Reporter" demonstrates that Hersh has derived three simple lessons from that rule:

  1. The powerful prey mercilessly upon the powerless, up to and including mass murder.
  2. The powerful lie constantly about their predations.
  3. The natural instinct of the media is to let the powerful get away with it.

* * *

... ... ...

[Aug 08, 2018] Sergei Skripal was linked to a consultant with former UK spy Christopher Steele's Orbis Business Intelligence

Highly recommended!
"Door handle" theory is dead on arrival. the main theory now is that UK government gave Skripals different agent BX (similar to LSD and which caused hallucinations) and they voluntarily took it in order to start preplanned Skripal false flag provocation. That's why military nurse accidentally appeared near Skripals soon after poisoning.
Notable quotes:
"... Following the attack on the Skripals, European and US allies took Britain's side on the attack, ordering the largest expulsion of Russian diplomats since the height of the Cold War, reports Reuters . In response, Russia retaliated by expelling Western diplomats, while the Kremlin has repeatedly denied involvement in the attacks - while accusing the UK intelligence agencies of staging the attack in order to inflame anti-Russia tensions. ..."
"... Prior to the investigation's focus on the door handle, for a period of almost three weeks there were at least nine other theories proposed by the authorities as to where the Skripals came into contact with the poison. These included the restaurant, the pub, the bench, the cemetery, the car, the flowers, the luggage, the porridge and even a drone. During that time, police officers and investigators were entering and leaving the house, by the door, since it was not known to be the place where the poison was located. ..."
"... Once the door handle theory was established, those who had been in and out of the property during the previous three weeks would naturally have been concerned about the possibility that they had been contaminated. ..."
"... Every officer who entered the house after 4th March, and before the door handle became an object of interest, should have been given a medical examination to check for signs of poisoning. ..."
"... Initial reports about Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey stated that he was poisoned at the bench, after coming to the aid of Mr Skripal and Yulia. However, on 9th March, Lord Ian Blair stated that D.S. Bailey had actually become poisoned after visiting Mr Skripal's house. Since he was thought to have been poisoned with a military grade nerve agent, and since it was thought that this had occurred at Mr Skripal's house, the immediate next step should have been to seal off the house and set up a mobile decontamination unit outside. However, numerous photographs show officers in normal uniforms standing close to the door long after Lord Blair's claim ..."
"... Can the authorities explain how these decisions did not put the health and even the lives of those officers in jeopardy? ..."
"... Before the door handle theory was settled on, the majority of competing theories put out by the authorities tended to assume that Mr Skripal was poisoned long before he went to Zizzis. For example, the flowers, the cemetery, the luggage, the porridge and the car explanations all assume this to be the case. What this means is that according to the assumptions of police at that time, when Mr Skripal fed the ducks near the Avon Playground with a few local boys, at around 1:45pm, he was already contaminated. Yet although this event was caught on CCTV camera, it was more than two weeks before the police contacted the parents of these boys. ..."
"... Can the authorities comment on why they did not air the CCTV footage on national television, in an effort to appeal to the boys or their parents to come forward, and whether the delay in tracking them down might have put them in danger? ..."
"... If the door handle was the place of poisoning, it is extremely likely that the bread handed by Mr Skripal to the boys would have been contaminated. Certainly, areas that he visited after this incident were deemed to be so much at risk that they were either closed down (for example, The Mill and Zizzis, which are both still closed), or destroyed (for instance, the restaurant table, the bench and – almost certainly – the red bag near the bench have all been destroyed). ..."
"... It has been said that one of the reasons the Government is/was so sure that the ultimate culprit behind the poisoning was the Russian state, is the apparent existence of an "FSB handbook" which, amongst other things, allegedly features descriptions of how to apply nerve agent to a door handle. Given that the Prime Minister first made a formal accusation of culpability on 12th March in her speech to the House of Commons, the Government must therefore have been in possession of this manual prior to that day. However, claims about the door handle being the location of the poison did not appear until late March (the first media reports of it were on 28th March). What this means is there was a delay of several weeks between the Government making its accusation, based partly on the apparent existence of the "door handle manual", and the door handle of Mr Skripal's house being a subject of interest to investigators. ..."
"... "We are learning more about Sergei and Yulia's movements but we need to be clearer around their exact movements on the morning of the incident. We believe that at around 9.15am on Sunday, 4 March, Sergei's car may have been in the areas of London Road, Churchill Way North and Wilton Road. Then at around 1.30pm it was seen being driven down Devizes Road, towards the town centre. We need to establish Sergei and Yulia's movements during the morning, before they headed to the town centre. Did you see this car, or what you believe was this car, on the day of the incident? We are particularly keen to hear from you if you saw the car before 1.30pm. If you have information, please call the police on 101." ..."
"... Now that Sergei and Yulia Skripal have been awake and able to communicate for around four months, these details are presumably now all known to investigators. In the normal course of such a high profile investigation, details such as these would be relayed to the public in the hope of jogging memories to prompt more information. And in fact, many such details have been released to the public in this case. Yet, confirmation of Mr Skripal's and Yulia's movements that day remain conspicuous by their absence. ..."
"... These questions have nothing to do with any conspiracy theory. On the contrary, they are all based on the assumption that the two central claims made by the authorities regarding the mode and the method used in this incident are correct. They are, however, very serious and perfectly legitimate questions about the way the authorities have dealt with this incident, on their own terms and on the basis of their own claims . ..."
"... "Reports that the United Kingdom is planning to ask Russia to extradite suspects in a Salisbury poisoning incident are nothing more than a "speculation," a spokesperson for the UK Foreign Office told Sputnik on Monday. ..."
Aug 06, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

The British government has prepared an extradition request to Moscow for two Russians they claim carried out the Salisbury nerve agent attack, according to The Guardian , citing Whitehall and security sources.

Former Russian double-agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were found unconscious on a public bench in Salisbury in early March - which UK authorities believe was due to a nerve agent called Novichok.

Months later on June 30, nearby residents Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess, a 44-year-old mother of three, were subsequently treated for exposure to the nerve agent. Rowley recovered while Sturgess died.

Authorities are operating on the assumption that the Skripals were poisoned using a novichok-laced perfume bottle or a door handle smeared with the nerve agent, while Rowley may have picked up said bottle and given to Sturgess, who applied it to her wrists.

Sturgess received a much higher dose than the other three after apparently smearing the substance on her wrists, having sprayed it from the bottle. Rowley's recovery was helped, according to a source, by one of the first responders being familiar with the nerve agent, having been involved in helping the Skripals.

The Porton Down military defence laboratory near Salisbury has examined the novichok found on the Skripals' doorknob and the perfume bottle, but police have not yet said whether they are from the same batch. - The Guardian

UK authorities believe they have pieced together the movements of the two Russians, from their entry into the UK to their departure after the alleged assassination attempt.

Following the attack on the Skripals, European and US allies took Britain's side on the attack, ordering the largest expulsion of Russian diplomats since the height of the Cold War, reports Reuters . In response, Russia retaliated by expelling Western diplomats, while the Kremlin has repeatedly denied involvement in the attacks - while accusing the UK intelligence agencies of staging the attack in order to inflame anti-Russia tensions.

Oddly, Sergei Skripal was linked by The Telegraph to a consultant with former UK spy Christopher Steele's Orbis Business Intelligence, who he reportedly had repeated contacts with.

The motive for trying to assassinate the 66-year-old skripal is unknown. Skripal moved to the UK in a Kremlin-approved "spy swap" in 2010, causing many to question why they would suddenly try to take him out a decade later.

In July, journalist Rob Slane compiled 10 questions for the UK authorities on the ever-confusing Skripal case:

***

The two most basic claims made by the Government and investigators regarding the method and the mode in the Salisbury poisoning are these:

  1. That military grade nerve agent was used to poison Mr Skripal
  2. That it was applied to the door handle of his house

These claims raise a number of very obvious questions. For example, how did the assassin(s) apply such a powerful chemical without wearing protective clothing? How did the people who are said to have come into contact with the substance not die immediately, or at the very least suffer irreparable damage to their Central Nervous Systems? How did this military grade nerve agent manage not only to have a delayed onset, but also managed to affect a large 66-year-old man and his slim 33-year-old daughter, both of whom would have vastly different metabolic rates, at exactly the same time?

These are perfectly reasonable questions that deserve reasonable answers. I am aware, however, that no matter how obvious and rational such questions might be, doing so places one – at least in the eyes of the authorities – in the camp of the conspiracy theorist. This is disingenuous. One of the marks of a true conspiracy theorist is that he is someone who refuses to accept an explanation for an event, even after being presented with facts which fit and explain it coherently . But when the "facts" presented in a case do not fit the event they are supposed to explain, and are neither rational nor coherent -- as in the Salisbury case -- then calling the person who raises legitimate questions a "conspiracy theorist" is a bit rich, is it not?

Nevertheless, for the purposes of this piece, what I'd like to do is work on the assumption that the "Military Grade Nerve Agent on the Door Handle" claim is correct. And working from this assumption, I want to ask some questions about how the authorities have handled the case. The point is this: These questions are not really intended to challenge the official claims; rather the intention is to ask whether the authorities have handled the case correctly on their own terms .

1. Prior to the investigation's focus on the door handle, for a period of almost three weeks there were at least nine other theories proposed by the authorities as to where the Skripals came into contact with the poison. These included the restaurant, the pub, the bench, the cemetery, the car, the flowers, the luggage, the porridge and even a drone. During that time, police officers and investigators were entering and leaving the house, by the door, since it was not known to be the place where the poison was located.

Can the authorities explain how these officers and investigators were not poisoned?

2. Once the door handle theory was established, those who had been in and out of the property during the previous three weeks would naturally have been concerned about the possibility that they had been contaminated.

Can the authorities tell us what steps were taken to reassure these officers?

3. Every officer who entered the house after 4th March, and before the door handle became an object of interest, should have been given a medical examination to check for signs of poisoning.

Can the authorities confirm that this took place for every officer?

4. Initial reports about Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey stated that he was poisoned at the bench, after coming to the aid of Mr Skripal and Yulia. However, on 9th March, Lord Ian Blair stated that D.S. Bailey had actually become poisoned after visiting Mr Skripal's house. Since he was thought to have been poisoned with a military grade nerve agent, and since it was thought that this had occurred at Mr Skripal's house, the immediate next step should have been to seal off the house and set up a mobile decontamination unit outside. However, numerous photographs show officers in normal uniforms standing close to the door long after Lord Blair's claim.

Can the authorities confirm why the house was not sealed off and a decontamination unit set up immediately after it became known that D.S. Bailey had been there, and why officers with no protective clothing on were allowed to continue standing guard outside the house for the next few weeks?

5. Can the authorities explain how these decisions did not put the health and even the lives of those officers in jeopardy?

6. Before the door handle theory was settled on, the majority of competing theories put out by the authorities tended to assume that Mr Skripal was poisoned long before he went to Zizzis. For example, the flowers, the cemetery, the luggage, the porridge and the car explanations all assume this to be the case. What this means is that according to the assumptions of police at that time, when Mr Skripal fed the ducks near the Avon Playground with a few local boys, at around 1:45pm, he was already contaminated. Yet although this event was caught on CCTV camera, it was more than two weeks before the police contacted the parents of these boys.

Can the authorities explain why it took more than two weeks to track down the boys, who – as the CCTV apparently shows – were given bread by Mr Skripal?

7. Can the authorities comment on why they did not air the CCTV footage on national television, in an effort to appeal to the boys or their parents to come forward, and whether the delay in tracking them down might have put them in danger?

8. If the door handle was the place of poisoning, it is extremely likely that the bread handed by Mr Skripal to the boys would have been contaminated. Certainly, areas that he visited after this incident were deemed to be so much at risk that they were either closed down (for example, The Mill and Zizzis, which are both still closed), or destroyed (for instance, the restaurant table, the bench and – almost certainly – the red bag near the bench have all been destroyed).

Can the authorities comment on how the boys, who were handed bread by Mr Skripal, managed to avoid contamination?

9. It has been said that one of the reasons the Government is/was so sure that the ultimate culprit behind the poisoning was the Russian state, is the apparent existence of an "FSB handbook" which, amongst other things, allegedly features descriptions of how to apply nerve agent to a door handle. Given that the Prime Minister first made a formal accusation of culpability on 12th March in her speech to the House of Commons, the Government must therefore have been in possession of this manual prior to that day. However, claims about the door handle being the location of the poison did not appear until late March (the first media reports of it were on 28th March). What this means is there was a delay of several weeks between the Government making its accusation, based partly on the apparent existence of the "door handle manual", and the door handle of Mr Skripal's house being a subject of interest to investigators.

Can the authorities therefore tell us whether the Government's failure to pass on details of the "door handle manual" put the lives of the officers going in and out of Mr Skripal's house from 5th March to 27th March in jeopardy?

10. On 17th March, Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu said:

"We are learning more about Sergei and Yulia's movements but we need to be clearer around their exact movements on the morning of the incident. We believe that at around 9.15am on Sunday, 4 March, Sergei's car may have been in the areas of London Road, Churchill Way North and Wilton Road. Then at around 1.30pm it was seen being driven down Devizes Road, towards the town centre. We need to establish Sergei and Yulia's movements during the morning, before they headed to the town centre. Did you see this car, or what you believe was this car, on the day of the incident? We are particularly keen to hear from you if you saw the car before 1.30pm. If you have information, please call the police on 101."

Now that Sergei and Yulia Skripal have been awake and able to communicate for around four months, these details are presumably now all known to investigators. In the normal course of such a high profile investigation, details such as these would be relayed to the public in the hope of jogging memories to prompt more information. And in fact, many such details have been released to the public in this case. Yet, confirmation of Mr Skripal's and Yulia's movements that day remain conspicuous by their absence.

Can the authorities confirm that the movements of the Skripals that day are now understood, and that they will be made known shortly, in order that more information from the public might then be forthcoming?

These questions have nothing to do with any conspiracy theory. On the contrary, they are all based on the assumption that the two central claims made by the authorities regarding the mode and the method used in this incident are correct. They are, however, very serious and perfectly legitimate questions about the way the authorities have dealt with this incident, on their own terms and on the basis of their own claims .

We await their explanations.

besnook Mon, 08/06/2018 - 14:22 Permalink

the brits want to embarrass themselves.

EuroPox -> besnook Mon, 08/06/2018 - 14:25 Permalink

They already have - that was just more lies:

"Reports that the United Kingdom is planning to ask Russia to extradite suspects in a Salisbury poisoning incident are nothing more than a "speculation," a spokesperson for the UK Foreign Office told Sputnik on Monday.

"This is just more speculation. The police investigation is ongoing and anything on the record will need to come from the Police," the spokesperson said."

https://sputniknews.com/europe/201808061067000089-uk-no-request-salisbu

[Aug 08, 2018] Ten Bombshell Revelations From Seymour Hersh's New Autobiography

Highly recommended!
Aug 08, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Here are ten bombshell revelations and fascinating new details to lately come out of both Sy Hersh's new book, Reporter , as well as interviews he's given since publication...

1) On a leaked Bush-era intelligence memo outlining the neocon plan to remake the Middle East

(Note: though previously alluded to only anecdotally by General Wesley Clark in his memoir and in a 2007 speech , the below passage from Seymour Hersh is to our knowledge the first time this highly classified memo has been quoted . Hersh's account appears to corroborate now retired Gen. Clark's assertion that days after 9/11 a classified memo outlining plans to foster regime change in "7 countries in 5 years" was being circulated among intelligence officials.)

From Reporter: A Memoir pg. 306 -- A few months after the invasion of Iraq, during an interview overseas with a general who was director of a foreign intelligence service, I was provided with a copy of a Republican neocon plan for American dominance in the Middle East. The general was an American ally, but one who was very rattled by the Bush/Cheney aggression. I was told that the document leaked to me initially had been obtained by someone in the local CIA station. There was reason to be rattled: The document declared that the war to reshape the Middle East had to begin "with the assault on Iraq. The fundamental reason for this... is that the war will start making the U.S. the hegemon of the Middle East. The correlative reason is to make the region feel in its bones, as it were, the seriousness of American intent and determination." Victory in Iraq would lead to an ultimatum to Damascus, the "defanging" of Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, and Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organization, and other anti-Israeli groups. America's enemies must understand that "they are fighting for their life: Pax Americana is on its way, which implies their annihilation." I and the foreign general agreed that America's neocons were a menace to civilization.

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

* * *

2) On early regime change plans in Syria

From Reporter: A Memoir pages 306-307 -- Donald Rumsfeld was also infected with neocon fantasy. Turkey had refused to permit America's Fourth Division to join the attack of Iraq from its territory, and the division, with its twenty-five thousand men and women, did not arrive in force inside Iraq until mid-April, when the initial fighting was essentially over. I learned then that Rumsfeld had asked the American military command in Stuttgart, Germany, which had responsibility for monitoring Europe, including Syria and Lebanon, to begin drawing up an operational plan for an invasion of Syria. A young general assigned to the task refused to do so, thereby winning applause from my friends on the inside and risking his career. The plan was seen by those I knew as especially bizarre because Bashar Assad, the ruler of secular Syria, had responded to 9/11 by sharing with the CIA hundreds of his country's most sensitive intelligence files on the Muslim Brotherhood in Hamburg, where much of the planning for 9/11 was carried out... Rumsfeld eventually came to his senses and back down, I was told...

3) On the Neocon deep state which seized power after 9/11

From Reporter: A Memoir pages 305-306 -- I began to comprehend that eight or nine neoconservatives who were political outsiders in the Clinton years had essentially overthrown the government of the United States -- with ease . It was stunning to realize how fragile our Constitution was. The intellectual leaders of that group -- Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, and Richard Perle -- had not hidden their ideology and their belief in the power of the executive but depicted themselves in public with a great calmness and a self-assurance that masked their radicalism . I had spent many hours after 9/11 in conversations with Perle that, luckily for me, helped me understand what was coming. (Perle and I had been chatting about policy since the early 1980s, but he broke off relations in 1993 over an article I did for The New Yorker linking him, a fervent supporter of Israel, to a series of meetings with Saudi businessmen in an attempt to land a multibillion-dollar contract from Saudi Arabia . Perle responded by publicly threatening to sue me and characterizing me as a newspaper terrorist. He did not sue.

Meanwhile, Cheney had emerged as a leader of the neocon pack. From 9/11 on he did all he could to undermine congressional oversight. I learned a great deal from the inside about his primacy in the White House , but once again I was limited in what I would write for fear of betraying my sources...

I came to understand that Cheney's goal was to run his most important military and intelligence operations with as little congressional knowledge, and interference, as possible. I was fascinating and important to learn what I did about Cheney's constant accumulation of power and authority as vice president , but it was impossible to even begin to verify the information without running the risk that Cheney would learn of my questioning and have a good idea from whom I was getting the information.

4) On Russian meddling in the US election

From the recent Independent interview based on his autobiography -- Hersh has vociferously strong opinions on the subject and smells a rat. He states that there is "a great deal of animosity towards Russia. All of that stuff about Russia hacking the election appears to be preposterous." He has been researching the subject but is not ready to go public yet.

Hersh quips that the last time he heard the US defense establishment have high confidence, it was regarding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He points out that the NSA only has moderate confidence in Russian hacking. It is a point that has been made before; there has been no national intelligence estimate in which all 17 US intelligence agencies would have to sign off. "When the intel community wants to say something they say it High confidence effectively means that they don't know."

5) On the Novichok poisoning

From the recent Independent interview -- Hersh is also on the record as stating that the official version of the Skripal poisoning does not stand up to scrutiny. He tells me: "The story of novichok poisoning has not held up very well. He [Skripal] was most likely talking to British intelligence services about Russian organised crime." The unfortunate turn of events with the contamination of other victims is suggestive, according to Hersh, of organised crime elements rather than state-sponsored actions –though this files in the face of the UK government's position.

Hersh modestly points out that these are just his opinions. Opinions or not, he is scathing on Obama – "a trimmer articulate [but] far from a radical a middleman". During his Goldsmiths talk, he remarks that liberal critics underestimate Trump at their peril.

He ends the Goldsmiths talk with an anecdote about having lunch with his sources in the wake of 9/11 . He vents his anger at the agencies for not sharing information. One of his CIA sources fires back: "Sy you still don't get it after all these years – the FBI catches bank robbers, the CIA robs banks." It is a delicious, if cryptic aphorism.

* * *

6) On the Bush-era 'Redirection' policy of arming Sunni radicals to counter Shia Iran, which in a 2007 New Yorker article Hersh accurately predicted would set off war in Syria

From the Independent interview : [Hersh] tells me it is "amazing how many times that story has been reprinted" . I ask about his argument that US policy was designed to neutralize the Shia sphere extending from Iran to Syria to Hezbollah in Lebanon and hence redraw the Sykes-Picot boundaries for the 21st century.

He goes on to say that Bush and Cheney "had it in for Iran", although he denies the idea that Iran was heavily involved in Iraq: "They were providing intel, collecting intel The US did many cross-border hunts to kill ops [with] much more aggression than Iran"...

He believes that the Trump administration has no memory of this approach. I'm sure though that the military-industrial complex has a longer memory...

I press him on the RAND and Stratfor reports including one authored by Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz in which they envisage deliberate ethno-sectarian partitioning of Iraq . Hersh ruefully states that: "The day after 9/11 we should have gone to Russia. We did the one thing that George Kennan warned us never to do – to expand NATO too far."

* * *

7) On the official 9/11 narrative

From the Independent interview : We end up ruminating about 9/11, perhaps because it is another narrative ripe for deconstruction by sceptics. Polling shows that a significant proportion of the American public believes there is more to the truth. These doubts have been reinforced by the declassification of the suppressed 28 pages of the 9/11 commission report last year undermining the version that a group of terrorists acting independently managed to pull off the attacks. The implication is that they may well have been state-sponsored with the Saudis potentially involved.

Hersh tells me: "I don't necessarily buy the story that Bin Laden was responsible for 9/11. We really don't have an ending to the story. I've known people in the [intelligence] community. We don't know anything empirical about who did what" . He continues: "The guy was living in a cave. He really didn't know much English. He was pretty bright and he had a lot of hatred for the US. We respond by attacking the Taliban. Eighteen years later How's it going guys?"

8) On the media and the morality of the powerful

From a recent The Intercept interview and book review -- If Hersh were a superhero, this would be his origin story. Two hundred and seventy-four pages after the Chicago anecdote, he describes his coverage of a massive slaughter of Iraqi troops and civilians by the U.S. in 1991 after a ceasefire had ended the Persian Gulf War. America's indifference to this massacre was, Hersh writes, "a reminder of the Vietnam War's MGR, for Mere Gook Rule: If it's a murdered or raped gook, there is no crime." It was also, he adds, a reminder of something else: "I had learned a domestic version of that rule decades earlier" in Chicago. "Reporter" demonstrates that Hersh has derived three simple lessons from that rule:

  1. The powerful prey mercilessly upon the powerless, up to and including mass murder.
  2. The powerful lie constantly about their predations.
  3. The natural instinct of the media is to let the powerful get away with it.

* * *

... ... ...

[Aug 08, 2018] God Bless Stephen Cohen

Notable quotes:
"... Max Boot believes that Donald Trump should have threatened (Boot's word, not mine) Vladimir Putin. How does one go about threatening a country with inter-continental nuclear weapons systems that are proven to work? ..."
Aug 04, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Let me stipulate at the outset that the phrase, "Max Boot," should be consider as a new synonym in the Oxford English Dictionary for the word inane moron or imbecile are other plausible possibilities.

Not since the days of Senator Joseph McCarthy have we witnessed such a bizarre, vicious level of red-baiting and smearing. Max Boot, have you no decency?

You will understand the context of my introductory observations after you view the following video. Max Boot believes that Donald Trump should have threatened (Boot's word, not mine) Vladimir Putin. How does one go about threatening a country with inter-continental nuclear weapons systems that are proven to work?

[Aug 08, 2018] McFaul is talking nonsense

Aug 08, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile August 8, 2018 at 3:10 am

McFaul is talking shit:

First rule of diplomacy– respect the culture and traditions of your your [sic] host country, aka as [sic] the place where you were born.

In Seagal's case, the "host" country to which the "academic" McFaul refers is not "also known as the place where you were born", where "you" is Seagal, to whom McFaul is proffering unsolicited advice.

The place where Seagal was born is the USA: Seagal's host country in this instance is Russia.

If Seagal had truly wished to respect the culture and traditions of his host country, he should have made his statement of acceptance of the post in Russian:

Я глубоко потрясен и польщен назначением специальным представителем российского Министерства иностранных дел по гуманитарным связям с США. Надеюсь, что мы сможем достичь мира, гармонии и положительных результатов в мире. Я очень серьезно отношусь к этой чести.

However, as far as I am aware, Mr. Seagal does not speak Russian, but McFaul does, albeit он несет полную хуйню!

Jen August 8, 2018 at 4:58 am
I see Seagal writes better English than McFaul does.
Mark Chapman August 8, 2018 at 4:06 pm
Oh, yeah, uh huh, McFaul speaks Russian. In fact, he is some kind of jive-talkin' Russian homie, telling his audience that he looked forward to seeing them in 'Yoburg', which is the culture-respectful term for "Yekaterinburg'. That's what got him dubbed "McFuck'. if I recall correctly.

http://exiledonline.com/mister-mcfahk-goes-to-fuckberg-the-continuing-saga-of-amb-michael-mcfauls-epic-struggle-with-language/

[Aug 08, 2018] Teetotalers at as much risk of dementia as excessive drinkers - study

Notable quotes:
"... In fact, researchers found those who abstain from alcohol are 45 percent more likely to develop dementia than those who drink about half a bottle of wine per week. ..."
"... We show that both long term alcohol abstinence and excessive alcohol consumption may increase the risk of dementia. Given the number of people living with dementia is expected to triple by 2050 and the absence of a cure, prevention is key, ..."
"... Moderate alcohol drinkers, meanwhile, have been known to have reduced cholesterol and blood pressure levels, which may protect them from dementia. ..."
"... we should remain cautious and not change current recommendations on alcohol use based solely on epidemiological studies ..."
"... should not motivate people who do not drink to start drinking ..."
Aug 02, 2018 | www.rt.com
People who don't drink alcohol are at as much of a risk of developing dementia as people who drink excessively, according to a new study by researchers who recommend wine as a way to ward off the degenerative brain disease. Middle-aged moderate wine drinkers, in particular, are at a reduced risk of developing dementia in comparison to teetotalers, the study, published in the British Medical Journal, says.

In fact, researchers found those who abstain from alcohol are 45 percent more likely to develop dementia than those who drink about half a bottle of wine per week.

Read more Alcohol may lower Alzheimer's risk, stress increases it in older people - studies

However, the study says people who drink above the recommended alcohol limit of 14 units per week are also at an increased risk of developing dementia.

" We show that both long term alcohol abstinence and excessive alcohol consumption may increase the risk of dementia. Given the number of people living with dementia is expected to triple by 2050 and the absence of a cure, prevention is key, " the study's authors said.

Researchers say it's nearly impossible to definitively determine the effect of alcohol consumption - as it would require a trial in which participants would have to stop drinking or start drinking heavily.

However, previous research has shown non-drinkers are at an increased risk of diabetes and cardiovascular disease, both of which could contribute to dementia.

Moderate alcohol drinkers, meanwhile, have been known to have reduced cholesterol and blood pressure levels, which may protect them from dementia.

The findings are based on a 1985 study involving 9,087 British civil servants aged between 35 and 55. The study assessed participants over an eight-year period in which they analysed the social, behavioral and biological implications alcohol has on long term health.

READ MORE: Jungle juice! Wild chimpanzees regularly drink alcohol, scientists find

The authors say while the study is important to fill gaps in knowledge, " we should remain cautious and not change current recommendations on alcohol use based solely on epidemiological studies ".

The researchers are also careful to say these findings " should not motivate people who do not drink to start drinking " given the detrimental effects alcohol consumption can have on other parts of your health, such as liver disease and cancer.

[Aug 08, 2018] Political War! Washington Goes Full Retard on the Russia Hoax - Antiwar.com Original

Aug 08, 2018 | original.antiwar.com

Political War! Washington Goes Full Retard on the Russia Hoax

by David Stockman Posted on August 08, 2018 August 7, 2018 It's hard to identify anything that's more uncoupled from reality than the Donald's Trade War and reckless Fiscal Debauch. Together they will soon monkey-hammer today's delirious Wall Street revilers and send main street's aging and anemic recovery back into the drink.

Except, except. When it comes to unreality, Trump's crackpot economics is actually more than rivaled by the full retard Russophobia of the MSM, the Dems and the nomenclatura of Imperial Washington.

In fact, their groupthink mania about the alleged Russian attack on American democracy is so devoid of fact, logic, context, proportion and self-awareness as to give the Donald's tweet storms an aura of sanity by comparison.

Their endless obsession with the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with a Russian nobody by the name of Natalia Veselnitskaya proves the point. She was actually in New York doing god's work, as it were, defending a Russian company against hokey money-laundering charges related to the abominable Magnitsky Act and its contemptible promoter, Bill Browder.

The latter had pulled off an epic multi-billion swindle during the wild west days of post-Soviet Russia and was essentially chased from the country in 2005 by Putin for hundreds of millions in tax evasion. Thereafter he turned the murky prison death of his accountant, Sergei Magnitsky, who was also charged with massive tax evasion, into a revenge crusade against Putin.

That resulted in a huge lobbying campaign subsidized by Browder's illicit billions and spearheaded by the Senate's most bloodthirsty trio of warmongers – Senators McCain, Graham and Cardin – to enact the 2012 Magnitsky Act.

The latter, of course, is the very excrescence of Imperial Washington's arrogant meddling in the internal affairs of other countries. It imposes sweeping sanctions on Russians (and other foreigners) deemed complicit in Magnitsky's death in a Russian jail and for other alleged human rights violations in Russia and elsewhere.

Needless to say, imperial pretense doesn't get any more sanctimonious than this. Deep State apparatchiks in the US Treasury Department get to try Russian citizens in absentia and without due process for vaguely worded crimes under American law that were allegedly committed in Russia, and then to seize their property and persons when involved in any act of global commerce where Washington can browbeat local satrapies and "allies" into cooperation!

Only in an imperial capital steeped in self-conferred entitlement to function as global hegemon would such a preposterous extraterritorial arrangement be even thinkable. After all, what happens to Russians in Russian prisons is absolutely none of Washington's business – nor by any stretch of the imagination does it pose any threat whatsoever to America's homeland security.

So the irony of the Trump Tower nothingburger is that the alleged Russian agent was here fighting Washington's meddling in Russia , not hooking up with Trump's campaign to further a Kremlin plot to attack American democracy.

You could properly call this a case of the pot calling the kettle black, but Imperial Washington and its shills among the ranks of Dem politicians and megaphones in the MSM wouldn't get the joke in the slightest. That's because Washington is in the business of meddling in the domestic affairs of virtually every country in the world – friend, foe and also-ran – on a massive scale never before imagined in human history.

That's what the hideously excessive $75 billion budget of the so-called 17-agency "intelligence community" (IC) gets you. To wit, a backdoor into every access point and traffic exchange node on the entire global internet, and from there the ability to hack, surveil, exfiltrate or corrupt the communications of any government, political party, business or private citizen virtually anywhere on the planet.

And, no, this isn't being done for the noble purpose of rooting-out the terrorist needles in the global haystack of communications and Internet traffic. It's done because the IC has the resources to do it and because it has invested itself with endless missions of global hegemony.

These self-serving missions, in turn, justify its existence, keep the politicians of Washington well stocked in scary bedtime stories and, most important of all, ensure that the fiscal gravy train remains loaded to the gills and that the gilded prosperity of the beltway never falters.

Indeed, if Washington were looking for corporate pen name it would be Meddling "R" Us. And we speak here not merely of its vast and secretive spy apparatus, but also of its completely visible everyday intrusions in the affairs of other countries via the billions that are channeled through the National Endowment for Democracy and the vast NGO network funded by the State Department, DOD and other organs of the national security complex.

The $750 million per year Board For International Broadcasting, for example, is purely in the propaganda business; and despite the Cold War's end 27 years ago, still carries out relentless "agit prop" in Russia and among the reincarnated states of the old Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact via Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and the Voice of America.

For example, here is a Voice of America tweet from this morning falsely charging Russia with the occupation of the former Soviet state of Georgia.

In fact, Russia came to the aid of the Russian-speaking population of the breakaway province of South Ossetia in 2008; the latter felt imperiled by the grandiose pretensions of the corrupt Saakashvili government in Tbilisi, which had unilaterally launched an indiscriminate military assault on the major cities of the province.

Moreover, even an EU commission investigation came to that conclusion way back in 2009 shortly after the events that the inhabitants of South Ossetia feared would lead to a genocidal invasion by Georgia's military.

An investigation into last year's Russia-Georgia war delivered a damning indictment of President Mikheil Saakashvili today, accusing Tbilisi of launching an indiscriminate artillery barrage on the city of Tskhinvali that started the war.

In more than 1,000 pages of analysis, documentation and witness statements, the most exhaustive inquiry into the five-day conflict dismissed Georgian claims that the artillery attack was in response to a Russian invasion

The EU-commissioned report, by a fact-finding mission of more than 20 political, military, human rights and international law experts led by the Swiss diplomat, Heidi Tagliavini, was unveiled in Brussels today after nine months of work.

Flatly dismissing Saakashvili's version, the report said: "There was no ongoing armed attack by Russia before the start of the Georgian operation Georgian claims of a large-scale presence of Russian armed forces in South Ossetia prior to the Georgian offensive could not be substantiated

The point is, whatever the rights and wrongs of the statelets and provinces attempting to sort themselves out after the fall of the Soviet Union, this was all happening on Russia's doorsteps and was none of Washington business even at the time. But wasting taxpayer money 10 years later by siding with the revanchist claims of the Georgian government is just plain ludicrous.

It's also emblematic of why the Imperial City is so clueless about the rank hypocrisy implicit in the Russian meddling hoax. Believing that America is the Indispensable Nation and that Washington operates by its own hegemonic rules, they are now Shocked, Shocked! to find that the victims of their blatant intrusions might actually endeavor to fight back.

Even then, the Russophobes have been frantically making a mountain out of a molehill. We investigated the Russian troll farm in St. Petersburg, for example, and found that it was actually the hobby horse of a mid-sized Oligarch. The latter had been minding his own business trolling the Russian Internet, as the oligarchs of that country are wont to do – until the US sponsored coup in Kiev in 2014 became the occasion for Washington's relentless vilification of Russia and Putin.

Accordingly, this particular Russian patriot hired a few dozen students at $3-4 per hour who mostly spoke English as a third-language. Operating on 12-hour shifts, they randomly trolled Facebook and other US based social media, posting crude and sometimes incoherent political messages from virtually all points on the compass – messages that were instantly lost in the great sea of social media trivia and mendacity.

Still, there is no evidence that this two-bit hobby farm was an instrument of Kremlin policy or that its tiny $2 million budget could hold a candle to the $200 million per year round-the-clock propaganda of Voice of America, and multiples thereof by the other Washington propaganda venues.

me title=

In any event, turning the Trump Tower meeting into evidence of Russian meddling and collusion actually gives the old saw about turning a molehill into a mountain an altogether new meaning. That is to say, on any given evening Anderson Cooper will be interviewing a lathered-up ex-general or ex-spook admonishing that Natalia Veselnitskaya was actually a nefarious Russian "cut out" sent by Putin to infiltrate the Trump campaign.

Really?

We have no brief for Vlad Putin, but one thing we are quite sure of is that he is anything but stupid. So would he really send a secret agent to Trump Tower – who neither speaks nor writes a word of English and has been to America only once – in order to plot a surreptitious attempt to manipulate the American election?

The fact is, the meeting happened because Veselnitskaya wanted to reach the Trump campaign in behalf of her anti-Magnitsky Act agenda, and to do so used the good offices of what appears to be the Russian Justin Bieber!

Specifically, the offer came to Don Trump Jr. via a London-based PR flack named Rob Goldstone, a music publicist who knew the Trumps through the Miss Universe pageant that was held in Moscow in 2013. Goldstone didn't know his head from a hole in the ground when it comes to international affairs or Russian politics, but he did represent the Russian pop singer Emin Agalarov, whose father was also a Trump- style real estate developer and had been involved in the 2013 pageant.

Said the London PR flack in an email to Don Jr:

"Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting .The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father .( this is) "part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump."

And a very big so what!

For one thing, the last "Crown prosecutor of Russia" was assassinated by the Bolsheviks in 1917, suggesting Goldstone's grasp of the contemporary Russian government was well less than rudimentary.

Secondly, there was neither a crime nor national security issue involved when a campaign seeks to dig-up dirt from foreign nationals. The crime is when they pay for it, and do not report the expenditure to the Federal Elections Commission.

Of course, that's exactly what Hillary Clinton's campaign did with its multi-million funding of the Trump Dossier, generated by foreign national Christopher Steele and intermediated to the FBI and other IC agencies by Fusion GPS.

And that gets us to the mind-boggling silliness of the whole Trump Tower affair. Self-evidently, the dirt on Hillary suggestion was a come-on so that Veselnitskaya (through her Russian translator) could make a pitch against the Magnitsky Act; and to point out that after 33,000 Russian babies had been adopted by Americans before its enactment, that avenue of adoption had been stopped cold when the Kremlin found it necessary to retaliate.

Don's Jr. emails to his secretary from the meeting long ago proved that he immediately recognized Natalia's bait and switch operation, and that he wanted to be summoned to the phone so he could end what he saw was a complete waste of the campaign's time.

But here's the joker in the woodpile. Its seem that Glenn Simpson, proprietor of Fusion GPs, had also been hired by Veselnitskaya Russian clients to make a case in Washington against the Magnitsky Act, and to also dig up dirt on the scoundrel behind it: Bill Browder.

More fantastically yet, Natalia had meet with Simpson both before and after the Trump Tower meeting apparently to be coached by him on her anti-Magnitsky pitch to the Trump campaign.

So if Veselnitskaya was part of a Russian collusion conspiracy, then so was the Glenn Simpson, the midwife of the Trump Dossier!

It doesn't get any crazier than that – meaning that the Donald could not be more correct about this entire farce:

This is a terrible situation and Attorney General Jeff Sessions should stop this Rigged Witch Hunt right now, before it continues to stain our country any further. Bob Mueller is totally conflicted, and his 17 Angry Democrats that are doing his dirty work are a disgrace to USA!

In truth, the only basis for Natalia Veselnitskaya's alleged Putin ties was through Russia's prosecutor general, Yuri Chaika.

And exactly why was Chaika interested in making American contacts?

Why, because he was pursuing one Bill Browder, fugitive from Russian justice and the driving force behind the abominable Magnitsky Act – an instrument of meddling in the domestic affairs of foreign countries like no other. As one report described it:

Chaika's foray into American politics began in earnest in April 2016. That is when his office gave Republican congressman Dana Rohrabacher and three other US representatives a confidential letter detailing American investor Bill Browder's "illegal scheme of buying up Gazprom shares without permission of the Government of Russia" between 1999 and 2006, one month after Rohrabacher returned from Moscow.

As it happened, Veselnitskaya had apparently brought a memo to the Trump Tower meeting that contained many of the same talking points as one written by Chaika's office two months earlier.

There you have it.

At the heart of the Russian collusion hoax and the wellspring of the current Russophobia is nothing more than a half-baked effort by Russians to tell their side of the Magnitsky story, and to expose the real villain in the piece – a monumentally greedy hedge fund operator who had stolen the Russian people blind and then conveniently gave up his American citizenship so that he would neither do time in a Russian jail or pay taxes in America.

Spoiler Alert for next part: When both economic policy and politics have gone full retard in the Imperial City is there anything which could possibly go wrong – that might pollute the punch bowl on Wall Street?

Stay tuned!

David Stockman was a two-term Congressman from Michigan. He was also the Director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Ronald Reagan. After leaving the White House, Stockman had a 20-year career on Wall Street. He's the author of three books, The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed , The Great Deformation: The Corruption of Capitalism in America and TRUMPED! A Nation on the Brink of Ruin And How to Bring It Back . He also is founder of David Stockman's Contra Corner and David Stockman's Bubble Finance Trader .

Read more by David Stockman

[Aug 08, 2018] Hidden in Plain View in Belgrade Consortiumnews

Notable quotes:
"... The New York Times ..."
"... A good hypothesis is, that Olof Palme was assassinated by a US stay-behind group, consisting of Nazi military and police. ..."
"... I think VG is quite correct in this: it was a test. And the test was of the neocon/humanitarian intervention marriage. Yes, the USA has doe a lot of this sort of thing in its history, but there has always been some opposition inside the USA. This time, they figured it out and "humanitarian bombing" was born. We have seen a lot more humanitarian bombing since. ..."
"... It was Gore, in consultation with Hillary Clinton, who decided to launch the criminal bombing of Serbia, informing PM Primakov after taking a phone call meant for the president. ..."
"... By launching an illegal attack on Russia's ally, the VP and the future Sec. of State, were offering a foreshadowing of the hawkish and belligerent anti-Russian policy that was to follow for the next 17 years. ..."
"... Western populations for the most part are so thoroughly brainwashed they still cling to the belief they live in civilized countries and their militaries keep them safe from barbarians. ..."
"... Gary I agree whole heartedly with every word you wrote. I would add to how intriguing it would be to learn of the high deception played during the passage of the Federal Reserve back in 1913. Then I'd push out of the way those who blocked Claude Pepper from endorsing Henry Wallace into the 1944 Democratic Convention. This alone may have changed the course of the establishment of the CIA, and avoided the disaster that is happening in Palestine to this day. ..."
"... I do believe the assassination era was the biggest turning point, as it sent a strong message to the would be seekers of sane government policies who would incur such tragedy if explored. Joe ..."
"... I believe there are many questions that need answering about NATO. For instance: July 14, 2018 The Diabolical "Work" of NATO and Its Allies: Why Are These War Criminals Still Free? ..."
Aug 08, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

By Vladimir Golstein
 in Belgrade
 Special to Consortium News

Right across the street from my hotel, tucked behind tall office buildings, is the rather large Church of St. Mark. Hidden in St. Mark's shadows is a tiny Russian Orthodox church. The Church of the Holy Trinity, known simply as the Russian Church, is famous for holding the remains of Baron Pyotr Nikolayevich Wrangel , the Russian Civil War leader of the Whites. It is hard to find, but luckily, a friend took me there.

As we were looking around the church, not particularly interested in Wrangel, a couple of Russians asked me to take their picture in front of his tomb. Trying to find a proper angle for the picture, I noticed a small plaque on a wall nearby. It listed the names of Russians who died fighting for Yugoslav Serbs during the conflict with separatist Albanians in Kosovo and the subsequent NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999.

As we left the church, we took a small path toward the top of the park. There we observed another brutal sign of that war: a destroyed building next to the TV center. It too had a plaque. It screamed, " Zashto " (For What? Why?). Below it were the names of all the TV people NATO killed during that attack. In all, as many as 2,500 civilians may have been killed by NATO, according to the then Yugoslav government, though the real number may never be known.

On the one hand, the question Zashto is both idle and provocative. It implies a laceration of wounds, a refusal to forget and to start anew. On the other, there is an obvious need to find an answer to this question simply to prevent future destruction and senseless murders.

We won't find answers to this question in the official narratives, which tell us that the noble Clinton administration decided to stop flagrant violations of human rights in the extremely complex situation in the Yugoslav province of Kosovo by bombing the Serbs into respecting minorities both on its own and on neighboring territories. (In fact the large exodus of Kosovo Albanians to Albania proper only began after NATO bombs started to fall.)

Testing the Limits

Russians who died fighting for Yugoslavia. (Photo by Vladimir Golstein)

Behind these official stories, a much sadder picture emerges. Why did these people die? Why did this NATO operation go ahead without UN Security Council authorization nor proof of self-defense, requirements of the UN Charter? Was it to satisfy the lust for power of U.S. and NATO leaders, of liberal interventionists like Madeleine Albright, Bill Clinton, and Susan Rice? To assuage the Clinton administration's guilt over its failure to respond to the 1994 genocide in Rwanda? Was it to set up America's largest military base in Europe since the Vietnam War, Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo? For American access to Kosovo's vast mineral wealth and other business opportunities, including for Ms. Albright ? Or was it to finally kill off a rather successful Yugoslav experiment in the "third way" between the West and the Soviet Union?

It seems these people had to die for all those reasons and to put into practice the doctrines of responsibility to protect ( R2P ) and full spectrum dominance , doctrines cooked up by liberal interventionists and neocons in Washington. Those who died were essentially guinea pigs of a New World Order experiment to see how far the world could be pushed to implement R2P, a policy that could be used to mask imperial ambitions.

And it worked. Yugoslavia was unable to stand up to the power of NATO operating outside the mandate of its obsolete charter: namely to defend Western Europe against an alleged Soviet threat. Indeed one could argue that with the Cold War over, another motive for the attack on Yugoslavia was to provide NATO with a justification to exist. (It would later go even further afield outside its legal theater of operation, into Afghanistan and then Libya.)

Russia could do little to help the Serbs. Then the Chinese Embassy was hit as well, as a test it seems, though The New York Times said it was a mistake. The Chinese did nothing.

Thus was R2P implemented -- with no protection for Yugoslav Serbs. They had to die in the experiment to explore the limits of U.S. power and the limits of its resistance.

Vladimir Golstein, a former associate professor at Yale University, manages the Department of Slavic Studies at Brown University and is a commentator on Russian affairs.

Noel cowling , August 7, 2018 at 4:16 pm

If my memory serves me correctly, President Bill Clinton had set up a summit meeting with Russian President Yevgeny Primakov here in the USA. Primakov was in flight on his way here for that summit meeting when President of Vice, Al Gore, without Clinton's permission or knowledge, called Primakov, in flight, to tell him NATO had decided to bomb Kosovo. Primakov immediately ordered his plane to turn around and return to Russia, thus cancelling the summit meeting...

Aurora , August 7, 2018 at 8:55 pm

In Russia that is known as "The Primakov Loop."

rosemerry , August 6, 2018 at 3:57 pm

Thanks Vladimir. The Serbs are demonized by so many, especially the Germans-many believe it was because they fought so valiantly against the Nazis in WW2. Diana Johnstone has written "Fools' Crusade- Yugoslavia, NATO and Western Delusions", and Michel Collon "Media Lies and the Conquest of Kosovo", but books with this point of view are not readily publicised. Nor is the fact that after his death (no trial had yet taken place) Slobodan Milosovic was finally found nOT to have been responsible for all the murderous acts he was accused/assumed to be responsible for.

We can note now of course the Russian reaction to the "annexation of Crimea" after a referendum, no bloodshed and the referendum also of Russians all over the Federation, while Kosovo was ripped from Serbia by trickery and not consent, and we see how it is now. Russia is sanctioned, the people who overthrew the Ukrainian government are not mentioned, Crimea is not allowed to return to Russia. Slight difference from the "nation" of Kososvo!

Thomas Binder , August 6, 2018 at 6:35 am

The war against #Serbia under #R2P was the #MilitaryIndustrialFinancialMedialComplex'es ruling the #USA/#NATO/#ISR/#SAU empire (#PNAC's) test for eternal war against #AlQaeda outside international law & interference of #USLegislators for getting full-spectrum dominance.

Jackson , August 5, 2018 at 2:21 pm

NATO should have been disbanded after the fall of the Soviets. When you arm people and train them to kill, they will look for an enemy to fight. War becomes inevitable.

jose , August 5, 2018 at 6:00 pm

It is hard to disagree with your post. Nato, disgracefully, has become a terrorist organization that has dedicated itself to be the paw of the western elite. Shamefully, other countries have joined Yugoslavia as victims of Nato criminality. Well done Jackson.

Björn Lindgren , August 5, 2018 at 7:25 am

FOR REASON OF STATE, FOR REASON OF INTEREST

There might be still more reasons for the destruction of Yugoslavia.

Germany had put its mind into destabilizing Yugoslavia to get a "Hinterland". Added to this, a revenge motive: Nazi Germany occupation of Yugoslavia failed, and this has never been forgotten. And lastly, Yugoslavia was a member of the non-alignment movement, not obeying US-NATO.

And, of course, after the collapse of the Warsaw pact, NATO had no enemy, no purpose. But, it invented one: full US spectrum global dominance.

Sweden has also been punished to obey the US.

During the years of PM Olof Palme, Sweden was also a member of the non-alignment movement. Palme was educated in and friendly to the US, but critized the US war in Vietnam. (Nixon hated Palme, and withdraw the US diplomats from Sweden).

1992 foreign submarines penetrated Swedish waters repeatedly.

The submarine incident at Hårsfjärden, a marine base, was not made by Russia, but was made by US and British submarines. Afterwards, both Caspar Weinberger and Sir Keith Speed confirmed this. Weinberger even thanked Sweden for not blowing up the US mini-sub (which we could have done. (Read, "Hårsfjärden. Det hemliga ubåtskriget mot Sverige," by Ola Tunander).

Purpose: pushing Sweden westward.

Already in the mid 50s, William Colby, later head of the CIA, was in Sweden organizing stay-behind groups, recruting Swedish voluntary ex-soldiers from the Finnish wars against Soviet Union. In the 50-s these people were organized in "Sveaborg", a Nazi group.

A good hypothesis is, that Olof Palme was assassinated by a US stay-behind group, consisting of Nazi military and police.

Which, of course, had to be stonewalled "for reason of state". Today, Sweden is "cooperating" shamelessly with NATO, invite, and have excersices with NATO. This week, the Swedish government annonced that it will purchase US "Patriot" anti-missiles with "ballistic capability" (Hey, hey!).

Supporting the insane belligerent US and UK nuclear armament (for a nuclear first-strike?) against neoliberal, oligarchic Russia, which is planning to keep up in the race towards the abyss. That is, Sweden is now d e f a c t o a member of NATO, without the Swedish people or parliament have had a say. NATO which eventually is falling apart, and with a lunatic US president and his military government in the White House, in a US empire collapsing. The peace aspirations of Sweden are long forgotten. And so, is the Helsinki Conference and agreement (1975-1983) for common security, disarmamanet , and a nuclear-free zone in Europe.

The question is if Germany, France, UK (with Corbyn in 10 Downing) and Russia will organize a new Helsinki Conference and Agreement?

Maybe, "for reasons of interest".

--

rosemerry , August 6, 2018 at 4:01 pm

Thanks so much for this comprehensive addition to the discussion. Sweden indeed has been placed in an invidious position. Pretending that NATO has any purpose even vaguely related to peace is laughable.

David G , August 6, 2018 at 6:01 pm

Great comment, Björn Lindgren. Many thanks.

The withering away of Swedish neutrality into an empty formality has become so obvious, but never remarked upon in the U.S. I'm sure most cable TV talking heads just assume Sweden is in NATO – indeed, I've heard the error made, albeit corrected after the next commercial break.

I appreciate reading your committed, highly informed perspective. Maybe you could submit an article on this under-reported subject to Consortium News?

Zivadin Jovanovic , August 5, 2018 at 4:54 am

Excellent article in the eve of 20th anniversary of NATO aggression on Yugoslavia which will be marked by Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals, March 23, 24rth, 2019.

NATO 1999 aggression was meant to be precedent and turning point in global conduct toward globalization of military interventionism (Avganistan, Iraq, Libya, etc.). Willy Wimmer wrote to Schoerder on May 2nd, 2000, USA position: "The war against Yugoslavia was conducted in order to correct the mistake of General Eisenhower from the 2ndWW. Subsequently, for strategic reasons, USA troops had to be stationed there ". And: "It is clear that it is the precedent to be recalled any time" The Bondstil base in Kosovo was only the first in the ensuing chain of new USA bases in Bulgaria (4), Rumania (4), Albania (2), Baltic states

Patrick Armstrong , August 4, 2018 at 5:30 pm

I think VG is quite correct in this: it was a test. And the test was of the neocon/humanitarian intervention marriage. Yes, the USA has doe a lot of this sort of thing in its history, but there has always been some opposition inside the USA. This time, they figured it out and "humanitarian bombing" was born. We have seen a lot more humanitarian bombing since.

Branko Mikasinovich , August 4, 2018 at 4:45 pm

A great and truthful article about Western Policy, NATO and US. A courageous and informative analysis of Mr. Golstein. Thank you.

ToivoS , August 4, 2018 at 1:18 pm

Goldstein writes Russia could do little to help the Serbs. Then the Chinese Embassy was hit as well, as a test it seems, though The New York Times said it was a mistake. The Chinese did nothing.

Actually the Chinese did do something. They changed their attitude towards the US. I have yet to meet a Chinese national who believes that the embassy hit was a "mistake". They and their government view it as a deliberate attack on their sovereignty. But they realized they were not in a position respond so they then began military planning for possible conflict between China and the US Navy in the Western Pacific. In 2000 they started a 10 plan to achieve the ability to sink any US aircraft carrier within a 1000 km of their shores. We won't know if they have achieved that ability until a real test is conducted. But that is the something they have done.

FB , August 8, 2018 at 9:24 am

Good point Toivos The Chinese have never forgotten the Belgrade embassy bombing and they never will. Ask any Chinese today, even those living in the West the Chinese are an ancient people with a long and proud memory the embassy bombing was a step too far. All of these hubristic missteps will come back to haunt the empire

Theo , August 4, 2018 at 10:51 am

I remember well the NATO bombings of Yugoslavia under the pretext to stop the genocide that was allegedly committed by the Serbs. The saddest thing for me was that Germany was participating in the bombing campaign. My father who was in Yugoslavia as a Wehrmacht soldier was outraged as were many others. After almost sixty years German bombers were over Serbia again. My dad used to say German soldiers on foreign soil had never been good neither for the foreign country nor for Germany. That's why until today the Germans have an aversion to all military and the deployment of German soldiers in foreign countries is not very popular.

David G , August 4, 2018 at 11:16 am

The 1999 air attacks were the coup de grace, but I think Germany had the (dis)honor of leading the vivisection of Yugoslavia from the start.

As Vladimir Golstein rhetorically asks: "Or was it to finally kill off a rather successful Yugoslav experiment in the 'third way' between the West and the Soviet Union?"

Indeed it was, and that surely appealed to all the Western powers. But Germany was particularly interested in removing a possible continental rival, and took the lead in making sure it happened – not at all to absolve the U.S., under whose aegis it was ultimately operating.

Antiwar7 , August 4, 2018 at 11:42 am

The German people and the German government are different. The German government has had an anti-Serb animus for over 150 years: that's clear. But the German people, as Theo's dad shows, can be very nice. My father was a POW in Germany for 4 years during WWII, and most of the German people he encountered were quite nice to him.

Theo , August 4, 2018 at 3:56 pm

You are right. The vivisection of Yugoslavia began when Germany recognized the independence of Slovenia before any other country did. The German government with Genscher as foreign minister didn't consult with any of the European allies. Especially France was not amused at all.

rosemerry , August 6, 2018 at 4:04 pm

It was Germany, 9 days after reunification, which led the removal of Croatia from Yugoslavia and beginning the breakup of a successful multicultural country.

Juan P. Zenter , August 4, 2018 at 7:29 am

Yugoslavia was a federation of states and was, thus, an obstacle to consolidating EU and NATO power in Southeastern Europe. Once the federation was destroyed, the individual states that comprised it could be absorbed by EU/NATO. That was the ultimate outcome of NATO bombing there, despite all denials about that being the intent.

Jessika , August 4, 2018 at 5:30 am

Thanks for the article, the photo of the beautiful church, and the reflection on this horrible chapter from the book of atrocities disguised as "humanitarian" to fool the masses. This also helped Bill and Hillary Clinton distract the American public from the Monica Lewinsky affair.

j. D. D. , August 4, 2018 at 7:59 pm

I don't see it that way. Rather, as President Clinton was hit with the Lewinsky scandal and put on the defensive immediately following his speech to NY's Council on Foreign Relations in which he called for "a new world financial archithitecture," VP Al Gore, who later shunned the president, saw the opportunity to determine policy. It was Gore, in consultation with Hillary Clinton, who decided to launch the criminal bombing of Serbia, informing PM Primakov after taking a phone call meant for the president. Whereupon the PM turned around his flight in mid-air over the Atlantic and returned to Russia. By launching an illegal attack on Russia's ally, the VP and the future Sec. of State, were offering a foreshadowing of the hawkish and belligerent anti-Russian policy that was to follow for the next 17 years.

FB , August 8, 2018 at 9:31 am

Disagree these are minor details that are meaningless. Yugoslavia had already been systematically dismembered starting the very instant after German unification and the fall of the Soviet Union. Coincidence ? Maybe a child could believe it by 1999, the final chapter of the dismemberment, Kosovo, was ready, after several years of laying careful groundwork of subversion, propaganda and agitation

The Nato war of aggression in 1999 would have proceeded no matter what to think that the Lewisnky nonsense had anything to do with anything is ridiculous

nonsense factory , August 3, 2018 at 11:50 pm

One major factor in the NATO bombing and the overall agenda in the region was control of territory for a proposed gas/oil pipeline export route from Central Asia to Europe. The creation of Camp Bondsteel was directly related to that goal, and the chief contractor (KBR-Halliburton) played the same role there that they did in the construction of numerous military bases in Iraq after the 2003 invasion.

That's been a dominant theme in U.S. foreign policy and military strategy circles ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Numerous routes have been proposed – trans-Afghanistan pipeline, the Nabucco pipeline, etc., all with the same goal – getting Central Asia fossil fuels (leased to US and British majors like Exxon, Chevron, BP, etc.) to global markets while bypassing Iran and Russia.

Monbiot in the Guardian, 2001 (when it was still a fairly decent paper, rather than a gung-ho enforcer of the Blairite neoliberal agenda), said this:

"For the past few weeks, a freelance researcher called Keith Fisher has been doggedly documenting a project which has, as far as I can discover, has been little-reported in any British, European or American newspaper. It is called the Trans-Balkan pipeline, and it's due for approval at the end of next month. Its purpose is to secure a passage for oil from the Caspian sea. . ."

"In November 1998, Bill Richardson, then US energy secretary, spelt out his policy on the extraction and transport of Caspian oil. "This is about America's energy security," he explained. "It's also about preventing strategic inroads by those who don't share our values. We're trying to move these newly independent countries toward the west. We would like to see them reliant on western commercial and political interests rather than going another way. We've made a substantial political investment in the Caspian, and it's very important to us that both the pipeline map and the politics come out right. . ."

Paul Stuart, in the WSWS, 2002, noted:

"According to leaked comments to the press, European politicians now believe that the US used the bombing of Yugoslavia specifically in order to establish Camp Bondsteel. Before the start of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999, the Washington Post insisted, "With the Middle-East increasingly fragile, we will need bases and fly over rights in the Balkans to protect Caspian Sea oil.""
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2002/04/oil-a29.html

Forward project of American imperial power in the name of control of energy resources and the cash flows arising from them, in a nutshell. Or, "business as usual since the 1950s". Since JFK, it's all been done under the cover of "humanitarian intervention" and "protecting democracy" which is why so many American citizens have no idea what the true aims of these wars have really been

MH , August 7, 2018 at 2:13 pm

Sadly, Monbiot's column aside, the Guardian's coverage of what most of us here think of as a war against Yugoslav independence was unabashedly pro-NATO and anti-Serb. The outlet did it's best to confuse otherwise war skeptical liberals -- by demonizing the Serbs as bloodthirsty savages purveying late 1930s genocide -- about the true character of "the west's" aggression against the Serbs. Unlike Iraq, where the Graundiad reversed their pro-war stance, the paper only doubled down on its anti-Serb biases, culminating in trumpets and coronets for Hague's prosecutors ludicrously inept (at best) handling of Milosevic's trial.

Bob Van Noy , August 3, 2018 at 8:11 pm

Thank you Vladimir Golstein for this article. I'm sure you know the answers to the questions you ask in the paragraph titled "Testing the Limlts". The answer to each of them is given to us and to the world in F. William Engdahl's devastating book entitled "Manifest Destiny" : Democracy as Cognitive Dissonance. I say devastating because Mr. Engdahl thoroughly describes a series of American administrations responsible for all of these crimes and more.

It will be up to us (American Citizens) to educate ourselves as to the real history of our government acting secretly, without broad consensus, and illegally. This article is a good beginning but the discussion needs to be broadened and further documented. Then we can begin to find a resolution.

https://www.amazon.com/Manifest-Destiny-Democracy-Cognitive-Dissonance/dp/3981723732/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1533341271&sr=8-1&keywords=f.+william+engdahl

Jimbobla , August 3, 2018 at 6:55 pm

How one can wonder how the German population stood aside while the Nazis committed their atrocities while at the same time not speaking out at our own apparent daily military excesses is beyond me.

irina , August 4, 2018 at 12:01 am

Not to mention meekly paying for these daily military excesses, with no protest.

christina garcia , August 4, 2018 at 1:02 am

here is an historical answer, My Grandfather and Grandmother were born in Koenigsberg Prussia what is now known as Kaliningrad. The City of Emanuel Kant and not quite in the 1930's fans of National Socialism. My Grandfather owned a brick factory and a saw mill . They were capitalists, not National Socialists. And you JIMBOBLA , fyi, My Opa was caught by the Russian Army 1943, my family was totally disunited. It took the Red Cross 3 years to find my family members and repatriate them .The Nazi organization disliked capitalism . I can prove every single sentence I wrote. Please be careful when you write Nazism

Sam F , August 4, 2018 at 8:48 am

If you disagree, you should really address the issue of "how the German population stood aside while the Nazis committed their atrocities." Are you arguing that Nazi atrocities were justified by the USSR dispersing a family in 1943 Kaliningrad, during a war in which Nazis killed over 20 million Russians? It would be interesting to hear an argument with substance and references.

christina garcia , August 4, 2018 at 1:04 am

it is beyond you because you never experienced these atrocities

Milojkovic , August 5, 2018 at 8:11 pm

Dear Christina, I am very sorry about what happened to your family. They probably didn't have a choice, otherwise the Nazis would have hurt them. Maybe you'd have never been born if they dared to resist actively. Probably good people, unfairly caught in the whirlwind of history and human brutality. They were then retaliated against by other Nazi victims without deserving so, just because of their ethnicity. I am a Serb, living in U.S. Trust me, I can relate. I was here in U.S. during those terrible days of 1999, living through them as if in a daze. Life is now "kinda back to normal", but I try my best not to think just how big a part of me had died in that bombing. My grandfather, who was just a peasant but a very devoted Christian, died in a horrible pain from the terminal stomach cancer because there was no pain medication for him; plus the pharmaceutical factories were bombed after having been accused of being able to produce chemical weapons in a coordinated NATO propaganda just days before. In agony, he was trying to undress himself, and was screaming and running around the garden. Several of our family members were killed by Wehrmacht in WW II. I think that Germany had no business participating in this bombing. Look up Varvarin bridge. It was shameful. And yes, unfortunately, it was a German hand holding the match that lit up the powder keg that was Yugoslavia in early 90's.

Consortium's Fan , August 7, 2018 at 10:28 am

Did YOU, Christina Garcia, experience atrocities? Judging by you comment, I am confidently saying you DIDN'T. You know NOTHING about atrocities. Read and watch films about Nazi doings. And compare them to "dispersing a family" in a wartime. A recent film worth seeing is SOBIBOR, entirely based on archives, – a Nazi concentration camp in Poland's Sobibor – hence the name. Educate yourself.

Lois Gagnon , August 3, 2018 at 5:37 pm

Western populations for the most part are so thoroughly brainwashed they still cling to the belief they live in civilized countries and their militaries keep them safe from barbarians. Unf*cking believable.

rosemerry , August 6, 2018 at 4:11 pm

The likelihood of damage being caused by the USA NOT intervening anywhere must be vanishingly small!!!!!

Realist , August 3, 2018 at 5:24 pm

To U.S. authorities, foreign lives simply do not matter. No need to conduct any "intelligence assessment" to determine their culpability. They shamelessly commit mass murder right out in the open with impunity.

Jean , August 3, 2018 at 6:14 pm

What makes you think USA lives matter to them. I see no evidence of that either.

Realist , August 3, 2018 at 11:39 pm

Nothing makes me think that. Why do you think I chose the phraseology that I did? It gained currency in reaction to the murderous abuses by American police on our own streets.

LarcoMarco , August 4, 2018 at 1:50 pm

It gained currency when that other Donald (Rumsfeld) essentially said that G.I's were cannon fodder.

REDPILLED , August 4, 2018 at 4:54 pm

That despicable attitude long predates war criminal Rumsfeld: "Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy."? Henry Kissinger

Drew Hunkins , August 3, 2018 at 5:17 pm

Michael Parenti's book "To Kill a Nation" is the best book on the criminal NATO war on Yugoslavia. Followed closely by Diana Johnstone's seminal book "Fool's Crusade."

Antiwar7 , August 4, 2018 at 11:45 am

Agreed: those are excellent books, the best English language works on the breakup of Yugoslavia.

dj anderson , August 3, 2018 at 4:57 pm

Thank you for this article. Noam Chomsky also bravely gave a fine accounting. https://chomsky.info/200005__/

Jeff Harrison , August 3, 2018 at 4:55 pm

One wonders how many times these sorts of things have to happen, and fail before the rest of the world says enough of your bullshit, "West".

REDPILLED , August 4, 2018 at 4:59 pm

The rest of the world has already passed judgment on the imperialistic, war-waging U.S.: Polls: US Is 'the Greatest Threat to Peace in the World Today'
https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/08/07/polls-us-greatest-threat-to-peace-world-today.html

Joe Tedesky , August 3, 2018 at 4:50 pm

Isn't it sad that the most enduring monuments the U.S. is leaving for it's worldly legacy are but artifacts of war and destruction. We could have done much better than this.

Gary Weglarz , August 3, 2018 at 8:25 pm

Joe – Exactly. I sometimes find myself thinking the "what if" to the U.S. mayhem of just my own lifetime. "What if" the CIA hadn't coordinated the assassinations of JFK and Lumumba, as well as of course the murder or overthrow of dozens of elected leaders in former colonies who simply aspired to helping their own people, rather than acting as proxies to the continuing pillage by U.S. & Western capitalism. What if instead those leaders were allowed to lead their nations into a non-aligned world and not forced to be beholden to either the U.S. or Soviet systems by threats of U.S. military and economic violence? What if Malcolm and MLK and RFK had not been murdered by forces connected to the U.S. ruling institutions, and had instead by now had become elder statesmen in a more humane and democratic U.S. system that would stand in stark contrast to the insane neoliberal capitalist freak show which has been forced upon the world, and who's mystical – "invisible hand" – can be found tightly wrapped around the throats of the poor everywhere?

Yes Joe I agree, I think we could have lived in a very different world had not the greed and pathology of U.S. and Western oligarchy quite intentionally and violently destroyed any possibility of a more humane and egalitarian world by routinely murdering those more humane leaders who could have helped us reach it. That possibility of a more humane world was replaced instead with the odious Maggie Thatcher's "there is no alternative" global nightmare of continued neocolonial pillage euphemistically called neoliberal capitalism. Only the fine-tuning of the rational for mass murder has changed. Now we have "duty to protect" – which translated from 'newspeak' means = "we now must bomb and kill you because we care about you so very, very much." Sort of a Western postmodern version of earlier justifications for slaughtering the indigenous in order to – "save their souls" I suppose. We in the West have created this current version of global "reality" through absolutely amoral unrelenting mass violence over 500+ years now, and sadly there does not seem to be any real evidence of a change of heart or direction in our global mayhem.

Joe Tedesky , August 3, 2018 at 9:24 pm

Gary I agree whole heartedly with every word you wrote. I would add to how intriguing it would be to learn of the high deception played during the passage of the Federal Reserve back in 1913. Then I'd push out of the way those who blocked Claude Pepper from endorsing Henry Wallace into the 1944 Democratic Convention. This alone may have changed the course of the establishment of the CIA, and avoided the disaster that is happening in Palestine to this day.

Thatcher & Reagan surly introduced us into this new economy which is often said to be doing so great, and there we are ruined by an overly eager Fed lender along with an out of sight Defense budget. Your job isn't there, and with that you are told to blame the union. Ah, the Union wasn't that what Margaret & Ronny sabotaged eventually . nice work.

I do believe the assassination era was the biggest turning point, as it sent a strong message to the would be seekers of sane government policies who would incur such tragedy if explored. Joe

Gary Weglarz , August 3, 2018 at 11:11 pm

Joe – I quite agree. The assassination era was the huge turning point, but as you point out the corruption and manipulation of democracy by the oligarchy goes way back. Yes, imagine if Wallace had been the VP for FDR? Had Wallace's nomination not been sabotaged, perhaps the Dulles brothers would have spent their remaining time on earth learning woodworking skills in prison workshop after being convicted for the treason of their Nazi dealings – instead of leading the CIA and State Dept. into the corrupt secrecy of multiple regime changes, assassinations, and endless insane cold war posturing. The Dulles CIA era, including it's loving embrace of the Nazi war criminals, seems to have a been in retrospect a very dark prelude leading up to the assassination era to follow. Ike certainly had some foreboding of the evil to come given his parting comments.

REDPILLED , August 4, 2018 at 5:04 pm

A brief recommended reading list:

Bob Van Noy , August 4, 2018 at 8:35 am

Joe and Gary, very nice and well informed thread, thank you. Clearly we all share the history that both of you mentioned and we also see through the now crumbling obfuscation. It will become our new duty to use that past experience and a new hope to help make an official case for correcting the official record and reclaiming Democracy. Actually it's a worthy endeavor and we're uniquely positioned to help

Consortium's Fan , August 7, 2018 at 10:42 am

"Sort of a Western postmodern version of earlier justifications for slaughtering the indigenous in order to – "save their souls" I suppose."

Or even earlier justifications (by the Holy Inquisition in the Middle Ages) to burn people alive to "save their souls".

Realist , August 4, 2018 at 6:03 pm

Excellent point, Joe. I wonder how different the history books will look if this country somehow manages to shed the warmongering hegemonists who have been in control for at least the last 70 years (or, one might argue, from its inception).

I'd also like to see an English translation of the current world history books, used in the schools of China, Russia, Iran, India, Pakistan, Cuba, Vietnam or dozens of other countries not part of the American World Empire. I'll bet American actions and motives are not portrayed to be as noble and pure as the driven snow. I'll bet even Mexico has a quite different take. Canada? You stopped our invasion in 1812, aided the slaves sent to you via the Underground Railway and refused to cooperate in the Vietnam fiasco. What happened since then? Now you extradite AWOL GI's who don't want to go back to the numerous "sand boxes" we play in. I'll bet those books, if ever published in English, would not be allowed on public library shelves in the U.S.

Stephen J. , August 3, 2018 at 4:45 pm

Interesting article.

I believe there are many questions that need answering about NATO. For instance: July 14, 2018 The Diabolical "Work" of NATO and Its Allies: Why Are These War Criminals Still Free?

NATO's recent meeting or summit in Brussels July 11 – 12, 2018, could be described as a gathering of heinous hypocrites. [1] There are millions of people dead, millions are refugees, their countries have been destroyed and our ruling hypocrites spout the words "rule of law." Has there ever been a gang of human reptiles (are they even human?) so evil, dressed in expensive suits [and dresses] and operating out of houses of power called "parliaments" and other houses of ill repute? These criminals, or gangsters, or bandits, or reprobates (Add your own epithet) are up to their filthy necks in the blood of the victims of their planned carnage.

Yet it was reported: "The summit will also discuss the fight against terrorism." Gee! Does that statement about fighting "terrorism" smack of hypocrisy? There is evidence that NATO and its members have, in fact, been consorting with, and supporting, terrorists. [2]
[much more info at link below]
http://graysinfo.blogspot.com/2018/07/the-diabolical-work-of-nato-and-its.html

[Aug 08, 2018] At some point the Western Powers decided the that old Communist Apparachik Milosevic would be the Bad Guy and the Croatian freedom-loving "our bastards" the good guys to be internationally recognized and thus enflamed the passion of secession.

Notable quotes:
"... At some point the Western Powers decided the that old Communist Apparachik Milosevic would be the Bad Guy and the Croatian freedom-loving "our bastards" the good guys to be internationally recognized and thus enflamed the passion of secession. The thing just flew apart. And afterwards we had to bomb the country in order to save it. ..."
Aug 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

Sic Semper , August 8, 2018 at 1:37 pm GMT

I vividly recall the 1984 Winter Olympics in Sarajevo. I was nine-years-old and we were not wired for cable then. There also was no remote control for the 27″ Zenith color console. I was forced to watch some of the coverage for those reasons. Sarajevo was held up as a utopian city where Serbs, Croats and Muslims all lived in a beautiful city peacefully.

It was so beautiful said the announcers. And in less than a decade that Olympic stadium was turned into a cemetery as those peaceful Croats, Serbs and Muslims slaughtered each other. Once the Soviet Army withdrew from Yugoslavia and the nation disintegrated back into its ethnic lines, the killings started.

Imagine what is coming in the United States where the simmering hatreds are invited and exploited by not three distinct groups, but hundreds. Image what is to come when "historically aggrieved" peoples who have been weaponized for generations to despise their non-homogenous neighbors.

The erasure of common nationhood and the instilling of grievance as a caste system will see the US descend into chaotic slaughter the likes of which have never been seen before.

When Pakistan separated from India after the British pulled out, Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus slaughtered each other, stopping trains filled with refugees being repatriated into their new nations and slaughtering every one of them. Americans have been so denuded of historical understanding that these histories are unknown.

The malevolence of humanity seething just under the surface until the opportunity arises for it to burst forth is forgotten by placated propagandized people. What people in world history have been more propagandized and placated than Americans who have been viewing carefully crafted scripts since their eyes were first able to focus on a tv screen and whose desperately poor are morbidly obese?

Stocking a warehouse to the rafters with volatile materials, packing them in so tightly until they near critical mass, now add in some agitation -- and light a match. The most devastating weapon ever devised in not the hydrogen bomb, it is a population bomb. A 100 megaton nuclear weapon destroys cleanly -- one flash and a wind storm -- it's all over aside from lingering sunshine units. In a thousand years the land will forget what had happened.

A population bomb where the very people have been weaponized will prove far more devastating and remain scarring the land for eons and that common memory lives on in the survivors igniting anew every few decades.

El Dato , Next New Comment August 8, 2018 at 2:04 pm GMT
@Sic Semper

Once the Soviet Army withdrew from Yugoslavia and the nation disintegrated back into its ethnic lines, the killings started.

That never happened though because the Soviet Army was never in Yugoslavia in the first place. It was Tito who maintained order with an iron fist.

At some point the Western Powers decided the that old Communist Apparachik Milosevic would be the Bad Guy and the Croatian freedom-loving "our bastards" the good guys to be internationally recognized and thus enflamed the passion of secession. The thing just flew apart. And afterwards we had to bomb the country in order to save it.

I vaguely remember a pretty explanation in First Do No Harm: Humanitarian Intervention and the Destruction of Yugoslavia by David N. Gibbs

[Aug 08, 2018] The Utility of the RussiaGate Conspiracy

Images deleted...
Notable quotes:
"... The election of Donald Trump came as a shock to many ( Independent , 11/5/16 ). ..."
"... The Washington Post ( 11/24/16 ) was one of the first media outlets to blame the election results on Russian "fake news." ..."
"... Thomas Friedman ( Morning Joe , 2/14/18 ) pointedly compared email hacking to events that the US responded to with major wars. ..."
"... Outlets like Slate ( 5/11/18 ) warned of a sinister connection between Black Lives Matter and Russia. ..."
"... "We are at war," Morgan Freeman assures us on behalf of the Committee to Investigate Russia. ..."
Jul 27, 2018 | fair.org

New McCarthyism allows corporate media to tighten grip, Democrats to ignore their own failings Alan MacLeod

The election of Donald Trump came as a shock to many ( Independent , 11/5/16 ).

To the shock of many, Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential elections, becoming the 45th president of the United States. Not least shocked were corporate media, and the political establishment more generally; the Princeton Election Consortium confidently predicted an over 99 percent chance of a Clinton victory, while MSNBC 's Rachel Maddow ( 10/17/16 ) said it could be a "Goldwater-style landslide."

Indeed, Hillary Clinton and her team actively attempted to secure a Trump primary victory, assured that he would be the easiest candidate to beat. The Podesta emails show that her team considered even before the primaries that associating Trump with Vladimir Putin and Russia would be a winning strategy and employed the tactic throughout 2016 and beyond.

With Clinton claiming , "Putin would rather have a puppet as president," Russia was by far the most discussed topic during the presidential debates ( FAIR.org , 10/13/16 ), easily eclipsing healthcare, terrorism, poverty and inequality. Media seized upon the theme, with Paul Krugman ( New York Times , 7/22/16 ) asserting Trump would be a " Siberian candidate," while ex-CIA Director Michael Hayden ( Washington Post , 5/16/16 ) claimed Trump would be Russia's "useful fool."

The day after the election, Jonathan Allen's book Shattered detailed, Clinton's team decided that the proliferation of Russian-sponsored "fake news" online was the primary reason for their loss.

Within weeks, the Washington Post ( 11/24/16 ) was publicizing the website PropOrNot.com , which purports to help users differentiate sources as fake or genuine, as an invaluable tool in the battle against fake news ( FAIR.org , 12/1/16 , 12/8/16 ). The website soberly informs its readers that you see news sources critiquing the "mainstream media," the EU, NATO, Obama, Clinton, Angela Merkel or other centrists are a telltale sign of Russian propaganda. It also claims that when news sources argue against foreign intervention and war with Russia, that's evidence that you are reading Kremlin-penned fake news.

The Washington Post ( 11/24/16 ) was one of the first media outlets to blame the election results on Russian "fake news."

PropOrNot claims it has identified over 200 popular websites that "routinely peddle Russian propaganda." Included in the list were Wikileaks , Trump-supporting right-wing websites like InfoWars and the Drudge Report , libertarian outlets like the Ron Paul Institute and Antiwar.com , and award-winning anti-Trump (but also Clinton-critical) left-wing sites like TruthDig and Naked Capitalism . Thus it was uniquely news sources that did not lie in the fairway between Clinton Democrats and moderate Republicans that were tarred as propaganda.

PropOrNot calls for an FBI investigation into the news sources listed. Even its creators see the resemblance to a new McCarthyism, as it appears as a frequently asked question on their website. (They say it is not McCarthyism, because "we are not accusing anyone of lawbreaking, treason, or 'being a member of the Communist Party.'") However, this new McCarthyism does not stem from the conservative right like before, but from the establishment center.

That the list is so evidently flawed and its creators refuse to reveal their identities or funding did not stop the issue becoming one of the most discussed in mainstream circles. Media talk of fake news sparked organizations like Google , Facebook , Bing and YouTube to change their algorithms, ostensibly to combat it.

However, one major effect of the change has been to hammer progressive outlets that challenge the status quo. The Intercept reported a 19 percent reduction in Google search traffic, AlterNet 63 percent and Democracy Now! 36 percent. Reddit and Twitter deleted thousands of accounts, while in what came to be called the "AdPocalypse," YouTube began demonetizing videos from independent creators like Majority Report and the Jimmy Dore Show on controversial political topics like environmental protests, war and mass shootings. (In contrast, corporate outlets like CNN did not have their content on those subjects demonetized.) Journalists that questioned aspects of the Russia narrative, like Glenn Greenwald and Aaron Maté, were accused of being agents of the Kremlin ( Shadowproof , 7/9/18 ).

The effect has been to pull away the financial underpinnings of alternative media that question the corporate state and capitalism in general, and to reassert corporate control over communication, something that had been loosened during the election in particular. It also impels liberal journalists to prove their loyalty by employing sufficiently bellicose and anti-Russian rhetoric, lest they also be tarred as Kremlin agents.

Thomas Friedman ( Morning Joe , 2/14/18 ) pointedly compared email hacking to events that the US responded to with major wars.

When it was reported in February that 13 Russian trolls had been indicted by a US grand jury for sharing and promoting pro-Trump and anti-Clinton memes on Facebook , the response was a general uproar. Multiple senior political figures declared it an "act of war." Clinton herself described Russian interference as a " cyber 9/11 ," while Thomas Friedman said that it was a " Pearl Harbor–scale event ." Morgan Freeman's viral video, produced by Rob Reiner's Committee to Investigate Russia, summed up the outrage: "We have been attacked," the actor declared ; "We are at war with Russia." Liberals declared Trump's refusal to react in a sufficiently aggressive manner further proof he was Putin's puppet.

The McCarthyist wave swept over other politicians that challenged the liberal center. Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein refused to endorse the Russia narrative, leading mainstream figures like Rachel Maddow to insinuate she was a Kremlin stooge as well. After news broke that Stein's connection to Russia was being officially investigated, top Clinton staffer Zac Petkanas announced :

"Commentary" that succinctly summed up the political atmosphere.

In contrast, Bernie Sanders has consistently and explicitly endorsed the RussiaGate theory, claiming it is "clear to everyone (except Donald Trump) that Russia was deeply involved in the 2016 election and intends to be involved in 2018." Despite his stance, Sanders has also been constantly presented as another Russian agent, with the Washington Post ( 11/12/17 ) asking its readers, "When Russia interferes with the 2020 election on behalf of Democratic nominee Bernie Sanders, how will liberals respond?" The message is clear: The progressive wave rising across America is and will be a consequence of Russia, not of the failures of the system, nor of the Democrats.

Outlets like Slate ( 5/11/18 ) warned of a sinister connection between Black Lives Matter and Russia.

It is not just politicians who have been smeared as Russian agents, witting or unwitting; virtually every major progressive movement challenging the system is increasingly dismissed in the same way. Multiple media outlets, including CNN ( 6/29/18 ), Slate ( 5/11/18 ), Vox ( 4/11/18 ) and the New York Times ( 2/16/18 ), have produced articles linking Black Lives Matter to the Kremlin, insinuating the outrage over racist police brutality is another Russian psyop. Others claimed Russia funded the riots in Ferguson and that Russian trolls promoted the Standing Rock environmental protests.

Meanwhile, Democratic insider Neera Tanden retweeted a description of Chelsea Manning as a "Russian stooge," writing off her campaign for the Senate as "the Kremlin paying the extreme left to swing elections. Remember that." Thus corporate media are promoting the idea that any challenge to the establishment is likely a Kremlin-funded astroturf effort.

The tactic has spread to Europe as well. After the poisoning of Russian double agent Sergei Skripal, the UK government immediately blamed Russia and imposed sanctions (without publicly presenting evidence). Jeremy Corbyn, the pacifist, leftist leader of the Labour Party, was uncharacteristically bellicose, asserting , "The Russian authorities must be held to account on the basis of the evidence and our response must be both decisive and proportionate."

The British press was outraged -- at Corbyn's insufficient jingoism. The Sun 's front page ( 3/15/18 ) attacked him as "Putin's Puppet," while the Daily Mail ( 3/15/18 ) went with "Corbyn the Kremlin Stooge." As with Sanders, the fact that Corbyn endorsed the official narrative didn't keep him from being attacked, showing that the conspiratorial mindset seeing Russia behind everything has little to do with evidence-based reality, and is increasingly a tool to demonize the establishment's political enemies.

The Atlantic Council published a report claiming Greek political parties Syriza and Golden Dawn were not expressions of popular frustration and disillusionment, but "the Kremlin's Trojan horses," undermining democracy in its birthplace. Providing scant evidence, the report went on to link virtually every major European political party challenging the center, from right or left, to Putin. From Britian's UKIP to Spain's Podemos to Italy's Five Star Movement, all are charged with being under one man's control. It is this council that Facebook announced it was partnering with to help promote "trustworthy" news and weed out "untrustworthy" sources ( FAIR.org , 5/21/18 ), as its CEO Mark Zuckerberg met with representatives from some of the largest corporate outlets, like the New York Times , CNN and News Corp , to help develop a system to control what content we see on the website.

"We are at war," Morgan Freeman assures us on behalf of the Committee to Investigate Russia.

The utility of this wave of suspicion is captured in Freeman's aforementioned video . After asserting that "for 241 years, our democracy has been a shining example to the world of what we can all aspire to" -- a tally that would count nearly a century of chattel slavery and almost another hundred years of de jure racial disenfranchisement -- the actor explains that "Putin uses social media to spread propaganda and false information, he convinces people in democratic societies to distrust their media, their political process."

The obvious implication is that the political process and media ought to be trusted, and would be trusted were it not for Putin's propaganda. It was not the failures of capitalism and the deep inequalities it created that led to widespread popular resentment and movements on both left and right pressing for radical change across Europe and America, but Vladimir Putin himself. In other words, "America is already great."

For the Democrats, Russiagate allows them to ignore calls for change and not scrutinize why they lost to the most unpopular presidential candidate in history. Since Russia hacked the election, there is no need for introspection, and certainly no need to accommodate the Sanders wing or to engage with progressive challenges from activists on the left, who are Putin's puppets anyway. The party can continue on the same course, painting over the deep cracks in American society. Similarly, for centrists in Europe, under threat from both left and right, the Russia narrative allows them to sow distrust among the public for any movement challenging the dominant order.

For the state, Russiagate has encouraged liberals to forego their faculties and develop a state-worshiping, conspiratorial mindset in the face of a common, manufactured enemy. Liberal trust in institutions like the FBI has markedly increased since 2016, while liberals also now espouse a neocon foreign policy in Syria, Ukraine and other regions, with many supporting the vast increases in the US military budget and attacking Trump from the right.

For corporate media, too, the disciplining effect of the Russia narrative is highly useful, allowing them to reassert control over the means of communication under the guise of preventing a Russian "fake news" infiltration. News sources that challenge the establishment are censored, defunded or deranked, as corporate sources stoke mistrust of them. Meanwhile, it allows them to portray themselves as arbiters of truth. This strategy has had some success, with Democrats' trust in media increasing since the election.

None of this is to say that Russia does not strive to influence other countries' elections, a tactic that the United States has employed even more frequently ( NPR , 12/22/16 ). Yet the extent to which the story has dominated the US media to the detriment of other issues is a remarkable testament to its utility for those in power.

[Aug 08, 2018] New 'bubble' looming How dangerous are tech giants that don't make profits (VIDEO)

Notable quotes:
"... "Definitely, there's a bubble, not just in tech stocks but in general stock market itself," ..."
"... "there are signs of financial fragility" ..."
Aug 08, 2018 | www.rt.com

Tech giants like Tesla, Uber, or Spotify are making less and less profit at the moment and experts are worried about their impact on the world. Are we seeing a new economic bubble in the making? RT's Daniel Bushel finds out. American tech corporations are often making headlines nationwide and internationally, although their own performance is far from perfect. They lose more and earn less, and experts warn of a potential "bubble" looming in the horizon.

Tesla, Elon Musk's flagship company, is worth more than Ford or GM, but produces only a small number of cars. Spotify, a music streaming service, as well as Uber, are losing billions of dollars every year.

"Definitely, there's a bubble, not just in tech stocks but in general stock market itself," Jack Rasmus, professor of political economy at St. Mary's College, told RT, warning that "there are signs of financial fragility" that endanger the world

[Aug 08, 2018] Prepare for $90 oil after sanctions against Iran take effect analyst

Notable quotes:
"... "As we go more towards (the fourth quarter) that's when we really see the risk of prices going well into the 80s and potentially even into the 90s but very critical is how much Iranian production we lose," ..."
"... "A lot of people think China can just buy all of the Iranian oil but they came out and said: 'Yes, we may not reduce but we are not going to increase our intake either.' So, you could see a significant crunch in terms of lost supplies into the market and then that obviously means higher prices," ..."
Aug 06, 2018 | www.rt.com

Looming US sanctions against Iran will likely hit Tehran's oil sales abroad, and it could lead to a price spike in oil contracts. The first round of renewed US sanctions will take effect on Tuesday with the harshest sanctions, potentially targeting Iran's oil industry, expected to return in early November.

"As we go more towards (the fourth quarter) that's when we really see the risk of prices going well into the 80s and potentially even into the 90s but very critical is how much Iranian production we lose," Amrita Sen, chief oil analyst at Energy Aspects, told CNBC Monday.

Oil was trading at $74 per barrel of Brent benchmark, while the US West Texas Intermediate stood at $69.77 on Monday.

"A lot of people think China can just buy all of the Iranian oil but they came out and said: 'Yes, we may not reduce but we are not going to increase our intake either.' So, you could see a significant crunch in terms of lost supplies into the market and then that obviously means higher prices," the analyst added.

The new US sanctions will likely slash oil supply. The last time Iran was sanctioned, it lost half of its exports, which have now returned to 2.4 million barrels per day. Many analysts have said that this time, the negative impact on Iranian oil trade will be less significant, and Iran will lose only half of the previous loss.

Meanwhile, other major producers are ramping up their output. This July, OPEC, Russia and other significant players agreed to gradually raise output for fear of supply deficit on the market. OPEC+ countries will increase production by 1 million barrels per day, of which 200,000 bpd will be provided by Russia.

For more stories on economy & finance visit RT's business section

Read more

[Aug 08, 2018] Is Russia Facilitating Trump's Strangulation of Iran

Bloomberg article cited in Russia To Propose Rolling Back 1.8 Million Bpd Of Oil Cuts OilPrice.com is a rumor. Russians clearly understand that it was the USA who orchestrated 2014-2018 oil price slump which hurt Russia pretty severely with standard of living still not recovered to 2014 levels. There no trump toward the USA left. for russia the USA with its neocon foreign policy is now in a way "Great Satan" as it is for Iran.
Aug 08, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org
put forward a proposal to OPEC to increase production by 1.8million barrels per day (bpd) – and, unusually, proposed that these increases were to start kicking in within weeks. In the end, a pact to increase production by 1 million barrels per day – spearheaded by Russia and Saudi Arabia – was agreed by OPEC and non-OPEC countries in late June. The rise was opposed by Iran, Iraq, Venezuela and Algeria, with Iranian oil minister Bijan Zanganeh commenting ahead of the meeting that "OPEC is not the organization to receive instruction from President Trump OPEC is not part of the Department of Energy of the United States".

Within days of the adoption of the Russian-led production increase, the Trump administration announced its plans to "reduce Iranian oil exports to zero" by November 4th. Questioned on whether such a policy might cause disruption as countries scrambled to replace supplies, State Department policy director Brian Hooks remarked that "we are confident there is sufficient global spare oil capacity." Russia's push for increased production had, in effect, smoothed the path for the next round of Trump's strangulation of Iran. It was precisely this deal which lay behind Trump's brazen claim that world oil supplies would plug the gap created by the loss of Iranian crude; without the end to Russian-Saudi production limits, this would have been unthinkable. As things stand, however, all the pieces are in place for Trump to apply serious pressure on all importers of Iranian oil. Whilst the Russian-Saudi deal offers alternative sources of supply, the trade war now underway demonstrates Trump's willingness to use tariffs against those who do not bend to his geopolitical will. Whilst Trump has openly threatened sanctions against those who do not heed his call to end their dealings with Iran, it is quite possible that those who do heed it will be rewarded with tariff exemptions. China, in particular – Iran's biggest trading partner, and now threatened with tariffs on all $500bilion of their exports to the US – will be particularly under pressure.

On the surface, then, Russia's actions appear self-defeating. The end to the, hugely successful, production quotas of the previous 18 months immediately triggered a drop in oil prices – Russia's main export commodity – whilst facilitating the escalation of US economic warfare against key Russian ally Iran. Yet there are several reasons Russia may be supporting Trump's moves.

Most obviously, Iran is a major competitor with Russia for oil export markets – especially in Europe. European hopes to reduce dependence on Russian energy supplies are likely to be seriously dashed if they can no longer turn to Iran as an alternative supplier. Quite simply, Russia will sell more oil without Iranian competition.

More than this, however, even Trump's use of tariffs as leverage to push countries away from Iran could be to Russia's benefit. If Trump does indeed make tariff-free access to the US market conditional on cutting investment and trade with Iran, China would face a major dilemma.

China has for some years been not only Iran's major trading partner, but investment financier as well. In 2011, China signed a $20 billion agreement to boost bilateral cooperation in Iran's industrial and mining sectors. Today, China is poised to take over development of the massive South Pars oil and gas field should the French company TOTAL pull out, as they are widely expected to do, whilst a $3billion deal was recently signed giving SINOPEC the right to expand the Abadan oil refinery in Khuzestan Province. Meanwhile, reports Fox News , "With the U.S. Treasury putting pressure on Western banks to not make any deals with Iran, the Chinese state-owned CITIC bank is extending lines of credit worth $10 billion for Iranian banks. This funding will finance water, energy and transport projects. To bypass U.S. sanctions, the lines of credit will use euros and yuan currencies".

But most significant for Russia is the 2017 $1.5 billion deal made by the Chinese Export-Import Bank to finance a high-speed railway between Tehran and Mashhad. The railway is envisioned to become part of China's 'Belt and Road Initiative' , creating a high-speed transit route between central Asia and Europe that will shave weeks off current travel times.

This May – in a clear act of defiance to the US – China opened a new train line between China's Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region and Tehran, shortening travel time by 20 days compared to cargo ship. Once the full vision of a Chinese built high-tech, high-speed rail network across central Asia is realised, however, the current 'Northern route' through Russia is likely to be rendered all but redundant.

Could it be, then, that Russia sees it as in its own interests to facilitate Trump's quest to chase Chinese investment out of Iran in order to preserve its trade routes and access to European oil markets?

If so, it is likely to be disappointed. For Iran is central not only to the Belt and Road Initiative – China's multi-trillion, multi-decade long 'geoeconomic' programme – but also to its defence strategy. As correctly observed in a recent piece published by The Diplomat, "Iran constitutes [China's] true priority. China has nurtured bilateral relations with Tehran for decades, leveraging a common resentment toward Western dominance . This partnership has great geostrategic importance to both nations. Thanks to its oil and gas reserves, Iran could help Beijing withstand a U.S. attack on its SLOCs (Sea Lines of Communication)."

For China, much as it naturally seeks to avoid further punishment from the US, Iran is simply too important to be bargained away. Unfortunately not so, it seems, for Moscow. Join the debate on Facebook More articles by: Dan Glazebrook

[Aug 08, 2018] The Magnitsky Trio Pushes For War With Russia With New Sanctions by Tom Luongo

Aug 08, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

If half of what I have come to understand about the Curious Case of Bill Browder is true, then the "Magnitsky Trio" of Senators John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Ben Cardin are guilty of espionage, at a minimum.

Why? Because they know that Browder's story about Sergei Magnitsky is a lie. And that means that when you tie in the Trump Dossier, Christopher Steele, Fusion GPS, the Skripal poisoning and the rest of this mess, these men are consorting with foreign governments and agencies against the sitting President.

As Lee Stranahan pointed out recently on Fault Lines, Cardin invited Browder to testify to Congress in 2017 to push through last year's sanctions bill, a more stringent version of the expiring Magnitsky Act of 2011, which has since been used to ratchet up pressure on Russia.

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

Cardin knew there were problems with Browder's story about Magnitsky's death and yet brought him into Congress to testify to secure the vote.

That's suborning perjury, as Lee points out.

Just the holes in Browder's story about Magnitsky's death are alone enough to warrant a perjury charge on him. If you haven't read Luck Komisar's detailed breakdown of Browder's dealings then you owe it to yourself to do so.

I'd read it a few times, because it's about as murky as The Swamp gets. And, still my eyes glaze over.

The Magnitsky Act and its sequel have been used to support aggressive policy actions by the U.S. against Russia and destroy the relationship between the world's most prominent militaries and nuclear powers.

The new bill is said to want to put 'crushing sanctions' on Russia to make 'Putin feel the heat.' In effect, what this bill wants to do is force President Trump to enforce sanctions against the entire Russian state for attempting to do business anywhere in the world.

The new financial penalties would target political figures, oligarchs, family members and others that "facilitate illicit and corrupt activities" on behalf of Putin.

It would also impose new sanctions on transactions tied to investments in state-owned energy projects, transactions tied to new Russian debt, and people with the capacity or ability to support or carry out a "malicious" cyber act.

In addition, if it wasn't clear enough already, that he's no friend of the President, Graham is trying to tie the President's hands on NATO withdrawal, requiring a two-thirds majority.

Now, why would Graham be worried about that, unless it was something the President was seriously considering? This is similar to last year's sanctions bill requiring a similar majority for the President to end the original sanctions placed on Russia in 2014 over the reunification with Crimea.

And behind it all stands Bill Browder.

Because it has been Browder's one-man campaign to influence members of Congress, the EU and public opinion the world over against Putin and Russia for the past 10 years over Magnitsky's death.

Browder's story is the only one we see in the news. And it's never questioned, even though it has. He continually moves to block films and articles critical of him from seeing distribution.

Browder is the epicenter around which the insane push for war with Russia revolves as everyone involved in the attempt to take over Russia in 1999 continues to try and cover their collective posteriors posterities.

And it is Browder, along with Republic National Bank chief Edmond Safra, who were involved together in the pillaging of Russia in the 1990's. Browder's firm hired Magintsky as an accountant (because that's what he was) to assist in the money laundering Heritage Capital was involved in.

The attempted take over of Russia failed because Yeltsin saw the setup which led him to appoint Putin as his Deputy Prime Minister.

Martin Armstrong talked about this recently and it is featured prominently in the film about him, The Forecaster, which I also recommend you watch.

There was $7 billion that was wired through Bank of New York which involved money stolen from the IMF loans to Russia. The attempt to takeover Russia by blackmail was set in motion. As soon as that wire was done, that is when Republic National Bank ran to the Department of Justice to say it was money-laundering. I believe this started the crisis and Yeltsin was blackmailed to step down and appoint Boris A. Berezovsky as the head of Russia.

Clearly, Republic National Bank was involved with the US government for they were sending also skids of $100 bills to Russia. It was written up and called the Money Plane . Yeltsin then turned to Putin realizing that he had been set up. This is how Putin became the First Deputy Prime Minister of Russia on August 9th, 1999 until August 16th, 1999 when he became the 33rd Prime Minister and heir apparent of Yeltsin.

So, now why, all of a sudden, do we need even stronger sanctions on Russia, ones that would create untold dislocation in financial markets around the world?

Look at the timeline today and see what's happening.

  1. Earlier this year Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicts 13 people associated with Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian troll farm, for influencing the 2016 election.
  2. Then Mueller indicts twelve members of Russian intelligence to sabotage the upcoming summit between Trump and Putin while the Russia Hacked Muh Election narrative was flagging.
  3. Three days later President Trump met with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki. There a Putin let the world know that he would assist Robert Mueller's investigation if in return the U.S. would assist Russia in returning Bill Browder, who was tried and convicted in absentia for tax evasion.
  4. All of a sudden Browder's story is all over the alternative press. Browder is all over U.S. television.
  5. Earlier this week Facebook comes out, after horrific earnings, to tell everyone that IRA was still at it, though being ever so sneaky, trying to influence the mid-terms by engaging Democrats and anti-Trumpers to organize... In that release, Facebook let it be known it was working with the political arm of NATO, The Atlantic Council, to ferret out these dastardly Russian agents.

And now we have a brand-new shiny sanctions bill intended to keep any rapprochement between the U.S. and Russia from occurring.

Why is that? What's got them so scared of relations with Russia improving?

Maybe, just maybe, because Putin has all of these people dead to rights and he's informed Trump of what the real story behind all of this is.

That at its core is a group of very bad people who attempted to steal trillions but only got away with billions and still have their sights set on destroying Russia for their own needs.

And Lindsay Graham is their mouthpiece. (all puns intended)

That all of U.S. foreign policy is built on a lie.

That our relationship with Russia was purposefully trashed for the most venal of reasons, for people like Bill Browder to not only steal billions but then have the chutzpah to steal the $230 million he would have paid in taxes on those stolen billions.

And the only way to ensure none of those lies are exposed is for Trump to be unable to change any of it by forcing him to openly side with the Russian President over members of his own political party.

The proposed sanctions by the Graham bill are so insane that even the Treasury department thinks they are a bad idea. But, at this point there is nothing Graham won't do for his owners.

Because they are desperate they will push for open warfare with Russia to push Putin from power, which is not possible. All of this is nothing more than a sad attempt to hold onto power long enough to oust Trump from the White House and keep things as horrible as they currently are.

Because no one gives up power willingly. And the more they are proven to be frauds the more they will scream for war.

Skip -> ???ö? Sat, 08/04/2018 - 18:35 Permalink

TrumpHate rises to new heights. Will it work?
July 17, 2018 by Kevin MacDonald

I should also mention Putin's treatment of certain Jewish oligarchs who have attempted to influence Western policies toward Russia (e.g., Mikhail Khodorkovsky). A truly stunning moment in the Trump-Putin presser (all but ignored in the MSM) was Putin saying that Bill Browder and his associates had illegally earned $1.5 billion in Russia ("the way the money was earned was illegal") without paying taxes either to Russia or the United States where the money was transferred. And that he and his associates had contributed $400 million to Hillary Clinton's campaign. While the charges back and forth are impossible for me to evaluate, Browder's firm, Hermitage Capital Management, has been involved in other accusations of fraud. Browder was the main force promoting the Magnitsky Act, signed by President Obama in 2012, that barred Russian officials said to be involved in the death of Sergei Magnitsky, a Browder associate, from entering the U.S. or using the U.S. banking system.

Here the point is that American neocons have been in the forefront of hostility over Putin's treatment of Jewish oligarchs, taking the view that Browder et al. are completely innocent victims of Russian evil. Along with Russian foreign policy, Putin's actions toward the oligarchs is one factor in neocon and hence some factions of the GOP toward Russia. It's no surprise that they are now eagerly joining the hate-Trump chorus throughout the American establishment.

MoreSun -> BigJim Sun, 08/05/2018 - 00:43 Permalink

Regarding Article:

Do we need to know anything else?

"William Felix "Bill" Browder was born into a Jewish family in Chicago, Illinois.

Browder's paternal grandfather was Earl Browder , who was born in Kansas in 1891. [1] He was a radical and had lived in the Soviet Union for several years from 1927 and married Raisa Berkman, a Jewish Russian woman, while living there. [1]

After his return to the United States in 1931, [1] Earl Browder became the leader of the Communist Party USA , and ran for U.S. president in 1936 and 1940. [13]

After World War II, Earl Browder lost favor with Moscow and was expelled from the American Communist party . [1]

Remove all jew supremacists from all positions of power, no matter how small-NOW!

Get It, Read It:

"A History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind" Stephon Mitford Goodson

https://www.walmart.com/ip/A-History-of-Central-Banking-and-the-Enslave

Hapa -> MoreSun Sun, 08/05/2018 - 02:54 Permalink

Magnitsky film back up on Bitchute:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/kHqYoFm3q2Ll/

Thoresen -> Hapa Sun, 08/05/2018 - 06:50 Permalink

Great film that takes you from Browder the poor defrauded good guy with a hero lawyer Magnitsky, to a bad guy with Magnitsky the long employed accountant who made none of the assertions injected into the Russian -English translations that no one reviewed. But why is this film banned in the West? (/s)

JSBach1 -> Skip Sat, 08/04/2018 - 21:19 Permalink

Not only is Steele part of this shady group but there are ties with Alexander Litvinenko, Boris Berezovsky, Alexander Perepelichny (who all meet thier untimely deaths) around Bill Browder (directly/indirectly)"

As Browder responds with "I do not recall" and "I do not know" on any substantial inquiry in the court, the US judiciary could be very interested in hearing Perepelichny. This menace to Magnitsky Act was eliminated one week before the bill passed the US House: on Nov 10, 2012 Alexander Perepelichny was found dead outside his mansion in London. The police investigation did not bring any tangible result but the theory of "Russian mafia" involved was timely injected into the international media. One month later Magnitsky Act was signed by president Obama

https://off-guardian.org/2018/03/13/fatal-quad-who-is-assassinating-former-mi6-assets-on-british-soil/

MK ULTRA Alpha -> caconhma Sat, 08/04/2018 - 20:30 Permalink

McCain hand carried the Steele Dossier to Comey. McCain was in Canada when MI6 operative Sir Andrew Wood enlisted McCain. Then McCain took the bait, no he was working to take Trump out.

He tried to get out of it in his new book, The Restless Wave.

I've watched McCain for years, I believe he has brain damage from the Vietnam War.

serotonindumptruck -> madashellron Sat, 08/04/2018 - 19:37 Permalink

The documentary has been completely scrubbed from the internet in the West.

As soon as someone posts a link to a download site, the website is shut down within a half hour by US gov intel agencies.

I'm actually surprised that IMDB still has a listing for it. Some of the reviews there are interesting.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6028446/?ref_=rvi_tt

Jackprong Sat, 08/04/2018 - 20:48 Permalink

I can understand repealing Jackson-Vanik because it pertained to how U. S. deals with "non-market economies." Free market mechanisms were introduced in Russia and China since the 1970s so there needed to be changes. However, if there's government corruption in other nation states, how does this rate an act of Congress? Why repeal the law that required annual reviews of trade relations and replace it with normalization of trade only to sanction foreign government officials that have never even had a trial? What about all the financial misdeeds, money laundering, abuse of the banking system that can be traced to Browder, the congressional instigator? How does Graham, McCain and Cardin benefit by derailing relations with Russia over ONE GUY's WORD with a dicey past?

Law

In June 2012, the United States House Committee on Foreign Affairs reported to the House a bill called the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012 (H.R. 4405). The main intention of the law was to punish Russian officials who were thought to be responsible for the death of Sergei Magnitsky by prohibiting their entrance to the United States and their use of its banking system. The legislation was taken up by a Senate panel the next week, sponsored by Senator Ben Cardin , and cited in a broader review of the mounting tensions in the international relationship.

In November 2012, provisions of the Magnitsky bill were attached to a House bill (H.R. 6156) normalizing trade with Russia (i.e., repealing the Jackson–Vanik amendment ) and Moldova . On December 6, 2012, the U.S. Senate passed the House version of the law, 92-4. The law was signed by President Barack Obama on December 14, 2012.

In 2016, Congress enacted the Global Magnitsky Act which allows the US Government to sanction foreign government officials implicated in human rights abuses anywhere in the world.

[Aug 08, 2018] What is left unsaid in the Anglo-Saxon accusations against Russia by Thierry Meyssan

Aug 08, 2018 | www.voltairenet.org

In 16 November 2009, tax specialist lawyer Sergey Magnitsky died in Matrosskaya Tishina prison (Moscow). Immediately, the US Press claimed that he had been in possession of information concerning a State scandal, and had been tortured by the " régime ".

The Magnitsky Act

The death of Magnitsky shut down the legal procedures that had been launched against him by the Russian Minister of Justice. Billionaire William ("Bill") Browder declared in Washington that the tax expert possessed proof that Russian Power had stolen 3 billion dollars from him. Despite lobbying by Goldman Sachs, the US Congress believed it had clarified the affair, and in 2012 adopted a law sanctioning the Russian personalities suspected of having murdered the lawyer. Goldman Sachs, which did not believe the information forwarded by the parliamentarians, hired the lobbying firm Duberstein Group in an attempt to block the vote on the law [ 1 ].

On this model, in 2016, the Congress extended the " Magnitsky Act " to the whole world, requesting the President to implement sanctions against all people and all states which violate individual property. Presidents Obama and Trump obeyed, placing about twenty personalities on the list, including the President of the Republic of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov.

These two laws were aimed at giving back to the United States the role it had assumed during the Cold War as defender of individual property, even though they had no communist rival.

The two versions of the " Magnitsky affair "

As for the Russian State Duma, it responded to its US counterpart by forbidding the adoption of Russian children by US families, and by denouncing the responsibility of US personalities in the legalisation of torture (the Dima Yakovlev Law, from the name of the Russian child adopted in the USA who died as a result of negligence by the parents). President Putin applied this text in 2013, also forbidding ex-US Vice President Dick Cheney access to Russian territory.

The " Magnitsky affair " could have ended there. It seems to be independent of the " Khodorkovsky affair ", exploited by NATO in order to accuse Russia of interference in Western democracies by way of disinformation or " fake news " [ 2 ]. However, the Russian Prosecutor General contests the narrative presented by William Browder to the US Congress.

According to William Browder, his company Hermitage Capital invested in Russia, particularly in Gazprom. He allegedly discovered signs of irregular practices and attempted to warn the Kremlin. However, his resident's visa was then cancelled. Then his Russian companies were allegedly robbed by Lieutenant-Colonel Artem Kuznetsov, a civil servant from the Financial Brigade of the Russian Ministry of the Interior. Kuznetsov apparently seized the property documents during a search, then used them to register a new owner. Lawyer Sergey Magnitsky, who apparently blew the whistle on the embezzlement, was arrested, tortured and finally died in prison. In the end, Lieutenant-Colonel Artem Kuznetsov and " godfather " Dmitry Klyuev were allegedly able to deposit the 3 billion stolen dollars in a Cypriot bank. This is a classic case of theft by the Russian mafia with the help of the Kremlin [ 3 ]. This narrative inspired the seventh season of the Showtime TV series, Homeland .

On the contrary, according to Russian Prosecutor General Yury Chaika, William Browder illegally acquired 133 million shares in Gazprom on behalf of the Ziff brothers, via various straw men. Not only did Browder avoid paying 150 million dollars in taxes, but the acquisition of part of this crown jewel of the Russian economy is in itself illegal. Furthermore, his financial advisor, Sergey Magnitsky, who had developed another scam for the same Browder, was arrested and died of a heart attack in prison [ 4 ].

It is obviously impossible to tell the truth from the lies in these two versions. However, it is now recognised that Sergey Magnitsky was not a lawyer working freelance, but was employed by William Browder's companies. He was not investigating embezzlement, but was tasked by Browder

with the creation of financial structures which would avoid him having to pay taxes in Russia. For example, the two men imagined remunerating mentally handicapped people as front men in order to benefit from their tax exempt status. Browder had much experience with tax evasion – which is why he lived for ten years in Russia with a simple tourist visa, then abandoned his US citizenship and became a British citizen.

These last elements prove William Browder wrong, and are compatible with Prosecutor Chaika's accusations. In these conditions, it seems at the least imprudent for the US Congress to have adopted the Magnitsky Act , unless of course the operation was aimed not at defending individual property, but at hurting Russia [ 5 ].

A leader of the Russian opposition paid by Browder

Alongside the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), Browder abundantly finances the work of a young lawyer, Alexeď Navalny. Thanks to the help of US ambassador Michael McFaul, the young man pursued his studies in the USA at Yale in 2010. He created an Anti-Corruption Foundation in order to promote Browden's version and accuse Putin's administration.

Having become a leader of the political opposition, Navalny and his Foundation directed a first documentary accusing the family of Prosecutor Chaika of corruption. But although the video is convincing at first look, it presents no proof of the facts it relates.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/3eO8ZHfV4fk

Simultaneously, Navalny ordered a second documentary from a Russian film director and member of the opposition about the " Magnitsky affair ". But this journalist turned against his employer during the investigation, which was finally broadcast by Russian public television.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/QgK7MlZDuJ8

A spook and an ambassador paid by Browder

Thereafter, William Browder engaged an ex-agent of MI6 in Moscow (1990-93), Christopher Steele, and the ex-US ambassador to Moscow (2012-14), Michael McFaul.

It so happens that it was Christopher Steele who, in 2006 – while he was with MI6 – accused President Vladimir Putin of having ordered the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko with Polonium. In 2016, he also worked – freelance this time – for the US Democratic Party. That was when he wrote the famous dossier accusing candidate Donald Trump of being under the threat of blackmail by the Russian secret services [ 6 ] ; an unwarranted charge which has just resurfaced after the bilateral Summit in Helsinki. We find Steele once again, in 2018, involved in the Novitchok poisoning of Sergueď Skripal – as a " consultant " for MI6, he of course accused the inevitable Vladimir Putin.

The Russian riposte

During the US Presidential campaign of 2016, Russian Prosecutor General Yury Chaika attempted to influence a member of Congress who was open to Russian thinking, Dana Rohrabacher (Republican, California). He sent her a note concerning his version of the Browder-Magnitsky affair. Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya met the son and son-in-law of candidate Donald Trump at Trump Tower, in order to inform them that a part of Browder's dirty money was being used to finance the candidacy of Hillary Clinton [ 7 ].

Thereafter, William Browder became the main source of the enquiry run by Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller about possible Russian interference in " US Democracy ". A long time before he became the Director the FBI, Mueller – who officially has no link to the CIA – had been responsible for the enquiry on the Lockerbie attack, which he attributed to Mouammar Kadhafi. Let's remember that Libya never recognised that it was implicated in this affair, although it accepted to pay a compensation to the victims. Above all, Scottish Justice established the fact that fragments of the detonator found on site were placed there by the CIA in order to accuse Libya. Mueller used the meeting of Trump's team with Natalia Veselnitskaya as " proof " of the subordination of Donald Trump to the Russian Intelligence services.

In the USA, Natalia Veselnitskaya represents the interests of several of Browder's Russian victims. She also acted in 2014 on behalf of one of the companies that Browder accused of being connected to " godfather " Dmitry Klyuev. She also raised the question about the manner in which an agent of Homeland Security, Todd Hyman, had transmitted a trial document without proceeding with the usual verifications.

There will be no moment of truth

During the US-Russia summit in Helsinki, President Vladimir Putin proposed that his US counterpart allow US investigators to question those Russian civil servants suspected of interference in the US Presidential campaign, on the condition that Russian investigators would also be allowed to question suspects in the USA. Donald Trump is reserving his answer.

However, when the office of Prosecutor Yury Chaika transmitted the list of witnesses to be questioned, Washington panicked. Not only did Chaika ask to question British subjects William Browder and Christopher Steele if they should travel in the United States, but also ambassador Michael McFaul, lawyer Jonathan Winer, researcher David J. Kramer, and finally, agent Todd Hyman.

Jonathan Winer was in charge of the Lockerbie dossier at the State Department during the 1990's. He is a personal friend of Christopher Steele, and transmitted his reports to the neo-conservatives for a decade [ 8 ].

During Bush Jr.'s first term, David J. Kramer played an important role in the management of the propaganda system for the State Department as well as looking after the stay-behind agents in Eastern Europe and in Russia. After having worked in various think tanks, he became the president of Freedom House, and campaigned on the " Magnitsky affair ". He is today a researcher at the McCain Institute.

Although, so far, nothing enables us to tell which of the Browder and Chaika versions is accurate, the truth will soon emerge. It is possible that Russian interference may be no more than fake news, but US interference (by introduction into the crown piece of the Russian economy as well as via Alexeď Navalny) may in fact be a reality.

In the context of' Washington's unanimous anti-Russian stand, President Trump declines Vladimir Putin's proposition. Thierry Meyssan

Translation
Pete Kimberley
[ 1 ] " Bank of Putin. Goldman Sachs lobbying against human rights legislation ", Adam Kredo, Free Beacon, July 19, 2012.

[ 2 ] " The NATO campaign against freedom of expression ", by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete Kimberley, Voltaire Network , 5 December 2016.

[ 3 ] " Foreigner's Investment in Russia Is Derailed by Kremlin's Might ", Clifford J. Levy, The New York Times , July 24, 2008.

[ 4 ] Note from Yury Chaika Office to Dana Rohrabacher, June 2016.

[ 5 ] " Intouchable, Mr. Browder ? ", par Israël Shamir, Traduction Maria Poumier, Entre la plume et l'enclume (France), The Unz Review (USA), Réseau Voltaire , 22 juin 2016.

[ 6 ] " The Steele Report ".

[ 7 ] " Natalia Veselnitskaya Memo on the William Browder & Sergei MagnitskyCase ", by Natalia Veselnitskaya, Voltaire Network , 1 June 2016.

[ 8 ] " Devin Nunes is investigating me. Here's the truth ", Jonathan Winer, The Washington Post , February 8, 2018.

[Aug 08, 2018] US addiction to sanctions knows no bounds – Iranian foreign minister

Notable quotes:
"... "[The] US' unlawful sanctions against two Turkish ministers – from an allied country – illustrates not just [the] US administration's policy of pressure and extortion in lieu of statecraft, but that its addiction to sanctions knows no bounds," ..."
"... "a victim of unfair and unjust detention" ..."
"... "an absence of evidence." ..."
"... "a great Christian, family man and wonderful human being." ..."
"... "any property, or interest in property" ..."
"... "US persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them." ..."
"... "psychological warfare" ..."
"... "a strong and sincere ally." ..."
"... "won't be left without retaliation." ..."
Aug 02, 2018 | www.rt.com
The "addiction" of Washington to sanctions "knows no bounds," Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said. It comes after Washington slapped two top officials from major ally Turkey with restrictions. "[The] US' unlawful sanctions against two Turkish ministers – from an allied country – illustrates not just [the] US administration's policy of pressure and extortion in lieu of statecraft, but that its addiction to sanctions knows no bounds," Zarif tweeted.

US' unlawful sanctions against two Turkish ministers - from an allied country - illustrates not just US administration's policy of pressure and extortion in lieu of statecraft, but that its addiction to sanctions knows no bounds.

-- Javad Zarif (@JZarif) August 2, 2018

In a heightening of tensions between the two allies, the US Treasury Department on Wednesday announced restrictions against Turkish Minister of Justice Abdulhamit Gul and Minister of Interior Suleyman Soylu over the continued detention of American pastor Andrew Brunson.

Brunson is being held by Turkey on charges of espionage and assisting the plotters of an unsuccessful 2016 military coup attempt.

The US says Brunson is "a victim of unfair and unjust detention" by the Turkish government, adding that he was accused with "an absence of evidence." US President Donald Trump has called the pastor "a great Christian, family man and wonderful human being."
The Treasury Department announced that "any property, or interest in property" of both Gul and Soylu within US jurisdiction is blocked and "US persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them."

Brunson's case has long been a stumbling block in already strained relations between Washington and Ankara. Days before the US Treasury announced its decision, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan accused his American counterpart of waging "psychological warfare" against Turkey over the pastor and warned that the US may lose "a strong and sincere ally."

Responding to the restrictions, Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu tweeted that they "won't be left without retaliation."

US relations with Turkey have not been smooth in recent months. Among other things, Ankara and Washington are locking horns over Turkey's decision to buy Russian S-400 missile systems. Erdogan's government is also adamant on pushing ahead with the purchase of American F-35 jets, which US lawmakers are trying to block due to Ankara's S-400 deal.

Read more:

[Aug 08, 2018] The Soviet entry into the war played a much greater role than the atomic bombs in inducing Japan to surrender because it dashed any hope that Japan could terminate the war through Moscow's mediation

Aug 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

Question , August 3, 2018 at 10:28 pm GMT

@Johnny Rico

Thank you for the clarification. Based on their research, Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, Professor of History at the University of California at Santa Barbara, and Terry Charman, a Senior Historian at London Imperial War Museum, concur:

"
"The Soviet entry into the war played a much greater role than the atomic bombs in inducing Japan to surrender because it dashed any hope that Japan could terminate the war through Moscow's mediation," Hasegawa, a Russian-speaking American scholar, said in an interview.

Despite the death toll from the atomic bombings -- 140,000 in Hiroshima, 80,000 in Nagasaki the Imperial Military Command believed it could hold out against an Allied invasion if it retained control of Manchuria and Korea, which provided Japan with the resources for war, according to Hasegawa and Terry Charman

"The Soviet attack changed all that," Charman said. "The leadership in Tokyo realized they had no hope now, and in that sense August Storm did have a greater effect on the Japanese decision to surrender than the dropping of the A-bombs."
"

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/08/14/historians-soviet-offensive-key-japans-wwii-surrender-eclipsed-bombs.html

Pablo , August 3, 2018 at 10:47 pm GMT
@Question

"Isn't this patently contradicting the historical fact that Japan surrendered (militarily, what else!) precisely because of Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic destructions? "

Another victim of the American education system and Hollywood history lessons

[Aug 08, 2018] US corps have bought out UK and EU corps and then outsource the work to India and China. US Corps = Globalisation.

Aug 08, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

DancehallStyle -> AgainstDarkness , 6 Aug 2018 20:02

US corps have bought out UK and EU corps and then outsource the work to India and China. US Corps = Globalisation.
DancehallStyle -> AnthonyFlack , 6 Aug 2018 19:57
IT tech and even intricate clothing are too fiddly for automata.

Americans view is if other countries like China make too much money and will overtake them then they will take it all back.

They did that with Japan. They also destroyed Soviet's economy.

ID4355982 , 6 Aug 2018 19:52
trump has wrecked environmental policy, trade policy and domestic social policy....the upshots will be: 1- a much more toxic environment & much higher level of respiratory disease and cancerous related ailments; overall poorer health & health care for the average citizen 2- higher prices for imported goods, lower level of trade exports, fewer US based jobs and more off-shoring of US jobs 3- a substantial increase in the homeless population in the urban areas of this country; increased rates of poverty for the poor, lower economic prosperity for the lower and lower middle class income brackets; wage stagnation for the middle & upper middle income brackets; less advanced education & lower worker productivity and innovation to name just a few of the impacts created by this idiot....in simple in English, Trump and his so-called initiatives are shafting this country in almost every way possible
Ilya Grushevskiy -> RepaTea , 6 Aug 2018 19:17
What part of international law is not just pissed on toiler paper strewn over the floors of a urinal? Which post WWII president respected this law?

None.

International law, since WWII failed. It failed in '47 when no referendum was held in Palestine - against Chapter 1, Article 1 paragraph 2 of the UN Charter. It failed in Crimea, when the results of such a referendum was spat on by the previous war criminal to sit in the Oval Office. It fails now as sanctions are used unilaterally - being equivalent to the use of force in result, they should be

But then let's not stop at after the war. The US is the only country to nuke civilians. 6/7 US four star generals at the time said the action had no strategic or tactical purpose whatsoever.

The US is what ISIS dreams to be, the sooner it falls into obscurity the better.

Brian Black -> bobthebuilder2017 , 6 Aug 2018 19:13
Pure nonsense. The Great Depression began on October 29, 1929. FDR was inaugurated on March 4, 1933 nearly 4 years after it began. Hoover had actually only been in office for just over 6 months before Black Tuesday. GDP began growing and unemployment began falling in 1933 shortly after FDR took office. The Depression officially came to an end in 1939 when GDP returned to pre-Depression levels.
Ilya Grushevskiy , 6 Aug 2018 19:09
There is no long term US growth. There is a debt default after people realize the fact that the top of the whole US government is incompetent. That it has chained itself to such astronomic liabilities for useless wars (as the Empire has not succeeded in world hegemony), is even sadder. It coould have spent the $5tn of Iraq and Afghanistan on building shit, but instead it bombed shit.

Trump doesn't matter for US long run - in 5-10 years time the country will be only found in history books.

gmiklashek950 , 6 Aug 2018 17:59
Remember Kruschev's (sp?) last words on leaving office, and I'm paraphrasing: "Don't worry about America, they'll spend themselves to death (just like we have)". Continued economic growth is a wet dream of Wall Street origin. We are massively overpopulated and rapidly using up earth's natural resources at an increasingly unsustainable rate. We must begin to reduce our growth, not keep increasing it. Population density stress is killing us now and only increasing every day along with the 220,000 new mouths to feed that we are turning out into a world that has no room for 28,000,000 homeless migrants already. Just how crazy are we really. If this article is to be believed, we are nuts. E.F. Schumacher is rolling in his grave! Stress R Us
AgainstDarkness , 6 Aug 2018 16:56
Trump/the US is attempting to renegotiate globalisation.

It is time for the rest of the western world to follow suit.

Levente Tanka -> plakias , 6 Aug 2018 16:34
The contribution of a president to the national debt depends a bit on how you calculate it. You could simply look at rhe dates of inauguration or go a step further and look at the fiscal years. For the latter see :

https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296

In absolute terms Obama is indeed at the top of the list, percentagewise his predecessor played a larger part. No matter how you look at it or what the causes were, under Bush and Obama the U.S. debt seems to have spiralled out of of control and Trump is doing bugger all to stop that trend.

[Aug 08, 2018] Exclusive Iran, then Turkey, as the Hot War Gains Ground in Washington

Notable quotes:
"... The recent hyperbolic exchange of threats between US President Donald Trump and his equal Iranian rank Hassan Rouhani, despite the obvious bad taste, has revealed an absolute truth: a potential new conflict against Iran could really have devastating outcomes not only for the Middle Eastern region but also for the whole world. From the triumph of the Islamic Revolution in Iran to today, the relations between the two countries, excluding the short life of the nuclear agreement JCPOA – Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (however never fully respected by the North American side under the Obama administration as well as the present), have never known a real relaxation of tension. ..."
"... a warning against the oppressors of the people ..."
"... the outcasts have become creators of public norms ..."
"... 5Stars – League ..."
"... rhetoric of the clash between civilizations ..."
"... Western colonialism, from the perspective of Imam Khomeini, has been able to counter the reality of Islam by introducing into the Muslim countries foreign laws and cultures incompatible with it so as to make it totally inauthentic. The colonization of the minds is the step immediately following the economic colonization aimed at expropriating natural resources and making the colonized territory a market for the sale of western products. For this reason, according to Khomeini, in the time that the necessary conditions for the Parousia of the Imam of the time are not met, it is not possible for the Islamic Law to remain unused. ..."
"... velayat-e faqih ..."
"... the general aim of the prophetic mission is the rectification of humanity in the framework of a righteous and neatly developed social structure, which can be achieved through the definition of a government able to run the law. ..."
"... The hatred of Iran comes from the fact that this represents a concrete example of resistance, and in some respects an alternative, to this destructive and culturally racist model of civilization. ..."
"... Original article by Daniele Perra, L'Intellettuale Dissidente – Translation by Costantino Ceoldo – Pravda freelance ..."
Aug 08, 2018 | www.veteranstoday.com

The intelligence is coming in, Russia appearing to be pushed to the side, making many wonder what Netanyahu has on Russia's President Vladimir Putin. Iran should well be a "redline" for Russia but, increasingly, analysts are coming to believe that Trump and Putin at their conference in Helsinki may well have "sold Iran down the river."

The next target, of course is Turkey.

When Iran is gone, Turkey will go as well, with America having a long standing relationship with the Kurds and holding the what Trump's sees has his key to Turkey, Gulan, the radical cleric living in Pennsylvania, groomed by the CIA to become Washington's puppet in Ankara when Erdogan can finally be eliminated.

Behind this is an economic war. Israel is crushing the Palestinians, aided by Trump rag-tail relation and probably Mueller investigation target, Jared Kushner. Few are aware of the real "geologicals" from the Eastern Mediterranean, with massive gas deposits under Idlib and Latakia in Syria and adjacent Turkey and both off and onshore in Gaza. The Gaza reserves alone may well constitute the second largest untapped gas reserve in the world.

The the first under both Iran and Qatar, moves to put both nations "out of business," will benefit Israel, Russia and the US and push pipeline gas and LNG to new record highs.

It is always about the money and US sanctions on Iran and Russia are intended, of course, to bring the "hot war" on Iran to fruition as soon as possible.

Now for an Italian source on the issue translated by Pravda's Constantino Ceoldo

by Daniele Perra

The recent hyperbolic exchange of threats between US President Donald Trump and his equal Iranian rank Hassan Rouhani, despite the obvious bad taste, has revealed an absolute truth: a potential new conflict against Iran could really have devastating outcomes not only for the Middle Eastern region but also for the whole world. From the triumph of the Islamic Revolution in Iran to today, the relations between the two countries, excluding the short life of the nuclear agreement JCPOA – Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (however never fully respected by the North American side under the Obama administration as well as the present), have never known a real relaxation of tension.

The 1979 hostage crisis, as a result of which Pope John Paul II sent a request for release that Imam Khomeini rejected by arguing his answer with the fact that the Iranian people would have expected from the messenger of Christ a warning against the oppressors of the people and not solidarity with them, and the terrifying war of aggression that Saddam Hussein's Iraq, on US and Saudi commission, moved against the newborn Islamic Republic were only the first episodes of a long series of more or less direct confrontation between a nation with ancient history and culture and that paradise of Protestant eschatological heterodoxy in which, as the Russian philosopher Aleksandr Dugin affirmed, the outcasts have become creators of public norms .

Add to this the fact that between the imposition of sanctions regimes on several levels and in different periods and direct interference in Iranian internal affairs (heavy exploitation of the protests of the so-called Green Movement and support to various terrorist groups that aim to destabilize the country: first among all the Mojahedin-e Khalq with offices in France and Albania), the US has never stopped aspiring and dreaming of that "regime change" that now, with the appointment of Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State but above all of John R. Bolton as a national security advisor, seems to have come back very closely.

Also, and above all, because the fears for the Iranian presence in Syria, considered as an existential threat to Israel, has triggered various hysterical reactions between the North American Zionist lobby and the Israeli military and political leaders themselves. See in this regard the bombastic as unreliable presentation of "irrefutable evidence" on the Iranian violations of the JCPOA by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or the twelve requests, drawn up by Mike Pompeo, that Iran should meet if it intends to renegotiate the agreement with the USA. Requests among which there appears to be at least a ridiculous cessation of aid to al-Qaeda and to the Afghan Taliban that Iran have always been sworn enemies and which, on the contrary, have often enjoyed the support of the US and Zionist intelligence . The Taliban, among other things, have carried out real massacres of the Hazara : the ethnic Shiite component of Afghanistan.

For what concerns Italy (Iran's first European commercial partner), the new sanctions imposed by the USA following the unilateral exit from the JCPOA would damage the economy much more than those, however useless, inflicted on Russia and the whose removal has been included (even if at the time it is taken into the background) in the program of the new yellow-green government [ 5Stars – League ].

The low negotiating power of European economic actors, faced with the forced choice between access (with the risk of sanctions) to the Iranian market or to the "imposed" US market, and the cultural subalternity that many governments continue to suffer towards the US, despite of the desire to preserve the JCPOA, do not foresee anything that does not go beyond the usual forms of masochistic schizophrenia of Europe.

Now, from a purely geopolitical point of view, the North American obsession with Iran is more than justified. The Islamic Revolution has overthrown a regime that in previous decades, except for the small parenthesis of the nationalist government of Mossadeq (not coincidentally overturned by a joint Anglo-American operation), had made of its total alignment to the United States its only form of international legitimacy and which, with Turkey, represented one of the "pillars" of North American geopolitics in the Middle East. And the Revolution has also prevented the North American elites from directly managing huge energy resources.

Iran, to date, is the third country in the world in terms of oil resources and the first in terms of natural gas reserves. It is therefore clear how the Trump administration, by launching the Energy Dominance doctrine aimed at achieving dominance on the global energy market, can not help but perceive Iran as a fearsome potential competitor and at the same time as a "prey" for the effective expansion and implementation of the aforementioned plan.

Nor should we forget the fact that Iran, as a pillar of the new multipolar order and a hegemonic power in the Middle East, represents a sort of black hole that threatens the US control of that Eurasian rimland that the geopolitical scholar Nicholas J. Spykman laid the foundation of the North American hegemonic system. However, there are other factors that, although preliminary to the North American hegemonic design, remain more related to the rhetoric of the clash between civilizations and the perception of an Islam that can not be used for its geopolitical purposes as an enemy to be fought and annihilated whenever possible. And even in this sense, the North American obsession with Iran appears more than justified.

Today's Iran, albeit with obvious defects (though not alien to any nation in the world), represents the antithesis par excellence of a model of civilization set on the magnificent and progressive fate of modernity. The Khomeinist Revolution developed as a reappropriation of the dimension of the sacred, as a restoration of that direct thread between the physical and metaphysical order that the Western modernity imposed by the Shah regime had almost irretrievably split. The Revolution, understood in the etymologically correct sense of the term re-evolution , has shown how the phenomenon of modernity has no connection with contemporaneity. Modernity is only a model of society, of civilization, of the vision of the world which through a process of reversion of time and of reappropriation of one's traditional "being in the world" can be overturned.

Western colonialism, from the perspective of Imam Khomeini, has been able to counter the reality of Islam by introducing into the Muslim countries foreign laws and cultures incompatible with it so as to make it totally inauthentic. The colonization of the minds is the step immediately following the economic colonization aimed at expropriating natural resources and making the colonized territory a market for the sale of western products. For this reason, according to Khomeini, in the time that the necessary conditions for the Parousia of the Imam of the time are not met, it is not possible for the Islamic Law to remain unused.

But this law must refer to authentic Islam and not to its version counterfeited by Western colonialism. The Imam, for example, never stopped defining Wahhabism as American Islam . The doctrine of the velayat-e faqih (vicariate of the jurisconsult) as the foundation of the current Iranian political system, by the admission of Khomeini himself, is not the product of his theoretical elaboration. This is not something new, but is at the center of the question of Islamic government from the beginning. Khomeini limited himself only to a more in-depth analysis, identifying its roots in the Islamic tradition.

The vicariate of the jurisconsult is the order to fulfill a delivery. The assumption of the obligations of government and of the burden of command by the doctors of the law implies the realization of a precise purpose: to confirm the truth and to eliminate the lie. According to a well known prophetic hadith the doctors of the law are the custodians of the trust of the prophets. And as the Imam reiterates in his speech on the Islamic government:

the general aim of the prophetic mission is the rectification of humanity in the framework of a righteous and neatly developed social structure, which can be achieved through the definition of a government able to run the law.

A concept present on several occasions even in his most strictly focused works on irfan (gnosis) in which to the divine Nuncio and fixed archetype of the Perfect Man is given the task of preserving the limits established by God and preventing them from coming out of the confines of moderation. A call, that to measure, present in a relevant way also in Western culture, both in ancient Greece and in the Middle Ages. It is said, for example, that Frederick II Hohenstaufen, questioned by the legendary Priest Gianni (figuration of the Guenonian "King of the World") about what was the best thing in the world, replied: "the best thing in this world is measure".

It is therefore obvious that as a philosophical-metaphysical logos set entirely on the sense of measure and on the virtue of moderation it can not necessarily clash against a vision of the world based on excess (on that "gigantism" so stigmatized by Martin Heidegger) and on the negation of all that is human. Man realizes himself through thought. Being human means first of all to think and investigate around the sense of truth. And if the instrument of the intellect is not exercised and developed, man is transformed into a machine and is sacrificed on the altar of technique. The fact that Western thought has produced such an artificial act by determining its own suicide does not mean that every other civilization / culture must do the same in the name of unipolar globalization.

The hatred of Iran comes from the fact that this represents a concrete example of resistance, and in some respects an alternative, to this destructive and culturally racist model of civilization. And the same idea is also valid for what concerns Zionism that has imported this model in the Near East, openly confronting the Islamic world. In this regard, the Imam was particularly critical in the first place with the rabbis: "they – said Khomeini – despite being the guardians of Jewish religious law have done nothing to prevent the oppressors to pronounce their sinful words, spread lies, slander and distort the truth".

Original article by Daniele Perra, L'Intellettuale Dissidente – Translation by Costantino Ceoldo – Pravda freelance

[Aug 08, 2018] Obama added some $12.8 Trillion Dollars to the debt.

Aug 08, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

RepaTea -> plakias , 6 Aug 2018 14:56

Why quote figures without context?

Obama came to power January 2008.

Financial crisis hit 2007/8

So he gets the blame for the cost?

Conservative estimate is it added some $12.8 Trillion Dollars to the debt.

Now please grow up and compare apples with apples and be honest about the context....

plakias -> RepaTea , 6 Aug 2018 14:49
On January 20, 2009, when he was sworn in, the debt was $10.626 trillion. On January 20, 2017, when he left, it was $19.947 trillion. Most people would calculate Obama added $9 trillion to the debt, more than any other president. But then Tom Eleven isn't "Most people".

[Aug 08, 2018] Soros the 400k Question What constitutes 'foreign interference' in democracy

Notable quotes:
"... "Unproven Russian involvement in Brexit -- terrible! Impose more sanctions on Moscow! A £400k check from an American billionaire for an anti-Brexit campaigning group -- that's no problem; it's helping our democracy!" ..."
"... "By quitting Europe, I fear that we are hastening Putin's dream of the break-up of the EU -- and with it, potentially, western civilisation," ..."
"... "propaganda arms of the Russian government," ..."
"... "at the back of the queue" ..."
"... "This is not foreign interference This is not foreign interference!" ..."
"... " highly probable " ..."
"... "had conducted a thorough investigation around the Brexit referendum and found no evidence of Russian interference ." ..."
"... "Russian troll factory," ..."
"... "very low levels of engagement" ..."
"... "conspiracy theorist" ..."
"... "Just what does George Soros think he is doing pouring £400,000 into a campaign to stop Brexit. For a start he is not actually a resident of this country so it has nothing to do with him." ..."
"... "I don't know that the public understands the gravity of what the Russians were able to do and continue to do here in the United States. They've attacked us. They're trying to undermine our democracy," ..."
"... "I looked at them and said: 'I'm leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you're not getting the money " ..."
"... "I said, 'I'm telling you, you're not getting the billion dollars," ..."
"... "Well, son of a b***h. He got fired." ..."
www.rt.com

You'd have to have a real sense of humor failure not to laugh. The news that US billionaire Soros donated £400k to an anti-Brexit group came on the day that YouTube said they found no evidence of Russian interference in Brexit. Repeat After Me (with robotic arm movements): "Unproven Russian involvement in Brexit -- terrible! Impose more sanctions on Moscow! A £400k check from an American billionaire for an anti-Brexit campaigning group -- that's no problem; it's helping our democracy!"

You don't have to own a brand new £999 state-of-the art Hypocrisy Detector from Harrods, to pick up on the double standards. Just having a few functioning brain cells and thinking for yourself will do. For months in the UK we've been bombarded with Establishment-approved conspiracy theories -- peddled in all the 'best' newspapers -- that Russia somehow 'fixed' Brexit. Getting Britain to leave the EU was all part of a cunning plot by Vladimir Putin, aka Dr. Evil, to weaken Europe and the 'free world.'

Read more Soros-backed anti-Brexit group is 'undemocratic' -- cofounder Gina Miller

Even West End musical composer Andrew Lloyd-Webber, who knows quite a bit about phantoms, seemed taken in by it. "By quitting Europe, I fear that we are hastening Putin's dream of the break-up of the EU -- and with it, potentially, western civilisation," the noble Lord declared in July.

Never mind that we don't have a single statement from Putin or other senior Kremlin figures saying that they actually supported Brexit. These Establishment Russia-bashers know exactly what The Vlad is thinking.

And never mind that RT and Sputnik, which we are repeatedly told are "propaganda arms of the Russian government," ran articles by pro- and anti-Brexit writers. The same people who told us Iraq had WMDs in 2003 were absolutely sure it was those dastardly Russkies who had got Britain to vote 'leave.' The irony is of course that there was significant foreign interference in Brexit. But it didn't come from Moscow.

Or Obama actually visiting the U.K. to urge people to vote Remain. Imagine if Putin did the same for Leave!

-- jeffreydujon (@vanremny) February 8, 2018

The US has always wanted Britain to stay in the EU. In April 2016, two months before the Referendum, President Obama made it clear what he wanted when he visited the UK. He warned that if Britain exited the EU it would be "at the back of the queue" for trade deals with the US .

Just imagine if Putin had said that. The Russophobes would have spontaneously combusted.

Then of course there was the backing the Remain camp had from the giants of US capital. Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan donated £500,000 each to the 'Britain Stronger in Europe' group, Citigroup and Morgan Stanley -- £250,000 each.

Again, repeat after me (with robotic arm movements): "This is not foreign interference This is not foreign interference!"

You've got to see the funny side of this: all that hysterical fake news about 'Russian interference' in Brexit & here we have one side receiving £400K from a US billionaire who is part of the US political establishment. Is that not 'interference' ?!! https://t.co/URzrB3ciLd

-- Neil Clark (@NeilClark66) February 8, 2018

The point is not whether we are for or against Brexit. Or whether we think George Soros is a malign influence who only acts out of self-interest or an old sweetie-pie with the good of humanity at heart. The point is the double standards that are causing our Hypocrisy Detectors to explode.

Let's think back to December 2016. Then, the pro-war and fiercely anti-Russian Labour MP Ben Bradshaw told Parliament that it was " highly probable " that Russia had interfered with Brexit.

Fourteen months on, what have we got? On Thursday, the global head of You Tube's public policy, Juniper Downs, said her company "had conducted a thorough investigation around the Brexit referendum and found no evidence of Russian interference ."

Read more © Sophia Kembowski / Global Look Press No Russian interference in Brexit referendum - YouTube exec tells parliamentary committee (VIDEO)

Twitter meanwhile says it detected 49 (yes, 49) accounts from what it claimed to be a "Russian troll factory," which sent all of 942 messages about Brexit -- amounting to less than 0.005% of all the tweets about the Referendum. Twitter said the accounts received "very low levels of engagement" from users. If the Kremlin had planned to use tweets to persuade us to vote 'leave,' they didn't really put much effort into it, did they?

Finally, Facebook said that only three "Kremlin-linked" accounts were found which spent the grand sum of 72p (yes, 72p) on ads during the Referendum campaign. Which amounts to the greater "interference" ? 72p or £400K? Erm tough call, isn't it?

You might have thought, given his concern with 'foreign interference' in British politics, that Ben Bradshaw would have been urging 'Best for Britain' to return George Soros' donation. Au contraire! His only tweets about it were retweets of two critical comments about the Daily Telegraph, and the BBC's coverage of the story. Conclusion: Those who rail about 'Russia meddling in Brexit' but not Soros' intervention aren't concerned about 'foreign interference' in UK politics, only 'foreign interference' from countries they don't approve of.

Those who are quite happy peddling ludicrous conspiracy theories about Russians shout "conspiracy theorist" (or worse) at those who report factually on proven meddling from others. The Daily Express hit the nail on the head in their Friday editorial which said: "Just what does George Soros think he is doing pouring £400,000 into a campaign to stop Brexit. For a start he is not actually a resident of this country so it has nothing to do with him."

That really is the rub of the matter. And Bradshaw and co. have no adequate response except to shoot the messenger.

If we look at the affair with an even wider lens, the hypocrisy is even greater. The US has been gripped by an anti-Russian frenzy not seen since the days of Senator Joe McCarthy. The unsubstantiated claim that Russia fixed the election for Donald Trump is repeated by 'liberals' and many neocons too, as a statement of fact. "I don't know that the public understands the gravity of what the Russians were able to do and continue to do here in the United States. They've attacked us. They're trying to undermine our democracy," film director Rob Reiner said .

But the number one country round the world for undermining democracy and interfering in the affairs of other sovereign states is the US itself.

Read more The US Vice President Joe Biden (L) jokes that Ukraine's President Petro Poroshenko (R) is buying lunch, before sitting down to their bilateral meeting at the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington March 31, 2016. © Jonathan Ernst 'Son of b***h got fired': Joe Biden forced Ukraine to sack prosecutor general 'in six hours'

While Establishment journos and pundits have been foaming at the mouth over 'Russiagate' and getting terribly excited over 'smoking guns' which turn out -- surprise, surprise -- to be damp squibs, there's been less attention paid to the boasts of former Vice President Joe Biden on how he got the allegedly 'independent' Ukrainian government to sack its prosecutor general in a few hours. "I looked at them and said: 'I'm leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you're not getting the money "

"I said, 'I'm telling you, you're not getting the billion dollars," Biden said during a meeting of the US' Council on Foreign Relations. "Well, son of a b***h. He got fired."

Again, just imagine the furore if a leading Russian government figure boasted about how he used financial inducements to get another country's Prosecutor General to be sacked. Or if a tape was leaked in which the Russian Ambassador and a Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson could be heard discussing who should or shouldn't be in the new 'democratic' government of another sovereign state. But we had the US Ambassador to Ukraine and the US Assistant Secretary of State doing exactly that in 2014 -- and the 'Russia is interfering in the Free World!' brigade were as silent as a group of Trappist monks.

It's fair to say that Orwell would have a field day with the doublespeak that's currently on show. The cognitive dissonance is there for all to see. Repeat After Me: Unproven Russian interference -- Bad. Proven interference from other external sources -- Good. What's your problem?

Neil Clark is a journalist, writer, broadcaster and blogger. He has written for many newspapers and magazines in the UK and other countries including The Guardian, Morning Star, Daily and Sunday Express, Mail on Sunday, Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, New Statesman, The Spectator, The Week, and The American Conservative. He is a regular pundit on RT and has also appeared on BBC TV and radio, Sky News, Press TV and the Voice of Russia. He is the co-founder of the Campaign For Public Ownership @PublicOwnership. His award winning blog can be found at www.neilclark66.blogspot.com. He tweets on politics and world affairs

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

[Aug 07, 2018] Britain Tightens NATO s Noose Around Russia

Notable quotes:
"... In addition, Russia is being literally fenced off from Europe, with NATO members and/or EU member states Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland building border fences. Finland, Norway and Ukraine are members of neither NATO nor the EU but contribute to NATO and are also building fences with Russia. ..."
Aug 07, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

A European Parliament report (2017) says :

"All Russian security documents explicitly single out the challenges that the policies of Western states supposedly create for Russian security (with particularly harsh words in the Security strategy). Grievances connected to what Russia sees as 'systemic problems in the Euro-Atlantic region' (Foreign policy concept), the enlargement of NATO, the location of its military infrastructure close to Russian borders, its 'offensive capabilities' and the trend towards the Alliance acquiring 'global functions', the 'symptoms' of the U.S. efforts to retain absolute military supremacy (the global antimissile system, Global Strike capabilities, militarization of space) "

Are Russian forces in Canada and Mexico conducting joint exercises against the US? No. Are Russian forces in Ireland conducting joint exercises against Britain? No. Is there an obvious Russian presence in Scotland promoting independence from the UK? No. But Britain and the US are mounted on Russia's borders and conducting joint exercises with its neighbors.

In addition, Russia is being literally fenced off from Europe, with NATO members and/or EU member states Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland building border fences. Finland, Norway and Ukraine are members of neither NATO nor the EU but contribute to NATO and are also building fences with Russia.

But what do Russia's neighbours, like the Estonians, rank as their national security priorities? A survey suggests that for Estonians, the biggest threat to global security is the Islamic State, followed by the refugee crisis in Europe and the war in Syria. Russia came fourth on the list, even after the Ukraine crisis. According to Gallup , a majority 52% of Estonians consider NATO a protective force, but 43% see it as either a threat (17%) or neither (26%). Estonians are behind Kosovars, Albanians, Poles and Lithuanians in their opinions of NATO.

[Aug 07, 2018] The UK s Labour Party and Its Anti-Semitism Crisis

Aug 07, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

The Labour is in the midst of an "antisemitism crisis" orchestrated by the media, pro-Zionist Jewish groups, and the party's Blairite faction bent on ousting Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader.

The UK's media is overwhelmingly rightwing and pro-Israel. Even the BBC, terrified of being donated to Rupert Murdoch in a Tory privatization, is pro-Tory and pro-Israel in its news reporting, all its professions of "objectivity" notwithstanding.

Corbyn has been their constant target since he became the party's leader, and the "antisemitism" smear is the latest installment in this rightwing effort to discredit him.

Even the supposedly liberal Guardian newspaper, whose editorial line on Israel is led by the staunch Zionist Jonathan Freedland, is resolutely anti-Corbyn.

No leader of a major political party has been as resolute as Corbyn in defending Palestinian rights. The Observer newspaper put this succinctly: "As a long-term and ardent critic of Israel's policies and staunch supporter of Palestinian causes, he has always been distrusted by the Jewish community".

Pro-Zionist Jewish groups fear that under his leadership Britain will become much more like Ireland (which recently banned the import of products made in the illegal Israeli settlements) in its disposition towards Israel.

A clue to the motivation of these pro-Zionist UK Jewish groups was provided by the recent public protest in London against Labour's "antisemitism"– many protesters carried the Israeli flag and "Israel we stand behind you" signs, thereby making it clear that their concern for Zionist Israel was highly instrumental, and perhaps primarily so, in their presence at this rally against Labour's "antisemitism".

Several Blairite Labour MPs were present at this demonstration.

The Blairite faction in Labour has already made one attempt to overthrow Corbyn when it made him submit to an unprecedented reelection shortly after he became party leader.

Corbyn went on to win this challenge with a percentage exceeding Blair's when the latter was elected Labour leader.

Labour's Blairite bloc know that Corbyn has to lose the next general election if they are to survive as a force within the party. If Labour (under Corbyn) wins this election, they will have little choice but to take the option already being talked about by some of these Blairites, that is, splitting from Labour and forming a new "centrist" party.

Their eminence grise, Tony Blair himself, has already talked about creating this "centrist" party.

So, paradoxically, Labour's Blairites would rather have the Conservatives win the next general election as their ticket to survival within their own party!

Predictably, one of these Blairites, Labour's deputy leader Tom Watson, jumped on the "crisis" bandwagon by saying that Labour faces "eternal shame" over antisemitism.

Of course, there are pockets of antisemitism in Labour, as is the case in nearly every non-Jewish British walk of life, including the Tories (though dressing up in Nazi uniform and chanting "Sieg Heil!" at parties, as opposed to upholding Palestinian rights, is their forte).

A few days ago, it was revealed that the senior Tory politicians Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, and Jacob Rees-Mogg had recently met in secret with Steve Bannon, who runs Breitbart News , a haven for antisemitic views. The British media, and the Blairite Labour MPs hounding Corbyn, have said nary a word about these meetings. Nor have the vociferous UK Jewish organizations.

The notion that there is significant antisemitism in Labour, let alone one amounting to a "crisis", is a red herring.

The most recent purported manifestation of this crisis pivots on the decision of Labour's National Executive Committee (NEC) to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Association's "non-legally binding working definition" of antisemitism, but not the "illustrations" which accompany it. The definition states:

"Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities."

The "illustrations" which accompany this definition include some which are uncontroversial for any fair-minded and relatively rational person, and others which are highly problematic for such a person.

The uncontroversial "illustrations" of antisemitism:

+ advocating the killing or harming of Jews for ideological or religious reasons;

+ making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such;

+ holding Jews as a people responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group;

+ Holocaust denial;

+ using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis;

+ holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel;

+ accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.

The controversial "illustrations" of antisemitism (and non-coincidently they all have a bearing on the Palestinian cause):

+ accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel than to the interests of their own nations;

+ claiming that the existence of the state of Israel is a racist endeavour;

+ applying double standards by requiring of Israel conduct not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation;

+ drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

A close examination of this latter set of "illustrations" shows that Labour is absolutely right to resist the immense pressure from Zionists and their supporters to accept these latter "illustrations" as part of the definition of antisemitism.

There are examples of Jewish US citizens being more loyal to Israel than to the interests of their country.

The casino mogul Sheldon Adelson donated $25 million to Trump's 2016 campaign ($82 million in total to Republicans in 2016), and $5 million towards his inauguration. Earlier this year Adelson donated $70 million to Birthright, the organization that brings young Jews to Israel for nothing (he's donated $100m in total to Birthright). He also donated $30 million to Republicans after Trump withdrew from the nuclear agreement with Iran. Adelson spent $150m in the 2012 election in a futile attempt to unseat the "anti-Israel" Barack Obama.

Adelson's aim in all of this is to swing Trump behind his friend Netanyahu's "Greater Israel" political agenda. To this end Adelson pushed hard for the US's withdrawal from the Iran deal, appointing the arch-Zionist John Bolton as a Trump adviser, recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital (in contravention of international law), and moving the US embassy to Jerusalem. Adelson has succeeded in all of these objectives.

Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law and "envoy" for a "peace" deal in the Middle East, has made it clear that any such deal will have to be compatible with Likud's "Greater Israel" political agenda.

According to The New York Times , Kushner's family real estate company "received a roughly $30 million investment from Menora Mivtachim, an insurer that is one of Israel's largest financial institutions".

The same NYT article also reported that "the Kushners had teamed up with at least one member of Israel's wealthy Steinmetz family to buy nearly $200 million of Manhattan apartment buildings, as well as to build a luxury rental tower in New Jersey".

More from the same article: "Mr. Kushner's company has also taken out at least four loans from Israel's largest bank, Bank Hapoalim, which is the subject of a Justice Department investigation over allegations that it helped wealthy Americans evade taxes".

Kushner's family foundation also donates to an illegal settlement in the West Bank.

Meanwhile , US military aid to Israel amounts to $3.8 billion annually, or $23,000 per year for every Jewish family living in Israel for the next 10 years.

At the same time, 40 million Americans live in poverty, seniors and veterans are sleeping rough, and teachers have to buy school supplies, and in some cases food, for their students.

Given these two examples of prominent Jewish individuals with loyalties divided between the US and Israel, with Israel acquiring much and the US gaining so little from their actions, it is arguable whether it is "antisemitic" to broadcast the information detailed above.

Claiming that the existence of the state of Israel is a racist endeavour is likewise hardly antisemitic. The recently passed Israeli Nationality Law confirms why.

According to the law, Israel's full name is "Israel, the nation state of the Jewish people". The law stipulates that Eretz Israel (historical Palestine) is the homeland of the Jewish people, while the state of Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people.

As such, only Jews have the right to self-determination in Israel. Hebrew is the only official language, with Arabic no longer considered an official language.

The nationality law enjoins that future Jewish settlement in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories is a supreme national objective (in contravention of international law).

The law also grants Jewish communities the right to a segregated territory in the state(in practice legalizing exclusive villages and towns for Jews).

The nationality law effectively deprives Arabs of any official semblance of their national identity, and confirms Israel's status as an apartheid, i.e. racist, state. Saying this is certainly anti-Zionist, but only a dogmatist would insist that it is ipso facto "antisemitic".

The IHRA "illustration" maintaining that it is antisemitic to apply double standards by requiring of Israel conduct not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation is likewise extremely awkward in formulation and also in practice.

The 2017 Democracy Index used 4 categories to assess countries– full democracy, flawed democracy, hybrid regime, and authoritarian regime.

The following countries were ranked by the Index as full democracies: Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Mauritius, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and Uruguay.

Israel was listed as a flawed democracy, as was the US.

Israel's leaders have always touted their country as "the only democracy in the Middle East", as if their country stood on a par with the 19 countries ranked as full democracies by the 2017 Democracy Index.

Is it "antisemitic" to hold Israel to a standard deemed to be achieved by Mauritius and Uruguay?

Or to say that Israel is really an "ethnocracy", as opposed to being a democracy?

The Israeli political geographer Oren Yiftachel argued in his 2006 book Ethnocracy: Land and Identity Politics in Israel/Palestine that an ethnocracy is a regime promoting "the expansion of the dominant group in contested territory while maintaining a democratic façade".

When it comes todrawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis, it all depends on the basis used in making the comparison between Israel and the Nazis.

Having gas chambers for mass exterminations, then certainly not.

However, nearly everyone who believes that comparing Israel with the Nazis is "antisemitic" invariably takes the concentration-camp gas chambers as the implicit norm, whether out of bad faith or ignorance, for making such comparisons.

The Nazi "final solution", vast as it was, had many strands, with horror piled upon horror. This multiple-layering must be considered when making the Israel-Nazi comparison.

Encircling and starving-out an entire community in a ghetto (Warsaw?), then yes, the comparison is valid– this is precisely what is taking place in Gaza.

The Nazis confiscated Jewish property wholesale; the Israelis are doing the same to Palestinian houses and land in order to "clear" them for the expansion of the illegal settlements, and for alleged military purposes. B'Tselem, Israel's human rights watchdog, confirms this on their website . So, yes, in this case the comparison between Israel and the Nazis is valid.

Jews were prevented from leaving German-occupied Poland by the SS. Similarly, Palestinians are prevented from leaving Gaza (even for medical treatment) by the combined efforts of Israel and the Egyptian dictatorship. So, yes, in this case the comparison between Israel and the Nazis is valid.

German Civil Police K-9 Units were used by the SS to assist in the roundup and deportation of Jews in WW2. Similarly, the Israeli army uses attack dogs on unarmed Palestinians when raiding their homes, and when arresting peaceful demonstrators. So, yes, in this case the comparison between Israel and the Nazis is valid.

It is difficult to see why comparing Israel to the Nazis on these latter bases, while scrupulously eschewing the gas chambers as a basis for comparison (the Palestinians have not been sent to gas chambers en masse), necessarily makes one an "antisemite".

The Israeli historian Ilan Pappé describes Israel's policy regarding Gaza as "incremental genocide", in contrast to the Nazi's absolute genocide. The final outcome however is not in doubt.

The distinguished Oxford jurist Stephen Sedley (himself a Jew) has saidthat "there is no legal bar on criticising Israel. Yet several of the "examples" that have been tacked on to the IHRA definition (by whom is not known) seek to stifle criticism of Israel irrespective of intent. The House of Commons select committee on home affairs in October 2016 advised adding: "It is not antisemitic to criticise the government of Israel, without additional evidence to suggest antisemitic intent"."

Corbyn, under siege from the media and Jewish groups (who say, with risible hyperbole, that he poses an "existential threat" to British Jews), has apologized for not doing enough to root out antisemitism in the Labour Party.

Corbyn's apology was unnecessary. Not just because it was not merited by the real circumstances underlying this manufactured "crisis", but also because every step he takes now is dismissed as "meaningless" and "too little, too late" by his opportunistic opponents.

Instead Corbyn should have given an immediate forensic analysis of the IHRA's flawed "examples" of "antisemitism", indicating that Labour was wise not to incorporate these, root and branch, in the definition of antisemitism it adopted.

Corbyn should also have come out earlier with his pledge to deal firmly with those justifiably guilty of antisemitism in the Labour party.

Corbyn has many admirable qualities, but perhaps doing forensics is not one of them. However, he has many surrogates capable of undertaking this task, and they should be entrusted with it immediately.

The late and much missed Robin Cook, the former Labour minister who demolished Blair's rationales for the Iraq war in the House of Commons debate on Blair's push for the war, would have been perfect for the job.

Will Labour now find its anti-Zionist Robin Cook? Join the debate on Facebook More articles by: Kenneth Surin

Kenneth Surin teaches at Duke University, North Carolina. He lives in Blacksburg, Virginia.

[Aug 07, 2018] False flag antisemtism

Aug 07, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

MoreSun -> Luc X. Ifer Tue, 08/07/2018 - 12:17 Permalink

Yip, and this is a part of (((their))) tactic:

Doesn't matter if it's 2004 or 2018, the (((usual suspects))) keep playing this cruel game to maintain their eternal victim status, garner pity, sympathy and the mandatory outpouring of tax dollars from the city/state/nation's Treasury to their jew supremacist pockets.

And it's been going on for centuries....all over the western world.

Five Jews Arrested for Painting Swastikas on Israel Consulate

Jewish man accused of spray-painting swastikas on own home

It's restricted, jewtube don't want you viewing it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgSEmkhMcIM

[Aug 07, 2018] Mueller, Russia and Oil Politics by Rob Urie

Notable quotes:
"... The Great Satin (sic) ..."
"... Source: gulfbusiness.com ..."
"... Chart: Demonization of Russia centers on competition for oil and gas revenues. Pipelines to deliver oil and gas from the Middle East to Europe run through North Africa (Libya) and Syria and / or Turkey. These pipelines are substantially controlled by Western interests with imperial / colonial ties to the U.S., Britain and 'developed' Europe. Russian oil and gas did run through Ukraine, which is now negotiating to join NATO, or otherwise hits a NATO wall before entering Europe. ..."
Feb 19, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

The indictments are a major political story, but not for the reasons given in mainstream press coverage. Once Mr. Mueller's indictment is understood to charge the exploitation of existing social tensions (read it and decide for yourself), the FBI, which Mr. Mueller directed from 2001 – 2013, is precisely the wrong entity to be rendering judgment. The FBI has been America's political police since its founding in 1908. Early on former FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover led legally dubious mass arrests of American dissidents. He practically invented the slander of conflating legitimate dissent with foreign agency. This is the institutional backdrop from which Mr. Mueller proceeds.

In the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s the FBI's targets included the civil rights movement, the antiwar movement, the American Indian Movement (AIM), the Black Panther Party and any other political organization Mr. Hoover deemed a threat. The secret (hidden) FBI program COINTELPRO was intended to subvert political outcomes outside of allegations of criminal wrongdoing and with no regard for the lives of its targets . Throughout its history the FBI has sided with the powerful against the powerless to maintain an unjust social order.

Robert Mueller became FBI Director only days before the attacks of September 11, 2001. One of his first acts as Director was to arrest 1,000 persons without any evidence of criminal wrongdoing. None of those arrested were ever charged in association with the attacks. The frame in which the FBI acted -- to maintain political stability threatened by 'external' forces, was ultimately chosen by the George W. Bush administration to justify its aggressive war against Iraq.

It is the FBI's legacy of conflating dissent with being an agent of a foreign power that Mr. Mueller's indictment most insidiously perpetuates. Russians are 'sowing discord,' and they are using Americans to do so, goes the allegation. Black Lives Matter and Bernie Sanders are listed in the indictment as roadblocks to the unfettered ascension of Hillary Clinton to the presidency. Russians are sowing discord, therefore discord is both suspect in itself and evidence of being a foreign agent.

The posture of simple reporting at work in the indictment -- that it isn't the FBI's fault that the Russians (allegedly) inserted themselves into the electoral process, runs against the history of the FBI's political role, the tilt used to craft criminal charges and the facts put forward versus those put to the side. Given the political agendas of the other agencies that the FBI joined through the charges, they are most certainly but a small piece of a larger story.

In the aftermath of the indictments it's easy to forget that the Pentagon created the internet , that the NSA has its tentacles in all of its major chokepoints, that the CIA has been heavily involved in funding and 'using' social media toward its own ends and that the FBI is only reputable in the present because of Americans' near-heroic ignorance of history. The claim that the Russian operation was sophisticated because it had corporate form and function is countered by the fact that it was, by the various agencies' own claims, ineffectual in changing the outcome of the election.

I Have a List

While Robert Mueller was busy charging never-to-be-tried Russians with past crimes, Dan Coats, the Director of National Intelligence, declared that future Russian meddling has already cast a shadow over the integrity of the 2018 election. Why the Pentagon that created the internet, the NSA that has its tentacles in all of its major chokepoints, the CIA that has been heavily involved in funding and 'using' social media toward its own ends and the FBI that just landed such a glorious victory of good over evil would be quivering puddles when it comes to precluding said meddling is a question that needs to be asked.

The political frame being put forward is that only these agencies know if particular elections and candidates have been tainted by meddling, therefore we need to trust them to tell us which candidates were legitimately elected and which weren't. As generous as this offer seems, wouldn't the creation of free and fair elections be a more direct route to achieving this end? Put differently, who among those making the offer, whether personally or as functionaries of their respective agencies, has a demonstrated history of supporting democratic institutions?

The 2016 election was apparently a test case for posing these agencies as the meddling police. By getting the bourgeois electocracy -- liberal Democrats, to agree that the loathsome Trump is illegitimate, future candidates will be vetted by the CIA, NSA and FBI with impunity. It's apparently only the pre-'discord, ' the social angst that the decade of the Great Recession left as its residual, that shifts this generous offer from the deterministic to the realm of the probable. The social conditions that led to the Great Recession and its aftermath are entirely home grown.

More broadly, how do the government agencies and people that spent the better part of the last century undermining democracy at home and abroad intend to stop 'Russian meddling?' If the FBI couldn't disentangle home grown 'discord' from that allegedly exploited and exacerbated by the Russians, isn't the likely intention to edit out all discord? And if fake news is a problem in need of addressing, wouldn't the New York Times and the Washington Post have been shut down years ago?

The Great Satin (sic)

While Russia is the villain of the day, week and year due to alleged election 'meddling,' the process of demonization that Russia has undergone has shown little variation from (alleged) villain to villain. It is thanks to cable news and the 'newspaper of record' that the true villainy of Vladimir Putin, Muammar Gadhafi, Saddam Hussein, Nicolas Maduro and the political leadership of Iran has been revealed. In the face of such monsters, questions of motivation are moot. Why wouldn't Mr. Putin 'sow discord?'

The question as yet unasked, and therefore unanswered is: is there something besides base villainy that brought these national leaders, and the nations they lead, into the crosshairs of America's fair and wise leadership? This question might forever go unanswered were it not for the secret list from which their names were apparently drawn. No, not that secret list. This one is publicly available -- hiding in plain sight, as it were. It is the list of proven oil reserves by country (below). This is no doubt unduly reductive -- evil is as evil does, but read on.

The question of how such a list could divide so evenly between heroes and villains I leave to the philosophers. On second thought, no I won't. The heroes are allies of a small cadre of America's political and economic elite who have made themselves fabulously rich through the alliances. The villains have oil, gas, pipelines and other resources that this elite wants. Reductive, yes. But this simple list certainly appears to explain American foreign policy over the last half-century quite well.

Source: gulfbusiness.com

It's almost as if America's love for humanity, as demonstrated through humanitarian interventions, is determined by imperial competition for natural resources -- in this case oil and gas. Amongst these countries, only one (Canada) is 'democratic' in the American sense of being run by a small cadre of plutocrats who use the state to further their own interests. Two -- Iraq and Libya, were recently reduced to rubble (for the sake of humanity) by the U.S. Nigeria is being 'brought' under the control of AFRICOM. What remains are various and sundry petro-states plus Venezuela and Russia.

Following the untimely death of Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, the horrible tyrant kept in office via free and fair elections , who used Venezuela's petro-dollars to feed, clothe and educate his people and was in the process of creating a regional Left alliance to counter American abuse of power, the CIA joined with local plutocrats to overthrow his successor, Nicolas Maduro. The goal: to 'liberate' Venezuela's oil revenues in their own pockets. At the moment Mr. Maduro is down the list of villains, not nearly the stature of a 'new Hitler' like Vladimir Putin. But where he ends up will depend on how successfully the CIA (with Robert Mueller's help) can drum up a war against nuclear armed Russia.

What separates Russia from the other heroes and villains on the list is its history as a competing empire as well as the manner in which Russian oil and gas is distributed. Geography placed it closer to the population centers of Europe than to Southeastern China where Chinese economic development has been concentrated. This makes Europe a 'natural' market for Russian oil and gas.

The former Soviet state of Ukraine did stand between, or rather under, Russian pipelines and Europe until Hillary Clinton had her lieutenants engineer a coup there in 2014. In contrast to the 'new Hitler' of Mr. Putin (or was that Trump?) Mrs. Clinton and her comrades demonstrated a preference for the old Hitler in the form of Ukrainian fascists who were the ideological descendants of 'authentic' WWII Nazis. But rest assured, not all of the U.S.'s allies in this affair were ideological Nazis .

Chart: Demonization of Russia centers on competition for oil and gas revenues. Pipelines to deliver oil and gas from the Middle East to Europe run through North Africa (Libya) and Syria and / or Turkey. These pipelines are substantially controlled by Western interests with imperial / colonial ties to the U.S., Britain and 'developed' Europe. Russian oil and gas did run through Ukraine, which is now negotiating to join NATO, or otherwise hits a NATO wall before entering Europe.

In contrast to the alternative hypotheses given in the American press, NATO, the geopolitical extension of the U.S. military in Europe, admits that the U.S. engineered coup in Ukraine was 'about' oil geopolitics with Russia. The American storyline that Crimea was seized by Russia ignores that the Russian navy has had a Black Sea port in Crimea for decades. How amenable, precisely, might Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and his friends be if Russia seized a major U.S. naval port given their generous offer to take over the U.S. electoral system because of a few Russian trolls?

Although Russia is toward the bottom of the top ten countries in terms of oil reserves, it faces a problem of distribution that the others don't. Imperial ties and recent military incursions have left the distribution of oil and gas from the Middle East to Europe largely under Western control. Syria, Turkey and North Africa are necessary to moving this oil and gas through pipelines to Europe. That Syria, Libya and Turkey are now, or recently have been, militarily contested adds credence to the contention that the 'international community's' heroes and villains are largely determined by whose hands their oil and gas resources are currently in.

Democratic Party loyalists who see Putin, Maduro et al as the problem first need to answer for the candidate they put forward in 2016. Hillary Clinton led the carnage in Libya that murdered 30,000 – 50,000 innocents for Western oil and gas interests. Russia didn't force the U.S. into its calamitous invasion of Iraq. Russia didn't take Americans' jobs, houses and pensions in the Great Recession. Russia didn't reward Wall Street for causing it. Democrats need to take responsibility for their failed candidates and their failed Party.

Part of the point in relating oil reserves to American foreign entanglements is that the countries and leaders involved are incidental. Vladimir Putin certainly seems smarter than the American leadership. But this has no bearing on whether or not his leadership of Russia is broadly socially beneficial. The only possible resolution of climate crisis requires both Russia and the U.S. to greatly reduce their use of fossil fuels. Reports have it that Mr. Putin has no interest in doing so. And once the marketing chatter is set to the side, neither do the Americans.

By placing themselves as arbiters of the electoral process, the Director of National Intelligence and the heads of the CIA, NSA and FBI can effectively control it. Is it accidental that the candidate of liberal Democrats in the 2016 election was the insiders' -- the intelligence agencies' and military contractors,' candidate as well? Implied is that these agencies and contractors are now 'liberal.' Good luck with that program if you value peace and prosperity.

There are lots of ways to create free and fair elections if that is the goal. Use paper ballots that are counted in public, automatically register all eligible voters, make election days national holidays and eliminate 'private' funding of electoral campaigns. But why make elections free and fair when fanciful nonsense about 'meddling' will convince the liberal class to deliver power to grey corpses in the CIA, NSA and FBI for the benefit of a tiny cabal of stupendously rich plutocrats. Who says America isn't already great?

[Aug 07, 2018] It s very profitable to be an anti-Russian talking head.

Aug 07, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

New Cold War

"Ex-FBI agent: Trump got elected, thanks to Russia" [ Yahoo News ]. • One thing to remember about RussiaRussiaRussia -- R 3 ? -- is that it's very profitable to be a talking head.

"DOJ Announces Public Release of the Cyber-Digital Task Force's First Report; Impact on and Role of the Private Sector Likely to be a Focus in the Coming Months" [ Compliance and Enforcement ]. "[Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein] lauded 'self-policing' efforts to remove 'fake accounts' and encouraged companies to 'consider the voluntary removal of accounts and content' that are linked by the FBI to foreign agents' activities, which he said 'violate terms of service and deceive customers.'" • What could go wrong?

flora , August 6, 2018 at 2:44 pm

re: Living in the Age of the Big Lie.

"The Death of Truth" by Pulitzer-Prize winning book critic Michiko Kakutani explores the waning of integrity in American society, particularly since the 2016 elections. Daniel Patrick Moynihan's observation that "everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts," is more timely than ever, Kakutani says: "polarization has grown so extreme that voters have a hard time even agreeing on the same facts." And no wonder: Two-thirds of Americans get at least some of their news through social media -- a platform that has been overwhelmed by trolls and bots, and which uses algorithms to decide what each of us gets to see.

Executives ignore the cultural shift away from honesty at their peril.

I would put the start date for the cultural shift away from honest at 2008; every one knew what caused the financial disaster, knew who the culprits were (and are), saw them get away with grand theft and govt protection, and knew they were being lied to by the sort of bs excuses like WF's "it was a computer glitch" that done it. Once it was clear the govt was going to protect the robbers, the new paradigm of dishonesty in high places trickled down. Ohhh, so that's how trickle down works.

[Aug 07, 2018] Yemen? We are assisting a genocidal war. What else can be said?

Aug 07, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com
8. Yemen? We are assisting a genocidal war. What else can be said? pl

English Outsider -> EEngineer , 7 hours ago

On your last paragraph, I've been nursing that hope as far as the ME goes for a while as well. Ever since the Jerusalem decision.

As for European NATO, isn't that already shot? Turkey unreliable at one end. The UK at odds with the mainland at the other, if all the disaster talk isn't just theatre and maybe if it is. European NATO no longer looks like a credible alliance. Not an alliance at all should Trump remove or cause to be removed the American glue holding it all together.

But the Colonel's item 8 is going to weigh on the conscience of the West for a long time.

EEngineer -> English Outsider , 6 hours ago
On #8: I would bet that not 1 in 100 Americans know anything about the place at all, never mind the current slaughter. There will be nothing for them to forget. I'm not trying to be flippant either. Unfortunately, most of my countrymen are simply fat, dumb, and happy; and content to stay that way.

[Aug 07, 2018] An interesting analogy with neocons effort to fuel Russiagate hysteria

Notable quotes:
"... First, the wrecking and diversionist-espionage work of agents of foreign countries , among whom a rather active role was played by the Trotskyists, affected more or less all, or nearly all, of our organizations-economic, administrative, and Party. ..."
"... Second, agents of foreign countries, among them the Trotskyites , penetrated not only into lower organizations, but also into certain responsible posts. ..."
"... Third, some of our leading comrades, both at the center and at the periphery, not only failed to discern the face of these wreckers, diversionists, spies, and killers, but proved to be so careless, complacent,and naive that at times they themselves assisted in promoting agents of foreign states to responsible posts. ..."
Aug 07, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

clarky90 , August 3, 2018 at 5:15 pm

Re. "Old, white, Bernie Sanders"

Comrade Stalin speaks from the grave, in support of Kommissar General Clinton supporting her brave fight against wreckers, spies, provocateurs, diversionists, whiteguards, kulaks .who are trying to infiltrate and destroy, OUR Democratic Party!

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1937/03/03.htm

Defects in Party Work and Measures for Liquidating Trotskyite and Other Double Dealers : March 3, 1937

"Comrades!

From the reports and the debates on these reports heard at this plenum, it is evident that we are dealing with the following three main facts.

First, the wrecking and diversionist-espionage work of agents of foreign countries , among whom a rather active role was played by the Trotskyists, affected more or less all, or nearly all, of our organizations-economic, administrative, and Party.

Second, agents of foreign countries, among them the Trotskyites , penetrated not only into lower organizations, but also into certain responsible posts.

Third, some of our leading comrades, both at the center and at the periphery, not only failed to discern the face of these wreckers, diversionists, spies, and killers, but proved to be so careless, complacent,and naive that at times they themselves assisted in promoting agents of foreign states to responsible posts.

These are the three incontrovertible facts which naturally emerge from the reports and the discussions on them "

JBird , August 4, 2018 at 12:14 am

Diversionist is a new one to me. I suppose that those are thieves?

clarky90 , August 4, 2018 at 1:12 am

Wrecking (Russian: вредительство or vreditel'stvo, lit. "inflicting damage", "harming"), was a crime specified in the criminal code of the Soviet Union in the Stalin era. It is often translated as "sabotage"; however, "wrecking", "diversionist acts" , and "counter-revolutionary sabotage" were distinct sub-articles of Article 58 (RSFSR Penal Code) (58-7, 58-9, and 58-14 respectively), The meaning of "wrecking" is closer to "undermining".

These three categories were distinguished in the following way:

Diversions were acts of immediate infliction of physical damage on state and cooperative property.

Wrecking was deliberate acts aimed against normal functioning of state and cooperative organisations, such as giving deliberately wrong commands.

Sabotage was non-execution, or careless execution, of one's duties.
The definition of sabotage was interpreted dialectically and indirectly, so any form of non-compliance with Party directives could have been considered a 'sabotage'."

JBird , August 4, 2018 at 6:40 pm

Sabotage was non-execution, or careless execution, of one's duties.
The definition of sabotage was interpreted dialectically and indirectly, so any form of non-compliance with Party directives could have been considered a 'sabotage'."

So no deviating from being, or at least appearing as, an ultra obedient group-thinking conformist drone. Gotcha. Anyone the higher ups didn't like would be guilty of something, rather like how Americans today commit multiple felonies each day because it is unavoidable.

ObjectiveFunction , August 4, 2018 at 2:50 am

Yeah, a not so distant mirror. Didn't Stalin also have a title that amounted to Stable Genius of the Revolution?

In 1937 he wasn't on about ((((homeless cosmopolitans)))) yet.

Procopius , August 4, 2018 at 11:13 pm

I never followed up on it, but I read years ago that virtually all the original members of PNAC and American Enterprise Institute were Trotskyites. Specifically Irving Kristol (Butcher Bill's father), and Gertrud Himmelfarb (his mother).

[Aug 07, 2018] Comrade Stalin speaks from the grave, in support of Kommissar Hillary Clinton

Notable quotes:
"... First, the wrecking and diversionist-espionage work of agents of foreign countries , among whom a rather active role was played by the Trotskyists, affected more or less all, or nearly all, of our organizations-economic, administrative, and Party. ..."
"... Second, agents of foreign countries, among them the Trotskyites , penetrated not only into lower organizations, but also into certain responsible posts. ..."
Aug 07, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

clarky90 , August 3, 2018 at 5:15 pm

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1937/03/03.htm

Defects in Party Work and Measures for Liquidating Trotskyite and Other Double Dealers : March 3, 1937

"Comrades!

From the reports and the debates on these reports heard at this plenum, it is evident that we are dealing with the following three main facts.

First, the wrecking and diversionist-espionage work of agents of foreign countries , among whom a rather active role was played by the Trotskyists, affected more or less all, or nearly all, of our organizations-economic, administrative, and Party.

Second, agents of foreign countries, among them the Trotskyites , penetrated not only into lower organizations, but also into certain responsible posts.

Third, some of our leading comrades, both at the center and at the periphery, not only failed to discern the face of these wreckers, diversionists, spies, and killers, but proved to be so careless, complacent, and naive that at times they themselves assisted in promoting agents of foreign states to responsible posts.

These are the three incontrovertible facts which naturally emerge from the reports and the discussions on them "

[Aug 06, 2018] The deeper problem, is that while Max Boot get so many issues wrong, he is given such a massive platform for propagating his neocon views.

Notable quotes:
"... BUT, the deeper problem, IMO, isn't just that Boot get so many issues wrong, it is that he is given such a massive platform for propagating his wrong views. Notably: the platform Fred Hiatt has given him at WaPo . That's the real issue, that his opinions are given such undeserved prominence. ..."
"... Deep State my a**, this is the Kosher Konspiracy! And notice how many of those names have found a prominent place on the WaPo Op-Ed page, and other prominent media venues, shaping and driving American opinion. ..."
"... Why can Boot claim a win? Because he sneered at Cohen and called him a "Russia apologist", and Cohen, while visibly irritated, could only say his credentials for understanding Russia and the history of the first Cold War. ..."
"... Cohen needed to respond IN KIND to Boot's disrespect. Because paradoxically, that is how you get "respect" on the street - you respond in kind and to a greater degree when attacked. ..."
Aug 06, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Keith Harbaugh , 21 hours ago

Thanks, PT, for publicizing this.

BUT, the deeper problem, IMO, isn't just that Boot get so many issues wrong, it is that he is given such a massive platform for propagating his wrong views. Notably: the platform Fred Hiatt has given him at WaPo . That's the real issue, that his opinions are given such undeserved prominence.

As to Fred Hiatt's network, some insight is given by the acknowledgements in Robert Kagan's book Dangerous Nation , where Kagan writes:

I [Robert Kagan] have also been lucky to enjoy the comradeship and wise counsel of dear friends Fred Hiatt, Bill Kristol, Leon Wieseltier, Reuel Gerecht, Ed Lazarus, and Joe Rose ...

Deep State my a**, this is the Kosher Konspiracy! And notice how many of those names have found a prominent place on the WaPo Op-Ed page, and other prominent media venues, shaping and driving American opinion.

PRC90 , 2 days ago
Boot would appear to be a self-publicist, in this case unsuccessfully.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

http://maxboot.net/

richardstevenhack , 2 days ago
So this has been popping up on my screen for the last week, so I finally decided to watch it.

Cohen, of course, was the voice of reason. Boot is an idiot and a disrespectful one at that. All true.

The problem is that the bulk of the population is going to go with Boot. That is, the bulk of the population that give a damn about Russia or foreign policy, which as the recent poll testifies is a mighty small group.

However, that group includes most of the Democrats. So Boot is going to walk away claiming a win and Anderson Cooper is never going to claim otherwise, either, because he is on Boot's side.

Why can Boot claim a win? Because he sneered at Cohen and called him a "Russia apologist", and Cohen, while visibly irritated, could only say his credentials for understanding Russia and the history of the first Cold War.

In a debate, that isn't enough. WE think Cohen "schooled" Boot. The Democrats won't. And the undecided's won't either.

Cohen needed to respond IN KIND to Boot's disrespect. Because paradoxically, that is how you get "respect" on the street - you respond in kind and to a greater degree when attacked.

Now how you do that can vary. You can either be a sneering scumbag like Boot, or you can be a cold assassin that simply blows him away with calm, but vicious ridicule.

I'm reminded of a joke video I saw a while back. Check it out.

Dressing Up Your Dressing Downs with Indira Varma

[Aug 06, 2018] Both Zionism and Nazism are essentially exaggerations of Nineteenth century European racial nationalism, both posit a more or less imaginary history to justify their territorial claims

Aug 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

Colin Wright , Website August 6, 2018 at 5:34 am GMT

It's worth pointing out that described abstractly, Zionism and Nazism are ideologically very similar. Both are essentially exaggerations of Nineteenth century European racial nationalism, both posit a more or less imaginary history to justify their territorial claims, both ignore the rights of all others in favor of their chosen group, both openly worship violence, and both are contemptuous of both legal and moral constraints. Israel has committed crimes proportionately as horrific as any Nazi Germany committed up to the outbreak of total war in 1941, and I'm all too confident that if total war did come to the Middle East, Israel would take advantage of the opportunity to engage in some very genocidal treatment of her Palestinian subjects.

The primary differences are really that while Nazism was defeated over seventy years ago, Israel is still very much in being, and that while we here in the US opposed Nazism, we support Israel.

[Aug 06, 2018] There are three classes of men; lovers of wisdom, lovers of honor, and lovers of gain.

Aug 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

GKB507 , 6 Aug 2018 23:01

At very least, a leader should be able to tell right from wrong... and sadly, too often in this world, "nice guys finish last".
"There are three classes of men; lovers of wisdom, lovers of honor, and lovers of gain."
Plato

[Aug 06, 2018] New 'bubble' looming How dangerous are tech giants that don't make profits (VIDEO)

Notable quotes:
"... "Definitely, there's a bubble, not just in tech stocks but in general stock market itself," ..."
"... "there are signs of financial fragility" ..."
Aug 06, 2018 | www.rt.com

Tech giants like Tesla, Uber, or Spotify are making less and less profit at the moment and experts are worried about their impact on the world. Are we seeing a new economic bubble in the making? RT's Daniel Bushel finds out. American tech corporations are often making headlines nationwide and internationally, although their own performance is far from perfect. They lose more and earn less, and experts warn of a potential "bubble" looming in the horizon.

Tesla, Elon Musk's flagship company, is worth more than Ford or GM, but produces only a small number of cars. Spotify, a music streaming service, as well as Uber, are losing billions of dollars every year.

"Definitely, there's a bubble, not just in tech stocks but in general stock market itself," Jack Rasmus, professor of political economy at St. Mary's College, told RT, warning that "there are signs of financial fragility" that endanger the world

[Aug 06, 2018] Prepare for $90 oil after sanctions against Iran take effect analyst -- RT Business News

Notable quotes:
"... "As we go more towards (the fourth quarter) that's when we really see the risk of prices going well into the 80s and potentially even into the 90s but very critical is how much Iranian production we lose," ..."
"... "A lot of people think China can just buy all of the Iranian oil but they came out and said: 'Yes, we may not reduce but we are not going to increase our intake either.' So, you could see a significant crunch in terms of lost supplies into the market and then that obviously means higher prices," ..."
"... For more stories on economy & finance visit RT's business section ..."
Aug 06, 2018 | www.rt.com

Prepare for $90 oil after sanctions against Iran take effect – analyst Published time: 6 Aug, 2018 21:03 Get short URL Prepare for $90 oil after sanctions against Iran take effect – analyst © China Stringer Network / Reuters Looming US sanctions against Iran will likely hit Tehran's oil sales abroad, and it could lead to a price spike in oil contracts. The first round of renewed US sanctions will take effect on Tuesday with the harshest sanctions, potentially targeting Iran's oil industry, expected to return in early November.

"As we go more towards (the fourth quarter) that's when we really see the risk of prices going well into the 80s and potentially even into the 90s but very critical is how much Iranian production we lose," Amrita Sen, chief oil analyst at Energy Aspects, told CNBC Monday.

Read more © Jorge Silva Is this the end of ultra cheap gasoline in Venezuela?

Oil was trading at $74 per barrel of Brent benchmark, while the US West Texas Intermediate stood at $69.77 on Monday.

"A lot of people think China can just buy all of the Iranian oil but they came out and said: 'Yes, we may not reduce but we are not going to increase our intake either.' So, you could see a significant crunch in terms of lost supplies into the market and then that obviously means higher prices," the analyst added.

The new US sanctions will likely slash oil supply. The last time Iran was sanctioned, it lost half of its exports, which have now returned to 2.4 million barrels per day. Many analysts have said that this time, the negative impact on Iranian oil trade will be less significant, and Iran will lose only half of the previous loss.

Meanwhile, other major producers are ramping up their output. This July, OPEC, Russia and other significant players agreed to gradually raise output for fear of supply deficit on the market. OPEC+ countries will increase production by 1 million barrels per day, of which 200,000 bpd will be provided by Russia.

For more stories on economy & finance visit RT's business section

[Aug 06, 2018] What is left unsaid in the Anglo-Saxon accusations against Russia by Thierry Meyssan

Aug 06, 2018 | www.voltairenet.org

n 16 November 2009, tax specialist lawyer Sergey Magnitsky died in Matrosskaya Tishina prison (Moscow). Immediately, the US Press claimed that he had been in possession of information concerning a State scandal, and had been tortured by the " régime ".

The Magnitsky Act

The death of Magnitsky shut down the legal procedures that had been launched against him by the Russian Minister of Justice. Billionaire William ("Bill") Browder declared in Washington that the tax expert possessed proof that Russian Power had stolen 3 billion dollars from him. Despite lobbying by Goldman Sachs, the US Congress believed it had clarified the affair, and in 2012 adopted a law sanctioning the Russian personalities suspected of having murdered the lawyer. Goldman Sachs, which did not believe the information forwarded by the parliamentarians, hired the lobbying firm Duberstein Group in an attempt to block the vote on the law [ 1 ].

On this model, in 2016, the Congress extended the " Magnitsky Act " to the whole world, requesting the President to implement sanctions against all people and all states which violate individual property. Presidents Obama and Trump obeyed, placing about twenty personalities on the list, including the President of the Republic of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov.

These two laws were aimed at giving back to the United States the role it had assumed during the Cold War as defender of individual property, even though they had no communist rival.

The two versions of the " Magnitsky affair "

As for the Russian State Duma, it responded to its US counterpart by forbidding the adoption of Russian children by US families, and by denouncing the responsibility of US personalities in the legalisation of torture (the Dima Yakovlev Law, from the name of the Russian child adopted in the USA who died as a result of negligence by the parents). President Putin applied this text in 2013, also forbidding ex-US Vice President Dick Cheney access to Russian territory.

The " Magnitsky affair " could have ended there. It seems to be independent of the " Khodorkovsky affair ", exploited by NATO in order to accuse Russia of interference in Western democracies by way of disinformation or " fake news " [ 2 ]. However, the Russian Prosecutor General contests the narrative presented by Wiliam Browder to the US Congress.

According to William Browder, his company Hermitage Capital invested in Russia, particularly in Gazprom. He allegedly discovered signs of irregular practices and attempted to warn the Kremlin. However, his resident's visa was then cancelled. Then his Russian companies were allegedly robbed by Lieutenant-Colonel Artem Kuznetsov, a civil servant from the Financial Brigade of the Russian Ministry of the Interior. Kuznetsov apparently seized the property documents during a search, then used them to register a new owner. Lawyer Sergey Magnitsky, who apparently blew the whistle on the embezzlement, was arrested, tortured and finally died in prison. In the end, Lieutenant-Colonel Artem Kuznetsov and " godfather " Dmitry Klyuev were allegedly able to deposit the 3 billion stolen dollars in a Cypriot bank. This is a classic case of theft by the Russian mafia with the help of the Kremlin [ 3 ]. This narrative inspired the seventh season of the Showtime TV series, Homeland .

On the contrary, according to Russian Prosecutor General Yury Chaika, William Browder illegally acquired 133 million shares in Gazprom on behalf of the Ziff brothers, via various straw men. Not only did Browder avoid paying 150 million dollars in taxes, but the acquisition of part of this crown jewel of the Russian economy is in itself illegal. Furthermore, his financial advisor, Sergey Magnitsky, who had developed another scam for the same Browder, was arrested and died of a heart attack in prison [ 4 ].

It is obviously impossible to tell the truth from the lies in these two versions. However, it is now recognised that Sergey Magnitsky was not a lawyer working freelance, but was employed by William Browder's companies. He was not investigating embezzlement, but was tasked by Browder

with the creation of financial structures which would avoid him having to pay taxes in Russia. For example, the two men imagined remunerating mentally handicapped people as front men in order to benefit from their tax exempt status. Browder had much experience with tax evasion – which is why he lived for ten years in Russia with a simple tourist visa, then abandoned his US citizenship and became a British citizen.

These last elements prove William Browder wrong, and are compatible with Prosecutor Chaika's accusations. In these conditions, it seems at the least imprudent for the US Congress to have adopted the Magnitsky Act , unless of course the operation was aimed not at defending individual property, but at hurting Russia [ 5 ].

A leader of the Russian opposition paid by Browder

Alongside the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), Browder abundantly finances the work of a young lawyer, Alexeď Navalny. Thanks to the help of US ambassador Michael McFaul, the young man pursued his studies in the USA at Yale in 2010. He created an Anti-Corruption Foundation in order to promote Browden's version and accuse Putin's administration.

Having become a leader of the political opposition, Navalny and his Foundation directed a first documentary accusing the family of Prosecutor Chaika of corruption. But although the video is convincing at first look, it presents no proof of the facts it relates.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/3eO8ZHfV4fk

Simultaneously, Navalny ordered a second documentary from a Russian film director and member of the opposition about the " Magnitsky affair ". But this journalist turned against his employer during the investigation, which was finally broadcast by Russian public television.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/QgK7MlZDuJ8

A spook and an ambassador paid by Browder

Thereafter, William Browder engaged an ex-agent of MI6 in Moscow (1990-93), Christopher Steele, and the ex-US ambassador to Moscow (2012-14), Michael McFaul.

It so happens that it was Christopher Steele who, in 2006 – while he was with MI6 – accused President Vladimir Putin of having ordered the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko with Polonium. In 2016, he also worked – freelance this time – for the US Democratic Party. That was when he wrote the famous dossier accusing candidate Donald Trump of being under the threat of blackmail by the Russian secret services [ 6 ] ; an unwarranted charge which has just resurfaced after the bilateral Summit in Helsinki. We find Steele once again, in 2018, involved in the Novitchok poisoning of Sergueď Skripal – as a " consultant " for MI6, he of course accused the inevitable Vladimir Putin.

The Russian riposte

During the US Presidential campaign of 2016, Russian Prosecutor General Yury Chaika attempted to influence a member of Congress who was open to Russian thinking, Dana Rohrabacher (Republican, California). He sent her a note concerning his version of the Browder-Magnitsky affair. Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya met the son and son-in-law of candidate Donald Trump at Trump Tower, in order to inform them that a part of Browder's dirty money was being used to finance the candidacy of Hillary Clinton [ 7 ].

Thereafter, William Browder became the main source of the enquiry run by Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller about possible Russian interference in " US Democracy ". A long time before he became the Director the FBI, Mueller – who officially has no link to the CIA – had been responsible for the enquiry on the Lockerbie attack, which he attributed to Mouammar Kadhafi. Let's remember that Libya never recognised that it was implicated in this affair, although it accepted to pay a compensation to the victims. Above all, Scottish Justice established the fact that fragments of the detonator found on site were placed there by the CIA in order to accuse Libya. Mueller used the meeting of Trump's team with Natalia Veselnitskaya as " proof " of the subordination of Donald Trump to the Russian Intelligence services.

In the USA, Natalia Veselnitskaya represents the interests of several of Browder's Russian victims. She also acted in 2014 on behalf of one of the companies that Browder accused of being connected to " godfather " Dmitry Klyuev. She also raised the question about the manner in which an agent of Homeland Security, Todd Hyman, had transmitted a trial document without proceeding with the usual verifications.

There will be no moment of truth

During the US-Russia summit in Helsinki, President Vladimir Putin proposed that his US counterpart allow US investigators to question those Russian civil servants suspected of interference in the US Presidential campaign, on the condition that Russian investigators would also be allowed to question suspects in the USA. Donald Trump is reserving his answer.

However, when the office of Prosecutor Yury Chaika transmitted the list of witnesses to be questioned, Washington panicked. Not only did Chaika ask to question British subjects William Browder and Christopher Steele if they should travel in the United States, but also ambassador Michael McFaul, lawyer Jonathan Winer, researcher David J. Kramer, and finally, agent Todd Hyman.

Jonathan Winer was in charge of the Lockerbie dossier at the State Department during the 1990's. He is a personal friend of Christopher Steele, and transmitted his reports to the neo-conservatives for a decade [ 8 ].

During Bush Jr.'s first term, David J. Kramer played an important role in the management of the propaganda system for the State Department as well as looking after the stay-behind agents in Eastern Europe and in Russia. After having worked in various think tanks, he became the president of Freedom House, and campaigned on the " Magnitsky affair ". He is today a researcher at the McCain Institute.

Although, so far, nothing enables us to tell which of the Browder and Chaika versions is accurate, the truth will soon emerge. It is possible that Russian interference may be no more than fake news, but US interference (by introduction into the crown piece of the Russian economy as well as via Alexeď Navalny) may in fact be a reality.

In the context of' Washington's unanimous anti-Russian stand, President Trump declines Vladimir Putin's proposition. Thierry Meyssan

Translation
Pete Kimberley

[ 1 ] " Bank of Putin. Goldman Sachs lobbying against human rights legislation ", Adam Kredo, Free Beacon, July 19, 2012.

[ 2 ] " The NATO campaign against freedom of expression ", by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete Kimberley, Voltaire Network , 5 December 2016.

[ 3 ] " Foreigner's Investment in Russia Is Derailed by Kremlin's Might ", Clifford J. Levy, The New York Times , July 24, 2008.

[ 4 ] Note from Yury Chaika Office to Dana Rohrabacher, June 2016.

[ 5 ] " Intouchable, Mr. Browder ? ", par Israël Shamir, Traduction Maria Poumier, Entre la plume et l'enclume (France), The Unz Review (USA), Réseau Voltaire , 22 juin 2016.

[ 6 ] " The Steele Report ".

[ 7 ] " Natalia Veselnitskaya Memo on the William Browder & Sergei MagnitskyCase ", by Natalia Veselnitskaya, Voltaire Network , 1 June 2016.

[ 8 ] " Devin Nunes is investigating me. Here's the truth ", Jonathan Winer, The Washington Post , February 8, 2018.

[Aug 06, 2018] The Magnitsky Trio Pushes For War With Russia With New Sanctions by Tom Luongo,

Aug 06, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

If half of what I have come to understand about the Curious Case of Bill Browder is true, then the "Magnitsky Trio" of Senators John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Ben Cardin are guilty of espionage, at a minimum.

Why? Because they know that Browder's story about Sergei Magnitsky is a lie. And that means that when you tie in the Trump Dossier, Christopher Steele, Fusion GPS, the Skripal poisoning and the rest of this mess, these men are consorting with foreign governments and agencies against the sitting President.

As Lee Stranahan pointed out recently on Fault Lines, Cardin invited Browder to testify to Congress in 2017 to push through last year's sanctions bill, a more stringent version of the expiring Magnitsky Act of 2011, which has since been used to ratchet up pressure on Russia.

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

Cardin knew there were problems with Browder's story about Magnitsky's death and yet brought him into Congress to testify to secure the vote.

That's suborning perjury, as Lee points out.

Just the holes in Browder's story about Magnitsky's death are alone enough to warrant a perjury charge on him. If you haven't read Luck Komisar's detailed breakdown of Browder's dealings then you owe it to yourself to do so.

I'd read it a few times, because it's about as murky as The Swamp gets. And, still my eyes glaze over.

The Magnitsky Act and its sequel have been used to support aggressive policy actions by the U.S. against Russia and destroy the relationship between the world's most prominent militaries and nuclear powers.

The new bill is said to want to put 'crushing sanctions' on Russia to make 'Putin feel the heat.' In effect, what this bill wants to do is force President Trump to enforce sanctions against the entire Russian state for attempting to do business anywhere in the world.

The new financial penalties would target political figures, oligarchs, family members and others that "facilitate illicit and corrupt activities" on behalf of Putin.

It would also impose new sanctions on transactions tied to investments in state-owned energy projects, transactions tied to new Russian debt, and people with the capacity or ability to support or carry out a "malicious" cyber act.

In addition, if it wasn't clear enough already, that he's no friend of the President, Graham is trying to tie the President's hands on NATO withdrawal, requiring a two-thirds majority.

Now, why would Graham be worried about that, unless it was something the President was seriously considering? This is similar to last year's sanctions bill requiring a similar majority for the President to end the original sanctions placed on Russia in 2014 over the reunification with Crimea.

And behind it all stands Bill Browder.

Because it has been Browder's one-man campaign to influence members of Congress, the EU and public opinion the world over against Putin and Russia for the past 10 years over Magnitsky's death.

Browder's story is the only one we see in the news. And it's never questioned, even though it has. He continually moves to block films and articles critical of him from seeing distribution.

Browder is the epicenter around which the insane push for war with Russia revolves as everyone involved in the attempt to take over Russia in 1999 continues to try and cover their collective posteriors posterities.

And it is Browder, along with Republic National Bank chief Edmond Safra, who were involved together in the pillaging of Russia in the 1990's. Browder's firm hired Magintsky as an accountant (because that's what he was) to assist in the money laundering Heritage Capital was involved in.

The attempted take over of Russia failed because Yeltsin saw the setup which led him to appoint Putin as his Deputy Prime Minister.

Martin Armstrong talked about this recently and it is featured prominently in the film about him, The Forecaster, which I also recommend you watch.

There was $7 billion that was wired through Bank of New York which involved money stolen from the IMF loans to Russia. The attempt to takeover Russia by blackmail was set in motion. As soon as that wire was done, that is when Republic National Bank ran to the Department of Justice to say it was money-laundering. I believe this started the crisis and Yeltsin was blackmailed to step down and appoint Boris A. Berezovsky as the head of Russia.

Clearly, Republic National Bank was involved with the US government for they were sending also skids of $100 bills to Russia. It was written up and called the Money Plane . Yeltsin then turned to Putin realizing that he had been set up. This is how Putin became the First Deputy Prime Minister of Russia on August 9th, 1999 until August 16th, 1999 when he became the 33rd Prime Minister and heir apparent of Yeltsin.

So, now why, all of a sudden, do we need even stronger sanctions on Russia, ones that would create untold dislocation in financial markets around the world?

Look at the timeline today and see what's happening.

  1. Earlier this year Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicts 13 people associated with Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian troll farm, for influencing the 2016 election.
  2. Then Mueller indicts twelve members of Russian intelligence to sabotage the upcoming summit between Trump and Putin while the Russia Hacked Muh Election narrative was flagging.
  3. Three days later President Trump met with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki. There a Putin let the world know that he would assist Robert Mueller's investigation if in return the U.S. would assist Russia in returning Bill Browder, who was tried and convicted in absentia for tax evasion.
  4. All of a sudden Browder's story is all over the alternative press. Browder is all over U.S. television.
  5. Earlier this week Facebook comes out, after horrific earnings, to tell everyone that IRA was still at it, though being ever so sneaky, trying to influence the mid-terms by engaging Democrats and anti-Trumpers to organize... In that release, Facebook let it be known it was working with the political arm of NATO, The Atlantic Council, to ferret out these dastardly Russian agents.

And now we have a brand-new shiny sanctions bill intended to keep any rapprochement between the U.S. and Russia from occurring.

Why is that? What's got them so scared of relations with Russia improving?

Maybe, just maybe, because Putin has all of these people dead to rights and he's informed Trump of what the real story behind all of this is.

That at its core is a group of very bad people who attempted to steal trillions but only got away with billions and still have their sights set on destroying Russia for their own needs.

And Lindsay Graham is their mouthpiece. (all puns intended)

That all of U.S. foreign policy is built on a lie.

That our relationship with Russia was purposefully trashed for the most venal of reasons, for people like Bill Browder to not only steal billions but then have the chutzpah to steal the $230 million he would have paid in taxes on those stolen billions.

And the only way to ensure none of those lies are exposed is for Trump to be unable to change any of it by forcing him to openly side with the Russian President over members of his own political party.

The proposed sanctions by the Graham bill are so insane that even the Treasury department thinks they are a bad idea. But, at this point there is nothing Graham won't do for his owners.

Because they are desperate they will push for open warfare with Russia to push Putin from power, which is not possible. All of this is nothing more than a sad attempt to hold onto power long enough to oust Trump from the White House and keep things as horrible as they currently are.

Because no one gives up power willingly. And the more they are proven to be frauds the more they will scream for war.

[Aug 06, 2018] The Rise and Continued Influence of the Neocons. The Project for the New American Century (PNAC)

Notable quotes:
"... The neocons did not vanish with the departure of the Bush Republicans from office, and the rise of Obama . Indeed, the clout of this group and their grip on power is arguably as strong as ever. Not only did they continue to shape the U.S. foreign policy establishment, but they have managed to alter what constitutes acceptable public and media discourse within the world's remaining superpower. The trajectory of neocon influence in Washington is explored in depth in the documentary series, A Very Heavy Agenda, by independent journalist and film-maker Robbie Martin. ..."
"... This feature is followed by an interview with writer, ecological campaigner, and Deep State researcher Mark Robinowitz . Originally recorded and aired in January 2018, Robinowitz helps delineate the factions of power shaping the outcome of the 2016 presidential election, as well as the players within the National Security State, including the neocons, that appear to be manipulating him and his presidency, possibly maneuvering him towards an impeachment within the next year. ..."
"... Robbie Martin is a journalist, musician and documentary film-maker. He is co-host with his sister Abby Martin of Media Roots Radio. A Very Heavy Agenda can be streamed or purchased here . Soundtrack for Film and music for these series from Fluorescent Grey (Robbie Martin). ..."
"... Mark Robinowitz is a writer, political activist, ecological campaigner and permaculture practitioner and publisher of oilempire.us as well as jfkmoon.org . He is based in Eugene, Oregon. ..."
"... from the period between 2014 to 2018, it was like an exponentially rising climate of propaganda against Russia coming from the U.S. media ..."
"... they also were the earliest pioneers pushing this Russiagate Cold War 2.0 mentality. ..."
"... And how it only took, you know, certain nudges and pushes and policy papers , and here we are. They essentially got their way, and Russia has never been more demonized since the fall of communism and the Berlin wall and the Soviet Union. ..."
"... she had over 200 basically hit piece stories written about her within the span of a week, and I was just in this kind of depressed place checking in with her making sure she was doing okay, and not basically getting too stressed out from all this media pressure and this barrage of negative stories. So I was just watching these videos basically from the neocon think-tank that I believe was behind the smear campaign against her. ..."
"... Foreign Policy Initiative is actually a re-branded, reopened version of the Project for The New American Century think tank, which was the most infamous neocon think tank that was behind the Iraq War. ..."
"... Finally I got to Robert Kagan. And I was listening to him, and it struck me differently from the way that most other neoconservatives would talk, because I perceived him as being more candid about the way American foreign policy has actually conducted itself, and also more clever with the way that I perceived him as, re-branding, repackaging neocon rhetoric for the Obama era. ..."
"... the neocons managed to rebrand themselves, massage their rhetoric, and make themselves seem less crazy in order to influence the larger DC foreign policy community into basically accepting and going along with almost all their foreign policy platforms, with the exception of overtly wanting to invade Iran which arguably that is the neocon prize but see, a lot of these smarter neocons like Robert Kagan and Bill Kristol, and a lot of these neocons who managed to convince the blob, they have hidden, and not been open about the fact that they want to overthrow the regime of Iran. ..."
"... That's one of their foreign policy platforms they've sort of brushed under the rug, because that's one of The reason I'm giving that example is because that's how they have managed to cross the aisle, so to speak, in DC and put a hand out to the neoliberal think tanks and say, hey we're kind of on the same side in this, and we all think Putin's bad, and let's really go after him. Let's overthrow Assad. So these are things that the neocons managed to essentially convince and influence the rest of the DC foreign policy community to believe. ..."
"... So the first one is that how right after 9/11, several of these neocons, I think it's Don and Fred Kagan, went on TV and radio kind of immediately after for at least a 24-hour 48-hour period after 9/11 and basically blamed Palestinians for the attack, and were basically outright calling for the U.S. to attack Palestine. And even saying that they had no evidence but we should just go and attack them. So could you talk about what happened there, and what was the effect there? Everyone kind of forgets about this but what happened there, and what do you think the effect of that was? ..."
"... Because, and this is important to know, that Don Kagan is one of the only three authors credited as writing Rebuilding America's Defenses, the infamous paper that PNAC released that says we need a new Pearl Harbor, a catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor. ..."
"... Don Kagan is someone who just, mostly an obscure figure in this, but I'd like to believe that if he was saying that on the radio within 24 hours of 9/11, that it was something being heavily discussed within that community behind the scenes. And h e and his son Fred Kagan are two of the most intellectual, influential neoconservatives in DC. Fred Kagan is behind the Iraq surge, he is also behind the Afghanistan s urge for Obama, directly working under David Petraeus. So these are not just like random neocons. It's important to stress that they are some of the most influential neocon brain-trust type people in DC even though they're so relatively obscure They're not household names. ..."
"... The news media played footage of Palestinians allegedly celebrating the attacks in the middle of a national emergency at 12 p.m. while thousands of people were still missing during the World Trade Center attacks. So this is the kind of stuff that U.S. media was doing. ..."
"... And then also something else interesting Don Kagan brings up in the recording, and maybe you were going to mention this next, but I'll just say it because it's so weird, as he says what would have happened, and keep in mind this is 9/12-01, one day after 9/11. He says, what would have happened if the terrorists had Anthrax on that plane? ..."
Aug 06, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

Robert Kagan. William Kristol. Paul Wolfowitz. Richard Perle. John Bolton. Elliott Abrams. Gary Schmitt. These are a few of the names generally associated with a strain of far-right political thought called neoconservatism. [1][2]

Politically, the neocons favour a world in which the United States adopts a much more aggressive military posture, and utilizes its military might to not only contain terrorist and related threats to its security, but force regime change in regions like the Middle East. They further take on the task of 'nation-building' all in the name of creating a safer world for 'democracy.' It was the neocons who promoted the stratagem of pre-emptive military action. [3]

The neocons enjoyed a robust period of influence under the Bush-Cheney administration. The 9/11 attacks and the triggering of a 'war on terrorism' enabled a series of foreign policy choices, most notably the War on Afghanistan and the War on Iraq, which aligned with the aims and aspirations of the group once referred to by President George Bush Sr. as the 'crazies in the basement.'[4]

The neocons did not vanish with the departure of the Bush Republicans from office, and the rise of Obama . Indeed, the clout of this group and their grip on power is arguably as strong as ever. Not only did they continue to shape the U.S. foreign policy establishment, but they have managed to alter what constitutes acceptable public and media discourse within the world's remaining superpower. The trajectory of neocon influence in Washington is explored in depth in the documentary series, A Very Heavy Agenda, by independent journalist and film-maker Robbie Martin.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/9kHHR_yy9CE

In part one of a special two part interview by Global Research News Hour guest contributor Scott Price , Martin describes the inspiration behind making the film, the post 9/11 atmosphere in which the neocons flourished, and the neocons' role in fostering the new Cold War mentality which contributed to the smearing of his better-known sister, former RT host Abby Martin .

This feature is followed by an interview with writer, ecological campaigner, and Deep State researcher Mark Robinowitz . Originally recorded and aired in January 2018, Robinowitz helps delineate the factions of power shaping the outcome of the 2016 presidential election, as well as the players within the National Security State, including the neocons, that appear to be manipulating him and his presidency, possibly maneuvering him towards an impeachment within the next year.

Robbie Martin is a journalist, musician and documentary film-maker. He is co-host with his sister Abby Martin of Media Roots Radio. A Very Heavy Agenda can be streamed or purchased here . Soundtrack for Film and music for these series from Fluorescent Grey (Robbie Martin).

Mark Robinowitz is a writer, political activist, ecological campaigner and permaculture practitioner and publisher of oilempire.us as well as jfkmoon.org . He is based in Eugene, Oregon.

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

Transcript – Interview with Robbie Martin, July 2018

... ... ...

And of course, right after the Sochi Olympics, is when the Euromaidan protest in Ukraine, it kind of boiled over to the point where there were, you know, walls of flaming tires all over Euromaidan – basically a war zone. And of course the Ukrainian government fell due to a coup which many believe, including myself, was partially U.S. sponsored by the U.S. State Department.

And then things from there, Scott, just started to spiral out of contro , and from the period between 2014 to 2018, it was like an exponentially rising climate of propaganda against Russia coming from the U.S. media, and when I made my film series, I didn't I made it before the election, s o I didn't realize how hysterical it was going to get after the election, and frankly, I had no idea it was going to get this bad, to the point that it's got now.

I know that doesn't quite answer your question about my inspiration, but it 's kind of a long answer to your question is my film itself is essentially.. was tracking the neocon influence and how the neoconservatives from the Bush era that pushed the Iraq war, that constructed the blueprints to the Iraq war, how they also were the earliest pioneers pushing this Russiagate Cold War 2.0 mentality.

Neocon 101: What do neoconservatives believe?.

And how it only took, you know, certain nudges and pushes and policy papers , and here we are. They essentially got their way, and Russia has never been more demonized since the fall of communism and the Berlin wall and the Soviet Union. So that's I don't know if that was too long of an answer for your question , but that's what was sort of my inspiration for how I made it. My sister was also kind of a part of the story because some of these neocons actually tried to smear her while she was working for RT.

... ... ...

RM: Yeah, that's a really good question. I think at first, I was really fascinated by the psychology of these key neoconservatives. I was watching, at first I didn't even know I was going to make a film. I was kind of in this weird place mentally, my sister had just been put through the wringer, she had over 200 basically hit piece stories written about her within the span of a week, and I was just in this kind of depressed place checking in with her making sure she was doing okay, and not basically getting too stressed out from all this media pressure and this barrage of negative stories. So I was just watching these videos basically from the neocon think-tank that I believe was behind the smear campaign against her.

So I was watching videos from this think tank, they were called the Foreign Policy Initiative, and I quickly learned maybe over 48 hour period, oh, the Foreign Policy Initiative is actually a re-branded, reopened version of the Project for The New American Century think tank, which was the most infamous neocon think tank that was behind the Iraq War. Once I realized that, then I just then I was obsessed with watching these videos. I watched probably every single video on their YouTube channel, and the majority of them were incredibly boring, very dry. And I was already in a depressed place, so, you know, it was kind of just putting me into this weird state where I was watching nothing but these dry foreign policy think tank videos for weeks on end.

Finally I got to Robert Kagan. And I was listening to him, and it struck me differently from the way that most other neoconservatives would talk, because I perceived him as being more candid about the way American foreign policy has actually conducted itself, and also more clever with the way that I perceived him as, re-branding, repackaging neocon rhetoric for the Obama era. Once I saw this, I became fascinated with his psychology. And I was already sort of fascinated with Bill Kristol's psychology, you know , going back to when I was a young man when I would watch Fox News you know during the Iraq War, I would watch Bill Kristol, and I found him fascinating back then because he seemed on a different level than most other, you know, war hawks that would go on Fox News.

But it was really Robert Kagan though that made me think, you know, his own words are so fascinating and so candid and so revealing without adding any editorial content that I wonder if this will work, if I present it just simply in his own words.

... ... ...

But I think one way to describe why they're so important and they're still so influential is because they managed to, a very small handful of them, maybe less than a dozen figures, managed to convince the rest of, what people describe as the DC blob, the sort of foreign policy consensus in DC overall, the neocons managed to rebrand themselves, massage their rhetoric, and make themselves seem less crazy in order to influence the larger DC foreign policy community into basically accepting and going along with almost all their foreign policy platforms, with the exception of overtly wanting to invade Iran which arguably that is the neocon prize but see, a lot of these smarter neocons like Robert Kagan and Bill Kristol, and a lot of these neocons who managed to convince the blob, they have hidden, and not been open about the fact that they want to overthrow the regime of Iran.

That's one of their foreign policy platforms they've sort of brushed under the rug, because that's one of The reason I'm giving that example is because that's how they have managed to cross the aisle, so to speak, in DC and put a hand out to the neoliberal think tanks and say, hey we're kind of on the same side in this, and we all think Putin's bad, and let's really go after him. Let's overthrow Assad. So these are things that the neocons managed to essentially convince and influence the rest of the DC foreign policy community to believe.

So yes, it's true that there are not that many actual literal neocons, but a lot of people now who are sort of anti-war, do work in anti-war or do foreign policy critique, they don't see much of a difference any more between sort of the neoliberal foreign policy group in DC, which is most of it, and the actual neocons anymore. Because they have essentially merged in a non-partisan fashion, and it's been very surreal to watch, especially after the 2016 election when you actually saw neocons saying well you should vote for Hillary. For the first time ever they all said that you shouldn't vote for a R epublican.

That's so I don't know that fully answers your question, but I think to su m it up it's because the neocons have influenced everybody. So now that they've been able to do that you don't really need that many of them around you know making that much trouble because everybody is carrying out their agenda essentially. In this DC foreign policy think-tank.

GR: Yeah I think the way you kind of describe it in maybe it's I don't know if you personally describe it, but I wrote it down in my notes about how neoconservatism is almost like a species and it kind of evolved over the last 20 years in a way? So I think what you're talking about how there's a shift to Hillary, and, but I mean that shift is more that the neoconservative line really became the mainstream line, whereas, you know, maybe in the early 2000s, like, there was a larger perception, yes, they were in the White House, but these people are also crazy, whereas now is kind of like the mainstream, which is quite scary. Which is something I think we'll talk about in a little bit. But kind of what I was talking about a bit before what I referenced was that I was a teenager when 9/11 happened, and it really shaped my generation and the world that I'm living in now

But as I was watching the 3-part documentary, there were several things that I was like kind of blown away by how these things kind of just went down the memory hole, and I want to talk about those things because several of these things I vaguely kind of remember now but for some odd reason I had totally forgotten about them, and they're not really within the wider narrative of 9/11 and the war on terror.

So the first one is that how right after 9/11, several of these neocons, I think it's Don and Fred Kagan, went on TV and radio kind of immediately after for at least a 24-hour 48-hour period after 9/11 and basically blamed Palestinians for the attack, and were basically outright calling for the U.S. to attack Palestine. And even saying that they had no evidence but we should just go and attack them. So could you talk about what happened there, and what was the effect there? Everyone kind of forgets about this but what happened there, and what do you think the effect of that was?

RM: You just opened up a really big can of worms with that question. Well, to fully answer that it would require a totally separate interview, but I'll do my best to answer it in this short time that we have. What you're describing is, what I would say, is the neocons flipping up and revealing too much of an early iteration of their script, than the rest of the consensus was ready to reveal or get on board with. And perhaps, even, they jumped ahead with something that the rest of the neocons already decided, we can't go there. Because, and this is important to know, that Don Kagan is one of the only three authors credited as writing Rebuilding America's Defenses, the infamous paper that PNAC released that says we need a new Pearl Harbor, a catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor.

Don Kagan is someone who just, mostly an obscure figure in this, but I'd like to believe that if he was saying that on the radio within 24 hours of 9/11, that it was something being heavily discussed within that community behind the scenes. And h e and his son Fred Kagan are two of the most intellectual, influential neoconservatives in DC. Fred Kagan is behind the Iraq surge, he is also behind the Afghanistan s urge for Obama, directly working under David Petraeus. So these are not just like random neocons. It's important to stress that they are some of the most influential neocon brain-trust type people in DC even though they're so relatively obscure They're not household names.

So to hear both of them saying that we need to clean out Palestine with the U.S. Delta Force raids and the full panoply of U.S. military tools and arsenal, it's a very shocking thing to hear. Even though I've long believed that neocons are some of the most evil people on the planet, that was even surprising for me to hear. That they went ahead and openly said that the U.S. military should do that, and actually, in their broadcast they make it clear that they don't even care who's behind 9/11. Which is strange. They say that if we run around tracing the actual perpetrators, we're just going to be wasting our time and we won't get anywhere. So what they are saying is that we should just go attack all these countries anyways because even if they're behind it or not, they hate us and want to kill us.

And Palestine was one of their primary targets to retaliate against in response to 9/11. Now that's very strange when you look at the day of 9/11, and I've actually done a podcast on this, I call it the Palestinian Frame-up, on 9/11, there were four separate incidences that were run throughout U.S. media throughout the day of 9/11 that were attempting to blame Palestinians for the attacks before Bin Laden became the primary culprit that the U.S. media latched on to. So I find that very strange.

And I'm not going to try to explain it here during this interview, but you can look into that. It's all documented. The news media played footage of Palestinians allegedly celebrating the attacks in the middle of a national emergency at 12 p.m. while thousands of people were still missing during the World Trade Center attacks. So this is the kind of stuff that U.S. media was doing.

So it's very interesting for me to see neocons actually piggy-backing on that and saying we should attack Palestine. And that's a rare thing, I think, to find neocons slipping up that badly. And I guess I find that clip particularly fascinating because it's really one of the only ones like that out there, and to my knowledge, I'm the first one to find it by combing through all these archives. I've never heard of it before, never even heard of any neocon s saying that before on record.

And then also something else interesting Don Kagan brings up in the recording, and maybe you were going to mention this next, but I'll just say it because it's so weird, as he says what would have happened, and keep in mind this is 9/12-01, one day after 9/11. He says, what would have happened if the terrorists had Anthrax on that plane?

GR: Right. Yeah.

RM: And on October 5, weaponized anthrax was sent through the U.S. mail. While the Bush Administration was already inoculated with Cipro. the antibiotic taken to prevent Anthrax infection. So there's a lot of interesting and very scary questions that are raised just by that single clip. and I'm to this day it's still a mystery to me.

GR: That was Part 1 of the Global Research News Hour special with Robbie Martin on his documentary series, A Very Heavy Agenda that explores the rise and continued influence of the neoconservatives. Part 2 will air next week where we will explore the anthrax attacks, the role of Vice in spreading U.S. propaganda. You can buy or stream A Very Heavy Agenda at averyheavyagenda.com. Music for this special provided by Fluorescent Grey, AKA Robbie Martin. For the Global Research News Hour, I'm Scott Price.

-end of transcript-

Global Research News Hour Summer 2018 Series Part 5

[Aug 06, 2018] The deeper problem, is that while Max Boot get so many issues wrong, he is given such a massive platform for propagating his neocon views.

Notable quotes:
"... BUT, the deeper problem, IMO, isn't just that Boot get so many issues wrong, it is that he is given such a massive platform for propagating his wrong views. Notably: the platform Fred Hiatt has given him at WaPo . That's the real issue, that his opinions are given such undeserved prominence. ..."
"... Deep State my a**, this is the Kosher Konspiracy! And notice how many of those names have found a prominent place on the WaPo Op-Ed page, and other prominent media venues, shaping and driving American opinion. ..."
"... Why can Boot claim a win? Because he sneered at Cohen and called him a "Russia apologist", and Cohen, while visibly irritated, could only say his credentials for understanding Russia and the history of the first Cold War. ..."
"... Cohen needed to respond IN KIND to Boot's disrespect. Because paradoxically, that is how you get "respect" on the street - you respond in kind and to a greater degree when attacked. ..."
Aug 06, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Keith Harbaugh , 21 hours ago

Thanks, PT, for publicizing this.

BUT, the deeper problem, IMO, isn't just that Boot get so many issues wrong, it is that he is given such a massive platform for propagating his wrong views. Notably: the platform Fred Hiatt has given him at WaPo . That's the real issue, that his opinions are given such undeserved prominence.

As to Fred Hiatt's network, some insight is given by the acknowledgements in Robert Kagan's book Dangerous Nation , where Kagan writes:

I [Robert Kagan] have also been lucky to enjoy the comradeship and wise counsel of dear friends Fred Hiatt, Bill Kristol, Leon Wieseltier, Reuel Gerecht, Ed Lazarus, and Joe Rose ...

Deep State my a**, this is the Kosher Konspiracy! And notice how many of those names have found a prominent place on the WaPo Op-Ed page, and other prominent media venues, shaping and driving American opinion.

PRC90 , 2 days ago
Boot would appear to be a self-publicist, in this case unsuccessfully.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

http://maxboot.net/

richardstevenhack , 2 days ago
So this has been popping up on my screen for the last week, so I finally decided to watch it.

Cohen, of course, was the voice of reason. Boot is an idiot and a disrespectful one at that. All true.

The problem is that the bulk of the population is going to go with Boot. That is, the bulk of the population that give a damn about Russia or foreign policy, which as the recent poll testifies is a mighty small group.

However, that group includes most of the Democrats. So Boot is going to walk away claiming a win and Anderson Cooper is never going to claim otherwise, either, because he is on Boot's side.

Why can Boot claim a win? Because he sneered at Cohen and called him a "Russia apologist", and Cohen, while visibly irritated, could only say his credentials for understanding Russia and the history of the first Cold War.

In a debate, that isn't enough. WE think Cohen "schooled" Boot. The Democrats won't. And the undecided's won't either.

Cohen needed to respond IN KIND to Boot's disrespect. Because paradoxically, that is how you get "respect" on the street - you respond in kind and to a greater degree when attacked.

Now how you do that can vary. You can either be a sneering scumbag like Boot, or you can be a cold assassin that simply blows him away with calm, but vicious ridicule.

I'm reminded of a joke video I saw a while back. Check it out.

Dressing Up Your Dressing Downs with Indira Varma

[Aug 06, 2018] It's very profitable to be an anti-Russian talking head.

Aug 06, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

New Cold War

"Ex-FBI agent: Trump got elected, thanks to Russia" [ Yahoo News ]. • One thing to remember about RussiaRussiaRussia -- R 3 ? -- is that it's very profitable to be a talking head.

"DOJ Announces Public Release of the Cyber-Digital Task Force's First Report; Impact on and Role of the Private Sector Likely to be a Focus in the Coming Months" [ Compliance and Enforcement ]. "[Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein] lauded 'self-policing' efforts to remove 'fake accounts' and encouraged companies to 'consider the voluntary removal of accounts and content' that are linked by the FBI to foreign agents' activities, which he said 'violate terms of service and deceive customers.'" • What could go wrong?

[Aug 05, 2018] Cooper was equally as unhinged as Boot: Neoliberal MSM is a real 1984 remake.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... I'm somewhat puzzled why Trump and his people, when referring to the "fake news" and answering questions from hostile journalists, especially about the idea that the media are "enemies of the American people", fail to bring up the fact that the "fake news" and the "enemies of the people" are not the journalists themselves, but rather the management and ownership of the media. ..."
Aug 05, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com
paul malfara , a day ago
I posted this one to my facebook page three or four days ago. It's brilliant. I have a few comments. First, I disagree with the analysis given by the fellow from the Duran in the introduction, something along the lines of "even Anderson Cooper was smirking because Cohen was demolishing Boot so badly".

If you pay attention to the questions and statements, you find that Cooper is equally as unhinged as Boot is, first hammering on the point that nobody knows what was discussed in the meeting, then after Cohen rattles off a list, Cooper shifts to the "you're believing Vladimir Putin on this" tactic, a nail that Cohen wisely smashes with a hammering statement, "I don't want to shock you, but I believe Vladimir Putin on several things."

Cooper continues to insist that the content of the meeting is unknown and unconfirmed, regardless of what Putin and Trump say. The sheer hubris of journalists today is unprecedented and outrageous.

I do admit that Cooper shuts up after being schooled by Cohen a second and third time and after Boot makes the mistake of calling Cohen an apologist for Putin and Russia. This leads me to a second point.

I'm somewhat puzzled why Trump and his people, when referring to the "fake news" and answering questions from hostile journalists, especially about the idea that the media are "enemies of the American people", fail to bring up the fact that the "fake news" and the "enemies of the people" are not the journalists themselves, but rather the management and ownership of the media.

\This would accomplish two important things, both necessary, in my opinion. First, it would put the front line journalists into their correct place, telling them that they are really nothing but mouthpieces, and we know that the real decisions on content are not made by them.

What a blow to their narcisstic self-esteem that would be!

Second, it would give the American people more information on how their consent is engineered, how the media has owners who have an agenda, and that agenda is not related to improving the lives of the American people, or even keeping them informed with accurate information.

[Aug 05, 2018] Orwell doublethink in action

Aug 05, 2018 | www.rt.com

A Russian company spends 72p on Facebook ads: interference, hybrid war, parliamentary inquiry

Soros spends £400K on bringing down UK Government: nothing to worry about

pic.twitter.com/yeCZw4Z2B1

[Aug 05, 2018] The Skripals' misadventure (contretemps, dust up, theater, bit of bother) is absurd but did the U.K. government embrace it with alacrity and a vengeance or what? by Ron Unz

Aug 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

Ace , August 1, 2018 at 3:39 pm GMT

@Jeff Stryker

The Skripals' misadventure (contretemps, dust up, theater, bit of bother) is absurd but did the U.K. government embrace it with alacrity and a vengeance or what?

The only thing missing was narration by Edgar R. Murrow. Not to mention the Skripals.

The very absurdity of it calls into question anything that preceded it with the same story line, viz., "Russians are animals."

What anyone needs to be wary of is the people who push this and other "narratives": "Animal Assad," "religion of peace," "multiculturalism," "propositional nation," "comprehensive immigration law reform," "living Constitution," "equality," "hate speech," "Iranchiefsponsorofterror," "regime change," "treason," "collusion," "McCarthyism," "humanitarian intervention," "global/climate freeze/warming/change/disruption," "anti-Semitism," "Judeo-Christian," "target civilians/hospitals," and such like.

[Aug 05, 2018] Cooper was equally as unhinged as Boot: Neoliberal MSM is a real 1984 remake.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... I'm somewhat puzzled why Trump and his people, when referring to the "fake news" and answering questions from hostile journalists, especially about the idea that the media are "enemies of the American people", fail to bring up the fact that the "fake news" and the "enemies of the people" are not the journalists themselves, but rather the management and ownership of the media. ..."
Aug 05, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com
paul malfara , a day ago
I posted this one to my facebook page three or four days ago. It's brilliant. I have a few comments. First, I disagree with the analysis given by the fellow from the Duran in the introduction, something along the lines of "even Anderson Cooper was smirking because Cohen was demolishing Boot so badly".

If you pay attention to the questions and statements, you find that Cooper is equally as unhinged as Boot is, first hammering on the point that nobody knows what was discussed in the meeting, then after Cohen rattles off a list, Cooper shifts to the "you're believing Vladimir Putin on this" tactic, a nail that Cohen wisely smashes with a hammering statement, "I don't want to shock you, but I believe Vladimir Putin on several things."

Cooper continues to insist that the content of the meeting is unknown and unconfirmed, regardless of what Putin and Trump say. The sheer hubris of journalists today is unprecedented and outrageous.

I do admit that Cooper shuts up after being schooled by Cohen a second and third time and after Boot makes the mistake of calling Cohen an apologist for Putin and Russia. This leads me to a second point.

I'm somewhat puzzled why Trump and his people, when referring to the "fake news" and answering questions from hostile journalists, especially about the idea that the media are "enemies of the American people", fail to bring up the fact that the "fake news" and the "enemies of the people" are not the journalists themselves, but rather the management and ownership of the media.

\This would accomplish two important things, both necessary, in my opinion. First, it would put the front line journalists into their correct place, telling them that they are really nothing but mouthpieces, and we know that the real decisions on content are not made by them.

What a blow to their narcisstic self-esteem that would be!

Second, it would give the American people more information on how their consent is engineered, how the media has owners who have an agenda, and that agenda is not related to improving the lives of the American people, or even keeping them informed with accurate information.

[Aug 05, 2018] "Anti-semitism" is merely the enforcement wing of Zionism

Aug 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

nickels , July 30, 2018 at 1:55 pm GMT

"Anti-semitism" is merely the enforcement wing of Zionism.

Anywhere Zionists uses injustice, pointing that out becomes anti-Semitic. The Zionists, unlike the dullard goyim, understand the power of the moral force, despite the fact they work fully against it's dictates.

[Aug 05, 2018] Question

Aug 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

says: August 3, 2018 at 10:28 pm GMT 200 Words @Johnny Rico There's no circle. The Saker believes the only thing the US did in World War II was murder civilians.

That it was Russia that saved the world from fascism. Japan surrendered because Stalin finally entered the war against Japan like the day after Hiroshima and invaded Manchuria. The US had nothing to do with it.

It is nonsense. But that is the standard narrative here. Thank you for the clarification. Based on their research, Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, Professor of History at the University of California at Santa Barbara, and Terry Charman, a Senior Historian at London Imperial War Museum, concur:

"
"The Soviet entry into the war played a much greater role than the atomic bombs in inducing Japan to surrender because it dashed any hope that Japan could terminate the war through Moscow's mediation," Hasegawa, a Russian-speaking American scholar, said in an interview.

Despite the death toll from the atomic bombings -- 140,000 in Hiroshima, 80,000 in Nagasaki the Imperial Military Command believed it could hold out against an Allied invasion if it retained control of Manchuria and Korea, which provided Japan with the resources for war, according to Hasegawa and Terry Charman

"The Soviet attack changed all that," Charman said. "The leadership in Tokyo realized they had no hope now, and in that sense August Storm did have a greater effect on the Japanese decision to surrender than the dropping of the A-bombs."
"

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/08/14/historians-soviet-offensive-key-japans-wwii-surrender-eclipsed-bombs.html

[Aug 05, 2018] 23 Years Ago the US Backed a Brutal Croatian Ethnic Cleansing of Serbs

Notable quotes:
"... "We could not prevent the slaughter of the Serbs by the Croatians, including elderly people and children " –  UNPROFOR French Lieutenant-General Jean Cot ..."
"... " The decision to launch Operation Storm is not controversial; what is controversial, however, is 'the successful effort' of some Croatian officials headed by President Franjo Tudjman to 'exploit the circumstances' and implement the plan to drive Serbs out of Krajina ." --  ICTY prosecutor Alain Tieger ..."
"... Just remember that at that time, US government offered $5 million reward for the capture of war criminal Ante Gotovina, making him the ICTY most wanted man. He was at that time sheltered by Croatian government, and through the notorious Vatican' "Rat Channels", that were used at the end of WWII to facilitate the escape of Nazis, he was hidden (among the other Croatian war criminals) in a Catholic monastery, to be smuggled to Tenerife, where he was eventually captured by the Spanish police, in 2005. ..."
"... " It is important that these [Serb] civilians start moving and then the army will follow them, and when the columns start moving, they will have a psychological effect on each other. That means we provide them with an exit, while on the other hand we feign (pretend) to guarantee civilian human rights and the like " -- ..."
"... Croatian President Franjo Tudjman, during War Council meeting in July 1995 ..."
"... Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varivode_massacre ..."
"... "American concern is that if General Gotovina is arrested he may carry out a threat to disclose previously unknown extent of US covert involvement in the Krajina offensive " ..."
"... – London Times, June 14th, 2003. ..."
"... Crime pays, doesn't ..."
Aug 05, 2018 | russia-insider.com

23 Years Ago the US Backed a Brutal Croatian Ethnic Cleansing of Serbs Miodrag Novakovic ( FBReporter ) Sat, Aug 4, 2018 | 4,303 445 If there was a nation that could safely conclude from its own historical experience that "Crime Pays", than it must be the newest EU member, Croatia. In the modern history this tiny Catholic nation committed one of the most horrific genocides in WWII over Serbian Orthodox Christian population residing in Croatia and Bosnia, murdering at least one million people; and recently in 1995, Croatia conducted (under US supervision) the biggest and permanent ethnic cleansing "military operation" against its (again) Serbian population, expelling over 200,000 of them in just three days (the real number of ethnically cleansed Serbs from Croatia during the wars in 90ies, is at least twice larger)- unofficially becoming the most ethnic cleanse European state.

If you believe, that Croats "en masse", would be ashamed of such reputation, then you are dead wrong. Actually most of them are very proud, and for the last 23 years they are celebrating it very loudly, and doing everything in their power to prevent (after being pressured by the international community) the return of hundreds of thousands of Serbs to their ancient land, and to avoid returning of their stolen property, mostly (real estates, farm lands, etc.).

https://www.youtube.com/embed/lw0qZmFhPBg

"We could not prevent the slaughter of the Serbs by the Croatians, including elderly people and children " –  UNPROFOR French Lieutenant-General Jean Cot

Elderly Krajina' resident murdered in his home by Croatian soldiers. His guilt- He was a Serb

WHEN WESTERN "DEMOCRACIES" ORCHESTRATE ETHNIC CLEANSINGS

Of course, if would be unreasonable, for this evident and well documented war crimes, and crimes against humanity, to blame only Croats. If their hands are soaked in the blood, of innocent Serbian civilians, up to their arms, then the hands of their Western sponsors (namely USA and Germany) are soaked in the blood at least up to their elbows. Simply Croats would never get away with "such perfect crime", if they were not backed, in every possible way, by their American and German sponsors.

This week will mark 22 years, since on August 4th 1995, Croatia lunched so called military-police operation, named Storm, against Serb' held and controlled Krajina region. Croats backed by US military-logistic & air support, CIA intelligence drone reconnaissance, and open political support from Washington, completed their "operation" in just three days. On August 7th they declared "victory".

Their "victory resulted": in a complete ethnic cleansing of Krajina region, and a murder of at least 2,000 Serbs; vast majority of them were defenseless civilians. Official sources claim that: 1,192 Serbian civilians were killed or missing, and around 200,000 thousands (entire Krajina population) were expelled from their ancient land. Their property was destroyed, looted and stolen, by the Croatian "soldiers" (who performed this "operation" under direct Washington' supervision, while UNPROFOR peacekeepers assigned for the protection of UN designated "Krajina Safe Zone" just stood by, doing almost nothing to prevent the slaughter).

Croatian "soldiers" in "liberated Krajina"

IMPERATIVE WAS TO ESTABLISH US MILITARY PRESENCE IN YUGOSLAVIA

To understand this US complicity, and its direct military involvement, in such horrendous atrocity against one ethnic group, in one, of many, civil wars, which erupted, when former Socialist Yugoslavia "fell apart", again with covert or overt Western support, we have to look here at the wider picture-

When the Clinton' government, together with their major European allies, decided in 90ies, that the best American interest in the Balkans will be to back armed rebellion of the separatist administrative regions in Western Yugoslavia, and openly support the breakup of, internationally recognized, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, while it was still the UN member, they consciously opened the Pandora box.

They openly sided politically & militarily with Slovenian and Croatian Catholics from the Western Yugoslavian Republics, and with Islamic fundamentalists from Bosnia, in their civil and religious wars against Orthodox Christian Serbs living outside, then administrative Republic of Serbia (and later in 1999, US & NATO started another illegal war against Serbia, on behalf of Islamic Albanian separatists from Kosovo, ultimately "stealing" this Southern Serbian province).

Croatian and Bosnian Serbs, who simply wanted to remain in their Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and not to be "taken away" by Catholic and Islamic separatists, and not to be stripped of their constitutional rights, under existing Yugoslavian laws, naturally rebelled against such illegal and violent Yugoslavian outcome, and they subsequently declared own autonomy within the Yugoslavian separatist' regions.

And then all hell broke loose

The historical roots of such American approach, could be found in the Western (mainly British and American) support of "Anti-Stalin" communist leader of post-WWII Yugoslavia Marshal Josip Broz Tito (who was Croat himself), who provided Western leaders with assurances that he will, not only keep Yugoslavia outside the Soviet bloc, but he would align militarily his country with NATO alliance as well; and later in Reagan' presidential directive NSDD133, from 1984, which outlined US strategic interest to expand its military presence to Yugoslavia.

Croatian and US military leadership celebrating "joint operation"- the biggest ethnic cleansing in Europe since WWII

THEY ARE KILLING "LITTLE RUSSIANS" TOO, AREN'T THEY ?

The "only" obstacle to this US (read NATO) expansionist policy in the former Yugoslavia, was Serbian (majority) population, which was, due to its traditional friendship with Russia, considered as "problematic" and had to be decimated, "broken into pieces", and Republic of Serbia to be disabled as an independent state, during so called "spontaneous" civil wars in 90s.

I am not trying here to state that in the Western society exist some unexplained hatred against Serbs (in same time, there is a lots of prejudice, and media & Hollywood bias, picturing Serbs primarily as "bad guys"), actually I believe that people and their politicians in the West could not care less about Serbs (Serbians), and most of them have no clue where to find Serbia on the geographic map. But in same time, as we can observe these days in the West, particularly in United States, there is a lot of unfounded and unreasonable hatred for the Russians

And if we are familiar with the popular saying among Western diplomats, that "Serbs are Little Russians", then is not difficult to put two and two together, and understand their desire to "disable" any Russian-friendly nation in the region.

As long as you are a Serb, regardless of your age, for Croats and their US sponsors, you are a "fair game"

CROATIAN WAR CRIMES AGAINST SERBS WERE SO EVIDENT, AND ON SUCH LARGE SCALE, THAT WESTERN CONTROLLED ICTY HAD NO CHOICE, BUT TO SENTENCE CROATIAN LEADERSHIP

Western controlled ICTY (International Crime Tribunal for Yugoslavia) reluctantly brought charges for war crimes and ethnic cleansing, against (war time) ultra-nationalistic Croatian leadership and group of its generals. But in the wake of overwhelming evidence and international outcry, they had little choice.

In 2001 ICTY brought charges for war crimes against Croatian president general Franjo Tudjman (who will be remembered for publically saying "that he was very proud that his wife was neither Jew or Serb"), Croatian defence minister Gojko Susak (prior to war- open Neo-Nazi ideologist), and two other former (renegade) Yugoslav Army generals, (promoted into supreme commanders of Croatian army) Janko Bobetko and Zvonimir Cermenko. Their indictment was actually travesty of justice, because at the time they were charged, all of them (with exception of General Janko Bobetko), were already dead (by natural cause). General Bobetko died one year after indictment, before he could be delivered to ICTY.

" The decision to launch Operation Storm is not controversial; what is controversial, however, is 'the successful effort' of some Croatian officials headed by President Franjo Tudjman to 'exploit the circumstances' and implement the plan to drive Serbs out of Krajina ." --  ICTY prosecutor Alain Tieger

When the indictment of Croatian generals Ante Gotovina, Ivan Cermak and Mladen Markac, for their war crimes and ethnic cleansing of Croatian Serbs in Krajina, during "operation" Storm in 1995, was announced in 2008- Serbs who survived US sponsored pogrom and ethnic cleansing, were naively hoping that at last some justice will be served.

Even, with such unprecedented obstruction of ICTY by Croatian government, Catholic Church and wider Croatian society, who concealed and destroyed many war documents, facilitated escape and concealment of indicted Croatian war criminals, and intimidated not only victims and witnesses, but ICTY leadership as well- the trial of those three Croatian generals came to conclusion in 2011, and after the overwhelming evidence (the evidence, Croats were not able to conceal or destroy), Gotovina was sentenced to 24 years, Markac to 18 years, while Cermak was acquitted.

Serbian victims hoped that at the end at least some justice was served- but they were wrong again. There is a Serbian saying: "A crow doesn't pick out another crow's eyes."-

In 2012, ICTY appeal chamber overturned the decision of lower chamber, and unconditionally acquitted Croatian war criminals Gotovina and Markac for all crimes. Entire Croatia and its diaspora erupted in joy and massive celebration.

Their historical experience that Crime Pays have been proven yet again

Serbian children getting starved to death and slaughtered by knife in a first-ever death camp for children and infants established by Croats in Jastrebarsko, Sisak, Stara Gradiska, Independent State of Croatia in WW2

Even, after the ICTY had proved (from the audio and written transcript of Croatian war leadership meeting in July 1995) – that there was very credible evidence of existence of a joint criminal enterprise, with intent to forcibly remove ethnic Serbs from Croatia, and that civilian areas in Krajina, including the subsequent civilian refugee columns, were indiscriminately shelled by Croatian artillery, and bombed & machine gunned by Croatian air-force – that did not prevent the real ICTY masters to pervert the course of justice.

One would wander who and what was behind such obvious and embarrassing justice travesty, demonstrated in this example. What had forced American controllers of ICTY to change their mind, and influence the tribunal to free of any charges, these obvious and heavy documented, war criminals?

Just remember that at that time, US government offered $5 million reward for the capture of war criminal Ante Gotovina, making him the ICTY most wanted man. He was at that time sheltered by Croatian government, and through the notorious Vatican' "Rat Channels", that were used at the end of WWII to facilitate the escape of Nazis, he was hidden (among the other Croatian war criminals) in a Catholic monastery, to be smuggled to Tenerife, where he was eventually captured by the Spanish police, in 2005.

Serbian civilians fleeing US/CRO joint operation "Storm" were bombed, machine-gunned, and ran by Croatian tanks, mercilessly- thousands of innocent people just perished

INTERNATIONAL "POST-MORTEM" RESPONSE

It is worth to mention accusations and reactions, to such perversion of justice by ICTY, from some highest international bodies and public persons, at that time-

US Security Council, on August 10th 1995 issued "post-mortem" (when ethnic cleansing of Serbs was already completed) resolution #1009, demanding from Croatia to halt military operation, and condemning targeting of UN peacekeepers (during the operation Storm, Croats had killed three UN soldiers) – but UNSC failed to request a withdrawal of the Croatian forces, and de-facto accepted new "ethnically cleanse" reality!?

The only UN official, who was fully aware of the horrific aspect of this US sponsored "operation", and who was trying to prevent further Croatian atrocities against Serbian population, was, at that time, the Head of UN mission in Yugoslavia, Thorvald Stoltenberg, who urged UN Secretary Yasushi Akashi to request NATO strikes against Croatian army, to prevent further atrocities against civilians.

Of course, that never happened, especially if we know that Croatian operation Storm, was directly supervised by the retired US generals (via Pentagon military contractor MPRI), while US Air Force conducted air raids against Serbian Air Defense systems in Krajina, and CIA officers operated surveillance drones, which provided intelligence for advancing Croatian troops, from two Croatian bases in Adriatic.

Even, EU negotiator Carl Bildt, and US ambassador in Croatia Peter Galbraith, publically condemned Croatian atrocities in Krajina- but they too stayed short of requesting some concrete and punitive measures.

" It is important that these [Serb] civilians start moving and then the army will follow them, and when the columns start moving, they will have a psychological effect on each other. That means we provide them with an exit, while on the other hand we feign (pretend) to guarantee civilian human rights and the like " --   Croatian President Franjo Tudjman, during War Council meeting in July 1995

The only ones from UN troops who tried to prevent Croatian atrocities, and in couple occasions fought bravely against bloody-thirsty Croatian soldiers, where Canadian peacekeepers from "Patricia Company", but they too, where upon return to Canada, silenced and their experience never got real media traction. Their testimony simply did not fit with the Western agenda, that Serbs are the only bad guys

THE REAL ATROCIOUS OUTCOME OF THE BIGGEST ETHNIC CLEANSING IN POST-WWII EUROPE IS MUCH HIGHER, THEN THE OFFICIAL FIGURES STATE

While ICTY prosecutors accepted the fact that some 200,000 Serbs were ethnically cleansed in just couple of days from Krajina region, they "lowered" the number of murdered Serbian civilians to 324. Serbian sources on the ground documented 1,192 dead or missing civilians, while Croatian Helsinki Committee documented 677 killed.

Human Rights Watch documented at least 5,000 Serbian homes razed to the ground by Croatian forces, and HRW accused Croats for summary executions of elderly and disabled Serbs, who stayed behind due to inability or unwillingness to leave their homes. We can only imagine if the entire defenseless Serbian civilian population stayed behind, and faced bloody-thirsty Croatian soldiers- in that case we would be talking here about a full scale genocide, not "just" the ethnic cleansing!?

To better understand what kind of "Croatian justice" were facing defenseless Serbian civilians, who decided not to leave their homes during operation Storm, here is one excerpt from Wikipedia, describing one of many of Croatian "post-Storm" atrocities against innocent civilians-

"The Varivode massacre was a mass killing that occurred on 28 September 1995 in the village of Varivode , Croatia during the Croatian War of Independence . According to United Nations officials, soldiers of the Croatian Army (HV) and Croatian police killed nine Croatian Serb villagers, all of whom were between the ages of 60 and 85. [4] After the war, six former Croatian soldiers were tried for committing crimes in the village, but were all eventually released due to lack of evidence On the night of 28 September 1995, Croatian soldiers entered the village of Varivode and killed nine elderly Serb villagers. The civilians that were killed were Jovan Berić, Marko Berić, Milka Berić, Radivoje Berić, Marija Berić, Dušan Dukić, Jovo Berić, Špiro Berić and Mirko Pokrajac. After the executions occurred, the bodies were buried in a cemetery near the village without the knowledge of the families of the victims. [4] After the massacre, Croatian authorities denied reports of widespread atrocities targeting Serbs and said that they were propaganda. Later, the government blamed the atrocities on uncontrollable elements within the Croatian Army and Croatian police. [25] Christiane Amanpour 's report from October 1995 said that the "United Nations believes 12 Serb civilians were massacred." [25] In the first one hundred days following Operation Storm, at least 150 Serb civilians were summarily executed, and many hundreds disappeared as part of a widespread campaign of revenge against Croatia's Serb minority. [26] The bodies of the killed Serbs were never exhumed, autopsies were never performed and much of the evidence that could have been used against the perpetrators of the crime was discarded. [27] Despite this, six Croatian soldiers were tried for committing crimes in the village. The soldiers were Ivan Jakovljević, Peri Perković, Neđeljko Mijić, Zlatko Ladović, Ivica Petrić and Nikola Rašić. However, in 2002 they were all released due to the lack of evidence against them. [27] In July 2012, the Supreme Court of Croatia ruled that the Republic of Croatia was responsible for the deaths of the nine Serb villagers who were killed in Varivode. The Supreme Court declared, "two months after the conclusion of Operation Storm, an act of terrorism was committed against the Serb inhabitants of Varivode for the purpose of causing fear, hopelessness and to spread feelings of personal insecurity among the citizens." [35] – Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varivode_massacre

By 2012, Croatian government received 6,390 reports about committed war crimes against Serbian civilians, during and after operation Storm, but did little or nothing to bring the perpetrators to justice.

To make things worse and more humiliating for surviving Krajina Serbs, Croatian government is still refusing to return (or reimburse) 140,000 Serbian homes, stolen from ethnic Serbs. 795 Serbs, presumed dead, are still missing, 1,604 bodies were retrieved- according to NGO "Veritas".

Croats were attacking Krajina using the strategy of "Scorched Earth", with unconditional US support

DID THE CROATS SUCCESSFULLY BLACKMAIL U.S. GOVERNMENT INTO SUBMISSION, FORCING THEM TO OVERTURN THE INITIAL ICTY RULING!?

Defense ministers celebrating the joint outcome of the biggest ethnic cleansing in Europe since WWII- Left: US William Perry, Right: CRO Gojkos Susak

The initial ICTY ruling in 2011, which sentenced Croatian generals Gotovina and Markac to long term imprisonment, was expected, and very well supported by the "conclusive evidence". Even, according to many international experts, this sentencing was not enough tough, and did not cover the full scale of war crimes and atrocities, committed by Croatian political and military leadership, during and in the aftermath of operation Storm. Still, many Serbian victims were satisfied that they finally achieved at least some justice

So, when in November 2012 ICTY appeal chamber ruled that Croatian generals are innocent of all charges and free to go, the news came to many as a complete shock, and reaffirmed them in a belief that ICTY tribunal is just another NATO war tool, in their efforts to punish and humiliate, not only the Serbian government, but the numerous Serbian victims of civil wars in 90ies, whose executors were never (and probably never will be) brought to justice.

The ruling was very controversial, not only because it ignored all the hard evidence, including the forensics and the testimony of the international observers, but because the formal excuse for the liberating judgment was – that in the prosecutor documents were missing the Croatian artillery log books, that according to the Appeal chamber, were the only document that would prove the Croatian intent to drive Serbian population from Krajina. The same books were previously repeatedly requested by the ICTY prosecutors, and Croatia did not even deny its existence, but simply refused to cooperate with ICTY and hand them over. Finally, when in 2008 Croatia was warned by European leaders that non-cooperation with ICTY might affect the prospect of its EU membership – somebody from the Croatian leadership simply destroyed these books, and they informed Hague tribunal that Artillery logs no longer exist. Even such provocative and blunt obstruction of the international justice by the Croatian government, did not result in any repercussions for them, and practically they were forgiven for their deeds. Crime pays – doesn't it?

Anyway, ICTY tribunal had plenty of other evidence, proving the intentional destruction of Serbian civilian infrastructure was very well documented by the international observers, and in April 2011 ICTY had no choice but to sentence general Gotovina to 24 years, and general Markac to 18 years.

Another fact that indicates that Appeal chamber' ruling was the political one, and result of some external interference was its split decision – the chamber ruled by the majority decision 3 – 2, implying that there were serious doubts and disagreements, by at least two of the Appeal chamber judges.

"American concern is that if General Gotovina is arrested he may carry out a threat to disclose previously unknown extent of US covert involvement in the Krajina offensive " – London Times, June 14th, 2003.

Gotovina was arrested, but only shortly, until Croatian blackmail convinced their US masters, to pull strings in ICTY, and free him unconditionally

CROATIAN OFFICIALS PROVIDED A PLENTY OF EVIDENCE THAT U.S. GOVERNMENT WAS INVOLVED IN "STORM" MILITARILY, AND HAD A FULL CONTROL OVER WAR (CRIMES) ACTIVITIES THAT TOOK PLACE ON THE GROUND

As soon the ICTY indictments against Croatian leaders were announced in 2001, the Croatian government, NGOs, public, and very well organized and connected diaspora, displayed anger and disagreement, promising that they will do everything in their power to obstruct ICTY investigations and prevent trials against their "national heroes". When in 2011, the first instance judgment by ICTY was issued and Croatian generals were sentenced to long term imprisonment, the Croatian Prime Minister Jadranka Kosor and President Ivo Josipovic publicly expressed their shock and rejection of the ruling, promising to help to overturn the judgment, on appeal!?

And they started their campaign – of obstruction of justice, of abetting the accused war criminals, of the intimidation, and finally, of the blackmail, of ICTY and US officials –

On July 4th, 2002, NGO associated with Croatian government "Croatian World Congress- CWC" filed complaint with ICTY citing what proofs, about US direct involvement in ethnic cleansing of Krajina, they have:

" US officials aided General Gotovina and the Croatian army in operation Storm by violating UN arms embargo and allowing Croatia to obtain weapons US officials established a CIA base inside General Gotovina' military base, which provided the US officials with real-time video footage of events transpiring on the ground during Operation Storm (and thus imputing to them knowledge of events on the ground ), but also from which they could provide such intelligence data to General Gotovina to assist him in conducting Operation Storm . If General Gotovina carried out pre-planed campaign to deport 150,000 to 200,000 Croatian Serbian civilians, the CIA base was not only used to provide knowledge to US officials of such plan and course of conduct on the part of General Gotovina , but was also used to assist General Gotovina in achieving the goals of his alleged plan . The US official gave the green light for the Operation and provided diplomatic and political support for it . The US officials at all times had the ability to halt the military operations . Accordingly, the US officials named in the complaint should be indicted for having aided and abetted General Gotovina. "

Ethnic cleansing in Krajina was the joint US/CRO criminal enterprise History will be the judge

If you read carefully through this CWC statement (threat), they are not even trying to deny Gotovina' war crimes, they are just implying bluntly, that if their lovely General was sentenced, they would gladly provide ICTY with the evidence of Croatian-American "Joint criminal enterprise to forcibly remove the Serb population from Croatia ", as it states the ICTY indictment from 2001, of course omitting the US participation (which was the very secret deal, at least until Croatian officials started "mouthing" their "American friends").

Croatian complaint to ICTY specifically named the highest US officials, alleging that they, along General Gotovina, committed too war crimes against Serbian population:

"On behalf of the Croatian World Congress, a non-governmental organization that is a member of the United Nations with advisory status, you are hereby notified pursuant to Article 18(1) of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia of the existence of information concerning serious violations of international humanitarian law (hereinafter "IHL"), namely that officials of the United States of America, including but not limited to William Jefferson Clinton , Anthony Lake , Samuel Berger , Richard Holbrooke , Peter Galbraith and/or George J. Tenet (hereinafter collectively referred to as "U.S. officials"), aided and abetted Croatian General Ante Gotovina , who was indicted by your office on 8 June 2001."

War Criminals at work together- Croatian general Kresimir Cosic and US supreme commander general Wesley Clark

We are not going here to present detailed evidence of US crimes, committed during the operation Storm. Of course, the Croatian war crimes on the ground were very brutal, systematic and savage, they did "the physical work", but from the evidence provided by numerous Croatian officials and their organizations, it is very obvious, that operation Storm would never happen, or if happened never would be successful, without US military support and direct supervision, or without US approval.

Just to give you "a taste" what kind of American support Croats were enjoying during their atrocious operation against innocent Serbian civilians, will present you with some documented facts:

The Green Light for the operation came a couple days prior the assault- President Clinton passed the order directly to US military attaché in Zagreb Colonel Richard Herrick; Herrick passed order to Croatian head of military intelligence Markica Rebic (the others involved directly were defense minister Gojko Susak, Miro Tudjman and Miro Medimurac, heads of Secret Service and Intelligence Service). US masters were so pleased with Rebic' service, that they rewarded him with Meritorious Service Medal, delivered to him by Ambassador Galbraith in 1996. The other people from USG involved in this joint criminal enterprise with Croats, in addition to Clinton, were Anthony Lake and William Perry. US masters imposed the time limit on operation Storm- it had to be completed in 5 days.

Long before the Storm, in 1992 USG with Croatian approval established CIA reconnaissance base on island of Brac, from where CIA operators were flying unmanned aircraft spying on Serbian positions in Krajina, Bosnia and part of Serbia itself. USG requested that this cooperation to be held a top secret, so outsiders don't find that US is taking sides in the Balkans' civil wars. But it did not stay for too long the top secret. On January 1st, 1994, Croatian state security apprehended a spy on the base perimeter. They delivered him right away to General Gotovina, to find out it was their German ally, precisely it was German military attaché Hans Schwan.

This incident alerted USG, which wanted to conceal any covert activities on behalf of CG, so they promptly removed CIA base to new secret location, in Sepurina, near city of Zadar. This new location was covered by three security layers, to ensure the full secrecy. From new base CIA started immediately collecting photographic and video evidence of Serbian activities in Krajina and Bosnia, and passing them to Croats, and to Pentagon. There was 24 hours, 6 member intelligence crew, present on site- consisting of three CIA and three Croatian military officers.

Croatian military base Sepurine, near Zadar, from which CIA operated drones, aiding operation Storm, and providing live video feed of "military activities" on the ground to Pentagon

"STORM" WASN'T THE FIRST ETHNIC CLEANSING, UNDERTAKEN BY CROATIA AND US, AS A JOINT CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE:

It is interesting that disgruntled (by ICTY indictment) Croatian Officials and Croatian World Congress body, in their complaint to ICTY, are providing the evidence about USG intelligence and logistical support for another Croatian genocidal operation, named Flash, that took place in Western Slavonia, between May 1st and 3rd, 1995, which resulted in another complete ethnic cleansing of Serbian population- prior to the operation this area was populated by 29,000 Serbs, after Flash, only 1,500 remained.

The number of killed civilians is unknown because Croats prevented UNPROFOR troops from accessing the area, until they did "the sanitation" (read: removing the evidence of their crimes, because entire Serbian refugee columns were massacred and overran by Croatian tanks). Estimates of killed civilians rage between one hundred to couple thousands. Another example of "the successful US-CRO joint criminal enterprise"?

The interesting details, revealed here by Croatian sources, is- that US military attaché Herrick was attached to the Croatian mobile military command, during the genocidal operation Flash, supervising it directly- and the head of CIA branch in Zagreb Marc Kelton was directly coordinating expulsion of Slavonia' Serbs, with Croatian president Tudjman son Miro.

In the eve of the attack on Krajina, on August 4th 1995, between midnight and 4 a.m. Croatian forces were ordered to turn off all telecommunication devices, to unable US air force to electronically disable all Serbian communications.

The outcome of Joint US/CRO "justice"

According to NATO spokesman Jim Mitchell in Aviano, Italy, two US military planes EA-6B Prowlers were dispatched to Krajina air space. USAF planes, on the top of jamming Serbian telecommunications, destroyed the airport Udbine, and Radar and Serbian Air Defense near Knin, in order to prevent any Serbian air support or defence, against invading Croatian forces.

Here, US military attaché Herrick was replaced by the Colonel John Sadler, who was embedded with Gotovina command unit, directly supervising operation Storm. Pentagon was also directly monitoring the operation via live video feed.

Shortly after the biggest joint (US/CRO) ethnic cleansing in Europe was completed, US head of DIA General Colonel Patrick Hughes visited Croatia to coordinate further military actions against Serbs in Bosnia and if necessary in Republic of Serbia

Crime pays, doesn't

[Aug 05, 2018] War Is A Racket After 17 Years and Billions Wasted, US Seeks Peace With Taliban by Ron Paul and Daniel McAdams

Jul 31, 2018 | www.antiwar.com
Last week, US State Department officials met with Taliban leaders in Qatar. At the request of the Taliban, the US-backed Afghan government was not invited. The officials discussed ceasefires and an end to the war. Meanwhile, the US inspector general charged with monitoring US spending on Afghanistan reconstruction has reported that since 2008, the US has completely wasted at the least $15.5 billion. He believes that's just the tip of the iceberg, though. Will President Trump do the smart thing and negotiate peace and leave? Tune in to today's Ron Paul Liberty Report:

[Aug 05, 2018] Film that tracking the neocon influence and how the neoconservatives from the Bush era pushed the Iraq war

Notable quotes:
"... "My film itself is essentially was tracking the neocon influence and how the neoconservatives from the Bush era that pushed the Iraq war, that constructed the blueprints for the Iraq war, how they also were the earliest pioneers pushing this Russiagate Cold War 2.0 mentality." ..."
"... – Robbie Martin, from this week's program. ..."
Aug 04, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

"My film itself is essentially was tracking the neocon influence and how the neoconservatives from the Bush era that pushed the Iraq war, that constructed the blueprints for the Iraq war, how they also were the earliest pioneers pushing this Russiagate Cold War 2.0 mentality."

– Robbie Martin, from this week's program.

[Aug 05, 2018] Chutzpah Killing your parents, then complaining you're an orphan

Notable quotes:
"... NY Times reporters panic about losing financial benefits after willfully destroying the paper's only value: it's reputation ..."
Aug 05, 2018 | thefinereport.com

April 24, 2012 NY Times reporters panic about losing financial benefits after willfully destroying the paper's only value: it's reputation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=xTw0B_lmIHM#!

A recent example:

[Aug 05, 2018] Soros the 400k Question What constitutes 'foreign interference' in democracy -- RT Op-ed

Notable quotes:
"... "Unproven Russian involvement in Brexit – terrible! Impose more sanctions on Moscow! A £400k check from an American billionaire for an anti-Brexit campaigning group – that's no problem; it's helping our democracy!" ..."
"... "By quitting Europe, I fear that we are hastening Putin's dream of the break-up of the EU – and with it, potentially, western civilisation," ..."
"... "propaganda arms of the Russian government," ..."
"... "at the back of the queue" ..."
"... "This is not foreign interference This is not foreign interference!" ..."
"... " highly probable " ..."
"... "had conducted a thorough investigation around the Brexit referendum and found no evidence of Russian interference ." ..."
"... "Russian troll factory," ..."
"... "very low levels of engagement" ..."
"... "conspiracy theorist" ..."
"... "Just what does George Soros think he is doing pouring £400,000 into a campaign to stop Brexit. For a start he is not actually a resident of this country so it has nothing to do with him." ..."
"... "I don't know that the public understands the gravity of what the Russians were able to do and continue to do here in the United States. They've attacked us. They're trying to undermine our democracy," ..."
"... "I looked at them and said: 'I'm leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you're not getting the money " ..."
"... "I said, 'I'm telling you, you're not getting the billion dollars," ..."
"... "Well, son of a b***h. He got fired." ..."
"... Follow Neil Clark @NeilClark66 ..."
Aug 05, 2018 | www.rt.com

Soros & the £400k Question: What constitutes 'foreign interference' in democracy? Neil Clark Neil Clark is a journalist, writer, broadcaster and blogger. He has written for many newspapers and magazines in the UK and other countries including The Guardian, Morning Star, Daily and Sunday Express, Mail on Sunday, Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, New Statesman, The Spectator, The Week, and The American Conservative. He is a regular pundit on RT and has also appeared on BBC TV and radio, Sky News, Press TV and the Voice of Russia. He is the co-founder of the Campaign For Public Ownership @PublicOwnership. His award winning blog can be found at www.neilclark66.blogspot.com. He tweets on politics and world affairs @NeilClark66 Published time: 9 Feb, 2018 16:32 Edited time: 19 Feb, 2018 09:39 Get short URL Soros & the £400k Question: What constitutes 'foreign interference' in democracy? © Wiktor Dabkowski / Global Look Press You'd have to have a real sense of humor failure not to laugh. The news that US billionaire Soros donated £400k to an anti-Brexit group came on the day that YouTube said they found no evidence of Russian interference in Brexit. Repeat After Me (with robotic arm movements): "Unproven Russian involvement in Brexit – terrible! Impose more sanctions on Moscow! A £400k check from an American billionaire for an anti-Brexit campaigning group – that's no problem; it's helping our democracy!"

You don't have to own a brand new £999 state-of-the art Hypocrisy Detector from Harrods, to pick up on the double standards. Just having a few functioning brain cells and thinking for yourself will do. For months in the UK we've been bombarded with Establishment-approved conspiracy theories – peddled in all the 'best' newspapers – that Russia somehow 'fixed' Brexit. Getting Britain to leave the EU was all part of a cunning plot by Vladimir Putin, aka Dr. Evil, to weaken Europe and the 'free world.'

Read more Gina Miller(R), George Soros(L) © Global Look Press Soros-backed anti-Brexit group is 'undemocratic' – cofounder Gina Miller

Even West End musical composer Andrew Lloyd-Webber, who knows quite a bit about phantoms, seemed taken in by it. "By quitting Europe, I fear that we are hastening Putin's dream of the break-up of the EU – and with it, potentially, western civilisation," the noble Lord declared in July.

Never mind that we don't have a single statement from Putin or other senior Kremlin figures saying that they actually supported Brexit. These Establishment Russia-bashers know exactly what The Vlad is thinking.

And never mind that RT and Sputnik, which we are repeatedly told are "propaganda arms of the Russian government," ran articles by pro- and anti-Brexit writers. The same people who told us Iraq had WMDs in 2003 were absolutely sure it was those dastardly Russkies who had got Britain to vote 'leave.' The irony is of course that there was significant foreign interference in Brexit. But it didn't come from Moscow.

Or Obama actually visiting the U.K. to urge people to vote Remain. Imagine if Putin did the same for Leave!

-- jeffreydujon (@vanremny) February 8, 2018

The US has always wanted Britain to stay in the EU. In April 2016, two months before the Referendum, President Obama made it clear what he wanted when he visited the UK. He warned that if Britain exited the EU it would be "at the back of the queue" for trade deals with the US .

Just imagine if Putin had said that. The Russophobes would have spontaneously combusted.

Then of course there was the backing the Remain camp had from the giants of US capital. Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan donated £500,000 each to the 'Britain Stronger in Europe' group, Citigroup and Morgan Stanley – £250,000 each.

Again, repeat after me (with robotic arm movements): "This is not foreign interference This is not foreign interference!"

You've got to see the funny side of this: all that hysterical fake news about 'Russian interference' in Brexit & here we have one side receiving £400K from a US billionaire who is part of the US political establishment. Is that not 'interference' ?!! https://t.co/URzrB3ciLd

-- Neil Clark (@NeilClark66) February 8, 2018

The point is not whether we are for or against Brexit. Or whether we think George Soros is a malign influence who only acts out of self-interest or an old sweetie-pie with the good of humanity at heart. The point is the double standards that are causing our Hypocrisy Detectors to explode.

Let's think back to December 2016. Then, the pro-war and fiercely anti-Russian Labour MP Ben Bradshaw told Parliament that it was " highly probable " that Russia had interfered with Brexit.

Fourteen months on, what have we got? On Thursday, the global head of You Tube's public policy, Juniper Downs, said her company "had conducted a thorough investigation around the Brexit referendum and found no evidence of Russian interference ."

Read more © Sophia Kembowski / Global Look Press No Russian interference in Brexit referendum - YouTube exec tells parliamentary committee (VIDEO)

Twitter meanwhile says it detected 49 (yes, 49) accounts from what it claimed to be a "Russian troll factory," which sent all of 942 messages about Brexit – amounting to less than 0.005% of all the tweets about the Referendum. Twitter said the accounts received "very low levels of engagement" from users. If the Kremlin had planned to use tweets to persuade us to vote 'leave,' they didn't really put much effort into it, did they?

Finally, Facebook said that only three "Kremlin-linked" accounts were found which spent the grand sum of 72p (yes, 72p) on ads during the Referendum campaign. Which amounts to the greater "interference" ? 72p or £400K? Erm tough call, isn't it?

You might have thought, given his concern with 'foreign interference' in British politics, that Ben Bradshaw would have been urging 'Best for Britain' to return George Soros' donation. Au contraire! His only tweets about it were retweets of two critical comments about the Daily Telegraph, and the BBC's coverage of the story. Conclusion: Those who rail about 'Russia meddling in Brexit' but not Soros' intervention aren't concerned about 'foreign interference' in UK politics, only 'foreign interference' from countries they don't approve of.

Those who are quite happy peddling ludicrous conspiracy theories about Russians shout "conspiracy theorist" (or worse) at those who report factually on proven meddling from others. The Daily Express hit the nail on the head in their Friday editorial which said: "Just what does George Soros think he is doing pouring £400,000 into a campaign to stop Brexit. For a start he is not actually a resident of this country so it has nothing to do with him."

That really is the rub of the matter. And Bradshaw and co. have no adequate response except to shoot the messenger.

If we look at the affair with an even wider lens, the hypocrisy is even greater. The US has been gripped by an anti-Russian frenzy not seen since the days of Senator Joe McCarthy. The unsubstantiated claim that Russia fixed the election for Donald Trump is repeated by 'liberals' and many neocons too, as a statement of fact. "I don't know that the public understands the gravity of what the Russians were able to do and continue to do here in the United States. They've attacked us. They're trying to undermine our democracy," film director Rob Reiner said .

But the number one country round the world for undermining democracy and interfering in the affairs of other sovereign states is the US itself.

Read more The US Vice President Joe Biden (L) jokes that Ukraine's President Petro Poroshenko (R) is buying lunch, before sitting down to their bilateral meeting at the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington March 31, 2016. © Jonathan Ernst 'Son of b***h got fired': Joe Biden forced Ukraine to sack prosecutor general 'in six hours'

While Establishment journos and pundits have been foaming at the mouth over 'Russiagate' and getting terribly excited over 'smoking guns' which turn out – surprise, surprise – to be damp squibs, there's been less attention paid to the boasts of former Vice President Joe Biden on how he got the allegedly 'independent' Ukrainian government to sack its prosecutor general in a few hours. "I looked at them and said: 'I'm leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you're not getting the money "

"I said, 'I'm telling you, you're not getting the billion dollars," Biden said during a meeting of the US' Council on Foreign Relations. "Well, son of a b***h. He got fired."

Again, just imagine the furore if a leading Russian government figure boasted about how he used financial inducements to get another country's Prosecutor General to be sacked. Or if a tape was leaked in which the Russian Ambassador and a Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson could be heard discussing who should or shouldn't be in the new 'democratic' government of another sovereign state. But we had the US Ambassador to Ukraine and the US Assistant Secretary of State doing exactly that in 2014 – and the 'Russia is interfering in the Free World!' brigade were as silent as a group of Trappist monks.

It's fair to say that Orwell would have a field day with the doublespeak that's currently on show. The cognitive dissonance is there for all to see. Repeat After Me: Unproven Russian interference – Bad. Proven interference from other external sources – Good. What's your problem?

Follow Neil Clark @NeilClark66

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

[Aug 05, 2018] Perils of Ineptitude

Notable quotes:
"... cordon sanitaire ..."
"... ANDREW LEVINE is the author most recently of THE AMERICAN IDEOLOGY (Routledge) and POLITICAL KEY WORDS (Blackwell) as well as of many other books and articles in political philosophy. His most recent book is In Bad Faith: What's Wrong With the Opium of the People . He was a Professor (philosophy) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and a Research Professor (philosophy) at the University of Maryland-College Park. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). ..."
Aug 05, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

There is less shame in being undone by a "master of deceit."

When J. Edgar Hoover coined that description, he had Communists in mind. Back then, though, "Ruskies" and "Commies" – it was all the same. Americans were conditioned to live in fear that the Russians were coming.

That nonsense should have ended when Communism more or less officially expired in 1989, followed two years later by the demise of the Soviet Union itself. For a long time, it seemed that it had.

At first, the reaction in Western, especially American, political and media circles was triumphalist. The war was over and our side won.

Beneath the surface, however, there was mourning in America.

With the Cold War, the death merchants, the masters of war, the neocons, and a host of others had had a good thing going. Having been born into it, the political class was comfortable with the status quo too; and generations of Americans had grown up imbibing Russophobia in their mother's milk (or infant formula).

It turned out, though, that American triumphalism was only a phase. Before long, it became clear that our economic and political masters had nothing to worry about, that Cold War anti-Communism was more robust than Communism itself.

However, in the final days of Bush 41 and then at the dawn of the Clinton era, nobody knew that. Nobody gave America's propaganda system the credit it deserved.

Also, nobody quite realized how devastating Russia's regression to capitalism would be, and nobody quite grasped the savagery of the kleptocrats who had taken charge of what remained of the Russian state.

For more than a decade, the situation in that late great superpower was too dire to sustain the old fears and animosities. Capitalism had made Russia wretched again.

That suited Bill Clinton and his First Lady, the former Goldwater Girl. Boris Yeltsin, Russia's leader, was their man. He was a godsend, a Trump-like cartoon character and a drunkard to boot – with an economy in tatters, and no rightwing base egging him on.

But anti-Communism (without Communism) and its close cousin, Russophobia, could not remain in remission forever. The need for them was too great.

In the Age of Obama, the Global War on Terror, with or without that ludicrous Bush 43-era name, wasn't cutting it anymore. It was, and still is, good for keeping America's perpetual war regime going and for undoing civil liberties, but there had never been much glory in it, only endless misery for all. Also it was getting old and increasingly easy to see through.

The time was therefore right for a return of the repressed -- for full-blooded, fifties-style, anti-Communist (= anti-Russian) hysteria, or, since that still seemed far-fetched, for anti-Communist (= anti-Chinese) hysteria.

This was not the only factor behind the Obama administration's "pivot towards Asia," its largely failed attempt to take China down a notch or two, but it was an important part of the story.

However, by the time Obama and his team decided to pivot, China had become too important to the United States economically to make a good Cold War enemy. Worse still, it had for too long been an object of pity and contempt, not fear.

When the Soviet Union was an enemy, China was an enemy too, most glaringly during the Korean War. It remained an enemy even after the Sino-Soviet split became too obvious to deny. However, unlike post-1917 Russia, it had never quite become an historical foe.

Moreover, as Russia began to recover from the Yeltsin era, the Russian political class, and many of the oligarchs behind them, sensing the popular mood, decided that the time was ripe "to make Russia great again." Putin is not so much a cause as he is a symptom – and symbol – of this aspiration.

And so, there it was: the longed for new Cold War would be much like the one that seemed over a quarter century ago.

***

As everyone who has seen, heard or read anything about the 2016 election "knows," Russian intelligence services (= Putin) meddled. Everyone also "knows" that, with midterm elections looming, they are at it again.

This, according to the mainstream consensus view, is a bona fide casus belli , a justification for war. To be sure, what they want is a war that remains cold; ending life on earth, as we know it, is not on their agenda.

But inasmuch as cold wars can easily turn hot, this hardly mitigates the recklessness of their machinations. Humankind was extraordinarily lucky last time; there is no guarantee that all that luck will hold.

Exactly what "Putin," the shorthand name for all that is Russian and nefarious, did, or is still doing, remains unclear. But this does not seem to bother purveyors of the conventional wisdom.

Neither is ostensibly informed public opinion fazed by the fact that the evidence supporting the consensus view comes mainly from American intelligence services and from their counterparts in the UK and other allied nations.

Time was when anyone with any sense understood that these intelligence services, the American ones especially, are second to none in meddling in the affairs of other nations, and that the American national security state – essentially our political police -- is comprised, by design, of liars and deceivers.

How ironic therefore that nowadays it is mainly bamboozled Trump supporters in the Fox News demographic -- people who could care less about peace or, for that matter, about truth -- who are wary of the CIA and skeptical of the FBI's claims!

Try as they might, the manufacturers and guardians of conventional wisdom have so far been unable to concoct a plausible story in which Russian meddling affected the outcome of the 2016 election in any serious way. The idea that the Russians defeated Hillary, not Hillary herself, is, to borrow a phrase from Jeremy Bentham, "nonsense on stilts." Leading Democrats and their media flacks don't seem to mind that either.

They do not even seem to notice that what they allege, vague as it is, is trifling compared to the massive and very open meddling of American plutocrats, Republican vote suppressers and gerrymanderers, and the governments of supposedly friendly nations – like Saudi Arabia, the Gulf monarchies, and Israel.

Nevertheless, it probably is true that the Russians meddled. Cold War revivalists can therefore rest easy, confident that their propagandists will have at least a few facts with which they can work to restore the perils of their vanished youth.

Even so, the level of their hypocrisy is appalling. Russia, along with former Soviet republics and former members of the Warsaw Pact, has been bearing the brunt of far worse American meddling for far longer than anything sanctimonious defenders of so-called American "democracy" can plausibly allege.

Moreover, it should go without saying that the democracy they purport to care so much about has almost nothing to do with "the rule of the demos." It doesn't even have much to do with free and fair competitive elections – unless "free and fair" means that anything goes, so long as the principals and perpetrators are homegrown or citizens of favored nations.

Self-righteous posturing aside, Putin's real sin in the eyes of the American power elite is that, in his own small way, he has been defying America's "right" to run the world as it sees fit.

When Clinton was president, Serbia did that, and lived to regret it. Cuba has been suffering for nearly six decades for the same reason, and now Venezuela is paying its dues. The empire is merciless towards nations that rebel.

With Soviet support and then with sheer determination and grit, Cuba has been able to withstand the onslaught to some extent from Day One. Venezuela may not be so lucky – especially now that Republicans and Democrats feel threatened by the growing number of "democratic socialists" in their midst. Already, the propaganda system is targeting Venezuelan "socialism," blaming it for that country's woes, and warning that if our newly minted, homegrown socialists prevail, a similar fate will be in store for us.

This is ludicrous, of course – American hostility and the vagaries of the global oil market deserve the lion's share of the blame. But the on-going propaganda blitz could nevertheless pave the way for horrors ahead, should Trump decide to start a war America could actually win.

Inconsequential Russian meddling is a big deal on the "liberal" cable networks, on NPR, and in the "quality" press. Democrats and a few Republicans love to bleat on about it. But it is Ukraine that made Russia our "adversary" and its president Public Enemy Number One.

Hypocrisy reigns here too. It was the Obama administration – run through with neocons, liberal imperialists, and other holdovers from Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State – that did all it could to exacerbate longstanding tensions between that country's Ukrainian and Russian speaking populations, the better to complete NATO's encirclement of the Russian federation. And it was American meddling that led to the empowerment of virulently anti-Russian, fascisant Ukrainian politicians, much to the detriment of Russian speaking Ukrainians in the east.

But never mind: Putin – that is, the Russia government – violated international law by sending troops briefly into beleaguered Russian-speaking parts of the country. That they were generally welcomed by the people living there is of no importance.

Worst of all, Russia annexed Crimea – a territory integral to the Russian empire since the eighteenth century. Since long before the Russian Revolution, Crimea has been home to a huge naval base vital to Russia's strategic defense.

The story line back in the day was that anything that could be described as Russian aggression outside the Soviet Union's agreed upon sphere of influence had to do with spreading Communism. In fact, the Soviets did everything they could to keep Communist and other insurgencies from upending the status quo. The mainstream narrative was wrong.

Now Communism is gone and nothing has taken its place. Even so, the idea that Russia has designs on its neighbors for ideological reasons is hard to shake – in part because it is actively promoted by propagandists who have suddenly and uncharacteristically become defenders of international law.

Meanwhile, of course, the hypocrisies keep piling on. It is practically a tenet of the American civil religion that international law applies to others, not to the United States. This is why, when it suits some perceived purpose, America flaunts its violations shamelessly.

Thus nothing the Russians did or are ever likely to do comes close to the shenanigans Bill Clinton displayed – successfully, for the most part – in his efforts to tear Kosovo away from Serbia. Clinton even went so far as to bomb Belgrade; Putin never bombed Kiev.

The Cold War that began after World War II involved a clash of rival political economic systems. The Cold War that reignited a few years ago involves a clash of rival imperialist centers. Its world more nearly resembles the one that existed before World War I than the one that emerged after World War II.

However, the difference may be more superficial than it seems. The ease with which Cold War revivalists have been able to get the Cold War up and running again, even without Communism, suggests what a few observers have long maintained -- that the Cold War, on Russia's part, had little, if anything, to do with spreading Communism around the world, and everything to do with maintaining a cordon sanitaire around Russia's borders in order to protect against a demonstrably aggressive "free world."

George W. Bush claimed that 9/11 happened because "they hate our freedom." "They" would be radical Islamists of the kind stirred into action in Afghanistan by Zbigniew Brzezinski and his co-thinkers in the Carter administration. Their objective was to undermine the Soviet Union by getting it bogged down in a quagmire like the one that did so much harm to the United States in Vietnam.

That part of Brzezinski's plan was at least a partial success. But inasmuch as Bush's "they" are still there, still spreading murder and mayhem throughout the Greater Middle East, America and the world has been paying a high price for the benefits, such as they were, that ensued.

The never-ending wars set in motion by the "pivot" towards radical Islamism decades ago never quite succeeded in producing an enemy as serviceable as the USSR. But now that Putin's Russia has been pressed into service, that problem is potentially "solved."

However, the American public is not as naïve as it used to be, and it is impossible to say, at this point, how well this new story line will work.

Efforts to recycle Bush's "they hate our freedom" nonsense ought to be non-starters. But this is the best Cold War revivalists have come up with so far. The Russians, they say, simply cannot deal with the fact that we Americans are so damned free.

It is hard to believe, but there are people who are actually buying this but, with a lot of corporate media assistance, there are. No matter how clear it is that they are not worth being taken seriously, Cold War mythologies just won't die.

However, it is worth pondering why today's Russia would do what it is alleged to have done; and why, as is also alleged, it is still doing it.

From a geopolitical point of view, Russia does have an interest in doing all it can to ward off Western aggression. It also has an interest in undermining strategic alliances aimed at blocking anything and everything that challenges American supremacy. And, until sanity prevails in Washington and other Western capitals, it arguably also has an interest in aiding and abetting rightwing nationalists in order to exacerbate tensions within Western societies.

However, in view of prevailing power relations, these are interests it cannot do much to advance. Acting as if this were not the case only puts Russia in a bad light -- not for meddling, but for meddling stupidly.

No doubt, for reasons both fair and foul, Putin wanted Hillary to lose the election two years ago. So, but for one little problem, would anyone whose head is screwed on right. That problem's name is Donald Trump.

Clinton is bad, but Trump is worse -- not just by most measures but by all.

Her fondness for war and preparations for war was alarming; she was bellicosity personified. But it was plain even before the election that Trump, a mentally unhinged narcissist, would be even more likely than she to bring on massive devastation. A vote for Trump was and still is a vote for catastrophe.

Putin's enemy was Trump's enemy, and it is axiomatic that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" -- except sometimes it isn't. Sometimes, my enemy's enemy is an enemy far worse.

For reasons that remain obscure, Putin and Trump seem to have a "thing" going on between them. Some day perhaps we will know what that is all about. For now, though, the hard and very relevant fact is that Trump has done nothing to help, and quite a few things to harm, Russia.

It isn't just ordinary Russians who have been made worse off. Trump has been at least as hard on oligarchs close to Putin as Clinton would have been.

If those damned Russians were half as smart as they are made out to be, they would have realized long ago that, for getting anything done that bucks the tide, Trump is too inept to be of any use at all; and that anything he sets out to do is likely to turn out badly not just for America and its allies but for Russia too.

Therefore, if there really was Russian meddling, as there probably was, Putin should be ashamed – not so much for the DNC reasons laid out 24/7 on MSNBC and CNN, but for overestimating Trump's abilities and for underestimating the extent to which what started out as a maneuver of Hillary Clinton's, concocted to excuse her incompetence, would take a perilously "viral" turn, becoming a major threat to peace in a political culture that never quite got beyond the lunacy of the First Cold War. Join the debate on Facebook More articles by: Andrew Levine

ANDREW LEVINE is the author most recently of THE AMERICAN IDEOLOGY (Routledge) and POLITICAL KEY WORDS (Blackwell) as well as of many other books and articles in political philosophy. His most recent book is In Bad Faith: What's Wrong With the Opium of the People . He was a Professor (philosophy) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and a Research Professor (philosophy) at the University of Maryland-College Park. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press).

[Aug 05, 2018] What If Everything We've Been Told About Recent History Is a Lie

Notable quotes:
"... The author is a prominent American Christian conservative who was a presidential candidate for the paleoconservative Constitution Party in 2008, when he was endorsed by Ron Paul. ..."
"... He is the pastor of Liberty Fellowship, a non-denominational church in Montana, and he is a popular radio host and columnist . His weekly sermons are available on his YouTube channel. ..."
"... He is a relentless foe of neoconservatism and frequently criticizes the neocon hostility towards Russia. His views are representative of an influential and substantial part of Trump's popular support. ..."
"... Here is an archive of his excellent articles which we have published on Russia Insider , when they were relevant to the debate over Russia. ..."
"... The War on Terror ..."
"... The War On Terror: The Plot To Rule The Middle East ..."
"... The War On Terror: The Plot To Rule The Middle East ..."
"... The War On Terror: The Plot To Rule The Middle East ..."
"... The War On Terror: The Plot To Rule The Middle East ..."
"... The War On Terror: The Plot To Rule The Middle East ..."
"... The War On Terror: The Plot To Rule The Middle East ..."
Aug 05, 2018 | russia-insider.com

"Behind the War on Terror is a strategic plan crafted decades in advance to redraw the map of the Middle East. 9/11 was a false-flag operation blamed on Muslims ..." Chuck Baldwin Wed, Aug 1, 2018 | 14,261 389 MORE: History Revisionist History The author is a prominent American Christian conservative who was a presidential candidate for the paleoconservative Constitution Party in 2008, when he was endorsed by Ron Paul.

He is the pastor of Liberty Fellowship, a non-denominational church in Montana, and he is a popular radio host and columnist . His weekly sermons are available on his YouTube channel.

He is a relentless foe of neoconservatism and frequently criticizes the neocon hostility towards Russia. His views are representative of an influential and substantial part of Trump's popular support.

Here is an archive of his excellent articles which we have published on Russia Insider , when they were relevant to the debate over Russia.

What if everything we've been told about 9/11 is a lie? What if it wasn't 19 Muslim terrorist hijackers that flew those planes into the Twin Towers and Pentagon? What if the Muslims had nothing whatsoever to do with the attacks on 9/11? What if everything we've been told about the reasons we invaded two sovereign nations (Afghanistan and Iraq) is a lie?

What if the 17-year-old, never-ending "War on Terror" in the Middle East is a lie? What if our young soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines who have given their lives in America's "War on Terror" died for a lie? What if G.W. Bush, Barack Obama and Donald Trump have been nothing but controlled toadies for an international global conspiracy that hatched the attacks of 9/11 as nothing more than a means to institute a perpetual "War on Terror" for purposes that have nothing to do with America's national security? Would the American people want to know? Would the truth even matter to them?

The sad reality is that the vast majority of Americans who would read the above paragraph would totally dismiss every question I raised as being unrealistic and impossible -- or even nutty. Why is that? Have they studied and researched the questions? No. Have they given any serious thought to the questions? No. They have simply swallowed the government/mainstream media version of these events hook, line and sinker.

It is totally amazing to me that the same people who say they don't believe the mainstream media (MSM) and government (Deep State) versions of current events -- which is why they voted for and love Donald Trump -- have absolutely no reservations about accepting the official story that the 9/11 attacks were the work of jihadist Muslims and that America's "War on Terror" is completely legitimate.

These "always Trumpers" are dead set in their minds that America is at war with Islam; that Trump's bombings of Syria were because President Assad is an evil, maniacal monster who gassed his own people; and that Trump's expansion of the war in Afghanistan is totally in the interests of America's national security.

BUT WHAT IF ALL OF IT IS A BIG, FAT LIE?

What if the Muslims had NOTHING to do with 9/11?

What if Bashar al-Assad did NOT gas his own people?

What if America's "War on Terror" is a completely false, manufactured, made-up deception?

What if America's military forces are mostly fighting for foreign agendas and NOT for America's national security or even our national interests?

What if America's war in Afghanistan is a fraud?

What if the entire "War on Terror" is a fraud?

The Trump robots have bought into America's "War on Terror" as much as Obama's robots and Bush's robots did. Bush was elected twice, largely on the basis of America's "War on Terror." Obama campaigned against the "War on Terror" and then expanded it during his two terms in office. Trump campaigned against the "War on Terror" and then immediately expanded it beyond what Obama had done. In fact, Trump is on a pace to expand the "War on Terror" beyond the combined military aggressions of both Bush and Obama.

But who cares? Who even notices?

America is engaged in a global "War on Terror." Just ask G.W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, FOX News, The Washington Post, the New York Times and the vast majority of America's pastors and preachers. They all tell us the same thing seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. Liberals scream against Trump, and conservatives scream against Maxine Waters; but both sides come together to support America's never-ending "War on Terror."

But what if it's ALL a lie? What if Obama and Trump, the right and the left, the MSM and the conservative media are all reading from the same script? What if they are all (wittingly or unwittingly) in cahoots in perpetuating the biggest scam in world history? And why is almost everyone afraid to even broach the question?

Left or right, liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican, secular or Christian, no one dares to question the official story about the 9/11 attacks or the "War on Terror."

And those who do question it are themselves attacked unmercifully by the right and the left, conservatives and liberals, Christians and secularists, Sean Hannity and Chris Matthews. Why is that? Why is it that FOX News and CNN, Donald Trump and Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer and Ted Cruz equally promote the same cockamamie story about 9/11 and the "War on Terror?"

Why? Why? Why?

Tell me again how Donald Trump is so different from Barack Obama. Tell me again how Ted Cruz is so different from Chuck Schumer. They all continue to perpetuate the lies about 9/11. They all continue to escalate America's never-ending "War on Terror." They are all puppets of a global conspiracy to advance the agenda of war profiteers and nation builders.

The left-right, conservative-liberal, Trump-Obama paradigm is one big giant SCAM. At the end of the day, the "War on Terror" goes on, bombs keep falling on people in the Middle East who had absolutely NOTHING to do with 9/11 and the money keeps flowing into the coffers of the international bankers and war merchants.

All of the above is why I am enthusiastically promoting Christopher Bollyn's new blockbuster book The War on Terror .

Of course, Bollyn is one of the world's foremost researchers and investigators into the attacks on 9/11. He has written extensively on the subject. But unlike most other 9/11 investigators, Bollyn continued to trace the tracks of the attacks on 9/11. And those tracks led him to discover that the 9/11 attacks were NOT "the event" but that they were merely the trigger for "the event." "What was the event?" you ask. America's perpetual "War on Terror."

As a result, Mr. Bollyn published his findings that the attacks on 9/11 were NOT perpetrated by Muslim extremists but by a very elaborate and well financed international conspiracy that had been in the planning for several decades. Bollyn's research names names, places and dates and exposes the truth behind not just 9/11 (many have done that) but behind America's "War on Terror" that resulted from the attacks on 9/11.

IT'S TIME FOR THE TRUTH TO COME OUT!

And Christopher Bollyn's investigative research brings out the truth like nothing I've read to date. His research connects the dots and destroys the myths.

Mr. Bollyn's research is published in a book entitled (full title): The War On Terror: The Plot To Rule The Middle East . I mean it when I say that if enough people read this book, it could change the course of history and save our republic.

This is written on the book's back cover:

The government and media have misled us about 9/11 in order to compel public opinion to support the War on Terror.

Why have we gone along with it? Do we accept endless war as normal? Are we numb to the suffering caused by our military interventions?

No. We have simply been propagandized into submission. We have been deceived into thinking that the War on Terror is a good thing, a valiant struggle against terrorists who intend to attack us as we were on 9/11.

Behind the War on Terror is a strategic plan crafted decades in advance to redraw the map of the Middle East. 9/11 was a false-flag operation blamed on Muslims in order to start the military operations for that strategic plan. Recognizing the origin of the plan is crucial to understanding the deception that has changed our world.

Folks, 9/11 was a deception. The "War on Terror" is a deception. The phony left-right paradigm is a deception. FOX News is as much a deception as CNN. The "always Trump" group is as much a deception as the "never Trump" group. America has been in the throes of a great deception since September 11, 2001. And this deception is being perpetrated by Republicans and Democrats and conservatives and liberals alike.

I do not know Christopher Bollyn. I've never met him. But I thank God he had the intellectual honesty and moral courage to write this book. I urge readers to get this explosive new book. If you don't read any other book this year, read Mr. Bollyn's investigative masterpiece: The War On Terror: The Plot To Rule The Middle East .

Again, I am enthusiastically recommending this book to my readers, and I make no apologies for doing so. The truth contained in this research MUST get out, and I am determined to do all I can to help make that possible.

Order Christopher Bollyn's blockbuster book The War On Terror: The Plot To Rule The Middle East here:

The War On Terror: The Plot To Rule The Middle East

I am confident that after you read this book, you will want to buy copies for your friends and relatives. The book is under 200 pages long and is not difficult reading. However, the facts and details Bollyn covers are profound and powerful. I have read the book three times so far and I'm not finished.

Frankly, Bollyn's book made so many things make sense for me. His book dovetails and tracks with much of my research on other topics. Truly, his book helped me get a much fuller understanding of the "big picture."

What if everything we've been told about 9/11 and the "War on Terror" is a lie? Well, Bollyn's book proves that indeed it is.

Again, here is where to find Christopher Bollyn's phenomenal new book The War On Terror: The Plot To Rule The Middle East :

The War On Terror: The Plot To Rule The Middle East

Source: Chuck Baldwin LIVE

[Aug 05, 2018] Multiculturalism is a recipe for national suicide. Culture, including religious belief, is the unifying factor that allows strangers to work with one another, by ensuring that they share the same assumptions about morality and about correct behavior in general.

Aug 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

CanSpeccy , Website July 31, 2018 at 12:10 am GMT

Multiculturalism is a recipe for national suicide. Culture, including religious belief, is the unifying factor that allows strangers to work with one another, by ensuring that they share the same assumptions about morality and about correct behavior in general.

Jews have been a problem for European societies for hundreds of years. The recent mass migration of people of multiple races and religions to Europe and its settler outposts in the America's and the Pacific is creating cultural chaos.

Immigrants who will not assimilate to the Christian culture of the West have no place in the West. For Africans, Asians, Hispanics and Middle-Easterners the message must be: assimilate or leave. The same for Jews who now, fortunately, have a place to go where they can live by the precepts of their ancient religion, however bizarre some of those precepts may seem to others.

That then leaves only the problem of the Palestinians. A solution can surely be found in a deal with Egypt. The Sinai is twice the size of Palestine, yet has only a half a million inhabitants. The US could easily organize a purchase, funded by itself, Britain, the country primarily responsible for the dispossession of the Palestinians, the EU, Russia and some other countries, and of course Israel, which would have to pay for the land and houses of the departing Palestinians.

At say $10,000 per hectare, a ridiculous price for a desert sand and rocky hillsides, the whole of Sinai could be purchased for $60 billion, a trivial amount in relation to the US trillion-dollar defense budget. In addition, there might be a need for something like half a trillion dollars for construction of the the cities and high-tech desert agricultural system of the new Palestinian state. But again, that is a rather trivial amount over, say ten years.

[Aug 05, 2018] Nationalists winning Eastern Europe after the dissolution of the USSR is a verifiable tendency

Aug 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

peterAUS , July 31, 2018 at 2:15 am GMT

@AaronB

Only Leftists can defeat Leftists, only progressives can defeat progressives – conserving the old cannot win. Ideas of stability, homeostasis, and the like, cannot win.

You sure?

Don't know.

Franco, for example. Then, more recently, Nationalists winning over Communists in Eastern Europe after the fall of The Wall. We could agree, I guess, that Nationalism is a bit older than Communism.

And there is no organized opposition because there is no Platonic Idea around which they can rally – while the Left has one. The Right seems to just be a headless chicken- all body, no head.

In the West. In the East not so sure about that. Do a (mental) test: imagine that US (military) power can't get delivered in Balkans anymore. Or Russian (military) power can't get delivered in Donbass. Or some other places.

Watch ..

AaronB , July 31, 2018 at 3:07 am GMT
@peterAUS

That's a good point about nationalism – but I think what we are seeing in places like Russia and Poland is a resurgence of religious nationalism – pure nationalism, without a Platonic Idea, just materialism, seems to have no long term success anywhere. I don't think the attempt to revive it among materialist western right wingers will work. I think they fundamentally misunderstand this.

In the context of a failed Communism, religious nationalism appears as progressive – as an exciting step in the direction of progress towards a higher state.

Its not that old traditional ideas can't be revived – its that I think conservatives basically misunderstand traditional ideas. In their time, traditional ideas were meant to facilitate the self-perfection of man – not provide stability, safety, or homeostasis. Christianity was a program for the perfection of man – not social stability.

Traditional ideas were based on a Platonic Idea – never materialism. The attempt to revive traditional ideas on a materialist basis, because they provide stability, seems a misunderstanding. In fact, traditional ideas provide stability because they were accepted as part of the plan of self-perfection. That's why they secured consent – i.e became the basis of a stable society. People accept a social organization that they believe will assist in self-perfection, and that is the source of social stability.

As for military power projection, once local power balances alter its hard to predict what will come to seem "progressive". And short term social expedients taken in chaotic cobditions don't necessarily translate into long term social organization.

That's my take, at any rate.

peterAUS , July 31, 2018 at 5:14 am GMT
@AaronB

A thoughtful post.

.traditional ideas were meant to facilitate the self-perfection of man – not provide stability, safety, or homeostasis. Christianity was a program for the perfection of man – not social stability.

..traditional ideas provide stability because they were accepted as part of the plan of self-perfection.

I am not quite sure I get this.
Feels as a deep topic. Not well versed in that I am afraid.

A couple of things: the concept of "self-perfection" in, say, traditional Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, with accepting that a man is a sinner and only though Jesus he/she can find salvation.
Then, I can get that top thinkers of those nations maybe thought along those lines; common folk, though, based their nationalism on simple living with people who shared the same values in life. Sometimes even just the same customs. The sense of belonging. The perception of "us" and "them" as the bottom line.

You want a problem to ponder about?
Here it is, then:
Why such ..animosity .. then, between Catholics and Orthodox in Balkans and Ukraine? The same, now dormant, between Protestant and Catholics in N.I.?

I guess that your approach to nationalism is, say, what ..metaphysical?
Mine is way, way below. Just blood and soil, in that order. "Us" vs "them".

West is doomed re nationalism. Maybe. Not quite sure.
All those wars of Catholics vs Protestants ..and we are talking about people of the same race.
Now, that "we" vs "them" is much more visible.

.short term social expedients taken in chaotic cobditions don't necessarily translate into long term social organization.

Agree.
Again, so what? If it works during my lifetime fine (say, if I were a young man). After me, their problem. Something like that.

[Aug 05, 2018] Ideas of stability, homeostasis, and the like, cannot win.

Aug 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

AaronB , July 31, 2018 at 3:07 am GMT

@peterAUS

That's a good point about nationalism – but I think what we are seeing in places like Russia and Poland is a resurgence of religious nationalism – pure nationalism, without a Platonic Idea, just materialism, seems to have no long term success anywhere. I don't think the attempt to revive it among materialist western right wingers will work. I think they fundamentally misunderstand this.

In the context of a failed Communism, religious nationalism appears as progressive – as an exciting step in the direction of progress towards a higher state.

Its not that old traditional ideas can't be revived – its that I think conservatives basically misunderstand traditional ideas. In their time, traditional ideas were meant to facilitate the self-perfection of man – not provide stability, safety, or homeostasis. Christianity was a program for the perfection of man – not social stability.

Traditional ideas were based on a Platonic Idea – never materialism. The attempt to revive traditional ideas on a materialist basis, because they provide stability, seems a misunderstanding. In fact, traditional ideas provide stability because they were accepted as part of the plan of self-perfection. That's why they secured consent – i.e became the basis of a stable society. People accept a social organization that they believe will assist in self-perfection, and that is the source of social stability.

As for military power projection, once local power balances alter its hard to predict what will come to seem "progressive". And short term social expedients taken in chaotic cobditions don't necessarily translate into long term social organization.

That's my take, at any rate.

[Aug 05, 2018] Mulegino1

Aug 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

says: August 1, 2018 at 11:33 pm GMT @Beefcake the Mighty This is a highly misleading statement as Stalin did not turn against the Jewish faction of the Party until the late 30's (the Purges are best understood as a reaction against an essentially Jewish mafia), by which time this faction had wrought bloodthirsty terror. Stalin was obviously no angel, but one shudders to think of the horrors that would have been unleashed had Trotsky assumed control. You're 100 percent correct. An interesting book on this subject is "Stalin's Enduring Legacy" by Kerry Bolton. Bolton does not excuse Stalin's brutality, but he points out exactly what you wrote. Stalin was a thousand times preferable to Trotsky and the other vicious Jewish Bolsheviks.

[Aug 05, 2018] Bernie Sanders did everything he was told he should do. He supported the Democratic establishment candidate, and now he believes the Russiagate story.

Notable quotes:
"... While you are at it, you might also want to come up with an improved definition of "treason": something better than " a skeptical attitude toward preposterous, unproven claims made by those known to be perpetual liars. ..."
"... So you plan to continue this McCarthy Russian BS? You didn't speak out when you got cheated in the primaries, and you didn't seem to care that Hillary was using her own paid troll army. Integrity matters Bernie and you are losing yours. ..."
"... You stopped speaking for me and millions of others when you caved to crooked HRC. No it was NOT clear that Russia was "deeply involved in the election. What is CLEAR is your betrayal of your followers and cover up of the election fraud perpetrated by DNC! Everybody knows... ..."
"... Bernie, that's MIC propaganda. Stop helping it. There are millions of reasons Trump should not be president. We don't need a hyped up corporate fairytale to make that point https://t.co/7FAwb47LtB ..."
"... Democratic party jingoism in 2020 will be extra-ordinary with candidates each trying to out do each other how they will fuck over Putin and the Russian nation. There will be a shit load of public loyalty testing against any third party candidate by the democrats. ..."
Aug 05, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

It has been clear to everyone (except Donald Trump) that Russia was deeply involved in the 2016 election and intends to be involved in 2018. It is the American people who should be deciding the political future of our country, not Mr. Putin and the Russian oligarchs.

-- Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) February 16, 2018

However, Sanders had already committed the unforgivable sin of criticizing the Democratic establishment candidate from the left. There is simply no way of coming back from that treason.

Despite his stance, Sanders has also been constantly presented as another Russian agent, with the Washington Post (11/12/17) asking its readers, "When Russia interferes with the 2020 election on behalf of Democratic nominee Bernie Sanders, how will liberals respond?" The message is clear: The progressive wave rising across America is and will be a consequence of Russia, not of the failures of the system, nor of the Democrats.

It isn't just progressive politicians that are all traitors. Movements like Black Lives Matter are also traitors for Russia.

Slate: Russian Trolls Were Obsessed With Black Lives Matter
CNN: Her son was killed -- then came the Russian trolls
NY Times: The Propaganda Tools Used by Russians to Influence the 2016 Election

snoopydawg on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 6:32pm
Bernie's tweet is hysterical
It is the American people who should be deciding the political future of our country, not Mr. Putin and the Russian oligarchs.

Hey, Bernie. The American people were the ones who should have decided who won the primary, not Hillary, the DNC and the delegates. That you are blaming Her loss on Russia instead of admitting that the American people rejected her makes you nothing more than a democratic puppet. How embarrassing for you.

Every Black voter should abandon the DP until they apologize for their disrespect for the BLM and saying that they only started protesting cops killing Blacks because Russia manipulated them into doing so.

Eichenwald thinks that our intelligence agencies are patriots who have spent their lives working on keeping us safe does he? I agree with Dmitry Orlov's take on them.

US Intelligence Community is Tearing the Country Apart from the

The objective of US intelligence is to suck all remaining wealth out of the US and its allies and pocket as much of it as possible while pretending to defend it from phantom aggressors by squandering nonexistent (borrowed) financial resources on ineffective and overpriced military operations and weapons systems. Where the aggressors are not phantom, they are specially organized for the purpose of having someone to fight: "moderate" terrorists and so on.

....

the US intelligence community has been doing a wonderful job of bankrupting the country and driving it toward financial, economic and political collapse by forcing it to engage in an endless series of expensive and futile conflicts -- the largest single continuous act of grand larceny the world has ever known. How that can possibly be an intelligent thing to do to your own country, for any conceivable definition of "intelligence," I will leave for you to work out for yourself.

While you are at it, you might also want to come up with an improved definition of "treason": something better than " a skeptical attitude toward preposterous, unproven claims made by those known to be perpetual liars. "

And let's not forget how many coups and false flag events they had a hand in creating that have cost so much misery and death.

One major advancement in their state of the art has been in moving from real false flag operations, ŕ la 9/11, to fake false flag operations, ŕ la fake East Gouta chemical attack in Syria (since fully discredited). The Russian election meddling story is perhaps the final step in this evolution: no New York skyscrapers or Syrian children were harmed in the process of concocting this fake narrative, and it can be kept alive seemingly forever purely through the furious effort of numerous flapping lips.

It is now a pure confidence scam. If you are less then impressed with their invented narratives, then you are a conspiracy theorist or, in the latest revision, a traitor.

The real puppets are the ones who believe in this silly story that Russia is pulling Trump's strings and that the GOP are also Russian puppets. Good grief!

snoopydawg on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 6:55pm
The first tweet shows how people twist events

The others show that there are others out there that have seen through this propaganda crap. I'd like to see the breakdown of Hillary supporters that believe Russia Gate and the Bernie supporters that don't. Most of the Trump supporters think it's phony so what made Hillary's believe in something that everyone should be laughing at?

You deserve a lot of credit. Russia interfered in your favor, yet you are man enough to admit that they interfered. Thank you Bernie!

-- Ed Krassenstein (@EdKrassen) February 16, 2018

So you plan to continue this McCarthy Russian BS? You didn't speak out when you got cheated in the primaries, and you didn't seem to care that Hillary was using her own paid troll army. Integrity matters Bernie and you are losing yours.

-- Underdawg47 (@Underdawg47) February 17, 2018

You stopped speaking for me and millions of others when you caved to crooked HRC. No it was NOT clear that Russia was "deeply involved in the election. What is CLEAR is your betrayal of your followers and cover up of the election fraud perpetrated by DNC! Everybody knows...

-- Logan (@KOMBUCHABABY) February 17, 2018

Bernie, that's MIC propaganda. Stop helping it. There are millions of reasons Trump should not be president. We don't need a hyped up corporate fairytale to make that point https://t.co/7FAwb47LtB

-- SanBernieDingDong (@noreallyhowcome) February 17, 2018

MrWebster on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 7:19pm
2020 dem candidates will try to out do each other on Russia

Democratic party jingoism in 2020 will be extra-ordinary with candidates each trying to out do each other how they will fuck over Putin and the Russian nation. There will be a shit load of public loyalty testing against any third party candidate by the democrats.

The democrats (and media cohorts) have become an apocolyptic death cult. The language that comes from them is infused with the language of conspiracies, violence, treason, aggression and demonization.

And here is the thing, Bernie to survive electorally will have to become a cult member. Effectively he will have to be pro-war with Russia. He will be giving from the the Left supposed support for aggressive action andmilitarism toward Russia.

I fear that if a democrat becomes president in 2020 (it won't be Bernie), is elected president that in the year of the midterms in 2022, the US will start a real war with Russia which has a highly likehood of going nuclear.

[Aug 05, 2018] Earlier this year, Representative James Moran, a Democrat, said that "if it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq, we would not be doing this."

While neocons definitely agitated for invasion and were well represented in Bush Ii government, this statement might be not true. As Greenspan said it was about oil.
Aug 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

anon [228] Disclaimer , August 2, 2018 at 7:32 pm GMT

Earlier this year, Representative James Moran, a Democrat, said that "if it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq, we would not be doing this." In Britain, Tam Dalyell, a longstanding Labor member of Parliament, expressed a similar view. Tony Blair, he opined, was listening too much to a "cabal" of Jews around President Bush that included Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz; an under secretary of defense, Douglas Feith; Richard Perle, a member of the Defense Policy Board; Elliott Abrams, director of Middle East Affairs in the White House; and the former presidential spokesman Ari Fleischer. "Those people drive this policy," Dalyell said.
Dalyell was "worried about my country being led up the garden path on a Likudnik-Sharon agenda" by British Jews close to Blair.
-- -- -- -- -- -
Earlier this year, Representative James Moran, a Democrat, said that "if it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq, we would not be doing this." In Britain, Tam Dalyell, a longstanding Labor member of Parliament, expressed a similar view. Tony Blair, he opined, was listening too much to a "cabal" of Jews around President Bush that included Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz; an under secretary of defense, Douglas Feith; Richard Perle, a member of the Defense Policy Board; Elliott Abrams, director of Middle East Affairs in the White House; and the former presidential spokesman Ari Fleischer. "Those people drive this policy," Dalyell said.
Dalyell was "worried about my country being led up the garden path on a Likudnik-Sharon agenda" by British Jews close to Blair.

https://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/31/magazine/how-to-talk-about-israel.html

The way , this war has played out, the way Oslo has been shredded, the way Iran deal has been gutted, the way Blair spoke in Bush's ranch and took money form and awards from Israel, the way attacks on Lebanon and Syria have been allowed and helped , the way Libya have been made a failed country, the way billions have been poured on Israel, the way dissent against war has been suppressed, the way Corbyn was attacked prove one thing – only one thing that is the author was entirely wrong .Moran Japanense and British minister are and were correct.

[Aug 05, 2018] Are you a Russiagate traitor by gjohnsit

Notable quotes:
"... There was NO hack. ..."
"... emphasis in original. ..."
"... "inside job" ..."
"... "Who's the insider?" ..."
"... -- William Powell, The Anarchist Cookbook (1971), from memory ..."
"... @thanatokephaloides ..."
"... Finally there's the meeting that Assange's lawyer set up with congress for him to testify to congress and tell them where he got the DNC emails that showed how they rigged the primary. Comey and Schaffer shot that down because it would have killed Russia Gate. Dead and buried and the country could move on. ..."
"... In this case, it is NOT a matter of opinion. It is a matter of FACT. The physical proof that we have right now tells us that the Wikileaks documents did not come from a "hack." We also have physical evidence that someone (no doubt Crowdstrike) manipulated copies of the leaked documents and embedded awkward amateurish evidence to make them look like they were taken by a "Russian" hacker. Here's how we know that: ..."
"... Assange's diplomatic trip to the US in mid-2017 to testify before Congress and prove where the documents came from was emergency-blocked by Comey and Rosenstein. As a consequence, Assange immediately released the extensive Vault 7 documents to the American people so we could forensically recognize the signature techniques that the US intelligence agencies would use to alter downloaded DNC documents and embed fake Russian "fingerprints." We have seen the physical evidence that that occurred. ..."
"... The US has no real physical evidence of a Russian hack or they would never have released the fake evidence. Yet they continue their attack to harm Russia's economy and the continue their attempts to provoke a hot war with Russia. The US motive for this has nothing to do with their fake hacking narrative; it is about crippling Russia (and China) to forestall the rapid rise of Eurasia, which is stripping the Neocons and war-profiteering corporations of their dream for the US to achieve total domination over all other nations. The Entitled Elite want their New American Century back! Their Empire was supposed to rule the world.... ..."
"... @Pluto's Republic ..."
"... While you are at it, you might also want to come up with an improved definition of "treason": something better than " a skeptical attitude toward preposterous, unproven claims made by those known to be perpetual liars. ..."
"... third run ..."
"... ~~Author Unknown ..."
"... ~~Martin Luther King Jr. ..."
"... @Unabashed Liberal ..."
"... @Unabashed Liberal ..."
"... ~~Martin Luther King Jr. ..."
"... Democratic party jingoism in 2020 will be extra-ordinary with candidates each trying to out do each other how they will fuck over Putin and the Russian nation. There will be a shit load of public loyalty testing against any third party candidate by the democrats. ..."
Aug 04, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

Russiagate may technically be about Trump, but in fact most of the "traitors" and Putin Puppets are progressives on the left. Russiagate officially started in 2015 long before the DNC hack and the Democratic primaries.

From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Date: 2015-12-21 12:09

Best approach is to slaughter Donald for his bromance with Putin

Russiagate never was actually about Russia. It's the Democrats' version of Obama's birth certificate. As Caitlin Johnstone puts it, Russiagate is 9/11 minus 9/11.

TWIT:

Kurt Eichenwald

@kurteichenwald

Bottom line: You either support the patriots in our intelligence community and law enforcement who work endlessly for our national security, and all of the intelligence agencies of our allies, or you support Putin.

You're either a patriot, a traitor or an idiot. Choose.

10:51 AM-16 Jul 2018

In reality, Russiagate started with Ralph Nader and the 2000 election .

They said a vote for Nader was a vote for Bush. You have a moral duty to vote for the Democrat and to be pragmatic. Your Naderite purity came at the expense of the poor. Only affluent selfish white guys could afford this type of virtue signaling. In fact, maybe some of these people were really Republicans in disguise. There were no Russian bots to blame just yet, but clearly some liberals are unable to imagine good faith criticism of Democrats coming from the left.

The terms " virtue signaling", " purity pony", and of course "White Berniebro" weren't coined yet, but the the stereotype they describe was formed in 2000. Gore lost and Nader and all his voters, in swing states or not, were vilified. They were worse than Republicans. They were traitors. Of all the factors that caused Gore's loss, the only one that Democratic partisans really cared about was Nader.

People that voted for Nader became responsible for the Iraq War, while Democrats who voted for Bush and the Iraq War got a free pass. Liberals, besides their obvious double-standards when allocating responsibility, made the dubious claim that morality requires being pragmatic in your voting. And then, as if to prove the basis of their claims to be false, they approach their target audience in a non-pragmatic way.

The anger on open display is the opposite of pragmatic politics. They don't try to persuade people to vote for the Democrat. They demand it. It is a moral litmus test, or rather, a judgement of one's very soul. Good people know they have to vote for the Democrat. Bad people vote for Republicans and the very worst people of all claim to be left, but vote for Stein or maybe even voted for Clinton, but criticized her. Democratic partisans have no interest in what you say about an issue if they perceive it as in any way an attack or a criticism of a Democrat. If you are a third party advocate you can forget about being taken seriously on any issue because you have already self identified as a Satanist and you need to be exorcised from the body politic. Even if you say you support the Democrat as the lesser evil, you speak as one of the damned and deserve no mercy. Sanders played the game in 2016 exactly the way people said Nader should have played it and he and his supporters were still dismissed.

Like Nader before her, Stein is the absolute worst traitor of all . Worse than Trump himself.

Jill Stein is a Russian agent.
Jill Stein is a Russian agent.
Jill Stein is a Russian agent.
Jill Stein is a Russian agent.
Jill Stein is a Russian agent.
Jill Stein is a Russian agent.
Jill Stein is a Russian agent.
Jill Stein is a Russian agent. https://t.co/qkDUe6yADd

-- Zac Petkanas (@Zac_Petkanas) 18 December 2017

Maddow cast suspicion on Stein's silence over alleged Russian attempts to interfere with the election to benefit Donald Trump, who she claimed during her own campaign would govern no differently than Hillary Clinton.

"So everybody's like, 'Wow, how come this like super, super aggressive opposition that we saw from these third-party candidates -- how come they haven't said anything since this scandal has broken?'" Maddow said.

"I don't know, Jill -- I can't pronounce it in Russian," Maddow said, with apparent sarcasm.

. @maddow spots something fishy going on between Jill Stein and Vladimir Putin. pic.twitter.com/Cah10YWx8p

-- DESUS & MERO (@desusandmero) 15 February 2017

Bernie Sanders, OTOH, did everything he was told he should do. He supported the Democratic establishment candidate, and believed the Russiagate story.

It has been clear to everyone (except Donald Trump) that Russia was deeply involved in the 2016 election and intends to be involved in 2018. It is the American people who should be deciding the political future of our country, not Mr. Putin and the Russian oligarchs.

-- Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) February 16, 2018

However, Sanders had already committed the unforgivable sin of criticizing the Democratic establishment candidate from the left. There is simply no way of coming back from that treason.

Despite his stance, Sanders has also been constantly presented as another Russian agent, with the Washington Post (11/12/17) asking its readers, "When Russia interferes with the 2020 election on behalf of Democratic nominee Bernie Sanders, how will liberals respond?" The message is clear: The progressive wave rising across America is and will be a consequence of Russia, not of the failures of the system, nor of the Democrats.

It isn't just progressive politicians that are all traitors. Movements like Black Lives Matter are also traitors for Russia.

Slate: Russian Trolls Were Obsessed With Black Lives Matter
CNN: Her son was killed -- then came the Russian trolls
NY Times: The Propaganda Tools Used by Russians to Influence the 2016 Election

That's because you, Russia, funded riots in Ferguson. See 0 hour I have your connections to Trump archived via Schiller and Scavino https://t.co/aTUDlCGkYi

-- Louise Mensch (@LouiseMensch) April 9, 2017

If you are still confused about what is treason and what isn't, ask yourself the question: Does the issue advance the narrative that the Democratic Party is a force for absolute good?

Oh my god: this is how deranged official Washington is. The President of the largest Dem Party think tank (funded in part by dictators) genuinely believes Chelsea Manning's candidacy is a Kremlin plot. Conspiracy theorists thrive more in mainstream DC than on internet fringes pic.twitter.com/e8g314iQHT

-- Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 15, 2018

We still have the 2018 election, and then the long lead-up to the 2020 election. There is nothing to indicate that the rhetoric won't get a lot more insane. The general indifference of the public doesn't seem to discourage the media and pundits. So how will it likely look in Fall 2020? Probably like it looked in 1952 .

The purpose of advancing the Communist issue was not to fix the Communist problem -- it was to exploit that problem for political and ideological advantage. That is how the Republican Party could produce its unhinged 1952 platform, which charged that the Democrats "have shielded traitors to the Nation in high places," "work unceasingly to achieve their goal of national socialism," and "by a long succession of vicious acts, so undermined the foundations of our Republic as to threaten its existence." (Does that kind of talk strike you as overheated? Then you, too, are failing to take the Russia issue seriously.)

There is little to no danger for conservatives and Republicans. All of the danger is for progressives and socialists, and the angry mob is the Democratic establishment trying to silence left-wing ideas. In comparison, the danger of the GOP to the left-wing is trivial.

Deja on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 5:04pm

Ffs, there was NO "hack"

Russiagate officially started in 2015 long before the DNC hack and the Democratic primaries.

I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that people keep posting it as common knowledge and factual -- especially on this site. Old dkos habits are hard to break, I guess. The speed at which the files were STOLEN prove it was done from within the network. Not from Russia, or from a van parked down the street. I can only guess that the DNC can't reveal whose network account was used to do so, because it would blow the bullshit lie of a hack out of the water.

There was NO hack.

thanatokephaloides on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 5:21pm
inside job

@Deja

The speed at which the files were STOLEN prove it was done from within the network. Not from Russia, or from a van parked down the street. I can only guess that the DNC can't reveal whose network account was used to do so, because it would blow the bullshit lie of a hack out of the water.

There was NO hack.

emphasis in original.

The term usually used by the perpetrator classes for this sort of thing is: "inside job" . And, as with all other inside jobs, the question really is: "Who's the insider?"

"The easiest way to raise a revolutionary army is to use someone else's; especially if it belongs to your enemy."
-- William Powell, The Anarchist Cookbook (1971), from memory

Deja on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 5:27pm
Dead men tell no tales

@thanatokephaloides
R.I.P. Seth Rich

Side note: I find it odd that his parents sued Fox News for saying he was murdered by the DNC. The judge sided with Fox.

gjohnsit on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 5:51pm
It makes no difference

@Deja

I've seen an article debunking the "hack was a leak" story, but it makes no difference anyway. In my book, the leak/hack just created a more informed electorate, and that's good for American democracy.

gjohnsit on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 6:25pm
"care about the truth"

@Deja
The truth is contained in the emails, not in their journey. Remember who else is telling you that the contents of the emails is less important than how they got there - the Democrats.

divineorder on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 8:22pm
Yes, 'shill' equals bad imo. I too, have read that the 'leak'

@Deja hypothesis has problems. Don't get me wrong, I think it holds more promise than the 'hack' hypothesis. But right now, really, we got shit for proof either way? Would honestly look forward to your proof either way, sans the critique of the essayist. Might I suggest that you criticize the point, not the person, please? Questions remain.

- DNC leak vs hack remains unproven (servers not provided)
- one party consent is complicated. On the tape, there was 3rd party on speaker phone. Were they in one party consent jurisdiction as well?
- How was CNN able to confirm that this tape was recorded in NY?

-- John LeFevre (@JohnLeFevre) July 25, 2018

snoopydawg on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 10:09pm
Leak or hack - there's no evidence that Russia was involved

@divineorder

in it. This is the point that matters to me. Assange has stated that the emails didn't come from Russia. Craig Murray said that he was involved with the person who got the information from the DNC computers and that there was no connection to Russia.

The CIAs Vault 7 shows how evidence on computers can be manipulated to make it seem like someone's dawg did the deed. I think it'd be very sloppy for trained hackers to leave their own footprints on the scene don't you think?

Finally there's the meeting that Assange's lawyer set up with congress for him to testify to congress and tell them where he got the DNC emails that showed how they rigged the primary. Comey and Schaffer shot that down because it would have killed Russia Gate. Dead and buried and the country could move on.

Pluto's Republic on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 10:34pm
Absolutely right.

@Deja

It matters profoundly. Knowing the facts surrounding critical political events or social earthquakes can be epigenetic events. Hard truths can trigger conscious evolution while we are alive and your advanced gene expressions can be physically inherited, changing the species.

By exercising our own critical thinking and working very hard to see through narratives to the core realities in the universe and in all things -- we are physically evolving the species into better and more enlightened generations of humans.

In this case, it is NOT a matter of opinion. It is a matter of FACT. The physical proof that we have right now tells us that the Wikileaks documents did not come from a "hack." We also have physical evidence that someone (no doubt Crowdstrike) manipulated copies of the leaked documents and embedded awkward amateurish evidence to make them look like they were taken by a "Russian" hacker. Here's how we know that:

Assange's diplomatic trip to the US in mid-2017 to testify before Congress and prove where the documents came from was emergency-blocked by Comey and Rosenstein. As a consequence, Assange immediately released the extensive Vault 7 documents to the American people so we could forensically recognize the signature techniques that the US intelligence agencies would use to alter downloaded DNC documents and embed fake Russian "fingerprints." We have seen the physical evidence that that occurred.

The US has no real physical evidence of a Russian hack or they would never have released the fake evidence. Yet they continue their attack to harm Russia's economy and the continue their attempts to provoke a hot war with Russia. The US motive for this has nothing to do with their fake hacking narrative; it is about crippling Russia (and China) to forestall the rapid rise of Eurasia, which is stripping the Neocons and war-profiteering corporations of their dream for the US to achieve total domination over all other nations. The Entitled Elite want their New American Century back! Their Empire was supposed to rule the world....

If that is what your instincts tell you, you should trust them. It's a biological imperative.

on the cusp on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 10:22pm
Perfect.

@Pluto's Republic At the very least, we should call it "alleged" hacks. I want some proof before we drop nukes.

Mickt on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 5:57pm
I saw this today

Just to lighten things up?

https://www.theonion.com/the-onion-reviews-christopher-robin-1828056997

The Aspie Corner on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 6:17pm
This whole thing is starting to look like

the plot to Beavis and Butt-head Do America.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/3eTqb_fgTAA

snoopydawg on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 6:32pm
Bernie's tweet is hysterical
It is the American people who should be deciding the political future of our country, not Mr. Putin and the Russian oligarchs.

Hey, Bernie. The American people were the ones who should have decided who won the primary, not Hillary, the DNC and the delegates. That you are blaming Her loss on Russia instead of admitting that the American people rejected her makes you nothing more than a democratic puppet. How embarrassing for you.

Every Black voter should abandon the DP until they apologize for their disrespect for the BLM and saying that they only started protesting cops killing Blacks because Russia manipulated them into doing so.

Eichenwald thinks that our intelligence agencies are patriots who have spent their lives working on keeping us safe does he? I agree with Dmitry Orlov's take on them.

US Intelligence Community is Tearing the Country Apart from the

The objective of US intelligence is to suck all remaining wealth out of the US and its allies and pocket as much of it as possible while pretending to defend it from phantom aggressors by squandering nonexistent (borrowed) financial resources on ineffective and overpriced military operations and weapons systems. Where the aggressors are not phantom, they are specially organized for the purpose of having someone to fight: "moderate" terrorists and so on.
....
the US intelligence community has been doing a wonderful job of bankrupting the country and driving it toward financial, economic and political collapse by forcing it to engage in an endless series of expensive and futile conflicts -- the largest single continuous act of grand larceny the world has ever known. How that can possibly be an intelligent thing to do to your
own country, for any conceivable definition of "intelligence," I will leave for you to work out for yourself. While you are at it, you might also want to come up with an improved definition of "treason": something better than " a skeptical attitude toward preposterous, unproven claims made by those known to be perpetual liars. "

And let's not forget how many coups and false flag events they had a hand in creating that have cost so much misery and death.

One major advancement in their state of the art has been in moving from real false flag operations, ŕ la 9/11, to fake false flag operations, ŕ la fake East Gouta chemical attack in Syria (since fully discredited). The Russian election meddling story is perhaps the final step in this evolution: no New York skyscrapers or Syrian children were harmed in the process of concocting this fake narrative, and it can be kept alive seemingly forever purely through the furious effort of numerous flapping lips. It is now a pure confidence scam. If you are less then impressed with their invented narratives, then you are a conspiracy theorist or, in the latest revision, a traitor.

The real puppets are the ones who believe in this silly story that Russia is pulling Trump's strings and that the GOP are also Russian puppets. Good grief!

Unabashed Liberal on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 6:53pm
Say it, Sister! ;-) The entire exercise--

@snoopydawg

meaning the 'Russia Ruse'--IMO, has been an exercise in setting up a scenario under which the PtB can put in place a system geared toward major social media 'censorship,' and, a face-saving exercise for FSC--just in case she decides to make a third run in 2020. Heaven forbid!

Mollie/Blue Onyx (Reverting to my original handle)

"Every time I lose a dog, he takes a piece of my heart. Every new dog gifts me with a piece of his. Someday, my heart will be total dog, and maybe then I will be just as generous, loving, and forgiving." ~~Author Unknown

"Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well-being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way." ~~Martin Luther King Jr.

"Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong." ~~W. R. Purche

MrWebster on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 7:51pm
Coates said the Russias are engaged in "messaging campaign"

@Unabashed Liberal @Unabashed Liberal

"... has been an exercise in setting up a scenario under which the PtB can put in place a system geared toward major social media 'censorship,'

Yup. Dan Coates directory of national intelligence came out and accused Russsia of engaging in a "messaging campaign". So how does one stop this messaging campaign. Well, back in the day, the answer was to answer bad speech with more and better speech.

Well, with Russiagate both the media and dem/gop establishment have to come to demand censorship from the major social media platforms. And they have responded. At first they actually didn't and thought the Russia charges were trivial. Until that is, they were theatened by House and Senate reps. And then they hopped to it.

And just a number of days ago, Facebook proudly announced they took down some nefarious pages who seemed to be engaging in a message campaign. And turns out they shut down a real group organizing an anti-fascist rally. There are other examples like this.

The censorship will continue becoming more and more brazen. (BTW, youtube started ths process earlier demonitizing and hurting a lot of popular, but alternative voices.)

BTW--the Young Turks showed the Coats clip and claimed "see the Russians are still hacking our elections".

Unabashed Liberal on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 8:17pm
Hi, Mr W!--good to see you. I couldn't

@MrWebster

agree more with all of your comments/sentiments.

I'm truly getting concerned regarding the direction our government appears to be taking when it comes to 'freedom of expression/speech.' Strangely, many on the 'left' don't seem very concerned. Indeed, because the MSM is so intent on going after DT, many so-called progressives--including the supposedly more liberal (cough, cough) lawmakers--have become major cheerleaders of the corporatist media. Go figure.

Mollie/Blue Onyx (Reverting to my original handle)

"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die, I want to go where they went." ~~Will Rogers

"Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well-being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way." ~~Martin Luther King Jr.

"Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong." ~~W. R. Purche

snoopydawg on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 8:35pm
Dan Coates should be fired

@MrWebster

as well as every other person in Trump's administration that is working against him. This is insubordination and if Trump continues to let them run their mouths then I believe that he is in on this scam and is playing along with it. Why? Look at what has been happening since he became president. From the increasing Russian sanctions to the internet censorship to the increased military budget with money that goes to fighting cyber warfare and many other things that are being done because of this new and improved false flag.

As you stated YouTube has been removing lots of videos, Facebook and Twitter have been censoring alternative media sites that are not playing along with Russia Gate and Google changed its algorithms so that traffic to those sites are down up to 90% according to WSWS.

I once thought that this would eventually be exposed for the scam it is, but not any more. It's here to stay. And just like in 1984 where there was that place where history was changed to fit the narrative of the day, we are seeing that here. Things that happened last decade are being blamed on Russia hacking. I wouldn't be surprised if the KKK and Jim Crow were blamed on Russia. This is how out of control it's gotten. And I was so looking forward to seeing Rachel trying to explain to her viewers how she got things so wrong.

The Aspie Corner on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 8:46pm
Trumpy Boy is as complicit in this as the rest of the pigs.

@snoopydawg His erratic actions are the perfect distraction for the capitalist pigs the same as the "Obama is a Kenyan Muslim Marxist Communist Fascist Socialist Radical Leftist Feminazi SJW" crap that went on during the last capitalist puppet presidency. Either way, the world still burns and the pigs make out like bandits in the process. Keeping the plebs at each other's throats is just a bonus for them.

Alligator Ed on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 9:41pm
Rachel will never admit she's wrong.

@snoopydawg Remember whom you are discussing. Alas, you must be a Russian wolfhound to think R. Madcow could ever be wrong. Apologize, then stand in the corner until after the midterms when the GRU hauls off recalcitrant Dims and Repugnants failing to swear fealty to Vladimir Vladimirovich.

divineorder on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 7:18pm
sd yes Orlov calls it like it is.

@snoopydawg

Caitlin J. Interesting Twitter thread:

https://mobile.twitter.com/caitoz/status/1025482696628137986

"Russiagate is like a mirage. It looks so real from a distance you'll swear it's there and mock anyone who says otherwise, but once you get up close and examine its component parts you find it's made of nothing but innuendo, spin, unsubstantiated claims and dishonest omissions.
2:45 PM · Aug 3, 2018"

And....

https://mobile.twitter.com/caitoz/status/1025489710594945024Caitlin Johnstone

"
@caitoz
·
Aug 3
Nothing wrong with wanting a full investigation. There's something very, very wrong with pressuring a US president to continually escalate dangerous cold war tensions with a nuclear superpower without ever backing down based on an "idea" with no evidence. "

MrWebster on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 8:11pm
In 2020 Bernie will be a "strong" pro-war candidate

@snoopydawg Bernie will not be able to say "Oh evil Russia but let's not go to war with them." Diplomacy itself finally became full criminalized and made tresonous when Trump meet Putin in Finland. Any level of moderation will be attacked as soft on Putin and treasonous.

And I write "pro-war" and not "anti-Russian". One cannot be anti-Russian in any moderate way. Being anti-Russian means supporting a harsh and aggressive military stance toward their nation. The Russians are after all destroying Western civilization and this cannot be meant with diplomacy.

And from what I can, every national democratic candidate for House and Senate will follow suite.

divineorder on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 10:25pm
Hard to know what will happen by then but your guess

@MrWebster is as good as mine.

I wonder if this list is correct?

For reference, these are the only 10 senators who voted AGAINST giving Trump a $717 billion war budget:

Bernie Sanders
Elizabeth Warren
Ed Markey
Kirsten Gillibrand
Dick Durban
Kamala Harris
Jeff Merkley
Ron Wyden
Mike Lee (R)
Marco Rubio (R)
So much for #Resistance huh?

-- Clayton Farris (@ClaytonRFarris) August 3, 2018

Wars and rumours of wars...

This is OT, and some will say Bernie is sheepdogging these kids.

Thank you to the young people standing up to fossil fuel corporations and leading the movement to combat climate change. #ThisIsZeroHour pic.twitter.com/77f9KvY4og

-- Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) July 24, 2018

... ... ...

snoopydawg on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 6:55pm
The first tweet shows how people twist events

The others show that there are others out there that have seen through this propaganda crap. I'd like to see the breakdown of Hillary supporters that believe Russia Gate and the Bernie supporters that don't. Most of the Trump supporters think it's phony so what made Hillary's believe in something that everyone should be laughing at?

You deserve a lot of credit. Russia interfered in your favor, yet you are man enough to admit that they interfered. Thank you Bernie!

-- Ed Krassenstein (@EdKrassen) February 16, 2018

So you plan to continue this McCarthy Russian BS? You didn't speak out when you got cheated in the primaries, and you didn't seem to care that Hillary was using her own paid troll army. Integrity matters Bernie and you are losing yours.

-- Underdawg47 (@Underdawg47) February 17, 2018

You stopped speaking for me and millions of others when you caved to crooked HRC. No it was NOT clear that Russia was "deeply involved in the election. What is CLEAR is your betrayal of your followers and cover up of the election fraud perpetrated by DNC! Everybody knows...

-- Logan (@KOMBUCHABABY) February 17, 2018

Bernie, that's MIC propaganda. Stop helping it. There are millions of reasons Trump should not be president. We don't need a hyped up corporate fairytale to make that point https://t.co/7FAwb47LtB

-- SanBernieDingDong (@noreallyhowcome) February 17, 2018

MrWebster on Sat, 08/04/2018 - 7:19pm
2020 dem candidates will try to out do each other on Russia

Democratic party jingoism in 2020 will be extra-ordinary with candidates each trying to out do each other how they will fuck over Putin and the Russian nation. There will be a shit load of public loyalty testing against any third party candidate by the democrats.

The democrats (and media cohorts) have become an apocolyptic death cult. The language that comes from them is infused with the language of conspiracies, violence, treason, aggression and demonization.

And here is the thing, Bernie to survive electorally will have to become a cult member. Effectively he will have to be pro-war with Russia. He will be giving from the the Left supposed support for aggressive action andmilitarism toward Russia.

I fear that if a democrat becomes president in 2020 (it won't be Bernie), is elected president that in the year of the midterms in 2022, the US will start a real war with Russia which has a highly likehood of going nuclear.

[Aug 04, 2018] The Strangulation of the Russian Economy in the 1990s Was a Deliberate IMF policy

Notable quotes:
"... The activities of the organization are gussied up in sanctimonious prose about aiding the poor and raising the living standards of the third world. Don't be fooled. These bailouts are really about protecting interests of Chase Manhattan, J.P. Morgan, and Fidelity Investments ..."
"... for inexplicable reasons, ..."
"... harshly worded ..."
"... To be sure, there were unsettling reports of shady dealings during the takeovers, but most observers explained them away as inevitable side effects of such a far-reaching transformation. ..."
"... for the best of reasons ..."
"... Americans, who thought their money was helping a stricken land, have been dishonored; and the Russian people who trusted us are now in debt twice what they were in 1991 and rightly feel themselves betrayed. ..."
Aug 04, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Within four weeks they bought $6.5 billion and transferred most of it to foreign banks. [8] Most of the rest of IMF loan was a stealth bailout for western financial institutions which had some $200 billion worth of loans and investments in Russia. The banks feared the prospect of Russian default which would leave them with crippling losses. These risks became even more acute in the aftermath of the 1997 East Asian financial crisis that would engulf Russia in 1998.

In a testimony before the U.S. Congress, veteran investor Jim Rogers characterized IMF's assistance to Russia as follows: " The activities of the organization are gussied up in sanctimonious prose about aiding the poor and raising the living standards of the third world. Don't be fooled. These bailouts are really about protecting interests of Chase Manhattan, J.P. Morgan, and Fidelity Investments ." [9]

In addition to loading Russia up with unproductive debt, IMF also engineered Russia's hyperinflation and liquidity crisis. After eliminating price controls, IMF obliged Russia to maintain the ruble as the common currency for all Soviet Union successor states, giving each of the 15 new countries the incentive to issue ruble credits for their own benefit while fueling inflation for all others. Sachs reported that he strenuously argued with the IMF against this measure but " for inexplicable reasons, " he was consistently rebuked.

The result was a one-year delay in the introduction of national currencies for the former Soviet republics, pushing Russia into hyperinflation and needlessly prolonging its economic depression. At this same time, the IMF engineered Russia's staggering liquidity crisis that made it almost impossible for enterprises to pay their suppliers and workers. Under IMF's dictate, Russian economy struggled along on less than one sixth of the currency required to operate an economy of its size.

The extent of IMF's iron-fisted control over Russian economy was exemplified in a letter from the IMF's representative Yusuke Horaguchi to Russia's central bank chairman Sergei Dubinin . The letter specified the precise schedule of Russia's ruble supply along with " harshly worded " instructions regarding bank credits, the state budget, energy policy, price levels, trade tariffs and agricultural policies. Horaguchi's letter even included a warning that any acts of the parliament contravening the IMF mandates would be vetoed by president Yeltsin. [10]

It is clear that shock "therapy" was little more than a relentless, cruel strangulation of Russia's economy to facilitate looting of her vast industrial and resource wealth . Nonetheless, most Western-published analyses of this episode tended to treat it as failure of good intentions. While lamenting the outcomes and certain questionable practices, most analysts essentially attribute the failure of Russian transition to honest errors, Russia's endemic corruption, and perhaps inexperience in many of the drama's protagonists.

Goldman Marshall of Harvard and the Council of Foreign Relations wrote: " To be sure, there were unsettling reports of shady dealings during the takeovers, but most observers explained them away as inevitable side effects of such a far-reaching transformation. "

Naturally, Marshall fails to detail how or where he polled these "most observers," but his message to the readers is unmistakable: move along folks, there's nothing to see here – especially pay no attention to the fact that many of those thousands of Westerners who came to Russia " for the best of reasons ," including Bill Browder , Andrei Schleifer and Jonathan Hay , [12] returned from Russia as multi-millionaires. Financial reporter Anne Willamson , who covered Russia for the New York Times and Wall Street Journal rightly remarked in her Congressional testimony that, " Americans, who thought their money was helping a stricken land, have been dishonored; and the Russian people who trusted us are now in debt twice what they were in 1991 and rightly feel themselves betrayed. "

[12] During his time managing the HIID's Moscow operation, Andrei Schleifer and Jonathan Hay took advantage of their position and relationships to make personal investments in Russia. An investigation by the FBI and U.S. Justice Department found evidence of fraud and money laundering by Harvard's consultants. In 2004, Schleifer was found guilty of fraud and he agreed to pay a $31 million fine to settle the case. Not only did Harvard University persist in defending Schleifer over the 8 years of investigations and trials, it paid the bulk of Schileifer's fine and kept him on university's faculty.

[Aug 04, 2018] Edward Snowden 5 years in Russia and still relevant as ever

Aug 04, 2018 | theduran.com

TASS reported that August 1 was the five year anniversary of Edward Snowden's being granted temporary asylum in the Russian Federation. This happened after his release of an enormous trove of information showing clandestine and illegal practices being carried out by the US intelligence agencies to gather information on just about anyone in the world, for any – or no – reason at all.

Support The Duran – Browse our Shop >>

Edward Snowden, 35, is a computer security expert. In 2005-2008, he worked at the University of Maryland's Center for Advanced Study of Language sponsored by the National Security Agency (NSA) and at the global communications division at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. In 2007, Snowden was stationed with diplomatic cover at the US mission to the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland. In 2009, he resigned from the CIA to join the Dell company that sent him to Hawaii to work for the NSA's information-sharing office. He was particularly employed with the Booz Allen Hamilton consulting firm.

In June 2013, Snowden leaked classified information to journalists Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras, which revealed global surveillance programs run by US and British intelligence agencies. He explained the move by saying that he wanted to tell the world the truth because he believed such large-scale surveillance on innocent citizens was unacceptable and the public needed to know about it.

The Guardian and The Washington Post published the first documents concerning the US intelligence agencies' spying on Internet users on June 6, 2013. According to the documents, major phone companies, including Verizon, AT&T and Sprint Nextel, handed records of their customers' phone conversations over to the NSA and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), who also had direct access to the servers of Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, Skype, YouTube, Paltalk, AOL and Apple. In addition, Snowden's revelations showed that a secret program named PRISM was aimed at collecting audio and video recordings, photos, emails and information about users' connections to various websites.

The next portion of revelations , which was published by the leading newspapers such as The Guardian, Brazil's O Globo, Italy's L'Espresso, Germany's Der Spiegel and Suddeutsche Zeitung, concerned the US spying on politicians. In particular, it became known that the NSA and Great Britain's Government Communications Headquarters intercepted the phone calls that foreign politicians and officials made during the G20 summit in London in 2009. British intelligence agencies particularly tried to intercept then Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's phone calls. US intelligence monitored the phone calls of 35 world leaders, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

According to the disclosed information, the NSA regularly gathered intelligence at the New York and Washington offices of the European Union's mission. The agency also achieved access to the United Nations' internal video conferences and considers the Vienna headquarters of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as one of its major targets for spying.

The leaks also uncovered details about the Blarney and Rampart-T secret surveillance programs. Blarney, which started in 1978, is used to collect information related to counter-terrorism, foreign diplomats and governments, as well as economic and military targets. Rampart-T has been used since 1991 to spy on foreign leaders. The program is focused on 20 countries, including Russia and China.

Snowden also let the world know that Germany's Federal Intelligence Service and Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution used the NSA's XKeyScore secret computer system to spy on Internet users, monitoring their web activities. In addition, the NSA and Great Britain's Government Communications Headquarters developed methods that allowed them to hack almost all the encryption systems currently used on the Internet. Besides, the leaked documents said that the NSA had secretly installed special software on about 100,000 computers around the globe that provided access to them and made cyber attacks easier. In particular, the NSA used a secret technology that made it possible to hack computers not connected to the Internet.

Portions of the information Snowden handed over to Greenwald and Poitras continue to be published on The Intercept website . According to edwardsnowden.com – a website commissioned by the Courage foundation (dedicated to building support for Snowden), a total of 2,176 documents from the archive have been published so far.

The NSA and the Pentagon claim that Snowden stole about 1.7 mln classified documents concerning the activities of US intelligence services and US military operations. He is charged with theft of government property, unauthorized communication of national defense information and willful communication of classified communications intelligence information to an unauthorized person. He is facing up to ten years in prison on each charge.

As can be seen, Mr. Snowden's work is of extreme importance now in the connected Internet age. But how is his life in Russia now?

According to Sputnik News, his life goes on . Reports say that he is continuing to learn the Russian language and to travel about the country:

Anatoly Kucherena, Edward Snowden's lawyer, has revealed some details of the renowned whistleblower's life to Sputnik. According to him, Snowden has found a job, is actively traveling around Russia and is continuing to learn the language.

Kucherena added that Snowden receives visits from his girlfriend, Lindsey Mills, and his parents. When asked about the whistleblower's favorite place in Russia, his lawyer said that he likes St Petersburg "a lot."

"He is doing alright: his girlfriend visits him, he has a good job and he's continuing to study Russian. His parents visit him occasionally. [They] have no problems with visas. At least they have never complained about having any trouble," the lawyer said.

After Snowden released classified NSA documents, he fled first to Hong Kong, then, on June 23, 2013, arrived in Moscow from Hong Kong. The whistleblower remained in the transit zone of Sheremetyevo Airport until he was granted temporary asylum in Russia, which was later prolonged to 2020.

[Aug 04, 2018] The US establishment behind the Helsinki Summit, by Manlio Dinucci

So the US neoliberal establishment tried to sabotage Trump-Putin summit in doer to pursue "business as usual". In other words military-industrial complex is in control of the USA government...
Notable quotes:
"... It's no coincidence that, at the very moment when the President of the United States was about to meet with the President of Russia, special prosecutor Robert Mueller III charged twelve Russians with having manipulated the US presidential elections by hacking into the data networks of the Democratic party in order to hinder candidate Hillary Clinton. The twelve Russians, accused of being agents of the military secret services (GRU), were officially defined as " conspirators ", and found guilty of " conspiracy to the detriment of the United States ". Simultaneously, Daniel Coats, National Director of Intelligence and principal advisor to the President in these matters, accused Russia of working to " undermine our basic values and our democracy ". He then sounded the alarm about the " threat of cyber-attacks which have arrived at a critical point " similar to that which preceded 9/11, on behalf not only of Russia, " the most aggressive foreign agent ", but also China and Iran. ..."
"... At the same time, in London, British " investigators " declared that the Russian military secret service GRU, which had sabotaged the Presidential elections in the USA, is the same service which poisoned ex-Russian agent, Sergueď Skripal and his daughter, who, inexplicably, survived contact with an extremely lethal gas. ..."
"... The political objective of these " enquiries " is clear – to maintain that at the head of all these " conspirators " is Russian President Vladimir Putin, with whom President Donald Trump sat down at the negotiating table, despite vast bi-partisan opposition in the USA. After the " conspirators " had been charged, the Democrats asked Trump to cancel the meeting with Putin. Even though they failed, their pressure on the negotiations remains powerful. ..."
"... In opposition to the easing of tension with Russia are not only the Democrats (who, with a reversal of formal roles, are playing the " hawks "), but also many Republicans, among whom are several highly-important representatives of the Trump administration itself. It is the establishment, not only of the US, but also of Europe, whose powers and profits are directly linked to tension and war. ..."
"... Even if an agreement on these questions were reached between Putin and Trump, would the latter be able to implement it? Or will the real deciders be the powerful circles of the military-industrial complex? ..."
Aug 04, 2018 | www.voltairenet.org

While the International Press distorted the content of the NATO Summit, the US establishment perfectly understood the unique issue – the end of enmity with Russia. Thus disturbing the bilateral summit in Helsinki between the USA and Russia became its priority. By all means possible, it had to prevent any rapprochement with Moscow.

We need to talk about everything, from commerce to the military, missiles, nuclear, and China " - this was how President Trump began at the Helsinki Summit. " The time has come to talk in detail about our bilateral relationship and the international flashpoints ", emphasised Putin.

But it will not only be the two Presidents who will decide the future relationships between the United States and Russia.

It's no coincidence that, at the very moment when the President of the United States was about to meet with the President of Russia, special prosecutor Robert Mueller III charged twelve Russians with having manipulated the US presidential elections by hacking into the data networks of the Democratic party in order to hinder candidate Hillary Clinton. The twelve Russians, accused of being agents of the military secret services (GRU), were officially defined as " conspirators ", and found guilty of " conspiracy to the detriment of the United States ". Simultaneously, Daniel Coats, National Director of Intelligence and principal advisor to the President in these matters, accused Russia of working to " undermine our basic values and our democracy ". He then sounded the alarm about the " threat of cyber-attacks which have arrived at a critical point " similar to that which preceded 9/11, on behalf not only of Russia, " the most aggressive foreign agent ", but also China and Iran.

At the same time, in London, British " investigators " declared that the Russian military secret service GRU, which had sabotaged the Presidential elections in the USA, is the same service which poisoned ex-Russian agent, Sergueď Skripal and his daughter, who, inexplicably, survived contact with an extremely lethal gas.

The political objective of these " enquiries " is clear – to maintain that at the head of all these " conspirators " is Russian President Vladimir Putin, with whom President Donald Trump sat down at the negotiating table, despite vast bi-partisan opposition in the USA. After the " conspirators " had been charged, the Democrats asked Trump to cancel the meeting with Putin. Even though they failed, their pressure on the negotiations remains powerful.

What Putin tried to obtain from Trump is both simple and complex – to ease the tension between the two countries. To that purpose, he proposed to Trump, who accepted, to implement a joint enquiry into the " conspiracy ". We do not know how the discussions on the key questions will go – the status of Crimea, the condition of Syria, nuclear weapons and others. And we do not know what Trump will ask in return. However, it is certain that any concession will be used to accuse him of connivance with the enemy. In opposition to the easing of tension with Russia are not only the Democrats (who, with a reversal of formal roles, are playing the " hawks "), but also many Republicans, among whom are several highly-important representatives of the Trump administration itself. It is the establishment, not only of the US, but also of Europe, whose powers and profits are directly linked to tension and war.

It will not be the words, but the facts, which will reveal whether the climate of détente of the Helsinki Summit will become reality - first of all with a de-escalation of NATO in Europe, in other words with the withdrawal of forces (including nuclear forces) of the USA and NATO presently deployed against Russia, and the blockage of NATO's expansion to the East.

Even if an agreement on these questions were reached between Putin and Trump, would the latter be able to implement it? Or will the real deciders be the powerful circles of the military-industrial complex?

One thing is certain – we in Italy and Europe can not remain the simple spectators of dealings which will define our future. Manlio Dinucci

Translation
Pete Kimberley

Source
Il Manifesto (Italy)

Manlio Dinucci

Geographer and geopolitical scientist. His latest books are Laboratorio di geografia , Zanichelli 2014 ; Diario di viaggio , Zanichelli 2017 ; L'arte della guerra / Annali della strategia Usa/Nato 1990-2016 , Zambon 2016. The warmonger The warmonger's response to negotiation
"The Art of War"

[Aug 03, 2018] US Senators Announce Russia Sanctions 'Bill From Hell'

Trump administration works against Trump
Aug 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Neuters via Antiwar.com: U.S. Senator Paul to visit Russia to promote diplomacy
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-russia-senator-meeting/u-s-senator-paul-to-visit-russia-to-promote-diplomacy-statement-idUKKBN1KN1N9

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov will meet U.S. Senator Rand Paul, a proponent of encouraging diplomacy with Russia amid tense relations, in Moscow on Aug. 6, the senator's office said on Thursday.

"Senator Rand Paul is a proponent of diplomacy and is supporting President Donald J. Trump in engaging around the world. He looks forward to his meetings," Paul's office said in a statement on Thursday. No further information was available about the trip, including who else might be in the delegation.
####

Meanwhile:

Sources via Antiwar.com: US Senators Announce Russia Sanctions 'Bill From Hell'
https://news.antiwar.com/2018/08/02/us-senators-announce-russia-sanctions-bill-from-hell/

Bill intends to sanction Russian 'oligarchs,' restrict energy projects

The Russian Ruble dropped Thursday to a near-term low after bipartisan US senators announced what they are calling a "bill from hell" round of new sanctions and restrictions targeting the Russian economy and leadership.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), one of the leading proponents of the bill, said the massive present US sanctions against Russia have failed, saying that all of these new sanctions are needed to "punish" Russia.

As currently envisioned, the sanctions target a number of top Russian politicians and "oligarchs." The bill also aims to severely restrict Russia's ability to raise sovereign debt, and to restrict their ability to seek investment in energy projects.

There is no timeline for a vote on the bill yet, but reportedly some senators are also lining up to offer amendments adding yet more sanctions or other measures against Russia. This could go on for quite awhile, with almost the whole Senate looking to one-up each other on being anti-Russia these days, and could mean an actual vote won't happen.
####

It looks to me that with the mid-terms coming up and showing diplomacy with Russia not taking a hit with Republican voters, this further push by Rand Paul looks to make the Dems look and sound even more extreme, maybe drawing disgusted voters to the Republican camp..

Like Like Reply Mark Chapman August 3, 2018 at 6:24 pm

This is just America pretending to itself that it controls the global economy and that it can strangle any country economically at a time of its choosing – I am frankly surprised to see them continually trying harder when their efforts to date have had such negligible success. I suppose the Senate needs something to do to make itself look busy and necessary. But all this will achieve is further cementing of America as an enemy of Russia in the eyes of ordinary Russians – should a future US government decide that was a mistake, and soft power is the way to go, it will not be able to make any progress for around 50 years, and a great deal of hard work and careful relationship-building has been thrown away. American businesses must be finding it increasingly difficult to continue operations in Russia, and Asian companies must be acing them out for market share . Altogether a continuing exercise in stupidity and willful blindness – if America wants to destroy Russia, it is eventually going to have to take it on in a head-on military confrontation. Because its efforts to destroy it economically are failing and will continue to fail. Not to mention that they are building sympathy around the world – outside North America – for Russia. America has to understand that while it is enjoying playing "I'm crushing Russia", it has consequences and it will not be able to make things up for a generation.

I'm not quite sure what Paul thinks he might achieve with this, but he certainly is not going to make any friends in Russia, and he certainly is not going to have any leverage to make changes in American policy so long as the Russophobic majority has the bit in its teeth. He's basically just wasting the taxpayers' money on a junket to Moscow. Alternatively, he might be going to measure Russian desperation, to see if there is any possibility the country can be brought to its knees without having to fight it.

[Aug 03, 2018] Anglo America Russophobes as Fake Miracle workers; the Post Christ Resurrections

Jun 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

Extracted from: Appeasement as Global Policy, by James Petras - The Unz Review

As part of the propaganda campaign to discredit and isolate Russia, the UK and the Ukraine, stalwart flunkies of Washington, accused Moscow of assassinations by poison and bullets. Both alleged victims appeared live and well in due time!

On March 4, 2018, the Prime Minister of the UK Theresa May claimed that Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned by Russian secret agents. Foreign Secretary Boris "Bobo" Johnson called the poison, 'the most-deadly agent known to man' (sic) – Novichok. According to "Terry and Bobo" the poison kills in 30 seconds. Two months later Sergei and Yulia were seen taking a stroll in a park.

The fake charges were promoted by the entire Anglo-Americans mass media. The UK proceeded to charge Putin with 'crimes against humanity' , backed additional diplomatic and economic sanctions, increased military spending for homeland defense and urged President Trump to take forceful action. Once the 'victims' 'rose from the dead' the media never questioned the regime's claim of a Russian conspiracy planned at the highest level.

The UK scored a few trivial merit points from Washington, which, however, did not prevent President Trump from slapping a double-digit tariff on British steel and aluminum exports (with more to come)!

The Ukraine joined the line of toadies trying to secure President Trump's approval by cooking up another Russian murder plot. This time Ukraine leaders claimed Kremlin agents assassinated one Arkady Babchenko, an anti-Russian journalist and self-proclaimed exile in Kiev.

On May 29, 2018, Arkady was found 'murdered' or so said the Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko and repeated, embellished and circulated by the entire western mass media.

On May 31, a wide-eyed 'Arkady' turned up alive and claiming his 'resurrection' was a planned plot to catch a Russian agent!

Western regimes systematic use of lies, plots and conspiracies are central to the imperial drive for world power.

In Syria, the US accused Damascus of using poisonous gas against its own people in order to justify NATO's terror bombing of Aleppo's civilian population!

In Libya, Obama and Clinton claimed President Gaddafi distributed Viagra to his armed forced to rape innocent civilians, precipitating the US-EU terror bombing of the country and rape and murder of President Ghaddafi.

The question is whether western leaders will seek papal recognition of CIA directed resurrections to coincide with Easter?

[Aug 02, 2018] Stephen F. Cohen Debates Max Boot on CNN

Jul 31, 2018 | American Committee for East-West Accord

Perhaps the defining trait of neoconservatives like Max Boot is that they – for whatever reason – feel free to opine on subjects about which they know little, if anything.

Having no knowledge of history, cheap polemicists like Boot resort to ad hominem attacks when confronted by serious scholars like Cohen while cable news anchors sit by and scoff.

– Editor

[Aug 02, 2018] Prof Cohen beating Max Boot like a rented mule

Max Book demonstrates typical neocon Chutzpah (Killing your parents, then complaining you're an orphan) and attacks like rabid dog. Intelligcully he is nto equl to Cohen.
Q: What's the difference between a rabid dot and Max Boot? A: You think there is difference
Aug 02, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

[Aug 02, 2018] Mcfaul's describes Browder simply as a British businessman. Ignoring possible connection to MI6 and his activities in pushing Magnitsky act

McFaul lies. and that raises question about his connections to intelligence agencies as well.
In no way a regular businessman would lobby for Magnitsky act, using false evidence and blatant lies (for example that Magnitsky was a lawyer; Browder admitted that this is a lie in his court deposition. This was yet another false flag operation with fingerprints of MI6
Aug 02, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Taras77 , July 30, 2018 at 11:42 am

Not sure where this link would fit but here it is:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/putin-wanted-to-interrogate-me-trump-called-it-an-incredible-offer-why/2018/07/26/7bb11552-90d2-11e8-b769-e3fff17f0689_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a8100ef8e8fd

Article is strong on self-pity and whine-evidently this neocon had a serious case of the vapors when putin made an "offer" to interview him.

It remains to be seen as to the extent of Mcfaul's cooperation with Browder, who he describes simply as a british businessman.

Jessika , July 28, 2018 at 9:35 am

It really is peculiar what's happened to these dimwit Dems. I used to listen to Thom Hartmann and Rachel Maddow when they were on Air America, and their main political positions were for working people. Now, all they do is partisan politics which they don't seem to understand benefits only the Deep State war party.

Incidentally, State of the Nation website, http://www.sott.net , has an article by Alex Krainer, who wrote the book about Bill Browder's crooked dealings in Russia. His book, which was suppressed by Browder first, i think is "Grand Deception", now available from Red Pill Press for $25 (and must be selling well because it's being reprinted). I wrote this hastily but you'll see it on sott.net. Russia's resurgence under Putin is nothing short of astounding.

Also, there is a video on Youtube, "The Rise of Putin and the Fall of the Russian Jewish Oligarchs", 2 parts. I only saw the beginning showing how the Russian people were given state vouchers that led to the oligarchs buying them up for their own profit and plunging Russians into shock therapy disaster instigated by IMF and other US led monetary agencies including Harvard. This is why it is so incredible how Americans receive political "perception control" when the truth is exactly opposite of what they are being told. At least more people are realizing the lies being told about Russia and Putin.

[Aug 02, 2018] Republic of Latvia, Apartheid State within the EU by Gilbert Doctorow

Notable quotes:
"... Does Russia Have a Future? ..."
Jul 31, 2018 | gilbertdoctorow.com
This essay draws upon my personal acquaintance with Alexander Gaponenko, the victim of ongoing cruel and unusual judicial procedures in Riga, Latvia which violate fundamentally the much-touted "values" of the European Union. However, this is not about the misfortune of one person, fallen afoul of local authorities. The Gaponenko case fits into a broad context of vicious discrimination by the Latvian state of its minority of Russian speakers who constitute more than thirty percent of the general population of the country. I will begin with an overview and proceed to the particulars.

My objective is to raise public awareness in Western Europe of the Apartheid regime that has been running Latvia since its independence in 1991 with the connivance of the USA and EU. It is high time for protests to be lodged with Latvian embassies so as to force a solution to what is eminently amenable to political remedy.

* * * *

These days we hear a lot about the wayward EU Member States of Central Europe, which are allegedly reverting to authoritarian habits of their Communist past and are trampling on democratic principles and rule of law. Foremost in these countries selected for stigmatization are Viktor Orban's Hungary and Poland under its Law and Justice Party of the Kaczynskis.

How grave the recidivism of these two nations may be remains to be determined, and so far the possible sanctions against them are only a talking point. The contest with Brussels will be difficult. While the Polish government is on the defensive, insisting that its judicial reforms do not violate EU law, the Hungarian government is on the offensive. In the past week Prime Minister Orban asserted flatly that Western Europe is no longer democratic. If by that he means that it is no longer open to free discussion of basic issues, is intolerant of other views of governance than those prescribed by Liberal Internationalism, then he is entirely correct.

In any case, these disputes are over abstractions that are entirely internal to the European Union. There is at the same time flagrant violation of EU law on human rights and judicial procedure that goes on with hardly a murmur in Brussels, though its risks to the Union concern not so much internal housekeeping as relations with the big neighbor to the East, thereby impinging on European and global peace. I have in mind the egregious denial of civil rights to Russian-speakers in Latvia.

This history goes back to the early days of Latvian independence from the Soviet Union when a 1992 law on nationality effectively stripped more half the population of Russian-speaking Latvians of their citizenship. That loss was compounded by economic restrictions on employment that barred the new non-citizens from certain professions like law and banking, set ceilings on how high they could rise in other domains and barred them from land ownership. At the time, those deprived of their rights numbered 400,000. Since then by natural attrition of mortality and by emigration, that number has dropped to 300,000 but still amounts to 15% of the current population of the country.

The objective was plainly to ensure that the core Latvian population enjoyed full political and economic control within national borders. That may sound innocent and excusable given the woeful tale of past hardships imposed on Latvians during the preceding fifty years of domination from Moscow, including the large-scale settlement on their land of non-Latvians serving in Soviet naval and army bases and in Soviet-built factories. But as with ethnic cleansing anywhere, the measures to rectify past injuries inflicted enormous harm on the newly targeted population, created resentments and set the stage for ever worsening inter-ethnic relations. Latvian nationalists running the state have exploited an imaginary potential for 'fifth column' resistance to their rule in order to progressively tighten the repression and injustice directed against the Russian speakers.

More to the point, the guilty consciences of Latvian ruling elites induced them to direct an information war against the Russian Federation to cover up their incivility against Latvian born Russian speakers, all to avoid dealing with the problems in their own house. Hence the leading role of the Republic of Latvia in the EU's confrontation with Russia and its insistent calls upon NATO for ever more protections on the ground to deter a possible Russian military strike or the launch of hybrid warfare instrumentalizing the Russian-speaking minority in Latvia.

One of the ironies of the past quarter century is that the ethnic cleansing intent of Latvia's discriminatory legislation utterly failed to achieve its objectives. The hardships imposed on them induced some of the Russian-speaking minority to emigrate, but not nearly on the same scale as ethnic Latvians who could use their EU passports to freely leave in search of employment and a better life in Western Europe, with right of return at any time. The numbers of the Latvian emigration are in line with similar departures of economic emigrants from other Baltic states and from former Communist countries of Eastern Europe, on the order of 25% of the population.

In Latvia, as in the other two Baltic States, the outward flow of its best and most energetic citizens was a largely self-inflicted wound, since the limited job opportunities at home resulted directly from the worsening relations with Russia, with which they had had extensive mutually advantageous commercial relations before they launched their information war on their neighbor for purposes of their nation-building.

The flagrant violation of human rights inherent in the citizenship law was known to the EU when Latvia's accession application was under review. But for reasons of expediency, to hasten the implementation of security provisions for the whole region, and in diplomatic horse-trading among the Member States to assure all candidate countries sponsored by one or another of them got a pass, Latvia joined the EU in 2004 with no consequential constraints on its practices towards the Russian speakers in its midst.

* * * *

In March 2014, I spent several days in Riga, my first time in the city since independence twenty-three years earlier. I came as a guest of the city authorities who were generously welcoming visitors to experience "Riga, Cultural Capital of Europe," for the coming half-year.

At the time, I published my impressions¹ which duly described the cultural attractions of the city but mostly dealt with the political atmosphere, which as a privileged guest I was able to observe not only at street level but in the company of the ruling elite, including, to be quite precise about it, the mayor's direct assistant for public relations, who guided the festival and spoke to me at some length during one of the cocktail receptions. My focus of interest was treatment of the Russian minority, and I learned to my considerable surprise, that this robust nationalist who ran the festival admitted it had been a terrible mistake to strip the Russia-speakers of their citizenship. She had seen how Russian neighbors fully supported Latvia's liberation from the Soviet Union with their votes and at the barricades when there was a military showdown. It was only stubbornness and the conviction that they could not be seen to back down before Putin's Russia that maintained this injustice.

Also on this visit, I spent some hours with a certain Alexander Gaponenko, who was one of the co-founders of the Congress of Latvian Non-Citizens, a body set up in 2012 and whose members were elected by the 300,000 stateless Latvians to represent their interests before the powers-that-be. I had made Gaponenko's acquaintance by chance the week before when I heard him address the Brussels Press Club together with Congress co-founder Elizabeta Krivcova in a talk urging West Europeans to use their right to vote, to rise from indifference by considering how others in the EU were struggling to regain their citizenship and, with it, the franchise.

Eager to hear more, I had agreed with Alexander to meet during my visit to the cultural festival. That meeting was in fact delayed by his detention for six hours of police interrogation just after my arrival. This was part of the cat and mouse game the authorities were playing with him over his attempts to arrange an evening of Russian songs. Just songs, not protests or politics. The concert was eventually prohibited. This fit a pattern of harassment that he had become accustomed to.

Following his release, Alexander very kindly took me on a walking tour of downtown Riga during which he explained the psychology of people like himself who had refused to attempt the naturalization process, which they considered demeaning. In fact, at the time, only about 2,000 Russian speakers a year were passing the process and regaining their citizenship. It was patently clear that the 300,000 non-citizens would never be assimilated.

From speaking to others and in particular from a visit with one of the priests in the Russian Orthodox cathedral of Riga, I understood that the number one issue facing the Russian-speaking community now was the assault on their cultural identity by the authorities in the form of restrictions on use of the Russian language in public school instruction.

The fears of the Russian-speaking community were realized this year when the legislature passed and the prime minister signed on 2 April a language law completely forbidding Russian-language instruction in the public school system. The complete ban takes effect in the 2020-21 academic year, but it will be introduced in stages beginning already in the coming year.

Like the citizenship law of 1992 and the rupture of commercial ties with Russia that began later in that decade, the prohibition on use of Russian is not only a slap in the face of the 40% of the population of Riga that speaks Russian as its maternal language. It is a measure that will be destructive of the entire educational system for years to come, because there simply are insufficient numbers of competent Latvian speaking teachers available in the country. The result will be, for example, math lessons given in broken Latvian by teachers who are basically Russian-speakers.

However, the nationalists who call the shots in Latvia are not interested in practical outcomes. Their concern is to exercise and maintain their monopoly on power at whatever cost.

The expected passage of the new language law outraged many Latvians months in advance and gave rise to a protest movement that has included street demonstrations. Given his long-established activism, it comes as no surprise that Alexander Gaponenko was one of the leaders of this movement.

* * * *

My third and most recent meeting with Alexander Gaponenko was quite accidental, as we found one another in the small party of 40 international election observers sent to the Crimea by various NGOs to report on the 18 March 2018 presidential election. An accidental and yet surely also inescapable meeting..

On the evening of the 17 th , Alexander and I were seated at the same dinner table of a small hotel on the outskirts of Yalta where our group was spending the night. Early the next morning we would head out to polling stations in Yalta, then to several small villages along the main coastal road leading up to the regional capital of Simferopol where we would conclude our inspections. However, the evening of the 17 th was free. We ordered several bottles of the best Crimean wine I have ever sampled, a white that would rival any fine French Chablis and priced accordingly. We chatted.

Alexander spoke of his various film and publishing projects. Everything seemed normal.

Therefore I was deeply shocked when just over a month later I learned of his arrest and incarceration in Riga on 21 April over unspecified charges.

The violent manner of Alexander's arrest itself was unnerving. He was beaten. He was handcuffed for more than 11 hours and he was not given food. However, that was only the start of his ordeal. Under Latvian law, the authorities have the right to impose preliminary arrest for a period of two months. In fact, when that term expired on 21 June, his arrest was extended for another two months.

Since charges have not been brought, one may speculate on what prompted this arrest.

Some say the current accusation is related to his recent film "The Latvia we lost-2" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZWTxQ-Pu11 ) about Soviet Latvia, a one-sided film generally positive about Soviet history.

Others believe the case is related to Gaponenko's having spoken at a parents' conference for the defense of Russian-language schools on 31 March. That was the opinion of Vladimir Vuzajevs, Latvian Human Rights Committee co-Chairman in a letter dated 20 May to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.

In fact, Alexander Gaponenko was not the only defender of Russian language usage in the Latvian public schools to face proceedings. As of 9 May, at least five participants of the parents' conference in Riga protesting the coming language prohibition were called to the Security Police for questioning, partly as suspects, partly as witnesses, among them Tatjana Zdanoka, co-chair of the Latvian Russian Union political party and until her resignation in March 2018, a three term Member of the European Parliament.

On 8 May, one of the keynote speakers of the conference, Mr. Vladimirs Lindermans was arrested in Riga by masked people without uniform. Later the Security Police clarified that they were its officers acting in criminal proceedings initiated on April 18. On 21 May, by decision of the regional court of the city of Riga, he was released from prison but numerous restrictions were placed on his liberty.

In addition to the Parliamentary Assembly, the Latvian Human Rights Committee wrote to the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities, the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the UN Special Rapporteur on minority issues, asking that they "remind the Latvian authorities about the need to enter into frank dialogue with national minorities, and to have their meaningful participation in decision-making on their education, instead of political intimidation."

Up to present, the Council of Europe and the OSCE have responded to the letter of the Latvian Human Rights Committee that they are following developments in Latvia with respect to the problems raised. The UN rapporteurs, for their part, sent a stern letter to the Latvian authorities at the start of the year criticizing the planned elimination of education in Russian, but have taken no action on the recent cases of police harassment.

© Gilbert Doctorow, 2018

* * * *

¹Republished as chapter 33 "Latvia's failed U.S.-inspired policies towards Russia and Russians" in G. Doctorow, Does Russia Have a Future?

[Aug 02, 2018] This is a large book, embracing a vast amount of research. Conclusion is that accommodation with Putin will be very difficult

Events in Ukraine after EuroMaidan are notoriously difficult to understand.
The book is fairly recent and as such might be a useful introduction for a Western reader who is interested in Ukrainian event, but the material should be taken with a grain of salt. The author is way too simplistic and his views on geopolitical problems are incorrect. The idea that " Putin's Munich speech as a declaration of war" is nonsense. Also most of the readers probably know State Department talking points and can recognize them in the text.
. In some areas the author is clearly incompetent as the quote "In 2016, France blocked 24,000 cyber attacks targeting its military. Ukraine experienced 24, 000 cyber attacks in only the last two months of 2016" suggests.
The author views of Russia are typical of the US-based Ukrainian diaspora. As it is pretty much radicalized, it can be argued that it brings to Ukraine more harm then good. In short his views on Russia can be defined as cocktail of a 40% proof Russophobia with pure Neoconservatism. So while author analysis of "Post-Maydan" Ukrainian elite has its value, his view on Russia should probably be discarded.
For those who also bough McFaul book it is interesting to see correlation in views as well as differences (especially McFaul laments from page 429 to the end of the book) . McFaul was the co-architect of the 2011-2012 color revolution in Russia; and as an Ambassador became ostracized by Russian and later removed by Obama. For his role in "White color revolution of 2012" McFaul was put on the travel ban list by Russians and is not allowed to travel to the country. Both represent neoconservative stance on the events, but there are some subtle and rather interesting differences ;-)
Some Amazon reviews as one reproduced below are actually as valuable as the book itself and can serve as a valuable addition.
Aug 02, 2018 | www.amazon.com
5.0 out of 5 stars Graham H. Seibert TOP 500 REVIEWER on March 17, 2017
This is a large book, embracing a vast amount of research. Conclusion is that accommodation with Putin will be very difficult.

This is a large book, embracing a vast amount of research. Kuzio provides the conclusion to the book as the conclusion to his introduction. It is somber, but realistic:

"There cannot be a conclusion to the book because the Donbas is an unresolved conflict that is on-going. There will be no closure of the Ukraine-Russia crisis as long as Putin is Russian president which will be as long as he remains alive. To fully implement the Minsk-2 Accords would mean jettisoning the DNR-LNR which Putin will not do and therefore, a political resolution to the Donbas conflict is difficult to envisage."

Having lived in Kyiv for ten years, I was witness to the latter chapters of the drama that Kuzio describes. His account jibes with what I witnessed, and provides a coherent explanation of the events as they unfolded. The animus against Yanukovych was universal. His blatant theft was visible to all. Every merchant I dealt with lived in fear of his tax police. We saw, or more often read accounts about, the depredations of the titushki on a daily basis.

One of my key questions in 2014 was whether it might have been better to endure Yanukovych for another couple of years, until the elections. The Ukrainian people answered for me -- they had had enough. It wasn't exactly a coup, because the opposition was not well organized and because Yanukovych fled before he could be overthrown. But the will of the people was clear. He had to go. Kuzio makes a strong case that if it had not happened then, Yanukovych might have had time to secure his dictatorship in such a way that he could not be dislodged through democratic means.

Kuzio provides the most thorough and accurate description of the language situation I have ever read. A fact he often repeats is that a majority of the soldiers fighting against the Russians are themselves Russian speakers. Putin's claim that he is protecting a persecuted linguistic minority is absolute nonsense. Kuzio makes the very useful analogy between the use of English in Ireland and that of Russian in Ukraine. It is a matter of history and convenience.

Ukrainian is not a dialect of Russian. They are very distinct languages. Speaking Spanish, I was able to learn Portuguese quite easily. Speaking Russian has not enabled me to master Ukrainian. They have different alphabets and even different grammars. As a resident of Kyiv for 10 years I have not been forced to, and almost not been in a position to speak Ukrainian. Everybody I interact with is exactly as Kuzio describes – ardently Ukrainian, but nevertheless Russian speaking.

A question Kuzio does not raise is the utility of a language. For better or worse, Russian is a world language. There is a significant body of scientific literature, fiction and poetry written in Russian. It is, or was until recently, the lingua franca of the former USSR.

A lot of information about Kuzio himself is packed in the brief lead into his chapter entitled Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism: "Ukraine is in the hands of homosexuals and Jewish oligarchs. Aleksandr Dugin"

Russian philosopher Dugin is one of Kuzio's major bête noire's. Kuzio's book makes it clear that Dugin is as much of an activist as he is a philosopher. Dugin seems to have a hand in most things anti-Ukrainian. As a philosopher he is nothing – his book The Fourth Political Theory is the subject of the most savage pan I have ever written. Nonetheless, he is taken seriously by the resurgent Russian nationalists and Putin himself.

Dugin's claim that Ukraine is in the hands of homosexuals is absurd. Homosexuals are tolerated here, but they are discrete. Most Ukrainians, though they have no love whatsoever for Russia, are largely in sympathy with Russia's stand against the flaunting of homosexuality. The college-educated twentysomethings whom I know seem unaware that they even know homosexuals, though it appears to this San Franciscan that some people in our circles must be gay.

The claim that Ukraine is in the hand of Jewish oligarchs is quite another matter. Kuzio gives quite rational explanations for anti-Ukrainian, anti-Belarusian and anti-Russian sentiment, a great deal of which he manifests himself. He somehow looks at anti-Semitism as a phenomenon that is beyond explanation. I would contend that it should be regarded just as the other anti- concepts. Especially in the former USSR, where the Jews were regarded as a separate people in the same way as Ukrainians.

He writes about the forged Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Fraud or hoax might be a better word. Internet sources name the author as a certain Russian Professor S. Nilus writing in 1901. The attractiveness of the fraud is that it coincides quite neatly with widely held opinions about the Jews, many of which have some substance.

Going to substance, Kuzio mentions some of the major Jewish oligarchs, Kolomoisky and Taruta, and some of the Jewish participants and Ukrainian politics: Yatsenyuk and Groisman. He discounts the notion that President Poroshenko's father, born Valtzman, was Jewish. I had never heard this account questioned. Other prominent Jews in Ukrainian politics/oligarchy who come immediately to mind include Feldman and Rabinowitz. It is not that there is anything wrong with Jews occupying dominant positions, but "simple Ivan" is not so stupid as to fail to notice them. It is also widely perceived that the Jewish oligarchs are no better or worse than the others, in that they put their personal interests ahead of that of the people who elected them. Poroshenko has been a major disappointment. Kuzio writes of Kolomoisky's support of the volunteer battalions in Donbas. True – but it was totally in line with his business interests.

The fact that six of the seven billionaires to emerge after the collapse of the USSR were Jewish belies Kuzio's claims that they were radically disadvantaged in the USSR. More balanced accounts of Soviet Judaism have been written by Robert Wistrich , Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Yuri Slezkine .

Even a paranoid has enemies. American Jewish neocons, especially Victoria Nuland and husband Robert Kagan, actively involved in Ukrainian politics, were strongly anti-Russian. Though Kuzio is absolutely correct that the animus of the Ukrainian people for Yanukovych was more than enough to power the Maidan uprising, it is also probably true that the CIA was covertly abetting the protesters.

Kuzio's history of the Donbas and Crimea provides a very useful background to the conflict. After the Welsh engineer John Hughes discovered coal around Donetsk in the 1880s there was a rush to exploit it. The sparse population of Ukrainian farmers was not interested in working the mines. The Russians brought in men from all over the Empire. A large number were criminals who earned early release by promising to work there. Others were simply soldiers of fortune.

Mining is dirty, dangerous and very masculine work. Kuzio reports that the history of the Donbas always mirrored the miners themselves. Politically, it sat in the middle between the Russians and the Ukrainians, respecting neither very much and casting its lot with whoever appeared at the moment to be most generous to them, more often Moscow than Kyiv.

Kuzio relates that Lenin included the Donbas within the Ukrainian SSR as a built-in fifth column, as a lever to control all of Ukraine. It remained after independence in 1991. The Donbas' unique culture and clannishness protected its politicians from probing inquiries into their dark pasts, such as Yanukovych' two prison terms. They would overlook his depredations and send him to Kyiv with the idea that "he's a crook, but he's our crook."

Crimea's history is even more convoluted, but the bottom line is that it has always been Russian speaking and did not identify greatly with Ukraine.

Kuzio reports, seemingly approvingly, that fellow author Alexander Motyl believes that Ukraine would be better off without these insubordinate, intransigent ingrates.

In the end, Kuzio sums the origins of the crisis up very well, "The roots of the Ukraine-Russia crisis do not lie in EU and NATO enlargement and democracy promotion, as left-wing scholars and realists would have us believe, but in two factors. The first is Russia's and specifically Putin's unwillingness to accept Ukrainians are a separate people and Ukraine is an independent state with a sovereign right to determine its geopolitical alliances. The second is Yanukovych and the Donetsk clan's penchant for the monopolization of power, state capture, corporate raiding of the state and willingness to accommodate practically every demand made by Moscow that culminated in treason on a grand scale. This was coupled with a shift to Sovietophile and Ukrainophobic nationality policies and return to Soviet style treatment of political opponents. Taken together, these policies made popular protests inevitable in the 2015 elections but they came a year earlier after Yanukovych bowed to Russian pressure to back away from the EU Association Agreement. These protests, in turn, became violent and nationalistic in response to the Party of Regions and KPU's destruction of Ukraine's democracy through the passing of draconian legislation, the president's refusal to compromise and his use of vigilantes and police spetsnaz for political repression, torture, and murders of protestors."

The question facing Ukraine at the moment is how to resolve the war in Donbas and how to prevent Russia from making further incursions. Kuzio shares some very useful insights in this regard.

Even in 2014, Russia simply did not have the resources to conquer Ukraine even if it had had the desire. Kuzio repeatedly makes the point that the Russian doctrine of hybrid war depends on a sympathetic or at least indifferent local populace. Even in the Donbass the Russians have not been welcomed by a majority.

Time and again, Putin proves himself too smart by half. In his desire to maintain deniability, he employed Chechens, Don Cossacks and "political tourists," thugs from all over Russia to infiltrate the Donbass as separatists. Criminals are simply not suited for either civil administration or organized warfare. After three months it was clear to Putin that he had to use Russian troops and administrators, pushing the separatists aside. Not mentioned in the book is the fact that a great many of the separatist leaders died mysteriously. Although Russia attempted to frame Ukraine for "Motorola's" death, it appears to have been done by Russian agents. Russia's trecherous duplicity neither won the war for them no fooled anybody for very long.

Russia has thus had several handicaps in capturing and holding even the small, Russophone and previously Russophile enclaves in Lugansk and Donetsk. The LPR and DPR would not survive without ongoing Russian support. They have not won the hearts and minds of the people.

This calls to mind Custine's Penguin Classics Letters From Russia on the fact that Russian duplicity and deceit made it impossible for them ever to subvert the West. Alexandr Zinoviev summed it up exquisitely in his satirical Homo Sovieticus :

"Even though the West seems chaotic, frivolous and defenseless, all the same Moscow will never achieve worldwide supremacy. Moscow can defend itself against any opponent. Moscow can deliver a knockout blow on the west. Moscow has the wherewithal to mess up the whole planet. But it has no chance of becoming the ruler of the world. To rule the world one must have at one's disposal a sufficiently great nation. That nation must feel itself to be a nation of rulers. And when it comes to it, one that can rule in reality. In the Soviet Union the Russians are the only people who might be suited to that role. They are the foundation and the bulwark of the Empire. But they don't possess the qualities of a ruling nation. And in the Soviet empire their situation is more like that of being a colony for all the other peoples in it."

This is the bottom line, something for the warmongers in Washington to keep in mind. Ukraine and NATO cannot defeat Russia on its own doorstep, but Russia can certainly defeat itself. For NATO to arm Ukraine, as the west did Georgia, or continue to crowd it as they are doing in the Baltics, is counterproductive. It would be quite possible, but also quite stupid for Russia to roll over its neighbors. The adventure in Ukraine has already been expensive, and holding Crimea and Donbas will only become more so. Conversely, for the west to arm countries against the Russians, as the US did in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Nicaragua, proved quite deadly for these supposed friends. Ukraine and the west should wait Putin out just as they waited out the USSR.

I have a couple of quibbles with the book. Kuzio uses the word "Fascist" to characterize various Russian nationalist groups that support Putin and attack Ukrainians. Fascism died with Hitler, 72 years ago. There should be a better term. This is especially true as Putin terms Ukrainians as "Fascists." The word is inappropriate, old and clichéd.

Kuzio goes on to paint the rising nationalist movements in Europe as Fascist, or extreme right wing. He excoriates Marine le Pen for taking Putin's money. There is a strong case to be made that anti-democrats, supported by mainstream parties, have seized the European Parliament and strongly suppressed free speech, open debate and the ability of such nationalists to find funding. Their national banks are prejudicially closed to Farage, Wilders, Orban, le Pen and the others. Kuzio should be more accommodating to the nationalists. Ukraine may soon find itself forced to work with them. Moreover, they have many good points. Generation Identity provides a succinct summary. It is a book of the millennial generation, the nationalists' strongest base, outlining their case against their elders, the boomers.

Ukraine is a conservative country. It is not wise to push the west's liberal agendas with regard to immigration, homosexuality, feminism and civil rights for the Roma and at the same time steel Ukraine for its fight against Russia. Even joining the battle against corruption smells of hypocrisy, as evidence of political corruption emerges all over the west. It is better to recognize the simple facts, as Kuzio does, and have a bit of faith. Ukraine managed against stiffer odds in 2014. It will survive.

[Aug 02, 2018] Putin Tongue-Lashes American Journo Who Criticized Him For Promoting Stereotypes About America

Flashback: Putin about Neo-McCarthyism
Nov 10, 2017 | www.youtube.com

Putin Puts in Place American Journo Toby Gati Who is Criticizing Him for Not Wanting to Admit that America is Exceptional Nation

Steve Powell , 4 months ago

I think he behaved very well towards this lady. He was polite and respectful and open. I believe everything he said. We need more like him. I do not believe for a moment all the rubbish in the news. Its quite clearly from lack of evidence (re the UK incident) or proper dialogue that the reason for those accusing Russia is purely political and Anti-Russia as per usual.

F Zulu , 4 months ago

Bravo Putin i love this man so humble and straight to the point. He literally ripped the old hog apart .

[Aug 02, 2018] Stephen F. Cohen Debates Max Boot on CNN

Jul 31, 2018 | American Committee for East-West Accord

Perhaps the defining trait of neoconservatives like Max Boot is that they – for whatever reason – feel free to opine on subjects about which they know little, if anything.

Having no knowledge of history, cheap polemicists like Boot resort to ad hominem attacks when confronted by serious scholars like Cohen while cable news anchors sit by and scoff.

– Editor

[Aug 02, 2018] The "pension reforms" are an Atlanticist trojan horse to erode the legitimacy of the government and not a necessary "reform".

Aug 02, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

jnewman , 3 hours ago

Putin needs to get himself a good monetary economist not affiliated or influenced by the Chicago School. The "pension reforms" are an Atlanticist trojan horse to erode the legitimacy of the government and not a necessary "reform".

Putin has made his reputation "allocating real resources to the common people of Russia, he should continue to do that.

[Aug 02, 2018] Nekrasov's film is fatal to Browder's story.

Aug 02, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

BROWDER MOVIE. A Russian documentary maker believed everything Browder said and started a film to justify him. As it progressed, he discovered anomalies and came to realise the story was false. See here . It is moving around the Net now and it's worth looking for because Browder's story is a primary founding myth of the Putin hysteria. The film is fatal to Browder's story.

[Aug 02, 2018] Senators Seek Crushing Sanctions For Russia In New Bill

Aug 02, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

In the latest effort to punish Moscow over alleged election meddling, as well its role in both Ukraine and Syria, a bipartisan bill has been introduced in the Senate Thursday that seeks to be so far reaching that it's being widely described as "crushing".

Predictably, it has as sponsors such Congressional hawks as Senators Bob Menendez, John McCain, and Lindsey Graham -- the latter which announced the bill's goal is to " impose crushing sanctions and other measures against Putin's Russia until he ceases and desists meddling in the U.S. electoral process, halts cyber-attacks on US infrastructure, removes Russia from Ukraine, and ceases efforts to create chaos in Syria," according a statement .

Via Google News

According to lawmakers' statements, the Graham-Menendez bill introduces harsh new restrictions on sectors ranging from energy and oil projects to uranium imports and on sovereign debt transactions. And the new sanctions further target various Russian political figures and oligarchs.

Bob Menendez (D) of New Jersey called the measure the "next step in tightening the screws on the Kremlin" so Putin understands "that the U.S. will not tolerate his behavior any longer."

Other supporters include Sens. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) among those previously mentioned.

In a statement Sen. John McCain said, "Until Putin pays a serious price for his actions, these attacks on our democracy will only grow. This bill would build on the strongest sanctions ever imposed on the Putin regime for its assault on democratic institutions, violation of international treaties, and siege on open societies through cyberattacks and misinformation campaigns."

Notably, part of the legislation would require the State Department to make an assessment on whether Russia should be designated as a state sponsor of terrorism .

It might have trouble passing, however, as even though a broad spectrum of legislators have lately criticized President Trump for meeting Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki last month and have charged Russia with seeking to interfere in US elections, there's concern that it could inadvertently impact markets beyond Russia's borders. It would further have to pass the House of Representatives before going to Trump's desk.

According to Reuters :

The Banking and Foreign Relations Committees are planning hearings in advance of legislation coming to the floor. Some senators have expressed concern new sanctions might go too far or not succeed in getting Putin to change course.

The Treasury Department has warned Congress against legislation that would block transactions and financing for Russian sovereign debt in part because of the pain it would wreak across markets outside Russia's borders .

The bill is considered the broadest and most far reaching of any Russia sanctions bill previously considered. Sen. Graham had recently described that it would include everything but "the kitchen sink."

Meanwhile the ruble and Russian local bonds were shaken moments after the bipartisan legislation was announced Thursday : the ruble traded down by as much as 0.9 percent against the dollar, and bond yields jumped to the highest level since July last year.

[Aug 02, 2018] Trump's nationalistic blather is creating a "base" of people who believe in the godliness of the US. They are in for a very serious disappointment.

Aug 02, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Bill Herschel , 2 days ago

Very, very slightly off-topic.

Much has been made, including in this post, of the excellent organization of Russian forces and Russian military technology.

I have been re-investigating an open-source relational database system known as PosgreSQL (variously), and I remember finding perhaps a decade ago a very useful whole text search feature of this system which I vaguely remember was written by a Russian and, for that reason, mildly distrusted by me.

Come to find out that the principle developers and maintainers of PostgreSQL are Russian. OMG. Double OMG, because the reason I chose it in the first place is that it is the best non-proprietary RDBS out there and today is supported on Google Cloud, AWS, etc.

The US has met an equal or conceivably a superior, case closed. Trump's thoroughly odd behavior with Putin is just one but a very obvious one example of this. Of course, Trump's nationalistic blather is creating a "base" of people who believe in the godliness of the US. They are in for a very serious disappointment.

kao_hsien_chih -> Bill Herschel , a day ago
After the iron curtain fell, there was a big demand for Russian-trained programmers because they could program in a very efficient and "light" manner that didn't demand too much of the hardware, if I remember correctly. It's a bit of chicken-and-egg problem, though. Russia, throughout 20th century, had problem with developing small, effective hardware, so their programmers learned how to code to take maximum advantage of what they had, with their technological deficiency in one field giving rise to superiority in another.

Russia has plenty of very skilled, very well-trained folks and their science and math education is, in a way, more fundamentally and soundly grounded on the foundational stuff than US (based on my personal interactions anyways). Russian tech ppl should always be viewed with certain amount of awe and respect...although they are hardly good on everything.

TTG -> kao_hsien_chih , a day ago
Well said. Soviet university training in "cybernetics" as it was called in the late 1980s involved two years of programming on blackboards before the students even touched an actual computer. It gave the students an understanding of how computers works down to the bit flipping level. Imagine trying to fuzz code in your head.
FarNorthSolitude -> TTG , a day ago
I recall flowcharting entirely on paper before committing a program to punched cards. I used to do hex and octal math in my head as part of debugging core dumps. Ah, the glory days. Honeywell once made a military computer that was 10 bit. That stumped me for a while, as everything was 8 or 16 bit back then.
kao_hsien_chih -> FarNorthSolitude , 10 hours ago
That used to be fairly common in the civilian sector (in US) too: computing time was expensive, so you had to make sure that the stuff worked flawlessly before it was committed. No opportunity to seeing things go wrong and do things over like much of how things happen nowadays. Russians, with their hardware limitations/shortages, I imagine must have been much more thorough than US programmers were back in the old days, and you could only get there by being very thoroughly grounded n the basics.

[Aug 02, 2018] Call to break up Russia by Latvian MP proof of NATO's hostile plans senior lawmaker

Notable quotes:
"... We should not be shy, we should offer tough resistance. Resistance not even to such statements but rather the danger of our country being split up that arises after them ..."
Aug 02, 2018 | www.rt.com

" We should not be shy, we should offer tough resistance. Resistance not even to such statements but rather the danger of our country being split up that arises after them ," said Kalashnikov. The Russian lawmaker also noted that the call to split up Russia clearly contradicted earlier assurances from Western nations that they have no intention of capturing Russian territory and breaking it into parts. He went on to say that it's important for Russia to counter NATO's aggressive plans and not simply trust assurances from aggressive nations.

According to Russian Defense Ministry reports, the first half of 2018 saw NATO conduct 13 large-scale military exercises – involving more than 40,000 servicemen and 2000 units of combat hardware – near the bloc's south-western borders. Russia maintained the same military strength on the " contact line " with NATO, but had to increase their combat ability through more intensive training and the introduction of new, more effective weapons.

Last week Russian defense chief Sergey Shoigu told an assembly of senior generals and officers that NATO countries have never stopped carrying out actions aimed at preventing Russia from becoming an independent player in international politics and geopolitical competitors to the nations of the Western military bloc. He also accused NATO of using all spheres of human activity such as politics, economics and even culture and sports to impose its anti-Russian agenda on as many people as possible.

[Aug 02, 2018] The classic method of American negotiation and warfare like the Roman before them is to divide and conquer.Even the Soviet Union and Russians were unable to make the American respect their commitments

Notable quotes:
"... I agree with the caricature nature of much of this. I don't think there will be a next target. The MIC has become bloated while Iran, Syria, Russia, China are turning out true fighters as well as stronger economic planning. ..."
Jul 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
The United States seems ready to give up on Afghanistan.

After the World Trade Center came down the U.S. accused al-Qaeda, parts of which were hosted in Afghanistan. The Taliban government offered the U.S. to extradite al-Qaeda chief Osama Bin Laden to an Islamic country to be judged under Islamic law. The U.S. rejected that and decided instead to destroy the Afghan government.

Taliban units, supported by Pakistani officers, were at that time still fighting against the Northern Alliance which held onto a few areas in the north of the country. Under threats from the U.S. Pakistan, which sees Afghanistan as its natural depth hinterland, was pressed into service. In exchange for its cooperation with the U.S. operation it was allowed to extradite its forces and main figures of the Taliban.

U.S. special forces were dropped into north Afghanistan. They came with huge amounts of cash and the ability to call in B-52 bombers. Together with the Northern Alliance they move towards Kabul bombing any place where some feeble resistance came from. The Taliban forces dissolved. Many resettled in Pakistan. Al-Qaeda also vanished.

A conference with Afghan notables was held in Germany's once capital Bonn. The Afghans wanted to reestablish the former Kingdom but were pressed into accepting a western style democracy. Fed with large amounts of western money the norther warlords, all well known mass-murderers, and various greedy exiles were appointed as a government. To them it was all about money. There was little capability and interest to govern.

All these U.S. mistakes made in the early days are still haunting the country.

For a few years the Taliban went quiet. But continued U.S. operations, which included random bombing of weddings, torture and abduction of assumed al-Qaeda followers, alienated the people. Pakistan feared that it would be suffocated between a permanently U.S. occupied Afghanistan and a hostile India. Four years after being ousted the Taliban were reactivated and found regrown local support.

Busy with fighting an insurgency in Iraq the U.S. reacted slowly. It then surged troops into Afghanistan, pulled back, surged again and is now again pulling back. The U.S. military aptly demonstrated its excellent logistic capabilities and its amazing cultural incompetence. The longer it fought the more Afghan people stood up against it. The immense amount of money spent to 'rebuild' Afghanistan went to U.S. contractors and Afghan warlords but had little effect on the ground. Now half the country is back under Taliban control while the other half is more or less contested.

Before his election campaign Donald Trump spoke out against the war on Afghanistan. During his campaign he was more cautious pointing to the danger of a nuclear Pakistan as a reason for staying in Afghanistan. But Pakistan is where the U.S. supply line is coming through and there are no reasonable alternatives. Staying in Afghanistan to confront Pakistan while depending on Pakistan for logistics does not make sense.

Early this year the U.S. stopped all aid to Pakistan. Even the old Pakistani government was already talking about blocking the logistic line. The incoming prime minister Imran Khan has campaigned for years against the U.S. war on Afghanistan. He very much prefers an alliance with China over any U.S. rapprochement. The U.S. hope is that Pakistan will have to ask the IMF for another bailout and thus come back under Washington's control. But it is more likely that Imran Khan will ask China for financial help.

Under pressure from the military Trump had agreed to raise the force in Afghanistan to some 15,000 troops. But these were way to few to hold more than some urban areas. Eighty percent of the Afghan people live in the countryside. Afghan troops and police forces are incapable or unwilling to fight their Taliban brethren. It was obvious that this mini-surge would fail :

By most objective measures, President Donald Trump's year-old strategy for ending the war in Afghanistan has produced few positive results.

Afghanistan's beleaguered soldiers have failed to recapture significant new ground from the Taliban. Civilian deaths have hit historic highs. The Afghan military is struggling to build a reliable air force and expand the number of elite fighters. Efforts to cripple lucrative insurgent drug smuggling operations have fallen short of expectations. And U.S. intelligence officials say the president's strategy has halted Taliban gains but not reversed their momentum, according to people familiar with the latest assessments.

To blame Pakistan for its support for some Taliban is convenient, but makes little sense. In a recent talk John Sopko, the U.S. Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), made a crucial point:

"We keep referring to Pakistan as being the key problem. But the problem also was that the Afghan government at times was viewed very negatively by their local people and what you really need is to insert a government that the people support, a government that is not predatory, a government that is not a bunch of lawless warlords," observed Sopko.

He went on to say that the U.S. policy of pouring in billions of dollars in these unstable environments contributed to the problem of creating more warlords and powerful people who took the law into their own hands.

"In essence, the government we introduced, particularly some of the Afghan local police forces, which were nothing other than warlord militias with some uniforms on, were just as bad as the terrorists before them," said Sopko ...

This was the problem from the very beginning. The U.S. bribed itself into Afghanistan. It spent tons of money but did not gain real support. It bombed and shot aimlessly at 'Taliban' that were more often than not just the local population. It incompetently fought 17 one-year-long wars instead of a consistently planned and sustained political, economic and military campaign.

After a year of another useless surge the Trump administration decided to pull back from most active operations and to bet on negotiations with the Taliban:

The shift to prioritize initial American talks with the Taliban over what has proved a futile "Afghan-led, Afghan-owned" process stems from a realization by both Afghan and American officials that President Trump's new Afghanistan strategy is not making a fundamental difference in rolling back Taliban gains.

While no date for any talks has been set, and the effort could still be derailed, the willingness of the United States to pursue direct talks is an indication of the sense of urgency in the administration to break the stalemate in Afghanistan.
...
Afghan officials and political leaders said direct American talks with the Taliban would probably then grow into negotiations that would include the Taliban, the Afghan government, the United States and Pakistan.

In February the Taliban declared their position in a public Letter of the Islamic Emirate to the American people (pdf). The five pages letter offered talks but only towards one aim:

Afghans have continued to burn for the last four decades in the fire of imposed wars. They are longing for peace and a just system but they will never tire from their just cause of defending their creed, country and nation against the invading forces of your war­mongering government because they have rendered all the previous and present historic sacrifices to safeguard their religious values and national sovereignty. If they make a deal on their sovereignty now, it would be unforgettable infidelity with their proud history and ancestors.

Last weeks talks between the Taliban and U.S. diplomats took place in Doha, Qatar. Remarkably the Afghan government was excluded. Despite the rousing tone of the Reuters report below the positions that were exchanged do not point to a successful conclusion:

According to one Taliban official, who said he was part of a four-member delegation, there were "very positive signals" from the meeting, which he said was conducted in a "friendly atmosphere" in a Doha hotel.

"You can't call it peace talks," he said. "These are a series of meetings for initiating formal and purposeful talks. We agreed to meet again soon and resolve the Afghan conflict through dialogue."
...
The two sides had discussed proposals to allow the Taliban free movement in two provinces where they would not be attacked, an idea that President Ashraf Ghani has already rejected . They also discussed Taliban participation in the Afghan government.

"The only demand they made was to allow their military bases in Afghanistan ," said the Taliban official.
...
"We have held three meetings with the U.S. and we reached a conclusion to continue talks for meaningful negotiations," said a second Taliban official.
...
"However, our delegation made it clear to them that peace can only be restored to Afghanistan when all foreign forces are withdrawn ," he said.

This does not sound promising:

It is difficult to see how especially the last mutually exclusive positions can ever be reconciled.

The Taliban are ready to accept a peaceful retreat of the U.S. forces. That is their only offer. They may agree to keep foreign Islamist fighters out of their country. The U.S. has no choice but to accept. It is currently retreating to the cities and large bases. The outlying areas will fall to the Taliban. Sooner or later the U.S. supply lines will be cut. Its bases will come under fire.

There is no staying in Afghanistan. A retreat is the only issue the U.S. can negotiate about. It is not a question of "if" but of "when".

The Soviet war in Afghanistan took nine years. The time was used to build up a halfway competent government and army that managed to hold off the insurgents for three more years after the Soviet withdrawal. The government only fell when the Soviets cut the money line. The seventeen year long U.S. occupation did not even succeed in that. The Afghan army is corrupt and its leaders are incompetent. The U.S. supplied it with expensive and complicate equipment that does not fit Afghan needs . As soon as the U.S. withdraws the whole south, the east and Kabul will immediately fall back into Taliban hands. Only the north may take a bit longer. They will probably ask China to help them in developing their country.

The erratic empire failed in another of its crazy endeavors. That will not hinder it to look for a new ones. The immense increase of the U.S. military budget, which includes 15,000 more troops, points to a new large war. Which country will be its next target?

james , Jul 30, 2018 3:26:49 PM | 2

thanks b.. it would be good if the exceptional warmongering nation could go home, but i am not fully counting on it.. i liked your quote here "The U.S. military aptly demonstrated its excellent logistic capabilities and its amazing cultural incompetence." that is ongoing.. unless the usa leaves, i think the madness continues.. i suspect the madness will continue.. the only other alternative is the usa, with the help of their good buddies - uk, ksa, qatar, uae and israel - will keep on relocating isis to afgan for future destabilization.. i watched a video peter au left from al jazzera 2017 with isis embedded in the kush mtns... until the funding for them ceases - i think the usa will have a hand in the continued madness... if the usa was serious about ending terrorism they would shut down the same middle east countries they are in bed with.. until that happens, i suspect not much will change.. i hope i am wrong..
Pft , Jul 30, 2018 3:52:04 PM | 5
I dont believe it for a second. Especially with Iran looming as a potential target. US is staying in Afghanistan also to counter China , keep opium production high and of course there is the TAPI pipeline to "protect" that is backed by US as an alternative to the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline that would have tapped Iran's South Pars gas field. A hostile or unfriendly Pakistan is just one more reason to stay

Just like US will never leave Iraq or Syria, they will stay in Afghanistan. There will be ebbs and flows, and talk of disengagement from time to time primarily for domestic consumption, but thats all it is IMO.

Jackrabbit , Jul 30, 2018 4:01:30 PM | 7
It seems that an ISIS-Taliban proxy war has begun.

That will take pressure off USA to leave. Likely gives USA an excuse to stay (to supply fight ISIS).

Uncoy , Jul 30, 2018 4:19:49 PM | 11
This is a fine recap of the situation. It's much too optimistic. The classic method of American negotiation and warfare like the Roman before them is to divide and conquer. It was very successful against the American Indians.

If the Taliban get free movement in two provinces, the Americans will demand an end to attacks on their bases, their soldiers and their agents elsewhere in Afghanistan. Just as the Iroquois Confederation enjoyed special privileges in what is now Upper New York for their help against the French, the Taliban will have special privileges in their two provinces while the Americans consolidate in the rest of Afghanistan. When the Americans feel strong enough, just as with the Iroquois, they will break the previous treaties.

After the Revolutionary War, the ancient central fireplace of the League was re-established at Buffalo Creek. The United States and the Iroquois signed the treaty of Fort Stanwix in 1784 under which the Iroquois ceded much of their historical homeland to the Americans, which was followed by another treaty in 1794 at Canandaigua which they ceded even more land to the Americans./b

Posted by: Uncoy | Jul 30, 2018 4:03:17 PM | 8

(...continuation of the comment above, somehow got posted when I pressed the return key)

Even the Soviet Union and Russians were unable to make the American respect their commitments. The United States reneged on the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty as soon as it could in 2001 (Russia was on its knees), reneged on its commitments not to expand NATO east and has built ballistic missile bases all around Russia which seem to be preparation for a pre-emptive nuclear strike/war against Russia.

The Afghanis (foolish to call them the Taliban, they are traditional Afghani patriots) have always been wise enough to annihilate any invader to the last man. This salutary policy keeps invaders out for decades at a time. The Taliban have a long row to hoe. It took almost a hundred years and several massacres to finally curb British ambitions on Afghanistan (1838 to 1919). Afghanis' best hopes rely on forging tight alliances with Pakistan and China, squeezing the Americans out completely right now.

The Americans burnt their bridges with the Russian already and are in the process of burning their bridges with Pakistan while losing influence with China. The US is very short of options right now. It's the ideal time for Afghanis to reclaim the whole territory, not leaving a single American soldier or airbase operational. They'll need a technically sophisticated ally to help them clear their skies of US drones. This role might appeal to either the Russians or the Chinese. As a training exercise, extended anti-drone warfare could be very useful.

fast freddy , Jul 30, 2018 4:24:15 PM | 12
What a great success the US achieved in destroying Yugoslavia. Murdering thousands went almost unnoticed. It was able to break up the country into a number of tiny, impoverished nations and got to put a US MIC Base in most of them.

Afghanistan is one tough nut to crack.

Bilal , Jul 30, 2018 4:39:14 PM | 13
You did not mention isis-k in your analysis. Its active mostly in eastern afghanistan in areas close to or adjacent to Pakistan (it is also controlls a small area in Jawzjan, in northern afghanistan). Many fighters are formerly pakistani taliban(not to be confused with afghan taliban who are simply called taliban). Before isis-k appeared in afghanistan, the areas which it now controls had pakistani taliban presence. TTP, or tehreek e taliban pakistan was facilitated by afghan ggovernment to settle down in these areas after they fled pakistan when its military launched a large scale offensive, Operation Zarb e Azb. The afghan government planned to use them to pressurize Pakistan, basically to use them as a bargaining chip. They operate openly in eastern afghanistan, but many of them joined isis-k.

Russians estimate isis-k's strength to be between 10k to 12k, although it might be a bit inflated number. From here they plan attacks against afghanistan and pakistan alike, mostly suicide bombings as of now. They have had fierce clashes with afghan taliban in eastern Afghanistan but have held their territory for now. Afghan army simply doesn't have the capacity in those areas to confront them. It was here that MOAB was dropped but as expected against a guerrilla force, it was ineffective in every way. But it did make headlines and has helped US in giving an impression its seriously fighting ISIS. The reports of unmarked helicopters dropping god-knows-what have also been coming from these areas. Hamid karzai mentioned that and also maria zakharova asked afghan gov. and US to investigate that which shows these are not just rumors. Recently intelligence chiefs of Pakistan, russia, iran and china as well(if i remember correctly) met in islamabad to discuss isis-k in afghanistan, no details other than this of this meeting are available.

In Northern afghanistan, in Jawzjan, fierce clashes broke out between taliban and isis-k after taliban commander in thiae areas was beheaded. ISIS-k has been beaten up pretty badly there but clashes are ongoing. Many areas have been cleared but fighting is still ongoing. An interesting aspect is taliban sources claiming that whenever they come close to a decisive victory, they have to stop operations becauae of heavy bombardment by US planes. They made similar claims when fighting daesh in eastern afghanistan. Anyway in a few days isis presence will probably be finished in Jawzjan. ISIS fighters who have survived have done so by surrendering to afghan forces. They will probably end up back in eastern afghanistan.

Red Ryder , Jul 30, 2018 4:49:21 PM | 14
Next Target for a long war?

Africa. US AFRICOM has a huge playground, tactics won't change and logistics is far easier.

There also will be a long Hybrid wr against Iran, but that will be much like the early days of Syria. Proxies as "moderates". Insurgents, not US troops. ISIS and AQ crazies will be on the ground.

The big money will go into Africa. You want to see Trillions "spent"? It will be Africa.

Robert Snefjella , Jul 30, 2018 4:55:49 PM | 15
The decision to invade Afghanistan had been taken before the 9/11 false flag coup. Had nothing much to do with the CIA's al-Qaeda mercenaries.

As I understood it, there were many agendas at work: testing weapons and making money for the MIC; controlling the lucrative (how many hundreds of billions of dollars ?) opium/ heroin production/profiteering; military bases relating to Iran, Russia, China, Pakistan and other ...stans, etc; control of oil and gas pipelines; access to increasingly valuable and sought rare earth minerals; proximity to oil and gas actual and potential.

More generally, subjugating Afghanistan was a necessary part of the 'full spectrum dominance' 'we will rule the earth' doctrine, dear til recently to too many mad hatters, and still evoking a misty eyed longing in some, no doubt.

NemesisCalling , Jul 30, 2018 5:00:17 PM | 16
Ahhh...the US produces some of the lamest euphemisms approved for all audiences; such as "Afgahn Security Forces." So sterile, innocuous. And benign. How could anyone question their plight? (We did pick up the game a little bit in Syria with "Free Syrian Army..." Can I get a hell yeah?) All the people hearing this in the US could do was shrug their shoulders and speak, "I guess I should support them." That is, of course, after we took out OBL and the mission in Afghanistan was a little more opaque. Just a little bit. Anyways...Hell, yeah! Get some!

Thanks b for the brief history. Really invaluable.

StephenLaudig , Jul 30, 2018 5:26:35 PM | 17
Afghani patriots, resisting invaders since 330 BCE... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasions_of_Afghanistan
The US military, the planet's costliest losingest military since 1946. The US military, like its munitions manufacturers, doesn't win but it does get paid and is why we can have nice things like oh, decent health care. Lack of health insurance kills more Americans than the Russians ever will. The Russians aren't the enemy, Trump is. Lobbyists are too.
Eugene , Jul 30, 2018 5:39:35 PM | 18
I haven't read anything about Blackwater wanting to replace the U.S. Military in Afghanistan. Of course, the U.S. Treasury would continue to shovel those pallet loads of newly printed $100.00 bills down the Blackwater hole. Any odds this might go forward from anyone's opinion?
Willy2 , Jul 30, 2018 5:45:04 PM | 19
- The US already started to plan an invasion of Afghanistan in januari & february of 2001.
adam gadahn , Jul 30, 2018 5:45:40 PM | 20
robin cook before he was murdered stated that alqueda was a cia data base.
i believe bresinski knew obl as tim osman who was later killed by cia mi6 man omar blah blah sheikh bhutto of pakisyan was assasinated after spilling the beans about sheikh.

christopher bolleyn on you tube will give you the sp on what 9 and 11 was shirley we are past the point of the offecal theory.
the turd burger that is the official theory is clearly the worst and lowest grade of all the conspiracy theories.
the taliban where in barbera bushes texas talking lithium opium and oil pipelines with the paedo bush crime syndicate before 9 and 11

marvin bush ran security at the twin towers

christopher bollyn is the go to man in these regardings

http://www.bollyn.com/

Peter AU 1 , Jul 30, 2018 5:55:31 PM | 21
The US wants peace talks but wants to keep its bases in Afghanistan. US under Trump has built new bases in Syria, Iraq, Kuwait.
SDF have been talking with Syrian government, and US in Talks with Taliban. Are these just moves to buy the US a little time until it launches the war Trump has been building the US military up for.
dahoit , Jul 30, 2018 6:00:22 PM | 22
Trump is?What about the neocons who started this f*ck up.
adam gadahn , Jul 30, 2018 6:02:02 PM | 23
alas not a nice number 13 bilal

isis is israeli counter gang with support of usa usa and the city of london,ukrainian,polish,uk sas,cia,kiwi,aussie,jordanian and donmeh satanic house of saud.

talking of isis as if it is real entity rather than a frank kitson gang counter gang and pseudo gang is polluting the well.

who has been providing extraction helicopters from syriana for the last 14 months.
who has been washing these bearded devils operating on them in kosher field hospitals making them well shiny and new
who?
scchhhhh you know who

Peter AU 1 , Jul 30, 2018 6:13:36 PM | 24
From Russian Ministry of Foriegn Affairs 25 March 2018.

http://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/3139715
"We are alarmed by the growing number of terrorist activities being carried out by the Taliban who stage armed attacks across Afghanistan, as well as by the increased ISIS presence in Afghanistan's northern provinces that border CIS countries.

We are concerned about reports regarding the use of helicopters without any identification marks in many parts of Afghanistan that are delivering terrorists and arms to the Afghan branch of this terrorist organisation. We believe that reports to this effect made by Afghan officials should be thoroughly investigated."

Willy2 , Jul 30, 2018 6:27:53 PM | 25
- Of course. The US wants to keep its bases in Afghanistan. Surprise, surprise.
In 2002 when ABC corporate propaganda showed Special Forces rounding up village Hajji, the writing was on the wall. Afghanistan is a Holy War run by incompetents for a profit. The only question is when will the Westerners withdraw from the Hindu Kush and how disastrous it will be. Americans cannot afford the unwinnable war's blood and treasure. The US's Vietnam War (1956 to 1975) ended for the same reasons. That war ushered in the Reagan Revolution and the Triumph of the Oligarchy. The consequences of the breakup of the Atlantic Alliance will be even more severe.

Posted by: VietnamVet , Jul 30, 2018 7:06:37 PM | 26

In 2002 when ABC corporate propaganda showed Special Forces rounding up village Hajji, the writing was on the wall. Afghanistan is a Holy War run by incompetents for a profit. The only question is when will the Westerners withdraw from the Hindu Kush and how disastrous it will be. Americans cannot afford the unwinnable war's blood and treasure. The US's Vietnam War (1956 to 1975) ended for the same reasons. That war ushered in the Reagan Revolution and the Triumph of the Oligarchy. The consequences of the breakup of the Atlantic Alliance will be even more severe.

Posted by: VietnamVet | Jul 30, 2018 7:06:37 PM | 26 /div

james , Jul 30, 2018 7:21:13 PM | 27
@uncoy.. i basically see it like you, however another proxy war involving usa-russia-china sounds like a running theme now...

@13 bilal.. good post.. i agree about the analysis missing much on isis presence in afgan as @6 jr also points out.. i think it is a critical bit of the puzzle.. it appears the usa is using isis as a proxy force, as obama previously stated with regard to syria... the usa just can't seem to help themselves with their divide and conquer strategy using isis as part of it's methodology... it's exact opposite of what they profess..

@18 eugene.. isn't blackwater or whatever they're called now - headquartered in uae? perfect place for them, lol... right on top of yemen, afgan, and etc. etc.. if isis can't do the job for the west thru their good friends ksa, uae - well, then maybe they can pay a bit more and get blackwater directly involved too..

dltravers , Jul 30, 2018 7:41:30 PM | 28
Trump is serious when he said he would talk to anybody. The CIA is alleged to have been stirring the pot with Islamic militants prior to the Soviet invasion when the country went full socialist. I would suspect the Russians had a hand in that in 1978. US intelligence was said to be helping along the backlash to socialism by Islamic militants back then in 1978. The CIA station chief was promptly assassinated the next year.

Obviously you could dump 600,000 NATO and US soldiers into the country and not control it short of executing every Muslim. What a foolish endeavor but what would you expect from these buffoons and their death cult? These human sacrifices are holy to them. They worship blood, death, power and money.

With their loss in Syria the NEOCONS can now make peace with the Taliban and use them and ISIS to push into old Soviet Central Asia in an attempt to deny them what the Anglo American Zionist alliance cannot have at this time, control of the commodities.

China will slide right in and take it all at some point once exhaustion sets into place. Even the Brits knew when it was time to leave India and their Middle Eastern holdings. They realized the costs of containment would wipe out their country.

Harry , Jul 30, 2018 7:53:57 PM | 29
@ Patrick Armstrong | 10
I still think Trump wants to cut the Gordian Knot and get the USA out of all this crap. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/30/trump-i-am-ready-to-meet-with-iran-anytime-they-want-to.html

No he doesnt, along with Israel and neocons. There was already nuclear deal, and US was out of "all this crap", so why introduce Gordian Knot if he doesnt want it?

What Trump demands is Iran's surrender. 'b discussed it at length some time ago, the list of Trump's demands is completely ridiculous and the goal is Iran as a client state.

From its side, Iran is refusing to even meet Trump, two reasons: 1) If Iran agrees to meet, it would mean they agree to renegotiate the deal, which they dont. 2) US word isnt worth a toilet paper, so any negotiations is meaningless. Plus US list of demands makes even endeavor to negotiate dead from the get go.

Curtis , Jul 30, 2018 7:54:05 PM | 30
Congress went along with the Pentagon's 7 countries in 5 years plan. No investigation of 9/11 or even consideration of Ron Paul's bringing in an old idea of Letters of Marque and Reprisal.
As to the US leaving the warlords in power to continue opium production, etc, Van Buren (We Meant Well book) said some of the same happened in Iraq with some sheikhs still holding power in local areas. General Garner looked forward to going in to rebuild (and was promising quick elections) but was shocked to see no protection of ministries (except oil) which were looted and burned. And then Bremer was put in charge. Complete mismanagement of the war, the aftermath, etc. Like someone once said, if they were doing these things at random you would expect them to get it right once in a while.

The Kunduz Airlift which allowed Pakistan a corridor to fly out Pak officials, Taliban, and possibly al Qaeda was yet another snafu like paying Pakistan to supposedly block any escape from their side of Tora Bora only to have a long convoy leave at night. It made one wonder about the US supposed air superiority/domination. Again, complete mismanagement.

A comparison to the end situation in VietNam 1975 is apt.

Peter AU 1 , Jul 30, 2018 8:11:57 PM | 31
Trump meeting Rouhani. Trump saays he wants a better deal. The nuke agreement took years to negotiate and Iran accepted far more stringent inspections than any other country signed up NPT. There is nothing more for Iran to negotiate other than to give away their sovereignty.
The offer of a meeting by Trump is more along the line of "we tried to avoid war".
The US under Trump have scrapped the nuke agreement and made demands that are impossible for Iran to meet without giving away its sovereignty.
Red Ryder , Jul 30, 2018 8:21:00 PM | 32
Erik Prince's plan for fighting in Afghanistan.
He presented it to the WH. Military rejected it.
He is no longer Blackwater-connected.
Frontier Services Group Ltd. is his new military-security services corp.
He has extensive contracts with the Chinese government and their SOEs overseas.

This was a trailer he made to explain his concept. He still wants to do this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjhPSaqBj1c

spudski , Jul 30, 2018 8:38:09 PM | 33
Peter AU 1 @31

I fear you're absolutely right.

occidentosis , Jul 30, 2018 9:08:50 PM | 34
did you see General Souleimani answer's to Trump rabid tweet

it went like this

Our president doesnt lower himself to answer someone like.I, a soldier answer someone like you, you re someone who speaks in the vocabulary of a cabaret owner and a gambling house dealer.(paraphrasing saker has the video on his site)

and then he went on to describe how your cowad troops wore adult diapers in Afghanistan and Iraq

fairleft , Jul 30, 2018 9:25:35 PM | 35
China will slide right in and take it all at some point once exhaustion sets into place.

dltravers @28

No. China, being development-oriented rather than imperialist, will leave Afghanistan alone. China and Russia, but especially China, requires an Afghanistan that is not a U.S.-controlled terrorist base. Because China needs the oil/gas link that it is building through Pakistan to access Gulf energy resources, and that energy corridor would be the primary target of U.S.-hired mercenaries ('terrorists').

How Afghanistan manages itself in the post-U.S. era is Afghan business, but it will almost certainly involve the Pashtun majority (in the form of the 'Taliban') retaking power in Kabul but with the traditional huge amounts of autonomy for the provinces. That arrangement reduces pressure by Pashtun nationalists in Pakistan against Pakistan's government, and in general seems to be the long-term stable set up, and stability is what China has to have in Afghanistan.

Now is the time with perfect China partner Khan and the Pakistan military firmly in power. Not instant, but over the next two years I think we'll see the Taliban's fighting capacity hugely improve, with transfers of supplies, weapons and intelligence from Pakistan. It would be very smart for Trump to get out in 2019. History is going to accelerate in that region.

S , Jul 30, 2018 9:31:48 PM | 36
Which country will be its next target?

I know I'm in the minority here, but I worry a lot about Venezuela. See, it's a perfect fit for the U.S. economy. U.S. shale oil is way too light to be useful, while Venezuelan oil is way too heavy to be useful. They are destined for each other, i.e. to be mixed into a blend that would be a good fit U.S. refineries. Plus, Venezuela is very import-dependent and thus would make for a good vassal. It also has a rabid capitalist class that will do anything -- any kind of atrocity or false flag -- to return to the good old days of exploitation. "But Venezuela has a lot of arms!", I hear you counter. True, but the people are severely demoralized because of the extreme economic hardship. Think of the USSR in late 80s/early 90s. It had the most powerful military in the world, and yet people were so demoralized and disillusioned with the old system that they simply chose not to defend it. Same thing may happen in Venezuela. After Colombia has signed peace accords with FARC, U.S. has been steadily increasing its military presence in Colombia. I think there is a very real possibility of a naval blockade combined with supply lines/air raids from Colombia supporting the "Free Venezuelan Army" assembled from Venezuelan gangs and revanchist capitalists and foreign mercenaries. It would be logistically impossible for Russia or China to provide military help to far-away Venezuela. Neighbors will not come to the aid of Venezuela either as there is a surge of pro-U.S. right-wing governments in the region.

ben , Jul 30, 2018 9:33:25 PM | 37
Any moves the U$A makes will have to be approved according to which natural resources their corporate masters covet at any particular moment. Lithium and other rare earth minerals, strategic importance, whatever the corporate form needs to stay on top globally, will dictate what the empire does.

Leave Afghanistan? I very much doubt it.

DJT will do what the "puppet masters" desire. Just like all his predecessors.

Profits uber alles!!

fairleft , Jul 30, 2018 9:36:15 PM | 38
'Correction': No reliable census has been done in decades, but I don't think the Pashtun are the majority in Afghanistan. They
are by far the largest minority however. British 'divide and rule' stategists long ago deliberately separated them into Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Peter AU 1 , Jul 30, 2018 9:40:53 PM | 39
s 36

Venezuela and Iran have two things in common. Both have large oil reserves and neither recognize Israel.
Trump's wars will be about destroying enemies of Israel, and at the same time, achieving global energy dominance.

Chipnik , Jul 30, 2018 9:58:21 PM | 40
I've posted this before. I met a Taliban leader and his two guards in a brutal area during the Hearts and Minds Schtick, preparatory to Cheney getting all the oil and gas, and copper and iron and coming coal lease awards.

He was a nice guy, the Taliban leader. His guards looked at me with absolute death in their eyes. Not wanting them to hear him, as we finished our tea, the Taliban leader leaned close, then whispered, 'I love your Jesus, but I hate your Crusaders.'

And I take issue with the US 'incompetence' meme. Ever since Cheney hosted the Taliban in Texas in 1998, trying to get a TAPI pipeline, the US has deliberately and cunningly taken over the country, assassinated the local-level leadership, and installed their foreign Shah, first Karzai, then Ghani.

In that time of occupation, 18 years, Pentagon MIC disappeared TRILLIONS in shrink-wrapped pallets of $100s, and ballooned from $340B a year, to now Trump is saying $840B a year.

That's not incompetence. Just the opposite.

Now, to honor my Afghan friends, who love to joke even after 35+ years of machine warfare, a joke I wrote in their honor:

Ring ring ring ring

"Office of the President of the United States, Ronald Reagan!"

"BRRZZZBRRZZZV..."

"Hold please."

President Reagan, it's the Iranian ambassador!"

"Well hello Mr. Assinabindstani, what can I do for you?"

"BRRZZZBRRZZZV..."

"Well I'll get my staff right on it."

[Intercomm clicks]

"Hey Ollie, the Ayatollah wants more guns! Step on it!"

Chipnik , Jul 30, 2018 10:10:55 PM | 41
38

Actually, the British paid an annual tithe-tribute the the Afghan king to stop raiding their India holdings, and agreed to a neutral zone between them. Then when the British pulled out, they declared the neutral zone as Pakistan and shrunk India away from Pashtun territory to create a bigger divide. The Afghan leaders had no say in the matter. I believe Baluchistan was also carved away. At one time, Afghan control extended from Persia to the Indus Valley. There is no way to defeat a nation of warriors who created a kingdom that vast, while William the Conqueror was still running around in bear skin diapers.

dh , Jul 30, 2018 11:03:19 PM | 42
@41 'Afghan control extended from Persia to the Indus Valley.'

You are probably referring to the Khalji Dynasty, a brutal bunch, who ruled India from 1290 to 1320 by which time William the Conqueror was long dead. You would be a lot more credible if you got your history right.

Lozion , Jul 30, 2018 11:30:50 PM | 43
@42 dh is correct. Afghan territory was in the Persian sphere of influence much longer compared to the Mughal/British/Indian periods..
Charles Michael , Jul 31, 2018 12:19:59 AM | 44
IMHO the military Budget increase, and what an increase it is!
is part of worsening an already outrageous situation to reach a caricatural point. Typical of trump repeated special "art".
Of course Nobody in USA, no President can go against the MIC and Pentagon.
But money is cheap when you print it.

It is sugaring the intended shrinking of foreign deployments (as in NATO), closure of "facilities" and replacing them officially with total deterrence capacities (Space Forces anybody ?).
While keeping classical projection capacities for demonstration against backward tribes.

Guerrero , Jul 31, 2018 12:21:04 AM | 45
That is an excellent account. Who can help rooting for the Afghanis to get their country back?

The economics of empire are always upside down; the homeland people end up shelling out for it.

Hoarsewhisperer , Jul 31, 2018 12:26:51 AM | 46
...
From its side, Iran is refusing to even meet Trump, two reasons: 1) If Iran agrees to meet, it would mean they agree to renegotiate the deal, which they dont. 2) US word isnt worth a toilet paper, so any negotiations is meaningless. Plus US list of demands makes even endeavor to negotiate dead from the get go.
Posted by: Harry | Jul 30, 2018 7:53:57 PM | 29

Tru-ish but Trump's latest offer is, according to the MSM, "no pre-conditions." It's quite likely that Iran's allies have advised the Iranians to tell Trump to Go F*ck yourself (if you feel you must), but then satisfy yourselves that Trump's No Preconditions means what Iran wants it to mean.

Trump jumped into the NK and Putin talks first because both were eager to talk. Iran will be a good test of Trump's seduction skills. All he's got to do is persuade the Iranians that talking is more useful than swapping long-distance insults. Iranians are rusted onto logical principles and Trump will find a way to appeal to that trait, imo.

Ian , Jul 31, 2018 12:41:07 AM | 47
Which country will be its next target?

Iran.

Debsisdead , Jul 31, 2018 1:11:58 AM | 48
It's too late for the afghanis who have been driven into the urban areas during the regulaar 'Afghanistanisation' campaigns. Most of them will have become hooked on consumerism and the necessity of dollars.
That leaves only two options for the Taliban when they take over as they undoubtedly will altho that is likely to mean having to tolerate clutches of obese amerikans lurking in some Px strewn green zone, the inhabitants of which are likely to have less contact with people from Afghanistan than any regular user of a Californian shopping mall. The new government can ignore the consumerists even when these rejects insist on getting lured into some nonsense green revolution - the danger with this isn't the vapid protests which can easily be dealt with by fetching a few mobs of staunch citizens from rural Afghanistan who will quickly teach them that neither cheeseburgers nor close captioned episodes of daytime television provide sufficient nutrition to handle compatriots raised on traditional food and Islam. Or the new administration can do as other traditional regimes have done many times over the last 80 years or so, purge the consumerists by disappearing the leadership and strewing empty lots in the urban areas with mutilated corpses of a few of the shitkicker class consumerists. That option can cause a bit of a fuss but it (the fuss) generally only lasts as long as the purge.

I suspect the Afghan government will favour the latter approach but they may try to hold off until the North has been brought back into line. OTH, consumerism is a highly contagious condition so, unless the North can be pacified speedily which seems unlikely, initially at least the Taliban adminsitration may have to fight on two fronts, agin the North while they nip urban consumerists in the bud before those confused fools can cause any highly publicised in the west but in actuality, low key, attempted insurrection.
My advice to the gaming, TV or cheeseburger addicted inhabitants of Kabul would be to volunteer your services to the amerikan military as a 'translator' asap and join yer cobbers in California.
It is unlikely that you will bump into Roman Brady especially not when he is in one of his avuncular moods, but if you stay outta Texas, Florida or any other part of flyover amerika chocka with alcohol induced blowhardism, you will discover than amerikan racism isn't as lethal as it once was.

Apart from having to ignore being jostled in the line at fast food joints and being loudly and incorrectly termed a motherf**in sand n***er mid-jostle. Certainly a whole lot less lethal than trying to cover your Fortnite jones by waving a badly copywritten sign in front of the al-Jazeera cameras for a one month battle pass .

AV17 , Jul 31, 2018 1:49:03 AM | 49
This retreat is to focus resources on Iran. Nuclear Winter it is!
Daniel , Jul 31, 2018 2:05:21 AM | 50
What was happening in Kabul, Afghanistan less than 8 hours after the WTC Towers turned into dust in midair? Who here remembers the massive bombing/cruise missile attack?

Here is CNN's transcript:

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: "Well, Joie, it's about 2:30 in the morning here in Kabul. We've been hearing explosions around the perimeter of the city. We're in a position here which gives us a view over the whole city. We just had an impact, perhaps a few miles away.

"If I listen, you can hear the ripple of explosions around the city. Perhaps you heard there. The fifth explosion -- sixth explosion, I think. Gun bursts and star bursts in the air. Tracer fire is coming up out of the city. I hear aircraft flying above the city of Kabul. Perhaps we've heard half a dozen to 10 detonations on the perimeter of the city, some coming from the area close to the airport. I see on the horizon what could be a fire on the horizon, close, perhaps, to where the airport might be. A flash came up then from the airport. Some ground fire coming up here in Kabul."

"I've been in Belgrade and I've been in Baghdad and seen cruise missiles arrive in both those cities. The detonations we're hearing in Kabul right now certainly sound like the detonations of loud missiles that are coming in. "

"Certainly -- certainly it would appear that the Afghan defense systems have detected a threat in the air. They are launching what appears to be anti-aircraft defense systems at the moment. Certainly, I can see that fire that was blazing on the horizon. It was a faint yellow; it's now a bright orange blazing. Several other detonations going off around the city, multiple areas. Rockets appear to be taking off from one end of the airport. I can see that perhaps located about 8 or 9 miles away from where we stand, Joie."

The bombing/explosions continue for 10+ minutes of this broadcast.

Then, they cut to WILLIAM COHEN, FORMER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: who says the US is only collecting intelligence. He says what we're seeing must be part of the "Civil War" (despite the fact that neither side had an air force or cruise missiles). The Pentagon later denies knowing anything about it.

Then, CNN returns to Nic Robertson, who- within 15 minutes of his first report - begins to change his tune. Suddenly, the jet sounds are not mentioned. The cruise missiles (jet engines) have transformed into possible rockets. The airport fire is now an ammunition dump.

And voila! They lose their connection and Nic will not be heard from again. And this little bit of history will essentially disappear.

CNN video archive (attack report starts at 7:43).

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/11/bn.61.html

NPR had a reporter in Kabul that night. He apparently didn't notice the massive bombing, at least in his memoir 15 years later.

Mishko , Jul 31, 2018 2:07:19 AM | 51
Dear Mr. B,
"All these U.S. mistakes made in the early days are still haunting the country."
These mistakes are by design. To cause and keep causing destabilisation.

I like to refer to it as the 3-letter Scrabble method of doing things.
Me living in the Netherlands as I do, let me take the example of Greece.
Greece had its regime changed in 1948 (Wiki says 46-49).
And how is Greece doing these days? ...

Plasma , Jul 31, 2018 2:16:47 AM | 52
@37 yep, gotta agree with the more passimistic outlook here. Personally i'll eat my shoes if US leaves Afghanistan within any reasonable time frame. In addition to plentiful natural resources, there are very influential vested interests in Afghanistans booming opium industry.
Quentin , Jul 31, 2018 2:20:09 AM | 53
Off topic: Andrei Nekrasov's 'Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes' can be viewed in full on You Tube at this moment (31 July, 08:15 Amsterdam time). Can it also be seen in the USA, I wonder? How long will it take before Google take it down ? Watch it and learn about one of the main drivers of the Russia obsession.
Andreas Schlüter , Jul 31, 2018 3:35:18 AM | 54
The US (Neocon dominated) Power Elite has only one strategy left for that Region: destabilization and chaos to serve as a barrier against the Project of the Eurasian Cooperation!
See:
„Geo-Politics: The Core of Crisis and Chaos and the Nightmares of the US Power Elite" https://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2016/08/01/geo-politics-the-core-of-crisis-and-chaos-the-nightmares-of-the-us-power-elite/
And on the recent developments:
"US Politics, Russia, China and Europe, Madness and Strategies": https://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2018/07/22/us-politics-russia-china-and-europe-madness-and-strategies/
Best regards
Harry , Jul 31, 2018 4:35:59 AM | 55
@ Hoarsewhisperer | 46
Tru-ish but Trump's latest offer is, according to the MSM, "no pre-conditions." It's quite likely that Iran's allies have advised the Iranians to tell Trump to Go F*ck yourself (if you feel you must), but then satisfy yourselves that Trump's No Preconditions means what Iran wants it to mean.

White House just explained what Trump's "no preconditions" means: 1) Iran should at the core change how it deals with its own people. 2) Change its evil stance in foreign policy. 3) Agree on nuclear agreement which would REALLY prevent them making a nuke.

In other words, Iran should capitulate and become a client state, thats what Trump means by "no preconditions."

venice12 , Jul 31, 2018 4:53:03 AM | 56
@eugene #18

https://taskandpurpose.com/blackwater-eric-prince-afghan-war-plan/

"Blackwater Founder Erik Prince's Afghan War Plan Just Leaked, And It's Terrifying "

Tis was 8 months ago.

et Al , Jul 31, 2018 5:04:41 AM | 57
Afghanistan, the graveyard of empires!

When I heard old hand Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (what a name!) was heading back it was clear that things were afoot.

China's been trying to get in for a while, the Mes Aynak mine for example, but nothing much has happened.

Afghanistan is sitting on huge amounts of valuable mineral resources (an estimated $3t) but remains dirt poor...

ashley albanese , Jul 31, 2018 6:42:37 AM | 58
In any hot clash with China the U S would be very exposed in Afghanistan .
Mark2 , Jul 31, 2018 6:51:36 AM | 59
At this advanced stage of American insanity, I don't see why the devil should have all the best tunes. I'm sick of the yanks doing this shit in over people's county's ! While they stuff there fat faces with burgers and donuts! The dirty games they play on over country's, should now be played in America with all the brutality that they have used on others. Until that happens things world wide will continue to detriate. Natural justice is all that remains. They'v curupted all else.
Yeah, Right , Jul 31, 2018 7:09:00 AM | 60
@19 "The US already started to plan an invasion of Afghanistan in januari & february of 2001."

Well, to be fair the USA probably has plans to invade lots of countries.

Indeed, it would be more interesting to consider how many countries there are that the USA *doesn't* have invasion plans gathering dust on the shelves.

Not many, I would suggest.

Mark2 , Jul 31, 2018 7:41:56 AM | 61
It's just been reported on the bbc news---- the man responsible for the Manchester bombing had been 'rescued from Lybia when Gadafi was overthrown and tracked ever since. Even in Britain up to the day of the bombing ! And now on this post we discuss America uk transporting terrorists from Syria to Afghanistan . Not to mention the white helmet bunch and where Ther going! The Manchester bombing, Westminster bridge and London Bridge atacks were done by the Tory party to win a general election ! This is the reality of the world we live in.full on oppression !!!
TG , Jul 31, 2018 8:26:48 AM | 62
Indeed, I agree with the sentiments here. But missing a big part of the picture.

Afghanistan and Pakistan have sky-high fertility rates. Forget the rubbish peddled by economist-whores like Milton Friedman, under these conditions no country without an open frontier has ever developed into anything other than a larger mass of poverty. In Pakistan something like half the children are so malnourished that they grow up stunted, and it is this misery that is starting slow population growth. Pakistan is yet another example of the Malthusian holocaust, which is not a global catastrophe: it is slow grinding poverty that results when people have more children than they can support.

Bottom line: these places will remain poor and unstable no matter what lunacy the United States does or does not do. The traditional approach to such places is to leave them alone, and only keep them from escaping. Bottled up, the Afghanis and Pakistanis will kill only each other. 9/11 is a consequence of allowing people from these places free access to the Untied States.

The 'war on terror' is a consequence of 'there shall be open borders.' It's a big and messy world, and even if the government of the United States was not criminally incompetent, there would be a lot of misery and hatred in it. Open borders means that now the Untied States has to intervene in every country all over the world to ensure that nowhere can there develop terrorist cells. An impossible task.

Charles Michael @ 44

I agree with the caricature nature of much of this. I don't think there will be a next target. The MIC has become bloated while Iran, Syria, Russia, China are turning out true fighters as well as stronger economic planning.

financial matters , Jul 31, 2018 9:19:51 AM | 63
The US still has some resources and some use but needs to continue to make friends in the pattern of Kim and Putin and give up on its self defeating economic and military sabotage planning which has been exposed as morally bankrupt as well.

[Aug 02, 2018] The Trump Doctrine Has Foreign Policy Elites Pulling Out Their Hair by Harry J. Kazianis

Notable quotes:
"... On the one hand, he loves to flatter and compliment China's President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin -- that angers the Beltway foreign policy intelligentsia to no end, myself included. But, and of a more important note, Trump also plays hard-nosed geopolitics as good as anyone, arming Ukraine, sending ships into the South China Sea, hitting Moscow with more sanctions and working more closely with Taiwan. ..."
"... When you add in a growing military budget, Trump might sound weak to his critics and at the podium during superpower summits, but his policies are, in fact, right out of the standard GOP foreign policy playbook. ..."
Aug 02, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

What about America's traditional great-power adversaries like Russia and China? Here and again, anyone who studies international politics for a living is likely ripping their hair out, as Trump does not conform to anything that they understand.

On the one hand, he loves to flatter and compliment China's President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin -- that angers the Beltway foreign policy intelligentsia to no end, myself included. But, and of a more important note, Trump also plays hard-nosed geopolitics as good as anyone, arming Ukraine, sending ships into the South China Sea, hitting Moscow with more sanctions and working more closely with Taiwan.

When you add in a growing military budget, Trump might sound weak to his critics and at the podium during superpower summits, but his policies are, in fact, right out of the standard GOP foreign policy playbook.

Harry J. Kazianis ( @grecianformula ) is director of defense studies at the Center for the National Interest and executive editor of its publishing arm The National Interest. Previously, he led the foreign policy communications efforts of the Heritage Foundation, and served as editor-in-chief of The Diplomat and as a fellow at CSIS:PACNET. The views expressed are his own.

[Aug 02, 2018] Prof Cohen beating Max Boot like a rented mule

Max Book demonstrates typical neocon Chutzpah (Killing your parents, then complaining you're an orphan) and attacks like rabid dog. Intelligcully he is nto equl to Cohen.
Q: What's the difference between a rabid dot and Max Boot? A: You think there is difference
Aug 02, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

[Aug 02, 2018] The plot thins How gel became a liquid and the whole Novichok affair began to smell to high heaven by George Galloway

Notable quotes:
"... "military-grade lethal nerve agent" ..."
"... Moreover, so little of their "training" ..."
"... "training manual" ..."
"... Some things are now clearer though. The settled narrative has been for months that the initial 'Novichok' attack on the Skripals had been via a "gel" ..."
"... The government claims that the #Novichok poison was a "gel" smeared onto Sergei Skripal's "front door handle". If the #Novichok was in the form of a gel, how could it be in a perfume bottle which are only designed to hold liquids? pic.twitter.com/BV0pUY5uAM ..."
"... More importantly, if this narrative were to be accepted, it doesn't explain how long (several hours) the substance took to work, nor the fact that it became effective on both Skripals at precisely the same moment – despite the huge divergence in their size, weight, age, and state of health. ..."
"... Mr Rowley of course was a criminal – he had been imprisoned for possession of 11 wraps of heroin in Salisbury only a couple of years before – and is still a daily drug-user. In those circumstances, in any normal police investigation, Mr Rowley would himself be a suspect rather than only a victim in this crime. So far as we know this is not the case, though no-one can ask him in his safe house, even through his non-existent television or undelivered newspapers. ..."
"... American filmmaker and radio host Lee Stranahan, who works out of Washington DC, was a house guest of mine last week. During his brief visit to England, he took his camera to Salisbury. Without wishing to spoil the documentary he's working on, I know he won't mind me saying that of the dozens of people he spoke to at the heart of the crime scene, not a single one of them believed the state version of events. ..."
"... "Russian criminals," ..."
"... "Not the Russian state then?" ..."
"... "They are the least likely suspects," ..."
"... "It was Ukraine." ..."
"... "military-grade deadly nerve agent." ..."
"... Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! ..."
Jul 24, 2018 | www.rt.com
'Novichok' survivor Charlie Rowley is in a "safe house" but has been denied access to television and newspapers, according to his brother. The ever-stranger case of the Salisbury-Amesbury poisonings gets curiouser and curiouser. Whoever said 'Novichok' was a "military-grade lethal nerve agent" doesn't know their tables.

For a program which Boris Johnson told us had been 10 years in the making, had cost (presumably) millions of dollars to develop (and "train" agents to put poison on a doorknob), a 20-percent success rate must have been a bitter disappointment.

Four out of five of those affected by 'Novichok' – Sergei and Yulia Skripal, Detective Sergeant Bailey, and Charlie Rowley – have survived the contact, with only poor Dawn Sturgess, a homeless alcoholic, succumbing to its "deadly" effects.

Read more 'Curiouser and Curiouser': Salisbury, the Skripals & the epic failure of the British Fairy Tale

A polythene bag would have been a rather more effective method of assassination.

Moreover, so little of their "training" had the assassins absorbed that they apparently "discarded" this valuable deadly nerve agent in a perfume bottle in a park, coincidentally close to the bench on which the Skripals had been found slumped four months previous. The bottle miraculously evaded the dragnet of "hundreds of anti-terror police" working on the case. Thus discarded, the perfume bottle carelessly provided evidence which could well lead to the indictment of the criminals involved. Doubtless such carelessness was not in the Russian "training manual" that Mr Johnson said was in the possession of British intelligence.

No information has emerged as to when or where Mr Rowley and/or the late Ms Sturgess happened upon this perfume bottle, or why in the middle of the swirl of the Salisbury events they picked it up, took it home, but either waited until the fateful day to spray it or alternatively the bottle had lain unattended for weeks – even months – despite the fine-tooth-comb search of the park by the authorities.

Some things are now clearer though. The settled narrative has been for months that the initial 'Novichok' attack on the Skripals had been via a "gel" on their front doorknob (in accordance with the manual and the 10-year training program). Not many believe this any longer, although unfortunately the taxpayer is committed to a way-above-market-price compulsory purchase of the house.

Apart from anything else, it is difficult to envisage a gel being dispensed via a spray from a perfume bottle.

The government claims that the #Novichok poison was a "gel" smeared onto Sergei Skripal's "front door handle".
If the #Novichok was in the form of a gel, how could it be in a perfume bottle which are only designed to hold liquids? pic.twitter.com/BV0pUY5uAM

-- Ian56 (@Ian56789) July 19, 2018

More importantly, if this narrative were to be accepted, it doesn't explain how long (several hours) the substance took to work, nor the fact that it became effective on both Skripals at precisely the same moment – despite the huge divergence in their size, weight, age, and state of health.

It has always seemed much more plausible to me that the Skripals were attacked either in the restaurant where they had a leisurely full lunch, and where Mr Skripal was initially reported as behaving oddly towards the end of the restaurant experience, or on the short walk from the restaurant to the park bench, or on the bench itself. This would be far more consistent with their simultaneous collapse and, of course, would explain the perfume bottle discarded nearby.

Read more We want to hear from Scotland Yard, not media reports on Skripals' case – Russian envoy to UK

The perfume bottle being thrown away at all casts significant doubt that this attack was by a state (any state) actor at all, unless that state actor wanted the substance to be found and wanted false inferences of its provenance to be drawn. It makes it much more likely to me at least that the assailants sprayed something at the Skripals for criminal rather than political purposes and for reasons we can only, for now, speculate upon.

Mr Rowley of course was a criminal – he had been imprisoned for possession of 11 wraps of heroin in Salisbury only a couple of years before – and is still a daily drug-user. In those circumstances, in any normal police investigation, Mr Rowley would himself be a suspect rather than only a victim in this crime. So far as we know this is not the case, though no-one can ask him in his safe house, even through his non-existent television or undelivered newspapers.

It will be evident that I think little of the official state narrative in the Salisbury-Amesbury affair, but you'd be surprised at the kind of people who agree with me.

American filmmaker and radio host Lee Stranahan, who works out of Washington DC, was a house guest of mine last week. During his brief visit to England, he took his camera to Salisbury. Without wishing to spoil the documentary he's working on, I know he won't mind me saying that of the dozens of people he spoke to at the heart of the crime scene, not a single one of them believed the state version of events.

I myself spoke to a senior British Army officer at a black-tie event in London last week. There were hundreds of them there, so I'm not giving his identity away. He asked me, who did I really think was responsible for the 'Novichok' affair?

"Russian criminals," I answered. "Not the Russian state then?" he pressed. "They are the least likely suspects," I said. At which point this heavily decorated soldier leant over and whispered in my ear, "It was Ukraine."

He offered no evidence, I should say, and – but for his rank and position – I wouldn't even bother relaying it. But that is what he said.

Finally, I wish to place on record another of my dissident views on this matter. I do not believe that the substance used to attack the Skripals, and which we are told killed Ms Sturgess, was 'Novichok' at all – or any other kind of "military-grade deadly nerve agent." I am on the trail of this matter and you will be the first to know when I've found it.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

George Galloway was a member of the British Parliament for nearly 30 years. He presents TV and radio shows (including on RT). He is a film-maker, writer and a renowned orator.

[Aug 02, 2018] Did God Send Us Donald Trump by Nick Pemberton

Notable quotes:
"... I Thought About Killing You ..."
"... No, my new theory about why Americans want conflict with Russia is because we know in our heart of hearts that the world is ending soon because of climate change. ..."
"... Nick Pemberton is a student at Gustavus Adolphus College. He is currently employed by Gustavus Dining Services. Nick was born and raised in St. Paul, Minnesota. He can be reached at [email protected] ..."
Jul 27, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org
Did God Send Us Donald Trump?

Photo by Durán | CC BY 2.0

And I think about killing myself
And I love myself way more than I love you, so

-- Kanye West, I Thought About Killing You

For the past two years, I have been wondering why Americans have been so ready, if not eager, to reengage the Cold War with Russia, despite Russia showing no desire to do so. A war between Russia and the United States, given the nuclear arsenals, political allegiances around the world, and the unhinged nature of our President, could destroy the entire species. And for what? Russia's alleged crime of election meddling, is negligible at best when in comparison to what America has done in Russia, or what rich Americans have done in America. Xenophobia, historical revisionism, and an embrace of fake news are all on the rise in the age of Trump, and are surely all factors for blaming Russia. But lying and bigotry, while practiced routinely, is often shameful, not something to get excited about.

No, my new theory about why Americans want conflict with Russia is because we know in our heart of hearts that the world is ending soon because of climate change. Just as born-again Christians flock to Trump as they yearn for a Revelations-style apocalypse, liberals want a showdown with Russia. If the world is ending anyways, let's end it on our own terms seems to be the rationale. Other countries have reacted with a more rational response to the potential of the world ending -- namely doing something about it. The Republican Party stands alone, in terms of rich countries, in its blatant denial of climate change. This is why Noam Chomsky correctly calls them the most dangerous organization in human history. The Democratic Party, their hapless and willing enablers, are a close second.

The Republican Party though has seemed to stand alone in their tendency to live in an 'alternative facts' universe. As bad as Democrats are, they know better ways to lie. But since the election of Donald Trump, the Democrats have become just as paranoid and dishonest as their friends across the aisle. The Republicans may see a communist behind every corner, but the Democrats see a Russian behind every corner. This makes sense because Russia, or at least the Soviet Union, was seen as communist the first time around. And the Democrats have always been scared of communism too. Now Russia isn't communist, or even close, but what world power is? Poor Mr. Putin. He has tried so hard to be a ruthless capitalist, in fact he has succeeded at this goal, but it appears that America is too hotheaded to care.

In the age of Barack Obama, those who deal with life superficially could forget the coming Armageddon. If one could get by his arrogance and kill lists, Mr. Obama seemed like a pretty cool guy. And when it came to Russia, a better diplomat. One has to wonder if the fear of Trump has become so irrational that we are scared of anything he does, and that by simply forcing him into the opposite, we will be better off. There also is surely a part of the American psyche that is just rooting for Mr. Trump to fail. And who wouldn't want that? Anything that gets him out of office as soon as possible should be welcomed, no matter the undemocratic implications of Robert Mueller's agenda. Trump failing while in office though? It is unclear who this helps besides the anti-Trump resistance who may be more interested in being morally superior than stopping Trump's vicious agenda.

Regardless, what Donald Trump brings to America is the sense that we are powerless. He is unpredictable, reckless, stupid and vengeful. We now live in constant fear, and for good reason. But the legitimate fear of Trump manifests as illegitimate fear of Putin, even though there is little implication they actually like each other. We fear Putin's authoritarian state, when it is Donald Trump who is bringing authoritarianism home. Why? Well, many of the resistance are imperialists. We want an enemy we can bomb and scapegoat, not one that pervades all of our own crumbling American institutions. It is the same reason why Republicans blame immigrants that Democrats blame Russia. Someone to blame, not something to change.

This powerlessness we feel may remind us of our powerless future that can easily be forgotten in the age of mass distraction. However, with Donald Trump, he is both the distraction and the problem. He is useful to the rich because he distracts, but perhaps he is a little too close to the real problem to be the calming relaxer that our smartphones are. One can turn on the TV and see Trump said blank, or Russia did that, but any person could quickly be reminded that not only is Trump a petty scandal, but a serious one.

Such is the reason for this extreme level of neurosis. There is endless piffling Trump material to focus on, but the material is based in something far more alarming not yet examined in a serious way. Thus, Trump, while ever present, remains enticing simply because we are not yet at the root of our fear. Many Americans may fear Donald Trump will grope them, insult them or embarrass them but the real fear is that he is deregulating and privatizing everything, and killing us all in the process. This is not the focus of discourse though. In part because mass media and their ties to polluting companies won't allow it. But also in part because it is no longer fun gossip.

Russia somehow remains fun gossip. The game of bringing down Donald Trump continues. He messes up, we scold, nothing happens. Until we drop the bomb, it's all fun and games. It's endless flirtation without a lot of action. I imagine it is how Ted Cruz deals with his sexual urges. It is a whole lot of fun talking about them, but he knows he is going to hell if he ever does them. Likewise, Russia is fun to talk about, but if we ever act on our claim that they are the greatest threat to democracy since 9/11, we will be bringing the end times early.

If Donald Trump was impeached, what would war-mongering corporate liberals talk about? Expect them to ask Russia to rig it even harder in 2020 for Mr. Trump.

Trump has reminded us of the real cause for alarm: the mass extinction thundering towards us. We feel so uneasy, but what can we do? Climate change is depressing and horrifying and we can seemingly do nothing about it on an individual level. We then opt for the only thing that we have left to control: how we all die. Foolish, I think. As bad as Trump is, there is something left to live for, and if Trump were to blow up Russia, it would not be on our terms, but on his. In fact, he is only likely to blow up Russia if he feels he is being out-machoed by the neoliberal corporate class in combative rhetoric. As it stands, America is egging on this madman for no other purpose than a sense of control over our own demise. If anything lets Trump and the corporate overlords win, this is it.

It is worth detailing what has happened in the Russia scandal, if only to show nothing has really happened. The first charge, which is denied by the accused firm, is that a Russian company known as Internet Research Agency funded 'millions of dollars' in advertisements. There has been no link established between this company and the Russian government. The accusation, if it is true, is no different from the private American companies who invest billions in elections, sometimes illegally, but often legally. The second charge is related to the Russian government and the alleged hacking of the Democratic National Committee. Once again, this is only a charge, but the information released by hackers was potentially damaging to Hillary Clinton and the Democrats, simply because it was true. The irony is that the damaging information for the DNC was that they had rigged their own primary. The accused riggers only crime is exposing the proven riggers. There are allegations of state and local hacking too, but those were present before 2016. Did Russia do it? is hardly our biggest story now. For whatever it is, even if it did prevent the corporate warmonger Hillary Clinton from winning, it should be far less concerning than the obsessive, neurotic, fear-mongering, scapegoating, ominous mood in the United States since the 2016 election.

Why were Democrats tearing their hair out over a Trump-Putin meeting last week that seemed to offer zero conclusions about how Trump felt about anything? The whole week, which was typical Donald, was just another week of bullying the weak and submitting to the strong. Putin may be able to push some buttons in his own country, but when Trump, who never apologizes for anything, ran back his own words, it was clear that NATO would live to see another day, no matter the scattered thoughts of a wimpy man in over his head. The deranged response to the deranged Donald was enough for me to think long and hard about a theory given to me by a right-wing woman this past week.

Her theory was that God had in fact sent us Donald Trump. My first thought: highly unlikely. This man lacks the morals of the people God sends to us. In fact, I can hardly think of a worse human being. There may actually be no human being worse than Trump, save maybe Charles Koch, David Koch and whoever funds Adam Sandler movies. But I thought of the alternative the corporate media was telling me: Vladimir Putin is the real President of America and the real reason the entire country is undemocratic, poor, hungry, and in prison. Also, highly unlikely.

Yet the pamphlet this woman handed me at least admitted there was no rhyme or reason to this theory other than some guy hearing it from God: "I, like many of you, was shocked by the word I received regarding Donald Trump. Trust me when I say it was given with fear and trembling." Has the fear and trembling gone away?

The only biblical evidence of this theory the pamphlet provided was 1 Corinthians 15:52: "In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed." and 1 Thessalonians 4:16: " For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first." The problem with being a fundamentalist in the age of Trump is that you are taking a book word for word that you haven't even read. If you are going to take it literally, at least look for that capital T in trump, otherwise you have to take every trumpet player as a prophet. Next thing you know Trumpettes will be swapping out their Johnny Rebel records and replacing them with Lee Morgan. Still, the trail left by the Trumpettes was no less convincing than Robert Mueller's. There was as much evidence of Trump in the Bible as Trump in Putin's pocket.

It should come to no one's surprise that Donald Trump has not exactly been pro-Russia. A broken clock may strike right twice a day, but a doomsday clock never strikes right. Glen Greenwald points out that Barack Obama was actually more pro-Russia than Trump: "you look at President Obama versus President Trump, there's no question that President Obama was more cooperative with and collaborative with Russia and the Russian agenda than President Trump. President Trump has sent lethal arms to Ukraine -- a crucial issue for Putin -- which President Obama refused to do. President Trump has bombed the Assad forces in Syria, a client state of Putin, something that Obama refused to do because he didn't want to provoke Putin. Trump has expelled more Russian diplomats and sanctioned more Russian oligarchs than [Obama] has. Trump undid the Iran deal, which Russia favored, while Obama worked with Russia in order to do the Iran deal." Once again, liberals give Mr. Trump too much credit. He has no friends. He gets along with no one. There is no coherent plan here other than corruption.

As liberals resist Putin-Trump with homophobic memes, one has to wonder, how mad are these people? Do they realize that Donald Trump is crazy, even crazier than them? Why on earth do they want Trump armed and angry?

Anyone who can still bear to follow the news knows that the corporate media is still attempting to paint Russia as an aggressive and unreasonable foe. This is all with Mr. Trump as the President! It is hard to believe that anyone is more unreasonable and aggressive than Trump, but once again, the liberals let him off the hook. Despite military on Russia's borders, years of war-mongering rhetoric and hostile economic activity, meddling in Russia's own elections, and constant racism, Russia remains a reasonable actor in its relation to the United States. One wonders why Russia tries to reason with us at all, but the nuclear weapons certainly make things a little more complicated.

For all the talk about Putin destroying American democracy, no one mentions the real threats to U.S. democracy that led to Trump's election -- absurd campaign financing, a sensationalist profit-driven corporate media, and voter suppression. No one mentions that there was a proven election scandal in the United States in 2016. This scandal was the DNC rigging its primary for Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders. If the United States was a democracy, Bernie Sanders would be President right now.

Finding no comfort or coherence in the liberal narrative, I turned once again to my new right-wing friend. She told me that all these recent storms were punishment for the sins of a liberal society. Almost, actually. But her anti-choice, anti-immigrant complaints showed me she was as far from the truth as anyone else. Still, I found this to be a fascinating denial of climate change. It was not so much that she denied that it is happening, she just denied human involvement. Which goes to show, as climate change becomes increasingly hard to ignore, religion may be the only method left to explain it away.

I have always thought the war over public opinion is a losing battle though. After all, what is the prize if you win? It is far more rewarding to fight hunger, poverty, deregulation, incarceration and war. Beat those things and we will all be too cozy to have a worthwhile opinion anyways.

The public opinion debate too often turns into a qualification of other people's mental health, as if any skepticism deserves to be medicated by the liars who tell you that you need their drugs. Climate change skeptics should have a place in public discourse. The skeptics do at times have a financial interest in keeping us fooled, but then their problem isn't their skepticism, but their dishonesty, which almost proves the real skeptics right. Otherwise, these are sincere believers who are right to be skeptical of science, which has brought us eugenics, unnecessary mental health treatments, nuclear power, and the very pollutants we now oppose, and would have kept at it without government checks and populist skeptics. If only the same amount of skepticism could be applied to Fox News and the corporate hacks Donald Trump appoints.

In the spirit of skepticism, let's look at what Trump has done on climate change and the coming end of the world. As Noam Chomsky puts it, the Republicans are racing to the precipice. Among the recent sins by Mr. Trump:

1. Rolling back the Endangered Species Act.

2. Cutting NASA Climate monitoring.

3. A move to make details of scientific studies public, making sure that scientists will have to choose between privacy rights and conducting a study.

4. Rollback of car emissions standards

5. Repeal of Water of the United States rule, which threatens clean water for 117 million Americans.

6. Repeal of lead-risk reduction program

7. Reduction of chemical bans for methylene chloride, trichloroethylene and N-Methylpyrrolidone

8. Stripping rules for coal ash waste removal.

9. Pardoning despicable ranchers Dwight and Steven Hammond

10. Appointing anti-EPA Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court

11. Pushing for drilling the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska.

If anything, God sent us Trump to punish us for our sins, not to save us from them.

Alas, while a worthwhile exercise to imagine that God indeed sent us Donald Trump, I was only reminded that the right-wing is just as bonkers as the neoliberal wing. A week of watching CNN will have you believing anything; even pushing one to believe that God really did send Donald Trump. But I will confirm, for anyone so tempted by a new way of thinking, the glove just doesn't fit. God did not send us Donald Trump. I can't prove it, but I am fairly certain. I then was left with one mystifying question: if God did not send Donald Trump, what does the corporate media have against him?

The common variable between Trumpettes and Russiaphobes is the end of the world narrative. Is it a reaction to climate change that both must make up stories about how the world will end? Is it the only power any of us have left? Is it the cancer patient learning they have a year to live and then shooting up a school just so they can end it on their own terms? Sorry, to all Cold War Warriors and all Donald Doomers, some of us just are not ready to die. There is, one has to believe, a rose growing in the concrete somewhere that makes these prophecies not worth an early exit. At the very least, must we go out on such fabricated and petty terms? Surely there is something worth dying for besides hating political correctness or Putin's soccer ball.

What is that nuclear taste? Is reviving Hillary's corpse really worth it? Or has the entire country given up and opted for a death they can blame on someone else? It is not so dissimilar from the apocalypse envisioned by the Trumpettes, who can blame every storm that Trump makes worse on the sins of a liberal society. If Trump and Putin were to blow each other up tomorrow, liberals would die on top. However, if we are to die slightly slower due to climate change, the entire industrialized world will have to know we played a part. And there will be those pesky Trumpettes who blame it on liberalism, not capitalism. To all this I say, who cares. Yes, we messed up. We shouldn't have drained the earth of all its resources, we shouldn't have elected Trump. But no need to feel guilty and embrace the end of the world! There is still good work to be done. Who will be laughing when the world dies by nuclear (a Russiaphobe wet dream) or fire (a Trumpette wet dream). There will be no moral high ground at that point. The apocalypse will be the great equalizer. Even in the age of Trump, the world is worth sticking around for, although She might as well be done with us as soon as She can be.

Surely the principle of lesser evilism still has a place, no? Can't we all agree that dying tomorrow is better than dying today? Who is more looney, the apocalyptic Trumpettes or the Russiaphobic corporate class? We will find out soon enough. While it is very likely that Trump will win reelection (poll numbers in the Republican Party for him are very positive), it is just as likely that the new Cold War will continue until Trump is gone, whether that be in 2 years, 6 years, or 14 years (Ivanka). The premise is that we will either have Trump's apocalypse or we will blow up Russia. There must be a winner. Given Trump's flair for winning and upending the liberal class, who would be surprised if it was he who ended up blowing up Russia, not for our reasons, but for his own. Therefore, it is equally important to get Trump, the Republicans and Democrats out of power as quickly as possible.

We are once again pawns to the powers that be. Sensing the end is coming, they wish to go out with a bang. It is true, the end is coming, whether that be by climate change, nuclear weapons or God Himself. The battle over how we end is worth fighting for. I for one have no interest in being killed by Trump, the neocons, or the ecocide maniacs. If God must take me, I will let Him, but giving the establishment the satisfaction of having the last word is too much to bear. To hear Hillary's cackle at my funeral with the words "We came, we saw, he died" across the headstone would be a tragedy too great for even a species sprinting towards the precipice. If Donald were to preside over my grave, he would simply say "I won, you tiny loser", but I would resent this option equally. If God exists, and wants the last word for Himself, He should start by kicking all with nuclear fever to the curb. For we all are dangerously close to becoming the latest item on America's war-mongering resume. Let's just hope Donald doesn't take the bait and one-up the liberals one last time.

Even if God doesn't exist, one would have a better chance reasoning with Him than either Donald or his yuppy resistance groupies. So I thanked my right-wing friend today. For even if she was no more sane than the neoliberals prattling to the abyss, she at least had a nice place to send me after the world ended; that is assuming, I was born in America, had as many babies as ejaculations, and voted for God's unconventional servant, Donald J. Trump. Join the debate on Facebook More articles by: Nick Pemberton

Nick Pemberton is a student at Gustavus Adolphus College. He is currently employed by Gustavus Dining Services. Nick was born and raised in St. Paul, Minnesota. He can be reached at [email protected]

[Aug 02, 2018] Trump threatens to 'shut down' government if Dems don't support border measures

Notable quotes:
"... "would be willing to 'shut down'" ..."
"... "I would be willing to 'shut down' government if the Democrats do not give us the votes for Border Security," the president tweeted, "which includes the Wall! Must get rid of Lottery, Catch & Release etc." ..."
"... "based on MERIT!," ..."
"... "great people." ..."
Aug 02, 2018 | www.rt.com

The Sunday morning tirade saw the president claim he "would be willing to 'shut down'" the federal government if members of Congress from the opposition party didn't row in behind Republicans in voting for his immigration reform package, which includes releasing funds for the US-Mexico border wall that formed the cornerstone of his election campaign.

"I would be willing to 'shut down' government if the Democrats do not give us the votes for Border Security," the president tweeted, "which includes the Wall! Must get rid of Lottery, Catch & Release etc."

I would be willing to "shut down" government if the Democrats do not give us the votes for Border Security, which includes the Wall! Must get rid of Lottery, Catch & Release etc. and finally go to system of Immigration based on MERIT! We need great people coming into our Country!

-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 29, 2018

He also called for an immigration system "based on MERIT!," adding that immigrants wanted by the USA needed to be "great people."

[Aug 01, 2018] The word McCarthyism came to mean making accusations of treason without sufficient evidence

Aug 01, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

To some, that fear was not a problem but a tool -- one could defeat political enemies simply by accusing them of being Russian sympathizers. There was no need for evidence, so desperate were Americans to believe; just an accusation that someone was in league with Russia was enough. Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy fired his first shot on February 9, 1950, proclaiming there were 205 card-carrying members of the Communist Party working for the Department of State. The evidence? Nothing but assertions .

Indeed, the very word " McCarthyism " came to mean making accusations of treason without sufficient evidence. Other definitions include a ggressively questioning a person's patriotism, using accusations of disloyalty to pressure a person to adhere to conformist politics or discredit an opponent, and subverting civil and political rights in the name of national security.

Pretending to be saving America while he tore at its foundations, McCarthy destroyed thousands of lives over the next four years simply by pointing a finger and saying "communist." Whenever anyone invoked his Fifth Amendment right to silence, McCarthy answered that this was "the most positive proof obtainable that the witness is communist." The power of accusation was used by others as well: the Lavender Scare , which concluded that the State Department was overrun with closeted homosexuals who were at risk of being blackmailed by Moscow for their perversions, was an offshoot of McCarthyism, and by 1951, 600 people had been fired based solely on evidence-free "morals" charges. State legislatures and school boards mimicked McCarthy. Books and movies were banned. Blacklists abounded.

The FBI embarked on campaigns of political repression (they would later claim Martin Luther King Jr. had communist ties), even as journalists and academics voluntarily narrowed their political thinking to exclude communism.

[Aug 01, 2018] Trump threatens to 'shut down' government if Dems don't support border measures -- RT US News

Notable quotes:
"... "would be willing to 'shut down'" ..."
"... "I would be willing to 'shut down' government if the Democrats do not give us the votes for Border Security," the president tweeted, "which includes the Wall! Must get rid of Lottery, Catch & Release etc." ..."
"... "based on MERIT!," ..."
"... "great people." ..."
Aug 01, 2018 | www.rt.com

The Sunday morning tirade saw the president claim he "would be willing to 'shut down'" the federal government if members of Congress from the opposition party didn't row in behind Republicans in voting for his immigration reform package, which includes releasing funds for the US-Mexico border wall that formed the cornerstone of his election campaign.

"I would be willing to 'shut down' government if the Democrats do not give us the votes for Border Security," the president tweeted, "which includes the Wall! Must get rid of Lottery, Catch & Release etc."

I would be willing to "shut down" government if the Democrats do not give us the votes for Border Security, which includes the Wall! Must get rid of Lottery, Catch & Release etc. and finally go to system of Immigration based on MERIT! We need great people coming into our Country!

-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 29, 2018

He also called for an immigration system "based on MERIT!," adding that immigrants wanted by the USA needed to be "great people."

[Jul 31, 2018] Is not the Awan affair a grave insult to the US "Intelligence Community?

Highly recommended!
Jul 31, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Nik , July 28, 2018 at 9:22 am

Is not the Awan affair a grave insult to the US "Intelligence Community?" http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2017/07/what-are-the-democrats-hiding-by-publius-tacitus.html

For several years, a family of foreign nationals (and not only Wassermannn-Schultz) has been surfing the congressional computers while having no security clearance.

Then there was a criminal negligence by H. Clinton who made her emails, filled with the highest-level classified information, available to Chinese (not the Russians). http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/07/httpstruepunditcomfbi-lisa-page-dimes-out-top-fbi-officials-during-classified-house-testimony-bureau-bos.html

Both Debbie and Hillary should be in federal prison already. Clinton used to be fond of droning Assange for divulging the criminal and illegal activities of the state. What Debbie and Hillary did has been much more dangerous to the US national security.

[Jul 31, 2018] Is not the Awan affair a grave insult to the US "Intelligence Community?

Highly recommended!
Jul 31, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Nik , July 28, 2018 at 9:22 am

Is not the Awan affair a grave insult to the US "Intelligence Community?" http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2017/07/what-are-the-democrats-hiding-by-publius-tacitus.html

For several years, a family of foreign nationals (and not only Wassermannn-Schultz) has been surfing the congressional computers while having no security clearance.

Then there was a criminal negligence by H. Clinton who made her emails, filled with the highest-level classified information, available to Chinese (not the Russians). http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/07/httpstruepunditcomfbi-lisa-page-dimes-out-top-fbi-officials-during-classified-house-testimony-bureau-bos.html

Both Debbie and Hillary should be in federal prison already. Clinton used to be fond of droning Assange for divulging the criminal and illegal activities of the state. What Debbie and Hillary did has been much more dangerous to the US national security.

[Jul 31, 2018] Uber Neocon Max Boot Often Wrong but Never in Doubt by Richard C. Young

Notable quotes:
"... Author and professor Paul Gottfried writing at The American Conservative , amplifies the words of Yoram Hazony, that just because America doesn't want to annex the territories of foreign nations, doesn't mean it carries no imperial ambitions. In fact, says Gottfried, uber-neocon War Dog Max Boot has called for "an American empire," outright. ..."
"... Max Boot, for example, has been quite open in demanding "an American empire" built on ideological and military control even without outright annexation. ..."
Jul 19, 2018 | www.richardcyoung.com

Author and professor Paul Gottfried writing at The American Conservative , amplifies the words of Yoram Hazony, that just because America doesn't want to annex the territories of foreign nations, doesn't mean it carries no imperial ambitions. In fact, says Gottfried, uber-neocon War Dog Max Boot has called for "an American empire," outright.

Gottfried writes (abridged):

Recently while reading a book by an Israeli scholar named Yoram Hazony with the provocative title The Virtue of Nationalism, I encountered a distinction drawn by the late Charles Krauthammer between empire building and American global democratic hegemony. Like the editors of the Weekly Standard, for which he periodically wrote, Krauthammer believed it was unfair to describe what he wanted to see done, which was having the U.S. actively spread its own form of government throughout the world, as "imperialism." After all, Krauthammer said, he and those who think like him "do not hunger for new territory," which makes it wrong to accuse them of "imperialism."

Hazony responds with the obvious answer that control can be imposed on the unwilling even if the empire builders are not overtly annexing territory.

Meanwhile, other neoconservatives have given the game away by pushing their imperialist position a bit further than Krauthammer's. Max Boot, for example, has been quite open in demanding "an American empire" built on ideological and military control even without outright annexation.

The question that occurred to me while reading Krauthammer's proposal and Hazony's response (which I suspect would have been more devastating had Hazony not been afraid of losing neoconservative friends and sponsors) is this one: how is this not imperialism?

It might be argued (and has been by neoconservatives many times) that the U.S. is both morally superior and less dangerous than ethnically defined societies because we advocate a "value" or "creed" that's accessible to the entire human race.

Please tell me this is not what it obviously is: an invitation to war and empire building. The quest for hegemony always looks the same, no matter what moral labels some choose to give it.

Read more here .

[Jul 31, 2018] Trump vs. the New World Order by Stephen Kokx

Notable quotes:
"... As Bishop Athanasius Schneider recently opined in an interview , "the powerful of our world, the Western states" support groups like ISIS "indirectly." As a result, civilians get killed, and a prolonged bloodbath between warring religious factions ensues, thus ruining thousands, if not millions, of lives. ..."
"... Persons who espouse this warped ideology are what political scientists refer to as neoconservatives. To put it in Catholic terms, neoconservatives seek to once and for all obliterate the Social Kingship of Christ by constructing a world order rooted in the Freemasonic Social Kingship of Man. For decades neocons have preyed on the patriotism of ordinary Americans to get them to fight unjust wars on behalf of Arab theocrats and Jewish Zionists, the real behind-the-scenes power brokers. ..."
Mar 07, 2016 | akacatholic.com

Super Tuesday and Super Saturday came and went. As expected, Donald Trump dominated the competition.

Sort of.

While Trump did exceptionally well in states like New Hampshire, South Carolina and elsewhere in the South, The Donald has stumbled as of late, coming in second to Ted Cruz in a number of recent contests.

Trump will likely expand his delegate lead in the coming weeks. However, he won't arrive at the Republican convention with enough of them to secure the nomination outright.

If that happens, the oligarchs in the Republican Party will do everything they can at the convention to deny Trump that which would rightfully be his.

It's been rumored that Mitt Romney will be called upon by the establishment to save the Party of Lincoln from being "torn asunder." Some Republicans say they simply won't vote for Mr. Trump. Others suggest running a third party "conservative" candidate.

However it shakes out, if reaction to Romney's anti-Trump press conference held earlier this month indicates anything, it's that refusing the billionaire from New York the nomination if he has the majority of delegates would literally break the GOP in two.

Before discussing what a Trump victory would mean for the Republican Party, let's backtrack a bit and try to put this man's candidacy into context. If possible, a Catholic context.

American "exceptionalism"

Since the Second World War but most especially since the early 1990s, a cabal of intellectuals desirous of global empire have hubristically argued that it is America's duty to advance "freedom" and "democracy" to "the people" of the world, all in the name of bringing about a lasting "peace."

Of course, when these men speak of "freedom" what they really mean is massive economic inequality and social hedonism. And when these men speak of "democracy" what they truly mean is rigged elections with candidates that they and not "the people" get to pick. (See the U.S.-backed coup that took place in Ukraine in February 2014 for evidence of this.)

Despite the lofty language used to trick Americans into supporting this political pyramid scheme, the reality is that bringing about this so-called "peace" is a dirty business.

For one, the U.S. essentially bribes countries into joining NATO. Economically sanctioning those who refuse to do so.

Two, when leaders from sovereign Middle Eastern nations are no longer viewed as politically useful, they're assassinated. Of course, the more diplomatic way to put it is "so and so has to go! "

And three, sustaining American imperialism oversees requires the funneling of billions of taxpayer dollars to Islamic states like Saudi Arabia and providing firearms to "moderate rebels" in countries most people can't locate on a map.

As Bishop Athanasius Schneider recently opined in an interview , "the powerful of our world, the Western states" support groups like ISIS "indirectly." As a result, civilians get killed, and a prolonged bloodbath between warring religious factions ensues, thus ruining thousands, if not millions, of lives.

The end game, of course, is to pick off Eastern European countries one by one in order to expand NATO (something the U.S. promised decades ago they wouldn't do) so that "liberal democracy" can be established not only there but also in North Africa and, most importantly, in Russia.

Globalism

Persons who espouse this warped ideology are what political scientists refer to as neoconservatives. To put it in Catholic terms, neoconservatives seek to once and for all obliterate the Social Kingship of Christ by constructing a world order rooted in the Freemasonic Social Kingship of Man. For decades neocons have preyed on the patriotism of ordinary Americans to get them to fight unjust wars on behalf of Arab theocrats and Jewish Zionists, the real behind-the-scenes power brokers.

While paying lip service to social conservatism, limited government, constitutionalism and state's rights these war hawks hijacked the Republican Party and surgically transformed it into a weak-kneed, open borders, bloodthirsty Frankenstein in the service of international elites.

Though insurgent candidates like Pat Buchanan in the 1990s reminded folks about the direction this clandestine group of war criminals was leading the country, the monied class acted quickly and decisively. Buchanan's warnings about 1) the looming culture wars 2) the harm cheap labor abroad would have on the American middle class 3) the problems associated with not securing the border and 4) the debt and death required with being the policeman of the world were easily tamped down, thanks in no small part to the help of the corporate media.

Since that time Americans have had to choose between presidential candidates who, at the end of the day, were nothing more than cogs in the globalist's wheel.

Enter Trump

Donald J. Trump has the temperament of an eight year old child. He mocks. He condescends. He can't give specifics to half the things he talks about. And I don't trust him on social issues. Put another way, I have the same concerns about Mr. Trump as American Conservative contributor Rod Dreher does .

For good reason, these facts and many others, have a large number of folks, including many Catholics, deeply disturbed.

At the same time, much of his public image is an act, and he has turned out be a shrewder political operator than I expected. No one, and I mean no one, predicted he would have this much success.

People support Trump not necessarily because of his policies but because of what he represents. And what he represents is the frustration ordinary, mostly white, Americans have towards politics in general. More specifically, the antipathy they have towards the feckless politicians the Republican Party has nominated over the past thirty years who have largely failed to halt the social and economic decay of the United States.

Against the neocons

Despite his inconsistency, immaturity and, at times, imbecility, Trump has been clear on several important policies. Policies that can be appreciated from a Catholic viewpoint.

In an article for the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, Daniel Mcadams outlines where Trump differentiates himself from the war hawks in his party.

First, according to Mcadams Trump states "the obvious" when he says "the Iraq war was brought to us by the liars of the neoconservative movement" and that it was a "total disaster" for the rest of us who "are forced to pay for their fantasies of world domination."

Second, Trump wants to "actually speak with Russian President Vladimir Putin to see if US/Russia differences can be worked out without a potentially world-ending nuclear war."

Third, although Trump is "arguing that he is hugely pro-Israel" he is "nevertheless suggesting that if the US is to play a role in the Israel/Palestine issue the US side should take a neutral role in the process."

Fourth, Trump is also calling out the "idiotic neocon advice" that resulted in the overthrowing of Gaddafi in Libya that has led to "the red carpet" being "laid down for ISIS" in that failed state.

And lastly, Trump is "suggesting that it may be a good thing that Russia be bombing ISIS into oblivion and that we might want to just sit back and let that happen for once."

Push back

The ruling class disdains each and every one of these positions. And for good reason.

By talking about the Iraq War and claiming Bush lied about it, Trump reminds us about the back room dealings and costs, both human and monetary, spreading "freedom" and "democracy" necessarily entails. And by drawing attention to the disastrous situation in Libya, Trump shines light on the foolishness of nation building abroad and the need to nation build at home. Obviously, all of this causes voters to have a less favorable view of foreign intervention in the future.

By painting Putin as a potential ally instead of a "thug," Trump de-programs Americans from thinking of the Russian President as Josef Stalin re-incarnated. It also disabuses ordinary citizens from seeing everything through an us-versus-them prism. Having a villain to point at evokes patriotism at home and affirms Americans in the moral right-ness of the pursuit of spreading "liberty." Neocons have long understood this. And Trump could potentially reverse that paradigm.

Furthermore, by taking a "neutral" stance towards Israel, Trump is indicating that he may put American interests ahead of Zionist interests. In other words, Trump would likely approach the Middle East in a way that holds Israel to the same moral standards as others. Realizing that this may result in an American president who refuses to be silent about the terrorist attacks Israelis commit against Palestinians on an almost daily basis, the globalists and their cronies in the media have been quick to compare Trump with, you guessed it, Adolf Hitler.

Going forward

Neoconservatives, in short, are apoplectic over a possible Trump presidency. His success could mean their demise, if only for a short while.

To be sure, it is difficult to know who Trump would surround himself with if he were to win the presidency. Would he call up Henry Kissinger? Would he seek the advice of the Council on Foreign Relations? I don't know.

But what I do know is that as of right now Trump appears to have all the right enemies. Enemies that include the neo-Catholic neocon community. Read here .

Now, don't expect the elites to go silently into the night. The attacks in the coming days and weeks will only get more vicious. We've already seen how quickly they brought up "the 1930s." Additionally, more than 100 self-identified "members of the Republican national security community" have signed an open letter excoriating Trump for his foreign policy views, adding that they are "united in our opposition to a Donald Trump presidency."

Unsurprisingly, some of them have said they would support Hillary Clinton, a Democratic neocon, instead of Trump in the general election.

So much for party loyalty.

In brief, a Trump nomination means the internationalists would no longer dictate the terms of America's economic and foreign policy. Moreover, if Trump arrives at the Republican convention with the majority of delegates and is denied the nomination, it will be clear to all that we live in country that is anything but a democracy.

Indeed, far from being a "breaking" of the GOP in two, wouldn't a Trump victory be nothing more than a re-calibration of the party to what it stood for historically? A party that serves the will of the American people instead of global elites?

Stephen Kokx is the host of " Church & State with Stephen Kokx " on Magnificat Media.com , which airs Fridays at 11am, 2pm, 6pm and 9pm and Saturdays at 10am EST. Follow him on twitter @StephenKokx and like him on Facebook

aroamingcatholicny March 7, 2016

I utterly despise Neocons, whether in Politics & Government or as Catholic Church Commentators.

This is why I come to akacatholic.com, The Remnant Newspaper & Catholic Family News.

In Politics, Conservatives would use The Bomb, while Neocons would engage in "Protective Reaction", whatever that means.

In The Case of Louie, Mike Matt, Chris Ferrara, John Vennari, Dr John Rao & Ann Barnhardt, one is told the truth as it occurred. There are no "Sweeps Week Specials" by People who are financed by Fat Cats & sound like Shills for said Fat Cats, while broadcasting from a Miniaturized Version of The CBS Broadcast Center on West 57th Street, from a Suburb of The Motor City, who tells everyone that what The Pope Said was a Mistranslation, while making Hay of Cardinal Dolan, passing wind on the Uptown Platform of the IND 6th Avenue Subway, all while the Polemicist is telling the World that The SSPX is in Schism. No, THAT Guy, despite the Bells & Whistles, is a Neo Catholic, who in many cases, cannot get his facts straight.

The NeoCatholics are the ones telling people that Girl Altar Servers are OK because the Pope says so. Ditto, Sancte Communion A Mano & Altar Tables facing the Congregation.You know WHO They Are.

But something I have noticed is that when it comes to Intelligent Conversation on the message boards, the Neo Catholics will not tolerate dissent vis a vis their position. The one with his broadcast centre is a classic example, with commenters practically forced to pay homage to The Fearless Leader's Position, even when not well researched.

Those who hold the Traditional Catholic Position, allow True Discussion on matters Catholic.

Traditional Catholic is true Freedom, without being patronizing. I cannot say that for a certain site, which charges $10 per month for Premium Membership.

AlphonsusJr March 7, 2016

You've reminded me of how the totally neocon and cuckservative National Review now rigorously–with all the fanaticism of the Stasi–polices its comments section. It's unreal.

[Jul 31, 2018] Liberals Leap to Defend Former US Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul by Tony Cartalucci

Notable quotes:
"... Were one to read the Washington Post's article on a Russian proposal regarding the questioning of suspects in various, ongoing US and Russia investigations, they would have imagined former US ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul was about to be shipped to a dungeon beneath the Kremlin for interrogation. ..."
"... McFaul's association with individuals and organizations funded by the government he represented is in reality the very sort of political meddling and interference many have accused Russia of since 2016. There support of someone actually involved in political meddling in Russia, further undermines their credibility and moral authority in regards to accusations against Russia. ..."
"... While the Western media depicts both McFaul and Browder's conflicts with the Russian government as a result of their supposed advocacy for "democracy" and "human rights," McFaul was clearly hiding behind such principles to advance US corporate interests, while Browder was attempting to gain leverage regarding his criminal conviction. ..."
"... This troubling trend of the Western public gravitating toward and supporting individuals like McFaul and Browder solely out of their perceived hatred for President Trump and Russia is pushing Western political discourse further from rational debate and deeper toward hysteria. ..."
Jul 29, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca
By Tony Cartalucci

Were one to read the Washington Post's article on a Russian proposal regarding the questioning of suspects in various, ongoing US and Russia investigations, they would have imagined former US ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul was about to be shipped to a dungeon beneath the Kremlin for interrogation.

The Washington Post's article, " Outrage erupts over Trump-Putin 'conversation' about letting Russia interrogate ex-U.S. diplomat Michael McFaul " fueled anti-Russian hysteria, claiming:

At this week's summit in Helsinki, Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed what President Trump described as an "incredible offer" -- the Kremlin would give special counsel Robert S. Mueller III access to interviews with Russians who were indicted after they allegedly hacked Democrats in 2016. In return, Russia would be allowed to question certain U.S. officials it suspects of interfering in Russian affairs.

One of those U.S. officials is a former U.S. ambassador to Moscow, Michael McFaul, a nemesis of the Kremlin because of his criticisms of Russia's human rights record.

The Washington Post would compound confusion and hysteria by also claiming (emphasis added):

The willingness of the White House to contemplate handing over a former U.S. ambassador for interrogation by the Kremlin drew ire and astonishment from current and former U.S. officials. Such a proposition is unheard of. So is the notion that the president may think he has the legal authority to turn anyone over to a foreign power on his own.

In reality, the proposal never entailed the US or Russia handing anyone over for interrogation. Bloomberg in an article titled, " Trump 'Looks Weak' by Considering Putin's Interrogation Idea, McFaul Says ," would more accurately summarize the deal, stating:

Putin proposed letting Russians observe interrogations of McFaul and other Americans. In exchange, U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller could send members of his team to watch Russian questioning of 12 Russian intelligence agents indicted by a U.S. grand jury last week in connection with hacking Democratic Party email accounts and disseminating those messages before the 2016 presidential election.

Americans of interest would be questioned in the United States, by Americans, merely with Russian representatives present, in exchange for American representatives travelling to Russia to watch a Russian interrogation of suspects relevant to ongoing US investigations.
Further evidence is the transcript of the actual statement by Russian President Vladimir Putin himself, posted by Politico , which states unequivocally (emphasis added):

We can actually permit representatives of the United States, including the members of this very commission headed by Mr. Mueller, we can let them into the country. They will be present at questioning. In this case, there's another condition. This kind of effort should be mutual one. Then we would expect that the Americans would reciprocate. They would question officials, including the officers of law enforcement and intelligence services of the United States whom we believe -- who have something to do with illegal actions on the territory of Russia. And we have to request the presence of our law enforcement.

Despite these facts, the hysteria has continued to spread in part due to a dishonest media eager to fan the flames of conflict with Russia and Western audiences eager to believe them.

Who is McFaul? And Why are Liberals Defending Him?

US Election Meddling: Smoke and Mirrors

Americans convinced Russia interfered in American elections must then be acutely aware that meddling in another nation's internal political affairs is unacceptable. Thus, McFaul's role in doing precisely this before and during his appointment as US ambassador to Russia from 2012-2014 should elicit condemnation and outcries from these same Americans.

Instead, many Western liberals have leaped to McFaul's defense.

The short answer as to why many in the West are defending McFaul is out of a reflexive response to their blind hatred of US President Donald Trump and Russia. McFaul has positioned himself both as a critic of President Trump and of Russia, fulfilling the only two prerequisites required to garner support among circles entertaining the current anti-Russia hysteria.

Yet McFaul represents special interests and activities that many Americans, left or right of the political spectrum, would find unacceptable – and perhaps especially for those outraged over alleged Russian meddling in American politics.

McFaul's Role in Supporting Global Political Meddling

Before McFaul served as US ambassador to Russia from 2012-2014 he served on the board of trustees of Freedom House (page 30, PDF) .

Freedom House is a US government and corporate-financier funded front that imposes the interests of its sponsors on nations abroad under the guise of expanding "freedom and democracy around the world." This process entails the creation and support of opposition groups to undermine and eventually either oust or overthrow targeted governments.

When McFaul served as trustee for Freedom House, its 2005 annual report indicated the US State Department and the US Agency for International Development (USAID) as sponsors. It also included Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, and pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly.

Additionally, Freedom House is a subsidiary of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) which is chaired by a variety of career, pro-war Neoconservatives – Neoconservatives who promoted many of the Bush-era wars Western liberals opposed.

NED is also funded by the US government as well as corporations (page 126, PDF ) including Goldman Sachs, convicted financial criminal George Soros' Open Society, Coca-Cola, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and the US Chamber of Commerce which itself serves as a collective lobbying front for some of the largest corporations in the US.

NED and subsidiaries like Freedom House use the pretext of "democracy promotion" to pressure and even overthrow governments around the world, making way for client regimes that will serve US corporations and their expansion around the globe. In other words, "democracy" is a principle the NED and its subsidiaries hide behind, not uphold with US client regimes often being more abusive and corrupt than the governments they replaced.

One would imagine someone like McFaul involved in aiding and abetting corporations in their meddling worldwide and their subsequent exploitation of nations they undermine and overthrow would be the last person Western liberals would rush to the defense of.

McFaul Minding US-Funded Agitators in Moscow

McFaul's role at Freedom House would become more "hands on" when he was nominated , then appointed US ambassador to Russia from 2012-2014. During his first year as ambassador, Russian opposition figures funded by the NED and its subsidiaries would report to the US embassy in Moscow to meet with McFaul.

Present at the 2012 US embassy meeting were regular mainstays of the Western-backed Russian opposition , including Boris Nemtsov, Yevgeniya Chirikova of the NED-funded "Strategy 31″ protests, Lev Ponomarev of the NED, Ford Foundation, Open Society, and USAID-funded Moscow Helsinki Group, and Liliya Shibanova of NED-funded GOLOS, an allegedly "independent" election monitoring group that serves as the primary source of accusations of voting fraud against President Putin's United Russia party.

Today, many of these organizations have hidden their US funding and the US NED webpage disclosing its activities in Russia describes its current meddling in the most ambiguous terms possible. Despite this, there are still nearly 100 entries on the NED's Russian webpage covering everything from meddling in the media, education, and the environment, to interfering in Russia's legal system and Russian elections.

We could only imagine the condemnation, outcry, and demands for action should a front similar to NED be created by Russia to interfere likewise in all aspects of American socioeconomic and political affairs, especially considering how mere accusations of "meddling" entailing e-mail leaks and social media posts have tipped off sanctions, a multi-year investigation, and even talk of treason and war.

McFaul's association with individuals and organizations funded by the government he represented is in reality the very sort of political meddling and interference many have accused Russia of since 2016. There support of someone actually involved in political meddling in Russia, further undermines their credibility and moral authority in regards to accusations against Russia.

Pavlovian Politics

McFaul's involvement in the recent Russian proposal was not – however – related to his role in political meddling in Russia, but instead his alleged involvement with convicted financial criminal William Browder.

While the Western media depicts both McFaul and Browder's conflicts with the Russian government as a result of their supposed advocacy for "democracy" and "human rights," McFaul was clearly hiding behind such principles to advance US corporate interests, while Browder was attempting to gain leverage regarding his criminal conviction.

Interestingly enough, George Soros – who has funded subversion in Russia alongside organizations like NED – also attempted to leverage the notion of human rights to sidestep his own criminal conviction in France for insider trading, even according to the New York Times .

This troubling trend of the Western public gravitating toward and supporting individuals like McFaul and Browder solely out of their perceived hatred for President Trump and Russia is pushing Western political discourse further from rational debate and deeper toward hysteria.

That powerful special interests can easily manipulate sections of the Western public to support virtually anyone or anything, including unsavory characters like McFaul and Browder or the notion of expanding NATO or continued war abroad in nations like Syria simply by invoking "Trump" or "Russia" represents a predictable but dangerous Pavlovian phenomenon likely to leave deep scars, permanently disfiguring American politics and society much in the way the so-called "War on Terror" has.

The increasing lack of political sophistication in America is a reflection of a much wider deterioration of American economic and geopolitical strength both at home and around the globe. While one would expect sound leadership to begin preparing America for an orderly transition from a once global hegemon to a constructive member of a more multipolar world order, history has proven the lack of grace that generally accompanies an empire's decline.

*

Tony Cartalucci is Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook" where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

[Jul 31, 2018] Uber Neocon Max Boot Often Wrong but Never in Doubt by Richard C. Young

Notable quotes:
"... Author and professor Paul Gottfried writing at The American Conservative , amplifies the words of Yoram Hazony, that just because America doesn't want to annex the territories of foreign nations, doesn't mean it carries no imperial ambitions. In fact, says Gottfried, uber-neocon War Dog Max Boot has called for "an American empire," outright. ..."
"... Max Boot, for example, has been quite open in demanding "an American empire" built on ideological and military control even without outright annexation. ..."
Jul 19, 2018 | www.richardcyoung.com

Author and professor Paul Gottfried writing at The American Conservative , amplifies the words of Yoram Hazony, that just because America doesn't want to annex the territories of foreign nations, doesn't mean it carries no imperial ambitions. In fact, says Gottfried, uber-neocon War Dog Max Boot has called for "an American empire," outright.

Gottfried writes (abridged):

Recently while reading a book by an Israeli scholar named Yoram Hazony with the provocative title The Virtue of Nationalism, I encountered a distinction drawn by the late Charles Krauthammer between empire building and American global democratic hegemony. Like the editors of the Weekly Standard, for which he periodically wrote, Krauthammer believed it was unfair to describe what he wanted to see done, which was having the U.S. actively spread its own form of government throughout the world, as "imperialism." After all, Krauthammer said, he and those who think like him "do not hunger for new territory," which makes it wrong to accuse them of "imperialism."

Hazony responds with the obvious answer that control can be imposed on the unwilling even if the empire builders are not overtly annexing territory.

Meanwhile, other neoconservatives have given the game away by pushing their imperialist position a bit further than Krauthammer's. Max Boot, for example, has been quite open in demanding "an American empire" built on ideological and military control even without outright annexation.

The question that occurred to me while reading Krauthammer's proposal and Hazony's response (which I suspect would have been more devastating had Hazony not been afraid of losing neoconservative friends and sponsors) is this one: how is this not imperialism?

It might be argued (and has been by neoconservatives many times) that the U.S. is both morally superior and less dangerous than ethnically defined societies because we advocate a "value" or "creed" that's accessible to the entire human race.

Please tell me this is not what it obviously is: an invitation to war and empire building. The quest for hegemony always looks the same, no matter what moral labels some choose to give it.

Read more here .

[Jul 31, 2018] You d have Trump waterboard Putin - Stephen Cohen schools Max Boot on CNN

Max Boot tries hard to ear his 12 silver coins from MIC. He does not want to point houses for living. Nothing new here.
Most card-carrying Russophobs and neocons are not crazy: they are cynical people without scruples working for money.
Hating Russia can be a highly paid profession
Jul 31, 2018 | www.rt.com

Renowned Russia scholar Stephen Cohen, a known skeptic of the 'Russia attacked America in 2016' narrative favored by some political circles, lectured neocon pundit Max Boot after he called him a "Russia apologist" on CNN. The two men with opposing views on whether Russia should be considered a threat to the US clashed during a panel hosted by CNN's Anderson Cooper, who asked if the American people should be concerned about US President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin had a two-hour meeting behind closed doors during a summit in Helsinki, with only their two interpreters to witness the conversation.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Xb4ryRqJPe8

Boot, an outspoken 'Never Trump' neoconservative who openly joined the #Resistance and got a Washington Post column recently, said there was something "scary" about the situation. The established wisdom among the #Resistance pundits is that Putin is somehow controlling Trump and that the secret meeting in the Finnish capital was all about the US president selling his country's interest to the Kremlin.

Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies at NYU and Princeton, said there was nothing unusual about two heads of state meeting behind closed doors. He added people could get an idea or two about what was said at the meeting from public statements made by Putin. As both Boot and Cooper pointed out that it would require trusting Putin's word on it, Cohen said: "I don't want to shock you, but I believe Vladimir Putin on several things."

Read more But Putin said otherwise: #Resistance embraces Russian president to counter Trump

The professor offered a parallel to what happened after similar one-on-one talks between Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev in Reykjavik, in 1986, which eventually led to partial nuclear disarmament. Even some conservatives who today worship Reagan as a hero branded him a "useful idiot" then, for signing the INF treaty with the USSR.

Boot brought up Trump's willingness to negotiate with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, which he said would fit Trump's pattern of behavior, threatening leaders before talking to them.

"The striking thing to me is though he is willing to threaten North Korea, he is willing to threaten Iran, he never threatens Russia. And that's why a lot of intelligence officials think that there is something highly suspect in the relationship between Putin and Trump," Boot said, apparently failing to recall how Trump literally threatened Putin with American missiles over Syria.

"I have no idea what Mr. Boot is talking about," Cohen replied. "He wants Trump to threaten Russia? Why would we threaten Russia?"

"Because they are attacking us!" the agitated Boot cut the scholar off. "Russia is attacking us, Mr Cohen! Russia is attacking us right now, according to Trump's own director of national intelligence!"

"I've been studying Russia for 45 years," Cohen said, only to be interrupted by Boot, who claimed Cohen has been "consistently an apologist for Russia those 45 years." The scholar apparently couldn't believe the debate sank to personal attacks, because he asked Boot to repeat what he just said.

"I don't do defamation of people, I do serious analysis of serious national security problems," the professor said. "When people like you call people like me, and not only me, but people more eminent than me, apologists for Russia because we don't agree with your analysis, you are criminalizing diplomacy and detente and you are the threat to American national security, end of story."

CNN's @andersoncooper hosted a panel with @MaxBoot and Professor Stephen F. Cohen on Trump-Russia. Watch Cohen give Boot a lesson in history (and comportment): https://t.co/03gSrG25AP

-- Aaron Maté (@aaronjmate) July 31, 2018

"Why do you have to defame somebody you don't agree with?" Cohen continued. "They used to do that in the old Soviet Union. We don't do that here. Well, we used to, but we need to stop it."

Boot laughed as Cooper tried to regain control of the discussion, asking Cohen if he believed Russia attacked the US in 2016. As he tried to explain why he didn't, Boot cut him off again.

"You just denied being an apologist for Russia. You are apologizing for Russia as we speak," he said.

"Will you let me finish? You don't know what I am going to say," Cohen said after a pause. Then he argued that the US and Russia have been meddling in each other's affairs since after the 1917 Bolshevik revolution. The US actually sent troops to get involved in the Russian civil war, he reminded. The alleged Russian meddling "is not an attack, it is not 9/11, it is not Pearl Harbor. It is not Russian paratroopers descending on Washington," he said.

As one comment says " @MaxBoot got Cohen's boot" in this debate with Professor Stephen Cohen on @andersoncooper 's show. By debate I mean of course that Cooper sides with his neo-con guest the whole time: https://t.co/TSeienbseI

-- Anya Parampil (@anyaparampil) July 31, 2018

"I think that Mr Boot would have been happy if Trump had waterboarded Putin at the summit and made him confess," Cohen said. "Trump carried out an act of diplomacy fully consistent with the history of American presidency. Let us see what comes out of it, then judge."

Subscribe to RT newsletter to get stories the mainstream media won't tell you.

[Jul 31, 2018] The classic method of American negotiation and warfare like the Roman before them is to divide and conquer.Even the Soviet Union and Russians were unable to make the American respect their commitments

Jul 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
The United States seems ready to give up on Afghanistan.

After the World Trade Center came down the U.S. accused al-Qaeda, parts of which were hosted in Afghanistan. The Taliban government offered the U.S. to extradite al-Qaeda chief Osama Bin Laden to an Islamic country to be judged under Islamic law. The U.S. rejected that and decided instead to destroy the Afghan government.

Taliban units, supported by Pakistani officers, were at that time still fighting against the Northern Alliance which held onto a few areas in the north of the country. Under threats from the U.S. Pakistan, which sees Afghanistan as its natural depth hinterland, was pressed into service. In exchange for its cooperation with the U.S. operation it was allowed to extradite its forces and main figures of the Taliban.

U.S. special forces were dropped into north Afghanistan. They came with huge amounts of cash and the ability to call in B-52 bombers. Together with the Northern Alliance they move towards Kabul bombing any place where some feeble resistance came from. The Taliban forces dissolved. Many resettled in Pakistan. Al-Qaeda also vanished.

A conference with Afghan notables was held in Germany's once capital Bonn. The Afghans wanted to reestablish the former Kingdom but were pressed into accepting a western style democracy. Fed with large amounts of western money the norther warlords, all well known mass-murderers, and various greedy exiles were appointed as a government. To them it was all about money. There was little capability and interest to govern.

All these U.S. mistakes made in the early days are still haunting the country.

For a few years the Taliban went quiet. But continued U.S. operations, which included random bombing of weddings, torture and abduction of assumed al-Qaeda followers, alienated the people. Pakistan feared that it would be suffocated between a permanently U.S. occupied Afghanistan and a hostile India. Four years after being ousted the Taliban were reactivated and found regrown local support.

Busy with fighting an insurgency in Iraq the U.S. reacted slowly. It then surged troops into Afghanistan, pulled back, surged again and is now again pulling back. The U.S. military aptly demonstrated its excellent logistic capabilities and its amazing cultural incompetence. The longer it fought the more Afghan people stood up against it. The immense amount of money spent to 'rebuild' Afghanistan went to U.S. contractors and Afghan warlords but had little effect on the ground. Now half the country is back under Taliban control while the other half is more or less contested.

Before his election campaign Donald Trump spoke out against the war on Afghanistan. During his campaign he was more cautious pointing to the danger of a nuclear Pakistan as a reason for staying in Afghanistan. But Pakistan is where the U.S. supply line is coming through and there are no reasonable alternatives. Staying in Afghanistan to confront Pakistan while depending on Pakistan for logistics does not make sense.

Early this year the U.S. stopped all aid to Pakistan. Even the old Pakistani government was already talking about blocking the logistic line. The incoming prime minister Imran Khan has campaigned for years against the U.S. war on Afghanistan. He very much prefers an alliance with China over any U.S. rapprochement. The U.S. hope is that Pakistan will have to ask the IMF for another bailout and thus come back under Washington's control. But it is more likely that Imran Khan will ask China for financial help.

Under pressure from the military Trump had agreed to raise the force in Afghanistan to some 15,000 troops. But these were way to few to hold more than some urban areas. Eighty percent of the Afghan people live in the countryside. Afghan troops and police forces are incapable or unwilling to fight their Taliban brethren. It was obvious that this mini-surge would fail :

By most objective measures, President Donald Trump's year-old strategy for ending the war in Afghanistan has produced few positive results.

Afghanistan's beleaguered soldiers have failed to recapture significant new ground from the Taliban. Civilian deaths have hit historic highs. The Afghan military is struggling to build a reliable air force and expand the number of elite fighters. Efforts to cripple lucrative insurgent drug smuggling operations have fallen short of expectations. And U.S. intelligence officials say the president's strategy has halted Taliban gains but not reversed their momentum, according to people familiar with the latest assessments.

To blame Pakistan for its support for some Taliban is convenient, but makes little sense. In a recent talk John Sopko, the U.S. Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), made a crucial point:

"We keep referring to Pakistan as being the key problem. But the problem also was that the Afghan government at times was viewed very negatively by their local people and what you really need is to insert a government that the people support, a government that is not predatory, a government that is not a bunch of lawless warlords," observed Sopko.

He went on to say that the U.S. policy of pouring in billions of dollars in these unstable environments contributed to the problem of creating more warlords and powerful people who took the law into their own hands.

"In essence, the government we introduced, particularly some of the Afghan local police forces, which were nothing other than warlord militias with some uniforms on, were just as bad as the terrorists before them," said Sopko ...

This was the problem from the very beginning. The U.S. bribed itself into Afghanistan. It spent tons of money but did not gain real support. It bombed and shot aimlessly at 'Taliban' that were more often than not just the local population. It incompetently fought 17 one-year-long wars instead of a consistently planned and sustained political, economic and military campaign.

After a year of another useless surge the Trump administration decided to pull back from most active operations and to bet on negotiations with the Taliban:

The shift to prioritize initial American talks with the Taliban over what has proved a futile "Afghan-led, Afghan-owned" process stems from a realization by both Afghan and American officials that President Trump's new Afghanistan strategy is not making a fundamental difference in rolling back Taliban gains.

While no date for any talks has been set, and the effort could still be derailed, the willingness of the United States to pursue direct talks is an indication of the sense of urgency in the administration to break the stalemate in Afghanistan.
...
Afghan officials and political leaders said direct American talks with the Taliban would probably then grow into negotiations that would include the Taliban, the Afghan government, the United States and Pakistan.

In February the Taliban declared their position in a public Letter of the Islamic Emirate to the American people (pdf). The five pages letter offered talks but only towards one aim:

Afghans have continued to burn for the last four decades in the fire of imposed wars. They are longing for peace and a just system but they will never tire from their just cause of defending their creed, country and nation against the invading forces of your war­mongering government because they have rendered all the previous and present historic sacrifices to safeguard their religious values and national sovereignty. If they make a deal on their sovereignty now, it would be unforgettable infidelity with their proud history and ancestors.

Last weeks talks between the Taliban and U.S. diplomats took place in Doha, Qatar. Remarkably the Afghan government was excluded. Despite the rousing tone of the Reuters report below the positions that were exchanged do not point to a successful conclusion:

According to one Taliban official, who said he was part of a four-member delegation, there were "very positive signals" from the meeting, which he said was conducted in a "friendly atmosphere" in a Doha hotel.

"You can't call it peace talks," he said. "These are a series of meetings for initiating formal and purposeful talks. We agreed to meet again soon and resolve the Afghan conflict through dialogue."
...
The two sides had discussed proposals to allow the Taliban free movement in two provinces where they would not be attacked, an idea that President Ashraf Ghani has already rejected . They also discussed Taliban participation in the Afghan government.

"The only demand they made was to allow their military bases in Afghanistan ," said the Taliban official.
...
"We have held three meetings with the U.S. and we reached a conclusion to continue talks for meaningful negotiations," said a second Taliban official.
...
"However, our delegation made it clear to them that peace can only be restored to Afghanistan when all foreign forces are withdrawn ," he said.

This does not sound promising:

It is difficult to see how especially the last mutually exclusive positions can ever be reconciled.

The Taliban are ready to accept a peaceful retreat of the U.S. forces. That is their only offer. They may agree to keep foreign Islamist fighters out of their country. The U.S. has no choice but to accept. It is currently retreating to the cities and large bases. The outlying areas will fall to the Taliban. Sooner or later the U.S. supply lines will be cut. Its bases will come under fire.

There is no staying in Afghanistan. A retreat is the only issue the U.S. can negotiate about. It is not a question of "if" but of "when".

The Soviet war in Afghanistan took nine years. The time was used to build up a halfway competent government and army that managed to hold off the insurgents for three more years after the Soviet withdrawal. The government only fell when the Soviets cut the money line. The seventeen year long U.S. occupation did not even succeed in that. The Afghan army is corrupt and its leaders are incompetent. The U.S. supplied it with expensive and complicate equipment that does not fit Afghan needs . As soon as the U.S. withdraws the whole south, the east and Kabul will immediately fall back into Taliban hands. Only the north may take a bit longer. They will probably ask China to help them in developing their country.

The erratic empire failed in another of its crazy endeavors. That will not hinder it to look for a new ones. The immense increase of the U.S. military budget, which includes 15,000 more troops, points to a new large war. Which country will be its next target?

james , Jul 30, 2018 3:26:49 PM | 2

thanks b.. it would be good if the exceptional warmongering nation could go home, but i am not fully counting on it.. i liked your quote here "The U.S. military aptly demonstrated its excellent logistic capabilities and its amazing cultural incompetence." that is ongoing.. unless the usa leaves, i think the madness continues.. i suspect the madness will continue.. the only other alternative is the usa, with the help of their good buddies - uk, ksa, qatar, uae and israel - will keep on relocating isis to afgan for future destabilization.. i watched a video peter au left from al jazzera 2017 with isis embedded in the kush mtns... until the funding for them ceases - i think the usa will have a hand in the continued madness... if the usa was serious about ending terrorism they would shut down the same middle east countries they are in bed with.. until that happens, i suspect not much will change.. i hope i am wrong..
Pft , Jul 30, 2018 3:52:04 PM | 5
I dont believe it for a second. Especially with Iran looming as a potential target. US is staying in Afghanistan also to counter China , keep opium production high and of course there is the TAPI pipeline to "protect" that is backed by US as an alternative to the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline that would have tapped Iran's South Pars gas field. A hostile or unfriendly Pakistan is just one more reason to stay

Just like US will never leave Iraq or Syria, they will stay in Afghanistan. There will be ebbs and flows, and talk of disengagement from time to time primarily for domestic consumption, but thats all it is IMO.

Jackrabbit , Jul 30, 2018 4:01:30 PM | 7
It seems that an ISIS-Taliban proxy war has begun.

That will take pressure off USA to leave. Likely gives USA an excuse to stay (to supply fight ISIS).

Uncoy , Jul 30, 2018 4:19:49 PM | 11
This is a fine recap of the situation. It's much too optimistic. The classic method of American negotiation and warfare like the Roman before them is to divide and conquer. It was very successful against the American Indians.

If the Taliban get free movement in two provinces, the Americans will demand an end to attacks on their bases, their soldiers and their agents elsewhere in Afghanistan. Just as the Iroquois Confederation enjoyed special privileges in what is now Upper New York for their help against the French, the Taliban will have special privileges in their two provinces while the Americans consolidate in the rest of Afghanistan. When the Americans feel strong enough, just as with the Iroquois, they will break the previous treaties.

After the Revolutionary War, the ancient central fireplace of the League was re-established at Buffalo Creek. The United States and the Iroquois signed the treaty of Fort Stanwix in 1784 under which the Iroquois ceded much of their historical homeland to the Americans, which was followed by another treaty in 1794 at Canandaigua which they ceded even more land to the Americans./b

Posted by: Uncoy | Jul 30, 2018 4:03:17 PM | 8

(...continuation of the comment above, somehow got posted when I pressed the return key)

Even the Soviet Union and Russians were unable to make the American respect their commitments. The United States reneged on the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty as soon as it could in 2001 (Russia was on its knees), reneged on its commitments not to expand NATO east and has built ballistic missile bases all around Russia which seem to be preparation for a pre-emptive nuclear strike/war against Russia.

The Afghanis (foolish to call them the Taliban, they are traditional Afghani patriots) have always been wise enough to annihilate any invader to the last man. This salutary policy keeps invaders out for decades at a time. The Taliban have a long row to hoe. It took almost a hundred years and several massacres to finally curb British ambitions on Afghanistan (1838 to 1919). Afghanis' best hopes rely on forging tight alliances with Pakistan and China, squeezing the Americans out completely right now.

The Americans burnt their bridges with the Russian already and are in the process of burning their bridges with Pakistan while losing influence with China. The US is very short of options right now. It's the ideal time for Afghanis to reclaim the whole territory, not leaving a single American soldier or airbase operational. They'll need a technically sophisticated ally to help them clear their skies of US drones. This role might appeal to either the Russians or the Chinese. As a training exercise, extended anti-drone warfare could be very useful.

fast freddy , Jul 30, 2018 4:24:15 PM | 12
What a great success the US achieved in destroying Yugoslavia. Murdering thousands went almost unnoticed. It was able to break up the country into a number of tiny, impoverished nations and got to put a US MIC Base in most of them.

Afghanistan is one tough nut to crack.

Bilal , Jul 30, 2018 4:39:14 PM | 13
You did not mention isis-k in your analysis. Its active mostly in eastern afghanistan in areas close to or adjacent to Pakistan (it is also controlls a small area in Jawzjan, in northern afghanistan). Many fighters are formerly pakistani taliban(not to be confused with afghan taliban who are simply called taliban). Before isis-k appeared in afghanistan, the areas which it now controls had pakistani taliban presence. TTP, or tehreek e taliban pakistan was facilitated by afghan ggovernment to settle down in these areas after they fled pakistan when its military launched a large scale offensive, Operation Zarb e Azb. The afghan government planned to use them to pressurize Pakistan, basically to use them as a bargaining chip. They operate openly in eastern afghanistan, but many of them joined isis-k.

Russians estimate isis-k's strength to be between 10k to 12k, although it might be a bit inflated number. From here they plan attacks against afghanistan and pakistan alike, mostly suicide bombings as of now. They have had fierce clashes with afghan taliban in eastern Afghanistan but have held their territory for now. Afghan army simply doesn't have the capacity in those areas to confront them. It was here that MOAB was dropped but as expected against a guerrilla force, it was ineffective in every way. But it did make headlines and has helped US in giving an impression its seriously fighting ISIS. The reports of unmarked helicopters dropping god-knows-what have also been coming from these areas. Hamid karzai mentioned that and also maria zakharova asked afghan gov. and US to investigate that which shows these are not just rumors. Recently intelligence chiefs of Pakistan, russia, iran and china as well(if i remember correctly) met in islamabad to discuss isis-k in afghanistan, no details other than this of this meeting are available.

In Northern afghanistan, in Jawzjan, fierce clashes broke out between taliban and isis-k after taliban commander in thiae areas was beheaded. ISIS-k has been beaten up pretty badly there but clashes are ongoing. Many areas have been cleared but fighting is still ongoing. An interesting aspect is taliban sources claiming that whenever they come close to a decisive victory, they have to stop operations becauae of heavy bombardment by US planes. They made similar claims when fighting daesh in eastern afghanistan. Anyway in a few days isis presence will probably be finished in Jawzjan. ISIS fighters who have survived have done so by surrendering to afghan forces. They will probably end up back in eastern afghanistan.

Red Ryder , Jul 30, 2018 4:49:21 PM | 14
Next Target for a long war?

Africa. US AFRICOM has a huge playground, tactics won't change and logistics is far easier.

There also will be a long Hybrid wr against Iran, but that will be much like the early days of Syria. Proxies as "moderates". Insurgents, not US troops. ISIS and AQ crazies will be on the ground.

The big money will go into Africa. You want to see Trillions "spent"? It will be Africa.

Robert Snefjella , Jul 30, 2018 4:55:49 PM | 15
The decision to invade Afghanistan had been taken before the 9/11 false flag coup. Had nothing much to do with the CIA's al-Qaeda mercenaries.

As I understood it, there were many agendas at work: testing weapons and making money for the MIC; controlling the lucrative (how many hundreds of billions of dollars ?) opium/ heroin production/profiteering; military bases relating to Iran, Russia, China, Pakistan and other ...stans, etc; control of oil and gas pipelines; access to increasingly valuable and sought rare earth minerals; proximity to oil and gas actual and potential.

More generally, subjugating Afghanistan was a necessary part of the 'full spectrum dominance' 'we will rule the earth' doctrine, dear til recently to too many mad hatters, and still evoking a misty eyed longing in some, no doubt.

NemesisCalling , Jul 30, 2018 5:00:17 PM | 16
Ahhh...the US produces some of the lamest euphemisms approved for all audiences; such as "Afgahn Security Forces." So sterile, innocuous. And benign. How could anyone question their plight? (We did pick up the game a little bit in Syria with "Free Syrian Army..." Can I get a hell yeah?) All the people hearing this in the US could do was shrug their shoulders and speak, "I guess I should support them." That is, of course, after we took out OBL and the mission in Afghanistan was a little more opaque. Just a little bit. Anyways...Hell, yeah! Get some!

Thanks b for the brief history. Really invaluable.

StephenLaudig , Jul 30, 2018 5:26:35 PM | 17
Afghani patriots, resisting invaders since 330 BCE... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasions_of_Afghanistan
The US military, the planet's costliest losingest military since 1946. The US military, like its munitions manufacturers, doesn't win but it does get paid and is why we can have nice things like oh, decent health care. Lack of health insurance kills more Americans than the Russians ever will. The Russians aren't the enemy, Trump is. Lobbyists are too.
Eugene , Jul 30, 2018 5:39:35 PM | 18
I haven't read anything about Blackwater wanting to replace the U.S. Military in Afghanistan. Of course, the U.S. Treasury would continue to shovel those pallet loads of newly printed $100.00 bills down the Blackwater hole. Any odds this might go forward from anyone's opinion?
Willy2 , Jul 30, 2018 5:45:04 PM | 19
- The US already started to plan an invasion of Afghanistan in januari & february of 2001.
adam gadahn , Jul 30, 2018 5:45:40 PM | 20
robin cook before he was murdered stated that alqueda was a cia data base.
i believe bresinski knew obl as tim osman who was later killed by cia mi6 man omar blah blah sheikh bhutto of pakisyan was assasinated after spilling the beans about sheikh.

christopher bolleyn on you tube will give you the sp on what 9 and 11 was shirley we are past the point of the offecal theory.
the turd burger that is the official theory is clearly the worst and lowest grade of all the conspiracy theories.
the taliban where in barbera bushes texas talking lithium opium and oil pipelines with the paedo bush crime syndicate before 9 and 11

marvin bush ran security at the twin towers

christopher bollyn is the go to man in these regardings

http://www.bollyn.com/

Peter AU 1 , Jul 30, 2018 5:55:31 PM | 21
The US wants peace talks but wants to keep its bases in Afghanistan. US under Trump has built new bases in Syria, Iraq, Kuwait.
SDF have been talking with Syrian government, and US in Talks with Taliban. Are these just moves to buy the US a little time until it launches the war Trump has been building the US military up for.
dahoit , Jul 30, 2018 6:00:22 PM | 22
Trump is?What about the neocons who started this f*ck up.
adam gadahn , Jul 30, 2018 6:02:02 PM | 23
alas not a nice number 13 bilal

isis is israeli counter gang with support of usa usa and the city of london,ukrainian,polish,uk sas,cia,kiwi,aussie,jordanian and donmeh satanic house of saud.

talking of isis as if it is real entity rather than a frank kitson gang counter gang and pseudo gang is polluting the well.

who has been providing extraction helicopters from syriana for the last 14 months.
who has been washing these bearded devils operating on them in kosher field hospitals making them well shiny and new
who?
scchhhhh you know who

Peter AU 1 , Jul 30, 2018 6:13:36 PM | 24
From Russian Ministry of Foriegn Affairs 25 March 2018.

http://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/3139715
"We are alarmed by the growing number of terrorist activities being carried out by the Taliban who stage armed attacks across Afghanistan, as well as by the increased ISIS presence in Afghanistan's northern provinces that border CIS countries.

We are concerned about reports regarding the use of helicopters without any identification marks in many parts of Afghanistan that are delivering terrorists and arms to the Afghan branch of this terrorist organisation. We believe that reports to this effect made by Afghan officials should be thoroughly investigated."

Willy2 , Jul 30, 2018 6:27:53 PM | 25
- Of course. The US wants to keep its bases in Afghanistan. Surprise, surprise.
In 2002 when ABC corporate propaganda showed Special Forces rounding up village Hajji, the writing was on the wall. Afghanistan is a Holy War run by incompetents for a profit. The only question is when will the Westerners withdraw from the Hindu Kush and how disastrous it will be. Americans cannot afford the unwinnable war's blood and treasure. The US's Vietnam War (1956 to 1975) ended for the same reasons. That war ushered in the Reagan Revolution and the Triumph of the Oligarchy. The consequences of the breakup of the Atlantic Alliance will be even more severe.

Posted by: VietnamVet , Jul 30, 2018 7:06:37 PM | 26

In 2002 when ABC corporate propaganda showed Special Forces rounding up village Hajji, the writing was on the wall. Afghanistan is a Holy War run by incompetents for a profit. The only question is when will the Westerners withdraw from the Hindu Kush and how disastrous it will be. Americans cannot afford the unwinnable war's blood and treasure. The US's Vietnam War (1956 to 1975) ended for the same reasons. That war ushered in the Reagan Revolution and the Triumph of the Oligarchy. The consequences of the breakup of the Atlantic Alliance will be even more severe.

Posted by: VietnamVet | Jul 30, 2018 7:06:37 PM | 26 /div

james , Jul 30, 2018 7:21:13 PM | 27
@uncoy.. i basically see it like you, however another proxy war involving usa-russia-china sounds like a running theme now...

@13 bilal.. good post.. i agree about the analysis missing much on isis presence in afgan as @6 jr also points out.. i think it is a critical bit of the puzzle.. it appears the usa is using isis as a proxy force, as obama previously stated with regard to syria... the usa just can't seem to help themselves with their divide and conquer strategy using isis as part of it's methodology... it's exact opposite of what they profess..

@18 eugene.. isn't blackwater or whatever they're called now - headquartered in uae? perfect place for them, lol... right on top of yemen, afgan, and etc. etc.. if isis can't do the job for the west thru their good friends ksa, uae - well, then maybe they can pay a bit more and get blackwater directly involved too..

dltravers , Jul 30, 2018 7:41:30 PM | 28
Trump is serious when he said he would talk to anybody. The CIA is alleged to have been stirring the pot with Islamic militants prior to the Soviet invasion when the country went full socialist. I would suspect the Russians had a hand in that in 1978. US intelligence was said to be helping along the backlash to socialism by Islamic militants back then in 1978. The CIA station chief was promptly assassinated the next year.

Obviously you could dump 600,000 NATO and US soldiers into the country and not control it short of executing every Muslim. What a foolish endeavor but what would you expect from these buffoons and their death cult? These human sacrifices are holy to them. They worship blood, death, power and money.

With their loss in Syria the NEOCONS can now make peace with the Taliban and use them and ISIS to push into old Soviet Central Asia in an attempt to deny them what the Anglo American Zionist alliance cannot have at this time, control of the commodities.

China will slide right in and take it all at some point once exhaustion sets into place. Even the Brits knew when it was time to leave India and their Middle Eastern holdings. They realized the costs of containment would wipe out their country.

Harry , Jul 30, 2018 7:53:57 PM | 29
@ Patrick Armstrong | 10
I still think Trump wants to cut the Gordian Knot and get the USA out of all this crap. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/30/trump-i-am-ready-to-meet-with-iran-anytime-they-want-to.html

No he doesnt, along with Israel and neocons. There was already nuclear deal, and US was out of "all this crap", so why introduce Gordian Knot if he doesnt want it?

What Trump demands is Iran's surrender. 'b discussed it at length some time ago, the list of Trump's demands is completely ridiculous and the goal is Iran as a client state.

From its side, Iran is refusing to even meet Trump, two reasons: 1) If Iran agrees to meet, it would mean they agree to renegotiate the deal, which they dont. 2) US word isnt worth a toilet paper, so any negotiations is meaningless. Plus US list of demands makes even endeavor to negotiate dead from the get go.

Curtis , Jul 30, 2018 7:54:05 PM | 30
Congress went along with the Pentagon's 7 countries in 5 years plan. No investigation of 9/11 or even consideration of Ron Paul's bringing in an old idea of Letters of Marque and Reprisal.
As to the US leaving the warlords in power to continue opium production, etc, Van Buren (We Meant Well book) said some of the same happened in Iraq with some sheikhs still holding power in local areas. General Garner looked forward to going in to rebuild (and was promising quick elections) but was shocked to see no protection of ministries (except oil) which were looted and burned. And then Bremer was put in charge. Complete mismanagement of the war, the aftermath, etc. Like someone once said, if they were doing these things at random you would expect them to get it right once in a while.

The Kunduz Airlift which allowed Pakistan a corridor to fly out Pak officials, Taliban, and possibly al Qaeda was yet another snafu like paying Pakistan to supposedly block any escape from their side of Tora Bora only to have a long convoy leave at night. It made one wonder about the US supposed air superiority/domination. Again, complete mismanagement.

A comparison to the end situation in VietNam 1975 is apt.

Peter AU 1 , Jul 30, 2018 8:11:57 PM | 31
Trump meeting Rouhani. Trump saays he wants a better deal. The nuke agreement took years to negotiate and Iran accepted far more stringent inspections than any other country signed up NPT. There is nothing more for Iran to negotiate other than to give away their sovereignty.
The offer of a meeting by Trump is more along the line of "we tried to avoid war".
The US under Trump have scrapped the nuke agreement and made demands that are impossible for Iran to meet without giving away its sovereignty.
Red Ryder , Jul 30, 2018 8:21:00 PM | 32
Erik Prince's plan for fighting in Afghanistan.
He presented it to the WH. Military rejected it.
He is no longer Blackwater-connected.
Frontier Services Group Ltd. is his new military-security services corp.
He has extensive contracts with the Chinese government and their SOEs overseas.

This was a trailer he made to explain his concept. He still wants to do this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjhPSaqBj1c

spudski , Jul 30, 2018 8:38:09 PM | 33
Peter AU 1 @31

I fear you're absolutely right.

occidentosis , Jul 30, 2018 9:08:50 PM | 34
did you see General Souleimani answer's to Trump rabid tweet

it went like this

Our president doesnt lower himself to answer someone like.I, a soldier answer someone like you, you re someone who speaks in the vocabulary of a cabaret owner and a gambling house dealer.(paraphrasing saker has the video on his site)

and then he went on to describe how your cowad troops wore adult diapers in Afghanistan and Iraq

fairleft , Jul 30, 2018 9:25:35 PM | 35
China will slide right in and take it all at some point once exhaustion sets into place.

dltravers @28

No. China, being development-oriented rather than imperialist, will leave Afghanistan alone. China and Russia, but especially China, requires an Afghanistan that is not a U.S.-controlled terrorist base. Because China needs the oil/gas link that it is building through Pakistan to access Gulf energy resources, and that energy corridor would be the primary target of U.S.-hired mercenaries ('terrorists').

How Afghanistan manages itself in the post-U.S. era is Afghan business, but it will almost certainly involve the Pashtun majority (in the form of the 'Taliban') retaking power in Kabul but with the traditional huge amounts of autonomy for the provinces. That arrangement reduces pressure by Pashtun nationalists in Pakistan against Pakistan's government, and in general seems to be the long-term stable set up, and stability is what China has to have in Afghanistan.

Now is the time with perfect China partner Khan and the Pakistan military firmly in power. Not instant, but over the next two years I think we'll see the Taliban's fighting capacity hugely improve, with transfers of supplies, weapons and intelligence from Pakistan. It would be very smart for Trump to get out in 2019. History is going to accelerate in that region.

S , Jul 30, 2018 9:31:48 PM | 36
Which country will be its next target?

I know I'm in the minority here, but I worry a lot about Venezuela. See, it's a perfect fit for the U.S. economy. U.S. shale oil is way too light to be useful, while Venezuelan oil is way too heavy to be useful. They are destined for each other, i.e. to be mixed into a blend that would be a good fit U.S. refineries. Plus, Venezuela is very import-dependent and thus would make for a good vassal. It also has a rabid capitalist class that will do anything -- any kind of atrocity or false flag -- to return to the good old days of exploitation. "But Venezuela has a lot of arms!", I hear you counter. True, but the people are severely demoralized because of the extreme economic hardship. Think of the USSR in late 80s/early 90s. It had the most powerful military in the world, and yet people were so demoralized and disillusioned with the old system that they simply chose not to defend it. Same thing may happen in Venezuela. After Colombia has signed peace accords with FARC, U.S. has been steadily increasing its military presence in Colombia. I think there is a very real possibility of a naval blockade combined with supply lines/air raids from Colombia supporting the "Free Venezuelan Army" assembled from Venezuelan gangs and revanchist capitalists and foreign mercenaries. It would be logistically impossible for Russia or China to provide military help to far-away Venezuela. Neighbors will not come to the aid of Venezuela either as there is a surge of pro-U.S. right-wing governments in the region.

ben , Jul 30, 2018 9:33:25 PM | 37
Any moves the U$A makes will have to be approved according to which natural resources their corporate masters covet at any particular moment. Lithium and other rare earth minerals, strategic importance, whatever the corporate form needs to stay on top globally, will dictate what the empire does.

Leave Afghanistan? I very much doubt it.

DJT will do what the "puppet masters" desire. Just like all his predecessors.

Profits uber alles!!

fairleft , Jul 30, 2018 9:36:15 PM | 38
'Correction': No reliable census has been done in decades, but I don't think the Pashtun are the majority in Afghanistan. They
are by far the largest minority however. British 'divide and rule' stategists long ago deliberately separated them into Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Peter AU 1 , Jul 30, 2018 9:40:53 PM | 39
s 36

Venezuela and Iran have two things in common. Both have large oil reserves and neither recognize Israel.
Trump's wars will be about destroying enemies of Israel, and at the same time, achieving global energy dominance.

Chipnik , Jul 30, 2018 9:58:21 PM | 40
I've posted this before. I met a Taliban leader and his two guards in a brutal area during the Hearts and Minds Schtick, preparatory to Cheney getting all the oil and gas, and copper and iron and coming coal lease awards.

He was a nice guy, the Taliban leader. His guards looked at me with absolute death in their eyes. Not wanting them to hear him, as we finished our tea, the Taliban leader leaned close, then whispered, 'I love your Jesus, but I hate your Crusaders.'

And I take issue with the US 'incompetence' meme. Ever since Cheney hosted the Taliban in Texas in 1998, trying to get a TAPI pipeline, the US has deliberately and cunningly taken over the country, assassinated the local-level leadership, and installed their foreign Shah, first Karzai, then Ghani.

In that time of occupation, 18 years, Pentagon MIC disappeared TRILLIONS in shrink-wrapped pallets of $100s, and ballooned from $340B a year, to now Trump is saying $840B a year.

That's not incompetence. Just the opposite.

Now, to honor my Afghan friends, who love to joke even after 35+ years of machine warfare, a joke I wrote in their honor:

Ring ring ring ring

"Office of the President of the United States, Ronald Reagan!"

"BRRZZZBRRZZZV..."

"Hold please."

President Reagan, it's the Iranian ambassador!"

"Well hello Mr. Assinabindstani, what can I do for you?"

"BRRZZZBRRZZZV..."

"Well I'll get my staff right on it."

[Intercomm clicks]

"Hey Ollie, the Ayatollah wants more guns! Step on it!"

Chipnik , Jul 30, 2018 10:10:55 PM | 41
38

Actually, the British paid an annual tithe-tribute the the Afghan king to stop raiding their India holdings, and agreed to a neutral zone between them. Then when the British pulled out, they declared the neutral zone as Pakistan and shrunk India away from Pashtun territory to create a bigger divide. The Afghan leaders had no say in the matter. I believe Baluchistan was also carved away. At one time, Afghan control extended from Persia to the Indus Valley. There is no way to defeat a nation of warriors who created a kingdom that vast, while William the Conqueror was still running around in bear skin diapers.

dh , Jul 30, 2018 11:03:19 PM | 42
@41 'Afghan control extended from Persia to the Indus Valley.'

You are probably referring to the Khalji Dynasty, a brutal bunch, who ruled India from 1290 to 1320 by which time William the Conqueror was long dead. You would be a lot more credible if you got your history right.

Lozion , Jul 30, 2018 11:30:50 PM | 43
@42 dh is correct. Afghan territory was in the Persian sphere of influence much longer compared to the Mughal/British/Indian periods..
Charles Michael , Jul 31, 2018 12:19:59 AM | 44
IMHO the military Budget increase, and what an increase it is!
is part of worsening an already outrageous situation to reach a caricatural point. Typical of trump repeated special "art".
Of course Nobody in USA, no President can go against the MIC and Pentagon.
But money is cheap when you print it.

It is sugaring the intended shrinking of foreign deployments (as in NATO), closure of "facilities" and replacing them officially with total deterrence capacities (Space Forces anybody ?).
While keeping classical projection capacities for demonstration against backward tribes.

Guerrero , Jul 31, 2018 12:21:04 AM | 45
That is an excellent account. Who can help rooting for the Afghanis to get their country back?

The economics of empire are always upside down; the homeland people end up shelling out for it.

Hoarsewhisperer , Jul 31, 2018 12:26:51 AM | 46
...
From its side, Iran is refusing to even meet Trump, two reasons: 1) If Iran agrees to meet, it would mean they agree to renegotiate the deal, which they dont. 2) US word isnt worth a toilet paper, so any negotiations is meaningless. Plus US list of demands makes even endeavor to negotiate dead from the get go.
Posted by: Harry | Jul 30, 2018 7:53:57 PM | 29

Tru-ish but Trump's latest offer is, according to the MSM, "no pre-conditions." It's quite likely that Iran's allies have advised the Iranians to tell Trump to Go F*ck yourself (if you feel you must), but then satisfy yourselves that Trump's No Preconditions means what Iran wants it to mean.

Trump jumped into the NK and Putin talks first because both were eager to talk. Iran will be a good test of Trump's seduction skills. All he's got to do is persuade the Iranians that talking is more useful than swapping long-distance insults. Iranians are rusted onto logical principles and Trump will find a way to appeal to that trait, imo.

Ian , Jul 31, 2018 12:41:07 AM | 47
Which country will be its next target?

Iran.

Debsisdead , Jul 31, 2018 1:11:58 AM | 48
It's too late for the afghanis who have been driven into the urban areas during the regulaar 'Afghanistanisation' campaigns. Most of them will have become hooked on consumerism and the necessity of dollars.
That leaves only two options for the Taliban when they take over as they undoubtedly will altho that is likely to mean having to tolerate clutches of obese amerikans lurking in some Px strewn green zone, the inhabitants of which are likely to have less contact with people from Afghanistan than any regular user of a Californian shopping mall. The new government can ignore the consumerists even when these rejects insist on getting lured into some nonsense green revolution - the danger with this isn't the vapid protests which can easily be dealt with by fetching a few mobs of staunch citizens from rural Afghanistan who will quickly teach them that neither cheeseburgers nor close captioned episodes of daytime television provide sufficient nutrition to handle compatriots raised on traditional food and Islam. Or the new administration can do as other traditional regimes have done many times over the last 80 years or so, purge the consumerists by disappearing the leadership and strewing empty lots in the urban areas with mutilated corpses of a few of the shitkicker class consumerists. That option can cause a bit of a fuss but it (the fuss) generally only lasts as long as the purge.

I suspect the Afghan government will favour the latter approach but they may try to hold off until the North has been brought back into line. OTH, consumerism is a highly contagious condition so, unless the North can be pacified speedily which seems unlikely, initially at least the Taliban adminsitration may have to fight on two fronts, agin the North while they nip urban consumerists in the bud before those confused fools can cause any highly publicised in the west but in actuality, low key, attempted insurrection.
My advice to the gaming, TV or cheeseburger addicted inhabitants of Kabul would be to volunteer your services to the amerikan military as a 'translator' asap and join yer cobbers in California.
It is unlikely that you will bump into Roman Brady especially not when he is in one of his avuncular moods, but if you stay outta Texas, Florida or any other part of flyover amerika chocka with alcohol induced blowhardism, you will discover than amerikan racism isn't as lethal as it once was.

Apart from having to ignore being jostled in the line at fast food joints and being loudly and incorrectly termed a motherf**in sand n***er mid-jostle. Certainly a whole lot less lethal than trying to cover your Fortnite jones by waving a badly copywritten sign in front of the al-Jazeera cameras for a one month battle pass .

AV17 , Jul 31, 2018 1:49:03 AM | 49
This retreat is to focus resources on Iran. Nuclear Winter it is!
Daniel , Jul 31, 2018 2:05:21 AM | 50
What was happening in Kabul, Afghanistan less than 8 hours after the WTC Towers turned into dust in midair? Who here remembers the massive bombing/cruise missile attack?

Here is CNN's transcript:

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: "Well, Joie, it's about 2:30 in the morning here in Kabul. We've been hearing explosions around the perimeter of the city. We're in a position here which gives us a view over the whole city. We just had an impact, perhaps a few miles away.

"If I listen, you can hear the ripple of explosions around the city. Perhaps you heard there. The fifth explosion -- sixth explosion, I think. Gun bursts and star bursts in the air. Tracer fire is coming up out of the city. I hear aircraft flying above the city of Kabul. Perhaps we've heard half a dozen to 10 detonations on the perimeter of the city, some coming from the area close to the airport. I see on the horizon what could be a fire on the horizon, close, perhaps, to where the airport might be. A flash came up then from the airport. Some ground fire coming up here in Kabul."

"I've been in Belgrade and I've been in Baghdad and seen cruise missiles arrive in both those cities. The detonations we're hearing in Kabul right now certainly sound like the detonations of loud missiles that are coming in. "

"Certainly -- certainly it would appear that the Afghan defense systems have detected a threat in the air. They are launching what appears to be anti-aircraft defense systems at the moment. Certainly, I can see that fire that was blazing on the horizon. It was a faint yellow; it's now a bright orange blazing. Several other detonations going off around the city, multiple areas. Rockets appear to be taking off from one end of the airport. I can see that perhaps located about 8 or 9 miles away from where we stand, Joie."

The bombing/explosions continue for 10+ minutes of this broadcast.

Then, they cut to WILLIAM COHEN, FORMER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: who says the US is only collecting intelligence. He says what we're seeing must be part of the "Civil War" (despite the fact that neither side had an air force or cruise missiles). The Pentagon later denies knowing anything about it.

Then, CNN returns to Nic Robertson, who- within 15 minutes of his first report - begins to change his tune. Suddenly, the jet sounds are not mentioned. The cruise missiles (jet engines) have transformed into possible rockets. The airport fire is now an ammunition dump.

And voila! They lose their connection and Nic will not be heard from again. And this little bit of history will essentially disappear.

CNN video archive (attack report starts at 7:43).

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/11/bn.61.html

NPR had a reporter in Kabul that night. He apparently didn't notice the massive bombing, at least in his memoir 15 years later.

Mishko , Jul 31, 2018 2:07:19 AM | 51
Dear Mr. B,
"All these U.S. mistakes made in the early days are still haunting the country."
These mistakes are by design. To cause and keep causing destabilisation.

I like to refer to it as the 3-letter Scrabble method of doing things.
Me living in the Netherlands as I do, let me take the example of Greece.
Greece had its regime changed in 1948 (Wiki says 46-49).
And how is Greece doing these days? ...

Plasma , Jul 31, 2018 2:16:47 AM | 52
@37 yep, gotta agree with the more passimistic outlook here. Personally i'll eat my shoes if US leaves Afghanistan within any reasonable time frame. In addition to plentiful natural resources, there are very influential vested interests in Afghanistans booming opium industry.
Quentin , Jul 31, 2018 2:20:09 AM | 53
Off topic: Andrei Nekrasov's 'Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes' can be viewed in full on You Tube at this moment (31 July, 08:15 Amsterdam time). Can it also be seen in the USA, I wonder? How long will it take before Google take it down ? Watch it and learn about one of the main drivers of the Russia obsession.
Andreas Schlüter , Jul 31, 2018 3:35:18 AM | 54
The US (Neocon dominated) Power Elite has only one strategy left for that Region: destabilization and chaos to serve as a barrier against the Project of the Eurasian Cooperation!
See:
„Geo-Politics: The Core of Crisis and Chaos and the Nightmares of the US Power Elite" https://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2016/08/01/geo-politics-the-core-of-crisis-and-chaos-the-nightmares-of-the-us-power-elite/
And on the recent developments:
"US Politics, Russia, China and Europe, Madness and Strategies": https://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2018/07/22/us-politics-russia-china-and-europe-madness-and-strategies/
Best regards
Harry , Jul 31, 2018 4:35:59 AM | 55
@ Hoarsewhisperer | 46
Tru-ish but Trump's latest offer is, according to the MSM, "no pre-conditions." It's quite likely that Iran's allies have advised the Iranians to tell Trump to Go F*ck yourself (if you feel you must), but then satisfy yourselves that Trump's No Preconditions means what Iran wants it to mean.

White House just explained what Trump's "no preconditions" means: 1) Iran should at the core change how it deals with its own people. 2) Change its evil stance in foreign policy. 3) Agree on nuclear agreement which would REALLY prevent them making a nuke.

In other words, Iran should capitulate and become a client state, thats what Trump means by "no preconditions."

venice12 , Jul 31, 2018 4:53:03 AM | 56
@eugene #18

https://taskandpurpose.com/blackwater-eric-prince-afghan-war-plan/

"Blackwater Founder Erik Prince's Afghan War Plan Just Leaked, And It's Terrifying "

Tis was 8 months ago.

et Al , Jul 31, 2018 5:04:41 AM | 57
Afghanistan, the graveyard of empires!

When I heard old hand Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (what a name!) was heading back it was clear that things were afoot.

China's been trying to get in for a while, the Mes Aynak mine for example, but nothing much has happened.

Afghanistan is sitting on huge amounts of valuable mineral resources (an estimated $3t) but remains dirt poor...

ashley albanese , Jul 31, 2018 6:42:37 AM | 58
In any hot clash with China the U S would be very exposed in Afghanistan .
Mark2 , Jul 31, 2018 6:51:36 AM | 59
At this advanced stage of American insanity, I don't see why the devil should have all the best tunes. I'm sick of the yanks doing this shit in over people's county's ! While they stuff there fat faces with burgers and donuts! The dirty games they play on over country's, should now be played in America with all the brutality that they have used on others. Until that happens things world wide will continue to detriate. Natural justice is all that remains. They'v curupted all else.
Yeah, Right , Jul 31, 2018 7:09:00 AM | 60
@19 "The US already started to plan an invasion of Afghanistan in januari & february of 2001."

Well, to be fair the USA probably has plans to invade lots of countries.

Indeed, it would be more interesting to consider how many countries there are that the USA *doesn't* have invasion plans gathering dust on the shelves.

Not many, I would suggest.

Mark2 , Jul 31, 2018 7:41:56 AM | 61
It's just been reported on the bbc news---- the man responsible for the Manchester bombing had been 'rescued from Lybia when Gadafi was overthrown and tracked ever since. Even in Britain up to the day of the bombing ! And now on this post we discuss America uk transporting terrorists from Syria to Afganistan . Not to mention the white helmet bunch and where Ther going! The Manchester bombing, Westminster bridge and London Bridge atacks were done by the Tory party to win a general election ! This is the reality of the world we live in.full on oppression !!!
TG , Jul 31, 2018 8:26:48 AM | 62
Indeed, I agree with the sentiments here. But missing a big part of the picture.

Afghanistan and Pakistan have sky-high fertility rates. Forget the rubbish peddled by economist-whores like Milton Friedman, under these conditions no country without an open frontier has ever developed into anything other than a larger mass of poverty. In Pakistan something like half the children are so malnourished that they grow up stunted, and it is this misery that is starting slow population growth. Pakistan is yet another example of the Malthusian holocaust, which is not a global catastrophe: it is slow grinding poverty that results when people have more children than they can support.

Bottom line: these places will remain poor and unstable no matter what lunacy the United States does or does not do. The traditional approach to such places is to leave them alone, and only keep them from escaping. Bottled up, the Afghanis and Pakistanis will kill only each other. 9/11 is a consequence of allowing people from these places free access to the Untied States.

The 'war on terror' is a consequence of 'there shall be open borders.' It's a big and messy world, and even if the government of the United States was not criminally incompetent, there would be a lot of misery and hatred in it. Open borders means that now the Untied States has to intervene in every country all over the world to ensure that nowhere can there develop terrorist cells. An impossible task.

Charles Michael @ 44

I agree with the caricature nature of much of this. I don't think there will be a next target. The MIC has become bloated while Iran, Syria, Russia, China are turning out true fighters as well as stronger economic planning.

div
Charles Michael @ 44

I agree with the caricature nature of much of this. I don't think there will be a next target. The MIC has become bloated while Iran, Syria, Russia, China are turning out true fighters as well as stronger economic planning.

div
financial matters , Jul 31, 2018 9:19:51 AM | 63
The US still has some resources and some use but needs to continue to make friends in the pattern of Kim and Putin and give up on its self defeating economic and military sabotage planning which has been exposed as morally bankrupt as well.

[Jul 31, 2018] Trump Has a Grand Strategy, He Wants to Do a 'Reverse Nixon' -- Partner Russia for an Alliance against China

Jul 31, 2018 | russia-insider.com

In a conversation with the Financial Times last week, Henry Kissinger made a highly significant remark about President Donald Trump's attempt to improve the United States' relations with Russia. The conversation took place in the backdrop of the Helsinki summit on July 16. Kissinger said: "I think Trump may be one of those figures in history who appears from time to time to mark the end of an era and to force it to give up its old pretences. It doesn't necessarily mean that he knows this, or that he is considering any great alternative. It could just be an accident."

Kissinger did not elaborate, but the drift of his thought is consistent with opinions he has voiced in the past – the US' steady loss of influence on global arena, rise of China and resurgence of Russia necessitating a new global balance .

As far back as 1972 in a discussion with Richard Nixon on his upcoming trip to China, signifying the historic opening to Beijing, Kissinger could visualize such a rebalancing becoming necessary in future. He expressed the view that compared with the Soviets (Russians), the Chinese were "just as dangerous. In fact, they're more dangerous over a historical period." Kissinger added, "in 20 years your (Nixon's) successor, if he's as wise as you, will wind up leaning towards the Russians against the Chinese."

Kissinger argued that the United States, which sought to profit from the enmity between Moscow and Beijing in the Cold War era, would therefore need "to play this balance-of-power game totally unemotionally. Right now, we need the Chinese to correct the Russians and to discipline the Russians." But in the future, it would be the other way around.

Of course, Kissinger is not the pioneer of US-Russia-China 'triangular diplomacy'. It is no secret that in the 1950s, the US did all it could to drive a wedge between Mao Zedong and Nikita Khrushchev. The accent was on isolating "communist China". Khrushchev's passion for 'peaceful co-existence' following his summit with Dwight Eisenhower in 1959 at Camp David became a defining moment in Sino-Soviet schism.

But even as Sino-Soviet schism deepened (culminating in the bloody conflict in Ussuri River in 1969), Nixon reversed the policy of Eisenhower and opened the line to Beijing, prioritizing the US' global competition with the Soviet Union. The de-classified Cold-War archival materials show that Washington seriously pondered over the possibility of a wider Sino-Soviet war. One particular memorandum of the US State Department recounts an incredible moment in Cold War history – a KGB officer querying about American reaction to a hypothetical Soviet attack on Chinese nuclear weapons facilities.

Then there is a memo written for Kissinger's attention by then influential China watcher Allen S. Whiting warning of the danger of a Soviet attack on China. Clearly, 1969 was a pivotal year when the US calculus was reset based on estimation that Sino-Soviet tensions provided a basis for Sino-American rapprochement. It led to the dramatic overture by Nixon and Kissinger to open secret communications with China through Pakistan and Romania.

Now, this recapitulation is useful today, because Trump's moves so far are indicative of an agenda to revert to the Eisenhower era – containment of China by forging an alliance with Russia .

Will Putin fall for Trump's bait? Well, it depends. To my mind, there is no question Putin will see a great opening here for Russia. But it will depend on what's on offer from the US. Putin's fulsome praise for Trump on North Korean issue and the latter's warm response was a meaningful exchange at Helsinki, has been a good beginning to underscore Moscow's keenness to play a broader role in the Asia-Pacific.

Beijing must be watching the 'thaw' at Helsinki with some unease. The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson welcomed the Helsinki summit. But the mainstream assessment by Chinese analysts is that nothing much is going to happen since the contradictions in the US-Russia relations are fundamental and Russophobia is all too pervasive within the US establishment.

The government-owned China Daily carried an editorial – Has the meeting in Helsinki reset US-Russia relations? – where it estimates that at best, " Helsinki summit represents a good beginning for better relations between the US and Russia." Notably, however, the editorial is pessimistic about any real US-Russia breakthrough, including on Syria, the topic that Putin singled out as a test case of the efficacy of Russian-American cooperation.

On the other hand, the Chinese Communist Party tabloid Global Times featured an editorial giving a stunning analysis of what has prompted Trump to pay such attention ("respect") to Russia -- China can learn from Trump's respect for Russia . It concludes that the only conceivable reason could be that although Russia is not an economic power, it has retained influence on the global stage due to military power:

Trump has repeatedly stressed that Russia and the US are the two biggest nuclear powers in the world, with their combined nuclear arsenal accounting for 90 percent of world's total, and thus the US must live in peace with Russia. On US-Russia relations, Trump is clearheaded.

On the contrary, if the US is piling pressure on China today, it is because China, although an economic giant, is still a weak military power. Therefore:

China's nuclear weapons have to not only secure a second strike but also play the role of cornerstone in forming a strong deterrence so that outside powers dare not intimidate China militarily Part of the US' strategic arrogance may come from its absolute nuclear advantage China must speed up its process of developing strategic nuclear power Not only should we possess a strong nuclear arsenal, but we must also let the outside world know that China is determined to defend its core national interests with nuclear power.

Indeed, if the crunch time comes, China will be on its own within the Kissingerian triangle. And China needs to prepare for such an eventuality. On the other hand, China's surge to create a vast nuclear arsenal could make a mockery of the grand notions in Moscow and Washington that they are the only adults in the room in keeping the global strategic balance.

Source: Indian Punchline

[Jul 31, 2018] More evidence for the at least passive complicity of GCHQ for which Matt Tait used to work, and which Robert Hannigan used to run in corrupt 'information operations' comes in a report yesterday on CNN.

Notable quotes:
"... As it happens, the same writer – Marco Giannangeli – had disseminated a parallel piece of palpable fiction on 1 September 2013, in the 'Sunday Express', in relation to the Ghouta 'false flag.' ..."
Jul 31, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

David Habakkuk , 11 days ago

All,

More evidence for the at least passive complicity of GCHQ – for which Matt Tait used to work, and which Robert Hannigan used to run – in corrupt 'information operations' comes in a report yesterday on CNN.

(See https://edition.cnn.com/201... )

It opens:

'Police have identified two suspects in the poisoning of former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, a source with knowledge of the investigation told CNN on Thursday.

'The pair left the UK in the wake of the attack on what is believed to have been a commercial flight, the source added.

'Their departure was revealed in a coded Russian message to Moscow sent after the attack, which was intercepted by a British base in Cyprus, the source said. The British government blames the Skripals' poisoning on Russia.'

The base in question is high up in the Troodos mountains, and is formally run by the RAF but actually a key resource for both GCHQ and NSA in monitoring communications over a wide area. According to an internal document from the former organisation, it has 'long been regarded as a 'Jewel in the Crown' by NSA as it offers unique access to the Levant, North Africa, and Turkey'.

(See https://theintercept.com/20... .)

That the quote comes a report in 'The Intercept' in January 2016 revealing that one of the uses of the Troodos facility is to intercept live video feeds from Israeli drones and fighter jets brings out how paradoxical the world is. For it also appears to have emerged as an important resource in 'information operations' in support of 'Borgist' agendas.

The claim about intercepts incriminating the Russians over the Salisbury incident was first made in a piece by Marco Giannangeli in the Daily Express on 9 April, which followed up the claims which Colonel de Bretton-Gordon had been instrumental in disseminating, and was then widely picked up by the MSM.

(See https://www.express.co.uk/n... .)

It was headlined: 'REVEALED: The bombshell Russian message intercepted on DAY of Skripal poisonings,' and opened: 'AN ELECTRONIC message to Moscow sent on the day former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned with a nerve agent in Salisbury included the phrase "the package has been delivered".'

Supposedly, this 'prompted a young Flight Lieutenant to recall a separate message that had been intercepted and discounted on the previous day.' The messages were 'understood to have formed "just one part" of the intelligence packet which later allowed Prime Minister Theresa May to state it was "highly likely" that Russia was behind the attacks.'

As it happens, the same writer – Marco Giannangeli – had disseminated a parallel piece of palpable fiction on 1 September 2013, in the 'Sunday Express', in relation to the Ghouta 'false flag.'

(See https://www.express.co.uk/n... .)

This one was headlined, even more melodramatically, 'Senior Syrian military chiefs tell captain: fire chemicals or be shot; BRITISH intelligence chiefs have intercepted radio messages in which senior Syrian military chiefs are heard ordering the use of chemical weapons.'

Part of the story of how bogus claims about 'smoking gun' evidence from 'SIGINT' were used to support the attempt to use the Ghouta 'false flag' to inveigle the British and Americans into destroying the Syrian government was told in my SST post on the incident. However, to mix metaphors, I only scratched the surface of a can of worms.

In a report on the 'Daily Caller' site on 29 August 2013, Kenneth Timmerman claimed that the sequence had started with an actual intercept by Unit 8200 – the Israeli equivalent of GCHQ and NSA.

(See http://dailycaller.com/2013... .)

Claiming to base his account on Western intelligence sources, he suggested that:

'According to these officers, who served in top positions in the United States, Britain, France, Israel, and Jordan, a Syrian military communication intercepted by Israel's famed Unit 8200 electronic intelligence outfit has been doctored so that it leads a reader to just the opposite conclusion reached by the original report.'

While I am not in a position to establish whether his claim is or is not accurate, an AP report on the same day quoted 'U.S. intelligence officials' explaining that 'an intercept of Syrian military officials discussing the strike was among low-level staff, with no direct evidence tying the attack back to an Assad insider or even a senior Syrian commander'.

(See https://www.salon.com/2013/... )

Meanwhile, Timmerman's claim that 'The doctored report was picked up on Israel's Channel 2 TV on Aug. 24, then by Focus magazine in Germany, the Times of Israel, and eventually by The Cable in Washington, DC' is supported by links to the relevant stories, which say what he claims they say.

Moreover, it seems clear that the 1 September 2013 report was an attempt to counter a – somewhat devastating – critique made in a 31 August post entitled 'The Troodos Conundrum' by the former British Ambassador Craig Murray, who had been closely involved with the facility during his time at the Foreign Office (and has written invaluable material on the Salisbury incident.)

(See https://www.craigmurray.org... .)

Precisely because of the closeness of the GCHQ/NSA collaboration, Murray brought out, there was indeed a major problem explaining why claims about 'SIGINT' had been central to the case made in the 'Government Assessment' released by the White House on 30 August 2013, but not even mentioned in the Joint Intelligence Community 'Assessment' produced two days before.

The answer, Murray suggested, was that the 'intelligence' came from Mossad, and so would not have been automatically shared with the British. But, given the superior capabilities of Troodos, if Mossad had it, the British should have also. So his claims 'meshed' with those by Timmerman and the AP, and the 'Express' report looks like a lame attempt at a cover-up.

Again however, one finds the world is a paradoxical place. As I noted in my SST post, detailed demolitions of the claims about 'SIGINT' in relation to Ghouta were provided both Seymour Hersh, in the 'Whose sarin?' article, and also on the 'Who Attacked Ghouta?' site masterminded by one 'sasa wawa.'

Later, it became clear that this was likely to be the Israeli technology entrepreneur Saar Wilf, a former employee of Unit 8200. So this may – or may not – be an indication of deep divisions within Israeli intelligence.

Between 18 March and 31 April, a fascinating series of posts on the Salisbury incident appeared on the 'Vineyard of the Saker' blog. The author, who used the name 'sushi', was a self-professed IT professsional, who had however obviously acquired an extensive familiarity with 'chemical forensics' and appeared to have some experience of 'SIGINT.'

(See https://thesaker.is/tag/sushi/ .)

In a 14 April post, 'sushi' produced a dismissal of the claims about 'SIGINT' implicating the Russians over the Salisbury incident quite as contemptuous as that which 'sasa wawa' had produced in relation to the claims about it incriminating the Syrian government over Ghouta.

Pointing to the implausibility of the story disseminated by the 'Express', he remarked that:

'It is doubted that any message traffic is processed on Cyprus. It is more likely that the entire take is transmitted back to GCHQ in Cheltenham via a fibre optic link. There exabytes of take are processed, not by a bored flight lieutenant, but by banks of high speed computers.

'Clearly someone in Cheltenham has committed a programming error. Anyone with any knowledge of secret communications knows that the code phrase used to confirm a murder in Salisbury is "small pizza, no anchovies." '

Interestingly, another paper in the 'Express' group made a parallel claim in relation to the Khan Sheikhoun incident to that about the Ghouta incident, but the story was not picked up and may indeed have been suppressed.

On 9 April, the paper published a report headlined 'Brit spies' lead role in Syrian air strikes; RAF BASE IS 'WEAPON.' This claimed that 'within an hour of the airstrike', Troodos had intercepted communications revealing that nerve gas had been used, and had been delivered by jets from the Syrian Arab Air Force's Shayrat Air Base.

(See

View Hide
David Habakkuk , 12 days ago
All,

I was drafting a response to the comment by 'Barbara Ann' – thanks for the link to the recent posts by Adam Carter – before going out. Returning and reading some very interesting comments, I think what I wanted to say has more general relevance.

One reason I am reading so much into 'this Dzerzhinsky thing' is the body of accumulating evidence that people like Tait are part of a system of networks which combine sanctimoniousness, corruption and stupidity in about equal measures. So some more examples may be to the point.

Different cases in which I have taken an interest come together in a post by Tait on the 'Lawfare' site on 13 March, entitled 'U.K. Prime Minister's Speech on the Russian Poisoning of Sergei Skripal: Decoding the Signals.'

(See https://www.lawfareblog.com... .)

In support of the claim that in accusing Russia of a pioneering act of chemical terrorism Theresa May was relying upon accurate analysis from the 'U.K. intelligence community', Tait wrote that:

'May then explained that Skripal was poisoned by a "military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia one of a group of nerve agents known as 'Novichok.'" She is laying out the basic groundwork for the government's attribution to a nation state and, more specifically, Russia. At Porton Down, the U.K. has one of the world's best forensic labs for analyzing chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. With the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko in 2006, this lab not only established that Polonium-210 was used but also which reactor in Russia it came from.'

In the event, as is by now well know, Boris Johnson's claim that Porton Down scientists had told him that the agent which poisoned the Skripals came from Russia was specifically repudiated by the head of that organisation, Gary Aitkenhead, on 3 April. Our Foreign Secretary told a flagrant lie, and was exposed.

(See https://www.craigmurray.org... .)

As I have shown in previous posts on this site, the 'Inquiry' conducted by Sir Robert Owen into the death of Litvinenko was patently corrupt. Moreover, it seems highly likely that, in fabricating 'evidence' to cover up what actually happened, Christopher Steele was doing a 'dry-run' for the fabrication of material in the dossier published by 'BuzzFeed.'

In fact, however, Owen's report made quite clear that the role of Porton Down was marginal. Furthermore, 'Scientist A1' from the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston quite specifically rejected the claim that 'impurity profiling' made it possible to establish that the source of the polonium was the Avangard facility at Sarov, her arguments being accepted by Owen. Either Tait has not bothered to read the report or very much of the coverage, or he is lying.

(For the report, see http://webarchive.nationala... . For some of the mass of evidence which Owen chose to ignore, see my discussions at http://turcopolier.typepad.... ; http://turcopolier.typepad....

What Porton Down did do was to use 'impurity profiling', which can produce 'spectra' identifying even the tiniest traces of substances, to frustrate the attempt to use the 'false flag' attack at Ghouta on 21 August 2013 to inveigle the American and British governments into destroying the Assad 'régime' and handing the country over to jihadists.

It may well be that this display of competence and integrity led to a 'clampdown' at the organisation, which encouraged Boris Johnson to believe he could get away with lying about what its scientists told him.

(See my defence and development of the crucial reporting by Seymour Hersh, at http://turcopolier.typepad.... .)

A general pattern which emerges is that the same small group of 'disinformation peddlers' resurfaces in different contexts – and the pattern whereby 'private security companies' are used to create a spurious impression of independence also recurs.

As I bring out in my piece on Ghouta, two figures who were critical in shaping the 'narrative' acccording to which Syrian government responsibility for the atrocity had been conclusively proved, were Colonel Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, formerly the former commanding officer of the UK Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Regiment, and also NATO's Rapid Reaction CBRN Battalion, and Dan Kaszeta.

Immediately after the story of the poisoning of the Skripals on 4 March broke, the same duo reappeared, and have been as critical to shaping the 'narrative' about the later incident as they were to that about the former.

(For the piece by Kaszeta on 'Bellingcat' which introduced the 'Novichok' theme four days later, see https://www.bellingcat.com/... .)

This makes it particular interesting to look at the website of Kaszeta's consultancy, 'Strongpoint Security Limited', in conjunction with the 'Companies House' documentation on the company.

(See http://strongpointsecurity.... ; https://beta.companieshouse... .)

One would have thought from the website that his company was a small, but hardly insignificant, player, in the field of 'physical and operational security.' As it happens, having filed 'Total exemption small company accounts' since its incorporation in May 2011, last December it filed 'Micro company accounts' for the year to 31 May 2017.

With a turnover of £20,000, staff costs of a bit more than half of that, and a profit of £394, we can see that although unlike Matt Tait's, Kaszeta's company did trade, if indeed it was his sole source of income, this pivotal figure in Anglo-American 'disinformation operations' was living on something less than $15,000 a year, at current exchange rates. (Pull the other one, as we say in Britain.)

This is all the more ironic, as the website brings out quite how critical a figure Kaszeta has been in obscuring the truth. From the bio he gives, we learn that having started as a Chemical Officer in the U.S. Army, he worked for 12 years in the White House, dealing with CBRN matters, before moving to Britain in 2008.

Among the articles to which he links on the site, we see his response in 'NOW Lebanon' in December 2013 to Hersh's original 'Whose sarin?' piece on Ghouta, -- in which Kaszeta first introduced the famous 'hexamine hypothesis.'

This – patently preposterous – suggestion that the presence of a single 'impurity' is a 'smoking gun' incriminating the Syrian government has echoed on into the clearly corrupt OPCW documents purporting to demonstrate that it was responsible for the 4 April 2017 Khan Sheikhoun attack.

Of some interest in understanding where Kaszeta he is coming from is what he describes as his 'oldest (and most footnoted on Wikipedia)' piece, which is an article published in 1988 on a site called 'Lituanus', on 'Lithuanian Resistance to Foreign Occupation 1940-52.'

(See http://www.lituanus.org/198... .)

As to Colonel de Bretton-Gordon, it is of interest to look at the attempt to 'finger' the GRU over the Skripal poisoning published under the title 'UK Poisoning Inquiry turns to Russian Agency in Mueller Indictments' in the 'New York Times' last Sunday, and the response by the Russian Embassy in London to a question about it.

(See https://www.nytimes.com/201... ; https://www.rusemb.org.uk/f... .)

The response objects that 'while the British authorities keep concealing all information concerning the investigation into the Salisbury incident, the newspaper has quoted "one former US official familiar with the inquiry".'

It also asserts that that crucial evidence which has not been made available to the Russians – and here, as with Ghouta and Khan Sheikhoun, the results of 'impurity profiling' are critical – appears to have been shared not just with inappropriate Americans, but with all kinds of others.

And indeed, the Embassy is quite right in suggesting that the claim made by the supposed creator of 'Novichok', Vladimir Uglev, to the BBC in April about 'all the spectrum data I was sent recently' has neither been confirmed nor denied. This seems a general pattern – the 'spectra' which may actually be able to provide definitive answers to questions of responsibility are only provided to people who can be relied upon to give the 'right' answers.

The Embassy response also quite fairly refers to a report in the 'Times' also in April, about the 'intelligence' which had been 'used to persuade world leaders that Moscow was behind the poisoning' and that the 'Novichok' had been manufactured at the Shikhany facility at in southwest Russia, which stated that de Bretton-Gordon, 'who had seen the intelligence, called it very compelling.' He has a long history of lying about CW in Syria – so is obviously the right person to lie about them in the UK.

(See https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/... ; https://www.thetimes.co.uk/... .)

It thus becomes interesting to probe into what lies behind the opening of de Bretton-Gordon's entry on the 'Military Speakers' website ('Real Heroes; Real Stories.') According to this, he is 'Chief Operating Office of SecureBio Ltd a commercial company offering CBRN Resilience, consultancy and deployable capabilities.'

(See http://www.militaryspeakers... .)

From 'Companies House', we learn that the liquidation of 'Secure Bio', which started in in June 2015, was concluded in August last year. The really interesting thing about the records, however, is that at the time of the liquidation the company had very large debts, which were written off, of a kind and in a manner which suggested that de Bretton-Gordon's activities may have been largely funded by loans from untraceable sources which were not meant to be repaid.

(See https://beta.companieshouse... – in particular the 'Statement of affairs' dated 30 June 2015.)

Actually, with the 'NYT' report we come full circle. Among those quoted is Mark Galeotti – apparently his admission that he had totally misrepresented the thinking of the Russian General Staff has not him made more cautious about making extravagant claims about its Main Intelligence Directorate (misreported as Main Directorate by the 'NYT.')

Also quoted are two figures who play key roles in Owen's Report – the Soviet era-GRU defector 'Viktor Suvorov' (real name 'Vladimir Rezun') and the former KGB operative Yuri Shvets. Both of these feature prominently in the posts on the Litvinenko affair to which I have linked, and both were key members of the 'information operations' network centred around the late Boris Berezovsky. This now seems to have taken control of American policy, as of British.

The role of 'Suvorov'/Rezun in attempting to defend the interpretations of Stalin's policy put forward by MI6 in the run-up to the Second World War, and those asserted later by General Keitel, and the way he was demolished by the leading American historian of the War in the East, Colonel David Glantz, and the Israeli historian Gabriel Gorodetsky, is too large a subject to go into here.

(For a brief review, see https://networks.h-net.org/... .)

However, it provides further reason to wonder whether the misreadings of Stalin's policy which caused MI6 to give advice to Chamberlain which helped destroy the last chances of preventing the Nazi-Soviet Pact, may still be the 'house view' of that organisation. It was, obviously, the Pact which spelled 'curtains' both for Poland and the Baltics.

Jack -> David Habakkuk , 12 days ago

David

There is a pattern of abuse of formerly well regarded institutions to achieve the propaganda aims of the Deep State establishment. The depths that were plumbed to push the Iraq WMD falsehoods are well known. Yet no one was held to account nor was there any honest accounting of the abuse. There have been pretenses like the Owen inquiry that you note.

We see the same situation of sweeping under the rug malfeasance and even outright criminality through obfuscation and obstruction in the case of the meddling in the 2016 election by top officials in intelligence and law enforcement. Clearly less and less people are buying what the Deep State sells despite their overwhelming control of the media channels.

It seems that we are marching towards a credibility crisis similar to what was experienced in the Soviet Union when no one trusted the contents in Pravda.

What is to be gained by the leadership in Britain in promoting these biological weapons cases since Litvinenko? In the US it is quite apparent that the Deep State have become extremely powerful and the likelihood that Trump recognizes that resistance is futile is very high. Schumer may be proven right that they have six ways from Sunday to make you kowtow to their dictats.

[Jul 31, 2018] The question re the Russians still targeting our elections? belongs to the same category as Are you still beating your wife? Both suggest kangaroo court in action

Jul 31, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

STEPHEN COHEN: ...Are the Russians still targeting our elections?" This is in the category "Are you still beating your wife?" There is no proof that the Russians have targeted or attacked our elections. But it's become axiomatic. What kind of media is that, are the Russians still, still attacking our elections.

And what Michael McFaul, whom I've known for years, formerly Ambassador McFaul, purportedly a scholar and sometimes a scholar said, it is simply the kind of thing, to be as kind as I can, that I heard from the John Birch Society about President Eisenhower when he went to meet Khrushchev when I was a kid growing up in Kentucky.

...to stage a kangaroo trial of the president of the United States in the mainstream media, and have plenty of once-dignified people come on and deliver the indictment, is without precedent in this country

[Jul 31, 2018] Top German Editor CIA Bribing Journalists

Notable quotes:
"... Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung ..."
"... Russia Insider ..."
Oct 03, 2014 | russia-insider.com

The allegations, while shocking, are consistent with the CIA's long and well-established history of media infiltration Fri, Oct 3, 2014 | 44,230 48 Members of the German media are paid by the CIA in return for spinning the news in a way that supports US interests, and some German outlets are nothing more than PR appendages of NATO, according to a new book by Udo Ulfkotte , a former editor of Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung , one of Germany's largest newspapers.

Ulfkotte is a serious mainstream journalist. Here he is on Germany's leading political talk show a couple of years ago. The book is a sensation in Germany, #7 on the bestseller list. Its political dynamite, coming on the heels of German outrage of NSA tapping of their phones. Check out the RT.com story on it in the video below.

This is Germany's largest, most serious newsweekly. The headline reads "Stop Putin Now", and shows pictures of the victims of MH17. Their coverage of Russia over the years has read like a US state department memo.

Here at Russia Insider , it has long been apparent to us that there is something distinctly odd about the German media regarding Russia. We follow it, and it is much more strident than even the anglo-saxon media regarding Russia, while German public opinion is much more positive towards Russia than in other countries.

Another interesting thing about it is that it is very disparate. Some major voices are very reasonable about Russia, but most are negative, and some are comically apocalyptic. This is what one would expect if there was some financial influence ginning the system.

We've been talking about this for a while now. German public opinion is becoming more and more fed up with the what they increasingly believe to be a rigged media, and its starting to come out everywhere.

The allegations, while shocking, are consistent with the CIA's long and well-established history of media infiltration.

Operation Mockingbird, which began in the 1950s, was a secret CIA operation which recruited journalists to serve as mouthpieces for the American government. The program was officially terminated after it was exposed by the famous Church Committee investigations , but evidence of ongoing CIA influence over the media continues to accumulate.

Just last week Glenn Greenwald's (of Edward Snowden fame) new groundbreaking investigative website, The Intercept , charged that the CIA leveraged its considerable influence - some might even say friendship - with media in order to discredit Gary Webb, the fearless American journalist who uncovered CIA cocaine trafficking as part of the Iran-Contra scandal of the 1980s.

From The Intercept (emphasis our own):

On September 18, the agency released a trove of documents spanning three decades of secret government operations. Culled from the agency's in-house journal, Studies in Intelligence, the materials include a previously unreleased six-page article titled " Managing a Nightmare: CIA Public Affairs and the Drug Conspiracy Story ." Looking back on the weeks immediately following the publication of "Dark Alliance," the document offers a unique window into the CIA's internal reaction to what it called "a genuine public relations crisis" while revealing just how little the agency ultimately had to do to swiftly extinguish the public outcry.

Thanks in part to what author Nicholas Dujmovic, a CIA Directorate of Intelligence staffer at the time of publication, describes as "a ground base of already productive relations with journalists," the CIA's Public Affairs officers watched with relief as the largest newspapers in the country rescued the agency from disaster, and, in the process, destroyed the reputation of an aggressive, award-winning reporter.

It's as if Operation Mockingbird never ended.

This post first appeared on Russia Insider

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

[Jul 31, 2018] The Yellow Peril Comes to Washington by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected]. ..."
Jul 31, 2018 | www.unz.com

Philippics are good, but at some point they faile to exite. The key question that Phipip forgot to ander is: Dore Izreal acts a alobbist of the US MIC or it hasits own l(local agnda) that conflicts the MIC interests in the region.

So President Donald Trump reckoned on Monday that the United States Intelligence Community (IC) just might be wrong in its assessment that Russia had sought to interfere in the 2016 U.S. election but then decided on Tuesday that he misspoke and had the greatest confidence in the IC and now agrees that they were correct in their judgment. But Donald Trump, interestingly, added something about there being "others" that also had been involved in the election in an attempt to subvert it, though he was not specific and the national media has chosen not to pursue the admittedly cryptic comment. He was almost certainly referring to China both due to possible motive and the possession of the necessary resources to carry out such an operation. Indeed, there are reports that China hacked the 30,000 Hillary Clinton emails that are apparently still missing.

Just how one interferes in an election in a large country with diverse sources of information and numerous polling stations located in different states using different systems is, of course, problematical. The United States has interfered in elections everywhere, including in Russia under Boris Yeltsin. It engaged in regime change in Iran, Chile, and Guatemala by supporting conservative elements in the military which obligingly staged coups. In Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. forces invaded and overthrew the governments while in Libya the change in regime was largely brought about by encouraging rebels while bombing government forces. The same model has been applied in Syria, though without much success because Damascus actually was bold enough to resist.

So how do the Chinese "others" bring about "change" short of a full-scale invasion by the People's Liberation Army? I do not know anything about actual Chinese plans to interfere in future American elections and gain influence over the resulting newly elected government but would like to speculate on just how they might go about that onerous task.

First, I would build up an infrastructure in the United States that would have access to the media and be able to lobby and corrupt the political class. That would be kind of tricky as it would require getting around the Foreign Agent Registration Act of 1938 (FARA), which requires representatives of foreign governments operating in the United States to register and have their finances subject to review by the Department of the Treasury. Most recently, several Russian news agencies that are funded by the Putin government have been required to do so, including RT International and Sputnik radio and television.

The way to avoid the FARA registration requirement is to have all funding come through Chinese-American sources that are not directly connected with the government in Beijing. Further, the foundations and other organizations should be set up as having an educational purpose rather than a political agenda. You might want to call your principal lobbying group something like the American Chinese Political Action Committee or ACPAC as an acronym when one is referring to it shorthand.

Once established, ACPAC will hire and send hundreds of Chinese-American lobbyists to Capitol Hill when Congress is in session. They will be carefully selected to come from as many states and congressional districts as possible to maximize access to legislative offices. They will have with them position papers prepared by the ACPAC central office that explain why a close and uncritical relationship with Beijing is not only the right thing to do, it is also a good thing for the United States.

As part of the process, new Congressmen will benefit from free trips to China paid for by an educational foundation set up for that purpose. They will be able to walk on the Great Wall and speak to genuine representative Chinese who will tell them how wonderful everything is in the People's Republic.

Congressmen who nevertheless appear to be resistant to the lobbying and the emoluments will be confronted with a whole battery of alternative reasons why they should be filo-Chinese, including the thinly veiled threat that to behave otherwise could be construed as politically damaging anti-Orientalist racism. For those who persist in their obduracy, the ultimate weapon will be citation of the horrors of the Second World War Rape of Nanking. No one wants to be accused of being a Rape of Nanking denier.

The second phase of converting Congress is to set up a bunch of Political Action Committees (PACs). They will have innocuous names like Rocky Mountain Sheep Herders Association, but they will all really be about China. When the money begins to flow into the campaign coffers of legislators any concerns about what China is doing in the world will cease. The same PACs can be use to fund billboards and voter outreach in some districts, allowing China to have a say in the elections without actually having to surface or be explicit about whom it supports. Other PACs can work hard at inserting material into social websites, similar to what the Russians have been accused of doing.

And then there is the mass media. Using the same Chinese-American conduit, you would simply buy up controlling interests in newspapers and other media outlets. And you would begin staffing those outlets with earnest young Chinese-Americans who will be highly protective of Chinese interests and never write a story critical of the government in Beijing or the Chinese people. That way the American public will eventually become so heavily propagandized by the prevailing narrative that they will never question anything that China does, ideally beginning to refer to it as the "only democracy in Asia" and "America's best friend in the whole wide world." Once the indoctrination process is completed, the Chinese leadership might even crush demonstrators with tanks in Tiananmen Square or line up snipers to pick off protest leaders and no congressman or newspaper would dare say nay.

When the political classes and media are sufficiently under control, it would then be time to move to the final objective: the dismantling of the United States Constitution. In particularly, there is that pesky Bill of Rights and the First Amendment guaranteeing Free Speech. That would definitely have to go, so you round up your tame Congress critters and you elect a president who is also in your pocket, putting everything in place for the "slam-dunk." You pass a battery of laws making any criticism of China both racist and felonious, with punitive fines and prison sentences attached. After that success, you can begin to dismantle the rest of the Bill of Rights and no one will be able to say a word against what you are doing because the First Amendment will by then be a dead duck. When the Constitution is in shreds and Chinese lobbyists are firmly in control of corrupted legislators, Beijing will have won a bloodless victory against the United States and it all began with just a little interference in America's politics alluded to by Donald Trump.

Of course, dear reader, all of the above might be true but for the fact that I am not talking about China at all and am only using that country as a metaphor. Beijing may have spied on the U.S. elections but it otherwise has evidenced little interest in manipulating elections or controlling any aspect of the U.S. government. And even though I am sure that Donald Trump was not referring to Israel when he made his offhand comment about "others," the shoe perfectly fits that country's subjugation of many of the foreign and national security policy mechanisms in the United States over the past fifty years. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently boasted about how he controls Trump and convinced him to pull out of the Iran nuclear agreement.

The real mystery, if there is one, is why no American politician has either the guts or the integrity or perhaps the necessary intelligence to substitute Tel Aviv for Moscow and to call Israel out like we are currently calling out Russia for actions that pale in comparison to what Netanyahu has been up to.

To be specific, there is no evidence that Russia ever asked for favors from Trump's campaign staff and transition team but Israel did so over a vote on its illegal settlements at the United Nations. Is Special Counsel Robert Mueller or Congress interested? No. Is the media interested? No.

Israel, relying on Jewish power and money to do the heavy lifting, has completely corrupted many aspects of American government and, in particular, its foreign policy by aggressive lobbying and buying politicians. All new members of Congress and spouses are taken to Israel on generously funded "fact finding" tours after being elected to make sure they get their bearings straight right from the git-go. Israel's nearly total control over the message on the Middle East coming out of the U.S. mainstream is aided and abetted by the numerous Jewish editors and journalists who are prepared to pump the party line. The money to do all this comes from Jewish billionaires like Haim Saban and Sheldon Adelson, who have their hooks deep into both political parties. Meanwhile, the ability of America's most powerful foreign policy lobby AIPAC to avoid registration as a foreign agent is completely due to the exercise of Jewish power in the United States which means in practice that Israel and its advocates will never be sanctioned in any way.

Israel is eager to have the United States fight Iran on its behalf, even though Washington has no real interest in doing so, and all indications are that it will be successful. Though it is a rich country, it receives a multi-billion-dollar handout from the U.S. Treasury every year. When its war criminal prime minister comes to town he receives 26 standing ovations from a completely sycophantic congress and now the United States has even stationed soldiers in Israel who are "prepared to die" for Israel even though there is no treaty of any kind between the two countries and the potential victims have likely never been consulted regarding dying for a foreign country. All of this takes place without the public ever voting on or even discussing the relationship, a tribute to the fact that both major parties and the media have been completely co-opted.

And now there is the assault on the First Amendment, with legislation currently in Congress making it a crime either to criticize Israel or support a boycott of it in support of Palestinian rights. When those bills become law, which they will, we are finished as a country where fundamental rights are respected.

And what has Russia done in comparison to all this? Hardly anything even if all the claims about its alleged interference are true. So when will Mueller and all the Republican and Democratic baying dogs say a single word about Israel's interference in our elections and political processes? If past behavior is anything to go by, it will never happen.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected].

Rational , July 31, 2018 at 4:23 am GMT

USA = ISRAEL'S BANANA REPUBLIC.

Thanks for the great article, Sir. You are so right.

The New York Times should change its name to Tel Aviv Times. Everyday, it interferes in virtually every US election, on behalf of Israel, attacking candidates who do not support Israel or those who are patriotic and want to ban immigration.

Same with CNN, WaPo, the Economist (a Rothschild publication), etc.

Our Congressmen are Gazans. They are forced to sign pledges supporting Israel, and forced to destroy their country through 3rd world immigration, or risk destruction of their careers, mockery or defamation by the Zionist controlled media, loss of campaign contributions from their biggest donors, or even risk being framed.

When Cynthia McKinney refused to sign the pledge, she was forced out. When another freshman Congressman simply wanted to delay a vote in favor of Israel, he was attacked, taken to Israel where he was softened up and now is totally under the Jewish Lobby's control.

http://forward.com/news/israel/206542/how-the-israel-lobby-set-beto-orourke-right/

And then they bragged about how them "set him straight" -- as if he was crooked before. Or is he crooked now?

[Jul 31, 2018] Donald Trump is Not the 'Manchurian Candidate' The American Conservative

Notable quotes:
"... The New York Times ..."
"... Vanity Fair ..."
"... The Washington Post , ..."
"... With impeachment itself on the table, Mueller has done little more than issue the equivalent of parking tickets to foreigners he has no jurisdiction over. Intelligence summaries claim the Russians meddled, but don't show that Trump was involved. Indictments against Russians are cheered as evidence, when they are just Mueller's uncontested assertions. ..."
Jul 31, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

An answer was needed, so one was created: the Russians. As World War II ended with the U.S. the planet's predominant power, dark forces saw advantage in arousing new fears . The Soviet Union morphed from a decimated ally in the fight against fascism into a competitor locked in a titanic struggle with America. How did they get so powerful so quickly? Nothing could explain it except traitors. Cold War-era America? Or 2018 Trump America? Yes, on both counts.

To some, that fear was not a problem but a tool -- one could defeat political enemies simply by accusing them of being Russian sympathizers. There was no need for evidence, so desperate were Americans to believe; just an accusation that someone was in league with Russia was enough. Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy fired his first shot on February 9, 1950, proclaiming there were 205 card-carrying members of the Communist Party working for the Department of State. The evidence? Nothing but assertions .

Indeed, the very word " McCarthyism " came to mean making accusations of treason without sufficient evidence. Other definitions include a ggressively questioning a person's patriotism, using accusations of disloyalty to pressure a person to adhere to conformist politics or discredit an opponent, and subverting civil and political rights in the name of national security.

Pretending to be saving America while he tore at its foundations, McCarthy destroyed thousands of lives over the next four years simply by pointing a finger and saying "communist." Whenever anyone invoked his Fifth Amendment right to silence, McCarthy answered that this was "the most positive proof obtainable that the witness is communist." The power of accusation was used by others as well: the Lavender Scare , which concluded that the State Department was overrun with closeted homosexuals who were at risk of being blackmailed by Moscow for their perversions, was an offshoot of McCarthyism, and by 1951, 600 people had been fired based solely on evidence-free "morals" charges. State legislatures and school boards mimicked McCarthy. Books and movies were banned. Blacklists abounded. The FBI embarked on campaigns of political repression (they would later claim Martin Luther King Jr. had communist ties), even as journalists and academics voluntarily narrowed their political thinking to exclude communism.

John Brennan, Melting Down and Covering Up Real Takeaway: The FBI Influenced the Election of a President

Watching sincere people succumb to paranoia again, today, is not something to relish. But having trained themselves to intellectualize away Hillary Clinton's flaws, as they had with Obama, about half of America seemed truly gobsmacked when she lost to the antithesis of everything that she had represented to them. Every poll (that they read) said she would win. Every article (that they read) said it too, as did every person (that they knew). Lacking an explanation for the unexplainable, many advanced scenarios that would have failed high school civics, claiming that only the popular vote mattered, or that the archaic Emoluments Clause prevented Trump from taking office, or that Trump was insane and could be disposed of under the 25th Amendment .

After a few trial balloons during the primaries under which Bernie Sanders' visits to Russia and Jill Stein's attendance at a banquet in Moscow were used to imply disloyalty, the fearful cry that the Russians meddled in the election morphed into the claim that Trump had worked with the Russians and/or (fear is flexible) that the Russians had something on Trump. Everyone learned a new Russian word: kompromat .

Donald Trump became the Manchurian Candidate. That term was taken from a 1959 novel made into a classic Cold War movie that follows an American soldier brainwashed by communists as part of a Kremlin plot to gain influence in the Oval Office. A Google search shows that dozens of news sources -- including The New York Times , Vanity Fair , Salon , The Washington Post , and, why not, Stormy Daniels' lawyer Michael Avenatti -- have all claimed that Trump is a 2018 variant of the Manchurian Candidate, controlled by ex-KGB officer Vladimir Putin.

The birth moment of Trump as a Russian asset is traceable to MI-6 intelligence officer-turned-Democratic opposition researcher-turned FBI mole Christopher Steele , whose "dossier" claimed the existence of the pee tape. Supposedly, somewhere deep in the Kremlin is a surveillance video made in 2013 of Trump in Moscow's Ritz-Carlton Hotel, watching prostitutes urinate on a bed that the Obamas had once slept in. As McCarthy did with homosexuality, naughty sex was thrown in to keep the rubes' attention.

No one, not even Steele's alleged informants, has actually seen the pee tape. It exists in a blurry land of certainty alongside the elevator tape , alleged video of Trump doing something in an elevator that's so salacious it's been called "Every Trump Reporter's White Whale." No one knows when the elevator video was made, but a dossier-length article in New York magazine posits that Trump has been a Russian asset since 1987.

Suddenly no real evidence is necessary, because it is always right in front of your face. McCarthy accused Presidents Roosevelt, Truman, and Eisenhower of being communists or communist stooges over the "loss" of China in 1949. Trump holds a bizarre press conference in Helsinki and the only explanation must be that he is a traitor.

Nancy Pelosi ("President Trump's weakness in front of Putin was embarrassing, and proves that the Russians have something on the president, personally, financially, or politically") and Cory Booker ("Trump is acting like he's guilty of something") and Hillary Clinton ("now we know whose side he plays for") and John Brennan ("rises to and exceeds the threshold of 'high crimes and misdemeanors.' It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump's comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin") and Rachel Maddow ("We haven't ever had to reckon with the possibility that someone had ascended to the presidency of the United States to serve the interests of another country rather than our own") and others have said that Trump is controlled by Russia. As in 1954 when the press provided live TV coverage of McCarthy's dirty assertions against the Army, the modern media uses each new assertion as "proof" of an earlier one. Snowballs get bigger rolling downhill.

When assertion is accepted as evidence, it forces the other side to prove a negative to break free. So until Trump "proves" he is not a Russian stooge, his denials will be seen as attempts to wiggle out from under evidence that in fact doesn't exist. Who, pundits ask, can come up with a better explanation for Trump's actions than blackmail, as if that was a necessary step to clearing his name?

Joe McCarthy's victims faced similar challenges: once labeled a communist or a homosexual, the onus shifted to them to somehow prove they weren't. Their failure to prove their innocence became more evidence of their guilt. The Cold War version of this mindset was well illustrated in movies like Invasion of the Body Snatchers or the classic Twilight Zone episode " The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street ." Anyone who questions this must themselves be at best a useful fool, if not an outright Russia collaborator. (Wrote one pundit : "They are accessories, before and after the fact, to the hijacking of a democratic election. So, yes, goddamn them all.") In the McCarthy era, the term was "fellow traveler": anyone, witting or unwitting, who helped the Russians. Mere skepticism, never mind actual dissent, is muddled with disloyalty.

Blackmail? Payoffs? Deals? It isn't just the months of Mueller's investigation that have passed without evidence. The IRS and Treasury have had Trump's tax documents and financials for decades, even if Rachel Maddow has not. If Trump has been a Russian asset since 1987, or even 2013, he has done it behind the backs of the FBI, CIA, Secret Service, and NSA. Yet at the same time, in what history would see as the most out-in-the-open intelligence operation ever, some claim he asked on TV for his handlers to deliver hacked emails. In The Manchurian Candidate , the whole thing was at least done in secret as you'd expect.

With impeachment itself on the table, Mueller has done little more than issue the equivalent of parking tickets to foreigners he has no jurisdiction over. Intelligence summaries claim the Russians meddled, but don't show that Trump was involved. Indictments against Russians are cheered as evidence, when they are just Mueller's uncontested assertions.

There is no evidence the president is acting on orders from Russia or is under their influence. None.

As with McCarthy, as in those famous witch trials at Salem, allegations shouldn't be accepted as truth, though in 2018 even pointing out that basic tenet is blasphemy. The burden of proof should be on the accusing party, yet the standing narrative in America is that the Russia story must be assumed plausible, if not true, until proven false. Joe McCarthy tore America apart for four years under just such standards, until finally public opinion, led by Edward R. Murrow , a journalist brave enough to demand answers McCarthy did not have, turned against him. There is no Edward R. Murrow in 2018.

When asking for proof is seen as disloyal, when demanding evidence after years of accusations is considered a Big Ask, when a clear answer somehow always needs additional time, there is more on the line in a democracy than the fate of one man.

Peter Van Buren, a 24-year State Department veteran, is the author of We Meant Well : How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People and Hooper's War : A Novel of WWII Japan. Follow him on Twitter @WeMeantWell .

[Jul 30, 2018] RussiaGate Is a Partisan Freak-Show - Latest Update from Consummate Political Insider, Roger Stone

Jul 30, 2018 | russia-insider.com

The Rosenstein Justice Department is entirely too calculated and manipulative, from all we have now seen, to believe there is not a deep and profound ulterior motive behind its obstinate, even petulant, refusal to produce critical documents at the center of the entire Russian collusion pretextual hoax that, beyond question now, was manufactured." Roger Stone 4 hours ago | 311 31 Stay classy MSM

Well, America's national freak show hit parade of the sleazy shaved head "Intelligence Community" liars, and Bond-villainous deep state subversives are at it again, busy rolling out the 6th or 7th permutation (who can keep count?) of their ever-evolving (ever-collapsing, really) Russian collusion defamation-distraction hoax.

Even with the fact that bipartisan hitman Robert Mueller has spent $16 Million and two years using bully tactics and continuously threatening lawyers for people who don't care to testify in this Inquisition still has proof of collusion, conspiracy.

Deep State Democrat frauds are frantic to keep the most cynical, deceitful smear campaign in American history alive and kicking. Time is not on their side. It has brought steady plodding revelation of the facts, inevitably exposing the depths of their deceit and willingness to corrupt public power.

With their bag of manipulative dirty tricks approaching exhaustion these sordid schemers are in panic mode, and their shrill lies and flailing antics are escalating. On July 23, 2018, two of California's worst political afflictions on America, Nancy Pelosi, and Adam Schiff used the ruse of announcing a toothless, useless House resolution "condemning" the president's remarks at the Helsinki summit to double down on their latest round of twisted defamations of President Trump.

" As the whole world knows, one week ago, President Trump sold out our democracy ," crowed Pelosi, in typically-understated rhetorical style.

Without the slightest irony, the under-medicated then incredibly pronounced, " The last thing you want in intelligence is partisanship, and we were able to avoid that for so long ."

[Certainly, Nancy, we wouldn't want that. And rest assured, the self-unmasking of the psychopathic duo of Obama thugs John Brennan and James Clapper has made abundantly obvious which lying partisan lunatics are responsible for ending this mythical streak of non-partisan intelligence.]

If nothing else, Pelosi and Schiff's grandstand-of-the-day highlighted how practiced and polished the Democrat tribe's demagogues are at hyperbole, hypocrisy and almost medical-grade ingenuity. Entirely predictable does not make their nauseating faux sanctimony any less appalling to witness, though.

But really who's to complain when watching one's opponents make complete asses of themselves huckstering a contrived scandal that is polling around 1% in the list of most important issues to Americans.

Plus, if not for power-lusting Democrat demagogues like Adam and Nancy and their Democrat platoon of expert political bullshit artists, America might be forced to go on without the benefit of having our public life perpetually hijacked by one phony leftist melodrama after another.

With the president's poll numbers steadily rising, when not holding firm, it is easy to understand why the conniptions underway amongst the unholy alliance between the bellicose Russo-phobic Beltway war party and perpetually-impotent Democrat leftist losers. Both camps were tossed aside .dethroned in one fell swoop by the ascendancy of a president who promotes the alien idea of having peace around the world. It is no wonder they are so apoplectic.

They are getting an object lesson about how Donald Trump will not be bumrushed and bullied into launching any more messianic military misadventures, squandering American blood and treasure in some hell hole on the other side of the planet. Nor will he be hoaxed into provoking the world's only other nuclear power even close to the United States in its stockpile.

Their latest descent into It was not enough that the Robert Mueller hit squad, being so high, holy and apolitical as we have all been repeatedly admonished by those whose motives are just as pure, happened to conveniently announce the indictment of 12 Russians within hours of the president's face-to-face meetings with the Russian president.

Surely this was just a pure coincidence. Who could dare think there was anything suspicious (or malicious) about having an ad hoc legal inquisition headed by Barack Obama's former FBI chief and loaded with Hillary Clinton supporters (donors, even) spark a partisan media frenzy around astonishingly-specific domestic criminal allegations against purported agents of America's only matching nuclear-armed rival on the planet, just as the president is on foreign soil daring try to establish a workable relationship with that nation, potentially affecting everything from middle-east conflict reduction to North Korean denuclearization.

Apparently this cute little connivance staged by Trump's own #2 at the DOJ, the pompous smirking self-righteous foot-dragger and Mueller protégé Rod Rosenstein, was merely a prelude to the truly-grotesque torrent of vicious, seditious slander unleashed on the president by the Clinton-Obama fifth columnists and their himself was about one step away from facing articles of impeachment for his obstruction of congressional oversight and inquiry into the unprecedented abuse of national security by Obama apparatchiks.

Over at the Comey Noise Network, the hairless, brainless, spineless tub of crap named Brian Stelter (you can also refer to him by his initials: BS) oozed up from his feeding hole to act as a lead parrot for their latest and, so far, thinnest of fabricated defamations.

CNN's very own BS ominously posed their latest ploy to all six of his viewers and on Twitter in the form of laughably-demented questions:

"What does Putin have on Trump?"

"Has he been compromised ?"

When there is a particularly important lie or smear or spin that the Democrat-Media axis of sleaze wants to be injected into the news cycle, the specific talking (lying) points will usually be assigned to multiple prominent Democrat spokesliars to be repeated pretty much verbatim in separate appearances on various high profile news outlets (the Sunday morning network shows are most favored).

Whether their latest consensus lie is meant to breathe new life into their perpetually-collapsing false narrative using a newly cooked-up defamation or false accusation or it is designed to manufacture a timely distraction drawing attention away from some other story they want to be squelched, the imperative of putting it out there can be gauged by how many media stooges are enlisted to parrot it and how precisely the stooges repeat the exact wording of the lie.

This was clearly the case with the latest load of bullschiff initially shoveled by Stelter. Chief Hoaxliar Adam Schiff (and likely fabricator of most or all of the Trump-Russia lies and manipulations floated over the last two years) added his shiny talking head to Smelter's stooging, on where else but ABC's This Week with Clinton deceit fluffer and amenable leftist dwarf, George Stephanopoulos.

Schiff quadrupled down, likely out of smug satisfaction at having concocted this latest twist on his Russia-Trump carousel of lies:

"I think there's no ignoring the fact that for whatever reason, this president acts like he's compromised ."

"Well, I certainly think he's acting like someone who is compromised . And it may very well be that he is compromised or it may very well be that he believes that he's compromised , that the Russians have information on him."

"I hope that Bob Mueller's investigating it, because again, if that's the leverage the Russians are using, it would not only explain the president's behavior, but it would help protect the country by knowing that in fact our president was compromised ."

Schiff naturally did not find the 145 million smakers Bill and Hillary took from executives of the Russian State-owned Energy company compromising – just as he sees no problem with his own association with defense contractors connected to Ukrainian Organized crime.

Reinforcing these two spinning BS artists, they brought in a real luminary from the Obama Mafia to drive the smear home. Good old Susan Rice, what with her clean hands.

Like any other professional con artist, they know better than to linger around any particular pack of lies they pounded incessantly for weeks, or even months, extracting every last molecule of ill-gotten benefit they possibly could from it while desperately squirming to salvage anything possible from their messy, slimy trail of serially-debunked lies and disinformation.

The Rosenstein Justice Department is entirely too calculated and manipulative, from all we have now seen, to believe there is not a deep and profound ulterior motive behind its obstinate, even petulant, refusal to produce critical documents at the center of the entire Russian collusion pretextual hoax that, beyond question now, was manufactured.

Source: Stone Cold Truth

Stop Bush and Clinton • 10 hours ago ,

Spot on about the Russiagate witch hunt -- but describing Trump as a "president who promotes the alien idea of having peace around the world" is almost as Fake News as CNN.

Trump doesn't want peace in Iran. Trump doesn't want peace for Syria or Palestine. He's less insane than Hitlery Clinton on Russia, but that's like saying he's less insane than Adolf Hitler on the issue of annexing Austria.

Surely the Democrats suck -- but it's not like Republicans or Trump are the solution.

Franklin Wisman Stop Bush and Clinton • 7 hours ago ,

Austrians were overjoyed with annexation. Nearly 98% for it.

siamdave Stop Bush and Clinton • 2 hours ago ,

when thinking about Trump and Iran, try to inform your thoughts with the Trump and North Korea story .... he's a very skilled dealmaker, and when doing negotiations, you don't lay your full hand on the table at the beginning ...

XRGRSF Stop Bush and Clinton • 10 hours ago ,

Perhaps Trump, et al, are not the solution, but in the U$ system they are the only other option. There will be only two options until this straw shack finally goes up in flames, and rebuilds itself as something better.

AM Hants • 9 hours ago ,

I do like Tucker Carlson. Interesting interview with Carter Page. Tucker Carlson Tonight 72318 FoxNews Today July 23, 2018 Breaking News...

Play Hide
IllyaK AM Hants • 5 hours ago ,

Carter Page is too fucking stupid to be a spy.

IllyaK • 13 hours ago ,

They are getting an object lesson about how Donald Trump will not be bumrushed and bullied into launching any more messianic military misadventures

Unless one of those 'messianic adventures' features Iran in a starring role. This orange-haired assclown is literally minutes away from doing his benefactor's bidding and starting a war with Persia.

A war the Monkey Empire will lose - but that's beside the point.

wilmers13 • 3 hours ago ,

This is all great fun to see them hissing and fighting but at the end of the day, it is very unproductive to be so preoccupied with things US. I promise I will try to avoid the soap opera a bit more.

Maria Angelica Brunell Solar • 4 hours ago ,

The author expresses his justified anger in an ingenious and hilarious way! I just would like Mr. Stone to apologize for saying that Trump will not continue "squandering American blood and treasure in some hell hole on the other side of the planet". The invaded countries in the ME (or in other parts of the world earlier) were not "hell holes" before the US set its deadly boot on their soil! The author's anger should not be deflected against the US gov's victims

Franklin Wisman • 7 hours ago ,

Here's an important article on 'why' os many in the West, the neocons, hate Russia. Eye opening to the reality of things.
https://www.sott.net/articl...

Russell McGinnis • 11 hours ago ,

Enough irony to explode your brain. Stone misidentifies the subversives in his McCarthy-Murrow graphic. Murrow represented the anti-America Judeo-supremacist faction. It was McCarthy who accurately warned us of the Deep State threat for which shabbos Murrow fronted.

See: Venona Transcripts

Stephan Williams Russell McGinnis • 9 hours ago ,

You might want to read "Blacklisted by History, The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight against America's Enemies" by M. Stanton Evans

Senator McCarthy was one of the few GOOD GUYS.

https://www.amazon.com/Blac...

Russell McGinnis • 13 hours ago ,

Russiagate isn't a partisan freak show. It is a naked demonstration of Jewish subversion of public institutions to aggress against the White race. Thank you for today's cognitive infiltration, (((Mr. Stone))). We so love marching in circles, it's good cardio training.

AM Hants • 14 hours ago ,

There should be a special investigation into Mueller. Dodgy, some of the investigations he has been involved in, plus, who he supports. Now why does Uranium One, so come to mind?

Has anybody read the George Eliason articles on the Mueller investigation?

The Daily Beast Agrees with Mueller Indictment: It's Ukraine... https://www.opednews.com/ar...

Mueller's Indictment Found Ukrainian Intel is Fancy Bear... https://www.opednews.com/ar...

Hmph AM Hants • 11 hours ago ,

Duh, no kidding. Ukrainian hackers have been posing as Russians from day one. Add to that, the SBU's little noivichok scam and you have the full picture of Ukraine Today.

Congress CAN'T be that stupid. Only logical conclusion, they're in cahoots.

AM Hants Hmph • 10 hours ago ,

Have you seen how much they get from their sponsors? Funny, how the Pro-Israel America Lobby, spend so much on sponsoring politicians, whilst doing nought for the people of Israel or America.

This article from The Saker, with regards who wrote the HR1644 Bill (then went on to write the Russian Sanction Bill, using no more than a Government telephone directory), shows how much they are sponsored, not to represent the electorate. I could not believe it, or the fact the Pro-Israel America Lobby, support the Ukraine Nazis.

How the Israel Lobby Protected Ukrainian Neo-Nazis... https://www.opednews.com/ar...

..................................

THE US BILL H.R. 1644 TO KILL RUSSIAN FOOD EXPORT AND CHINESE TRADE

Authors of the Bill
Edward Randall "Ed" Royce, a member of the United States House of Representatives for California's 39th congressional district, is listed as the main author of this bill.

Edward R. Royce is listed by the non-government political watchdogs as the top second US representative that received pro-Israel campaign contributions – $233,943

Total Campaign Contributions Received by Ed Royce: $4,041,553

NORPAC is a bipartisan, multi-candidate political action committee working to strengthen the United States–Israel relationship – $114,243

Top 10 Interests Funding

Interest Contributions
Real Estate $344,349
Securities & Investment $321,400
Insurance $261,850
Pro-Israel $233,943
Lawyers/Law Firms $171,975
Health Professionals $107,185
Commercial Banks $101,000
Misc Finance $88,700
Republican/Conservative $70,740
Accountants $66,250
Top 10 Organizations Funding

Organization Contributions
NORPAC $114,243
Royce Victory Fund $35,100
Morgan Stanley $17,500
Mutual Pharmaceutical $15,600
Blackstone Group $13,500
Rida Development $13,500
First American Financial Corporation $12,700
Seville Classics $12,240
Arnold and Porter $12,200
Wells Fargo $12,000
Contributions above are for the last two years of available data, Nov 29, 2014 – Nov 28, 2016.

According to the MapLight disclamer, "Contributions data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics ( OpenSecrets.org ). Legislative data from GovTrack.us . "

-- –

Eliot L. Engel Democrat (Elected 1988), NY House district 16

I wrote in details about the Representative Eliot Lance Engel in connection to his anti-Russia activities in authoring STAND for Ukraine Act H.R. 5094 in May 2016

Eliot Lance Engel has been reported as being a recipient of the pro-Israel campaign contributions $191,150

Total Campaign Contributions Received by Eliot L. Engel: $1,596,646

Top 10 Interests Funding

Interest Contributions
Pro-Israel $191,150
Real Estate $123,000
Health Professionals $105,925
Lawyers/Law Firms $95,186
Securities & Investment $68,025
Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $55,700
Hospitals/Nursing Homes $36,350
Education $34,300
Building Trade Unions $34,000
Public Sector Unions $31,500
Top 10 Organizations Funding

Organization Contributions
NORPAC $28,000
St Georges University $20,000
Natural Food Source Incorporated $16,200
Duty Free Americas $16,200
Stroock Stroock and Lavan $11,100
Nimeks Organics $10,800
Baystate Medical Center $10,800
Boeing Company $10,000
Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $10,000
Raytheon Company $10,000
Contributions above are for the last two years of available data, Nov 29, 2014 – Nov 28, 2016.

-- -

Ted S. Yoho Republican (Elected 2013), FL House district 3

Total Campaign Contributions Received by Ted S. Yoho: $721,346

Top 10 Interests Funding

Interest Contributions
Crop Production & Basic Processing $72,411
General Contractors $39,451
Real Estate $35,177
Agricultural Services/Products $24,839
Health Professionals $23,960
Livestock $23,300
Special Trade Contractors $22,150
Pro-Israel $17,000
Securities & Investment $13,400
Printing & Publishing $11,800
Top 10 Organizations Funding

Organization Contributions
Islands Mechanical $15,400
Anderson Columbia Company $13,400
Angel Investor $10,800
National Cattlemens Beef Association $10,000
Hennessey Arabian Horses $10,000
Florida Congressional Committee $10,000
American Crystal Sugar $7,500
Cecil W Powell And Company $6,400
Lockheed Martin $6,000
Vallencourt Construction $5,900
--

Brad Sherman Democrat (Elected 1996), CA House district 30

Brad Sherman has reputedly received $93,580 in pro-Israel campaign contributions.

Total Campaign Contributions Received by Brad Sherman: $1,575,550

Top 10 Interests Funding

Interest Contributions
Real Estate $122,900
Securities & Investment $109,475
Pro-Israel $93,580
Lawyers/Law Firms $72,198
Insurance $69,300
Accountants $60,330
Building Trade Unions $57,500
Misc Finance $51,300
Health Professionals $46,575
TV/Movies/Music $46,015
Top 10 Organizations Funding

Organization Contributions
NORPAC $25,720
Hackman Capital Partners $16,200
Capital Group Companies $15,400
Majestic Realty $10,800
Pachulski Stang Et Al $10,800
Saban Capital Group $10,800
Keyes Automotive Group $10,800
United Food and Commercial Workers Union $10,000
Honeywell International $10,000
Deloitte Llp $10,000
Contributions above are for the last two years of available data, Nov 29, 2014 – Nov 28, 2016.

--

The US Representatives sponsoring the Bill
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen is listed as a recipient of the pro-Israel campaign contributions – $138,800

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen Republican (Elected 1988), FL House district 27

Total Campaign Contributions Received by Ileana Ros-Lehtinen: $1,453,178

Top 10 Interests Funding

Interest Contributions
Pro-Israel $140,650
Real Estate $85,650
Lawyers/Law Firms $80,048
Foreign & Defense Policy $53,750
Transportation Unions $38,000
Health Professionals $36,150
Republican/Conservative $34,700
Building Trade Unions $29,000
Misc Manufacturing & Distributing $27,300
Defense Aerospace $26,750
Top 10 Organizations Funding

Organization Contributions
Duty Free Americas $20,500
NORPAC $18,850
Leon Medical Centers $16,450
Southern Wine and Spirits $15,400
Clearpath Foundation $10,800
Badia Spices $10,800
Irving Moskowitz Foundation $10,800
Tate Enterprises $10,700
At and T Incorporated $10,000
Operating Engineers Union $10,000
Contributions above are for the last two years of available data, Nov 29, 2014 – Nov 28, 2016. Contributions fro

--

The US representative Ralph Lee Abraham, Jr.

Total Campaign Contributions Received by Ralph Lee Abraham: $649,364

Top 10 Interests Funding

Interest Contributions
Crop Production & Basic Processing $76,435
Health Professionals $61,950
Agricultural Services/Products $33,200
Oil & Gas $23,950
Commercial Banks $23,450
Real Estate $22,775
Lawyers/Law Firms $20,850
Hospitals/Nursing Homes $17,900
Misc Business $15,100
Forestry & Forest Products $14,000
Top 10 Organizations Funding

Organization Contributions
American Society of Anesthesiologists $15,000
American Sugar Cane League $10,000
National Association of Realtors $8,500
Farm Credit Council $8,000
Intermountain Management $6,300
Centurylink $6,250
Central Management $5,400
Moore Oil $5,400
Lasalle Management $5,400
Hospital Administrator $5,400
Contributions above are for the last two years of available data, Nov 29, 2014 – Nov 28, 2016. Contributions from political

--

William R. Keating (D-MA) U.S. House

Total Campaign Contributions Received by William R. Keating: $1,094,550

Top 10 Interests Funding

Interest Contributions
Lawyers/Law Firms $76,117
Building Trade Unions $67,500
Public Sector Unions $53,500
Transportation Unions $48,500
Industrial Unions $47,000
Real Estate $40,549
Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $39,000
Special Trade Contractors $30,475
Defense Aerospace $30,000
Crop Production & Basic Processing $26,500
Top 10 Organizations Funding

Organization Contributions
Superior Plumbing $21,700
Nixon Peabody LLP $13,320
United Food and Commercial Workers Union $10,000
Honeywell International $10,000
Plumberspipefitters Union $10,000
Carpenters and Joiners Union $10,000
Operating Engineers Union $10,000
Painters and Allied Trades Union $10,000
Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $10,000
Ironworkers Union $10,000
Contributions above are for the last two years of available data, Nov 29, 2014 – Nov 28, 2016. https://southfront.org/the-...

Russell McGinnis Hmph • 10 hours ago ,

The Presidency has been compromised for 100+ years. The Congress for at least 50. But I would say "(((blackmailed)))" instead of "in cahoots".

[Jul 29, 2018] Watch Bob Mueller Lie to Congress About Iraq s Weapons of Mass Destruction in 2003 When He Ran the FBI (Video)

Notable quotes:
"... Why anyone believes a thing this man says or does is a mystery. He is obviously a Deep State tool who was perfectly willing to go along with the Big Lie back then, resulting in 1 million dead Iraqis, $1 trillion is squandered money, the rise of ISIS, and the destabilization of the Middle East, resulting in millions of refugees. ..."
"... He is protected by the US media which are the mouthpiece of the Deep State. ..."
"... 'Truth is to WASHINGTON DC, as Sunlight is To Dracula' http://www.johnccarleton.or... ..."
"... he lied the US people into the genocidal war against Iraq is a fitting centerpiece to the bookends provided by The Mueller Inquiry and the WTC demolition. ..."
"... Politics is the profession where scum rises to the top faster than all the others combined. ..."
Jul 23, 2018 | https://russia-insider.com

Why anyone believes a thing this man says or does is a mystery. He is obviously a Deep State tool who was perfectly willing to go along with the Big Lie back then, resulting in 1 million dead Iraqis, $1 trillion is squandered money, the rise of ISIS, and the destabilization of the Middle East, resulting in millions of refugees.

He's a public disgrace and should be behind bars, not running a bogus Russian Meddling investigation that is pure hoax and political conspiracy.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/uTDO-kuOGTQ

Chi • 12 hours ago ,

He is protected by the US media which are the mouthpiece of the Deep State.

Franklin Wisman Chi • 6 hours ago ,

He's protected all the way around.

John C Carleton • 10 hours ago ,

'Truth is to WASHINGTON DC, as Sunlight is To Dracula' http://www.johnccarleton.or...

Washington Post John C Carleton • 5 hours ago ,

Democracy dies in our darkness.

Franz Kafka • 11 hours ago ,

Mueller is a professional liar, traitor and scumbag. He is not even a good liar but he is a prolific one. ... That he lied the US people into the genocidal war against Iraq is a fitting centerpiece to the bookends provided by The Mueller Inquiry and the WTC demolition.

The fact that he is not only at large, but in charge of the coup against Donald Trump is a tragedy of immeasurable proportions for the long-suffering US people. The good news is, one way or another, it may be their final tragedy.

ALTERNATE HISTORY • 6 hours ago ,

Once a lying sack of shit, always a lying sack of lying shit.

hmmm ALTERNATE HISTORY • 5 hours ago ,

Politics is the profession where scum rises to the top faster than all the others combined.

wilmers13 Billy Brown • 8 hours ago ,

17 intelligence agencies ensure they publish what leads to more war in other people's streets. Ugly American reincarnation.

Franklin Wisman wilmers13 • 6 hours ago ,

Please, keep the anti-American thing down to a roar. Ya'll by now see that the people do not control their gov at all. They, the cabal, did 9-11 on us and spy on us. It's the cabal at the top which does us in too - Pearl Harbor another e.g.

[Jul 29, 2018] The Helsinki Debacle and US-Russian Relations

MIC is a cancer, and looks like there is no cure
Notable quotes:
"... Improving the relationship with Moscow has been and continues to be a worthwhile goal, but Trump has made it politically impossible to pursue that goal in the near term. ..."
"... I do think the credit for this goes to the Clinton campaign, the "intelligence" agencies, the neoconlib biparty and individuals like McCain, who have gone to McCarthyite lenghts since before the GOP primaries ended to prevent Trump from attempting *any* change of the status quo on foreign policy. Granted, the man might be ineffectual no matter what, but we will never know. The US establishment and the retainees of the war profiteering classes have made any negotiations with Russia impossible long before Trump even announced his campaign. ..."
"... We also should not forget to credit the GOP for test-driving the whole "weak on Russia" playbook during the Obama years. ..."
"... Additionally there has yet to be any actual evidence presented re significant election interference. Indictments are accusations, not evidence. ..."
"... I'm no Trump fan, but he was just saying he believed Putin rather than the people who are clearly trying to bring his administration down. Can't really blame him. ..."
"... CNN even used Putin's dearly departed Labrador, Konni making her look like Cujo stating that Putin use her to terrorize Angela Merkel. A U.S. Congressman fumed that the 50,000 children died in Syria because this fiend supported Assad when Syria was about to be liberated (a number suspiciously close to the true number of Yemeni children we helped to kill). ..."
"... As flawed as Trump may be, he is merely holding up a mirror to what we have become. Had we elected a conventional candidate it would just be business as usual with these seething hatreds buried just below the surface. ..."
"... No one better suggest that we should tarnish ourselves talking to the likes of a Russian leader unless we are discussing terms of surrender. We want Yeltsin or maybe Medvedev. ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Improving the relationship with Moscow has been and continues to be a worthwhile goal, but Trump has made it politically impossible to pursue that goal in the near term. The U.S. and Russia could and should have a more constructive relationship, but it can't be based on the denial of reality and ignoring the genuine disagreements that exist between our governments.

If there is to be genuine improvement in U.S.-Russian relations, it will come from facing up to these disagreements and finding a way to work through or around them.

b. July 16, 2018 at 9:35 pm

"Trump has made it politically impossible to pursue that goal in the near term."

I do think the credit for this goes to the Clinton campaign, the "intelligence" agencies, the neoconlib biparty and individuals like McCain, who have gone to McCarthyite lenghts since before the GOP primaries ended to prevent Trump from attempting *any* change of the status quo on foreign policy. Granted, the man might be ineffectual no matter what, but we will never know. The US establishment and the retainees of the war profiteering classes have made any negotiations with Russia impossible long before Trump even announced his campaign.

We also should not forget to credit the GOP for test-driving the whole "weak on Russia" playbook during the Obama years.

Rob , says: July 16, 2018 at 11:21 pm
I agree with b. While Trump may not be savvy enough to calibrate his engagement with Putin in a way that would allow a proper dialogue with Russia in spite of the political backdrop in the US, the primary blame for any failure to allow such dialogue rests for those responsible for creating that political backdrop that makes it so difficult in the first place (hint: it's not Trump, unless you blame him for winning the election – rather it is the unholy alliance of Democrats looking for an excuse for them losing the election and Cold War hawk neocons who have Russia-hate in their DNA (and their stock portfolios)).
a spencer , says: July 17, 2018 at 1:33 am
That Putin talked up the Iran deal in the press conference makes me wonder what was said in the one-on-one. Couldn't have pleased the Adelson/Bolton wing.
Erik , says: July 17, 2018 at 2:35 am
I also agree with b.

Additionally there has yet to be any actual evidence presented re significant election interference. Indictments are accusations, not evidence.

I saw nothing particularly wrong with the press conference. I'm no Trump fan, but he was just saying he believed Putin rather than the people who are clearly trying to bring his administration down. Can't really blame him.

Christian Chuba , says: July 17, 2018 at 9:59 am
The embarrassment was the reaction in the MSM showcasing how they are now CIA state run media.

They trot out former high ranking CIA officers now employed by them recycling every meme to reinforce that we are the forces goodness and light and anyone strong enough to oppose us is evil.

CNN even used Putin's dearly departed Labrador, Konni making her look like Cujo stating that Putin use her to terrorize Angela Merkel. A U.S. Congressman fumed that the 50,000 children died in Syria because this fiend supported Assad when Syria was about to be liberated (a number suspiciously close to the true number of Yemeni children we helped to kill). These are just two random examples in a very long day. It was
a show worthy of the priests of Baal who confronted Elijah.

As flawed as Trump may be, he is merely holding up a mirror to what we have become. Had we elected a conventional candidate it would just be business as usual with these seething hatreds buried just below the surface.

No one better suggest that we should tarnish ourselves talking to the likes of a Russian leader unless we are discussing terms of surrender. We want Yeltsin or maybe Medvedev.

DanJ , says: July 18, 2018 at 1:07 am
The summit was announced by the White House and the Kremlin on June 28. The Finnish hosts probably knew about it a few days earlier. That leaves only three weeks for preparation.

The summit itself lasted one day. Putin arrived late and after lunch and diplomatic niceties there was only 2-3 hours for actual talks.

That's not a problem if everything is already carefully negotiated and the presidents just sign documents and smile for the cameras. But it seems very little was agreed on beforehand.

I'm all for world leaders meeting and talking. The more the better. But I really don't see the point of hastily calling a summit where nothing is agreed upon. At least not that we know of.

[Jul 29, 2018] The USA intentionally tried to destroy Russia after the dissolution of the USSR

Notable quotes:
"... This silly article is proof, as if more was needed that what passes for Russia scholarship in the US is little more than politicized group-think. ..."
"... Russia has risen from utter economic, political, and societal collapse (gold reserves, factories, military secrets, science labs stripped bare and shipped or brain-drained out of the country; millions of pre-mature deaths; plunging birth rates) to recover, within a mere 20 years, to the point where the population has stabilized and the nation can credibly hold its own again on the world stage. Infrastructure is being rebuilt and modernized, the military has been restructured and re-equipped, pensions and salaries have risen 3 or 4-fold. ..."
Jul 29, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

John Perry July 28, 2018 at 1:48 pm

"Vladimir Putin rode a counter-wave of anti-Western nationalism to power in Moscow."

Uh, no. Putin came to power at a time when Russia seemed to be falling apart, quite literally. There was war in Chechnya, open criminal activity on the streets, and clear social decay. Putin's popularity begins with his address to the nation after the bombing of the Moscow metro, promising that the government (which he did not then lead) would chase those responsible down and kill them, even if that meant chasing them into outhouses. The relationship between the bombing and Putin's rise is so well-known that the conspiracy theorists who have Jay Nordlinger's ear over at National Review claim that the bombing was a set up by Putin's pals in the FSB, precisely to bring Putin to power.

My wife is Russian, from the city of Kazan in the Tatar Republic (part of Russia; it's complicated), and when we were merely pen pals in 2003 she wrote me what it was like. It was bad, very bad. At one point her entire neighborhood was placed under curfew on account of open warfare between criminal gangs. And of course when we visit the cemetery today one sees the striking spike in tombstones whose date of death is at some point in the mid- to late 90's, when it all seemed to be going to pieces and the government didn't even pay its own employees for half a year.

Today, by contrast, Russians can walk the streets more or less without fear, count on a paycheck, read in the news how their country has sent yet another capsule of Western astronauts to the international space station (because Westerners haven't been able to do that for the better part of a decade, thanks to Bush and Obama), and even find jobs in a successful tech sector (Kaspersky, JetBrains, Yandex, the list goes on).

But, hey, if you want to fantasize that Putin's rise is thanks to anti-Western sentiment, you go ahead and do that.

John Perry , says: July 28, 2018 at 1:53 pm
One other comment, if I may. I share the concern most Westerners have about Russia's seizure of Crimea. But where is our concern about Turkey's 40-plus-year occupation of northern Cyprus, also sparked by internal political disorder on the island? Why is it alright for a NATO country to invade another nation and prop up its separatists, expel the inhabitants of a disfavored ethnic group -- in this case, the Greeks?
Rodrigo Alvarez , says: July 28, 2018 at 6:15 pm
Shame on TAC for publishing this garbage. For one, Putin more or less saved Russia as a sovereign state, it is easy to forget the sorry condition Russia was in at the turn of the century. Without him, Russia would've most likely been dismembered or simply colonized by the West and China. He has performed admirably in the face of massive odds. Russia will still exist in 100 years as the state of the Russian and other native people of its land – can the same be said of the United States? Russia is slowly climbing its way out of the pit of despair created by 80 years of Communism, the United States is crawling into the very same pit.
Cynthia McLean , says: July 28, 2018 at 6:27 pm
I am much more concerned that voter roll purges, suppression of the vote, Citizen's United Dark Money and folks like the Kochs and Addelson are undermining US democracy than the Russians. As for the aggression of military machines around the world, the US wins hands down.
Groucho , says: July 28, 2018 at 6:37 pm
Like Fran my inclination was to bail after the first paragraph but I pushed on.

In the first paragraph Mr Desch lays out his position which is well within the bounds of polite discussion that Russia is a corrupt oligarchy but don't worry because it's an economic and military basketcase.

Where to start?

1. Corrupt kleptocracy. The Russian oligarchy/ mafia was a biproduct of the privatization binge that followed the collapse of the USSR. This evolved under the disastrous Yeltsin aided and abetted by US elites. The case of William Browder is instructive. Putin has taken significant measures to reassert government control and has greatly improved the lot of the average Russian.

2. Political freedom. Putin did not inherit a developed liberal democracy. Russia needs to be judged in the context of its own historical timeline in this regard not compared to western democracies. Do you prefer Stalin, Brezhnev, Andropov? In contrast compare the state and trajectory of US democratic institutions to, say the 1970s.

3. Human rights. Again the situation in Russia vis a vis human rights needs to be judged in terms of Russia's history not against Western nations with a long-standing tradition of human rights and political freedoms. That said, the illusion of political repression is largely overstated. For example Putin is routinely accused of murdering journalists but no real proof is ever offered. Instead, the statement is made again in this article as though it were self evident.

4. Foreign aggression. This is my favorite because it flies in the face of observable reality to the point of being ridiculous. Russia did not invade Ukraine. It provided support to ethnic Russians in Ukraine who rebelled after the illegal armed overthrow of the Russian leaning democratically elected president.That coup was directly supported by the United States. Far from ratcheting up tensions Russia has consistently pressed for the implementation of the Minsk accords. Putin is not interested in becoming responsible for the economic and political basket case which is Ukraine. The "largely bloodless" occupation of Crimea was actually a referendum in which the citizens of Crimea overwhelmingly supported annexation to Russia. Again This result makes sense in light of even a basic understanding of Russian history. Finally, in the case of Georgia Russia engaged after Georgia attacked what was essentially a Russian protectorate. This was the conclusion reached by an EU investigation.

Russia's so-called aggressive foreign-policy has been primarily in response to NATOs continuous push eastward and the perceived need to defend ethnic Russians from corrupt ultranationalist governments in former republics of the USSR. This is what Putin was talking about when he called the dissolution of the USSR one of the greatest tragedies of the 20th century – the fact that, overnight 20 million Russians found themselves living in foreign countries. It wasn't about longing for a Russian empire.

As for the current state of Russias military capabilities, Mr Desch Would do well to read Pepe Escobar's recent article in the Asia Times. Russian accomplishments in Syria illustrated a level of technology and strategic effectiveness that rivals anything the US can do. Name one other nation – other than the US – that can design and build a world class 6th generation fighter jet or develop its own space program. Even Germany can't do that.

This silly article is proof, as if more was needed that what passes for Russia scholarship in the US is little more than politicized group-think.

laninya , says: July 28, 2018 at 7:45 pm
VG1959
"It is in the pursuit of empire that Putin, like Napoleon or Hitler before him, threatens the stability of Europe and by extension world peace."

Ah! ha!ha! Right.

Like Russia with a population of 150 million persons inhabiting a land mass that stretches across 9 or 10 time zones, from the Arctic pole to the Black Sea is chafing for "lebensraum" !?

No, Russia just wants to develop what it already owns. And, trying to do it on the strength of their own efforts (no overseas colonies filling the coffers), on a GDP as Winston, above, has pointed out which is smaller than that some US states. They're focussed, not on grabbing tiny, constipated territories like Estonia. Latvia, and Lithuania (full of Nazi sympathizers), but on bringing back to life those ancient trade routes which are their inheritance from the past (the Silk Road, primarily).

Why not just leave them alone and see what they can do? Those who have been relentlessly picking fault with Russia (and North Korea) might want to put down their megaphones and start taking notes.

What I mean is: pause for a moment to consider that:

1. Russia has risen from utter economic, political, and societal collapse (gold reserves, factories, military secrets, science labs stripped bare and shipped or brain-drained out of the country; millions of pre-mature deaths; plunging birth rates) to recover, within a mere 20 years, to the point where the population has stabilized and the nation can credibly hold its own again on the world stage. Infrastructure is being rebuilt and modernized, the military has been restructured and re-equipped, pensions and salaries have risen 3 or 4-fold.

2. North Korea, in 1953, had been so destroyed by war that no structures over a single story were left standing (and American generals were actually barfing into their helmets at the horror of what had been done to those people). The DPRK authorities, helpless to assist the population, could only advise to dig shelters underground to survive the winter. Yet, 70 years later, under international sanctions designed to starve those traumatized people into surrender, North Korea has restored its infrastructure, built modern cities, and developed a military apparatus able to credibly resist constant threats from abroad.

See: rather than picking nits to find things that are not yet perfectly hunky-dory with the governing structures/systems in those countries, I'm taking notes!!

Because, I'm convinced that if those people (those nations) were able to do what they've done with the time and resources they've had to work with, there is absolutely no reason and no excuse for our rich nations of "the West" to be caught in a nightmare of austerity budgeting, crumbling infrastructure, collapsing pensions, and spiralling debt.

Funny how the English speaking world SO resisst learning something that could actually do us a whole lot of good. I don't know who coined the terms "stiffnecked" and "bloodyminded", but it sure describes us!

connecticut farmer , says: July 29, 2018 at 12:43 pm
"From Moscow's perspective, the events in Kiev in late 2013 and 2014 looked suspiciously like a Western-backed coup."

Gee, ya think? Kinda reminds one of the 1996 Russian election. But, hey, don't broadcast this because, after all, too many people might start, er, noticing.

EliteCommInc. , says: July 29, 2018 at 1:11 pm

"They may be weakened, but their ability to make trouble is undiminished, given their aptitude for cyberattacks."

And if you have evidence that Russia so engaged, the FBI has a place for you.

[Jul 29, 2018] Russians exposed a CIA spook who's implicated not only in Secret Agent Browder's war propaganda

Notable quotes:
"... So Kramer is a good example of how CIA runs the State Department. When a CIA vital interest like impunity comes up, they parachute a mole in to get their criminals off the hook. ..."
Jul 29, 2018 | www.unz.com

HO-LY COWW , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 6:41 pm GMT

@anon

Yes indeed, first Britain, and now Russia has pantsed the US too. In a virtuosic dick move, they exposed a CIA spook who's implicated not only in Secret Agent Browder's war propaganda ( http://russiahouse.org/current_news.php?language=eng&id_current=1454 ) but in CIA crimes against humanity -- specifically, 'legal pretexts for manifestly illegal acts."

David Kramer, Tufts/Harvard Political Science/Russian studies, **PNAC** , DoS focal point, then CIA's famous captive NGO **Freedom House** , and a featherbed job at the McCain Institute for Freedom, Democracy, and Abandoning Thousands of MIAs in Vietnam to Die Slow Agonizing Deaths in Penal Camps.

Here he is talking to his co-conspirator Robert Otto, "Only idiots like Kerry think we have common interests in Syria."

https://freeworld556.wordpress.com/2017/07/12/us-state-department-official-robert-otto-got-hacked/

Needless to say, Kramer wouldn't know a human right from a bar of soap. He's a knuckledragger. CIA sent Kramer to DRL when Alfreda Bikowsky got her tit caught in the crimes-against-humanity wringer for systematic and widespread torture.

The US was five years late reporting to the Committee Against Torture and got a mind-boggling eight (8) follow-on inquiries for urgent derogations of non-derogable rights. So Kramer had to think fast and make up some bullshit why simulated live burial, object rape, death by dryboard suffocation, and penis-slitting is not torture. Kramer is not the brightest bulb, but that's not a hard job. During the Bush administration all the delegation did was say, "The US does not Torture," robotically over and over.

So Kramer is a good example of how CIA runs the State Department. When a CIA vital interest like impunity comes up, they parachute a mole in to get their criminals off the hook.

[Jul 29, 2018] Debunking the Putin Panic with Stephen F. Cohen

Notable quotes:
"... The European Commission, if you're talking about the 2008 war, the European Commission, investigating what happened, found that Georgia, which was backed by the United States, fighting with an American-built army under the control of the, shall we say, slightly unpredictable Georgian president then, Saakashvili, that he began the war by firing on Russian enclaves. And the Kremlin, which by the way was not occupied by Putin, but by Michael McFaul and Obama's best friend and reset partner then-president Dmitry Medvedev, did what any Kremlin leader, what any leader in any country would have had to do: it reacted. It sent troops across the border through the tunnel, and drove the Georgian forces out of what essentially were kind of Russian protectorate areas of Georgia. ..."
"... So that- Russia didn't begin that war. And it didn't begin the one in Ukraine, either. We did that by [continents], the overthrow of the Ukrainian president in [20]14 after President Obama told Putin that he would not permit that to happen. And I think it happened within 36 hours. The Russians, like them or not, feel that they have been lied to and betrayed. They use this word, predatl'stvo, betrayal, about American policy toward Russia ever since 1991, when it wasn't just President George Bush, all the documents have been published by the National Security Archive in Washington, all the leaders of the main Western powers promised the Soviet Union that under Gorbachev, if Gorbachev would allow a reunited Germany to be NATO, NATO would not, in the famous expression, move two inches to the east. ..."
"... If you want to know what obsesses Putin, it's the word 'sovereignty.' Russia lost its sovereignty- political, foreign policy, security, financial- in the 1990s. Putin saw his mission, as I read him, and I try to read him as a biographer. He says a lot, to regain Russia's sovereignty, which meant to make the country whole again at home, to rescue its people, and to protect its defenses. That's been his mission. Has it been more than that? Maybe. But everything he's done, as I see it, has followed that concept of his role in history. And he's done pretty well. ..."
"... "Facts don't matter in broadcast journalism". Good interview. Cohen always surprises me with something he says, and he doesn't disappoint me here in this regard. A healthy readjustment of our perspective is occasionally called for. How true the adage, "The first casualty in any war is the truth". ..."
Jul 29, 2018 | therealnews.com

AARON MATE: It's The Real News. I'm Aaron Mate. This is part two with Stephen Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies at New York University and Princeton. In part one we talked about the uproar over the Trump-Putin summit, and Trump's comments about the U.S. intelligence community and about cooperation with Russia. Now in part two we're going to get to some of the main talking points that have been pervasive throughout corporate media, talking about the stated reasons for why pundits and politicians say they are opposed to Trump sitting down with Putin.

So let me start with Jon Meacham. He is a historian. And speaking to CNN, he worried that Trump, with his comments about NATO calling on the alliance to pay more, and calling into question, he worried about the possibility that Trump won't come to the aid of Baltic states in the event that Russia invades.

JON MEACHAM: And what worries me most is the known unknown, as Donald Rumsfeld might put it, of what happens next. Let's say Putin- just look at this whole week of the last five, six days in total. What happens if Putin launches military action against, say, the Baltics? What, what is it that President Trump, what about his comments that NATO suggest thar he would follow an invocation of Article 5 and actually project American force in defense of the values that not only do we have an intellectual and moral assent to, but a contractual one, a treaty one. I think that's the great question going forward.

AARON MATE: OK. So that's Jon Meacham speaking to CNN. So, Professor Cohen, putting aside what he said there about our intellectual values and strong tradition, just on the issue of Trump, of Putin posing a potential threat and possibly invading the Baltics, is that a realistic possibility?

STEPHEN COHEN: So, I'm not sure what you're asking me about. The folly of NATO expansion? The fact that every president in my memory has asked the Europeans to pay more? But can we be real? Can we be real? The only country that's attacked that region of Europe militarily since the end of the Soviet Union was the United States of America. As I recall, we bombed Serbia, a, I say this so people understand, a traditional Christian country, under Bill Clinton, bombed Serbia for about 80 days. There is no evidence that Russia has ever bombed a European country.

You tell me, Aaron. You must be a smart guy, because you got your own television show. Why would Putin want to launch a military attack and occupy the Baltics? So he has to pay the pensions there? Which he's having a hard time already paying in Russia, and therefore has had to raise the pension age, and thereby lost 10 percentage points of popularity in two weeks? Why in the world can we, can we simply become rational people. Why in the world would Russia want to attack and occupy Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia? The only reason I can think of is that many, many of my friends love to take their summer vacations there. And maybe some crazy person thinks that if we occupy it, vacations will be cheaper. It's crazy. It's beyond crazy. It's a kind-.

AARON MATE: Professor Cohen, if you were on CNN right now I imagine that the anchor would say to you, well, okay, but one could say the same thing about Georgia in 2008. Why did Russia attack Georgia then?

STEPHEN COHEN: I'm not aware that Russia attacked Georgia. The European Commission, if you're talking about the 2008 war, the European Commission, investigating what happened, found that Georgia, which was backed by the United States, fighting with an American-built army under the control of the, shall we say, slightly unpredictable Georgian president then, Saakashvili, that he began the war by firing on Russian enclaves. And the Kremlin, which by the way was not occupied by Putin, but by Michael McFaul and Obama's best friend and reset partner then-president Dmitry Medvedev, did what any Kremlin leader, what any leader in any country would have had to do: it reacted. It sent troops across the border through the tunnel, and drove the Georgian forces out of what essentially were kind of Russian protectorate areas of Georgia.

So that- Russia didn't begin that war. And it didn't begin the one in Ukraine, either. We did that by [continents], the overthrow of the Ukrainian president in [20]14 after President Obama told Putin that he would not permit that to happen. And I think it happened within 36 hours. The Russians, like them or not, feel that they have been lied to and betrayed. They use this word, predatl'stvo, betrayal, about American policy toward Russia ever since 1991, when it wasn't just President George Bush, all the documents have been published by the National Security Archive in Washington, all the leaders of the main Western powers promised the Soviet Union that under Gorbachev, if Gorbachev would allow a reunited Germany to be NATO, NATO would not, in the famous expression, move two inches to the east.

Now NATO is sitting on Russia's borders from the Baltic to Ukraine. So Russians aren't fools, and they're good-hearted, but they become resentful. They're worried about being attacked by the United States. In fact, you read and hear in the Russian media daily, we are under attack by the United States. And this is a lot more real and meaningful than this crap that is being put out that Russia somehow attacked us in 2016. I must have been sleeping. I didn't see Pearl Harbor or 9/11 and 2016. This is reckless, dangerous, warmongering talk. It needs to stop. Russia has a better case for saying they've been attacked by us since 1991. We put our military alliance on the front door. Maybe it's not an attack, but it looks like one, feels like one. Could be one.

AARON MATE: OK. And in a moment I want to speak to you more about Ukraine, because we've heard Crimea invoked a lot in the criticism of Putin of late. But first I want to actually to ask you about a domestic issue. This one is it's widely held that Putin is responsible for the killing of journalists and opposition activists who oppose him. And on this front I want to play for you a clip of Joe Cirincione. He is the head of the Ploughshares Fund. And this is what he said this week in an appearance on Democracy Now!.

JOE CIRINCIONE: Both of these men are dangerous. Both of these men oppress basic human rights, basic freedoms. Both of them think the press are the enemy of the people. Putin goes further. He kills journalists. He has them assassinated on the streets of Moscow.

Donald Trump does not go that far yet. But I think what Putin is doing is using the president of the United States to project his rule, to increase his power, to carry out his agenda in Syria, with Europe, et cetera, and that Trump is acquiescing to that for reasons that are not yet clear.

AARON MATE: That's Joe Cirincione.

STEPHEN COHEN: I know him well. It's worse than that. It's worse than that.

AARON MATE: Well Yes. There's two issues here, Professor Cohen. One is the state of the crackdown on press freedoms in Russia, which I'm sure you would say is very much alive, and is a strong part of the Russian system. But let's first address this widely-held view that Putin is responsible for killing journalists who are critical of him.

STEPHEN COHEN: I know I'm supposed to follow your lead, but I think you're skipping over a major point. How is it that Joe, who was once one of our most eminent and influential, eloquent opponents of nuclear arms race, who was prepared to have the president of the United States negotiate with every Soviet communist leader, including those who had a lot of blood on their hands, now decide that Putin kills everybody and he's not a worthy partner? What happened to Joe?

I'll tell you what happened to him. Trump. Trump has driven once-sensible people completely crazy. Moreover, Joe knows absolutely nothing about internal Russian politics, and he ought to follow my rule. When I don't know something about something, I say I don't know. But what he just said is ludicrous. And the sad part is-.

AARON MATE: But it's widely held. If it's ludicrous-. But widely held, yeah.

STEPHEN COHEN: Well, the point is that once distinguished and important spokespeople for rightful causes, like ending a nuclear arms race, have been degraded, or degraded themselves by saying things like he said to the point that they're of utility today only to the proponents of a new nuclear arms race. And he's not alone. Somebody called it Trump derangement syndrome. I'm not a psychiatrist, but it's a widespread mania across our land. And when good people succumb to it, we are all endangered.

AARON MATE: But many people would be surprised to hear that, because again, the stories that we get, and there are human rights reports, and it's just sort of taken as a given fact that Putin is responsible for killing journalists. So if that's ludicrous, if you can explain why you think that is.

STEPHEN COHEN: Well, I got this big problem which seems to afflict very few people in public life anymore. I live by facts. I'm like my doctor, who told me not long ago I had to have minor surgery for a problem I didn't even know I had. And I said, I'm not going to do it. Show me the facts. And he did. I had the minor surgery. Journalists no longer seem to care about facts. They repeat tabloid rumors. Putin kills everybody.

All I can tell you is this. I have never seen any evidence whatsoever, and I've been- I knew some of the people who were killed. Anna Politkovskaya, the famous journalist for Novaya Gazeta was the first, I think, who was- Putin was accused of killing. I knew her well. She was right here, in this apartment. Look behind me, right here. She was here with my wife, Katrina vanden Huevel. I wouldn't say we were close friends, but we were associates in Moscow, and we were social friends. And I mourn her assassination today. But I will tell you this, that neither her editors at that newspaper, nor her family, her surviving sons, think Putin had anything to do with the killing. No evidence has ever been presented. Only media kangaroo courts that Putin was involved in these high-profile assassinations, two of the most famous being this guy Litvinenko by polonium in London, about the time Anna was killed, and more recently Boris Nemtsov, whom, it's always said, was walking within the view of the Kremlin when he was shot. Well, you could see the Kremlin from miles away. I don't know what within the view- unless they think Putin was, you know, watching it through binoculars. There is no evidence that Putin ever ordered the killing of anybody outside his capacity as commander in chief. No evidence.

Now, did he? But we live, Aaron, and I hope the folks who watch us remember this. Every professional person, every decent person lives or malpractices based on verified facts. You go down the wrong way on a one-way street, you might get killed. You take some medication that's not prescribed for you, you might die. You pursue foreign policies based on fiction, you're likely to get in war. And all these journalists, from the New York Times to the Washington Post, from MSNBC to CNN who churn out daily these allegations that Putin kills people are disgracing themselves. I will give you one fact. Wait. One fact, and you could look it up, as Casey Stengel used to say. He was a baseball manager, in case you don't know.

There's an organization called the Committee to Protect American Journalists. It's kind of iconic. It does good things, it says unwise things. Go on its website and look at the number of Russian journalists killed since 1991, since the end of the Soviet Union, under two leaders. Boris Yeltsin, whom we dearly loved and still mourn, and Putin, whom we hate. Last time I looked, the numbers may have changed, more were killed under Yeltsin than under Putin. Did Putin kill those in the 1990s?

So you should ask me, why did they die, then? And I can tell you the main reason. Corrupt business. Mafia-like business in Russia. Just like happened in the United States during our primitive accumulation days. Profit seekers killed rivals. Killed them dead in the streets. Killed them as demonstrations, as demonstrative acts. The only thing you could say about Putin is that he might have created an atmosphere that abets that sort of thing. To which I would say, maybe, but originally it was created with the oligarchical class under Boris Yeltsin, who remains for us the most beloved Russian leader in history. So that's the long and the short of it. Go look at the listing on the Committee to Protect Journalists.

AARON MATE: OK. So, following up on that, to what extent- and this gets a bit into history, which you've covered extensively in your writings. To what extent are we here in the West responsible for the creation of that Russian oligarchal class that you mentioned? But also, what is Putin's relationship to it now, today? Does he abet it? Is he entrenched in it? We hear, often, talk of Putin possibly being the richest person in the world as a result of his entanglement with the very corruption of Russia you're speaking about. So both our role in creating that problem in Russia, but then also Putin's role now in terms of his relationship to it.

STEPHEN COHEN: I'm going to give you a quick, truncated, scholarly, historical perspective on this. But this is what people should begin with when they think about Vladimir Putin and his 18 years in power. Putin came to power almost accidentally in 2000. He inherited a country whose state had collapsed twice in the 20th century. You've got to think about that. How many states have collapsed that you know of once? But the Russian state, Russian statehood, had collapsed once in 1917 during the revolution, and again in 1991 when the Soviet Union ended. The country was in ruination; 75 percent of the people were in poverty.

Putin said- and this obsesses him. If you want to know what obsesses Putin, it's the word 'sovereignty.' Russia lost its sovereignty- political, foreign policy, security, financial- in the 1990s. Putin saw his mission, as I read him, and I try to read him as a biographer. He says a lot, to regain Russia's sovereignty, which meant to make the country whole again at home, to rescue its people, and to protect its defenses. That's been his mission. Has it been more than that? Maybe. But everything he's done, as I see it, has followed that concept of his role in history. And he's done pretty well.

Now, I can give you all Putin's minuses very easily. I would not care for him to be my president. But let me tell you one other thing that's important. You evaluate nations within their own history, not within ours. If you asked me if Putin is a democrat, and I will answer you two ways. He thinks he has. And compared to what? Compared to the leader of Egypt? Yeah, he is a democrat. Compared to the rulers of our pals in the Gulf states, he is a democrat. Compared to Bill Clinton? No, he's not a Democrat. I mean, Russia-. Countries are on their own historical clock. And you have to judge Putin in terms of his predecessors. So people think Putin is a horrible leader. Did you prefer Brezhnev? Did you prefer Stalin? Did you prefer Andropov? Compared to what? Please tell me, compared to what.

And by the way, that's how that's how Russians-. You want to know why he's so popular in Russia? Because Russians judge him in the context of their own what they call "zhivaya istoriya" (living history); what we call autobiography. In terms of their own lives, he looks pretty darn good. They complain out about him. We sit in the kitchen and they bitch about Putin all the time. But they don't want him to go away.

AARON MATE: All right. Well, on that front, we're going to wrap this up there. Stephen Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies at New York University and Princeton. His books include "Failed Crusade: America and the Tragedy of Post-Soviet Russia," and "Soviet Fates and Lost Alternatives: From Stalinism to the New Cold War." Professor Cohen, thank you.

STEPHEN COHEN: You forgot one book.

AARON MATE: I did not say I was reading your, your complete bibliography.

STEPHEN COHEN: It's called-. It's called "Confessions of a Holy Fool."

AARON MATE: Is that true? Or are you making a joke.

STEPHEN COHEN: Somewhere in between. [Thank you, Aaron.]

AARON MATE: Professor Cohen, thank you. And thank you for joining us on The Real News.

[Jul 29, 2018] The Putin-Trump Helsinki summit by The Saker

Notable quotes:
"... This is the proverbial case where the real " action is in the reaction " and, in this case, the reaction of the Neocon run US deep-state and its propaganda machine (the US corporate media) was nothing short of total and abject hysterics. ..."
"... What Trump is facing today is not a barrage of criticism but a very real lynch mob! And what is really frightening is that almost nobody dares to denounce that hysterical lynch mob for what it is. ..."
"... Even such supposed supporters of President Trump like Trey Gowdy who has fully thrown his weight behind the "Russia tried to attack us" nonsense . With friends like these... ..."
"... What has been taking place after this the summit is an Orwellian "two minutes of hatred" but now stretched well into a two weeks of hatred. And I see no signs that this lynch mob is calming down. In fact, as of this morning, the levels of hysteria are only increasing . ..."
"... By the way, these are typical Neocon-style tactics: double-down, then double-down again, then issue statements which make it impossible for you to back down, then repeat it all as many times as needed. This strategy is useless against a powerful and principled enemy, but it works miracles with a weak and spineless foe like Trump. ..."
"... The process which is taking place before our eyes splits the people of the US into two main categories: first, the Neocons and those whom the US media has successfully brainwashed and, second, everybody else. That second group, by the way, is very diverse and it includes not only bona fide Trump supporters (many of whom have also been zombified in their own way), but also paleo-conservatives, libertarians, antiwar activists, (real) progressives and many other groups. ..."
"... I am also guessing that a lot of folks in the military are watching in horror as their armed forces and their country are being wrecked by the Neocons and their supporters. Basically, those who felt "I want my country back" and who hoped that Trump would make that happen are now horrified by what is taking place. ..."
"... I believe that what we are seeing is a massive and deliberate attack by the Neocons and their deep state against the political system and the people of the United States. Congress, especially, is now guilty of engaging on a de-facto coup against the Executive on so many levels that they are hard to count (and many of them are probably hidden from the public eye) including repeated attempts to prevent Trump from exercising his constitutional powers such as, for example, deciding on foreign policy issues. ..."
"... By now there is overwhelming evidence that a creeping Neocon coup has been in progress from the very first day of Trump's presidency and that the Neocons are far from being satisfied with having broken Trump and taken over the de-facto power in the White House: they now apparently also want it de-jure too. ..."
"... From the Russian point of view, it matters very little whether Trump is removed from office or not – the problem is not one of personalities, but one of the nature of the AngloZionist Empire. ..."
"... the infighting of the US elites does and, if not, then at the very least the current crisis will further weaken the US, hence the Russian willingness to participate in this summit even if by itself this summit brought absolutely no tangible results: the action was in the reaction. ..."
"... The Deep State has opposed him at every turn, choosing to favor the policies of the Neocons and their enablers in the Democratic Party. Hence, having no team of his own, he has been saddled with personnel from the ranks of his most virulent enemies at every level. ..."
"... the Neocons and the Clinton gang are willing to say anything, no matter how destabilizing, to hurt Trump even if the US political system by itself is also put at risk. ..."
"... Saker, something is not adding up. If Trump is truly as pathetic a pushover, as "weak and spineless," as you say, why all the hysteria? If, on the other hand, he is a rather successful wrecking ball, already having put in jeopardy half the key resources of the empire, that's another story. ..."
"... He's laying waste to the Empire in the most peaceful process possible – in large part by so embarrassing the Empire's elites, allies and vassals that they withdraw first their active support, and then finally even their consent. Inducing hysteria, both foreign and domestic, is a non-trivial component of the forces giving the wrecking ball an extra push as it heads for the edifice. ..."
"... I don't think that Trump is the fool on the hill. I think that mostly all those around him are. The latest hysteria over Russia is not about any "meddling" in any "democracy". It's about throwing tantrums that Russia won't submit to US hegemony. In my opinion, they don't deserve to be in charge of their own country, let alone to be asking to be in charge of Russia. ..."
"... It is not just "unanimity of hatred and chaos", "abject hysterics", "hate-filled hysteria", "two minutes of hatred stretched well into a two weeks of hatred" etc. It's something else and, I feel, simply much worse and dangerous. ..."
Jul 29, 2018 | www.unz.com

Oh sure, there were a number of general statements made about "positive discussions" and the like, and some vague references to various conflicts, but the truth is that nothing real and tangible was agreed upon. Furthermore, and this is, I believe, absolutely crucial, there never was any chance of this summit achieving anything. Why? Because the Russians have concluded a long time ago that the US officials are " non-agreement capable " (недоговороспособны). They are correct – the US has been non-agreement capable at least since Obama and Trump has only made things even worse: not only has the US now reneged on Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (illegally – since this plan was endorsed by the UNSC ), but Trump has even pathetically backtracked on the most important statement he made during the summit when he retroactively changed his " President Putin says it's not Russia. I don't see any reason why it would be " into " I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be Russia " (so much for 5D chess!).

If Trump can't even stick to his own words, how could anybody expect the Russians to take anything he says seriously?! Besides, ever since the many western verbal promises of not moving NATO east " by one inch eastward " the Russians know that western promises, assurances, and other guarantees are worthless, whether promised in a conversation or inked on paper. In truth, the Russians have been very blunt about their disgust with not only the western dishonesty but even about the basic lack of professionalism of their western counterparts, hence the comment by Putin about " it is difficult to have a dialogue with people who confuse Austria and Australia ".

It is quite obvious that the Russians agreed to the summit while knowing full well that nothing would, or even could, come out of it. This is why they were already dumping US Treasuries even before meeting with Trump (a clear sign of how the Kremlin really feels about Trump and the US).

So why did they agree to the meeting? Because they correctly evaluated the consequences of this meeting. This is the proverbial case where the real " action is in the reaction " and, in this case, the reaction of the Neocon run US deep-state and its propaganda machine (the US corporate media) was nothing short of total and abject hysterics. I could list an immense number of quotes, statements and declarations accusing Trump of being a wimp, a traitor, a sellout, a Putin agent and all the rest. But I found the most powerful illustration of that hate-filled hysteria in a collection of cartoons from the western corporate media posted by Colonel Cassad on this page:

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/4330355.html

What we see today is a hate campaign against both Trump and Russia the likes of which I think the world has never seen before: even in the early 20th century, including the pre-WWII years when there was plenty of hate thrown around, there never was such a unanimity of hatred as what we see today. Furthermore, what is attacked is not just "Trump the man" or "Trump the politician" but very much so "Trump the President". Please compare the following two examples:

The US wars after 9/11: many people had major reservations about the wars against Afghanistan, Iraq and the entire GWOT thing. But most Americans seemed to agree with the "we support our troops" slogan. The logic was something along the lines of "we don't like these wars, but we do support our fighting men and women and the military institution as such". Thus, while a specific policy was criticized, this criticism was never applied to the institution which implement it: the US armed forces. Trump after Helsinki: keep in mind that Trump made no agreement of any kind with Putin, none. And yet that policy of not making any agreements with Putin was hysterically lambasted as a sellout. This begs the question: what kind of policy would meet with the approval of the US deep state? Trump punching Putin in the nose maybe? This is utterly ridiculous, yet unlike in the case of the GWOT wars, there is no differentiation made whatsoever between Trump's policy towards Putin and Trump as the President of the United States. There is even talk of impeachment, treason and "high crimes & misdemeanors" or of the "KGB" (dissolved 27 years ago but nevermind that) having a hand in the election of the US President.

What Trump is facing today is not a barrage of criticism but a very real lynch mob! And what is really frightening is that almost nobody dares to denounce that hysterical lynch mob for what it is. There are a few exceptions, of course, even in the media (I think of Tucker Carlson), but these voices are completely drowned out by the hate-filled shrieks of the vast majority of US politicians and journalists. Even such supposed supporters of President Trump like Trey Gowdy who has fully thrown his weight behind the "Russia tried to attack us" nonsense . With friends like these...

What has been taking place after this the summit is an Orwellian "two minutes of hatred" but now stretched well into a two weeks of hatred. And I see no signs that this lynch mob is calming down. In fact, as of this morning, the levels of hysteria are only increasing .

By the way, these are typical Neocon-style tactics: double-down, then double-down again, then issue statements which make it impossible for you to back down, then repeat it all as many times as needed. This strategy is useless against a powerful and principled enemy, but it works miracles with a weak and spineless foe like Trump. This is particularly true of US politicians and journalists who have long become the accomplices of the deep state (especially after the 9/11 false flag and its cover-up) and who now cannot back down under any circumstances or treat President Trump as a normal, regular, President. The anti-Trump rhetoric has gone way too far and the US has now reached what I believe is a point of no return.

The brewing constitutional crisis: the Neocons vs the "deplorables"

I believe that the US is facing what could be the worst crisis in its history: the lawfully elected President is being openly delegitimized and that, in turn, delegitimizes the electoral process which brought him to power and, of course, it also excoriates the "deplorables" who dared vote for him: the majority of the American people.

The process which is taking place before our eyes splits the people of the US into two main categories: first, the Neocons and those whom the US media has successfully brainwashed and, second, everybody else. That second group, by the way, is very diverse and it includes not only bona fide Trump supporters (many of whom have also been zombified in their own way), but also paleo-conservatives, libertarians, antiwar activists, (real) progressives and many other groups.

I am also guessing that a lot of folks in the military are watching in horror as their armed forces and their country are being wrecked by the Neocons and their supporters. Basically, those who felt "I want my country back" and who hoped that Trump would make that happen are now horrified by what is taking place.

I believe that what we are seeing is a massive and deliberate attack by the Neocons and their deep state against the political system and the people of the United States. Congress, especially, is now guilty of engaging on a de-facto coup against the Executive on so many levels that they are hard to count (and many of them are probably hidden from the public eye) including repeated attempts to prevent Trump from exercising his constitutional powers such as, for example, deciding on foreign policy issues. A perfect example of this can be found in Nancy Pelosi's official statement about a possible invitation from Trump to Putin:

"The notion that President Trump would invite a tyrant to Washington is beyond belief. Putin's ongoing attacks on our elections and on Western democracies and his illegal actions in Crimea and the rest of Ukraine deserve the fierce, unanimous condemnation of the international community, not a VIP ticket to our nation's capital. President Trump's frightened fawning over Putin is an embarrassment and a grave threat to our democracy. An invitation to address a Joint Meeting of Congress should be bipartisan and Speaker Ryan must immediately make clear that there is not – and never will be – an invitation for a thug like Putin to address the United States Congress."

Another example of the same can be found in the unanimous 98-0 resolution by the US Senate expressing Congress's opposition to the US government allowing Russia to question US officials. Trump, of course, immediately caved in, even though he had originally declared "fantastic" the idea of actually abiding by the terms of an existing 1999 agreement on mutual assistance on criminal cases between the United States of America and Russia. The White House "spokesperson", Sarah Sanders, did even better and stated : (emphasis added)

"It is a proposal that was made in sincerity by President Putin, but President Trump disagrees with it. Hopefully, President Putin will have the 12 identified Russians come to the United States to prove their innocence or guilt "

Talk about imperial megalomania! The US will not allow the Russians to interrogate anybody, but it wants Putin to extradite Russian citizens. Amazing

As for Nancy Pelosi, her latest "tweet" today is anything but subtle. It reads:

Every single day, I find myself asking: what do the Russians have on @realDonaldTrump personally, financially, & politically? The answer to that question is that only thing that explains his behavior & his refusal to stand up to Putin. #ABetterDeal.

Pretty clear, no? "Trump is a traitor and we have to stop him".

By now there is overwhelming evidence that a creeping Neocon coup has been in progress from the very first day of Trump's presidency and that the Neocons are far from being satisfied with having broken Trump and taken over the de-facto power in the White House: they now apparently also want it de-jure too. The real question is this: are there any forces inside the US capable of stopping the Neocons from completely taking all the reins of power and, if yes, how could a patriotic reaction to this Neocon coup manifest itself? I honestly don't know, but my feeling is that we might soon have a "President Pence" in the Oval Office. One way or another, a constitutional crisis is brewing.

What about the Russian interests in all this?

I have said it many times, Russia and the AngloZionist Empire (as opposed to the United States as a country) are at war, a war which is roughly 80% informational, 15% economic and only 5% "kinetic". This is a very real war nonetheless and it is a war for survival simply because the Empire cannot allow any major country on the planet to be truly sovereign. Therefore, not only does the AngloZionist Empire represent an existential threat to Russia, Russia also represents an existential threat to the Empire. In this kind of conflict for survival there is no room for anything but a zero-sum game and whatever is good for Russia is bad for the US and vice-versa.

The Russians, including Putin, never wanted this zero-sum game, it was imposed upon them by the AngloZionists, but now that they have been forced into it, they will play it as hard as they can. It is therefore only logical to conclude that the massive systemic crises in which the Neocons and their crazy policies have plunged the US are to the advantage of Russia.

To be sure, the ideal scenario would be for Russia and the US (as opposed to the AngloZionst Empire) to work together on the very long list of issues where they share common interests. But since the Neocons have seized power and are sacrificing the US for the sake of their imperial designs, that is simply not going to happen, and the Russians understand that. Furthermore, since the US constitutes the largest power component of the AngloZionist Empire, anything weakening the US also thereby weakens the Empire and anything which weakens the Empire is beneficial for Russia (by the way, the logical corollary of this state of affairs is that the people of the US and the people of Russia have the same enemy – the Neocons – and that makes them de-facto allies).

It is not my purpose here to discuss when and how the Neocons came to power in the US, so I will just say that the delusional policies followed by the various US administrations since at least 1993 (and, even more so, since 2001) have been disastrous for the United States and could be characterized as one long never-ending case of imperial hubris (to use the title of here ). The long string of lost wars and foreign policy disasters are a direct result of this lack of even basic expertise. What passes for "expertise" today is basically hate-filled hyperbole and warmongering hysterics, hence the inflation in the paranoid anti-Russian rhetoric.

The US armed forces are only good at three things: wasting immense sums of money, destroying countries and alienating the rest of the planet. They are still the most expensive and bloated armed forces on the planet, but nobody fears them anymore (not even relatively small states, nevermind Russia or China). In technological terms, the Russians (and to a somewhat lesser degree the Chinese) have found asymmetrical answers to all the key force planning programs of the Pentagon and the former US superiority in the air, on land and on the seas is now a thing of the past. As for the US nuclear triad, it is still capable of accomplishing its mission, but it is useless as an instrument of foreign policy or to fight Russia or China (unless suicide is contemplated).

[Sidebar: this inability of the US military to achieve desired political goals might explain why, at least so far, the US has apparently given up on the notion of a Reconquista of Syria or why the Ukronazis have not dared to attack the Donbass. Of course, this is too early to call and these zigs might be followed by many zags, especially in the context of the political crisis in the US, but it appears that in the cases of the DPRK, Iran, Syria and the Ukraine there is much barking, but not much biting coming from the supposed sole "hyperpower" on the planet] The US is now engaged in simultaneous conflicts not only with Iran or Russia but also with the EU and China. In fact, even relationships with vassal states such as Canada or France are now worse than ever before. Only the prostituted leaders of "new Europe", to use Rumsfeld's term , are still paying lip service to the notion of "American leadership", and only if they get paid for it.

The US "elites" and the various interest groups they represent have now clearly turned on each other which is a clear sign that the entire system is in a state of deep crisis: when things were going well, everybody could get what they wanted and no visible infighting was taking place. The Israel Lobby has now fully subordinated Congress, the White House, and the media to its narrow Likudnik agenda and, as a direct result of this, the US has lost all their positions in the Middle-East and the chorus of those with enough courage to denounce this Zionist Occupation Government is slowly but steadily growing (at least on the Internet). Even US Jews are getting fed up with the now openly Israeli apartheid state (see here or here ). By withdrawing from a long list of important international treaties and bodies (TPP, Kyoto Protocol, START, ABM, JCPOA. UNESCO, UN Human Rights Council, etc.) the United States has completely isolated themselves from the rest of the planet. The ironic truth is that Russia has not been isolated in the least, but that the US has isolated itself from the rest of the planet.

In contrast, the Russians are capitalizing on every single US mistake – be it the carrier-centric navy, the unconditional support for Israel or the simultaneous trade wars with China and the EU. Much has been made of the recent revelation of new and revolutionary Russian weapon systems (see here and here ) but there is much more to this than just the deployment of new military systems and technologies: Russia is benefiting from the lack of any real US foreign policies to advance her own interests in the Middle-East, of course, but also elsewhere. Let's just take the very latest example of a US self-inflicted PR disaster – the following "tweet" by Trump: (CAPS in the original)

To Iranian President Rouhani: NEVER, EVER THREATEN THE UNITED STATES AGAIN OR YOU WILL SUFFER CONSEQUENCES THE LIKES OF WHICH FEW THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE EVER SUFFERED BEFORE. WE ARE NO LONGER A COUNTRY THAT WILL STAND FOR YOUR DEMENTED WORDS OF VIOLENCE & DEATH. BE CAUTIOUS!

This kind of infantile (does he not sound like a 6 year old?) and, frankly, rather demented attempts at scaring Iranians (of all people!) is guaranteed to have the exact opposite effect from the one presumably sought: the Iranian leaders might snicker in disgust, or have a good belly-laugh, but they are not going to be impressed .

The so-called "allies" of the US will be embarrassed in the extreme to be "led" by such a primitive individual, even if they don't say so in public. As for the Russians, they will happily explore all the possibilities offered to them by such illiterate and self-defeating behavior.

Conclusion one: a useful summit for Russia

As a direct consequence of the Helsinki summit, the infighting of the US ruling classes has dramatically intensified. Furthermore, faced with a barrage of hateful attacks Trump did what he always does: he tried to simultaneously appease his critics by caving in to their rhetoric while at the same time trying to appear "tough" – hence his latest "I am a tough guy with a big red button" antics against Iran (he did exactly the same thing towards the DPRK). We will probably never find out what exactly Trump and Putin discussed during their private meeting, but one thing is sure: the fact that Trump sat one-on-one with Putin without any "supervision" from his deep-state mentors was good enough to create a total panic in the US ruling class resulting in even more wailing about collusion, impeachment, high crimes & misdemeanors and even treason. Again, the goal is clear: Trump must be removed.

From the Russian point of view, it matters very little whether Trump is removed from office or not – the problem is not one of personalities, but one of the nature of the AngloZionist Empire. The Russians simply don't have the means to bring down the Empire, but the infighting of the US elites does and, if not, then at the very least the current crisis will further weaken the US, hence the Russian willingness to participate in this summit even if by itself this summit brought absolutely no tangible results: the action was in the reaction.

Conclusion two: the Clinton gang's actions can result in a real catastrophe for the US

Trump's main goal in meeting with Putin was probably to find out whether there was a way to split up the Russian-Chinese strategic partnership and to back the Israeli demands for Syria. On the issue of China, Trump never had a chance since the US has really nothing to offer to Russia (whereas China and Russia are now locked into a vital symbiotic relationship ). On Syria, the Russians and the Israelis are now negotiating the details of a deal which would give the Syrian government the control of the demarcation line with Israel (it is not a border in the legal sense) and Trump's backing for Israel will make no difference. As for Iran, the Russians will not back the US agenda either for many reasons ranging from basic self-interest to respect for international law. So while Trump did the right thing in meeting with Putin, it was predictable at least under the current set of circumstances, that he would not walk away with tangible results.

For all his very real failings, Trump cannot be blamed for the current situation. The real culprits are the Clinton gang and the Democratic Party which, by their completely irresponsible behavior, are creating a very dangerous crisis for the United States: the Neocons and the Clinton gang are willing to say anything, no matter how destabilizing, to hurt Trump even if the US political system by itself is also put at risk. Furthermore, the Neocons have now completely flipped around the presumption of innocence – both externally (Russian "attack" on the US elections) and internally (Trump's "collusion" with Putin). As for Trump, whatever his good intentions might have been, he is weak and cannot fight the entire US deep state by himself. The Neocons and the US deep state are now on a collision course with Russia and the people of the United States and while Russia does have the means to protect herself from the Empire, it is unclear to me who, or what could stop the Neocons from further damaging the US. Deep and systemic crises often result in new personalities entering the stage, but in the case of the US, it is now undeniable that the system cannot reform

exiled off mainstreet , July 26, 2018 at 4:47 am GMT

All of this seems profoundly depressing, but it appears to be how things are. I was disappointed by Trump's efforts to cave into the deep state on his statements. The fact he can't even control his justice ministry reveals his weakness. I'm of the view history shows that once spy agencies reach a critical mass in power they become the absolute rulers of a structure and the rule of law becomes a facade, then is sidelined completely.
Anonymous [333] Disclaimer , July 26, 2018 at 10:55 am GMT
@exiled off mainstreet

Trump was a complete outsider to politics when he decided to run for the presidency in 2015. He had no team or political allies. He really didn't have much of a philosophy of governance, a solid foundation of history and facts, a first rate vocabulary or the debating skills of an 8th grader. He has consistently failed to win over any Democratic and probably not even a majority of Republican politicians.

The Deep State has opposed him at every turn, choosing to favor the policies of the Neocons and their enablers in the Democratic Party. Hence, having no team of his own, he has been saddled with personnel from the ranks of his most virulent enemies at every level.

His lack of knowledge and primitive persuasive skills, which might work in big business but not under the microscope of politics, have not won him any converts but only encouraged a vicious escalation of antipathy from his opponents, who, controlling the media from top to bottom, are openly calling him a traitor on no objective grounds, unless trying to do the job of the office, maintain the peace, and explore possible avenues for reducing international tensions is now considered treasonous. The charge of treason is clearly bombastic but with virtually everyone of influence nodding in agreement, it's difficult for the man to retain his credibility before the public.

Actually, a smidgen south of half the public are the only base of his support. And a very eclectic base they are, including numerous liberals, progressives, intellectuals and peaceniks, in addition to conservatives, Republicans and Libertarians, who prefer to deal with the real world rather than Hillary's deliberate misrepresentation of it.

Will that be enough for him to survive? The way the maniacs are raving in the media, expect the country to throw a big celebration if he gets "taken out" one way or another tomorrow. The situation is really dangerous and utterly shameful. Most of the blame goes to Hillary Clinton and her insurrectionists for not accepting the outcome of our system of ersatz "democracy." Her husband won with something like 43% of the popular vote in 1992. I'm pretty sure Trump had a higher number. Cry me a river, Hillary, but stop trying to destroy what you can't have like a petulant child.

(I'm a liberal Democrat.)

Johnny Rottenborough , Website July 26, 2018 at 11:20 am GMT
the logical corollary of this state of affairs is that the people of the US and the people of Russia have the same enemy – the Neocons – and that makes them de-facto allies

I think it would be more accurate to say that the people of Russia had the same enemy.

Anonymous [346] Disclaimer , July 26, 2018 at 1:37 pm GMT

By the way, these are typical Neocon-style tactics: double-down, then double-down again, then issue statements which make it impossible for you to back down, then repeat it all as many times as needed.

It's like trial lawyers say: if the facts are on your side and the law is not, then argue the facts; if the law is on your side and the facts are not, then argue the law; and if neither the facts nor the law are on your side, then bang your fists on the table and shout as loud as you can! That's exactly what the neo-clowns are doing here.

the Neocons and the Clinton gang are willing to say anything, no matter how destabilizing, to hurt Trump even if the US political system by itself is also put at risk.

All of which just helps to further discredit the empire. Even with all the insanity in the media, I still thank God every day that Hellary did not become president.

War for Blair Mountain , July 26, 2018 at 2:25 pm GMT
The Paradox:

The above h0moerotic caricature of Putin and Trump is quite revealing in what it tells us about what drives the emotional life of White Liberals and White Leftist. They are driven by powerful urges to impose homosexuality-pedophilia-pederasty on both Christian Russia and the Working Class Native Born White American Christians.

sarz , July 26, 2018 at 3:28 pm GMT
Saker, something is not adding up. If Trump is truly as pathetic a pushover, as "weak and spineless," as you say, why all the hysteria? If, on the other hand, he is a rather successful wrecking ball, already having put in jeopardy half the key resources of the empire, that's another story.
Carlo , July 27, 2018 at 12:08 am GMT
@sarz

I think because Trump postulated himself as a candidate, then got nominated the Republican candidate and worst of all, despite the huge campaign against him, won the elections, without the blessing of the Deep State and the neocons. So now they want to teach him (and anyone else who might think about doing the same) a lesson: "Anyone who tries to become president without our approval will be crushed", so it never happens again.

Erebus , July 27, 2018 at 2:12 am GMT
@sarz

something is not adding up. If Trump is truly as pathetic a pushover, as "weak and spineless," as you say, why all the hysteria?

And nobody seems to like him
They can tell what he wants to do
And he never shows his feelings

But the fool on the hill
Sees the sun going down
And the eyes in his head
See the world spinning around

That Trump is a wrecking ball is a hypothesis I've held since the first GOP debate, when I also realized he would (probably) win not only the election, but may even succeed at the far more difficult challenge of bringing the Empire to a sufficiently soft landing that the nation survives. I'm less convinced of the latter now, largely because I underestimated the centrifugal forces driving the fault lines in the American body politic. The nation, tragically may not survive the Empire's twilight, but I've seen nothing that makes me want to change my hypothesis.

He's laying waste to the Empire in the most peaceful process possible – in large part by so embarrassing the Empire's elites, allies and vassals that they withdraw first their active support, and then finally even their consent. Inducing hysteria, both foreign and domestic, is a non-trivial component of the forces giving the wrecking ball an extra push as it heads for the edifice.

As for the summit, I frankly wouldn't be surprised to learn that much of it was staged for maximum hysteria-inducing effect. Their 2hrs spent alone probably was little more than comparing notes. After all, what can Trump promise that he can also deliver under the circumstances? He can only promise to keep doing what he's doing.

In any case, they both know the Empire has to go, and they both want the American nation to be a player after it goes. A vibrant America is as critical to the multipolar world as it is to Americans. Maybe more so.

Collusion? Maybe, but the Trump phenomena, IMHO, has all the earmarks of regime change done right. With or without collusion, the hystericals can't quite put their finger on what happened, which drives further hysteria, which pushes the wrecking ball even faster, which drives....

Franz , July 27, 2018 at 6:13 am GMT
now undeniable that the system cannot reform itself

Yes, Saker and that puts US politics behind European fascism of 70+ years ago. Mussolini was booted out by a fascist committee, Franco paved the way for a constitutional monarchy, but all Americans get is Bozo the Clown/President.

The destruction of the US working class amazes me in its absence from all serious debate. First subverted by the CIA then rendered null by outsourcing (which is still undercounted) the "deplorables" have no mechanism for resistence except the unthinkable one: Hope for total breakup of the United States. Or hope for a foreign invasion.

Makes one wonder. When Egyptians greeted Alexander the Great as a liberator as he conquered them, it was a fairly pungent comment on the ruling Persians. Will blue-collar former-Yanks be cheering for liberating Chinese or Russian troops anytime soon? Henry Kissinger once predicted something of the sort.

We do live in interesting times.

Cyrano , July 27, 2018 at 7:10 pm GMT
@Erebus

Well on the way, head in a cloud
The man of a thousand voices talking perfectly loud
But nobody ever hears him
Or the sound he appears to make
And he never seems to notice

He never listens to them
He knows that they're the fools
They don't like him

I don't think that Trump is the fool on the hill. I think that mostly all those around him are. The latest hysteria over Russia is not about any "meddling" in any "democracy". It's about throwing tantrums that Russia won't submit to US hegemony. In my opinion, they don't deserve to be in charge of their own country, let alone to be asking to be in charge of Russia.

All they come up with is terrible ideas which they in their generosity are way too eager to share with the world – against the wishes or the best interests of the world. Like the multiculturalism. It's bad enough that they came up with that awful idea, but then they had to force it down the throats of the stupid Europeans.

Then when Merkel showed enough brains to challenge their idea, they forced her to make 180 turn and to welcome over a 1 million refugees from the imperial misadventures.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/10/18/frum.merkel.multicultural

peterAUS , July 28, 2018 at 7:14 am GMT
Well, Saker did put, this time, some good points here. Of course, they were well mixed with the usual Kremlin propaganda, but that's now like "good morning" with his writing. Probably all public members of "Team Russia" have that clause in their contract. The usual spin "Russia is great, winning, and all is not only good but simply getting better for Kremlin and the Great Leader".

He does point to this "thing" with MSM and public figures in West re the summit. I agree, it's surreal. If I were watching this in a serious movie I'd change the channel/walk out. If I were reading a serious book with the "thing" as a part of the plot I'd stop reading. I think there IS something there.

It is not just "unanimity of hatred and chaos", "abject hysterics", "hate-filled hysteria", "two minutes of hatred stretched well into a two weeks of hatred" etc. It's something else and, I feel, simply much worse and dangerous.

I guess we have entered a zone beyond geopolitics into mass psychology. Not my area of expertise at all, but simply feel there is something there. It feels as watching, hard to express it, hysterical people? Now, on my level, whenever I dealt with such people I simply walked away, most of the time. A couple of times, when I couldn't walk away I simply floored them (or so I say). Both men and women (talking about being a gentleman , a). With women, it's even easier, just one strike, weak hand even. With men a full combination, even with a takedown and ..anyway. Joking. Sort of. Besides, I was younger then. But how can you take out people who control, in essence, US power, nuclear weapons in particular? You simply can't . That is what makes, IMHO, this so dangerous. I simply can't recollect anything similar in relationship between superpowers. I am not so optimistic re the collapse of The Empire, multipolar world etc.

This "thing" can, I concede, deliver a couple of goods: People, at last, realizing who, or better what, are our "betters". The real power of The Empire diminishing because of the mess and chaos those species ..created. Those two things creating an opportunity to, somehow, do something about this abomination.

But, and a big but, there is the flip there. People simply not paying attention. And, those hysterics really getting the levers of power in their hands. While they are in that state, that is.

As I've said several times here so far (doesn't matter a bit, of course) Trump supporters fucked up. Not him; he didn't expect to win and when he did he found himself in a really bad position. His supporters. As soon as he won they walked home. A mistake. A terrible mistake. I feel we'll all pay, dearly, for it.

[Jul 29, 2018] Trump is being beaten down by the propaganda arm of the deep state (the MSM) but his tenacity is paying off. Already poles are indicating that the majority of people are not taken in by the charade

Notable quotes:
"... The Deep State has opposed him at every turn, choosing to favor the policies of the Neocons and their enablers in the Democratic Party. Hence, having no team of his own, he has been saddled with personnel from the ranks of his most virulent enemies at every level. ..."
"... His lack of knowledge and primitive persuasive skills, which might work in big business but not under the microscope of politics, have not won him any converts but only encouraged a vicious escalation of antipathy from his opponents, who, controlling the media from top to bottom, are openly calling him a traitor on no objective grounds, unless trying to do the job of the office, maintain the peace, and explore possible avenues for reducing international tensions is now considered treasonous. The charge of treason is clearly bombastic but with virtually everyone of influence nodding in agreement, it's difficult for the man to retain his credibility before the public. ..."
"... Neocons have seized power and are sacrificing the US for the sake of their imperial designs ..."
"... Private corporations have become global, have acquired many public resources, and are now in control of whole segments of the profit potential in the entire world. This makes them as big as or bigger than the nations states that gave birth to them. America is just a small part of the private corporate wealth generating reach of the private domain. What corporations don't control is left to government. What's wrong with that? ..."
"... The USA has become a transfer mechanism and a transport company. Those in power are transferring massive arrays of public rights, duties, and resources to private corporate opulence. The elite (Pharaoh and his private corporation) have not been more secure, but Americans have reached the extended edge of insecurity. Leadership now consist of two masters: Public elected government 40% and privately owned corporations 60%. ..."
"... Every empire in history, after conquering its future colonies, ruled those colonies with a good degree of acceptance by the colonised population. Now the US claims that it is a global empire, the biggest one in history, but I know of no country which likes to be even man-handled let alone managed by US. ..."
"... Here is the specific threat to CIA impunity behind the US propaganda hysterics. Russia is turning over the rocks where CIA hides its moles in the US government. Russia knows what the perps are up to, so US state secrets don't protect them as they do at home. ..."
"... The CIA focal points that Fletcher Prouty told us about decades ago, they're still infesting the government, dug in deeper than ever. Russia proposes to question them. It's the American public's first look at the secret dotted-line reports CIA uses to control the US government. ..."
"... The US agents Russia singled out for questioning: Browder, Steele, McFaul (CIA war propaganda against Russia,) Jonathan Wiener (Lockerbie fabricator and DoS focal point,) David J. Kramer (ran Russian agents from DoS DRL and CIA's Freedom House), Kyle Parker (CIA mole on Senate staff) Todd Hyman, Schvartsman (CIA's DHS moles.) and Jim Rote, a garden-variety CIA spook rather than an agent, and CIA's transnational organized crime boss Robert Otto. ..."
"... Many millions of patriotic conservative, nationalist, and libertarian people working in "white-collar" jobs voted for Trump (as well as some more lefty white-collar folks who couldn't abide the DNC's rigging the primaries against Sanders and/or her obvious personal corruption, incessant warmongering, and loyalty to very rich folks in the finance/banking and entertainment fields). ..."
Jul 29, 2018 | www.unz.com

Anonymous

Trump was a complete outsider to politics when he decided to run for the presidency in 2015. He had no team or political allies. He really didn't have much of a philosophy of governance, a solid foundation of history and facts, a first rate vocabulary or the debating skills of an 8th grader. He has consistently failed to win over any Democratic and probably not even a majority of Republican politicians.

The Deep State has opposed him at every turn, choosing to favor the policies of the Neocons and their enablers in the Democratic Party. Hence, having no team of his own, he has been saddled with personnel from the ranks of his most virulent enemies at every level.

His lack of knowledge and primitive persuasive skills, which might work in big business but not under the microscope of politics, have not won him any converts but only encouraged a vicious escalation of antipathy from his opponents, who, controlling the media from top to bottom, are openly calling him a traitor on no objective grounds, unless trying to do the job of the office, maintain the peace, and explore possible avenues for reducing international tensions is now considered treasonous. The charge of treason is clearly bombastic but with virtually everyone of influence nodding in agreement, it's difficult for the man to retain his credibility before the public.

Actually, a smidgen south of half the public are the only base of his support. And a very eclectic base they are, including numerous liberals, progressives, intellectuals and peaceniks, in addition to conservatives, Republicans and Libertarians, who prefer to deal with the real world rather than Hillary's deliberate misrepresentation of it.

Will that be enough for him to survive? The way the maniacs are raving in the media, expect the country to throw a big celebration if he gets "taken out" one way or another tomorrow. The situation is really dangerous and utterly shameful. Most of the blame goes to Hillary Clinton and her insurrectionists for not accepting the outcome of our system of ersatz "democracy." Her husband won with something like 43% of the popular vote in 1992. I'm pretty sure Trump had a higher number. Cry me a river, Hillary, but stop trying to destroy what you can't have like a petulant child.

(I'm a liberal Democrat.)

chris , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 12:09 pm GMT

If Trump can't even stick to his own words, how could anybody expect the Russians to take anything he says seriously?!

I think this is tanken too seriously; the Russians definitely appreciate Trump's courage in taking a step toward them in an era of such hysteria. Trump is being beaten down by the propaganda arm of the deep state (the MSM) but his tenacity is paying off. Already poles are indicating that the majority of people are not taken in by the charade. As with the 2016 election, a sizable portion of the population just ain't buying it.

Anonymous [157] Disclaimer , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 12:17 pm GMT
I dunno whether citing Nancy Pelosi on anything is relevant. Never had courage on anything during the Dubya Years, and now she's pretty gone, a political career robot with decaying functions.

You can practically see the cabling coming out of the spine, she's probably having herself dominated remotely via TeamViewer by MS-13 members, too.

animalogic , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 12:25 pm GMT
I agree with your comments. I wish to emphasize one point: Trump was NEVER given a chance. The establishment HATED him from his candidacy. That hatred has become more pathological by the day.
It's gone beyond "agreeing"/ "disagreeing" with Trump: this is a sickening assault on U.S democracy.
The Democratic Party IS guilty of treason. The US establishment – the deep state, if you like is -- criminally INSANE.
animalogic , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 12:33 pm GMT
@War for Blair Mountain

I think there is an element of truth to your views. However, I can't get past the fact that the head of this Trump hating psychotics are native born white Americans. Yes, they pander to "minorities" but it's merely a means to their own piggish elite ends. Minorities are also "useful idiots" .

chris , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 12:39 pm GMT

the people of the US and the people of Russia have the same enemy – the Neocons – and that makes them de-facto allies

There's definitely something to this statement. I think the Russian people can definitely commensurate with the "deplorables" as they too have (and to some extent continue to) spend many decades under Jewish dominated Nomenklatura.

anastasia , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 12:49 pm GMT
Trump did not do anything different in this meeting with Putin than any other leader, who had in the past met with the Russian leader. It was not what was done; it was the reaction to what was presumed to have been done, and wasn't..

The entire Mueller investigation is being conducted, and will continue for all the years of the Trump Presidency, to be sure, to insure that Trump does not do what he promised to do during his campaign – cooperate with Putin and get out of the mid-east. It is very obvious that so far, Trump has shown to have completely reneged on his campaign promises in this regard (eg. putting military bases in Syria, evacuating ISIS commandos, bombing Syria, recognizing Jerusalem as the state capital, continuing the war in Afghanistan, arming to the teeth Saudi Arabia, etc. and some of the actions he has taken were based upon patent and obvious lies (eg. bombing Syria ..twice).

If one listens carefully to the concerns of Trump in the Putin meeting, it was predominantly the "security" of Israel vis a vis Iran. It was not the Untied States, but Israel that was his major concern, and if you listen even more carefully, anyone could have heard some key words, "Putin is a big fan of BeeBee", which means what? It means that these mid-eastern wars are never, never. never going to end.

All this noise coming from the right and left is only that .noise. Because really nothing under the sun has changed.

anon [317] Disclaimer , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 12:56 pm GMT
@Anonymous

the lawfully elected President is being openly delegitimized and that, in turn, delegitimizes the electoral process which brought him to power and, of course, it also excoriates the "deplorables" who dared vote for him: the majority of the American people.

Neocons have seized power and are sacrificing the US for the sake of their imperial designs, that is simply not going to happen, and the Russians understand that.

transition from ::to

But I think the ruling classes intensity is a result of copyright and patent laws and other devices too numerous to list here have been taken to privatize the public resources held in trust by the USA into the hands of Pharaoh and his right arm corporations. Essentially American public assets were entrusted to the USA, and its corporate elected leaders pieced the public assets up, and sold them to the highest bidder. Now the successful bidders are trying to get control or ownership over the remaining few assets that still held in the public [USA} trust, when that is finished America will be wasted and the USA will become a dictatorship.

Privatization is the first and foremost internal problem; unless it is fixed, nothing will change.

What do I mean by privatization? Whole segments of the national USA and global economy now belong to one or a few private enterprises: by contract, by rule of some law, or by ownership of assets that were taken, or that are controlled by contract, or agreement, the public domain was reduced and the private domain was increased. Substantial economic power and most political power h\b transferred into private hands.

Private corporations have become global, have acquired many public resources, and are now in control of whole segments of the profit potential in the entire world. This makes them as big as or bigger than the nations states that gave birth to them. America is just a small part of the private corporate wealth generating reach of the private domain. What corporations don't control is left to government. What's wrong with that?

Private corporations (PCs) conduct their affairs independent of national laws and politics, but the political systems and the people that depend on those political systems are highly dependent, not on government, but on these private corporations.

Privatization means a part of the public domain has been transferred to the private domain (mostly corporations). Water franchises, health care, pharmaceuticals, hospitals, military arms production, transportation (airlines and ships used to be public owned or highly controlled quasi-governmental entities), energy production and distribution, private armies, public research discoveries converted by rule of law and investment capital into private properties, global manufacturers of important and necessary software or hardware systems or components ; energy, water, gas production and distribution, and services such as garbage, jail management, education, and so on, are public services provided by private corporations.

Just as British Colonial Aristocrats and their massive corporations were doing in 1776, today's elites are busy transferring public government and American assets, resources, and governing powers to their private selves.

The USA has become a transfer mechanism and a transport company. Those in power are transferring massive arrays of public rights, duties, and resources to private corporate opulence. The elite (Pharaoh and his private corporation) have not been more secure, but Americans have reached the extended edge of insecurity. Leadership now consist of two masters: Public elected government 40% and privately owned corporations 60%.

Pieces of the public government were carved out and given to private corporate enterprises. Each transfer from public government to private corporate government; provides elites more power, and the government that represents the public less power.

The problems the Saker presents are all results of the private taking from public.

anonymous [128] Disclaimer , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 1:05 pm GMT
If the media truly hated Trump as much as they say they did, they would never have put him front and center during the primary and given him all that publicity. They would have Ron Pauled him into public oblivion. They had complete control, but instead of ignoring him, they put him front of center.

And those polls? If they were rigged, the media knew they were rigged, and would have conducted one in secret. And why would Hillary have a schedule of campaign stops, half of which were lies. Why was she lying about her campaign schedule? His election was a surprise to no one, except those they wanted to fool – the public.

The "surprise" of his election was nothing more than part of the grand theatre we see being played now.

There was collusion all right during this election, but it certainly wasn't with the Russians.

Kiza , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 1:07 pm GMT
Every empire in history, after conquering its future colonies, ruled those colonies with a good degree of acceptance by the colonised population. Now the US claims that it is a global empire, the biggest one in history, but I know of no country which likes to be even man-handled let alone managed by US.

Therefore, I fail to understand where this claim to empire comes from. Yes, the behaviour appears empirial (for example requesting delivery of some "12 Russians" that some third-rate US horse-face pretend-policeman identified as perpetrators of a crime which never happened), but every Napoleon in my local asylum for the insane behaves empirially.

As to Pellosi and the gang who suck the dicks of Netanyahoo and MbS, the real mass murderers, like little bunny rabbits suck bottles of milk, their words on Putin are words of frustration due to the fact that Putin will never offer his member to be similarly sucked.

Let me summise it simply: what an amazing fuck up US is under its Jewish ownership.

HO-LY COWW , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 1:22 pm GMT
Here is the specific threat to CIA impunity behind the US propaganda hysterics. Russia is turning over the rocks where CIA hides its moles in the US government. Russia knows what the perps are up to, so US state secrets don't protect them as they do at home.

The CIA focal points that Fletcher Prouty told us about decades ago, they're still infesting the government, dug in deeper than ever. Russia proposes to question them. It's the American public's first look at the secret dotted-line reports CIA uses to control the US government.

From Meduza: "The list of names also includes Homeland Security Department official Todd Hyman (who testified in a deposition against Prevezon, a Russian company accused of laundering proceeds from the fraud uncovered by Sergey Magnitsky), Svetlana Engert (who supposedly stole criminal case materials from Russia), Alexander Shvartsman (who supposedly oversaw Browder's stay in the U.S.), Jim Rote (a supposed CIA agent acting as Browder's "financial manager"), Robert Otto (who supposedly served as deputy director of a U.S. intelligence agency until January 2017), David Kramer (who recently served as an adviser to the U.S. State Department), Jonathan Wiener (a long-time aide to John Kerry and an adviser on national security), and Kyle Parker (a recent U.S. State Department official), according to Kurennoi."

http://www.interfax.ru/russia/621432

The US agents Russia singled out for questioning: Browder, Steele, McFaul (CIA war propaganda against Russia,) Jonathan Wiener (Lockerbie fabricator and DoS focal point,) David J. Kramer (ran Russian agents from DoS DRL and CIA's Freedom House), Kyle Parker (CIA mole on Senate staff) Todd Hyman, Schvartsman (CIA's DHS moles.) and Jim Rote, a garden-variety CIA spook rather than an agent, and CIA's transnational organized crime boss Robert Otto.

Russia is showing us how CIA infiltrates and controls the entire US government.

anonymous [128] Disclaimer , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 1:36 pm GMT
Trump's accomplishments:

(1) continuing indefinitely the war in Afghanistan
(2) bombing Syria twice for reasons which he knew or should have known were false.
(3) putting a military base in Syria as an invader https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/syria/u-s-forces-set-up-new-base-in-syria-s-manbij-despite-turkish-threats-1.6073192 something no President dared do in the past.
(4) appointing neo-con war mongers in all key cabinet positions
(5) telling police (on video for all the world to hear) to confiscate guns and "worry about due process later" (13 states have followed this advice) This statement tramples upon not only the second amendment, but the fifth and fourteenth as well
(6) saying absolutely nothing about Google, Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, censuring all right wing groups, showing that he doesn't give a hoot about anyone's lst amendment rights, including his supporters.
(7) recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel (at a cost of thousands injured and dead Palestinians during Israel's celebration)
(8) sanctioning Russia at least three times since he has been in office; with sanctions more severe than those imposed by Obama.
(9) having the US military evacuate ISIS commandos in Syria
(10) breaching the agreement with Iran at a time when the only party with continuing contract obligations was Iran who was abiding by the contract (he certainly was not going to get back the Obama money,w hich is the only thing he complained about during his campaign)
(11) fully funding planned parenthood (now trying to undo this Congressional action with an Executive Order which compounds the problem in his attempt to usurp the powers of Congress, violating Article 1, Section 8 of the constitution)
(12) not building the wall
(13) lying about his gross immorality (keep in mind that if the Senate impeached Clinton for committing fellatio in the Oval Office with a foolish young girl in her early twenties, Trump would never have dared to run for office with his background)
(14) lying about the economy (saying there was 4 percent unemployment when all the big retailers employing hundreds of thousands went out of business on the heels of his statement)
(15) proposing to reward millions of immigrants who have broken our laws

Yet, his supporters are still on the street with those silly hats reciting their mantra that he is making America great again.

What he is doing in fact is continuing unjustified wars (military Keynesian economics that will destroy the US) while simultaneously and quietly taking away our constitutional rights. Those are his biggest "accomplishments"

Z-man , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 1:48 pm GMT
An example has to be made of one or two Neocons/Deep State'rs .
RadicalCenter , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 1:55 pm GMT
@War for Blair Mountain

Sound analysis, WBC.

I'd just quibble that it's unlikely that the majority of Trump's voters were "blue collar", if that's what we mean by working class.

Many millions of patriotic conservative, nationalist, and libertarian people working in "white-collar" jobs voted for Trump (as well as some more lefty white-collar folks who couldn't abide the DNC's rigging the primaries against Sanders and/or her obvious personal corruption, incessant warmongering, and loyalty to very rich folks in the finance/banking and entertainment fields).

Unfortunately, if we're counting manufacturing and assembly jobs as "blue collar" or "working class", there just aren't enough of those jobs left in the USA for their holders to constitute a majority even of Trump voters. That was part of Trump's appeal, right, the endless loss of good-paying jobs actually making things of tangible usefulness and value?

animalogic , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 1:58 pm GMT
@peterAUS

What "we" have is a corrupt US (global) elite. An elite, primed in the 80′s & let entirely off the leash in '91. Benevolent despots ? A concept with only the vaguest comprehension.

No – these US/ Globalist elites just KNEW history was on THEIR side. Take the brakes off, & spin the capitalist coin: heads – class war; tails imperialism. Win -win. (Can't remember his name – guy who runs Hathaway-something: "there is class war, & my class is winning". Damn few business men are as worshipped as this bloke) And yes, just look at the 90′s, the Yeltsin years, the Clinton years looked like it was all working out.

Well, contradictions will "out". And here we are. A ruling class descending into sociopathology. A public unable to fully comprehend the toxic brew bubbling just beneath the surface ( the 6 o'clock news, comfortable, day in day out, pay the damn bills, the kid's teeth need braces & the car a new exhaust).

I won't mention climate change – few here who believe, let alone give a fuck ? We are in diabolical trouble but fuck it – instinctively we all know it's a Panglossian universe .& the devil take the hindmost.

RadicalCenter , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 1:59 pm GMT
@War for Blair Mountain

Both the USA and Russia are much less "Christian" than you make out. But you're right, of course, that our enemies seem especially motivated to destroy any nation with a meaningful vestige of Western (Greco-Roman-Anglo-European) Civilization and/or Christian mores.

Miro23 , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 2:01 pm GMT
@War for Blair Mountain

The Democratic Party Voting Bloc is now effectively-demographically majority post-1965 nonwhites+American Blacks .

True enough but they aren't necessarily against the "Deplorables". For example Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez who recently won a Democratic primary in New York (against heavy odds) describes herself as a "Democratic Socialist" for affordable single-payer national healthcare, tuition free education in high schools and universities ,with a downsized MIC & Deep State and realistic corporate taxation helping pay for it.

And on the Gaza border shooting of Palestinians she recently said, "This is a massacre. I hope my peers have the moral courage to call it such. No state or entity is absolved of mass shootings of protesters. There is no justification. Palestinian people deserve basic human dignity, as anyone else. Democrats can't be silent about this anymore." She opposes the Likudniks, AIPAC, Netanyahu and wants a two state solution.

Democratic Socialism and Elite Globalist Zionism seem to have a problem living together in the Democratic Party.

The strains are also visible in the UK where Jeremy Corbyn could also be described as a Democratic Socialist with much the same platform as Ocasio-Cortez and a good chance of becoming Prime Minister.

animalogic , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 2:04 pm GMT
@Erebus

Trump – good & evil. But his base need to take to the streets before he has a "problem in Dallas" or the dickless wonders in Congress finally get the gumption to impeach (hard as that's to believe of the Dem-castrartie party .)

Imperial myths , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 2:11 pm GMT
The US has been a very succesful country, an amazing empire . In barely a century and a half expanded enormously thanks to Northern European protestant immigration and to the occupation of Mexican territories .

In 1945 the USA was on top of the world , it was " the shining city of the hill " , the only city shining in the hill in fact , it had 50% of the world GDP . while the rest of the world was in ruins . The decadent Europeans had destroyed themselves in two world wars . . The Russians had suffered the horrors of the communist revolution and the two world wars . The Japanese although defeated had destroyed Asia , specially China which also endured a civil war and a communist revolution .

So , in 1945 the world was in ruins , and the USA was indeed the only "shining city on the hill " . The USA never suffered the world wars destruction on its own territory , had few casualties in the world wars , and had 50% of the world GDP. Besides the USA inherited economically and politically the British Empire that England, exhausted by the two world wars could not maintain .

In the 60`s the USA was still the " shining city on the hill ", Kennedy wanted to do some changes , I do not know which ones, and he was killed ( by the deep State ? ), the world was shocked .

In the 70`s Nixon finished the Vietnam war ( a colonial heritage of the French ) it was an American defeat, and the " shining city in the hill " impeached him ( the deep State does not accept defeat ) . Europe , the USSR , Japan , China , had recovered from the wars and wanted to have their shining little villages in the hills too.

Presently the USA has 20% of the GDP , that`s a lot , the USA is a very powerful country , probably the most powerful country of the world , but 20% is not 50% . Probably Kennedy and Nixon realized that this day would come , and Trump sees that this day is arrived . Probably the american deep State would like to freeze time in 1945 , as well as the french deep State would like it to freeze history in 1805 in Austerlitz with Napoleon , or the Spanish deep State would like to freeze history in 1492 when Spain completely expelled the moors from Spain after seven centuries of fighting and discovered America , with the Catholic Kings .

The deep States are always sick of imperial nostalgia , they are the war party , they would like to make war to anyone to threatens its 1945 imperial glorious moment . And the Kennedys , Nixons and Trumps of this world are the party of peace, they want to adapt to a changing reality less glorious than the magic orgasmic moments that all empires have had , but more constructive, more adapted to an ever changing world .

All the Empires that the earth has seen have passed though this dilemma : party of war vs party of peace . At the end the parties of peace end up prevailing, but the parties of war can make a lot of damage both to their own country and to others .

jilles dykstra , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 2:22 pm GMT
@Cyrano

I still think the best explanation of Merkel's immigration policy is her belief that indeed the Germans are guilty of two world wars and the holocaust. Therefore 'ein neuer Mensch', a new German, must be created through mass immigration, as a German commentator explains. His book should be ready by now. His prediction is that just the E European countries, Hungary, Poland, etc., will remain European. Writing this, one may expect that they will turn politically to Russia, also a catholic white country.

jilles dykstra , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 2:29 pm GMT
@Imperial myths

" The decadent europeans had destroyed themselves in two world wars . . "

The USA destroyed Europe in two world wars. Do not remember if it was here that I read what Mark Twain said or wrote 'it is easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled'.
About WWI:
Charles Callan Tansill, 'Amerika geht in den Krieg', Stuttgart 1939 (America goes to War, 1938)
FDR's preparations for WWII:
Charles A. Beard, 'American Foreign Policy in the Making, 1932 – 1940, A study in responsibilities', New Haven, 1946
Charles A. Beard, 'President Roosevelt and the coming of the war 1941, A study in appearances and realities', New Haven, 1948

animalogic , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 2:45 pm GMT
@Been_there_done_that

"Russian leaders provoked popular sentiment in numerous countries to join NATO, no doubt abetted by their unfavorable experiences under Russian occupation"

You mean USSR occupation, of course. Perhaps Russia might discuss any number of issues when the US removes it's illegal forces in Syria, stops supporting the crypto--Nazi coup government in Ukraine, withdraws it's missiles from Poland etc (oh, we'll protect you from non existent Iranian nuclear weapons) & pulls back it's conventional forces, stops proving up invasions like the Georgian invasion of Sth Iapetus, stops interfering in what remains of the democratic processes of the former USSR states, stops supporting terrorists across the ME, stops interfering in the energy business of its allies in the EU, stops it's lies & threats against Russian allies such as Iran & stops iys criminal sanctions on Russia .Well, that scratches the surface, anyway .

Anon [235] Disclaimer , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 2:54 pm GMT

3.The US armed forces are only good at three things: wasting immense sums of money, destroying countries and alienating the rest of the planet.

Alienating the rest of the planet: Wasting immense sums of money: The U.S. War Industry Raked in $5+ Billion Worth of Foreign Military Sales in June 2018

July 27, 2018 / Christian Sorensen /

"The U.S. war industry raked in $5,408,112,575 worth of foreign military sales (FMS) during June 2018. Notable items included $1.12 billion worth of Lockheed Martin F-16 aircraft for Bahrain and "

iseeit , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 3:04 pm GMT
@Anonymous

An uncommonly excellent analysis. High quality comment threads and sites that allow for reactions/debate/introduction of public discourse are my gold standard. Unz is exceptional and much appreciated. Just because it's unlikely that I might post here often

I would like to suggest Dr. Judith Curry's blog to anyone like me who enjoys going deeper into subjects than most 'normal' people would ever find time for. It's a climate blog. It's brilliant. Curry is a genuinely exceptional human and scientist. The comment threads are pure mind candy..

Comanche , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 3:07 pm GMT
@Been_there_done_that

are u ok ? Russia occupying her province of Kaliningrad ? maybe your country is occupying illegally California , Arizona , Nevada , Colorado , Utah , New Mexico , Oklahoma and Texas ? Get your nato out of Europe , Europe is fed un with your 80.000 yankee occupation troops .

Even baltics are missing Russians, Baltics` population is going down since they left CCCP , they are fed up with American warmongers , they do not want to be cannon fodder for the well paid eccentric American militarists .

TomSchmidt , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 3:20 pm GMT
@War for Blair Mountain

Trump won 20% of the Black male electorate. If he can increase that percentage, then the Democratic coalition becomes black females, post-1965 immigrants, and white New Class managerial types. He might get blacks to side with him over immigration, which has cut out the support for lower-skilled wages across the board.

linguistic smiles , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 3:26 pm GMT
It is very funny for the French speaking the American word neocon , for neo conservative. In French con means idiot , dumb , stupid , silly

so, neocon neoidiot , hehehhehehehehhehe

El Dato , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 3:39 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

The USA destroyed Europe in two world wars.

That's kinda over the top. Continental suicide was on the books for the Great Continental War (I don't know how it comes it is called "World War") as general desire of revanchism, political nastiness, prussian militarism, yougoslav apsirations, decaying empires and the British desire for a continental balance of power met head-on with war tool mechanization. The US came online rather late.

As for "Word War II", it was mainly about two socialist systems facing off, and Japan irking the US with a bout of late-onset colonialism. Also everyone going crazy with operations research and even more mechanization. So it should be called "Socialist War I with Colonialism on the side.".

El Dato , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 3:40 pm GMT
@Anon

Something out of a Kubrick Movie or out of Borat. Release the Nouveau Cheque!

TomSchmidt , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 3:42 pm GMT
@Ilyana_Rozumova

They should have destroyed Germany after WWI, or come to a just Peace. They did neither, slightly weakening it and strongly pissing it off.

After the Soviets went out of business, the US neither welcomed it to the brotherhood of nations, nor destroyed it so it could not be a threat. Letting the looters loose upon it sure did piss a lot of people off though. Your point is well taken.

karakulaitis , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 3:56 pm GMT
@Been_there_done_that

You logorrheic schmuck , do you know the evolution of population in the baltic countries after they left the Soviet Union in 1990 ?

1990 : Estonia 1,600.000 2017 : Estonia 1,200.00

1990 : Letonia 2,700.000 2017 : Letonia 1,900.000

1990 : Lituania 3,700.000 2017 : Lituania 2,800.000

Looks like they are being exterminated by the new NATO/EU regime , don`t you think so ?

It is a new version of the plan Ost ?

Colin Wright , Website Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 4:18 pm GMT
Two reactions.

First reaction. All I can think of whenever I read another allegation of Russia influence, control of Trump or anyone else, or of Putin coming to Washington is Israel. Over and over: these people simply keep ignoring the elephant in the room. I don't care about the Pekinese: there's an elephant right there! Look at it! Yes, a Russian businessman once gave a Trump advisor (since dismissed) fifty thousand dollars. Israel partisans were the leading contributors to both candidates; Sheldon Adelson alone gave Donald Trump thirty five million dollars. Shall we talk about what we're doing as a consequence; how we're remorselessly driving Iran to the point where there will be no choice but war -- and at whose behest we're doing this?

No let's fret and fantasize about 'Russian influence.' Never mind that the body bags won't be coming back from Latvia, but from Iran.

Second reaction: this one's more optimistic. Yes, the attacks are increasingly hysterical; but they're also coming from an increasingly narrow base. More and more, people on both the right and the left just don't buy them anymore: see, for example, the denunciation of all this nonsense at the impeccably 'progressive' Mondoweiss.

I perceive the remaining anti-Trump partisans as still possessing a grip on the traditional media outlets. However, more and more, they simply speak for no one but themselves. In fact, this may account for the note of hysterical exaggeration; underneath it all is the sneaking suspicion that no one believes them, or is even listening. After all, look at Trump's poll numbers. The media keeps announcing that 'now he's blown it' -- and his numbers keep inching up. I like tracking a rolling average of the last ten polls. When I started the figure was around 38. Now it's moving past 43. Neither 'babygate' nor 'Russiagate' perceptibly affected this at all.

So to sum up, 'Russiagate' isn't the problem, and it's questionable if many actual Americans even think it is. This remains true whatever the ravings coming out of The Washington Post, or The New Yorker , or USA Today . All the evidence is that these organs speak for fewer and fewer people, and fewer and fewer are even listening.

Colin Wright , Website Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 4:32 pm GMT
Basically, I think most Americans don't even care about all this nonsense.

They know that if Trump is awful, the alternatives were even worse, and they know that the economy's doing well. No one's saying 'if only Hillary coulda won '

jilles dykstra , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 4:48 pm GMT
@El Dato

The USA came into WWI from the very beginning. Without buying USA food and weapons on credit GB and France could not have fought at all. Moreover, the USA was not neutral, the USA allowed the British blockade of Germany. As to continental suicide, there was no such thing.
GB wanted war.

WWII, how many times must be repeated what Lindbergh already said before Pearl Harbour, that 'jewry and GB wanted war'. FDR was brought into politics by Bernard Baruch, who already in 1928 prevented his friend Churchill from going into business, because 'he saw great things for Churchill in the future'. These great things came, Churchill waged an unnecessary war, and destroyed the empire.

ploni almoni , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 4:54 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

This is the best the CIA can do?

chris , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 5:09 pm GMT
@Anon

maybe they're singing: "We Arm the World"

Been_there_done_that , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 5:24 pm GMT
@karakulaitis

Quote:
" do you know the evolution of population in the baltic countries after they left the Soviet Union in 1990 ?"

Yes, the decreases in population can easily be explained primarily by Russians, who used to live there, having moved back to Russia. Additionally, there might have been small population flows of Lithuanias to Poland, Latvians to Sweden, and Estonians to Finland, given the close relationships. Nothing nefarious.

anon [317] Disclaimer , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 5:51 pm GMT
@HO-LY COWW

interesting that Russia has been called to defend itself in England. There its Novichok the instant death substance arguably produced in London by USA controlled labs or taken from the old USSR when it fell apart.

Putin vs British government case: Putin charged with poisoning an ex Russian spy and his daughter, unfortunately for the media and the British corporate Zionist both Russians survived, Russia has called the British liars to the carpet.. Russia demands an investigation but the Banksters and their corporations refuse to allow the British Government to open its "so-called" investigation to Russian questioning.

Keep your eyes focused on Nord II. the one road one belt, Turkey moving in support of Syria and Yemen against Saudi Arabia, BRICS and concern yourself with the fact that Russia not only does not own any USA debt, but Russia also has a non federal reserve approved monetary exchange operation, SCO is growing in strength, China Gold backed bonds are available for anyone to buy and convert the face value of the bond to gold. These are game changers.

Stay tuned for more privately owned advertising supported corporate media productions showing on "FREE THEATER". M 16, (criminal instigating Association) CIA and Mossad employees are busy writing new propaganda, budget is not a problem, the Russian's will be made to pay for the articles, movies etc. so everything is free. Enjoy!

HO-LY COWW , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 6:41 pm GMT
@anon

Yes indeed, first Britain, and now Russia has pantsed the US too. In a virtuosic dick move, they exposed a CIA spook who's implicated not only in Secret Agent Browder's war propaganda ( http://russiahouse.org/current_news.php?language=eng&id_current=1454 ) but in CIA crimes against humanity – specifically, 'legal pretexts for manifestly illegal acts."

David Kramer, Tufts/Harvard Political Science/Russian studies, **PNAC** , DoS focal point, then CIA's famous captive NGO **Freedom House** , and a featherbed job at the McCain Institute for Freedom, Democracy, and Abandoning Thousands of MIAs in Vietnam to Die Slow Agonizing Deaths in Penal Camps.

Here he is talking to his co-conspirator Robert Otto, "Only idiots like Kerry think we have common interests in Syria."

https://freeworld556.wordpress.com/2017/07/12/us-state-department-official-robert-otto-got-hacked/

Needless to say, Kramer wouldn't know a human right from a bar of soap. He's a knuckledragger. CIA sent Kramer to DRL when Alfreda Bikowsky got her tit caught in the crimes-against-humanity wringer for systematic and widespread torture. The US was five years late reporting to the Committee Against Torture and got a mind-boggling eight (8) follow-on inquiries for urgent derogations of non-derogable rights. So Kramer had to think fast and make up some bullshit why simulated live burial, object rape, death by dryboard suffocation, and penis-slitting is not torture. Kramer is not the brightest bulb, but that's not a hard job. During the Bush administration all the delegation did was say, "The US does not Torture," robotically over and over.

So Kramer is a good example of how CIA runs the State Department. When a CIA vital interest like impunity comes up, they parachute a mole in to get their criminals off the hook.

peterAUS , July 29, 2018 at 7:02 pm GMT
@animalogic

.A public unable to fully comprehend .

Really? Why? What's to hard to fully comprehend? This ain't quantum physics. Not enough time in busy lives to spend some effort on the topic?
Yeah .But enough time for shopping, social media, online entertainment and such. Etc.

No. Yes, the elites are corrupted. But, the masses are corrupted too. THAT is the problem here.

Or, Trump support base is corrupted too. Not as bad/evil/malicious. As weak. W ..e a k. And weak always get ruled by strong.

What did/do they think? That the same people who can slaughter hundreds of thousands Iraqis without missing their lunch are just going to give up their power like that? That the half an hour of voting "effort" will change that game of power?

What are they doing now? How can one expect to challenge that power by sitting at home and waiting for one man to go against all that? Bullshit.

I've been told that "Trump base" doesn't do mass demonstrations. I still don't get why not? What's so hard to do, WHENEVER Dems/progs pull their numbers on the street, the "Trump base" does the same? That's reactive. Go active. Whenever Trump pulls some of his moves which flips the Dems/progs his support base floods the streets From the little town in Midwest to New York.

What's so hard about that? The same people have no problem going out .watching games being outdoors..whatever. Oh, yes, it could get what .dangerous? Really? What? Fistfights? Shooting? What happened to that "brave" in the "land of ."?

Don't get this post wrong. Not directed at you. It's directed at lazy and weak people who are out of their depth. Wouldn't be a problem save what's going to happen when Dems/progs get their person in White House.

Then, all of us, will have fun times I am sure.

[Jul 29, 2018] The Helsinki summit, CIA-run media and U.S.-Russian Relations

MIC is a cancer, and looks like there is no cure
Notable quotes:
"... I do think the credit for this goes to the Clinton campaign, the "intelligence" agencies, the neoconlib biparty and individuals like McCain, who have gone to McCarthyism lengths since before the GOP primaries ended to prevent Trump from attempting *any* change of the status quo on foreign policy. Granted, the man might be ineffectual no matter what, but we will never know. The US establishment and the retainers of the war profiteering classes have made any negotiations with Russia impossible long before Trump even announced his campaign. ..."
"... it is the unholy alliance of Democrats looking for an excuse for them losing the election and Cold War hawk neocons who have Russia-hate in their DNA (and their stock portfolios)). ..."
"... The embarrassment was the reaction in the MSM showcasing how they are now CIA state run media. They trot out former high ranking CIA officers now employed by them recycling every meme to reinforce that we are the forces goodness and light and anyone strong enough to oppose us is evil. ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

b. July 16, 2018 at 9:35 pm

"Trump has made it politically impossible to pursue that goal in the near term."

I do think the credit for this goes to the Clinton campaign, the "intelligence" agencies, the neoconlib biparty and individuals like McCain, who have gone to McCarthyism lengths since before the GOP primaries ended to prevent Trump from attempting *any* change of the status quo on foreign policy. Granted, the man might be ineffectual no matter what, but we will never know. The US establishment and the retainers of the war profiteering classes have made any negotiations with Russia impossible long before Trump even announced his campaign.

We also should not forget to credit the GOP for test-driving the whole "weak on Russia" playbook during the Obama years.

Rob , says: July 16, 2018 at 11:21 pm
I agree with b. While Trump may not be savvy enough to calibrate his engagement with Putin in a way that would allow a proper dialogue with Russia in spite of the political backdrop in the US, the primary blame for any failure to allow such dialogue rests for those responsible for creating that political backdrop that makes it so difficult in the first place (hint: it's not Trump, unless you blame him for winning the election – rather it is the unholy alliance of Democrats looking for an excuse for them losing the election and Cold War hawk neocons who have Russia-hate in their DNA (and their stock portfolios)).
a spencer , says: July 17, 2018 at 1:33 am
That Putin talked up the Iran deal in the press conference makes me wonder what was said in the one-on-one. Couldn't have pleased the Adelson/Bolton wing.
Erik , says: July 17, 2018 at 2:35 am
I also agree with b.

Additionally there has yet to be any actual evidence presented re significant election interference. Indictments are accusations, not evidence.

I saw nothing particularly wrong with the press conference. I'm no Trump fan, but he was just saying he believed Putin rather than the people who are clearly trying to bring his administration down. Can't really blame him.

Christian Chuba , says: July 17, 2018 at 9:59 am
The embarrassment was the reaction in the MSM showcasing how they are now CIA state run media. They trot out former high ranking CIA officers now employed by them recycling every meme to reinforce that we are the forces goodness and light and anyone strong enough to oppose us is evil.

CNN even used Putin's dearly departed Labrador, Konni making her look like Cujo stating that Putin use her to terrorize Angela Merkel. A U.S. Congressman fumed that the 50,000 children died in Syria because this fiend supported Assad when Syria was about to be liberated (a number suspiciously close to the true number of Yemeni children we helped to kill). These are just two random examples in a very long day. It was
a show worthy of the priests of Baal who confronted Elijah.

As flawed as Trump may be, he is merely holding up a mirror to what we have become. Had we elected a conventional candidate it would just be business as usual with these seething hatreds buried just below the surface.

No one better suggest that we should tarnish ourselves talking to the likes of a Russian leader unless we are discussing terms of surrender. We want Yeltsin or maybe Medvedev.

[Jul 29, 2018] Russia, the West, and Recent Geoeconomics in Europe's Gas Wars by Gordon M. Hahn

The USA can't compete on price and volume. But dir to dvassal status of EU can still force "diversification"
Notable quotes:
"... As a result, Europeans are deciding to stick with the Russians while finding new options in the east, such as Turkey and Azerbaijan. This is creating competition if not tensions in present and potential gas transit countries in southeastern and eastern Europe, for example. ..."
Jul 29, 2018 | gordonhahn.com

Russia has advanced forward in something of a tactical and potential strategic victory in the Russo-Western gas war. This is a three-party war, with the US, EU, and Russia each promoting separate interests. It is one sphere where a united West has failed to 'isolate Russia.' The US seeks move in on the European energy market with LNG supplies and replace Russian pipeline-delivered natural gas supplies to Europe. Washington is using the risks of dependence on Russian gas and Russia's 'bad behavior' as leverage in attempting to convince Europeans to reject Russia's Nord Stream 2 pipeline. Russia is said to be unreliable and prone to shut off gas supplies to Europe.

Due to past Russian-Ukrainian gas crises, the Ukrainian crisis, and general Russian-Western tensions, Europe has decided on a gas diversification policy in which each EU member should have at least three sources of natural gas supply. One additional option that could facilitate this diversification policy is US liquified natural gas (LNG), but the US is still unable to supply enough LNG to offset Russian gas supplies that might be rejected by Europe. In the process, Washington is looking less like a 'team West' player and more like a solely self-interested power maximizer in European eyes and therefore no more reliable than Moscow. As a result, Europeans are deciding to stick with the Russians while finding new options in the east, such as Turkey and Azerbaijan. This is creating competition if not tensions in present and potential gas transit countries in southeastern and eastern Europe, for example.

The Battle Over Re-Sale: No Victors

One recent battle was largely inconclusive, but if a victor has to be designated it may be Moscow. In May, the European Commssion concluded a settlement with Russia's Gazprom in May ending a seven-year anti-trust dispute. In return for the EU dropping billions of dollars in penalty fees, GazProm agreed to end limitations on the use of gas purchased by EU members, allow them to re-sell the gas. Some EU members, such as Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Slovakia have re-sold or wanted to re-sell gas. Moscow frowned, for example, on Slovakia's resale of natural gas to Ukraine at cheaper prices than Moscow sought to charge Kiev. The agreement will also restrict Moscow's ability to charge different countries different prices. So EU members in central and eastern Europe can get a price close to that paid by Germany and appeal to an arbitration court in case of a dispute. The agreement guarantees Russia's presence on the European gas market at a time when the latter's reliance on the former has peaked.

The Northern Front: Nord Stream 2

At the same time, the battle over Russia' Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline has heated up. When it comes on line in 2019, the 759-mile pipeline will carry GazProm natural gas along the bed of the Baltic Sea to Germany and double the supply Nord Stream pipeline's current annual capacity of 55 billion cubic meters (bcm). The Trump administration has threatened yet more sanctions on third-party companies, this time with those that work on the pipeline. The US sanctions threat is an attempt to promote American LNG interests as well as to protect Ukrainian interests, though it contradicts the view that Ukraine should eschew its dependence on Russian gas.

US officials have been hammering home to Europeans the 'Russian threat' in tandem with the risk of reliance on Russian gas may pose, which will increase with Nord tream 2, but to no avail. Public opinion is not working in the US favor, with Germans trusting Moscow more than Washington, despite all the crimes laid at the Kremlin's door by the West. A recent ZDF Television opinion survey found that only 14 percent of Germans regard the U.S. as a reliable partner, while 36 percent view Russia as reliable ( www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-05-17/trump-s-global-disruption-pushes-merkel-closer-to-putin-s-orbit ). Thus, notwithstanding Ukraine, Syria and alleged chemical attacks, Russiagate, and the Skrypals, GazProm's supplies to Europe have risen to hold nearly 40 percent of its gas market, growing last year by 8.1 percent last year to a record level of 193.9 billion cubic metres (bcm).

Nevertheless, with the EU decision, the U.S., Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania and others have stepped up their pressure on Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark and other western Eureopean EU members to abandon the Nord Stream 2 project. Germans and other western Europeans are unlikely to give up the short-term gain of energy security for the US LNG given the higher price and unproven nature of Washington's numerous allegations against the Kremlin. German officials say they still have no proof from 10 Downing on Russia's culpability for the Skrypal poisoning so loudly trumpeted by British PM Theresa May.

One motivation for the Russians in building Nord Stream 2 is to obviate the need to transport gas through Ukraine, which will hurt Ukraine's own energy supply – given Ukrainian skimming -- and overall economy beyond the present non-sale of Russian gas to Ukraine. Another Russian motivation is to avert the unreliable Ukrainians, who have failed to make payments according to contract in the past causing Russian gas cutoffs to Ukraine and thus Europe with the resulting crises blamed solely on Moscow. The Trump sanctions threat has put Germany and the other Nord Stream 2 supporting countries between a rock and a hard place, between Russia and the US. Therefore, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, while supporting Nord Stream 2, has called for guarantees from Russia that Ukraine will remain a gas transit country. Ukraine's current contract with Russia ends in 2019 at the very time Nord Stream 2 is to go on line and the EU has urged re-starting EU-mediated negotiatons now in order to avoid another gas crisis. Putin agreed to do this at his meeting with Germany's merkel in late May. Nord Stream 2 significantly strengthens Putin's hand in any such talks.

The Southern Front: Turkish Stream, SGC and the Azeri and Bulgarian Factors

Russia is strengtheining its position on the European gas war's southern front by building the Turkish Stream (TS) gas pipeline to Europe. TS consists of a sea and a land leg. The former runs under the Black Sea from Russia to Turkey and is built, with Russo-Turkish talks on the land leg ongoing.

Russia's Turkish Stream is being challenged by the Southern Gas Corridor (SGC) backed by Western powers, including the EU (along with Turkey and Azerbaijan), which sees the SGC as a means of diversifying from dependence on Russia. Not just Turkey, but Azerbaijan is emerging as a major player on the EU gas market, with a shift in policy accenting gas supplies to Europe as well as oil supplies as in the past. The SGC consists of three components: an expanded South Caucasus Pipeline and the to be constructed Trans-Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline (TANAP) and Trans-Adriatic Pipeline (TAP). TANAP is 51 percent Azerbaijani owned, 37 percent Turkish, and 12 percent belonging to British Petroleum. The SGC will carry Azerbaijani gas through Turkey to Europe and will be able to supply up to one-third of the gas consumed by Bulgaria, Greece and Italy ( https://en.trend.az/business/energy/2910573.html ). However, the source of the gas supplying the pipeline demonstrates the limits of Western attempts to isolate Russia (and Iran). Azerbaijan's Shah-Deniz gas field is co-owned by British Petroleum (29 percent), Turkey's Turkish Petroleum (19 percent), Azerbaijan's SOCAR (17 percent), Malaysia's Petronas (15 percent), Russia's LukOil (10 percent), and Iran's NICO (10 percent). Moreover, Russia's LukOil is negotiating with SOCAR a stake in Azerbaijan's second-largest gas field, Umid-Babek, which also includes Britain's Nobel Upstream ( https://newsbase.com/topstories/lukoil-talks-join-umid-babek-project?utm_campaign=466286_GERD%2031%20May%202018&utm_medium=email&utm_source=NewsBase%20LTD&dm_i=4NTN,9ZSE,2Q5R2D,13DVS,1 ).

Again the Ukrainian issue is part of the picture here, as a good portion of GasProm supplies to Bulgaria go through Ukraine. Turkish Stream can replace at least some of that supply should Moscow decide to entirely avert Ukraine's pipeline system. It is of interest that no one in the West has offered to include in any of these projects or attempted to fashion a pipeline or pipeline extension that could link up with the Ukrainian network.

During Bulgarian President Rumen Radev's late may visit to Moscow, Putin reported to Radev that during his meetings with Turkish President Recip Tayyip Erdogan, the latter said he would pose no oppsotion to extending the Turkish Stream gas pipeline to Bulgaria. In response, Radev seemed to suggest making Bulgaria a "a gas redistribution center, a hub" for the Turkish Stream's supplies further into Europe ( http://kremlin.ru/events/president/news/57608 ). Moreover, one gets the impression that Bulgaria is wary more about its dependence on Turkey and Ankara's new offensive energy policy in Europe than on Russia and might help Moscow detour Ukraine. In 2015, Erdogan declared a major policy initiative of making Turkey a, if not the major energy transit hub for supplies heading from the east to Europe. Russia's annexation of Crimea could help Russia in its talks both with Erdogan over the Turkish Stream and pose the threat of undermining the SGC. It may also help Putin deal with Merkel, Kiev and the EU over the Ukraine pipeline system's future role. Bulgarian President Radev also said in Moscow that Sofia supports building a direct gas pipeline under the Black Sea to bring Russian gas to Bulgaria ( https://echo.msk.ru/news/2206394-echo.html ). The Bulgarian option could be used by Putin to threaten Erdogan with reducing the Turkish Stream's supplies or abandoning it altogether in favor of a Black Sea Russian-Bulgarian Stream and to reduce Russia's dependence on Ukraine as well.

... ... ...

[Jul 29, 2018] Time to Talk to the Taliban by Daniel L. Davis

Too many US clans are profiting from the war...
Notable quotes:
"... While agree totally with what Col. Davis says here about ending America's involvement in the Afghanistan War. Way to many are profiting from this long-term misadventure. ..."
"... Eminently sensible advice, except that Trump can't take it without being greeted with a hysterical chorus of "we're losing Afghanistan ZOMG!" (as if we ever had it) and "Putin puppet!" ..."
"... "Of course most Americans are clueless about the cost of these wars and how it impacts money necessary to re-build our country infrastructures." ..."
"... Completely disagree. I don't know a single individual who supports the war in Afghanistan or misunderstands its costs. The American people just have no say in the matter. ..."
"... Finally, they realise what St Ronnie knew in the 1980s. He created the Taliban we know today via Operation Cyclone. Maybe Ollie North can lead the negotiations? He seems to have a good channel to the Iranians ..."
"... Putting together Sid_finster's and spite's comments paints an interesting picture. Aside from war profiteering (Fran Macadam) there is no real purpose served by our occupation except to be there. ..."
"... I'll go a step further and say that the invasion of Afghanistan was unnecessary too. We were not attacked by Afghanistan. We were not even attacked by the Taliban. We were attacked by al Quaida, by teams comprised mostly of Saudi Arabians. ..."
"... It cannot be repeated too often that Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires. Let the Taliban have it. ..."
"... What the Army could not do, and still cannot do, is transform a tribal society in isolated mountainous terrain into a liberal democracy. As LTC Davis observes: "The reason McChrystal failed to end the war -- and Miller will likewise fail -- is that these objectives can't be militarily accomplished." ..."
"... The conclusion of this simple argument is that the war in Afghanistan actually has almost nothing to do with that country and almost entirely to do with the political and economic demands arising from the US .nothing to do with Afghanistan other than the destruction of the place and its people. ..."
Jul 24, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
We have no choice. The 17-year war in Afghanistan has failed at every level, while the violence is only getting worse.

Reports have surfaced recently that the White House is instructing its senior diplomats to begin seeking "direct talks with the Taliban." It's a measure that would have been unthinkable at the start of the Afghanistan war yet today it's long overdue. Despite the criticism it's elicited, such talks offer the best chance of ending America's longest and most futile war.

While there is broad agreement that American leaders were justified in launching military operations in Afghanistan following the 9/11 attacks, it's painfully evident after 17 years that no one has any idea how to end the fighting on military terms.

Possibly the biggest impediment to ending the war has been the definition of the word "win." General Stanley McChrystal said in 2009 that winning in Afghanistan meant "reversing the perceived momentum" of the Taliban, "seek[ing] rapid growth of Afghan national security forces," and "tackl[ing] the issue of predatory corruption by some" Afghan officials.

Nine full years and zero successes later, however, Lieutenant General Austin S. Miller, latest in line to command U.S. troops in Afghanistan, defined as America's "core goal" at his confirmation hearing that "terrorists can never again use Afghanistan as a safe haven to threaten the United States."

The reason McChrystal failed to end the war -- and Miller will likewise fail -- is that these objectives can't be militarily accomplished. Predicating an end to the war on such is to guarantee perpetual failure. A major course correction is therefore in order.

Keeping 15,000 U.S. troops on the ground in Afghanistan does not, in any way , prevent terror attacks against the United States from originating there -- and for this lack of success we will pay at least $45 billion this year alone. The real solution is therefore to withdraw our troops as quickly as can be safely accomplished rather than throw more of them into a fruitless conflict.

I personally observed in 2011 during my second combat deployment in Afghanistan that even with 140,000 U.S. and NATO boots on the ground, there were still vast swaths of the country that were ungoverned and off-limits to allied troops.

Meaning, at no point since October 2001 has American military power prevented Afghanistan from having ungoverned spaces. What has kept us safe, however -- and will continue to keep us safe -- has been our robust, globally focused intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities that work in concert with the CIA, FBI, and local law enforcement to defend our borders from external attack.

Many pundits claim that if the U.S. military withdraws from Afghanistan then chaos will reign there -- and that is almost certainly true. But that's how we found Afghanistan, that's how it is today, and -- wholly irrespective of when or under what conditions the U.S. leaves -- that's how it will be long into the future until Afghans themselves come to an accommodation.

The question U.S. policymakers need to ask is which is more important to American interests: the maintenance of a perpetually costly war that fails to prevent any future attacks, or ending America's participation in that war?

Continuing to fight for a country that can't be won cements a policy that has drained the U.S. of vital resources, spilled the blood of American service members to no effect, and dissipated the Armed Forces' ability to defend against potentially existential threats later on -- while in the meantime not diminishing the threat of international terrorism. To strengthen our national security, we must end the enduring policy of failure by prudently and effectively ending our military mission.

While the fundamentals of a withdrawal plan are relatively straightforward, they would still be met by considerable opposition. One of the arguments against leaving was voiced by McChrystal nine years ago when he pleaded with the American public to "show resolve" because "uncertainty disheartens our allies [and] emboldens our foe." Yet the facts can't be denied any longer: for all eight years of the Obama administration and the first 500 days of Trump's tenure, we maintained that "resolve" and were rewarded with an unequivocal deterioration of the war.

Since McChrystal's admonition to maintain the status quo, the Taliban have exploded in strength to reportedly 77,000 , more territory is now in the hands of the insurgents than at any point since 2001 , the Afghan government remains one of the most corrupt regimes on the planet, and civilian casualties in the first half of 2018 are the highest ever recorded .

The only way this permanent failure ends is if President Trump shows the courage he has sometimes demonstrated to push back against the Washington establishment. That means ignoring the status quo that holds our security hostage, ending the war, and redeploying our troops. Without that resolve, we can count on continued failure in Afghanistan. With it, American security will be strengthened and readiness improved.

Daniel L. Davis is a senior fellow at Defense Priorities and a former lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army who retired in 2015 after 21 years, including four combat deployments. Follow him on Twitter @DanielLDavis1 .

Fred Bowman July 24, 2018 at 1:29 pm

While agree totally with what Col. Davis says here about ending America's involvement in the Afghanistan War. Way to many are profiting from this long-term misadventure. The only way these wars of choice will ever end is when Congress has the balls to cut off funding. Of course most Americans are clueless about the cost of these wars and how it impacts money necessary to re-build our country infrastructures. Military madness indeed.
Sid_finster , says: July 24, 2018 at 2:06 pm
Eminently sensible advice, except that Trump can't take it without being greeted with a hysterical chorus of "we're losing Afghanistan ZOMG!" (as if we ever had it) and "Putin puppet!"

If Trump were going to leave, he should have done so soon after taking office. At least then he could blame his predecessors.

That country is Trump's baby now.

Fran Macadam , says: July 24, 2018 at 3:37 pm
The financial security of the National Security State and its suppliers now depends on no war ever ending or being won. The new definition of defeat is having any war end. As long as it continues, that war is being won.
Kent , says: July 24, 2018 at 4:31 pm
"Of course most Americans are clueless about the cost of these wars and how it impacts money necessary to re-build our country infrastructures."

Completely disagree. I don't know a single individual who supports the war in Afghanistan or misunderstands its costs. The American people just have no say in the matter.

spite , says: July 24, 2018 at 5:31 pm
There is only one reason why the USA is still in Afghanistan that makes sense (all the official reasons are an insult to ones intelligence), it borders on Iran and thus serves as a means to open a new front against Iran. The more the US pushes for war against Iran, the more this seems correct.
EliteCommInc. , says: July 24, 2018 at 5:43 pm
"Reports have surfaced recently that the White House is instructing its senior diplomats to begin seeking "direct talks with the Taliban."

I have to give my Jr High response here:

"Well, duh."
__________________

"While there is broad agreement that American leaders were justified in launching military operations in Afghanistan following the 9/11 attacks . . ."

Yeah . . . no.

1. They manipulated the game to make what was a crime an act of war to justify the an unnecessary, unethical, and strategically unwise invasion. I remain now where I was 14 years ago -- bad decision in every way.

2. It was even a poor decision based on reason for war. To utterly bend the will of the opponent to conform to the will of the US. it is possible to win. But to do so would require such massive force, brutality and will.

3. 9/11 was a simple criminal act, despite the damage. As a crime we should have sought extradition, and or small team FBI and special forces operations to a small footprint in either capturing, and or if need be killing Osama bin Laden and company.

Nothing that has occurred since 9/11 provides evidence that the invasion was either justified or effective. It will if the end game is to quit be one of three losses suffered by the US.

They are: War of 1812
Iraq
Afghanistan

" . . . it's painfully evident after 17 years that no one has any idea how to end the fighting on military terms."

Sure leave. Though talking so as to avert whole slaughter of those that aided the US is the decent thing to do.

Whine Merchant , says: July 24, 2018 at 5:48 pm
Finally, they realise what St Ronnie knew in the 1980s. He created the Taliban we know today via Operation Cyclone. Maybe Ollie North can lead the negotiations? He seems to have a good channel to the Iranians
Janek , says: July 24, 2018 at 6:05 pm
Solving USA problems in Afghanistan an at the same time pushing for war with Iran is by definition classic oxymoron. Afghanistan's problems can only be solved with cooperation and understanding with Iran. Conflict of the USA with Iran will extend indefinitely the suffering of the Afghanis and the eventual lose of the Afghanistan and Iran to the Russia. Always reigniting and keeping on the front burner the conflict with Iran by the USA is exactly what Russia and V. Putin want. I can't see any other politicians except D. Trump, B. Netanyahu and American 'conservatives' for the advancement of the Russia's goals in the Middle East and in the globalistan. These are the new XXI century 'useful (adjective)'.
Myron Hudson , says: July 24, 2018 at 6:22 pm
Putting together Sid_finster's and spite's comments paints an interesting picture. Aside from war profiteering (Fran Macadam) there is no real purpose served by our occupation except to be there.

I'll go a step further and say that the invasion of Afghanistan was unnecessary too. We were not attacked by Afghanistan. We were not even attacked by the Taliban. We were attacked by al Quaida, by teams comprised mostly of Saudi Arabians. This should have been a dirty knife fight in all the back alleys of the world, but we responded to the sucker punch as our attackers intended; getting into a brawl with somebody else in the same bar; eventually, with more than one somebody else.

It cannot be repeated too often that Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires. Let the Taliban have it.

TG , says: July 25, 2018 at 8:28 am
Indeed, but as others have commented, the entire point of the Afghanistan war is that it is pointless. It can suck up enormous amounts of money, and generate incredible profits for politically connected defense contractors – and because Afghanistan is in fact pointless, it doesn't matter if all of that money is wasted or stolen, how could you tell? The vested interest in these winless pointless foreign wars means that they will continue until the American economy finally collapses – and anyone who opposes these wars is a fascist, a Russian stooge, "literally Hitler." Because money.
EarlyBird , says: July 25, 2018 at 4:22 pm
Thank you for this. I am very surprised to learn that Trump is pursuing this, given his pugilistic nature. I hope he does in fact, get us the hell out of there. He may be, like Nixon, the one who is politically able to make this smart move. Can you imagine the Republican outrage if Obama had tried a diplomatic exit from this sand trap?

We can still be proud of what we attempted to do there. A few years post-9/11, an Afghan colleague of mine who had come to the US as a boy said, "9/11 is the best thing to ever happen to Afghanistan." He meant that rather than carpet bombing Afghanistan "back to the Stone Age," as the left predicted the US would do, we poured billions of dollars in aide to build schools, hospitals, sewage and water plants, roads, etc.

EliteCommInc. , says: July 25, 2018 at 8:29 pm
"He meant that rather than carpet bombing Afghanistan "back to the Stone Age," as the left predicted the US would do, we poured billions of dollars in aide to build schools, hospitals, sewage and water plants, roads, etc."

And we could have done a lot more if we had not invaded. The Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11.

furbo , says: July 26, 2018 at 4:47 pm
The achievable operational level Military objectives in the Afghan war were accomplished in the first year; The Taliban were out of power and hiding in Pakistan and the Afghans had a somewhat benevolent government that wanted to guarantee security an property and a measure of individual liberty.

What the Army could not do, and still cannot do, is transform a tribal society in isolated mountainous terrain into a liberal democracy. As LTC Davis observes: "The reason McChrystal failed to end the war -- and Miller will likewise fail -- is that these objectives can't be militarily accomplished."

This has been particularly true with the intense guerrilla actions enabled by the Pakistanis who have a vested interest in an unstable Afghanistan.

I believe the noble goals 'might' have been doable – but it would have required a level of effort, and more importantly a 'cultural confidence' on par with the Roman Empire of the 2nd Century to pull it off. That is no longer us.

masmanz , says: July 27, 2018 at 1:29 am
"9/11 is the best thing to ever happen to Afghanistan"? I bet none of his family members died or suffered. Probably they are all living in the US. Are we supposed to feel proud that instead of carpet bombing and killing millions our war killed only a hundred thousand?
Wizard , says: July 27, 2018 at 9:53 am
Sadly, Kent, I do know people who still claim that our continued presence in Afghanistan is a good thing. Some of these are otherwise fairly bright people, so I really can't comprehend why they continue to buy into this idiocy.
James Keye , says: July 27, 2018 at 12:12 pm
Afghanistan must be Afghanistan and the US must be the US; this is such a simple tautology. If the US leaves, Afghanistan will become what ever it can for its own reasons and options. If the US stays, it will be for the US' reasons, not for the Afghans.

The conclusion of this simple argument is that the war in Afghanistan actually has almost nothing to do with that country and almost entirely to do with the political and economic demands arising from the US .nothing to do with Afghanistan other than the destruction of the place and its people.

[Jul 28, 2018] 'He was not killed, he died' Kremlin critic's Magnitsky movie premiers in US, exposing Browder

Notable quotes:
"... "a calculated attempt to harm our campaign and to make people doubt the legacy of Sergey Magnitsky," ..."
"... "This is a core issue about getting points of view into the public domain," ..."
"... I believe Magnitsky died ..."
"... Questions remain, but the fact that he was not killed, as Mr Browder says, by the same people who investigated his case and had a 'motive' to make him silent as a whistleblower – this is totally certain. ..."
"... "The story of Magnitsky turned out to be made-up," ..."
"... "I saw facts that do not add up, that prove that the story of Magnitsky was faked by Browder," ..."
"... "There is no evidence that he [Magnitsky] was killed or even was beaten," ..."
"... "I am a critic of the Russian authorities and I continue to be this critic, but in this particular case, the West made a mistake by adopting the Magnitsky Act and the Magnitsky resolutions, as they are based on a made-up story," ..."
"... "it is not in the interests of the US to remain trammelled by prejudice against Russia." ..."
"... "I thought I was filming about great the whistleblower Magnitsky. But it became my story of coming together basically with a lie, and with a lot of selfishness, and cynicism," ..."
"... "You have become a foot soldier of the propaganda war," ..."
"... "I am ashamed for you, Andrei. You will have to live with that." ..."
"... "I am a critic of the Russian regime and still am. I had a sort of political affiliation to Browder and his friends," ..."
"... "It goes against your ideology and your worldview to say that actually the Russian cops did not kill Magnitsky, the Russian cops didn't steal the money. Russia is still a very corrupt country, but in this case it was different." ..."
Jun 14, 2016 | www.rt.com
Despite threats of a libel lawsuit, a documentary about the Magnitsky case by a prominent critic of the Russian government has been shown in Washington. The film rejects the narrative about the case accepted in the West, on which the US Magnitsky Act is based. The film, titled 'The Magnitsky Act – Behind the Scenes', was presented to the public for the first time on Monday at the Newseum, a private museum dedicated to the news industry and freedom of speech in Washington, DC. The two-hour production is part documentary, part dramatization of the events that surround the death of Russian lawyer Sergey Magnitsky six years ago. Read more Hermitage Capital investment fund CEO William Browder (AFP Photo / Bertrand Guay) After Magnitsky: Dead lawyer's boss Browder and his legal hurdles – now in US

Magnitsky worked as an accountant for US-British investor William F. Browder, who made millions in Russia during the 1990s, but was later accused of tax evasion and fled the country. The lawyer was detained by the Russian police as part of a separate fraud investigation and died in police custody in November 2009.

Browder claimed that Magnitsky had been investigating corrupt police officers and was thrown into jail and murdered by them. He declared a crusade against what he called endemic corruption in the Russian government and lobbied across Europe and the US for punishment of the individuals whom he accused of involvement in Magnitsky's death.

In 2012 the US passed an act named after the Russian lawyer, which imposed sanctions against 40 Russian citizens – a move that Moscow saw as blatantly anti-Russian, and apparently retaliated against by banning the adoption of Russian orphans by US citizens.

'Story of coming together with lie, selfishness & cynicism'

Director Andrei Nekrasov struggled for months to have his controversial work shown to the public. Scheduled screenings in three European venues, including the European Parliament, were canceled because Browder threatened multimillion-dollar libel lawsuits against producers or would-be broadcasters of the film.

Browder opposes the film because he believes it to be "a calculated attempt to harm our campaign and to make people doubt the legacy of Sergey Magnitsky," as he told euobserver.com back in April.

Read more The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Smolenskaya-Sennaya Square in Moscow. © Natalia Seliverstova Russia slaps travel ban on 5 US ex-officials over 'legalization of torture'

Newseum was threatened in the same way, but rejected the pressure, saying that publishing Nekrasov's film was an issue of freedom of speech.

"This is a core issue about getting points of view into the public domain," investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, who moderated the event, told the audience before the screening.

Nekrasov says he wanted to make a docudrama film about Magnitsky ever since he heard of his story. He received funding for the project from eight European film foundations and state broadcasters and got in touch with Browder as part of his work.

But he found inconsistencies in the evidence presented by Browder's campaign to back his story, saying most of it was circumstantial at best. When he confronted the businessman about them, he said Browder broke off all contact and started to oppose the film.

The director believes that the narrative of Magnitsky as the brave whistleblower killed by corrupt Russian cops, as it was accepted in the West, is a scam by Browder, who capitalized on the lawyer's death to shield himself from all past and future accusations from Russian law enforcement, which he could claim to be politically motivated.

" I believe Magnitsky died ," Nekrasov told journalists in response to a question on whether he believed the lawyer was killed or died. " Questions remain, but the fact that he was not killed, as Mr Browder says, by the same people who investigated his case and had a 'motive' to make him silent as a whistleblower – this is totally certain. "

"The story of Magnitsky turned out to be made-up," Nekrasov told journalists as he commented on revelations he made during the making of his film. "I saw facts that do not add up, that prove that the story of Magnitsky was faked by Browder," he added.

Read more Aleksandr Perepelichny Key Magnitsky case witness may have been poisoned – report

Documents show that the evidence presented by Browder as proof that Magnitsky was a whistleblower was in fact a transcript of Magnitsky's interrogations, which were conducted before he made his statements, Nekrasov claimed, stressing that police officers had no motive for killing Magnitsky as he did not expose them.

"There is no evidence that he [Magnitsky] was killed or even was beaten," the film director told journalists.

"I am a critic of the Russian authorities and I continue to be this critic, but in this particular case, the West made a mistake by adopting the Magnitsky Act and the Magnitsky resolutions, as they are based on a made-up story," Nekrasov said, adding that "it is not in the interests of the US to remain trammelled by prejudice against Russia."

"I thought I was filming about great the whistleblower Magnitsky. But it became my story of coming together basically with a lie, and with a lot of selfishness, and cynicism," Nekrasov told RT in May, when the screening of the film was cancelled at the last moment in Brussels.

The director's view didn't go well with some of the first viewers of the film, including Russian opposition politicians and rights activists.

"You have become a foot soldier of the propaganda war," exclaimed Ilya Yashin, a veteran opposition figure in Russia. "I am ashamed for you, Andrei. You will have to live with that."

The outcry was perhaps to be expected. Nekrasov himself has been a critic of the Russian government for years. Some of his earlier works explored alleged involvement of the Kremlin in very serious issues, including the Chechnya war, the murder of Aleksandr Litvinenko, corruption in security agencies and others.

His documentaries, both political and otherwise, were praised by critics and won a number of awards, including the prestigious German Grimme-Preis award. Georgia named him person of the year 2009 for a film about the 2008 war against Russia.

"I am a critic of the Russian regime and still am. I had a sort of political affiliation to Browder and his friends," Nekrasov said of his latest film. "It goes against your ideology and your worldview to say that actually the Russian cops did not kill Magnitsky, the Russian cops didn't steal the money. Russia is still a very corrupt country, but in this case it was different." Where to watch Schedule Subscribe to RT newsletter to get stories the mainstream media won't tell you

[Jul 28, 2018] Alex Krainer's book. It is a devastating critique of Browder,

Jul 28, 2018 | thesaker.is

Harley Schlanger on October 05, 2017 , · at 4:00 pm EST/EDT

I have read Alex Krainer's book. It is a devastating critique of Browder, which exposes him as the corrupt thug he is. Browder is no more interested in "democratizing" Russia than the U.S. Deep State is in protecting the integrity of the U.S. election process! That Browder was the "star witness" for the Congress before it overwhelmingly passed the latest sanctions bill against Russia shows why it is important that he be exposed.

I highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to know something about the networks and individuals acting to prevent a rapprochement between the U.S. and Russia.

[Jul 28, 2018] Putin Is Right to Question Browder and McFaul - One Meddled in Russia's Elections, One Ripped Off her People

Jul 28, 2018 | whatreallyhappened.net

At the press conference following their summit meeting in Helsinki, Russian President Vladimir Putin and American President Donald Trump discussed the possibility of resolving potential criminal cases involving citizens of the two countries by permitting interrogators from Washington and Moscow to participate in joint questioning of the individuals named in indictments prepared by the respective judiciaries. The predictable response by the American nomenklatura was that it was a horrible idea as it would potentially require U.S. officials to answer questions from Russians about their activities.

Putin argued, not unreasonably, that if Washington wants to extradite and talk to any of the twelve recently indicted GRU officers the Justice Department has named then reciprocity is in order for Americans and other identified individuals who are wanted by the Russian authorities for illegal activity while in Russia. And if Russian officials are fair game, so are American officials.

[Jul 28, 2018] Putin Vs. McFaul, DHS, Browder And Why

Notable quotes:
"... Included in the documents released by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday is a one-page document submitted by Paul Manafort, the former campaign chairman for Donald Trump's 2016 effort. Manafort was serving in that role on June 9, 2016, when he joined Donald Trump Jr. and campaign adviser Jared Kushner in a meeting with a Kremlin-linked attorney who had promised incriminating information about Hillary Clinton. ..."
"... Those notes, apparently taken on Manafort's phone , are as follows. ..."
"... Offshore -- Cyprus ..."
"... Not invest -- loan ..."
"... Value in Cyprus as inter ..."
"... Active sponsors of RNC ..."
"... Browder hired Joanna Glover ..."
"... Tied into Cheney ..."
"... Russian adoption by American families ..."
"... In the absence of other context, the notes are cryptic and include words that certainly seem to wave red flags. "Offshore," "Illici[t]" -- even an apparent mention of former vice president Richard B. Cheney. ..."
Jul 28, 2018 | www.trevorloudon.com

Included in the documents released by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday is a one-page document submitted by Paul Manafort, the former campaign chairman for Donald Trump's 2016 effort. Manafort was serving in that role on June 9, 2016, when he joined Donald Trump Jr. and campaign adviser Jared Kushner in a meeting with a Kremlin-linked attorney who had promised incriminating information about Hillary Clinton.

Those notes, apparently taken on Manafort's phone , are as follows.

In full:

In the absence of other context, the notes are cryptic and include words that certainly seem to wave red flags. "Offshore," "Illici[t]" -- even an apparent mention of former vice president Richard B. Cheney.

[Jul 28, 2018] How my book unmasking Bill Browder was censored by Amazon by Alex Krainer

Notable quotes:
"... [ Note by the Saker : for my review of Alex Krainer's book please click here ] ..."
"... "I always say the truth is best even when we find it unpleasant. Any rat in a sewer can lie. It's how rats are. It's what makes them rats. But a human doesn't run and hide in dark places, because he's something more. Lying is the most personal act of cowardice there is." ― Nancy Farmer, "The House of the Scorpion" ..."
"... Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch. Nay, you may kick it about all day, and it will be round and full at evening. ..."
"... Alex Krainer is a hedge fund manager based in Monaco. His book, "The Killing of William Browder" may still be available in paperback at Book Depository , Barnes&Noble (USA), Amazon.fr , Amazon.co.uk , or ..."
Oct 05, 2017 | thesaker.is
[ Note by the Saker : for my review of Alex Krainer's book please click here ]

"I always say the truth is best even when we find it unpleasant. Any rat in a sewer can lie. It's how rats are. It's what makes them rats. But a human doesn't run and hide in dark places, because he's something more. Lying is the most personal act of cowardice there is." ― Nancy Farmer, "The House of the Scorpion"

In January 2015 I received a book titled "Red Notice" written by Bill Browder, once a hedge fund manager running Hermitage Capital the largest foreign-owned hedge fund in Russia. In the past, my path had crossed with Browder's on two occasions. In 2005, I was invited to his presentation, only days before he was expelled from Russia. On that occasion Browder surprised me because he was the first credible person I ever heard speaking positively about Vladimir Putin. The next time I met Browder was in 2010 during an investment conference in Monaco. This time he was very anti-Putin. When I received his book, it was recommended to me as an excellent read.

Through his book, Browder presents himself in glowing colors. By contrast, he portrays Russia as a sinister, backward tyranny and President Putin as the greediest, most ruthless tyrant since Genghis Khan. The book's main plot shapes up as an appealing story about the struggle of good against evil, about a lone maverick (Browder himself), taking on a powerful network of dangerous criminals and corrupt government officials in selfless pursuit of justice. It would be a beautiful story – if only it were true.

I was familiar with Parts of Browder's story, so his tale seemed fishy to me. A few days after reading it I had to re-read it from the beginning. Sure enough, I discovered quite a number of things that didn't add up which prompted me to do some research of my own. Much about it bothered me enough that I ended up writing a whole book which I titled "The Killing of William Browder: Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception." In August of this year I finally finished it and self-published it on Amazon.com.

My book's main object is to unmask Browder's brazen and dangerous deception. Beyond this, I've also sought to put his story into proper context by including a rather detailed account of the relevant events that led to the collapse of the USSR, Russia's subsequent transition from Communism to Capitalism and what 17 years of Vladimir Putin's leadership have changed . I've also included a section discussing the person and character of Vladimir Putin (since Browder relentlessly demonizes him). The book's last chapter discusses the history of the relations between the U.S. and Russia from the beginnings of the 19 th century, including the U.S. Civil War when Russia came to Abraham Lincoln's aid and played the key role in preserving the Union and what the future relations between the U.S. and Russia might, or should be.

As it turned out, my book was surprisingly well received by its readers and during the first few weeks it received very encouraging reader reviews (seven five-star and one four-star review). Unfortunately, by mid-September "The Killing of William Browder" came up on Browder team's radar and my problems began. It seems that in the free world, the freedom of expression comes with some restrictions. Exposing Bill Browder is one of them.

On 13 th September, University of Tulsa professor Jeremy Kuzmarov cited some of the materials from my book in his own Hffington Post article about Bill Browder, titled "Raising the Curtain on the Browder-Magnitsky Story." I was flattered by that article, but Huffington Post scrubbed it from their website within hours. A week later, Amazon's publishing company, CreateSpace "suppressed" my book, purging it from Amazon.com website and from its Kindle store.

CreateSpace explained that a third party claimed that my book "may contain defamatory content," and that to resolve the issues I needed to contact Mr. Jonathan M. Winer, Mr. Browder's legal counsel. Mr. Winer's word was all that was necessary for Amazon to oblige and remove my book from its bookstore. My protest and subsequent communications with CreateSpace had no effect and my only venue was to "work" with Browder's lawyers to "resolve the issues." In other words, I was put in the situation to have Browder censor my book and decide on whether it could be published or not. At first I rejected idea and refused to contact Mr. Winer offering instead my book for free to whoever requested a copy. But subsequently I decided to write to Mr. Winer anyway to find out what, if anything went wrong. So far, I have received no response.

This is not the first time Bill Browder – and whoever is backing him – has effectively censored what the Western public may or may not know about his story. In 2016, Russian film-maker Andrei Nekrasov made the documentary film, "The Magnitsky Act – Behind the Scenes."

Over the years, Nekrasov had built a reputation for producing documentaries that were critical of the Russian government, and with the Magnitsky affair, he initially followed Browder's narrative of the events and even envisioned Browder as the film's narrator. But his research into the subject turned up a number of problems with Browder's story. Nekrasov reached out to him for an explanation, but was unable to get in touch with Browder for several months. Nekrasov finally tracked down Browder at a book signing event where he tried and failed to get clarifications from him. Ultimately however, Nekrasov managed to meet with Browder and with the cameras rolling, he began to lay out his findings. As he did so, Browder became visibly vexed until at one moment he abruptly interrupted Nekrasov with an accusation that he was spreading Russian propaganda.

When Nekrasov's film was completed, Browder took aggressive action to block its screenings. With threats of lawsuits, he prevented an already scheduled screening to a group of Members of the European Parliament in Brussels. He did the same with another screening in Norway, and even managed to pressure the Franco-German television network "Arte" to call off the showing of Nekrasov's film on its channel. In June 2016, Browder tried to force The Newseum in Washington DC to cancel the screening of Nekrasov's film. Thankfully, The Newseum, whose laudable mission is to promote freedom of expression and "the five freedoms of the First Amendment to the U.S. Consitution," refused to be cowed by Browder's intimidation and showed the film to a Washington audience.

No, unfortunately this did not happen. Freedom of expression – which should be sacrosanct – is dangerously compromised in the west.

Open, civilized societies seek resolution of contentious issues by allowing proponents of different sides in any dispute to present their respective points of view. An informed, open debate is by far the best mechanism of conflict resolution because we can only arrive at constructive solutions to problems by taking different stakeholders' points of view into consideration. Browder's approach is contrary to that of civilized societies: he seeks to silence all points of view but his own. He seeks to persuade not by initiating an informed debate, but by suppressing all debate. This is not the conduct of a truth teller pursuing elevated objectives like human rights, justice, and truth. Truth does not need such forceful defense. As Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote, " Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch. Nay, you may kick it about all day, and it will be round and full at evening. " Browder is clearly anxious that his story cannot take any kicking at all. Meanwhile in the western world, we appear to be at the mercy of lawyered-up elites for what we are allowed to know and what we are not.

In the end, I have no doubt that truth will prevail and that Bill Browder will lose his battle to keep his deception going. It is because there's something sacrosanct about truth and most people will reject a lie once they are aware of it.

Alex Krainer is a hedge fund manager based in Monaco. His book, "The Killing of William Browder" may still be available in paperback at Book Depository , Barnes&Noble (USA), Amazon.fr , Amazon.co.uk , or Amazon.de ­

bengo on October 05, 2017 , · at 11:20 am EST/EDT

Does anybody know how to get access to the movie?

This shocking tale of alleged Russian official corruption and brutality drove legislation that was a major landmark in the descent of U.S.-Russian relations under President Barack Obama to a level rivaling the worst days of the Cold War.

.But what the film shows is how Nekrasov, as he detected loose ends to the official story, begins to unravel Browder's fabrication which was designed to conceal his own corporate responsibility for the criminal theft of the money. As Browder's widely accepted story collapses, Magnitsky is revealed not to be a whistleblower but a likely abettor to the fraud who died in prison not from an official assassination but from banal neglect of his medical condition.

The cinematic qualities of the film are evident. Nekrasov is highly experienced as a maker of documentaries enjoying a Europe-wide reputation. What sets this work apart from the "trade" is the honesty and the integrity of the filmmaker as he discovers midway into his project that key assumptions of his script are faulty and begins an independent investigation to get at the truth .

RC on October 05, 2017 , · at 11:49 pm EST/EDT
The reason nekrasov has a following among European liberal snowflakes is that his documentaries have had a sarcastic jaded and negative tinge with respect to Russia (even BBC News has aired his documentaries as recently as 2016). He is rather pessimistic regarding Russia. That's what makes this revelation that even he (Nekrasov, a darling of the debauch liberals of the west, and Putin critic) found browder to not be credible. Coming from Nekrasov, that allegation and documentary would really destroy the battering ram (and useful fraud) that browder had provided the Western establishment.

Nekrasov is now getting a painful reality check as to how sophisticated the West's totalitarian nature is: they are not crude like the Chinese who will arrest small time nobodies for being too honest or critical, the West focusses it's blunt oppression for high value targets; just as outlined in 1984, the higher up you are and the greater your reach, the greater the scrutiny and the more blunt the instrument used to keep you in line. One must admit that the Anglo empire and their hypocrit vassals/covert-competitors in the EU, have refined this to an art and are far more efficient at it than their poor understudies in CCP China, or the Soviet Union.

Krainer is right though, the truth is going to prevail and eventually browder will be exposed (especially when the deep state decides he's too much of an annoying liability – as times progresses or as the deep state finds browder's agenda and his supporters getting in the way of the state's own agenda).

There is one thing that no one has clarified: Why was magnitsky allowed to die, why was he denied medical treatment, who was responsible for that? What are the facts around magnitsky's death?

Alex Krainer on October 06, 2017 , · at 4:40 am EST/EDT
Hi RC – a few great point. In Nekrasov's defence, I think I can understand him. I'm Croatian and if we started discussing Croatia, you'd find me very critical. My inclination would be to expose negative developments – not because I'm anti-Croatian but becauseI would want to draw public attention to problems that need to be addressed. To his credit, when he realized truth was different from what he initially believed, he made a turn to pursue truth when he could have made the film that would have been far better for his career.

I agree with you that Browder will probably end up thrown under the bus. That's what I'm afraid of (and the #1 reason for my book's title). But they will try to first make Browder a household name (crusader for human rights and justice, bla, bla..) with their Hollywood movie. Then they'll try to make it look like Putin had him killed.

As to why Magnistky died – that's a mystery. It was definitely a massive cock-up on the part of Russian law enforcement, but there's also the angle that his death was VERY convenient for Browder and his goodfellas.

Mulga Mumblebrain on October 06, 2017 , · at 5:44 am EST/EDT
Magnitsky died of his alcoholism, as alcoholics do.
Johan Vermeulen on December 25, 2017 , · at 5:10 am EST/EDT
I think that Magnitsky was such a pain in the ass ( he made 450 complaints about the prison-conditions during 358 days in prison, most ofwhich nobody could solve without a much larger budget) that doctors and staff prefered to not hear or to look the other way when Magnitsky came into a psychosis. He got into this psychosis after a court case from where he returned very disappointed. Future looked a lot worse than he had expected.

During the psychosis his heart stopped.

­
anonymoose on October 05, 2017 , · at 3:16 pm EST/EDT
"The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes" can be seen online @:

https://my.mail.ru/bk/n-osetrova/video/71/18682.html?time=155&from=videoplayer

Anonymoose

­
Anonymous on October 06, 2017 , · at 7:11 pm EST/EDT
Parry's article mentions that he viewed the film on Vimeo, using a password provided by Piraya Film, the Norwegian production company.

This is a fairly standard way that independent producers shop their films around, looking for a distribution deal. I.e., a journalist or distributor contacts them, and they are given a Vimeo link and password for a private, limited-time viewing of the film. Journalists get this access because their writing helps to promote the film. The simplest distribution deal would then be through a subscription-based streaming platform. DVDs are more complicated and usually happen later.

However, in this case, the film is a co-production with four other companies, including ZDF and ARTE, which are large European networks, and all of whom have been threatened with litigation, presumably by Browder's lawyers.

In effect, then, the film in its original version has been censored. It is not available, unless or until somebody pirates it. There are several scammy-looking streaming sites that claim to have it, but they want your credit card number and they might just have the same Russian-dubbed version that you can watch for free via the link posted above.

I suspect the version of the film with the Russian voice-over was not done by Piraya Film, as the production of the sound doesn't seem very high compared to the quality of the original. This might have been done with authorization of Piraya, but if not, it means somebody has a illegitimate copy of the film to which they added the Russian voice-over. This means, they could also post the film in its original form. If they really want to increase awareness in the West of how the new Cold War is playing out, such a move could help.

Given the legal threats and the fact that few small distribution companies have the resources to fight legal battles, this might be a situation in which we are waiting for somebody to pirate the film, somebody who has access to the original, and to distribute it via a torrent.

Anonymous on October 08, 2017 , · at 2:24 pm EST/EDT
I wonder whether Nekrasov himself knows of the level of interest (at least in some quarters) in seeing the film, and could find a way to make one available somehow. . .

Katherine

Alex on October 09, 2017 , · at 3:08 pm EST/EDT
Something tells me he doesn't want to push this too much as money for this film came from French and German sources. It is nice to see him sticking his neck out to uphold the Truth.

When I watched the US rep. who supposedly investigated this Magnitzky affair for the US gov. state under oath that he never verified any of the info that Browder gave him, I kept thinking "Is this guy serious ?" But when you realize that they never did any investigation then it all seems logical.

[Jul 28, 2018] When Your Story Implodes, Call Me – I m an American Chemical Weapons Expert! by Mark Chapman

Notable quotes:
"... Look at the case, frequently discussed here, of British intelligence services and the fake rock , which had the guts of a Blackberry cellular telephone inside it, in Moscow. This 'rock' was strategically situated so that intelligence assets (you only call them 'traitors' if they are western citizens; Russians who betray their country are dissident heroes) could stroll past and flip messages to the rock, and every so often, British intelligence services could remotely extract it; the 'rock' only had to be touched to charge the batteries. ..."
"... But that was six years after the fact. For six years the British stonewalled and denied, and acted hurt that anyone would believe such an obvious Russian-bullshit story ..."
"... Tony Blair, for example, has never to the best of my knowledge admitted to having lied to influence public opinion in the UK in favour of committing with its partner, the United States, to the Iraq War, which was such a smorgasbord of lies that the weapons-of-mass-destruction whopper was only the biggest. Iraq was wrecked, hundreds of thousands of people were killed, and the liars were never punished, nor ever in fact admitted their guilt. In cases where the guilty must begrudgingly admit they lied, nobody does anything about it, the firebolts of celestial retribution never appear, and the liars go on to lie some more with increased confidence. An eager and gullible audience is always ready to swallow some more horseshit. ..."
"... Like now, with the Skripal case. We are supposed to believe mysterious Russian assassins daubed Novichok nerve agent on the Skripals' front doorknob, which transferred to their hands, and then they drove downtown, enjoyed a good meal in a restaurant, and then started feeling poorly, and collapsed on a public bench, victims of a nerve agent much more toxic than VX. Five to eight times, says FOX News . ..."
"... But the Skripals did not die. They were carefully shielded and monitored by the British security services so that they could not be questioned by the public, but they did not die. ..."
"... Perhaps of greatest concern, if chemical-weapons professionals were aware that Novichok could persist in deadly concentrations for months – that it was specially engineered to be not only virtually undetectable by NATO sensors, but to remain deadly through the deleterious effects of the elements why did they say nothing when the dozy police assured the public that it was in absolutely no danger? ..."
"... This article is a timely reminder that the UK never stopped fighting the Cold War. I had forgotten about the embarrassing spy rock incident. The (labour) government lies were accepted without question by the media. ..."
"... The Novichok issue – fits into this pattern of behaviour. ..."
Jul 28, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Uncle Volodya says, "Stupidity is the same as evil, if you judge by the results."

I've been waiting for something to happen
for a day, or a week, or a year;
with the blood in the ink of the headlines
and the roar of the crowd in my ears.
You might ask what it takes to remember
but you know that you've seen it before;
when a government lies to a people
and a country is drifting to war

Jackson Browne, from "Lives in the Balance"

"People never lie so much as after a hunt, during a war, or before an election."

Otto von Bismarck

During an hour or so of poring over quotes about lying (of course I don't make these up myself), before the snatch of lyric from "Lives in the Balance" floated into my memory unbidden, I was struck as never before by the prevalence of belief in the truth always coming out. Lyric after quote after stanza has it that you can lie and lie and lie, but eventually the truth will always surface, and the liar will be caught.

Is that true? Was it ever true? Perhaps among the congenitally stupid, who labour simultaneously under their guilt and a suspicion that smarter people (which is everybody else) can read minds; I'm reminded of a story which was set in the American southern states, in which the probable perpetrator of some petty crime or other was brought into the rural sheriff's office for questioning. He was told that he must take a lie-detector test. Accordingly, a metal colander, such as is used for washing salad ingredients, was placed on his head, with wires from it leading to the photocopier. The deputies had put a piece of paper in the copier which read, "He's Lying!!", and whenever they asked the suspect a question, they would press the 'print' button following the answer, and out would come a paper which averred that the answer was a lie, which they would show to him. Eventually, confronted with his tapestry of falsehoods and under the apprehension that he was being measured by other-worldly technology, he confessed. But the local law enforcement was already well aware that he was guilty – they just wanted a confession.

So, perhaps in circumstances like that, in which the liar is a desperate fool, perhaps then the truth always comes out. But in reality, not only does truth almost never come out, it only does when all possibility of further elaboration on existing lies has been exhausted. But here's the real kicker – when the truth does come out, we are led by philosophers to believe that evangelical vengeance will be swift to follow. Does that really happen? Perhaps after the liar is dead, he or she goes someplace featuring a dancing-flames motif, where he or she is prodded the livelong day by imps with little pitchforks. But that sort of forestalls the satisfaction of justice done in the here and now – punishment delayed is punishment denied, am I right?

Look at the case, frequently discussed here, of British intelligence services and the fake rock , which had the guts of a Blackberry cellular telephone inside it, in Moscow. This 'rock' was strategically situated so that intelligence assets (you only call them 'traitors' if they are western citizens; Russians who betray their country are dissident heroes) could stroll past and flip messages to the rock, and every so often, British intelligence services could remotely extract it; the 'rock' only had to be touched to charge the batteries.

But that was six years after the fact. For six years the British stonewalled and denied, and acted hurt that anyone would believe such an obvious Russian-bullshit story; the Foreign Office scornfully retorted , "We are concerned and surprised at these allegations. We reject any allegation of improper conduct in our dealing with Russian NGO's ." So receiving surreptitious messages through a styrofoam rock is just the above-board, in-plain-sight honest dialogue in which foreign embassies everywhere engage; why the outrage? And when Britain finally admitted what had been going on, minus all the holier-than-thou gilding of trying to build a better world with Russia through an active and engaged civil society absolutely nothing was done. Not only does the truth not necessarily ever come out – Tony Blair, for example, has never to the best of my knowledge admitted to having lied to influence public opinion in the UK in favour of committing with its partner, the United States, to the Iraq War, which was such a smorgasbord of lies that the weapons-of-mass-destruction whopper was only the biggest. Iraq was wrecked, hundreds of thousands of people were killed, and the liars were never punished, nor ever in fact admitted their guilt. In cases where the guilty must begrudgingly admit they lied, nobody does anything about it, the firebolts of celestial retribution never appear, and the liars go on to lie some more with increased confidence. An eager and gullible audience is always ready to swallow some more horseshit.

Like now, with the Skripal case. We are supposed to believe mysterious Russian assassins daubed Novichok nerve agent on the Skripals' front doorknob, which transferred to their hands, and then they drove downtown, enjoyed a good meal in a restaurant, and then started feeling poorly, and collapsed on a public bench, victims of a nerve agent much more toxic than VX. Five to eight times, says FOX News . Ten times more deadly than its better-known predecessors, says Anne Applebaum. But the Skripals did not die. They were carefully shielded and monitored by the British security services so that they could not be questioned by the public, but they did not die.

And that's possible – in the case of a mild dose of, say, VX (much less deadly than Novichok, remember), as a liquid through a skin-contact vector, it might take up to two hours for symptoms (local sweating and muscular twitching) to appear, according to the US Army's Armament, Munitions and Chemical Command Chemical Research, Development and Engineering Center's Reigle Report . The trouble with that scenario as applied to the Skripals is that the duration of those effects would be about 3 days for a mild exposure, and 5 days for a severe exposure. The Skripals showed no such effects; they ate dinner in what must have been to all appearances a normal fashion, and then collapsed unconscious on a bench outside. Some accounts suggested they had a quantity of foam around their mouths, which might result from salivation. At least one report says Yulia Skripal had vomited. No reports mentioned excessive sweating and muscular twitching, both of which are hallmarks of nerve-agent poisoning via liquid (as opposed to gas) exposure through the skin.

There are a couple of other problems with the British approach. We've all seen the pictures of the chemical-warfare types in their green dung-beetle suits, meticulously taking samples, while unprotected firemen in simple turnout gear with no masks or breathing apparatus stood just a couple of feet away. VX as a liquid could become a gas, but it'd have to be pretty hot. If that happened, it would not be persistent beyond a couple of hours. VX as a liquid, under very cold conditions, can actually persist for a couple of months. Quite a bit colder than it typically is in even England, though, in spring and summer. Daily averages for Salisbury, UK in March are above freezing, an average of about 45F, and it customarily gets much warmer going into summer. So you can't have it both ways – if it's a liquid, it's more persistent in its toxicity over time, but that effect is greatly attenuated by temperature. If it's a gas, breathing apparatus for anyone who might be exposed is an absolute rule.

Another discrepancy came up, in a timeline of the Skripals' movements . They left the father's home at some time close to but prior to 1:30 PM, and drove into town. This, it is estimated, would take about 10 to 15 minutes. They are observed by CCTV entering a multi-story car park in Salisbury at around 1:32 PM. Here one of the Skripals – both of whom apparently touched the front doorknob on the way out, the second one perhaps just for luck – then touched the ticket machine with their bare hand. This machine remained unchecked for 8 days after the event. How many other people touched it between that time and the time anyone checked it for toxicity? Yet nobody else showed any symptoms.

It was an extremely oddball event, which continues to inspire skeptical questions and scornful refutations. But I don't want to get too bogged-down in the Skripal affair – instead, I want to focus a bit on the more recent incident, the 'poisoning' of Dawn Sturgess and Charles Rowley, in nearby Amesbury. This incident, also, has featured a wildly-improbable British-government narrative and skeptical questioning, and one of the foremost skeptical questions has been "How the hell could a nerve agent that did not kill the people who were its targets accidentally kill a chance victim four months later?"

Enter, stage left, the American Chemical Weapons Expert, who announces that Novichok was specially engineered to remain persistent over a long time . So that it could, you know, kill incidental victims months later and further incriminate the country where it is supposed to have originated. That's why it is the go-to poison for Russian assassins. It might not kill the people you wanted to kill, but it could kill someone totally unrelated, months later. True story.

There are a few things you should know about the expert quoted, Dan Kaszeta. One, he's the Managing Director of Strongpoint Security (it seems like all the UK's go-to commentators are executives in the security industry, like FireEye or Crowdstrike). Sounding off in the media, taking a position which unreservedly supports the government narrative – no matter how nutty it is – is a good way to get noticed in the security business, and Strongpoint is a fairly new operation. Two, he's the resident CBRN expert at Bellingcat . Three, he is not a Trump fan, broadcasting for his anti-Trump audience how the President of the United States' motorcade and security detail might be confused, frustrated and sidetracked so that he would get the message he was not welcome. I can hardly fault Kaszeta for that, since Trump is over-the-top unpopular just about everywhere he goes, but it's a little unusual to see a former White-House consultant handing out advice on how to screw up a White House visit.

Four, he is a much bigger noise on the CBRN front than you might have imagined if you've never heard of him before, confidently chatting up the wide-eyed press corps on all things chemical-warfare. And always supporting the UK government's contention that Novichok was always Russian, only Russian, and that it could not have been anyone else. Here he is, letting the WBUR Boston audience know in no uncertain terms, "I don't know anybody who knows how to make it except these guys in Russia. They've been a deep, dark secret." But their purported engineer, Vil Marzayanov, claimed their precursors were ordinary organophosphates which are commercially available; "One should be mindful that the chemical components or precursors of A-232 and its binary version novichok-5 are ordinary organophosphates that can be made at commercial chemical companies that manufacture fertilizers and pesticides [nerve agents, after all, arose from research into pesticides and are really advanced versions of pesticides]. In my opinion, this research program was premised on the ability to hide the production of precursor chemicals under the guise of legitimate commercial chemical production of agricultural chemicals . And if America was concerned that its manufacture was devious and covert, it is kind of difficult to imagine why an American publisher published a book which featured the formula for making it, courtesy of Marzayanov, and which anyone can obtain for around $30.00. Is that how you keep something a deep, dark secret? And obviously the Defense Research establishment at Porton Down, only a couple of miles from the site of the Salisbury poisoning, had samples of Novichok, since they were able to identify it in a couple of hours. It's beginning to shape up like the worst-kept deep dark secret in the world.

According to Dan, the Soviets wanted to engineer chemical agents that NATO equipment could not detect. Gosh! Those tricky sons of bitches. So then they engineered it to be extra-persistent, so it would stay around for months, just to make it fair, so NATO could have lots of time to take more samples. The thing is, the whole raison d'etre of a nerve agent is that it be non -persistent; you want it to rapidly and efficiently kill off the enemy, but you want to move your own troops into that same area in a matter of days, to consolidate your gains and establish your own military presence. Months just doesn't cut it.

Asked why an assassin would use such a distinctive agent, pointing straight back at his own country, Dan suggests that given the historic secrecy of the project, someone might have reasoned that it would go undetected. Uh huh; sure – the Stimson Report came out in 1995. And the agent used is 'specially engineered to remain a toxic menace for months'.

Here's Dan again , backstopping the White House's assertion that only Assad could have been behind an alleged sarin gas attack at Khan Sheikhoun; the Russian version, he says, is "highly implausible". "Nerve agents are the result of a very expensive, exotic, industrial chemical process -- these are not something you just whip up." Oh, dear – put John Gilbert, senior science fellow at the Centre for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, in the "Disagree" column: he says all you would need to make sarin is about a 200 square-foot room and a competent chemist.

Two other attributes compound sarin's insidiousness. First, it's not especially hard to produce, in terms of both resources and expertise. "A competent chemist could make it, and possibly very quickly, in a matter of days," says John Gilbert, a senior science fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, who spent much of his Air Force career assessing countries' WMD capabilities. Producing sarin doesn't require any kind of massive facility; a roughly 200 square foot room would do.

According to Dan – yet again, this time in the Los Angeles Times – one form of Novichok is as a solid at normal temperatures, and it might have been deployed as a dust or powder. Uh huh, might have been. But (a) that would have been the least-persistent method except for as a gas, it would never have lasted four months outside, through rain, and (b) not even a rummy like Charles Rowley would have tried to pawn off a bottle of dust to his girlfriend as perfume.

Because here we are again, at another 'Novichok' poisoning, and Dan helpfully dispels the myth that Novichok would not still be around and deadly after four months, by announcing the Soviets specially engineered it to do just that. And not only that – they made it especially for contaminating large areas of land, such as ports, and equipment, like tanks, so that they would be dangerous for months. That was supposedly 'the idea' when they were developed.

Horseshit. Nerve agents are most effective against unprotected troops in the open, and if you want to contaminate an area the size of a port, the only possible way you could do it would be with a spray – the least persistent form of all. All organophospate-based nerve agents can be effectively dealt with – before unprotected personnel are exposed – by spraying and washing contaminated areas with water; moisture makes them break down quickly. Nobody has engineered a miracle waterproof organophosphate nerve agent. Once nerve agents are known to have been used, troops in the field are in TOPP (Threat-Oriented Protective Posture) Medium at least, in full chem suits with breathing apparatus available for rapid donning. Nerve agents were not developed as a weapon of covert assassination, although they have definitely been used in that role; they were developed as a weapon of mass destruction to be used against a military adversary who presumably is trained in CBRN countermeasures. They were not developed to spray tanks, in the hope that some mook would put his bare hand on it two months later, and fall over jerking and drooling. How the fuck would you disperse enough nerve agent to contaminate an airfield? Fly over with a water-bomber and drench it from end to end? You don't think that might offer a bit of a clue? If you want to disperse a large amount of nerve agent, it will have to be vaporized, and it will have to be carried in the dispersal vehicle as a liquid. Liquids are heavy – the more you want to disperse, the bigger your dispersal vehicle will have to be. The Soviet Union developed gas warheads, to be used on a ballistic missile, but if you can land a gas warhead next to an airfield you might as well go the whole nine yards and blow it up, because a warhead that lies there hissing and dispersing a cloud of vapour is kind of a giveaway. Unless, of course, you only want to kill the military personnel in the area, and not damage the airfield, so you can quickly take it over and deploy your own aircraft from it. In which instance you would have been pretty stupid to envelope it in a toxic nerve agent that is still going to be active next spring. And the whole idea of a nerve agent is to deploy a small amount of it, using an unobtrusive dispersal vehicle, so as not to call attention to it until personnel in the target area are affected.

It's nice of Dan to try and fill in the blanks the way he did, but there are just too many blanks. The latest story from HM government is that a perfume bottle was found in Charles Rowley's home, and tests revealed – surprise! – that it contained Novichok. The story is that Rowley found it in Queen Elizabeth Park. Somehow, Dawn Sturgess is supposed to have sprayed the contents of the bottle on her wrists and face, like perfume. Oops! now it's an aerosol, the fastest-acting form of nerve agent, and she probably would have been affected in minutes at most, not hours. But she was not at Rowley's home, where the bottle was supposedly discovered. So he either took the bottle with him to meet her, and after noticing her exhibiting symptoms of nerve-agent poisoning, took the bottle home with him and put it in his house, or they were both affected at roughly the same time, and somebody thoughtfully posted the bottle to his home address. If she was poisoned at his house, she would not likely have made it out.; remember, it was dispersed as a vapor. So there is a question as to how the bottle got there, and another as to how it laid there in the park for nearly four months, until Rowley discovered it.

And how it remained powerful enough to kill after all that time, when the fresh-off-the-shelf Novichok, four months previously, failed to kill the Skripals. Not to mention how it got there in the first place – are we supposed to believe that highly-trained assassins straight from the Kremlin did the Skripal job, and then tossed away their backup supply in a local park?

Perhaps of greatest concern, if chemical-weapons professionals were aware that Novichok could persist in deadly concentrations for months – that it was specially engineered to be not only virtually undetectable by NATO sensors, but to remain deadly through the deleterious effects of the elements why did they say nothing when the dozy police assured the public that it was in absolutely no danger?

Mark Chapman says: July 20, 2018 at 7:53 am

Thanks, Al! Yes, Britain – like the USA – has a reliable stable of current and ex-military officers to call upon whenever the broader public starts getting inquisitive or uncomfortable with the official storyline, to get us back on the path with the uncompromising guarantee of military experience and exotic knowledge the average yokel can never hope to possess.

General (Ret'd) Wesley Clark, for example, the affable and polished talking head for CNN during the Iraq War and onetime presidential candidate.

Yes, the term CBRN replaced the old NBCD, Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Defense.

James lake says: July 20, 2018 at 2:17 am
This article is a timely reminder that the UK never stopped fighting the Cold War. I had forgotten about the embarrassing spy rock incident. The (labour) government lies were accepted without question by the media.

The Novichok issue – fits into this pattern of behaviour.

[Jul 28, 2018] Vladimir The Terrible - US Deep State Desperately Needs A Russian Villain To Cover Its Tracks Zero Hedge

Jul 28, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

by Tyler Durden Fri, 07/27/2018 - 21:05 24 SHARES Authored by Robert Bridge via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

Conventional wisdom would have us believe that Russia became America's sworn enemy in the aftermath of the 2016 presidential election. As is often the case, however, conventional wisdom can be illusory.

In the momentous 2016 showdown between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, a faraway dark kingdom known as Russia, the fantastic fable goes, hijacked that part of the American brain responsible for critical thinking and lever pulling with a few thousand dollars' worth of Facebook and Twitter adverts, bots and whatnot. The result of that gross intrusion into the squeaky clean machinery of the God-blessed US election system is now more or less well-documented history brought to you by the US mainstream media: Donald Trump, with some assistance from the Russians that has never been adequately explained, pulled the presidential contest out from under the wobbly feet of Hillary Clinton.

For those who unwittingly bought that work of fiction, I can only offer my sincere condolences. In fact, Russiagate is just the latest installment of an anti-Russia story that has been ongoing since the presidency of George W. Bush.

Act 1: Smokescreen

Rewind to September 24th, 2001. Having gone on record as the first global leader to telephone George W. Bush in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Putin showed his support went beyond mere words. He announced a five-point plan to support America in the 'war against terror' that included the sharing of intelligence, as well as the opening of Russian airspace for US humanitarian flights to Central Asia.

In the words of perennial Kremlin critic, Michael McFaul, former US ambassador to Russia, Putin's "acquiescence to NATO troops in Central Asia signaled a reversal of two hundred years of Russian foreign policy. Under Yeltsin, the communists, and the tsars, Russia had always considered Central Asia as its 'sphere of influence.' Putin broke with that tradition."

In other words, the new Russian leader was demonstrating his desire for Russia to have, as Henry Kissinger explained it some seven years later, "a reliable strategic partner, with America being the preferred choice."

This leads us to the question for the ages: If it was obvious that Russia was now fully prepared to enter into a serious partnership with the United States in the 'war on terror,' then how do we explain George W. Bush announcing the withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty just three months later?

There are some things we may take away from that move, which Putin tersely and rightly described as a "mistake."

First , Washington must not have considered a security partnership with Moscow very important, since they certainly understood that Russia would respond negatively to the decision to scrap the 30-year-old ABM Treaty.

Second , the US must not considered the 'war on terror' very serious either; otherwise it would not have risked losing Russian assistance in hunting down the baddies in Central Asia and the Middle East, geographical areas where Russia has gained valuable experience over the years. This was a remarkably odd choice considering that the US military apparatus had failed spectacularly to defend the nation against a terrorist attack, coordinated by 19 amateurs, armed with box cutters, no less.

Third , as was the case with the decision to invade Iraq, a country with nodiscernible connection to the events of 9/11, as well as the imposition of the pre-drafted Patriot Act on a shell-shocked nation, the decision to break with Russia seems to have been a premeditated move on the global chessboard. Although it would be hard to prove such a claim, we can take some guidance from Rahm Emanuel, former Obama Chief of Staff, who notoriously advised, "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste."

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Pb-YuhFWCr4

So why did Bush abrogate the ABM Treaty with Russia? The argument was that some "rogue state," rumored to be Iran, might be tempted to launch a missile attack against "US interests abroad." Yet there was absolutely no logic to the claim since Tehran was inextricably bound by the same principle of "mutually assured destruction" (MAD) as were any other states that tempted fate with a surprise attack on US-Israeli interests. Further, it made no sense to focus attention on Shia-dominant Iran when the majority of the terrorists, allegedly acolytes of Osama bin Laden, reportedly hailed from Sunni-dominant Saudi Arabia. In other words, the Bush administration happily sacrificed an invincible relationship with Russia in the war on terror in order to guard against some external threat that only nominally existed, with a missile defense system that was largely unproven in the field. Again, zero logic.

However, when it is considered that the missile defense system was tailor-made by America specifically with Russia in mind, the whole scheme begins to make more sense, at least from a strategic perspective. Thus, the Bush administration used the attacks of 9/11 to not only dramatically curtail the civil rights of American citizens with the passage of the Patriot Act, it also took the first steps towards encircling Russia with a so-called 'defense system' that has the capacity to grow in effectiveness and range.

For those who thought Russia would just sit back and let itself be encircled by foreign missiles, they were in for quite a surprise. In March 2018, Putin stunned the world, and certainly Washington's hawks, by announcing in the annual Address to the Federal Assembly the introduction of advanced weapons systems – including those with hypersonic capabilities - designed to overcome any missile defense system in the world.

These major developments by Russia, which Putin emphasized was accomplished "without the benefit" of Soviet-era expertise, has fueled the narrative that "Putin's Russia" is an aggressive nation with "imperial ambitions," when in reality its goal was to form a bilateral pact with the United States and other Western states almost two decades ago post 9/11.

Now, US officials can only wring their hands in angst while speaking about an "aggressive Russia."

"Russia is the most significant threat just because they pose the only existential threat to the country right now. So we have to look at that from that perspective," declared Air Force Gen. John Hyten, commander of US Strategic Command, or STRATCOM.

Putin reiterated in his Address, however, that there would have been no need for Russia to have developed such advanced weapon systems if its legitimate concerns had not been dismissed by the US.

"Nobody wanted to talk with us on the core of the problem," he said. "Nobody listened to us. Now you listen!"

To be continued: Part II: Reset, or 'Overcharged' Vote up! 9 Vote down! 0

Buckaroo Banzai -> powow Fri, 07/27/2018 - 21:11 Permalink

Everybody needs to get up to speed on international Jew criminal Bill Browder. He's at the center of the Deep State, and royally fucked up when he tried to rip off Putin for $400 million.

https://dxczjjuegupb.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/TheKilli

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgK7MlZDuJ8

chunga -> Buckaroo Banzai Fri, 07/27/2018 - 21:27 Permalink

And the maverick didn't want to hear it.

Skip -> Buckaroo Banzai Fri, 07/27/2018 - 21:44 Permalink

Good stuff and may I add some more...

TrumpHate rises to new heights. Will it work?
July 17, 2018 by Kevin MacDonald

I should also mention Putin's treatment of certain Jewish oligarchs who have attempted to influence Western policies toward Russia (e.g., Mikhail Khodorkovsky). A truly stunning moment in the Trump-Putin presser (all but ignored in the MSM) was Putin saying that Bill Browder and his associates had illegally earned $1.5 billion in Russia ("the way the money was earned was illegal") without paying taxes either to Russia or the United States where the money was transferred. And that he and his associates had contributed $400 million to Hillary Clinton's campaign. While the charges back and forth are impossible for me to evaluate, Browder's firm, Hermitage Capital Management, has been involved in other accusations of fraud. Browder was the main force promoting the Magnitsky Act, signed by President Obama in 2012, that barred Russian officials said to be involved in the death of Sergei Magnitsky, a Browder associate, from entering the U.S. or using the U.S. banking system.

Here the point is that American neocons have been in the forefront of hostility over Putin's treatment of Jewish oligarchs, taking the view that Browder et al. are completely innocent victims of Russian evil. Along with Russian foreign policy, Putin's actions toward the oligarchs is one factor in neocon and hence some factions of the GOP toward Russia. It's no surprise that they are now eagerly joining the hate-Trump chorus throughout the American establishment.

The Jewish Ethnic Nexus of Bill Browder' Financial Operations July 27, 2018 Kevin MacDonald
"A tweetstorm consisting of quotes from Israel Shamir's excellent article on Bill Browder showing how he operated in an entirely Jewish milieu. Jewish ethnic networking is alive and well in the twenty-first century."

Facebook's Sheryl Sandberg and Jewish Ethnic Networking

Infinite Loop: Mueller Now Back at Trump Jr. Russian Lawyer Meeting
Andrew Anglin July 27, 2018
Cohen doesn't have proof, but he is one of God's Chosen people - enough for a conviction.

[Jul 28, 2018] The Curious Case of Pro-Trump Leftism by Eric Draitser

Notable quotes:
"... Eric Draitser is the founder of StopImperialism.org and host of CounterPunch Radio . He is an independent geopolitical analyst based in New York City. You can reach him at [email protected]. ..."
Jul 28, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

To Russia with Love?

Every morning, just before his first threatening tweet of the day, and well before the bright lights and not-so-bright blondes of Fox & Friends have even had a chance to caffeinate, President Trump awakens, shuffles out to the Truman Balcony, and releases a pair of snow white doves in the direction of Moscow.

At least, that's the impression one gets reading what passes for analysis from some of the more depraved corners of the online left.

It's true that the number of self-professed "analysts" and dementia-addled lefties spouting the Trump-as-peacenik line is relatively small, but the impact their voices have had on left discourse around Trump and this historical moment is not insignificant. For every protest, be it a mainstream liberal march, radical Antifa direct action, or anything in between, the Left Trumpists focus their ire on the opponents of Trumpism. Ostensibly, it's because the anti-Trump activists are hypocrites who only form political opposition against Republicans while letting Democrats eat live babies on YouTube and roll wheelchair-bound pensioners into oncoming traffic. But, seen from a more realistic perspective, it seems this chorus of silliness is based more on Trump's words, and those of openly pro-Putin media, than on reality.

Take, for instance, this agonizingly vapid talking point about Trump desperately trying to repair the US-Russia relationship and promote peace with Russia. It certainly aligns with Trump's words. But how about his actions?

Well, it wasn't particularly inspiring when the Trump Administration decided to escalate Obama's already insane policy vis-à-vis Ukraine by providing lethal weapons to the US-backed Kiev regime which continues to be partnered with, and in some ways captive to, Ukrainian Nazis and other fascist, er um, "ultra-nationalist," forces. Even the great Russophobe himself, that elusive covert Kenyan-Muslim Brotherhood communist agent Obama wouldn't go that far.

Trump's genius, apparently, is in being a peacenik toward Russia while arming to the teeth the anti-Russian Nazis whose grandfathers got their jollies collaborating with Hitler, killing Jews and other ethnic minorities. Sources on the ground tell me, however, that these are very fine people who simply want to Make Ukraine Great Again. What's wrong with that? (Sidenote: My grandfather was busy killing their grandfathers. He didn't think they were very fine people.)

The Left Trumpists though still manage to find ways to justify, or at least explain away, Trump's arming of Ukrainian fascists by pointing out that Trump is a victim of his intelligence agencies, the Deep StateTM, SJWs, the Alt-Left, and the War on Christmas. The Hillary-Comey-Maddow cabal hashed out a plan to destroy Trump by forcing the actual left into talking about Trump's actual dangerous policies that are openly acknowledged and easily researched by anyone with an internet connection. Damn liberals.

And let's all remember with warm reminiscence the good old days of the 2016 campaign when Donald Trump stood before the American people undermining the imperial military juggernaut of NATO, presenting himself as the first major US politician in recent memory to question the very function of the alliance. These leftists championed Trump the anti-imperialist, the man who would rein in the US's European war machine.

Welp, within 18 months Trump has not only not reduced NATO's importance or reach, he has, in fact, demanded a more robust, more deadly, and more provocative NATO with each member state increasing significantly their contribution to the military alliance. Oops. I guess Trumpian anti-imperialism and America First-erism extends to funding the world's most dangerous imperial alliance used as a weapon against Russia and much of the world.

But, of course, the spending hike for NATO only mirrors Trump's glorious peace program at home, which includes a record $700 billion military budget . That obscene amount of blood money will fund massive new killing machines and line the pockets of Lockheed, Boeing, Raytheon, and the other death merchants who today sit around laughing at the notion that Trump would somehow be bad for the military-industrial complex. For these ghouls, Trump means business, and business is booming. Trump: A Russian Stooge?

The history of the Russiagate story is still being written. But, as usual, liberals have already transmogrified a murky, hitherto unproven narrative of Russian puppetry of the US president into a story of treason and of despoiling the good name of the US of A. And the Left Trumpists reject it, arguing that Trump is merely trying to restore friendly relations and avoid a World War III apocalypse.

But what if – bear with me now – what if they're both completely fucking wrong? What if Trump is actually just warmongering and undermining peace in the way that presidents of the Imperium Americana have for decades, but in a more unpredictable way?

Consider that Midtown Mussolini, the great orange conciliator, has actually imposed expanded sanctions on Russia, going further than the Obama Administration did. Whether this is a response to domestic political pressures, a negotiating strategy, weakness in the face of neocons, or some combination of the three, is not terribly important given that the end result is heightened tensions with the Kremlin. Naturally, those points are used by the Left Trumpists as "explantions" for Trump's behavior. Note that these lefties will never admit to defending Trump, they prefer to cast their defenses as "explanations."

Regardless, Trump has managed to present himself as a dove on Russia, while in fact being more hawkish than any president in recent memory. This is further demonstrated by Trump's expulsion of more than 60 Russian embassy, consulate, and/or intelligence officials over the alleged poisoning of a former Russian spy in the UK. Trumpologists, though, have the talking points in hand: "Trump is just bowing to pressure from liberals and the intelligence agencies, he didn't really want to do it!"

Interesting. Since when do leftists care about the political pressures a president faces? Lyndon Johnson faced tremendous political pressures from his right and left, does he get a pass on Vietnam? Nixon faced incredible pressure, as did Carter and Clinton. And why, please tell, am I supposed to care? Their actions are what matter.

I suppose the Left Trumpists also forgot that Trump brought in the utterly unhinged neocon imperialist, John Bolton. And, predictably, the mustache that launched a thousand ships has in short order raised the threat of war with Iran, moved the administration further to the right on Venezuela , argued in favor of a first strike against North Korea , and much more. And who could forget now Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who succeeded Exxon Mobil kingpin Rex Tillerson, as Trump's consiglieri. I suppose it's progress as the US threatens to kill millions in the name of Jesus, rather than in the name of oil profits.

There are probably a hundred other policies and actions taken by Trump that are worth examining in context of left apologism for the Fascist-in-Chief. But this essay is not intended to catalog all the criminal, degenerate policies that Agent Orange has enacted or championed. It is merely an introduction, a window into a confused political space and discourse on the Left that is both infuriating and deeply depressing.

Many decent, well-meaning people who have dedicated their lives to fighting neoliberal imperialism have suddenly positioned themselves to the right of neocons in alliance with ascendant fascism in the US. They don't espouse the fascism, but have nonetheless made common cause with the far right in defense of Trump on the grounds of world peace and smashing the neoliberal/neoconservative consensus in Washington.
One has to wonder, though Would they also align with the hangman to spite the gallows-maker? Join the debate on Facebook More articles by: Eric Draitser

Eric Draitser is the founder of StopImperialism.org and host of CounterPunch Radio . He is an independent geopolitical analyst based in New York City. You can reach him at [email protected].

[Jul 28, 2018] State Department Reportedly Revokes Visa Of Magnitsky Act Campaigner The Two-Way NPR

Jul 28, 2018 | www.npr.org

The latest move by Russia has angered defenders of Browder, including Michael McFaul, the ambassador to Russia under President Barack Obama from 2012-2014.

McFaul tweeted "this is outrageous" and called on President Trump and the State Department to "fix this now."

McFaul's concern was picked up by Preet Bharara, the former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York who was fired earlier this year by President Trump. Bharara "seconded" McFaul in the retweet, adding in a subsequent tweet that Russia's allegation that Browder may have killed Magnitsky is a "farce."

[Jul 28, 2018] The Drivel of a Diplomat Michael McFaul's 'From Cold War to Hot Peace' - Progressive.org

Notable quotes:
"... From Cold War to Hot Peace ..."
"... In his book, McFaul repeats this version of events, despite the fact that more recent evidence has cast serious doubt on this story. For example, Magnitsky was not a lawyer, as McFaul suggests, but a tax accountant, and he may have been a party to the tax evasion scheme Browder himself perpetuated. ..."
"... Jeremy Kuzmarov is author of ..."
"... (Monthly Review Press, 2018) among other works on U.S. foreign policy ..."
Jul 28, 2018 | progressive.org

ontemporary American media is filled with sensationalist articles and accusations directed against Russia and its President Vladimir Putin. The current fixation with Russian aggression is one indication of a dangerous deterioration in bilateral relations, which is being taken advantage of by hawkish politicians to fuel a new arms race and Cold War.

Into this overheated foreign policy landscape comes From Cold War to Hot Peace (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2018), a memoir by Michael McFaul, a former ambassador to Russia.

download.jpeg

According to McFaul, Putin is an authoritarian leader reminiscent of some of the worst traditions of Russia's past. He has not only trampled on freedom in Russia, but antagonized the West through election hacking and the carrying out of military aggression in Eastern Ukraine and Syria.

But McFaul's book presents a misreading of Russia that will make future relations only more challenging. Unfortunately his view is one that predominates in the mainstream and left media as well as the Democratic Party.

McFaul was the U.S. ambassador to Russia from 2012-2014, a key period in the deterioration of U.S.-Russian relations. He previously worked for the U.S. National Security Council as Special Assistant to President Obama, and senior director of Russian and Eurasian affairs.

Central to McFaul's worldview is the notion that economic liberalization will inevitably pave the way for political democratization and reform, and that a democratic Russia would never go to war with the United States (the democratic peace theory holds that two democracies will never go to war with each other).

McFaul was part of a coterie of Quiet Americans who descended on Russia in the 1990s infused with a missionary like zeal to export liberal economic systems and democracy. He was a protégé of George P. Shultz, Reagan's Secretary of State. He participated in Russia's anti-communist revolution, believing, as he writes in his book, if "we could forge deep political, economic, and security relationships with a democratic Germany or democratic Japan after World War II, why couldn't we do the same with a democratic Russia at the end of the Cold War?"

McFaul's analysis of Russian politics repeats historical tropes about a democratic West and autocratic East. He gives especially short shrift to the economic hardship facilitated by the neoliberal shock therapy policies imposed on Russia by Ivy League types like himself and the vast corruption that ensued -- undermining his theories. He in turn misses a key factor underlying support for Vladimir Putin, who went after predatory Western financial interests and oligarchs that weakened Russia in the 1990s.

During the Russian presidency of Dmitry Medvedev from 2008 to 2012, the Obama administration successfully initiated a "reset" policy that resulted in foreign policy breakthroughs such as the 2010 new START treaty mandating a reduction of nuclear weapons, and ensured cooperation in fighting the War on Terror and a number of other issues.

According to McFaul, Putin's re-election in 2012 brought back old Cold War animosities. Putin, in McFaul's estimation, needed to create a menacing United States to justify his power and crackdown on domestic liberties, and nothing the U.S. could do would change that.

McFaul's narrative fails to take into account why Putin is actually quite popular in Russia.

McFaul's narrative fails to take into account why Putin, despite his autocratic proclivities, is actually quite popular in Russia. Putin presided over a period of economic growth and successfully prosecuted oligarchs like Mikhail Khodorkovsky who had exploited privatization initiatives during the 1990s. By pushing economic integration with other Central Asian states in forming a Eurasian power bloc, Putin has also prevented Russia's disintegration.

McFaul also leaves out the role that the United States played in provoking many of Putin's foreign policy actions, including the U.S.-NATO invasion of Libya, which even Medvedev, who initially supported it, considered a mistake. He fails to discuss how American economic incentives, such as control over Central Asian oil and gas resources, have fueled geopolitical rivalry.

McFaul also underplays the importance of NATO's expansion towards Russia's borders. His version of events about the conflicts in Ukraine leave out U.S. and European Union support of the Maidan protests in February 2014, which brought down the pro-Russian government of Viktor Yanukovych and provoked civil war.

McFaul claims that he helped engage both the government and the demonstrators "to try and find a peaceful way to defuse the crisis." However, evidence shows that U.S. politicians not only egged the protesters on, but also were priming for the imposition of Arseniy "Yats" Yatsenyuk, a neoliberal technocratic who they believed would open Ukraine's economy to the West.

Though claiming to champion human rights, McFaul has nothing to say about the neo-Nazi presence among the protesters and the shelling of villages in Donetsk as part of counter-terrorism operations pursued against Eastern Ukrainian rebels. Nor does he write about the vast displacement and torture carried out by the Ukrainian military and its proxy militias financed by the United States.

McFaul's misleading depiction of the war in Ukraine fits with a broader pattern of omissions. He waxes hysterical about the annexation of Crimea following the Ukrainian coup, without acknowledging that a large majority of Crimeans supported a referendum on the annexation, and that Crimea has strong historical ties to Russia.

Putin takes all the blame for backing the despot Bashar al-Assad and prolonging the war in Syria, as another example, but McFaul is silent on the United States arming of jihadists opposition forces who are equally reprehensible.

In an interview in Moscow in early May, Alexey Pushkov, a Russian Senator and former head of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the state Duma, told me that since the United States had fueled instability in Iraq and Libya, Russia felt it had to become more involved in Middle Eastern affairs to prevent further chaos. He said he was intent that Syria would not become another failed state and haven for jihadism like Libya.

While Russia may also be seeking the maintenance of its naval base in Tartus, Pushkov has a valid point which McFaul's narrative fails to consider.

According to Pushkov, Russia naturally seeks friendly neighbors and was concerned by outside interference or the presence of hostile regimes or Islamic extremists in its geopolitical neighborhood.

The Russian military budget, furthermore is far less than that of the United States, which hosts at least 800 overseas military bases worldwide, when Russia has only about a dozen , mostly near its border.

A key turning point in U.S.-Russia relations was the passage of the Magnitsky Act in 2012 which levied sanctions on Russian officials who had allegedly covered up the murder of whistleblower Sergei Magnitsky after he had exposed a Russian government scam to rob American investor William F. Browder, the head of Hermitage Capital, of $230 million.

In his book, McFaul repeats this version of events, despite the fact that more recent evidence has cast serious doubt on this story. For example, Magnitsky was not a lawyer, as McFaul suggests, but a tax accountant, and he may have been a party to the tax evasion scheme Browder himself perpetuated.

In a book about the deception used to sell intervention in World War I nearly a century ago, journalist George Abel Schreiner urged people "not give too much heed to the drivel one finds in the books of diplomatist-authors." Historians and the public should indeed read McFaul's words with caution, and be conscious of the tradition in which he writes.

The true history of U.S.-Russian relation in the last decade is one of lost opportunity for cooperation and tragedy.

His agenda becomes apparent in light of his role as an informal advisor to the Hillary Clinton campaign on Russia. In that capacity, McFaul advocated for a strategy of greater resources and soldiers for NATO in the Baltics, more economic and military support for Ukraine, new sanctions on Russia, the creation of no-fly zones in Syria, and more expansive efforts to push back Russian propaganda in the world. This program was a recipe for the continuation of Cold War hostilities which threaten world peace.

The true history of U.S.-Russian relation in the last decade is one of lost opportunity for cooperation and tragedy, which the United States and its diplomatic representatives must take important responsibility for. The media demonization of Vladimir Putin is being used to re-invoke Cold War imageries of Russian subversion.

If the first cold war was a tragedy, the second one is playing out as farce, and McFaul's new book is part of the charade.

Jeremy Kuzmarov is author of The First Cold War as Tragedy, the Second as Farce (Monthly Review Press, 2018) among other works on U.S. foreign policy .

[Jul 28, 2018] From Cold War to Hot Peace An American Ambassador in Putin's Russia

In 1990 McFaul an NDI guy. That tells us a lot about this Cold War warrior... And now we know the he was connected to Bill Browder...
McFaul was a regular, semi-talented imperial diplomat sent to Russia after dissolution of the USSR. Like "Harvard mafia" of Yletsin advisers he probably contributed to conversion of Russia into oligarchic republic. Which probably was a plan. Now with revelations about Browder the question arise how much of this activity was coordinated via intelligence agencies such as MI6.
He was sent to Russia during Medvedev providence (who was a weak President, kind of reincarnation of Yletsin; kind of side effect of Putin overreliance of close circle of Sanct Petersburg friends and lack of succession mechanism in Russia) to foment a color revolution in Russia (so called White revolution of 2011-2012). And due to Medvedev tenure Putin actually has chances to lose elections of 2012.
But the USA overplayed its hand pushing "White revolution" in 2011-2012. It shook Russian establishment (and some semi-efficient measures to block further attempt to stage color revolutions were taken). They were close to "regime change" but eventually failed. The USA will have another chance when Putin eventually leaves but with events in Ukraine neoliberal fifth column in Russia was considerably weaned. So the changes are that a nationalist will come to power next.
After this failure a very strong backlash followed, that definitely harmed the US relations with Russia. McFaul tenure from 2013 to 2014 was just unnecessary suffering after the defeat. He should be recalled in early 2013 or even earlier. Nobody in Putin government would make any concessions to the guy who dared to invite opposition leaders to the US embassy acting as Roman proconsul, not as a diplomat. And diplomacy is about obtaining concessions. BTW Russians suffered this indignity quite stoically, because after economic rape of 1990th Russia was still very weak. McFaul clams that he suffered from harassment are probably exaggerated. but the attitude to him of Russian "street" and "intelligencia" definitely changed for worse after his attempt of regime change. And after election of Putin he was partially ostracized.
Now he had written a book were he claims that he wanted to improve relations between the USA and Russia ;-)
There is clear lack on independent thinking from this Professor. He mostly repeat standard State Department talking points. This is not interesting and you can read them for free elsewhere. I wonder how many month it will take for the book to reach this propaganda piece its true price -- $1.
The way McFaul treats election of Trump is just a repeating of State Department talking point. This is probably the most disappointing part of the book, as he due to his tenure as Ambassador in Russia should have more in-depth view. For a Professor of a prestigious US university to regurgitate undigested propaganda is both simplistic and naive. For this part you might better off reading Michael Wolf book. While also a pulp fiction, it is just $1(used) and the first three chapters were written and more entertaining ;-)
In any case pages 430 till the end of the book are a real embarrassment. This not an analyses of events. This is a blatant propaganda.
In reality Trump election was about the crisis of neoliberalism in the USA. when the neoliberal establishment failed to put in power his beloved candidate it became clear that there are cracks in the neoliberal facade and after financial crisis on 2008 neoliberalism was unable to recover. It is now a discredited ideology, kind of "Naked Emperor", much like Bolshevism became after WWII. If this analogy is correct, neoliberalism can last probably only another three-four decades, or even less. Much depends whether the "end of cheap oil" happens. That might be the last nail in neoliberal globalization coffin. In this sense neo-McCarthyism campaign lauched after Trump victory is just a clumsy attempt to patch the cracks by uniting the country using Russia as a scapegoat.
Notable quotes:
"... At the concluding dinner that night, Russians and Americans together toasted our cooperation and success. In the midst of our celebration, Sechin, Putins deputy, made a jarring confession. As we congratulated each other on a successful conference, he revealed to me that he too had worked in intelligence, just like his boss. He spoke Portuguese, just like I did, and had worked in southern Africa, just like I had. Although I am sure that I had met dozens of Soviet intelligence officers by then, none of them had admitted it. I wondered if he was telling me this information, especially about our shared experiences in Lusophonc Africa, to suggest that he believed that I also was an intelligence officer, a CIA agent. ..."
"... Alter Yeltsins reelection, many Americans believed that the project of building Russian democracy was over, and that the United States was now free to pursue other foreign policy interests. First up was NATO expansion, which President Clinton had delayed until after the Russian presidential election... ..."
"... When asked by Joe Scarborough on MSNBCs Morning Joe about the killing of journalists and opposition leaders in Russia, Trump countered, "Well, I think our country does plenty of killing also, Joe." 1 -' When given the chance to correct the record a year later on Bill O'Reillys television show on Fox, a very friendly venue. President-elect Trump instead doubled down. "We have a lot of killers... you think our country' is so innocent?" 1 ' ..."
"... To the Kremlin, Trump seemed to represent another ideological ally in this transnational movement against globalism, [neo]liberalism, and multilateralism. ..."
"... (A Russian television series called Sleepers, in which the United States is plotting to overthrow the Russian government, began airing in the fall of 2017. In the show, the U.S. ambassador is blond; his name is Michael. They haven't forgotten about me yet!) ..."
"... geminif4ucorsair on July 10, 2018 ..."
"... There were important achievement during the "reset" period, most notably the New START treaty, Russian support for sanction on Iran, and Russia cooperation with NATO on Afghanistan, and expanded trade and investment (most of which now is in the dust-bin). ..."
Jul 28, 2018 | www.amazon.com

As the chief liaison with our Russian partners, I was in charge of making sure everything ran smoothly.

It was while planning these seminars that I first met Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, then the deputy mayor in Leningrad in charge of international contacts. I was an international contact, and one who must have intrigued a KGB officer. Our NDI delegation had come to meet Anatoly Sobchak, the new mayor of Leningrad, soon to be renamed St. Petersburg. Sobchak, a law professor turned politician, was one of the truly inspirational leaders of Russia's surging democratic movement at the time. Emphatically pro-Western, pro-European, and pro-American, he radiated hope about the possibilities of a democratic Russia and closer relations between our two countries. At that meeting, I stepped in to translate, and aside from mixing up "Abkhazia" as "Oklahoma," helped communicate our proposal for a conference that would bring city council members from Los Angeles and New York to the Russian city to share their experiences about formulating a city budget in a democratic, transparent way.

Sobchak embraced our proposal, our ideas, and us. We were ideological allies. We loved the guy. The following year, NDI gave Sobchak the W. Averell Harriman Democracy Award, given to an individual to honor his or her commitment to democracy and human rights. Putin made much less of an impression on me than his boss. He was careful, unenthusiastic, diminutive -- an apparatchik. I could not tell from this meeting or our subsequent encounters with him if he supported or detested NDI's work.

He said little, but promised that his team would organize an orderly, successful workshop -- and delivered. He handed me off to his trusted deputy, Igor Sechin, who ran the logistics to perfection...

... ... ...

At the concluding dinner that night, Russians and Americans together toasted our cooperation and success. In the midst of our celebration, Sechin, Putins deputy, made a jarring confession. As we congratulated each other on a successful conference, he revealed to me that he too had worked in intelligence, just like his boss. He spoke Portuguese, just like I did, and had worked in southern Africa, just like I had. Although I am sure that I had met dozens of Soviet intelligence officers by then, none of them had admitted it. I wondered if he was telling me this information, especially about our shared experiences in Lusophonc Africa, to suggest that he believed that I also was an intelligence officer, a CIA agent. Or was he just trying to be friendly? I finally concluded that it didn't really matter, since we were all on the same side now.

... ... ...

Alter Yeltsins reelection, many Americans believed that the project of building Russian democracy was over, and that the United States was now free to pursue other foreign policy interests. First up was NATO expansion, which President Clinton had delayed until after the Russian presidential election...

... ... ...

... television network in Russia, Mikhail Leontiev warned his viewers that I was neither a Russia expert nor a traditional diplomat, but a professional revolutionary whose assignment was to finance and organize Russia's political opposition as it plotted to overthrow the Russian government; to finish Russia's Unfinished Revolution, the title of one of my books written a decade earlier. This portrayal of my mission to Moscow would haunt me for the rest of my days as ambassador.

A few months later, in May 2012,1 accompanied my former boss at the White House, National Security Advisor Tom Donilon, to his meeting with President elect Putin. This was the first meeting between a senior Obama official and Putin since Putins reelection in March 2012. We met at Novo-Ogaryovo, Putins country estate, the same place where Obama had enjoyed a cordial, construc tive, three-hour breakfast with the then prime minister four years earlier. Putin listened politely to Tom's arguments for continued cooperation. At some point in their dialogue, however, he turned away from Tom to stare intensely at me with his steely blue eyes and stern scowl to accuse me of purposely seeking to ruin U.S.-Russia relations. Putin seemed genuinely angry with me; I was genuinely alarmed. The hair on the back of my neck stood on end and sweat covered my brow as I endured this tongue-lashing from one of the most powerful people in the world.

... ... ...

Less man a year into the Trump presidency, the Putin-Trump "bromance" had faded. Trump did not deliver on his more audacious pro-Russia campaign promises, such as lifting sanctions, looking into recognizing Crimea as a part of Russia, or withdrawing support for NATO. He may well have wanted to do these things, but his own foreign policy team, the U.S. Congress, and American public opinion were united against him.

... ... ...

Most shockingly, Trump assigned moral equivalency to the United States and Russia. When asked by Joe Scarborough on MSNBCs Morning Joe about the killing of journalists and opposition leaders in Russia, Trump countered, "Well, I think our country does plenty of killing also, Joe." 1 -' When given the chance to correct the record a year later on Bill O'Reillys television show on Fox, a very friendly venue. President-elect Trump instead doubled down. "We have a lot of killers... you think our country' is so innocent?" 1 '

... ... ...

In audition to supporting pro-Kremlin policies, Trumps ideological orientation overlapped with many Putin ideas. For years, Putin railed against the liberal world order, and what he called decadent Western cultural trends.

Trump did the same. Putin chastised American interventionism and hegemony. So too did Trump. Putin and his government had cultivated xenophobic, nationalist, conservative allies throughout Europe, including Marine Le Pen in France, Nigel Farage in the United Kingdom, and Viktor Orban in Hungary.1''

To the Kremlin, Trump seemed to represent another ideological ally in this transnational movement against globalism, [neo]liberalism, and multilateralism. Self-proclaimed populist, nationalist ideologues on Trumps team, such as Steve Bannon, perceived even deeper philosophical connections to like-minded Russian thinkers.17 Alleged defenders of the white, Christian world against Islam and China worked in or hovered around both the Kremlin and the Trump campaign."

Putin also despised Clinton...

... ... ...

... Putin repeated, "We have never meddled in the domestic affairs and never will." ... When confronted about Russian interference in the American presidential election, Putin responded, "The United States, everywhere, all over the world, is actively interfering in electoral campaigns in other countries,"6' as if to justify Russian intervention in the American election. In another interview, Putin defensively countered, "When ... we are told: 'Do not meddle in our affairs. Mind your own business. This is how we do things, 'we feel like saying: 'Well then, do not meddle in our affairs."'

... ... ...

Irrespective of who was in the White House, Putin in 2016 was no longer seeking to join our Western clubs...

... ... ...

(A Russian television series called Sleepers, in which the United States is plotting to overthrow the Russian government, began airing in the fall of 2017. In the show, the U.S. ambassador is blond; his name is Michael. They haven't forgotten about me yet!)

geminif4ucorsair on July 10, 2018
Outstanding, first-person account of Obama's "reset" effort toward better relations with Russia, only partially successful.

Author McFaul served as President Obama's Russian policy advisor (2009-12), and then as U.S. Ambassador to Russia (2012-14). He had long been a democracy advocate, based on an academic background at Stanford. During these early years, he lived in Moscow as a Fulbright scholar, linked with the National Democratic Institute in the '90s, a period of extensive transition in Russia, following Yeltsin's meeting with Ukraine and Belarus that resulted in the Belovezhakaya Accord - the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The period was marked by efforts of democratic forces to change Russia, a period in which Russian voters within and closest to cities supported the new liberal parties - while traditional communist strongholds in rural areas in central Russia stayed true to form and back the Communist and Agrarian Parties." (p. 35)"

McFaul covers the changing developments under Yeltsin's "partial revolution", with good insight to Yeltsin's thinking, outside political forces (including the KGB and Putin), including a discussion of Yeltsin's decision to nominate Putin as his successor. Yeltsin certainly had other democratic-oriented options other than Putin, including Boris Nemtsov. Unfortunately for First Deputy Prime Minister Nemtsov, the 1998 Asian and Russian economic crisis did great damage to Nemtsov's economic reforms, while challenging the oligarchs and tackling corruption in the country, brought his time to a close under Yeltsin.

The economic crisis also set in motion a Russian counter-reaction to rising prices and other economic woes, setting in motion a new wave of Russian attraction for authoritarian governance. In the wake of this, McFaul notes, "If Russia's faltering democracy gave way,... Russia would once again become our competitor and eventually even enemy. Of course, the United States and Russia would always have some competing interests around the world. But a democratic Russia - strong or weak - was a more likely partner of the United States than an autocratic Russia - whether strong or weak." (p.62). We have been seeing the impact of this from the earliest days of the Obama Administration.

Obama began what was known as a "reset" of relations with Moscow, and McFaul was point man for this effort to improve relations, advance democratic principles, etc. in Russia. Throughout later chapters, McFaul documents the growing Putin hostility toward the U.S. as an evolutionary event, rooted in the premiers background in the KGB, his witnessing the fall of the Soviet Union, the destruction of pro-Moscow regimes in the Middle East, the "Color" revolutions in the Ukraine and Georgia, and Putin's personality traits that perceive as insults and arrogance - a form his paranoia - toward Russia, by the West.

There were important achievement during the "reset" period, most notably the New START treaty, Russian support for sanction on Iran, and Russia cooperation with NATO on Afghanistan, and expanded trade and investment (most of which now is in the dust-bin). McFaul presents a strong argument that "individual leaders" shape events: thus, as long as Putin remains as head of the Russian government, hostility to the U.S. and Europe will continue.

[Jul 27, 2018] What Has Happened to Ukraine. Inertial Scenario for Ukraine's National and Political Identity by Alexei V. Popov

The author provides some interesting observations... He ignores the role of economics though.
Looks like a replay of events in Baltic republics. Might increase emigration and "provisialization" of Ukraine because Russian is suppressed but English did not became the second language (which is probably impossible without switching education into English language). Dominance of EU might be more harsh regime, then most of the supporters of Eurointergation assume, especially in economic sphere -- the status of semi-colony and debt slave are given, but it can be worse.
Economic suffering of population and pauperization of Ukraine are immense...
Notable quotes:
"... Yet, at least half of the population of all eight administrative regions of mainland South-East Ukraine viewed the Euromaidan as a coup, because, according to a survey conducted in early April 2014 by the Kiev International Institute of Sociology, only a third of respondents in these regions (the survey was not conducted in Crimea and Sevastopol) considered Yatsenyuk and Turchinov legitimate heads of government and state, while half of respondents considered them illegitimate (Kiev International Institute of Sociology, 2014c). ..."
"... The conformism of the South-East elite, which only recently was at the head of the anti-Maidan movement, surpassed the conformism of society many times over, because this elite had much to lose. ..."
"... The situation with Crimea was another factor that objectively strengthened Kiev's position in the South-East. ..."
"... This predictably could not increase pro-Russian sentiments in the rest of Ukraine. ..."
"... anti-Russian forces took an increasingly tough position, describing all talk of federalization as separatism. ..."
"... the winners of the Euromaidan Crimea was not a reason but a pretext for starting a policy of de-Russification. However, these events influenced the political swamp, that is, citizens without a clear position, and strengthened the base of the current regime, as evidenced by the results of public opinion polls and elections. ..."
"... the Europeans played up to Kiev in criminalizing the notion 'federation,' because for the West the Ukrainian problem is part of the Russian problem ..."
"... The West views them as paramilitary organizations which established power in those regions with external help and imposed themselves on the population. ..."
"... This position of the West strengthened the attitude of the pro-Western liberal public in Ukraine towards people in the South-East as sovok ..."
"... the "discursive violence of the Ukrainian media" in late February-early April 2014 paved the way for the "brutality of the antiterrorist operation" by creating a negative image of people of the South-East. ..."
"... Ukrayinska Pravda, Livyi Bereg, ..."
"... At the same time, Ukrainian radical nationalism objectively was an instrument which Ukrainian [neo]liberals used to achieve victory. ..."
"... However, positive dynamics for either party to the conflict is not only measured by territories they seize -- it is seen in the fact that actions, formerly deemed impossible, turn out to be possible and not having obvious negative consequences. For example, the implementation of the political part of the Minsk Agreement (which both Kiev and the West consider imposed on Ukraine from the outside) now seems to be a much more illusory goal than it seemed in 2014-2015. ..."
"... In particular, Kiev has rescinded a bill on constitutional amendments regarding decentralization; an economic blockade of Donbass has been introduced; and several laws have been passed and measures taken to combat the Russian World, both inside and outside the country. ..."
"... The law on the reintegration of Donbass, passed by the Verkhovna Rada this January, was a logical development and a new stage of this policy. Its purpose is not so much to recognize the territories beyond Kiev's control as occupied by Russia. What is more important is that the law recognizes this state de facto without a formal recognition of the war with Russia de jure. ..."
"... This positive dynamics creates a situation where a critical mass of society thinks that at least Ukraine will not find itself in the same difficult situation as in the spring of 2014 and that, at best, it will restore full control over Donbass on its terms: Russia will not withstand the sanctions and will stop supporting the uncontrolled territories. The policy of the West does not contradict these expectations: the sanctions continue, there is almost no public criticism of Kiev's actions in Donbass at the state level, except for minor issues, and the U.S. has decided to supply Javelin antitank missiles to Ukraine, which is largely a symbolic gesture fitting perfectly into the aforementioned pattern of positive dynamics. ..."
"... Of course, very many of the above-mentioned elements of the positive (for Kiev) dynamics also have a great negative effect. For example, the existing format of the conflict in Donbass involves great military expenditures and leads to reduced ties with Russia, which is a significant burden for the Ukrainian economy. ..."
"... The present scale of losses of the Ukrainian army is not a factor that may spark a mass antiwar movement in the country, similar to the antiwar movement in the United States in the late 1960s, because the ratio of casualties to population in Ukraine is much smaller than that in the U.S. during the Vietnam War. ..."
"... Naturally, the economic situation in Ukraine is much less stable than that of the U.S. during the Vietnam War. However, in the public consciousness, the war is only one factor behind the economic problems (along with corruption, incompetence of the authorities, etc.). ..."
"... The war has advantages, too. Of course, they would have disappeared in the event of a full-scale conflict, but Kiev is confident that this will never happen. In a situation like this, it finds it simpler to mobilize society, convince it to put up with difficulties and, most importantly, format the political and information space in an advantageous way. Beneficiaries of this reformatting include not only the government but also a wide range of parties and politicians who supported the Euromaidan. ..."
"... So, the current format of the conflict strengthens the political regime in Ukraine, which is actually the closest to regimes of limited political competition, such as those that existed in some countries of Central and Eastern Europe during the interwar period in the 20th century, or some Latin American countries (Brazil and Guatemala) after the Second World War. There is formal pluralism and a real possibility of succession of power there, yet real power can be contested only by forces from one political spectrum, whereas forces that are beyond this spectrum are restrained and can only aspire to seats in parliament. ..."
"... support is limited -- the West will not fight for Ukraine and will not provide aid on a scale comparable to the Marshall Plan. ..."
"... Already now, due to migration, the population of the territory now controlled by Kiev is less than 30 million people (judging by bread consumption statistics). ..."
"... This means it has decreased by more than 40 percent since 1991. ..."
"... As regards Ukraine's admission to NATO, many Western European countries oppose this option. On the other hand, they have not proposed any detailed plan for Ukraine's non-aligned status. Objectively, such status would be best guaranteed by the specifics of the state's internal structure, when accession to a military alliance would require a consensus of the regions. ..."
"... If this state collapses due to external factors, the identity of a large part of its present population may change very quickly, as evidenced by the experience of the 17th century and recent decades. ..."
Jul 27, 2018 | eng.globalaffairs.ru

In Ukraine, however, the switching of sides takes place on a larger scale. For example, President Kuchma and Prime Minister Yanukovich had a majority in the Verkhovna Rada elected in 2002, which decreased somewhat in the last few months before the 2004 elections. Yet, newly elected President Yushchenko did not have any problems with the same parliament. The Ukrainian parliament elected in 2007 supported Prime Minister Timoshenko, but after Yanukovich won a presidential election in February 2010 he had a solid majority in it until the next election. Yanukovich also had a majority in parliament elected in 2012 until the last days of the Euromaidan. However, after the victory of the Euromaidan, a coalition was formed in parliament that supported the new authorities. It united factions and groups of 235 deputies in the 450-seat parliament, of whom 69 did not belong to pro-Euromaidan parties. Also, 371 deputies, including almost all deputies from the Party of Regions, voted to appoint Yatsenyuk as prime minister.

Can these figures serve as grounds to classify the Euromaidan as a coup d'état and accuse the new regime of failing to build a government of national accord, provided for by the agreement between Yanukovich and the opposition? A coup d'état presupposes suspending and resetting the functioning of government institutions, whereas this agreement did not specify what a national accord government should look like. On the other hand, the essence of such governments is to unite people of different political views, rather than make their members and supporters give up their former beliefs.

Yet, at least half of the population of all eight administrative regions of mainland South-East Ukraine viewed the Euromaidan as a coup, because, according to a survey conducted in early April 2014 by the Kiev International Institute of Sociology, only a third of respondents in these regions (the survey was not conducted in Crimea and Sevastopol) considered Yatsenyuk and Turchinov legitimate heads of government and state, while half of respondents considered them illegitimate (Kiev International Institute of Sociology, 2014c). However, the elite of the South-East did not question the legitimacy of the new government. The most it was ready to do was consider this government undesirable and due to be replaced at the next election.

The conformism of the South-East elite, which only recently was at the head of the anti-Maidan movement, surpassed the conformism of society many times over, because this elite had much to lose. But in this situation, the masses of protesters who considered the Euromaidan a coup found themselves without their usual leaders. New leaders emerged spontaneously from among protesters and were not viewed as authoritative by those who did not take part in the protests. The depth of the gap between the masses and the elites can be seen from the following fact: There is the émigré Ukraine Salvation Committee in Moscow, headed by former Prime Minister Nikolai Azarov, which positions itself as almost a government in exile. The Committee considers the hostilities in Donbass a civil war and, therefore, does not view the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics as occupation administrations. Yet, it has no contact with the leaders of these republics, which also consider themselves an alternative Ukraine.

Although there was less conformism among the masses than among the elites, it still made the protests in the South-East less widespread than they might have been if there had been a sign of dual power, for example, if Yanukovich and the part of the elite, including parliament deputies, who did not recognize the new regime had tried to create alternative government institutions. This conformism made many people accept on faith the assurances of the new government about broad decentralization, including the humanitarian sphere.

The situation with Crimea was another factor that objectively strengthened Kiev's position in the South-East. Beginning in March, Crimea and Sevastopol, which could have been at the vanguard of protests for reformatting Ukraine, withdrew from the political field of the country by joining Russia. This predictably could not increase pro-Russian sentiments in the rest of Ukraine. Formerly, public opinion polls had invariably showed a good attitude of the overwhelming majority of Ukrainians towards Russia. However, during the conflicts over Tuzla in 2003 and the gas dispute of 2009 their attitude deteriorated significantly. Now it happened again, only this time the conflict was much more serious. Attempts by the state which annexed part of Ukrainian territory to act as an arbiter and, at the same time, pressure Kiev to reformat Ukraine into a federation, in which the voice of the South-East should be heard, were predictably doomed to failure. Even potential supporters of Russia doubted the impartiality of such arbitration, and anti-Russian forces took an increasingly tough position, describing all talk of federalization as separatism.

True, Ukrainians who were firmly pro-Russian did not become more hostile to Russia because of Crimea, while for the winners of the Euromaidan Crimea was not a reason but a pretext for starting a policy of de-Russification. However, these events influenced the political swamp, that is, citizens without a clear position, and strengthened the base of the current regime, as evidenced by the results of public opinion polls and elections. EUROPEAN INTEGRATION VS COMPROMISE

On the other hand, it would be legitimate to ask whether the victory of the Euromaidan necessarily had to lead to a war, and whether a compromise could have been reached with the masses of the discontented in the South-East at an early stage. My answer is "no."

The short history of independent Ukraine developed, on the one hand, as a history of steady integration into European and world (but Western-controlled) organizations, and on the other hand, as a history of crises which became increasingly explosive and which ended in increasingly imperfect compromises. For some time, the relationship between these processes could be easily overlooked, but now it is much more difficult not to notice it. The February 2014 agreement on the settlement of the crisis, for the first time achieved with the participation of European guarantors, was also the first world agreement in the history of Ukraine that was not fulfilled. It was after the signing of the economic part of the Association Agreement that an anti-terrorist operation began in the East, and immediately after the political part of this agreement was signed (June 27, 2014), this operation entered into its largest-scale and bloodiest phase.

Of course, the West needed to put an end to Kiev's multi-vector policy and achieve unambiguous certainty for it. Hence its position on the language issue and the territorial structure of the country, which was most vividly realized in the April 2014 PACE resolution, which spoke of the inadmissibility of any mention of Ukraine's federalization (Parliamentary Assembly, 2014).

Obviously, the real problem was not in the word but in an optimal distribution of powers (for example, Spanish autonomous communities have more powers than Austrian federal lands), but the Europeans played up to Kiev in criminalizing the notion 'federation,' because for the West the Ukrainian problem is part of the Russian problem . Its attitude to the protests in the South-East and then the war in Donbass differed fundamentally from its attitude to an overwhelming majority of internal conflicts around the globe.

In the cases of Cyprus, Nagorno-Karabakh, ethnic Serbs in Croatia and Kosovo, Aceh in Indonesia, FARC in Colombia, etc., the West considered the leaders of separatists or insurgents legitimate representatives of certain ethnic or social groups who had taken over powers not provided for by the laws of their country. Their right to be a party to negotiations was not questioned. But the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics are in no way seen as self-proclaimed republics that reflect the views of their populations, even though illegitimately from the point of view of Ukrainian legislation. The West views them as paramilitary organizations which established power in those regions with external help and imposed themselves on the population.

This position of the West strengthened the attitude of the pro-Western liberal public in Ukraine towards people in the South-East as sovok (homo Sovieticus) and vatnik (bigots), whose opinion could be ignored. A recent study (Baysha, 2017) convincingly shows how the "discursive violence of the Ukrainian media" in late February-early April 2014 paved the way for the "brutality of the antiterrorist operation" by creating a negative image of people of the South-East. Importantly, these were not state-run, oligarchic or party nationalist media, although they did the same. These were popular websites, which are thought to be mouthpieces for liberal civil society ( Ukrayinska Pravda, Livyi Bereg, and Gordon ).

In other words, the conflict was a logical consequence of Westernization, rather than the rise of nationalism. Welcoming the successes of the Ukrainian army in July 2014, the European Parliament thus made it clear that this Westernization on the civilizational borders of Europe may not resemble the practices of major European countries. At the same time, Ukrainian radical nationalism objectively was an instrument which Ukrainian [neo]liberals used to achieve victory. True, it is not willing to play this role and wants to be something more than just an instrument. But behind the talk of the Banderization of Ukraine is a confusion of the notions of customer and contractor.

WAR IN AN ACCEPTABLE FORMAT

Of course, many of those who took part in the Euromaidan did not fight there for renaming Vatutin Avenue in Kiev as Shukhevich Avenue, or for banning the import of Russian books, including memoirs of Princess Yekaterina Dashkova, or for banning songs by Russian singers Vladimir Vysotsky and Victor Tsoi described as "tentacles of the Russian World" which leeched onto Ukrainians (definition by Vladimir Vyatrovich, the head of the Institute of National Memory, the most Euro-integrated organization of the Ukrainian government, which consistently advocates the idea of a nationalist "recoding" of Ukrainians). The voices of people who do not agree with this (for example, the poet and culturologist Evgenia Bilchenko) are sometimes heard in the media space, but the problem is whether these voices, together with the voices of those who were against the Euromaidan from the very beginning, can become a political factor.

I think this is almost ruled out under the most likely, inertial, scenario which provides for the development of tendencies that emerged after the victory of the Euromaidan and the preservation by Russia and the West of their behavioral models which have developed over recent years.

When assessing this scenario, one should bear in mind that the armed conflict in Donbass has over the last three years entered into a format that is the most advantageous (of all really possible ones) for Ukraine -- a low-intensity smoldering conflict.

This situation objectively predisposes one to see dynamics, positive for Kiev, in the conflict that began in 2014. At first, Ukraine surrendered Crimea to Russia and pro-Russian forces without a fight. At the next stage, however, it localized the offensive of the Russian World to Donbass, although it failed to take full control over the region. The result of this phase of the fight can be regarded as a draw, or Ukraine's defeat on points. But Crimea was lost through a knockout. After that, a defeat on points is still a better outcome.

The next, longest phase of the conflict has been going on without changes on the frontline. However, positive dynamics for either party to the conflict is not only measured by territories they seize -- it is seen in the fact that actions, formerly deemed impossible, turn out to be possible and not having obvious negative consequences. For example, the implementation of the political part of the Minsk Agreement (which both Kiev and the West consider imposed on Ukraine from the outside) now seems to be a much more illusory goal than it seemed in 2014-2015.

In particular, Kiev has rescinded a bill on constitutional amendments regarding decentralization; an economic blockade of Donbass has been introduced; and several laws have been passed and measures taken to combat the Russian World, both inside and outside the country. The latter include the termination of air service, a ban on remittances, restrictions on the import of Russian books, a ban on performances by some Russian entertainers, the actual abolition of the law "On the Basic Principles of the Language Policy," restrictions on the use of the Russian language on the Ukrainian radio and television and its abolition in education (with the exception of primary school), de-Russification of geographical names, and the removal of monuments.

Kiev views all these measures as non-military blows to the enemy, and the scale of such actions increases with every year.

The law on the reintegration of Donbass, passed by the Verkhovna Rada this January, was a logical development and a new stage of this policy. Its purpose is not so much to recognize the territories beyond Kiev's control as occupied by Russia. What is more important is that the law recognizes this state de facto without a formal recognition of the war with Russia de jure.

This positive dynamics creates a situation where a critical mass of society thinks that at least Ukraine will not find itself in the same difficult situation as in the spring of 2014 and that, at best, it will restore full control over Donbass on its terms: Russia will not withstand the sanctions and will stop supporting the uncontrolled territories. The policy of the West does not contradict these expectations: the sanctions continue, there is almost no public criticism of Kiev's actions in Donbass at the state level, except for minor issues, and the U.S. has decided to supply Javelin antitank missiles to Ukraine, which is largely a symbolic gesture fitting perfectly into the aforementioned pattern of positive dynamics.

For the reasons mentioned above, the West does not advocate a direct dialogue between Kiev and Donetsk/Lugansk, but considers the existing level of conflict with more and more victims an obviously lesser evil than a possible strengthening of the self-proclaimed republics. This clearly follows from the statement of German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel about the inadmissibility of Russia's proposal on a UN peacekeeping mission, which provides for the separation of the warring parties by peacekeepers, to be deployed along the frontline, and the protection of the OSCE mission, because that would only mean freezing the conflict. (A meeting between Vladislav Surkov and Kurt Volker, which took place in Dubai during the writing of this article, showed that the Americans are nevertheless ready to accept the Russian format as the first phase of a peacekeeping mission; yet its practical implementation is still far off.)

Of course, very many of the above-mentioned elements of the positive (for Kiev) dynamics also have a great negative effect. For example, the existing format of the conflict in Donbass involves great military expenditures and leads to reduced ties with Russia, which is a significant burden for the Ukrainian economy. However, it is important to understand a balance between positive and negative aspects from Kiev's point of view.

Of course, the mobilization was a straining factor for society, because it could affect almost every family. But since the end of 2016, when all people mobilized a year before returned home, only contract soldiers and professional officers have taken part in the conflict from the Ukrainian side -- that is, only those who have made this choice voluntarily or who have chosen military service as their lifetime career. This is the main reason why the format of hostilities can be considered acceptable or, at least, not too burdensome for Ukrainian society.

The present scale of losses of the Ukrainian army is not a factor that may spark a mass antiwar movement in the country, similar to the antiwar movement in the United States in the late 1960s, because the ratio of casualties to population in Ukraine is much smaller than that in the U.S. during the Vietnam War.

Naturally, the economic situation in Ukraine is much less stable than that of the U.S. during the Vietnam War. However, in the public consciousness, the war is only one factor behind the economic problems (along with corruption, incompetence of the authorities, etc.).

The unpopularity of the idea of peace at any cost not only shows the specific character of the Ukrainian regime but, above all, it shows that society does not view the crisis as a catastrophe, which means that the conflict has acquired a format convenient for Kiev.

This format means, in particular, that, to paraphrase Trotsky, Ukraine is in a state of both peace and war with Russia, taking advantage of each of these states. For example, over the first 11 months of 2017, Ukrainian exports to Russia grew by 12 percent and brought Ukraine U.S. $360 million more than a year before. Two-thirds of Ukrainian coal imports come from Russia, including 80 percent of anthracite, which has become scarce due to the blockade of Donbass.

The war has advantages, too. Of course, they would have disappeared in the event of a full-scale conflict, but Kiev is confident that this will never happen. In a situation like this, it finds it simpler to mobilize society, convince it to put up with difficulties and, most importantly, format the political and information space in an advantageous way. Beneficiaries of this reformatting include not only the government but also a wide range of parties and politicians who supported the Euromaidan. For example, there is a segment among supporters of the Batkivshchina Party, led by Yulia Timoshenko, and the Radical Party, led by Oleg Lyashko, who, judging by public opinion polls, do not support either a confrontation with Russia or the current policy of historical memory. Obviously, these are former supporters of the Party of Regions and communists, who have realized that the successors to these parties will not be allowed to win anyway and that power can be contested only by pro-Euromaidan parties. Therefore, they side with forces that are close to their own ideological position, guided by their social slogans and disregarding their greater geopolitical and humanitarian radicalism in comparison with the current authorities. But such a choice can be made only if one is confident that this radicalism will not lead to a great war and catastrophe.

So, the current format of the conflict strengthens the political regime in Ukraine, which is actually the closest to regimes of limited political competition, such as those that existed in some countries of Central and Eastern Europe during the interwar period in the 20th century, or some Latin American countries (Brazil and Guatemala) after the Second World War. There is formal pluralism and a real possibility of succession of power there, yet real power can be contested only by forces from one political spectrum, whereas forces that are beyond this spectrum are restrained and can only aspire to seats in parliament.

History shows that such regimes can exist for a very long time, especially with external support, which Kiev certainly has, if we mean support for its geopolitical policy, rather than concrete persons in power. It is another thing that such support is limited -- the West will not fight for Ukraine and will not provide aid on a scale comparable to the Marshall Plan.

The Georgian scenario for changing this regime is theoretically possible but unlikely, because several factors prevent the success of a would-be Ukrainian Ivanishvili. The conflict in Ukraine is felt more sharply because in 2014 it lost territories that it had controlled all the years of independence, while Georgia lost control over Abkhazia in 1993 and over South Ossetia even earlier. The August 2008 war only showed the impossibility of regaining these territories. But the most important thing is that, whereas Georgia was an obvious loser in that war, Ukraine has some positive dynamics, which was discussed above. In addition, differences between Georgians and Russians have always been obvious, whereas for Kiev the current conflict is a way to recode a large part of the population and form the nation on the basis of the thesis that "Ukraine is different from Russia." Finally, the evolution of Georgia should not be exaggerated. Diplomatic relations between Tbilisi and Moscow have not been restored, while relations between Kiev and Moscow have never been broken off. Although Georgia has toned down its anti-Russian rhetoric, it keeps moving towards the Euro-Atlantic structures.

Ukraine is moving in the same direction. Its problems will obviously grow in the near future. Already now, due to migration, the population of the territory now controlled by Kiev is less than 30 million people (judging by bread consumption statistics).

This means it has decreased by more than 40 percent since 1991. In addition, the largest, postwar, generation is now entering the mortality age, while the generation of newborns is the smallest over the years of independence. Yet, the territory of the country has retained its geopolitical value and, regardless of whether Ukraine is granted formal NATO membership or not, American troops can be permanently deployed in its territory during the current Cold War -- or, more precisely, their presence can be broadened, because several thousand NATO troops, half of them Americans, have been involved in military exercises permanently held at the Yavorovo test range since the spring of 2015.

As regards Ukraine's admission to NATO, many Western European countries oppose this option. On the other hand, they have not proposed any detailed plan for Ukraine's non-aligned status. Objectively, such status would be best guaranteed by the specifics of the state's internal structure, when accession to a military alliance would require a consensus of the regions. In an interview with the Atlantic magazine in November 2016, Henry Kissinger echoed this idea: "I favor an independent Ukraine that is militarily non-aligned. If you remove the two Donbass regions from eastern Ukraine, you guarantee that Ukraine is permanently hostile to Russia, since it becomes dominated by its Western part, which only joined Russia in the 1940s. The solution, then, is to find a way to give these units a degree of autonomy that gives them a voice in military entanglements, but otherwise keeps them under the governance of Ukraine." (Goldberg, 2016)

But since this voice remains solitary, the negative attitude of Western European countries to Ukraine's accession to NATO is only a short-term tactical choice which may change later.

It is also unlikely that the implementation of the Minsk Agreement will help create the model described by Kissinger, because a "voice in military entanglements" is a trait of a confederation. Meanwhile, the status of individual Donbass regions, as defined by the above agreement, is far even from that provided for in a federation. Rather, it is similar to the limited autonomy of ethnic Serbs in Croatia, which they received under the Erdut agreement.

Therefore, even if the Minsk Agreement is implemented, which is unlikely, the existing political regime in Ukraine will hardly change.

As regards Russians and Russian-speaking Ukrainians, in a situation where they cannot change this regime through elections, they will try to adapt to the existing reality, at least outwardly.

The described inertial scenario is basic and most probable. However, it is not the only possible one due to the weakness of the Ukrainian state (in particular, due to the growing influence of right-wing radicals who may obtain parallel power), the unstable situation in the world, and the unpredictability of Russia's policy in the long term, as Moscow may decide that Kiev has crossed certain red lines established by it. If this state collapses due to external factors, the identity of a large part of its present population may change very quickly, as evidenced by the experience of the 17th century and recent decades.

Alexei V. Popov is an expert with the Kiev Center of Political Studies and Conflictology

[Jul 27, 2018] Ukraine over the Edge Russia, the West and the New Cold War by Gordon M. Hahn

Notable quotes:
"... an essential warning against a continuation of the frivolous and dangerous policies of regime change adopted by the West after the end of the Cold War ..."
"... The result is both a sophisticated, multilevel analysis of how and why Ukraine emerged as the key hotspot in East-West relations, and an indispensable guide for those wishing to understand the origins of the New Cold War. ..."
"... Gordon M. Hahn challenges simplistic and often misleading narratives by the media and politicians and provides a corroboration that the Maidan massacre was a false flag mass killing ..."
"... They show Maidan's quasi-revolution was driven by international geopolitics, supporting counterposed Western and Russian "civilizationist" beliefs, and deep divisions within Ukrainian society itself, not a wellspring of widespread aspiration to Western-style democracy. ..."
Jul 27, 2018 | www.amazon.com

Review "Ukraine's 2013-2014 revolution, its civil war, and Russia's annexation of the Crimea have been succeeded by newer crises, but political analyst Hahn uses detailed reportage and geopolitical theory to argue for their long-term significance, presenting Ukraine as a troubling turning point in Russo-American relations and a case study of how democratization efforts can go awry...with Russia atop American headlines to an extent not seen since the end of the Cold War, [this book] will be a strong addition to global studies collections" -- Booklist

"It was not only Ukraine that went over the edge in 2014, but the whole European security system disintegrated, while a 'new cold war' chills relations between the great powers. In this masterful study, Gordon Hahn examines how Ukraine's internal divisions combined with external lines of fragmentation to create an explosive mix, which in turn intensified domestic conflicts. The result is an internationalized civil conflict, with catastrophic consequences for Ukraine and the world. Hahn is one of the few scholars with the knowledge and discernment to make sense of it all. His impressively well-researched and well-written book is essential reading."--Richard Sakwa, University of Kent

"This impressively researched and strongly argued book is an essential corrective to the myths that have been generated concerning the crisis in Ukraine, and an essential warning against a continuation of the frivolous and dangerous policies of regime change adopted by the West after the end of the Cold War ." --Anatol Lieven, Professor, Georgetown University in Qatar and author of Ukraine and Russia, A Fraternal Rivalry

Ukraine Over the Edge is a rigorous analysis of the cultural, historical, and intellectual origins of the Ukrainian crisis. While stressing that blame for the latest phase of this crisis is shared all around, Hahn traces its domestic origins to the militancy of the opposition to president Yanukovych, and its international origins to NATO expansion, which he regards as militarized democracy-promotion. The result is both a sophisticated, multilevel analysis of how and why Ukraine emerged as the key hotspot in East-West relations, and an indispensable guide for those wishing to understand the origins of the New Cold War. "--Nicolai N. Petro, Silvia-Chandley Professor of Peace Studies and Nonviolence, University of Rhode Island

" Ukraine Over the Edge is a very useful contribution to understanding origins and key developments of the crisis in this important European and post-Soviet country. Gordon M. Hahn challenges simplistic and often misleading narratives by the media and politicians and provides a corroboration that the Maidan massacre was a false flag mass killing ." --Ivan Katchanovski, University of Ottawa About the Author Gordon M. Hahn is an advisory board member at Geostrategic Forecasting Corporation, Chicago, and at the American Institute of Geostrategy (AIGEO), Los Angeles; a contributing expert for Russia Direct, and a senior researcher at the Center for Terrorism and Intelligence Studies (CETIS), San Jose, California. He lives in Mountain View, California.

Preface

As I read, listened and watched Western sources on the events surrounding the mass demonstrations on central square in Kiev during winter 2013-2014, a sense of deja vu became undeniable. Having studied the nature of terrorism in Russia's North Caucasus, the causes and course of the August 2008 Georgian-Russian war, and other events involving Russia, I had seen a pattern of misrepresentation of these events by most Western, especially American, media, academia and government sources. There was a clear sense that this pattern was being repeated with regard to the events on the Maidan. Hence, I decided to investigate matters for myself and have come to a distinctly different conclusion regarding them than that imparted to the Western public.

Two years after the Maidan "revolution of dignity," it was already clear that the Western-backed overthrow of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich was not entirely a revolution and was ultimately in vain regardless of how one conceptualizes the events surrounding the fall-winter 2013-2014 demonstrations and violence on Kiev's Maidan. The movement was based initially on middle class opposition to corruption and soft authoritarianism and support for European integration. Ultimately, the nascent pro-democratic revolution was hijacked by neofascist elements that infiltrated the Maidan protests, overthrew the government, and then were themselves superseded by several key oligarchs, who always have thrived under the post-Soviet ancient regime. Thus, corruption and criminality have increased rather than decreased, European integration has stalled, and authoritarianism is not just in the corridors of power but on the streets under the yoke of roaming bands of neofascist groups seeking to foment a second, truly "national revolution."

Despite the all-too-numerous adepts of democratization and democratic transition, this is not the first, nor is it likely to be the last time when the West has misunderstood processes it has hoped for, encouraged, and often funded and helped to organize. The "Arab Spring" is only the most recent set of cases in point. Predictably, that spring's various revolutions became an Islamist winter spread across parts of the Middle East and North Africa, except in Egypt -- where a counterrevolution returned the status quo ante.

Similarly, in 1991 the adepts of democratic transitions or "transitology" got it wrong. Few post-Soviet states became democracies because the "democratic revolution" that overthrew the reformist late Soviet regime of Mikhail Gorbachev's perestroika was assumed to be a "revolution from below" led by societal opposition forces bent on living in a democracy. This was true in the Baltic republics, but in most cases the elements of democratic revolution from below were subsumed by a mix of less civil state bureaucrat-led revolutions from above and nationalist-led revolutions from below. In Russia, the revolution was largely one led from above by the Russian President Boris Yeltsin and the Russian state apparatus against the partially reformed but crumbling central Soviet state and regime. In Central Asia and elsewhere, there was simply a change of signboards, rebranding for still very authoritarian regimes. The partial exception is Kyrgyzstan's tulip revolutions and counterrevolutions, which also had strong elements from above. Thus, it is no surprise that both Ukraine's 2004 Orange revolution, as 1 noted at the time, and the 2013-2014 Maidan "revolution of dignity," as I predicted, proved to be something less than the democratic revolutions "transitologists" hailed.

In addition to elements of revolution from below, the Maidan revolt also has elements of revolution from above led by some state officials and state-tied oligarchs. Moreover, the revolution from below was under considerable influence from national chauvinist, ultranationalist, and neofascist groups. The Maidan ultranationalist-oligarchic regime now has little popular support and few accomplishments in democratization, and is little different from the previous, except for a marked increase in western Ukrainian neofascism (both in the corridors of power and on the streets) and a near catastrophic economy. Revolutions are indeed unwieldy things, not very manageable once unleashed.

The international geopolitical consequences have been even more deleterious. A deepening Russian-Western confrontation over Ukraine risks recreating a bipolar "world split apart," with Russia more inclined than ever to forge alliances with regimes opposed to American and Western power.

This book is dedicated to clarifying these events and their consequences, something that is imperative given the misleading government and media characterizations of them. This study is based on Western, Ukrainian and Russian sources, including media reports, reliable primary and secondary Internet sources, and official documents of governments and international organizations.

They show Maidan's quasi-revolution was driven by international geopolitics, supporting counterposed Western and Russian "civilizationist" beliefs, and deep divisions within Ukrainian society itself, not a wellspring of widespread aspiration to Western-style democracy.

[Jul 27, 2018] The story Browder refuses to tell is far more interesting than the one he wrote for the book

Not one review mentions possible close tied of Brower and MI6. Not a single review compare his book with Netrasov story or Alex Krainer's book
Jul 27, 2018 | www.amazon.com
1.0 out of 5 stars

By J. Koerner on January 9, 2018

The story Browder refuses to tell is far more interesting than the one he wrote for the book.

I found the book quite easy to put down: I got tired of all the chapters about how he made so much money following the fall of the Soviet Union. But Norman Pearlstine's statement that "Browder's business saga meshes well with the story of corruption and murder in Vladimir Putin's Russia" is more true than he realizes. With the release of Glenn Simpson's 20 hours of testimony before three Senate committees we now know that there is a great deal of information Browder failed to disclose. I'll let Simpson tell it:

He was willing to, you know, hand stuff off to the DOJ anonymously in the beginning and cause them to launch a court case against somebody, but he wasn't interesting in speaking under oath about, you know, why he did that ... All of this -- his determined effort to avoid testifying under oath, including running away from subpoenas and changing -- frequently changing lawyers and making lurid allegations against us, including that, you know, he thought we were KGB assassins in the parking lot of Aspen, Colorado when we served the subpoena, all raised questions
in my mind about why he was so determined to not have to answer questions under oath about things that happened in Russia.

I'll add that, you know, I've done a lot of Russia reporting over the years. I originally met William Browder back when I was a journalist at the Wall Street Journal when I was doing stories about corruption in Russia. I think the first time I met him he lectured me about -- I was working on a story about Vladimir Putin corruption and he lectured me about how have Vladimir Putin was not corrupt and how he was the best thing that ever
happened to Russia.

But returning to the detailed discussion of my work, we investigated William Browder's business practices in Russia, we began to understand maybe what it was he didn't want to talk about, and as we looked at that we then began to look at his decision to surrender his American citizenship in 1998. At that point somewhere in there the Panama papers came out and we discovered that he had incorporated shell companies offshore in the mid 1990s, in 1995 I believe it was in the British Virgin Islands, and that at some point his hedge fund's shares had been transferred to this offshore company. This offshore company was managed -- several of his offshore companies were managed by the Panamanian law firm called Mossack Fonseca, which is known now for setting up offshore companies for drug kingpins, narcos, kleptos, you name it. They were servicing every bad guy around. And I'm familiar with them from other money laundering and corruption and tax evasion investigations that I've done.I'll note parenthetically that William Browder talks a lot about the Panama papers and the Russians who are in the Panama papers without ever mentioning that he's in the Panama papers.

Now, I choose to believe Simpson, who not only chose to submit to 20 hours of Senate committee but then demand that it be made public, and not Browder, who fled from Simpson in the parking lot of an Aspen resort, later claiming he thought Simpson was KBG.

By Decorum on December 13, 2017
Heed the titular warning! Stay well away!

This is not a book to be set aside lightly... in the words of Dorothy Parker. It has been many years since I have read a book this bad. And many more since I finished one this bad. In recent years I have been more able to simply give up on bad books, ignoring the sunk cost fallacy that previously drove me to soldier on - perhaps it's an increasing awareness of the value of time, but nowadays I will bail out when it is clear I've made a big mistake. But this one was recommended by a friend whose taste I had no reason to doubt so I kept on, chapter after gruelling chapter, hoping for some epiphany or quality uptick. Let me save you from the same mistake.

One service this book does render, though, is to remind you, if you need it, that writing is hard. You may be the world's most fabulous person (well, second most fabulous - the author of this book is pretty clear about who occupies the top spot) but it don't make you a good writer, see. So the first important thing to know is that Bill Browder cannot write. He strings together cliches, name drops, humble brags (and regular brags too) but he can't write. No matter; perhaps the content can make up for it? I'm sure there are plenty of books where the content redeems the awful style, such as... well, I'm sure there are plenty. But the second thing to know going in is that the story is a pretty tedious, linear tale of BB's triumphs in the world of finance and then, as he calls it, "human rights". The problem, I think, is that the tone of the book is very smug and, despite the occasional and obviously cynical self-deprecation, deeply self-satisfied. The author has a real tin ear for his tone, I think, and it's well illustrated by a very early part of the story. He arrives in Poland in his first job, charged with the assessment and, hopefully, revival of a failing bus company. He expresses his deep sorrow and pity for the poor, poor workers and wonders what he can do to help. Meanwhile, he comes across a class of stocks in Poland that seem to him to be ridiculously underpriced. Aha! thinks the naive reader - I know where this is going: he will get the bus company to invest in these stocks ad save the day. But no! It turns out that these narratives shall not meet: he buys the stocks himself and makes out like a bandit, and he recommends that the bus company be shut down, throwing all the workers on the street. He is very, very sorry about the latter, of course, but, on the other hand, he has discovered his true calling as a value investor! Gaudeamus!

The author seems to have absolutely no appreciation of his role as a functionary in a very particular social system and it makes all of his carefully laid out social conscience ring hollow and renders his thoroughly documented tears crocodilian.

By EBaiz on February 15, 2018
two wrongs dont make a right

Both sides of this story are doing horrible things and the writer thinks what he did was correct!
This is a story where the writer only criticizes the horrible things the russian goverment did to him and how some oligarchs steal tax money (as everywhere but blatantly) but fails to realize that what he did, purchasing people-owned companies at fractions of a penny on the dollar and knowing it, while taking advantage of the imperfect systems put in place for the distribution of those companies' wealth to the people of that country, as he perfectly describes in this book, is also wrong in the first place. He fails to understand he actually hurt the people of that country when he bought shares at a "steal" price as he writes, he thinks he is doing the right thing because of his wall street mentality, no rules, prey on whomever gives an opportunity. Sad, but it's the world we live in today

By NYNYGuy on May 30, 2016
Greedy Hedgie's Delusions of Ritousness

Browder's story seems like a complete scam. First, he personally profited to the tune of $2 BN off the backs of the Russian people, taking advantage of inequities in the voucher system used with the dissolution of the USSR. He never mentions how much he personally made, as that would have cast too much reality on the sheer vanity, self-aggrandizement, and sanctimonious rubbish that is the rest of the story. More pointedly, he does not speak to how his money provided access to the highest levels of government, John McCain, and greased the wheels of the European legal system. Take for example, his ability to miraculously get two Interpol Red Notices removed within days of their placement. The Magnitsky case was terrible but he clearly uses it as a sanctimonious shield to get public sympathy and protection. I could go on but the bottom line is do not waste your time or money. Browder is one of the bad guys- at best a delusional narcissist, or more likely a greedy scam artist, pulling the wool over everyone's eyes.

By Critical Rationalist on July 18, 2015
What a greedy narcissist. Sheesh.

After finishing Masha Gessen's "Man Without a Face" (insightful) Karen Dawisha's "Putin's Kleptocracy" (a mind-boggling, devastating indictment of Putin and his cronies), and David Hoffman's "Billion Dollar Spy" (reads like a thriller novel), I was hoping that Bill Browder's book would provide some additional depth and an interesting perspective on the thoroughly corrupt workings of post-Soviet Russia. It does not.

Like Browder, I went to Russia numerous times -- but didn't have an office there as he did -- during the 90s and did a number of deals there. Unlike Browder, I speak the language and know Russian business and legal culture quite well. (I'm an average American, born and raised in Ohio, where I still live, but I do have a Russian wife, whom I met on one of my trips there in the 1990s.)

Browder is an extremely unsympathetic figure: Although he doesn't admit to it in the book, he was blinded by greed and arrogance to the point where he viewed his marriage and his son as of only trivial importance compared to his mission in life to get rich. He went to Russia to get something for nothing, thinking he was being shrewd. His utter ignorance of Russian business and Russian culture permeate the book -- his condescending attitude is similar to that of a British governor-general back in 1940s Iran, when the British role was limited to exploiting Iran by grabbing its oil for a pittance while speaking contemptuously of the locals. Browder contemptuously describes Russian attempts to reign him in: "Russians will gladly -- gleefully even -- sacrifice their own success to screw their neighbor." Yet he is oblivious to the fact that he himself, without any second thoughts, sacrificed his own family for the prospect of making just one more deal, just one more deal, and then just one more deal. American citizenship too was just another expendable in his all-consuming quest for riches.

Russia in the 1990s was a sea of corruption, intrigue, mafia protection rackets, turf battles, economic chaos, incompetence, and power grabs. Browder injected himself into it, completely ignorant of what he was getting into, determined to take advantage. He got burned.

"Red Notice" doesn't provide any perspective or depth; it isn't even particularly interesting. Browder's narcisssm and self-justifications permate the book, making it extremely unpleasant to read.

By AlanH on September 26, 2017
Russophobe Shill

The author is, inter alia, wanted in Russia for tax fraud and so, obviously, will say everything he can that is negative about Russia. His background and backers are also very suspicious, to my mind anyway.

I found the book to be nothing but hype. This was confirmed when I read Alex Krainer's "The Killing of William Browder: Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception." This excellent book - with factual content and well referenced - tears Browder to shreds. As he deserves to be.

But the sheeple will continue to want to believe this fiction - it suits the current american meme.

By Sorin Strugariu on October 29, 2017
I recommend to turn off the TV ( tel-a-vision or the-lies-on-vision ...

The ' truth ' and the brainwashed herd of the sheeple. The death of the Anglo-American-Zionist Empire. For those who think for themselves and cares for the others, here in the USA ( former United States of America, now United Slaves of America ) and all-over the World, for those of you in the research of ' whatreallyhappened ', I recommend to turn off the TV ( tel-a-vision or the-lies-on-vision ) and read...R E A D INDEPENDENT books and watch INDEPENDENT documentaries ! Books like ' The Killing of William Browder: Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deceptions ' - NOT for sale on 'amazon.com' - WHY ???!!!...Documentaries like ' The Magnitsky act: Behind the Scenes ', produced by filmmaker Andrei Nekrasov ( a fierce critic of President Putin ).

By Maria S Plaksina on June 6, 2015
Crook got his chances in Russia ----- HE IS A LIER!!!!

Complete Rubbish! Not only he concealed a lot of facts - he fabricated a lot of them. The book is complete fiction, Why he doesnt mention that Magnitsky helped Hermitage create schemes to avoid taxes, crate shell-companies to buy stocks of Gazprom (foreigners can not buy Gazprom stocks), created shell companies in Cyprus and Kalmikia to pay joke taxes, hired disabled people to again lower taxes? etc He is a joke

Mr. Browder went to Russian in the early 90s to make quick cash - he did it by buying stocks from uneducated russians (similar to other russian oligarchs). Story of another greedy individual who wanted to become a billionaire fast - once he had to pay the price he become outraged by injustice of the system... XOXOXOXOXOX next time when you, Mr Browder, go to another developing country with the intention to rob the system be prepared to take the responsibility and do not whine about it like a little girl. A crook got upset that he didnt make as much money as he wanted and got kicked out from the country - what a joke.

BTW - the youtube video with Mr. Browder running away from the officer who served him subpoena is hilarious. If Mr Browder is so ethical and clean why he doesn't want to testify in court?

By max2015 on March 8, 2015
20% what readers want, the rest is poop!

This book came highly recommended to me by someone in the hedge fund industry. I was surprised at how bad it was. I was looking into insight as to how Bill Browder, who once ran the largest Russian hedge fund, made his fortune, estimated to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Instead the book was a very self serving book which I would identify as 20% self aggrandizement, self serving, 20% discussion of the arbitrage trades that made him rich, 60% discussion of the Sergie Magnitsky Act which he worked to pass. The book is full of contradictions including Browder's moral position and his self righteousness. It makes you wonder if anyone thought about this book in context of the 2008 financial markets collapse or did any research on Browder when reading it. Also, why does Browder today actively evade subpoenas to testify about what happened in American court as shown in Youtube videos?

The book is full of villains on both sides. Browder is the grandson of the former head of the US communist party. He gave up his US citizenship to become a British citizen in 1997. He worked for the criminal Robert Maxwell who had misappropriated corporate pension funds to live a flamboyant lifestyle, then he went to work with Edmond Safra as a partner in Hermitage Capital. Not only these global speculators but the book includes Mossad and a host of Russian oligarchs (all financed by Fred Goodwin's Royal Bank of Scotland). Browder's arbitrage was that Russian companies were severely undervalued because no other investors trusted Russian corporations and Russian rule of law. Whereas most other investors thought Russian companies were 100% un-investable, Browder figured many of them were only 50% un-investable and he invested in that 50% that was investable. After that arbitrage went away, he decided to start investigating Russian corporations for inside dealing and his activist strategy paid off but made many enemies. He was warned by numerous other investors that his life and others would be in danger for this. Everyone he works with leaves wreckage behind until he does the same. When one of his lawyers who gets less than 1% of coverage in the first half of the book dies in a Russian prison, he goes all out to try to get revenge on the Russians who he claims made tax fraud on the Russian government and him by seizing control of companies he owned. Many questions arise from the book some of which I list below.

(1) Browder's hedge fund is domiciled in Guernsey and Cayman Islands, notorious tax evasion locales, yet the premise of the second half of the book is to get revenge on corrupt Russian officials for stealing Russian tax money (his hundreds of millions of dollars)
(2) Browder is drawn to evil people and shady characters (Maxwell, oligarch companies, mossad, etc) like moths to a flame. Is it force of habit for him to fall into bad situations with them? Is it the US government's role to spend taxpayer money on exacting revenge for him on the crooked crowd he deals with? His friends are spoken with in great superlatives, his enemies despised. It is easy to imagine if you were a friend and became an enemy he would label you with epithets thus immediately.
(3) Browder becomes a British citizen (but a hedge fund deci or centi millionaire) yet he easily gets access to John McCain, Joe Lieberman and other US elected officials to get the Magnitsky act passed. Ultimately the Magnitsky act passes and Russia responds by banning all US adoptions of Russian children. For all you childless women looking to adopt Russian babies, thank the egotist Browder for your inability to do so going forward. Were you screwed in the 2008 financial markets collapse? The system may not work for you but it works for a global speculator who wants vengeance.
(4) But its worse. Browder goes to war with the Oligarchs who were funded by Royal Bank of Scotland and who defaulted on their loans from RBS. The UK citizens had to bail out RBS. Browder tries to utilize the British government to exact vengeance on the very same Oligarchs the British government is bailing out in some ways.
(5) Browder is the great example of the speculative hedge fund trader of the 90's and 00's run amok. He is a speculator, he was warned about the risks, he jumps headlong into them and knows Russia does not have American or British rule of law. But he expects the US and Britain to jump to his aid for his recklessness and bail him out like the other crooks of the 2008 vintage. EVEN THOUGH HE IS A BRITISH CITIZEN.
(6) Lookup the Wall Street Journal articles or Youtube videos about how the cowardly Browder runs away from being served by a subpoena and has constantly sought to avoid subpoena's from the Russians who are countersuing him in US and British court. If he is for rule of law, why not work his way through the legal systems. Seems like there is another side to the story.

By Jeremy J. Glover on August 19, 2015
Crack Cocaine Seller

Hey, guys and gals, the man is a shark. An investment banker. He'd sell his own grandmother if he thought he's make a profit. And now he's trying to profit by selling his own story, all teary-eyed about his lawyer and his quest for "justice." Barf. He wants to expose Kremlin corruption, happily forgetting Wall St. corruption that he hoped would make HIM millions. He only saw the light when other folks made millions and he got arrested. Kinda like any low-life Baltimore drug pusher. Please don't buy his line of crack cocaine.

By Jeremiah Gelles MD on August 18, 2017
The Kettle is Black

This is a thrilling page-turner of financial and political intrigue. The problem is that it is much like the pot calling the kettle black. Just about everything of which Browder accuses the Russian kleptocrats is equaled or excelled by the US robber barons and the agencies of violence wielded by the US government. Browder also digresses from time to time into the history of the USSR about which he knows nothing except the propaganda that we have been fed, most of which originates, ironically enough, from the very oligarchs he so justifiably criticizes.

By J. wilson on June 23, 2018
Paean to self

Very interesting to hear an insider's experience of Russia privatization and the politics of the 90's and early 2000s. I enjoyed that part.
That said, I found Browder spent a lot of time tooting his own horn and virtue signaling . He seemed quite impressed with himself and spends much of the book detailing why you should be too.
I never thought Putin was a good guy.
I never thought neocon/ deep state John McCain was a good guy. ( Browder does).
I don't think Browder made his gazillions by being a good guy. A lot of ordinary Russians got ripped off . Browder and a lot of others got rich.

By A.I. 8706 on May 18, 2015
The narrator ruins the narrative

This is a fairly interesting, if pretty unsurprising, story of high-level graft and corruption in Russia. Yes, Putin and the Russian government are rife with corruption, and the rules are subject to change on a whim. That should be obvious to anyone who paid any attention to Russia's preparation for the Sochi Olympics. I'm even inclined to take Browder's story about the torture and eventual death of Sergei Magnitsky (who he describes as a tax lawyer, but was actually an accountant) at face value.

But where Browder really grates is with his remarkable lack of self-awareness and out-of-touch declarations. At one point, for instance, in the run-up to the 1996 elections, in which there was a chance that the Communist candidate, Gennady Zyuganov, would win the presidency and potentially re-nationalize state companies, Browder said that he could deal with food shortages, hyperinflation, or any number of terrible conditions, but what he couldn't stomach was re-nationalization of industry. So, according to this guy, people starving and their savings evaporating into thin air is tolerable, but the worst thing imaginable is him losing his gains from fleecing Russian peasants. Solid guy, Browder.

For some background-- when the USSR fell, Russia embarked on a program of "voucher privatization" where every citizen received vouchers that they could use to bid on the shares of previously state-owned enterprises. Since Russia has incredible resource wealth, these were quite valuable. Unfortunately, in a country with no history of any kind of capital markets, the overwhelming majority of people had no clue what use they could get out of stock ownership. Immediately after they were issued, you could buy a voucher for a bottle of cheap vodka. And the people who became the oligarchs, as well as western vultures like Browder, did just that. Eventually, these shares sold at incredibly low valuations, and investors made a killing. But what Browder doesn't mention is that these absurdly low valuations almost certainly came about, in large part, from the fact that investors hate uncertainty. The possibility that a Zyuganov would come to power and re-nationalize state-owned enterprises was a real possibility, so plenty of investors stayed on the sidelines. Not Browder-- he jumped in, and when (surprise!) the Russian government behaved like the Russian government is wont to do, he acted like he was the victim of the world's worst injustice. Sure, what happened was in some way unfair. So was all the vultures jumping in to take advantage of peasants. Browder had no problem ripping off Russian peasants while extolling himself as a "great capitalist," but, when the Russian government took him in, he complained about the big bad Russians. It was extremely tiresome.

There were other places where his tone was equally annoying. He spent time talking about how "sexy" his second wife was/is, how she's "not like those other Russian girls that are just after money," and how many other people wanted to date her and how awesome he was because she chose him. Sergei Magnitsky's death is a sad story from a sad place. It's too bad the person to tell it is such a wildly out of touch hypocrite.

By Patricia5115 on March 22, 2015
A Self-Congratulatory Book with a Mission

The book was fun to read, like a Marvel comic book. Truly Bill Browder is, according to Bill Browder, a brilliant man willing to take daring risks where he sees an opportunity for personal gain. And I have to agree with him. With his inherited genetic intelligence, and some of the best education money can buy, he made himself enormously rich profiting from financial transactions that produced nothing of real value. I found this book to be quite self-congratulatory, written with no embarrassment for taking advantage of a whole population.
As Browder writes, "I found that to transition from communism to capitalism, the Russian government had decided to give away most of the state's property to the people. The government was going about this in a number of ways, but the most interesting was something called voucher privatization. The government granted one privatization certificate to every Russian citizen---roughly 150 million people in total -- and taken together these were exchangeable for 30 % of nearly all Russian companies." "The market price of the vouchers equaled 3 billion this meant that the valuation of the entire Russian economy was only 10 billion! That was one-sixth the value of Wal-Mart!" "Russia had 24% of the word's natural gas, 9% of the world's oil, and produced 6.6 % of the world's steel, among many other things. Yet this incredible trove of resources [owned by ordinary Russian citizens] was trading for a mere 10 billion! Even more astonishing was that there were no restrictions on who could purchase these vouchers. I could buy them, anyone could buy them." He recounts, "The Russian people had no idea what to do with the vouchers when they received them for free from the state and, in most cases, were happy to trade them for a $7 bottle of vodka or a few slabs of pork." Mr. Browder took advantage of their ignorance and brought millions of vouchers from the Russian people for a pittance of their true value. This is something to brag about? It is not laudable to buy something for a pittance of its real worth, from owners who have no idea of its true value. It is reprehensible. It was disturbing to me to see no introspection on the rightness or wrongness of beating someone out of his or her money.
Mr. Browder describes in his Sidanco deal the feeling he has when an opportunity for ungodly gains presents itself, "I had that tingling, greedy tension in my gut, similar to when I saw my $2,000 Polish investment multiply by nearly ten times, or when I unearthed the Russian voucher scheme."
Greed is not a virtue, Mr. Browder. It is a vice.

Reviewer Ian Kaplan wrote:
The second half of the book is about how Putin's gang tried to crush Hermitage Capital and everyone associated with it."

And, I would add, how Browder's gang is trying to crush Putin.
It makes me think that a large part of Mr. Browder's dogged determination in pushing the Maginsky Act through Congress, and signed into law, was not so much a humanitarian turn of the leaf for him, but a strategy to enlist the whole backing of the United States into his personal war with Putin, who put him out of a lucrative business in Russia.

By william schaffer on March 21, 2018
Confirmation that Russia is a very bad place.

I was familiar with Hermitage and Browder so it was not "news" to me. I feel Browder makes himself look good when in reality he was a jerk.
I don't wish him well!
Bill Schaffer

By exurbanite on February 25, 2018
Skepticism Advisable

Bill Browder is a shrewd fellow, at least up to a point. He saw an opportunity to make money after the collapse of Communism in Russia. He moved to Moscow, started a hedge fund, and succeeded in a big way. He made piles of money in essentially the same way the Russian oligarchy made it, by purchasing formerly state owned assets at hugely discounted rates.

It all worked beautifully for a while, but clever as he was Browder didn't realize he was living in a fool's paradise. Rather than remaining cool and quiet while making money, he publicly accused certain local enterprises of corruption. He did this, rather naively, in a country notoriously resentful of foreign interference in its affairs. Furthermore, there are indications that he himself was not above involvement in dodgy dealings, including fudging on taxes and sneaking funds into tax havens.

Not surprisingly, Browder, away on a trip, was barred from reentering Russia. Authorities raided his Moscow offices, confiscating files and computers. Although Browder managed to get his staff out of Russia, a man named Sergei Magnitsky whom Browder calls his lawyer, though he was apparently only an auditor, chose not to leave. This was a grave error, as poor Magnitsky became the foil for Russian displeasure with Browder. He was jailed, beaten, denied medical treatment, and died in prison. Meanwhile, a couple of thugs attached to the KGB, Russia's secret police, extorted large sums of money from Browder via a complex fraud, presumably accomplished with the tacit consent of establishment superiors.

Browder used Magnitsky's death to launch a major and eventually successful lobbying campaign for a U.S. law which came to be known as the Magnitsky Act. The law imposing sanctions on Russian officials responsible for Magnitsky's death. The Russians retaliated by placing Browder on the Interpol wanted list and later sentencing him in absentia to nine years in prison for tax fraud.

"Red Notice" is written in the fashionably breezy and colloquial style seemingly favored by many professional ghost writers. Not surprisingly, it portrays Browder as a skilled and principled financier who, prompted by the Magnitsky tragedy, turns himself into a towering figure in the world of human rights.

There are odd omissions in descriptions of Browder's family life. Divorce from his first wife is mentioned only in passing; although much ado is made over his meeting his glamorous Russian second wife, she fades entirely from later portions of the manuscript. "Red Notice" is a work of considerable interest. However, given the many controversies that hover over Browder's life and reputation, I believe it wise to view its contents with a generous degree of skepticism.

By El Briano on February 15, 2015
Hero with Somewhat Tarnished Halo

Other reviewers have accurately summarized the book, and justly praised Browder's commitment and courage in seeking a measure of justice for the brutal treatment, leading to death, of Sergei Magnitsky. My comment will focus on a disquieting subtext babout browder's activities in setting up and running his hedge fund.

Browder's rise to prominence with his Hermitage Fund followed the classic MBA playbook: find and exploit undervaluation. Fair enough in a financial world of transparency and disclosure where "consenting adults" can presumably fend for themselves. But this was not exactly the environment in Russia in the early 1990s. In its attempted transition from communism to some form of capitalism, the Russian government granted "privatization certificates" to the people - one certificate per citizen, about 150 million in total. Browder found that these certificates, in the aggregate, were exchangeable for about a 30 percent interest in newly privatized Russian companies.

In theory, this should have been a promising financial arrangement for the impoverished Russian people, particularly given the country's wealth of natural resources and the p[otential of its energy sector. But after decades of communism, capitalism was a largely unknown concept in day-to-day practice. Controlling interests were diverted to a well-connected oligarchical minority, who saw the companies more as ATMs rather than what we in the West would call modern corporations with appropriate disclosure and governance standards. Companies were valued at a tiny fraction of comparable Western entities, and the Russian stock market, such as it was, had little volume and virtually no transparency.

Browder had the insight to realize that the participation certificates were ludicrously undervalued in relation to the potential net worth of Russian companies. By purchasing large numbers of these certificates from the essentially clueless Russian citizenry for the functional equivalent of pennies on the dollar in relation to underlying value, Browder was able to position his Hermitage Fund to get in on the ground floor of a stock market that was virtually certain to rise dramatically as the potential of the Russian economy came to be understood in the Western world.

Depending on one's perspective, this is either an instance of brilliant, if amoral, take-the-world-as-it-is MBA-ism, or a classic example of a city slicker fleecing the rubes in a manner that would be much more difficult to pull off in a more sophisticated financial environment. I lean toward the latter position, and surely am not the only one dazed by the irony of Browder, grandson of a one-time head of the U.S. Communist Party, so unapologetically exploiting the ignorance of the Russian populace for capitalist gain.

Browder deserves all the kudos he's received for his work on the Magnitsky matter. But his Hermitage Fund (and its progeny and imitators) helped give visibility (though not transparency) and liquidity, as well as an aura of respectability, to the previously "undernourished" Russian stock market. Browder's investors did well, as did numbers of average Russians (though not necessarily those who sold the participation certificates). Principal beneficiaries, however, were the oligarchs and the well-connected favored few, the value of whose controlling interests soared greatly. In part, Browder was an enabler of the system he came (rightly) to despise and fight against.

By Scott Shorey on July 31, 2015
Whitewash Job

It seems Browder is trying to whitewash his own reputation and the part he played in the disasterous privitazation of Russian businesses after the collapse of the Soviet Union. He was an active and avid participant in buying up shares of companies for pennies on the dollar which helped to impoverish Russians for a generation. In addition his part in the death of Sergei Magnitsky was shameful. Yes Browder and Magnitsky uncoverd massive fraud but ultimately Browder decided that the money was more important than his "friend's" life. Passige of the Magnitsky Law slightly punished the perpetrators but he didn't need to die and Browder should be ashamed of himself as well.

[Jul 27, 2018] Grand Deception The Truth About Bill Browder, the Magnitsky Act and Anti-Russian Sanctions Alex Krainer 9780692131954 Amazo

Jul 27, 2018 | www.amazon.com
Product details
0 out of 5 stars Jareth Copus on July 19, 2018
A must read, regardless of political party of choice. A book that could save America, literaly

Well written, stringently researched and truly shines a light on the dark dealings of Bill Browder. Seamlessly disects the chapters of Bill browders book red notice bit by bit. Everyone should read this book.

[Jul 27, 2018] Key Magnitsky case witness may have been poisoned report

Notable quotes:
"... "no third-party involvement." ..."
"... "heartbreak grass." ..."
"... "cause for very serious concern," ..."
May 19, 2015 | www.rt.com
Russian businessman Aleksandr Perepelichny, a key witness in the Sergey Magnitsky case who died in southern England in November 2012, may have been poisoned, British media reported. Perepelichny allegedly cooperated with Swiss investigators looking into the death of Sergey Magnitsky and a $240 million money laundering case, involving Russian officials and organized crime.

Magnitsky was a Russian lawyer, who was held in pre-trial detention in connection with tax fraud, and died in 2009 due to being denied crucial medical treatment by prison officials.

His death caused an international outcry and led to the passing of the so-called Magnitsky Act by the US Congress in 2012, which punished a group of Russian state officials and law enforcers with a US asset freeze and a visa ban over alleged human rights violations.

READ MORE: 'Key witness' in Magnitsky case suddenly dies in UK - report

Shortly before testifying in the Magnitsky case, Perepelichny collapsed and died while jogging near his home near in Surrey, south of London.

The Surrey police initially found nothing suspicious about the 44-year-old man's death, saying that there was "no third-party involvement."

However, a pre-inquest hearing Monday has shed light on new facts in the case, which contradicted the initial conclusions by the police.

A top poisons expert examined a sample of Perepilichny's stomach contents last year and discovered the presence of a chemical strongly associated with a lethal plant toxin, the Independent newspaper reported.

Professor Monique Simmonds from Royal Botanic Gardens in Kew, London, told the court that the substance was extremely rare in nature and could only be obtained from gelsemium, a poisonous plant also known as "heartbreak grass."

The plant only grows in remote areas in Russia and China, and became known as a poison used by assassins in the two countries.

READ MORE: After Magnitsky: Dead lawyer's boss Browder and his legal hurdles – now in US

However, it isn't used very often. The most recent known use of gelsemium as a poison was the assassination of Chinese billionaire Huang Guang in 2011.

Lawyers representing the police at Surrey Coroner's Court in Woking acknowledged that the presence of the chemical "ion" in Perepilichny's system was a "cause for very serious concern," the Independent reported.

The new finding prompted the judge to reschedule a hearing in Perepilichny's case, due to begin Monday, until September as to allow more tests to be performed.

According to the Independent, the Surrey police may find themselves in hot water for negligence if Perepilichny's poisoning is confirmed, as the case would resemble the high-profile murder of Aleksandr Litvinenko in London in 2006.

Litvinenko, a former Russian security officer, died in hospital after being poisoned with radioactive Polonium 210, with his death acting as a stumbling block in relations between Russia and the UK.

[Jul 27, 2018] Browder Is Censoring a Film about Magnitsky

Notable quotes:
"... A documentary screening of Andrei Nekrasov's investigation comes to a halt due to behind-the-scenes schemes of an American billionaire. ..."
"... Originally appeared at Rusplt , translated by Mona Lita exclusively for SouthFront ..."
Jun 03, 2016 | southfront.org
A documentary screening of Andrei Nekrasov's investigation comes to a halt due to behind-the-scenes schemes of an American billionaire.

Nekrasov (c) in a scene from his new film (Photo: greens-efa.eu)

Originally appeared at Rusplt , translated by Mona Lita exclusively for SouthFront

Seems like the world has turned upside down. After decades of living under the conditions of censorship, Russia has generated an unprecedented desire for freedom. Europe, by contrast, is increasingly resorting to banning facts that are inconvenient for her. Myths that benefit politicians of the Old World are claimed as truth, while all the rest is, for example, Russian "propaganda". On this basis the obstacles to Mass Media activities are being fixed, while access to individual documentaries is being cut off from the viewer. One of these types of works is a film "the Magnitsky Act – behind the scenes", made by a Russian director Andrei Nekrasov, which is dedicated to a famous story about tax evasion, which later becomes the reason for the adoption of the American law with the same name.

Another screening of Nekrasov's film was to be held today, on May 27th as one of the short films at a festival in Grimstad, Norway [ SF editor: It wasn't screened]. Whether it will happen or not is not yet clear. The fact is that the film's authors now have a powerful opponent, an American billionaire and CEO of Hermitage Capital – William Browder, an author of the Sergei Magnitsky myth and his self-proclaimed political executor. Unhappy with Nekrasov's investigation, in which a version of an innocent businessman is being refuted, Browder launched an opposition campaign. He is not hesitating to use a whole arsenal of tools for this: direct political pressure, defender assaults and prosecution. A Norwegian publication Dagbladet writes about this.

According to the publication, for the sake of counteracting the film's circulation Browden held separate meetings with the Storting parliament members – Ingerd Skou from the "Høyre" Party and Morten Wold from the Progress Party. Both of them are also members of the Storting delegation in PACE, and this means they have European-scale influence. Moreover, Browder met with the leader of the Norwegian Party Venstre, Trine Skei Grande. In respect to Nekrasov's film the policy is set to be very critical, calling it propaganda. "Everyone knows that Russia is a master at conducting such campaigns", a publication quotes her words. It turns out she has not seen the film itself but believes in Browder's version.

In addition to politicians' support, Browder – an American with a British passport, enlisted the sympathy of human rights activists. The Norwegian Helsinki Committee is entirely on his side. A corresponding meeting took place during the visit of this country's businessman.

A sacrifice is required for human rights activists to exist. Magnitsky is the suitable candidate. Death in a Russian prison makes him a desirable target to human rights fanatics. In case this resource is not enough, Browder prepared a court appeal. "I have hired Norwegian attorneys. They have been ordered to take up the case", he explained to Dagbladet. Browder wants to sue not only the film director but also the film festival in Grimstad, if he did not remove the film from screening.

Right now, the festival organizers are resisting. According to the Executive Director Anita Svingen, they will refuse the showing of Nekrasov investigation only if the creators themselves will withdraw the film for legal reasons. Despite Browder's threats to sue the festival, its organizers invited him to a discussion that will take place after the viewing. They recalled that it was a Norwegian company that created the film, which guarantees him a sufficient level of confidence.

It should be noted that funding for Nekrasov's work is also European. The film received millions of krones from the Nordic Film and TV Fond, the Norwegian Film Institute (NFI), Norsk Film Institute and the Foundation Fritt Ord ("Free Word"). If those politicians who oppose the showing are outraged by this circumstance, then the Representative of NFI Mette Taraldsen reasonably noted that the very "form and task of documentaries is to raise critical questions and to cover the case from different angles". At the same time he also reminded that Andrei Nekrasov is one of the most experienced documentarians, and it makes no sense not to trust him.

Europe is afraid of free speech?

In fact, the Russian director is considered one of the masters in European documentary films. A partnership with Andrei Tarkovsky, training in Bristol and work on the British television network allowed him to sustain a professional status. His work has received numerous awards, including one at the Cannes Film Festival. An important factor in Nekrasov's reputation is that he is the current Russian president's enemy. Accusations that he "sold out" to the Kremlin obviously have no ground to stand on. "I used to make films that were quite critical of Putin, and such allegations hurt me deeply", he said.

When Nekrasov first began shooting the film, he implicitly believed in Browder's version. After all, all the major Western media consistently wrote and spoke about it with one voice. The adaptation of the story "about the conspiracy of Russian policemen killing the fighter of Magnitsky corruption" was assumed. It was only during the process of filming, when the director was introduced to the documents that he realized he was filming a lie. The version of the story that Browder circulated has little to do with reality, but rather serves the businessman's personal interests. This explains the powerful complex program to counter the film's showing and threats with multi-million dollar lawsuits to anyone involved in its spread. It's just that Browder's pride was hurt.

The first documents Nekrasov learned of were from Browder's famous site "the Untouchables", where Magnitsky exposes the corruption of investigators Karpov and Kuznetsov. As it turns out, there was no exposure. "There was an interrogation, and there was protocol, which shows that Magnitsky is in the midst of a heavy defensive struggle with the investigation. And he is not blaming any MIA officers, and doesn't even mention them", writes Nekrasov in his blog on the website "Echo of Moscow". "Since then (Fall of 2014) my "based on a true story" film began ripping at the seams. Each day I was more certain that it was based on a lie".

As a result, the director developed his own version of events that was built as a result of personally studying all sources. According to Nekrasov, Magnitsky was not an auditor but an accountant who was arrested for tax fraud. He died in prison not because of beatings or other illegal pressures but as a result of a fatal deterioration of health caused by being confined. Browder, as a political attack on Russia used his tragic death in retaliation for his expulsion from the country in 2005 and termination of business. And this is how his interests coincided the U.S. foreign policy objectives: it is how the "Magnitsky Act" was born, the effect of which has recently spread globally. The main thing that Nekrasov understood was that Magnitsky was not murdered and has not pressed charges against the investigators.

It is not surprising that Browder was so ready to actively oppose the showing of Nekrasov's film. Forces all too powerful are drawn into the story. The previous film showing in the European Parliament that was scheduled for April 27th, and it too met resistance and was cancelled. The organizers received a letter with threats from Browder and were unable to withstand pressure. A member of the European Parliament Heidi Hautala particularly mentioned this. She called the pressure "sudden and strong". The fact that the premier of this film was so easily removed from a scheduled screening in the European Parliament shows that the right to the freedom of speech is offered only to one side", said the film's screening organizer Natalia Veselnitskaya.
A near future will show how another attack of this unscrupulous billionaire will end. Nekrasov himself seems to hope for the best, and that the Europeans will still see his honest investigation and will draw conclusions. "An 'Oscar' is not necessary. But we will see the idols fall", said the director.

[Jul 27, 2018] Transformed Gas Markets Fuel US-Russian Rivalry, But Europe Plays Key Role Too by Morena Skalamera

US wants to leverage his dominance in Europe into gas market. That's can work as long as gas is plentiful. As soon as it became a scarcity the situation will radically change.
May 30, 2018 | www.russiamatters.org
This month, the Wall Street Journal reported that U.S. President Donald Trump has been pressuring Germany to drop its support for a major new Russian gas pipeline if Europe wants to avoid a trade war with Washington, while a senior U.S. diplomat warned that the project could be hit with U.S. sanctions; Russian President Vladimir Putin responded defiantly . This development, sadly, fuels the further politicization of the European gas market -- a space that, in many ways, has reflected the triumphs of a depoliticized, pro-market technocracy, which has managed to stimulate competition and lower prices irrespective of changing political trends. Just last year, Trump called on European countries to buy American liquefied natural gas, or LNG, which, for now, remains more expensive than Russia's pipeline gas. Certainly, the U.S. has much to gain on the global gas market, which has changed drastically over the past decade, as America rapidly transformed from an importer to an exporter. Europe's gas market, meanwhile, has much to gain from additional supply. But Trump's approach, especially if the latest reports are true, both alienates Western European partners and feeds into a sensationalist, simplistic portrayal of the new U.S. role's effect on Russia -- as a zero-sum game, in which these new, plentiful U.S. gas supplies serve as an antidote to Russia's "gas dominance" in Europe and hence to Moscow's political leverage.

In fact, even if Russia remains Europe's dominant gas supplier in the coming years -- as is likely -- it now has to play by EU rules and vie hard for market share, ultimately benefiting European consumers. America's gas boom has catalyzed this thriving competition, but an equally important factor has been a massive, long-term investment in infrastructure and regulation by Brussels. These EU efforts have done a great deal to weaken Moscow's geopolitical "gas power," which has never been uniform across the continent. Today, gas is a prized commodity but not a major weapon in East-West relations: Russia's gas leverage cannot harm the West, and neither does competition with U.S. gas pose a major threat to Russia as a state or, for now, to its gas behemoth, Gazprom. Moreover, in the near to medium term, Russian and U.S. gas companies may face many challenges in common : Both will be competing against new, price-lowering producers and grappling with ever "greener" regulations on the European market, while also trying to profit from Asia's thirst for energy.

[Jul 27, 2018] 3rd Russian LNG shipment to USA to arrive 26th July

Jul 27, 2018 | community.oilprice.com

Simon Hauser said:

How cheap could Russia produce to compete with growing US LNG exports?

Gazprom needs price around 4 $ per mmbtu in Europe to be profitable. Today in Europe are close to 8 $. US LNG long term imho need about 8 to 9 $ per mbbtu.

[Jul 27, 2018] Financial Times: Chinese Officials "Awed" by Trump's "Skill as a Strategist and Tactician"

Notable quotes:
"... You would do well to consult a dictionary on questions of spelling ..."
"... Trump is not merely mouthing platitudes about farmers or workers or the Rust Belt. He is bringing them back into the game for the first time in ages, and the other side (who considered them dead and gone) is furious. You cannot claim to be for the working class and not cheer a little, if you are being at all honest. ..."
"... But if he succeeds? Wow. ..."
"... According to the Center for Automotive Research's (CAR's) latest trade briefing, applying a 25-percent tariff on all automobile and parts imports would result in 2 million fewer U.S. vehicle sales, 715,000 fewer U.S. jobs and nearly $60 billion in lower U.S. economic output. ..."
"... I was stunned to see that and still don't quite know what to make of it. But the argument is basically, there is no real way to ramp up US auto production without investing in new capacity, which the auto companies are not going to do, period. And since domestic steel and aluminum capacity has already been decimated, and the domestic steel and aluminum producers are even more unwilling to add new capacity than the auto companies, the only effect of the tariffs is to dramatically raise materials costs. ..."
Jul 27, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Posted on July 26, 2018 by Yves Smith A Financial Times article, The Chinese are wary of Donald Trump's creative destruction , by Mark Leonard, director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, is so provocative, in terms of the contrast with Western perceptions of Trump, that I am quoting from it at some length.

According to Leonard, quite a few key players in China see Trump as having a coherent geopolitical agenda, with reducing China's influence as a key objective, and that he is doing an effective job of implementation. From his Financial Times piece :

I have just spent a week in Beijing talking to officials and intellectuals, many of whom are awed by his [Trump's] skill as a strategist and tactician ..

Few Chinese think that Mr Trump's primary concern is to rebalance the bilateral trade deficit .They think the US president's goal is nothing less than remaking the global order.

They think Mr Trump feels he is presiding over the relative decline of his great nation. It is not that the current order does not benefit the US. The problem is that it benefits others more in relative terms. To make things worse the US is investing billions of dollars and a fair amount of blood in supporting the very alliances and international institutions that are constraining America and facilitating China's rise.

In Chinese eyes, Mr Trump's response is a form of "creative destruction". He is systematically destroying the existing institutions .as a first step towards renegotiating the world order on terms more favourable to Washington.

Once the order is destroyed, the Chinese elite believes, Mr Trump will move to stage two: renegotiating America's relationship with other powers. Because the US is still the most powerful country in the world, it will be able to negotiate with other countries from a position of strength if it deals with them one at a time rather than through multilateral institutions that empower the weak at the expense of the strong.

My interlocutors .describe him as a master tactician, focusing on one issue at a time, and extracting as many concessions as he can. They speak of the skilful way Mr Trump has treated President Xi Jinping. "Look at how he handled North Korea," one says. "He got Xi Jinping to agree to UN sanctions [half a dozen] times, creating an economic stranglehold on the country. China almost turned North Korea into a sworn enemy of the country." But they also see him as a strategist, willing to declare a truce in each area when there are no more concessions to be had, and then start again with a new front.

For the Chinese, even Mr Trump's sycophantic press conference with Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, in Helsinki had a strategic purpose. They see it as Henry Kissinger in reverse. In 1972, the US nudged China off the Soviet axis in order to put pressure on its real rival, the Soviet Union. Today Mr Trump is reaching out to Russia in order to isolate China.

In fact, Trump made clear on the campaign trail that he wanted to normalize relations with Russia because he saw China as the much bigger threat to US interests, and that the US could not afford to be taking them both on at the same time. He also regarded Russia as having more in common culturally with the US than China, and thus a more natural ally. Given the emphasis that Trump has placed on US trade deficits as a symbol of the US making deals that are to America's disadvantage, by exporting US jobs,

However, even if the Chinese are right, and there is more method to Trump's madness than his apparent erraticness would have you believe, there are still fatal flaws in his throwing bombs at international institutions.

As anyone who has done a renovation knows, the teardown in the easy part. Building is hard. And while the young Trump that pulled off the Grand Hyatt deal had a great deal of creativity and acumen, early successes appear to have gone to Trump's head. He did manage to get out of the early 1990s real estate downturn in far better shape than most New York City developers by persuading lenders that his name was so critical to the value of his holdings that creditors needed to cut him some slack. But the older Trump has left a lot of money on the table, such as with The Apprentice, by not even knowing what norma were to press for greatly improved terms.

The fact that the half-life of membership on Trump's senior team seems to be under a year does not bode well for establishing new frameworks, since they require consistency of thought and action. And the fact that Trump has foreign policy thugs operatives like John Bolton and Nikki Haley in important roles works against setting new foundations.

So even if the Chinese are right and Trump has been executing well on his master geopolitical plan, Trump is at best capable of delivering only on the easy, destructive part, and will leave his successors to clean up his mess.

Code Name D , July 26, 2018 at 2:51 am

Mind blown

(PS) Underline was never closed..

Louis Fyne , July 26, 2018 at 8:02 am

Trump is called GEOTUS by many of his fans, God-Emperor of the United States.

(for any literalists out there, no, Trump fans aren't monarchists. It's a sarcastic joke that stuck.)

pictboy3 , July 26, 2018 at 9:30 am

It's a Warhammer 40k reference. It absolutely tickles me that there are people out there who take it seriously.

Solar Hero , July 26, 2018 at 10:44 am

Well, also Dune, right?

pictboy3 , July 26, 2018 at 12:25 pm

Possibly, but the meme's I saw rolling around in the run up to the 2016 election had a decidedly 40k aesthetic. In either case, that anyone takes it seriously is hilarious.

Plenue , July 26, 2018 at 5:21 pm

It's intended as a 40k reference (see for example: http://i.imgur.com/LYJJTmY.jpg ). But 40k took the title directly from Dune.

Jonathan Holland Becnel , July 26, 2018 at 9:35 pm

Everyone knows theres only one God-Emperor round these parts: LETO II

Code Name D , July 26, 2018 at 4:22 pm

I'm sorry, but I just can't rap my head around this. It reads like a union piece. "Trump brilliantly does nothing in the face of oncoming challenges." Thanks to our insane foreign policy, when Trump doses anything with a modicum of intelligence, it must seem like "brilliance" to the outside world.

The trick to playing poker isn't having a good hand – but convicting the other players that you have a better hand than theirs. And when Trump isn't smart enough to know when he has been dealt a bad hand? You have to look out for two kinds of players – the ones who know what they are doing, and the ones who don't.

Tomonthebeach , July 26, 2018 at 3:07 am

If the Chinese are saying they are in awe of Trump's brilliance as a strategist/tactician then we are witnessing the Great Khan (con?).

Harry , July 26, 2018 at 3:29 am

I got a similar impression. He went to see that old scumbag Kissenger who i am sure would have told him to cosy up to Russia.

vlade , July 26, 2018 at 3:50 am

I suspect that they suffer from overprojection, i.e. can't believe he would not be rational, and project on Trump what they would do in his position. Not unusual behaviour when one meets with a chaotic behaviour.

PlutoniumKun , July 26, 2018 at 4:13 am

It doesn't really surprise me. In China there is still a sort of awe attached to the 'big man' with power who throws his weight around, even if its not always with subtlety. In my experience, many Chinese are quite fascinated with Trump, and were so even before he became POTUS. So it doesn't surprise me that they tend to put the most positive spin on his blunderbuss approach to international affairs. On the flip side, I also found that the Chinese never shared the rest of the worlds awe of Obama, they saw him as weak and vain.

That said, I'm pretty sure the strategists in Beijing are well aware of Trumps weaknesses and will work out (if they haven't already) how to manipulate him. For now, broken institutions may well suit China very well.

John k , July 26, 2018 at 10:07 am

I doubt it. They have been rising like a rocket as they manipulate institutions like WTO, if this breaks they will do ok one on one with small countries, but poorly wrt Eu and us.

Tomonthebeach , July 26, 2018 at 4:37 pm

I doubt seriously if anybody in China is impressed by Trump's brilliance. Like all world leaders, they have realized that if you stroke Trump's ego, he'll sit up and beg – woof.

I suggest reading Hilda Hookham's " A Short History of China. " Though published in 1972, the history of China dates back millennia. From that book, I note that China has cycles of domination followed by economic implosion (often triggered by revolution – most recently Mao) and a slow crawl back. It has been going on for centuries. Some of it is endemic to the Chinese culture (how they view the world), and some of it is likely due to the limits of central control when the country is just too huge to govern. If Hookam's observations are correct, then we should expect a financial meltdown at some point. After all, China's personal debt level is high and their housing bubble is ginormous – the sort of thing that generates recessions.

The Rev Kev , July 26, 2018 at 4:19 am

If this is all the case, it may be partially working. The EU just agreed to buy more soybeans to make up for what US farmers lost in orders to China as well as offering to build more facilities to take in US LPG shipments which is by its nature is much more expensive and less reliable than that coming in from Russia. So the EU has basically surrendered to Trump's demands.
The implication of this article is that Trump would spend his first term smashing up things and the second term securing all these you beaut deals to secure his legacy. I doubt that Russia will go along because they know that the US is not only incapable of keeping an agreement but can trash a deal and impose all sorts of sanctions in a matter of days. Iran is already experiencing this. China may be taking note.
I think too that the deep state is also working against this model. I am going to throw out a theory that what they want is to see the formation of a second Tripartite Pact but this time between China, Russia and Iran hence the constant pressure against these three nations. With that in place, it would guarantee ever-increasing defense budgets for decades to meet this 'united threat'. In addition, China may want to be cautious here. Once you pay 'danegeld' it never stops.

Pookah Harvey , July 26, 2018 at 11:10 am

According to the WaPo it appears Juncker gave Trump a non-concesstion concesstion:

Trump also touted an agreement by the Europeans to buy more American soybeans and liquefied natural gas. But Juncker in a speech later Wednesday indicated the gas purchases would only go forward "if the conditions were right and price is competitive." (Anthony Gardner, a former U.S. ambassador to the E.U., said in a tweet it was "absurd" to believe liquefied gas could compete with what the continent pipes in from nearer by.) And the E.U. was already looking to import more U.S. soybeans, since China -- in its own trade fight with the Trump administration -- has been buying more from Brazil, driving up the price of the product there.

John Zelnicker , July 26, 2018 at 12:28 pm

@The Rev Kev
July 26, 2018 at 4:19 am
-- --

" they want to see the formation of a second Tripartite Pact but this time between China, Russia and Iran"

It is a basic necessity for the MIC (in which I include the "deep state") to have a worthy opponent to continue producing and selling their weaponry to all of the other countries of the world, or at least the ones on "our" side. Such an opponent also justifies the continuing massive funding of the surveillance agencies.

The Soviet Union served for decades as the worthy opponent, but since 1991 the US has been looking for another worthy opponent, i.e., a credible threat. Saddam Hussein served that purpose for a short time, and then the broader War on Terror. However, neither one of those was sustainable as a credible threat.

A Tripartite Pact v2.0 would create a very worthy opponent, keeping the MIC companies very busy and profitable for many years to come.

Yves Smith Post author , July 26, 2018 at 2:50 pm

See Links today. Politico reported that everything that Junkcer promised to Trump (save maybe soyabeans but not sure there) is stuff the EU was doing/going to do already. So Trump got nothing new.

Seamus Padraig , July 26, 2018 at 2:55 pm

I think too that the deep state is also working against this model. I am going to throw out a theory that what they want is to see the formation of a second Tripartite Pact but this time between China, Russia and Iran hence the constant pressure against these three nations.

If so, they would probably be making a huge mistake. Handling China by itself will soon be more than a chore for an ever-declining west. Handling a "tripartite pact" would be way, way out of our league. A Russo-Chinese-Iranian alliance in the Eurasian heartland would have Mackinder turning in his grave. That's why the neocon strategy is so stupid: it just pushes the Russians further into the arms of the Chinese. Say what you want about Trump–at least he understands that much.

nervos belli , July 26, 2018 at 4:34 am

Trump, especially in his foreign policy is very rational if chaotic. Chaotic can still be rational.
He saw what e.g. Obama tried to do. Obama wanted to curb down on US global force projection, less US instigated wars on 7 continntes. He did it poorly, was stupid even. And when he didn't want to start new wars, the deep state including the state department (Hillary) or his allies (France/UK) drew him into new conflicts anyways: Ukraine, Syria, Lybia.

Trump saw this and therefore uses a different strategy, basically a crazy Ivan. Be so outrageous, chaotic, etc, that the US is simply not welcome anymore. Not in Syria, not in Ukraine, but even more important: not with their own allies. UK/France could be sure their ally US would bail them out when it was clear that Lybia was a total clusterfuck for them. Would any NATO ally be able to depend on Trump today for one of their stupid wars anymore? Exactly.
Trump is no pacifist of course. He still likes to sell weapons to anyone who pays, but the crucial difference is, Saudi-Arabia and UAE pays, it's not a "deliver weapons for free via CIA" as before to some shitty terrorist cel^W^Wfreedom fighter.

On the tradefront it's the same: he ruthlessly tries to exploit the hegemonial position the US still enjoys here. That's why he asked Merkel several times about a bilateral trade agreement in the beginning. He knows in one on one treaties the US always has the advantage due to its size. I'm sure he asked everybody he ever met that. Germany loudly and publically declined and pointed to the EU for that, but maybe not every country would: eg. Poland or any other eastern european country might agree to a quiet "we protect you from Russia, but we need a consideration for this" treaty mafia style.
He will try to exploit every kind of advantage like this all the while giving the impression of being a moron, crazy or both.
Same with his constant tries to bring back industry to the US any way he can, gutting NAFTA, etc. He doesn't care if he pollutes to high heaven, for him it's actually bringing the industry back first and foremost. You cannot really have both which sucky but that's physics. The left however wants both, and gets neither btw.

This is a high risk strategy, and far from certain it will work, but it's much better than the constant decline over the last 20 years with perpetual wars draining the coffers, generating unrest at home, hobbling the economy in the process only lining the pockets of the rich and creating two worldwide major economical crises. Not counted the by now millions of deaths the US is almost solely responsible for.
It actually uses the power that the US still has fairly optimally cause when the power is totally gone, it's too late. We all know free trade and globalism do not help "the economy" much less the common man, so when someone is actually doing something practical instead of writing useless books so the NC commentariat can gripe or fap to Mr. Hudson in an embarassing fanboi way, then he's vilified.

You can vilify him for his corruption, e.g. his self serving tax reform, the personal credit for his private ventures from UAE/Saudi Arabia or ZTE, gutting of financial oversight or EPA, but especially his foreign policy has some method in his madness.
Of course he is not a shining liberal progressive saviour, but a right wing reactionary evil capitalist so the way he does it is his way the evil way. The US already tried a compassionate, smiling "peace for all mankind" ineffective moron from 2008-2016. It didn't help, it made it all around much worse everywhere and was indistinguishable from the criminal evil moron before him.

Loneprotester , July 26, 2018 at 9:11 am

There are pearls of wisdom mixed in with a goodly dose of horse hooey here. You would do well to consult a dictionary on questions of spelling (it's not LYbia, but Libya; not hegemonial but hegemonical, etc.).

Like the FT piece itself, it is hard to parse what perspective you are coming from. I will focus here on the piece itself, which I read yesterday. The FT piece could be genuine: "Hey, look at this guys! The Chinese really seem to think Trump is a genius strategist!" It could be a CYA operation by an increasingly hostile FT editorial board worried by the increasing vehemence of commentators on both ends of the spectrum and some of its columnists who appear to be suicidal over the rise of Trump AND Brexit. Or, the 3rd option, it is a concerted strategy by the Chinese to appeal to Trump's vanity in a way that calls to mind a brilliant episode of South Park where Pokeman is a mind control plot by the Japanese to take over America and the worried parents keep getting distracted from their efforts to get to the bottom of it by Japanese proclamations of wonder at the size of their male members. Classic!

Time will tell. But one thing is certain, Trump is not a fool, at least not in the classic sense of the term. For my part, I get the sense of someone who has a map of the minefield and is deftly maneuvering through it, but whose luck could run out at any time. In the meantime, the world as a whole finally gets a chance to see the minefield, which we have been told repeatedly does not exist.

integer , July 26, 2018 at 11:24 am

You would do well to consult a dictionary on questions of spelling

FWIW it's Pokémon, not Pokeman. Orthography aside, I agree that Trump has shown the world the "map of the minefield", although my preferred metaphor is that Trump has sent (and continues to send) impulses through the liberal international order, and in doing so, has revealed the liberal international order's impulse response function.

In signal processing, the impulse response , or impulse response function (IRF), of a dynamic system is its output when presented with a brief input signal, called an impulse. More generally, an impulse response is the reaction of any dynamic system in response to some external change. In both cases, the impulse response describes the reaction of the system as a function of time (or possibly as a function of some other independent variable that parameterizes the dynamic behavior of the system).

In all these cases, the dynamic system and its impulse response may be actual physical objects, or may be mathematical systems of equations describing such objects.

Since the impulse function contains all frequencies, the impulse response defines the response of a linear time-invariant system for all frequencies.

I'm not sure whether the liberal international order is a linear time-invariant system though, but " The End of History and the Last Man " appears to suggest that it is.

marym , July 26, 2018 at 10:04 am

Trump and his appointees have no policies that will benefit the common person, and many that will do them great harm. There's no path from smashing "globalism" to the common good under such a regime.

John k , July 26, 2018 at 10:22 am

Balanced trade is better for our workers than the status quo.
And reduced immigration is similar all this is the unwind of the Corp push, aided by both parties, to push down wages because profits. Unwinding means breaking agreements.
It is not news that we have let other countries take advantage of our workers, or that, as trump said, winning trade wars is easy, given that you're the big importer. Or that in trade wars it is the exporter that is hurt the most in the 30's it was the us. True, Apple might get hurt since most stuff is made in Asia, so what? How many us workers do they have? Not like GM.
Trump certainly wanted his tax cuts, but it seems he has not forgotten flyover.

marym , July 26, 2018 at 10:47 am

What hurts workers is predatory capitalism. That's why we don't have good wages, safe workplaces, universal healthcare, robust social programs, sustainable food and energy supplies, clean air and water, infrastructure maintenance and improvement .etc.

Trump and his appointees are neglecting or working against all those things now. Why would that change under protectionist capitalism, even for the white flown-overs who attend his rallies and cheer his bigotry, let alone the rest of the common people?

Loneprotester , July 26, 2018 at 11:03 am

"Predatory capitalism" is not a thing in and of itself. It is the end product of globalisation breaking all the old rules of reciprocity and communal obligations/rights. Trade unions got a (deservedly) bad rap in post-war America for hindering productivity and making off-shoring attractive to management. What gets less play is their place in western labor/economic history where they held the line against robber barons, big finance, and their political cronies as a link in a chain going back to the Middle Ages, when noblesse oblige was an actual thing and not a vague concept. When we focus too much on one player in a complex chess match, we lose the importance of the shared authority of both sides. JohnK is correct. Trump is not merely mouthing platitudes about farmers or workers or the Rust Belt. He is bringing them back into the game for the first time in ages, and the other side (who considered them dead and gone) is furious. You cannot claim to be for the working class and not cheer a little, if you are being at all honest.

Left in Wisconsin , July 26, 2018 at 12:09 pm

Trump is not merely mouthing platitudes about farmers or workers or the Rust Belt. He is bringing them back into the game for the first time in ages, and the other side (who considered them dead and gone) is furious. You cannot claim to be for the working class and not cheer a little, if you are being at all honest.

While I agree with this in principle, what matters is actual practice, not principle. The farmers here in Wisconsin are going berserk. The commodity soybean producers are seeing their Chinese market go away. The dairy farmers are losing their undocumented help while dairy prices stay depressed. While we have a relatively large organic and small scale farm sector compared to many other places, it is still peanuts in the grand scheme of things and no one in that sector believes Trump is out to help them.

But it should be different in manufacturing, right? Well, I'm not sure what to make of it but an old auto industry acquaintance I know to be union friendly just wrote this:
http://thehill.com/opinion/finance/398312-by-any-measure-25-auto-tariffs-will-cost-americans-dearly

According to the Center for Automotive Research's (CAR's) latest trade briefing, applying a 25-percent tariff on all automobile and parts imports would result in 2 million fewer U.S. vehicle sales, 715,000 fewer U.S. jobs and nearly $60 billion in lower U.S. economic output.

I was stunned to see that and still don't quite know what to make of it. But the argument is basically, there is no real way to ramp up US auto production without investing in new capacity, which the auto companies are not going to do, period. And since domestic steel and aluminum capacity has already been decimated, and the domestic steel and aluminum producers are even more unwilling to add new capacity than the auto companies, the only effect of the tariffs is to dramatically raise materials costs.

Loneprotester , July 26, 2018 at 12:30 pm

I do not wish to make light of the real pain of real people, but there was always going to be short to mid-term disruption to "the system" to stop the outflow of capital and redirect growth domestically. It's like trimming a tree or pruning a grape vine. The branches that were growing are definitely feeling the pain and would protest if they could. But the productivity and long term prospects of the plant and/or crop are infinitely improved.

You cannot negotiate with a gun to your head, and if the gun is pointed by your supporters and political opposition, it is nevertheless potentially lethal. Were he the most popular political leader ever, Trump would still face this backlash, and the backlash is legitimate. He is NOT the most popular, so this is very dangerous. But if he succeeds? Wow.

Left in Wisconsin , July 26, 2018 at 1:12 pm

But if he succeeds? Wow.

If you mean success the way I mean success, there will need to be some sort of fundamental change to US/MNC corporate leadership. I don't see how Trump achieves this. Not even convinced he really wants it.

Why would a rational person believe this is anything more than a ploy from a bullsh1tter to win votes? Or that Trump cares about anything beyond 2020 (if that far out)?

Also, I think your (best case) argument only applies to manufacturing, not farming. For better or worse, US agriculture is heavily export oriented. And I have never heard Trump mutter one word about growing our own food.

lyman alpha blob , July 26, 2018 at 2:29 pm

From what I understand the US has been overproducing dairy for quite some time now which benefits the big midwestern farms and hurts the smaller farms, like those in New England. When the New England diary compact came up for renewal by Congress several years ago they declined to renew after pressure from the larger corporate dairy enterprises.

My family has milked 60 cows for decades now no matter what the price of milk is. Others have expanded their herds when prices go up, thinking they would cash in, which annoys my father to no end. As long as we're under a capitalist system, increasing production without increasing demand is going to cause prices to drop. I don't know how all the other farmers in Vermont did over the years, but I do know that my family's farm is still milking 60 cows while all up and down the road nearby other barns are crumbling to dust. My family has never hired any undocumented workers and very few documented ones either, and none in the half century I've been around. The herd is kept to a size they can manage by themselves.

I believe someone here linked the astronomical amount of government cheese we currently have lying around that nobody wants. What exactly is the point of all this overproduction? No small farmers I know are retiring early from any great windfall they've received.

Now if Trump's idea was to cut production and decrease the perceived 'need' for undocumented workers, I'd be all for it. Without the US overproducing cheap dairy and dumping it on other nations, the undocumented might be able to begin farming in their own countries again. But since Trump seems to want Canada, which has evidently managed its dairy industry much better, to start accepting cheap US dairy, I don't think that's his plan. I'm still not convinced he has a coherent strategy on anything, despite what the Chinese think.

But if the result turns out to be less overproduction and less illegal immigration, fewer corporate farms and a return to the smaller family farm, that can't be a bad thing.

At this point global warming can't be denied. If these policies result in less overproduction which means less industrial activity and fewer overall large ruminants with their own food requirement, I would count that as a victory.

Staying the course means capitalism ruins the planet even quicker.

The system needs to change. I'd much rather have someone other than Trump doing the changing, but there seems to be almost noone else in DC willing to upset the apple cart (or the milk wagon) for fear that their corporate bribes will dry up. If someone could convince Trump of a little MMT, and make sure all the workers who do lose their jobs when overproduction is cut will be taken care of, then I think we're on the right track.

Left in Wisconsin , July 26, 2018 at 4:27 pm

I'm no dairy expert. But I found a very informative article in the local ag rag from Sept 2017: Total dairy farms in Wisconsin were just less than 9000, down 500 from the year before, with an average herd size of 142. (That average masks a number of 5000 cow mega-dairies.) Compared to 1997, when there were 50,000 dairy farms with average herd size of 37. 1.8 million total dairy cows then, 1.2 million now producing twice as much milk per cow. (In 1957, 103,000 dairy farms in the state.)

lyman alpha blob , July 26, 2018 at 9:54 pm

Interesting stats – thanks! I'm guessing BGH has something to do with the increased production.

Synoia , July 26, 2018 at 12:24 pm

against robber barons, big finance, and their political cronies as a link in a chain going back to the Middle Ages, when noblesse oblige was an actual thing and not a vague concept.

Noblesse Oblige was more of a guideline than a practice. It certainly was not law.

Loneprotester , July 26, 2018 at 12:34 pm

Not true. There were wide variations depending on country and period, but the vassal/liege model replicated all the way down society. Nobles who broke customary law could face serious uprisings and when agricultural labor was in short supply, as after a plague outbreak, their serfs might simply run away, leaving them with worthless estates.

Yves Smith Post author , July 26, 2018 at 2:56 pm

No, you have it backwards. Predatory capitalism, if you want to call it that, goes back to the Thatcher/Reagan revolutions, which received legitimation from the raiders of the 1980s, who took overdiversified conglomerates that were trading at a discount, bought them with tons of debt, and sold the parts for more than the purchase price. All the money they made was depicted as a victory for entreprenurship over corporate norms of considering the needs of all of what would now be called stakeholders, not just shareholders.

The actions of the raiders and the gospel of "maximizing shareholder value) predate the globalization/outsourcing fetish, which really took hold in the 1990s.

Seamus Padraig , July 26, 2018 at 2:26 pm

There's no path from smashing "globalism" to the common good under such a regime.

Maybe. But there's definitely no path from globalism to the common good, so Trump is just a risk we're going to have to take. One thing is beyond dispute here: we gave those jokers in Washington (and Brussels) a full eight years after the economic crash of 2008 to fix the situation, and they did nothing. Not a damn thing! Now the situation is really dire, and it looks like we might have to–forgive the metaphor–break a little china.

Yves Smith Post author , July 26, 2018 at 2:57 pm

Trump has zero interest in the welfare of ordinary workers save for optics to fool the rubes. If you think he's breaking things for your benefit, you are smoking something very strong.

John k , July 26, 2018 at 8:03 pm

But he does want to be re-elected.
Dems refuse to consider giving up any income stream from donors, trump, though beholden to Sheldon and Israel, will toss any Corp group save real estate under the bus if that helps. M4a would do it, so I think he might get the reps to give up that income stream.
And could be very gradual, two years down every year.

skippy , July 26, 2018 at 5:04 am

"creative destruction" – sigh .

So were back to applying GT to humans in a multivariate T&S matrix and then laying claim or extenuating the results to meaninglessness.

Synoia , July 26, 2018 at 12:29 pm

extenuating? Or extrapolating?

In a chaotic system extrapolation is unwise. Extrapolation assumes some form of linear behavior.

Jim Haygood , July 26, 2018 at 5:24 am

'They think Mr Trump feels he is presiding over the relative decline of his great nation'

And he is, of course, as a nearby post about the downwardly mobile middle class makes clear.

Unfortunately flake-o-nomics will not make America great again. The Republican party's crackpot fiscal stimulus pumps hundreds of billions into negative rate of return global military domination during Trump's first and only term.

This is money flushed down the toilet which should have been invested in fixing the substandard features of America's late-Soviet-era economy: failing infrastructure, failing education, a failed health care system. It's high times for looters defense contractors though.

Don't mistake Chauncey Gardner Trump for a very stable genius.

Anarcissie , July 26, 2018 at 10:18 am

I would expect the domestic money hoses to be turned on for the 2020 election. By the way, education and medical care are weird sinkholes of very large amounts of money now and the hosemasters may try to avoid them. If you waste billions on a highway at least at the end of the process you may have a highway, whereas it's clear that the education and medical care industries can make infinite amounts of money vanish leaving behind no tangible signs of their passage.

MyLessThanPrimeBeef , July 26, 2018 at 11:19 am

The Chinese economy may be in a worse shape, or more vulnerable to going from boom to bust.

Synoia , July 26, 2018 at 12:47 pm

It depends on the speed at which the Chinese can build a self-sustaining consumer economy. That is, become an Autarchy.

Their imports are raw materials and Oil. They will solve the oil problem, as most oilfields are associated with large rivers, and the Chinese have a number of large rivers where they can explore for oil.

OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL , July 26, 2018 at 6:51 pm

Chinese have a trump card: a sovereign currency. Like one other nation: Ecuador. When the state issues the scrip (and not commercial banks) it gives you many options. Michael Hudson is one of the very few to point out the importance of this glaring fact.

athena , July 26, 2018 at 5:43 am

I think there's also a chance the Chinese are just lying, because whatever he's doing is something where they feel it actually gives them the upper hand. It's impossible to say either way at this point, as far as I can tell.

Disturbed Voter , July 26, 2018 at 5:44 am

So much projection by readers, so little time until the next election. Shouldn't y'all spend more time promoting the right kind of populist candidates and getting them elected? Focusing on Trump is taking your eye off the ball (again).

Yes, the Chinese are mercantilist, and so is Trump. They recognize their own. Kissinger has never sold a single ice cube to a single Inuit. Followers of Plato's Republic, frequently are mesmerized by academic nonsense.

Get back to work, I would like some populists to vote for (not same as progressives).

Carolinian , July 26, 2018 at 9:21 am

Agreed that the all Trump all the time focus of much of the left is fruitless. The reality is that nobody knows for sure what Trump is up to including, perhaps, Trump himself. Speculation about a strategic plan is mostly useful for curbing the hysteria that says Trump must be stopped, now, immediately, and that's all that matters. Even Sanders has fallen prey with his recent denunciation of the Russia summit. It makes one wonder whether Sanders has a plan either.

And while Kissinger was certainly amoral and had his own crackpot notions, his "realist" view of foreign policy would be a refreshing change from the fake solicitude that says we have to bomb one country after another in order to save them.

Newton Finn , July 26, 2018 at 9:58 am

Sanders' capitulation to the Russiagate narrative was sad, as was his capitulation to Clinton and the DNC after knowing they stabbed him AND THOSE WHO SUPPORTED HIM in the back. As one who worked hard for Bernie and deeply appreciates what he did for America–demonstrating that an effective national campaign can be crowd-funded, and that socialism is no longer a dirty word–I hope that he does not run the next time around. He was John the Baptist. We await "the one who comes after" to carry the revolution forward and take it home. Horizontalism and the grass roots have their important places, but history shows that nothing happens, nothing changes, without the key ingredient of leadership

pretzelattack , July 26, 2018 at 10:09 am

well that's what he did to chile, via coup rather than bombing, there's a quote about "not letting chile go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people". sanders' capitulation on russia gate bothers me a great deal.

Carolinian , July 26, 2018 at 11:10 am

True, so amoral "realism" can be just as bad as (effectively) amoral R2P.

But in this particular case Kissinger has said that Russia should be given its sphere of influence and given Russia's nuclear status it's hard to see why that isn't sensible and true. It's hard to see what the American interests would be in the Ukraine.

Anarcissie , July 26, 2018 at 12:43 pm

That depends on what you think America's interests are. That is, its ruling class's interests. If one conceives of America's interests as dominating a weakened Russia, then of course one wants to get them kicked out of Syria and the Middle East in general, and to turn Ukraine into a hostile pro-Western bastion by whatever means necessary. The risk that these moves would result in hostility and countermoves was accepted, and some of the threats have now come to pass. From my point of view, it was stupid to provoke them, but as government seems to attract psychopaths, perhaps inevitable.

BillS , July 26, 2018 at 6:50 am

I think this article misses the fact that the Chinese are far more subtle than P45 could ever understand. They may appear "awed", but they are not the least bit fooled. If P45 reads any book before dealing with the Chinese, it should be the Art of War.
*****
Allure the enemy by giving him a small advantage. Confuse and capture him. If there be defects, give an appearance of perfection, and awe the enemy. Pretend to be strong, and so cause the enemy to avoid you. Make him angry, and confuse his plans. Pretend to be inferior, and cause him to despise you. If he have superabundance of strength, tire him out; if united, make divisions in his camp. Attack weak points, and appear in unexpected places.

MyLessThanPrimeBeef , July 26, 2018 at 11:42 am

I think Xi violated the Art of War a while back, with

1. Proclaiming Made In China 2025
2. One Belt One Road.

To appear 'awe,' again, also seems to go against Mao's "the barrel of the gun" strategy that raw power matters more.

Brumel , July 26, 2018 at 7:49 am

Strategy or tactics aside, on the math Trump's retraction of his tariff menace against Europe, at the price of a few bags of soybeans, seems a huge victory for Juncker, right?

Brooklin Bridge , July 26, 2018 at 9:01 am

Teasing out Trump's merits is a little like diving for quarters in the sewer. You'll find some for sure, but

As to the Reno analogy, if the frame of a building is rotten throughout, then tearing down walls even by temper tantrum appears strategic in that it's guaranteed to uncover issues that must be addressed. The established method of diplomacy, for instance, has become so formalized and drawn out that for all it's merits in caution, the simple act of a human meeting between one leader and – GASP – the POTUS can contribute significantly to unexpected success. It's not easy to tell if Trump upsets the apple cart of protocal because he's a spoiled brat who thinks he's the greatest negotiator ever to walk upright, or because he has an intuitive grasp of human nature or a bit of both.

Glen Greenwald strikes me as one of the better Trumpticians who can discuss Trump intellegently without having to put on a wet suit. He presents the facts and highlights the positives and let's the cards fall where they may as far as merit goes and indeed it puts a certain shine on Trump which he may or may not deserve and even then without necessarily being a great tactician.

(recently in links): https://theintercept.com/2018/07/16/a-spirited-substantive-debate-on-the-trumpputin-summit-russia-and-us-politics/

Brooklin Bridge , July 26, 2018 at 9:08 am

protocal -> protocol

Louis Fyne , July 26, 2018 at 9:05 am

It's good to hear that Chinese official-dom believes that it's dealing with a rational, but unconventional, US.

Countries who feel that they're dealing with rational actors tend avoid shooting first and asking questions later.

Danpaco , July 26, 2018 at 9:13 am

Maybe the Chinese are just appealing to his vanity.

MyLessThanPrimeBeef , July 26, 2018 at 9:57 am

Who is going to have more luck

1. The Chinese with this,

or

2. Sanders who said Helsinki was embarrassing?

Brooklin Bridge , July 26, 2018 at 2:23 pm

Now that's a good one

I'll go for Sanders cause we can all make mistakes ? Is there a right answer? All of the above? None o the above? All of the above and none of the above simultaneously?

fajensen , July 26, 2018 at 9:24 am

Ancient Chinese Proverb: Flattery will get you anywhere!

Louis Fyne , July 26, 2018 at 9:59 am

so true.

that's what i like about reading the comments here. lots of people more witty than me cranking out quality lines before i've even finished my 2nd coffee

MyLessThanPrimeBeef , July 26, 2018 at 10:06 am

I am trying to come with up a historical Chinese example where flattery won a dynasty.

The first emperor – through sheer military might

There was the Feast at Hong Gate ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feast_at_Hong_Gate ), and Liu Bang escaped with the help of an insider from the opposition (treason) to later establish the second Chinese dynasty – the Han empire.

The Qing conquerors did not win with flattery – with again through the treasonous act of a Ming general guarding the gate to Manchuria (Shanhaiguan).

Throughout Chinese history, I can recall, at this moment, only flattery on the part of the subservient Mandarins or eunuchs, presuming a superior and inferior hierarchy.

And it worked sometimes, and failed disastrously other times, for the flatter.

richard savage , July 26, 2018 at 9:30 am

Great post – saves me having to pay to read the original FT article too

Steely Glint , July 26, 2018 at 9:47 am

Creative destruction. Shock doctrine with new name?

John k , July 26, 2018 at 10:42 am

Couple points
Your earlier point was that his modus was to keep firing until he is happy with his team I can imagine his not being happy yet. And he has to keep hiring people he doesn't know.
Minefields certainly deep, msm and dems are making it as difficult as they can to be nice to Russia, and to pivot from China to them. He's got to keep both the base and elected reps reasonably happy, lots to juggle. Amazing how Twitter keeps to base engaged and opp off guard.
China they really, really don't want existing world order upset or broken, they're doing well, and change that leads to unemployment can slip into revolution, given their only excuse to rule is ever rising living standard. There are always thousands of protests that need suppressing. So why would they say anything that encourages his behavior? Sounds like grudging admiration.
Omelettes require breaking eggs. Reversing 40 years of wage repression attacks profits Bernie wants 15/hr, but stopping immigration while balancing trade would naturally push up wages without mandate. And, of course, push down profits Apple and others in jeopardy.

Left in Wisconsin , July 26, 2018 at 12:27 pm

Amplifying:
The US corporate class does very little business with Russia. They have little to lose by siding with the neocons on Russia. Also very good for defense budgets, military contractors.

The US corporate class is deeply invested in China. The neocons obviously see this and tread much more lightly on the China issue. Also, "we need to protect the WTO and the world trade order" so that our allies see us as a "responsible" trade partner and aren't driven into the arms of China – even though our corporate class is completely wedded to China at this point. Inconsistency on China also not bad for defense budgets, military contractors.

Where does Trump fit in all this? Hard to say. I have been surprised by his continued willingness to push the trade issue despite the complete opposition of the corporate class. On the other hand, I don't see how he actually benefits the working person if the corporations refuse to reinvest in the USA. And I see no evidence that they are or ever will again. So my conclusion at this point is that he simply sees it as an electoral winner even if no substantive change is ever achieved. And my second conclusion would be to follow Trump's money. I'm still of the opinion that Trump taking on the "community" is more about knee-capping their ability to dig into, or at least do anything about, his finances than about any geo-strategic America-first thinking.

John k , July 26, 2018 at 5:59 pm

25% tariff brings a lot of car mfg, whether our own or Japanese or Europe japan now labor short anyway, they can quickly expand.
Grant that trump doesn't care about working class, but he clearly wants to be re-elected. Most dems still aren't paying any attention to working class, all about Russia, a losing strategy even from Bernie.

I could imagine trump pushing m4a thru, great for his hotel workers, not clear even Bernie could beat him if he does. Why not? He's already going against most Corp in attacking China.

Course he makes mistakes, but shouldn't let personal distaste convince you he's stupid.

Left in Wisconsin , July 26, 2018 at 6:05 pm

I posted this (with link) above. Not saying it's gospel but the link between tariffs and domestic manufacturing runs though the US corporate class, who seem very disinterested in US mfg:

According to the Center for Automotive Research's (CAR's) latest trade briefing, applying a 25-percent tariff on all automobile and parts imports would result in 2 million fewer U.S. vehicle sales, 715,000 fewer U.S. jobs and nearly $60 billion in lower U.S. economic output.

I was stunned to see that and still don't quite know what to make of it. But the argument is basically, there is no real way to ramp up US auto production without investing in new capacity, which the auto companies are not going to do, period. And since domestic steel and aluminum capacity has already been decimated, and the domestic steel and aluminum producers are even more unwilling to add new capacity than the auto companies, the only effect of the tariffs is to dramatically raise materials costs.

marym , July 26, 2018 at 6:35 pm

He would need someone to explain how Medicare works, and how it would be expanded to M4A. Probably not the person he appointed to administer it though.

Top Trump health official slams 'Medicare for all'

Verma said the focus of Medicare should be on seniors and disabled individuals and that expanding the program to cover younger, healthier people will drain the program of funding and deprive seniors of the coverage they need.

"By choosing a socialized system, you are giving the government complete control over the decisions pertaining to your care or whether you receive care at all. It would be the furthest thing from patient-centric care," Verma said.

Verma also said the CMS would likely deny waivers from states that seek to implement their own single-payer systems.

coboarts , July 26, 2018 at 11:58 am

Trump's been developing real estate in New York and running casinos. He doesn't need to read the book by Sun Tzu. Underestimation is mentioned where as a recommended strategy? I think Trump has planned his work and is working his plan. That's for strategy. The tactics develop in play. I also think that Mr. Pompeo will be around for a while. Take out your pens. History is being written, and yes, it involves risk.

herm , July 26, 2018 at 12:03 pm

I wonder how much of this would be gaslighting on the part of the Chinese, or at least a hint the direction they would like to nudge Trump. What made me wonder that was the all too true quip tearing down is easy, building is hard . As someone who has gone through renovation I can attest to that! But it's not only me, in the aftermath of WWII America was the only 'great power' that hadn't been shattered by the war, and can thank its postwar dominance on that fact. Even the USSR, though victorious, had lost millions of lives and been thoroughly ravaged by the Nazis. And the best the US could come up with against this fairly broken rival was Cold War!

The thing is, today no other 'great power' is in such as state as they were after WWII. None are at the mercy of the US the way they were then. Trump can take swings and smash stuff, but will not be able to rebuild anything on his own terms because the situation is nowhere near the same. In fact, the more damage Trump does can only put the US in a worse position. We become the loose canon that may vote in another Trump at any time, who may again overtly smash things and try to be more aggressively dominant in the world, and China can portray themselves as a model of stability in comparison.

john c. halasz , July 26, 2018 at 12:18 pm

"Creative destruction" is so 1980's. It's all about "disruptive innovation" nowadays!

Summer , July 26, 2018 at 12:52 pm

" even if the Chinese are right and Trump has been executing well on his master geopolitical plan, Trump is at best capable of delivering only on the easy, destructive part, and will leave his successors to clean up his mess."

What you refer to as a mess, may be the next stage, following the Chinese perception that there is a coherency to the chaos.

Over and over again, it's been shown that the allowed choices by the establishment are neoliberalism (what is currently defined as liberal democracy) or its kissing cousin (maybe siamese twin) overt fascism.

"Overt" is an important word doing a lot of work here.

For the USA, Trumps alliances with supporters of theocracy means the cleanup is going to be a baton pass to actual ideologues with a horrifying domestic agenda that we are not prepared for.

Pelham , July 26, 2018 at 12:52 pm

Maybe it won't be so much a matter of cleaning up a mess as just modestly building international linkages that don't stupidly favor a bunch of leech-like allies.

cbu , July 26, 2018 at 1:05 pm

If Trump destroys the credibility of the U.S. in stage one, then there is not much he can accomplish in stage two.

Susan the other , July 26, 2018 at 2:23 pm

In spite of the face-saving flattery, I think the Chinese are right. But I also think that this is pablum for the egos of us Americans who don't understand the world anymore. If they say rational things about Trump it makes it easier for the US public. I must wonder what Rachel is gonna make of what almost appears to be an orchestrated, cooperative international effort to adjust trading relationships and, clearly, to avoid war. The Chinese know full well they have exported a fatal dose of deflation to the American economy; they knew it would happen as far back as 1980. And so did our big corporations – which explains why they dumped American labor like garbage. I really think the fix was in back then and it is in today.

Our European allies are behaving interestingly, calmly. In Canada they all gathered around a sitting, stubborn looking Trump for a photo op that depicted them all wanting to talk reason – all the while following a set plan. Notice how they stood by us when China wanted to do trade treaties with them that harmed us. And they have been very patient with us over Russia – they didn't rush into Ukraine even though Vicki publicly said "Fuck the EU" and they didn't turn their backs on us when we asked for 2% NATO payments.

And Russia has really kept her powder dry . it all looks orchestrated to me. The big question is Where to now?

Germany just advised India to buy oil from Iran (because Germany is in on the Saudi pipeline no doubt). We and Europe are acting like a big family – and I just heard the most profound description of "family" – it is where "things are left unsaid." I certainly hope that is the reason nobody is talking about what an emergency global warming is – and that they are actually getting ready for some big changes. Always hopeful.

Lambert Strether , July 26, 2018 at 3:45 pm

> In Chinese eyes, Mr Trump's response is a form of "creative destruction". He is systematically destroying the existing institutions

So, " volatility voters " have brought forth a "Volatility Executive." If you're playing in a rigged game and losing, the upside comes from kicking over the table .

John k , July 26, 2018 at 6:17 pm

Absolutely. Maybe delayed on account of Russia Russia, but he seems to have consolidated power and might be on course now. Granted vol voters don't have absolute control over a vol exec, but his moves so far likely encourage them. I personally doubt dems will get enough house seats by appealing to moderate reps.

And it's also granted trump moves have huge Corp and political enemies, flyover knows this, IMO will be patient. I've been talking to HK expats in Toronto, they didn't know what flyover meant, but quickly understood the shift in voter pref. My point to them is that the side hurt the most in a trade war is the big exporter they don't need to be told China is particularly vulnerable, can't take unemployment. We're used to it here

J Bank , July 26, 2018 at 4:13 pm

Or maybe the Chinese know that flattery is the only way to appeal to him?

MyLessThanPrimeBeef , July 26, 2018 at 10:36 pm

I think Beijing is just acknowledging it's a new world kind of like the people during the last years of the Han dynasty.

That was when the famed Three Kingdom Period commenced. One of the two or three greatest Chinese novels was written in the late Yuan/early Ming dynasty – more than 1,000 years later and Chinese adults and kids still remembered – about the battles of wits, strategizing and brave deeds of various heroes during that period. The novel is called Romance of the Three Kingdom

How the three kingdoms played one off another would be quite relevant today, with three major world powers trying to cope.

stefan , July 26, 2018 at 6:15 pm

Trump is very good at getting people's attention. What he does with that attention remains to be seen. Statecraft is a long game.

MyLessThanPrimeBeef , July 26, 2018 at 10:27 pm

China knows Trump is the first American (or Western) leader, in a long time, and likely to be the only American one in the foreseeable future, to stand up to Beijing.

That they don't just say that, but have to say this, indicates the game has changed for them.

And to think one can bury one's stupid opponent by lauding him can be not too smart. It implicitly under-estimate that opponent, by presuming.

MyLessThanPrimeBeef , July 26, 2018 at 10:47 pm

Among the three kingdoms

As it turned out, Wei provoked Shu and Wu to war against each other, with the latter killing a great general Guan Yu (who was honored by later Chinese through even today as the Martial Saint/Duke/God). Not much later, Wei first defeated Wu and then conquered Shu.

[Jul 26, 2018] EXCLUSIVE Russian TV Bill Browder is CIA agent, recruited Navalny. Browder furious! Navalny sues! - YouTube

Jul 26, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Russia Insight Published on Jul 17, 2016

This documentary caused an uproar in Russia when it appeared in April of 2016.

This film was made by the main Russian government news broadcasting company, Rossiya 1.

It alleges that Bill Browder, the legendary American hedge fund manager who from 1995 - 2005 was the largest foreign investor in Russia, controlling billions of $ and a significant share of Russia's leading companies, was in fact a CIA front.

At one point his funds owned 7% of Gazprom, using what the film argues were illegal schemes to acquire shares

The film argues that Browder's whole involvement with Russia was a CIA operation to disrupt Russia politically and economically
It alleges that in 2006, Browder was instructed by the CIA to provide financial support to the rising opposition politician, Alexei Navalny, and that the two then closely cooperated for the next 5 years.

As evidence, the film cites hacked CIA email and skype correspondence which it claims fell into Russian hands during the government upheaval in Kiev in 2014.

When the film appeared, Browder and Navalny charged that the evidence was faked, and Navalny sued Rossiya 1 for libel. As of the translation of this video, (July 2016), the suit has not been concluded.

Browder was expelled from Russia in 2006, after which he led a highly successful public campaign criticizing Russia and Putin. The film argues that the campaign was financed by the CIA.

The campaign demanded sanctions against Russia for what Browder alleged was the murder of one of his employees, Sergei Magnitsky, and theft from his companies, by corrupt Russian officials.

His campaign resulted in the famous "Magnitsky Act" sanctions against Russia, passed by Congress in 2012.

The film alleges that this cynically misrepresents the facts. It alleges that Magnitsky ended up in jail for carrying out major fraud for Browder, and that he was on the verge of testifying against Browder when he died. It cites the hacked CIA mail as evidence that the CIA managed to orchestrate Magnitsky's death in prison.

The film argues that the only people with a motive for Magnitsky's death were Browder and the CIA, because his testimony about the tax fraud would have been devastating.

The film includes embarrassing details of tax avoidance schemes used by Browder and Magnitsky, including hiring barely literate invalids in remote corners of Russia as fake executives in order to receive tax breaks amounting to 100s of millions of $.

The film then alleges, again citing the hacked CIA correspondence, that in 2010 Browder paid Navalny $300,000 to conduct a PR campaign in Russia in support of the Magnitsky Act.

This documentary was never aired separately, rather appeared as a segment within the April 13, 2016 episode of the popular Russian political talk show "Spetsialnii Korrespondent" https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAkt...

The episode consisted of an emotional 1.5 hour discussion of the film, with several people who appeared in the film present https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37GZ3... (only in Russian)

Of the 10-plus guests, all but one, an American journalist, argued heatedly that Browder had clearly committed gross financial crimes and agreed with the film.

The comment leading into the beginning of the film is typical of the tone of the talk show, where the Deputy Chairman of Russia's parliament compares Browder to an "intestinal tapeworm".

At the conclusion of the film, the talk show guests discussed the film for a further 1.5 hours. About half of the guests were also featured in the film, and they were able to go into much more detail about their knowledge of the Browder case.

The discussion became very emotional, with some guests shouting about what they alleged are Browder's crimes.

Russia Insider website https://www.russia-insider.com/en

Support Russian Insider website http://russia-insider.com/en/support

[Jul 26, 2018] Report Russia Implicates Browder In Magnitsky 'Murder' Probe, Citing Widely Mocked MI6 'Expose' by Carl Schreck

Smoke without fire ?
Oct 24, 2017 | www.rferl.org

In April 2016, the head of Russia's powerful Investigative Committee instructed his subordinates to examine the potential " complicity " of U.S.-born British businessman William Browder -- once Russia's largest portfolio investor -- in the "murder" of his former employee, Sergei Magnitsky.

It was a bizarre twist in the saga of Magnitsky, whose 2009 death in a Moscow jail resulted in a 2012 U.S. law bearing his name that slaps sanctions on Russians deemed to be human rights abusers. Browder vigorously lobbied for the law, arguing that Magnitsky was tortured and denied medical treatment for blowing the whistle on a massive tax fraud allegedly involving Russian law enforcement and tax officials.

Russia, which says Magnitsky's death was a tragedy but denies allegations that he was abused while in custody, has undertaken an aggressive, multipronged effort in recent years aimed at discrediting Browder and the narrative underpinning the U.S. Magnitsky Act.

The law was said to be at the center of a meeting between a Russian lawyer, Donald Trump Jr., and other confidants of U.S. President Donald Trump at a controversial meeting in New York in June 2016.

Investigative Committee chief Aleksander Bastrykin's call last year to probe allegations of Browder's possible role in Magnitsky's death was explicitly linked to a documentary on Russian state TV that alleged a byzantine conspiracy between Browder, British intelligence, and Russian opposition leader Aleksei Navalny.

But for 18 months, it was unclear if this probe had gone anywhere.

According to an October 22 report by The New York Times, however, Russian authorities are indeed pursuing a possible murder charge against Browder -- and citing evidence that parrots widely mocked claims presented in the documentary broadcast on Rossia-1 television a day prior to the Investigative Committee's announcement.

Citing documents obtained from a court docket by a lawyer for Magnitsky's family, the Times reported that Russian prosecutors allege Browder colluded with a representative of Britain's MI6 to convince doctors to withhold medical care to "cause the death of S.L. Magnitsky" while he was in custody.

RFE/RL reached out to Browder, who said he was not immediately able to provide a copy of the documents in question.

Prosecutors, according to the Times report, also cite alleged intercepts of intelligence communications and suggest the goal of the purported plot was to start "a significant news trigger to discredit" Russia.

They also cite claims made in the Rossia-1 documentary, including that Browder was in cahoots with Navalny in a purported secret operation titled "Quake" -- with Browder supposedly using the code name "Solomon" and Navalny using the moniker "Freedom."

Clumsy Fakes

The documentary featured scans of alleged secret U.S. and British documents concerning Browder, Navalny, and Magnitsky that were widely ridiculed as crude fakes based on their clumsy syntax and grammatical mistakes -- including improper use of English indefinite and definite articles that often stymie native Russian speakers.

The claims by Russian prosecutors, as reported by the Times, echo one alleged CIA document from 2009 shown in the Rossia-1 program with the awkward subject line: "Report on the health status of a Sergei Magnitsky."

The document purports that Browder ("Agent Solomon") "was offered by proxies in the Russian Federal Penitentiary Service to arrange the termination of any medical services for Magnitsky...which could lead to his death."

That document is signed by "V. Plame" -- an apparent reference to former CIA covert officer Valerie Plame, who was exposed by officials in the administration of President Georgia W. Bush after her husband criticized the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Plame on Twitter called the document, purportedly from 2009, " such nonsense " and noted that she left the CIA in 2007.

The Russian Investigative Committee did not respond to an e-mail seeking comment on The New York Times report, and officials there could not immediately be reached by telephone.

The report was published just days after Canada on October 19 passed its version of the Magnitsky Act, a move that Russian President Vladimir Putin called " unconstructive political games ."

Browder U.S. Travel Blocked?

Browder, meanwhile, is claiming that Russia has placed him on an Interpol list, and that his U.S. "global entry status" -- which can expedite entry to the United States -- has been revoked by U.S. officials, The Guardian reported.

Interpol has previously refused to place the investor, whom Russia convicted in absentia on tax-evasion charges in 2013, on an international wanted list at Moscow's request.

The Guardian reported over the weekend that Russia had used a loophole allowing governments to place individuals on the Interpol database unilaterally.

A spokesperson for U.S. Customs and Border Protection said in an e-mailed statement that Browder's visa waiver had been "manually approved" on October 18, though Browder told the Associated Press that he had been informed by U.S. authorities of his rejection on October 19.

Browder said on Twitter late on October 23 that his waiver had been " restored " and that he has "successfully checked into a U.S. flight."

[Jul 26, 2018] Who Is Assassinating MI6 Assets On British Soil The Millennium Report

Notable quotes:
"... I do not recall ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | themillenniumreport.com

It took place in New York on Feb 3, 2015, when marshals from the U.S. District Court in Manhattan tried to serve him a subpoena to give evidence as part of the only trial thus far on US soil proceeding from the Magnitsky Act. (The details of that case can be found here .) The reason for Mr. Browder's nervous behavior is obvious: his arguments served only political aims and were intended for cases in which the verdict is known from the beginning. But none of his claims could stand up to scrutiny by any experienced lawyer once real business interests were at stake, and this is exactly what happened with Mark Cymrot from BakerHostetler during Browder's court deposition on Apr 15, 2015.

Returning to Perepelichny, we have to acknowledge that he was a key witness who could potentially destroy the high-political-stakes scam being conducted with the Magnitsky dossier. As Browder was responding with " I do not recall " and " I do not know " to any real question asked him in court, the US judiciary system might have been very interested in hearing from Perepelichny. This menace to the Magnitsky Act was eliminated one week before the bill passed the US House: on Nov. 10, 2012 Alexander Perepelichny was found dead outside his mansion in London. The police investigation did not yield any tangible results, but the theory of "Russian mafia" involvement was implanted in the international media at the proper time. One month later the Magnitsky Act was signed by President Obama

... ... ...

https://orientalreview.org/2018/03/12/fatal-quad-who-is-assassinating-former-mi6-assets-on-british-soil/

[Jul 26, 2018] Agent William F. Browder The Smoking Gun by Gilbert Doctorow

Notable quotes:
"... When some Washington (politician) was asked why he opposed Trump - He is not part of the Security establishment. "Security establishment" = insider ..."
Apr 13, 2016 | euvsdisinfo.eu

The common conclusion of my two encounters with Bill Browder was that his intensity and the time he was devoting now to putting in place anti-Russian sanctions in Europe was in no way comparable to the behavior of a top level international businessman. It was clear to me that some other game was in play.

One of the clear missions of Russian state television in 2016, the year of elections to the State Duma has been to discredit Alexei Navalny, the long established blogger, wily critic of the Kremlin and leader of the new generation 'non-systemic' opposition by exposing him as a fraud in the pay of Russia's Western rivals and ill-wishers.

Several weeks ago Russian state television broadcast hidden camera recordings of Navalny's first meeting with Carl Bildt, former Swedish premier and foreign minister, best known in this part of the world for leading the Eastern Partnership program aimed at removing former Soviet republics, notably Ukraine, from the Russian sphere of influence.

A screen shot from the documentary, with what is allegedly a conversation between Browder and Navalny

This past Sunday, the Vesti nedeli program, a prime time Sunday evening wrap-up of the week's news presented by the senior journalist and manager of Russia's informational broadcasting resources, Dmitry Kiselyov, showed excerpts from a documentary film about Navalny and his mentor, or handler, William F. Browder. (Video below - in Russian only)

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Pjv48NPdst4

The film, entitled "The Browder Effect," was assembled by the channel's investigative reporter and presenter in his own right, Yevgeni Popov. The full version of "The Browder Effect" will be aired on Wednesday evening, 13 April on Russia's flagship network, Pervyi Kanal. However, from the lengthy segments shown on Sunday it is possible to draw some conclusions about the sensational material it sets out.

Both Vesti 24 and Pervyi Kanal are Russian language stations directed at the domestic audience. From the standpoint of their management, whatever is sensational about the film has to do with the way it conclusively details Navalny's recruitment by Bill Browder in 2007 for a program run by Britain's Secret Intelligence Service, also known as Military Intelligence (MI6), intended to destabilize the Russian government. Navalny came to the attention of MI6 because Browder determined he was "the most suitable candidate for future political leader" given his creativity, new media mastery and speaking skills on politics, law and economics.

We then follow Navalny's progress as a foreign-paid trouble-maker engaged in standing up for minority shareholders and exposing corruption in major Russian, partly state-owned companies, meaning that he was busily attacking Vladimir Putin's direct appointees. We are told Navalny was next a useful aid to U.S. authorities in compiling a list of high Russian judicial and penal administrative officials for inclusion in the Magnitsky List on the basis of their alleged involvement in the torture and murder in detention of Browder's erstwhile accountant, Sergei Magnitsky. One document from 2010 indicates Navalny received large sums of money, at one point a $300,000 payment, from his overseas handlers to apply his skills with social media and disseminate a positive spin on American sanctions to Russia's liberals and creative classes. The objective was to undermine popular trust in the courts.

The last documents involving Navalny shown on the Vesti nedeli program Sunday date from just before the State Duma elections on 4 December 2011, which were followed by massive street demonstrations against what was called electoral fraud perpetrated by the ruling party. Notwithstanding the advice from his mentor, Browder, to stick with his economic warfare on Russian big business and stay out of politics, this was the point when Navalny went on to emerge as a key leader in the new generation of forces opposed to the Kremlin.

For Western observers, there is nothing sensational in the exposé of Navalny as a paid agent of British intelligence operating under the code name "Freedom." He is a remote personality, has been denounced by some in the West as a Russian nationalist and he is at liberty, not a prisoner of conscience. The truly sensational nature of Yevgeny Popov's film lies elsewhere, in its material on Browder. If Navalny was recruited by Browder, then Popov was obliged to show how it was that the billionaire co-founder and owner of Hermitage Capital, which was at one point the largest foreign portfolio investment company in Russia, could be an agent, code named "Solomon," in the MI6 documents presented on screen.

To answer this question, the film flashes back to 1995, and a Memorandum for the Chief of Secret Intelligence dated 12 July describing the attraction of Browder for his new bosses: "he is an important figure in integration of financial structures into the Russian economy. [He] has extensive contacts with [sic] international banking community and has [sic] wide range of relations with representatives of business communities in the UK, the USA, Europe, China and India."

This was about the time when Browder was making a transition from highly paid employee heading up the section of private investing in Russia at Salomon Brothers (hence the coy code name, a corruption of Salomon) to setting up his own investment company with seed capital from the elderly Syrian-Jewish-Brazilian banker and entrepreneur Edmond Safra. It was also the time when Browder, a US citizen became a British subject.

And so that we may understand why such talents and contacts could be useful to British (and by extension to American) intelligence, a further flashback to 28 August 1986 shows us a CIA document entitled "Change the Constitutional and Political System in Eastern Europe and the USSR" signed by the agency director Wiliam Casey. Among the specific actions within the scope of this program would be "getting control over financial flows and removing assets from the economies of developed countries."

The narrator explains that even more than 25 years after the disappearance of the USSR, this CIA policy, known as "The Quake" (Drozh', in Russian) remains in effect.

Not content with proving that a billionaire investment fund owner could also be an MI6 operative, the film's producer also saw fit to demolish via documentary proof the entire Browder story about the reasons for his being declared persona non grata in Russia in 2006 as a threat to national security and about the persecution of his loyal retainer Magnitsky at the hands of rapacious Moscow officials plundering the remains of his company.

It emerges from a memorandum to the Director of Central intelligence written on CIA letterhead and dated 20 September 2009 that Browder had discussed with MI6 the deteriorating health of Magnitsky in detention and that he was involved in plans to have the penitentiary service arrange the termination of medical services. The report went on to say that this 'medical error' could lead to Magnitsky's death.

A follow-on interview with one political analyst explains that Browder was the only one who could profit from Magnitsky's demise. We are told his former protégé was about to start talking to prosecution against his employers. Then his death provided the material for the cause célčbre that Browder would ride to nation-wide prominence in the USA and in Europe with the eventual passage of the sanctions on Russia he promoted as the just punishment for corrupt and murderous officials of the Putin regime.

Thus, the collateral damage resulting from Yevgeni Popov's exposé amounts to a devastating attack on the political situation in the United States, where the CIA is shown to have been complicit in setting up the case used to move the American political mood and legislation in a harshly anti-Russian direction via the Magnitsky Act sanctions. Here is a smoking gun of great potential importance for those who care about who is actually controlling the US government if not our elected leaders.

Part of the documentary rests on expert testimony of Russian political analysts. Part rests on skype texts and on telephone conversations intercepted by the Russian intelligence agencies. But the most important material, including the aforementioned 'smoking gun' come from documents in a cache prepared by Kremlin-nemesis Boris Berezovsky in London as he tried to negotiate with Vladimir Putin a possible return to his motherland that would land him in good graces and not in a prison cell.

One sequence in the documentary introduces us to Sergei Sokolov, the former chief of security for Berezovsky who, at his boss's instructions, hid copies of this cache of documents in several locations and eventually brought a set with him to Moscow, where we may assume Russian intelligence officers pored over them. Sokolov is not a new face to viewers of Russian state television. Several months ago he was shown in a documentary examining the death of Berezovsky in one of his London properties. The cache of documents was mentioned then but not described.

This peculiar provenance of the documents means that they should have been subjected to special scrutiny by Mr. Popov's team before presentation to the general public. Considering the possible impact of the content of these documents on US-Russian relations, such caution would be doubly recommended. Regrettably, that appears not to have been the case.

In the information war that has been ongoing and escalating to fever pitch ever since Vladimir Putin made his famous accusatory speech directed against the United States at the Munich Security Conference in February 2007, I have examined closely a succession of key documents produced by the American side and its close allies and discovered patent fraud and forgeries.

In my essay on the article "Containing Russia" signed but not written by Yulia Tymoshenko and published in Foreign Affairs magazine in the spring of 2007, I demonstrated how textual analysis could turn up inconsistencies that give the lie to official attribution.

The same essay pointed out the fraud perpetrated by the German Marshall Fund in the summer of 2008 when it commissioned an open letter denouncing Barack Obama's recently launched policy of re-set which was distributed to and published by The New York Times and other mainstream media as a cri de coeur from Lech Walesa, Vaclav Havel and other Cold War heroes in the struggle against Soviet domination.

Still another essay of mine devoted to the launch of the EU's Eastern Partnership Program at a summit in Prague in May 2009 pointed to the American spelling used in the Southern Corridor papers presented in the concurrent summit on the New Silk Road for energy. While interference by MS Word spellcheck cannot be totally eliminated as an explanation, the greater likelihood was that these ostensibly European documents on a new, anti-Russian energy policy were written in Washington, D.C. See my book Stepping Out of Line, pp. 315 ff.

It is with this background of interest in textual analysis that I have approached the documents presented by the film "The Browder Effect" and at once serious questions arose. In one or two documents, my reservations are at the level of tell-tale signs of Russian speakers' intervention: namely absence of or poor control over the use of articles. In the one memo where this occurs most, it could be just telegraphic style, but it stands out and differs from the other texts. Another document has one specifically Russian turn of speech. More generally, it is disconcerting that memorandums from the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) and the one memorandum on CIA letterhead are formatted identically. The most recent document, from MI6, the "Report on performing duties under special operation 'Magnitsky list'" is dated 'Jan 23, 2010,' American style; it has the American spelling of "program" and British punctuation. Such mongrel style does not usually exist in nature.

It is impossible to say what is the source of the problems cited. One possibility is that the documents, which are said to have come from the US embassy in London, were copied out by hand and mistakes were made in the transcription. Then they were retyped in a single style. Another possibility is that they are forgeries, pure and simple.

Having called attention to these issues, I hasten to add that the content of the documents as they concern Bill Browder ring true to my understanding of his possible role in the entire Magnitsky case. I say this on the basis of my personal reading of Browder during his two visits to Brussels in 2013 when I saw him and his road show exhibits up close.

In his first visit, at a public seminar on Russian political prisoners held in the European Parliament building on 5 June 2013, Browder brought a collection of spiteful witnesses intent on blackening the reputation of Vladimir Putin and his 'regime.' The seminar, which was sponsored by the neo-Liberal ALDE faction in the Parliament, was scheduled to take place one day after the publication of an Address to Foreign and Interior Ministers of the EU signed by 47 European Parliamentarians pressing on the EU executive the adoption of a law similar to the so-called Magnitsky Act.

Notwithstanding the various particular messages and particular concerns of the diverse panel, united only in its opposition to the Putin regime, the event was called to promote such a Magnitsky bill and those on the podium spoke in unison in its favor, disseminating the (manifestly false) idea that the bill enjoyed broad support within Russia and was only opposed by the regime itself. The entire proceedings were video recorded, presumably for future use in the halls of power by the event's sponsors.

At that event, Browder spoke very little. His task as master of ceremonies was to introduce his assembled witnesses. These included Mikhail Kasyanov, former prime minister and leader of the Parnas Party, together with Boris Nemtsov, the allied party to ALDE in the Russian Federation. A tearful speech was delivered by Pavel Khodorkovsky, son of the then still imprisoned oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky. But perhaps the most passionate speech was by the iconic freedom fighter Ludmila Alexeeva, former leading personality in the Moscow Helsinki Group. In her mid-80s but still very active, Alexeeva likened the environment in Russia to 1937, year of the Great Purge.

When I saw mention in one document presented by Popov of the Moscow Helsinki Group as the vehicle that MI6 used to get money to Navalny, this clicked perfectly with the reality Browder brought with his road show to Brussels on that day .

I wrote up my impressions of Browder's second visit to Brussels that year, in a November essay . On that occasion, which was nominally to present a book he financed promoting a Magnitsky Act for Europe at the Brussels Press Club, Browder once again presented assorted witnesses, including the particularly odious Vladimir Kara Murza, an unrestrained propagandist against the Putin regime and fellow-traveler of the Parnas group. What was most revealing was the Q&A session in which Browder dropped his genial mask and spoke openly about the need to punish by sanctions the million thieves and murderers who run Russia. His stated objective was regime change.

The common conclusion of my two encounters with Bill Browder was that his intensity and the time he was devoting now to putting in place anti-Russian sanctions in Europe was in no way comparable to the behavior of a top level international businessman. It was clear to me that some other game was in play. But at the time, Browder was enjoying vast popularity in the USA, was not doing badly in Europe and no one could stand up and suggest the man was a fraud, an operative of the intelligence agencies.

Whatever the final verdict may be on the documents presented by the film "The Browder Effect," it raises questions about Browder that should have been asked years ago in mainstream Western media if journalists were paying attention. Yevgeni Popov deserves credit for highlighting those questions, even if his documents demand further investigation before we come to definitive answers.

The author is the European Coordinator of The American Committee for East West Accord Ltd. His most recent book, "Does Russia Have a Future", was published in August 2015. This post first appeared on Russia Insider

American Graffiti • 2 years ago ,

I never liked Browder. His background reminds me too much of Armand Hammer (named after Arm & Hammer). He had relatives that were jailed in the US as Stalin-era NKVD spies. He renounced his US citizenship in part, for what the US did to them and the persecution of his father. The apple never falls far from the tree. Another Berezovsky-type.

Jane • 2 years ago ,

After what has happened in Ukraine, regardless of this programme; the Parnas party are going nowhere, this just adds to the commonly held negative views of people like Navalny and his liberal gang

Kjell Hasthi • 2 years ago ,

- it is disconcerting that memorandums from the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) and the one memorandum on CIA letterhead are formatted identically

Simon Parkes' mother was employed by MI5 but worked for CIA. Not much difference then, same bosses.

Anja K. Boettcher Kjell Hasthi • 2 years ago ,

Apart from preparing the ground for destabilizing Russia from within, the US is already planning other Ukraine-like destabilisation of Latvia, in order to further promote a further escalation of the NATO-Russian relationship up to the moment they want to enforce a Russian response to violence against the Latvian Russian minority with the use of tactile nuclear weapons which would then allow a full war-response by NATO. The want to incite a rebellion of that minority, to which the Latvian government, after first attempts to reconcile, is pressed by Poles and Ukrainians to react toughly, so that step for step the situation becomes worse – up to the moment of physical violence against the Russian minority which then would provoke a Russian reaction for their support.

The plan was figured out by a thinktank for a US-conference entitled "Rethinking Amageddon – Planning Scenarios for the Second Nuclear Age" on the 12th February 2016.

http://csbaonline.org/2016/...

According to the plans, worked out their by US-thinktanks, they have sketched their an elaborate path to a full scale war in scripts available in the net.

The link can be found here:

https://www.futureworldfoun...

While they know that unwilling and (in their eyes) too compromising and de-escalting EU countries like Germany, Italy, Austria, the Chechs and the Greeks, could be an obstacle, they have as well started various taskforce for the "information warfare". One which is directed to make Europe's population swallow the idea of NATO airstrikes against Russia held a conference in Novermber 2015 in Essen, Germany. Their strategic report can as well be found in the internet. It shows the direction of NATO propaganda and the determination to abuse all our media for that purpose:

https://www.japcc.org/wp-co...

It's all quite obvious, they do not even hide it. They are so damn sure that the public might be distracted to the degree of complete disregard to all these plans – although they are publicly available.

What can we do to prevent their scenario of a full scale Amageddon of Europe?

THESE FASCISTS WANT TO MURDER US ALL!!!

teddyfromcd Anja K. Boettcher • 2 years ago ,

imo...

with all due consideration to potential and likely inevitable LOSSES .. the RUSSIANS - EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM - no matter how remotely russian MUST BEGIN PREPARATIONS TO LEAVE -- and start transferring assets, however that goes n the procedures...

i am talking about REAL ''PICK UP AND START LIFE" AGAIN..it is going to be a painful process and they will have to sacrifice much of what they have established for generations in the baltics...IT SHOULD ALSO be noted that the DUMA is about to approve the 1 hectare free , no tax for ''every russian citizen and foreigner that wants to establish in Russia for any business or personal reasons -- EXCEPT to sell to foreigners" anyway.. And at least whatever the limitations of that -- they DO have something to ''go home to" .. a dacha, a new house, to build on free land, something...

RATHER THAN WAIT for their possessions to be confiscated, burned, and their lives miserable BECAUSE they are russian in latvia, and baltics as will SURELY COME because they are going to be used as ''BAIT" BY NATO/USA BALTICS to provoke russia.

but it is ALSO CLEAR that WORSE will come unless they already do it now. it is better that whatever 'losses" they have to make for picking up - houses to sell, even at lower prices, etc...are NOTHING COMPARED to if the USA/NATO/BALTICS

EVENTUALLY will provoke something like what happened in UKRAINE. AND BY LEAVING THEY REMOVE A VERY, VERY LARGE part of national assets with them TO their true homeland in russia. and at least -- literally -- BE SAFE.

IT HAS come to that point and the lessons of Ukraine, etc...have already shown they are RUNNING OUT OF TME and can not rely on HOPE that things will be better and the worst can be avoided. NOT AT ALL - THE USA ANGLO-AMERICAN regme changers through the baltics are INTENT on creating a 'vietnam" RIGHT IN THAT AREA.

AND THE RUSSIAN ETHNICS better make their preparations now . bank accounts, etc...businesses to liquidate -- invest again in russia, simply MAKE their chilldren understand the critical importance that their very LIVES are at stake FOR BEING RUSSIANS.

AND it partly removes the EXCUSE by the USA/NATO/BALTICS. ''the russians left -- all of them" WHERE IS THIS RUSSIAN EXPANSION YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT? "IF you cross even an inch of russian borders -- your shps SINK, PERIOD".

it HAS TO be that kind of ''red line" now. as the LUNATICS OF the west and baltcs can't and WON'T stop their lunacy. it is really time for KREMLIN RUSSIA - FORTRESS russia to make the decisions without further delay , imo. and it has to now include the russian ethnics - they MUST FLEE - just like CRIMEA AND EAST UKRAINE HAVE DONE -- FROM WESTERN FASCISTS that are impending in descending upon them.

Kjell Hasthi Anja K. Boettcher • 2 years ago ,

- Apart from preparing the ground for destabilizing Russia from within, the US is already planning

I haven't gone through the sources yet. But are you telling the sources tells "US" wants to destabilize Russia, and also start a WW? US is a superpower in decline -> US has more important problems to worry about US think tank - does not have to mean the client is US
A Russian think tank may be pro-Putin or anti-Putin. In last case that is not a "Russian" think tank, more an Oligarch think tank

... ... ...

Anja K. Boettcher Kjell Hasthi • 2 years ago ,

The US either wants to topple an independent Russian government or to go step for step up a pre-planned escalation ladder. The fictitious scenario in the script, composed by a thinktank for that conference, shows something like a chess arrangement: We will make move x1, then they either will have to surrender or they will go step y1. Secondly we make move x2, then they will either have to.... and so on.

In this scenario (which really names the dates of the described chain of events, supposed to start next year) they really think through any use of the weapons they have at their disposal.

And a second aspect becomes obvious: They are determined never to allow any of their "allies" turning out to be a possible game-changer. They take into consideration that they may always use Poland and Lithuania for the next step of escalation, if it's convenient, and the German government to slow things down, if they need it. But that any other country could persuade them to alter any of their steps or even the general course is definitely outruled.

Nuclear war is not at all a no-go for the US, while I am absolutely sure that the Russians would only make use of it under the inescapble threat of physical extinction - following the clear message: "If you decide, we have to die, we won't go alone."

This is as well Ron Paul's view, that of Clinton's defense secretary William Perry and Andre Damon's interpretation of John Kerry's current message to Japan.

Kjell Hasthi Anja K. Boettcher • 2 years ago ,

Your source (1) is Washington DC / Pentagon related http://csbaonline.org/publi... We may equal that with Hillary in US. Your source (2) "FutureWorld Fundation"

View Hide

Anja K. Boettcher Kjell Hasthi • 2 years ago ,

My source (1) is from the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessment. The persons who sign responsible are all US congressmen. They have as well produced the script I have linked (even if the link was as well given on the sites of Future World.)

Wikipedia says about the CSB:

"The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) is an independent, non-profit, Washington, D.C.-based think tank specializing in US defense policy, force planning, and budgets. It is headed by Andrew Krepinevich, a West Point graduate. According to its website, CSBA's mission is "to promote innovative thinking and debate about national security strategy, defense planning and military investment options [and] to enable policymakers to make informed decisions in matters of strategy, security policy and resource allocation."[1] CSBA emphasizes initiatives the United States and its allies can take to wisely invest in the future, even during periods of fiscal austerity and uncertainty. CSBA evaluates its policy proposals through the net assessment methodology, wargaming, and by estimated impact on the Department of Defense budget over multiple Future Years Defense Programs."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

How can you claim it has nothing to do with the US-administration?

teddyfromcd Kjell Hasthi • 2 years ago ,

the destabilizing of Russia project goes apace, even accelerating - it is what the USA has to do in order to preserve its primacy - that's the whole point. it knows it is a vicious rabid dog cornered in its exposed brutality so now -- it is lashing out in all directions -- it's an all-out war, . that has actually been going from the USA FOR A LONG TIME NOW. it can't help itself -- it's what the USA IS AND DOES.

Kjell Hasthi teddyfromcd • 2 years ago ,

When some Washington (politician) was asked why he opposed Trump - He is not part of the Security establishment. "Security establishment" = insider

... ... ..

[Jul 26, 2018] According to MI6 and CIA internal documents, Alexei Navalny had been recruited to work for MI6 by UK hedge fund manager Bill Browder

Not very plausible, as Navalny spend time int he USA in YYale, so if he was recruted it is probably during his stay in the USA, but connection of Bill Browder and MI6 is plausible
EU vs DISINFORMATION

According to MI6 and CIA internal documents, Alexei Navalny had been recruited to work for MI6 by UK hedge fund manager Bill Browder. His task is to carry out operation "Quake" which aims to undermine the existing constitutional order of the Russian Federation. He is being paid handsomely for his services via the Moscow Helsinki Group (MHG) human rights organisation.

[Jul 26, 2018] Bill Browder US visa revoked, accused of murder by Russia by Natasha Bertrand

Oct 23, 2017 | www.businessinsider.com

Russia has claimed Magnitsky died of natural causes and, in a new twist, is now accusing Browder of colluding with a British spy in 2009 "to cause the death of S. L. Magnitsky by persuading Russian prison doctors to withhold care," according to The New York Times .

[Jul 26, 2018] Putin LOSES IT, Warns Journalists of War 'I Don't Know How to Get Through to You People' (Video)

Notable quotes:
"... We know year by year what's going to happen, and they know that we know. It's only you that they tell tall tales to, and you buy it, and spread it to the citizens of your countries. You people in turn do not feel a sense of the impending danger - this is what worries me. How do you not understand that the world is being pulled in an irreversible direction? While they pretend that nothing is going on. I don't know how to get through to you anymore. ..."
Jul 26, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Putin railed against the journalists for their "tall tales" in blindly repeating lies and misinformation provided to them by the United States on its anti-ballistic missile systems being constructed in Eastern Europe. He pointed out that since the Iran nuclear deal, the claim the system is to protect against Iranian missiles has been exposed as a lie.

The journalists were informed that within a few years, Russia predicted the US would be able to extend the range of the system to 1000 km. At that point, Russia's nuclear potential, and thus the nuclear balance between the US and Russia, would be placed in jeopardy.

Putin completely lost patience with the journalists, berating them for lazily helping to accelerate a nuclear confrontation by repeating US propaganda. He virtually pleaded with the western media, for the sake of the world, to change their line:

We know year by year what's going to happen, and they know that we know. It's only you that they tell tall tales to, and you buy it, and spread it to the citizens of your countries. You people in turn do not feel a sense of the impending danger - this is what worries me. How do you not understand that the world is being pulled in an irreversible direction? While they pretend that nothing is going on. I don't know how to get through to you anymore.

Does anyone in the reeking garbage heap that is mainstream western media have a conscience? Do they even have enough intellect to get what Putin is saying - that they are helping to push the planet towards World War III?

[Jul 26, 2018] "Soft neoliberals" blatant hypocrisy by James Kirkpatrick

Notable quotes:
"... Guardians of the Galaxy ..."
"... Chris Pratt and more break silence after James Gunn fired from 'Guardians of the Galaxy 3 ,' ..."
"... Note: Hollywood Finds Child Rape Hilarious , ..."
"... Hollywood demonizes Roseanne, But Defends James Gunn Pedophile Tweets , Newswars, ..."
"... National Review ..."
"... Roseanne and the High Cost of Embracing Craziness . ..."
"... Lesson from the Roseanne debacle: Stop hiring hateful nutjobs , ..."
"... New York Daily News, ..."
"... Should James Gunn have lost his job at Disney ? Daily Wire, ..."
"... Roseanne's behavior is not defensible , The Maven, ..."
"... BBQ Becky, Permit Patty and why the Internet is shaming white people who police people 'simply for being black' , ..."
"... How Pizzagate Pusher Mike Cernovich Keeps Getting People Fired , ..."
"... Huffington Post, ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
Jul 23, 2018 | www.unz.com
Inc.'s Fawning Response to James Gunn Scandal Reveals Where Its True Loyalties Lie •

It's the classic man-bites-dog story; a Leftist artist suffered a career setback because of his statements on social media. The person in question is Guardians of the Galaxy director James Gunn, who lost his gig directing Disney's next installment in the film series after independent reporters such as Mike Cernovich highlighted his "jokes" about the sexual exploitation of children. Senator Ted Cruz, among others, was outraged and suggested Gunn's comments even bordered on illegality.

Hollywood celebrities are defending Gunn and even demanding that he be rehired [ Chris Pratt and more break silence after James Gunn fired from 'Guardians of the Galaxy 3 ,' by Lisa Respers France, CNN, July 23 2018). However, one can't help but notice the same celebrities defending or telling graphic "jokes" about sexually exploiting children are also the people who want careers ended for Politically Incorrect comments directed at privileged classes such as women, homosexuals, or nonwhites [ Note: Hollywood Finds Child Rape Hilarious , by John Nolte, Breitbart, July 22, 2018].

It's not clear why Disney, a company dependent on its appeal to children, would ever employ someone who thinks horrific crimes are comedic fodder. After all, as Gunn himself once tweeted:

What's more, this comes only weeks after comedienne Roseanne Barr had her top-rated show canceled for comparing former Obama advisor Valerie Jarrett to a monkey . (Revealingly, Barr defended herself by claiming that she thought Jarett was white –Jarrett (right) is notably pale for an African-American.) Many of the celebrities now defending Gunn openly celebrated when Roseanne was fired [ Hollywood demonizes Roseanne, But Defends James Gunn Pedophile Tweets , Newswars, July 21, 2018].

Yet it isn't just Leftist celebrities who are suddenly eager to defend the sacred right of free speech when it comes to pedophilia. Shockingly, some Conservativism Inc. luminaries, particularly those who love to showily brag about their Christianity and social conservatism , have chosen this hill to die on as well.

David French, one of the most prominent Never Trump activists of the 2016 election, rushed to Gunn's defense, saying:

In contrast, however, when Roseanne was purged for a single tweet, French penned an entire piece for National Review on May 29, 2018 entitled Roseanne and the High Cost of Embracing Craziness .

Similarly, S.E. Cupp, who has a long career as one of CNN's token conservatives , decided this of all things was something that she couldn't remain silent about. She endorsed French's tweet in support of Gunn and added:

Yet only two months ago. when mob rule on Twitter decided Roseanne's fate, Cupp gleefully piled on. Like NR 's French, she faulted ABC for hiring Roseanne in the first place.

Remember, this is a woman who was an early supporter of birtherism, has compared Muslims to Nazis, took to Twitter regularly to attack citizens both private and public, floated wild conspiracy theories and bullied Trump opponents with racist, homophobic and anti-Semitic insults.

[ Lesson from the Roseanne debacle: Stop hiring hateful nutjobs , by S.E. Cupp, New York Daily News, May 29, 2018]

Minicon Ben Shapiro , another opponent of Trump during the primaries, is also among Gunn defenders. Shapiro acknowledged Gunn's tweets were "loathsome" but said "that doesn't mean he should have lost his job at Disney". [ Should James Gunn have lost his job at Disney ? Daily Wire, July 20, 2018]

Roseanne, however, was different: "Roseanne played herself in the series, so when she made a new racist reference about Valerie Jarrett, her persona was inseparable from her character," Shapiro wrote. " Roseanne was Roseanne."

This Talmudic reasoning about how the cases are different is suspicious given how eager Shapiro is to police the American right for unauthorized speech

Erick Erickson is another Never Trumper whose views about respectability have mysteriously changed within two months. When Roseanne was driven off the air, Erickson self-righteously proclaimed: "Her joke was not in poor taste. It was racist" [ Roseanne's behavior is not defensible , The Maven, May 30, 2018]. Yet regarding Gunn, he said:

The last comment is revealing. It's hard to imagine in what ways conservatives are "winning" -- Trump supporters are regularly attacked on the street and expelled from businesses. Random white people are humiliated by the Main Stream Media and fired from their jobs for calling the police. [ BBQ Becky, Permit Patty and why the Internet is shaming white people who police people 'simply for being black' , Jessica Guynn, USA TODAY, July 18, 2018] Meanwhile, even as the Democrats become ever more radical, they continue to enjoy all but unanimous support from the MSM and are leading the polls. Insofar as the American Right has won any major victories in the recent past, it was President Trump's election -- something Erickson and his Never Trump co-conspirators fought every step of the way.

Yet the strange connection between Never Trump and defending James Gunn is easily explained. All of the figures above rely on Leftist media, and the powerful mafias that dominate it , to grant them fame and legitimacy as "leading" American conservatives. For that reason, Never Trump conservatives share a common interest with System media outlets in making sure only certain people have access to a mass audience -- certainly not independents like Mike Cernovich [ How Pizzagate Pusher Mike Cernovich Keeps Getting People Fired , by Luke O'Brien, Huffington Post, July 21, 2018].

For ideological and ethnic reasons, Never Trumpers are desperate to purge the American Right of any authentic populist and nationalist tendencies that can't be controlled from the top down. Their power relies on their audience remaining corralled within a certain ideological space and not hearing dissident ideas such as the biological reality of race or the political insanity of expecting nonwhites to vote for "limited government." These Beltway Right hacks have a positive interest in making sure that websites and platform outside Conservatism Inc., although equally or more critical of supposed common enemies on the Left, are marginalized and stripped of resources.

Thus, Cupp, French, Shapiro, Erickson et. al will always be far more eager to purge the Conservative movement than to combat Leftist control of key cultural institutions. To a Never Trump conservative dreaming of future bylines in The New York Times and television appearances on CNN, a far-Left Hollywood degenerate poisoning the minds of America's youth isn't even a problem, let alone an enemy. The problem for Conservatism Inc. remains Donald Trump and what he represents -- a fighting American Right, united behind nationalism, and willing to do what it takes to win power.

After all, the point of that fighting Right is not to get a sinecure in the enemy's System. The point is to destroy it entirely.

[Jul 25, 2018] THE MAGNITSKY ACT - BEHIND THE SCENES

From Vimeo site comment section: "Cynthia Buckner, 22 hours ago What a detective story, I watched it two times. This is what making a documentary is all about, uncovering truth under layers of lies. This is why today's News Media is nothing but "Fake News".
Jul 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

beemasters -> loveyajimbo Wed, 07/25/2018 - 22:47 Permalink

It's no longer available on Bitchute site. In any case, the two I have downloaded have been dubbed in Russian. I was hoping to watch it later, but it's going take me awhile to learn the language.

JSBach1 -> beemasters Wed, 07/25/2018 - 22:49 Permalink

Great that Philip Giraldi uses the embedded Vimeo llink in his article that is still operational since the bitchute link has been taken down.

Or follow this same link to the Vimeo English version:

THE MAGNITSKY ACT - BEHIND THE SCENES

https://vimeo.com/281295276

Courtesy of another poster:

Bill Browder April 15, 2015 Deposition in case of U.S.A. vs. Prevezon Holdings LTD. (watch his reactions):

full transcript: https://c1.100r.org/media/2017/10/Browder-Deposition-April-15-2015.pdf

sarcrilege -> beemasters Wed, 07/25/2018 - 22:53 Permalink

still here:

https://youtu.be/QgK7MlZDuJ8

beemasters -> sarcrilege Wed, 07/25/2018 - 22:58 Permalink

Great. Thanks! English version. Downloading it on clipconverter.cc before it gets taken down again.

samsara -> beemasters Wed, 07/25/2018 - 23:10 Permalink

'THE MAGNITSKY ACT - BEHIND THE SCENES'

https://vimeo.com/281295276

Giant Meteor -> sarcrilege Wed, 07/25/2018 - 23:09 Permalink

Yep watching now, thank you.

Never One Roach -> Giant Meteor Wed, 07/25/2018 - 23:10 Permalink

Amazing story of lies and deceit on the part of Browder seems like. I don't judge people by the way they look, but just looking and listening to this guy makes me believe he is one BIG slimey fellow, even without watching the movie.

I'd turn him over to the Russians for questioning. After all, he has nothing to worry about if he has nothing to hide.

[Jul 25, 2018] Also, they will be buying vast amounts of LNG!

Jul 25, 2018 | twitter.com

Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) Twitter

Donald J. Trump ‏ Verified account @ realDonaldTrump 1h 1 hour ago

European Union representatives told me that they would start buying soybeans from our great farmers immediately. Also, they will be buying vast amounts of LNG!

[Jul 25, 2018] US-Russia-China triangle in flux, again

Notable quotes:
"... Has the meeting in Helsinki reset US-Russia relations? ..."
"... China can learn from Trump's respect for Russia ..."
Jul 25, 2018 | blogs.rediff.com

In a conversation with the Financial Times last week, Henry Kissinger made a highly significant remark about President Donald Trump's attempt to improve the United States' relations with Russia. The conversation took place in the backdrop of the Helsinki summit on July 16. Kissinger said: "I think Trump may be one of those figures in history who appears from time to time to mark the end of an era and to force it to give up its old pretences. It doesn't necessarily mean that he knows this, or that he is considering any great alternative. It could just be an accident."

Kissinger did not elaborate, but the drift of his thought is consistent with opinions he has voiced in the past – the US' steady loss of influence on global arena, rise of China and resurgence of Russia necessitating a new global balance .

As far back as 1972 in a discussion with Richard Nixon on his upcoming trip to China, signifying the historic opening to Beijing, Kissinger could visualize such a rebalancing becoming necessary in future. He expressed the view that compared with the Soviets (Russians), the Chinese were "just as dangerous. In fact, they're more dangerous over a historical period." Kissinger added, "in 20 years your (Nixon's) successor, if he's as wise as you, will wind up leaning towards the Russians against the Chinese."

Kissinger argued that the United States, which sought to profit from the enmity between Moscow and Beijing in the Cold War era, would therefore need "to play this balance-of-power game totally unemotionally. Right now, we need the Chinese to correct the Russians and to discipline the Russians." But in the future, it would be the other way around.

Of course, Kissinger is not the pioneer of US-Russia-China 'triangular diplomacy'. It is no secret that in the 1950s, the US did all it could to drive a wedge between Mao Zedong and Nikita Khrushchev. The accent was on isolating "communist China". Khrushchev's passion for 'peaceful co-existence' following his summit with Dwight Eisenhower in 1959 at Camp David became a defining moment in Sino-Soviet schism.

But even as Sino-Soviet schism deepened (culminating in the bloody conflict in Ussuri River in 1969), Nixon reversed the policy of Eisenhower and opened the line to Beijing, prioritizing the US' global competition with the Soviet Union. The de-classified Cold-War archival materials show that Washington seriously pondered over the possibility of a wider Sino-Soviet war. One particular memorandum of the US State Department recounts an incredible moment in Cold War history – a KGB officer querying about American reaction to a hypothetical Soviet attack on Chinese nuclear weapons facilities.

Then there is a memo written for Kissinger's attention by then influential China watcher Allen S. Whiting warning of the danger of a Soviet attack on China. Clearly, 1969 was a pivotal year when the US calculus was reset based on estimation that Sino-Soviet tensions provided a basis for Sino-American rapprochement. It led to the dramatic overture by Nixon and Kissinger to open secret communications with China through Pakistan and Romania.

Now, this recapitulation is useful today, because Trump's moves so far are indicative of an agenda to revert to the Eisenhower era – containment of China by forging an alliance with Russia .

Will Putin fall for Trump's bait? Well, it depends. To my mind, there is no question Putin will see a great opening here for Russia. But it will depend on what's on offer from the US. Putin's fulsome praise for Trump on North Korean issue and the latter's warm response was a meaningful exchange at Helsinki, has been a good beginning to underscore Moscow's keenness to play a broader role in the Asia-Pacific.

Beijing must be watching the 'thaw' at Helsinki with some unease. The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson welcomed the Helsinki summit. But the mainstream assessment by Chinese analysts is that nothing much is going to happen since the contradictions in the US-Russia relations are fundamental and Russophobia is all too pervasive within the US establishment.

The government-owned China Daily carried an editorial – Has the meeting in Helsinki reset US-Russia relations? – where it estimates that at best, " Helsinki summit represents a good beginning for better relations between the US and Russia." Notably, however, the editorial is pessimistic about any real US-Russia breakthrough, including on Syria, the topic that Putin singled out as a test case of the efficacy of Russian-American cooperation.

On the other hand, the Chinese Communist Party tabloid Global Times featured an editorial giving a stunning analysis of what has prompted Trump to pay such attention ("respect") to Russia -- China can learn from Trump's respect for Russia . It concludes that the only conceivable reason could be that although Russia is not an economic power, it has retained influence on the global stage due to military power:

On the contrary, if the US is piling pressure on China today, it is because China, although an economic giant, is still a weak military power. Therefore:

Indeed, if the crunch time comes, China will be on its own within the Kissingerian triangle. And China needs to prepare for such an eventuality. On the other hand, China's surge to create a vast nuclear arsenal could make a mockery of the grand notions in Moscow and Washington that they are the only adults in the room in keeping the global strategic balance.

[Jul 24, 2018] Angry Bear The Most Important Issue At Helsinki

Notable quotes:
"... While if star wars* were anything other than a very profitable science project, it has already violated ABM, which RS 26 is in part hardened to missile defenses. ..."
"... Worst, if a miracle occurred and the pentagon trough could actually make something work star wars enables a first strike which is far more destabilizing! ..."
"... Given star wars, START is not in Russia's interests. ..."
"... This from soft spoken, occasionally logical Robert Reich. The depths of Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) and the willingness to scream for war on allegations of cyber attack on "sacred US democracy"* while the money (oil sheik, AIPAC, etc) in government and the DNC dirty tricking Sanders leave huge holes in the claims of "sacred US democracy". ..."
"... Sen Shaheen (D NH)+ was all over Trump about his scaring US allies in NATO! She is a co-chair on the Senate NATO Observer Group whose purpose is to meddle in execute branch operations of foreign policy specifically to turn NATO into an offensive alliance where "collective security" requires surrounding Russia and assuring the new "allies" that the US will go nuclear over their "integrity". ..."
"... Best bet is for Russia to want to trade with the US and Europe. The gas pipe line will not be enough leverage on Germany as it provides 9% of their needs. ..."
"... I am sorry I sent this thread "off the rails". The topic is timely and important. We all should push for new START and INF. From what I have read, it was mentioned but nothing has come out of the executive offices. ..."
Jul 24, 2018 | angrybearblog.com

The Intermediate Nuclear Force (INF) was agreed to in Dec. 1987 by US President Ronald Reagan and Soviet President Gorbachev. It is a permanent treaty requiring no special extension. It bans missiles of intermediate range of especial danger to NATO nations in western Europe. Until 2014 it was followed by both sides. Then in 2014 Putin adopted the RS-26 missile that violates the treaty, although he has denied it does. But US SecDef Mattis thinks it does.

So, what Trump should have had as his top priority in Helsinki and before while visiting NATO allies, whom he dissed, including the EU as our "worst foe," would have been to demand that Putin get rid of the RS-26 missile that violates the INF treaty. Instead we are told that he and Putin have agreed to "extend" it and the START. This is plain awful, but not surprising.

Barkley Rosser

ilsm , July 22, 2018 10:39 am

wkik reports the RS 26 is on "hold". We might consider (or Putin might bring up) US respect for deals with Iran and ABM treaty. I worked a project involved in implementing the INF treaty years ago. I also have had dealing with related weapon systems.

I should keep up with the INF kerfuffle.

RS-26 and such "weapons is [are] to deter Western forces from coming to the aid of the NATO's newer eastern members that are located closer to Russia's borders.[15] "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RS-26_Rubezh

Seems RS 26 has been put in some kind of hold, there are better techie things for the Russian's to use for the nuclear trip wire sitting on the Dnieper.

The US needs to meet with Russia about START while spending a trillion bucks upgrading nukes over the next generation.

While if star wars* were anything other than a very profitable science project, it has already violated ABM, which RS 26 is in part hardened to missile defenses.

Ai=sideon the sundered ABM treaty and star wars:

The St Ronald approach to star wars: he did not want to be "Henry Fonda in Fail Safe". It has now grown to systems that are not so useful for missile defense but are enablers of other tactics which have moved in to former Warsaw area and Korea. Worst, if a miracle occurred and the pentagon trough could actually make something work star wars enables a first strike which is far more destabilizing!

Given star wars, START is not in Russia's interests.

Karl Kolchak , July 22, 2018 4:48 pm

Yeah, the U.S. violates every agreement with Russia and brings NATO right up to their doorstep, yet Russia should give up the one weapon that is key to protecting it from NATO aggression. You want to carry some MORE water for the unaccountable empire?

Dan , July 22, 2018 6:32 pm

While the issue of defensive missiles is important, the immediate concern is the rabid anti-Russian stance of the liberals who, up until 2016, were just fine with "discussions" or "negotiations" with the Russians to keep antagonism to a moderate and manageable level. Then, with Trump's election, the rails came off the rational train of thought in liberals' heads. Now they are seeking confrontations with the Russians who they blame for Hillary Clinton's defeat rather than the fact that enough people saw her for the sociopath that she is. So, any chance they have to poke the bear, they take it.

Some reading:
https://www.thenation.com/article/do-liberal-democrats-want-war-with-russia/

ilsm , July 22, 2018 8:18 pm

Imagine you live in a world where a country's leader for merely talking to the leader of a similar, nuclear armed power brings rants of "treason".

http://robertreich.org/post/176069359495

This from soft spoken, occasionally logical Robert Reich. The depths of Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) and the willingness to scream for war on allegations of cyber attack on "sacred US democracy"* while the money (oil sheik, AIPAC, etc) in government and the DNC dirty tricking Sanders leave huge holes in the claims of "sacred US democracy".

Sen Shaheen (D NH)+ was all over Trump about his scaring US allies in NATO! She is a co-chair on the Senate NATO Observer Group whose purpose is to meddle in execute branch operations of foreign policy specifically to turn NATO into an offensive alliance where "collective security" requires surrounding Russia and assuring the new "allies" that the US will go nuclear over their "integrity".

Opposing that aggressive alliance is not treason it is the best way to assure the future of the world.

The democrats have gone from soft on defense to raving war mongers. TDS is not the main cause.

*in a constitutional republic owned by money foreign and domestic!!

+I will work and contribute to unseat all democrats in NH.

run75441 , July 23, 2018 2:02 pm

ilsm:

If it was just a matter of talking to another world leader, this would be a so what. The fact is, Putin is not just another world leader the same as Merkel, May, or Macron. You have cited Robert Reich's post of July 19, 2018 in general without specifics you would find wildly exaggerated, half true, or just plain lies. Trump's wildly fallacious comments and bizarre actions in light of his past public blundering nationally and globally leave much to the imagination and do not breed trust. He is a liar who makes things up as he goes along.

Shaheen calling for a congressional hearing with an interpreter is a call to war? It is kind of funny we have to interrogate an interpreter to find out what Trump actually said because by the next day he will have forgotten. That is the danger of his forgetting what he actually promised.

Maybe too you meant Bush II placement of missiles in Poland and Czech republic, canceled by Obama due to techie issues, and to be placed elsewhere closer to Iran in 2018 with an improved version (feign south?). Czechs did not want them and the nationalistic Poles did want them. Obama did not want to spend the money on something (Aegis, Patriot?) of which earlier versions did not work effectively. Trump signed off on a $10.5 billion deal with the Poles giving them an advanced version. And Dems are clamoring for war?

A while back Russia was testing hypersonic weapons. You said it earlier that Russia can not afford a large War budget as it takes from the economy. Large amounts of money spent on war materials helped lead to their collapse previously. Best bet is for Russia to want to trade with the US and Europe. The gas pipe line will not be enough leverage on Germany as it provides 9% of their needs.

Barkley Rosser , July 23, 2018 12:17 am

ilsm,

I think you are right that the RS-26 is on some sort of hold, which seems to date to the Obama era. This is a big deal, but nobody wants to talk about it publicly, which is why you have to have somebody like me to bring up this deep shit, :-).
JBR

EMichael , July 23, 2018 8:48 am

So Russia ratfckes our election and the problem is liberals looking for a confrontation with them?

Like to see the reaction of these so called americans when they show up to vote and find they are not registered any longer for reasons no one knows.

ilsm , July 23, 2018 4:29 pm

Barkley Rosser,

I am sorry I sent this thread "off the rails". The topic is timely and important. We all should push for new START and INF. From what I have read, it was mentioned but nothing has come out of the executive offices.

While Kim may be watching how Trump and Putin deal with the really big stuff.

ilsm

[Jul 24, 2018] Reader Coping Strategies for Engaging With Committed Liberals by Yves Smith

Notable quotes:
"... By contrast, Americans, who pretend to fetishize individualism, are conformists. Dissent is not well tolerated at work or social spheres. And its only gotten worse as media fragmentation and political strategies based on hitting voter hot buttons means that many people are deeply invested in their political views, whether they are well founded or not. Punitive unfriending and other forms of ostracism have become a new normal. ..."
"... She said the "fake news" campaign has been extremely effective in discrediting non-mainstream views. And since her friends are also PhDs, she was also frustrated at their refusal to consider evidence, or entertain the idea that their preferred sources were biased. ..."
"... One approach she has used that worked was to find information from other sources they could not reject, like Reuters and the Associated Press, that had not been covered in the New York Times or better yet, contradicted what they wanted to believe, such as a Reuters story describing how Germany opposed sanctions against Russia. But she clearly found it taxing to find these informational nuggets. ..."
"... Saying early on that Hillary was an awful alternative to Trump can lower the temperature considerably. Going on to talk about issues and staying away from Trump bashing is a follow through. ..."
"... Speaking as a member of the clergy, I have a suggestion about how to use the teachings of Jesus to reach Team Blue, whether or not they subscribe to Christianity in some form. ..."
"... One of the most radical of Jesus' teachings, one that is often given lip service but is extremely difficult to put into practice, is the commandment that we love our enemies and pray for them ..."
"... I am increasingly encountering extremism as the base line for discussions, really arguments, in my daily encounters. This comes from both ends of the political spectrum. This I perceive as a sign of desperation. ..."
"... Fair enough, Chuck, but I think you might be missing a very important bit: the fact that many people who are otherwise staunch rank-and-file supporters might also have an otherwise invisible breakpoint, or fault line. I say this as a former Dem Party supporter, who did the full song and dance – supported Hillary, supported Kerry before that, and was a total devotee to Obama. I was as tied to the Dem party as anyone not getting a paycheck could be, and when Obama won, I was elated. I thought that things would really change. ..."
"... The Financial Crisis was a rude, rude awakening. The pretty speeches meant little, and did even less. If anyone had a hand in setting fire to my generally moderate viewpoint, it was Obama himself, his worship for Wall Street, and his inability to put up a fight about anything. It was a weird time for me, politically, but 2008-2016 was what set the stage, while the last set of primaries only confirmed what I had felt in my gut for many years. ..."
"... Listen is first. Would you expect to walk into any fundamentalist church or mosque and change minds? Conversation among strangers gets more specific along commonalities until it hits a split point, then drops down a level. If nothing in common, there's always the weather. That's universal. ..."
"... On Russia – the biggest "liberal" fake new angle for years now – I say "Not one single piece of evidence has ever been presented that Russia meddled in the election. Not one single piece. The same agencies that said WMD in Iraq are now telling us Russia meddled. This is Democrat's WMD in Iraq moment." ..."
"... The Making of the President 2016 ..."
"... my point is that she enforces dogma and insinuates disloyalty in any heretic. ..."
"... It would be great if the one group of unthinking believers cancelled out the other group of unthinking believers, but of course the adherents are so blind to reality that that can't see that the difference between Bush's Goldman Sachs' Treasury Secretary and Obama Goldman Sachs' Treasury Secretary is .???? ..."
"... I wonder, sadly, if "engaging with liberals" might be, in fact, a lost cause. Struggling to find common cause with the delusional amidst the collapse of empire, environmental catastrophe, and financial ruin might not be the best use of limited resources. ..."
"... Americans, who pretend to fetishize individualism, are conformists ..."
"... fairness and decency ..."
"... Arguing with entrenched people is a lost cause but sarcasm = mercilessly tearing right into their own hypocrisy does the work of shaming them for a while, especially if you make the point about a topic they are virtue signalling about. These people do not have a policy idea in mind, they are pure virtue signallers. ..."
"... knows what he is talking about ..."
Jul 24, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

An oft-repeated bit of advice in America is never to talk about religion or politics. Sadly, the reason is that Americans are dreadful at talking across political lines. When I lived in Australia in the early 2000s and adopted a pub, by contrast, I found the locals to be eager to debate the topics of the day yet remain civil about it. That may be because Australians in generally have mastered the art of being confrontational by lacing it with humor and/or self deprecation.

By contrast, Americans, who pretend to fetishize individualism, are conformists. Dissent is not well tolerated at work or social spheres. And its only gotten worse as media fragmentation and political strategies based on hitting voter hot buttons means that many people are deeply invested in their political views, whether they are well founded or not. Punitive unfriending and other forms of ostracism have become a new normal.

And now that we have anger over Trump directed at not the best or most useful objects, like Russia! Russia! as opposed to his packing of the Federal bench, or his environmental policies, or even his push to privatize Federal parks, a lot of educated people expect, even demand, that their friends be vocal supporters of the #Resistance.

For instance, at the San Francisco meetup, I spent a fair bit of time with a woman who had held elected offices in her community. She was clearly distressed by the fact (without using such crass terms) that her friends had turned into pod people. They all believe that the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the New Yorker are authoritative. When she tried arguing with them about what they've read in these outlets, they shoot back, "Oh, so you believe in fake news?" She said the "fake news" campaign has been extremely effective in discrediting non-mainstream views. And since her friends are also PhDs, she was also frustrated at their refusal to consider evidence, or entertain the idea that their preferred sources were biased.

One approach she has used that worked was to find information from other sources they could not reject, like Reuters and the Associated Press, that had not been covered in the New York Times or better yet, contradicted what they wanted to believe, such as a Reuters story describing how Germany opposed sanctions against Russia. But she clearly found it taxing to find these informational nuggets. She also said they would not consider foreign sources, even the BBC or Der Spiegel or Le Monde.

Readers also discussed their frustrations in Links over the weekend. For instance:

Montanamaven , July 22, 2018 at 8:28 am

"Shame" looks to me like the word of the week. I've heard from liberal/Democrat friends that they are "ashamed" of this President. They are embarrassed by his behavior at NATO and Helsinki. I asked, "Who are you embarassed in front of? What does that mean?" Then I got a link to a Thomas Friedman article .

I'm not sure how to answer my friends with grace. I don't want to be condescending by saying "Really, you read Tom Friedman without a red pen in your hand?" What should I say? "I had no idea you were a globalist although you are kind of anti labor, right?" Any suggestions for talking to Dems about this last week?

My usual answer is "I don't know why we need NATO now that the Cold War is over. Bush I promised Gorbachev not to expand NATO into the former Warsaw Pact countries. Putin wanted to join NATO. Russia, especially the populous West is more European than Asian. So why don't we have Russia join NATO. Wouldn't that solve the problem?

Amfortas the Hippie , July 22, 2018 at 10:06 am

on talking to democrats. LOL. you and me both. Haldol as a prophylactic, perhaps. The Berners are a lot easier but the "mainstream" dem people have been difficult to talk to for some time too many triggers and blind spots. They've become as reactionary as the tea party.. The aversion to figuring out what we're FOR must be overcome.

... ... ...

Hamford , July 22, 2018 at 6:10 pm

Montanahaven, great post, and I don't know the answer on how to talk to Dems or the general gammit of duopoly supporters, but I have been working on refining a technique I heard Tim Black talking about: "drop a few lines, and walk away". I am working on inserting a few judgment free comments without argument, however it requires patience in listening to the ramble of the other side. A few examples in my recent life:
  1. Hillary Dem: "But Mueller found Russia was hacking. Blah Blah, Blah, 17 intelligence agencies"

    Me: Did you know in 2003 Mueller helped lead us into Iraq and testified before Congress pushing WMD intel. [I did not follow with anything about along the lines of "Is this guy trustworthy."]

  2. Trump Repub: "People are killing each other in the streets, blah blah freeloaders, murder rate going up, blah blah, this country is not the same, what happened to our country"

    Me: "People are desperate, Americans are addicted to opiates and will get it however they can, but someone peddling marajuana will get 10 years in prison, but the Sackler family who wantonly pushed opiates on all of America are worth billions" [I could have argued that American crime rate has gone down since the 80's, but I just wanted to divert their attention to a part of the current problem, not to start an argument]

    A few weeks later these folks repeated these talking points as their own, which is a win in my book. I have been trying to drop stuff as subtly as possible and hope they find their own way. People get more entrenched on their viewpoint while arguing, and more words often means less average impact per word. My sample size is admittedly low right now, so I will continue observation.

Another approach, although it takes a great deal of patience, is to go Socratic and ask the true believers in your circle to provide the support for their views. You may still be stuck with the problem that they regard people like Louise Mensch or Timothy Synder or (gah) James Clapper as unimpeachable.

Of course, not everyone is dogmatic. On my way back to New York, I sat next to a Google engineer (PhD, possibly even faculty member at Cornell since he'd gotten some major grant funding for his research, now on an H1-B visa and on track to have to leave the US in the next year+ due to Trump changes in the program) who held pretty orthodox views. He wanted to chat and we were able to discuss the Dems and even Russia. He even thanked me for the conversation as he was getting off the plane. But I knew I was lucky to find someone who wasn't deeply invested in his views, or perhaps merely not invested in winning arguments.

Any further tips or observations would be helpful to everyone. Things will only get more heated as the midterms approach.

MassBay , July 24, 2018 at 6:25 am

Nice comments. It is all about ego. Most of us become invested in our own position and will not surrender, because it is OURS!!

Quanka , July 24, 2018 at 8:25 am

This is true. This is why I like Hamford's idea of information nuggets. You have to let people think you are on their side while they come around to your ideas more or less on their own. If you give someone a good nugget that they take in as their own, then you have more leverage to convince them of something grander.

And listen. Just listen. You don't have to agree with people to give them time and space to be heard. They are more likely to reciprocate if you do.

ScottS , July 24, 2018 at 12:14 pm

Letting people "talk it out" works for strangers and acquaintances. They'll eventually run out of road or realize they've monopolized the conversation and give you a chance to react, even if only out of politeness.

I find closer friends and family will chew your ear off mercilessly, and once they start, you're trapped. If you start poking holes in their beliefs after they've gone on for a while, they'll feel betrayed. I find it best to say "that's nice" and walk away to maintain your sanity. Don't mess with tribalism, you'll always lose.

David Miller , July 24, 2018 at 6:31 am

Ha ha these posts resonate with me – my mother is a committed Rachel Maddow watcher and my best friend is a Trump supporter.

And both of them are otherwise very nice people and rather similar in terms of personality, interests, and outlook aside from red team/blue team foolishness.

What I like to do with both of them is use the term BushBamaTrump. And at the slightest bit of pushback just jump right in to all the things that have been done more or less the same under all three. It never gets through and you really can't change people, but still. Gives me a bit of pleasure to at least throw a little wrench into their silly partisan blinkered world view

notabanker , July 24, 2018 at 8:26 am

If you can't shift out of the partisan mentality, then all hope is really lost. My brain just does not compute this way and I find it really hard to understand how someone else's does.

I find it difficult to break this construct without coming off as arrogant or cynical. I readily admit this feature in myself could be a bug.

hemeantwell , July 24, 2018 at 8:31 am

jump right in to all the things that have been done more or less the same under all three

Yes. Even though disagreements appear to be about issues, there's an underlying personal partisanship that often drives conversational breakdown. This is particularly true for people on the right. Saying early on that Hillary was an awful alternative to Trump can lower the temperature considerably. Going on to talk about issues and staying away from Trump bashing is a follow through.

Amfortas the Hippie , July 24, 2018 at 6:47 am

Hamford's approach is one that I have used with the people I live around(supermajority Repubs, altho much of that is habit and/or single issue apathy is the only growing demograph)

Introducing doubt, "short, sharp shock", and then they worry over it for a day or a week, and later they seem to have incorporated it into their weltanshauung.

That is, indeed, a win.

I've much more experience, given my habitus(central texas wilderness) with culture jamming and otherwise undermining the orthodoxy of republicans. To talk about important things with them, one must avoid numerous trigger words that cause salivation or violent conniptions.

Finding these rhetorical paths has been enlightening, to say the least. like talking about unionism by using the Chamber of Commerce as an example, or playing on their own memories of the Grange or the Farmer's Co-Op or even going directly at the cognitive dissonance, as in "hey, wait a minute if we have freedom of religion, aren't I by necessity free to be a Buddhist?"

Similarly, I've found that using the language of Jesus gets results, unless my interlocutor is too far gone into the whole warrior Christ thing. I'm still working on how to do this with Team Blue.

Like with the R's, the D's have an emotional attachment, and a psychological need, to avoid believing that their party is in any way less than pristine and above board.

Similarly, I remember a discussion of the Puma's (Hillary's 08 supporters) wherein they were so caught up with Herstory(!) that an attack on (or even criticism of) Hillary was an attack on their Identity.

Stages of Grief applies the acceptance we wish for is a big step for most people, because the manifest problems are so huge and complex and intertwined that acknowledging them feels like giving in and even giving up.

It's a big problem, and I thank you for addressing it.

The forces arrayed against civil discourse are huge and well funded(which is, in itself, a sort of indictment and indicator)

Newton Finn , July 24, 2018 at 10:45 am

Speaking as a member of the clergy, I have a suggestion about how to use the teachings of Jesus to reach Team Blue, whether or not they subscribe to Christianity in some form.

One of the most radical of Jesus' teachings, one that is often given lip service but is extremely difficult to put into practice, is the commandment that we love our enemies and pray for them.

I have come to believe that the Russiagate attacks on Trump are driven not by reason but by pure hatred, a sin which always blinds. While there are many reasons to oppose much of Trump's policies and actions, we must not allow ourselves to wallow in personal hatred of the man himself. If Jesus doesn't work here for some of Team Blue, MLK, who taught the same message, is an excellent alternative. Take away the visceral hatred of Trump, and he will be opposed, much more reasonably, ethically, and effectively.

Michael Fiorillo , July 24, 2018 at 11:44 am

I agree: whenever possible, Trump the individual should be ignored, since too many people seem unable to separate the man from the systems, processes and interests in play.

When it's all about Trump, he wins. You'd think people would have realized that by now, but take a look at Alternet, where it's literally "All Trump All The Time," and you see how trapped in their fears and illusions liberals are.

As Lambert and others insist, make it about issues and policy; that's how people can (eventually, hopefully) be reached over time. As the saying goes, they lose their minds in crowds/herds, and will only regain their sanity one at a time.

The added benefit is that ignoring Trump's provocations goes a ways toward depriving him of oxygen. Ignoring him is one of the few ways to drive him crazy(er), takes away much of his effectiveness, and provides the personal satisfaction of being able to do something against him, even if just passively.

readerOfTeaLeaves , July 24, 2018 at 12:06 pm

I'm really hopeful that Michael Hudson's upcoming book on the roots of Christianity will open up a whole new conversation for people of all views, particularly the role of debt and 'what we owe to one another'. Or when we should, and what we shouldn't, owe one another.

IMVHO, Trump is the apotheosis of a debt-based form of greed, which conventional politics mostly exalts and exacerbates, but doesn't seem to really understand -- and papers over its social costs [see also: FoxNews, CNBC]. In this form of (leveraged) debt, the debtor owes absolutely nothing to society, irrespective of the social dislocations that his/her debt creates.

I find that people who get caught up in Dem/Repub conflicts are unreachable on political terms, but if the conversation shifts to economics, to outrage at financial shenanigans, to who 'owes' what to whom, the emotional tone shifts and the conversations are much more engaged.

The R's that I know tend to affiliate with 'lenders', but have an abhorrence of debt. They seem weirdly incapable of grappling with the social and political implications of debt. To them, debt is a sign of weakness. I find myself struggling to grapple with their worldview on the general topic of 'debt'.

The D's that I know tend to at least be able to think about debt as a means to an end: an education, a home, a business idea. But they seem to experience debt as a form of guilt, or powerlessness, a lot of the time. The people in my life who fall into this category are very careful with money, but they are also capable of carrying on a conversation about social meaning of debt.

I don't think it is any accident that the two most articulate, informed voices in current politics are on the 'left', and their expertise and focus is on debt: Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. I suspect that is because debt is one of the most fundamental social-political-cultural issues of our time.

ambrit , July 24, 2018 at 6:50 am

I do come across as a bit of a nutter, and bloodthirsty to boot. However, in my defense, I am increasingly encountering extremism as the base line for discussions, really arguments, in my daily encounters. This comes from both ends of the political spectrum. This I perceive as a sign of desperation.

The Third Way 'faux left' movement is running out of steam as the inequality that it was designed to enable takes hold, and disenchants those that the movement required to at least be neutral in order for it to do its 'work.' The Right wing has always cultivated a sense of being oppressed in order to cultivate the sense of 'belonging' to a 'special' and 'chosen' people. I have been called "dirty socialist" and even less salubrious terms so many times, I've developed somewhat of a thick skin to the insult. The problem with that is that those who are doing the insulting are dead serious in their obloquy. This can escalate into actions. Therein lies the rub. the step from verbal abuse to physical abuse must be guarded against and, if encountered, short circuited. Hence, the comment about the probable bad results of trying to crash someone's SHTF refuge.

I have worked with several ex-cons during my work life. Jail is the pressure cooker of power relations for Western society. All the ex-cons said that threats, even when coming from obviously superior physical specimens must be responded to quickly and decisively. As one man put it, "Even if you have to take a beat down. Make the point that you will fight. Once is usually enough. After that, people in jail will leave you alone." Another man related the tale of a small man in prison who was being groomed for 'bitchdom' by a much bigger man. "The big guy poked the little guy in the chest and started to say something. The little guy grabbed the finger and broke it. Then this tiny tornado tore into the big guy. Man! Nobody f -- -d with the little guy again. He was crazy everybody said. Some of the older cons said that he was smart."

It may not be relevant yet, but America certainly does seem to be sliding into a full blown Police State. As such, the etiquette of prison is slowly being imposed on the civil society. Pure power relations are becoming the norm. This manifests in our more genteel disputations.
So, my present reply to people who take me to task for not voting for Her Royal Highness is to say; "Thank you for giving us Trump. Without your gallant efforts, we would have had a decent government, under Bernie." Then, as one of the above comments suggests, I walk away, and make sure our Urban Bug In Bag is ready.

Bugs Bunny , July 24, 2018 at 7:02 am

That is a frightening observation and I believe it is unfortunately accurate. Relations in the workplace certainly have resembled this since 2008. Civil society was next.

ambrit , July 24, 2018 at 6:52 am

Skynet ate a longer comment. Short version: "Thank you for running Hillary so Trump could win."

Brooklin Bridge , July 24, 2018 at 10:01 am

A brilliant compaction. And nice (fascinating being even better desc.) to see the longer version as well. Skynet apparently liked it too.

My poor wife has somewhat 'come around' (been dragged along) because many of the predictions (that I get from NC)seem to materialize in one way or another, but on the flip side we have lost what we thought were real friends (fortunately few), largely because of my inability to shut up (at least I don't do it until asked some hard to get out of question) combined with insufficient command of a given subject – alas, all given subjects it seems.

ambrit , July 24, 2018 at 11:37 am

We do find out who our 'real' friends are when we go a little 'off the reservation' with subjects having a significant emotional content. I have found that I also discover personal biases by observing what subjects being 'rejected' by others give me pain. I have been surprised at some of my personal biases. Don't be too hard on yourself about those things that you need to study more. Everyone has those kinds of subjects. I certainly do. Yesterday's thread on the lowly apostrophe was such a wake up call to me.

ex-PFC Chuck , July 24, 2018 at 6:57 am

It seems to me that the longer the person has supported the Democratic Party the more they are resistant to changing their views. The affiliation comes to resemble that of a football fan to her favorite team. People who've changed their political affiliation over the course of their lives, and especially those who have done so relatively recently, are more open-minded and willing to consider evidence contrary to their current views.

ambrit , July 24, 2018 at 7:10 am

Not to quibble, but your observation takes on the appearance of a 'chicken or egg' problem. As the Political Fundamentalists showed, politics is a long term game. That's one reason that Lamberts comment about the Democrat party and their 'missing' ground game is so pertinent.

Di Modica's Dumb Steer , July 24, 2018 at 10:12 am

Fair enough, Chuck, but I think you might be missing a very important bit: the fact that many people who are otherwise staunch rank-and-file supporters might also have an otherwise invisible breakpoint, or fault line. I say this as a former Dem Party supporter, who did the full song and dance – supported Hillary, supported Kerry before that, and was a total devotee to Obama. I was as tied to the Dem party as anyone not getting a paycheck could be, and when Obama won, I was elated. I thought that things would really change.

The Financial Crisis was a rude, rude awakening. The pretty speeches meant little, and did even less. If anyone had a hand in setting fire to my generally moderate viewpoint, it was Obama himself, his worship for Wall Street, and his inability to put up a fight about anything. It was a weird time for me, politically, but 2008-2016 was what set the stage, while the last set of primaries only confirmed what I had felt in my gut for many years.

I think there are many out there, struggling like I did. They'll show. Eventually. I'd say that the famous line about the center not holding applies here, but I'm likely missing a ton of context.

polecat , July 24, 2018 at 11:58 am

My 'turn' was when Nancy P. swiped "impeachment" off the gilded table in 2006, Right • After • The • House • Elections. So, when shortly there after, while listening to Obama give his inaugural address, all I could say was "we'll see ??" . Then came his cabinet appointments, and from then on the d-party lost me with their passive-aggressive "We'll have to $ee what's in it AFTER WE VOTED FOR IT" FU tactics.

Steve H. , July 24, 2018 at 6:58 am

Mediation in kindergarten words: Listen, Talk, Ask, Agree, Write.

Listen is first. Would you expect to walk into any fundamentalist church or mosque and change minds? Conversation among strangers gets more specific along commonalities until it hits a split point, then drops down a level. If nothing in common, there's always the weather. That's universal.

Which blogger was it, trying to change the world when he realized he was only reaching the 5% who thought like he did, & stopped? Think how hard it is to undo economics class learnin' and understand MMT.

Politically, these are not going to be new customers. I can't find number of new voters for AOC, but turnout was less than 1 in 5. She gained trust by knocking on doors. You can't reach the frontal lobes if the amygdala is signalling threat.

If you find points of agreement, you can move the conversation to universal. Then to concrete and material.

ChiGal in Carolina , July 24, 2018 at 8:38 am

This dovetails with hamsher above, whose defiines success as hearing his talking points adopted by those he has dropped them on. The key is to be nonjudgmental .

kimyo , July 24, 2018 at 6:59 am

there are two statements which have worked in my recent exchanges with liberals:
1) Obama has bombed more nations than Bush
2) no one person did more to put donald trump in office than hillary clinton (extreme, indisputable malfeasance against sanders in the primary)

although many seem completely ready to discard 'russian collusion' i still hear 'why is he trying to be friends with putin?' on a regular basis.

any criticism of obamacare is immediately discarded, even though many know someone who has health insurance but doesn't have health care.

i keep trying to argue that democrats are best served if abortion is constantly under threat. that most democratic politicians strongly prefer this situation, as it would otherwise be close to impossible to motivate people to get out to the polls. (or, likewise, republicans and gun rights) so far, this doesn't seem to work.

calling out tesla as a nonsense scam is working pretty well, though. (monorail!)

also, pointing out that new research shows that wifi/cellphone exposure increases miscarriage risk is starting to gain traction. i cringe everytime i see a toddler playing with an i-pad. (obviously not a liberal issue, but it helps to dispel the fog of complacency)

timbers , July 24, 2018 at 7:01 am

Here is my general approach, good or bad towards Hillary "liberal" or establishment think or whatever you may call it. I think it helps put the burden of proof to the fake news'ers

On Russia – the biggest "liberal" fake new angle for years now – I say "Not one single piece of evidence has ever been presented that Russia meddled in the election. Not one single piece. The same agencies that said WMD in Iraq are now telling us Russia meddled. This is Democrat's WMD in Iraq moment."

I ask them to "show me the money" if they can point to any evidence to support the claim Russia hacked. Depending on how much time I have, I can shoot it down (like the click bait social media example that is full of holes) but there is so much non-sense out their I am always up on the latest.

Chris , July 24, 2018 at 7:01 am

Long time NC reader in the DC/Maryland area.

Re: discussing what's happening with people I just gave up. Partially because I couldn't keep calm in the face of being labeled a "white cis gendered Russia loving hate monger." Partially because the medium for debate my friends and I were using was Facebook, which is really not a great tool for serious discussions. Partially because it took so much time and energy and garnered no rewards.

Most of my circle of friends ardently believe the following:

(1) the Democrats are significantly different from the Republicans and suggesting otherwise is lying. This gets you the most violent reactions from most people.

(2) all or most of what Trump is doing is a significant departure from the Obama administration.

(3) withholding votes or voting for other candidates than "electable Democrats" is equivalent to voting for fascists.

(4) US citizens who live in depressed economic areas are to blame for their own problems because they vote against their own interests and won't move to better places.

(5) increased immigration, increased globalism, and free trade agreements like TPP are policies we should support.

(6) Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft, Google, etc. are not monopolies and anti-trust law should not be used to break them up.

(7) solutions to inequality in public education should not include busing children from poor areas to wealthy areas. Or vice versa.

(8) our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan must continue.

(9) we need identity politics in this country.

(10) the world would be better off if Hillary was president. P.S. she was robbed by Russians, misogynists, and electoral manipulation from the fascistic Trump campaign.

When I try to mention that all of those points are debatable at best, and admittedly I do that with varying degrees of success, they do not accept it. Any of it. They find discussions of what happened during the Obama administration which either lead to, or was similar to, what Trump is doing now tiring and painful. Mentioning how poorly the HRC campaign was run, how HRC laundered money through local state dem orgs, the wasted millions in consultants, the lack of campaigning in key states, globalism, etc. get you a soulful vomiting of Russia/Misogyny/Fascism. They will ask why you focus on the Democrats, and not the Republicans. It's the Republicans fault we're here and their voters deserve rock suffer.

Humor or analogy doesn't work on this topic either. If you mention something like both parties blame outsiders for their troubles, except Republicans blame people from Mexico and Democrats blame people from Michigan, you get angry stares. If you mention both parties want to go back in time to a better, safer place, except for Republicans it's an imaginary 1950 something and for Democrats is an imaginary 2006, you'll end up drinking alone.

I realized that the only thing I was doing was aggravating my friends and hurting my cause. They're all too high strung to have discussions. They don't want to consider that the status quo ante that they think was great was only "great" for a select portion of the country. They might have admitted that progressives and leftists weren't happy with the Obama administration in 2016. They have no space for that kind of thinking now. So I logged out of FB and Twitter, deleted the apps and spend the time doing other things. I will talk to people about this stuff if they're interested and if it's in person. I stop when I see their body language shift to 'uncomfortable.'

The other thing I've been doing is working to support local candidates who believe in th kind of policies I want to see in my community. I think that's a much better way to use my time and political energy.

Good luck to anyone who wants to try and fight this battle with words. No one is reading or listening anymore. They just want red meat and a torch to join their preferred mob. And with what's happening if you post something a boss or other person finds objectionable, I strongly recommend the virtues of self censorship and keeping your mouth shut until this time passes.

Marshall Auerback , July 24, 2018 at 9:19 am

"being labeled a 'white cis gendered Russia loving hate monger'" Welcome to the club!

Shane Mage , July 24, 2018 at 9:27 am

Please. When mentioning Facebook bots, *always* put the scare quotes about the word "friend."

Chris , July 24, 2018 at 11:02 am

These were all people who I know and associate with off line. What surprised and saddened me was that they couldn't leave an argument behind.

I can leave an FB discussion on FB. I have other topics to discuss when I'm with my friends. They can't do that anymore.

It was that fact more than anything that lead me to believe there was no benefit in trying to post articles or participate in social media discussions. No one is listening. Everyone in my socal circle is feeling too raw to have measured discussions about how we got here and where we could go next.

flora , July 24, 2018 at 11:29 am

I've experienced the same from long time friends or who I thought were friends. For months after the election all they could talk about was 'Hillary was robbed.' I let them vent because it seemed like a grieving time for them. After six months or so, when they still could not talk about anything else even if I tried shifting the conversation to family or gardening or something, then I knew they were caught up in more than grieving. I'm starting to wonder if this is the fury of people who suspect they've been conned and are determined to prove they were not conned. 'The most qualified candidate ever' was a terrible campaigner.
From 2016:
https://www.businessinsider.com/clinton-losing-wisconsin-results-2016-11

My outlook now is that people determined to prove they were not conned then will need to find their way back to calmness.

Reply ↓
flora , July 24, 2018 at 11:39 am

adding: she couldn't turn out the vote. simple as that. imo. but not something people who are determined to prove they were not conned want to hear.

Arizona Slim , July 24, 2018 at 11:40 am

In Roger Stone's book, The Making of the President 2016 , there was a passage about people, many of them on the left, who view those who disagree with them as truly evil people.

What comes next explains a lot about what we've seen since the election. Quoting Stone:

"This is a very immature worldview that produces no coping skills."

Hence, the meltdowns that go on and on and on

christy , July 24, 2018 at 7:01 am

Yes! Plz someone tell me a way to discuss immigration at the border and separating families. The word on the street that 10k of those 12k children being separated were ACTUALLY being 'trafficked' and WITHOUT their REAL parents in the first place.

There are a lot of Dem Nuts on facebook that harrassed the heck out of me and since I posted #walkaway, as an astute BERNIE supporter, this has SHOCKED many and I been unfriended 5 times.

8 million MISSING children and our FBI has only reunited/found 526?

Someone plz tell me wth?

marym , July 24, 2018 at 8:56 am

Please don't post such serious charges about trafficked children without sources. As far as I know not even the Trump administration in its own defense is claiming to have identified trafficked children at those levels.

I'm going to try to put together a comment later today about what we know of the current situation, the need to understand what was happening pre-Ttrump, and what may be happening to the children now after separation. It will probably be on the links thread, as it's not directly related to the coping issue of this thread.

Carla , July 24, 2018 at 10:02 am

Thank you, marym. Hope I can find your comment later.

christy , July 24, 2018 at 7:10 am

Joker Hitler Burgler Spy https://t.co/LA9pTj0jQ0 This is how he does it.

Reply ↓
fresno dan , July 24, 2018 at 7:40 am

So, I made the below comments in today's LINKS. But I will emphasize a different aspect here – in the Links comment my point was the reporter was wrong (about Obama representing the 1% – I think he did). Here my point is that she enforces dogma and insinuates disloyalty in any heretic.

fresno dan
July 24, 2018 at 7:25 am
Why So Many Reporters Are Missing the Political Story of the Decade Washington Monthly. Versailles 1788.

Frankly, someone needs to tell this guy (i.e., Bernie Sanders) to sit down and shut up for a while. Reinforcing the notion that a party that was led by Barack Obama for eight years has merely been representing the one percent contributes to the divide and reinforces Republican lies.
====================================================
party that was led by Barack Obama for eight years has merely been representing the one percent
BESIDES believing that Obama DIDN'T represent the 1%, I'm sure this reporter believes:
1. The earth is flat
2. Elvis is alive
3. The living head of John F. Kennedy is kept at the CIA
4. There are 2 Melania Trumps
5. that Hillary got more white women voters than Trump .
other examples are welcome

Amfortas the Hippie , July 24, 2018 at 8:29 am

on that inability to confront the less stellar record of Obama: it's the same process that happened(and is happening, I'd argue) on the Right .and that happens, over and over, when science chips out another block in the wall of religious certainty.
Fear of the disenchantment of having been wrong, or fooled they'll resist tooth and claw from admitting being descendants of apes .even when they feel/know in their secret hearts that it's true.
With the Dems(non-Berner subspecies), it's acute right now.
They must defend the paradigm at all costs, because to do otherwise is to open the door to a frightening and incomprehensible world that would demand their attention and resolve. For so long, the ire was safely directed at the Right it's their fault we can't have nice things, they are a regressive existential threat, omgomgomg. This is rendered tolerable by the belief that the Dems are their team, on their side and the polar opposite of the hateful Right.
This latter set of assumptions was thrown into existential even ontological doubt by numerous reports, surveys and even by plain old look-out-the-window observation.
The belief and the Reality couldn't be reconciled(America is not already great for a whole bunch of folks) and the Nature of the newly perceived Reality was so ugly, and so huge, that they recoil into paradigm defense.
a giant edifice of bullshit is inherently unstable, it turns out.

The challenge, as I see it, is to acknowledge that the Way We Do Things is falling apart, and that it should fall apart, if we really believe all the high minded rhetoric we perform to each other and then to try to figure out what system/paradigm we'd like to replace it to use the chaos and destruction of the trump era to our advantage.
So more and more, in lib/dem/prog* social spaces, I'm asking "what are we for?"

(* the confusion of tongues here is both instructive and disheartening and encouraging(!). asking folks to define such things is resulting in less fury and spittle and froth, and more with either silence or thought and honest questioning. at least in my little circles )

Reply ↓
fresno dan , July 24, 2018 at 11:37 am

Amfortas the Hippie
July 24, 2018 at 8:29 am

I can't beat what notabanker said:
notabanker
July 24, 2018 at 8:26 am
If you can't shift out of the partisan mentality, then all hope is really lost. My brain just does not compute this way and I find it really hard to understand how someone else's does ..
==============================================
"Independent" self sufficient Americans .join groups called political parties that as a rite of passage evidently require the adherents to believe idiotic, inconsistent things.
But another thing is that the number of people who even belong to political parties isn't that great. But they set the agenda.

It would be great if the one group of unthinking believers cancelled out the other group of unthinking believers, but of course the adherents are so blind to reality that that can't see that the difference between Bush's Goldman Sachs' Treasury Secretary and Obama Goldman Sachs' Treasury Secretary is .????
NOW, of course there were real differences between Obama and Bush .Obama droned a LOT more.

Reply ↓
Colonel Smithers , July 24, 2018 at 7:53 am

Thank you, Yves and the community. This situation applies in the UK, too. It's amazing to meet people who took time off to protest against Trump, but won't against homelessness or austerity.

PlutoniumKun , July 24, 2018 at 11:59 am

Yes, the Irish media used to be moderately independent, but they are getting in line too. Over the weekend I nearly threw my copy of the Irish Times away in disgust at reading some of the articles from writers I'd consider pretty clear minded normally. They are just gradually absorbing the message by osmosis I think.

When someone here rants about Trump, I usually say something like 'well,what exactly has he done thats worse than anything Obama did to, say for example, Libya, or Honduras?' I'd love to say I get a thoughtful response, but thats rarely the case. Interestingly, I find that its the people who profess themselves as non-political or don't read the newspapers much who are more open to discussion.

Watt4Bob , July 24, 2018 at 8:15 am

I'm sure that a lot of NC readers have, over time, experienced some amount of pain associated with the dissolution of long-held beliefs surrounding the American dream, and faith in our economic, and political systems abilities to ' self-correct '.

It's been very painful to realize that ' things ' are not going to get better if we simply vote for the other team.

Over many decades, both the ' other teams ' have pointed fingers at each other and invited us to believe that our problems originated on the other side of the fence, when in reality, as many of us now understand, our two political parties have all the while, worked in collusion to forward the interests of the rich and powerful, the result of which has been wide spread, and extreme economic hardship for most of us.

This failure of our politics has engendered a wide spread visceral hatred of our leadership class, that so far, has remained loosely in the control of the two political parties, but, and I think this a good thing, there is a dawning understanding among a significant number of us, that the hatred of Hillary, and her party, is well deserved, and rooted in exactly the same reality as the hatred of George 'W', and his party.

All that hatred of the political parties and their leadership has so far, resulted in Trump, which in an odd sense is evidence supporting optimism that the two parties strangle-hold on our lives is not invincible, and that there exists a wide-spread thirst for change.

I think that thirst for change is the point where we have an opportunity to make conversation fruitful, and find common ground.

fresno dan , July 24, 2018 at 11:45 am

Watt4Bob
July 24, 2018 at 8:15 am

I'm sure that a lot of NC readers have, over time, experienced some amount of pain associated with the dissolution of long-held beliefs surrounding the American dream, and faith in our economic, and political systems abilities to 'self-correct'.

It's been very painful to realize that 'things' are not going to get better if we simply vote for the other team.
================================================
I don't know how many times I have heard that voting for a third party is "throwing your vote away"
REALITY, that voting for a democrat* or a republican is throwing your vote away, never seems to sway anyone.
* maybe there are individual democrats that are worth voting for, but that is usually due to some screw up by the party apparatchiks

festoonic , July 24, 2018 at 8:34 am

I wonder, sadly, if "engaging with liberals" might be, in fact, a lost cause. Struggling to find common cause with the delusional amidst the collapse of empire, environmental catastrophe, and financial ruin might not be the best use of limited resources. There's a guy running for local city council whose campaign I intend to work for, and anyone campaigning on Medicare-for-All (free at the point of care, of course!), a minimum wage humans can live on, and anything else beneficial to people who work for a living will get my jealously-guarded vote. But the rest looks more and more like the re-arranging the proverbial deck chairs.

macnamichomhairle , July 24, 2018 at 8:39 am

I also think that this is not the time to try to argue. Many people (liberals) seem to have been shocked to their core by Clinton's loss and the arrival of the barbarians. The world has come unhinged, it appears to them.

That is a deeply unsettling feeling that can induce a deep distress and panic. I think it's also new to most liberals because things in America had proceeded pretty much sensibly, even during the Bush years. Also, I suspect many are at a stage in life when they have settled their own sense of their lives on a platform of comfort with the status quo as personified by the liberal consensus; or they are deeply committed ideologically for other reasons of self-identity.

The liberal establishment everyday is whipping the flames of people's panic and resulting outrage, and has created a huge firestorm. The "resistance" gives people a way to make sense of the world again. They will hold onto the "resistance" with all their power because admitting that the "resistance" is in any way flawed throws them back into a chaotic world. So any argument about this stuff derives from a deep place and is not conducive to reasoning. You threaten them, if you try to take away their "resistance" bear.

I also think it is better to put energy into other things, like building positive political movements or structures of life that extend "under" the current debate. (If you go down below general political buzz words, you can sometimes find agreement across political barriers.)

I still make general comments non-locally, but I do not engage with people individually about this. It's useless right now.

Eric , July 24, 2018 at 8:41 am

IMO, these factors contribute to the problem:

Some additional tribes: Wall St bankers, corporate CEOs, police, teachers, Congress, your town, your state, sports fans, etc.

GeorgeOrwell , July 24, 2018 at 8:41 am

Very relevant commentary to which I can completely relate. I had to leave a certain FB group because it became increasingly apparent that these mostly PhD, higher education types were not really interested in being the resistance or fighting fascism. No, what they really want is a safe space/echo chamber in which they can whine about everything that has gone to shit while completely ignoring how they themselves and the 'Democrat' party facilitated said shit's construction. The level of cognitive dissonance was simply mind boggling.

No rational thought about how going along to get along contributed to the current situation, that the lesser of two evils still gets you to the same destination. My working theory is they suffer from social detachment disorder due to their comfortable government (many tenured professors) jobs. As I attempted to explain to one of them, the economic damage created by the policy responses following the GR directly contributed to the door opening for Trump or something like him. These PhD types seem to be completely willing to overlook the social injustice of the Obama tenure, growth of the surveillance state, economic monopolies etc.

Many of these people have not had to worry about a paycheck for some time, thus the complete disconnect from the realities of the current economy. They talk a good game about fighting for social & economic equality, but when push comes to shove many of them are willing to throw their working neighbor under the bus so they can keep their comfortable (not rich mind you) tenured positions and lifestyles. If nothing else, the level of cognitive dissonance in this group certainly made me think about tenure from a much different perspective. Certainly not an encouraging picture of higher ed for sure.

TroyMcClure , July 24, 2018 at 10:45 am

Thomas Frank has repeatedly pointed out that credentialed professionals were the most reliably Republican voting block in America for decades. Now they're firmly democrat. Did their politics/interests change? Doubtful

The decades-long purge of any hint of leftists from the American university system (which started right here in California in the 50's then spread out) has led to our extremely conservative tenure class of professors.

I've had the same experience with these credential class types. Their politics are uniformly anti-labor and elitist. There's no convincing them.

jrs , July 24, 2018 at 11:37 am

I think that it is seldom clear in discussions what differentiates credentialed class from not. Just a bachelors degree? Bachelors degree attainment is over 30% now among young people. They are luckier than many who don't have the degree, but with every white collar job wanting a bachelors degree (often for fairly lowly work that didn't used to) and with a bachelors degree no guarantee of anything (nope not even that white collar job) I'm not sure its all that. (BTW I don't have a bachelors degree, but I'm in no good shape economically at all, if I had a degree maybe I'd be allowed to live, that is all .. so I consider it but without illusion at 40 something).

I think what really protects people's jobs etc. is licensed professions (lawyers, doctors, CPAs, landscape architects etc.) and in some cases those requiring post-bachelors attainment including years of additional training (physical therapists etc.). Well and unionization in the public sector obviously and tenure in academia.

jrs , July 24, 2018 at 11:23 am

it's not in their class interest to care, well the tenured ones, the adjuncts it depends on who they identify with, with the working class or with the tenured ones whose life they can't get anyway.

The average office worker would be more likely to care, although usually not political, and though they usually pretend otherwise, and though they are taught to sympathize with the bosses, there is a chance they might at some level ultimately know the are pawns in a game that they don't control and that can eat them alive (unlike those protected with tenure).

TroyMcClure , July 24, 2018 at 11:39 am

Ask the professors at Vermont Law School, 75% of whom just had tenure stripped unceremoniously. It's coming for them all. I give it less than 10 years. These tenured types total lack of solidarity within their group or any other will finally come home to roost.

My dear friend has been slogging through the trenches of the adjunct lifestyle for the better part of a decade and it's only now at this late date starting to dawn on him that he'll never get regular work at the university. Those waves and easy smiles from tenured faculty hid what they were thinking all along, "Better you than me pal!"

David , July 24, 2018 at 8:45 am

Not my country, but this is less a question of talking to "liberals" (who have their own problems) than of talking to conspiracy theorists. All over the world, certain groups of people are finding that history has suddenly, in the last few years, veered off in directions it has no right to. Since they refuse to believe they are responsible, however distantly, and since they seek, as we all do, simple explanations for complex problems, it must be a conspiracy. And anyone who questions the existence of a conspiracy is by definition part of it.

Because conspiracy theories serve essentially emotional and ideological purposes, rational discussion is by definition useless, and studies show that pointing out that people are factually wrong actually makes them more likely to cling to their beliefs.

I'd recommend a site which discusses and dissects conspiracy theories (www.metabunk.org), and which has discussion threads on how to argue with conspiracy theorists.

Darius , July 24, 2018 at 8:47 am

I was a Keynesian. I thought that meant the same as being a Democrat. Obama cured me of that mistake. Now, I'm in the Modern Money camp. Explaining that to paygo liberals is an even bigger chore.

Jeff N , July 24, 2018 at 10:33 am

Yes, although I've found that when I simply explain basic MMT concepts to either repub or dem friends, I come across as non-political. Because neither dems or repubs support it.

And I gain instant credibility/solidarity with them when I agree with their knee-jerk reaction that state/local governments ARE constrained.

Carolinian , July 24, 2018 at 8:59 am

Americans, who pretend to fetishize individualism, are conformists

That's spot on. Perhaps it has to with out lack of a set class structure which makes people socially insecure. Plus the rise of the meritocracy means that the worse thing you can call someone these days is "stupid" meaning uneducated. Life experience gets little credit at a time when knowledge has been overly formalized.

However we can take some comfort in a history where periods of intense conformity such as the 1950s provoke periods of more liberated thinking as in the 1960s. Things do seem to be changing–hopefully not for the worse. Patience with those vehement NYT and WaPo readers may be necessary until the fever breaks.

Amber Waves , July 24, 2018 at 9:02 am

My concern is that we have a poisoned public space, as it is hard to find the facts in the press or the body politic. Hard to find common ground to discuss or solve problems. I think our democracy, what is left of it, is in deep trouble. I agree that we need to talk to our neighbors about issues of the day. It is hard to overcome the do not talk about politics meme of the last 30 years.

Utah , July 24, 2018 at 9:02 am

I try really hard these days to talk about the system. Trump is a product of the system that we created and we need to change to better everyone.
I try to be compassionate above all else. Trump supporters are not evil or selfish. They believed the lies of someone telling them he was going to save jobs. We, as a nation, believed the lies of Obama's "hope and change" and it got us nowhere except a little more hopeless. Its not about political affiliation. Its about the world oligarchs having entire control. I refuse to be divided by what they want me to be divided by.

Brooklin Bridge , July 24, 2018 at 9:10 am

A fascinating and often painful subject. Being mostly a dismal failure in my own attempts, I've been keenly interested in and come up with several 'types' (hardly exhaustive) that seem gifted with varying degrees of success in communicating though I'm not sure about convincing others. Making others sit up and think (I should say 'having that effect' rather than 'making') might be as far as most in this select group will ever get but I strongly suspect such exchanges can ultimately be very powerful (meaning the 'other' will almost always do the changing of pov, or the expansion of understanding, under their own steam and in their own time).

Trite as it may seem, those who have a strong core of honesty, or who always tend to gravitate toward truth, have the most success in the above. They are the ones who seem to make headway under the most ridiculously difficult or impossible conditions. That they often have a strong command of their subject seems (to me) to be a natural outcome of the affinity for truth rather than truth being a result of knowledge breadth. They aren't always likeable but are often admirable.

After that, there are the 'warm intellectuals' and note that this categorization does not preclude honesty. My father was such. He had a way of making all present feel welcome and valuable despite the intricacy of the discussion. One usually had to ferret out his opinions or his 'take' on something as he rarely made an issue of it. But his conversation and 'presence' always made fairness and decency seem cool; the natural order of things, and I know for a fact he had a profound influence on at least some people – some hard core ones as well.

The ability to bend and compromise for a greater good (or in some cases for another purpose) is yet another 'type' who I see as potentially having considerable power in their exchanges with others. I see them as having emotional energy and an ability to see through the 'facts' or to 'suspend' them for a period. This is obviously a tricky – perhaps flawed (although in reality they are all flawed) – category, home to intellectuals inclined toward the Machiavellian as well as do-gooders quickly judged and relegated -not always justly- to the lot of suck-asses, and I image it has mixed results. It includes but is not the sole domain of those with the facility to put themselves in anther's shoes (and occasionally get lost in so doing).

I am only describing those who can influence others of extreme or highly contrary positions and beliefs, not the relatively larger group who can be eloquent in their own right but are not of note in dealing with made-up minds. Since we are all banging about under varying degrees of illusion , the truly or profoundly successful ambassador, along with his/her close cousin the successful negotiator, even the mundane every-man commenting on a blog or at a social gathering that provokes others to reassess, is a rather unusual individual indeed. That there is some preponderance of such individuals on NC does not contradict the rarity in general.

Perhaps just a very long winded way of saying, "Don't be too hard on yourself."

Brooklin Bridge , July 24, 2018 at 9:38 am

What I meant to say in the last sentence is, "I won't be too hard on myself ", but put in the general form while thinking of it applying to me. I don't presume to give others such advice (though I imagine it holds for others as well ).

Also, since the process of changing or simply being influenced, always takes time, it is almost impossible to see or assess; an unhappy circumstance for those who try at it rather than let it be an outcome..

Bite hard , July 24, 2018 at 9:11 am

Arguing with entrenched people is a lost cause but sarcasm = mercilessly tearing right into their own hypocrisy does the work of shaming them for a while, especially if you make the point about a topic they are virtue signalling about. These people do not have a policy idea in mind, they are pure virtue signallers.

Sarcasm is not to be confused with irony, which allows people to react mildly along "ha, ha, ha, oh my, what a world we live in". You can always escape from irony but a good, hard sarcasm put the moral dilemma right out there and people cannot escape their own crap poorly founded opinions.

danpaco , July 24, 2018 at 9:23 am

Political talk has really become a competition as opposed to a conversation. If the conversation decends into competition I'll try to ask "are there are any rules to this game?". When all else fails, go Socratic. Their answers can be enlightening.

Skip Intro , July 24, 2018 at 9:24 am

I think it can be effective to do a virtual cannonball into the kiddie pool of their belief system. Like Maddow squared but willing to connect the dots.

'Of course the Russians put Trump in, but the whole hacking story is part of a scam and a distraction. There's barely a connection between the leaked emails and the election results. They are a sideshow to get Assange. No, the real story is that the Russians had a high level operative inside the DNC. That's how the emails leaked. That is why the campaign was diverted away from Wisconsin, for example, in favor of Arizona. It is why the campaign pulled strings to get airtime for Trump during the GOP primary. It is why the DNC relied on bad software models and ignored experienced campaigners. Heck, it is why the DNC ran Hillary, even though she was over 43% animatronic by the end of the primary.'

Then you reveal that the mole is Mook.

The more facts you can weave into an acceptable narrative, the more secret landmines you can slip into their bubble, until the critical mass of cognitive dissonance causes a rupture

Reply ↓
ambrit , July 24, 2018 at 11:58 am

Watch out for the response being a psychotic break. I have had that happen when I got too carried away with 'weaponized humour' in my arguments.
I mean not just angry outbursts directed in my direction but actual punches. These times are becoming physically dangerous.

Reply ↓
William Hunter Duncan , July 24, 2018 at 9:24 am

I will generally, when I encounter a true believer Left or Right, let them get comfortable, agreeing with their critique of the Other until they say something grotesquely hypocritical or patently false or deranged, and then I will call out the hypocrisy/bs by way of pointing to it in their own party, then segway into something like 'MSNBC is part of the DNC, CNN is mockingbird CIA/DEEP STATE, and FOX is Rupert Murdoch's geriatric limp dick. Sometimes I call myself an anarchist, because I am liberal about some things and conservative about others and hypocrisy sucks. Wtf are Americans left and right going to pull their heads out of their buttz and realize the country has been gutted and the people put in debt servitude to globalist corp, bank, billionaire and eternal profiteering war/surveillance machine? Oh, and capitalism looks like a death cult if you are a pollinator or an ecosystem, so wtf about your bloody party ."

Which rant I can sustain as long as the person can hear it. Sometimes with liberals though I just ask why they think Hillary would have been a better president, and they usually realize at some point they have tied themselves in knots.

Reply ↓
voteforno6 , July 24, 2018 at 9:26 am

One quibble: It should be "Russia!Russia!Russia!", not "Russia!Russia!" – it makes the Jan Brady jokes a little funnier.

Anyway, with some people, I'm not sure if people should really be trying to "talk to" liberals, with the intent of changing their minds. I remember similar discussions going on in Daily Kos around 2006 or so, but there they discussed how to "talk to" conservatives, or people in rural areas, or "low information voters," as they liked to call them. It does seem a little condescending – some people believe what they believe, and you're not going to be able to argue them out of their positions. As macnamichomhairle posted above, the election of Trump really seems to have caused a psychic break in certain segments of society. I'm not sure if agitating them any further would really be that helpful. It's gotten to the point that I wonder (only half-jokingly) if Trump Derangement Syndrome will be included in the next volume of the DSM.

So, if you want to argue with people about something, make it sports. It seems that Americans are much more civil and mature when it comes to arguing about that topic. That is, unless they're from Philadelphia.

Reply ↓
Arizona Slim , July 24, 2018 at 11:44 am

From Philadelphia? Whatsa matter with that?

Says Slim, who was born in Pittsburgh and raised outside of Pittsburgh and Philadelphia.

Reply ↓
fresno dan , July 24, 2018 at 11:52 am

http://dailysnark.com/vikings-fans-claim-eagles-fans-took-hats-off-peed/

Reply ↓
vidimi , July 24, 2018 at 9:28 am

thank the lord i don't live in the united states.

when facing russia! putin! arguments, i usually retort with a big "i don't care" and paraphrase Mohammed Ali: "ain't no vladimir putin ever set the middle east on fire and crash the global economy".

Reply ↓
Newton Finn , July 24, 2018 at 11:11 am

Utter genius line.

Reply ↓
Arizona Slim , July 24, 2018 at 11:45 am

Me? I use these arguments as an opportunity to practice my Russian language skills.

Reply ↓
Carolinian , July 24, 2018 at 10:10 am

Caitlin Johnstone has a column on how to respond to the Russiagaters.

https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/the-burden-of-proof-is-on-the-russiagaters-eb0b5e3602a3

Reply ↓
pretzelattack , July 24, 2018 at 10:58 am

thanks for that link. the debate is very familiar to me.

Reply ↓
The Rev Kev , July 24, 2018 at 10:20 am

At first I was going to suggest using a lead pipe on so-called liberals as a coping strategy but I think that this is too serious to joke about. Think about this. The US midterms take place on Tuesday, November 6, 2018 and only 16 days later you will have Thanksgiving in the US. If you think that people are on edge now can you imagine what it will be like around Thanksgiving tables this year?
Look, it is a real bad idea to tie your identity to any political party. Too much putting your faith in princes here – or princesses too for that matter. I don't think that the US voting system helps either where they want you to register for Party A or Party B which, when you think about it, kinda defeats the purpose of a secret ballet.
If people with phds are drinking the kool-aid and are not using their critical thinking skills, then how can you expect average people to be convinced? I am not sure that you can but what you can do is undermine their beliefs. Don't let them shape the battlefield of argument ('Or course everybody knows Russia did it!') or else it is a losing game. In any case, this whole thing reeks of the old identity game where those in power set two sides to fiercely combat each other while skimming profits all the way to the bank. An example of this? Democrats and Republicans hate each other's guts but when it come time to vote $1.5 trillion to the wealthiest people in the country then it was bipartisan all the way, baby.

Reply ↓
Arizona Slim , July 24, 2018 at 11:47 am

My birthday comes shortly after the election. I'm thinking of throwing a party for myself and inviting liberal Democrats, libertarians, Republicans, Greens, independents, and those who refuse to be classified.

It'll be fun!

Reply ↓
flora , July 24, 2018 at 12:18 pm

Thanksgiving in the US. If you think that people are on edge now can you imagine what it will be like around Thanksgiving tables this year?

hmmm if the MSM determine too many of the midterm winners are the *wrong* sort of people then watch out for more MSM, Thanksgiving weekend, crazy stories, as in 2016. Properly speaking or not. ;)

Reply ↓
vlade , July 24, 2018 at 10:21 am

For a discussion to occur, both sides have to be willing and able to listen. While most people claim both, in my experience especially the latter (able to) is a learned skill which majority lacks (of all bents, not just liberals etc.).

Hence after this was tested, I do not discuss anymore, I rant, if I feel like it.

Reply ↓
tokyodamage , July 24, 2018 at 10:27 am

Talk about small, but 'respectably' sourced news stories instead of whatever's dominating the current news cycle – stories where the DNC spokespeople haven't already poisoned the well by telling people "This is your team's official position, there's no need to make up your own mind."

Give the liberal a chance to make up their own mind on the small story. Chances are that they sympathize with the underdog in that story – showing how 'liberals care'.

Then – if you're in the mood – spring the trap:

"You're absolutely right to be concerned about the underdog in [story A]. The compassion -that's why people like liberals! By the way, why do you think that [famous dem spokesperson] doesn't show the same compassion regarding [morally analogous but more mainstream news controversy B]?"

That's all i got.

Reply ↓
tokyodamage , July 24, 2018 at 10:32 am

"Russian meddling, eh? That's a scary country. I've been reading about Russia in the 90s. The average life expectancy of the whole country went down by years after the communist government collapsed. Old people dying alone in their apartments from easily treatable illnesses. Yeah, it IS terrible. Yeah it IS disgusting and immoral. Oh by the way, that's around the time they switched to a for-profit medical system like we have. Weird huh?"

Brooklin Bridge , July 24, 2018 at 10:39 am

The inability to talk politics with others of differing views is hardly limited to the US even if it expresses itself in different ways. I have family in France (je suis une pičce rapportée – in-law) and it's almost identical to the US. As even my wife is somewhat of a 'guest' when we go over now, You simply avoid subjects where you know it could get too hot and so do they among themselves. Things are not at all as cut and dry as they were (at least seemed) back in the late 60's early 70's when students AND workers united massively in common cause.

A few years ago, I had a discussion that turned into an argument with a friend visiting from France who is an economist by training but made his pile (of comfortable not gargantuan size) in real estate. It turned around Jeremy Corbyn with my argument that as long as people are really hurting, social/political/economic justice movements will thrive and often succeed in radical change and his argument that 1) he is an economist and therefore knows what he is talking about and 2) Corbyn is simply unacceptable and unworkable in todays economy , c'est tout!

How horribly frustrating for me not to have a good command of the subject, getting hot under the collar is not a compelling argument, (though I didn't let him get away with the, being an economist, braggadocio), but on the good side, our friendship survived the bout and we holstered our pistols for the rest of their visit.

Eureka Springs , July 24, 2018 at 10:57 am

I find arguments of systemic problems, corruption, absence of actual solutions, divide conquer, class war, rather than D vs R work best.

Example:
Ask anyone who has a problem with immigrants why not one politician demands an arrest of a ceo and board members for illegal hiring practices. Put them in jail just for a weekend and things would dramatically change over night. We don't need to cage many thousands of desperate people, just a few greedy ones. Like them or not, quit blaming desperate poor people for crawling through a nasty river and horrific desert to get a crappy job. If the illegal hiring didn't exist they wouldn't come. As for children and adults, once 'we' have them captured, under our control, how they exist is all about us, not them.

And then I shut up. You have to know when to shut up.

At other times I love reminding D's or R's and especially those who are neither, the D's and R's are at best 27 percent of the eligible voters. Independents are far greater in number than they are and 'refuse to vote' for any of them are greatest of all. The D's and R's both have a super majority against them for good reasons which are being ignored at all our peril. That they are not listening, not asking, not representing. They are owned and we are all being played like a two dollar banjo. Fighting for either one of them is exactly what they want and need to keep the con alive.

I keep reminding people this is not professional football, you don't have to watch, much more you are not forced to pick between two teams, please choose neither like most of us are doing because we need an entirely new game. Issues, not personality. Because all owners are always a winner, cashing in, if you do.

Adam Eran , July 24, 2018 at 11:01 am

More generally speaking, there are actually clinical trials of ways to be persuasive. Doctors need this for the difficult patients: the heart patients who don't want to take their meds, the addicts who don't want to quit, etc. It's worth looking up: Motivational Interviewing . The link is to a course offered by Citizens' Climate Lobby, designed to help their members deal with climate change denial.

The key, they say, is forming partnerships. Disagreement can take the form of fights, arguments or partnerships, with only the last providing some prospect for relief.

So providing the "perfect squelch" or putting down one's opponent is the very last thing you want to do. Finding areas of agreement and building on those is the royal road to something more positive.

I've also found some of the worst offenders in the environmental community. These are often former bureaucrats who want to keep the (bankrupt) process in place, but encourage a different outcome. They want to be the "good guys," and judge the environmental "bad guys" rather than make a significant change.

Ah, the human ego! Gotta love it!

Quite Likely , July 24, 2018 at 11:11 am

I tend towards the Socratic approach, both for establishment Democrats and the larger universe of people I disagree with in person. It generally means doing more listening than talking, which I know is a downside for some, but letting people talk things out in front of you with occasional nudges in the right direct does a decent job of moving them gradually in the right direction, and leaves them with an impression of you as a friendly good-listener with whom they have some disagreements rather than that asshole yelling about nonsense.

JohnnyGL , July 24, 2018 at 11:12 am

I'm going to throw out my tips that I've used for years to talk politics in various environments (office, family gatherings, etc).

1) Keep context in mind if you're in the office, keep encounters brief and cordial, couple of news headlines as you breeze by for a couple of minutes. Crack a couple of jokes and try to keep it light. But choose your topics with care, especially if you don't know the person really well.

2) Find common ground: with trumpers you can rail against clintons, obamas, and dem hypocrisy. with clintonites you can talk about how excited you are that Ted Cruz has a real challenge, Paul Ryan's retiring, all the damage Trump is doing to the establishment repubs, etc. Tell them the positive thing about Trump winning is that ALL THE OTHER REPUBS LOST .badly!

3) As far as genuinely changing minds .THESE THINGS TAKE TIME! Some minds aren't open to being changed, some will periodically open and close, and some of us are genuinely trying to figure out WTF is going on in the world (which is why we come to NC!) In any case, minds get changed over weeks and months, not a couple of hours.

4) Understand and remember that you DO NOT have all the answers and think about all things you've changed your mind about over the years and it helps to open minds to SHARE stories with people about what changed your mind and why. If you're not sure why you think what you think, go figure out why! :)

5) Once you've got a certain comfort level, don't be afraid to crack a joke that aggravates the other person, but don't overdo it and don't do a lot of public mocking/shaming.

6) When someone else uses 5) on you, practice to make sure you DO NOT get too mad about it. Get thicker skin, if you can't do it .then you aren't ready to talk politics.

7) Yes, that includes people saying ignorant stuff. That doesn't mean you have to grin and bear it, you don't and you shouldn't. Drop a mild rebuke (no more and no less) and change the subject. Don't ostracize or shame. Keep interacting with people, as much as they want to do so. We've all said stupid $h!t at one time or another, we can and should all be able to forgive/forget. I've certainly said my fair share. But also, people do change their minds over time. It's helpful if you can guide them in a positive direction.

8) Talk about the context in which things happen and put yourself in other people's shoes. This is something I've learned a lot in the last few years and people forget to step back and look at things from a high level. I've been amazed at how much more sense things can make when you think more about context.

marym , July 24, 2018 at 11:34 am

My coping method is mostly avoidance, but if I did intervene it would be something like this:

I agree Trump is ill-suited to the job and has horrible policies.

If Russia (or Russians) interfered with the election, if Trump and his cronies participated in that, or if Trump and cronies had other dealings with Russian that are illegal, Mueller is the right person to figure it out. His whole career has been defending and strengthening the pre-Trump status quo, the "norms" of the military-industrial-corporatist-security complex. If there's a way to push us back in that direction, there may be no one on earth more committed to that job.

Our job is to examine the impacts of current Trump policy, the roots where applicable in those status quo "norms", issues other than Russia that weaken and corrupt our electoral system, failures of centrist Democrat policies to solve problems; and to promote alternative policies and politicians. None of this will be adddressed by any negative Mueller consequences to Trump, and maybe to a few of those around him.

RUKidding , July 24, 2018 at 11:39 am

Whether it's committed liberals (eg, super strong Big D voters) or committed conservatives, there's really not much point in "talking."

I accidentally said something truthful about Trump's/the Republicans' recent tax law, and my super conservative sister launched into a tirade that came right out of Rush Limbaugh's mouth. I hadn't meant to stir the pot, either, and what I said was pretty nothingburger. I let her rant for a few minutes; explained my side very graciously and calmly (mainly that MY taxes have been raised, not lowered as advertised), and then I changed the topic.

I know a very few D voter friends who are starting to pay more attention – it's taken a while but they are – and they're starting to see that Big D is NOT their savior, at least, not as they currently exist. Of course, I have Big D friends who revile Bernie Sanders as the worst of the worst, and they're HORRIFIED that he's a socialist!!!111!!!!! Well, there's nothing to say there.

Mostly if I'm thinking about it, I'll drop in a few salient points – as some other commenters have suggested, above – and then mostly walk away.

The Big Fat Propaganda Wurlizter has done it's job, and HOW. And it's not just about conservatives ranting out the usual Fox/Rush rightwing talking points. Now it's so-called liberals ranting out the latest from, I guess (no tv, never watch), Rachael Maddow and similar.

I can barely ever listen to what passes for "nooz" on NPR, but possibly they get their talking points from there, as well. Some of those talking points now come up regularly in the weekend game shows. I duly noted that "Wait Wait Don't Tell Me" had James EFFEN Comey on last weeked. R U Kidding ME???? Of course, I didn't listen.

So, go figure.

Both sides are being heavily brainwashed by our M$M. For me: No TV at all and precious little radio (mostly music stations). And judicious nooz paper reading.

Get my real info at sites like this one.

Thanks to all who comment logically here in reality-land.

timbers , July 24, 2018 at 11:41 am

In general, the way I deal with the liberals, partisan Dems, Hillary crowd or whatever you call it, is in person (I'm not on FB) with this type of statement:

"Not one single piece of evidence has every been presented showing Russia meddled in the election. Not one. We don't even have grounds to investigate such a thing. And what evidence we do have points away from Russia. The same agencies that said WMD in Iraq are now saying Russia meddled in the election, have you learned nothing? Russiagate is Democrat's WMD in Iraq moment."

That usually silences them because they don't have any evidence and some even know that. If they offer "evidence" (like the social media click bait adds) I am usually familiar enough show how silly the examples given are.

meadows , July 24, 2018 at 12:02 pm

I hike regularly w/my buddy who is a 73 year old Nam vet, I am a 65 year old conscientious objector he is blue collar for generations, I am college educated family for generations New Deal Dems forever.

Our concerns in life are the same, the well being of our adult children and grandchildren, our relationships w/our spouses, how to manage our retirements. But Oh do we talk politics! He teases me that I'm a Trumpster because of my deserved critiques of Clinton, Obama and my anger at that gang of liars, as if that means I think Trump and his band of "obligerant" oligarchs are great! (oblivious and belligerent)

The executive branch is a huge about-to-become-extinct dinosaur w/the brain of a tiny reptile, little realizing only the little mammals will survive, while still imagining itself to be king of the place forever.

[Jul 24, 2018] Browder is one of those nine Russian oligarchs who stole hundreds of billions from Russia, helped by the drunken buffoon Yeltsin and a battery of Wall Street financial sharpies who also filled their pockets.

Notable quotes:
"... So Mother Russia was raped, and by Bill Clinton, of all people. Where is the outrage? #MeToo ..."
Jul 24, 2018 | www.unz.com

Greg Bacon , Website July 24, 2018 at 7:43 am GMT

" American politicians like Senators John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Ben Cardin and ex-Senator Joe Lieberman "

American? I beg to differ. All of those turncoats serve their Master Israel and kiss the nether regions of those TBTF Wall Street Casinos.

Browder is one of those nine Russian oligarchs -- eight of whom are Jews -- who stole hundreds of billions from Russia when it was decompressing from being the USSR, helped by the drunken buffoon Yeltsin and a battery of Wall Street financial sharpies who also filled their pockets.

Watch the tough guy Browder run like a scared bunny rabbit in NYC from a process server.

Browder needs to be arrested by Interpol, tried, convicted and spend the rest of his sorry life in a Super Max prison for his thefts, frauds and helping to poison the relationship between the USA & Russia, in an effort to save his sorry ass from prosecution.

The Alarmist , July 24, 2018 at 10:37 am GMT

"Yeltsin had won a fraudulent election in 1996 supported by the oligarch-controlled media and by President Bill Clinton, who secured a $20.2 billion IMF loan that enabled him to buy support. Today we would refer to Clinton's action as "interference in the 1996 election," but at that time a helpless and bankrupt Russia was not well placed to object to what was being done to it."

[emphasis mine]

So Mother Russia was raped, and by Bill Clinton, of all people. Where is the outrage? #MeToo

geokat62 , July 24, 2018 at 11:18 am GMT
@Greg Bacon

Browder needs to be arrested by Interpol

Although I posted this comment under another thread, I think it bears repeating here (especially relevant to your point is the bolded part):

I think debunking the vulture capitalist Bill Browder's false claim of being, of all things, a human rights advocate is the key to unraveling the Russia-gate hoax. I also think the following information goes a long way in doing that:

1. Nekrasov's documentary, The Magnitsky Act: Behind The Scenes, now available for viewing

2. Alex Krainer's The Killing of William Browder, now available online; and

3. Bill Browder's Previzon deposition in which he claims "I can't remember" at least 50 times and answers "I don't know" fully 211 times.

Notwithstanding these facts, it appears Mr. Browder is an untouchable. The Russians have issued a Red Notice at least six times and he has managed to walk away scot free on each occasion.

The zinger was when the Senate Judiciary Committee invited him to testify as an expert witness against Fusion GPS, arguing that it should have registered under FARA because it was working on behalf of a foreign government, in this case the Russian. The irony of this scene was incredible. The hallowed chamber in which this inquiry took place is completely bought and paid for by The Lobby but not a peep about having it register under FARA. Totally surreal!

Anonymous lurker , July 24, 2018 at 12:00 pm GMT
An interesting thing about this that has gone almost completely unreported is that HSBC quietly held a series of closed-door meetings with Russian authorities earlier this year regarding the tax fraud charges leveled at Browder and his businesses (HSBC jointly managed Hermitage) and decided to pay up some of the cash he illegally siphoned out of the country (22 million dollars I believe, so a drop in the ocean given the scale of his endeavors, but it's something.)

"Bill Browder declined to comment" according to one of the few articles on the matter.

Isn't all of that more or less tantamount to an admission of guilt?

Anonymous [128] Disclaimer , July 24, 2018 at 12:11 pm GMT
Questions I have:

(1) Why is he so protected?

(2) How does a respectable congress pass a law based solely on the testimony of someone convicted of a crime by another country? No jury in the world would reach a verdict based solely on the word of a convict, without it being substantiated by numerous pieces of other circumstantial and direct evidence.

(3) Even if he paid everyone oodles of money and brought a thousand lawsuits, why would gazillionaire corporations cave in to his demands to ban books, movies, organizations, etc.?

There is something more powerful about Bill Browder than just his pile of money.

Johnny Smoggins , July 24, 2018 at 1:04 pm GMT
You'd think that a man who gave up his US citizenship to dodge his tax bill would be seen as a villain, not defended by presidents and congressmen.
Andrei Martyanov , Website July 24, 2018 at 1:24 pm GMT
@Anonymous

How does a respectable congress pass a law based solely on the testimony of someone convicted of a crime by another country?

US Congress has an approval rating slightly above that of Al Qaeda and Ted Bundy.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/207579/public-approval-rating-of-the-us-congress/

In fact, most (not all) US lawmakers long ago became a euphemism for incompetence, corruption and lies. So, no -- modern US Congress is not respectable by people and numbers reflect that. Hopefully, sometime in the future, some honorable and loyal to their country people will make it there.

Anatoly Karlin , Website July 24, 2018 at 1:28 pm GMT
Couple of other standard narrative-critical articles on the Magnitsky Affair:

* kovane: Sergei Magnitsky, Bill Browder, Hermitage Capital Management and Wondrous Metamorphoses

* Lucy Komisar: The Man Behind the Magnitsky Act Did Bill Browder's Tax Troubles in Russia Color Push for Sanctions?

John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan , July 24, 2018 at 2:30 pm GMT
Can someone help me remember the names of those 9 oligarchs?

These are the ones I remember:

1) Anatoly Chubais
2) Browder
3) Boris Berezovsky
4) Mikhail Khodorkovsky
5) Vladimir Gusinsky

Who were the others? Thanks.

Of these 5, Chubais remained in Russia but the others fled. Chubais was the one who was instrumental in starting the loans-for-shares scheme. My understanding is that those who fled are real scum, since Putin offered all oligarchs the chance to keep their money so long as they avoided politics. Most vulture capitalists agreed to this arrangement, but the worst of the Jewish oligarchs were too greedy and lustful to give in. So I have heard, anyway.

[Jul 24, 2018] Demonizaion of Russia and Putin started in full force the day that Putin said "no more" to US mischief and moved into Syria. From there the coup in Ukraine was engineered in an attempt to neutralize the Black Sea fleet supporting Syria, which was based in Crimea.

Jul 24, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Case in point: An opinion piece on the Fox News website, by Dan Gainor makes note of the absolute media carnage (not too strong a word in this case) concerning the reaction of the political establishment and almost ALL media outlets (including Fox) to President Trump's conciliatory tone struck with Russian President Vladimir Putin at the Helsinki Summit, one week ago today.

We have excerpted from his piece, adding emphasis:

A raging epidemic of Trump Derangement Syndrome broke out among reporters covering the summit between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday, as journalists gave the American president hellish reviews for his performance in Helsinki at a joint news conference.

No reporters knew what actually transpired in the main event of the day – the private meeting between the two presidents. So journalists put themselves in the position of critics, grading President Trump's news conference performance

USA Today reported in a front-page story: " Every nation has an infamous traitor. And now, after a news conference Monday in Finland, the term is being used in relations to the 45th president of the United States. Donald Trump, master of the political insult, finds himself on the receiving end. "

The New York Daily News screamed "OPEN TREASON" on its cover page with a cartoon showing Trump holding Putin's hand and holding a gun in his other hand and shooting Uncle Sam in the head. Really.

CNN host Fareed Zakaria wasn't satisfied with "treason" as a descriptor. "I feel like treasonous is too weak a word, because the whole thing has taken on an air of such unreality," he said.

Zakaria had lots of company : CNN analyst Max Boot, MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace, and, of course, former CIA Director John Brennan, who now works for NBC and MSNBC.

CNN presidential historian Douglas Brinkley said "the spirit of what Trump did is clearly treasonous," and declared that the president "came off as being a puppet of Putin."

The list of network reactions in Mr. Gainor's article is very long and deserves a careful read. But all of those reactions and more led to this point :

The hellish outrage over the Helsinki news conference had its desired effect for now. Newsweek posted a story on an opinion poll that declared : "According to a new Ipsos poll, 49 percent of Americans said Trump was "treasonous" during the summit and ensuing press conference, with only 27 percent disagreeing."

In other words the viewing, listening and reading public did absorb this very unified tirade. One of the most unusual aspects of this which we have reported on here, is that the media's unity included many conservative elements. In all but a few cases, most notably that of Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity, even very respected conservative voices still bought into "Russian meddling" as though this were some sort of issue. It really isn't, because as even some of these hosts acknowledged, "everyone does it."

But as to why this is happening, the explanation really has to do with the establishment reaction to a speech that President Putin himself gave several years ago about the situation in the West. It is this speech that spurred most of the sanctions and actions taken against Russia. It is NOT the "invasion" of Crimea or the 25 invasions of Ukraine that were reported during the years 2014-2016. It is the alignment that the Russian President noted in the West, and Russia's refusal to follow that same path.

Blackpilled offered this video clip and a translation of the speech in English. We offer that clip and the relevant part of the speech's transcript here.

It is of tantamount importance to understand that this is the main factor in all the opposition against President Trump, because his presence threw a major monkey wrench into "the plan."

Two things of note:

1. The narrator of the video here offers a translation that is slightly different than the one offered on the Kremlin's own website. The link to the relevant page is included here.

2. The narrator of "BlackPilled is incorrect in attributing this speech as being given "shortly after Trump was elected." The actual speech was given at the Valdai conference in 2013. If we consider this, and the timeline of events following – such as the Sochi Olympics and the concurrent list of "scandal after scandal" concerning Russia, then the pieces fall into place:

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

From the site Kremlin.ru, emphasis added:

Another serious challenge to Russia's identity is linked to events taking place in the world. Here there are both foreign policy and moral aspects. We can see how many of the Euro-Atlantic countries are actually rejecting their roots, including the Christian values that constitute the basis of Western civilisation. They are denying moral principles and all traditional identities: national, cultural, religious and even sexual. They are implementing policies that equate large families with same-sex partnerships, belief in God with the belief in Satan.

The excesses of political correctness have reached the point where people are seriously talking about registering political parties whose aim is to promote paedophilia. People in many European countries are embarrassed or afraid to talk about their religious affiliations. Holidays are abolished or even called something different; their essence is hidden away, as is their moral foundation. And people are aggressively trying to export this model all over the world. I am convinced that this opens a direct path to degradation and primitivism, resulting in a profound demographic and moral crisis.

What else but the loss of the ability to self-reproduce could act as the greatest testimony of the moral crisis facing a human society? Today almost all developed nations are no longer able to reproduce themselves, even with the help of migration. Without the values embedded in Christianity and other world religions, without the standards of morality that have taken shape over millennia, people will inevitably lose their human dignity. We consider it natural and right to defend these values . One must respect every minority's right to be different, but the rights of the majority must not be put into question.

At the same time we see attempts to somehow revive a standardised model of a unipolar world and to blur the institutions of international law and national sovereignty. Such a unipolar, standardised world does not require sovereign states; it requires [slaves]."

And... anyone that is against America's unipolar hegemon must be removed - as this year's new US military strategy proved, as Defense Secretary Mattis explained that fighting terror is now on the back burner, because " we face growing threats from revisionist powers as different as China and Russia, nations that seek to create a world consistent with their authoritarian models ... great power competition -- not terrorism -- is now the primary focus of US national security."

Sanity Bear Mon, 07/23/2018 - 21:20 Permalink

It started the day that Putin said "no more" to US mischief and moved into Syria.

From there the coup in Ukraine was engineered in an attempt to neutralize the Black Sea fleet supporting Syria, which was based in Crimea.

That was never going to be allowed to happen, but the usual suspects managed to lose their shit anyway when they failed to capture Crimea in the coup and the fleet was able to continue to assist Syria against US/Turk/Saudi-sponsored jihadis.

max_is_leering -> Sanity Bear Mon, 07/23/2018 - 21:45 Permalink

the coup de'tat in Ukieville occurred in late 2013/early2014 and Putin's speech to the UN was Sept. 2015, where he asked: 'Do you (meaning the west) realize what you have done?", and promptly a week later he starts bombing terrorists in Syria

opport.knocks -> max_is_leering Mon, 07/23/2018 - 22:38 Permalink

The full speech... https://youtu.be/q13yzl6k6w0

SubjectivObject -> Goodsport 1945 Mon, 07/23/2018 - 21:33 Permalink

i'm predisposed to that

but how'd he become a multi billionaire?

on a politician's "salary"

max_is_leering -> SubjectivObject Mon, 07/23/2018 - 21:50 Permalink

I really couldn't give a good god-damn about whether or not he's a billionaire, a gazillionaire or any other number... look, if Mark Fuckerberg can steal an idea from the twins and make a few billion, I have NO issue with Vlad having all the loot he needs... no questions asked, ever

opport.knocks -> SubjectivObject Mon, 07/23/2018 - 21:59 Permalink

He is not a multi-billionaire. That is just part of the anti-Putin propaganda campaign by: Boris Berezovsky, Bill Browder, Mikhail Khodorovsky, Masha Gessen, George Soros and assorted other (((Usual Suspects))), to attempt to isolate Russia and Putin from the global "community".

opport.knocks -> exlcus Mon, 07/23/2018 - 22:31 Permalink

Anti-Putin propagandists Masha Gessen and the Washington Post's David Ignatius's led the charge on that one. The Palace is wonderful, but no one claims it belongs to Putin.

The whislterblower claims in the Wikipedia entry are unsubstantiated and appear to be totally motivated by other business dealings that went bad. Similar to Bill Browder and the Magninsky Affair.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Putin%27s_Palace

RagnarRedux Mon, 07/23/2018 - 21:31 Permalink

Great articles.

https://russia-insider.com/en

SybilDefense Mon, 07/23/2018 - 21:41 Permalink

Wait until we see Bill Browders client list. What Democratic insiders made the most from his Hermitage hedge fund prior to his stealing the money and the tax money and paying off those deep state Dems (including Soros) who helped make it happen. Can we charge some Mi6 fucks too? Magnitsky was killed by Browder to set the stage for his stories.

From then on, the Dems needed a Russian villain to demonize so the cover would stick... Until Putin and Donald exposed the truth in Helstinky

Chief Joesph Mon, 07/23/2018 - 22:03 Permalink

No, Putin's speech didn't start anything, because most Americans were totally unaware of it, since MSM rarely ever reports much about what Putin says. Instead, America has had a hatred for Russia going back over 100 years, starting with the first Red Scare in 1917-1924. Second Red Scare 1947-1957. . This current nonsense about the Russians makes Red Scare #3.

[Jul 24, 2018] Is Bill Browder the Most Dangerous Man in the World by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... The contrary narrative to that provided by Browder concedes that there was indeed a huge fraud related to as much as $230 million in unpaid Russian taxes on an estimated $1.5 billion of income, but that it was not carried out by corrupt officials. Instead, it was deliberately ordered and engineered by Browder with Magnitsky, who was actually an accountant, personally developing and implementing the scheme, using multiple companies and tax avoidance schemes to carry out the deception. Magnitsky, who was on cardiac medication, was indeed arrested and convicted, but he, according to his own family, reportedly died due to his heart condition, possibly exacerbated by negligent authorities who failed to medicate him adequately when he became ill. ..."
"... As Nekrasov worked on the documentary, he discovered that the Browder supported narrative was full of contradictions, omissions and fabrication of evidence . By the time he finished, he realized that the more accurate account of what had occurred with Browder and Magnitsky had been that provided by the Russian authorities. ..."
"... When one gets past all of his bluster and posturing, by one significant metric Bill Browder might well be accounted the most dangerous man in the world. ..."
"... That the U.S. media and Congress appear to be entranced by Browder and dismissive of Moscow's charges against him is symptomatic of just how far the Russia-phobia in the West has robbed people of their ability to see what is right in front of them. To suggest that what is taking place driven by Browder and his friends in high places could well lead to tragedy for all of us would be an understatement. ..."
"... Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected]. ..."
Jul 24, 2018 | www.unz.com

At the press conference following their summit meeting in Helsinki, Russian President Vladimir Putin and American President Donald Trump discussed the possibility of resolving potential criminal cases involving citizens of the two countries by permitting interrogators from Washington and Moscow to participate in joint questioning of the individuals named in indictments prepared by the respective judiciaries. The predictable response by the American nomenklatura was that it was a horrible idea as it would potentially require U.S. officials to answer questions from Russians about their activities.

Putin argued, not unreasonably, that if Washington wants to extradite and talk to any of the twelve recently indicted GRU officers the Justice Department has named then reciprocity is in order for Americans and other identified individuals who are wanted by the Russian authorities for illegal activity while in Russia. And if Russian officials are fair game, so are American officials.

A prime target for such an interrogation would be President Barack Obama's Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul, who was widely criticized while in Moscow for being on an apparent mission to cultivate ties with the Russian political opposition and other "pro-democracy" groups. But McFaul was not specifically identified in the press conference, though Russian prosecutors have asked him to answer questions related to the ongoing investigation of another leading critic, Bill Browder, who was named by Putin during the question and answer session. Browder is a major hedge fund figure who, inter alia , is an American by birth. He renounced his U.S. citizenship in 1997 in exchange for British citizenship to avoid paying federal taxes on his worldwide income.

Bill Browder is what used to be referred to as an oligarch, having set up shop in 1999 as Hermitage Capital Management Fund, a hedge fund registered in tax havens Guernsey and the Cayman Islands. It focused on "investing" in Russia, taking advantage initially of the loans-for-shares scheme under Russia's drunkard President Boris Yeltsin, and then continuing to profit greatly during the early years of Vladimir Putin. By 2005 Hermitage was the largest foreign investor in Russia.

Yeltsin had won a fraudulent election in 1996 supported by the oligarch-controlled media and by President Bill Clinton, who secured a $20.2 billion IMF loan that enabled him to buy support. Today we would refer to Clinton's action as "interference in the 1996 election," but at that time a helpless and bankrupt Russia was not well placed to object to what was being done to it. Yeltsin proved keen to follow oligarchical advice regarding how to strip the former Soviet Union of its vast state-owned assets. Browder's Hermitage Investments profited hugely from the commodities deals that were struck at that time.

Browder and his apologists portray him as an honest and honorable Western businessman attempting to operate in a corrupt Russian business world. Nevertheless, the loans-for-shares scheme that made him his initial fortune has been correctly characterized as the epitome of corruption by all parties involved, an arrangement whereby foreign investors worked with local oligarchs to strip the former Soviet economy of its assets paying pennies on each dollar of value. Along the way, Browder was reportedly involved in money laundering, making false representations on official documents and bribery.

Browder was eventually charged by the Russian authorities for fraud and tax evasion. He was banned from re-entering Russia in 2005 and began to withdraw his assets from the country, but three companies controlled by Hermitage were eventually seized by the authorities. Browder himself was convicted of tax evasion in absentia in 2013 and sentenced to nine years in prison.

Browder, who refers to himself as Putin's "public enemy #1," has notably been able to sell his tale of innocence to leading American politicians like Senators John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Ben Cardin and ex-Senator Joe Lieberman, all of whom are always receptive when criticizing Russia, as well as to a number of European parliamentarians and media outlets. In the wake of the Helsinki press conference he has, for example, claimed that Putin named him personally because he is a threat to continue to expose the crimes of the mafia that he claims is currently running Russia, but there is, inevitably, another less discussed alternative view of his self-serving narrative.

Central to the tale of what Browder really represents is the Magnitsky Act , which the U.S. Congress passed into law to sanction individual Kremlin officials for their treatment of alleged whistleblower Sergei Magnitsky, arrested and imprisoned in Russia. Browder has sold a narrative which basically says that he and his "lawyer" Sergei Magnitsky uncovered massive tax fraud and, when they attempted to report it, were punished by a corrupt police force and magistracy, which had actually stolen the money. Magnitsky was arrested and died in prison, allegedly murdered by the police to silence him.

The Magnitsky case is of particular importance because both the European Union and the United States have initiated sanctions against the identified Russian officials who were allegedly involved. In the Magnitsky Act , sponsored by Russia-phobic Senator Ben Cardin and signed by President Barack Obama in 2012, the U.S. asserted its willingness to punish foreign governments for human rights abuses. The Act, initially limited to Russia, has now been expanded by virtue of 2016's Global Magnitsky Act , which enabled U.S. sanctions worldwide.

Russia reacted angrily to the first iteration of the Act , noting that the actions taken by its government internally, notably the operation of its judiciary, were being subjected to outside interference, while other judicial authorities also questioned Washington's claimed right to respond to criminal acts committed outside the United States. Moscow reciprocated with sanctions against U.S. officials as well as by increasing pressure on foreign non-governmental pro-democracy groups operating in Russia. Some have referred to the Magnitsky Act as the start of the new Cold War.

The contrary narrative to that provided by Browder concedes that there was indeed a huge fraud related to as much as $230 million in unpaid Russian taxes on an estimated $1.5 billion of income, but that it was not carried out by corrupt officials. Instead, it was deliberately ordered and engineered by Browder with Magnitsky, who was actually an accountant, personally developing and implementing the scheme, using multiple companies and tax avoidance schemes to carry out the deception. Magnitsky, who was on cardiac medication, was indeed arrested and convicted, but he, according to his own family, reportedly died due to his heart condition, possibly exacerbated by negligent authorities who failed to medicate him adequately when he became ill.

The two competing Browder narratives have been explored in some detail by a Russian documentary film maker Andrei Nekrasov, an outspoken anti-Putin activist, who was actually initially engaged by Browder to do the film. An affable Browder appears extensively in the beginning describing his career and the events surrounding Magnitsky.

As Nekrasov worked on the documentary, he discovered that the Browder supported narrative was full of contradictions, omissions and fabrication of evidence . By the time he finished, he realized that the more accurate account of what had occurred with Browder and Magnitsky had been that provided by the Russian authorities.

When Nekrasov prepared to air his work " The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes," he inevitably found himself confronted by billionaire Browder and a battery of lawyers, who together blocked the showing of the film in Europe and the United States. Anyone subsequently attempting to promote the documentary has been immediately confronted with 300 plus pages of supporting documents accompanying a letter threatening a lawsuit if the film were to be shown to the public.

A single viewing of "The Magnitsky Act" in Washington in June 2016 turned into a riot when Browder supporters used tickets given to Congressional staffers to disrupt the proceedings. At a subsequent hearing before Congress, where he was featured as an expert witness on Russian corruption before a fawning Senate Judiciary Committee, Bill Browder suggested that those who had challenged his narrative and arranged the film's viewing in Washington should be prosecuted under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (FARA), which includes penalties of up to five years in prison.

Because of the pressure from Browder, there has never been a second public showing of "The Magnitsky Act" but it is possible to see it online at this site .

Bill Browder, who benefited enormously from Russian corruption, has expertly repackaged himself as a paragon among businessmen, endearing himself to the Russia-haters in Washington and the media. Curiously, however, he has proven reluctant to testify in cases regarding his own business dealings. He has, for example, repeatedly run away , literally, from attempts to subpoena him so he would have to testify under oath.

When one gets past all of his bluster and posturing, by one significant metric Bill Browder might well be accounted the most dangerous man in the world. Driven by extreme hatred of Putin and of Russia, he personally and his Magnitsky Myth have together done more to launch and sustain a dangerous new Cold War between a nuclear armed United States and a nuclear armed Russia. Blind to what he has accomplished, he continues to pontificate about how Putin is out to get him when instead he is the crook who quite likely stole $230 million dollars and should be facing the consequences. That the U.S. media and Congress appear to be entranced by Browder and dismissive of Moscow's charges against him is symptomatic of just how far the Russia-phobia in the West has robbed people of their ability to see what is right in front of them. To suggest that what is taking place driven by Browder and his friends in high places could well lead to tragedy for all of us would be an understatement.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected].

tac , July 24, 2018 at 4:45 am GMT

PG:

Please take a look at the documentary that has been quashed by Bill Browder and his enablers, as it has not only been nixed in its premiere in many EU countriu, except Norway, but has been deleted almost immediately when it was made available on YouTube. Now, however, it is still available on bitchute and has almost 13K hits in almost four days after being posted (as of this post):

As an aside, Thank you to Robin and S2C for spreading it so that people can make up their own minds.

tac , July 24, 2018 at 4:51 am GMT
PG:

A special thanks should be made to Robin and S2S for distributing this film. The video is almost at 13K as of this posting. We all have to work together in order to reveal the truth. Perhaps we will benefit in the end, but that is to be determined yet. Nontheless, we must try!

tac , July 24, 2018 at 5:05 am GMT
@tac

Sorry the video on bitchute which you have in your presentation was not present when first losded in my browser, but I must admit from the time I first encountered this video, having just 38 views until now, almost four days later, at almost 13K views, people are certainly paying attention!

RobinG , July 24, 2018 at 5:08 am GMT
YES!!!!

Phil,

Please team up with Stranahan in his campaign to make Senators answer the question, "Have you seen Bill Browder's 2015 deposition in the U.S. vs. Prevazon case?"

Full research sources here , including links to Browder's deposition. See for yourselves how Browder contradicts himself in depositions, Senate testimony and his book. Sad, but maybe not for us!

https://populist.tv/2018/01/20/bill-browder-links-and-resources-to-understand-controversy/

Anonymous [337] Disclaimer , July 24, 2018 at 5:11 am GMT

The darling of the war party

Q: Which party is that?

A: Both of them.

Anon [613] Disclaimer , July 24, 2018 at 6:44 am GMT
SAME THING HAPPENED WITH THE AL JAZEERA DOCUMENTARY ON ISRAELI LOBBY IN AMERICA

For the past year, Qatar has been under tremendous pressure from other US puppet Gulf states (SAudi ARabia, UAE, Egypt etc) and from US and Israeli lobby. There was a economic blockade of Qatar. WHY? Because Al Jazeera was about to release a documentary on Israeli lobby in the US. Its documentary on Israeli lobby in UK had already been embarassing for zionists.

Because of the extreme economic pressure put on Qatar and the threat of sanctions and worse, Qatar (which owns Al Jazeera) shelved the documentary. They also had to grease a lot of zionist organizations in US.

Not only did the Israeli lobby pressure Qatar into shelving the Al Jazeera documentary on the lobby in America, they also shook them down for money.

Qatar donated $250,000 to some of the most extreme pro-Israel organizations in the United States, including one that funds senior Israeli military officers to go on propaganda tours.

Joseph Allaham, a lobbyist working for the Qatari government, transferred the money through his firm Lexington Strategies in late 2017 and early 2018.

The sums included $100,000 to the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), $100,000 to Our Soldiers Speak and $50,000 for Blue Diamond Horizons, Inc.

jilles dykstra , July 24, 2018 at 6:57 am GMT
The USA idea about justice is best expressed by a USA law, allowing an invasion of the Netherlands, if a USA citizen would be in the The Hague prison of the International Court.

To liberate this USA citizen. " far the Russia-phobia in the West has robbed people of their ability to see what is right in front of them " Nothing new, in the 30ties Kennan was unable to make USA ambassador Davies see through Stalin's show trials.
George F. Kennan, ´Memoirs 1925 – 1950', New York 1967, 1972

Greg Bacon , Website July 24, 2018 at 7:43 am GMT

" American politicians like Senators John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Ben Cardin and ex-Senator Joe Lieberman "

American? I beg to differ. All of those turncoats serve their Master Israel and kiss the nether regions of those TBTF Wall Street Casinos.

Browder is one of those nine Russian oligarchs – eight of whom are Jews – who stole hundreds of billions from Russia when it was decompressing from being the USSR, helped by the drunken buffoon Yeltsin and a battery of Wall Street financial sharpies who also filled their pockets.

Watch the tough guy Browder run like a scared bunny rabbit in NYC from a process server.

Browder needs to be arrested by Interpol, tried, convicted and spend the rest of his sorry life in a Super Max prison for his thefts, frauds and helping to poison the relationship between the USA & Russia, in an effort to save his sorry ass from prosecution.

Tom Welsh , July 24, 2018 at 8:33 am GMT
"Central to the tale of what Browder really represents is the Magnitsky Act, which the U.S. Congress passed into law to sanction individual Kremlin officials for their treatment of alleged whistleblower Sergei Magnitsky, arrested and imprisoned in Russia".

Hmmm. The USA has its whistleblowers, too. Maybe Russia (and other civilized countries) should impose their own sanctions on all American officials in any way involved with the persecution of Chelsea Clinton, Edward Snowden, Julian Assange and others.

Although the existing US sanctions are a dead letter, since they will not get their hands on the people they are trying to harm, they still give the world a wholly misleading impression.

The sanctions insidiously suggest to the people and governments of the world that the US government is somehow entitled to decide what is legal and what is illegal everywhere – not just within its own jurisdiction – and moreover that it has the power to be prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner against any of the world's citizens.

That is wrong, illegal, immoral, and unconscionable, and should not be tolerated.

Tyrion 2 , Website July 24, 2018 at 8:45 am GMT
As a Jew, I look at Bill Browder and feel how I imagine decent black Americans feel when they look at thuggish ebonic-speaking black street dealers.

If you're going to be an awful bloke can you at least not conform to racist stereotypes?

Den Lille Abe , July 24, 2018 at 10:22 am GMT
He is "just" another robber baron
The Alarmist , July 24, 2018 at 10:37 am GMT

"Yeltsin had won a fraudulent election in 1996 supported by the oligarch-controlled media and by President Bill Clinton, who secured a $20.2 billion IMF loan that enabled him to buy support. Today we would refer to Clinton's action as "interference in the 1996 election," but at that time a helpless and bankrupt Russia was not well placed to object to what was being done to it."

[emphasis mine]

So Mother Russia was raped, and by Bill Clinton, of all people. Where is the outrage?

#MeToo

Cagey Beast , July 24, 2018 at 10:58 am GMT
@tac

This is most likely the one you mean:

THE MAGNITSKY ACT – BEHIND THE SCENES

https://www.bitchute.com/video/lQ3qEwX66pIL/

vinteuil , July 24, 2018 at 11:01 am GMT
Andrei Nekrasov's documentary is absolutely damning – how, after viewing it, could anybody see Browder as anything but a shameless serial liar? The closest I can find on the internet to a rebuttal is from the Daily Beast:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/dissident-director-helped-trumps-russia-comrade-attack-us

a ridiculous hatchet job which doesn't even begin to engage with Nekrasov's evidence.

Cagey Beast , July 24, 2018 at 11:07 am GMT
@Cagey Beast

Ooops, I posted this comment before seeing that this video was already posted above in the article. I got a link to it from an entirely different source. It shows how it's getting around! Good.

geokat62 , July 24, 2018 at 11:18 am GMT
@Greg Bacon

Browder needs to be arrested by Interpol

Although I posted this comment under another thread, I think it bears repeating here (especially relevant to your point is the bolded part):

I think debunking the vulture capitalist Bill Browder's false claim of being, of all things, a human rights advocate is the key to unraveling the Russia-gate hoax. I also think the following information goes a long way in doing that:

1. Nekrasov's documentary, The Magnitsky Act: Behind The Scenes, now available for viewing

2. Alex Krainer's The Killing of William Browder, now available online; and

3. Bill Browder's Previzon deposition in which he claims "I can't remember" at least 50 times and answers "I don't know" fully 211 times.

Notwithstanding these facts, it appears Mr. Browder is an untouchable. The Russians have issued a Red Notice at least six times and he has managed to walk away scot free on each occasion.

The zinger was when the Senate Judiciary Committee invited him to testify as an expert witness against Fusion GPS, arguing that it should have registered under FARA because it was working on behalf of a foreign government, in this case the Russian. The irony of this scene was incredible. The hallowed chamber in which this inquiry took place is completely bought and paid for by The Lobby but not a peep about having it register under FARA. Totally surreal!

jilles dykstra , July 24, 2018 at 11:27 am GMT
@Tyrion 2

Is jewish eyesight different from non jewish eyesight ?
I never look as a Dutchman, or a Frysian, whatever you like.

PasDeTout , July 24, 2018 at 11:58 am GMT
Thanks again to Philip Giraldi for another informative article. The film you linked is on my to-do list today.
Anonymous lurker , July 24, 2018 at 12:00 pm GMT
An interesting thing about this that has gone almost completely unreported is that HSBC quietly held a series of closed-door meetings with Russian authorities earlier this year regarding the tax fraud charges leveled at Browder and his businesses (HSBC jointly managed Hermitage) and decided to pay up some of the cash he illegally siphoned out of the country (22 million dollars I believe, so a drop in the ocean given the scale of his endeavors, but it's something.)

"Bill Browder declined to comment" according to one of the few articles on the matter.

Isn't all of that more or less tantamount to an admission of guilt?

Anonymous [128] Disclaimer , July 24, 2018 at 12:11 pm GMT
Questions I have:

(1) Why is he so protected?

(2) How does a respectable congress pass a law based solely on the testimony of someone convicted of a crime by another country? No jury in the world would reach a verdict based solely on the word of a convict, without it being substantiated by numerous pieces of other circumstantial and direct evidence.

(3) Even if he paid everyone oodles of money and brought a thousand lawsuits, why would gazillionaire corporations cave in to his demands to ban books, movies, organizations, etc.?

There is something more powerful about Bill Browder than just his pile of money.

Johnny Smoggins , July 24, 2018 at 1:04 pm GMT
You'd think that a man who gave up his US citizenship to dodge his tax bill would be seen as a villain, not defended by presidents and congressmen.
Andrei Martyanov , Website July 24, 2018 at 1:24 pm GMT
@Anonymous

How does a respectable congress pass a law based solely on the testimony of someone convicted of a crime by another country?

US Congress has an approval rating slightly above that of Al Qaeda and Ted Bundy.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/207579/public-approval-rating-of-the-us-congress/

In fact, most (not all) US lawmakers long ago became a euphemism for incompetence, corruption and lies. So, no–modern US Congress is not respectable by people and numbers reflect that. Hopefully, sometime in the future, some honorable and loyal to their country people will make it there.

DESERT FOX , July 24, 2018 at 1:26 pm GMT
Browder is a Zionist Bolshevik of the stripe that murdered some 60 million Russians from 1917 to 1957 and as such is not only an enemy of Russia but an even greater enemy of America and is a typical communist who wrecks and destroys countries.

Read THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION, Browder is a poster boy for these thieves and murderers .

vinteuil , July 24, 2018 at 1:28 pm GMT
You'd think that a man who gave up his US citizenship to dodge his tax bill would be seen as a villain, not defended by presidents and congressmen.

Yeah, you'd think that.

Anatoly Karlin , Website July 24, 2018 at 1:28 pm GMT
Couple of other standard narrative-critical articles on the Magnitsky Affair:

* kovane: Sergei Magnitsky, Bill Browder, Hermitage Capital Management and Wondrous Metamorphoses

* Lucy Komisar: The Man Behind the Magnitsky Act Did Bill Browder's Tax Troubles in Russia Color Push for Sanctions?

Stel , July 24, 2018 at 1:31 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

The 'Netherlands Invasion Act' is a former fact popularized by Noam Chomsky. The Netherlands invasion provisions were quietly repealed because it was too embarrassing and disruptive to US policy. What remains is a prohibition against US assistance to certain criminal investigations. Putin poked at the same neuralgic spot in Helsinki when he proposed reciprocity in mutual legal assistance. The issue is US impunity for war propaganda and coercive interference.

The US government has asserted a specific reservation to the international prohibition of war propaganda (ICCPR Article 20.) And legal experts are chipping away at the nonsense rationale behind the US reservation. The US claims it is defending free speech, so Article 19 and other NGOs propose an important distinction:

. Dumb broke Joe Blow with his bumper sticker that says Make Iran a Parking Lot
. Concerted government and media campaigns advocating war.

Only the latter constitutes illegal war propaganda, which is illegal under conventional international law (UN Charter Article 2(4)), customary international law (E/Conf. 6/C.i/ig of 1948 and other resolutions), and legal precedent (Nuremberg Count 1).

So when Russia gets fed up and decapitates the US regime, Browder will be in the cage at the war crimes tribunal under the Streicher, Fritzsche, Dietrich, and von Weizsaeker Nuremberg precedents.

Prester John , July 24, 2018 at 2:05 pm GMT
@The Alarmist

Where is the outrage? You ain't gonna get it from Big Media, who sold out a long time ago. BM has all but ignored the Clinton Administration collusion with Yeltsin in the Russian 1996 election. It was an, er, "inconvenient truth."

John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan , July 24, 2018 at 2:30 pm GMT
Can someone help me remember the names of those 9 oligarchs?

These are the ones I remember:

1) Anatoly Chubais
2) Browder
3) Boris Berezovsky
4) Mikhail Khodorkovsky
5) Vladimir Gusinsky

Who were the others? Thanks.

Of these 5, Chubais remained in Russia but the others fled. Chubais was the one who was instrumental in starting the loans-for-shares scheme. My understanding is that those who fled are real scum, since Putin offered all oligarchs the chance to keep their money so long as they avoided politics. Most vulture capitalists agreed to this arrangement, but the worst of the Jewish oligarchs were too greedy and lustful to give in. So I have heard, anyway.

[Jul 24, 2018] Helsinki Secrets by Israel Shamir

Notable quotes:
"... The Prince and The Pauper ..."
"... In Brussels, Trump attacked Frau Merkel. How does she dare to buy Russian gas, if Germany faces a Russian threat? ..."
"... NATO is an instrument of American control over Europe, and Washington keeps dozens of bases in Europe, in particular – in Germany. Germany has remained under American occupation since 1945. This would seem good for America, but the occupied and controlled Western European states are tied to the Clinton camp, to Democrats and liberals. They do not accept Trump as their rightful sovereign. And Europe does not pay for its occupation, so it is costly. Of course, it is a great honour to occupy and control the great powers of the past, England, France, the Netherlands, Spain. But it costs a lot of money for America. Likewise, in 1990 Russia discovered that it is expensive to control surly East Germany, independent Poland, sunny Georgia, tricky Armenia, populous Uzbekistan and the rainy Baltic States. ..."
"... Russians are in a very uncomfortable seat. All their neighbours are subject to American pressure to annoy Russia, be it Georgia (once they even attacked Russia militarily being led by American and Israeli advisers) or the Ukraine (Americans arranged a coup d'état and installed extremely hostile to Russia government in Kiev). American military bases surround Russia and NATO troops drew closer and closer to its centres. American military budget of 600 billion dollars dwarfs the Russian one, while the armaments' race can undermine Russian finances. If Russia were a woman, she would scream: stop it! ..."
"... From the beginning to the end, the US media was highly hostile to Trump and to his mission in Europe. They eagerly followed anti-Trump demos and exaggerated his every blunder. Google obediently trailed at the top Twitter messages of the ex-CIA boss calling Trump 'a traitor'. All prominent Western newspapers spoke of Trump's 'treason'. ..."
"... In the current Russophobian climate, it would have been impossible to concede almost anything to Russia, and V. Putin understands this. But as Russiagate unravels ever so slowly, he will have more room. But as long as both leaders agreed not to start WWIII , something has been achieved, therefore I also believe the Iran threats to be posturing, it would make sense if Russia have calmed Israel, what the current situation indicates. ..."
"... The US knows fully well than an Iran war would not be winnable and bring the rest of the world together; the world has not yet overcome the last financial crisis, a new largescale war in the ME could very well crash the Global economy and the petrodollar. Nobody are keen on that. ..."
Jul 24, 2018 | www.unz.com

an orange hurricane, President Trump made a stormy visit to the Old World. Usually American presidents' visits to Europe present photo opportunities and vows of eternal love and friendship. Not this time. Since the Mongol invasion, not many visitors from outside shook Europe like he did. The US President has finally emerged from the cage built by his political adversaries, and begun to say things his voters wanted to hear.

However, his wonderful daring statements were quickly undermined and disowned by his ministers and advisers, creating the feeling that Trump speaks only for himself, while the US administration, his own appointees say the opposite. And then he also repudiated his own statements, saying he was misunderstood.

The American president increasingly resembles the hero of The Prince and The Pauper , the poor boy who accidentally became a king – and began to behave in a non-royal way: showing mercy and caring for people. His own staff disregards his commands. Trump says what people like to hear, but his administration sticks to the original course.

During the first part of his trip he acted a rebel in Wodehouse World with its feeble men and formidable women. Indeed the West is ruled by formidable aunts and elder sisters. Aunt Angela in Germany, Aunt Theresa in England, Aunt Brigitte in France. Only Aunt Hillary is missing to complete the puzzle and establish the rule of Aunties over their hen-pecked nephews.

(Hillary's defeat didn't derail the Aunties' program of emasculation: #MeToo campaign goes on unabated. Men are afraid to flirt with girls. Henry ( The Superman ) Cavill admitted as much in an interview, saying that flirting with somebody would be like "casting myself into the fires of hell", as a person in the public eye. "I think a woman should be wooed and chased", he said, but it could lead to jail. He was immediately attacked for this heresy: "If Henry Cavill doesn't want to be called a rapist then all he has to do is not rape anyone", implausibly they claimed. And he apologised profusely.)

Trump's trip had been accompanied by mass protest demos. Normally I am all in favour of a good anti-American demo, but in this case, the protesters were extreme feminists and supporters of unlimited immigration. That's people who like the Aunties, and hate Uncles. They do not mind conflict with Russia and even consider Trump as a "Russian agent". They dislike that he does not obey Aunties.

In the second part of the tour, Trump had met with the formidable Mr Putin, a real man. Now that we have learned from our reliable sources what had happened in the palatial halls of Helsinki (excepting face-to-face private talk with Putin) we can describe Trump's Pilgrim's Progress and share our knowledge and conclusions with you.

In short, President Trump made the right sounds and called for right solutions, but he has been unable to insist on any. If he were a free man of his own mind, this trip would transform the world. The way things are, it will remain a sign of his honourable intentions, for everything he said has been overturned and denied by his aides.

In Brussels, Trump attacked Frau Merkel. How does she dare to buy Russian gas, if Germany faces a Russian threat? Why does it accept immigrants and refugees who undermine the European way of life? Saying that, he sided with "the populists", the Italians, Hungarians and Austrians, whose top politicians are male and friendly to Trump and Putin.

The Brussels meeting almost came to an undoing of NATO. Trump hinted that the US would leave NATO unless they pay. They have to pay more, much more, if they want to have American protection.

Could he mean it? NATO is an instrument of American control over Europe, and Washington keeps dozens of bases in Europe, in particular – in Germany. Germany has remained under American occupation since 1945. This would seem good for America, but the occupied and controlled Western European states are tied to the Clinton camp, to Democrats and liberals. They do not accept Trump as their rightful sovereign. And Europe does not pay for its occupation, so it is costly. Of course, it is a great honour to occupy and control the great powers of the past, England, France, the Netherlands, Spain. But it costs a lot of money for America. Likewise, in 1990 Russia discovered that it is expensive to control surly East Germany, independent Poland, sunny Georgia, tricky Armenia, populous Uzbekistan and the rainy Baltic States.

There is no certainty that the countries of Europe will agree to pay and submit to Trump's demands. In Germany, there are growing voices demanding the Yankees be sent home, that is, to ask the American soldiers to leave Germany. It would be good if NATO were to disintegrate and disappear, like the Warsaw Treaty Organization disappeared. Trump has repeatedly said that he wants to return the American soldiers home. Perhaps we shall witness Pax Americana without American troops in Europe, like England fictitiously claimed to belong to the Roman Empire, though Roman legions had left, and Rome lost all interest in foggy Albion.

In England, Trump confronted Mrs May. She reminded him of his school mistress, and Donald does not like school mistresses. The soft Brexit, which she intends to conclude, is a complete bummer, not a Brexit, he said. Under the proposed treaty, all prerogatives remain in Brussels. So, there can be no trade agreement between the United States and Britain. America will negotiate directly with Brussels. And in general, it would be better if May transferred Downing Street 10 to her former Foreign Secretary, a hard-line Brexit supporter, the red-headed Bojo (as the Brits call Boris Johnson, who had just resigned, resenting the proposed plan for soft Brexit).

The European Union is an American design, too. Why, then, does the US President want to undermine it by removing the UK, his own Trojan Horse? Apparently, it means that the globalist forces have entered a state of direct confrontation with America.

This first part of Trump's tour had been followed by the Kremlin with satisfaction. The Kremlin also believes that NATO has become obsolete, and that Brexit is the right step. Russia instinctively disapproves of mass migration, just like Trump.

ORDER IT NOW

Trump's meeting with President Putin had been postponed for a year; both men were eager to meet. Trump wanted to meet another strong man, a powerful chieftain who can assist him in building a new world, instead of the one created under Obama, by media and Supreme Court Judges. President Putin wanted to solve bilateral issues and to ease American pressure upon Russia.

Their problems were very different. The main problems of Trump were Mme Clinton and Barack Obama, and the whole army of their obstinate followers who didn't recognise Trump's legitimacy. Putin couldn't do much for him, with all his sympathy.

Putin's problem is the hybrid warfare carried out by the United States against Russia. Despite accusations you hear in your media (alleged Russian ads in the Facebook and Twitter influencing voters), American pressure on Russia is very real and very painful. American officials try to wreck every international deal Russia attempts to clinch. It is not only, or even mainly about weapons. If a country A wants to sell Russians, say, bananas, the US ambassador will come to A's king, or his minister, and will expressly forbid him to sell bananas to godless Russians. Otherwise, do not expect the US aid, or do not count on US favours in your disputes with your neighbours, or the US won't buy your production, or US banks will take another long and jaundiced view at your financial transactions. You witnessed the scene , when the crazed Nikki Haley, the US Ambassador to the UN, threatened sovereign nations with severe punishment for voting against the US desires, so you have an idea of American delicacy and caution while pushing their will through.

Russians are in a very uncomfortable seat. All their neighbours are subject to American pressure to annoy Russia, be it Georgia (once they even attacked Russia militarily being led by American and Israeli advisers) or the Ukraine (Americans arranged a coup d'état and installed extremely hostile to Russia government in Kiev). American military bases surround Russia and NATO troops drew closer and closer to its centres. American military budget of 600 billion dollars dwarfs the Russian one, while the armaments' race can undermine Russian finances. If Russia were a woman, she would scream: stop it!

Perhaps our colleague Mr Andrei Martyanov is right and the US can't destroy Russia militarily; perhaps Immanuel Wallerstein is correct and American power is in decline; but meanwhile the US is perfectly able to make life hard and difficult for any state. It made life unbearably hard for North Korea, extremely hard for Iran. Russia is not doing half as good as she could do without ceaseless American meddling.

President Putin would like Trump to relent. There is no reason for this incessant picking on Russia; it is not Communist anymore; it is much smaller and less populous than the former USSR; it wants to live in peace as a member of the family of nations, not as a great alternative. The anti-Russian offensive began in earnest in the days of previous US presidents, namely Obama and Clinton; so it would make sense for Trump to stop it.

Problem is, President Trump is also actively engaged in war against Russia. Just a few days ago he pressured the German Chancellor to give up on the North Stream-2, to stop buying Russian gas. His advisers demanded that Turkey desist from buying a Russian antimissile system. The US Air Force bombed Russian troops in Syria.

Still Putin made a good try. He proposed to hold a referendum in the Donbas area of Eastern Ukraine which is presently independent though lacking international recognition. The people of Donbas had their own referendum in 2014, and voted for independence; Kiev regime and its Western sponsors denied its validity as it was done under Russian army's protection, they claimed. Now Putin proposed a re-run under international auspices.

Trump ostensibly agreed, he said it was a good idea, and he asked for the opinion of John Bolton, his national security advisor; Bolton confirmed it was a good idea. This was in Helsinki; however, since then the idea had been rejected by the Americans, as the Kiev regime balked at it. The regime knows well that the people of Eastern Ukraine aren't likely to opt for their tender mercies, and Trump administration won't push Kiev to agree to secession, or to abide by the Minsk agreements and let them re-join federal Ukraine as an autonomous unit. So this haemorrhaging wound at the western border of Russia will bleed on.

As for Syria, Putin told Trump that he agreed upon the arrangements with Mr Netanyahu to keep Iranians and their militias at some 80 km away from the disengagement (1974) lines at the Golan Heights. (Iranians are now going through a difficult stretch and they accepted this solution without a murmur.) This was acceptable to Trump, and both presidents stressed that they value Israeli security highly.

(They have differing reasons for it. Putin wants Syria to remain in peace under his protégé and ally President Bashar Assad, and for this, he needs some security arrangements with pugnacious Israel. Putin is aware of Jewish state's ability to pull strings and he doesn't want to antagonise it. Putin also wants Trump to be happy, and Israel is a point of huge importance for the US President, much more than for Putin.

Trump sacrifices at the altar of Israel to propitiate the Jews he is fighting in the US. Trump fights everything American Jews stand for, against all they achieved recently. He wants to have them back in the cash flow cubicle, the 'short guys that wear yarmulkes every day', counting his notes. They want much, much more: they wish to dominate and rule America their own way. Trump is ready to give all he can to Israel, so the American Jews will be less eager to fight him.

This ploy had been tried by the German National-Socialists in 1930s, who gave the Zionist-Socialists the most profitable Ha'avara deal to offset and overcome hostility of American Jews. It failed then, it is likely to fail again, but not before the Zionists will get all they dream of.)

For North Korea, Putin lauded Trump's move and said he will keep playing a supportive role to American efforts.

ORDER IT NOW

For the bogus "Russian interference in the US elections", Putin proposed to establish a bilateral expert group for cyber security. Let experts deal with experts, and sort out the claims, he said. Trump agreed with the idea, though his advisers were quick to repudiate it upon their return to Washington.

Putin also proposed to allow cross-examinations on the reciprocity basis: the US investigators will travel to Russia and interrogate Russian officials indicted by Mueller's team; while Russian investigators will travel to the US and interrogate Ambassador McFaul for his participation in Browder affair . Trump had been impressed by the generous offer; but as he returned to Washington, McFaul (falsely) claimed Trump intends to send him to the Gulag, and Trump's advisers promptly repudiated the proposal.

Putin did not intend to arrest and detain McFaul, just to question him; likewise, he wouldn't permit Mueller investigators to carry Russian intelligence officers to a Guantanamo of their choice, just to ask them questions. The Browder Affair grows bigger as time goes: though the rascal was not the biggest of Russian assets' looters, he was the most outspoken and keen on hanging on the stolen goods. The US advisers from top-league universities implanted in the Yeltsin administration in 1990s had stolen more; they also facilitated creation of the mighty oligarchs of that time. However, Browder had more tenacity and he judiciously invested a lion share of his ill-gotten profits in bribes aiming to suborn the US administration and turn it onto relentless pursuit of Russia. Ambassador McFaul fronted for him and covered his misdeeds; while McFaul tried to interfere in Russian electoral process following the precedent established in 1996.

Thus at Helsinki, a pattern had been established, I was told by a witness. Putin would make a proposal, Trump would tentatively agree and promptly deny and repudiate on return to Washington.

From the beginning to the end, the US media was highly hostile to Trump and to his mission in Europe. They eagerly followed anti-Trump demos and exaggerated his every blunder. Google obediently trailed at the top Twitter messages of the ex-CIA boss calling Trump 'a traitor'. All prominent Western newspapers spoke of Trump's 'treason'.

Perhaps they would be able to convince some Republicans to follow their trend, but the defeat of Rep. Mark Sanford in South Carolina primaries following Trump's angry Twitter had brought them to their senses. A Republican leader stated the case well: "Obviously there are going to be those who are going to criticise him but they're going to criticise him for anything that he says. This committee stands strong, stands behind him and wants to support him. We're interested not only in the 2018 elections, we're interested in the 2020 elections as well."

The result of violent Trump-is-a-traitor campaign was surprising: 80% of Trump voters approved of his Helsinki shtick, notwithstanding the vehement accusations. American media had lost its silver touch. President may continue to build his power structure, and perhaps one day his word will be worth something.

Bottom line: Trump dared, and survived.

Israel Shamir can be reached at [email protected] This article was first published at The Unz Review .

RobinG , July 24, 2018 at 5:16 am GMT

Putin mentioned BILL BROWDER, and Lee Stranahan's twitter caught fire!

Crack the Deep State matrix. Join Lee's campaign to make Senators answer the question, "Have you seen Bill Browder's deposition in the U.S. vs. Prevezon Holdings case?" Full research links, including testimony, here -

https://populist.tv/2018/01/20/bill-browder-links-and-resources-to-understand-controversy/

Miro23 , July 24, 2018 at 6:01 am GMT

Trump sacrifices at the altar of Israel to propitiate the Jews he is fighting in the US. Trump fights everything American Jews stand for, against all they achieved recently. He wants to have them back in the cash flow cubicle, the 'short guys that wear yarmulkes every day', counting his notes. They want much, much more: they wish to dominate and rule America their own way. Trump is ready to give all he can to Israel, so the American Jews will be less eager to fight him.

This could well be right, with Trump's slavish pro-Israel stance designed to get (some) US Jews off his back. The implication is that there is a split between US Jewry and the Israeli's, which seems likely since US Jews want to dominate and rule America, whereas Israeli Jews want to dominate and rule the Middle East (different concepts).

The Israeli project is a costly affair for the US, and is leading straight towards an Iran war which could well duplicate the cost of Iraq. If it happens, the US will inevitably be weakened and further impoverished – maybe more obviously this time as the US has reached its debt limit – with a guaranteed increase in social unrest.

US Jewry couldn't care less if the US population is impoverished, but there is the issue that social unrest builds support for Trump, so Israeli action on Iran may force US Jewry to deal with increased US popular nationalism – with the (US elite Jewish) instinctive reaction to go for repression. Basically US Jewry wants to be an untouchable minority elite (US Neo-Bolshevism) but the transition to totalitarianism can be tricky, and the Israelis may be dangerously accelerating the process for them.

jilles dykstra , July 24, 2018 at 6:53 am GMT
" Problem is, President Trump is also actively engaged in war against Russia. Just a few days ago he pressured the German Chancellor to give up on the North Stream-2, to stop buying Russian gas. His advisers demanded that Turkey desist from buying a Russian antimissile system. The US Air Force bombed Russian troops in Syria. "

As Trump said 'Russia is not a friend, nor a foe, but a competitor. In Helsinki the gas price was discussed. I wonder if Shamir understands what's going on, unique in history, the leader of an empire giving up that empire, because he sees keeping it, even more expanding it, as neocons, AIPAC, AEI, want, is suicide.

The Alarmist , July 24, 2018 at 9:15 am GMT

"Indeed the West is ruled by formidable aunts and elder sisters."

Better characterised as childless Harpies, agents of globalist punishment, who defecate on the countries and cultures they purport to represent and torture their people as they carry them down into the abyss of Tartarus.

Den Lille Abe , July 24, 2018 at 10:38 am GMT
In the current Russophobian climate, it would have been impossible to concede almost anything to Russia, and V. Putin understands this. But as Russiagate unravels ever so slowly, he will have more room. But as long as both leaders agreed not to start WWIII , something has been achieved, therefore I also believe the Iran threats to be posturing, it would make sense if Russia have calmed Israel, what the current situation indicates.

The US knows fully well than an Iran war would not be winnable and bring the rest of the world together; the world has not yet overcome the last financial crisis, a new largescale war in the ME could very well crash the Global economy and the petrodollar. Nobody are keen on that.

Israel Shamir , July 24, 2018 at 11:44 am GMT
Giving up the empire: Gorbachev did it, I witnessed that.
mark green , July 24, 2018 at 12:35 pm GMT
Good article by Shamir.

There are numerous agendas and countless anti-Trump saboteurs at play in this latest escalation. Nevertheless, it is in America's economic and security interests (as well as Russia's) to ease military tensions and seek normalized relations.

Why not? After all, the USSR collapsed nearly 3o years ago. And with it died the 'cold war'. America now trades with communist China. So why not Christian Russia? What's the real roadblock? The last election? That's impossible to believe. Russian 'interference' (if it occurred at all) was not decisive. And what Russia is alleged to have done is not unique or particularly unusual. Besides, the new cold war with Russia had been brewing for years. So what's behind it all?

This is where the oversized Israeli footprint in US politics rears its ugly head. International Zionists have their not-so-secret list of 'demands'. This list gets Washington's attention. So here's the Israeli deal: Russia's alliance with Iran and Syria must be 'contained' and diminshed. And Putin–unless he capitulates–must be kept in his box, isolated. This is what Israel wants. Trump must accommodate–or try to accommodate–these demands. Israel's influence is too great to ignore.

The Zionist master plan is simple: continue the break-up of the Arab (and Persian) worlds into smaller, compliant, non-democratic autocracies or puny, fragmented religious orthodoxies. Sound crazy? Not at all. In Israel's mind, we're already most of the way there.

Starting soon after 911, Zio-Washington initiated a war that crushed Iraq and set back its culture, economy and military capabilities decades. Ditto on Libya. Syria has also been severely damaged. This is all good news to Israel. But the job of re-making the Middle East to Israel's liking remains unfinished. Assad's Syria (with Russian and Iranian help) is about to emerge–if not victorious–then intact, after years of Zio-American meddling and covert warfare. Assad survives but Israel has not given up. Syria remains weak.

Next step: using Washington's awesome military and intelligence capabilities, global Zionism is now embarking on a campaign that will attempt to destabilize Iran without using US bombs or missiles. How? Hundreds of millions of US dollars have just been earmarked to target Iran's existing regime through propaganda, sabotage and subterfuge. The ongoing Zionist-lead BDS campaign against Iran is about to hit an even higher gear. This is another act of war against the people of Iran. Yet no one seems to care. There's simply no discussion or dissent. It's simply Zio-America's next target. For the safety of Israel, Iran must fall.

Talk about direct interference in another country's sovereign affairs! What Zio-Washington is doing to Iran makes 'Russiagate' look absolutely insignificant in comparison, even if every exaggerated assertion was true. Yet no one protests.

Not the pundits. Not the politicians. Not even the anti-war Left. Either they're too frightened or they're complicit. Duplicity, dirty deeds, and double standards is how Zio-Washington rolls. And Israel wouldn't have it any other way. Zionist power is simply too vast, too effective and too unrelenting to resist–even for a US President. But Trump's objective to 'Make America Great Again' is up against Israel's presumption that it can direct US policies to it liking. Can this marriage survive? Can Trump serve two masters?

The inevitable clash ahead is why Trump is under so much media and political pressure. The Zions want to keep him under pressure and off balance. Also, there is the simmering, embarrassing, unresolved matter of Palestine. The native goyim there are still resisting. This fact too, is as astonishing as it is shameful. The refusal of Israel to give back land, allow independence, and cut a deal that would allow Palestine autonomy after decades of Israeli occupation and endless 'talks' speaks volumes about Israeli ruthlessness. The 'Two State Solution' failed because Israel decided that it didn't want an independent and sovereign Palestinian state. To the Israelis, the sad plight of the Palestinian people matters not.

And even Washington is not powerful enough to force Israel to return to the Palestinians the land that the Jewish state snatched in its preemptive 1967 war. So the 'peace process' gradually died. But as the talks dragged on, Israel expanded its borders, built Jewish settlements in Palestine, gained greater militarily power, cultivated its regional influence (and power in Washington), and increased its GDP. Palestine on the other hand, achieved none of those things. Conditions have actually worsened. At this point, all the Palestinians can do is hold on or surrender. Meanwhile, it's clear that Israel's race-conscious majority want the native non-Jews out of the Jewish State. This political 'value' can now be seen for what it is. Can the torture of Palestine go on indefinitely?–or must Israel soon act ruthlessly and decisively?

One option is for the Jewish state to radically increase colonization of the Occupied Territories and begin the forcible transfer of non-Jews into Jordan, Egypt or Syria. Ironically, Meir Kahane's racist, reviled (but prophetic) proclamation (and book) 'They [the Arabs] Must Go' has finally found its audience. Israel's 'national socialist' values are showing. Even Trump is being held hostage. Can Trump shake the Zionist monkey off his back?–or will he have to obediently target all the usual bad guys: Iran, Hamas, Russia and Assad?

Israel orchestrates. Washington executes. And the sad story continues.

DESERT FOX , July 24, 2018 at 1:44 pm GMT
Trump is but another example of the Zionist control of the American government and Trumps pissing backwards in his statements at the Helsinki news conference is the Zionist deep state in action for all the world to see. Trump is a puppet of the Zionists who surround him and who hold the paper on his real estate house of cards and so he does what he is told as the only other option is the JFK route and obviously he has made the right choice for him but not for America.

Zionist control of American was proven on 911 when Israel and the zionist deep state did 911 and got away with it and every thinking American knows they did it.

Mike P , July 24, 2018 at 3:01 pm GMT
@EliteCommInc.

Trump has always been speaking out of both sides of his mouth, so his agreeing and disagreeing with the "intelligence community" at the same time is all in a day's work for him. It seems to me that he is just playing for time – he may of course still lose bigly in the end, but he has not yet conceded defeat.

[Jul 24, 2018] Political Persecutions in Eastern Europe to prepare War with Russia (and a note on Hungary, Trump and the refugees) Defend De

Notable quotes:
"... By Dimitris Konstantakopoulos ..."
"... (*) We say concealed, because it is becoming more and more the privileged method of the Empire to control and use for its own goals various rightist or leftist political currents and identities, inverting their original intentions and goals. Conspiracy and Deception were always formidable political tools. In our era, an era of unprecedented civilizational decline of Western Capitalism, they have become the main ones. That made it possible for America and the "Deep Finance" to use Tsipras and SYRIZA in Greece and that also made it possible for a politician so closely connected to the US and Israeli Neocons, as Donald Trump is, to deceive so many people and to present himself as a friend of Russia and an opponent of Wars, while in fact he was the guy entrusted with continuing the Neocon agenda in a more dangerous form, bringing into the equation also the nuclear card. ..."
Jul 24, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press

Political Persecutions in Eastern Europe to prepare War with Russia (and a note on Hungary, Trump and the refugees) 09/07/2018

By Dimitris Konstantakopoulos

We have witnessed during the last two years the multiplication of cases of political repressions in various Eastern European countries, like Poland, where Mateusz Piscorski, leader of the party Smena is detained illegally already for two years, without any accusations formulated against him! But this is not the only authoritarian action of the Polish authorities, which, by the way have been condemned by UN Human Rights Committee and by the Polish Ombudsman (Rzecznik praw obywatelskich) for their actions. Among them the process against the Polish Communist party, the harassment against the trotskyte group "Power to the Councils", a pro-Palestinian conference and scientific conferences about Karl Marx! To all that you may add the massive expulsion to the streets of impoverished tenants due to the re-privatization process.

It seems that, for the Polish authorities, "Democracy" and "Freedom" were very good as slogans against "Socialism" and the "Russians", but not so good to be really applied As for Polish nationalism is of a very peculiar brand. Polish say for instance they are still angry with the Soviet invasion to Poland in 1921 (after a failed Polish invasion of Soviet Russia!) But they cannot explain why in the hell the leaders of this proud nation send their troops to invade, occupy and destroy Iraq in 2003, along with US, Britain and Australia! It seems Iraq cannot have the same right to national independence Poles claim for their country.

More to the South, in Moldova, an intellectual like Iurie Rosca, an internationally known Moldovan is also persecuted by the authorities of the country. His real crime is that Rosca, a militant for democracy since the Soviet times, remains a strong pro-independence and pro-neutrality figure in a country NATO wants to include, as fast as possible.

More to the North, in the Baltic states, the so-called "Russian-speaking" huge minorities in those states, of Russian, Ukrainian or Bielorussian origin, are the object of mass repressions since the demise of the USSR. They are even deprived of their most fundamental political and civic rights, with the complicity of European governments and EU institutions. In both Baltic states and Ukraine, authorities do not object to the open celebration of the most terrible and criminal Nazi or pro-Nazi figures as national heroes. (By the way one wonders why the World Jewish Council and other similar organizations seem so little wondered by Nazi and anti-semitic manifestations in this region, in particular by the Nazi activities in Ukraine. If something like that happened anywhere else in the world, as a minimum they would ask for sanctions against the powers which tolerate such manifestations or they would organize campaigns to remove them from power!)

Except for the Baltic states and Ukraine, political persecutions did not take a massive character and they don't need to take for the time being. Still those persecutions and the general ideological climate (mostly anti-Russian and anti-Communist, sometimes clearly pro-Nazi) are quite serious indications of the political project they want to serve.

Communists for instance or the Left are nearly inexistent in nearly all Eastern European countries. Those repressions are not justified by any "Communist threat". As for Russia, it dissolved, at its own initiative, both the Warsaw Pact and the USSR. To claim now it represents a military threat for its ex-dominions it would be utterly ridiculous, if it was not very dangerous. By the way, campaigns to persuade Europeans that Russia is a serious threat are under way in all Europe, including Britain, Scandinavia or Germany, adapted to the particular conditions and the level of consciousness in every European country. In Germany, in 2014, the editor of Handelsblatt himself has compared the treatment of Russia by the local media, with what German newspapers were writing in the beginning of WWI. It is clearly a European wide project to present Moscow under the worse possible light.

Such media campaigns in History usually precede military campaigns, even if in the Russian case it is not so simple. The aim here is not to counter a non-existent Russian threat but to encircle, contain and provoke regime change in Russia and also undermine the relations between Europe and Russia. By destroying the relations between Russia and Europe, you deny also to the latter the means of its independence.

What the powers in place in Eastern Europe try to do by such repressive action is to neutralize "pro-actively" any dissident voice, of the left or of the right, afraid that the mere existence of any independent voice would harm their very ambitious plans. They are also trying to begin shifting European ideology , from its old democratic values (even if often not applied) to new authoritarian ones , something absolutely necessary for the attack of Capital against popular classes and of Western Imperialism against Russia and other "outside enemies" – targets. This is also essentially Trump's game: To use dissatisfaction from the establishment policies to present a more authoritarian regime as an alternative.

Moldova: Encircling Russia from SE Europe

In Moldova, all economy and all politics and all power, except for the President of the Republic, elected by direct vote, are controlled by one and only one Oligarch who was even received officially in the US. Extreme corruption and exploitation of its people is the normal state of affairs in this once rich land, turned into the poorest nation of Europe, after the soviet collapse-suicide and the near to feudal neo-capitalist plundering of its resources, with one third of its population emigrating abroad! NATO and the EU, as usual, pretend to fully ignore the real situation in Moldova.

Read also: EU referendum: Brexit sparks calls for other EU votes

Moldova's Oligarch and the Western powers behind him are afraid now of the likelihood that, in the next parliamentarian elections, the people of Moldova will overthrow their political representatives. In the same time, Moldova is most probably one of the next targets of NATO on its road to Moscow .

After destroying Yugoslavia , after launching a Debt War against Greece and Cyprus , after provoking a bloody civil war in Ukraine , Western imperialism needs now to control Moldova, to abolish whatever remains of its independence and neutrality and to turn it into a military base, absolutely necessary for its war planning against Russia. Moldova , Serbia and FYROM are the three remaining " holes " in the near complete chain of NATO protectorates now encircling Russia from its South West, from the Adriatic to Donetsk, from the Mediterranean to Hungary.

In reality, NATO is not doing anything different than what Hitler did, back in 1941, spending precious time and his best military units to occupy Greece and control the Balkans before launching the Barbarossa Operation. It is absolutely imperative for Western Imperialism to control the Balkans and all of SE Europe before launching, if it will be able, its final attack against Russia, an attack which may not take a ( not impossible but rather difficult) military form, but which can adopt other forms, such as geopolitical isolation and threats, economic, financial and ideological war with the purpose of regime change, to return this country to the status of Western vassal, as it was during the Yeltsin years, in alliance with pro-Western forces inside Russia, probably more concealed that overt (*). In all possible scenarios, the encirclement of Russia, the cutting of its access to the South , to the "Warm Seas", is one of the principal strategic lines of attack of the West against Moscow, as it has always been during the Soviet, but also during the Tsarist regime before the 1917 Revolution. But now, the West is much more advanced as it is already waging war from positions like Kiev or Caucasus, which belonged to the Russian Empire since centuries.

Hungary, Trump and the refugee crisis

Let us open a parenthesis at that point. Hungary is a very special case in Eastern-Central Europe, as it pretends to be simultaneously a friend of Russia, of Trump and of Netanyahu! It is only natural for Russia, attacked as it is from all sides, to see in Budapest a precious ally and he is in some cases, when for example it supports Macedonian Slav nationalism thus putting obstacles to the inclusion of FYROM into NATO. It is also rather normal for a power like Russia to try to manoeuver exploiting serious contradictions inside imperialist centers (Neocon-nationalists vs. Globalizers, Netanyahu against Soros, US Empire vs. Financial Empire). The only problem is that, if the winds of the Western establishment are diverging in serious problems, like Iran or the western political regime, they are absolutely united to their hostility to Russia, even if some of those politicians try to portray themselves as friends of Moscow. By the way that is not new. Even Hitler played in the past, rather successfully, this game, before attacking Russia!

Returning to Hungary, the question is if Orban and similar regimes are or can be long-term strategic allies of Russia. Especially in the context of the broader imperial game against Moscow, of which the NATO expansion is only one, very important, but only one chapter.

We will see at the end of the day what all that game really means. Past historic experience, but also the common anti-German, pro-US front of the Visegrád countries for decades is a very strong indication of problems ahead. It is true that many people in Europe, even in Germany, hate Merkel, Soros and globalization. Trump is using this dissatisfaction to create a pro-US camp in Europe, with Poland and Hungary as its leaders. This does not seem the best method to address the challenges put by Globalizers from the perspective of European independence. (Greece is also such an example, with Tsipras counting on US and "Deep Finance" support to counter Merkel. We have seen where all that led finally).

Hungary and its Eastern and Central European allies are now protesting against the refugees who supposedly threaten them. But in reality it is not they who are threatened, the refugee problem is serious and it is mainly affecting South and not Eastern European countries.

By attacking refugees, Eastern European states are constructing a very convenient outside enemy, whose utility is first to help Trump against Europe, second to solidify an authoritarian ideology at home, and third , to facilitate new Western wars against Islam.

Read also: Israel hints it could hit Iran's 'air force' in Syria

It is very indicative the fact that both sides of the debate in Europe (pro- and anti-immigrant/refugee) are hardly saying one word about the main root cause of the refugee crisis, Western direct or by proxy interventions and the wars they provoked in the Middle East. That means they are not so much interested in addressing the refugee crisis, they are interested in using it.

The Dialectics of the Refugee Crisis

" Neocon – Nationalists " (the Huntington party) seem to be bitter enemies of Soros and the Fukuyama type " Globalizers " and they are indeed regarding many questions. Still they agree on the main, Western and Financial Domination in the world, they are seriously divided as far as the means to impose it are concerned.

By the way, one gets often the impression of a kind of an objective division of labor between those two camps. Neocons helped produce the refugees in the first place, by launching the wars in the Middle East. Then, by greatly facilitating the massive transfer of refugees to Europe, Soros-minded politicians and NGO's, tried to facilitate the implementation of their totalitarian dream of destroying nations, states and every human identity, religion or ideology, potentially able to resist the world domination of Financial Capital and the institutions it is controlling, like the EU.

By doing that, they helped create the adverse reaction, which, instead of provoking a backlash against the Wars, it is destined to fuel new ones! You bomb Libya, you create refugees and then you use them to impose political regimes which are more convenient for new wars! Just fine.

US vs. Europe

We must not forget also that all Eastern European elites, including the Hungarian one, were formed by the Americans and some of their allies after the fall of the soviet regime and they are structurally anti-Russian and against European independence from the US, even if, in some rare cases, they can pretend to be friends of Russia. Eastern Europe, the "New Europe" of Ramsfeld and the Neocons, stubbed in the back France, Germany and Russia, which were opposing the war in Iraq in 2003, the same war which initiated the chain of Middle Eastern wars responsible for the refugee crisis they are now protesting against!

Again on what is Trump

As for Mr. Trump, it is becoming really tiring to have to repeat, in 2018, already obvious facts. The US President, examined on the basis of what he does, not what he says, on the basis of the real record of his administration, on the basis of the fact that now Neocons in Geopolitics and Goldman Sachs in economics are ruling Washington as never before, is nothing else than the main tool for the reappearance of the main Neocon project, albeit in a much expanded, multi-faceted and nuclear version. This program could not reappear by normal political ways, so it reappeared as a result of a huge and complicated conspiracy to elect and control Mr. Trump . Obama did not stop the Neocon policies, but he contained the more dangerous manifestations of them, like war against Iran, a new, Iraqi-style invasion of Syria, or providing Ukraine with more sophisticated weapons, as the present administration is already doing, or in moving Israel's capital to Jerusalem.

Mr. Trump makes everything to persuade us he is mad and he probably is, I am not a psychiatrist to make a diagnosis. But his policy is not mad at all. It is following, on the contrary, an Iron Logic, the logic of Yinon, of Huntington, of the Wars of Civilizations, of the New American Century, of Neocons, of Cheney, albeit adapted to the new international situation. Here we are facing again nothing else than the centuries old phenomenon of Western Imperialism, projected by both Western superpowers, the Empire of Finance and the US Empire, in its more clear, more aggressive and more extremist form.

Regime Change in the West: Precondition for War

Most political and military leaders hate the fact that, always, even after the discovery of Nuclear Weapons, War remains the continuation of politics with other means, as Clausewitz put it. They like the fact that they can use their military means to implement their political goals. But they don't like the fact they have to persuade their citizens and foreign opinion for what they are doing. If they use their weapons without some form of consent, they will pay a huge cost.

Without a political regime like Hitler's in Germany, without the enormous support he commanded among German people (De Gaulle stated that no other people in History has supported so much its leaders), all the technical and military means of the world would not permit the Barbarossa Operation. (Let me clarify at that point that this is not an anti-German comment. It is true that Germans committed horrendous crimes, for which there is no whatever justification. But at least one can say they were pushed into committing them by the social disaster and the national humiliation they suffered after WWII and the 1929 crisis. But there was no military reason for levelling the German industrial, workers towns, or Nagasaki in Japan. Nowadays Americans lack even such a pseudo-justification for what they are doing or threaten to do all around the world. Nobody has invaded or plans to invade the United States, nobody has imposed its catastrophic economic diktats to them.)

Read also: Trump, Flynn and the anti-Islam" Lobby

By the way it was exactly the will and capacity of Hitler's regime to attack Soviet Russia, which made it acceptable to large sections of the German and Western establishment and facilitated its ascension to power. As for his attack against Russia, it was not a mistake. It was his aim and the logic of his project from the very beginning. But of course he had to hide it in order to realize it.

We understand that some of our readers, accustomed to many decades of peace in Europe, may be skeptical about this kind of reasoning. We should remind them that European history is full of such abrupt changes from War to Peace and from Peace to War. It happened before, it can happen again. By the way, it is already happening in modern Europe. It has happened in Yugoslavia, it is happening in Ukraine, it is happening even in Greece, but by economic, not military means. But mainly, the new Cold War is already and in many aspects the dominating reality in nowadays Europe. It is War, even if it is not using the classical military means.

To push further this War, to encircle and strangle Russia, Western Imperialism and its military tool, NATO have now and "pro-actively" to silence any dissenting voice in Eastern Europe, from the right or from the left, which may become tomorrow poles of resistance. They have, through their repression, to teach to all potential dissidents the huge risks they will assume if they express their disagreements.

They need also to persuade European nations that any resistance to their plans is futile and they have nothing else to do than surrender and try to survive as best as they can. In the beginning of the decade we had the transformation of Greece from a more or less usual Western parliamentarian state into a Debt Colony , the Greek experiment and the Greek paradigm . The 2015 betrayal of the Greek people by its own leaders came to support the conclusion of futility of any resistance, in a way even a military defeat would not do.

Now, Poland seems to have been chosen as the New Authoritarian paradigm, with clear proto-Fascist elements, right and pro-US. The historic mission, the function of this new-old Authoritarianism is to attack social rights and their force in both Eastern and Western Europe. By doing that, they promote neoliberalism inside all of Europe, while creating the necessary political and social conditions to facilitate the wars they plan against external threats (Russia, Islam-Iran, Global South like Venezuela, China).

This is why we are witnessing such a definite turn to clearly authoritarian methods also in Western and Central Europe, where special legislation is introduced everywhere, invoking the need to "fight terrorism", which is in many cases a result of western services activities and, in all cases, a result of Western interventions. This special legislation is not so much addressed against terrorists but it aims in reality political dissenters, independent intellectuals and social movements. To organize war against the East, it was always necessary to suppress democracy, political dissent and social movements in the West. (This was also the reason Mc Carthyism has been developed in the USA during the previous Cold War. It was necessary to prepare USA for the War with USSR).

Note

(*) We say concealed, because it is becoming more and more the privileged method of the Empire to control and use for its own goals various rightist or leftist political currents and identities, inverting their original intentions and goals. Conspiracy and Deception were always formidable political tools. In our era, an era of unprecedented civilizational decline of Western Capitalism, they have become the main ones. That made it possible for America and the "Deep Finance" to use Tsipras and SYRIZA in Greece and that also made it possible for a politician so closely connected to the US and Israeli Neocons, as Donald Trump is, to deceive so many people and to present himself as a friend of Russia and an opponent of Wars, while in fact he was the guy entrusted with continuing the Neocon agenda in a more dangerous form, bringing into the equation also the nuclear card.

[Jul 23, 2018] Usage Examples of Our Intelligence Community, with Implications

Notable quotes:
"... "Our intelligence community" is one of those phrases that make my back teeth itch, because I hate to see "our" doing that much work (especially when I know how much work our's parent, "we," has to do.) ..."
"... On Friday, Michael McFaul, a former United States ambassador to Russia, wrote on Twitter: "I'm very impressed that Mueller was able to name the 12 GRU officers in the new indictment. Demonstrates the incredible capabilities of our intelligence community ." ..."
"... Almost one year ago, on January 28th, 2003, the President devoted one-third of his State of the Union address to what he described as "a serious and mounting threat to our country" posed by Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction. He spoke, in those famous 16 words, about efforts by Iraq to secure enriched uranium from Africa. He talked about aluminum tubes "suitable for nuclear weapons production." He described stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and said, "we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs." ..."
"... That "we know, we know from sources that a missile brigade outside Baghdad was dispersing rocket launchers and warheads containing biological warfare agent to various locations " That "there can be no doubt that Saddam Hussein has biological weapons and the capability to rapidly produce more, many more." Pictures of what he called "active chemical munitions bunkers" with "sure signs that the bunkers are storing chemical munitions." ..."
"... The WMDs episode led to the (bipartisan) Iraq War, the greatest strategic debacle in American history. The WMDs episode was marked by fake evidence (yellowcake; aluminum tubes), planted stories, gaslighting, and a consensus of elite opinion along the Acela Corridor, exactly as today. The intelligence community was wrong. The national security establishment was wrong. The press was wrong. The Congressional leadership was wrong. The President was wrong. Everybody was wrong (except for a few outliers who couldn't get jobs afterwards anyhow, exactly because they were right). And now, today, we are faced with the same demand that we believe what the intelligence community says, without question, and without evidence that the public can see and examine. The only difference is that this time, the stakes are greater: Rather than blowing a few trillion and slaughtering hundreds of thousands of faraway brown people, we're rushing toward a change in the Constitutional Order that in essence makes the intelligence community a fourth branch of the government. ..."
Jul 20, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
Usage Examples of "Our Intelligence Community", with Implications Posted on July 22, 2018 by Lambert Strether By Lambert Strether of Corrente .

"Our intelligence community" is one of those phrases that make my back teeth itch, because I hate to see "our" doing that much work (especially when I know how much work our's parent, "we," has to do.) So I thought I'd throw together some usage examples of the term to see if I could find more significant readings than my own reaction, and then draw out some implications from that reading. But first, let's look at how often that term is used, and where. We turn to Google Trends :

Some caveats: Google doesn't have enough data to track "our intelligence community," or so it says, so the search is for "intelligence community" only.

Further, the search is for 2008 to the present, again because Google, or so it says, doesn't have enough data for shorter time frames.[1] However, I think the chart shows that interest in the intelligence community is not general in time or space: It spikes when there's gaslighting with reader interest in particular stories, and spikes along the Acela Corridor, in Washington and New York. (We might also speculate, based on HuffPost/YouGov voter data , that interest in the today's stories about the intelligence is limited not only in space, and time, but in scope: Primarily among liberal Democrats.[2]) With that, let's turn to our usage examples.

I used Google to find them, and of course Google search is crapified and all but useless -- for example, it insists on returning examples of "intelligence community" along with "our intelligence community" in normal search, even with when the search string is quoted -- but it is what it is; readers are invited to supply their own examples.

Example 1, July 13, 2018, New York Times :

On Friday, Michael McFaul, a former United States ambassador to Russia, wrote on Twitter: "I'm very impressed that Mueller was able to name the 12 GRU officers in the new indictment. Demonstrates the incredible capabilities of our intelligence community ."

No. Mueller provided no evidence and the case is unlikely to go to trial; the capability consists in the naming, not in the proof. Verdict: Credulity .

Example 2, July 3, 2018, Washington Post :

The intelligence community determined that the Kremlin intended to "denigrate" and "harm" Clinton, and "undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process" while helping Trump.

And the same claim, July 10, 2018, Washington Post:

The U.S. intelligence community has concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to boost Trump's candidacy

No. If you click through, you'll find that this is the "17 agencies"/"high confidence" report, whose agencies and analysts were hand-picked by Clapper; that's just not the "intelligence community" as a whole[3]; the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), was not involved in the analysis, for example. (I don't see how it's normal that such an important topic not to be the subject of a Presidental Finding, but perhaps people were in a rush.) Verdict; Misinformation .

Example 3, July 19, 2018, ( retiring ) Senator Jeff Flake (R), New York Times :

FLAKE: We know the intelligence is right. We stand behind our intelligence community . We need to say that in the Senate. Yes, it's symbolic, and symbolism is important.

And a similar formulation, July 22, 2018, Senator Marco Rubio (R), CBS News :

We need to move forward from that with good public policy and part of that is, I think, standing with our intelligence community .

Posturing aside, to my sensibilities, it's pretty disturbing when "support the troops" bleeds over into "support the spies," and when supporting the conclusions of an institution bleeds over into supporting the institution itself, as such. (The whole of the Federalist Papers argues against the latter view: "Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.") Verdict: Authoritarian followership .

Example 4, undated, Office of the Director of National Intelligence :

WE UNIFY OUR INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY TOWARD A STRONGER, SAFER NATION

No. The DNI mistakes the hope for the fact; were the intelligence community in fact unified , Clapper would not have hand-picked agencies for his report, and a Presidential Finding would have been made. (And given the source, "our" is doing even more work there than it usual does; it reminds of liberal Democrats talking about "our Democracy." Whose, exactly?) Verdict: Wishful thinking .

Example 5, July 16, 2018, John Sipher (interview), PBS :

I do think the intelligence community is quite resilient. They put their head down and they do their work, but they take this very seriously. And they see the president as their primary customer and they will do almost anything to get the president the information that he needs to do his job.

No. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes -- "Who will guard the guards themselves?" -- was formulated by the Roman poet Juvenal (d. 138AD) in the late first or early second century, [checks calculator], about 1880 years ago. It's absurd to assume that "the intelligence" community has always served its "primary customer" -- see the Bay of Pigs invastion at " groupthink " -- or that they will in the future, especially considering the enormous stakes involved today. Verdict: Historical ignorance .

Example 6, July 12, 2018, Representative Barbara Comstock :

Today I voted for H.R. 6237, the Matthew Young Pollard Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 2018 and 2019. This important legislation funds our Intelligence community and provides them the resources they need to effectively defend our nation "This legislation makes sure that the dedicated men and women who serve our nation in the Intelligence Community [caps in the original] are fully equipped to fulfill their mission."

No. While Sipher urges ( as does Clapper ) that the intelligence community is in the business of serving customers, Comstock, through her language ("dedicated men and women who serve our nation") identifies it with the military. That's pretty disturbing when you realize that the intelligence community has a domestic component (and when you think back to Obama's 17-city crackdown on Occupy, or Obama's militarized response to #BlackLivesMatter). Verdict: Militarization

Example 7, July 16, 2018, ABC :

Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, head of the U.S. intelligence community , reaffirmed his conclusion that Russia had indeed tried to sway the election in a statement published after Trump's remarks.

No. The U.S. has 17 intelligence agencies; the DNI is in no sense their head. From the DNI site :

The core mission of the ODNI is to lead the IC in intelligence integration, forging a community that delivers the most insightful intelligence possible. That means effectively operating as one team: synchronizing collection, analysis and counterintelligence so that they are fused. This integration is the key to ensuring national policymakers receive timely and accurate analysis from the IC to make educated decisions.

If you boil that bureucratic porridge down -- the Russian word for porridge is kasha , in case kompromat has worn thin for you -- you'll see that the 17 intelligence agencies do not have a reporting relationship to the DNI. Hence, the DNI is not their head. QED. Verdict: Authoritarian followership

Example 8, July 18, 2018, John Brennan, Salon :

[BRENNAN:] What Mr. Trump did (Monday) was to betray the women and men of the FBI, the CIA and NSA and others and betray the American public. That's why I use the term, this was nothing short of treason, because it is a betrayal of the nation. He's giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

(Leaving aside Brennan's broad definition of enemy -- apparently a sovereign state with interests different from our own, as opposed to a nation against whom Congress has declared war -- note that Brennan treats the agencies as individual entities, not as "unified," presumably betraying DNI Coats). More:

BRENNAN:] I still shake my head trying to understand what was discussed during the two-hour one-on-one, what was discussed between the two sides in their bilateral meeting. We only saw what Mr. Trump said during the press conference. I can't even imagine what he said behind closed doors. I can't imagine what he said to Mr. Putin directly. I am very concerned about what type of impact it might have on our intelligence community and on this country."

No. Note well: What ( torture advocate ) Brennan says contradicts the other two models expressed in this aggregation. If the President is the customer, it's not Brennan's concern what that customer does (any more than it's Best Buy's concern what I buy in Starbucks after I pick up my flat-screen TV). And if the intelligence community is a branch of the military, it's not their concern what their Commander-in-Chief does; he'll tell them what they need to know.) Seriously, why does the Praetorian Guard need to know what the emperor is doing. Now, one could argue that Brennan's ambition is counteracting Trump's ambition; well and good, but then one needs to think through the consequences. And if Brennan, et al., really believe that Trump committed treason, then they -- as the good patriots they presumably are -- need to indicate a path to removing him. If that path does not include full disclosure of the evidence for whatever charges are to be made, then the country will have to deal with the consequences -- which I'd speculate won't be pretty -- of a change in the Constitutional order where the "intelligence community" can remove a President from office based on its own internal consensus . Praetorian

(Here's a collection of examples ; I wish I had time to do more examples, but these will have to do.)

But speaking of the internal consensus of the intelligence community, let's take a little walk down memory lane . From the "Salon Staff," quoting Senator Jane Harmon:

Almost one year ago, on January 28th, 2003, the President devoted one-third of his State of the Union address to what he described as "a serious and mounting threat to our country" posed by Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction. He spoke, in those famous 16 words, about efforts by Iraq to secure enriched uranium from Africa. He talked about aluminum tubes "suitable for nuclear weapons production." He described stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and said, "we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs."

One week later, on February 5th, Secretary of State Colin Powell, with Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet sitting behind his right shoulder, used charts and photographs to elaborate on the Administration's WMD case. "These are not assertions," Powell said, "these are facts corroborated by many sources." Among Powell's claims were:

That "we know, we know from sources that a missile brigade outside Baghdad was dispersing rocket launchers and warheads containing biological warfare agent to various locations " That "there can be no doubt that Saddam Hussein has biological weapons and the capability to rapidly produce more, many more." Pictures of what he called "active chemical munitions bunkers" with "sure signs that the bunkers are storing chemical munitions."

Powell has subsequently said that he spent days personally assessing the intelligence. He included only information he felt was fully supported by the analysis. Hence, no mention of enriched uranium from Africa, no claim that al Qaeda was involved in 9-11.

The effect was powerful. Veteran columnist for the Washington Post, Mary McGrory, known for liberal views and Kennedy connections, wrote an op-ed the following day entitled "I Am Persuaded". Members of Congress, like me, believed the intelligence case. We voted for the resolution on Iraq to urge U.N. action and to authorize military force only if diplomacy failed. We felt confident we had made the wise choice.

But as the evidence pours in the Intelligence Committee's review of the pre-war intelligence; David Kay's interim report on the failure to find WMD in Iraq; an impressive study by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board's critique; thoughtful commentaries like that of Ken Pollack in this month's Atlantic Monthly; and investigative reporting including a lengthy front page story by Barton Gellman of the Washington Post on January 7,

we are finding out that Powell and other policymakers were wrong, British intelligence was wrong, and those of us who believed the intelligence were wrong . Indeed, I doubt there would be discussions of David Kay's possible departure if the Iraq Survey Group were on the verge of uncovering large stockpiles of weapons or an advanced nuclear weapons program.

But if 9/11 was a failure to connect the dots, it appears that the Intelligence Community, in the case of Iraq's WMD, connected the dots to the wrong conclusions . If our intelligence products had been better, I believe many policymakers, including me, would have had a far clearer picture of the sketchiness of our sources on Iraq's WMD programs, and our lack of certainty about Iraq's chemical, biological and nuclear capabilities.

Let me add that policymakers -- including members of Congress -- have a duty to ask tough questions, to probe the information being presented to them. We also have a duty to portray that information publicly as accurately as we can.

The WMDs episode led to the (bipartisan) Iraq War, the greatest strategic debacle in American history. The WMDs episode was marked by fake evidence (yellowcake; aluminum tubes), planted stories, gaslighting, and a consensus of elite opinion along the Acela Corridor, exactly as today. The intelligence community was wrong. The national security establishment was wrong. The press was wrong. The Congressional leadership was wrong. The President was wrong. Everybody was wrong (except for a few outliers who couldn't get jobs afterwards anyhow, exactly because they were right). And now, today, we are faced with the same demand that we believe what the intelligence community says, without question, and without evidence that the public can see and examine. The only difference is that this time, the stakes are greater: Rather than blowing a few trillion and slaughtering hundreds of thousands of faraway brown people, we're rushing toward a change in the Constitutional Order that in essence makes the intelligence community a fourth branch of the government.

Why are we doing that? Well, if you look at the verdicts after each of the quotes I've found, taking the quotes as a proxy for elite opinion, one reason might be that the portion of our elites involved in the Russia narrative -- who, let us remember, are limited in space and scope -- are:

If power is lying in the street, beware of who picks it up. Matters might not improve.

NOTES .

[1] The hit count (100 for the spike in January 2017) is oddly low; sadly, although 100 looks like a blue link, we cannot click through to check the data. However, even if the aggregates are low, I think we can assume that both the shape of the trend line and its geographic distribution are directionally correct, because the spikes occur at reasonable places for them to occur. Sidebar: Note the horrid user interface design, which uses inordinate amounts of screen space to no purpose, disrespecting the time-pressed professional user.

[2] We might even go so far as to speculate that -- given these limitations in space -- that while "our" asserts Democrat leadership as a National party, Democrats are in fact a State party. Removing the hyphen from "nation-state" is a neat way of encapsulating our current legitimacy crisis.

[3] "Intelligence community," like "deep state," connotes unity among institutions that are in fact riven by faction.

ADDENDUM: Scott Horton

I didn't add this material to the post proper, because I only had screen shots, and I wasn't able to find the post in time using Google, or Facebook's lousy search. So after ten minutes of plowing through Facebook's infinite scroll, here is the embed* from Scott Horton that I sought:

And a screen shot personally taken by me:

Note the lead: "European intelligence analysts ," so reminiscent of Bush's "British intelligence has learned " (the sixteen words ). What they "learned," of course, was the faked evidence on Niger yellowcake. Go through my list of "verdicts," starting with "credulous," and see what does not apply to Horton.

Horton is a Contributing Editor to Harper's Magazine, has a law practice in New York, and is affiliate with Columbia Law School and the Open Society Institute.

Corey Robin's reaction ( via ):

I agree. And from a voter:

The key point, for me, is this: "Liberal Democrats do not view anyone outside of places like Orange and Lexington County (whom they go all-out to court) as people fit to make their own choices." It's important to watch for outright denial of agency, to others, not merely lack of agency. That's true for Horton, it was true for Clinton's "deplorables" comment, and it was true for Obama's "bitter"/"cling to" Kinseley gaffe.

It would be nice if Senator Sanders didn't signal boost this stuff. Here's another usage example of "intelligence community":

Or, to put this another way, Sanders needs to get his supporters' backs, and fast, with messaging that doesn't take a "duck and cover" approach by repeating the catchphrases of the current onslaught, but contextualizes and decontaminates it. I didn't say that would be easy

NOTE * I like the picture the Time chose very much; apparently, the evul left is young, female, swarthy, and/or black. No suburban Republicans here! The "AbolishICE" t-shirt -- and not, say, #MedicareForAll -- is also a nice touch.

[Jul 23, 2018] America On It s Way to Being Stalin s Soviet Union by Publius Tacitus

Notable quotes:
"... PT is correct. Any Russian anywhere who has ever spoken to any American for any reason is now considered attempting to "undermine American democracy." When in reality, we're doing it just fine ourselves. The hypocrisy and paranoia is breathtaking - and extremely dangerous. ..."
Jul 23, 2018 | /turcopolier.typepad.com

richardstevenhack • a day ago ,

I noticed this situation some months ago when Torshin was accused of donating money to the NRA in order to help Trump get elected. Apparently he is a member of the NRA and as such is perfectly entitled to make donations to the organization.

What I noticed in the article about this is that the one piece of information left out was the amount of the donation. Since the NRA spent $50 million trying to get Trump elected, unless Torshin's donation was some significant percentage of that $50 million, it would make no sense for his donation to be considered significant, if it was little more than what a normal NRA member might be expected to contribute.

Which is, of course, why that figure was deliberately left out of the article - and several other articles on the subject.

An article at ABC News finally acknowledged what the "donation" was:

Last month, a lawyer for the NRA told ABC News that Torshin had, indeed, donated membership dues of between $600 and $1,000 to the organization.But the lawyer, J. Steven Hart, said that was the extent of money coming from Russians.

"We have one contribution from a Russian," Steven Hart, outside counsel to the NRA, said in an interview with ABC News before Friday's sanctions announcement.

Hart said it was the "life membership payment" made by Torshin, which went to the NRA's non-profit parent organization, which is not required by law to disclose the donation. Hart added, "The donation was the person's membership dues" and was not used for election-related activities. "That was not a major donor program," he said.

PT is correct. Any Russian anywhere who has ever spoken to any American for any reason is now considered attempting to "undermine American democracy." When in reality, we're doing it just fine ourselves. The hypocrisy and paranoia is breathtaking - and extremely dangerous.

william mcdonald richardstevenhack • 16 hours ago ,

A Russian donating to the NRA - that is going to make liberal heads explode! Snowflakes, run do not walk to the campus safe spaces before they fill up!

RaisingMac richardstevenhack • 10 hours ago ,

"Since the NRA spent $50 million trying to get Trump elected, unless Torshin's donation was some significant percentage of that $50 million, it would make no sense for his donation to be considered significant, if it was little more than what a normal NRA member might be expected to
contribute."

And just how significant was the $100,000 that clickbait firm from St. Petersburg spent on Facebook ads in 2016? We're through the looking-glass now, friend! Logic doesn't matter anymore.

Grazhdanochka • 20 hours ago ,

The Narrative here faces serious Questions... Poor Trade-craft is obvious using insecure Communications, Chit Chat with supposed 'Handler' to name a few... The Note left about the FSB - FSB being INTERNAL Agency of RF begs yet more Questions...

The NYT Article about it brings up another one I think I should Highlight:

https://www.nytimes.com/201...

"Prosecutors sought criminal charges after agents reported over the weekend that she was moving money out of the country, had her boxes packed, looked into renting a moving truck and had terminated her apartment lease. "

If she was an Agent of the Government and preparing to leave the Country due to increased Attention - she would hardly waste her Time sorting her Affairs and Possessions in the US - This would be considered Government write off effectively.

Her actions however screams someone trying to preserve personal Possessions and Earnings..

I can suggest two 'soft' theories on this whole Affair -

A) She is a naive Girl who genuinely believed what she was doing, found a sponsor whom guided her, maybe even persuaded her to thinking she was working for Russian Government or elements within and thus her naive and very unprofessional behavior has obvious explanation.

B) Much of what is suggested she wrote has been playful Jest, the Types of Jokes my Friends and I have made countless Times when visiting Foreign Countries and taken for whatever reason utmost seriously by Investigators....

Even this Explanations feels forced - The alternative hard Theories may be something far worse as PT suggests

Having lived in a few Western Countries for varied Times, I feel vindicated having returned to Russia - Though I still travel constant for work, this serves as careful reminder that the very qualities I once admired in the Western World are potentially at highest risk and as a Russian - maybe best to be careful...

Harlan Easley • 13 hours ago ,

This poor naive girl has been imprison by a bunch of cowards. This insanity has gone so far over the top with this relentless drive toward armed conflict with a nuclear superpower that it forces me to believe there is a more organizing principle than just TDS. They openly defy a elected President and plan his coup. Assange will be arrested next. The conspiracy will use his arrest against Trump as a bludgeoning tool and force his extradition to the US. Just another political prisoner in the Land of the Free.

RaisingMac Harlan Easley • 10 hours ago ,

I'm sure you're right: there's more at work here than just TDS. The establishment was obviously planning something big, and Hillary was in on it. I can't say for sure what it was, but if I had to take a wild guess, I would say she was going to invade Syria, which would have almost certainly led to a war with Russia. But now that Trump is president instead, they're threatened with the specter of peace!

Fred S • 13 hours ago ,

By this indictment's logic every foreign national helping planned parenthood is trying to "influence American politics". I wonder if speeches to chambers of commerce or economic clubs or universities by former Presidents of Mexico also make one guilty of this crime?

James Thomas • 15 hours ago ,

It is worth remembering that the Soviet Union purported to be a democracy - the country held elections and the government and the news media told the people that they lived in the greatest democracy in the world.

I have a friend who grew up in the Soviet Union. Until he was 12 years old he believed he lived in the greatest country in the world. Then his mother went to England on a trade mission (an opportunity that very few Soviet citizens ever had), and when she came back she told her son what she had seen there. It was only then that he started to figure out the truth.

English Outsider • 15 hours ago ,

Scarey. Foreign nationals will no doubt take note. But she is getting a court hearing, at least. Will it extend to Western citizens living and working in their home countries?

It already has. In England, in Australia, on the Continent and in the States there are many such examples. Seldom coming before the Courts. The use of government agencies to harass undesirables has long been standard - using the tax authorities mostly, as far as one can see, but sometimes other agencies.

For the average citizen it's never made a lot of odds. Those targeted are usually big names who are making waves or might do. The ordinary citizen has no fear that because he or she holds the view that Government's activities are wrong some official's going to turn up on the doorstep.

If ordinary people are vulnerable, as this case indicates even though this particular ordinary person is a foreigner, then we may begin to feel a trifle uneasy. But these are uneasy times in any case.

Timothy Hagios • 17 hours ago ,

We are already seeing censorship of social media under the pretext of protecting the country from the supremely powerful Russian bots. I do not see this de-escalating, despite the best efforts of the Russians not to escalate.

Since the general consensus among Russia "experts" in policy-making circles is that they'll get regime change if only Russia's wealthy are harassed sufficiently, the logical next step would be to start arresting the children of wealthy Russians who are studying at US universities.

PRC90 Timothy Hagios • 16 hours ago ,

Trump's intent for dialogue with the Russians and Putin's intent to maintain his 'Putin the Statesman' brand should preclude a very dangerous spiral of retaliation. We think.

[Jul 23, 2018] Who is Bill Browder and Why is Putin so Interested in Him?

Jul 21, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

At the now-famous Helsinki press conference with Presidents Trump and Putin the name of a former US businessman, Bill Browder, came up as a person of interest to the Russian president. Let's make a deal, he said: you can come to Moscow and question the 12 GRU officers you accuse of hacking the DNC computers and we'll question Bill Browder and a group of other businessmen who had done business in Moscow. And the former US ambassador to Moscow. While the usual suspects shrieked at such a deal, many wondered what was wrong with trying to get to the bottom of the indictments and "Russiagate."

So what's the deal with Browder? RPI's Daniel McAdams spoke to RT America about the former hedge fund operator who reportedly gave up his US citizenship to avoid US taxes and is wanted in Moscow for tax avoidance...

https://www.youtube.com/embed/JHZEEqYN9GA

Copyright © 2018 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

[Jul 23, 2018] American Pravda The Bolshevik Revolution and Its Aftermath, by Ron Unz - The Unz Review

Notable quotes:
"... The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion ..."
"... The International Jew ..."
"... The New York Journal-American ..."
"... The Times of London ..."
"... Trotsky in New York, 1917 ..."
"... The Black Book of Communism ..."
"... Dearborn Independent ..."
"... The Dearborn Independent ..."
"... The International Jew: The World's Foremost Problem ..."
"... The International Jew ..."
"... The Atlantic Monthly ..."
"... Century Magazine ..."
"... The International Jew ..."
"... The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. ..."
"... The International Jew ..."
"... Times of London ..."
"... The International Jew ..."
"... The International Jew ..."
"... The Dearborn Independent ..."
"... Congressional Record ..."
"... Times of London ..."
"... The Last Days of the Romanovs ..."
"... The New World Order ..."
"... The Jewish Century ..."
"... The International Jew ..."
"... If anybody ever benefited from the Bolshevik revolution – it was the workers in the west, primarily US. ..."
"... The October revolution forced the capitalists to make concessions to the working class that they wouldn't have otherwise made simply out of their good natured kind hearts. ..."
"... If the Jews were so diabolical to unleash the Bolshevik revolution because of sinister motives only, how come that they didn't predict that it's going to hurt their profit margins in the US – via increased wages and benefits that they were forced to pay in order to keep the working class calm – out of fear that the Bolshevik revolution might have given them some ideas about conducting feasibility study of staging a copycat revolution. ..."
Jul 23, 2018 | www.unz.com

In my unjustified arrogance, I also sometimes relished a sense of seeing obvious things that magazine or newspaper journalists got so completely wrong, mistakes which often slipped into historical narratives as well. For example, discussions of the titanic 20th century military struggles between Germany and Russia quite often made casual references to the traditional hostility between those two great peoples, who for centuries had stood as bitter rivals, representing the eternal struggle of Slav against Teuton for dominion over Eastern Europe.

Although the bloodstained history of the two world wars made that notion seem obvious, it was factually mistaken. Prior to 1914, those two great peoples had not fought against each other for the previous 150 years, and even the Seven Years' War of the mid-18th century had involved a Russian alliance with Germanic Austria against Germanic Prussia, hardly amounting to a conflict along civilizational lines. Russians and Germans had been staunch allies during the endless Napoleonic wars, closely cooperated during the Metterich and Bismarck Eras that followed, while even as late as 1904, Germany had supported Russia in its unsuccessful war against Japan. Later, Weimar Germany and Soviet Russia had a period of close military cooperation during the 1920s, the Hitler-Stalin Pact of 1939 marked the beginning of the Second World War, and during the long Cold War, the USSR had no more loyal a satellite than East Germany. Perhaps two dozen years of hostility over the last three centuries, with good relations or even outright alliance during most of the remainder, hardly suggested that Russians and Germans were hereditary enemies.

Moreover, throughout much of that period, Russia's ruling elite had had a considerable Germanic tinge. Russia's legendary Catherine the Great had been a German princess by birth, and over the centuries so many Russian rulers had taken German wives that the later Czars of the Romanov dynasty were usually more German than Russian. Russia itself had a substantial but heavily assimilated German population, which was very well represented in elite political circles, with German names being quite common among government ministers and sometimes found among important military commanders. Even a top leader of the Decembrist revolt of the early 19th century had had German ancestry but was a zealous Russian-nationalist in his ideology.

Under the governance of this mixed Russian and German ruling class, the Russian Empire had steadily risen to become one of the world's foremost powers. Indeed, given its vast size, manpower, and resources, combined with one of the world's fastest economic growth rates and a natural increase in total population that was not far behind, a 1914 observer might have easily pegged it to soon dominate the European continent and perhaps even much of the world, just as Tocqueville had famously prophesized in the early decades of the 19th century. A crucial underlying cause of the First World War was Britain's belief that only a preventative war could forestall a rising Germany, but I suspect that an important secondary cause was the parallel German notion that similar measures were necessary against a rising Russia.

Obviously, this entire landscape was totally transformed by the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, which swept the old order from power, massacring much of its leadership and forcing the remainder to flee, thereby ushering in the modern world era of ideological and revolutionary regimes. I grew up during the final decades of the long Cold War, when the Soviet Union stood as America's great international adversary, so the history of that revolution and its aftermath always fascinated me. During college and graduate school I probably read at least one hundred books in that general topic, devouring the brilliant works of Solzhenistyn and Sholokhov, the thick historical volumes of mainstream academic scholars such as Adam Ulam and Richard Pipes, as well as the writings of leading Soviet dissidents such as Roy Medvedev, Andrei Sakharov, and Andrei Amalrik. I was fascinated by the tragic story of how Stalin outmaneuvered Trotsky and his other rivals, leading to the massive purges of the 1930s as Stalin's growing paranoia produced such gigantic loss of life.

I was not so totally naive that I did not recognize some of the powerful taboos surrounding discussion of the Bolsheviks, particularly regarding their ethnic composition. Although most of the books hardly emphasized the point, anyone with a careful eye for the occasional sentence or paragraph would surely know that Jews were enormously over-represented among the top revolutionaries, with three of Lenin's five potential successors -- Trotsky, Zinoviev, and Kamenev -- all coming from that background, along with many, many others within the top Communist leadership. Obviously, this was wildly disproportionate in a country having a Jewish population of perhaps 4%, and surely helped explain the large spike in worldwide hostility towards Jews soon afterward, which sometimes took the most deranged and irrational forms, such as the popularity of The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion and Henry Ford's notorious publication of The International Jew . But with Russian Jews so much more likely to be educated and urbanized, and suffering from fierce anti-Semitic oppression under the Czars, everything seemed to make reasonable sense.

Then perhaps fourteen or fifteen years ago, I encountered a rip in my personal space-time continuum, among the first of many to come.

In this particular instance, an especially rightwing friend of evolutionary theorist Gregory Cochran had been spending long days browsing the pages of Stormfront , a leading Internet forum for the Far Right, and having come across a remarkable factual claim, asked me for my opinion. Allegedly Jacob Schiff, America's leading Jewish banker, had been the crucial financial supporter of the Bolshevik Revolution, providing the Communist revolutionaries with $20 million in funding.

My first reaction was that such a notion was utterly ridiculous since a fact so enormously explosive could not have been ignored by the many dozens of books I had read on the origins of that revolution. But the source seemed extremely precise. The Knickerbocker columnist in the February 3, 1949 edition of The New York Journal-American , then one of the leading local newspapers, wrote that "Today it is estimated by Jacob's grandson, John Schiff, that the old man sank about 20,000,000 dollars for the final triumph of Bolshevism in Russia."

Once I checked around a little, I discovered that numerous mainstream accounts described the enormous hostility of Schiff towards the Czarist regime for its ill-treatment of Jews, and these days even so establishmentarian a source as Wikipedia's entry on Jacob Schiff notes that he played a major role financing the Russian Revolution of 1905, as was revealed in the later memoirs of one of his key operatives. And if you run a search on "jacob schiff bolshevik revolution" numerous other references come up, representing a wide variety of different positions and degrees of credibility. One very interesting statement appears in the memoirs of Henry Wickham Steed , editor of The Times of London and one of the foremost international journalists of his era. He very matter-of-factly mentions that Schiff, Warburg and the other top Jewish international bankers were among the leading backers of the Jewish Bolsheviks, through whom they hoped to gain an opportunity for the Jewish exploitation of Russia, and he describes their lobbying efforts on behalf of their Bolshevik allies at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference following the end of the First World War.

Even the very recent and highly skeptical 2016 analysis in Kenneth D. Ackerman's 2016 book Trotsky in New York, 1917 notes that U.S. Military Intelligence reports of the period directly made that astonishing claim, pointing to Trotsky as the conduit for the heavy financial backing of Schiff and numerous other Jewish financiers. In 1925 this information was published in the British Guardian and was widely discussed and accepted throughout the 1920s and 1930s by numerous major media publications, long before Schiff's own grandson provided a direct confirmation of those facts in 1949. Ackerman rather cavalierly dismisses all of this considerable contemporaneous evidence as "anti-Semitic" and a "conspiracy story," arguing that since Schiff was a notorious conservative who had never shown any sympathy for socialism in his own American milieu, he surely would not have funded the Bolsheviks.

Now admittedly, a few details might easily have gotten somewhat garbled over time. For example, although Trotsky quickly became second only to Lenin in the Bolshevik hierarchy, in early 1917 the two were still bitterly hostile over various ideological disputes, so he certainly was not then considered a member of that party. And since everyone today acknowledges that Schiff had heavily financed the failed 1905 Revolution in Russia, it seems perfectly possible that the $20 million figure mentioned by his grandson refers to the total invested over the years supporting all the different Russian revolutionary movements and leaders, which together finally culminated in the establishment of Bolshevik Russia. But with so many seemingly credible and independent sources all making such similar claims, the basic facts appear almost indisputable.

Consider the implications of this remarkable conclusion. I would assume that most of Schiff's funding of revolutionary activities was spent on items such as activist stipends and bribes, and adjusted for the average family incomes of that era, $20 million would be as much as $2 billion in present-day money. Surely without such enormous financial support, the likelihood of any Bolshevik victory would have been far lower, perhaps almost impossible.

When people casually used to joke about the total insanity of "anti-Semitic conspiracy theories" no better example was ever tossed around than the self-evidently absurd notion that the international Jewish bankers had created the worldwide Communist movement. And yet by any reasonable standard, this statement appears to be more or less true, and apparently was widely known at least in rough form for decades after the Russian Revolution, but had never been mentioned in any of the numerous more recent histories that shaped my own knowledge of those events. Indeed, none of these very comprehensive sources ever even mentioned Schiff's name, although it was universally acknowledged that he had funded the 1905 Revolution, which was often discussed in enormous detail in many of those very weighty books. What other astonishing facts might they similarly be concealing?

When someone encounters remarkable new revelations in an area of history in which his knowledge was rudimentary, being little more than introductory textbooks or History 101 courses, the result is a shock and an embarrassment. But when the same situation occurs in an area in which he had read tens of thousands of pages in the leading authoritative texts, which seemingly explored every minor detail, surely his sense of reality begins to crumble.

ORDER IT NOW

In 1999, Harvard University published the English edition of The Black Book of Communism , whose six co-authors devoted 850 pages to documenting the horrors inflicted upon the world by that defunct system, which had produced a total death toll they reckoned at 100 million. I have never read that book and I have often heard that the alleged body-count has been widely disputed. But for me the most remarkable detail is that when I examine the 35 page index, I see a vast profusion of entries for totally obscure individuals whose names are surely unknown to all but the most erudite specialist. But there is no entry for Jacob Schiff, the world-famous Jewish banker who apparently financed the creation of the whole system in the first place. Nor one for Olaf Aschberg, the powerful Jewish banker in Sweden, who played such an important role in providing the Bolsheviks a financial life-line during the early years of their threatened regime, and even founded the first Soviet international bank .

When one discovers a tear in the fabric of reality, there is a natural tendency to nervously peer within, wondering what mysterious objects might dwell there. The Ackerman book denounced the notion of Schiff having funded the Bolsheviks as "a favorite trope of Nazi anti-Jewish propaganda" and just prior to those words he issued a similar denunciation of Henry Ford's Dearborn Independent , a publication which would have meant almost nothing to me. Although Ackerman's particular book had not yet been published when I began exploring the Schiff story a dozen years ago, many other writers had similarly conjoined those two topics, so I decided to explore the matter.

Ford himself was a very interesting individual, and his world-historical role certainly received very scanty coverage in my basic history textbooks. Although the exact reasons for his decision to raise his minimum wage to $5 per day in 1914 -- double the existing average pay for industrial workers in America -- can be disputed, it certainly seems to have played a huge role in the creation of our middle class. He also adopted a highly paternalistic policy of providing good company housing and other amenities to his workers, a total departure from the "Robber Baron" capitalism so widely practiced at that time, thereby establishing himself as a world-wide hero to industrial workers and their advocates. Indeed, Lenin himself had regarded Ford as a towering figure in the world's revolutionary firmament, glossing over his conservative views and commitment to capitalism and instead focusing on his remarkable achievements in worker productivity and economic well-being. It is a forgotten detail of history that even after Ford's considerable hostility to the Russian Revolution became widely known, the Bolsheviks still described their own industrial development policy as "Fordism." Indeed, it was not unusual to see portraits of Lenin and Ford hanging side-by-side in Soviet factories , representing the two greatest secular saints of the Bolshevik pantheon.

ORDER IT NOW

As for The Dearborn Independent , Ford had apparently launched his newspaper on a national basis not long after the end of the war, intending to focus on controversial topics, especially those related to Jewish misbehavior, whose discussion he believed was being ignored or suppressed by nearly all mainstream media outlets. I had been aware that he had long been one of the wealthiest and most highly-regarded individuals in America, but I was still astonished to discover that his weekly newspaper, previously almost unknown to me, had reached a total national circulation of 900,000 by 1925, ranking it as the second largest in the country and by far the biggest with a national distribution. I found no easy means of examining the contents of a typical issue, but apparently the anti-Jewish articles of the first couple of years had been collected and published as short books, together constituting the four volumes of The International Jew: The World's Foremost Problem , a notoriously anti-Semitic work occasionally mentioned in my history textbooks. Eventually my curiosity got the best of me, so clicked a few buttons on Amazon.com, bought the set, and wondered what I would discover.

Based on all my pre-suppositions, I expected to read some foaming-at-the-mouth screed, and doubted I would be able to get past the first dozen pages before losing interest and consigning the volumes to gather dust on my shelves. But what I actually encountered was something entirely different.

Over the last couple of decades, the enormous growth in the power and influence of Jewish and pro-Israel groups in America has occasionally led writers to cautiously raise certain facts regarding the untoward influence of those organizations and activists, while always carefully emphasizing that the vast majority of ordinary Jews do not benefit from these policies and actually might be harmed by them, even leaving aside the possible risk of eventually provoking an anti-Jewish backlash. To my considerable surprise, I found that the vast majority of the material in Ford's 300,000 word series seemed to follow this same pattern and tone.

The individual 80 chapter-columns of Ford's volumes generally discuss particular issues and events, some of which were well-known to me, but with the vast majority totally obscured by the passage of almost a hundred years. But as far as I could tell, almost all the discussions seemed quite plausible and factually-oriented, even sometimes overly cautious in their presentation, and with one possible exception I can't recall anything that seemed fanciful or unreasonable. As an example, there was no claim that Schiff or his fellow Jewish bankers had funded the Bolshevik Revolution since those particular facts had not yet come out, only that he had seemed to be strongly supportive of the overthrow of Czarism, and had worked toward that end for many years, motivated by what he regarded as the hostility of the Russian Empire towards its Jewish subjects. This sort of discussion is not all that different from what one might find in a modern Schiff biography or in his Wikipedia entry, though many of the important details presented in the Ford books have disappeared from the historical record.

Although I somehow managed to plow through all four volumes of The International Jew , the unrelenting drum-beat of Jewish intrigue and misbehavior became somewhat soporific after a while, especially since so many of the examples provided may have loomed quite large in 1920 or 1921 but are almost totally forgotten today. Most of the content was a collection of rather monotonous complaints regarding Jewish malfeasance, scandals, or clannishness, the sort of mundane matters which might have normally appeared in the pages of an ordinary newspaper or magazine, let alone one of the muckraking type.

However, I cannot fault the publication for such a narrow focus. A consistent theme was that because of the intimidating fear of Jewish activists and influence, virtually all of America's regular media outlets avoided discussion of any of these important matters, and since this new publication was intended to remedy that void, it necessarily required coverage overwhelmingly skewed toward that particular subject. The articles were also aimed at gradually expanding the window of public debate and eventually shame other periodicals into discussing Jewish misbehavior. When leading magazines such as The Atlantic Monthly and Century Magazine began running such articles, this result was cited as a major success.

Another important goal was to make ordinary Jews more aware of the very problematical behavior of many of their community leaders. Occasionally, the publication received a letter of praise from a self-proclaimed "proud American Jew" commending the series and sometimes including a check to purchase subscriptions for other members of his community, and this achievement might become the subject of an extended discussion.

And although the details of these individual stories differed considerably from those of today, the pattern of behavior being criticized seemed remarkably similar. Change a few facts, adjust the society for a century of change, and many of the stories might be exactly the same ones that well-meaning people concerned about the future of our country are quietly discussing today. Most remarkably, there were even a couple of columns about the troubled relationship between the earliest Zionist settlers in Palestine and the surrounding native Palestinians, and deep complaints that under Jewish pressure the media often totally misreported or hid some of the outrages suffered by the latter group.

I certainly cannot vouch for the overall accuracy of the contents of these volumes, but at the very least they would constitute an extremely valuable source of "raw material" for further historical investigation. So many of the events and incidents they recount seem to have been entirely omitted from the major media publications of that day, and surely were never included in later historical narratives, given that even such widely known stories as Schiff's major financial backing for the Bolsheviks were completely tossed down George Orwell's "memory hole."

With the volumes long out of copyright, I have added the set to my collection of HTML Books, and those so interested may read the text and decide for themselves.

The International Jew The World's Foremost Problem Henry Ford • 1920 • 323,000 Words

ORDER IT NOW

As mentioned, the overwhelming majority of The International Jew seems a rather bland recitation of complaints about Jewish misbehavior. But there is one major exception, which has a very different impact upon our modern mind, namely that the writer took very seriously The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Probably no "conspiracy theory" in modern times has been subjected to such immense vilification and ridicule as the Protocols , but a voyage of discovery often acquires a momentum of its own, and I became curious about the nature of that infamous document.

Apparently, the Protocols first came to light during the last decade of the 19th century, and the British Museum stored a copy in 1906, but it attracted relatively little attention at the time. However, all this changed after the Bolshevik Revolution and toppling of many other long-standing governments at the end of the First World War led many people to seek a common cause behind so many enormous political upheavals. From my distance of many decades, the text of the Protocols struck me as rather bland and even dull, describing in rather long-winded fashion a plan of secret subversion aimed at weakening the bonds of the social fabric, setting groups against each other, gaining control over political leaders by bribery and blackmail, and eventually restoring society along rigidly hierarchical lines with an entirely new group in control. Admittedly, there were many shrewd insights into politics or psychology, notably the enormous power of the media and the benefits of advancing political front-men who were deeply compromised or incompetent and hence easily controllable. But nothing else really jumped out at me.

Perhaps one reason I found the text of the Protocols so uninspiring is that over the century since its publication, these notions of diabolical plots by hidden groups have become such a common theme in our entertainment media, with countless thousands of spy novels and science fiction stories presenting something similar, though these usually involve far more exciting means, such as a super-weapon or a powerful drug. If some Bond villain proclaimed his intent to conquer the world merely through simple political subversion, I suspect that such a film would immediately die at the box office.

But back one hundred years ago, these were apparently exciting and novel notions, and I actually found the discussion of the Protocols in many of the chapters of The International Jew far more interesting and informative than reading the text itself. The author of the Ford books seems to appropriately treat it as any other historical document, dissecting its content, speculating on its provenance, and wondering whether or not it was what it purported to be, namely an approximate record of the statements of a group of conspirators pursuing mastery over the world, with those conspirators widely believed to be an elite fraternity of international Jews.

Other contemporaries seem to have taken the Protocols very seriously as well. The august Times of London fully endorsed it, before later retracting that position under heavy pressure, and I've read that more copies were published and sold in the Europe of that era than any other book save the Bible. The Bolshevik government of Russia paid the volume its own sort of deep respect, with mere possession of the Protocols warranting immediate execution.

Although The International Jew concludes that the Protocols was probably genuine, I doubt that likelihood based upon the style and presentation. Browsing around on the Internet a dozen years ago, I discovered quite a variety of different opinions even within the precincts of the Far Right, where such matters were freely discussed. I remember some forum writer somewhere characterizing the Protocols as "based upon a true story," suggesting that someone who was generally familiar with the secretive machinations of elite international Jews against the existing governments of Czarist Russia and other countries had drafted the document to outline his view of their strategic plans, and such an interpretation seems perfectly plausible.

Another reader somewhere claimed that the Protocols were pure fiction but very significant nonetheless. He argued that the very keen insights into the methods by which a small conspiratorial group can quietly corrupt and overthrow powerful existing regimes arguably ranked it alongside Plato's The Republic and Machiavelli's The Prince as one of the three great classics of Western political philosophy, and earned it a place on the required reading list of every Political Science 101 course. Indeed, the author of Ford's books emphasizes that there are very few mentions of Jews anywhere in the Protocols , and all the implied connections to Jewish conspirators could be completely struck from the text without affecting their content whatsoever.

In any event, this short work is now available as one of my HTML Books, making it quite convenient for reading and text-searching.

The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion Anonymous • 1903 • 28,000 Words

Some ideas have consequences and others do not. Although my introductory history textbooks had often mentioned Henry Ford's anti-Semitic activities, his publication of The International Jew , and the concurrent popularity of the Protocols , they never emphasized any lasting political legacy, or at least I don't recall any. However, once I actually read the contents and also discovered the enormous contemporary popularity of those writings and the huge national circulation of The Dearborn Independent , I quickly came to a very different conclusion.

For decades pro-immigration liberals, many of them Jewish, have suggested that anti-Semitism was a major factor behind the 1924 Immigration Act that drastically reduced European immigration for the next forty years, while anti-immigration activists have always heatedly denied this. The documentary evidence from that era certainly favors the position of the latter, but I really do wonder what important private discussions may not have been set down in print and entered into the Congressional Record . The overwhelming popular support for immigration restriction had been successfully blocked for decades by powerful business interests, which greatly benefited from the reduced wages of the resulting labor-competition, but now matters had suddenly changed, and surely the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia must have had been a powerful influence.

Russia, overwhelmingly populated by Russians, had been governed for centuries by a Russian ruling elite. Then, heavily Jewish revolutionaries, drawn from a group amounting to just 4% of the population had taken advantage of military defeat and unsettled political conditions to seize control of the country, butchering those previous elites or forcing them to desperately flee abroad as penniless refugees.

Trotsky and a large fraction of the leading Jewish revolutionaries had been living as exiles in New York City, and now many of their Jewish cousins still resident in America began loudly proclaiming that a similar revolution would soon follow here as well. Huge waves of recent immigration, mostly from Russia, had increased the Jewish fraction of the national population to 3%, not far below the figure for Russia itself on the eve of its revolution. If the Russian elites who ruled Russia had been suddenly overthrown by Jewish revolutionaries, is it not obvious that the Anglo-Saxon elites who ruled Anglo-Saxon America feared suffering the same fate?

The "Red Scare" of the 1919 was one response, with numerous immigrant radicals such as Emma Goldman rounded up and summarily deported, while the Sacco-Vanzetti murder trial in 1921 Boston captured the attention of the nation, suggesting that other immigrant groups were violent radicals as well, and might ally themselves with the Jews in a revolutionary movement, just like the Letts and other disgruntled Russian minorities had done during the Bolshevik Revolution. But drastically reducing the inflow of these dangerous foreigners was absolutely essential since otherwise their numbers might easily grow by hundreds of thousands each year, increasing their already huge presence in our largest cities of the East Coast.

Sharply reducing immigration would certainly cause a rise in worker wages and hurt business profits. But considerations of profits are secondary if you fear that you and your family might eventually end up facing a Bolshevik firing squad or fleeing to Buenos Aires with just the clothes on your backs and a few hurriedly-packed suitcases.

A noteworthy bit of evidence in support of this analysis was the subsequent failure of Congress to enact similar restrictive legislation curtailing immigration from Mexico or the rest of Latin America. The local business interests of Texas and the Southwest argued that continuation of unrestricted Mexican immigration was important for their economic success, with Mexicans being good people, politically docile workers, and no threat to stability of the country. This was a clear contrast with the Jews and some other European immigrant groups.

The much less familiar early 1920s battle over restricting Jewish enrollment in the Ivy League may have been another consequence. In his magisterial 2005 volume The Chosen , Jerome Karabel documents how the very rapid growth in Jewish numbers at Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and other Ivy League colleges had by the early 1920s become an enormous concern to the Anglo-Saxon elites which had established those institutions and always dominated their student bodies.

As a result, a quiet war over admissions broke out, involving both political and media influence, with the reigning WASPs seeking to reduce and restrict Jewish numbers and the Jews struggling to maintain or expand them. Although there seems no paper-trail of any direct references to the enormously popular national newspaper and books published by Henry Ford or any similar material, it is difficult to believe that the academic combatants were not at least somewhat aware of the theories of a Jewish assault on Gentile society then being so widely promoted. It is easy to imagine that a respectable Boston Brahmin such as Harvard President A. Lawrence Lowell regarded his own moderate "anti-Semitism" as a very reasonable middle-ground between the lurid claims promoted by Ford and others and the demands for unlimited Jewish enrollment made by his opponents. Indeed, Karabel himself points to the social impact of Ford's publications as a significant background factor to this academic conflict.

At this point in time, the Anglo-Saxon elites still held the upper hand in the media. The very heavily Jewish film industry was only in its infancy and the same was true for radio, while the vast majority of major print outlets were still in Gentile hands, so the descendants of America's original settlers won this round of the admissions war. But when the battle was rejoined a couple of decades later, the strategic political and media landscape had completely shifted, with Jews having achieved near-parity in print influence and overwhelming dominance in the more powerful electronic media formats such as film, radio, and nascent television, and this time they were victorious, easily breaking the hold of their longtime ethnic rivals, and eventually achieving almost complete dominance over those elite institutions .

And ironically enough, the most lasting cultural legacy of the widespread anti-Jewish agitation of the 1920s may be the least recognized. As mentioned above, modern readers might find the text of the Protocols rather boring and bland, almost like they had been cribbed from the extremely long-winded monologue of one of the diabolical villains of a James Bond story. But it wouldn't surprise me if there were actually an arrow of causality in the opposite direction. Ian Fleming created this genre in the early 1950s with his string of international best-sellers, and it is interesting to speculate about the source of his ideas.

ORDER IT NOW

Fleming had spent his youth during the 1920s and 1930s when the Protocols were among the most widely read books in much of Europe and leading British newspapers of the highest credibility were recounting the successful plots of Schiff and other international Jewish bankers to overthrow the government of Britain's Czarist ally and replace it with Jewish Bolshevik rule. Moreover, his later service in an arm of British Intelligence would surely have made him privy to details of that history that went far beyond those public headlines. I think it is more than pure coincidence that two of his most memorable Bond villains, Goldfinger and Blofeld, had distinctly Jewish-sounding names, and that so many of the plots involve schemes of world-conquest by Spectre , a secretive and mysterious international organization hostile to all existing governments. The Protocols themselves may be half-forgotten today, but their cultural influence probably survives in the Bond films, whose $7 billion of aggregate box-office gross ranks them as the most successful movie series in history when adjusted for inflation.

The extent to which established historical facts can appear or disappear from the world should certainly force all of us to become very cautious in believing anything we read in our standard textbooks, let alone what we absorb from our more transient electronic media.

In the early years of the Bolshevik Revolution, almost no one questioned the overwhelming role of Jews in that event, nor their similar preponderance in the ultimately unsuccessful Bolshevik takeovers in Hungary and parts of Germany. For example, former British Minister Winston Churchill in 1920 denounced the "terrorist Jews" who had seized control of Russia and other parts of Europe, noting that "the majority of the leading figures are Jews" and stating that "In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing," while lamenting the horrors these Jews had inflicted upon the suffering Germans and Hungarians.

Similarly, journalist Robert Wilton, former Russia correspondent of the Times of London , provided a very detailed summary of the enormous Jewish role in his 1918 book Russia's Agony and 1920 book The Last Days of the Romanovs , although one of the most explicit chapters of the latter was apparently excluded from the English language edition . Not long afterward, the facts regarding the enormous financial support provided to the Bolsheviks by international Jewish bankers such as Schiff and Aschberg were widely reported in the mainstream media.

Jews and Communism were just as strongly tied together in America, and for years the largest circulation Communist newspaper in our country was published in Yiddish . When they were finally released, the Venona Decrypts demonstrated that even as late as the 1930s and 1940s, a remarkable fraction of America's Communist spies came from that ethnic background.

A personal anecdote tends to confirm these dry historical records. During the early 2000s I once had lunch with an elderly and very eminent computer scientist, with whom I'd become a little friendly. While talking about this and that, he happened to mention that both his parents had been zealous Communists, and given his obvious Irish name, I expressed my surprise, saying that I'd thought almost all the Communists of that era were Jewish. He said that was indeed the case, but although his mother had such an ethnic background, his father did not, which made him a very rare exception in their political circles. As a consequence, the Party had always sought to place him in as prominent a public role as possible just to prove that not all Communists were Jews, and although he obeyed Party discipline, he was always irritated at being used as such a "token."

However, once Communism sharply fell out of favor in 1950s America, nearly all of the leading "Red Baiters" such as Sen. Joseph McCarthy went to enormous lengths to obscure the ethnic dimension of the movement they were combatting. Indeed, many years later Richard Nixon casually spoke in private of the difficulty he and other anti-Communist investigators had faced in trying to focus on Gentile targets since nearly all of the suspected Soviet spies were Jewish, and when this tape became public, his alleged anti-Semitism provoked a media firestorm even though his remarks were obviously implying the exact opposite.

This last point is an important one, since once the historical record has been sufficiently whitewashed or rewritten, any lingering strands of the original reality that survive are often perceived as bizarre delusions or denounced as "conspiracy theories." Indeed, even today the ever-amusing pages of Wikipedia provides an entire 3,500 word article attacking the notion of "Jewish Bolshevism" as an "antisemitic canard."

I remember in the 1970s the enormous gusts of American praise for Solzhenitysn's three volume Gulag Archipelago suddenly encountered a temporary headwind when someone noticed that his 2,000 pages had included a single photograph depicting many of the leading Gulag administrators, along with a caption revealing their unmistakably Jewish names. This detail was treated as serious evidence of the great author's possible anti-Semitism since the actual reality of the enormously large role of Jews in the NKVD and the Gulag system had long since disappeared from all the standard history books.

As another example, the Rev. Pat Robertson, a leading Christian televangelist, published The New World Order in 1991, his fiery attack on the "godless globalists" whom he considered his greatest enemy, and it quickly became a massive national best-seller. He happened to include a couple of brief, somewhat garbled mentions of the $20 million which Wall Street banker Jacob Schiff had provided to the Communists, carefully avoiding any suggestion of a Jewish angle and providing no reference for that claim. His book quickly provoked a vast outpouring of denunciation and ridicule across the elite media, with the Schiff story seen as conclusion proof of his delusional anti-Semitism . I cannot really fault these critics since in pre-Internet days they could only consult the indexes of a few standard histories of the Bolshevik Revolution, and finding no mention of Schiff or his money, naturally assumed that Robertson or his source had simply invented the bizarre story. I myself had had exactly the same reaction at the time.

ORDER IT NOW

Only after Soviet Communism had died in 1991 and no longer was perceived as a hostile force were academic scholars in America once again able to publish mainstream books that gradually restored the true picture of that past era. In many respects, a widely praised work such as The Jewish Century by Yuri Slezkine, published in 2004 by Princeton University Press, provides a narrative quite consistent with long-forgotten works by Robert Wilton but marks a very sharp departure from the largely obfuscatory histories of the intervening eighty-odd years.

Until about a dozen years ago, I had always vaguely assumed that Henry Ford's The International Jew was a work of political lunacy and the Protocols was a notorious hoax. Yet today, I would probably consider the former as a potentially useful source of possible historical events otherwise excluded from most standard accounts, while at least understanding the argument of why the latter might deserve a place alongside Plato and Machiavelli as a classic of Western political thought.

Related Reading:

Colin Wright , Website July 23, 2018 at 5:01 am GMT

' A crucial underlying cause of the First World War was Britain's belief that only a preventative war could forestall a rising Germany, but I suspect that an important secondary cause was the parallel German notion that similar measures were necessary against a rising Russia '

Indeed. I forget where, but I have read that the German General Staff had calculated that after 1916, Russia would be unbeatable. While I disagree with the rather widespread belief that Germany was particularly responsible for World War One, it may well have been the case that once the ball started rolling, many in the General Staff calculated that it would be better to have it out now than to wait.

Incidentally, to digress, I feel that while it was above all the situation and the paradigm of the times that brought World War One about, if anyone should be held culpable, it would be France and Serbia, while -- in contrast to your opinion -- I feel that Britain probably was the one power least responsible for the outbreak of war.

Sean , July 23, 2018 at 5:27 am GMT

Colin Wright , Website July 23, 2018 at 5:43 am GMT

I'd note that associations between Jews and revolutionary socialism in America weren't just the product of observing events in Europe.

I read an interesting book called More Powerful than Dynamite that describes the social unrest and pre-revolutionary agitation that gripped New York City in 1915-1916. The author appears genuinely unaware of the fact, but a very large proportion -- half? two-thirds? -- of the figures he names are Eastern European Jews. For whatever reason, a completely disproportionate percentage of these people came boiling out of their shtetls absolutely possessed by revolutionary fervor. Was it hatred of Tsarism? A reaction to being freed from the rule of their traditional communities and rabbis? I don't know -- but it'd be interesting to read about.

More mundanely, I read Frederik Pohl's memoir of the early science-fiction scene, The Way the Future Was. In it, he discusses his membership in the Young Communists League or some such thing in New York City in late thirties -- and notes that although he didn't find the fact significant, the membership was indeed disproportionately Jewish.

It's a bit like blacks and basketball. Not all basketball players are black, but they disproportionately are. Ditto for Jews and Communists -- both in Europe and here. As a rough rule, they seem to have been overrepresented by a factor of between ten and a hundred. I think that seeing Communism as a Jewish plot is a paranoid over-simplification -- but it is equally unreasonable to see no connection at all.

Anarcho-Supremacist , July 23, 2018 at 5:58 am GMT
You lost me at Robert Wilton. Wilton's list has been debunked. Now I do not know a lot about the guy but some of what he says is obvious BS.
Colin Wright , Website July 23, 2018 at 6:09 am GMT
As to the reality and extent of China's famine during the Great Leap Forward, I strongly recommend you read Yang Jisheng's Tombstone: the Great Chinese Famine 1958-1962. It was real -- and fully as bad as advertised.
Cyrano , July 23, 2018 at 6:34 am GMT
According to some, one of the ethnic groups that have benefited the most from the good old capitalism are the Jews.

Thanks to the capitalist system, many of them have managed to become enormously rich – some would say thanks to their genetic predisposition towards greed, which of course is unique only to them.

Well then it makes a perfect sense to me that they would be the ones to finance a revolution in Russia that would bring a system which pretty much doesn't allow anyone to get rich.

Wouldn't it have made more sense if members of the Jewish community have financed a capitalist – sorry – "democratic" revolution in Russia, which will allow them to prosper financially like they did in the west?

Or was the Bolshevik revolution a payback for the pogroms? What is the logic here? They did it because they are evil? How did the Jewish financiers of the October revolution knew that Stalin will come along and pervert the idea of Socialism (to a certain degree), and turn it into one massive orgy of pogroms (according to some) against anybody and everybody.

The whole idea is pure nonsense. The only way that it will make sense to me is that the Jews financed the October revolution because they expected that their people will get more equal treatment under that system than in Czarist Russia. Not because they wanted to unleash something evil on this world.

jilles dykstra , July 23, 2018 at 7:17 am GMT
Books I do not see mentioned:
Alexander Solschenizyn, ´Die russisch- jüdische Geschichte 1795- 1916, >> Zweihundert Jahre zusammen <<´, Moskau 2001, München 2002
Antony C. Sutton, ´Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution', 1974 New Rochelle, N.Y.
Voline ( Vsevolod Mikhailovitsch Eichenbaum), 'The unknown revolution (Kronstadt 1921 Ukraine 1918-21)', New York 1955
Horace Meyer Kallen, 'Zionism and World Politics; A Study in History and Social Psychology', New York, 1921
Elisabeth Dilling, ´The Roosevelt Red record and its background', 1936, Chicago

And I have a consolation, the murder of Rabin by an orthodox jew after the Oslo Accords made me wonder if zionist jews did want peace, being retired I had the time to investigate, and found about about fairy tales such as 'land without people for people without land'.

Sept 11 was the next investigation trigger, once I could no longer prevent the conclusion that it had nothing to do with Islamic terrorism.
How could our liberator of WWII have become an evil state ?
I found out about Baruch and FDR, etc.
Had there been no Baruch, I wonder if there would have been a WWII.
As Hitler in 1939 threatened jewry 'if they again caused a world war '.

I must add that, though WWI was set up by GB, France and the tsar, I never found evidence that jews were involved in the conspiracy.

However, the blackmail of the Balfour Declaration, jews do seem responsible for the German defeat in 1918.
Without USA military interference Germany would have won in November 1917.

Jon Halpenny , July 23, 2018 at 7:23 am GMT
One important historical figure who is unknown in the west is Alexander Parvus, aka Israel Helphand. He was the man who persuaded the German Generals to send Lenin to Russia in the sealed train. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Parvus#Russian_Revolution
Waitemata , July 23, 2018 at 7:41 am GMT
Thanks for this article. I have just reread Ford's 'My Life and Work;' my father's old (1926) edition. Have also read Robert Wilton's 'Last Days of the Romanoffs' several times so appreciate references to these two authors. I hope Wilton has been republished in this year of the anniversary of the cruel martyrdom of the Russian Imperial family by the Bolsheviks.
JohnnyWalker123 , July 23, 2018 at 8:24 am GMT
Very interesting article.

Here's a fascinating quote from "The International Jew."

In other countries the Jew is permitted to mix more readily with the people, he can amass his control unchallenged; but in Germany the case was different. Therefore, the Jew hated the German people; therefore, the countries of the world which were most dominated by the Jews showed the greatest hatred of Germany during the recent regrettable war.

If you replace "Germany" with "Russia," perhaps this paragraph would be a good explanation of why Western leaders hate Russia so much. Interestingly enough, modern Jews seem to really like Germany these days.

What are your thoughts on the refugee crisis in Europe? Given how much Jewish currency trader George Soros has done to encourage refugee migration into Europe, do you think there's some sort of Jewish conspiracy at work here?

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-08/how-george-soros-singlehandedly-created-european-refugee-crisis-and-why

Anon [341] Disclaimer , July 23, 2018 at 8:25 am GMT
During the early 2000s I once had lunch with an elderly and very eminent computer scientist, which whom I'd become a little friendly.

With

Bukowski , July 23, 2018 at 8:27 am GMT
Article by Mark Weber – The Jewish Role in the Bolshevik Revolution and Russia's Early Soviet Regime – can be found here.

https://codoh.com/library/document/2487/

Anon [122] Disclaimer , July 23, 2018 at 8:45 am GMT
Much of the problem with Jacob Schiff and his ilk is that he actually thought the 'socialist utopia' was achievable. He believed all the propaganda. When he was donating his money, he had no clue the communist takeover would turn out to be a bloody failure detested by the Russian people who lived all their lives under the system, although there was certainly a strong element of "Let's get revenge on the Tsar and his ilk for treating us like animals," in Schiff's thinking.

Much of what Jews have been trying to do in politics during the 20th century is idealistic lever-pulling by men with too much Asperger's disorder to understand human nature, and who keep thinking that if you unleash the dark side of the human personality, everything will turn out all right.

This is one reason why Jews keep insisting that blacks who commit crimes should only get a slap on the wrist and be turned loose right back into society again. They honest-to-god think that scolding will stop sociopaths in their tracks, in denial of all evidence, because Jews have no understanding of evil human nature. When Jews became a secular, modern, and scientific-minded people, they lost all their understanding of evil, because as moderns, they were now 'above all that primitive, backward thinking.'

Jews who think this way keep saying, "Of course communist Russia turned out to be bad because the wrong people were in charge." This is a bunch of coded wording for, "If me and my friends were in charge we would do it right because we're different and special," without realizing that practically everyone becomes corrupt if handed the reins of power.

At one point in their careers, Obama and Hillary, as well as many of their liberal friends in the Democratic party thought of themselves as decent, well-intended beings who would run things the Correct Way once in power. But once they were in power, they became corrupt, and they're still too blinded by their egos to see it.

Their supporters, left-wing Jews, are also too blind to see it because they have no self-knowledge at all. Part of the problem with Asperger's, which is far too prevalent among Jews, is that the disorder blocks you from acquiring self-knowledge of your own personality, as well as preventing from gaining insight into the personalities of others. This leaves you with the ideological side of your brain entirely in charge.

silviosilver , July 23, 2018 at 9:01 am GMT
I read The International Jew about five years ago. Well, I tried to read it, but gave up before getting half way through. As Ron said, it became quite monotonous and too much of the discussion was focused on obscure events of the day. I might have persevered, but eventually the numerous speculative conspiracy-theory-style reaches in explaining contemporary and historical events got to me.

As for the Protocols , neo-nazis often claim that the important thing about it isn't whether it was a 'hoax' or not, but whether it explains the present. I suppose that's true in the sense that it gives an insight into the mindset of the people who were concerned about the growth of Jewish influence before that influence became a fact. I haven't read the whole thing, so I can't comment on Ron's claim that it deserves to be a considered a classic of political theory.

Another neo-nazi point which I also think is partly correct is that "Jews are the skeleton key to history." Neo-nazis take that and run with it, which leads to all sorts of weird and wonderful conspiracy theories, but the basic point has to be granted: that an understanding of certain historical events will always be incomplete without sufficient consideration of the Jewish role.

It is a forgotten detail of history that even after Ford's considerable hostility to the Russian Revolution became widely known, the Bolsheviks still described their own industrial development policy as "Fordism."

This makes it sound like the Russians coined "Fordism." Did they? I don't know. But modern historians and social scientists with a leftist bent routinely refer to Fordism, both as a management theory and as a social structure.

Jon Halpenny , July 23, 2018 at 10:31 am GMT
A possible consequence of the Bolshevik Revolution was the rise of anti-Semitism in Germany. In Munich refugees from the Russian Empire met members of a new German Nationalist party, the NSDAP. The interactions between these people are believed to have resulted in the adoption of extreme anti-semitic policies by the NSDAP. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aufbau_Vereinigung
Anatoly Karlin , Website July 23, 2018 at 11:12 am GMT
A brave and necessary essay. I was not aware of many of the details here.

That said, it's worth noting that whatever the figures that Schiff contributed during 1917, they would have paled into irrelevance to the 50 million gold marks ($1 billion in modern currency) that the German government funneled through Swedish and Danish banks to the Bolsheviks in Saint-Petersburg that year. The Bolshevik Revolution would not have happened without vast amounts of German money (which, given the wartime context, is understandable).

Incidentally, apart from being the Bolsheviks' main money-man in the West, Olof Aschberg also acquired one of the world's finest collections of Russian icons in the process of selling the values that the Bolsheviks had looted. The collection now resides in a Swedish museum.

I recently discovered that his son is rather "colorful" too. Robert Aschberg went being a Maoist in his youth to the anti-racist commissar of Swedish journalism. Dollars to peanuts he also hates current-day Russia, hates Putin, etc. Incidentally, he used to be Director-General of the Swedish Institute, which last year released a 14,000 member list of far right extremists on Twitter, such as myself.

jilles dykstra , July 23, 2018 at 11:50 am GMT
@JohnnyWalker123

The plans to destabilise the ME originate in Israel.
If part of these plans was to destabilise Europe too, possible, but I never heard of it.
Soros' indoctrination scheme for open society has been running for many decades.

jilles dykstra , July 23, 2018 at 11:51 am GMT
@Jon Halpenny

German antisemitism began around 1870.
Ismar Schorsch, 'Jewish Reactions to German Anti-Semitism, 1870 – 1914′, New York 1972

Seraphim , July 23, 2018 at 11:52 am GMT
@Colin Wright

As I feel that the subject of German responsibility for the outbreak of WW1, relevant for the outbreak of the revolution in Russia, will be attacked with gusto, I suggest to keep in mind firmly the fact that Germany was the first to declare war on Russia. The reason was indeed the fear that Russia by 1916 would be unbeatable and all the objectives of the 'Weltpolitik' of Germany, which would have been at a certain point in time opposed and countered by Russia. To refresh your memory, the date of the calculations was 1912. Just a few words for orientation (from Wikipedia):

"The German Imperial War Council of 8 December 1912 was an informal conference of some of the highest military leaders of the German Empire. Meeting at the Stadtschloss in Berlin, they discussed and debated the tense military and diplomatic situation in Europe at the time. As a result of the Russian Great Military Program announced in November, Austria-Hungary's concerns about Serbian successes in the First Balkan War, and certain British communications, the possibility of war was a prime topic of the meeting
[Kaiser Wilhelms'] opinion was that Austria-Hungary should attack Serbia that December, and if "Russia supports the Serbs, which she evidently does then war would be unavoidable for us, too," and that this would be better now than later, after completion of (the just begun) massive modernization and expansion of the Russian army and railway system toward Germany. Moltke agreed. In his professional military opinion "a war is unavoidable and the sooner the better". Moltke "wanted to launch an immediate attack"
Admiral Tirpitz, however, asked for a "postponement of the great fight for one and a half years" because the Navy was not ready for a general war that included Britain as an opponent. He insisted that the completion of the construction of the U-boat base at Heligoland and the widening of the Kiel Canal were the Navy's prerequisites for war. The British historian John Röhl has pointed out the coincidence that the date for completion of the widening of the Kiel Canal was the summer of 1914, but a reading of the report of the conference shows no agreement as to a war in 1914. However, Tirpitz did say that the Navy wanted to wait until the Kiel Canal was ready in summer 1914 before any war could start. Though Moltke objected to the postponement of the war as unacceptable, Wilhelm sided with Tirpitz. Moltke yielded "only reluctantly."

The 'controversial' book of Fritz Fischer "Griff nach der Weltmacht: Die Kriegzielpolitik des kaiserlichen Deutschland 1914–1918 (published in English as Germany's Aims in the First World War), will certainly come into the discussions. He devotes a large chapter to the subversive operations of the Germans in Russia in order to provoke the revolution and the exit from the war with the help of the Jews and Social-Democrats (both Mensheviks and Bolsheviks).

Jon Halpenny , July 23, 2018 at 12:06 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

In 1915 the British made a treaty promising Constantinople to the Russians. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantinople_Agreement

JackOH , July 23, 2018 at 12:33 pm GMT
Ron, extraordinary, provocative stuff in your American Pravda series. Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of Unz Review is my impression that this is how big-shouldered people of goodwill and genuinely liberal disposition used to talk a century ago. I don't know squat about The Protocols except as it's referred to by others, almost always prefaced as "anti-Semitic". The Unzian approach: "Let's read the damned thing", seems to me superior and more grown-up.

BTW-a childhood friend of mine and her husband, both Jewish and one of them observant, retired and now live in the Carolinas. Their occasional stories of elderly neighbors, call them Morris and Sheldon, returning from prison after having served time for white collar crimes such as tax evasion or improprieties on government contracts are sort of unintentionally funny. Looks like they missed the memo on how to be the world's wire-pullers.

Andrei Martyanov , Website July 23, 2018 at 12:41 pm GMT

Influenced by Maxim Gorky, he and his nephew Nikolai Pavlovich Schmit[e] were significant financial contributors of the Bolshevik faction of the Russian Social Democratic Workers Party including the newspaper Iskra.[12][13]

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

Jake , July 23, 2018 at 12:46 pm GMT
"From my distance of many decades, the text of the Protocols struck me as rather bland and even dull, describing in rather long-winded fashion a plan of secret subversion aimed at weakening the bonds of the social fabric, setting groups against each other, gaining control over political leaders by bribery and blackmail, and eventually restoring society along rigidly hierarchical lines with an entirely new group in control."

That sounds exactly like traditional WASP rule of non-WASP peoples, exactly the way, for example, that Brit Empire businesses set about arranging for revolution of New Spain against Spain, and then of Mexican mestizos and Indios against Mexican criollos (meaning full of nearly full European blood).

Of course, Anglo-Saxon Puritanism was a Judaizing heresy.

Johnny Rottenborough , Website July 23, 2018 at 12:58 pm GMT
From pages 390-1 of Henry Wickham Steed's Through Thirty Years :

'The gulf that severed Western Europe from Russia during the latter half of the 19th century was dug and kept open chiefly by Jewish resentment of Russian persecution of the Jews. Yet that resentment sprang also from Jewish detestation of the Russian Holy Synod and of the Russian Orthodox Church. Against Russian Christian fanaticism was ranged an intense Jewish fanaticism hardly to be paralleled save among the more militant sects of Islam. This Jewish fanaticism allied itself with the anti-Russian forces before and during the earlier years of the war. It abated only when the Russian Revolution of March 1917 and the subsequent advent of Bolshevism, largely Jewish in doctrine and in personnel , overthrew the Russian Empire and the Russian Orthodox Church. The joy of Jewry at these events was not merely the joy of triumph over an oppressor but was also gladness at the downfall of hostile religious and semi-religious institutions -- a joy, moreover, in which the Vatican shared, as its attitude towards the Bolshevist delegates to the Genoa Conference of April, 1922, significantly indicated.'

The resurgence of Russian Christianity under President Putin has left the 'joy of Jewry' looking distinctly tattered. Enter the West's largely Jewish-owned governments and media with their Russophobia campaign.

Johnnie Walker Read , July 23, 2018 at 1:03 pm GMT
I feel perhaps the most truthful book ever written on the Bolshevik Revolution was Juri Lina's "Under The Sign Of The Scorpion". It details both the heavy Jewish influence and the financial backing by American financiers such as the Schiff's and Warburg's
https://archive.org/stream/Under The Sign Of The Scorpion/sign_scorpion#page/n0

Another great source for information on the backing of the Bolshevik Revolution by American so called "Capitalist" is Anthony Sutton's "Wall Street And The Bolshevik Revolution"

https://archive.org/stream/WallStreetTheBolshevikRevolution#page/n0

Sean , July 23, 2018 at 1:07 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

At comment 7 above is an interview with Antony C. Sutton. From his book.

http://www.reformation.org/wall-st-bolshevik-ch3.html
Brockdorff-Rantzau's ideas of directing or controlling the revolutionaries parallel, as we shall see, those of the Wall Street financiers. [...]

A subsequent document5 outlined the terms demanded by Lenin, of which the most interesting was point number seven, which allowed "Russian troops to move into India"; this suggested that Lenin intended to continue the tsarist expansionist program. Zeman also records the role of Max Warburg in establishing a Russian publishing house and adverts to an agreement dated August 12, 1916, in which the German industrialist Stinnes agreed to contribute two million rubles for financing a publishing house in Russia.6

Consequently, on April 16, 1917, a trainload of thirty-two, including Lenin, his wife Nadezhda Krupskaya, Grigori Zinoviev, Sokolnikov, and Karl Radek, left the Central Station in Bern en route to Stockholm. When the party reached the Russian frontier only Fritz Plattan and Radek were denied entrance into Russia. The remainder of the party was allowed to enter.

The German-Jewish Economic Elite (1900 – 1933) was central to the German effort to help Lenin.

Jeff Stryker , July 23, 2018 at 1:13 pm GMT
@JackOH

WAYWARD JEWS

I've known a few Jewish ex-cons, big tough druggies or con men.

In jail, all the historical differences go right out the window. Its a black and white world in there.

Usually Jewish ex-cons have a bunch of skinhead friends from jail with Swastika tattoos who will basically concur that "Some Jews are cool".

The toughest Jews will all be friends with the Nazis because they've done time with them.

anon [317] Disclaimer , July 23, 2018 at 1:13 pm GMT
@Colin Wright

Quite, man quite. the British Banksters would send your sweat ass to their London Tower for a neck stretching ceremony should they over hear Blasphemy suggesting "Britain was not strongest and most powerful promoter of WWI".

the case begins in earnest in 1896, Switzerland, Hertzl, Zionist Congress.
The failure of the theme British and French and Russian Banksters(generally known as the Jewish controlled Entente) forced on the Congress (basically to orchestrate successfully the overthrow the whole of the oil and gas rich Ottoman Arab world. The plan was to replace the Ottoman system with a Colonial Rule of Law System, to enable Zionist producers of oil and gas access to Ottoman oil and gas). Revolution after revolution was initiated throughout the Balkans and Macedonia all designed in one way or the other to bring about this change..
When regime change failed, plan B was initiated.. that plan involved using the highly distributed small groups of Jewish Populations to migrate into the Ottoman Territory. communicating the messages and propaganda to these distributed groups was a Jewish Network task. Immigration was weaponized and used to gain political control over the Ottoman Territory.. hence WWI purpose: get that control of Ottoman oil and block German and Russia competition for the Ottoman oil.
British and French Palestine.. the result.

Wizard of Oz , July 23, 2018 at 1:19 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

Wasn't Luther an anti Semite? And did this not infect his teachings?

DESERT FOX , July 23, 2018 at 1:25 pm GMT
Check WALL STREET and THE BOLSHEVIK REVOLUTION by Anthony Sutton, can be had on Amazon leaves no doubt that the Zionists bankers were behind the overthrow of the Russian government and they are behind the overthrow of the Russian and American governments today.
CornCod1 , July 23, 2018 at 1:43 pm GMT
It turns out that the events of the past few years has proven that the views of "right-wing cranks," anti-Semites and "conspiracy theorists" had a more correct view of world events than mainstream conservatives. In the eighties I used to gently dismiss the theories of my Bircher friends (gently because they were nice people). Now I know that most of them were right on the money. The events of the last few years have proven this. We have a shadowy "deep state" rebellion against our president, a James Bond villain named George Soros, whose activities Wikileaks proves controls the Democratic Party and other Leftist parties in Europe. Now, anyone with half a brain admits that secret societies control governments across the world.
RebelWriter , July 23, 2018 at 1:51 pm GMT
I never read the Protocols in its entirely, only bits and pieces. I remember thinking it seemed to be written by a caricature of an evil villain, not even a Bond villain, but a Scooby Doo level villain. It screams fakery from its style. In form, though, it's brilliant.

If I were ever to pen something like it, for the Anglo-Saxon world, I would write it just like that. It imparts all necessary information and instructions, yet has plausible deniability built into it. "It's a fraud, you see. It's anti-Anglo-Saxon."

I admire you for your courage, Mr. Unz; this sort of self-published introspection cannot be as easy as you sometimes make it out to be. Yet, I believe, for the very sake of world peace, we need to at least be able to discuss these issues. If there's nothing at all to them, let the light shine on the facts, and let each judge for himself. The censorship around certain issues, particularly of the Holocaust, only convinces some of their lack of historical authenticity. Laws aren't required to back up claims which history easily vindicates, after all.

utu , July 23, 2018 at 1:53 pm GMT
@Johnnie Walker Read

Juri Lina film or the revolution.

TomSchmidt , July 23, 2018 at 2:01 pm GMT
A crucial underlying cause of the First World War was Britain's belief that only a preventative war could forestall a rising Germany, but I suspect that an important secondary cause was the parallel German notion that similar measures were necessary against a rising Russia.

Required reading here is The Silk Roads, by Frankopan. He demarcates the reason for Russo-German war. Edward Grey, English foreign minister, at the behest of a declining British empire, knew that Russian expansion in Asia would eventually threaten Britain's Jewel in the Crown, India. Russia had to be turned from a focus on Asia to one on Europe, and alliances with the South Slavs proved just the trick. Russia rightly saw Austria as an easy target for territorial gains, setting off war amongst what had once been the Dreikaiserbund.

Perfidious Albion has killed more people than any other country as direct and indirect result of policy.

Winnetou1889 , July 23, 2018 at 2:02 pm GMT
Most people also do not know, because of whitewashing history, that Germany in 1919 had a Bavarian Soviet Republic centered in Munich, headed by Communist Kurt Eisner. WWI vets, the Freikorps, and others rooted them out. Later Herr H and his men weren't just street fighting for the hell of it; they were clashing with the Communists, still fighting to root the Communists all out once and for all. Not all Jews were Communists, but many Communists were Jews.

In 1932, the three people on the ballot in Germany were old von Hindenberg, Hitler and Communist Ernst Thälmann. Eventually, as we know, Herr H won out. The rewriting history and whitewashing this Red scare, in the aftermath of WWII, has obscured all of this. My super educated Jewish husband, who was a history major, had never heard of this. All he knows is of trains going east, and nothing of the root of the fight.

The same fight is actually going on today in a different form. If people knew more about the root of the fight generally, perhaps the issues would be clearer. Like writes above: "And here we are." The same fighting and choices in issues remain, but most people don't even realize it.

Wizard of Oz , July 23, 2018 at 2:03 pm GMT
@Colin Wright

I would like to see elaboration and justification of that apparently careful formulation of Ron's that "a crucial underlying [sic] cause of the First World War was Britain's belief [sic] that only a preventative war could forestall [sic] Germany".

Maybe Jilles Dykstra who makes the extraordinary claim that Britain, France and the Czar conspired to get up the war might pitch in.

Rational consideration, absent any evidence, would star with the demographics. Unlike Germany and Russia the birth rates of France and Britain had become quite modern and sustainable. Consistently with its traditional balance of powers policy it made sense for Britain to make an alliance with France to deter Germany from attacking the latter and, in particular from occupying the Low Countries – an interest of Britain since at latest 1588. Germany would have to concentrate its resources on its army so its naval building program did not loom up as more than a cause of expense to the British taxpayer as Britain stepped up its shipbuilding program accordingly. In a world of no permanent friends what was it that made Britain turn the alleged belief into some action, not mentioned, to precipitate a war against Germany – especially when it must have known that Russia wasn't yet ready. Or is there some record somewhere of Britain calculating that 1914 was the perfect time to ensure parity of German and Russian losses?

RebelWriter , July 23, 2018 at 2:04 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

He was a philo-semite, or at least sympathetic to the Jews re the Catholic Church. He seems to have expected the Jews to convert to Christianity under his new ideas. They rejected his version of the Gospel, unsurprisingly, and then he did a 180, and published, "On the Jews and Their Lies."
He seemed to believe that no honest, thinking person could deny what he was preaching, something hardly unusual in religious figures.

Luther's story somewhat parallels that of Mohammed, who was initially very gratuitous toward the local Jewish people in Medina. The Jews didn't want any part of his new polity, and plotted in secret with his enemies, which proved catastrophic for those Jews.

ploni almoni , July 23, 2018 at 2:17 pm GMT
@Anarcho-Supremacist

You are hereby debunked.

ploni almoni , July 23, 2018 at 2:19 pm GMT
@Anarcho-Supremacist

Anarcho-Supremacist? What bunk dedunk.

ploni almoni , July 23, 2018 at 2:22 pm GMT
@Cyrano

Just a doin' a what comes nachurally.

Anonymous [306] Disclaimer , July 23, 2018 at 2:36 pm GMT
Ron Unz is kickin' ass and takin' names! I just love American Pravda .

The thing about Jacob Schiff is: what really motivated him? I think the standard version of the story is that he hated Czar because of the pogroms, the Cossacks, etc. But what if there was something more at work than some merely personal peeve, or some gauzy notion of 'tikkum olaam'? Unz also mentions Olof Aschberg (whom I had never heard of), so what if this was not merely the lone act of vengeance of a single Russian Jew, but rather a real plot with a strategy?

One other fact that Unz doesn't mention that draws my attention is that, at exactly the same time that Schiff was financing the Bolsheviks, the US Army was deployed to Russia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Expeditionary_Force,_North_Russia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Expeditionary_Force,_Siberia

What were they really doing there? Not even in the official version of events were they 'fighting the Reds'. Some of my Russian contacts have insisted that this was really a sinister Anglo-Zionist plot to fragment or balkanize Russia. (I'm thinking along the lines of Mackinder's old Eurasian 'heartland' theory, which some of the commenters above also mentioned.) If so, could it be that Schiff was really working in tandem with the US Govt. to carry out such a plan? Could it be that the original Bolsheviks were really just an ISIS-like terrorist group that somehow got out of hand and managed to take over all of Russia?

Anonymous [253] Disclaimer , July 23, 2018 at 2:36 pm GMT
@JackOH

"the only statement I care to make about the Protocols is that they fit in with what is going on." – Henry Ford

"There is a great force that creates the movement of thought in the people, and that is the media. It is in the media that the triumph of freedom of speech finds its incarnation. Through the Press we have gained the power to influence minds while remaining unobserved. We shall erase from the memory of men the historical facts we do not want them to know, and leave only those we wish".- the Protocols

Before you read "the damned thing", you may read an interesting article by Mr Israel Shamir:

The Elders of Zion and the Masters Discourse

http://www.israelshamir.net/English/Elders_of_Zion.htm

utu , July 23, 2018 at 2:48 pm GMT
@RebelWriter

Philosemitic undercurrent was present in many anti RC heresies. Often the idea was that the reform would bring Jews to Christianity. Before Martin Luther there was Jan Hus and the subsequent splinter groups that believed that their improved Christianity would be more palatable to Jews. The end result was Judaization of Christianity.

Martin Luther's anti-semitism has all marks of resentment for being betrayed.

JackOH , July 23, 2018 at 2:50 pm GMT
@RebelWriter

Rebel, that's pretty much my understanding, too, that Luther's "On the Jews . . ." was a specific ephemeral work addressing a specific issue of the time with respect to Jews, the Church, and the Reformation. I scanned it years ago, in the Pelikan edition I think, and can't remember much more about it. I'm pretty sure I've seen it and other works of Luther described as adiaphoric, not essential to Luther's teaching.

refl , July 23, 2018 at 2:53 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

Read: https://firstworldwarhiddenhistory.wordpress.com/

Wizard of Oz , July 23, 2018 at 3:04 pm GMT
@RebelWriter

Thanks. Interesting. It does seem likely then that Luther contributed to anti Semitism in Germany well before the 19th century.

Cf. also the novel Jud Suß by Lion Feuchtwanger which suggests there was popular anti Semitism in 18th century Germany.

Anonymous [155] Disclaimer , July 23, 2018 at 3:16 pm GMT
@JohnnyWalker123

Soros thinks he's a god:

It seems that Soros believes he was anointed by God. "I fancied myself as some kind of god " he once wrote. "If truth be known, I carried some rather potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood, which I felt I had to control, otherwise they might get me in trouble."

When asked by Britain's Independent newspaper to elaborate on that passage, Soros said, "It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out."

and not a benevolent one. The "philanthropist" persona is fake:

Despite his reputation as an international philanthropist, Soros remains candid about his true charitable tendencies. "I am sort of a deus ex machina," Soros told the New York Times in 1994. "I am something unnatural. I'm very comfortable with my public persona because it is one I have created for myself. It represents what I like to be as distinct from what I really am. You know, in my personal capacity I'm not actually a selfless philanthropic person. I've very much self-centered."

http://articles.latimes.com/2004/oct/04/opinion/oe-ehrenfeld4

So there it is. The lizard himself gave you some basic truths. Now you're free to connect the dots of his various "philanthropic" projects and see the common thread (white genocide).

ploni almoni , July 23, 2018 at 3:25 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

Dear Innocent in Paradise: German "Anti-Semitism" was the invention of a Jewish journalist, Wilhelm Marr (yes, he was Jewish, and Karl Marx was a Lutheran) hired by the Zionists to prepare the way for the coming of the Millennium. Anti-Semitism was at that time already invented in Russia by a respectable doctor, Leon Pinsker, who said Anti-Semitism is thousands of years old, hereditary and incurable. Dr. Pinsker MD was an early front man, a public spokesman for Zionism, who already adopted Hatikvah as the anthem, before Herzl was hired. And yes, Theodore Herzl was also a hired journalist, a front man, an employee, who did as he was told, until he was disposed of. And yes, the Dreyfus Affair was a gimmick, a phony Psy-Op like 9/11. And yes, Emile Zola was another hired journalist. And yes, the pogroms, including the Kishinev pogrom, were just riots. The people killed were rioters. That the pogroms were Anti-Jewish is pure spin, like what you watch on television. Goyim are hopeless and helpless, muscle bound but dumb, a little like cattle or beasts of burden. Give them a peanut, and they are grateful. You can dance circles around them. You can tell them everything, and they just grunt. And then you can lead them by the ring in their noses because they were not endowed with free-will and can't think for themselves.

utu , July 23, 2018 at 3:33 pm GMT
@Anonymous

http://www.israelshamir.net/English/Elders_of_Zion.htm

Indeed Israel Shamir's article on Elders of Zion is very good. He cites Solzhenitsyn:

"The Protocols show a blueprint of a social system. Its design is well above abilities of an ordinary mind, including that of its publisher. It is a dynamic process of two stages, of destabilization, increasing freedom and liberalism, which is terminated in social cataclysm, and on the second stage, new hierarchical restructuring of society takes place. It is more complicated than a nuclear bomb. It could be a stolen and distorted plan designed by a mind of genius. Its putrid style of an anti-Semitic grubby brochure [intentionally] obscures the great strength of thought and insight".

"The text demonstrates impressive foresight on the two systems of society, the Western and the Soviet one. While a strong thinker could possibly predict the development of the West in 1901, how could he grasp the Soviet future?"

The master-plan begins with reshaping of human mind:

"People's minds should be diverted (away from contemplation) towards industry and trade, and then they will have no time to think. The people will be consumed by the pursuit of gain. It will be vain pursuit, for we shall put industry on a speculative basis: what is withdrawn from the land by industry will slip through the hands of workers and industrialists and pass into the hands of financiers.
The intensified struggle for survival and superiority, accompanied by crises and shocks will create cold and heartless communities with strong aversion towards religion. Their only guide is gain that is Mammon, which they will erect into a veritable cult".

Foresight of Anonym is amazing: in the days of the Protocols' publication, Man was still the measure of things, and full eighty years would pass, until Milton Friedman and Chicago School would proclaim Market and Profit as the only guiding light.

ploni almoni , July 23, 2018 at 3:37 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

Martin Luther was a competing product to Judaism, but the same materialist, Dualist thing in Christian garb. He was just knocking the competition. The princes supported him because he said that the peasants deserved to treated like animals. Because they were animals.

SunBakedSuburb , July 23, 2018 at 3:42 pm GMT
"When one discovers a tear in the fabric of reality, there is a natural tendency to nervously peer within, wondering what mysterious objects might dwell there."

Very Lovecraftian statement. In the previous American Pravda, Ron Unz revealed the polytheistic secret of Judaism. Perhaps the above "mysterious objects" found in the void beyond the veil are the gods of the Kabbalah.

" two of his [Fleming's] most memorable Bond villains, Goldfinger and Blofeld, had distinctly Jewish-sounding names, and that so many of the plots involve schemes of world-conquest by Spectre "

Agree with the idea that Goldfinger is Fleming's concept of an international criminal of Jewish origin, probably an agent of the Schiff or Rothschild cartels. But Spectre was a representation of the shadow power in the Cold War -- the ODESSA/Die Spinne network of diaspora Nazis who had operational ties with the Dulles faction at CIA.

Hans Olav Brendberg , July 23, 2018 at 3:44 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Robert Aschberg is not the son, but the granson of Robert Aschberg. He was central in Swedish maoism in the seventies, then turned to journalism. He has been a driving force in the "anti-extremism"-movement in Sweeden. Not just the Swedish Institute, but also the Expo – a Swedish branch of the ADL/SPLC "antiracist" network.

David Martin , Website July 23, 2018 at 3:44 pm GMT
You failed to mention the Schiff-Gore merger: http://www.apfn.org/apfn/kgore.htm
Dutch Boy , July 23, 2018 at 3:44 pm GMT
Transferring a good part of American manufacturing to China and beggaring the American working class thereby had quite a bit to do with the Chinese economic miracle and that was done by our own ruling class, not the Chinese.
Wally , July 23, 2018 at 3:45 pm GMT
@Seraphim

Said by a hasbarist / Zionist who hates free speech.

And yes, that tsunami is coming whether you like it or not.

http://www.codoh.com

Anatoly Karlin , Website July 23, 2018 at 3:49 pm GMT
@Anonymous

Easy, the Entente were blocking Russian ports so that they could not be utilized by the Germans, whom they were at war with.

This was of course a tragedy for Russia, since the Bolsheviks could point to this as evidence of an Angl0-French "invasion" of Russia and portray themselves as its defenders (even though they themselves were more or less direct hirelings of the Germans), while the Whites got entirely negligible military benefits from it.

There's no need for conspiracies on this score. None of the Western Powers had a democratic mandate to participate in the Russian Civil War, and having the Bolsheviks win was not entirely negative from their perspective, since there would then be no need to share the postwar spoils with it (the French were a partial exception, since the Bolshevik repudiation of Tsarist era debt hit them far harder).

Wally , July 23, 2018 at 3:51 pm GMT
@Charlie Wyoming

What 'pogroms' do you refer to.
Please present proof.

Thanks.

Wally , July 23, 2018 at 3:53 pm GMT
@Sean

If so, then what exactly did that "microfilm text" say?
And citation, please.

http://www.codoh.com

SunBakedSuburb , July 23, 2018 at 3:57 pm GMT
@Charlie Wyoming

"Democratic Socialism is on its way."

It's already here in the form of a mixed economy. What we need to fear is the new breed of elites, Trotskyite racialists who have prospered in the capitalist game and now want world revolution, at the behest of the Babylonian supremacist cult.

Wally , July 23, 2018 at 3:57 pm GMT
@Cyrano

said:
"Or was the Bolshevik revolution a payback for the pogroms? "

Please present proof for these alleged "pogroms".

said:
"According to some, one of the ethnic groups that have benefited the most from the good old capitalism are the Jews."

You surely mean "capitalism" where Jews play by a different set of self serving rules.

http://www.codoh.com

Ronnie , July 23, 2018 at 3:59 pm GMT
Another very significant book of the time is "The Rulers of Russia" 1938 by Father Denis Fahey (Amazon), an Irish Catholic Priest who had traveled to Russia and analyzed the make up and financing of the Revolution. He made most of the same points as Ron and his book was widely sold at the time even in the USA. Although Fahey was a noted theologist he was also a brilliant observer and acute analyst. I think that Ron Unz would be very interested to read this book from a sophisticated and honest contemporary of the Revolution.
Wally , July 23, 2018 at 4:02 pm GMT
@BenKenobi

And here we are.

http://www.codoh.com

SunBakedSuburb , July 23, 2018 at 4:04 pm GMT
@Anonymous

"Soros thinks he's a god "

By the weights and measures of the Materialist reality, Soros is a god.

Anatoly Karlin , Website July 23, 2018 at 4:06 pm GMT
@Hans Olav Brendberg

Correct, I made a mistake , Robert is ofc Olof's grandson, it can't be otherwise even just age-wise.

As a Swede (I assume), do you know what his position on Russia is? I imagine it's the standard Putlerreich narrative, perhaps turned up to 11. I am curious to see if this guess is correct.

Wally , July 23, 2018 at 4:11 pm GMT
@silviosilver

said:
"Neo-nazis take that and run with it, which leads to all sorts of weird and wonderful conspiracy theories, "

Please tell us what alleged 'neo-Nazi' "weird and wonderful conspiracy theories" that it "leads" to.

http://www.codoh.com

anon [393] Disclaimer , July 23, 2018 at 4:19 pm GMT
@Sean

Yes id like to see Unz take a run at anthony suttons work which strikes me probably true but all these things so hard to get to bottom when memory holed by powers that be

roo_ster , July 23, 2018 at 4:25 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

Luther started out philo-semetic. He railed against the Roman church for using bad technique in its efforts to convert Jews to Christianity. Once the Jews heard Luther and his way of explaining the Gospel, they'd come around.

Then Luther met and interacted with many learned and influential Jews and modified his views accordingly.

Anonymous [306] Disclaimer , July 23, 2018 at 4:26 pm GMT
@SunBakedSuburb

But Spectre was a representation of the shadow power in the Cold War -- the ODESSA/Die Spinne network of diaspora Nazis who had operational ties with the Dulles faction at CIA.

It is likely that Odessa/Spinne was penetrated by Mossad. Founding member Otto Skorzeny was probably an asset: https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/the-strange-case-of-a-nazi-who-became-a-mossad-hitman-1.5423137

Colin Wright , Website July 23, 2018 at 4:28 pm GMT
@Seraphim

' "The German Imperial War Council of 8 December 1912 was an informal conference of some of the highest military leaders of the German Empire " '

Yes, but

I think all the great powers were making preparations and calculations in the same way.

Against this must be set the fact that Germany was essentially a 'satisfied power' at the time. As even your quote implies, she sought no change in the status quo, but on the contrary, feared such a change.

It was other powers that threatened to bring about that change: France, with her incessant scheming and machinations to create a coalition that could avenge 1870, Serbia, with her pathological belligerence towards everyone, Russia, with her Slavophile pretensions that, in the upshot, led her to support a Serbia that was manifestly in the wrong. Here, too, France played an apparently key if obscured role in egging both Serbia and Russia on, and then in the case of Russia, making sure she didn't back down.

I am not arguing that Germany was innocent. I am merely insisting that (a) it was above all the underlying paradigm that made an eventual explosion probable, and that (b) other powers were more at fault.

There's a lot to be said about it. For example, it's been argued that if Austria hadn't delayed and sought the support of Germany, but rather, had promptly attacked Serbia, then the other powers wouldn't have found themselves taking up the positions that made general war inevitable. Of course, this makes the rather dubious assumption that Austria could in fact have quickly beaten Serbia, but it is an example of how the blame for the greater conflagration shifts depending on how one looks at it.

Germany can be blamed for the gratuitious provocation of building a High Seas Fleet. However, if there was any one nation that could have prevented the war from breaking out, it would have been France. Absent her activities, a great war becomes discernably less probable. Serbia would never have dared to have engaged in the provocations she did, and isolated and without encouragement from France, Russia would have been more likely to seek security in an accord with Germany and Austria rather than hostility towards them. After all, for Russia above all, a great war objectively offered nothing. Finally, theories about British bankers notwithstanding, I see Britain as less guilty than any other player. She didn't even have an immense conscript army. She was the only player who had refrained from building one.

Mike P , July 23, 2018 at 4:29 pm GMT
@Johnny Rottenborough

The joy of Jewry at these events was not merely the joy of triumph over an oppressor but was also gladness at the downfall of hostile religious and semi-religious institutions

The resurgence of Russian Christianity under President Putin has left the 'joy of Jewry' looking distinctly tattered. Enter the West's largely Jewish-owned governments and media with their Russophobia campaign.

Good observations. However, the degenerate Western "elites," whose degradation was caused to a large extent by decades of Zionist blackmail and corruption, are unable to mount another serious challenge to a renewed Russia supported by a rapidly surging China.

LSJohn , July 23, 2018 at 4:36 pm GMT
@JohnnyWalker123

"If you replace "Germany" with "Russia," perhaps this paragraph would be a good explanation of why Western leaders hate Russia so much. "

Simpler than that: Russia supports Iran and Syria, which each support Hezbollah, Public Enemies #s 1, 2, and 3 of you-know-who(m),

Anon [781] Disclaimer , July 23, 2018 at 4:39 pm GMT
therefore regarded American history as just too bland and boring to study.
By contrast, one land I found especially fascinating was China, the world's most populous country and its oldest continuous civilization, with a tangled modern history of revolutionary upheaval

In macro terms, Chinese history was more exciting because of massive upheavals and titans like Mao.
But in micro terms, Chinese history of the 20th century was mostly simple: Until 1950, chaos, humiliation, and incompetence. After 1950 to mid 70s, one-man show of Maoism, a period that produced nothing of interest in thought, art, literature, science, technology, cinema, music, etc. In contrast, US history produced so many important individuals and movements in the arts, sciences, enterprise, music, and just about everything. For Mao to be god, everyone had to be ant-like minions. The US, having a more stable system and short-term leaders, was less exciting on a grand scale. But it achieved so much in so many areas.

utu , July 23, 2018 at 4:50 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

That said, it's worth noting that whatever the figures that Schiff contributed during 1917, they would have paled into irrelevance to the 50 million gold marks ($1 billion in modern currency) that the German government funneled through Swedish and Danish banks to the Bolsheviks in Saint-Petersburg that year.

But we do not know how much money Schiff put into the project of revolution. We know that he put a lot of money into Japan:

http://nda-repository.nda.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/11605/91/1/1-2_人文科学抜刷_村岡先生.pdf
By the end of 1905, Kuhn, Loeb&Co., to the surprise of many, floated a bond issue in the sum of $200 million – equivalent to some $4.5 billion in today's money. Schiff's loans were an important factor -- and his extensive financial involvement, a deciding factor -- in bringing victory to Japan.

Is it possible that German project was linked and coordinated with Schiff? Who was peddling this project to Germans? Are there any links between Alexander Pavrus and Jacob Schiff?

Peripatetic commenter , July 23, 2018 at 4:58 pm GMT
Small issue:

I had been aware that he had long been as one of the wealthiest and most highly-regarded individuals in America

Missing word or redundant word in there

Rurik , July 23, 2018 at 5:00 pm GMT
Great read, Mr. Unz.

He very matter-of-factly mentions that Schiff, Warburg and the other top Jewish international bankers were among the leading backers of the Jewish Bolsheviks, through whom they hoped to gain an opportunity for the Jewish exploitation of Russia ,

Echoes of the ((("Russian"))) oligarchs that looted the wealth and resources of the Russian people following the generations of Jewish Bolshevik genocide and slavery of the Russian people.

They go from being brutalized by commie Jews, to being looted by (crony, klepto)-capitalist Jews. Such a deal!

Many people point out that the "Russian" oligarchs weren't all Jews, and neither was Yeltsin- who summarily betrayed Russia and her people to destitution on behalf of their most intractable enemy, and they'd be right.

But I feel an article like this should include the worst and most loathsome man who ever lived, and he wasn't a Jew.

Schiff and Trotsky would have been stopped long before their treachery could have sent Russia and millions of others reeling into the abyss, were it not for the most execrable man who ever befouled the ether; a one president Woodrow Wilson.

It was Wilson who accommodated Schiff by betraying the American people and handing over the keys to our Treasury to this sinister cabal of Jewish supremacist banksters.

It was Wilson whose betrayals and intrigues allowed for Trotsky to escape Canadian internment and be sent with 'suitcases' full of lucre into Russia, with Wilson even arranging a passport and transport documents.

Also, we shouldn't forget that it was also Wilson who promised the American people that he would keep us out of the war, (and was consequently elected president) and then did all he could to betray that promise, and involve us in that disastrous conflict.

Let's not forget that it was Wilson who foisted the ruse of his "Fourteen Points", guaranteeing 'self-determination' to Germany if she laid down her arms, only to betray Germany with a starvation campaign into signing Germans into perpetual slavery. Leading directly to WWII, and all the attendant horrors.

The weight of Woodrow Wilson's singular treachery, treason, betrayals and enormities is beyond my comprehension, but when calculating the worst villains of the 20th century, he certainly takes all the cakes I can think of.

http://www.wildboar.net/multilingual/easterneuropean/russian/literature/articles/whofinanced/whofinancedleninandtrotsky.html

The Bolshevik government of Russia paid the volume its own sort of deep respect, with mere possession of the Protocols warranting immediate execution.

Not just possession of the Protocols, but any perceived 'anti-Semitism' was declared a capital offense when Lenin came to power. (I remember reading somewhere, that this law, death for "anti-Semites", was the first one enacted, but I don't remember where I read that).

http://truthmegasite.com/the-bolshevik-revolution-in-russia-was-the-work-of-jewish-planning-and-jewish-dissatisfaction-our-plan-is-to-have-a-new-world-order/

with the Schiff story seen as conclusion proof of his delusional anti-Semitism.

conclusive ?

Plato and Machiavelli as a classic of Western political thought.

the problem I would have with calling it "Western", is that I consider the Protocols (and Bolshevism), as distinctively anti- Western.

For me, the meaning of 'Western' goes back to the Greeks and Romans, marching though Bysantium and finding its perfect expression in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, and is an expression of something intrinsic to the spirit and genes of Western man. Fundamental to what I'd describe as the ultimate virtue of the West, is honor. IOW honesty, decency, blood, home and hearth. Father and motherland, and fair play.

Whereas the Protocols seems to mock these notions as the weaknesses of 'beast-like' simpletons. The Achilles heal of the West- to be exploited as a means to bashing the West on the rocks of genocidal malevolence, and enslaving the survivors, just as the Old Testament commands.

So it's difficult for me to consider the Protocols anywhere near the writings of Plato/Socrates, who seemed above all to love the Truth. Whereas such quaint weaknesses like 'honor' are exploited in the Protocols with sinister glee.

Sort of like comparing Ron Paul to Richard Pearl. To me they are mutually exclusive.

Anyway, you're a magnificent and brave intellect Mr. Unz, for taking on these most salient and even urgent issues of our day.

Kudos to you Sir!

sarz , July 23, 2018 at 5:03 pm GMT
Brother Nathanael Kapner at realjewnews.com has published several pieces on the status of the Protocols,showing why they are not to be dismissed with the usual tired responses such as "forgeries". Put Protocols in the search box at his site.
Sean , July 23, 2018 at 5:04 pm GMT
@Wally

It was the Times on microfilm so a reproduction of that days edition. Don't get me wrong the Times article can be read as fully endorsing them, but that is the bit where the piece is rhetorically imagining the effect of the Protocols on lesser minds, so such a quote would be really obtuse if it was sincere . The Times article that is often cited as accepting the Protocols authenticity actually took it for granted that the Protocols were fake, it just bemoaned the lack of information proving they were not what they purported to be. The Times piece was an appeal for someone to find out exactly who wrote the protocols.

jilles dykstra , July 23, 2018 at 5:05 pm GMT
" ' "The German Imperial War Council of 8 December 1912 was an informal conference of some of the highest military leaders of the German Empire " ' "

The Morgenthau phantasy ?

Anon [680] Disclaimer , July 23, 2018 at 5:11 pm GMT
@Dan Hayes

I got $50 on the holocaust

Peripatetic commenter , July 23, 2018 at 5:12 pm GMT

Not longer afterward, the facts regarding the enormous financial support provided to the Bolsheviks

Another small one.

jilles dykstra , July 23, 2018 at 5:16 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

Balfour already in 1907 said to the USA ambassador 'that maybe war was the cheapest way to keep the British standard of living'.
Patrick J. Buchanan, 'Churchill, Hitler and "The unnecessary war", How Britain lost its empire and the west lost the world', New York, 2008, Balfour, US ambassador Henry White, 1907, page 48/ 49

jilles dykstra , July 23, 2018 at 5:20 pm GMT
@ploni almoni

See also:
Fritz Stern, 'Gold and Iron, Bismarck, Bleichröder, and the Building of the German Empire', New York, 1977.
Jakob Wassermann, 'MEIN WEG ALS DEUTSCHER UND ALS JUDE', Berlin 1921
'From prejudice to destruction', Jacob Katz, 1980, Cambridge MA
'Christianity and the Holocaust of the Hungarian Jewry', Moshe Y Herclz, 1993 New York University press

jilles dykstra , July 23, 2018 at 5:26 pm GMT
@Jon Halpenny

Never heard of this treaty.
If you just read the introduction you understand that it never was.
If you understood anything of geopolitics you would know that never would Britain allow Russia free access to the Med.
The movement of grain ships from Russia to the Med interrupted for two days, already Russia could not pay the interest on her foreign debt.
So the Straits were perfect for controlling Russia.
It of course may have been that perfidious Albion held out a herring.

Hibernian , July 23, 2018 at 5:30 pm GMT
@Jake

Juarez served the purpose of evicting the French. Criollo rule continues to this day, exemplified by my Hibernian brother Vicente Fox.

Old fogey , July 23, 2018 at 5:44 pm GMT
@Sean

Many thanks for the link to Antony Sutton. I will need to read his books. He had scathing things to say about the Hoover Institution, by the way.

Hibernian , July 23, 2018 at 5:48 pm GMT
@Colin Wright

"She didn't even have an immense conscript army."

We Americans proved in 1863, 1917, 1940, and 1948 (this last continuing until 1971) that those can be put together quickly, as long as you have a strong cadre to start with. The British have a strong tradition of reserve units, also.

Anonym , July 23, 2018 at 5:52 pm GMT
@Heros

So when I read these Pravda articles, I am always frustrated because Ron Unz is always deferring to some hidden jew in his background who he knows will take offense at what he says, so he has to temper it. Because he is a jew, he cannot call a lying jew a lying jew, or he will be ostracized and boycotted even more. Unz tells us how Ford documents event after event for 80 chapters about how jews have conspired, tricked, committed fraud, and even murdered Christians, sometimes in rituals, to cover it all up, yet as a Jew he cannot understand that we Christians find this centuries old, documented, and still ongoing, satanic blood conspiracy to be worthy of more than a nod and a "tsk".

I think within the last few weeks Ron has shown immense courage. Ron is an agent of reform and I am thankful he exists.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Art , July 23, 2018 at 5:55 pm GMT
The Unz Review is a modern day – The Dearborn Independent .

Thanks!

Art

CanSpeccy , Website July 23, 2018 at 5:56 pm GMT
For God's sake read Strunk and White, or if you have, follow Strunk's rule: "eliminate unnecessary words": all those damn intensifiers -- very, actually, entirely, somewhat, rather importantly, extremely, considerably, exactly, etc.
Bukowski , July 23, 2018 at 5:58 pm GMT
@Winnetou1889

A lot of people also don't know that there was a short lived communist government in Hungary in 1919 led by Bela Kun.

http://www.jrbooksonline.com/some_pics_from_cecile_tormay.htm

Verymuchalive , July 23, 2018 at 5:58 pm GMT
@Frankie P

None of the civilisations mentioned has been continuous in the sense of unconquered. All have been subject to foreign conquest, partition and warring states at various times. The last continuous civilisation was the Japanese, until their defeat in 1945.

peterike , July 23, 2018 at 5:58 pm GMT
@Johnny Rico

Yes. Mao, Deng, and Zhou Enlai were all Jewish.

You mock, but in fact there WERE Jews along with Mao. Which is another topic for Ron some day, perhaps.

https://forward.com/schmooze/159051/a-jew-in-maos-china/

https://jewishjournal.com/news/world/179731/

sarz , July 23, 2018 at 6:02 pm GMT
@Dan Hayes

No, my money for "the eminent computer scientist" is definitely on Claude Shannon, whom I ran into a couple of times in the 60s at the house of a Jewish friend and mentor of mine with whom he used to play chess. I knew about his communism, but not about his Jewish mother. The main thing about him, of course, was that he had pioneered information theory.

Rurik , July 23, 2018 at 6:02 pm GMT
@sarz

Put Protocols in the search box at his site.

from the article

In any event, this short work is now available as one of my HTML Books, making it quite convenient for reading and text-searching.

The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion

http://www.unz.com/book/anonymous__the-protocols-of-the-learned-elders-of-zion/

Rurik , July 23, 2018 at 6:10 pm GMT
@CanSpeccy

"eliminate unnecessary words": all those damn intensifiers -- very, actually, entirely, somewhat, rather importantly, extremely, considerably, exactly, etc.

German_reader , July 23, 2018 at 6:13 pm GMT

Once I checked around a little, I discovered that numerous mainstream accounts described the enormous hostility of Schiff towards the Czarist regime for its ill-treatment of Jews

But the Czarist regime had already fallen in March 1917 and the liberals that replaced it enacted Jewish emancipation.
And the allies, including the US, had no interest in overthrowing the provisional government, they wanted it to continue the war against Germany, so Schiff would have acted against American interests, surely not without some risk.
And of course in November 1917 there was the Balfour declaration, which should have aligned any ethnocentric Jewish nationalist with the Allied cause.
So apart from irrational hatred of Russia, what plausible motive could Schiff have had for financing the Bolsheviks?

Arnieus , July 23, 2018 at 6:14 pm GMT
By the time Jewish capitalists financed the Bolsheviks they had honed their weaponized economics to a high degree. The similar MO of most if not all "revolutions" in Europe gives credence to the reality of this articles premise.

It is not hard to find Jewish financing for Cromwell, and later William of Orange. One of the first things William did after deposing James was borrow money to fight France from a central bank the newly created Bank of England. The French and the Bolshevik revolutions were instigated and financed and the reining monarchs were murdered just like Cromwell executed Charles the first. In France the aristocracy was wiped out. Napoleon thwarted the banker plan in France and was put down with Rothschild financing. The revolution in Germany that deposed Kaiser Wilhelm and ended WWI was all too similar though the Kaiser escaped the fate of his cousin in Russia. Like Napoleon, Hitler thwarted the agenda planned for Germany, that is a Bolshevik slaughter of Germans. WWII was the result. As Russia is all too aware the US spent billions to hire revolutionaries to depose the elected, Russia friendly government in the Ukraine.

The revolutions are not ideological. All that "workers paradise" and "freedom and liberty" drivel is to motivate the peasants. Russia was pillaged and the likes of Jacob Schiff received a 20-fold return on investment. Only Bankers win the wars.

for-the-record , July 23, 2018 at 6:19 pm GMT
@Ronnie

Another very significant book of the time is "The Rulers of Russia" 1938 by Father Denis Fahe y

It's in the public domain. Here is a link (PDF):

https://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/WebSources/B_345_The-Rulers-of-Russia.pdf

Thorfinnsson , July 23, 2018 at 6:24 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

This dipshit led the program Trolljägarna (Troll Hunters), which EXPOSED internet commenters with right-wing views. Such as the dangerously extremist view that Sweden is for Swedes.

He has the standard Establishment views on Russia and Putin. See this op-ed in Aftonbladet (evening daily, formerly had a working class orientation): https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/kolumnister/a/qnpWom/sociala-medier–demokratins-undergang

Rysslands Vladimir Putin har trollfabriker som jobbar dygnet runt och har satt upp tweet-robotar som den senaste tiden gjort allt för att stödja separatisterna i Katalonien.

Russia's Vladimir Putin has troll factories who work around the clock and have set up Twitter robots that the most recent time did everything to support the separatists in Catalonia.

Karl XII should be reviled less for his disastrous invasion of Russia and more for bringing the Jews into Sweden for the first time ever.

dieter kief , July 23, 2018 at 6:28 pm GMT
@Colin Wright

Add to that the tight connection between jews and the secret police and spys and – you know: intelligence services of all kinds in Eastern Europe. It's said, that they were heavily dominated by Jews – one of the rather solid reasons for anti-semitism there after the implosion of the Eastern Block.

Later famous German literary critic Marcel Reich-Ranicki for example was one of those secret service men in London after he had survived the Third Reich in a hideawy in Poland.

jsm , July 23, 2018 at 6:32 pm GMT
@Anon

his is one reason why Jews keep insisting that blacks who commit crimes should only get a slap on the wrist and be turned loose right back into society again. They honest-to-god think that scolding will stop sociopaths in their tracks, in denial of all evidence,

Why do you assert that Jews insist criminal blacks be let out because they honest to go think scolding will work

as opposed to

that the Jews insist blacks be let out because they are parasites who want to weaken their White host?

What makes YOU an expert in what goes on in Jews' minds?

SCL , July 23, 2018 at 6:50 pm GMT
I think it is odd that no one has mentioned Solzhenitsyn's TWO HUNDRED YEARS TOGETHER. It seems the obscuring of this work has been successful.
Thorfinnsson , July 23, 2018 at 6:54 pm GMT
There are some other examples of Jewish influence in America which few people are aware of.

In the latter part of the 19th century, it became customary for the United States to send Jewish ambassadors to the Sublime Porte. The first Jew was appointed in 1889, and up until the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire WASPs would only hold the post for a total of seven years.

The reason why hardly needs to be explained.

Jews also helped poison Russo-American relations in this period (which previously had been quite friendly) by successfully lobbying the American government to intervene diplomatically every time there was a pogrom in Russia.

Charles Pewitt , July 23, 2018 at 6:56 pm GMT
Jews have never found a more secure perch than within the Anglo-Saxon nations of England and the United States.

Jews have rarely displayed any gratitude whatsoever for being able to launch their global plots from such safe perches.

Jacob Schiff was a Jew globalizer banker who funded the Jew-controlled Bolsheviks in Russia. The Jews were so fond of Bolshevism because they saw it as an excellent way to attack and destroy their European Christian enemies.

Paul Singer, George Soros, Seth Klarman, Mark Zuckerberg, Shelly Adelson, Mike Bloomberg and many other wealthy Jews are no different than Jacob Schiff.

Mass immigration will prove to be the ultimate undoing of the Jews in European Christian nations.

The response to the Jew push for open borders mass immigration will be the mass expulsion of Jews from European Christian nations.

Anonymous [155] Disclaimer , July 23, 2018 at 6:57 pm GMT
@Anon

Much of the problem with Jacob Schiff and his ilk is that he actually thought the 'socialist utopia' was achievable. He believed all the propaganda. When he was donating his money, he had no clue the communist takeover would turn out to be a bloody failure detested by the Russian people who lived all their lives under the system, although there was certainly a strong element of "Let's get revenge on the Tsar and his ilk for treating us like animals," in Schiff's thinking.

Lol no!

The "socialist utopia" angle was clearly designed to appeal to the poor Russian goyim. Did I miss the part where Schiff abandoned his treasures and moved to Russia to bask in that utopia?

The "revenge" angle was the goal. Obviously. He poured money into "utopia propaganda" and into "revenge". Only one of them worked as advertised. Imagine my shock.

Much of what Jews have been trying to do in politics during the 20th century is idealistic

Haha, save that shit for Yahoo Answers or Wikipedia.

for-the-record , July 23, 2018 at 7:04 pm GMT
@utu

Is it possible that German project was linked and coordinated with Schiff? Who was peddling this project to Germans? Are there any links between Alexander Pavrus and Jacob Schiff?

From The World at the Cross Roads by Boris Brasol (1921), pp. 70-71:

The full history of the interlocking participation of the Imperial German Government and international finance in the destruction of the Russian Empire is not yet written. Much time and research will be required in order to disentangle the complex relations between the two powers, which sought to beat down the Russian Colossus which for centuries stood as a watchful sentinel on the border of Europe, protecting Western civilization from savage invasions originated in the depths of Asia.

It is not a mere coincidence that at the notorious meeting held at Stockholm in 1916, between the former Russian Minister of the Interior, Protopopoff, and the German Agents, the German Foreign Office was represented by Mr. Warburg, whose two brothers were members of the international banking firm Kuhn, Loeb & Company, of which the late Mr. Jacob Schiff was a senior member. Nor is it a mere coincidence that in the later stages of the Russian Revolution we still find international finance hard at work engaged in further endeavors to break the last resistance of Russia against the onslaught of the "Triple Alliance" -- that is of the Central Powers, Revolutionary internationalism and International Finance itself.

This is a link to the book (pdf).

Johnny Rottenborough , Website July 23, 2018 at 7:12 pm GMT
@Mike P

Mike P -- Yes, the chances of engineering another Russian Revolution or replacing Russians with assorted ethnics are slim indeed.

for-the-record , July 23, 2018 at 7:30 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

In the latter part of the 19th century, it became customary for the United States to send Jewish ambassadors to the Sublime Porte.

The most famous being Henry Morgenthau Sr. (1913-1916), perhaps now better known for being the father of Henry Morgenthau Jr., father of the "Morgenthau Plan".

Morgenthau Sr. was the maternal grandfather of the historian Barbara Tuchman (Guns of August ).

Jon Halpenny , July 23, 2018 at 7:39 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

It was a real agreement. Why do you think the British attacked Gallipoli? It was to fulfil the promise to Russia. The Russians gave a Quid Pro Quo in the form of allowing Britain a larger occupation zone in Persia.

MBlanc46 , July 23, 2018 at 7:40 pm GMT
@Charlie Wyoming

Jews are seen as white and Palestinians are seen as people of color. That probably doesn't bode well for the Jews.

gmachine1729 , Website July 23, 2018 at 7:42 pm GMT

By contrast, one land I found especially fascinating was China, the world's most populous country and its oldest continuous civilization, with a tangled modern history of revolutionary upheaval, then suddenly reopened to the West during the Nixon Administration and under Deng's economic reforms starting to reverse decades of Maoist economic failure.

Very unambiguously, Mao >> Deng. Of course, the US media will always twist it the other way round. For an explanation, see this: https://www.unz.com/tsaker/book-review-losing-military-supremacy-the-myopia-of-american-strategic-planning-by-andrei-martyanov/#comment-2415952 . And https://www.unz.com/jderbyshire/trump-trips-but-hes-right-on-russia-our-ruling-class-is-crazy-remember-the-romanovs/#comment-2429247 .

I used to believe the mainstream American narrative on this too, until I realized that the faster economic growth starting from the reforms had more to do with China's finally being able to trade with the US (at its core more a product of what happened later on in Mao's era than what Deng and his supporters did) than with the accompanying change in economic policy. I came to the conclusion that China in 1970 had more or less secured herself to the extent that establishing relations with the US became a possibility. With the industrial and modern foundation already developed and integration into the wider international community, rapid economic growth became more or less inevitable. One can think of China in Mao's years as having developed a proven to work operating system and programming language in bootstrap mode, on top of which the application software that delivered more immediate and tangible returns were built as part of "economic reform." Many knowledgeable people in China feel the same; that those reformists who returned to power afterwards were actually less competent leaders taking undue credit by building on the work of others.

With the Chinese people clearly having such tremendous inherent talent and their potential already demonstrated on a much smaller scale in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore, I believed there was an excellent chance that Deng's reforms would unleash enormous economic growth, and sure enough, that was exactly what happened. In the late 1970s, China was poorer than Haiti, but I always told my friends that it might come to dominate the world economically within a couple of generations, and although most of them were initially quite skeptical of such an outrageous claim, every few years they became a little less so. The Economist had long been my favorite magazine, and in 1986 they published an especially long letter of mine emphasizing the tremendous rising potential of China and urging them to expand their coverage with a new Asia Section; the following year, they did exactly that.

I think the comparison between China and Haiti in the late 70s is patently ridiculous, for obvious reasons. Many in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore look down on mainland Chinese for being much poorer and for being 共匪 . The reality is that it's like comparing ordinary engineers in the dominant company to those who started and built an inferior but for the most part working alternative. And now, that alternative China created is starting to become serious competition to the long established market standard.

These days I feel tremendous humiliation for having spent most of my life being so totally wrong about so many things for so long, and I cling to China as a very welcome exception. I can't think of a single development during the last forty years that I wouldn't have generally expected back in the late 1970s, with the only surprise having been the total lack of surprises. About the only "revision" I've had to make in my historical framework is that I'd always casually accepted the ubiquitous claim that Mao's disastrous Great Leap Forward of 1959-61 had caused 35 million or more deaths, but I've recently encountered some serious doubts, suggesting that such a total could be considerably exaggerated, and today I might admit the possibility that only 15 million or fewer had died.

Wow, what exactly did you expect back in the late 1970s for the next forty years? More or less what's happening now? And that was considered extremely farfetched at the time? The more I look at it, the more I realize that China in the late 1970s was in essence not anywhere near as bad as it might have appeared on the surface. There was already, for instance, the expertise to develop not great but passable nuclear submarines, which Andrei Martyanov characterized in his book as "the most complex machinery in human history." I also realized that that estimate of 35 million was made by comparing to the death and birth rate of 1958 (so number of excess deaths plus number of fewer births relative to 1958 baseline). It's laughable to label a "dictator" one does not like as a "mass murderer" by comparing himself to himself in population statistics. The overall trend was that during his 25 years, the population of China went from 475 million to 900+ million, hardly what one would expect from a genocidal state.

Now that China is so much more powerful and credible internationally, more people will discredit what those silly and politically motivated American scholars have put in their history books for the masses.

I'm a pretty exceptional and extreme guy (as are you Ron), so I naturally prefer those who dare to use more extreme and unorthodox approaches. I like revolutionaries who transform weird into normal, be they in science, be they in politics. Because the most consequential to our civilization happens at the extremes. Because there's so much more of a story to tell. Mediocrity and conformism is the default, and more people ought to try radical (but appropriated hedged) methods if societal advancement is to be optimized for. Like, what Stalin did, in pioneering the planned economy, was truly revolutionary and met with fierce opposition from the outside world, but it proved to be a miraculous success. Mao replicated it successfully in the Chinese context to modernize China. I think Mao was a genius poet and political thinker and leader and a true revolutionary at heart. His brothers and sons were all killed for "revolutionary" activities. Nearing the last decade of his life, he wasn't about leaving behind wealth and power to heirs of blood like the typical dictator/magnate, as he had few real ones. Most likely, he cared much more about his legacy and what would happen to China afterwards. He distrusted those people under him running things, Deng included, who were scrambling to ensure the best position for themselves and their children after he died. So he launched the Cultural Revolution, using popular uprising to instigate a political reshuffle at the top. Of course, the people who made it to the top who ran things during his last decade were very questionable. He may well have been quite displeased with the result. Nonetheless, he probably felt this political balancing would be the healthiest choice for his legacy, for the political situation afterwards. The people he brought down came back to power after he died, and I'm sure many of them secretly resented him but were too scared to say anything. So he succeeded, unlike Stalin, in not getting posthumously denounced. And China is still thriving forty years after his death, though maybe not as much as he would have hoped.

As I write this, I am reminded of Mao's poetic quote: 人间正道是沧桑, which means literally "the correct course for the human world is for seas to turn into mulberry fields."

bjdubbs , July 23, 2018 at 7:43 pm GMT
Re Nixon and the problems of hiding the ethnic dimension of red-baiting, it was always puzzling why conservatives focused so much on "Whitaker Chambers and Alger Hiss" because the story itself seemed pretty inconsequential and not really worth the monumental status it seemed to possess for conservatives. Now it makes sense if Hiss served the role of being the respectable, WASP target of redbaiting.
Daniel Rich , July 23, 2018 at 7:44 pm GMT
@Colin Wright

Westerns on TV would have Native Americans burn down everything within sight [and mostly without any logical reason].

But when you start looking at who're behind such scenarios [writers, directors, producers], you'll discover a projection of pogroms [quite often by Jews with an Eastern European background].

And, yes, I fell for it too.

The Hollywood Indian – Link to Wikipedia [this being a Wikipedia entry, don't expect to find the full and naked truth]

MarkinPNW , July 23, 2018 at 7:44 pm GMT
@silviosilver

Wasn't "Fordism" the official state religion in Huxley's "Brave New World", with the symbol of the capitol T in honor of the Ford Model T automobile replacing the Christian Cross (resembling the lower case t) as the primary religious symbol?

Wizard of Oz , July 23, 2018 at 7:49 pm GMT
@Charles Pewitt

Not a fact that "Jews have rarely displayed any gratitude .". In the Anglophone countries many of the great charitable gifts, to art galleries/ museums, to medical research and hospitals, to musical events and institutions and other objects of charity are from Jews.

Done anonymously? Probably not? "Displayed"? Yes.

Daniel Rich , July 23, 2018 at 7:51 pm GMT
@for-the-record

Most likely you've already read this book, but I'll add a link to it for those who haven't:

"George Bush : the unauthorized biography" – Link to Archive.org

Indeed, what a tangled web they've woven and how we're ff-ing stuck in it

Scipio Africanus , July 23, 2018 at 7:52 pm GMT
Mr. Unz,

The intellectually curious know the problem of Jewish, power, influence , propaganda, and subversion. Enlightenment has tremendous value, but the paramount question is how do we stop international Jewish power. The combination of ethnic unity, wealth, media manipulation, high IQ and institutional infiltration creates a formidable deadly opponent. This has been going since the ancient world.

JQ has dire consequences for the very survival of western civilization particularly with mass demographically swamping immigration policies.

What will happen to Jews when the Occident becomes minority majority? Jews will be perceived as just any other white person by minority groups, many of which harbor hatred against Jews. There will be a Chinese world hegemony when the west falls, which will not be good for Jews. The elite Jews need to wake up. Destroying the goyim is not good for them!

Anon [330] Disclaimer , July 23, 2018 at 7:58 pm GMT
@Rurik

Remember that Wilson was blackmailed into WW1 by Sam Untermeyer Zionist and big shareholder in Standard Oil

He was also the kind of do gooder Puritan who causes so many problems in the world

Wizard of Oz , July 23, 2018 at 8:00 pm GMT
@Jon Halpenny

Isn't Gallipoli – and the original attempt to send warships through the Bosporus – explicable as
1. An attempt to knock a German ally out of the war
2. Open an ice free supply route to Russia (and maybe an export route for Russian grain?)?

Cyrano , July 23, 2018 at 8:09 pm GMT
If anybody ever benefited from the Bolshevik revolution – it was the workers in the west, primarily US.

The October revolution forced the capitalists to make concessions to the working class that they wouldn't have otherwise made simply out of their good natured kind hearts.

If the Jews were so diabolical to unleash the Bolshevik revolution because of sinister motives only, how come that they didn't predict that it's going to hurt their profit margins in the US – via increased wages and benefits that they were forced to pay in order to keep the working class calm – out of fear that the Bolshevik revolution might have given them some ideas about conducting feasibility study of staging a copycat revolution.

Wizard of Oz , July 23, 2018 at 8:21 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

If actually said it counts for some fraction of one per cent of the needed evidence. That is true, in particular, because it suggests no knowledge of Balfour the man. I recall a vignette (here's another tiny fractional piece of evidence) from an essay by Leonard Woolf (Virginia Woolf's v clever husband) in an essay where he describes Balfour in committee in 1915 receiving a note, pausing for just a moment, then continuing "as I was saying, in the matter of an additional farthing .". The note told him of the sinking of the Lusitania. At least my informants of what was said on the occasion of news being received of, first, the invasion of the Soviet Union and, second, Pearl Harbour, reported "we've won the war" as the enthusiastic expression on both occasions.

I commend resurrection of Leonard Woolf's writings as a pleasure awaiting Ron and like minded fossickers for small nuggets (with hopes of greater ones).

Anonymous [199] Disclaimer , July 23, 2018 at 8:22 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

Destabilize might not be quite the word for it. Pulverize and dilute the various indigenous national identities? Yes.

One other related maneuver that is underway is that the Jews are giving Muslims territory in Europe and the United States in exchange for the Jews' having taken Palestine. It's a form of pacification, of letting the pressure out. It distracts the Muslims with the fruits of capitalism and other material wealth and political power (in Europe and US). It also clears potentially resistant young men out of Israel's neighborhood. I suppose one could also view it as payment of compensatory damages.

Allan , July 23, 2018 at 8:25 pm GMT
@Rurik

Let he who is without hypocrisy cast the first damn .

It's by the way that I agree with your summary of the bust out phase of the life of the crime organization established through the supposedly "Russian Revolution":

Echoes of the ((("Russian"))) oligarchs that looted the wealth and resources of the Russian people following the generations of Jewish Bolshevik genocide and slavery of the Russian people.

So, are not reparations owed to Russians? If so, they must not be financed by further extractions from the Germans, who appear to be the victims of a set up for a holocaust (Dresden, etc.) after a suitable pretext had been identified by the same cabal, more or less, who financed and plotted the 1905 & 1917 insurrections in Russia. Adequate compensation must include unconditional surrender of any and all ownership and control over the many "Holocaust" museums that have been foisted upon us in order to cripple us with guilt and to distract us from another painful pravda about Jewish history.

The painful truth about the Holocaust is basically just this: Any holocaust of Jews in Europe during the 1940′s can be explained correctly as an own goal brought about by compassionate activists such as Hugo Preuß. He and others labored for generations to plunge Europe into chaos again and again and now again with the movement to abolish border controls and to relocate to Europe tens of millions of Muhammadists, subsaharans Africans, and other aliens.

Sparkon , July 23, 2018 at 8:43 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

I must add that, though WWI was set up by GB, France and the tsar, I never found evidence that jews were involved in the conspiracy.

T he evidence is there already by 1903 in Zionist co-founder Max Nordau's stirring speech that year to Zionists in Paris:

Litman Rosenthal:

"About a month later [~Sept. 1903] I went on a business trip to France. On my way to Lyons I stopped in Paris, and there I visited, as usual, our Zionist friends. One of them told me that this very same evening Dr. Nordau was scheduled to speak about the Sixth Congress"
[...]
"When we reached the hall in the evening we found it filled to overflowing and all were waiting impatiently for the great master, Nordau, who, on entering, received a tremendous ovation. But Nordau, without paying heed to the applause showered upon him, began his speech immediately, and said:"

'You all came here with a question burning in your hearts and trembling on your lips, and the question is, indeed, a great one, and of vital importance. I am willing to answer it. What you want to ask is: How could I -- I who was one of those who formulated the Basle program -- how could I dare to speak in favor of the English proposition concerning Uganda, how could Herzl as well as I betray our ideal of Palestine '

"The whole assembly was under the spell of Nordau's beautiful, truly poetic and exalted diction, and his exquisite, musical French delighted the hearers with an almost sensual pleasure. For a few seconds the speaker paused, and the public, absolutely intoxicated by his splendid oratory, applauded frantically. But soon Nordau asked for silence and continued":

'Now this great progressive world power, England, has after the pogroms of Kishineff, in token of her sympathy with our poor people, offered through the Zionist Congress the autonomous colony of Uganda to the Jewish nation. Of course, Uganda is in Africa, and Africa is not Zion and never will be Zion.'
[...]
' let me tell you the following words as if I were showing you the rungs of a ladder leading upward and upward: Herzl, The Zionist Congress, the English Uganda proposition, the future world war, the peace conference where with the help of England a free and Jewish Palestine will be created.'

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_International_Jew/Volume_1/Chapter_14

Them Guys , July 23, 2018 at 8:52 pm GMT
@Johnnie Walker Read

Yes, I found that book as a free read online and read it. It is amazing how purely evil and so filled with hatred those jewish Bolshevik torturers and mass murderers actually were/are.

Every description in that book of the many, many ways jews invented for use as a torture reminds one of Apache Indians of the 1800′s era. There is simply No method of torture or murderous deaths, them bolshie jews will not do. One thing certain is, whoever reads that book better have a strong stomach, and even the strongest of men will be found wiping a few eye tears away now and then, since the abject brutality and totally Inhuman tortures gleefully done border on being unspeakable.

And with No other valid reason to be found, other than a true explaination of how, be it Talmudic religion, or other dna traits, or some form insanity present within jewry in general, folks better trained medically than me can debate But the best reasons when all is added up is simply jews are jews and its Bad for all non jews period. Far too many historical evidences and eras seem to validate that regardless of which nation jews choose to infiltrate in large numbers, so that it then becomes the Next New Host Nation of 1/2 of more of international worldwide jewry. Very evil and immoral and unethical situations develop and develop to the proverbial, Inth-degree every damn time.

And to date about the only remedy has been for every host nation to give jewry the Big Boot Out.

At least now, todays usa host nation, none can claim jews still have zero places to call home eh.

Israel's big enough to fit them all within it. And you can bet all you own, and win the bet, if you bet that within two seconds flat of usa jewry finds out of a plan to get jewry out of America. Most American dwelling jews will screech and squak and holler as if a swine pig stuck with a dagger knife.

All of their constant talk of how jews so so love israel, how they Own it, and even most every athiest jew when asked "Why so, a right to return eh jewboy"? Those athiests with out skipping a beat, will answer back "Oh thats due to G-d (god) Gave land of israel to Us jews, see"! Indeed that same god they reject and refuse to believe even exists, somehow Gave jews lands in palestine like a real estate agent at centruy-21 real estate co. eh. And soon as they get wind of an exit agenda, a thousand excuses to why cannot go live in israel shall surface and do so fast. Benjamin Franklin, founding father, said it best. They are Paristies and like Vampires a jew can't live off another vampire. Nor a flea live off of another flea They always require a Host Body aka Nation to keep 1/2 of jewry in so to provide for the other 1/2 thru too many corrput ways and means to list.

Yet no other method of fixing a host nation works. How long has america left before even that option wont work. It sure be real swell if for a change jewry as a whole would finally just act like Mr. Ron Unz, and be willing to admit to facts and truths without any baggage of talmudic fantasy and jewy jewish fables eh I wont hold my breath for such, and expect that unless jews are who make first moves to fix what they fucked up, it will not end good for anyone involved.

Cannot help but wonder at times what if? What If, about 800 or so years ago when some Pope and european Kings agreed to hunt down and find and Burn every talmud scrolls or copies etc to be found What if they succeded and located every single one, by now 800 yrs later maybe jewry would have assimilated much better and none of this would be reality.

However for now the real main reality is Yes usa Is latest Host nation, Yes many maybe most jews within usa are grand kids of orig russian bolsheviks, and so far many of them have shown their true colors and leave no secret that america is Next up to play role russian whites and christians suffered so badly under .Read that book, see for yourself what a real fully Depraved and pure evil jewish mind can conjur up when it comes to vicious unspeakable tortures, and mass murderous venomous hatred for the "other" aka all non jews HINT: Forget MSM claims of how bad a torture Water Boarding is!..Yes it too sounds not too nice to experience, but compared to 1917 and onwards Russia and jewsih invented methods of tortures and mass deaths, no comparison at all.

Many jews and their Shabboz goy defenders will likely claim such an honest book need be Banned due to it creates more jew haters Well maybe so eh But maybe also after you read of those vile evil methods, maybe some jews deserve being hated so badly. That alone should cause naysayer jews and shabboz goys to divert atten To jews and seek a rapid and lasting jew-fix, before too many more folks read the book perhaps.

Jon Halpenny , July 23, 2018 at 9:27 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

Both of the reasons you give are valid in their own right. But it is a fact that the British had given an assurance to hand Constantinople over to the Russians shortly before they began the Gallipoli Campaign. If the campaign had succeeded Russia would have got Constantinople and the Straits.

refl , July 23, 2018 at 9:34 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

According to the site I mentioned above (firstworldwarhiddenhistory), the British attacked Gallipoli to keep Russia in the war until the coming collapse of Germany and Russia – hard to swallow but the authors make quite a compelling case. I do not want to unnerve anyone but the site by these two Scots is certainly worth a mention on tis forum.

Che Guava , July 23, 2018 at 9:38 pm GMT
@Verymuchalive

Aah, the myth of etternal Japan. In the fifth century, the nobility was 60% Korean, 20% Chinese, and 20% native. After that brief period, thie Shogunates were in power. The Mongol invasion was, indeed, unsuccessful, but enough landed and wrought havoc in Kyushu, the Kamakura Shogunate fell as a result. That it never happened (they were all blown away by divine winds), is simply a confection for the (unfortunately, still) occupying Americans.

In southern Kyushu, ynu can still see populations of Mongolian ponies, and markers of the sites of landings and battles. One reason the right hates the current emperor is that he once acknowledged his Korean ancestry.

Kratoklastes , July 23, 2018 at 10:35 pm GMT
@Anarcho-Supremacist

People who say things like " [X] has been debunked " without giving any evidence of the debunking of [X], debunk themselves.

It takes about ten seconds to buttress a claim of 'debunking' by typing in a reference to the work that supposedly does the debunking.

I know this isn't a graduate seminar or a think-tank tea-room, but given Unz's preparedness to disclose his previous naïveté (and the process by which the scales fell from his eyes), it would be good form to make counter-arguments rather than what amounts to a content-free tweet.

Give Unz some credit: he has the training to discriminate between sources, and seems genuinely committed to figuring out what things are true and what are not. To assert that his process is retarded (which is what you're doing by dismissing a source so flippantly), without any obligation to buttress your assertion, makes you immediately suspect.

James N. Kennett , July 23, 2018 at 11:19 pm GMT
@Heros

This Pravda article was once again a frustrating read because it once again tries to dance around difficult issues while minimizing offense to jews.

When presenting controversial material, IMHO it is best to minimize offense to everyone, so that the material can speak for itself. Do not give one's opponents an excuse to label the article as anti-semitic or anti anything else. Do not give them an excuse to avoid thinking about the subject matter. Present the facts.

I think the American Pravda series strikes the right tone, and each article surprises me with vital historical information that has been memory-holed.

gmachine1729 , Website July 23, 2018 at 11:20 pm GMT
@Scipio Africanus

I don't think the West will fall, but it will certainly weaken relative to China and East Asia at large. I feel like the Chinese are the most able to see through Jewish shenanigans and also most politically able to openly talk about it.

There is a benefit from being half isolated from Western culture. It's perfectly okay in China to be like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yang_Rui#Controversy . This is coming from the host of the most prominent English news show of CCTV, China's virtual TV monopoly.

Chinese businessmen can openly say that Jews are the types to do whatever they can to get ahead, scruples be damned.

I used to much admire, to a great extent blindly, Jewish achievement, especially in science. I still do to a great extent. But now I think they are overrated, especially in terms of raw ability. It's the combination of higher raw ability and being a privileged minority group within elite Western culture. Nowadays, in the US it's the East Asian kids winning the 100% meritocratic contests at the high school level, where there is basically zero, human promotion subjective factor. Moreover, from the 40s on, the Japanese more or less held their own vis-a-vis the Jews in theoretical physics.

Yukawa, Tomonaga, Nambu, Maskawa, Kobayashi all won Nobel, and their work arguably exceeded that of the typical physics theory Nobel, as there was still some bias in the committee, against Soviets, against Japanese.

The more mathematical and theoretical and loaded on individual brilliance the field, the better East Asians have done. My non-Jewish white friend who placed at the top in elite math contests shocked me by suggesting that in terms of biological intelligence, East Asians may actually be higher than Jews are.

Colin Wright , Website July 23, 2018 at 11:27 pm GMT
@Cyrano

' If anybody ever benefited from the Bolshevik revolution – it was the workers in the west, primarily US.

The October revolution forced the capitalists to make concessions to the working class that they wouldn't have otherwise made simply out of their good natured kind hearts '

I don't think so. When opportunity afforded, capitalists would be just has hard-hearted and exploitative as ever: see Union Carbide knowingly virtually sentencing workers desperate for employment to death by having them drill a tunnel through dry silica at the height of the Great Depression.

On the other hand, long-term, the restriction on immigration drove wages up; Archie Bunker was able to afford his own house and a stay-at-home wife on a forklift driver's salary, and that wasn't a TV fantasy. By 1970, it was a reality -- and American workers were hardly vulnerable to Communist propaganda.

But opening up the floodgates to immigration did away with that. Now we're back to masses of desperate, suitably docile workers.

It's immigration, not fear of communism. Reduce the supply of labor; conditions for the working man improve. Increase the supply of labor; they decline. This has been true since at least the Enclosure movement.

Kratoklastes , July 23, 2018 at 11:30 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

Why do you think that naming a wing after oneself in a museum or university or hospital, is an expression of ' gratitude '? It's an expression of economic power , and is self-serving.

"Charity vampires" are a thing: they're the people who draw a $500k/yr salary, and first-class travel and accom, from the proceeds of earnest-but-naïve 'chuggers' who collect loose change from earnest-but-naïve citizens.

The notion that $2500-a-plate (and upwards) 'charity dinners/galas/events' exist to raise money for 'charity', is marketing aimed at rubes. Such events exist in order for people to rub shoulders with each other, in tax-deductible ways that specifically exclude hoi polloi (because the price of entry is far too high).

The only thing more likely to fund the lives of an economic vampire than a self-styled 'charity', is a self-styled 'foundation'.

(Note – this is all completely independent of the ethnocultural background of the vampire in question: Gentile, Joo, and Musselman too there are parasitic sociopaths in all human societies, and they find the easiest grifts – 'charity' and politics chief among them).

German_reader , July 23, 2018 at 11:32 pm GMT
@iffen

Claiming that a New York banker financed communist revolutionaries seems rather implausible to me all the more so at a time when Czarism had already been overthrown and legal discrimination against bourgeois Jews like Schiff had just been removed by the new liberal government in Russia.

The situation in 1917 was very unlike that in 1904/05, and supporting the Bolsheviks would have been much more extreme than supporting Japan (which was then a British ally; public opinion in the US and Britian had been pro-Japan during the Russo-Japanese war).

I can't think of any plausible reason why Schiff would have supported the Bolsheviks (apart from completely irrational hatred of Russia or did he want to support his old home country Germany in WW1 and help Russia knock out of the war?). If he had wanted to make Russia ripe for exploitation by Jewish finance as Unz seems to insinuate with his vague hints about "Jewish exploitation", there surely would have been more fitting ways than supporting communist revolution.

But yes, I suppose expecting an answer to those questions here is probably futile.

ploni almoni , July 23, 2018 at 11:34 pm GMT
@German_reader

Money. They paid him back plus.

[Jul 23, 2018] Neoliberalism has brought out the worst in us by Paul Verhaeghe

Not only "An economic system that rewards psychopathic personality traits has changed our ethics and our personalities", it crushes the will to resist presenting psychopathic dictate in forms that make it difficult. Such as performance reviews waterboarding or putting individual in the way too complex and self-contradictory Web of regulations.
Notable quotes:
"... An economic system that rewards psychopathic personality traits has changed our ethics and our personalities. ..."
"... Bullying used to be confined to schools; now it is a common feature of the workplace. This is a typical symptom of the impotent venting their frustration on the weak – in psychology it's known as displaced aggression. There is a buried sense of fear, ranging from performance anxiety to a broader social fear of the threatening other. ..."
"... Constant evaluations at work cause a decline in autonomy and a growing dependence on external, often shifting, norms. This results in what the sociologist Richard Sennett has aptly described as the "infantilisation of the workers". Adults display childish outbursts of temper and are jealous about trivialities ("She got a new office chair and I didn't"), tell white lies, resort to deceit, delight in the downfall of others and cherish petty feelings of revenge. This is the consequence of a system that prevents people from thinking independently and that fails to treat employees as adults. ..."
"... Our society constantly proclaims that anyone can make it if they just try hard enough, all the while reinforcing privilege and putting increasing pressure on its overstretched and exhausted citizens. An increasing number of people fail, feeling humiliated, guilty and ashamed. We are forever told that we are freer to choose the course of our lives than ever before, but the freedom to choose outside the success narrative is limited. Furthermore, those who fail are deemed to be losers or scroungers, taking advantage of our social security system. ..."
"... The current economic system is bringing out the worst in us. ..."
Jul 23, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

An economic system that rewards psychopathic personality traits has changed our ethics and our personalities.

Thirty years of neoliberalism, free-market forces and privatisation have taken their toll, as relentless pressure to achieve has become normative. If you're reading this sceptically, I put this simple statement to you: meritocratic neoliberalism favours certain personality traits and penalises others.

There are certain ideal characteristics needed to make a career today. The first is articulateness, the aim being to win over as many people as possible. Contact can be superficial, but since this applies to most human interaction nowadays, this won't really be noticed.

It's important to be able to talk up your own capacities as much as you can – you know a lot of people, you've got plenty of experience under your belt and you recently completed a major project. Later, people will find out that this was mostly hot air, but the fact that they were initially fooled is down to another personality trait: you can lie convincingly and feel little guilt. That's why you never take responsibility for your own behaviour.

On top of all this, you are flexible and impulsive, always on the lookout for new stimuli and challenges. In practice, this leads to risky behaviour, but never mind, it won't be you who has to pick up the pieces. The source of inspiration for this list? The psychopathy checklist by Robert Hare , the best-known specialist on psychopathy today.

This description is, of course, a caricature taken to extremes. Nevertheless, the financial crisis illustrated at a macro-social level (for example, in the conflicts between eurozone countries) what a neoliberal meritocracy does to people. Solidarity becomes an expensive luxury and makes way for temporary alliances, the main preoccupation always being to extract more profit from the situation than your competition. Social ties with colleagues weaken, as does emotional commitment to the enterprise or organisation.

Bullying used to be confined to schools; now it is a common feature of the workplace. This is a typical symptom of the impotent venting their frustration on the weak – in psychology it's known as displaced aggression. There is a buried sense of fear, ranging from performance anxiety to a broader social fear of the threatening other.

Constant evaluations at work cause a decline in autonomy and a growing dependence on external, often shifting, norms. This results in what the sociologist Richard Sennett has aptly described as the "infantilisation of the workers". Adults display childish outbursts of temper and are jealous about trivialities ("She got a new office chair and I didn't"), tell white lies, resort to deceit, delight in the downfall of others and cherish petty feelings of revenge. This is the consequence of a system that prevents people from thinking independently and that fails to treat employees as adults.

More important, though, is the serious damage to people's self-respect. Self-respect largely depends on the recognition that we receive from the other, as thinkers from Hegel to Lacan have shown. Sennett comes to a similar conclusion when he sees the main question for employees these days as being "Who needs me?" For a growing group of people, the answer is: no one.

Our society constantly proclaims that anyone can make it if they just try hard enough, all the while reinforcing privilege and putting increasing pressure on its overstretched and exhausted citizens. An increasing number of people fail, feeling humiliated, guilty and ashamed. We are forever told that we are freer to choose the course of our lives than ever before, but the freedom to choose outside the success narrative is limited. Furthermore, those who fail are deemed to be losers or scroungers, taking advantage of our social security system.

A neoliberal meritocracy would have us believe that success depends on individual effort and talents, meaning responsibility lies entirely with the individual and authorities should give people as much freedom as possible to achieve this goal. For those who believe in the fairytale of unrestricted choice, self-government and self-management are the pre-eminent political messages, especially if they appear to promise freedom. Along with the idea of the perfectible individual, the freedom we perceive ourselves as having in the west is the greatest untruth of this day and age.

The sociologist Zygmunt Bauman neatly summarised the paradox of our era as: "Never have we been so free. Never have we felt so powerless." We are indeed freer than before, in the sense that we can criticise religion, take advantage of the new laissez-faire attitude to sex and support any political movement we like. We can do all these things because they no longer have any significance – freedom of this kind is prompted by indifference. Yet, on the other hand, our daily lives have become a constant battle against a bureaucracy that would make Kafka weak at the knees. There are regulations about everything, from the salt content of bread to urban poultry-keeping.

Our presumed freedom is tied to one central condition: we must be successful – that is, "make" something of ourselves. You don't need to look far for examples. A highly skilled individual who puts parenting before their career comes in for criticism. A person with a good job who turns down a promotion to invest more time in other things is seen as crazy – unless those other things ensure success. A young woman who wants to become a primary school teacher is told by her parents that she should start off by getting a master's degree in economics – a primary school teacher, whatever can she be thinking of?

There are constant laments about the so-called loss of norms and values in our culture. Yet our norms and values make up an integral and essential part of our identity. So they cannot be lost, only changed. And that is precisely what has happened: a changed economy reflects changed ethics and brings about changed identity. The current economic system is bringing out the worst in us.

tocq1 , 7 Aug 2014 22:21

Panic attacks, anxiety attacks, nervous breakdowns, depression, suicidal thoughts alienation, cancers, withdrawal are all symptoms of the de-humanizing aspects of a market-driven life. In its worst forms it manifests periodically in mass shootings at strangers. So what do people do to cope? Drugs, pain killers, shrinks, alcohol, potato chips and soda. They then develop obesity, diabetes and heart diseases and cancers. How to save a human species terminally intoxicated with technology and enslaved by the market while the inner spirit is running empty may not be possible given the advanced nature of the disease.
Gary Walker -> NotForTurning , 7 Aug 2014 19:59
...what?
You fail to really acknowledge that time and again we've failed to exercise constrain within the capitalist models. The the meritorious are often inadequately rewarded - when any person in work cannot afford to home and feed themselves and their family then a reasonable balance has not been struck - in that sense at no time in history has capitalism functioned adequately.
To suggest that socialism is anti-human is to ignore how and why as a species we formed societies at all, we come together precisely because there is a mutual benefit in so doing; to help another is to help oneself - the model itself fails to operate in practice for the same reason that capitalism does - the greed of the power holder.

You reserve your sharpest barbs for socialism, but at least within the socialist agenda there is a commitment to the protection of the citizen, whoever they are, even the 'unmerited' as you describe them - a capitalist's paraphrase for 'those that create no value'.

The socialist at least recognises that whilst the parent may be 'unmerited' their dependants should be entitled to receive equality of opportunity and protection from the 'law-of-the-jungle' i.e., the greed of others.

The ability to generate wealth, simply by already having wealth and therefore being able to thrive off the labour of others carries little merit as far as I can tell and does indeed create the soul-crushing command-and-control empires of the capitalism that millions around the world experience daily.

zii000 , 7 Aug 2014 18:25
Neoliberalism is indeed a huge self-serving con and ironically the Thatcher/Regan doctrine which set out to break the status quo and free the economy from the old elitist guard has had exactly the opposite effect.
camllin , 7 Aug 2014 17:58
Capitalism cannot differentiate between honest competition and cheating. Since humans will cheat to win, capitalism has become survival of the worst not the best.
TheBBG , 7 Aug 2014 17:51
The bottom line is the basic human condition prizes food, shelter, sex, and then goes directly to greed in most modern societies. It was not always that way, and is not that way in ever fewer societies. As it is, greed makes the world go around.

In capitalistic societies greed has been fed by business and commerce; in communist societies it has been "some pigs are more equal then others"; and in dictatorships or true monarchies (or the Australian Liberal Party) there is the born to rule mentality where there are rulers and serfs.

Jon Allan , 7 Aug 2014 17:44
Nobody ever seems to address the paradox of the notion of an absolute free market: that within a free market, those who can have the freedom to exploit do exploit, thereby thus eliminating the freedom of the exploited, which thence paradoxically negates the absoluteness of the free market. No absolute freedom truly exist in a free market.

As such, the free market is pipe dream - a con - to eliminate regulations and create economic freedoms only where they benefit the elite. The free market does not exist, is impossible, and therefore should cease to be held as the harbinger of a progressive socio economic reality.

If we are to accept the Christian assumption that we, humans, are all self-serving and acquisitive, then we must, therefore, negate the possibility of an absolutely "free" market, since exploitation is a naturally occurring byproduct of weak-strong interactions. Exploitation negates freedom, and therefore, it must be our reality, as it is in all peoples' best interests, to accept directly democratic regulations as the keystone to any market.

Colin Bennett , 7 Aug 2014 17:06
It sounds very like the Marxist critique of capital. And similarly, points to real problems, but doesn't seek evidence for why such a sick situation not only persists, but is so popular - except by denigrating 'the masses'.

Surely what is particular about our time, about industrialisation generally, is the fragmenting of long term social structures, and orientation around the individual alone. It seems to me the problem of our times is redeveloping social structures which balance the individual and the socials selves, as all not merely stable but thriving happy creative societies, have always done.

pinkrobbo -> Jim Greer , 7 Aug 2014 16:06
Their propaganda is the same- an obsessive hatred of the state in any form, a semi-religious belief in the power of the individual operating in the free-market to solve humanity's ills.

Granted, they aren't social libertarians, but then, in the US, libertarians don't seem to be either.

makingtime -> YoungPete , 7 Aug 2014 13:28

Pretty typical that the assumption is the Marx "nailed it" and any dissenters are just "scared".


I'm scared by it too, as I said, it's a sensible fear of change. The question remains. What if Marx's analysis, just the analysis, is broadly correct? What if markets really are the road to ruination of our planet, morality and collective welfare in roughly the way that he explained?

It's not a trivial question, and clearly the current economic orthodoxy has failed to explain some recent little problems we've been having, while Marx explains how these problems are structurally embedded and only to be expected. It is intellectual cowardice to compulsively avoid this, in my view. Better minds than ours have struggled with it.

So beware of the fallacious argument from authority - 'You are stupid while I am axiomatically very clever, because I say so, hence I must be correct and you must shut it.' It goes nowhere useful, though we are all prone to employing it.

But it is not 'sixth form' thinking, surely, to consider these problems as being worth thinking about in a modern context. It is a plain fact that Stalinism didn't work as planned. We know it, but it doesn't make the problems it was intended to solve disappear to say so.

If you believe human nature can be changed by enforcing your interpretation of Marx's road to human freedom (a quasi-religious goal) you condemn millions to starvation, slaughter, gulags, misery etc.


Please read what I actually wrote about that. I'm not remotely quasi-religious, nor do I seek to enforce anything. My intention is only to expose a particularly damaging mythology. The extent of my crimes is persuasion as a prelude to consensual change before necessity really bites us all.

Markets conjure up the exact forms of misery you describe. Totalitarians of the right are highly undesirable too. I am against totalitarians, as are you, but an admirer of Marx's work. Do I fit into your simplistic categories? Does anyone? The freedoms we are permitted serve the market before they serve people. Markets are a social construct, as is capital, that we can choose to modify or squash. A child starving in a slum for lack of competitiveness, for its inability to serve the interests of capital, is less abstract perhaps.

Richard McDonough , 7 Aug 2014 13:20
Clintons are neoliberalss and about to be embraced by the neocons in foreign policy.
Reagan lives in a pan suit.
Serpentsarecreeps , 7 Aug 2014 12:15
The thing about selfishness and a brutal form of dog eat dog capitalism.

You see, it is a truth axiomatic that we human beings, as all living beings, are fundamentally selfish. We have to be in order to survive, and excel, and advance and perpetuate.

It is not theory but hard biology. You breathe for yourself, eat for yourself, love for yourself, have a family for yourself and so on. People are most affected and hurt if something happens to something or someone who means something to them personally. This is why concepts such as religion and nationality have worked so well, and will continue to even if they evolve in different ways, for they tap into a person's conception of theirself. Of their identity, of their self-definition. People tend to feel worse if something bad happens to someone they know than to a stranger; people tend to feel less bad when something happens to a cockroach than to a dog, simply because we relate better to dogs than to insects...So even our compassion is selfish after a fashion.

Capitalism and Socialism are two ends of the the same human spectrum of innate and hardwired selfishness. One stresses on the individual and the other on the larger group. It's always going to be hard to find the right balance because when you vest excessive power in any selfish ideology, it will begin to eat into the other type of selfishness..

The world revolves around competing selfishnesses...

yourmiddleclassfarce , 7 Aug 2014 11:46
The global economy is based upon wasting lives and material resources.

Designer landfill is no longer an option and neo-liberalism, which places importance of the invention called money over that of people (which is a dehumanising process), was never an option.

It is time for the neo-liberal fake politicians (that is 99.99% of them) to take up politics.

It really is, as ever since it is only another word for change, time for revolution.

Serpentsarecreeps , 7 Aug 2014 11:34
Excellent article by one of my favourite writers on this site! :)
steverandomno -> richterscalemadness , 7 Aug 2014 11:32

By extension, moving away from a system the shuns those who 'fail' people would be emotionally better off, and with the removal of the constant assessment and individualistic competition, people may feel better able to relate to one another. This would imply that healthy communities would be more likely to flourish, as people would be less likely to ignore those on lower income or of 'lower status'.

Move to what system? What system would achieve this?

Whether you agree or not, it is pretty clear what was being said.

Of course it's clear. George and his followers dislike market based systems. It couldn't be clearer. Even when the subject has little to do with the market, George and his followers always blame it for everything that is wrong with this world. That's pretty much the whole point of this article.

What's never clear is what alternative George and his followers propose that wouldn't result in all of the same flaws that accompany market driven systems. How can they be so sure some of those problems won't be worse? They always seem a bit sketchy, which is remarkable given the furor with which they relentlessly critique the market. We are told of alternatives concepts painted in the broadest of brushes, rich with abstract intangible idealism, but lacking in any pragmatism. We are invited to consider the whole exercise simply as academically self-indulgent navel gazing by the priviledged overeducated minority that comprise much of the Guardian's readership. It's quite disappointing. This article correctly details much of the discontent in the world. But this isn't a revelation. Where are the concrete ideas that can actualy be implemented now?
frontalcortexes at least makes a stab at something a bit more practicle than a 17 paragraph esoteric essay citing ancient Greek.

LastNameOnTheShelf , 7 Aug 2014 11:27
One of the worst thing is that the winners in the market race are showered with things which are fundamentally valueless and far in excess of what they could consume if they weren't, while bare necessities are withheld from the losers.
fractals -> Guardiansofwhatnow , 7 Aug 2014 11:12
of course, the nature of 'the market' means that all of our ipads and television sets will be obsolete within a year or 2.

[Jul 23, 2018] Sick of this market-driven world You should be too by George Monbiot

Notable quotes:
"... The workplace has been overwhelmed by a mad, Kafkaesque infrastructure of assessments, monitoring, measuring, surveillance and audits, centrally directed and rigidly planned, whose purpose is to reward the winners and punish the losers ..."
"... The same forces afflict those who can't find work. They must now contend, alongside the other humiliations of unemployment, with a whole new level of snooping and monitoring. All this, Verhaeghe points out, is fundamental to the neoliberal model, which everywhere insists on comparison, evaluation and quantification. We find ourselves technically free but powerless. Whether in work or out of work, we must live by the same rules or perish. All the major political parties promote them, so we have no political power either. In the name of autonomy and freedom we have ended up controlled by a grinding, faceless bureaucracy. ..."
Jul 23, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

I was prompted to write it by a remarkable book, just published in English, by a Belgian professor of psychoanalysis, Paul Verhaeghe. What About Me? The Struggle for Identity in a Market-Based Society is one of those books that, by making connections between apparently distinct phenomena, permits sudden new insights into what is happening to us and why.

We are social animals, Verhaeghe argues, and our identities are shaped by the norms and values we absorb from other people. Every society defines and shapes its own normality – and its own abnormality – according to dominant narratives, and seeks either to make people comply or to exclude them if they don't.

Today the dominant narrative is that of market fundamentalism, widely known in Europe as neoliberalism. The story it tells is that the market can resolve almost all social, economic and political problems. The less the state regulates and taxes us, the better off we will be. Public services should be privatised, public spending should be cut, and business should be freed from social control. In countries such as the UK and the US, this story has shaped our norms and values for around 35 years: since Thatcher and Reagan came to power. It is rapidly colonising the rest of the world.

Verhaeghe points out that neoliberalism draws on the ancient Greek idea that our ethics are innate (and governed by a state of nature it calls the market) and on the Christian idea that humankind is inherently selfish and acquisitive. Rather than seeking to suppress these characteristics, neoliberalism celebrates them: it claims that unrestricted competition, driven by self-interest, leads to innovation and economic growth, enhancing the welfare of all.

At the heart of this story is the notion of merit. Untrammelled competition rewards people who have talent, work hard, and innovate. It breaks down hierarchies and creates a world of opportunity and mobility.

The reality is rather different. Even at the beginning of the process, when markets are first deregulated, we do not start with equal opportunities. Some people are a long way down the track before the starting gun is fired. This is how the Russian oligarchs managed to acquire such wealth when the Soviet Union broke up. They weren't, on the whole, the most talented, hardworking or innovative people, but those with the fewest scruples, the most thugs, and the best contacts – often in the KGB.

Even when outcomes are based on talent and hard work, they don't stay that way for long. Once the first generation of liberated entrepreneurs has made its money, the initial meritocracy is replaced by a new elite, which insulates its children from competition by inheritance and the best education money can buy. Where market fundamentalism has been most fiercely applied – in countries like the US and UK – social mobility has greatly declined .

If neoliberalism was anything other than a self-serving con, whose gurus and thinktanks were financed from the beginning by some of the world's richest people (the US multimillionaires Coors, Olin, Scaife, Pew and others), its apostles would have demanded, as a precondition for a society based on merit, that no one should start life with the unfair advantage of inherited wealth or economically determined education. But they never believed in their own doctrine. Enterprise, as a result, quickly gave way to rent.

All this is ignored, and success or failure in the market economy are ascribed solely to the efforts of the individual. The rich are the new righteous; the poor are the new deviants, who have failed both economically and morally and are now classified as social parasites.

The market was meant to emancipate us, offering autonomy and freedom. Instead it has delivered atomisation and loneliness.

The workplace has been overwhelmed by a mad, Kafkaesque infrastructure of assessments, monitoring, measuring, surveillance and audits, centrally directed and rigidly planned, whose purpose is to reward the winners and punish the losers . It destroys autonomy, enterprise, innovation and loyalty, and breeds frustration, envy and fear. Through a magnificent paradox, it has led to the revival of a grand old Soviet tradition known in Russian as tufta . It means falsification of statistics to meet the diktats of unaccountable power.

The same forces afflict those who can't find work. They must now contend, alongside the other humiliations of unemployment, with a whole new level of snooping and monitoring. All this, Verhaeghe points out, is fundamental to the neoliberal model, which everywhere insists on comparison, evaluation and quantification. We find ourselves technically free but powerless. Whether in work or out of work, we must live by the same rules or perish. All the major political parties promote them, so we have no political power either. In the name of autonomy and freedom we have ended up controlled by a grinding, faceless bureaucracy.

These shifts have been accompanied, Verhaeghe writes, by a spectacular rise in certain psychiatric conditions: self-harm, eating disorders, depression and personality disorders.

Of the personality disorders, the most common are performance anxiety and social phobia: both of which reflect a fear of other people, who are perceived as both evaluators and competitors – the only roles for society that market fundamentalism admits. Depression and loneliness plague us.

The infantilising diktats of the workplace destroy our self-respect. Those who end up at the bottom of the pile are assailed by guilt and shame. The self-attribution fallacy cuts both ways: just as we congratulate ourselves for our success, we blame ourselves for our failure, even if we have little to do with it .

So, if you don't fit in, if you feel at odds with the world, if your identity is troubled and frayed, if you feel lost and ashamed – it could be because you have retained the human values you were supposed to have discarded. You are a deviant. Be proud.

[Jul 23, 2018] Neoliberalism glorifies inequality

Notable quotes:
"... Neoliberalism sees competition as the defining characteristic of human relations. It redefines citizens as consumers, whose democratic choices are best exercised by buying and selling, a process that rewards merit and punishes inefficiency. It maintains that "the market" delivers benefits that could never be achieved by planning. ..."
"... We internalise and reproduce its creeds. The rich persuade themselves that they acquired their wealth through merit, ignoring the advantages – such as education, inheritance and class – that may have helped to secure it. The poor begin to blame themselves for their failures, even when they can do little to change their circumstances. ..."
Jul 23, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Neoliberalism sees competition as the defining characteristic of human relations. It redefines citizens as consumers, whose democratic choices are best exercised by buying and selling, a process that rewards merit and punishes inefficiency. It maintains that "the market" delivers benefits that could never be achieved by planning.

Attempts to limit competition are treated as inimical to liberty. Tax and regulation should be minimised, public services should be privatised. The organisation of labour and collective bargaining by trade unions are portrayed as market distortions that impede the formation of a natural hierarchy of winners and losers. Inequality is recast as virtuous: a reward for utility and a generator of wealth, which trickles down to enrich everyone. Efforts to create a more equal society are both counterproductive and morally corrosive. The market ensures that everyone gets what they deserve.

We internalise and reproduce its creeds. The rich persuade themselves that they acquired their wealth through merit, ignoring the advantages – such as education, inheritance and class – that may have helped to secure it. The poor begin to blame themselves for their failures, even when they can do little to change their circumstances.

Never mind structural unemployment: if you don't have a job it's because you are unenterprising. Never mind the impossible costs of housing: if your credit card is maxed out, you're feckless and improvident. Never mind that your children no longer have a school playing field: if they get fat, it's your fault. In a world governed by competition, those who fall behind become defined and self-defined as losers.

Among the results, as Paul Verhaeghe documents in his book What About Me? are epidemics of self-harm, eating disorders, depression, loneliness, performance anxiety and social phobia. Perhaps it's unsurprising that Britain, in which neoliberal ideology has been most rigorously applied, is the loneliness capital of Europe. We are all neoliberals now.

[Jul 23, 2018] Sic Semper Tyrannis THE BROWDER DOCUMENTARY (by Patrick Armstrong)

Jul 23, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Attached is the URL for the Nekrasov film on Browder. The producer tells me it is an illegal pirate copy but I assured him I would buy a copy if it ever became available in Canada and he seemed to be happy with that. He tells me "There is an upcoming proper release."

Some background. You've all heard the story: Browder hired a smart Moscow lawyer to investigate a crime. Said lawyer, Sergey Magnitskiy, discovers that two policemen and some thieves-in-law have managed to steal a quarter of a billion dollars from the Russian state pretending to be Browder companies. Magnitskiy goes to the police to complain, is arrested, tortured and beaten to death in prison. Browder has been going around the world, telling this story over and over again and getting laws passed to sanction Russians. The story is a very important part of the foundation of the anti-Russian house.

The film-maker Andrey Nekrasov, who has made several anti-Putin documentaries, is attracted to the story, completely believing Browder. The first 30 minutes of the documentary are him interviewing Browder and, through actors, running the movie as Browder says it.

But, he noticed an anomaly in the story: how can six lumpy cops plus truncheons fit into the tiny cell to beat Magnitskiy to death. He starts pulling on that thread; he finds others, pulls on them, and the entire sweater Browder has knitted falls apart.

Very much worth watching because it not only exposes a very important lie, every repetition of which brings us a step closer to becoming radioactive dust, but also does it in a rather thrilling way as the sweater is unravelled. So, apart from anything else, it's a good mystery.

Two things we learn: 1) that everybody who has "investigated" the story has accepted everything Browder has said without the slightest questioning 2) the whole story depends on people being unable to read Russian so that when Browder shows them a document they are unable to see that it doesn't actually say what Browder is telling them it says.

Also note the German "human rights expert" who is uninterested in mere details.

Oh. Magnitskiy was the "the smartest lawyer in Moscow" and specially hired by Browder to investigate; he was actually an accountant who worked for Browder for years.

So, if you watch this, make a mental note to buy it so that the film team get the royalties they deserve.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/lQ3qEwX66pIL/

[Jul 23, 2018] Muslim population of Russia

Jul 23, 2018 | www.unz.com

FKA Max , Website July 22, 2018 at 6:28 pm GMT

@Jon0815

Thanks very much for your feedback. You are correct the Stratfor numbers are all over the place, but they were the best I could find.

It is difficult to find definitive numbers on the actual Russian Muslim population. Here is another data point, which points to a quite significant increase in the Muslim population, from 2008:

Meanwhile, identifying with religions other than Orthodox Christianity was more common among younger Russians (13% among those ages 16-29, 7% among those ages 30-49) than among older Russians (1% among those ages 50-69, 4% among those ages 70 and older). According to the ISSP data, Muslims account for 9% of Russians ages 16-29, 6% of Russians ages 30-49, 1% of those ages 50-69 and 3% of those ages 70 and older.

Source: http://www.pewforum.org/2014/02/10/russians-return-to-religion-but-not-to-church/

The Economist put the Russian Muslim population at about 24-25 million (I added all the populations in the below map together) in 2002:

A Muslim power? It sounds bizarre. But Russia has more Muslims than any other European state (bar Turkey); and the Muslim share of the population is rising fast. The 2002 census found that Russia's Muslims numbered 14.5m , 10% of its total of 145m. In 2005 the foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, put the number of Muslims at 20m . Ravil Gaynutdin, head of Russia's Council of Muftis, talks of 23m , including Azeri and Central Asian migrants.

Source: https://www.economist.com/europe/2007/04/04/a-benign-growth and https://www.quora.com/Do-Russians-know-much-about-Islam

Russian Muslims might be less problematic than Middle-Eastern ones though, since they are probably less inbred, i.e. fewer cousin marriages, and thus likely more intelligent and less clannish, violent and fanatical, etc.

But their higher intelligence could also be an advantage to them and a double-edged sword for the native Russian population if they ever wanted to take over the country, once their numbers have reached critical mass and they are close to a majority in Russia.

Russia's formerly richest man is Muslim, for example:

Alisher Usmanov- $19.6 billion
Vagit Alekperov- $12.3 billion
Suleyman Kerimov- $7.1 billion
Iskander Makhmudov- $6.5 billion

-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslims_in_business#Russia

Andrei Martyanov , Website July 22, 2018 at 8:10 pm GMT
@gmachine1729

I'm about 65% Russian, 25% Lak (Dagestani), and 10% other (mostly Italian, Jewish).

Russian 65% DNA doesn't make one Russian, which is primarily the function of culture.

That Political Economy degree from Berkeley surely is a signal for that. I like humanities. Problem is a lot of US humanities is garbage

Most of them are. We can observe today the results of those "degrees" all over the place -- cognitive dissonances follow and people become hysterical. In general, modern Western "economism" (not all of it) operates of the "profound" assumption that wind blows because trees are moving. Hence Wall Street, "GDP" and virtual economy with consequences of post-modernism and post-industrialism. Per political, so called, "science" -- it is altogether a whole other story. In the West, most people who have some grasp on reality are people primarily from serious academia who dedicated life to a real science and history, and some from military and intelligence -- the rest is a swamp.

Maybe I come across as high V low M

I have no idea what it is.

FKA Max , Website July 22, 2018 at 9:39 pm GMT
@FKA Max

According to the ISSP data, Muslims account for 9% of Russians ages 16-29, 6% of Russians ages 30-49, 1% of those ages 50-69 and 3% of those ages 70 and older.

This is a highly interesting data point. There are more Muslims ages 70 and older in Russia than among those ages 50-69.

What this indicates, in my opinion, is that Russian Muslims not only have more babies than ethnic/native Russians, but that they also live longer.

This is likely due to not drinking alcohol, etc.

So the Russian Muslim population is not only expanding through higher fertility rates, but also because of higher life expectancies.

According to United Nations statistics, the fertility of Russia's Muslims stands at 2.3, much higher than the overall national fertility rate of 1.7.[21]
[...]
Its Muslim population is expected to rise from 16.7 million in 2010 to 18.3 million in 2030. A comparatively robust growth among the Muslim population could be attributed to lifestyle choices like less or no alcoholism and higher rate of reproduction. While the growth rate for the Muslim population in Russia is projected to be 0.6 percent annually over the next two decades, the non-Muslim population is expected to shrink by an average of 0.6 percent annually over the same period.[22] Continuation of TFR differentials across ethnic groups implies long-run shifts in the ethnic composition of the population.

-- https://www.orfonline.org/research/russias-demographic-trajectory-dimensions-and-implications/

[Jul 23, 2018] Did Bernie Sanders break down doors for new US socialist movement by Dave Lindorff

Notable quotes:
"... "democratic socialist," ..."
"... Dave Lindorff is an award-winning US journalist, former Asia correspondent for Business Week, and founder of the collectively-owned journalists' news site ThisCantBeHappening.net. ..."
Jul 23, 2018 | www.rt.com

Socialism as a political force has never had an easy time in the US, a country that mythologizes the go-it-alone entrepreneur and the iconoclastic loner. For a brief time in the period between the two world wars, socialism was popular enough among US workers that American Socialist Party leader Eugene Debs was able to win almost a million votes for president in 1912 (about 6 percent of the popular vote at that time). But after two brutal government anti-red campaigns in the '20s and '50s that included Debs' arrest, the blacklisting of many actors, teachers and journalists in the 1950s on charges of being Communists, and finally decades of government and media propaganda equating socialism with Communism, Bolshevism and Maoism, socialism has had few adherents and little public acceptance among most Americans.

Until now, that is.

Things started to change in late 2015 and the spring of 2016 when the independent US Senator Bernie Sanders, who has long called himself a "democratic socialist," surprised everyone by running a popular grass-roots primary campaign that nearly defeated Hillary Clinton for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. (Many believe hidden favoritism and sabotage by the leadership of the Democratic Party may have stolen that primary from Sanders.)

Now, in part because the Sanders campaign has made socialist ideas like national healthcare and free college education – once not on any Democratic candidate's campaign agenda – suddenly acceptable topics for political discourse, his millions of enthusiastic youthful supporters from that campaign are openly considering socialism as a possible answer to the economic problems they face.

Read more Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrives for a signing of her new book 'What happened' at Barnes & Noble bookstore at Union Square in Manhattan, New York City, U.S., September 12, 2017. © Andrew Kelly Clinton's new book removes all doubt. She still has no idea why she lost

And as those young people, and older folks too, look for answers, more and more candidates are willing to espouse them. And like Ocasio-Cortez and the four socialists who won primaries in Pennsylvania, they are showing that proposing or supporting socialist programs, and even calling oneself a socialist, can be a winning strategy.

One sign that this sudden popularity of socialist politics and ideas is not just a short-time phenomenon is that it's showing up most among younger people, many of whom hadn't shown much interest in politics before. A Harvard University study published in April for example, found that 51 percent of those between the ages of 18-29 disliked capitalism, with a majority preferring socialism as a political system. A year earlier, the conservative magazine National Review wrote with alarm that in the wake of the Sanders campaign, a poll by the conservative American Culture and Faith Institute had found 40 percent of Americans saying they favored socialism over capitalism.

... ./.. ...

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Dave Lindorff is an award-winning US journalist, former Asia correspondent for Business Week, and founder of the collectively-owned journalists' news site ThisCantBeHappening.net.

[Jul 23, 2018] US diplomats act like imperial governors riding roughshod over sovereignty of national governments by John Laughland

Notable quotes:
"... More shocking than Nuland's bad language, however, was what the conversation was about. The US government officials were discussing how to put their men into power in Ukraine - which of the three then opposition factions would dominate, who would take the lead (Arseniy Yatsenyuk) and who would be excluded (Vladimir Klitschko). At the time of this conversation, early February 2014, their enemy Viktor Yanukovych was still president. The leaked recording proved that the US and its Kiev embassy were actively involved in a regime change operation. The composition of the post-Maidan government corresponded exactly with US plans. ..."
"... What few people knew at the time was that such levels of control over the composition of foreign governments had become standard practice for US embassies all over the world. As I could see on my very numerous travels around the Balkans in the late 1990s and early 2000s, the US ambassador was treated by the political class and the media in those countries not as the officially accredited representative of a foreign government but instead as an imperial governor whose pronunciamentos were more important than those of the national government. ..."
"... "As regards parallels between Nicaragua in 1989-90 and Belarus today, I plead guilty. Our objective and to some degree methodology are the same." ..."
"... "pseudo-Euroskeptic" ..."
"... " interference " ..."
"... "fifth columnists" ..."
"... "Euro-Atlantic structures" ..."
"... "It was all settled in no more time than it takes to set down." ..."
"... Like this story? Share it with a friend! ..."
Jul 19, 2018 | www.rt.com

Photo (omitted): Geoffrey R. Pyatt (L) and Samantha Power on Maidan square, in Kiev on June 10, 2015 © YURY KIRNICHNY / AFP

On the world's Grand Chessboard, the US is fighting for control and influence. And there are countries where its ambassadors are perceived more as imperial governors than simple channels of communication. At the height of the Maidan protests in Kiev in early 2014, a conversation was leaked between the US ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, and the then-Assistant Secretary of State in the Obama administration, Victoria Nuland. The conversation gained notoriety because Nuland said to Pyatt, "F**k the EU" and the recording was almost instantly available on Youtube .

More shocking than Nuland's bad language, however, was what the conversation was about. The US government officials were discussing how to put their men into power in Ukraine - which of the three then opposition factions would dominate, who would take the lead (Arseniy Yatsenyuk) and who would be excluded (Vladimir Klitschko). At the time of this conversation, early February 2014, their enemy Viktor Yanukovych was still president. The leaked recording proved that the US and its Kiev embassy were actively involved in a regime change operation. The composition of the post-Maidan government corresponded exactly with US plans.

Read more American meddling is bad too, except when it isn't, says ex-ambassador to Russia

What few people knew at the time was that such levels of control over the composition of foreign governments had become standard practice for US embassies all over the world. As I could see on my very numerous travels around the Balkans in the late 1990s and early 2000s, the US ambassador was treated by the political class and the media in those countries not as the officially accredited representative of a foreign government but instead as an imperial governor whose pronunciamentos were more important than those of the national government.

This has been going on for decades, although the levels of control exercised by the United States increased as it rushed to fill the political vacuum created by the collapse of Soviet influence in Eastern Europe after 1989. In earlier times, such control, especially regime change operations, had to be conducted either covertly, as with the overthrow of Iranian prime minister, Mohammad Mosaddegh, in 1953, or by financing and arming an anti-government militia, such as in Nicaragua and elsewhere in central and South America, or by encouraging the army itself, most famously in Chile in 1973. There is a huge body of literature on this vast subject (for the coup against Mosaddegh, see especially 'All the Shah's Men' by Stephen Kinzer, 2003) and there is no possibility of denying that such operations took place. Indeed, former CIA director, James Woolsey, recently admitted that they continue to this day.

Many of the ambassadors who engineered or attempted regime change operations in Eastern Europe and the former USSR had cut their teeth in Latin America in 1980s and 1990s. One of them, Michael Kozak, former US ambassador to Belarus, even boasted in a letter to The Guardian in 2001 that he was doing the same thing in Minsk as he had done in Managua. He wrote: "As regards parallels between Nicaragua in 1989-90 and Belarus today, I plead guilty. Our objective and to some degree methodology are the same."

Read more US fingerprints all over Nicaragua's bloody unrest

Kozak did not mention that he also played a key role in the overthrow of General Noriega in Panama in 1989 but he is far from alone. The experience accumulated by the Americans during the Cold War, including in major European countries like Italy where US interference was key to preventing Communist victories in elections, spawned a whole generation of Kermit Roosevelts (the architect of the coup against Mosaddegh) who have made their careers over decades in the State Department. Some names, such as that of Michael McFaul, former US ambassador to Russia who made no secret of his opposition to the president of the state to which he was accredited, will be familiar to RT readers.

Two years after the violent overthrow of Viktor Yanukovych, which he helped coordinate, Geoffrey Pyatt was appointed US ambassador to Greece. He remains in that post to this day - which is why some are asking whether his hand might be behind last week's expulsion of Russian diplomats from Athens. Greece and Russia have customarily had good relations but they differ on the Macedonian issue. Now, the Greek government headed by the "pseudo-Euroskeptic" Alexis Tsipras, claims that four Russian diplomats were engaged in covert operations in Greece to lobby against forcing Macedonia to change its official name.

READ MORE: Macedonian MPs ratify Greece name deal again

Like almost every other political issue these days, this relatively arcane one is regarded through the distorting prism of alleged Russian " interference " : any decision which does not consolidate the power of American-dominated supranational structures like the US or the EU is now routinely attributed to all-pervasive Russian influence, as if all dissidents were foreign agents. Western discussion of this subject now resembles the paranoia of the old Soviet regime, and of its satellites in Eastern Europe, which similarly attacked anti-Communists for being "fifth columnists" - the very phrase used by a prominent European politician last month to lambast all his enemies as Russian stooges.

Europe has a fifth column in its ranks: Putin's cheerleaders who want to destroy Europe & liberal democracy from within: Le Pen, Wilders, Farage, Orbàn, Kaczynski, Salvini use Kremlin money & intel. Like Farage's friend Arron Banks, who colluded w/ Russians to deliver #Brexit

-- Guy Verhofstadt (@guyverhofstadt) 13 juin 2018

US influence is suspected in this case between Greece and Macedonia because the Americans are pushing to bring the whole of the Balkan peninsula under Western control. This has been policy for nearly thirty years - at least since the Yugoslav wars led to a US-brokered peace deal in Bosnia in 1995. In recent years the tempo has quickened, with the accession of Montenegro to NATO last year leaving only Macedonia and Serbia as missing pieces of the puzzle. The Greek victory over the name of Macedonia removes the last obstacle to that country's accession to NATO and other "Euro-Atlantic structures" like the EU and soon only Serbia will be left. Will she last long?

One of the most notorious anecdotes of the Second World War was told by Churchill. While in Moscow in 1944, he and Stalin divided up Eastern Europe and the Balkans into spheres of influence, putting percentage figures to show the respective weight of the West and the USSR - 10:90 in Greece, 50:50 Yugoslavia, 25:75 in Bulgaria, and so on. Churchill recalls how this so-called Percentages Agreement was concluded in a few minutes, and how he scribbled a note of their verbal agreement on a piece of paper which Stalin glanced at for a second and then ticked off. Churchill wrote, "It was all settled in no more time than it takes to set down."

Churchill then reflected that it might seem cynical to decide the fate of millions of people in such an offhand manner. Later generations have generally agreed with his self-criticism. Today's West would certainly never conclude such an agreement - but not because of any squeamishness or lack of cynicism on its part. Instead, the West, especially the US, could not conclude any agreement because in every case the only acceptable outcome would be 100% influence for itself. That is what Geoffrey Pyatt and his colleagues spend their entire careers trying to achieve - and, to a large extent, they succeed.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

John Laughland, who has a doctorate in philosophy from the University of Oxford and who has taught at universities in Paris and Rome, is a historian and specialist in international affairs.

[Jul 23, 2018] Neoliberalism has spawned a financial elite who hold governments to ransom by Deborah Orr

Jun 08, 2013 | www.theguardian.com

The crash was a write-off, not a repair job. The response should be a wholesale reevaluation of the way in which wealth is created and distributed around the globe

he International Monetary Fund has admitted that some of the decisions it made in the wake of the 2007-2008 financial crisis were wrong, and that the €130bn first bailout of Greece was "bungled". Well, yes. If it hadn't been a mistake, then it would have been the only bailout and everyone in Greece would have lived happily ever after.

Actually, the IMF hasn't quite admitted that it messed things up. It has said instead that it went along with its partners in "the Troika" – the European Commission and the European Central Bank – when it shouldn't have. The EC and the ECB, says the IMF, put the interests of the eurozone before the interests of Greece. The EC and the ECB, in turn, clutch their pearls and splutter with horror that they could be accused of something so petty as self-preservation.

The IMF also admits that it "underestimated" the effect austerity would have on Greece. Obviously, the rest of the Troika takes no issue with that. Even those who substitute "kick up the arse to all the lazy scroungers" whenever they encounter the word "austerity", have cottoned on to the fact that the word can only be intoned with facial features locked into a suitably tragic mask.

Yet, mealy-mouthed and hotly contested as this minor mea culpa is, it's still a sign that financial institutions may slowly be coming round to the idea that they are the problem. They know the crash was a debt-bubble that burst. What they don't seem to acknowledge is that the merry days of reckless lending are never going to return; even if they do, the same thing will happen again, but more quickly and more savagely. The thing is this: the crash was a write-off, not a repair job. The response from the start should have been a wholesale reevaluation of the way in which wealth is created and distributed around the globe, a "structural adjustment", as the philosopher John Gray has said all along.

The IMF exists to lend money to governments, so it's comic that it wags its finger at governments that run up debt. And, of course, its loans famously come with strings attached: adopt a free-market economy, or strengthen the one you have, kissing goodbye to the Big State. Yet, the irony is painful. Neoliberal ideology insists that states are too big and cumbersome, too centralised and faceless, to be efficient and responsive. I agree. The problem is that the ruthless sentimentalists of neoliberalism like to tell themselves – and anyone else who will listen – that removing the dead hand of state control frees the individual citizen to be entrepreneurial and productive. Instead, it places the financially powerful beyond any state, in an international elite that makes its own rules, and holds governments to ransom. That's what the financial crisis was all about. The ransom was paid, and as a result, governments have been obliged to limit their activities yet further – some setting about the task with greater relish than others. Now the task, supposedly, is to get the free market up and running again.

But the basic problem is this: it costs a lot of money to cultivate a market – a group of consumers – and the more sophisticated the market is, the more expensive it is to cultivate them. A developed market needs to be populated with educated, healthy, cultured, law-abiding and financially secure people – people who expect to be well paid themselves, having been brought up believing in material aspiration, as consumers need to be.

So why, exactly, given the huge amount of investment needed to create such a market, should access to it then be "free"? The neoliberal idea is that the cultivation itself should be conducted privately as well. They see "austerity" as a way of forcing that agenda. But how can the privatisation of societal welfare possibly happen when unemployment is already high, working people are turning to food banks to survive and the debt industry, far from being sorry that it brought the global economy to its knees, is snapping up bargains in the form of busted high-street businesses to establish shops with nothing to sell but high-interest debt? Why, you have to ask yourself, is this vast implausibility, this sheer unsustainability, not blindingly obvious to all?

Markets cannot be free. Markets have to be nurtured. They have to be invested in. Markets have to be grown. Google, Amazon and Apple haven't taught anyone in this country to read. But even though an illiterate market wouldn't be so great for them, they avoid their taxes, because they can, because they are more powerful than governments.

And further, those who invest in these companies, and insist that taxes should be low to encourage private profit and shareholder value, then lend governments the money they need to create these populations of sophisticated producers and consumers, berating them for their profligacy as they do so. It's all utterly, completely, crazy.

The other day a health minister, Anna Soubry , suggested that female GPs who worked part-time so that they could bring up families were putting the NHS under strain. The compartmentalised thinking is quite breathtaking. What on earth does she imagine? That it would be better for the economy if they all left school at 16? On the contrary, the more people who are earning good money while working part-time – thus having the leisure to consume – the better. No doubt these female GPs are sustaining both the pharmaceutical industry and the arts and media, both sectors that Britain does well in.

As for their prioritising of family life over career – that's just another of the myriad ways in which Conservative neoliberalism is entirely without logic. Its prophets and its disciples will happily – ecstatically – tell you that there's nothing more important than family, unless you're a family doctor spending some of your time caring for your own. You couldn't make these characters up. It is certainly true that women with children find it more easy to find part-time employment in the public sector. But that's a prima facie example of how unresponsive the private sector is to human and societal need, not – as it is so often presented – evidence that the public sector is congenitally disabled.

Much of the healthy economic growth – as opposed to the smoke and mirrors of many aspects of financial services – that Britain enjoyed during the second half of the 20th century was due to women swelling the educated workforce. Soubry and her ilk, above all else, forget that people have multiple roles, as consumers, as producers, as citizens and as family members. All of those things have to be nurtured and invested in to make a market.

The neoliberalism that the IMF still preaches pays no account to any of this. It insists that the provision of work alone is enough of an invisible hand to sustain a market. Yet even Adam Smith, the economist who came up with that theory , did not agree that economic activity alone was enough to keep humans decent and civilised.

Governments are left with the bill when neoliberals demand access to markets that they refuse to invest in making. Their refusal allows them to rail against the Big State while producing the conditions that make it necessary. And even as the results of their folly become ever more plain to see, they are grudging in their admittance of the slightest blame, bickering with their allies instead of waking up, smelling the coffee and realising that far too much of it is sold through Starbucks.

[Jul 23, 2018] Brennan, Hayden, Panetta, Morell, might well be children of parents who supported Joseph McCarthy

Kind of long-term effect of childhood intoxication with anti-communism...
Jul 23, 2018 | www.unz.com

FKA Max , Website July 22, 2018 at 10:33 pm GMT

So those Facebook ads posted by Russians in 2016 were just like Pearl Harbor, just like 9/11. It's war, says General Hertling! Get those boats in the water! And Trump is Putin's tool!

I just put forth a hypothesis in the other comments thread which could also apply to General Hertling, in my opinion, since he appears to be Catholic:

Hertling was born on September 29, 1953 in St. Louis, Missouri. He attended Christian Brothers College High School in Clayton, Missouri, graduating in 1971 -- he is also a member of the CBC Alumni Hall of Fame, having been elected in 2010.

-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Hertling#Early_life_and_education

Christian Brothers College High School (CBC High School) is a Lasallian Catholic college preparatory school for young men in St. Louis, Missouri . It is located in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Saint Louis and is owned and operated by the De La Salle Christian Brothers Midwest District.

-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Brothers_College_High_School

Here my hypothesis:

Most of these guys are Catholic; Brennan, Hayden, Panetta, Morell, etc.

I just wanted to explain why, I believe, them being Catholic is relevant in this context.

My guess is that most of these guys' parents were likely supporters of Sen. Joseph McCarthy, since his biggest support base was among Catholic Democrats, so they probably grew up in a very anti-Soviet/Communist/Russian environment and households.

I believe their obsession with alleged, large-scale Russian interference in the election and their McCarthy-like attitude and tactics might stem from and be a carryover from their upbringing.

-- http://www.unz.com/imercer/doubting-the-intelligence-of-the-intelligence-community/#comment-2427738

Joseph McCarthy on Democrats

"This war in which we are now engaged is not -- cannot -- be a war between America's two great political parties. As I have often said in the past, certainly the millions of loyal Americans who have long voted the Democrat ticket love America just as much and hate Communism just as much as the average Republican." -- McCarthy speech to the Irish Fellowship Club, 1954

[Jul 22, 2018] MoA - 'Progressives Are Putin Stooges' - How Centrists Will Help To Reelect Trump

Notable quotes:
"... Naked Capitalism ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... The Democrats preferred to lose with Hillary than to win with Sanders ..."
"... Note that the predominance of these two doctrines undeline a deeper contradiction in the USA: its resources are limited, therefore it can only fight one of the two at a given time. This is funny, because that means the USA is not destined to be the sole superpower in the first place (the underlying objective of both doctrines). ..."
"... It seems to me that both Democrats and Republicans are colluding with each other now. They have agreed to share the Presidency and alternate with each other every 8 years. They wont get serious about winning until 2024, assuming there will still be elections then. ..."
"... Both parties have the same elite controllers. Basically voters chose between 2 flavors of neoliberal imperialism. One is a bitter in your face brew, the other is a sickly sweet poison. Both make you sick ..."
"... USA deep state's Russian gambit expires on November 4th when the embargo on Iran goes into effect. It is already clear that China will support Iran. ..."
"... Neo-macarthyism as just another aspect of the Trump psy-op. The 'bad cop' to Trump's 'good cop'. ..."
"... In every case what they are looking for is candidates who are not 'soft.' Not soft on crime. Not soft on Russia. Not soft on welfare etc etc. Thus it is that the primary defenders of "our nation's intelligence services" and cops nowadays are the democrats, and none more than the 'progressives' howling about the treason of not believing in CIA intelligence assessments, as leaked to the Washington Post. ..."
Jul 22, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Blaming 'Russian meddling' for their loss of the 2016 elections allowed the democratic establishment to avoid any discussion about their unelectable candidate and their bad centrist policies. Meanwhile the party base has moved on. Progressives candidates continue to win in primaries. The centrist party establishment will now use their genius invention of 'Russian meddling' to defeat them.

Lambert Strether at Naked Capitalism links several recent pieces about the democrats and notes:

Suddenly a lot of stories about centrists. Somebody must have gotten funding.

The centrists and their big money sources feal endangered. They try to find strategies to defeat calls for 'medicare for all', demands to 'abolish ICE' and other progressive aims:

The gathering here was just that -- an effort to offer an attractive alternative to the rising Sanders-style populist left in the upcoming presidential race. Where progressives see a rare opportunity to capitalize on an energized Democratic base, moderates see a better chance to win over Republicans turned off by Trump.

The fact that a billionaire real estate developer, Winston Fisher, co-hosted the event and addressed attendees twice underscored that this group is not interested in the class warfare vilifying the "millionaires and billionaires" found in Sanders' stump speech.
...
The invitation-only gathering brought together about 250 Democratic insiders from key swing states. Third Way unveiled the results of focus groups and polling that it says shows Americans are more receptive to an economic message built on "opportunity" rather than the left's message about inequality.

"Once again, the time has come to mend, but not end, capitalism for a new era," said Third Way President Jon Cowan.

The 2016 elections have shown that people no longer buy the Third Way nonsense. The republican electorate moved to the more radical candidate Trump. The democratic electorate is now well underway to mirror that move :

[T]rends within the Democratic Party itself could take the Washington-based establishment by surprise, just as the Republican national security community found itself out of sync with the broad base of GOP voters as demonstrated in the 2016 election. The muscular interventionism championed by almost all of the Republican party's standard-bearers was rejected in favor of an "America First" message which resonated with primary and general election voters. Similarly, the rise and growing prominence of a more unabashedly progressive wing of the Democratic Party has similar implications , because the activists' critique of the status quo does not end at the water's edge. The Democratic foreign policy establishment may find it difficult to forge a stable marriage with a mobilized voter base and the candidates it is putting forward.

The republican establishment has now bought into the 'Russian meddling' meme to suppress the insurgency within its party. It is trying to limit the space for Trump to achieve more radical measures, especially in foreign policies. The democratic establishment is using the very same trick. 'Russian meddling' must be responsible for the insurgency within their own party. Progressive candidates are Putin marionettes.

A few days ago Doug Henwood warned of this:

It seems that Democrats are now incapable of talking about anything but Russian interference in our sacred elections.
...
We're seeing Dem pundits even accusing Bernie Sanders and other insurgents within their party of being Russian agents , witting or unwitting. Their indictments of Trump for treason make them sound like demented right-wingers at the height of the Cold War.

This obsession does relieve mainstream Democrats of concocting an attractive agenda that might win an election or two, but to do that they'd have to tack left, and Goldman Sachs wouldn't like that.

This Russia obsession's a win win for the establishment though – subdue Trump and the domestic left insurgency all at once.

A few days later Henwood points to a Facebook post by Columbia Law lecturer and Harpers author Scott Horton which accuses progressive Democrats of being Putin's agents. Horton comments on a New York Times piece that discussed the wave of progressive candidates in democratic primaries:

Horton claims to have talked with 'European intelligence analysts' who allegedly told him that Putin authorized an 'active measure campaign' to split the Democratic party to let Trump and the Republicans win again:

The Russian operation will also aim, in the classic fashion, to pick Democratic candidates in the primary period who, for whatever reasons, are seen as likely not electable. Some evidence for this is clearly at play now. The key thing to look for is not positive messaging supporting any particular policy program, but negative messaging attacking other Democrats.

To point out what Democratic candidates Putin will pick Horton adds a picture from the NYT piece which shows a 'progressives' candidate with an 'Abolish ICE' t-shirt.

Political scientist and author Corey Robin notes :

In other words, we should look at these [progressive] candidates as tainted by a "Russian operation". Based on nothing other than the word of an individual who cites no facts but alleged conversations with "European intelligence analysts".

Robin points to historic similarities with McCarthyism. He adds :

If this thing catches on , if it becomes something that now gets reported in the paper, everything single candidate from the left, who is running in a Democratic primary, will be tainted by the suspicion that they are somehow or other a Putin operation.

Tainting leftish candidates as Putin stooges is the ideal tool for Democratic centrist to defeat them. Tuition free colleges, single-payer health care and $15 minimum wage are obviously Russian conspiracies designed to destroy the United States. This scheme is effective and will therefore be widely used by the centrists during all primaries and the next federal elections.

It also guarantees that Trump and the Republicans continue to win.

During the Obama years the Democrats lost over 1,000 positions in state and federal elections. Centrist policies have been tried and they failed to win votes. More of the same will not lead to different results. To move even further to the right to catch a few conservative votes from republican voters disgruntled with Trump will not help to win. The further the party moves to the right the more people on the left will abstain from voting for it. These are the decisive few percent that cost the Democrats the presidency and the majorities in Congress and in various states.

These centrists are the ones who are really helping Trump. Aren't they the real 'Russian agents'?

james , Jul 22, 2018 1:06:16 PM | 1

thanks b...lol your last line.. maybe..

how far are we from a civil war in the usa? i think we are a long ways away.. i think most of the folks buying into this bs will go for a hot war with russia instead..

horton is trying to make like christopher steele with his intel sources, lol.. now if horton had talked with skripal, i would be impressed!

mccarthyism version 2 seems very prevalent in the usa at this point..

William Fusfield , Jul 22, 2018 1:37:56 PM | 4
"Once again, the time has come to mend, but not end, capitalism for a new era," LOL at that choice piece of advice which has been trotted out by centrists and conservatives at least since the legion horrors of the capitalist system were mercilessly exposed to the world by William Wordsworth, Thomas Carlyle, Charles Dickens, Victor Hugo, Freiderich Engels, and dozens of other perceptive writers during the 19th Century.

And we have global neoliberal capitalism, the very acme of capitalist cruelty to the vast mass of humanity forced to labor hard daily, for relatively ever worse wages and under deteriorating conditions as well, rather than be able to make millions, indeed, even billions annually simply by being lucky stock holders in a financial market system rigges in favor f the plutocrats and against everyone else!

The only people daft enough to buy the idea that the vicous, inhuman, indeed, inherently ever more unequal, irrational, environmentally detructive, and profoundly unjust neoliberal capitalist system all are subjected to today needs merely to be "mended, not ended" are those who are historical, social, political, cultural and economic illiterates.

"Capitalism lives on as ruthless totalitarianism, because the moment for the transition to socialism was missed," said Max Horkeimer as early as the 1930s while observing the rise of Hitler, Franco, and Mussolini. High time we quit missing it and built a movement to end capitalist exploitation in all its forms once and for all! ON TO SOCIALISM!!

Jackrabbit , Jul 22, 2018 1:38:27 PM | 5
Psyops. The gift that keeps on giving.

What happens when your in-group controls the narrative AND the counter-narrative.

jayc , Jul 22, 2018 1:41:40 PM | 6
Establishment Democrats have, since 1968, considered holding the left in check a main function. I forget who formulated this sentence but it is completely accurate: "The Democrats preferred to lose with Hillary than to win with Sanders."

The NBC News article on the so-called moderate Democrats reveals the game of the past five decades: the Republicans go further and further to the right, and the Establishment Dems follow them to hold an ever-shifting centre. (not to mention that the party has been deliberately courting potential candidates who have military and Intelligence backgrounds)

oops, according to Scott Horton, by using the term "Establishment Democrat" I've revealed myself as part of a Russian influence campaign.

johnt , Jul 22, 2018 2:21:23 PM | 9
jayc @ #6

" The Democrats preferred to lose with Hillary than to win with Sanders ."

Sounds like the words of Jimmy Dore. And right on the money.

Clearly in league with Putin. Ha ha

William Fusfield , Jul 22, 2018 3:00:18 PM | 13 vk , Jul 22, 2018 3:05:54 PM | 14
Bottom line is this: the myth of the end of History of the early 1990s evaporated after 2003-2008 (the period which begun with the Iraq Invasion and ended with the financial meltdown). After this, there's an ongoing debate in the USA about what the empire must focus on.

As I've mentioned before many times in this blog, there're three extant doctrines in the USA, of which only two are accessible to the civilian population.

The first is the Wolfowitz Doctrine, by far the dominant one, so dominant Americans don't even give it a name (it's just spelled out a common sense), which states that Russia is the military successor State of the USSR, which inherited its nuclear arsenal, therefore, objectively, the only country materially capable of turning the entire American territory into radioactive ash. So, long story short, Russia is still the main enemy.

The second is the "Clash of Civilizations" doctrine, which states that, after the Cold War, conflict on a global scale would happen only in the cultural front, between many cultures and creeds. The main conflict in the long term, however, would be the cultural clash between West and East, i.e. Western Civilization against the "Yellows", a.k.a. China (the Japanese are the "Westernized yellows", the "honorary whites", as is South Korea, Japan's carbon copy, so they don't count).

Note that the predominance of these two doctrines undeline a deeper contradiction in the USA: its resources are limited, therefore it can only fight one of the two at a given time. This is funny, because that means the USA is not destined to be the sole superpower in the first place (the underlying objective of both doctrines).

Adrian E. , Jul 22, 2018 3:18:57 PM | 16
In general, I also think that by banking mainly on the evidencefree Russiagate conspiracy theory instead of normal political opposition based on issues that are important to most people, mainstream Democrats set themselves up for losing again.

But increasingly, I also think that we (everyone interested in world peace and fearing an escalation of conflicts) also have to hope that this is the case. I find it quite strange that I now think that way because as a center-left European I always used to think that Democrats are the lesser evil and Republicans are the greater evil.

Now, I think there is a scenario that really seems frightening to me. Progressives have won some primaries, but in general, the Democratic party is still dominated by the same forces, and I have read that now, a record number of people from the secret services and other organizations of the military industrial complex will probably be on the Democrats' ballots. If Democrats manage to win in the mid-term elections, the establishment forces in the Democratic forces may see this as a sign that the strategy of banking on the Russiagate conspiracy theory and extreme hostility towards Russia and treating everyone who doubts the allegations of secret services a traitor was the right one. Then, if in 2020 a mainstream Democrat wins the primaries and then the general election, what is he or she going to do? Their core base will be those people who daily watch Rachel Maddow's minutes (or hours) of hate against Russia, and there will be an expectation that they will act on these sentiments. After four years of extreme demonization of Russia, when even just a normal meeting between the US and Russian presidents was treated as a kind of treason, it will be very difficult to return to normal international relations. They will hardly be able to say that all this hatred was just a means to weaken the Trump administration and can be done away with after winning the elections, they have caged themselves in with their extremely hostile rhetoric, and their core base will probably expect that they act on their jingoistic rhetoric and conduct an extremely hostile kind of foreign policy with ultimatums against Russia, which could have extremely dangerous consequences.

I think that the more likely scenario is that mainstream Democrats' behavior will lead to losing again and Trump being re-elected, but I think we should not forget about the possibility of such a horror scenario which could bring the world to the brink of the abyss or beyond.

Pft , Jul 22, 2018 3:20:40 PM | 17
It seems to me that both Democrats and Republicans are colluding with each other now. They have agreed to share the Presidency and alternate with each other every 8 years. They wont get serious about winning until 2024, assuming there will still be elections then.

Both parties have the same elite controllers. Basically voters chose between 2 flavors of neoliberal imperialism. One is a bitter in your face brew, the other is a sickly sweet poison. Both make you sick .

Jackrabbit , Jul 22, 2018 3:37:29 PM | 19
Alternative theory:

Trump was used by the establishment to "turn the page" on the Obama years.

Just as Obama was used to "turn the page" on the Bush years.

If we surmise that the Presidency is the most important office for the Empire, and is the "face" of the Empire, if you will, then the Obama Presidency was designed to present a peaceful and rational public face ( very different from the Bush neocons!) while covert opts were used to further the interests of the Empire.

The Obama faux populist psy-op worked very well. Putin recently admitted that he was slow to understand how the game had changed.

The Trump/MAGA psyop lays claim to a new sort of "realist" peaceful and rational standpoint: ending costly adventurism and ending the new Cold War with Russia. But what does the establishment really want? They want to recover from the embarrassing Syrian debacle and stop the rise of SCO. They aim to do this via distractions and splitting Russia from China. Iran is the anvil for splitting Russia and China.

The howls of protest about Trump's meeting with Putin are NOT because Trump seeks "peace" with Russia but because he wasn't successful in convincing Putin to play ball.

USA deep state's Russian gambit expires on November 4th when the embargo on Iran goes into effect. It is already clear that China will support Iran.

<> <> <> <> <> <> <>

1) Neo-macarthyism as just another aspect of the Trump psy-op. The 'bad cop' to Trump's 'good cop'.

2) Hillary could never have "turned the page" like Trump. In fact, she talked about how her election would secure Obama's legacy. Conclusion: the 2016 election was a set-up.

the pair , Jul 22, 2018 4:24:25 PM | 23
some of the targets of these tactics aren't helping themselves; both sanders and ocasio-cortez have hinted that they actually believe the russiagate stupidity. nor did the latter score any hits with the stumbling (and possibly cowardly) interview regarding israel's lunatic tendencies. just letting that idiot get away with saying "the war in the middle east" is enough to make me question her spine.

the establishment dems - like any "establishment" group - are whores. so are the media who have their collective backs. at this point it's time to realize they all - like their financial masters - mistake kindness for weakness. what anyone needs to win at this point is to (unfortunately) copy pre-election trump's tactics with their own message.

there's no law that says you can't be for $15 minimum wage and single payer while also saying "shut up you dumb cunt " to any media prostitute that brings up russiagate. the idiots acting as middle(wo)men for their plutocrat owners rely on forced politeness and decorum. many people have noted that is their main grievance with trump: it's cool that he's horrible and surrounded by warmongers but does he have to be so vulgar and gauche? well i never!

the US is (as it has been for most of its short bloody history) quite angry and wound up right now. obama showed what good a "polite yes man" does. the left needs a fire-breathing populist demon. what they have is a pleasant bartender from the bronx.

bevin , Jul 22, 2018 4:33:25 PM | 24
Bernie Sanders was quick to respond to these attacks by giving in. For every 'progressive' Democrat who has won in the primaries there have been ex CIA, ex FBI, ex military types to add the appeal of their blood stained hands to that of the former prosecutors (boasting about the number of death sentences they have won) and ultra rich candidates.

In every case what they are looking for is candidates who are not 'soft.' Not soft on crime. Not soft on Russia. Not soft on welfare etc etc.
Thus it is that the primary defenders of "our nation's intelligence services" and cops nowadays are the democrats, and none more than the 'progressives' howling about the treason of not believing in CIA intelligence assessments, as leaked to the Washington Post.

Democrats simply cannot understand what the word 'principle' means. That is why they are continually adopting their opponents' ideas- filling the prisons with black people, cancelling welfare programmes- and persecuting their own supporters.

Now Sanders, who knows very well why Hillary lost the election, and spent months warning her that she would do so in the primary campaigns, is front and centre in the farcical campaign to blame Putin and internet trolls 'sowing discord'!
And what is his evidence? The most dishonest and reactionary deep state warmongers say it is true. So it must be.
What will be interesting in the coming months is to watch as these "progressive" Democrats-the victors of primary battles- settle down to agreeing that "Israel has a right to defend itself" by massacring defenceless Palestinians whenever the mood comes over it. And attacking Iran.
Watch in the coming weeks for people like Sanders to attack Trump for not changing the 'regime' in Damascus- the way that Obama with their support did in Libya.
The great thing about the Democrats is that they are united-they are all as bad as each other. This is after all the working man's party that supported slavery with such enthusiasm that when it had been abolished they re-introduced it, in the form of Jim Crow plus lynching, in the states that they controlled. In which it lasted until the late 1960s. Its shadow-in the form of vote suppression and a crooked criminal justice system- still looms over America.

NemesisCalling , Jul 22, 2018 4:37:25 PM | 25
@18 dh

The dems have nobody. Not at the plate or on deck. After DJT's state of the union, they trotted out a Kennedy that had vasoline smeared all over the sides of his mouth as he gave the Dem response. No one remembers what he said, but they do remember that substance.

Now this inexperienced Socialist-airhead from the Bronx who claimed a rough upbringing only to have forgotten her silver-spoon childhood comes along.

Here on the west coast, in Seattle, a socialist mayor and city council has tried to push egalitarian policies regarding wages and taxation, allthewhile dealing with a pervasive homeless population that is tainting the city and its reputation. Their policies have gotten a stiff rebuke from Amazon and Microsoft and so their ironfisted will has itself been crushed and they have yielded to these business behemoths. They will be ousted very soon. As will the wannabe-socialists up and down the west coasts. If they are not...we are talking mass exodus and floundering economies.

So b is right that the centrists will prevail but it is mostly because the left is lost right now. Can't drum up a unified beat to march to for the life of them.

At least DJT tapped into what must be done to save this country, irrespective of his actual will and desire to get there (which I believe is being hampered by both sides of the aisle).

Babyl-on , Jul 22, 2018 4:41:15 PM | 26
Does this not come down to a fight for the BRAND - DNC? The establishment wants to keep the "donors" (same as the Rs) and millions rolling in so they support their interests and try to freeze out progressives.

It's like an invasion, what happens the next day? The progressives take over the DNC, then the donors depart and the DNC brand is the worth about as much as the Green brand.

The problem is that the entire system of Western Liberal Democracy is corrupted entirely and clearly an unmitigated failure.

Russ , Jul 22, 2018 4:53:40 PM | 27
The so-called "insurgents" are no such thing. That's a standard Democrat scam to keep potential apostates roped in. Bernie Sanders always has been a con artist. Not that it's any secret: His entire senate record is of worthless grandstanding and zero real monkey-wrenching or grid-locking action .

As for his campaign, from day one he proclaimed he was a loyal Democrat soldier and that he would support Clinton and do all he could to deliver his supporters to her. He dutifully kept that promise. Along the way and since the 2016 election he's done zero toward building any kind of grassroots alternative. That's because he never intended to be part of any real alternative in the first place. And that's why the DNC always has supported his "independent" senate campaigns - he does an excellent con-job on behalf of their agenda.

And today he's fully on board with the Russiagate campaign, doing all he can to rope in "progressives" who might be having doubts about the anti-Russia lunacy. His usual job.

As for the latest wave of progressive heroes, for just one typical example I'll observe that Ocasio-Cortez immediately after her primary win lost no time scrubbing the anti-war plank from her site and publicly retracting her previous statements on behalf of the Palestinians. The Democrat con always runs like clock-work.

And as the post describes, with Russiagate the fake insurgents provide a new service to the Party: To serve as bogeymen for internally-directed Party propaganda, as an organizational vehicle to "get out the vote" among establishment loyalists.

There's no way forward with the Democrat Party. It always has been a death trap for all progressive, let alone radical aspirations. The Party and its partisans must politically perish completely, as a prerequisite for any good transformation of America.

ben , Jul 22, 2018 5:39:16 PM | 28
@23 said:"the left needs a fire-breathing populist demon. what they have is a pleasant bartender from the bronx."

Absolutely, but it won't happen. The malignant billionaires have won the battle.

b, you nailed this one..

The Kochs, The Mersers and the Adelsons with R. Murdoc own the whole system now.

Workers, bend over!!

0use4msm , Jul 22, 2018 5:53:44 PM | 29
I used to have great admiration for Scott Horton for his intrepid reporting on Gitmo and the War on Terra during the Bush era, so it's very sad to see how he deep has fallen into silly Neo-McCarthyian group-think.

I don't think much of Trump as a person or as a politician. But I think he's great as a trickster performance artist, doing what used to be the task of the 20th century avant-garde: shocking bourgeois complacency. And boy, is there a lot of that around these days. Trump is 21st century Dada.

jo6pac , Jul 22, 2018 6:02:50 PM | 30
#20
My thought also.

Good shut out to Lambert and NC

karlof1 , Jul 22, 2018 6:15:35 PM | 31
The term Progressive is now so mutilated that it's no longer effective as an identifier. To be a truly modern Progressive: one must 1st be Anti-War, except in the most dire of circumstances, which includes being Anti-Imperialist/Anti-Empire; 2nd, one must be Pro-Justice as in promoting Rule of Law over all else; 3rd, one must be tolerant and willing to listen to others of all stripes--even terrorists (not imitation state-sponsored mercenary terrorists); and 4th, work for Win-Win outcomes and denounce Zero-sum as the #1 promoter of inequality. As you might imagine, by that set of criteria there are very few Modern Progressive Politicians in any nation at any level of government--certainly an endangered species within the Outlaw US Empire. Bernie Sanders is not even close to being a Progressive of any sort as he supports and promotes Militarism and Apartheid. The actual differences between his political stances and Hillary Clinton's is really very small--health care and social security are the only two with large gaps.

But there appears to be much happening at the grassroots nationally and the next 2 months will see lots happening--but how will it be reported locally and nationally is my main concern. Insurrections are being aimed at a great many Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats. IMO, this off-year election will be the most important for the planet ever as the stakes are very high. IMO, the key factor is if Russiagate's still in play or will it finally be slain by November.

Fidelios Automata , Jul 22, 2018 7:13:03 PM | 32
True progressives and populists (which characterizes a lot of Trump supporters such as myself) have a lot more in common with each other than with the Centrist Democrats and Beltway Republicans (A.K.A. Cuckservatives.) If we could only dispense with all the BS identity politics, we could join forces.
Hoarsewhisperer , Jul 22, 2018 7:54:44 PM | 33
Posted by: William Fusfield | Jul 22, 2018 3:00:18 PM | 13
(Comment lost after Timeout)

Some wag once said "Experience is a good school, but the fees are high."

You can easily bulletproof your draft comment by right-clicking in the comment box and choosing Select All from the menu. That hilites the entire draft. Right click again and select Copy. You can then safely refresh the page knowing you've preserved a copy.

All you really need to do is back arrow and refresh. I've never had a draft erased by refreshing. But then again I usually refresh AFTER copying..

Also Undo (in the right click menu) can usually recover accidentally deleted text.

daffyDuct , Jul 22, 2018 8:52:56 PM | 34
Wow - Comey, the guy that fixed Hillary's email problem has an urgent centrist plea.

"Democrats, please, please don't lose your minds and rush to the socialist left. This president and his Republican Party are counting on you to do exactly that. America's great middle wants sensible, balanced, ethical leadership."

https://twitter.com/Comey/status/1021132108381683712?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

[Jul 22, 2018] Trump Trips, But He's Right On Russia. Our Ruling Class Is Crazy. Remember The Romanovs! by John Derbyshire

Notable quotes:
"... It is clear that Trump's own DoJ acted to sabotage him by releasing the indictments of the twelve russian GRU officials just before Trump's meeting with Putin. ..."
"... A year ago legislators introduced a bill in Sweden to restrict [total] media ownership to no more than 5% by any person, family, company or ethnic group. The Jews wasted no time screaming anti-semitism. ..."
"... It is a ritual, so the purpose is to convey loyalty. It doesn't placate anyone. What it unfortunately does is to undermine all else Derbyshire says. If he is this uninformed, or conformist, about basic facts, how can one take what he says seriously? ..."
Jul 22, 2018 | www.unz.com

PiltdownMan , July 21, 2018 at 4:46 am GMT

Putin is the illegitimate leader of a corrupt and dysfunctional country, an economic nonentity among nations, geographically overstretched, with a rusting military and a population increasingly composed of aging drunks.

I'm not sure what the purpose of this somewhat jingoistic prefatory note is, or whom it is intended to placate. It is a farrago of false, outdated stereotypes about Russia based entirely on the situation there in the 1990s.

Like it or not, Putin is the democratically elected leader of Russia, in elections that have been generally free and fair. They like him over there, and vote for him in huge numbers. Given that per capita GDP in Russia is about 3-4 times as high as when he took office, this is not surprising.

As for its being an "economic non-entity among nations", it is a mid-sized economy, about the size of an Australia, Italy, India and so on, a $2 trillion economy, give or take, using the purchasing power parity figures. It is no America, China, Japan or Germany, but is nestled in the tier of countries just below those. Much of the disparagement of its post 2014 economy is based on the US$ figures of its GDP, a misleading measure that is severely affected by transient fluctuations in the exchange rate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)

The stereotype about its rusting military is equally out-of-date, as numerous factually detailed articles right here at unz.com attest.

Lastly, there is plenty of credible evidence that deaths from alcoholism have fallen by 50% or so, since the bad old days, two decades ago. Yes, that's still twice the rate for males in the EU, but they're sobering up.

Andy , July 21, 2018 at 5:09 am GMT
Russia has a number of problems but a rusting military? Derbyshire needs to be put up to date with Putin's successful drive to modernize the Russian military. In some cases (for example, the hypersonic missiles announced by Putin early this year) they actually have more advanced weaponry than the US. And Russia has actually won a war in the Middle East (in Syria) something that the US gave been unable to do for the last 15 years.
phil , July 21, 2018 at 5:23 am GMT
"Putin is the illegitimate leader of a corrupt and dysfunctional country, an economic nonentity among nations, geographically overstretched, with a rusting military and a population increasingly composed of aging drunks."

Putin took over on December 31, 1999. The country had been raped by the oligarchs and suffered hyperinflation. Pensioners were driven into horrific poverty en masse. Life expectancy plummeted. Putin neutralized the oligarchs without renationalizing industries and put the economy on a more sustainable upward path. The people are now in much better shape, including ordinary Jews. Drunkenness has lessened. Putin is reasonably popular. There is hope. Russia also has new advanced weapons.

Miro23 , July 21, 2018 at 6:39 am GMT

Losing the 2016 election was a terrible, colossal psychic trauma for the American Left. They can't believe Trump did it by himself. They can't believe 63 million Americans voted for him of our own free will.

This just shows that a lot of people no longer trust the MSM. The next step is to take a closer look at Congressional candidates and get commitments for 1) no ME wars 2) infrastructure spending 3) no mass immigration 3) stop $ billions for Israel 6) active swamp draining.

blahbahblah , July 21, 2018 at 7:08 am GMT

The poisoning in England of Sergei Skripal and his daughter is beyond naughty

It was the falsiest false flag in the history of false flags. Nothing about it made any sense whatsoever. A complete PR operation. The whole(and failed) purpose was to derail the World Cup.

anonymous [340] Disclaimer , July 21, 2018 at 7:20 am GMT
Mr. Derbyshire is pretty good at spoon feeding people who enjoy being told that they're superior to blacks, especially those who also think Brits are, in turn, above them.

But Mr. Derbyshire once again genuflects before his adoptive Uncle Sam, mindlessly parroting the PutinIsEvilTyrant mantra that the likes of Pat Buchanan, Andrew Napolitano, and occasionally even Tucker Carlson need to keep their spots along the Right side of Establishia.

That Mr. Derbyshire does so here -- fancying himself a martyr in the war against institutional thinking like that at National Review -- indicates naïveté or cravenness.

Before further embarrassing himself by sharing his gulled views on Russia, he should read and think about the work of the more informed, insightful authors at Unz Review who provide a broader and better readership than he deserves.

Or just stick with the race bait.

Eagle Eye , July 21, 2018 at 7:26 am GMT

The poisoning in England of Sergei Skripal and his daughter is beyond naughty; it's disgraceful, and deserving of diplomatic retaliation

Agree that "diplomatic retaliation" is called for. The U.S. should break off diplomatic relations to the UK immediately, and through them out on their ear.

The Skripals are DEAD, murdered by MI5 to extend the useful life of Hillary's anti-Trump "Steele Dossier" that Sergei Skripal helped concoct.

The fact that Britain claims to have Sergei and Yulia Skripal in custody proves that Britain is responsible. British media coverage is smothered by "D notices" and blithely play along with a ridiculous government "narrative" – another bad sign.

Does anyone really expect to see the Skripals alive again?

Who else do you expect will come back from the dead?

http://www.unz.com/akarlin/good-timing/#comment-2403153

Adrian E. , July 21, 2018 at 7:31 am GMT
I don't think there is any reasonable way in which Trump can be said to be a more legitimate president of his country than Putin. He did not even receive a majority of votes, after all. Certainly, the electoral college is the way it is done in the US, so overall, Trump is still the legitimate president of the US, but there are certainly fewer doubts in Putin's case than in Trump's.

Calling Russia dysfunctional is completely ignorant. That may have been the case in the 90es when the authoritarian darling of the West, the drunkard Yeltsin was in power and the Russian economy was ruined by oligarchs and American advisors. Things have changed a lot since then.

byrresheim , July 21, 2018 at 8:06 am GMT
The Romanovs undoing was the collusion of a large part of the Russian elite with the British Empire – the very same British Empire that had happily contributed to the Japanese Victory in the war of 1905.

The still-slandered Rasputin was a strong voice against the (for the Romanovs) suicidal war of 1914, and, surprise, the British consul was present on the occasion of his murder).

Indeed, our ruling class is crazy, as is any ruling class that sides with the British.

byrresheim , July 21, 2018 at 8:11 am GMT

Sure, post-Soviet Russia has done naughty things. [ Crimea ] and they've intervened energetically in Syria's civil war. Naughty for sure

Intervening in Syria's civil war is naughty? Thus saving a christian tradition of 2.000 years is naughty? Mr. Derbyshire certainly knows who is acting murderously naughty in Syria. What has happened in Syria is a disgrace for the christian West.

animalogic , July 21, 2018 at 8:25 am GMT
Derbyshire articles are always tricky: a sharp intelligence married to the capacity for utter nonsense.
Once Derbyshire dismounts from his immigration/cultural Marxism hobby horse he often ends up to his ankles in poo of his own making.
He seems to have swallowed the MSM/establishment line on the Skripnals hook, line, & sinker. His views on Russia are simply embarrassing.
But, he's spot on re: causes of the Russia hysteria. Russia is the great convenience – perfect to explain the defeat of the vile Clinton & a perfect stick to constantly bash the President. (I didn't hear the whole of the Putin press conference, but my impression of Trump's so-called treason was that he merely implied that the US's IC wasn't correct re hacking etc So this amounts to treason ? Treason, because Trump is correct & the IC are a ravening pack of liars & monsters.)
Realist , July 21, 2018 at 11:18 am GMT

Putin is the illegitimate leader of a corrupt and dysfunctional country, an economic nonentity among nations, geographically overstretched, with a rusting military and a population increasingly composed of aging drunks. Trump is the constitutionally elected leader of a country so prosperous, buoyant, and secure, our main national problem is holding back the tide of people trying to break in across our bordersto share in our blessed bounty.

So much bullshit. Putin is not an illegitimate leader. The is no country on the face of the earth more corrupt than the US.
Derbyshire must be under attack by the Deep State.

David JW , July 21, 2018 at 12:58 pm GMT
Derbyshire is a phony. First of all, the deep state in the US is controlled by a certain ethnic minority. They're not all patriotic Americans by any means. Trump is doing nothing wrong by winding things up in Syria – or by making peace with Russia, a country with which the US has little trade. I think Trump is preparing for a bigger clash with China and the Russia and Middle East things are diversions. Of course, in a clash with China, which side would Derbyshire be on? 'Nuff said.
Art Deco , July 21, 2018 at 1:01 pm GMT
Putin is the illegitimate leader of a corrupt and dysfunctional country, an economic nonentity among nations, geographically overstretched, with a rusting military and a population increasingly composed of aging drunks. Trump is the constitutionally elected leader of a country so prosperous, buoyant, and secure, our main national problem is holding back the tide of people trying to break in across our borders to share in our blessed bounty.

Richard Lowry employed you for the amusement value of an elderly man making throwaway remarks. In the course of your current employment, you and your readers might benefit if you actually checked the numbers now and again.

1. You could classify Russia as a high-end middle income country or a 2d tier affluent country. Depending on the metric you prefer, its productive base is the world's 6th largest or 12th largest. Since 1998, it has registered a doubling of domestic product per capita with a growth rate exceeding that of all but 5 European countries and all but 1 European country from among those with a population exceeding 4 million. Of course, it has been more dynamic than North America, the Antipodes, and the affluent Far East.

2. Russia's total fertility rate at 1.75 exceeds both the European and occidental means. Russia, unlike many countries, has seen a dramatic recovery in fertility since 1998. If past proves to be prologue, they may reach replacement-level fertility within 10 years. Israel is the only affluent country with replacement-level fertility as we speak.

3. Russian life expectancy at birth (71.6 years) is depressed for an occidental country. However, they've pulled out of the public health catastrophe they suffered during their Yeltsin-era economic depression and have added 7 years to life expectancy at birth since that time.

4. The homicide rate in Russia is high for an occidental country (11 per 100,000). However, it's been cut by 30% in the last 7 years or so.

5. Russia's military expenditure ranks 4th globally. Persons familiar with proper performance metrics can weigh in on how effective that military is. Please note, however, that Russia is one of a small menu of occidental and quasi-occidental countries willing to act independently abroad. (The others are the United States, Britain, France, and Israel).

6. It encompasses all territory in the world which is predominantly Great Russian bar the city of Narva in Estonia and some border counties in Kazakhstan. Over 90% of it's population lives in territories in which ethnic Russians predominate. The only peripheral areas in which Great Russians do not form a majority are in the Caucasus. About 4% of the country's total population lives in those areas. Russia is not territorially over-stretched.

7. The political order is deficient in various ways. It is, however, pluralistic and pluralistic to a degree matched in Russian history only between 1905 and 1918 and between 1988 and 2005. The degree of public assent to VP and his confederates in the Duma exceeds that accorded a head of state and government in just about any other occidental country.

Diversity Heretic , July 21, 2018 at 1:40 pm GMT

Putin is the illegitimate leader of a corrupt and dysfunctional country, an economic nonentity among nations, geographically overstretched, with a rusting military and a population increasingly composed of aging drunks.

Other commentators have noted how highly inaccurate this statement is, so I'll say only that I lived in Moscow from September 2016 until January 2018 and the country that I saw in no way resembles Derb's characterization. Russia has its problems but I don't see demographic replacement or civil war in the cards, as I do for the [sooner-or-later-to-be] Disunited States.

Russian control of the Crimea is essential to its national security; the Black Sea is to Russia what the Gulf of Mexico is to the U.S. Any Russian leader, seeing the Ukrainian government toppled by a U.S. backed coup, that failed to act to secure Crimea, is irresponsible. The wisdom of Russian involvement in Syria can be fairly debated among Russians, but Syria is a lot closer to Russia than to the United States. At least Russian involvement in Syria is not the result of being a pawn of a foreign power, as it is in the case of the U.S.

Sunbeam , July 21, 2018 at 1:47 pm GMT
"Sure, post-Soviet Russia has done naughty things. They occupied the Crimea and they've intervened energetically in Syria's civil war. Naughty for sure, but under strong geostrategic compulsion: Russia needs those naval bases."

Seriously, you wrote this? Besides the hypocrisy of someone living in the US writing this, you actually think the Syria thing is about Russia wanting naval bases.

That's so wrong, I don't know where to start. I'd be here for a while writing exactly why I think Russia is in Syria. Not in my wildest imaginings did any of it involve naval bases though.

"They've murdered people in foreign countries, too. The poisoning in England of Sergei Skripal and his daughter is beyond naughty; it's disgraceful, and deserving of diplomatic retaliation -- which indeed it's got: 23 Russian diplomats were expelled from Britain."

So I take it you believe the Russian poisoned this guy?

"On 4 March 2018, he and his daughter Yulia, who was visiting him from Moscow, were poisoned with a Novichok nerve agent.[5][6] As of 15 March 2018,[7] they were in a critical condition at Salisbury District Hospital. The poisoning is being investigated as an attempted murder.[6] He holds both Russian and British citizenship.[8] On 21 March 2018 Russian ambassador to the UK Alexander Yakovenko said that Sergei Skripal is also a Russian citizen.[9][10] [7]

On 29 March, Yulia was reported to be out of critical condition, 'conscious and talking'.[11] A week later, on 6 April, Skripal was said to no longer be in a critical state.[12] He was discharged on 18 May."

I say it never happened. I think it was made up out of thin air. Just for a talking point and propaganda piece. And it is a clumsy, ludicrous framing job. Nothing clever about it, just BS as brazen as Colin Powell lying his ass off to the UN.

So in England people theoretically exposed to nerve toxins get treated by the NHS at a public facility? Really? Really? That's how they do it? Not by a military doctor trained to specifically deal with cases like this?

Rubbish. If you buy it, you are not very smart.

jeppo , July 21, 2018 at 3:18 pm GMT
Yet presentation-wise, Putin looked like the alpha male at Helsinki, with Trump nodding along deferentially.

Trump can afford to be deferential since Putin will be making all the concessions.

Felix Keverich , July 21, 2018 at 4:25 pm GMT
@PiltdownMan

I suspect trashing Russia makes him feel better about his own country going to shit. He knows America and the West in general are anything, but "buoyant". A healthy, confident society does not elect president Donald Trump.

Art Deco , July 21, 2018 at 4:46 pm GMT
@Corvinus

The government barred Putin's leading opponent from running.

No, it did not. Since 1991, the distribution of preferences in Russia has bounced around a series of set points. What you see roughly is as follows:

1. "The Machine": 55%
2. Soviet nostalgiacs: 15%
3. Russian nationalists: 15%
4. Occidental spectrum: 15%

The 3d of these is apportioned about evenly between Zhirinovsky admirers and the remainder. The last is apportioned between parties of a more social democratic or populist bent and parties of a more social-liberal bent. The sort of Europhile element you're calling 'the leading opponent' is generally good for 7% of the ballots. People wanting that choice had that choice, just not the particular person to whom you refer.

Andrei Martyanov , Website July 21, 2018 at 5:32 pm GMT

To add insult to the Left's injury, the Russians -- well, some of them -- returned openly to Christianity. And not only did they drop actual Marxism, they showed no enthusiasm for Cultural Marxism, marginalizing homosexuals and feminists and keeping themselves overwhelmingly, shamefully, white.

So called "Cultural Marxism", or whatever is passing under this term in the West, didn't exist in USSR since Stalin. It was a profoundly conservative society with a huge emphasis on family values, with homosexuality considered a crime and with many other cultural features, including "folkish" Russian culture (somebody has to lecture Western "academia" on what were the most popular TV series in USSR in 1960s-1980s) promoted, including a massive and greatly influential art-movement of Pochvenniki. But I guess for "connoisseurs" of Russian culture whose bottom line is founded on Solzhenitsyn with some Pasternak and Hollywood cliches it is difficult to admit the fact that they pretty much know nothing about Russia's history of the 20th century.

Mr. Anon , July 21, 2018 at 6:03 pm GMT

I'll even have to admit I agree with the people who piled on Trump for dissing our intelligence agencies at the news conference. I'm not a fan of those agencies, or indeed of intelligence agencies in general, ours or anyone else's. I think Trump's right to distrust them.

Maybe. Maybe not. It is clear that Trump's own DoJ acted to sabotage him by releasing the indictments of the twelve russian GRU officials just before Trump's meeting with Putin.

I would like to see a couple questions asked of Trump's critics (maybe Tucker Carlson could ask them).

1.) When was the last time that the Justice Department indicted foreign intelligence agents living abroad? Have they ever done it? Are we truly shocked that foreign spies are spying on us?

2.) Has the CIA ever interfered with a foreign election? Is there any current operation in which they are interfering with a foreign election? Have they supported any NGO or political party in Russia that is in opposition to the current russian government?

3.) When did liberals decide that the acid test of loyalty to America is one's loyalty to the US government's clandestine intelligence agencies?

Reactionary Utopian , July 21, 2018 at 6:20 pm GMT

Putin is the illegitimate leader of a corrupt and dysfunctional country, an economic nonentity among nations, geographically overstretched, with a rusting military and a population increasingly composed of aging drunks. Trump is the constitutionally elected leader of a country so prosperous, buoyant, and secure, our main national problem is holding back the tide of people trying to break in across our borders to share in our blessed bounty.

Mr. Derbyshire, in what sense is Putin "illegitimate" as the Russian head of state?

I mean, for all my horror of the HellBeast (and it's substantial), let's face it: Trumpy is the skin-of-his-teeth winner of a Constitutional, yes, but also corrupt and rigged, election process. And our main national problem isn't holding back the tide of border-breakers; it's the lack of any interest in doing so on the part of the ruling class, and the failure of the ruled to rise up and overthrow our corrupt rulers. In a lot of ways, we make Russia look pretty good.

Hunsdon , July 21, 2018 at 6:37 pm GMT
The Russians went into Crimea after the US instigated a coup ("regime change") against Ukraine. Crimea is the home to the Black Sea Fleet and has tremendous national importance to Russia. Think of it as our San Diego.

The Russians went into Syria at the express invitation of the government of the Syrian Arab Republic. The US is in Syria on the basis of "no one can tell us no." Might makes right? Is that a principle the Derb really wants to endorse? (If need be, we could go deeper into the weeds and discuss just who each side, the Americans and the Russians, are supporting in Syria; that also favors the Russians.)

Perhaps the Derb should educate himself by visiting Pat Lang's site and reading what non-propagandists are saying.

Cyrano , July 21, 2018 at 9:18 pm GMT

Putin is the illegitimate leader of a corrupt and dysfunctional country, an economic nonentity among nations, geographically overstretched, with a rusting military

Watch it there, pal, you are coming dangerously close to what that genius Hitler once said about Russia – something about Russia being a limp virgin ready to be taken into the lustful mighty arms of German Mars – or some stupidity like that. It turned out that our limp virgin by 1945 developed such a phallus that managed to tore a new one to Germany.

If I was you, I wouldn't worry so much about the condition that Russia is in today, I would rather worry about the shape that your country of origin – GB is in. On one hand, Britain still rules over the same eclectic mix of people like in the glory days of its empire – the only difference is that now they had to scale down their "empire" to about 244 000 sq km and also had to suffer some minor indignities along the way, such as organized gang rapes from their subjects of indo-pakistani origin, but other than that – it's just like it used to be.

WorkingClass , July 21, 2018 at 9:30 pm GMT

Putin is the illegitimate leader of a corrupt and dysfunctional country, an economic nonentity among nations, geographically overstretched, with a rusting military and a population increasingly composed of aging drunks.

Bullshit!

They've murdered people in foreign countries, too. The poisoning in England of Sergei Skripal and his daughter is beyond naughty; it's disgraceful, and deserving of diplomatic retaliation -- which indeed it's got: 23 Russian diplomats were expelled from Britain.

More Bullshit!

I just don't think a news conference in a foreign country is the right place to air that distrust.

That's your stupid opinion. It was a crappy presentation. And presentation for you means more than substance. You are NOT helping Derb.

Jon0815 , July 21, 2018 at 9:34 pm GMT
@PiltdownMan

Given that per capita GDP in Russia is about 3-4 times as high as when he took office, this is not surprising.

It's 8 times as high: $1330 in 1999 vs. $10,743 in 2017.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCA

As for its being an "economic non-entity among nations", it is a mid-sized economy, about the size of an Australia, Italy, India and so on, a $2 trillion economy, give or take, using the purchasing power parity figures.

It's a $4 trillion economy using the purchasing power parity figures (the same as Germany).

Colin Wright , Website July 21, 2018 at 9:54 pm GMT
' Our Ruling Class Is Crazy '

They're no longer our ruling class. That's why Trump drives them crazy. That he's in the White House rubs their nose in the fact.

Chris Mallory , July 21, 2018 at 10:41 pm GMT

our intelligence professionals are Americans,

And many of them are dual citizens, foreign nationals, immigrants or the children of immigrants, so they are not American at all. No one not a natural born citizen born to natural born citizens should be employed by the US government in any capacity, including the military.

romar , July 22, 2018 at 12:16 am GMT
@Andy

Mr. JD doesn't appear to keep up with the news about Russia Puzzling.
But even more puzzling: he believes the UK leaders nonsense about the "Skripals affair." A bad sign, indeed.
As for Trump's performance at Helsinki, I don't see why he should be pained by it: it was no worse than any of his previous shows.

And Putin was just his usual self: efficient and together. Trump did well to agree that Putin should present the summary of their talks, as there was no time for producing a written report for Trump to read. Putin had, as usual, taken notes during the two meetings.

What Trump said in his opening remarks was fine, and he sounded just right and convincing. The problem arose when he was answering questions, and he certainly shouldn't have run his intel down as he did, but in all fairness they don't deserve better.

Daniel Rich , July 22, 2018 at 5:21 am GMT
I wonder why nobody denounces the asking of idiotic questions, solemnly to embarrass the leader of another country [H.E. Mr. Putin] in front of an international audience ?
jilles dykstra , July 22, 2018 at 7:29 am GMT
With the exception of the period 1919 1933 the USA, that is, the ruling class, wanted to control the world. In this period the ideas of the ruling class, to be precise, were the same, but the people had enough of USA blood flowing for imperialism, neutrality laws came, the laws that FDR hated.

If trying to control the world is crazy, I wonder. Rome also then wanted to control the then known world, that is, the accessible parts. The British empire controlled 40% of the world, also the then accessible parts.

So when in fact one man blocks that the whole world is controlled, the ruling class assumes that after Russia had fallen China will fall too, I wonder if one can say they're crazy. If they are, then mankind has been crazy forever. A historian calculated that on thirteen years of war in Europe on average there were three years of peace.

If I'm right in my ideas on Trump, he's unique in world history, the first time the ruler of an empire sees that the empire can no longer be held, and acts accordingly. Those who still think the USA can conquer those parts of the world the USA does not yet control, are, of course are near a nervous breakdown. Panic is not good for thoughtful solutions, if one of these days Trump dies unexpectedly, from whatever cause, it will not surprise me. What is interesting, to understate, what the reaction will be among those who elected Trump.

El Dato , July 22, 2018 at 7:38 am GMT
@WorkingClass

Yeah, what happened to the Novichok story? Last I heard was that a person died 4 months after because she found a novichok dispenser somewhere, and the UK announced that after painstakingly combing through CCTV footage and Russian passenger records "they knew who did it".

animalogic , July 22, 2018 at 7:42 am GMT
Trump derangement syndrome makes idiots (greater idiots) of the establishment. These morons can't see that the alliance between Russia & China is THE greatest threat to US international ambitions. If appearances are correct Trump wishes to weaken that alliance – which is diplomacy 101. Trump has a multitude of faults, but his actions re Russia would possibly gain Bismarck's approval.
JL , July 22, 2018 at 10:14 am GMT
It seems this author can't overcome his Cold Warrior past of supporting (((Soviet dissidents))) against the evils of Communism so he believes what he wants about Russia and its current state. As others have pointed out here, if he's so wrong about Russia, he's probably getting a lot else wrong as well. Perhaps Unz should become no country for old men, and leave the revolution to the younger vanguard who seem much more reality based.
RVBlake , July 22, 2018 at 11:40 am GMT
Occupied Crimea and attacked Skripal? Hmmm. And intervened energetically in Syria? Pot, kettle?
El Dato , July 22, 2018 at 11:43 am GMT
Based commentary by Michael McCaffrey for RT: Captain America savages Trump in battle of the useful idiots He just left out Mr. Schwarzenegger's tweets. People playing tough guys doing shouty politics by short message, thinking they are what they pretend to be on stage. It's pretty liberal out there.
JohnRedburn , July 22, 2018 at 11:44 am GMT
@Miro23

I would add number 7: dismantle the monopoly on American media and internet. You're not going to have a functioning democracy when one small ethnic group controls a country's media. And expect the inevitable. A year ago legislators introduced a bill in Sweden to restrict media ownership to no more than 5% by any person, family, company or ethnic group. The Jews wasted no time screaming anti-semitism.

Miro23 , July 22, 2018 at 12:46 pm GMT
@JohnRedburn

And expect the inevitable. A year ago legislators introduced a bill in Sweden to restrict [total] media ownership to no more than 5% by any person, family, company or ethnic group. The Jews wasted no time screaming anti-semitism.

I can understand person, family and company but ethnic group? Do you mean minority ethnic group – or are ethnic Swedes not allowed to own more than 5% of their own media?

Jon Halpenny , July 22, 2018 at 1:23 pm GMT
The man who led the killing of the Romanovs. Yakov Yurovsky. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakov_Yurovsky#Early_life
JMcG , July 22, 2018 at 1:27 pm GMT
@blahbahblah

The Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Warfare just issued a report last week stating that there is no evidence that chemical weapons were used in Syria. Another false flag. I really don't believe a word I read in the press any longer. I can't believe that anyone does. The left means to take and hold power and that's it. That idiot Andrew McCarthy from NR has just expressed astonishment that he could have been so naive as to believe in the integrity of the FISA warrant process. What a load of codswallop.

I, commenter , July 22, 2018 at 2:24 pm GMT
last year the BBC had a bunch of nostalgic puff pieces on the 1917 Revolution, this year all the press is silent about the murder of the Romanovs. The brutal murder of that family was a grisly foreshadow of what was essentially a government ran by a foreigners was to do to the Russian (and Ukrainian) people. and perhaps its a grisly foreshadow of what the globalists want to do to badwhites. also remember that 'revolution' was sponsored by many wall street firms, who made a ton of money liquidating the nobility's assets
Jon0815 , July 22, 2018 at 3:56 pm GMT
@FKA Max

That stratfor chart is outdated and already proven wrong: It projects a total Russian population of 137 million in 2020, but in 2018 Russia's population is 146 million (144 without Crimea), and it has been basically stable for years.

It's true that the Muslim share of Russia's population is rising, but it is doing so very slowly, because the fertility of Russia's Muslims isn't high (below replacement in every majority-Muslim region except Chechnya). It's currently something 1.9 children per woman for Muslims, vs. 1.6 for ethnic Russians, and will likely equalize long before Muslims are anywhere near a majority.

Muslims and the Chinese are taking over the south and east of Russia through high birth rates and (illegal) immigration.

The trope that Chinese are taking over Russia's east is complete nonsense. Chinese have little economic incentive to migrate north to Siberia, rather than south to the wealthy regions of their own country.

Beckow , July 22, 2018 at 4:19 pm GMT
@PiltdownMan

what the purpose of this somewhat jingoistic prefatory note is, or whom it is intended to placate

It is a ritual, so the purpose is to convey loyalty. It doesn't placate anyone. What it unfortunately does is to undermine all else Derbyshire says. If he is this uninformed, or conformist, about basic facts, how can one take what he says seriously?

gmachine1729 , Website July 22, 2018 at 5:52 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

From his website ,

I'm about 65% Russian, 25% Lak (Dagestani), and 10% other (mostly Italian, Jewish).I have a degree in Political Economy from U.C. Berkeley.

Reminds me of http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2011/06/high-v-low-m.html . That Political Economy degree from Berkeley surely is a signal for that. I like humanities. Problem is a lot of US humanities is garbage, and if you have only a humanities degree from a US school, smart, knowledgable people will assume you to be problematic.

Maybe I come across as high V low M too, but I'm not, see https://gmachine1729.com/writings-by-category/pure-math/ . Yes, I also consider many people in programming and software engineering to be high V low M. I've seen Google senior engineers who don't even know what divergence or curl are.

utu , July 22, 2018 at 5:54 pm GMT
@Art Deco

https://www.jewishquarterly.org/issuearchive/articled325.html?articleid=38

Jewish activity in the porn industry divides into two (sometimes overlapping) groups: pornographers and performers. Though Jews make up only two per cent of the American population, they have been prominent in pornography. Many erotica dealers in the book trade between 1890 and 1940 were immigrant Jews of German origin. According to Jay A. Gertzman, author of Bookleggers and Smuthounds:The Trade in Erotica, 1920-1940 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999), 'Jews were prominent in the distribution of gallantiana [fiction on erotic themes and books of dirty jokes and ballads], avant-garde sexually explicit novels, sex pulps, sexology, and flagitious materials'.

In the postwar era, America's most notorious pornographer was Reuben Sturman, the 'Walt Disney of Porn'. According to the US Department of Justice, throughout the 1970s Sturman controlled most of the pornography circulating in the country. Born in 1924, Sturman grew up in Cleveland's East Side. Initially, he sold comics and magazines, but when he realized sex magazines produced twenty times the revenue of comic books, he moved exclusively into porn, eventually producing his own titles and setting up retail stores. By the end of the 1960s, Sturman ranked at the top of adult magazine distributors and by the mid-70s he owned over 200 adult bookstores. Sturman also introduced updated versions of the traditional peepshow booth (typically a dark room with a small colour TV on which the viewer can view X-rated videos). It was said that Sturman did not simply control the adult-entertainment industry; he was the industry. Eventually he was convicted of tax evasion and other crimes and died, disgraced, in prison in 1997. His son, David, continued running the family business.

The contemporary incarnation of Sturman is 43-year-old Jewish Clevelander Steven Hirsch, who has been described as 'the Donald Trump of porno'. The link between the two is Steve's father, Fred, who was a stockbroker-cum-lieutenant to Sturman. Today Hirsch runs the Vivid Entertainment Group, which has been called the Microsoft of the porn world, the top producer of 'adult' films in the US. His specialty was to import mainstream marketing techniques into the porn business. Indeed, Vivid parallels the Hollywood studio system of the 1930s and 1940s, particularly in its exclusive contracts to porn stars who are hired and moulded by Hirsch. Vivid was the subject of a behind-the-scenes reality TV show recently broadcast on Channel 4.

Anonymous [128] Disclaimer , July 22, 2018 at 6:39 pm GMT
German Christians whose children are force-fed LGBT sex ed in schools and where home schooling is not permitted, and where parents will be arrested if they do not put their children in the schools, have sought asylum in Russia, and there have been more than a few of them, much as the media likes to ignore it. When the US no longer allows home-schooling, and forces their children into the schools, you will see the same thing happening in the US. Christian Americans will be seeking asylum in Russia

That is going to happen.

Anonymous [128] Disclaimer , July 22, 2018 at 7:02 pm GMT
When Trump said he considers Russia a "competitor", he was right. No truer words were ever spoken. But the only way to get Americans on board with the greedy plans of greedy people in and out of government is to demonize your "competitors."
WJ , July 22, 2018 at 7:48 pm GMT
"Naughty things in Syria"??? Saving the non crazies in Syria from jihadi lunatics is naughty? I suppose if you an Israeli, Saudi or US Democrat. To others , Russia was a savior. This writer appears to be auditioning for a return to NRO.
Art Deco , July 22, 2018 at 10:07 pm GMT
@Stick

Russia's economy is stillborn while China's is booming and feasting on America's assets and market.

Russia's per capita product exceeds China's. It hasn't been as economically dynamic as China (a 2-fold increase in per capita produce over 1998-2016, v. China's 3.3-fold), but it has done quite well and has satisfactory macroeconomic indicators across the board. It's export sector remains dominated by oil and minerals, there's an excess of state ownership in the economy, and there are some quality of life issues (street crime). Room for improvement, but not doing badly.

Avery , July 22, 2018 at 10:54 pm GMT
@Art Deco

{Russia's per capita product exceeds China's.}

Not by a whole lot (China=$8,800 vs Russia=$10,900 2017).
Also, China's huge GDP is divided by 1.38 billion people.
I doubt anything more than 200-300 million of those ~1.4 billion are involved in contributing anything significant to China' GDP. So their $12 trillion GDP is quite impressive.

Russia should be doing much, much better.

{It hasn't been as economically dynamic as China}

China's economic 'miracle' is largely thanks to America, like South Korea before, and like Japan before SK.

America opened up its rich, practically unlimited market to Chinese goods _and_ American companies were encouraged to setup shop in China ( .like in South Korea). Chinese are smart people and they learned, and over time started creating their own. You go to Home Depot or Lowes today and there is hardly _anything_ manufactured in US: it's all "Made in China".

Russia, on the other hand, is considered an enemy by US, so everything is done to thwart its economic progress. Russians are also at fault, but we cannot ignore the fact that China got a huge boost from the economically advanced West to get its (dynamic) economy going.

[Jul 22, 2018] Israel helping move 800 White Helmets out of Syria via Jordan report -- RT World News

Notable quotes:
"... "members of a Syrian civil organization and their families" ..."
"... "additional European countries." ..."
"... "due to an immediate threat to their lives," ..."
"... "an exceptional humanitarian gesture." ..."
"... "humanitarian aid to civilians, women and children" ..."
"... "will not accept any Syrian refugee to our territory." ..."
"... "political solution." ..."
"... If you like this story, share it with a friend! ..."
Jul 22, 2018 | www.rt.com

Some 800 members of the controversial Western-backed White Helmets will be brought to Jordan through Israel to be reportedly resettled later in the UK, Canada, and Germany. The UN is overseeing the exodus. Hundreds of the self-described aid workers, who operate exclusively in rebel-held areas, have crossed into Israel from southwestern Syria overnight on Sunday, German tabloid Bild reported, citing its own correspondents in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights.

Evacuation of white helmets plus families still ongoing here at syrian israeli border. Plan is to drive asap to jordan. @BILD pic.twitter.com/KcBOdduM2t

-- Paul Ronzheimer (@ronzheimer) July 22, 2018

The White Helmets' passage has been facilitated by Israel, according to Bild, which reports they have been transferred through an Israeli military base. The evacuation kicked off at 9:30 pm local time on Saturday and was expected to continue into the night. Several roads were put on lockdown by the army and police as part of preparations for the exodus.

On Sunday morning, the IDF's Twitter account confirmed that Israeli forces had evacuated "members of a Syrian civil organization and their families" at the request of the US and "additional European countries." In a number of subsequent tweets, the military said that some "civilians" were rescued from southern Syria "due to an immediate threat to their lives," and because Israel wanted to make "an exceptional humanitarian gesture."

Following an Israeli Government directive and at the request of the United States and additional European countries, the IDF recently completed a humanitarian effort to rescue members of a Syrian civil organization and their families

-- IDF (@IDFSpokesperson) July 22, 2018

The civilians were subsequently transferred to a neighboring country. Israel continues to maintain a non-intervention policy regarding the Syrian conflict and continues to hold the Syrian regime accountable for all activities in Syrian territory

-- IDF (@IDFSpokesperson) July 22, 2018

It did not clarify to which organization, if any, the evacuees belonged.

Israel previously admitted that it has been providing humanitarian assistance to Syrian militants, treating over 1,000 wounded rebel fighters in its hospitals. According to Israel's ex-Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon, the assistance was granted under the condition that the militants would not let Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) and Al-Qaeda affiliated fighters slip into Israel and would not do any harm to the population of Druze villages.

Read more FILE PHOTO © Hosam Katan White Helmets are helping Syrian militants prepare 'false flag' chemical attack – Idlib residents

However, Israel has been adamant about not taking in Syrian refugees, with hawkish Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman stating last month that while the Jewish state keeps providing "humanitarian aid to civilians, women and children" camped on the Syrian side of the border, it "will not accept any Syrian refugee to our territory."

It is supposed that the White Helmets will not stay in the Jewish state for longer than is needed to transport them to the Jordanian border. The transfer has been confirmed by Jordanian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ambassador Mohammad al-Kayed, as cited by Ammon News.

Al-Kayed said that Jordan had granted the request on purely humanitarian grounds after Britain, Canada and Germany each reportedly pledged to take in a share of the White Helmets fleeing what they describe as potential persecution by Damascus. Last month, Jordan, which already hosts some 1.3 million displaced Syrians, said it won't take any more in, stressing the need for a "political solution."

Once in the Jordanian territory, the Syrians will be confined to a specially designated restricted area where they will stay for a maximum of three months until handed over to one of the Western countries, Al-Kayed noted , adding that the scheme should not place any additional burden on Jordan, as the organization of their passage has been arranged by the UN.

Read more White Helmets member walks on the rubble of destroyed buildings in Eastern Ghouta © Abdulmonam Eassa / AFP 'Propaganda organization': White Helmets 'engage in anti-Assad activities' – author Sy Hersh to RT

It's yet unclear how the members of the White Helmets, who have on multiple occasions been reported as dealing with Al-Qaeda-linked militants, will be distributed among the potential recipients, with Bild reporting that it is yet unknown how many of them will come Germany's way.

A looming evacuation of the White Helmets from Syria was first reported by CBS News on July 14. The broadcaster reported that the issue was raised by US allies in conversations with US President Donald Trump on the sidelines of the two-day NATO summit on July 11- July 12.

Reportedly, UK Prime Minister Theresa May personally interceded on the White Helmets' behalf during Trump's visit to the UK, a day after the summit.

On Friday, CBS News reported that the operation was to be launched "very quickly" and proceed in accordance with a joint plan, thrashed out by the US, the UK and Canada.

If you like this story, share it with a friend!

[Jul 22, 2018] How eerie and unsettling it can be when people change their minds by Corey Robin

Jul 22, 2018 | crookedtimber.org

Jul 5, 2018

I just finished reading the letters of Thomas Mann, who's an exemplary figure in this regard. Leading up to World War I, he was a fairly standard old-school conservative militarist/nationalist. That continued until the end of the war. After the war, he became a dedicated liberal defender of Weimar. Once the Nazis took over, his liberalism morphed into a humanist anti-fascism. By the end of the war, that antifascism had come to include overt sympathy with communism and the Soviet Union (he even praised Mission to Moscow on aesthetic grounds!) That continued into the late 1940s, when he supported Henry Wallace for president and was outspoken in his opposition to HUAC .

But then, around 1950 or so, you begin to see, ever so slightly and subtly, Mann's opinions starting to change once again. He never comes out in defense of McCarthyism, but you begin to feel a chill and distance toward the left. His criticisms of the repression in the US begin to modulate and moderate. Till finally, in a 1953 letter to Agnes Meyer, his close friend and matriarch of The Washington Post, he confesses that he has decided not to publicly oppose McCarthyism in the New York Times. He reports to her that when he was asked -- "probably by someone on the 'left'" -- what he thinks about the censorship and restrictions on freedom in the US, this was his reply: "American democracy felt threatened and, in the struggle for freedom, considered that there had to be a certain limitation on freedom, a certain disciplining of individual thought, a certain conformism. This was understandable." Though he adds some sort of anodyne qualification at the end of that.

It just about broke my heart. That "left" in scare quotes (previously Mann had seen himself as a part of the left), the clichés about freedom and the Cold War, the betrayal of all that he had said and done in the preceding decades -- and most important, the seeming inability to see that he was betraying anything at all.

... ... ....

During the McCarthy years, Arendt wrote in a letter to Jaspers how terrified she was of the repression. It wasn't just the facts of the coercion she saw everywhere. It was how quickly it happened, how the mood of the moment had gone so suddenly from a generous and capacious liberalism to a cramped anticommunism. "Can you see," she wrote, "how far the disintegration has gone and with what breathtaking speed it has occurred? And up to now hardly any resistance. Everything melts away like butter in the sun." Victor Klemperer notices and narrates a similar shift among his friends and colleagues in his diaries of Nazi Germany.

Adam Roberts 07.05.18 at 7:12 am (no link)

One of the core truths about clever people is that they are very good at coming-up with clever justifications for whatever it is they happen to believe.
Z 07.05.18 at 9:27 am (no link)
People who were lambasting that kind of politics in 2016 are now embracing it -- without remarking upon the change, without explaining it, leaving the impression that this is what they believed all along.

Amusingly, and for essentially the same reasons, a symmetric movement has taken place in France, with many people self-identifying as socialist (at least nominally) two years ago now fully behind flat taxes on capital gains, detention of minors up to 90 days if their parents are undocumented and privatization of passenger trains (three ideas that have historically been considered outside of the spectrum of reasonnable political opinion, even by the former mainstream right-wing party).

But coincidentally, I was re-reading Bourdieu's On the State these last weeks so I'm not so surprised, especially as I don't think that believe is quite the right word to describe how political and social positions are embraced (and in that respect, I believe that intellectuals are different only in their vociferous protestations to the contrary, and their somewhat superior ability to identify with the domineering side).

"In modern societies, the State makes a decisive contribution towards the production and reproduction of the instruments of construction of social reality. [ ] The State thereby creates the conditions for an immediate orches­tration of habitus which is itself the foundation for a consensus on this set of shared self-evidences which constitute common sense ."

So when shifts and breaks in the structure of the field of State power happen, it is perhaps not so surprising that schemes of perceptions also quickly change so that single-payer universal health care/the suppression of a capital gain tax can move in a couple of months from worthy to mention only to summarily dismiss as absurd to common sense.

Glen Tomkins 07.05.18 at 1:48 pm (no link)
I don't understand the problem. Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia. Always. Simple fact. What's to explain?
Alex Ameter 07.05.18 at 1:49 pm (no link)
American culture is terrifyingly guilty of this. The inability for an empire's people to understand the concept of blowback when their nation's military incursions into the surrounding world create deep sources of instability and trauma is one marker of empire in decline.

That being said, the fact that free will is tenuous at best and humans are so easily manipulated en masse gives me hope that the species might pull off long-term survival if it finds the right balance between setting up mutually reinforcing beneficial mechanisms to guide most human psyches and cultures into generally sustainable behavior and the chaos of a free reality without socially enforced categorizations or narratives.

Bard the Grim 07.05.18 at 2:02 pm (no link)
I've never liked the wording of the proverbial "When the facts change ." Speaking as a scientist and pedant, facts don't change. Circumstances, which are facts as a function of time, can change. Evidence, which is fact revealed by observation, can change. When discussing how opinions and interpretations change, it's helpful to make those distinctions.
Yan 07.05.18 at 2:50 pm (no link)
Political football @32: "we'd need to know who has changed "in the media, on social media, among politicians, activists, and citizens"."

Exhibit A:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/03/opinion/radical-democrats-are-pretty-reasonable.html

For Twitter readers, exhibit B:
https://mobile.twitter.com/peterdaou

William Uspal 07.05.18 at 2:55 pm (no link)
"A couple of comments reprimanded me about how Thomas had moved to the right in the 1950s, on a path similar to Thomas Mann's. [ ] The pressure exerted during McCarthyism was immense and it took almost superhuman strength to resist it"

I recently read a biography of Bayard Rustin, partially in the hope of getting some insight into how to integrate civil rights / racial justice and comprehensive social-democratic reform into one program. One might object: Rustin drifted towards the neoconservative right in his later years -- did his theoretical framework already carry the germ of accommodation in the 1960s/70s? But: how easy was it to resist the neoliberal/Reaganite tide?

SusanC 07.05.18 at 3:37 pm (no link)
Yes, I agree the phenomenon is really interesting.

On the other hand, what other people think can be one of the facts that changed. This is particularly true of variants of the "lesser evil argument" which were very much in evidence before the last UK general election and the US presidential election.

If someone was saying, "Look, I know the left of the Democrats prefer Sander's policies, but the important thing is defeating Trump, and Clinton has the best chance of doing that", then they can in good faith claim that new facts -- we now know that Clinton didn't win against Trump -- has caused them to have changed tactics, but their overall objective -- supporting anyone who looks like they could defeat Trump -- is basically unchanged.

The Guardian newspaper became significantly less anti-Corbyn once the general election results were out (although it still regularly features attack pieces), which looks like another instance of this.

Joseph Brenner 07.05.18 at 6:10 pm (no link)
This entire piece seems to be about big changes in attitude and opinion, leaving me a little puzzled by the remark about "micro-shifts". But I guess the general drift is this:

the subtle coercions of new opinion, the ever-finer movements we all make to keep up with the flow, so as not to be left behind.

You want to be engaged with the world, to be part of the conversation, which means you can be influenced by the conversation, which means you may very well be exposed to some pressures to conform.

Much like the later Thomas Mann, I have difficulty talking about the left without quotations (though I'm more likely to use the adjective "lefty"). The present-day right is certainly a mess, it may indeed have always been a mess (which as I take it is Corey Robin's main theme) but there were times in the past when the left was also decidedly a mess (and in some respects it still is [1])–

Why would you be shocked at the lack of intellectual integrity of someone who was a Stalinist on into the 1940s? Myself, I have a lot of respect from someone like Chomsky who's managed to be left-wing his entire life without indulging in apologies for Stalin or Mao.

These days, periodically you see someone try to do a i-was-a-righty-until-trump piece but many people seem to view these with suspicion and regard them as phony ploys for attention of some sort. We pay lip service to the idea that people should be open to intellectual change– who could forget the genre where the author demonstrates open-mindedness with ritual lists of "things I've changed my mind about" (um I see John Quiggin went there)– but when actually confronted with someone who has changed their mind, the reaction is often not very positive.

I have a tendency to use the Iraq war as a pundit-litmus test: In principle I'm willing to continue reading a pro-invasion pundit, but I want to see them recant, and I want to read their excuses– but really there isn't anything they can say that's going to impress me. If they're blowing in the wind this badly, if they can ignore the obvious for the sake of fitting in with the pack, it's unlikely they've got anything of value to add on anything.

[1] my standard example of present-day left-wing madness is the anti-nuclear power stance: if Jerry Brown were really serious about global warming, he would not have had the Diablo Canyon plant closed. I would feel happier about Ocasio-Cortez if she were in favor of clean energy, rather than just "renewable".

Lee A. Arnold 07.05.18 at 7:50 pm (no link)
Corey: "mainstream liberal opinion -- in the media, on social media, among politicians, activists, and citizens micro-shifts that happen under the pressure of events the most pressing fact that seems to change people's opinions is other people's opinions."

1. Most intellectuals aren't guided by intellect but by emotion like everyone else, and so there is a lot of herd instinct especially in regard to politics.

2. I am not convinced that the media catalogue of mainstream opinion truly reflects the most widely-held opinions. What is happening out here in the low-income suburbs seems more amorphous and changeable.

3. A lot of the microshifts are evidence of a political emergence because a compromising centrist Democrat failed, the new President is no such animal, and the Republican Party is revealed to centrists as policy obstructionists with lots of false promises, now freely aiming to destroy the safety-net and distort the justice system. My sense of it is that consequently a lot more people now see that the time for compromising moderation is over because it will never be reciprocated by the Republicans in Congress.

This goes along with our old thesis that both parties are breaking up; the only question was which one would go first. Trump is destroying the Republicans and it opened the cracks wider in the Democratic Party. Question now is whether the centrist Democrats have the brains to accept the newbies.

4. Little noticed is that the "intellectuals" and Bernie supporters committed malpractice by never emphasizing, enough to make it through the media noise, that Sanders' and now Ocasio-Cortez's "socialism" is not "gov't ownership of the means of production" but rather New Deal-style social democracy like any sane country. (Bernie's people acted as if everybody should know this already, but of course they don't.) Next up, will the "intellectuals" continue to commit malpractice by not helping Ocasio-Cortez explain through the media noise how it can work?

engels 07.06.18 at 1:31 am (no link)
Liberal pundits are twisting themselves into pretzels trying to explain away Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's victory.
https://jacobinmag.com/2018/07/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-liberal-pundits
Helen 07.06.18 at 4:17 am (no link)
Speaking as a social democrat who is anti – everything to do with neoliberalism and its destruction of labour relations and economic safety nets, I was scolded relentlessly by a brogressive pro-Sanders friend throughout the year of the US election (I'm an Australian, so is he, so the level of animus was astonishing.) Some of the tropes thrown at me were: Since you think HC is the least worst candidate, it means you endorse everything she's ever done, it means you are in favour of neoliberalism, it means you just want to vote for a woman even though we say Bernie's a better candidate, it means you are pro-war and want to kill Syrian children, it means you're an elitist who just wants to support the haute bourgeoisie.. on and on and on.
So fast forward to last week and guess what? of course I'm delighted by a self-described social democratic (or democratic socialist which seems to be the current wording) winning a primary. My principles haven't changed. They were just distorted and misrepresented by the brogressive left. My friend would eagerly adopt the framing employed in the OP (that I've belatedly seen the light about preferring a social democratic candidate), because of course that makes him look wise and consistent, and me uneducated and fickle. I completely reject that frame; it's false.
Mario 07.06.18 at 10:42 pm (no link)
The problem with the modern left is that it has very little political capital (oh, the word!) apart from principles and morals. Back in the day there was a realistic alternative political project, which, in principle, had something for everyone. Nowadays though there just isn't such a project and the result is that all that is left really just is bare morals and principles, and the resulting piety contests.

As a consequence, the left has, in practice, accepted capitalism as the baseline scenario and is playing by its rules while pretending something else. (Back when the Damore memo hit the waves, what really struck me was the idea that the google campus was a "liberal environment". That was like reading that the death star in star wars was staffed by budhists.)

The modern left can't provide a constructive answer to the problems of, say, the working class. Such things are not even much on the radar. Note how trans rights and gender issues (issues completely irrelevant to the wider population) absolutely dominate the discussion, while the plight of the working poor, or the well-being of families, is mostly ignored.

Furthermore, many on the modern left use principles and morals as branding tokens (like wearing Nike shoes, being vegan or driving a hybrid), and don't give much of a damn about outcomes. That's why they can change opinions overnight without feeling much remorse: it's not as if these ever were sincere opinions.

Mario 07.06.18 at 10:52 pm ( 112 )
Lobsterman @106,

But gender is still a construct, no matter how desperately attached to performing their preferred gender a given person is. That's where people go off the rails. We'll get back there fairly soon, I'm sure. There are far too many cis men who want to be nice to their kids and cis women who have ambition toward their careers for us to put up with this gender role nonsense much longer.

If you pardon me – how do you suggest we negotiate who gets to get pregnant and/or breast feed?

That "role nonsense" you so attack has reasons to exist. It's not just a whim of the folks that just happened to be around recently on the planet. A political project that does not acknowledge that is just plain misanthropy.

mclaren 07.08.18 at 2:23 am (no link)
Does Corey Robin admit how colossally and stupendously wrong he got the entire 2016 zeitgeist?

http://crookedtimber.org/2016/03/22/historically-liberals-and-the-left-have-underestimated-the-right-today-they-overestimate-it/

No? Well, then maybe we shouldn't listen to anything Corey Robin says.

One aspect of his argument that's completely unfair and unrealistic is that people have to decide on whether to elect a politician or enact a social policy or an economic scheme before they have any real experience-based empirical information of what the consequences will be.

Consider: neoliberal globalization was proposed and debated on the basis of books like the Toffler's Future Shock which got the future entirely wrong. The theory behind these kind of futurist predictions sounded plausible. Ever-increasing rates of technological change will result in people constantly moving around the country to new jobs, work will shift from manufacturing to knowledge work, industries will die off and constantly be replaced by new ones, the U.S. will offload its manufacturing to 3rd world countries and move to high-profit knowledge work that will vastly increase the income of the average U.S. worker, and so on. All completely wrong.

Mobility of workers in the USA has dropped to record lows because the interior of the USA is now depopulating and mired in poverty and chronic drug addiction due to the destruction of the middle class by shipping all the high-paid blue collar jobs overseas. Meanwhile, the areas with high-paying jobs are on both coasts, where housing and everything else has become so expensive average people can't afford to live there. But the high-paying coastal jobs are really only for people with artificial licensing barriers to entry that protect their professions, like doctors or lawyers or lobbyists or defense contractor liaisons who need special security clearance or financial traders who need to live within 10 blocks of the stock exchange because any farther away and their high-speed trading internet links will have too much latency to execute 50,000 trades per second. And so on.

Nobody foresaw that knowledge work would collapse because entire movies or ebooks or music CDs could be digitized and downloaded and sprayed all over the world with bittorrent. Nobody foresaw that textbooks and tutorial videos could be digitized and sent to third world countries where their population would whip our asses by producing centers of technological innovation like Shenzen or Guangdong or the whole island of Taiwan. No one foresaw that manufacturing processes prove essential to the very act of technological innovation, so that when America offshored its factories to Asia, we also lost our ability to innovative technologically, to the point where even if the USA wanted to bring back industries like iPad manufacturing to the continential U.S., we couldn't do it because we don't have the essential process technology engineering knowledge and skills.

So globalization sounded completely reasonable and sensible when it was proposed in the 1970s. Converting the USA to knowledge work seemed like a good economic model. Only in retrospect does it become clear what a gigantic trainwreck it turned out to be, and why.

Likewise, I supported Obama when he ran in 2008. Obama ran on a bunch of progressive policies. Single-payer healthcare. Shutting down the drug war. "Not doing stupid stuff." Then Obama abandons single-payer for a disastrous mandate for-profit ACA system with zero cost controls guaranteed to raise health insurance premiums limitless forever, and he starts blowing up wedding parties with drones and prosecutes more whistleblowers than all other presidents put together. That's not what I signed up for.

But how are voters supposed to know what a politician will really do until he's in office? The people who voted for FDR voted for a moderate pol who ran on a policy of balancing the budget. They got a radical progressive who experimented with all sort of wild policies, including packing the Supreme Court, to find something that would work. That's not what voters signed up for but it happened to be very successful.

The people who voted for Herbert Hoover voted for a world-famous humanitarian who was renowned for his 1921 famine relief efforts. Anyone who studied Hoover's life would predict that he would do a great job spearheading relief efforts for impoverished average workers thrown onto the street when the Great Depression hit. Instead, Hoover sat around and tried to rein in the tidal flow of red ink while the U.S. economy crashed and burned.

People change their minds because we live in a fog of uncertainty. No one has the slightest idea of what the actual results of social or economic policies will be. For example: crime has plummeted since 1990 in the U.S., but no one has the slightest idea why. Crime was a huge issue in the 1960s and 1970s and 1980s, and now it's turned out to be a problem that mysteriously disappeared on its own. No experts predicted this, no experts have been able to explain it. An awful lot of American history seems to work like this. People convulse in frenzies of worry over some huge problem that then just disappears. (Cue the deadly threat of the USSR or Erlich's "population bomb" of the 1960s or Thomas Malthus' dire predictions or the myth of "future shock" or the worries of eugenics prophets of the 1920s or the "yellow peril" predictions of late 19th century colonialis or our allegedly inevitable rush toward thermonuclear armageddon because of the arms race of the 1950s/60s etc.)

Highly-educated experts with PhDs have demonstrated zero ability to predict the actual real-world results of current trends or technology or socioeconomic policies. We live in a world dominated by the Cobra Effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect

Efforts to pass this off on the high-school-educated population of the USA as some kind of irrationality ("How eerie and unsettling it can seem when people change their minds") seem infantile and jejune. How about: "How eerie and unsettling it can seem when highly educated Ivy League PhDs' predictions and policies turn out to be gigantic trainwrecks that produce the exact opposite of what was claimed and what was calculated in highly sophisticated mathematical models"?

Larry Summers, anyone? The man responsible both for the rise of Putin (Summers and his Harvard team blew up & wrecked the Russian economy in an epic debacle from 19911-1998) _and_ Trump (Summers infamously urged Bill Clinton to deregulate the financial system and ram through bad "free trade" agreements like NAFTA that turbocharged globalization and destroyed the U.S. middle class, leading to a 1930s-style financial crash and mass impoverishment of Americans exactly the kind of circumstances which, in the 1930s, led to the rise of fascism. Which of course is what's happening today.

Yet our leaders still listen to ignorant incompetent clowns like Larry Summers with the utmost respect and reverence. Maybe that's what really "eerie," not people changing their minds when they discover that the results of the policies proposed by our elites turn out to be the kind of destructive idiocy at which even a brain-damaged three-year-old would rebel.

nastywoman 07.08.18 at 7:33 am (no link)
– and the following might be really worth repeating:

"Ever-increasing rates of technological change will result in people constantly moving around the country to new jobs, work will shift from manufacturing to knowledge work, industries will die off and constantly be replaced by new ones, the U.S. will offload its manufacturing to 3rd world countries and move to high-profit knowledge work that will vastly increase the income of the average U.S. worker, and so on. All completely wrong".

Mobility of workers in the USA has dropped to record lows because the interior of the USA is now depopulating and mired in poverty and chronic drug addiction due to the destruction of the middle class by shipping all the high-paid blue collar jobs overseas. Meanwhile, the areas with high-paying jobs are on both coasts, where housing and everything else has become so expensive average people can't afford to live there".

Yes?

"Converting the USA to knowledge work seemed like a good economic model".

Not – for anybody who know how few jobs "knowledge work" creates.

"So 'globalization sounded completely reasonable and sensible when it was proposed in the 1970s".

It's still "completely reasonable" for any "Producing Country" – where well paying manufacturing jobs were kept.

"Only in retrospect does it become clear what a gigantic trainwreck it turned out to be, and why".

Only in "Consuming Countries" -(like the US) – where the inequality of high paying "knowledge work" and "Finance" and poor paying "service jobs" let to the trainwreck and the funny idea that it is the fault of "trade" – while trade created million an million of better and better paying jobs in "Producing Countries" – which could lead us to Mario and @135

"For example, while it is mostly an illusion, the right offers jobs"

Yes –
it's mostly a illusion – as only "Producing Countries" offer jobs – while "Consuming Countries" -(with their right wing idiots) – don't – or better said they NEVER-EVER will offer enough "good" jobs to make our workers happy -(again)- and that's why we need politicians like AOC!

And that IS – because we actually DON'T live in a fog of uncertainty??!
-(saying: Nearly everybody on CT knows how well "Social-Democratic Producing Countries" work)

bruce wilder 07.11.18 at 8:53 am (no link)
many very interesting comments, but i find myself puzzled by the OP's implicit premises concerning what politics as philosophical discourse is (the nature of the beast), and what it would mean for an individual person to be "consistent" over time.

it seems to me that political discourse is a stream into which it is not possible to step into at the same place twice. and, it also seems to me that political discourse always reflects the panoply of human ambivalence amidst deep uncertainty about the consequences of public choices conditioned against private actions. could anyone strive to either embody the full range of ambivalence or be "right"? i think not.

our political opinions are in the nature of hedges: expressions of some thing we think we "know" balanced against a background of things we choose not to focus on or fully consider. and we bet our hedges socially, aligning with others on the basis of some portfolio of salients, and in historical time, ephemeral salients at that. dare i add, for and against? push-pull marching in step

the split that opened in the Democratic coalition in the 2016 primaries was just as startling and rapid as the current spate of coming together.

[Jul 22, 2018] America's Derangement Syndrome A Danger To World Peace

Jul 22, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

It is significant that Presidents Putin and Trump have both spoken out against "haters" among America's political establishment who would rather see conflict between Russia and the United States instead of a normalization of bilateral relations.

Following their landmark, successful summit this week in Helsinki, Putin and Trump separately made public comments deploring the hostile hysterical reaction emanating from broad sections of the US political establishment and its dutiful, controlled news media.

Speaking in Moscow to his diplomatic corps, President Putin warned that there were "powerful forces" within the US which are ready to sacrifice the interests of their country and indeed the interests of world peace in order to pursue selfish ambitions.

For his part, Trump also slammed opponents in the US who "hated" to see him having a good meeting with Putin. "They would rather see a major confrontation with Russia, even if that could lead to war," said the American president.

That's it in a nutshell. Rather than welcoming the opening of a cordial dialogue between the US and Russia, the American political establishment seems to desire the deepening of already dangerous tensions between the world's two nuclear superpowers. If that's not deranged, then what is?

Significantly, the hostile reaction was overwhelmingly on the American side. Russians, by and large, welcomed the long-overdue summit between Trump and Putin, and the potential beginning of a new spirit of dialogue and partnership on a range of urgent global problems. Problems including arms control, nuclear proliferation, and working out political settlement to conflicts in the Middle East, Ukraine and the Korea Peninsula.

Few people would believe that these problems can be resolved easily. But the main thing is that the leaders of the US and Russia are at least attempting to open a dialogue for understanding and political progress. That in itself is a breakthrough from the impasse in bilateral relations which have frozen into a new Cold War since the previous US administration.

We dare say that most citizens of the world would also endorse this effort by Trump and Putin at improving the relations between the US and Russia.

Significantly too, according to recent polls, most ordinary Americans seem to be agreeable or neutral about Trump's diplomatic engagement with Russia. According to a Gallup poll out this week, the vast majority of US citizens are far more concerned by economic woes than they are by anything untoward in American-Russian relations.

Thus, what we are seeing in the explosion of hostility towards the Trump-Putin summit is twofold. It is an American phenomenon, and secondly, it is an angst that animates only the political class in Washington and the news media corporations. This constituency, it is fair to say, is an elite faction within the US, albeit extremely powerful, made up of Washington politicos, the state intelligence apparatus, the corporate media and think tanks, and the deep state establishment of imperial planners and strategists. In short, this constituency is what some observers call the "War Party" that transcends the US ruling class.

Any reasonable person would have to welcome the friendly rapport engendered between Trump and Putin, and at least their initial commitment to working together on major matters of global security. The dangerous impasse of recent years in which dialogue was absent must be overcome for the sake of world peace.

Nevertheless, what has become crystal clear this week following the Helsinki summit is the "War Party" within the US is more determined than ever to sabotage any rapprochement with Russia.

No sooner had Trump returned to the US, he was assailed with a tidal wave of vilification for having met Putin in a mutual, agreeable manner. The most disturbing aspect was the recurring slander denigrating Trump as a "traitor". The hysterical name-calling was conveyed by all the major news media, citing former intelligence officials and politicians from both Democrat and Republican parties.

Which again shows that in the US there is really only one party, the War Party.

President Trump was evidently forced into making an embarrassing U-turn over his views expressed in Helsinki. He made an unconvincing disavowal of statements made alongside Putin. Trump had been pilloried for appearing to dismiss allegations of Russian interference in the US elections while he was in Helsinki. Within 24 hours, he was forced into making a retraction, saying that he did – kind of – believe that Russia had meddled in US democracy.

What Trump was subjected to by the US establishment was akin to the worst years of McCarthyite Red-Baiting as seen during the Cold War in the 1950s and 60s, when Americans were mercilessly humiliated and ostracized for being "Communist sympathizers". Today, official American paranoia is back with a vengeance. In truth, it never went away.

To be fair to Trump he has not completely capitulated to the American derangement syndrome. He has since said that he is looking forward to holding a second meeting with his Russian counterpart and continuing their promises of partnership as announced in Helsinki.

However, it is instructive that the American president is, in effect, being held hostage by powerful elements in the US ruling class who view any kind of detente with Moscow as an unforgivable betrayal.

Trump's instincts are correct that the whole so-called Russia-gate mania is a phony contrivance. That has been orchestrated by the US establishment based on its refusal to accept Trump's democratic mandate, as well as being based on an abiding hostility towards Russia as an independent world power.

The object lesson here is that the scope for improving US-Russia relations is limited, in spite of Trump's favorable personal inclinations.

An entrenched animosity towards Russia remains among the American War Party, and the current president has evidently little room for implementing his avowed policy of normalizing relations.

Russia therefore cannot place too much faith in making progress towards peaceful relations, because all-too apparently President Trump has actually very little freedom to exercise his democratic mandate. That is a damning indictment on the charade of American formal democracy. A president is elected partly on the basis of peaceful engagement, but the unelected powers-that-be have another agenda of conflict which they are pursuing come hell or high water.

What's more, the American derangement syndrome is becoming even more virulent, as can be adjudged from this week's hysterical backlash over the successful Helsinki summit.

Trump's willingness for dialogue with Russia is a welcome development. But the far more disturbing development is the full-tilt belligerence and derangement on display among the American political class. This American political chizophrenia is a clear and present danger to world peace. American citizens are as much a victim of the madness as are Russians and the rest of the world.

One positive aspect of the new phase of Cold War is that before it was largely concealed, and deceived, as a simplistic bifurcated confrontation of Americans versus Russians. Today it is evidently a situation of an American deranged elite versus the rest of the world, with the latter including ordinary American citizens who have much more to gain from standing in solidarity with Russian citizens.

[Jul 21, 2018] Either Trump Fires These People Or The Borg Will Have Won

Notable quotes:
"... The borg, financed and sworn to the agenda of globalists and the military-industrial-media complex, has its orders and is acting on them. The globalists want more free trade agreements, no tariffs and more immigration to prevent higher wages. Capital does not have a national attachment. It does not care about the 'deplorables' who support Trump and his policies: ..."
"... Nearly three-fourths, or 73 percent, of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who responded to a Pew Research survey out this week said they felt increased tariffs would benefit the country. ..."
"... Donald Trump is, indeed, a kind of traitor to the Washington Consensus, a hyper-militarized capitalist utopia of corporate dominated global supply chains that doubled the international wage-slave workforce in the last two decades of the 20th century and herded these desperate billions into a race to the bottom. The leadership of both corporate parties conspired to force U.S. workers into the global meat-grinder. ..."
"... The weapon industry and the military recognize that the 'war of terror' is nearing its end. To sell more they need to create an new 'enemy' that looks big enough to justify large and long-term spending. Russia, the most capable opponent the U.S. could have, is the designated target. A new Cold War will give justification for all kinds of fantastic and useless weapons. ..."
"... Trump grand foreign policy is following a realist assessment . He sees that previous administrations pushed Russia into the Chinese camp by aggressive anti-Russian policies in Europe and the Middle East. He wants to pull Russia out of the alliance with China, neutralize it in a political sense, to then be able to better tackle China which is the real thread to the American (economic) supremacy. ..."
Jul 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

President's Trump successful summit with President Putin was used by the 'resistance' and the deep state to launch a coup-attempt against Trump. Their minimum aim is to put Trump into a (virtual) political cage where he can no longer pursue his foreign policy agenda.

One does not have to be a fan of Trump's policies and still see the potential danger. A situation where he can no longer act freely will likely be worse. What Trump has done so far still does not add up to the disastrous policies and crimes his predecessor committed.

The borg, financed and sworn to the agenda of globalists and the military-industrial-media complex, has its orders and is acting on them. The globalists want more free trade agreements, no tariffs and more immigration to prevent higher wages. Capital does not have a national attachment. It does not care about the 'deplorables' who support Trump and his policies:

[P]olls show that Trump appears to still have the support of the bulk of Republican voters when it comes to tariffs. Nearly three-fourths, or 73 percent, of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who responded to a Pew Research survey out this week said they felt increased tariffs would benefit the country.

His 'isolationist' economic policies make Trump an enemy of the globalists :

Donald Trump is, indeed, a kind of traitor to the Washington Consensus, a hyper-militarized capitalist utopia of corporate dominated global supply chains that doubled the international wage-slave workforce in the last two decades of the 20th century and herded these desperate billions into a race to the bottom. The leadership of both corporate parties conspired to force U.S. workers into the global meat-grinder.

The weapon industry and the military recognize that the 'war of terror' is nearing its end. To sell more they need to create an new 'enemy' that looks big enough to justify large and long-term spending. Russia, the most capable opponent the U.S. could have, is the designated target. A new Cold War will give justification for all kinds of fantastic and useless weapons.

Trump does not buy the nonsense claims of 'Russian meddling' in the U.S. elections and openly says so. He does not believe that Russia wants to attack anyone. To him Russia is not an enemy.

Trump grand foreign policy is following a realist assessment . He sees that previous administrations pushed Russia into the Chinese camp by aggressive anti-Russian policies in Europe and the Middle East. He wants to pull Russia out of the alliance with China, neutralize it in a political sense, to then be able to better tackle China which is the real thread to the American (economic) supremacy.

This week was a prelude to the coup against Trump :

Former CIA chief John Brennan denounced Trump as a "traitor" who had "committed high crimes" in holding a friendly summit with Putin.

It can't get more seditious than that. Trump is being denigrated by almost the entire political and media establishment in the US as a "treasonous" enemy of the state.

Following this logic, there is only one thing for it: the US establishment is calling for a coup to depose the 45th president. One Washington Post oped out of a total of five assailing the president gave the following stark ultimatum: "If you work for Trump, quit now".

Some high ranking people working for Trump followed that advice. His chief of staff John Kelly rallied others against him:

According to three sources familiar with the situation, Kelly called around to Republicans on Capitol Hill and gave them the go-ahead to speak out against Trump. (The White House did not respond to a request for comment.) Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan held televised press conferences to assert that Russia did meddle in the election.

Others who attacked Trump over his diplomatic efforts with Russia included the Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats who used an widely distributed interview for that:

The White House had little visibility into what Coats might say. The intelligence director's team had turned down at least one offer from a senior White House official to help prepare him for the long-scheduled interview, pointing out that he had known Mitchell for years and was comfortable talking with her.

Coats was extraordinarily candid in the interview, at times questioning Trump's judgment -- such as the president's decision to meet with Putin for two hours without any aides present beyond interpreters -- and revealing the rift between the president and the intelligence community.

FBI Director Wray also undermined his boss' position:

FBI Director Christopher Wray on Wednesday defended Special Counsel Robert Mueller as a "straight shooter," and said the Russia investigation is no "witch hunt."

Speaking at the Aspen Security Forum in Colorado, Wray said he stood by his view that Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election in some capacity and that the threat remained active.

A day latter Secretary of Defense Mattis also issued a statement that contradicted his president's policy:

Secretary of Defense James Mattis took his turn doing the implicit disavowing in a statement about new military aid to Ukraine:

"Russia should suffer consequences for its aggressive, destabilizing behavior and its illegal occupation of Ukraine. The fundamental question we must ask ourselves is do we wish to strengthen our partners in key regions or leave them with no other options than to turn to Russia, thereby undermining a once in a generation opportunity to more closely align nations with the U.S. vision for global security and stability."

Pat Lang thinks that Trump should fire Coats, Wary and Rosenstein, the Deputy Attorney General who is overseeing the Mueller investigation.

My advice is to spare Rosenstein, for now, as firing him would lead to a great uproar in Congress. The Mueller investigation has not brought up anything which is dangerous to Trump and is unlikely to do so in the immediate future. He and Rosenstein can be fired at a latter stage.

But Wray and Coats do deserve a pink slip and so do Kelly and Mattis. They are political appointees who work 'at the pleasure of the President'.

The U.S. has the legislative and the judicative as a counterweight to the president who leads the executive. The 'deep state' and its moles within the executive should have no role in that balance. The elected president can and must demand loyalty from those who work for him.

Those who sabotage him should be fired, not in a Saturday night massacre but publicly, with a given reason and all at the same time. They do not deserve any warning. Their rolling heads will get the attention of others who are tempted by the borg to act against the lawful policy directives of their higher up.

All this is not a defense of Trump. I for one despise his antics and most of his policies. But having a bad president of the United States implementing the policies he campaigned on, and doing so within the proper process, is way better than having unaccountable forces dictating their policies to him.

It will be impossible for Trump to get anything done if his direct subordinates, who work 'at his pleasure', publicly sabotage the implementation of his policies. Either he fires these people or the borg will have won.

[Jul 21, 2018] Solomon Climb Down From The Summit Of Hostile Propaganda Zero Hedge

Jul 21, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Solomon: Climb Down From The Summit Of Hostile Propaganda

by Tyler Durden Fri, 07/20/2018 - 22:25 7 SHARES Authored by Norman Solomon via TruthDig.com,

Throughout the day before the summit in Helsinki, the lead story on the New York Times home page stayed the same: "Just by Meeting With Trump, Putin Comes Out Ahead." The Sunday headline was in harmony with the tone of U.S. news coverage overall. As for media commentary, the Washington Post was in the dominant groove as it editorialized that Russia's President Vladimir Putin is "an implacably hostile foreign adversary."

Contempt for diplomacy with Russia is now extreme. Mainline U.S. journalists and top Democrats often bait President Donald Trump in zero-sum terms. No doubt Hillary Clinton thought she was sending out an applause line in her tweet Sunday night: "Question for President Trump as he meets Putin: Do you know which team you play for?"

A bellicose stance toward Russia has become so routine and widespread that we might not give it a second thought -- and that makes it all the more hazardous. After President George W. Bush declared "You're either with us or against us," many Americans gradually realized what was wrong with a Manichean view of the world. Such an outlook is even more dangerous today.

Since early 2017, the U.S. mass media have laid it on thick with the rough political equivalent of a painting technique known as chiaroscuro -- "the use of strong contrasts between light and dark, usually bold contrasts affecting a whole composition," in the words of Wikipedia. The Russiagate frenzy is largely about punching up contrasts between the United States (angelic and victimized) and Russia (sinister and victimizer).

Countless stories with selective facts are being told that way. But other selectively fact-based stories could also be told to portray the United States as a sinister victimizer and Russia as an angelic victim. Those governments and their conformist media outlets are relentless in telling it either way. As the great journalist I.F. Stone observed long ago, "All governments lie, and nothing they say should be believed." In other words: don't trust, verify.

Often the biggest lies involve what remains unsaid. For instance, U.S. media rarely mention such key matters as the promise-breaking huge expansion of NATO to Russia's borders since the fall of the Berlin Wall, or the brazen U.S. intervention in Russia's pivotal 1996 presidential election, or the U.S. government's 2002 withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, or the more than 800 U.S. military bases overseas -- in contrast to Russia's nine.

For human survival on this planet, an overarching truth appears in an open letter published last week by The Nation magazine:

"No political advantage, real or imagined, could possibly compensate for the consequences if even a fraction of U.S. and Russian arsenals were to be utilized in a thermonuclear exchange. The tacit pretense that the worsening of U.S.-Russian relations does not worsen the odds of survival for the next generations is profoundly false."

The initial 26 signers of the open letter " Common Ground: For Secure Elections and True National Security " included Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, writer and feminist organizer Gloria Steinem, former UN ambassador Gov. Bill Richardson, political analyst Noam Chomsky, former covert CIA operations officer Valerie Plame, activist leader Rev. Dr. William Barber II, filmmaker Michael Moore, former Nixon White House counsel John Dean, Russia scholar Stephen F. Cohen, former U.S. ambassador to the USSR Jack F. Matlock Jr., Pulitzer Prize-winning writers Alice Walker and Viet Thanh Nguyen, The Nation editor Katrina vanden Heuvel, former senator Adlai Stevenson III, and former longtime House Armed Services Committee member Patricia Schroeder. (I was also one of the initial signers.)

Since its release five days ago, the open letter has gained support from a petition already signed by 45,000 people . The petition campaign aims to amplify the call for protecting the digital infrastructure of the electoral process that is now "vulnerable to would-be hackers based anywhere" -- and for taking "concrete steps to ease tensions between the nuclear superpowers."

We need a major shift in the U.S. approach toward Russia. Clearly the needed shift won't be initiated by the Republican or Democratic leaders in Congress; it must come from Americans who make their voices heard. The lives -- and even existence -- of future generations are at stake in the relationship between Washington and Moscow.

Many of the petition's grassroots signers have posted comments along with their names. Here are a few of my favorites:

* From Nevada: " We all share the same planet! We better learn how to do it safely or face the consequences of blowing ourselves up! "

* From New Mexico: "The earth will not survive a nuclear war. The weapons we have today are able to cause much more destruction than those of previous eras. We must find a way to common ground."

* From Massachusetts: " It is imperative that we take steps to protect the sanctity of our elections and to prevent nuclear war anywhere on the earth ."

* From Kentucky: "Secure elections are a fundamental part of a democratic system. But this could become meaningless in the event of thermonuclear war."

* From California: " There is only madness and hubris in talk of belligerence toward others, especially when we have such dangerous weapons and human error has almost led to our annihilation already more than once in the past half-century ."

Yet a wide array of media outlets, notably the "Russiagate"-obsessed network MSNBC , keeps egging on progressives to climb toward peaks of anti-Russian jingoism . The line of march is often in virtual lockstep with GOP hyper-hawks like Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham. The incessant drumbeat is in sync with what Martin Luther King Jr. called "the madness of militarism."

Meanwhile, as Dr. King said, "We still have a choice today: nonviolent coexistence or violent coannihilation."

Zorba's idea Fri, 07/20/2018 - 22:38 Permalink

My Father in law is one of the last of the Iwo Jima Marines...he is still of sound mind, enough to say, it takes far more courage for a man to solve a conflict peacefully then to end it violently. What sickness lies in the hearts and minds of these people beating the drums of war is beyond me, especially knowing none of them would ever risk their own lives. Add that to your definition of Tyranny.

[Jul 21, 2018] "Fun experiment: of those old enough, how many today who believe the "Trump is a Russian asset" story, in 2003 believed the Iraq has WMD story? 'Cause the source who lied to you in 2003, the intel community, is your same source today."

Jul 21, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

BobS July 20, 2018 at 3:43 pm

"Fun experiment: of those old enough, how many today who believe the "Trump is a Russian asset" story, in 2003 believed the Iraq has WMD story? 'Cause the source who lied to you in 2003, the intel community, is your same source today."

Growing up as I did in the Nixon/Vietnam era, I developed a skepticism of the 'official' story, something that served me well through Iran contra, incubator babies being tossed to the floor, and WMD's (a skepticism reinforced at the time by Scott Ritter, among others). As I recall, the WMD story was less a failure of intelligence as much as an administration insisting on so-called 'stovepiped' intelligence to sell their war to an American public through a mostly compliant MSM.
Regardless, my conclusion that Trump is a "Russian asset" is a result of my belief that Trump- who has yet to disclose the financial information that would disprove that belief- is reliant on Russian money, some or all of it organized crime related, to sustain his 'empire', and that there is significant overlap between the Russian mob and the Russian government.
His actions as president haven't done anything to dispel me of my belief that he is a 'Russian asset', including his traitorous behavior this past week.

[Jul 20, 2018] What exactly is fake news caucus99percent

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... @The Voice In the Wilderness ..."
"... @Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal ..."
"... By creating an extremely anti-communist state, the elite will never have to worry about losing control over society because their wealth and power remains safe and sound. ..."
Jul 20, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

k9disc on Wed, 07/18/2018 - 11:12pm

Fake News = 21st Century Conspiracy Theory Fake News is the 21st century version of Conspiracy Theory.

It is an evolution of conspiracy theory, not requiring any kind of convoluted logic or story telling that used to be required for conspiracy theory to stick. Fake News allows for simple, truthful, and logical information to be dismissed out of hand, without examination.

divineorder on Thu, 07/19/2018 - 5:58am
Yes, and then...

@edg @k9disc

Fake News allows for simple, truthful, and logical information to be dismissed out of hand, without examination.

and then they use that as justification for MIC actions.

The 'outrage' is fake. The focus on 'fake news' is fake news.

It's actually about defending the corporate media's monopoly on producing fake news serving elite state-corporate interests. https://t.co/uunJF9lj5r

-- Media Lens (@medialens) July 19, 2018

Here's an ad about COCs (PDF) from 1942. They're used for tanning leather, in soaps and perfumes, as insect repellents, for dying cloth, as antiseptics, and for many, many other commercial and industrial purposes.

Damn those Syrian butchers for dropping perfume on civilians!

Fake News is the 21st century version of Conspiracy Theory.

It is an evolution of conspiracy theory, not requiring any kind of convoluted logic or story telling that used to be required for conspiracy theory to stick. Fake News allows for simple, truthful, and logical information to be dismissed out of hand, without examination.

Cant Stop the M... on Thu, 07/19/2018 - 11:10am
@The Voice In the Wilderness In the dim reaches of

@The Voice In the Wilderness In the dim reaches of pre-history, when Walter Cronkite was reporting, a real journalist wouldn't report that someone launched a chemical weapons attack unless the journalist had at least two credible, independent sources providing solid evidence that the story was true. Newspaper editors and television producers knew their reputations were on the line and that their competitors would make sure the egg on their face stuck if they reported something blatantly wrong.

Nowadays, there are no competitors, because journalists and news outlets are mostly hanging out together in one big cheery cartel, every member of which will defend every other member to protect the reputation of the whole. The goal is not to outdo competitors and gain more eyeballs or a greater distribution or greater authority over public opinion. The goal is to defend the status quo by any means necessary, while somehow maintaining the credibility of the press.

But no, they shouldn't have published a story that Assad had launched a chemical weapons attack unless they had a significant amount of solid evidence that it was true.

I have a hard time understanding how people can even begin to credit this crap, given how close it is to what they told us about Saddam Hussein. But it's actually even worse, because at least Hussein did, at one time, use chemical weapons on the Kurds. I mean, at least he did it once, even if he didn't have weapons of mass destruction ready to aim at Israel, or the Saudis, or the U.S.

#7
It was big news. But failure to report it as false with just as much (or more) attention and timing was journalistic malpractice. They should have been outraged to have been conned into spreading false propaganda. IF they were legitimate journalists.

The Voice In th... on Thu, 07/19/2018 - 6:00pm
That was then, this is now.

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
I don't know that anyone waits for confirmation anymore. And the two sources could be the CIA and VOA or one of their tame journalists.
Credibility is in the eye of the beholder. After they all jumped on Saddam's WMD one can hardly compare them with Cronkite.

I do remember web blogs asking to please wait for the UN inspectors report. When that report did come out, anyone with integrity, even if not a professional journalist, would have highlighted that report and retracted the original and not figuratively bury it on page 56.

But we are substantially together on this. They reported is as fact not as an unsubstantiated claim.

fakenews on Thu, 07/19/2018 - 7:02am
I know FakeNews when I see it.

Chomsky's Five News Filters: A little dated but a good starting point.

Peace
FN

lotlizard on Thu, 07/19/2018 - 8:15am
Regrettably fails to name a huge part of Flak and the Enforcers

@fakenews
namely big, opinion-policing non-profits and their lobbyists and followers, ranging from religious denominations, to AIPAC and the NRA, to the ADL and SPLC.

[Jul 20, 2018] Is President Trump A Traitor Because He Wants Peace With Russia by Paul Craig Roberts

Highly recommended!
Looks like MIC is a cancel of the society for which there is no cure....
While this jeremiad raises several valid point the key to understanding the situation should be understanding of the split of the Us elite into two camp with Democratic party (representing interests of Wall Street) and large part of intelligence communality fighting to neoliberal status quo and Pentagon, some part of old money, part of trade unions (especially rank and file members) and a pert of Republican Party (representing interests of the military) realizing that neoliberalism came to the natural end and it is time for change which includes downsizing of the American empire.
This bitter internal struggle in which neoliberals so far have an upper hand over Trump administration and forced him into retreat.
Notable quotes:
"... Trump is a traitor because he wants peace with Russia. ..."
"... The Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians, and the North Koreans, as well as the rest of the world, desperately need to notice the extremely hostile reaction to peace on the part of the US Democratic Party, many members of the Republican Party, including the despicable US Republican Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, and the Western Presstitute Media, a collection of people on the CIA payroll according to the German newspaper editor, Udo Ulfkotte, and the CIA itself. ..."
"... Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and the rest of the corrupt filth that rules over us are all in the pay of the military/security complex. Just go and investigate the donations to their re-election campaigns. The 1,000 billion dollar budget of the military/security complex, amplified by the CIA's front corporations and narcotics business, provides enormous sums with which to purchase the senators and representatives that the insouciant American voters think that they elect. ..."
"... Therefore, the American public gets not representation, but lies that justify war and conflict. The military/security complex, about which President Eisenhower warned the American people to no effect, is in desperate need of an enemy. In obedience to the military/security complex, the Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama regimes have made Russia that enemy. If Trump and Putin do not understand this, they will easily be made irrelevant. ..."
"... They both can be assassinated, and that is what the statements from Pelosi, Schumer, McCain, Lindsey Graham, et. al., repeated endlessly in the propaganda ministry that is the Western press, encourages. ..."
"... The Supply-Side Revolution ..."
"... When the combination of tax cuts with defense budget cuts came up for a vote, the legendary senator Strom Thurmond, a 48-year member of the US Senate from South Carolina, tapped me on the shoulder. He said: "son, never set your senator up against the military/security complex. He will not be re-elected, and you will be out of a job." I replied that we were just establishing for the record that under no conditions would the Democrats, who wanted more government, vote for a tax rate reduction even if there was a case that it would cure stagflation. He replied: "son, the military/security complex doesn't care." ..."
"... Later as a member of a secret presidential committee, I saw how the CIA attempted to prevent President Reagan from ending the Cold War. ..."
"... Today, right now, at this moment, we are faced with a massive effort of the military/security complex, the neoconservatives, the Democratic Party, and the presstitute media to discredit the elected President of the United States and to overthrow him in order that the utterly corrupt elite that rule American can continue to hold on to power and to protect the massive budget of the military/security complex that, along with the Israel Lobby, funds the elections of those who rule us. ..."
"... There is no institution in America, government or private, that can be trusted. Any government or person who trusts America or any Western country is stupid beyond belief. ..."
"... The entire Russiagate hoax is an orchestration by the military/security complex, led by John Brennen, Comey, and Rosenstein. The purpose is to discredit President trump for two reasons. One is to prevent any normalization of relations with Russia. The other is to remove Trump's agenda as an alternative to the agenda of the Democratic Party. ..."
"... President Trump is almost powerless. Putin, the Chinese, the Iranians, and the North Koreans should recognize this before it is too late for them. President Trump cannot fire and arrest for high treason Mueller and Rosenstein. ..."
"... Reckless and irresponsible comments about treason from former CIA director Brennan, and other ranking public figures, echo similar inflammatory rhetoric from far-right-wing rabble rouser Gen. Edwin Walker, and other members of the John Birch Society, in the days before Pres. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas. ..."
"... What's going on in the United States of America beats the band what happened under Joe McCarthy. The witch hunt against a sitting President by 95 percent of the media, major government institutions such as the criminal CIA, FBI, DOJ and the rest of the crooked Intel community plus the rascals in the US Congress can only happen in a totalitarian society, which the US is. ..."
"... The Brennan, Clappers, Obamas, Clintons, Comeys, Rosenstein and their many subordinate political Mafiosi should be put behind bars instead of running from one TV station to the next and lay the ground for a possibly Trump assassination. ..."
"... As Mr. Rogers correctly states, President Trump is almost powerless. These US fools even try to breed discord between the so-called nationalists and the globalists in Russia for which Medvedev stays. He once served US interests more than Russian ones when he was Prime Minister and got flattered by the ineffable Bill Clinton. ..."
"... So what do we see now ? Putin aiding Trump in steering the USA away from trying to control the whole world, an effort that is destroying the USA, but Deep State does not mind. In this way Russia indeed meddles in USA politics. Trump now invited Putin to come to Washington, the MH17 statement is withheld, the hysteria at CNN is such that MH17 is not even mentioned. In stead: Trump must be mentally deranged. ..."
"... Gore Vidal said there's only one party in America, it's the Money Party and it has two branches. It is even more true today than when he said it. There is no Left or Right anymore, only the question, is it good for Israel? And the American people be damned. ..."
"... Trump is completely powerless to do anything about these two. And this has gone on for a year and a half. ..."
"... It's clear though that Trump believes he has forced his opponents to play a bad hand in their outlandish craze the past week. It's why he doubled down and invited Putin to Washington near the 2018 election time. He perceives this as a chance to re-enact the 2016 election and coast to victory. The establishment is insane, and if he brings their insanity out it plays to his favor. ..."
Jul 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

The US Democratic Party is determined to take the world to thermo-nuclear war rather than to admit that Hillary Clinton lost the presidential election fair and square. The Democratic Party was totally corrupted by the Clinton Regime, and now it is totally insane. Leaders of the Democratic Party, such as Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, my former co-author in the New York Times, have responded in a non-Democratic way to the first step President Trump has taken to reduce the extremely dangerous tensions with Russia that the Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama regimes created between the two superpowers.

Yes, Russia is a superpower. Russian weapons are so superior to the junk produced by the waste-filled US military/security complex that lives high off the hog on the insouciant American taxpayer that it is questionable if the US is even a second class military power. If the insane neoconservatives, such as Max Boot, William Kristol, and the rest of the neocon scum get their way, the US, the UK, and Europe will be a radioactive ruin for thousands of years.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi (CA), Minority Leader of the US House of Representatives, declared that out of fear of some undefined retribution from Putin, a dossier on Trump perhaps, the President of the United States sold out the American people to Russia because he wants to make peace: "It begs the question, what does Vladimir Putin, what do the Russians have on Donald Trump -- personally, politically and financially that he should behave in such a manner?" The "such a manner" Pelosi is speaking about is making peace instead of war.

To be clear, the Democratic Minority Leader of the US House of Representatives has accused Donald Trump of high treason against the United States. There is no outcry against this blatantly false accusation, totally devoid of evidence. The presstitute media instead of protesting this attempt at a coup against the President of the United States, trumpet the accusation as self-evident truth. Trump is a traitor because he wants peace with Russia.

Here is Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer (NY) repeating Pelosi's false accusation: "Millions of Americans will continue to wonder if the only possible explanation for this dangerous behavior is the possibility that President Putin holds damaging information over President Trump." If you don't believe that this is orchestrated between Pelosi and Schumer, you are stupid beyond belief.

Here is disgraced Obama CIA director John Brennan, a leader of the fake Russiagate campaign against President Trump in order to prevent Trump from making peace with Russia and, thus, by making the world safer, threatening the massive, unjustified budget of the military/security complex: "Donald Trump's press conference performance in Helsinki rises to and exceeds the threshold of high crimes and misdemeanors. It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump's comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin. Republican Patriots: Where are you???"

Here are many more: https://www.infowars.com/meltdown-left-seething-over-trump-putin-summit/

And here is more from the CIA bought-and-paid-for BBC: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44852812

NOTICE THAT NOT ONE WESTERN MEDIA SOURCE IS CELEBRATING AND THANKING TRUMP AND PUTIN FOR EASING THE ARTIFICIALLY CREATED TENSIONS THAT WERE LEADING TO NUCLEAR WAR. HOW CAN THIS BE? HOW CAN IT BE THAT THE WESTERN MEDIA IS SO OPPOSED TO PEACE? WHAT IS THE EXPLANATION?

The Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians, and the North Koreans, as well as the rest of the world, desperately need to notice the extremely hostile reaction to peace on the part of the US Democratic Party, many members of the Republican Party, including the despicable US Republican Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, and the Western Presstitute Media, a collection of people on the CIA payroll according to the German newspaper editor, Udo Ulfkotte, and the CIA itself.

Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and the rest of the corrupt filth that rules over us are all in the pay of the military/security complex. Just go and investigate the donations to their re-election campaigns. The 1,000 billion dollar budget of the military/security complex, amplified by the CIA's front corporations and narcotics business, provides enormous sums with which to purchase the senators and representatives that the insouciant American voters think that they elect.

Do you know how large 1,000 billion is? You would have to live for thousands of years and do nothing for 24/7 except count to reach that figure. It is a sum that nurtures the recipients, and the recipients regard it as worth protecting.

Therefore, the American public gets not representation, but lies that justify war and conflict. The military/security complex, about which President Eisenhower warned the American people to no effect, is in desperate need of an enemy. In obedience to the military/security complex, the Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama regimes have made Russia that enemy. If Trump and Putin do not understand this, they will easily be made irrelevant.

They both can be assassinated, and that is what the statements from Pelosi, Schumer, McCain, Lindsey Graham, et. al., repeated endlessly in the propaganda ministry that is the Western press, encourages. Trump can be assassinated or overthrown in a political coup for selling out America to Russia, as members of both political parties claim and as the media trumpets endlessly. Putin can be easily assassinated by the CIA operatives that the Russian government stupidly permits to operate throughout Russia in NGOs and Western/US owned media and among the Atlanticist Integrationists, Washington's Firth Column inside Russia serving Washington's purposes. These Russian traitors serve in Putin's own government!

ORDER IT NOW

Americans are so unaware that they have no idea of the risk that President Trump is taking by challenging the US military security complex. For example, during the last half of the 1970s I was a member of the US Senate staff. I was working together with a staffer of the US Republican Senator from California, S. I. Hayakawa, to advance understanding of a supply-side economic policy cure to the stagflation that threatened the US budget's ability to meet its obligations. Republican Senators Hatch, Roth, and Hayakawa were trying to introduce a supply-side economic policy as a cure for the stagflation that was threatening the US economy with failure. The Democrats, who later in the Senate led the way to a supply-side policy, were, at this time, opposed (see Paul Craig Roberts, The Supply-Side Revolution , Harvard University Press, 1984). The Democrats claimed that the policy would worsen the budget deficit, the only time in those days Democrats cared about the budget deficit. The Democrats said that they would support the tax rate reductions if the Republicans would support offsetting cuts in the budget to support a balanced budget. This was a ploy to put Republicans on the spot for taking away some groups' handouts in order "to cut tax rates for the rich."

The supply-side policy did not require budget cuts, but in order to demonstrate the Democrats lack of sincerety, Hayakawa's aid and I had our senators introduce a series of budget cuts together with tax cuts that, on a static revenue basis (not counting tax revenue feedbacks from the incentives of the lower tax rates) kept the budget even, and the Democrats voted against them every time.

When the combination of tax cuts with defense budget cuts came up for a vote, the legendary senator Strom Thurmond, a 48-year member of the US Senate from South Carolina, tapped me on the shoulder. He said: "son, never set your senator up against the military/security complex. He will not be re-elected, and you will be out of a job." I replied that we were just establishing for the record that under no conditions would the Democrats, who wanted more government, vote for a tax rate reduction even if there was a case that it would cure stagflation. He replied: "son, the military/security complex doesn't care."

My emergence from The Matrix began with Thurmond's pat on my shoulder. It grew with my time at the Wall Street Journal when I learned that some truthful things simply could not be said. In the Treasury I experienced how those outside interests opposed to a president's policy marshall their forces and the media that they own to block it. Later as a member of a secret presidential committee, I saw how the CIA attempted to prevent President Reagan from ending the Cold War.

Today, right now, at this moment, we are faced with a massive effort of the military/security complex, the neoconservatives, the Democratic Party, and the presstitute media to discredit the elected President of the United States and to overthrow him in order that the utterly corrupt elite that rule American can continue to hold on to power and to protect the massive budget of the military/security complex that, along with the Israel Lobby, funds the elections of those who rule us. Trump, like Reagan, was an exception, and it is the exceptions that accumulate the ire of the corrupt leftwing, bought off with money, and the ire of the media, concentrated into small tight ownership groups indebted to those who permitted the illegal concentration of a once independent and diverse American media that once served, on occasion, as a watchdog over government. The rightwing, wrapped in the flag, dismisses all truth as "anti-American."

If Putin, Lavrov, the Russian government, the traitorous Russian Fifth Column -- the Atlanticist Integrationists -- the Chinese, the Iranians, the North Koreans think that any peace or consideration can come out of America, they are insane. Their delusions are setting themselves up for destruction. There is no institution in America, government or private, that can be trusted. Any government or person who trusts America or any Western country is stupid beyond belief.

The entire Russiagate hoax is an orchestration by the military/security complex, led by John Brennen, Comey, and Rosenstein. The purpose is to discredit President trump for two reasons. One is to prevent any normalization of relations with Russia. The other is to remove Trump's agenda as an alternative to the agenda of the Democratic Party.

President Trump is almost powerless. Putin, the Chinese, the Iranians, and the North Koreans should recognize this before it is too late for them. President Trump cannot fire and arrest for high treason Mueller and Rosenstein. And Trump cannot indict Hillary for her numerous unquestionable crimes in plain view of everyone, or Comey or Brennan, who declares Trump "to be wholly in the pocket of Putin," for trying to overthrow the elected president of the United States. Trump cannot have the Secret Service question the likes of Pelosi and Schumer and McCain and Lindsey Graham for false accusations that encourage assassination of the President of the United States.

Trump cannot even trust the Secret Service, which accumulated evidence suggests was complicit in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and Robert Kennedy.

If Putin and Lavrov, so anxious to be friends of Washington, let their guards down, they are history.

As I said above, Russiagate is an orchestratration to prevent peace between the US and Russia. Leading military/security complex experts, including the person who provided the CIA's daily briefing of the President of the United States for many years, and the person who devised the spy program for the National Security Agency, have proven conclusively that Russiagate is a hoax designed for the purpose of preventing President Trump from normalizing relations between the US and Russia, which has the power to destroy the entirety of the Western World at will.

Here is the report from the retired security professionals who, unlike those still in office, cannot be fired and deprived of a careet for telling the truth: https://original.antiwar.com/mcgovern/2018/07/15/memo-to-the-president-ahead-of-mondays-summit/

Here is what the clued-in Russian Defense Minister Shoigu has to say about the aggressive actions of the West against the Russian homeland: https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/07/13/defense-minister-shoigu-on-moscow-vision-security-problems.html

If Putin doesn't listen to him, Russia is in the trash can of history.

Keep in mind that no media informs you better than my website. If my website goes down, you will be left in darkness. No valid information comes from the US government or the Western presstitutes. If you sit in front of the TV screen watching the Western media, you are brainwashed beyond all hope. Not even I can rescue you. Nor God himself.

Americans, and indeed the Russians themselves, are incapable of realizing it, but there is a chance that Trump will be overthrown and a Western assault will be launched against the handful of countries that insist on sovereignty.

I doubt that few of the Americans who elected Trump will be taken in by the anti-Trump propagana, but they are not organized and have no armed power. The police, militarized by George W. Bush and Obama, will be set against them. The rebellions will be local and suppressed by every violation of the US Constitution by the private powers that rule Washington, as always has been the case with rebellions in America.

In the West, which the Russians are so anxious to join, all freedoms are dead -- freedom of assembly, freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of inquiry, freedom of privacy, freedom from arbitrary search, freedom from arbitrary arrest, along with the Constitutional protections of due process and habeas corpus. Today there are no countries less free than the United States of America.

Why do the Russian Atlanticist Integrationists want to join an unfree Western world? Are they that brainwashed by Western Propaganda?

If Putin listens to these deluded fools, Putin will destroy Russia.

There is something wrong with Russian perception of Washington. Apparently the Russian elite, with the exception of Shoigu and a few others are incapable of comprehending the neoconservative drive for US world hegemony and the neoconservative determination to destroy Russia as a constraint on US unilateralism. The Russian government somehow, despite all evidence to the contrary, believes that Washington's hegemony is negotiable. (Republished from PaulCraigRoberts.org by permission of author or representative)

nagra , July 20, 2018 at 4:46 am GMT
is big question even if Trump wants peace at all. Trump has shown his real face on the very beginning when he said that they are going to talk about "his friend" Xi, making Putin very uncomfortable and throwing some worms in Russia~China relationship in front of cameras for all to see

Trump came to the meeting in hope to impress Putin with his cowboy arrogance, He now says that he'll be Putin's worst enemy ( if he don't bow to him I guess : ). all Trump cares about is his ego, nothing else too sweat mouthed sleazy person

Sparkon , July 20, 2018 at 4:57 am GMT
Reckless and irresponsible comments about treason from former CIA director Brennan, and other ranking public figures, echo similar inflammatory rhetoric from far-right-wing rabble rouser Gen. Edwin Walker, and other members of the John Birch Society, in the days before Pres. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas.
RobinG , July 20, 2018 at 5:10 am GMT
@geokat62

Okay then! Cue the real story of [lying filth] Bill Browder, a film by Andrei Nekrasov. Watch and share before it disappears!

https://www.bitchute.com/embed/lQ3qEwX66pIL/

The Magnitsky Act – Behind the Scenes

Ludwig Watzal , Website July 20, 2018 at 5:41 am GMT
What's going on in the United States of America beats the band what happened under Joe McCarthy. The witch hunt against a sitting President by 95 percent of the media, major government institutions such as the criminal CIA, FBI, DOJ and the rest of the crooked Intel community plus the rascals in the US Congress can only happen in a totalitarian society, which the US is.

The Brennan, Clappers, Obamas, Clintons, Comeys, Rosenstein and their many subordinate political Mafiosi should be put behind bars instead of running from one TV station to the next and lay the ground for a possibly Trump assassination. Trump is portrayed by these crooks as a "traitor." In the US, traitors usefully deserve death. If these political Mafiosi don't bring down Trump "legally," they will hire a kind of Lee Harvey Oswald who "shot" JFK.

As Mr. Rogers correctly states, President Trump is almost powerless. These US fools even try to breed discord between the so-called nationalists and the globalists in Russia for which Medvedev stays. He once served US interests more than Russian ones when he was Prime Minister and got flattered by the ineffable Bill Clinton.

Let's wait and see what happens in the upcoming mid-term elections. If the Dems win both Houses of Congress, Trump is done. The obstructionists will have the upper hand. If they can't remove him from office "legally," there will be a hitman out there somewhere.

RealAmericanValuesCirca1776Not1965 , July 20, 2018 at 6:49 am GMT
President smugly making peace with the Russian nation that was supposed to be the evil enemy in a 3rd and final brother war to devastate the white race beyond recovery.

Little upstart in the Democrat party making left wing politics less palatable to the masses with her heavy handed socialist rhetoric. All while preaching BDS and anti-Israel sentiment too, representing Frankenstein's CultMarx monster turning on it's creator.

And fewer and fewer people on all sides buying what the American Pravda is selling with each passing day. The resulting hysteria is both par for the course and downright delectable.

jilles dykstra , July 20, 2018 at 7:24 am GMT
" Apparently the Russian elite, with the exception of Shoigu and a few others are incapable of comprehending the neoconservative drive for US world hegemony and the neoconservative determination to destroy Russia as a constraint on US unilateralism. " My idea is that many in Russia understand quite well, this is why they demonstrate Russia's military capabilities frequently. Why does Putin support Assad and Syria ? Not because he likes these countries, but because he understands that if these countries also get the USA yoke the position of Russia and China deteriorate.

Putin is careful not to give USA public opinion more 'reason' to fear Russia. Already a few years ago something fell into the E part of the Mediterranean. It was asserted that Russia had intercepted a USA missile fired from Spain to Syria. USA and Israel declared that an excercise had been held. Putin said nothing.

Despite all that NATO does at Russia's borders Putin does not let himself be provoked. MH17, I suppose Putin knows quite well what happened, Russia has radar and satelites, yet Putin never gave the Russian view.

So what do we see now ? Putin aiding Trump in steering the USA away from trying to control the whole world, an effort that is destroying the USA, but Deep State does not mind. In this way Russia indeed meddles in USA politics. Trump now invited Putin to come to Washington, the MH17 statement is withheld, the hysteria at CNN is such that MH17 is not even mentioned. In stead: Trump must be mentally deranged.

Tsar Nicholas , July 20, 2018 at 7:48 am GMT
Another fine piece from PCR. It is a shame that trolls have caused him to avoid comments.
NoseytheDuke , July 20, 2018 at 8:03 am GMT
Good to see PCR accepting comments again. It's not just the Dumbocruds, it's the Rupuglicunts too. Follow the money, it's coming from the same sources. Gore Vidal said there's only one party in America, it's the Money Party and it has two branches. It is even more true today than when he said it. There is no Left or Right anymore, only the question, is it good for Israel? And the American people be damned.
Anonymous [337] Disclaimer , July 20, 2018 at 8:20 am GMT

Is President Trump A Traitor Because He Wants Peace with Russia?
The Democrats say he is

The Democrats -- and their wholly-owned MSM -- will call Trump any name that'll stick. It means little. Even if Trump got everything he wanted on immigration, that particular toothpaste is already out of the tube and unless we send back some of the millions of illegal third-world squatters we've no hope of recovering the United States of America.

If you want to talk treason, you need look no further than the Hart-Celler Act of 1965, whereby the plan was laid to replace the population of this nation with third-world refuse, which guaranteed cheap labor for GOP capitalists and endless political support for Democrat traitors.

Oh yeah, it's going swimmingly.

Robert Magill , July 20, 2018 at 9:36 am GMT
Fact 1: Russia's Defense Dept. IS a defense dept. Our alleged Defense Dept. is a War Dept. Nuff said.
Fact 2: Don't invade Russia.
Fact 3: Don't invade Russia.
RobertMagill.wordpress.com
Biff , July 20, 2018 at 9:47 am GMT

HOW CAN THIS BE? HOW CAN IT BE THAT THE WESTERN MEDIA IS SO OPPOSED TO PEACE? WHAT IS THE EXPLANATION?

Money

Moi , July 20, 2018 at 11:08 am GMT
@Tsar Nicholas

For a country that cares little about morality, it really does not matter whether Trump, Hillary, Obama or anyone else is the leader.

geokat62 , July 20, 2018 at 11:13 am GMT
@RobinG

As the saying goes "timing is everything." I have to admit I was incredulous that you were somehow able to link to a functioning version of the Nekrosov film. I've been trying to get my hands on that documentary for the last few years, but to no avail. I finally managed to read a comment on another blog that recommended that people who were interested in viewing the film could do so by reaching out to the producer to request a personalized link, after which you had to request a password from another individual affiliated with the film.

I managed to do all of that a few weeks ago and was able to watch the video on Vimeo for the full 2 hours. It was riveting, to say the least. After viewing it again, I thought about making it available to others. Due to the pressures by Browder and his lawyers, however, Nekrosov was prevented from making his film available to a wider audience. He got around this limitation by making it available for private viewing only. And to prevent a private viewer from uploading it onto the internet he cleverly placed a watermark on each film, indicating the owner of each copy of the video by displaying a number on the screen. I was surprised to see the version you linked to indeed has this watermark shown on the screen. Somehow, this did not deter the individual tied to that number from uploading it and being the one identified as doing so. That said, I'm glad the film is more widely available as it should be viewed by as many people as possible so that they can realize what a despicable liar Browder really is and how the passage of The Magnitsky Act was a travesty of justice which must be reversed.

Reactionary Utopian , July 20, 2018 at 11:35 am GMT
"Do you know how large 1,000 billion is? You would have to live for thousands of years and do nothing for 24/7 except count to reach that figure. It is a sum that nurtures the recipients, and the recipients regard it as worth protecting."

Tens of thousands of years. At one count per second, 31,687 years and a few months.

Sally Snyder , July 20, 2018 at 11:39 am GMT
Here is an interesting look at how the anti-Russian narrative began in the United States and who really rigged the 2016 U.S. election:

https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/07/the-genesis-of-russian-interference.html

Main Street America is being manipulated into believing that Russia is the enemy, giving Washington a complete...

Jake , July 20, 2018 at 11:49 am GMT
"In the West, which the Russians are so anxious to join, all freedoms are dead -- freedom of assembly, freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of inquiry, freedom of privacy, freedom from arbitrary search, freedom from arbitrary arrest, along with the Constitutional protections of due process and habeas corpus."

True. That is the Anglo-Zionist Empire. That is what the WASP Empire delivers, and it does so to destroy more conservative national and local cultures so their peoples are tossed into the melting pot and reduced into a goop easy to rule.

Oliver Cromwell taking Jewish money, allying with Jews so he would have the funds to wage permanent war against the vast, vast majority of non-WASP whites within his reach: that is the definition of WASP culture; that picture tells you what it always will do.

nagra , July 20, 2018 at 12:14 pm GMT
@RobinG

to everyone who make such movies

make something serious about Obama and Hillary destroying whole African country of Libya killing Colonel Gaddafi on the street, which is greatest war crime in the 21st century so far or, Bill Clinton bombing Bosnian Serbs '95 opening the door to jihadis to continue behead people in the middle of the Europe or, Bill Clinton and Nato bombing Serbia '99 to give "Kosovo" independence killing many civilian and destroying infrastructure on purpose or Madeline Albright confessing killing half of million Iraqi kids on the camera or, Bush and or Bushes or those such Bill Browder are just small dirty fish who in comparison is almost not worth filming I appreciate the effort but get seriously real if you are about to get truth to people

annamaria , July 20, 2018 at 12:22 pm GMT
@Ludwig Watzal

"The Brennan, Clappers, Obamas, Clintons, Comeys, Rosenstein and their many subordinate political Mafiosi "

What is going on in the US is systematic. Assange, an investigative journalist who became the light of truth worldwide, is under a grave danger from US' and UK' Intelligence Communities of the non-intelligent opportunists and real traitors: https://www.rt.com/news/433783-wikileaks-assange-ecuador-uk/

Meanwhile, Mrs. Clinton, who was criminally negligent with regard to the most important classified information, has been protected by the politicking Brennan, Clapper, and Mueller: " it was over 30,000 emails , emails that were sent through to Hillary Clinton through the unauthorized server and unsecured server and every email she sent out.

There were highly classified -- beyond classified -- top secret-type stuff that had gone through that server. an instruction embedded, compartmentalized data embedded in the email server telling the server to send a copy of every email that came to Hillary Clinton through that unauthorized server and every email that she sent out through that server, to send it to this foreign entity that is not Russia." http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/07/congressional-record-transcript-on-chinagate.html

The Awan Affair, the most serious ever violation of national cybersecurity, has demonstrated the spectacular incompetence of the CIA and FBI, which had allowed a family of Pakistani nationals to surf congressional computers of various committees, including Intelligence Committee, for years. None of the scoundrels had a security clearance! Their ardent protector, Wasserman-Schultz (who threatened the DC Marschall) belongs to the untouchables, unlike Assange: https://www.theepochtimes.com/awan-congressional-scandal-in-spotlight-as-president-suggests-data-could-be-part-of-court-case_2500703.html

Ilyana_Rozumova , July 20, 2018 at 12:27 pm GMT
Trump and Putin made a mistake. I do not understand how it could have happened. They should have issued communiqué that they have agreed to work toward peace and relieve tensions and suppress conflicts around the world. (I do not have a time for now to write more.) (sorry)
Carroll Price , July 20, 2018 at 12:30 pm GMT
@Eagle Eye

Don't give FDR too much credit. He didn't approve the Normandy invasion until well after Russia had destroyed the German army.

Zogby , July 20, 2018 at 12:36 pm GMT
If Rosenstein & Mueller had done what they did with the publication of the indictments a few days before the summit -- and were North Koreans -- they'd be in front of a firing squad within 24 hours. Trump is completely powerless to do anything about these two. And this has gone on for a year and a half. This is not a strength of democracy.

The US today is like Venezuela was shortly after Maduro was elected (by a narrow margin) -- after Chavez's death -- and before violence eventually broke out. The losing opposition refused to accept the result and tensions simmered for a long time.

Or after Morsi was elected in Egypt and before the military coup. The victory was narrow, the opposition refused the to accept the result and tensions simmered for a long time.

Or maybe like Bush vs Gore. Bush was kinda saved by 9/11 which completely changed the atmosphere.

Who knows what will happen. It's clear though that Trump believes he has forced his opponents to play a bad hand in their outlandish craze the past week. It's why he doubled down and invited Putin to Washington near the 2018 election time. He perceives this as a chance to re-enact the 2016 election and coast to victory. The establishment is insane, and if he brings their insanity out it plays to his favor.

Russ , July 20, 2018 at 1:04 pm GMT
@Sparkon

https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/3975-deep-state-delirium

Brennan, the Communist. The linked article begins with that and proceeds from there in a first-rate deep-state summary.

Den Lille Abe , July 20, 2018 at 1:04 pm GMT
The reception of the Trump- Putin meeting is breathtaking. I have in my 61 years never witnessed such a hate and slander in the MSM. I have after this begun to actually dismiss that Americans are sensible people! They have completely forgotten the cost of the Civil War. We in Europe have not forgotten the cost of war and are not going there again. Ever.

The US has become a lunatic asylum with nuclear weapons, never mind Kim Jong Un, look a squirrel! But the US is a threat to humanity, included it's protegé Israel, the new Apartheid state.

Harold Smith , July 20, 2018 at 1:43 pm GMT
"Is President Trump A Traitor Because He Wants Peace with Russia?"

Wait; what?

From badmouthing Russia to appointing Russophobes to high office, to imposing sanctions, to illegally seizing Russian diplomatic property, to committing war crimes in Syria, to a provocative military buildup in Europe, to arming the illegitimate Ukrainian "government," etc., presidential poseur Orange Clown has spent 99% of his "presidency" so far antagonizing Russia; apparently trying to provoke some kind of Russian military response.

If it was anyone else other than Vladimir Putin calling the shots in Russia, WW3 probably would've happened already. Yet PCR claims Orange Clown wants peace with Russia?

Note to PCR: It is Vladimir Putin who wants peace, not presidential poseur Orange Clown. If Orange Clown has had some kind of spiritual epiphany/change of heart, he's going to have to show good faith by taking some kind of unambiguous action; posturing won't suffice.

Mike P , July 20, 2018 at 1:48 pm GMT
@NoseytheDuke

There is a lot of truth in what you say, but it does not account for the fight we are currently witnessing. Two factions in the Money Party are at war with each other. Neither one is willing to level with the public as to its true aims and motives -- they are fighting viciously but under the bed sheets, which is why the spectacle looks so unhinged and silly.

AnonFromTN , July 20, 2018 at 2:28 pm GMT
It appears that he is trying to save the US from financial collapse. Hence, he is a traitor to MIC, particularly to the obscenely greedy Pentagon contractors. The US presidents and Congress always pandered to MIC first and foremost. He broke (or at least tried to break) the pattern.
Anonymous [166] Disclaimer , July 20, 2018 at 4:48 pm GMT
@Den Lille Abe

Don't blame all Americans. Forty-eight percent of us voted for Trump; it is very likely that more than half of the rest voted for Hellary only with great reluctance, owing largely to the unprecedented campaign of vilification directed at Trump. The point is: a very large majority of people in this country are nowhere near as insane as the media and elites are -- in fact, we're still nowhere near insane enough for their taste!

[Jul 20, 2018] Su-30 Coming to Iran Elite Russian Fighters in Iranian Hands Set be a Game Changer for the Middle East

Jul 20, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Garry Compton • 21 days ago ,

So Iran has no offensive air force or any Nukes but the Israelis with their air superiority and nukes are making Iran - enemy #1. How very - American - of them.

Marko Garry Compton • 21 days ago ,

" The Anglo-Zion Art of War "

1) Sweet-talk the enemy into disarming.

2) Attack the enemy.

JPH Marko • 21 days ago ,

Omitted steps:
3) Sodomize with a bayonet and murder the leader
4) Have a good laugh while stating "We came, We saw, he died!".

[Jul 20, 2018] What exactly is fake news caucus99percent

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... @The Voice In the Wilderness ..."
"... @Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal ..."
"... By creating an extremely anti-communist state, the elite will never have to worry about losing control over society because their wealth and power remains safe and sound. ..."
Jul 20, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

k9disc on Wed, 07/18/2018 - 11:12pm

Fake News = 21st Century Conspiracy Theory Fake News is the 21st century version of Conspiracy Theory.

It is an evolution of conspiracy theory, not requiring any kind of convoluted logic or story telling that used to be required for conspiracy theory to stick. Fake News allows for simple, truthful, and logical information to be dismissed out of hand, without examination.

divineorder on Thu, 07/19/2018 - 5:58am
Yes, and then...

@edg @k9disc

Fake News allows for simple, truthful, and logical information to be dismissed out of hand, without examination.

and then they use that as justification for MIC actions.

The 'outrage' is fake. The focus on 'fake news' is fake news.

It's actually about defending the corporate media's monopoly on producing fake news serving elite state-corporate interests. https://t.co/uunJF9lj5r

-- Media Lens (@medialens) July 19, 2018

Here's an ad about COCs (PDF) from 1942. They're used for tanning leather, in soaps and perfumes, as insect repellents, for dying cloth, as antiseptics, and for many, many other commercial and industrial purposes.

Damn those Syrian butchers for dropping perfume on civilians!

Fake News is the 21st century version of Conspiracy Theory.

It is an evolution of conspiracy theory, not requiring any kind of convoluted logic or story telling that used to be required for conspiracy theory to stick. Fake News allows for simple, truthful, and logical information to be dismissed out of hand, without examination.

Cant Stop the M... on Thu, 07/19/2018 - 11:10am
@The Voice In the Wilderness In the dim reaches of

@The Voice In the Wilderness In the dim reaches of pre-history, when Walter Cronkite was reporting, a real journalist wouldn't report that someone launched a chemical weapons attack unless the journalist had at least two credible, independent sources providing solid evidence that the story was true. Newspaper editors and television producers knew their reputations were on the line and that their competitors would make sure the egg on their face stuck if they reported something blatantly wrong.

Nowadays, there are no competitors, because journalists and news outlets are mostly hanging out together in one big cheery cartel, every member of which will defend every other member to protect the reputation of the whole. The goal is not to outdo competitors and gain more eyeballs or a greater distribution or greater authority over public opinion. The goal is to defend the status quo by any means necessary, while somehow maintaining the credibility of the press.

But no, they shouldn't have published a story that Assad had launched a chemical weapons attack unless they had a significant amount of solid evidence that it was true.

I have a hard time understanding how people can even begin to credit this crap, given how close it is to what they told us about Saddam Hussein. But it's actually even worse, because at least Hussein did, at one time, use chemical weapons on the Kurds. I mean, at least he did it once, even if he didn't have weapons of mass destruction ready to aim at Israel, or the Saudis, or the U.S.

#7
It was big news. But failure to report it as false with just as much (or more) attention and timing was journalistic malpractice. They should have been outraged to have been conned into spreading false propaganda. IF they were legitimate journalists.

The Voice In th... on Thu, 07/19/2018 - 6:00pm
That was then, this is now.

@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
I don't know that anyone waits for confirmation anymore. And the two sources could be the CIA and VOA or one of their tame journalists.
Credibility is in the eye of the beholder. After they all jumped on Saddam's WMD one can hardly compare them with Cronkite.

I do remember web blogs asking to please wait for the UN inspectors report. When that report did come out, anyone with integrity, even if not a professional journalist, would have highlighted that report and retracted the original and not figuratively bury it on page 56.

But we are substantially together on this. They reported is as fact not as an unsubstantiated claim.

fakenews on Thu, 07/19/2018 - 7:02am
I know FakeNews when I see it.

Chomsky's Five News Filters: A little dated but a good starting point.

Peace
FN

lotlizard on Thu, 07/19/2018 - 8:15am
Regrettably fails to name a huge part of Flak and the Enforcers

@fakenews
namely big, opinion-policing non-profits and their lobbyists and followers, ranging from religious denominations, to AIPAC and the NRA, to the ADL and SPLC.

[Jul 20, 2018] Is President Trump A Traitor Because He Wants Peace With Russia by Paul Craig Roberts

Highly recommended!
Looks like MIC is a cancel of the society for which there is no cure....
While this jeremiad raises several valid point the key to understanding the situation should be understanding of the split of the Us elite into two camp with Democratic party (representing interests of Wall Street) and large part of intelligence communality fighting to neoliberal status quo and Pentagon, some part of old money, part of trade unions (especially rank and file members) and a pert of Republican Party (representing interests of the military) realizing that neoliberalism came to the natural end and it is time for change which includes downsizing of the American empire.
This bitter internal struggle in which neoliberals so far have an upper hand over Trump administration and forced him into retreat.
Notable quotes:
"... Trump is a traitor because he wants peace with Russia. ..."
"... The Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians, and the North Koreans, as well as the rest of the world, desperately need to notice the extremely hostile reaction to peace on the part of the US Democratic Party, many members of the Republican Party, including the despicable US Republican Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, and the Western Presstitute Media, a collection of people on the CIA payroll according to the German newspaper editor, Udo Ulfkotte, and the CIA itself. ..."
"... Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and the rest of the corrupt filth that rules over us are all in the pay of the military/security complex. Just go and investigate the donations to their re-election campaigns. The 1,000 billion dollar budget of the military/security complex, amplified by the CIA's front corporations and narcotics business, provides enormous sums with which to purchase the senators and representatives that the insouciant American voters think that they elect. ..."
"... Therefore, the American public gets not representation, but lies that justify war and conflict. The military/security complex, about which President Eisenhower warned the American people to no effect, is in desperate need of an enemy. In obedience to the military/security complex, the Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama regimes have made Russia that enemy. If Trump and Putin do not understand this, they will easily be made irrelevant. ..."
"... They both can be assassinated, and that is what the statements from Pelosi, Schumer, McCain, Lindsey Graham, et. al., repeated endlessly in the propaganda ministry that is the Western press, encourages. ..."
"... The Supply-Side Revolution ..."
"... When the combination of tax cuts with defense budget cuts came up for a vote, the legendary senator Strom Thurmond, a 48-year member of the US Senate from South Carolina, tapped me on the shoulder. He said: "son, never set your senator up against the military/security complex. He will not be re-elected, and you will be out of a job." I replied that we were just establishing for the record that under no conditions would the Democrats, who wanted more government, vote for a tax rate reduction even if there was a case that it would cure stagflation. He replied: "son, the military/security complex doesn't care." ..."
"... Later as a member of a secret presidential committee, I saw how the CIA attempted to prevent President Reagan from ending the Cold War. ..."
"... Today, right now, at this moment, we are faced with a massive effort of the military/security complex, the neoconservatives, the Democratic Party, and the presstitute media to discredit the elected President of the United States and to overthrow him in order that the utterly corrupt elite that rule American can continue to hold on to power and to protect the massive budget of the military/security complex that, along with the Israel Lobby, funds the elections of those who rule us. ..."
"... There is no institution in America, government or private, that can be trusted. Any government or person who trusts America or any Western country is stupid beyond belief. ..."
"... The entire Russiagate hoax is an orchestration by the military/security complex, led by John Brennen, Comey, and Rosenstein. The purpose is to discredit President trump for two reasons. One is to prevent any normalization of relations with Russia. The other is to remove Trump's agenda as an alternative to the agenda of the Democratic Party. ..."
"... President Trump is almost powerless. Putin, the Chinese, the Iranians, and the North Koreans should recognize this before it is too late for them. President Trump cannot fire and arrest for high treason Mueller and Rosenstein. ..."
"... Reckless and irresponsible comments about treason from former CIA director Brennan, and other ranking public figures, echo similar inflammatory rhetoric from far-right-wing rabble rouser Gen. Edwin Walker, and other members of the John Birch Society, in the days before Pres. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas. ..."
"... What's going on in the United States of America beats the band what happened under Joe McCarthy. The witch hunt against a sitting President by 95 percent of the media, major government institutions such as the criminal CIA, FBI, DOJ and the rest of the crooked Intel community plus the rascals in the US Congress can only happen in a totalitarian society, which the US is. ..."
"... The Brennan, Clappers, Obamas, Clintons, Comeys, Rosenstein and their many subordinate political Mafiosi should be put behind bars instead of running from one TV station to the next and lay the ground for a possibly Trump assassination. ..."
"... As Mr. Rogers correctly states, President Trump is almost powerless. These US fools even try to breed discord between the so-called nationalists and the globalists in Russia for which Medvedev stays. He once served US interests more than Russian ones when he was Prime Minister and got flattered by the ineffable Bill Clinton. ..."
"... So what do we see now ? Putin aiding Trump in steering the USA away from trying to control the whole world, an effort that is destroying the USA, but Deep State does not mind. In this way Russia indeed meddles in USA politics. Trump now invited Putin to come to Washington, the MH17 statement is withheld, the hysteria at CNN is such that MH17 is not even mentioned. In stead: Trump must be mentally deranged. ..."
"... Gore Vidal said there's only one party in America, it's the Money Party and it has two branches. It is even more true today than when he said it. There is no Left or Right anymore, only the question, is it good for Israel? And the American people be damned. ..."
"... Trump is completely powerless to do anything about these two. And this has gone on for a year and a half. ..."
"... It's clear though that Trump believes he has forced his opponents to play a bad hand in their outlandish craze the past week. It's why he doubled down and invited Putin to Washington near the 2018 election time. He perceives this as a chance to re-enact the 2016 election and coast to victory. The establishment is insane, and if he brings their insanity out it plays to his favor. ..."
Jul 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

The US Democratic Party is determined to take the world to thermo-nuclear war rather than to admit that Hillary Clinton lost the presidential election fair and square. The Democratic Party was totally corrupted by the Clinton Regime, and now it is totally insane. Leaders of the Democratic Party, such as Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, my former co-author in the New York Times, have responded in a non-Democratic way to the first step President Trump has taken to reduce the extremely dangerous tensions with Russia that the Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama regimes created between the two superpowers.

Yes, Russia is a superpower. Russian weapons are so superior to the junk produced by the waste-filled US military/security complex that lives high off the hog on the insouciant American taxpayer that it is questionable if the US is even a second class military power. If the insane neoconservatives, such as Max Boot, William Kristol, and the rest of the neocon scum get their way, the US, the UK, and Europe will be a radioactive ruin for thousands of years.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi (CA), Minority Leader of the US House of Representatives, declared that out of fear of some undefined retribution from Putin, a dossier on Trump perhaps, the President of the United States sold out the American people to Russia because he wants to make peace: "It begs the question, what does Vladimir Putin, what do the Russians have on Donald Trump -- personally, politically and financially that he should behave in such a manner?" The "such a manner" Pelosi is speaking about is making peace instead of war.

To be clear, the Democratic Minority Leader of the US House of Representatives has accused Donald Trump of high treason against the United States. There is no outcry against this blatantly false accusation, totally devoid of evidence. The presstitute media instead of protesting this attempt at a coup against the President of the United States, trumpet the accusation as self-evident truth. Trump is a traitor because he wants peace with Russia.

Here is Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer (NY) repeating Pelosi's false accusation: "Millions of Americans will continue to wonder if the only possible explanation for this dangerous behavior is the possibility that President Putin holds damaging information over President Trump." If you don't believe that this is orchestrated between Pelosi and Schumer, you are stupid beyond belief.

Here is disgraced Obama CIA director John Brennan, a leader of the fake Russiagate campaign against President Trump in order to prevent Trump from making peace with Russia and, thus, by making the world safer, threatening the massive, unjustified budget of the military/security complex: "Donald Trump's press conference performance in Helsinki rises to and exceeds the threshold of high crimes and misdemeanors. It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump's comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin. Republican Patriots: Where are you???"

Here are many more: https://www.infowars.com/meltdown-left-seething-over-trump-putin-summit/

And here is more from the CIA bought-and-paid-for BBC: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44852812

NOTICE THAT NOT ONE WESTERN MEDIA SOURCE IS CELEBRATING AND THANKING TRUMP AND PUTIN FOR EASING THE ARTIFICIALLY CREATED TENSIONS THAT WERE LEADING TO NUCLEAR WAR. HOW CAN THIS BE? HOW CAN IT BE THAT THE WESTERN MEDIA IS SO OPPOSED TO PEACE? WHAT IS THE EXPLANATION?

The Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians, and the North Koreans, as well as the rest of the world, desperately need to notice the extremely hostile reaction to peace on the part of the US Democratic Party, many members of the Republican Party, including the despicable US Republican Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, and the Western Presstitute Media, a collection of people on the CIA payroll according to the German newspaper editor, Udo Ulfkotte, and the CIA itself.

Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and the rest of the corrupt filth that rules over us are all in the pay of the military/security complex. Just go and investigate the donations to their re-election campaigns. The 1,000 billion dollar budget of the military/security complex, amplified by the CIA's front corporations and narcotics business, provides enormous sums with which to purchase the senators and representatives that the insouciant American voters think that they elect.

Do you know how large 1,000 billion is? You would have to live for thousands of years and do nothing for 24/7 except count to reach that figure. It is a sum that nurtures the recipients, and the recipients regard it as worth protecting.

Therefore, the American public gets not representation, but lies that justify war and conflict. The military/security complex, about which President Eisenhower warned the American people to no effect, is in desperate need of an enemy. In obedience to the military/security complex, the Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama regimes have made Russia that enemy. If Trump and Putin do not understand this, they will easily be made irrelevant.

They both can be assassinated, and that is what the statements from Pelosi, Schumer, McCain, Lindsey Graham, et. al., repeated endlessly in the propaganda ministry that is the Western press, encourages. Trump can be assassinated or overthrown in a political coup for selling out America to Russia, as members of both political parties claim and as the media trumpets endlessly. Putin can be easily assassinated by the CIA operatives that the Russian government stupidly permits to operate throughout Russia in NGOs and Western/US owned media and among the Atlanticist Integrationists, Washington's Firth Column inside Russia serving Washington's purposes. These Russian traitors serve in Putin's own government!

ORDER IT NOW

Americans are so unaware that they have no idea of the risk that President Trump is taking by challenging the US military security complex. For example, during the last half of the 1970s I was a member of the US Senate staff. I was working together with a staffer of the US Republican Senator from California, S. I. Hayakawa, to advance understanding of a supply-side economic policy cure to the stagflation that threatened the US budget's ability to meet its obligations. Republican Senators Hatch, Roth, and Hayakawa were trying to introduce a supply-side economic policy as a cure for the stagflation that was threatening the US economy with failure. The Democrats, who later in the Senate led the way to a supply-side policy, were, at this time, opposed (see Paul Craig Roberts, The Supply-Side Revolution , Harvard University Press, 1984). The Democrats claimed that the policy would worsen the budget deficit, the only time in those days Democrats cared about the budget deficit. The Democrats said that they would support the tax rate reductions if the Republicans would support offsetting cuts in the budget to support a balanced budget. This was a ploy to put Republicans on the spot for taking away some groups' handouts in order "to cut tax rates for the rich."

The supply-side policy did not require budget cuts, but in order to demonstrate the Democrats lack of sincerety, Hayakawa's aid and I had our senators introduce a series of budget cuts together with tax cuts that, on a static revenue basis (not counting tax revenue feedbacks from the incentives of the lower tax rates) kept the budget even, and the Democrats voted against them every time.

When the combination of tax cuts with defense budget cuts came up for a vote, the legendary senator Strom Thurmond, a 48-year member of the US Senate from South Carolina, tapped me on the shoulder. He said: "son, never set your senator up against the military/security complex. He will not be re-elected, and you will be out of a job." I replied that we were just establishing for the record that under no conditions would the Democrats, who wanted more government, vote for a tax rate reduction even if there was a case that it would cure stagflation. He replied: "son, the military/security complex doesn't care."

My emergence from The Matrix began with Thurmond's pat on my shoulder. It grew with my time at the Wall Street Journal when I learned that some truthful things simply could not be said. In the Treasury I experienced how those outside interests opposed to a president's policy marshall their forces and the media that they own to block it. Later as a member of a secret presidential committee, I saw how the CIA attempted to prevent President Reagan from ending the Cold War.

Today, right now, at this moment, we are faced with a massive effort of the military/security complex, the neoconservatives, the Democratic Party, and the presstitute media to discredit the elected President of the United States and to overthrow him in order that the utterly corrupt elite that rule American can continue to hold on to power and to protect the massive budget of the military/security complex that, along with the Israel Lobby, funds the elections of those who rule us. Trump, like Reagan, was an exception, and it is the exceptions that accumulate the ire of the corrupt leftwing, bought off with money, and the ire of the media, concentrated into small tight ownership groups indebted to those who permitted the illegal concentration of a once independent and diverse American media that once served, on occasion, as a watchdog over government. The rightwing, wrapped in the flag, dismisses all truth as "anti-American."

If Putin, Lavrov, the Russian government, the traitorous Russian Fifth Column -- the Atlanticist Integrationists -- the Chinese, the Iranians, the North Koreans think that any peace or consideration can come out of America, they are insane. Their delusions are setting themselves up for destruction. There is no institution in America, government or private, that can be trusted. Any government or person who trusts America or any Western country is stupid beyond belief.

The entire Russiagate hoax is an orchestration by the military/security complex, led by John Brennen, Comey, and Rosenstein. The purpose is to discredit President trump for two reasons. One is to prevent any normalization of relations with Russia. The other is to remove Trump's agenda as an alternative to the agenda of the Democratic Party.

President Trump is almost powerless. Putin, the Chinese, the Iranians, and the North Koreans should recognize this before it is too late for them. President Trump cannot fire and arrest for high treason Mueller and Rosenstein. And Trump cannot indict Hillary for her numerous unquestionable crimes in plain view of everyone, or Comey or Brennan, who declares Trump "to be wholly in the pocket of Putin," for trying to overthrow the elected president of the United States. Trump cannot have the Secret Service question the likes of Pelosi and Schumer and McCain and Lindsey Graham for false accusations that encourage assassination of the President of the United States.

Trump cannot even trust the Secret Service, which accumulated evidence suggests was complicit in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and Robert Kennedy.

If Putin and Lavrov, so anxious to be friends of Washington, let their guards down, they are history.

As I said above, Russiagate is an orchestratration to prevent peace between the US and Russia. Leading military/security complex experts, including the person who provided the CIA's daily briefing of the President of the United States for many years, and the person who devised the spy program for the National Security Agency, have proven conclusively that Russiagate is a hoax designed for the purpose of preventing President Trump from normalizing relations between the US and Russia, which has the power to destroy the entirety of the Western World at will.

Here is the report from the retired security professionals who, unlike those still in office, cannot be fired and deprived of a careet for telling the truth: https://original.antiwar.com/mcgovern/2018/07/15/memo-to-the-president-ahead-of-mondays-summit/

Here is what the clued-in Russian Defense Minister Shoigu has to say about the aggressive actions of the West against the Russian homeland: https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/07/13/defense-minister-shoigu-on-moscow-vision-security-problems.html

If Putin doesn't listen to him, Russia is in the trash can of history.

Keep in mind that no media informs you better than my website. If my website goes down, you will be left in darkness. No valid information comes from the US government or the Western presstitutes. If you sit in front of the TV screen watching the Western media, you are brainwashed beyond all hope. Not even I can rescue you. Nor God himself.

Americans, and indeed the Russians themselves, are incapable of realizing it, but there is a chance that Trump will be overthrown and a Western assault will be launched against the handful of countries that insist on sovereignty.

I doubt that few of the Americans who elected Trump will be taken in by the anti-Trump propagana, but they are not organized and have no armed power. The police, militarized by George W. Bush and Obama, will be set against them. The rebellions will be local and suppressed by every violation of the US Constitution by the private powers that rule Washington, as always has been the case with rebellions in America.

In the West, which the Russians are so anxious to join, all freedoms are dead -- freedom of assembly, freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of inquiry, freedom of privacy, freedom from arbitrary search, freedom from arbitrary arrest, along with the Constitutional protections of due process and habeas corpus. Today there are no countries less free than the United States of America.

Why do the Russian Atlanticist Integrationists want to join an unfree Western world? Are they that brainwashed by Western Propaganda?

If Putin listens to these deluded fools, Putin will destroy Russia.

There is something wrong with Russian perception of Washington. Apparently the Russian elite, with the exception of Shoigu and a few others are incapable of comprehending the neoconservative drive for US world hegemony and the neoconservative determination to destroy Russia as a constraint on US unilateralism. The Russian government somehow, despite all evidence to the contrary, believes that Washington's hegemony is negotiable. (Republished from PaulCraigRoberts.org by permission of author or representative)

nagra , July 20, 2018 at 4:46 am GMT
is big question even if Trump wants peace at all. Trump has shown his real face on the very beginning when he said that they are going to talk about "his friend" Xi, making Putin very uncomfortable and throwing some worms in Russia~China relationship in front of cameras for all to see

Trump came to the meeting in hope to impress Putin with his cowboy arrogance, He now says that he'll be Putin's worst enemy ( if he don't bow to him I guess : ). all Trump cares about is his ego, nothing else too sweat mouthed sleazy person

Sparkon , July 20, 2018 at 4:57 am GMT
Reckless and irresponsible comments about treason from former CIA director Brennan, and other ranking public figures, echo similar inflammatory rhetoric from far-right-wing rabble rouser Gen. Edwin Walker, and other members of the John Birch Society, in the days before Pres. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas.
RobinG , July 20, 2018 at 5:10 am GMT
@geokat62

Okay then! Cue the real story of [lying filth] Bill Browder, a film by Andrei Nekrasov. Watch and share before it disappears!

https://www.bitchute.com/embed/lQ3qEwX66pIL/

The Magnitsky Act – Behind the Scenes

Ludwig Watzal , Website July 20, 2018 at 5:41 am GMT
What's going on in the United States of America beats the band what happened under Joe McCarthy. The witch hunt against a sitting President by 95 percent of the media, major government institutions such as the criminal CIA, FBI, DOJ and the rest of the crooked Intel community plus the rascals in the US Congress can only happen in a totalitarian society, which the US is.

The Brennan, Clappers, Obamas, Clintons, Comeys, Rosenstein and their many subordinate political Mafiosi should be put behind bars instead of running from one TV station to the next and lay the ground for a possibly Trump assassination. Trump is portrayed by these crooks as a "traitor." In the US, traitors usefully deserve death. If these political Mafiosi don't bring down Trump "legally," they will hire a kind of Lee Harvey Oswald who "shot" JFK.

As Mr. Rogers correctly states, President Trump is almost powerless. These US fools even try to breed discord between the so-called nationalists and the globalists in Russia for which Medvedev stays. He once served US interests more than Russian ones when he was Prime Minister and got flattered by the ineffable Bill Clinton.

Let's wait and see what happens in the upcoming mid-term elections. If the Dems win both Houses of Congress, Trump is done. The obstructionists will have the upper hand. If they can't remove him from office "legally," there will be a hitman out there somewhere.

RealAmericanValuesCirca1776Not1965 , July 20, 2018 at 6:49 am GMT
President smugly making peace with the Russian nation that was supposed to be the evil enemy in a 3rd and final brother war to devastate the white race beyond recovery.

Little upstart in the Democrat party making left wing politics less palatable to the masses with her heavy handed socialist rhetoric. All while preaching BDS and anti-Israel sentiment too, representing Frankenstein's CultMarx monster turning on it's creator.

And fewer and fewer people on all sides buying what the American Pravda is selling with each passing day. The resulting hysteria is both par for the course and downright delectable.

jilles dykstra , July 20, 2018 at 7:24 am GMT
" Apparently the Russian elite, with the exception of Shoigu and a few others are incapable of comprehending the neoconservative drive for US world hegemony and the neoconservative determination to destroy Russia as a constraint on US unilateralism. " My idea is that many in Russia understand quite well, this is why they demonstrate Russia's military capabilities frequently. Why does Putin support Assad and Syria ? Not because he likes these countries, but because he understands that if these countries also get the USA yoke the position of Russia and China deteriorate.

Putin is careful not to give USA public opinion more 'reason' to fear Russia. Already a few years ago something fell into the E part of the Mediterranean. It was asserted that Russia had intercepted a USA missile fired from Spain to Syria. USA and Israel declared that an excercise had been held. Putin said nothing.

Despite all that NATO does at Russia's borders Putin does not let himself be provoked. MH17, I suppose Putin knows quite well what happened, Russia has radar and satelites, yet Putin never gave the Russian view.

So what do we see now ? Putin aiding Trump in steering the USA away from trying to control the whole world, an effort that is destroying the USA, but Deep State does not mind. In this way Russia indeed meddles in USA politics. Trump now invited Putin to come to Washington, the MH17 statement is withheld, the hysteria at CNN is such that MH17 is not even mentioned. In stead: Trump must be mentally deranged.

Tsar Nicholas , July 20, 2018 at 7:48 am GMT
Another fine piece from PCR. It is a shame that trolls have caused him to avoid comments.
NoseytheDuke , July 20, 2018 at 8:03 am GMT
Good to see PCR accepting comments again. It's not just the Dumbocruds, it's the Rupuglicunts too. Follow the money, it's coming from the same sources. Gore Vidal said there's only one party in America, it's the Money Party and it has two branches. It is even more true today than when he said it. There is no Left or Right anymore, only the question, is it good for Israel? And the American people be damned.
Anonymous [337] Disclaimer , July 20, 2018 at 8:20 am GMT

Is President Trump A Traitor Because He Wants Peace with Russia?
The Democrats say he is

The Democrats -- and their wholly-owned MSM -- will call Trump any name that'll stick. It means little. Even if Trump got everything he wanted on immigration, that particular toothpaste is already out of the tube and unless we send back some of the millions of illegal third-world squatters we've no hope of recovering the United States of America.

If you want to talk treason, you need look no further than the Hart-Celler Act of 1965, whereby the plan was laid to replace the population of this nation with third-world refuse, which guaranteed cheap labor for GOP capitalists and endless political support for Democrat traitors.

Oh yeah, it's going swimmingly.

Robert Magill , July 20, 2018 at 9:36 am GMT
Fact 1: Russia's Defense Dept. IS a defense dept. Our alleged Defense Dept. is a War Dept. Nuff said.
Fact 2: Don't invade Russia.
Fact 3: Don't invade Russia.
RobertMagill.wordpress.com
Biff , July 20, 2018 at 9:47 am GMT

HOW CAN THIS BE? HOW CAN IT BE THAT THE WESTERN MEDIA IS SO OPPOSED TO PEACE? WHAT IS THE EXPLANATION?

Money

Moi , July 20, 2018 at 11:08 am GMT
@Tsar Nicholas

For a country that cares little about morality, it really does not matter whether Trump, Hillary, Obama or anyone else is the leader.

geokat62 , July 20, 2018 at 11:13 am GMT
@RobinG

As the saying goes "timing is everything." I have to admit I was incredulous that you were somehow able to link to a functioning version of the Nekrosov film. I've been trying to get my hands on that documentary for the last few years, but to no avail. I finally managed to read a comment on another blog that recommended that people who were interested in viewing the film could do so by reaching out to the producer to request a personalized link, after which you had to request a password from another individual affiliated with the film.

I managed to do all of that a few weeks ago and was able to watch the video on Vimeo for the full 2 hours. It was riveting, to say the least. After viewing it again, I thought about making it available to others. Due to the pressures by Browder and his lawyers, however, Nekrosov was prevented from making his film available to a wider audience. He got around this limitation by making it available for private viewing only. And to prevent a private viewer from uploading it onto the internet he cleverly placed a watermark on each film, indicating the owner of each copy of the video by displaying a number on the screen. I was surprised to see the version you linked to indeed has this watermark shown on the screen. Somehow, this did not deter the individual tied to that number from uploading it and being the one identified as doing so. That said, I'm glad the film is more widely available as it should be viewed by as many people as possible so that they can realize what a despicable liar Browder really is and how the passage of The Magnitsky Act was a travesty of justice which must be reversed.

Reactionary Utopian , July 20, 2018 at 11:35 am GMT
"Do you know how large 1,000 billion is? You would have to live for thousands of years and do nothing for 24/7 except count to reach that figure. It is a sum that nurtures the recipients, and the recipients regard it as worth protecting."

Tens of thousands of years. At one count per second, 31,687 years and a few months.

Sally Snyder , July 20, 2018 at 11:39 am GMT
Here is an interesting look at how the anti-Russian narrative began in the United States and who really rigged the 2016 U.S. election:

https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/07/the-genesis-of-russian-interference.html

Main Street America is being manipulated into believing that Russia is the enemy, giving Washington a complete...

Jake , July 20, 2018 at 11:49 am GMT
"In the West, which the Russians are so anxious to join, all freedoms are dead -- freedom of assembly, freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of inquiry, freedom of privacy, freedom from arbitrary search, freedom from arbitrary arrest, along with the Constitutional protections of due process and habeas corpus."

True. That is the Anglo-Zionist Empire. That is what the WASP Empire delivers, and it does so to destroy more conservative national and local cultures so their peoples are tossed into the melting pot and reduced into a goop easy to rule.

Oliver Cromwell taking Jewish money, allying with Jews so he would have the funds to wage permanent war against the vast, vast majority of non-WASP whites within his reach: that is the definition of WASP culture; that picture tells you what it always will do.

nagra , July 20, 2018 at 12:14 pm GMT
@RobinG

to everyone who make such movies

make something serious about Obama and Hillary destroying whole African country of Libya killing Colonel Gaddafi on the street, which is greatest war crime in the 21st century so far or, Bill Clinton bombing Bosnian Serbs '95 opening the door to jihadis to continue behead people in the middle of the Europe or, Bill Clinton and Nato bombing Serbia '99 to give "Kosovo" independence killing many civilian and destroying infrastructure on purpose or Madeline Albright confessing killing half of million Iraqi kids on the camera or, Bush and or Bushes or those such Bill Browder are just small dirty fish who in comparison is almost not worth filming I appreciate the effort but get seriously real if you are about to get truth to people

annamaria , July 20, 2018 at 12:22 pm GMT
@Ludwig Watzal

"The Brennan, Clappers, Obamas, Clintons, Comeys, Rosenstein and their many subordinate political Mafiosi "

What is going on in the US is systematic. Assange, an investigative journalist who became the light of truth worldwide, is under a grave danger from US' and UK' Intelligence Communities of the non-intelligent opportunists and real traitors: https://www.rt.com/news/433783-wikileaks-assange-ecuador-uk/

Meanwhile, Mrs. Clinton, who was criminally negligent with regard to the most important classified information, has been protected by the politicking Brennan, Clapper, and Mueller: " it was over 30,000 emails , emails that were sent through to Hillary Clinton through the unauthorized server and unsecured server and every email she sent out.

There were highly classified -- beyond classified -- top secret-type stuff that had gone through that server. an instruction embedded, compartmentalized data embedded in the email server telling the server to send a copy of every email that came to Hillary Clinton through that unauthorized server and every email that she sent out through that server, to send it to this foreign entity that is not Russia." http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/07/congressional-record-transcript-on-chinagate.html

The Awan Affair, the most serious ever violation of national cybersecurity, has demonstrated the spectacular incompetence of the CIA and FBI, which had allowed a family of Pakistani nationals to surf congressional computers of various committees, including Intelligence Committee, for years. None of the scoundrels had a security clearance! Their ardent protector, Wasserman-Schultz (who threatened the DC Marschall) belongs to the untouchables, unlike Assange: https://www.theepochtimes.com/awan-congressional-scandal-in-spotlight-as-president-suggests-data-could-be-part-of-court-case_2500703.html

Ilyana_Rozumova , July 20, 2018 at 12:27 pm GMT
Trump and Putin made a mistake. I do not understand how it could have happened. They should have issued communiqué that they have agreed to work toward peace and relieve tensions and suppress conflicts around the world. (I do not have a time for now to write more.) (sorry)
Carroll Price , July 20, 2018 at 12:30 pm GMT
@Eagle Eye

Don't give FDR too much credit. He didn't approve the Normandy invasion until well after Russia had destroyed the German army.

Zogby , July 20, 2018 at 12:36 pm GMT
If Rosenstein & Mueller had done what they did with the publication of the indictments a few days before the summit -- and were North Koreans -- they'd be in front of a firing squad within 24 hours. Trump is completely powerless to do anything about these two. And this has gone on for a year and a half. This is not a strength of democracy.

The US today is like Venezuela was shortly after Maduro was elected (by a narrow margin) -- after Chavez's death -- and before violence eventually broke out. The losing opposition refused to accept the result and tensions simmered for a long time.

Or after Morsi was elected in Egypt and before the military coup. The victory was narrow, the opposition refused the to accept the result and tensions simmered for a long time.

Or maybe like Bush vs Gore. Bush was kinda saved by 9/11 which completely changed the atmosphere.

Who knows what will happen. It's clear though that Trump believes he has forced his opponents to play a bad hand in their outlandish craze the past week. It's why he doubled down and invited Putin to Washington near the 2018 election time. He perceives this as a chance to re-enact the 2016 election and coast to victory. The establishment is insane, and if he brings their insanity out it plays to his favor.

Russ , July 20, 2018 at 1:04 pm GMT
@Sparkon

https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/3975-deep-state-delirium

Brennan, the Communist. The linked article begins with that and proceeds from there in a first-rate deep-state summary.

Den Lille Abe , July 20, 2018 at 1:04 pm GMT
The reception of the Trump- Putin meeting is breathtaking. I have in my 61 years never witnessed such a hate and slander in the MSM. I have after this begun to actually dismiss that Americans are sensible people! They have completely forgotten the cost of the Civil War. We in Europe have not forgotten the cost of war and are not going there again. Ever.

The US has become a lunatic asylum with nuclear weapons, never mind Kim Jong Un, look a squirrel! But the US is a threat to humanity, included it's protegé Israel, the new Apartheid state.

Harold Smith , July 20, 2018 at 1:43 pm GMT
"Is President Trump A Traitor Because He Wants Peace with Russia?"

Wait; what?

From badmouthing Russia to appointing Russophobes to high office, to imposing sanctions, to illegally seizing Russian diplomatic property, to committing war crimes in Syria, to a provocative military buildup in Europe, to arming the illegitimate Ukrainian "government," etc., presidential poseur Orange Clown has spent 99% of his "presidency" so far antagonizing Russia; apparently trying to provoke some kind of Russian military response.

If it was anyone else other than Vladimir Putin calling the shots in Russia, WW3 probably would've happened already. Yet PCR claims Orange Clown wants peace with Russia?

Note to PCR: It is Vladimir Putin who wants peace, not presidential poseur Orange Clown. If Orange Clown has had some kind of spiritual epiphany/change of heart, he's going to have to show good faith by taking some kind of unambiguous action; posturing won't suffice.

Mike P , July 20, 2018 at 1:48 pm GMT
@NoseytheDuke

There is a lot of truth in what you say, but it does not account for the fight we are currently witnessing. Two factions in the Money Party are at war with each other. Neither one is willing to level with the public as to its true aims and motives -- they are fighting viciously but under the bed sheets, which is why the spectacle looks so unhinged and silly.

AnonFromTN , July 20, 2018 at 2:28 pm GMT
It appears that he is trying to save the US from financial collapse. Hence, he is a traitor to MIC, particularly to the obscenely greedy Pentagon contractors. The US presidents and Congress always pandered to MIC first and foremost. He broke (or at least tried to break) the pattern.
Anonymous [166] Disclaimer , July 20, 2018 at 4:48 pm GMT
@Den Lille Abe

Don't blame all Americans. Forty-eight percent of us voted for Trump; it is very likely that more than half of the rest voted for Hellary only with great reluctance, owing largely to the unprecedented campaign of vilification directed at Trump. The point is: a very large majority of people in this country are nowhere near as insane as the media and elites are -- in fact, we're still nowhere near insane enough for their taste!

[Jul 20, 2018] In the event, as is by now well know, Boris Johnson's claim that Porton Down scientists had told him that the agent which poisoned the Skripals came from Russia was specifically repudiated by the head of that organisation, Gary Aitkenhead, on 3 April. Our Foreign Secretary told a flagrant lie, and was exposed.

Jul 20, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

David Habakkuk , a day ago

All,

I was drafting a response to the comment by 'Barbara Ann' – thanks for the link to the recent posts by Adam Carter – before going out. Returning and reading some very interesting comments, I think what I wanted to say has more general relevance.

One reason I am reading so much into 'this Dzerzhinsky thing' is the body of accumulating evidence that people like Tait are part of a system of networks which combine sanctimoniousness, corruption and stupidity in about equal measures. So some more examples may be to the point.

Different cases in which I have taken an interest come together in a post by Tait on the 'Lawfare' site on 13 March, entitled 'U.K. Prime Minister's Speech on the Russian Poisoning of Sergei Skripal: Decoding the Signals.'

(See https://www.lawfareblog.com... .)

In support of the claim that in accusing Russia of a pioneering act of chemical terrorism Theresa May was relying upon accurate analysis from the 'U.K. intelligence community', Tait wrote that:

'May then explained that Skripal was poisoned by a "military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia one of a group of nerve agents known as 'Novichok.'" She is laying out the basic groundwork for the government's attribution to a nation state and, more specifically, Russia. At Porton Down, the U.K. has one of the world's best forensic labs for analyzing chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. With the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko in 2006, this lab not only established that Polonium-210 was used but also which reactor in Russia it came from.'

In the event, as is by now well know, Boris Johnson's claim that Porton Down scientists had told him that the agent which poisoned the Skripals came from Russia was specifically repudiated by the head of that organisation, Gary Aitkenhead, on 3 April. Our Foreign Secretary told a flagrant lie, and was exposed.

(See https://www.craigmurray.org... .)

As I have shown in previous posts on this site, the 'Inquiry' conducted by Sir Robert Owen into the death of Litvinenko was patently corrupt. Moreover, it seems highly likely that, in fabricating 'evidence' to cover up what actually happened, Christopher Steele was doing a 'dry-run' for the fabrication of material in the dossier published by 'BuzzFeed.'

In fact, however, Owen's report made quite clear that the role of Porton Down was marginal. Furthermore, 'Scientist A1' from the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston quite specifically rejected the claim that 'impurity profiling' made it possible to establish that the source of the polonium was the Avangard facility at Sarov, her arguments being accepted by Owen. Either Tait has not bothered to read the report or very much of the coverage, or he is lying.

(For the report, see http://webarchive.nationala... . For some of the mass of evidence which Owen chose to ignore, see my discussions at http://turcopolier.typepad.... ; http://turcopolier.typepad....

What Porton Down did do was to use 'impurity profiling', which can produce 'spectra' identifying even the tiniest traces of substances, to frustrate the attempt to use the 'false flag' attack at Ghouta on 21 August 2013 to inveigle the American and British governments into destroying the Assad 'régime' and handing the country over to jihadists.

It may well be that this display of competence and integrity led to a 'clampdown' at the organisation, which encouraged Boris Johnson to believe he could get away with lying about what its scientists told him.

(See my defence and development of the crucial reporting by Seymour Hersh, at http://turcopolier.typepad.... .)

A general pattern which emerges is that the same small group of 'disinformation peddlers' resurfaces in different contexts – and the pattern whereby 'private security companies' are used to create a spurious impression of independence also recurs.

As I bring out in my piece on Ghouta, two figures who were critical in shaping the 'narrative' acccording to which Syrian government responsibility for the atrocity had been conclusively proved, were Colonel Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, formerly the former commanding officer of the UK Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Regiment, and also NATO's Rapid Reaction CBRN Battalion, and Dan Kaszeta.

Immediately after the story of the poisoning of the Skripals on 4 March broke, the same duo reappeared, and have been as critical to shaping the 'narrative' about the later incident as they were to that about the former.

(For the piece by Kaszeta on 'Bellingcat' which introduced the 'Novichok' theme four days later, see https://www.bellingcat.com/... .)

This makes it particular interesting to look at the website of Kaszeta's consultancy, 'Strongpoint Security Limited', in conjunction with the 'Companies House' documentation on the company.

(See http://strongpointsecurity.... ; https://beta.companieshouse... .)

One would have thought from the website that his company was a small, but hardly insignificant, player, in the field of 'physical and operational security.' As it happens, having filed 'Total exemption small company accounts' since its incorporation in May 2011, last December it filed 'Micro company accounts' for the year to 31 May 2017.

With a turnover of £20,000, staff costs of a bit more than half of that, and a profit of £394, we can see that although unlike Matt Tait's, Kaszeta's company did trade, if indeed it was his sole source of income, this pivotal figure in Anglo-American 'disinformation operations' was living on something less than $15,000 a year, at current exchange rates. (Pull the other one, as we say in Britain.)

This is all the more ironic, as the website brings out quite how critical a figure Kaszeta has been in obscuring the truth. From the bio he gives, we learn that having started as a Chemical Officer in the U.S. Army, he worked for 12 years in the White House, dealing with CBRN matters, before moving to Britain in 2008.

Among the articles to which he links on the site, we see his response in 'NOW Lebanon' in December 2013 to Hersh's original 'Whose sarin?' piece on Ghouta, -- in which Kaszeta first introduced the famous 'hexamine hypothesis.'

This – patently preposterous – suggestion that the presence of a single 'impurity' is a 'smoking gun' incriminating the Syrian government has echoed on into the clearly corrupt OPCW documents purporting to demonstrate that it was responsible for the 4 April 2017 Khan Sheikhoun attack.

Of some interest in understanding where Kaszeta he is coming from is what he describes as his 'oldest (and most footnoted on Wikipedia)' piece, which is an article published in 1988 on a site called 'Lituanus', on 'Lithuanian Resistance to Foreign Occupation 1940-52.'

(See http://www.lituanus.org/198... .)

As to Colonel de Bretton-Gordon, it is of interest to look at the attempt to 'finger' the GRU over the Skripal poisoning published under the title 'UK Poisoning Inquiry turns to Russian Agency in Mueller Indictments' in the 'New York Times' last Sunday, and the response by the Russian Embassy in London to a question about it.

(See https://www.nytimes.com/201... ; https://www.rusemb.org.uk/f... .)

The response objects that 'while the British authorities keep concealing all information concerning the investigation into the Salisbury incident, the newspaper has quoted "one former US official familiar with the inquiry".'

It also asserts that that crucial evidence which has not been made available to the Russians – and here, as with Ghouta and Khan Sheikhoun, the results of 'impurity profiling' are critical – appears to have been shared not just with inappropriate Americans, but with all kinds of others.

And indeed, the Embassy is quite right in suggesting that the claim made by the supposed creator of 'Novichok', Vladimir Uglev, to the BBC in April about 'all the spectrum data I was sent recently' has neither been confirmed nor denied. This seems a general pattern – the 'spectra' which may actually be able to provide definitive answers to questions of responsibility are only provided to people who can be relied upon to give the 'right' answers.

The Embassy response also quite fairly refers to a report in the 'Times' also in April, about the 'intelligence' which had been 'used to persuade world leaders that Moscow was behind the poisoning' and that the 'Novichok' had been manufactured at the Shikhany facility at in southwest Russia, which stated that de Bretton-Gordon, 'who had seen the intelligence, called it very compelling.' He has a long history of lying about CW in Syria – so is obviously the right person to lie about them in the UK.

(See https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/... ; https://www.thetimes.co.uk/... .)

It thus becomes interesting to probe into what lies behind the opening of de Bretton-Gordon's entry on the 'Military Speakers' website ('Real Heroes; Real Stories.') According to this, he is 'Chief Operating Office of SecureBio Ltd a commercial company offering CBRN Resilience, consultancy and deployable capabilities.'

(See http://www.militaryspeakers... .)

From 'Companies House', we learn that the liquidation of 'Secure Bio', which started in in June 2015, was concluded in August last year. The really interesting thing about the records, however, is that at the time of the liquidation the company had very large debts, which were written off, of a kind and in a manner which suggested that de Bretton-Gordon's activities may have been largely funded by loans from untraceable sources which were not meant to be repaid.

(See https://beta.companieshouse... – in particular the 'Statement of affairs' dated 30 June 2015.)

Actually, with the 'NYT' report we come full circle. Among those quoted is Mark Galeotti – apparently his admission that he had totally misrepresented the thinking of the Russian General Staff has not him made more cautious about making extravagant claims about its Main Intelligence Directorate (misreported as Main Directorate by the 'NYT.')

Also quoted are two figures who play key roles in Owen's Report – the Soviet era-GRU defector 'Viktor Suvorov' (real name 'Vladimir Rezun') and the former KGB operative Yuri Shvets. Both of these feature prominently in the posts on the Litvinenko affair to which I have linked, and both were key members of the 'information operations' network centred around the late Boris Berezovsky. This now seems to have taken control of American policy, as of British.

The role of 'Suvorov'/Rezun in attempting to defend the interpretations of Stalin's policy put forward by MI6 in the run-up to the Second World War, and those asserted later by General Keitel, and the way he was demolished by the leading American historian of the War in the East, Colonel David Glantz, and the Israeli historian Gabriel Gorodetsky, is too large a subject to go into here.

(For a brief review, see https://networks.h-net.org/... .)

However, it provides further reason to wonder whether the misreadings of Stalin's policy which caused MI6 to give advice to Chamberlain which helped destroy the last chances of preventing the Nazi-Soviet Pact, may still be the 'house view' of that organisation. It was, obviously, the Pact which spelled 'curtains' both for Poland and the Baltics.

David Habakkuk , 6 hours ago
All,

More evidence for the at least passive complicity of GCHQ – for which Matt Tait used to work, and which Robert Hannigan used to run – in corrupt 'information operations' comes in a report yesterday on CNN.

(See https://edition.cnn.com/201... )

It opens:

'Police have identified two suspects in the poisoning of former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, a source with knowledge of the investigation told CNN on Thursday.

'The pair left the UK in the wake of the attack on what is believed to have been a commercial flight, the source added.

'Their departure was revealed in a coded Russian message to Moscow sent after the attack, which was intercepted by a British base in Cyprus, the source said. The British government blames the Skripals' poisoning on Russia.'

The base in question is high up in the Troodos mountains, and is formally run by the RAF but actually a key resource for both GCHQ and NSA in monitoring communications over a wide area. According to an internal document from the former organisation, it has 'long been regarded as a 'Jewel in the Crown' by NSA as it offers unique access to the Levant, North Africa, and Turkey'.

(See https://theintercept.com/20... .)

That the quote comes a report in 'The Intercept' in January 2016 revealing that one of the uses of the Troodos facility is to intercept live video feeds from Israeli drones and fighter jets brings out how paradoxical the world is. For it also appears to have emerged as an important resource in 'information operations' in support of 'Borgist' agendas.

The claim about intercepts incriminating the Russians over the Salisbury incident was first made in a piece by Marco Giannangeli in the Daily Express on 9 April, which followed up the claims which Colonel de Bretton-Gordon had been instrumental in disseminating, and was then widely picked up by the MSM.

(See https://www.express.co.uk/n... .)

It was headlined: 'REVEALED: The bombshell Russian message intercepted on DAY of Skripal poisonings,' and opened: 'AN ELECTRONIC message to Moscow sent on the day former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned with a nerve agent in Salisbury included the phrase "the package has been delivered".'

Supposedly, this 'prompted a young Flight Lieutenant to recall a separate message that had been intercepted and discounted on the previous day.' The messages were 'understood to have formed "just one part" of the intelligence packet which later allowed Prime Minister Theresa May to state it was "highly likely" that Russia was behind the attacks.'

As it happens, the same writer – Marco Giannangeli – had disseminated a parallel piece of palpable fiction on 1 September 2013, in the 'Sunday Express', in relation to the Ghouta 'false flag.'

(See https://www.express.co.uk/n... .)

This one was headlined, even more melodramatically, 'Senior Syrian military chiefs tell captain: fire chemicals or be shot; BRITISH intelligence chiefs have intercepted radio messages in which senior Syrian military chiefs are heard ordering the use of chemical weapons.'

Part of the story of how bogus claims about 'smoking gun' evidence from 'SIGINT' were used to support the attempt to use the Ghouta 'false flag' to inveigle the British and Americans into destroying the Syrian government was told in my SST post on the incident. However, to mix metaphors, I only scratched the surface of a can of worms.

In a report on the 'Daily Caller' site on 29 August 2013, Kenneth Timmerman claimed that the sequence had started with an actual intercept by Unit 8200 – the Israeli equivalent of GCHQ and NSA.

(See http://dailycaller.com/2013... .)

Claiming to base his account on Western intelligence sources, he suggested that:

'According to these officers, who served in top positions in the United States, Britain, France, Israel, and Jordan, a Syrian military communication intercepted by Israel's famed Unit 8200 electronic intelligence outfit has been doctored so that it leads a reader to just the opposite conclusion reached by the original report.'

While I am not in a position to establish whether his claim is or is not accurate, an AP report on the same day quoted 'U.S. intelligence officials' explaining that 'an intercept of Syrian military officials discussing the strike was among low-level staff, with no direct evidence tying the attack back to an Assad insider or even a senior Syrian commander'.

(See https://www.salon.com/2013/... )

Meanwhile, Timmerman's claim that 'The doctored report was picked up on Israel's Channel 2 TV on Aug. 24, then by Focus magazine in Germany, the Times of Israel, and eventually by The Cable in Washington, DC' is supported by links to the relevant stories, which say what he claims they say.

Moreover, it seems clear that the 1 September 2013 report was an attempt to counter a – somewhat devastating – critique made in a 31 August post entitled 'The Troodos Conundrum' by the former British Ambassador Craig Murray, who had been closely involved with the facility during his time at the Foreign Office (and has written invaluable material on the Salisbury incident.)

(See https://www.craigmurray.org... .)

Precisely because of the closeness of the GCHQ/NSA collaboration, Murray brought out, there was indeed a major problem explaining why claims about 'SIGINT' had been central to the case made in the 'Government Assessment' released by the White House on 30 August 2013, but not even mentioned in the Joint Intelligence Community 'Assessment' produced two days before.

The answer, Murray suggested, was that the 'intelligence' came from Mossad, and so would not have been automatically shared with the British. But, given the superior capabilities of Troodos, if Mossad had it, the British should have also. So his claims 'meshed' with those by Timmerman and the AP, and the 'Express' report looks like a lame attempt at a cover-up.

Again however, one finds the world is a paradoxical place. As I noted in my SST post, detailed demolitions of the claims about 'SIGINT' in relation to Ghouta were provided both Seymour Hersh, in the 'Whose sarin?' article, and also on the 'Who Attacked Ghouta?' site masterminded by one 'sasa wawa.'

Later, it became clear that this was likely to be the Israeli technology entrepreneur Saar Wilf, a former employee of Unit 8200. So this may – or may not – be an indication of deep divisions within Israeli intelligence.

Between 18 March and 31 April, a fascinating series of posts on the Salisbury incident appeared on the 'Vineyard of the Saker' blog. The author, who used the name 'sushi', was a self-professed IT professsional, who had however obviously acquired an extensive familiarity with 'chemical forensics' and appeared to have some experience of 'SIGINT.'

(See https://thesaker.is/tag/sushi/ .)

In a 14 April post, 'sushi' produced a dismissal of the claims about 'SIGINT' implicating the Russians over the Salisbury incident quite as contemptuous as that which 'sasa wawa' had produced in relation to the claims about it incriminating the Syrian government over Ghouta.

Pointing to the implausibility of the story disseminated by the 'Express', he remarked that:

'It is doubted that any message traffic is processed on Cyprus. It is more likely that the entire take is transmitted back to GCHQ in Cheltenham via a fibre optic link. There exabytes of take are processed, not by a bored flight lieutenant, but by banks of high speed computers.

'Clearly someone in Cheltenham has committed a programming error. Anyone with any knowledge of secret communications knows that the code phrase used to confirm a murder in Salisbury is "small pizza, no anchovies." '

Interestingly, another paper in the 'Express' group made a parallel claim in relation to the Khan Sheikhoun incident to that about the Ghouta incident, but the story was not picked up and may indeed have been suppressed.

On 9 April, the paper published a report headlined 'Brit spies' lead role in Syrian air strikes; RAF BASE IS 'WEAPON.' This claimed that 'within an hour of the airstrike', Troodos had intercepted communications revealing that nerve gas had been used, and had been delivered by jets from the Syrian Arab Air Force's Shayrat Air Base.

(See

View Hide

[Jul 20, 2018] The Magnitsky Act – Behind the Scenes

unz.com

geokat62 , July 20, 2018 at 11:13 am GMT

Okay then! Cue the real story of [lying filth] Bill Browder, a film by Andrei Nekrasov. Watch and share before it disappears!

https://www.bitchute.com/embed/lQ3qEwX66pIL/

The Magnitsky Act – Behind the Scenes

geokat62 , July 20, 2018 at 11:13 am GMT
@RobinG

As the saying goes "timing is everything." I have to admit I was incredulous that you were somehow able to link to a functioning version of the Nekrosov film. I've been trying to get my hands on that documentary for the last few years, but to no avail. I finally managed to read a comment on another blog that recommended that people who were interested in viewing the film could do so by reaching out to the producer to request a personalized link, after which you had to request a password from another individual affiliated with the film.

I managed to do all of that a few weeks ago and was able to watch the video on Vimeo for the full 2 hours. It was riveting, to say the least. After viewing it again, I thought about making it available to others.

Due to the pressures by Browder and his lawyers, however, Nekrosov was prevented from making his film available to a wider audience. He got around this limitation by making it available for private viewing only.

And to prevent a private viewer from uploading it onto the internet he cleverly placed a watermark on each film, indicating the owner of each copy of the video by displaying a number on the screen.

I was surprised to see the version you linked to indeed has this watermark shown on the screen. Somehow, this did not deter the individual tied to that number from uploading it and being the one identified as doing so.

That said, I'm glad the film is more widely available as it should be viewed by as many people as possible so that they can realize what a despicable liar Browder really is and how the passage of The Magnitsky Act was a travesty of justice which must be reversed.

AnonFromTN , July 20, 2018 at 2:31 pm GMT
@RobinG

The very fact that this movie was deleted almost everywhere suggests that it must be true. Lies are never so consistently deleted from all Western resources. This is only natural: nobody is scared of lies much, as they can be debunked. The truth can only be deleted. That's what Soviet propaganda under Stalin and German propaganda under Hitler did.

Zumbuddi , July 20, 2018 at 2:35 pm GMT
@nagra

You make a good point, nagra, there are many, many evils that demand exposure, most of them of greater importance than Browder. For example, I don't care a bit abot Clinton-Steele dossier etc etc etc -can't be bothered to try to figure it out.

She fricking destroyed a country & laughed like a deranged hyena at the assassination-by-sodomy, on film, of its leader! And women in USA dress up like cunts and adore her for her righteousness!

But re Browder -- against the forces and the wealth that , ie financed the pussy hat rally in Jan 2017, and similarly for Browder himself, who can finance his massive PR coverup. From money he stole! ANDis tied i to HSBC, where Stuart Levey, the former head of US Dept of Treasury Office of Terror Finance, is now head of legal department -- well, you have to recognize that all of the things you complain about are connected: Browder is connected to the Russian Jewish crime gang, which is connected to the American Jewish crime gang thru Ben Cardin & US Senate, fer chrissske, and tbru Levey to USTreasury, fer chrissake!; US Treasury may be complicit in Browder's crimes, same for Cardin.

Cicero lost his head for less.

It's a big ball of string, and you have to start somewhere to unravel it. The Loose String of the Browder case may or may not connect t to the core of this tangled mess, but it is a start.

"Once begun is half done."

RobinG , July 20, 2018 at 4:50 pm GMT
@geokat62

First, H/T to commenter tac, who found the link. 2nd, thanks for the background. I had no idea. The whole watermark/private viewing thing underscores, this is Limited Time Only! 3rd, in 2 days there are over 2000 views. I've been sharing this as much as possible. Let's keep it going!

https://www.bitchute.com/video/lQ3qEwX66pIL/

RobinG , July 20, 2018 at 5:06 pm GMT
@nagra

Good comment to you by Zumbuddi.

You greatly underestimate the significance of Browder re. the inflaming of a new Cold War and the coup against Pres. Trump. He is a KEY FIGURE behind all this Russia hysteria.

The notorious Trump Tower meeting concerned Browder's Magnitsky Act, money stolen [from Russia] by Browder, etc.

THIS is the Man Putin Said Gave Hillary Money

[Jul 20, 2018] Su-30 Coming to Iran Elite Russian Fighters in Iranian Hands Set be a Game Changer for the Middle East

Jul 20, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Garry Compton • 21 days ago ,

So Iran has no offensive air force or any Nukes but the Israelis with their air superiority and nukes are making Iran - enemy #1. How very - American - of them.

Marko Garry Compton • 21 days ago ,

" The Anglo-Zion Art of War "

1) Sweet-talk the enemy into disarming.

2) Attack the enemy.

JPH Marko • 21 days ago ,

Omitted steps:
3) Sodomize with a bayonet and murder the leader
4) Have a good laugh while stating "We came, We saw, he died!".

[Jul 20, 2018] 'Make them pariahs': how shaming Trump aides became a resistance tactic by Sam Wolfson

Hat tip to caucus99percent.com
Notable quotes:
"... @snoopydawg ..."
"... @gulfgal98 ..."
"... The Russians Are Coming, Again: The First Cold War as Tragedy, the Second as Farce. ..."
Jul 11, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

After another week saw leading Republicans accosted in public places, many on the left are arguing that harassment is legitimate

The day after Sarah Sanders was asked to leave the Red Hen restaurant in Virginia, Maxine Waters, the representative for the California 43rd who has become a leader of the anti-Trump resistance within Congress, addressed a rally in Los Angeles. Up until that point, national Democratic leaders had mostly urged respectful protest in response to the Trump administration.

"Let's make sure we show up wherever we have to show up," she said to cheers from the crowd. "And if you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them they're not welcome any more, anywhere."

In the days that followed, other leading Democrats, among them Nancy Pelosi and David Axelrod, distanced themselves from the comments and called for civility. Trump personally attacked Waters, calling her an "extraordinarily low IQ person". But Waters gave voice, and perhaps legitimacy, to what has become a prominent form of activism since Trump took office: accosting members of his team in public places.

Over the weekend, Steve Bannon was called "a piece of trash" by a heckler at a bookstore; a bartender gave Stephen Miller the middle finger, apparently causing Miller to throw away $80 of sushi he'd just bought in disgust; and Mitch McConnell was chased out of a restaurant in Kentucky by protesters, who followed him to this car yelling "turtle head" and "we know where you live".

These follow similar encounters for other members of Trump's top team. The homeland security secretary, Kirstjen Nielsen, was confronted by protesters chanting "shame" while she ate at a Mexican restaurant. Last week, Scott Pruitt was accosted by Kristin Mink while he was eating lunch. Mink, a teacher, held her two-year-old child as she asked him to resign "before your scandals push you out". Days later, Pruitt did resign, and although he was probably asked to do so by Trump, in his letter he cited "the unrelenting attacks on me" as his reason for leaving.

After each case, the merits of such an approach have been debated – many have called for civility or argued that protesters leave themselves open to attack if they pursue Trump-like techniques. There has been some consensus that encounters like Mink's, which are eloquent and non-aggressive, are more acceptable than when protesters chant personal attacks or use threatening language

... ... ...

Submitted by edg on Thu, 07/19/2018 - 2:08pm
If you stand with Markos ... @Wink

... you don't stand with most of C99 and most of progressive society. He is wrong, on this and many other things. Where was his (and your) outrage when Obama was droning American citizens, destroying Libya and creating Europe's current refugee crisis, and helping Saudi Arabia wreak havoc on Houthi civilians? How many pies did he throw then? How many Obama administration officials did he publicly shame?

Submitted by snoopydawg on Thu, 07/19/2018 - 1:37pm Would that have gone for shaming members of Obama's @Wink

administration too? He did many of the same things that Trump is doing to immigrants. He deported more of them then any president including 56% of them who hadn't committed any crimes. How about shaming them for his drone policies, killing 3 Americans without due process, bombing wedding parties and then the people who came to their rescue? Or the many, many other things he and his admin members did that were absolutely heinous?

Should we have done that to the people in the Bush administration too or how far back should we have been shaming people who worked in a president's administration?

Maybe we should be shaming the democrats who have been voting with the republicans to pass Trump's legislation, cabinet picks and justices? Where would it stop?


Submitted by thanatokephaloides on Thu, 07/19/2018 - 5:49pm

where it stops @snoopydawg

Maybe we should be shaming the democrats who have been voting with the republicans to pass Trump's legislation, cabinet picks and justices? Where would it stop?

Where it should -- with the non-voluntarily-complicit.

Submitted by Amanda Matthews on Thu, 07/19/2018 - 9:50pm When political life is reduced to @Wink

the publicly harassing, embarrssing, and running off the oposition then we're really fucked. Or do you seriousy think those tactics won't be repaid in kind?

on public shaming.
#7
Especially in public restaurants.
There is no better way to protest this admin than to shame them in a public place, confront them while they attempt to swallow a bite of pork chop.

up 0 users have voted. --

I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks

Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa Submitted by gulfgal98 on Thu, 07/19/2018 - 12:00pm Critical thinking skills seem to be non-existent over there.

Again, Markos and his staff refuse to discuss policy from a positive perspective. Instead, they focus their readers on the outrage de jour and tribalism. The entire purpose of that site is a massive propaganda push designed to keep us divided. And the narrative they keep pushing are not only divisive, but extremely dangerous.

I rarely go there any more, mostly because I would like to keep as many of my remaining brain cells intact. But when I have visited that place, it is a very frightening place to see how Markos (post purge) has herded the remaining members into a small corral, all of them nodding in agreement with whatever gruel Markos and his front pagers are serving up. Submitted by snoopydawg on Thu, 07/19/2018 - 6:29pm Daily Kos should change its name to @gulfgal98

The Daily Tabloid. Or The Daily Gossip because of some of the topics covered there. The new McCarthyism will destroy this country even more:

BAR Book Forum: Jeremy Kuzmarov's and John Marciano's "The Russians are Coming, Again"
"The American people have been constantly manipulated and made to fear the Russian threat when it is the United States that has been the aggressive power."

In this series, we ask acclaimed authors to answer five questions about their book. This week's featured authors are Jeremy Kuzmarov and John Marciano . Kuzmarov is Jay P. Walker Assistant Professor of American History, University of Tulsa. Marciano is Professor Emeritus at SUNY Cortland. Their book is The Russians Are Coming, Again: The First Cold War as Tragedy, the Second as Farce.

Roberto Sirvent: How can your book help BAR readers understand the current political and social climate?

Jeremy Kuzmarov and John Marciano: Our book provides a historical perspective on contemporary affairs by showing how the Russo-phobia that has been prevalent in our political discourse over the last four to five years has deep and long historical roots, and has often been used by government leaders to turn public attention away from domestic inequalities by channeling societal resources towards the military sector. During the early Cold War, a period of labor militancy and momentum for the expansion of the New Deal was destroyed by McCarthyism and the Cold War.The Korean War brought on huge military budgets that have never left us and an expansion of the U.S. overseas military base network. These policies were underlain by exaggerated views about the Soviet Union which were stoked by political elites, who had worked for companies that reaped enormous profit from the permanent warfare state. The same forces are behind the renewed efforts to demonize Russian President Vladimir Putin and exaggerate the Russian threat, with serious adverse consequences for society that have already been evident. The consequences include a revitalization of the arms race, waging of proxy wars, and a further poisoning of the domestic political culture through the reinvigoration of a McCarthyist discourse and tactics.

"During the early Cold War, a period of labor militancy and momentum for the expansion of the New Deal was destroyed by McCarthyism and the Cold War."

More: https://www.blackagendareport.com/bar-book-forum-jeremy-kuzmarovs-and-john-marcianos-russians-are-coming-again up

[Jul 20, 2018] Trump Stays Defiant Amid a Foreign Policy Establishment Gone Mad The American Conservative

Notable quotes:
"... New York Times ..."
"... Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, ..."
"... . To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at www.creators.com. ..."
Jul 20, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Trump Stays Defiant Amid a Foreign Policy Establishment Gone Mad By Patrick J. Buchanan • July 20, 2018, 12:01 AM

lev radin / Shutterstock.com "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

Under the Constitution, these are the offenses for which presidents can be impeached.

And to hear our elites, Donald Trump is guilty of them all.

Trump's refusal to challenge Vladimir Putin's claim at Helsinki that his GRU boys did not hack Hillary Clinton's campaign has been called treason, a refusal to do his sworn duty to protect and defend the United States, by a former director of the CIA.

Famed journalists and former high officials of the U.S. government have called Russia's hacking of the DNC "an act of war" comparable to Pearl Harbor.

The New York Times ran a story on the many now charging Trump with treason. Others suggest Putin is blackmailing Trump, or has him on his payroll, or compromised Trump a long time ago.

Wailed Congressman Steve Cohen: "Where is our military folks? The Commander in Chief is in the hands of our enemy!"

Apparently, some on the left believe we need a military coup to save our democracy.

Not since Robert Welch of the John Birch Society called Dwight Eisenhower a "conscious agent of the Communist conspiracy" have such charges been hurled at a president. But while the Birchers were a bit outside the mainstream, today it is the establishment itself bawling "Treason!"

What explains the hysteria?

The worst-case scenario would be that the establishment actually believes the nonsense it is spouting. But that is hard to credit. Like the boy who cried "Wolf!" they have cried "Fascist!" too many times to be taken seriously.

A month ago, the never-Trumpers were comparing the separation of immigrant kids from detained adults, who brought them to the U.S. illegally, to FDR's concentration camps for Japanese Americans.

Other commentators equated the separations to what the Nazis did at Auschwitz.

If the establishment truly believed this nonsense, it would be an unacceptable security risk to let them near the levers of power ever again.

Using Occam's razor, the real explanation for this behavior is the simplest one: America's elites have been driven over the edge by Trump's successes and their failures to block him.

Trump is deregulating the economy, cutting taxes, appointing record numbers of federal judges, reshaping the Supreme Court, and using tariffs to cut trade deficits and the bully pulpit to castigate freeloading allies.

Worst of all, Trump clearly intends to carry out his campaign pledge to improve relations with Russia and get along with Vladimir Putin.

"Over our dead bodies!" the Beltway elite seems to be shouting.

Hence the rhetorical WMDs hurled at Trump: liar, dictator, authoritarian, Putin's poodle, fascist, demagogue, traitor, Nazi.

Such language approaches incitement to violence. One wonders whether the haters are considering the impact of the words they so casually use. Some of us yet recall how Dallas was charged with complicity in the death of JFK for slurs far less toxic than this.

The post-Helsinki hysteria reveals not merely the mindset of the president's enemies, but the depth of their determination to destroy him.

They intend to break Trump and bring him down, to see him impeached, removed, indicted, and prosecuted, and the agenda on which he ran and was nominated and elected dumped onto the ash heap of history.

Thursday, Trump indicated that he knows exactly what is afoot, and threw down the gauntlet of defiance: "The Fake News Media wants so badly to see a major confrontation with Russia, even a confrontation that could lead to war," he tweeted. "They are pushing so recklessly hard and hate the fact that I'll probably have a good relationship with Putin."

Spot on. Trump is saying: I am going to call off this Cold War II before it breaks out into the hot war that nine U.S. presidents avoided, despite Soviet provocations far graver than Putin's pilfering of DNC emails showing how Debbie Wasserman Schultz stuck it to Bernie Sanders.

Then the White House suggested Vlad may be coming to dinner this fall.

Trump is edging toward the defining battle of his presidency: a reshaping of U.S. foreign policy to avoid clashes and conflicts with Russia and the shedding of Cold War commitments no longer rooted in the national interests of this country.

Yet should he attempt to carry out his agenda -- to get out of Syria, pull troops from Germany, and take a second look at NATO's Article 5 commitment to go to war for 29 nations, some of which, like Montenegro, most Americans have never heard of -- he is headed for the most brutal battle of his presidency.

This Helsinki hysteria is but a taste.

By cheering Brexit, dissing the EU, suggesting NATO is obsolete, departing Syria, trying to get on with Putin, Trump is threatening the entire U.S. foreign policy establishment with what it fears most: irrelevance.

For if there is no war on, no war imminent, and no war wanted, what does a War Party do?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever . To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at www.creators.com.

[Jul 20, 2018] Russophobia is running amok in this country

Jul 20, 2018 | twitter.com

VICE News ‏ Verified account @ vicenews Jul 17

There's a small but vocal group of American scholars who say that anti-Russian hysteria is on the rise. We met with two of them to hear their admittedly unpopular case for the rightness of Russia.

(via @HBO ) pic.twitter.com/sm6pmhmEkO

-- VICE News (@vicenews) July 17, 2018

[Jul 19, 2018] Trump-Putin summit induced the neoliberal ruling classes hysteria or How to Stop Worrying and Love the New McCarthyism

So it appears America and democracy have miraculously survived the dreaded Trump-Putin summit or Trump's meeting with his Russian handler, as the neoliberal ruling classes and their mouthpieces in the corporate media would dearly like us all to believe. NATO has not been summarily dissolved. Poland has not been invaded by Russia.
Notable quotes:
"... So it appears America and democracy have miraculously survived the dreaded Trump-Putin summit or Trump's meeting with his Russian handler, as the neoliberal ruling classes and their mouthpieces in the corporate media would dearly like us all to believe. NATO has not been summarily dissolved. Poland has not been invaded by Russia. ..."
"... And so, once again, Western liberals, and others obsessed with Donald Trump, having been teased into a painfully tumescent paroxysm of anticipation of some unimaginably horrible event that would finally lead to Trump's impeachment ..."
"... In the days and weeks leading up to the summit, the global capitalist ruling class Resistance deployed every weapon in its mighty arsenal to whip the Western masses up into a frenzy of anti-Putin-Nazi fervor ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

Extracted from: Trump's Treasonous Traitor Summit or How Liberals Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the New McCarthyism by CJ Hopkins

So it appears America and democracy have miraculously survived the dreaded Trump-Putin summit or Trump's meeting with his Russian handler, as the neoliberal ruling classes and their mouthpieces in the corporate media would dearly like us all to believe. NATO has not been summarily dissolved. Poland has not been invaded by Russia.

The offices of The New York Times , The Washington Post , CNN, and MSNBC have not been stormed by squads of jackbooted Trumpian Gestapo.

The Destabilization of the Middle East, the Privatization of Virtually Everything, the Conversion of the Planet into One Big Shopping Mall, and other global capitalist projects are all going forward uninterrupted. Apart from Trump making a narcissistic, word-salad-babbling jackass of himself, which he does on a more or less daily basis, nothing particularly apocalyptic happened.

And so, once again, Western liberals, and others obsessed with Donald Trump, having been teased into a painfully tumescent paroxysm of anticipation of some unimaginably horrible event that would finally lead to Trump's impeachment (or his removal from office by other means) were left standing around with their hysteria in their hands. It has become a sadistic ritual at this point like a twisted, pseudo-Tantric exercise where the media get liberals all lathered up over whatever fresh horror Trump has just perpetrated (or some non-story story they have invented out of whole cloth), build the tension for several days, until liberals are moaning and begging for impeachment, or a full-blown CIA-sponsored coup, then pull out abruptly and leave the poor bastards writhing in agony until the next time which is pretty much exactly what just happened.

In the days and weeks leading up to the summit, the global capitalist ruling class Resistance deployed every weapon in its mighty arsenal to whip the Western masses up into a frenzy of anti-Putin-Nazi fervor. While continuing to flog the wildly popular baby concentration camp story (because the Hitler stimulus never fails to elicit a Pavlovian response from Americans, regardless of how often or how blatantly you use it), the corporate media began hammering hard on the "Trump is a Russian Agent" hysteria. (Normally, the corporate media alternates between the Hitler hysteria and the Russia hysteria so as not to completely short-circuit the already scrambled brains of Western liberals, but given the imminent threat of a peace deal , they needed to go the whole hog this time and paint this summit as a secret, internationally televised assignation between Hitler and well, Hitler).

[Jul 19, 2018] Putin Asked Trump Permission to Interrogate Obama's Ambassador

Notable quotes:
"... McFaul: "Russia made the whole story up." Typical projection. And Browder only became a critic of Putin (the russian justice system) after his criminal enterprise was uncovered. ..."
"... As a "red blooded, Bible believing American", one who has served under oath, and know the duties and penalties, I suggest it's perhaps the best "diplomatic move" seen since Mr. Putin took up the Secretary of State's offer, took Syria's chemical weapons, and took up truly ridding the Nation of terrorists, both those of Saudi, and those my own government made. ..."
Jul 19, 2018 | russia-insider.com

This is pure brilliance on Russia's part. It wont happen, but it draws attention to the Browder story, and discredits McFaul by association. Very smart. Update : It appears Michael McFaul is really getting nervous, tweeting like a teenager on meth tonight:

"I hope the White House corrects the record and denounces in categorical terms this ridiculous request from Putin. Not doing so creates moral equivalency between a legitimacy US indictment of Russian intelligence officers and a crazy, completely fabricated story invented by Putin"

me title=

With The White House flip-flopping back and forth on what was actually said - and meant to be said - in Helsinki, Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders dropped the latest tape-bomb to blow the establishment's mind during to today's press conference.

Sanders reported that President Trump is open to a proposal from Vladimir Putin to let Russian authorities question the former U.S. ambassador to Moscow, Michael McFaul .

While Trump reportedly made no commitments to Putin, the Russian president offered to allow Special Counsel Robert Mueller to observe interrogations of the 12 Russian intelligence agents indicted by a U.S. grand jury last week for hacking Democratic Party email accounts.

Trump called it an "interesting idea" and an "incredible offer" at the news conference.

Sanders left the press corps dangling by concluding that:

"The president will work with his team and we'll let you know if there's an announcement on that front."

As The Hill reports, Russia state-owned outlet RT reported that Russia wanted to question McFaul and the author of the so-called Steele dossier, Christopher Steele, among others in its investigation into American financier Bill Browder.

Browder is a prominent critic of Putin who lobbied on behalf of the Magnitsky Act, which imposed sanctions against Russia.

McFaul has denounced the possibility of his being questioned by Russian officials, and has called on Trump to condemn the proposal .

"Putin has been harassing me for a long time," McFaul said on Twitter on Wednesday.

"That he now wants to arrest me, however, takes it to a new level. I expect my government to defend me and my colleagues in public and private ."

And went on...

Does he seem nervous to you?

Source: Zero Hedge Putin Asked Trump Permission to Interrogate Obama's Ambassador This is pure brilliance on Russia's part. It wont happen, but it draws attention to the Browder story, and discredits McFaul by association. Very smart. Tyler Durden 11 hours ago | 1,727 41 MORE: Politics Update : It appears Michael McFaul is really getting nervous, tweeting like a teenager on meth tonight:

"I hope the White House corrects the record and denounces in categorical terms this ridiculous request from Putin. Not doing so creates moral equivalency between a legitimacy US indictment of Russian intelligence officers and a crazy, completely fabricated story invented by Putin"

With The White House flip-flopping back and forth on what was actually said - and meant to be said - in Helsinki, Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders dropped the latest tape-bomb to blow the establishment's mind during to today's press conference.

Sanders reported that President Trump is open to a proposal from Vladimir Putin to let Russian authorities question the former U.S. ambassador to Moscow, Michael McFaul .

While Trump reportedly made no commitments to Putin, the Russian president offered to allow Special Counsel Robert Mueller to observe interrogations of the 12 Russian intelligence agents indicted by a U.S. grand jury last week for hacking Democratic Party email accounts.

Trump called it an "interesting idea" and an "incredible offer" at the news conference.

Sanders left the press corps dangling by concluding that:

"The president will work with his team and we'll let you know if there's an announcement on that front."

As The Hill reports, Russia state-owned outlet RT reported that Russia wanted to question McFaul and the author of the so-called Steele dossier, Christopher Steele, among others in its investigation into American financier Bill Browder.

Browder is a prominent critic of Putin who lobbied on behalf of the Magnitsky Act, which imposed sanctions against Russia.

McFaul has denounced the possibility of his being questioned by Russian officials, and has called on Trump to condemn the proposal .

"Putin has been harassing me for a long time," McFaul said on Twitter on Wednesday.

"That he now wants to arrest me, however, takes it to a new level. I expect my government to defend me and my colleagues in public and private ."

And went on... Does he seem nervous to you?

Source: Zero Hedge

ole • 11 hours ago ,

McFaul: "Russia made the whole story up." Typical projection. And Browder only became a critic of Putin (the russian justice system) after his criminal enterprise was uncovered.

mis dos centavos • 11 hours ago ,

Considering McFaul is just another Pyatt, all his 'Russia made up" nonsense is hardly worth an afterthought. He's in dirt up to his ears.

mis dos centavos mis dos centavos • 11 hours ago ,

Only reason he couldn't get to square one pulling off a Pyatt was because he had no banderite fascist-style goon squads in Russia under his command.

mis dos centavos mis dos centavos • 11 hours ago ,

Think about that one, Mr. McFoul. It's not only Russia that can read you like a book.

mis dos centavos mis dos centavos • 9 hours ago ,

I did like this one review of your insightful book, Mr. McFoul. If I send you the review, will you sign it? I'd be honored. Russia's Unfinished Revolution: Political Change from Gorbachev to Putin By Michael McFaul, Cornell University Press, 2001
http://exiledonline.com/mik...

This book is a four-hundred page testimonial to the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of the American Russia-watching mafia. In its pages, Michael McFaul condemns himself again and again with staggering non-sequiturs, self-serving lies, crude misrepresentations of his own past and the recent history of Russia, and repeated failures to meet even the most basic standards of academic rigor.

tom • 11 hours ago ,

Mr McFaul seems to be unfamiliar with the concept of law and a justice system. If he is indicted by the Russian courts and required for questioning, why is that any different from Russian "suspects" being indicted by US courts and required for questioning? Until the justice system has made its inquiries and run its course, no one can know for sure whether Mr McFaul is guilty of crimes or not. So why does he demand total immunity from justice in such a peremptory, entitled way?

Surely it can't be because he feels that Americans are in any way "superior", "exceptional", or immune from justice? Surely Mr McFaul isn't a crude common-or-garden racist? Surely...?

jsinton tom • 8 hours ago ,

The rub here is the ambassador enjoys diplomatic immunity from prosecution for events that might have occurred during his tenure in Moscow from Russian courts. If the Trump DOJ decides he should face the music then he has no immunity.

Bad boy!! Otto!! tom • 6 hours ago ,

Your third question answers your second question almost perfectly. Because he feels that Americans are in every way "superior", "exceptional", and should be immune from justice, no matter how heinous the crimes they have committed. There fixed it for ya. :-)

Brian Eggar • 5 hours ago ,

What a circus and what a lot of clowns. As they say, nobody is above the law or at least they shouldn't be. I would say that Mr McFaul does protest too much and judging by his rattled statements appears that he has something to hide. Getting back to basics where is the $400K and how did it get there and did any go missing on the way?

David James • 7 hours ago ,

Bonobo Administration exempt from Law, Prosecution or scrutiny---via the CIA.

Truth • 11 hours ago ,

McFaul is a bag boy shabbos goy for the Jooz that are trying to re-steal (1917, 1991, 2014) Russian wealth. Browder was a discarded Rothschild foreskin.

Constantine BMWA1 • 6 hours ago ,

Earl Browder was lauding Soviet Russia and its successes. He didn't fleece the Russian people. His grandson is a parasite that hates Russia and has siphoned his ill-gotten gains from the country. No comparison.

Kjell Hasthi • 8 hours ago ,

The interesting side of the story is Trump can say yes as president. Not much Michael McFaul can do then? It will turn MSM Media upside down. Btw. NSA can give tips to the Russians about what to ask. They know everything. Assad probably would also like to question McCain regarding illegal stay in Syria

Tommy Jensen Kjell Hasthi • 5 hours ago ,

What I like most of all is Trump´s comment "an interesting idea and an incredible offer". ha ha ha ha ha ha. It will probably not be possible to realize, but it shows Trump is not stupid at all.

Merijn • 10 hours ago ,

Pay Back Time: Puppeticians will be taken out... One at the time...the Longer the Fun will Last...Russia just make all their Lies Visible... it is a very Strong Weapon... People are Tired and fed up with Liars, Traitors & Deceivers... Yesterday they caught our Foreign Minister Blok with some nice Statements...He's like a gut-Shot animal at the moment...one more Trick and He is Exit....just keep an eye on him...

https://www.aljazeera.com/n...
Stef Blok... You are a complete idiot... take your stuff and Buzz Off...the IMF or the European Union always can use Some Retarded Ex-Puppeticians Like You...

Ray Douglas • 4 hours ago ,

I wouldn't advise Trump to go to Dallas.

Koroviev,Behemoth&Woland LLP • 5 hours ago ,

View Hide

Snowglobe • 20 minutes ago ,

Lee Stranahan Exposes Bill Browder, The Man Mentioned By Putin In Helsinki Summit Play Hide

Solzhenitsyn fan • an hour ago ,

Putin is not 8 Dan for nothing! Absolutely brilliant!

In the news:
https://www.smh.com.au/worl...

"Trump invited Putin to Washington for summit: White House". Washington: President Donald Trump invited Russian leader Vladimir Putin to Washington for a summit in the northern autumn. "In Helsinki, @POTUS agreed to ongoing working level dialogue between the two security council staffs," White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said in a tweet on Thursday. "President Trump asked @AmbJohnBolton to invite President Putin to Washington in the fall and those discussions are already underway.

Sanders announced the invitation less than an hour after the Republican-led Senate effectively rebuked President Donald Trump for considering Russia's request to question US officials, giving voice to growing unease over the president's relationship with Putin following their summit in Helsinki on Monday...

Bobbie Taylor • an hour ago ,

Russia should be allowed to question McFaul. We should honor the treaty. Unfortunately, the intelligence agencies have more power than the president at this point. They want to assassinate him.

Haut • 4 hours ago ,

Everything about this guy just smells, Foul Lol

John McClain • 4 hours ago ,

As a "red blooded, Bible believing American", one who has served under oath, and know the duties and penalties, I suggest it's perhaps the best "diplomatic move" seen since Mr. Putin took up the Secretary of State's offer, took Syria's chemical weapons, and took up truly ridding the Nation of terrorists, both those of Saudi, and those my own government made.

I was afraid for a bit, Syria was going to be broken, and I've served beside Syrian Army in Beirut, I respect them highly, consider them among the best professionals, as the world can easily see they are, and I hate what a criminal cadre are doing to my Country, while we enjoy our sit/coms and beer, and eat snacks and get fat.

God Bless Russia and President Putin, "it take's a man to make a man", is an old saying, and the same is true for Nations, I expect.
Semper Fidelis,
John McClain
Vanceboro, NC, USA

Snowglobe • 4 hours ago ,

LOL! Thank you Mr. Putin! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Keep poking these idiots with a stick. :-)

Tommy Jensen Lycan Thrope • 5 hours ago ,

There is only one solution for uncle Sam.
View Hide

Maria Angelica Brunell Solar Lycan Thrope • 4 hours ago ,

You did not understand the proposal. Russian police interrogates the indicted Russian officials, and Mueller and team can be given permission to enter Russia and watch the interrogations. American police interrogates Browder and accomplices, and Russian police can be given permission to enter the US and watch the proceedings. Completely fair and transparent, according to existing Treaty between the 2 countries. Nobody can be extradited, because there is no extradition treaty between the countries.

Leon • 6 hours ago ,

If Russia is doing killing and poisoning, how come Soros and Browder are not killed, if anybody deserves - here are two biggest criminals and both of them are Joos.

[Jul 19, 2018] America Overrules Trump No Peace with Russia by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

Notable quotes:
"... The governments of Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, if their countries are to survive, must give up their deluded hopes of reaching agreements with the United States. No such possibility exists on terms that the countries can accept. ..."
"... American foreign policy rests on threat and force. It is guided by the neoconservative doctrine of US hegemony, a doctrine that is inconsistent with accepting the sovereignty of other countries. ..."
"... The Russians -- especially the naive Atlanticist Integrationists -- should take note of the extreme hostility, indeed, to the point of insanity, directed at the Helsinki meeting across the entirety of the American political, media, and intellectual scene ..."
"... There is no support for Trump's agenda of peace with Russia in the US foreign policy arena. The president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haass, spoke for them all when he declared that "We must deal with Putin's Russia as the rogue state it is." Russia is a " rogue state" simply because Russia does not accept Washington's overlordship. ..."
"... There is no support even in Trump's own government for normalizing relations with Russia unless the neoconservative definition of normal relations is used. By normal relations neoconservatives mean a vassal state relationship with Washington. That, and only that, is "normal." Russia can have normal relations with America only on the basis of this definition of normal. Sooner or later Putin and Lavrov will have to acknowledge this fact. ..."
"... A lie repeated over and over becomes a fact. That is what has happened to Russiagate. Despite the total absence of any evidence, it is now a fact in America that Putin himself put Trump in the Oval Office. That Trump met with Putin at Helsinki is considered proof that Trump is Putin's lackey, as the New York Times and many others now assert as self-evident. That Trump stood next to "the murderous thug Putin" and accepted Putin's word that Russia did not interfere in the election of the US president is regarded as double proof that Trump is in Putin's pocket and that the Russiagate story is true. ..."
Jul 19, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

The governments of Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, if their countries are to survive, must give up their deluded hopes of reaching agreements with the United States. No such possibility exists on terms that the countries can accept.

American foreign policy rests on threat and force. It is guided by the neoconservative doctrine of US hegemony, a doctrine that is inconsistent with accepting the sovereignty of other countries. The only way that Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea can reach an agreement with Washington is to become vassals like the UK, all of Europe, Canada, Japan, and Australia.

The Russians -- especially the naive Atlanticist Integrationists -- should take note of the extreme hostility, indeed, to the point of insanity, directed at the Helsinki meeting across the entirety of the American political, media, and intellectual scene. Putin is incorrect that US-Russian relations are being held hostage to an internal US political struggle between the two parties. The Republicans are just as insane and just as hostile to President Trump's effort to improve American-Russian relations as the Democrats, as Donald Jeffries reminds us .

The American rightwing is just as opposed as the leftwing. Only a few experts, such as Stephen Cohen and Amb. Jack Matlock , President Reagan's ambassador to the Soviet Union, have spoken out in support of Trump's attempt to reduce the dangerous tensions between the nuclear powers. Only a few pundits have explained the actual facts and the stakes.

There is no support for Trump's agenda of peace with Russia in the US foreign policy arena. The president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haass, spoke for them all when he declared that "We must deal with Putin's Russia as the rogue state it is." Russia is a " rogue state" simply because Russia does not accept Washington's overlordship. Not for any other reason.

There is no support even in Trump's own government for normalizing relations with Russia unless the neoconservative definition of normal relations is used. By normal relations neoconservatives mean a vassal state relationship with Washington. That, and only that, is "normal." Russia can have normal relations with America only on the basis of this definition of normal. Sooner or later Putin and Lavrov will have to acknowledge this fact.

A lie repeated over and over becomes a fact. That is what has happened to Russiagate. Despite the total absence of any evidence, it is now a fact in America that Putin himself put Trump in the Oval Office. That Trump met with Putin at Helsinki is considered proof that Trump is Putin's lackey, as the New York Times and many others now assert as self-evident. That Trump stood next to "the murderous thug Putin" and accepted Putin's word that Russia did not interfere in the election of the US president is regarded as double proof that Trump is in Putin's pocket and that the Russiagate story is true.

[Jul 19, 2018] The Russian US Election Meddling Big Lie Won't Die by Stephen Lendman

Notable quotes:
"... Propaganda works, proved effective time and again – why it's a key tool in America's deep state playbook. ..."
"... Virtually anything repeated enough, especially through the major media megaphone, gets most people to believe it – no matter how preposterous the claim. ..."
"... Normalized relations with Russia and world peace are anathema notions in Washington. Bipartisan neocons infesting the US political establishment want none of it. America's hegemonic aims matter most – wanting dominance over planet earth, its resources and populations. Endless wars of aggression, color revolutions, and other unlawful practices harmful to human rights and welfare are its favored strategies. ..."
Jul 19, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

Propaganda works, proved effective time and again – why it's a key tool in America's deep state playbook.

Virtually anything repeated enough, especially through the major media megaphone, gets most people to believe it – no matter how preposterous the claim.

Not a shred of evidence suggests Russia meddled in America's political process – nothing.

Yet an earlier NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showed most Americans believe the Russia did it Big Lie. A months earlier Gallup poll showed three-fourths of Americans view Vladimir Putin unfavorably.

Americans are easy marks to be fooled. No matter how many times they were deceived before, they're easily manipulated to believe most anything drummed into their minds by the power of repetitious propaganda – fed them through through the major media megaphone – in lockstep with the official falsified narrative.

America's dominant media serve as a propaganda platform for US imperial and monied interests – acting as agents of deception, betraying their readers and viewers time and again instead of informing them responsibly.

CNN presstitute Poppy Harlow played a clip on air of Reuters reporter Jeff Mason asking Putin in Helsinki the following question:

"Did you want President Trump to win the election and did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?"

Putin said: "Yes," he wanted Trump to win "because he talked about bringing the US-Russia relationship back to normal," as translated from his Russian language response.

Here's the precise translation of his remark:

"Yes, I wanted him to win, because he talked about the need to normalize US-Russia relations," adding:

"Isn't it natural to have sympathy towards a man who wants to restore relations with your country? That's normal."

Putin did not address the fabricated official narrative notion that he directed his officials to help Trump win. Yet CNN's Harlow claimed otherwise, falsely claiming he ordered Kremlin officials to help Trump triumph over Hillary.

He did nothing of the kind or say it, nor did any other Kremlin officials. No evidence proves otherwise – nothing but baseless accusations supported only by the power of deceptive propaganda.

Time and again, CNN, the NYT, and rest of America's dominant media prove themselves untrustworthy.

They consistently abandon journalism the way it's supposed to be, notably on geopolitical issues, especially on war and peace and anything about Russia.

After rejecting, or at least doubting, the official narrative about alleged Russian meddling in the US political process to aid his election, Trump backtracked post-Helsinki – capitulating to deep state power.

First in the White House, he said he misspoke abroad – then on CBS News Wednesday night, saying it's "true," deplorably adding:

Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election, and he "would" hold Russian President Vladimir Putin responsible for the interference – that didn't occur, he failed to stress.

Here's his verbatim exchange with CBS anchor Jeff Glor :

GLOR: "You say you agree with US intelligence that Russia meddled in the election in 2016."

TRUMP: "Yeah and I've said that before, Jeff. I have said that numerous times before, and I would say that is true, yeah."

GLOR: "But you haven't condemned Putin, specifically. Do you hold him personally responsible?"

TRUMP: "Well, I would, because he's in charge of the country. Just like I consider myself to be responsible for things that happen in this country. So certainly as the leader of a country you would have to hold him responsible, yes."

GLOR: "What did you say to him?"

TRUMP: "Very strong on the fact that we can't have meddling. We can't have any of that – now look. We're also living in a grown-up world."

"Will a strong statement – you know – President Obama supposedly made a strong statement. Nobody heard it."

"What they did hear is a statement he made to Putin's very close friend. And that statement was not acceptable. Didn't get very much play relatively speaking. But that statement was not acceptable."

"But I let him know we can't have this. We're not going to have it, and that's the way it's going to be."

There you have it – Trump capitulating to America's deep state over Russia on national television.

From day one in power, he caved to the national security state, Wall Street, and other monied interests over popular ones.

The sole redeeming part of his agenda was wanting improved relations with Russia and Vladimir Putin personally – preferring peace over possible confrontation, wanting the threat of nuclear war defused.

Despite tweeting post-Helsinki that he and Putin "got along well which truly bothered many haters who wanted to see a boxing match," his remarks on CBS News showed he'll continue dirty US business as usual toward Russia.

Anything positive from summit talks appears abandoned by capitulating to deep state power controlling him and his agenda.

Normalized relations with Russia and world peace are anathema notions in Washington. Bipartisan neocons infesting the US political establishment want none of it. America's hegemonic aims matter most – wanting dominance over planet earth, its resources and populations. Endless wars of aggression, color revolutions, and other unlawful practices harmful to human rights and welfare are its favored strategies.

Will Americans go along with sacrificing vital freedoms for greater security from invented enemies – losing both? Will US belligerent confrontation with Russia inevitably follow? Will mushroom-shaped denouement eventually kill us all?

*

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the CRG, Correspondent of Global Research based in Chicago.

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org ( Home – Stephen Lendman ). Contact at [email protected] .

My newest book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III. http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html "

[Jul 19, 2018] The Magnitsky Hoax by Philip Giraldi

A more serious question is: Was Browder MI6 agent or not? His conversion from the US to UK citizenship is highly unusual.
Notable quotes:
"... "The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes," ..."
"... Red Notice: A True Story of High Finance, Murder and One Man's Fight for Justice ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
Jun 28, 2016 | www.unz.com

... ... ...

... I had the privilege of attending the first by invitation only screening of a documentary "The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes," produced by Russian filmmaker Andrei Nekrasov. The documentary had been blocked in Europe through lawsuits filed by some of the parties linked to the prevailing narrative but the Newseum in Washington eventually proved willing to permit rental of a viewing room in spite of threats coming from the same individuals to sue to stop the showing.

Nekrasov by his own account had intended to do a documentary honoring Magnitsky and his employers as champions for human rights within an increasing fragile Russian democracy. He had previously produced documentaries highly critical of Russian actions in Chechnya, Georgia and Ukraine, and also regarding the assassinations of Russian dissident Alexander Litvinenko in London as well as of journalist Anna Politkovskaya in Moscow. He has been critical of Vladimir Putin personally and was not regarded as someone who was friendly to the regime, quite the contrary. Some of his work has been banned in Russia.

After his documentary was completed using actors to play the various real-life personalities involved and was being edited Nekrasov returned to some issues that had come up during the interviews made during the filming. The documentary records how he sought clarification of what he was reading and hearing but one question inevitably led to another.

The documentary began with the full participation of American born UK citizen William Browder, who virtually served as narrator for the first section that portrayed the widely accepted story on Magnitsky. Browder portrays himself as a human rights campaigner dedicated to promoting the legacy of Sergei Magnitsky, but he is inevitably much more complicated than that. The grandson of Earl Browder the former General Secretary of the American Communist Party, William Browder studied economics at the University of Chicago, and obtained an MBA from Stanford.

From the beginning, Browder concentrated on Eastern Europe, which was beginning to open up to the west. In 1989 he took a position at highly respected Boston Consulting Group dealing with reviving failing Polish socialist enterprises. He then worked as an Eastern Europe analyst for Robert Maxwell, the unsavory British press magnate and Mossad spy, before joining the Russia team at Wall Street's Salomon Brothers in 1992.

He left Salomon in 1996 and partnered with the controversial Edmond Safra, the Lebanese-Brazilian-Jewish banker who died in a mysterious fire in 1999, to set up Hermitage Capital Management Fund. Hermitage is registered in tax havens Guernsey and the Cayman Islands. It is a hedge fund that was focused on "investing" in Russia, taking advantage initially of the loans-for-shares scheme under Boris Yeltsin, and then continuing to profit greatly during the early years of Vladimir Putin's ascendancy. By 2005 Hermitage was the largest foreign investor in Russia.

Browder had renounced his U.S. citizenship in 1997 and became a British citizen apparently to avoid American taxes, which are levied on worldwide income. In his book Red Notice: A True Story of High Finance, Murder and One Man's Fight for Justice he depicts himself as an honest and honorable Western businessman attempting to function in a corrupt Russian business world. That may or may not be true, but the loans-for-shares scheme that made him his initial fortune has been correctly characterized as the epitome of corruption, an arrangement whereby foreign investors worked with local oligarchs to strip the former Soviet economy of its assets paying pennies on each dollar of value. Along the way, Browder was reportedly involved in making false representations on official documents and bribery.

As a consequence of what came to be known as the Magnitsky scandal, Browder was eventually charged by the Russian authorities for fraud and tax evasion. He was banned from re-entering Russia in 2005, even before Magnitsky died, and began to withdraw his assets from the country. Three companies controlled by Hermitage were eventually seized by the authorities, though it is not clear if any assets remained in Russia. Browder himself was convicted of tax evasion in absentia in 2013 and sentenced to nine years in prison.

Browder has assiduously, and mostly successfully, made his case that he and Magnitsky have been the victims of Russian corruption both during and since that time, though there have been skeptics regarding many details of his personal narrative. He has been able to sell his tale to leading American politicians like Senators John McCain, Ben Cardin and ex-Senator Joe Lieberman, always receptive when criticizing Russia, as well as to a number of European parliamentarians and media outlets. But there is, inevitably, another side to the story, something quite different, which Andrei Nekrasov presents to the viewer.

Nekrasov has discovered what he believes to be holes in the narrative that has been carefully constructed and nurtured by Browder. He provides documents and also an interview with Magnitsky's mother maintaining that there is no clear evidence that he was beaten or tortured and that he died instead due to the failure to provide him with medicine while in prison or treatment shortly after he had a heart attack. A subsequent investigation ordered by then Russian President Dimitri Medvedev in 2011 confirmed that Magnitsky had not received medical treatment, contributing to this death, but could not confirm that he had been beaten even though there was suspicion that that might have been the case.

Nekrasov also claims that much of the case against the Russian authorities is derived from English language translations of relevant documents provided by Browder himself. The actual documents sometimes say something quite different. Magnitsky is referred to as an accountant, not a lawyer, which would make sense as a document of his deposition is apparently part of a criminal investigation of possible tax fraud, meaning that he was no whistleblower and was instead a suspected criminal.

Other discrepancies cited by Nekrasov include documents demonstrating that Magnitsky did not file any complaint about police and other government officials who were subsequently cited by Browder as participants in the plot, that the documents allegedly stolen from Magnitsky to enable the plotters to transfer possession of three Hermitage controlled companies were irrelevant to how the companies eventually were transferred and that someone else employed by Hermitage other than Magnitsky actually initiated investigation of the fraud.

In conclusion, Nekrasov believes there was indeed a huge fraud related to Russian taxes but that it was not carried out by corrupt officials. Instead, it was deliberately ordered and engineered by Browder with Magnitsky, the accountant, personally developing and implementing the scheme used to carry out the deception.

To be sure, Browder and his international legal team have presented documents in the case that contradict much of what Nekrasov has presented in his film. But in my experience as an intelligence officer I have learned that documents are easily forged, altered, or destroyed so considerable care must be exercised in discovering the provenance and authenticity of the evidence being provided. It is not clear that that has been the case. It might be that Browder and Magnitsky have been the victims of a corrupt and venal state, but it just might be the other way around. In my experience perceived wisdom on any given subject usually turns out to be incorrect.

Given the adversarial positions staked out, either Browder or Nekrasov is essentially right, though one should not rule out a combination of greater or lesser malfeasance coming from both sides. But certainly Browder should be confronted more intensively on the nature of his business activities while in Russia and not given a free pass because he is saying things about Russia and Putin that fit neatly into a Washington establishment profile. As soon as folks named McCain, Cardin and Lieberman jump on a cause it should be time to step back a bit and reflect on what the consequences of proposed action might be.

One should ask why anyone who has a great deal to gain by having a certain narrative accepted should be completely and unquestionably trusted, the venerable Cui bono? standard. And then there is a certain evasiveness on the part of Browder. The film shows him huffing and puffing to explain himself at times and he has avoided being served with subpoenas on allegations connected to the Magnitsky fraud that are making their way through American courts. In one case he can be seen on YouTube running away from a server, somewhat unusual behavior if he has nothing to hide.

A number of Congressmen and staffers were invited to the showing of the Nekrasov documentary at the Newseum but it is not clear if any of them actually bothered to attend, demonstrating once again how America's legislature operates inside a bubble of willful ignorance of its own making. Nor was the event reported in the local "newspaper of record" the Washington Post , which has been consistently hostile to Russia on its editorial and news pages.

A serious effort that a friend of mine described as "hell breaking loose" was also made to disrupt the question and answer session that followed the viewing of the film, with a handful of clearly coordinated hecklers interrupting and making it impossible for others to speak. The organized intruders, who may have gained entry using invitations that were sent to congressmen, suggested that someone at least considers this game being played out to have very high stakes.

The point is that neither Nekrasov nor Browder should be taken at their word. Either or both might be lying and the motivation to make mischief is very high if even a portion of the stolen $230 million is still floating around and available. And by the same measure, no Congressman or even the President should trust the established narrative, particularly if they persist in their hypocritical conceit that global human

Notheroldguy , August 8, 2017 at 9:12 pm GMT

Gee, I know G. was a spook of some kind and I always read his articles wherever they turn up.. but how could he get this wrong unless on purpose: Magnitsky was no lawyer. He was an accountant and he was a co-conspirator in the frauds being perpetrated that resulted in the charges. He died alright but there is some shading to the thesis that the fraudsters had him bumped off because they knew he was a weak link. They bribed somebody in the prison to deny him medical care. Hey, much like they did to Milosevic knowing they couldn't convict him of their trumped up charges. Why would G. get wrong such a simple thing to determine? Hmm. I wonder..
anon Disclaimer , August 8, 2017 at 9:45 pm GMT
Why would you continue the falsehood of calling Magnitsky a lawyer? He was not a lawyer. Ever. He is and was an accountant and will remain that until Judgement Day. On the other other hand, calling him a lawyer is perhaps an even greater insult than calling him an accountant.

[Jul 19, 2018] Iraqi protesters blame 'bad government, bad roads, bad people' by Patrick Cockburn

Notable quotes:
"... The Independent ..."
"... Read the first piece in Patrick Cockburn's latest series, 'Catastrophic drought threatens Iraq as major dams in surrounding countries cut off water to its great rivers', here . ..."
"... Part II, 'For this Iraqi tribe massacred by Isis, fear of the group's return is a constant reality', here ..."
"... Part III, 'After series of calamitous defeats, is Isis about to lose its last town?', here . ..."
"... Part III, 'Iraq unrest: Chaos reigns in the country even Saddam Hussein 'found difficult to rule', here. ..."
Jul 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

"The people want an end to the parties," chanted protesters, adapting a famous slogan of the Arab Spring , as they stormed the governor's office and the international airport in the Shia holy city of Najaf.

Part of the wave of demonstrations sweeping across central and southern Iraq, they demanded jobs, electricity, water and an end to the mass theft of Iraq's oil wealth by the political parties.

Beginning on 8 July, the protests are the biggest and most prolonged in a country where anti-government action has usually taken the form of armed insurgency.

The demonstrations are taking place in the heartlands of the Shia majority, reflecting their outrage at living on top of some of the world's largest oilfields, but seeing their families barely survive in squalor and poverty.

The protests began in Basra, Iraq's third largest city which is at the centre of 70 per cent of its oil production. A hand-written placard held up by one demonstrator neatly expresses popular frustration. It read:

"2,500,000 barrels daily
Price of each barrel = $70
2,500,000 x $70 = zero !!
Sorry Pythagoras, we are in Basra"

The protests quickly spread to eight other provinces, including Najaf, Kerbala, Nasariya and Amara.

In several places, the offices of the Dawa Party, to which the Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi belongs, were burned or attacked, along with those of parties whom people blame for looting oil revenues worth hundreds of billions of dollars in the 15 years since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein.

As the situation deteriorated, Mr Abadi flew to Basra on 13 July, promising to make $3bn available to improve services and provide more jobs. After he left, his hotel was invaded by protesters.

The credibility of almost all Iraqi politicians is at a low ebb, the acute feeling of disillusionment illustrated by the low 44.5 per cent turnout in the parliamentary election on 12 May that produced no outright winner.

The poll was unexpectedly topped by the Sairoun movement of the populist nationalist cleric, Muqtada al-Sadr, who has encouraged his followers to start protests against government corruption and lack of services since 2015.

The Sadrists, who emphasised their socially and economically progressive programme by allying themselves with the Iraqi Communist Party in the election, are playing a role in the current protests.

The demonstrations are also backed by the prestigious Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani. At ground level, political activists and tribal leaders have set up a joint committee called "the Coordination Board for Peaceful Protests and Demonstrations in Basra", its purpose being to produce a list of demands, unite the protest movement, and keep their actions non-violent.

"The ends don't justify the means," says the committee in a statement. "Let us, being oppressed, not lead to the oppression of others."

A list of 17 demands is headed by one asking for a government timetable for supplying water and electricity, both of which are short at a time of year when the temperature sometime exceeds 50C, making it one of the hottest places on earth.

Local people claim that the last time that the port city of Basra, once called the Venice of the Gulf, had an adequate supply of drinking water was in 1982. Iran had been supplying some extra electricity, but has cut this back because of its own needs and failure of Iraq to pay on time.

The second demand of the protesters is for jobs with "priority to the competent sons of Basra", the discharge of foreign labourers and employment for a quarter of people living in the oilfields.

Lack of jobs is a source of continuing complaint all over Iraq. Much of its oil income already goes on paying 4.5 million state employees, but between 400,000 and 420,000 young people enter the workforce every year with little prospects of employment.

Anger towards the entire political class is intense because it is seen as a kleptocratic group which syphoned off money in return for contracts that existed only on paper and produced no new power plants, bridges or roads.

Political parties are at the centre of this corruption because they choose ministries, according to their share of the vote in elections or their sectarian affiliation, which they then treat as cash cows and sources of patronage and contracts.

Plundering like this and handing out of jobs to unqualified people means that many government institutions have become incapable of performing any useful function.

Radical reform is difficult because the whole system is saturated by corruption and incompetence. Technocrats without party backing who are parachuted into ministries become isolated and ineffective.

One party leader told The Independent that he thought that the best that could be done "would be to insist that the parties appoint properly qualified people to top jobs."

The defeat of Isis in 2017 with the recapture of Mosul means that Iraqis are no longer absorbed in keeping their families safe so they have they have more time to consider "corruption" – a word they use not just to mean bribery but the parasitic nature of the government system as a whole.

There is a general mood of cynicism and dissatisfaction with the way things are run.

"Bad government, bad roads, bad weather, bad people," exclaimed one Iraqi friend driving on an ill-maintained road.

Corrupt motives are ascribed to everything that happens: a series of unexplained fires in Baghdad in June were being ascribed to government employees stealing from state depots and then concealing their crime by setting fire to the building and destroying it.

Given that the Iraqi security forces are primarily recruited from the areas in which the protests are taking place, the government will need to be careful about the degree of repression it can use safely.

Some eight protesters have been killed so far by the police , who are using rubber bullets, water cannon and rubber hoses to beat people.

ORDER IT NOW

The armed forces have been placed on high alert. Three regiments of the elite Counter-Terrorism Service, which led the attack on Mosul and is highly regarded and well disciplined, has been ordered south to cope with protests and away from places where there is still residual activity by Isis.

The protests are largely spontaneous, but the Sadrists, whose offices have not been attacked by crowds, want to put pressure on Mr Abadi, Dawa and other parties to form a coalition government with a reform programme.

Many protesters express anti-Tehran slogans, tearing up pictures of Iranian spiritual leaders such as Ayatollah Khomeini and the current Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. They blame Iran for supporting corrupt parties and governments in Iraq.

Protesters have so far escalated their actions slowly, gathering at the entrances to the major oil and gas facilities, but not disrupting the 3.6 million barrel a day production. If this happens, it would affect a significant portion of world crude output.

Iraq's corrupt and dysfunctional governing system may be too set in its profitable ways to be reformed, but, if the ruling elite wants to survive, it must give ordinary Iraqi a larger share of the oil revenue cake.

Read the first piece in Patrick Cockburn's latest series, 'Catastrophic drought threatens Iraq as major dams in surrounding countries cut off water to its great rivers', here .

Part II, 'For this Iraqi tribe massacred by Isis, fear of the group's return is a constant reality', here

Part III, 'After series of calamitous defeats, is Isis about to lose its last town?', here .

Part III, 'Iraq unrest: Chaos reigns in the country even Saddam Hussein 'found difficult to rule', here.

Echoes of History , July 18, 2018 at 2:59 am GMT

The ratio of people to cake is too big.
PJ London , July 18, 2018 at 8:46 pm GMT
"Oh for the good old days when Saddam was running things."
Johann Ricke , July 19, 2018 at 12:23 am GMT
@PJ London

"Oh for the good old days when Saddam was running things."

Electricity production in Iraq overall is superior to what it was during Saddam's rule. But availability is not 24/365, which is presumably what they're demanding:

Prewar Baghdad had electricity 16 to 24 hours per day and was favored for distribution. The remainder of Iraq received 4–8 hours of electricity per day.[6] Post war, Baghdad no longer has priority and therefore both Baghdad and the country as a whole received on average 15.5 hours of electricity per day as of February 2010.[7]

If they want some facsimile of Saddam's rule back, they could easily elect the Sunni Arab parties to power. Which they haven't. Demonstrations were rare during Saddam's reign because he killed the opposition and consigned those he did not kill to Abu Ghraib, where they were raped and/or beaten to within an inch of their lives.

Shiites were unhappy with American occupation because they thought the only thing keeping them from becoming a Shiite version of Saudi Arabia, economically-speaking was an American plot to steal their oil and sow division in the country. After GI's left, they discovered, through ISIS's long record of victories, that Sunni Arabs really, really don't like being ruled by Shiites, and that Iraq's Sunni Arabs really are better at military endeavors than the Shiites or the Kurds. They are fortunate that Uncle Sam came to their rescue, yet again.

It's becoming clear that the Iraq's Shiite Arabs and Kurds could never have lifted the Sunni Arab foot from their necks by their own efforts. The question is whether their history books will ever reflect this truth.

[Jul 19, 2018] Yes, We Should Call Them Imperialists by Paul Gottfried

Notable quotes:
"... Hazony responds with the obvious answer that control can be imposed on the unwilling even if the empire builders are not overtly annexing territory. Meanwhile, other neoconservatives have given the game away by pushing their imperialist position a bit further than Krauthammer's. Max Boot, for example , has been quite open in demanding "an American empire" built on ideological and military control even without outright annexation. ..."
"... The belief that the U.S. is a supremely good nation founded on universal principles has consequences that go well beyond electoral politics. Dennis Prager, a nationally syndicated talk radio host and co-owner of the website Townhall.com, extols American exceptionalism, which he says springs from American values. ..."
Jul 19, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Neoconservatives like Max Boot are fooling themselves if they think imposing 'values' on the rest of the world isn't a matter of empire.

Recently while reading a book by an Israeli scholar named Yoram Hazony with the provocative title The Virtue of Nationalism , I encountered a distinction drawn by the late Charles Krauthammer between empire building and American global democratic hegemony. Like the editors of the Weekly Standard , for which he periodically wrote, Krauthammer believed it was unfair to describe what he wanted to see done, which was having the U.S. actively spread its own form of government throughout the world, as "imperialism." After all, Krauthammer said, he and those who think like him "do not hunger for new territory," which makes it wrong to accuse them of "imperialism."

Hazony responds with the obvious answer that control can be imposed on the unwilling even if the empire builders are not overtly annexing territory. Meanwhile, other neoconservatives have given the game away by pushing their imperialist position a bit further than Krauthammer's. Max Boot, for example , has been quite open in demanding "an American empire" built on ideological and military control even without outright annexation.

The question that occurred to me while reading Krauthammer's proposal and Hazony's response (which I suspect would have been more devastating had Hazony not been afraid of losing neoconservative friends and sponsors) is this one: how is this not imperialism?

Certainly the use of protectorates to increase the influence of Western powers in the non-Western world goes back a long time. As far back as the Peloponnesian War, rival Greek city-states tried to impose their constitutional arrangements on weaker Greek societies as a way of managing them politically. According to Xenophon, when the Athenians then surrendered to the Spartan commander Lysander in 403 BC, they had two conditions imposed on them: taking down their great wall ( kathairein ta makra teixe ) and installing a regime that looked like the Spartan one. Thus is arguing that territory has to be annexed outright in order for it to become part of an American empire so utterly unconvincing.

One reason the views offered by Krauthammer and Boot did not elicit more widespread criticism -- and have enjoyed enthusiastic favor among Republicans for decades, culminating in the oratorical wonders of George W. Bush -- may have been the embrace of another neoconservative doctrine: "American exceptionalism." The belief that the U.S. is a supremely good nation founded on universal principles has consequences that go well beyond electoral politics. Dennis Prager, a nationally syndicated talk radio host and co-owner of the website Townhall.com, extols American exceptionalism, which he says springs from American values.

Those values have "universal applicability," according to Prager, and are "eminently exportable." Glenn Beck has taken up the same theme of "American exceptionalism" as an exportable "idea " that is meant for everyone on the planet. The "ideas" or "values" in question are variously defined by the neoconservative media as "human rights," "universal equality," or just making sure everyone lives like us. Whatever it is, we are told that to withhold it from the rest of the human race would be uncharitable. Our efforts to bring it to others therefore cannot be dismissed as "imperialism" any more than the Spanish government of the 16th century thought it was doing wrong by forcing its religion on indigenous people in the Americas.

Although I'm hardly a fan of his political views, former president Barack Obama once said something that I thought was self-evident but that offended even members of his own party. According to Obama, "Americans believe they're exceptional. But the Brits and Greeks believe they're special too." Obama was merely observing that it's okay for others to believe they're special, even if they're not Americans imbued with "the idea." Yet his statement was received with such uproar that he felt compelled to backtrack. Speaking later at West Point, he made it clear that "I believe in American exceptionalism with every fiber of my being." This from someone whom Fox News assures us hated America and spent every minute of his presidency denying our greatness! (And, yes, I've heard the rejoinder to this: Obama was only pretending to believe in the creed he dutifully recited.)

It might be argued (and has been by neoconservatives many times) that the U.S. is both morally superior and less dangerous than ethnically defined societies because we advocate a "value" or "creed" that's accessible to the entire human race. But this is hardly a recipe for peace as opposed to what Krauthammer called a "value-driven" relationship with the rest of the world. Australian journalist Douglas Murray, in his intended encomium Neoconservatism: Why We Need It , tries to praise his subjects but ends up describing a kind of global democratic jihadism. While Douglas admits that "socially, economically, and philosophically" neoconservatism differs from traditional conservatism, he insists that it's something better. He commends neoconservatives for wishing to convert the world to "values." Their primary goal, according to Murray, is the "erasing [of] tyrannies and [the] spreading [of] democracy," an arduous task that requires "interventionism, nation-building, and many of the other difficulties that had long concerned traditional conservatives."

Please tell me this is not what it obviously is: an invitation to war and empire building. The quest for hegemony always looks the same, no matter what moral labels some choose to give it.

Paul Gottfried is Raffensperger Professor of Humanities Emeritus at Elizabethtown College, where he taught for 25 years. He is a Guggenheim recipient and a Yale Ph.D. He is the author of 13 books, most recently Fascism: Career of a Concept and Revisions and Dissents .

[Jul 19, 2018] A Tale of Two Poisonings by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... Repeated requests by Russia to obtain a sample of the alleged nerve agent for testing were rejected by the British government in spite of the fact that a military grade nerve agent would have surely killed both the Skripals as well as anyone else within 100 yards. As the latest British account of the location of the alleged poison places it on the door handle of the Scripals' residence, the timetable element was also unconvincing. That meant that the two would have spent three hours, including a stop at a pub and lunch, before succumbing on a park bench. Military grade nerve agents kill instantly. ..."
"... Nevertheless, the politically weak May government, desperately seeking a formidable foreign enemy to rally around against, insisted that Russia, almost certainly acting under orders from Vladimir Putin himself, carried out the killing of a former British double agent who had been released from a Kremlin prison in a spy swap and who was no longer capable of doing any damage to Russia. Putin apparently did all that in spite of the fact that he had an election coming up and would be the host of the World Cup in the summer, an event that would be an absolute top priority to have go smoothly. ..."
Jul 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

Poisoning enemies has a long history with Augustus Caesar's wife Livia allegedly a master of the art, as were the Borgias in Renaissance Italy. Lately there has been a resurgence in allegations regarding the use of poisons of various types by several governments. The claims are particularly damaging both morally and legally as international conventions regard the use of poisonous chemical compounds as particularly heinous, condemning their use because they, when employed in quantity, become "weapons of mass destruction," killing indiscriminately and horribly, making no distinction between combatants and civilians. Their use is considered to be a "war crime" and the government officials who ordered their deployment are "war criminals," subject to prosecution by the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

There are two important poisoning stories that have made the news recently. Both are follow-ups to reporting that has appeared in the news over the past few months and both are particularly interesting because they tend to repudiate earlier coverage that had been largely accepted by several governments as well as the media and the chattering class of paid experts that appears on television.

The first story relates to the poisoning of former Russian intelligence agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in March. There was quite a bit that was odd about the Skripal case, which relied from the start " on circumstantial evidence and secret intelligence." And there was inevitably a rush to judgment. British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson blamed Russia less than forty-eight hours after the Skripals were found unconscious on a bench in Salisbury England, too soon for any chemical analysis of the alleged poisoning to have taken place.

British Prime Minister Theresa May threw gasoline on the fire when she addressed Parliament shortly thereafter to blame the Kremlin and demand a Russian official response to the event in 36 hours, declaring that the apparent poisoning was "very likely" caused by a made-in-Russia nerve agent referred to by its generic name novichok. The British media was soon on board with a vengeance, spreading the government line that such a highly sensitive operation would require the approval of President Vladimir Putin himself. The expulsion of Russian diplomats soon followed with the United States and other countries following suit.

Repeated requests by Russia to obtain a sample of the alleged nerve agent for testing were rejected by the British government in spite of the fact that a military grade nerve agent would have surely killed both the Skripals as well as anyone else within 100 yards. As the latest British account of the location of the alleged poison places it on the door handle of the Scripals' residence, the timetable element was also unconvincing. That meant that the two would have spent three hours, including a stop at a pub and lunch, before succumbing on a park bench. Military grade nerve agents kill instantly.

The head of Britain's own chemical weapons facility Porton Down even contradicted claims made by May, Foreign Minister Boris Johnson, and British Ambassador in Moscow Laurie Bristow. The lab's Chief Executive Gary Aitkenhead testified that he did not know if the nerve agent was actually produced in Russia, a not surprising observation as the chemical formula was revealed to the public in a scientific paper in 1992 and there are an estimated twenty countries capable of producing it. There are also presumed stocks of novichok remaining in independent countries that once were part of the Soviet Union, to include Russia's enemy du jour Ukraine, while a false flag operation by the British themselves, the CIA or Mossad, is not unthinkable.

Nevertheless, the politically weak May government, desperately seeking a formidable foreign enemy to rally around against, insisted that Russia, almost certainly acting under orders from Vladimir Putin himself, carried out the killing of a former British double agent who had been released from a Kremlin prison in a spy swap and who was no longer capable of doing any damage to Russia. Putin apparently did all that in spite of the fact that he had an election coming up and would be the host of the World Cup in the summer, an event that would be an absolute top priority to have go smoothly.

Now there has been an actual death in Amesbury near Salisbury that has been attributed to novichok. On June 30 th , Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess were admitted to hospital after being found unconscious. Sturgess died eight days later. The May government has not yet blamed it on Putin or even on a clumsy Russian operative that might have inadvertently left behind a vial of poison or a used syringe, though Home Secretary Sajid Javid came close to that when he suggested that Russia was using Britain as a "dumping ground for poisons." Police suggestions that the poisoned couple appear to have handled novichok infused material of some kind before succumbing appears to be contradicted by inability to find the actual source of the alleged exposure.

British government dancing around the issue notwithstanding, there have been suggestions that the closest source of more novichok might well be the U.K. government labs at nearby Porton Down, only seven miles from Salisbury and Amesbury, which increases suspicion about the original story promulgated by Downing Street. Would the British government actually poison an expendable ex-Russian spy and his daughter to divert attention from a domestic political problem at home? It's worth considering as the "blame it all on Putin narrative" becomes even less credible.

The second story comes from Syria, where there is also a Russian hand as Moscow is aiding the government of Bashar al-Assad. The by now notorious April 7, 2018 alleged chemical attack on the rebel-held Syrian city of Douma was widely blamed by Western countries and the mainstream media on Assad's forces. This resulted in a decision by U.S. President Donald Trump to order massive U.S.-led retaliatory airstrikes against targets reportedly involved in chemical production in and around Damascus.

Trump blamed "animal Assad" for "using nerve agents" and both the media and most European governments followed that line, concluding that Damascus had ordered the chemical attacks a mere moments after videos purporting to show scores of chemical attack victims first surfaced from rebel sources, long before U.S. intelligence could have made its own assessment. A 5-page White House assessment released on April 13th, just days after the alleged attack asserted that sarin was used at Douma , claiming that "A significant body of information points to the regime using chlorine in its bombardment of Duma, while some additional information points to the regime also using the nerve agent sarin."

Independent sources warned at the time that not a single neutral observer was on the ground to confirm that chemical agents launched by the Syrian government had, in fact, been used, but were ignored. All of the sources reporting the attack were either affiliated with the rebels who occupied the area or were not physically present in Douma.

Now, finally, three months later, there has been a credible independent report on what was determined about the attack through chemical analysis of traces recovered in Douma. A preliminary report published last Friday by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) found no traces of any nerve agent like sarin at the site. The OPCW report states this clearly : "No organophosphorous nerve agents or their degradation products were detected in the environmental samples or in the plasma samples taken from alleged casualties."

This means that the Trump Administration claimed to have details relating to an event in a foreign country that it did not know and could not actually confirm to be true. And it used that as a justification for ordering an airstrike that killed people and destroyed targets in Syria. Will the White House respond to the OPCW report and apologize, possibly to include reparations for an unjustified attack on another sovereign nation? Don't hold your breath.

The Salisbury and Douma attacks are illustrative of just what happens when a government is prepared to dissimulate or even lie to go the extra mile to make a case to justify preemptive action that otherwise might be challenged. Theresa May is, unfortunately, still in power and so is Donald Trump. In a better world an outraged public would demand that they be thrown out of office and even possibly subjected to the tender ministrations of the International Criminal Court in The Hague. With power comes accountability, or at least that should be the rule, but it is a dictum that has for some time been ignored. Even given that, one might hope that the blunders will not be repeated, but there is not even any assurance that either May or Trump is much given to "lessons learned" or that a Mike Pence or Boris Johnson would be any better. That is our tragedy.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected].

FKA Max , Website July 17, 2018 at 4:29 am GMT

Putin apparently did all that in spite of the fact that he had an election coming up and would be the host of the World Cup in the summer, an event that would be an absolute top priority to have go smoothly.
[...]
Would the British government actually poison an expendable ex-Russian spy and his daughter to divert attention from a domestic political problem at home? It's worth considering as the "blame it all on Putin narrative" becomes even less credible.

Mr. Giraldi,

these were my thoughts at first too, but I looked into the case quite extensively over the last several weeks and came to the conclusion that Putin actually had more of a motive than the British government, et al.

This is my evolution on the Skripals' case:

On Skripal I'm not entirely certain, since I haven't really looked into the case. Also the timing of the incident seems to be not what Putin would have chosen, in my opinion, since it was too close to the soccer World Cup events/celebrations in Russia, and Putin usually tries to be conciliatory with the West before big sporting events like that in Russia, e.g. when he released Khodorkovsky early before the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, for example.

– https://www.unz.com/article/revisiting-litvinenko-what-really-happened/#comment-2401031

As I said before, I was agnostic about the Skripal case and tried to keep an open mind about it and not reflexively blame it on (the) Russians (government), but you providing me with this additional information makes me actually more of a believer in the official Western narrative now.

– https://www.unz.com/article/revisiting-litvinenko-what-really-happened/#comment-2401541

I'm reaching here, and this is pure speculation on my part, but could it be that the Skripals were poisoned ( March 4, 2018 ) by Putin, et al. to distract from the 200+ Russian mercenaries allegedly killed by U.S. airstrikes in Syria ( February 7, 2018 ) http://www.unz.com/tsaker/book-review-losing-military-supremacy-the-myopia-of-american-strategic-planning-by-andrei-martyanov/#comment-2406731 before the Russian election ( March 18, 2018 )?

– https://www.unz.com/article/revisiting-litvinenko-what-really-happened/#comment-2407120

Repeated requests by Russia to obtain a sample of the alleged nerve agent for testing were rejected by the British government in spite of the fact that a military grade nerve agent would have surely killed both the Skripals as well as anyone else within 100 yards.

They mention that only 3 known cases of Novichok agent poisoning had been treated before the cases of the Skripals, so there was very little guidance and experience to go on in how to treat Yulia and her father. – https://www.unz.com/article/revisiting-litvinenko-what-really-happened/#comment-2401824

Skripals doctor: 'We expected them not to survive' – BBC News

tac , July 17, 2018 at 5:25 am GMT
@FKA Max

You should watch a recent interview with Walter Litvinenko (father of the deceased Alexander Litvinenko) to hear his startling admissions:

jilles dykstra , July 17, 2018 at 7:17 am GMT
It was hilarious to watch yesterday evening, as the presidential plane had been underway for two and a half hours, the consternation on CNN.
As I expected, the vague accusations about Russian meddling in the elections continued this morning, on CNN.
I remember an interview on CNN before the elections, someoen said 'if Trump wins', the two of CNN burst into laughter.
I do hope Trump survives, politically and fysically.
Luckily is it not very ease to murder a president these days.
On top of that, Sept 11 made many all over the world quite suspicious.
I for one never believed that Russia would be so stupid as to try to murder two former spies in such a stupid way, and without any motive.
MH17 is a similar case.
Assad also is not stupid, he had no interest whatsoever to use poison gas in Syria.
How Arafat died we still do not know, that was done professionally, or maybe not, if I had to kill him I would try to make his death look natural, a clear cause.
Who had a motive is quite clear.
Greg Bacon , Website July 17, 2018 at 9:18 am GMT
Until the unhinged May lets Yulia go free–if she's still alive–and go back to Russia and tell her side of the story, nothing will change.

The so-called Deep State and its willing toady, the corrupt, lying MSM are accomplices in this False Flag and they are the ones that should be in the dock at the ICC. But since the ICC is part of the Deep State, don't expect this to happen.

This Russian bashing has gotten completely out of hand. And now that Putin has stated that the sleazy Russian thief oligarch Browder helped launder 400 million to the DNC-Clinton Mob, it's going to get very interesting, if not dangerous for humanity.

They need a BIG distraction to get the sheeple's thought off the truth that there is NOTHING to the Putin-Trump election meddling, anything might happen, even a repeat of the Israeli masterminded 9/11 False Flag.

Does 'Lucky Larry' own anymore asbestos-laden skyscrapers?

EliteCommInc. , July 17, 2018 at 10:02 am GMT
i would love to make a formal complaint about conspiracies because there are people who will and do make trouble for others. it has taken me a long time to come to that place – but it is no joke as dr. geraldi no doubt knows.

however, one needs the evidence and what has been lacking in all these accusations whether its russia and us elections, chemical weapons in syria, or supposed poisoning of three people formerly associated with russia, there is suspicion, and there is narrative, but little in the way of facts. and if any of these accusations were concerning single individual battling mere gossip and innuendo or other nefarious behaviors, i have learned to discount nothing. look if you can't bring a coupon into a store, wait for coffee without people launching into fits of fear of life . . . then who knows what triggers people's self defense. it apparently dos not take much for the supposed superior people to make their inferiors look off kilt. i just take it granted that when i leave my house, on occasion, i have visitors – as "nutty" as that sounds.

but these cases have multiple researchers and resources to bar on the matter and yet, the evidence is either mere narrative, contradicted or has a variety of explanations just as reasonable or more reasonable. but what we have is an entire population engaged in manufacturing not one but several cases in which the president of the us actually engaged in treason based on sketchy financial dealings with russian banks and financial elites.

and i think this article makes the case that people with power who engage in wielding accusations should be held to the standard of providing evidence. and while i am a little uncomfortable with our president engaging in open debate with our intel community from overseas, his objection is well put. the process of evidence collection and by independent objective observers is unreasonable. yet he found it quite convenient to buy the argument by the same intel agencies for said use in syria. the election is over, but the war about the election, the level of dislike of the elected , i think it is fair to say has never been so widespread and deep such that members of the government or government agencies would sign up to press the matter.

and quip reflctions about the damage being done and "it's all in one's head" just are insufficient to address the issues.

frankly, i think the country's not outraged because they are "drama fatigued" last week in attempting to capture a stray kitten who disappearance has me overly stretched – i never used to like cats – bells rang and doors closed indicating that she had in fact been enclosed on the patio – around two am or so – only to discover a cute little skunk was the detainee. whose release required navigating around the house twice because the door locked actually worked. sometimes the evidence doesn't doesn't reveal what was expected.

as for the kitten, evidence suggests she managed to punch her way through a steel mesh garage vent. now i suspect that someone recently punched a hole in those mesh barriers, but that is speculation on my part, even likely speculation. however, minus the proof that is all it is. a mysterious frustrating event.

who knows maybe the cat and the skunk are pals.

All we like sheep , Website July 17, 2018 at 10:47 am GMT
With the sad demise of the woman of the couple, the continuing make-up story in MSM makes the twist that the nerve agent was found in a perfume bottle. While of these two non-Russian people (who allegedly were former drug-addicts) one may suspect that they pick up any strange bottle from the ground and have a sniff at it, this is completely surrealistic in the case of the Skripals. The difference couldn't be bigger between these two couples. Anyhow, the clue that brings them four together is the vicinity of Porton Down, where chemical weapons are stored & tested.
dearieme , July 17, 2018 at 10:55 am GMT
If I had to guess at what's been going on in Salisbury I'd wonder if a lunatic/evil employee at Porton Down has smuggled out something nasty and is amusing himself with it.
Moi , July 17, 2018 at 11:15 am GMT
Mr. Giraldi, you're telling me the American and Brit governments lie. Who'd have thunk

ps: do we still have people locked up in Gitmo without being charged of a crime? Just wondering

prusmc , Website July 17, 2018 at 11:52 am GMT
@All we like sheep

The author laments that May and Trump are still in office.
She will last longer than he will. Trump will be out in three months either by impeachment and conviction or by other means. None of this clandestine stuff like poisoning but by a military coup. I remember the era of 7 Days in May but that was not serious just a storey teller weaving a good yarn. Today, we have members of Congress and large numbers of the media(probably over 50 percent) calling for a Armed Forces take over.
The probable stumbling block is how to skip Pense and go directly to Speaker Paul Ryan. Or how to dispense with the chain of succession entirely and enshrine Hilary or recall Obama until the emergency is over.
Is Mad Dog the man or will McMaster lead the coup? Remember, anyone wearing more than one star made the elite grade during the Obama regime and some of the one stars had formative years as O-6 and O-5 while Obama ruled supreme.

The Alarmist , July 17, 2018 at 11:52 am GMT

"Military grade nerve agents kill instantly."

Quickly, not instantly. If you had an atropine pen handy, you might survive, though it would leave you immobilised and dazed. If the Skripals were dosed, it would likely have been at or near the bench where they were found. Residue on their clothing might be weak enough to not kill the constable.

Michael Kenny , July 17, 2018 at 12:34 pm GMT
Clearly, Putin's American supporters see the summit as a flop from their champion's point of view.
Tyrion 2 , Website July 17, 2018 at 12:58 pm GMT
@The Alarmist

The only thing the Salisbury incidents provide evidence for is that our culture is prone to hysterical outrage over anything relating to Russia or Putin.

And that's true even if it were rogue elements in the Russian security services.

ploni almoni , July 17, 2018 at 1:44 pm GMT
@FKA Max

Similarly, I was initially skeptical about the Moon landings but with time I have to the conclusion that they are plausible.

rbc , July 17, 2018 at 1:47 pm GMT
What I really loved about the coverage of the Skripal "poisoning" were the pictures of the cops wearing hazmat suits to clean up the park bench. In the same shot birds were hopping around apparently unaffected by the deadly nerve gas. So we're to believe that this stuff could kill a big cop but not a 2 pound pigeon .
Jake , July 17, 2018 at 3:16 pm GMT
British secret service and its 3 main children – CIA, Mossad, Saudi General Intelligence Agency – are morally capable of committing any horror imaginable against civilians, even their own.

The Anglo-Zionist Empire is desperate to find the One Ring That Rules Them All.

Jake , July 17, 2018 at 3:18 pm GMT
@rbc

That's no more absurd than thousands of things promoted as truth by the WASP empires over the past 400 years.

Felix-Culpa , July 17, 2018 at 4:15 pm GMT
@Jake

Yes, like that the Protestant Revolt which still gets called a "Reformation" was anything other than a looting operation.

AnonFromTN , July 17, 2018 at 4:22 pm GMT
@Biff

That's so naďve. When you commit a crime and have witnesses in your custody, you make sure they never talk. "Elementary, Watson", as Holmes used to say.

jacques sheete , July 17, 2018 at 4:24 pm GMT

Shaping a story to fit the agenda

That's why we have "journalists" and "historians," mass media and skoolink (yooniversities included), and I find it amazing that the stories change as fast as the agendas.

edNels , July 17, 2018 at 5:32 pm GMT
@NoseytheDuke

Oh "These Kids today" that old refrain again, and it's getting old too, all the emphasis on kids anyway, from concerns about posterity, to the unending posturing about faux parent related concerns sublimated in one way or another to the other mantra: " oh the Children" thing that phony liberal types do.

But to the point:

What a pity Western "Intelligence" seems to have never heard the story of The Boy Who Cried 'Wolf'.

When do these little monsters ever get a chance to hear childhood stories nowadays glued to their carry style devices, wearable devices, soon inserted devices , to hear any of the old wisdom? It now isn't all that likely. It is more the kids teaching the kids in a modern high tech reality version of Lord of the Flies scenario.

When they are inevitably inducted into the professions as they will, replacing remnants of earlier generations that maybe still had been somewhat exposed to folk tales and stories, or better TV of earlier times, well, don't be surprised that the rank and file of the intelligence industry, like elsewhere is unable personally to easily navigate anything, much less possessing inborn sensibility gained from age old culture and all that. Could it be in the whole Fake News genre too, it seems to indicate some dialectic flaw in thinking, (a priori as it were.) I feel like it's coming from youngsters lacking any frame of reference/experience blundering, not being held to account!
The Brat Pack was given free reign and away they go arrogant to a fault

What was folk knowledge is a cumbersome, anachronistic, vestigial relic of another era, sought to be replaced soon, by robots.

Who needs the f'n brats ?

Bill jones , July 17, 2018 at 5:47 pm GMT
The political filth really have no shame, do they?
chris , July 17, 2018 at 6:12 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

I think we know that Arafat was poisoned.

exudd1 , July 17, 2018 at 6:39 pm GMT
@Fran Macadam

Well said. Agree completely. Thanks.

Z-man , July 17, 2018 at 6:41 pm GMT
@prusmc

None of this clandestine stuff like poisoning but by a military coup. I remember the era of 7 Days in May but that was not serious just a storey teller weaving a good yarn. Today, we have members of Congress and large numbers of the media(probably over 50 percent) calling for a Armed Forces take over.

Watching too many old movies now , haven't we? LOL!!

The probable stumbling block is how to skip Pense and go directly to Speaker Paul Ryan. Or how to dispense with the chain of succession entirely and enshrine Hilary or recall Obama until the emergency is over.

Ok, now you need to be put down or at least committed. LOL

FKA Max , Website July 17, 2018 at 7:00 pm GMT
@tac

I'm glad Litvinenko Sr. is taken care of in his old age by the Russian state:

BAD CHEMISTRY? Ft. Walter Litvinenko, Father of Alexander Litvinenko

Although he chose to leave Russian of his own will, the authorities were unlikely to welcome him back and his dramatic u-turn looks like a calculated attempt to smooth the way for his return to the country of his birth.

Clearly relishing Mr Litvinenko senior's propaganda gift in the run-up to a presidential election expected to be won by Vladimir Putin next month, Russian state TV said the unhappy exile had run out of money and that electricity and gas had been cut off to his tiny Italian flat for non-payment of bills.
[...]
Alexander Goldfarb, the co-author of a book about the murder and a friend of the late Litvinenko, accused Russian TV of acting in an irresponsible and inhumane manner, saying the Kremlin's propaganda chiefs had exploited his grief and troubled psychological condition.

"They used the troubled psychological state of an elderly man for propaganda purposes in order to whitewash Alexander's killers," he said.

"Walter is going through a really tough time in connection with his wife's death a few months ago and feels lonely. It happens with old people."

– https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/9057560/Alexander-Litvinenkos-father-calls-his-son-a-traitor.html

Salisbury poisoning: Skripals 'were under Russian surveillance' – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44717835

– http://www.unz.com/article/revisiting-litvinenko-what-really-happened/#comment-2403171

Skripals 'were under Russian surveillance' – BBC Newsnight

Newsnight's Diplomatic and Defence Editor, Mark Urban, reveals that the Skripals 'were under Russian surveillance' and that he personally had several meetings with Sergei Skripal last year.

AnonFromTN , July 17, 2018 at 7:01 pm GMT
@Bill jones

Did they ever have shame? The world would be much better place if they did.

Bill Jones , July 17, 2018 at 7:40 pm GMT
@FKA Max

"Newsnight's Diplomatic and Defence Editor, Mark Urban, reveals"

Newsnight's Diplomatic and Defence Editor, Mark Urban, claims

there, fixed that for you.

Sean , July 17, 2018 at 8:52 pm GMT
Did you hear the one about the couple who found a bottle of perfume?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6794418/police-have-grainy-cctv-of-russian-spooks-who-carried-out-novichok-attack-on-ex-spy-sergei-skripal-and-his-daughter/

As Mad Frank said, two men together always looks suspicious. https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2018/mar/06/russian-spy-mystery-cctv-emerges-of-two-people-police-are-looking-for-video

I am very embarrassed for the GRU , they are even more incompetent than the French Secret Service combat swimmers who blew up the that Greenpeace ship. Russia should have sent a Spetsnaz veteran with his trusty entrenching tool to deal with Skripal. Or maybe one of their Kamikazi exploding dogs.

ThreeCranes , July 17, 2018 at 9:18 pm GMT
@tac

Maybe Putin did have them killed or poisoned because Russian intelligence had uncovered their plot to explode a dirty bomb in London which had been set up so as to implicate the Russians. The plotters were foiled and hoist by their own petard.

AnonFromTN , July 17, 2018 at 10:10 pm GMT
@Sean

I tell you a secret. GRU agents, on direct orders from Putin, killed JFK, burnt Giordano Bruno, crucified Christ, and poisoned Socrates. What's more, they are also responsible for the extinction of the dinosaurs. Didn't you suspect that?

Sean , July 17, 2018 at 10:16 pm GMT
@Tyrion 2

Rogue elements once, but not twice. Why is anyone's guess, the eliciting of hysterical outrage ?

Sean , July 17, 2018 at 10:29 pm GMT
@ThreeCranes

Russia seems to be burning its bridges with the West, which may be a deliberate long term strategy by Putin.

Sean , July 17, 2018 at 10:45 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

I did not even know those you named had ever been in the GRU, let alone they were British moles.

If you wake up and there is snow all over the ground, that is circumstantial evidence that it snowed in the night. When a Russian poisons Russians there is not all this Technical Tom sophistry, and motive is important especially when it supports the circumstantial evidence.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/indepth/brilliant-russian-engineer-poisoned-dozens-of-his-colleagues-at-top-secret-defence-plant-and-left-them-bald-in-botched-revenge-plot-aimed-at-his-boss/ar-AAvHyBm

Prison is full of people who say they are innocent.

unseated , July 18, 2018 at 12:20 am GMT
@prusmc

Trump will be out in three months either by impeachment and conviction or by other means.

I have a friend who said that to me a year ago and another who said it six months ago.

Colin Wright , Website July 18, 2018 at 2:13 am GMT
' Theresa May is, unfortunately, still in power and so is Donald Trump. In a better world an outraged public would demand that they be thrown out of office '

At least in the case of Trump, the problem with rejecting him is, as it always has been, the alternative.

It's literally oppressive that to date, no superior alternative to Trump has emerged. However, like it or not, one hasn't.

bjondo , July 18, 2018 at 2:45 am GMT
@FKA Max

Alexander Goldfarb the promoter of Pussy Riot?

He's certainly legit.

AnonFromTN , July 18, 2018 at 2:55 am GMT
@Colin Wright

Is there a superior alternative to May? If there is, why didn't Brits get rid of that embarrassment? Next to her even John Major looks like an outstanding statesman.

Wally , July 18, 2018 at 2:58 am GMT
@Colin Wright

said:
"It's literally oppressive that to date, no superior alternative to Trump has emerged. However, like it or not, one hasn't."

You mean that little rich 'Marxist' Latina is not a viable alternative?

'Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the 'girl from the Bronx,' raised in one of wealthiest US counties'

https://www.theblaze.com/news/2018/06/30/report-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-the-girl-from-the-bronx-raised-in-one-of-wealthiest-us-counties

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says: 'Occupy All ICE Offices, Borders, U.S. Airports', 'Occupy All of It'

https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/07/17/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-occupy-all-ice-offices-borders-u-s-airports-occupy-all-of-it/

Intelligent Dasein , Website July 18, 2018 at 3:03 am GMT
Every time I think about it, I do find it truly astonishing that we (the USA) launched a missile salvo into Syria based on an obvious and now proven false flag, and very few people seem to care. This is one of those glaring, "hidden in plain sight" contradictions to the narrative which tells me that, while the Deep State is finally losing some ground, its liquidation is far, far from over and all kinds of things are going to fall apart as this thrashing monster slowly sinks beneath the waves.
Wally , July 18, 2018 at 3:07 am GMT
@prusmc

said:
"Trump will be out in three months either by impeachment and conviction or by other means. "

Yawn. Heard that on election night

'The Left needs to face reality: Trump is winning' : https://nypost.com/2018/06/30/the-left-needs-to-face-reality-trump-is-winning/

Wizard of Oz , July 18, 2018 at 3:24 am GMT
@dearieme

Yes, interesting that PG has only now brought to a UR article that rather obvious possible connection between Porton Down and the nearby poisonings.

I don't think it is one of his major areas of attention. Why else would he include with Trump the unfortunate May as someone he would like to see people rise up against and throw out of office for offences unstated?

Wizard of Oz , July 18, 2018 at 3:27 am GMT
@AnonFromTN

Her performance on Skripal right or wrong is hardly worth mentioning when deciding whether and when she has to go. Compared to Brexit give it a 2 per cent weighting.

Colin Wright , Website July 18, 2018 at 3:29 am GMT
@Wally

My guess is that we haven't heard the last of Ms. Hyphen-Cortez.

"Ocasio-Cortez hedges criticisms of Israel– 'I may not use the right words'
US Politics Philip Weiss on July 15, 2018

Rising Democratic star Alexandria Ocasio-Cortex, soon to go to Congress from NY, all but apologized for using words "massacre" and "occupation" about Israel, saying she spoke as an "activist," and she is no expert on the Middle East and is willing to "learn and evolve." '

She's trainable.

NoseytheDuke , July 18, 2018 at 4:26 am GMT
@Wizard of Oz

Her performance has included telling bald-faced lies, lies that are easily exposed as lies too. This is rarely if ever going to add weight to any personal brand, let alone that of a political leader. She's toast!

byrresheim , July 18, 2018 at 11:45 am GMT
@Felix-Culpa

Indeed, sir.
Indeed.

L Garou , July 18, 2018 at 12:55 pm GMT
The sun never sets on the crimes of the British Empire..

[Jul 19, 2018] Lawmakers, Media Look to Undermine US-Russia Detente by Jason Ditz

Notable quotes:
"... That's because US hostility toward Russia being what it is, there is an incredible amount of bipartisan comfort with continuing that acrimony. Trump faced condemnations for even attending the summit, and more still for getting out of it without picking a fight with Putin. ..."
"... Media coverage of the summit was uniformly negative, parroting disputed allegations of election meddling. ..."
"... Allegations of meddling in the 2016 election have become "unquestionable" in the mainstream, both as a talking point and as a justification for picking new fights with Russia. ..."
Jul 17, 2018 | news.antiwar.com

Congress looks to counter Trump's diplomatic overtures with hostile actions

Monday's summit between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin ended with a relatively modest press conference. Things went well, by both leaders' accounts, and it represented a small but significant attempt at improving bilateral relations from their recent lows.

Deals were said to have been reached on cooperation on some fronts. Putin says he even told President Trump he intends to extend the New START nuclear treaty that is set to expire in 2021. But don't expect any positive coverage of the talks in the press, let alone any votes of encouragement from the US Congress.

That's because US hostility toward Russia being what it is, there is an incredible amount of bipartisan comfort with continuing that acrimony. Trump faced condemnations for even attending the summit, and more still for getting out of it without picking a fight with Putin.

Media coverage of the summit was uniformly negative, parroting disputed allegations of election meddling. Fox News' Chris Wallace interviewed Vladimir Putin, and failing to get Putin to admit to anything, reporters praised Wallace for " giving Putin the grilling Trump won't ."

Lawmakers were, of course, lining up to go after Trump over the summit. But now that the summit is over, their attention has shifted to trying to pass legislation that would attempt to undermine whatever modest progress toward a rapprochement Trump can be said to have made.

Speaker Paul Ryan termed Russia "a menacing government," and Congress is considering more sanctions, more hearings, and potentially even some non-binding resolutions endorsing the intelligence community's allegations against Russia. Which is really the center of most of the efforts to stop diplomatic progress. Allegations of meddling in the 2016 election have become "unquestionable" in the mainstream, both as a talking point and as a justification for picking new fights with Russia.

Trump has long expressed interest in improving ties with Russia, and this summit was actually one of his first real opportunities at doing so. Yet it will be difficult for this progress to have any permanence with everyone else so united in undermining it.

[Jul 19, 2018] Trump-Putin summit induced the neoliberal ruling classes hysteria or How to Stop Worrying and Love the New McCarthyism

So it appears America and democracy have miraculously survived the dreaded Trump-Putin summit or Trump's meeting with his Russian handler, as the neoliberal ruling classes and their mouthpieces in the corporate media would dearly like us all to believe. NATO has not been summarily dissolved. Poland has not been invaded by Russia.
Notable quotes:
"... So it appears America and democracy have miraculously survived the dreaded Trump-Putin summit or Trump's meeting with his Russian handler, as the neoliberal ruling classes and their mouthpieces in the corporate media would dearly like us all to believe. NATO has not been summarily dissolved. Poland has not been invaded by Russia. ..."
"... And so, once again, Western liberals, and others obsessed with Donald Trump, having been teased into a painfully tumescent paroxysm of anticipation of some unimaginably horrible event that would finally lead to Trump's impeachment ..."
"... In the days and weeks leading up to the summit, the global capitalist ruling class Resistance deployed every weapon in its mighty arsenal to whip the Western masses up into a frenzy of anti-Putin-Nazi fervor ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

Extracted from: Trump's Treasonous Traitor Summit or How Liberals Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the New McCarthyism by CJ Hopkins

So it appears America and democracy have miraculously survived the dreaded Trump-Putin summit or Trump's meeting with his Russian handler, as the neoliberal ruling classes and their mouthpieces in the corporate media would dearly like us all to believe. NATO has not been summarily dissolved. Poland has not been invaded by Russia.

The offices of The New York Times , The Washington Post , CNN, and MSNBC have not been stormed by squads of jackbooted Trumpian Gestapo.

The Destabilization of the Middle East, the Privatization of Virtually Everything, the Conversion of the Planet into One Big Shopping Mall, and other global capitalist projects are all going forward uninterrupted. Apart from Trump making a narcissistic, word-salad-babbling jackass of himself, which he does on a more or less daily basis, nothing particularly apocalyptic happened.

And so, once again, Western liberals, and others obsessed with Donald Trump, having been teased into a painfully tumescent paroxysm of anticipation of some unimaginably horrible event that would finally lead to Trump's impeachment (or his removal from office by other means) were left standing around with their hysteria in their hands. It has become a sadistic ritual at this point like a twisted, pseudo-Tantric exercise where the media get liberals all lathered up over whatever fresh horror Trump has just perpetrated (or some non-story story they have invented out of whole cloth), build the tension for several days, until liberals are moaning and begging for impeachment, or a full-blown CIA-sponsored coup, then pull out abruptly and leave the poor bastards writhing in agony until the next time which is pretty much exactly what just happened.

In the days and weeks leading up to the summit, the global capitalist ruling class Resistance deployed every weapon in its mighty arsenal to whip the Western masses up into a frenzy of anti-Putin-Nazi fervor. While continuing to flog the wildly popular baby concentration camp story (because the Hitler stimulus never fails to elicit a Pavlovian response from Americans, regardless of how often or how blatantly you use it), the corporate media began hammering hard on the "Trump is a Russian Agent" hysteria. (Normally, the corporate media alternates between the Hitler hysteria and the Russia hysteria so as not to completely short-circuit the already scrambled brains of Western liberals, but given the imminent threat of a peace deal , they needed to go the whole hog this time and paint this summit as a secret, internationally televised assignation between Hitler and well, Hitler).

[Jul 19, 2018] Peter van Buren on Trump-Russia Hysteria by Scott

Notable quotes:
"... We Meant Well: How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People ..."
"... This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: Zen Cash ; The War State , by Mike Swanson; WallStreetWindow.com ; Roberts and Roberts Brokerage Inc. ; NoDev NoOps NoIT , by Hussein Badakhchani; LibertyStickers.com ; and ExpandDesigns.com/Scott . ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | scotthorton.org

Peter van Buren discusses the media reaction to President Trump's recent meeting with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki. He compares the entire story of Russian collusion to the birther conspiracy movement , in that swaths of Americans have been swept up in a campaign against the president with very little real evidence presented to support the claims. Van Buren argues that the divisiveness about Trump being a Russian agent is harmful for the country, and at this point Robert Mueller and the intelligence community need to "put up or shut up" -- either present the clear evidence that Trump worked with the Russians, or admit that there is no such evidence. He goes on to discuss the DNC email leak, Hillary Clinton's private email server, and the recent indictment of 12 Russian operatives.

Discussed on the show:

Peter Van Buren worked for 24 years at the Department of State including a year in Iraq. He is the author of We Meant Well: How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People and the novel Hooper's War . He is now a contributing editor at The American Conservative magazine. Follow him on Twitter @WeMeantWell .

This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: Zen Cash ; The War State , by Mike Swanson; WallStreetWindow.com ; Roberts and Roberts Brokerage Inc. ; NoDev NoOps NoIT , by Hussein Badakhchani; LibertyStickers.com ; and ExpandDesigns.com/Scott .

Check out Scott's Patreon page.

[Jul 18, 2018] The USA and Russia: Two Sides of the Same Neoliberal Coin

Notable quotes:
"... There are many modern myths. One of them is about the events of 1989 as being the culmination of a grand historical struggle for freedom and liberty. Nothing could be farther from the truth. For years prior to 1989 the West through a combination of both legal business and criminal activity had interpenetrated the Communist elites with lucrative deals and promises of all kinds. ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org
The USA and Russia: Two Sides of the Same Criminal Corporate Coin by Dan Corjescu

Why, man, he doth bestride the narrow world
Like a Colossus, and we petty men
Walk under his huge legs and peep about
To find ourselves dishonorable graves.

-- Shakespeare, "Julius Caesar"

There are many modern myths. One of them is about the events of 1989 as being the culmination of a grand historical struggle for freedom and liberty. Nothing could be farther from the truth. For years prior to 1989 the West through a combination of both legal business and criminal activity had interpenetrated the Communist elites with lucrative deals and promises of all kinds.

This situation was even more pronounced in "non-aligned" Yugoslavia who for years had maintained CIA and American and West European business contacts.

In effect, the "cold war" witnessed a rapid convergence between the economic and power interests of both Western and Communist elites.

The "Communists" (in name only of course) quickly realized the economic benefits available to them through at times open at times clandestine cooperation with Western business/criminal interests.

Eventually, Communist elites realized that they had an unprecedented economic opportunity on their hands: state privatization made possible, in part, with active Western participation.

For them, "Freedom" meant the freedom to get rich beyond their wildest dreams.

And the 1990's were just that. A paradise for thieving on an unimaginable scale all under the rubric of the rebirth of "capitalism and freedom".

The true outcome of that decade was that the old communist elites not only retained their social and political power behind the scenes; they also were able to enrich themselves beyond anything the communist dictatorships could ever hope to offer them in the past.

Yes, the price was to give up imperial, national, and ideological ambitions. But it was a very small price to pay; since the East European elites had ceased to believe in any of those things years earlier.

The only firm belief they still held was the economic betterment of themselves and their families through the acquisition by any means of as many asset classes as possible. In effect, they became the mirror image of their "enemy" the "imperialist capitalist West".

This was not a case of historical dialectics but historical convergence. What appeared as a world divided was actually a world waiting to be made whole through the basest of criminal business activity.

But being clever thieves they knew how to hide themselves and their doings behind superficially morally impeccable figures such as Vaclav Havel and Lech Wałęsa, to name just a few. These "dissidents" would be the faces they would use to make a good part of the world believe that 1989 was a narrative of freedom and not outright pubic theft which it was.

Yes, people in the east, even in Russia, are freer now than they were. But it should never be forgotten that the events of 1989/1990 were not even remotely about those revolutionary dreams.

It was about something much more mundane and sordid. It was about greed. It was about the maintenance of power. And finally it was about money.

How deep has the Western nexus of power and wealth gone into the heart of the East? So far indeed that one can easily question to what extent a country like Russia is truly a "national" state anymore and rather just a territory open to exploitation by both local and global elites.

For that matter, we can ask the same question about the USA.

... ... ...

[Jul 18, 2018] The neoliberal elite and MSM turned the majority of Western liberals into paranoid McCarthyite fanatics denouncing anyone who questions the honesty of the US Intelligence Community as a "traitor," and seeing Russians and Nazis coming out of the woodwork

Notable quotes:
"... The New York Times ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

Extracted from: Trump's Treasonous Traitor Summit or How Liberals Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the New McCarthyism by CJ Hopkins

On the morning of the summit, Charles M. Blow, maestro of alliteration and subtlety, in The New York Times (which, we must remember, holds itself to the highest journalistic standards and in no way resembles a rabble-rousing tabloid), published this impassioned piece entitled " Trump, Treasonous Traitor ," accusing the President of "betraying the nation," and basically demanding that he be tried for treason. "America is under attack," Blow announces, "and its president absolutely refuses to defend it."

If Mother Jones ' David Corn has his way, Senator Rand Paul, who Corn denounces as "a traitor," would also be taken outside and shot for the crime of noting that the Attack on America® Russia allegedly perpetrated is fairly standard clandestine behavior, engaged in by most developed nations, including the United States of America, whose history of election interference, coup-fomenting, assassinations, and other, more hamfisted forms of regime change is common knowledge, or at least it was, until the ruling classes and the corporate media turned the majority of Western liberals into paranoid McCarthyite fanatics denouncing anyone who questions the honesty of the US Intelligence Community as a "traitor," and seeing Russians and Nazis coming out of the woodwork.

[Jul 18, 2018] feinstein.senate.gov INTERVIEW OF GLENN SIMPSON BEFORE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. TUESDAY, AUGUST 22, 2017 WASHINGTON, D.C.

Jul 18, 2018 | feinstein.senate.gov

Glenn Simpson August 22, 2017

Washington, DC -800-FOR-DEPO www.aldersonreporting.com

DEPO www.aldersonreporting.com

Alderson Court Reporting

Page 37 Prevezon who were part of the case. Other people were brought in -- you know, were brought in either by Prevezon or by the lawyers and I didn't always try to pin that down.

Q. In general would the decision whether you would share Fusion's information with them be dependent then upon the attorneys introducing you to them?

A. It would be dependent on the direction of the attorneys. I basically -- you know, in all these cases for reasons of privilege and simply just professionalism you work at the direction of the lawyers and you do what they instruct you to do.

Q. Did anyone from Fusion ever help arrange for other entities to be hired by Prevezon or Baker Hostetler for the Prevezon case?

A. I don't think you could say we arranged for others to be hired. If you're asking me if we made referrals, we would refer -- you know, we made quite extensive -- fairly extensive efforts to get a PR firm hired for the trial that we were expecting and we made a number of referrals in that case, in that matter.

Q. What was the name of that PR firm?

A. There were several. We actually, you know, had a series of screening sessions. I think Weber Shandwick was the one we ended up with.

Q. You mentioned that Fusion was conducting litigation support in regard to the Prevezon case. Could you expand a little more about what type of litigation support activities you undertook?

MR. LEVY: Beyond what he's already told you?

MR. DAVIS: With a little more detail.

BY THE WITNESS:

A. Yes. In the original period of the case the question -- the client's explanation for or response to the government's allegations was that they originated with an organized crime figure in Russia who had been extorting them and who they had reported to the police and who had been jailed and convicted for blackmailing them, and they claimed that that was where these allegations originated, which, you know, seemed remarkable because it was in a Justice Department complaint.

So the first thing, you know, in any case really is to sort of try and figure out whether your own client's story can be supported or whether it's not true, and the lawyers -- you know, we work with a lot of prominent law firms and in many cases the first thing the lawyers need to know is whether their client's story is real, whether it can be supported, you know, because in any new case you don't know whether your own client is telling you the truth.

So originally one of the first things we were hired to do was to check out whether this was, in fact, the case. So they claimed that the allegations originated with a mobster named Demetri Baranovsky, B-A-R-A-N-O-V-S-K-Y, who was, in fact, jailed for running a shake-down operation in which he posed as an anticorruption campaigner for the purpose of extorting money from people by threatening to accuse them of some kind of corrupt activities. As you know, Russia is rife with corruption and there's a lot of anger over corruption.

We were able to ascertain that Mr. Baranovsky was, in fact, associated with Russia's biggest organized crime family, the Solntsevo Brotherhood, S-O-L-N-T-S-E-V-O brotherhood, which is the major dominant mafia clan in Moscow. So as far as it went, the client seemed to be telling the truth. You know, there was extensive record of these events and we found some indications from western law enforcement that western law enforcement did consider Baranovsky to be a lieutenant in this organized crime family. So we did that for a while. Edward Baumgartner helped a lot with that because of his Russian language skills and his ability to interface with the court system in Russia.

And, you know, around the -- similarly, there was a deposition of a customs agent by one of the lawyers who -- you know, in this initial effort to trace the origin of these allegations, where they came from, how they could have ended up with the Justice Department, the first thing we did was interview the client, got their story, and interviewed the agent who worked on the case for the DOJ and that agent said he got all his information from William Browder.

So at that point I was asked to help see if we could get an interview with William Browder. They wrote a letter to Browder and asked him to answer questions and he refused. Then the lawyers wanted to know, you know, whether he could be subpoenaed. So a lot of what I did in 2014 was help them figure out whether he could be subpoenaed in the United States to give a deposition, and the first thing that we did was we researched the ownership and registration of his hedge fund, which was registered in Delaware and filed documents with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

was registered in Delaware and filed documents with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

So we subpoenaed his hedge fund. A lot of the early work I did was just documenting that his hedge fund had presence in the United States. So we subpoenaed his hedge fund. He then changed the hedge fund registration, took his name off, said it was on there by accident, it was a mistake, and said that he had no presence in the United States and that, you know -- as you may know, he surrendered his citizenship in 1998 and moved outside the United States. That was around the time he started making all the money in Russia. So he's never had to pay U.S. taxes on his profits from his time in Russia, which became important in the case later.

In any case, he said he never came to the United States, didn't own any property here, didn't do any business here, and therefore he was not required to participate in the U.S. court system even though he admitted that he brought the case to the U.S. Justice Department. So we found this to be a frustrating and somewhat curious situation.

He was willing to, you know, hand stuff off to the DOJ anonymously in the beginning and cause them to launch a court case against somebody, but he wasn't interesting in speaking under oath about, you know, why he did that, his own activities in Russia. So looking at the public record we determined that he did come to the United States frequently, and I discovered through public records that he seemed to own a house in Aspen, Colorado, a very expensive mansion, over $10 million, which he had registered in the name of a shell company in a clear attempt to disguise the ownership of the property. We were able to ascertain that he does use property. We were able to ascertain that he does use that property because he registered cars to that property with the Colorado DMV in the name of William Browder.

So we began looking for public information about when he might be in Aspen, Colorado, and I found a listing on the Aspen Institute Website about an appearance he was going to make there in the summer of 2014. So we -- I served him a subpoena in the parking lot of the Aspen Institute in the summer of 2014 using two people -- two subcontractors. Actually, those other subcontractors were -- their names escape me, but I forgot about those. We can get you that. This is all in the Pacer court record, the public court record.

In any event, the three of us served -- there was another subcontractor working for the law firm whose name I also forget. I did not retain him, but I was asked to work with him on this. He is a private investigator and we can get you his name. In any event, we served him the subpoena and he ran away. He dropped it on the ground and he ran away.

He jumped in his car and went back to his mansion.

At that point he tried to suppress -- tried to quash the subpoena on the grounds it hadn't been properly served. We didn't get a video, but there are sworn affidavits from my servers in the court record about the service. But he objected to it on a number of grounds. A, he continued to insist he had nothing to do with the United States and didn't come here very often even, though we caught him here, clearly has cars in Colorado. He also said that you can't serve a subpoena for a case in that you can't serve a subpoena for a case in New York in the state of Colorado, it's outside the primary jurisdiction. He also began to raise questions about whether Baker Hostetler had a conflict of interest because of some previous work he did with one of the Baker lawyers.

This led to a long, drawn-out discovery battle that I was in the center of because I served the subpoenas and I helped find the information for the first set of subpoenas that lasted, you know, through 2014. This was, you know, a lot of what I did. This was -- the main focus was on trying to get William Browder to testify under oath about his role in this case and his activities in Russia.

All of this -- his determined effort to avoid testifying under oath, including running away from subpoenas and changing -- frequently changing lawyers and making lurid allegations against us, including that, you know, he thought we were KGB assassins in the parking lot of Aspen, Colorado when we served the subpoena, all raised questions in my mind about why he was so determined to not have to answer questions under oath about things that happened in Russia.

I'll add that, you know, I've done a lot of Russia reporting over the years. I originally met William Browder back when I was a journalist at the Wall Street Journal when I was doing stories about corruption in Russia. I think the first time I met him he lectured me about -- I was working on a story about Vladimir Putin corruption and he lectured me about how have Vladimir Putin was not corrupt and how he was the best thing that ever happened to Russia. There are numerous documents that he published himself, interviews he gave singing the praises of Vladimir Putin. At that time I was already investigating corruption in Putin's Russia.

So this made me more curious about the history of his activities in Russia and what that might tell me about corruption in Russia, and as part of the case we became curious about whether there was something that he was hiding about his activities in Russia. So through this period while we were attempting to get him under oath we were also investigating his business practices in Russia and that research -- and I should add when I say "we," I mean the lawyers were doing a lot of this work and it wasn't -- I can't take responsibility or pride of place on having done all this work. We were doing it all together. It was a -- you know, there were a number of lawyers involved, other people.

In the course of doing this research into

25 what he might not want to be asked about from his history in Russia we began to learn about the history of his tax avoidance in Russia and we began to deconstruct the way that his hedge fund structured its investments in Russia and, you know, we gradually accumulated through public records, not all from Russia, that he set up dozens of shell companies in Cyprus and other tax havens around the world to funnel money into Russia and to hold Russian securities.

He also set up shell companies inside of Russia in order to avoid paying taxes in Russia and he set up shell companies in a remote republic called Kalmykia, K-A-L-M-Y-K-I-A, which is next to Mongolia. It's the only Buddhist republic in Russia and there's nothing much there, but if you put your companies there you can lower your taxes. They were putting their companies in Kalmykia that were holding investments from western investors and they were staffing these companies -- they were using Afghan war veterans because there's a tax preference for Afghan war veterans, and what we learned is that they got in trouble for this eventually because one of Putin's primary rules for business was you can do a lot of things, but you've got to pay your taxes.

In fact, William Browder famously said in 2005 at Davos everybody knows under Putin you have to pay your taxes, which is ironic because at the time he was being investigated for not paying taxes. Ultimately they were caught, some of these companies were prosecuted, and he was forced to make an enormous tax payment to the government of Russia in 2006.

I will add that Sergei Magnitsky was working

10 for him at this time and all of this happened prior to the events that you are interested in involving the Russian treasury fraud and his jailing. This precedes all that.

But returning to the detailed discussion of my work, we investigated William Browder's business practices in Russia, we began to understand maybe what it was he didn't want to talk about, and as we looked at that we then began to look at his decision to surrender his American citizenship in 1998. At that point somewhere in there the Panama papers came out and we discovered that he had incorporated shell companies offshore in the mid 1990s, in 1995 I believe it was in the British Virgin Islands, and that at some point his hedge fund's shares had been transferred to this offshore company.

This offshore company was managed -- several of his offshore companies were managed by the Panamanian law firm called Mossack Fonseca, M-O-S-S-A-C-K, Fonseca, F-O-N-S-E-C-A, which is known now for setting up offshore companies for drug kingpins, narcos, kleptos, you name it. They were servicing every bad guy around. And I'm familiar with them from other money laundering and corruption and tax evasion investigations that I've done.

I'll note parenthetically that William Browder talks a lot about the Panama papers and the Russians who are in the Panama papers without ever mentioning that he's in the Panama papers. This is, again, a public fact that you can check on-line.

So that's an overview of the sort of work I was doing on this case. In the course of that I also began reaching back, I read his book Red Notice to understand his story and the story of his activities in Russia. I'll add also that I was extremely sympathetic for what happened to Sergei Magnitsky and I told him that myself and I tried to help him. It was only later from this other case that I began to be curious and skeptical about William Browder's activities and history in Russia.

MR. FOSTER: Can I ask you a follow-up question. I appreciate the narrative answer, but at the very beginning of the narrative you talked about beginning this journey by interviewing -- conducting an interview of the case agent who said he'd gotten all of his information -- the case agent or the attorney, the primary person at the DOJ, you said they got all their information from Bill Browder. Can you tell us who that was and who conducted the interview?

MR. LEVY: Mr. Simpson should definitely answer that question. I just want to make sure for the record that he hadn't finished his answer. He can talk more extensively about the litigation support that he provided for Baker -- MR. FOSTER: We're happy to get into that if he wants to do that. We're just coming up at the end of our hour. MR. LEVY: No problem. MR. FOSTER: and I wanted to get that follow-up in before --

A. I'll just finish with one last thing and I'm happy to answer that question. So in the course of this, you know -- I mean, one of my interests or even obsessions over the last decade has been corruption in Russia and Russian kleptocracy and the police state that was there. I was stationed in Europe from 2005 to 2007 or '8. So I was there when Putin was consolidating power and all this wave of power was coming. So it's been a subject that I've read very widely on and I'm very interested in the history of Putin's rise.

You know, in the course of all this I'll tell you I became personally interested in where Bill Browder came from, how he made so much money under Vladimir Putin without getting involved in anything illicit. So I read his book and I began doing other research and I found filings at the SEC linking him quite directly and his company, Salomon Brothers at the time, to a company in Russia called Peter Star, and I had, as it happens, vetted Peter Star and I knew that Peter Star was, you know, at the center of a corruption case that I covered as a reporter at the Wall Street Journal. When I went back into the history of Peter Star I realized that Bill Browder did business with the mayor's office in Saint Petersburg when Vladimir Putin was the deputy mayor and was responsible for dealing with western businessmen and corporations.

I then went and looked in Red Notice, this was a large deal, it was the biggest deal ever for Salomon at that time, they sold $98 million worth of stock on NASDAQ. There's no mention of William Browder's deal with Peter Star in Red Notice. I can't tell you why, but I can tell you that Peter Star later became the subject of a massive Star later became the subject of a massive corruption investigation, Pan-European, that I exposed a lot of and that led to the resignation of Putin's telecoms minister. So I assume he might not have -- this is kind of a pattern with Browder, which is he tends to omit things that aren't helpful to him, and I think we've seen a good bit of that lately in his allegations against me, which I'm sure you're going to ask me about.

So your question about the ICE agent, he was deposed by John Moscow of the New York office of Baker Hostetler. John is an old associate of mine from my days as a journalist. John's an expert on tax evasion and money laundering. He was the head of the rackets bureau for the district attorney's office in New York.

MR. FOSTER: You're talking about a formal deposition in the litigation?

MR. SIMPSON: Yeah.

MR. FOSTER: I just wanted to clarify that.

MR. SIMPSON: Again, it's in the court record. One of the frustrating things about this whole issue for me is everything I'm talking about or most of it is in the court record. You know, I don't take a lot of credit for my work. So you won't see my name scattered through the court record, but a lot of this is what I did.

MR. DAVIS: I think that's concludes our first hour. Let's take a short break before we begin a new one.

[Jul 18, 2018] The Russian elite realized that they could lose their money and houses anytime – not in godless Putin's Russia, but in the free West, where they had preferred to look for refuge. The Magnitsky Act paved the road to the Cyprus confiscation of Russian deposits, to post-Crimean sanctions and to a full-fledged Cold War by Israel Shamir

Notable quotes:
"... The New Republic ..."
"... The documents had been doubted for some linguistic reasons discussed by Gilbert Doctorow who comes to a reasonable conclusion: "Bill Browder['s] intensity and the time he was devoting to anti-Russian sanctions in Europe was in no way comparable to the behaviour of a top level international businessman. It was clear to me that some other game was in play. But at the time, no one could stand up and suggest the man was a fraud, an operative of the intelligence agencies. ..."
"... We do not know whether Browder is, or had been, a spy. This should not surprise us, as he was closely connected to Maxwell, Safra and Berezovsky, the financiers with strong ties in the intelligence community. ..."
"... Perhaps he outlived his usefulness, Mr Browder did. He started the Cold war, now is the time to keep it in its healthy limits and to avoid a nuclear disaster or rapid armaments race. This is the task we may hope will be entertained by the next US President, Mr Donald Trump. ..."
June 20, 2016 | www.unz.com

Chapeau, Mr Browder! Hats off for this incredible man. Last month, he succeeded in stopping a film screening in the European parliament and took off a few articles from American web sites. This week, he turned the only US screening of a film critical to his version of events into a ruckus . No freedom of speech for his enemies! His lawyers prowl around and issue summons to whoever digs in his sordid affairs. His hacks re-wrote his Wikipedia entry, expunging even discussions of the topic: despite hundreds of edits, nothing survived but the official version. Only a few powerful men succeed purifying their record to such an extent. Still, good fortune (a notoriously flighty lady) is about to desert Mr Browder.

Who is this extremely influential man? A businessman, a politician, a spy? The American-born Jewish tycoon William Browder, says The Jewish Chronicle , considers himself Putin's Number One enemy. For him, Putin is "no friend of the Jews", "cold-blooded killer" and even "criminal dictator who is not too different from Hitler, Mussolini or Gadhafi". More to a point, Browder is the man who contributed most to the new cold war between the West and Russia. The roots were there, still he made them blossom. If the US and Russia haven't yet exchanged nuclear salvos, do not blame Browder: he tried. For a valid reason, too: he was hit by cruel Hitler-like Mr Putin into his most susceptible spot, namely his pocket. Or was there even a better reason?

Browder, a grandson of the US Communist leader, came to Russia at its weakest point after the Soviet collapse, and grabbed an enormous fortune by opaque financial transactions. Such fortunes are not amassed by the pure of spirit. He was a ruthless man who did as much as any oligarch to enrich himself.

Eventually he ran afoul of Mr Putin, who was (and is) very tolerant of oligarchs as long as they play by the rules. The oligarchs would not be oligarchs if they would found that an easy condition. Some of them tried to fight back: Khodorkovsky landed in jail, Berezovsky and Gusinsky went to exile. Browder had a special position: he was the only Jewish oligarch in Russia who never bothered to acquire the Russian citizenship. He was barred from returning to Russia, and his companies were audited and found wanting.

As you'd expect, huge tax evasion was discovered. Browder thought that as long as he sucked up to Putin, he'd get away with bloody murder, let alone tax evasion. He was mistaken. Putin is nobody's fool. Flatterers do not get a free ride in Putin's Russia. And Browder became too big for his boots.

It turned out that he did two unforgivable things. Russians were afraid the foreigners would buy all their assets for a song, using favourable exchange rates and lack of native capital, as had happened in the Baltic states and other ex-Communist East European countries. In order to avoid that, shares of Russian blue-chip companies (Gazprom and suchlike) were traded among Russian citizens only. Foreigners had to pay much more. Browder bought many such shares via Russian frontmen, and he was close to getting control over Russian oil and gas. Putin suspected that he had acted in the interests of big foreign oil companies, trying to repeat the feat of Mr Khodorkovsky.

His second mistake was being too greedy. Russian taxation is very low; but Browder did not want to pay even this low tax. He hired Mr Magnitsky, an experienced auditor, who used loopholes in the Russian tax code in order to avoid taxes altogether. Magnitsky established dummy companies based in tax-free zones of Russia, such as pastoral Kalmykia, small, Buddhist, and autonomous. Their tax-free status had been granted in order to improve their economy and reduce unemployment; however, Browder's companies did not contribute to economy and did not employ people; they were paper dummies swiftly bankrupted by the owner.

Another Magnitsky trick was to form companies fronted by handicapped people who were also freed from paying tax. In the film, some of these persons, often illiterate and of limited intelligence, told the filmmaker of signing papers they could not read and of being paid a little money for the millions passing through their account.

(Mr Browder does not deny these accusations; he says there is nothing criminal in trying to avoid taxes. You can read about Browder and Magnitsky tricks here and here , and learn of the ways they attacked companies using minority shareholders and many other neat schemes.)

Eventually Magnitsky's schemes were discovered and he was arrested. Ten months later, in 2009, he died in jail. By that time, his patron Mr Browder was abroad, and he began his campaign against Russia hoping to regain his lost assets. He claimed Mr Magnitsky had been his lawyer, who discovered misdeeds and the outright thievery of government officials, and was imprisoned and tortured to death for this discovery.

The US Congress rushed in the Magnitsky Act, the first salvo of the Cold War Two. By this act, any Russian person could be found responsible for Mr Magnitsky's untimely death and for misappropriation of Browder's assets. His properties could be seized, bank accounts frozen – without any legal process or representation. This act upset the Russians, who allegedly had kept a cool $500 billion in the Western banks, so tit for tat started, and it goes to this very day.

The actual effect of the Magnitsky Act was minimal: some twenty million dollars frozen and a few dozen not-very-important people were barred from visiting the US. Its psychological effect was much greater: the Russian elite realized that they could lose their money and houses anytime – not in godless Putin's Russia, but in the free West, where they had preferred to look for refuge. The Magnitsky Act paved the road to the Cyprus confiscation of Russian deposits, to post-Crimean sanctions and to a full-fledged Cold War.

This was painful for Russia, as the first adolescent disillusionment in its love affair with the West, and rather healthy, in my view. A spot of cold war (very cold, plenty of ice please) is good for ordinary people, while its opposite, a Russian-American alliance, is good for the elites. The worst times for ordinary Russian people were 1988-2001, when Russians were in love with the US. The oligarchs stole everything there was to steal and sold it to the West for pennies. They bought villas in Florida while Russia fell apart. That was bad time for everybody: the US invaded Panama and Afghanistan unopposed, Iraq was sanctioned to death, Yugoslavia was bombed and broken to pieces.

As the Cold War came back, some normalcy was restored: the Russians stopped the US from destroying Syria, and Russian officials learned to love Sochi instead of Miami. For this reason alone, Browder can be counted as a part of the power which eternally wills evil and eternally works good. The Russian government, however, did not enjoy the cold shower.

The Russians denied any wrongdoing or even political reasons for dealing with Browder. They say Magnitsky was not a lawyer, just an auditor and a tax code expert. They say that he was arrested and tried for his tax avoidance schemes, and he died of natural causes while in jail. Nobody listened to them, until they demanded that Browder testify under oath. He refused. For two years lawyers tried to give him a summons , but he was a quick runner. There are funny videos showing Browder running away from summons.

Some good sense began to seep into American minds. The New Republic wondered : if Browder was indeed the victim of persecution in Russia and had enlisted the U.S. justice system to right the balance, why was he so reluctant to offer his sworn testimony in an American courtroom?

Enter Mr Andrey Nekrasov , a Russian dissident filmmaker. He made a few films considered to be highly critical of Russian government. He alleged the FSB blew up houses in Moscow in order to justify the Chechnya war. He condemned the Russian war against Georgia in 2008, and had been given a medal by Georgian authorities. He did not doubt the official Western version of Browder-Magnitsky affair, and decided to make a film about the noble American businessman and the brave Russian lawyer fighting for human rights. The European organisations and parliamentarians provided the budget for the film. They also expected the film to denounce Putin and glorify Magnitsky, the martyr.

However, while making the film, Mr Nekrasov had his Road to Damascus moment. He realised that the whole narrative was hinging on the unsubstantiated words of Mr Browder. After painstaking research, he came to some totally different conclusions, and in his version, Browder was a cheat who run afoul of law, while Magnitsky was his sidekick in those crimes.

Nekrasov discovered an interview Magnitsky gave in his jail. In this interview, the accountant said he was afraid Browder would kill him to prevent him from denouncing Browder, and would make him his scapegoat. It turned out Browder tried to bribe the journalist who made the interview to have these words expunged. Browder was the main beneficiary of the accountant's death, realised Nekrasov, while his investigators were satisfied with Magnitsky's collaboration with them.

Nekrasov could not find any evidence that Magnitsky tried to investigate the misdeeds of government officials. He was too busy covering his own tax evasion. And instead of fitting his preconceived notions, Nekrasov made the film about what he learned. ( Here are some details of Nekrasov's film)

While the screening in the EU Parliament was been stopped by the powerful Mr Browder, in Washington DC the men are made of sterner stuff. Despite Browder's threats the film was screened , presented by the best contemporary American investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, who is 80 if a day, and still going strong. One has to recognise that the US is second to none for freedom of speech on the globe.

What makes Browder so powerful? He invests in politicians. This is probably a uniquely Jewish quality: Jews outspend everybody in contributions to political figures. The Arabs will spend more on horses and jets, the Russians prefer real estate, the Jews like politicians. The Russian NTV channel reported that Browder lavishly financed the US lawmakers. Here they present alleged evidence of money transfers: some hundred thousand dollars was given by Browder's structures officially to the senators and congressmen in order to promote the Magnitsky Act.

Much bigger sums were transferred via good services of Brothers Ziff, mega-rich Jewish American businessmen, said the researchers in two articles published on the Veteran News Network and in The Huffington Post .

These two articles were taken off the sites very fast under pressure of Browder's lawyers, but they are available in the cache. They disclose the chief beneficiary of Browder's generosity. This is Senator Ben Cardin, a Democrat from Maryland. He was the engine behind Magnitsky Act legislation to such an extent that the Act has been often called the Cardin List . Cardin is a fervent supporter of Hillary Clinton, also a cold warrior of good standing. More to a point, Cardin is a prominent member of Israel Lobby.

Browder affair is a heady upper-class Jewish cocktail of money, spies, politicians and international crime. Almost all involved figures appear to be Jewish, not only Browder, Brothers Ziff and Ben Cardin. Even his enemy, the beneficiary of the scam that (according to Browder) took over his Russian assets is another Jewish businessman Dennis Katsiv (he had been partly exonerated by a New York court as is well described in this thoughtful piece).

Browder began his way to riches under the patronage of a very rich and very crooked Robert Maxwell, a Czech-born Jewish businessman who assumed a Scots name. Maxwell stole a few million dollars from his company pension fund before dying in mysterious circumstances on board of his yacht in the Atlantic. It was claimed by a member of Israeli Military Intelligence, Ari Ben Menashe, that Maxwell had been a Mossad agent for years, and he also said Maxwell tipped the Israelis about Israeli whistle-blower Mordecai Vanunu. Vanunu was kidnapped and spent many years in Israeli jails.

Geoffrey Goodman wrote Maxwell "was almost certainly being used as – and using himself as – a two-way intelligence conduit [between East and West]. This arrangement included passing intelligence to the Israeli secret forces with whom he became increasingly involved towards the end of his life."

After Maxwell, Browder switched allegiance to Edmond Safra, a very rich Jewish banker of Lebanese origin, who also played East vs West. Safra provided him with working capital for his investment fund. Safra's bank has been the unlikely place where the IMF loan of four billion dollars to Russia had been transferred -- and disappeared. The Russian authorities say that Browder has been involved in this "crime of the century," next to Safra. The banker's name has been connected to Mossad: increasingly fearful for his life, Safra surrounded himself by Mossad-trained gunmen. This did not help him: he died a horrible death in his bathroom when his villa was torched by one of the guards.

The third Jewish oligarch on Browder's way was Boris Berezovsky, the king-maker of Yeltsin's Russia. He also died in his bathroom (which seems to be a constant feature); apparently he committed suicide. Berezovsky had been a politically active man; he supported every anti-Putin force in Russia. However, a few months before his death, he asked for permission to return to Russia, and some negotiations went on between him and Russian authorities.

His chief of security Sergey Sokolov came to Russia and purportedly brought with him some documents his late master prepared for his return. These documents allege that Browder had been an agent of Western intelligence services, of the CIA to begin with, and of MI6 in following years. He was given a code name Solomon, as he worked for Salomon Brothers. His financial activity was just a cover for his true intentions, that is to collect political and economic data on Russia, and to carry out economic war on Russia. This revelation has been made in the Russia-1 TV channel documentary Browder Effect , (broadcasted 13.04.2016), asserting that Browder was not after money at all, and his activities in Russia, beside being very profitable, had a political angle.

The documents had been doubted for some linguistic reasons discussed by Gilbert Doctorow who comes to a reasonable conclusion: "Bill Browder['s] intensity and the time he was devoting to anti-Russian sanctions in Europe was in no way comparable to the behaviour of a top level international businessman. It was clear to me that some other game was in play. But at the time, no one could stand up and suggest the man was a fraud, an operative of the intelligence agencies. Whatever the final verdict may be on the documents presented by the film "The Browder Effect," it raises questions about Browder that should have been asked years ago in mainstream Western media if journalists were paying attention. Yevgeny Popov deserves credit for highlighting those questions, even if his documents demand further investigation before we come to definitive answers".

We do not know whether Browder is, or had been, a spy. This should not surprise us, as he was closely connected to Maxwell, Safra and Berezovsky, the financiers with strong ties in the intelligence community.

Perhaps he outlived his usefulness, Mr Browder did. He started the Cold war, now is the time to keep it in its healthy limits and to avoid a nuclear disaster or rapid armaments race. This is the task we may hope will be entertained by the next US President, Mr Donald Trump.

This article was first published in The Unz Review .

JL , June 20, 2016 at 9:14 am GMT

" Browder was not after money at all " Uh, no. Browder was notorious for his greed and obsession with money. This is someone who had a program that calculated his personal net worth online and would check it no less than every half hour.

Think Gordon Gekko but too cheap to even buy a decent suit. While there may have been some intelligence connections somewhere along the way, as the article states, he went political only when his honey pot was removed. Without Russia, his fund management business quickly tanked.

AmericaFirstNow , Website June 20, 2016 at 10:54 am GMT
US pushing a Zionist PNAC Neocon agenda vs Russia: http://america-hijacked.com/2014/02/24/us-has-neocon-agenda-in-ukraine-russia-analyst/

http://tinyurl.com/neoconmeddling

annamaria , June 20, 2016 at 11:20 am GMT
@Kiza

This is priceless: "We do not know whether Browder is, or had been, a spy. This should not surprise us, as he was closely connected to Maxwell, Safra and Berezovsky, the financiers with strong ties in the intelligence community."

Could Mr. Browder hope for a better end of life than Maxwell, Safra and Berezovsky? And what would be the fate of Mr. Cardin, the famous congressional prostitute? http://www.councilforthenationalinterest.org/new/?p=3742#.V2fRqzc5FCo

"Israel's Agent of Influence: Senator Ben Cardin shows how it's done:"

"So who does Cardin actually represent? I would suggest that he fits the mold of the classic agent of influence in that his allegiance to the United States is constrained by his greater loyalty to a foreign nation."

Israel Shamir , June 20, 2016 at 5:17 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

In Russia, everybody criticises Putin. No danger at all. Andrey Nekrasov was a foremost critic of Putin, made him no harm. Russia has as much freedom of speech as Europe; still less than the US.

Oscar Peterson , June 20, 2016 at 10:25 pm GMT
Incredible–well, not really–that our mainstream media resolutely refuses to print, much less discuss, the two main pieces of information here:

1. Browder was the one who gained most from Magnitsky's death as evidenced by the interview in which the latter asserted a fear of being killed by Browder.

2. Nekrasov, the film's director, has a history of making films very critical of Putin and the Russian government and state.

US media coverage either omits any mention of these two points or buries allusions to them in the article. The NYT piece on Browder's attempt to block the film's screening at the Newseum in Washington was filed in the "Europe" section of the paper.

Freedom of speech is under assault in the West and, again and again, we see the common denominator of these despicable efforts to suppress key information.

JL , June 21, 2016 at 7:52 am GMT
How funny to hear people question Browder's Jewishness, in the Unz comments section of all places. Lest there be any doubt, he, himself, very much identified as being a Jew, to the extent that he had a Mezuzah on his office doorway and hired only Jewish employees.

Concerning Magnitsky's indeed unusual posthumous trial, this was actually at the behest of his own mother who refused to sign the legal papers closing the criminal case due to his death. This is usually a mere formality. However, the Russian legal system is a stickler for the letter of the law and so the trial went ahead. His mother's motivation was unclear, though it probably had something to do with extra publicity.

tbraton , June 21, 2016 at 2:41 pm GMT
When I first became aware of Mr. Browder a number of years ago, I was curious about his name, since I was aware of Earl Browder, the former head of the American Communist Party when I was growing up. After I subsequently learned of the familial connection, I was highly amused to discover the leap from Communist to capitalist in three generations. But then I recalled that Dr. Armand Hammer, eventually the controlling shareholder of Occidental Petroleum, had a father who was also a doctor, an emigrant from Odessa, and a founder of the Communist Party U.S.A. That was a mere two generations to make the leap from Communist to capitalist.

A few years ago I happened to read an amusing memoir of the girl who was my date to my high school prom but who went on to achieve a modest fame and acquaintance with many prominent Americans and foreigners. (I am being intentionally vague.) When I was dating her in high school and college, I operated under the false assumption that her mother (whom I met) was Jewish and her natural father (whom I never met); I met her stepfather, who was Jewish) was Catholic, which I thought was kind of cool, since I was totally nonreligious. You can imagine my disappointment to learn nearly a half century later that both of her natural parents were Jewish. Elsewhere in her memoir, my friend referred to her mother's sister, who was a member of the Communist Party and got caught up in the Hollywood blacklist and lost her job. (That was the first I heard of it, btw.) Things turned out well for her since she hooked up with and married a wealthy Jewish doctor, who left her a sizable fortune when he died. She eventually moved to Israel where she found nirvana, marrying a much younger man and enjoying late in life "fantastic sex." So, it appears that what motivates many young Communists is the dream of becoming fantastically wealthy and enjoying life as a plutocrat, not the BS of improving life for the downtrodden. If I weren't such a natural skeptic, I would have been very disillusioned, but not as much as I was to discover late in life that her father was Jewish and not Catholic. Apologies to all those women I dated in my 20′s and 30′s whom I regaled with the story of my half-Jewish, half-Catholic prom date.

Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] , Website June 21, 2016 at 7:03 pm GMT

For two years lawyers tried to give him a summons, but he was a quick runner. There are funny videos showing Browder running away from summons.

I thoroughly enjoyed the video:-)

Seraphim , June 22, 2016 at 2:08 am GMT
@tbraton

It became tedious to evoke the murky relations of Bolshevism with the Jewish bank cartel in the financing of Lenin, Trotsky &Co by Jacob Schiff ("a banker who grew up in House of Rothschild Frankfurt, monopolized American rail system, funded the Rockefellers through First City Bank, ADL and the NAACP. Schiff's granddaughter married Al Gore's Son" From his base on Wall Street, he was the foremost Jewish leader from 1880 to 1920 in what later became known as the "Schiff era", grappling with all major Jewish issues and problems of the day, including the plight of Russian Jews under the Tsar, American and international anti-semitism, care of needy Jewish immigrants, and the rise of Zionism" – per Wikipedia), and Warburg ("Paul Warburg was a planner for the U.S. Federal Reserve System which is a collection of private banks, and attended as American representative, the Treaty of Versailles conference, where his brother Max was on the German side of the bargaining table" by Wiki). One can see why Lenin was 'permitted' to pass through Germany!

Schiff financed the Japanese for their attack on Russia ("He extended loans to the Empire of Japan in the amount of $200 million, through Kuhn, Loeb & Co Schiff saw this loan as a means of answering, on behalf of the Jewish people, the anti-Semitic actions of the Russian Empire, specifically the then-recent Kishinev pogrom"), the 1905 Revolution and the 1917 Revolution. "In addition to his famous loan to Japan, Schiff financed loans to many other nations, including those that would come to comprise the Central Powers Schiff made sure none of the funds from his loans ever went to the Russian Empire, which he felt oppressed Jewish people. When the Russian Empire fell in 1917, Schiff believed that the oppression of Jews would end. He formally repealed the impediments within his firm against lending to Russia". It's true that Communist Russia quickly opened the door for foreign investment (NEP) and the looting of Russia.

When Stalin tried to reduce USSR's dependence on foreign investments, he became instantly the monster. It is remarkable that America stood behind Trotsky in the case of the so-called "Show Trials" (The Dewey Commission).

Particularly interesting is that (per Wikipedia);

"Some ten years later, the Dewey Commission was cited in great detail, when in an open letter to the British press dated 25 February 1946, written by George Orwell and signed by Arthur Koestler, C. E. M. Joad, Frank Horrabin, George Padmore, Julian Symons, H. G. Wells, F. A. Ridley, C. A. Smith and John Baird, among others, it was suggested that the Nuremberg Trials then underway were an invaluable opportunity for establishing "historical truth and bearing upon the political integrity" of figures of international standing. Specifically, they called for Rudolf Hess to be interrogated about his alleged meeting with Trotsky and that the Gestapo records then in the hands of Allied experts be examined for any proof of any "liaison between the Nazi Party or State and Trotsky or the other old Bolshevik leaders indicted at the Moscow trials "

tbraton , June 23, 2016 at 12:33 am GMT
@tbraton

BTW I wonder how many people, including posters here, are aware that the U.S., under President Wilson, sent a military expedition to Russia after the Communist takeover there in 1917 and kept them there for about a year and a half.

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

When I was in college in the early 60′s, I bought a paperback of George Kennan's "Russia and the West, Under Lenin and Stalin" (hardcover ed. 1961), the first book of Kennan that I read, and was startled to learn of our military invasion of Russia at the end of WWI and after, something I didn't remember being taught in high school American history a few years earlier. That was about 50 years ago. This past year I got around to reading A. Scott Berg's much acclaimed biography, "Wilson." I didn't remember reading anything in that biography re Wilson's commitment of military forces to Russia. I have just reviewed the index and found one obscure reference to "military intervention in Russia" (p. 590 of hardcover ed.) and George Kennan.

More important, I reviewed the Bibliography and found no reference to George Kennan's "Russia and the West, Under Lenin and Stalin." I don't know what to make of the gross omission by a highly-regarded biographer, but it is clear that an effort has been made to downplay this aspect of Wilson's policy, for reasons that escape me.

Kiza , June 23, 2016 at 1:52 am GMT
@tbraton

Maybe because I was educated in a different country I was very well aware of this item of information. It was not only the US, then most of the Western countries from both sides of WW1, including Britain, France, Italy, then also Czechoslovakia (Austria-Hungary), Japan, Germany and so on, which sent troops to Russia on the side of Belaya Gvardiya fighting the Lenin's Bolsheviks, even whilst WW1 was still ongoing.

They fought with Belaya Gvardiya in Siberia, Ukraine and Crimea (part of Russia, not part of Ukraine until 1953 when given to Ukraine by the Communist leader Nikita Khrushchev).

This is possibly the best reference about this second, less well known, part of WW1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_movement

The US contingent was supposed to support the Siberain Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberian_Army but shipped back without fighting.

Sam Shama , June 23, 2016 at 1:56 am GMT
@tbraton

Fascinating, thank you. Reading more, I find that Wilson was motivated to safeguard almost a billion dollars in armaments and equipment [including railway cars] given to Russia by the U.S in the hopes of Russia prevailing over the Central Powers and thereafter adopting the capitalist model.

Alas the men and hardware [including frozen machine guns] did not hit the right wavelength with the Siberian winter.

Anatoly Karlin , June 23, 2016 at 2:41 am GMT
@Quartermaster

Just ask Khodorkovsky.

Why don't you ask the ECHR while you're at it?

Seraphim , June 23, 2016 at 5:47 am GMT
Many of us are aware of the 'Allied Intervention in the Russian civil war' which occured in the aftermath of the Peace of Brest-Litovsk while the Entante was still at war with Germany. The chaos which ensued as a result of the misguided policies of the HLH (Hindenburg, Ludendorff, Hoffman), especially the 'Napoleonic complex' of Ludendorff compounded by the greedy desires of many petty German 'Fuersten' for crowns in the East, determined the Allies to intervene, motivated by the following considerations:
- prevent the German or Bolshevik capture of Allied material stockpiles in Arkhangelsk
- mount an attack helping the Czechoslovak Legions stranded on the Trans-Siberian Railroad
– resurrect the Eastern Front by defeating the Bolshevik army with help from the Czechoslovak Legions and an expanded anti-Bolshevik force of local citizens and stop the spread of communism and the Bolshevik cause in Russia.

Now, this is news only for graduates of American schools where history is no more taught. The Wikipedia entry ('Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War') would have been sufficient (for beginners) to set the record straight:

"Severely short of troops to spare, the British and French requested that President Wilson provide American soldiers for the campaign. In July 1918, against the advice of the United States Department of War, Wilson agreed to the limited participation of 5,000 United States Army troops in the campaign. This force, which became known as the "American North Russia Expeditionary Force" (a.k.a. the Polar Bear Expedition) were sent to Arkhangelsk while another 8,000 soldiers, organised as the American Expeditionary Force Siberia, were shipped to Vladivostok from the Philippines and from Camp Fremont in California. That same month, the Canadian government agreed to the British government's request to command and provide most of the soldiers for a combined British Empire force, which also included Australian and Indian troops. Some of this force was the Canadian Siberian Expeditionary Force; another part was the North Russia Intervention. A Royal Navy squadron was sent to the Baltic under Rear-Admiral Edwyn Alexander-Sinclair. This force consisted of modern C-class cruisers and V- and W-class destroyers. In December 1918, Sinclair sailed into Estonian and Latvian ports, sending in troops and supplies, and promising to attack the Bolsheviks "as far as my guns can reach". In January 1919, he was succeeded in command by Rear-Admiral Walter Cowan.
The Japanese, concerned about their northern border, sent the largest military force, numbering about 70,000. They desired the establishment of a buffer state in Siberia, and the Imperial Japanese Army General Staff viewed the situation in Russia as an opportunity for settling Japan's "northern problem". The Japanese government was also intensely hostile to communism.
The Italians created the special "Corpo di Spedizione" with Alpini troops sent from Italy and ex-POWs of Italian ethnicity from the former Austro-Hungarian army who were recruited to the Italian Legione Redenta. They were initially based in the Italian Concession in Tientsin and numbered about 2,500.
Romania, Greece, Poland, China, and Serbia also sent contingents in support of the intervention."
All these troops have been involved, in a way or another, in the Russian Civil War, but by 1920 all have been withdrawn. Only the Japanese stayed in the Maritime Provinces of the Russian Far East until 1922 and in northern Sakhalin until 1925.

There is obviously no space here to talk about the 'Treaty of Rapallo' between Russia and Germany of 1922 and of the 'Genoa Conference' held in Genoa in 1922, where "the representatives of 34 countries gathered to discuss global economic problems following World War I. The purpose was to formulate strategies to rebuild central and eastern Europe, particularly Russia, after the war, and also to negotiate a relationship between European capitalist economies, and the new Russian Bolshevik regime". These were signals for the introduction of NEP (New Economic Policy) and the policy of 'concessions' which was, in Lenin's terms " a strategic retreat from socialism".
Anyhow, I think that a BA is a minimum requirement in order to gain a modicum of understanding of these problems. For sure Wikipedia is not sufficient.

tbraton , June 28, 2016 at 3:31 pm GMT
@Kiza

There is no question the involvement of U.S. troops in Russia following the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 is downplayed in the U.S. As I noted, the issue wasn't touched on in my high school history class, and I was surprised to learn of our military involvement in Russia's civil war only when I went to college and bought the small paperback of Kennan's "Russia and the West Under Lenin and Stalin." In fact, I have a one-volume history of the U.S. written by one of the U.S.'s leading historians, Samuel Eliot Morison, who was the highly acclaimed biographer of Christopher Columbus and John Paul Jones and a long-time professor of history at Harvard. He was also the author of the highly acclaimed "History of the United States Naval Operations in World War II," a 15-volume effort. In his "The Oxford History of the American People" (1965, 1122 pages, ending with the 1963 assassination of JFK), he states briefly at p. 878 that "President Wilson went along [with efforts of France and Britain to overthrow the Bolsheviks] to the extent of sending a small American force to Archangel, ostensibly to prevent a cache of military supplies reaching Germany, and participating in a Japanese-directed invasion of Siberia, to see that Japan did not go too far." Rather cryptic reference to a somewhat small military involvement that lasted for more than a year and a half, but, in defense of Morison, his history was a one-volume affair (published by the Oxford University Press) and the American involvement in Russia had no effect on the Russian Revolution, other than to sour the relationship between the new Communist government and the U.S., which did not diplomatically recognize the new regime until FDR became President in 1933.

A. Scott Berg has no such defense. His detailed biography of Wilson runs to 743 pages, and he makes no reference at all to the U.S. military contingent that was sent to Russia in 1918 by Wilson and remained there for more than a year and a half. You would think that Berg could have added a few brief sentences alluding to the military expeditionary force and a brief summary of its impact, but not a word. This from an author who discusses the infamous "Palmer raids" at the end of the Wilson Administration and the bombs which set off those raids. I am just puzzled about the omission and fail to see what agenda is being served, other than it highlights the utter hypocrisy of Wilson with his vaunted "Fourteen Points," which impliedly called for respect of international borders. Wilson was also the hypocrite who won reelection in a close race in 1916 running on a campaign that "he kept us out of war" and the declared war against Germany a month after he was reinaugurated in March 1917.

BilDing , August 2, 2017 at 2:58 am GMT
Alternate title

Benefits of Friends in High Places

Clinton has Congress in a frenzy over a Russian illusion.
Browder has Congress in a frenzy over a Russian illusion.

Is it little wonder that real America has been taken to the cleaners over the past 4 decades?

Robert Magill , August 3, 2017 at 10:00 am GMT

BTW I wonder how many people, including posters here, are aware that the U.S., under President Wilson, sent a military expedition to Russia after the Communist takeover there in 1917 and kept them there for about a year and a half.

Actually this 'invasion' was to help stabilize Russia during the revolution and to block Japan in the far east. Russia and the US had been good friends and allies since we helped Russia during the Crimean War, and with the purchase of Alaska and they had helped us during the US Civil War.
Harry Truman put an end to all that 'good neighbor policy" when he needed a scapegoat to launch the National Security State and prevent another depression. On it goes.

http://robertmagill.wordpress.com

TheJester , August 4, 2017 at 10:38 am GMT
Seems like the entire Browder/Magnitsky hustle is nothing more than Jews protecting Jews in a kind of international crime syndicate. When found out, they even have the network in place to control the narrative about their crimes to the point that trying to hold them accountable quickly morphs into a fundamental violation of their human rights.

"What do you mean you can't rip off a country's assets and hide the loot in offshore accounts? What do you do when you see a $10 bill laying in the street? You take it, of course! What else is a person suppose to do? When opportunity strikes, you make the best of it."

Browder and Magnitshy . How history repeats itself! I recall reading that something similar happened in the Weimar Republic when Germany was stripped of its assets after WWI. Indeed, even then there was an ((( international syndicate ))) in place to control the narrative and protect the shysters.

Don bass , August 4, 2017 at 6:39 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

"""Meaning, Putin gets a healthy cut. If he doesn't get a piece of the action, you will suddenly be found to have evaded taxes, or worse. And, heaven forfend, if you decided to use your wealth to oppose Putin politically, just as Khodorkovsky."""
What evidence do you have for this libellous allegation?? These assertions are made habitually in the western media. However this article on Browder demonstrates who are the parties making such claims and why.

Hibernian , August 5, 2017 at 12:41 am GMT
@Uebersetzer

We're talking about his grandson, an international businessman active in Russia at one time. The WASP grandfather who eventually became CPUSA chief married a Jewish woman and their mathematician son was the international businessman grandson's father.

Try to get your facts straight before you call everybody and his brother a Nazi.

n230099 , August 6, 2017 at 12:03 pm GMT
@Kiza

"The most interesting, previously unknown, detail to me in this article was that Browder's grandfather was the leader of the US Communist Party. "

That's funny. The first thing I thought upon seeing the name and the topic was "oh good grief could it be?'

Kiza , August 10, 2017 at 3:48 am GMT
@Skeptikal

Being English speaking and brought up in the Anglo-world but with good understanding of Russia through Communism, made this Jewish Godfather much more damaging to Russia than the other forced Jewish emigres: Berezovsky, Gusinsky and Khodorovsky.

Browder's ties with Mossad and CIA make him a prototypical Deep-Stater, spreading Anglo-Zionist dominance of the World (Globalism) and getting personally rich in the process. If the Anglo-Zionists manage to bring down Russia (say, kill Putin) then Browder could become the Paul Bremer III of Russia (perhaps titled William Browder I).

Jacques , Website September 10, 2017 at 8:26 am GMT
There a book, a merciless, factual excoriation of the Browder Hoax: The Killing of William Browder: Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception by Alex Krainer

https://www.amazon.com/Killing-William-Browder-Deconstructing-Dangerous-ebook/dp/B074TJ5LCK/

Fran800 , February 9, 2018 at 4:38 am GMT
@NewModelArmy

Earl Browder, born into a Kansas Methodist farm family became the head of the Communist party in the U.S. in the 30′s, probably for idealistic reasons. As a Communist, he became an atheist. He went to Russia and married a Russian Jewish woman. Their son, Felix, raised as a Jew by his mother, became a mathematician. Felix Browder married a Jewish woman and their son is the William Browder, subject of this article. William Browder is thus 3/4 Jewish. His one grandfather, from whom he got his name, was born a Christian gentile, but chucked it up to become a Communist leader. Through marriage to Jewish women, his grandson, William, is a ruthless capitalist Jewish oligarch who contributed to scavenging the decaying body of the former Soviet Union.

Sean , July 18, 2018 at 5:26 am GMT

intensity and the time he was devoting to anti-Russian sanctions in Europe was in no way comparable to the behaviour of a top level international businessman.

The writer does not know much about the business world, does he? Browder is still looking to get paid off, and businessmen can be motivated by vengeance (Warren Buffet included). Anyway, Mr. Browder seems far too focused on his wallet and effective an operator on that account to have been directed by MI6.

There is this myth that secret intelligence agents are more competent than lesser mortals (such as policemen). I like reading memoirs and novels about spys as much as anyone, but rich, tax dodging/philanthropic and litigious people like Browder are the real 007s of this world. I dare say there are a few holes in his story.

AnonFromTN , July 18, 2018 at 2:33 pm GMT
I can only tell Mr. Shamir that if he had stolen as much money as Browder, he'd be untouchable, too. Look at any dollar bill. It says "IN GOD WE TRUST". This is THE God Americans trust in. All the other gods are subject to freedom of religion.
HBM , July 18, 2018 at 3:01 pm GMT
@TheJester

Exactly right. Looting Russia– and later working to destroy it for objecting -- is their YHWH-given right. The Jewish criminality and evil Browder embodies is of so great a magnitude that it's difficult for a decent person to process such a creature.

Svigor , July 18, 2018 at 3:29 pm GMT
Funny, I heard (((Big Media's))) glowing take on Browder the other day and figured he must be a piece of shit. I don't base conclusions on such hunches, of course, so I guess I'll have to read the article and check around.

But it's funny how race-realism, countersemitism, and hatred of (((Big Media))) have such predictive power.

[Jul 18, 2018] US Media is Losing Its Mind Over Trump-Putin Press Conference

Notable quotes:
"... Special to Consortium News ..."
"... was no longer online ..."
"... If you enjoyed this original article please consider making a donation to Consortium News so we can bring you more stories like this one. ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Consortiumnews Volume 24, Number 199 -- –Independent Investigative Journalism Since 1995 -- –July 18, 2018

US Media is Losing Its Mind Over Trump-Putin Press Conference July 16, 2018 • 316 Comments

The media's mania over Trump's Helsinki performance and the so-called Russia-gate scandal reached new depths on Monday, says Joe Lauria

By Joe Lauria
Special to Consortium News

The reaction of the U.S. establishment media and several political leaders to President Donald Trump's press conference after his summit meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday has been stunning.

Writing in The Atlantic , James Fallows said :

" There are exactly two possible explanations for the shameful performance the world witnessed on Monday, from a serving American president.

Either Donald Trump is flat-out an agent of Russian interests -- maybe witting, maybe unwitting, from fear of blackmail, in hope of future deals, out of manly respect for Vladimir Putin, out of gratitude for Russia's help during the election, out of pathetic inability to see beyond his 306 electoral votes. Whatever the exact mixture of motives might be, it doesn't really matter.

Or he is so profoundly ignorant, insecure, and narcissistic that he did not realize that, at every step, he was advancing the line that Putin hoped he would advance, and the line that the American intelligence, defense, and law-enforcement agencies most dreaded.

Conscious tool. Useful idiot. Those are the choices, though both are possibly true, so that the main question is the proportions never before have I seen an American president consistently, repeatedly, publicly, and shockingly advance the interests of another country over those of his own government and people."

As soon as the press conference ended CNN cut to its panel with these words from TV personality Anderson Cooper: "You have been watching perhaps one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president at a summit in front of a Russian leader, surely, that I've ever seen."

David Gergen, who for years has gotten away with portraying himself on TV as an impartial political sage, then told CNN viewers:

" I've never heard an American President talk that way but I think it is especially true that when he's with someone like Putin, who is a thug, a world-class thug, that he sides with him again and again against his own country's interests of his own institutions that he runs, that he's in charge of the federal government, he's in charge of these intelligence agencies, and he basically dismisses them and retreats into this, we've heard it before, but on the international stage to talk about Hillary Clinton's computer server "

" It's embarrassing," interjected Cooper.

" It's embarrassing," agreed Gergen.

Cooper: "Most disgraceful performance by a US president."

White House correspondent Jim Acosta, ostensibly an objective reporter, then gave his opinion: "I think that sums it up nicely. This is the president of the United States essentially taking the word of the Russian president over his own intelligence community. It was astonishing, just astonishing to be in the room with the U.S. president and the Russian president on this critical question of election interference, and to retreat back to these talking points about DNC servers and Hillary Clinton's emails when he had a chance right there in front of the world to tell Vladimir Putin to stay the HELL out of American democracy, and he didn't do it."

In other words Trump should just shut up and not question a questionable indictment, which Acosta, like nearly all the media, treat as a conviction.

The Media's Handlers

The media's handlers were even worse than their assets. Former CIA director John Brennan tweeted : "Donald Trump's press conference performance in Helsinki rises to & exceeds the threshold of 'high crimes & misdemeanors,.' It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump's comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin. Republican Patriots: Where are you???"

Here's where the Republican Patriots are, Brennan: " That's how a press conference sounds when an Asset stands next to his Handler," former RNC Chairman Michael Steele tweeted.

Representative Liz Cheney, the daughter of the former vice president, said on Twitter: " As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I am deeply troubled by President Trump's defense of Putin against the intelligence agencies of the U.S. & his suggestion of moral equivalence between the U.S. and Russia. Russia poses a grave threat to our national security."

All these were reactions to Trump expressing skepticism about the U.S. indictment on Friday of 12 Russian intelligence agents for allegedly interfering in the 2016 U.S. presidential election while he was standing next to Russian President Vladimir Putin at the press conference following their summit meeting in Helsinki.

" I will say this: I don't see any reason why it would be" Russia, Trump said. "I have great confidence in my intelligence people, but I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today."

The indictments, which are only unproven accusations, formally accused 12 members of the GRU, Russian military intelligence, of stealing Democratic Party emails in a hacking operation and giving the materials to WikiLeaks to publish in order to damage the candidacy of Trump's opponent, Hillary Clinton. The indictments were announced on Friday, three days before the summit, with the clear intention of getting Trump to cancel it. He ignored cries from the media and Congress to do so.

Over the weekend Michael Smerconish on CNN actually said the indictments proved that Russia had committed a "terrorist attack" against the United States. This is in line with many pundits who are comparing this indictment, that will most likely never produce any evidence, to 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. The danger inherent in that thinking is clear.

Putin said the allegations are "utter nonsense, just like [Trump] recently mentioned." He added: "The final conclusion in this kind of dispute can only be delivered by a trial, by the court. Not by the executive, by the law enforcement." He could have added not by the media.

Trump reasonably questioned why the FBI never examined the computer servers of the Democratic National Committee to see whether there was a hack and who may have done it. Instead a private company, CrowdStrike, hired by the Democratic Party studied the server and within a day blamed Russia on very dubious grounds.

" Why haven't they taken the server?" Trump asked. "Why was the FBI told to leave the office of the Democratic National Committee? I've been wondering that. I've been asking that for months and months and I've been tweeting it out and calling it out on social media. Where is the server? I want to know, where is the server and what is the server saying?"

But being a poor communicator, Trump then mentioned Clinton's missing emails, allowing the media to conflate the two different servers, and be easily dismissed as Gergen did.

At the press conference, Putin offered to allow American investigators from the team of special counsel Robert Mueller, who put the indictment together, to travel to Russia and take part in interviews with the 12 accused Russian agents. He also offered to set up a joint cyber-security group to examine the evidence and asked that in return Russia be allowed to question persons of interest to Moscow in the United States.

" Let's discuss the specific issues and not use the Russia and U.S. relationship as a loose change for this internal political struggle," Putin said.

On CNN, Christiane Amanpour called Putin's clear offer "obfuscation."

Even if Trump agreed to this reasonable proposal it seems highly unlikely that his Justice Department will go along with it. Examination of whatever evidence they have to back up the indictment is not what the DOJ is after. As I wrote about the indictments in detail on Friday:

" The extremely remote possibility of convictions were not what Mueller was apparently after, but rather the public perception of Russia's guilt resulting from fevered media coverage of what are after all only accusations, presented as though it is established fact. Once that impression is settled into the public consciousness, Mueller's mission would appear to be accomplished."

Still No 'Collusion'

The summit begins. (Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead)

The indictments did not include any members of Trump's campaign team for "colluding" with the alleged Russian hacking effort, which has been a core allegation throughout the two years of the so-called Russia-gate scandal. Those allegations are routinely reported in U.S. media as established fact, though there is still no evidence of collusion.

Trump emphasised that point in the press conference. "There was no collusion at all," he said forcefully. "Everybody knows it."

On this point corporate media has been more deluded than normal as they clutch for straws to prove the collusion theory. As one example of many across the media with the same theme, a New York Times story on Friday , headlined, "Trump Invited the Russians to Hack Clinton. Were They Listening?," said Russia may have absurdly responded to Trump's call at 10:30 a.m. on July 27, 2016 to hack Clinton's private email server because it was "on or about" that day that Russia allegedly first made an attempt to hack Clinton's personal emails, according to the indictment, which makes no connection between the two events.

If Russia is indeed guilty of remotely hacking the emails it would have had no evident need of assistance from anyone on the Trump team, let alone a public call from Trump on national TV to commence the operation.

More importantly, as Twitter handle "Representative Press" pointed out: "Trump's July 27, 2016 call to find the missing 30,000 emails could not be a 'call to hack Clinton's server' because at that point it was no longer online . Long before Trump's statement, Clinton had already turned over her email server to the U.S. Department of Justice." Either the indictment was talking about different servers or it is being intentionally misleading when it says "on or about July 27, 2016, the Conspirators attempted after hours to spearphish for the first time email accounts at a domain hosted by a third party provider and used by Clinton's personal office."

This crucial fact alone, that Clinton had turned over the server in 2015 so that no hack was possible, makes it impossible that Trump's TV call could be seen as collusion. Only a desperate person would see it otherwise.

But there is a simple explanation why establishment journalists are in unison in their dominant Russian narrative: it is career suicide to question it.

As Samuel Johnson said as far back as 1745: "The greatest part of mankind have no other reason for their opinions than that they are in fashion since vanity and credulity cooperate in its favour."

Importance of US-Russia Relations

Trump said the unproven allegation of collusion "has had a negative impact upon the relationship of the two largest nuclear powers in the world. We have 90 percent of nuclear power between the two countries. It's ridiculous. It's ridiculous what's going on with the probe."

The American president said the U.S. has been "foolish" not to attempt dialogue with Russia before, to cooperate on a range of issues.

"As president, I cannot make decisions on foreign policy in a futile effort to appease partisan critics or the media or Democrats who want to do nothing but resist and obstruct," Trump said. "Constructive dialogue between the United States and Russia forwards the opportunity to open new pathways toward peace and stability in our world. I would rather take a political risk in pursuit of peace than to risk peace in pursuit of politics."

This main reason for summits between Russian and American leaders was also ignored: to use diplomacy to reduce dangerous tensions. "I really think the world wants to see us get along," Trump said. "We are the two great nuclear powers. We have 90 percent of the nuclear. And that's not a good thing, it's a bad thing."

Preventing good relations between the two countries appears to be the heart of the matter for U.S. intelligence and their media assets. So Trump was vilified for even trying.

Ignoring the Rest of the Story

Obsessed as they are with the "interference" story, the media virtually ignored the other crucial issues that came up at the summit, such as the Middle East.

Trump sort of thanked Russia for its efforts to defeat ISIS. "When you look at all of the progress that's been made in certain sections with the eradication of ISIS, about 98 percent, 99 percent there, and other things that have taken place that we have done and that, frankly, Russia has helped us with in certain respects," he said.

Trump here is falsely taking credit, as he has before, for defeating ISIS with only some "help" from Russia. In Iraq the U.S. led the way against ISIS coordinating the Iraqi and Kurdish security forces. But in the separate war against ISIS in Syria, Russia, the Syrian Arab Army, Kurdish forces, Iranian troops and Hizbullah militias were almost entirely responsible for ISIS' defeat.

A grand deal? (Photo: Sputnik)

Also on Syria, Trump appeared to endorse what is being reported as a deal between Russia and Israel in which Israel would accept Bashar al-Assad remaining as Syrian president, while Russia would work on Iran to get it to remove its forces away from the northern Golan Heights, which Israel illegally considers its border with Syria.

After a meeting in Moscow last week with Putin, Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he accepted Assad remaining in power.

" President Putin also is helping Israel," Trump said at the press conference. "We both spoke with Bibi Netanyahu. They would like to do certain things with respect to Syria, having to do with the safety of Israel. In that respect, we absolutely would like to work in order to help Israel. Israel will be working with us. So both countries would work jointly."

Trump also said that the U.S. and Russian militaries were coordinating in Syria, but he did not go as far as saying that they had agreed to fight together there, which has been a longstanding proposal of Putin's dating back to September 2015, just before Moscow intervened militarily in the country.

" Our militaries have gotten along probably better than our political leaders for years," Trump said. "Our militaries do get along very well. They do coordinate in Syria and other places."

Trump said Russia and the U.S. should cooperate in humanitarian assistance in Syria.

" If we can do something to help the people of Syria get back into some form of shelter and on a humanitarian basis that's what the word was, a humanitarian basis," he said. "I think both of us would be very interested in doing that."

Putin said he had agreed on Sunday with French President Emmanuel Macron on a joint effort with Europe to deliver humanitarian aid. "On our behalf, we will provide military cargo aircraft to deliver humanitarian cargo. Today, I brought up this issue with President Trump. I think there's plenty of things to look into," Putin said.

Joe Lauria is editor-in-chief of Consortium News and a former correspondent for T he Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe , Sunday Times of London and numerous other newspapers. He can be reached at [email protected] and followed on Twitter @unjoe .

If you enjoyed this original article please consider making a donation to Consortium News so we can bring you more stories like this one.

17563

Tags: Anderson Cooper Benjamin Netanyahu CNN Donald Trump Joe Lauria Media New York Times Robert Mueller Russia Russiagate Vladimir Putin

Post navigation ← Memo to the President Ahead of Monday's Summit Climb Down From the Summit of Hostile Propaganda → 316 comments for "US Media is Losing Its Mind Over Trump-Putin Press Conference"

Show Comments

Gary Weglarz , July 18, 2018 at 1:06 am

I'm really hard pressed to come up with anything to be optimistic about given the dire nature of our current global and national predicaments combined with the bat-sheet crazy nature of our current version of the mass psyche. About the only bright spot I can find is that it is really encouraging to read the overall high quality of the comments here at CN, which suggest that I can look forward to taking part in some wonderful future conversations in "the camps."

Susan Sunflower , July 17, 2018 at 9:36 pm

new Reuters poll: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-voters/majority-of-americans-think-trump-mishandling-russia-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN1K72T1?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter

AnthraxSleuth , July 17, 2018 at 10:15 pm

What an unbelievably slanted poll.

"The Reuters/Ipsos poll gathered responses from 1,011 registered voters throughout the United States, including 453 Republicans and 399 Democrats. The poll has a credibility interval, a measure of precision, of 4 percentage points."

Independents/anaffiliated make up more than 42% of the registered voters currently in the USA.

irina , July 17, 2018 at 11:09 pm

"medium = Social / source = Twitter"

Babyl-on , July 17, 2018 at 9:35 pm

I think we should take heart that they are such a small group – loud yes, they have the corporate press, but it is not a big group and they have already lost the narrative. This has to be the end for them, they have no political support for impeachment after all this screeching articles can't even get introduced mostly the "resistance" isn't even trying – they know they don't have evidence.

The scream these words TREASON and COLLUSION but they are powerless politically to do anything. So a "treasonous" president goes on. Clearly they are at their wits end their heads have actually exploded. The powerful "liberal" cabal which has run Washington for decades is disintegrating before there very eyes. Clinton is the witch – Trump is the water.

A , July 17, 2018 at 11:33 pm

Okay , I get it, I will go down , but I am not going down by the orange shit head. You guys win, you wanted your Cheeto to give us some love, and tax breaks , favorable trade deals, get rid of people like me , be besties with Russia, kill everyone from central America. Cool. You guys win. I hope you are happy , apparently you have achieved what you wanted.

Jessika , July 17, 2018 at 8:45 pm

Thanks, Drew and Realist, i just read Finian Cunningham's essay at Information Clearing House. Yes, this is indeed scary. It does appear a coup is being planned. All the more reason for us to speak up. The thought of Mike Pence is scarier than Trump.

willow , July 17, 2018 at 9:30 pm

I was a Sanders supporter and donor who voted for Trump because he promised diplomacy, whereas Hillary wanted a no-fly zone in Syria, and her proven track record of supporting illegal regime change in Iraq, Honduras, Libya, Ukraine and Syria. She was a faux progressive and ultimate racist in that she has the blood of countless brown people (mostly women and children) on her hands. What is really scary and disheartening is that the pro-WW3 propaganda seems to be working if the reader comments from the NYT and WaPo are accurate gauges of public perception. The verdict of commenters in corporate media websites is unanimous: Trump is a traitor for committing the crime of détente. Consortium news readers are informed because we search truth in alternative media. I hope it's not naďve to believe we are the silent majority and most Americans still possess the common sense and critical thinking skills necessary to see through the hysteria even if they don't venture to sites like Consortium news.

AnthraxSleuth , July 17, 2018 at 10:19 pm

Don't worry yourself too much. The highest rated MSM news shows only garner about 1.2 million viewers. That's far less than 1% of the American population.
The MSM fancy themselves what they have not been in decades; Relevant.

Jessika , July 17, 2018 at 7:44 pm

That was good, mrbt (not enough vowels for me). Yes, we are in a jalopy headed for a cliff. Instead we get a cliffhanger with this Mueller intel fiasco. I misspoke with the bank bailout, of course, it was 2009 just after Obama got into office; he told those banksters, "I'm the only one between you and the pitchforks". Now it seems like we're on a roller coaster ready to jump the track!

mrtmbrnmn , July 17, 2018 at 7:33 pm

This disgraceful and obscene display of pants-wetting by the MSM over the Trump-Putin meeting and press conference was pre-planned and essentially pre-scripted to advance the deep state regime change op against Trump (and ultimately Putin). I was trying to imagine these journalistic malpracticers prepped to embarrass and humiliate Obama in a similar setting by asking questions like: "Mr Obama, which do you prefer, watermelon or chicken bones?"

It is clear beyond doubt that we are helpless passengers in the back seat of the out of control jalopy that is America, barreling helter skelter down the highway bound to hell and total collapse. The Dementedcrats need to get off the crack pipe and the unconscionable CIA thug John Brennan might benefit from a frontal lobotomy to get him to chill out.

irina , July 17, 2018 at 8:32 pm

the best description i've read of this insanity is : 'the MSM is (p-faced) drunk on its own p . . . " with appreciation to the commentor who wrote that !

It sounds like Lisa Page is, unlike Strzok (remember him, from late last week ?) cooperatively providing information which might implicate China as the 'party which got the 30,000 emails'. Perhaps this is what Trump & Putin talked about ? In which case, The Donald's walking back his press conference comments may be only a temporary feint. If true, Lisa will need excellent protection and a new name !

irina , July 17, 2018 at 8:38 pm

Link to above :

https://truepundit.com/fbi-lisa-page-dimes-out-top-fbi-officials-during-classified-house-testimony-bureau-bosses-covered-up-evidence-china-hacked-hillarys-top-secret-emails/

If true, that would make a nice hangover for the MSM !

Jessika , July 17, 2018 at 7:29 pm

Something big may be in the works, as Stephen says. Now Veterans Today says that a move on Iran by the US was discussed at Helsinki, and they think that Putin would capitulate in some sort of trade-off -- what, to get off their backs? Putin is much smarter than that. Zero Hedge just reports that Russia has dumped all their US Treasury bonds, further stating that Russia's close ties to China indicate a trial run on the market preparatory to China dumping their pile, too. What many feel the big event is really another economic meltdown, as nothing was done in the 2008 Obama crisis except bail out the banks, which went right back to their chicanery. The western Deep State always sets up for war to divert attention from internal crisis.

Deniz , July 17, 2018 at 6:59 pm

I get far more concerned when the press, intelligence agencies and various other DC gangsters lavish praise on Trump. Judging by their reactions, it seems likely that Trump must have actually brought us closer to peace.

Jessika , July 17, 2018 at 6:46 pm

Stephen J, excellent verse as usual, "Blame It On Putin". It was reported that "the lights went out" in the White House when Trump did his U-turn on Russian election meddling. Was that supposed to be symbolic of something?

Stephen J. , July 17, 2018 at 7:06 pm

Thanks Jessika. I believe something big is in the works. The powers that be have had things their own way for so long. The corporate media monopoly are their mouthpieces and are barking like dogs in a frenzy in case they lose their bones. The bones being the millions dead from planned wars and blood soaked profits that attained to the corporate cannibals. Enemies are needed to continue the corrupt system. The War Criminals are getting desperate, the gangsters war is just starting. Unfortunately we are all Prisoners of "Democracy"
https://graysinfo.blogspot.com/2017/07/the-prisoners-of-democracy.html

Antiwar7 , July 17, 2018 at 6:22 pm

David Gergen says Trump acts "against his [Trump's] own country's interests of his own institutions [including] these intelligence agencies."

There's the rub, isn't it? The interests of our country and of those institutions: are they the same?

Susan Sunflower , July 17, 2018 at 6:59 pm

Also worth, sorry for broken record but, using Trump's unique "awfulness" as justification for vigilante-style "trial in the press" or manipulated/propagandized "public opinion" there's a deep deep antidemocratic anti-due process or rule-of-law desperation here which has had "liberal" (or "illiberal") precedent we've already seen in "political correctness" and #metoo (emanating from the "progressive camp" often justified by the awfulness / despicable-ness of those they despise.

This is a very very sad devolution (or arguably the unmasking) of the Democratic Party (I vote the latter).

mike k , July 17, 2018 at 6:13 pm

Trump mumbled some sort of half maybe apology about questioning Russian meddling. But he will contradict that apology just as quickly. They are really having trouble pinning this guy down on anything. His enemies want to nail him, but he just keeps moving. For a fat guy, he is pretty nimble.

Jessika , July 17, 2018 at 5:52 pm

Now, Trump says he misspoke and "accepts US intel on Russian election meddling"! I guess he got anothet 'trip to the woodshed', as Skip Scott has often said. James Howard Kunstler is right, it's a "Clusterfuck Nation". Well, the Russians are smart enough never to trust the US.

irina , July 17, 2018 at 9:49 pm

He got the truth out first and for that I have to give him kudos.
He probably knew backtracking and its attendant issues was
Inevitable. Very nice that power went out while he said he misspoke.

as WaPo itself says, "Truth Dies in Darkness".

Drew Hunkins , July 17, 2018 at 5:18 pm

Look, this is getting frightening.

Never in my lifetime have I witnessed a group think/mob mentality like what's occurring over Russiagate and the overriding Russophobia fueling it all. This is washing over virtually all planks of the political spectrum. We just had a damaged and awful president try to do one of the very few things he actually gets right: make rapprochement with Moscow; he was subsequently browbeaten, smeared and viciously attacked by every single mainstream Western media outlet on the planet. Not just news media, but also the entertainment media are completely on board -- Kimmel, Fallon, Colbert, Maddow, etc.

To say one kind word about Putin or the modicum of detente that Trump just unsuccessfully tried to pull off is to be mocked, ridiculed, scoffed at and laughed at by liberal leaning friends, colleagues and acquaintances.

The militarist-corporate propaganda during the run-up to the 2003 Iraq War pales in comparison to this new and scary McCarthyism that has permeated everything.

I'm 47 y.o. and never experienced anything like this.

The liberal intelligentsia who are falling for this and propagating this have some of the hottest places in heII waiting for them.

Deniz , July 17, 2018 at 5:31 pm

If you think the overwhelming majority of the US cares about what the press and politicians think, then I would suggest you spend less time with Democrats. I dont agree with many Republican platforms, but on the reliability of media, they are far more prescient than the Democrats. I wonder if it is because they have more first-hand knowledge than the Democrats because they tend to send their kids to the meat grinder oil, wars more frequently than Democrats.

Drew Hunkins , July 17, 2018 at 5:40 pm

The best thing we have going right now Deniz is the cynical and skeptical attitude of much the hardworking American population.

The Russians certainly aren't the ones who foisted this unconscionable inequality on the U.S. population, nor was it the Russians who caused the American heartland to deteriorate into a wasteland of service sector employment and Oxy dependence. It wasn't Putin who mired recent American college grads in deplorable debt in the range of $30,000 to $400,000, nor was it Putin who demanded that millions of Americans go without adequate healthcare coverage.

It's economic inequality and it's political enablers who are stalking the towns and cities of America, not the Russian military.

John P , July 17, 2018 at 6:37 pm

That is the real problem, so why arn't kids, their parents and the poor out on the streets like those of my generation during the Vietnam war stiring things up. Is it social media which kills the urge to go out and protest and make yourself heard? Get the money and business influence out of modern day politics, Raise hell !

irina , July 17, 2018 at 8:15 pm

There was a DRAFT during the Vietnam war. That made a huge difference.
And, I think we were actually better informed than today's young people.
Bringing the war live into people's living rooms was New Thing back then,
and we paid attention. Now, we are habituated and just tune out bad news,
unless it happens to be a domestic shooting spree or other home turf stuff.

willow , July 17, 2018 at 9:36 pm

Irina below is right. The draft was the difference. People would wake up and engage if we had the draft. We have an economic draft today. It's the only option for poor and lower class kids who will never afford college. It's unfortunate that identity politics doesn't include the socioeconomic bias of targeting of poor kids being used as cannon fodder

irina , July 17, 2018 at 11:12 pm

And moreover, the draft was based on a birthdate lottery.

All in the luck of the draw. (And of course, economic standing
since there were college deferments, etc. etc.)

Realist , July 17, 2018 at 5:49 pm

I'm 71, Drew, and can tell you that the darkest days of the Vietnam War were not as scary. Our power structure has taken McCarthyism as practiced during the Korean Conflict and doubled down on it, directing its kinetics at the office of the presidency. This is as close to a civil war or an actual coup d'etat that I have ever seen, much more divisive and explosive than Nixon and Watergate. Someone claiming authority they do not have may soon make a move against Trump. They've stirred up enough hate by the mob to mask their motives.

Drew Hunkins , July 17, 2018 at 6:02 pm

Thanks for kicking some historical info to this Gen Xer. You make some very interesting (and quite scary) points.

Over at 'Information Clearing House' the always excellent Finian Cunningham has just penned a dynamite and trenchant essay on a possible pending coup against Trump.

Realist , July 17, 2018 at 6:32 pm

Thanks. I always read your spot-on posts at the ICH website, Drew.

Drew Hunkins , July 17, 2018 at 8:36 pm

Thanks Realist.

In solidarity,

Drew Hunkins
Madison, WI

Dave P. , July 17, 2018 at 7:13 pm

Yes. This excellent article by Finian Cunningham really nails it.

Monoloco , July 17, 2018 at 6:49 pm

Trump derangement syndrome is so powerful, it turns liberals into neocons.

KiwiAntz , July 17, 2018 at 7:27 pm

Drew your absolutely correct, this is a unprecedented groupthink & dangerous propaganda on a scale that's never existed before! It's mass hysteria on steroids! And all because of the simple fact that Trump, a man who was never supposed to win the Election over the anointed candidate, crooked Hillary Clinton occurred! Trump must be removed by a slow motion coup by any means possible? Whether it's by undermining his authority or belittering his character. If that doesn't work they will take the JFK removal method? As Stalin stated, death is the solution to all problems, no man, no problem? It's frightening where all this fake Russiagate nonsense is going to lead us, it's almost as if they want to start the next great extinction event by starting WW3 & a Nuclear War with Russia? The arrogance of America & its Deepstate, Propagandist MSM & political system is going to be the death of us all!

Miranda Keefe , July 17, 2018 at 4:58 pm

I guess Trump is now caving into the Deep State and the media.

Maybe he's afraid if he doesn't he'll die of a 'heart attack'- no way they'd do it with a bullet from a patsy- they don't want him to be a martyr.

https://www.facebook.com/CBSNews/videos/10155975560905950/?t=20

Banger , July 17, 2018 at 4:08 pm

I don't know that to say. Whatever was left of the republic is either gone or doomed. If we have a mainstream media that is so nakedly attempting a coup d'état or calling for one with such universal fury based on little evidence and just embroidering one myth over another then I will have to just focus my energy elsewhere. My comrades on most of the left have, despite decades of proof that the media is deeply dishonest and constantly howling for one war after another the only hope is to batten down the hatches and just survive the next decade through local efforts. The sad part is I oppose many of Trump's policies but this isn't about policies–this is about re-invigorating American militarism and imperialism.

I've been around a lot of crises but nothing like this madness.

Stephen J. , July 17, 2018 at 3:53 pm

As usual the "media impostors" and propaganda pushers blame Putin.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -
January 10, 2017
"Blame It" On Putin

There is endless wars and devastation around the world
Western war criminals have their war banners unfurled
Millions dead and many millions uprooted
And the financial system is corrupted and looted
"Blame it" on Putin

The war criminals are free and spreading bloody terror
And their dirty propaganda says Putin is an "aggressor"
These evil plotters of death and destruction
Should be in jail for their abominable actions
But, "Blame it" on Putin.

The American election is won by Donald Trump
Hillary Clinton loses and gets politically dumped
The media is frenzied and foaming at their mouths
They are crying and lying, these corporate louts
They "Blame it" on Putin

Hollywood, too, is getting in on the act
The B.S. merchants are able to twist facts
In their fantasy world of channel changers
They do not approve of a political stranger
They "Blame it" on Putin

The spymasters and their grovelling politicians
All agree that "their democracy" is "lost in transmission"
Their comfortable and controlled system is now in danger
And these powerful parasites are filled with anger
They "Blame it" on Putin

One loose canon talks and babbles of "an act of war"
Could nuclear hell be started by a warmongering whore?
If the madmen of the establishment get their way
Could we all be liquidated in the nuclear fray?
"Blame it" on Putin

There is no doubt that the ruling class
Are all worried about saving their ass
Could there be huge changes and still more coming?
Is the sick and depraved society finally crumbling?
Hey, "Blame it" on Putin
[more info at link below]
http://graysinfo.blogspot.com/2017/01/blame-it-on-putin.html

Susan Sunflower , July 17, 2018 at 3:46 pm

This just in: (NYT headline / top of page)

Trump Backtracks on Russian Meddling
Under Fire, He Says He Accepts U.S. Intelligence Reports

Susan Sunflower , July 17, 2018 at 4:03 pm

and then
Guardian:

Trump flips – then flips again – a day after downplaying Russian interference
President says he supports US intelligence consensus on 2016 election – but then says 'it could be other people also'

(oh, nevermind)

Miranda Keefe , July 17, 2018 at 5:39 pm

I heard him say that. He meant that Russia did it and others could also have been involved.

Will , July 17, 2018 at 3:30 pm

Perhaps New York magazine has it right? "The president isn't a traitor: He's just constitutionally incapable of processing simple information, or prioritizing the national interest above his own egoistic desires." or more maybe New York's earlier article from last week suggesting Trumpkin has been a Russian intelligence asset since 1987 is true.

One thing's for sure: Trumpkin borrowed 100's of millions from shady Russian bankers and other oligarchs, some of whom seem to have laundered a bunch of money through Trump's real estate holdings by buying condos for dollars on the penny. If you foliks don't see that as being at least somewhat on the same level as Dick Cheney holding those un-exercised Halliburton stock options at the time Haliburton was servicing the Iraq invasion

michael , July 17, 2018 at 7:06 pm

Or Hillary exchanging access to the State department for donations

Gregory Herr , July 17, 2018 at 7:40 pm

"Cheney has pursued a political and corporate career to make himself very rich and powerful. He is the personification of a war profiteer who slid through the revolving door connecting the public and private sectors of the defense establishment on two occasions in a career that has served his relentless quest for power and profits."

https://www.commondreams.org/views05/1117-22.htm

Profiting from the death and destruction of a heinous war of aggression that Cheney himself played a key role in instigating can in no way be compared with shady business dealings. I harbour disdain for shady businessmen who cheat property owners, honest contractors or workers. But that type of wrongdoing pales in comparison to the wicked malfeasance of Cheney (or the Bush family for that matter).

Before you "process" any more simple "information" from New York magazine Will, I suggest you take note of the GIGO truism and check yourself for leakage.

Jerry Alatalo , July 17, 2018 at 3:28 pm

It seems President Lenin Moreno of Ecuador might have the perfect solution for his "problem" in London.

Free Julian Assange, Allow him to walk out of the Ecuadorian Embassy with all the proper rights available for any innocent man or woman on Earth.

Immediately upon Mr. Assange's exit, allow William (Bill) Browder to enter and occupy the same room at the Ecuadorian Embassy – whereupon Mr. Browder will reside at that address until July 2024, punished under the identical treatment and conditions as Julian Assange.

"Problem solved" – President Moreno!

David Otness , July 17, 2018 at 2:50 pm

Not much to say but the USA has gone bat-shit cray-cray.
I'm going to be delighted to be excised from many so-called "friends" – friends of mob mentality.
The US media and Intel complex have induced a national psychosis and a likely Constitutional crisis.
Keep yer powder dry.

Susan Sunflower , July 17, 2018 at 3:04 pm

I'd guess half the country considers this -- in the end -- just more partisan theatrics sad to suspect that they actually are the "sane ones" It's ennui versus cynicism as to which is more deadly .

KiwiAntz , July 17, 2018 at 7:47 pm

The scary thing is, Americans second amendment right to bear arms against enemies both domestic & foreign! There's a Edward Abbey saying that a days "a Patriot must always be ready to defend his Country against his Govt"! How long will it be before American citizens reach a tipping point where they recognise that it's enemies are its own domestic leaders & institutions such as the false corporate propagandist MSM & corrupt Politicians in both Republican & Democratic Parties who are undermining & sabotaging their human rights as free people! How long will it be before they say enough's enough we can't stomach this anymore?

Larry Gates , July 17, 2018 at 2:37 pm

In the Odyssey a witch-goddess named Circe turned Odysseus' men into pigs. I think Trump is a modern day sorcerer. In the GOP primaries he turned his more intelligent and more experienced competitors into incoherent cartoon characters. He has done the same to the entire Democratic establishment, and he has done it to the entire mainstream press. There is no effective opposition because politicians and the media have become stark-raving mad – wild swine, just as dangerous as the monster they oppose. We are in America's darkest hour and only half the blame goes to the vulgarian in the White House.

The Ministry of Truth has declared that seeking détente with Russia is an act of treason. And peace is war. Long live Oceania!

jsinton , July 17, 2018 at 6:14 pm

I love it.

BobS , July 17, 2018 at 2:37 pm

The POTUS stood on foreign soil and announced to the world that the leader of one of our historical adversaries was more credible than the US intelligence services.
If it walks like a traitorous duck, and quacks like a traitorous duck, ..

anon , July 17, 2018 at 4:25 pm

Then it is a traitorous troll.

Gregory Herr , July 17, 2018 at 7:47 pm

That's rich! Do please grace us with an explanation as to why "credible" is an adjective aptly applied to either the FBI or the CIA.

Dario Zuddu , July 17, 2018 at 2:33 pm

Excellent piece. Fortunately, there is still someone here retaining sanity.
The only thing I have to add is that, most regrettably, it is not only the media and opportunistic politicians that have lost their minds on this matter.
Large segments of the public appear to have too.
Just take a look at the readers' comments on the very same type of press coverage that is indicted by Mr. Lauria.
They overwhelmingly level the same one sided, unbalanced, shallow, wrong-headed and hysterical attacks on Trump as the press articles they comment – and for the same completely questionable reasons.
Accusations of Trump "surrendering to Putin", being a "traitor" for siding with Russia instead of the US intelligence community (on a totally unproven matter, by the way; and since when the US intelligence community is necessarily more reliable than foreign leaders on these matters?) are the norm in the readers' comment (as well as in the mostly recommended ones).
Incredibly, the same public that lambasted at the intelligence community for its appalling record on Iraq, now does not even want to consider that same community's obvious self interest in Russia-bashing.
In the USA, who stands the most to loose from a possible pacification of foreign relations with the biggest military counterpart, i.e., well, Russia?
This question just rings as troubling now as it did at the onset of the cold war.
Yet, nobody seems to wonder it.

Banger , July 17, 2018 at 4:23 pm

It's just over for those of us on the old left. The Orwellian nature of the media has taken hold and we are powerless against it. We have a population utterly uncurious of facts or history, logic or science, rationality or erudition. It's over. People want to belong, want to share their anger at whatever enemy there is no matter how ludicrous is that threat from the enemy. This is how the oligarch has decided to use Trump's election–first to divide us on tribal grounds and second to invent some enemy that uses all the mythology of Hollywood villains with Russian accents. It's working and it means the oligarchs are unassailable and now are able to control public opinion with a bunch of gestures on the screen and the population will bark on command. Goebbels is, somewhere, cackling with delight.

We will be lucky if we avoid war, fortunately the professional military understands the situation much better than the civilian leaders and have put brakes on our drift into permanent major war everywhere.

Paula Densnow , July 17, 2018 at 2:19 pm

The US media tries to browbeat Trump into saying that he stole the 2016 election with the help of Putin, and when he refuses to do that, they call him a traitor.
We live in an insane asylum.

Will , July 17, 2018 at 3:31 pm

No, trump is clearly a traitor.

Beard681 , July 17, 2018 at 9:07 pm

To who? The military industrial complex? Bill Browder who renounced his citizenship to avoid Taxes? Certainly not average US people for whom Russia poses no credible threat.

Robin Harper , July 17, 2018 at 10:31 pm

Gee, if this is all made up, explain this: (And keep in mind, to get an indictment, you MUST have proof.)

The full list of known indictments and plea deals in Mueller's probe:

Total of indictments (so far) – 35.

1) George Papadopoulos, former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, pleaded guilty in October to making false statements to the FBI.

2) Michael Flynn, Trump's former national security adviser, pleaded guilty in December to making false statements to the FBI.

3) Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign chair, was indicted in October in Washington, DC on charges of conspiracy, money laundering, and false statements -- all related to his work for Ukrainian politicians before he joined the Trump campaign. He's pleaded not guilty on all counts. Then, in February, Mueller filed a new case against him in Virginia, with tax, financial, and bank fraud charges.

4) Rick Gates, a former Trump campaign aide and Manafort's longtime junior business partner, was indicted on similar charges to Manafort. But in February he agreed to a plea deal with Mueller's team, pleading guilty to just one false statements charge and one conspiracy charge.

5-20) 13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies were indicted on conspiracy charges, with some also being accused of identity theft. The charges related to a Russian propaganda effort designed to interfere with the 2016 campaign. The companies involved are the Internet Research Agency, often described as a "Russian troll farm," and two other companies that helped finance it. The Russian nationals indicted include 12 of the agency's employees and its alleged financier, Yevgeny Prigozhin.

21) Richard Pinedo: This California man pleaded guilty to an identity theft charge in connection with the Russian indictments, and has agreed to cooperate with Mueller.

22) Alex van der Zwaan: This London lawyer pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI about his contacts with Rick Gates and another unnamed person based in Ukraine.

23) Konstantin Kilimnik: This longtime business associate of Manafort and Gates, who's currently based in Russia, was charged alongside Manafort with attempting to obstruct justice by tampering with witnesses in Manafort's pending case this year.

24-35) 12 Russian GRU officers: These officers of Russia's military intelligence service were charged with crimes related to the hacking and leaking of leading Democrats' emails in 2016.

Two ex-Trump advisers lied to the FBI about their contacts with Russians:
Michael Flynn Mario Tama/Getty

No, Trump didn't 'steal' the election. The presidency was handed to him – by Putin.

skipNclair , July 17, 2018 at 2:01 pm

The US media lost its mind long ago.

didi , July 17, 2018 at 1:46 pm

What has happened on this trip of President Trump is simple. The axis Washington-EU/NATO has been thrown under the bus., It has been replaced by the axis Washington-Moscow. Whether that is a cause to rejoice remains to be seen. Rejoicing now is wildly premature. Axes can break.
There will be expectations of better lives by the Russian people. What if that does not happen? There have been far more uprisings and revolutions in Russian history than in ours.

lizzie dw , July 17, 2018 at 1:34 pm

To respond to one commenter's suggestion that the US get rid of the electoral college; if one looked at the map of the US on post-election morning, one saw that practically the entire country was coloured red – only the coasts were blue. If we went the "popular vote" route, every president would be elected by the coastal states because that is where most of the people live. The coastal population does not represent the country. In my opinion, since we want to have a representative government we need the electoral college so that each state gets to vote. The people in each state can direct the vote of their state.

didi , July 17, 2018 at 1:51 pm

Sorry Lizzie. The population of all states represent our nation. That is why the vote count, while it does not elect the President and Vice President, is not wholly without meaning. Governing totally against the views of the majority of voters implies that they are wrong and stupid. That is my view. It is also arrogant.

strngr-tgthr , July 17, 2018 at 2:32 pm

Thanks you! The MAJORITY should ALWAYS rule. There should be no acceptions especially for President of the United States. Too few people speak this TRUTH! In this day an age there is no reason to have any system or institutions in place that does not speak for the MAJORITY! Electoral College down!

Susan Sunflower , July 17, 2018 at 2:52 pm

Never heard of the "tyranny of the majority", eh? It's a genuine problem with democracy it's quite possible that many issues would never have reached majority status -- slavery would never have been abolished (so much fuss about a regional "peculiar institutution"),

""The notion of the tyranny of the majority was popularised by the 19th century political thinkers Alexis de Tocqueville (Democracy in America) and John Stuart Mill (On Liberty). It refers to a situation in which the majority enforces its will on a disadvantaged minority through the democratic process.""

The vote of far too many would be rendered irrelevant if there were no proportional representation mechanism in place too much of those disenfranchised by the elimination of the electoral college are already amongst the have-nots of our country, at the further hungry end of income inequality (some do better than other by providing "services" -- vacation homes/destinations and cheap labor -- to the oligarchs. -- those coasts are where the money and jobs are wealth

Susan Sunflower , July 17, 2018 at 3:08 pm

handy maps . Trump won 85% of the land mass .
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/16/us/politics/the-two-americas-of-2016.html

JoeD , July 17, 2018 at 3:12 pm

The electoral college DOES NOT prevent the "tyranny of the majority" because you do not have equal voting. If every state cast the same number of votes then you have equal voting. Because each state has different number of electoral votes based on their populations, candidates can spend their time in a few states while ignoring others.

A national popular vote restores equality

A national popular vote means 3rd party candidates can win because there is no more electoral strategy or asinine argument of red state / blue state.

Realist , July 17, 2018 at 5:12 pm

We've never had such a system, wise guy. The Senate is inherently undemocratic, based on states' rights, not one man one vote. Moreover, judges are not elected but appointed by the executive and confirmed by the legislature. Having the president chosen by the Congress, as is done in all parliamentary systems, would be "tidier" ("fairer?") than the present system, but we've lived with this mess since 1789 and several times have been governed by a "minority president" without the world coming to an end. The rules were no excuse for a coup d'etat then, nor are they now.

michael , July 17, 2018 at 7:22 pm

The Constitution allows Amendments to change with changing times. The vote has been given to free men without property, freed slaves and women. More than 10% of Presidents did not win the plurality of votes. If people truly want their votes to count more, they can work to amend the Constitution, or vote with their feet and move to states where their votes count more.
A much bigger issue is the lack of proportional voting practiced by most real Democracies around the world. Gerrymandering districts can result in the party getting the least votes (of the two) in a state still winning the most representatives. Proportional voting would eliminate this problem, but was outlawed by LBJ in favor of first-past-the-post, winner takes all Districts.

Jim in NH , July 17, 2018 at 3:18 pm

Sorry, Didi, but our federal constitutional republican form of government is neither stupid nor arrogant.

It is a well designed construct that binds together the entire nation, not only the people but the states, into an organic being. The electoral college consciously factors in the fact that we are a union of states, not only a union of "demos" (people). That is why the "New Jersey plan" at the Federal Convention was a high point in your high school civics class. The states are intended to mean something in our federal republican form of government.

Indeed, for those who view the massive growth of our federal government into an imperial hegemon over the past century or so, it is no small coincidence that the balance constructed by the founders was tipped in favor of Washington, and BIG MONEY, by the passage of the 17th Amendment in 1912. That amemdment (for the popular election of Senators instead of their being appointed by state legislatures as written in the constitution) inexorably led to the growth of our imperial state; immediately thereafter came the passage of the Federal Reserve Act, enactment of a the personal income tax to replace import tariff's to fund the federal government, our engagement in WW 1, and increasing alliance with the British Empire that lasts today in our "special relationship", the NATO alliance, and the Anglo American hegemon.

It is also no coincidence that the root source of "Russia-gate" and "Trump Derangement Syndrome" is a sustained effort by British Intelligence, in cahoots with US deep state intelligence that works not for the people of the US but for the Anglo-American empire of western capital centered on Wall Street and the medieval City of London. That is why the "golden shower dossier" was written by a British intelligence officer (Steele), that the basis for the deep state rat Strzok to spy on Trump was an Australian "diplomat" (read spy) Downer, friend of the globalist Clintons, and US deep state intelligence operatives attempted entrapment of Trump campaign supporters (such as by Stefan Halper, an Mi-6 and CIA asset).

The entire attack to undermine the results of the Electoral College triumph of Donald Trump is directed by Anglo-American deep intelligence assets, working for the globalist western capitalist cabal, that cannot permit a mere president to alter their globalist plans; ergo, deep state rats Brennan and 10 hand picked analysts come up with "Russian collusion", unleasigh Mueller (protector of the Whitey Bulger Winter Hill Gang), Strzok, Rosenstein, etc. to to find a basis to neuter, if not impeach, the constitutionally elected President.

Indeed, Pres. Washington foresaw such an eventuality of foreign influence tainting our Republic; see his Farewell Address at Paragraphs 32-39. Indeed, his prescience amazing; read these warnings:

"So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite
nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing
into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without
adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which
is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained,
and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it
gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or
sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of
a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or
foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened
and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of
seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards
a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people
ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of
republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence
to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another
cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on
the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its
tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests."

Indeed, if any nation can be found to be interfering in our domestic politics and seeking to influence the actions of the President, or more precisely to have him removed from power, it's not Russia, its the United Kingdom.

Susan Sunflower , July 17, 2018 at 3:59 pm

Interesting, thank you. I will read up on the 17th. I've blamed the "federalization" of politics for a lot of the apparent decline in citizen interest in Democracy as state and local influence "on people's lives" seemed to have been ceded over to the fed not entirely a bad thing (when it comes to civil rights, equal opportunity and federal funding for stuff states could never afford) still, I think something encouraged a complacent electorate even if the educational values of unions (voting for your interests rather than against) signifies.

backwardsevolution , July 17, 2018 at 4:31 pm

Jim in NH – brilliant post! Thank you. Everybody should read it.

Fred , July 17, 2018 at 10:08 pm

If three million more voted for Hillary than Trump, then majority of voters are wrong and stupid. Good thing the Electoral College saved us from ourselves.

Dave P. , July 18, 2018 at 1:26 am

A very good observation indeed.

BobS , July 17, 2018 at 2:42 pm

" one saw that practically the entire country was coloured red – only the coasts were blue."
Right, "only the coasts". The ones where nearly 50% of the US population live.

irina , July 17, 2018 at 8:09 pm

And that 50% mostly live in big cities which would not survive long
without the rural areas which provide the resources to support them.

Fred , July 17, 2018 at 10:09 pm

They actually think food comes from the supermarket Irina.

irina , July 17, 2018 at 11:17 pm

And you buy it with EBT (Electronic Benefit Transfer) cards.

JoeD , July 17, 2018 at 3:06 pm

The coasts were not blue. Clinton got the west coast. Trump won most of the east: FL, GA, SC, NC and they split Maine. Trump won 30 out of 50 states. There were also less people who voted in 2016 than did in 2012 and in 2008.

So it does not follow Clinton would win if there was a National Popular vote.

Susan Sunflower , July 17, 2018 at 3:22 pm

It's actually worse than it appears on a state-by-state map Clinton won densely populated areas of California, but on a precinct by precinct map https://www.citylab.com/equity/2017/04/is-this-the-ultimate-2016-presidential-election-map/521622/ (note says map was an "amateur effort" but there may be others) ..

Our electoral system(s) have very serious problems voter access (and apathy) and gerrymandering probably top the list, but that "neoliberal income inequality" appears to color/overlay everything

Bob Van Noy , July 17, 2018 at 1:33 pm

Great article and commentary CN, many thanks. There is an excellent comment by Craig Murray at his site and one should not miss the commentary there either

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/07/detente-bad-cold-war-good/#tc-comment-title

Jamie , July 17, 2018 at 1:20 pm

Liberals should be ashamed of themselves. They voted a Russian bribery hag Hillary and now go far-right John Birch in drumming up war with Russia -- just because Trump hurt their feelings by beating Hillary. Sad!

Susan Sunflower , July 17, 2018 at 12:42 pm

couple of polls .
from the Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/07/poll-prri-republican-democratic-voter/565328/
appears to be at 68% for democrats, / 22% for Republicans

from Gallop (H/T Dave Sirota Twitter): https://news.gallup.com/poll/1675/most-important-problem.aspx (bit unsure of unsure of date, looks like May 2018) (doesn't reach full integer)

I was impressed on the eve of 2016 election how ineffective Clinton's constant beating on Obama's drum wrt to Russia-Russia-Russia had been I don't remember the polls but the numbers for "major concern" iirc were low, around maybe 12% (after months and months)

I think the media is drunk on their own piss . I remember feeling frustrated when Gore (who had a better case for "stolen electoin" imho) walked away my suspicion is that on completion of the Mueller inquiry this is going backfire badly . even if Manafort gets decades in prison for money laundering

Anon , July 17, 2018 at 12:22 pm

Debate: Is Trump-Putin Summit a "Danger to America" or Crucial Diplomacy Between Nuclear Powers?

Glenn Greenwald and another thoughtful dude, Joe Cirincione. All substance and strong disagreements without shouting or personal attacks.

Greenwald:

I also think that that last point that Joe made is actually an important one, and it does put people like me into a difficult position, which is, you know, on the one hand, of course I don't think that Donald Trump is well intentioned and is going to have the diplomatic skill to negotiate complicated new agreements of trade and of arms control with very sophisticated regimes like the one in North Korea, or at least complicated regimes in North Korea, or in Russia. On the other hand, as we've been discussing, unfortunately, he's the only game in town. There is nobody else who's saying that we ought to question NATO. Democrats, when you say we ought to question NATO, act like you've committed blasphemy. There is nobody else talking about tariffs and the unfairness of free trade agreements, except for a couple of fringe people within the Democratic Party. Just like this week, when he said that the European Union was a foe, what he said was something that for a long time on the left was really kind of just uncontroversial orthodoxy, which is that of course the European Union is an economic competitor of the U.S., and a lot of what their trade practices are do harm the American worker. We put up barriers against Chinese products entering the U.S., and yet the EU buys them and then sells them into the U.S., indirectly helping China circumvent those barriers in a way that directly harms U.S. workers. This is something that people like Robert Reich and Sherrod Brown and Bernie Sanders have been talking about for a long time. So it does make it very difficult when the only person who's raising these kinds of issues and talking about these things-we need to get along better with Russia and China, we need to reform these old, archaic, destructive institutions-is a megalomaniac, somebody who's completely devoid of any positive human virtue, which is Donald Trump. So it puts you in the position of kind of trying to agree with him, while knowing that he's really not going to be able to do anything about those in a positive way.

On the other hand, I don't feel comfortable being aligned with people like Bill Kristol and David Frum and all of those Bush-era hawks who are now the best friends of MSNBC and the Democratic Party, either, because they're not well intentioned, either. And so, what I try and do is use Donald Trump and the kind of shifting alliances, that we started off by talking about, to open up a lot of the debates, that will remain closed if you only look at U.S. politics through the prism of the 2016 election and Republicans versus Democrats. And I think the most important point is the one that, as I said, Joe made just this week, which is that until the Democratic Party figures out-and this is true not just of Democrats but of center-left parties all throughout Europe and here in Brazil-until they figure out how again to reconnect, not with the highly educated class and the rich and the metropolitan enclaves, but with the working class of these countries, that feel trampled on and ignored, and for that reason are turning to demagogues, we're going to have more Donald Trumps and worse Donald Trumps, not just in the United States, but throughout the world. And that is, for me, the greatest problem that we face politically

Democracy Now

Part One – There's an intro of about 2 min before debate starts:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BK_D4yaTae4

Part Two
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1iq_c3AyGs

TIEDE , July 17, 2018 at 11:03 am

This is the best article I've read on the topic, hands down.

Realist , July 17, 2018 at 11:38 am

No question about that, TIEDE, but considering the pitifully low standards applied to what emanates from the wreckage of the American mass media, Mr. Lauria really didn't have much competition to beat. Of course, no matter how deserved, he will not be winning any Pulitzers, since mediocre groupthink, especially of the warmongering variety, is the new standard of excellence in American letters.

Susan Sunflower , July 17, 2018 at 12:45 pm

As others have noted, it "treason" isn't impeachable, what is? If not now, when?

Should we go off and invade Somalia in retaliation? The anti-Trump/Democrats are undermining their own credibility -- not to mention the press, whose credibility might reach nosedive if they still had much of an audience .

More ridiculous than GWB after 09/11 . which reminds me that Trump keeps reminding me of want-to-share-a-beer-with GWB but stupider and with less "fund of knowledge"

Realist , July 17, 2018 at 5:26 pm

And how are these "others" defining "treason?" Whatever they say it is, and without any evidence that it genuinely occurred? This is not a case of treason, it is a case of attempted mob rule, like the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution. The vile media acts as the bull horn of the seditionists, they show some insurrectionists making a hullabaloo on your television screen, and the coup plotters point and say, "see, it's treason, off with his head!" Meanwhile, your government has been stolen yet again because some insiders didn't like the results.

michael , July 17, 2018 at 7:42 pm

To have treason you must have a declared war and a declared enemy. If you look at the list of people convicted of treason in the US, there are what, a dozen?
The President has broad powers of foreign policy (and immigration) which may be a bad thing, but I applaud Trump's peace overtures to North Korea and Russia as well as Obama's (reviled by many of the same warmongers) deal with Iran. Unfortunately all these deals are President-specific and undercut by un-elected Intelligence agencies with agendas of their own, and politicians taking money from the MIC and foreign lobbyists with war profiteering agendas. No one can believe a President no matter how well meaning and sincere. Clinton abrogated Reagan's deal with Gorbachev, almost destroying Russia, as did Obama reneging on the deal with Gaddafi, destroying Libya. Clearly the best option is to build up a cache of nuclear arms and to use them if necessary to protect sovereignty.

gailstorm , July 17, 2018 at 10:53 am

At least Cooper used a small window – there haven't been many U.S. Russia summits – but Fallows? Uh, 9/11 and the Saudis anyone? More evidence there than Russian collusion and three Presidents – including Trump – have given that a pass.

Jessika , July 17, 2018 at 10:50 am

Treason-schmeason, Dave! You don't seem to know much about the real history of the US government, only the manufactured one of the powers in charge. Pick up a copy of Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznick's book "The Untold History of the United States".

As for the vaunted democracy these talking bobbleheads and puppet politicians go on about, we don't hear them speaking about lobbying, do we, or Citizens United or McCutcheon vs Buckley decisions of the Supreme Court? It's not even the Electoral College that skews the vote and takes democracy out of the citizens' decisions -- it's lobbying, which is legalized fraud and bribery. No, they go on and on about Russia, Russia, Russia, all to make sure folks look somewhere else while they continue the hijacking.

Dave , July 17, 2018 at 10:35 am

What is amazing is how you and so many GOP are actually defending Russia! This was treason!

Deniz , July 17, 2018 at 10:53 am

What is amazing is the extent that the Democrats are lied to, and the extent that they believe those lies. I am awestruck by the complete and utter brainwashing of a democratic, educated country by the CIA. Getting Republicans, who are inclined to think negatively of foreigners is one thing, but Liberal Democrats, who profess to believe in education and equality becoming the brown shirts, it never occurred to me that was possible.

By the way, i am speaking as a former Democrat, Obama voter.

gailstorm , July 17, 2018 at 10:58 am

Yes, it is quite frightening. I think Trump is dangerously inept but reading the intelligence report on Russia released Jan., 2017 was the most frightened I have ever been as an American. It provided no evidence (apparently keeping things top secret is more important than alleged election tampering which should give cause to thought right there) and instead laid out a game plan for attacking dissenters of U.S. foreign policy.

Realist , July 17, 2018 at 11:18 am

Maybe it's just wishful thinking, because I am one too, but it seems the country must be full of former Democrats (and thoroughly disillusioned Obama voters), or at least we should be if we want to survive over the long term. Hillary was just another pack of lies (and threatened violence) too far, which is why she lost. Had NOTHING to do with Russians hacking elections, influencing the vote or stealing our democracy. That is simply the revisionist bullshit in the aftermath of her self-inflicted debacle, as she persists in dragging down the party, the country and maybe the world out of self-centered petulance.

Realist , July 17, 2018 at 11:24 am

Unless you are trying to be sarcastic, Dave, you added an extraneous letter to the word you should really want. What Mr. Lauria has written here is pure "reason," not "treason." Go back and consider all the relevant issues again, this time accurately.

Daniel , July 17, 2018 at 1:12 pm

I guess Dave forgot that our intelligence agencies have lied us into war in the past.

Realist , July 17, 2018 at 5:29 pm

And YOU are prosecuting Russia on what EVIDENCE? None! That is madness and the ticket to war. You are just the sort of pawn to make Goebbels tremble with delight, Dave.

Samuel , July 18, 2018 at 12:34 am

I am not American but like so many out there, am concerned by what is going on in your once beautiful country. It amazes to realize that people have chosen to bury truth and reason for hatred's sake. How can one hope to build a secure, prosperous democracy based on a fraudulent lie? If one can pick a leaf from the Iraqi war it is that one should never believe unquestioningly everything that comes from the intelligence community. That deception resulted in perhaps millions dead. This time round it might result in billions dead including Americans. Is that what people like Dave want? Could this be a secret conspiracy to bring destruction to the entire universe? To what ends?

David G , July 17, 2018 at 10:00 am

Trump's actual treason:
-- turning environmental policy over to the biggest polluters
-- turning financial regulation over to parasitic elites
-- turning education policy over to anti-public, pro-charter grifters
-- turning the FCC over to the big telecoms
-- turning the Iran-nuke deal over to Netanyahu

What gets Trump called a traitor by the Beltway blob:
-- wanting to talk with Russia, and holding a Soviet/Russia summit just like every president since FDR

Wotta country!

Karen , July 17, 2018 at 11:06 am

Exactly!

BrianS , July 17, 2018 at 7:54 pm

Don't relish the me too, or "same here" moniker, but: Exactly!

mike k , July 17, 2018 at 9:39 am

The enemies of Peace, having failed to prevent the Putin/Trump summit, are now busy saying that it was a disaster, and that it was meaningless – two seemingly discordant observations. The real religion of America is WAR. Anything that smacks of peace is Heresy!

David G , July 17, 2018 at 10:08 am

"The stories of how North Korea is now violating an imaginary pledge by Kim to Trump in Singapore are even more outrageous, because big media had previously peddled the opposite line: that Kim at the Singapore Summit made no firm commitment to give up his nuclear weapons and that the 'agreement' in Singapore was the weakest of any thus far."

-- Gareth Porter

https://consortiumnews.com/2018/07/13/the-medias-brazen-dishonesty-about-north-korean-nuclear-violations/

Realist , July 17, 2018 at 11:02 am

Yeah. The lunatics would have the world believe that Trump was a cowardly traitor because he didn't i) berate President Putin to his face for rigging the election in his favor (as did the impertinent network goon Chris Wallace whom Putin totally pwned, though absolutely unbeknownst to the American jingoist corp) and ii) summarily declare war on the Russian Federation to cap everyone's day of fun and games. Insults and war seem to be what the imbeciles so passionately want. I wish I could give them their suicidal war that didn't involve me, my relatives, friends and other innocent bystanders, but that's not how it works and they will eagerly take us all down if given the chance. We are seeing war fever sweep across a crazed nation led astray by the worst demagogues to come down the pike since the "Greatest Generation" got an invite from Uncle Sam to Hitler's big dance. Everybody is a flag waving blood-lusting maniac, from the corporate boardrooms, to the residue of what is left skulking around the fake newsrooms, to the cocky stand-up comedians now inhabiting every late night channel spewing trash and attitude without having the first clue. Must be as invigorating as sucking in the cordite-perfumed air of Berlin circa 1939. The pity is that this time the glorious experience will be so short once the rockets are launched. Almost seems a waste to squander the experience on a bunch of lame brains who probably assume they can get their ticket price back if they don't fully enjoy the show.

Dave P. , July 17, 2018 at 1:35 pm

Realist, As always, your comments are stunningly accurate, and have literary flavor as well. It is really getting there as you have described.

As Gore Vidal wrote long ago, this brainwashing started long time ago during the nineteenth century when they started inoculating the innocent American population against socialism and all that, the ideas which were sweeping across Europe in that century. Here we are now, it is almost a crazed Nation. My wife reads L.A. Times religiously and being a Hillary fan has been watching CNN, MSNBC, Judy Woodruff and other channels like these.

It is not going to end up pretty, the atmosphere is frightening.

Doran Zeigler , July 17, 2018 at 9:32 am

I consider my politics as beyond progressive, and I am definitely not a Trump cheerleader, but I must say that this article by Consortium News is by far the most balanced and fair article I have read on the Trump/Putin press conference. Did the Russians hack Clinton's emails? Most likely. Were the hacks responsible for Clinton's defeat -- not on your life. Hillary offered nothing other than the same old tired rhetoric and hostilities toward Russia. She basically defeated herself.

The fact that Clinton won the popular vote by three million should dispel any notion that the Russian hacks were effective. What this does say is that we should get rid of the antiquated and unfair Electoral College. The press conference was not the venue to grill or attempt to embarrass Putin, besides, Putin could hurl those same accusations at the US for not only interfering in the Ukraine election, but also contributing millions of dollars to it. Putin, if he wanted, could point to NATO creeping up to Russian borders when NATO had promised years ago not to go beyond unified Germany. The Russians have a multitude of complaints, but are more diplomatic than the provocative Americans and would rather not solve these problems in the press.

Is Trump a bumbler -- no doubt. The conference was not the place to air America's dirty laundry or bring up his usual complaints. All of this hoopla is a dog and pony show, a theatrical media event to distract the American people from their real problems like a collapsing economy made worse by Trump's tariffs, like the bloated military budget, the horrific income inequality, the rise of poverty, and an endless stream of worsening problems of which neither party has a solution. It is the old sleight of the hand trick -- watch the hand I wave in front of you face, but pay no attention to the hand that is stealing you blind.

I am at least happy to see a media outlet that has broken from the pack of running lemmings that are not heading for a cliff, but are running in a small circle.

Daniel , July 17, 2018 at 1:16 pm

Where is the evidence that Russia, rather than an insider like Seth Rich, released the emails?

Assange has all but verbally confirmed it was Seth Rich, not Russia.

Zinny , July 17, 2018 at 1:44 pm

Begs the question; Why doesn't the NSA either confirm or deny the download?

michael , July 17, 2018 at 7:50 pm

Why doesn't Mueller offer Assange immunity to testify? Sounds like Mueller may offer the Podestas (Manafort's partners in crime in the Ukraine) immunity to testify against Manafort.

TragiCom , July 17, 2018 at 9:28 am

You'd be forgiven if you thought Brennan's rant was an episode from 'Who is America'!!

Brennan & co. behaving absolutely like unaccountable gangsters. Very dangerous gangsters. Nuclear armed gangsters.

Herman , July 17, 2018 at 9:25 am

"The indictments, which are only unproven accusations, formally accused 12 members of the GRU, Russian military intelligence, of stealing Democratic Party emails in a hacking operation and giving the materials to WikiLeaks to publish in order to damage the candidacy of Trump's opponent, Hillary Clinton. The indictments were announced on Friday, three days before the summit, with the clear intention of getting Trump to cancel it. He ignored cries from the media and Congress to do so."

The most blatant and desperate effort to date to sabotage détente, any effort to cooperate on crucial issues. The media and its sources are hysterical but scary as hell. Using words like treason without a peep from the media or anyone in Washington is also scary as hell.

Didn't watch much of the news but curious about CNN, turned it on to watch Blitzer and Rand Paul exchange. Last question do you trust our security folks or Putin. The patriots versus the devil. Rand Paul ignored it and earlier pointed to our less than Simon pure history of trying to meddle in elections. Hell we ran the campaign of the greatest thief in Russian history, Yeltsin.

Bottom line, folks will do anything to stop the President's efforts to improve relations with Russia. It began before the inauguration and has not let up since.

There is reason to use the word treason but it is not Trump's.

Nancy , July 17, 2018 at 11:12 am

It's a bizarre world when Donald Trump is actually the voice of reason in the USA. The corporate media (including our "public" networks) are running around with their hair on fire at the thought of the two nuclear nations having a rational relationship. Why can't the public see the insanity of what's going on?

michael , July 17, 2018 at 7:53 pm

Sedition is the more accurate word for those in the Intelligence agencies seeking a soft coup.

richard vajs , July 17, 2018 at 8:54 am

The US Media lost its mind about two years ago. After all this time they are still trying to change the 2016 election. It was plain then – a dirt-bag vs. a fool. The US Media had a dog in that fight – the dirt-bag. What is driving them insane is that the "fool" has survived their best efforts to destroy him – should have been easy, but it is not. So the insane manipulators are going for the throat now – TREASON. It is all ridiculous – America has deep economic problems that need to be addressed, namely the terminal income inequality that exists. Killing the fool and re-elevating the dirt-bag will accomplish nothing but give the U S Media and the elites they represent another fifteen minute stroll on the decks of the Titanic

Charron , July 17, 2018 at 8:24 am

The corporate press has been shocked that President Trump would not believe the findings of his own intelligence. Never once has anyone in the Corporate press ever noted that out intelligence sources, the CIA in particular lied when they said Iraq had WMDS. It was a terrible lie. And even if you prefer to believe that the intelligence community had merely made a mistake, our invasion cost us over 3trillion dollars, cost thousands of American soldiers their lives, and ended up causing the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians, and has ignited the middle east, resulting in the rise of ISIS. But no one in the corporate press sees fit to even mention the fact that the CIA claimed were a "slam dunk." Nor has anyone in the corporate press mentioned the fact that James Come, when he was in the FBI, who headed up the Anthrax investigation fingered the wrong man, though he had said when questioned if he had the right man, said he was absolutely certain that Hatfiield was the man who spread the Anthrax. The government settled the false charges against Hatfiled for 5.82 million, as it turned out a fellow named ivans. P.S. Robert Mueller was the head of the FBI during most of the investigation. And let me make this clear, I also think Trump is a scoundrel, but the members of our corporate press are scoundrels too.

gailstorm , July 17, 2018 at 11:09 am

That the parroted information that got us into Iraq was a lie was widely reported and the intelligence debunked in independent media at the time. There was no mistake. The information was out there but went ignored by the mainstream media. But it goes back further. Yugoslavia, the first Gulf War erroneous reporting on such issues has been consistent at CNN.

AnthraxSleuth , July 17, 2018 at 3:18 pm

You could not be more wrong about the Anthrax.
Comey and co. ignored a material witness in that case (me) that caught Hatfill snooping around my house in November of 2001. Approx. a month and a half after I received an anthrax letter. Mr Comey's Anthrax investigation was no such thing. It was just like Hillary's email investigation. It was a "matter" not an investigation.
An investigation would have included having agents pay a visit to the man (me) that gave them Hatfill's last name 7 months before his name became public. I was able to do that b/c I when I caught him snooping around my house he was arrogant enough to wear his army jacket. Guess what is on your army jacket? Your last name.
MR. Comey's Anthrax matter also ignored when I informed the FBI that Ottillie Lundgren and Cathy Nugyen had posted on the same internet message board at the same time and to the same article that I did.
Mr. Comey and Mr. Mueller lied then and are lying now.

For kicks and giggles you can hear Hatfill admit that he was in North Carolina at the time I caught him snooping around my house in NC here .
https://youtu.be/fSfcIh1WCdg?t=1640

Mike , July 17, 2018 at 8:01 am

"The queen of diamonds the queen of diamonds"

padre , July 17, 2018 at 7:41 am

You ain't seen nothing yet, wait till your allies come tot their senses!

Alcuin , July 17, 2018 at 7:38 am

Who is Bill Browder and what was his role in the election and the new cold war? A very incomplete answer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgPQZCkkMZo (38:00-48:00)

Alcuin , July 17, 2018 at 12:58 pm

Well now I feel silly. I just saw the ZeroHedge piece and understand that Robert Parry wrote often about Browder, so presumably most visitors of this site are familiar with the name. I'll have to look for those articles. Is Browder in the same league as Soros?

Alcuin , July 17, 2018 at 1:25 pm

Webb: "Trump and Putin are closing in on this Brennan/Browder gang; that's why you had that incredible reaction from Brennan "

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjvVeS_vPQw

Alcuin , July 17, 2018 at 1:32 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRFy-hoFsck

Alcuin , July 17, 2018 at 6:46 am

Stephen Cohen: Relations between US and Russia more dangerous than ever before, including during Cuba Crisis. (!!)

(starting ca. 5:00) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0UiEYK7Es4

Wendi , July 17, 2018 at 3:47 am

Ditto what (almost) everyone else says.

Putin tried to make the point that private citizens are not the state in a country. A private citizen doesn't speak official government words.
Russian billionaires perhaps poured money into election campaigns. If so, the head of state is not to blame, nor is the crime done by authority of the government.
Putin said Browder evaded Russian taxes and laundered $1.2 bn into USA, and moved one-third = $400 mn to Clinton's campaign.
Netted him $800 mn. With one-eighth of that Browder bribed Congress to enact Magnitsky (sp) proclamation to spur sanctions.

Russia filed criminal warrants with US under the 1999 treaty (Putin cited) to question Browder and bring charges; unlawfully ignoring them, US violated treaty.

Browder money 'meddling' in 2016 campaigns is NOT 'Putin dunnit' and NOT 'Kremlin dunnit' and NOT 'Russia dunnit.' Only truthfully, 'Russian Browder dunnit.'

In reflection, is Warren Buffett the US Gov't or are his actions the USG acting? Whatabout Bezos, is he USG Authority?; he owns the WashPost. Sulzberger, Mercers, Kochs, Murdoch(!), frickin Bill Kristol, Rash Lamebrain, Bloomberg, Bill Gates fer gawdsakes -- are they 'America' or 'the President/Administration?'
Is what's good for Mary Barra's security good for our National Security? No, no, and see this:
http://www.businessinsider.com/sun-valley-conference-2018-attendees-photos-2018-7#youtube-ceo-susan-wojcicki-is-already-decked-out-in-a-sun-valley-2018-hat-2

Trump's right for peace, but deplorable (almost) every other way.

If he did 'collude and conspire' that seems the least of his crimes. Impeach him for being morally unfit. Cripes, he was named in Florida court indictments as co-defendant against charges of rape and abuse of 13- and 14-yo girls; his partner Jeffrey Epstein was convicted and did time. Forget Russia, Trump's is a sex pervert, racist, and fascist -- unfit for office.
https://www.justice-integrity.org/1445-welcome-to-waterbury-the-city-that-holds-secrets-that-could-bring-down-trump

No link but find July 10 item at ClubOrlov.com titled, Taking Refuge in Insanity. It may be solace for Joe, in a way, and moreover a general understanding of media cohort insanity.
If understanding is possible.

And MOST I stopped to say Thank You, thank you Joe Lauria. Your work brought me deep relief and it's refreshing.
_____

PS, I predict the 12 indicted Russians do get their day in US courtroom to defend themselves with lawyers rightfully allowed to question (Mueller's) prosecution witnesses and testimony, and to present defense , and (Mueller's) prosecution loses there.

PPS, any rich moneybags domestic or foreign who aimed to spend in 2016 to hurt Hillary or help Donald be elected,
put all the money into Bernie's campaign: split the left vote and the rightist candidate skulks into office. Vice versa, Dems in 2020 may prop up a Republican candidate on the left of Trump; split the R's vote between soft and hard rightwingers.

exiled off mainstreet , July 17, 2018 at 2:25 am

Who are the traitors? Those who seek war with a nuclear power or those who wish to solve the problems. What about Browder's $400,000,000 to the Clinton campaign. Putin wouldn't make such a statement if there were nothing to back it up, though Mueller is willing to lay unsubstantiated charges which go against proven evidence that the DNC leak was from a thumb drive, not internet transmission. In any event, why is it so bad that the crimes of the DNC were revealed? I guess the truth is dangerous to the yankee form of "managed democracy."

Alcuin , July 17, 2018 at 2:10 am

I don't know if it's true or not, but I once read that Nicholas II actually ordered the de-mobilization of the Russian army on the eve of WWI, but that his order was ignored by his subordinates who were eager for war. Trump in his interview with Hannity implies at one point that he doesn't have full control over the military -- that the belligerent rhetoric has been having practical and dangerous consequences. Frightening. Starting at ca. min. 5. https://youtu.be/dRMW4knpiUo

Zhu Ba Jie , July 17, 2018 at 1:22 am

Just for sh*ts & giggles, try listening to prophecy preachers like Bro. Stair at http://www.overcomerministry.org (Do NOT belive them!) Such folks have radically different assumptions. Listening will clear your intellectual pallette, so to say.

David G , July 17, 2018 at 1:11 am

Others may not feel the connection strongly, but watching today's (yesterday's now) media meltdown flashed me back to the day of Colin Powell's Iraqi WMD presentation to the U.N.

I watched that live, and even at the time – before the specific fabrications were exposed – it was such a self-evidently lame effort that I was genuinely surprised and confused when all the media people instantly hailed the its supposedly irresistible power in making the case for the coming war. And it's not like I went into the day with such a high opinion of the corporate media.

As with Trump in Helsinki, it was clear the media was activating a pre-arranged narrative (approval then, opprobrium now) rather than genuinely reacting to what they had seen and heard.

Jared , July 17, 2018 at 6:48 am

That is an excellent assesment.
That is the dumbfound aspect the blatantly preconceived and coordinated attack on the public dialog.
I feel certain the media is being required to sacrifice its reputation for the purpose of distracting the public from some issue. I dont thing the anderson coopers realise that this is the purpose they belive they are simply acting as political assasins of the enemy.
Maybe is niave of me but is it possible this is simply to defray discussion of dnc communications and dnc conspiring by which they pretty much destroyed the democratic brand? Of course there are also the globalists concern with nationalism and populism and mic with concern fear of outbreak of peace.

gailstorm , July 17, 2018 at 11:23 am

The average journalist, mostly print but even regional TV, statistically makes less money than school teachers. It's quite different at the national TV level. They are paid ridiculously well and maybe coincidentally (maybe not) removed from the ground work among the masses. The system has rewarded them so there is natural bias toward the status quo (something that exists to a degree in objective journalism to begin with). They likely aren't aware but they are hired and keep their jobs based on questions they are not likely to ask. It's corporate America. Just as in low level administrative job hiring at large companies, blandness and safe get the jobs.

Chumpsky , July 16, 2018 at 11:23 pm

"Constructive dialogue between the United States and Russia forwards the opportunity to open new pathways toward peace and stability in our world. I would rather take a political risk in pursuit of peace than to risk peace in pursuit of politics."

A page taken out of JFK's playbook.

No wonder the democrats/MSM/Deep State are so disturbed and ready to shoot the messenger. He's encroaching on their sanctified turf!

Jean , July 16, 2018 at 11:43 pm

Actually they now work for those who killed JFK

The ironies never end

David G , July 17, 2018 at 12:25 am

The full Trump quote, as it appears above:

"As president, I cannot make decisions on foreign policy in a futile effort to appease partisan critics or the media or Democrats who want to do nothing but resist and obstruct Constructive dialogue between the United States and Russia forwards the opportunity to open new pathways toward peace and stability in our world. I would rather take a political risk in pursuit of peace than to risk peace in pursuit of politics."

Question for those who have seen the video: were these prepared remarks, or were they spontaneous?

I appreciate them either way, but if Trump crafted those lines on the fly I really might have to give the cheeto-faced, ferret-wearing shitgibbon (thank you, Scotland!) a fresh look.

Nora De Groote , July 17, 2018 at 3:44 am

I was thinking the exact same thing when reading that quote. That doesn't seem like his rhetoric at all. The "good thing bad thing" is where you have his level of "eloquence" again. Regardless, even if he had to memorize the statement beforehand, he still scored in my book.

Vivian O'Blivion , July 17, 2018 at 7:10 am

"cheeto-faced, ferret-wearing, shitgibbon" as a Scotsman I can only apologise for my compatriots sickeningly sycophantic language. We are normally less diplomatic in our appraisals. In Scotland, if you hear the word "f**k", it's just to let you know a noun is coming.

Zim , July 17, 2018 at 9:00 am

It's hard to believe that statement came out of Trumps mouth. But I believe it to be spot on.

Tom Van Meurs , July 17, 2018 at 2:38 am

To Chumpsky : A very courageous statement of Trump! He is no fool . You can't tell a bonk from its cover,

David G , July 16, 2018 at 11:12 pm

Lauria: "The media's handlers were even worse than their assets."

Zing! Props to you, Joe.

David G , July 16, 2018 at 11:00 pm

I haven't read the article or the comments yet, but I want to chime in now:

I've been watching MSNBC on and off all day, and the summit has clearly caused their brains (already in parlous condition) to completely liquefy.

"Treason! Worse than Watergate *and* 9/11!!"

Demented.

tom , July 17, 2018 at 10:07 am

+1

Lois Gagnon , July 16, 2018 at 10:38 pm

Once again, the hypocrisy of the media is on full display. Every president including this one pays total fealty to the criminal state of Israel which we know has interfered in the US political process, not to mention sinking a US naval vessel. But heaven forbid there be diplomatic talks with Putin who has bent over backwards to accommodate the US when he can. So far all he's gotten is sand kicked in his face.

The behavior of the media and its fellow juvenile delinquents in Washington are an embarrassment. They are without realizing it, making Trump look presidential. You can't make this sh*t up.

mike k , July 16, 2018 at 10:35 pm

The Evil Monsters destroying our world with their greed and violence are being flushed into the open. But will the brainwashed masses be able to see this? That is the crucial test that humanity faces at this time. The Rulers will go all out to spin this in their favor, and if that fails, they will probably try to assassinate this dangerous man, President Donald Trump.

Joe Tedesky , July 16, 2018 at 10:33 pm

Meanwhile, while everyone is focused on Trump and Putin's summit, the real power of collusion is hard at work.

https://ahtribune.com/us/israelgate/2369-useful-idiot-trump.html

I'm posting this, because while it's appropriate we talk at length about the disgraceful reception Trump got for his trying to wage peace, we should not lose sight to what country is using the U.S, as it's useful idiot.

Besides that, an article such as what Phil Giradi wrote should not go unnoticed thank you once again MSM for being the jerks you are. Did the MSM ever hear of the word 'reporting'? Thank you Joe Lauria & the Parry family for being here when we need you the most. I don't know what I'd do without the Consortium. Hey kudos to you too Robert Parry, your still number one with me.

Joe Tedesky , July 17, 2018 at 9:14 am

Moonofalabama has the strategy right.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/07/helsinki-talks-how-trump-tries-to-rebalance-the-global-triangle.html#more

Joe Tedesky , July 17, 2018 at 9:17 am

Surprisingly Professor Coke, says this

https://www.juancole.com/2018/07/shocked-bromance-netanyahu.html

Howard Mettee , July 16, 2018 at 10:09 pm

Thank you Joe,

For trying to restore a note of sanity and balance in the crucible of journalistic/political dialogue between Russia and the US centers of power, where we sense the truth will be lost in white hot bombast, and the accepted narrative of reality will be decided by the heads pushing the correct emotional buttons to fit their nationalistic needs, and their needs for continued employment. Who can forget the last time all 17 intelligence services were of one mind on weapons of mass destruction – that turned out to be nonexistent! Let's hope we can catch our breath before we trip into a patriotic war that destroys civilization.

John P , July 16, 2018 at 11:20 pm

Excuse me, but the intelligence service was turned upside down by Bush and his team inserting their own officials to sensor what was released. The Agencies were very upset that the truth wasn't coming out, and you had the Valerie Plame incident also.
From Slate: "Trump and Putin Met in Helsinki's Hall of Mirrors. Here Are the Highlights." ends with the following:
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- –
On a related note, Rob Goldstone, the British publicist who set up that Trump Tower meeting by promising Trump's son that it was "part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump," just tweeted that Putin had lied earlier in the day when he said he did not know that Trump would be in Moscow for the 2013 Miss Universe pageant.
Rob Goldstone @GoldstoneRob
President Putin just stated that he had no idea Donald Trump was in Moscow in 2013. I know for sure that he did and tell the full story in my soon to be released book "Pop Stars, Pageants & Presidents: How an Email Trumped My Life"
1:16 PM – Jul 16, 2018
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -
There may not have been collusion but I think we can say there probably was interference, voting machines and misinformation spread by agents throughout the social communications media of today. And Putin did admit late, that he was for Trump not Hillary.

If there was funding from Russia to the Democrats as some say, and Putin is truthful that he preferred Trump then why did they give money to the Democrats? Was it to designed to undermine Hillary through its exposure.

Others complain about the timing of the 12 Russian agents, but that was no different from the timing of the Hillary email story release shortly before the election.

Zhu Ba Jie , July 17, 2018 at 1:44 am

"Putin Stole the Election" is fantasy fiction, just like "Obama is a Kenyan" was.

Typingperson , July 17, 2018 at 1:46 am

So you're OK with Hillary using an illegal, off-the-books email server to do pay-to-play arms deals with shitty countries like Saudi Arabia–that gave millions of $$ to Clinton Foundation in return?

If lawfully using a govt server, Hillary"s emails would be subject to FOIA petitions. By USA citizen taxpayers and reporters. Her emails as Sec of State are the property of the American people, who paid her salary. That's what people still don't get.

She used a private server to keep secret the illegal, pay-to-play arms deals–in return for payola bucks to Clinton Foundation.

And Obama turned a blind eye for 4 years. His specialty: Suck-up talking while turning a blind eye.

To Hillary"s incompetence and murderous corruption, to his weekly drone-murders, and to accelerated deportation of innocent immigrants–and ICE separating parents from kids.

While starting 5 new wars on top of Iraq and Afghanistan–including ongoing genocide of Yemen.

Obama was a good boy for the deep state / war profiteers. And he collected his $60M "book contract." Bribe.

Bill , July 17, 2018 at 3:59 pm

"So you're OK with Hillary using an illegal, off-the-books email server to do pay-to-play arms deals with shitty countries like Saudi Arabia–that gave millions of $$ to Clinton Foundation in return?"

How is that different from Trumpkin or Bush doing much the same thing?

Tony Frede , July 17, 2018 at 1:50 am

Maybe it doesn't make sense because Russia never really worked for either side.

Ron Johnson , July 17, 2018 at 6:48 am

Tracing who, exactly, did the hacking is always difficult because the evidence left behind is usually impossible to trace. In the case of the hacking or attempted hacking of certain states' data, the only evidence that it was the Russians came from Russian language characters in the code. Slam dunk, right? Well no, since our CIA/NSA admitted to using exactly such techniques to misdirect researchers away from their own hacking.

If you read deeper into the story of how the Russians funded Clinton, you'll find that it was not the Russian government. Putin pointed out that the money was made 'illegally' in Russia and sent out of the country 'illegally', ending up in Clinton's campaign.

There are a number of differences between the indictments of the Russians and the release of information in the Hillary e-mail investigation. First, there is no chance the Russians will ever end up in a U.S. court so it is an indictment with no future. Second, Comey, a supporter of Hillary, made the announcement and subsequently cleared her, probably to save his own career because the field office that was doing the investigating was about to go public with his dereliction of duty in the Clinton investigation. Subsequent investigations have revealed how the highly politicized FBI and DOJ went out of their way to protect Clinton. Mueller's indictments, on the other hand, are just pure political malfeasance.

John P , July 17, 2018 at 7:20 pm

Zhu Ba Jie, I never said that Russia influnced the results of the election. It probably didn't. But what I do think is that the Russians are probably laughing at how didvided America has become. Neoliberalism which caters to busines rather than liberalism which caters to the people and the country as a whole is destroying society. People need to get on the streets and voice their concerns, Get together and form rallies like those who spoke out against the Vietnam War.
Is it social media that makes people babble and rave rather than be active out there getting the much needed attention?
Gather fo support a greener world, a fairer more benevolent world. To get local economies going putting money in needy people's pockets is far better than trickle down or financing and support for big business. The poor will spend it locally and that's good.
Get out there and make a stir. Trump ain't going to help you. Get rid of PACs, superPACs and other big donor money pots for a start start. Bernie Sanders and now some new young people are seeing the light. Get in there and help them along. Get out on the streets and shout for change!
Throw away the smart phone and get marching!

John P , July 17, 2018 at 7:34 pm

Also, Ron Johnson , I'm not American, I didn't know the full story of the mob money and Hillary. My choice was Bernie Sanders never Hillary or Trump. My fear is, the way things are going, it's like the period between the great wars and the effects of poverty and big business. Support for the needy and the busting up of big business were two steps which helped the world climb out of the mire. Perhaps we need to add robotics to the list. People need work and a purpose.

Larry Gates , July 16, 2018 at 9:59 pm

Donald Trump is a vile human being, and I disagree with 98% of what he says and does, but today he was right and everyone else was wrong. I've been on a trip in my car most of the day, listening to public radio. It was an endless orgy of misinformation and deep-state propaganda. PRI was as insane and dangerous as Fox News on a really bad day. I'm starting to think that nuclear war is a more immanent danger than global warming. It isn't just Rachel Maddow who has gone off the deep end. It is the entire national media. What kind of country have we become? Pray for peace.

strngr-tgthr , July 16, 2018 at 10:45 pm

Larry – Don't buy the Trump CoolAid He is completely wrecking are world order. Last month was Kim, this month was Putin and now this! Look:

White House Orders Direct Taliban Talks to Jump-Start Afghan Negotiations

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/15/world/asia/afghanistan-taliban-direct-negotiations.html

He is meeting with all the dictators of the world now! Guaranteed he will have Assad at the White House before we can get him impeached. This is 100% out of Putin's play book. He is a trader to American Values. Never have we sunk so low, dissing are true allies and honoring thugs, killers and despots! 110% vile!

Joe Lauria , July 16, 2018 at 11:00 pm

Do you mean like Pinochet, Somoza, Galtieri, Rios Montt, Suharto, Mobuto, shall I go on?

Joe Lauria , July 16, 2018 at 11:02 pm

And it is about time there are direct talks with the Taliban. The U.S. has lost in Afghanistan. It has to try to get something out of it.

strngr-tgthr , July 16, 2018 at 11:23 pm

We are in Afghanistan for woman's rights! "Hillary: justified by the desire to emancipate Afghan women." And we have all seen the concern that Trump has for woman (Billy Bush – Babies at the Border, shall I go on?) 120% vile!

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jul/20/hillary-clinton-afghan-women-taliban

Realist , July 17, 2018 at 3:54 am

You are totally deluded, Mr. Man Without Vowels in His Name, if you think we are in Afghanistan to promote women's rights. I'm sure you still faithfully watch the Jay Leno Show to stay apprised of Mrs. Leno's featured assessment of that crusade. Ranking light years ahead of your purported reason for the last 17 years of war in the Hindu Kush are i) the planned oil and gas pipelines*, ii) the proven deposits of rare earth elements essential to modern electronic devices, and iii) the immediate proximity to Iran, Russia, China and Pakistan giving Washington the ability to raise hell from its many military bases in Afghanistan on a moment's notice (all part of Obama's infamous "Pivot to Asia," which implied far more than a new cadre of Peace Corp workers–more like, we can buy any locals we need with the pallets of Franklins we now air drop on a routine schedule).

* Read "Forbidden Truth: U.S.-Taliban Secret Oil Diplomacy and the Failed Hunt for Bin Laden" by Brisard and Dasquie, it's still relevant 17 years later, while Hillary's "feminist" credentials remain completely irrelevant.

Gene Poole , July 17, 2018 at 5:48 am

An analysis of this contributor's writing style reports a 98.3% likelihood that he/she is Donald Trump.

Larry Gates , July 17, 2018 at 8:04 am

The United States has been "honoring thugs, killers, and despots" at least since Allen Dulles became the director of the CIA in the 1940s. America is an expansive empire, controlled by our corporate oligarchy. It's all about their money and power. They talk about human rights, but that is just a cover for their greed. Much of Trump's foreign policy is bad, but it is simply a logical continuation of the foreign policies of Obama, Bush, and Clinton. Negotiations with Putin is a step in the right direction and the Orange Beast deserves credit for it. It looks to me like it is you, not me that has swallowed the Kool-Aid.

Susan Sunflower , July 17, 2018 at 11:02 am

The Taliban, in the last week – 10 days, has said they will not negotiate as long as the USA occupies Afghanistan This was abbreviated in most headlines to say that the Taliban refuse to negotiate.

The Americans have launched the "time to negotiate with the Taliban" trial balloon before -- "tragically" coming to nothing.

We (USA) interfere when the Baghdad government attempts their own negotiations. (or simply do things that encourage retaliatory attacks) . Now ISIS in the mix.

Zhu Ba Jie , July 17, 2018 at 1:47 am

We've become a theater state. A powerful performance is what matters.

Susan Sunflower , July 17, 2018 at 11:08 am

Indeed. The histrionics of the last 48 hours have been beyond belief and credulity. The hardcore news-as-scandal-addicted will stay tuned, but I lost respect for some "stars" of the news in ways that won't be forgotten I keep expecting Maddow to either use hand puppets or present "crime reenactment" videos, along with her other show-and-tell visual aids.

BBC is just as bad in terms of prejudice but at least present a professional facade .DW and France 24 are alternatives as is the (much too short, almost every hour on the hour) RT headline news. RT's interview and talk shows are excellent and quite sober. It's not that they aren't slanted, they're just not insulting to the audience.

HiggBo , July 17, 2018 at 10:10 am

Maybe now you will think about the things these very same people said about him. Maybe they arent true either.
Hint: The vast majority arent.

Deniz , July 16, 2018 at 9:59 pm

They are losing their minds over Putins announcement of the $400 milion that was transferred Clinton through Browder.

michael , July 17, 2018 at 7:01 am

Seems Hillary learned a lot from Chinagate (where the Clintons paid the illegal donations from a foreign nation back AFTER winning the Election). And China only received military technology, offshored jobs and permanent favored nation trading status in return. Win-win.
You can be sure Hillary will claim that $400 million, if ever traced to her despite bleach bitting all her records, was for the Clinton Foundation Campaign and it was just an inadvertent mixup.

PuddinNTain , July 16, 2018 at 9:54 pm

Thank you for this reasoned piece amidst a plethora of madness. Most of my friends and colleagues who identify as Democrats, liberals, progressives, haters of Trump, etc, people I have the most in common with, politically speaking, have completely lost their freaking minds over this stuff. Critical thinking? Who needs it! Mueller and the intelligence community have surely seen the light since the "Iraq has WMDs" days.
Exactly when did the intelligence community, the sellers of lies and perpetrators of regime change world-wide, become a friend to the American people?

Drew Hunkins , July 16, 2018 at 9:49 pm

"He had a chance right there in front of the world to tell Vladimir Putin to stay the HELL out of American democracy,.."

What democracy? 99% of the candidates' campaigns have been almost completely funded by Wall Street, the blood thirsty giant defense contractors, or paranoid and hegemonic Zionist sociopaths.

It's been proven in a recent academic study by Princeton political scientists (and long lamented before these guys got on the case by such luminaries as Michael Parents, S. Wollin, James Petras, N. Chomsky, Vidal, Hedges) that the American citizenry has absolutely no influence whatsoever regarding poltico-economic decisions that emanate from Washington, they're drowned out by big business and the imperialist ruling elites.

So I ask this warmongering Russophobic talking head once again: what democracy? What democracy do you speak of? The same democracy that mires millions of newly college grads with $30,000 to $500,000 in student loan debt, or the same democracy that's witnessing close to 50% of the entire population living close to the poverty level, or that has tens of millions of its denizens without adequate healthcare coverage

Drew Hunkins , July 16, 2018 at 9:55 pm

typo: such luminaries as Michael Parenti, S. Wollin, James Petras

The editor regrets the error.

John P , July 16, 2018 at 11:26 pm

Trump ain't going to help you on that one. You need to get together with others work to get rid of PACs and Super PACs. In most western countries they wouldn't be allowed.

Sam F , July 17, 2018 at 7:20 am

The political parties are also corrupt, taking donations fed back directly or indirectly from government funding of contractors. These are extensive rackets supported by half the population, who have never worked for anything but a political gang operation, and really believe in gangs.

michael , July 17, 2018 at 7:11 am

Why are you bringing up "ponies" that we will never have, when Hillary's private club (or so the judge ruled when Bernie's supporters tried to fight their fraud, saying private clubs can do what they please, particularly picking potential presidents) was hacked into by those supercompetent Russians? Much akin to the Nigerian guy who's been trying to help me collect money from some dead rich relative I didn't know I had. Still waiting, but I'm sure if this was a fraud Mueller and our Intelligence agencies would be all over it, just like Hillary's Private Club, the DNC. The Russians didn't steal any money from Hillary, as far as I know, or there would have been War!

gcw919 , July 16, 2018 at 9:29 pm

These media "pundits" are truly an embarrassment. They become apoplectic about "possible" Russian hacking in our elections, but one can search in vain for their comments about our own interference in Ukrainian politics, and many other countries around the globe. (eg, Victoria Nuland, Hillary's pit bull, gloating about the US spending $5 billion in "support" of Ukrainian democracy). Its as if real concerns, such as nuclear annihilation, or catastrophic climate change, were afterthoughts. We are certainly living in mystifying times.

Mike From Jersey , July 16, 2018 at 10:16 pm

I think the same thing. The whole "election meddling" hoopla, even if it was true, pales to insignificance in light of what we are actually doing.

We have a base – a military base – in Syria. We weren't invited. We didn't get permission to set up a base. But we set up a military base in another country while announcing that that country's leader "must go." And now – with a total absence of evidence – we have the gall to condemn Russia for "meddling in our democracy."

What is wrong with these people? Can't they see the utter hypocrisy in it all?

AZ_bob , July 16, 2018 at 11:29 pm

I tell people all the time, if Russia did put their thumb on the scale, then hey – I guess "What Goes Around, Comes Around" huh? If you CAN'T take it, DON'T dish it out. Quite simple, really

irina , July 17, 2018 at 1:28 am

The US media's hysterical (in the unfunny sense) response to "Russian meddling"
is very like the husband who catches his wife cheating on him and goes totally postal,
although he himself has been cheating on her ever since their courting days . . .

Tony Frede , July 17, 2018 at 1:53 am

No they don't see the hypocrisy. A large percentage of the population suffers from a severe Irony Deficiency and that can't be cured.

Layne , July 17, 2018 at 6:55 am

I beat my head against the wall with the very same question! Thanks for sharing..

Tristan , July 16, 2018 at 9:26 pm

Thank you for doing the real journalism needed for readers to gain perspective and understanding. It is important to call out propaganda in the face of facts. One thing that stands out significantly is the statement by Trump, "I would rather take a political risk in pursuit of peace than to risk peace in pursuit of politics." Even if only partially pursued, the goal of peace is indeed a very worthy endeavor. In fact, this is one of the first times in recent memory that a US president has used the word "Peace".

I don't like the majority of what the Trump administration is doing, it is important to stick to the facts and support efforts that could lead to a reduction of the tensions and hostility which dominate current US / Russia relations.

F. G. Sanford , July 16, 2018 at 9:22 pm

"A productive dialogue is not only good for the United States and good for Russia, but it is good for the world."

I could hear in the inflection of that sentence the profoundly courageous and confidently certain voice of John F. Kennedy. Gergen, Amanpour, Cooper, Cheney, Brennan, Clapper and the rest of them be damned. The usual suspects, the bought and paid-for mouthpieces of the "deep state" raised their reptilian ire in the expected reprehensible fashion. War is what keeps them on the "payroll", and they'll tell any lie it takes to keep those checks rolling in. Despicable. It seems likely that their vitriol may stem as much from fear of exposure as anything else.

I think President Trump gave a laudable and compelling performance. It's a tragedy that this article will probably not get the circulation it deserves. Thanks to Joe Lauria for having the guts to write it.

Litchfield , July 16, 2018 at 9:43 pm

Amen.

jaycee , July 16, 2018 at 10:15 pm

Cheers. I noticed the same JFK echo in that sentence.

Brennan and the whole lot of those pundits sound exactly like the paleolithic right from the 50s and 60s, the ones who insisted MLK was a communist and were so effectively personified by Sterling Hayden in the Dr Strangelove film.

Joe Tedesky , July 16, 2018 at 10:35 pm

Here ya go F.G. your on par with Paul Craig Roberts.

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/07/16/is-president-trump-a-traitor-because-he-wants-peace-with-russia/

Enjoy my man. Joe

Dave P. , July 16, 2018 at 11:52 pm

Yes. I agree completely.

W. R. Knight , July 16, 2018 at 9:22 pm

I recall about 16 years ago when the U.S. media almost unanimously reported, with absolute certainty, that Saddam Hussein was harboring numerous weapons of mass destruction. I also recall their fervent calls for regime change because Hussein was a threat to our national security. There were a few voices who spoke against it, but they were drowned out by MSM. It would appear that U.S. media is adamantly against anyone who is opposed to war. Is it because war is so profitable for the media, or is it because war is so profitable for their masters?

Jessika , July 16, 2018 at 9:08 pm

Hey, Johnmichael, you must know that the US is headed by an oligarchy, UK too, France, etc. What runs the world is banks and multinational corporations. The US could actually be called a corporatocracy, because the people have very little say in their government. Yes, media bashers do bash media when they lie because they are supposed to ferret out facts but they don't, they serve their money masters. They all use "Goebbels style" messaging, Putin the least, i notice. It's a western script.

Steve , July 16, 2018 at 9:08 pm

Everything the Main Stream media says about Trump applies ten times over to themselves, the presstitutes that they are useful Idiots of the Corrupt New World Order.

Bob In Portland , July 16, 2018 at 9:03 pm

A look at Mueller's career will go far in explaining why Mueller is handling this and what he won't see while investigating:

https://caucus99percent.com/content/what-mueller-wont-find

If you haven't read this, please do.

Joe Tedesky , July 16, 2018 at 9:40 pm

I did Bob, and I'm encouraging more to read it. Joe

Dave P. , July 17, 2018 at 3:30 am

Bob – Yes, I have read the article about Mueller's career.

backwardsevolution , July 17, 2018 at 5:08 am

Bob in Portland – excellent read! Thank you. Mueller is like a fixer, a sweeper, someone who cleans up and, as you said, moves investigations away from the CIA.

"He knew where to look and where not to look."

No doubt he's a valuable asset to the Deep State. Not a nice man.

Seer , July 17, 2018 at 8:39 am

Great work!

Yes, Mueller's a master of misdirection. Was it Parry who noted (likely others as well) that reporting is now less about lying than deliberate omission. Hard to fact-check what ain't there (vs. a lie which lays out data which can be tested) Knowledge IS power: we are not to have knowledge.

Bob Van Noy , July 17, 2018 at 9:34 am

Thanks to all in this thread. I filed this statement recently here, and it was edited out. I'll try again because it's appropriate.

A relatively vibrant Press was modified violently in the days and weeks following November 22, 1963. Some careers were enhanced, some lives were lost. If some contemporary student of History or Journalism wanted to study the decline of American Democracy they might begin by reading all of the linked article below about a Journalist named Penn Jones

http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKjonesP.htm

W. R. Knight , July 16, 2018 at 8:59 pm

As much as I loathe Trump, I have to admit this is one time I agree with him. No matter how much Trump screws up, the simple fact is that no one is 100% wrong, and it's important to recognize when they are not wrong.

I don't agree that the Russians are our enemy. I don't believe they are our friends, but there's a large gap between an enemy and a friend and I place the Russians somewhere in that gap. I don't deny that they hacked into the DNC database, but that doesn't rise above my threshold of significance and certainly doesn't hold a candle to all the U.S. interference in the politics of most of the world's nations (which includes deposing democratically elected presidents). And finally, I don't believe in gunboat diplomacy and I agree that it's better to talk with the Russians than it is to beat the war drums and seek more confrontation.

Having said that, I deplore Trump's behavior toward our European, Canadian and Mexican friends, and his domestic policies are the worst of any in the last 100 years. But as much as I deplore this buffoon, I believe that he is right in attempting to normalize relations with Russia.

Litchfield , July 16, 2018 at 9:49 pm

"I don't deny that they hacked into the DNC database,"

Well, you should, because there is zero evidence of a Russian hack.
On what basis in the world do you so confidently assert that you "do not deny" something that is untrue?
The evidence is of an inside leak.
Please, learn the difference between the two, a hack and a leak.

Nancy , July 17, 2018 at 11:38 am

Another indication of the insidious power of the media over common sense.

Realist , July 17, 2018 at 3:22 am

Of course it is entirely within the interests of America to have free and friendly relations with Russia. Why? Not only because peace beats the hell out of war, especially the nuclear variety, but because we, along with the rest of the world, need Russia's vast resources in a planet rapidly being depleted of everything essential to modern technology. If they don't sell their products to the West on the open market because Washington thinks it can steal them after some kind of "regime change," all those essential goodies will go to China, India and the other peoples of the East whom we look down upon, and are also fixing to mess with.

From all I have gleaned, Russia has always aspired to be a part of the West, ever since Peter the Great opened Russia to Europe, but Washington thinks that being a member of team West means being a totally subservient vassal to it and only it. Look at how shamelessly Washington has abused the interests of the EU in its efforts to subjugate Russia. There is mostly one party that threatens the future of Western prosperity and moral values: the United States, or rather its government. Its motives are uncontested power and greed to benefit its small clique of decadent aristocrats.

Zhu Ba Jie , July 16, 2018 at 8:51 pm

Why would anyone believe the Liars' Club (the CIA) about anything? Their successes are more shameful than their failures.

Seer , July 17, 2018 at 8:43 am

Ah, but successes and failures are not ours to judge, no, it is for the ruling elite to judge, and given that their power and wealth has but steadily increased it is safe to say, under their measuring, that the CIA has been quite successful.

Johnmichael2 , July 16, 2018 at 8:45 pm

Putin brilliantly heads an Oligarchy. Trump obsequiously admires Putin because he too, by all of his actions to date, aspires to the same power. To all of you media bashers, who are on a very strange campaign of denial, don't forget that Trump and his Goebbels style messaging received prime time from the electronic media throughout the campaign and was probably key to the win.

The real Deep State is the multinational world order of capitalism, which doesn't care what type of government it owns. Yet CN seems totally oblivious to their existence. If the media is to blame for anything, it is that their coverage tends to be controlled by ratings; in other words, by money, and the Deep State controls the money.

Zhu Ba Jie , July 16, 2018 at 8:52 pm

The US has oligarchic since 1789.

Zhu Ba Jie , July 16, 2018 at 8:53 pm

Goebbels was far smarter and articulate than Trump.

Danny , July 17, 2018 at 9:57 pm

the free $2B from the same media now screeching for his head? (Fox excepted) the 35-40 minutes dedicated to his empty podium while Sanders talked? I have some REALLY bad news for you 'bout who was behind that

http://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/

Jessika , July 16, 2018 at 8:44 pm

I highly recommend reading James Howard Kunstler's piece on Russia Insider, "Idiotic Russia Meddling Hoax Kept Alive by Trump-Putin Summit". On his blog 'Clusterfuck Nation' he titles it "12 Ham Sandwiches with Russian Dressing". Kunstler is a great cynicist humorist called a dystopian by the NYT. This piece he just published is one of the best and will undoubtedly be picked up by others. Has a funny cartoon on Russia Insider for a musical based on the Mueller never-ending saga. At least it's a few cynical laughs for this sorry affair.

Gregory Herr , July 16, 2018 at 10:00 pm

https://russia-insider.com/sites/insider/files/styles/1200xauto/public/russia_follies_mueller_trump_hillary-1024x751_0.jpg?itok=mrheD4D_

Lester D , July 16, 2018 at 8:41 pm

Mass hysteria is a frightening spectacle to behold. The power with which it grips the minds of virtually everyone is beyond belief. As I watched the media coverage of Helsinki unfold, it seemed the media minions were perceptibly working themselves into a collective frenzy, a totally berserk, bonkers group who were bidding the price of tulips up to a million each. The ironic aspect of all this to me is that even if the commie bastards did what we say they did would it have made any difference? And if indeed it was they who hacked HC's "personal" email files and made them available to Wikileaks, I'm glad as Hell they did.

Zhu Ba Jie , July 16, 2018 at 8:56 pm

It would not make any difference. We Americans are to blame for our own follies and mistakes.

KiwiAntz , July 16, 2018 at 9:03 pm

It's Washington & the MSM's mass hysteria, not the common folk who couldn't give a rats ass about this lunacy? Ask the ordinary citizen in the US or Worldwide what they care about? It's not the never ending Russiagate BS spewed out by the MSM or corrupt DEMS! It's about, how will my Family be housed, Fed, & cared for! How will I support myself & my Family's needs & wants! THATS WHAT WE CARE ABOUT, WE DON'T CARE ABOUT THE FAKE RUSSIAGATE NONSENSE & it's BS! But what do these MSM idiots know, they think their smarter than those who voted for change & are getting that with Mr Trump!

David G , July 17, 2018 at 12:01 am

Right on, Lester D.

JRGJRG , July 16, 2018 at 8:39 pm

I'm starting to get hopeful about Trump after a lot of doubts.
Whatever his limitations, he at least has some common sense. This is something we would never have seen happen with Crooked Hillary Clinton, ever. Somebody had to listen to Putin, who actually has quite a lot of sensible things to say about this, and is a very intelligent and articulate politician.
Given enough time, Trump might actually figure things out in Washington before he leaves office and sees all the treasonous forces in the permanent security state. I didn't vote for either Clinton or Trump in '16 but if he listens to Putin and gives peace a chance, this will mend all cracks with me.
Maybe they should put up a fence around CNN headquarters and call in a battalion of psychs to provide mental health treatments to the war profiteers and talking heads.
I voted for peace. I want to see peace. Kudos to Trump and Putin for bringing an oasis of sanity to the world. Nuclear war is bad for our kids. I am very relieved to see this happening. Even General Eisenhower could not buck the Military Industrial Complex in 1959 when he tried to reach detente with Khrushchev. Trump will go down in history as a great president if he can pull this off.

mike k , July 16, 2018 at 8:38 pm

The incredible ugliness of the media, spy agencies, military figures, and politicians is unfortunately only the tip of a huge iceberg. Underneath all that is the deep state oligarchs, who are willing to sacrifice billions of lives and the very continuation of life on our precious planet – just to fulfill their insatiable greed for wealth and power. These evil monsters are the real enemies of Humanity.

Lolita , July 16, 2018 at 8:29 pm

Not only the U.S. Media, but also the Canadian, French, British etc that is, the agitprop tools for NATOland/Soros, ready for selective and well rehearsed indignation, on cue.

Frances , July 16, 2018 at 10:06 pm

Yes, Australian media and politicians too.

Lolita , July 17, 2018 at 12:17 am

Tonight CBC The National managed to invite a "balanced" panel to discuss the Trump-Putin press conference: a researcher from Stratfor and a journalist from the Washington Post!!!! LOL

Lolita , July 17, 2018 at 5:32 pm

And when CBC's narrative and their fake-debate in the National is challenged in the comment section the CBC sycophants know only one action:

"Your account has been banned until 10/15/2018. Reason: We have banned this account for 90 days because we believe it is in violation of our Terms of Use, specifically repeated off-topic comments, uncivil comments, and personal attacks. For more information, please visit: http://www.cbc.ca/aboutcbc/discover/submissions.html ."

All of this to mask political censorship
In my last posts, I quoted Joe Lauria and they did not like it one bit:
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize."

Good Bye ICIJ

KiwiAntz , July 17, 2018 at 2:16 am

And add NZ's Media to that shameful list of Propagandists telling lies & expecting us to belithis tripe!

Mike Lamb , July 16, 2018 at 8:23 pm

The calls of President Trump being a traitor mimic those of the calls that President Eisenhower was a traitor back in the 1950s.
But what can you expect from the cult followers of the former Goldwater girl who have done their best to turn the Party of Gene McCarthy into the Party of Joe McCarthy?

Zhu Ba Jie , July 16, 2018 at 8:59 pm

Dems have GOP lite for a long time, at least since Reagan.

Pandas4peace , July 16, 2018 at 8:22 pm

Americans need to turn off their damn television sets.

JRGJRG , July 16, 2018 at 8:45 pm

I canceled my cable subscription three months ago and haven't missed it one bit.

Realist , July 17, 2018 at 2:53 am

One needs to keep apprised of the lies that the enemies of humanity so effectively spread through their propaganda in order to counter them.

Besides, if you ever need a good emetic, there is always the opportunity to tune in Rachel Maddow until your stomach upchucks its contents.

Seer , July 17, 2018 at 8:51 am

Ha ha! The Rachel Maddow weight loss program!

Zhu Ba Jie , July 16, 2018 at 9:01 pm

Good idea. I quit watching regularly in the '70s. But does make one somewhat alienated from everyone else.

Freedom lover , July 16, 2018 at 10:32 pm

Actually I have Direct TV and for a change I can tune in to channel 321 RT America and listen to some real news instead of the 24-hr fake news on the rest of the channels.

Skip Scott , July 17, 2018 at 6:55 am

Last night I blocked CNN on the TV where I am currently forced to reside. I am the only one with the p/w to unblock it. Take that CNN!!!

Jessika , July 16, 2018 at 8:13 pm

Well said, as always, Realist, but the scary part is to read the vitriolic anti-Trump responses indicating the 'liberals' would actually rather risk war! I just read a few of them and honestly wonder if there's any hope for this country, maybe we will have to take some harsh lessons that will be meted out. They do not realize that they are assisting in bringing down every one of us with their hate. The controllers who play them love it.

JRGJRG , July 16, 2018 at 8:47 pm

The danger is that they will bring their war hysteria into the next election and get someone elected that is even worse than Hillary would have been.

Zhu Ba Jie , July 16, 2018 at 9:02 pm

I'm not convinced that anyone is control. "Time and chance come to them all."

Realist , July 17, 2018 at 2:46 am

My, how we have come full circle, Jessika. So, now it's the "liberals" who would rather be "dead" than "red?" That used to be the far right John Birchers back in my youth. (Not that anyone anywhere on the planet is a genuine "communist" any longer, not even in Cuba or North Korea.) I just wish there was some mechanism to allow them to self-immolate without killing or harming the rest of us nearly 8 billion human beings. They have some potent demons colonizing what passes for their minds. Perhaps they could use a convincing exorcist to drive the Hillary entity out of their system.

Seer , July 17, 2018 at 8:54 am

All comes in cycles. Dixiecrats, anyone?

Brad Owen , July 17, 2018 at 12:09 pm

EXACTLY. Actually, FDR was the "Bernie Sanders" of his day, and completely turned the Party upside down with his "New Deal for the forgotten man" (Labor and farmers). The traditional D-Party was the party of southern plantation aristocracy and their money handlers on Wall Street, and the original R-Party contained the fire-breathing radicals within its ranks.

jose , July 16, 2018 at 8:10 pm

It is my understanding that Russia and US are holding approximately 90% of nuclear weapons worldwide. In a sane world, The US media should be commending Trump for trying to reach an agreement regarding denuclearization with Putin. Nonetheless, Trump is being grilled for doing what almost the entire planet is seeking: a world free of nuclear weapons. Indubitably, US national media are very busy undermining Trump's efforts to reduce the scorch of nuclear war. Do the US media think that in a nuclear exchange humans will survive? We will all lose.

JRGJRG , July 16, 2018 at 8:54 pm

No, the elites on both sides of the political spectrum are living in a mythical Hollywood rich man's fantasy world believing that the worst that can happen to them is they will retreat to their luxury underground cities and live out the nuclear war, communicating with their nuclear subs, while the rest of us paeons fry. They don't care about us, at all. They are congenital psychopaths.
It sounds crazy because it is, and it is hard for the rest of us to believe they could be so foolish. They are fatally misguided in their beliefs that this would ever work and be good for them.

Joe Tedesky , July 16, 2018 at 9:34 pm

I think your right. Joe

Jean wyman , July 16, 2018 at 9:53 pm

Good comment Jose. In answer to your observations, I'd pose a question: what was Obusha thinking when he proposed a 3TRILLION dollar upgrade of America's nukes? Who exactly was it that he was placating and that T-rump isn't.

Skip Scott , July 16, 2018 at 8:09 pm

When the talking heads said that Trump trusted Putin more than his own Intelligence Agencies, I screamed at the TV, "ME TOO!". I can think of no clearer sign that the CIA is still embedded with the MSM. Discussion of the history of our Intelligence Community in both the near and distant past, and it's utter lack of trustworthiness, is a forbidden topic. My only hope is that enough people actually listened to what Putin said, instead of the talking heads' rantings, and saw for themselves that Putin is a rational and fair-minded leader. The near hysteria of Anderson Cooper and his ilk is a sure sign that their grip on the narrative is slipping.

jose , July 16, 2018 at 8:15 pm

I concur with your post. Personally, I rather listen to Putin than the US national media. You are correct to assert that "Putin is a rational and fair-minded leader" You would have to be mentally retarded to pay any heed to US national media that have proven to be a tool of those controlling the livers of power. Well done, Skip.

Joe Lauria , July 16, 2018 at 9:04 pm

"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize."

JRGJRG , July 16, 2018 at 9:07 pm

Anderson Cooper, the grandson of Gloria Vanderbilt, and great-grandson of robber baron railroad mogul Cornelius Vanderbilt is CIA trained in Operation Mockingbird.
https://youtu.be/w8NTLVOjas8

Joe Tedesky , July 16, 2018 at 9:33 pm

I said that once, and got booed out of the room. Joe

Joe Tedesky , July 16, 2018 at 9:28 pm

Skip I hear ya, but allow me to tell you what I saw, and heard today. So after Trump made his remarks about trusting, or not trusting, certain intelligence data, I while driving in my car heard callers calling in to the local talk show. The callers who expressed themselves the way we do on this comment board were berated by the callers who thought this kind of talk (like we here on CN talk) was treasonous by all known treasonous standards. The callers who sounded like we do here were labeled as their being crazed Trump supporters, and yet all of them said of how they don't even necessarily like Trump, but right is right and left is now warmongering. None of the other opposing callers bought this denial of Trump, as they just fluffed it off, as Trump supporters hiding behind whatever it was their suppose to be hiding behind. Facts are painfully ignored, especially when it comes to analyzing Trump.

I see the MSM pundits and the strongly patriotic lying legislators taking Trump's remarks while calling him a trader, as the launching of a great American vs American social confrontation. This new confrontation will pit brother against brother, child against parent, and wife against husband . just ask my wife. The discontent is about where we were back during the Vietnam years, as the only thing missing are the peace marchs. This time our civil war will be fought strictly on a social level, aided by an instigating MSM, as division messes up any real citizen advocacy as the citizen may require to straighten out any of this disconnection of their society or that's at least the way I see it.

We citizens are officially at war with each other. We will all look back upon this period of our evolvement, and laugh over the Facebook censorship, and dream of a time when it was merely just about politics, and taxes. We are moving in a direction where the National Security Deep State is beating up an outsider maverick, and this maverick is now in the Deep States crosshairs. It's darn strange, and I swear if something awful were to happen to President Trump that the MSM would encourage us Americans to make Trump's ugly fate a new national holiday . I think there are many among this Deep State cabal who still celebrate with joy the sad happenings of November 22nd, 1963.

The empire is finally going down, and we are all witnessing it first hand. Joe

Dave P. , July 17, 2018 at 4:14 am

"I see the MSM pundits and the strongly patriotic lying legislators taking Trump's remarks while calling him a trader, as the launching of a great American vs American social confrontation. This new confrontation will pit brother against brother, child against parent, and wife against husband . just ask my wife. . . ."

Good observation Joe. It already started happening some time back in our home. A truce was reached with a compromise that my wife would not watch CNN, MSNBC . . . when I am around the house and I will not read CN and make comments, at least when she is around. This morning my wife went to our retired neighbor's house to watch these channels with her. Both of them have been feeling today as if some tragedy has happened.

That is what this two years of Russia Gate hysteria fueled by the Media and Politicians has done to the people. Today was probably the worst day; they are really messing up the population. It is even worse than those cold war days of 1950's which I have read about. And there is no end in sight.

Joe Tedesky , July 17, 2018 at 9:02 am

Dave I swear we live in the same house. Joe

Tristan , July 16, 2018 at 9:34 pm

Aye aye! Well put, I concur.

Lyle Courtsal , July 16, 2018 at 8:09 pm

Killary had a crap platform. That is why she lost. If the platform was something progressives could support, then people would come out and vote for her. Her record of dependability is crap; just a double talking republican liar. No good. That's why she lost. I didn't vote for her and won't vote for her if she is forced on us again. Lyle Courtsal http://www.3mpub.com

jose , July 16, 2018 at 8:20 pm

You are correct Lyle about Hillary's lost. I would like to add the following:Vladimir Putin has not meddled in the US election, Hillary Clinton has. Leaked emails reveal that the popular socialist Bernie Sanders had his chance of becoming president stolen from him by Hillary Clinton and her associates at the Democratic National Committee. If defrauding democracy is worth going to war over, certainly it is worth going to jail over. Millions of Americans had their votes stolen.

Litchfield , July 16, 2018 at 10:34 pm

Yes, I listened to some of her campaign speeches, and they were embarrassingly awful, and empty of ideas except inciting horror of "Le Trump"! She was truly pathetic in her confidence that she was in the in-group, addressing others in the "in-group," thus not needing to actually campaign.
Recently Hillary was awarded the Radcliffe medal, and she spoke at Radcliffe Day. I was horrified that she was given this honor. I heard that she read from a Teleprompter. That indicates to me that she was and is indeed not physically up to the challenges of the office, quite apart from her many other deficits.

Seer , July 17, 2018 at 9:07 am

I wouldn't vote for a mass murderer. If you cannot fundamentally be for peace then all else, no matter how wonderful it sounds (it could be) has nowhere to anchor.

John V. Walsh , July 16, 2018 at 8:05 pm

Great column.
There is no doubt that the Summit moved us away from confrontation with Russia which holds the grave danger of going nuclear.
Bravo for Trump and the brave words he spoke.
Now it is up to us.
If we wish the process to continue which these meetings with Putin initiated, let us raise our voices in support.
If we wish to let the neocons, "Deep State," Dem and GOP elites to stop the process, let us stay silent.

Dan Kuhn , July 16, 2018 at 8:05 pm

I read the New York times and the comments to the editorial. This is my comment.

The comments here sound like a lynch mob working themselves into a frenzy to hang someone. Proof? Who needs any dang proof. Clapper the guy who admitted lying to Congress under oath said Trump was guilty and thats good enough for the people who commented here. The Intelligence Agencies that lied to get the USA to invade Iraq with their WMD claims say he is guilty, well that must be proof then.
This goes to show that Barnum was right, there is a sucker born every minute. But a whole nation suckered into believing this nonsence about Russia having Trump elected with not one shred of evidence presented? Even Barnum would have been shocked and surprised at that one.

Dan Kuhn , July 16, 2018 at 8:06 pm

Sorry the reply was to a story on the front page.

backwardsevolution , July 16, 2018 at 8:29 pm

Good comment, Dan Kuhn.

Realist , July 17, 2018 at 2:27 am

Well, I guess that influential people on the inside figure that the "reign of terror" worked out so well in effecting regime change during the French Revolution that they'd give it another go approximately two centuries later approximately a hundred years after the Bolshevik Revolution, so maybe this is a natural phenomenon with a periodicity of about 100 years. Perhaps Hillary thinks she's gonna pick up the pieces as the next Napoleon after the revolution burns itself out. More like her fate will be as the next Robespierre, hoisted on her own guillotine.

Seer , July 17, 2018 at 9:11 am

Yes, the cycle is tied to the controlling currency, the USD in current day form. That control is rapidly slipping away. The crooks are pulling the fire alarms in the bank and running out the back door and the public is looking for safety from the crooks' army (MSM, "authority figures" etc.).

George , July 16, 2018 at 8:00 pm

There is nothing left to say.
The summit only leaves one to speculate.

Realist , July 16, 2018 at 7:57 pm

It would seem that there is not a single independent, unbought, honest, objective journalist left working for the corporate mass media in America. They are all mere puppets delivering the propaganda and fake analysis demanded of them by the oligarchy that owns them. It's absolutely stunning how lock-step they all are in maintaining the false narrative cooked up by the careless and arrogant tyrants who threw away a sure thing (Hillary's coronation) by pressing too hard to give her what they thought was the biggest patsy (Trump) in the clown show called the presidential election. They were so confident they actually allowed the ballots to be counted and have been scrambling to undo the results using every possible mechanism and pretext ever since. If there is one thing the American people can count on in the future, it is that no election will ever again be semi-free, fair and not rock-solid rigged with the contrived results agreed upon months before the charade of elections ever goes on.

A rational mind might say, well, give us more reasonable candidates, those in tune with the problems of the voters (mostly caused by government), and give us more of them, more parties, more platforms, more options. That is exactly what they intend to avoid. They tried to force feed us Hillary as the only acceptable figure running for the position, but enough people saw through that and chose the fellow they wanted us to abhor after they deliberately built him up to help the despised Hillary. Now absolutely every loyal apparatchik in the elite establishment, and most especially the media–the essential propagandists, are working 24/7 for regime change in Washington, what they perceive as the necessary first step towards regime change in Moscow and later Beijing. Only then will the NWO–in which they give all the orders and control everything and everybody–be complete.

I tell you, the reach of their tentacles and the uniformity of response amongst their minions is impressive in a most foreboding way. They will brook NO peaceful co-existence with any geopolitical "partners" or competitors and will not give even the slightest iota of respect to our own elected leader, not even to his office out of formal courtesy. Rather than "going high" when he "goes low," they choose to up the ante in ad hominem insults and political thuggery. The power structure in this country has become irretrievably warmongering neo-con and ruthlessly imperialistic. The most catastrophic consequence will be to see the dissolution of civilisation itself as the myriad of environmental, population and resource crises hit the planet full on as the century unfolds, for thuggery, tyranny and simplistic political slogans are not the solutions for escaping the impending bottleneck with an actual future still remaining for humanity.

Joe Tedesky , July 16, 2018 at 8:42 pm

Hey Realist you brought back memories of the 2016 presidential election to when Trump was given 4.9 billion dollars worth of free air time (JP Sottile quoted the 4.9). As it has been written about of how early on the Clinton campaign thought Trump was the best to run up against, because who in their right mind would take the Trumpster serious, was the go to mindset among the DNCer's. So the MSM turned on the cameras at Trump rallies believing that given enough rope that Trump would hang himself. The backlash that came from this, was mind boggling on many levels. One no one likes Hillary, number two no one likes the MSM. So with that the MSM, and Hillary's bend strategy was what loss the election for the Democrats, and oh yeah then there's Bernie.

I don't think in total we Americans are all living on the same planet. Joe

Mike From Jersey , July 16, 2018 at 8:55 pm

I am absolutely appalled by the behavior of the American media. They are acting like Trump is a disgrace to the country but the MSM is a disgrace to journalism.

I don't even like Trump but – to me – he is coming out better in this exchange.

JRGJRG , July 16, 2018 at 9:17 pm

Excellent statement.

Sam F , July 16, 2018 at 9:29 pm

Indeed the US mass media are no more than propagandists for the arrogant tyrants of its government. But despite US bluster and economic arm-twisting, educated people know that BRICS cannot be dominated so imperialism is theater not policy. Over 20-40 years, the US can only choose cooperation or self-embargo. Few educated people believe the recycled hysteria of invisible threats.

The enmity of the PTB toward Russia and Korea always starts with and returns to the Mideast and centers upon Israel, which controls the US mass media and both political parties, and thereby appoints the politicians who control the military budget and agenda. Indeed "no election will ever again be semi-free." The MIC is large and will attack small countries anywhere, but it is the servant of Israel.

Zhu Ba Jie , July 17, 2018 at 2:22 am

People who complain aboutIsrael somehow never mention Dispensationalism, Christian Zionism, etc.

Sam F , July 17, 2018 at 6:26 am

Thank you for mentioning those; I did not have room in that comment.
Israel also substantially controls the Christian z leaders.

Dave P. , July 17, 2018 at 4:28 am

Wow! Great comments Realist.

j michael king , July 16, 2018 at 7:54 pm

I thought Mueller was playing politics to announce the indictments of 12 Russians mere hours before Trump met Putin more and more I'm losing faith in Mueller and the Democrats who have damn near destroyed their party themselves

Seer , July 17, 2018 at 9:17 am

If the fact that the Dems managed to undermine the people's choice for president (Sanders) isn't enough to convince you that the Dems are destroyed then I don't know what to tell you.

I'm almost certain that the CIA had a hand in that: consider their infiltration into the MSM (ensuring that Sanders was not talked about). Not only was the CIA involved in trying to derail Trump, but it was active in preempting Sanders. For sure, having meddling in BOTH parties would likely bring out real pitch forks: when it's just one party it's easy to use the other party to offset the anger. Joe, if you're reading these comments (still), I'd love to get your take on this "theory."

jean , July 16, 2018 at 7:52 pm

I never imagined I would cheer on Trump ..but that took guts .

Don DeBar , July 16, 2018 at 7:52 pm

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1018955906690584576

robira , July 16, 2018 at 7:27 pm

Thanks for this report, Mr. Lauria; you're certainly of stronger mettle than me. I would not have withstood the noxious exhalations of the US newsmedia (which itself now openly includes newly "retired" intelligence agents as commentators) you've described in this article; the anecdotes alone almost had me hurling my phone across the room.
Thank you for performing a valuable public service with this report. Peace.

Gary Weglarz , July 16, 2018 at 7:21 pm

Welcome to what passes for "reality" in 2018 America. If the stakes for humanity were not so frightfully high these bizarre, slapstick, nonsense comments from the MSM talking heads would be knee-slapping hilarious in their total off the charts lunacy and patent absurdity. What can one say? Wow – off the freaking charts! You simply can't make this stuff up! Words are inadequate in an age of mass delusion posing as sanity!

Gregory Herr , July 16, 2018 at 7:34 pm

I think your words "total off the charts lunacy and patent absurdity" are as adequate as they come in this situation.

Litchfield , July 16, 2018 at 10:42 pm

Not only absurd, though, but also deeply isulting, treasonous, really horrendous that our national-level journalists arrogate to themselves the right to diss, insult, accuse, charge, condemn, vilify, etc. the president of the United States. I don't like trump either, I hate waht he is doing in Israel, supporting the rabid Zionists there and here. BUT, standing up to the media and intelligence onslaught took guts, and he came out of the meeting looking pretty good, I think. The meeting also gave Putin an opportunity to score a few points for reason, thus an international platform he might otherwise not have had.

I LOVE the Putin points re Browder $$$ (rather, rubles) to Hillary. I do so hope that this topic is taken up and richly sucked and considered and tasted and finally chewed and swallowed and digested and the real . . . finally is delivered to the AMerican people regarding Hill's $$$ shenanigans. If that happens it could point once again to an investigation of her emails and those of her assistant Huma Abedin. Remember her? When do we get the full investigation of this very compromised woman?

James , July 16, 2018 at 11:25 pm

Well said.

Jessika , July 16, 2018 at 7:16 pm

What, did Trump say that, Gregory? I am impressed, if he did!

Gregory Herr , July 16, 2018 at 7:30 pm

By the CNN video of the entire press conference, Trump says this at the 13:54 mark.

And for a complete transcript of the presser:

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/transcript-trump-putin-press-conference-in-helsinki/

Jessika , July 16, 2018 at 7:14 pm

Yes, it is critical to support Trump's talks with Putin and not let these Deep State agents control.

Jessika , July 16, 2018 at 7:05 pm

These people have no shame, as they take their massive paychecks for lying to keep the fools in line. Well, thanks to websites like this one and others, there aren't so many fools anymore. They are pathetic, and days of Cronkite, Murrow et al who reported news objectively are dead and buried.

Zhu Ba Jie , July 16, 2018 at 9:38 pm

Probably they believe their own nonsense, at least when they say. Much as crooked preachers do.

Jean , July 16, 2018 at 10:30 pm

Cronkite wasn't so objective, Jessika. He was pretty bought into the glory of our Viet nam adventuring until the war protesters (whom he did not represent objectively either) opened Amerika's eyes.

mike k , July 16, 2018 at 7:01 pm

FOR ONCE, I AM PROUD TO STAND WITH OUR PRESIDENT.

irina , July 16, 2018 at 7:17 pm

Roger That.

Mike From Jersey , July 16, 2018 at 8:14 pm

Ditto

JRGJRG , July 16, 2018 at 9:21 pm

Me, too. An act of extraordinary political courage.

mike k , July 16, 2018 at 6:59 pm

That took guts, Mr. Trump. I didn't know you had it in you. Congratulations for standing up to your (deadly) opponents. They are now showing themselves to be the evil scum they really are.

Rohit , July 16, 2018 at 6:57 pm

There is one small problem with this article. While I trust Consortium News far more than the New York Times, there are those who trust the latter. And the article is far too long for those who already believe that Trump is guilty of collusion with Russia. A shorter article by Consortium News with a one two punch is what is needed.

JRGJRG , July 16, 2018 at 9:22 pm

Oh, go pound sand, would you?

Zhu Ba Jie , July 16, 2018 at 9:40 pm

People don't change their minds because of rational arguments. Russiagate will go on, in spite of logic and evidence, much as Birther nonsense does.

mike k , July 16, 2018 at 6:54 pm

I just listened to NBC nightly news, and CNN. They are screaming treason! And the end of America! They are absolutely aghast that Trump is making peace moves with Putin. Doesn't he know that America is a Warfare State?? To talk peace is against everything we hold sacred. Beware Mr. Trump, the CIA hit squads will be champing at the bit to field one of their "lone assassins on you". Pray for the Donald not being gunned down for doing the right thing (for once).

JRGJRG , July 16, 2018 at 9:37 pm

I still fear someone will do the president harm as a result of this. Trump is taking chances with the mafia that runs this shadow permanent government, given this level of hysteria. They just have too much at stake. They are used to getting their way. I hope I'm wrong. The last time a president took on the entire establishment to this extent was JFK. I wish I could be more optimistic.

Litchfield , July 16, 2018 at 10:44 pm

"They are screaming treason! "

How dare they???
they are the treasonous ones.
These crazed zombies are terrifying.

Gregory Herr , July 16, 2018 at 6:52 pm

"I would rather take a political risk in pursuit of peace, than risk peace in pursuit of politics."

Bravo Mr. President.

Joe Tedesky , July 16, 2018 at 8:27 pm

Great quote Gregory. Joe

Bruce Dickson , July 16, 2018 at 8:51 pm

A JFK-worthy quote, that.

And, to quote its deliverer, "Who would think..?"

JRGJRG , July 16, 2018 at 9:23 pm

That one statement will go down in history, mark my words.

Jeff Harrison , July 16, 2018 at 6:40 pm

"never before have I seen an American president consistently, repeatedly, publicly, and shockingly advance the interests of another country over those of his own government and people."

Really? You obviously haven't been paying attention to the US's obeisance to Israel. I can think of no other country that puts another country's wishes ahead of their own the way the US does with Israel.

"he had a chance right there in front of the world to tell Vladimir Putin to stay the HELL out of American democracy, and he didn't do it."

And he was wise not to do so. The United States has far more blatantly interfered with Russian elections than what the idiots in our alphabet soup of intelligence agencies are accusing Russia of now. The reason you call Putin a thug is not because he is one but because he won't let you get away with that kind of crap. Putin has made it clear that American regime change is off the table and he intends to see to it that it stays off the table.

Rohit , July 16, 2018 at 7:30 pm

""never before have I seen an American president consistently, repeatedly, publicly, and shockingly advance the interests of another country over those of his own government and people.""

Is that why he wants NATO to beef up? Is that why he complained about Germany's energy dependence on Russia?

He is not putting Putin above the American people. He is just not accepting the lies told by the FBI which is really pretty much still controlled by Obama.

JesseJean , July 16, 2018 at 10:33 pm

Bravo, Jeff!

David Hamilton , July 16, 2018 at 6:34 pm

If the allegations are true – of GRU officers successfully phishing for HRC campaign dirt from Chairman Podesta's emails – then the officers are guilty as charged. As I understand it, this was the avenue through which Wikileaks obtained the content of Hillary Clinton's speeches to Goldman Sachs. That confirmation of what most already suspected to be true – that Hillary had been pledging fealty to Wall Street bankers at the expense of the people – probably contributed to Hillary's defeat at the polls. So, I say "more power to 'em". Those officers show common cause with the common man and woman in America. Hillary was never going to release those transcripts on her own!

And that same phishing – if true – was certainly no "terrorist attack" or "act of war' or other hyperbolic nonsense like "the undermining of democracy in America". We have no democracy – only an oligarchy – much like the Russians under Boris Yeltsin. Maybe the phishing undermined oligarchy here, which would be a good thing. Oligarchy is at the heart of the cruel neo-liberal order which tyrannizes the people.

Jeff Harrison , July 16, 2018 at 6:42 pm

Julian Assange has consistently said he did not get the files from Russia. Assange has yet to be caught in a lie. The US is a serial liar and doesn't even look embarrassed when caught in a lie.

David Hamilton , July 16, 2018 at 6:49 pm

Thanks Jeff, maybe I don't understand the transfers to Wikileaks very well. I wonder if the FBI/Justice Department really knows, like they say they do.

LarcoMarco , July 16, 2018 at 7:41 pm

Well, if DNC's servers and Hillarious' stealth servers and Podesta's email were hacked, the NSA has Hooverd up all the evidence (if it exists). The Dumpster should demand this material be revealed and also demand disclosure of proof that RussiaGate is more than Deep State designs.

Frederike , July 16, 2018 at 7:58 pm

Something must be done to release Assange! Trump: do something.

backwardsevolution , July 16, 2018 at 8:57 pm

Frederike – I think Trump will release Assange. Patience.

JRGJRG , July 16, 2018 at 9:33 pm

911 ushered in the post-truth era.

JRGJRG , July 16, 2018 at 9:25 pm

Maybe they got the information because Hillary took home classified documents and recklessly-knowingly exposed them to hackers in her private basement server?

Freedom lover , July 16, 2018 at 10:56 pm

"If the allegations are true". Well we probably will never find out will we. Putin was shrewd to offer to have Mueller and his investigators come to Russia to investigate the indited GRU officers and offering full cooperation with Russian Law enforcement. Putin and Trump both know that Mueller will make every excuse in the book of why that can't happen. Mueller must be craping his pants wondering if he will somehow be forced to take his investigation to Russia and have it publically exposed for the fraud that it is.

backwardsevolution , July 17, 2018 at 3:42 pm

Freedom lover – yes, what a great move by Putin! "Come on, let's work together to get to the bottom of this." Mueller must just be dying! Unfortunately, Trump is really in danger now.

Alcuin , July 16, 2018 at 6:04 pm

Why no mention of the most explosive claim at the press conference? https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/07/putin-blows-apart-russia-collusion-probe-says-russian-group-gave-400000000-to-hillary-clinton-video/

Alcuin , July 16, 2018 at 6:21 pm

"I have GREAT confidence in MY intelligence people." Translation: He has little confidence in Obama and Bush intelligence people. Good for him.

JRGJRG , July 16, 2018 at 9:32 pm

Wow, that was explosive! Just imagine how bad things would be right now if someone other than Putin were in charge of Russia. We should count ourselves as lucky.

[Jul 18, 2018] Russiagate A CIA Concocted Hoax. Trump Knows It By Stephen Lendman

Notable quotes:
"... No Russian interference in America's political process occurred in 2016, earlier, or is being cooked up for the nation's November midterm elections. ..."
"... Trump knows it and said so in Helsinki. When asked if he holds Russia accountable for anything, he said: ..."
"... Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the CRG, Correspondent of Global Research based in Chicago. ..."
"... VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at [email protected]. My newest book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

No Russian interference in America's political process occurred in 2016, earlier, or is being cooked up for the nation's November midterm elections.

Trump knows it and said so in Helsinki. When asked if he holds Russia accountable for anything, he said:

"I hold both countries responsible (for dismal bilateral relations). I think that the United States has been foolish. I think we've all been foolish And I think we're all to blame."

Regarding election meddling, he said:

"There was no collusion at all. Everybody knows it. And people are being brought out to the fore. So far that I know, virtually none of it related to the campaign. And they're going to have to try really hard to find somebody that did relate to the campaign."

"My people came to me and some others (T)hey think it's Russia President Putin said it's not Russia. I will say this: I dont see any reason why it would be."

" President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today."

Trump is wrong about most things, not this. No evidence, nothing, proves Russian meddling in the US political process.

If it existed, it would have been revealed long ago. It never was and never will be because there's nothing credible to reveal, Big Lies alone.

Trump's above remarks were in Helsinki. In response to a raging Russophobic firestorm of criticism back home, he backtracked from his above comments, saying he misspoke abroad.

He accepts the intelligence community's claim about Russian US election meddling – knowing it didn't occur.

Russiagate was cooked up by Obama's thuggish Russophobic CIA director John Brennan , media keeping the Big Lie alive.

DNC/John Podesta emails were leaked, not hacked – an indisputable fact media scoundrels suppress to their disgrace.

Former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray earlier explained that

"(t)he source of these emails and leaks has nothing to do with Russia at all," adding:

"I discovered what the source was when I attended the Sam Adam's whistleblower award in Washington."

"The source of these emails (came) from within official circles in Washington DC. You should look to Washington, not to Moscow."

"WikiLeaks has never published any material received from the Russian government or from any proxy of the Russian government. It's simply a completely untrue claim designed to divert attention from the content of the material" and its true source.

The Big Lie alone matters when it's the official narrative. The Russian meddling hoax and mythical Kremlin threat to US security are central to maintaining adversarial relations with America's key invented enemy.

It's vital to unjustifiably justifying the nation's global empire of bases, its outrageous amount of military spending, its belligerence toward all sovereign independent states, its endless wars of aggression, its scorn for world peace and stability, its neoliberal harshness to pay for it all, along with transferring the nation's wealth from ordinary people to its privileged class.

America's deeply corrupted political process is far too debauched to fix, rigged to serve wealth, power and privilege exclusively, at war on humanity at home and abroad.

It's a tyrannical plutocracy and oligarchy, a police state, not a democracy, a cesspool of criminality, inequity and injustice, run by sinister dark forces – monied interests and bipartisan self-serving political scoundrels, wicked beyond redemption, threatening humanity's survival.

Today is the most perilous time in world history. What's going on should terrify everyone everywhere.

Washington's rage for global dominance, its military madness, its unparalleled recklessness, threatens world peace, stability, and survival.

*

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the CRG, Correspondent of Global Research based in Chicago.

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at [email protected].

My newest book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

[Jul 18, 2018] Ron and Rand Paul Call Out Foreign Policy Hysteria by Jack Hunter

Notable quotes:
"... New York Magazine ..."
"... Manchurian Candidate ..."
"... Cutting through the crap on foreign policy is something of a Paul family tradition. ..."
"... When Ron Paul suggested on a Republican presidential primary debate stage in 2008 that U.S. foreign policy created " blowback " that led to 9/11, fellow GOP candidate Rudy Giuliani accused Paul of blaming America and defending the attackers. Paul didn't relent: "Have you ever read about the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years." ..."
"... The American Conservative ..."
"... There are neocons in both parties who still want Ukraine and Georgia to be in NATO. That's very, very provocative. It has stimulated and encouraged nationalism in Russia. George Kennan predicted this in 1998 when we still had Yeltsin and Russia was coming in our direction. He said, "If you push NATO up against Russia's borders, nationalism will arise and their militarist tendencies will increase, and you may get someone like a Putin," basically. ..."
"... "It's a big mistake for us, not to say that we're morally equivalent or that anything Russia does is justified," Paul told Tapper. "But if we don't understand that everything we do has a reaction, we're not going to be very good at understanding and trying to have peace in our world." ..."
"... "Most Americans are understandably shocked by what they view as an unprecedented attack on our political system," the New York Times ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... Rand Paul said Sunday, "People need to think through these things before they get so eager to rattle their sabers about wanting to have a confrontation with Russia." ..."
"... Jack Hunter is the former political editor of ..."
"... co-authored the 2011 book ..."
"... with Senator Rand Paul. ..."
Jul 17, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Ron and Rand Paul Call Out Foreign Policy Hysteria And like his father, the senator found himself on the wrong end of the media mob this week.

When Mitt Romney called Russia America's " number one geopolitical foe " during the 2012 election campaign, Barack Obama mocked him: "The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back." Vice President Joe Biden dismissed Romney as a "Cold War holdover." Hillary Clinton said Romney was "looking backward." John Kerry said "Mitt Romney talks like he's only seen Russia by watching Rocky IV ."

Romney's Russia warning came at a time when Republicans were eager to exploit President Obama's hot mic comments to Russian president Dmitri Medvedev where he promised " more flexibility " on missile defense issues after the election. Romney, to the delight of Republican hawks and neoconservatives , was eager to portray Obama as capitulating , weak , and dangerous . For his part, Obama, who once vowed to " reset " U.S.-Russia relations, painted Romney as outdated for disparaging diplomacy.

But that was then. This week the Cold War seemed to be back in full force for many former Obama supporters, as President Trump met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in the wake of 12 Russian agents being indicted for allegedly meddling in the 2016 election.

Democrats have joined forces with Republican hawks and neoconservatives to declare Trump " weak " for engaging Russia. One MSNBC pundit said Trump's NATO criticisms were the president " doing Vladimir Putin's bidding ." New York Magazine 's Jonathan Chait went full Alex Jones when he suggested that Trump may have been a Putin agent since 1987 -- a Manchurian Candidate -esque spin reminiscent of the original Red Scare . #TraitorTrump even trended on Twitter.

In the midst of this hysteria, Senator Rand Paul was asked by CNN's Jake Tapper on Sunday whether he thought Trump should demand that Putin acknowledge Russia's meddling.

"They're not going to admit it in the same way we're not going to admit that we were involved in the Ukrainian elections or the Russian election," Paul replied . "So all countries that can spy do. All countries that want to interfere in elections and have the ability to, they try." Paul insisted that U.S. and Russian meddling are not "morally equivalent," but said we must still take into account that both nations do this.

That's when "Rand Paul" began trending on Twitter.

"Rand Paul is on TV delivering line after line of Kremlin narrative, and it is absolutely stunning to watch," read one tweet with nearly 5,000 likes. Another tweet, just as popular, said , "Between McConnell hiding election interference and Rand Paul defending it, looks like Russia's already annexed Kentucky." A Raw Story headline on Paul's CNN interview read, " Stunned Jake Tapper explains why NATO exists to a Russia-defending Rand Paul ."

But was Paul really "defending" Russia? Was he even defending Russian meddling in U.S. elections? Or was he merely trying to pierce through the hysteria and portray American-Russian relations in a more accurate and comprehensive context -- something partisans left and right won't do and the mainstream media is too lazy to attempt?

Cutting through the crap on foreign policy is something of a Paul family tradition.

When Ron Paul suggested on a Republican presidential primary debate stage in 2008 that U.S. foreign policy created " blowback " that led to 9/11, fellow GOP candidate Rudy Giuliani accused Paul of blaming America and defending the attackers. Paul didn't relent: "Have you ever read about the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years."

No one in the GOP wanted to hear what Ron Paul had to say because it challenged and largely rebutted Republicans' entire political identity at the time. Paul was roundly denounced. FrontPageMag's David Horowitz called him a " disgrace ." RedState banned all Paul supporters. The American Conservative 's Jim Antle would recall in 2012: "The optics were poor: a little-known congressman was standing against the GOP frontrunner on an issue where 90 percent of the party likely disagreed with him . Support for the war was not only nearly unanimous within the GOP, but bipartisan."

Rand Paul now poses a similar challenge to Russia-obsessed Democrats. Contra Jake Tapper sagely explaining "why NATO exists" to a supposedly ignoramus Paul, as the liberal Raw Story headline framed it, here's what the senator actually said:

There are neocons in both parties who still want Ukraine and Georgia to be in NATO. That's very, very provocative. It has stimulated and encouraged nationalism in Russia. George Kennan predicted this in 1998 when we still had Yeltsin and Russia was coming in our direction. He said, "If you push NATO up against Russia's borders, nationalism will arise and their militarist tendencies will increase, and you may get someone like a Putin," basically.

Do you think Jake Tapper Googled "George Kennan"? That's about as likely as Giuliani Googling "blowback."

"It's a big mistake for us, not to say that we're morally equivalent or that anything Russia does is justified," Paul told Tapper. "But if we don't understand that everything we do has a reaction, we're not going to be very good at understanding and trying to have peace in our world."

As for Russian spying -- was Paul just blindly defending that, too? Or did he make an important point in noting both sides do it?

"Most Americans are understandably shocked by what they view as an unprecedented attack on our political system," the New York Times reported in February. "But intelligence veterans, and scholars who have studied covert operations, have a different, and quite revealing, view."

The Times continued: "'If you ask an intelligence officer, did the Russians break the rules or do something bizarre, the answer is no, not at all,' said Steven L. Hall, who retired in 2015 after 30 years at the C.I.A., where he was the chief of Russian operations. The United States 'absolutely' has carried out such election influence operations historically, he said, 'and I hope we keep doing it.'"

The U.S. will no doubt keep meddling in foreign elections. Russia will do the same, just as it did during the Obama administration and years prior . The cries against diplomacy and for war will ebb, flow, flip, and flop, depending on who sits in the White House and how it makes the screaming partisans feel. Many Democrats who view Trump's diplomacy with Russia as dangerous would have embraced it (and did) under Obama. Many Republicans who hail Trump's diplomatic efforts wouldn't have done so were he a Democrat. President Hillary Clinton could be having the same meeting with Putin and most Democrats would be fine with it, Russian meddling or no meddling.

So many headlines attempted to portray Paul as the partisan hack on Sunday when the opposite is actually true. It's the left, including much of the media, that's now turned hawkish towards Russia for largely partisan reasons, while Paul was making the same realist foreign policy arguments regarding NATO and U.S.-Russia relations long before the Trump presidency.

Responding to Romney's anti-Russia, anti-Obama comments in 2012, Thomas de Waal, a Russia expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told the New York Times , "There's a whole school of thought that Russia is one you need to work with to solve other problems in the world, rather than being the problem." Rand Paul said Sunday, "People need to think through these things before they get so eager to rattle their sabers about wanting to have a confrontation with Russia."

But think they won't and sabers they'll rattle, as yesterday's villains become today's heroes and vice versa.

Just ask Mitt Romney .

Jack Hunter is the former political editor of Rare.us and co-authored the 2011 book The Tea Party Goes to Washington with Senator Rand Paul.

Come On July 17, 2018 at 1:51 am

There's the elephant in the room, of course. Nobody seems to want to touch it yet, but everybody knows that Israeli meddling in US elections puts Russian meddling in the shade. Still, it's fascinating watching the reporting and waiting to see who will break the silence.

In the meantime, wake me up when there's something called "the Russia-American Political Action Committee" in DC. Wake me up when US politicians vie to win its favor, as they vie to win the favor of AIPAC, and win the huge financial contributions that result from getting its support. Wake me up when Russian oligarchs contribute even a fraction of what Israel donors like Sheldon Adelson already contribute to US political campaigns – and wake me up when they get results like an American president moving the US embassy to Jerusalem or an America president sending American troops to stand between Israel and its enemies Russia may have moved a few thousand votes here or there, but Israel gets American politicians to send America's children to die in Middle East wars. At the moment, Russia can only dream of meddling with that degree of success.

Yep – American elections have been corrupted by foreign countries for a long time. Russia's only problem is that it hasn't learned who to pay off, and how much. Next time Mr. Netanyahu visits Mr. Putin (and he visits him fairly often), he can give him a few pointers. And then Mr. Putin will be invited to give speeches to joint sessions of Congress. Just like Mr. Netanyahu. And freshmen US congressmen will be frog-marched to Russia for instructions, just like they're already frog-marched to Israel.

cynthia , says: July 17, 2018 at 7:50 am
President Trump took a slice out of the Military Industrial Complex yesterday. John McCain and war mongers went crazy. The SWAMP IS ANGRY!
connecticut farmer , says: July 17, 2018 at 8:26 am
Russia has been engaging in international espionage dating back at least to Peter the Great. As such, they play the game as well as, or possibly better, than anyone. They, like we, will do what is necessary-even to the point of injecting themselves in the internal affairs of another country–if they deem it in their interest to do so or, as the cliche has it, "in the interest of state". Not very nice but–that's the way the game is played.

Thank you, Rand Paul and Mr. Hunter, for injecting some much needed sanity into this debate.

Youknowho , says: July 17, 2018 at 8:49 am
I said it before, and I will repeat it here:

There is no need to demonize the Russians. Their country has national interests and goals. If they are patriots, the Russians will seek to advance those interests and goals.

We also have interests and goals, and if we are patriots, we seek to advance them (though we disagree on what our real interests are and what our goals should be).

When our interests concide with that of Russia we collaborate. When they clash, we seek to undermine each other.

The Russians seem to have been doing it, as their interests now clash with ours. Nothing to be worked out about. That's how the game is played.

Which does not mean that we should defend ourselves strenuously from such undermining. And the President is precisely tasked with defending this country and advance its interests. This he seems to be unable to do.

Do not hate the Russians. Do not demonize them. But be aware of what they are doing, because we are NOT in a Kumbayah moment with them.

Andy Johnson , says: July 17, 2018 at 8:56 am
Well done, Mr. Hunter. It's a shame that the Pauls' position on foreign policy is not shared by ostensibly "libertarian" commentators who value DC cocktail parties above all principles.
Johann , says: July 17, 2018 at 10:27 am
The left's hatred of Russia goes even deeper than US partisan politics. They hate them because they gave up their world-wide communism ideology. And they hate them because they are not fully on board with the LGBQTXYZ movement.
David Smith , says: July 17, 2018 at 11:08 am
The real problem with Russia is that it exists, and it is too big for us to control. The real problem with Putin is that he is the first strong leader Russia has had since the fall of the Soviet Union, and he is messing up our plans for world hegemony.

As one who grew up during the Cold War (the real one) and lived through the whole thing (the Iron Curtain, the Warsaw Pact, the crushing of Hungary, communists behind every door and under every bed), I find it very hard to take all the current hysteria about Russia very seriously.

connecticut farmer , says: July 17, 2018 at 11:19 am
@Youknowwho

Sane, reasonable comments. Totally agree with your sentiments. Unfortunately, since we live in a 3-ring media circus, so few people will listen or pay heed. In a world possibly even more dangerous than any time since the Cold War, the act of demonizing one of the two greatest nuclear powers on earth is surely madness.

General Manager , says: July 17, 2018 at 11:26 am
CNN etc. headlines are not even thinly veiled editorials against Trump. Not related to just publishing the news. But telling readers how to think. Mainstream media has an M&M type coating. Remove the outer shell and you find the good old boys and girls as ever-lurking and ever vigilant Neocon Nation pushing their one and only agenda on the American people. They are insatiable as long as they do not do the fighting and dying. Stay tough Trump and realize short of complete capitulation you cannot satisfy these people.
Ryszard Ewiak , says: July 17, 2018 at 11:37 am
Donald Trump took a step towards peace. Of course, not everyone likes this. As can be seen, Donald Trump has many enemies, even among Republicans. They want war. These are people dangerous to America and the world.

What is better: peace with Russia, or a global nuclear war?

The Book of Revelation warns: "And another horse, fiery red, came out, and the one who rode it was granted permission to take peace from the earth, so that people would butcher one another, and he was given a huge sword." (6:4) "The great sword" – what does it mean?

Jesus gave many important details: "Terrors [φοβητρα] both [τε] and [και] unusual phenomena [σημεια – unusual occurrences, transcending the common course of nature] from [απ] sky [ουρανου] powerful [μεγαλα] will be [εσται]." (Luke 21:11)

Some ancient manuscripts contain the words "and frosts" [και χειμωνες] (we call this today "nuclear winter"), and in Mark 13:8 "and disorders" [και ταραχαι] (in the sense of confusion and chaos). There will be also significant tremors, food shortages and epidemics along the length and breadth of the regions as a result of using this weapon.

This weapon will also cause climate change, catastrophic drought and global famine. (cf. Revelation 6:5, 6)

So here we have a complete picture of the consequences of the global nuclear war. Is there any sense in speeding up this war?

Angolo , says: July 17, 2018 at 11:38 am
Trump's "treason"? What a laugh.

He called out the perfidy and incompetence of American intelligence and foreign policy officials during the Obama era, as he should have. He wants a productive relationship with a declining nuclear and regional power, as he should have. Is Putin a nice man? No. But neither is he a pusillanimous Leftist eurotwit.

I'm glad to see adults in the room, at long last. The Sixties are over, baby. Good riddance.

Countme-a-Demon , says: July 17, 2018 at 11:44 am
"Of course the Paul's are right as they always are."

Always?

"A number of the newsletters criticized civil rights activist Martin Luther King, Jr., calling him a pedophile and "lying socialist satyr".[2][15] These articles told readers that Paul had voted against making Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday a federal public holiday, saying "Boy, it sure burns me to have a national holiday for that pro-communist philanderer, Martin Luther King. I voted against this outrage time and time again as a Congressman. What an infamy that Ronald Reagan approved it! We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day."[2][16][17] During the 2008 and 2012 presidential election campaigns, Paul and his supporters said that the passages denouncing King were not a reflection of Paul's own views because he considers King a "hero".[18][19][20″

That last sentence is a hoot. Talk about "hysteria", but, go ahead, repeat Paul's lies that he knew nothing about his own newsletter.

Johann:

"The left's hatred of Russia goes even deeper than US partisan politics. They hate them because they gave up their world-wide communism ideology. And they hate them because they are not fully on board with the LGBQTXYZ movement."

Do fake news much?

https://medium.com/@FreisinnigeZtg/did-the-kremlin-support-ron-paul-in-2008-f6b6ca4b58f9

Like the NRA, The American Conservative needs to open "The Russian Conservative" chapters in Putin's conservative Russia to protect Putin's murderous government.

It could be that the "Left", whatever that is in addlepated minds, merely desires a little real politik in our relations with relations with Putin's Russia.

It's hard to tell the difference between ex-KGB Putin and ex-republicans like Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan.

The latter two make "full of crap" seem mild praise.

Clifford , says: July 17, 2018 at 12:08 pm
You lost me at "Ron Paul." Sorry.
Reader , says: July 17, 2018 at 12:17 pm
Off the top of my head, a few egregious examples in which the US government has "meddled" in other countries during the last 100 years:

Mexico (Woodrow Wilson had thousands of US troops occupying Mexico until calling them back to "meddle" in Europe's War to End All Wars, setting the stage for an even worse war 20 years later.)

Russia (Woodrow Wilson used the US military to "meddle" in the Russian revolution after the War to End All Wars.)

Korea (undeclared war)

Vietnam (undeclared war)

Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Chile, and much of the rest of Central and South America.

Iran (helped overthrow its government in the 1950s and install the Shah of Iran, setting the stage for the Iranian revolution.)

Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Egypt.

Yemen (huge humanitarian disaster as I write this. US government fully supporting head-chopping Saudi Arabians in their campaign to starve, sicken and blow to bits hundreds of thousands of people. Support includes US planes in-flight fueling of Saudi fighter/bomber jets.)

And let us not forget the enormous "meddling" in numerous US government elections and policy debates by . . . Israel.

Good Reason , says: July 17, 2018 at 1:19 pm
I vote with Angolo's comment:

"He called out the perfidy and incompetence of American intelligence and foreign policy officials during the Obama era, as he should have. He wants a productive relationship with a declining nuclear and regional power, as he should have. Is Putin a nice man? No. But neither is he a pusillanimous Leftist eurotwit."

It's important to understand what the US intelligence community is calling "interference in our election." There has been no accusation that the Russians hacked into our electronic voting and changed results. Rather, they did what we have done in other countries–the Russians ran an influence campaign. They bought ads and created bots to spread the word. This is so utterly tame . . . there is nothing out of the ordinary US playbook here.

Hacking the DNC server and revealing underhanded DNC doings? Hey, that's on the DNC for being both venal and incompetent.

anonymous , says: July 17, 2018 at 2:21 pm
Anybody in 1962 shouting wild paranoid conspiracy theories about

THERE ARE RUSSIAN SPIES EVERYWHERE, THEY'RE TRYING TO TAKE OVER AMERICA

These people in 1962 would be (correctly) dismissed as Right Wing conspiracy kooks, now it's just standard Lib Dems, RINOs, Neo Conservatives and fake news lying press.

We commissioned this Farstar comics with this theme – I mean like who in 2018 is really scared that Russians like Anna Kournikova are going to take over America –

Who's in bed with the Russians?

I wish that was me!

https://goo.gl/images/3HbsbS

b. , says: July 17, 2018 at 2:23 pm
Unfortunately, Rand Paul is acting, but not on principle or in good faith. If he really wanted to stand against manufactured hysteria, he would not accept the US "intelligence" agency claims and refer to their record – e.g. on Iraq and before regarding stability of the Soviet Union – he would question the staggering difficulties of attribution and forensics for networked, digital attacks (the main reason why any claims about who hacked whom have to be read with skepticism), he would point to the corruption of our foreign politics by Saudi and Israeli interests and money within the Trump-Kushner clan, and both parties, and he would compare the alleged – and allegedly ineffectual – attempts to influence an already ridiculous election to the very real, pervasive and corrupting impact of GOP voter disenfranchisement and bipartisan gerrymandering in service of incumbents and their networks.

Rand Paul is the man who was going to stand against the Haspel appointment. He is a phoney, but he serves as a weather vane for niche politicians on how the winds are turning.

You can find the same token opposition here:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/07/11/russia-nato-editorials-debates/36799277/

Nothing about New START, no word about how George Bush made a promise that might have been in bad faith, how Gorbachev was foolish enough to accept it, and how Bill Clinton broke it across the board, and piled on by targeting Serbia in the Balkan conflict. Kennan did not refer to the Ukraine on his missive.

If Rand Paul is our last best hope, we are in deep trouble.

Kurt Gayle , says: July 17, 2018 at 2:41 pm
Jack Hunter " Senator Rand Paul was asked by CNN's Jake Tapper on Sunday whether he thought Trump should demand that Putin acknowledge Russia's meddling."

(0:01) TAPPER: 48 hours ago the US government, the Trump administration, said the top Russian military intelligence officers orchestrated a massive hack to affect the US election. How much do you want President Trump to try to hold Putin accountable for that?

PAUL: I think really we mistake our response if we think it's about accountability from the Russians. They're another country. They're going to spy on us. They do spy on us. They're going to interfere in our elections. We also do the same. Dov Levin at Carnegie Mellon studied this over about a 50-year period in the last century and found 81 times that the US interfered in other countries' elections. So we all do it. What we need to do is to make sure that our electoral process is protected. And I think because this has gotten partisan and it's all about partisan politics we have forgotten that really the most important thing is the integrity of our election. And there are things we can do and things that I've advocated: Making sure it's decentralized all the way down to the precinct level; making sure we don't store all the data in one place, even for a state, and that there's a back-up way so that someone in a precinct can say, 'Two thousand people signed in, this was the vote tally I sent to headquarters.' There's a lot of ways that we can back-up our election. Advertising, things like that, it's tricky. Can we restrict the Russians? We might be able to in some ways, but I think at the bottom line we wanted the Russians to admit it. They're not going to admit it in the same way we're not going to admit that we were involved in the Ukrainian elections or the Russian elections. So all countries that can spy do. All countries that want to interfere in elections and have the ability to, they try."

TAPPER: It sounds as though you are saying that the United States has done the equivalent of what the Russians did in the 2016 election, and it might sound to some viewers that you're offering that statement as an excuse for what the Russians did.

PAUL: No, what I would say is it's not morally equivalent, but I think in their mind it is. And I think it's important to know in your adversary's mind the way that they perceive things. I do think that they react to our interference in both their elections. One of the reasons they really didn't like Hillary Clinton is they found her responsible for some of the activity by the US in their elections under the Obama administration. So I'm not saying it's justified

TAPPER: But surely, Senator Paul, the United States has never done what the Russians did.

PAUL: I'm not saying they're equivalent, or morally equivalent, but I am saying that this is the way that the Russians respond. So if you want to know how we have better diplomacy, or better reactions, we have to know their response. But it's not just interference in elections that I think has caused this nationalism in Russia. Also, I think part of the reason is is we promised them when James Baker, at the end when Germany reunified, we promised them that we wouldn't go one inch eastward of Germany with NATO, and we've crept up on the borders, and we still have neocons in both parties who want Ukraine and Georgia to be in NATO.

That's very, very provocative and it has stimulated and encouraged nationalism in Russia. George Kennan predicted this. In 1998 when we still had Yeltsin and Russia was coming in our direction, he said, if you push NATO up against Russia's borders, nationalism will arise and their militarist tendencies will increase, and you may get someone like a Putin, basically.

George Kennan predicted the rise of Putin in 1998. And so we have to understand that for every action we have, there is a reaction. And it's a big mistake for us -- not to say that we're morally equivalent or that anything that Russia does is justified – but if we don't realize that everything we do has a reaction, we're not going to be very good at understanding and trying to have peace in the world (3:38)

Coupon Cutter , says: July 17, 2018 at 3:32 pm
It's pretty weird to read articles about "meddling" in US elections and not see the word "Israel" anywhere.

How much pro-Russia money was spent on "meddling" in 2016? How much pro-Israel money was spent "meddling" in 2016?

[Jul 18, 2018] This two part, excellent documentary on Russia in the 90's is all about VVP and Major Russian Jewish Oligarch Boris Berezovsky

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Unknown User -> Billy the Poet Mon, 07/16/2018 - 19:31 Permalink

Berezovsky's Daughter Speaks Out: British Intelligence Killed Former Asset to Prevent Him Leaking

Conscious Reviver -> Unknown User Mon, 07/16/2018 - 20:18 Permalink

This two part, excellent documentary on Russia in the 90's is all about VVP and Major Russian Jewish Oligarch Boris Berezovsky. Boris took over the Kremlin. Boris shot himself in the foot, but wound up saving Russia when he picked Putin to succeed alchoholic Yeltsin. Putin took the country back.

Larry Summers, Harvard Jew American oligarch led the rape and looting of Russia.

The Rise of Putin and The Fall of The Russian-Jewish Oligarchs (1/2)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2Cl8lSv9Is#

The Rise of Putin and The Fall of The Russian-Jewish Oligarchs (2/2)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2nNtynZAiI

Killdo -> Conscious Reviver Mon, 07/16/2018 - 22:32 Permalink

also described in Naomi Klein's book The Shock Doctrine- the rise of the disaster capitalism

[Jul 18, 2018] Fox News post Summit interview with Putin.

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Boing_Snap -> Not Too Important Mon, 07/16/2018 - 21:35 Permalink

Fox News post Summit interview with Putin.

https://youtu.be/rHY8yG4mVzs

Conscious Reviver -> IridiumRebel Mon, 07/16/2018 - 20:07 Permalink

Great, informative, entertaining documentary on Russia in the 90's.

The Rise of Putin and The Fall of The Russian-Jewish Oligarchs (1/2)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2Cl8lSv9Is#

The Rise of Putin and The Fall of The Russian-Jewish Oligarchs (2/2)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2nNtynZAiI

nmewn -> Not Too Important Mon, 07/16/2018 - 18:19 Permalink

Podesta failing to register as a foreign agent for Russia, Browder greasing the palms of the Klintons with "illicit cash" purloined from Russia...lol...oh man, this is really getting interesting!

Ahem...and just where in the world is...Mr.Mifsud? ;-)

[Jul 18, 2018] After the press conference the usual anti-Trump operatives went ballistic

Jul 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

After the press conference the usual anti-Trump operatives went ballistic:

John O. Brennan @JohnBrennan - 15:52 UTC - 16 Jul 2018

Donald Trump's press conference performance in Helsinki rises to & exceeds the threshold of "high crimes & misdemeanors." It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump's comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin. Republican Patriots: Where are you???

Senator John McCain released a scathing statement :

... "President Trump proved not only unable, but unwilling to stand up to Putin. He and Putin seemed to be speaking from the same script as the president made a conscious choice to defend a tyrant against the fair questions of a free press, and to grant Putin an uncontested platform to spew propaganda and lies to the world.
...
"No prior president has ever abased himself more abjectly before a tyrant. Not only did President Trump fail to speak the truth about an adversary; but speaking for America to the world, our president failed to defend all that makes us who we are -- a republic of free people dedicated to the cause of liberty at home and abroad. ...

These imbeciles do not understand the realism behind Trump's grand policy. Trump knows the heartland theory of Halford John Mackinder. He understands that Russia is the core of the Eurasian landmass. That landmass, when politically united, can rule the world. A naval power, the U.S. now as the UK before it, can never defeat it. Trump's opponents do not get what Zbigniew Brzezinski, the National Security Advisor of President Carter, explained in his book The Grant Chessboard (pdf). They do not understand why Henry Kissinger advised Trump to let go of Crimea.

Trump himself professed his view (vid) of the big picture and of relations with Russia in a 2015 press conference:

"I know Putin. And I tell you that we can get along with Putin. Putin has no respect for President Obama. Big Problem, big problem. And you know Russia has been driven - you know I always heard, for years I have heard - one of the worst things that can happen to our country, is when Russia ever gets driven to China. We have driven them together - with the big oil deals that are being made. We have driven them together. That's a horrible thing for this country. We have made them friends because of incompetent leadership. I believe I would get along very nicely with Putin- okay? And I mean where we have the strength. I don't think we need the sanctions. I think that we would get along very, very well. I really believe that. I think we would get along with a lot of countries that we don't get along with today. And that we would be a lot richer for it than we are today.
It took 45 years, not 20 as Kissinger foresaw, to rebalance the U.S. position.

After the Cold War the U.S. thought it had won the big ideological competition of the twentieth century. In its exuberance of the 'unilateral moment' it did everything possible to antagonize Russia. Against its promises it extended NATO to Russia's border. It wanted to be the peerless supreme power of the world. At the same time it invited China into the World Trade Organisation and thereby enabled its explosive economic growth. This unbalanced policy took its toll. The U.S. lost industrial capacity to China and at the same time drove Russia into China's hands. Playing the global hegemon turned out to be very expensive. It led to the 2006 crash of the U.S. economy and its people have since seen little to no gains. Trump wants to revert this situation by rebalancing towards Russia while opposing China's growing might.

Not everyone shares that perspective. As security advisor to Jimmy Carter Brzezinski continued the Nixon/Kissinger policy towards China. The 'one China policy', disregarding Taiwan for better relations with Beijing, was his work. His view is still that the U.S. should ally with China against Russia:

"It is not in our interest to antagonize Beijing. It is much better for American interests to have the Chinese work closely with us, thereby forcing the Russians to follow suit if they don't want to be left out in the cold. That constellation gives the U.S. the unique ability to reach out across the world with collective political influence."

But why would China join such a scheme? Brzezinski's view of Russia was always clouded. His family of minor nobles has its roots in Galicia, now in west-Ukraine. They were driven from Poland when the Soviets extended their realm into the middle of Europe. To him Russia will always be the antagonist.

Kissinger's view is more realistic. He sees that the U.S. must be more balanced in its relations :

[I]n the emerging multipolar order, Russia should be perceived as an essential element of any new global equilibrium, not primarily as a threat to the United States.

Kissinger is again working to divide Russia from China . But this time around it is Russia that needs to be elevated, that needs to become a friend.

Trump is following Kissinger's view. He wants good relations with Russia to separate Russia from China. He (rightly) sees China as the bigger long term (economic) danger to the United States. That is the reason why he, immediately after his election , started to beef up the relations with Taiwan and continues to do so. ( Listen to Peter Lee for the details). That is the reason why he tries to snatch North Korea from China's hands. That is the reason why he makes nice with Putin.

It is not likely that Trump will manage to pull Russia out of its profitable alliance with China. It is true that China's activities, especially in the Central Asian -stans, are a long term danger to Russia. China's demographic and economic power is far greater than Russia's. But the U.S. has never been faithful in its relations with Russia. It would take decades to regain its trust. China on the other hand stands to its commitments. China is not interested in conquering the 'heartland'. It has bigger fish to fry in south-east Asia, Africa and elsewhere. It is not in its interest to antagonize Russia.

The maximum Trump can possibly achieve is to neutralize Russia while he attempts to tackle China's growing economic might via tariffs, sanctions and by cuddling Taiwan, Japan and other countries with anti-Chinese agendas.

The U.S. blew its 'unilateral moment'. Instead of making friends with Russia it drove it into China's hands. Hegemonic globalization and unilateral wars proved to be too expensive. The U.S. people received no gains from it. That is why they elected Trump.

Trump is doing his best to correct the situation. For the foreseeable future the world will end up with three power centers. Anglo-America, Russia and China. (An aging and disunited Europe will flap in the winds.) These power centers will never wage direct war against each other, but will tussle at the peripheries. Korea, Iran and the Ukraine will be centers of these conflicts. Interests in Central Asia, South America and Africa will also play a role.

Trump understands the big picture. To 'Make America Great Again' he needs to tackle China and to prevent a deeper Chinese-Russian alliance. It's the neo-conservatives and neo-liberals who do not get it. They are still stuck in Brzezinski's Cold War view of Russia. They still believe that economic globalization, which helped China to regain its historic might, is the one and true path to follow. They do not perceive at all the damage they have done to the American electorate.

For now Trump's view is winning. But the lunatic reactions to the press conference show that the powers against him are still strong. They will sabotage him wherever possible. The big danger for now is that their view of the world might again raise to power.

Posted by b on July 17, 2018 at 07:41 AM | Permalink Jen , Jul 17, 2018 8:54:40 AM | 8

BTW it is worthwhile to keep in mind that back in 2001, Russia and China signed a treaty of friendship in which, among other things, both nations renounced all and any territorial designs on one another's territory. This meant that China would have renounced any claims on parts of Primorsky Kray in the Russian Far East along the Amur River, that used to be part of the old Ming and Qing empires.

The text of this treaty can be read at this link:
http://www.chinese-embassy.no/eng/dtxw/t110017.htm

There is one significant paragraphy to be noted:
Neither party will join any alliance or group that harms the other's sovereignty, security and territorial integrity. Neither of them will conclude such treaties with any third party, or allow a third country to use its territory to harm the other's sovereignty, security and territorial integrity.

Well ... there goes any attempt by Trump to prise apart Russian and Chinese friendship.

Tom Welsh , Jul 17, 2018 8:56:16 AM | 9
"Playing the global hegemon turned out to be very expensive. It led to the 2006 crash of the U.S. economy and its people have since seen little to no gains".

To continue the theme: "People? We don't need no stinkin' people". US government has long been directed towards the enrichment of a tiny clique of the super-rich and powerful. It is nothing more than a bloodsucking parasite on the USA itself.

[Jul 18, 2018] President Trump Holds a Joint Press Conference with the President of the Russian Federation

Youtube video.
Jul 18, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Jimmy Stone , 21 hours ago

I guess it was a successful meeting. What was all this news in some American news outlets, that it was going to be and is disaster? Unfortunately here in New Zealand we get our international news from cnn abc and BBC. Luckily I search for truth and go online to watch the full uncut interview. Nice coverage.

BarbaraL Lowell , 1 day ago

"I would rather take a political risk in pursuit of peace, than risk peace in pursuit of politics". Will any media have the guts and gusto that President Trump has to make this quote the headline? Or will they once again focus on the size of his hands or the color of his skin? I pray people wake up and celebrate the gravitas of this man.

Mary Hernandez , 1 day ago

Russia did nothing to help President Trump get elected PERIOD. We the American people voted him in PERIOD.

Bogdan Haotic , 1 day ago

God Bless the U.S.A and Russia

flewjewcoop , 1 day ago (edited)

I am growing proud to be an American again, President Trump. Thank you for your service and God bless you... along with the Russian people and their fine leader.

anthony k , 1 day ago

As a foreign observer, I can honestly claim, that this press conference between both leaders, was a very productive and successful conference. Well done to both presidents!

MegaBizzar , 1 day ago

The Elite Factions are not going to be happy about this.

Oli , 1 day ago

Browder and his business associates who have not paid taxes in the USA or Russia acquired 400 million dollars illegally and gave it to Hillary Clinton! No wonder the leftist didn't want this meeting to happen. They didn't want to be exposed

Vaniecia Ferguson , 1 day ago

I would have loved to seen the expressions on the faces of the media, and the Democrats and Mueller when Putin put it out there that there is a way to get the facts of who hacked the DNC/DCCC servers out there, and also a legal treaty that can allow the indicted people to be investigated, and Muellers team to be able to be present!! lol.... they really havent wanted the American public to know that there is a way to actually prove there isnt any proof!

Jeffery Jangala , 1 day ago

WooooHooooooooooo! Putin just called Mueller and Rosenstein on their BS!

Takoui Souvadjian , 1 day ago

So obvious that media and deep state and radicals on the left are protesting in a very exaggerated way after the presser. Notice lots of hastags against POTUS but no hasthags on the most important developments at the presser = $400 million to Hillary campaign from Russia. Folks, embrace this President. The better he makes America, the worst the attacks get. Just the fact that a US reporter ask such a file question against his President, in front of Putin and other foreign reporters is a disgrace and should be regarded as the utmost of treasonous acts. God bless your President. Defend him. Protect him. He could have very easily sided with the witch hunt but he chose to stay neutral knowing that cooperation with Putin is more important than looking good to the ridiculous media who would have vilified him in any way he answered that ridiculous question. Vote republican and make 2018 a victory for the right

Atlantean Sage , 21 hours ago

Russia is the 'enemy' only because Russia has thrown off the Jewish Mafia death grip around its throat ! The Jewish owned media and big finance are picking on Russia because they can't FLEECE Russia anymore !!!

Arm America , 1 day ago

That was a fantastic interview and both President Trump and President Putin did a great job. We Americans want PEACE ... But the disgusting MSM that are the enemies of America and the world do all they can to cause discord and trouble. We 'see' through their bullshit and despise them. All NORMAL people want to live in PEACE and God Bless President Trump and President Putin for working together to achieve that!!! #MAGA #TRUMP2020

warprat , 1 day ago

I was a Democrat for 30ys. Bernie was cheated and I voted for Trump. I didn't expect much from him. But he has shown himself to be an incredible man from day one, when he ripped up the TTP. An incredible President... God bless you Mr. President and keep you and your family safe. #WalkAway

System Servers , 1 day ago (edited)

So which country gets to arrest Soros? Didn't HRC break some Russian laws so she can be extradited and end up in a Russian prison? Will Russia sue the DNC for slander? Was the DNC's pet Pakistani working for Pakistani intelligence? These are the important questions nobody asked.

[Jul 18, 2018] Browder was heavily involved in the looting. He is heavy in distributing anti-Russian propaganda in a heavily Jewish controlled media, and he was all in for Clinton.

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

I Am Jack's Ma -> overbet Mon, 07/16/2018 - 18:56 Permalink

8 of 10, and all top 5 of Hillary's (on the books) donors were Jews - a group that is under 3% of the US population.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/10/top-five-clinton-donors-are-jewish-how-anti-semitic-is-this-fact.html

It has been reported in multiple mainstream and Jewish news sources that Jews contribute about 50% of donations to the Democratic Party.

Wherever one looks in print or tv news media, given that Jews are <3% of the US *and* Russian population, any objective review of

anti-Russian commentators would reveal a massive over-representation of Jews.

https://russia-insider.com/en/politics/its-time-drop-jew-taboo/ri22186

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/06/phil-giraldi/hating-russia-is-a-full-time-job/

After the collapse of the USSR, under Yeltsin, a large handful of 'oligarchs' grew immensely wealthy by buying Russian assets on the cheap. This was part of a privitization drive largely overseen by American economists.

The oligarchs were mostly Jews. The chief economic advisors were largely Jews.

http://www.softpanorama.org/Skeptics/Pseudoscience/harvard_mafia.shtml

https://www.thenation.com/article/harvard-boys-do-russia/

These are *facts*

Responding to my thanks for granting me the audience at such a hectic time, Boris Abramovich commented with a faint smile: "You would be writing the book in any case ..."

I understood that my visit was somewhat imposed on him so I got right to the point:

"Boris Abramovich, the real reason for writing this book is this. As you probably know there is a television show called 'The Puppets.' Puppets of Yeltsin, Yastrzhembsky, Chernomyrdin, Kulikov, and others perform. But the main puppeteer is behind the scenes -- his name is Shenderovich. And in real life there are Yeltsin, Kiriyenko, Fedorov, Stepashin and the others. But the main puppeteer has a long Jewish name: Berezovsky-Gusinsky- Smolensky-Khodorkovsky, and so on.

"This is to say that for the first time in a thousand years, since the first Jews settled in Russia, we hold the real power in this country. I want to ask you straight out: How do you intend to use it? What do you intend to do in this country? Cast it into the chaos of poverty or raise it from the mud? Do you understand that a chance like this comes only once in a thousand years? Do you understand your responsibility to our [Jewish] people for your actions?"

Boris Abramovich responded with some difficulty: "Of course, as you see, financial power is in Jewish hands, but we have never looked at this from the point of view of historical responsibility."

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v17/v17n6p13_Michaels.html

Putin stopped the fire sale, essentially by dividing the oligarchs, leveraging some against others.

Browder was heavily involved in the looting. He is heavy in distributing anti-Russian propaganda in a heavily Jewish controlled media, and he was all in for Clinton.

And he wants Trump impeached (I recommend reading the article below if you read just 1 link)

Most readers will identify Bill Broder with Hermitage Capital, but few will recall that the investment firm was also funded by one Beny Steimetz, the Israeli oligarch and financier just arrested (August 14) by Israeli and Swiss anti-corruption officials for widescale fraud and money laundering. The Russia privatization shark who was once Israel's richest man is a subject for another report. I only bring him up here to point at two facets of this war on Putin. First, the Jewish connection in all this is something that just needs to come out. Secondly, the ring of profiteers bent on Putin's demise all have gigantic skeletons in their wardrobes. A story citing one Putin hater, when investigated, always leads to ten more. This is no coincidence.

Back to Browder, his Hermitage was at one time was the largest foreign portfolio investor in Russia. That was before Vladimir Putin put a stop to the rape of Russia's legacy and the theft of her assets. This is undeniable fact, and even the lowliest of Russian peasants know it by now. Browder, a Chicago Jew, set out to profit from Russian privatization after Yeltsin, but was thwarted like other sharks when Putin's hammer fell on other mafiosos. RICO suits, libel cases, tax evasion charges, and ties to some of the seediest characters in world finance highlight the man who pushed the now famous Magnitsky Act into US foreign policy play. It's no coincidence that Browder has emerged as a central player in the ongoing investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 elections. The privateer who made billions off Russia privatization turned into a human rights activist, and now he's bent on seeing Donald Trump impeached!

https://m.journal-neo.org/2017/09/16/vladimir-putin-and-russia-versus-zionist-fairytales/

The war on Russia is very heavily a product of Jews pursuing Jewish group interests, internationally.

A man named Henry Ford once wrote a book on the topic. Of all the criticism it received and receives, that it is 'hate,' one will seldom find any effort to dispute its accuracy.

RationalLuddite -> I Am Jack's Ma Mon, 07/16/2018 - 19:33 Permalink

Terrific post I Am Jack. And also thank you for emphasising the unholy convergence of vested interests in Putin Russia demonization - the Jewish bankers raping Rusdia in the 90s on a scale not seen since the Mongols hordes, and Western oligarchs seeing a chance to become even more insanely wealthy (hence the London, Wall St, Pentagon, Fed, DC, Brussels etc involvement).

Putin is an extraordinary and immensely intelligent and brave individual who divided and knee-capped the world mafia. THIS is why he is demonised, not because he is some evil Tsar of Mordor. That being said he hasn't done it alone - the people of Russia made huge mistakes by allowing communism in, and economic genocide in the 1990s was wilful influcted upon them, but their resilience is extraordinary.

I hope they are all watching their backs. Putin if all people stated that he is careful about cornering rats with now way out, so i have a feeling that things are going to get unpredictable ...

RationalLuddite -> El Vaquero Mon, 07/16/2018 - 18:26 Permalink

http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/hating-russia-is-a-full-time-job/

Good article. Remember that Bill Browder's grandfather was head of the American Communist Party in the 1930s ...

The Killing of William Browder is compulsory reading if you want to sssure yourself about that lying theiving NPD sack of s*** Browder. Lots on him on Sott etc.

https://youtu.be/ryVavTF6hR0

Yeah - he's got nothing to hide.

I did post about 3 months back that Browder and the trillion dollar rape Russia in the 1990s , the Money Plane etc are the key to understand current events, Putin and what is being covered up now, in my opinion, but unfortunately it doesn't seem to get traction.

Cardinal Fang -> RationalLuddite Mon, 07/16/2018 - 19:09 Permalink

Yeah but $400 mill is what he put on the table, you know there is more shit behind this...

[Jul 18, 2018] Russia would like to ask a few questions to the US officials believed to have HELPED Browder funnel 400K to Clinton and probably avoid paying tax on 1.5 billion in Russia AND the US...

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Whoa Dammit -> I Am Jack's Ma Tue, 07/17/2018 - 10:39 Permalink

I'd not seen the AP reporters question that triggered this before. It looks like the reporter was trying to embarrass both Putin and Trump but wound up getting his ass, Clinton's ass, and the asses of the intelligence community handed to him instead.

wafm -> Whoa Dammit Tue, 07/17/2018 - 11:39 Permalink

too right. If I remember correctly, it was in the context of Putin saying Russia is open to have FBI guys come to question the 12 GRU guys indicted (no proof yet) by Mueller.

In return, he then said Russia would like to ask a few questions to the US officials believed to have HELPED Browder funnel $400K to Clinton and probably avoid paying tax on 1.5 billion in Russia AND the US...

Browder has to be on top of the US wanted list in the not too distant future or there really is no fuckin justice.

BROWDER IS A FUCKIN TRAITOR, LOCK HIM UP!

[Jul 18, 2018] Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception Alex Krainer: with review by The Saker

Aug 18, 2017 | thesaker.is
The Saker:
Today I want to introduce you to a book whose importance simply cannot be overstated: The Killing of William Browder: Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception by Alex Krainer. I consider that book as a *must read* for any person trying to understand modern Russia and where the new Cold War with Russia came from.
Most of you must have heard of the Magnitsky Act or even maybe of William Browder himself. You probably know that Browder was a British businessman who founded Hermitage Capital Management investment fund which Sergei Magnitsky represented as a lawyer and auditor. Finally, you must have heard that Magnitsky died (was killed) in a Russian jail while Browder was placed by the Russian government on a black list and denied entry. For the vast majority of you, that is probably as much thought as you ever gave this topic and I have to confess that this is also true for me. I never bothered really researching this issue because I knew the context so well that this, by itself, gave me a quasi-certitude that I knew what had happened. Still, when I read this book I was amazed at the fantastically detailed account Krainer provides to what is really an amazing story.
In his book Alex Krainer offers us the truth and truly shows us how deep the rabbit hole goes....
The Vineyard of the Saker
Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception – Alex Krainer: with review by The Saker The Saker

See also

As Congress still swoons over the anti-Kremlin Magnitsky narrative, Western political and media leaders refuse to let their people view a documentary that debunks the fable, reports Robert Parry.
Consortium News (Updated Aug. 4, 2017)
A Blacklisted Film and the New Cold War
Robert Parry

[Jul 18, 2018] Russia wants to question Christopher Steele, Michael McFaul, top politicians for aiding Bill Browder -- RT World News

Notable quotes:
"... "Browder's long-standing partners in crime." ..."
"... "on even terms." ..."
"... "meet US authorities half-way" ..."
"... "on the condition" ..."
"... "Realizing that the Russian prosecutors wouldn't let go off him easily, Browder has tried to cultivate connections with political influencers in in the US, and this can be seen through the Ziff brothers, and their support for the Democratic Party in the last election," ..."
"... Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | www.rt.com

Russia's prosecutor general will demand interviews with American congressmen, security services staff, and other high-profile individuals as it seeks to involve the US in its investigation into convicted financier Bill Browder. Moscow accuses Browder of illegally taking $1.5 billion out of Russia and fabricating evidence that led to the passing of the sanctions-imposing Magnitsky Act. As part of the investigation, the prosecutor general wants to speak to ex-MI6 agent Christopher Steele, author of the notorious Trump dossier, and former ambassador to Moscow Michael McFaul, who campaigned on behalf of Browder. Michael McFaul and Hillary Clinton in 2016. / Reuters

Other persons of interest on what Russia said was an incomplete list included David Kramer, former Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and president of think tank Freedom House, and the billionaire Ziff brothers, who are described as "Browder's long-standing partners in crime."

This was announced by Aleksandr Kurennoy, the head of the mass media department of the prosecutor general's office in Moscow, who said that Russia was ready to share its findings with US law enforcement agencies "on even terms."

Read more Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks during a joint news conference with U.S. President Donald Trump in Helsinki, Finland, July 16, 2018. © Grigory Dukor If Mueller investigation sends official request to question suspects, Russia will do that - Putin

The announcement follows hot on the heels of a proposal made by Vladimir Putin during his press conference with Donald Trump in Helsinki on Monday, in which he offered to "meet US authorities half-way" and allow the Mueller investigation into Moscow's election meddling to interview suspects in Russia, "on the condition" that Russian investigators could speak to suspects in the Browder investigation. Russia has previously tried to extradite Browder and gain access to others, but without success, though the businessman was briefly arrested in Spain in May, before being set free.

"Realizing that the Russian prosecutors wouldn't let go off him easily, Browder has tried to cultivate connections with political influencers in in the US, and this can be seen through the Ziff brothers, and their support for the Democratic Party in the last election," said Kurennoy, explaining the intertwining of business and politics that has led to the current investigation.

Browder has responded to Putin's words in the Washington Post, claiming that the Russian leader's offer meant he was "rattled" by Browder's accusations of corruption against Moscow officials.

US-born Browder made a fortune as an investor in Russia, starting in the 1990s, but was barred from entering the country in 2005, and has since become an arch-critic of the Kremlin. His allegations over the treatment of one of his staff, Sergei Magnitsky, while in custody, led to the sanctioning of select Moscow officials in the 2012 Magnitsky Act, but the legislation has since been expanded and can be applied to any foreign official, who is deemed to have violated human rights.

Browder was convicted in Russia in absentia in 2013 for fraud and tax evasion, and again, at the end of last year.

The 54-year old investor has also been a prominent voice in the Mueller investigation itself, though it does not concern him directly, and he submitted a scathing testimony about Russia to the US Senate a year ago.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

[Jul 18, 2018] Grand Deception The Truth About Bill Browder, the Magnitsky Act and Anti-Russian Sanctions by Alex Krainer

Jul 18, 2018 | www.amazon.com

In 2015, Bill Browder published Red Notice - purportedly a true story about his experience in Russia between 1996 and 2005. Upon closer scrutiny however, his story doesn't add up and demonstrably fails to stand up in a court of law. Nonetheless, on the dubious strength of that story, Browder has been able to lobby the U.S. Congress to pass the Magnitsky Act in 2012 which needlessly damaged the relations between the U.S. and Russia. Where he failed in courts of law, however, his campaign of relentless demonization of Russia and of Vladimir Putin has been successful in the court of public opinion in the West. As humanity finds itself on the precipice of yet another great war, what we need are bridges of mutual understanding and constructive engagement, not demonization. This book's modest hope is to contribute to the construction of those bridges.

"I consider [this] book as a must read for any person trying to understand modern Russia and where the new Cold War with Russia came from. ... Krainer offers us the truth and truly shows us how deep the rabbit hole goes. ... Get the book, read it, and then give it to your friends. This is one of the most important books to have come out in the recent years (and an excellent read too!)." --The Saker

"True to form, Alex brings to life the shenanigans and the deception of those who have gone out of their way to stay in the shadows, in this gripping true-life-detective non-fiction thriller." --Daniel Estulin, author of The True Story of the Bilderberg Group

"Krainer's book is an indispensable contribution to understanding the connection between the looting of Russia during the disastrous shock therapy of the Yeltsin years, and the dangerous anti-Russian provocations of today. His insight into the duplicitous role of Bill Browder provides compelling evidence of how unscrupulous greed can lead to much larger crimes." --Harley Schlanger, Schiller Institute

A commodities trader and hedge fund manager by day, Alex Krainer took up writing in an effort to uncover the truth about the pressing social, economic and political issues of the day, and share it broadly with the public. He was born in Croatia, one of the republics of former Yugoslavia, to a Croatian father and a Serbian mother. As a young man in the 1990s he lived through the downfall of the 'Communist Bloc' and served in the Croatian Army during the war in that country. Having observed first-hand the events that led to the destructive and tragic wars in former Yugoslavia, he believes that truth is the single most important requirement needed to preserve peace. This book represents Alex's personal endeavor to contribute an important element of truth toward a peaceful resolution of the dangerous yet needless new Cold War between the United States and Russia so that the relations between these two great nations may develop in the spirit of friendship, mutual cooperation and widespread prosperity.

You can visit Alex's blog at thenakedhedgie.com and the website for this book at thirdalliance.ch.

[Jul 18, 2018] The Killing of William Browder Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception by Alex Krainer

The book is delisted. You can read it at https://dxczjjuegupb.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/TheKilli free pdf download 218 pages
Jul 18, 2018 | www.amazon.com

David Gortner on April 27, 2018

Russia may be in much better shape economically now than during the 1990s and immediately ...

The book does make a compelling case against much of Browder's version of events in Russia over the years from the fall of the USSR through most of Putin's time as leader of Russia. But there is nothing about democracy in Russia since Putin came to power. How is democracy left out of the equation? Russia may be in much better shape economically now than during the 1990s and immediately afterward but there is no appearance of anything like democracy. We have seen nothing in the leadership of Russia; only Putin since 2000 (alternating with Medvedev). Read more

Darth Nerd on August 31, 2017

Very import to look behind the scenes of the demonization of Russia!

I agree with the reviews posted prior to mine. I only want to add that I feel it is extremely important that Browder's tale, which is based on his word only, be countered. It amazes me how many have swallowed Browder's (and his backers) bait. Alex Krainer shows that there is probably a hook hidden by the bait. The demonization of Putin and Russia seems to me very, very dangerous, and as best I can tell it's completely unfounded. This book shows that it is not only unfounded, it contradicts various facts.

I bought this book because of the news that Browder was blocking distribution and screening of Andrei Nekrasov"s documentary "The Magnitsky Act. Behind the Scenes".

This made me very suspicious that Browder has something to hide. If Nekrasov's documentary is untruthful I feel it would be much better to let it be distributed and then counter it with evidence than with legal bullying and other means to prevent it's distribution.

This book strongly reinforced my suspicions.

Avery on September 16, 2017
Needs a read

This book starts off slow, but the more you read, the more you will realize the menacing extent of Browder's deception. Krainer describes how Browder built a web of deception and lies in order to paint Russia as an evil place and America's enemy. Browder's book preys on America's wounded sense of global supremacy and casts the US as a victim in a country where we served as predators. Anyone who read Browder's book should read this one for sure.

Dostoyevsky on October 25, 2017
Things are not what they seem to be in the USA

A highly intelligent, frank and entertaining take-down of one of the biggest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the US public and the world - The Magnitsky Act.

The Bill Browder of the title, who has positioned himself both as victim and champion of the downtrodden is revealed as anything but that.
The picture painted of a vulture/hedge fund manager who took advantage of the lawlessness of the Yeltsin years to steal from the poorest of the poor of a broken USSR is chilling.

Browder's carefully cultivated and paid for image in the West (he was planning a movie about himself with the Weinstein brothers) is so at odds with the reality exposed here as to make up a kind of horror story effect out of Bram Stoker. Yet the way Alex Krainer tells it is both compelling and convincing. The thing is, no one else has looked at Browder's story critically. It was accepted as fact, with no corroboration of any sort, by a gullible, and probably complicit, US political establishment.

An even more terrifying question raised by the very existence of this book is: What was the interest of the US Senate and Congress in unquestionably believing this 'scheister,' Bill Browder, and using his outlandish and unsubstantiated claims to restart the Cold War and bring us to the brink of nuclear confrontation?

Get the book while you can. As with a documentary about him by Nekrasov, called 'The Magnitsky Act - Behind the Scenes,' Browder has armies of lawyers trying to squelch any information coming out about him and the events he fabricated. Understandably, since the story he told is so shabby and full of holes that any light cast on it at all begins to crumble the fabric of it.

Mark Boberg on October 23, 2017
Every Concerned American Should read this, then make up his or her own mind!

An interesting alternative view of Russia, Russia's President Vladimir Putin, and Bill Browder. Something every concerned American should read and consider, and then make up his or her own mind. Also some really good background on events in Russia since the fall of the Soviet Union and the subsequent rise and popularity of Pres. Putin.

His explanation of the Deflationary Gap in the Appendix helped to clarify several related ideas that I have picked up or thought of in the past,but never put together clearly the way Mr.Krainer does.

Roman on August 22, 2017
Riveting Expose of one of the Century's Big Hoaxes.

Alex Krainer's second book, "Killing of William Browder: Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception" is a meticulously scrupulous research of a fascinating tale whose protagonist has all the traits of a fiendish movie villain. Needless to point out, in the cacophonic pandemonium of relentless anti-Russian propaganda that permeates both political and mass-media scene in the West throughout 2017, Bill Browder, by trade a vulture investor, is depicted as akin to a holy warrior against the Devil himself, the Russian president Vladimir Putin.

In our increasingly insane world a fascinating tale of William Browder's role in pushing the Magnitsky Act, that was passed in the U.S. Senate in order "to punish those suspected of being involved in the death of Russian tax lawyer Sergei Magnitsky," might have eluded you. The Magnitsky Act that has passed the Congress on 3rd of January, 2012 resulted in blacklisting of five Russian nationals on 9th of January, 2017 and elevated Bill Browder, at least in his own eyes, to the status of a global human rights activist.

Enters "Killing of William Browder: Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception" and shatters that delusion. Krainer mercilessly dissects Browder's tale in the most minute details and, as he examines Browder's numerous statements, he portrays Browder as he truly is: not a magnanimous human rights champion but rather a wicked purveyor of (other man's) tragedy and salesman of (his own) self-aggrandizing fantasies. Bill Browder seems to me as a somehow cartoonish villain who makes us chuckle even while we shudder.

Krainer writing possesses a great sense of drama and a fine sense of irony. His book reads like a horrific thriller sprinkled with taunting humor. Even when he excoriates Browder's own "Red Notice" and his posing, he does it with penetrating wit: "Browder didn't neglect to throw in more ugly smears on Russia and the Russian people. He assures us that – 'Most Russians don't operate on high-minded principles Everything in Russia was about money. Making it, keeping it and making sure no one took it ' – (that) stands in stark contrast with Bill Browder and his goodfellas who did everything they did out of selfless desire to make the world a better place."

Krainer's study of Bill Browder's book and actions is a riveting, unflinching expose of what might end up being pivotal in revealing one of this decade's big hoaxes.

"Killing of William Browder: Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception" is a monumental work of an extraordinary skilled writer who pulls no punches as he bravely swims upstream.

darbycook on October 4, 2017
Who knew I'd like a subject matter this dry

Who knew I'd like a subject matter this dry, but I found myself LMFAO so many times I can't keep count. Beautifully done, Mr. Krainer!

Y. on September 29, 2017
Must read!

Well researched. Insightful and thought provoking

Amazon Customer on August 30, 2017
Excellent!

A well researched and interesting read. Recommended for those that would like to understand much more of the browder myth.

David Gortner on April 27, 2018
Russia may be in much better shape economically now than during the 1990s and immediately ...

The book does make a compelling case against much of Browder's version of events in Russia over the years from the fall of the USSR through most of Putin's time as leader of Russia. But there is nothing about democracy in Russia since Putin came to power. How is democracy left out of the equation? Russia may be in much better shape economically now than during the 1990s and immediately afterward but there is no appearance of anything like democracy. We have seen nothing in the leadership of Russia; only Putin since 2000 (alternating with Medvedev).

Daniel Good on December 30, 2017
It is amazing that Browder has been able to prevent the showing ...

It is amazing that Browder has been able to prevent the showing of an important documentary by Andrei Nekrasov on the Magnitsky Act and also prevent the distribution on the Amazon site of this excellent well written intelligent exposé of the fraud perpetrated by him. One wonders who is behind Browder that gives him such power and influence.

Who should Browder fear more: those who are supporting him or Vladimir Putin?

In this book, unavailable on Amazon, can be found:

1. one of the best summaries of the Yeltsin years;

2. a useful review of US-Russia relations in the XIX century; 3. a counter-view of the personality of V.V. Putin; 4. copious footnotes and a very valuable bibliography; 5. a deconstruction of William Browder's thriller, Red Notice.

Only the people who make those decision at Amazon know why the book is not available on their site.

[Jul 18, 2018] From what I know of Browder, he went to Russia in the 90's. Ten years later he owned a good chunk of Russian oil and other assets and pulling in profits of around $125 million per year.

See https://dxczjjuegupb.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/TheKilli free pdf download 218 pages
Jul 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

This book by Alex Krainer has been delisted by amazon Pft , Jul 17, 2018 11:30:45 PM | 183

I need to read this book by alex krainerthats which has been delisted by amazon. I bet Bill Browder is not a fan

http://mikenormaneconomics.blogspot.com/2017/08/deconstructing-bill-browders-dangerous.html?m=1

[Jul 18, 2018] Putin handed Trump a means of openly investigating Killary s/CIA s manipulation of US politics via the Browder investigation, the crime of manipulating the DNC to remove Bernie can also loop into the mix

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Boing_Snap -> eclectic syncretist Tue, 07/17/2018 - 09:43 Permalink

Putin handed Trump a means of openly investigating Killary's/CIA's manipulation of US politics via the Browder investigation, the crime of manipulating the DNC to remove Bernie can also loop into the mix.

Let's hope Trump follows through and exposes the nest of vipers. The majority of people are now seeing the light, only the people with skin the game or those far too controlled through an excellent propaganda/mass mind control experiment do not.

Edward Bernays and Joseph Goebels could only dream that their methods would go this far.

"But being dependent, every day of the year and for year after year, upon certain politicians for news, the newspaper reporters are obliged to work in harmony with their news sources."
― Edward L. Bernays , Propaganda

[Jul 18, 2018] Putin certainly didn't pluck that lying idiot's name randomly

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

RationalLuddite -> overbet Mon, 07/16/2018 - 18:37 Permalink

+50 Overbet. I posted before i read yours. I have tired of trying to convince people that 90s Russia and the thefts then and subsequent covering of crimes is STILL the key to understanding the Deep States obsession and fear of Putin and Russia. Soros, Clinton's, Chubias, the FED's off the books money printing, London money laundering , EU buying the stolen movables etc - they are all there. Browder's animus is also driving much behind the scenes with 'Russiagate'. Look people - you will see. Putin certainly didn't pluck that lying idiot's name randomly.

I urge people to at least read the 90s chapter in the Killing of William Browder (free online PDF) to begin to understand what is going on now.

shrimpythai -> RationalLuddite Mon, 07/16/2018 - 19:34 Permalink

https://dxczjjuegupb.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/TheKilli free pdf download 218 pages

RationalLuddite -> shrimpythai Mon, 07/16/2018 - 19:44 Permalink

Thanks heaps Shrimp.

The appendix on Jacob Rothschild alone and Yukos makes it worth the read. But if you read nothing else, read the chapters on Browder's interrogation and Russia in the 1990s - easy reads and give a great introduction to this orgy of psycopathy and mendacity. They are all connected

[Jul 18, 2018] The United States and the Russian Federation would seem to be natural allies

Notable quotes:
"... It will be a long time before US and Russia can become allies or friends. US imported a lot of east European dissidents since WWII. Many have risen to places of influence and also lecture at Universities and so forth. Hatred of Russia is now an established component of US culture. ..."
"... Whether of not Trump has the foresight, b's analysis is fundamentally interesting and to the point: A weak Western Europe and even more demographically challenged partners in Asia will not allow the US to keep up with even a loose coalition of China and Russia. India is a bit of a wild card in all this, but too hemmed geographically and by its own politics to help the US, even if it truly came into play. ..."
"... Putin mentioned Browder and 400 million in laundered money that supposedly went to Hillary somehow (thats a big sum , perhaps a tax haven account). ..."
"... Some Elements in both countries seem committed to making Putin an enemy and going to extraordinary lengths to make it happen. Putin wants Browder badly, supposedly for taxes ..."
"... following the money might be interesting ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Guerrero , Jul 17, 2018 4:30:52 PM | 116

The United States and the Russian Federation would seem to be natural allies and indeed
Russia crucially came to the aid of the USA at an extremely crucial juncture by sending
it's Pacific and Baltic fleets to San Francisco and New York/Washington DC respectively.

This was the darkest hour of the USA Civil War and the support of Russian military force
has been credited with keeping England from joining the conflict on the side of the South.

Guerrero , Jul 17, 2018 4:46:34 PM | 118

As for yesterday's meeting of Presidents Putin and Trump, I must say I was pleasantly surprised to find out that Trump is hardly the buffoon his detractors claim him to be.

Probably, Trump speaks like a buffoon when addressing buffoons, so his political enemies
pretend that everything coming out of this politician's mouth were coming from his heart.

The lack of specific content of the talks does not surprise. Many folks here have noted
that Trump has little or nothing to offer Russia; this meeting was not really for that.

I thought Trump did well to not play the fool where this would NOT be well appreciated;
he looked the part of a TV-President, and carried off the role I think with some aplomb.

The good news is that Trump actually has a brain and sense enough to know where he's at.
Trump's unpopularity in Mexico must be nearly 100%, so my view counters everyone else's.

Daniel , Jul 17, 2018 4:56:35 PM | 119
karlof1 quoting Pepe. "It was inevitable that a strategically crucial summit between the Russian and American presidencies would be hijacked by the dementia of the US news cycle;"

Which is to say, "Lookit the Squirrels!" From EU threats and putdowns to NATO expansion (while the pundits look elsewhere) to Britain canned protests to Putin Summit "TREASON!!!", it's been a veritable downpour of Squirrels!

Yes, it was inevitable. What is not is our responses.

Peter AU 1 , Jul 17, 2018 5:13:16 PM | 122
Guerrero 116
It will be a long time before US and Russia can become allies or friends. US imported a lot of east European dissidents since WWII. Many have risen to places of influence and also lecture at Universities and so forth. Hatred of Russia is now an established component of US culture.
stonebird , Jul 17, 2018 5:45:32 PM | 126
Continuing on from MacKinders theory of three central power groups, it is unlikely that the Russian China get-together can be broken up. As many posters have remarked. BUT, has Trump also learned the saying, "if you can't beat them, join them"?

It is clear that the US cannot physically "join" Eurasia, but there could be an alternative if one or more of US territories are part of the landmass. What "territories? Simple answer = if the EU is/becomes an US possession.
This is what I think that the Donald may have been proposing to Putin, that the "US overseas territory of the EU" could be allowed to be part of the One road. Thereby including the US in any power structure.

This is not as far fetched as it may appear on the surface. Donald's tactic with the ruling class of the EU has been to insult - and then reward. To see just how cowed and obedient they are. The bozos have proved themselves to be lackeys. Look at the reactions of the two singing sisters "Merkel and May", and how - after being insulted - they are left licking the hand that holds them down. The EU itself is an occupied territory (by NATO) and we, the idiots, are supposed to be paying more for our own submission to a military force. We, (the EU) are being hurt by sanctions and are supposed to approve and carry them out?

(Just as as aside ; NATO now has taken over 8 US military bases in Colombia and has appeared in other S.American countries, has bases in Kuwait, has Israel as an "observer" participating in exercises, as well as fighting in Afghanistan, is in Turkey etc. What have they got to do with a North Atlantic mutual admiration club ?)

For the US to join the Eurasian landmass it means the the invasion of Europe by the US Booty Snatchers, and its "conversion" into a totally subservient US "statelet". (This does not have to be a political manoeuvre, financial slavery will do just as well).
Individual nations?. Ruin them by massive immigration to break down societies. Destroy their right to act individually (Decision by Consensus at Brussels).

OK. This could be preferable for the world, to the "stop the One road" and delay tactics of the "Intelligence" groups and the Military-Industrial bloodsuckers in the US. Has the D actually acted as I have suggested above? No way of knowing....yet.

(PS: CAN anyone think of a better term for the "intelligence" services in the US as they appear to be anything except intelligent? )

fx , Jul 17, 2018 6:05:32 PM | 130
Whether of not Trump has the foresight, b's analysis is fundamentally interesting and to the point: A weak Western Europe and even more demographically challenged partners in Asia will not allow the US to keep up with even a loose coalition of China and Russia. India is a bit of a wild card in all this, but too hemmed geographically and by its own politics to help the US, even if it truly came into play.
Peter AU 1 , Jul 17, 2018 6:06:21 PM | 131
129
Perhaps the cultural hatred is more concentrated in the types that have taken political science lessons and the politicians.
The last round of sanctions was carried by 98% of the elected representatives. These were specifically to undermine Trump. I believe at that time, legislation was passed that only congress could end Russia sanctions.
Pft , Jul 17, 2018 6:10:29 PM | 132
Giving way too much credit to Trump. He is just a figure head. Besides his Business Empire borrowed tons of money from Russian oligarchs/banks and he may want to renegotiate the loan terms. Besides this Papa Bibi has good relations with Putin and has met 3 times this year, including last week. Iran is Israels priority and Trump will do as they say. And to add to this, Russia has liquidated 85% of their USTS holdings from 100 billion to 14 billion in just 2 months. Watch out below if Russias pal China does the same. Lots of elements at play here

As for the absurdity in the reaction by some in the US about nothing, it seems likely something is up thats not being talked about openly. Putin mentioned Browder and 400 million in laundered money that supposedly went to Hillary somehow (thats a big sum , perhaps a tax haven account). Browder is now a UK citizen to avoid US taxes and has much more than this to throw around in the UK. Some Elements in both countries seem committed to making Putin an enemy and going to extraordinary lengths to make it happen. Putin wants Browder badly, supposedly for taxes but I wonder if Browder may have ripped off one of the oligarchs who is head of the Russian mafia that has been connected to both Putin and Trump . No idea but following the money might be interesting


[Jul 18, 2018] Western appetites with respect to the lands settled by Russian-speaking populations long predate the Nazi invasion, the Napoleonic campaign of 1812 or even the ill-fated incursion of the King of Sweden Karl XII that ended at Poltava in 1709.

Jul 18, 2018 | disqus.com

burton50 • a day ago ,

Many thanks to Publius Tacitus for an excellent post.
It would, however, be appropriate to note that Western "appetites" with respect to the lands settled by Russian-speaking populations long predate the Nazi invasion, the Napoleonic campaign of 1812 or even the ill-fated incursion of the King of Sweden Karl XII that ended at Poltava in 1709. The whole stature of the Russian state in the history of the East Slavic territories is one long struggle to preserve its freedom from foreign domination in the context of fairly constant military emergencies on its borders, including but not limited to, the rule of the heirs of Ghengis Khan (1238-1240 to 1480), and the repeated attempts of the crowned heads of the various Swedish, Lithuanian, Polish, Polish-Lithuanian entities, and the Teutonic orders based in Livonia (modern-day Latvia and Estonia), to absorb lands long settled by Russian-speaking populations. The earliest (semi-legendary) chronicle accounts involving the "invitation" to the founder of the first Riurikid princely dynasty in the 9th century was organized by the local tribesmen following upon their forcible ejection of Swedish tribute takers from the Russian northwest. Thus, the entire authoritarian ethos of the Russian state as a garrison state – in many ways perfected in the reign of Grand Prince Ivan III Vasilievich (1462-1505) – was forged in the crucible of an almost constant struggle for national sovereignty. The Russian historian Kliuchevskii (1841-1911) characterized such a state as one in which the "state interest" (gosudarstvennyi interes') was supreme and while the population consisted of commanders, soldiers and laborers, there were no citizens in any modern sense. That this arrangement -- and a deep distrust of the collective "West" -- persists in the national mentality until the present time is, for me, not at all surprising.

Keith Harbaugh • a day ago ,

People who like PT's analysis above (like me) should also enjoy "sundance" 's analysis:
https://theconservativetree...

Also, regarding the videos on "The Unknown War", they are accumulated in a YouTube playlist:

Play Hide

[Jul 18, 2018] Pepe Escobar Russophobia Is A 24-7 Industry by Pepe Escobar

Russophobia feeds considerable part of official Washington (including monstrous intelligence agencies) and lion share of think tanks. As Upton Sinclair quipped: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
Notable quotes:
"... Russophobia is a 24/7 industry, and all concerned, including its media vassals, remain absolutely livid with the "disgraceful" Trump-Putin presser. Trump has "colluded with Russia." How could the President of the United States promote "moral equivalence" with a "world-class thug"? ..."
"... As if this was not enough, Trump doubles down invoking the Democratic National Committee (DNC) server. "I really do want to see the server. Where is the server? I want to know. Where is the server and what is the server saying?" ..."
"... Trump was unfazed. He knows that the DNC computer hard-drives -- the source of an alleged "hacking" -- simply "disappeared" while in the custody of US intel, FBI included. He knows the bandwidth necessary for file transfer was much larger than a hack might have managed in the time allowed. It was a leak, a download into a flash-drive. ..."
"... Additionally, Putin knows that Mueller knows he will never be able to drag 12 Russian intelligence agents into a US courtroom. So the -- debunked -- indictment, announced only three days before Helsinki, was nothing more than a pre-emptive, judicial hand grenade. ..."
"... No wonder John Brennan, a former CIA director under the Obama administration, is fuming. "Donald Trump's press conference performance in Helsinki rises to exceed the threshold of 'high crimes and misdemeanors.' It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump's comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin." ..."
"... No "grand bargain" on Iran seems to be in the cards. The top adviser to Ayatollah Khamenei, Ali Akbar Velayati, was in Moscow last week. The Moscow-Tehran entente cordiale seems unbreakable. In parallel, as Asia Times has learned, Bashar al-Assad has told Moscow he might even agree to Iran leaving Syria, but Israel would have to return the occupied Golan Heights. So, the status quo remains. ..."
"... Putin did mention both presidents discussed the Iran nuclear deal or Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action and essentially they, strongly, agree to disagree. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin have written a letter formally rejecting an appeal for carve-outs in finance, energy and healthcare by Germany, France and the UK. A maximum economic blockade remains the name of the game. Putin may have impressed on Trump the possible dire consequences of a US oil embargo on Iran, and even the (far-fetched) scenario of Tehran blocking the Strait of Hormuz. ..."
Jul 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Asia Times,

US President stirs up a hornet's nest with his press conference alongside his Russian counterpart, but it seems that no 'grand bargain' was struck on Syria, and on Iran they appear to strongly disagree

"The Cold War is a thing of the past." By the time President Putin said as much during preliminary remarks at his joint press conference with President Trump in Helsinki, it was clear this would not stand. Not after so much investment by American conservatives in Cold War 2.0.

Russophobia is a 24/7 industry, and all concerned, including its media vassals, remain absolutely livid with the "disgraceful" Trump-Putin presser. Trump has "colluded with Russia." How could the President of the United States promote "moral equivalence" with a "world-class thug"?

Multiple opportunities for apoplectic outrage were in order.

Trump: "Our relationship has never been worse than it is now. However, that changed. As of about four hours ago."

Putin: "The United States could be more decisive in nudging Ukrainian leadership."

Trump: "There was no collusion I beat Hillary Clinton easily."

Putin: "We should be guided by facts. Can you name a single fact that would definitively prove collusion? This is nonsense."

Then, the clincher : the Russian president calls [Special Counsel] Robert Mueller's 'bluff', offering to interrogate the Russians indicted for alleged election meddling in the US if Mueller makes an official request to Moscow. But in exchange, Russia would expect the US to question Americans on whether Moscow should face charges for illegal actions.

Trump hits it out of the park when asked whether he believes US intelligence, which concluded that Russia did meddle in the election, or Putin, who strongly denies it.

"President Putin says it's not Russia. I don't see any reason why it would be."

As if this was not enough, Trump doubles down invoking the Democratic National Committee (DNC) server. "I really do want to see the server. Where is the server? I want to know. Where is the server and what is the server saying?"

It was inevitable that a strategically crucial summit between the Russian and American presidencies would be hijacked by the dementia of the US news cycle.

Trump was unfazed. He knows that the DNC computer hard-drives -- the source of an alleged "hacking" -- simply "disappeared" while in the custody of US intel, FBI included. He knows the bandwidth necessary for file transfer was much larger than a hack might have managed in the time allowed. It was a leak, a download into a flash-drive.

Additionally, Putin knows that Mueller knows he will never be able to drag 12 Russian intelligence agents into a US courtroom. So the -- debunked -- indictment, announced only three days before Helsinki, was nothing more than a pre-emptive, judicial hand grenade.

No wonder John Brennan, a former CIA director under the Obama administration, is fuming. "Donald Trump's press conference performance in Helsinki rises to exceed the threshold of 'high crimes and misdemeanors.' It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump's comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin."

How Syria and Ukraine are linked

However, there are reasons to expect at least minimal progress on three fronts in Helsinki : a solution for the Syria tragedy, an effort to limit nuclear weapons and save the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces treaty signed in 1987 by Reagan and Gorbachev, and a positive drive to normalize US-Russia relations, away from Cold War 2.0.

Trump knew he had nothing to offer Putin to negotiate on Syria. The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) now controls virtually 90% of national territory. Russia is firmly established in the Eastern Mediterranean, especially after signing a 49-year agreement with Damascus.

Even considering careful mentions of Israel on both sides, Putin certainly did not agree to force Iran out of Syria.

No "grand bargain" on Iran seems to be in the cards. The top adviser to Ayatollah Khamenei, Ali Akbar Velayati, was in Moscow last week. The Moscow-Tehran entente cordiale seems unbreakable. In parallel, as Asia Times has learned, Bashar al-Assad has told Moscow he might even agree to Iran leaving Syria, but Israel would have to return the occupied Golan Heights. So, the status quo remains.

Putin did mention both presidents discussed the Iran nuclear deal or Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action and essentially they, strongly, agree to disagree. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin have written a letter formally rejecting an appeal for carve-outs in finance, energy and healthcare by Germany, France and the UK. A maximum economic blockade remains the name of the game. Putin may have impressed on Trump the possible dire consequences of a US oil embargo on Iran, and even the (far-fetched) scenario of Tehran blocking the Strait of Hormuz.

Judging by what both presidents said, and what has been leaked so far, Trump may not have offered an explicit US recognition of Crimea for Russia, or an easing of Ukraine-linked sanctions.

It's reasonable to picture a very delicate ballet in terms of what they really discussed in relation to Ukraine. Once again, the only thing Trump could offer on Ukraine is an easing of sanctions. But for Russia the stakes are much higher.

Putin clearly sees Southwest Asia and Central and Eastern Europe as totally integrated. The Black Sea basin is where Russia intersects with Ukraine, Turkey, Eastern Europe and the Caucasus. Or, historically, where the former Russian, Ottoman and Habsburg empires converged.

A Greater Black Sea implies the geopolitical convergence of what's happening in both Syria and Ukraine. That's why for the Kremlin only an overall package matters. It's not by accident that Washington identified these two nodes -- destabilizing Damascus and turning the tables in Kiev -- to cause problems for Moscow.

Putin sees a stable Syria and a stable Ukraine as essential to ease his burden in dealing with the Balkans and the Baltics. We're back once again to that classic geopolitical staple, the Intermarium ("between the seas"). That's the ultra-contested rimland from Estonia in the north to Bulgaria in the south -- and to the Caucasus in the east. Once, that used to frame the clash between Germany and Russia. Now, that frames the clash between the US and Russia.

In a fascinating echo of the summit in Helsinki, Western strategists do lose their sleep gaming on Russia being able to "Finlandize" this whole rimland.

And that brings us, inevitably, to what could be termed The German Question. What is Putin's ultimate goal: a quite close business and strategic relationship with Germany (German business is in favor)? Or some sort of entente cordiale with the US? EU diplomats in Brussels are openly discussing that underneath all the thunder and lightning, this is the holy of the holies.

Take a walk on the wild side

The now notorious key takeaway from a Trump interview at his golf club in Turnberry, Scotland, before Helsinki, may offer some clues.

"Well, I think we have a lot of foes. I think the European Union is a foe, what they do to us in trade. Now, you wouldn't think of the European Union, but they're a foe. Russia is a foe in certain respects. China is a foe economically, certainly they are a foe. But that doesn't mean they are bad. It doesn't mean anything. It means that they are competitive."

Putin certainly knows it. But even Trump, while not being a Clausewitzian strategist, may have had an intuition that the post-WWII liberal order, built by a hegemonic US and bent on permanent US military hegemony over the Eurasian landmass while subduing a vassal Europe, is waning .

While Trump firebombs this United States of Europe as an "unfair" competitor of the US, it's essential to remember that it was the White House that asked for the Helsinki summit, not the Kremlin.

Trump treats the EU with undisguised disdain. He would love nothing better than for the EU to dissolve. His Arab "partners" can be easily controlled by fear. He has all but declared economic war on China and is on tariff overdrive -- even as the IMF warns that the global economy runs the risk of losing around $500 billion in the process. And he faces the ultimate intractable, the China-Russia-Iran axis of Eurasian integration, which simply won't go away.

So, talking to "world-class thug" Putin -- in usual suspect terminology -- is a must. A divide-and-rule here, a deal there -- who knows what some hustling will bring? To paraphrase Lou Reed, New Trump City "is the place where they say "Hey babe, take a walk on the wild side."

During the Helsinki presser, Putin, fresh from Russia's spectacular World Cup soft power PR coup, passed a football to Trump. The US president said he would give it to his son, Barron, and passed the ball to First Lady Melania. Well, the ball is now in Melania's court.

[Jul 18, 2018] That information was no more the private property of the DNC and Clinton Campaign than a plan to rob a bank belongs to the robbers. Isn't that so, Mr. Mueller?

Jul 18, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

ill-gotten goods are undeserving of protection of law. The DNC and Podesta had no legitimate expectation of privacy in their combinations to defraud the public and steal elections.

It's been imputed that the Russians did this to damage the reputation of Hillary Clinton. To take the alleged damage to reputation angle to its conclusion, truth is an entirely sufficient defense to any charge of libel. What was revealed by an alleged hack was the truth, something that is entirely lacking in the rest of this affair.

As for the alleged theft and public release of email, ill-gotten goods are undeserving of protection of law. The DNC and Podesta had no legitimate expectation of privacy in their combinations to defraud the public and steal elections.

The Russian GRU is accused of revealing that the people who run the DNC and Clinton campaign committee colluded with each other to steal the nomination. The allegedly hacked emails show what they really did and thought during the fraudulent nomination of Hillary Clinton. It might be argued, that whomever revealed the truth actually did a public service for the American people. An odd sort of "act of war," that.

Finally, individual officials and military officers have a limited immunity and are not normally indicted by foreign states for intelligence activities such as electronic surveillance and hacking across borders. That is where the element of harm comes in. The only real precedent for this is the Rainbow Warrior case. In 1985, French intelligence officers blew up and sank a Greenpeace ship by that name anchored in Auckland, NZ harbour, killing a passenger, a Dutch photographer. A UN arbitrator held in that case the French agents were not immune under customary international law to prosecution in a New Zealand court and could be individually tried and jailed, but only because of the death of the victim as part of "a criminal act of violence against property in New Zealand . . . done without regard for innocent civilians." Greenpeace was additionally awarded damages in the UK under international Maritime Law because the vessel was a British-flagged ship.

Also bear in mind, the US and UK both provide immunity to their own intelligence officers and law enforcement officers for hacking and related computer crimes committed against foreign powers. The UK takes that a step further and exempts police officers for domestic hacking:

See, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/may/15/intelligence-officers-ha...

This is a dangerous precedent, and the likely result is to ignite retaliation and further exacerbate U.S.-Russian tensions. The entire staffs of the NSA, GCHQ and GRU could be similarly "prosecuted," but what will that accomplish? Even if every word of the indictment is fact, the indictment itself violates the norms of international law and this latest "Russiagate" escalation by Mueller seems intended to ratchet up the New Cold War.

That is why "Russiagate" is a legal sham, in my opinion. Even if the alleged Russian hack of the DNC email actually happened as claimed, and even if the hack was with bad intent, there was no real crime or harm in the release of that information. That information was no more the private property of the DNC and Clinton Campaign than a plan to rob a bank belongs to the robbers. Isn't that so, Mr. Mueller?

[Jul 17, 2018] I think there is much more to the comment made by Putin regarding Bill Browder and his money flows into the DNC and Clinton campaign. That would explain why the DNC didn t hand the servers over to the FBI after being hacked.

Highly recommended!
Jul 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

NumNutt -> 847328_3527 Tue, 07/17/2018 - 11:41 Permalink

I think there is much more to the comment made by Putin regarding Bill Browder and his money flows into the DNC and Clinton campaign. That would explain why the DNC didn't hand the servers over to the FBI after being hacked. If you follow the money a lot of what happened during the election and afterwards in regards to Russia and Trump start to make sense. Could it be that we are finally witnessing the removal the last layers of the center of the onion?

[Jul 17, 2018] I think there is much more to the comment made by Putin regarding Bill Browder and his money flows into the DNC and Clinton campaign. That would explain why the DNC didn t hand the servers over to the FBI after being hacked.

Highly recommended!
Jul 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

NumNutt -> 847328_3527 Tue, 07/17/2018 - 11:41 Permalink

I think there is much more to the comment made by Putin regarding Bill Browder and his money flows into the DNC and Clinton campaign. That would explain why the DNC didn't hand the servers over to the FBI after being hacked. If you follow the money a lot of what happened during the election and afterwards in regards to Russia and Trump start to make sense. Could it be that we are finally witnessing the removal the last layers of the center of the onion?

[Jul 17, 2018] Browder admitting Sergei Magnicky was not a lawyer. He was an accountant who was stealing money with shitbag Bill Browder.

Jul 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Thordoom -> onewayticket2 Mon, 07/16/2018 - 17:31 Permalink

Everybody should watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pu9DMxfTGhY Billy boy admitting Sergei Magnicky was not a lawyer. He was an accountant who was stealing money with shitbag Bill Browder.

[Jul 17, 2018] Deep State agent Bill Browder operated at the very nexus of the US and UK Intelligence Communities that conspired to produce both the fake Russiagate and very real Spygate

Jul 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Super Sleuth -> css1971 Tue, 07/17/2018 - 13:55 Permalink

BILL BROWDER: The CIA Asset and Neocon Zionist Who Was Used to Restart the Cold War with Russia

---

http://stateofthenation2012.com/?p=101126

" Deep State agent Bill Browder operated at the very nexus of the U.S. and U.K. Intelligence Communities that conspired to produce both the fake Russiagate and very real Spygate ."

-- Intelligence Analyst & Former Military Officer

Creative_Destruct -> King of Ruperts Land Tue, 07/17/2018 - 10:23 Permalink

" The US fabricated evidence to start the Vietnam war and the US fabricated WMD talk on the second war in Iraq. US intelligence had no idea the Berlin Wall was about to fall. The US meddled in Russia supporting a drunk named Yeltsin because we erroneously thought we could control him."

YUP! AMEN.

It's amusing to me that the Leftist's NOW have a blind-faith trust in government, whereas during the Vietnam war, and at the start of the Iraq war the opposite was (justifiably) the case.

And remember, the [neoliberal] Left was all OVER how we manipulated Russia into an Oligarchy:

https://www.thenation.com/article/harvard-boys-do-russia/

Boing_Snap -> eclectic syncretist Tue, 07/17/2018 - 09:43 Permalink

Putin handed Trump a means of openly investigating Killary's/CIA's manipulation of US politics via the Browder investigation, the crime of manipulating the DNC to remove Bernie can also loop into the mix.

Let's hope Trump follows through and exposes the nest of vipers. The majority of people are now seeing the light, only the people with skin the game or those far too controlled through an excellent propaganda/mass mind control experiment do not.

Edward Bernays and Joseph Goebels could only dream that their methods would go this far.

"But being dependent, every day of the year and for year after year, upon certain politicians for news, the newspaper reporters are obliged to work in harmony with their news sources."
― Edward L. Bernays , Propaganda

Boing_Snap -> eclectic syncretist Tue, 07/17/2018 - 09:43 Permalink

Putin handed Trump a means of openly investigating Killary's/CIA's manipulation of US politics via the Browder investigation, the crime of manipulating the DNC to remove Bernie can also loop into the mix.

Let's hope Trump follows through and exposes the nest of vipers. The majority of people are now seeing the light, only the people with skin the game or those far too controlled through an excellent propaganda/mass mind control experiment do not.

Edward Bernays and Joseph Goebels could only dream that their methods would go this far.

"But being dependent, every day of the year and for year after year, upon certain politicians for news, the newspaper reporters are obliged to work in harmony with their news sources."
― Edward L. Bernays , Propaganda

wafm -> NumberNone Tue, 07/17/2018 - 11:24 Permalink

Unless Herr fuckin Mueller comes up with some damn FUCKIN PROOF, and SOON, he should hang.

Browder IS a major scumbag and there is plenty of fuckin proof of that. Putin knows. 400 millions to the Clinton campaign. The sooner she fuckin hangs the better.

[Jul 17, 2018] MSNBC kept showing the headline, Former CIA Director Calls Trump Treasonous , yet they didn t use Brennan s name. Plus all the guests they had on were intel officers who either served under Obama, Mueller, or both

Notable quotes:
"... Then there's the fact, and I love this one, that the New York Times, in 2008, directly called Brennan a war criminal for openly supporting torture, rendition, and illegal wiretaps under the Bush Jr. administration, in the CIA, yet now he's the MSM's "main" consultant on these matters: ..."
"... Exactly. People simply have to remember 9/11 and that the US intelligence agencies are the most sophisticated and most controlling monsters on the globe. They are masters of disinformation and deception and if they were not trying to fool all of the people all of the time they would simply be out of work. ..."
"... The only sense we the people - the unwashed and constantly deceived masses - can make of the apparent division in the US over Russia, is through history. Historically Russia has been the arch enemy of both the Zionists and the Brits, and that it was the banksters of Wall Street, London and Zurich which did the most to install a communist regime in Russia, with their efforts beginning years before 1917. The plan was mainly to destroy the Russian establishment and religion, which they largely did, but the communist alternative they used had a life of its own. ..."
"... When the USSR folded in the early 1990's, the Western banksters and capitalists couldn't wait to get their hands on Russian resources and economic opportunities and they started gobbling up everything of value at bargain basement prices from the cash-starved Russians. In reaction, the old guard - the highly trained and efficient Russian intelligence community - reacted to the corruption and installed Putin on the throne. He nationalized the oil and gas industry and other interests and kicked the Western carpetbaggers clean out of Russia. They have never and will not forgive him, and his main opposition in Russia is the Zio establishment. ..."
Jul 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Space_Cowboy -> 1 Alabama Tue, 07/17/2018 - 13:52 Permalink

I posted this in another ZH article, but wanted to spread awareness about these matters:

I cracked up when MSNBC kept showing the headline, "Former CIA Director Calls Trump Treasonous", yet they didn't use Brennan's name. Plus all the "guests" they had on were intel officers who either served under Obama, Mueller, or both. Definitely attempted CYA going on.

Then there's the fact, and I love this one, that the New York Times, in 2008, directly called Brennan a war criminal for openly supporting torture, rendition, and illegal wiretaps under the Bush Jr. administration, in the CIA, yet now he's the MSM's "main" consultant on these matters:

https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/01/07/the-right-or-wrong-exp

Meanwhile, not to get off topic but.....

... ... ...

chunga -> Occams_Razor_Trader Tue, 07/17/2018 - 08:28 Permalink

Today would be a great day for Sessions to come out of his slumber. His name is Bill Browder.

FBaggins -> NidStyles Tue, 07/17/2018 - 11:48 Permalink

Exactly. People simply have to remember 9/11 and that the US intelligence agencies are the most sophisticated and most controlling monsters on the globe. They are masters of disinformation and deception and if they were not trying to fool all of the people all of the time they would simply be out of work.

The only sense we the people - the unwashed and constantly deceived masses - can make of the apparent division in the US over Russia, is through history. Historically Russia has been the arch enemy of both the Zionists and the Brits, and that it was the banksters of Wall Street, London and Zurich which did the most to install a communist regime in Russia, with their efforts beginning years before 1917. The plan was mainly to destroy the Russian establishment and religion, which they largely did, but the communist alternative they used had a life of its own.

When the USSR folded in the early 1990's, the Western banksters and capitalists couldn't wait to get their hands on Russian resources and economic opportunities and they started gobbling up everything of value at bargain basement prices from the cash-starved Russians. In reaction, the old guard - the highly trained and efficient Russian intelligence community - reacted to the corruption and installed Putin on the throne. He nationalized the oil and gas industry and other interests and kicked the Western carpetbaggers clean out of Russia. They have never and will not forgive him, and his main opposition in Russia is the Zio establishment.

Remember, how the US-Anglo-Zionist establishment reacted to the ousting of the Shah of Iran in 1979, and the end of Western control of Iranian oil and gas. That nation has been on the hit list ever since.

Trump is either not sincere in dealing with Putin and the US-led axis will pull something off very shortly, or he is doing something quite revolutionary and wants rapprochement.

I Am Jack's Ma -> freedommusic Tue, 07/17/2018 - 14:38 Permalink

worth a read...

Paranoia May Destroy Ya' – The Collective Response From the Co-Conspirators

I didn't vote for Trump. His handling of the Iran deal, Palestine and regurgitation of Likudnik talking points, many of his appointments... these aren't America First positions. They smack of Adelson and Bibi and using the MEK to foment moar regime change should trouble everyone.

However, I always conceded that he was better than Hillary. I almost voted for GJ but live in MA so why bother.

But he has my vote next time.

This isn't about Trump anymore - it's about the ability of a shadow government to undo elections with fisa and intel abuse and with the help of a controlled, CIA-minded legacy media.

I also think these 'deep state' types are determined to get major wars going, and determined to keep flooding the country with debt serfs and cannon fodder all while attacking our sovereignty and promoting endless wars that benefit the banks and MIC.

I think we are in an incredibly dangerous time and that Brennan and Clapper need to be indicted and arrested for sedition ASAP.

Ditto Hillary, and others, including Obama.

In simple terms its the Republic versus the Empire, and if you support the Republic, I don't care if we deeply disagree on lots of other stuff - I am on your side.

And if the Left marches on Washington as some are calling for, I think patriots need to go out and meet them with a peaceful show of our numbers.

Enough.

[Jul 17, 2018] Mass hysteria is exactly what it is, because it threatens their gravy train that comes from money taken by force from taxpayers. the citizens voted against the establishment, and the establishment is fighting back along with their MSM cronies.

Jul 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

MoreFreedom -> 847328_3527 Tue, 07/17/2018 - 14:31 Permalink

... that is a much harder conversation to have about why the Democrats have lost elections than just blaming a foreign villain and saying it's because Vladimir Putin ran some fake Facebook ads and did some phishing emails ... the conversation we need to be having [about lies/corruption from the deep state and powerful actors acting against US citizens interests, and decline of institutions that support US citizens' freedom], but we're not having, because we're evading it by blaming everything on Vladimir Putin.

I agree with Mish on all this, including " Nearly every political action that generates this much complete nonsense and hysteria from the Left and Right is worthy of immense praise" though he doesn't qualify/define "Left and Right" as the Left and Right establishment aka. the Uniparty. The statement wouldn't have applied to say the Left and Right establishment that existed when our founders created the country and were united to create a government that defends our lives, liberties and pursuit of happiness with an extremely limited (by today's standards) government. You don't see the Freedom Caucus getting hysterical about Trump's meeting Putin.

Mass hysteria is exactly what it is, because it threatens their gravy train that comes from money taken by force from taxpayers. the citizens voted against the establishment, and the establishment is fighting back along with their MSM cronies.

Farqued Up -> 847328_3527 Tue, 07/17/2018 - 15:12 Permalink

I've never been enthralled with Neil Cavuto due to considering him inferior as a host on things financial. Today he just crapped in his mess kit with me. He has to be dirty, the way he was defending the wonderful intelligence "community" of the USA, and was hinting that treason may not be a strong assessment of Trump with Putin. He is a real POS along with girly-man Shepard Smith. Not one criticism of any Cabalist about graft and corruption, and especially no mention of the uranium to Russia by Obama's and Hillary's REAL treason.

I repeat, all of you goofy imbeciles, Trump is sucking you down into the depths of embarrassment once the hammer drops. I expected the fruity Smith but must admit the Cavuto stupidity is a bit of a surprise. Someone has pics of that dumb fuck in a compromising situation.

[Jul 17, 2018] Sic Semper Tyrannis Editorial - China hacked Clinton s e-mail

This is a real bombshell, if true.
Jul 17, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Editorial - China hacked Clinton's e-mail I have some inside information.

Looks like a hacking operation by China. They nailed Clinton's completely unprotected system and then inserted code that gave them all her traffic over e-mail subsequent to that.

That included all her State Department classified traffic which she had her staff illegally scan and insert in her private e-mail. We are talking about 30,000+ messages.

Strzok was told that by the Intelligence Community Inspector General WHILE he was running the Clinton e-mail investigation and chose to ignore it. pl

Valissa Rauhallinen , an hour ago

Given the likely culprits, China made the most sense. Thanks for the confirmation!

Meanwhile, under the radar, another segment of the "Gordian knot" is getting ready to be cut.

White House Orders Direct Taliban Talks to Jump-Start Afghan Negotiations https://www.nytimes.com/201...
The Trump administration has told its top diplomats to seek direct talks with the Taliban, a significant shift in American policy in Afghanistan, done in the hope of jump-starting negotiations to end the 17-year war.

The Taliban have long said they will first discuss peace only with the Americans, who toppled their regime in Afghanistan in 2001. But the United States has mostly insisted that the Afghan government must take part.

The recent strategy shift, which was confirmed by several senior American and Afghan officials, is intended to bring those two positions closer and lead to broader, formal negotiations to end the long war.
-----------------------

Bring home the troops!

Jay M , 2 hours ago
Glad to hear we are vassals of China and others. That multipolar world must have been part of someone's 13 dim chess?
Harlan Easley , 3 hours ago
I am an independent. I voted for Obama twice because his opponents were so unappealing. I am starting to hate the left. I view them and the neocon establishment behavior nothing short of treasonous.
Mark McCarty , 3 hours ago
So China was the "non-Russian foreign power" that Gohmert referred to when interrogating Strozok. Veeeery interesting!
Fred S , 4 hours ago
To ask the obvious question: when did the IC inform President Obama?

[Jul 16, 2018] Putin Claims U.S. Intelligence Agents Funneled $400K To Clinton Campaign Zero Hedge

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... For instance, we can bring up Mr. Browder, in this particular case. Business associates of Mr. Browder have earned over $1.5 billion in Russia and never paid any taxes neither in Russia or the United States and yet the money escaped the country. They were transferred to the United States. They sent [a] huge amount of money, $400,000,000, as a contribution to the campaign of Hillary Clinton. Well that's their personal case. ..."
"... we have solid reason to believe that some [US] intelligence officers accompanied and guided these transactions. So we have an interest in questioning them. ..."
"... Browder is notoriously the man behind the 2012 Magnitsky Act, which exploited Congressional willingness to demonize Russia and has done so much to poison relations between Washington and Moscow. ..."
"... Browder, a media favorite who self-promotes as "Putin's enemy #1," portrays himself as a selfless human rights advocate, but is he? He has used his fortune to threaten lawsuits for anyone who challenges his version of events, effectively silencing many critics. He claims that his accountant Sergei Magnitsky was a crusading "lawyer" who discovered a $230 million tax-fraud scheme that involved the Browder business interest Hermitage Capital but was, in fact, engineered by corrupt Russian police officers who arrested Magnitsky and enabled his death in a Russian jail. ..."
"... William Browder is again in the news recently in connection with testimony related to Russiagate. On December 16th Senator Diane Feinstein of the Senate Judiciary Committee released the transcript of the testimony provided by Glenn Simpson, founder of Fusion GPS. According to James Carden, Browder was mentioned 50 times, but the repeated citations apparently did not merit inclusion in media coverage of the story by the New York Times, Washington Post and Politico. ..."
Jul 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

07/16/2018

Vladimir Putin made a bombshell claim during Monday's joint press conference with President Trump in Helsinki, Finland, when the Russian President said some $400 million )should be $400K) in illegally earned profits was funneled to the Clinton campaign by associates of American-born British financier Bill Browder - at one time the largest foreign portfolio investors in Russia. The scheme involved members of the U.S. intelligence community, said Putin, who he said "accompanied and guided these transactions."

Browder made billions in Russia during the 90's. In December, a Moscow court sentenced Browder in absentia to nine years in prison for tax fraud, while he was also found guilty of tax evasion in a separate 2013 case. Putin accused Browder's associates of illegally earning over than $1.5 billion without paying Russian taxes, before sending $400 million to Clinton. After offering to allow special counsel Robert Mueller's team to come to Russia for their investigation - as long as there was a reciprocal arrangement for Russian intelligence to investigate in the U.S., Putin said this:

For instance, we can bring up Mr. Browder, in this particular case. Business associates of Mr. Browder have earned over $1.5 billion in Russia and never paid any taxes neither in Russia or the United States and yet the money escaped the country. They were transferred to the United States. They sent [a] huge amount of money, $400,000,000, as a contribution to the campaign of Hillary Clinton. Well that's their personal case.

It might have been legal, the contribution itself but the way the money was earned was illegal. So we have solid reason to believe that some [US] intelligence officers accompanied and guided these transactions. So we have an interest in questioning them.

From a report we noted in February by Philip Giraldi of The Strategic Culture Foundation :

Israel Shamir, a keen observer of the American-Russian relationship, and celebrated American journalist Robert Parry both think that one man deserves much of the credit for the new Cold War and that man is William Browder, a hedge fund operator who made his fortune in the corrupt 1990s world of Russian commodities trading.

Browder is also symptomatic of why the United States government is so poorly informed about international developments as he is the source of much of the Congressional "expert testimony" contributing to the current impasse. He has somehow emerged as a trusted source in spite of the fact that he has self-interest in cultivating a certain outcome. Also ignored is his renunciation of American citizenship in 1998, reportedly to avoid taxes. He is now a British citizen.

Browder is notoriously the man behind the 2012 Magnitsky Act, which exploited Congressional willingness to demonize Russia and has done so much to poison relations between Washington and Moscow. The Act sanctioned individual Russian officials, which Moscow has rightly seen as unwarranted interference in the operation of its judicial system.

Browder, a media favorite who self-promotes as "Putin's enemy #1," portrays himself as a selfless human rights advocate, but is he? He has used his fortune to threaten lawsuits for anyone who challenges his version of events, effectively silencing many critics. He claims that his accountant Sergei Magnitsky was a crusading "lawyer" who discovered a $230 million tax-fraud scheme that involved the Browder business interest Hermitage Capital but was, in fact, engineered by corrupt Russian police officers who arrested Magnitsky and enabled his death in a Russian jail.

Many have been skeptical of the Browder narrative, suspecting that the fraud was in fact concocted by Browder and his accountant Magnitsky. A Russian court recently supported that alternative narrative, ruling in late December that Browder had deliberately bankrupted his company and engaged in tax evasion. He was sentenced to nine years prison in absentia.

William Browder is again in the news recently in connection with testimony related to Russiagate. On December 16th Senator Diane Feinstein of the Senate Judiciary Committee released the transcript of the testimony provided by Glenn Simpson, founder of Fusion GPS. According to James Carden, Browder was mentioned 50 times, but the repeated citations apparently did not merit inclusion in media coverage of the story by the New York Times, Washington Post and Politico.

Fusion GPS, which was involved in the research producing the Steele Dossier used to discredit Donald Trump, was also retained to provide investigative services relating to a lawsuit in New York City involving a Russian company called Prevezon. As information provided by Browder was the basis of the lawsuit, his company and business practices while in Russia became part of the investigation. Simmons maintained that Browder proved to be somewhat evasive and his accounts of his activities were inconsistent. He claimed never to visit the United States and not own property or do business there, all of which were untrue, to include his ownership through a shell company of a $10 million house in Aspen Colorado. He repeatedly ran away , literally, from attempts to subpoena him so he would have to testify under oath.

Per Simmons, in Russia, Browder used shell companies locally and also worldwide to avoid taxes and conceal ownership, suggesting that he was likely one of many corrupt businessmen operating in what was a wild west business environment.

My question is, "Why was such a man granted credibility and allowed a free run to poison the vitally important US-Russia relationship?" The answer might be follow the money. Israel Shamir reports that Browder was a major contributor to Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland, who was the major force behind the Magnitsky Act.

[Jul 16, 2018] Putin Claims U.S. Intelligence Agents Funneled $400K To Clinton Campaign Zero Hedge

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... For instance, we can bring up Mr. Browder, in this particular case. Business associates of Mr. Browder have earned over $1.5 billion in Russia and never paid any taxes neither in Russia or the United States and yet the money escaped the country. They were transferred to the United States. They sent [a] huge amount of money, $400,000,000, as a contribution to the campaign of Hillary Clinton. Well that's their personal case. ..."
"... we have solid reason to believe that some [US] intelligence officers accompanied and guided these transactions. So we have an interest in questioning them. ..."
"... Browder is notoriously the man behind the 2012 Magnitsky Act, which exploited Congressional willingness to demonize Russia and has done so much to poison relations between Washington and Moscow. ..."
"... Browder, a media favorite who self-promotes as "Putin's enemy #1," portrays himself as a selfless human rights advocate, but is he? He has used his fortune to threaten lawsuits for anyone who challenges his version of events, effectively silencing many critics. He claims that his accountant Sergei Magnitsky was a crusading "lawyer" who discovered a $230 million tax-fraud scheme that involved the Browder business interest Hermitage Capital but was, in fact, engineered by corrupt Russian police officers who arrested Magnitsky and enabled his death in a Russian jail. ..."
"... William Browder is again in the news recently in connection with testimony related to Russiagate. On December 16th Senator Diane Feinstein of the Senate Judiciary Committee released the transcript of the testimony provided by Glenn Simpson, founder of Fusion GPS. According to James Carden, Browder was mentioned 50 times, but the repeated citations apparently did not merit inclusion in media coverage of the story by the New York Times, Washington Post and Politico. ..."
Jul 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

07/16/2018

Vladimir Putin made a bombshell claim during Monday's joint press conference with President Trump in Helsinki, Finland, when the Russian President said some $400 million )should be $400K) in illegally earned profits was funneled to the Clinton campaign by associates of American-born British financier Bill Browder - at one time the largest foreign portfolio investors in Russia. The scheme involved members of the U.S. intelligence community, said Putin, who he said "accompanied and guided these transactions."

Browder made billions in Russia during the 90's. In December, a Moscow court sentenced Browder in absentia to nine years in prison for tax fraud, while he was also found guilty of tax evasion in a separate 2013 case. Putin accused Browder's associates of illegally earning over than $1.5 billion without paying Russian taxes, before sending $400 million to Clinton. After offering to allow special counsel Robert Mueller's team to come to Russia for their investigation - as long as there was a reciprocal arrangement for Russian intelligence to investigate in the U.S., Putin said this:

For instance, we can bring up Mr. Browder, in this particular case. Business associates of Mr. Browder have earned over $1.5 billion in Russia and never paid any taxes neither in Russia or the United States and yet the money escaped the country. They were transferred to the United States. They sent [a] huge amount of money, $400,000,000, as a contribution to the campaign of Hillary Clinton. Well that's their personal case.

It might have been legal, the contribution itself but the way the money was earned was illegal. So we have solid reason to believe that some [US] intelligence officers accompanied and guided these transactions. So we have an interest in questioning them.

From a report we noted in February by Philip Giraldi of The Strategic Culture Foundation :

Israel Shamir, a keen observer of the American-Russian relationship, and celebrated American journalist Robert Parry both think that one man deserves much of the credit for the new Cold War and that man is William Browder, a hedge fund operator who made his fortune in the corrupt 1990s world of Russian commodities trading.

Browder is also symptomatic of why the United States government is so poorly informed about international developments as he is the source of much of the Congressional "expert testimony" contributing to the current impasse. He has somehow emerged as a trusted source in spite of the fact that he has self-interest in cultivating a certain outcome. Also ignored is his renunciation of American citizenship in 1998, reportedly to avoid taxes. He is now a British citizen.

Browder is notoriously the man behind the 2012 Magnitsky Act, which exploited Congressional willingness to demonize Russia and has done so much to poison relations between Washington and Moscow. The Act sanctioned individual Russian officials, which Moscow has rightly seen as unwarranted interference in the operation of its judicial system.

Browder, a media favorite who self-promotes as "Putin's enemy #1," portrays himself as a selfless human rights advocate, but is he? He has used his fortune to threaten lawsuits for anyone who challenges his version of events, effectively silencing many critics. He claims that his accountant Sergei Magnitsky was a crusading "lawyer" who discovered a $230 million tax-fraud scheme that involved the Browder business interest Hermitage Capital but was, in fact, engineered by corrupt Russian police officers who arrested Magnitsky and enabled his death in a Russian jail.

Many have been skeptical of the Browder narrative, suspecting that the fraud was in fact concocted by Browder and his accountant Magnitsky. A Russian court recently supported that alternative narrative, ruling in late December that Browder had deliberately bankrupted his company and engaged in tax evasion. He was sentenced to nine years prison in absentia.

William Browder is again in the news recently in connection with testimony related to Russiagate. On December 16th Senator Diane Feinstein of the Senate Judiciary Committee released the transcript of the testimony provided by Glenn Simpson, founder of Fusion GPS. According to James Carden, Browder was mentioned 50 times, but the repeated citations apparently did not merit inclusion in media coverage of the story by the New York Times, Washington Post and Politico.

Fusion GPS, which was involved in the research producing the Steele Dossier used to discredit Donald Trump, was also retained to provide investigative services relating to a lawsuit in New York City involving a Russian company called Prevezon. As information provided by Browder was the basis of the lawsuit, his company and business practices while in Russia became part of the investigation. Simmons maintained that Browder proved to be somewhat evasive and his accounts of his activities were inconsistent. He claimed never to visit the United States and not own property or do business there, all of which were untrue, to include his ownership through a shell company of a $10 million house in Aspen Colorado. He repeatedly ran away , literally, from attempts to subpoena him so he would have to testify under oath.

Per Simmons, in Russia, Browder used shell companies locally and also worldwide to avoid taxes and conceal ownership, suggesting that he was likely one of many corrupt businessmen operating in what was a wild west business environment.

My question is, "Why was such a man granted credibility and allowed a free run to poison the vitally important US-Russia relationship?" The answer might be follow the money. Israel Shamir reports that Browder was a major contributor to Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland, who was the major force behind the Magnitsky Act.

[Jul 16, 2018] When Did Russia Become an Adversary by Gary Leupp

Notable quotes:
"... decisive point. ..."
Jul 16, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

July 16, 2018
"Russia is an adversary." How many times have we heard this lately? Perhaps in some schoolmarmish reminder from a CNN, MSNBC or Fox anchor. Everybody's just supposed to know this. But when did it become received wisdom?

How many times did we hear that Russia was an adversary in the 1990s, when Boris Yeltsin ruled over the Russian Federation, presiding over a bleak decade of economic downward spiral, banning the Communist Party (1991-93), bombarding the Duma building in 1993 during a constitutional crisis, colluding with the U.S. to fix the 1996 Russian presidential election, tolerating repeated U.S./NATO interventions in former Russian ally Yugoslavia from 1994 to 1999, welcoming Harvard Business School advisors to Moscow to reform the Russian economy?

(Oops, I must remind myself that my current university students were for the most part born in the late 90s. So they might not remember hearing much about Russia at all.)

Actually we didn't as I recall hear anything at all about enmity with Russia.

Russia had gone from being the hulking Eurasian brown bear of the Cold War era to the cuddly teddy bear of a drunken buffoon, Boris Yeltsin. Russia was not an enemy but a pathetic foil, the other superpower experiencing abject defeat as the U.S. asserted "full-spectrum dominance" during the "American Century" of the 2000s, an object of amusement by those crowing over the U.S.'s (imagined) victory in the Cold War.

Russia was not an adversary when, following the 9/11 attacks, Yeltsin's successor Vladimir Putin offered NATO a transport route through Russia to supply the alliance in its Afghan War. I don't recall hearing any official announcement to the effect that Russia had been judged an adversary at that point -- by anyone I respect, anyway.

Was it in June 1999 when the Russian Army moved to secure Pristina Airport in Kosovo, at the end of NATO's aggressive campaign in the Serbian province? This incident strikes me not as a provocation but as a measured move and pointed statement to NATO (the anti-Soviet military alliance that refuses to fold as the Warsaw Pact did in 1990, and which has increasingly become a tool of U.S. imperialism) that Russia too retains historical interests in the Balkans.

The fact that Russia opposed the cruelly absurd Rambouillet ultimatum followed by the NATO war on Serbia did not make Russia my enemy; I absolutely agreed that the war was wrong. My adversary was Madeleine Albright, who wanted war in Kosovo and delighted in the result (an independent country of Kosovo, a failed state wrenched illegally from Serbia, a drugs hub and ceter of human trafficking scheduled for NATO admission).

Did Russia become an adversary in 2008, when (after the U.S. had recognized Kosovo's independence, as a thing needing no justification because it was as Condi Rice put it "sui generis") Russia went ahead and recognized two separatist republics in what had been the Georgian SSR, South Ossetia and Abkhazia? Did it become such when Russia briefly invaded Georgia, where a poathetic U.S. puppet (Mikhail Saakashvili) brought to power during the "color revolution" (Rose Revolution) of 2003 emboldened by a promise of foture NATO membership provoked Russian forces stationed in South Ossetia?

Recall how at the time Sen. John McCain said, "We are all Georgians now" and called for military aid to Georgia. (McCain's always been clear on who the enemy was, and while you might suppose that his extreme militarist views would have wholly discredited him, he is every news anchor's ideal, the ultimate U.S. patriot and war hero.) But the Bush administration declined to provoke Russia; had not Bush seen into Putin's soul, the soul of a man deeply concerned about the interests of his country?

Enter the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton as secretary of state intent on arranging a "reset" of the bilateral relationship. But the expansion of NATO to include Albania and Croatia was not helpful. Nor was the campaign, waged by the "National Foundation for Democracy" and other foreign NGOs in Ukraine, to topple the elected president Viktor Yanukovych (an opponent of Ukraine's NATO entry) and replace him with one that would join the anti-Russian alliance.

In February 2014 a coup plainly conceptualized in Washington, amply documented by intercepted calls between Victoria Nuland and the U.S. ambassador in Ukraine, succeeded in toppling Yanukovych, who fled to Russia. Ethnic Russians who dominate in the eastern Donbas region predictably rebelled against the fascist-tinged new Kiev government. Russia predictably annexed (re-annexed) Crimea to insure its continued control over its bases.

Look at the map. Look at how big Russia is. Look at where it has naval bases. Russia is not like the U.S. with coasts dotted with naval bases. It has some on the Baltic Sea, one in Vladivostok on the Pacific, Murmansk on the Barents Sea in the far north. The Black Sea Fleet present in Crimea from the 1770s is important to what any objective professor of international relations would call "Russian national security." Of course the Russians were angry and concerned.

That I think was the decisive point. Yes, February 2014. The relentless drive of the U.S. to complete the expansion of NATO, to integrate the largest nation on the European continent, which some neocons call "the crown jewel" into the alliance, using in this case the cause of "the Ukrainian people's European aspirations" failed . It invited an immediate, decisive Russian response. An investment of $ 5 billion and preposterous interventions such as the visits of Nuland, John McCain and Lindsey Graham to the Maidan Square in Kiev had produced a new government of dubious legitimacy as well as a frozen conflict.

Russia became an "adversary" because it refused to accept massive U.S. intervention in the politics of a neighboring country more closely integrated into Russian history and civilization that Mexico is integrated into the U.S. in such respects. It's an adversary because it opposes NATO, which is to say, it resists its own military encirclement. As any U.S. leadership would under similar circumstances. (Imagine an existing Russia-centered military pact including most of Central America, Cuba and Venzuela moving to include Mexico. The "Monroe Doctrine" forbids colonization and the establishment of military bases by Old World powers in the New World. But the U.S. expects Russia to accept NATO bases on its very borders. And no TV journalist bothers to raise this, or think historically, critically, comparatively.)

But don't expect cable commentators to dwell on NATO. No, Putin is hostile to the west because he hates liberal democracy, the value of the free ballot, human rights. He just wants to divide Europe, supporting nationalists over mainstream parties. He wants to disrupt democracies like the Grinch wanted to spoil Christmas. It's not a matter of attributing him a particular ideology like Marxism. He's just evil, and you, dear viewer, are supposed to realize that.

* * * *

The basis of Kantian ethics is Matthew 7:2. Do unto others what you would have them do unto you. The U.S. is -- through NATO expansion, provocations of Russia, application of sanctions of Russia and demand for allies' participation in them -- subjecting its one-time (Yeltsin-era) "partner" to insulting treatment.

NATO announces expansion. Moscow complains, asks "Why?" NATO responds: "Don't worry. This is not directed at you." Russia replies: "Of course it's directed against us. Don't be silly."

In its long history, Russia has been attacked from eastern or central Europe many times (as well as from the Caucasus in southern Europe). German crusader knights invaded in 1242. Lithuania invaded in the fourteenth century, when the Lithuanian state was greater than Muscovy. In the seventeenth and eighteenth century there were multiple invasions from Sweden and/or Poland. Napoleon invaded between 1798 and 1815; Tolstoy's War and Peace chronicles this epic conflict. Probably around 400,000 civiian casualties. In 1940 the Germans launched Operation Barbarossa, the invasion of Russia that took eleven million soldiers' lives and those of 26 million civilians.

What has the U.S. experienced comparable to these invasions? How well can a brainwashed North American understand the problem of securing borders, not against poor immigrants, but against invasion? How many are equipped, by education, media, and political discourse, to understand geopolitics from the point of view of Russians?

(I do not mean to suggest that Russians have a common view; Russia is a civil society and debates rage. But my sense is that Russians of many different stripes see NATO as frightening and threatening and will support the regime in resisting its expansion. As they and all of us should.)

The summit is imminent. I would hope that Putin in Helsinki says, "Look, let's agree state-sponsored hacking and surveillance, as conducted by many governments, are big problems. Let us work to resolve these issues. I'm just glad you were elected, not Hillary, because she was horrible. Look what she did in Libya and Syria. You seem sincere about improving relations but we're concerned about apparent divisions in your staff since we keep getting conflicting messages .

"In Syria we want a stable secular (not religiously-based) regime. We think the Syrian Arab Army is the best guarantor of stability and the defeat of ISIL and other al-Qaeda spin-offs. We understand your desire to continue to confront ISIL in northeastern Syria, such as it is, and although our Damascus ally condemns it as a violation of Syrian sovereignty we have been cooperating with you off and on against ISIL -- even though in Sept. 2016 you sabotaged an agreement with us to coordinate strikes when you attacked Deir Ezzor killing 100 of our Syrian allies.

"We want to facilitate the departure of your forces as you've indicated you want to accomplish. As for arranging Iranian departure, we do not control Iran and the Iranians have made it clear they will withdraw advisors from Syria and Iraq only at their governments' request. I our view they have played a positive role against ISIL and other al-Qaeda factions and spin-offs. We do not agree with your vilification of Iran and indeed will be expanding commercial and military ties. We urge you not to pressure your allies to cut all trade ties with Iran; we and the Chinese will profit in any case.

"On Ukraine, you know, Russia will never return Crimea to Ukraine. You must please decide whether you want to sanction us forever for something that is not going to change, or do what Condi Rice did in 2008 (recognize a sui generis ) and reset the U.S.-Russian relationship as loser Hillary could not do. We can make a deal about concrete implementation of the Minsk Agreements.

"We are still very interested in an Exxon-Gasprom deal on Arctic oil drilling, the one Rex Tillerson was negotiating when the sanctions were applied in 2014. Of course we want a Trump Tower eventually. Why can't we be friends?

"Let's announce U.S. full participation in the Astana negotiations with Syria, Turkey, Iran and Russia to facilitate inter-Syrian dialogue to produce a peace settlement and new elections, and in the Minsk talks between Russia, Ukraine, the Ukrainian opposition, and European parties. And maybe an agreement not to expand NATO to include Ukraine or Georgia. That will show the world tensions are declining an enhance your prospects for that Nobel Peace prize you so deserve."

May flattery make Putin a friend. He is not my adversary, or this country's adversary. He's the adversary of those who, in their desire to topple Trump on any basis whatsoever, are happy to mentally leapfrog back to the McCarthy era, trash their object of disdain as a Russian puppet and even demand that Trump cancel his summit because of a suspiciously time Mueller Investigation announcement of more Russian indictments.

Russophobia has proven as strong as "anticommunism" as a persistent, unquestioned force in this country at this critical time. Both its strength and stupidity are frightening. If Trump's uniquely odd presidency sees the possibility of rapprochement with Russia -- smothered by the traditional wise and evil councilors -- -we might as well have Goldwater Girl Clinton in the White House, labeling Putin Hitler and likening Crimea to the Sudetenland.

[Jul 16, 2018] America's Russia Derangement Syndrome by Publius Tacitus

Jul 16, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Watching the various media commentary on Russia and Vladimir Putin I am beyond stunned by the ignorance, insanity and stupidity that grips the vast multitude of talking heads and so-called reporters as they opine on the upcoming summit. The memes are simple:

You got the drift. Now let us get back to reality.

Putin and Russia will welcome improved relationships with the West, especially the United States. But they will not sell out their soul and they will not acquiesce to our lies. Here is one simple truth and reality that lurks in the background--despite all of our chest thumping about Russia involvement in Syria, we are in daily coordination with the Russian military on deconflicting air space and upcoming ground operations. This does not get covered in the media therefore it does not exist within the consciousness of the American public.

Russia is appropriately and correctly leery of the United States and its sanctimonious bullshit. Consider the uproar here over "Russian meddling." The U.S. has a long and blood soaked history of intervening in other countries and ousting elected leaders. Prominent on that list are Iran, Guatemala, Chile and Vietnam. Our protests against alleged Russian meddling are like a whore protesting the fact that a high school cheerleader lost her virginity on prom night.

The Russians have not forgotten our role in developing and launching the Stuxnet virus in 2010. Although it was supposed to only target the Iranian nuclear reactors, it infected the Russian Space Station and a Russian nuclear plant . The ground truth is that the United States, through the activities of the CIA, the NSA and the Department of Defense, has the largest, most robust computer network operations aka hacking activity, in the world. We live in the biggest damn glass house.

Syria? We, the United States, along with the Brits, the Turks, the Saudis and the Qataris, funded, organized and armed Islamic extremists in Syria. We were giving arms to terrorists. It was the Russians who intervened to stablize the Syrian regime and turn the tables on all of the rebel groups. We are just sore damn losers. We were out fought and out thought by Russia in Syria and have been loath to admit the facts.

How about the question of foreign intervention? Let's put Syria to the side. The U.S. has a far more disgraceful, shameful history on this point. Since December of 1989, we have invaded Panama, Iraq (twice), Yemen, Somalia, Libya and Syria. At the same time we have broken our promise to the Russians to not expand NATO into the former member of the Soviet Union. In fact, U.S. and British intelligence operatives played a crucial (albeit covert role) in organizing the Euromaidan:

a wave of demonstrations and civil unrest in Ukraine , which began on the night of 21 November 2013 with public protests in Maidan Nezalezhnosti ("Independence Square") in Kiev . The protests were sparked by the Ukrainian government's decision to suspend the signing of an association agreement with the European Union , instead choosing closer ties to Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union .

These protest led ultimately to the ouster of the democratically and legally elected Ukrainian President, Viktor Yanukovych. In stark contrast to the alleged meddling of Russia in our 2016 election, the United States actually succeeded in helping oust an elected President. Vladimir Putin has not forgotten that fact.

The Deep State keeps harping on the "Russian invasion" of Crimea. As I noted in my previous piece, Nato, A Naked Emperor , the Russians did not invade. There was a referendum. I am sure that Putin will point out the fact that the United States continues to "lease" Guatanamo Bay in Cuba without the legitimacy of an election. The Cubans want us out but we insist that we have a legal right to be there. Unlike Crimea, which historically was part of Russia, we have no historic claim to Cuba other than our own greed.

The Deep State also wants Trump to get the Russians to do something about Iran. Do not be surprised if Vladimir Putin takes time to explain to Donald that Iran's rise in the Middle East is not because of Russian support. Nope. It is a direct consequence of the U.S. 2003 invasion of Iraq.

How about future cooperation? The Russians already are playing Lyft driver for U.S. astronauts as they ferrying us to and from the Space Station. On the nuclear front, Putin withdrew in 2016 from a treaty , on the disposal of plutonium, in anger over the U.S. breaking of its promise to not grow NATO and increase military exercises on Russias border. Putin does not have alzheimer's. He is not going to back off on this point.

At the core of the U.S. mythology about Russia is the lingering resentment of how the Soviets treated Jews in the former Soviet Union and our self-delusion that we, the United States, defeated the Nazis. The largest tank battle in history was not the Battle of the Bulge. It was Kursk and that was led by a Russian General. The West has refused to acknowledge the critical role that Russia played in defeating the Nazis. Without the incredible stands at Moscow, Leningrad and Stalingrad, the West probably would have lost the war and we would be living under a true fascist regime.

History is not a strong suit for Americans. Embarrassing ignorance is our currency. And we our flush with that cash.

[Jul 16, 2018] The West Is Past

Notable quotes:
"... Two U.S. 'realists', Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski, had always warned that the 'west' must keep China and Russia apart if it wants to keep its leading global position. Nixon went to China to achieve that. ..."
"... Years later the U.S. fell for the myth that it had 'won' the Cold War. It felt invincible, the 'sole superpower' and sought to 'rule them all'. It woke up from that dream after it invaded Iraq. The mighty U.S. military was beaten to pulp by the 'sand niggers' it despised. A few years later U.S. financial markets were in shambles. ..."
"... Crude attempts to further encircle Russia led to the Chinese-Russian alliance that now leads the SCO and soon, one might argue, the world. There will be no photo like the above from the SCO summit. The Chinese President Xi calls Russia's President Putin 'my best friend'. ..."
"... Agreed! But what will the US psychopaths do to maintain their grip when they realize they are really losing it? Nuclear war? ..."
"... Watching the two meetings play out has really been interesting, that the West is dead is not in question. And once it started it seems to be gaining momentum. I don't know how many readers here watch CGTN but it is amazing. My IQ goes up every time I watch. Astonishing how much more valuable information you get from a "heavily censored" Chinese news compared to MSM. The website is a little slow at times but it is well worth the wait. ..."
Jun 10, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

G-7 summits are supposed to symbolize "the west", its unity and its power. The summits pretended to set policy directions for the world. We are happy to see that they are dead.

Trump was obviously not inclined to compromise.

Before attending the summit Trump trolled his colleagues by inviting Russia to rejoin the G-7/G-8 format without conditions. Russia had been kicked out after Crimea voted to join its motherland. Merkel, who had negotiated the Minsk agreement with Russia, was furious. She wants to use such an invitation as an element of future negotiations. (It is stupid talk. Russia is not interested in rejoining the G-7/G-8 format.)

There are now many fields where the U.S. and its allies disagree: climate change, the Iran deal, trade are only the major ones.

Before leaving the summit Trump again used Mafia language against everyone else:

As he prepared to depart early from the G-7 summit in Charlevoix, Canada, to head to Singapore ahead of his planned meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, Trump delivered an ultimatum to foreign leaders, demanding that their countries reduce trade barriers for the U.S. or risk losing market access to the world's largest economy.

"They have no choice. I'll be honest with you, they have no choice," Trump told reporters at a news conference, adding that companies and jobs had left the U.S. to escape trade barriers abroad. "We're going to fix that situation. And if it's not fixed, then we're not going to deal with these countries. "

The row at the G-7 meeting was in stark contrast to the more important other meeting that happened today, the 18th Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Qingdao, China:

Dazzling against the city skyline of Qingdao, fireworks lit up the faces of guests who traveled across the vast Eurasian continent to the coast of the Yellow Sea for the 18th Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit, on Saturday night.

It is the first such summit since the organization's expansion in June 2017 when India and Pakistan joined as full members.

...

The Shanghai Spirit of mutual trust, mutual benefit, equality, consultation, respect for diverse civilizations and pursuit of common development , was stated in the Charter of the SCO, a comprehensive regional organization founded in 2001 by China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan and later expanded to eight member states.

This weekend Xi will chair the summit for the first time as Chinese president, which is attended by leaders of other SCO member states and four observer states, as well as chiefs of various international organizations.

...

The SCO has grown to be an organization covering over 60 percent of the Eurasian landmass, nearly half the world's population and over 20 percent of global GDP.

Two U.S. 'realists', Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski, had always warned that the 'west' must keep China and Russia apart if it wants to keep its leading global position. Nixon went to China to achieve that.

Years later the U.S. fell for the myth that it had 'won' the Cold War. It felt invincible, the 'sole superpower' and sought to 'rule them all'. It woke up from that dream after it invaded Iraq. The mighty U.S. military was beaten to pulp by the 'sand niggers' it despised. A few years later U.S. financial markets were in shambles.

Crude attempts to further encircle Russia led to the Chinese-Russian alliance that now leads the SCO and soon, one might argue, the world. There will be no photo like the above from the SCO summit. The Chinese President Xi calls Russia's President Putin 'my best friend'.

The 'west' has lost in Eurasia.

The U.S. is reduced to a schoolyard bully who beats up his gang members because their former victims have grown too big. Trump is off to Singapore to meet Kim Yong-un. Unlike Trump North Korea's supreme leader will be well prepared. It is likely that he will run rings around Trump during the negotiations. If Trump tries to bully him like he bullies his 'allies', Kim will pack up and leave. Unlike the U.S. 'allies' he has no need to bow to Trump. China and Russia have his back. They are now the powers that can lead the world.

The 'west' is past. The future is in the east.

Posted by b on June 9, 2018 at 03:14 PM | Permalink

Kelli , Jun 9, 2018 3:37:22 PM | 1

Agreed! But what will the US psychopaths do to maintain their grip when they realize they are really losing it? Nuclear war?
Laguerre , Jun 9, 2018 3:44:17 PM | 2
Yeah, I was just thinking that. Trump is running full-speed into isolation. It's an ancient policy, which recalls the 1920s. What does America need of the outside world? Good question.

I would think we will hear in the not too distant future of a European replacement of the US exchange systems, such as VISA. The Americans have become too unreliable. Obviously the Russians and Chinese do have their own systems, but that won't do for the EU.

Independence is going to be forced, and the consequences will be permanent.

Babyl-on , Jun 9, 2018 3:53:27 PM | 5

Watching the two meetings play out has really been interesting, that the West is dead is not in question. And once it started it seems to be gaining momentum. I don't know how many readers here watch CGTN but it is amazing. My IQ goes up every time I watch. Astonishing how much more valuable information you get from a "heavily censored" Chinese news compared to MSM. The website is a little slow at times but it is well worth the wait.

Last year during the border standoff with India they had on strident Indian voices arguing the Indian position every day. Imagine if CNN had on Mexican reps regarding the wall - never happen.

Harry Law , Jun 9, 2018 3:59:37 PM | 6
Because Iran was under sanctions levied by the United Nations earlier, it was blocked from admission as a new member of the Shanghai Cooperation Council [SCO]. The SCO stated that any country under UN sanctions could not be admitted. After the UN sanctions were lifted, Chinese president Xi Jinping announced its support for Iran's full membership in SCO during a state visit to Iran in January 2016.Iran must join the SCO ASAP it is also a military alliance and should prepare itself for a big effort at regime change by the US and lackeys. The moral of the story unless they hang together, the US will hang them separately.
ashley albanese , Jun 9, 2018 4:01:15 PM | 7
Well, China as the text books say was always ' half the human story' - only eclipsed by Western connivance in the 1860's .I remember my father argueing with high ranking Australian government and commercial figures in 1970.

My father argued Australia needed to find its own voice with China and Chinese policy . They replied sneeringly '' Ralph , their just red communists and will never amount to anything ' . Shortly thereafter Nixon flew to Beijing and my father sat back in his living room with a sardonic look on his face !

Scotch Bingeington , Jun 9, 2018 4:05:14 PM | 8
Interesting picture! Judging by his posture, Japan's Prime Minister Abe seems to back Trump's position.

By the way, Mr. Abe doesn't look Japanese to me, he rather has a striking resemblance to a certain Bavarian actor - one Max Griesser .

Laguerre , Jun 9, 2018 4:13:18 PM | 9
You may like Freedland's article yesterday, which unusually I agreed with, that in fact Trump is a poor negotiator, and gives away tricks he doesn't have to. Why no concession from Israel, over the move of the US embassy to Jerusalem? Why give away the honour to NK of a one-to-one with the US president? I'd be surprised if NK surrenders, when they know what will happen if they do.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/08/trump-master-negotiator-meeting-kim-jong-un-art-of-deal

Madderhatter67 , Jun 9, 2018 4:18:15 PM | 10
They did win the Cold War. That's how they became the'sole superpower'.
Red Ryder , Jun 9, 2018 4:25:57 PM | 11
"President Putin is the leader of a great country who is influential around the world," Xi said. "He is my best, most intimate friend." Xi promised Russia and China would increase their coordination in the international arena.

Putin expressed his thanks for the honor and said he saw it as an "evaluation" of his nation's efforts to strengthen its relationship with its southern neighbor.

"This is an indication of the special attention and respect on which our mutual national interests are based, the interests of our peoples and, of course, our personal friendship," Putin said.

http://www.newsweek.com/putin-my-best-most-intimate-friend-chinese-president-xi-says-967531

This is not going missed by the West.

But it is unstoppable. The range of integrating projects the Chinese and Russians are working on is more than strategic.

They are forcing a massive shift in economics that is impossible for the US and EU to maintain as competitors.

https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201806091065269583-putin-xi-summit-takeaways/

The Double Helix is ascending.

Peter AU 1 , Jun 9, 2018 4:34:45 PM | 12
Interesting that Trump has said Russia should be invited back into the west's G7/G8 at this time. In cold war 1.0, Soviet Union was the main enemy of the US and China was split away from the Soviet Union. In this war, Trump sees China's economy as the main threat to the US and is trying but failing to pull Russia away from China.
Lea , Jun 9, 2018 4:45:07 PM | 13
Posted by: Madderhatter67 | Jun 9, 2018 4:18:15 PM | 10
They did win the Cold War. That's how they became the'sole superpower'.

If winning the Cold War is about vanquishing communism, they flat out lost. Because, while they were concentrating on the end of the USSR and celebrating, China was going up and up and up. They never saw her coming, yet to this day and for the foreseeable future, China is a socialist, Marxist country.

So the new, desperate Western spin is to try to argue that China has "succumbed" to capitalism. Yeah, right, a country where all the private companies have to have members of the CPC on their board and hand over enough shares to the state to grant it veto powers, not to mention the Central bank and all its major companies are state-owned... Lol.

les7 , Jun 9, 2018 4:49:57 PM | 14
"The 'west' is past. The future is in the east."

Wow... such grandiose conclusions...

After the collapse of the USSR the consensus - even of the alt-media (what little of it existed) was that a new American century was on the way and the whole world would be better off for it. A decade later in 2003 the consensus (post 'shock & awe' Gulf War 2) was that America had the ability to re-structure the Asian /African world and that it would all be for good.

15 years later we are all sick of the fruit of that delusion. So we look to another power to save us... Do we understand nothing?

Without the accountability of multi-polarity, Western supreme power all became security-obsessed privilege, self-aggrandizement, blatant plunder and total disregard for moral value and life. Power corrupts - it knows no exceptions.

If the West is truly dead, the East will be no different.

Laguerre , Jun 9, 2018 4:55:53 PM | 15
re 12
Interesting that Trump has said Russia should be invited back into the west's G7/G8 at this time.
Thought of a moment to annoy the Europeans. It is obvious that Trump was pissed off about having to attend, and left at the earliest opportunity. The Europeans heard that, and will draw the inevitable conclusions.
Quentin , Jun 9, 2018 4:57:21 PM | 16
Lea @ 13 Socialist, Marxist, Capitalist, what does it matter: it seems to work for China, at least for the time being. It's success makes me think that a bit more government control of corporations might not be such a bad thing.
Grieved , Jun 9, 2018 5:00:44 PM | 17
The summit with Kim will be fascinating to observe. In my view, NK has finessed the US and the Trump administration to a degree I would not have thought possible, even from native US insiders. To do it long range from the other side of the world speaks to me a lot about the power of Asia, and the clarity of view from there.

I agree with Laguerre @9 that Trump is a terrible negotiator (forgive that I didn't read the Guardian piece). I would take this much further and say that all the US institutions themselves are culturally crippled in terms of understanding what's happening in the ascendancy of Asia. All of their negotiation is feeble, because their grasp on their own true position is based on yesterday's view of their power. You cannot go into negotiation without knowing what you hold.

Every day, I become more confident in the ability of the elder nations to put the young western empires to rest without their being triggered into death spasms.

Red Ryder @11 - I see China's full-on drive for the one Road as its way of waging total war, its strategic masterstroke to render the enemy powerless without the enemy's realizing that it is being attacked. Russia as the other half of the Double Helix mesmerizes the west with weaponry while China undercuts the ground. Both countries are fully at war, and winning, while unseeing commenters complain that it's time for them to "do something." How superb the silk rope drawn so softly around the throat.

It's a beautiful play. I very much hope - and truly expect - that we can all survive to be able to sit back and admire it as the years unfold.

psychohistorian , Jun 9, 2018 5:05:30 PM | 18
I have a small quibble with b's wording but thank him for following and reporting on our evolving world.

b's words:"

The U.S. is reduced to a schoolyard bully who beats up his gang members because their former victims have grown too big.

"

My rewording:

The global elite have their US puppet acting like a schoolyard bully who beat up his gang members because their former victims have grown too big.

The West is trying to consolidate power and control while they still have some ghost of a chance. How they hold countries after this global divorce will be interesting.

At his time the West has little to offer humanistically except its vice grip on most economic interaction and the tools including banking underpinning the "system". The elite have deluded the public in the West for centuries about private finance behind the scenes of all/most conflict......pointing to other religions but never their own.

It sure is getting interesting. IMO, the two Koreas are going to announce a reconciliation that requires the removal of America military forces/bases et al, which fits in with the fake nationalism efforts of Trump.

Jen , Jun 9, 2018 5:09:16 PM | 19
That the US and the EU and their respective camps are at loggerheads over trade and perhaps other economic issues should not (I hope) lead readers to assume that one side has the interests of the public it represents uppermost in mind. As the US and the Anglosphere is dominated by one set of neoliberals, so Germany and the lackey EU nations following Berlin are dominated by another set of neoliberals in thrall to an export-led mercantilist ideology. Just as the elites in charge of US power structures are only interested in enriching themselves, the same can be said for those in charge of power structures in Europe. Whether under the US or the EU, the public suffers.

Notice that Germany benefits from being the major economic power in the EU while its fellow EU nations around the Atlantic and Mediterranean rim flail under a huge debt (and Greece is being punished back into the impoverished colonial status it held under Nazi German occupation) and eastern European EU members are following suit running their economies into the ground and having to beg NATO into setting up bases in their territories to attract money. At the same time German workers are becoming poorer, they are not benefiting from Berlin's economic policies, they are not reproducing fast enough so Berlin needs to bring in more foreign workers in the guise of "refugees" to prop up factories and keep wages low.

@ Madderhatter67: The US did not win the Cold War because the Cold War was only ever a propaganda front for the secret war waged by US / UK elites against Russia and China to dominate and rob these nations and their neighbours of their natural resources.

Grieved , Jun 9, 2018 5:12:25 PM | 20
@5 Babyl-on

Thanks for the nod to CGTN. For any who care, I searched out its YouTube channel and it produces a huge daily output in English:

https://www.youtube.com/user/CCTVNEWSbeijing/videos

I've recently added Vesti News to my news for the same reason, a large daily feed of short clips of the Russian view, in English:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCa8MaD6gQscto_Nq1i49iew/videos

I've never been a TV watcher, especially not for news, but I'm enjoying these tastes and flavors of this burgeoning century.

james , Jun 9, 2018 5:20:12 PM | 21
thanks b - and for the laugh with the marjorie and homer pic for comparison!

i think this parallel you draw is a good one.. the west is certainly floundering... i am not sure how global finance responds here... i can't imagine the 1% being on the wrong side of a bet on the direction of things here either..

@6 harry law.. did iran make it into the sco? it sounds like it did.. good!

@14 les7.. regarding your last line - i tend to agree with that viewpoint..

@19 jen... do you think it will be somehow different if the power shifts to russia/china? i guess i am not so sanguine over power, regardless of who holds it.

Wess County , Jun 9, 2018 5:23:01 PM | 22
Very well put, only issue that as to be dealt with is all those Stan Countries, they are a hibernating and breeding ground for Terrorists and Arms dealers , who don't care who they sell arms to and how they get them to rogue regimes.
Zanon , Jun 9, 2018 5:28:02 PM | 23
Its quite funny how Trump wrecked that meeting.

Trump could talk about Russia but who cares, he cant be trusted, hes totally unreliable and hopefully Russia sees that.

Zanon , Jun 9, 2018 5:29:13 PM | 24
at the same time Trump is a king, just look at how the pathetic western states STAND AROUND HIM begging him basically on all kinds of things!
Laguerre , Jun 9, 2018 5:57:10 PM | 25
re Grieved 17
I see China's full-on drive for the one Road as its way of waging total war, its strategic masterstroke to render the enemy powerless without the enemy's realizing that it is being attacked.
I do think you're exaggerating there.

China's past history has been one of a country very contented with itself, much like the US, because defended geographically by vast deserts. A longer history, so some foreigners did traverse the deserts.

The Chinese exported their products by foreign ships (Arabo-Persian) arriving at Canton, and buying cargoes, or camel caravans arriving in the north and buying silk. The Chinese themselves did not travel abroad very much, and so didn't know very much about surrounding countries, or the rest of the world. There was a fleet of Chinese junks which arrived in the Gulf in the 14th century, but it was the only one.

Today's situation is not so different. There are Chinese interventions in Africa, but their diplomacy is pretty ham-fisted. The Belt-and-Road initiative is in fact intended to bring up to speed Central Asian countries like Tajikistan. Fine, Tajikistan needs it, but it's not world-changing.

The rail freight from Beijing to Frankfurt works better as an intermediate between sea and air freight, but essentially it is what has always happened - foreigners export Chinese products. The Chinese don't know how to run a foreign policy.

bjd , Jun 9, 2018 5:58:01 PM | 26
I am surprised nobody here remarked on the pontifically present John Bolton.

This was about Iran, I am pretty sure.

bjd , Jun 9, 2018 6:02:20 PM | 27
I note, by the way, that in the second photo, the two persons holding a paper are not on the same page .

Talk about symbolism.

bjd , Jun 9, 2018 6:07:30 PM | 28
Have a closer look and you'll see that in the first photo, John Bolton is talking (Trump is silent and sitting there like 'Il Duce').

Bolton is talking to Macron, who is looking straight at Bolton.

In the second photo, Merkel is looking at Bolton, who is probably speaking at that moment.

Tell me this is not about Iran.

michaelj72 , Jun 9, 2018 6:26:40 PM | 29
hopehely at @4

"OK, so, is Japan 'east' or 'west'?"

from their body language, I would say that Japan is surely 'with' Trump and the US, but that's only because that arch-reactionary Abe is in power.....and when he goes, and go he will, there will be a big period of adjustment...some day.

Villainesse , Jun 9, 2018 6:26:46 PM | 30
The scambastic Trump could be inclined to make a slightly more fair deal in Singapore just to make a deal, but he is going extra early (no jet lag) and will be controlled by Pompeo with his 'Grim Reaper' CIA-dog/warhawk/translator/born & raised S. Korean with multiple relations in their South KCIA (NIS) and cabinet leadership, Andrew Kim (born Kim Sung-hyun). Kim's purpose will be to control Trump's spontaneaous decision making, inform him on what he reads as N. Korea's intent, and give baseline hawkish color to the translations for his own hawkish viewpoint.
annie , Jun 9, 2018 6:29:13 PM | 31
bjd, bolton is trump's overseer, making sure he doesn't step out of line.

Trump is a poor negotiator, and gives away tricks he doesn't have to. Why no concession from Israel, over the move of the US embassy to Jerusalem?

Laguerre, you have it backwards. the embassy move, the iran deal, and the appointment of bolton are all concessions trump made, as payback for adelson's millions to both the gop and his campaign. possibly also has a little something to do cambridge analytica, honey traps or whatever.

Adelson: the casino mogul driving Trump's Middle East policy

The imprint of the 84-year-old's political passions is seen in an array of Donald Trump's more controversial decisions, including violating the Iran nuclear deal, moving the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, and appointing the ultra-hawkish John Bolton as national security adviser.

......The New York Times reported that Adelson is a member of a "shadow National Security Council" advising Bolton

Jen , Jun 9, 2018 6:36:52 PM | 32
James @ 21: I think one should always be a bit suspicious of those who hold power, especially those who find themselves holding the uppermost hand in power as a result of victory in war (whether in the form of actual military combat, trade war or other wars in soft power).

Russia under Vladimir Putin and China under Xi Jinping may be fine but will their successors know not to abuse the power they may gain from the New Silk Road projects encompassing Eurasia and Africa?

hopehely , Jun 9, 2018 6:38:17 PM | 33
Posted by: bjd | Jun 9, 2018 6:02:20 PM | 27
I note, by the way, that in the second photo, the two persons holding a paper are not on the same page.

Talk about symbolism.

In that pic, is that Miller lurking from behind?

Red Ryder , Jun 9, 2018 6:42:03 PM | 34
@29, bjd,

Of course, it is about Iran. It's the Iranian deal that the EU needs to continue. They benefit as the biggest vendors to Iran. They want to get inside that developing 70 million person market, also.

Bolton wants regime change. The EU knows that will be worse than Iraq. And economically, the EU will be in the dumps for 2 decades if there's another war they are forced to join. And they will be forced to join. They cannot say No to the Hegemon.

The EU 2, Germany and France, are at a historic moment of truth.

They could have a great future with Russia, China, Iran, the BRICS, SCO, OBOR and EAEU or they could be crippled by the Empire.

John Gilberts , Jun 9, 2018 7:01:17 PM | 35
Excellent analysis as always. Here's the muck CBC is reporting on the summit.

Canada Rejects Trump's Call to Let Russia Back Into G-7

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trump-russia-g7-canada-1.4697655

"...But Canada, which pushed for Russia to get the boot in 2014, is not onside. 'Russia was invited to be part of this club and I think that was a very wise initiation, and an invitation full of goodwill,'[FM Chrystia Freeland] she told reporters at the summit. 'Russia, however, made clear that it had no interest in behaving according to the rules of Western democracies..."

Glad to hear it...

michaelj72 , Jun 9, 2018 7:15:43 PM | 36
it's kind of wonderful to see all these imperialist and former neo-colonial powers fighting among themselves.

unfortunately, like the old African proverb goes, when the elephants fight it's the grass and small animals that suffer.

I see no reason for optimism for the peoples of europe at this point, as the stranglehold of the Trioka is perhaps as strong as ever, and hundreds of millions of people are suffering; the people simply have to get organized at all levels and take back their sovereignty at least as a start

WorldBLee , Jun 9, 2018 7:17:31 PM | 37
The US still has the power of the dollar in its arsenal. The UK and EU, and any nation that deals with Wall Street, are addicted to US investment in dollars. Since the EU is run by the banks, and western banks can't function with the dollar, any statements by the EU that they're going to avoid US sanctions over Iran are meaningless.

The equation is essentially this: you can have your sovereignty or you can have the benefits of the dollar that make your 1% very rich. You can't have both. Since the EU is ruled by the 1% banker/investor class they will forestall any attempts to regain sovereignty by the people. In a sense, Europe is like Russia 10-15 years ago, thinking that the US is the key to the golden calf. Russia learned the hard way they needed to establish some independence (although to this day Russia doesn't have nearly the financial independence one might hope), and China saw from Russia's example they needed to do so as well. This led them to team up on many economic initiatives while seeking to reduce the dominance of the dollar.

Perhaps someday Europe will learn this lesson. But as long as the EU exists, I kind of doubt it. The EU-crats will cry and criticize Trump but the bankers love US money too much to let them actually do anything serious.

Ghost Ship , Jun 9, 2018 7:20:38 PM | 38
Paul Krugman is tweeting that this is all happening because Trump doesn't understand Value-Added Tax !

This is not an endorsement of Krugman who is trying to blame it on Putin.

rexl , Jun 9, 2018 7:56:05 PM | 39
If the West is dead and the East is the future, then why are so many Chinese buying houses and living part time in Canada, Australia, and the USA? Why is there so much emphasis put on Western education facilities by Asians?
Winston , Jun 9, 2018 8:02:05 PM | 40
I'm sure Trump doesn't understand VAT.

Most Americans don't no matter how much explanation I go into.

They insist its a tariff or duty,which its not.

I've given up trying to explain its a sales tax on all,paying at customs is merely a cash flow issue for the importer.A reclaimable input on his VAT return,did it many times myself.

Sabine , Jun 9, 2018 8:11:53 PM | 41
there is no west nor east.

there is only a bunch of paid of administrators running the countries and the corporations that pay them.

Trumps quid pro quo is deals that benefit his family. I don't thinks he cares one bit about the GOP and how the party fundraises. He cares about advancing his family and keeping the loot.

maybe we should realize that the concepts of east and west, as much as neo liberalism or neo conservatism or any other moniker that we could apply to loot and steal - legally and without shame under the guise of trade - are concepts of the past.

the future is for the strongest, irrespective of their origins or philosophy. we are burning this planet down with a vengeance and we - the people - are to numerous and too expensive to keep.

while we debate and some even chuckle with delight as to how the west is treated by trump, or how much the west deserves to be made redundant and all hail the Russians and the Chinese - the king is dead, long live the king - it is us who dies in the wars, it is our children that are being kidnapped and locked up in prison when arriving on the border seeking asylum, it is us who will watch the women in our live die in childbirth because of lack of medical care, it is us who will die of black lung, hunger, thirst and general malice.

and while we gossip, they laugh all the way to the bank.

NemesisCalling , Jun 9, 2018 8:24:56 PM | 42
b, we have no doubt that the North Korean leadership is ready for the Americans and know the score with a rising Eurasia and a sinking NATO. However, your last assumption of Kim being more than ready to go toe-to-toe with DJT smacks of some of the worst tendencies of many posters here who are ready to venerate Kim without him ever even making formal address of more than a few words to a) his people, 2) his allies, or D) even the world. This is a laughable assumption from you and it would be like having the most beautifully-made garment handy for a long while, desperate for anyone to come along so you could fling it on them to prove they were the most amazing supreme leader in all the world!

This is not to say I do not want the NoKos to succeed in their endeavors of getting a fair deal...hardly: I think they will succeed eventually because they are shrewd. But this is an attempt to squash the unbelievably propagandistic (or naive) attempts to place the mantle of imperviousness, all-knowingness, utterly-innocentness, and insurmountably-cleverousness onto the boy that would be king. DJT could eat a boy like Kim for breakfast if left alone from their advisors.

CE , Jun 9, 2018 8:26:35 PM | 43
Interesting that this happens in June. Because it reminds me of this classic little fun ditty:

Death in June - Death of the West

ben , Jun 9, 2018 8:33:09 PM | 44
Sabine @ 41 said:"there is no west nor east.

"there is only a bunch of paid of administrators running the countries and the corporations that pay them"

And this"and while we gossip, they laugh all the way to the bank."

I would tend to agree, but I'm hoping b's right in his assessment, the empire and her minions very badly need a comeuppance..

dh , Jun 9, 2018 8:45:10 PM | 45
Trump is very dependent on his base. He knows them well. At risk of hitting a discordant note I suspect a lot of his fans are happy seeing him sock it to the goddamn ch*nks and euro faggots.
Daniel , Jun 9, 2018 8:46:57 PM | 46
It's a big weekend. G7, SCO, Bilderberg, NATO Defence Ministers meeting in Brussels and the huge NATO "Drills" including the Baltic States and for the first time, Israel.

Oh, and the US called on NATO to add 30 land battalions, 30 air fighter squadrons, and 30 naval ships to "counter Russian aggression."

The AZW Empire is not giving up its plans.

karlof1 , Jun 9, 2018 8:47:27 PM | 47
I predicted it would become the G6+1 and so it has. Trump told his staffers NOT to sign the Joint Communique, which I believe is a first.

On the issue of power and the BRI , the linked item is a trove of info as it focuses on perhaps the most problematic region of the SCO/BRI.

If Europe is to break free from the Outlaw US Empire, Merkel must be jettisoned and independent-minded leaders must take control of Germany and EU. I'm not at all surprised with how events went in Canada. However, I see the Policy as the Bully, not Trump, the policy still being the attempt to gain Full Spectrum Domination. What's most important, IMO, is this spectacle will not go unnoticed by the rest of the world. The Outlaw US Empire cannot make it any plainer that it's the primary enemy state of all except the Zionist Abomination. I think Abe wonders why he's there and not in Qingdao.

Although this item focuses on Kashmir , it should be read after the longer article linked above. There's little news as of yet coming from Qingdao other than who's cooking what and sideline meets. I expect more coming out beginning Monday. Of course, Kim-Trump begins now, it being the 10th in Singapore already.

bevin , Jun 9, 2018 10:26:24 PM | 48
The difference between the two projects- the western Empire and the Eurasian schemes exemplified by OBOR- is that the former, as 500 years of experience teaches us, relies on ethnic divisions, wars and competition while the latter requires peace and co-operation.

In a sense that answers Jen @ 32. It really doesn't matter who runs the governments of China and Russia, provided that they can prevent the imperialists from distracting them into rivalry. It was that which, thanks to plenty of stupidity on both sides, gave rise to the tensions of which Nixon and Kissinger took advantage.

Had the USSR and China ironed out their small differences on the sixties- and Vietnam gave them a perfect excuse to do so, history would have been very different and probably much less bloody.

The truth is that, as b asserts, the SCO is already much more important than the G7- America and the Six Dwarfs. How much more important is shown by the role of Freeland (the neo-Nazi Ukrainian apologist) in insisting on holding the line against Russia's re-admission to a club that it almost certainly does not want to rejoin.

Trump may not be a 'good negotiator' but he has a position of relative strength vis a vis the rest of the G7 who cannot negotiate because they do as they are told. If they won't do what Trump tells them to do they will be on the lookout for someone else to give them orders-they have no idea of independence or sovereignty. Just watch most of them scuttle back to Brussels for ideas, or set up back channels to Moscow- once a puppet always a puppet.

karlof1 , Jun 9, 2018 11:57:39 PM | 49
The Sino-Soviet Split occurred while Stalin was still alive--he refused to allow the Chinese to develop "Communism with Chinese Characteristics" just like any other European Orientalist. And as the Monthly Review article I linked, the Chinese must beware of becoming/being seen as Imperialistic in their zeal to push BRI--Imperialist behavior will kill the Win-Win concept as it will revert to just another Zero-sum Game.
Hoarsewhisperer , Jun 10, 2018 12:20:55 AM | 50
One of the factors which has been killing the 'Democratic' West is that its bribed & blackmailed leaders have alienated themselves from The People whose views they were elected to represent.

No-one living in a so-called democracy is prepared to tolerate a leader who spends too much time praising, and making excuses for, the crimes of the racist-supremacist Zionist Abomination (h/t karlof1) and its Piece Process in Palestine. It can be persuasively argued that embrace of and fealty to the Z.A. is the only factor which Western Leaders have in common. And it's neither a coincidence nor happenstance.

ben , Jun 10, 2018 12:40:15 AM | 51
Hoarsewhisperer @ 50 said:" Piece Process in Palestine."

Nice word play. I'm assuming the "piece" word is referring to the Israelis taking the Palestinian's lands one piece at a time..

Debsisdead , Jun 10, 2018 12:51:14 AM | 52
Grrr! I still don't get why so many humans believe anything good comes from chucking aside one greedy oppressive arsehole then replacing it with another. Sure the SCO has a founding document laden with flowery words and seemingly wonderful concepts but I say "So what" check out the UN charter or the amerikan constitution and you'll find the same.

These issues of justice & equity cannot be fixed by swapping bosses because every society has its share of pathologically fucked up greedies who have the means and lack of empathy to destroy anything and everyone in their lust for whatever it is they imagine they need.

We have to accept that will never change and that trying to purge the planet of those types just creates more of them from within the structure most successful in effecting the swap.

I know I sound like a scratched disc but the only fix that could hope to work is one that smashes the conglomerations into tiny shards, reducing the world to thousands of small self governing entities; sure some places will still end up being taken over by low self esteem motivated arseholes, but not only will they not be able to do as much damage, arseholes stand out in a small society where more 'normal' humans interact with them - currently all the pr1cks coagulate in spots such as the G7 and few non-pr1cks ever get close enough to see them for what they are. A low count on the old degrees of seperation register makes it much more difficult for the scum to rise. Making sure that no chunk is sufficiently big to force its will on another would also be vital.

That won't fix everything, but who outside some totally screwed up anal regressive would want that anyway? I just want to live in a world where no one cops it like the entire Yemeni population currently is. I see no benefit in moving the horror from Yemen to Uigar-land or whatever place the new bosses decide should be their fun palace of hate, murder and misery.

The Congo and/or Nigeria another coupla sites of misery for money. Timor Leste aka East Timor, now that the Portuguese expats in the form of the man with the Nobel stamp of obeisance to the monied Jose Ramos Horta have done over the locals, something Xanana Gusmăo always said could happen. Horta's arseholeness made the wealthiest nation in the world (divide resources by population) riven by poverty, lack of health and education services plus of course old favourite, racist oppression. Check out these kids here untroubled by issues like getting a decent phone signal or their ranking on Twitch - wondering where their next decent feed is coming from is prolly their most pressing issue.

Swapping SCO for G7 will do SFA for them or anyone else unlucky enough to be living on top of whatever the current 'must have' is deemed to be.

Anyone who imagines that it could is delusional.

karlof1 , Jun 10, 2018 12:55:44 AM | 53
Official SCO Conference site .

Humanity either learns how to live with itself on an equal basis or it will perish; it's really that simple. The likes of the Outlaw US Empire, its NATO vassals and the Zionist Abomination are shining examples of what MUST be exorcised for ever more.

[Jul 16, 2018] Trump Is Right - NATO Is Obsolete, and if Europe Wants to Fight Imaginary Enemies, It Should Pay Its Own Way

Jul 16, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Hysteria is at fever pitch. After the NATO summit in Brussels, the definitive Decline of the West has been declared a done deal as President Trump gets ready to meet President Putin in Helsinki.

It was Trump himself who stipulated that he wants to talk to Putin behind closed doors, face-to-face, without any aides and, in theory, spontaneously, after the preparatory meeting between Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov was canceled. The summit will take place at the early 19 th century Presidential Palace in Helsinki, a former residence of Russian emperors.

As a preamble to Helsinki, Trump's spectacular NATO blitzkrieg was a show for the ages; assorted "leaders" in Brussels simply didn't know what hit them. Trump didn't even bother to arrive on time for morning sessions dealing with the possible accession of Ukraine and Georgia. Diplomats confirmed to Asia Times that after Trump's stinging "pay up or else" tirade, Ukraine and Georgia were asked to leave the room because what would be discussed was strictly an internal NATO issue.

Previewing the summit, Eurocrats indulged in interminable carping about "illiberalism" taking over, from Viktor Orban in Hungary to Sultan Erdogan in Turkey, as well as mourning the "destruction of European unity" (yes, it's always Putin's fault). Trump though would have none of it. The US President conflates the EU with NATO, interpreting the EU as a rival, just like China, but much weaker. As for the US "deal" with NATO, just like NAFTA, that's a bad deal.

NATO is 'obsolete'

Trump is correct that without the US, NATO is "obsolete" – as in non-existent. So essentially what he did in Brussels laid bare the case for NATO as a protection racket, with Washington fully entitled to up the stakes for the "protection".

But "protection" against what?

Since the dismemberment of Yugoslavia, when NATO was repositioned in its new role as humanitarian imperialist global Robocop, the alliance's record is absolutely dismal.

That features miserably losing an endless war in Afghanistan against a bunch of Pashtun warriors armed with Kalashnikov replicas; turning functional Libya into a militia wasteland and headquarters for Europe-bound refugees; and having the NATO-Gulf Cooperation Council lose its bet on a galaxy of jihadis and crypto-jihadis in Syria spun as "moderate rebels".

NATO has launched a new training, non-combat mission in Iraq; 15 years after Shock and Awe, Sunnis, Shi'ites, Yazidis and even Kurdish factions are not impressed.

Then there's the NATO Readiness Initiative; the capacity of deploying 30 battalions, 30 battleships and 30 aircraft squadrons within 30 days (or less) by 2020. If not to wreak selected havoc across the Global South, this initiative is supposedly set up to deter "Russian aggression".

So after dabbling with the Global War on Terror, NATO is essentially back to the original "threat"; the imminent Russian invasion of Western Europe – a ludicrous notion if there ever was one. The final statement in Brussels spells it out, with special emphasis on item 6 and item 7.

The combined GDP of all NATO members is 12 times that of Russia. And NATO's defense spending is six times larger than Russia's. Contrary to non-stop Polish and Baltic hysteria, Russia does not need to "invade" anything; what worries the Kremlin, in the long term, is the well being of ethnic Russians living in former Soviet republics.

Russia can't be both threat and an energy partner

Then there's Europe's energy policy – and that's a completely different story.

Trump has described the Nord Stream 2 pipeline as "inappropriate", but his claim that Germany gets 70% of its energy (via natural gas imports) from Russia may be easily debunked. Germany gets at best 9% of its energy from Russia. In terms of Germany's sources of energy , only 20% is natural gas. And less than 40% of natural gas in Germany comes from Russia. Germany is fast transitioning towards wind, solar, biomass and hydro energy, which made up 41% of the total in 2018. And the target is 50% by 2030.

Yet Trump does have a sterling point when, stressing that "Germany is a rich country", he wants to know why America should "protect you against Russia" when energy deals are on the table. "Explain that! It can't be explained!" as he reportedly said to Nato Secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg on Wednesday.

In the end, of course, it's all about business. What Trump is really aiming at is for Germany to import US shale gas, three times more expensive than pipeline-delivered Russian gas.

The energy angle is directly linked to the never-ending 2% defense spending soap opera. Germany currently spends 1.2% of GDP on NATO. by 2024, it's supposed to reach at best 1.5%. And that's it. The majority of German voters, in fact, want US troops out .

So Trump's demand for 4% of GDP on defense spending for all NATO members will never fly. The sales pitch should be seen for what it is: a tentative "invitation" for an increased EU and NATO shopping spree on US military hardware.

In a nutshell, the key factor remains that Trump's Brussels blitzkrieg did make his case. Russia cannot be a "threat" and a reliable energy partner at the same time. As much as NATO poodles may be terrified of "Russian aggression", the facts spell out they won't put their money where their rhetorical hysteria is.

Foreign ministers attend a working dinner during the NATO Summit in Brussels on July 11, 2018. They gathered to discuss Russia, Iraq and their mission in Afghanistan. Photo: AFP/ pool/ Yves Herman

Are you listening now?

"Russian aggression" should be one of the top items discussed in Helsinki. In the – remote – possibility that Trump will strike a deal with Putin, NATO's absurd raison d'etre would be even more exposed.

That's not the US "deep-state" agenda, of course, thus the 24/7 demonization of the summit even before it happens. Moreover, for Trump, the transactional gambling man's Make-America-Great-Again point of view, the ideal outcome would always be to get even more European weapons deals for the US industrial-military-intelligence complex.

Terrified by Trump, diplomats in Brussels over these past few days have conveyed to Asia Times fears about the end of NATO, the end of the World Trade Organization, even the end of the EU. But the fact remains that Europe is absolutely peripheral to the Big Picture.

In Losing Military Supremacy , his latest, groundbreaking book, crack Russian military-naval analyst Andrei Martyanov deconstructs in detail how, "the United States faces two nuclear and industrial superpowers, one of which fields a world-class armed forces. If the military-political, as opposed to merely economic, alliance between Russia and China is ever formalized – this will spell the final doom for the United States as a global power."

The US deep state (its influential bureaucrats) may be wallowing in perpetual denial, but Trump – after many a closed-door meeting with Henry Kissinger – may have understood the suicidal "strategy" of Washington simultaneously antagonizing Russia and China.

Putin's landmark March 1 speech , as Martyanov stresses, was an effort to "coerce America's elites, if not into peace, at least into some form of sanity, given that they are currently completely detached from the geopolitical, military and economic realities of the newly emerging power configurations of the world". These elites may not be listening, but Trump seems to indicate he is.

As for the NATO poodles, all they can do is watch.

[Jul 16, 2018] Excellent Russian Analysis of Upcoming Trump - Putin Helsinki Meeting from Russian TV's New York Correspondent

Jul 16, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Our correspondent Valentin Bogdanov is reporting from the USA.

Part of Americans which opposes Donald Trump is afraid to leave him face-to-face with Vladimir Putin. However, the American president himself shows confidence in Great Falls, VA while meeting with his supporters 1,5 weeks before the summit. The head of the White House is going to get along with the Russian leader despite ill tongues.

Donald Trump: "Now they're discussing the meeting with Putin. Like, Putin is ready for the meeting, but will Trump be ready for it? Trust me, it will be just fine. We'll do it. Fake news, bad people."

These bad people also got at American congressmen who had recently visited Russia. Headed by Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, they were almost labeled as Moscow's agent of influence.

John Brennan, CIA director (2013-2017 ): "This is alarming: first, it should have been a bipartisan delegation. It's unclear if the American media will go and will be allowed to attend the talk behind closed doors. Have we forgotten what the Russians did to the 2016 elections? Have we forgotten about the Crimea? Unfortunately, there is no John McCain, who would tell his Republican colleagues that that's not the right way to maintain the US national security."

People like Brennan dream that the upcoming bilateral meeting in Helsinki looked like last year's APEC summit in Danang, Vietnam, where Putin and Trump only met on their way to photographing. They shook hands and exchanged several phrases.

Frightened by his own environment, Trump did not dare to have a long conversation with the Russian president, although he had intended to hold a fruitful meeting. Now, the head of the White House got his own way. He wants to talk to the Russian president behind closed doors face-to-face, without aides.

John McLaughlin, CIA former Deputy Director : "As a former intelligence officer, I can say that President Trump is a recruiter's dream. He's completely transparent with his public statements and tweets. You can easily find out what he's not satisfied with, his desires, weaknesses, and vulnerabilities. Usually, one has to study a person deeply to learn such things, but he presents it all by himself. Of course, Putin is a seasoned intelligence officer."

As a venue, Finnish Helsingin Sanomat named the Presidential Palace. Built at the beginning of the XIX century, it used to be the residence of Russian emperors. It is in this that Trump's opponents see a bad token. Russia will allegedly play almost at home.

"Putin is going to be in high spirits after the exciting World Cup in Moscow He will enjoy a considerable advantage at the summit."

Malcolm Nance, MSNBC analyst: "Yes, he's going to play home, and it's his advantage. What is strange is that President Trump sent messages to our NATO allies, severely criticizing their contribution to the Alliance. He somehow adopted the Russian paradigm that NATO is a threat to Russia, that NATO is to be dissolved, that NATO members don't pay fees."

The US president will arrive in Helsinki from Brussels from the summit of the North Atlantic Alliance. Trump still succeeded to improve the discipline of NATO members. 26 out of 28 member states agreed to increase their contributions to the defense budget despite their resentment. But it is not enough for Trump. According to the US president, Europe continues to bite the hand that protects it, and Germany is the worst of all.

Donald Trump: "We're paying from 70 to 90% to protect Europe, and it's normal. Of course, they're outdoing us not only in trade, they made it impossible for us to have business in Europe. Then they come here to sell their Mercedes' and BMWs. The trade deficit with the EU is $151 billion. And they're killing us with NATO. We contribute 4% of the GDP, while Germany, the EU strongest country, pays only 1%."

It is now clear that the trade war, which Trump, in fact, declared to his allies, was only a curtain-raiser for an even larger battle. Having imposed this week 25% tariffs on imports from China worth $34 billion, the head of the White House opened a new front of the world trade battle. In such an old-fashioned way, the US administration is trying to bridge the $ 500-billion gap in the trade balance with China.

It is old-fashioned as the response of Beijing was predictable, that is, tit-for-tat and immediate. The rules of trade that Trump rewrites by virtue of power, as well as his desire to meet with Putin face-to-face, may only surprise those who missed the American president's election agenda.

Even if he hasn't made America great again, with only 47% of the US population being proud of being Americans, Trump increases his chances to remain in power.

He hasn't ridden so high since the beginning of his presidency.

[Jul 15, 2018] Effect of the US TV on a parrot

Jun 15, 2018 | www.unz.com

anonymous [739] Disclaimer , June 14, 2018 at 12:31 pm GMT

Can't believe any sane American thinks Russians – including beautiful Russian tennis players are more of a threat to us in 2018 then say M13 Gang banger invaders, Chicago Black street gangs, Afghan and Pakistani child rapists or just the sub Saharan Black African mobs with their machetes.

We commissioned some Farstar cartoons on this theme – seems pretty basic to me, but the J media mafia simply goes on and on – there is supposedly a Russian spy behind every bush, some Russians posted anti Hillary posts on Facebook – oh the horror!

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=wYcqmOzk&id=3B43263DD48F82D1FEC205044FBE66DCDA30A42F&thid=OIP.wYcqmOzkZCrNMrWlfuDUigHaJu&mediaurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.occidentaldissent.com%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2f2017%2f06%2frussians-out.jpg&exph=1280&expw=974&q=occidental+dissent+farstar&simid=607993335092480560

[Jul 15, 2018] Effect of the US TV on a parrot

Jun 15, 2018 | www.unz.com

anonymous [739] Disclaimer , June 14, 2018 at 12:31 pm GMT

Can't believe any sane American thinks Russians – including beautiful Russian tennis players are more of a threat to us in 2018 then say M13 Gang banger invaders, Chicago Black street gangs, Afghan and Pakistani child rapists or just the sub Saharan Black African mobs with their machetes.

We commissioned some Farstar cartoons on this theme – seems pretty basic to me, but the J media mafia simply goes on and on – there is supposedly a Russian spy behind every bush, some Russians posted anti Hillary posts on Facebook – oh the horror!

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=wYcqmOzk&id=3B43263DD48F82D1FEC205044FBE66DCDA30A42F&thid=OIP.wYcqmOzkZCrNMrWlfuDUigHaJu&mediaurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.occidentaldissent.com%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2f2017%2f06%2frussians-out.jpg&exph=1280&expw=974&q=occidental+dissent+farstar&simid=607993335092480560

[Jul 15, 2018] Global Energy Dominance is now part of the US National security Strategy

Notable quotes:
"... Global Energy Dominance is now part of the US National security Strategy. Although not labeled as global, when reading through the energy dominance section of the NSS, it can clearly been seen to be global. This is not just about sell oil produced in the US. Trump is going for the Achilles heel of Eurasia - energy. ..."
"... Rather than a creative accounting scam that simply racks up huge amounts of debt, Trump is looking for a monopoly or near monopoly business to take over and rake in the profits. ..."
"... As for oil supremacy. This has been an Anglo-american joint venture for over a century and was one reason for WWI being fought as well as the Balfour Declaration to give the Brits a future pro-British state in the region at some point. ..."
"... As for Saudi oil, this was lockef up well before 1945. It was left untouched by the British after WWI and King Saud handed the concessions to the Americans in 1933 because he felt they had no imperialist designs like the British. He was not a fan of the British due to various skirmishes before he solidified power and Saudi borders. . ..."
Jul 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Peter AU 1 , Jul 14, 2018 4:55:33 PM | 101

The latest article at the Saker site by Rostislav Ishchenko - Trump's Geopolitical Cruise - I think is the best take on Trump's and his backers mindset. Worth a read and covers what I think was the cause of the split in the US elite.

The petro dollar, kicking off in the late 70s was a piece of creative accounting to give unlimited credit. This should have been ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union, but greed got the better of most. Trump and the people backing him could see that this was now in its terminal stages and US close to collapse itself.

Rostislav Ishchenko, like many thinks that Trump is pulling the US back to a form of isolation from the world, but I don't think this is the case.

Global Energy Dominance is now part of the US National security Strategy. Although not labeled as global, when reading through the energy dominance section of the NSS, it can clearly been seen to be global. This is not just about sell oil produced in the US. Trump is going for the Achilles heel of Eurasia - energy.

Rather than a creative accounting scam that simply racks up huge amounts of debt, Trump is looking for a monopoly or near monopoly business to take over and rake in the profits.

Russia supply energy to Eurasia from the North. The opening for the Trump mob is in the south. The meet with Putin may well be to sound out the possibilities of forming a cartel. Putin/Russia is also the only entity that can prevent Trump's US from simply walking in and taking over the rich energy hub (Mafia style) to the south of Eurasia.

Daniel , Jul 14, 2018 5:35:42 PM | 104
Peter @101

"Global Energy Dominance is now part of the US National security Strategy."

Yes, it absolutely is. But this is not a new "Trump policy." Certainly Zbiginew Brzezenski laid this out quite clearly in his 1997 book, "The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives." It's really all in there, just as you're now identifying. If you can't take the time to read it, please consider at least reading some book reviews. As I've noted before, Ziggy apparently didn't foresee Putin rising to power and restoring the Russian state, which threw the proverbial monkey wrench into the globalists' plans, but really, US foreign policy has continued to follow his plans otherwise.

Kissinger has written much the same, though I don't recall in which books/articles. This page from the US Navy seems a fine reading list, designed as it appears to indoctrinate officers in AZ Empire geopolitics.

http://www.navy.mil/ah_online/CNO-ReadingProgram/partnernetwork.html#!

IMO, the US took the lead in the Empire's Global Energy Dominance quest when FDR met with King Saud on Great Bitter Lake in the Suez Canal in 1945 (swinging by after the final post-war world planning meeting with Churchill and Stalin at Yalta). This was when the US largely replaced Great Britain in primacy over Asian/Middle Eastern energy dominance.

Peter AU 1 , Jul 14, 2018 5:42:51 PM | 105
Daniel, I will read through the Grand Chessboard again.
Peter AU 1 , Jul 14, 2018 5:49:29 PM | 106
US setting up more bases. A base in Iraq, and a large airfreight logistics base in Kuwait.
https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201807141066354147-new-us-bases-iraq/

The US is in the Persian Gulf to stay. Trumps face face meet with Putin will be so Trump can try and gauge what Putin will do - if he will run any blocking moves, his reaction to a fait accompli ect. Most likely a few more face to face meetings before any move on Iran.

Daniel , Jul 14, 2018 6:52:45 PM | 108
Peter, thanks for pointing out the new and unwanted US base in Iraq. I just read that the US was building the world's largest Embassy Compound in "Iraqi Kurdistan." I wonder it they're the same thing?

In a quick web search, failing to find an answer, I noticed that besides the "Green Zone" compound we built in Baghdad at the start of the current military occupation, the record holder was the US Embassy Compound in Pakistan.

James and I have discoursed here a bit on the history of US military occupations since WW II. Boils down to the US has never removed its military from any country it's occupied with the exception of Vietnam.

veritas semper vincit @103 linked blogpost notes that the US has 40,000 troops still occupying Germany. His (I presume) post is quite entertaining considering the severe seriousness of the topic.

Dis is a nice little country ya gotz heyah. Id be a shame if sumpin' bad was ta happen to it.

Pft , Jul 14, 2018 7:14:55 PM | 111
Daniel@104

Have to disagree on the impact of FDR meeting with Saudi Arabias King Saud. That was more about feeling him out on a future Israeli state in Palestine. His death a couple of months later may have been related because King Saud made an impression on FDR as to what an Israeli state would mean for peace in the region. Also, FDR was close to Uncle Joe and unlikely to back the planned Cold War supported by some of the same folks wanting a destabilized Middle East and preventing a rebirth of the Ottoman Empire which would control much of the worlds oil reserves.

As for oil supremacy. This has been an Anglo-american joint venture for over a century and was one reason for WWI being fought as well as the Balfour Declaration to give the Brits a future pro-British state in the region at some point.

As for Saudi oil, this was lockef up well before 1945. It was left untouched by the British after WWI and King Saud handed the concessions to the Americans in 1933 because he felt they had no imperialist designs like the British. He was not a fan of the British due to various skirmishes before he solidified power and Saudi borders. .

"The 1933 concession agreement between Saudi Arabia and Standard Oil of California (SOCAL) went like this: SOCAL could search for and produce oil in eastern Saudi Arabia -- a region 20 percent larger than the state of Texas -- for 60 years; it also received preferential rights to explore elsewhere in the future. The kingdom received an immediate loan of £30,000 in gold and, 18 months later, another loan of £20,000 in gold -- an amount equivalent to about $250,000 today -- plus yearly rentals of £5000 and royalties of four shillings in gold -- about $1 -- per ton of oil produced. (Only later would oil be measured in barrels.)"

[Jul 15, 2018] Deep State Sideswipes Helsinki Summit With Mueller Indictments by Tom Luongo

Notable quotes:
"... "In my mind, this is a level of panic and desperation unseen in the annals of Washington D.C. coverups...this is a desperate move by Mueller...this does nothing at all to strengthen Mueller's investigation of Trump himself. It actually weakens his mandate as Special Counsel" ..."
"... Tom is a regular contributor not only here at Russia Insider but also at Seeking Alpha and Newsmax . Check out his blog, Gold Goats 'n Guns and please support his work through his Patreon where he also publishes his monthly investment newsletter. ..."
"... isolationist, conspiracy theorist, nativist and racist ..."
"... Please support my work by joining my Patreon. ..."
Jul 14, 2018 | russia-insider.com

"In my mind, this is a level of panic and desperation unseen in the annals of Washington D.C. coverups...this is a desperate move by Mueller...this does nothing at all to strengthen Mueller's investigation of Trump himself. It actually weakens his mandate as Special Counsel"

Tom is a regular contributor not only here at Russia Insider but also at Seeking Alpha and Newsmax . Check out his blog, Gold Goats 'n Guns and please support his work through his Patreon where he also publishes his monthly investment newsletter.

So, imagine my shock, Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicted twelve Russian intelligence officers on the eve of a summit between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Despite his oh-so-earnest protestations to the contrary, Rod Rosenstein, of all people, knows there are no coincidences in politics.

Trump is on a search and destroy mission all across Europe right now attacking the pillars of the post-WWII institutional order.

While in Washington, Congress devolved into an episode of Jerry Springer during the Peter Strzok hearings yesterday. Both Strzok and Rosenstein have literally destroyed their credibility by stonewalling Congress over the investigations into Hillary Clinton's email server, which, conveniently Mueller now has enough information to take to the Grand Jury.

In my mind, this is a level of panic and desperation unseen in the annals of Washington D.C. coverups. Both Strzok and Rosenstein know that Attorney General Jeff Sessions is completely compromised and can do nothing to stop them from obstructing investigations and turning our justice system into something worse than farce.

And why do I think this is a desperate move by Mueller? Because the indictments go out of their way to preclude any Americans having any involvement in these 'hacking events' at all.

So, this does nothing at all to strengthen Mueller's investigation of Trump himself. It actually weakens his mandate as Special Counsel.

On the other hand, it does a bang-up job of shifting the news cycle away from Trump's heavy-handed but effective steam-rolling Germany and the UK over NATO spending, energy policy and Brexit.

Trump continues, in his circuitous way, to stick a fork in the eye of the globalists whose water politicians like Angela Merkel and Theresa May have carried for years.

Now with Trump prepared to sit down with Putin and potentially hammer out a major agreement on many outstanding issues like Syria, arms control, NATO's purpose, energy policy and terrorism the Deep State/Globalist/Davos Crowd needed something to saddle him with to prevent this from happening.

The reasoning will be (if not already out there as I write this) that Trump would be a traitor for sitting down with Putin after these indictments.

These indictments are not of some Russian private citizens Internet trolls like the last batch. These are Russian military intelligence officers. And the irony of this, of course, is that the intelligence officers involved in collating and disseminating demonstrably false information about Trump which led to all this in the first place hail from the country that Trump is currently visiting, the U.K.

So, the trap is set for the Democrats, Never Trumpers and media to hang Trump next week with whatever agreement he signs with Putin. In fact, at this point Trump could shoot Putin in the face with a concealed Derringer and they'd say he killed Putin to shut him up.

There is no rationality left to this circus. And that's what these indictments represent.

This is not about right and wrong, it never was. It is, was and always will be about maintaining power. If this week shows people anything it should show just how far these powerful people will go to maintain that power, pelf and privilege.

Because winning isn't everything, it's the only thing in politics. Unfortunately, for them, people all over the West are getting tired of it. And the more they smirk, shuck, jive and cry "Point of Order!" the angrier the people will get.

As one of my savvy subscribers said to me this morning, the Strzok hearings are brilliant. They are shifting the Overton Window so far away from the status quo that it will never shift back to where it was.

I'm sure Mueller, et.al. are thinking they are so smart in doing this today. Just like Angela Merkel continues to think she's survived the challenge to her power and Theresa May hers.

They think they've managed these crises.

They haven't. All they are doing is ensuring the next opportunity the people get to rise up against them at the ballot box the worse it will be for them. And if the ballot box doesn't work, then pitchforks and torches come out.

It is the way of things. It has happened before and it will happen again.

Those in power and their quislings in the media and the legislatures continue to decry this growing sense of unfairness as dangerous. Terms like isolationist, conspiracy theorist, nativist and racist are all used as bludgeons to shame people for feeling outraged at the corruption they see with their own eyes.

The problem for people like Strzok, Rosenstein and Mueller is that they are simply expendable pawns. And when the time is right they will be sacrificed to ensure the real perpetrators walk without a scratch.

Please support my work by joining my Patreon.

[Jul 15, 2018] The US was trying to get EU to sanction Russia for some time. MH17 was what was required to push EU to sanction Russia.

Jul 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Peter AU 1 , Jul 14, 2018 9:26:21 PM | 120

Daniel.

Energy was a part of it, but I think MH17 was more to do with keeping Russia separated from Europe. Russia and Europe coming together according to the grand chessboard as something that must not be allowed to occur under any circumstance.

The US was trying to get EU to sanction Russia for some time. MH17 was what was required to push EU to sanction Russia. I have the timeline of events.
From the 17th we were swamped with propaganda, victims bodies left laying in the sun, nasty Russia not letting anyone to the site, bellingcrap tracking how the Russians brought the launcher in, ect ect.

This went on for two weeks, all this time US pushing EU to sanction Russia. Around the 29th-30th EU agreed to sanction Russia. On the 30th, the Ukrainian rada passed a law allowing the Australian and Dutch official teams to go to the site. On the night of the 30th, possibly on the 31st, before the official teams got to the site, the Ukies pushed an armored column up through Torez and into the crash zone. Sporadic fight occurred in and around the crash site from that time, until the Ukies were cleaned up at the Debaltseve cauldron. It was only then the the wreckage was lifted and carried away for reconstruction. For the last few months the Ukies had intermittently shelled the site from Debaltseve. No complaints to the Ukies from Australia nor Netherlands. It was all called Russian aggression.

Have read a bit of the Grand Chessboard now. The section titled Eurasia and also much of the conclusion section.

My takeaway at the moment is that was the era of Economic hegemony backed up by the export of US style democracy. Energy under that system was used if required to keep nations down, stop groups of nations forming together, basically prevent challenges to US economic hegemony. Wars were fought, countries destroyed to ensure the usage of the US dollar. Energy was just one of a number of tools used.

What I think the US is attempting for the coming era - Global energy dominance - is to simply squat on a major source of oil and hold much of Eurasia to ransom.
Doing it this way, the massive US military deployed throughout the world is no longer required, just small covert ops to sabotage competitors. Most of the old institutions needed to manage hegemony no longer required.

Daniel , Jul 14, 2018 8:20:45 PM | 113
Peter et al. I don't remember who posted the link to this wonderful article by KEES VAN DER PIJL Why Was Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17 Shot Down?


It is well worth the read, in general, and it directly discusses your Global Energy Dominance thesis. It also brings it up to date compared to my tracing it back to the 1990s, if not the 1940s.

"In 2009 the EU had introduced a new energy policy, dubbed a 'Third Energy Package' . effectively forcing Gazprom to sell even the gas piped through the Ukrainian grid to other companies before it could enter the EU."

Obviously, this raised the price of Russian gas to European countries.

"Even at the time of the Kiev coup, commentators wondered to what extent shale gas from the US might be used to offset Russian deliveries. LNG facilities planned in Florida and Maryland were projected to serve the European market at Gazprom's expense, a prospect meanwhile far more realistic."

"As Mark Leonard, founder and director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, noted in a newspaper interview a year later, 'without MH17 it would have been pretty difficult to find sufficient support for the increased sanctions on the Russian economy'."

And these sanctions were specifically aimed at the Russian energy industry.

"The downing of Flight MH17 also definitively sealed the fate of South Stream. Russian banks financing the project, led by Gazprombank, were hit by new sanctions, so that the necessary capital could no longer be raised internationally."

So here we have a concerted program, from at least 2009, intended to reduce Russia's role in the Global Energy market, and set up US LNG to compete directly with the RF.

[Jul 15, 2018] Russia studying possible oil-for-goods deal with Iran - Novak

Jul 15, 2018 | uk.reuters.com

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak said on Friday that a deal under which Russia would provide goods to Iran in exchange for oil is still possible.

Russia is studying all legal issues related to the possible deal, he said.

[Jul 15, 2018] Anglos don't value direct warfare, so they don't care if another military has better tech. Anglos realized a long time ago it is much less costly to just play divide and conquer to defeat a more powerful adversary by getting other countries to do the fighting.

Jul 15, 2018 | www.unz.com

Anonymous [298] Disclaimer , July 15, 2018 at 12:58 am GMT

The Saker is missing the point of Anglo Warfare. Anglos don't value direct warfare, so they don't care if another military has better tech. Anglos realized a long time ago it is much less costly to just play divide and conquer to defeat a more powerful adversary by getting other countries to do the fighting.

Hence trying to tarpit Russia in Syria which Putin wisely did not fall for.

The Anglo-Zionist Empire would be foolish to directly confront Russia, so they won't. Instead they will seek to economically strangle Russia and turn close allies against her such as Ukraine.

This is something Russias weapons cannot protect itself with.

Kiza , July 15, 2018 at 1:03 am GMT
I am very busy at the moment and have little time to comment. However, I did read the Saker's review of Martyanov's book and its comments. My small insight is that a son of a Soviet sovok and a son of White-Russian are cooperating. I always wanted for this to happen, but I still find it amazing and most significant. For me, it is a good explanation why modern Russia is so successful compared with US and Soviet Union. The Russians are mostly at peace with their 20th century history and look towards the future. Opposite to this, as the generals usually fight the previous war, US still fights a country which does not exist any more. The new Russian challenge is to fight the fifth column of the Russian Liberals, the lovers of the West, exemplified by Anatoly Elliot Karlin-Higgins, the customary Jewish ideologues with forked tongues.

My apology for using the disparaging word sovok, which I read for the first time in disparaging comments by the above mentioned big BSer.

Finally, it would be interesting if the current Russian and Chinese weapons development would initiate a weapons race which would help crush the already precarious US and Western financial system. It is not that US military spending is a problem as a percentage of GDP, but its further increase at this time could be the straw which broke camel's back. In my mind, Saker and Martyanov with their writing, as well as the Russian civilian and military leadership with their public statements, show an honest wish to deter the West from attacking Russia. But the unintended effect on somebody bound on world-supremacy will be to spend even more (as inefficiently as before) to gain back the supremacy. As I have written many times before, the only possible solution for the preservation of humanity is the financial collapse of the US/West .

Or maybe it is a bit like with the most recent US Presidential Election, the Russians win with either of the two terrible candidates winning. If US chase them in military technology development, they go bankrupt. If US do not chase them, they cannot attack Russia and China any more. Shaking down "the allies" for more money is already seriously destabilising the political order of the West. The overall direction of things is obvious.

Kiza , July 15, 2018 at 1:21 am GMT
@The Alarmist

Communication satellites were mentioned in the article, that is not LEO since the Motorola's Iridium died. Most if not all US military communication satellites are in the geo-sync orbit 36,000 km away. Any decent ASAT system would be targeting both GPS in LEO and C3 satellites in geosynchronous orbit.

[Jul 15, 2018] Peter Strzok testifies, reveals partisan warfare (VIDEO)

Jul 15, 2018 | theduran.com

Vox News reported on this as well, calling the event a "ridiculous circus."

FBI agent Peter Strzok' s testimony before Congress on Thursday collapsed into a full-on partisan circus , with Republican and Democratic members shouting at each other, House Judiciary Chair Bob Goodlatte threatening to hold Strzok in contempt, and Democrats staging an over-the-top political stunt

During the 2016 presidential campaign, Strzok exchanged a series of text messages with Lisa Page, an FBI lawyer with whom he was having an affair, that were critical of Trump. In one particularly controversial exchange, Page texted Strzok that she was worried Trump might win. "No. No, he won't. We'll stop it," Strzok reassured her.

Trump and many of his Republican allies have seized on these text messages as proof of anti-Trump bias in the FBI and to discredit the Mueller probe -- the investigation Trump calls a " Rigged Witch Hunt ."

His appearance before a joint session of the House Judiciary and House Oversight Committees on Thursday was the first time he had publicly testified before Congress since the revelations about his texts.

It was bound to be a contentious hearing -- and so far, it has been.

Democratic Rep. Elijah Cummings (MD), the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, immediately accused Reps. Goodlatte and Trey Gowdy (R-SC), the chair of the House Oversight Committee, of deliberately trying to interfere with the special counsel investigation after Mueller obtained five guilty pleas from people associated with the Trump campaign in recent months.

And Cummings brought along some pretty spectacular signs to make the point.

As he spoke, Democratic staffers held huge signs with the names and photos of the five people affiliated with the Trump campaign who have already pleaded guilty in the Mueller probe: former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, former Trump campaign aide Rick Gates, former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, London lawyer Alexander van der Zwaan, and Richard Pinedo, a California man who committed identity theft as part of the Russian election interference campaign.

Republicans first objected to the sign-holding, but seemed to back off when Democrats asked them to cite which rules the signs violated. The signs stayed up as Cummings listed what Flynn et al had pleaded guilty to and slammed Republicans for interfering with the advancement of the Trump-Russia probe.

As the hearing continued, lawmakers fought over what kinds of questions Strzok should be obligated to answer.

Gowdy's very first question for Strzok -- about how many witnesses he had interviewed in the opening days of Russia probe -- sparked a huge debate . Strzok responded that he was not permitted to answer the question based on instructions from the FBI. Then Goodlatte threatened to hold Strzok in contempt for not answering the question.

"Mr. Strzok, you are under subpoena and are required to answer the question," Goodlatte said.

Democratic lawmakers interrupted Goodlatte and objected loudly in defense of Strzok.

"This demand puts Mr. Strzok in an impossible position," Jerry Nadler, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, responded. "If we have a problem with this policy we should take it up with the FBI, not badger Mr. Strzok."

Strzok then asked to speak to the FBI general counsel before answering the question.

When Goodlatte responded that Strzok could only consult "with your own counsel," that set off another testy exchange. Per CNN :

At one point, Strzok suggested that his removal from the special counsel's Russia investigation was driven by optics. "It is not my understanding that he kicked me off because of any bias it was done based on the appearance," Strzok said, adding that he "didn't appreciate" the way Gowdy was framing the issue.

Gowdy replied, "I don't give a damn what you appreciate, Agent Strzok."

"I don't appreciate having an FBI agent with an unprecedented level of animus working on two major investigations during 2016," Gowdy added.

The stakes are high here, which may explain the tense nature of the hearing. If Strzok's defense of his past actions is received well by the public, he could potentially deal a serious blow to the power of right-wing narratives about FBI corruption.

But if he comes off looking bad it will do damage to the credibility of the Mueller probe -- and Mueller's ability to investigate the full extent of Trumpworld's relationship with Russia.

[Jul 15, 2018] COLLUSION Peter Strzok reveals THREE different versions of the 'Trump Dossier'

Notable quotes:
"... Via Strategic Culture ..."
Jul 15, 2018 | theduran.com

The salacious "Trump Dossier" that was spread as an amazing example of "fake news" being treated as real, received a further blow to its own credibility by none other than FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok on Thursday in the House Judiciary Committee hearing. Fox News notes that Mr. Strzok indicated that there was not one dossier, but three variations of this document – one held by Senator John McCain, a second by Mother Jones writer David Corn, and Fusion GPS owner Glenn Simpson.

Fox goes on to say:

Rudy Giuliani on Thursday slammed the "totally phony" Russia probe after anti-Trump FBI agent Peter Strzok refused to identify the individuals who apparently handed the bureau three different copies of the salacious Trump dossier.

"Isn't that called collusion or conspiracy to gin up a totally inappropriate, totally illegally wire based on national security? And doesn't it taint the entire Russian probe?" Giuliani told Fox News' Laura Ingraham on "The Ingraham Angle."

"That's a disgrace, [Special Counsel Robert] Mueller should be ashamed of himself. Those Democrats trying to protect that liar, Strzok, should be ashamed of themselves. And every FBI agent I know wants to see this guy drummed out of the bureau," he said.

Giuliani said the dossier led to fake news and the "national intelligence wiretap" of the Trump campaign officials.

"So how much of it is infecting the investigation today? We may never know, which is why I think the investigation is totally phony," he added.

The inquiry into the dossier occurred during a fiery exchange earlier between Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Strzok, who appeared before a joint House committee about his role in the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

Jordan pressed Strzok about an email he sent to his colleagues, including FBI lawyer Lisa Page with whom he had an extramarital affair, indicating that he has seen different versions of the infamous Trump dossier from three different sources.

Jordan said he had the email the he sent to Page and several others with the subject: "BuzzFeed is about to accomplish the dossier."

"It says this, ' Comparing now the set is only identical to what (Sen. John) McCain had, parentheses, it has differences from what was given to us by (Mother Jones' David) Corn and (Fusion GPS founder Glenn) Simpson. ' Did you write all that?" Jordan asked.

Strzok refused to answer and declined to confirm whether there were three copies of the dossier the FBI had its hands on , saying he can't answer under the directive of the bureau.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/vkjnjZW8WkA?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

Related Topics: Rudy Giuliani 'Trump dossier' Laura Ingraham Fusion GPS Glenn Simpson Trey Gowdy Peter Strzok Jim Jordan David Corn Up Next

Peter Strzok testifies, reveals partisan warfare (VIDEO) Don't Miss

For some Western leaders, the Cold War never ended Continue Reading Advertisement You may like

Comments Latest Greece folds to deep state demands, expels Russian diplomats over meddling (Video)

The Duran – News in Review – Episode 54.

Published

6 mins ago

on

July 15, 2018 By

Alex Christoforou Ahead of the NATO summit, Alexis Tsipras made an unprecedented move to expel two Russian diplomats and bar the entry of two others Russian diplomats to Greece.

The claim that Tsipras' radical left government cites in its expulsion is the tried and true Russia meddling narrative. The SYRIZA Greek government claims alleged "Russian meddling" in an attempt to foment opposition to the "historic" name deal between Athens and Skopje, a deal which coincidently paves the way for FYROM to join NATO.

A little creativity would have been nice, but in this specific case Alexis Tsipras decided to just go with the canned, Deep State script known as "Russian meddling" in order to guarantee that his very unpopular name deal with FYROM goes through the rigged approval process.

The fact that a government as corrupt as Greece's SYRIZA is now suddenly issuing expulsions for bribery is ironic to say the least.

Did Tsipras cut off his nose to please his EU/NATO paymaster to spite Greece's face?

The Duran's Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss Greece's recent expulsion of Russian diplomats, in what is clearly a Deep State orchestrated maneuver to drive a wedge between two countries that have had traditionally close ties, while fitting another piece into NATO's geopolitical puzzle to engulf the balkan states.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran's YouTube Channel.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/o2cbwNn6ejo?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

Continue Reading Latest Hidden agenda behind Greece's unfriendly move against Russia

On July 11, Greece said it would expel two Russian diplomats and barred the entry of two others.

Published

18 hours ago

on

July 14, 2018 By

Arkady Savitsky Geoffrey Pyatt, former US ambassador to Ukraine and current US ambassador to Greece. The formal reason is alleged meddling in an attempt to foment opposition to the "historic" name deal between Athens and Skopje paving the way for Macedonia's NATO membership. Moscow said it would respond in kind.

Nothing like this ever happened before. The relations between the two countries have traditionally been warm. This year Moscow and Athens mark the 190th anniversary of diplomatic relations and the 25th anniversary of the Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation between the Russian Federation and the Hellenic Republic. They have signed over 50 treaties and agreements.

The Greek people's positive attitude towards Russia is well known . It had been widely believed that Athens trusted Moscow more than Brussels. Russian ambassador to Athens Andrey Maslov has recently described Greece "as a reliable partner". More than one million Russian tourists are expected to visit Greece this year.

Unlike the majority of other Western countries, Greece rejected the British request to expel Russian diplomats in the wake of London's claims of Moscow's involvement in the Skripal poisoning . It's also among the few NATO members to have Russian weapons in the armed forces' inventory, including S-300 air defense systems.

The Greek Kathimerini daily's report offers details on the matter. It's not so important what exactly happened or if the sources cited are reliable enough to believe them. The information is too scarce anyway for making any conclusions. New Democracy's shadow Foreign Minister Giorgos Koumoutsakos on July 12 criticized the lack of information from the government on the rift between Greece and Russia.

Such things happen from time to time and if the relations are good, the differences can be ironed out behind the scenes without much ado. There is always a hidden agenda behind making such scoops leaked into media. Nothing comes from nothing. And timing is never accidental.

Spy scandals never come out of the blue. For instance, the news about the expulsion coincided with the NATO summit in Brussels demonstrating Greece's solidarity with the allies. It was also the time preparations for a visit of Russian FM Sergey Lavrov to Greece were in full swing. Now it's not known whether the visit will take place.

Kathimerini says the relationship started to gradually worsen behind the scenes about a couple of years ago. What happened back then? Geoffrey Pyatt assumed office as US Ambassador to Greece. Before the assignment he had served as ambassador to Ukraine in 2013-2016 at the time of Euromaidan – the events the US took active part in. He almost openly contributed into the Russia-Ukraine rift. Now it's the turn of Greece. The ambassador has already warned Athens about the "malign influence of Russia". He remains true to himself.

During the two years, Greece has not been opposing the anti-Russia sanctions as vigorously and resolutely as Italy or Hungary. None of the planned energy or other economic projects has come into fruition.

Greece is involved in the EastMed sea gas project along with Cyprus, Italy and Israel. The country is also viewed by the United States as a potential customer for American LNG exports, especially after it modernized its port facilities near Pireaus. Greece plans to build a floating storage terminal for LNG in Alexandroupoli. Economy always shapes foreign policy. Evidently, Greece is not interested in cheap Russian gas coming to Europe via the North Stream pipelines. Neither is the United States.

The scandal may be a straw for Greece to catch at as the heavily indebted nation is balancing on the brink of financial crisis. Athens needs relief deals to restructure the debt. It makes it dependent on the US-controlled IMF and the EU (Germany is the largest lender) to bail it out. Under the circumstances, it cannot be politically independent. As opposition to the austerity measures is growing, the government needs a "meddling scandal" to distract the people from everyday life woes.

President Trump has promised Prime Minister Tsipras large investments into economy. The United States is the sixth-largest foreign investor in that country. Addressing the American-Hellenic Chamber of Commerce annual New Year's event in Athens, Geoffrey Pyatt expressed his optimism that 2018 would be a year of recovery for Greece, while all the more US investors are seeking ways to collaborate with Greek enterprises.

The extension of the agreement for the use of the US naval base in Souda Bay, Crete, the only deep-water port in southern Europe and the Mediterranean able to accommodate American aircraft carriers, is a topic for talks. Upgrading of the Greek fleet of F-16 fighters is also on the agenda. The US is ready to make it a relief deal.

Its military is reportedly harboring thoughts about developing in Greece a regional alternative to the use of the crucial Incirlik base in Turkey. The relationship between Turkey and the West continues to deteriorate. Greece sees it as a chance to boost its importance for the US in the Mediterranean, Middle East, and North Africa.

Propaganda also has a role to play. For instance, Russia is blamed by Western media for harboring nefarious plans to hinder the possible agreement between Cyprus, Greece, Turkey and the UK to reunify the island. It is also accused of meddling in Macedonia. As usual, one story is invented after another to be spread around by Western media outlets.

A day after expelling diplomats, Greece said it wants to turn a page seeking good relations with Moscow. Russia has no desire to seriously deteriorate the relationship but it will retaliate as it always does. It will also keep in mind that the Greek government is playing its own games and Russia is supposed to a part of it. Greece is also used by those it depends on.

National sovereignty happened to be too costly for Athens. Normal bilateral relations may be preserved but things like trust and sincerity will be missing. Games change and governments come and go but friendly relations between the peoples remain. The provocation committed by the Greek government cannot change the reality. 63% of Greeks hold a favorable view of Russia. This relationship is too strong to be ruined outside pressure.

Via Strategic Culture Continue Reading Latest Trump CRUSHES 'fake news' Jim Acosta and CNN in the UK (VIDEO)

During a joint press conference with British Prime Minister Theresa May, US President Donald Trump refuses to take a question from CNN reporter Jim Acosta in a hilarious jab, rightly calling CNN "fake news."

Published

19 hours ago

on

July 14, 2018 By

Vladimir Rodzianko Earlier in the press conference, Trump called out CNN after receiving a question from NBC News reporter Hallie Jackson. Trump said NBC is "possibly worse than CNN." Support The Duran – Browse our Shop >>

ACOSTA : "Mr. President, since you attacked CNN, can I ask you a question?"

TRUMP : "[FOX News correspondent] John Roberts go ahead."

ACOSTA : "Can I ask you a question?"

TRUMP : "No."

TRUMP : "CNN is fake news. I don't take questions from CNN. CNN is fake news. I don't take questions from CNN."

Acosta brought the press conference to a halt insisting that the U.S. president take his question. Trump tried to move things along by calling on Roberts again.

TRUMP : "John Roberts from FOX, let's go to a real network."

Trump continued after the press conference in a tweet:

So funny! I just checked out Fake News CNN, for the first time in a long time (they are dying in the ratings), to see if they covered my takedown yesterday of Jim Acosta (actually a nice guy). They didn't! But they did say I already lost in my meeting with Putin. Fake News

-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 14, 2018

Watch: CNN really HATES being called 'fake news'

Subscribe to The Duran's YouTube channel and never miss a video!

http://www.youtube.com/embed/sgx1RuAY7cA?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

Continue Reading JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL Advertisement

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Waiting for PayPal... Validating payment information... Waiting for PayPal... Advertisement Latest 6 mins ago Greece folds to deep state demands, expels Russian diplomats over meddling (Video) Latest 18 hours ago Hidden agenda behind Greece's unfriendly move against Russia Latest 19 hours ago Trump CRUSHES 'fake news' Jim Acosta and CNN in the UK (VIDEO) Latest 2 days ago Peter Strzok testifies, reveals partisan warfare (VIDEO) Latest 2 days ago COLLUSION: Peter Strzok reveals THREE different versions of the 'Trump Dossier' Latest 1 week ago Syria is calling its people home Latest 1 week ago Deconstructing British anti-Russian propaganda: the parallel universe of the BBC

[Jul 15, 2018] Question to Rosenstein: Why did you hide the fact that Peter Strzok and Judge Contreras were friends?

Jul 15, 2018 | theduran.com
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein went before Congress to testify on the DOJ's role in the DNC email hacks.

According to Zerohedge , a visibly frustrated Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) unleashed on Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Chris Wray during Congressional testimony on Thursday, lashing out at FBI agent Peter Strzok's bias against Donald Trump while investigating him – before telling Rosenstein that the ongoing Russia investigation is tearing the country apart.

Representative Jim Jordan pressed Rosenstein on a variety of issues (via Zerohedge ) .

– Slow document delivery from the DOJ

– "Why did you hide the fact that Peter Strzok and Judge Contreras were friends?" (The original judge in Mike Flynn case)

– "Did you threaten staffers on the House Intelligence committee?"

– Peter Strzok's Wednesday testimony which FBI attorneys repeatedly muzzled

Rosenstein refused to say whether or not any member of the Obama administration tried to undermine Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.

The Duran's Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris analyze the heated back and forth between the Assistant AG and Rep. Gowdy and Rep. Jordan.

As Zerohedge rightly puts it: "In short, GOP sabre rattling was met with smug indignancy as a visibly annoyed and very confident Rosenstein batted their questions away like gnats."

"Why'd you tell Mr. Strozk not to answer our questions yesterday, Mr. Rosenstein?" -Jim Jordan

-- Jordan Rachel (@TheJordanRachel) June 28, 2018

Complete exchange between Rep. @Jim_Jordan and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

Rosenstein: "Your use of this to attack me personally is wrong."

Jordan: "It's not personal." pic.twitter.com/kR0ornT5Gs

-- CSPAN (@cspan) June 28, 2018

Trey Gowdy transcript below

For Peter Strzok – at precisely the same time that Bob Mueller was appointed – precisely the same time, Peter Strzok was talking about his "unfinished business" and how he needed to fix and finish it so Donald Trump did not become President. He was talking about impeachment within three days of special counsel Mueller being appointed!

Three days! That's even quicker than MSNBC and the Democrats were talking about impeaching him. Within three days, the lead FBI agent is talking about impeaching the president.

We're two years into this investigation, we're a year and a half into the presidency. We're over a year into the special counsel. You have a counterintelligence investigation that's become public. You have a criminal investigation that's become political. You have more bias than I have ever seen manifest in a law enforcement officer in the 20 years I used to do it for a living. And four other DOJ employees who had manifest animus towards the person they were supposed to be neutrally and detachedly investigating.

More than 60 Democrats have already voted to proceed with impeachment before Bob Mueller has found a single solitary damn thing! More than 60 have voted to move forward with impeachment! And he hasn't presented his first finding!

Russia attacked this country, they should be the target. But Russia isn't being hurt by this investigation right now, we are. This country is being hurt by it. We are being divided. We've seen the bias. We need to see the evidence.

If you have evidence of wrongdoing by any member of the Trump campaign, present it to the damn grand jury. If you have evidence that this president acted inappropriately, present it to the American people.

There's an old saying: "Justice delayed is justice denied." I think right now that all of us are being denied.

[Jul 15, 2018] 'Creepiest person in America': Peter Strzok's bizarre congressional testimony goes viral

Jul 15, 2018 | on.rt.com

Posted by: Zanon | Jul 14, 2018 7:46:29 AM | 73

@Zanon | Jul 14, 2018 7:46:29 AM | 73

'Creepiest person in America': Peter Strzok's bizarre congressional testimony goes viral
https://on.rt.com/9a4o

OMG!

At the risk of being attacked by the PC Police, does that look like a heterosexual man? Does that look like a macho-man who carries on a long and steamy love affair with a cop-woman behind his wife's back?

I've doubted the narrative around their alleged conspiracy to neutralize a Presidential candidate since reading that these two FBI agents apparently didn't realize that their phone communications were monitored and saved. But this adds yet another floor to that particular rabbit hole.

BTW: Same with General Michael Flynn, former Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. Why was he "fired" again?

Oh, he lied about a phone conversation he had. really? If a DIA had been asked about the contents of a potentially damning phone call, he would have asked back, "I don't recall that conversation word-for-word. Why don't you play back the tape you have?"

Posted by: Daniel | Jul 14, 2018 3:41:25 PM | 93

Daniel

He talks like a psychopath throughout that congressional hearings,

Check this,
FBI agent Peter Strzok angrily rejects charges of bias
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/video-fbi-agent-peter-strzok-angrily-rejects-charges-of-bias/

Posted by: Zanon | Jul 14, 2018 3:46:58 PM | 94

Zanon @94

Yeah, one psychopath questioning another psychopath. But psychopaths come in all sexual flavors, and even in that clip, where he is going out of his way to sound tough, he presents as quite effeminate.

Play it sound off in slow motion.

Oh deary me! I can feel the PC Police bearing down.

Posted by: Daniel | Jul 14, 2018 4:29:07 PM | 100

[Jul 15, 2018] As if the Donald did not sanctioned to death the Russians on every possible level. How is this different from Mueller's and comp witch hunt against the Russians?

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The Donald likes to complain about fake news when these implicate him, but on the other hand he creates and acts on fake news himself: see the Russian sanctions, Skripal case, the two Syrian attacks based on fake news created by the White Helmets, paid by the State Department. ..."
Jul 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

veritas semper vincit , Jul 14, 2018 5:07:00 PM | 103

As if the Donald did not sanctioned to death the Russians on every possible level. How is this different from Mueller's and comp witch hunt against the Russians?

The Donald likes to complain about fake news when these implicate him, but on the other hand he creates and acts on fake news himself: see the Russian sanctions, Skripal case, the two Syrian attacks based on fake news created by the White Helmets, paid by the State Department.

I have new posts and new portraits at my sites:

-Givi, the hero of Donbass

-Asma al -Assad

-Houthi fighters

https://me582.wordpress.com/
https://artisticexpressions394454247.wordpress.com/

[Jul 14, 2018] Today orange fatty called out Germany for being captive to Russia.

The USA is "captive" of Canada (to use the terminology of trump), but don't seem to have much appreciation or respect for their position.
Jul 14, 2018 | peakoilbarrel.com

Hickory

x Ignored says: 07/11/2018 at 11:20 am
Looks like OPEC 14 peaked two years. Can they beat it?, perhaps by a small amount in a world without chaos.

Today orange fatty called out Germany for being captive to Russia. I'm pretty sure he was referring to German dependence on imported fossil energy from Russia.

As of 2015 Germany net energy imports are 64% of total [USA 12% for comparison]. If this means 'captive', then perhaps we should acknowledge that 11 of our top 13 trading partners are highly dependent on imported energy from either Russia or the big OPEC producers.

'Captives' so to speak. Better get used to that idea, and learn how to get along with others. Only Canada and Mexico aren't 'captives', but we don't look to good at being friends with them either.

[Jul 14, 2018] Rediscovering the Art of Diplomacy With Vladimir Putin by Ted Galen Carpenter

As a personality and politician Trump is infinitely smaller then Putin. So the only trump card he has is "imperial arrogance".
Also Trump is severely constrained by what he do or offer by the Deep State, especially intelligence agencies which have semi-autonomous power in the USA and are no longer under direct control of the government, representing a shadow government by itself. Brennan attempt to unseat Trump is just one recent example.
He also has a full of neocons cabinet now. Just Pompeo is very dangerous neocon indeed.
Notable quotes:
"... However, Washington's dominant position has also led to some foreign policy bad habits. Because U.S. leaders have not had to deal with serious peer competitors in a long time, they appear to have lost the art of skillful, nuanced diplomacy. Even before the arrival of the Trump administration, U.S. policy exhibited a growing arrogance and lack of realism about diplomatic objectives. ..."
"... If the hardliners had prevailed, no summit would have taken place. Their demands were multiple poison pills to any feasible negotiations. ..."
"... even more than he did with North Korea, he needs to make major changes in current U.S. policy toward Russia and reject the advice and demands that Russophobic hardliners are pushing. Once again, the president must distinguish between achievable and unachievable goals. And he must be willing to make meaningful concessions to the Russian leader to secure the former. ..."
"... Some of Washington's existing demands are manifestly unrealistic . Russia is not going to reverse its annexation of Crimea and return that territory to Ukraine. The Kremlin's move was at least partly a response to the clumsy and provocative actions that the United States and key European Union powers took to support demonstrators who unseated Ukraine's elected, pro-Russian president, Viktor Yanukovych, before the expiration of his term. Moscow was not about to accept that Western power play and watch the region containing Russia's main naval base come under the control of a manifestly hostile Ukrainian regime. ..."
"... With regard to Syria, Trump should inform Putin that the United States is ceasing its efforts to unseat Assad -- a venture that has been a disaster, in any case. To reinforce that pledge, the United States should offer to withdraw all of its forces over the next year. ..."
"... In conducting serious negotiations with Putin, President Trump has an opportunity for a diplomatic (and public relations) success that would exceed his achievement with the Kim summit. To do so, however, he must make a major course correction in how the United States handles delicate and dangerous situations with adversaries. Indeed, he must take an important step in America's willingness to relearn the techniques of achievable diplomacy. ..."
Jul 14, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

However, Washington's dominant position has also led to some foreign policy bad habits. Because U.S. leaders have not had to deal with serious peer competitors in a long time, they appear to have lost the art of skillful, nuanced diplomacy. Even before the arrival of the Trump administration, U.S. policy exhibited a growing arrogance and lack of realism about diplomatic objectives. The upcoming summit between President Donald Trump and Russia's Vladimir Putin affords an opportunity to relearn the requirements of effective diplomacy. If handled poorly, though, it will underscore the adverse consequences of Washington's rigid approach to world affairs.

Too many American politicians, pundits, and foreign policy operatives seem to believe that when dealing with an adversary, diplomacy should consist of issuing a laundry list of demands, including manifestly unrealistic ones, without offering even a hint of meaningful concessions. Critics of Trump's summit with North Korea's Kim Jong-un epitomized that attitude. Some of them excoriated the president just for his willingness to accord Kim implicit equal status by approving a bilateral meeting. House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi groused that President Trump "elevated North Korea to the level of the United States while preserving the regime's status quo."

Others grudgingly conceded that the summit theoretically might have been an appropriate move, but argued that Washington should have demanded major substantive and irreversible North Korean steps toward denuclearization in exchange for such a prestigious meeting. In other words, they wanted North Korea's capitulation on the central issue before Trump even agreed to a summit. Critics were furious that such a capitulation was not at least enshrined in the joint statement emerging from the meeting. And if that hardline stance was not enough, they insisted that Trump should have made North Korea's human rights record a feature of the negotiations. Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne asserted that "our wrongful indifference to human rights in the past should not be used as an excuse to justify apologias for dictatorships in our time."

For Peace With Putin, End America's Pointless Wars
Xi Jinping's Great Leap Backward

The lack of realism such positions exhibit is breathtaking. If the hardliners had prevailed, no summit would have taken place. Their demands were multiple poison pills to any feasible negotiations. And the consequences flowing from the course they favored would have been the perpetuation, if not escalation, of alarming tensions on the Korean Peninsula. By spurning their advice, Trump secured a worthwhile change in the dynamics of the U.S.-North Korean relationship. The rapprochement may yet falter, since there are still extremely serious disagreements between the two countries, but the summit was a beneficial reset that has reduced the danger of a catastrophic military confrontation. Because he focused on the achievable, Trump secured a modest, but constructive, gain both for the United States and the East Asian region.

The president has an opportunity for an even more important success in his upcoming summit with Putin. But even more than he did with North Korea, he needs to make major changes in current U.S. policy toward Russia and reject the advice and demands that Russophobic hardliners are pushing. Once again, the president must distinguish between achievable and unachievable goals. And he must be willing to make meaningful concessions to the Russian leader to secure the former.

Some of Washington's existing demands are manifestly unrealistic . Russia is not going to reverse its annexation of Crimea and return that territory to Ukraine. The Kremlin's move was at least partly a response to the clumsy and provocative actions that the United States and key European Union powers took to support demonstrators who unseated Ukraine's elected, pro-Russian president, Viktor Yanukovych, before the expiration of his term. Moscow was not about to accept that Western power play and watch the region containing Russia's main naval base come under the control of a manifestly hostile Ukrainian regime. Given the stakes involved, Russia is no more likely to withdraw from Crimea than Israel is likely to return the Golan Heights to Syria or Turkey return occupied northern Cyprus to the Republic of Cyprus. Persisting in an utterly unattainable demand regarding Crimea before U.S. and EU sanctions against Russia will be lifted is pointless.

Inducing the Kremlin to reduce and phase out its support for separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine is more achievable. Indeed, despite the hysterical allegations that appear periodically in the Western press, Russia's backing of the insurgents has been quite limited and is far less than constituting an "invasion." Putin shows little stomach for making Ukraine an arena for a full-fledged confrontation with the West.

A similar situation exists with respect to Syria. The Kremlin clearly wishes to see Bashar al-Assad remain in power, and given the extreme Islamist orientation of many of Assad's opponents, that is not an outrageous position. Nevertheless, Putin has avoided establishing a large-scale Russian military, especially ground force, presence in that country. He apparently wishes to confine Moscow's role to protecting its naval base at Tartus and assisting Assad's military efforts with Russian air power . There appears to be an opportunity for Washington to gain assurances from the Kremlin that its involvement in Syria will not escalate and might even recede gradually.

To secure such goals, though, the U.S. would need to offer some appealing concessions to Putin. In exchange for ending Russian support of Ukrainian secessionists and confirming Moscow's toleration of the anti-Russian regime in Kiev, Trump should be willing to sign an agreement pledging that the United States will neither propose not endorse NATO membership for Ukraine or Georgia . NATO's previous waves of enlargement right up to Russia's border were a key factor in the deterioration of the West's relations with Moscow. It is time to end that provocation. In addition to that concession, Trump should pledge that NATO military exercises (war games) in Eastern Europe and the Black Sea will come to an end. In exchange, the United States ought to insist that Russian forces end their provocative deployments in Kaliningrad and along Russia's frontier with NATO members.

With regard to Syria, Trump should inform Putin that the United States is ceasing its efforts to unseat Assad -- a venture that has been a disaster, in any case. To reinforce that pledge, the United States should offer to withdraw all of its forces over the next year. Those moves would tacitly accept Russia as the leading foreign power in terms of influence in Syria. Such a concession is a simple recognition of reality . Syria is barely 600 miles from Russia's border; it is 6,000 miles from the American homeland. Moscow's interests are understandably more central than America's, given that geographic factor alone.

In conducting serious negotiations with Putin, President Trump has an opportunity for a diplomatic (and public relations) success that would exceed his achievement with the Kim summit. To do so, however, he must make a major course correction in how the United States handles delicate and dangerous situations with adversaries. Indeed, he must take an important step in America's willingness to relearn the techniques of achievable diplomacy.

Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow in defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute and a contributing editor at The American Conservative, is the author of 10 books, the contributing editor of 10 books, and the author of more than 700 articles on international affairs.

[Jul 14, 2018] Is Washington Playing Iran's Useful Idiot in Syria The American Conservative

Notable quotes:
"... Damascus and Moscow welcomed Iran's critical contribution to defeating the opposition and giving Washington and its allies a diplomatic bloody nose in the bargain. Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov acknowledges that Iran's presence in Syria -- at the invitation of the regime -- is legitimate and that it would be "unrealistic" to demand its ouster. ..."
"... But instead of viewing the end of the war as an opportunity to lessen Iran's value to the regime and to reduce its footprint in the country, Washington is continuing heedlessly with failed policies created for an environment that no longer exists. As long as the fighting continues and the regime's efforts to reassert sovereignty over the entire country are frustrated by U.S. deployments in the northeast and southeast, Iran's military presence in the country is secure. Likewise, Washington shows no sign of reconsidering international sanctions against the regime, which also forces Syria into the arms of Tehran. ..."
"... A colorblind appraisal of the effects of U.S. policy in Iraq and now Syria would suggest that Washington is either brilliantly in cahoots with Iran to the latter's benefit or is being outplayed by weaker but more clear-eyed players. My vote goes squarely to the latter. ..."
"... Confronted with the disintegration of its diplomatic and military strategy, the Trump administration is reduced to playing spoiler, obstructing the inevitable restoration of the regime's sovereignty over the country and continuing the punishing sanctions that have removed the battered but resilient Syrian private sector from international capital and commercial markets. This policy fails on two fronts -- it creates more gratuitous misery for the Syrian people and it undermines the stated U.S. objective of reducing and removing Iranian and Hezbollah influence in the country. Indeed, continuing to pursue the current policies will leave the U.S. isolated among friends (Jordan and Israel) as well as frenemy Russia, and will postpone rather than speed the day that Iran leaves Syria. ..."
Jul 13, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Washington has been on the offensive against the Islamic Republic of Iran for close to half a century. Largely as a result, Iran, a rounding error in the superpower sweepstakes, has gone from strength to strength, challenging American power throughout the region, most notably in Iraq and Syria.

U.S.-led regime change in Iraq created Tehran's historic opportunity to return to Baghdad for the first time since the creation of the Ottoman caliphate in the 15th century. This unscripted but entirely predictable outcome was no mean feat, all the more so for being the opposite of what Washington intended.

The Bush administration knew that it no longer wanted Saddam in the chair, but could not think beyond this one, giant, uncharted leap into the future. Iran has a far greater and more lasting interest in the affairs of its neighbor and often bitter enemy. As a consequence, the mullahs are playing a far longer, and more successful, game.

The legacy of unintended consequences continues to define Washington's policy towards Iraq a generation after the first Gulf War ended. And so too with Syria. In both countries, U.S. shortcomings have created a historic opportunity for Iran to enhance its influence in Arab arenas that when not actively hostile to it (Iraq) are at best lukewarm (Syria).

Are al-Qaeda Affiliates Fighting Alongside U.S. Rebels in Syria's South? How U.S. Iran Policy Hurts Iran and America

When asked about Syria's relationship with Iran, Farouk Shara'a, longtime foreign minister and vice president, once explained to a mutual friend, "You don't have to love the woman you are sleeping with."

Syria has been in bed with Iran for decades. Saddam's war against Iran in the '80s, the rise of Hezbollah in Lebanon, and most recently the war against the Assad regime in Syria, have conspired to throw these two unlikely allies into a cold embrace.

Washington has been oblivious to this essentially ambivalent Syrian attitude towards Iran, and remains equally so to the opportunities it creates to reduce Iran's footprint in postwar Syria. Now that the war is winding down, the value of Iran's military contribution to Syria is declining. In parallel, Syria's interest in reducing the power of its erstwhile Iranian and Russian friends over its destiny increases.

Damascus and Moscow welcomed Iran's critical contribution to defeating the opposition and giving Washington and its allies a diplomatic bloody nose in the bargain. Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov acknowledges that Iran's presence in Syria -- at the invitation of the regime -- is legitimate and that it would be "unrealistic" to demand its ouster.

But while Iran's wartime contribution proved critical to victory, neither Assad nor Putin was displeased to distance Iranian-backed elements from the recent battle front in the south. Neither has an interest in enabling Tehran to pursue a postwar Syrian agenda towards Lebanon and Israel. Nor is either enamored with Iran's continuing efforts to reshape the Syrian military in its image. On these important issues, Iran stands all but alone against an invisible, de facto coalition that includes Washington and the EU alongside Israel, Moscow, and the Assad regime itself.

But instead of viewing the end of the war as an opportunity to lessen Iran's value to the regime and to reduce its footprint in the country, Washington is continuing heedlessly with failed policies created for an environment that no longer exists. As long as the fighting continues and the regime's efforts to reassert sovereignty over the entire country are frustrated by U.S. deployments in the northeast and southeast, Iran's military presence in the country is secure. Likewise, Washington shows no sign of reconsidering international sanctions against the regime, which also forces Syria into the arms of Tehran.

A colorblind appraisal of the effects of U.S. policy in Iraq and now Syria would suggest that Washington is either brilliantly in cahoots with Iran to the latter's benefit or is being outplayed by weaker but more clear-eyed players. My vote goes squarely to the latter.

Apart from the lingering campaign against ISIS, in every other respect the U.S. effort in Syria is imploding. Washington under Obama and now Trump has been forced to uneasily acknowledge the regime's staying power. It has now been reduced to bickering over the details of Syrian constitutional reform in the postwar era, a waste of time if ever there was one. Lately, the U.S. secretary of state, from his respected perch, has personally threatened Iran's key military strategist and architect of its advances in Iraq and Syria, Qassem Sulemani, a sure sign that the policymaking process at State is frozen.

In the field, Washington has ignominiously abandoned allies in the southern front. And in the northeast, the Kurds have embarked on the road back to Damascus, imperiling Washington's deployment there.

Confronted with the disintegration of its diplomatic and military strategy, the Trump administration is reduced to playing spoiler, obstructing the inevitable restoration of the regime's sovereignty over the country and continuing the punishing sanctions that have removed the battered but resilient Syrian private sector from international capital and commercial markets. This policy fails on two fronts -- it creates more gratuitous misery for the Syrian people and it undermines the stated U.S. objective of reducing and removing Iranian and Hezbollah influence in the country. Indeed, continuing to pursue the current policies will leave the U.S. isolated among friends (Jordan and Israel) as well as frenemy Russia, and will postpone rather than speed the day that Iran leaves Syria.

Geoffrey Aronson is chairman and co-founder of The Mortons Group and a non-resident scholar at the Middle East Institute.

Janwaar Bibi July 12, 2018 at 11:24 pm

A colorblind appraisal of the effects of U.S. policy in Iraq and now Syria would suggest that Washington is either brilliantly in cahoots with Iran to the latter's benefit or is being outplayed by weaker but more clear-eyed players. My vote goes squarely to the latter.

US foreign policy is controlled by the Israeli lobby and to a lesser extent, by the Saudi lobby. The illegal and unprovoked attacks by the US on Iraq, Libya and Syria were done at the behest of these lobbies. The only country that has benefited from all this bloodshed is Israel, which now dominates the Middle East.

Since this obvious truth cannot be said out aloud, we need to pretend we don't know who is behind all the mayhem in the Middle East, like this pointless article does.

Procivic , , July 13, 2018 at 12:55 am
The writer can't see the forest for the trees. Successive U.S. administrations have behaved irresponsibly to enhance Israel's position in the guise of bring "democracy" to the region. Washington's failures have created ongoing misery in Iraq, a failed state in Libya and the destruction of the ancient land of Syria.

The U.S. continues to
pretend it had no role in the creation of the huge refugee problem that followed its interventions in Libya and Syria.

No lessons learned, the folly is being played out daily in Yemen where the Pentagon is leading the a campaign of death and destruction alongside its "democratic" allies, the Salman clan of Arabia and the sheikhs of the Persian Gulf minnow petrostates.

Genesee Hike , , July 13, 2018 at 8:11 am
"the stated U.S. objective of reducing and removing Iranian and Hezbollah influence "

I've yet to see a compelling reason for this "stated objective". If you want to argue that it's an American interest because the Israel Lobby wants it, well, OK, there are politicians who can be bribed to do Israel's will, but no real American would agree.

One of these days an American president will make an "opening to Iran" as Nixon once made one to China. Surely we can bury the hatchet with Iran for the sake of a grand bargain that accomplishes America's one real interest in the Middle East, which is to free ourselves of the various parasites who entangle us in their messes, and get the hell out of there. Some of us hoped that Trump might be that president, but it wasn't meant to be.

Krzysztof Hołubicki , , July 13, 2018 at 8:59 am
As far as Procivic and Genesee Hike comments are concerned -- they are perfectly right and down to the point.
the piper will be paid , , July 13, 2018 at 11:36 am
"The U.S. continues to
pretend it had no role in the creation of the huge refugee problem that followed its interventions in Libya and Syria."

Which is ridiculous. When you bomb, invade, and arm insurgencies in people's countries, a lot of people run away. Everybody knows that.

In the case of our bombing, invading, and/or arming insurgencies in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria, a lot of people ran away.

Millions ran into Turkey. Millions more ran through Turkey into Greece and then up through the Balkans into other NATO countries. And still more came up from Africa and sailed away from the shores of ruined Libya to our NATO allies Italy, Spain, and France.

We did this. Everybody knows we did it. It's absurd to deny it. What's worse is that many of the allies destabilized by the refugees warned or even begged us not to start those wars. With no American interest at stake, no real risk assessment, and no exit strategy formulated, we did it anyway.

Sid Finster , , July 13, 2018 at 12:07 pm
Much simpler explanation: For decades, the United States has been the loyal servant of Israel, and to a lesser extent, Saudi Arabia, faithfully carrying out its masters' every dictate.

As an unintended consequence of Israeli/Saudi policy, Iran has grown much stronger.

The only reason that the US foreign policy establishment is rushing headlong into a war with Iran is because Israel and Saudi Arabia are terrified of the Iran that they have created.

[Jul 13, 2018] Trump, like the innocent child in the tale of the naked emperor, has stated the obvious truth that the elite and the experts have refused steadfastly for years to publicly acknowledge. Way to go Trump. You hit a home run.

Notable quotes:
"... Trump seems to enjoy antagonizing the Europeans one way or the other. As to NATO, Trump made the same complaints during his campaign while calling it "obsolete." Sometimes it sounds like he would rather have the US out of NATO. One theory I have is that he is limited in what he can do so he works around TPTBs to get closer to his goals. So he antagonizes and threatens Europe on NATO. The same goes for Syria. He talked about wanting to pull out but kept being drawn back in by the usual suspects. So he's pulled monetary support in certain cases and refused to dig the US in any deeper than it is. And it will be interesting to see what happens with his upcoming meeting with Putin considering how much he had to backtrack on his talk of better relations during his campaign. Those who've wanted him to join the "hate Russia" team may get frustrated. ..."
"... Within this new "mulit-polar" world, only Russia is cutting its military budge. And they still seem to have at least one of the most effective conventional war-fighting capability, and their next generation nuclear deterrence looks nothing short of awesome. They have pipelines to build, and like China, long-term economic contracts to sign. ..."
"... I'm no fan of Angela, but she/Germany have been trying to tamp down this AZ Empire New Cold War against Russia since at least 2013. When she, Putin, Yanukovych (elected President of Ukraine) and the leaders of the Maidan protests got together and signed an agreement in which Yanukovych acquiesced to essentially all of the "peaceful, pro-democracy protesters'" demands, it was the Asst. Secretary of the US State (Vickie Nuland) who said, "F*ck the EU" "We can midwife this thing" and even appointed the new PM "Yats is the guy." ..."
"... The US can't keep funding your crappy little joke of a disintegrating "European Union" for ever. Sooner or later you'll have to put on big-boy pants. ..."
"... USA govt's assessment of China and Russia as "revisionist" should be understood as a determination to remain the hegemonic power. Thus, we have Cold War II. From that perspective, European objections to more "defense" spending are considered naive (or worse) as Europe's fate is views as tied to that of the Empire. ..."
"... I think European elites are much more likely to side with USA than European people. If the Trump's talk with Putin doesn't go well, we are likely to see increased scaremongering to rectify public opinion. ..."
"... Chaos can make doing business harder, but that can also increase profits. As the posters said in the '60s, "War Is Not Good For Children And Other Living Things." But it's great for the psychopaths. ..."
"... Here is an article that explains the relationship between Russian pipelines, USA sanctions on Russia, MH17, Crimea, and Syria. It is an excellent background to comprehend Trump's accusations about Germany's purchase of gas from Russia. Patrick Armstrong and Pat Lang seem to think that Trump is about to cut NATO support, reduce/eliminate sanctions against Russia, and redirect relations with Israel, but I am not persuaded. https://www.unz.com/article/why-was-malaysian-airlines-flight-mh17-shot-down/ by Kees van der Pijl He also wrote a book on this topic. ..."
"... Everything the US does works to undermine its old power in the new world. We see this continually. Trump is an accelerator. But whether any of this is intentional and actually desired by a part of US vested interests, is still an open question. ..."
"... Nevertheless, as we watch, we see every action of the US working to cement the bonds of its opposition in the rest of the world. From the Escobar article linked by karlof1 above, we see the pressure on the Middle East to reject the US and turn for safety to the Eurasian institutions of commerce, finance and national security. The same thing is happening to Europe. ..."
"... he equation as it stands now is this: A muscle-bound USA + an anaemic Europe "deterring" a Russian Federation that has no intention of invading. ..."
"... Since Russia is no threat either way then there is no need - none whatsoever - for the Europeans to increase their military expenditure to "defend themselves" against a non-existent Russian threat. ..."
"... Indeed, the only reason the Europeans would feel that they might have to prepare to "defend themselves" would be because that muscle-bound US military is now outside the tent pissing in, not inside the tent pissing out. ..."
"... Since whenever, America has been the proxy front for the current instantiation of empire with the core of control being ongoing private finance with global tools like BIS, IMF, World Bank, etc. Since WWII and even before the goal of empire is to have all of the world under its control. Since the engine of empire is a supra-national matrix of private finance control, the enemy becomes any nations who do not want to be impregnated with the Western model of private Central Bank, an oligarchy , inheritance, private property, etc. ..."
"... The empire model of growth through wars and boom/bust expansion has reached its "logical" limits and the the existential question has become, blow everything all up or agree to a multipolar world. I think that the elite hope Trump's bluster will make it so they do not have to answer that existential question.....yet ..."
"... If Trump's fake argument gambit was intended to inspire people inside and outside the EU to think outside the box then it seems to have worked. ..."
"... I LUV how Trump stomped on all those preaning European elite scumbags. ..."
"... Agree with Patrick. It is surprising to still see so much animosity towards a president who has done more to combat the absurdity of NATO and globalism than I can remember any other President doing. The ball is in the EU elites court, now. Put up or shut up and I believe it makes no difference to Trump. We are about to find out who is REALLY to blame for marching lockstep with the current of hypercentralization (globalism): the Trump admin or the EU elitez. ..."
"... The US has been manipulating NATO ever since it was formed. Most NATO officials are vetted by the US. Trump is an idiot, like the bulk of US politicians. ..."
"... Trump's "reasoning" makes sense in an infantile sort of way, but there's more too it than meets the eye, is there not? Trump doesn't just want to Europe to "pay their fair share" for NATO, which we all know is code for buying more US mil.gear but also to buy their LNG from US too. It's like NATO is some sort of grotesque, evil franchise where the franchisees can only buy goods/services from that single source, even though it's crap & inordinately expensive, and even if you can get it cheaper elsewhere, i.e Russia. ..."
"... Wow! You don't feel that Trump has, by his mere existence and by winning the presidency, been given a platform of which to decry the myriad injustices of globalization and to utter things unspeakable by any Prez in the last fifty years? ..."
"... Europe has an arms industry of their own. I doubt European countries invest their money into US stuff - they buy their own. Most of the money does not go into weapons anyway, but personel and administration. Germany contributes to the maintenance and infrastructure of US bases, but those bases are business, too. This is not Saudi Arabia buying protection. The real news is that Trump has started a trade war negotiating by tantrum. ..."
Jul 13, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

kgw , Jul 11, 2018 7:37:47 PM | 35

You are agreeing with an idiot, no matter what...Europe has nothing to worry about with regards to Russia. Unless they threaten Russia. 'Love this exchange at breakfast;

You'd have to be an idiot not to agree with Trump here.

Curtis , Jul 11, 2018 7:42:06 PM | 36

Trump seems to enjoy antagonizing the Europeans one way or the other. As to NATO, Trump made the same complaints during his campaign while calling it "obsolete." Sometimes it sounds like he would rather have the US out of NATO. One theory I have is that he is limited in what he can do so he works around TPTBs to get closer to his goals. So he antagonizes and threatens Europe on NATO. The same goes for Syria. He talked about wanting to pull out but kept being drawn back in by the usual suspects. So he's pulled monetary support in certain cases and refused to dig the US in any deeper than it is. And it will be interesting to see what happens with his upcoming meeting with Putin considering how much he had to backtrack on his talk of better relations during his campaign. Those who've wanted him to join the "hate Russia" team may get frustrated.

Will he take direct action on any of these things? I doubt it. The indirect route seems to go in the right direction.

Daniel , Jul 11, 2018 7:50:36 PM | 38
karlof!. Good to "see" you back. The following is specifically to you, but it does continue from your first comment. [I couldn't get some links to embed, sorry]

My best short term hope is that all this war-blustering is just to convince we commoners to bend over so the military/industrial contractors can make lots of gelt. The Global War OF Terror has been terrific for their bank accounts, but with SAA and the MoD of the RF beating the snot out of terrorists wherever they go to such an extent that the Pentagon is considering ISIS essentially defeated.

Besides, the really "big ticket products" are things like aircraft carriers, "upgraded" nuclear weapons, 5th Generation fighters, etc. etc. etc., that are harder to excuse when their targets are guys in sandals with AK47s and IEDs. That could be why the 2018 National Defense Strategy plan has shifted from fighting "terrorism" back to " the long-term, strategic competition between nations." https://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/2018-National-Defense-Strategy-Summary.pdf

Same with our "adversary" across the big pond in China. Just the other day, the CPC warned of "China's army infiltrated by 'peace disease' requiring a major new "defense posture" just like the US and NATO.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/2153579/chinas-army-infiltrated-peace-disease-after-years

China's Central Military Commission specified that much of this "posturing" will be "military reforms are aimed at expanding its military might from the traditional focus on land territories to maritime influence to protect the nation's strategic interests in a new era. "

Within this new "mulit-polar" world, only Russia is cutting its military budge. And they still seem to have at least one of the most effective conventional war-fighting capability, and their next generation nuclear deterrence looks nothing short of awesome. They have pipelines to build, and like China, long-term economic contracts to sign.

Patrick Armstrong , Jul 11, 2018 7:52:25 PM | 39
No dear b, for once I think you've got it wrong. I see Trump asking three question for all of which there is one answer.
1. Angela. You tell us that NATO ought to concentrate on the Russian threat. If Russia is a threat, why are you buying gas from it?
2. Angela, You tell us that Russia is a reliable energy supplier. If Russia is a reliable supplier, why are you telling us it's a threat?
3. Angela. I hope you're not saying Russia is a threat and its gas is cheap but the USA will save us.

The answer to all 3 questions is: we're out of here, defend yourselves. It's Trump cutting the Gordian Knot of obligations.

Daniel , Jul 11, 2018 7:54:11 PM | 40
Aarrgghh! Besides some continuity problems when I recut and pasted the above since the links weren't working, I also left out the following completely.

That could be why, even though the US 2018 Nuclear Posture Review observes we are changing from: "For decades, the United States led the world in efforts to reduce the role and number of nuclear weapons." To " the current, pragmatic assessment of the threats we face and the uncertainties regarding the future security environment." Which conveniently can use up, or more likely go over budget on former President CareBear's additional $10 Billion in nuclear weapons development over the succeeding 10 years.

https://media.defense.gov/2018/Feb/02/2001872886/-1/-1/1/2018-NUCLEAR-POSTURE-REVIEW-FINAL-REPORT.PDF

Daniel , Jul 11, 2018 8:12:45 PM | 42
Patrick Armstrong @38.

I'm no fan of Angela, but she/Germany have been trying to tamp down this AZ Empire New Cold War against Russia since at least 2013. When she, Putin, Yanukovych (elected President of Ukraine) and the leaders of the Maidan protests got together and signed an agreement in which Yanukovych acquiesced to essentially all of the "peaceful, pro-democracy protesters'" demands, it was the Asst. Secretary of the US State (Vickie Nuland) who said, "F*ck the EU" "We can midwife this thing" and even appointed the new PM "Yats is the guy."

She was then an active participant in the Minsk Agreement to end the "anti-terrorism action" Which our gal Vickie shredded publicly the next day because the AZ Empire thought the Uki-Nazis would finish off those Muscovite, Colorado hicks and (can I post the Ukie terms for Jews?) in the east like they'd done in the south.

Then, Angela was involved in the Minsk II cease-fire/road to peace (when the Uki-Nazis were being driven out of the east, and were about to lose Mariupol).

I know there are others in addition to b here who know this stuff better than I. Isn't this about right?

Piotr Berman , Jul 11, 2018 8:19:07 PM | 43
"It is extremely hypocritical for Poland to lobby against Nord Stream when it significantly contributes to Poland's energy security."

There are other explanations that could be better documented, like stupidity and insanity. BTW, Poland has big pollution problem, and a major part is that many older multifamily buildings and new single family building has polluting heating with coal furnaces and stoves. Natural gas does not generate pollutants except for CO2 which is not affecting health, plus it uses less than half of carbon than coal.

On the other note, merely to get enough gas for internal needs, Poland could get enough through Belorus. But if you need to add re-export to Ukraine, that is not enough. So Poles can pride themselves of not being as stupid and insane as their southeastern neighbors.

james , Jul 11, 2018 8:24:21 PM | 44
publius tacitus at sst take on this..
james , Jul 11, 2018 8:26:42 PM | 45
@41 daniel.. patrick has quite a good handle on this topic... https://patrickarmstrong.ca/
financial matters , Jul 11, 2018 8:27:15 PM | 46
Patrick Armstrong@38

Well stated. There are many gordian knots. The BIS should be dissolved ""Responsible fiscal practice requires a government to fill spending gaps left by fluctuations in non-government spending patterns. In that way, the government takes responsibility for maintaining full employment. What the Troika did in Greece was the exemplar of irresponsible fiscal practice.""

Tannenhouser , Jul 11, 2018 8:28:19 PM | 47
I really really like the way you include a 'solution' to a global problem in this analysis b. To many times we just speak to the choir and rarely are solutions presented regardless where they lie on the possible/probable line. Did I mention I really like this SA. Thanks.
Daniel , Jul 11, 2018 8:28:38 PM | 48
karlof1 @7. In graph 1, of actual dollar expenditure, NATO spending was going down until 2012, then it started to rise again, and has been a net increase every year since 2015.

In graph 4, per nation spending relative to GDP went up from 2014 to 2017 in almost all member states notably, except the US and UK, but even then, US went from 3.58% to slightly over 3.5% and UK from 2.14% to a touch over 2.1%, so both are above the 2% "minimum."

Graphs 5, 6, 7 all show actual dollar expenditures dropping from 1010 to 2014, but then increasing every year since then.

Perhaps I misunderstood your point. But it sure looks like NATO spending has been rising since this "New Cold War" really kicked into gear in 3024/2015.

Daniel , Jul 11, 2018 8:54:30 PM | 49
Pft @ 27

"One big reason they deposed the Shah who was planning to go big with nuclear power with orders for about 20 French and /or German reactors"

Another hat in the ring for CIA/MI6/Mossad helping to install the Islamic part of the Iranian Revolution? WooHoo!

"China basically has a monopoly on these metals"

Yes. Bear in mind though that "discovered" after the US invasion/occupation is that Afghanistan has perhaps the world's largest reserves of lithium. And the "Democratic Republic" of Congo also has much rare earth wealth. As in fact do other parts of central Africa. Hence, the AZ Empire's new "AfriCom" military classification and the reinstallation of French Colonialism.

I'm not so up on this whole tariff thing. Hasn't Germany had substantial tariffs on automobiles for years now? Do those tariffs apply to other EU states?

Peter AU 1 , Jul 11, 2018 9:02:50 PM | 50
Daniel
I have read in the past that Afghan is very rich in a number of minerals and China was looking at development there as part of it road belt intuitive. Going by the state Afghanistan is in I can't see the US extracting minerals there. US squatting in Afghanistan may be simply to deny Chinese access to the mineral deposits.
/div
/div
Chipnik , Jul 11, 2018 9:07:45 PM | 52
10

If NS2 goes online and EU goes dark to Qatar, especially if Iran corks Qatar with a South pipeline, the Middle East economies will collapse into chaos, and nobody will be buying either US guns or butter.

US'own economy is going down the crapper with No Taxes for the Rich running an $800B Deficit, and private Fed Bank ratcheting up $50B at a gulp in interest-only Debt financing ...forever. Collapse of MediCare and MediCaid will bleed even more out of the retsil economy, which will increase the Deficit, into a National Debt death spiral, and collapse of the public pensiin systems.

If you project MIC arms spendung and Fed interest-only bleed out, Trump's illegal 25% Fed VAT sales tax (aka 'tariffs) and EU/RU/CH counter-tariffs, all US health and human services will be insolvent by 2025.

When that happens, and could happen much sooner, the world we knew in 20C will be inverted, upended, chaos, albeit, only chaos for the Lower Classes, Workers and Private Pensioners/401Ks. The Deep Purple Mil.Gov UniParty will...uhh...find a way!

gda , Jul 11, 2018 9:10:23 PM | 53
@kgw
"You are agreeing with an idiot, no matter what...Europe has nothing to worry about with regards to Russia. Unless they threaten Russia."

Well shit or get off the pot why don't you - "idiot" Trump is calling your bluff - stop freeloading off a (by your assessment) non-existent threat, or he'll stop it for you. Can't have it both ways. The US can't keep funding your crappy little joke of a disintegrating "European Union" for ever. Sooner or later you'll have to put on big-boy pants.

Methinks this guy has a good take on this. "Trump, like the innocent child in the tale of the naked emperor, has stated the obvious truth that the elite and the experts have refused steadfastly for years to publicly acknowledge. Way to go Trump. You hit a home run."
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/07/nato-a-naked-emperor-by-publius-tacitus.html/

Daniel , Jul 11, 2018 9:23:02 PM | 54
James, @44. I largely agree with (and have called for) Patrick's recommendations for what Ukraine should do now. I don't see anything in there that contravenes what I wrote about Germany's role in the AZ Empire's coup and resulting war, though.

Do you remember those events, or should I dig out citations? I was following it pretty closely from mid/late 2013 until it quieted down in 2015. Since then, I just pick up articles here and there.

like, did you see that Israel is providing assault rifles and ammo to the Azov Battalion (the naziest of the neo-nazis)? And then, of course, the Zoo-nazis whine about a couple of Jewish journalists reporting on it.

Chipnik , Jul 11, 2018 9:23:59 PM | 55
34

When you'd have to be an idiot to agree with Trump ($1 TRILLION MIC arms profiteering slash National Police State slash MIC Indefinite Detention Gulags), but now you'd have to be an idiot NOT to agree with Trump (drag EU into the funeral pyre)m then you know it must be the Red Army v Blue Army media spewfest and the National Novitiate in November is near. Rahhh.

E pluribus now get back to work. Your 2Q ONE TRILLION Deep Purple State tithe-tibute is due in 3 more days, ONE TRILKION that you and your hiers will never see again.

Jackrabbit , Jul 11, 2018 9:29:23 PM | 56
USA govt's assessment of China and Russia as "revisionist" should be understood as a determination to remain the hegemonic power. Thus, we have Cold War II. From that perspective, European objections to more "defense" spending are considered naive (or worse) as Europe's fate is views as tied to that of the Empire.

I think European elites are much more likely to side with USA than European people. If the Trump's talk with Putin doesn't go well, we are likely to see increased scaremongering to rectify public opinion.

Daniel , Jul 11, 2018 9:31:41 PM | 57
Peter AU 1 @49

Well, the opium is sure getting out ok. ;-)

Not to mention those same rare earth metals are getting out of DRC despite millions of murderous deaths and disease.

And the oil started flowing out of Libya before Gaddafi was even lynched. Oil's been flowing out of "Kurdish" Iraq into Israel come hell or high water. And of course, ISIL was shipping Syrian oil through Turkey and Jordan (if not Israel) throughout.

Chaos can make doing business harder, but that can also increase profits. As the posters said in the '60s, "War Is Not Good For Children And Other Living Things." But it's great for the psychopaths.

Guerrero , Jul 11, 2018 9:35:30 PM | 58
Trump's native approach I suspect may be something like that of fellow-New Yorker and great American chess player Bobby Fischer who famously said: "Try something!"
Jackrabbit , Jul 11, 2018 9:46:02 PM | 60
Daniel @41

That sounds about right. I would only add that Minsk Accord is another example of a non-agreement. Ukraine never signed yet Russia is accused of not implementing this non-agreement whenever people feel the need for some more Russia-bashing.

mauisurfer , Jul 11, 2018 10:31:07 PM | 61
Here is an article that explains the relationship between Russian pipelines, USA sanctions on Russia, MH17, Crimea, and Syria. It is an excellent background to comprehend Trump's accusations about Germany's purchase of gas from Russia. Patrick Armstrong and Pat Lang seem to think that Trump is about to cut NATO support, reduce/eliminate sanctions against Russia, and redirect relations with Israel, but I am not persuaded. https://www.unz.com/article/why-was-malaysian-airlines-flight-mh17-shot-down/ by Kees van der Pijl He also wrote a book on this topic.
Guerrero , Jul 11, 2018 10:40:00 PM | 62
I'm not so up on this whole tariff thing.

Trump follows the footsprints of the post-USA Civil War Republican Party policy. From Chapter 1 of The Politicos 1865-1896 by Matthew Josephson (published in 1938)

"The new industrialist and financial class and the farmers of the North emerged the greatest gainers by far among the mixed coalition of classes which fought to win the social revolution underlying the War Between the States. But no less triumphant and dominent was the war party itself, the youthful organization of professional politicians and officeholders known as the Republican Party. A minority party in 1860, and victor in a three-cornered electoral contest, it knew during the war the intoxication of unchallenged power and fortune beyond calculation, leaving it in command of all the offices of the Federal Government!"

From Beard, Contemporary American History, p.91

It had the management of the gigantic war finances, through which it attached to itself the interests ... of the great capitalists and bankers throughout the North. It raised revenues by a high tariff which placed thousands of manufacturers under debt to it and linked their fortunes also with its fate ... Railway financiers and promoters of all kinds had to turn to it for privileges and protection...

mauisurfer , Jul 11, 2018 10:48:49 PM | 63
jackrabbit@59
surprised to hear you say Ukraine did not sign MinskII. On the contrary, I read that it was signed by LD Kuchma, Second President of Ukraine. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Signatories

The document was signed by:[23]

Swiss diplomat and OSCE representative Heidi Tagliavini
Former president of Ukraine and Ukrainian representative Leonid Kuchma
Russian Ambassador to Ukraine and Russian representative Mikhail Zurabov
Separatist's leaders Alexander Zakharchenko and Igor Plotnitsky
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_II#Signatories

All-night negotiations on Wednesday ended with the signing of the Declaration of Minsk in support of the "Package of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements" by Angela Merkel of Germany, Francois Hollande of France, Petro Poroshenko of Ukraine and Vladimir Putin of Russia and release of the full agreement. The talks, according to some reports, almost collapsed near the end as Ukraine and rebel leaders balked at signing.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2015/02/13/putin-comes-out-on-top-in-new-minsk-agreement/#21ffe18f4ede

Guerrero , Jul 11, 2018 11:34:57 PM | 64
From Chapter 1 of The Politicos 1865-1896 by Matthew Josephson (published in 1938):

"The prosecution of the war against rebellion had been associated with a protective tariff levied against a hated England. which profited and sought to profit further from our disaster. With the close of the war, a cry arose from the Northeastern region that high tariffs were needed to pay the war debt. and an outburst of high Protectionism followed in 1866."

V , Jul 11, 2018 11:44:37 PM | 65
# 20

Trump is factually correct; but it doesn't make him right.

Grieved , Jul 11, 2018 11:51:06 PM | 66
Everything the US does works to undermine its old power in the new world. We see this continually. Trump is an accelerator. But whether any of this is intentional and actually desired by a part of US vested interests, is still an open question.

Nevertheless, as we watch, we see every action of the US working to cement the bonds of its opposition in the rest of the world. From the Escobar article linked by karlof1 above, we see the pressure on the Middle East to reject the US and turn for safety to the Eurasian institutions of commerce, finance and national security. The same thing is happening to Europe.

Some days I think that Trump was a brilliantly inspired choice of some deep state players to further their agenda of fragmenting the old arrangements to allow new alignments to come into place - to modernize the elite control of the world. But most days I just don't know. What can one say about a force this magisterial and still this enigmatic?

I was talking with a friend today about Trump. She said she sees his approach as quite typical of US business style. You come out with the big stick, knowing it will get chopped in half by the time you get to agreement. But at least you end up with half a stick. Gotta start big. You don't ask, you don't get.

This style worked perfectly with North Korea, which was a standout among the nations of the world, in my opinion, for understanding superbly well how Trump played the game, and played it right back. The result was a meeting of equals, where something could actually get done. But NK worked hard to develop the bargaining chip to put on the table too. Words without substance don't work.

I'm not seeing many other countries responding with this same kind of exaggerated bravado - it is a very US way of doing business. Most countries are simply working to go around the US. Europe seems to be doing the same thing, simply rejecting and turning away. But the European countries could certainly create bargaining chips if they wanted to play the Trump game of negotiation. I truly suspect his style is something they're still getting to grips with. Perhaps they should call Kim for pointers.

I think ultimately we are seeing two things at work, and in tandem: the natural style of Trump, and the very real and unstoppable current of history. Whether either force is aware of the other, I can't say. Like the success or failure of the French Revolution, it's too soon to tell.

dh , Jul 11, 2018 11:56:34 PM | 67
@65 Good summary. I think the Europeans simply don't know what to make of him. The look on Stoltenberg's face said it all. They just don't know how to respond to someone so direct. Maybe Putin is the only one who can talk his language....but not in public.
karlof1 , Jul 11, 2018 11:57:58 PM | 68
Daniel--

China's taking a page from Mahan regarding sea power. NATO graphs: I mentioned Obama ordered an increase in spending and the chart shows the compliance. The ups and downs correlate well with wars and major recessions.

james , Jul 12, 2018 12:07:22 AM | 69
@53 daniel... what you said earlier - i think much the same way... i would be curious to know more of how patrick armstrong sees all that, but i think it is much the same as us too.. those links @53 reflect how messed up ukraine is at present.. having a failed state on your doorstep doesn't sound like fun and that works both ways for europe and russia.. i guess that was the usa ( and israels?) plan... screw up countries so they don't function properly, so you have to spend a lot of imf money to fix them.. works for wall st, lol..
Yeah, Right , Jul 12, 2018 12:07:56 AM | 70
@38 "The answer to all 3 questions is: we're out of here, defend yourselves"

Patrick, I'm confused: they are meant to defend themselves against whom, exactly? T he equation as it stands now is this: A muscle-bound USA + an anaemic Europe "deterring" a Russian Federation that has no intention of invading.

Remove the muscle-bound Americans from the equation and this is what remains: An anaemic Europe "deterring" a Russian Federation that has no intention of invading.

Since Russia is no threat either way then there is no need - none whatsoever - for the Europeans to increase their military expenditure to "defend themselves" against a non-existent Russian threat.

Indeed, the only reason the Europeans would feel that they might have to prepare to "defend themselves" would be because that muscle-bound US military is now outside the tent pissing in, not inside the tent pissing out.

dh , Jul 12, 2018 12:17:13 AM | 71
@68 Maybe they thought Ukraine would join the EU at some point but Crimea was the prize. The plan was to turn Crimea into a NATO base. Putin spoiled everything.
Jackrabbit , Jul 12, 2018 12:19:28 AM | 72
mauisurfer @62

Wikipedia also says (as part Leonid Kuchma's bio):

Since July 2014, Kuchma has been Ukraine's representative at the semi-official peace talks regarding the ongoing War in Donbass.
Why are they "semi-official"? Because Ukraine would not talk to the rebels directly. They believe that the rebels are sponsored by Russia so the dispute is between Russia and Ukraine. They would not talk to the rebels as that might convey legitimacy to the rebels. That's why the Trialteral Contact Group was set up. The signers of Minsk II (Russia, Germany, France, Kuchma/Ukraine) are merely "guarantors" of an agreement between Ukraine and the Donbas rebels - neither of which has actually signed.

Kuchma "represents" Ukraine but can't bind Ukraine. Although Poroschenko attended some of the talks, he never signed the agreement.

Minsk and Minsk II have reduced conflict somewhat but Ukraine has dragged its feet every step of the way. For example: they were slow to pull back heavy artillery as called for under the accord, then they wouldn't pass laws that were necessary for other provisions of the accord.

Recently, Ukraine has passed a law that essentially negates Minsk/Minsk II and treats the rebels as terrorists (as Ukraine has always claimed them to be) .

The Minsk accords outlined a detailed procedure through which Donetsk and Luhansk would receive "special status," hold internationally-recognized elections, and then negotiate their reintegration into Ukraine directly with Kiev, including basic constitutional reforms to federalize the country. No substantive steps have ever been undertaken by either side to implement these terms, and the new "Donbass Integration Law" now makes clear that Kiev expects the country to be re-united on its terms alone, though probably not anytime soon.

Ukrainian lawmakers, who overwhelmingly passed the bill on Jan. 19, argue that it simply normalizes a situation that has long existed but was clouded by misleading jargon and official fealty to the non-functioning Minsk accords .

Poroschenko signed the bill into law in February 2018.

Peter AU 1 , Jul 12, 2018 12:22:41 AM | 73
@dh "Maybe Putin is the only one who can talk his language"

Going by what Putin said of Trump after their 2 1/2 hour meeting in Vietnam, it seems more likely Trump talks in Putin's language when meeting actual leaders. Same would go for his meeting with KJU, and I would guess Xi.

Peter AU 1 , Jul 12, 2018 12:25:05 AM | 74
Within the US west, there would be no one Trump could meet as a leader and equal. They are all hired help.
psychohistorian , Jul 12, 2018 12:52:59 AM | 75
@ Grieved with his observations

Since whenever, America has been the proxy front for the current instantiation of empire with the core of control being ongoing private finance with global tools like BIS, IMF, World Bank, etc. Since WWII and even before the goal of empire is to have all of the world under its control. Since the engine of empire is a supra-national matrix of private finance control, the enemy becomes any nations who do not want to be impregnated with the Western model of private Central Bank, an oligarchy , inheritance, private property, etc.

The empire model of growth through wars and boom/bust expansion has reached its "logical" limits and the the existential question has become, blow everything all up or agree to a multipolar world. I think that the elite hope Trump's bluster will make it so they do not have to answer that existential question.....yet

The EU has always been a bastard child with little chance of growing up because there was no finance core agreements to manage the national variations within. I am surprised it has lasted as long as it has given the historical tension between the nations. The US has similar social tensions but our structure has homoginized the economy enough that we haven't imploded...yet

The key to this process which I believe is being managed by the elite is at what point are the big decisions made and by whom. Given the accelerated nature of the managed deconstruction, I suspect the elite believe they will retain their mystique of power long enough to not lose grip on private finance running the Western world. The EU countries will have to come to terms with their oligarchs and determine what path forward works for all of eurasia. I don't see the current leadership of any EU countries as having the public's best interest in mind or action.

Are we seeing Western plutocracy fail of its own "weight"? Perhaps so.....nice

Hoarsewhisperer , Jul 12, 2018 1:03:22 AM | 76
If Trump's fake argument gambit was intended to inspire people inside and outside the EU to think outside the box then it seems to have worked.
Fernando Arauxo , Jul 12, 2018 1:05:36 AM | 77
I LUV how Trump stomped on all those preaning European elite scumbags. He's my hero for pooping all over their little pride parade. Tell em like it is Donald they call you stupid and all those other useless names. Your stinking GENIUS. MORE and an ENCORE!!!!
NemesisCalling , Jul 12, 2018 1:25:27 AM | 78
@39 Patrick

Agree with Patrick. It is surprising to still see so much animosity towards a president who has done more to combat the absurdity of NATO and globalism than I can remember any other President doing. The ball is in the EU elites court, now. Put up or shut up and I believe it makes no difference to Trump. We are about to find out who is REALLY to blame for marching lockstep with the current of hypercentralization (globalism): the Trump admin or the EU elitez.

Sorry for the break in the Trump-bashing. Let's all get back to that good ol' America-hatin' catharsis.

Den Lille Abe , Jul 12, 2018 1:55:52 AM | 79
So nothing is really new, sigh!

Since the start of the 70ties I have heard exactly the same tune from the US and the blathering idiot in charge now has not changed the tune; ever since have I had to listen to this "The Russians are coming" tune, with the rhetoric getting ever more shrill and false, 1989 brought a brief and marvelous, albeit very short pause to this tune, and for a few years the US Kleptocracy was happy plundering the former USSR. When Russia resisted the plunder i. e. Putin was elected, the tune started over again from where it was paused, disregarding the fact that Russia does not in any way compare to the former USSR.

N, noooe , it is still "The Russians are coming" playing, but with a new beat, pepped up, but same substance. But we are not listening anymore, the disgraceful actions and evil behavior of The United States of Mordor, have come into the open (The internet, appreciate it, we will not for long have it in its present form), even the most daft of us quietly starts wondering.

Well I am not daft, and the questioning ended 4 decades ago, The US must be resisted. Our politicians here on the continent must wake up and reject US imperialism and militarism, and devise our own defenses if deemed necessary, many European nations are not at the living standards we enjoy in Scandinavia, surely the money were better spent on that.

If the Poles and Baltic's want American troops on their soil, withdraw EU spending, we do not need their insane sabre rattling. (Especially the Poles are vile, they forget that when Hitler invaded, they had been a fascist dictatorship for years).

V , Jul 12, 2018 2:36:38 AM | 80
Den Lille Abe # 79
N, noooe , it is still "The Russians are coming" playing, but with a new beat, pepped up, but same substance.

Two things; a total lack of imagination combined with a failure to apply intelligence; the I.Q. kind.

Pft , Jul 12, 2018 2:54:07 AM | 81
Nemesisiscalling@78

What exactly has Trump done to combat the absurdity of globalization and NATO besides talk? While he stopped TPP and TIPP he is negotiating similar agreements bilaterally. Also his Personal Empire benefits from globalization.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/28/five-ways-donald-trump-benefits-from-the-globalization-he-says-he-hates/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.daf25165315b

US only contributes 1% of their defense budget to NATO's direct costs so pulling out of NATO would make hardly a dent in the budget except to increase costs to relocate all the personnel and hardware. Those bases are invaluableHis calling for NATO countries to increase defense spending benefits US and Israeli companies who make up the military and security industrial complex and wont do squat to lower the defense budget

kgw , Jul 12, 2018 3:05:25 AM | 82

Born and raised in Southern California, been here 70 years... The US has been manipulating NATO ever since it was formed. Most NATO officials are vetted by the US. Trump is an idiot, like the bulk of US politicians.

@kgw
"You are agreeing with an idiot, no matter what...Europe has nothing to worry about with regards to Russia. Unless they threaten Russia."

Well shit or get off the pot why don't you - "idiot" Trump is calling your bluff - stop freeloading off a (by your assessment) non-existent threat, or he'll stop it for you. Can't have it both ways. The US can't keep funding your crappy little joke of a disintegrating "European Union" for ever. Sooner or later you'll have to put on big-boy pants. Methinks this guy has a good take on this.

"Trump, like the innocent child in the tale of the naked emperor, has stated the obvious truth that the elite and the experts have refused steadfastly for years to publicly acknowledge. Way to go Trump. You hit a home run."
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/07/nato-a-naked-emperor-by-publius-tacitus.html/

rcentros , Jul 12, 2018 4:42:16 AM | 83
You're assuming Europe's leaders aren't bought and paid for by Wall Bank Street Banksters. The system is rigged. I wouldn't doubt that they go into lapdog mode and bow to blowhard Trump.
somebody , Jul 12, 2018 5:58:30 AM | 84
83 Trump has just offically blown up NATO.

This was worked out before - there will be a " European Defense Union " including Britain.

Mrs Merkel emphasised that the German armed forces would remain commanded by parliament and not the government, and "would not take part in every mission".

This is theater.

somebody , Jul 12, 2018 6:18:14 AM | 85
add to 84

This here is a clear description of the issues involved . Of course, in the rivalry between the US and Russia, Europe's interest is best served playing the two off each other united. It is no surprise both - the US and Russia - have a strategic interest to split Europe. You don't believe Russia doing this, too? This here is from Greece . No, their government is not anti-Russian.

Macedonia is expecting an invitation at the NATO summit in Brussels this week to join following its landmark deal with Greece whereby it will change its name to the Republic of North Macedonia. Moscow strongly opposes NATO expansion.

...

The Greek diplomatic source told Reuters Athens would expel two diplomats and bar two other Russians from entering the country due to concerns that they were involved in rallies in Greece against the deal with Macedonia and that they had attempted to offer money to Greek state officials.

Becoming a "neutral" military force would end this type of nonsense. Trump acting like mafia is another strong incentive.

ralphieboy , Jul 12, 2018 6:20:14 AM | 86
@AH #37:

"The U.S. military is the biggest socialist organization of the world. It is egalitarian and its citizens, i.e. the soldiers, are extremely well cared for. It runs its own healthcare system through the Veterans Health Administration."

A wonderful conclusion b.

Does anyone know of any in-depth economic analysis of the U.S. military as a state welfare system for its members, as well as the impact of aggregate military spending on the general purchasing power of citizens within the society at large?

And US military spending is also an enormous job-creation and wealth-redistribution program in the form of defense contractors spread all over the nation, where they are especially vital for areas with weak employment.

The US winds up with a lot of projects it does not need because Congresspeople are not about to kill a program that employs thousands in their districts.

Zanon , Jul 12, 2018 6:43:32 AM | 87
Why should Germany spend 4% on its military? Didnt see that coming from this blog. Are germany facing an enemy? If not, its a waste of more money. All this useless money could be spend to actually strenghten the welfare state. Something that actually matters and are much needed. So which enemy is Germany facing? Either Trump is right that Russia is a threat to Germany or hes not. What is it?
V , Jul 12, 2018 6:54:14 AM | 88
#87
So which enemy is Germany facing?

The U.S., of course...

Zanon , Jul 12, 2018 7:18:45 AM | 89
This is absurd, Nato leader kick out EU leader during talks with Trump...
https://www.rt.com/usa/432844-trump-nato-leave-congress/
somebody , Jul 12, 2018 7:31:37 AM | 91
Posted by: ralphieboy | Jul 12, 2018 6:20:14 AM | 86

Therefore Trump needs NATO more than Europe needs NATO. How else defend the defense spending?

Senate votes to support NATO ahead of Trump summit

The nonbinding motion, which came as the Senate voted to reconcile its version of the annual defense policy bill with that of the House, expresses the Senate's support for NATO and calls on negotiators to reaffirm the U.S. commitment to it. The 97-2 vote in the Senate comes as Trump heads to Brussels.

That is bi-partisanship.

Zanon , Jul 12, 2018 7:34:27 AM | 92
Lol watching Trump asking questions, pretty only fanatical eastern-European journalists pretty much urging war with Russia,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gb9Snz6ivdY
Mark2 , Jul 12, 2018 7:34:59 AM | 93
The last time they debated a missing 21 trillion defense money at the pentagon, they got a cruse missile through the door! Figure that out! 911
somebody , Jul 12, 2018 8:12:36 AM | 95
It looks like Germany caved on the Iran deal

Helaba is a state bank.

xLemming , Jul 12, 2018 8:27:20 AM | 96
@21 gda

Trump's "reasoning" makes sense in an infantile sort of way, but there's more too it than meets the eye, is there not? Trump doesn't just want to Europe to "pay their fair share" for NATO, which we all know is code for buying more US mil.gear but also to buy their LNG from US too. It's like NATO is some sort of grotesque, evil franchise where the franchisees can only buy goods/services from that single source, even though it's crap & inordinately expensive, and even if you can get it cheaper elsewhere, i.e Russia.

I would love to see those fence-sitting NATO countries tell the US "sure, we'll increase our mil. spending, but after what we saw in Syria, we'll be buying our gear from Russia" (more bang for the buck too!) - that would be game, set & match right there!

LeaNder , Jul 12, 2018 8:33:38 AM | 97
I think you are wrong, Bernard. It will sell well in Europe too. To what extend were the themes of the Brexit campaign based on Germany as the slave master of Europe, to exaggerate slightly? It will also sell well in the US.
NemesisCalling , Jul 12, 2018 8:40:01 AM | 98
@81 pft

Wow! You don't feel that Trump has, by his mere existence and by winning the presidency, been given a platform of which to decry the myriad injustices of globalization and to utter things unspeakable by any Prez in the last fifty years?

I don't think you've been paying attention. The proof is in the pudding but what will be the benefit of raising the spectre of doubt over bad deals like NATO, the current iteration of world trade, and for animosity towards Russia? Evidently, it ain't worth shit to predictable TDS-sufferers that hang around here.

Circe , Jul 12, 2018 9:01:34 AM | 99
So much for those who projected that Trump's demands for an increase in the defense spending of other members and his scolding of Germany would lead to a weaker Nato! Nato members just caved to Trump and are increasing their spending and Trump is touting that Nato is stronger and everyone's doing the kumbaya.

When I say that Trump is establishment on steroids; it's an understatement. Trump is doing the kissy, kissy with Putin because the plan is to pull Russia away from collaborating with China. Zionist oligarchs are in league with Trump and Russia will eventually be under their complete control.

@98 You just don't get it. Trump is fascist establishment. Trump is separating kids from their mothers. Who does that??? He's a sick sadist.

somebody , Jul 12, 2018 9:14:59 AM | 100
Posted by: xLemming | Jul 12, 2018 8:27:20 AM | 96

Europe has an arms industry of their own. I doubt European countries invest their money into US stuff - they buy their own. Most of the money does not go into weapons anyway, but personel and administration. Germany contributes to the maintenance and infrastructure of US bases, but those bases are business, too. This is not Saudi Arabia buying protection. The real news is that Trump has started a trade war negotiating by tantrum.

[Jul 13, 2018] Trump's False Arguments about Russian gas will not sell well in Europe

But Trump has a great point: if you claim that Russia is ready to invade you, why you are buying gas from potential occupier?
Notable quotes:
"... Russia is a near neighbor to Germany. Commerce between relatively close countries is the normal course of events, so what is Trump suggesting, a 1970's style energy embargo on Russia? Depriving Russia the opportunity all trade with her neighbors 'because we said so' is no better than a blockade. ..."
Jul 13, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Donald Trump, the 'America First' salesman, came to Brussels today to demand more tribute to the empire. He wants Europe to buy more U.S. made weapons and to use U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG). But his arguments are all wrong. The people in Europe are not impressed by them and they will reject his appeals.

His first talk in Brussels was a profoundly wrong bashing of Germany to push it into buying very expensive LNG from U.S. fracking producers. Trump, Putin's puppet according to the 'resistance', used the Russian bogeyman to set the scene:

Well, I have to say, I think it's very sad when Germany makes a massive oil and gas deal with Russia, where you're supposed to be guarding against Russia, and Germany goes out and pays billions and billions of dollars a year to Russia.
...
So we're protect you against Russia, but they're paying billions of dollars to Russia, and I think that's very inappropriate. And the former Chancellor of Germany is the head of the pipeline company that's supplying the gas. Ultimately, Germany will have almost 70 percent of their country controlled by Russia with natural gas.

So you tell me, is that appropriate? I mean, I've been complaining about this from the time I got in. It should have never been allowed to have happened. But Germany is totally controlled by Russia , because they will be getting from 60 to 70 percent of their energy from Russia and a new pipeline.
...
Now, if you look at it, Germany is a captive of Russia because they supply. They got rid of their coal plants. They got rid of their nuclear. They're getting so much of the oil and gas from Russia.
...
I think trade is wonderful. I think energy is a whole different story. I think energy is a much different story than normal trade. And you have a country like Poland that won't accept the gas . You take a look at some of the countries -- they won't accept it, because they don't want to be captive to Russia. But Germany, as far as I'm concerned, is captive to Russia, because it's getting so much of its energy from Russia. So we're supposed to protect Germany, but they're getting their energy from Russia. Explain that. And it can't be explained -- you know that.

Trump was talking about the Nordstream II pipeline which will supply Germany and other European countries with natural gas from Russia.


bigger

Nord Stream I has been operating for a while. Nord Stream II is currently being build by private Austrian and German companies.

Cont. reading:

Posted by b at 02:50 PM | Comments (161)

bevin , Jul 11, 2018 3:41:00 PM | 3

It is indeed hard to believe that western european governments would agree to what Christopher Black calls a "US shakedown". Except that they have been doing so since 1949.

It is important to remember that the US Embassy exerts at least as much influence on the government as Parliament does. And that Parliaments are full of agents of the the US empire, in some cases they are actually on the payroll, many more are either US educated, marinated in the imperialist ideology or in the service of corporations which know that the Empire is the final guarantor of their survival and capable of crushing them with ease.

That having been said, things are changing, The imperialists cling to power only by exerting the most extraordinary, and unsustainable, pressure. An example of which is the ludicrously over-wrought campaign against the left in the UK being waged by the Israeli Embassy, with the assistance of the entire MSM.

B's arguments are correct but it will take a mobilised and politically conscious public opinion to impose them on governments full of people who see themselves as Washington's servants and expect to be rewarded one day for being loyal to the US and for betraying their countrymen and, of course, women.

SomeGuy , Jul 11, 2018 3:41:41 PM | 4

The question is if Europe will truly continue to bark and bite at the deep state or if this is all just for show and they'll eventually capitulate. I'm worried that this is nothing more than political theatre. I'm not expecting much from the Europeans. But we'll see.
karlof1 , Jul 11, 2018 6:45:07 PM | 25
Europe buying LNG from the US just makes no sense at all. Aside from the cost, LNG is difficult to transport and work with; the whole idea is just nuts, especially considering the quantities involved. In addition, Russian gas is plentiful and cheap, so to expect Europe not to use it is also nuts.

Could it be that Trump fully understands this and the hidden agenda is to get out of NATO and bring home the troops?

jack Leavitt | Jul 11, 2018 3:53:59 PM | 5

An Act of War against Russia

Russia is a near neighbor to Germany. Commerce between relatively close countries is the normal course of events, so what is Trump suggesting, a 1970's style energy embargo on Russia? Depriving Russia the opportunity all trade with her neighbors 'because we said so' is no better than a blockade.

One of these days, my country is going to get a taste of, 'no soup for you' and we will be screaming like stuck pigs.

Yes, I am obsessed w/Sean Hannity

It's his earnest, self-righteous, mind numbingly idiotic voice, I'm hypnotized. Ollie North was on his show and they were going on about 'Iran's' saber rattling by threatening to close the Straits of Hormuz. Sean rattled off how the EU would wake up and it would be the end of Iran's belligerence.

He neglected to mention that this 'threat' is only coming after our act of war by actively trying to cut off all of Iran's oil exports which is no better than a naval blockade.

Posted by: Christian Chuba | Jul 11, 2018 4:25:37 PM | 6

Much can be gleaned from this NATO Defence Expenditure pdf with special attention given to graphs 5, 6 & 7. Since the dissolution of the USSR, military spending as share of GDP by EU & Canada decreased about 50% as shown in Graph 5. It should also be noted that the demand made by the Outlaw US Empire for EU NATO members to increase their wastage of monies on military equipment began with Obama in 2015, with compliance noted by the graphs in 2016. When Obama gave his orders, very little squawking was heard from EU/Canada governments, although it was quite different from the public. Of course, EU/Canada are caught in a trap of their own design--Russia's quite obviously not the "aggressive" nation that must be defended against using all necessary means as promoted by Russophobic Media Propaganda as they all trade and benefit from commercial interactions; thus, bean counters see NATO as a wastage of vital, finite monies that ought to be spent on productive endeavors advancing the human condition. In national legislatures: "Russia's a growing threat to humanity!!--BUT--No, I'm voting against any increase in military spending as there's no need for it."

European members of NATO don't need such an organization. If they were to join the Russian and Chinese enterprises to unite Eurasia into a common economic zone, then the need for NATO would become indefensible. And their finally becoming independent of the Outlaw US Empire's diktats would provide the impetus required to finally solve the status of Palestine and reaffirmation of the paramountcy of International Law as a greatly expanded Multipolar Order would be established. The United Nations might actually begin to function as designed.

Is Trump trying to push NATO apart by injecting it with a dose of American Chaos? Force EU/Canada to declare their independence from the Outlaw US Empire for numerous reasons? All of which would force the contraction of the Overseas element of the Empire and install an actual defense policy, not one aiming to control the world? Is this Trump's way to force a Neocon retreat?

Meanwhile, China charms Arabia "Under the radar,..., the eighth ministerial meeting of the China-Arab States Cooperation Forum (CASCF), established in 2004, sailed on in Beijing, hosted by President Xi Jinping." Please note the article's citing of new demands made to Iraq by the Outlaw US Empire, which has their roots in Trump's appraisal of the situation.

karlof1 | Jul 11, 2018 4:36:16 PM | 8

I'd say this is why you do not mix a military alliance with politics. Nor allow federal presidents to command and represent an army. Trump's retarded bullshit aside the USA shouldn't be holding committee meetings with allies without an war. An alliance shouldn't be considered active during peacetime. An ally is a figment of political imagination until military necessity requires it in actuality. Historically and currently a military alliance is treated as a contract for warmongering against an outnumbered enemy while at peace or at war. Which is why honorable people (currently very few) eschew alliances or non-aggression agreements until they become a defensive requirement. If President Trump want's to crash NATO with no survivor's, more power to him.

Posted by: anon | Jul 11, 2018 4:44:41 PM | 9

How could a deal like nordstream happen anyway? Are puppets now allowed to make high-level strategic contracts on their own?

Posted by: radiator | Jul 11, 2018 6:10:23 PM | 18

We should also recognize that to some degree Trump is posturing before meeting Putin.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 11, 2018 6:15:11 PM | 19

The bright side of Trump bullying is revealing NATO astronomical hypocrisy as they join psychotic delusions about Russian menace they refuse to put money where their mouth is and shamelessly disclose their vassal status begging for American military support for free.

All that knowing well that there is no threat from Russia that cannot be eliminated simply by good neighborly relation with Russia not by spending $billions on otherwise useless fraudulent US MIC junk.

Is that nor reverse psychology that is in play here, put up or shut up, let me make deal with Russia so you do not have to spend on military rediculous sums to match your delusional rhetorics about Russian threat.

Trump is s gambling man, wants to make money for US MIC on anti Russian lies or make money for US industry on Russia peace and cooperation truths.

Posted by: Kalen | Jul 11, 2018 6:31:42 PM | 20

Love this exchange at breakfast;

"Stoltenberg: [ ] I think that two World Wars and the Cold War taught us that we are stronger together than apart.

Trump: But how can you be together when a country is getting its energy from the person you want protection against or from the group that you want protection?

Stoltenberg: Because we understand that when we stand together, also in dealing with Russia, we are stronger. I think what we have seen is that --

Trump: No, you're just making Russia richer. You're not dealing with Russia. You're making Russia richer."

You'd have to be an idiot not to agree with Trump here.

Posted by: gda | Jul 11, 2018 6:34:15 PM | 21

A notable difference between the way Trump treats the likes of Putin, Xi, and Kim Jong Un - all leaders in their own right - to the way he treats the EU poodles. Zero respect for the poodles.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Jul 11, 2018 6:40:20 PM | 22

"... The big advantage for Germany is that (Nordstream I and Nordstream II] pipelines do not run through any other country ..."

That's because idiot EU / NATO countries like Denmark, who would gladly accept having the pipelines pass through their land and maritime territories (and the transit fees that go with them) if Russian gas were not flowing through them, prefer to support the Nazi whacko Banderites ruling Ukraine who whine that all Russian gas should transit Ukrainian territory in deteriorating pipelines. So Denmark and others refuse to host any part of the pipelines at all.

When Gazprom starts sending all gas through Nordstream I and II and pipelines through the Black Sea, completely bypassing Ukraine, then that country will be close to bankruptcy. Denmark and everyone else in the EU and NATO had better be ready to rescue the Banderites.

Posted by: Jen | Jul 11, 2018 6:43:45 PM | 23

Der Speigel 's fact-checking article of Trump's assertions provides some interesting facts, all in German, which I used Yandex to translate. To counterargue Trump's most pointed assertion that Germany's a captive of Russia, the author provides this rebuke: "Russland ist auf den Abnehmer Deutschland angewiesen. Die Deutschen benötigten die Russen vor allem als Lieferanten für Erdgas." (Russia is dependent on the customer Germany. The Germans needed the Russians mainly as suppliers of natural gas.) Overall: "Für Russland ist Deutschland als Handelspartner wichtiger als andersherum. Von allen deutschen Importen kamen 2017 nur drei Prozent aus Russland - und lediglich zwei Prozent der Exporte gehen in Putins Reich. Für die Russen war die Bundesrepublik mit einem Anteil von 8,6 Prozent ihres gesamten Außenhandels der zweitwichtigste Partner hinter China. Und mehr als zwei Drittel der russischen Exporte nach Deutschland waren Erdgas, Öl und Steinkohle." (For Russia, Germany is more important as a trading partner than elsewhere. Of all German imports, only three percent came from Russia in 2017 - and only two percent of exports go to Putin's Reich. For the Russians, Germany was the second most important Partner behind China, accounting for 8.6 percent of its total foreign trade. And more than two-thirds of Russian exports to Germany were natural gas, Oil and coal.)

Clearly, the total trade turnover between Russia and Germany represents just a small fraction of their totals, and both nations would likely find a replacement if a total embargo was to ensue.

Pft , Jul 11, 2018 7:03:43 PM | 28
The US began pressuring countries to forego nuclear power to support the Petro Dollar in 1978. One big reason they deposed the Shah who was planning to go big with nuclear power with orders for about 20 French and /or German reactors

The TMI accident was likely a false flag run by the newly established FEMA.

If the restrictions on recycling nuclear fuel rods were eliminated there would not be a disposal problem.

Germanys decision to phase out nuclear makes US happy. Germany will only accept Nord Stream 2 if it does not bypass Ukraine. This also makes US happy although they would prefer no Nord Stream 2. As said up thread this is as much about posturing before the Putin meeting and gaining leverage.

A bit O/T but it appears rare metals needed by US military and tech industries are on the list of products subject to tarrifs. China basically has a monopoly on these metals so the only short term purpose is to drive up prices for weapons and tech gadgets which get passed onto the taxpayer/consumer. In effect the tarrifs are just another revenue source to finance tax cuts to corporations and the rich.

Longer term of course the tarrifs make mining some of these metals in the US more feasible, at some cost to the environment , seeing as EPA has been gutted. But for that to happen the tarrifs need to be more or less a permanent thing. Its not like they dont have tarrifs on food and clothes from China. Just expanding the revenue base. The middle class takes the hit in the end, whats left of it anyways

Den Lille Abe , Jul 11, 2018 7:12:41 PM | 29
Trump as a used car salesman does not make much sense either. In fact I don't think he can spell to sense. It telling that he is impervious to the mood in both NATO and the EU.

His middle name should be clueless. He is truly clueless, he will not get an increase in defense expenditure, it would be political self goal (Hello Engeland, no not football, that's more like clueless) for any major political party to demand that, the electorate across Europe are firmly against it. Ohh and who cares about Perfidious Albion, they are not part of Europe anymore, they are some Islands with bad weather in the North Sea.

Seabird sanctuary ?

Europe hopefully comes to its senses and casts of the American yoke, and fashion its own defences, based on ITS needs.

BTW: F the Poles and the Baltics!

dh , Jul 11, 2018 7:37:45 PM | 34
thanks b.. informative and interesting comments from everyone too.. thanks..

trump is a hard guy to read in some respects... he is like a blunt object on the one hand, but he might have some alternative purpose in mind, which would include the meet with trump in 5 days..

if he wants to get rid of nato, i think he is going about it the right way.. i can't see why he would though as that wouldn't benefit the mil complex...i can't see the purpose of nato either way and perhaps it would be best if the poodles let go of having the usa as it's leader in the 21st century.. consider a different approach... i am not sure what canada and other western type poodles can do with all this..

@7 karlof1.. thanks for the pepe link... i just don't see the approach - bullying - taken by the usa to iraq, as working out.. i am listing the demands for others to see firsthand..
"
1. 30% of all the oil in Iraq should be American-controlled – and it's up to the US do what it wants with it.

2. Washington must have full access and control of Iraqi banks.

3. All business and trade with Iran must cease right now.

4. The Hashd al-Shaabi, known as People Mobilization Units (PMUs), instrumental in the victorious fight against Daesh (Islamic State),

must be immediately disbanded."

the usa takes this approach based on weakness, not strength... in fact - if one was to read trumps comments on the surface here - it is the same thing that b has highlighted in this post.. again - the usa is not working from a place of strength.. it is like a wild animal in the last phase of it's life - not good..

Posted by: james | Jul 11, 2018 7:21:18 PM | 30

Lost in the story is fact it is not new supply of natural gas to Europe. It is new pipe lines including two others with the sole intent of bypassing Ukraine. Presently near all Russian natural gas passes through Ukraine on its way to Western Europe and particularly .. Germany. The Ukraine regime has been reaping the benefit of transmission fees and stealing billions of cubic meters of gas, on which they also charged transmission fees. This was the basis behind a recent dispute panel finding in favor of Ukraine and the gas theft. The Americans and willing European Poodles would very much like to keep the gas flowing through Naziville where they would maintain a strangle hold. Gazprom, the principle Russian supplier, more or less said f**K you and formed consortiums to build new pipe lines

Posted by: ger | Jul 11, 2018 7:23:58 PM | 33

@32 So if Germany gets gas through Nordstream they are 'controlled by Russia' but if they get it via Ukraine they aren't. Seems Nordstream would be good insurance against Ukrainian meddling. Cheaper too, a very sound business strategy that Trump should appreciate.

[Jul 13, 2018] NATO's Crisis and the Trans-Atlantic Conflict by Jan Oberg

Notable quotes:
"... common security ..."
"... rapproachment and Ostpolitik ..."
"... Jan Oberg is director of the Transnational Foundation for Peace & Future Research in Lund, Sweden. ..."
Jul 13, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

July 11, 2018 When the Berlin Wall came down and the Soviet Union dissolved and the Warsaw Pact disappeared, a few of us argued that the appropriate response would be to close down NATO and develop a new all-European peace system and a policy for conflict-handling to replace the predominantly military security thinking that had dominated during the First Cold War.

I had a particular reason for arguing that at the time. As part of the research I did for my PhD (1981) on Denmark's defence and security policy in a global perspective, I had interviewed a small number of middle-level civilian and military personnel at NATO's HQ in Brussels. They all basically told me the same three things – remember this was the late 1970s, or about 10 years before the Cold War ended:

– My parents' belong to a generation that knows what war is, we are here at NATO to prevent a repetition (war prevention goal – which is not the same as peace, but let that pass).

– NATO is for the maintenance of peace, not for war, and the most important thing is Art 5 in our Treaty: If one member is attacked, all shall come to its rescue – "all for one and one for all" (the defensive principle, the musketeer pledge).

– The only – only – reason, NATO exists today is the presence and nature of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact (raison d'etre, existential argument – however a little strange, perhaps, in that the Warsaw Pact was established in 1955, NATO in 1949 – but defining the world in such terms that my own profession seems utterly important is nothing new to human beings).

Western leaders – that is, until one of the worst, Bill Clinton, took over in 1994 – showed statesmanship and told Gorbachev that they would not expand NATO an inch and that the divided Germany would be neutral if unified. There was no talk of closing NATO in those circles, however – nobody who took Gorbachev intellectually sound and visionary idea about a new European House seriously.

No, they had won the Cold War. The Soviet Union had lost and became a militarily a dwarf in comparison to what it had been. And that wasn't that strong either: The Warsaw Pact's military expenditures varied between 60 and 80% per cent of those of NATO and it vastly inferior in terms of technological quality, innovation capacity and discipline – but stronger in quantities, e.g. the number of tanks.

The 2nd Cold War

We're in Cold War 2 – of course not a repetition because of all the differences between that world and today's. Ten of the former Warsaw Pact countries are now full NATO members, neutral states back then like Sweden and Austria have abolished that – wise – policy. And, mind you, the military expenditures of Russia – one country facing NATO's 29 – are 8 per cent of NATO – yes, you got it right: Eight per cent of NATOs military expenditures in spite of all the propaganda about Russia and Putin representing an existential threat to Europe and the US if not the whole world. Who said disinformation was used only by Russia?

The Clinton Administration decided to not give a damn about the promises made and started the expansion of NATO in 1994, the new (humanitarian!!) interventionism in Yugoslavia – devoid of knowledge about its complexities, of common sense and without a UN Security Council mandate and one gross violation of international law after the other including the bombing of Serbia to carve out a forever-failed state, Kosovo state – the second Albanian state in Europe. Oh Crimea, what a crime in comparison!

And then came, one-by-one, incrementally – the new NATO members right up under the skirts of Russia in total defiance of its history psychology and legitimate near-abroad security perceptions.

The wisdom of softer borders and neutrals, of dialogue and confidence-building – like Finland that started the OSCE , like Sweden under Palme that started common security and Germany under Brandt that started rapproachment and Ostpolitik etc – a ll gone today.

Imagine a Russia-led alliance with 12 times more military than the US making Mexico and Canada new members. Sure, Washington would love it.

Facts, analyses, intellectual understanding went out of the window long ago – in Western mainstream media and politics, from Right to Left too, the latter believing in humanitarian intervention and human rights advocates flying F-16.

We're living in dangerous times because facts, knowledge, science and common sense play virtually no role anymore. And because the peace discourse has disappeared decades ago.

Today's Western security policy managers are anti-intellectuals, seemingly unaware of their moral responsibilities and under much less control than when Dwight D. Eisenhower in his farewell speech in 1961 warned the world and the US itself about the MIC – the Military-Industrial Complex. (Bless him for doing so and curse those who never listened but made it a cancer on Western civilisation).

99% of these security managers would not be able to offer an intellectually decent definition of concepts such as deterrence, defensive/offensive, conflict-resolution, or peace. They don't write books.

But – at least some of them have a button close to them with which they can kill millions.

Today we are facing a Western militarist cancer in which policies are run by, not the MIC, but the MIMAC – the Military-Industrial-MEDIA-ACADEMIC Complex. And it is de facto out of any democratic control.

Enemies are invented and marketed, one after the other, and the new WMD – Weapons of Mass Deception – consists marketing companies, military academies, militaries in civilian institute, military corporations influencing/steering media narratives, social media censorship (Facebook and Google) etc. (Say Syria since 2011 ).

By and large this is what explains all the wars, in the Middle East in particular, all the millions dead and wounded, all the hatred, terrorism (which thanks to the idiotic U.S. Global War on Terror since 9/11 2001 has boosted the number of dead and wounded in political terror acts from about 1 100 to 32 000.

The inverse proportionality between intellectual and military capacity is in and of itself the largest threat to humanity's survival.

So is the absence – or woefully inadequate power – of a vibrant public dialogue about peace, social peace actions and peace policies. No government has peace advisers, no government even thinks of matching peace research with military research investment and no government has a peace policy or minister. Don't even know that such things might be a good idea.

The discourse, as I said, is non-existing. Militarism – the Juggernaut – has no brakes. And, so, we're in the Second Cold War that more knowledgeable and responsible people would have avoided.

NATO crisis indicators

People talk far too much about Trump, the person(ality). And far too little about the system that brought him on stage and runs him to a large extent – as large as anyone can run Trump. Remember, Kennedy was killed some time after a revolutionary speech about a new world peace order.

The day we talk as much about MIMAC as we talk about Trump and his sex life or Tweets, there might be some hope – but don't expect it in media and a Western, Christian culture that is obsessed with individuals and individual morality and hardly can spell the word structure . MIMAC is a structure and not exactly benign – but did you ever hear about it in the mainstream press?

1. Since 1989, the West – not Russia – has destroyed the importance of international law; it began in Yugoslavia – probably the richest event since 1989 in terms of consequences for that country, the region, Europe and the world.

2. We got a Middle East destroyed beyond repair – physically, economically (e.g. sanctions), culturally and in terms of fomenting terrorism.

3. We got a US unilateralism, US First, helter-skelter policy that sees, consistently, the world out there as its enemies – one way or the other – NATO allies, Russia, China, Middle Eastern leaders, North Korea – and whose main contribution to the rest of the world is: threats, trade wars, sanctions, bad words, arms trade to authoritarian allies like Saudi Arabia that is not exactly a democracy but now the third largest military spender, larger than Russia.

4. We got a Turkey, NATO's second largest military power, basically having departed, contributed heavily to the destruction of Syria, have US nukes stored on its territory, is becoming more and more authoritarian (hardly compatible with NATO's defence of democracy) and makes deal after deal with arch-enemy Russia. In other words, a very serious problem for NATO.

5. We got a NATO that has done nothing under its seemingly brainwashed Secretary-General Stoltenberg – once a highly respected Norwegian PM with a humanist family background – speaking like a US ventriloquist's dummy about how good all the confrontational, expansive initiatives are – all legitimated with the same three mantras: Security, Stabiliy and Peace – none of which will ever appear with those policy kinds of initiatives.

6. We now get a Trump Administration that tries – for God knows which time the last 4-5 decades – to sell the argument that "the Europeans ought to pay more"! The magic formula is "2 per cent of GNP" – without the slightest analysis of threats or opportunities! If a country does well in general, the alliance will get more military? Asn vice-versa? Intellectually, this is nonsense, pure and simple. It has nothing to do with security and peace.

Furthermore, anyone knowing just a little about these matters are perfectly aware that the US is in Europe for the sake of the US itself, not for the blue-eyed people of Europe. Europe has always been and remains the forward defence area of the American territory and it is in Europe the war shall be fought, not on US territory. Therefore also the Ballistic Missile Defence in Europ – shooting down whatever retaliatory missile Moscow might fire in response to a US attack upon it – and shoot it down over Europe.

Every single forward deployment, every new NATO member is today much much less secure than before. Why? Because when you join an alliance and make the borders hard – there is no way to avoid that Russian military defensive preparation for the eventuality of an attack upon it, will target every single of these countries. Simple military logic – any NATO general would do the same if situated in a Russian military planning unit.

7. We got a NATO that – running out of raison d'etre with the end of the First Cold War – tries to reinvent itself. Read its Treaty here that states that it shall adhere to the UN Charter and solve conflict by peaceful means, support democracy and freedom and international NATO is today a criminal organisation in the sense that it consistently violates everything it was founded to work for. Even works against it own fine priciples!

8. Since the 1990s, NATO member states have violated international law and its own Charter which states that it pertains to Europe and North America. What does NATO do, then, with a new office in Kuwait, with commitments way outside its member territories, with formalised cooperation with the Gulf States with a Danish ambassador there as a go-between?

9. Finally, and most importantly, NATO members have invested trillions of dollars on increasing their security. How come we are now in a new Cold War? How come everybody is talking about the need for even larger investments in this one type of security, the military? How come such a well-endowed alliance can feel threatened – and lack a genuine trust-building and cooperative policy with its old-time enemy, Russia? How come that NATO members' War on Terror has only produced much more terror? How come the democracy and freedom NATO shall protect seem to be in crisis too? Why all these wars, destroyed countries and refugees problems – instead of peace by peaceful means and much more peaceful world?

Something is wrong. Very very wrong. With NATO.

NATO is what its members make it: Change it completely or dissolve it

You may now think that I mix "NATO, the alliance" with "NATO members" above. True! There comes a time when a Club that once had noble purposes falls apart because of its members' reckless, immoral and constitution-violating behaviour. The centre simply doesn't hold. There comes a time when you cannot healthily maintain a figleaf distinction between the organisation and its members. Call it compromised, corruption, de-moralization or decay and think, for instance, of the Swedish Academy .

NATO turns 70 next year. Age is not itself an argument for or against anything. The UN is even older and its Charter is still the most important governments have ever signed.

But NATO members, lead by the U.S., have undermined the organisation and all the noble principles it once stood for. (Also by having nuclear weapons which are not mentioned in the Treaty but militates against any concept of peace by peaceful means). In particular, since the end of the First Cold War, its net contribution to the world has become negative, destructive. NATO today stands for North Atlantic Treaty Obsolescence.

In conclusion, crap NATO as we know it!

Let's use the anniversary to discuss how it can survive in a completely new shape and avoid the fate of its then beloved enemy, the Warsaw Pact – without which it should have been heavily reformed or closed down about 30 years ago. Join the debate on Facebook More articles by: Jan Oberg

Jan Oberg is director of the Transnational Foundation for Peace & Future Research in Lund, Sweden.

[Jul 13, 2018] False flag operation covering DNC leaks now involves Mueller and his team

Highly recommended!
Looks like another Steele dossier and it has Brennan fingertips all over. Looks like another exercise in creation of a parallel reality. The content of the document implies that malware was installed in GRU computers and those computers were monitored 24/7 by CIA. The documents describes both GNU officers and DNC employees as unsophisticated idiots. DNC employees who who should undergo some basic security training were easily deceived by fishing emails from a foreign country. And a good practice is to disable hotlinks in emails.
I always suspected that Guccifer 2.0 was a false flag operation to hide the leak of DNC documents. If this is true this was really sophisticated false flag.
BTW GRU is military intelligence unit, so to hack into civil computers is kind of out of their main sphere of activities. They also should be aware about NSA capabilities of intercepting the traffic.
I especially like the following tidbit: "On or about June 1,2016, the Conspirators attempted to delete traces of their presence on the DCCC network using the computer program CCleaner." This is how third rate hackers (wannabes) behave.
Link to the original document: https://www.scribd.com/document/383793520/Netyksho-Et-Al-Indictment#fullscreen&from_embed
First of all the investigation of DNC was botched by hiring a private, connected to Democratic Party security company (Crowdstrike), so no data from it are acceptable in court. FBI did not have any access to the data.
Which means that Mueller is a patsy of more powerful forces
How about speed of download that proved to be excessive for Internet connection? Nothing is said about Dmitri Alperovitch role is all this investigation, which completely discredit all that results? See for example diuscusstion at Why Crowdstrike's Russian Hacking Story Fell Apart- Say Hello to Fancy Bear And, again, the question is: Was Guccifer 2.0 in itself a USA false flag operation ?
Looks like Mueller is acting as an operative of Democratic Party. Could not dig up enough dirt on Trump, so he now saddled his beloved horse, trying to provoke Russia to respond.
And this John Le Carre style details about individuals supposedly involved. Probably were provided by CIA ;-)
Jul 13, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

... ... ...

4. By in or around April 2016, the Conspirators also hacked into the computer networks of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee ("DCCC") and the Democratic National Committee ("DNC"). The Conspirators covertly monitored the computers of dozens of DCCC and DNC employees, implanted hundreds of files containing malicious computer code ("malware"), and stole emails and other documents from the DCCC and DNC.

5. By in or around April 2016, the Conspirators began to plan the release of materials stolen from the Clinton Campaign, DCCC, and DNC.

6. Beginning in or around June 2016, the Conspirators staged and released tens of thousands of the stolen emails and documents. They did so using fictitious online personas, including "DCLeaks" and "Guccifer 2.0."

7. The Conspirators also used the Guccifer 2.0 persona to release additional stolen documents through a website maintained by an organization ("Organization Iй), that had previously posted documents stolen from U.S. persons, entities, and the U.S. government The Conspirators continued their U.S. election-interference operations through in or around November 2016.

8. To hide their connections to Russia and the Russian government, the Conspirators used false identities and made false statements about their identities. To further avoid detection, the Conspirators used a network of computers located across the world, including in the United States, and paid for this infrastructure using cryptocurrency.

... ... ...

13. Defendant ALEKSEY VIKTOROVICH LUKASHEV (Лукашсв Алексей Викторович) was a Senior Lieutenant in the Russian military assigned to ANTONOV's department within Unit 26165. LUKASHEV used various online personas, including "Den Katenberg" and "Yuliana Martynova." In on around 2016, LUKASHEV sent spcarphisliing emails to members of the Clinton Campaign and affiliated individuals, including the chairman of the Clinton Campaign.

14. Defendant SERGEY ALEKSANDROVICH MORGACHEV (Моргачев Сергей Александрович) was a Lieutenant Colonel in the Russian military assigned to Unit 26165. MORGACHEV oversaw a department within Unit 26165 dedicated to developing and managing malware, including a hacking tool used by the GRU known as "X-Agent." During the hacking of the DCCC and DNC networks, MORGACHEV supervised the co-conspirators who developed and monitored the X-Agent malware implanted on those computers.

15. Defendant NIKOLAY YURYEVICH KOZACHEK (Козачек Николай Юрьевич) was a Lieutenant Captain in the Russian military assigned to MORGACHEV's department within Unit 26165. KOZACHEK used a variety of monikers, including "kazak" and "blablablal234565 " KOZACHEK developed, customized, and monitored X-Agent malware used to hack the DCCC and DNC networks beginning in or around April 2016.

16. Defendant PAVEL VYACHESLAVOVICH YERSHOV (Ершов Павел Вячеславович) was a Russian military officer assigned to MORGACHEV's department within Unit 26165. In or around 2016, YERSHOV assisted KOZACHEK and other co-conspirators in testing and customizing X-Agent malware before actual deployment and use.

17. Defendant ARTEM ANDREYEVICH MALYSHEV (Малышев Арт е м Андреевич) was a Second Lieutenant in the Russian military assigned to MORGACHEV's department within Unit 26165. MALYSIIEV used a variety of monikers, including "djangomagicdev" and "realblatr." In or around 2016, MALYSHEV monitored X-Agent malware implanted on the DCCC and DNC networks.

18. Defendant ALEKSANDR VLADIMIROVICH OSADCHUK (Осадчук Александр В ладимирович) was a Colonel in the Russian military and the commanding officer of Unit 74455. Unit 74455 was located at 22 Kirova Street, Khimki, Moscow, a building referred to within the GRU as the 'Tower." Unit 74455 assisted in the release of stolen documents through the DC Leaks and Guccifer 2.0 personas, the promotion of those releases, and the publication of anti-Clinton content on social media accounts operated by the GRU.

19. Defendant ALEKSEY ALEKSANDROVICH POTEMKIN (Потемкин Алексей Александрович) was an officer in the Russian military assigned to Unit 74455. POTEMKIN was a supervisor in a department within Unit 7445f responsible for the administration of computer infrastructure used in cyber operations. Infrastructure and social media accounts administered by POTEMKIN'S department were used, among other things, to assist in the release of stolen documents through the DCLeaks and Guccifer 2 0 personas.

21, ANTONOV, BADIN, YKRMAKOV, LUKASHEV, and their co-conspiratore targeted victims using a technique known as spearphishing to steal victims' passwords or otherwise gain access to their computers. Beginning by at least March 2016, the Conspirators targeted over 300 individuals affiliated with the Clinton Campaign, DCCC, and DNC.

a. For example, on or about March 19, 2016, LUKASHEV and his co-conspirators created and sent a spearphishing email to the chairman of the Clinton Campaign. LUKASHEV used the account "John356gh" at an online service that abbreviated lengthy website addresses (referred to as a "URL-shortcning service"). LIJKASHEV used the account to mask a link contained in the spearphishing email, which directed the recipient to a GRU-created website. LUKASHEV altered the a security notification from Google (a technique known as "spoofing"), instructing the user to change his password by clicking the embedded link. Those instructions wore followed. On or about March 21, 2016, LUKASHEV, YERMAKOV, and their co-conspirators stole the contents of the chairman's email account, which consisted of over 50,000 emails.

Starting on or about March 19, 2016, LUKASHEV and his co-conspirators sent spearphishing emails to the personal accounts of other individuals affiliated with the Clinton Campaign, including its campaign manager and a senior foreign policy advisor. On or about March 25, 2016, LUKASHEV used the same john356gh account to mask additional links included in spearphishing emails sent to numerous individuals affiliated with the Clinton Campaign, including Victims 1 and 2. LUKASliEV sent these emails from the Russia-based email account [email protected] that he spoofed to appear to be from Google. On or about March 28,2016, YERMAKOV researched the names of Victims 1 and 2 and their association with Clinton on various social media sites. Through their spearphishing operations, LUKASHEV, YERMAKOV, and their co-conspirators successfully stole email credentials and thousands of emails from numerous individuals affiliated with the Clinton Campaign. Many of these stolen emails. Including those from Victims 1 and 2, were later released by the Conspirators through DCLeaks.

On or about April 6, 2016, the Conspirators created an email account in the name (with a one-letter deviation from the actual spelling) of a known member of the Clinton Campaign. The Conspirators then used that account to send spearphishing emails to the work accounts of more than thirty different Clinton Campaign employees. In the spearphishipg emails, LUKASHEV and his co-conspirators embedded a link purporting to direct the recipient to a document titled "hillary-clinton-favorable-rating.xlsx " In fact, this link directed the recipients' computers to a GRU-crcatcd website.

22. The Conspirators spearphished individuals affiliated with the Clinton Campaign throughout the summer of 2016. For example, on or about July 27, 2016, the Conspirators attempted after hours to spearphish for the first time email accounts at a domain hosted by a third-
party provider and used by Clinton's personal office. At or around the same time, they also targeted seventy-six email addresses at the domain for the Clinton Campaign.

Hacking into the DCCC Network

23. Beginning in or around March 2016, the Conspirators, in addition to their spearphishing efforts, researched the DCCC and DNC computer networks to identify technical specifications and vulnerabilities.

  1. For example, beginning on or about March 15,2016, YERMAKOV ran a technical query for the DNC's internet protocol configurations to identify connected devices.
  2. On or about the same day, YERMAKOV searched for opcn-source information about the DNC network, the Democratic Party, and Hillary Clinton.
  3. On or about April 7. 2016. YKRMAKOV ran я technical query for the DNC's internet protocol configurations to identify connected devices.

24. By in or around April 2016, within days of YERMAKOV's searches regarding the DCCC, the Conspirators hacked into the DCCC computer network. Once they gained access, they installed and managed different types of malware to explore the DCCC network and steal data.

a. On or about April 12,2016. the Conspirators used the stolen credentials of a I )CCC On or about April 12,2016, the Conspirators used the stolen credentials of a DCCC Employee ('"DCCC Employee 1") to access the DCCC network. DCCC Employee 1 had received a spearphishing email from the Conspirators on or about April 6,2016, and entered her password after clicking on the link.

b. Between in or around April 2016 and June 2016, the Conspirators installed multiple versions of their X-Agent malware on at least ten DCCC computers, which allowed them to monitor individual employees' computer activity, steal passwords, and maintain access to the DCCC network.

c. X-Agent malware implanted on the DCCC network transmitted information from the victims' computers to a GRU-leased server located in Arizona. The Conspirators referred to this server as their "AMS" panel. KOZACHEK, MALYSHEV, and their со-conspirators logged into the AMS panel to use X-Agent's keylog and screenshot functions in the course of monitoring and surveilling activity on the DCCC computers. 'Ibe keylog function allowed the Conspirators to capture keystrokes entered by DCCC employees. The screenshot function allowed the Conspirators to take pictures of the DCCC employees' computer screens.

d. For example, on or about April 14, 2016, the Conspirators repeatedly activated X-Agent's keylog and screensiot functions to surveil DCCC Employee 1's computer activity over the course of eight hours. During that time, the Conspirators captured DCCC Employee 1 's communications with co-workers and the passwords she entered while working on fundraising and voter outreach projects. Similarly, on or about April 22, 2016, the Conspirators activated X-Agcnt's keylog and screenshot functions to capture the discussions of another DCCC Employee ("DCCC Employee 2") about the DCCC's finances, as well as her individual banking information and other personal topics.

25. On or about April 19, 2016, KOZAC1IEK, YERSIIOV, and their co-conspirators remotely configured an overseas computer to relay communications between X-Agent malware and the AMS panel and then tested X-Agent's ability to connect to this computer. The Conspirators referred to this computer as a "middle server." The middle server acted as a proxy to obscure the connection between malware at the DCCC and the Conspirators' AMS panel. On or about April 20, 2016, the Conspirators directed X-Agent malware on the DCCC computers to connect to this middle server and receive directions from the Conspirators.

Hacking into the DNC Network

26. On or about April 18, 2016, the Conspirators hacked into the DNC's computers through their access to the DCCC network. The Conspirators then installed and managed different types of malware (as they did in the DCCC network) to explore the DNC network and steal documents, a. On or about April 18, 2016, the Conspirators activated X-Agent's keylog and screenshot functions to steal credentials of a DCCC employee who was authorized
to access the DNC network. The Conspirators hacked into the DNC network from the DCCC network using stolen credentials. By in or around June 2016, they gained access to approximately thirty-three DNC computers.

In or around April 2016, the Conspirators installed X Agent malware on tho DNC network, including the same versions installed on the DCCC network.
MALYSHEV and his co-conspifators monitored the X-Agent malware from the AMS panel and captured data from the victim computers. The AMS panel collected thousands of keylog and screenshot results from the DCCC and DNC computers, such as a screenshot and keystroke capture of DCCC Employee 2 viewing the DCCC's online banking information.

Theft of DCCC and DNC Documents

27. The Conspirators searched for and identified computers within the DCCC and DNC networks that stored information related to the 2016 U.S. presidential election, for example, on or about April 15, 2016, the Conspirators searched one hacked DCCC computer for terms that included "hillary," "cruz," and "trump." The Conspirators also copied select DCCC folders, including "Benghazi Investigations." The Conspirators targeted computers containing information such as opposition research and field operation plans for the 2016 elections.

28. To enable them to steal a large number of documents at once without detection, the Conspirators used a publicly available tool to gather and compress multiple documents on the DCCC and DNC networks. The Conspirators then used other GRU malware, known as "X-Tunncl," to move the stolen documents cutside the DCCC and DNC networks through encrypted channels.

a. For example, on or about April 22, 2016, the Conspirators compressed gigabytes of data from DNC computers, including opposition research. The Conspirators later moved the compressed DNC data using X-Tunnel to a GRU-leased computer located in Illinois.

b. On or about April 28, 2016, the Conspirators connected to and tested the same computer located in Illinois. Later that day, the Conspirators used X-Tunnel to connect to that computer to steal additional documents from the DCCC network.

29. Between on or about May 25, 2016 and June 1, 2016, the Conspirators hacked the DNC Microsoft Exchange Server and stole thousands of emails from the work accounts of DNC employees. During that time, YERMAKOV researched PowerShell commands related to accessing and managing the Microsoft Exchange Server.

30. On or about May 30, 2016, MALYSHEV accessed the AMS panel in order to upgrade custom AMS software on die server. That day, the AMS panel received updates from approximately thirteen different X-Agent malware implants on DCCC and DNC computers.

31. During the hacking of the DCCC and DNC networks, the Conspirators covered their tracks by Intentionally deleting logs and computer flies. For example, on or about May 13, 2016, the Conspirators cleared the event logs from a DNC computer. On or about June 20, 2016, the Conspirators deleted logs from the AMS panel that documented their activities on the panel, including the login history. Efforts to Remain on the X'CC and PNC Networks

32. Despite the Conspirators' efforts to hide their activity, beginning in or around May 2016, both the DCCC and DNC became aware that they had been hacked and hired a security company ("Company 1") to identify the extent of the intrusions. By in or around June 2016, Company 1 took steps to exclude intruders from the networks. Despite these efforts, a Linux-based version of X-Agent, programmed to communicate with the GRU-registercd domain linuxkml.net, remained on the DNC network until in or around October 2016.

33. In response to Company Ts efforts, the Conspirators took countermeasures to maintain access to the DCCC and DNC networks.

a. Oil 01 about May 31, 2016, YERMAKOV searched for opcn-sourcc information about Company 1 and its reporting on X-Agent and X-Tunnel. On or about June 1,2016, the Conspirators attempted to delete traces of their presence on the DCCC network using the computer program CCleaner.
b. On or about June 14, 2016, the Conspirators registered the domain actblues.com,
which mimicked the domain of a political fundraising platform that included a
DCCC donations page. Shortly thereafter, the Conspirators used stolen DCCC
credentials to modify the DCCC website and redirect visitors to the actblucs.com

On or about June 14, 2016, the Conspirators registered the domain actblues.com,
which mimicked the domain of a political fundraising platform that included a
DCCC donations page. Shortly thereafter, the Conspirators used stolen DCCC
credentials to modify the DCCC website and redirect visitors to the actblucs.com
domain.
On or about June 20, 2016, after Company 1 had disabled X-Agent on the DCCC
network, the Conspirators spent ever seven hours unsuccessfully trying to connect
to X-Agent. The Conspirators also tried to access the DCCC network using
previously stolen credentials.

34. In or around September 2016, the Conspirators also successfully gained access to DNC
computers hosted on a third-party cloud-computing service. These computers contained test
applications related to the DNC's analytics. After conducting reconnaissance, the Conspirators
gathered data by creating backups, or "snapshots," of the DNC's eloud-based systems using the
cloud provider's own technology. The Conspirators then moved the snapshots to cloud-based
accounts they had registered with the same service, thereby stealing the data from the DNC.
Stolen Documents Released through DCLcaks

35. More than a month before the release of any documents, the Conspirators constructed the online persona DCLeaks to release and publicize stolen election-related documents. On or about April 19, 2016, after attempting to register the domain clcctionleaks.com, the Conspirators registered the domain dcleaks.com through a service that anonymizcd the registrant. The funds used to pay for the dcleaks.com domain originated from an online cryptocutrrecy service that the Conspirators also used to fund the lease of a virtual private server registered with the operational email account [email protected]. The dirbinsaabol email account was also used to register the john356gh URL-shortening account used by LUKASHEV to spearphish the Clinton Campaign chairman and other campaign-related individuals.

36. On or about June 8,2016, the Conspirators launched the public website dcleaks.com, which they used to release stolen emails. Before it shut down in or around March 2017, the site received over one million page views. The Conspirators falsely claimed on the site that DCLeaks was started by a group of "American hacktivists," when in fact it was started by the Conspirators.

37. Starting in or around June 2016 and continuing through the 2016 U.S. presidential election, the Conspirators used DCLeaks to release emails stolen from individuals affiliated with the Clinton Campaign. The Conspirators also released documents they had stolen in other spearphishing operations, including those they had conducted in 2015 that collected emails from individuals affiliated with the Republican Party.

38. On or about June 8,2016, and at approximately the same time that the dcleaks.com website was launched, the Conspirators created a DCLeaks Facebook page using a preexisting social media account under the fictitious name "Alice Donovan." In addition to the DCLeaks Facebook page, the Conspirators used other social media accounts in the names of fictitious U.S. persons such as "Jason Scott" and "Richard Gingrey" to promote the DCLeaks website. The Conspirators accessed these accounts from computers managed by POTEMKFN and his co-conspirators.

39. On or about June 8, 2016, the Conspirators created the Twitter account @dcleaks_. The Conspirators operated the @dclcaks_ Twitter account from the same computer used for other efforts to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential election. For example, the Conspirators used the same computer to operate the Twitter account @BaltimorcIsWhr, through which they encouraged U.S. audiences to "[j]oin our flash mob" opposing Clinton and to post images with the hashtag #BlacksAgainstHillary.

Stolen Documents Released through Guccifer 2.0

40. On or about June 14, 2016, the DNC -- through Company 1 -- publicly announced that it had been hacked by Russian government actors. In response, the Conspirators created the online persona Guccifer 2.0 and falsely claimed to be a lone Romanian hacker to undermine the allegations of Russian responsibility for the intrusion.
41. On or about June 15,2016, the Conspirators logged into a Moscow-based server used and managed by Unit 74455 and, between 4:19 PM and 4:56 PM Moscow Standard Time, searched for certain words and phrases, including:

Search terms

42. Later that day, at 7:02 PM Moscow Standard Time, the online persona Guccifer 2.0 published its first post on a blog site created through WordPress. Titled "DNC's servers hacked by a lone hacker," the post used numerous English words and phrases that the Conspirators had searched for earlier that day (bolded below):

Worldwide known cyber security company [Company 1] announced that the Democratic National Committee (DNC) servers had been hacked by
"sophisticated" hacker groups.

I'm very pleased the company appreciated my skills so highly))) [...]

Here are just a few docs from many thousands I extracted when hacking
into DNC's network. [...]

Some hundred sheets! This's a serious case, isn't it? [...]

I guess [Company 1] customers should think twice about company's competence.

F[***J the Illuminati and their conspiracies! МШШ F[***]

[Company 1] !!!!!!!!

43. Between in or around June 2016 and October 2016, the Conspirators used Guccifer 2.0 to release documents through WordPrcss that they had stolen from the DCCC and DNC. The Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0, also shared stolen documents with certain individuals.

a. On or about August 15,2016, the Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0, received a request for stolen documents from a candidate for the U.S. Congress. The Conspirators responded using the Guccifer 2.0 persona and sent the candidate stolen documents related to the candidate's opponent. On or about August 22,2016, the Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0, transferred approximately 2.5 gigabytes of data stolen from the DCCC to a then-registered state lobbyist and online source of political news. The stolen data included donor records and personal identifying information for more than 2,000 Democratic donors.

On or about August 22, 2016, the Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0, sent a reporter stolen documents pertaining to the Black Lives Matter movement. The reporter responded by discussing when to release the documents and offering to write an article about their release.

44. The Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0, also communicated with U.S. persons about the release of stolen documents. On or about August 15, 2016, the Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0, wrote to a person who was in regular contact with senior members of the presidential campaign of Donald J. TVump, "thank u for writing back... do u find anyt[h]ing interesting in the docs i posted?" On or about August 17, 2016, the Conspirators added, "please tell me if i can help u anyhow ... it would be a great pleasure to me." On or about September 9,2016, the Conspirators, again posing as Guccifer 2.0, referred to a stolen DCCC document posted online and asked the person, "what do u think of the info on the tunout model for the democrats entire presidential campaign." The person responded, "[p]retty standard."

45. The Conspirators conducted operations as Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks using overlapping computer infrastructure and financing.

a. For example, between on or about March 14, 2016 and April 28. 2016, the Conspirators used the same pool of bitcoin funds to purchase a virtual private network ("VPN") account and to lease a server in Malaysia. In or around June 2016, the Conspirators used the Malaysian server to host the dcleaks.com website.

On or about July 6, 2016, the Conspirators used the VPN to log into the @Guccifcr_2 Twitter account. The Conspirators opened that VPN account from
the same server that was also used to register malicious domains for the hacking of the DCCC and DNC networks.

On or about June 27, 2016, the Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0, contacted a U.S. reporter with an offer to provide stolen emails from "Hillary Clinton's staff." The Conspirators then sent the reporter the password to access a nonpublic, password-protected portion of dc.eaks.com containing emails stolen from Victim 1 bу LUKASHEV, YERMAKOV, and thier co-conspirators in or around March 2016.

46. On or about January 12,2017, the Conspirators published a statement on the Guccifer 2.0 WordPrcss blog, falsely claiming that the intrusions and release of stolen documents had "totally no relation to the Russian government"

Use of Organization 1

47. In order to expand their interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, the Conspirators transferred many of the documents they stole from the DNC and the chairman of the Clinton Campaign to Organization 1. The Conspirators posing as Guccifer 2.0, discussed the release of the stolen documents and the timing of those releases with Organization 1 to heighten their impact on the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

a. On or about Juno 22, 2016, Organization 1 sent a private message to Guccifer 2.0 to "[s]end any new material [stolen from the DNC] here for us to review and it will have a much higher impact than what you are doing." On or about July 6, 2016, Organization 1 added, "if you have anything hillary related we want it in the next tweo [sic] days prefable [sic] because the DNC [Democratic National Convention] is approaching and she will solidify bernie supporters behind her after." The Conspirators responded, "ok... i see." Organization I explained, "we think trump has only a 25% chance of winning against hillary ... so conflict between bernie and hillary is interesting "

b After failed attempts to transfer the stolen documents starting in late June 2016, on or about July 14, 2016, the Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0, sent Organization 1 an email with an attachment titled "wk dnc linkl.txt.gpg." The Conspirators explained to Organization 1 that the encrypted file contained Instructions on how to access an online archive of stolen DNC documents. On or about July 18, 2016, Organization 1 confirmed it had "the 1Gb or so archive" and would make a release of the stolen documents "this week."

48. On or about July 22, 2016, Organization 1 released over 20,000 emails and other documents stolen from the DNC network by the Conspirators. This release occurred approximately three days before the start of the Democratic National Convention. Organization 1 did not disclose Guccifer 2.0's role in providing them. The latest-in-time email released through Organization 1 was dated on or about May 25,2016, approximately the same day the Conspirators hacked the DNC Microsoft Exchange Server.

49. On or about October 7, 2016, Organization 1 released the first set of emails from the chairman of the Clinton Campaign that had been stolen by LUKASHEV and his co-conspirators. Between on or about October 7, 2016 and November 7, 2016, Organization 1 released approximately thirty-three tranches of documents mat had been stolen from the chairman of the Clinton Campaign. In total, over 50,000 stolen documents were released.

... ... ...

[Jul 13, 2018] The Holes in the Official Skripal Story by Craig Murray

Notable quotes:
"... In my last post I set out the official Government account of the events in the Skripal Case. Here I examine the credibility of this story. Next week I shall look at alternative explanations. ..."
Jul 12, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

In my last post I set out the official Government account of the events in the Skripal Case. Here I examine the credibility of this story. Next week I shall look at alternative explanations.

Russia has a decade long secret programme of producing and stockpiling novichok nerve agents. It also has been training agents in secret assassination techniques, and British intelligence has a copy of the Russian training manual, which includes instruction on painting nerve agent on doorknobs.

The only backing for this statement by Boris Johnson is alleged "intelligence", and unfortunately the "intelligence" about Russia's secret novichok programme comes from exactly the same people who brought you the intelligence about Saddam Hussein's WMD programme, proven liars. Furthermore, the question arises why Britain has been sitting on this intelligence for a decade and doing nothing about it, including not telling the OPCW inspectors who certified Russia's chemical weapons stocks as dismantled.

If Russia really has a professional novichok assassin training programme, why was the assassination so badly botched? Surely in a decade of development they would have discovered that the alleged method of gel on doorknob did not work? And where is the training manual which Boris Johnson claimed to possess? Having told the world – including Russia -the UK has it, what is stopping the UK from producing it, with marks that could identify the specific copy erased?

The Russians chose to use this assassination programme to target Sergei Skripal, a double agent who had been released from jail in Russia some eight years previously.

It seems remarkable that the chosen target of an attempt that would blow the existence of a secret weapon and end the cover of a decade long programme, should be nobody more prominent than a middle ranking double agent who the Russians let out of jail years ago. If they wanted him dead they could have killed him then. Furthermore the attack on him would undermine all future possible spy swaps. Putin therefore, on this reading, was willing to sacrifice both the secrecy of the novichok programme and the spy swap card just to attack Sergei Skripal . That seems highly improbable.

Only the Russians can make novichok and only the Russians had a motive to attack the Skripals.

The nub of the British government's approach has been the shocking willingness of the corporate and state media to parrot repeatedly the lie that the nerve agent was Russian made, even after Porton Down said they could not tell where it was made and the OPCW confirmed that finding. In fact, while the Soviet Union did develop the "novichok" class of nerve agents, the programme involved scientists from all over the Soviet Union, especially Ukraine, Armenia and Georgia, as I myself learnt when I visited the newly decommissioned Nukus testing facility in Uzbekistan in 2002.

Furthermore, it was the USA who decommissioned the facility and removed equipment back to the United States. At least two key scientists from the programme moved to the United States. Formulae for several novichok have been published for over a decade. The USA, UK and Iran have definitely synthesised a number of novichok formulae and almost certainly others have done so too. Dozens of states have the ability to produce novichok, as do many sophisticated non-state actors.

The Skripal Affair: Smearing "Evidence" on a Door Handle

As for motive, the Russian motive might be revenge, but whether that really outweighs the international opprobrium incurred just ahead of the World Cup, in which so much prestige has been invested, is unclear.

What is certainly untrue is that only Russia has a motive. The obvious motive is to attempt to blame and discredit Russia. Those who might wish to do this include Ukraine and Georgia, with both of which Russia is in territorial dispute, and those states and jihadist groups with which Russia is in conflict in Syria. The NATO military industrial complex also obviously has a plain motive for fueling tension with Russia.

There is of course the possibility that Skripal was attacked by a private gangster interest with which he was in conflict, or that the attack was linked to Skripal's MI6 handler Pablo Miller' s work on the Orbis/Steele Russiagate dossier on Donald Trump.

Plainly, the British governments statements that only Russia had the means and only Russia had the motive, are massive lies on both counts.

The Russians had been tapping the phone of Yulia Skripal. They decided to attack Sergei Skripal while his daughter was visiting from Moscow.

In an effort to shore up the government narrative, at the time of the Amesbury attack the security services put out through Pablo Miller's long term friend, the BBC's Mark Urban , that the Russians "may have been" tapping Yulia Skripal's phone, and the claim that this was strong evidence that the Russians had indeed been behind the attack.

But think this through. If that were true, then the Russians deliberately attacked at a time when Yulia was in the UK rather than when Sergei was alone. Yet no motive has been adduced for an attack on Yulia or why they would attack while Yulia was visiting – they could have painted his doorknob with less fear of discovery anytime he was alone. Furthermore, it is pretty natural that Russian intelligence would tap the phone of Yulia, and of Sergei if they could. The family of double agents are normal targets. I have no doubt in the least, from decades of experience as a British diplomat, that GCHQ have been tapping Yulia's phone. Indeed, if tapping of phones is seriously put forward as evidence of intent to murder, the British government must be very murderous indeed.

Their trained assassin(s) painted a novichok on the doorknob of the Skripal house in the suburbs of Salisbury. Either before or after the attack, they entered a public place in the centre of Salisbury and left a sealed container of the novichok there.

The incompetence of the assassination beggars belief when compared to British claims of a long term production and training programme. The Russians built the heart of the International Space Station. They can kill an old bloke in Salisbury. Why did the Russians not know that the dose from the door handle was not fatal? Why would trained assassins leave crucial evidence lying around in a public place in Salisbury? Why would they be conducting any part of the operation with the novichok in a public area in central Salisbury?

Why did nobody see them painting the doorknob? This must have involved wearing protective gear, which would look out of place in a Salisbury suburb. With Skripal being resettled by MI6, and a former intelligence officer himself, it beggars belief that MI6 did not fit, as standard, some basic security including a security camera on his house.

The Skripals both touched the doorknob and both functioned perfectly normally for at least five hours, even able to eat and drink heartily. Then they were simultaneously and instantaneously struck down by the nerve agent, at a spot in the city centre coincidentally close to where the assassins left a sealed container of the novichok lying around. Even though the nerve agent was eight times more deadly than Sarin or VX, it did not kill the Skripals because it had been on the doorknob and affected by rain.

Why did they both touch the outside doorknob in exiting and closing the door? Why did the novichok act so very slowly, with evidently no feeling of ill health for at least five hours, and then how did it strike both down absolutely simultaneously, so that neither can call for help, despite their being different sexes, weights, ages, metabolisms and receiving random completely uncontrolled doses. The odds of that happening are virtually nil. And why was the nerve agent ultimately ineffective?

Detective Sergeant Bailey attended the Skripal house and was also poisoned by the doorknob, but more lightly. None of the other police who attended the house were affected.

Why was the Detective Sergeant affected and nobody else who attended the house, or the scene where the Skripals were found? Why was Bailey only lightly affected by this extremely deadly substance, of which a tiny amount can kill?

Four months later, Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess were rooting about in public parks, possibly looking for cigarette butts, and accidentally came into contact with the sealed container of a novichok. They were poisoned and Dawn Sturgess subsequently died.

If the nerve agent had survived four months because it was in a sealed container, why has this sealed container now mysteriously disappeared again? If Rowley and Sturgess had direct contact straight from the container, why did they not both die quickly? Why had four months searching of Salisbury and a massive police, security service and military operation not found this container, if Rowley and Sturgess could?

I am, with a few simple questions, demolishing what is the most ludicrous conspiracy theory I have ever heard – the Salisbury conspiracy theory being put forward by the British government and its corporate lackies.

My next post will consider some more plausible explanations of this affair.

The original source of this article is Craig Murray Copyright © Craig Murray , Craig Murray , 2018

[Jul 13, 2018] Liberals' Trump-Russia fever dreams have reached parody status by Matthew

Jul 13, 2018 | theweek.com

Walther

July 10, 2018

Does Jonathan Chait know about Basil, I wonder?

If, like me, you were impressed by the magisterial comprehensiveness of a chart that accompanied New York 's cover story , in which Chait outlined his theory that President Trump has been an agent of the Russian government since 1987, you might assume that he cannot have missed this crucial personage and is sitting on the info until more becomes clear.

Noble as his intentions might seem, I am not so sure that the revelations can wait this long. Allow me, in the interest of national security, to rehearse the facts. On April 5, 2013, more than two years before he announced his candidacy for the presidency, Donald Trump made a cryptic reply to a tweet from an account with the handle @_Mickey_Mouse. "Thanks Basil," the then-businessman wrote. Unfortunately the tweet to which our future president was responding seems to have disappeared, along with any information about the account's provenance. Whoever this "Basil" was, he seems to have covered his tracks exceedingly well.

But not well enough. Consider the clues that remain in plain sight. "Basil" is, of course, a Westernized version of "Vasily," one of the most common Russian male first names. St. Basil, who has given his name to the cathedral that is the single most iconic piece of Russian architecture, is also the patron saint of Russia and a popular symbol of reactionary nationalism. A Kremlin operative, of course, would be careful not to select a Twitter handle easily associated with his employer; he would pick something anodyne and American-sounding. What could answer better to these descriptions than a cartoon character who helped to win World War II? If only, you might be thinking, Trump himself were more careful, he would have avoided using this operative's actual codename in a public forum.

But this is a misapprehension. If there is anything we have learned about the pattern of Trump-Russia collusion and the antics of the coterie of online nationalists, white supremacists, anime Nazis, and 4chan memers, it is that they cannot resist making their little in-jokes and dropping seemingly clever references into their communications. Consider the wider significance of the date of Trump's tweet. On April 5, in the Year of Our Lord 1242, the great Russian general Alexander Nevsky defeated the Teutonic Knights at Lake Pepius in the famous Battle of the Ice, an event of enormous significance for nationalists who see the knights as representative of a proto-liberal globalizing tendency already present in the European culture of the Middle Ages.

But why that day in 2013, of all years? What is the significance of that gap of some 771 years? Please. To the uninitiated layman this no doubt seems baffling. To someone who understands the tech-obsessed culture of online neoreactionary pranksters, it is an obvious (and somewhat amusing) throwback. As any programmer knows, 771 is the code page used in DOS to produce text in the Russian alphabet. It is, in other words, a retro racist joke, the kind of thing whose importance would no doubt have been lost on Trump himself while seeming hugely important (and absolutely hilarious) to "Basil."

But all of this is a distraction from the real question of what exactly Trump and Basil were discussing. Alas, it may be a long time indeed before most of us know, but that doesn't mean Bob Mueller doesn't already. It appears that Basil's account has been suspended by Twitter, which may be the result of a subpoena. It is possible that sources close to Mueller have told Chait that it would be for the best if Basil, whose communications with the president and other Kremlin-linked Twitter accounts are in the process of being recovered and analyzed, remained a secret for the time being. On the other hand, it is possible that this exchange has escaped both Chait's and Mueller's attention, in which case I draw attention to it here in the hope of a little-noticed but obvious example of collusion -- one more piece in the giant, seemingly unsolvable puzzle.

I give voice to the above lunatic fancy, which I was able to concoct with almost minimal effort in a matter of about 30 seconds with the use of Twitter, Google, and Wikipedia, in the hope of reminding readers how easy it is to put together a plausible-sounding hypothesis if you are already convinced of certain premises. In this case, that premise is the fact that despite the lack of any real evidence, there exists or existed a high-level conspiracy between Trump and various members of his 2016 campaign and various agents of the Russian government, up to and potentially including Vladimir Putin himself, to elect Trump president of the United States two years ago.

This premise has been widely adopted and reiterated in American media on the basis of a six degrees of Kevin Bacon-like game involving persons as unlikely as a model who once had an affair with an oligarch who was acquainted with a former Soviet-era ambassador who knows the president of Ukraine, for whom Paul Manafort once did lobbying many years before his brief employment by the Trump campaign (phew), and by the appellation of vague but sinister-sounding adjectives ("Kremlin-linked," "Russia-backed").

Add to this perfervid climate of speculation people's concerns about the species of online nerd culture known as the "alt-right" and you can pretty much accuse anybody who has ever had anything to do with Trump of anything. A week before Chait's article appeared, thousands of persons became convinced that a hitherto-unnoticed press release from the Department of Homeland Security was actually a coded neo-Nazi message because the brief declarative sentence in the headline reminded some observers of a racist slogan that also contains 14 words and because in one statistic used in the story the natural number 88, which is associated with admirers of Adolf Hitler, appeared. Did I mention that, like neo-Nazism, which, has its so-called "14 words," the press release also contained 14 of what could be considered points, although only 13 of them appear alongside typographical bullets? Even MSNBC's Chris Hayes, a vociferously anti-Trump but otherwise level-headed journalist, briefly fell for this nonsense.

The easy flow of ill-gotten Russian money into the economies of Western Europe and the United States is one of the great unsung evils of the post-Cold War era. The oligarchs do not particularly care who does their dirty laundry or sells them luxury apartments. This is why it would be just as easy , if not in fact easier , to make a chart like Chait's showing the connections between Hillary Clinton, Russian business interests, and the Kremlin. Barack Obama's insistence to Dmitry Medvedev that he would have "more flexibility" after the 2012 election is, considered out of context, subject to the least generous or responsible interpretation, far more sinister than anything of which Trump or anyone in his circles has been accused. But the truth is that none of these connections are especially significant. We are all connected somehow to Russia, just as we are all complicit in the spoliation of the Third World and the abuse of indigenous peoples because we all buy products made abroad and use the internet and own stock.

More Perspectives Ryan Cooper Trump vs. the West Damon Linker How conservative media taught Trump to trash NATO

Likewise, there is so much information available about so many people that it has never been easier to insinuate connections and intentions and conspiracies into meaningless coincidences. Imagine what Jim Garrison, the New Orleans district attorney who unsuccessfully prosecuted an area businessman for his supposed involvement in a nonexistent conspiracy to assassinate President John K. Kennedy, would have been able to accomplish with the resources of the internet at his disposal. The ease with which we can access information has made it easier than ever for semi-intelligent persons to concoct lurid stories. It should also make it easier for those of us who are sensible to dismiss them out of hand.

This is why I do not think it is worth calling New York magazine irresponsible for publishing conspiracy theories. Bores and scolds might suggest that at a time when the president seems to be getting away with painting any media outlet that criticizes him as "fake news," it might be a good idea to stick to facts and leave this kind of thing to ResistanceHole . I disagree. New York has no duty to its readers except that of entertainment. If squinting to try to tell the difference between the red line connecting two oligarchs and the green one linking an unknown Florida-based GOP hack to a longtime party donor is your idea of fun, knock yourself out. But don't pretend that what you're reading is journalism.

[Jul 13, 2018] Trump, Putin, Marine Le Pen, the AfD, and a variety of other globalist-hating Hitler-alikes form "the Alliance of Authoritarian and Reactionary States" (the "AARS ) conspired to disband the European Union and NATO by C.J. Hopkins

Notable quotes:
"... C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing (USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23 , is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. He can reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org . ..."
Jul 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

Here it comes, the moment we've been waiting for, when Trump and Putin meet in Helsinki to officially launch the Destruction of Democracy, and very possibly the Apocalypse itself. That's right, folks, once again, it appears we're looking at the end of everything, because according to the corporate media, on July 16, 2018, Trump is probably going to disband NATO so that Putin can invade the Baltic states, then Germany, then the rest of Europe, and then presumably order an all-out thermonuclear strike on the United States, which will pretty much end civilization as we know it. Or perhaps the plan is to do away with NATO, withdraw all American troops from Poland , let Putin rape and pillage Western Europe, and then have North Korea nuke both coasts of the US mainland (and Canada, of course) so that a Putin-Nazified Middle Amerika will have carte blanche to exterminate the Mexicans and make women wear those "Handmaid" costumes, or some other ridiculously paranoid scenario, possibly involving Susan Sarandon as some kind of Putin-Nazi triple agent.

Tragically, the global neoliberal establishment is completely powerless to stop Trump and Putin from carrying out this evil scheme (whatever it turns out to be in the end), because even the US Intelligence Community has to obey the law, after all, and not do anything sneaky, or unethical, not even with the fate of democracy at stake. No, unlike the Russians, who go around blatantly poisoning people with novichok oatmeal more or less whenever they like, the global capitalist ruling classes' hands are tied by their own integrity. All they can do is watch in horror as these two Hitlerian megalomaniacs destroy their entire global empire and establish a thousand-year Putin-Nazi Reich.

Thank God at least the corporate media are raising their collective voices in protest. In a recent piece in The Washington Post , Max Bergmann of the Center for American Progress warns that "this is a summit about appeasement, and we should be terrified that Trump is going to sell out America and its allies." According to Bergmann, Trump might "accidentally" share state secrets with Putin, or promise to reduce support for our freedom-loving Ukrainian Nazis , or stop trying to overthrow the Syrian government so that Syria, with the help of Russia and Iran, can launch a sneak attack on Israel and drive "the Jews" into the sea. Worse still, Bergmann speculates, he might make "secret agreements" with Putin without telling the editors of The Washington Post , which God help us all if that ever happened.

Not to be out-apocalypsed by The Post , Roger Cohen of The New York Times published a full-blown dystopian vision wherein Trump, Putin, Marine Le Pen, the AfD, and a variety of other globalist-hating Hitler-alikes form "the Alliance of Authoritarian and Reactionary States" (the "AARS"), disband the European Union and NATO, impose international martial law, and start ethnically cleansing the West of immigrants. Matteo Salvini and Horst Seehofer, decked out in full Putin-Nazi regalia, personally supervise the genocidal purges, which frightened Europeans come to support after Putin's irresistible "fake news" bots brainwash them into believing that a little Russian girl named "Tatiana" has been abducted by Moroccan migrants off a beach along the Costa del Sol.

... ... ...

C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing (USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23 , is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. He can reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org .

[Jul 12, 2018] Challenging Chait s Paradigm by Hunter DeRensis

Jul 12, 2018 | www.unz.com

But to not only ignore the February 2014 coup in Ukraine that initiated recent hostilities between the U.S. and Russia, but to also put the blame on the latter's "aggressive behavior," is at best laughable and at worst dishonest. In February of 2014 the democratically elected government of Ukraine was overthrown in a coup orchestrated by the United States government, an event Chait and his peers do their best to forget . Russia's subsequent annexation of the Crimean Peninsula (containing the Russian naval base at Sevastopol) was a wholly reactive measure. To say the recent estrangement was triggered by anything else than western aggressive behavior is factually inaccurate.

Quartermaster , July 12, 2018 at 12:48 pm GMT

But to not only ignore the February 2014 coup in Ukraine that initiated recent hostilities between the U.S. and Russia, but to also put the blame on the latter's "aggressive behavior," is at best laughable and at worst dishonest.

You lost me at that point. There was no coup in 2014. That's simply a Putinist lie. Yanukovich ran when he was going to be brought to book for the murders he ordered on the Maidan. He was interviewed last year and was completely evasive when it came to questions about the killings he ordered. He's now a fugitive from justice and was righteously removed from office when he ran for asylum in Russia.

It's long past time for idiots like yourself to get the facts and quit parroting Putin's lies.

hyperbola , Next New Comment July 12, 2018 at 6:21 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

Why I Quit the Democratic Party Yesterday

https://www.opednews.com/articles/Why-I-Quit-the-Democratic-by-Eric-Zuesse-Congress-Democrats_Congress-Republican-GOP_Democracy_Democrats-DNC-140815-725.html

I left the Democratic Party yesterday, because I cannot support the first American President who ever installed anywhere in the world a nazi regime -- it has never happened before, not even under a Republican President; and, until Obama, I had always assumed that if it ever would happen, it could come only under a Republican President, never under any Democratic one. But I was wrong -- mortifyingly wrong -- because Barack Obama did this in Ukraine (see here and here for the evidence); he is the first-ever U.S. President to install a nazi regime anywhere, and so I wrote to my Representative seeking Obama's impeachment by the Democrats in Congress; and, yesterday, that person, a Democratic member of the U.S. House of Representatives, told me that, notwithstanding Barack Obama's having unquestionably done this, this Democratic Representative will not introduce on the floor of the U.S. House (which is the only place where a bill of impeachment can be introduced) a bill of impeachment against this -- what is the appropriate term for such a person, if not a -- nazi U.S. President. (That's nazi as an ideology, racist fascist, not as a party designation, which is merely a party's name.) Simply because Obama calls himself a 'Democrat,' that Representative in the House will not introduce a bill to impeach him. There was no argument on the facts; the facts weren't at issue here at all; it's just that Obama calls himself a 'Democrat.' That's all ..

Ukraine's Pres. Poroshenko Says Overthrow of Yanukovych Was a Coup

http://washingtonsblog.com/2015/06/ukraines-pres-poroshenko-says-overthrow-of-yanukovych-was-a-coup.html

Participants in 2014 Ukrainian coup confess

http://washingtonsblog.com/2017/11/participants-2014-ukrainian-cup-confess.html

.. The Italian newspaper Il Giornale, and Italian Mediaset Matrix TV, Chanel 5, issued, on November 15th, confessions by a few of the snipers who on 20 February 2014 fired down into the crowd of "Maidan" demonstrators and police, in order "to sow chaos," as they say that they had been instructed to do.

The Georgian mercenary Alexander Revazishvilli said: "Everyone started shooting two or three shots at a time. It went on for fifteen, twenty minutes. We had no choice. We were ordered to shoot both on the police and the demonstrators, without any difference." This account is entirely consistent with the leaked phone-conversation on 26 February 2014 in which Urmas Paet, the investigator whom the EU had assigned to determine whom to blame for the snipers and their massive bloodshed during the overthrow, informed the EU's Foreign Affairs chief, Catherine Ashton, that the anti-Yanukovych, pro-U.S. and pro-EU side, were to blame, and that Paet had just been informed of this by Petro Poroshenko (who shortly thereafter became elected as Ukraine's figurehead President). Paet said: ..

Oliver Stone Exposes US Coup d'etat In Ukraine

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/01/17/oliver-stone-exposes-us-coup-detat-ukraine/

How and Why the US Government Perpetrated the 2014 Coup in Ukraine

https://countercurrents.org/2018/06/04/how-and-why-the-u-s-government-perpetrated-the-2014-coup-in-ukraine/

[Jul 12, 2018] Are The Russia-Gate Fanatics Crazy, Or Just Cynical by Justin Raimondo

Jul 12, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Authored by Justin Raimondo via AntiWar.com,

The kookification of the "mainstream" continues, with none other than Jonathan Chait – the most conventional sort of boring corporate liberal – producing an unhinged diatribe purporting to prove that Donald Trump has been a Russian agent since 1987 – and that his path to the presidency was paved by his Russian handlers, who were planning it all along. And not to be outdone, formerly rational person Marcy Wheeler, whose investigations as "emptywheel" won her some renown, is now claiming that she not only has definitive proof of Trump's collusion with the Kremlin, but that, as a result, she was forced to turn one of her sources into the FBI for some vague cloak-and-dagger-ish reason.

I looked in on the Chait production, and came upon his reiteration of the Alfa Bank computer link – this was a story, you'll recall, that claimed there was a stream of communications between this "Kremlin-connected" bank and the Trump organization. This, we were told, was almost certainly Vladimir Putin sending instructions to his zombie-agents in the Trump White House. Yes, this was actually the story, backed up by several computer "experts" – except it turned out to be advertising spam . Chait repeats this story, adding it on top of the several dozen other conspiracy factoids he throws in the mix – but without mentioning that the computer signals were simply ad-bots. On the basis of this, and a string of other "interactions" with Russians, we are supposed to believe that the omnipotent Russian intelligence agencies hatched a plot 30 years ago to put Trump into the White House. This is a conspiracy theory that's so shoddy and far-fetched that not even Alex Jones would touch it with a ten-foot pole.

Which brings us to an interesting question: do these people really believe their own craziness?

In some instances, it's pure psychopathology. That's the case, I believe, for Marcy Wheeler, Louise Mensch, and the more active online Twitter-paranoids. These people have been so shocked by the unexpected – the election of Trump – that they have been forced into a dubious mental state bordering on insanity.

However, in the case of Jonathan Chait, it's pure viciousness and cynicism. He even says of his own theory that it's "unlikely but possible." It's just a show for the suckers. The same is true for most of the other journalists who have enlisted in #TheResistance and given up any pretense at objectivity: they are simply doing what they do best, and that is taking dictation from their spookish sources. The treatment of Russia-gate in the media parallels precisely what occurred with Iraq's storied "weapons of mass destruction" – reporters are taking it all on faith, and they don't even necessarily believe it. Thus the biggest hoax since Piltdown Man is reported as "fact." And of course all this is coming to the fore as Trump takes on NATO and our European "allies."

For anti-interventionists, Trump's trip to Europe could not be more timely or enlightening. He went to the NATO meeting with a few admonitory tweets up front , complaining that America pays far more than a fair share of the alliance's monetary costs, and no sooner does he get off the plane than he notes that for all the anti-Russian rhetoric coming out of our allies, the Germans are cuddling up to the Russians on the energy front with the Nord Stream II pipeline. Merkel shot back that Germany is, after all, an independent country and can do what it likes. True, but then why the weird contradiction between claiming that Russia is a military threat and also setting up the mechanism of energy dependence?

Before getting on the plane for his European sojourn, the President reiterated his longstanding position:

"We pay far too much and they pay far too little. The United States is spending far more on NATO than any other country. This is not fair, nor is it acceptable."

And the cost is not just measured in monetary terms: there's also the incalculable cost of risking war, under Article 5 of the NATO treaty, which obligates us to come to the aid of a NATO ally that's under attack, or at least that claims to be under attack. In which case, the government of tiny Montenegro, with a population of a bit over half a million, could declare that the Russians are trying to pull off a coup, and US troops would be in country "defending" it against an incursion that may not even exist.

Take a look at the Euro-weenies squirming in their seats at that "bilateral breakfast," which was turned into a lecture by the President about why the burden of empire should not fall only on our shoulders. Pompeo and Kay Bailey Hutchinson don't look happy, either, but that's just too bad, now isn't it? The President is speaking truth to the once high-and-mighty – and more power to him!

Meanwhile, the main event is going to be in Helsinki: NATO is just a sideshow. After all, militarily the alliance is really nothing but the United States and a few Brits: the Europeans carry little actual weight. The really serious business will take place with Putin, although there is a relentless propaganda campaign in progress to prevent Trump from making the Helsinki summit a success.

What must be addressed in Helsinki is the backsliding of both countries when it comes to preventing a nuclear catastrophe. The program to find and secure loose nukes, which became a problem after the breakup of the Soviet Union, needs to be renewed, in addition to the mutual disarmament agreements that have fallen by the wayside , with the US and the Russians re-arming . As tensions between Washington and Moscow rise, the possibility of a nuclear conflict increases, along with the chances of an accidenta l nuclear exchange. The nuclear death machine is on automatic, with all kinds of scenarios where it could be set off by something other than an enemy attack : a terrorist strike in Washington, D.C., or anywhere, involving nuclear material, or simply a computer software glitch. Americans would be horrified to learn just how close we are to an extinction event.

The Trump-haters would rather the President fail than give him credit for securing the peace. They would much prefer to wage a new cold war with Russia than put an end to the horrific threat of utter annihilation that's cast a dark shadow over the world for all this time. In preferring universal ruin to the vindication of their enemies, they fit the very definition of what it means to be evil.

Trump is out to transform US foreign policy by – finally! – recognizing the reality that's been in place since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The old structures that served us when Communism was thought to be a threat to Europe are no longer functional, and haven't been for quite some time. NATO today is nothing but a gigantic subsidy to two major beneficiaries: our European "allies" and the big arms manufacturers such as Boeing, Raytheon, etc. The current arrangements allow the European welfare states to huddle under the US nuclear shield while dispensing all kinds of goodies to their citizens. It's quite a racket for all concerned: as NATO countries must continually update their military equipment to meet rising standards, American taxpayers are footing most of the bill.

Whether Trump succeeds in getting the incubus of NATO off our backs, or not, this outmoded institution is bound to wither away no matter who is in the White House, for the simple reason that it no longer serves any useful purpose. Those howls of outrage you're hearing are all coming from self-interested parties being cut off from the gravy train – and, as such, all that noise should be music to our ears. Tags Politics War Conflict Commercial Banks Commercial Aircraft Manufacturing Oil Related Services and Equipment - NEC Aerospace & Defense - NEC

Comments Vote up! 27 Vote down! 3

GunnyG Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:45 Permalink

Unhinged loons all. The only collusion seems to be between the Magic Nigger and Putin along with Hellery and Mueller and Uranium One.

President Obama : "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

President Medvedev : "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you."

jm -> GunnyG Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:46 Permalink

We're over it.

Dickweed Wang -> jm Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:48 Permalink

More projection from the left . . . accusing Trump of the very thing(s) they themselves are guilty of. It's really getting obvious.

Automatic Choke -> Dickweed Wang Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:53 Permalink

I have a good friend. Intelligent, usually quite well balanced, but a bad case of TDS. She keeps falling back on "where there is smoke there must be fire....we keep hearing about Russia and Trump, so it must be true."

I have yet to point out to her that is precisely what was behind Goering's philosophy of "tell a lie often enough and people will believe it to be true". After all, she is also jewish, and the Goering reference might make her head explode.

Billy the Poet -> Automatic Choke Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:55 Permalink

Have you shown her the Steele dossier which lists Kremlin agents and Russian spies as sources A, B, C and G?

DingleBarryObummer -> Billy the Poet Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:58 Permalink

let's get some Likud/Chabad Lubavitch-gate articles

Boing_Snap -> DingleBarryObummer Thu, 07/12/2018 - 17:23 Permalink

RussiaGate was spawned as Trump was calling her out for her crimes, the ties to the Uranium One scam were obvious and public. So in typical fashion she paints her opponent with the the false brush of her crimes to deflect the reality.

Besides the MI6 need to smear the Russians was first on the agenda anyway, can't have the Russians looking good on anything.

lazarusturtle -> Boing_Snap Thu, 07/12/2018 - 19:05 Permalink

Thank Q for exposing all the closet zionists. When you replace the word "Russiagate" with "Israelgate", then all the 'fire & fury' over the Trump presidency actually starts to make sense.

MillionDollarButter -> lazarusturtle Thu, 07/12/2018 - 20:25 Permalink

To the new owners of ZH. Everyone knows what's up.

TBT or not TBT -> MillionDollarButter Thu, 07/12/2018 - 20:56 Permalink

Crazy OR cynical? Embrace the healing power of and.

Rapunzal -> DingleBarryObummer Thu, 07/12/2018 - 17:23 Permalink

No it's just a hollow divide and conquer meme, to keep the sheeple arguing about nonsense and keep the flow of fake news at a high level. Don't give the sheeple a moment of a break, they might start to think for themselves.

WallHoo -> Rapunzal Thu, 07/12/2018 - 17:34 Permalink

Come on rapu dont say that,you can do better!!

Life rule number one if someone supports something beyond reason that means that they benefit from it.

Nature_Boy_Wooooo -> Automatic Choke Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:56 Permalink

I think deep down these people know it's nonsense, they just hate Trump so much they feel the need to be dishonest just to try and hurt him.

It blows my mind because these are the same people who would have a meltdown if a prosecutor went after a black man with these tactics. Somehow they feel that a malicious prosecution is acceptable just this one time.

stant -> Automatic Choke Thu, 07/12/2018 - 17:00 Permalink

the tribe has a cult following. the crack pipe has second hand smoke

Consuelo -> Automatic Choke Thu, 07/12/2018 - 18:05 Permalink

Ancient hatred of ethnic Russians from the old Khazarian empire, now known as 'Ukraine'...

It is no wonder, nor surprise that Khazarian cockroaches who infest the halls of U.S. foreign policy are apoplectic regarding any warming of common-sense relations with Russia.

Consuelo -> Automatic Choke Thu, 07/12/2018 - 18:05 Permalink

Dup.

Is-Be -> Automatic Choke Thu, 07/12/2018 - 18:13 Permalink

Her head will explode with Guilt.

https://books.google.com.au/books/about/Tell_the_Truth_and_Shame_the_De

TeamDepends -> jm Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:51 Permalink

Trump Acceptance Resistance Disorder induced hysteria. So, crazy. And yet, many are some of the most cynical creatures you'll ever meet- true misanthropes. So there's that.

lookslikecraptome -> TeamDepends Thu, 07/12/2018 - 17:03 Permalink

how about something interesting.You know about dick eater McAffe and the crypto world.We all know the dem/lib shit about Russia and Trump is already complete bullshit.

Boing_Snap -> TeamDepends Thu, 07/12/2018 - 17:30 Permalink

Yes, the Libtards that think they're smarter than everyone else are the most trapped by their ego.

Present fact, logic and reasonable discourse and these geniuses lose their sheet and produce fallacy, fake news, and eventually run away from the conversation or end up in tears.

Funny and sad at the same time.

I Am Jack's Ma -> jm Thu, 07/12/2018 - 18:28 Permalink

The anti-Russia hysteria comes from all over the Left as well as parts of the Right...

But as with Chait, Mensch, Kristol, Appelbaum, Gessen and on and on and on you find Jews wildly over-represented in the Putin bashing (which is one thing - he's a politician in bed with some bad hombres and not at all above criticism) and Russia itself.

https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/hating-russia-is-a-full-time-job/

new game -> GunnyG Thu, 07/12/2018 - 17:09 Permalink

i was just up at a lake in northern mn and there was two loons going nutso on the lake! guess what i was thinking?

lol...

it was pretty cool. it was like a spat on the water, or a sexual experience. don't know cept they were making a hell-of-a-lot of cool sounds...

GunnyG -> new game Thu, 07/12/2018 - 17:22 Permalink

The Americanus Liberalum Loonicus does not make cool sounds. It screeches, mewls, whines, and bitches and moans.

esum -> GunnyG Thu, 07/12/2018 - 18:40 Permalink

DEMS/LIBTARDS

suk ya dick for a dolla

N0TME -> GunnyG Thu, 07/12/2018 - 19:32 Permalink

I have a question. Why is this still an issue?

I thought it was over.

LawsofPhysics Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:48 Permalink

War is Peace

Freedom is Slavery

Ignorance is Strength

Get in line comrade!

1 Alabama -> LawsofPhysics Thu, 07/12/2018 - 17:25 Permalink

ignorance is also bliss, far from strength

LawsofPhysics -> 1 Alabama Thu, 07/12/2018 - 17:33 Permalink

Still nothing useful to add and completely ignorant of history...

expected.

louiedafag -> LawsofPhysics Thu, 07/12/2018 - 18:00 Permalink

small is big. big is small.

Biggy Small

NukeChinaNow -> LawsofPhysics Thu, 07/12/2018 - 21:17 Permalink

Sexual deviance is pride.

Infanticide is choice.

Invader is undocumented migrant.

It's a hell of a LONG list the evil bastards have going-to try to destroy western civilization with cutesy little names to deflect from the truth about what they REALLY support.

But hey, what do I know?

I'm sure there are a lot people who can easily add to my list. Have at it.

attah-boy-Luther Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:48 Permalink

only ones that believe russsia-gate rev.1.0/2.0/3.0 etc are:

______________________________________________

Copy and paste and fill-in!

cheech_wizard -> attah-boy-Luther Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:54 Permalink

only ones that believe russsia-gate rev.1.0/2.0/3.0 etc are:

Congressman Adam Schiff-for-brains -or- the thoroughly rabid idiots over on Democratic Underground

Copy and paste and fill-in!

What did I win?

TeamDepends -> cheech_wizard Thu, 07/12/2018 - 17:17 Permalink

A Full Del Monte from Stormy Daniels and parting gifts.

shovelhead -> TeamDepends Thu, 07/12/2018 - 17:30 Permalink

Is that a melon salad?

Consuelo -> cheech_wizard Thu, 07/12/2018 - 18:07 Permalink

Doesn't Schiff have some Epstein to diddle with at the Pizza joint...?

Lost in translation Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:49 Permalink

I'll take demonically-possessed for $800, Alex.

TeamDepends -> Lost in translation Thu, 07/12/2018 - 17:20 Permalink

Bingo! Communism is merely thinly-veiled Luciferianism. Take the Alinskyites, please.

1 Alabama -> Lost in translation Thu, 07/12/2018 - 17:27 Permalink

What is the U.S. gvt?

geno Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:49 Permalink

Meanwhile look at this "elite" Russian military tech FAILURE..:

http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-admits-defeat-su-57-not-going-int

geno -> geno Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:50 Permalink

I actually like Russia and hope for a good relationship with them, but the US must fail and Russia is the best cheer-leading on this site has become unbearable.

Billy the Poet -> geno Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:59 Permalink

I see lots of folks here who want both the US and Russia to succeed. That's one of the reasons we support the President and his policy of peace, commerce and honest friendship with old Cold War enemies. It's not 1949/1950 anymore.

chestergimli -> Billy the Poet Thu, 07/12/2018 - 19:04 Permalink

I'd like to see them get together with CHIna and do the Jews in.

Is-Be -> geno Thu, 07/12/2018 - 18:23 Permalink

Get it through your thick skull,

Just because Russia exists, does not imply any action is required from the USA.

As the ancient and venerable ancestral religions of Asatru and Vanatru say, "There are many ways of Being in the world, and this is natural and Good".

Tend to the mote in your own eye.

cheech_wizard -> geno Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:58 Permalink

So the Russians realized that US equipment is crap and can be handled by what they already have.

No real surprise there. U.S. military equipment is in many cases relying on electronic components from the 70's and 80's rather than upgrading their electronic systems.

new game -> cheech_wizard Thu, 07/12/2018 - 17:16 Permalink

grift and graft has succeeded in making the military a pork barrel of overprice inferior stuffs.

quantity but not quality. sooooo many problems associated with uuuuuge budgets..

don't know where to go-just so many issues that could be solve by shrinkage.

half it and see what happens for strters...

shovelhead -> cheech_wizard Thu, 07/12/2018 - 17:40 Permalink

Russia won't waste money on an impractical design that's really not worth the enormous cost? Why, that's crazy.

Instead of spending millions to make a pen write in 0 G, they use a 2 cent pencil?

Barbarians.

Is-Be -> cheech_wizard Thu, 07/12/2018 - 18:29 Permalink

US. military equipment is in many cases relying on electronic components from the 70's and 80's rather than upgrading their electronic systems.

That's a surprisingly pertinent observation.

So where did the $21 TRILLION dollars that Catherine Austin Fitts found missing Go, if not into weapons upgrades?

That sort of coin buys you a whole new civilization.

Incredulity is not an argument.

dietrolldietroll Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:49 Permalink

Crazy, cynical, moronic. Yeah.

GoHillary2016 Thu, 07/12/2018 - 16:50 Permalink

they are very similar to Trump fanatics, they will believe any crazy shit.

Is-Be -> GoHillary2016 Thu, 07/12/2018 - 18:30 Permalink

If you say so, it must be true, O great Oracle.

[Jul 10, 2018] Why Congress Should Not Honor One of the Most Notorious Doping Cheats of All Time The Nation

Notable quotes:
"... The New York Times ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... National Enquirer ..."
Jul 10, 2018 | www.thenation.com

Why Congress Should Not Honor One of the Most Notorious Doping Cheats of All Time | The Nation n international sports-doping bill -- the first of its kind criminalizing sports doping for international competitions -- named the Rodchenkov Anti-Doping Act was introduced in the US House of Representatives on June 12. The subject matter is highly relevant because sports doping is an important international problem with geopolitical implications. The name is disconcerting, however, because Dr. Grigory Rodchenkov has admitted to being one of the biggest enablers of sports doping in history. Why, then, would the US Congress consider honoring him?

Perhaps the main reason for this development is the influence of The New York Times . Congressional representatives, like so many, have been exposed to continuing and distorted Times coverage on this subject. That coverage has now been exposed as selective by two lengthy opinions of the respected Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) that were published on April 23, 2018, and, not coincidentally, that received only minimal coverage by the Times . What distinguished these CAS opinions is that, for the first time, in the CAS hearings Rodchenkov was confronted by his accusers with cross-examination. The results of that cross-examination tell a very different story from that related by the Times in the past two years.

Publication by The New York Times of an unverified front-page interview based on a highly questionable informant is a formula for trouble, which is an apt word to describe the May 13, 2016, article -- "An Insider in Sochi Tells How Russia Beat Doping Tests" -- on alleged Russian state-sponsored doping. Exacerbating the problem was the companion lead article in the sports section with a headline worthy of the National Enquirer : "Russia's Open Secret Is Whispered No More." The trouble became apparent almost two years later, with the publication of the CAS opinions mentioned above and the scant coverage of those opinions by the Times . This combination of distorted coverage and lack of coverage have had significant athletic and geopolitical repercussions: detracting from the Rio and PyeongChang Olympic Games and demonizing one country, Russia, for what is in fact an international doping problem. The result is an impediment to the solution of that doping problem and a worsening of the new cold-war atmosphere that now permeates relations between the West and Russia.

Such is the power of the Times that it generated worldwide headlines out of something that had been reported six months before its front-page, multi-column lead article. In November 2015, a three-person so-called Independent Commission (IC) appointed by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) concluded, relying in part on witnesses who demanded anonymity, that there had been systematic doping involving Russian Olympic and Paralympic athletes. No ban of Russia resulted from the IC Report.

According to the IC Report, at the center of the story was the then–director of the Russian anti-doping laboratory, Rodchenkov, who the IC found was "at the heart of the positive drug test cover-up." The IC Report made some statements about him that would give any reasonable person pause about his reliability as a witness, including "The IC finds that that Dir. Rodchenkov's statements regarding the destruction of the [1417 urine] samples are not credible" and "Director Rodchenkov was also an integral part of the conspiracy to extort money from athletes in order to cover up positive doping test results." The Times article states that Rodchenkov denies extortion, despite evidence to the contrary that at least two Russian athletes gave to the IC.

Not surprisingly, once Rodchenkov became subject to criminal charges in Russia, he was forced to resign from his position and fled to the United States. What was surprising, in light of the negatives about Rodchenkov in the IC Report and his previous opposition to it, was that the Times published its prominent and sensational interview of him, stating that , despite the fact that "Rodchenkov's account could not be independently verified it was consistent with the broad findings" of the IC Report. As noted above, the IC Report was anything but a ringing endorsement of Rodchenkov. Although Rodchenkov was now supportive of the IC Report, his change of heart -- like that of many informants -- got him a valuable reward: placement in the US Witness Protection Program.

Further illustrating the power of the Times , four days after the publication of this sensationalized and unverified article, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) ordered another WADA investigation because the IOC considered Rodchenkov's "spectacular revelations" to the Times "very detailed and very worrying." This new investigation became the so-called "Independent Person" Report, the independent person (IP) being a Canadian law professor named Richard McLaren.

How independent the IP really was, however, is questionable because he was one of the three authors of the IC Report, and the likelihood that he would disagree with himself was slim to none. Echoing the Times , the IP considered Rodchenkov's changed testimony, which now supported the IC Report, credible.

The IP finished his new report, which covers numerous athletes over multiple years, in only 57 days. One explanation for this extraordinary speed on such a complex report is that he questioned no Russian officials. Although some might have wondered about the lack of balance caused by this failure, his report was greeted with great fanfare by the Times and by international media, which did not question -- despite vehement denials by Russia and the Russian athletes -- the IP's conclusion of Russian state-sponsored doping based on, as McLaren later put it, "immutable facts." The report -- despite, as described below, its fatal flaws -- ultimately led to the banning of hundreds of Russian Olympic and Paralympic athletes, from Rio and PyeongChang combined, without hearings to prove their individual guilt. No such ban of a great world power's athletes had occurred since Germany and Japan were banned from the 1948 Olympics.

The chaos in the Olympic movement since 2016 caused by these bans has been the subject of numerous headlines chronicling the often inconsistent banning and unbanning of Russian athletes by the IOC and the various international sports-governing organizations. Part of the reason for the chaos is that the Court of Arbitration for Sport -- the highest court for international sports matters -- had not yet weighed in with definitive decisions that included a critical element of due process: the cross-examination of Rodchenkov and McLaren. When that process finally started, based on a joint hearing of the doping cases of 39 Russian Winter Olympic athletes occurring just weeks before the 2018 PyeongChang Olympics, 27 of the bans were overturned completely and 12 were partially overturned.

This was major news, although at this point -- February 1, 2018 -- because of the imminence of the PyeongChang Olympics, the CAS issued just a media release, rather than reasoned decisions. The Times duly reported this development on the same day it occurred. Despite the great majority of favorable results for the Russian athletes, the Times report noted, with some self-congratulatory editorialization, that the "case against Russia was largely built on the bombshell testimony of the former head of its drug testing laboratory, Grigory Rodchenkov."

[Jul 09, 2018] The CIA s return to the bad old days, when it engaged in a global program of assassinating political leaders

Notable quotes:
"... IS THE LEASH NOW OFF THE 'OTHER CIA?' https://southfront.org/is-the-leash-now-off-the-other-cia/ ..."
"... Under Donald Trump, who is on record favoring CIA kidnapping and torture programs, the CIA has been given a green light to carry out "targeted assassinations." ..."
Jul 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

redmudhooch , July 3, 2018 at 12:58 pm GMT

IS THE LEASH NOW OFF THE 'OTHER CIA?' https://southfront.org/is-the-leash-now-off-the-other-cia/

Under Donald Trump, who is on record favoring CIA kidnapping and torture programs, the CIA has been given a green light to carry out "targeted assassinations."

Although most of these targeted kills have been carried out by drone attacks in Yemen, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Somalia, where civilian deaths from "collateral damage" are estimated to be well over three hundred, recent events point to the CIA's return to the "bad old days," when it engaged in a global program of assassinating political leaders.

... ... ...

[Jul 09, 2018] On the subject of Jews celebrating the death of others, I have seen photos of them gaily cooking Rachel Corrie pancakes to celebrate the death of the American student they brutally crushed to death with a tractor in occupied Palestine.

Jul 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

ParadiseNow Giraldi always says what needs to be said. Excellent article.

Speaking of the news that evaporates--"The story was covered in Israel and Europe but insofar as I could determine did not appear in any detail in the U.S. mainstream media"--and of the stories that disappear an hour or so after they are posted...

I've never come across anyone in the US who had seen or heard of the story that popped up on my monitor one day while working in a newsroom in Los Angeles, a headline piece by the BBC stating that the California legislature in Sacramento had just passed a resolution apologizing to Mel Gibson for the treatment he was subjected to after his drunken comments were illegally relayed to the press. The article also reported that legislation was passed increasing fines and jail penalties in California for anyone who illegally gave or sold arrest information to the media.

The story had some serious bearing on our immediate market as numerous celebrities' private medical information etc were being illegally gathered and sold to news outlets. I brought it to the attention of my (Jewish) chief editor who read the article, thanked me for the heads up, then completely ignored it.

Shortly after the piece just evaporated from the BBC site, and to this day I can find no trace of it in their archives.

On the subject of Jews celebrating the death of others, I have seen photos of them gaily cooking 'Rachel Corrie pancakes' to celebrate the death of the American student they brutally crushed to death with a tractor in occupied Palestine.

Jmaie , July 4, 2018 at 3:48 am GMT

I have seen photos of them gaily cooking 'Rachel Corrie pancakes'

Here's my take as a (non-Jewish) American.

My sympathies are with the Palestinians with regards to trying somehow to estabilsh sustainable territorial boundaries. IMHO Israel is clearly stealing land by building settlements in the West Bank. But given the ad-hoc nature of the current borders and the intent of the various parties, , God/Allah knows how this can be reasonably adjudicated.

I am ambivalent with regards to the plight of those in Gaza, Egypt is certainly in a position to help. The southern border is after all under their control.

Launching random missiles into southern Israel (assuming that's an actual thing rather than propaganda on the Israeli's part) seems silly and unlikely to improve the situation.

Both parties seem to regard the other as filth, undeserving of human compassion. How we move forward from here is beyond my ability to guess.

Arab neighbors seem to view refugees as pawns to be kept in squalor for their own political aims.

It seems like (and this is my own reading from afar) Hamas uses the "right of return" as an issue to turn gullible Palestinian youth into canon fodder. It's been 75 years and Israel is stronger than ever. Time to wake up and smell the coffee

There is so damn much much fault on both sides .

Now, having said all that – Rachael Corrie pancakes? She was an idiot and I have not the slightest sympathy for her. I wish I'd thought the joke up .

jilles dykstra , July 4, 2018 at 6:31 am GMT
@Jmaie

" Launching random missiles into southern Israel (assuming that's an actual thing rather than propaganda on the Israeli's part) seems silly and unlikely to improve the situation. "

What do you suggest the inmates of the Gaza concentration camp can do to get attention to their plight ?
The only way seems to be to provoke Israel into some retaliatory action.
Netanyahu is as stupid as Hitler, who let himself be provoked by Poland.
And indeed, both sides see the other as dirt.

jilles dykstra , July 4, 2018 at 6:40 am GMT
@CCR

They did drive the Palestinians out...

Jabotinski in 1923 saw it well 'just force will make Palestinians give up their lands'. But he did not foresee that they never really would give up.

What he also did not foresee that the ethnic cleansing would cause a growth of the number of Palestinians. As far as I can see Israel has no long time strategy for dealing with the Palestinian problem.

Trying to convince the great majority of the world's countries in the UN Assembly that they're all wrong, and Israel right, lunacy.

byrresheim , July 4, 2018 at 9:43 am GMT
@Jmaie

Now, having said all that – Rachael Corrie pancakes? She was an idiot and I have not the slightest sympathy for her. I wish I'd thought the joke up .

Thank you for unmasking yourself in the last sentence

L.K , July 4, 2018 at 7:26 pm GMT
@Jmaie

New Zionist shill on the block, 'jmaie'

Now, having said all that – Rachael Corrie pancakes? She was an idiot and I have not the slightest sympathy for her. I wish I'd thought the joke up

Buddy, you really are FILTH.

[Jul 09, 2018] Presstitutes from BBC report lies again

Jul 09, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Daniel , Jul 8, 2018 2:07:03 PM | 53

LOL. I see BBC is today reporting:

"Almost all the Syrians who fled to the border with Jordan from an army offensive have now returned to their homes, a top UN official says."

Just days ago they reported that "The offensive in Syria's south-west had earlier forced more than 320,000 people to flee," and were bleating that Jordan should open their border and let them all in.

Today "Anders Pedersen, the UN humanitarian co-ordinator in Jordan, said that "around 150 to 200 people (are) right now at the border".

320,000 became <200 in a matter of days. LOL

So, once again we see that the civilians were fleeing the fighting, NOT the Syrian government. And once the SAR regains control of an area, almost everyone returns.

Well, at least BBC online did sort of admit it.

[Jul 09, 2018] Senate Intelligence Committee Prostitutes Itself In Behalf Of Russiagate, by Paul Craig Roberts

Jul 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

Are you stupid enough to believe that American voters elected Trump president because Vladimir Putin influenced them to vote for Russia's candidate? The US Senate Intelligence (sic) Committee is that stupid. This collection of nitwits actually produced a report that a few ads allegedly placed online on Putin's instructions, ads that did not cost one-hundredth of one percent of the huge sum spent by the candidates themselves, both national committees and everyone else, were decisive in influencing voters who never saw the ads in the first place or read or responded to tweets.

That a Senate Committee would expect anyone to believe such a far-fetched story shows that the Senate Intelligence (sic) Committee has no respect whatsoever for the people who elected President Trump, or, for that matter, for anyone else at home or abroad.

This Senate report is the most incredible bullshit I have every encountered in my life. There is no evidence whatsoever in the report. Only assertions. And most of these are based on "open-source" internet postings by trolls and bots financed by the military/security complex and Democratic Party.

What the report actually tells us is that no member of the Senate Intelligence Committee has enough intelligence or integrity to serve in the US Senate. It is the Senate Intelligence Committee that is a disgrace to America and to the entire human race.

RT has great fun with the collection of nitwits that comprise the Senate Intelligence Committee: https://www.rt.com/usa/431661-senate-intelligence-assessment-russia/

On this Fourth of July, how can anyone be a Proud American?

[Jul 09, 2018] 'Pay Up You NATO Deadbeats or Else!' by Eric Margolis

Notable quotes:
"... Trump and his fellow neocons want NATO to serve as a sort of US foreign legion in Third World wars in Africa and Asia. NATO was formed as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to defend western Europe, not to fight in Afghanistan and who knows where else? ..."
"... In Europe, it's hard to find many people who still consider Russia a serious threat except for some tipsy Danes, right wing Swedes, and assorted Russophobic East Europeans. The main fear of Russia seems concentrated in the minds of American neoconservatives, media, and rural Trump supporters, all victims of the bizarre anti-Russian hysteria that has gripped the US. ..."
"... Equally important, most civilians don't understand that neither US and NATO forces nor Russia's military are in any shape to fight war that lasts more than a few days. Both sides lack munitions, spare parts, lubricants, and battlefield equipment. The overworked US Air Force, busy plastering Muslim nations, has actually run low on bombs. US industry can't seems to keep up supplies. There has even been talk of buying explosives from China! ..."
"... At this point NATO is the muscle for projecting and maintaining Western (read US) hegemony. It's activities are a threat to sovereign nations that refuse to be Washington's vassals. So they react with self-defensive postures and programs that NATO can claim are "aggression" in order to justify its own existence. ..."
Jul 07, 2018 | www.unz.com

`We are the schmucks' thundered President Donald Trump, using a favorite New York City Yiddish term for penis. The object of Trump's wrath at his Make America Great Again' rally in Great Falls, Montana was the craven, stingy European members of NATO, only 16 of 22 members are on budget for their US-commanded military spending. Trump wants them to spend much more.

Trump and his fellow neocons want NATO to serve as a sort of US foreign legion in Third World wars in Africa and Asia. NATO was formed as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to defend western Europe, not to fight in Afghanistan and who knows where else?

Equally bad, according to Trump, is that the US runs a whopping trade deficit with the European Union which is busy shipping high-end cars and fine wines to the US. The wicked foreigners don't buy enough Amerian bourbon, corn and terribly abused pigs.

Trump is quite right that America's NATO allies, particularly Germany and Canada, don't spend enough on defense. Germany is reported to have less than twenty operational tanks. Canada's armed forces appear to be smaller than the New York City police department.

But the Europeans ask, 'defense against whom?' The Soviet Union was a huge threat back in the Cold War when the mighty Red Army had 55,000 tanks pointed West. Today, Russia's land and navel power has evaporated. Russia has perhaps 5,500 main battle tanks in active service and a similar number in storage, a far cry from its armored juggernaut of the Cold War.

More important, Russia's military budget for 2018 was only $61 billion, actually down 17% from last year. That's 4.3% of GDP. Russia is facing hard economic times. Russia has slipped to third place in military spending after the US, China and Saudi Arabia. The US and its wealthy allies account for two thirds of world military spending. In fact, the US total military budget (including for nuclear weapons and foreign wars) is about $1 trillion, 50% of total US government discretionary spending.

In addition, Russia must defend a vast territory from the Baltic to the Pacific. The US is fortunate in having Mexico and Canada as neighbors. Russia has North Korea, China, India, the Mideast and NATO to watch. As with its naval forces, Russia's armies are too far apart to lend one another mutual support. Two vulnerable rail lines are Russia's main land link between European Russia and its Pacific Far East.

Trump's supplemental military budget boost this year of $54 billion is almost as large as Russia's entire 2018 military budget. As for Trump's claim that Europe is not paying its fair share of NATO expenses, note that that Britain and France combined together spend more on their military forces than Russia.

ORDER IT NOW

In Europe, it's hard to find many people who still consider Russia a serious threat except for some tipsy Danes, right wing Swedes, and assorted Russophobic East Europeans. The main fear of Russia seems concentrated in the minds of American neoconservatives, media, and rural Trump supporters, all victims of the bizarre anti-Russian hysteria that has gripped the US.

Equally important, most civilians don't understand that neither US and NATO forces nor Russia's military are in any shape to fight war that lasts more than a few days. Both sides lack munitions, spare parts, lubricants, and battlefield equipment. The overworked US Air Force, busy plastering Muslim nations, has actually run low on bombs. US industry can't seems to keep up supplies. There has even been talk of buying explosives from China!

These essentials of war have been seriously neglected in favor of buying fancy weapons. But such weapons need spares, electronics, fuel depots, missiles and thousands of essential parts. As former US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld observed, 'you go to war with what you have.' Neither side has enough. A war would likely peter out in days after supplies were exhausted. Besides, no side can afford to replace $100 million jet fighters or $5 million apiece tanks after a war, however brief.

President Trump has learned about war from Fox TV. Europeans have learned from real experience and don't want any more.

Robert Magill , July 7, 2018 at 11:42 pm GMT

The last time the US put troops into action in North Korea, China lashed out and drove us back South. In retaliation we dropped more tonnage of bombs and napalm on the North than was used in the entire Pacific War.

Why would anyone think the same thing cannot happen again? https://robertmagill.wordpress.com/2018/07/07/we-are-a-very-modern-and-enlightened-species-and-we-can-prove-it/

Giuseppe , July 8, 2018 at 3:11 pm GMT

In fact, the US total military budget (including for nuclear weapons and foreign wars) is about $1 trillion, 50% of total US government discretionary spending.

Disband NATO already. The USSR is gone and Russia has no revanchist plans. Our military spending on the defense of Europe only frees their budgets for social programs like medical care and college education.

And what have we gotten for spending the nation's wealth on blowing up the Greater Middle East, killing a million plus civilians and displacing millions more? Rusting cities, crumbling infrastructure, a school system that can't compete with even that of India American Exceptionalism indeed. Exceptionally deluded.

Bill Pilgrim , July 9, 2018 at 6:37 am GMT
At this point NATO is the muscle for projecting and maintaining Western (read US) hegemony. It's activities are a threat to sovereign nations that refuse to be Washington's vassals. So they react with self-defensive postures and programs that NATO can claim are "aggression" in order to justify its own existence.
Bill Pilgrim , July 9, 2018 at 6:49 am GMT
Here's a former UK ambassador:

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/07/no-need-for-nato/

[Jul 09, 2018] MH17 and Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal which was established to oversee and investigate complaints from victims of wars and armed conflict in relation to crimes against peace, war crimes, crimes against humanity and other like offences as recognized under International Law.

Jul 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

ALCvA , July 9, 2018 at 5:11 am GMT

I don't know what happened to Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 on 17 July 2014 nor do I know what happed to Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370/MAS370 on 8 March 2014. Except that my suspicion is aroused that there is a connection with these events and the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal which was established to oversee and investigate complaints from victims of wars and armed conflict in relation to crimes against peace, war crimes, crimes against humanity and other like offences as recognized under International Law.

In November 2011 the tribunal purportedly exercised universal jurisdiction to try in absentia former US President George W. Bush and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, convicting both for crimes against peace because of what the tribunal concluded was the unlawful invasion of Iraq.

In May 2012 after hearing testimony for a week from victims of torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, the tribunal unanimously convicted in absentia former President Bush, former Vice President Dick Cheney, former Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, former Deputy Assistant Attorneys General John Yoo and Jay Bybee, former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and former counsellors David Addington and William Haynes II of conspiracy to commit war crimes, specifically torture. The tribunal referred their findings to the chief prosecutor at the International Court of Justice in the Hague.

In November 2013, the tribunal convicted State of Israel guilty of genocide of the Palestinian people and convicted former Israeli general Amos Yaron for crimes against humanity and genocide for his involvement in the Sabra and Shatila massacre.

Thus, my conspiratorial mind suspects that there is a connection between the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal's convictions and the missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370/MAS370 and Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17.

The problem is that the convictions by the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunals are little known and were never reported by the mainstream media.

Kees van der Pijl , Website July 9, 2018 at 6:35 am GMT
@ALCvA

I also have this in the book, with the same details, and after a discussion that also includes Malaysia's arms purchases in Russia, I write 'But we should be reminded that we are looking at a 'systems event', a conditional structure of great complexity, in which even factors that are highly unlikely to have been the cause (such as punishing Malaysia or killing Putin) may yet have played a role, at some point, in overcoming moral or other barriers.'

jilles dykstra , July 9, 2018 at 6:41 am GMT
" However, irrespective of the actual perpetrator, and whether it was an intentional act or an accident, there is no doubt about the West's intent to exploit the event to the maximum. "

The key sentence.
Dutch vice first minister Asscher at the time of the disaster was on vacation in the south of France.
This fool, in a Dutch tv show, explained the need for secrecy, in the afternoon of the day of the MH17 disaster prime minister Rutte called Asscher on his mobile, and asked him to call back on a land line 'so that the Russians could not listen in'.
Until now no Dutch people's representative dared to ask Rutte what was so secret then that the Russians had tobe prevented from listening in.
The only thing I can think of is that Rutte told Asscher 'we want the Russians to get the blame'.

It is interesting to see how the MH17 propaganda follows the example of the holocaust propaganda.
Monuments, remembrances, accusations, but never any concrete facts.
One might also say 'follows the Sept 11 propaganda'.
As a USA politician said 'MH17 is the Dutch Sept 11′.

I did not read the article carefully, so I do not know if it mentions that suspect Ukraine is part of the investigation organisation, or that Ukraine spied on the investigation.

But the essential question remains, except for an accident, why would Russia shoot down a passenger plane ?
Putin is not stupid, he does not do things that just harm him.

jilles dykstra , July 9, 2018 at 6:51 am GMT
@ALCvA

In a Dutch talkshow the chairman of the Dutch airline pilots organisation Benno Baksteen mentioned casually that aboard MH370 there were two groups of Chinese technicians specialised in making planes invisible for radar.
Nowhere in the media this was picked up, Benno Baksteen never again was on tv, and, as far as I know, he's no longer chairman.
My theory on MH17: control of the plane was taken from the crew from outside, this is possible since early 2001.
It was directed direction Antarctica, until is crashed, lack of fuel.
The second pilot tried to use his mobile phone to make contact, however, this is not possible, a passenger plane flies simply to fast, there was a connection, but before he could say anything the plane was too far away.
Also one of the Sept 11 problems.
So, following the old question 'who benefitted', it is clear for me who the suspect is.

Wizard of Oz , July 9, 2018 at 9:04 am GMT
@anon

Indeed, after noting the Marxistish approach I wondered how reliable he would be on key facts if tested. It wasn't encouraging to find him writing that the Dutch Safety Board's report could be "conveniently [sic] dismissed". As the critical account of a presentation by him that I shall post below notes he doesn't seem to know the difference between the Dutch Safety Board's technical investigation and report and the Joint Investigation Team's work on the criminal aspects of the case. That is pretty elementary and leaves him looking like someone who could only wave his hands when it is pointed out that the DSB made a compelling case that MH17 was brought down by a BUK missile fired by someone not named.

He seems to be a retired professor keen to be noticed so his air fares will be paid and his book with a title which also mentions MH17 will sell.

Anyway here is a useful critique slightly truncated from

http://www.whathappenedtoflightmh17.com/presentation-van-kees-van-der-pijl-on-ukraine-and-mh17/

showing pretty well what a BS artist the author is

What happened to flight MH17?

Presentation van Kees van der Pijl on Ukraine and MH17
Posted on September 23, 2017 by admin in Uncategorized // 4 Comments

jilles dykstra , July 9, 2018 at 11:24 am GMT
@Wizard of Oz

" DSB made a compelling case that MH17 was brought down by a BUK missile fired by someone not named. "
A weird compelling case.
They say they know who did it, a Russian officer, name and photograph have been publicised here, but they've been unable to ask him why he did it.
Any normal criminal investigation begins with motive, here at the end the motive still is lacking.
I am not in the least convinced.
The motive, except when it was an accident, lies in the west, the Netherlands objected most to sanctions.
About a possible accident, Ukraine seems to have misused overflying passenger planes as shield for its bombers.
But, the Ukrainian pilot said to have shot down MH17 committed suicide.
If he did it, he did what a fighter pilot on a illegal mission would have done, target the cockpit from behind, no possibility of an emergency signal.
If it was a BUK, it did what a fighter pilot would have done.
But a BUk flies vertical at a speed of 4500 kmh, a passenger plane at some 900.
Why did not the BUK hit from beneath ?
All in all, indeed a very compelling case, as the murder of Kennedy, Sept 11, Diana, etc

Tom Welsh , July 9, 2018 at 11:55 am GMT
"In February 2016 that assertion had still been dismissed as unfit for evidence by the Dutch chief prosecutor on the JIT, Fred Westerbeke, in a letter to victims' relatives. How can it possibly have become the core component of the case for the prosecution two years and two months later?"

That is extremely puzzling – indeed, inexplicable – if you believe that the object of the exercise is to determine the truth and to see justice done. But it isn't.

As long ago as Plato's "Politeia" ("Republic"), a widely-held view was that "justice is the will of the stronger", as Thrasybulos argues in that dialogue. As far as I can see, that is still the most popular view, and it is certainly the one supported by Western governments. (The Skripal affair is another prominent case in point: the UK government declared who was guilty without the tedious formalities of investigation, indictment, and trial).

The real object of the Western elites – as embodied in the statements of their servants in government and the media – is to control public opinion. In this endeavour, precise accuracy, consistency and objective truth are not only unnecessary hindrances – they are positive handicaps. The purpose is to imprint on the dim public consciousness some desired certainties, such as that Russia is aggressive and barbarous, that Mr Putin is a wicked soulless murderer, and so on.

That is not done by proving a case to courtroom standards. It is done by loudly repeating memorable and emotional slogans, over and over, until everyone vaguely internalizes them and anyone who dares to disagree is attacked for disloyalty.

Hence the change in value of the Bellingcat assertions referred to by the quoted passage is not only unsurprising – it is exactly what we should expect. Yesterday's completely unproven allegation is today's generally known fact.

FB , July 9, 2018 at 11:56 am GMT
Wow what a tremendous article from a bona fide scholar

I have not yet seen anywhere such an accurate and succinct overview of the geopolitical history of the post-1991 era anywhere

There is something that is not clear though the author mentions a 'land for gas' deal discussed by Putin and Merkel on the sidelines of the 2014 World Cup in Brazil

' Its tentative provisions included normalising the status of Crimea in exchange for a massive economic rehabilitation plan and a gas price rebate for Ukraine '

I have no idea what this actually means an 'economic rehabilitation plan for whom ? and what does 'normalization' of Crimea's status mean recognition of Crimea's rejoining the Russian Federation ?

I look forward to reading the author's book

[Jul 09, 2018] Why Was Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17 Shot Down, by Kees van der Pijl

Notable quotes:
"... Today, Western imperialism projects its global power, as far as capital is concerned, primarily from the perspective of speculative, financial asset investment. Long gone are the days of class and international compromise forced upon it after World War Two. Instead, the predatory instincts of dominant financial capital require forcibly opening up all states for commodification and exploitation. Given the global spread of product and commodity chains, the continued flow of profits to the West cannot be taken for granted as long as effective state sovereignty elsewhere persists. For the liberal, Anglophone heartland of capital, 'defence' is therefore not merely, or even primarily, a matter of upholding the territorial integrity of the states constituting it, but keeping open the arterial system of the global economy and maintaining the centrality of the West. Regime change is a logical corollary, and from this perspective we must view the coup in Ukraine in February 2014 and all ensuing events, including the downing of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17. ..."
"... Russia under Yeltsin had effectively surrendered its sovereignty to transnational capital and the West and as a result was left a social and economic disaster zone. ..."
"... The Anglo-American invasion of Iraq on a false pretext made abundantly clear that the West was abandoning the rules of the post-war international order. 'Democracy promotion' intended to prevent national sovereignty from being mobilised against Western global governance, was now made a priority. The 'Rose Revolution' in Georgia in 2003 and the 'Orange Revolution' a year later in Ukraine, marked the lengths to which the United States was willing to go. ..."
"... To ensure that countries incorporated into the US-NATO sphere of influence, really became neoliberal client states, Pascual and Krasner devised a strategy for preventive intervention with a rulebook listing the measures by which 'market democracy' was to be established. Ukraine was a key target and battleground, because by now, Russia was beginning to contest Western forward pressure. ..."
"... The economic mismanagement and infighting of the different oligarchic clans in Ukraine led to payment arrears and repeated shutdowns of the gas supply from Russia, and Gazprom, the state-owned Russian gas company, early on began to look for ways to bypass the Ukrainian grid. ..."
"... If Russia takes Ukraine, Belarus will join the Eurasian Union, and, presto, the Soviet Union (in another name) will be back. ..."
"... Far easier to [hold] the line now, in Ukraine than elsewhere, later ..."
"... weekend of 13 to 14 April, CIA Director John Brennan was in the Ukrainian capital. ..."
"... Parubiy sent out a Twitter message on the 15th that veterans of the Maidan uprising were poised to join the fight. ..."
"... The downing of MH17 on 17 July changed all that. As I said above, who did it and how remains obscure, although there are several pursued by people familiar with local circumstances, or revealed by insiders who know who which military assets were operating that day -- but all that remains inconclusive. The official reports by the Dutch Safety Board and the JIT may be conveniently dismissed although the DSB rightly pointed at the questionable decision by Kiev to allow civilian planes to fly over a war zone. However, irrespective of the actual perpetrator, and whether it was an intentional act or an accident, there is no doubt about the West's intent to exploit the event to the maximum. ..."
"... 'without MH17 it would have been pretty difficult to find sufficient support for the increased sanctions on the Russian economy' ..."
"... Even at the time of the Kiev coup, commentators wondered to what extent shale gas from the US might be used to offset Russian deliveries. LNG facilities planned in Florida and Maryland were projected to serve the European market at Gazprom's expense, a prospect meanwhile far more realistic. ..."
"... The downing of Flight MH17 also definitively sealed the fate of South Stream. Russian banks financing the project, led by Gazprombank, were hit by new sanctions, so that the necessary capital could no longer be raised internationally. ..."
"... Since the F-16 that shot down the Russian jet was part of a pro-NATO unit based at Inçirlik airbase that took part in the coup attempt, the incident over Syria would appear to fit in a framework that may also have decided the fate of Flight MH17: a provocation to throw relations with Russia into disarray, but we don't know for sure. ..."
"... cover the scenarios from changes of leadership within the current structures, to the emergence of a group ready to pursue structural reform in some sort of accountable dialogue with the Russian population, to regime collapse ..."
"... In the current global conjuncture, even the tentative contender coalition combining the Eurasian Union, the BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, constitutes an acute danger to a capitalist West in crisis. Whether the United States and NATO would therefore also be willing to take even greater risks than they are doing now is a prospect too frightening to contemplate. However, it must be confronted, or the fate of the 298 people on Flight MH17 may become that of humanity at large. ..."
Jul 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

Four years ago, on 17 July 2014, in the midst of a civil war raging in eastern Ukraine, Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17 was destroyed with all 298 passengers and crew. On 25 May last, the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) entrusted with the criminal investigation of the downing and composed of the Netherlands, Australia, Belgium, Malaysia and paradoxically, given its possible involvement, Ukraine, presented its second progress report. Like the first report in September 2016, it took the form of a press conference, with video animations supporting the investigation's findings.

This time there was even less to report; the main conclusion was that elements from the Russian 53rd Buk missile brigade were the culprits, a claim already made by the London-based investigative group Bellingcat two years before.

In February 2016 that assertion had still been dismissed as unfit for evidence by the Dutch chief prosecutor on the JIT, Fred Westerbeke, in a letter to victims' relatives. How can it possibly have become the core component of the case for the prosecution two years and two months later?

The JIT press conference was immediately followed by a formal declaration on the part of the Dutch and Australian governments that held Russia responsible. However, JIT member Malaysia dissociated itself from the accusation, whilst Belgium has remained silent.

The obviously over-hasty conclusion, on the heels of the alleged Skripal nerve gas incident in Salisbury and the likewise contested Syrian government gas attack on jihadist positions in Douma, all point in the same direction: Putin's Russia must be kept under fire and there is no time to wait for a court verdict.

In my book Flight MH17, Ukraine and the New Cold War. Prism of Disaster (Manchester University Press), I have refrained from entering the slippery terrain of making claims about who pulled the trigger, intentionally or by accident, in the late afternoon of 17 July, or even which type of weapon was used. For the downing of the Malaysian plane has become part of a propaganda war that was already heating up prior to the catastrophe. Instead the book is about what we do know about the events surrounding it, in the preceding months, weeks, and days, indeed even on the day itself. Subsequent events have only underlined that it is this context that lends meaning to the tragedy.

Refocusing US Supremacy After the Soviet Collapse

Today, Western imperialism projects its global power, as far as capital is concerned, primarily from the perspective of speculative, financial asset investment. Long gone are the days of class and international compromise forced upon it after World War Two. Instead, the predatory instincts of dominant financial capital require forcibly opening up all states for commodification and exploitation. Given the global spread of product and commodity chains, the continued flow of profits to the West cannot be taken for granted as long as effective state sovereignty elsewhere persists. For the liberal, Anglophone heartland of capital, 'defence' is therefore not merely, or even primarily, a matter of upholding the territorial integrity of the states constituting it, but keeping open the arterial system of the global economy and maintaining the centrality of the West. Regime change is a logical corollary, and from this perspective we must view the coup in Ukraine in February 2014 and all ensuing events, including the downing of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17.

Right from the Soviet collapse in 1991, the US global perspective was articulated in several new strategic doctrines. The first and perhaps foundational one is the Wolfowitz Doctrine, named after Paul Wolfowitz, undersecretary of defence in the Bush Sr. administration, who commissioned a Defence Planning Guidance for Fiscal 1994-'99 (DPG) of 1992. It proclaims the United States the world's sole superpower, which must remain ahead of all possible contenders in arms technology and never again accept military parity, as with the USSR during the Cold War. The newly self-confident European Union, too, was obliquely warned that the US alone would handle global policing.

Additional doctrines, specifying on which grounds armed US intervention might be undertaken and justified, added elements such as humanitarian intervention (a Carnegie Endowment report of 1992, Self-Determination in the New World Order ); it was applied in Yugoslavia and again in Libya. Next, the'War on Terror', originally floated at Israeli Likud/US Neocon conferences between 1979 and 1984, was revived after the collapse of the USSR as the 'Clash of Civilizations' by Cold War strategist Samuel Huntington; Afghanistan and Iraq stand as monuments of the application of this doctrine. Finally, Zbigniew Brzezinski's The Grand Chessboard of 1997 specifically dealt with reorganising the former USSR, including Ukraine.

Through the different episodes, NATO was transformed into a global policing structure serving the interests of Atlantic capital. 'Out of area operations', unthinkable in the Yalta epoch, were first tried out against the Bosnian Serbs in the mid-1990s. The enlargement of the alliance into the former Soviet bloc, which began around that time too, was obviously motivated to prevent European departures from US tutelage, hence its bold forward surge. Already in 1994, Ukraine became the first former Soviet republic to join the Partnership for Peace, the newly created waiting room for NATO membership. To quell Russian concerns about the advancing West, the NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997 laid down that no nuclear weapons and permanent troop deployments would take place in new member states. Yet Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Moldova not long afterwards joined a low-key organisation of former Soviet republics (after the initials, GUAM), another oblique link up with NATO.

Mobilising Georgia and Ukraine against Resurgent Russia

Russia under Yeltsin had effectively surrendered its sovereignty to transnational capital and the West and as a result was left a social and economic disaster zone. Under his successor, Vladimir Putin, the country began to mutate back to a society led by a directive state, assisted by rising oil prices. After the United States unilaterally withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002 and announced a missile defence system deployed in the CzechRepublic, Poland, and Rumania, Russia shifted to a more robust international position. The Anglo-American invasion of Iraq on a false pretext made abundantly clear that the West was abandoning the rules of the post-war international order. 'Democracy promotion' intended to prevent national sovereignty from being mobilised against Western global governance, was now made a priority. The 'Rose Revolution' in Georgia in 2003 and the 'Orange Revolution' a year later in Ukraine, marked the lengths to which the United States was willing to go.

Yet even a colour revolution means little if there is no accompanying make-over of the fundamental state/society relation. Hence, the incoming policy planning director at the US State Department, Stanford professor Stephen Krasner, and Carlos Pascual, former US ambassador in Kiev, developed a comprehensive regime change doctrine in 2004. This would prove a key element in the subsequent Ukraine intervention. To ensure that countries incorporated into the US-NATO sphere of influence, really became neoliberal client states, Pascual and Krasner devised a strategy for preventive intervention with a rulebook listing the measures by which 'market democracy' was to be established. Ukraine was a key target and battleground, because by now, Russia was beginning to contest Western forward pressure.

At the Munich Security Conference in January 2007, Putin reminded his audience of the promises made to Gorbachev in 1991 not to expand the Atlantic alliance and warned that further attempts at enlargement (the Baltic states having been included in 2004) would imply great risks. Yet NATO and the EU were inexorably pressing forward. At the Bucharest NATO summit in April 2008 the Americans made the offer of NATO membership to Georgia and Ukraine, only to have the offer vetoed by Germany and France. Possibly to force the issue, the pro-Western president brought to power by the Rose Revolution in Georgia, Mikheil Saakashvili, armed and encouraged by the US and Israel, later that year embarked on a military adventure to recapture the breakaway province of South Ossetia. It ended in a complete debacle, as a Russian army stood ready in North Ossetia to deal the invaders a major, if very costly, blow. This, then, was what Richard Sakwa calls, 'the war to stop NATO enlargement'. From now on, every post-Soviet republic tempted to join the Atlantic alliance would have to reckon with Russian protection for groups resisting such integration, irrespective of whether it concerned actual Russians or any other of the almost two hundred nationalities of the former USSR.

The EU-Russian Energy Equation and Ukraine

The gas from Russia that feeds Europe today was discovered back in the 1960s; the Friendship oil pipeline was built in 1964 and the Soyuz, Urengoi and Yamal pipelines followed after West Germany started purchasing Soviet gas. The link-up culminated in 1980 with the contract for a gas pipeline from Urengoi in north Siberia to Bavaria, signed by a heavy-industry consortium headed by Deutsche Bank.

After the collapse of the USSR, Russian gas had to pass through the pipeline grid of independent Ukraine, which in the meantime had become the prey of rival clans of oligarchs. For most of them, gas was the key source of rapid enrichment -- directly, as in the case of subsequent prime minister Yuliya Timoshenko, 'the Gas Princess', or indirectly, by supplying steel pipes for gas transport, as in the case of president Leonid Kuchma's son-in-law, Victor Pinchuk, the 'Pipeline King'. The economic mismanagement and infighting of the different oligarchic clans in Ukraine led to payment arrears and repeated shutdowns of the gas supply from Russia, and Gazprom, the state-owned Russian gas company, early on began to look for ways to bypass the Ukrainian grid.

After Putin had come to power, he disciplined the Russian oligarchs as part of the restoration of state sovereignty. Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the energy oligarch and richest of all Russian billionaires at the time, at the time was buying support in the Duma to build a trans-Siberian pipeline to China; whilst negotiating with ExxonMobil and Chevron about US participation in his Yukos concern, which he planned to merge with Sibneft into the world's largest oil company. In 2005 he was convicted to a long prison sentence. Yukos was brought back into the Russian patrimony via a proxy construction involving state-owned Rosneft and Gazprom, as part of broader subordination of the economy to the state.

Gazprom meanwhile began building alliances to avoid future disruption of supplies via Ukraine and secure its European market. In 2005 it agreed with the outgoing government of Gerhard Schröder to build a pipeline across the Baltic directly to Germany, 'Nord Stream', with a consortium of German companies. Schröder was made the chairman of the board of the joint venture, Achimgaz, and two years later, a South Stream pipeline across the Black Sea to Bulgaria was contracted with ENI of Italy. It was to be extended into south-eastern Europe as far as Austria. In this way Gazprom and the Russian state were outmanoeuvring various EU projects for pipelines aimed at by-passing Russia. Indeed it was the EU's plan to use a Nabucco pipeline across Turkey to connect to the Caspian energy reserves that prompted the $40 billion South Stream project. Romano Prodi, prime minister of Italy, who first discussed South Stream with Putin in late 2006, was offered the chairmanship, which he declined, perhaps in the knowledge the project would become highly contested.

The Eurasian connection by now posed a direct threat to the cohesion of the enlarged Atlantic bloc. Besides Nord Stream and South Stream, Gazprom's collaboration with NIOC of Iran and a joint venture with ENI in Libya set all alarm bells ringing in Washington. Already in May 2006, a few months after the gas shutdown to Ukraine, the US Senate unanimously adopted a resolution calling on NATO to protect the energy security of its members and have it develop a diversification strategy away from Russia. Senator Richard Lugar in a much-noted speech prior to the NATO summit in Riga, Latvia, in November 2006, argued in favour of designating the manipulation of the energy supply as a 'weapon' that can activate Article 5 of the NATO treaty (common defence).

In a report to the European Parliament in 2008, the director of the EurasianPolicyCenter of the Hudson Institute in the US recommended that the EU should assist in liberalising and modernising the Ukrainian grid instead of supporting South Stream. Tension in the Black Sea area, her report noted candidly, might serve the purpose of blocking that pipeline altogether. However, after the 2010 election of president Victor Yanukovych, the front man of the powerful eastern and southern oligarchs, the lease of Russia's Crimean naval base at Sebastopol, home of its Black Sea fleet, had been extended to 2042, so the prospects for stirring up unrest there were mitigated by Moscow's enduring naval preponderance.

Regime Change in Kiev

One aspect of the resurgence of a sovereign Russia was the plan for a Eurasian economic union to rebuild relations with former Soviet republics (Ukraine obtained observer status early on). The EU's Eastern Partnership was a direct response. It was offered to former Soviet republics in 2008, in a gesture that signalled that Europe now effectively acted as a subcontractor to the larger anti-Russian design drafted in Washington. Concretely, the EU offered Ukraine and other former Soviet republics an Association Agreement that also included provisions for the country's alignment on NATO security policy, besides a neoliberal make-over in the spirit of the Krasner-Pascual doctrine. The envisaged reforms would be devastating for the country's existing power structure, not least for the Donbass oligarchs whose front man was Yanukovych. Their heavy industry assets would be swept away by EU competition, the country turned into an agricultural supplier, and Russian gas cut off.

Hence, when both the EU and Russia sought to win over Yanukovych to join their respective blocs and Brussels ruled out the triangular arrangement by which the Ukrainian president had hoped to postpone the choice, he could not but step back from signing the EU Association Agreement in November 2013 and accept a Russian counteroffer. By then, 'Europe' had become a code word for an end to oligarchic rapaciousness, in which Yanukovych and his sons had become involved as well. The president's decision triggered mass demonstrations and occupations, which this time included an armed insurrection by Ukrainian ultra-nationalists in the historically anti-Russian west of the country. It created the space for actual fascists to hijack the protests and prepare a coup. By their use of deadly force at the Maidan central square (ascribed by the coup plotters and in the West to the riot police), the Ukrainian ultras demonstrated they were ready to kill their own compatriots to achieve their aims.

To prevent the situation from getting out of hand completely, the foreign ministers of Germany, France and Poland flew to Kiev on 20 February 2014. However, whilst they negotiated a deal with Yanukovych and the opposition, the US and other NATO ambassadors met with Andriy Parubiy, the co-founder of the fascist party of Ukraine and former head of its militia, Patriot of Ukraine . Parubiy, today the speaker of the Kiev parliament, was in command of the armed gangs at the Maidan; two days later these took power in the capital, installing a government of Ukrainian nationalist stripe, selected by US diplomats. Parubiy was appointed secretary of the National Security and Defence Council (NSDC), a key post overseeing all military and intelligence operations, which he continued to hold until three weeks after the downing of MH17. With the Russian-Ukrainian half of the country effectively disenfranchised, the coup was responded to by the secession of Crimea and an armed insurrection in the Donbass. Stirrings of revolt in Odessa and Mariupol would be suppressed with deadly violence, in which Parubiy and other far right figures were directly involved.

Confronting the BRICS in Ukraine

From late March onwards the war party in the United States and NATO began to elaborate a strategy that would make Ukraine the testing ground for a trial of strength with Russia and China. The secession of Crimea and its re-incorporation into the Russian Federation was exploited to evoke the spectre of an impending Russian invasion on several fronts. General Philip Breedlove, commander of US Eucom (European Command, one of nine regional US military commands spanning the globe) and NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe (Saceur), coordinated the Western position with General Wesley Clark, a former NATO Saceur at the time of the Yugoslavia wars. Clark was already advising Kiev forces in eastern Ukraine before the Donbass had actually risen in revolt. On 12April he asked Breedlove whether the NATO commander could not arrange a statement blaming Moscow for the violence because ' if the Ukrainians lose control of the narrative , the Russians will see it as an open door'. Clark then elaborated on the general geopolitical situation, giving further insights into why the war party in the US believed that Ukraine was to be 'held' and chosen as a battle ground to confront Russia and China. No time was wasted on market democracy here. Claiming that 'Putin has read US inaction in Georgia and Syria as US "weakness",' Clark went on to explain that

China is watching closely. China will have four aircraft carriers and airspace dominance in the Western Pacific within 5 years, if current trends continue. And if we let Ukraine slide away, it definitely raises the risks of conflict in the Pacific. For, China will ask, would the US then assert itself for Japan, Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, the South China Sea? If Russia takes Ukraine, Belarus will join the Eurasian Union, and, presto, the Soviet Union (in another name) will be back. Neither the Baltics nor the Balkans will easily resist the political disruptions empowered by a resurgent Russia. And what good is a NATO "security guarantee" against internal subversion? And then the US will face a much stronger Russia, a crumbling NATO, and [a] major challenge in the Western Pacific. Far easier to [hold] the line now, in Ukraine than elsewhere, later .

On the weekend of 13 to 14 April, CIA Director John Brennan was in the Ukrainian capital. The Anti-Terrorist Operation (ATO, so called because the use of military force within the country is only warranted under that label) began right after Brennan's visit; Parubiy sent out a Twitter message on the 15th that veterans of the Maidan uprising were poised to join the fight. Since NATO had earlier implored Yanukovych not to use force against (armed) demonstrators, Moscow now asked the alliance to restrain the coup leaders in turn. But according to foreign minister Lavrov, the answer they got was that 'NATO would ask them to use force proportionately'.

In fact even the oligarch, Petro Poroshenko, elected president on 25 May 2014 to provide a veneer of legitimacy to the coup regime, proved unable to restrain the hardliners. On 30 June, following a four-hour NSDC meeting with Parubiy, interior minister Avakov, and others whose armed followers were demonstrating outside, Poroshenko declared that the ceasefire would be lifted and a new offensive launched. Three days later NATO naval manoeuvres in the Black Sea commenced with US participation and with electronic warfare a key component. On the ground, Kiev's forces made rapid progress, apparently drawing a ring around the large rebel city of Donetsk. NATO had its own concerns: an upcoming summit in Wales in September was expected to capitalise on the trope of a 'Russian invasion', vital after the Afghanistan debacle, and dovetailing with the emerging contest with the BRICS bloc.

The BRICS, coined first as a banker's gimmick, were never more than a loose collection of '(re-) emerging economies', but from Washington's perspective, sovereign entities not submitting to neoliberal global governance are unacceptable. So when on 16 July, the BRICS heads of state, hosted by the Brazilian president, Dilma Rousseff (removed by a rightwing conspiracy in May 2016), signed the statute establishing a New Development Bank, or BRICS bank, as a direct challenge to the US and Western-dominated World Bank and IMF, the US imposed new sanctions on Russia over Ukraine, specifically targeting the energy link with the EU. The creation of an equivalent of the World Bank with a capital of $100 billion with a reserve currency pool of the same size (an equivalent of the IMF), laid the groundwork of a contender pole in the global political economy challenging the West's austerity regime frontally -- or so it seemed at the time.

Still in Brazil before flying back to Moscow, Russian president Putin on the fringes of the football world cup finals also agreed with German Chancellor Angela Merkel to pursue a comprehensive Land for gas deal. Its tentative provisions included normalising the status of Crimea in exchange for a massive economic rehabilitation plan and a gas price rebate for Ukraine. However, a special European Council meeting convened on the 16th could not reach agreement on whether the EU should follow the American lead this time, since countries with export interests to Russia and dependent on its gas, were balking. Instead, the Council stressed the EU's commitment 'to pursue trilateral talks on the conditions of gas supply from the Russian Federation to Ukraine' in order to 'safeguard the security of supply and transit of natural gas through Ukraine.'

The Downing of Flight MH17 and South Stream

The downing of MH17 on 17 July changed all that. As I said above, who did it and how remains obscure, although there are several pursued by people familiar with local circumstances, or revealed by insiders who know who which military assets were operating that day -- but all that remains inconclusive. The official reports by the Dutch Safety Board and the JIT may be conveniently dismissed although the DSB rightly pointed at the questionable decision by Kiev to allow civilian planes to fly over a war zone. However, irrespective of the actual perpetrator, and whether it was an intentional act or an accident, there is no doubt about the West's intent to exploit the event to the maximum.

Former secretary of state and then-presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton in a TV interview on the 18th called for making 'Russia pay the price' once its culpability had been established. Her to-do list for the EU included, one, 'toughen sanctions'; two, find alternatives to Gazprom, and third, 'do more in concert with us to support the Ukrainians'. The 'Land for gas' negotiations were shelved and on the 22nd Europe dropped the remaining hesitations when it underwrote the US sanctions targeting Russia's role as an energy supplier. As Mark Leonard, founder and director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, noted in a newspaper interview a year later, 'without MH17 it would have been pretty difficult to find sufficient support for the increased sanctions on the Russian economy' .

In 2009 the EU had introduced a new energy policy, dubbed a 'Third Energy Package'. It does not permit gas to be transported to the EU by the company producing it, effectively forcing Gazprom to sell even the gas piped through the Ukrainian grid to other companies before it could enter the EU. Nord Stream had still been exempted from EU competition rules, but the projected South Stream was not, never mind that most contracts with Gazprom had been signed before the Third Energy Package came into force. Even at the time of the Kiev coup, commentators wondered to what extent shale gas from the US might be used to offset Russian deliveries. LNG facilities planned in Florida and Maryland were projected to serve the European market at Gazprom's expense, a prospect meanwhile far more realistic.

The Crimean secession and incorporation into the Russian Federation obviously played its own role here. Crimea is a historically Russian region; having been assigned to Ukraine by a whim of Soviet party leader Khrushchev in 1954, it never reconciled itself to being part of an independent Ukraine. After the nationalist coup in late February, the status of the Russian naval base in Sebastopol was in the balance. In 1991, the Black Sea had been a Soviet/bloc inland sea, with one NATO country (Turkey) bordering it. Now there were two more NATO/EU countries and two pro-Western, aspiring NATO members on its littoral. So when one week after the coup, three former Ukrainian Presidents, Kravchuk, Kuchma, and Yushchenko, called on the coup government in Kiev to cancel the agreement under which the lease of Sebastopol, home to the Russian Black Sea fleet, had been extended to 2042, the question of who would be able to project naval power over the Black Sea became acute. The question now was whether Russia would be able to provide cover for a large-scale project such as South Stream, or not.

South Stream itself came into the firing line directly. The European Parliament, which never raised the issue of why the February agreement with Yanukovych the EU brokered had been sidelined by the coup, on 17 April 2014 adopted a non-binding resolution opposing the South Stream gas pipeline and recommended a search for alternative sources of gas. On 28 April, the United States imposed a ban on business transactions within its territory on seven Russian officials, including Igor Sechin, the CEO of Rosneft, the Russian state oil company, as well as Gennady Timchenko, whose Volga Group controls Stroytransgaz, the company entrusted with building the Bulgarian section of South Stream. Nevertheless the Bulgarian parliament approved South Stream two weeks after the reincorporation of Crimea, circumventing the EU's anti-trust legislation by renaming the pipeline a 'sea-land connection'.The European Commission then instructed Bulgaria to stop work on South Stream and proceeded to cut off tens of millions of much-needed regional development funds, whilst the US ambassador warned Bulgarian companies against working with Timchenko. A final visit of US Senators John McCain and Ron Johnson, in combination with other punitive measures then led to the cancellation in early June. As Eric Draitser commented at the time, 'South Stream has become one of the primary battlegrounds in the economic war that the West is waging against Russia'.

The downing of Flight MH17 also definitively sealed the fate of South Stream. Russian banks financing the project, led by Gazprombank, were hit by new sanctions, so that the necessary capital could no longer be raised internationally. Putin earlier had hinted at moving the transit of gas for the EU to non-European countries; in August, it was reported there was a Plan B in the works to export via Turkey. On 1 December 2014, during a state visit to Ankara, the Russian president announced that in light of Western sanctions and the refusal of construction permits in the EU, South Stream would be replaced by a 'Turkish Stream' pipeline, besides the existing Blue Stream link. However, in November 2015, a Turkish F-16 shot down a Russian fighter jet over northern Syria, throwing relations between Moscow and Ankara into a deep crisis and entailing the cancellation of Turkish Stream. This was only overcome after the July 2016 coup attempt against Erdoğan, in which Russia sided with the Turkish president, possibly even warning him in advance. Since the F-16 that shot down the Russian jet was part of a pro-NATO unit based at Inçirlik airbase that took part in the coup attempt, the incident over Syria would appear to fit in a framework that may also have decided the fate of Flight MH17: a provocation to throw relations with Russia into disarray, but we don't know for sure.

Regime Change in Moscow?

The MH17 disaster occurred in the context of a deep crisis, in which capitalist discipline as imposed from its historic epicentre in the West, has become primarily predatory, relying to an ever-greater extent on violence.

Speculative financial operations in combination with the 'War on Terror' have spread economic risk and repression at home, war and regime change abroad. Human survival itself has been turned into a global gamble played out over the head of the affected populations for private gain.

The West, led by the effectively bankrupt United States, increasingly relies on force to sabotage the formation of any alternative, something its own social formation can no longer bring forth. Even the most promising, potentially revolutionary IT and media developments coming out of Silicon Valley have been mortgaged by a planetary project of communications surveillance to safeguard US imperial positions.

Back in the 1980s, when it launched the second Cold War, the Reagan administration intended to destabilise the Soviet bloc and bring about regime change in Moscow. This is also the aim of the current, new Cold War. A 2015 Chatham House report, 'The Russian Challenge', discusses this in some detail. Although it concedes that the West cannot have an interest in Russia sliding into complete anarchy, neither should the Putin presidency be protected 'against change, whether managed or violent '. Therefore, 'whether Putin was ousted by an internal coup, by illness or by popular unrest , it would nevertheless be sensible for the West to give further thought to how it might deal with the consequences of regime change in Russia.'

Effective communication with the Russian people and the defence of human values beforehand would be essential for Western credibility Planning for the future ought, lastly, to cover the scenarios from changes of leadership within the current structures, to the emergence of a group ready to pursue structural reform in some sort of accountable dialogue with the Russian population, to regime collapse .

The president of the National Endowment for Democracy, Carl Gershman, in a piece for the Washington Post in October 2016 suggested launching a new, sustained anti-Putin campaign, for which the contract killing of the journalist, Anna Politkovskaya, ten years earlier, might be used as a vignette.

For such a campaign, George Soros' Open Society Foundation can be trusted to have elaborated the 'civil society'/colour revolution scenarios, whilst identifying the groups that might be mobilised for their execution. The OSF plan of action for 2014-17, titled Russia Project Strategy , identifies Russian intellectuals active in Western academic and opinion networks, the Russian gay movement, and others as potential levers for civil society protest against the conservative bloc in power in Moscow. From the OSF documents hacked by the CyberBerkut collective, Alexei Navalny's Anti-Corruption Foundation emerges as the key beneficiary, and discussion portals and liberal media such as Echo of Moscow radio station, RBK news agency, and the newspaper Vedomosti, as the preferred channels to disseminate content.

There is no need to repeat that all this is part a powerful offensive to derail the loose contender bloc around China and Russia, which had constituted itself in the face of Western aggressiveness and crisis. The seizure of power in Ukraine as well as the secession of Crimea and the civil war in the east, which has meanwhile cost the lives of more than 13,000 people and displaced a million, as well as economic warfare against Russia by the US and the EU, have brought the danger of a large European war several steps closer. Whether the actual downing of Flight MH17 was an intentional, premeditated act or an accident, whether it involved a jet attack, an anti-aircraft missile, or both, ultimately cannot be established with certainty. Yet both the NATO war party and the coup regime in Kiev, which on many occasions has demonstrated that its ultra-nationalist and fascist antecedents are very much alive, would have been perfectly capable of such an act and had the means for it. Most importantly, they had the motive. Those in power in Kiev had several times already attempted to draw Moscow into the civil war, directly and through a NATO intervention. If this indeed was their aim, it would also have served the Atlantic bloc's determined and long-standing commitment to force continental Europe into an antagonistic relation with Russia.

In the current global conjuncture, even the tentative contender coalition combining the Eurasian Union, the BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, constitutes an acute danger to a capitalist West in crisis. Whether the United States and NATO would therefore also be willing to take even greater risks than they are doing now is a prospect too frightening to contemplate. However, it must be confronted, or the fate of the 298 people on Flight MH17 may become that of humanity at large.

Kees van der Pijl is a Fellow, Centre for Global Political Economy and Professor Emeritus of the School of Global Studies at the University of Sussex.

[Jul 09, 2018] Leaked Chinese Memo Warns Of Thucydides Trap

Jul 07, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

According to Bank of America's Mike Hartnett , the "trade war" of 2018 should be recognized for what it really is: the first stage of a new arms race between the US & China to reach national superiority in technology over the longer-term via Quantum Computing, Artificial Intelligence, Hypersonic Warplanes, Electronic Vehicles, Robotics, and Cyber-Security.

This is hardly a secret, as the China strategy is laid out in its "Made in China 2025" blueprint: It aims to transform "China's industrial base" into a "smart manufacturing" powerhouse via increase competitiveness and eroding of tech leadership of industrial trading rivals, e.g. Germany, USA, South Korea; this is precisely what Peter Navarro has been raging against and hoping to intercept China's ascent early on when it's still feasible.

The China First strategy will be met head-on by an America First strategy. Hence the "arms race" in tech spending which in both countries is intimately linked with defense spending. Note military spending by the US and China is forecast by the IMF to rise substantially in coming decades, but the stunner is that by 2050, China is set to overtake the US, spending $4tn on its military while the US is $1 trillion less, or $3tn.

This means that some time around 2038, roughly two decades from now, China will surpass the US in military spending, and become the world's dominant superpower not only in population and economic growth - China is set to overtake the US economy by no later than 2032 - but in military strength and global influence as well. And, as Thucydides Trap clearly lays out , that kind of unprecedented superpower transition - one in which the world's reserve currency moves from state A to state B - always takes place in the context of a war.

Which explains BofA's long-term strategic recommendation: " We believe investors should thus own global defense, tech & cybersecurity stocks, particularly companies seen as "national security champions" over the next 10-year s ."

And in April , an unclassified 50-page transcript on Advance Policy Questions warned that Beijing has the capability and capacity to control the South China Sea "in all scenarios short of war with the United States."

In written testimony to the US Senate Armed Services Committee, Adm. Davidson said China is seeking "a long-term strategy to reduce the U.S. access and influence in the region," which he claims the U.S. must maintain its critical military assets in the area. He views China as "no longer a rising power," but rather a "great power and peer competitor to the United States in the region." Adm. Davidson agreed with President Trump's recent assessment on China, calling the country a "rival."

In response to questions about how the U.S. Navy in the South China Sea should handle the increased military presence in the region. Adm. Davidson advocated for a sustained U.S. military approach, with the increased investment in new high-tech weaponry.

"US operations in the South China Sea -- to include freedom of navigation operations -- must remain regular and routine. In my view, any decrease in air or maritime presence would likely reinvigorate PRC expansion."

And in regards to the type of weapons, Adm. Davidson outlined some critical technologies for immediate investment:

" A more effective Joint Force requires sustained investment in the following critical areas: undersea warfare, critical munitions stockpiles, standoff weapons (Air-Air, Air-Surface, Surface-Surface, Anti-Ship), intermediate range cruise missiles, low cost / high capacity cruise missile defense, hypersonic weapons, air and surface lift capacity, cyber capabilities, air-air refueling capacity, and resilient communication and navigation systems. "

Adm. Davidson's testimony to the US Senate Armed Services Committee, provided us with the much-needed knowledge that American exceptionalism is quickly deteriorating in the South China Sea after more than seventy years of control. The transcript reveals how America's military will continue to drain the taxpayers, as it will need an increasing amount of investments and military assets in the Eastern Hemisphere to protect whatever control it has left. The clash of exceptionalism between Beijing and Washington is well underway, will war come next?

Vote up! 35 Vote down! 54

Harry Lightning -> peopledontwanttruth Fri, 07/06/2018 - 17:17 Permalink

I am waiting for the typical response from the anti Jew ZH crowd, to the effect that there won't be a wart in China until Jews want authentic Chinese food on Sunday nights rather than the American Chinese food.

More to the point, this article is informative but looks at the trees without considering the forest. China has a number of problems ahead in the not too distant future that will sink their battleships and ruin their plans for an expanded military that can fight wars.

First of all, they are in the early stages of seeing their export empire get scaled back considerably. First the tariffs will take a bite out of their income, then the inevitable global recession, which will be as deep if not deeper than in 2009 and last longer as Central Banks don't have the bullets this time to save the financial system. On top of that, production costs inside China have been rising so much that their huge price advantage over developed countries is shrinking to the point where outsourcing to China does not return an adequate enough amount of profit to justify the outsourcing. In addition, China has some very large debts to the external world, and the accruing interest over time will take a progressively larger bite out of Chinese profits in the future.

And then, in the final analysis, China's size precludes it from getting involved in a war. Because of their huge population, the only way to defeat the Chinese at war is to nuke the rice out of them. As there are so many delivery systems that can deliver nuclear payloads today, the Chinese will not be able to defend against such an attack, and the results would be horrific.

The Chinese are practical people who have little history as war mongers. Its totally out of their character to be acting in such a militaristic way. They are doing it to play the part of the up and coming global power who uses its economic might to project a military strength. Its all for show. The Chinese do not want a large scale military war with a significant world power, and they will not cause such to happen. The best course for China is to take its export profits and start developing the interior of its country.

HRH of Aquitaine 2.0 -> Harry Lightning Fri, 07/06/2018 - 17:25 Permalink

I agree, this article doesn't discuss the increasing fragility of the Chinese market. A great deal of fraud and government manipulation underlies the Chinese economy, including debts which are much greater than those of the US. Throw in leverage that is based, oftentimes, on nothing.

And there is always the Mandate of Heaven. Empires rise and fall based on that and no Chinese leader, not even the commies, ignore that.

Jim in MN -> HRH of Aquitaine 2.0 Fri, 07/06/2018 - 17:41 Permalink

I always said, we'll only know when China enters a real economic slump when we see the smoke rising from the cities on the satellite pics.

inosent -> Jim in MN Fri, 07/06/2018 - 17:59 Permalink

From a purely military and strategic point of view, the USA is extremely vulnerable. It doesn't matter how much money Trump flushes down the toilet to the mega corp war machine, what is missing is a unified nation, under God (let's call it the Highest Good that each person seeks in all good faith on a daily basis). This nation is badly divided, and considerably weakened by the third world invasion. The niggas, la raza, antifa, the luciferians, the asians, they won't show up to fight, nor will the fairies and all their homosexual behaviorist sympathizers. And neither will the feminists and social justice warriors, and nor will the rank and file of the demonrat party. And neither will the hollyscum freaks, and all their sycophantic off shoots.

Did I miss anybody?

This nation has no soul. It is a place inhabited by narcissists, nihilists, the decadent and self indulgent, the immoral, and blasphemous, lovers of self and disloyal to everything and everyone except their carnal appetite.

The nation is overrun by the psychologically insane (definitely from a foreign power's point of view, whose mouths are drooling at the prospect of taking the nation for their own), and a government that promotes the insanity.

The only ppl left that might fight will be the handful of hired mercenaries already on the payroll, but they are only a few in number compared to the 2 billion Chinese. What's left of who else might fight are ppl who hate the government because it is a satanic institution riddled with jews who control it and wish for its total annihilation.

You can't save a country like this from an external attack.

And the US has no allies. Push come to shove, all those 'allies' will just step away and watch the destruction of the USA from afar. The jew can find another 'New York' to infest, or, like they did in Poland, made nice with Hitler once they saw Hitler was the man of the hour - the jew will do the same with the Chinese.

In a country where its own declaration of independence is determined to be 'hate speech' by an American corporation, where the nation is so weak as to not obliterate this corporation (fakebook), you tell me, exactly where is the core strength of the nation to defend itself?

I don't see it.

Don't be surprised to wake up one day to nukes and other sorts of bombs and missiles. Hated by all, totally divided within, controlled by lucifer, the USA is ripe for the picking - low lying fruit.

Rapunzal -> inosent Fri, 07/06/2018 - 18:12 Permalink

All wars are bankers wars.

Tarzan -> Manthong Fri, 07/06/2018 - 21:43 Permalink

Which explains BofA's long-term strategic recommendation: " We believe investors should thus own global defense, tech & cybersecurity stocks, particularly companies seen as "national security champions" over the next 10-year s ."

The Bankers recommend you send them your money, so you can pay for their war. Isn't that nice of them.

MoreFreedom -> spanish inquisition Fri, 07/06/2018 - 21:35 Permalink

Historically Japan is China's rival. The US spends about 2.8X more on the military, but it's being wasted meddling in oppressive countries civil wars. Our economy (if Chinese numbers are believable) is about 60% bigger than China's. And as others have said, there's a lot of corruption and debt in China. They also have their MIC. But most importantly, I don't believe Xi wants to get into a war, especially with the US. It's too destructive, and they prefer to win in the economic marketplace.

Best Satan in Town -> MoreFreedom Sat, 07/07/2018 - 00:00 Permalink

Maybe the US's military spending is completely wasteful, but maybe it isn't. What if the reason for our invasion of middle eastern countries served a vital national interest (at least, in the empire's eyes) such that they were able to shore up support for the current global monetary paradigm (the petrodollar) and also do the bidding of Israel in the Middle East? I mean, we must remember back in the early aughts when Saddam threatened to stop accepting dollars and instead accept euros and also gold I believe. This was back when the US was much more feared and respected. We did this to ourselves to some degree, but also it is the cycle of empire. Nothing is the same forever.

As bad as we may think the US's global leadership is (and I'm not making any apologies for it) imagine when China assumes this position how they would act? The world under Chinese global governance would probably be much more authoritarian and much less free. The US is trying to continue the last vestiges of it's republican heritage at home while practicing Empire abroad. Hoping to keep the current global system intact. History shows us that this is a losing battle. I believe that the US will always be a great power if it's constituted the same as it is now. Maybe after the mantle of world hegemony is passed, the US will revert back to how it was pre-WW2. By all accounts, economically, socially, in terms of technological innovation, we were the envy of the world and everybody wanted to be part of it. I would love to see us return back to that state.

Alex Lemas -> Rapunzal Fri, 07/06/2018 - 19:44 Permalink

Or as Sydney Riley said, "all wars start in the board rooms of banks".

mkkby -> wafm Fri, 07/06/2018 - 22:55 Permalink

China's economy is fragile. Just the TALK of tariffs has brought their stock market down 25%. US still at record highs. Look how every little tick up or down in their currency causes instability. Yet simpletons here think they can just wave their hands and become the reserve currency. It's nuts.

China is still a turd world country with a few showcase modern cities. They still have 600 million dirt poor slaves working for a daily bowl of rice.

If they upgrade their military, in 2 decades they might challenge japan or south korea. Right now either of them would stomp china flat without US help. And Trump is on to their tricks. The trade war will bring back not only the jobs, but the investment capital that they need for modernization. China fucked up bigly by being too greedy and arrogant. Now they will see their world domination dreams fade away.

COSMOS -> mkkby Sat, 07/07/2018 - 00:35 Permalink

Stock market shmarket, given the multicultural genetic crap flushing the USA down the drain, my money is on the Chinese long term. They have staying power of a few thousand year history.

the artist -> Buckaroo Banzai Fri, 07/06/2018 - 22:00 Permalink

Bush-Clinton-Obama were happy to sell out to the Chinese. That party is now over. There is a new crew in charge. I don't know all the players besides USA and Russia but China is not invited.

The name of the game now is tech isolation of the Dragon.

atlas_crumbles -> inosent Fri, 07/06/2018 - 18:50 Permalink

I feel the same way. Trump being elected has only bought a little more time.

rtb61 -> freedommusic Fri, 07/06/2018 - 22:01 Permalink

Would those leaks have been anything like the US leaks, not so leaky. Leaks a way of making a public statement, whilst neither confirming nor denying the content of that statement.

The way for the government of China to issue a warning, without issuing a warning. No joke the game they play is one of autocrats, they have no qualms about taking out corporate leaders, they are not a part of government in an espionage assassination sense.

Many main land China businesses will have little problem with paying bounties on the random deaths of US troops when the US interferes with their business via criminal methods, fake terrorism et al. It will get pretty messy and the message from China, yeah they know the US will not attack them but use terrorist like tactics to damage them and they have no qualms about engaging in similar tactics (not the government, just corporate executives who know the government will not act against them unless they fuck up in a big way).

They know more about what is going on in the US deep state and US shadow government, than those entities realise. Always keep in mind, the punishment for failure at the high end of town in China, is to be executed for corruption, no fucking about, that is what they do to their own, how do you think they will treat others. They know, they absolutely know, the US will not attack directly, as a result the endless yapping dog screams about attacking (played that card way, way too often) and when it comes to a dirty war, China will win because they will target the real heads of the snake, not the sellout empty suit politicians or equally worthless political appointees.

Honestly I am kind of comfortable with the various psychopaths in suits running corporations 'er' sanctioning each other (as long as they avoid collateral damage), US executives travelling abroad will need to be quite careful if they are playing attack China game for global domination, the only thing they will end up dominating is a very tiny plot of land. The Chinese are very skilled herbalists be careful what you eat.

economicmorphine -> falconflight Fri, 07/06/2018 - 20:28 Permalink

A society that never existed. America's great strength has always been (and still is) geography. We have the best farmland in the world and its dissected by a river system that allows us to ship production anywhere. We have an ocean to the east, and ocean to the west, Canada (the ultimate beta country) to the north and Mexico (dirt poor and reliant on us) to the south. Freedom was the most useful concept in the history of the world. Tell the serfs they own the land and they'll work their asses off to make it better. When they do, we'll take it back. I'm not wrong...

Ajax-1 -> Smerf Fri, 07/06/2018 - 22:44 Permalink

The USA is no longer a sovereign nation. It is now little more than an economic trade zone for the Globalist Cabal.

DemandSider -> inosent Fri, 07/06/2018 - 23:49 Permalink

This isn't about who's nicer or least war prone. Countries act in their own best interests, except The Anglo countries, which run chronic trade debt for their parasitic banking sectors. Since so much of the world depends on The American export market, they will align with The U.S. The PRC won't buy their manufactured goods. If the author believes Europe and East Asia will align with The PRC in a war, he has little experience with East Asian people, and he ignores NATO.

wafm -> Harry Lightning Fri, 07/06/2018 - 21:32 Permalink

whilst I agree on a lot of what you say about China, you'd have to offset this with a state of the union analysis - what is so great about the decaying US imperium and its zero crumbling infrastructure... on the subject of debt, well the US has it all - domesric, national, personal to the extent that unless it can carry on printing the dollar, it more or less will collapse instantly. And this is really where the danger is, I agree that China is definitely not interested in a war - never has been. But Washington on the other hand is fast approaching the point where war is the only option...

I pray this doesn't happen but on the other hand, Washington will need to be brought to heel one way or another for the world to become normal again. And for this, you can count on China to deliver some strikes the likes of which America has never seen if it comes to that. Destruction of major american cities will very quickly bring America down if this war scenario unfolds. Because america has never seen war on its own turf, it will be totally unable to cope.

Chartsky -> Harry Lightning Fri, 07/06/2018 - 23:54 Permalink

I'm disappointed.

Is this kind of misleading and sensational headline what's known as "click bait?"

The documents do NOT say "war is unavoidable" as per the headline.

Instead, the leaked documents say that at least someone in China believes a strong military is the best way to " escape the obsession that war is unavoidable between an emerging power and a ruling hegemony".

[Jul 09, 2018] My own observation is that most of the projected U.S./Russian and U.S./Chinese confrontations would involve very extended lines of communication in the case of U.S. forces.

Notable quotes:
"... On an optimistic (sort of) note: the US never deliberately attacks a country that has WMDs. The very fact that the US attacked Iraq and Syria shows that Deep State was 100% sure that those countries do not have WMDs. The US never attacked North Korea because it does have WMDs. ..."
"... An avalanche of mistakes leading to the nuclear war between the US and Russia or China is still possible. Then we all lose. Consolation prize: warmongering mega-thieves and the scum serving them in the media will be just as dead as everybody else. ..."
Jul 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

AnonFromTN , July 5, 2018 at 6:21 pm GMT

@Diversity Heretic

On an optimistic (sort of) note: the US never deliberately attacks a country that has WMDs. The very fact that the US attacked Iraq and Syria shows that Deep State was 100% sure that those countries do not have WMDs. The US never attacked North Korea because it does have WMDs.

An avalanche of mistakes leading to the nuclear war between the US and Russia or China is still possible. Then we all lose. Consolation prize: warmongering mega-thieves and the scum serving them in the media will be just as dead as everybody else.

[Jul 09, 2018] Charles Krauthammer: Finally they are hitting targets power plants, fuel depots, bridges, airports, television transmitters that may indeed kill the enemy and civilians nearby

Jul 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

Robjil , July 5, 2018 at 8:42 pm GMT

@MacNucc11

Yes, you are correct about that. The Yugoslav attack was on March 24, 1999. It was three weeks later than the last Purim – March 3 – Shushan Purim (walled city Purim – Jerusalem). Erev Purim (Eve of Purim) March 1 and March 2 – Purim. It wasn't exactly on the date of Purim as the middle east attacks in 1991 – Iraq, 2003 Iraq and 2011 Libya. But near enough to it for the Neocons.

Charles Krauthammer, a neocon who recently died, wanted civilians to be attacked in Yugoslavia in the 1999 NATO attack and he got his wish. This is his lovely quote.
"Finally they are hitting targets – power plants, fuel depots, bridges, airports, television transmitters – that may indeed kill the enemy and civilians nearby."

The'Balkan Action Committee' formed during the NATO 1999 attack on Yugoslavia consisted of neocons who lobbied hard for war against Yugoslavia. Committee members included these neocons – Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeld – three men would later lobby again for another war in Iraq.

[Jul 09, 2018] Alt-media websites that you probably can mostly trust

Jul 09, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

SomeGuy , Jul 8, 2018 2:43:11 PM | 1

Hello, everyone.

In the July 07, 2018 edition of Moon of Alabama, I asked everyone for links and alt-media websites to go to. The way I did it seemed to be disruptive, given the reactions that I got. I wanted to apologize for that. I simply wanted to learn more about alt-media websites, not to troll, but I could have done it in a better way.

Anyway, let's share some alt-media websites that we know of.

http://www.wsws.org

https://thefreethoughtproject.com

https://www.globalresearch.ca

https://consortiumnews.com

https://www.youtube.com/user/corbettreport/videos?disable_polymer=1

Got a host of leftwing websites and rightwing websites and alt-media websites that I don't think are either leftwing or rightwing, so if you want anymore, just ask me.

Anyway, please, if you've got any alt-media websites you'd like to share, I think that the Open Thread is the best place to do it. I'm always on the look-out for any alt-media websites, so if you've got any, please tell me. The reason why I ask is because it's going to get harder and harder to find these websites, I think. So with that in mind, I'd like to learn more about what's out there in terms of the alt-media.

You got any alt-media websites to share, please do.

And thanks to anyone that have already shared what they knew in yesterday's thread.

Glad to be here by the way. I've known about Moon of Alabama for some time and I've decided to drop into the comments. I didn't really keep track of all the links that you guys posted, but I will now. Thank you.

[Jul 09, 2018] The myth of Jewish "superintellegnce" as a part of Zionism set of myths

Jul 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

bj , July 4, 2018 at 10:34 pm GMT

@j2

"As this is the reason, there are twice as many Jews above some range, like 151, than non-Jewish whites, which is what Terman found. "

Jew IQ is largely a myth established by marketing and media control, starting with the Einstein brand. The myth is necessary to justify and conceal Jewish tribal nepotism as the main factor establishing dominance of a hostile elite in host nations. The question has been examined in numerous locations easily found with a search engine.

https://archive.org/stream/TheManufactureAndSaleOfSaintEinstein-ThePropagandaOfSupremacy/TheManufactureAndSaleOfSaintEinstein_djvu.txt

"If Jews are 2% of US population, that is 7 million Jews. 117,000 of them have IQs above 140.

If there are 190 million non-Hispanic Whites in America, 730,000 of them have IQs above 140."

https://greyenlightenment.com/vox-day-v-jordan-peterson-on-jewish-iq/

There are approximately six times as many white Americans with IQ above 140, as there are Jews with IQ above 140. No, Jewish intelligence does not account for their dominance in academia, media, and government. It must be Jew priviledge, not Jew IQ that justifies their right to rule the goyim.

[Jul 09, 2018] Gilad Atzmon: The Cognitive Elite of Jewish History

Jul 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

RobinG , September 13, 2015 at 1:28 am GMT

@Wizard of Oz

(Sigh.) Sorry you don't notice that I'm not engaging.

Gilad Atzmon: The Cognitive Elite of Jewish History

[Jul 08, 2018] Syria - OPCW Issues First Report Of Chemical Weapon Attack in Douma

From comment of chet380, Jul 7, 2018 7:03:08 PM (19): "Notwithstanding the counter-evidence and the strong counter-arguments, the decision by the OPCW to include references to 'chlorinated chemical compounds' guaranteed that the 'attack' scenario would continue to be advanced.Is it possible that the UK, US and/or France put pressure on the OPCW to make the inclusion so they would not have to admit they were wrong and that they were fooled? The fraud of the White Helmets should have been exposed by the OPCW inspection, but this interim report will give them continued life."
Notable quotes:
"... Interestingly the MI6 outlet in Coventry, the Syrian Observatory For Human Rights (SOHR), does not confirm a 'gas' incident. ..."
"... The "Sarin" organophosphate use the 'rebels' claimed is thereby debunked. No degradation products of such chemicals were found. The "various chlorinated organic chemicals" are unsurprising. Chlorine is widely used for water purification and cleaning and "chlorinated organic chemicals" will be found in any household. ..."
"... The preliminary OPCW report says nothing about the concentrations in which these substances were found. Without knowing the concentrations, which may may be extremely low, one can not come to further conclusion. The report includes none of the witness statements the fact finding mission took. In various TV reports the medical personal of the one hospital involved in the stunt said that none of their patients were affected by chlorine or chemical weapons. ..."
"... After the 'rebels' claimed the 'chemical attack' and published their staged videos of stacked bodies U.S. President Trump tweeted that he would retaliate for the strike. Politically he could not pull back from that even when Secretary of Defense Mattis voiced his doubts about the 'rebel' claims. Trump attacked Syria with a series of cruise missiles most of which were shot down by the Syrian air defense. A civil chemical laboratory was destroyed during the attack but no one was hurt. ..."
"... They cannot admit everything was staged. And the report is not at all clear, so anyone can give it the desired spin. ..."
"... They didn't find anything relevant. See Appendix 3 of the report. There's no mention of traces of chlorine which I would find hard to believe anyway, they refer to chloride Cl- as in NaCl (table salt) or organic chlorides, of which they do name at least one. ..."
"... The Guardian employs Olivia Solon, a digital journalist (whose specialty is in writing about and recommending particular IT consumer hardware or software products) based in California, with no knowledge or access to knowledge about Syria, its politics or history, to write an article defending the White Helmets and defame the investigative journalists Eva Bartlett and Vanessa Beeley. That practice seems to be par for the course for The Guardian and other print and online newspapers. ..."
"... And yes, the corporate MSM is definitely profit-driven. When "news" was separate from "entertainment," there was some free press possible, but once they were combined, any imaginary wall between sponsors and newscasters was removed. ..."
"... Here in the US, CBS was founded by William Paley, who had been in charge of radio propaganda for the US Army Office of Psychological Warfare. CBS was owned by Westinghouse, which became the world's largest military contractor during WW II. ..."
"... Neither CBS and NBC ever generated even 5% of their parent companies revenues. The real profits were in consumer products and war. And so, not just their news, but all of their programming promoted world views that encouraged consumption and war. ..."
"... Almost all reporters covering international news are working for the various government and private intelligence agencies/think tanks and many domestic reporters as well. ..."
"... This has been the case for over 50 years if not a century. Many of the critical reports are likely written by the agencies/think tanks. Many CIA interns work at MSM for example and reporters are recruited as early as college if not high school through thr corporate government education system. ..."
"... Regarding comments of journalists, the problem may not always be with them. There have been countless discussions on the influence of intelligence agencies. Most people would choose to do the right thing when given the choice. However, if the choices are following orders or "suicide by nailgun", most people would choose to live another day. ..."
"... The British-created Anglo-American funded black propaganda organisation, the so-called White Helmets were the primary source for the claims of Sarin use by the SAG in Douma. In as just world, the White Helmets as proven liars would now become international pariahs. That they will still be hailed as heroes in the West and western MSM so just how sick the West and western MSM really are. Perhaps now that the OPCW is free to cast blame for "chemical weapons incidents", they should name and shame the United Kingdom for its black propaganda. ..."
"... Well, we all knew a false flag op was pending. So here it is. Also Trump is a POS. ..."
"... When the White Helmets and the rebels staged the 'Douma' chemical attack they were probably expecting that Douma would not be liberated and that no serious inspection would take place to debunk the 'fake' attack. That was bad luck for them. Contrary to the other chemical "attacks" locations, an inspection on location has taken place early enough and the masks may be falling. ..."
"... There are critically important information here from Vanessa Beelley False Flag Fail: How Syrian Civilians Derailed White Helmet 'Chemical' Stunt in Eastern Ghouta that Bernhardt has not mentioned. ..."
"... The White Helmets specifically stated that the protesters had ruined their chemical attack and ruined their communications with the UN, and that the Americans would not come to their assistance because of it. This incident explains important aspects of the false flag: ..."
"... 1) So close to impending defeat, the terrorists were really desperate to induce the Americans to save them, and really believed they would do so; ..."
"... the conflicting signals given out by the MI6 proxies SOHR I would read as a damage limitation act specifically in response to the civilian protest; ..."
"... It would appear that MI6 feared news of this protest would be spread, so that they needed to protect their proxies. ..."
"... Unfortunately, despite this information being published by Vanessa Beeley, I haven't seen any other mention of it. The protesters endangered their lives by this protest, at least one of them [or another hostage? - this is not clear] was shot dead for it, and all of them were sentenced to death. They deserve due publicity for it and it is really important to an understanding of the incident as a whole. ..."
"... Bernhardt, I am afraid I don't share your apparent confidence in this OPCW report. It is far too little and lopsided after months of investigation, and appears to be designed to test the waters for a decision confirming that chlorine was used as a weapon, and to coordinate with the MSM to prepare the ground for such a decision. In that case, the MSM reaction to the report is highly consistent with such an objective. ..."
"... Why did the the report make no caveats about the chlorine compounds, why did they include no data about concentrations, why did they emphasise the chain of custody of the (probably trivial) chrorine compound samples (and only those samples), why no information on witness testimony, why no mention of the witness testimony in the Hague, why mention (totally irrelevant) testimony of alleged witnesses in Turkey and biological samples taken in Turkey for which no plausible chain of custody exists? ..."
"... This report is a scandal, an outrage. This report itself is a false flag, it is designed to appease those observers who know the incident was a false flag by using carefully ambiguous wording, while preparing the ground for a full-blown 99% dishonest and 100% misleading report condemning the Syrian government. ..."
"... For Trump self inflicted ego wound somebody will pay. ..."
"... If the OPCW can no longer be trusted; then what? The U.S. has done an admirable job of destroying trust between countries. ..."
"... Nice article, however I tend to disagree partially on the last part, the US administration and the alleged rebels are two faces of the same coins, rebels are funded by the administration from various sources and they acr in response to commands from it, see the southern command operations where this approach of command was openly divulged by various reports and accounts. The reason for the Administration to get into Syria was to further weaken the middle eastern countries for a specific and obvious reason, and each strike and wall destroyed goes into this direction..the bigger picture explains it all.. ..."
"... So, as expected, this latest OPCW report will have no effect on the establishment narrative. The good guys vs bad guys scenario is the only approved version, and with no alternative versions being offered in the MSM, it is the one that the most people will believe. ..."
"... I suspect some of the stupidest staged events are just experiments to monitor how many people will simply buy anything. ..."
Jul 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Syria - OPCW Issues First Report Of 'Chemical Weapon Attack' in Douma

On April 7 2018 Syrian 'rebels' claimed that the Syrian government used chlorine gas and Sarin in an attack on the besieged Douma suburb near the Syrian capital Damascus. They published a series of videos which showed the dead bodies of mainly women and children.

During the night the incident allegedly happened Douma was hit with artillery and air strikes in retaliation for earlier deadly attacks by some 'rebels' splinter groups on Damascus city. Jaish al-Islam, the main 'rebel' group in Douma, had already agreed to leave towards Idleb governorate.

The claim of the 'chemical attack' was made shortly after U.S. President Trump had announced that he wanted U.S. troops to leave Syria. It was designed to "pull him back in" which it indeed did.

Moon of Alabama published several pieces on the issue:

It seemed obvious from the very first claims of the 'gas attack' that it did not happen at all. The Syrian government had no motive to use any chemical weapon or an irritant like chlorine in Douma. It had already won. The incident was obviously staged, like others before it, to drag the U.S. into a new attack on Syria.

Even a prominent opposition outlet said that no 'chemical attack' had taken place. As noted on April 9:

Interestingly the MI6 outlet in Coventry, the Syrian Observatory For Human Rights (SOHR), does not confirm a 'gas' incident. In its version of events some 40 people died after their shelter collapsed:

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights issued a higher death toll, saying at least 80 people were killed in Douma, including around 40 who died from suffocation. But it said the suffocations were the result of shelters collapsing on people inside them.

Main stream media, which have quoted SOHR for years, now ignore it and report of a 'chemical attack' as if it were a proven reality.

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) send a Fact Finding Mission (FFM) to Douma and investigated the incident. Today it published an interim report and some technical results:

OPCW designated labs conducted analysis of prioritised samples. The results show that no organophosphorous nerve agents or their degradation products were detected in the environmental samples or in the plasma samples taken from alleged casualties. Along with explosive residues, various chlorinated organic chemicals were found in samples from two sites, for which there is full chain of custody. Work by the team to establish the significance of these results is on-going. The FFM team will continue its work to draw final conclusions.

The "Sarin" organophosphate use the 'rebels' claimed is thereby debunked. No degradation products of such chemicals were found. The "various chlorinated organic chemicals" are unsurprising. Chlorine is widely used for water purification and cleaning and "chlorinated organic chemicals" will be found in any household.

In the technical notes of the OPCW report note that one of its laboratory found "dichloroacetic acid", "trichloroacetic acid", "chloral hydrate", "trichlorophenol" and "chlorphenol" in some of the samples its fact finding mission took at the claimed incident sites. These are all substances that are no surprise in any upbuild environment and especially within any home. Dichloroacetic acid" is for example "a trace product of the chlorination of drinking water". Chloral hydrate is likewise "a minor side-product of the chlorination of water when organic residues such as humic acids are present". The other substances are also not uncommon and of various household uses.

The other OPCW laboratory found only "No CWC-scheduled chemicals" and "2,4,6-trinitrotoluene" residues in the samples. Trinitrotoluene, also known as TNT, is an explosive widely used in military ammunition. The second laboratory does not report the chlorinated organic chemicals the other laboratory found.

The preliminary OPCW report says nothing about the concentrations in which these substances were found. Without knowing the concentrations, which may may be extremely low, one can not come to further conclusion. The report includes none of the witness statements the fact finding mission took. In various TV reports the medical personal of the one hospital involved in the stunt said that none of their patients were affected by chlorine or chemical weapons.

After the 'rebels' claimed the 'chemical attack' and published their staged videos of stacked bodies U.S. President Trump tweeted that he would retaliate for the strike. Politically he could not pull back from that even when Secretary of Defense Mattis voiced his doubts about the 'rebel' claims. Trump attacked Syria with a series of cruise missiles most of which were shot down by the Syrian air defense. A civil chemical laboratory was destroyed during the attack but no one was hurt.

The now published preliminary OPCW report reinforces the doubts about the 'rebel' claims. There was no 'chemical attack' in Douma. The incident was staged.

One hopes that Trump has learned from this episode and will in future refrain from violent threats over incidents for which no plausible and vetted evidence is provided.

Posted by b on July 6, 2018 at 03:23 PM | Permalink

Comments

Zanon , Jul 6, 2018 3:57:54 PM | 1

Remember the propaganda in the western media and among politicians, they lied and lied, and people like us here were right in our doubts.

Western media again act as warcriminal psyop agent, not to mention a useful idiot for the terrorists!

Ort , Jul 6, 2018 4:03:05 PM | 2
Thanks for this report, even though in my case you're "preaching to the choir".

I wish I could share your closing optimism: "One hopes that Trump has learned from this episode and will in future refrain from violent threats over incidents for which no plausible and vetted evidence is provided."

Hope springs eternal. But even though I'm not rabidly anti-Trump, I think he will remain unwilling to refrain, or is incapable of refraining, from impulsively responding with bluster, bombast, and chauvinistic bumptiousness when his buttons are pushed, regardless of the validity of the stimulus.

Trump, whose narcissism is second to no one's, is devoid of the introspective humility contemplated by the axiom "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me"; his ego will not process the possibility that he can ever be fooled.

Alas! Trump is definitely a "Threaten first and ask questions later" kind of guy.

psychohistorian , Jul 6, 2018 4:13:31 PM | 3
Thanks for the report b. I was surfing the net as I prepared a meal and saw that the BBC is pushing this hard.

The BBC is even writing about the April chemical weapon scam as being added proof.....sad

The elite keep trying to start a war with anyone to keep the focus off their failure as the "leaders of the free world" BS. When are the elite going to realize their temper tantrums aren't working?

I hope they don't get their shooting war and I hope their economic war provides their final undoing.....think of the waste of human and other resources over the past 70 years.....let alone the centuries that the private finance/property scam has been going on.

Yag , Jul 6, 2018 4:24:04 PM | 4
And liquid chlorine (household bleach) combined with another common household chemical used around the world will release chlorine gas.
Pnyx , Jul 6, 2018 4:38:34 PM | 5
Still, Ard-Tagesschau says the following (originally in German): "In the battles for the Syrian rebel stronghold Duma, chlorine gas was apparently used in April. The OPCW found traces of this in gas cylinder residues."

Sure enough I agree with you B, but for the MSM the OPCW report reads different.

They cannot admit everything was staged. And the report is not at all clear, so anyone can give it the desired spin.

b , Jul 6, 2018 5:04:07 PM | 6
"The OPCW found traces of this in gas cylinder residues." Claiming that the OPCW found "traces of chlorine" is like claiming one found "traces of oxygen" or "traces of hydrogen" when one found water (H2O).

The occurrence of a basic element in a compound is not a "trace" of the basic element. That's chemistry 001. Journalists nowadays seem to lack most basics of higher education.

Hmpf , Jul 6, 2018 5:14:09 PM | 7
@5 Pynx

They didn't find anything relevant. See Appendix 3 of the report. There's no mention of traces of chlorine which I would find hard to believe anyway, they refer to chloride Cl- as in NaCl (table salt) or organic chlorides, of which they do name at least one.

What to expect from the 'Tagesschau' - same old, same old. They're making stuff up again, almost certainly out of willful ignorance and bias.

@6 b
I figure it's even worse than that. They're not even asking the most basic question: Am I a competent person?
My guess is a great many of these folks avoid asking that question on purpose.

Jen , Jul 6, 2018 6:06:36 PM | 8
Pnyx @ 5, B @ 6, Hmpf @ 7:

It would seem that a common (and deliberate) ploy used by the MSM these days is to use journalists with no particular knowledge, experience or insight in an area to write articles that need that knowledge or experience.

The Guardian employs Olivia Solon, a digital journalist (whose specialty is in writing about and recommending particular IT consumer hardware or software products) based in California, with no knowledge or access to knowledge about Syria, its politics or history, to write an article defending the White Helmets and defame the investigative journalists Eva Bartlett and Vanessa Beeley. That practice seems to be par for the course for The Guardian and other print and online newspapers.

Plus The Guardian and others rely on dubious sources like Bellingcat and the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, whose credentials are laughable at best, as "experts" in their chosen areas of reporting.

All the Western MSM are now entirely driven by the pursuit of sales revenue and profit and are now no different from outlets peddling entertainment. No surprise really when news media outlets are now owned by the same individuals or corporations that own film studios, TV stations, online media and TV channels, book and comics publishers, and games publishers.

Daniel , Jul 6, 2018 6:35:53 PM | 9
Jen @8. Great point on the strategy of using "journalists" with no background in the topic they're tasked to 'report."

And yes, the corporate MSM is definitely profit-driven. When "news" was separate from "entertainment," there was some free press possible, but once they were combined, any imaginary wall between sponsors and newscasters was removed.

Still, considering who owns the MSM, I'd say their main purpose is not to sell commercials, but to sell the most profitable "products" of their owners.

Here in the US, CBS was founded by William Paley, who had been in charge of radio propaganda for the US Army Office of Psychological Warfare. CBS was owned by Westinghouse, which became the world's largest military contractor during WW II.

NBC was owned by GE, which was also one of the largest military contractors in the world.

Neither CBS and NBC ever generated even 5% of their parent companies revenues. The real profits were in consumer products and war. And so, not just their news, but all of their programming promoted world views that encouraged consumption and war.

Pft , Jul 6, 2018 6:56:32 PM | 10

Almost all reporters covering international news are working for the various government and private intelligence agencies/think tanks and many domestic reporters as well.

This has been the case for over 50 years if not a century. Many of the critical reports are likely written by the agencies/think tanks. Many CIA interns work at MSM for example and reporters are recruited as early as college if not high school through thr corporate government education system.

Everyone likes to supplement their income and many are convinced its their patriotic duty to disseminate propaganda. For some its a chance to join the elite class, even at a low level. Obviously getting the 6-8 corporate entities that own 80% of the media to go along is not difficult especially as those who go rogue will be punished by members of the business roundtable responsible for most advertising , which would of course dry up as punishment

Now monitoring the internet and social media with big data analytics allows almost Total Information Awareness. They can see in real time whats working and to what extent and what is not. They can then fill holes or modify the story as needed. They know they dont need to get 100% believability. This is why they have not shut down dissenting comments. They are useful, for now.

I suspect some of the stupidest staged events are just experiments to monitor how many people will simply buy anything. At some point they will feel confident enough to simulate an alien invasion of beings capable of taking human form. This will necessitate martial law which thw fearful will gladly accept, and a global governement led by the countries with the largest space force. Funny how the US still needs Russian Rockets to launch satellites so its Space Force has a way to go yet. I guess I wont be around for the fun since time is not a friend of old men

Ian , Jul 6, 2018 7:01:03 PM | 11

Regarding comments of journalists, the problem may not always be with them. There have been countless discussions on the influence of intelligence agencies. Most people would choose to do the right thing when given the choice. However, if the choices are following orders or "suicide by nailgun", most people would choose to live another day.

Timothy Hagios , Jul 6, 2018 7:05:17 PM | 12
Pft @ 10

Speaking of experiments to monitor how many people will believe anything, some good claims from the MSM come to mind: 40% of North Koreans are on crystal meth, the Russians killed the last clown in Aleppo, and the Breatharians (people who purportedly survive on only air and sunlight).

james , Jul 6, 2018 7:06:44 PM | 13
thanks b... unfortunately, i tend to see it much like what @8 jen says... these folks are unsure about their next pay check and are happy to write with a chatham house /scl / cambridge analytica slant knowing what is expected of them.. they ask no questions and are unwilling to articulate the false flags that have shaped all this discussion of opcw and chemical attacks in syria.. in this respect i also agree with @5 pnyx... they are unwilling or unable to raise these questions for fear of dismissal.. more and more people recognize what a poor state the msm is in today.. that is my hope anyway..
ben , Jul 6, 2018 7:47:04 PM | 14
b said:"One hopes that Trump has learned from this episode and will in future refrain from violent threats over incidents for which no plausible and vetted evidence is provided."

Unfortunately, probably no one here in the land of theater, will ever hear about this report. As to DJT, he'll do whatever it takes to enhance his appearance with the morons. His learning curve only bends toward his own enhancement. To him and his minions, truth doesn't matter...

Mark2 , Jul 6, 2018 8:19:28 PM | 15
There's unlikely to be any real investigative journalism regarding opcw reports, considering the papers in uk are owned by mega millionaires who profit from war and the Middle East land grab.oil ect. Plus the owners featured largely in the off shore tax haven leaks- relavent here not so much regarding tax, but what that hidden money is invested in, Gun running, slave labour, buying rebels? It's a small world, media moguls own it.
bevin , Jul 6, 2018 8:33:50 PM | 16
Try these Mark2

https://skwawkbox.org/2018/07/07/bbcs-outright-fake-news-tonight-on-douma-chlorine-attack/
https://skwawkbox.org/2018/07/07/video-bbc-news-joins-fake-news-scandal-over-opcws-douma-chlorine-report/

Ghost Ship , Jul 6, 2018 8:43:25 PM | 17
The British-created Anglo-American funded black propaganda organisation, the so-called White Helmets were the primary source for the claims of Sarin use by the SAG in Douma. In as just world, the White Helmets as proven liars would now become international pariahs. That they will still be hailed as heroes in the West and western MSM so just how sick the West and western MSM really are. Perhaps now that the OPCW is free to cast blame for "chemical weapons incidents", they should name and shame the United Kingdom for its black propaganda.
Mark2 , Jul 6, 2018 8:55:31 PM | 18
Thanks Bevin @ 16
I do follow that site, but had'nt looked recently. Really Good, no doubt your aware of 'the canary ' good article on this subject! Both sites I recommend to one and all.
fast freddy , Jul 6, 2018 9:01:43 PM | 19
Well, we all knew a false flag op was pending. So here it is. Also Trump is a POS.
Daniel , Jul 6, 2018 9:24:19 PM | 20
Thanks, bevin for the links to yet another site I'll be trying to find the time to visit. :-)

Both of those articles lay out the BBC BS succinctly and clearly.

Virgile , Jul 6, 2018 10:12:59 PM | 21

When the White Helmets and the rebels staged the 'Douma' chemical attack they were probably expecting that Douma would not be liberated and that no serious inspection would take place to debunk the 'fake' attack. That was bad luck for them. Contrary to the other chemical "attacks" locations, an inspection on location has taken place early enough and the masks may be falling.

james , Jul 6, 2018 10:40:08 PM | 22
@21 virgile... exactly.... all the money the usa/uk have sunk into the white helmets and etc - and very little to nothing to show for it..
chet380 , Jul 6, 2018 10:59:46 PM | 23
@3 Psychohistorian --

Your early call that the MSM would go with the chlorine findings to support the attack is proving true across the board -- there is not a chance that an admission of having been mistaken is going to happen.

adamski , Jul 7, 2018 12:19:58 AM | 24
Chloral Hydrate...?! This was an old school sedative medication. Seems appropriate somehow.
V , Jul 7, 2018 12:36:26 AM | 25
Finally, straight shooting from the OPCW. About time...
Red Ryder , Jul 7, 2018 1:20:06 AM | 26
It is Highly Likely that all the gas attacks were staged as false flags. Exceedingly Likely.
fairleft , Jul 7, 2018 1:37:18 AM | 27
james @13 I think it's clearly true, not just a hope, that fewer and fewer people take the media seriously. Those who still watch mainstream and cable 'news' programs are a pretty small minority, and the MSNBC/FOX side of that is probably acknowledged even by most of its consumers, as 'my side' comfort food rather than 'news' as we used to understand it.

The media's lock-step Western-Empire perspective _is_ frightening, but we also need to remember recent election results that have gone against the empire's wishes. Just a couple days ago in Mexico, for example. Real alternative and real (whether socialist, left, right, or libertarian) populist media is having an impact, I think, and we may be able to turn things around in the West before the next world wars start.

BM , Jul 7, 2018 2:00:06 AM | 28

There are critically important information here from Vanessa Beelley False Flag Fail: How Syrian Civilians Derailed White Helmet 'Chemical' Stunt in Eastern Ghouta that Bernhardt has not mentioned.

Vanessa Beeley interviewed at least two witnesses who - seeing that the government forces were about to liberate Hamouriya village in Douma from the terrorists under whose control they had suffered for 6 years and thereby feeling empowered - on 6th March at 3pm decided to publicly protest against the terrorists by marching through Hamouriya carrying Syrian national flags. They were met by members of the White Helmets and the terrorists, who blamed them explicitly for ruining their chemical weapons false flag.

Critically importantly, the White Helmets had already released news for the claimed false flag that morning and the night before, and they had already collected 30 dead bodies from all over Douma and brought them to the hospital, and had already started filming.

The protest critically negated the propaganda message of the false flag chemical attack - if the Syrian Army had really been dropping chemical weapons on Hamouriya the night before with intent to kill civilian women and children, why would the civilians immediately afterwards start marching through the city carrying Syrian national flags, and having raised the flag at key points in the city? It makes the whole flase flag [even more] implausible. The White Helmets then wrapped one hostage in a Syrian flag and shot him dead as a warning. Fortunately the two witnesses interviewed (and hopefully most of the protesters) were able to escape soon afterwards with the help of the nearby Syrian Army.

The White Helmets specifically stated that the protesters had ruined their chemical attack and ruined their communications with the UN, and that the Americans would not come to their assistance because of it. This incident explains important aspects of the false flag:

1) So close to impending defeat, the terrorists were really desperate to induce the Americans to save them, and really believed they would do so;

2) Having already announced the false flag the previous night and having collected so many dead bodies in preparation, the existence of the protest creates a credibility problem for the terrorists and White Helmets, to which they seem to have responded with various conflicting signals;

3) In particular, the conflicting signals given out by the MI6 proxies SOHR I would read as a damage limitation act specifically in response to the civilian protest;

4) It would appear that MI6 feared news of this protest would be spread, so that they needed to protect their proxies.

Unfortunately, despite this information being published by Vanessa Beeley, I haven't seen any other mention of it. The protesters endangered their lives by this protest, at least one of them [or another hostage? - this is not clear] was shot dead for it, and all of them were sentenced to death. They deserve due publicity for it and it is really important to an understanding of the incident as a whole.

Bernhardt, I hope you will update the article above to include some of Vanessa Beeley's reporting on this incident.

BM , Jul 7, 2018 2:20:22 AM | 29
Bernhardt, I am afraid I don't share your apparent confidence in this OPCW report. It is far too little and lopsided after months of investigation, and appears to be designed to test the waters for a decision confirming that chlorine was used as a weapon, and to coordinate with the MSM to prepare the ground for such a decision. In that case, the MSM reaction to the report is highly consistent with such an objective.

Why did the the report make no caveats about the chlorine compounds, why did they include no data about concentrations, why did they emphasise the chain of custody of the (probably trivial) chrorine compound samples (and only those samples), why no information on witness testimony, why no mention of the witness testimony in the Hague, why mention (totally irrelevant) testimony of alleged witnesses in Turkey and biological samples taken in Turkey for which no plausible chain of custody exists?

Posted by: V | Jul 7, 2018 12:36:26 AM | 25
Finally, straight shooting from the OPCW.
About time...

This report is a scandal, an outrage. This report itself is a false flag, it is designed to appease those observers who know the incident was a false flag by using carefully ambiguous wording, while preparing the ground for a full-blown 99% dishonest and 100% misleading report condemning the Syrian government.

The correct response to this report is very loud and active and persistent protest against it.

The Russians should make very strongly worded complaints and criticisms about it both at the OPCW and at the UN (maybe they have, I wouldn't know).

V , Jul 7, 2018 2:31:49 AM | 30
BM | Jul 7, 2018 2:20:22 AM | 29

You may be correct; we'll see...

Kalen , Jul 7, 2018 3:09:25 AM | 31
For Trump self inflicted ego wound somebody will pay.
V , Jul 7, 2018 7:09:29 AM | 35
Mark2 | Jul 7, 2018 6:29:06 AM | 34

So, following your logic (which I mostly agree); what value/good are elections?
None, near as I can tell.
Time for something new?
But then I digress; what to do about false flag chemo attacks?

If the OPCW can no longer be trusted; then what? The U.S. has done an admirable job of destroying trust between countries.

dfnslblty , Jul 7, 2018 9:25:39 AM | 39
żHas anyone here read Peter Ford's piece on OPCW? I believe it fits somewhere in the discussion. Unfortunate this choir is so small. Keep writing and Protest Loudly!
Mike , Jul 7, 2018 9:29:28 AM | 40
Hi
Nice article, however I tend to disagree partially on the last part, the US administration and the alleged rebels are two faces of the same coins, rebels are funded by the administration from various sources and they acr in response to commands from it, see the southern command operations where this approach of command was openly divulged by various reports and accounts. The reason for the Administration to get into Syria was to further weaken the middle eastern countries for a specific and obvious reason, and each strike and wall destroyed goes into this direction..the bigger picture explains it all..
Mike , Jul 7, 2018 9:35:41 AM | 41
... to clarify , every "regime" that threatens Israel openly is to be brought down ... Libya, Iraq,, Sudan, Yemen, Syria, Iran , Egypt's Nasser and the list goes on..
bevin , Jul 7, 2018 10:22:39 AM | 42
More on the BBC and this story:
https://skwawkbox.org/2018/07/07/bbc-forced-to-correct-douma-gas-story-after-skwawkbox-exposes-fake-news/

And Craig Murray too:

"Yesterday the OPCW reported that, contrary to US and UK assertions in the UN security council, there was no nerve agent attack on jihadist-held Douma by the Syrian government, precisely as Robert Fisk was execrated by the entire media establishment for pointing out. The OPCW did find some traces of chlorine compounds, but chlorine is a very commonly used element and you have traces of it all over your house.

The US wants your chicken chlorinated. The OPCW said it was "Not clear" if the chlorine was weaponised, and it is plain to me from a career in diplomacy that the almost incidental mention is a diplomatic sop to the UK, US and France, which are important members of the OPCW.

"Trump's reaction to yet more lying claims by the UK government funded White Helmets and Syrian Observatory, a reaction of missile strikes on alleged Syrian facilities producing the non-existent nerve agent, was foolish. May's leap for British participation was unwise, and the usual queue of Blairites who stood up as always in Parliament to support any bombing action, stand yet again exposed as evil tools of the military industrial complex.

"Hillary Clinton, true to form, wanted more aggressive military action than was undertaken by Trump. Hillary has been itching to destroy Syria as she destroyed Libya. Libya was very much Hillary's war and – almost unreported by the mainstream media – NATO bombers carried out almost 14,000 bombing sorties on Libya and devastated entire cities...."

If you put Murray, MoA, The Skwawkbox, Strategic Culture, Dissident Voice and a few of the better aggregators together you've got a better Daily Newspaper than The Guardian or Le Monde ever was, far better.

By the way, unless I'm mistaken (it wouldn't be a first!) Ghandi was asked what he thought about Western Civilisation when he replied that "It would be a good idea". It still is an idea worth looking into. It would look just like socialism.

james , Jul 7, 2018 10:50:35 AM | 43
@27 fairleft.. i hope you are correct on that..

@28 BM... i think it was daniel who left that link here at moa a few days ago.. i read it..

@29 BM.. i tend to agree with you, but see @6 b for more clarity...

@32 pft... it is my observation that the msm in the usa is so usa centric, they know shit about canada, or the rest of the world.. i could be wrong, but that is my general view on what ''americans'' consume for news in the usa.. the indoctrination is heavy.. i would like to think people like @33 V are the norm, but i mostly think people are tuned out of the news - excluding the older generation - above 60 or 70 especially - who still consume the shit via the tv..

@41 mike.. in other words, the usa foreign policy is built around looking after israel.. most here at moa would agree with that.. will the usa ever get it's head out of israels ass? one can hope, lol..

craig murrays post from today that bevin quotes @42.. good comments bevin!

et Al , Jul 7, 2018 10:53:24 AM | 44
Motherboard.com: Japan Just Executed the Leaders of an LSD-Fueled Doomsday Science Cult
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/gy3xex/what-is-aum-shinrikyo-sarin-attack

####

This one was real, but even the Aum Shinrikyo sect showed all those years ago how how difficult it is to pull off an effective chemical weapons attack, requiring an enclosed space like the metro system. But that's never the point. Instilling mass fear and panic, not to mention being 'news friendly' is what makes such attacks, sponsored proxy false-flag or not, so enduringly popular . To borrow a well known ad phrase ' Once you pop, you can't stop '

Noirette , Jul 7, 2018 11:00:54 AM | 45
Journalists nowadays seem to lack most basics of higher education. b.

Yes + they have zero comprehension of basic numbers. Amazing. (Nobody wants to read my exs..) Nowadays, they are not supposed to have any knowledge whatsoever; they have become scribal hacks, merely write, film, show, expose, what they are told or do haphazard copy-pasta.

They are bought servants, nah compradors, and their presence is completely useless (A.I. and some guidance, input from above by 7 -say- very smart ppl would do the job faster and cheaper, for the whole W world) they are actors whose function is to pretend that a 'fourth estate' is necessary to uncover facts, inform the populace, air dissenting points of view, have debates, and so on Lies.

(comes to mind, book https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Udo_Ulfkotte)

Aware they are past their sell-date, one can smell the desperation. The reaction is to become more subservient, toe the line, preserve what can be, become more in-groupy and shaft colleagues who might stray away from the prescribed hyper-rigid guide-lines. Collectively, they have fantastic potential power and means of control (network savvy, present at the switches, etc.) but they are so dumbed down and terrified of status and monetary loss they are like deer caught in the headlights, to stay on track they secretly pray at dawn, conjure the fates, or whatever. The mansion with pool, the ginormous mortgage, Junior, etc. in the US. In France, the monetary aspect is less vital; being excluded from the movers and shakers, the in-ppl, the heady, sexy, wonderful Parisian life.. no.. no.. help

Part of how a 'post-truth' environment comes about. The other driver is the underlying aim, i.e. the imposition of one narrative over another, the Rovian creation of realities which can only be managed by wielding power violent enough to make the 'other - the people - the adversary' accept and bow down to the proffered narrative, and never object, call out the lies. Using this template requires careful calculations which, it appears, have gone off kilter in the US.

Maybe one should consider that there were never any Chem-WMD attacks in Syria at all (pace Seymour Hersh, heh, but that is a personal beef of mine..) - there are always limited hangout ppl who try to cobble up one narrative with another and make a living out o that.

Curtis , Jul 7, 2018 11:10:52 AM | 46
So far, I'm seeing BBC (as above), al Jazeera, ABC, Reuters, Qatar Tribune twisting the report to say it was a Chlorine attack. PressTV, RT, and Sputnik News say the report clears SAA.
Rob , Jul 7, 2018 1:36:25 PM | 50
And then there's this: https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2018/07/06/world/europe/06reuters-syria-crisis-chemicalweapons.html
and this: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/06/25/world/middleeast/syria-chemical-attack-douma.html
both from the New York Times.

The latter is an absurd "virtual crime scene" in which crack reporters claim to prove that the Syrian government used chemical weapons on their own people.

So, as expected, this latest OPCW report will have no effect on the establishment narrative. The good guys vs bad guys scenario is the only approved version, and with no alternative versions being offered in the MSM, it is the one that the most people will believe.

Mark2 , Jul 7, 2018 2:24:33 PM | 55
Den Kelley Abe @ 53

O k see if I can help, kind of kill or cure! The shock to us all may be to much ! There is no squirrel ! They made it up, yes I know it's kind of tuff !we all looked for a squirrel they distracted us. There was no people poisoned by Russians in Salisbury, Amesbury the chlorine attack in Syria yes made up.What the tv and papers said was a lie, to program us all like a laptop !!!

Whilst we were out squirrel huntin, they got through half of world 3 we never noticed. They formed a dictatorship. Sold all your urban buildings services and council houses to one an other. And devalued us all by about 60% But i'l go easy for now. Couse from there on things went down hill !!! Warm regards

Patrick Armstrong , Jul 7, 2018 7:14:13 PM | 61
By the way, I read somewhere recently that Chlorine rapidly degrades Sarin and therefore no one would use them together. But I can't find the reference now. Can anybody help?
fast freddy , Jul 7, 2018 8:12:38 PM | 62
47. hrc = Bloodthirsty killer; sociopath coming out the gate. Likewise. POS. Trump was not a mass murderer until a couple months in. Didn't take him long to join the club.
Guerrero , Jul 7, 2018 8:43:14 PM | 63
Posted by: Jen | 8Pnyx @ 5, B @ 6, Hmpf @ 7:
It would seem that a common (and deliberate) ploy used by the MSM these days is to use journalists with no particular knowledge, experience or insight in an area to write articles that need that knowledge or experience.

I wonder if these "news reporters" were not selected based upon their "sex appeal" to a superior?

Posted by: Pft | @10

I suspect some of the stupidest staged events are just experiments to monitor how many people will simply buy anything.

I agree. These zany false flag events might be designed to map the approach to an asymptote .

(In analytic geometry, an asymptote (/ˈćsɪmptoʊt/) of a curve is a line such that the distance between
the curve and the line approaches zero as one or both of the x or y coordinates tends to infinite stupidity)

[Jul 08, 2018] Russia Joins The Global Trade War

Notable quotes:
"... Reuters reports ..."
"... "The compensation measures will be applied in the form of additional, higher rates of import duties ranging from 25% to 40% of the price of imported goods. Duties will be imposed on some U.S. goods, the analogues of which are produced in Russia. In particular, the measures cover some types of road construction equipment, oil and gas equipment, metalworking machines, rock drilling equipment, and optical fiber," Minister Maxim Oreshkin said as quoted by the ministry. ..."
"... "The financial damage inflicted on Russian exporters by the U.S. trade restrictions amounts to $537.6 million. This is the amount of additional duties that Russian suppliers have to pay in the U.S. ..."
"... The current increase of duties allows us to compensate for only part of the damage amounting to $87.6 million. This is compensation that Russia has the right to recover under the WTO rules," he said. ..."
Jul 08, 2018 | oilprice.com

Whether this is a coordinated response is unclear - and certainly on a much smaller scale - but Bloomberg reports that Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev signed a decree this morning imposing higher tariffs on U.S. products in retaliation for U.S. duties on metals imports, according to Economy Ministry statement.

Reuters reports that Russia's additional duties will apply to imports of fiber optics, equipment for road construction, oil and gas industry, metal processing and mining, according to an economy ministry statement.

Russia will impose duties on goods which have Russian-made substitutes, Economy Minister Maxim Oreshkin is quoted as saying in the statement.

"The compensation measures will be applied in the form of additional, higher rates of import duties ranging from 25% to 40% of the price of imported goods. Duties will be imposed on some U.S. goods, the analogues of which are produced in Russia. In particular, the measures cover some types of road construction equipment, oil and gas equipment, metalworking machines, rock drilling equipment, and optical fiber," Minister Maxim Oreshkin said as quoted by the ministry.

"The financial damage inflicted on Russian exporters by the U.S. trade restrictions amounts to $537.6 million. This is the amount of additional duties that Russian suppliers have to pay in the U.S.

The current increase of duties allows us to compensate for only part of the damage amounting to $87.6 million. This is compensation that Russia has the right to recover under the WTO rules," he said. Russia will be able to compensate for the remaining part in three years since the introduction of the U.S. duties or after approval of the WTO dispute settlement body if it finds the U.S. restrictions violating the organization's rules, the ministry said.

Makes you wonder how long Russia will stay with WTO - just like Trump - if this is all the response "you're allowed."

Shots fired...

[Jul 08, 2018] Correctly Defining Modern Zionism by Brett Redmayne-Titley

Looks like that author mixes Zionism with neoliberalism. Critique of Zionism here is mixes with critique of neoliberalism and that makes the whole piece unconvincing.
Some points made are interesting, though.
Notable quotes:
"... "Anti-Semitism." ..."
"... we are losing! ..."
"... " All the world suffers from the user of the Jews, their monopoly and deceit. They have brought many unfortunate people into a state of poverty especially working people and the very poor." ..."
"... "All [personal] vows we are likely to make, all [personal] oaths and pledges we are likely to take between this Yom Kippur and the next Yom Kippur, we publicly renounce. Let them all be relinquished and abandoned, null and void, neither firm nor established. Let our [personal] vows, pledges and oaths are considered neither vows nor pledges nor oaths." ..."
"... -the Kol Nidrei. ..."
"... "In violent opposition to all this sphere of [positive], Jewish efforts rise the schemes of the International Jews. Most, if not all, of them, have forsaken the faith of their forefathers and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new."- Winston Churchill. ..."
"... "His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people . It being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in ..."
"... " For in Palestine, we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting with wishes of the [Palestinians]. And Zionism (is) of far profounder[sic] import than the desire and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who inhabit this ancient land." ..."
"... "Possession is 9/10ths of the law." ..."
"... " America is a Golden Calf and we will suck it dry, chop it up, and sell it off piece by piece until there is nothing left Why? This is what we do to countries that we hate. We destroy them very slowly and make them suffer for refusing to be our slaves."- I sraeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu ..."
"... "Israel First" and "Corporations First." ..."
"... Consider the fate of former US Secretary of Defence, Chuck Hagel who, long ago during Obama's presidency had the audacity, just prior to leaving for Tel Aviv, to say that he was first and foremost an America and would put American interests before that of Israel, adding that, ""The political reality is that the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here." ..."
"... Once Hagel returned to the exceptional nation from Tel Aviv he was, due to his president being now under Zionist control, summarily fired. ..."
"... "suck it dry, chop it up, and sell it off piece by piece until there is nothing left " ..."
"... without a request by either of the two moving parties. ..."
"... "changed the case to give themselves an opportunity to change the law". ..."
"... Federalist Society (FS). ..."
"... "Never has there been a collusion like the one between the U.S. and Israel. It suggests another word and that is "immunity." It has a moral immunity, a cultural immunity, a geopolitical immunity, a legal immunity, and certainly a media immunity. All the talk of Iran and nuclear weapons is without any reference to the biggest nuclear power in the Middle East. [Israel] " ..."
"... get the hell out of Palestine. Remember, these people are occupied and it's their land " ..."
"... which further illustrated how endemic this doctrine of linking criticism of Israel to anti-Semitism has become. ..."
"... Did her example die with her? ..."
"... If you torture the numbers long enough, they will say whatever you want," ..."
"... Are they wrong? ..."
"... The House Committee on Foreign Affairs unanimously passed a measure on Thursday that ..."
"... it never gives back! ..."
"... Zionists are winning the battle for the hearts and minds of what remains of our world. ..."
"... then he is a Zionist. ..."
"... moral obligation ..."
"... then, she a Zionist. ..."
"... understood hypocrisy ..."
"... then, they are Zionists. ..."
"... knowingly prioritizes ..."
"... ignores the scriptures ..."
"... and their hearts- ..."
"... wilfully choose to do nothing ..."
"... clear conscience ..."
"... temptation to protest ..."
"... allow themselves ..."
"... "God, Forgive me." ..."
"... Too God Damned Late! ..."
"... Zionism cannot be understood outside the context of late 19th century European nationalism. The purpose of Zionism is to build a "normal" country of Jews in the Land of Israel, accepted by and at peace with it's Arab neighbors. The idea is to replace assimilation of individual Jews with the assimilation of the entire Jewish nation. ..."
"... Most Jews of course support Israel and they still practice mutual help, which causes the same problems as always: they were an endogamous and fast growing population trying to promote their group interests and seeing others as enemies. Jews in Israel face the problems of an occupation force: as they are confronted by asymmetric resistance, they are forced to do what they are doing, and that is the strategy of the resistance. ..."
"... Additionally there is Talmud with its different treatment of Jews and non-Jews, it makes things only worse. The actions Israel must make turn it into a pariah state. ..."
"... Zionism was, and is, a farcical and bloodthirsty imitation of the 19th-century German nationalism. ..."
Jul 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

There is much that the civilized world does not understand about modern Zionism. Today, the definitions of being Jewish, Israeli or Zionist are, to most people, analogous. They are not.

Indoctrinated into submitting to this incorrect, singular and collective definition, solely due to Zionism's false claim of a direct religious link to Judaism, hence the objective, critical world cowers at the similarly incorrect, but inevitable charge of "Anti-Semitism." This false charge has too often caused the political and journalistic demise of too many. Thus the world is scared away from exercising one's full mental faculties, such faculties of conscience that would normally rise-up in collective reaction and outrage.

The result, instead, has been worldwide apathy. This inaction towards the daily Zionist violations of the fundamental laws of the conscience of man has become the designed result. In the battle against the expansion of the many forms of worldwide Zionism, take note we are losing!

For the outraged world to confidently and factually respond against the broad brush of the charge of Anti-Semitism, one used continually and routinely to mask all discussion of Israeli and Zionist crimes, it is essential to understand what today defines "modern" Zionism, for here our fight for conscience begins. In reality, Zionism is an a-religious scourge that uses a singular excuse to justify its existence and its collective actions, an excuse- a hypocrisy- routinely missing in factual discussion and rarely understood by world Jewry as well. Here is what can be accurately described as the root of Zionist thought.

This fundamental is a prayer. It has been debated, reviled, cast out and reborn in repeated cycles by the most senior Jewish theologians over the past two thousand years. Most of the growing horrors of our world- past and present- can be summed up and exemplified within this single prayer, Jewish in creation, yet today exclusively Zionist in its modern use. Yes, one single self-serving, rarely mentioned, prayer that, when considered correctly is today the metaphor, if not the personification and the excuse, for all the moral ills that allow for the suffering across the world today. This metaphoric prayer transcends all religions. It is the propagation of a malignancy- now seemingly endemic- within a growing portion of humankind. Much worse, this fundamental provides for the wilful individual rotting of one's mind, one's conscience, and one's soul.

This unconscionable prayer's name? The Kol Nidrei.

Of, Zionism Past: Saying a Prayer for Zionism.

Zionism is not a recent ideology. The name is. In the 1890s, Theodor Herzl infused Zionism- the quest for a nation of Israel- with an expanded ideology that lead to the First Zionist Congress at Basel in 1897, which created the World Zionist Organization (WZO). Long ago cast-out from Judea since AD 70, by Roman emperor, Titus, and in seeming finality by Hadrian- who renamed the whole region Syria Palestinia in 135 AD- due to the Zionist Jew's growing dominance of that small piece of the Roman Empire. Sadly, this happened repeatedly throughout history on multiple occasions by multiple other countries, and for centuries Judaism was repeatedly without a host country.

Unfortunately for the whole of world Jewry, at many points throughout history, like in Judea, their quest for a country was attempted via the ascension of powerful Jewish interests progressively gaining control over established nations and afflicting societal crimes that violated the conscience of the leaders of their host nations. As an example, in 1604 AD Catholic Pope Clement VIII proclaimed:

" All the world suffers from the user of the Jews, their monopoly and deceit. They have brought many unfortunate people into a state of poverty especially working people and the very poor."

Here, Clement VIII- like many world leaders past and present- was inaccurate in his statement, for he, too, did not understand Zionism nor have a separate definition for it, and so made the oft-repeated mistake of associating all Jews together and therefore collectively demonizing the entire religion and all its followers instead.

Then, as is the case today with modern Zionism, the vast majority of world Jewry had committed no crime and deserved no charge, yet due to the actions of the few Jews who wilfully worked towards hegemonic sedition from within their host country of the time, Clement VIII cast-out all Jews in reaction. What Clement VIII failed to understand was that there was indeed a difference within this one religion to be noted: a difference that was not Judaism; it was- even back then- Zionism which excused its advocacy of the societal hypocrisy by citing within the minds of certain Jews, the Kol Nidrei.

By extension, the unjustifiable horrors of the Holocaust inflicted on Jews were a similar collective demonization by the German Third Reich of all Jews as their reaction to the practices of the very few; those who had violated the boundaries of the societal conscience of Germany and their own Torah.

However, the Germans who committed the resultant atrocities based solely on one's affiliation with Judaism were unknowingly guilty of exactly the same failure of personal conscience that ignored the fundamental tenets of their own religious Catholicism and their bible. Together, these two subsets of religion within one society had one inherent amoral similarity: a failure of personal conscience, one that deliberately ignored or excused away their own religion's prohibition against their barbaric crimes against the norms of society.

Known or not by name, theirs was each an individual use of an unjustifiable rationale; one that allowed their afflicted minds to strangely turn Evil into Good, Devil into God, and Wrong into Right. Today, this lapse of conscience is no longer peculiar to any one religion, but, when considered correctly, is indeed purely Zionist. To understand worldwide Zionism is to correctly understand the Kol Nidrei.

"All [personal] vows we are likely to make, all [personal] oaths and pledges we are likely to take between this Yom Kippur and the next Yom Kippur, we publicly renounce. Let them all be relinquished and abandoned, null and void, neither firm nor established. Let our [personal] vows, pledges and oaths are considered neither vows nor pledges nor oaths."
-the Kol Nidrei.

The Kol Nidrei, ("All Vows") often misspelt Kol Nidre, was not originally a prayer, but a declaration offered during Rosh Hashana, the start of the Jewish new year. In "modern" Judaism it is now being delivered as a prayer and has so grown in prominence during the last sixty years that it is now delivered at the commencement of Judaism's holiest yearly event of Passover.

The internal philosophical Judaic controversy over whether the Kol Nidrei should be allowed to be included in Jewish services has been argued, pro-or-con, for centuries by the most pre-eminent Judaic scholars, most of whom vehemently opposed its inclusion and banned it repeatedly. Their fundamental concern: How can the Jewish religion flourish if it violates the most fundamental tenet of human conscience?: Adherence to Right vs. the temptation of Wrong.

This question was succinctly answered over the centuries as the Kol Nidrei rightly fell from grace or was subsequently reinstated by new Zionist elements of society. Historical examination of the Kol Nidrei shows the polarity between the demand for the proper benevolence offered in the original Judaism of the Torah verses the post-Torah books of the Talmud, which contain rationales supported in part by this one single all-excusing prayer that is the fundamental malady, if not the definition, of modern Zionism.

... ... ...

Thus viewed correctly, Zionism is not a religion, nor is it part of Judaism. It is a political tool of expediency and far more comparable to the western created Daesh/ ISIS. Both use a self-serving created form of an ostensibly beneficent religion, Muslim or Judaic, as an alternate rendition of that religion that excuses away a person's obvious factual sins against one's true religious dogma and one's own conscience.

In the ages-old religious argument of whether mankind is born good or evil, as is shown in the daily newsreels of the continued and growing horrors against true humanity, Zionism, like Saudi Wahhabism, has made an a-religious and hypocritical choice to honour the later.

Zionism First Defined: A Conquest of Country.

"In violent opposition to all this sphere of [positive], Jewish efforts rise the schemes of the International Jews. Most, if not all, of them, have forsaken the faith of their forefathers and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new."- Winston Churchill.

When the Israeli Zionists, in 1948, achieved their goal of attaining the nation of Israel, theirs was a victory that had already shown, over the previous thirty years, their methods and goals of new world hegemony to come. The Zionist inspired Balfour agreement was not, as claimed, merely the guarantee of carving Israel out of existing Palestine: It was a bribe.

On Nov. 7, 1917, Lord Lionel Walter Rothchild, arguably the leading Zionist financial and political asset in Britain and America, due to his families multi-national banking interests, guaranteed UK foreign Secretary, Arthur Balfour and the British Government -- then losing WW I desperately- that he would bring American military might to their side in exchange for its ceding Palestine. This led to the signing of the Balfour Agreement, the entry of American troops under false premises and the agreed upon genocide and enforced relocation of the Palestinians. Said Balfour publicly:

"His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people . It being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine " [Emph. Added]

But, here, Balfour lied, having himself succumbed to Zionist influence within his own failure of conscience and personal religious hypocrisy. This was clearly shown when he privately, and far more truthfully, stated:

" For in Palestine, we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting with wishes of the [Palestinians]. And Zionism (is) of far profounder[sic] import than the desire and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who inhabit this ancient land."

This pro-Zionist and fully exclusionary mindset is continued in the horrors perpetrated against Palestinians and other nations to this day. Consider the past three months of this current year alone. Over 150 Palestinians have been slaughtered on their own land and almost 5,000 wounded because of related IDF approved genocidal target practice. Meanwhile, at the same time, nearly 4,500 new illegal settlements have also been recently approved on the occupied West Bank. Soon, reportedly, the US will approve the Israeli seizure of the entire Golan Heights. For within Zionism's mental adherence to the Kol Nidrei is a further incorrect Talmudic influenced hegemonic adage which is used repeatedly as Israeli foreign policy, "Possession is 9/10ths of the law."

Today, Palestine is a sliver of it's 1917 boundaries. Over ninety-five percent has been purchased, coerced, annexed, destroyed or stolen by Israeli Zionists. Not satisfied yet, the deplorable conditions imposed by Israel on the remaining Palestinians are deliberate attempts at further genocide designed to finish their two thousand year project in their favour.

Expanding Zionism: From Palestine to America.

" America is a Golden Calf and we will suck it dry, chop it up, and sell it off piece by piece until there is nothing left Why? This is what we do to countries that we hate. We destroy them very slowly and make them suffer for refusing to be our slaves."- I sraeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu

Israel and its Zionist minions control America. Completely. American nationalism and populism have been steadily changed since the establishment of Israel to an agenda today of "Israel First" and "Corporations First." This is true for any aspiring US politician as well as in the mind of the average American voter. Worse, this current national endemic result is not limited only to America.

In the post-Palestine era after 1947, Zionists were not content with finally having their own nation of Israel. Their new nation would not have resulted without the pressure exerted on the United Nation's members by the American government which ultimately produced, on Nov 27, 1947, UN resolution 181. As with the many previous host nations over the previous centuries that provided sanctuary to the Jewish faith, the Zionist sub-set within American politics began to further their power beyond the Israeli borders. Hence, Israel began the strengthening of its political control of the US Congress and its individual politicians. This, of course, is seen by the unapologetic decisions, platform and control exerted by AIPAC ( the American Israeli Political Affairs Committee) which is undeniably the foremost political action interest within the US Congress. This is documented thoroughly in the 2006 academic work, "The Israel Lobby," by University of Chicago and Harvard University professors John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt. Despite this carefully researched, referenced and footnoted study, and the fact that Mearsheimer is a Jew, both were publicly excoriated as being anti-Semites.

It is well established that both houses of the US Congress care not for the concerns of their voters once they have been placated every two or six years in order to be re-elected and return to primarily pleasing Zionist interests. Looking at US foreign policy alone, today the questionable moniker of, "Dual Loyalty," is used to justify growing Israeli involvement in US military leadership and access by Israeli Zionists within the US government. In foreign policy, America's military always marches to a Zionist tune that has little or no bearing on US national security, yet it's politicians always avoid answering the question: "why?"

As shown repeatedly, from the 2015 Gaza war atrocities onto the granting of Jerusalem as the US denoted Israeli capital, followed by the anticipated subsequent slaughter of the few remaining indigenous Palestinians, if America is not invading on behalf of Israel or its Zionist brethren, such as Saudi Arabia destroying Yemen, it is re-supplying Zionist vassals with weapons or voting only for Zionist interests against UN resolutions and worldwide calls for of peace and sanity. Are not "Neo-Conservatism" and "American Exceptionalism" really the results of the inherent self-serving message of the Kol Nidrei applied to US nationalism and re-branded as national security-not as Zionism- for the dulled American mind?

Consider the fate of former US Secretary of Defence, Chuck Hagel who, long ago during Obama's presidency had the audacity, just prior to leaving for Tel Aviv, to say that he was first and foremost an America and would put American interests before that of Israel, adding that, ""The political reality is that the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here." Hagel later apologised for the use of the term "Jewish lobby", saying he should have said "pro-Israel lobby", but Hagel did not back down over his comments. He also continued to question the duplicity in US foreign and military policy that did not directly support American interests first. Being a former US senator (1997- 2008) from Nebraska, Hagel was sincere in his pro-American statements, so sincere in fact that he was hypocritically cast out by Obama, who had, during his 2008 campaign, similarly opposed the, "unwavering pro-Likud approach to Israel." Once Hagel returned to the exceptional nation from Tel Aviv he was, due to his president being now under Zionist control, summarily fired.

Military control, however, is only one of the many facets of Zionist control within American society and is certainly not necessarily Jewish. Here we see what the true goal of Zionism is within American society and that it does indeed clearly intend to, "suck it dry, chop it up, and sell it off piece by piece until there is nothing left "

From Health Care to Education, Social Services to Corporatization, life expectancy to retirement, America is in decline and Americans are in denial, too scared at being charged with anti-Semitism to take note of the obvious facts. Zionism is destroying their country, piece by piece, but they, unlike Hagel, Thomas, Mearsheimer and Walt, have been indoctrinated that any criticism will be denoted as anti-Semitic and/or disloyal to America. This only accelerates the decline while emboldening the sociopaths who do run their country without any concern for public well-being.

As shown in in a 2015 study by Professors Martin Gilens of Princeton University and Benjamin Page of Northwestern University , those who run American government almost completely ignore providing any benefits that might help their voters.

Gilens and Page tabulated more than 20 years of congressional voting data to answer the question: Does the US government represent the people? They drew several conclusions, particularly that, "The opinions of the bottom 90% of income earners in America has essentially no impact at all because purchasing political influence is 100% legal." Those benefiting from congressional votes in the House and the Senate were almost exclusively the interests of corporate dominance, profit and greed, not the growing needs of the citizens. This is, and always has been throughout history, a peculiar trait of Zionism, since it features a type of greed so severe that it transcends human conscience and any obligation to society. In doing so, this abrogation of duty by politicians is very much in keeping with the tenets and political hypocrisy espoused by the Kol Nidrei.

Only in America are corporations legally treated as live human beings, but these newly created humans, as expected, have no conscience at all. The Zionist mind of the corporation has shown that it controls Congress as well as the US Supreme Court. Further, in the mind of the Zionist, all social services including education need to be privatized and its finances under their control, if not completely eliminated.

When the US Supreme Court made the case of Citizen's United v F.E.C. the law of the land, few took the time to understand the real insidious nature of this historic and divisive Supreme Court decision.

Thirty-five year Supreme Court Justice, John Paul Stevens, did.

In a twenty-three page Dissenting Opinion and using strong words very rarely written within the collegial confines of the court, Stevens railed against Citizen's United and its likely results. As Stevens pointed out, the politically and corporately controlled court under brand new Chief Justice, John Roberts, violated the time-honoured legal concept of Stare Decisis . This was an extremely unusual move that saw the court take-up for its subsequent divisive decision a standing appellate court decision, without a request by either of the two moving parties. Stevens also argued that the Court addressed a question not raised by the litigants, and that the majority "changed the case to give themselves an opportunity to change the law".

Further, incoming Chief Justice, John Roberts, who ordered the case brought before the court anyway, threw the majority of his own written legal precedents on corporations in the rubbish bin of time in order to strangely join the majority opinion. Those are only a few of the problems with the creation of Citizen's United, but here, again, Roberts and the 5-4 majority (Roberts, Kennedy, Alito, Thomas, Scalia) found a way to mentally and morally approve what was their own understood violation of law, if not a violation of conscience. Of course, this was in keeping with the mental hypocrisy of the Kol Nidrei. No, they did not likely know it by name, but those in the majority knew that they were indeed sacrificing their legal acumen, the US constitution and their moral obligation to the higher a authority of modern Zionism.

This cadre of Zionist thought within the Supreme Court is fully admitted by these modern day Pharisees of American jurisprudence who willingly brandish their personal attachment to the Federalist Society (FS). Current card carrying members members include Chief Justice John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch. This organization supports rolling back civil liberties, imperial wars, free-wheeling laissez-faire capitalism and corporatism, along with ending New Deal/Great Society social programs. It's also against reproductive choice, government regulations, labour rights, environmental protections, and justice for unwanted aliens.

This accusation that Federalist doctrine is controlling and creating the laws of the land was further confirmed this past week as this Supreme Court certified bigotry against one religion (Muslim) by allowing Trump's pro-Israel travel ban. On the same day, the same court gutted what little remains of the American unions and the political influence of working voters via collective bargaining. As shown by the Page and Gilens study, Unions are also anathema to corporate interests and this week national Unions joined the Muslim world in being prohibited from helping social change against Zionist influence.

This was a big win for Zionism which abhors the nations of the Muslim world that it cannot control and was clearly shown in the list of countries that were banned. The countries which do not support American expansionism nor Zionism were all banned, while one of the most barbaric Muslim nations, Saudi Arabia, was exempt because their country's leadership has been willing to suck on America's and Israel's teat.

US healthcare, despite being the most expensive per capita in the world, is measured, not by success in prevention, but by the nation's operating table mortality rates, infant mortality rates and rising insurance rates, all of which are some of the worst in the developed world. Despite these foibles of American capitalist Zionism, HMO profits are also at historically high levels as are its administrative fees which exceed 20% compared to just over 2% in the UK's vaunted NHS.

Pharmaceutical companies wine and dine doctors and politicians with a manipulative budget of over $1.2 billion per year. As a result, no longer is the FDA the ultimate arbiter of new drugs being brought to market since it allows and accepts verbatim the self-serving clinical trials of the drug companies that create these drugs. Many, as shown clearly on US television advertising, have a laundry list of side effects. Despite this, these drugs are approved and the doctor's, with few exceptions, happily prostitute their Hypocratic Oath and scientific fact in order to serve up these tainted drugs to their unsuspecting and trusting patients.

These and many other prescription drugs, despite being offered in many other countries, are always the most expensive in America. When many Americans who realized that Canada and Mexico offered the same drugs at a far lesser price, they took their prescriptions over the border to save money. However, once Big Pharma realized it no longer had a captured market, it used its powerful and paid for lobby in congress to effect legislation making it a felony criminal offence similar to smuggling for anyone to save money on their prescriptions by traveling. Not a peep was heard from doctors nationally, nor from congress who had, of course, also sold their professional souls already. This week, the Financial Times reported that Pfizer, the largest drug company in the US, has now further raised prices on 100 products. These price hikes were announced just weeks after President Trump claimed that US drug companies would soon announce "massive" voluntary price cuts .

As a reaction, certain municipalities and healthcare clinics have used cooperative buying to lower prices to their patients, but dutifully the FDA is already attempting to make this practice illegal as well.

Yearly, American education teaches Americans to be ignorant and not to think, much less develop an informed, fact-based opinion. Less and less federal funding goes to public education and the poor test scores show America in 38 th position of developed nations worldwide in mathematics and 17 th overall. This poor performance has led to the advent of private charter schools.

As championed by US Education Secretary, Betsy De Voss, who is decidedly Zionist within her stated public comments about fixing public education, already world geography and critical thinking are rarely taught and history is so heavily skewed as to be revisionist. This is shown by too many Americans still believing that modern day Russia and the long dismembered Soviet Union remain unchanged and an identical threat as well as their failure to be able to find their own nation on a globe. This myopic narrow-mindedness has left most Americans with no interest in discerning the truth about the remaining world around them, but an illogical enthusiasm for US expansionism and "thermonuclear war."

Americans are not stupid, but they are indeed extraordinarily ignorant. An ignorant populace increasingly has no desire for divining the truth of world events and so routinely turns to their singular news source for the "facts" that they hold as indisputable. To this end, in America most journalists prostitute their necessary role as the vanguards of society. This is easily evidenced by the fact that over 90% of all traditional media sources ( TV, Radio, Newspaper) are owned and managed by just six huge corporate interests that have an all too similar editorial slant that favours a Zionist agenda. 20th-century American writer, Truman Capote, in a 1968 Playboy interview, assailed "the Zionist mafia" of his time that has since only increased its monopolizing of the news publishing industry today.

Reaffirming the current condition of journalism, this past week during a public speech in support of Julian Assange, award-winning, career journalist and documentary film maker, John Pilger commented on today's Zionist media editorial control, saying,

"Never has there been a collusion like the one between the U.S. and Israel. It suggests another word and that is "immunity." It has a moral immunity, a cultural immunity, a geopolitical immunity, a legal immunity, and certainly a media immunity. All the talk of Iran and nuclear weapons is without any reference to the biggest nuclear power in the Middle East. [Israel] "

Indeed. With critical thinking substantially suppressed in America, and the media proffering virtually no criticism of Israel, nor Zionist crimes against society, the supposed journalists of the 4th Estate and First Amendment are mostly willing propagandists.

Or else.

Scared into submission while offering only as one sided Zionist agenda, and bribed with lucrative contracts and benefits, no US mainstream journalist will risk the likely connected charge of anti-Semitism. Virtually none will stand-up, respect their conscience and do a proper job of reporting on journalism's control, and societal connection to, Zionism. In the minds of many, however, remains the sudden and tragic demise of the most senior White House correspondent in press history, Helen Thomas. Her crime: Stating what every member of the press already knew to be true, but did not have the guts to say themselves.

While chatting privately during of a Washington, DC cocktail party, Thomas said that Israel should, " get the hell out of Palestine. Remember, these people are occupied and it's their land " Then, as today, this sent of howls of outrage that she or anyone would audaciously state the truth, even in private. Hence, Thomas, her fifty-seven years as a White House correspondent and her exemplary dedication to a high standard of news reporting were gone from public view within 48 hours, when Hearst publications dutifully fired her in order to placate the Zionist outrage against the truth of this matter. She was, of course, speaking about Zionists, not Jews, yet she was charged with Anti-Semitism, a capital crime, and summarily convicted.

Not one US journalist publicly came to Helen Thomas' defence which further illustrated how endemic this doctrine of linking criticism of Israel to anti-Semitism has become.

Helen Thomas, like the facts, truth and example of courage she represented, died less than two years later.

Did her example die with her?

Pre-Modern Zionism: Buying the Stairway to Heaven?

"New York is the city of privilege. Here is the seat of the Invisible Power represented by the allied forces of finance and industry. This Invisible Government is reactionary, sinister, unscrupulous, mercenary, and sordid. It is wanting in national ideals and devoid of conscience . . . This kind of government must be scourged and destroyed."

-William Jennings Bryant ( three-time DNC presidential candidate)

Before modern Zionism took a hold on America there once was a religious mandate to wilfully provide for the less fortunate. Because of the scriptures, if not an ultimate fear of God, many of society's super-wealthy of that by-gone era did substantially contribute to serving the societies around them. This was shown in the construction of libraries, museums, universities, hospitals, endowments, social services and church social programs paid for by oligarchs such as Carnegie, Roosevelt, Blair, Morgan, Getty, Mellon and Tufts. Some of these men, knowing the capitalist crimes they had perpetrated on the path to their riches, were certainly buying their own "Stairway to Heaven." Try as they might, none could deny in their minds the unavoidable final decision that would befall them all come "Judgement Day."

Today, no such religious obligation exists. Any such religious requirements have long since been replaced by the tenets of the Kol Nidrei that allows for, and excuses away, the pure selfishness of Zionism's influence.

By comparison, as a positive example of these too long-ignored religious requirements of societal ethics in business, take Charles William (C.W.) Post and Will Keith (W.K.) Kellogg . These were the breakfast cereal barons of the late 19th century and became very wealthy men indeed. Post was a Christian, Kellogg a Seventh Day Adventist. Both believed and practised the concept that an employee was an asset to be propagated for the good of the company and the good of the worker.

Both Post and Kellogg headquartered their growing empires in Battle Creek, MI. Here they needed a massive workforce, while thousands in pre-industrial and post-depression America needed jobs. Believing that both owner and worker could benefit from their collective endeavours, Post and Kellogg built thousands of modest houses near the factories for the workers, many of which exist today. These houses were sold to the workers at cost and the owners provided credit terms so favourable that workers could pay them off to full ownership on the 30 hour work week that both Post and Kellogg believed to be part of this mutual bargain. Company stores bought their goods at wholesale prices and passed this discount along to the worker. Retirement benefits were guaranteed to all long-standing employees, the majority of whom stayed that long.

As a result, the community of Battle Creek- until the advent of NAFTA and monopoly- flourished, as did both the companies and their profits. At the onset of the 1929 Great Depression, Battle Creek became a sought-after final destination for the many unemployed "two-tankers"- those with just enough money remaining for, not one, but two tanks of gas for their cars- who came up from the southern states seeking work.

With both the owners and the workers prospering, neither Kellogg nor Post had the need to buy their own stairway to heaven, nor prostitute their conscience. They did not know it, but they had not succumbed to the mindset of the Kol Nidrei and did not care to become Zionists, for they chose to honour what their conscience and their religion told them was right and, thus, ignore what they knew to be wrong.

Contrast this socially correct example of religious discipline with a quite different memory from the same time period, one that still wafts in the air across the hills and surrounding green valleys of Merthyr Tydfil in Southern Wales, UK. Here, in what was, for more than a century, iron and coal country, the name and the odour of the infamous steelworks owner, Robert Thompson Crawshay, remains to this day in the minds and on the lips of the local Welsh.

Crawshay typified the many all-powerful industrialist owners of America and Britain in the times when the value of a workhorse far exceeded the value of the human worker. Employees were expendable as was evidenced by the horrible living and working conditions and the massive amount of workplace injuries and fatalities to which the owners, like Crawshay, could not have cared less. Despite being a routine church-goer himself, the list of the societal horrors inflicted on the workers and their families by Crawshay was a long one indeed.

He was born rich, lived that way and died in luxury, and he wanted to let the impoverished community outside his walled estate know it. When Crawshay had a new mansion built in Merthyr he also built a tall four-sided clock tower, but the side facing the workers and the ironworks was left blank. When one year the workers organized a strike, rather than negotiating a settlement with them he closed the entire ironworks and every other business in the town, thus putting everyone, including support trades and other manufacturing in nearby towns, out of work. This fomented dissent in the already starving community and the breaking of the strike. Crawshay also built homes and company stores for his workers, but the homes were on loan at his pleasure and he charged exorbitant rents as he did inflated prices at his stores. This kept the workers forever in debt and indentured to him and his factories.

To further show his personal power over all who lived in his domain, on the eve of a worker's wedding day Crawshay would often have the driver of his two-horse black carriage deliver him to the doorstep of the groom. He would then provide him with an ultimatum: allow him to be the first to deflower the man's betrothed that very night, or lose his job and be blackballed from working in all other nearby locations on the very day of his wedding. To cross Crawshay then, or at any time, was to be "sacked," with the local Crawshay foreman knocking unannounced on one's door of an evening, holding a single used burlap sack for the victim to carry out everything and what little he and his family owned, forthwith, while two Crawshay goons attended to the sacking.

As a staunch Protestant Crawshay knew that his actions were not supported by his bible, his God, nor his conscience, yet he carried on, relishing in his unchecked power and the hatred towards him by the whole town. No, Crawshay did not know the correct definition of his crimes, but he, too, was inherently a Zionist within his own mind. So conscious was Crawshay of his demonstrative and deliberate earthly violations that when he died in 1879 he commissioned a massive horizontal gravestone made of one piece of 16-inch thick granite to cover over his entire grave so that no one would dig up his remains and scatter his God-forsaken corpse to winds or to the hogs.

Yes, Crawshay was, in practice, a Zionist. Today, the capitalist malady exhibited by Crawshay has returned to the factories, sweatshops, and service sector jobs that offer no benefits, retirement or future for workers or families worldwide. The return of the mindset of Crawshay has infected the many corporate religious hypocrites of the today's new industrial age, regardless of religion. Humanity has been cast out. Zionism has returned beginning in America.

The state of America today is already deplorably Zionist in its lack of societal or moral concern. While the US government uses the Zionist economic mantra," If you torture the numbers long enough, they will say whatever you want," in order to brandish its touted lies of purported success, the reported 3.8% unemployment rate does not bare scrutiny with real unemployment actually at 21.4% according to Shadowstats economist John Williams.

The Trump regime and GOP-controlled Congress- like the Federalists on the Supreme Court- want New Deal/Great Society programs eliminated altogether via de-funding or privatization, giving Wall Street and other corporate predators new profit centers to pillage at the expense of the grievously harmed working people, particularly the nation's most vulnerable.

Most US workers are underemployed in future-less part-time or temp jobs because millions of full-time ones that include benefits and retirement no longer exist – lost by offshoring to low-wage countries by corporate Zionist who do not care about their own society that spawned their own business successes. They only care about continued profit. As a further example, this past Tuesday, June 19, Republican House members introduced an FY 2019 budget proposal, calling for $5.4 trillion in mandatory social service spending cuts over the next decade yet they strangely demanded even more defence spending and further tax cuts for the rich and not a penny more for the poor and the indigent. Major cuts to Medicare and Medicaid are prioritized over the next decade – $537 billion and $1.5 trillion respectively- and another $5 billion per year from Social Security and additional cuts from other social programs.

Such is the mind of the corporate and political Zionist in America, today. Robert Thompson Crawshay would have been most supportive of seeing thie return to the amoral conscience of the corporate Zionist. For in his mind, as in the minds of today's corporate Zionists, admission beyond the Pearly Gates is just a matter of buying the Stairway to Heaven.

Are they wrong?

Modernizing Zionism: A Claim to One's Mind and Soul.

Like Crawshay, who failed to heed his bible's teachings in favour of a Zionist-like selfishness and quest for power and more money, seemingly all the major religions today are also similarly affected by a wilful ignorance of conscience.

This week it was reported that, for the first time ever, at the exclusively pro-Zionist gathering of the Bilderberg Group summit the Secretary of State of the Catholic church, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, will be attending from Rome. It is not likely that he will be tutoring this Zionist coven on any of his own religion's twelve commandments, but more likely he will tutored by them on the need for reviewing the spirit of the Kol Nidrei for inclusion as Catholicism's new thirteenth.

By extension, over the last twenty-plus years the advent of the religious duplicity known as the " Christian Zionist" has also manifested itself behind too many American pulpits that spout a deliberately pro- Israel mantra to their parishioners. This hypocrisy was by design of the Israeli Zionists that these supposed Christian ministers now actually serve. Virtually all of them have accepted all-expense-paid junkets to Israel and Jerusalem and thus been indoctrinated with a pro-Zionist / anti- Muslim philosophy that they have been convinced is integral to Judaism and Christianity. This has served Israel well, with the Christian Zionist being blinded into the actual giving of his mind and his religion over to Zionism while parishioners attempt to appease their chosen God in favour of a very different God.

Modern Zionism has even managed to take over a religion that is specifically anti-war, anti-greed, anti-poverty and pro-peace and love. Is it not Zionism further personified when we, the civilized world, behold the daily television spectacle of religious hypocrisy which shows, before our very eyes, the crimson and saffron-colored velvet robes, shaved-heads and be-sandaled Buddhist monks who, incredibly, are now brandishing AK-47 rifles and shooting, when not burning, innocent Rohingha? Yes. They too are not correctly serving their God. They have replaced their true religion with their own bastardized version, one that favours the mantra of the Kol Nidrei over that of non-violence and peace. Thus, they are not Buddhists. They, too, have become .Zionists.

However, what took place in America during the past seventy years since the Kol Nidrei returned is the working model and example of Zionist hegemony as seen across the globe in most countries today. This modern goal is not just a hegemony that attempts to control new country, it is one that seeks to, and results in, forcing, not merely a change in national allegiance in favour of Israel, but worse, it demands a change within one's mind, as personified by the Kol Nedrei, that is beyond Judaism, yet penetrates all religions and morals.

War, selfishness, greed, and avarice are now seemingly endemic in the conscience of society worldwide. This is the great crime of the Zionists: creating a world that now subliminally and unknowingly abrogates its conscience to the religiously hypocritical agenda of the Kol Nidrei. For those of proper religious and/or moral virtue, the concept of the Kol Nidrei, whether defined or not, is naturally abhorrent. For those with a pro-Zionist predisposition, justification of their personal crimes of conscience are too easily excused. Personal success at any cost is the modern mantra. Once sprinkled with the cerebral Zionist pixie-dust of the Kol Nidrei's pervasive influence, any primary concern towards proper humanity becomes tertiary at best.

The crimes of Zionism, via this deliberate cross-societal indoctrination of the Kol Nidrei, go far beyond the bartered religion of Judaism. Many of the required societal elements, such as nationalism, political parties, military defence, education, journalism, medicine, banking, industry, manufacturing and respect for knowledge are similarly degraded by this immoral plague against conscience and society.

The Zionist is wrong in thinking that the whole world beyond America is similarly and completely afflicted with this terminal lapse of conscience. Increased opposition to Israel and Zionism in cities across the globes show that those of true conscience understand their adversary very well. But not necessarily by name.

Zionism's answer to this growing opposition uses the creation of ignorance and apathy as it weapon in forcing the false accusation of anti-Semitism on all who dare to correctly attack its philosophy, its goals and results. But for those who do rarely stand up and state what is obvious, their resistance, free will and minds have now been made illegal.

Take the recent Israeli efforts to make photographing and reporting on any IDF crime against humanity a mandatory prison sentence of 5-10 years. Aside from attempting to further hide their crimes, the Zionist mind wishes to force a new choice of prison vs. conscience on those who would rise to a normal societal standard.

Floating through the US House is another legal challenge to one's free will and thoughts that seeks to challenge any opposition on college campuses in America that would criticize, via peaceful protest, the crimes of the Zionist Israelis. This bill, if successful, would require a full administrative investigation- paid for at public expense- of any campus protest against Israel and of those involved in the new crime of free will and conscious thought. Of course, any similar protests by Zionists are not to be investigated, only those that would attempt to blaspheme against their demonstrative examples of moral turpitude.

Further, The House Committee on Foreign Affairs unanimously passed a measure on Thursday that will allow the president to financially and criminally punish any corporation that elects to follow a moral compass and divest of, or not do business, with Israel. Rep. Ed Royce , (R-Calif.), introduced and then modified the text of the bill called the Israel Anti-Boycott Act. The unconstitutionality of such legislation should be obvious, yet considering the coven of Zionist minded Federalists on the Supreme Court, the chance of this becoming binding law would seem likely.

It was also revealed this week that three previous presidents, and now Trump, had signed a letter authored by Israel that promised they would never to mention publicly the widely known fact that Israel is indeed to only Mid East nuclear power, nor its reported 200 plus nuclear missiles. Reportedly, Trump was not aware of this requirement of ascension to the presidency, but sign it he did, so the Zionist goal of " Nuclear Ambiguity" continues as US condoned nuclear hypocrisy.

Faced with this legalized Zionism, the far greater crime is that the once rational minds of the vast majority of the world are now willing to prostitute their own minds into apathy, or worse, accept this societal influenza in exchange for buying-in to a decidedly personal agenda that ignores the needs of all others. Hence, more than ever before rational humans of all religions- as we see with the Christian Zionists, Industrialists, Buddhists and world leaders across almost all ethnicities, are volunteering to sell their souls merely for the desire a few more shekels. For these rewards, they ignore all else and have, too often, sold their souls.

For Zionism takes it never gives back!

Zionism Today: America's No.1 Export.

As modern Zionism has methodically taken over Palestine and America, so it has done to a vast portion of the world. Today, there are almost no world leaders who put their allegiance to their own countrymen before that of their Zionist masters. The game plan of Zionist hegemony towards political leaders, country, mind and opposition are just as complete in Australia, Canada, the European Union, Britain, Japan, South Korea, etc.,al. For those who have not bitten from their immoral fruit, the Zionist offers only one other choice: financial degradation and internal civil war! This is shown in the few countries that resist a Zionist agenda such as Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, China, Brazil, Venezuela, Russia and others. These countries have been the targets of Zionist propaganda- via American foreign policy- which demands regime change and war.

Take Britain for example and its upstart parliamentary leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn. Despite being Jewish himself, the unabashed "Friends of Israel" coalition within the UK parliament, knowing which side their own bread is buttered on, have attacked Corbyn as being an anti-Semite. On face value this is claimed to be the result of his public and well-articulated support of Palestine and his condemnation in the press of IDF war crimes. But this is not Corbyn's true threat to the Zionists who are buried in parliaments around the world and are rarely exposed by the Zionist controlled world press. No. His true crime is that he offers hope to the many Brits who have suffered years of unjustified austerity at the hands of the Zionist European Union that has, like their American brethren, imposed years of increased funding for hypothetical war at the expense of any social obligations.

Corbyn is possibly the only true socialist leader in the world- one with a track record of standing up for his voters and not surrendering his leadership nor his conscience to the influence of the Zionists. Corbyn not only speaks for a growing majority in the UK, he speaks for the much more powerful interests in Britain that would like to see a return to the policies of True Labour, not the New Labour that was bastardized into existence by the Zionist former Prime Minister, Tony Blair, an indoctrination that seemed almost complete until the rise to power of Corbyn as a true populist Champion. What most fail to observe within Corbyn's rise is that he has successfully weathered not one but two attempts by the Zionist controlled traitors within his own party to oust him as leader. Despite these attempts, Corbyn has emerged unscathed and more popular than ever, and this strongly indicates the power base behind the scenes that wants to see him bring a return to a socialist Britain.

He is also the sole example to a world desperately looking for a leader to follow in their own fight for a return to proper society in their own nations.

This, of course, is anathema to everything the Zionists stand for and for what control they have gained since Maggie Thatcher morphed into John Major, who hatched into Gordon Brown, who then spawned Tony Blair who allowed for the rise of David Cameron and Theresa May, but whose chrysalis has now been crushed under the boot of this rising populism lead by Corbyn.

At the seat of European Zionist control, Brussels, the EU is too busy crushing Zionist opposition in Greece, Italy, Spain/ Catalonia and Brexit to devote their full attention, yet, to Corbyn. Few realize that creation of the EU, from its inception to its current form of unelected economic and social control over 27 once-sovereign nations was,in reality, spawned, propagated, institutionalized and brought to power by the American Zionists looking to further their centralized national control using the pre-existing American model.

The American model of "United" states or nations had, far before 1999, become a tool to prioritize a Zionist agenda over that of the public. Once the Zionist banking interests had succeeded in adding central monetary control to the EU via its emulation of the US Federal Reserve Bank, the interests of the twenty-eight nations were reduced to the interests of the corporation, never more the voter.

Then, there is the IMF. As the foremost tool for turning sovereign nations into Zionist debt slaves, the IMF has used its coercion to force nations across the globe into accepting massive loan packages of US dollars that are more than fully secured by the pledging of national assets that the Zionist business interests covet. The results of this tactical plunder is shown by the fact that the IMF currently holds the third largest gold reserves in the world, all of which was provided as ransom from the countries it afflicted. It has also inflicted massive economic and environmental disasters of staggering proportions on its host nations whose Zionist inspired leadership sought to do a deal with the devil, one that helped their pockets, but not their nation, their people, nor their long term future.

In his book, "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man," John Perkins details the way the IMF forces countries to take on these unpayable loan packages and how the IMF uses this as a wedge to seed its hegemony, austerity, misery and political upheaval- in the name of "progress"- on so much of the unsuspecting world. Greece, is of course, the poster child for these results where a treasonous Alexis Tsipras, as Prime Minister, has now sold off most of the public assets to private corporate interests, has destroyed the national social obligations to his countrymen, and has made Greece a vassal state of the EU, yet he still has made barely a dent in the massive debt obligations to the Troika; the EU, IMF and World Bank.

Still, they want more.

The societal results today, as predicted by the previous results of the American model, have been almost worldwide in its austerity imposed on the poor, massive increases in military armaments purchases, elimination of democracy and democratic results, restrictions of existing civil rights and social services, an ever growing refugee crisis and the autocratic political control of Europe and most of the world by a selected or unelected coven of Zionists who have already sold their own souls for personal power and riches.

In destroying the nation of Greece, theirs is not just a message to the Greeks from the Zionists who run the EU and the Troika. It was a message to all the other nations and peoples of the world: Resistance is futile!

Or, is it?!

Zionism's "Final Solution" Are You a Zionist?!

Yes, when considered in its many worldwide manifestations the true definition of Zionism is much broader and seemingly all encompassing. Once its incorrect attachment to Judaism is accurately debunked, Zionism's degradations of the cornerstones of civilization and its goal towards a subliminal personal adherence to selfishness, greed, and the immoral can be correctly defined in summation by the single all-serving excuse offered by the Kol Nidrei.

But the "Final solution" of Zionism is much worse.For the final goal of Zionism is to take away your human desire to resist.

Truly, Zionism's greatest success has been in indoctrinating the opposition conscience of the remaining world into acquiescence, apathy and failure. Zionism would not have achieved its world threatening level of power had the morals of society already risen up en mass against the crimes of Israeli and Zionist expansion. So far, our world has allowed this to be our current societal condition. Hence we are losing!

As clearly shown, the world is awash in the mindset of the Zionist. Virtually all aspects of civilization are now steeped in the subtle manipulative and hypocritical tenets of the Zionist- not Jewish- Kol Nidrei. This infection of the conscience is certainly spreading worldwide and, whether one knows it by name, this infection has become increasingly systemically endemic. As done so many times through history, Zionism and Zionists must be cast out again from world society.

Across the world, as shown, examples of the horrors of Zionism are not at all limited to the barbarism that is ongoing in Palestine. As suggested in a previous article, "The Good Friday Massacre : World, We Are All Palestinians Now," we, the remaining civilized world, must quickly awaken to the knowledge that we are apathetically existing in an ever-growing cage of Zionist control while to cage door is quickly closing. It is time to understand Zionists are winning the battle for the hearts and minds of what remains of our world.

When the politician ignores his conscience , the will of the voters, his duty to country, and his oath of office in favour of supporting a foreign interest then he is a Zionist.
When the journalist casts aside her moral obligation and wilfully crafts preposterous pro- Israeli articles that distort and belie the truth, while deliberately leaving out the horrors of Israeli war crimes and worldwide influence- thus prostituting the true tenets of objective reporting then, she a Zionist.

When doctors, lawyers and teachers, use understood hypocrisy to justify allowing personal interests and money to come before their obligation to their charges within the society they serve then, they are Zionists.

When the professional athlete knowingly prioritizes continued riches and fame before his obligation to the people whose accolades made him wealthy and fails to use his media power to stand-up against or take a knee in opposition to the injustices he or she sees

then, those athletes are Zionists.

When the Preacher, Rabbi, Imam, Priest, Monk or Holy Father ignores the scriptures of their particular religion and does not thunder a call from the pulpit for the immoral factions within their religion to be ejected then, that man of God is a Zionist.

But, the most critical manifestations that defines modern Zionism are those within society who know in their own minds and conscience- and their hearts- that their own world, and that of human kind, is being destroyed, yet they wilfully choose to do nothing in opposition. Those of the moral world who do see the social hegemony of Zionism before very eyes, yet fail to be disgusted to the point of action. Men and women of clear conscience whomerely pass quiet comment rather than shaking their fists in proper outrage. People whose temptation to protest is too easily calmed by the next media distraction

when those of the civilized world allow themselves to become too scared and apathetic to disconnect Zionism from Judaism and scream at, throw back and laugh-off the erroneous accusation of Ant-Semitism and, then, demand that modern Zionism be removed completely from our world's society for the good, for the future, for the very existence of mankind then, sadly, they too have been, thus, similarly afflicted. And so, yes

they, too, have become Zionist.

Epitaph For Zionism- The Day of Judgement.

On a warm summer's day in mid-Wales, while wandering the hills of the old iron town of Merthyr, a hiker might suddenly be almost overcome by the unmistakable stench of human urine.

It is the grave of Robert Thompson Crawshay.

Long since dead, the memory of this scourge, a man who ignored his religion, his society and his conscience, is still, and will forever be, firmly in the minds of the Welsh. The grave is surrounded by a picketed wrought iron fence, made in his iron works and designed to keep the actions of those of outrage and conscience at bay. So sits his massive flat gravestone, a single, one-line epitaph inscribed at the top. His grave, today, remains as an unintended testament to this man, and all men, who hypocritically defiled their own religious obligations..

Yes, here on this slowly decaying plot, during the many decades past and many more to come, a fence will not be enough to restrict those who respect the true value of mankind and are not so easily put off. Acting on their own continued outrage against what this man once did, and still does, stand for, here they climb that fence. Here, they consciously stand in defiance on his gravestone, a marker that seeks to cover-over the crimes of one man against mankind.

Here. they stare down at the final words of a man so foul that those of conscience, true morals and memory, to this day, have only one possible choice to make.

So, every summer's day they do not forget, deliberately climbing that spiked fence to stand atop of this oligarch and wilfully emptying their bladders all over this villain of humanity. Thus, they leave their mark, their opinion and their personal statement here to waft through the air as the smell of ongoing resistance all over Crawshay's one line epitaph.

Far too many in our world today, like Crawshay, assume that they will somehow, despite their crimes, purchase their own stairway to heaven. For all of his money, his mansions and his final one line, desperate epitaph- carved forever at the head of the massive granite slab- these words could not, would not, and forever will not, sanctify or turn all the Wrongs into Right.

Yes, Crawshay was indeed a Zionist. Like all Zionists, he assumed that atonement for his crimes– such as others pray for using the the Kol Nidrei- could be easily absolved by scrawling his own final prayer to God.

On that gravestone, in 12-inch chiselled letters, is a simple one line epitaph his own final prayer, his desperate demand, for ultimate absolution.
"God, Forgive me." cries out Crawshay, in the finality of his life on hard, unforgiving stone.

For an unconscionable man like Crawshay, it was, then Too God Damned Late!

About the Author: Brett Redmayne-Titley has published over 170 in-depth articles over the past eight years for news agencies worldwide. Many have been translated. On-scene reporting from important current events has been an emphasis that has led to his many multi-part exposes on such topics as the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, NATO summit, Keystone XL Pipeline, Porter Ranch Methane blow-out, Hizbullah in Lebanon, Erdogan's Turkey and many more. He can be reached at: live-on-scene((at)) gmx.com. Prior articles can be viewed at his archive: www.watchingromeburn.uk

Of Related Interest

Greasy William , July 8, 2018 at 4:38 am GMT

Zionism cannot be understood outside the context of late 19th century European nationalism. The purpose of Zionism is to build a "normal" country of Jews in the Land of Israel, accepted by and at peace with it's Arab neighbors. The idea is to replace assimilation of individual Jews with the assimilation of the entire Jewish nation.

Clearly this ideology violates the Torah. The Torah commands us to physically destroy the Arabs and anyone else who challenges us and four us to expand our borders from the Nile to the Euphrates. The Temple must be rebuilt, sacrifices must be resumed and Israel must return to being a theocratic monarchy led by somebody from King David's line.

Peace with the Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians and Iranians? Impossible because we are clearly commanded to annihilate those nations. What about the Iraqis, Egyptians and Saudis then? No, because they also currently occupy land that rightfully belongs to us.

As for the rest of the Arab/Islamic world, when they pay reparations to us and agree to send us an annual tribute in perpetuity and then recognize us as G-d's chosen people and the rightful rulers of the entirety of the Land, then we shall grant them peace. These terms, however, are in final form and non negotiable.

geokat62 , July 8, 2018 at 5:06 am GMT

When the politician ignores his conscience, the will of the voters, his duty to country, and his oath of office in favour of supporting a foreign interest then he is a Zionist .

FIFY

When the politician ignores his conscience, the will of the voters, his duty to country, and his oath of office in favour of supporting a foreign interest then he is a traitor .

utu , July 8, 2018 at 6:50 am GMT
True Torah Jews: The Real Reason that Netanyahu and Israeli Leader's Claim to Speak for All Jews (Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro)

https://youtu.be/E4_1dfp3tAM

j2 , July 8, 2018 at 6:58 am GMT
I will comment this as I have for the last ten years tried to get to the bottom of this "conspiracy".

About the conspiracy:

The New World was an idea of the Enlightenment, replacement of the Old Regime by democracy and capitalism, later by socialism and communism. This idea was promoted by a secret society, Freemasons, later by Communists and other secret societies which did not want communism. Jews were not yet active in this movement, they had a niche as kings people, a separate class. They did not fit into the new world, so they either had to assimilate or to move to some place. As they did not want to assimilate, and they had the tendency of mutual help, proto-Zionists started preparing the transfer of Jews to Palestine already 1840ies.

Those proto-Zionists included Freemasons, some bankers and so on, and it is this group that become to rule the world in a short time, and it is the new form of this group that are the globalists wanting to unify the world and get immigrants and all that. They do not include Masons anymore, but one can identify some organizations working for these goals. To get the non-assimilating Jews out of the new world, they needed Zionism.

Herzl's Zionism and modern Anti-Semitism were created by this group about the same time for this exact purpose. Israel was their creation. The logic behind the new world is to create one world, free market, no religion,.. (just like Imagine of John Lennon or the Masonry dream) But there has to be a ruling class, maybe secret.

In Communism it was the party, UK/US Freemasons possibly saw it as WASPs, maybe it is an ethnic group here. I do not know, these models change and such groups can be infiltrated unless they are closed and endogamous.

About the Jews:

Most Jews of course support Israel and they still practice mutual help, which causes the same problems as always: they were an endogamous and fast growing population trying to promote their group interests and seeing others as enemies. Jews in Israel face the problems of an occupation force: as they are confronted by asymmetric resistance, they are forced to do what they are doing, and that is the strategy of the resistance.

Additionally there is Talmud with its different treatment of Jews and non-Jews, it makes things only worse. The actions Israel must make turn it into a pariah state. The strategy of the resistance may or may not lead to a success.

American Jews support Israel, which is natural as Jews should support Jews. Christian Zionists support Israel, as they read the Bible in that way, the Jews as God's nation. Yet, neither of these groups are the globalists who run the world. Jews, including Zionists, are a cover for the ruling group: resistance is posed as antisemitism. It is the same as was with Freemasonry. Most Freemasons did not make revolutions, it was Memphis and Mizraim, but they acted as a cover: any opposition to the revolutionary Masonry was ridiculed as conspiracy theories and normal Masons insisted that they are innocent, as they were, but they just covered up those lodges which were not at all innocent. Jews have the same role: opposition to those who do all this that must be opposed is presented as opposition to the Jews and Israel and dubbed antisemitism.

Maybe I am wrong in this view that there are two different groups, but historically taken, it was not the Jews who started this development to the new world. Jews are called the lesser cousins in the Protocols and in Joly's Dialogues Machiavelli is a group of evil men, who have taken the ways of the Jews, that is, it was not ethnic Jews at that time (Mizraim members were mostly Catholic, though some were crypto: Frankists and so on).

jilles dykstra , July 8, 2018 at 7:30 am GMT
'Committed no crime'.
If anyone knows the definition of crime in international politics, I'd like to hear it.
Lewis Mumford, 'The city in history, Its origins, its transformations and its prospects', London, 1991, 1961 writes that the judaic rules were meant to cause separation from non jews, and maximum growth of population, in itself no crimes.
I'm reading on the European fourth and fifth centuries, cannot say that judaism's efforts for power were worse than those described.

Anyhow, Rome in the first century CE twice sent powerful armies to Palestine to subjugate jewry, in how far these armies were sent because jews were suspected of being implicated in the murder of the Roman emperor, I'm not sure.

If christianity indeed was created by Paul as secret agent of the Roman emperor, to underrmine judaism, an interesting theory. The copper Dead Sea scroll describes where the jewish treasure was hidden, I'm inclined to think that what is described was real, the Jerusalem temple was very rich. Michael Grant, 'The Jews in the Roman World', 1973, New York

After the west, in any case on the surface, became christian, with the pope as highest authority, jews became a nuisance: they made clear that the pope was not almighty, kings liked to use the jews for tax gathering etc., the pope could not interfere. As jews were excluded from many professions, often also forbidden to own land of houses, it is not suprising that some of them lent themselves to shady practices of kings etc.

What went wrong, in my view, is that jews, not all of them, of course, assimilated insufficiently after the got equal rights in the 19th century. Katz writes 'the expectation that jews would disappear through assimilation was not fullfilled, on the contrary, jews became more visible'.
'From prejudice to destruction', Jacob Katz, 1980, Cambridge MA. One of the factors Katz mentioned for success was 'close economic cooperation'.

And so, after 1870 in the unified Germany, antisemitism emerged. Antisemitism is not antijudaism, as the anti sentiment after 1870 was also against non religious jews. Zionism, in my view, no more than a reaction to antisemitism.

The creation of Israel, the most stupid thing jews ever did, my idea. Zionism is seen by many as the same as judaism, Israel advertises the worst aspects of jewish culture. Israel can only exist through jewish power in the USA, and wars by the USA. Israel may be the third military power in the world, as the British said 'one can do a lot with bayonets, except sit on them'.

Bardon Kaldian , July 8, 2018 at 7:58 am GMT
A very stream-of-consciousness & confusing text. As for myself, I'm all for Zionism with consequences, similar to Arthur Koestler. Let's see..

1. Jews are religious-cultural-historical people. Wherever they settled, they remained an isolated group.

2. Europe, if you wish, is a state of mind: first during Greco-Roman cultural sphere & then during long centuries of Christianity. Jews remained the only tolerated Middle Eastern group in Europe, a group that, mostly, did not assimilate (Muslims and others were booted).

3. in Muslim & Eastern cultural spheres (Iran, Ottomans, Arabs,..) Jews were just one among co-existing cultural groups because Islamic world did not developed as Europe: the nations & nation-states (language, territory, customs, law, culture, history,..) became in past 500-800 years primal foci of loyalty of European peoples. Jews did not fit in.

4. during 19th-20th C Theodor Herzl was a shrewd observer. He clearly saw that most Jews were Europeanized, but still alien Middle-Eastern historical people living among various, different European peoples. Zionist idea was a realist admission that Jews in Europe remained a separate nation, whether they lived in Italy, Germany, France or Russia. Of course, this does not apply to assimilated, not just acculturated Jews: Jews simply cease to be Jews when they lose their ethnic religious identity & fully embrace different cultural-identity matrix. Was Karl Marx a Jew? No, he was a German of Jewish descent.

5. after establishment of Israel, Jews got their nation-state. But, many diaspora Jews continued with their anti-national culture war against western nations, while extolling Israel as a Jewish nation. Sorry guys, you can't have it both ways. It can't be multiculturalism & anti-nationalism for thee (US, France, Poland, Italy,..) & nationalism for me (Israel).

6. contemporary BDS crowd is mostly composed of home-grown far leftists, ideological progeny of the 1960s counter-culture & New Left, and various anti-Jewish racial & religious groups (Muslims, Africans..-who historically don't belong to Europe). Pro-Palestinian, pro-Muslim & pro-3rd world rhetoric is absurdity for most sane whites (Europeans & North Americans). They're not worried about fully integrated co-nationals of Jewish origin; they're annoyed by Zionist Jews who behave like accepted, but still alien & sometimes hostile group; and they're extremely inimical toward unassimilable racial & cultural aliens (blacks, Muslims, Asians, )

For most Europeans & Europe-derived peoples (at least the mentally sane majority)- they want to get rid of all- Asians, blacks, self-conscious Middle Easterners these guys don't belong here. It is not a continuation of some Jewish obsession, but a simple admission: sorry guys, you're not my people. You got your home somewhere in the East & go there. We may trade with all you Israelis, Turks, Moroccans, Pakistanis, Nigerians, .but good fences make good neighbors.

mcohen , July 8, 2018 at 9:08 am GMT
Robert crawshay is the reason the Palestinians are suffering.he was a low down hootchie cootchie and the welsh have no jobs and kol nidrei is to blame
Tyrion 2 , Website July 8, 2018 at 10:06 am GMT
This is some serious rambling nonsense. It touches on myriad subjects and manages to get them all wrong.

Example: the absurd fake quote from Netanyahu.

RealAmerican , July 8, 2018 at 11:01 am GMT
In sum, Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East and its army is the most moral army in the world. Indeed, Israel was founded to be a shining light onto humanity, illuminating how a state should function vis a vis its citizens and its neighbors. Both learned and unlearned know that to be so. To elaborate is no avail, and unquestionably anti-semitic.
Heros , July 8, 2018 at 11:43 am GMT
A very good article on Zionism that addresses the JQ straight on. Unfortunately, I think it is off target by trying to equate the greed and madness for power of Crayshaw, and jews in general, with Zionism. He never really links Crawshays' actions to Kol Nidrei, it is more of a association through a high correlation of depravity and greed.

By confining his definition of Jewish Power be to a subset of Zionism, he provides "good jews" far too much wiggle room to disassociate themselves from their people actions, often when they themselves are citizens of Israel.

... ... ...

dearieme , July 8, 2018 at 11:45 am GMT
"Long ago cast-out from Judea since AD 70, by Roman emperor, Titus ..": but that's simply untrue, a yarn invented centuries after 70AD. They were banned from living in Jerusalem, sure, but that was after the second revolt, not the first. Nor were they ever expelled from Palestine. Plain didn't happen.

Being on the losing side of a revolt against Rome must be grim but expulsion was not one of the punishments. For a start, why would the Romans expel those Jews who took no part in the revolt? When else did Rome expel a whole population as a punishment? Why is there no record of this punishment of the Jews? Even Josephus makes no mention of this purported exile. Pah! It's baloney.

Rugged Pyrrhus , July 8, 2018 at 12:49 pm GMT
Why the maximalism, bro? You make a great case against Zionism, and then conflate it with the Federalist Society's support of "rolling back civil liberties, imperial wars, free-wheeling laissez-faire capitalism and corporatism, along with ending New Deal/Great Society social programs", and their stance "against reproductive choice, government regulations, labour rights, environmental protections, and justice for unwanted aliens."

I happen to love laissez-faire capitalism, and the thought of ending New Deal/Great Society social programs tickles me pink.

Does that make me a Zionist catspaw?

Some of us think the term "reproductive rights" is a euphemism for "child murder", and "government regulations, labour rights, environmental protections, and justice for unwanted (illegal) aliens" are subjectively defined terms, to say the least.

I would have read the whole thing, but after that you devolved into Counterpunchian logorrhea, and I just aint got the time.

Anonymous [117] Disclaimer , July 8, 2018 at 1:16 pm GMT
After the fake quote supposedly from Netanyahu (lol at least spell his name correctly next time) I kept pressing page down and it kept going. Amazing. Why does Unz publish these idiotic schizoid rants?
jilles dykstra , July 8, 2018 at 1:58 pm GMT
@dearieme

The diaspora began maybe two centuries BCE. Why, I never saw an explanation. Of course, the destruction of the temple etc. increased it

James Brown , July 8, 2018 at 2:47 pm GMT
"He(Jeremy Corbyn) is also the sole example to a world desperately looking for a leader to follow in their own fight for a return to proper society in their own nations."

Not a very good example IMHO. Better example is the former PM of Malaysia and again PM of Malaysia recently elected at the young age of 92. Mahathir Mohamad is a well known "anti-semite" which of course means is an enemy of the "Zionist international mafia."

Jeremy Corbyn, if elected, will be the new Alexis Tsipras. Why ? Because as everyone knows, if the "Zionist international mafia" have complete control of the USA, it is obvious that they also have complete control of GB. Corbyn like Tsipras, will do as told.

More: As a leader of opposition, Jeremy Corbyn never had the courage to call a cat a cat. He has never called the former PM and a well known zionist-Tony Bair- a war criminal.

Most British people and Labour members believe that TB is a war criminal. Even today, the blairites (Zionists) still control the Labour Party. How credible that someone that doesn't control his own party, will control Britain's deep state ?

"Thus viewed correctly, Zionism is not a religion, nor is it part of Judaism".

This seems to be, according to Gilad Atzmon wishful thinking from the writer and "Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro, probably the most eloquent Torah Jew spokesperson".

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2017/10/9/judaism-zionism-and-conflation

Otherwise, an excellent piece.

annamaria , July 8, 2018 at 3:28 pm GMT
@Greasy William

"Zionism cannot be understood outside the context of late 19th century European nationalism."
– Sure.
"National Socialism, more commonly known as Nazism, subscribed to theories of racial hierarchy and Social Darwinism The Nazis aimed to unite all Germans living in historically German territory, as well as gain additional lands for German expansion under the doctrine of Lebensraum and exclude those who they deemed either community aliens or "inferior" races." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism
Replace Nazism with Zionism: " Zionism subscribed to theories of racial hierarchy and Social Darwinism The Zionism aimed to unite all Jews living in historically Jewish territory, as well as gain additional lands for Jewish expansion under the doctrine of Lebensraum and exclude those who they deemed either community aliens or "inferior" races."

– Close your holocaust museums already. The worst among the Jews have plagiarized the German nationalism' ideas to create the monstrosity of indecent, dishonorable, inhuman, immoral, and obnoxious imitation (forgery), Zionism. The forgery has been flourishing thanks to the deeply-dishonest talmudic traditions married to tribal solidarity.

The talmudic lunatics have been destroying each and very safe haven throughout Europe and now in the US. Your Polish bastard Bibi and the Moldovan thug Avi can try on taking all possible poses and mannerism of "distinguished" men -- this will not help. They are thugs.
Zionism is a dangerous cancerous growth on western civilization. Would not it be great if your lot collectively disappear from the cultural centers of the EU and the US?

Your problem is, the Zionists cannot coexist with the Zionists. The article explains, why.

Echoes of History , July 8, 2018 at 4:00 pm GMT
@EliteCommInc.

Same sex is the only choice the Jewish Rabbi Jezus allows in Jewheaven.

"When Jewgod raises people to life, they won't marry. They will be like the Jewangels in Jewheaven." (((Matthew 22:30)))

That perversion alone is reason enough to refuse any offer of a Jew to save you to his Jewish utopia. Yet you fall for this degenerate storytelling hook, line, and sinker!

P.S. That verse is but one of many anti-family, anti-normal sex teachings of the Jewish Rabbi Jezus. JESUS' ANTI-FAMILY VALUES http://www.usbible.com/Jesus/jesus_family.htm

annamaria , July 8, 2018 at 4:13 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

"Zionism, in my view, no more than a reaction to antisemitism." – The above paper's focus is on a specific prayer:

"All [personal] vows we are likely to make, all [personal] oaths and pledges we are likely to take between this Yom Kippur and the next Yom Kippur, we publicly renounce. Let them all be relinquished and abandoned, null and void, neither firm nor established. Let our [personal] vows, pledges and oaths are considered neither vows nor pledges nor oaths."
-the Kol Nidrei.

The Kol Nidrei, ("All Vows") often misspelt Kol Nidre, was not originally a prayer, but a declaration offered during Rosh Hashana, the start of the Jewish new year. In "modern" Judaism it is now being delivered as a prayer and has so grown in prominence during the last sixty years that it is now delivered at the commencement of Judaism's holiest yearly event of Passover."

– It was not "antisemitism" but the anti-talmudism reaction towards the indecency and treachery of a certain segment of the Jewish populace.
Zionism was, and is, a farcical and bloodthirsty imitation of the 19th-century German nationalism.

[Jul 07, 2018] All social orders and hierarchies are imagined, they are all fragile, and the larger the society, the more fragile it is. The crucial historical role of religion has been to give superhuman legitimacy to these fragile structures

Jul 07, 2018 | www.unz.com

Dissident X , July 5, 2018 at 2:23 am GMT

@bj

thank you for your comment.

I should like to cite several passages from Yuval Harari's excellent book, " Sapiens ":

p.210: " all social orders and hierarchies are imagined, they are all fragile, and the larger the society, the more fragile it is. The crucial historical role of religion has been to give superhuman legitimacy to these fragile structures.
two distinct criteria:
1. Religions hold that there is a superhuman order, which is not the product of human whims or agreements.
2. Based on this superhuman order, religion establishes norms and values that it considers binding. "
p. 195 It's for your own good : " Evolution has made Homo sapiens. like other social mammals, a xenophobic creature. Sapiens instinctively divide humanity into two parts, 'we' and 'they'. We are people like you and me, who share our language, religion and customs. We are all responsible for each other, but not responsible for them. We were always distinct from them, we owe them nothing. We don't want to see any of them in our territory, and we don't care an iota what happens in their territory. They are barely even human. "

p. 228 The Worship of Man : " if we take into consideration natural-law religions, then modernity turns out to be an age of intense religious fervour, unparalleled missionary efforts, and the bloodiest wars of religion in history. The modern age has witnessed the rise of new natural-law religions, such as liberalism, Communism, capitalism, nationalism, and Nazism. These creeds do not like to be called religions, and refer to themselves as ideologies. But this is just a semantic exercise. If a religion is a system of human norms and values that is founded on belief in a superhuman order, then Soviet Communism was no less a religion than Islam. "

p. 242 Blind Clio : " Ever more scholars see cultures as a kind of mental infection or parasite, with humans as its unwitting host. Organic parasites, such as viruses, live inside the body of their host. They multiply and spread from one host to the other, feeding off their hosts, weakening them, and sometimes killing them. As long as the hosts live long enough to pass along the parasite, it cares little about the condition of its host. In just this fashion, cultural ideas live inside the minds of humans. They multiply and spread from one host to another, occasionally weakening the host and sometimes even killing them. – can compel a human to dedicate his or her life to spreading that idea, even at the price of death. The human dies, but the idea spreads. . Successful cultures are those that excel in reproducing their memes, irrespective of the costs and benefits to their human hosts. Similar arguments are common in the social sciences, under the aegis of game theory. Game theory explains how in multi-player systems, views and behaviour patterns that harm all players nevertheless manage to take root and spread. "

[Jul 06, 2018] The crisis of neoliberal society and American Empire is systemic and neocons are only are only one, however important, part of that.

Notable quotes:
"... As far as Jews are concerned, this appears to be yet another red herring, like Russia-bashing. Are gentile Koch brothers or Walton family any better than the worst Jews in the US? They are just as selfish, greedy, and repulsive as George Soros or Sheldon Adelson. ..."
Jul 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 15, 2018 at 3:35 pm GMT

@AnonFromTN

As far as Jews are concerned, this appears to be yet another red herring, like Russia-bashing. Are gentile Koch brothers or Walton family any better than the worst Jews in the US? They are just as selfish, greedy, and repulsive as George Soros or Sheldon Adelson.

As I always say -- as repulsive and debilitating Jewish influence on US body politic is, this influence, now transformed in almost complete "intellectual" dominance, it wouldn't have been possible without willing accomplices from radical Christian Zionists and a massive corruption in the highest echelons of power.

Agree entirely -- a wholesale dumbing down of masses and even "elites" (both intentional and not) is a direct result of liberalism as a whole.

The crisis is systemic and Jews are only one, however important, part of that. In the end, Bolton is a practicing Lutheran but look at him -- the guy is completely mad. And I mean this in purely psychiatric terms -- he has some real serious demons haunting him and I even have suspicion about what some of those are. Just an example.

[Jul 06, 2018] If Ukraine drifts into chaos, its neighbors, being aware of its history of extreme violence and atrocity are preparing themselves for the spillover

So far Ukrainian society holds well and I see no signs that it will collapse soon. Economics in dismal shape though...
Jul 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

Erebus , June 16, 2018 at 9:40 am GMT

Look up Rostislav Ishenko's latest excellent piece yesterday:

I did, and as usual Ishenko takes an oblique approach that shines a light into obscure but critical corners.

What an eye opener this one is.

Not sure how much was lost in translation, but if I understood correctly the Russians are massing forces in the Western District, not because they fear an attack from NATO, or plan to attack Europe but to rescue Europe from a conflagration that will be sparked in Ukraine. That it was drifting into failed state status is well known, but that a religious war is in the offing was utterly unknown to me, and I suspect to most others here.

That in turn shines a light on why Poland and the Baltics are begging for US/NATO troops as well, and at least partially why US/NATO is delivering. As Ukraine drifts into chaos, its neighbours, being aware of its history of extreme violence and atrocity are preparing themselves for the spillover. They have no desire to relive the decade+ blood orgy that erupted in the middle of the 20th C centred on Ukraine (where, IMHO, the real Holocaust happened).

Overwhelming force applied at an overwhelming pace is the best way of dealing with such an outbreak, and the Russians are the only party able to deliver. US/NATO forces can be expected to roar around in their APCs avoiding trouble and then claim credit in accordance with Western military tradition. Meanwhile, the Russians will go into mopping up the leftovers.

Makes a lot of sense if Ishchenko's read of the situation is right. It probably has a bigger impact on Dunford's and Gerasimov's meeting than the USM "going home".

Whew!
PS: Yes, I was aware of the Russian central bank selling off its USTs. With the Petro-Yuan and Western sanctions now in full swing, it really doesn't need $100B's worth to manage its U$ denominated imports.

[Jul 06, 2018] Pathological lust for political power which afflicted so many is in itself a good indication of a borderline disorder.

Notable quotes:
"... Generally, the term "Russia scholar" when applied to most, in our particular case American, experts should be treated as a bad joke. This is not to mention that most of those "scholars" (with the exception of predominantly Jewish Soviet emigres, such as moron Max Boot) can not even speak, forget a complete command, Russian language. ..."
Jul 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 15, 2018 at 5:20 pm GMT

@EugeneGur

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

It is not "misunderstood"–it is a complete caricature which now blows into the faces of those who helped to create it. Western Russia "expertise" is pathetic and some exceptions merely confirm the rule. Generally, the term "Russia scholar" when applied to most, in our particular case American, experts should be treated as a bad joke. This is not to mention that most of those "scholars" (with the exception of predominantly Jewish Soviet emigres, such as moron Max Boot) can not even speak, forget a complete command, Russian language.

AnonFromTN , June 15, 2018 at 5:46 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

Quite a few grant-eating "liberals" inside Russia speak the language, but this does not make them any more competent. Basically, they illustrate the saying that "he, who pays the musicians, calls the tune". The same applies to "Russia scholars" residing in the US, regardless of their language proficiency.

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 15, 2018 at 5:46 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

However mad Bolton might be, most card-carrying Russophobs and neocons are not crazy: they are cynical people without scruples working for money.

Very true but they are multidimensional and only some of them are not crazy, Ralph Peters, Max Boot or many other rabid Russophobes are genuinely mad. Enough to take a look at their reactions and behavior, I omit here a complete military-political delirium they propagate, which in itself a fruit of a sick imagination.

So it is both for very many of them. After the death of Richard Pipes I received communications from person who studied under him, this person has Ph.D in history, he describes him going completely mad, from going hi pitch in his voice, almost screaming, to sweating profusely, once the word Russia and Russians were uttered.

The hatred of Russia was palpable. Guess what, Pipes was hailed as America's greatest "Russia scholar". It is never one thing. Moreover, pathological lust for political power which afflicted so many is in itself a good indication of a borderline disorder.

AnonFromTN , June 15, 2018 at 6:11 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

If we consider lust for power as a sign of mental affliction, not a single person trying to become US president is completely normal. Might be true, considering the kind of trash we are repeatedly getting.

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 15, 2018 at 6:34 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

If we consider lust for power as a sign of mental affliction, not a single person trying to become US president is completely normal. Might be true, considering the kind of trash we are repeatedly getting.

Combined West and its "electoral" and educational institutions completely stopped production of real statesmen already in 1970s. We saw last pool of real statesmen depart the scene with Bill Clinton's victory in 1992. Current Western so called "elites" do not even qualify for the term mediocrity. Many of then are simply degenerate such as European Greens or American, so called, Left, albeit the nominal Right also doesn't shine with any traces of intellect.

[Jul 06, 2018] I am pretty sure without WWII there would be no 1991.

Notable quotes:
"... While not being a fan of Stalin, I acknowledge that only the people who rose to the top before Bolsheviks took power were good for anything. Those who rose after, from Khruschev on, were worthless nonentities. I consider this negative selection of leaders as one of the drawbacks of the Soviet system. ..."
Jul 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

Sergey Krieger , June 16, 2018 at 6:12 pm GMT

@AnonFromTN

Compared to modern western leaders Kruschev was rather good leader and Brezhnev is downright genius. I was and am actually fond of Dear Leonid Iliich. So I believe it is not a matter of social political organization but systematic and probably human feature.

The West has been producing non entities, idiots and morons at the top with unerring consistency. It is just that conditions in the West are far more forgiving than in Russia. Also we have not mentioned destruction and suffering caused by war in ussr somewhat lagging in few aspects of life standards. Socialism slogan is from everyone by their abilities to everyone for their contribution.

Hence obviously hardworking and better contributing people should be rewarded especially like in Stalin times via glorifying and promoting them to higher status. Stahanov movement comes to mind.

I think Stalin genius is underappreciated. Regarding weapons manufacturing I believe it was a matter of great patriotic war shock.

That war in every respect has caused great damage to us including probably due to huge loss of Tim and best human material laying foundation for further problems. Stalin wasted 8-10 years of his life to first win the war and then rebuild the country. Imagine no war. I am pretty sure there would be no 1991.

AnonFromTN , June 16, 2018 at 2:47 pm GMT
@Sergey Krieger

While not being a fan of Stalin, I acknowledge that only the people who rose to the top before Bolsheviks took power were good for anything. Those who rose after, from Khruschev on, were worthless nonentities. I consider this negative selection of leaders as one of the drawbacks of the Soviet system.

Materially the people in some Western countries lived better than the Soviet people. However, the difference was ~2-3-fold at best, not 10+-fold as many in the USSR believed, and there were (and are) very few countries with higher living standards than Russia. As far as psychological wellbeing is concerned, the USSR compared to the West even better, except for the people with excellent education and willingness to work hard, like me. That's the PR campaign Soviet authorities lost to their peril: the support of better intellectually equipped and the most active people.

I agree that nobody, even the laziest and most useless, should go hungry today, but the difference between what those get and what hard-working people get should be many-fold. Otherwise, the society provides disincentive for the people who can contribute, dragging itself down.
Also, USSR should have paid more attention to the production of consumer goods, even if it meant fewer tanks and artillery pieces. It's policies made all these tanks useless, anyway, not to mention that today these tanks and other military hardware is used against Russia by former "brothers" (with "bothers" like that, who needs enemies).

AnonFromTN , June 16, 2018 at 2:55 pm GMT
@Sergey Krieger

I agree that the people who went to college in Soviet times are better educated and more creative than recent graduates. I am pretty sure that recent successes of Russian MIC are largely due to the Soviet legacy. We'll see what happens next, as "effective managers" they are cranking out now are totally useless in real life.

[Jul 06, 2018] Putin conversion from atheist to a believer

Jul 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

AnonFromTN , June 15, 2018 at 3:03 pm GMT

@Wizard of Oz

My personal opinion: it is exactly "Paris is worth a mass" conversion. It is based on Putin's actions, which suggest a very pragmatic (you can say cynical) person, who has the benefits of his country in mind (rather, who believes that benefits for his country are the best benefits for him). I could be wrong, though.

EugeneGur , June 15, 2018 at 4:22 pm GMT
@Frankie P

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

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

Thankfully that chapter of history is over

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

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

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

[Jul 06, 2018] An interesting variation of anti-Putin propaganda in blogs

Jul 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

"Neo-Tsarist empire." Ha, that's rich. Congrats, you've managed to outdo even the most unhinged anti-Putin elements of the l'chaimstream media.
"impoverishes his people even more." You mean be improving their lives as measured by virtually every metric since kicking out the (((Russian))) banksters and their (((American))) advisers who were robbing the place blind? Dude, you're delusional. Go peddle your nonsense elsewhere.
EugeneGur , June 14, 2018 at 7:53 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

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

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

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

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

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

[Jul 06, 2018] Russian army usually outperform Russian economy

Jul 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

Cyrano , June 15, 2018 at 4:28 am GMT

Why (Oh Why) do they hate the Russians so much? Let me try to answer that question. Most armies in history were created for the purpose of enriching the host country by looting foreign lands. US are bucking that trend – they have an army that's looting mostly the host country for enriching the same army and those who support it (domestically).

Also, the best armies in history usually belonged to whoever happened to be the economic powerhouse at the moment – examples are too many to list them all – ancient Rome, Great Britain 16-19 century, France 19 century, Germany 19-20 century.

There are exceptions to this rule, of course – Genghis Khan – the Mongols hardly an economic powerhouse, yet a number one military power of its time.

Then we come to Russia. I don't know when exactly Russia underwent the Genghis Khanisation process, but it's apparent that they did and it served them well throughout their history. Meaning that their army usually outperforms their economy, and that's what's driving the west mad at least since Napoleon's times.

They think that Russia doesn't deserve to be a powerhouse like they are thanks to their military, because they believe that other than their military, the Russians are culturally, economically, civilizationally, and yes – even genetically inferior to the west.

Tough luck, chums. I have one answer to that: Maybe it's not Russia's fault that militarily they have always managed to outperform the west. Maybe the fault lies with you. How can you blame Russia for the fact that your armies suck? But, as they say in the US – you got to support the troops.

[Jul 06, 2018] Russia's history is a bit more complex than some Manichean struggle between evil Jews and noble Russian Orthodox Christians.

Notable quotes:
"... Vladimir Putin is NO historian and his fascination with Solzhenitsyn is not a healthy one. Nobody denies the role of Jews (positive, as well as negative) in Russian History but Russia's history is a bit more complex than some Manichean struggle between evil Jews and noble Russian Orthodox Christians. In fact, it is infinitely more complex. ..."
Jul 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 15, 2018 at 5:34 pm GMT

@Rurik

...Moreover, Vladimir Putin is NO historian and his fascination with Solzhenitsyn is not a healthy one. Nobody denies the role of Jews (positive, as well as negative) in Russian History but Russia's history is a bit more complex than some Manichean struggle between evil Jews and noble Russian Orthodox Christians. In fact, it is infinitely more complex.

But if you want to view it as one unstoppable Jewish juggernaut against Christ-loving Russians, who am I to suggest to you otherwise.

[Jul 06, 2018] Russia, the Neoconservatives, and the Real Issues Involved by Boyd D. Cathey

So Boyd D. Cathey claims that the main reason of anti-russian hysteria is that Russia represents an obstacle to establishing global US domninance -- a global neoliberal empire led by the USA.
Notable quotes:
"... Consider the recent -- but largely unreported -- formation of an umbrella group, the Renew Democracy Initiative (RDI), with the goal of "uni[ting] the center-left and the center-right." Its leaders include former John McCain foreign policy advisor Max Boot, The Washington Post ..."
"... When Tucker Carlson on his prime time program last July 11, 2017, demanded that Peters provide facts and figures for his accusations, Peters immediately exploded and implied that program host Carlson was a "Hitler apologist." It was a classic argument and instance of reductio ad Hitlerum ..."
"... National Review ..."
"... The Weekly Standard ..."
"... Indeed, another ploy by Neocon pundits (and Congress) has been to parade Bill Browder, the grandson of American Communist Party boss Earl Browder, as a star witness to President Putin's nefarious dealings. Of course, it should be noted that Browder fils ..."
"... Two Hundred Years Together ..."
"... The End of Europe: Dictators, Demagogues, and the Coming Dark Age, ..."
"... Beyond the ideological foundations for their hatred of nationalist Russia are economic considerations and the issue of who controls and manages the Russian economy: Wall Street and Bruxelles, or ..."
"... More, for the past twenty-five years Russia has experienced the poisoned tip of Islamic terrorism, domestically, including the brutal war in Tchechnya in the Caucasus region and the horrid bombings in the heart of the country, Moscow. From the beginning of his tenure Putin has offered to cooperate with the United States in the fight against international Islamic terror, but each time it was the United States -- us -- who refused, including famously Paul Wolfowitz during the George W. Bush administration who replied to one such offer: "We don't need your assistance or intel." ..."
"... as Neocon Charles Krauthammer once declared: "We live in a unipolar world today, and there is only ONE superpower, and that is the United States." That attitude was not received with equanimity by post-Communist Russia, a Russia that has discovered its heritage and its traditions and has asked for partnership with the United States, and not the hysteria we have witnessed in the United States sweeping aside all rationality. ..."
Jul 06, 2018 | www.unz.com
155 Comments Reply

Almost one year ago the United States Congress (with only a handful of "nay" votes) adopted new and severe sanctions against Russia for its supposed attempt to influence and interfere in the 2016 national elections. Included in that legislation was a provision -- specifically placed there by Russophobe Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) -- that President Trump cannot alter or lift any of the sanctions without future Congressional approbation.

The government of Vladimir Putin, in response to this provocation, announced that the American diplomatic presence in Russia would be reduced by 755 persons, a drastic move by any standards. But we cannot say it was unexpected -- or undeserved.

That sanctions vote was fascinating as it illustrated during the first year of the contentious Trump presidency a rare point of political unity between the socialist Left, the Democrats and the mainstream media -- formerly noted for their "soft" and favorable attitude to the old and unloved Soviet Communist Russian regime -- and the conservative/GOP mainstream, dominated by the Neoconservatives. Of course, perspectives and approaches to the question differ, whether it was the Trump campaign that was colluding with Moscow, or if it was Hillary and the Clinton Foundation that had collaborated in some way, but their target remained the same: that man in the Kremlin and the country he governs.

One thing was clear: the result of the 2016 presidential election had the most unheard of and remarkable result in recent American political history: a de facto alliance of these supposedly antipodal political forces. And what we have witnessed is a phalanx of the pseudo-Right Neocons and the formerly pro-Soviet Left linked together, competing to see who could be more "anti" and who could come up with the more far-fetched Russia conspiracy theories, and -- as with the 2017 sanctions -- the latest unwarranted, over the top legislation.

Consider the recent -- but largely unreported -- formation of an umbrella group, the Renew Democracy Initiative (RDI), with the goal of "uni[ting] the center-left and the center-right." Its leaders include former John McCain foreign policy advisor Max Boot, The Washington Post 's Anne Appelbaum, Never Trumper Bill Kristol, former chess wizard Gary Kasparov, and Richard Hurwitz of Council on Foreign Relations. [See " Neocons & Russiagaters Unite! ," April 27, 2018] RDI's manifesto calls for "fresh thinking" and urges "the best minds from different countries to come together for both broad and discrete projects in the service of liberty and democracy in the West and beyond . Liberal democracy is in crisis around the world, besieged by authoritarianism, nationalism, and other illiberal forces. Far-right parties are gaining traction in Europe, Vladimir Putin tightens his grip on Russia and undermines democracy abroad, and America struggles with poisonous threats from the right and left."

Or, recall those on-camera Fox News Russia experts -- think here of General Jack Keane or the unhinged Colonel Ralph Peters who literally foamed at the mouth when talking about Putin, calling him "the new Hitler," and who asserted that Putin had committed "worse crimes" than the German dictator. (Peters is so anti-Russian that he finally left the Fox News network in March 2018 )

When Tucker Carlson on his prime time program last July 11, 2017, demanded that Peters provide facts and figures for his accusations, Peters immediately exploded and implied that program host Carlson was a "Hitler apologist." It was a classic argument and instance of reductio ad Hitlerum .

Of course, such examples aren't rare in the establishment "conservative movement" media. Pick up any issue of National Review or The Weekly Standard or listen to the Glenn Beck radio program and you can find the same hysteria, largely laced with faked quotes or disinformation (e.g., "Putin wants to re-establish the Soviet Union" or "Putin was head of the KGB" or "Putin has had his enemies assassinated," and so on, ad nauseum ).

Indeed, another ploy by Neocon pundits (and Congress) has been to parade Bill Browder, the grandson of American Communist Party boss Earl Browder, as a star witness to President Putin's nefarious dealings. Of course, it should be noted that Browder fils lost big time financially in his manipulations in Russia, as investigative journalists Philip Giraldi and Robert Parry have documented, and he is engaged in a vicious personal vendetta against Vladimir Putin.

For the Neoconservative leaders of what passes for "conservatism" these days, it is as if nothing has changed since 1991, since the ignominious fall of Communism. It's even arguable that their hostility to Moscow has increased since then.

Let me suggest several reasons for this: First, many of the more prominent Neoconservatives descend from Russian Jews from the Pale of Settlement, whose memories go back to the pre-Communist days of persecution and pogroms under the Tsars. They originally welcomed Lenin and the Communist regime as liberators and formed some of its staunchest supporters and apparatchiks in the regime of terror that followed (especially in the Cheka and KGB) until Josef Stalin unleashed a wave of anti-semitism after World War II. [See the partially translated excerpts from Solzhenitsyn's Two Hundred Years Together at: https://200yearstogether.wordpress.com , and the commentary ]

Putin, despite his strong support from native Russian Jews and from the Moscow Rabbinate, is a Russian nationalist and fervent supporter of the traditionalist Russian Orthodox Church, and those two factors bring up painful memories of the "bad old days" of discrimination and Jewish persecution for the Neocons.

A prime example of this comes in a recent volume authored by prominent Neocon journalist and homosexual activist (yes, the two traits often seem to go together), James Kirchick: The End of Europe: Dictators, Demagogues, and the Coming Dark Age, 2017). In his jumble of Neocon ideology and prejudice, Kirchick evaluates what for him seems to be happening ominously in Europe. He is deeply fearful of the efforts to "close borders" against Muslim immigrants from the Middle East. He blasts Marine Le Pen as a racist -- and most likely a subtle "holocaust denier!" -- and attacks the attempts in places like Hungary and Poland to reassert national traditions and Christian identity; for him these are nothing less than attempts to bring back "fascism."

Russia comes in for perhaps his harshest criticism, and the reason is unmistakable: Russia seems to be returning to its older national and pre-Communist heritage, to its age-old Orthodox Christian faith. Russians are returning by the millions to the church and the "old-time" religion. For Kirchick this can only mean one thing: the triumph of bigotry, anti-semitism, and "extreme right wing" ideology, and the failure of what he terms "liberal democracy and equality" (including, he would no doubt include, feminism, same sex marriage, across-the-board equality, and all those other "conservative values"!).

Kirchick's critique, shared by many of the leaders of the national Republican Party and dominating the pages of most establishment "conservative" publications and talk radio these days, joins him arm-in-arm with globalist George Soros in efforts to undermine the Russian state and its president all in the name of "democracy" and "equality." [See, " George Soros Aghast as Collapsing EU, while Russia Resurgent, " January 19, 2018]

But, just what kind of "democracy" and what kind of "equality" do Kirchick and Soros defend?

Beyond the ideological foundations for their hatred of nationalist Russia are economic considerations and the issue of who controls and manages the Russian economy: Wall Street and Bruxelles, or Russia, itself. Unlike the weak and pliant Boris Yeltsin, Putin the nationalist ended the strangle-hold of Russian industry, in particular control of Russia's important energy sector, by those few international businessmen, the oligarchs (many of them Jewish), most of whom fled the country. That could not stand! How dare Russia -- and its president -- oppose the economic diktats of Bruxelles and Wall Street!

Lastly, we should add one more reason for hostility, and that is Russia's remaining international presence, in particular, in Syria. It is very simple: you don't go from being one of the world's two "superpowers" to all of a sudden a second-rate, economically-handicapped "has been" without some remorse. As a patriot and nationalist President Putin has, understandably, attempted to reassert Russian prosperity and power -- certainly, not as much or in the same manner as the old Communist leaders. But, from his reasonable point of view, the largest country in the world does have interests, and not just in what goes on in neighboring nations where millions of Russians (formerly within Russia) reside, but also with long-time allies such as Syria.

Is not this same criterion true for the United States and its dealings with its neighbors and allies?

More, for the past twenty-five years Russia has experienced the poisoned tip of Islamic terrorism, domestically, including the brutal war in Tchechnya in the Caucasus region and the horrid bombings in the heart of the country, Moscow. From the beginning of his tenure Putin has offered to cooperate with the United States in the fight against international Islamic terror, but each time it was the United States -- us -- who refused, including famously Paul Wolfowitz during the George W. Bush administration who replied to one such offer: "We don't need your assistance or intel." And thus, the revealing files on the Tsarnaev brothers (Boston bombing) were not received.

But, as Neocon Charles Krauthammer once declared: "We live in a unipolar world today, and there is only ONE superpower, and that is the United States." That attitude was not received with equanimity by post-Communist Russia, a Russia that has discovered its heritage and its traditions and has asked for partnership with the United States, and not the hysteria we have witnessed in the United States sweeping aside all rationality.

[Jul 06, 2018] Richard Fuisz - Wikipedia

Notable quotes:
"... Fuisz was prohibited from answering questions regarding the relationship between his Russian businesses and the Central Intelligence Agency – when asked if Folkon did any work for the CIA, whether it received any money from the CIA, or whether there were any links between the CIA and any of the companies operated by Fuisz, U.S. Attorney ( DOJ ) ..."
Jul 06, 2018 | en.wikipedia.org

Folkon and the Soviet Union [ edit ]

In the 1980s, Fuisz was involved in a number of business ventures in the Soviet Union through Leopoldina Import-Export Inc., an international business consulting firm, and Folkon, Ltd., an oil exploration company. [14] [15] Working with a young Mikhail Khodorkovsky , then the head of the Young Communist League , Fuisz exported computers and other electronics to the Soviet Union through the Center for Scientific and Technical Creativity of the Youth , [16] and he would later claim that his business helped to supply computers to the KGB . [17] [18]

In 1988, Fuisz was approached by Yuri Dubinin , the Soviet ambassador to the United States, to set up a modeling agency that would prepare young Soviet models for American markets. [16] The first model Fuisz was to oversee was Yulia Sukhanova, the first-ever Miss USSR , but hard-liners in the Moscow City Council obstructed Fuisz's efforts to secure Sukhanova's visa .

With Khodorkovsky's assistance, he was able to smuggle Sukhanova out of the country, though upon reaching the U.S. she cut ties with Fuisz after a dispute over his commissions . In the first of two depositions regarding Fuisz's knowledge of the 1988 Lockerbie bombing , held in December 2000, Fuisz was prohibited from answering questions regarding the relationship between his Russian businesses and the Central Intelligence Agency – when asked if Folkon did any work for the CIA, whether it received any money from the CIA, or whether there were any links between the CIA and any of the companies operated by Fuisz, U.S. Attorney ( DOJ )

Anthony Coppolino raised objections precluding Fuisz's testimony on the grounds of state secrets privilege . [19] In the second deposition, held in January 2001, when asked to describe his interactions with high-level Soviet officials, Fuisz claimed to have difficulty separating information gained in his capacity as director of the modeling agency from information gained in "his employment by the government", and that he was "prohibited by a contract with the government" from providing further clarification. [20]

[Jul 06, 2018] Svidomite (Ukrainian nationalist anti-Russian view) has gotten greater academic play in US russian studies

Jul 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

Mikhail , Website June 16, 2018 at 4:23 am GMT

@Andrei Martyanov

You mean this chap?

http://russialist.org/francis-a-boyle-nyt-obit-on-dick-pipes/

An accurate contrast from what was written about Pipes by Jacob Helibrunn in The National Interest and Ira Straus in JRL.

The there's this leftist BS:

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/06/richard-pipes-cold-war-russian-revolution (JRL Promoted)

The late Richard Pipes wasn't incorrect in his assertion that the image of a foreign intervention on the side of the Russian Civil War era Whites is a matter that has been quite bloated from reality.

The Germans did more for the Reds than just transport Lenin from Zurich to Petrograd. There was also the concerted soft power anti-White/pro-Red left activism in the West, as well as some other matters mentioned in these non-JRL promoted pieces:

https://www.eurasiareview.com/08042016-fuzzy-history-how-poland-saved-the-world-from-russia-analysis/

https://www.eurasiareview.com/23032017-reexamining-russias-past-analysis/

The Jacobin piece linked at the very top of this note makes some broad inaccuracies on the Russian Civil War era violence. There was plenty of such on the side of the Reds, which BTW adversely affected a good number of Jews.

Towards the end of the Russian Civil War, the more objective of historians on this issue note that the Whites had noticeably maintained a better discipline of its forces concerning the issues of looting and violence. A hypothetical White victory wasn't destine for a Nazi/Nazi light scenario. One notes the exiled manner of many Whites including Anton Denikin and Peter Wrangel.

The pogroms against the Jews in Russian Civil War era Ukraine happened before the Whites established a primary base there. These pogroms included involvement from the forces loyal to Ukrainian nationalist leader Symon Petliura, as well as some locals.

Much of the historical accounting on this subject says that Petliura's forces were the most violent among Russian Civil War era combatants against the Jews. In more recent years, there seems to be an increase of claims stating differently -- which appear a blend of questionably biased views from some on the left and others (not necessarily on the left) taking an anti-White/pro-Petliura stance.

I'm not sure how pro-White Pipes was as suggested by the leftist author of the above linked Jacobin piece. I recall Pipes saying rather rather derisively that US based Russian studies programs had at one time been more influenced by the Whites. Whatever the degree of that being true has declined as the svidomite (Ukrainian nationalist anti-Russian view) has gotten greater academic play (Motyl, Kuzio, et al), mixed in with the leftist and JRL court appointed Russia friendly syndromes.

[Jul 06, 2018] I frankly do not think that communism requires redemption.

I a way communism was a new religion and extermination of non-believers are typical for religious wars.
The emergence of neoliberalism was a death sentence for Soviet communism. In this sense the USA did won the Cold War. The triumph of neoliberalism over communism was complete. The USSR elite changes sides and became turncoats.
Communism as practiced by the Soviets was nether a sustainable ideology, not a sustainable political system. As such it was doomed as any quasi theocratic state is doomed. It can' convert itself into something else. So the collapse was inevitable although efforts of "collective West" to speed up this collapse by manipulating oil prices and withholding critical technologies should not be underestimated. As well as bribing key players which by some estimates cost the USA one billion in cash.
Also in 90th the level of degeneration of Soviet elite was staggering and that open a way for neocons. The country was in deep cultural, ideological and political crisis. West supported nationalist movements became important shadow players in several of former USSR republics. Supported by Soros foundation among others. I always wonder about the level of connections between Soros and CIA.
Notable quotes:
"... Regarding new found religious feelings. it is obviously all fake. ..."
Jul 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

Sergey Krieger , June 15, 2018 at 9:25 am GMT

@AnonFromTN

I frankly do not think that communism requires redemption. It was first attempt at moving humanity towards next step in social evolution and it did not happen under the best conditions. It happened in the country ridden with accumulated problems from previous regime mishandling the country for a couple of centuries with those issues coming to a head and after so much pressure it resulted in massive eruption of violence which would have been even worse without Bolsheviks as it would lead to Russia disintegration and Russian state death., There would have happened something similar to modern Ukraine. Basically there were real issues behind those color revolutions in Ukraine and elsewhere but without progressive force caring about people there were ulterior forces that led those eruption of real grievances and these grievances are caused by the system of capitalism you have just described. Yours and other former Soviet citizens excellent education is another testament to communism regime.
Current Russian regime got bad roots and I do not believe anything good will come out of these bad roots. The system is freakish and rotten at the core. It care s not for people. Current increase of retirement age is another testament to this. Bolsheviks when they started made their intentions rather obvious in destroyed and poor country. They assured real human rights while current system removed those rights and there is no guarantees that we as a soviet citizen used to enjoy. Obviously things were not perfect. They never are.

Regarding new found religious feelings. it is obviously all fake.

I also wonder what do you think of spontaneous life appearance? I read some books on this issue including Dawkins' and Behe, but considering your experience and professional background it would be very interesting to hear your thoughts.

AnonFromTN , June 15, 2018 at 4:20 pm GMT
@Sergey Krieger

Communism (at least as implemented in the USSR) had its severe faults. The main of these was that they built a loser-oriented society: no matter how little you contribute, you get quite a bit, with inevitable other side of this coin – no matter how much you contribute, you don't get much more. People are quite different, and a difference in compensation on the order of 5-10-fold would be appropriate. Naturally, the difference on the order of 50-500-fold, like in current Russia or the "liberal" West, is thievery, pure and simple: advantageously born or smarter people without conscience robbing regular folks blind, and using their control of MSM to convince suckers that any other system is for losers. On top of that, some (party numenclatura) were a lot more equal than others (to borrow Orwell's expression). There were also tactical blunders: Soviet authorities did not allow most citizens to travel and work abroad, where they could find out for themselves that huge material advantage of the West is a propaganda myth. In fact, in material terms Russians now live much better then Italians, Greeks, Spaniards, not to mention the majority of Eastern European countries. In the USSR this myth festered and eventually lead to the downfall of the USSR, as there were no serious forces ready to defend it from traitors at the top, who just wanted to steal more than the party rules allowed them. I remember believing in that myth until I got my personal experience working in the US. Here I learned how true is the American folk wisdom that "there is no such thing as a free lunch" and "free cheese is only in the mousetrap".

AnonFromTN , June 15, 2018 at 4:21 pm GMT
@Sergey Krieger

However, Soviet education system was way superior to American, and possibly better than in many European countries (I have no personal experience there). I know for a fact that Soviet school gave a lot better education than the school in the US, even though the US spends enormous amounts of money on schools, much more than USSR did per pupil. The difference in college education was huge in the USSR and is huge in the US. I know that Moscow State or Phystech gave education that was not worse, possibly better than Harvard, Yale, Caltech, UPenn, and other best schools in the US. But most colleges in the USSR were way below MSU level. Similarly, most colleges in the US aren't worth the name, and only 2% of US college students attend really good schools. However, I remember that when we graduated from Biofak MSU, which trained the students mostly to do research, I had a feeling that they taught us to swim but never put water into the pool. After moving to the US (I did not lie to pretend being a persecuted refugee, I found a job via mail and went to work) within months of working in the lab I got a reputation of a star post-doc, a "go to" person in anything related to molecular biology and biochemistry. Besides, it became my unofficial duty to fix the scintillation counter, which was regularly screwed up by the Italian post-docs working in another lab. So, I published many strong papers as a post-doc, found my independent position after 4 years, and got my first NIH RO1 grant a year later.

AnonFromTN , June 15, 2018 at 4:21 pm GMT
@Sergey Krieger

I can't say that today's Russia is all bad or all good. I think open borders is a huge achievement. People have a chance to see the reality with their own eyes: wherever you go in Europe or Asia now, you meet lots of people from Russia, which means that they have the money to travel and an interest in other cultures, as you meet them in museums and at historical sites all over Europe. I do resent what current authorities did to the education system: they degraded it, ostensibly in an attempt to reform and make it more Western-like. I think these "reforms" were extremely ill-conceived, the school is becoming much worse (in fact, American-like, although it must be degraded a lot more to sink all the way down to the US level). I resent than instead of improving Russian Academy of Sciences (it was pretty bad in the USSR) they essentially emasculated it. If you go by publications, there is less decent research in Russia now than there was in the USSR. Huge inequality is another negative, especially considering that most oligarchs got rich by looting state property, and now continue to enrich themselves the same way (heads of most Russian corporations, state-owned and private, are nothing but thieves). That made Russia more US-like, but I consider that regress rather than progress. On the other hand, I consider it a huge achievement that in international affairs Russia today is pursuing its own interests, rather than engaging in a thankless task of saving the world. I subscribe to the Protestant dictum that "God helps those who help themselves", so whoever is worth saving will save themselves, and the rest be damned.

AnonFromTN , June 15, 2018 at 4:22 pm GMT
@Sergey Krieger

Finally, life. As a biochemist, I see no other option than the idea that life appeared spontaneously. The best book about evolution is Dawkins' "The blind watchmaker". People who don't know even elementary biology would tell you that the probability of an emergence of any protein by chance is virtually nil. That is true, but no protein emerged that way. Proteins consist of parts, sequence motifs and domains, each much smaller than the whole thing. Modern proteins (ours and bacterial alike – we all evolved for billions of years) emerged as combinations of these parts. You can find the same domain or sequence motif in dozens, sometimes hundreds, of proteins, attesting to the combinatorial nature of evolution of complex things. When you mutagenize your protein and look at the sequence, you can see how protein families evolved in the sequence of nucleotides (most amino acids can be encoded by many, up to 6, different codons, which makes the evolution clearly traceable). Our ribosomes (machines that make proteins by translating messenger RNA sequence) are a lot bigger and slower than ribosomes in eubacteria, yet we have those better and more efficient ribosomes in mitochondria (plants also have them in chloroplasts). Creationists can't explain this, but this is just the result of eukaryotic cell being a symbiosis of anaerobic archaebacteria with "bad" ribosomes and aerobic eubacteria with better ribosomes, that became mitochondria and chloroplasts. There are many other clear traces of evolution (constantly developing antibiotic resistance of disease-causing bacteria being one of the most obvious), but the funniest argument for evolution I know is this: "Bush junior is the best argument against intelligent design: nobody intelligent would ever design that".

[Jul 06, 2018] Russian "neoliberals" both grant-supported and ones that are not is a separate animal altogether

Jul 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 15, 2018 at 6:00 pm GMT

@AnonFromTN

Quite a few grant-eating "liberals" inside Russia speak the language, but this does not make them any more competent. Basically, they illustrate the saying that "he, who pays the musicians, calls the tune". The same applies to "Russia scholars" residing in the US, regardless of their language proficiency.

Here, I have to politely disagree since Russian "liberals" both grant-supported and ones that are not is a separate animal altogether. Firs, most of them, grants or no grants, are the real deal, they got grants because they are the real deal, not the other way around, and causality in this case really matters. I don't need even to know if Mr. Nekrasov or Gozman are grant-eaters, their hatred of everything Russian is palpable. The only weaker feeling than hatred they have is contempt. This cannot be hidden -- it shines through. They do it for the idea and grants are just a bonus. It all goes back to Russian "Westerners" and liberals about whom Tyutchev (IIRC) left a profound paragraph.

AnonFromTN , June 15, 2018 at 6:31 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

I guess we have to agree to disagree on this. My point is, all these "ideological Russia-haters" eat at least three times a day, and they are used to eating well (no McDonalds burgers for them, they prefer filet mignon). Yes, there is a long history of fights between "Westerners" and "Slavophiles" in Russia, going even before Tyutchev. However, being a "Westerner" one does not have to be a traitor. For example, Peter the Great was a "Westerner", yet he was clearly a Russian patriot (even though he was not quite Russian by blood). Whereas all this scum are traitors. In the US they would be compelled by the law to register as foreign agents.

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 15, 2018 at 8:02 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

We are talking about the same thing with different words. My point is simply that there are whores who do it for money and there are whores who do it for both money and pleasure.

[Jul 06, 2018] Russophobs and neocons are not crazy: they are cynical people without scruples working for money

Notable quotes:
"... However mad Bolton might be, most card-carrying Russophobs and neocons are not crazy: they are cynical people without scruples working for money. ..."
Jul 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

AnonFromTN , June 15, 2018 at 5:10 pm GMT

@Andrei Martyanov

Yes, sick ideology often attracts nutcases. I know a guy in Ukraine with a history of mental illness who is a staunch supporter of current "president" Poroshenko.

However mad Bolton might be, most card-carrying Russophobs and neocons are not crazy: they are cynical people without scruples working for money. Say, Hillary Clinton or Mike Pompeo are not the brightest bulbs in the chandelier, but they are not too mad or too stupid to understand the reality. They are simply greedy scum paid to do the hatched job. The same applies to most current politicians involved in the smear campaign against Russia. The greatest sin of Russia and Putin is that they got in the way of thieves who wanted to loot the whole world but encountered resistance. Assad in Syria, Iran, North Korea, China, and Venezuela committed the same sin: got between the thieves and their intended loot.

[Jul 06, 2018] New PNAC formed. Called the Renew Democracy Initiative (RDI)

Notable quotes:
"... The Washington Post ..."
Jul 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

Consider the recent -- but largely unreported -- formation of an umbrella group, the Renew Democracy Initiative (RDI), with the goal of "uni[ting] the center-left and the center-right." Its leaders include former John McCain foreign policy advisor Max Boot, The Washington Post 's Anne Appelbaum, Never Trumper Bill Kristol, former chess wizard Gary Kasparov, and Richard Hurwitz of Council on Foreign Relations. [See " Neocons & Russiagaters Unite! ," April 27, 2018] RDI's manifesto calls for "fresh thinking" and urges "the best minds from different countries to come together for both broad and discrete projects in the service of liberty and democracy in the West and beyond . Liberal democracy is in crisis around the world, besieged by authoritarianism, nationalism, and other illiberal forces. Far-right parties are gaining traction in Europe, Vladimir Putin tightens his grip on Russia and undermines democracy abroad, and America struggles with poisonous threats from the right and left."

John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan , June 14, 2018 at 5:16 pm GMT

My favorite part of the Renew Democracy Initiative's manifesto:

10. The extremists share a disdain for the globalism on which modern prosperity is based. Whether they are far-left or far-right, they believe in top-down solutions to problems that can best be resolved through greater freedom, competition, openness and mobility . Both seek power without compromise or coalition and defer to the rule of law only when it strengthens their own position. These illiberal forces embrace divisive rhetoric that makes rational debate impossible. Indeed, they frequently reject established facts and scientific reasoning in favor of conspiracy theories and malicious myths. Liberal democracy must address the problems of those disadvantaged by economic change with practical programs grounded in fact and reason.

Amazing! There are two parts to this. The "openness and mobility" is a nod towards their status as rootless kosmopolity who destroy civil society and local communities in favor of a permanent, mobile underclass. But they actually imply that globalism is bottom-up; that globalism is the result of liberty and the free market. Such balls, these people.

Rurik , June 14, 2018 at 7:51 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

The US elites (neocons are just one type of servants they hired)

ah, so it was Dubya all along!

what a clever little schemer he was! Pretending all that time to be dumb as a rock, and a tool of organized Zionism, while he was using the neocons to his own advantage!

So while ((Wolfowitz and Feith and Pearl and Kristol)) were being schooled at the feet of ((Leo Strauss)), it was Dubya the college cheerleader all along who was the mastermind behind the Project for a New American Century and 9/11 !

sure, Goldman Sachs and Hollywood get federal subsidies, but it's the (dying) American middle class that has been exploiting the world's poor!

The hysterical US foreign policy in the last 10-15 years, with its mindless suicidal aggressiveness, is in fact death throes of an Empire that resents going down the drain,

what's been going down the drain has been the blood and tears and future of working class Americans, forced to suit up their children to go slaughter innocent Arabs and others in a transparent and treasonous policy intended to bolster Israel – at the direct and catastrophic expense of America and the American people.

I wonder, as the American people are taxed to the tune of billions every year, to send to Israel as tribute, is that also a case of US elites using Israel to their own devices? As Americas roads and bridges crumble, and veterans are denied care?

Or, is it just possible, that the ((owners)) of the Federal Reserve Bank, have used that printing press as a weapon to consolidate absolute power over the institutions of the ZUSA?

Do you suppose that when France bombs Libya or menaces Syria, that they're doing it to benefit the French elite? And that Israel is their dupe, who give them a pretext for doing so? Or that the French (and British and Polish and Ukrainian, etc..) elite are getting their marching orders from Jewish supremacist Zionists who're hell bent on using Gentile Christians to slaughter Gentile Muslims while they laugh and count the shekels? Eh?

[Jul 06, 2018] Are terms "neocon" and "Jew" synonyms

They are not. Lobbing for MIC does not require to be Jewish, although many Jews are talented propagandists. Neocons and Zionists are more closely related, with Zionists being a subset of Neocons
Jul 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

anonymous [965] Disclaimer , June 17, 2018 at 8:06 pm GMT

@Jake

The "deep state" has always existed everywhere, and always will. It's a feature, not a bug, depending on whether its interests coincide with the people's, or not. For example, many of the Romanovs were installed via "deep state" palace coups.

But can we stop using the word "neocon" and simply start using the word "jews" instead?

From the article:

>Renew Democracy Initiative (RDI) leaders include former John McCain foreign policy advisor Max Boot, The Washington Post's Anne Appelbaum, Never Trumper Bill Kristol, former chess wizard Gary Kasparov, and Richard Hurwitz of Council on Foreign Relations.

Every. Single. Time.

Oh, and about those Brits, I found it really interesting to know that all of the Royal Family's men are circumcised, and it's not done medically as in the USA, it's done by a Rabbi.

_at_ Quartermaster

>done in Ukraine

That was done by the USA. One of the primary architects of it was Victoria Nuland. She's Jewish, in case you were wondering.

Rurik , June 18, 2018 at 1:05 pm GMT

But can we stop using the word "neocon" and simply start using the word "jews" instead?

no, because the worst neocons are Gentiles

And I say worst, because at least the Jews are doing what they consider to be 'best for the Jews', as they foment war, and loot the US treasury of billions of dollars every year to benefit their tribe.

Whereas the Gentile neocons are serving the Jewish supremacists at the direct of their own tribe and nation.

Scum like Dick Cheney, James Woolsey, George Will, the entire membership of the GOP in good standing with 'conservative Inc., Paul Ryan deserves a mention of his own, John McCain and Lindsey, and all the rest of the rotten neocon Gentiles, who're far, far worse human beings than Max Boot or William Kristol.

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 18, 2018 at 2:05 pm GMT
@Rurik

no, because the worst neocons are Gentiles

Bingo! It is this self-evident and simple fact which many are afraid to face.

Rurik , June 18, 2018 at 3:08 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

this is perhaps the most contemptible man alive. (even possibly edging out McCain!)

listen how at 1:38 -- 1:42 he advocates taking out all of Syria's defenses, which would of course lead to the utter destabilization and ultimate carving up of Syria.

what this POS doesn't mention is that he, (and Dick Cheney and other Gentile scum) are on the strategic board of Genie Energy, which is poised to make trillions of dollars pumping oil out of Syria's Golan Heights. Which today is universally considered Syrian territory. But if Assad falls, then that all changes in a heartbeat.

also look at him at 51 seconds in, drooling over the planned destruction of Lebanon by the ZUS.

here he admits that he's an investor in 'energy and national security matters'

can you imagine a rich man advocating for the slaughter of untold innocents, including American service men and women, in order to illegally and immorally steal a nations territory so that he could profit by it with a few shekels more?

There aren't words..

He also was part of John McCain's presidential campaign.

The Jewish neocons are babes in the woods when it comes to the raw, treasonous evil of men like Woolsey.

youp , June 24, 2018 at 12:54 pm GMT
All of the verbage to tell us what we already know? That the alliance between the soft neoliberal, the media and the neocons is all about the Jewish supremacist agenda.

That is to use the might of the US against those who oppose the plan for Greater Israel to dominate the world thru endless wars and financial manipulation.

To destroy the entire Middle East to steal land, to control the political process in ALL the countries on Earth particularly the West.

Look at the fake media ownership, the journalists, the "comics" , the sports owners, academia. All jewish controlled and financed.
Putin is in the way. He's lucky to be alive still.

[Jul 06, 2018] It used to be that the only things one could be certain of were "death taxes." Now of course we must add to that list the very dependable presence of CIA / State Dept lies parroted by MSM all over the West.

Jul 06, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Gary Weglarz , July 5, 2018 at 1:01 pm

It used to be that the only things one could depend on were "death & taxes." Now of course we must add to that list the very dependable presence of CIA / State Dept lies parroted by MSM all over the West. Lies which are endlessly repeated in defiance of all physical reality and often in direct opposition to actual events in the actual world we live in.

From the Ukraine coup, to Russia-gate, to the "Assad's gassing his own people" regime change propaganda, to the totally surreal Alice in Wonderland Skripnal poisoning nonsense in the U.K, the Western MSM have been as dependable as the rising sun.

They can and do provide fact-free, evidence-free reporting directly from the bowels of the deep state in support of the neocolonial West, including unending support for the never ending resort to mass violence the West relies upon to keep the rest of the planet subjugated -- just as it has for the last 500+ years.

[Jul 06, 2018] Unfortunately, probably due to 'American Exceptionalism', most Americans think the MSM is bringing them 'the truth'. But nothing could be further from The Truth

Jul 06, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

irina , July 5, 2018 at 2:06 pm

It's not just the media. The late night talk show hosts are doing their bit too, as I heard last night on a Jimmy Kimmel rerun (of a recent show). Can't remember the context as I was doing the dishes, but did hear him say the usual "Russian illegally annexed Crimea" standard phrase, immediately followed by "and then invaded Ukraine". The latter just casually tossed off as a given. People hear these memes constantly repeated and, regardless of their veracity (suspect to say the least) it becomes part of their worldview.

Who is behind the political preaching of hosts like Jimmy Kimmel ? Inquiring minds want to know !

Joe Tedesky , July 5, 2018 at 2:43 pm

You know what irina, seeing these late night talk shows go all crazy over Putin makes me think of the Zio-Media executives, and where their allegiance to power resides. Joe

Gary Weglarz , July 5, 2018 at 6:28 pm

irina -- I quite agree. The same is true of the former Daily Show crew members who now have their own shows. Several have shown themselves to be quite the little imperialist war mongers when it comes to gleefully repeating the CIA sponsored Syrian regime change and Russiagate propaganda. Samantha Bee & John Oliver kept triggering my gag reflex with their propaganda lines until I found a simple but effective solution and stopped watching them altogether. We have an amazingly seamless propaganda system here in the U.S. One can chose to either get one's "pro-war regime change propaganda" delivered with barely concealed racism and misogyny from Fox News, or instead opt for hearing the same nonsense delivered with pretentious blather and catchy jazz interludes at PBS. American democracy is all about having "choices."

Jeff Harrison , July 5, 2018 at 7:57 pm

I quite agree. I knew the minute that they started calling RT a propaganda outlet that, in fact, the USG was running a full scale propaganda operation. I don't know if I simply wasn't paying enough attention or if they have, in fact ramped the operation up, but I can hardly read any MSM outlet's output without calling bullshit on it.

irina , July 6, 2018 at 2:55 am

Jimmy Kimmel actually used to be funny and there is a really good clip (somewhere on youtube no doubt) of him reading a 'doctored' Dr. Seuss
book to The Donald (a live guest) during his primary candidacy.

But since The Donald's election Kimmel has opened almost every show with 'ten minutes hate' segment on The Donald. I still watch (or at least listen) occasionally because I want to know what is being fed to The Public.

You are absolutely right though, "we have an amazingly seamless propaganda system here in the US". The average person maybe has 30 minutes to devote to the news, between getting home and having dinner; they watch some sort of news show and think they are 'informed'. But it actually takes MANY hours and a knowledge of alternative websites to even begin to piece together an approximation of what might, in reality, be going on.

The Russians used to say that, at least they knew they were being propagandized.

Unfortunately, probably due to 'American Exceptionalism', most Americans think the MSM is bringing them 'the truth'. But nothing could be further from The Truth.

[Jul 06, 2018] Geopolitical geo-economic challenges that the US West faces compels even good old-fashioned Anglo-Imperialists to say nasty things about Russia.

Notable quotes:
"... "Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power." ..."
"... Wolfowitz's document was leaked before release, and its bald-faced call for Imperial conquest caused enough of a noise that it was hastily rewritten before its official release a month later. ..."
Jul 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

Erebus , June 15, 2018 at 9:26 am GMT

The personal viciousness of the Neocons' attacks on Putin and Russia may have something to do with ancient memories (however false they may be), but the geopolitical & geo-economic challenges that the US & West faces compels even good old-fashioned Anglo-Imperialists to say nasty things about Russia.

Since Putin came to power, Russia has been working the Plan. Its strategic objectives are to rejuvenate and consolidate the "Russian World" in Mackinder's Heartland, and from there to leverage its enormous geographical size & natural resource base to become the central power on the Eurasian continent. It's unique position culturally and geographically allows it to aspire to being the Grand Arbiter of Eurasian affairs, the only nation able to link the two ends of the continent geographically, economically and culturally.

When Wolfowitz wrote his now infamous words

"Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power."

he was channelling Mackinder who said

who rules the Heartland commands the World-Island;
who rules the World-Island commands the world.

Wolfowitz's document was leaked before release, and its bald-faced call for Imperial conquest caused enough of a noise that it was hastily rewritten before its official release a month later.

The manner of the Wolfowitz Doctrine's emergence was a harbinger of the sort of half-assed attempt at empire the US embarked on. When it comes to Empire building, one is well advised to either Go Big, or Go Home. In the event, stretching its half-baked, incoherent doctrines to the breaking point, a series of inevitable fiascos followed and what we're seeing now is the last desperate attempts to keep its satraps onside by bamboozling their publics and making it difficult for clear sighted politicians to lead their countries away from the increasingly loud sucking sound coming out of Washington. As even that tactic is now failing, the US will soon face another Go Big, or Go Home moment.

DanFromCt , June 15, 2018 at 12:31 pm GMT
@Rurik

Exactly. "Elites" are doing it. They own Hollywood, too. Republicans like Trump, Ryan, Graham aren't groveling before organized Int'l Jewry when they take orders from "billionaires," not at all. It's Chamber of Commerce nerds they secretly answer to, you see, not Int'l Jewry's Wall Street and Fed, whose business is tricking a profit from honest American labor wherever it's found, while (apparently for laughs) calling this extortion the efficient allocation of scarce financial resources. It's all so farcically obvious at this point yet Conservatism Inc is telling us it's all MAGA magic. Have to love this new face of Conservatism Inc, too -- a fruitcake whose sexuality derives from an obsession with male defecation to the extent his kind ingest feces and genital excreta and call it luv. Nonetheless, the CUFIs will be sending their sons to die and lose their limbs to turn the ME into one big Tel Aviv and in the process leave poor Moloch seeming like Mickey Mouse in comparison.

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 15, 2018 at 3:22 pm GMT
@Erebus

the US will soon face another Go Big, or Go Home moment.

US doesn't have resources anymore of "going big". It is not realistically an option, unless one wants to start a global war. But I in general agree with your thesis.

EliteCommInc. , June 15, 2018 at 3:30 pm GMT
@anonymous

laughing -- you forgot russian gangs, italian gangs, irish gangs, polish gangs, corrupt law enforcement, etc, etc . . . .

I don't have any unique beef with Russia. I think is it is great that they no longer outlaw acknowledging that god exists.

AriusArmenian , June 15, 2018 at 3:57 pm GMT
Many liberals and progressives walked straight into a Russophobia trap initiated by the CIA.

And there they remain.

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 15, 2018 at 5:04 pm GMT
@Rurik

Yes, Stalin was not Jewish, but what would you say was the Jewish role (if any) with the Bolshevik revolution (and the Holodomor and the rest of the horrors visited upon Russia and beyond, -as described by Solzhenitsyn- by Jewish finance, intrigue, treachery and genocidal villainy)?

Look first at the list of first Sovnarkom, for starters. Jewish finance and interests were important but only, again, as part of the puzzle. I do not consider Solzhenitsyn a good writer, even less a competent Russia historian, not to mention him being a complete amateur in any affairs pertaining defining military and political factors which led to two Russian Revolutions (in fact, three, once 1905 is considered). So, I am not interested in discussing the work of falsifiers.

Rurik , June 15, 2018 at 5:15 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

Look first at the list of first Sovnarkom, for starters.

Anonymous [144] Disclaimer , June 15, 2018 at 6:01 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

You didn't answer his question:

If the ECB, (an extension of Rothschild's Fed) were in the hands of Gentiles, do you think Europe would be committing ethnic suicide?

The ongoing White Goyim Genocide project is proof positive that the Tribe is holding the reigns. Our own gentile "elites" are getting played into this suicide just like everyone else. Only the lies differ. They don't know that their seat of "power" is at the kiddie table and that it has an expiration date.

Rurik , June 15, 2018 at 6:24 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

Russia's history is a bit more complex than some Manichean struggle between evil Jews and noble Russian Orthodox Christians.

obviously

In fact, it is infinitely more complex.

I've delved a bit into it. Read some books and such. But my education is always incomplete, and I'm an eternal student.

But if you want to view it as one unstoppable Jewish juggernaut against Christ-loving Russians, who am I to suggest to you otherwise.

naw, that's not how I see it.

The reason I bring up Jews is because I see them as often times bad actors that are causing dire problems right now, today, in this world. And menacing things I value, like peace, when peace is practicable.

When you talk about the infinite complexity of Russia's history, so too is that history tied to her neighbors, and Ukraine's history as well. (I suspect you know where I'm going with this ; )

So what some very clever and sinister people might do, is use that history and certain fault lines in the Russian and Ukrainian narratives, to foist strife and death and misery and war. You see?

Now you may say that Poroshenko is not a Jew, and as far as I know, that's right, (or not, I don't really know or care), but what I do know, and do care about, is the way neocon Jews (and goyim stooges) in my country have cynically used those historic fault lines to foment strife and war.

The way I see contemporary Russian history is one that following the collapse of the SU, Russia was looted during Yeltin's drunken reign by Rothschild agents known as the "Russian" oligarchs, (a few of which seem to have been actual ethnic Russians), and from there how Putin heroically wrested the destiny of Russia from these bad actors.

Then it was on to a bright future, except then Putin grew alarmed by what he saw happening to Libya, to be followed by Syria and what was it Gen. Clark said.., seven other countries?

So he put the kibosh in Syria's destabilization, and by doing so, earned the wrath of the Zionists.

Whereupon neocon Jews like Nuland installed Jews like Yatz in a coup that here in the ZUS they called "democracy".

The reason ((they)) did that, was to stick a pointed stick into the Russian bear, for defying ((their)) agenda in the greater Levant.

That's why they blamed Putin for MH17.

That's (probably) why they lowered the price of oil, to harm Putin (and Venezuela and others)

That's why our media are 24/7, 365 screeching that PUTIN IS HITLER!!!

Because, as far as I can tell, it is Putin that is the only resistance to whatever Bibi wants.

Because what I can tell you, is that Russia or no Russia, Bibi gets what ever he wants from "our" fecal government, always.

And so because of this dire paradigm, I do sometimes mention that it is Jewish supremacists that are foisting these wars. And causing great strife between Russia and the rest of the world.

I don't fulminate about Jewish supremacists because they stole my twinkle, no.

I talk about Zionist intrigue because that is exactly why the world is demanding that Putin return Crimea. And pay for the deaths on MH17, and why thousands have died in Donbas, etc..

These things didn't happen in a vacuum. There are actors involved, and geopolitics, and Machiavellian intrigues and machinations that should be exposed IMHO.

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 15, 2018 at 6:29 pm GMT
@Anonymous

You didn't answer his question:

If the ECB, (an extension of Rothschild's Fed) were in the hands of Gentiles, do you think Europe would be committing ethnic suicide?

Western Liberalism doesn't have Jewish roots, unless one wants to associate capitalism with Jews only, which is not the case. This liberalism is flesh and blood of the Enlightenment and Europe's current problems have roots in this liberalism, together with the post-WW II cultural shock. It is also rooted in the United States emerging from this war unscathed. So, no it is not just the tribe, it is the whole clockwork of Western Civilization and its leader, the United States, which drives it into the gutter. Jews here are just for the ride and chutzpa–US and Jews were created for each-other. "Rothschild's Fed" in this case but one of many institutions which was created to enrich a rather substantial (to put it mildly) American strata of radically not-Jewish waspies who are now trying to find any justification (and excuses) for them screwing their own country into the increasingly grim future. Per tribe, ask yourself a question WHO owns this site and who allows, including very many openly mental people, to freely and openly express their opinions? Is Ron Unz, who is a real cultural American asset (even though I do not always agree with him) a tribe or not? Guess who is the most vocal and courageous fighter against anti-Russian madness in US? Professor Stephen Cohen, is he a tribe?

Here is a great British historian for ya:

"This swift decline in British vigor at home and the failure to exploit the empire were not owing to some inevitable senescent process of history .That cause was a political doctrine .The doctrine was liberalism, which criticized and finally demolished the traditional conception of the nation-state as a collective organism, a community, and asserted instead the primacy of individual. According to liberal thinking a nation was no more than so many human atoms who happened to live under the same set of laws .It was Adam Smith who formulated the doctrine of Free Trade, the keystone of liberalism, which was to exercise a long-live and baneful effect on British power .Adam Smith attacked the traditional "mercantilist" belief that a nation should be generally self-supporting "

"The Collapse Of British Power", Correlli Barnett. William Morrow & Company, Inc. New York, 1972. Page 91.

Now ask yourself a question–IS the United States a nation-state?

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 15, 2018 at 11:15 pm GMT
@Rurik

The liberalism of the Enlightenment meant that we should all use our rationality to question the dogmas (and the leaders) of the day, and put them to the test of reason. That's why it's also known as the Age of Reason.

You obviously intent on ignoring economics of the issue and transition from one mode of production to another. It was this thing which predetermined all others. I do have 1929 (IIRC) version of Paine's Age of Reason.

Erebus , June 16, 2018 at 2:25 am GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

US doesn't have resources anymore of "going big". It is not realistically an option

I know, and should probably have made it clearer that when faced with that decision, the US will have to go home. The top levels of the USM pyramid know well the limits of the box they've gotten themselves into. They've built the wrong force structure for the world as it is and will be.

Madeleine Albright's famous question to Gen. Powell 'What's the point of having this superb military you're always talking about if we can't use it?' can now be re-worded to ask "What's the point of having this enormous military edifice and expenditure if it isn't superb, or even effective?" The answer is that there is no point. Much of it can be jettisoned without affecting the US' real strategic situation, and almost all of it if its mandate were to be shrunk to defence of its homeland and close allies.

The recent 6hr meeting in Finland between Gerasimov and Dunford, is (I believe) likely to have dealt with some of the parameters governing the USM's "going home". I can't even imagine how they're gonna do this in an organized way, but it's in everybody's interest that it happens as smoothly as possible. That those two seem to have built a professional rapport and even understanding is heartening.

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 16, 2018 at 4:00 am GMT
@Erebus

The recent 6hr meeting in Finland between Gerasimov and Dunford, is (I believe) likely to have dealt with some of the parameters governing the USM's "going home"

Most likely, at least Dunford, unlike most of US establishment is professional. Look up Rostislav Ishenko's latest excellent piece yesterday:

http://actualcomment.ru/tak-nachinayutsya-voyny-1806150926.html

Google translate should help.

Meanwhile, Russia since March 31 this year got rid off 50% of her US treasuries–today's news.

https://ria.ru/economy/20180616/1522835784.html

AnonFromTN , June 16, 2018 at 3:59 pm GMT
@Sergey Krieger

Frankly, I always read Rostislav Ischenko with interest. After all, he worked for the Ukrainian government, including Ukrainian Foreign Affairs ministry, until 2014, when it became abundantly clear that project "Ukraine" is an abject failure. He has a lot of inside knowledge, although he sometimes predicts as imminent things that happen a year or two after his predictions. But in most things he tends to be right.

RICHARD BRAVERMAN , June 17, 2018 at 2:13 am GMT
jumping the shark ...revealing files on the Tsarnaev brothers (Boston bombing) were not received .. For all your research can you not see a false flag, i.e. manufactured event for public consumption confused see Operation Gladio

[Jul 06, 2018] Corporate Media's About-Face on Ukraine's Neo-Nazis by Daniel Lazare

Notable quotes:
"... Special to Consortium News ..."
"... The Washington Post ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... Zhydobanderivets ..."
"... The Frozen Republic: How the Constitution Is Paralyzing Democracy ..."
"... Le Monde Diplomatique ..."
"... The American Conservative ..."
"... If you enjoyed this original article please consider making a donation to Consortium News so we can bring you more stories like this one. ..."
Jul 05, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Corporate Media's About-Face on Ukraine's Neo-Nazis July 5, 2018 • 59 Comments

U.S. corporate media spent years dismissing the role of neo-Nazis in Ukraine's 2014 coup but it is suddenly going through a conversion, as Daniel Lazare reports.

By Daniel Lazare
Special to Consortium News

Last month a freelance journalist named Joshua Cohen published an article in The Washington Post about the Ukraine's growing neo-Nazi threat. Despite a gratuitous swipe at Russia for allegedly exaggerating the problem (which it hasn't), the piece was fairly accurate.

Entitled "Ukraine's ultra-right militias are challenging the government to a showdown," it said that fascists have gone on a rampage while the ruling clique in Kiev closes its eyes for the most part and prays that the problem somehow goes away on its own.

Thus, a group calling itself C14 (for the fourteen-word ultra-right motto, "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children") not only beat up a socialist politician and celebrated Hitler's birthday by stabbing an antiwar activist, but bragged about it on its website. Other ultra-nationalists, Cohen says, have stormed the Lvov and Kiev city councils and "assaulted or disrupted" art exhibits, anti-fascist demos, peace and gay-rights events, and a Victory Day parade commemorating the victory over Hitler in 1945.

Yet nothing has happened to stop this. President Petro Poroshenko could order a crackdown, but hasn't for reasons that should be obvious. The U.S.-backed "Euromaidan" uprising not only drove out former president Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014, who had won an OSCE-certified election, but tore the country in two, precisely because ultra-rightists like C14 were in the lead.

When resistance to the U.S.-backed coup broke out in Crimea and parts of the country's largely Russian-speaking east, the base of Yanukovych voters, civil war ensued. But because the Ukrainian army had all but collapsed, the new, coup government had no one to rely on other than the neo-fascists who had helped propel it to power.

So an alliance was hatched between pro-western oligarchs at the top – Forbes puts Poroshenko's net worth at a cool $1 billion – and neo-Nazi enforcers at the bottom. Fascists may not be popular. Indeed, Dmytro Yarosh, the fire-breathing leader of a white-power coalition known as Right Sector, received less than one percent of the vote when he ran for president in May 2014.

But the state is so weak and riddled with so many ultra-rightists in key positions – Andriy Parubiy, founder of the neo-Nazi Social-National Party of Ukraine, is speaker of the parliament, while ultra-rightist Arsen Avakov is minister of the interior – that the path before them is clear and unobstructed. As Cohen points out, the result is government passivity on one hand and a rising tide of ultra-right violence on the other. In the earlier stages of the civil war, for instance, the rightwing extremists burned more than 40 people alive in a labor union building in Odessa, a horrific incident downplayed by Western media.

Cohen's article may have Washington Post readers scratching their heads for the simple reason that the paper has long said the opposite. Since Euromaidan, the Post has toed the official Washington line that Vladimir Putin has exaggerated the role of the radical right in order to discredit the anti-Yanukovych revolt and legitimize his own alleged interference.

Sure, anti-Yanukovych forces had festooned the Kiev town hall with a white supremacist banner, a Confederate flag , and a giant image of Stepan Bandera , a Nazi collaborator whose forces killed thousands of Jews during the German occupation and as many as 100,000 Poles. And yes, they staged a 15,000-strong torchlight parade in Bandera's honor and scrawled an SS symbol on a toppled statue of Lenin. They also destroyed a memorial to Ukrainians who had fought on what Bandera supporters regard as the wrong side of World War II, that is, with the Soviets and against the Axis.

But so-called responsible, mainstream journalists are supposed to avert their eyes to avoid being tarred as a " useful idiot " whom Putin supposedly employs to advance his "anti-American agenda." Ten days after Yanukovych's departure, the Post dutifully assured its readers that Russian reports of "hooligans and fascists" had "no basis in reality."

A week or so later, it said "the new government, though peppered with right-wing politicians, is led primarily by moderate, pro-European politicians." A few weeks after that, it described Bandera as no more than "controversial" and quoted a Kiev businessman as saying: "The Russians want to call him a fascist, but I feel he was a hero for our country. Putin is using him to try to divide us."

Thus, the Post and other corporate media continued to do its duty by attacking Putin for plainly saying "the forces backing Ukraine's government in Kiev are fascists and neo-Nazis." But who was wrong ?

The New York Times was no better. It assailed Russia for hurling "harsh epithets" like "neo-Nazi," and blamed the Russian leader for "scaremongering" by attributing Yanukovych's ouster to "nationalists, neo-Nazis, Russophobes, and anti-Semites." The Guardian 's Luke Harding – a leading Putin basher – said of the far-right Svoboda Party:

"Over the past decade the party appears to have mellowed, eschewing xenophobia, academic commentators suggest. On Monday, the U.S. ambassador in Kiev, Geoffrey Pyatt, said he had been 'positively impressed' by Svoboda's evolution in opposition and by its behavior in the Rada, Ukraine's parliament. 'They have demonstrated their democratic bona fides,' the ambassador asserted."

This is the party whose founder, Oleh Tyahnybok, said in a 2004 speech that "a Moscow-Jewish mafia" was running the Ukraine and that Bandera's followers "fought against the Muscovites, Germans, Jews and other enemies who wanted to take away our Ukrainian state." Had the leopard really changed its spots, according to Pyatt? Or was it simply a matter of America not giving a damn as long as Svoboda joined the fight to encircle Russia and advance NATO's drive to the east?

As someone named Marx once observed , "Who you gonna believe, me or your own two eyes?" As far as Ukraine was concerned, the answer for the corporate press came from the U.S. State Department. If Foggy Bottom said that Ukrainian neo-Nazism was a figment of Russia's imagination, then that's what it was, regardless of evidence to the contrary.

Someday, historians will look back on Euromaidan Ukraine as one of the looniest periods in western journalism – except, of course, for all the ones that have followed. But if one had to choose the looniest story of all, one that best reflects the abject toadyism of the reporting classes, it would have to be "Why Jews and Ukrainians Have Become Unlikely Allies," a 1,400-word article that ran on the Post -owned Foreign Policy website in May 2014. Four years later, it stands as a model of how not to write about an all-important political crisis.

Cohen's Conversion

Tyahnybok: 'Moscow-Jewish mafia' is running Ukraine.

The piece begins with the usual hand-wringing about Svoboda and Right Sector and expresses remorse that the latter still venerates the "controversial" Bandera, whose followers "fought on the side of the Nazis from 1944 until the end of World War II." (Actually, they welcomed the Germans from the start and, despite rocky relations with the Slav-hating Nazis, continued to work with them throughout the occupation.)

But then it gets down to business by asserting that as bad as Ukrainian nationalists may be, Russia is doubly worse. "Despite the substantial presence of right wing nationalists on the Maidan during the revolution," it says, "many in Ukraine's Jewish community resent being used by Putin in his propaganda war." The proof is an open letter signed by 21 Ukrainian Jewish leaders asserting that the real danger was Moscow.

"We know that the political opposition consists of various groups, including some that are nationalistic," the letter declared. "But even the most marginal of them do not demonstrate anti-Semitism or other forms of xenophobia. And we certainly know that our very few nationalists are well-controlled by civil society and the new Ukrainian government – which is more than can be said for the Russian neo-Nazis, who are encouraged by your security services."

This was music to Washington's ears. But if neo-Nazis are free of "anti-Semitism or other forms of xenophobia," how does one explain the white-power symbols in the Kiev town hall? If nationalists were "very few" in number, why did journalists need to explain them away? If Russian security forces really encouraged neo-Nazis, where were the torchlight parades and portraits of Bandera-like collaborators hanging from public buildings in Moscow?

The article might have noted that Josef Zissels, the Jewish community leader who organized the letter, is a provocative figure who has long maintained close relations with Ukraine's far right. A self-styled Zhydobanderivets – a word that roughly translates as "Kike follower of Bandera" – he has since infuriated other Jewish leaders by criticizing California Congressman Ro Khanna for sending a letter to the State Department asking that pressure be brought on the governments of Poland and Ukraine to combat Holocaust revisionism in their countries.

Forty-one Jewish leaders were so angry, in fact, that they sent out a letter of their own thanking Khannna for his efforts, expressing "deep concern at the rise of anti-Semitic incidents and expressions of xenophobia and intolerance, including attacks on Roma communities," and "strongly proclaim[ing] that Mr. Iosif Zissels and the organization VAAD do not represent the Jews of Ukraine." A Jewish community leader in Russia was so outraged by the pro-Bandera apologetics of Zissels and a Ukrainian-Jewish oligarch named Igor Kolomoisky that he said he wanted to hang both men "in Dnepropetrovsk in front of the Golden Rose Synagogue until they stop breathing."

So Foreign Policy used a highly dubious source to whitewash Ukraine's growing neo-Nazi presence and absolve it of anti-Semitism. As crimes against the truth go, this is surely one of the worst. But now that the problem has gotten too big for even the corporate media to ignore, overnight muckrakers like Joshua Cohen are seeing to it that getting away with such offenses will no longer be so easy. Before his abrupt about-face, the author of that misleading Foreign Policy piece was Joshua Cohen.

Daniel Lazare is the author of The Frozen Republic: How the Constitution Is Paralyzing Democracy (Harcourt Brace, 1996) and other books about American politics. He has written for a wide variety of publications from The Nation to Le Monde Diplomatique , and his articles about the Middle East, terrorism, Eastern Europe, and other topics appear regularly on such websites as Jacobin and The American Conservative .

If you enjoyed this original article please consider making a donation to Consortium News so we can bring you more stories like this one.

mike k , July 6, 2018 at 4:49 pm

The leaders of Israel who sell weapons to the Nazis in Ukraine, are no better than those Nazis.

Susan Sunflower , July 6, 2018 at 1:37 pm

for those having Alice In Wonderland whiplash, yes the USA was funding the Ukranian neonazis Azov Brigade before Congress banned the funding in March 2018.

https://therealnews.com/columns/the-us-is-arming-and-assisting-neo-nazis-in-ukraine-while-congress-debates-prohibition

which of course does not mean that others are not funding them and/or funding or simply "arming" their friends and allies

https://electronicintifada.net/content/israel-arming-neo-nazis-ukraine/24876

same old "syrian playbook" wrt to enemy-of-my-memory bull .

rosemerry , July 6, 2018 at 10:12 am

The two-hour documentary "Putin" shows in an interview Pres. Putin explaining his government's cooperating with the Western- supported Ukrainian government for four years (because they were neighbors and had many links) which he considered normal behavior. However, once the 2014 election brought in a more "Moscow-friendly" team to govern Ukraine, the USA began its plans to overthrow it and we see all the consequences shown in this article.

Francis Lee , July 6, 2018 at 7:53 am

Ukraine: Fascism's toe-hold in Europe.

The tacit support given by the centre-left to the installation of the regime in Kiev should give them cause for concern writes Frank.

Politics in the Ukraine can only be understood by reference to its history and ethnic and cultural make-up – a make-up criss-crossed by lasting and entrenched ethnic, cultural and political differences. The country has long been split into the northern and western Ukraine, where Ukrainian is the official and everyday lingua franca, and the more industrialised regions of the east and south where a mixture of Russian speaking Ukrainians and ethnic Russians reside. Additionally, there has long been Hungarian and Romanian settlement in the west of the country, and a particularly important Polish presence, whose unofficial capital, Lviv, was once the Polish city of Lwow. The Russian Orthodox Church is the predominant form of Christianity in the East, whilst in the west the Christian tradition tends towards Roman Catholicism.

Politically the Eastern and Southern Oblasts (Regions) which includes the cities and centres of heavy industry, Kharkov, Lugansk, Donetsk, Zaporozhe, Nikolayev, Kherson, Simferopol and Odessa, have tended to tilt towards Russia whilst the western regions have had a more western orientation. This has traditionally been reflected in the electoral division of the country. There is no party which can be considered 'national' in this respect, except ironically, the old Communist party, which of course is now banned. The major regional parties have been the Fatherland party of Yulia Tymoshenko (since renamed) and the former head of government, Arseniy Yatsenyuk as well as the ultra-nationalists predominantly in the west of the country, and the deposed Victor Yanukovich's Party of the Regions in the East (now defunct) along with its junior partner in the coalition, the Ukrainian Communist Party.

However, what is new since the coup in February 2014 there has been the emergence from the shadows of ultra-nationalist (fascist) parties and movements, with both parliamentary and extra-parliamentary (i.e.,military) wings. In the main 'Svoboda' or Freedom Party, and the paramilitaries of 'Right Sector' (Fuhrer: Dimitry Yarosh) who spearheaded the coup in Kiev; these have been joined or changed their names to inter alia the Radical Party, and Patriots of the Ukraine; this in addition to the punitive right-wing militias, such as the Azov Regiment responsible for numerous atrocities in the Don Bas.

Suffice it to say, however, that these political movements and parties did not emerge from nowhere.
This far-right tradition has been historically very strong in the western Ukraine. The Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) was first established in 1929 and brought together, war veterans, student fraternities, far-right groups and various other disoriented socially and political flotsam and jetsam under its banner. The OUN took its ideological position from the writings of one, Dymtro Dontsov, who, like Mussolini had been a socialist, and who was instrumental in creating an indigenous Ukrainian fascism based upon the usual mish-mash of writings and theories including Friedrich Nietzsche, Georges Sorel, and Charles Maurras. Dontsov also translated the works of Hitler and Mussolini into Ukrainian.

The OUN was committed to ethnic purity, and relied on violence, assassination and terrorism, not least against other Ukrainians, to achieve its goal of a totalitarian and homogeneous nation-state. Assorted enemies and impediments to this goal were Communists, Russians, Poles, and of course – Jews. Strongly oriented toward the Axis powers OUN founder Evhen Konovalets (1891-1938) stated that his movement was ''waging war against mixed marriages'', with Poles, Russians and Jews, the latter which he described as ''foes of our national rebirth''. Indeed, rabid anti-Semitism has been a leitmotif in the history of Ukrainian fascism, which we will return to below.

Konovelts himself was assassinated by a KGB hit-man in 1938 after which the movement split into two wings: (OUN-m) under Andrii Melnyk and, more importantly for our purposes (OUN-b) under Stepan Bandera. Both wings committed to a new fascist Europe. Upon the German invasion in June 1941, the OUN-b attempted to establish a Ukrainian satellite state loyal to Nazi Germany. Stepan Lenkavs'kyi the then chief propagandist of the OUN-b 'government' advocated the physical destruction of Ukrainian Jewry. OUN-b's 'Prime Minister' Yaroslav Stets'ko, and deputy to Bandera supported, ''the destruction of the Jews and the expedience of bringing German methods of exterminating Jewry to Ukraine, barring their assimilation and the like.''

During the early days of the rapid German advance into the Soviet Union there were some 140 pogroms in the western Ukraine claiming the lives of between 13000-35000 people (Untermensch, in fascist terminology). In 1943-1944 OUN-b and its armed wing the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (Ukrainska povstanska armia – UPA) carried out large scale ethnic cleansing resulting in the deaths of tens of thousands; this was a particularly gruesome affair in Volhynia where some 90000 Poles and thousands of Jews were murdered. The campaign of the UPA continued well into the 1950s until it was virtually wiped out by the Soviet forces.

It should be said that during this early period Bandera himself had been incarcerated by the German authorities up until his release in 1944, since unlike Bandera they were not enamoured of an independent Ukrainian state but wanted total control. Bandera was only released at this late date since the German high command was endeavouring to build up a pro-German Ukrainian quisling military force to hold up the remorseless advance of the Red Army. Also pursuant to this it is also worth noting that during this period the 14th Galizian Waffen SS Division, a military Ukrainian collaborationist formation established by Heinrich Himmler, was formed to fight the Soviet forces, and yet another being the Nachtingal brigade; (1) this unit was integrated into the 14th Galizian in due course. It is also interesting to note, that every year, and up to 2014 commemoration ceremony including veterans of this unit takes place with a march through Lviv in an evening torchlight parade – genuine Nazi pastiche. The flag of this unit is not dissimilar to the Peugeot logo, the standing lion, and can be seen at ultra-nationalist rallies as well as football matches involving Lviv Karparti FC. There are also numerous statues of Bandera across Ukraine, and since the 2014 coup even street names bearing the same name. Significantly the UPA have now received political rehabilitation from the Kiev Junta, with Bandera declared a hero of the Ukraine and the UPA rebranded as 'freedom fighters.' One particularly splendid statue of Bandera stands proudly in Lviv and is usually adorned with flowers.

Other novel attractions the capital of Banderestan include 'Jewish themed restaurants' one such is Kryivka (Hideout or Lurking Hole) where guests have a choice of dishes and whose dinning walls are decorated with larger than life portraits of Bandera, the toilet with Russian and Jewish anecdotes. At another Jewish themed restaurant guests are offered black hats of the sort worn by Hasidim. The menu lists no prices for the dishes; instead, one is required to haggle over highly inflated prices ''in the Jewish fashion''. Yes, it's all good clean fun in Lviv. Anti-Semitism also sells. Out of 19 book vendors on the streets of central Lviv, 16 were openly selling anti-Semitic literature. About 70% of the anti-Semitic publications in Ukraine are being published by and educational institution called MUAP (The Inter-Regional Academy of Personnel Management). MAUP is a large, well-connected and increasingly powerful organization funded from outside anti-Semite sources, and also connected to White Supremacist groups in the USA and to the David Duke, former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.

(It is one of the ironies of history that if the Zionists in AIPAC and the Washington neo-con think tanks, and the Labour Party Friends of Israel, were so concerned about anti-Semitism, they might try looking for it in Lviv. They wouldn't have to search very far.)
Present day neo-Nazi groupings in Ukraine – Svoboda (Freedom) party and Right Sector – have been the direct descendants from the prior ideological cesspool. Heading Svoboda is Oleh Tyahnybok. Although these are separate organizations Tyahnybok's deputy Yuriy Mykhalchyshyn is the main link between Svoboda's official wing and neo-Nazi militias like Right Sector. The Social-Nationalist party as it was formerly known chose as its logo an amended version of the Wolfsangel, a symbol used by many SS divisions on the Eastern front during the war who in 2004 a celebration of the OUN-UPA, stated in 2004, that ''they fought against the Muscovite, Germans, Jews and other scum who wanted to take away our Ukrainian state.'' And further that ''Ukraine was ruled by a Muscovite-Jewish mafia.'' Tyahnybok came under pressure from the then President, Yuschenko, to retract his inflammatory statements, which he did, but he then retracted the retraction!

Given the fact that Svoboda was, apart from its stamping grounds in the west, making little national electoral headway, it was essential to clean up its image and deny its Nazi past. But this was always going to be difficult since the members of such groups cannot help the unscripted outbursts and faux pas which they tend to make and which reveals their true colours. For example, following the conviction and sentencing of John Demjanjuk to five years in jail for his role as an accessory to the murder of 27,900 people at the Sobibor death camp, Tyahnybok travelled to Germany and met up with Demjanjuk's lawyer, presenting the death camp guard as a hero, a victim of persecution ''who is fighting for truth''.
And so it goes on. We can therefore infer that this organization is inveterate fascist. More disturbing Svoboda has links with the so-called Alliance of National European Movements, which includes: Nationaldemokraterna of Sweden, Front Nationale of France, Fiamma Tricolore in Italy, the Hungarian Jobbik and the Belgian National Front. More importantly Svoboda held several ministerial portfolios in the Kiev administration, and Right Sector swaggers around Kiev streets with impunity, and/or are being drafted into a National Guard to deal with the separatist movements in the east, or to beat down anyone who doesn't conform to their Ayran racial and political ideals.

One would have thought that this mutating revolution in the Ukraine would have drawn attention of the centre-left to the fact that fascism had gained a vital beachhead in Europe, and that the danger signals should be flashing. But not a bit of it; a perusal of the Guardian newspaper quickly reveals that their chief concern has been with a non-existent 'Russian threat'. One of their reporters – or old friend, Luke Harding -described Right Sector as an ''eccentric group of people with unpleasant right-wing views.'' Priceless! This must rank as the political understatement of the century. In fact, the Guardian was simply reiterating the US-imposed neo-conservative foreign policy. But naturally, this is par for the course.

(1) The Nachtingal brigade, which was later incorporated into the SS Galizien, took part in a three-day massacre of the Jewish population of Lvov (now Lviv) from 30 June 1941. Roman Shukhevych was the commander of the Nachtingal and later, in 1943, became commander of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (the "Banderivtsy", or UPA/UIA[5] ), armed henchmen of the fascist Stepan Bandera, who after the war pretended that they had fought both Nazis and Communists. Members of the division are also accused of having murdered some 800 residents of the Polish village of Huta Pieniacka and 44 civilians in the village of Ch?aniów.

Paolo , July 6, 2018 at 7:11 am

Just for the record: the Ukrainians hailed the Nazis as liberators after the Soviets had let millions of Ukrainians die of hunger in the thirties, a sort of "genocide" that goes under the name of Holodomor and has officially been recognized by western Parlaments only a few decades ago. In eastern Ukraine there were no more inhabitants after the Holodomor, and the Russians imported hundreds of thousand peasants from Russia to get agriculture working again.

The problems of Ukraine are so deep that fomenting regime change there was a most idiotic thing to do. Sooner or later the problems will explode, and it will be tough shit. Whoever helped this regime change should be locked up in some high security jail as far as possible.

Garrett Connelly , July 6, 2018 at 9:52 am

The big lie is 180° opposite of reality repeated over and over using free corporate propaganda.

vinnieoh , July 5, 2018 at 3:15 pm

Still scratching my head at the electric last line of Mr. Lazare's piece. I'm mean, I'm used to "official" organs like WaPo and NYT publishing whatever narrative is most helpful to whatever pieces are being moved on the chessboard, but for the same "freelance journalist" to have written both the earlier Foreign Policy piece and the recent WaPo piece is a puzzle to me.

Does Joshua Cohen just write stuff that goes with the flow (at any particular moment) and has a good chance of being published (and consequently of himself being paid)?

Or did this person really have an epiphany, and the scales fell from his eyes? I suspect a third explanation though what that may be eludes me. One thing is for sure, as a Trump/Putin meeting gets closer, expect more false "official" narratives concerning both Ukraine and Syria.

robjira , July 5, 2018 at 2:54 pm

https://off-guardian.org/2018/01/11/documentary-ukraine-on-fire-2016/

For anyone who hasn't watched this film yet.

Seamus Padraig , July 5, 2018 at 2:05 pm

'The U.S.-backed "Euromaidan" uprising not only drove out former president Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014, who had won an OSCE-certified election, but tore the country in two, precisely because ultra-rightists like C14 were in the lead But if one had to choose the looniest story of all, one that best reflects the abject toadyism of the reporting classes, it would have to be "Why Jews and Ukrainians Have Become Unlikely Allies," a 1,400-word article that ran on the Post-owned Foreign Policy website in May 2014.'

Here's the thing though: however weird it may sound, there actually DOES seem to exist some sort of tacit alliance between (some, not all) Jews and Ukrainian Nazis. Even if their ultimate goals are completely at odds–the Nazis hate the EU, but the Jews mostly want to join it–they nearly always seem to work together against Russia. It has even been maintained that the Azov Battalion (one of the all-volunteer Neo-Nazi militias fighting against the Donbass rebels) was entirely financed for a time by Jewish oligarch Ihor Kholomoisky, at least until he did something to piss Poroshenko off and got sacked from his post as governor of Dniepropetrovsk. And in the beginning, Jews who tried to point out that Neo-Nazi groups were involved in overthrowing Yanukovych, like Dr. Stephen Cohen, were roundly denounced a 'Russia apologists' just for stating facts.

But now that Washington's whole Ukraine project has gone south, I guess the Nazis, having outlived their usefulness, are, as usual, to be the fall-guys and take all the blame.

Anna , July 5, 2018 at 2:39 pm

yeh, the Kaganat of Nuland has many veils.
The most stunning aspect of the banderite putsch in Kiev was the dead silence of nazi-hunters from Wiesenthal Center, the always oh-so-sensitive ADL, the main 52 (fifty-two!) American Jewish organizations, and the overall docility and compliance of the "righteous" Israel with the banderite-neo-Nazi ideology by Kagans-selected power structures in Ukraine.
Mr. Kolomojsky, a financier of neo-nazi battalion Azov, is still an Israeli citizen.
Mrs. Nuland-Kagan, the main machinator of the regime change in Kiev, has not been ostracized by the Jewish Community at large.
The deeply amoral and bloodthirsty Carl Gerschman from NED, who has been the main cheerleader for the putsch and for the installing the banderite-friendly government in Kiev, has not been ostracized by the Jewish Community at large either. What a stench!
https://medium.com/@gmochannel/us-staged-a-coup-in-ukraine-brief-history-and-facts-898c6d0007d6

Pft , July 5, 2018 at 9:07 pm

Yeah. The prime minister and many of the top oligarchs are Jewish. Relations between Ukraine and Israel seem quite good despite the UNSC vote that the US abstained on regarding Israeli settlements in the West Bank, perhaps reminded by Stalin doing the same to them in the 1920's.

As for relations with the neo nazis I remember before WWII that Zionists in Palestine cooperated with Nazis who sent German Jews to Palestine in return for the purchase of German goods which were being boycotted by Jews in the west

I suspect most Americans don't know Ukrainian history. The early years of Bolshevik rule were quite brutal and over 10 million rural Christians lost their lives in Ukraine over their policies .Solzhenitsyn 200 years can shed some light on the roots of the anti-Semitism among the peasants that developed in the 20's-30's and no doubt has been passed on.

Robert , July 6, 2018 at 4:24 pm

I've thought about this myself and have concluded that a fair number of Jewish organizations and institutions in the Ukraine were receiving a small portion of the US State Department funding allocated to the Ukraine each year of $200-250 million, totaling $5 billion since 1992. In return for this rather small (by US standards) outlay to a broad spectrum of NGOs, private educational and religious institutions, and political groups, the US purchased an enormous amount of influence. Most of the members of these groups were unaware of this US support, as the funds were funneled through individual leaders who were tasked to influence opinion, organize demonstrations and petitions, and write letters to the press and government members. Scholarships to the US and Canada were offered to promising youth to ensure continuity of support. For this reason, most Jewish and other groups operating in Ukraine have, until recently and only with reluctance, been willing to deviate from the official US "story". Thus, they knowingly (at least as far as their leadership was concerned) supported an overtly US-led neo-Nazi coup.

mike , July 5, 2018 at 1:24 pm

Makes sense that Josh Cohen is a former U.S. Agency for International Development project officer involved in managing economic reform projects in the former Soviet Union. Isn't that really what this is all about? Putin gets elected and takes charge of the economy, jailing corrupt oligarchs and putting the kibosh on said reform projects sponsored by us in care of Jeffrey Sachs et al. As Russia tries to reassert its sovereignty the US gets miffed and retaliates.

It's a lot of fun until someone loses an eye.

Tom Hall , July 5, 2018 at 1:21 pm

The Electronic Intifada has just posted an article by Asa Winstanley detailing how Israel, among others, has been supplying the Ukrainian Azov Battalion with military arms. It's well worth reading.

https://electronicintifada.net/content/israel-arming-neo-nazis-ukraine/24876

The next time you hear a pro-Israel mouthpiece sounding off about purported antisemitism in the British Labour Party, or in pro-Palestinine activist circles in the U.S., invite them to consider Israel's policy -- and that of the U.S. as well as friendly European states -- of direct military sponsorship of textbook Nazism in Ukraine. Jews are being menaced and beaten in the streets of Kiev by armed bands who celebrate their historical persecution, while thugs like Avigdor Lieberman sit cordially with officials representing that regime. But then, such warm relations between Zionists and anti-Semites is an old story.

Jeff Harrison , July 5, 2018 at 1:03 pm

Interesting. Anyone with two brains to rub together knows that the US, to the best of it's ability, has been surrounding Russia with compliant right wing governments, usually dictators, but we've gotten better at manipulating elections to get reliable puppet government. The bad news is that it is a full time job to stay on top of that.

Gary Weglarz , July 5, 2018 at 1:01 pm

It used to be that the only things one could depend on were "death & taxes." Now of course we must add to that list the very dependable presence of CIA / State Dept lies parroted by MSM all over the West. Lies which are endlessly repeated in defiance of all physical reality and often in direct opposition to actual events in the actual world we live in. From the Ukraine coup, to Russia-gate, to the "Assad's gassing his own people" regime change propaganda, to the totally surreal Alice in Wonderland Skripnal poisoning nonsense in the U.K, the Western MSM have been as dependable as the rising sun. They can and do provide fact-free, evidence-free reporting directly from the bowels of the deep state in support of the neocolonial West, including unending support for the never ending resort to mass violence the West relies upon to keep the rest of the planet subjugated – just as it has for the last 500+ years.

irina , July 5, 2018 at 2:06 pm

It's not just the media. The late night talk show hosts are doing their bit too, as I heard last night on a Jimmy Kimmel rerun (of a recent show). Can't remember the context as I was doing the dishes, but did hear him say the usual "Russian illegally annexed Crimea" standard phrase, immediately followed by "and then invaded Ukraine". The latter just casually tossed off as a given. People hear these memes constantly repeated and, regardless of their veracity (suspect to say the least) it becomes part of their worldview.

Who is behind the political preaching of hosts like Jimmy Kimmel ? Inquiring minds want to know !

Joe Tedesky , July 5, 2018 at 2:43 pm

You know what irina, seeing these late night talk shows go all crazy over Putin makes me think of the Zio-Media executives, and where their allegiance to power resides. Joe

Devil's Advocate , July 5, 2018 at 2:48 pm

I would assume you'd have to look at who owns the media source in question. Kimmel's show is on ABC, which is partly owned by Disney. Follow the money chain of those 2 parent companies, and you have your answer.

Gary Weglarz , July 5, 2018 at 6:28 pm

irina – I quite agree. The same is true of the former Daily Show crew members who now have their own shows. Several have shown themselves to be quite the little imperialist war mongers when it comes to gleefully repeating the CIA sponsored Syrian regime change and Russiagate propaganda. Samantha Bee & John Oliver kept triggering my gag reflex with their propaganda lines until I found a simple but effective solution and stopped watching them altogether. We have an amazingly seamless propaganda system here in the U.S. One can chose to either get one's "pro-war regime change propaganda" delivered with barely concealed racism and misogyny from Fox News, or instead opt for hearing the same nonsense delivered with pretentious blather and catchy jazz interludes at PBS. American democracy is all about having "choices."

Jeff Harrison , July 5, 2018 at 7:57 pm

I quite agree. I knew the minute that they started calling RT a propaganda outlet that, in fact, the USG was running a full scale propaganda operation. I don't know if I simply wasn't paying enough attention or if they have, in fact ramped the operation up, but I can hardly read any MSM outlet's output without calling bullshit on it.

irina , July 6, 2018 at 2:55 am

Jimmy Kimmel actually used to be funny and there is a really good clip (somewhere on youtube no doubt) of him reading a 'doctored' Dr. Seuss
book to The Donald (a live guest) during his primary candidacy.

But since The Donald's election Kimmel has opened almost every show with 'ten minutes hate' segment on The Donald. I still watch (or at least listen) occasionally because I want to know what is being fed to The Public.

You are absolutely right though, "we have an amazingly seamless propaganda system here in the US". The average person maybe has 30 minutes to devote to the news, between getting home and having dinner; they watch some sort of news show and think they are 'informed'. But it actually takes MANY hours and a knowledge of alternative websites to even begin to piece together an approximation of what might, in reality, be going on.

The Russians used to say that, at least they knew they were being propagandized.

Unfortunately, probably due to 'American Exceptionalism', most Americans think the MSM is bringing them 'the truth'. But nothing could be further from The Truth.

Peter H , July 6, 2018 at 10:41 am

I can't count the number of times I've had to turn off Colbert's Late Show for his Russian/Putin bashing BS. So disappointing. That's a rule in my house now. The first mention of Russia and off it goes.

Drew Hunkins , July 5, 2018 at 12:52 pm

Likewise, the corporate militarist-Zio media should eventually have to concede someday that the current Syrian "rebels" are little more than ruthless sociopathic Saudi-Zio-Washington intel agency supported mercenary terrorists.

Folks in the know knew very early on that much of the Kiev putschists and violent invaders of Eastern Ukraine were neo-Nazi types bent on eradicating the last vestiges of Russian social and ethnic solidarity.

It's really truly remarkable when one steps back to think about it all. These are the depraved groups the crypto-fascists, the Wall Street militarist imperialists, and Zionists have embedded themselves with: bloodthirsty Takfiri mercenary terrorists and neo-Nazis.

Bob Van Noy , July 5, 2018 at 2:25 pm

Each time I see an article like this I'm reminded of the videos of Zbigniew Brzezinski's early meetings with the Mujahideen and his manipulation of cultures on The Grand Chessboard or "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" a totally absurd assumption and the natural outcome of that absurdity, is blowback which this article again addresses. Our "boots on the ground" end up paying the price of this kind of supposed intellectualism. Shameful. Thank you Drew Hunkins.

Joe Tedesky , July 5, 2018 at 2:39 pm

Bob the old saying if I got right is the company you keep is what you become. We have truly loss our way, and Zbigniew Brzezinski is one of the biggest reasons we have become the predators of this dying green earth. All this for the profit, as all mankind must yield to the power of the dollar. Sad. Joe

MBeaver , July 6, 2018 at 5:03 am

One would think we had learned from Vietnam. Instead the "peace loving" liberals do everything to destabilize whole region for nothing and then send soldiers in who die for their messed up agenda.

JWalters , July 5, 2018 at 7:16 pm

It is truly remarkable. A lot of the behind-the-scenes magic is explained in "War Profiteers and Israel's Bank" http://warprofiteerstory.blogspot.com
.

[Jul 06, 2018] The possibility of Seneca cliff: Russia is certainly being creamed. The massive infill is visible from satellites and they haven't found/opened anything new of size

Jul 06, 2018 | peakoilbarrel.com

ProPoly 07/04/2018 at 10:28 am

More money now.

Russia is certainly being creamed. The massive infill is visible from satellites and they haven't found/opened anything new of size, yet have outlasted what everyone (including them) calculated would be the start of their decline.

Russia needs the oil revenue badly. But is their ultimate decline going to look like China? Very likely.

Hightrekker 07/04/2018 at 2:20 pm
Only Russia has more resources, a much smaller population, imports little, and is better educated.

Plus (not a given), global warming will ring some benefit. China doesn't have a chance (if one is biologist looking at it).

[Jul 05, 2018] SNAFU! Dr. Phillip Karber on the Russian Way of War (MUST WATCH VIDEO!!!!)

If we assume that this is true: "Beyond that, the Ukrainians had no realistic option to defend Crimea. Their military was in extremely poor shape by the time 2014 rolled around thanks to more than two decades of neglect, monumental corruption and even more monumental incompetence by Ukrainian politicians and military leaders, while the Russians had well prepared contingency plans and had already begun far reaching military reforms as a result of their experiences in Chechnya and Georgia."
Then Ukrainian armed forces should drastically improve after several years of fighting.
Notable quotes:
"... The fact that the US leadership didn't even stop to consider how the Russians might react shows just how arrogant, hubristic and incompetent Obama and his national security team really were. ..."
"... Caveat emptor. Karber is a flamboyant blowhard. This is not to dismiss Russia's invasion or or act of war in Ukraine but merely to state that this guy is essentially a Tom Clancy cut out. I like a lot of his slides (I wonder who made them?) and his valuable tactical observations (even if it does sound, at times, like a shopping list for Ukrainian military aid) but he is no SME. https://foreignpolicy.com/2... ..."
Jul 05, 2018 | www.snafu-solomon.com
Thundarr the Barbarian • 15 minutes ago

If the Obama administration ordered Ukraine not to fight for Crimea on the assumption they could force Russia to give it back via sanctions, they miscalculated badly.

The Russians believe Crimea rightfully belongs to them and they saw control of it as vital to their national security. There were some serious shenanigans going on in Kiev, which the Russians interpreted as an American engineered coup. The Russians reacted to what they believed was a major threat to their national security. The fact that the US leadership didn't even stop to consider how the Russians might react shows just how arrogant, hubristic and incompetent Obama and his national security team really were.

There is no way the Russians will ever give up Crimea, especially under pressure from the US, NATO and the EU. No Russian politician could do that and hope to survive. Besides, the Russians have repeatedly demonstrated an ability to endure suffering and hardships much greater than the capacity of Western nations to endure and the sanctions showed that Russia was far less vulnerable to pressure than Western politicians assumed.

Beyond that, the Ukrainians had no realistic option to defend Crimea. Their military was in extremely poor shape by the time 2014 rolled around thanks to more than two decades of neglect, monumental corruption and even more monumental incompetence by Ukrainian politicians and military leaders, while the Russians had well prepared contingency plans and had already begun far reaching military reforms as a result of their experiences in Chechnya and Georgia. SurfaceBook • 4 hours ago I disagree with mr kerber's assesment on Crimean ops being the largest air assault in history. Operation Market Garden in WW2 was the largest Air assault involving divisions of paratroopers from US/UK/Poland into german occupied drop zones (in conjuction with a land assault forcing it's way to Arnhem).

One other curiousity , Washington 'ordered' Ukraine ? a sovereign nation under orders ? just who is in charge of ukraine at that time ? see more

Thundarr the Barbarian SurfaceBook • 2 hours ago

To answer your question: Victoria Nuland, who was the Assistant Secretary of State for Eurasian Affairs during the Obama administration. In other words, she was the American proconsul for Eastern Europe.

ignatzthecat • 6 hours ago

Bottom line? "The Fog of War".........All these scenarios mean nothing after the first "shot" is fired. If any US "enemy" cannot crush US air power they are finished from the gitgo. Not a fan of our foreign policies but we can "crush" the enemy; we just can't "rule" them.

Distiller • 9 hours ago

Would really like to hear the other side. Where does he get his information from? The Ukrainians? All this Russia-is-evil-and-scheming-to-do-more-evil is ... slightly over the top. I don't say it's impossible that Russian regular troops have been involved in Donbas but he makes it sound like Unternehmen Zitadelle

BSmitty • 13 hours ago

IMHO, beware taking too many lessons away from this conflict. The Ukranian's don't have anything close to the SEAD/DEAD/EW/airpower capability of the US. What worked against their aviation won't necessarily work against ours. Once mid-high altitude air defenses are down, enemy jammers will have a short lifespan.

His comments that even light infantry should have the means to get away when under attack, and sufficient armor to counter attack point to the inadequacies of Army IBCTs (Infantry, not "Interim").

IMHO, IBCTs should have 100% vehicular mobility, and have the option of attaching an independent tank battalion. Cobbling together random HMMWVs from div/corps just seems silly. Make vehicles part of the core TOE. see more

DOnT4 BSmitty • 6 hours ago

You are assuming that we are working within our own timeline. Yes with enough time and blood, we can peal back their defense network with airpower. The question is, who buys us that time?

Russians (and the Chinese) ground forces trained to fight in contested airspace. The US Army assumes we have it.

utahbob62 • 14 hours ago

Sol, Thanks for posting the link and asking for discussion. One thing that makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand up is how much of this is being shared with the PLA and worse the DPRK? They are pretty smart and probility can figure lots of this out on their own. Is there any PLA observers up front with the RuFA or exchanging TTPs in an AAR? Or professional papers and presentations at staff school level or higher? I am just a grunt and red leg, but how does the EW and fires part impact the navy? A step is being taken: http://soldiersystems.net/2... I wonder when this is part of OPFOR at NTC or 29 Palms? see more

Solomon Mod utahbob62 • 14 hours ago

NO! thank you for sharing !!!!! this is like getting a seat at the Army War College and getting to hear what is never shared with the troops or the public.

to be honest what i heard in that video was downright shocking. i won't say scary cause i won't be facing that shit but if i was i'd be beyond concerned.

to answer your question you can bet your last dollar that the Chinese are getting briefings on this. you can bet that they're not only studying the above vid but getting info from the subject matter experts in Russia.

this guy is senior but i would so love to hear an assessment of Marine Corps chances if war were to break out in Norway or surrounding countries (we still have the flank). how would a Marine Expeditionary Brigade standup to those type tactics. we're talking about a lighter formation than the US Army equivalent but with integrated air.

oh and a side note. as much as i think the US Army and Marine Corps would be in a hurtlocker can you imagine what would happen to any of our European allies if they were somehow isolated and attacked?

my only regret about this whole thing is that i wanted to sit back and drink in serious conversation about this video. instead i'm getting the usual trolling. i can tolerate that on the majority of subjects i cover here but this one is different. i wanted to hear from serious individuals doing serious thinking about what the Dr presented.

such is life. if you run across anything else PLEASE send it. i find this fascinating!

Deckard Rick • 15 hours ago T

he slide at 12.44 is also interesting it shows Russia's "desire" for "friendly relations" with the west and its neighbours. But i guess like in the cold war there is no shortage of naives that think that Russia understands anything else but sanctions or force. see more

spinfight Deckard Rick • 13 hours ago

Very true but defenses still have to be credible. It's pretty clear that a European military would get squashed like a bug.

Remington Steele • 16 hours ago

Caveat emptor. Karber is a flamboyant blowhard. This is not to dismiss Russia's invasion or or act of war in Ukraine but merely to state that this guy is essentially a Tom Clancy cut out. I like a lot of his slides (I wonder who made them?) and his valuable tactical observations (even if it does sound, at times, like a shopping list for Ukrainian military aid) but he is no SME. https://foreignpolicy.com/2...

Deckard Rick • 16 hours ago

My conclusions -- Western/ US allies/Nato armies will need to have:

- integrated air defence at every level from platoon to regimental.(manpads, spaag,
- mass fire/steel rain capabilities cheap and heavy MLRS also MLRS launched antiradiation missiles)
the israelis launched AGM Shrikes with boosters from trucks to target Syrian Radars
- Field Army EW sigint/elint/jamming/defense capabilities
- EW munitions (currently russia has tube artillery launched jammers don't know about the US or NATO)
- Small and light SPGs like the Gvozdika

spinfight Nuno Gomes 16 hours ago
Whilst I agree Russia does tend to export it's kit extensively. Also some of the potential uses such as GPS jamming drones, could be more than merely inconvenient on very small budgets.

[Jul 05, 2018] Putin-Phobia, the Only Bipartisan Game in Town by Doug Bandow

Jul 05, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Few issues generate a bipartisan response in Washington. President Donald Trump's upcoming summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin is one.

Democrats who once pressed for détente with the Soviet Union act as if Trump will be giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Neoconservatives and other Republican hawks are equally horrified, having pressed for something close to war with Moscow since the latter's annexation of Crimea in 2014. Both sides act as if the Soviet Union has been reborn and Cold War has restarted.

Russia's critics present a long bill of requirements to be met before they would relax sanctions or otherwise improve relations. Putin could save time by agreeing to be an American vassal.

Topping everyone's list is Russian interference in the 2016 election, which was outrageous. Protecting the integrity of our democratic system is a vital interest, even if the American people sometimes treat candidates with contempt. Before joining the administration National Security Adviser John Bolton even called Russian meddling "a casus belli , a true act of war."

Washington Melts Down Over Prospect of Trump-Putin Meeting America the Hyperpowerful

Yet Washington has promiscuously meddled in other nations' elections. Carnegie Mellon's Dov H. Levin figured that between 1946 and 2000 the U.S. government interfered with 81 foreign contests, including the 1996 Russian poll. Retired U.S. intelligence officers freely admit that Washington has routinely sought to influence other nations' elections.

Yes, of course, Americans are the good guys and favor politicians and parties that the other peoples would vote for if only they better understood their own interests -- as we naturally do. Unfortunately, foreign governments don't see Uncle Sam as a Vestal Virgin acting on behalf of mankind. Indeed, Washington typically promotes outcomes more advantageous to, well, Washington. Perhaps Trump and Putin could make a bilateral commitment to stay out of other nations' elections.

Another reason to shun Russia, argued Senator Rob Portman, is because "Russia still occupies Crimea and continues to fuel a violent conflict in eastern Ukraine." Moscow annexed Crimea after a U.S.-backed street putsch ousted the elected but highly corrupt Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych. The territory historically was Russian, turned over to Ukraine most likely as part of a political bargain in the power struggle following Joseph Stalin's death. A majority of Crimeans probably wanted to return to Russia. However, the annexation was lawless.

Rather like America's dismemberment of Serbia, detaching Kosovo after mighty NATO entered the final civil war growing out of the dissolution of Yugoslavia. Naturally, the U.S. again had right on its side -- it always does! -- which obviously negated any obligations created by international law. Ever-virtuous Washington even ignored the post-victory ethnic cleansing by Albanian Kosovars

Still, this makes Washington's complaints about Russia seem just a bit hypocritical: do as we say, not as we do. In August 2008 John McCain expressed outrage over Russia's war with Georgia, exclaiming: "In the 21st century, nations don't invade other nations." Apparently he forgot that five years before the U.S. invaded Iraq, with McCain's passionate support. Here, too, the two presidents could agree to mutual forbearance.

Worse is the conflict in the Donbas, in eastern Ukraine, between the Ukrainian army and separatists backed by Russia. Casualty estimates vary widely, but are in the thousands. Moscow successfully weakened Kiev and prevented its accession to NATO. However, that offers neither legal nor moral justification for underwriting armed revolt.

Alas, the U.S. again comes to Russia with unclean hands. Washington is supporting the brutal war by Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates against Yemen. Area specialists agree that the conflict started as just another violent episode in a country which has suffered civil strife and war for decades. The Houthis, a tribal/ethnic/religious militia, joined with their long-time enemy, former President Ali Abdullah Saleh, to oust his successor, Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi. Riyadh and Abu Dhabi attacked to reinstall a pliable regime and win economic control. The U.S. joined the aggressors . At least Russia could claim national security was at stake, since it feared Ukraine might join NATO.

The "coalition" attack turned the Yemeni conflict into a sectarian fight, forced the Houthis to seek Iranian aid, and allowed Tehran to bleed its Gulf rivals at little cost. Human rights groups agree that the vast majority of civilian deaths and bulk of destruction have been caused by Saudi and Emirati bombing, with Washington's direct assistance. The humanitarian crisis includes a massive cholera epidemic. The security consequences include empowering al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Perhaps the U.S. and Russian governments could commit to jointly forgo supporting war for frivolous causes.

Human carnage and physical destruction are widespread in Syria. It will take years to rebuild homes and communities; the hundreds of thousands of dead can never be replaced. Yet Moscow has gone all out to keep Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in power. The Heritage Foundation's Luke Coffey and Alexis Mrachek demand that Moscow end its support for Assad "and demonstrate a genuine willingness to work with the international community to bring a political end to the Syrian civil war." The American Enterprise Institute's Leon Aron urged "a true Russian withdrawal from Syria, specifically ceding control of the Hmeymim airbase and dismantling recent expansions to the Tartus naval facility."

But the U.S. is in no position to complain. Washington's intervention has been disastrous, first discouraging a negotiated settlement, then promoting largely non-existent moderate insurgents, backing radicals, including the al-Qaeda affiliate (remember 9/11!?) against Assad, simultaneously allying with Kurds and Turks, and taking over the fight against the Islamic State even though virtually everyone in the Mideast had reason to oppose the group.

At least Russia, invited by the recognized government, had a reason to be there. Moscow's alliance with Syria dates back to the Cold War and poses no threat to America, which is allied with Israel, the Gulf States, Turkey, Jordan, and Egypt. Washington also possesses military facilities in Bahrain, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and United Arab Emirates. For most Middle Eastern countries Moscow is primarily a bargaining chip to extort more benefits from America. Trump could propose that both countries withdraw from Syria.

Coffey and Mracek also express outrage that Moscow "has weaponized its natural gas exports to Europe, turning off the tap when countries dare go against its wishes." Russia's customers should not fear coercion via cut-off. Of course, the U.S. never uses its economic power for political ends. Other than to routinely impose economic sanctions on a variety of nations on its naughty list. And to penalize not only American firms, but businesses from every other nation .

Indeed, the Trump administration is insisting that every company in every country stop doing business with Iran. The U.S. government will bar violators from the U.S. market or impose ruinous fines on them. The Trump administration plans to sanction even its European allies, those most vulnerable to Russian energy politics. Which suggests a modus vivendi that America's friends likely would applaud: both Washington and Moscow could promise not to take advantage of other nations' economic vulnerabilities for political ends.

Cyberwar is a variant of economic conflict. Heritage's Mracek cited "the calamitous cyberattack, NotPetya," as "part of Russia's effort to destabilize Ukraine even further than in the past." Yes, a criminal act. Of course, much the same could be said of Stuxnet, which was thought to be a joint American-Israeli assault on Iran's nuclear program. And there are reports of U.S. attempts to similarly hamper North Korean missile development. Some consider such direct attacks on other governments to be akin to acts of war. Would Washington join Moscow in a pledge to become a good cyber citizen?

Virtually everyone challenges Russia on human rights. Moscow falls far short, with Putin's control of the media, manipulation of the electoral process, and violence against those perceived as regime enemies. In this regard, at least, America is far better.

But many U.S. allies similarly fail this test. For instance, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has created an authoritarian state retaining merely the forms of democracy. Egypt's President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi has constructed a tyranny more brutal than that of Hosni Mubarak. Saudi Arabia's monarchy allows neither religious nor political freedom, and has grown more repressive under Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman. It is not just Trump who remains largely silent about such assaults on people's basic liberties. So do many of the president's critics, who express horror that he would deal with such a man as Putin.

Moscow will not be an easy partner for the U.S. Explaining that "nobody wanted to listen to us" before he took over, in March Putin declared: "You hear us now!" Compromise is inevitable, but requires respect for both nations' interests. A starting point could be returning the two nations' embassies to full strength and addressing arms control, such as the faltering Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and soon-expiring Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty. A larger understanding based on NATO ending alliance expansion in return for Russia withdrawing from the conflict in the Donbas would be worth pursuing.

Neither the U.S. nor the Russian Federation can afford to allow their relations to deteriorate into another Cold War. Russia is too important on too many issues, including acting as a counterweight to China, the most serious geopolitical challenge to the U.S. Hopefully the upcoming summit will begin the difficult process of rebuilding a working relationship between Washington and Moscow.

Doug Bandow is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute. A former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is author of Foreign Follies: America's New Global Empire .

[Jul 05, 2018] The Birth of Predatory Capitalism by Umair

Yes neoliberalism is deeply predatory. Still is survives as a social system for let's say 40 years (1987-2017) and probably will survive another 20-30 years. And what is coming might be worse. If Trump signify turn to "national neoliberalism" the next step from it might some kind of neofascism.
Notable quotes:
"... But financialization didn't just have a direct cost  --  no value being created, just men in shiny suits betting pebbles on who'd blink first. It also had an opportunity cost. As finance grew to be a larger and larger share of the economy, so the wind got sucked out of the sails of the "real economy", as American economists put it, which simply means people doing the work that actually does create value  --  teachers, nurses, engineers, artisans, bakers, small-town factories, and so on. Think about it simply: the more money that was burned up in speculating, the less that was available for making things of genuine value. So the incomes of all these people  --  those in the "real economy"  --  began to stagnate. New schools and hospitals and energy grids and so on weren't built  --  all the money was going towards speculating on the backs the old ones, sometimes, often, on their failures. A black hole was growing at the heart of the economy  --  but according to pundits, it was the sun itself. Everything was upside down. The bets were indeed about to all go south at once  --  only no one knew understood how or why yet. ..."
"... The third force in the rise of predatory capitalism was the implosion of the institution formerly known as the job. Now, just before peak financialization, beginning in the 1990s, many jobs were "offshored." That's a polite way to say that the speculators above discovered that companies were more profitable when they evaded as much of human civilization as possible. Find a country with no labour laws, no protections, no standards, no rule of law at all, in fact  --  and send jobs there. That way, you wouldn't have to pay for pensions, healthcare, childcare, insurance, and so on. Cost savings! Efficiency! Synergies, even  --  you could make everything in that one sweatshop. ..."
"... We're used to thinking that offshoring "took" jobs in rich countries. But the truth is subtler  --  and more ruinous. They blew apart the idea of a job as we used to know it. As jobs went to countries without good governance, decent labour laws, a boomerang effect happened. ..."
"... Managers began stripping away benefits of every kind, from childcare, to vacations, to healthcare. Until, at last, in a final triumph, the "at-will job" and the "zero-hours contract" were created  --  social contracts that were only "jobs" in name, but offered less than no stability, security, mobility, or opportunity. People who didn't have benefits could now be fired on a whim  --  and so now they bore all the risk. But the risk of what, precisely? ..."
"... Remember those speculators? Taking huge risks, betting billions with each other, on exactly nothing of real value? Risk had come full circle. Now it was the average person in the real economy who bore all the risks of these bets going bad. If the bets with south, who'd take the hit? All those people with zero benefits, no protection, no safety ..."
"... So in had to step governments. They bailed out the banks  --  but didn't "restructure" them, which is to say, fire their managers, wash out their shareholders, and sell off the bad loans and bets. They just threw money at them ..."
"... What does a bankrupt have to do? Liquidate. So governments began to slash investment in social systems of all kinds. Healthcare systems, pension systems, insurance systems, media and energy systems. This was the fourth step in the birth of predatory capitalism: austerity. ..."
"... The only thing keeping the real economy going at this point was investment by the government  --  after all, the speculators were speculating, not investing for the long run. It was governments that were effectively keeping economies afloat, by providing a floor for income, by anchoring economies with a vast pool of stable, safe, real, secure jobs, and investing dollars back in societies short of them. And yet, at the precise moment that governments needed to create more of precisely that, they did just the opposite. ..."
"... It's the once prosperous but now imploded middle which turns on the classes, ethnicities, groups, below it. The people who expected and felt entitled to lives of safety and security and stability  --  who anticipated being at the top of a tidy little hierarchy, the boss of this or that, the chieftain of that or this, but now find themselves adrift and unmoored in a collapsing society, powerless. ..."
"... Predatory capitalism imploding into strange, new forms of old diseases of the body politic ..."
Jul 05, 2018 | eand.co

A (successful) American politician who cries: Neo-nazis in the Bundestag . The extreme right rising in Italy . Poland's authoritarians purging its Supreme Court .

How did we get here? To a world where the forces of intolerance and indecency are on the rise, and those of decency, wisdom, and civilization are waning? Is something like a new Dark Age falling?

I think it has everything to do with predatory capitalism, and so I want to tell you a story. Of how it came to be born, in four steps, which span three decades.

During the 2000s, the economy of the rich world underwent something like a phase transition. It became "financialized", as the jargon goes  --  which simply means that finance came to make up a greater and greater share of the economy. Hedge funds and investment banks and shady financial vehicles of all kinds went from a modest portion of the economy, to making up a huge chunk of it  --  around half, in some countries.

Now, what was "financialization" for? What were all these bankers, hedge fund managers, investors, and so on, doing? The answer is: nothing. Nothing of value, anyways. They were simply placing bets with each other. Bets on bets on bets, meta-bets. Economists, who have something like an inferiority complex, envious of swashbuckling bankers, bought their marketing pitch hog, line, and sinker: "we're going to reduce risk! Everyone will benefit!" But no such thing was happening  --  and anyone could see it. Risk was being massively amplified, in fact, because every time a speculator made a billion dollar bet with another, they were both betting with the same pool of money, essentially. Whose money? It wasn't theirs  --  it was everyone's. Pensions, savings, bank accounts, earnings, retirement funds. All that being bet on bets on bets on bets which amounted to nothing. But what if all the bets went south at once?

First, I want you to really understand that what was happening was a zero-sum game, where one had to lose for another to win. Imagine there are three of us, in a little stone age tribe, with a hundred pebbles each. We spend all day every day finding new ways to lend pebbles to each other, to bet them on who'll blink first, or even bets on those bets, and so on. In our little economy, does anyone ever end up better off? Does anyone, for example, discover antibiotics, or even invent the wheel? Nope. We're just fools, who'll never accomplish, learn, or create anything, sitting around playing a zero-sum game, in which no real value is ever created. The pebbles never become anything more valuable, like, for example, books, symphonies, knowledge, or medicine. All that is exactly what was happening during the phase of financialization.

But financialization didn't just have a direct cost  --  no value being created, just men in shiny suits betting pebbles on who'd blink first. It also had an opportunity cost. As finance grew to be a larger and larger share of the economy, so the wind got sucked out of the sails of the "real economy", as American economists put it, which simply means people doing the work that actually does create value  --  teachers, nurses, engineers, artisans, bakers, small-town factories, and so on. Think about it simply: the more money that was burned up in speculating, the less that was available for making things of genuine value. So the incomes of all these people  --  those in the "real economy"  --  began to stagnate. New schools and hospitals and energy grids and so on weren't built  --  all the money was going towards speculating on the backs the old ones, sometimes, often, on their failures. A black hole was growing at the heart of the economy  --  but according to pundits, it was the sun itself. Everything was upside down. The bets were indeed about to all go south at once  --  only no one knew understood how or why yet.

How was the real economy to survive, then? Another hidden effect of financialization was super-concentration  --  the second force in the rise of predatory capitalism. Mom-and-pop capitalism is a healthy and beautiful thing, an economy of a million little shops, bakeries, artisans  --  but it takes only a modest attachment to a profit motive. But thanks to the rise of massive, global speculation, only aggressive quarterly profit-maximization was allowed. CEO earnings were hitched to share prices, and your share price only went up if your earnings did, relentlessly, illogicaly, crazily, every single quarter, instead of stabilizing at a happy, gentle amount  --  and so the only way left, in the end, to achieve it, was to build titanic monopolies, which could squeeze people for every dime. Once the economy had Macy's, JC Penney, K-Mart, Toys-R-Us and Sears. Now it has Walmart. The story was repeated across every single industry. Amazon, Google, Apple. A new age of monopoly arose.

But monopolies had an effect, too. The third force in the rise of predatory capitalism was the implosion of the institution formerly known as the job. Now, just before peak financialization, beginning in the 1990s, many jobs were "offshored." That's a polite way to say that the speculators above discovered that companies were more profitable when they evaded as much of human civilization as possible. Find a country with no labour laws, no protections, no standards, no rule of law at all, in fact  --  and send jobs there. That way, you wouldn't have to pay for pensions, healthcare, childcare, insurance, and so on. Cost savings! Efficiency! Synergies, even  --  you could make everything in that one sweatshop.

We're used to thinking that offshoring "took" jobs in rich countries. But the truth is subtler  --  and more ruinous. They blew apart the idea of a job as we used to know it. As jobs went to countries without good governance, decent labour laws, a boomerang effect happened. The machine discovered that it could do in rich countries what it had done in poor ones  --  and so it began stripping away everything that made a job "a job." Because the economy was increasingly composed of monopolies, giant companies, banks, and investors had the power to do so with impunity. Speculators began raiding pension funds. Managers began stripping away benefits of every kind, from childcare, to vacations, to healthcare. Until, at last, in a final triumph, the "at-will job" and the "zero-hours contract" were created  --  social contracts that were only "jobs" in name, but offered less than no stability, security, mobility, or opportunity. People who didn't have benefits could now be fired on a whim  --  and so now they bore all the risk. But the risk of what, precisely?

Remember those speculators? Taking huge risks, betting billions with each other, on exactly nothing of real value? Risk had come full circle. Now it was the average person in the real economy who bore all the risks of these bets going bad. If the bets with south, who'd take the hit? All those people with zero benefits, no protection, no safety, all those people for whom "a job" now meant something more like "a temporary soul-crushing way to avoid destitution." They're the ones who'd be fired, instantly, lose what little savings they had, have their already dwindling incomes slashed, be ruined.

And then the bets went bad. As bets tend to do, when you make too many of them, on foolish things. What had the speculators been betting with each other on? As it turns out, largely on property prices. But people without the stable jobs that had kept such a huge property bubble going didn't have growing incomes anymore. Property prices couldn't keep rising. Bang! The financial system fell like a row of dominoes. It turned out that everyone had bet property prices would go on rising  --  and on the other side of that bet was everyone else. All of them had been betting on the same thing  --  "we all bet prices will keep rising forever!" The losses were so vast, and so widespread, that the whole global financial system buckled. The banks didn't have the money to pay each other for these foolish bets  --  how could they have? Each one had bet the whole house on the same thing, and they all would have gone bankrupt to each other. LOL  --  do you see the fatal stupidity of it all yet?

So in had to step governments. They bailed out the banks  --  but didn't "restructure" them, which is to say, fire their managers, wash out their shareholders, and sell off the bad loans and bets. They just threw money at them  --  and took those bad bets onto the nation's books, instead. It was the most foolish decision since the Great Depression. Why?

Well, now governments had trillions in  --  pow!  --  sudden debt. What were they to do? How would they pay it off? Now, you might think that Presidents are very intelligent people, but unfortunately, they are just politicians. And so instead of doing what they should have done  --  printing money, simply cancelling each others' debts to each other, which were for fictional speculation anyways  --  they decided that they were "broke". Bankrupt, even  --  even though a country can't go bankrupt, anymore than you could if you could print your own currency at home, and spend it everywhere.

What does a bankrupt have to do? Liquidate. So governments began to slash investment in social systems of all kinds. Healthcare systems, pension systems, insurance systems, media and energy systems. This was the fourth step in the birth of predatory capitalism: austerity.

But people's incomes were already dwindling, thanks to the first three steps  --  as jobs not just disappeared in quantity, but also imploded in quality, as monopolies grew in power, and as pointless, destructive, zero-sum speculation sucked the life out of the real economy. The only thing keeping the real economy going at this point was investment by the government  --  after all, the speculators were speculating, not investing for the long run. It was governments that were effectively keeping economies afloat, by providing a floor for income, by anchoring economies with a vast pool of stable, safe, real, secure jobs, and investing dollars back in societies short of them. And yet, at the precise moment that governments needed to create more of precisely that, they did just the opposite.

Snap! Economies broke like twigs. The people formerly known as the middle class had been caught in between the pincers of these four forces  --  financialization, monopoly, the implosion of the job, and austerity. Together, they shattered what was left of rich economies  --  to the point that today, incomes are stagnant across the rich world, even in much vaunted Scandinavia, while living standards are falling in many rich countries, like the US and UK.

What do people do as hardship begins to bite  --  especially those who expected comfortable, easy lives? They become reactionary, lashing out violently. They seek safety in the arms of demagogues. That doesn't mean, as American pundits naively think, that "poor people become authoritarians!" Quite the opposite.

It's the once prosperous but now imploded middle which turns on the classes, ethnicities, groups, below it. The people who expected and felt entitled to lives of safety and security and stability  --  who anticipated being at the top of a tidy little hierarchy, the boss of this or that, the chieftain of that or this, but now find themselves adrift and unmoored in a collapsing society, powerless.

That gap between expectation and reality is what ruinous. They retain a desperate need to be atop a hierarchy, to be above someone, the entitled imploded middles  --  and what has happened in history, time and again, is that they turn to those who promise them just that superiority, by turning on those below them. Even if, especially if, it is in the extreme, irrational, yet perfectly logical form of supremacy and dominion over the weak, the despised, and the impure.

And that is what all today's reactionary, extremist movements  --   which I call the Faction  --  really are. Predatory capitalism imploding into strange, new forms of old diseases of the body politic -- ultrauthoritarianism, theosupremacism, kleptofascism, neofeudalism, biodominionism, hatriarchy, technotalitarianism, novel and lethal forms of ruin for a new dark age.

And so here we are, you and I. On the cusp of that age. A time where the shadows in human hearts shine as black and blinding as midnight. And once again, it is the folly and hubris of wise men that led us here.

Umair
July 2018

[Jul 05, 2018] Britain's Most Censored Stories (Non-Military)

Highly recommended!
Jul 01, 2018 | truepublica.org.uk

TruePublica

In this article, we have attempted to identify the most censored stories of modern times in Britain. We have asked the opinions of one of the most famous and celebrated journalists and documentary film-makers of our time, a high-profile former Mi5 intelligence officer, an investigative journalist with one of the most well-known climate-change organisations, a veteran journalist of the Iraq war, an ex-army officer, along with the head of one of the worlds largest charities working against injustice.

One comment from our eclectic group of experts said; "the UK has the most legally protected and least accountable intelligence agencies in the western world so even in just that field competition is fierce, let alone all the other cover-ups."

So true have we found this statement to be that we've had to split this article into two categories – military and non-military, with a view that we may well categorise surveillance and privacy on its own another time.

Without further ado – here are the most non-military censored stories in Britain since the 1980s, in no particular order. Do bear in mind that for those with inquisitive minds, some of these stories you will have read something about somewhere – but to the majority of citizens, these stories will read like conspiracy theories.

Consequences of American corporate influence over British welfare reforms

The demolition of the welfare state was first suggested in 1982 by the Conservative Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher. Using neoliberal politics, every UK government since 1982 has covertly worked towards that goal. It is also the political thinking used as justification for the welfare reforms of the New Labour government, which introduced the use of the Work Capability Assessment (WCA) for all out-of-work disability benefit claimants. Neoliberal politics also justified additional austerity measures introduced by the Coalition government since 2010, and the Conservative government(s) since 2015, which were destined to cause preventable harm when disregarding the human consequences. Much of this is known and in the public domain.

However, what is less known is a story the government have tried very hard to gag . The American healthcare insurance system of disability denial was adopted, as was the involvement of a US healthcare company to distance the government from the preventable harm created by its use. The private sector was introduced on a wide scale in many areas of welfare and social policy as New Labour adopted American social and labour market policies – and the gravity of its effects cannot be understated.

The result? In one 11 month study 10,600 deaths were attributed to the government disability denial system of screening, with 2,200 people dying before the ESA assessment was even completed. Between May 2010 and February 2014, an astonishing total of 40,680 people died within 12 months of going through a government Work Capability Assessment. The government department responsible has since refused to publish updated mortality totals.

This political and social scandal has been censored, with the author of THIS truly damning report in trouble with the government for publishing it.

Climate Change, what a British oil giant knew all along

For decades, tobacco companies buried evidence that smoking was deadly, the same goes for the fossil fuel industry. As early as 1981, big oil company Shell was aware of the causes and catastrophic dangers of climate change. In the 1980s it was acknowledging with its own research that anthropogenic global warming was a fact. Then, as the scientific consensus became more and more clear, it started introducing doubt and giving weight to a "significant minority" of "alternative viewpoints" as the full implications for the company's business model became clear.

By the mid-90s, the company started talking about "distinguished scientists" that cast aspersions of the seriousness of climate change. THIS REPORT provides proof of Shell's documentation including emails of what they knew and what they were hiding from the public domain. One document in 1988 confirms that: "By the time the global warming becomes detectable it could be too late to take effective countermeasures to reduce the effects or even stabilise the situation."

It was not until 2007 that scientific research eventually took a grip of the problem and proved what was known all along. However, as Shell did say – it's probably too late to take effective countermeasures now anyway. There is still persistent quoting of climate science deniers by the fossil fuel industries.

Government Surveillance

In 2016, the UK was identified as the most extreme surveillance state in the Western world. However, legislation really only came about to legalise its use because of the Edward Snowden revelations in 2013. Prior to that, the British government had created a secret 360-degree mass surveillance architecture that no-one, including most members of parliament, knew anything about. And much of it has since been deemed illegal by the highest courts in both Britain and the European Union.

From operation Optic Nerve which took millions of sexually explicit images of an unknowing public through their devices to a hacking operation called Gemalto – where GCHQ stole the keys to a global encryption system with 700 million subscribers. The unaccountable spymasters of the UK have undertaken breathtaking operations of illegality with absolute impunity.

Some other programmes included; Three Smurfs – an operation to turn on any mobile device so it could listen to or activate the camera covertly on mobile phones. XKeyScore was basically a Google search engine for spies to find any data about anyone. Upstream and Tempora hacked into the worlds main cable highway, intercepting everything and anything globally with a leaked presentation slide from GCHQ on this programme expressly stating they were intent on "Mastering the Internet". Royal Concierge identified diplomatic hotel reservations so GCHQ could organise a surveillance operation against dignitaries either domestic or foreign, in advance.

In truth, Britain is classed as an endemic surveillance state and right now, we only know what has been uncovered by whistleblowers. This is why people like Julian Assange, Edward Snowden and others are nothing less than political prisoners of Western governments. They don't want you to know what they know about you. They also don't want you to know about them, which is why the architecture is there in the first place. It is not for catching terrorists because if it was the courts would not deem these surveillance systems as illegal.

Evidence-Based Medical Studies

Over the last few years, medical professionals have come forward to share a truth that, for many people, proves difficult to swallow. One such authority is Dr. Richard Horton, the current editor-in-chief of the Lancet – considered to be one of the most well respected peer-reviewed medical journals in the world.

Dr. Horton recently released a statement declaring that a lot of published medical research is in fact unreliable at best , if not completely false.

"The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness."

Across the pond, Dr Marcia Angell , a physician and longtime Editor-in-Chief of the New England Medical Journal (NEMJ), which is also considered another one of the most prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals in the world, makes her view of the subject quite plain:

"It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine".

Many newspapers in Britain take the opportunity to indulge in some shameless click baiting and report completely false stories simply to gain visitor numbers onto their website – as in this example by the Mail Online HERE or HERE.

The Skripal poisoning and Pablo Millar

D-notice's (Defence and Security Media Advisory Notice) are used by the British state to censor the publication of potentially damaging news stories. They are issued to the mainstream media to withhold publication of damaging information. One such case was the widespread use of D-notices regarding the British ex-spy deeply involved in the Skripal/Novichok poisoning case in Salisbury.

(Here are the official D-Notices to the Skripal Affair )

Mainstream journalists, the press and broadcast media were issued with D-notices in respect of a former British intelligence officer called Pablo Miller. Miller was an associate of Christopher Steele, first in espionage operations in Russia and more recently in the activities of Steele's private intelligence firm, Orbis Business Intelligence .

Steele was responsible for compiling the Trump–Russia dossier, comprising 17 memos written in 2016 alleging misconduct and conspiracy between Donald Trump's presidential campaign and the Putin administration. The dossier paid for by the Democratic Party, claimed that Trump was compromised by evidence of his sexual proclivities (golden shower anyone?) in Russia's possession. Steele was the subject of an earlier D-notice, which unsuccessfully attempted to keep his identity as the author of the dossier a secret.

Millar is reported to be Skripal's handler in Salisbury and if Miller and by extension, Skripal himself were involved in Orbis' work on the highly-suspect Steele-Trump dossier, which is thought to be the case (for all sorts of reasons – including these D-notices) alongside representatives of British and possibly US intelligence, then the motivations for the attempted assassination on the ex-Russian double agent was very wide at best. As it turned out, blame could not be pinned on Russia's intelligence service, the FSB, no matter how hard the government tried. This particular part of the Skripal poisoning story remains buried by the mainstream media.

The City of London – A global crime scene

For over a hundred years the Labour party tried in vain to abolish the City of London and its accompanying financial corruption. In 1917, Labour's new rising star Herbert Morrison, the grandfather of Peter Mandelson made a stand and failed, calling it the "devilry of modern finance." And although attempt after attempt was made throughout the following decades, it was Margaret Thatcher who succeeded by abolishing its opponent, the Greater London Council in 1986.

Tony Blair went about it another way and offered to reform the City of London in what turned out to be a gift from God. He effectively gave the vote to corporations which swayed the balance of democratic power away from residents and workers. It was received by its opponents as the greatest retrograde step since the peace treaty of 1215, Magna Carta. The City won its rights through debt financing in 1067, when William the Conqueror acceded to it and ever since governments have allowed the continuation of its ancient rights above all others.

The consequence? It now stands as money launderer of the world , the capital of global crime scene with Britain referred to by the global criminal fraternity to be the most corrupt country in the world.

A 'watchman' sits at the high table of parliament and is its official lobbyist sitting in the seat of power right next to the Speaker of the House who is "charged with ensuring that its established rights are safeguarded." The job is to seek out political dissent that might arise against the City.

The City of London has its own private funding and will 'buy-off' any attempt to erode its powers – any scrutiny of its financial affairs are put beyond external inspection or audit. It has it's own police force – and laws. Its dark and shadowy client list includes; terrorists, drug barons, arms dealers, despots, dictators, shady politicians, corporations, millionaires and billionaires – most with something to hide. The shocking Panama Papers, Paradise Papers and Lux Leaks barely scratching the surface even with their almost unbelievable revelations of criminality.

Keith Bristow Director-General of the UK's National Crime Agency said in June 2015 that the sheer scale of crime and its subsequent money laundering operations was "a serious strategic threat to Britain." And whilst much of this activity is indeed published – the scale of it is not. It is now believed by many investigative journalists that the City of London is managing "trillions in ill-gotten gains" – not billions as we have all been told.

State propaganda – manipulating minds, controlling the internet

Reading this you would think this was the stuff of a conspiracy theory – sadly, it's not. The government, through its spying agent GCHQ developed its own set of software tools to infiltrate the internet to shape what people see, hear and read, with the ability to rig online polls and psychologically manipulate people on social media. This was what Glenn Greenwald of The Intercept confirmed through the Snowden files in 2014. It was not about surveillance but about manipulating public opinion in ever more Orwellian ways.

These 'tools' now constitute some of the most startling methods of propaganda delivery systems and internet deception programmes known to mankind. What the Snowden files show are that the government can change the outcome of online polls (codenamed Underpass), send mass delivery of emails or SMS messages (Warpath) at will, disrupt video-based websites (Silverlord) and have tools to permanently disable PC accounts. They can amplify a given message to push a chosen narrative (GESTATOR), increase traffic to any given website" (GATEWAY) and have the ability to inflate page views on websites (SLIPSTREAM). They can crash any website (PREDATORS FACE), reduce page views and distort public responses, spoof any email account and telephone calls they like. Visitors to WikiLeaks are tracked and monitored as if an inquiring mind is now against the law.

Don't forget, the government has asked no-one for permission to do any of this and none of this has been debated in parliament where representative democracy is supposed to be taking place. There is no protective legislation for the general public and no-one is talking about or debating these illegal programmes that taxpayers have been given no choice to fund – costing billions. This is government sponsored fake news and public manipulation programmes on a monumental scale.

Chris Huhne, a former cabinet minister and member of the national security council until 2012 said – "when it comes to the secret world of GCHQ, the depth of my 'privileged information' has been dwarfed by the information provided by Edward Snowden to The Guardian."

The Guardian's offices were then visited by MI5 and the Snowden files were ordered to be destroyed under threats that if they didn't, it would be closed down – a sign of British heavy-handedness reminiscent of the East-German Stasi.

Censorship – Spycatcher

'Spycatcher' was a truly candid autobiography of a Senior Intelligence Officer published in 1987. Written by Peter Wright, a former MI5 officer, it was published first in Australia after being banned by the British government in 1985. Its allegations proved too much for the authorities to allow it to be in the public domain.

In an interesting twist of irony, the UK government attempted to halt the book's Australian publication. Malcolm Turnbull, current Prime Minister of Australia, was a lawyer at the time and represented the publisher that defeated the British government's suppression orders against Spycatcher in Australia in September 1987, and again on appeal in June 1988. This is the same man that refuses to assist Julian Assange, an Australian citizen, from his hellhole existence in the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

The book details plans of the MI6 plot to assassinate Egyptian President Nasser during the Suez Crisis; of joint MI5-CIA plotting against British Prime Minister Harold Wilson and of MI5's eavesdropping on high-level Commonwealth conferences. Wright also highlights the methods and ethics of the spying business.

Newspapers printed in England, attempting proper reportage of Spycatcher's principal allegations were served gag orders. If they continued, they were tried for contempt of court. However, the book proved so popular many copies were smuggled into England. In 1987, the Law Lords again barred reportage of Wright's allegations or sale of books.

The ruling was then overturned, but Wright was barred from receiving royalties from the sale of the book in the United Kingdom. In November 1991, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the British government had breached the European Convention of Human Rights in gagging its own newspapers. The book has sold more than two million copies. In 1995, Wright died a millionaire from proceeds of his book.

Censorship – The Internet

To the inquisitive and knowledgeable, censorship of the internet by the British government is not news. In addition, there have been many reports, especially from independent outlets complaining about search engines and social media platforms censoring oppositional and dissenting voices.

Already described earlier in this article is the involvement of the authorities in strategies to manipulate public opinion and disseminate false narratives in their aims for control of the internet itself.

A few months ago, the government changed the law to block online content deemed as either pornographic or of an extremist nature to protect those under 16 years of age. It was anticipated that approximately 50 websites would be banned altogether. What subsequently happened was that thousands of websites disappeared from the internet with no court orders, injunctions, notices or justification. Even finding out which websites are on that list is a secret.

Over time, like many pieces of legislation that has been abused by the state, websites and online content that the government of the day does not like will have the perfect tool to simply press the 'delete' button, pretty much as they have already started doing.

On another, but related matter, just last week, The Independent had the headline: " Today's vote will change the face of the internet forever, from an open platform to a place where anything can be removed without warning ." The articles first line reads; "The idea of instituting a regime of petty everyday censorship, that randomly and unfairly damages campaigns, artists and the denizens of the Internet, ought to fill you with rage." This is how the state slowly takes control of what you read, see and hear.

In the meantime, Britain's current Prime Minister has refused to rule out censoring the internet like China in future.

Dark Money Taking Power

Soon after the Second World War, some of America's richest people began setting up a network of thinktanks to promote their interests. These purport to offer dispassionate opinions on public affairs. But they are more like corporate lobbyists, working on behalf of those who founded and fund them. These are the organisations now running much of the Trump administration . These same groups are now running much of Britain. Liam Fox and what was the Atlantic Bridge and the Adam Smith Institute are good examples.

They have control of the Conservative party and are largely responsible for years of work that steered Britain through the EU referendum that ended with Brexit. Tens of £millions have been spent, mostly undisclosed on making this dream to exploit Britain and its people a reality. In fact, almost everything in this article is about such organisations. Those hugely powerful individuals that own search engines and social media platforms along with the banking industry, the pharmaceutical and medical business, the fossil fuel and arms industries – they have reached a pinnacle of unprecedented corporate power.

Some of those fully censored stories pushed below the radar by these corporations include; how over 100,000 EU citizens die every year because of lobbying against workplace carcinogens, how corporate profits and taxes are hidden, the Tory-Trump plan to kill food safety with Brexit – to name but a few. And don't forget the corporate media who are complicit. There are a handful of offshore billionaires that have the ability to decide what millions should read or see.

The Adam Smith Institute referred to earlier is a good example. It is a mouthpiece for right-wing extreme neoliberal capitalists. With a turnover of over £130 million and an operating profit of nearly £17 million, it has received millions of pounds in UK government funding. That is taxpayers money being used against taxpayers because the ASI does not believe in the likes of the NHS or civil society in general.

Talking of Dark Money – Brexit and the climate deniers

We recently reported about a transatlantic network of lobbyists pushing against action on climate change and (latterly) for Brexit? This group are all based out of one building around the corner from the Palace of Westminster.

The network is funded by shadowy elites in the UK and US and lobbies for rampant market deregulation while pushing the myth that climate change is a hoax.

What is much less known is that more recently, these groups have lobbied for a Hard Brexit , hoping the UK's withdrawal from the EU will lead to a weakening of those environmental regulations that hinder future profits. These same groups are also behind the Tory-DUP pact , currently keeping Theresa May in her job while allowing hard-line Northern Irish social conservatives to dictate significant parts of the UK's political agenda, themselves climate change deniers. These are just some of Britain's most censored stories. There are so many of them that we have had to categorise them, which says something about how democracy, free speech, civil liberty and human rights are performing in Britain right now. truepublica.org.uk

[Jul 05, 2018] Ms. May is a poodle for the UK's intelligence agencies i.e. MI5 and MI6. The swift movement of her to get on board with the totally discredited blaming of Novichok and Putin/Russia for the nerve agent attack on the Skripals means she is very evil

Notable quotes:
"... she's following the lead of the UK's evil intelligence agencies which are waging a psychological and economic war on Russia and Putin just because the oligarchs in the West don't like Putin doing good things for Russia. ..."
Jul 05, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Deniz , July 4, 2018 at 5:07 pm

On behalf of this side of the pond, I would like to formally apoligize for calling Mr. Blair, Mr. Bush's poodle. I am also certain that Ms. Skripal, sorry Ms. May, with her fiery independence, is nobody's poodle either.

Tom , July 5, 2018 at 5:42 am

R U kidding me? Ms. May is a poodle for the UK's intelligence agencies i.e. MI5 and MI6. The swift movement of her to get on board with the totally discredited blaming of Novichok and Putin/Russia for the nerve agent attack on the Skripals means she is very evil -- she's following the lead of the UK's evil intelligence agencies which are waging a psychological and economic war on Russia and Putin just because the oligarchs in the West don't like Putin doing good things for Russia.

[Jul 05, 2018] Sic Semper Tyrannis What happened to the signers

Jul 05, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com
What happened to the signers?

"Five signers were captured by the British as traitors, and tortured before they died. Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned. Two lost their sons in the revolutionary army, another had two sons captured. Nine of the fifty-six fought and died from wounds or hardships resulting from the Revolutionary War.

These men signed, and they pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor!

What kind of men were they? Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists. Eleven were merchants. Nine were farmers and large plantation owners. All were men of means, well educated. But they signed the Declaration of Independence knowing full well that the penalty could be death if they were captured.

Carter Braxton of Virginia, a wealthy planter and trader, saw his ships swept from the seas by the British navy. He sold his home and properties to pay his debts, and died in rags." "What really happened?"

------------

I had a lot of ancestors in that war, some Continentals, some militia. One man in Boston raised his own regiment of militia at his own expense. He commanded it throughout the war. A lot of these soldiers were old broke down grunts by the end, They made new lives for themselves. I revere their memory. pl

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/DOCUMENTS/the_signers.html

blue peacock , 19 hours ago

"All were men of means, well educated. But they signed the Declaration of Independence knowing full well that the penalty could be death if they were captured."

They were men of character. They were willing to lose everything for their convictions and beliefs. These are men to be revered. Thank you Col. Lang for remembering them.

IMO, as a people we no longer have this character. We have allowed big & bigger government over the decades who have usurped our sovereignty and essential liberty through mass surveillance, civil forfeiture, state secrets doctrine as the cornerstone of deceit, and now the weaponization of law enforcement and intelligence for domestic political purposes.

TTG , 12 hours ago
These were indeed hard and principled men. I offer the example of one of the founding fathers of my hometown. Gideon Hotchkiss was a new light Puritan receiving a commission as an ensign in a Waterbury militia company in November 1756. He was at Saratoga in August 1757 when he wrote home about "the melancholy news of our upper fort" referring to the loss of Fort William Henry and the ensuing massacre. In July 1758 he took part in the battle of Fort Carillon as a lieutenant. He served another year as a captain in 1760 along with two of his sons.

Leading up to the War of Independence, he served on the local committee of inspection. He sent two sons and a grandson to serve in the war and organized a troop of light horse cavalry to respond to British incursions such as the raids on Woodbridge and Danbury. After the fall harvests were completed, his company of veterans served through the winter months when they were most needed.

Once while working in his fields, he heard the sound of battle to the south. He mounted his horse and, along with a servant boy, rode to meet the British at Westville, north of New Haven. His servant was struck by a cannon ball. Gideon placed the boy's body in a concealed place, sent his horse back to his farm and joined the battle. This was the British raid on New Haven in July 1779. He was sixty-three years old at the time.

After the War, he was appointed deacon of the church of Columbia Parish, now Prospect. One of his many sons became a Methodist minister. This Puritan deacon first disowned his son, but he soon forgave and embraced him. One of Gideon's descendants moved to the Shenandoah Valley. He was Jedediah Hotchkiss, cartographer and staff officer to General Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson.

richardstevenhack , 14 hours ago
Speaking of the signers, only three lived to see America's 50th Anniversary. Thomas Jefferson was unable to attend a reunion organized by the mayor of Washington, and this article provides the full text of his letter of RSVP.

Read What Thomas Jefferson Wrote on America's 50th Birthday
http://www.thetruthaboutgun...

Quote:

"May it be to the world, what I believe it will be, (to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all,) the Signal of arousing men to burst the chains, under which monkish ignorance and superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves, and to assume the blessings & security of self-government. That form which we have substituted, restores the free right to the unbounded exercise of reason and freedom of opinion. these are grounds of hope for others."

End Quote

It also cites this list of Jefferson quotes on the right to bear arms:

Thomas Jefferson on The Right To Bear Arms
https://www.nraila.org/arti...

[Jul 04, 2018] The former empire known as Great Britain, was struck again by bad luck: Novichok jumped on another couple

Notable quotes:
"... Novichok , the magic Russian military nerve agent jumped on another couple after it stayed low-key for weeks, in order to recover from the humiliation of being unable to kill the Skripals, in spite of being "the most powerful and deadly military agent". ..."
"... I May be wrong regarding this theory, but it is highly unlikely. ..."
Jul 04, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

veritas semper vincit , Jul 4, 2018 7:16:47 PM | 43

The former empire known as Great Britain, was struck again by bad luck:

Novichok , the magic Russian military nerve agent jumped on another couple after it stayed low-key for weeks, in order to recover from the humiliation of being unable to kill the Skripals, in spite of being "the most powerful and deadly military agent".

Britain lost the Empire's colonies, its greatness (even if this was built on murder and theft) , its economic power, and now has lost its mind and its shame .

Britain is currently a pedophile island, full of third world immigrants and given refuge to all the dictators, criminals, crooks and terrorists in the world. It is laundering money through its City of London, and this is the only thing keeping that island afloat. It's a huge latrine with a Crown on top, as I like to describe it.

Now the Russians are randomly "poisoning" ordinary British subjects, because this is what Brits are. The British government and media immediately knew it was Novichok and the Russians were behind it. Maybe even Mr. Putin found time to do this.

The Russian team just qualified in the FIFA World Cup quarters ; like Britain did after beating Columbia. Mr. Putin is practicing on poor Brits. If the Russian team will meet the Brits in the finals, he may pull a Novichok on them and brazenly win this way, the finals.

I May be wrong regarding this theory, but it is highly unlikely.

flamingo , Jul 4, 2018 6:01:40 PM | 34
Mad cow disease again. Theresa being the lead mad cow.

[Jul 04, 2018] MoA - British Government Peddles Warmed Over Novichok Muck

Notable quotes:
"... Craig Murray pointed out that when actions are discussed or carried out, strategies laid out, Trident is never even mentioned. ..."
"... Britain is a failing Western Democracy just as the US is -- they are getting desperate and trying all kinds of stuff under the general heading of evil Russia. Britain is pathetic when you think about it hollow empty country with no vision or concern for anything but the elites. The entire Western democratic ideal has failed utterly, we live in a multi-polar world now the SCO is far more important than the G7 but May probably doesn't even know what it stands for. Without its association with the US and out of the EU the UK will be about as important as Uruguay or Nauru. ..."
"... I can only conclude the the Ruling Class in GB looks at its own public as completely dimwitted morons, as they apparently believe them willing to swallow this crap. ..."
"... It is just over a week since OPCW was given more powers. Put forward by Britain and backed by the usual coalition of the killing. Pulling another Skripal so soon after that is more than a bit sus. ..."
"... And the unknown substance is now Novichuk. But that 4 day lag, not to worry, 1 day ago the suspects were already identified tying in with the Skripals. The 2 Hitmen with close ties to Russia. ..."
"... Take it from me 90 percent of the British public are dim witted morons that's official from me! No exaggeration! Half just regurgitate what the tv / papers say with out question or thought. The other half have just switched off entirely. Tell them 8,000000 could die in Yemen. There eyes glaze over. ..."
"... Britain was never a democracy. It was masquerading as one in order to placate the unwashed masses. They're definitely in panic mode and whatever they do makes them look insane. ..."
"... I love Guerrero's concept that these stories are prepared more like Novellas... especially the implication that the script for the next episode is written after gauging reaction to the former episode. ..."
"... "I think the take home point is to not live near a chemical weapons lab." Methinks it may be worse than that: just don't live in Britain, these days. Says this sympathetic anglophile. ..."
"... The British can't seem to put the lid back on the vial btw was this the same one used by US Secr of State Colin Powell in 2003 at the UN Security Council before the invasion and occupation of Iraq? The Ayatollahs of Persia be forewarned! ..."
"... After researching everything I could find on Novichok, the only rational and logical conclusion one can draw is the Skripals and this latest couple should be dead. The sad part of this incident and the Skripal affair is how many people actually believe the government's claims. ..."
"... Imagine being Yulia Skripal at this moment. She had a job, a boyfriend, a dog and a home in Russia she may never be able to see again, because the UK government cannot allow her to return home and spill the beans on this sordid affair. If their is any justice in this world, every rational individual should be demanding "FREE Yulia"! ..."
"... I don't think this latest version of the novichok case helps the British case at all as it strongly suggests that there is something else out there killing people than a military grade nerve agent. ..."
"... As for the report in the Daily Telegraph "Salisbury couple are fresh victims of the Novichok attack on Sergei and Yulia Skripal", I suspect that is pure bullshit. ..."
"... I've been wondering how The Swamp's inner circle are feeling about the likelihood that Trump and Putin will get along like a house (of cards) on fire. It looks as though the reptiles are more than just a little bit worried... ..."
"... The capacity of some people to believe these lies is seemingly limitless, otherwise they would not bother. Must be hundreds of people fall ill and require emergency treatment each day. Are the Russians to be suspects in each illness requiring workers to go into home wear Hazmat gear and shut down the neighborhood pending tests? ..."
Jul 04, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

British Government Peddles Warmed Over Novichok Muck

It seems that Theresa May felt a need to stoke some more Russia hate :

Just as the World Cup had forced the British media to grudgingly acknowledge the obvious truth that Russia is an extremely interesting country inhabited, like everywhere else, by mostly pleasant and attractive people, we have a screaming reprise of the "Salisbury incident" dominating the British media.

All British media outlets report of a middle-aged British couple, Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley, who fell seriously ill in Amesbury, a town near Salisbury and near the British chemical weapon site Proton Down. The couple were transported to the Salisbury hospital. They were first suspected to have taken drugs but the police now speaks (vid) of a "potential exposure to an unknown substance" and that they "remain in a critical condition".

The parallels to the poisoning of the British-Russian spy Sergej Skripal and his daughter four month ago are obvious. The government alleged they were poisoned by a nerve agent of the Novichok series. Like back in March the British government will soon name the evildoer of this new drama.

The most curious issue of the current case is that it happened Saturday morning and that since a lot of local police action took place. But news of the incident emerged only early today. None of the pieces I read explains the four day long lack of reporting. The British government obviously prohibited all news of the case until early today and now prohibits to explain the censoring.

Why?

A "friend of the couple", who has been together with them, was interviewed by several outlets:

Cont. reading: British Government Peddles Warmed Over Novichok Muck

Posted by b at 02:21 PM | Comments (47)

Michael , Jul 4, 2018 2:30:35 PM | 1

Applying Occam's Razor,I think the take home point is to not live near a chemical weapons lab, or you'll end up being one of the test rats.
daffyDuct , Jul 4, 2018 2:45:20 PM | 4
Here's a link to Newsnow's aggregator for the "major incident". FYI: Newsnow and Wikipedia are fighting the Copyright Directive of the European Parliament tomorrow (July 5th) - so get the news while you can...

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/h/?search=%22major+incident%22&lang=en&searchheadlines=1

Inquirer , Jul 4, 2018 2:46:43 PM | 5
Sam Hobson said: "His eyes were wide open and red, his pupils were like pinpricks." Yes, exposition to some toxic agents can make the pupils like pinpricks (and newspapers said that novichok has this effect), but this contraction is not so easy to note, because the pupil is not the whole iris and the iris doesn't contract.
daffyDuct , Jul 4, 2018 2:59:25 PM | 6
June 30:

"A police spokesman said: "At the moment it is not a police incident it is being led by the fire and the ambulance. It appears that there are three people who have taken drugs and had a medical incident. They have all been taken to hospital."

A cordon was put in place as a precaution but police say there is "no danger" to anyone else in the area.

A spokesman for South Western Ambulance Service later told the Journal that only one patient had been taken to Salisbury District Hospital.

http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16325525.person-taken-to-hospital-after-incident-in-amesbury/

June 30th
---------

"An incident in the Kings Gate area of Amesbury on Saturday evening (June 30th) is thought to have been a drug-related medical episode.

...

One patient has been taken to Salisbury District Hospital by land ambulance.

They also tell us the response from the emergency services has been 'precautionary'.

Wiltshire Police have told us they are 'certain there's no risk to the public' following the drug-related incident."

https://www.spirefm.co.uk/news/local-news/2622250/incident-at-amesburys-archers-gate/

daffyDuct , Jul 4, 2018 2:59:25 PM | 6 Guerrero , Jul 4, 2018 3:03:00 PM | 7
Fascinating!
But what is it that really happened here?

Might it be useful to think in terms of the structuring of TV-novelas? Are such media content events designed for a similiar/identical purpose? Unlike a literary novel, a soap opera series can be produced without having an idea as to how artistic unity will be achieved with some universal meaning.

Are serial tear-jerker episodes the product of private storyboard conferences? Their requirements would be much simpler and less demanding than those of art. Each episode ends with the equivalent of a lewd embrace of an illicit couple viewed by an interested, emotionally involved third-party who happens to come in the door. (this point-of-view would be that of peeping-tom reflex of a mass-media consumer)

The camera is focusing mostly on skin, and a tear in the eye of the intruder, or else it is a glare of rage... An advantage to the commercial TV content producers is that they would be able to gauge reaction before publishing succeeding episodes.

Is it the story of some homeless recreational drug users who were accidently poisoned by a dose of novichalk that Putin intended for a spy sheltering in the British isles accidently deposited as spare-change into guitar-case of strung-out subway musician...

Babyl-on , Jul 4, 2018 3:13:52 PM | 8
Maybe it is the case that cops are trained to look at pupils and can easily determine their size. I could never do that and I doubt anyone who says so without being trained to do so, and eve then eyesight and lighting needs to be close to to ideal.

Britain must be desperate or they really believe they are pulling this off. They must be getting backing from factions in Washington, they must have unspoken permission for this. Britain doing its humble part in the Russia demonizing to support Trident spending.

Craig Murray pointed out that when actions are discussed or carried out, strategies laid out, Trident is never even mentioned.

Britain is a failing Western Democracy just as the US is -- they are getting desperate and trying all kinds of stuff under the general heading of evil Russia. Britain is pathetic when you think about it hollow empty country with no vision or concern for anything but the elites. The entire Western democratic ideal has failed utterly, we live in a multi-polar world now the SCO is far more important than the G7 but May probably doesn't even know what it stands for. Without its association with the US and out of the EU the UK will be about as important as Uruguay or Nauru.

GM , Jul 4, 2018 3:34:10 PM | 9
So, uhm. How does a door handle on Skripal's front door end up contaminating the area near the bar. Legit curious to see how they'll spin this to tie it all together now
SteLe/TheDarkCornerInUrBrain , Jul 4, 2018 3:59:07 PM | 12
Now that me being an ex-Junkie is out in the open here, i will provide some possible explanations:

-Contaiminated Class A drugs: Heroin sold on the street is maximum 10% heroin, and 90% various more or less toxic filler stuff. That may be strychnin (Which is used as rat poison, and fits the symptoms well expect for hallucinating, valium or related opiates, paracetamol, aspirin, or 1000 other chemicals the dealer has lying around.

-"Legal highs": in UK and in EU, those new synthetic drugs that are marketed as legal substitute for cannabis, XTC, cocaine etc. are quite popular, and they are highly dangerous because of their synthetic nature, and are known to cause severe health problems up to death. In prisons also in UK those are popular, because inmates can pass drug tests easily. This couple seems to have prison and hard drugs experience, and is therefore likely, to have known or used those substances.

Additionally, being homeless, drug users/addicts, they are likely to have trouble with police, and are an easy target for manipulation by intelligence operatives.

And why should evil Putin try to kill some UK Junkies? Even BBC will have a pretty hard time to spin this..

the pessimist , Jul 4, 2018 4:04:05 PM | 13
Hard to believe the Brits are going for a second bite of the poison apple. Bad TV drama released into the wild...
Brendan , Jul 4, 2018 4:20:14 PM | 14
They look a bit like the couple in the Salisbury CCTV recording who were originally identified as the Skripals.
Ort , Jul 4, 2018 4:22:43 PM | 15
Oh, goody! Now we can have another round of UK authorities spewing ominous ambiguities, full of Russia-blaming sound and fury, in the Gorgon PM and her rotten Tory government's ongoing desperate struggle to keep its depraved nose above water.

I can't wait for UK Village Idiot Laureate Boris Johnson to provide another definitive briefing.

Meanwhile, hmm... I suspect one of those lost, stolen, strayed, or liquidated Skripal pets might be the perpetrator here.

I certainly agree that this story is worth reporting as farce . At this stage, though, I hope people will resist that catnip-like intoxication of sifting through the allegations and factoids to speculate on what it's "really" all about.

I wish this latest afflicted pair well, though. And just to flout my own suggestion and engage in hypotheticals-- who knows, maybe next thing we know the UK government will pay top dollar pound to purchase the crime-scene house!

dan , Jul 4, 2018 4:49:16 PM | 16
The dude sounds like me, having a good time. Eyes rolling back, dilated pupils, hallucinating. Its my average party. Meanwhile, in England....
james , Jul 4, 2018 4:49:52 PM | 17
thanks b...

no one really believes the uk anymore... if this doesn't make them a laughing stock, nothing will..apparently people like bad re-runs and are happy to watch them.. this is the new 2018 version of coronation street i guess..

Piotr Berman , Jul 4, 2018 4:52:59 PM | 18
Today I was totally surprised. Headline in The Guardian: There is a cloud hanging over this World Cup and Fifa must not ignore it

An otherwise brilliant World Cup has been cheapened by the kind of histrionics witnessed in England's game with Colombia and they have become a cancer in the game

Imagine: nothing in the article refers to Russia! Additionally "otherwise brilliant World Cup".

Tom Welsh , Jul 4, 2018 4:56:17 PM | 19
"...near the British chemical weapon site Proton Down".

I think you mean Porton Down. Proton Down, as any fule kno, is the British government's high-energy physics lab.

vk , Jul 4, 2018 5:03:00 PM | 20
I still stick with the food poisoning hypothesis (that doctor's letter sealed the deal for me).

Both were near the restaurant the Skripals went right before they showed their symptoms. They were homeless people. The simplest explanation is that they ate the same poisoned batch in the garbage of the restaurant; or that the restaurant has an unreliable supplier, which gave them more than one poisoned batch, or the restaurant simply pushes its luck with spoiled food which, in seafood case, can result in some kind of toxins liberation (the practice of recycling expired and sometimes even rotten expensive ingredients is common in sofisticated restaurants).

In the case of the Skripals, the British government got lucky they were Russians, and seized the opportunity. I don't see how they're going to use this now, since both victims are British. Unless they want to declare war.

daffyDuct , Jul 4, 2018 5:03:08 PM | 21
He described taking Mr Rowley to collect a prescription from Boots in Amesbury and on to eat lunch at Amesbury Baptist Church fair, before returning to his friend's home in Muggleton Road.

Boots, the church and the green outside it are among several sides in the town and nearby Salisbury that have been cordoned off by police.

Mr Hobson said Mr Rowley started falling ill around four hours after Ms Sturgess was taken to hospital, while they were preparing clothes to take to her. "He felt ill and went for a shower. Then his eyes went bloodshot and like two pin pricks, he began garbling incoherently and I could tell he was hallucinating.

"He was making weird noises and acting like a zombie. It was a zombie-like state. He slumped against the wall."

Mr Hobson said he called an ambulance and that when paramedics arrived they initially believed the illness was drugs-related because of his friend's struggle with addiction.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/wiltshire-salisbury-amesbury-major-incident-victims-dawn-sturgess-charlie-rowley-latest-a8431376.html

dan , Jul 4, 2018 5:03:46 PM | 22
By the way, SteLe/TheDarkCornerInUrBrain @ 12,

There are a plethora of substances that have those effects. Novichock is not one. That just kills you, straight away. No passing out, no hallucinating, and definitely no park benches. Done. Finished. Dead. Even cyanide kills very quickly. Although Jim Jones might not agree. If anybody wanted to kill anybody else through poisoning, they could do it very easily. Ratex (strychnine), takes days, weeks to kill. Whoever adds that to their product would be killing their market anyway. Capitalism hasn't gone full circle yet...

Den Lille Abe , Jul 4, 2018 5:08:06 PM | 23
Yhis "poisoning" meme is not funny anymore, nor comical, that has worn off. It is in fact tragic. It is tragic that the lies are so stupid, thick and unbelievable, that the whole narrative is so crudely pieced together, that it make Pravda' 1970 articles look like Voltaire's writings.

I can only conclude the the Ruling Class in GB looks at its own public as completely dimwitted morons, as they apparently believe them willing to swallow this crap.

Peter AU 1 , Jul 4, 2018 5:18:28 PM | 24
It is just over a week since OPCW was given more powers. Put forward by Britain and backed by the usual coalition of the killing. Pulling another Skripal so soon after that is more than a bit sus.
Brian , Jul 4, 2018 5:19:39 PM | 25
Hi All,

First post here - the only blog worth the time and effort to contribute to in my opinion. Seems to me that as the UK and friends bought the OPCW last week, this incident has been strategically timed so that the OPCW can investigate the 'poisoning' and apportion blame to Russia just in time for the WC final, or am I being too cynical?

james , Jul 4, 2018 5:21:45 PM | 26
@ p24/25 peter / brian - no, i think one has to be especially cynical given where we are at presently...
Likklemore , Jul 4, 2018 5:23:28 PM | 27
Thanks b for catching the 4 days lag in timeline. Early morning, July 4th, British time, it was on the Daily Express as "Breaking News" as in just happening. And the unknown substance is now Novichuk. But that 4 day lag, not to worry, 1 day ago the suspects were already identified tying in with the Skripals. The 2 Hitmen with close ties to Russia.

UK Police Allege Two Hitmen 'With Close Ties to Russia' Involved in Skripals LINK

Britain and its allies continue to blame Moscow for being behind the March 2018 attack on former Russian intelligence officer Sergei Skripal and his daughter with what UK experts claim was the A234 nerve agent, although the accusations have not been substantiated. Russian authorities vehemently reject the allegations as groundless.

The Sun has cited sources in Scotland Yard as saying that "a two-man hit team with close ties to Russia" orchestrated the alleged poisoning of ex-Russian security agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in the UK earlier this year.

Mark2 , Jul 4, 2018 5:31:41 PM | 28
Den Lille Abe @ 23

Take it from me 90 percent of the British public are dim witted morons that's official from me! No exaggeration! Half just regurgitate what the tv / papers say with out question or thought. The other half have just switched off entirely. Tell them 8,000000 could die in Yemen. There eyes glaze over.

Ian , Jul 4, 2018 5:31:55 PM | 29
Babyl-on @8:

Britain was never a democracy. It was masquerading as one in order to placate the unwashed masses. They're definitely in panic mode and whatever they do makes them look insane.

I find it amusing there is no mention on why China is not part of the G7/8. If you believe the official narrative that China's economy is the second largest in the World, then one would think China would have a seat at the table. I was half expecting Russia's seat to be given to China to create a wedge between China and Russia. But we all know why.

Daniel , Jul 4, 2018 5:45:36 PM | 30
James. How I wish nobody believed these fairy tales anymore.

I love Guerrero's concept that these stories are prepared more like Novellas... especially the implication that the script for the next episode is written after gauging reaction to the former episode.

One of the witnesses in the BBC article I read reported believing the gas leak story because electricity to the neighborhood had been cut off. Wonder what that's about?

Did y'all catch " False Flag Fail: How Syrian Civilians Derailed White Helmet 'Chemical' Stunt in Eastern Ghouta?"

wendy davis , Jul 4, 2018 5:56:29 PM | 33
ah, well...the verdict is in: 'Wiltshire pair poisoned by nerve agent novichok, say police; Substance deemed responsible for severe illness of Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley'

"Basu added: "I would add that the complex investigation into the attempted murders of Yulia and Sergei remains ongoing and detectives continue to sift through and assess all the available evidence and are following every possible lead to identify those responsible, for what remains a reckless and barbaric criminal act."

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jul/04/wiltshire-couple-poisoned-by-nerve-agent-police-announce-dawn-sturgess-charlie-rowley

oh, that evil putin!

flamingo , Jul 4, 2018 6:01:40 PM | 34
Mad cow disease again. Theresa being the lead mad cow.
Scotch Bingeington , Jul 4, 2018 6:17:14 PM | 35
Re Michael | 1

"I think the take home point is to not live near a chemical weapons lab." Methinks it may be worse than that: just don't live in Britain, these days. Says this sympathetic anglophile.

Oui , Jul 4, 2018 6:21:17 PM | 36
UK Nerve Center Porton Down: 'Putin Strikes Again!'

The British can't seem to put the lid back on the vial btw was this the same one used by US Secr of State Colin Powell in 2003 at the UN Security Council before the invasion and occupation of Iraq? The Ayatollahs of Persia be forewarned!

Must have forgotten to scrub the home front door knop of the Skripals or was Yulia's luggage returned via FedEx? Sloppy work by British Intelligence

Lightning never strikes twice, except near Porton Down. In fact, this second case will prove the first case was bogus. Were the two KGB agents from the Cold War still around?

Dick , Jul 4, 2018 6:21:39 PM | 37
After researching everything I could find on Novichok, the only rational and logical conclusion one can draw is the Skripals and this latest couple should be dead. The sad part of this incident and the Skripal affair is how many people actually believe the government's claims.

Imagine being Yulia Skripal at this moment. She had a job, a boyfriend, a dog and a home in Russia she may never be able to see again, because the UK government cannot allow her to return home and spill the beans on this sordid affair. If their is any justice in this world, every rational individual should be demanding "FREE Yulia"!

Babyl-on , Jul 4, 2018 6:37:50 PM | 38
Ian @28

Oh, but a communist dictatorship can't be in a club with the superior Western Democracies. Just because they lifted over 700 million people out of poverty who tonight have something to eat while Western Democracy is starving millions of people deliberately in Yemen, clearly communists don't understand the free market.

Western Liberal Democracy is an utter and contemptible failure.

Ghost Ship , Jul 4, 2018 6:47:57 PM | 39
>>>> Mark2 | Jul 4, 2018 3:34:26 PM | 10

That was me - I was being facetious as Putin is not into gangsterism unlike Obama, Cameron, May, Macron etc.

I don't think this latest version of the novichok case helps the British case at all as it strongly suggests that there is something else out there killing people than a military grade nerve agent.

Amesbury is about eight miles from Salisbury and I just can't see how a limited release of a chemical would create a hot spot several miles away and almost four months later. A few days later perhaps but not almost four months although I doubt that'd stop some wanker a bellingcat coming up with some dumb theory that's picked up by the MSM.

As for the report in the Daily Telegraph "Salisbury couple are fresh victims of the Novichok attack on Sergei and Yulia Skripal", I suspect that is pure bullshit.

Hoarsewhisperer , Jul 4, 2018 6:50:19 PM | 40
I've been wondering how The Swamp's inner circle are feeling about the likelihood that Trump and Putin will get along like a house (of cards) on fire. It looks as though the reptiles are more than just a little bit worried...
Pft , Jul 4, 2018 6:53:51 PM | 41
The capacity of some people to believe these lies is seemingly limitless, otherwise they would not bother. Must be hundreds of people fall ill and require emergency treatment each day. Are the Russians to be suspects in each illness requiring workers to go into home wear Hazmat gear and shut down the neighborhood pending tests?


Mark2 , Jul 4, 2018 7:13:05 PM | 42
Ghost ship @ 39
Thanks for owning up to that joke ! Hell in these times a bit of humour is good therapy. So can I stop digging my bunker now !
On a serious note- whether this latest incident proves to be drug over dose or nerve agent is pretty secondary to how it's being used to beat the Russians with. What this actually is,is dog whistle politics. A deliberate attempt again to ferment Hate for Russia in the eyes of the British public. The only trick they know is hate.
veritas semper vincit , Jul 4, 2018 7:16:47 PM | 43
The former empire known as Great Britain, was struck again by bad luck:
Novichok , the magic Russian military nerve agent jumped on another couple after it stayed low-key for weeks, in order to recover from the humiliation of being unable to kill the Skripals, in spite of being "the most powerful and deadly military agent".

Britain lost the Empire's colonies, its greatness (even if this was built on murder and theft) , its economic power, and now has lost its mind and its shame .
Britain is currently a pedophile island, full of third world immigrants and given refuge to all the dictators, criminals, crooks and terrorists in the world.
It is laundering money through its City of London, and this is the only thing keeping that island afloat.
It's a huge latrine with a Crown on top, as I like to describe it.

Now the Russians are randomly "poisoning" ordinary British subjects, because this is what Brits are.

The British government and media immediately knew it was Novichok and the Russians were behind it.
Maybe even Mr. Putin found time to do this.

The Russian team just qualified in the FIFA World Cup quarters ; like Britain did after beating Columbia.
Mr. Putin is practicing on poor Brits.
If the Russian team will meet the Brits in the finals, he may pull a Novichok on them and brazenly win this way, the finals.

I May be wrong regarding this theory, but it is highly unlikely.

https://me582.wordpress.com/
https://artisticexpressions394454247.wordpress.com/


Paul , Jul 4, 2018 7:32:14 PM | 44
Brendan @ 14

I think they look more than a "bit like"!

Here are pictures of the 2 people in the latest incident:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jul/04/wiltshire-unknown-substance-leaves-pair-critically-ill-in-salisbury-hospital

And this is the CCTV from 4 March:
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/russian-spy-poisoned-hunt-for-blonde-woman-seen-on-cctv-minutes-before-sergei-skripal-was-found-a3783386.html

The woman has the same hairline (off her forehead) and the shape of the man's face looks a reasonable match.

The CCTV is from a local gym and it was reported, back in March, that the police were only interested in that part of the CCTV. They must have known who these people were for a long time, which makes the 4 day delay even more ridiculous.

Jason , Jul 4, 2018 7:53:22 PM | 45
Can you imagine if they follow this up with another one in Syria? That would be too stupid but at this point not unfathomable. Seems like they would have tried to make us forget about Novichok and the lies that were told by May and the MSM about it being something only Russia could possibly produce. I guess when nobody is held accountable for spreading dangerous criminal misinformation like that than they just try it again. Even now that there is still zero evidence and no suspects in the Skirpal incident, none of the countries who expelled diplomats have apologized and the news hasn't stopped referring to Russia as the only culprit, so why not give it another go I suppose? Anything to put some smear on the World Cup maybe, though the details of this story don't seem to make sense yet. As far as Syria, the NeoCons like Bolton maybe panicking if the rumors that the Syrian government has made some preliminary deals in regards to lite-reunification and a peace plan with the YPG/SDF. They may do a "back to back" again and do something drastic in Syria while blaming both on Russia indirectly..
dh , Jul 4, 2018 8:27:08 PM | 46
I've been expecting another Steele dossier. If England make the finals it wouldn't surprise me if the team get propositioned by some attractive ladies. Of course they will gallantly resist.
james , Jul 4, 2018 9:38:25 PM | 47
@30 /31 daniel... one can dream, lol... thanks for the videos.. teh vanessa beeley one is very good.. which brings me to the comment peter mentioned on a previous thread, or maybe there were a few mentioning it.. the changes to the opcw - to quote the keyphrase from the usa daily propaganda briefing yesterday "The decision calls on the technical secretariat to establish arrangements for identifying the perpetrators of chemical weapons attacks in Syria by using all potentially relevant information..." which essentially means this... all the money the usa/uk have spent on propaganda to fund the white helmets, syrian civil defense, 'save our syria', chatham house and etc etc - will be accepted as fact, unless proven otherwise... this will be the grounds for making war on syria with macron, may and trump being the good poodles for saudi arabia and israel, that they continue to be.. well - that is what i get from that..

https://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2018/07/283773.htm

@34 flamingo - thanks for that! just when you think britian can't get any more crazy and whacked out then it already is - this comes along... a better view on britian at this point is the whole country has been subject to some form of mind altering drug.. we are witnessing the byproduct in their msm and political leadership vacuum...

[Jul 04, 2018] No Need For Nato - Craig Murray

Jul 04, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

A NATO summit approaches that brings Donald Trump to Europe and then on to these shores, and brings the usual clamour for more of the taxpayers' money to be given to arms manufacturers.

Yet NATO is a demonstrably useless institution. It's largest ever active military deployment, for 12 years in Afghanistan, resulted in military defeat throughout 80% of the country, the installation of a pocket regime whose scrip does not run further than you can throw the scrip, and a vast outflow of heroin to finance the criminal underworld throughout NATO countries. In invading Afghanistan and boosting the heroin warlords, NATO countries destabilised themselves

NATO's second biggest military operation ever was the attack on Libya, where NATO carried out an incredible 14,200 bombing sorties using high explosive munitions and devastated Libya's infrastructure and entire cities. Here is Sirte after NATO "liberation".

The direct result of the devastation of Libya and destruction of its government infrastructure has been the massive untrammelled exodus of migrants, especially from West Africa, through Libya and across the Mediterranean on boats. This has not only led to the appalling exploitation and tragic death of many migrants, it has fundamentally weakened the governments and indeed governing public ethos of European NATO member states and led to a right wing populist surge throughout much of the EU.

In short, in destroying Libya, NATO members destabilised themselves The direct result of NATO's destruction of Libya.

Now NATO is focusing once more on the original "threat" it was supposed to combat, a Russian invasion of Western Europe.

Russia has absolutely no intention of invading Western Europe. The very notion is ludicrous. It does not require NATO to deter a threat that does not exist.

Poland, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia alone have a combined GNP as big as Russia. On a purchasing power parity basis, if you add in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania those Eastern states still match Russia economically. On a PPP basis, the combined GDP of all NATO states is 12 times that of Russia.

Russia does have disproportionate military power for its size – but not that much. Russia's defence spending is one sixth that of NATO defence spending, though it is slightly more efficient because, despite corruption, less of Russia's defence spending goes into the pockets of arms company shareholders, lobbyists, politicians and other fatcats than happens in the West. But that cannot outweigh Russia's massive economic disadvantage. Nothing can. Russia is very well placed to defend itself, but in no position to attack major powers.

Russia's foreign policy successes – in Crimea, Syria and Georgia – have been based not on massive military strength – the NATO powers far outweigh Russia there – but simply on much better statecraft. And NATO, for all the trillions western taxpayers spend on it, has been unable to do anything about it, despite the fact that Russian actions in Crimea and Georgia have been illegal in international law.

In fact if anybody has not worked out by now that our famed nuclear arsenal is a chocolate teapot, then they have not been paying attention. In none of the recent foreign policy crises – including the North Korean nuclearisation issue – nobody, anywhere, ever has mentioned Trident missiles as part of the solution. They are utterly worthless.

The threat of a Russian attack on NATO itself is non-existent. The EU is not officially a military alliance but the idea that any part of EU territory could be subject to invasion without the rest of the EU reacting is a political impossibility. It is very plain that Vladimir Putin's policy is to reincorporate into Russia those bordering pockets of ethnic Russians in former Soviet states. But this has been approached piecemeal and avoiding major confrontation. There is no practical threat to the Baltic states whose security is already de facto guaranteed by EU membership.

So NATO's role of defence against Russia is otiose, and its wider military adventures have been a total disaster.

Finally, a thought about China. I cannot think of a parallel to China these last two decades, where any country in history has obtained so much economic pre-eminence in the World and shown so very little interest in military expansion. The invasion of Tibet occurred before China's economic flowering, and the South China Sea dispute is hardly the invasion of Iraq. I do not claim any expertise in Chinese culture or thought, but they appear to realise that dominance can be achieved by more subtle means than the sword. It is going to be a fascinating few decades as China rapidly overtakes the USA in the superpower stakes.

[Jul 04, 2018] Britain can't handle the truth so it uses "attack dogs" jornalists to discredit Mr/ Lavron. She failed miserably

This is like a chess party in real with this British journalist carefully prepared traps and polished ability to misinterpret the statements. Fascinating watch. Lavrow proved to be on the top of the game, despite severe disadvantages of not knowing what he will be asked.
Levett Prins comment is brilliant "''Are you accusing the British government of a cover-up of this incident?'' (Skripal) ... Was waiting for Lavrov to say ''Yes, it is highly likely''
Notable quotes:
"... No shortage of shameless journalists these days. I am sure this woman isn't stupid but probably she willingly accepted to carryout slanderous line of questioning in return for some money. The foreign minister totally schooled her. ..."
Jun 29, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Exclusive Channel 4 News interview with the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. He accuses Britain of 'extermination of the evidence' in the Skripal poisoning and of 'all kinds of tricks' to change the rules of the OPCW.

(Click to subscribe for more Channel 4 News videos.

https://www.youtube.com/channel4news?... )

He described that as a 'violation' of the chemical weapons convention and said that if the OPCW was not repaired 'the days of the OPCW would be counted, at least it would not remain as a universal organisation'

Levett Prins , 4 days ago (edited)

''Are you accusing the British government of a cover-up of this incident?'' (Skripal) ... Was waiting for Lavrov to say ''Yes, it is highly likely''

TheFreedomCycle , 3 days ago

The BS, smarmy so called journo interview was as embarrassingly short of fact and proper technique as compared with Lavrov's usual master classic diplomacy and truth telling. Having been part of this circus called British MSM journalism many years ago I see now just a cesspit of gutter process measly condoning and supporting the Western Gov narrative. No 4th estate this

Sam Which , 4 days ago

Is it just me or is her go to technique in any interview to completely misinterpret statements and then asks shitty gotcha questions based on her complete lack of understanding of what he is saying? A good interviewer holds their interviewee to account for what they say. not make up a complete competing narrative to what the person in front of them has just said and then battle that fictional ghost.

Ant Laud , 4 days ago

As Foreign Ministers go this ones pretty sharp

aligzanduh , 4 days ago

Usual venomous charade masquerading as journalism. Really childish questions and disrespectful framing. In other words a promotion awaits her!

Cabronosidad , 4 days ago

Oh dear! Kathy Newman wearing her dunce hat again. Embarrassing.

Stevie Gilbert , 4 days ago

Channel 4 news, bias propaganda machine, just as bad as the BBC, I can't watch it anymore, credability lost, goodbye Channel 4 news

TheC0mmnMann , 4 days ago

Bravo Mr. Lavrov.

poofendorf , 4 days ago

Totally outclassed her. Made her look like an imbecile.

zeitgeist , 4 days ago

C4 thumbnail "we dont like anybody" the guy was saying they keep professional state level relations between countries and C4 prints this pugnacious bs without the context? how does this not break any press laws? not that more laws are the answer theyd have a field day with their 1984 fake news label

e v , 4 days ago (edited)

What he actually talks about: diplomacy and foreign relations aren't about who you "like" and don't "like" - they're about pragmatism and interests. Video thumbnail: "We don't like anybody" This is just clickbait spin. And it doesn't help anyone.

Carlo Slats , 4 days ago

Lovely phrase somewhere around the 30th minute: The 'highly likely'- attitude.. :D

Vincent Rodriguez , 3 days ago

Let's face it, the UK is a postmodern neo-Marxist shithole, which is completely falling apart. It went passed the point of no return and now it's only a matter of time until it collapses completely.

Jermaine Charles , 3 days ago

these journalists are so embarrassing to watch. they always sadly try to interview Putin and Lavrov with these silly/fictional/propaganda questions and look stupid after!!!

titus02906 , 3 days ago

You know, as Americans, we find it hilarious that outlets like BBC and Channel 4 are considered legitimate outlets while RT is accused of being a propaganda outlet. The interviewer here proves the hypocrisy when Lavrov talks about the migrant exit provided by NATO's bombing of Libya and the interviewer accuses Russia's involvement in Syria for creating the refugee crisis. We remember - Lavrov is correct: Russia, which had, like us, a few advisers in place prior to this point, announced full-blown intervention in mid- to late August, 2015, and the full-blown intervention began in September, 2015. Those images of hundreds of thousands of migrants tramping through the Balkans, Hungary and Austria were from June-August, 2015. So, the interviewer was dutifully repeating a government propaganda line that Russia is causing the migrant crisis by intervening in Syria when the largest migrant flow preceded Russia's intervention in Syria. And of course, that propaganda line completely ignores our own State Department's statements encouraging the "Arab Spring" which made messes from which Libya, Syria and Egypt have never fully recovered. Egypt has a major problem in Sinai. Libya and Syria are complete messes. Tunisia, where it all started, has economic problems exacerbated by the attacks on tourists. The Yemen situation was part of it all, and the U.N. is projecting 18 million dead from starvation, never mind the cholera epidemic. Yes, indeed, we in the West are bringing freedom and happiness everywhere, aren't we? We learned nothing from the Soviet Union's peaceful collapse after 75 years (with no whole-hearted attempts at "regime change") and nothing from our failed experiments in "spreading democracy" in Iraq and Afghanistan. And as for the "meddling" question, well, isn't that a "When did you stop beating your wife, sir?" question.

G Engborie , 3 days ago

Kathy Newman - clearly biased. All she has is propaganda and conspiracy theories. Almost all western journalists are like this. This has serious implications for democratic societies where unbiased professional media are a pillar of democracy, keeping their people informed and able to make considered voting decisions. To me, every time they do this sort of interview, Russia looks like the good guy and the West look wicked, twisted and broken. My heart goes to Russia. They have TRUTH on their side.

Rex The Younger , 3 days ago

Christ this is a socking attempted hit piece from C4 news here. anyone with a brain can see what is happening. if you actually listen to Lavrov here he talks nothing but common sense. the thumbnail for this video is also some blatant propaganda. he never said that in the context it is presented. I am pleased people are seeing the real Russia via the world cup.

johnrb88 , 2 days ago (edited)

Cathy Newman is resolutely upholding the highest journalistic standards and ethics......of the Spanish Inquistion. The stranglehold over the media by the corrupted establishment is simply shameful. Lavrov is the patron saint of patience.

ValExperimenter , 3 days ago

Kathy you really should research before you interview, The OPCW press release on khan cheykun reads like something from the character Sir Humphry in yes minister. In the field of chemistry there is no need to rely on credibility.

g nolan , 3 days ago

Lavrov is to be taken seriously as a diplomat and a thinker. His English is most skillful and it will take a much more qualified person this young lady to lay bare his shortcomings.

Alejandro Rodriguez , 2 days ago

I thought Cathy Newman was inept, or incompetent at her job and had some contempt for her... after watching this I realize she just has no care for truth at all or for journalism. She was clearly just pushing her government's agenda while pretending to be a tough interviewer. No respect for this lady any longer. This interview was painful to watch because you could tell she wasn't listening to anything Lavrov was saying and was just waiting for an opening to launch an accusation, regardless of evidence or facts. Sad

D dicin , 3 days ago

Lavrov is hugely impressive here. I buy his side of the argument.

Fahed Sayed , 3 days ago (edited)

No shortage of shameless journalists these days. I am sure this woman isn't stupid but probably she willingly accepted to carryout slanderous line of questioning in return for some money. The foreign minister totally schooled her.

Yama Zakura , 3 days ago

Everything is fine, but unfortunately he probably just forgot to respond to this - 5:20 - "a government responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of its own citizens ... a gas-killing animal ..." - that this is also a gross exaggeration based on made-up stories spun up by venal media.

Anikita Asphodelev , 4 days ago

Cruise missile and drone killing animals sponsoring msm "journalists" to challenge reality and to promote their sick warmongering propaganda narratives. Disgusting.

Steven Wilson , 4 days ago

I'm amazed this British so called reporter...Doesn't know the United States under Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton...Started the coup in Syria...and Armed the terrorists with fully automatic weapons... Tow missiles and every weapon they could... to overthrow the Syrian Government. Why doesn't this woman know this before she asks misleading questions?

Mitch F , 4 days ago

Winner 2018 Tinfoil-hat Award: Channel 4 News's Kathy Newman for bringing propaganda, fake news, and "false narratives" to entirely new levels. During Newman's 34-minute interview with Russian Minister Sergey Lavrov, Newman aggressively parrots phony, dangerous accusations/representations and pushes "fake news media speaking points" intended to demonize Russia. Shockingly, Newman presents no backup, no facts, and no EVIDENCE whatsoever. Boris Johnson and Theresa May's new rule: "Guilty before trial because we said so, now sit down and shut up!", risible.

Yeni Kool , 3 days ago

I must admit, love watching these Fake Media prostitutes interview FM Lavrov, they won't present facts.. They think we the public are morons and we believe everything they say!! Thanks you BBC and C4 for showing us the people how stupid you really are.. Keep it up !

martin02031958 , 3 days ago

This is not journalism but failing effort of a propagandist's manipulation. But she simply fails outplay him. He is a top diplomat for more than 20 years; she is ridiculous trying to press him.

knowledge share , 4 days ago

The British is NOT just guilty of a cover up it was the BRITISH STATE who are 100% responsible for the Salisbury con.

knowledge share , 4 days ago

President Putin and FM Lavrov are obsessed with stability they are allergic to chaos. The notion that they promote chaos is insane.

EVZYL , 3 days ago (edited)

What a naive interviewer. Totally out of her depth, regurgitating CNN & BBC propaganda.

fight me gook yecciiss , 10 hours ago

People like this woman are completely empty. I mean that literally empty. Her assignment is to ask a sequence of questions try and cause the other person to get angry or emotional by asking provocative questions. These creatures don't understand the concept of gender. Nationality. Borders. Etc. They are psychopaths. Lavrov understands who they are that is why he can manoeuvre around her

Schlomo Weissbergman-Goldsteinwitz, Ph.D. , 2 days ago

Cathy has been trained quite well. There are, however, a couple of moments where she hams it up a bit too much. Overall, I give the performance a 7 out of 10.

G Hossain , 1 day ago

30:25 all her arguments are rebutted in one sentence.

Citizen X , 2 days ago (edited)

A World order were the Americans are sitting as the Leader at the end of the table. There will be only Chaos and endless wars !

gerald geaf , 2 days ago

Professionalism is DEAD in the West. Cathy Griffin is supposed to be a senior and experienced journalist but her questions - both avenue and phrasing - seem like a school leaver who is doing apprenticeship in reporting(not even journalism)

John Correa , 4 days ago

Wow. When you have as an interviewee someone like Sergei Lavrov, you really need to prepare your interviewer or try to get someone really knowledgeable about the matters to be discussed. This was like having a heavyweight on a ring with a newbie to boxing. Anyway, thanks to Channel 4 for the interview.

SmellMyKKPP , 21 hours ago

Lavrov is probably the best well known diplomat alive today

Roni Taylor , 4 days ago

Kudos to Cathy Newman for letting him speak! His well-informed and thoughtful views are valuable to anyone wishing to expand their own understanding, even if their initial questions are probably as asinine as these. The spasiba was a nice touch, too. Kudos also to Channel 4 for posting the full interview.

Christopher Barclay , 2 days ago

Lavrov only just controlled himself when responding to Newman's ridiculous question about Russia benefitting from the 'chaos' of Britain leaving the EU. Does she know a failed state when she sees one? Do France and Germany really need Britain to stop Europe from descending to the state of Somalia? Has the US really benefitted from the chaos that is Somalia, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan? (If your answer to the last question is 'yes', fair enough, but you are arguing that actual US foreign policy is very different to that which is publicly stated and I doubt poor little Cathy could get her head around that).

Bye Bye , 2 days ago

The brass necked bare faced audacity of 'Cathy dishonest Newman.' (In no particular order) reads notes, adopts an accusatory and dismissive head tilted eyes narrowed posture, then asks a Channel 4 gem, "Is Russia afraid of the truth."

Mark Time , 2 days ago

She got totally owned! Well done Mr Lavrov and well done to all the commentators below. Nice to see that so many people are recognising the government run MSM for what it is....a lie factory. Spread the word to all .....

James Grech , 2 days ago

Here's a straight talking politician who works his socks off for his country, put him next to his British counterpart you can clearly see who is dishonest.

Angelo , 8 hours ago

Sergey not only shows up 'Strawman' Newman as a plain and simple moron as Peterson did for overtly programming the public for a gender war, Sergey does far more and exposes the full breadth of her treachery, her being a ruthless lame stream actual war propagandist. This proud feminist woman, this virtue signalling warmongress is at once trying to divide society against itself and simultaneously pushing it into wars. Ephialtes of Trachis would be proud.

Poncenby Smithe , 1 day ago

Is Kathy Newman really the gibbering idiot she appears to be, or merely a nasty piece of work? I imagine the answer lies somewhere in between. Either way could you please find someone less aesthetically unpleasant to represent you the woman looks like a demented reptile.

CHAS1422 , 4 days ago

The immediate presumption is Bashar Assad is evil because "he kills his own people". Then she dismisses the historical context. How myopic. The insurgency in Syria has everything to do with history. The Jihadists are inspired bu the resurrection of the Islamic Caliphate. That is their inspiration, not Jeffersonian Democracy. There is a civil war and in order to fight, you must kill the enemy.

[Jul 04, 2018] Ep. 629 Pulitzer Prize-winning Sy Hersh Questions Official Line on NATO, Skripal ISIS - YouTube

Jul 04, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Published on Jun 30, 2018

In this episode, we are joined by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Sy Hersh who exposed NATO nation war crimes of the military-industrial complex. From Abu Ghraib prison in the Anglo-American war on Iraq to the Mee Lai Massacre, Sy Hersh has exerted a damning scepticism of the official line. His new book "Reporter - A Memoir" is out now.

LIKE Going Underground http://fb.me/GoingUndergroundRT
FOLLOW Going Underground http://twitter.com/Underground_RT
FOLLOW Afshin Rattansi http://twitter.com/AfshinRattansi
FOLLOW on Instagram http://instagram.com/officialgoingund...

Jonathan Bailey , 3 days ago

Sy Hersh is the embodiment of integrity. He's coming from a really good place. One hell of a journalist.

Rob Vann , 3 days ago

In the age of Fake News Sy is one of the few people you can depend on for accurate information..No wonder he rarely appears on corporate media...

00Billy , 3 days ago

Sy Hersh is a laser in the land of darkness.

Ana Suri , 3 days ago

Seymour Hirsch is based on reality but Western media is based on perception. They don't report news, they sell news.

John B. , 3 days ago

What does Seymour say about 9/11? Anyone, including seymour Hersh and Noam Chomski, isn't worth a damn if they gloss over 9/11. If he's written a book about Dick Cheney and omitted his major role in making sure 9/11 was the success it was for the neocons, he's a limited hangout.

Chris Weinert , 1 day ago

Isn't that "Russian mob" truly Jewish?

Kronos Transmission , 3 days ago

RT has more investigative journalists in a week than the BBC has in a decade.

Boris Tabare Ag , 3 days ago

Only RT dares to bring real bold journalists as John Pilger and Seymour Hersh, and let them speak freely. Congrats.

Sergei , 1 day ago (edited)

RT should bring Hersh on the show as much as possible. The guy is a legend and he is not allowed to publish his articles anywhere in the US except in a German newspaper.

Astraea Shaw , 2 days ago

Is he sure about tht chemical weapons in Syria? What happened then when it was taken out of Syria by the Authorities - whose name I have forgotten - and verified by the UN? He should have a chat with Vanessa Bealey.

Alexis Wilmot Porter , 2 days ago

Good to see Sy on the rounds again - it's been a while. I guess he was finishing his book. That point about the Russian sample being what proved to Obama that Nusra probably did the WMD attack - "Red Line" - and called it off - I bet that had a lot to do with the move to make Russia "beyond the pale" regarding official OPCW reports. Since then, all the tests have been done remotely, by Turkey, by the UK, by anyone but Russia. I believe that the balance of the evidence in the entire Syria aggression suggests that the Syrian government never conducted any chemical attacks, and that any real attacks that took place were done by the terrorists.

It should be just common sense - groups which are happy to massacre men, women and children, keep women as slaves, eat livers, etc would have no moral qualms about using chemical weapons whatsoever. The Syrian government, on the other hand, has always been in control of the majority of the population in Syria - even in their worst moments before the Russians came to help - and so any use of such barbaric methods would risk revolt from the masses.

No president under such a long conflict could remain in power if he were capable of such brutal and callous methods - in fact, the evidence shows that they have made every effort to either arrange the surrender or evacuate the belligerents, while allowing for civilian escape wherever possible.

The whole "brutal dictator" libel never made any sense about Assad - he remains popular, mingles with the people, has full support from the military. He is also a rarity for so-called dictatorships in the Middle East - not a military man, but a civilian doctor. If there were the slightest doubts about him, the military would have removed him by now - instead, his government and military appear to have both high morale and widespread support from the people.

Of course, the facts are never a big concern for the "regime change" crew - but thankfully, their ability to "create facts on the ground" has weakened immensely over the 20 years of terror the US rulers began in 2001.

[Jul 03, 2018] When you see some really successful financial speculator like Soros or (or much smaller scale) Browder, search for links with intelligence services to explain the success or at least a part of it related to xUSSR space , LA and similar regions

Highly recommended!
Jul 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Recently came across the following article written by F. William Engdahl in 1996 which might be of interest to some here:

The secret financial network behind "wizard" George Soros

The last page of the above article can be found here:

Soros's looting of Ibero-America

Posted by: integer | Jul 2, 2018 4:49:45 AM | 35

[Jul 03, 2018] When you see some really successful financial speculator like Soros or (or much smaller scale) Browder, search for links with intelligence services to explain the success or at least a part of it related to xUSSR space , LA and similar regions

Highly recommended!
Jul 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Recently came across the following article written by F. William Engdahl in 1996 which might be of interest to some here:

The secret financial network behind "wizard" George Soros

The last page of the above article can be found here:

Soros's looting of Ibero-America

Posted by: integer | Jul 2, 2018 4:49:45 AM | 35

[Jul 03, 2018] Russia has a lot of information about Lybia that could dig a political grave for Hillary. They did not release it

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The fact of the matter is, if Russia wanted to do, cause lot of difficulty to the American election they could have. Instead, they went and talked privately to us. So when the government says Russia intercepted stuff that was very important to us, I'm being very fuzzy about it, it wasn't about the election. They told us that there were certain people in America doing things that were very deleterious to the War on Terrorism for personal and financial gain, and they could have blown it publicly but they went internally to us." ..."
"... I haven't listened to that particular interview yet, but can say the the HRC emails with Sid Blumenthal show the reason we got in bed with Sarkozy (and Britain) to destroy Libya was: ..."
"... To steal the nationalized oil ..."
"... To steal the hundreds of tons of gold and silver. ..."
"... To prevent Libya from developing a pan-African gold dinar and development bank to complete with the Federal Reserve petrodollar and the IMF. ..."
"... I can also say that Hersh documented that Ambassador Stevens was an arms dealer, smuggling Libyan military weapons into Syria to finish the "regime change" operation still ongoing there. Also, HRC knew her "rebels" were hunting down and murdering any black Libyans they could find even before Gaddafi was anally bayonet raped. ..."
Jul 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Peter L. | Jul 1, 2018 11:21:17 PM | 23

Hello There! I'm curious to know if any readers have comments about a recent Sy Hersh interview. In response to a question about Russian interference in the last US presidential election Hersh replied:

"I have been reporting something, I've been watching something since 2011 in Libya, when we had a secretary of state that later ran for president, and I will tell you: Some stories take a long time. And I don't know quite how to package it. I don't know how much to say about it. I assure you that there's no known intelligence that Russia impacted, cut into the DNC, Podesta e-mails. That did not happen. I can say that.

I can also say Russia learned other things about what was going on in Libya with us and instead of blowing -- [. . . lots cut out here before returning to the topic . . . ] The fact of the matter is, if Russia wanted to do, cause lot of difficulty to the American election they could have. Instead, they went and talked privately to us. So when the government says Russia intercepted stuff that was very important to us, I'm being very fuzzy about it, it wasn't about the election. They told us that there were certain people in America doing things that were very deleterious to the War on Terrorism for personal and financial gain, and they could have blown it publicly but they went internally to us."

The full text is at the Intercept: https://theintercept.com/2018/06/27/intercepted-live-from-brooklyn-with-sy-hersh-mariame-kaba-lee-gelernt-and-narcy/

Does anyone have any comments on what Sy Hersh is discussing? Who is he talking about?

Daniel , Jul 2, 2018 2:24:48 AM | 31
Peter L. @23

I haven't listened to that particular interview yet, but can say the the HRC emails with Sid Blumenthal show the reason we got in bed with Sarkozy (and Britain) to destroy Libya was:

  1. To steal the nationalized oil
  2. To steal the hundreds of tons of gold and silver.
  3. To prevent Libya from developing a pan-African gold dinar and development bank to complete with the Federal Reserve petrodollar and the IMF.

I can also say that Hersh documented that Ambassador Stevens was an arms dealer, smuggling Libyan military weapons into Syria to finish the "regime change" operation still ongoing there. Also, HRC knew her "rebels" were hunting down and murdering any black Libyans they could find even before Gaddafi was anally bayonet raped.

If I come up with more after listening, I'll post again.

[Jul 03, 2018] No Fifth Column in the Kremlin Think again by The Saker

The problem is that there is no clear alternative to neoliberalism. Russian foreign policy is clearly anti-neoliberal. So in a way, Russia represent another example of National neoliberalism along with Trump "national neoliberalism".
Notable quotes:
"... I believe most of the confusing and seemingly contradictory actions of Putin can be explained if we assume Putin himself as a neo-liberal. It appears he genuinely believes that he can both retain Russian sovereignty and integrate with the west on a neo-liberal framework. My view is that his reluctance with purging Kremlin's 5th column operators come from his belief that their differences are not reconcilable and that a grand bargain with the western elites is possible where they would consider Russia's elites as equal partners. ..."
Jun 29, 2018 | www.unz.com

Following the re-appointment of Medvedev and his more or less reshuffled government, the public opinion in Russia and abroad was split on whether this was a good sign of continuity and unity amongst the Russian leadership or whether this was a confirmation that there was a 5 th column inside the Kremlin working against President Putin and trying to impose neo-liberal and pro-western policies on the Russian people. Today I want to take a quick look at what is taking place inside Russia because I believe that the Russian foreign policy is still predominantly controlled by what I call the "Eurasian Sovereignists" and that to detect the activities of the "Atlantic Integrationist" types we need to look at what is taking place inside Russia.

The Russian 5 th column and its typical operations

First, I want to begin by sharing with you a short video translated by the Saker Community of one of the most astute Russian analysts, Ruslan Ostashko, who wonders how it is that a rabidly pro-western and vociferously anti-Putin radio station named "Ekho Moskvy" manages not only to elude normal Russian legislation, but even gets money from the gaz giant Gazprom, which is majority owned by the Russian state. Ekho Moskvy is also so pro-Israeli that it has earned the nickname "Ekho Matsy" (Ekho Moskvy means "Echo of Moscow" whereas "Ekho Matsy" means "Echo of the Matzo"). Needless to say, that radio has the unwavering and total support of the US Embassy. It would not be an exaggeration to say Ekho Moskvy serves as in incubator for russophobic journalists and that most the liberal pro-western reporters in the Russian media have been, at one time or another, associated with this propaganda outfit. In spite of this or, more accurately, because of this, Ekho Moskvy has been bankrupt for quite a while already, and yet – it continues to exist. Just listen to Ostashko's explanations ( and make sure to press the 'cc' button to see the English language captions):

Interesting, no? The state giant Gazprom is doing all it can to keep Ekho Moskvy afloat and above the law. In fact, Gazprom has been financing Ekho Moskvy for years! According to the hyper-politically-correct Wikipedia , "As of 2005 Echo of Moscow was majority owned by Gazprom Media which holds 66% of its shares". If Gazprom is majority owned by the Russian state, and Ekho Moskvy is majority owned by Gazprom, then does that not mean that Ekho Moskvy is basically financed by the Kremlin? The reality is even worse, as Ostashko point out, Ekho Moskvy is the most visible case, but there are are quite a few pro-western media outlets in Russia which are financed, directly and indirectly, by the Russian state.

So let me ask you a simple question: do you really think that Ostashko is better informed than the Russian authorities, including Putin himself?

Of course not! So what is going on here?

Before attempting to answer this question, let's look at another interesting news item from Russia, the recent article " Pension reform as a fifth column tool to overthrow Putin " (original title "About a fair pension system") by Mikhail Khazin translated by Ollie Richardson and Angelina Siard from the Stalker Zone blog (and cross-posted here and here ). Please read the full article as it sheds a very interesting light on what the Medvedev government has been up to since it was reappointed. What I want to quote here are Mikhail Khazin's conclusions: (emphasis added)

In other words, all of this reform is frank poppycock, a political joke aimed at destroying relations between the People (society) and the Authorities. The specific aim of this is to overthrow Putin, as our liberals are commanded to do by their senior partners from the "Western" global project . And it is precisely like this that we should treat this reform. It has no relation to economic reforms – neither good, nor bad. It not an economic reform, but a political plot! And it is from here that we have to proceed.

Having explained what is really going on, Khazin then goes on the openly state how such an operation is even possible:

Now concerning the media. It should be understood that at the end of the 90's-beginning of the 2000's practically all non-liberal media died. Completely. And of course, practically all non-liberal journalists definitely died (only a few dozen mastodons from the times of socialism remain). And the youth that grew from the faculty of journalism are in general totally liberal. They were a little bit suppressed in the middle of the 2000's, but after Medvedev's arrival to the president's post they again blossomed. But then the attack of the State on everything that doesn't reflect "the policies of the party and the government" began.

And then it so happened that now there are many "patriotic" publications in Russia that employ mainly liberal journalists. An enchanting sight. These journalists (in full accordance with the ideas of Lenin that they didn't read) see their main task as supporting "theirs" – i.e., liberal-financiers, Nemtsov, Navalny and, so on, and to sully the "bloody KayGeeBee"! And it is this that they are involved in, meaning that, propagandising as much as possible the policies of the government, they optimally irritate the population by using Putin personally. There is just a need every time to act out some disgusting story (how an elderly man died on the way to the polyclinic or hospital, how children were taken away from a large family, how an official or a priest hit a pregnant woman and/or juvenile children with their chic car), to explain that this isn't just the result of the policies of the liberal power, but the concrete fault of the President, who put on their posts the very ministers and law enforcement officers who encourage all of this.

Amazing, no? This is an attempt to overthrow Putin and it is covered-up by the (pseudo) patriotic press. What about Putin himself? Why does he not take action? Khazin even explains that:

Of course, the President is guilty, first of all, because he understands that if he starts to cleanse this "Augean stable", then he will be obliged to shed blood , because they won't voluntarily give back their privileges . But the most important thing, and this is the essence: the liberal Russian elite today set for itself the political task of removing Putin. Why it decided to do this is an interesting question: if Putin himself and a liberal are flesh from flesh, then this task is stupid and senseless. Not to mention suicidal. But if he isn't a liberal (it is probably correct to say not a political liberal) then, of course, this activity makes sense . But at the same time, for purely propaganda reasons – because people hate liberals, there is a need to hang the label of political liberal on him.

Now let's connect all the dots: there is a pro-western (in realty, western-controlled) faction inside the government which is financing those who are attempting to overthrow Putin by making him unpopular with the Russian general public (which overwhelmingly opposes "liberal" economic policies and which despises the Russian liberal elites) by constantly forcing him into liberal economic policies which he clearly does not like ( he declared himself categorically opposed to such policies in 2005 ) and the so-called "patriotic media" is covering it all up. And Putin cannot change this without shedding blood.

ORDER IT NOW

But let us assume, for argument's sake, that Putin is really a liberal at heart, that he believes in " Washington Consensus " type of economics. Even if this was the case, surely he must be aware that 92% of Russians oppose this so-called "reform" . And while the President's spokesman, Dmitri Peskov, declared that Putin himself was not associated with this plan , the truth is that this process does also hurt his political image with the Russian people and political movements. As a direct result from these plans, the Communist Party of Russia is launching a referendum against this project while the "Just Russia" Party is now collecting signatures to dismiss the entire government . Clearly, a political struggle of monumental proportions is in the making and the traditionally rather lame internal opposition to Putin (I am talking about the major political movements and parties, not tiny CIA-supported and/or Soros-funded "NGOs") is now transforming itself into a much more determined kind of opposition. I predicted that about a month ago when I wrote that:

"it is quite clear to me that a new type of Russian opposition is slowly forming. Well, it always existed, really – I am talking about people who supported Putin and the Russian foreign policy and who disliked Medvedev and the Russian internal policies. Now the voice of those who say that Putin is way too soft in his stance towards the Empire will only get stronger. As will the voices of those who speak of a truly toxic degree of nepotism and patronage in the Kremlin (again, Mutko being the perfect example). When such accusations came from rabid pro-western liberals, they had very little traction, but when they come from patriotic and even nationalist politicians (Nikolai Starikov for example) they start taking on a different dimension. For example, while the court jester Zhirinovskii and his LDPR party loyally supported Medvedev, the Communist and the Just Russia parties did not. Unless the political tension around figures like Kudrin and Medvedev is somehow resolved (maybe a timely scandal?), we might witness the growth of a real opposition movement in Russia, and not one run by the Empire. It will be interesting to see if Putin's personal ratings will begin to go down and what he will have to do in order to react to the emergence of such a real opposition"

Those who vehemently denied that there as a real 5 th column problem inside the Kremlin are going to have a painful wake-up call when they realize that thanks to the actions of these "liberals" a patriotic opposition is gradually emerging, not so much against Putin himself as against the policies of the Medvedev government. Why not against Putin?

Because most Russian instinctively feel what is going on and understand not only the anti-Putin dynamics at work, but also how and why this situation was created. Furthermore, unlike most westerners, most Russians remember what took place in the crucial and formative 1990s.

The historical roots of the problem (very rough summary)

It all began in the late 1980s when the Soviet elites realized that they were losing control of the situation and that something had to be done. To really summarize what they did, I would say that these elites first broke up the country into 15 individual fiefdoms each run by gang/clan composed of these Soviet elites, then they mercilessly grabbed everything of any value, became overnight billionaires and concealed their money in the West. Being fabulously rich in a completely ruined country gave them fantastic political power and influence to further exploit and rob the country of all its resources. Russia herself (and the other 14 ex-Soviet republics) suffered an unspeakable nightmare comparable to a major war and by the 1990s Russia almost broke-up into many more even smaller pieces (Chechnia, Tatarstan, etc.). By then, Russia was subserviently executing all the economic policies recommended by a myriad of US 'advisors' (hundreds of them with offices inside the offices of many key ministries and various state agencies, just like today in the Ukraine), she adopted a Constitution drafted by pro-US elements and all the key positions in the state were occupied by what I can only call western agents. At the very top, President Eltisn was mostly drunk while the country was run by 7 bankers the so-called "oligarchs" (6 of which were Jews): the " Semibankirshchina ".

This is the time when the Russian security services successfully tricked these oligarchs into believing that Putin, who has a law degree and who had worked for the (very liberal) Mayor of Saint Petersburg (Anatolii Sobchack) was just a petty bureaucrat who would restore a semblance of order while not presenting any real threat to the oligarchs. The ploy worked, but the business elites demanded that "their" guy, Medvedev, be put in charge of the government so as to preserve their interests. What they overlooked was two things: Putin was a truly brilliant officer of the very elite First Chief Directorate (Foreign Intelligence) of the KGB and a real patriot. Furthermore, the Constitution which was passed to support the Eltsin regime could now be used by Putin. But more than anything else, they never predicted that a little guy in an ill-fitting suit would transform himself into one of the most popular leaders on the planet. As I have written many times, while the initial power base of Putin was in the security services and the armed forces and while his legal authority stems from the Constitution, is real power comes from the immense support he has from the Russian people who, for the first time in very long time felt that the man at the top truly represented their interests.

Putin then did what Donald Trump could have done as soon as he entered the White House: he cleaned house. He began by immediately tackling the oligarchs, he put an end to the Semibankirshchina , and he stopped the massive export of money and resources out of Russia. The then proceeded to rebuilt the "vertical of power" (the Kremlin's control over the country) and began rebuilding all of Russia from the foundations (regions) up. But while Putin was tremendously successful, he simply could not fight on all the fronts and the same time and win.

Truth be told, he did eventually win most of the battles which he chose to fight, but some battles he simply could not wage not because of a lack of courage or will on his part, but because the objective reality is that Putin inherited and extremely bad system fully controlled by some extremely dangerous foes . Remember the words of Khazin above: " if he starts to cleanse this "Augean stable", then he will be obliged to shed blood, because they won't voluntarily give back their privileges". So, in a typically Putin fashion, he made a number of deals.

For example, those oligarchs who agreed to stop meddling in Russian politics and who would, from now on, pay taxes and generally abide by the law were not be jailed or expropriated: those who got the message were allowed to continue to work as normal businessmen (Oleg Deripaska) and those who did not were either jailed or exiled (Khodorkovski, Berezovski). But if we look just below the level of these well-known and notorious oligarchs, what we find as a much deeper "swamp" (to use the US expression): an entire class of people who made their fortunes in the 1990s, who are now extremely influential and control most of the key positions in the economy, finance and business and who absolutely hate and fear Putin. They even have their agents inside the armed forces and security services because their weapon of choice is, of course, corruption and influence. And, of course, they have people representing their interests inside the Russian government: pretty much the entire "economic block" of the Medvedev government.

Is it really any surprise at all that these people also have their paid representatives inside the Russian media, including the so-called "pro-Russian" or "patriotic" media? (I have been warning about this since at least 2015)

Just like in the West, in Russia the media depends first and foremost on money and big financial interests are very good at using the media to promote their agenda, deny or obfuscate some topics while pushing others. This is why you often see the Russian media backing WTO/WB/IMF/etc policies to the hilt while never criticizing Israel or, God forbid, rabidly pro-Israeli propagandists on mainstream TV (guys like Vladimir Soloviev, Evgenii Satanovsky, Iakov Kedmi, Avigdor Eskin and many others). This is the same media which will gladly criticize Iran and Hezbollah but never wonder why the Russian main TV stations are spewing pro-Israeli propaganda on a daily basis.

And, of course, they will all mantrically repeat the same chant: "there is no 5 th column in Russia!! None!! Never!!"

This is no different than the paid for corporate media in the US which denies the existence of a "deep state" or the US "Israel Lobby".

And yet, many (most?) people in the US and Russia realize at an almost gut-level that they are being lied to and that, in reality, a hostile power is ruling over them.

Putin's options and possible outcomes

Sadly, in the US, Trump proved to be a disaster who totally caved in to the Neocons and their demands. In Russia, the situation is far more complex. So far, Putin has very skillfully avoided associating himself with the Atlantic Integrationists. Furthermore, the biggest crises of the past decade or so were all associated with foreign policy issues and those are still controlled by the Eurasian Sovereignists. Finally, while the Russian government clearly committed some mistakes or promoted some unpopular policies (such has healthcare reform for example), they also had their undeniable successes. As for Putin, he continued to consolidate his power and he gradually removed some of the most notorious individuals from their positions. In theory, Putin could probably have most top Atlantic Integrationists arrested on corruption charges, but short of engaging in a massive and bloody purge, he cannot get rid of an entire social class which is not only large but powerful.

Some of my contacts in Russia expected a purge of Atlantic Integrationists right after the election, the logic here was "enough is enough" and that once Putin got a strong mandate from the people, he would finally kick Medvedev and his gang out of the Kremlin and replace them with popular patriots. That obviously did not happen. But if this pension reform program continues to further trigger protests or if a major war blows up in the Middle-East or in the Ukraine, then the pro-western forces inside the Kremlin will come under great pressure to further yield control of the country to Eurasian Sovereignists.

Putin is an exceedingly patient man and, at least so far, he won most, if not all, of his battles. I don't believe that anybody can predict for sure how things will play out, but what is certain is that trying to understand Russia without being aware of the internal conflicts and the interests groups fighting for power is futile. In her 1000 year long history, internal enemies have always been far more dangerous for Russia than external ones. This is unlikely to change in the future.

mikkkkas , June 29, 2018 at 8:36 am GMT

Since "The Saker" does not approve difference of opinion or dissent on his own site i will post my response here.

This is yet another episode of "doom & gloom" articles of his in a series that started almost a year ago. If you have read one, you have read them all. Since then a quite 180 degree different and depression-ridden "The Saker" or whatever is hiding under that name has produced articles to the effect that "Putin has surrendered", "the end is nigh" or "it's all over". Hi's sudden embrace of "Paul Craig Roberts" views of all things Russian further confirms that.

The content aren't necessarily wrong and incorrect but the message is very far from what the author initially conveyed. The impression is now that things definitely doesn't bode well for Russia and there's nothing Russians or anyone can do about it, move on. "The Saker" is now using the encouraging confidence he built up with his "community",that has grown significantly over the years, to tear it apart it seems.

Where have we seen that before?

Isabella , June 29, 2018 at 8:48 am GMT
President Putin has himself categorically stated that "there is no such thing as any "5th column". When asked about the presence of Kudrin and a few like him, VP said, "it's useful to hear different points of view, but to suggest they are some sort of 5th column is nonsense"
I think I would trust his word – he has never been known to lie and he has no reason to do so.
He gave his reasons for retaining Medvedev plus a few others – good solid rational reasons. No-body in Russia is doubting them.
Can it be forgotten by this writer, that Medvedev is an appointed position – by the President. Putin can remove him in an instant any time he likes: he holds the strings, and is under thrall to no-one.
As for the article the writer refers to in "The Saker", the provenance of the authors shows how much value to put on it.
The writer – not mentioned here – is one Vadim Potapenko who gives details of himself as living in Cyprus, and working as a Development Manager – Slotegrator : Gambling & Casinos.!!
What a young man working in the ethically questionable world of casinos knows about pension reform and retirement age needs I dont know. He does deal in risk analysis of simplistic systems I guess, but an expert in the complexities of Government policy he can't be.
The second author is Mikhail Khazin – a man who claims to an economist and publicist, and states that "Putin is following the ideas of Andropov. They didn t' work then and they dont now: Putin by his very personality has polarised views in Russia, because some love him and some hate him"
This about a President with an 80% approval rating, a 77% voter return rate, and who is so far from any USSR person it's unbelievable. The mans' complete inability to understand the first thing about Putin, who he is, what he believes in, and the route he is following shows he is the last person whose views should be even listened to.
This brings me to the finale – more and more it seems "The Saker" wants people to believe that there are dark forces at work in the Kremlin, that Putin is either too weak and stupid to deal with them or even worse, is working in with them. In other words, he effects to support the Russian President but calls him a weakling or a traitor!!
Better to read work by qualified people and investigate Russia for yourself – dont be led into thinking Russia would be a cakewalk for anyone thinking of invading and making war on her, because she has a weak and divided leadership. She doesn't have – and waging war on Russia would have only one end, and it's not pretty.
kemerd , June 29, 2018 at 3:54 pm GMT
I believe most of the confusing and seemingly contradictory actions of Putin can be explained if we assume Putin himself as a neo-liberal. It appears he genuinely believes that he can both retain Russian sovereignty and integrate with the west on a neo-liberal framework. My view is that his reluctance with purging Kremlin's 5th column operators come from his belief that their differences are not reconcilable and that a grand bargain with the western elites is possible where they would consider Russia's elites as equal partners.

I think this is not a sustainable position, even if western elites were willing to play ball with Putin and Russia's elites. Because in a neo-liberal world nations cannot retain their sovereignty and that an international cabal of ultra-rich treat the peoples of the world as properties of their own. The best that could have happened would be that Russian elites would be partying with their western fellow billionaires on the corpses of the poor nations of the world. That part, I am convinced, is not acceptable for Putin (i.e. giving up sovereignty in return for a seat on the dinner table but I have serious doubts about anti-imperialism part)

Fortunately for Russia, the same cabal still cannot get over the fact that they lost the opportunity to rape Russia ad infinitum and still looking for holes in the Russian resolve. This will force Russia to take a clear anti-imperialist stand sooner or later, and on a war footing will have to purge all of the (would be) collaborators.

On a second note, it is indeed possible that Putin might have decided to postpone the decision for the purge after the world cup but I will not believe before I see Medvedev and Nabiullina be fired.

Anatoly Karlin , Website June 29, 2018 at 5:56 pm GMT

Of course not! So what is going on here?

The Kremlin is financing the craziest knee-jerk Russophobes to discredit liberalism. The two exist in a comfy symbiotic relationship. What is so difficult about that?

Now let's connect all the dots: there is a pro-western (in realty, western-controlled) faction inside the government which is financing those who are attempting to overthrow Putin by making him unpopular with the Russian general public (which overwhelmingly opposes "liberal" economic policies and which despises the Russian liberal elites) by constantly forcing him into liberal economic policies which he clearly does not like (he declared himself categorically opposed to such policies in 2005) and the so-called "patriotic media" is covering it all up.

The same "fifth column" that has over the past 18 years also forced Putin into adopting a flat tax, liberalizing land sales, monetizing benefits, and now pensions reform.

If Putin still hasn't managed to get rid of them, then what the hell is he good for?

At least, that's would I'd be asking – if I was the sort to rail against neoliberal fifth columns.

Reality is, all of those were great successes. Putin is an economic neoliberal and that is a good thing .

Even if this was the case, surely he must be aware that 92% of Russians oppose this so-called "reform".

Where on Earth do people support raising the pension age? Thankfully, many countries (including Russia) have safeguards against demotic idiocy.

As a direct result from these plans, the Communist Party of Russia is launching a referendum against this project while the "Just Russia" Party is now collecting signatures to dismiss the entire government.

The business elites are not in a position to demand anything. Medvedev is there as a whipping boy to protect Putin's ratings. He is very good at that, and that, too, is a good thing.

This is the same media which will gladly criticize Iran and Hezbollah but never wonder why the Russian main TV stations are spewing pro-Israeli propaganda on a daily basis.

The author's anti-Israel crusade is not Russia's. That Russia is not to Iran, Palestine, or Hezbollah what the US is to Israel (a slavish sponsor) is also a good thing.

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 29, 2018 at 7:36 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Karlin,

The same "fifth column" that has over the past 18 years also forced Putin into adopting a flat tax, liberalizing land sales, monetizing benefits, and now pensions reform.
If Putin still hasn't managed to get rid of them, then what the hell is he good for? Reality is, all of those were great successes. Putin is an economic neoliberal and that is a good thing .

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-06-07/putin-s-under-the-radar-nationalization-of-russia-s-private-banks

Even if Bershidsky gets it, however in the field which doesn't require any serious skills, except for good accounting. Now, you don't want me to refer to Russia's actual industries, especially hi-tech, which are nationalized, do you? Does the title Rostec ring a bell? What is remarkable, founding of Rostec somehow coincided with Putin's Munich Speech–both events are hardly any evidence of neoliberalism. Is Putin a liberal? Yes, but to a degree and political mostly–his progression from liberal economic model to a mixed model since 2014 is visible to people with even rudimentary knowledge of Russia. This is not to mention that Russia, quoting even Wiki:

Russia has an upper-middle income mixed economy with state ownership in strategic areas of the economy.

Some private bank is not a "strategic" area, nor is "liberalization" of land sales, resources and real hi-tech sector, however, together with agriculture, are. Since the start of Putin's tenure, Russia re-nationalized, that is returned to the state control or ownership, an enormous number of truly strategic companies. In fact, whole industries. Putin recently himself clearly stated that, especially pointing out a bonanza Russian State got from 2008 collapse and from sanctions. These are hardly signs of neoliberalism, not to mention that Russia, rightly so, is considered one of the most protectionist nations in the world. This is if to discount all this theoretical and metaphysical mambo-jumbo on the obvious fact that neoliberalism is dead, together with its founding Free Trade gospel, and stinks to heaven, poisoning surroundings. And, yes, I am sure Russian State has no control over Novatek (it is a bad joke).

FKA Max , Website June 29, 2018 at 8:21 pm GMT

At the very top, President Eltisn was mostly drunk while the country was run by 7 bankers the so-called "oligarchs" ( 6 of which were Jews ): the "Semibankirshchina".

I think Putin today is in a similar situation as Stalin was in the late 1940s regarding Jewish political activism and assertiveness, etc.

Despite Stalin's willingness to support Israel early on, various historians suppose that antisemitism in the late 1940s and early 1950s was motivated by Stalin's possible perception of Jews as a potential "fifth column" in light of a pro-Western Israel in the Middle East.
[...]
I think increasing the Jewish (and general) death toll in World War II and decreasing the "official" Jewish population of the Soviet Union served two purposes for Stalin.

Firstly, for propaganda purposes against the Germans higher death tolls were useful, and secondly lower "official" numbers of Jews in the Soviet Union were likely intended to discourage and prevent Jewish empowerment and organizing
[...]
Jeffrey Veidlinger writes that "By October 1948, it was obvious that Mikhoels was by no means the sole advocate of Zionism among Soviet Jews. The revival of Jewish cultural expression during the war had fostered a general sense of boldness among the Jewish masses.

– http://www.unz.com/article/against-david-irvings-view-of-hitler/#comment-2396013

This is slightly off-topic, but I just commented on this subject matter in another comments thread, which has to do with the fact that many more persons of Jewish origin live in Russia and the former Soviet states than is commonly known or reported:

Here the original in Russian: http://tavrio.ru/index.php/politics/nazpol/42-skolko-evreev-pf Archived link: http://archive.is/EDYeZ
[...]
And I believe that today, after a great aliyah, the number of halachic Jews in the countries of the former USSR is about four million. And six million more are those who know about their Jewish origin.
[...]
Half of the top 25 billionaires in Russia, I believe, come from a Jewish background. I know strong Jewish ethnic and religious networking, nepotism, etc. exists, but to achieve such a high billionaire density even the Jewish population has to be at least 2% of the Russian population (about 3 million at least out of the 150 million Russian population) like it is the case in the U.S. (about 6 million Jews out of a 300 million U.S. population).

Not just 400,000 (which would be 0.3% of the Russian population) or even lower estimates, like some sources claim. Wikipedia for example puts the number of Jews in Russia, at the moment, at a laughable: 179,500
[...]
, which would be about o.15% of the Russian population, but Jews are half of the top 25 billionaires in Russia?

Something does not quite compute here, to put it mildly

– http://www.unz.com/article/against-david-irvings-view-of-hitler/#comment-2394694

Putin might know how many Jews really died in the Holocaust and in World War II, and this is his way of telegraphing it and signalling to the Jewish Russian community that they should not get too uppity and bold?

'Holocaust on ice' dance by wife of Putin official causes uproar

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/27/wife-of-putin-official-performs-in-concentration-camp-ice-dance

Holocaust-themed ice dance sparks outrage

Verymuchalive , June 29, 2018 at 8:54 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Putin has ensured that foreign interests have been prevented from taking over vital Russian industries such as Oil,Gas, Minerals, Banking and Defence. At best, foreign companies can only get limited concessions under conditions that suit the Russian State, eg BP.
Putin isn't a Neoliberal, he's a pragmatist. This is a very good thing.

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 29, 2018 at 9:28 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

But you are of course correct. Russia is of course not neoliberal so far as Putin's kleptocratic chums are concerned.

Exactly, nor do you have any qualifications nor skills to write about Russia since, and I quote Margo Simonyan describing your kind.

Maybe you will finally understand that you do not believe us not because we lie, but because you know horseradish (dick) about surrounding world, because you are badly educated, do not read much and when do, do not read what is needed, you visit all the wrong places and communicate with the same small bunch of prejudiced and/or mental people, who only reinforce your condescending ignorance.

https://ria.ru/analytics/20180625/1523351567.html?referrer_block=index_only_ria_1

I guess we have an overwhelming empirical evidence supporting these claims, don't we?

Philip Owen , June 29, 2018 at 10:12 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

The picture is mixed. The Federal Antimonopoly Service has been given real teeth since its humiliation by the Customs Service under Medvedev. It goes beyond antimonopoly. For example, it reviews incoming foreign investment in the 42 strategic industries. This was originally a protectionist committee. It gave Pepsico a hard time for buying Wimm-Bill-Dann, clearly a military asset. These days its approach to foreigners is "how can I help you? Do you want money?" It is frequently chaired by Putin.

Kudrin's audit committee looks like being FAS Mark 2. He has been given the tools to take Sechin and other state moguls apart. Will he get to the Rotenbergs/Gazprom? Their behaviour is outrageous. Certainly not the kind of corporate governance required for a competitive market. e.g. Gazprom Bank has a Rotenberg son in charge of loans. Gazprom lent another Rotenberg son the money to build Aviapark. No Rotenberg capital at risk during the whole process. Now a $1 Bn asset. Kudrin has a target rich environment. Will he settle out of court or make some high level examples?

Daniel Rich , June 29, 2018 at 10:23 pm GMT
@Isabella

@ Isabella,

I judge a wo/man not on his/her words, but his/her deeds. Suffice to say, the difference between Russia in 2000 and Russia today, speaks volumes all by itself and is fully self explanatory as well.

One day the world will realize how close we've come to WW III in the period between 2015/2020. An extended version of the Cuban missile crisis, if you will, but this time with only one statesman participating in this conundrum, the president of the Russian Federation, H.E. Mr. V.V. Putin.

Much blood has been shed in Syria, including Russian, so it would be unfair to single out one particular country, but I know if it hand't been for Russia stepping up to the plate in 2015, the political landscape [in the M.E. and beyond] would be littered with the corpses of liberty, freedom and unity and the dust wouldn't settle down for decades to come.

The Russian military went in, turned the tide and most of the temporary influx is retreating back to the motherland as we speak. That's how a 'job' is done properly.

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 30, 2018 at 12:39 am GMT
@Philip Owen

Kudrin has a target rich environment. Will he settle out of court or make some high level examples?

Read by letters: F-S-B (Operational Technical Departments–Operativno-Technicheskie Otdely). And then there is always G(R)U. Sure, those boys such as Ulyukaev or Kudrin who saw so "much" in their lives are real "contenders". I am sure Naryshkin knows what color of stool Siluanov is having every day. The same goes for Kudrin. But he is a smart boy–he knows the routine. You obviously missed the revelation of the actual Putin's position in KGB/SVR–it was all over Russia's TV. Other than that–I agree, it is a "target rich" environment and yes, Kudrin is perfect for this job.

Isabella , June 30, 2018 at 1:09 am GMT
@Daniel Rich

Hi Daniel – so good to see you again, I was wondering recently where you might be.

I agree with you – the "proof of the pudding" says it all. One has only to look at the last 18 years, at where Russia and Russians were back then, and look at her now, all under Putins' direction and overall management. You do that, then read this sort of stuff and wonder just what is going on in some people's minds. It makes less than no sense – which means one has to start looking at premises one would not like to think about.
As for expecting some publicist who thinks Putin is a follower of Andropov as a person worth printing and quoting – words fail me.
Good to hear from you Daniel – take care mi amigo.

Isabella , June 30, 2018 at 1:16 am GMT
@mikkkkas

"Since "The Saker" does not approve difference of opinion or dissent on his own site i will post my response here."

Exactly what brought me here to comment, not on The Saker's own site.
Because I am being critical of the articles' thesis, and because I have criticised the provenance of the two writers of the article on pension reform, I knew it would not be published on his site.
I even had a comment I made, refusing to accept a pathetic reference for supposedly "proving" that V.V. promised to never raise the retirement age, redacted. There's an unfortunate aspect to the Saker site that puts one off making useful critical comment – the "mods" can redact your work – or even ditch the entire piece – and leave a vague comment insulting to your own probity, leaving it looking as though you are some foul mouthed abuser, yet because you wont be published you can't defend yourself.

I do have to commend "Unz" for it's freedom of expression.
Oh – I agree with your take on the article too – so much of Saker has become a doom laden cry that denigrates and decries Putin – which seems very odd.

FKA Max , Website June 30, 2018 at 1:27 am GMT
@FKA Max

Some more background information on how the Soviet internal passport registration system worked, for anyone interested:

In the Soviet Union, when someone with parents of two nationalities received identity papers at age 16, he could pick which nationality to list. A child of a Jewish father and non-Jewish mother could put down "Jew [ or not ]." The religious principle of matrilineal descent was irrelevant.
[...]
Persecution of Jews in the Soviet Union started with a policy Joseph Stalin initiated in 1937. Every Soviet citizen was required to carry an internal passport and under "nationality," Jews were required to list "Jewish." Beckerman says this policy actually may have been a tough decision for Stalin.

"On the one hand, he followed this Leninist principle [that] all Soviet citizens should just melt into one general populace that doesn't have any distinctions for nationality," he says. " But on the other hand, he wanted to control this population and Jews always had kind of a strange place in the Russian society psyche, so he wanted to know who the Jews were. "

– http://www.unz.com/article/against-david-irvings-view-of-hitler/#comment-2395070

here:

Data on the offspring of mixed couples in the Soviet Union show that they tended formally to affiliate with the nationality of the non-Jewish parent.

– http://www.unz.com/article/against-david-irvings-view-of-hitler/#comment-2394826

and here:

Following the firsthand account of discrimination experienced by Jews in the Soviet Union due to having their "nationality" registered as Jewish in their internal passports. I believe this lends credence to the assumption that most (half-)Jews with just one Jewish parent likely opted to be identified/registered by the nationality of their non-Jewish parent, and further strengthens my hypothesis that Holocaust and Jewish World War II casualties might have been significantly lower than what is generally accepted by mainstream and anti-revisionist Holocaust and World War II historians and researchers

– http://www.unz.com/article/against-david-irvings-view-of-hitler/#comment-2395136

Soviet Passport Line #5

mikkkkas , June 30, 2018 at 7:28 am GMT
@Isabella

Nailed it, well done!

Anon [172] Disclaimer , June 30, 2018 at 5:40 pm GMT

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 30, 2018 at 5:55 pm GMT

@FKA Max

National identity in USSR was important. Well, it is always important and yes, there was latent antisemitism (or whatever it is called) in some spheres of Soviet life. Not as big, though, as Jewish dissidents love to present to those who are ready to listen.

anon [228] Disclaimer , June 30, 2018 at 6:58 pm GMT
@FKA Max

So what was the result of this policy?

Did anybody get shafted ? Did anybody lose ?

FKA Max , Website June 30, 2018 at 7:17 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

Not as big, though, as Jewish dissidents love to present to those who are ready to listen.

Hahahaha I agree

Do you happen to know if Andrey Illarionov comes from a Jewish background? I know he is a dissident now, but I'm not sure whether he is ethnically Jewish or not.

Auschwitz joke angers Jewish groups

Andrei Illarionov, an economic adviser to the president, made the comparison during a visit to St Petersburg. He has recommended that Russia should not sign the protocol.
[...]
"Then we realised Gosplan was much more humane and we ought to call the Kyoto Protocol an international gulag. In the Gulag, though, you got the same ration daily and it didn't get smaller day by day. In the end, we had to call the Kyoto Protocol an international Auschwitz."

– https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/1459350/Auschwitz-joke-angers-Jewish-groups.html

ATBOTL , June 30, 2018 at 8:53 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

What is this dispensationalist neocon garbage? Have Freepers found Unz?

Philip Owen , June 30, 2018 at 11:48 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

I missed the revelation. I tend to focus on business rather than politics. Expert is the only journal I try to read regularly. (I am not fluent but I can usually manage if I focus).

jilles dykstra , July 1, 2018 at 6:57 am GMT
Soros's newspaper still appears in Russia.
A few days after MH17 the front page text something like 'Sorry, Netherlands', in Dutch.
Just imagine a few days after Sept 11 a USA newspaper with headlines, something like 'sorry, we had to kill a few thousand Americans in order te get an excuse for wars against Afghanistan and Iraq' ?
jilles dykstra , July 1, 2018 at 6:59 am GMT
@Daniel Rich

" One day the world will realize how close we've come to WW III in the period between 2015/2020. "

You suppose WWIII will not come.
Hope you're right.
If not, there will be nobody left to realise anthing

mcohen , July 1, 2018 at 7:29 am GMT
After what happened in the groves at jisr al shughour russia stepped up and did what was right.in that time in the syrian war they stood the moral high ground.the rest is history.bear in mind that 100 km away live over million russians and that does not include cyprus.most support likud.
EOLAWKI , July 1, 2018 at 9:19 am GMT
Well spoken. Analysts like the Saker would have us believe that what is happening in Russia is not really happening but something else is happening – something hidden, something powerful, all-pervasive, eating away at Putin's power base and destroying him behind the scenes – like the john Birch Society – A communist under every bed! From what I can see, and I do not believe I am alone by any means, is that if there are dark forces at work in the Kremlin and elsewhere in the media for example, they are profoundly weak and ineffective in Russia at this point. And whilst they might exist, there is little outward evidence of their workings except the odd Navalny incident, or the constant drippings from Western oriented media like the Moscow Times. If you want to see the effects of a REAL, persistent, powerful, pervasive 5th column, you need look any further than the USA with its Zionist lobby and MIC influence on politics and policy. Or the EU with its incredibly powerful bureaucracy and its link to Soros and his ilk. Those are real 5th columns, and by comparison, Russia has little to worry about.

I have followed the Saker for years now, and I too have seen this gradual transformation from top notch analyst to conspiracy theorist. His website has become almost cult-like. He has a few 'moderators' who operate anonymously behind the scenes to filter out unflattering content – not just the crazy insults and freaks that websites like his attract, but honest content that seeks to criticise, sometimes sharply, his views. If you read the comment section, it reads like a religious cult at times, most comments prefaced by the seemingly obligatory preface like "Great analysis, Saker!" "Well said, Saker!" And always there are the comments both on the part of the Saker and his 'community' that praises that community for being 'special', unlike the rubbish of other sites, insightful, and more knowledgeable than others – heaping praise on themselves at the expense of other site with comments to the effect of "We should be proud that we are not like other sites.".

I fear the Saker has over time fallen prey to the old devil's trick of taking oneself too seriously. Someone who is constant the object of unquestioned praise can easily fall into that trap.

Isabella , July 1, 2018 at 9:27 am GMT
@mikkkkas

Thank you Mikkkkas.

Anon [335] Disclaimer , July 1, 2018 at 9:45 am GMT

quasi_verbatim , July 1, 2018 at 10:17 am GMT

Good to see that freedom of thought and freedom of expression is thriving in Russia. They have fortunately a long way to go in MSM herd-think before they achieve our oppressive anti-human intellectual conformity.

And good luck in overthrowing Putin.

Fatima Manoubia , July 1, 2018 at 11:20 am GMT
@Isabella

I agree in that presenting Mr. Putin and Russia as weak seems to encourage military action, or a coup, against it, just "NOW", when the US is trying ( or simply, pretending ) an intend of approach ..This has nothing to do with suppossed "depressive" mood of The Saker himself ..this is a plan .

Thus I agree with you both in the general tone and confussing meddley of articles at Saker´s site, and as well with your impression on the last "generation" of mods ( to my view part of the real staff of this project, The Saker ) who, not only were put in charge of getting rid ( by using the most dirty tricks ) from the genuine former regular commenters/moderators who had a very personal view on what a good moderation and avoiding of harsh censure was, but also have displayed a shameful dictatorial censure and editing which not only amputates genuine and legitimate oppinions but also, as you notice, try, at the same time, to discredit you as commenter for the rest, by implying you were being rude and offensive and moreover denying the right to make things clear by allowing you a response to such a clear outrage, according with most probably direct guidelines from the people who lead The Saker from behind .

This tactic, of obliterating your comment and answering you by implying that you were being offensive, ( and even denigrating ) towards somebody ( mainly the author/ owner of the site and/or his relatives, coleagues and friends ), is common with other sites, like Pat Lang´s SST. This is why I think these two sites are "closely" related .being their paterns so similar also both have military ( more concretely counterintelligence ) background .have a harsh anti-communist stance . and have a team of attack dogs who try to get you giving up on posting when what you say is of no convenience for them ( or their editorial line ) .Then, they use the alibi on your comment not being "intelligent", but then you have there the ubiquitous one-liner sycophant who says nothing all over these two places permanently .who are never summoned .

But, Isabella, what you so confidently say about Mr. Andropov´s policies, intrigates me, since I wonder what idea you have on what the ideas, strategies, tactics and future plans of Mr. Andropov could be to state that VVP is not following them ..I think it is impossible for you, or even for Mr. Khazin, to know what the plans of Mr. Andropov would be, since he was, at different times in the USSR, at the helms of secret security agency and foreign policy, whose main directives were for sure secret, and not at the hand/knowledge of anybody but a few under/of his "umbrella"/confidence call them "siloviki" or whatever you want .

Thus, in spite of that VVP moves seem to confirm he is a liberal playing the same play than the capitalist West, we do not know nothing for sure, since, if this would be obvious for all us, somebody would not be doing its work rightly, as certain senior strategist told me at Fort Russ .
The worst side of this secrecy, obviously needed for strategic purposes, is that common people, as happens to me, could start feeling dissapointed with VVP and discouraged of continuing supporting him .thus some signs from time to time would be neccessary for the people to continue trusting .

Jake , July 1, 2018 at 11:32 am GMT
Of course there is a 5th column inside the Kremlin and Russia. The Anglo-Zionist Empire has paid for it.
Medvedev , July 1, 2018 at 11:39 am GMT

managed to effectively put its #1 liberal critic , Boris Nemtsov

When was he ever relevant?

ploni almoni , July 1, 2018 at 12:01 pm GMT
@Anon

Deep.

The Scalpel , Website July 1, 2018 at 12:35 pm GMT
@Anon

Fascinating. What is the source?

DESERT FOX , July 1, 2018 at 1:28 pm GMT
Zionists are Satanists and undermine governments everywhere that they get a foothold and they already created a holocaust in Russia with the 1917 overthrow of the czar and the resulting murder of some 60 million Russians and are now trying to undermine the Russian government again, this is no surprise as this is what Zionists do ie they are killers and wreckers of governments and are trying to do the same here in America.
Vojkan , July 1, 2018 at 1:59 pm GMT
One thing noticeable regarding people who comment Putin's policies from abroad, not from within Russia: much projection of own prejudices and a lot of wishful thinking.
One thing noticeable regarding Putin's policies: no prejudice, no wishful thinking, just Russian self-consciousness and pragmatism.
Order is restored. Russia's military might is restored. The economy and the living standard have improved. Russia masters her destiny. So far, what he does works. What else?
bj , July 1, 2018 at 2:33 pm GMT
@Anon

The ladies got a great interview with Aleksandr Dugin–

"Aleksandr Dugin on Millennials, Modernity and Religion"

bj , July 1, 2018 at 2:50 pm GMT
The ladies got a great interview with Alexandr Dugin–

Aleksandr Dugin on Millennials, Modernity and Religion

Dagon Shield , July 1, 2018 at 3:18 pm GMT
The article is written by Saker without any doubt for it has his imprimatur of length for readers like me, matzo ball radio says it all. Finally, it seems that Jews and Russians have a sado masochistic arrangements; one can't do without the other. Qui bono?
Svigor , July 1, 2018 at 3:58 pm GMT
So, America is trying to do to Russia what Russia has been trying to do to America for 100 years.

Great story, bro.

mike k , July 1, 2018 at 4:13 pm GMT
There seems to be unanimity on this site condemning the Saker, and those commenting on his blog. But what if he is simply correct in his suspicions about a fifth column in Russia? Is that really so strange? Do you really think the Atlantacists and their ilk are nonexistent? I notice no real proof of the inaccuracy of the Saker's contentions, but a lot of ad hominem critique of his "mood". Maybe he is dead wrong in all his ideas about Putin's Russia – but where's the proof?? The commenters here seem in danger of falling into the same baseless contentions trap they accuse the Saker of.
tyrone , July 1, 2018 at 4:25 pm GMT
@ATBOTL

They want the same democratic utopia for Russia they gave to Iraq,Libya ,Ukraine ,Syria etc. etc. etc.

Wally , July 1, 2018 at 4:31 pm GMT
@FKA Max

said:
"Putin might know how many Jews really died in the Holocaust "

Please preset proof that any Jews died in 'the holocau$t' as alleged.

Revisionists are just the messengers, the absurd impossibility of the 'holocaust' storyline is the message.

The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
see the 'holocaust' scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com

Anon [425] Disclaimer , July 1, 2018 at 5:09 pm GMT

Philip Owen , July 1, 2018 at 5:23 pm GMT

@mike k

To think about "Atlanticists" as some kind of coherent group is to submit to Saker's paranoia. Such paranoia is normal in nationalism. Shades of the John Birch society. If you look for evidence of conspiracy X you will always find it.

Blackdawg , July 1, 2018 at 6:22 pm GMT
Very well written synopsis of the current situation, and how Russia came to be in this place at this time. I appreciate the recap of the history from Yeltsin moving forward.
Svigor , July 1, 2018 at 6:46 pm GMT
@anonymous

Saker's a clown.

hyperbola , July 1, 2018 at 7:14 pm GMT
The "atlanticists" are a rampant fifth column throughout Europe. Germany is particularly badly infested and in need of a thorough cleaning out. Russians will be better off if they can keep them mostly out of their country.

Die Zeit Die Anstalt Netzwerke Think Tank Josef Joffe

Tyrion 2 , Website July 1, 2018 at 7:16 pm GMT
Given Russian life expectancy, Russian pension age was too low. Naturally, raising it temporarily lowered Putin's popularity, but taking that hit is the essence of forward-thinking leadership.
Milton , July 1, 2018 at 8:24 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

You Israeli-First traitors love citing Ezekiel 38 and Isaiah 17 to justify your wicked warmongering, but in your malice you have been blinded to the fact that Isaiah 17 describes not only the destruction of Damascus but also the destruction of a wicked faction in Israel: the Baal-worshipping Zionists whom you think are beyond God's reach.

Johnny Rico , July 1, 2018 at 9:40 pm GMT
You guys getting excited? That false flag and/or "Ukro-Nazi" attack by the "Anglo-Zionist" Empire is still happening right?

During the World Cup. Remember?

Anybody want to bet on the exact date?

Ya think the refs throwing the game to the Russians today is all part of the master plan?

obwandiyag , July 1, 2018 at 10:44 pm GMT
These are the people who murdered millions and millions under Yeltsin. By "privatizing" and other wonderful "conservative" "capitalist" policies. Getting rid of Communism by killing all the people who benefit by it. Brilliant.

So I guess that makes these "5th columnists" good, right? By your lights, anyway.

Wally , July 1, 2018 at 11:17 pm GMT
@obwandiyag

Except those who 'benefited from Communism' are the ones who got rid of Communism.

paullllllllllll , July 1, 2018 at 11:44 pm GMT
I think it's clear at this point that Putin serves the globalist elites. He is in the process of serving Syria and Iran to them on a dish.
FKA Max , Website July 2, 2018 at 1:11 am GMT
@FKA Max

I'm still puzzled as to why Illarionov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrey_Illarionov made that Kyoto Protocol-Auschwitz comparison, and I am still not sure if he is ethnically Jewish or not. I found some new indicators that point to him having Jewish roots, though.

Either he made the comment in sincerity and not as a joke, or someone (Putin?) told him to say it that way for propaganda purposes. Maybe being asked/forced to make that comparison also contributed to him quitting his job some months later?

In a 2005 interview after his resignation from his economic advisory post, he says the following, which could indicate that the Kyoto Protocol-Auschwitz comparison was not of his own making, but a talking point given to him by the Kremlin public relations and propaganda department:

This (gas) war was the last drop in my decision to resign. I was offered to take part in it as a propagandist who would explain why the price hike and everything else that is being done in our bilateral relations are liberal economic policies. However, the factors that led to this decision have nothing in common with liberal economic policies.

– http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1145192,00.html

Now to the point why I believe that Andrey (or Andrei, I don't know which spelling is the correct one) Illarionov might come from a Jewish background. He worked under/with "Young Turks" economist https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1992/02/09/yeltsins-inner-circle-of-young-turks/3ab11a79-fcdb-4dd0-a14e-da71cee520ee/ Yegor Gaidar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yegor_Gaidar who apparently was of Jewish extraction. This, in my opinion, increases the likelihood that Illarionvo is too. According to some Russian nationalists Medvedev is as well.

Having outlined all of the problems with the country, he announced who was responsible – the Jews. "[Yegor] Gaidar [in charge of privatisation under Yeltsin] – he is a Jew. What good has come in the last 17 years?" He continued, "We are international communists. Our fight is not with the Chechens or the Georgians. It is with the Jews!"
[...]
The Jewish community in Moscow were equally concerned about Medvedev's ethnicity. One local Jewish leader was quoted as saying, "I pray it isn't true, because it would only make trouble, for him and for us".

During his presidency, Vladimir Putin built his popularity on the traditional ground of national pride and defence of Russia from ill-willed foreigners, but, to his credit, he has a record of speaking out against antisemitism. His comments that he was "ashamed" of antisemitism in Russia when he visited Auschwitz in 2005 were seen as groundbreaking here.

– https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/may/22/russiasoldenmity

Putin seems to send mixed messages on and to the Jewish community. One to please his domestic audience of voters who, understandably, are overwhelmingly counter-semitic, because they blame predominately-Jewish economists and bankers and their radical and failed economic policies for the many millions of premature deaths during the 1990s economic crisis in Russia.

An extra 2.5-3 million Russian adults died in middle age in the period 1992-2001 than would have been expected based on 1991 mortality.

– https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC259165/

And one philo-semitic or semitic-sympathique message to his predominately-Jewish billionaire/oligarch financial backers to assure them and clam them down that they are safe with him, unless they turn on him or try to undermine his authority.

Here a video of Illarionov talking about the Russian economy. By the way, he considers himself to be a libertarian, which could be another indicator that he is Jewish, since libertarianism is very popular with Jews https://fee.org/articles/libertarianism-rejects-anti-semitism/

Economics in Russia – Andrei Illarionov | Rhodes 2016

JamesinNewMexico , July 2, 2018 at 2:01 am GMT
@mikkkkas

The important question: does the truth matter? Most people want the answer they want, not the truth and should be forced to truthfully answer why. One day that will happen.

AnonFromTN , July 2, 2018 at 2:19 am GMT
With all due respect, I think that seeing Russian politics as eternal fight between Eurasian Sovereignists (used to be called Slavyanophiles under tsars) and Atlantic Integrationists (used to be called Westerners in tsarist times) is naïve, maybe even childish. Not to mention that this does not explain why China is where it is now, and many other obvious things.

I'd propose an alternative theory. Russian and Chinese elites include people who are OK being second- or even third-rate in the world elites, and those who want to be first-rate. The latter are patriotic, because you cannot be first-rate unless you have a strong truly sovereign country behind you. Apparently, Putin, Xi, and many Russian and Chinese oligarchs supporting them, want to be seen as first-rate, equals among equals, in contrast to pathetic nonentities like Ukrainian "president" Poroshenko, most Ukrainian oligarchs, Polish elites, or elites of vaudeville Baltic statelets.

Thing is, if your country is a poodle of the US, you are second-rate at best (e.g., EU elites), but when your country is a poodle of the EU, you are no better than third-rate. So, the whole intrigue in Russian and Chinese politics is essentially the struggle between ambitious members of the elites (they call themselves patriots, thereby wooing the support of the populace), and weaker-spirited members, who would rather be third-rate than fight for a better position (pro-US, or generally pro-Western forces). So far proud patriots are winning in both Russia and China, but lower grade pro-Western forces won't concede and keep fighting. As far as pension reform in Russia goes, robbing the public to enrich the elites is in the interests of both factions. However, I won't be surprised if the patriotic faction blames it all on pro-Western forces, which Russian and Chinese people do sincerely despise.

AnonFromTN , July 2, 2018 at 2:29 am GMT
@Quartermaster

That's what Ukies hope for. They were always wrong (Mazepa serving Sweden, some scum serving Austro-Hungarian Empire, some scum serving Hitler, "holier-than-thou" communists serving USSR, etc.). They are wrong again. But it's inhumane to say this: you don't want to shatter pipe dreams of people who have nothing else, and never will.

AnonFromTN , July 2, 2018 at 2:45 am GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

Lots of people pretended to be persecuted just to get freebees in the US and elsewhere. Antisemitsm was by ~90% the myth created by these people. One example I know first-hand: in my year at the school of Biology in the best and most privileged Moscow State University about 20-25% of students were Jewish or half-Jewish, whereas Jews constituted 2-3% of the USSR population.

AnonFromTN , July 2, 2018 at 3:11 am GMT
@AnonFromTN

A note for those who know stats: this was a representative sampling: ~ 250 people graduated from MSU School of Biology in my year, and the picture was pretty much the same in subsequent years.

Bill spence , July 2, 2018 at 3:30 am GMT
@mikkkkas

A 5th column in the Kremlin won't do anything. You need one in the security service or in the army.

Saker likes to waste our time when he spins fantasies.

FKA Max , Website July 2, 2018 at 3:51 am GMT
@FKA Max

Dmitry Medvedev denies having any Jewish roots/ancestry: https://www.rferl.org/a/1079677.html

The following source claims his mother is Jewish, but I don't know how reliable he is:

As a sidenote, Medvedev's visit is all the more interesting given that he is a Jew, the son of a Jewish mother and the first Jew to become President of Russia, much less enter the Kremlin in any capacity besides the following: doctor, scientist, military hero, foreigner.

I've personally confirmed Medvedev's Jewish identity with former Muscovites, who say that Medvedev's mother regularly attended the main synagogue in Moscow. The subject has not been broached much in Russian media, as Medvedev is Putin's man, and, well, Russian journalists know what's good for them, or they have an accident – there is freedom of choice in Russia. I wonder if anyone's bothered to tell the Arabs.

– http://victorshikhman.blogspot.com/2010/11/lieberman-for-win.html Archived link : http://archive.is/Fi1Rn

Anonymous [116] Disclaimer , July 2, 2018 at 3:58 am GMT
@Isabella

You will notice that the comments section at that site is infested with leftist dinosaurs. Maybe they have a certain influence on the analyses.
Ozymandias

CrownLeaf , July 2, 2018 at 5:00 am GMT
@mikkkkas

You are spot on. I, too, have noticed a change toward the negative on The Saker's part. A bit befuddling. Seems that Russia and Putin have been doing well on numerous fronts, in spite of Western attempts to the contrary. Difficulties may often exist, but I just don't see 5th column doom and gloom.

Putin is perhaps the most rational, level headed, intelligent leader whom I've seen in my lifetime. Wish we had his equivalent in the USA.

[Jul 03, 2018] The role of diaspora might be as destructive in Ukraine as it was in Iraq and Iran

Notable quotes:
"... The reason they endlessly get it wrong, of course, is that they listen to the exiles in the US and elsewhere. Those exiles still mainly come from the old upper classes, with their eternal sense of entitlement to power, and their air-tickets ready in their pockets to fly back to Tehran and take back their positions under the Shah. Because of course, the Iranian revolution was one of the first populist movements, where the religious regime appealed directly to "the people", and the upper classes were cut out. The system has worked well - "the people" have continued to vote for the regime, naturally being a majority. ..."
Jul 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Laguerre , Jul 2, 2018 4:37:58 AM | 37

There was a distinct change earlier this year, after the second US fusillade of cruise missiles, and the Israeli bombing of "Iranian" bases in Syria.

We were all expecting further military action, but nothing happened, in particular no more Israeli action, although Iranian forces in Syria were hardly damaged.

Instead they started muttering about subversion of the Iranian state from the inside, which is what b is writing about here. That was a big sign that the all-out assault on Iran has been called off.

Why? Evidently because the military say no. The scenario was the same as the one back in 2012, the last time we thought to see Israeli aircraft getting permission from Saudi to do their bombing runs on Iran, but it didn't happen then, because the Israeli military were saying no. Evidently the position hasn't changed, I was relieved to discover, although the propagandists claimed the plan is all worked out now, and Iran has little defence.

Well, internal subversion of the regime, then. Hasn't the US been attempting to do precisely that for 40 years now, ever since the revolution overthrew the Shah in 1979? What are the conditions which mean that they are going to succeed now, when they've failed for 40 years?

The reason they endlessly get it wrong, of course, is that they listen to the exiles in the US and elsewhere. Those exiles still mainly come from the old upper classes, with their eternal sense of entitlement to power, and their air-tickets ready in their pockets to fly back to Tehran and take back their positions under the Shah. Because of course, the Iranian revolution was one of the first populist movements, where the religious regime appealed directly to "the people", and the upper classes were cut out. The system has worked well - "the people" have continued to vote for the regime, naturally being a majority.

I don't want to get into a historical disquisition (which in any case I've said before), but the reason this works is that there's history behind it - I'm pretty sure that the original Islamisation of Iran (I don't mean the Arab conquest, but the conversion of the country) was a popular revolt against the pre-Islamic nationalist aristocracy, who didn't pay any taxes. The present-day Iranian exiles attach themselves strongly to that old nationalist aristocracy, including most academics of Iranian origin in western universities. They don't seem to notice that the class they admire grindingly oppressed the poor, such that it led to a revolution.

sorry for that rant, as Debs would say.

[Jul 03, 2018] Is reconsiliation still possible?

Jul 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

currently having an online debate about conditions in the crimea, specifically alleged russian oppression of crimeans in 2018, but also conditions leading up to the initial referendum (my opponents claim annexation or conquest, and cite a freedom house survey to back it up--from what i can see freedom house is fully funded by the us govt). my understanding is the us fomented the coup in ukraine, along with nato, as opposed to the ukrainian people rebelling against a russian puppet, which is the us line i believe. any articles or sources detailing the us role in all this, or rebutting claims that crimeans are being terrified into silence in 2018 about russian oppression, would be appreciated.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Jul 1, 2018 2:05:08 PM | 3

somebody , Jul 1, 2018 4:01:34 PM | 5

3 Just quoting "Western" mainstream sources:

BBC?

"Ethnic Russians in the majority, Tartars and Ukrainians in the minority."

Carnegie?

About half of the respondents admit to having been taken by surprise by Russia's actions in 2014. Interestingly, there is agreement among the Crimean population, including the Crimean Tatars, that successive Ukrainian governments had neglected the region. Roughly one third of respondents pointed to this neglect as the main cause of the developments in 2014. ... The majority of survey respondents agree with the statement that the different ethnic groups in Crimea currently live peacefully side by side. Twenty percent disagree "fully" or "rather" with this statement, thereby indicating both an uncertainty and unease with the situation at the moment that reaches beyond the Crimean Tatar share of the population (about 12 percent). This result is mirrored in the reaction to the ban on the main political Crimean Tatar organization, the Mejlis, by the Russian authorities: 20 percent "fully" or "rather" disagreed with this step, compared to 80 percent endorsing this policy. ... The survey clearly spells out the severe disruption of links to the rest of Ukraine, limited travel to other parts of Russia, the absence of personal international reference points, and a near-complete integration into the Russian media sphere.

This combination makes any change in the opinions of the majority of the Crimean population on the annexation unlikely in the foreseeable future. However, it is also clear that the Crimean population's high expectations in the Russian economy and trust in Russian (but not Crimean) institutions needs to be carefully managed by Moscow in view of the already strained financial situation of the majority of the Crimean population.

Compare to Ukraine

The authors are also cautious about drawing overly-optimistic conclusions about the present time: "The risk of conflict emerging within Ukrainian society and growing serious remains, based on noticeable differences among residents of different regions about the further geopolitical direction the country should move in. There are also serious problems connected to restoring Ukraine's territorial integrity and the model of coexistence with those living in the regions that are currently occupied, how to reach reconciliation and mutual understanding." ...

Joining the EU remains a strong desire among a majority of Ukrainians. In September 2016, 51% of those surveyed by the Rating Group put integration with the EU ahead of joining Russia's Customs Union or some other association. Still, in Rating's September 2015 survey, 57% of Ukrainians did so, and in September 2014, 59% did. This noticeable decline could be the result of a number of factors. For one thing, the Association Agreement did not have a noticeable impact on the standard of living of most Ukrainians. Many Ukrainians are also upset at what they see as the European Union's limp response to Russia's aggression against their country. And the way the granting of a visa-free regime to the EU has been dragged out for years and the obvious internal squabbles among the Union's members have also left their imprint on Ukrainians.

Ukraine is a very diverse country. Trump coming to an agreement with Putin that eases tensions instead of agreeing/dividing on spheres of influence would be their best hope.

PavewayIV , Jul 1, 2018 6:26:14 PM | 8
pretzelattack@3 re: "...rebutting claims that crimeans are being terrified into silence in 2018 about russian oppression."

I honestly have not heard anything about actual oppression - just that some Ukrainians and Tartars are still - today - not terribly happy with the secession/annexation/transfer. Acts of civil disobedience were generally individual, "I don't want to be part of Russia and I'm not signing these papers or paying taxes," kind of thing. I know any polls of Crimeans are noted to be terribly flawed - neither the pro-Russian nor the pro-Ukraine people trust anyone taking polls. They'll not answer or give an answer that seems to agree with whatever 'side' the pollster might be from.

I can't see how this issue could be fairly considered without at least an acknowledgement that in 1954, 1.1 million people in Crimea woke up one day to find they were now citizens of the Ukraine SSR. No polls, no vote, no discussion and no terribly good reasons.

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/why-did-russia-give-away-crimea-sixty-years-ago

Jen , Jul 1, 2018 6:27:35 PM | 9
Pretzel Attack @ 3:

If you need sources to back up your argument that the US helped to foment the Maidan uprising that overthrew the Yanukovych government, here are a couple that feature a video and a transcript of a phone conversation.

Information CLearing House: Victoria Nuland [former US Assistant Secretary of State for Europe during Obama administration] Admits: US Has Invested $5 Billion In The Development of Ukrainian "Democratic Institutions"
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37599.htm

The article includes the video of the speech Nuland gave to the Washington press corp in December 2013 in which she talks about "investing" the $5 billion.

A transcript of the phone call between Nuland and the then US ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt discussing who to select for the post-Yanukovych government in Kiev at this Global Research link:
https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-eu-clash-on-how-to-install-a-puppet-regime-in-ukraine-victoria-nuland/5367794

This is the famous phone call in which Nuland utters her most memorable lines: "Yats [Yatsenyuk] is the guy [for deputy prime minister]" and "Fuck the EU".

-----

I have also found details of the Korsun massacre incident that occurred on 20 February 2014. I had known about this massacre but in a hazy way and had thought only a few people had been killed. However this incident is much more grave and this was the stimulus for the Crimeans to organise their independence referendum and break away from Ukraine.

Eight buses of Crimean supporters of the Yanukovych government were returning to Crimea when the convoy was ambushed by Nazi thugs (who had known of the convoy's movements in advance). The thugs ordered everyone off the buses, beat them up and tortured them. Several people were killed.

More details of the Korsun incident at this Fort Russ link:
https://www.fort-russ.com/2015/02/korsun-massacre-anniversary-what-really/

karlof1 , Jul 1, 2018 6:47:59 PM | 10
Crimeans are very pleased about their reaffiliation with Russia. To say otherwise is to lie, pure and simple.
dh , Jul 1, 2018 6:51:06 PM | 11
@3 You can add this to Jen @9...

"Americans prepared very seriously and thoroughly for their entrance into Crimea, – said a member of the Federation Council Committee on defense and security, Dmitry Sablin. – A year before the events on Maidan in Kiev, they made repair estimates of a number of buildings in Sevastopol and in Simferopol, where they planned to house the headquarters and intelligence units. Military airfields and garrisons, which then belonged to Ukraine, they considered as their own military installations and even sent instructions for their conversion to NATO standards. In the plans of the U.S. military April 2014 was the start time of upgrades in Crimea. It seemed to them that the issue has been settled. But the referendum had thrown off their plans, and on March 18, Crimea became Russian again, where the overseas guests were no longer welcome. Americans later themselves acknowledged that the Russians outplayed them on all counts. Well, and from helplessness imposed sanctions -- as a revenge for Crimea".

https://www.fort-russ.com/2016/03/how-russia-ruined-american-plans-in/

Jen , Jul 1, 2018 7:02:07 PM | 12
Pretzel Attack @ 3:

Here's a Russia Insight documentary in which survivors of the Korsun massacre help re-enact the incident:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ummUo7DEEzM

Jen , Jul 1, 2018 7:08:28 PM | 13
Pretzel Attack @ 3

You can add this to DH @ 11:

Renovation of Sevastopol School #5, Ukraine
Solicitation Number: N33191-13-R-1240
Agency: Department of the Navy
Office: Naval Facilities Engineering Command
Location: NAVFAC Europe and Southwest Asia
https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=2bb691b61c59be3a68180bd8c614a0cb&tab=core&_cview=1

This is the tender put out by the US Navy to invite private companies to propose renovation plans for a school for naval officers' children in the military base in Sevastopol.

Jen , Jul 1, 2018 7:08:28 PM | 13 Daniel , Jul 1, 2018 7:40:45 PM | 14
Sabine @6: On political/national/ethnic determinations.

It is a messy situation. I had thought one of the reasons we hate the Nazis is because ethno-nationalism is evil. And yet, most of the West's leaders fully support Israel, and the AZ Empire is promoting Kurdish ethno-states in Iraq and Syria (though not in Turkey, where 50% of all Kurds live).

We were all ready to accept a referendum that would have seen Scotland secede from Great Britain, and yet when people in regions of 1991 Ukraine resisted the Western-fomented coup in 2014, and voted to secede, we are told they are terrorists to be crushed.

Most of the national borders in the Middle East and Africa were created by an elite in Great Britain and Europe, which divided families and crammed together enemies, creating the inevitable century of turmoil. And yet, here most of us support the sovereignty of some of those artificially-created neocolonial states.

Messy.

Personally, I believe in the right to self-determination. If a group of people in a region choose to form, or dissolve, or maintain, or expand a political entity, then they should be allowed to. Such decisions should be made by the will of those people only.

What I see as illegitimate is people from outside that region interfering to force their will on others.

Jen , Jul 1, 2018 8:42:46 PM | 17
Pretzel Attack @ 3:

I keep finding juicy things for you!

Here is a link to a documentary "Crimea for Dummies" by Los Angeles-based film-maker Miguel Francis Santiago in 2014. Watch it and judge for yourself whether Crimeans seem genuinely happy at being part of Russia again.
https://21stcenturywire.com/2018/06/17/sunday-screening-crimea-for-dummies-2014/

MFS also travelled to the Donbass and made a documentary about his journey there. I saw the documentary a couple of years ago and from memory I believe he met Givi, one of the Donbass military commanders. Givi died in early 2017 when a missile hit his office.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukQgVoTnAuE

Daniel , Jul 1, 2018 9:32:44 PM | 19
Jen. Thanks for the great links on the Ukraine situation. Oliver Stone created a stunning documentary, that is the best on the subject I've seen: "Ukraine on Fire"

Unfortunately, it appears to be banned or at lest heavily censored within the US. I saw it on RT.

I found a version with foreign language over-dubbing which my ear finds difficult. But it does have CC in English.

Grieved , Jul 2, 2018 12:08:00 AM | 25
@3 pretzelattack

I second all of the very valuable responses made to you, but no story of Crimea would be complete without Crimea. The Way Home. Documentary by Andrey Kondrashev

I've seen several uploads of this documentary, which was made in 2015. But the resolution of this version is superb. I recommend it for everyone actually, and I'm happy to say that it's being hosted on the Vesti News channel - which is worth exploring in its own right.

This is the definitive story told from the inside of the people of Crimea forming a resistance force to take their land back from Ukraine. It was already happening but the Korsun massacre detailed above by commenters was the galvanizing point that showed the Crimeans that Kiev was coming to massacre it also, unless it resisted. And as everyone knew, Crimea was hated most of all, and its suffering would be far worse than that of Donbass.

Kondrashev is a popular Russian news commentator, and he interviews Putin extensively in the film. This was made one year after the Crimea restoration to Russia, after the events of that time, coordinated by Putin, were de-classified.

The documentary is a dramatic and stirring work. You will be totally in love with with Crimea and the Russian people by the end of it. And you will understand how the Maidan was a US color revolution in classical style. Your heart will jump when you see the snipers kill the hard-pressed Berkut. And it's a true story, made from real footage, and with parts reenacted by the actual people.

When the polite green men show up, in the very nick of time, you may find yourself weeping with gladness.

[Jul 03, 2018] With some exceptions Putin practices "national neoliberalism" in Russia

Notable quotes:
"... Since the start of Putin's tenure, Russia re-nationalized, that is returned to the state control or ownership, an enormous number of truly strategic companies. ..."
"... These are hardly signs of neoliberalism, not to mention that Russia, rightly so, is considered one of the most protectionist nations in the world. This is if to discount all this theoretical and metaphysical mambo-jumbo on the obvious fact that neoliberalism is dead, together with its founding Free Trade gospel, and stinks to heaven, poisoning surroundings. And, yes, I am sure Russian State has no control over Novatek (it is a bad joke). ..."
"... Kudrin's audit committee looks like being FAS Mark 2. He has been given the tools to take Sechin and other state moguls apart. Will he get to the Rotenbergs/Gazprom? ..."
Jul 03, 2018 | www.unz.com

Andrei Martyanov June 29, 2018 at 7:36 pm GMT

Karlin,

The same "fifth column" that has over the past 18 years also forced Putin into adopting a flat tax, liberalizing land sales, monetizing benefits, and now pensions reform.

If Putin still hasn't managed to get rid of them, then what the hell is he good for? ... Reality is, all of those were great successes. Putin is an economic neoliberal and that is a good thing .

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-06-07/putin-s-under-the-radar-nationalization-of-russia-s-private-banks

Even if Bershidsky gets it, however in the field which doesn't require any serious skills, except for good accounting. Now, you don't want me to refer to Russia's actual industries, especially hi-tech, which are nationalized, do you? Does the title Rostec ring a bell? What is remarkable, founding of Rostec somehow coincided with Putin's Munich Speech--both events are hardly any evidence of neoliberalism. Is Putin a liberal? Yes, but to a degree and political mostly--his progression from liberal economic model to a mixed model since 2014 is visible to people with even rudimentary knowledge of Russia. This is not to mention that Russia, quoting even Wiki:

Russia has an upper-middle income mixed economy with state ownership in strategic areas of the economy.
Some private bank is not a "strategic" area, nor is "liberalization" of land sales, resources and real hi-tech sector, however, together with agriculture, are. Since the start of Putin's tenure, Russia re-nationalized, that is returned to the state control or ownership, an enormous number of truly strategic companies. In fact, whole industries. Putin recently himself clearly stated that, especially pointing out a bonanza Russian State got from 2008 collapse and from sanctions.

These are hardly signs of neoliberalism, not to mention that Russia, rightly so, is considered one of the most protectionist nations in the world. This is if to discount all this theoretical and metaphysical mambo-jumbo on the obvious fact that neoliberalism is dead, together with its founding Free Trade gospel, and stinks to heaven, poisoning surroundings. And, yes, I am sure Russian State has no control over Novatek (it is a bad joke).

Philip Owen , June 29, 2018 at 10:12 pm GMT

The picture is mixed. The Federal Antimonopoly Service has been given real teeth since its humiliation by the Customs Service under Medvedev. It goes beyond antimonopoly. For example, it reviews incoming foreign investment in the 42 strategic industries. This was originally a protectionist committee. It gave Pepsico a hard time for buying Wimm-Bill-Dann, clearly a military asset. These days its approach to foreigners is "How can I help you? Do you want money?" It is frequently chaired by Putin.

Kudrin's audit committee looks like being FAS Mark 2. He has been given the tools to take Sechin and other state moguls apart. Will he get to the Rotenbergs/Gazprom?

Their behaviour is outrageous. Certainly not the kind of corporate governance required for a competitive market. e.g. Gazprom Bank has a Rotenberg son in charge of loans. Gazprom lent another Rotenberg son the money to build Aviapark. No Rotenberg capital at risk during the whole process. Now a $1 Bn asset. Kudrin has a target rich environment. Will he settle out of court or make some high level examples?

Anatoly Karlin , Website June 29, 2018 at 9:11 pm GMT

@Andrei Martyanov

Rostek, run by Chemezov, whose main qualification is being buddies with Putin in 1980s East Germany, famous for passing off an unsuccessful and outdated Taiwanese manufactured and American designed device as an example of "Russian innovation" [at pilfering government money].

But you are of course correct. Russia is of course not neoliberal so far as Putin's kleptocratic chums are concerned. Fortunately, overall domestic economic policy (with said exceptions) is neoliberal, which rules out a Venezuelan scenario in Russia. That is a good thing.

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 29, 2018 at 9:28 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

But you are of course correct. Russia is of course not neoliberal so far as Putin's kleptocratic chums are concerned.

Exactly, nor do you have any qualifications nor skills to write about Russia since, and I quote Margo Simonyan describing your kind.

Maybe you will finally understand that you do not believe us not because we lie, but because you know horseradish (dick) about surrounding world, because you are badly educated, do not read much and when do, do not read what is needed, you visit all the wrong places and communicate with the same small bunch of prejudiced and/or mental people, who only reinforce your condescending ignorance.

https://ria.ru/analytics/20180625/1523351567.html?referrer_block=index_only_ria_1

I guess we have an overwhelming empirical evidence supporting these claims, don't we?

[Jul 03, 2018] Musings II The "Intelligence Community," "Russian Interference," and Due Diligence

Highly recommended!
Looks like Brennan abused his power as a head of CIA and should be held accountable for that.
Notable quotes:
"... Did the U.S. "Intelligence Community" judge that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election? ..."
"... it is not that ..."
"... even that is misleading ..."
"... the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence Research did, in fact, have a different opinion but was not allowed to express it ..."
"... The second thing to remember is that reports of the intelligence agencies reflect the views of the heads of the agencies and are not necessarily a consensus of their analysts' views. The heads of both the CIA and FBI are political appointments, while the NSA chief is a military officer; his agency is a collector of intelligence rather than an analyst of its import, except in the fields of cryptography and communications security. ..."
"... Among the assertions are that a persona calling itself "Guccifer 2.0" is an instrument of the GRU, and that it hacked the emails on the Democratic National Committee's computer and conveyed them to Wikileaks. What the report does not explain is that it is easy for a hacker or foreign intelligence service to leave a false trail. In fact, a program developed by CIA with NSA assistance to do just that has been leaked and published. ..."
"... Retired senior NSA technical experts have examined the "Guccifer 2.0" data on the web and have concluded that "Guccifer 2.0's" data did not involve a hack across the web but was locally downloaded. Further, the data had been tampered with and manipulated, leading to the conclusion that "Guccifer 2.0" is a total fabrication. ..."
"... "Disclosures through WikiLeaks did not contain any evident forgeries." ..."
"... DHS [the Department of Homeland Security] assesses that the types of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in vote tallying ..."
"... Prominent American journalists and politicians seized upon this shabby, politically motivated, report as proof of "Russian interference" in the U.S. election without even the pretense of due diligence. They have objectively acted as co-conspirators in an effort to block any improvement in relations with Russia, even though cooperation with Russia to deal with common dangers is vital to both countries. ..."
Jun 29, 2018 | jackmatlock.com

Musings II The "Intelligence Community," "Russian Interference," and Due Diligence Posted on by Jack Did the U.S. "Intelligence Community" judge that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election?

Most commentators seem to think so. Every news report I have read of the planned meeting of Presidents Trump and Putin in July refers to "Russian interference" as a fact and asks whether the matter will be discussed. Reports that President Putin denied involvement in the election are scoffed at, usually with a claim that the U.S. "intelligence community" proved Russian interference. In fact, the U.S. "intelligence community" has not done so. The intelligence community as a whole has not been tasked to make a judgment and some key members of that community did not participate in the report that is routinely cited as "proof" of "Russian interference."

I spent the 35 years of my government service with a "top secret" clearance. When I reached the rank of ambassador and also worked as Special Assistant to the President for National Security, I also had clearances for "codeword" material. At that time, intelligence reports to the president relating to Soviet and European affairs were routed through me for comment. I developed at that time a "feel" for the strengths and weaknesses of the various American intelligence agencies. It is with that background that I read the January 6. 2017 report of three intelligence agencies: the CIA, FBI, and NSA.

This report is labeled "Intelligence Community Assessment," but in fact it is not that . A report of the intelligence community in my day would include the input of all the relevant intelligence agencies and would reveal whether all agreed with the conclusions. Individual agencies did not hesitate to "take a footnote" or explain their position if they disagreed with a particular assessment. A report would not claim to be that of the "intelligence community" if any relevant agency was omitted.

The report states that it represents the findings of three intelligence agencies: CIA, FBI, and NSA, but even that is misleading in that it implies that there was a consensus of relevant analysts in these three agencies. In fact, the report was prepared by a group of analysts from the three agencies pre-selected by their directors, with the selection process generally overseen by James Clapper, then Director of National Intelligence (DNI). Clapper told the Senate in testimony May 8, 2017, that it was prepared by "two dozen or so analysts -- hand-picked, seasoned experts from each of the contributing agencies." If you can hand-pick the analysts, you can hand-pick the conclusions. The analysts selected would have understood what Director Clapper wanted since he made no secret of his views. Why would they endanger their careers by not delivering?

What should have struck any congressperson or reporter was that the procedure Clapper followed was the same as that used in 2003 to produce the report falsely claiming that Saddam Hussein had retained stocks of weapons of mass destruction. That should be worrisome enough to inspire questions, but that is not the only anomaly.

The DNI has under his aegis a National Intelligence Council whose officers can call any intelligence agency with relevant expertise to draft community assessments. It was created by Congress after 9/11 specifically to correct some of the flaws in intelligence collection revealed by 9/11. Director Clapper chose not to call on the NIC, which is curious since its duty is "to act as a bridge between the intelligence and policy communities."

During my time in government, a judgment regarding national security would include reports from, as a minimum, the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), and the Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) of the State Department. The FBI was rarely, if ever, included unless the principal question concerned law enforcement within the United States. NSA might have provided some of the intelligence used by the other agencies but normally did not express an opinion regarding the substance of reports.

What did I notice when I read the January report? There was no mention of INR or DIA! The exclusion of DIA might be understandable since its mandate deals primarily with military forces, except that the report attributes some of the Russian activity to the GRU, Russian military intelligence. DIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency, is the U.S. intelligence organ most expert on the GRU. Did it concur with this attribution? The report doesn't say.

The omission of INR is more glaring since a report on foreign political activity could not have been that of the U.S. intelligence community without its participation. After all, when it comes to assessments of foreign intentions and foreign political activity, the State Department's intelligence service is by far the most knowledgeable and competent. In my day, it reported accurately on Gorbachev's reforms when the CIA leaders were advising that Gorbachev had the same aims as his predecessors.

This is where due diligence comes in. The first question responsible journalists and politicians should have asked is "Why is INR not represented? Does it have a different opinion? If so, what is that opinion? Most likely the official answer would have been that this is "classified information." But why should it be classified? If some agency heads come to a conclusion and choose (or are directed) to announce it publicly, doesn't the public deserve to know that one of the key agencies has a different opinion?

The second question should have been directed at the CIA, NSA, and FBI: did all their analysts agree with these conclusions or were they divided in their conclusions? What was the reason behind hand-picking analysts and departing from the customary practice of enlisting analysts already in place and already responsible for following the issues involved?

As I was recently informed by a senior official, the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence Research did, in fact, have a different opinion but was not allowed to express it . So the January report was not one of the "intelligence community," but rather of three intelligence agencies, two of which have no responsibility or necessarily any competence to judge foreign intentions. The job of the FBI is to enforce federal law. The job of NSA is to intercept the communications of others and to protect ours. It is not staffed to assess the content of what is intercepted; that task is assumed by others, particularly the CIA, the DIA (if it is military) or the State Department's INR (if it is political).

The second thing to remember is that reports of the intelligence agencies reflect the views of the heads of the agencies and are not necessarily a consensus of their analysts' views. The heads of both the CIA and FBI are political appointments, while the NSA chief is a military officer; his agency is a collector of intelligence rather than an analyst of its import, except in the fields of cryptography and communications security.

One striking thing about the press coverage and Congressional discussion of the January report, and of subsequent statements by CIA, FBI, and NSA heads is that questions were never posed regarding the position of the State Department's INR, or whether the analysts in the agencies cited were in total agreement with the conclusions.

Let's put these questions aside for the moment and look at the report itself. On the first page of text, the following statement leapt to my attention:

We did not make an assessment of the impact that Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election. The US Intelligence Community is charged with monitoring and assessing the intentions, capabilities, and actions of foreign actors; it does not analyze US political processes or US public opinion.

Now, how can one judge whether activity "interfered" with an election without assessing its impact? After all, if the activity had no impact on the outcome of the election, it could not be properly termed interference. This disclaimer, however, has not prevented journalists and politicians from citing the report as proof that "Russia interfered" in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

As for particulars, the report is full of assertion, innuendo, and description of "capabilities" but largely devoid of any evidence to substantiate its assertions. This is "explained" by claiming that much of the evidence is classified and cannot be disclosed without revealing sources and methods. The assertions are made with "high confidence" or occasionally, "moderate confidence." Having read many intelligence reports I can tell you that if there is irrefutable evidence of something it will be stated as a fact. The use of the term "high confidence" is what most normal people would call "our best guess." "Moderate confidence" means "some of our analysts think this might be true."

Among the assertions are that a persona calling itself "Guccifer 2.0" is an instrument of the GRU, and that it hacked the emails on the Democratic National Committee's computer and conveyed them to Wikileaks. What the report does not explain is that it is easy for a hacker or foreign intelligence service to leave a false trail. In fact, a program developed by CIA with NSA assistance to do just that has been leaked and published.

Retired senior NSA technical experts have examined the "Guccifer 2.0" data on the web and have concluded that "Guccifer 2.0's" data did not involve a hack across the web but was locally downloaded. Further, the data had been tampered with and manipulated, leading to the conclusion that "Guccifer 2.0" is a total fabrication.

The report's assertions regarding the supply of the DNC emails to Wikileaks are dubious, but its final statement in this regard is important: "Disclosures through WikiLeaks did not contain any evident forgeries." In other words, what was disclosed was the truth! So, Russians are accused of "degrading our democracy" by revealing that the DNC was trying to fix the nomination of a particular candidate rather than allowing the primaries and state caucuses to run their course. I had always thought that transparency is consistent with democratic values. Apparently those who think that the truth can degrade democracy have a rather bizarre -- to put it mildly–concept of democracy.

Most people, hearing that it is a "fact" that "Russia" interfered in our election must think that Russian government agents hacked into vote counting machines and switched votes to favor a particular candidate. This, indeed, would be scary, and would justify the most painful sanctions. But this is the one thing that the "intelligence" report of January 6, 2017, states did not happen. Here is what it said: " DHS [the Department of Homeland Security] assesses that the types of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in vote tallying ."

This is an important statement by an agency that is empowered to assess the impact of foreign activity on the United States. Why was it not consulted regarding other aspects of the study? Or -- was it in fact consulted and refused to endorse the findings? Another obvious question any responsible journalist or competent politician should have asked.

Prominent American journalists and politicians seized upon this shabby, politically motivated, report as proof of "Russian interference" in the U.S. election without even the pretense of due diligence. They have objectively acted as co-conspirators in an effort to block any improvement in relations with Russia, even though cooperation with Russia to deal with common dangers is vital to both countries.

This is only part of the story of how, without good reason, U.S.-Russian relations have become dangerously confrontational. God willin and the crick don't rise, I'll be musing about other aspects soon.

Thanks to Ray McGovern and Bill Binney for their research assistance.

Jack F. Matlock, Jr.
Booneville, Tennessee
June 29, 2018

[Jul 03, 2018] Lots of people pretended to be persecuted just to get freebees in the US and elsewhere

Jul 03, 2018 | www.unz.com

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 30, 2018 at 5:55 pm GMT

@FKA Max

National identity in USSR was important. Well, it is always important and yes, there was latent antisemitism (or whatever it is called) in some spheres of Soviet life. Not as big, though, as Jewish dissidents love to present to those who are ready to listen.

AnonFromTN , July 2, 2018 at 2:45 am GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

Lots of people pretended to be persecuted just to get freebees in the US and elsewhere. Antisemitsm was by ~90% the myth created by these people. One example I know first-hand: in my year at the school of Biology in the best and most privileged Moscow State University about 20-25% of students were Jewish or half-Jewish, whereas Jews constituted 2-3% of the USSR population.

[Jul 03, 2018] When you see some really successful financial speculator like Soros or (or much smaller scale) Browder, search for links with intelligence services to explain the success or at least a part of it related to xUSSR space , LA and similar regions

Highly recommended!
Jul 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Recently came across the following article written by F. William Engdahl in 1996 which might be of interest to some here:

The secret financial network behind "wizard" George Soros

The last page of the above article can be found here:

Soros's looting of Ibero-America

Posted by: integer | Jul 2, 2018 4:49:45 AM | 35

[Jul 03, 2018] No one actually has to act against US shale - it s something of a pretender in the real oil world anyway, and this has long been commented upon

Jul 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Grieved , Jul 1, 2018 11:31:44 PM | 30

@24 Peter AU 1

I encourage you to give the Escobar article a second reading. I just did to make sure I knew what it was saying. I think karlof1 is making the right points from it.

The collaboration between Saudia Arabia and Russia is a very small part of the article, and no one disputes that this collaboration is occurring. Russia may even be part of OPEC soon, if it chooses. The relationship works against the US but it's not specifically made for this reason. Read Adam Garrie's take on this to see that the moves into OPEC by Russia in recent years are clearly from its own interest as a hugely major supplier, and that Saudi Arabia needs Russia: The New Russia-Saudi Partnership Has Riyadh's US Ally Over a Barrel

I just skimmed it a third time and I don't see Escobar saying anywhere that the Saudi-Russia relationship is to kill US shale. He does say that both Russia and Iran are interested in countering it. I think the point here is that all serious oil producers with profitable reserves take alarm at the US shale oil because it's hard to say that it's a real commodity with an inbuilt profitability. It's a short-term entry into the market that can serve to disrupt the market temporarily, but it has no staying power. I suspect most nations would prefer it simply not intrude.

No one actually has to act against US shale - it's something of a pretender in the real oil world anyway, and this has long been commented upon. Escobar's point that the US shale is largely a myth is not a new concept. At best the reserve will deplete within 15 years, and that's at best - along the way it will destroy the US potable water table. And its intrinsic value is far from clear, since the entire industry is dubiously financed using relatively free Federal Reserve money. As Escobar points out, many call $100 per barrel the profit threshold for shale - that's a ludicrously high bar for profitability in the oil world.

Much of Escobar's article was about the relationship between Russia and Iran, and it served also as a very good primer in world oil and petro-currency numbers. I found it pretty sound.

In fact, I recommend it to those who may be interested: How the Iran sanctions drama intersects with OPEC-plus

[Jul 03, 2018] Clearly the reason for the Trump-Putin summit should be obvious to all by now

Notable quotes:
"... You don't need to give use Northstream 2. We will build it ourselves. ..."
"... Nordstream II only blocking party is Denmark, and they can and will bypass it at some price, if need be. ..."
"... Almost all of the countries that Nord Stream 2 passes through have signed on to its construction. The only holdout is Denmark. In response Gazprom has said it will reroute the pipeline through international waters. There is nothing the US can do about that and Denmark can say goodbye to its share of transit fees. ..."
"... A lot of that sort of crap was being pumped out by trolls and regulars alike a few weeks back on Putin, Nutty and SW Syria. Putin had done a deal and was giving SW Syria to nutty cetra cetra. Like Putin and Xi, Iran and others are too stupid to realize they have to work together against US attacks. ..."
"... Russia has to defend Iran. There is no chance that Putin will sell it to Trump. Once again we see the dreaded "US can do anything" disease arising. In fact US options are limited and evaporating. ..."
"... The most likely outcome of the 'summit'is a renewal or strengthening of old agreements on arms control and much high sounding chatter: in geopolitics the die is cast. ..."
Jul 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Julian , Jul 1, 2018 1:02:37 PM | 4

Clearly the reason for the Trump-Putin summit should be obvious to all by now

Trump to Putin: We will give you Syria & NordStream II. And in return all we ask is that you stand aside from Iran.

What will Putin do?

And what about the Ukrainian Elections coming up???

Surely Putin has to demand more to stand aside from Iran. Crimea for starters.

PutinToTrump , Jul 1, 2018 1:32:09 PM | 6

We already have Syria and the Crimea.
You don't need to give use Northstream 2. We will build it ourselves.
Šabaniri , Jul 1, 2018 2:02:23 PM | 7
@4, Syria is not Trump's to give. They already lost it.

Nordstream II only blocking party is Denmark, and they can and will bypass it at some price, if need be.

So - Trump has nothing and you think he will be given head of a Russian neigboor, SCO ally, fellow Empire target?
No way.

Yonatan , Jul 1, 2018 4:33:10 PM | 11
Julian @4

Almost all of the countries that Nord Stream 2 passes through have signed on to its construction. The only holdout is Denmark. In response Gazprom has said it will reroute the pipeline through international waters. There is nothing the US can do about that and Denmark can say goodbye to its share of transit fees.

Also Crimea is non-negotiable for Russia. It is Russian territory irrespective of what happens.

Peter AU 1 , Jul 1, 2018 11:14:41 PM | 27
Julian 26

A lot of that sort of crap was being pumped out by trolls and regulars alike a few weeks back on Putin, Nutty and SW Syria. Putin had done a deal and was giving SW Syria to nutty cetra cetra. Like Putin and Xi, Iran and others are too stupid to realize they have to work together against US attacks.

bevin , Jul 1, 2018 11:22:39 PM | 28
Russia has to defend Iran. There is no chance that Putin will sell it to Trump. Once again we see the dreaded "US can do anything" disease arising. In fact US options are limited and evaporating.

Incidentally it is very easy and probably wise to promise the US, in June, not to buy oil in November. It costs nothing and fits into bazaar bargaining strategies.

The most likely outcome of the 'summit'is a renewal or strengthening of old agreements on arms control and much high sounding chatter: in geopolitics the die is cast.

[Jul 03, 2018] MoA - British Parliament Confirms 'Conspiracy Theory' - Torture and Renditions Continue

Other patterns on behaviour of British government suggest their nefarious role in Skripal poisoning scandal
Notable quotes:
"... What else to expect from "Christian colonialists" but hypocrisy and double speak! "Many commit the same crime with a very different result. One bears a cross for his crime; another a crown." ― Juvenal, The Satires ..."
"... Most Christian Colonial wars are fake wars against weak, or weakened, countries for 2 streams of Private Profit using Public Funds. ..."
"... Western looting of Libya netted "someone"(s) more than $1 Trillion in gold and currency reserves alone. Iraq lost historical artifacts of inestimable value. The Friends & Relatives crowd will be perpetually pissed with Putin for ruining Christian Colonialism's plan to loot Damascus. ..."
"... I hate to add another layer of shit on a very deep pile, when it comes to my u k but ! Could the academics here take a look at the time lines concerning the last general election and referendum compared to the 3 terrorist attacks about the same time. That is what kept may in power! Compare to for instances the fake Salisbury incident and east Douma Chem incident. All same patten ! I dug deep but don't let me influence enyone. To add, look at the timing of the grenfail tower fire, re election. I'l just leave this here. ..."
"... Talking about fake wars, bombing functioning ME countries back to the Stone Age and looting them, and "Israel" being a vociferous promoter of the Iraq & Syria Fake Wars, does anyone know how 'lootable' Iran is? ..."
"... Another astonishing thing about all this is the "liberal" media MSM or however you choose to call the corporate establishment press has always gone along with all the coverups. But things have changed and things are changing. ..."
Jul 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Jun 29, 2018 11:39:28 AM | 1

Read Murray's blog entry prior to b's, and it's extremely damning. The May government must be thrown out and the notables from all post-911 UK governments must be charged with over the crimes they've committed--including the obstruction of those crimes investigations. This report also shows we ought to consider Skripal Affair as 100% falsehood as the May government has less than zero credibility on anything, which is one of the reasons it must be tossed. I wonder if there're enough Corbynites capable of unseating the "Blue Tories" to bring a new revitalized People's Labour Party back into power so that justice can be served.
james , Jun 29, 2018 12:16:26 PM | 4
craig murray and b are to be commended for addressing this ongoing issue..

we're back to the issue of accountability and again - nothing has changed..as karlof1 and worldblee note - this must be addressed and someone must be held accountable for this, or it will continue.

so - is the uk trying to be like the uae/ksa of the north? maybe they could take up headchopping as well? i am not sure what country is more backward - uk or usa... in this race to the bottom, both countries are fully supportive of these regressive regimes in uae/ksa and fully onside with the war on yemen which they must profit from in order for them to justify it... for me - justifying murder and mayhem based on profit is a sign of a really sick culture, but it is fully embraced by many of the so called democratic western countries, including the one i live in - canada... as far as leadership is concerned - there is a huge gap and no one is speaking out on any of it in the political spectrum as i know of... meanwhile we have to thank b and craig murray for shining a light on this as a constant reminder of just how backward the so called civilized countries are here in 2018..

james , Jun 29, 2018 12:18:54 PM | 5
and - Theresa May is a complete sleazeball.. Trump isn't much different or he would be addressing this too...
ex-SA , Jun 29, 2018 1:02:55 PM | 9
What else to expect from "Christian colonialists" but hypocrisy and double speak! "Many commit the same crime with a very different result. One bears a cross for his crime; another a crown." ― Juvenal, The Satires
Hoarsewhisperer , Jun 29, 2018 1:23:08 PM | 11
There are two aspects of this Christian Colonial (Western) clusterfuck which are particularly galling for The People in whose name these crimes are committed:

1. Torture was used to extract false confessions.
2. Most Christian Colonial wars are fake wars against weak, or weakened, countries for 2 streams of Private Profit using Public Funds.
----(a) The M-IC makes vast profits from Weapons (win or lose).
----(b) Their wealthy Friends & Relatives get first pick of the spoils of Looting, at a big discount.

Western looting of Libya netted "someone"(s) more than $1 Trillion in gold and currency reserves alone. Iraq lost historical artifacts of inestimable value. The Friends & Relatives crowd will be perpetually pissed with Putin for ruining Christian Colonialism's plan to loot Damascus.

Mark2 , Jun 29, 2018 1:45:03 PM | 12
I hate to add another layer of shit on a very deep pile, when it comes to my u k but ! Could the academics here take a look at the time lines concerning the last general election and referendum compared to the 3 terrorist attacks about the same time. That is what kept may in power! Compare to for instances the fake Salisbury incident and east Douma Chem incident. All same patten ! I dug deep but don't let me influence enyone. To add, look at the timing of the grenfail tower fire, re election. I'l just leave this here.
Hoarsewhisperer , Jun 29, 2018 2:03:06 PM | 13
Talking about fake wars, bombing functioning ME countries back to the Stone Age and looting them, and "Israel" being a vociferous promoter of the Iraq & Syria Fake Wars, does anyone know how 'lootable' Iran is?

Rumors says that Iran has very ancient roots and one imagines it may have artifacts going back 5000+ years, although I've never heard them talked about.

Babyl-on , Jun 29, 2018 2:12:11 PM | 14
Another astonishing thing about all this is the "liberal" media MSM or however you choose to call the corporate establishment press has always gone along with all the coverups. But things have changed and things are changing.

There is a not quite parallel story to this. The child separations - did you ever hear from the corp. media about the 5,100+ children separated from their families in 2011 by Obama. Nor much about how Obama had deported more than Trump at this point in his term.

I try to follow press from several countries and what I notice now is that EVEN MODI is moving away from the US. The general views is - hay, we want to trade and get along we want development but we have to deal with this big pain in the ass we have to spend a lot if time and energy dealing with the US that we could use for development.

Trump is doing the world a favor by bringing all the criminal behavior of the US into the open, its been there all along.

The liberal press which is hounding Trump over the issue now were silent for a decade when "liberals" were in power have a Pyrrhic victory, it will come back on them.

If this trade crazy stuff drives Modi to join the B&R the US commercial/corporate global empire is well and truly over.
Let us appeal to the gods.

[Jul 03, 2018] Donald Trump has been business partners with George Soros in at least $6 Billion in properties for more than a decade before his candidacy. They were even codefendants in a RICO suit (organized crime, as in the Jewish Mafia).

Jul 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

integer @35. Not a fan of George Soros? Ready to peak into the rabbit hole?

Donald Trump has been business partners with George Soros in at least $6 Billion in properties for more than a decade before his candidacy. They were even codefendants in a RICO suit (organized crime, as in the Jewish Mafia).

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-10-28/news/0410280265_1_donald-trump-soros-fund-management-blackacre-institutional-capital-management

http://www.pionline.com/article/20081009/ONLINE/810099993/developer-sues-soros-fortress-cerberus

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/18/realestate/commercial/the-kushner-companies-deal-for-666-fifth-avenue-avoids-foreclosure.html

After spending 17 years at Goldman Sachs, Trump's new Treasure Secretary, Steven Mnuchin ran OneWest Bank in CA. Guess who he worked for? George frigging Soros.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanvardi/2014/07/22/john-paulson-and-george-soros-score-big-selling-onewest-bank-for-3-4-billion/#32e7ee635ab0

So, Trump is partners with infamous globalist atheist George Soros, Orthodox Jews, Islamic Extremists, Goldman Sachs and GHW Bush's Carlyle Group.

And one more morsel to ponder. The CEO of CNN (portrayed as rabidly anti-Trump) is one of a long list of Globalist Zionists who have been Trump supporters for decades.

http://nojeveje.net/2017/01/23/trumps-jewish-elite-mafia-5-dancing-israelis/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RplnqsLas0g

Posted by: Daniel | Jul 2, 2018 4:05:48 PM | 55

[Jul 03, 2018] It seems that the political trend in central Europe is away from multi-culturalism. Hungary wants to maintain its culture.

Jul 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

ab initio , Jul 1, 2018 6:24:20 PM | 7

What is happening in Germany? Is "open borders" that Merkel has championed on its last legs? It seems that the CSU is worried about the coming elections in Bavaria where AfD might do much better than expected. Just as the outcome of the Italian elections was for a government coalition opposed to illegal economic immigration under the guise of asylum for political persecution.

Hungarian foreign minister in an interview with a snowflake BBC reporter. It seems that the political trend in central Europe is away from multi-culturalism. Hungary wants to maintain its culture.

https://youtu.be/q8itF62yIJg

This seems like the same contention between the Democrats who want "open borders" and "catch & release" while Trump wants to deport all illegals.

[Jun 28, 2018] What is John Bolton s role in Trump s ME drama?

With Mueller Trump is on a very short leash indeed, so I doubt that he has great freedom of maneuver.
Notable quotes:
"... Trump has a free hand from his base to negotiate peaceful coexistence with Russia, but he nevertheless must successfully deal with the passion of the neocon wing of the Borg (foreign policy establishment). They still swoon at the thought of the ongoing renewal of the Cold War. ..."
"... John Bolton is an arch-neocon, a neocon's neocon. Trump has sent him to Moscow to arrange an agenda, date and location for a meeting with Vladimir Putin. IMO this is a stroke of genius. What it does is put an enemy of good US-Russia relations in charge of arranging the schedule for discussions to improve US-Russia relations. In LBJ's vulgarism, Bolton is going to be inside the tent peeing out rather than outside peeing in. Having arranged the meeting, he will be personally invested in its success. How sweet that is! ..."
"... People want to believe so badly. I also want to believe, but I live in the real world. What happened the last time Trump made noises about leaving Syria to its own devices, most recently in April? Instant false flag, that's what. With Trump, it's worked twice already, I see no reason that it will not work a third or fourth time, or as often as needed. ..."
"... Without Russia as a selected enemy the US Army, with its expanding budget and end-strength has no important raison d'ętre , and what will the Borg do about that? First we can expect a large increase in the "Russia-bad" propaganda, similar to that on Iran (the greatest state sponsor of this and that). So I suppose Bolton is busy on his back-channel, etc. ..."
"... Between the end of Peace of Vienna and the start of Peace of Yalta there was a 50-year interval - filled with 2 world wars. Let us hope it be different this time. ..."
"... My biggest concern remains that Bibi's support itself will not guarantee acquiescence from the ultra-nationalist elements in Israel and their supporters elsewhere, who want to drag the US into the war. If the folks that carried out Khan Sheikhoun & other false flag CW attacks can be controlled, peace may have a chance. Otherwise, Trump's hand could still be forced. ..."
"... A stroke of genius. Bolton either demonstrates his obedience or is sacked, along with most of other neocons, for trying to spike the upcoming Putin summit. ..."
Jun 28, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

(editorial)

On a gestalt basis it seems to me from all the bits and pieces of information and rumor that DJT is attempting "The Deal of the Century!" (an episode or two of his soon to be award winning series on the subject of "The Greatest President.")

Russian cooperation in this is clearly needed. Trump is blessedly lacking in ideological fervor. His Deplorable base is also a bit short on ideology being focused on wages, prices, taxes and other everyday living issues. Their patriotism expresses itself in devotion to the flag and the anthem and a willingness to serve in the armed forces, something increasingly absent in the "resistance."

Trump has a free hand from his base to negotiate peaceful coexistence with Russia, but he nevertheless must successfully deal with the passion of the neocon wing of the Borg (foreign policy establishment). They still swoon at the thought of the ongoing renewal of the Cold War.

John Bolton is an arch-neocon, a neocon's neocon. Trump has sent him to Moscow to arrange an agenda, date and location for a meeting with Vladimir Putin. IMO this is a stroke of genius. What it does is put an enemy of good US-Russia relations in charge of arranging the schedule for discussions to improve US-Russia relations. In LBJ's vulgarism, Bolton is going to be inside the tent peeing out rather than outside peeing in. Having arranged the meeting, he will be personally invested in its success. How sweet that is!

Trumps is IMO trying for a grand ME bargain to be achieved with Russian help:

  1. Peace in Syria in the context of abandonment of regime change. Trump the pragmatist recognizes that the R+6 forces have won the civil war and, therefore he wishes to accept the sunk costs of previous American ineptitude in Syria and to walk away. US Embassy Amman has signaled to the FSA rebels in SW Syria that they should not expect the US to defend them. This is a traditional American stab in the back for guerrilla allies but the warning indicates to me that some group in the US Government (probably the CIA) has enough conscience to want to give warning. As soon as that warning was issued the rate of surrenders to the SAA rose.
  2. The US has thus made it clear that the SAA and Russian forces in Syria have a free hand in the SW and it seems that Israeli air and missile attacks are unlikely against the SW offensive. This has been insured through a Russian mandate that Hizbullah and IRGC dominated Shia militias stay out of the fight in Deraa and Quneitra Provinces.
  3. The Egyptians have been talking to Hamas about their willingness to enter into a hudna (religiously sanctioned truce) with Israel. Hamas has frequently offered this before. Such truces are renewable and are often for 10 years. Kushner's team thinks it has attained Natanyahhu's support for this. The deal would supposedly include; a Gaza-Egyptian industrial zone in the area of Raffa, an airport, a seaport. In return Hamas would be expected to police the truce from their side of the border. People on SST who have deep access in Israel doubt the sincerity of apparent Israeli assent, but there is little doubt I think that DJT considers this part of the Grand Bargain he is attempting to forge.

Nowhere in any of this is anything concerning Iran and I assume that regime change remains the policy. Nor is there anything about Saudi Arabia and the UAE's mercenary manned war in Yemen. Ah, well, pilgrims, everything in its time. pl

Sid Finster , 9 hours ago

People want to believe so badly. I also want to believe, but I live in the real world. What happened the last time Trump made noises about leaving Syria to its own devices, most recently in April? Instant false flag, that's what. With Trump, it's worked twice already, I see no reason that it will not work a third or fourth time, or as often as needed.
Don Bacon , 9 hours ago
Without Russia as a selected enemy the US Army, with its expanding budget and end-strength has no important raison d'ętre , and what will the Borg do about that? First we can expect a large increase in the "Russia-bad" propaganda, similar to that on Iran (the greatest state sponsor of this and that). So I suppose Bolton is busy on his back-channel, etc.
Pat Lang Mod -> Don Bacon , 9 hours ago
I suppose you mean the US Armed Forces, not the US Army.
Don Bacon -> Pat Lang , 6 hours ago
No, I mean the Army is especially invested in Europe and has been. I attended C&GSC at the peak of Vietnam and in exercises they were still mostly concerned with the Fulda Gap, division trains, etc. Big Army. Similar to how Army is going now, back to their roots so to speak. Even when they claimed they were short of funds, they found a way to send forces to Europe based on the claims that after Crimea, Russia was (and is) a threat to. . .the U.S.?

Peace with Russia would be a severe blow to Army especially with the shift to Indo-Pacific which involves Navy and Marines, and Army not much. I know Army was greatly involved with island operations in WWII, but China is not Japan regarding imperialism, IMO, and anyhow island invasions are not popular in Army.

So I look for a beefed up "Russia threat" campaign to counter Trump, and insider Bolton to be a big part of it.

Terra Cotta Woolpuller -> Pat Lang , 4 hours ago
Good analysis of the political implications of having Bolton establishing a summit as it worked with Pompeo. Always keep your friends close and your enemies closer good way to clean up the nest of venomous asps.
Michael Stojanovic , 9 hours ago
Qatar/Turkey may be an impediment/wild card, given it's Muslim brotherhood connections and leanings and strong backing for Hamas.
Pat Lang Mod -> Michael Stojanovic , 8 hours ago
It seems that Hamas has agreed.
Michael Stojanovic -> Pat Lang , 6 hours ago
Gen Sisi must have made an offer too good to resist. We know the House of Saud will finance it. Are they going to political legitimatize Hamas, turn Gaza in a statelet ? Perhaps Hamas sees, or is being threaten with the money spigot being turned off ? The only way to get money will be their share of offshore Natural Gas ? All for Hamas perhaps ? Nothing buys peace faster then lining a whole lot of pockets. With more money and Airports and a Shipping port, opens dangerous doors. Is Israel ready for that ? How will that be monitored ? So many damn questions. This may prove more problematic then the status quo, in the long run. Something does have to be done, the conditions in Gaza are unacceptable.
smoothieX12 . , 10 hours ago
Excellent analysis. In related news, a week or so ago semi-official Russian Vzglyad made a first media shot across the bow for Iran in which it stressed that the manner of Iran's "presence" in Syria is a complicating factor.
Babak Makkinejad -> smoothieX12 . , 9 hours ago
Russia cannot dislodge Iran out of Syria. And why should she try? And to what purpose?

Is there a new ABM Treaty in the works? Another SALT? Another Peace of Yalta?

smoothieX12 . -> Babak Makkinejad , 8 hours ago
Russia doesn't want to "dislodge" Iran from Syria but she needs Iran out of the border area with Israel. This is the key to a new arrangement, including, in the long run, Iran's security.

Is there a new ABM Treaty in the works? Another SALT? Another Peace of Yalta?

First two are important but are not clear and present danger for Russia for a number of reasons. Militarization of space is more important now. The last point, however, is extremely important because either there will be some kind of new geopolitical arrangement or we will see probability of a global military conflict grow exponentially.

Babak Makkinejad -> smoothieX12 . , 7 hours ago
Iranians do not need to be at the border area. All they need is to deploy their true and tested method of arming Syria with tens of thousands of precision rockets aimed at Haifa and Tel-Aviv. It worked for North Koreans.

No global peace is in the works.

Between the end of Peace of Vienna and the start of Peace of Yalta there was a 50-year interval - filled with 2 world wars. Let us hope it be different this time.

smoothieX12 . -> Babak Makkinejad , 5 hours ago
Between the end of Peace of Vienna and the start of Peace of Yalta there
was a 50-year interval - filled with 2 world wars. Let us hope it be
different this time.

It must be different, plus I disagree with historic parallel--two entirely different paradigms both in warfare, geopolitical balance and media.

Barbara Ann , 10 hours ago
Well I certainly wish The Greatest President luck. Who knows, I'm done underestimating the guy.

My biggest concern remains that Bibi's support itself will not guarantee acquiescence from the ultra-nationalist elements in Israel and their supporters elsewhere, who want to drag the US into the war. If the folks that carried out Khan Sheikhoun & other false flag CW attacks can be controlled, peace may have a chance. Otherwise, Trump's hand could still be forced.

The point of maximum danger appears to be at hand, given your characterization of the Daraa op as "betting the farm". Today's grant of new powers to the OPCW to apportion blame (designed to side-step the Russian veto at the UNSC) now means this body can effectively determine casus belli . Let us pray the OPCW will not have reason to exercise its new powers in Syria.

Tony , 11 hours ago
Let the hand wringing begin...
https://www.bbc.com/news/wo...
EEngineer , 12 hours ago
A stroke of genius. Bolton either demonstrates his obedience or is sacked, along with most of other neocons, for trying to spike the upcoming Putin summit.

On topic #2. If the SAA isn't feeling it's oats by now, forcing them fight a major battle that culminates a campaign by themselves would seem to be the ideal way to exorcise any remaining self doubts and engender a lasting esprit de corps. Stupid is what stupid does... Once these guys finish up in the SW and head east enforce it'll be show time.

[Jun 28, 2018] If Putin's behavior in the near abroad makes him a "thug," what can we say about Bush, Obama and Trump?

Jun 28, 2018 | www.unz.com

JoaoAlfaiate , June 5, 2018 at 12:52 pm GMT

@Quartermaster

" Putin has invaded Ukraine, stealing the Crimea, and attempting to gain a land bridge by backing a fake revolt in the Donbas with Russian troops, mercenaries, and equipment."

Of course Russia has strategic interests in the Ukraine and the the Crimea is virtually 100% Russian speaking. The Russians remember WW2 and the 20 million Russian dead inflicted upon them by western Europeans.

If Putin's behavior in the near abroad makes him a "thug," what can we say about Bush, Obama and Trump?

Bragadocious , June 5, 2018 at 2:14 pm GMT
I find it interesting how while the neocons demonize Putin and are trying to start WW3, Netanyahu and Putin seem to get along fine. This suggests that the neocons really have something else in mind besides towing the Israeli line. Namely, keeping the American public in a state of confusion and acquiescence and ensuring the endless flow of weapons to their favorite ethnostate.
Curmudgeon , June 5, 2018 at 3:23 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

Putin is just another thug that has imperial desires and is willing to steal his people blind to realize them.

Other than reliable sources like John Brennan, James Clapper, the New York Times and the Washington Post , I presume you have evidence to share of this

Putin has invaded Ukraine,

and this.

stealing the Crimea

Two referenda are "stealing"?

a fake revolt in the Donbas with Russian troops, mercenaries, and equipment.

Well, the dead people in Donbas, and their families, would probably disagree it was fake, particularly since the victim of the US coup d'etat (with its mercenaries) and rightful President of Ukraine, Victor Yanukovich, was from Donbas. As for the allegations of Russian troops and equipment, I return to my request for evidence.

Russian troops shot down MH-17. deal with it.

Yup, and Assad gassed his own people, so did Saddam, six kajillion were gassed in a 2 car garage located next to crematoria at Auschwitz using explosive bug spray, and the Easter Bunny leaves chocolate eggs at my house every year.

[Jun 28, 2018] More trade with Russia makes subjugation of Russia impossible

Jun 28, 2018 | www.unz.com

jilles dykstra , June 5, 2018 at 7:42 am GMT

Antony C. Sutton, ´Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution', 1974 New Rochelle, N.Y.
describes how Wall Street supported bolshevism in order to prevent that German, suppose also Dutch and other, trade, with Russia was resumed.
WII and the aftermath created the Atlantic alliance.

Just yesterday Pieter Hoekstra, USA ambassador in the Netherlands, stated that Russia should be punished for MH17 by more sanctions, no new gas pipeline from Russia to Germany.

What he did not say that this implies our buying of USA gas, 20% more expensive.

The MH17 show, in my opinion is run like the Sept 11 show...

The USA fear about Russia and the EU member states seems to be twofold:
- more trade with Russia makes subjugation of Russia impossible
- more trade with Russia, and the railway connections with China, threaten to turn the USA into an economic backwater

Anon [411] Disclaimer , June 5, 2018 at 9:18 am GMT
You seem to be obsessed with neocons, jews etc. Russia is arch-nemesis of the West long before them. Or we should admit Napoleon and Charles XII of Sweden were manipulated by Masons or Knight Templars.

Since Western Capitalism arose, Russia stands as anti-system to the West. As a model of decent society that is possible without usury, exploitation, violence, enslaving and pillaging other nations – i.e. outside imperialism-colonialism model. Powers that control the West live in constant fear since with mighty Russia their time is always limited, and their power is finite.

Jake , June 5, 2018 at 1:05 pm GMT
@Anon

"Or we should admit Napoleon and Charles XII of Sweden were manipulated by Masons or Knight Templars."

They were.

Of course, the Freemasons also penetrated Russia under Peter the Great and were necessary to all revolutionary activity in the Russian Empire from at least the 1820s.

[Jun 28, 2018] The neocons believe in only two things. First, that the United States is the sole world superpower, given license by something like a Divine Entity to exercise global leadership by force if necessary

Jun 28, 2018 | www.unz.com

A more constructive new on neocons is as well-paid MIC lobbyists. The fact that many Jews are talented lobbyists can explain the concentration of this particular nationality far better, although initially neocons really were mostly turn coat Trotskyites.

Greg Bacon , Website June 5, 2018 at 10:30 am GMT

The neocons believe in only two things. First, that the United States is the sole world superpower, given license by something like a Divine Entity to exercise global leadership by force if necessary.

Sounds very similar to another nation that rules over the USA and uses our military for their private merc army, Israel, who claims they have a divine right to Palestine and can kill as many Palestinians, Lebanese and Syrians as they want.
After all, their G-d declared them to be his pet project and you don't want to go against G-d, do you?

Not all Jews are neocons, but damn near every neocon is a Jew.

RebelWriter , June 5, 2018 at 11:47 am GMT
@Anonymous

Irving Krystol, the "Godfather of Neoconservatism," is just one example. If you search YouTube you can find a Brian Lamb Booknotes episode where he interviews Krystol about this book, "Neoconservatism; an Autobiography."

He admits in this interview, as well as in the book, that he and most of the early neocons were former Trotskyites.

gsjackson , June 5, 2018 at 11:47 am GMT
@Anonymous

The first generation of neocons -- Irving Kristol, Nathan Glazer, Daniel Bell, Gertrude Himmelfarb, etc. Maybe Norman Podhoretz, but he was always more of a 'main chance' guy.

The rallying cry of world revolution has filtered down after a fashion to their heirs. It's still all war all the time. And at the end of the day, when the wars have subdued the planet, who will be chosen to grasp the reins of world government? One guess.

Florin N , June 5, 2018 at 1:57 pm GMT
@Colin Wright

Read this re the origin of the neocon movement:

http://www.voltairenet.org/article178638.html

It was and is Jewish and Zionist at its core, without any question.

Wilton was a highly respected journalist whose claims seem to be reflexted in statements by various, and equally maligned/suppressed writers of the time.

https://archive.org/details/TheRulersOfRussia-AmericanEdition-ByRevDenisFahey

Of course, any source is immediately decried as 'anti-Semitic' which is a neat way to avoid the question of the truth of the matter

Tarheel American , June 5, 2018 at 2:46 pm GMT
@Anonymous

It's not quite a secret. The fact is just hidden by the neocons and their enablers. They used to trumpet it, though.

There's a quite robust body of evidence, including the principals themselves celebrating their communism, that shows the founders of neo-conservatism, Irving Kristol, et al were communists.

Moreover, they were communists of the international revolution variety–the flavor known as Trotskyism.

Here's Irving Kristol, the godfather of neoconservatism, in an article for the NY Times, titled "Memoirs of a Trotskyist:"

"I was graduated from City College in the spring of 1940, and the honor I most prized was the fact that I was a member in good standing of the Young People's Socialist League (Fourth International). This organization was commonly, and correctly, designated as Trotskyist (not "Trotskyite," which was a term used only by the official Communists, or "Stalinists" as we called them, of the day)"

Here's a chart, helpfully prepared by the Washington Post, tracing the genealogy of neocons:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/02/01/GR2008020102389.html

Here's a good PBS movie lauding these "intellectuals:"

http://www.pbs.org/arguing/about.html

Colin Wright , Website June 5, 2018 at 4:21 pm GMT
@Florin N

'Read this re the origin of the neocon movement '

To some extent you're mistaking your target here.

I'll readily agree the neo-cons amount to a Zionist cabal bent on perverting US conservatism into a tool to serve Israel.

On the other hand, I think that spectacular figures dating from 1920 concerning Jews and Bolshevism should be checked.

Colin Wright , Website June 5, 2018 at 4:30 pm GMT
@Crawfurdmuir

This is an irritating aspect of it all.

On the one hand, it has lately become common to hide the Judaism of various figures; 'I wonder if he's Jewish' can turn into quite a hunt.

On the other hand, some parties seem to label all and sundry as 'Jews.'

Speaking for myself, I wish I just didn't care. Certainly as of twenty years ago, I could have honestly said I didn't. However, Israel and the fact of our support for her, and the fact that most Jews ultimately support Israel to one degree or another, make the question relevant.

jack daniels , June 5, 2018 at 5:14 pm GMT
Jewish sympathy for Communism causes and is caused by Jewish antipathy to nationalism on the part of gentiles. Many articles written during the Cold War attest to the Jewish fear that the demise of Communism would unleash anti-Semitism. For example a piece in the Washington Post by Joseph Kraft of the ADA on the occasion of the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia advised non-intervention on the grounds that Communism wasn't so bad: it kept a lid on ancient ethnic hatreds. I have heard this line from many apologists for eastern European Communism.

The anti-nationalist agenda dovetails with the liberal views of Jews on social issues, since the EU and NATO have become enforcers of political correctness, while the politically incorrect traditional attitudes of Slavic countries would likely be defended by nationalist parties. Many Jews would like to see ethnic Russians and their Orthodox church again subjugated or at least marginalized with a fellow Jew like Garry Kasparov in charge, and they aren't too keen on Catholicism either.

It's unfortunate that the role of ethnic animosity in the panic over detente cannot be mentioned in polite society. It is the only factor that explains the datum of near-universal Jewish antipathy to Russia beginning after the collapse of Communism. I hope this taboo is successfully challenged going forward, since, as a Christian, I am grateful for Russia as the only Christian power left in the world.

[Jun 28, 2018] Did Senator Warner and Comey 'Collude' on Russia-gate by Ray McGovern

Notable quotes:
"... The U.S. was in talks for a deal with Julian Assange but then FBI Director James Comey ordered an end to negotiations after Assange offered to prove Russia was not involved in the DNC leak, as Ray McGovern explains. ..."
"... Special to Consortium News ..."
"... The report does not say what led Comey to intervene to ruin the talks with Assange. But it came after Assange had offered to "provide technical evidence and discussion regarding who did not engage in the DNC releases," Solomon quotes WikiLeaks' intermediary with the government as saying. It would be a safe assumption that Assange was offering to prove that Russia was not WikiLeaks' source of the DNC emails. ..."
"... If that was the reason Comey and Warner ruined the talks, as is likely, it would reveal a cynical decision to put U.S. intelligence agents and highly sophisticated cybertools at risk, rather than allow Assange to at least attempt to prove that Russia was not behind the DNC leak. ..."
"... On March 31, 2017, though, WikiLeaks released the most damaging disclosure up to that point from what it called "Vault 7" -- a treasure trove of CIA cybertools leaked from CIA files. This disclosure featured the tool "Marble Framework," which enabled the CIA to hack into computers, disguise who hacked in, and falsely attribute the hack to someone else by leaving so-called tell-tale signs -- like Cyrillic, for example. The CIA documents also showed that the "Marble" tool had been employed in 2016. ..."
"... In fact, VIPS and independent forensic investigators, have performed what former FBI Director Comey -- at first inexplicably, now not so inexplicably -- failed to do when the so-called "Russian hack" of the DNC was first reported. In July 2017 VIPS published its key findings with supporting data. ..."
"... Why did then FBI Director Comey fail to insist on getting direct access to the DNC computers in order to follow best-practice forensics to discover who intruded into the DNC computers? (Recall, at the time Sen. John McCain and others were calling the "Russian hack" no less than an "act of war.") A 7th grader can now figure that out. ..."
Jun 27, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Did Sen. Warner and Comey 'Collude' on Russia-gate? June 27, 2018 • 68 Comments

The U.S. was in talks for a deal with Julian Assange but then FBI Director James Comey ordered an end to negotiations after Assange offered to prove Russia was not involved in the DNC leak, as Ray McGovern explains.

By Ray McGovern
Special to Consortium News

An explosive report by investigative journalist John Solomon on the opinion page of Monday's edition of The Hill sheds a bright light on how Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) and then-FBI Director James Comey collaborated to prevent WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange from discussing "technical evidence ruling out certain parties [read Russia]" in the controversial leak of Democratic Party emails to WikiLeaks during the 2016 election.

A deal that was being discussed last year between Assange and U.S. government officials would have given Assange "limited immunity" to allow him to leave the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where he has been exiled for six years. In exchange, Assange would agree to limit through redactions "some classified CIA information he might release in the future," according to Solomon, who cited "interviews and a trove of internal DOJ documents turned over to Senate investigators." Solomon even provided a copy of the draft immunity deal with Assange.

But Comey's intervention to stop the negotiations with Assange ultimately ruined the deal, Solomon says, quoting "multiple sources." With the prospective agreement thrown into serious doubt, Assange "unleashed a series of leaks that U.S. officials say damaged their cyber warfare capabilities for a long time to come." These were the Vault 7 releases, which led then CIA Director Mike Pompeo to call WikiLeaks "a hostile intelligence service."

Solomon's report provides reasons why Official Washington has now put so much pressure on Ecuador to keep Assange incommunicado in its embassy in London.

Assange: Came close to a deal with the U.S. (Photo credit: New Media Days / Peter Erichsen)

The report does not say what led Comey to intervene to ruin the talks with Assange. But it came after Assange had offered to "provide technical evidence and discussion regarding who did not engage in the DNC releases," Solomon quotes WikiLeaks' intermediary with the government as saying. It would be a safe assumption that Assange was offering to prove that Russia was not WikiLeaks' source of the DNC emails.

If that was the reason Comey and Warner ruined the talks, as is likely, it would reveal a cynical decision to put U.S. intelligence agents and highly sophisticated cybertools at risk, rather than allow Assange to at least attempt to prove that Russia was not behind the DNC leak.

The greater risk to Warner and Comey apparently would have been if Assange provided evidence that Russia played no role in the 2016 leaks of DNC documents.

Missteps and Stand Down

In mid-February 2017, in a remarkable display of naiveté, Adam Waldman, Assange's pro bono attorney who acted as the intermediary in the talks, asked Warner if the Senate Intelligence Committee staff would like any contact with Assange to ask about Russia or other issues. Waldman was apparently oblivious to Sen. Warner's stoking of Russia-gate.

Warner contacted Comey and, invoking his name, instructed Waldman to "stand down and end the discussions with Assange," Waldman told Solomon. The "stand down" instruction "did happen," according to another of Solomon's sources with good access to Warner. However, Waldman's counterpart attorney David Laufman , an accomplished federal prosecutor picked by the Justice Departent to work the government side of the CIA-Assange fledgling deal, told Waldman, "That's B.S. You're not standing down, and neither am I."

But the damage had been done. When word of the original stand-down order reached WikiLeaks, trust evaporated, putting an end to two months of what Waldman called "constructive, principled discussions that included the Department of Justice."

The two sides had come within inches of sealing the deal. Writing to Laufman on March 28, 2017, Waldman gave him Assange's offer to discuss "risk mitigation approaches relating to CIA documents in WikiLeaks' possession or control, such as the redaction of Agency personnel in hostile jurisdictions," in return for "an acceptable immunity and safe passage agreement."

On March 31, 2017, though, WikiLeaks released the most damaging disclosure up to that point from what it called "Vault 7" -- a treasure trove of CIA cybertools leaked from CIA files. This disclosure featured the tool "Marble Framework," which enabled the CIA to hack into computers, disguise who hacked in, and falsely attribute the hack to someone else by leaving so-called tell-tale signs -- like Cyrillic, for example. The CIA documents also showed that the "Marble" tool had been employed in 2016.

Misfeasance or Malfeasance

Comey: Ordered an end to talks with Assange.

Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, which includes among our members two former Technical Directors of the National Security Agency, has repeatedly called attention to its conclusion that the DNC emails were leaked -- not "hacked" by Russia or anyone else (and, later, our suspicion that someone may have been playing Marbles, so to speak).

In fact, VIPS and independent forensic investigators, have performed what former FBI Director Comey -- at first inexplicably, now not so inexplicably -- failed to do when the so-called "Russian hack" of the DNC was first reported. In July 2017 VIPS published its key findings with supporting data.

Two month later , VIPS published the results of follow-up experiments conducted to test the conclusions reached in July.

Why did then FBI Director Comey fail to insist on getting direct access to the DNC computers in order to follow best-practice forensics to discover who intruded into the DNC computers? (Recall, at the time Sen. John McCain and others were calling the "Russian hack" no less than an "act of war.") A 7th grader can now figure that out.

Asked on January 10, 2017 by Senate Intelligence Committee chair Richard Burr (R-NC) whether direct access to the servers and devices would have helped the FBI in their investigation, Comey replied : "Our forensics folks would always prefer to get access to the original device or server that's involved, so it's the best evidence."

At that point, Burr and Warner let Comey down easy. Hence, it should come as no surprise that, according to one of John Solomon's sources, Sen. Warner (who is co-chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee) kept Sen. Burr apprised of his intervention into the negotiation with Assange, leading to its collapse.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. He was an Army Infantry/Intelligence officer and then a CIA analyst for a total of 30 years and prepared and briefed, one-on-one, the President's Daily Brief from 1981 to 1985.

If you enjoyed this original article please consider making a donation to Consortium News so we can bring you more stories like this one.

[Jun 28, 2018] Putin said that Russia has been blocked from participating in the ongoing international investigation into the 2014 downing of flight MH17, which Russia has been recently blamed for

Jun 28, 2018 | www.unz.com

tac , June 6, 2018 at 6:49 pm GMT

@Quartermaster

Russian troops shot down MH-17. deal with it.

From Putin (in an earlier interview in Austria):

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

Truly sensational new document leak confirms Kiev's direct responsibility for shooting down the Malesian Airlines flight MH17 in Donbass on July 17, 2014. Ukrainian top secret official documents show us that the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) was ordered to hide all evidence from the Ukrainian responsibility and especially everything which could prove Ukrainian air forces involvement in executed secret state terrorism operation.
The documents are leaked by Ukrainian official to the Sovershenno Sekretno newspaper. Russian and English translations from the orginal articles are available with copies of the leaked documents, which show written orders given by Ukrainian top officials concerning concealing of the operation, shooting down the flight MH17 .

http://www.vietatoparlare.it/leaked-documents-ukrainian-air-forces-shot-down-mh17-confirms-conspiracy-and-guilt/

This article first published on July 30, 2014 contradicts the substance of the recently released Dutch Safety Board Report. We are bringing it to the attention of our readers in view of the soon to be released BBC TV documentary, which suggests that the MH17 was shot down by a Ukrainian jet fighter.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/german-pilot-speaks-out-shocking-analysis-of-the-shooting-down-of-malaysian-mh17/5394111

Although the Dutch report concluded that the Russian-made BUK surface-to-air missile with a 9N314M warhead brought down the Boeing 777, it did not mention which side was responsible for firing the missile (International Business Times, March 8, 2016

The evidence amply confirms that Malaysian Airlines MH17 was not brought down by a surface to air missile. It was brought down by military aircraft .

http://www.globalresearch.ca/support-mh17-truth-osce-monitors-identify-shrapnel-like-holes-indicating-shelling-no-firm-evidence-of-a-missile-attack/5394324

Joint Investigation Team Includes, Excludes Surprising Members

With the Dutch leading the investigation, the logic being that the flight originated from the Netherlands and the majority of the passengers were Dutch, it has formed a Joint Investigation Team (JIT). At the onset of its creation it seemed obvious that Malaysia would too be included, considering it lost the second largest number of citizens to the disaster and the plane itself was registered in Malaysia. Instead, JIT would end up comprised of Belgium, Ukraine, and Australia, specifically excluding Malaysia.

Joint Investigation Team Includes, Excludes Surprising Members

With the Dutch leading the investigation, the logic being that the flight originated from the Netherlands and the majority of the passengers were Dutch, it has formed a Joint Investigation Team (JIT). At the onset of its creation it seemed obvious that Malaysia would too be included, considering it lost the second largest number of citizens to the disaster and the plane itself was registered in Malaysia. Instead, JIT would end up comprised of Belgium, Ukraine , and Australia, specifically excluding Malaysia.

Malaysia was both surprised and has protested its exclusion from JIT , and has repeatedly expressed a desire to be included directly in the investigation.

https://journal-neo.org/2014/11/28/mh17-malaysia-s-barring-from-investigation-reeks-of-cover-up/

Carroll Price , June 12, 2018 at 12:07 am GMT
@tac

I will never understand why Russia was foolish enough to turn the plane's black box over (with no strings attached) to Dutch authorities. You would think they would have, at the minimum maintained physical possession, while allowing one or more neutral parties to examine and publish it's contents.

[Jun 28, 2018] China's Port In Sri Lanka's Is Good Business - The NYT's Report On It Is Propaganda

Jun 28, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Babyl-on , Jun 27, 2018 10:01:20 AM | 9

China and the B&R have been topics of interest to me for a while, B&R I have follow from its first announcement in 2013. (I have often found it curious that B&R and the US Imperial "Pivot to Asia" announced by Obama came so close together in time.)

I think it is a mistaken point of view that accuses China of "economic imperialism." The big problem with Western analysis, in my view, is that it assumes a zero sum game, a game where trade is a weapon in hegemonic zero sum game of monopoly control of markets. China does not seek hegemony commercially or in any other way. China has no interest - as does the Imperial US - to take over the world. Building a community of common destiny is not "Imperial."

I would urge everyone to spend time watching the comment and analysis shows on CGTN - compare them to CNN and you'll see the Chinese "censored" news is so much more informative and offers a wider range of views.

We already live in a multi-polar world, China is very important, so is Russia and India. If you read the international press the impression you get is that all these countries plus Europe and even Canada now are trying to trade and get along while they all have to manage the burden of the US military interventions and aggression, the world's biggest problem for the vast majority of the 7+ billion people, over half of global land mass is not trade it is how to manage the threats of the Imperial US. Today without question the SCO is more important than the G7-6-8 but of course it is almost impossible to find coverage about the organization even in the most progressive of press outlets.

The so called left in the West needs to get over its elevation of democracy to that of a timeless law of nature (there is no such thing)- that "free speech" supposedly suppressed in China negates China bringing 700+ million people out of poverty, something no nation or culture has ever achieved in human history.

Please at least try to find some survey courses on Chinese history, nothing in it would suggest China has any interest what-so-ever in Western style Imperialism. China spent thousands of years focusing on uniting China from the 56+ ethnic groups that make up modern China not project power elsewhere.

Progressives are still living in a unipolar world they seem to know almost nothing about China especially, but Russia, India and more. The progressive view is limited to zero sum geopolitical hegemony much of its analysis is based on analysis of Zbigniew Brzezinski in the 70s and 80s.

China and the rest of the world has a far different view of Central Asia as a place of commerce and trade, not territory essential to global domination as Brzezinski calculated.

I hope to see more China coverage here and everywhere, covering China opens thought to question long held underlying assumptions.

There is no god - there is lust for power. No creator "endowed" us with "rights" or anything else - we have them and something better "The Will to Power" without mystical permission.

psychohistorian , Jun 27, 2018 10:58:14 AM | 10
Thanks for the posting b about ongoing NYT propaganda

Another perspective on this is that China focuses on economic infrastructure while I read that other Sri Lanka debt is for cricket stadium and such.

[Jun 27, 2018] Putin is rather philo-semitic

Jun 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

JohnnyD , June 5, 2018 at 8:08 pm GMT

I think it's important to point out that Putin is rather philo-semitic. As evident by his friendship with Roman Abramovich, Putin is ok with Jewish oligarchs, as long as they play by his rules ( http://www.unz.com/isteve/israel-admits-a-refugee ). Also, despite being allies with Syria and Iran, Putin has always been on relatively good terms with Israel and its leaders, especially Avigdor Lieberman.

Stephen Sniegoski has an excellent article about Putin's relationship with Israel ( https://www.unz.com/article/russia-and-israel-the-unmentioned-relationship/ ).

Furthermore, Russia has its own laws against Holocaust Denial ( https://forward.com/news/breaking-news/197664/holocaust-deniers-in-russia-now-face-five-years-in/ ).

Ironically, Mark Weber, whose work Mr. Giraldi links to, could be arrested in Putin's Russia. Thus, the idea that Putin is hostile to Jewish interests is absurd.

renfro , June 6, 2018 at 6:31 pm GMT
@JohnnyD

I think it's important to point out that Putin is rather philo-semitic

and

Furthermore, Russia has its own laws against Holocaust Denial ( https://forward.com/news/breaking-news/197664/holocaust-deniers-in-russia-now-face-five-years-in/ ).

First, Putin is a pragmatist and nationalist ..Russia is his only favoritism.

Second, due to Jewish narcissism they think the law was all about them. It wasn't. It doesn't mention the holocaust. It says :

'Denial of Nazi crimes and "wittingly spreading false information about the activity of the USSR during the years of World War Two"

This was Putin's "Polish Lite' law ..i.e ..divorcing Russia from any crimes during WWII and throwing all blame on the Nazis for any war crimes . 'like' killing Jews. Its his 'balancing act' after also condemning anti-Islam attitudes .

Putin is nipping in the bud any and all ethnic attitudes that could cause the same domestic and political 'unrest' that is now rampant in Europe and the US.

Which is why he also did this: .no 'ethnic ' or 'foreign' agents are going to get a foothold in Russia .

Russia Deports Israeli Rabbi, Second Deportation of Chabad Rabbi in 2017
For the second time this year, Russian authorities have ordered out of the country a foreign Chabad rabbi who had lived there for years.

https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/russia-deports-israeli-rabbi-second-deportation-of-chabad-rabbi-in-2017-1.5474750

"This week, a Moscow district court ordered Yosef Khersonsky, an Israeli who heads one of the capital's communities, to leave the Russian Federation in connection with his "setting up without permission a for-profit foreign entity," the RIA Novosti news agency reported. The court did not specify the nature of the entity.
In its ruling against Ari Edelkopf, the Krasnodar Court of Appeals accepted the determination of a Sochi tribunal that Edelkopf, who had been working as Chabad's emissary to the city, was a threat to national security
Approximately half of the 70 rabbis working for the Chabad-affiliated Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia are foreign. At least eight of them have been denied permission to work in Russia over the past decade, Gorin told JTA in March
Under legislation from 2012 that imposed major limitations on the work of groups with foreign funding, a Jewish charitable group from Ryazan, near Moscow, was flagged in 2015 by the Justice Ministry as a "foreign agent" over its funding from the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee and its reproduction in a newsletter of political op-eds that appeared in the L'chaim Jewish weekly
Last year, a court in Sverdlovsk convicted a teacher, Semen Tykman, of inciting hatred among students at his Chabad school against Germans and propagating the idea of Jewish superiority. Authorities raided his school and another one in 2015, confiscating textbooks, which some Russian Jews suggested was to create a semblance of equivalence with Russia's crackdown on radical Islam.

[Jun 27, 2018] How Washington Has Lost Its Way

This is a very superficial view. Israeli interests are taken into account as long as they are coincide with interests of military-industrial complex and the Us imperial/neoliberal foreign policy agenda. There is some flexibility, of course, and Israel might be able in certain cases do push more, but for example to say that invasion of Iraq was done due to Israeli lobbying would be inaccurate. yes neocons in the US government were active, but that main reason was access to oil which considered with Israeli geopolitical ambitions in the region.
Jun 27, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

One might well think that the only serious foreign policy imperative of the Donald Trump administration is to defend Israel. A president elected because he promised to put United States' interests first has turned out to be little different than his predecessors, bowing to the power of various lobbies and constituencies to carry out their wishes while simultaneously pretending to be serving poorly defined policies to promote the security and well-being of the American people.

Israel possesses, to be sure, the most powerful foreign policy lobby operating not only in the United States but as well in Western Europe and Australasia. When Israel makes its incessant demands, politicians from Washington to Canberra and Wellington pause to listen. In Britain, fully 80% of Conservative parliamentarians are members of the Conservative Friends of Israel.

Israel benefits from a large, influential and wealthy community of diaspora Jews that is willing to do its bidding and which also possesses easy access to the media and to politicians, many of whom are more than willing to be corrupted by money. This has led to the creation of an "Israeli narrative," most particularly in the United States, which glamorizes the state of Israel through the incessant reiteration of expressions like "the only democracy in the Middle East" and "America's best friend and closest ally," both of which assertions are completely false.

It should surprise no one that the Trump administration is packed with Israel-firsters from top to bottom. Those who deal with Israel directly – Ambassador David Friedman, Chief Middle East Negotiator Jason Greenblatt, and Special Envoy and son-in-law Jared Kushner are all Orthodox Jews with long standing ties to Israel and its leadership. They are major financial supporters of Israeli "charities," to include projects on the occupied West Bank, which are both illegal under international law and contrary to long established U.S. policy. It would seem, without being too hyperbolic, that Israeli interests are at least as important to them as are the American interests that they ostensibly represent and are being paid by the taxpayer to support.

Within the White House, there is virtually no pushback against Israeli pretensions even when American interests are being damaged. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has repeatedly voiced his support of the Jewish state and his animosity towards that state's enemy of choice Iran. National Security Adviser John Bolton, a long-time neoconservative, has never distanced himself in any way from complete identification with the policies being promoted by Israel and its increasingly right wing and racist governments. Donald Trump himself has declared that he will be the best president for Israel ever, a pledge that he has worked to honor by moving the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in spite of the damage that it does to actual regional American interests.

But the most vocal advocate for Israel within the Administration is Nikki Haley, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, who has consistently taken the hardest of all possible lines against Israel's claimed enemies while also fully endorsing the most brutal actions undertaken by the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Haley's most recent action reveals that the United States has truly lost its sense of direction and moral compass. If one were religious, it might be suggested that it has lost its soul.

Haley's most recent foray into her own style of what she might refer to as statesmanship came on June 1 st . Kuwait had brought a resolution to the United Nations Security Council to call on it to fulfil its responsibility to help protect the people of Gaza, who were being bombed, gassed and shot dead by Israeli Army sniper fire. Nikki Haley, however, was thinking of something quite different, a resolution she had drafted to denounce Hamas for the alleged volleys of rockets that were launched into adjacent Israeli controlled areas in response to the Israeli gunfire and bombings. Votes on the two resolutions followed, with Haley failing to obtain any votes on her resolution except her own.

Haley again voted alone when she vetoed the Kuwaiti resolution to protect the Palestinian people. And it was not Haley's first such bit of unilateralism. She had walked out of a previous Security Council meeting on Israel's killing of Palestinian protesters as a deliberate insult to their representative who had risen to begin to speak. Haley unfortunately represents America. America the home of the free and brave? Bullshit.

Tags: Israel

[Jun 27, 2018] jilles dykstra

Jun 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

Antony C. Sutton, ´Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution', 1974 New Rochelle, N.Y.
describes how Wall Street supported bolsjewism in order to prevent that German, suppose also Dutch and other, trade, with Russia was resumed.
WII and the aftermath created the Atlantic alliance.

Just yesterday Pieter Hoekstra, USA ambassador in the Netherlands, stated that Russia should be punished for MH17 by more sanctions, no new gas pipeline from Russia to Germany.

What he did not say that this implies our buying of USA gas, 20% more expensive. The MH17 show, in my opinion is run like the Sept 11 show. Or even the holocaust show, constant reminders.

The USA fear about Russia and the EU member states seems to be twofold:

Beckow , June 5, 2018 at 2:28 pm GMT

more trade with Russia, and the railway connections with China, threaten to turn the USA into an economic backwater

Precisely. US could eventually (20-30 years from now) turn into a country similar to many Latin American countries: rich in resources, demographically messy and ungovernable, weak infrastructure, but above all remote and quasi-provincial.

The 'Atlanticist' project is meant to forestall the provincial Latin American future. Washington does have some tools: dollar domination, military force, Hollywood, technology. But none of those are necessarily sustainable without also actively messing up Euro-Russia-China economic convergence. It might require a war to delay the inevitable slow descend into a backwater across the Atlantic.

[Jun 27, 2018] Iranian condensate will most likely replace US condensate to China as much as possible.

Jun 27, 2018 | peakoilbarrel.com

Kolbeinh x Ignored says: 06/27/2018 at 4:57 am

From the Bloomberg article: "The U.S. plans to speak with the governments of Turkey, India and China, all of which import Iranian oil, about finding other supplies."

Iranian condensate will most likely replace US condensate to China as much as possible. China is the key to if/when this harsh "embargo" of Iran will ease. They have the strength to stand up against the US and then others will follow suit (e.g. India). A barter system (goods vs. goods trade) or payment in yuan could probably be a good enough way to avoid american banking sanctions. But if China wants to stand up against US at this point is uncertain. If this strangling of Iran is highly successful, it is hard to see the rewards. A high oil price that will be the tipping point for the global economy in the wrong direction or indirectly (hopefully not directly – who needs another war now?) overthrow the Iranian government and thus the creation of new political problems in the country; a repeat of the Iraq experience almost. I almost forgot that there is the nuclear issue there as well, maybe that is also a driver

  1. Boomer II 06/26/2018 at 10:16 pm Reply

[Jun 27, 2018] Crawfurdmuir

Jun 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

says: June 5, 2018 at 3:50 pm GMT 100 Words

The Communist diaspora in Europe and America was also largely Jewish, including the cabal of founders of neoconservativism in New York City. The United States Communist Party was from the start predominantly Jewish. It was in the 1930s headed by Jew Earl Browder, grandfather of the current snake oil salesman Bill Browder, who has been sanctimoniously proclaiming his desire to punish Vladimir Putin for various alleged high crimes.

Earl Browder was not, so far as I know, born a Jew. While living in the Soviet Union he married a Russian Jewess named Raisa Berkman. One of their sons, Felix, married another Jewess, Eva Tislowitz, and Bill Browder was their son. He is matrilineally Jewish.

Apart from this minor quibble, the description of Bill Browder's career seems quite accurate.

[Jun 27, 2018] Disclaimer

Notable quotes:
"... Keep the fracturing United States together by focusing on an external aggressor. ..."
"... Keep the Europeans in line by making them afraid of the Russians ..."
"... Greed. Russia has natural resources and wishes to export them to competing markets, undercutting our Ruling Class's cut. ..."
"... Russia is traditionally white and nominally Christian, socially conservative. Leftists beat up on Russia as a proxy for beating up on traditional white Americans. ..."
"... With all due respect, current Russia-bashing in the US is not an issue of Jews vs non-Jews. It's more about the direct contradictions of the interests of the US as a country with those of the US as an Empire. ..."
"... as an Empire, the US does not tolerate anyone refusing to toe the line, be it Russia, China, Iran, Syria, or even Venezuela ..."
"... The fact that the US Empire is in decline makes its policy less and less rational, more and more hysterical. That's how all dominant Empires ended: not so much by being destroyed by opponents, but because of suicidal overreach. ..."
Jun 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

June 5, 2018 at 4:03 pm GMT • 200 Words There are probably five big reasons for all the Russia hate:

1. Keep the fracturing United States together by focusing on an external aggressor.

2. Keep the Europeans in line by making them afraid of the Russians .

3. This: "There are a huge number of cuckservatives who still think it is 1980. It isn't just neocons, but just about any cold-war cuckservative" -- geezer boomers who are having an end-of-life crisis.

4. Greed. Russia has natural resources and wishes to export them to competing markets, undercutting our Ruling Class's cut.

5. Russia is traditionally white and nominally Christian, socially conservative. Leftists beat up on Russia as a proxy for beating up on traditional white Americans. Back when Russia started their anti-gay thing, American leftists went nuts on them. Of course, Saudi Arabia is much worse but we didn't hear anything about them because they aren't white and being critical in such a case would be waycist.

AnonFromTN , June 5, 2018 at 7:29 pm GMT

With all due respect, current Russia-bashing in the US is not an issue of Jews vs non-Jews. It's more about the direct contradictions of the interests of the US as a country with those of the US as an Empire.

It is in the best interests of the US as a country to maintain good working relationship with Russia, China, and others, both to achieve economic prosperity and to solve complex international problems.

However, as an Empire, the US does not tolerate anyone refusing to toe the line, be it Russia, China, Iran, Syria, or even Venezuela .

The fact that the US Empire is in decline makes its policy less and less rational, more and more hysterical. That's how all dominant Empires ended: not so much by being destroyed by opponents, but because of suicidal overreach.

[Jun 27, 2018] WADA informer Rodchenkov 'attempted suicide' in Washington - source

Jun 27, 2018 | theduran.com

Reports have come in that WADA informer Rodchenkov, who fled Russia after allegedly committing crimes, has 'attempted suicide' in Washington.

You may remember Grigory Rodchenkov as the erstwhile head of Russia's Olympic anti-doping lab, before he resigned under shame, and fled to Washington, where he made his accusations of "state-sponsored doping" against the Russian Olympic committee.

His accusations, however, were DEMOLISHED by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), who ruled that Grigory Rodchenkov's evidence against Russian athletes was "hearsay with limited probative value."

Now, sources say that Rodchenkov has attempted suicide, Sputnik reports :
In 2016, Rodchenkov told The New York Times that at least 15 Russian Olympic medalists were part of an alleged state-run doping program, and his testimony served as a basis for the WADA independent commission's report on doping in Russian athletics. However, later he retracted a major part of his accusations against the Russian athletes. According to a source within the US law enforcement services, the informant tried to commit suicide on June 19 in his apartment in New York city.

[Jun 27, 2018] Immigration Western Wars and Imperial Exploitation Uproot Millions by James Petras

Jun 26, 2018 | www.unz.com

"Immigration" has become the dominant issue dividing Europe and the US, yet the most important matter which is driving millions to emigrate is overlooked is wars.

In this paper we will discuss the reasons behind the massification of immigration, focusing on several issues, namely (1) imperial wars (2) multi-national corporate expansion (3) the decline of the anti-war movements in the US and Western Europe (4) the weakness of the trade union and solidarity movements.

We will proceed by identifying the major countries affected by US and EU wars leading to massive immigration, and then turn to the western powers forcing refugees to 'follow' the flows of profits.

Imperial Wars and Mass Immigration

The US invasions and wars in Afghanistan and Iraq uprooted several million people, destroying their lives, families, livelihood, housing and communities and undermining there security.

As a result, most victims faced the choice of resistance or flight. Millions chose to flee to the West since the NATO countries would not bomb their residence in the US or Europe.

Others who fled to neighboring countries in the Middle East or Latin America were persecuted, or resided in countries too poor to offer them employment or opportunities for a livelihood.

Some Afghans fled to Pakistan or the Middle East but discovered that these regions were also subject to armed attacks from the West.

Iraqis were devastated by the western sanctions, invasion and occupation and fled to Europe and to a lesser degree the US , the Gulf states and Iran.

Libya prior to the US-EU invasion was a 'receiver' country accepting and employing millions of Africans, providing them with citizenship and a decent livelihood. After the US-EU air and sea attack and arming and financing of terrorist gangs, hundreds of thousands of Sub-Sahara immigrants were forced to flee to Europe. Most crossed the Mediterranean Sea to the west via Italy, Spain, and headed toward the affluent European countries which had savaged their lives in Libya.

The US-EU financed and armed client terrorist armies which assault the Syrian government and forced millions of Syrians to flee across the border to Lebanon,Turkey and beyond to Europe, causing the so-called 'immigration crises' and the rise of rightwing anti-immigrant parties. This led to divisions within the established social democratic and conservative parties,as sectors of the working class turned anti-immigrant.

Europe is reaping the consequences of its alliance with US militarized imperialism whereby the US uproots millions of people and the EU spends billions of euros to cover the cost of immigrants fleeing the western wars.

Most of the immigrants' welfare payments fall far short of the losses incurred in their homeland. Their jobs homes, schools, and civic associations in the EU and US are far less valuable and accommodating then what they possessed in their original communities.

Economic Imperialism and Immigration: Latin America

US wars, military intervention and economic exploitation has forced millions of Latin Americans to immigrate to the US.. Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras engaged in popular struggle for socio-economic justice and political democracy between 1960 – 2000. On the verge of victory over the landed oligarchs and multinational corporations, Washington blocked popular insurgents by spending billions of dollars, arming, training, advising the military and paramilitary forces. Land reform was aborted; trade unionists were forced into exile and thousands of peasants fled the marauding terror campaigns.

The US-backed oligarchic regimes forced millions of displaced and uprooted pr unemployed and landless workers to flee to the US.

US supported coups and dictators resulted in 50,000 in Nicaragua, 80,000 in El Salvador and 200,000 in Guatemala. President Obama and Hillary Clinton supported a military coup in Honduras which overthrew Liberal President Zelaya -- which led to the killing and wounding of thousands of peasant activists and human rights workers, and the return of death squads, resulting in a new wave of immigrants to the US.

The US promoted free trade agreement (NAFTA) drove hundreds of thousands of Mexican farmers into bankruptcy and into low wage maquiladoras; others were recruited by drug cartels; but the largest group was forced to immigrate across the Rio Grande. The US 'Plan Colombia' launched by President Clinton established seven US military bases in Colombia and provided 1 billion dollars in military aid between 2001 – 2010. Plan Colombia doubled the size of the military.

The US backed President Alvaro Uribe, resulting in the assassination of over 200,000 peasants, trade union activists and human rights workers by Uribe directed narco-death squad.Over two million farmers fled the countryside and immigrated to the cities or across the border.

US business secured hundreds of thousands of Latin American low wages, agricultural and factory workers almost all without health insurance or benefits – though they paid taxes.

Immigration doubled profits, undermined collective bargains and lowered US wages. Unscrupulous US 'entrepreneurs' recruited immigrants into drugs, prostitution, the arms trade and money laundering.

Politicians exploited the immigration issue for political gain – blaming the immigrants for the decline of working class living standards distracting attention from the real source : wars, invasions, death squads and economic pillage.

Conclusion

Having destroyed the lives of working people overseas and overthrown progressive leaders like Libyan President Gadhafi and Honduran President Zelaya, millions were forced to become immigrants.

Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Colombia, Mexico witnessed the flight of millions of immigrants -- all victims of US and EU wars. Washington and Brussels blamed the victims and accused the immigrants of illegality and criminal conduct.

The West debates expulsion, arrest and jail instead of reparations for crimes against humanity and violations of international law.

To restrain immigration the first step is to end imperial wars, withdraw troops,and to cease financing paramilitary and client terrorists.

ORDER IT NOW

Secondly, the West should establish a long term multi-billion-dollar fund for reconstruction and recovery of the economies, markets and infrastructure they bombed The demise of the peace movement allowed the US and EU to launch and prolong serial wars which led to massive immigration – the so-called refugee crises and the flight to Europe. There is a direct connection between the conversion of the liberal and social democrats to war -parties and the forced flight of immigrants to the EU.

The decline of the trade unions and worse, their loss of militancy has led to the loss of solidarity with people living in the midst of imperial wars. Many workers in the imperialist countries have directed their ire to those 'below' – the immigrants – rather than to the imperialists who directed the wars which created the immigration problem. Immigration, war , the demise of the peace and workers movements, and left parties has led to the rise of the militarists, and neo-liberals who have taken power throughout the West. Their anti-immigrant politics, however, has provoked new contradictions within regimes,between business elites and among popular movements in the EU and the US. The elite and popular struggles can go in at least two directions – toward fascism or radical social democracy.

[Jun 27, 2018] Have some sympathy, but my opinion is that most such groups were used at the time by the national police and by the CIA to oppose people with more serious ideas, and the support for such groups at the time by CIA etc. in the U.S.A and in Europe is making serious cultural and sometimes violent (I see photos of Antlfa morons, etc., direct descendants) blowback.

Jun 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

Che Guava , June 5, 2018 at 5:39 pm GMT

@Tarheel American

I once found a real great Web page with a great graph, kind of a family tree of the various western Trot. groups at the time.

It was bizarre, but did not include the neocons, I suppose that was reasonable because it was only of claimed affilliates to the nonsenical 'Fourth Internatiaoal'.

Also not comprehensive, did not include the minor parties and groupuscules in Japan and Europe of the boomer gen. , nor the earlier Viet Trots. nor Sri Lanka, the only place they ever obtained political power except as agents in the shadows.

Of course, they have enormous power in the shadows in the state media in many places, EU, cabinets in many European nations, etc.

Even without that, the chart and attached notes are bizarre enough.

The 'ite' 'ist' distinction among Trots is not just as you describe, they use it among themselves, too, at least in English, as one was explaining to me. Understood the words, not understanding the content at all.

Avoid Trots, their parties (as in social events) are miserable, and their households are like those of the worst cult religionists.

I make one exception, the HQ of the Kakumaru (Core Circle) is a few hundrd metres from my house, they are all old people now, they used to have their newspaper for sale until recently. no more. I would buy it at times.

Have some sympathy, but my opinion is that most such groups were used at the time by the national police and by the CIA to oppose people with more serious ideas, and the support for such groups at the time by CIA etc. in the U.S.A and in Europe is making serious cultural and sometimes violent (I see photos of Antlfa morons, etc., direct descendants) blowback.

[Jun 26, 2018] Graham Phillips, an Englishman and journalist made an interesting podcast about Shaun Walker demolishing Walker's claims that Russians were singing Nazi songs in a nightclub.

Jun 26, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

The World Cup proceeds as if carried along by an unstoppable force, pouring very positive concrete into foundations somewhere, giving ordinary people another vision of a country that has always fascinated me.

Graham Phillips, an Englishman and journalist, who joined with the Donbass people in their resistance to the coup in Ukraine made an interesting podcast echoing b.'s piece about Shaun Walker, my particular enemy. He quietly demolishes Walker's claims that Russians were singing Nazi songs in a nightclub.

All in all there is a feeling of tensions subsiding a little, a feeling that one can carry on a bit with one's life. The only thing I have learned is to enjoy such moments even if stuff like Yemen is agonizing. Agonizing but not existential as Syria is. But is that not just a bit cynical?

Posted by: Lochearn | Jun 24, 2018 6:05:53 PM | 25

[Jun 26, 2018] Donetsk and how it was founded by 19th-century Welsh engineer industrialist John Hughes, after whom it was originally named Yuzovka.

Jun 26, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mark2 @ 81, Daniel @ 82:

I am halfway through watching a film of US actor Peter von Berg travelling through the Donetsk People's Republic and meeting Prime Minister Alexander Zakharchenko and various others to find out how the Donetsk rebels are creating a socialist state under a situation of war. The film is as much an implicit criticism of US society (and by extension, Western capitalist society generally) as it is an investigation of the reality on the ground on Donetsk, ignored by the Western MSM.

Von Berg visits a greenhouse farm growing tomatoes, a hospital and a factory among other places he travels to (including the capital, of course) in the DPR.

There is even a short history of the city of Donetsk and how it was founded by 19th-century Welsh engineer industrialist John Hughes, after whom it was originally named Yuzovka.

https://www.therussophile.org/watch-nyc-to-donetsk-back-a-new-film.html/

Posted by: Jen | Jun 25, 2018 7:06:44 PM | 89

[Jun 26, 2018] Someone Finally Asked the Obama Administration to Own Up to America's Support of Terrorists in Syria

Notable quotes:
"... That people honestly think the Kenyan actually controlled the Pentagon & CIA is disturbing. Although of course he was a very willful participant in the CIA's Middle East color revolution known as the Arab Spring, he was merely a happy-to-oblige puppet in regards to the greater project underfoot. ..."
Jun 26, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Rhodes has been described as being so trusted and close to Obama that he was "in the room" for almost every foreign policy decision of significance that Obama made during his eight years in office. While the Intercept interview is worth listening to in full, it's the segment on Syria that caught our attention.

Rhodes with Obama

In spite of Rhodes trying to dance around the issue, he sheepishly answers in the affirmative when Mehdi Hasan asks the following question about supporting jihadists in Syria :

Did you intervene too much in Syria? Because the CIA spent hundreds of millions of dollars funding and arming anti-Assad rebels , a lot of those arms, as you know, ended up in the hands of jihadist groups, some even in the hands of ISIS.

Your critics would say you exacerbated that proxy war in Syria; you prolonged the conflict in Syria; you ended up bolstering jihadists.

Rhodes initially rambles about his book and "second guessing" Syria policy in avoidance of the question. But Hasan pulls him back with the following: " Oh, come on, but you were coordinating a lot of their arms."

The two spar over Hasan's charge of "bolstering jihadists" in the following key section of the interview , at the end of which Rhodes reluctantly answers "yeah..." -- but while trying to pass ultimate blame onto US allies Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia (similar to what Vice President Biden did in a 2014 speech ):

MH: Oh, come on, but you were coordinating a lot of their arms. You know, the U.S. was heavily involved in that war with the Saudis and the Qataris and the Turks.

BR: Well, I was going to say: Turkey, Qatar, Saudi.

MH: You were in there as well.

BR: Yeah, but, the fact of the matter is that once it kind of devolved into kind of a sectarian-based civil war with different sides fighting for their perceived survival, I think we, the ability to bring that type of situation to close, and part of what I wrestled with in the book is the limits of our ability to pull a lever and make killing like that stop once it's underway.

To our knowledge this is the only time a major media organization has directly asked a high ranking foreign policy adviser from the Obama administration to own up to the years long White House support to jihadists in Syria .

Though the interview was published Friday, its significance went without notice or comment in the mainstream media over the weekend (perhaps predictably). Instead, what did circulate was a Newsweek article mocking "conspiracy theories" surrounding the rapid rise of ISIS, including the following :

President Donald Trump has done little to dispel the myth of direct American support for ISIS since he took office. On the campaign trail in 2016, Trump claimed -- without providing any evidence -- that President Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton co-founded the group and that ISIS "honors" the former president.

Of course, the truth is a bit more nuanced than that , as Trump himself elsewhere seemed to acknowledge, and which ultimately led to the president reportedly shutting down the CIA's covert Syrian regime change program in the summer of 2017 while complaining to aides about the shocking brutality of the CIA-trained "rebels".

Meanwhile, mainstream media has been content to float the falsehood that President Obama's legacy is that he "stayed out" of Syria , instead merely approving some negligible level of aid to so-called "moderate" rebels who were fighting both Assad and (supposedly) the Islamic State. Rhodes has himself in prior interviews attempted to portray Obama as wisely staying "on the sidelines" in Syria .

But as we've pointed out many times over the years, this narrative ignores and seeks to whitewash possibly the largest CIA covert program in history , started by Obama, which armed and funded a jihadist insurgency bent of overthrowing Assad to the tune of $1 billion a year (one-fifteenth of the CIA's publicly known budget according to leaked Edward Snowden documents revealed by the Washington Post ).

It also ignores the well established fact, documented in both US intelligence reports and authenticated battlefield footage , that ISIS and the Free Syrian Army (FSA) jointly fought under a single US-backed command structure during the early years of the war in Syria, even as late as throughout 2013 -- something confirmed by University of Oklahoma professor Joshua Landis, widely considered to be the world's foremost expert on Syria .

me title=

Syria experts, as well as a New York Times report which largely passed without notice, verified the below footage from 2013 showing then US Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford working closely with a "rebel" leader who exercised operational command over known ISIS terrorists (Ambassador Ford has since acknowledged the relationship to McClatchy News ):

https://www.youtube.com/embed/yGaSghFK0nI

This latest Ben Rhodes non-denial-cum-sheepish-affirmation on the Obama White House's arming jihadists in Syria follows previous bombshell reporting by Mehdi Hasan from 2015.

As host of Al Jazeera's Head to Head, Hasan asked the former head of Pentagon intelligence under Obama, General Michael Flynn, who is to blame for the rise of ISIS ? (the August 2015 interview was significantly prior to Flynn joining Trump's campaign).

Hasan presented Flynn with the 2012 Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) declassified memo revealing Washington support to al-Qaeda and ISIS terrorists in Syria in order to counter both Assad and Iran. Flynn affirmed Hasan's charge that it was "a willful decision to support an insurgency that had Salafists, Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood...".

https://www.youtube.com/embed/y1oEoCRkLRI

Soon after, The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald appeared on Democracy Now to discuss the shocking contents of the Flynn interview:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/vFu9sZylUKY

It will be interesting to see years from now which "narrative" concerning Obama's legacy in the Syrian conflict future historians choose to emphasize.

Obama the president who "stayed out" and "on the sidelines" in Syria? Or Obama the president whose decisions fueled the rise of the most brutal terrorist organization the world has ever seen?

* * *

Below is the relevant excerpt covering Syria from the 26-minute Intercept interview with Obama deputy national-security adviser Ben Rhodes [bold emphasis ours].

The audio is available here -- Mehdi Hasan begins questioning Rhodes about Syria and ISIS at the 19-minute mark.

Mehdi Hasan: My guest today was at President Obama's side every step of the way over the course of those two terms in office. Ben Rhodes joined the Obama election campaign in 2007 as a foreign-policy speechwriter, when he was just 29, and rose to become a deputy national-security adviser at the White House, who was so intellectually and ideologically close to his boss that he was often described as having a mind-meld with Obama.

Ben, who currently works at the Obama Foundation, has written a new book, "The World as It Is: A Memoir of the Obama White House." And earlier this week I interviewed him about Obama's rather contentious foreign policy record

MH: But Ben, here's what I don't get, if you're saying this about Afghanistan and prolonged conflict, all of which I don't disagree with what you're saying. How do you, then, explain Syria? Because you've been criticized a lot. I've been listening to your interviews on the book tour; you talk about in the book about how you were criticized for not doing enough on Syria. I remember being an event in D.C. a couple years ago where Syrian opposition members were berating you for not doing enough at an event, and you often were the public face who came out and defended Obama. I want to come to the other direction and say: Did you intervene too much in Syria? Because the CIA spent hundreds of millions of dollars funding and arming anti-Assad rebels , a lot of those arms, as you know, ended up in the hands of jihadist groups, some even in the hands of ISIS. Your critics would say you exacerbated that proxy war in Syria; you prolonged the conflict in Syria; you ended up bolstering jihadists.

Ben Rhodes: Well, what I try to do in the book is, you know, essentially raise -- all the second guessing on Syria tends to be not what you expressed, Mehdi, but the notion that we should've taken military action.

MH: Yes.

BR: What I do in the book is I try to look back at 2011 and 2012, was there a diplomatic window that we missed or that we, in some ways, escalated its closure by pivoting to the call for Assad to go -- which obviously I believe should happen, I believe Assad has been a terrible leader for Syria and has brutalized his people -- but, you know, was there a diplomatic initiative that could have been taken to try to avert or at least minimize the extent of the civil war. Because, you know, what ended up happening essentially there is, you know, we were probably too optimistic that, you know, after Mubarak went and Ben Ali and eventually Saleh and Gaddafi, that you would have a situation where Assad would go. And, you know, not factoring in enough the assistance he was going to get from Russia and Iran, combined with his own nihilism, and how that could lead him to survive. So I do look back at that potentially missed diplomatic opportunity.

On the support of the opposition, you know, I don't know that I would give us that much agency. There are a lot of people putting arms into Syria, funding all sorts of --

MH : Oh, come on, but you were coordinating a lot of their arms. You know, the U.S. was heavily involved in that war with the Saudis and the Qataris and the Turks.

BR: Well, I was going to say: Turkey, Qatar, Saudi.

MH: You were in there as well.

BR: Yeah, but, the fact of the matter is that once it kind of devolved into kind of a sectarian-based civil war with different sides fighting for their perceived survival, I think we, the ability to bring that type of situation to close, and part of what I wrestled with in the book is the limits of our ability to pull a lever and make killing like that stop once it's underway.

So that's why I still look to that initial opening window. I also describe, there was a slight absurdity in the fact that we were debating options to provide military support to the opposition at the same time that we were deciding to designate al-Nusra, a big chunk of that opposition, as a terrorist organization. So there was kind of a schizophrenia that's inherent in a lot of U.S. foreign policy that came to a head in Syria.

MH: That's a very good word, especially to describe Syria policy

Source: Zero Hedge

[Jun 26, 2018] Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey and credibility of his story

Jun 26, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

SERIOUSLY?!!! - Did Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey have time to visit his home after he was exposed to the poison but before he exhibited symptoms? Or did someone deliberately pour bucketfuls of Novichok into his home?

'This Must Be a Joke!' Twitter Loses It Over UK's Latest Blunder in Skripal Saga

Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, who also fell ill after being exposed to Novichok, receiving £430,000 in compensation for his family home.

Actually I suspect there is nothing wrong with the house. It is Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey that is too poisonous to be allowed to roam free. He will be given a new identity, transferred to the USA and released into the custody of some FBI witness protection program. He must never be allowed to speak to public.

The secret that Nick Bailey must never reveal is that he was poisoned two days after the Skripals, most likely in the evidence room at the police station by the £100,000 of cash in the red bag .

Posted by: Petri Krohn | Jun 24, 2018 4:33:39 PM | 23

[Jun 26, 2018] "Conspiracy theories" are usually quite simple to solve: verify that there was a conspiracy verify that there was a cover-up verify that mass media is in the cover-up

Jun 25, 2018 | www.unz.com

j2, June 25, 2018 at 7:59 am GMT

I have found that these "conspiracy theories" are usually quite simple to solve: verify that there was a conspiracy verify that there was a cover-up verify that mass media is in the cover-up

- verify that there was a conspiracy
- verify that there was a cover-up
- verify that mass media is in the cover-up

Then, who can make a cover-up in media?

- the mob, no - the CIA, can try but really cannot do it long - the US President, like for instance JFK, Nixon, Clinton, no - the ones, who control the media and suppress publications they do not like, yes

Then only, why?

- the assassination of the president succeeded, so something major in the US politics changed - only one major thing changed

Solving these problems is easy, but the opponents behave as lawyers in kangaroo courts: deny everything, play a moron, refer to judicial decision, start repeating childish mumble like wackawackaconspeeracy.. and so on.

jilles dykstra , June 25, 2018 at 10:49 am GMT

@j2

Indeed, as with MH17.
Literally overnight EU sanctions against Russia were possible.
And, as with Kennedy, what exactly happened, we do not know, and, I fear, will never know.
On the afternoon of the day of the disaster prime minister Rutte phoned vice prime minister Asscher, who was on vacation in the south of France.
Rutte asked him to call back on a landline 'so that Russia could not listen in'.
Fool Asscher told this in a tv show.
Nobody has asked Asscher what was so secret a few hours after the disaster that the Russians should not know.

Why was the Diana 'accident' ?
I suppose to prevent that the future British king would have a Muslim stepfather.

Why was Anna Lyndh killed accidentally ?
She was to be the next Swedish prime minister, in favor of a EU economic boycott of Israel

Why was the phoney Hess suicided ?
Had he talked WWII history would have to be rewritten.

Why was Kelly suicided ?
He knew quite well Blair's nonsense about the 45 minutes WMD's

And so on and so forth

[Jun 25, 2018] Fake News for A Fake Scandal The Definitive Guide to Russian Collusion Hoaxes by Roger Stone

Notable quotes:
"... FBI informant for at least 17 years ..."
"... unless he had some sort of U.S. government dispensation ..."
"... be a 17-year FBI informant ..."
Jun 25, 2018 | stonecoldtruth.com

Now halfway into the 2 nd year of the Trump presidency it is clear that what seemed to be a severe national hissy fit being thrown by bitterly-defeated leftist Democrats after the 2016 election, gradually morphing into a chronic collective temper tantrum, has in fact turned out to be one of the most severe cases of mass psychosis in modern history.

This all-too-real mental derangement is manifested in seething, unhinged, pathological rage that has utterly consumed the entire Democrat party and countless authoritarian leftist malcontents across America, who have literally lost their minds thanks to Donald Trump's stunning victory. Their inability to control or contain it, even as it is becomes their steady undoing on a national scale, only makes it that much more disturbing.

The Democrat party's legion of arrogant simple-minded fake news media propagandists have only made matters worse for their fellow traveler politicians. No matter how badly their clumsy, malignant subversions are backfiring in their faces (the Russian collusion hoax being Exhibit A), no matter how sloppy, desperate and even absurd their ham-handed manipulations have become, apparently they will simply never cease their vicious crusade to inflict malicious harm on and, if possible, destroy the lives of their political opponents.

President Trump's strongest supporters and closest allies have the misfortune of being the central targets of their psychotic obsession and their most vile, degenerate misbehavior. In one sense it is a badge of honor to be a target of the seditious American left. But it is also a serious challenge to live a normal life at the top of their political kill list. Life as a highly-prized, ruthlessly-hunted target of a rage-driven leftist Democrat/corporate media/deep state lynch mob is no picnic.

Just these last 10 days, the usual cast of fake news jackals set to work deceitfully spinning my own voluntary revelation of a long-forgotten, effectively-pointless encounter almost two years ago with a bizarre individual who used the alias "Henry Greenberg", and claimed he had information relevant to the presidential race.

"Greenberg", whose real name turned out to be Gennady Vasilievich Vostretsov, solicited a meeting with me through my longtime colleague and fellow diehard Trump loyalist Michael Caputo.

I took the meeting. It barely lasted 20 minutes before I walked out, having neither given nor received anything whatsoever from Vostretsov, who I never saw or talked to again. My sole comment after the meeting was to text Michael Caputo that it had been waste of time. We never discussed it again.

Until a few weeks ago, I had not even recalled having the meeting, given that it was the only contact I have ever had with Vostretsov and the result was zilch.

Vostretsov's Russian nationality was of no consequence at the time of the meeting and is of no consequence today, EXCEPT in how it has conveniently created yet another fake news cycle opportunity wherein the media lynch mob could screech for awhile about how a "Trump ally met with a Russian!!!!"

(In case you missed the memo, apparently now it is a crime just to meet with anyone even remotely Russian. Same goes for considering any offer of opposition research .it's all ILLEGAL, no??).

My short-lived one-off meeting with Vostretsov is of no relevance to anything or anyone outside of the fake news unreality that is the Russian collusion delusion world.

Just because Democrats and the media cooked up this hoax to sustain their perpetual campaign of public disinformation and personal destruction doesn't mean sane people have to buy into it.

There is no dispute that the meeting with Vostretsov was a non-starter and I summarily walked away from any involvement with him. The substance of the meeting (or more accurately the lack thereof) is 100% exculpatory of me.

Beyond this, no one has the slightest obligation to entertain or otherwise indulge this Russian collusion madness merely because some cabal of Democrat spinmeisters and their media whores are consumed with chasing their own hoax and dragging the world along with them.

Clearly this cabal is willing to twist any and every conceivable circumstance however it suits their mania to persecute any Trump allies they can. Their attempts to frame and defame their political opponents are, frankly, pure rubbish, along with their histrionic chest-beating in favor of their sleazy objectives.

This story, however, does have a real bombshell. It is not that Vostretsov is a Russian national but that he was an FBI informant for at least 17 years prior to the time he solicited a meeting with me.

Even more explosive is Vostrestov's extensive criminal history, including violent crimes that landed him serious prison time in both Russia (10 years) and the United States.

The bombshell becomes nuclear when one considers how Vostretsov's criminal past would have excluded him from ever being in the United States at the time he tried to lure me into purchasing campaign intelligence, unless he had some sort of U.S. government dispensation such as is given only to criminal informants who are doing the bidding of their FBI patrons and handlers.

These extremely-relevant details, however, have quite deceitfully been either omitted or glossed over by the leftist media megaphonies, in a brazenly-deceitful attempt to re-cast a nothing-nowhere one-time meeting I had over two years ago as some sort of puzzle piece in their disintegrating Russian collusion hoax.

Leftstream media manipulators have purposefully disregarded the most relevant and revealing facts in order to dishonestly reduce their reporting to: "Stone met with a Russian!!!"

Incredible detail and documentation about Vostretsov's murky past and his decades of work as an FBI stooge may be found at the website democratdossier.org

Now the FBI is righteously under massive fire for its unprecedented, undeniable politicization and abuse of its extraordinary law enforcement powers in order to protect Hillary Clinton from prosecution, despite her clear cut crimes, while conspiring to frame Donald Trump and those around him with this bogus Russian collusion rap that the kill-Trump media have been gleefully peddling for nearly two years now.

From democratdossier.org:

" In a remarkable 2015 court affidavit (attached), Vostretsov admitted that he is FBI informant who worked for the agency for more than 17 years. He appears to have traded information about criminal activity for temporary visas provided to him by the FBI. We were able to collect 14 different Significant Public Benefit Parole (SPBP) documents allowing him to enter the US. This type of visa waiver is made available to international persons participating in a law enforcement action as an informant. The steady flow of these special waivers, with upgrades like multi-entry status and extensions, indicate his involvement and success in FBI informant projects. While Vostretsov claimed in the 2015 affidavit he sent to an immigration judge that he stopped working for the FBI that year, it would be safe to assume that if a criminal alien with his immigration background is still in the US today, he is only here with the support from the US government and is still working with the FBI."

So, to summarize: in May 2016 a person using the alias Henry Greenberg solicited a meeting with me, claiming they had information of importance to the presidential race. When I met with this person (who incidentally dressed up like a Trump campaign volunteer) he made no mention of Russia or Russian affairs and said he wanted $2M for what he had and, further, that he expected it would be paid for not by me but by Donald Trump himself.

I immediately suspected this was some sort of shakedown and told the person I was not interested, ending the meeting barely 20 minutes after it began. I never had any contact with this person again.

Two years later, this individual's name comes up, again via my colleague Michael Caputo, and I was reminded of this brief, one-off meeting, so wasteful of my time and pointless, from my view, that I never even recalled it. But then this is the case with 100's upon 100's of glancing encounters I've had with strangers over the course of a nearly two-year presidential campaign, not to mention my other professional and personal pursuits, from filming a documentary to writing multiple books to organizing efforts to beat back the establishment GOP machinations against Trump in the lead-up to the convention.

I most certainly had not thought at the time of the meeting that is was anything in the same universe as doing business with a "Russian", as opposed to being solicited by some random grifter whom I knew little about, either before or after the meeting, and from whom nothing came but a total waste of my time.

Once I recalled this meeting and pieced it together as something far more sinister than I had ever thought, with far greater implications than merely a glancing contact with some shakedown artist, I notified the House Intelligence Committee, and the information was simultaneously provided to the Washington Post.

A normal, rational, objective observer would conclude from all this that 2 years ago, in the midst of a whirlwind presidential campaign, I had a single 20-minute meeting with a random con man who used an alias, who may have been Russian, and about whom I knew literally nothing else.

Further, the meeting produced literally nothing, I took no further action, there was no further contact and I had no further thought about or even recall of it until the individual's name came up recently and took onfar greater dimension once we pieced together what was really going on (an attempted FBI set-up), after which I reported the truth about Mr. Vostrestov's (that he was yet another FBI "lure") to House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes.

Seems pretty simple, yes?

Well, not according to the Clinton-Obama leftist media juggernaut, which not only spun this meeting as 'another contact with Russia by a Trump loyalist', but even twisted my own pro-active revelation of it into some sort of proof that I had lied previously. Some of the more brazen propagandists went so far as to misportray my voluntary disclosure as a murky scheme to somehow conceal (in plain sight, no less) long-absent proof they so far have had to manufacture as they go, in order to prop up their Russian collusion conspiracy theory.

Predictably, the most nasty, malicious and pathologically-deceitful partisan media manipulators, epitomized by the glib, shifty leftist ambulance chaser and wannabe Watergate hero narrative flamekeeper Ariel Melber, immediately set about spouting their sanitized half-truth version of this story out of the usual Clinton-Obama propaganda defamation outlets, like MSNBC.

A full complement of fake news artists seized on my revelation of this incident as yet another cheap opportunity to mislead their audiences and, yet again, fire up their tired, repetitious false narrative, based solely on the same manipulative insinuations and factual distortions they have used before in an attempt to cast me as having somehow engaged in some sinister conspiracy.

These media hyenas will never miss a chance to peddle their fabricated version of reality, even where it completely flies in the face of demonstrable facts (unless, of course, you have the clairvoyance to read between the lines, aided by a giant pair of leftist lunatic lenses.)

Rather than highlight that I walked away from this meeting after maybe 20 minutes, never looking back, taking no action to avail myself of what was offered or even to pass it along to anyone in the Trump Campaign to pursue, Melber and his fake news wannabes twisted their coverage of it into a 10 minute roundtable spouting off ways in which they think I have somehow lied, not been fully honest or am a Soviet spy.

Naturally they simply ignored, or summarily dismissed as mere speculation and a ploy on my part, the most relevant data point of all -- that "Mr. Greenberg" turned out to be a 17-year FBI informant , who just so happened to be inspired in May 2016, of all times, to approach someone close to Donald Trump to sell information he supposedly had.

Returning to Melber and his stunted panel of forgettable nobodies looking for their 15 minutes of fame, these bullshitters epitomize the dishonesty and unhinged animus I described above. These are cheap partisan propagandists who do not report news or analyze facts or illuminate their audience with insights, but instead manipulate data points and spin the conclusions that suit their partisan orthodoxy.

Were it not for the Russian collusion hoax, what ever would the likes of Melber and his fellow dreck peddlers do to fill their airtime? Perhaps when the witch hunt is finally exhausted and their fake scandal finally falls apart, and I continue to walk the earth a free man, Ari Melber will have the opportunity to go out and get a real job and do some real work, rather than further pollute the world with his phony malicious propaganda.

I know beyond question that it is the absolute, unalterable operating premise of leftist lynch mobsters in anything and everything they either say, write, report or do concerning me that NOTHING that I say, or have ever said, will not be automatically presumed to be a lie, and that NOTHING I do, or have ever done, even in the most mundane and transparent of day-to-day activities, will not automatically be construed as some sort of criminal act or part of some larger criminal conspiracy (i.e. anything and everything I do or say is, per the jackass media manipulators, RUSSIAN COLLUSION!!!!).

No matter what is said, no matter what facts come to light, no matter how many defamatory leftist fabrications about me are serially and conclusively debunked, no matter how consistently my statements all along are subsequently validated as truthful and correct none of it matters because deceitful leftist attackbots and cheap Democrat propagandists will cherry-pick, parse or otherwise manipulate the facts and twist my statements to cast me as a suspicious villain.

No amount of debunking of their defamatory hoax-peddling spin and lies will dissuade them from persisting in their deceitful malpractice and their continued pollution of the airwaves and print outlets with their wildly-false, reckless, baseless allegations and defamatory suspicion-manufacturing. This is just the bottom line with these news fakers.

From the moment they first hatched their cynical, vindictive partisan charade against the American people (and sanity generally), almost 2 years ago, the leftist Democrats' sleazy Russian collusion hoax peddlers, along with their fake news media collaborators, have been nothing if not consistent.

In their spastic mania to prop up and prolong their Trump-Russia collusion fantasy they have proven themselves consistently deceitful, consistently manipulative, and consistently consumed with propagating and perpetuating a pure fiction they know damn well is not simply erroneous or exaggerated, but in fact is a complete and total fabrication, unparalleled in the amount of wanton malevolence that is behind it.

Underhanded and calculating as the leftist Democrats' manufactured torrent of breathless sensationalism, phony outrage and fake news recycling may be, these political bunco artists are not fooling anyone, at least who has an iota of common sense and rational discernment.

In fact, I doubt that the Russian collusion hoax is genuinely believed even by many of the vicious profane malcontents who lap up this sort of leftist sewage and hatefully spew it anywhere and everywhere possible, from social media to the family dinner table.

Of course, leftist Democrats and the Trump-hating national media are far too arrogant and self-serving to limit their deceitful machinations to merely concocting and proliferating a cynical treason hoax as a partisan weapon to take down a duly-elected President of the United States. No, they must also be able to cast their seditious skullduggery as some sort of high holy public service, saving America from itself by torpedoing the hated president it had the gall to elect.

[It is precisely this variety of boundlessly hypocritical self-regard that pretty much sums up the leftist attitude towards everything they do in their ceaseless lust to seize and wield supreme power.]

Back in reality, no one with even half of a functioning brain buys this patently-absurd notion that preening partisan pygmies from the megalomaniacal left actually give a rat's ass about serving the public interest or preserving the sanctity of our Republic.

Only the left's most repulsive partisan parasites (see e.g. Adam Schiff; Eric Swalwell) and deceitful media propagandists (see e.g. Ari Melber; Don Lemon; MSNBC; CNN; NY Times; WaPo .too many to possibly list) actually seem to believe there is some high holy civic purpose behind their endlessly-malicious, pathologically-dishonest scheming to frame, shame and defame President Donald Trump.

It would take a truly-mindless hoaxster to think they are somehow serving their country by conspiring to give constant false cover and perverted quasi-legitimacy to a lawless corrupt bureaucratic hit squad of Trump-hating Hillarybot lawyers and power-crazed federal bullies set loose, like a pack of rabid hyenas, to gleefully wage a ruthless legal jihad against President Trump, his family members, staff, political associates, loyal longtime supporters and anyone even marginally connected to his amazing 2016 victory and his (so far) stunningly- successful presidency.

Even the seditious trash perpetrating this Russia collusion scam know all too well what Trump's presidency and, above all, his singular leadership portend for the continued survival of the undeserved power and illegitimate control that these lowlife self-dealing elites consider to be theirs by divine right. (Suffice to say, it is not a pretty picture for them.)

The bottom line is that Russian collusion hoaxsters serve no higher or more noble purpose than to exact malicious petty revenge on the hated Trump and his allies, and fraudulently undo the epic smackdown that America handed them and their corrupt fellow swamp dwellers in November 2016 -- once and for all smiting the repulsive amoral witch their party has in the greedy self-entitled criminal hag Hillary Clinton.

Whether the Russia collusion hoaxsters like it or not, whatever minuscule shards of credibility, believability and basic dignity they might have once had long ago vaporized into their own toxic smoke-and-mirrors shit cloud of seething partisan malevolence and brazen underhanded deceit. It couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch of scoundrels

[Jun 24, 2018] This very convenient enemy Vladimir Putin; if he does not exits, he should be invented

Notable quotes:
"... Thank God for the US ruling class. Less acute, less imaginative ruling classes might be tricked by the fact that Russia spends but a tiny fraction of its GDP on "defence" compared to the US/NATO. ..."
"... Who wants to go to an Ivy League college for years & years, only to end up "fighting" a complete grot like Osama ? He was just so -- well, ugly ! ..."
"... So, the Putin/Nazi enemy is just scads better. Putin is a living "Hannibal's at the gates" enemy (And let's face it: even your most blinkered six-pack flag waver was having trouble getting his head around new aircraft carriers, new submarines, new F35′s & new nuclear missiles to defend against the whole motley terrorist thing). ..."
Jun 24, 2018 | www.unz.com

animalogic , June 24, 2018 at 8:44 am GMT

I thank the author for his timely apology. At this critical juncture we must be wise to these Slavic wiles.

Thank God for the US ruling class. Less acute, less imaginative ruling classes might be tricked by the fact that Russia spends but a tiny fraction of its GDP on "defence" compared to the US/NATO.

No, Russia/Putin's guile is at the level of 3D chess. Everyone knows that behind such obvious inadequacy lies a Cujo- like bear, taunt, ready to spring at an instinctively guileless US . And, let's be honest here, the US deserves a better enemy than a bunch of shabby "terrorists". There's something just so common about these ". "terrorists". Who wants to go to an Ivy League college for years & years, only to end up "fighting" a complete grot like Osama ? He was just so -- well, ugly !

Can you imagine Ellen doing an interview with him ? No !

So, the Putin/Nazi enemy is just scads better. Putin is a living "Hannibal's at the gates" enemy (And let's face it: even your most blinkered six-pack flag waver was having trouble getting his head around new aircraft carriers, new submarines, new F35′s & new nuclear missiles to defend against the whole motley terrorist thing).

Only trouble is all this does tend to cast aspersions on such a great German/American as Mr Hitler, who, 70 years ago did such sterling work combating the Russia/communist Evil .

[Jun 24, 2018] The government of the USA has marked Putin for destruction. But I think the rest of the world is rooting for him, and the Russian people, to survive the American onslaught.

Jun 24, 2018 | www.unz.com

Bro Methylene , May 21, 2017 at 2:18 am GMT

@Sean

What makes you think Assad is an idiot? He seems more intelligent than most politicians, journalists, and politicians in Washington, D.C. (I cringe at having to name the place. It's like speaking Orc-language in Rivendell.)

Millions of Americans, having been raised on TV propaganda, still have a screaming need to feel superior to everyone – except perhaps the Israelis.

The government of the USA has marked Putin for destruction. But I think the rest of the world is rooting for him, and the Russian people, to survive the American onslaught.

[Jun 24, 2018] Article 17 of the Russian Constitution says rights and freedoms of person and citizen are recognized and guaranteed pursuant to the generally recognized principles and norms of international law

Jun 24, 2018 | www.unz.com

Hier ist die Nadel , June 22, 2018 at 9:09 pm GMT

Hey uh, not to torque your cognitive dissonance, I know you have a lot of Democrat Party revolutionary self-criticism sessions to go through, but when Putinhitlernazi takes over, we get all our human rights, not just the niggardly hind-tit worthless US Bill of Rights that DHS revoked. The Putinhitlernazi constitution prohibits the bad-faith phony rights the US government screws us with. And the Putinhitlernazi constitution lets us go over the head of the government to the international human rights authorities if we get no satisfaction at home.

Article 17 of the Russian Constitution says rights and freedoms of person and citizen are recognized and guaranteed pursuant to the generally recognized principles and norms of international law. Ratified international treaties supersede any domestic legislation stipulating otherwise. Article 18 states that rights and freedoms of the person and citizen are directly applicable. That prohibits bad-faith tricks like the US pulls, declaring "non-self executing" treaties, making legally-void reservations, declarations, understandings, and provisos to screw you out of your rights. Article 46(3) gives citizens a constitutional right to appeal to inter-State bodies for the protection of human rights and freedoms if all available internal means of legal redress are exhausted.

So where can I sign up for the Putinhitlernazi waffle SS commandos? I wanna overthrow this shitcrap crapshit USA and get my rights.

[Jun 24, 2018] dfordoom

Jun 24, 2018 | www.unz.com

says: Website May 21, 2017 at 3:18 am GMT 200 Words @Authenticjazzman " The real reason Russia is hated is because it is a media threat"

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

The "real" reason Russia is hated is because it has rejected Communism, and it does not cater to gays.

Cummunist Russia had been , since the thirties, mecca and utopia for the US leftists and they are now out of their collective mind because their vision of world Marxism with Russia running the show have been obliterated by the likes of the anti-communist VP.

The Democrats were convinced that they had the election in the bag , and therefore the accomplishment of eternal one-party government. They would have legalized the illegals as a gigantic voting block,
and the huge upset dealt to them by the deplorables has driven them off the cliff and into total
madness.

"Media threat" is such a vague non-descript concept that I don't have the energy or patience to even elaborate thereon.

Authenticjazzman "Mensa" society member since 1973, airborne qualified US Army vet, and pro jazz artist.

PS off subject but relevant : Russia has a thriving Jazz scene, and the are some monster American-style Jazz players coming out of Russia.

Cummunist Russia had been , since the thirties, mecca and utopia for the US leftists and they are now out of their collective mind because their vision of world Marxism with Russia running the show

I don't see any evidence that those who call themselves the Left in the US today have any enthusiasm at all for Marxism. They serve the interests of global capitalism. The Russians are hated because they don't want to bow down before global capitalism and international bankers, and because Russia refuses to join in the persecution of Christians. The Russians aren't communists any more but they (quite rightly) recognise that global capitalism is every bit as evil as marxism ever was, if not more so.

I haven't noticed any of these so-called leftists in the modern US calling for the dictatorship of the proletariat. Have you?

It's amazing how many Americans on the right still subscribe to paranoid Cold War delusions about global Marxism.

dfordoom , Website May 21, 2017 at 3:41 am GMT

@ThereisaGod

The NeoCons are Trotsyists pretending to be Conservatives

I hear this all the time. I know that many Trotskyists morphed into neocons but that's not quite the same as saying that Trotskyists are neocons are identical. Trotsky may have been a heretical communist but he was still a communist. Are neocons actual communists? In what way are they actual communists?

annamaria , May 21, 2017 at 12:22 pm GMT
@dfordoom

"I don't see any evidence that those who call themselves the Left in the US today have any enthusiasm at all for Marxism. They serve the interests of global capitalism. The Russians are hated because they don't want to bow down before global capitalism and international bankers, and because Russia refuses to join in the persecution of Christians."
Agree.

Aaron8765 , May 21, 2017 at 1:21 pm GMT
We have enemies within and enemies without. Regarding our enemies without: the most dangerous are the Islamic supremacists, and China. The Chinese are a more traditional challenge, and hence more manageable. The Russians are a natural ally- and perhaps a necessary ally- against both of these threats. A traditional geopolitical analysis suggests that we always side with the weaker party- in this case the Russians- against rising/hegemonic states in Eurasia. So our foreign policy is out of joint. Why our foreign policy class insists upon supporting this policy is an interesting question- the policy is clearly in error.
Aaron8765 , May 21, 2017 at 1:28 pm GMT
@geokat62

I don't agree with everything you say, but thanks for your thoughts on this. If that is what the ADL is supporting- and I have no reason to doubt you- then they have to be opposed vigorously. On a lighter note, assimilated Jewish Americans never call our Christian brethren 'goyim' anymore- it might be a problem, considering that 60% of us, including yours truly, have married outside our religion of birth.

Aaron8765 , May 21, 2017 at 1:43 pm GMT
@CanSpeccy

I appreciate the sympathy. The whole situation is a complete mess and getting worse. On a historical note, a biography just came out about Ernst Kantorowicz, a Jewish- German medievalist. You might find it interesting. His life was also discussed in a book about the great medievalists of the 20th Century- 'Medieval Lives', by Cantor. It's a fascinating book. Kantorowicz was a wealthy, assimilated Jewish- German who grew up with the Prussian upper class. He was a German officer in World War I, and after the war joined the paramilitary- right Freikorps and fought against the Communists inside Germany. As a medievalist, he was a romantic- nationalist associated with a circle of poets and scholars, and friends with Percy Ernst Schramm, who along with Kantorowicz was one of the great medievalists of his generation. Then the Nazis took power. Kantorowicz was purged from academic life. Some of his friends protected him as best they could, while others sided with the Nazis. He got out, barely, in 1938 and ended up at Berkeley, of all places, and the Institute for Advanced Study. His friend Schramm became the official historian of the Wehrmacht in WWII, and observed Hitler at first hand. After the war Schramm turned to Kantorowicz for help in reentering official, academic life (Kantorowicz helped.) The whole story is a tragic metaphor for the tragedy of the patriotic, assimilated- nationalist German Jews.

Aaron8765 , May 21, 2017 at 1:48 pm GMT
@CanSpeccy

oh btw there was an amusing codicil to the Kantorowicz story. At Berkeley in the 50′s he and the other faculty were called to take an oath before some Govt Commission that they were not communists. Kantorowicz as a matter of principal refused to take the oath, since he believed in academic liberty, and was dismissed. In his explanation for his refusal he stated something to the effect that he was not a communist- in fact, he had shot a bunch in his youth!- but he wouldn't take the oath.

Corvinus , May 21, 2017 at 2:24 pm GMT
@CanSpeccy

"Naturally, however, people react with anger when Jews engage in anti-European genocidal advocacy such as this."

False characterization.

"I do understand your feelings and sympathize with you, but it is surely wrong to infer that because there is push back against what some Jews do, this is evidence of irrational hatred. It is not."

It is evidence of irrational hatred due to a belief that Jews overall engage in the purposeful destruction of cultures. There is the assumption that diversity/multi-culturalism/tolerance is the bane of existence, that the Jewish propaganda machine serves as an ethnic and societal meat grinder. Unwitting people are being brainwashed into promoting these concepts. Except you are conveniently discounting this important fact human beings have free will. Increasing numbers of people have made decisions of their own accord about these issues. They embrace these philosophies for a host of reasons. You are a snake oil salesman of how Cultural Marxism allegedly is murdering our youth. Let us assume that this Jewish menace would be neutralized. Do you not believe there would be some other group filling in for that void through their own strategies of indoctrination and mind control? Perhaps the philosophies you tout would then be force fed down the throats of the masses.

"According to Corvy, there's something wrong with those who are for the survival of their own kith and kin. In fact, being against extinction of your own people is how Corvy seems to define hate speech and racism."

That's not what I stated. I'm not a fan shall we say of you denigrating wholesale a particular group and characterizing that same group of being a proponent of genocide. You have every liberty to protect "your own kind", just as those individuals from "your own kind" have the freedom to question the reasons why you want those protections as well as how those protections are put in place. Furthermore, don't you realize there is no such thing as "racism" and "hate speech"? It's a ruse.

Pro-race is code for anti-humanity.

annamaria , May 21, 2017 at 5:10 pm GMT

@Aaron8765

Treason in high places: " Not Remembering the USS Liberty," by Ray McGovern

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/05/21/not-remembering-the-uss-liberty/

"The only investigation worth the name was led by Adm. Moorer, who had been Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Among the findings announced by the commission on October 2003:
" Unmarked Israeli aircraft dropped napalm canisters on the USS Liberty bridge, and fired 30mm cannon and rockets into the ship; survivors estimate 30 or more sorties were flown over the ship by a minimum of 12 attacking Israeli planes.
" The torpedo boat attack involved not only the firing of torpedoes, but machine-gunning of Liberty's firefighters and stretcher-bearers. The Israeli torpedo boats later returned to machine-gun at close range three of the Liberty's life rafts that had been lowered into the water by survivors to rescue the most seriously wounded."
"Shortly before he died in February 2004, Adm. Moorer strongly appealed for the truth to be brought out and pointed directly at what he saw as the main obstacle: " I've never seen a President stand up to Israel. If the American people understood what a grip these people have on our government, they would rise up in arms." Echoing Moorer, former U.S. Ambassador Edward Peck, who served many years in the Middle East, condemned Washington's attitude toward Israel as "obsequious, unctuous subservience at the cost of the lives and morale of our own service members and their families"

neutral , May 21, 2017 at 5:47 pm GMT
@Aaron8765

have married outside our religion of birth

That makes no difference, since being jewish is ultimately a racial category not a religious one. You don't have to take my word for it, you can research how the state of Israel defines what a jew is, and it is not on religious grounds. In fact they use the Nuremberg race acts that defined what a jew was as their own criteria, obviously they will claim they are using it for those fleeing oppression, but anyone who is sincere about this knows it is because the Nuremberg race acts were correct in their definitions.

CanSpeccy , Website May 21, 2017 at 8:08 pm GMT
@Aaron8765

Re: Kantorowicz

Bureaucracies, governmental or academic, hate a non-conformist. I know. I worked (briefly) for three governments and also held academic appointments at three universities, the last, a tenure-track appointment, that I abandoned after three days.

The problem for all groups in a multi-cultural society is that group interests are liable to conflict and thus generate antagonisms that often have a racial or religious aspect. For Jews, it is worse than for most because they are adherents, or associates by descent, of a religion that is fundamentally racist. Yahweh, after all, is the God of the Jews, and urges the Jews to go forth, multiply and rule over the nations of the Earth.

Thus, when Jews succeed as they have done in large numbers in America in gaining positions of great wealth and power, and especially when they exercise that power for specifically Jewish interests such as the defense of the state of Israel, they naturally raise feelings of suspicion, fear and antagonism, as would say a bunch of Russian nationalists if they ran much of Hollywood , were among the principal peddlers of porn in America , had massive media influence , and held many seats in Congress and used their financial clout to determine who holds many of the other seats in Congress .

None of this, of course, alters the fact that it may at times seem tough being a Jew and an American-firster.

Eagle Eye , May 21, 2017 at 9:00 pm GMT
@annamaria

WHY did the Israeli leadership collectively decide to attack the USS Liberty spy ship and risk serious damage to its relationship with its only superpower supporter? What did the Israelis know about the Liberty's activities? Why was this a matter of top-level national importance to Israel?

Somehow, endless repetition of the USS Liberty story never gets around to addressing the crucial WHY of the operation.

Without addressing the WHY, any account of the attack itself is little more than beating around the bush. Also, it is remarkable that no consistent U.S. version of the incident has evolved despite several generations of military and secret service officials transitioning to the relative safety and anonymity of retirement since then.

One conventional fake answer can easily be disposed off – it is sometimes claimed that the Israelis hoped to blame the sinking of the Liberty on Egypt, and cause damage to Egypt's relationship with the U.S. This version is wholly untenable.

First, an air attack would have been plainly visible on military radar across the Red Sea. Second, then as now, the U.S. had extensive secret service contacts throughout the Egyptian government. An Egyptian air attack on the USS Liberty would most likely have leaked in advance, and certainly within hours of a putative Egyptian attack which by definition would have to involved hundreds of individuals to propose, prepare and implement.

annamaria , May 22, 2017 at 2:09 am GMT
@Eagle Eye

"Somehow, endless repetition of the USS Liberty story never gets around to addressing the crucial WHY of the operation."

First, there is no "endless repetition of the USS Liberty story" by MSM: this story has been hushed for many years. Second, apart from disparaging the survivors of USSLiberty, you suggest no viable explanation to the murderous attack.
The USS Liberty story emphasizes inordinate influence of Israel-firsters on the US policies abroad and domestically. Here is a excerpt from a speech of Mr. Dershowitz (the Idiot): "People write a book called the Israel lobby and complain that AIPAC [American Israel Public Affairs Committee] is one of the most powerful lobbies in Washington. My response to that is, that's not good enough. We should be the most powerful lobby in Washington. . . . We are entitled to use our power. We have contributed disproportionately to the success of this country. . . . We are a very influential community. We deserve our influence."
"Israel Lobby Pays the Political Piper:" https://consortiumnews.com/2017/05/21/israel-lobby-pays-the-political-piper/
Don't you see how the obnoxious kind – that makes the Lobby, ADL, powerful warmongers among the Friends of Israel and such – have been destroying the true safe home for Jewry in the US and EU?

Rurik , Website May 22, 2017 at 1:09 pm GMT
@annamaria

First, there is no "endless repetition of the USS Liberty story" by MSM: this story has been hushed for many years.

yep

also as we all know, the attack on the USS Liberty was intended as a false flag attack to be blamed on Egypt in order to get America to fight Israel's wars for them.

As was the Lavon affair.

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

It is the well-known modus operendi of cowards. Commit crimes and blame them on people you don't like, so that those people will be punished for it. It happens all the time in America with hate "crime" hoaxes. The most egregious example of Israeli's treachery and endemic cowardice was the false flag attack on 9/11 – that is being used even today to get Americans to mass-murder people Israel doesn't like and reduce entire nations and regions into smoking ashes.

Corvinus , May 22, 2017 at 4:10 pm GMT
@Eagle Eye

"and it turned out that traditional English cultural notions in politics, economics and religion supplied much of the "magic sauce" that enabled the American experiment to take the world forward as and when it did."

You do realize that those traditions were a result of the combined efforts of the Britons, the Picts, the Romans, and the Anglo-Saxon tribes. Moreover, this "American experiment" was the product of the English, Greek, and Roman ways of governance, as well as the philosophies of the Enlightenment.

"English traditions achieved unrivaled primacy due to an innate sense of tolerance, restraint, privacy and secularism paired with traditional respect for organically grown institutions balanced by distrust of fads and "philosophies."

Thank you for your opinion on this matter.

"One of the advantages of the English language is that the language itself does not allow a person to identify his profession by saying "I am a philosopher.""

The English language does not prohibit anyone from indicating that their profession is a "philosopher", considering if a person graduates from university with a doctoral degree in philosophy and instructs students in this field.

annamaria , May 22, 2017 at 5:38 pm GMT
"Support our troops!" in the time of institutionalized treason.
Two ugly siblings or why ISIS is a best friend of both Israel and Saudi Arabia.

http://theduran.com/heres-why-saudi-arabia-and-israel-are-allies-in-all-but-name/

"Israel and Saudi Arabia have always been enemies of secular, Arab nationalist states and federations. Whether an Arab state is Nasserist, Ba'athist, socialist, Marxist-Leninist or in the case of Gaddafi's Libya a practitioner of the post-Nassierist Third Political Theory: Israel and Saudi Arabia have sought to and in large part have succeeded, with western help, at destroying such states.
Unlike Israel's Apartheid military state and Saudi Arabia's human rights free monarchy, the aforementioned Arab styles of government are worthy of the word modern. These are countries which had progressive mixed economies, had secular governments and societies, had full constitutional rights for religious and ethnic minorities, they championed women's rights and engaged in mass literacy programmes and infrastructural projects. ..
Syria is the last secular Arab Ba'athist state in the world. Unlike in Israel, minorities have full constitutional rights and unlike in Saudi Arabia, all religions are tolerated. In Syria, women can act, speak and dress as they wish. Syria's independence has in the past thwarted Israel's ambition to annex Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt and additional parts of Syria itself (Israel still occupies Syria's Golan Heights).
Syria remains strongly independent and refuses to surrender its values.
Saudi Arabia and Israel are allies in the material and psychological war against secular, modern Arab countries. It is a war which the United States has been fighting on behalf of Riyadh and Tel Aviv for decades ."

Eagle Eye , May 22, 2017 at 6:41 pm GMT
@annamaria

The basic question – which remains unaddressed in the response – is very simply:

What was the Israeli leadership trying to do by launching a combined airborne and naval attack on the USS Liberty during the Six Day War in 1967?

You mention the Lavon affair in 1954. This scandal arose out of an attempted Israeli false-flag operation in Egypt that went spectacularly wrong.

The Suez Crisis in 1956 was another major disaster for Israel, the UK and France.

This experience will have informed Israeli government thinking in 1967.

Moreover, as noted in the original post, radar technology at the time, as well simple visual identification of the attacking jet fighters and vessels precluded even a remote possibility of dressing up the attack as having been perpetrated by Egypt.

Further, the U.S. had plenty of intelligence assets in both Egypt and Israel to find out what actually happened to the USS Liberty within hours. An operation of this magnitude involves at a minimum hundreds of people across different countries and cannot be kept completely secret.

The Lavon affair was intended to involve small anonymous attacks against random civilian targets, but failed to achieve this relatively modest objective.

Are we now to believe that the Israelis thought they could pull off a massive combined air-sea attack against a United States vessel on the high seas (where radar and visual observation is unobstructed) and blame it on Egypt? The very idea is insane.

So why did Israel resort to this desperate gamble?

Barring a collective bout of insanity throughout Israel's civilian and military leadership, the most likely explanation is that the USS Liberty itself was seen as a major and indeed mortal threat to Israel, to such an extent that the Israeli leadership decided to risk a major rift with the U.S. to eliminate the threat.

How would the USS Liberty itself be a threat? Most likely by compiling high-grade military intelligence and passing it to Egypt and the other Arab nations. This could have occurred either pursuant to official directives from the top of the U.S. hierarchy, or perhaps because the local command went rogue.

Eagle Eye , May 22, 2017 at 9:09 pm GMT
@Rurik

as we all know, the attack on the USS Liberty was intended as a false flag attack to be blamed on Egypt in order to get America to fight Israel's wars for them

This suggestion at least makes logical sense.

However, the idea that Israel's entire senior leadership seriously thought they could pin a combined air/sea attack in the middle of the Red Sea on Egypt is quite outlandish, as explained in a separate post above. Given the circumstances, the Israelis must have KNOWN 100% that the attack would be traced back to them within hours at the latest.

In fact, nobody seems to suggest that the U.S. was ACTUALLY DECEIVED for even a split second about who launched the attack.

Reading between the lines of contemporary and later accounts, it appears that Israel took IMMEDIATE action to mitigate the fall-out in DC. This again is inconsistent with trying to pin it on Egypt.

Eagle Eye , May 23, 2017 at 2:45 am GMT
@annamaria

(1) I said that "reading between the lines," one might conclude that Israel IMMEDIATELY set about containing the fall-out in Washington. Of course, such efforts (if they indeed took place) would be hugely embarrassing to Israel and would be kept top secret even years later.

(2) You have still not given us any real theory of WHY Israel would launch a combined air/sea attack on the USS Liberty.

The idea that Israel was at this precise moment in the middle of the Six Day War trying to pin the blame on Egypt does not hold water as explained in several posts above.

CONCLUSION: The best working theory at present is that the USS Liberty was providing high-grade intelligence to the Arab countries fighting Israel in the Six Day War.

If you have a better explanation consistent with the known facts, including the use of radar by the USS Liberty and airborne units in the area please share it here.

QUESTION: What is known about LBJ's stated and actual positions vis-a-vis Israel, Egypt, other Arab countries? Post-retirement contacts by LBJ and his family?

annamaria , May 23, 2017 at 10:51 am GMT
@Eagle Eye

as compared to an artificial state that has been squeezing the native population and importing the (allegedly) ethnically-proper economic migrants?
You seem have peculiar explanations to why such formerly functioning states as Iraq, Libya, and Syria should better cease to exist (along with the USSLiberty staff). According to your logic, the ongoing Syrian slaughter is a good deed because it allows for weeding out the excess of population there. The weeding out also works as a rationale for grabbing the Syrian natural resources by the "most moral" apartheid state.
And please don't try at lecturing the readers on Israel's virtues vs the US perfidy, considering the history of betrayal of the US by Israel-firsters. Pollard and more, the despicable PNAC crowd and the ziocons' obnoxious and stupid global games against ethnically-wrong humanity. At the head of the current mess is the Israel-occupied Congress, "conditioned" for guiding the hapless host in a desired direction.

Rurik , Website May 23, 2017 at 6:19 pm GMT
@Eagle Eye

Given the circumstances, the Israelis must have KNOWN 100% that the attack would be traced back to them within hours at the latest.

then why did they machine gun the lifeboats, eh?

that in itself is a war crime you know, and the ONLY reason they would have done it is to sink the ship with ALL hands. Thereby leaving no survivors to expose the treachery.

and they had the Johnson regime and traitor McNamara on board with their cowardly, murderous treason.

not to mention the controlled kosher msm

Eagle Eye , May 23, 2017 at 7:05 pm GMT
@annamaria

You still haven't answered the question:

What was the U.S. Liberty doing in the Red Sea in 1967?

As a U.S. citizen, I would quite like to know, even at this late stage, what our military forces were doing far from Chesapeake Bay. Perhaps the answer gives a hint as to what is happening now.

Since you seem obsessed about the "sovereignty" of former Ottoman territories, please also explain how exactly the USS Liberty's presence was supposed to assist the "sovereignty" of Cis-Jordan (i.e. the current sovereign state of Israel).

Thank you.

Rurik , Website May 23, 2017 at 8:12 pm GMT
@Eagle Eye

if you (and Annamaria) don't mind, I'll address this..

What was the U.S. Liberty doing in the Red Sea in 1967?

there was a war going on between a US ally and a nation of strategic importance to the US- Israel and Egypt. The USS Liberty was a NSA intelligence ship. It was there to monitor what was going on. Duh.

explain how exactly the USS Liberty's presence was supposed to assist the "sovereignty" of Cis-Jordan (i.e. the current sovereign state of Israel).

unless you an admiral in the US Navy at the time, no one knows for sure. But a lot of people have speculated that the USS Liberty was sent by the Johnson regime to get sunk by Israel and be used as a false flag to take America into war against Egypt.

We already know for a fact that jets were scrambled to assist the USS Liberty and were called back and ordered not to assist by Johnson through Secretary of State McNamara. And not once, but twice.

So obviously Johnson wanted her sunk. Whether or not the ship was sent there for that purpose, or whether Johnson simply decided to let the Israelis sink her once he heard about it, we'll likely never know.

Hope that helps eagle

annamaria , May 23, 2017 at 10:43 pm GMT
@Eagle Eye

Why don't you look closely into the present to understand the past?

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/05/23/truth-has-become-un-american/

"As Israel controls US Middle East policy, Israel uses its control to have Washington eliminate obstacles to Israel's expansion. So far Israel has achieved the overthrow of Saddam Hussein's government and chaos in Iraq, Washington's war on Syria, and Washington's demonization of Iran in the hope that sufficient demonization will justify war."

Eagle Eye , May 24, 2017 at 12:07 am GMT
@Rurik

So obviously Johnson wanted her sunk. Whether or not the ship was sent there for that purpose, or whether Johnson simply decided to let the Israelis sink her once he heard about it, we'll likely never know.

This interpretation is at least internally consistent. It is also consistent with my earlier observation that nobody could seriously claim that the U.S. was ACTUALLY DECEIVED for even a split second about who launched the attack.

Putting the known factors together, we are left with two viable hypotheses as to the Israelis' reason for sinking the USS Liberty:

(1) To eliminate a mortal threat to Israel's national security in a time of war, e.g. because the USS Liberty was feeding intelligence information to Egypt and the Arabs.

(2) As an intentional false flag operation, with express (or at least hinted) support from the Pentagon for the purpose of publicly "justifying" a U.S. war against Egypt. This would necessarily mean that the sailors and staff on the USS Liberty were intentionally betrayed and sacrificed by Johnson and McNamara.

In either case, the Israeli leadership would have been painfully aware that it could NOT mislead the U.S. as to its authorship of the attack, whatever the Pentagon or Israel might later say in public later.

CanSpeccy , Website May 24, 2017 at 12:39 am GMT
@Rurik

A graphic account here by US naval veteran and survivor, Phil Tourney :

"Jet aircrafts came in firing and strafing our ship," he said. "Within minutes they took out hundreds of antennae and all of our .450-caliber machine guns. We were defenseless."

But all those aboard were not without hope. Utilizing true American ingenuity and never giving up their fighting spirit, Tourney described a miraculous effort.

"About half-an-hour into the attack," he said, "one of our men stretched a long wire so that we could transmit a message to the Sixth Fleet: 'Under Attack by Unmarked Fighters. Send Help.' A number of ships received this SOS, and soon Capt. Joseph Tully of the USS Saratoga ordered planes to rescue us."

However, in an act that goes well beyond betrayal into the realm of full-fledged treason, Tourney laid out how Liberty became a ship without a country.

"Defense Secretary Robert McNamara contacted the Saratoga and recalled the fighters, telling them not to aid our ship," he said. "But, showing true courage, Tully re-launched the jets, without authorization . . . After the second set of fighter jets were dispatched, the president of the United States -- Lyndon Johnson -- personally recalled them," said Tourney.

Tourney says Johnson told Tully: "I don't give a [expletive] if that ship goes to the bottom and every sailor is lost. We will not embarrass our ally, Israel."

A day or two later as Liberty limped toward a port in Malta, Adm. Isaac Kidd assembled the survivors in small groups and, after removing his stars, demanded to know what occurred.

After learning the truth, a red-faced Kidd pinned his stars back on his uniform and said, "If any of you ever repeat a word, I'll make sure you end up in the penitentiary, or worse," Tourney said.

Eagle Eye , May 31, 2017 at 4:10 pm GMT
@CanSpeccy

English traditions achieved unrivaled primacy due to an innate sense of tolerance, restraint, privacy and secularism

It may have escaped you that my earlier post referred to the time of the American Revolution, and in particular to sophisticated British traditions and conventions as they were perceived by the educated class in the colonies.

The sad decline of Britain in the modern era, and its more colorful history in earlier ages, are neither here nor there for these purposes.

[Jun 24, 2018] This very convenient enemy Vladimir Putin; if he does not exits, he should be invented

Notable quotes:
"... Thank God for the US ruling class. Less acute, less imaginative ruling classes might be tricked by the fact that Russia spends but a tiny fraction of its GDP on "defence" compared to the US/NATO. ..."
"... Who wants to go to an Ivy League college for years & years, only to end up "fighting" a complete grot like Osama ? He was just so -- well, ugly ! ..."
"... So, the Putin/Nazi enemy is just scads better. Putin is a living "Hannibal's at the gates" enemy (And let's face it: even your most blinkered six-pack flag waver was having trouble getting his head around new aircraft carriers, new submarines, new F35′s & new nuclear missiles to defend against the whole motley terrorist thing). ..."
Jun 24, 2018 | www.unz.com

animalogic , June 24, 2018 at 8:44 am GMT

I thank the author for his timely apology. At this critical juncture we must be wise to these Slavic wiles.

Thank God for the US ruling class. Less acute, less imaginative ruling classes might be tricked by the fact that Russia spends but a tiny fraction of its GDP on "defence" compared to the US/NATO.

No, Russia/Putin's guile is at the level of 3D chess. Everyone knows that behind such obvious inadequacy lies a Cujo- like bear, taunt, ready to spring at an instinctively guileless US . And, let's be honest here, the US deserves a better enemy than a bunch of shabby "terrorists". There's something just so common about these ". "terrorists". Who wants to go to an Ivy League college for years & years, only to end up "fighting" a complete grot like Osama ? He was just so -- well, ugly !

Can you imagine Ellen doing an interview with him ? No !

So, the Putin/Nazi enemy is just scads better. Putin is a living "Hannibal's at the gates" enemy (And let's face it: even your most blinkered six-pack flag waver was having trouble getting his head around new aircraft carriers, new submarines, new F35′s & new nuclear missiles to defend against the whole motley terrorist thing).

Only trouble is all this does tend to cast aspersions on such a great German/American as Mr Hitler, who, 70 years ago did such sterling work combating the Russia/communist Evil .

[Jun 24, 2018] The Saker publishes some interesting news re the MH17 tragedy:

Jun 24, 2018 | www.unz.com

annamaria , May 23, 2017 at 1:15 pm GMT

The Saker publishes some interesting news re the MH17 tragedy:
"SBU [Security Service of Ukraine] orders to destroy all evidence of the conducted special operation MH17″ http://thesaker.is/sbu-orders-to-destroy-all-evidence-of-the-conducted-special-operation-mh17/
by Scott Humor: " If you want to know my opinion that hasn't changed since 2014. The Boeing flight MH17 was shot down by the Ukrainian air force fighter jets, but not necessarily piloted by Ukrainian pilots. It was a CIA and NATO operation to frame Russia. Most likely the Dutch government was a part of this operation. Now, they are trying to hang all the dogs on Waltzman -Poroshenko, because neither the Dutch monarchs, nor the CIA would fancy to be implicated in this crime."

The whole edifice of sanctions against Russian federation was built on the MH17 case. A few people come to mind. First is the Secretary of State John Kerry who had proclaimed that Russians were guilty of the shooting before any investigation took place.
Then there is a Department of War Studies, King's College London, which became famous for inviting Eliot Higgins (an expert in selling ladies underwear) to lecture the College' students on Higgins' specialty – the russophobic stuff, which was debunked on numerous occasions but which is still dear to the hearts at the Department of War Studies, King's College London. http://www.kcl.ac.uk/aboutkings/principal/Indexnew.aspx https://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/warstudies/people/professors/rainsborough.aspx
And then there is a circus of Dutch investigation: https://www.rt.com/news/375105-mh17-investigation-dutch-journalist/ and this http://www.whathappenedtoflightmh17.com/dutch-prosecutor-does-not-answer-questions-on-russian-supplied-radar-data/
The Dutch/Ukrainian scoundrels are now facing this (which is just a beginning): https://www.rt.com/news/374893-trump-letter-mh17-investigation/ "The open letter, signed by 25 journalists, former civil aviation pilots and researchers from Germany, the Netherlands and Australia, was posted on the website of Joost Niemoller – a Dutch journalist who publicly challenged the current investigation into the ill-fated Flight MH17, which was downed over Ukraine in July 2014. "

[Jun 24, 2018] It is interesting to note that the anti-system parties of Europe, such as those in control in Hungary and Austria, seem to take more leftwing positions on issues other than immigration than sell-out former Socialist parties which have degenerated into the politically correct portion of the anti-russian neo-liberal centre.

Jun 24, 2018 | www.unz.com

exiled off mainstreet , June 22, 2018 at 1:16 am GMT

The Red Tory thing is interesting. I can see what "anon" (comment No. 5) is driving at, though the use of the word fascism is freighted with the eventual barbaric outcome of the Nazi project, as well as the outgrowths of western guilt for allowing it to proceed which in many instances such as political correctness and toleration of Nazi-like tactics by descendents of Nazi victims, have resulted in a new version of fascism.

It is interesting to note that the anti-system parties of Europe, such as those in control in Hungary and Austria, seem to take more leftwing positions on issues other than immigration than sell-out former Socialist parties which have degenerated into the politically correct portion of the anti-russian neo-liberal centre. Even the term "anti-system" is associated with the Nazi movement during Weimar but fits with the situation in the western world today. Thus, Le Pen, Orban and the Austrian government are more reliable at protecting workers' rights than the sell-out centre, and the cinque stelle (I hope I'm not that far off in spelling) can coalesce with the Lega, which also takes positions to the left of the corrupt centre in areas other than immigration. On immigration itself, here in Canada or in the US where everybody is eventually an immigrant other than the first nation remnant, it is hard to be totally anti-immigrant, but it is understandable in Europe where historic ethnicities are in some danger and where the results of the destabilisation of Africa and the Middle East by the yankee imperium and the Israelis is the root cause of the immigration problem.

As a final statement, I agree with the writer and say mea culpa mea maxima culpa as far as his anti or really pro- Putin-Nazi viewpoint is expressed.

[Jun 21, 2018] Britain In Panic As Trump-Putin Summit Looms : all roads in Russiagate lead to London, not, be it noted, Moscow. by Alexander Mercouris

Notable quotes:
"... In my article for Consortium News I discussed at length the size of the British footprint in the scandal, and the outsized role in it of various British or British connected individuals such as the ex British spy Christopher Steele who compiled the Trump Dossier, the former chief of Britain's NSA equivalent GCHQ Robert Hannigan, the former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove, and the Cambridge based US academic Stefan Halper. ..."
"... I would add that there are now rumours that Professor Joseph Mifsud, the mysterious London based Maltese Professor who also had a big role in the Russiagate affair, may also have had connections to British intelligence. ..."
"... As this article in Zerohedge says, all roads in Russiagate lead to London, not, be it noted, Moscow. ..."
Jun 21, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Alexander Mercouris via TheDuran.com,

Britain alarmed as John Bolton travels to Moscow to prepare summit...

Days after I discussed rumours of an imminent Trump-Putin summit , seeming confirmation that such a summit is indeed in the works has been provided with the Kremlin's confirmation that President Trump's National Security Adviser John Bolton is travelling to Moscow next week apparently to discuss preparations for the summit.

The Kremlin's confirmation of John Bolton's visit was given today by President Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov

As far as we know, such a visit is going to take place. This is all we can say for now.

Further suggestions that some sort of easing of tensions between Washington and Moscow may be in the works has been provided by confirmation that a group of US Republican Senators will shortly be visiting Moscow.

It seems that a combination of the collapse in the credibility of the Russiagate collusion allegations – which I suspect no Republican member of the House or Senate any longer believes – unease in the US at Russia's breakthrough in hypersonic weapons technology (recently discussed by Alex Christoforou and myself in this video ), and the failure of the recent sanctions the US Treasury announced against Rusal, has concentrated minds in Washington, and is giving President Trump the political space he needs to push for the easing of tensions with Russia which he is known to have long favoured.

One important European capital cannot conceal its dismay.

In a recent article for Consortium News I discussed the obsessive quality of the British establishment's paranoia about Russia , and not surprisingly in light of it an article has appeared today in The Times of London which made clear the British government's alarm as the prospect of a Trump-Putin summit looms.

As is often the way with articles in The Times of London, this article has now been "updated" beyond recognition. However it still contains comments like these

Mr Trump called for Russia to be readmitted to the G8 this month, wrecking Mrs May's efforts to further isolate Mr Putin after the Salisbury poisonings. Mr Trump then linked US funding of Nato to the trade dispute with the EU, singling out Germany for special criticism.

The prospect of a meeting between Mr Trump and Mr Putin appalls British officials. "It's unclear if this meeting is after or before Nato and the UK visit," a Whitehall official said. "Obviously after would be better for us. It adds another dynamic to an already colourful week." .

A senior western diplomatic source said that a Trump-Putin meeting before the Nato summit would cause "dismay and alarm", adding: "It would be a highly negative thing to do."

Nato is due to discuss an escalation of measures to deter Russian aggression. "Everyone is perturbed by what is going on and is fearing for the future of the alliance," a Whitehall source said.

I will here express my view that the Russiagate scandal was at least in part an attempt by some people in Britain to prevent a rapprochement between the US and Russia once it became clear that achieving such a rapprochement was a policy priority for Donald Trump.

In my article for Consortium News I discussed at length the size of the British footprint in the scandal, and the outsized role in it of various British or British connected individuals such as the ex British spy Christopher Steele who compiled the Trump Dossier, the former chief of Britain's NSA equivalent GCHQ Robert Hannigan, the former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove, and the Cambridge based US academic Stefan Halper.

I would add that there are now rumours that Professor Joseph Mifsud, the mysterious London based Maltese Professor who also had a big role in the Russiagate affair, may also have had connections to British intelligence.

As this article in Zerohedge says, all roads in Russiagate lead to London, not, be it noted, Moscow.

A summit meeting between the US and Russian Presidents inaugurated an improvement in relations between the US and Russia is exactly the opposite outcome which some people in London want.

That however looks to be what they are facing.

[Jun 21, 2018] Britain In Panic As Trump-Putin Summit Looms : all roads in Russiagate lead to London, not, be it noted, Moscow. by Alexander Mercouris

Notable quotes:
"... In my article for Consortium News I discussed at length the size of the British footprint in the scandal, and the outsized role in it of various British or British connected individuals such as the ex British spy Christopher Steele who compiled the Trump Dossier, the former chief of Britain's NSA equivalent GCHQ Robert Hannigan, the former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove, and the Cambridge based US academic Stefan Halper. ..."
"... I would add that there are now rumours that Professor Joseph Mifsud, the mysterious London based Maltese Professor who also had a big role in the Russiagate affair, may also have had connections to British intelligence. ..."
"... As this article in Zerohedge says, all roads in Russiagate lead to London, not, be it noted, Moscow. ..."
Jun 21, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Alexander Mercouris via TheDuran.com,

Britain alarmed as John Bolton travels to Moscow to prepare summit...

Days after I discussed rumours of an imminent Trump-Putin summit , seeming confirmation that such a summit is indeed in the works has been provided with the Kremlin's confirmation that President Trump's National Security Adviser John Bolton is travelling to Moscow next week apparently to discuss preparations for the summit.

The Kremlin's confirmation of John Bolton's visit was given today by President Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov

As far as we know, such a visit is going to take place. This is all we can say for now.

Further suggestions that some sort of easing of tensions between Washington and Moscow may be in the works has been provided by confirmation that a group of US Republican Senators will shortly be visiting Moscow.

It seems that a combination of the collapse in the credibility of the Russiagate collusion allegations – which I suspect no Republican member of the House or Senate any longer believes – unease in the US at Russia's breakthrough in hypersonic weapons technology (recently discussed by Alex Christoforou and myself in this video ), and the failure of the recent sanctions the US Treasury announced against Rusal, has concentrated minds in Washington, and is giving President Trump the political space he needs to push for the easing of tensions with Russia which he is known to have long favoured.

One important European capital cannot conceal its dismay.

In a recent article for Consortium News I discussed the obsessive quality of the British establishment's paranoia about Russia , and not surprisingly in light of it an article has appeared today in The Times of London which made clear the British government's alarm as the prospect of a Trump-Putin summit looms.

As is often the way with articles in The Times of London, this article has now been "updated" beyond recognition. However it still contains comments like these

Mr Trump called for Russia to be readmitted to the G8 this month, wrecking Mrs May's efforts to further isolate Mr Putin after the Salisbury poisonings. Mr Trump then linked US funding of Nato to the trade dispute with the EU, singling out Germany for special criticism.

The prospect of a meeting between Mr Trump and Mr Putin appalls British officials. "It's unclear if this meeting is after or before Nato and the UK visit," a Whitehall official said. "Obviously after would be better for us. It adds another dynamic to an already colourful week." .

A senior western diplomatic source said that a Trump-Putin meeting before the Nato summit would cause "dismay and alarm", adding: "It would be a highly negative thing to do."

Nato is due to discuss an escalation of measures to deter Russian aggression. "Everyone is perturbed by what is going on and is fearing for the future of the alliance," a Whitehall source said.

I will here express my view that the Russiagate scandal was at least in part an attempt by some people in Britain to prevent a rapprochement between the US and Russia once it became clear that achieving such a rapprochement was a policy priority for Donald Trump.

In my article for Consortium News I discussed at length the size of the British footprint in the scandal, and the outsized role in it of various British or British connected individuals such as the ex British spy Christopher Steele who compiled the Trump Dossier, the former chief of Britain's NSA equivalent GCHQ Robert Hannigan, the former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove, and the Cambridge based US academic Stefan Halper.

I would add that there are now rumours that Professor Joseph Mifsud, the mysterious London based Maltese Professor who also had a big role in the Russiagate affair, may also have had connections to British intelligence.

As this article in Zerohedge says, all roads in Russiagate lead to London, not, be it noted, Moscow.

A summit meeting between the US and Russian Presidents inaugurated an improvement in relations between the US and Russia is exactly the opposite outcome which some people in London want.

That however looks to be what they are facing.

[Jun 21, 2018] Neocons, Zionists and Evangelicals

Jun 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Peter AU 1 | Jun 21, 2018 10:00:27 PM | 33

Bible clutchers. Last time I looked AIPAC in the US consisted of roughly half Israeli's or Jews and half protestant evangelicals. A few years back I read the stats on the religion of US voters by percentage. I think that showed close to 25% of US voters evangelicals.

While looking for those stats to provide a link, I ran onto this WP article on the Trump election and ecumenicals. According to the article, 20% of US voters are evangelicals. That is a huge zionist voting block and the majority voted for Trump.

[Jun 21, 2018] The Diseased, Lying, Condition of America's 'News'Media by Eric ZUESSE

Notable quotes:
"... the 'news' media don't care about that evil, and that falsehood, and that dangerousness -- they do it anyway, and none of them attacks the others for perpetrating this vicious war-mongering lie, that lying provocation to yet more and worse war than already exists there. ..."
"... accepted the request from Syria's Government, for assistance in protecting Syria's Government, ..."
Jun 21, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

Both President Trump and former President Obama are commonly said in America's 'news' media to be or to have been "ceding Syria to Russia" or "ceding Syria to Russia and Iran," or similar allegations. They imply that 'we' own (or have some right to control) Syria. That's not only a lie; it is a very evil and harmful one, dangerously goading the US President to go even more against Russia (and Iran) (and, of course, against Syria ) than has yet been done -- but the 'news' media don't care about that evil, and that falsehood, and that dangerousness -- they do it anyway, and none of them attacks the others for perpetrating this vicious war-mongering lie, that lying provocation to yet more and worse war than already exists there. And the fact that none is exposing the fraudulence of the others on this important matter, is a yet-bigger additional scandal, beyond and amplifying the media's common lying itself. Because they all function here like a mob, goading to more and worse invasions, and doing it on the the basis of dangerous lies -- that America, and not the Syrians themselves, own Syria.

These lies simply assume that America (probably referring to the US Government, but whatever) somehow "has" or else "had" Syria (so that America can now 'cede' it, to anyone); and this assumption (that the US somehow owns Syria) is not only an imperialistic one (which is bad, and wrong, in itself), but it reduces to nothingness the rights (in the minds of the American public) of the Syrian people, to control their own land . That lie is what America's 'news'media won't expose, but instead they all cooperate with it, when they're not actually participating, themselves, in spreading these lies.

What they are doing is also to slur Russia, and to slur Iran, for having accepted the request from Syria's Government, for assistance in protecting Syria's Government, against the tens of thousands of jihadists who had been recruited throughout the world by the Saudi-American alliance, to overthrow and replace Syria's Government, to replace it with one that would be appointed by the Saud family ('America's ally'), the fundamentalist-Sunni royal family who (as the absolute monarchy there) do actually own Saudi Arabia -- a monarchical dictatorship, which the US Government calls an 'ally'.

The evilness of this imperialistic assumption, which is being constantly spread by the US-and-allied 'news'media, is as bad as is its falseness, because "America" (however one wishes to use that term) never had, never possessed, any right whatsoever to control Syria. Of course, neither does Russia possess such a right, nor does Iran, but neither Russia nor Iran is asserting any such right; both instead are there to protect Syria's national sovereignty, against the invaders (including the US, and the Sauds' regime). But the US-and-allied 'news'media don't present it that way -- the honest way -- not at all. Such truths are instead suppressed.

I was immediately struck by this false and evil assumption that the US owns Syria, when reading the June 15th issue of The Week magazine. It contained, under its "Best Columns" section, a piece by Matthew Continetti ( "Obama Too Good for America" ), which says, among other falsehoods, "Obama was wrong about a lot of other things, too, like ceding Syria to Russia." That phrase, "ceding Syria to Russia" rose straight out from the page to me as being remarkable, stunning, and not only because it suggests that America owns that sovereign nation, Syria. I was especially struck by it because the CIA has several times attempted Syrian coups and once did briefly, in 1949, overthrow and replace Syria's democratically elected President. But is that really something which today's America's 'news'media should encourage the American public to be demanding today's American politicians to be demanding from today's American President? How bizarre, even evil, an idea is that? But it is so normal that it's a fair indication of how evil and untrustworthy today's American 'news'media actually are. I just hadn't noticed it before.

Publishing such a false and evil idea, without any accompanying commentary that truthfully presents its context and that doesn't simply let the false and evil allegation stand unchallenged -- that instead lets it be unchallenged both factually and morally -- is not acceptable either factually or morally, but then I checked and found that it's the almost universal norm, in today's US 'news'media. For examples:

On 17 April 2018, CBS News headlined "Lindsey Graham 'unnerved' after Syria briefing: 'Everything in that briefing made me more worried'" and presented that US Senator saying, "It seems to me we are willing to give Syria to Assad, Russia, and Iran." He was criticizing President Trump as being "all tweet and no action." He wanted more war, and more threat of war. But when President Obama had repeatedly denied in public that only the Syrian people should have any say-so over whom Syria's leaders ought to be, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon repeatedly contradicted the US President's viewpoint on this, and he said, "The future of Assad must be determined by the Syrian people." If the American people have become so dismissive of international law as this, then is it because the US 'news'media start with the ridiculously false presumption that "America" (whatever that refers to) is the arbiter of international law, and therefore has the right to dictate to the entire world what that law is, and what it means? Is America, as being the dictator over the whole planet, supposed to be something that Americans' tax-dollars ought to be funding -- that objective: global dictatorship? How does that viewpoint differ, then, from perpetual war for perpetual 'peace' -- a dictum that's enormously profitable for America's big 'Defense' contractors, such as Lockheed Martin, but that impoverishes the general public, both in America, and especially in the countries (such as Syria) where 'our' Government drops bombs in order to enforce its own will and demand, that: "Assad must go!"

In fact, as any journalist who writes or speaks about the Syrian situation and who isn't a complete ignoramus knows, Bashar al-Assad would easily win any free and fair Presidential election in Syria, against any contender. His public support, as shown not only in the 2014 Syrian Presidential election , but also in the many Western-sponsored opinion-polls in Syria (since the CIA is always eager to find potential candidates to support against him), show this.

On 17 December 2016, Eric Chenoweth, a typical neocon Democratic Party hack, headlined "Let Hamilton Speak: Recapturing American Democracy" , and he wrote: "Trump's statements and appointments make clear he intends to tilt American policy to serve Russian interests: ceding Syria to Russia by ending support to pro-Western rebels; possibly lifting economic sanctions and recognizing the annexation of Crimea; proposing an alliance with Russia in the war on terror while remaining uncommitted to the defense of NATO allies, in particular the Baltic countries vulnerable to Russian aggression. Restoring American Democracy When they meet on December 19, Republican Electors who reflect on their constitutional duty should not then affirm Trump's election." Those "pro-Western rebels" in Syria were actually led by Al Qaeda's Syrian branch. Without them, the US regime wouldn't have had any "boots on the ground" forces to speak of there. In fact, the US regime has actually been fronting for the Saud family to take over control of Syria if and when Syria's Government falls. The Saud family even selected the people who in the U.N. peace talks on Syria represent 'the rebels' -- the Sauds, who have been Syria's enemy ever since 1950, selected 'Syria's opposition', who were now seeking to take over Syria if and when 'America's moderate rebels' succeed. Both Al Qaeda and ISIS are actually fundamentalist-Sunnis, like the Saud family are, and Assad's Government is resolutely non-sectarian. Assad himself is a non-Islamist Alawite Shiite secularist, which virtually all fundamentalist Sunnis (such as the Sauds are) are taught to despise and to hate -- especially because he's Shiite. The US regime knows that neither it, which is considered Christian, nor Israel, which is theocratically Jewish, could practically succeed at imposing rule in Syria, but that maybe the Sauds could -- so, they are the actual leaders of the 'pro-Western' forces, seeking to replace Syria's secularist Government. Overthrowing Syria's Government would be their victory. It would be the Saud family's victory. But this fact is kept a secret from the American public, by the US 'news'media.

Back on 17 September 2016, shortly before the change in US Administrations, Obama bombed the Syrian Government's garrison in Der Zor, or Deir Ezzor, which is the capital of Syria's oil-producing region. He did it in order to enable ISIS forces, which surrounded the city, to rush in and conquer it. Obama did this only eight days after his Secretary of State, John Kerry, had conceded to the demand by Sergei Lavrov, Russia's Foreign Minister, Russia's demand that in a cease fire, Russia be allowed to continue bombing not only ISIS there, which Kerry agreed should continue to be bombed by both the US and Russia, but also Al Qaeda's forces -- which until 9 September 2016, Obama refused to allow to be bombed during a cease-fire. But, finally, after a year of deadlock between Russia and the United States on that crucial issue, Kerry and Lavrov both signed a cease-fire agreement, and it allowed both ISIS and Al Qaeda-led forces to continue being bombed. (Russia had been bombing both, ever since 30 September 2015, when Russia began its bombing campaign in Syria.) That cease-fire went into effect on September 12th. Then Obama, unannounced -- and a great disappointment to his Secretary of State, who wasn't informed of this in advance -- broke the agreement, by bombing the Syrian outpost in Deir Ezzor -- and that's the moment when Vladimir Putin quit his efforts to get agreements from Obama, because Putin now recognized that Obama was totally untrustworthy.

Already by late September of 2015, even prior to Russia's having been requested by President Assad to enter the war in order to speed up the defeat of what Washington still calls 'the rebels', it was clear that Washington (actually Riyadh) wasn't going to take over Syria; and Americans were -- and are -- being taught by the 'news'media, that this was because Obama was 'weak' and didn't care enough about 'human rights' in Syria, and about 'democracy' in Syria. So, on 28 September 2015, Matt Purple at the libertarian "Rare Politics" site, headlined "Pentagon admits that the Syrian rebels it trained handed over weapons to al Qaeda" , and he wrote "Neoconservatives wail that President Obama is ceding Syria to Russia -- but the reason the Russians are taking the lead is precisely because America has sidelined itself." But the US regime hadn't at all "sidelined itself"; it continued -- and it continues to this day -- its invasion and occupation of that land. Trump's policy on Syria is basically a continuation of Obama's -- and it's not at all "ceding Syria to Russia," or "ceding Syria to Russia and Iran."

Because of America's 'news'media, it still isn't "ceding Syria to the Syrians" -- as Ban ki-Moon and international law would. That wouldn't be profitable for Lockheed Martin etc. (whose biggest customers other than the US Government are the Sauds, and Trump alone sold $400 billion of US weapons to them ); so, it's not done.

Syria's sovereignty is utterly denied by the US regime, but if the US regime were to succeed, the big winners would actually be the Saud family.

Do the American people have sovereignty, over 'their' ( our ) Government? US 'news'media effectively ban that question. Perhaps what controls the US Government is the Saudi-Israeli alliance: the Sauds have the money, and the Israelis have the lobbyists. Of course, the US 'news'media are obsessed whether Russia controls the US Government. That diversionary tactic is extremely profitable to companies such as General Dynamics, and America's other weapons-manufacturers, which thrive on wars -- especially by selling to the Sauds, and to their allies (and, obviously, not at all to Russia).

[Jun 21, 2018] The Media is a complete weapon for propaganda. The "writers" are propagandists. There never is a report on Russia from the Western media that does not vilify or demonize Russia or Russians in some way.

Jun 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Daniel | Jun 20, 2018 11:53:53 PM | 34

When I saw that Shawn Walker Tweet, and the mostly brilliant take-down responses, I hoped b would mention it. I can think of no one better suited to address this particularly putrid propaganda. Bravo! And to the (almost) universally excellent barfly commentariat.

BBC created a whole genre of Russian World Cup scare mongering. One they did was on the deadly threat of "Russian Football Hooligans." RT did an excellent 4 minute job of combining journalism with humor to expose that bit of 100% Fake News.

They also expanded it into a full set-piece. Here's the trailer:

Red Ryder , Jun 20, 2018 11:57:21 PM | 35

The Media is a complete weapon for propaganda. The "writers" are propagandists. There never is a report on Russia from the Western media that does not vilify or demonize Russia or Russians in some way.

The World Cup is experienced by hundreds of thousands of tourists in Russia. They are going to be the truth-tellers.
The event, like Sochi Winter Olympics will stand for itself. It will be splendid.

And the lies will die.

Never expect the truth from the Media.

Always expect the Russian people to be extraordinary. They have demonstrated it for a century.

[Jun 21, 2018] Steele cut his teeth blackmailing FIFA officials

The problem the MSMs have is that the World Cup so far has been a success.
Notable quotes:
"... Also just like the Trump bizzo, when his employers dipped out, Steele's unsubstantiated gossip & slander having done nothing useful, Steele leaked his report to the feds. ..."
"... The claims he makes are utterly fantastic ( WARNING the link is to a graun 'long read' and is brimming with tedious & tendentious bulldust) the most laughable being that 'Putin' - always Putin never any of the many thousands of astute bureaucrats who work in the Russian government, stole a bunch of valuable old paintings from the Hermitage and gave them to the blokes on the World Cup venue committee as a bribe. The feds who went through these poor old buggers' lives with a fine tooth comb found nothing to substantiate that libel. ..."
"... The worst thing about these slanders and the harassment of a few old geezers who prefer sport as a mechanism for nations to interact than war, is that these old fellas were all (well just about all) socialists who yeah probably did allow a coupla mill to fall into their wallets, but who were dedicated to their sport remaining egalitarian. They invested billions into developing their sport all over the world especially in Africa, Latin America and the Mid-East where a shortage of venues, kit and professional coaches used to really hold those nations back. ..."
"... The 'clean sweep' of FIFA has opened the door to neolibs who are talking about corporatising the World Cup like the Olympics, then the billions will all go to corporations and their shareholders ..."
"... It is stuff like this about Skirpal's boss Steele, which really opens up the field of suspects on the 'poisoning'. I have no doubt Skirpal would have been the alleged 'proof' for this farrago of tosh. Russia and Qatar got their world cup final, but england and amerika (who were the finalists against Qatar for hosting in 2022) didn't, surely it is the latter two who are more likely to have a grudge against old Sergei. ..."
"... The Western corporate media is a sorry spectacle to behold. The Baltic and the Scandinavian branches are the most pathetic. Combining native stupidity with pig-headed tenacity to hold on to the past. ..."
Jun 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Debsisdead | Jun 21, 2018 2:42:46 AM | 41

And another thing - the other day I came a cross an interesting tidbit, I would include a link if I can remember where I saw it, it may in fact have even been the graun. It goes like this:

A few years back the FBI raided the FIFA HQ in Switzerland eventually arresting and charging many FIFA commissioners alleging they were taking backhanders and at the time I, along with many other sort of assumed that the amerikans shoving their stickbeaks into an organisation which was none of their damn business was down to an announcement from FIFA president Blatter that if the Israeli army and police didn't cease harassing the Palestinian team preventing players from getting to international games by holding the players up at checkpoints, sometimes for days, FIFA would have no choice but to penalise the Israeli football team who had already been granted special dispensation by FIFA to play in the Euro conference rather than the ME one that their geography should have demanded.

Nuttytahoo did his usual 'antisemite' victim whine so it was a reasonable assumption to think the fed raid the next week was connected.

It may have been the issue which caused the amerikan sheet sniffers to move, but the actual investigation was caused by something completely different.
Two nations competed for the 2018 world cup hosting rights. One was Russia and the second one was . . .drumroll. . . England!
Yep the perfidious poms had put in their bid and one of the tools in their 'kit' was none other than the old fibber Christopher Steele, who just as with the Trump investigation, did his 'inquiry' by remote control as he is persona non grata in Russia.

Also just like the Trump bizzo, when his employers dipped out, Steele's unsubstantiated gossip & slander having done nothing useful, Steele leaked his report to the feds.

The claims he makes are utterly fantastic ( WARNING the link is to a graun 'long read' and is brimming with tedious & tendentious bulldust) the most laughable being that 'Putin' - always Putin never any of the many thousands of astute bureaucrats who work in the Russian government, stole a bunch of valuable old paintings from the Hermitage and gave them to the blokes on the World Cup venue committee as a bribe. The feds who went through these poor old buggers' lives with a fine tooth comb found nothing to substantiate that libel.

The other big lie was that while the Russian president was in Qatar finalising the joint gas pipeline deal he cut another deal of the 'you vote for us we'll vote for you' as world cup host in 2018 and 2022 respectively. Yeah that sounds just like President Putin tossing Russia's economic future to the side while he organised a few soccer games - not.

The worst thing about these slanders and the harassment of a few old geezers who prefer sport as a mechanism for nations to interact than war, is that these old fellas were all (well just about all) socialists who yeah probably did allow a coupla mill to fall into their wallets, but who were dedicated to their sport remaining egalitarian. They invested billions into developing their sport all over the world especially in Africa, Latin America and the Mid-East where a shortage of venues, kit and professional coaches used to really hold those nations back.

The 'clean sweep' of FIFA has opened the door to neolibs who are talking about corporatising the World Cup like the Olympics, then the billions will all go to corporations and their shareholders.

No one should begrudge these guys the few quid they grabbed, I know puritans hate it but in a truly tolerant society we should expect that a few otherwise dedicated types will always 'tickle the peter'. I used to get pissed about it in the union movement but the amounts are usually small compared to turn-over and I'd rather have a dodgy member of the proletariat who grabs a little in a position of power than a slimy neolib forever manouvering to flog the entire kit & kaboodle off to a bunch of anonymous 'financiers'.

It is stuff like this about Skirpal's boss Steele, which really opens up the field of suspects on the 'poisoning'. I have no doubt Skirpal would have been the alleged 'proof' for this farrago of tosh. Russia and Qatar got their world cup final, but england and amerika (who were the finalists against Qatar for hosting in 2022) didn't, surely it is the latter two who are more likely to have a grudge against old Sergei.

Virgile , Jun 21, 2018 4:17:00 AM | 44
The UK hates the idea that the EU that they left would turn to Russia for friendship. Their propaganda goes along with the USA that shares this apprehension. Now that Trump has humiliated the EU, the EU is turning toward Russia despite the UK...
Peter AU 1 , Jun 21, 2018 5:18:08 AM | 45
The pecking order of the mad monks 'anglosphere'.
  1. Britain is the matriarch.
  2. US is the black sheep that returned to rule the family.
  3. Australia, Canada, New Zealand are the loyal offspring that willingly do as they are told.
john , Jun 21, 2018 6:10:15 AM | 46
If two British scribes say they heard something, which each describes differently, then it must be true

oh yeah, absolutely. regarding the metaphysics of propaganda, obeisance trumps perception every time. Perceive the fallen tree .

Steve , Jun 21, 2018 6:15:33 AM | 47
The Western corporate media is a sorry spectacle to behold. The Baltic and the Scandinavian branches are the most pathetic. Combining native stupidity with pig-headed tenacity to hold on to the past.

[Jun 21, 2018] US interventions vs Russia interventions

Notable quotes:
"... The attributions of attacks to countries are very shaky. Throw in a couple of Cyrillic letters and voilà, you have associated a certain IP address or a certain piece of code with Russia. Somehow these simpleton arguments are uncritically accepted as proofs by computer security professionals the world over, who, of all people, really should know better. It's as if all the supposedly smart cryptographers and programmers are completely oblivious to the concept of manipulation. ..."
Jun 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mark2 , Jun 21, 2018 2:44:25 PM | 2

Could someone remind me the amount of country's America have invaded since the last world war 30 - 40 , I here'd. Compared to Russia 5-8 ? Russia is in Syria by invitation to deal with rebels/terrorist's .America is now threatening both. Despite being there to attempt a regime change. Just who do they think they are ? The sooner they are stopped the better and the easier.
karlof1 , Jun 21, 2018 3:13:44 PM | 3
Mark2 @2--

Russia intervened nowhere; the USSR intervened in Hungary and Czechoslovakia. In 1993, Yeltsin's cabal intervened in Russia to preserve Bush's and Clinton's New World Order. USSR was invited into Afghanistan; Outlaw US Empire wasn't. An incomplete list from William Blum's Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II . A graphic map based on Blum's book.

ben , Jun 21, 2018 5:31:23 PM | 14
Mark2@ 2: Here ya' go Mark:)

https://williamblum.org/essays/read/overthrowing-other-peoples-governments-the-master-list

karlof1 , Jun 21, 2018 5:32:52 PM | 15
Yesterday, Putin met with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. Unfortunately, the Kremlin's recap of the meeting's currently incomplete, but what is recorded is instructive:

"Of course, we look at the Russian Federation as a founder of the United Nations and as a permanent member of the Security Council, but I would say that at the present moment we look at the Russian Federation as an indispensable element of the creation of a new multipolar world.

"To be entirely frank, these are not easy times for multilateralism and not easy times for the UN. And I think that after the Cold War and after a short period of unipolar world we are still struggling to find a way to have a structured, multipolar world with multilateral governmental institutions that can work. And this is something that worries me a lot and is something in which, I believe, the Russian Federation has a unique role to play."

Considering many think Guterres just an agent for the Outlaw US Empire, maybe his cited words will cause a reassessment. I'd like to know what followed. Apparently there was some discussion about Korea and the economic initiatives being openly discussed since RoK President Moon will arrive in Russia tomorrow.

Lavrov met with Guterres today, and his opening remarks shine a bit more light on what was discussed:

"As emphasised by President Putin, we have invariably supported, support, and will continue to support the UN, this unique universal organisation. We think highly of your intention, Mr Secretary-General, to raise the profile of the United Nations in world affairs, particularly in settling regional conflicts. As you noted yourself at the meeting in the Kremlin yesterday, this is largely dependent on the general state of the international system as a whole and the UN member states' readiness to act collectively, jointly, rather than unilaterally, and to pursue the goals enshrined in the UN Charter rather than self-centred,[sic] immediate aims.

"We note that you have consistently advocated the pooling of efforts by major players to deal with world problems. This is the logic of the UN Charter, specifically its clauses on the creation and powers of the UN Security Council. I hope that based on the values we share we will be able to successfully continue cooperation in the interests of solving international problems."

Lots of emphasis on the absolute necessity of making the UN Charter whole again and not allowing any one nation to make a mockery of it by pursuing its "self-centered, immediate aims."

Mark2 , Jun 21, 2018 5:54:25 PM | 18
Ben @ 14
Thanks Ben. Yep that's what l thought reality would look like, that's my sanity safe for a while longer. Remember we are not alone!
Zanon @ 12
That is a perfect example of 'fake news' we can spot it here ! Or are we here now msm!
pantaraxia , Jun 21, 2018 6:06:38 PM | 20
@2 Mark2 'Could someone remind me the amount of country's America have invaded since the last world war '

Perhaps as relevant a question is how many countries are presently enjoying the beneficence of U.S. military operations?

According to Seymour Hersh in a recent interview on Democracy Now: " The United States is conducting war in 76 countries now."

Seymour Hersh on Torture at Abu Ghraib & Secret U.S. Assassination Programs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRvLZ6y4PxM

This confirms a recent statement by Sen. Bernie Sanders: "meanwhile we are "fighting terrorism" in some 76 countries...'

The Jimmy Dore Show - Bernie's Amazing Foreign Policy Smackdown: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmcMzCIEV8Y

karlof1 , Jun 21, 2018 6:19:58 PM | 21
I'd Like this made into a poster ! From Southfront's reporting about a RICO lawsuit filed against Clinton and Co. Quite the charge sheet, although it lacks several crimes.
Mark2 , Jun 21, 2018 6:36:55 PM | 22
Pantaraxia @ 20
Wow that doubles what I was already shocked about ! And then of course there's the comercal operations destablising country's using greed as a weapon. Plus the banks, I'm sure South Africa would have been a real success if they'd kept the banking curuption out. Time for immoral capitalism to fall.
Also don't you just hate victim blaming.There that's me done. Grrr
S , Jun 21, 2018 9:49:05 PM | 32
@b: I know you're just one man and can't do everything, but it would be wonderful if you could cover the history of hacking accusations against Russia. No one lays out a sequence of events better than you.

Just yesterday, another accusation has been leveled against Russia by the head of Germany's BfV intelligence agency, Hans-Georg Maassen: German intelligence sees Russia behind hack of energy firms - media report (Reuters). It's a serious accusation, and one would expect a serious proof. However, no proof has been given except that "it fits the Russian modus operandi". Also, the fact that the alleged attack has been named "Berserk Bear" by some unknown Western analyst. Apparently, that's enough proof by today's standards.

There is a critical lack of independent thinking and skepticism in the international computer security circles nowadays. The attributions of attacks to countries are very shaky. Throw in a couple of Cyrillic letters and voilà, you have associated a certain IP address or a certain piece of code with Russia. Somehow these simpleton arguments are uncritically accepted as proofs by computer security professionals the world over, who, of all people, really should know better. It's as if all the supposedly smart cryptographers and programmers are completely oblivious to the concept of manipulation.

[Jun 21, 2018] Russia to impose countermeasures to Trump s metals tariffs

Jun 21, 2018 | theduran.com

Russia to impose countermeasures to Trump's metals tariffs Meanwhile, Trump thinks he's bolstering America's national security

by Frank Sellers June 20, 2018, 11:45 645 Views

[Jun 21, 2018] No one believes the bloody presstitutes anymore!

Notable quotes:
"... Fact is that the Guardian and the Telegraph are full of anti-Russian propaganda. There is no piece in them about Russia or Putin that does not include snide and fear mongering or repeats long refuted claims about this or that incident for which Russia is claimed to be responsible. The military industrial complex gave order to condemn Russia and the "western" main stream media follow through. ..."
"... But don't pity them. They made their choice, and are well rewarded for their services. With respect, I would rather despise them. ..."
"... And Shaun is trying to sneak out: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/jun/20/police-england-fans-russia-nazi-salute-world-cup ..."
"... I can't prove Shaun Walker and Luke Harding are MI5 operatives but I feel it in my gut. ..."
"... Shawn Wanker personally witnessed Russian AFVs invading Ukraine when he was 1) too far away from the border to see them 2) had amazingly forgotten to bring his smart phone so he could take a geolocated photo. So his credibility is low. As in lower than snake shit. ..."
"... What a tangled web the west has woven for itself through its deceits. How these presstitutes had to work through the night, and sweat the details, to try to patch the holes in the sinking ship - while those who were part of the truth of discovering the reality of Russia slept soundly, and probably with a great beer buzz, and the ring of real people in their ears. ..."
Jun 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

The Guardian's Moscow Bureau Chief joined in and also retweets the Walker claim spreading it further and further:

Andrew Roth @Andrew__Roth - 14:37 UTC - 19 Jun 2018

Andrew Roth Retweeted Shaun Walker
Absurd the responses to this incident that multiple correspondents saw. And their point is that it was an outlier in what sounded like a fine night at the football. Context is all here, should they ignore it instead?

If two British scribes say they heard something, which each describes differently, then it must be true. "Evidence? We don't report with evidence. Trust us."

This morning a Russian blogger posted some evidence (machine translated from Russian):

Borisenko @amdn_blog - 7:58 UTC - 20 Jun 2018

Remember yesterday there was a lot of talk about the English journalist who wrote about the alleged Russians who sang Nazi songs in a bar in Volgograd? They found them. But they were not Russian, but... British. Actually, for that, it's e... Lo must be beaten. This is Volgograd! Stalingrad!

The attached a video shows three drunk British blokes in an 'Irish' pub where the menu is written in Cyrillic letters and World Cup flags hang from the ceiling. The blokes sing a line about putting someone to Auschwitz, give the Hitler salute and shout "Sieg Heil!" The pub where the video was taken seems to be a different one than the Harat's Walker and Luhn visited. But the point was made.

Fact is that the Guardian and the Telegraph are full of anti-Russian propaganda. There is no piece in them about Russia or Putin that does not include snide and fear mongering or repeats long refuted claims about this or that incident for which Russia is claimed to be responsible. The military industrial complex gave order to condemn Russia and the "western" main stream media follow through.

Both of the scribes quoted English fans who lament about the false picture they had when they arrived in Russia. Might that have something to do with the constant stream of russophobe trash the British media provides? Should a British correspondent in Russia take some time to reflect upon that?

But the two scribes go off to have lots of beer to then send spurious, late-night, anti-Russian claims to their 100,000 followers without providing any evidence. Then they lament about being called out for that.

They are mediocre propagandists who's words no one trusts or believes. One must truly pity these guys.

Posted by b on June 20, 2018 at 04:14 PM | Permalink

FHTEX | Jun 20, 2018 7:20:21 PM | 11

Pity these guys? Not really. Remember, they are not journalists. They are propagandist, hired mouthpieces. They say what they are scripted to say by their corporate bosses, it doesn't matter how absurd, the point is to just hammer and hammer and hammer away and mold public opinion via brute force. The old Soviet Union had more subtle liars.

But don't pity them. They made their choice, and are well rewarded for their services. With respect, I would rather despise them.

Vitor Vieira , Jun 20, 2018 7:43:08 PM | 16

And Shaun is trying to sneak out: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/jun/20/police-england-fans-russia-nazi-salute-world-cup
PhilK , Jun 20, 2018 8:00:26 PM | 17
RT's coverage of the Nazis:

England fans give Nazi salutes, sing Hitler song in World Cup city invaded during WWII (VIDEO)

Lochearn , Jun 20, 2018 8:11:39 PM | 19
I can't prove Shaun Walker and Luke Harding are MI5 operatives but I feel it in my gut. I got banned from the Guardian for contrasting Walker's article on the supposedly insanely loud, strident music in hotels at the Sochi Olympics with a real journalist who said the music was quiet and varied between classical and soft pop.

Most people are reading the sports journalists, thankfully, and watching them...

Mischi , Jun 20, 2018 8:17:25 PM | 20
@Peter 2 - I was going to write the same thing about Shaun Walker. He tried to start a war singlehandedly. I am amazed he still has a job!
PhilK , Jun 20, 2018 8:54:03 PM | 21
@20 I am amazed he still has a job!

Trying to start a war IS his job.

Bart Hansen , Jun 20, 2018 9:04:03 PM | 22
Every day the NYT has one or two op-ed pieces critical of Putin/Russia. Today it was by Alexey Kovalev, and titled "The World Cup Is Fun. Except for the Russians Being Tortured." I'm still waiting for a mention that the host team scored 8 goals in their two matches.
Patrick Armstrong , Jun 20, 2018 9:12:16 PM | 24
Shawn Wanker personally witnessed Russian AFVs invading Ukraine when he was 1) too far away from the border to see them 2) had amazingly forgotten to bring his smart phone so he could take a geolocated photo. So his credibility is low. As in lower than snake shit.
Den Lille Abe , Jun 20, 2018 9:34:59 PM | 25
Aaaaaaaaaand in the meantime, people around the world are are amazed at the beautiful stadiums, the fantastic atmosphere, the great welcome from local people who ar suddenly "invaded", they wonder at the well functioning machine behind it all, the wonder at the tight security and safety of spectators and sport stars.

Congratulations Russia and Russian people, well done! You are doing this exceptionally well. The World Cup, will be billions of dollars worth in positive reviews.

Great to see that Brit fans laid a wreath at the memorial. Shows May and Johnson are not connected to the public,

Jen , Jun 20, 2018 11:04:49 PM | 31
Seeing that the homophobia and racism claims are not sticking well in their relentless anti-Russian narrative, the MSM has dug up the case of the Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov who is currently on hunger strike while in jail in Labytnangi, in northern Siberia, for planning to carry out terrorist acts on public infrastructure and a statue in Crimea and to set fire to government office buildings in Simferopol in 2014, and is flaying it for all it's worth.
https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/ukrainian-film-director-on-hunger-strike-in-a-russian-prison-casts-dark-cloud-over-world-cup-20180620-p4zmmr.html
Grieved , Jun 20, 2018 11:28:38 PM | 32
The sports writers are the truth, while the established anchors are the party line. It was never any different.

We forget the upside. We forget how much energy it takes to keep a lie believable. We forget how the west has to strain against incredulity itself in order to counter the random and unschooled manifestations of the truth.

What a tangled web the west has woven for itself through its deceits. How these presstitutes had to work through the night, and sweat the details, to try to patch the holes in the sinking ship - while those who were part of the truth of discovering the reality of Russia slept soundly, and probably with a great beer buzz, and the ring of real people in their ears.

We have to do something, but we don't have to do everything, in order to counter the lies of the liars. The universe itself - the very nature of reality - abhors untruth, and causes the truth to show the shallowness of lies on countless, unscripted occasions.

And these occasions are usually a party. A celebration by ordinary people, joining in common understanding.

What the rulers most fear.

Because all it takes is a small consensus of 10-15 percent of any population and you have an activist force. They know this. Minions like the presstitutes mentioned here probably don't understand this in words, but in their bowels they know.

[Jun 21, 2018] C.J. Hopkins latest on the Russophobia hysteria

Jun 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

loneplateau | Jun 20, 2018 6:30:13 PM | 7

C.J. Hopkins latest on the Russophobia hysteria;

Awaiting the Putin-Nazi Apocalypse

Lochearn | Jun 20, 2018 7:38:52 PM | 14

I'm glad you linked to C J Hopkins. I am impressed with his wit, intelligence and writing style. He got booted off Counterpunch as I understand and is now published by the Unz Review, a rather strange but interesting site that picks up talented writers and thinkers from the left and from the right and appears to pay them.

I say strange because, judging by the comments, the alt-right appear to imagine that like zero hedge it is their forum and attack perfectly good articles because they do not fit in with their ideological mindset.

There is a sort of muddiness in the identity of the site (unlike MOA), but I am pleased that people like C J Hopkins may get something for their brilliant efforts. Diana Johnstone, someone I have huge regard for, is another who appears on Unz.

[Jun 21, 2018] Mad Dog Mattis, the destroyer of Raqqa, frets about losing moral authority by Finian Cunningham

Notable quotes:
"... "shake and bake" ..."
"... For Mattis to lament during a speech at a naval college last week that America's moral authority is being eroded by Putin is a symptom of the delusional official thinking infesting Washington. ..."
"... Mattis told his audience: "Putin aims to diminish the appeal of the western democratic model and attempts to undermine America's moral authority." He added that the Russian leader's "actions are designed not to challenge our arms at this point but to undercut and compromise our belief in our ideals." ..."
"... It is classic "in denial" ..."
"... "What a powerful delusion Mattis and Western leaders like him are encumbered with," ..."
"... "The US undercuts and compromises its own avowed beliefs and ideals because it has lost any moral integrity that it might have feasibly pretended to have due to decades of its own criminal foreign conduct." ..."
"... "America's so-called moral authority is the free pass it gives itself to topple democracy in Ukraine, replacing it with neo-Nazis; it has turned economically prosperous Libya into a wasteland, after murdering its leader Muammar Gaddafi; it funds and openly sponsors the MKO terror group in Iran for regime change in Tehran; and it is neck deep in fueling the Saudi coalition's genocidal war in Yemen." ..."
"... Despite this litany of criminality committed by the US with the acquiescence of European allies, Washington, says Martin, "preaches a bizarre doctrine of 'exceptionalism' and somehow arrogates a moral right to dominate the world. This is the fruit of the diseased minds of sociopaths." ..."
Jun 20, 2018 | www.rt.com

Jun 20, 2018, RT Op-ed The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

It's parallel universe time when US Pentagon chief James 'Mad Dog' Mattis complains that America's "moral authority" is being undermined by others – specifically Russian leader Vladimir Putin. This is the ex-Marine general who gained his ruthless reputation from when illegally occupying US troops razed the Iraqi city of Fallujah in the 2004-2005 using "shake and bake" bombardment of inhabitants with banned white phosphorus incendiaries.

A repeat of those war crimes happened again last year under Mattis' watch as Pentagon chief when US warplanes obliterated the Syrian city of Raqqa, killing thousands of civilians. Even the pro-US Human Rights Watch abhorred the repeated use of white phosphorus during that campaign to "liberate" Raqqa, supposedly from jihadists.

These are but two examples from dense archives of US war crimes committed over several decades, from its illegal intervention in Syria to Libya, from Iraq to Vietnam, back to the Korean War in the early 1950s when American carpet bombing killed millions of innocent civilians.

For Mattis to lament during a speech at a naval college last week that America's moral authority is being eroded by Putin is a symptom of the delusional official thinking infesting Washington.

According to Mattis, the problem of America's diminishing global reputation has nothing to do with US misconduct – even though the evidence is replete to prove that systematic misconduct. No, the problem, according to him, is that Russia's Putin is somehow sneakily undermining Washington's moral authority.

Mattis told his audience: "Putin aims to diminish the appeal of the western democratic model and attempts to undermine America's moral authority." He added that the Russian leader's "actions are designed not to challenge our arms at this point but to undercut and compromise our belief in our ideals."

The US Secretary of Defense doesn't elaborate on how he thinks Russia is achieving this dastardly plot to demean America. It is simply asserted as fact. This has been a theme recycled over and over by officials in Washington and Brussels, other Western government leaders and of course NATO and its affiliated think-tanks. All of which has been dutifully peddled by Western news media.

It is classic "in denial" thinking. The general loss of legitimacy and authority by Western governments is supposedly nothing to do with their own inherent failures and transgressions, from bankrupt austerity economics, to deteriorating social conditions, to illegal US-led wars and the repercussions of blowback terrorism and mass migration of refugees.

Oh no. What the ruling elites are trying to do is shift the blame from their own culpability on to others, principally Russia. American political analyst Randy Martin says that Mattis' latest remarks show a form of collective delusion among Western political establishments and their aligned mainstream news media.

"What a powerful delusion Mattis and Western leaders like him are encumbered with," says Martin. "The US undercuts and compromises its own avowed beliefs and ideals because it has lost any moral integrity that it might have feasibly pretended to have due to decades of its own criminal foreign conduct."

Read more This is America: Outrage at Trump is phony, US leaders have praised dictators for decades

The analyst added: "America's so-called moral authority is the free pass it gives itself to topple democracy in Ukraine, replacing it with neo-Nazis; it has turned economically prosperous Libya into a wasteland, after murdering its leader Muammar Gaddafi; it funds and openly sponsors the MKO terror group in Iran for regime change in Tehran; and it is neck deep in fueling the Saudi coalition's genocidal war in Yemen."

Despite this litany of criminality committed by the US with the acquiescence of European allies, Washington, says Martin, "preaches a bizarre doctrine of 'exceptionalism' and somehow arrogates a moral right to dominate the world. This is the fruit of the diseased minds of sociopaths."

This week, three headline-making issues speak volumes about America's declining moral authority.

... ... ...

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Finian Cunningham (born 1963) has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. Originally from Belfast, Northern Ireland, he is a Master's graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. For over 20 years he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organizations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent. Now a freelance journalist based in East Africa, his columns appear on RT, Sputnik, Strategic Culture Foundation and Press TV.

[Jun 20, 2018] Best Russian oil is going to china; Europe gets only whatg is left

Jun 20, 2018 | peakoilbarrel.com

alimbiquated x Ignored says: 06/18/2018 at 6:30 pm

Anyone careto comment on the quality of Russianoil?

http://uawire.org/europe-cuts-back-on-russian-oil-purchases-by-20-due-to-poor-quality

Watcher x Ignored says: 06/18/2018 at 9:39 pm
read deep into the article -- the best oil goes to China. Europe gets only what is left. Haven't needed it, but the North Sea is dying. Iran is the next supplier but if sanctions eliminate them, Russian oil of whatever quality will be the only choice.

Or Europe could ignore sanctions, if they have the courage.

[Jun 20, 2018] The only four countries that have any ability to increase production -- Russia, Saudis, UAE and Kuwait

Jun 20, 2018 | peakoilbarrel.com

Don, 06/20/2018 at 11:16 am

I wanted to make a comment about the OPEC(and Russia) meeting coming up and a possible production increase. The speculation going around is that OPEC and Russia might increase production up to 1.80 mbpd. The minimum production increase would be around 500kbpd. What is the most likely production increase based on past production?

The only four countries that have any ability to increase production are

1) Russia: Current production 10.9mbpd. High production 11.3mbpd Difference -400kbpd
2) Saudi Arabia: Current production 10.0mbpd. High production 10.6mbpd Difference -600kbpd
3) UAE: Current production 2.9mbpd. High production 3.10mbpd Difference -200kbpd
4) Kuwait: Current production 2.70mbpd. High production 2.8mbpd Difference -100kbpd

The high watermark in production for these countries happened from Mid 2016 to Mid 2017. Currently these four countries are producing about 1.3mbpd below their all-time high production limits. Ask yourself what is the likelihood that these four countries will increase production to all-time highs and potentially surpass their highs which would be required to increase production to 1.80mbpd? When OPEC did announce production cuts at the end of 2016 many believe they had increased production to unsustainable levels to give each country a higher quota from the production cuts. The guys a Core Labs believed they had to cut because it would have threaten the long term integrality of their fields.

My guess is that the most OPEC and Russia can bring back for a sustainable period is about half of the 1.30mbpd they reduced from their production highs .maybe about 600kbpd

[Jun 20, 2018] Awaiting the Putin-Nazi Apocalypse by C.J. Hopkins

Notable quotes:
"... C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing (USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23 , is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. He can reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org . ..."
Jun 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

I don't know about you, but I'm getting a little tired of waiting for the Hitlerian nightmare that the corporate media promised us was coming back in 2016. Frankly, I'm beginning to suspect that all their apocalyptic pronouncements were just parts of some elaborate cocktease. I mean, here we are, a year and half into the reign of the Trumpian Reich, and, well, where are all the concentration camps, the SS units with their death's head insignia, the Riefenstahlian parades and rallies? Trump hasn't even banned the Democratic Party, or annexed Canada, or invaded Mexico, or made anybody wear color-coded armbands. If he doesn't start Hitlering relatively soon, the oracles of the corporate media are going to have some serious explaining to do.

I don't think I'm overreacting. After all, back in 2016, The Guardian promised us an " Age of Darkness ," and the end of "civilized order" as we know it. " Globalization is dead, and white supremacy has triumphed ," one of its more hysterical pundits proclaimed. " Donald Trump is actually a fascist ," Michael Kinsley assured us in The Washington Post . Charles Blow of The New York Times warned that Trump's election was "the beginning of the end," the descent of the republic into " racial Orwellianism ," whatever that's supposed to mean. Thomas Friedman called it " a moral 911 ." Paul Krugman predicted nothing short of " a global recession with no end in sight ." Jonathan Chait, after heroically vowing not to flee the country with his terrified family, but to stay and fight to the bitter end, guaranteed us that the "monster," Trump, would " shake the republic to its foundations ."

Perhaps my seismometer is on the fritz, but I haven't detected much foundation shaking. Yes, Trump repulses me, personally. I do not like the man. I never have. I was based in New York for fifteen years, in the 1990s and early 2000s, before he became a game show host, when he was still just a shady real estate mogul with alleged ties to organized crime who occasionally appeared on Wrestlemania and just generally went about the city making a narcissistic ass of himself and plastering his gold-plated name onto everything. So I have no illusions about his character the man is an inveterate snake oil salesman with the moral compass of a Tijuana pimp. All I'm saying is, we were promised Hitler, or Mussolini at the very least, and it seems like all we're getting so far is just regular old narcissistic Donald Trump.

Of course, he could just be laying low and holding back on the Hitler stuff as part of the evil master plan personally developed by Vladimir Putin to systematically brainwash Americans (with state-of-the-art mind-control Facebook ads) into embracing all-out National Socialism and marching through the streets in full Nazi regalia singing Amerika Über Alles at which point Trump will rip off his mask, reveal his true Hitlerian face, Steve Bannon will suddenly reappear in the turret of an M1 Abrams tank at the head of a division of rebel infantry flying giant Confederate flags as they hideously rumble down Pennsylvania Avenue, and the Putin-Nazi Holocaust will begin.

Or maybe the extremely serious, Pulitzer Prize-winning political pundit David Leonhardt is onto something. In a prominent op-ed in The New York Times , he wonders if Putin's "secret plan" is for Trump to destroy "the Atlantic alliance" by arriving late for the G7 meeting and "picking fights over artificial issues," not to mention insulting the Canadian prime minister, which, it doesn't get much more hair-raising than that. OK, I know you're probably thinking that sounds like the hopelessly paranoid jabber of some conspiracy theorist nut on YouTube, but we're talking The New York Times here, folks, and a bona fide "respectable pundit" who wrote a whole 15,000-word ebook and has been interviewed by Stephen Colbert, among his many other distinguished accomplishments.

Examined in the context of other blatantly loony theories the corporate media are currently attempting to ram down our throats, Leonhardt's theory kind of makes sense. The Guardian , another very serious newspaper, in addition to covering the repercussions of its coverage of Corbyn's Nazi Death Cult , is hot on the trail of the soon-to-be-infamous Putin-Banks-Brexit Connection . According to "documents seen by The Observer ," a Guardian sister publication, Arron Banks, a "Brexit bankroller," allegedly had brunch with the Russian ambassador three times , instead of just once, as he had claimed. He was also allegedly offered a piece of some shady gold deal in exchange for the number of someone on Trump transition team, which for some reason it was otherwise impossible to obtain. Or whatever. It doesn't really matter what happened. The point is, Putin orchestrated the Brexit, presumably as part of his secret plan to destabilize the Atlantic alliance, and then blackmailed Trump into running for president with that "pee-tape" the Democrats paid a former British spook to allege exists .

Paul Krugman of The New York Times concurs. In his latest extremely serious piece of totally respectable grown-up opinionating , he once again calls Trump "a quisling" (he's developed a fondness for this term, which goes over well with New York Times readers) and reiterates that Trump is "a de facto foreign agent" and that "America as we know it is finished." Tragically, according to Krugman, the FBI, CIA, and other Guardians of Western Democracy are utterly powerless to deal with this quisling, and his evil puppet master, Putin, because it turns out the entire Republican Party is "hopelessly, irredeemably corrupt." Yes, it appears the only chance we have to save the world from Trumpzilla, and imminent Putin-Nazi Holocaust, is to elect a buttload of Democrats to office, and eventually an Obama-like Democratic President, so they can launch an all-out thermonuclear war against Russia and North Korea that'll teach these Putin-Nazis to screw around with our trade agreements!

Oh, and also, we need to cancel the Brexit, and do away with all these "populist" movements that Putin has fomented all over Europe. For example, according to billionaire George Soros , the refugee-hating League in Italy is likely another Putin-backed front, part of his scheme to "dominate the West." One can only assume that the AfD, the FPÖ, Rassemblement National, and every other extreme-Right party exploiting people's rage and fear in Europe are parts of Putin's grand conspiracy (except, of course, for the Ukrainian Nazis the Western alliance put into power ). Soros, like billionaire Bruce Wayne before him, tired of waiting for the West to strike back, is taking matters into his own hands. Not only has he been tirelessly laboring to prevent Donald Trump from " destroying the world ," now he's financing "Best for Britain," a campaign to de-brainwash the British people, who, obviously, only voted for Brexit because they'd been brainwashed by the Putin-Nazis.

I could go on and on with this. Have you heard the the one about the Putin-Nazis conspiring with the NRA ? How about the one where Emmanuel Macron, in order to protect the French from "fake news," and division-sowing Putin-Nazi memes, wants the authority to censor the Internet ? Or have you read the column in which David Brooks, without a detectable trace of irony , laments the passing of international relationships "based on friendship, shared values, loyalty, and affection" seriously, he used the word "affection" in reference to the Western alliance, one of the most ruthless, mass-murdering empires in the history of ruthless, mass-murdering empires ? Oh,yeah, and I almost forgot MSNBC's Rachel Maddow is reporting that the North Korea summit was also orchestrated by Putin !

I'm not sure how much more bizarre things can get. This level of bull goose loony paranoia, media-generated mass hysteria, and mindless conformity would be hysterically funny if it weren't so fucking horrifying in terms of what it says about millions of Westerners, who are apparently prepared to believe almost anything the authorities tell them, no matter how nuts. That famous Voltaire quote comes to mind "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities," he wrote. Another, more disturbing way of looking at it is, people willing to believe absurdities, to switch off their critical thinking faculties in order to conform to an official narrative as blatantly ridiculous as the Putin-Nazi narrative, are people who have already surrendered their autonomy, who have traded it for the comfort of the herd. Such people cannot be reasoned with, because there isn't really anyone in there. There is only whatever mindless jabber got injected into their brain that day, the dutiful repetition of which guarantees they remain a "normal" person (who believes what other normal persons believe), and not some sort of "radical" or "extremist."

These people are the people who worry me these "normal" people who, completely calmly, as if what they are saying wasn't batshit crazy, explain how Trump is just like Hitler, and how Putin is trying to take over the world. I sit there and listen and smile at these people, some of whom are friends and colleagues, people who I genuinely like, and who genuinely like me in return, but who, under the right set of circumstances, would stand by and watch me marched into prison, or worse, and not utter a word in protest.

C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing (USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23 , is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. He can reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org .

c matt , June 15, 2018 at 8:08 pm GMT

Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities

Like "We must destroy Iraq/Libya/Lebanon/Syria/Iran/Yemen so we can save it."

Biff , June 17, 2018 at 3:18 am GMT

These people are the people who worry me these "normal" people who, completely calmly, as if what they are saying wasn't batshit crazy, explain how Trump is just like Hitler, and how Putin is trying to take over the world. I sit there and listen and smile at these people, some of whom are friends and colleagues, people who I genuinely like, and who genuinely like me in return, but who, under the right set of circumstances, would stand by and watch me marched into prison, or worse, and not utter a word in protest.

I've got the same friends. Liberal Putin haters. Dupes, and suckers.

anon [997] Disclaimer , June 17, 2018 at 5:40 am GMT
I refuse to be friends with people stupid enough to believe the media propaganda. Did I mention I don't have any friends?
ick phlegm , June 17, 2018 at 3:13 pm GMT
It's true that some of this is a matter of loony cultish shibboleths imposed to enforce conformity. But there's more to it. This hysterical vilification of Trump is rational and purposive. The system depends on everybody blaming the other party for what CIA does to you. CIA has impunity and an illegal state of emergency based on secret law. They can kill anybody they want and get away with it, including the presidential puppet ruler, ask JFK, oh wait, you can't, he's dead. That absolute sovereignty means CIA's in charge, the buck stops there. So it's crucial to keep the public's attention and emotional energy fixed on the puppet.

Russia does pose a threat, but it's not what we're told. Tying the demonized political enemy to Russia is CIA's way of disguising the real threat Russia poses. Russia is the world's most effective advocate for black-letter rule of law, including human rights law that would destroy the CIA police state. The CIA regime's fulla-shitness is obvious to everyone in the world except the American public.

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

Russia complies with international law. The USA does not. The largest bloc Russia leads is not the SCO or the BRICS, it's the G-192, the rule-of-law advocates in UNCTAD, UNESCO, and the General Assembly. People are now discussing Uniting for Peace as a means to counter US abuse of veto impunity in the UNSC. Uniting for Peace was originally devised in response to Soviet obstruction, so the tables have turned in a striking way. The free world is ~USA, and they're going from strength to strength under the Russian nuclear umbrella. They're going to break down the Iron Curtain and let us out.

manorchurch , June 18, 2018 at 4:11 am GMT

the man is an inveterate snake oil salesman with the moral compass of a Tijuana pimp

You mean, a typical politician? I see it more as a salesman of golf-club memberships and the moral compass of a network news anchor.

Renoman , June 18, 2018 at 9:08 am GMT
Vlad Putin is the leader of the free World, most popular leader in the World, his people like what he's doing and that would be delivering them a better life while minding his own business internationally. Again I ask "what has Russia ever done to the USA"?
The left is sinking fast these days, most people aren't interested in being over run with immigrants or watching the faggots make fools of themselves or having the State in their business all the time. Time to pave the roads, give us decent schools and Hospitals, put the junkies into leaky boats and send them out to Sea and make sure everyone gets fed. That's what we want, fuck that war shit, nobody wants that. America is nothing but a Thug Nation, at least Trump is something different, anything would be better than the status quo down there.
Never mind, they'll be broke soon and the World will be wrecked for ten years, worth it I say.
annamaria , June 18, 2018 at 10:29 am GMT
@hyperbola

Agree.
In their feverish desire to be correct in the eyes of their paymasters, the ever-opportunistic Paul Krugman of The New York Times, the ever-opportunistic "psychologist" David Brooks, and the "progressively" profiteering Rachel Maddow of MSNBC have crossed all barriers of decent behavior. They are the product of Rovian creation of reality , when facts -- the documented facts -- have no weight anymore.
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities," indeed.

Meanwhile, in Syria, "Drivers Behind the War on Syria and the Impoverishment of Us All:" https://www.globalresearch.ca/drivers-behind-the-war-on-syria-and-the-impoverishment-of-us-all/5644381
"We know that the Western narratives about the war on Syria are entirely false, so what are some of the real reasons that are driving this overseas holocaust, and who is benefiting from it?
To be blunt, Western policymakers seek to destroy secular democracy in Syria, along with its socially uplifting political economy, with a view to installing a compliant fascist Wahhabi government. The end result is chaos, the enrichment of the transnational "oligarchs" and the impoverishment of Syria.
In doing this, the policymakers are also impoverishing the vast majority of people in Western countries1, destroying nation-state sovereignties, and endeavouring to create a totalitarian World Order.
International financial institutions see local banking as a threat. Consequently, in Aleppo, Syria, terrorists destroyed local banking institutions."
– Same as in Libya. The banking cabal had led the US/EU coalition of war criminals to murder hundreds of thousands of people in order to destroy Libyan banking system and to satisfy Israel's aspirations for Ertez Israel: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article38009.htm

annamaria , June 18, 2018 at 11:41 am GMT
@Wally

"America's Collusion With Neo-Nazis," by Stephen F. Cohen: ttps://www.thenation.com/article/americas-collusion-with-neo-nazis/
"– That the pogrom-like burning to death of ethnic Russians and others in Odessa shortly later in 2014 reawakened memories of Nazi extermination squads in Ukraine during World War II has been all but deleted from the American mainstream narrative even though it remains a painful and revelatory experience for many Ukrainians.
-- That the Azov Battalion of some 3,000 well-armed fighters, which has played a major combat role in the Ukrainian civil war and now is an official component of Kiev's armed forces, is avowedly "partially" pro-Nazi, as evidenced by its regalia, slogans, and programmatic statements, and well-documented as such by several international monitoring organizations. [The Azov Battalion was financed by a Jewish oligarch Kolomojsky]. ( https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Frussia-insider.com%2Fsites%2Finsider%2Ffiles%2F-DaRo81rUvA.jpg&f=1
" -- That stormtroop-like assaults on gays, Jews, elderly ethnic Russians, and other "impure" citizens are widespread throughout Kiev-ruled Ukraine, along with torchlight marches reminiscent of those that eventually inflamed Germany in the late 1920s and 1930s. And that the police and official legal authorities do virtually nothing to prevent these neo-fascist acts or to prosecute them. On the contrary, Kiev has officially encouraged them by systematically rehabilitating and even memorializing Ukrainian collaborators with Nazi German extermination pogroms and their leaders during World War II, renaming streets in their honor, building monuments to them, rewriting history to glorify them, and more."
– None of the 52 main Jewish American organizations raised their voices to condemn the revival of neo-Nazism (banderism) in Ukraine. Is this because of the ethnicity of the State Dept. organizers of the putsch, Nuland-Kagan and Pyatt? Or is it because of the zionists' visceral hatred towards Russia that has been protecting the sovereign state of Syria from the supremacist Israeli thugs?

Chris Bridges , June 18, 2018 at 12:19 pm GMT
I loved this article! Funny as hell! I do not have quite the negative view of Trump – I do think he has matured some from his playboy days and clearly is serious about doing some good things – but the author's depiction of the posturing buffoons of the media is spot on. Hitler indeed! Ha ha!
Wally Streeter , June 18, 2018 at 12:26 pm GMT
When Hillary started ranting about Trump being "Putin's Puppet", I wondered "Where did that come from?". I decided that she probably had a pot of evil warming on the stove and needed a scapegoat to go along with it. Later events haven't proven me wrong.
nickels , June 18, 2018 at 4:07 pm GMT
I just discovered the brilliant Shadia Drury, one of the best resources on the Neocon and Straussian concept of the 'Noble Lie', and the enemy (previously War On Terror, now Russia Threat) to unite the nihilism of liberal society and prevent it from disintegrating.
joe webb , June 18, 2018 at 4:09 pm GMT
trump derangement syndrome here with Hopkins. Trump was a showman, like thousands of others.

He also enjoyed celebrity , again, only this time, like millions of others.

He likes women, especially in a state of undress. Who doesn't? Women as much as men, like to look at pictures of naked ladies, maybe more than men.

Maybe the whole article by Hopkins is a joke.

What I do not fully understand, and Hopkins does not help is how lunatic-hatred on the part of liberals has become so powerful.

I talked some race, as in global North and global South and natural selection, to a liberal gal the other day, and she thought it made sense. But she still hates Trump.

Or take the current moral Outrage over baby Mexicans at the border. None of it makes any sense, especially inasmuch as Mom and Pop can just keep family together by going home, which is not an option for the average burglary suspect, etc. here at home.

Trump has become the default target for every aggrieved world-hating liberal sap. The world must be changed! I demand it!

It may have something to do also with the perception that maybe they picked the wrong team, and that various career choices may have been wrong, in terms of jobs/career and so on. Given the armies of professional liberals wearing badges of Equality but scrambling for Privilege, Trump's laughter at their expense must drive them nuts.

And/or, the SJW types of youngsters (like I was at the time of Vietnam Slaughters) Trump is the Absolute Negation of everything they dream about the Perfect World, and their own badges of Revolutionary Correctness/Rectitude which they desperately seek to pin on their chests/breasts.
( curiously, many young women bare their breasts in protest about something or other. More sexual politics, I guess, especially if they have nice tits.)

I am you and you are me and we are all together. Milan Kundera has a great image in one of his novels about the Revolution in Hungary (?), the communist Revolution that is: A circle dance of young pioneer dancers spiraling up into the sky, like the Ascent of Christians to heaven. He admitted that he was of that delusion at the time. Hope morphed into Belief.

The Delusions of Race Equality are also at hand. And even though Trump declares himself politically correct on that score, the Trump Deranged syndrome SJW children and their parents, deny that Trump is a fellow true-believer. Trump is a Racist! really, and so on.

After a half-century of blatant failure of Blacks to improve the Content of Their Character, never mind getting grades good enough to get into college without privileged access, quotas, etc. older liberals, at least, smell Failure. Disillusion dreams dying hard contributes to the hatreds afoot.

The kids vote for Bernie, but the parents are also disillusioned about socialism, yet the kids luv Bernie and even now blame Billary, etc. for Trump. Who can blame the kids what with the economy punishing their generation like we have not seen for generations

(The ten year cycle of recessions is about to recycle another recession, if history means anything in this regard. Trump is not out of trouble and his standard issue GOP economics is not going to save him if a recession roars in. Wages are still super low, etc, etc and will plummet in another recession, never mind Mexicans.)

So, the desperation of adult liberals is two-fold, or three-fold. Socialism failed. Racial Equality has failed. They know it but cannot admit it to one-another. Trump has won, a repudiation of Everything they Luv.

Hatred simmers in the melting-pot, acrid fumes enter the Body Politic. Liberals stagger while genuine conservatives have adjusted over the last couple decades to the stench of liberalism, all the while buying guns and waiting for the Tipping Point.

Maybe this begins to account for the hatreds swirling out there. I have not even mentioned the hatreds of Blacks who are the most aware of their Failure, and register it for example in their admiration of Elijah Muhammed, Reveredn Wright, and of course, the Obama Zip.

Trump is just the Beginning as the American and European peasantry grab their pitchforks and head for Brussels and D.C.

Joe Webb

nickels , June 18, 2018 at 4:45 pm GMT
On origins of the Russia Threat: just more 'perpetual war' to rescue society from the inherent nihilism of liberalism:

This is made clear in Strauss's exchange with Kojève (reprinted in Strauss's On Tyranny), and in his commentary on Schmitt's The Concept of the Political (reprinted in Heinrich Meier, Carl Schmitt and Leo Strauss: The Hidden Dialogue). Kojève lamented the animalisation of man and Schmitt worried about the trivialisation of life. All three of them were convinced that liberal economics would turn life into entertainment and destroy politics; all three understood politics as a conflict between mutually hostile groups willing to fight each other to the death. In short, they all thought that man's humanity depended on his willingness to rush naked into battle and headlong to his death. Only perpetual war can overturn the modern project, with its emphasis on self-preservation and "creature comforts." Life can be politicised once more, and man's humanity can be restored.
This terrifying vision fits perfectly well with the desire for honour and glory that the neo-conservative gentlemen covet. It also fits very well with the religious sensibilities of gentlemen. The combination of religion and nationalism is the elixir that Strauss advocates as the way to turn natural, relaxed, hedonistic men into devout nationalists willing to fight and die for their God and country.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/faith-iraqwarphiloshophy/article_1542.jsp

anon [107] Disclaimer , June 19, 2018 at 5:21 pm GMT
@nickels

You're right, Drury did give good insight into Strauss & his impact. Whoever compiled these clips, from Drury on Strauss to the Wolfowitz interview just after 9/11, made all the right connections.

And the chain of attitudes and actions can be examined in both directions, backward, to Strauss's expectations of Jew-power in Weimar -- he expected Jews to be the elite overseers of the "vulgar masses" who resented being resented by said vulgar masses.

Anon [280] Disclaimer , June 19, 2018 at 11:00 pm GMT
It's projection. They fantasize about doing the same things they falsely imagine Trump will do to them, but to their enemies. They are dangerous. The internet has also allowed the masses to see just how utterly incompetent the Ruling Class is. Neopotism, networking, and geography got them their positions, not talent or erudition.

"These people are the people who worry me these "normal" people who, completely calmly, as if what they are saying wasn't batshit crazy, explain how Trump is just like Hitler, and how Putin is trying to take over the world. I sit there and listen and smile at these people, some of whom are friends and colleagues, people who I genuinely like, and who genuinely like me in return, but who, under the right set of circumstances, would stand by and watch me marched into prison, or worse, and not utter a word in protest."

They can never be allowed to come to power. Ever. Their hysteria over Trump has let the mask slip too much. They have been revealed. It is no different than if Hitler had announced the Holocaust before taking office. At that point, it would have been morally correct to deny him regardless of the vote. We may very well have to consider this in 2020. Do you really want to hand your fate over to these people? They have made their psychotic feelings plain. On top of that, they are incompetent buffoons.

annamaria , June 20, 2018 at 6:04 pm GMT
@redmudhooch

Correct.
Meanwhile, the anonymous "nazi-hunters" at stopantisemitism.org have produced another anti-First Amendment battle cry, this time again a professor at Columbia University, who dared to speak the truth about The Lobby: http://hamiddabashi.com

The "nazi-hunters" at stopantisemitism.org should visit the Nuland-liberated Ukraine, where the activities of the US Zionists (specifically, Nuland-Kagan and Pyatt) have brought about a revival of neo-Nazism (banderism) and the consequent rise in real anti-semitism -- not the one invented by the Jewish vigilantes at stopantisemitism.org

If the "nazi-hunters" from stopantisemitism.org are serious about the memory of the WWII, they should better start investigating the pro-Nazi activities of the Kagans' clan first and foremost (see the "liberated" Ukraine) and then proceed with investigating the Israeli citizen Kolomojsky, who was the main financier of the openly neo-Nazi Azov Battalion.

https://www.thenation.com/article/americas-collusion-with-neo-nazis/

" the Azov Battalion of some 3,000 well-armed fighters is avowedly pro-Nazi, as evidenced by its regalia, slogans, and programmatic statements, and well-documented as such by several international monitoring organizations."

[Jun 20, 2018] Never underestimate what a man will do to keep a good-paying job.

Jun 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

dr kill , June 20, 2018 at 4:46 am GMT

@ChrisZ

Never underestimate what a man will do to keep a good-paying job.

[Jun 20, 2018] Updating Orwell by Steve Sailer

Notable quotes:
"... Orwell's 1984 is no longer a warning – it's a primer on how to to run your campaign. Use of social media to enforce absolute conformity of opinion, rampant doublethink, teach children to turn in the parents, four fingers equals five fingers – it's all there. ..."
"... Our present cycle of Two-Minutes-Hate seems pretty effective at keeping the Outer Party #Resistance fired up against Donald "Emmanuel Goldstein" Trump. ..."
"... Regular decent folks Democrats really have no idea how far to the Left their party has gone. ..."
"... You can see it in the NY Times. I dropped it recently after reading it for 30 years as I got so sick of their anti-white, gentile, male, heterosexual agenda. I still look at it through a free online subscription from my college, and get disgusted by the pieces in the opinion sections and then log off. ..."
"... I subscribed to the NYT for a number of years. After the recent campaign and the current treatment of our President, Donald Trump, I quit. I am stunned at how these old media properties are being purchased and used for political activism on behalf of their owners and advertisers. They're another example of extreme Left propaganda presented as respectable journalism. ..."
"... The Gray Lady is an old SJW tranny, as far as I can tell.. ..."
"... If a man isn't a committed socialist in 1948, he has no heart. If a man is still a committed socialist in 1984, he has no brain. Orwell was moving to the right, but there are so many "rights" that we can only guess which one he'd have ended up on. Neocon, nationalist, libertarian, who knows. But it's a common arc in one's forties. He didn't make it to 50. ..."
"... Classic satire is often the work of reactionaries: Aristophanes, Juvenal, Swift, Waugh. ..."
"... I have started calling the mass media furies a 'propaganda blitz'. The recent explosion around child separation is a perfect example. It is a combination of major media outlets all going into a froth, the expert use of social media, and the complete shaming of any other viewpoint. They announce a crisis precisely at the time there is movement on an issue, as a means of achieving a purely political objective. Thus, this crisis was timed to coincide with immigration legislation being discussed again. ..."
"... Even small-time progressive players like Russell Moore of the SBC successfully used this recently. They announced a crisis prior to their yearly convention (think voting day for the SBC), used friendly media to spread the word and erupt in hysteria, and used social media to bludgeon their political opponents. It was wicked, but HIGHLY effective. ..."
"... As Steve likes to point out, we need a word for this. I am using 'propaganda blitz', because if you are on the receiving end it is akin to the blitzes over London in WWII, except instead of bombs it is 7-14 days of a brutal, propagandistic news cycle. ..."
Jun 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

From George Orwell's "Inside the Whale," 1940, on the mental atmosphere of English writers in 1937 (slightly updated):

By 2018 the whole of the intelligentsia was mentally at war. Establishment thought had narrowed down to 'anti-Trumpism', i.e. to a negative, and a torrent of hate-literature directed against Russia and the politicians supposedly friendly to Russia was pouring from the Press. The thing that, to me, was truly frightening about the war in America was not such Twitter spats as I witnessed, nor even the party feuds on Instagram, but the immediate reappearance in respectable circles of the mental atmosphere of the McCarthy Era. The very people who for 65 years had sniggered over their own superiority to Kremlin hysteria were the ones who rushed straight back into the mental slum of 1950. All the familiar wartime idiocies, spy-hunting, orthodoxy-sniffing (Sniff, sniff. Are you a good anti-Trumpist?), the retailing of atrocity stories, came back into vogue as though the intervening years had never happened.

Of course, people in 1937 or 1950 at least had some justification for their hysteria.

Anon7 , June 19, 2018 at 3:51 pm GMT

Regular decent folks Democrats really have no idea how far to the Left their party has gone. Orwell's 1984 is no longer a warning – it's a primer on how to to run your campaign. Use of social media to enforce absolute conformity of opinion, rampant doublethink, teach children to turn in the parents, four fingers equals five fingers – it's all there.
Anon7 , June 19, 2018 at 3:52 pm GMT
Regular decent folks Democrats really have no idea how far to the Left their party has gone. Orwell's 1984 is no longer a warning – it's a primer on how to to run your campaign. Use of social media to enforce absolute conformity of opinion, rampant doublethink, teach children to turn in the parents, four fingers equals five fingers – it's all there.
Steve Sailer , Website June 19, 2018 at 3:52 pm GMT
Here's the original:

By 1937 the whole of the intelligentsia was mentally at war. Left-wing thought had narrowed down to 'anti-Fascism', i.e. to a negative, and a torrent of hate-literature directed against Germany and the politicians supposedly friendly to Germany was pouring from the Press. The thing that, to me, was truly frightening about the war in Spain was not such violence as I witnessed, nor even the party feuds behind the lines, but the immediate reappearance in left-wing circles of the mental atmosphere of the Great War. The very people who for twenty years had sniggered over their own superiority to war hysteria were the ones who rushed straight back into the mental slum of 1915. All the familiar wartime idiocies, spy-hunting, orthodoxy-sniffing (Sniff, sniff. Are you a good anti-Fascist?), the retailing of atrocity stories, came back into vogue as though the intervening years had never happened.

Thin-Skinned Masta-Beta , June 19, 2018 at 4:13 pm GMT
Our present cycle of Two-Minutes-Hate seems pretty effective at keeping the Outer Party #Resistance fired up against Donald "Emmanuel Goldstein" Trump.
anony-mouse , June 19, 2018 at 4:14 pm GMT
Don't a lot of people here use war talk like 'invasion' to describe migrants? That's excepting the many WWIII-ers here:

http://www.unz.com/proberts/ten-days-before-the-end-of-the-world/

People of all types seem to like talking about war regardless of how peaceful things are. Human nature?

Luke Lea , June 19, 2018 at 4:17 pm GMT
Nice job. We need a new nickname for this updated form of corporate speech.
bored identity , June 19, 2018 at 4:35 pm GMT
If you want a vision of the future, imagine a cosmopoliethnocentric. Boot with cleats stamping on a host's face – forever:

... ... ...

Neuday , June 19, 2018 at 5:40 pm GMT
@anony-mouse

Invading and colonizing a country is an act of war, regardless of a media-owning fifth column. Things are not peaceful.

Charles Pewitt , June 19, 2018 at 5:52 pm GMT
@Anon7

I like the acting ability of the Welsh guy tormenting the English guy from the Burton/Hurt version of 1984. John Hurt could have done a great O'Brien and Richard Burton could have done a smashing Winston Smith.

Did The Eurythmic's got memory-holed from 1984?

DoublePlusGood:

Charles Pewitt , June 19, 2018 at 6:02 pm GMT
@Steve Sailer

...Orwell and Boxer and Whites Without College Degrees from 2017:

I know what happened to Boxer -- Russian working class -- the work horse in George Orwell's Animal Farm. Boxer busted his arse building the farm back up to snuff after it had undergone the revolution and other problems. The pigs -- Stalinists -- rewarded Boxer by carting him away to the glue factory. Poor Boxer finally realized he was going to the glue factory while in the truck, but he was so exhausted from his labors in working on the farm that he didn't have enough strength to kick the truck to pieces to escape.

Whites Without College Degrees(WWCDs) are the new Boxer of the present day. The Stalinists are now the Globalizers. The Globalizers have decided that all the hard work and all the soldiering over generations by the WWCDs will be rewarded with deliberate attacks and sneaky ways to harm them. From mass immigration to de-industrialization to hooking the WWCDs on drugs, the Globalizer pigs have used every trick in the book to destroy Whites Without Colllege Degrees. Two academics have described this demographic phenomenom as the WHITE DEATH.

Flip , June 19, 2018 at 6:18 pm GMT
@Anon7

Regular decent folks Democrats really have no idea how far to the Left their party has gone.

You can see it in the NY Times. I dropped it recently after reading it for 30 years as I got so sick of their anti-white, gentile, male, heterosexual agenda. I still look at it through a free online subscription from my college, and get disgusted by the pieces in the opinion sections and then log off.

ChrisZ , June 19, 2018 at 6:29 pm GMT
@Anon7

I agree with your observation, Anon7.

Somehow, though, the Left persuaded itself early on that "1984″ was a prophecy of the Trump Era. IIRC the book actually saw a jump in sales, and a stage adaptation was mounted in New York.

I was thinking along your lines (and as yet unaware of the above-mentioned trends) when I saw someone reading it on a commuter train. I cautiously passed a word to him thinking I might be making contact with a fellow Rightist; but was quickly disabused of the notion when he responded with some "resistance" B.S., in the nasally whine typical of the species.

Anon7 , June 19, 2018 at 8:50 pm GMT
@Flip

I subscribed to the NYT for a number of years. After the recent campaign and the current treatment of our President, Donald Trump, I quit. I am stunned at how these old media properties are being purchased and used for political activism on behalf of their owners and advertisers. They're another example of extreme Left propaganda presented as respectable journalism.

The Gray Lady is an old SJW tranny, as far as I can tell..

Reg Cæsar , June 19, 2018 at 9:52 pm GMT
Yes, most Britons would agree that Orwell needs updating: "That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." He sounds awfully American here.
Reg Cæsar , June 19, 2018 at 10:00 pm GMT
@Tiny Duck

Orwell was a committed socialist

If a man isn't a committed socialist in 1948, he has no heart. If a man is still a committed socialist in 1984, he has no brain. Orwell was moving to the right, but there are so many "rights" that we can only guess which one he'd have ended up on. Neocon, nationalist, libertarian, who knows. But it's a common arc in one's forties. He didn't make it to 50.

Classic satire is often the work of reactionaries: Aristophanes, Juvenal, Swift, Waugh.

Gordo , June 19, 2018 at 10:27 pm GMT

Of course, people in 1937 or 1950 at least had some justification for their hysteria.

Descendants of the same people. Intellectually and often genetically.

Dan Hayes , June 19, 2018 at 11:39 pm GMT
@Reg Cæsar

Reg Caesar: Lord Kenneth Clark summed it all best in Civilisation : Like all great wits he was a violent conservative.

ChrisZ , June 20, 2018 at 12:10 am GMT
@Reg Cæsar

Reg, I thought Norm MacDonald's "gay 'pride'" bit (featured on an earlier thread here) was pretty Aristophanean.

J1234 , June 20, 2018 at 1:33 am GMT

Of course, people in 1937 or 1950 at least had some justification for their hysteria.

This is true, and then some. Just as today, the mainstream media was in on promoting the leftist agenda, though maybe to a lesser degree. Here's the New York Times' obituary (or, more accurately, eulogy) for Joseph Stalin back in 1953. Yes, they acknowledge some of his murderous tendencies, but it seems hard for them to condemn such a great guy for such a minor flaw. The headline reads, Stalin Rose From Czarist Oppression to Transform Russia Into Mighty Socialist State . That's the tone of the the whole article, generally speaking. It's hard for them to conceal their reverence.

https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/bday/1221.html

Anon [381] Disclaimer , June 20, 2018 at 1:54 am GMT
David French, National Review: Israel Has the Right and Obligation to Defend Its Border with Deadly Force

By David French
May 15, 2018 2:41 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/israel-has-right-obligation-defend-border-with-deadly-force/

David French, National Review:

Now Is the Time, Congress -- End Family Separation
By David French

June 18, 2018 5:20 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/family-separation-immigration-congress-end-it/

Anon [381] Disclaimer , June 20, 2018 at 1:58 am GMT
BTW

The EU is attempting to surreptitiously ban criticism of the Ruling Class using some copyright/link tax nonsense that will essentially ban memes and expose anonymous critics. The mask slips ever more.

Charles Erwin Wilson II , June 20, 2018 at 1:59 am GMT
@Anon7

Orwell's 1984 is no longer a warning – it's a primer on how to to run your campaign.

True. But then they do not know that they are Robespierre.

Ozymandias , June 20, 2018 at 2:06 am GMT
OT: Geraldo just invented a new word on Hannity; "THIS IS NOT HYSTERICA! America." He's wrong of course. This is Hysterica.
Charles Erwin Wilson II , June 20, 2018 at 2:10 am GMT
@Reg Cæsar

If a man isn't a committed socialist in 1948, he has no heart.

Wrong.

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. –Winston Churchill

John Pepple , June 20, 2018 at 3:44 am GMT
@Steve Sailer

And just two years later, the anti-fascist rhetoric was completely reversed and became anti-anti-fascist with the Nazi-Soviet pact. And two years after that, it went back to being anti-fascist when Hitler broke the pact.

dr kill , June 20, 2018 at 4:46 am GMT
@ChrisZ

Never underestimate what a man will do to keep a good-paying job.

Anonymous [427] Disclaimer , June 20, 2018 at 5:17 am GMT
@Anon

Quod licet Jovi, non licet bovi.

sb , June 20, 2018 at 9:55 am GMT
@Reg Cæsar

Quite
Orwell was clearly moving to the right being very anti Communist ( and fellow travellers ) but at all times he was first and foremost an English nationalist . Certainly he was no supporter of Left solidarity

In his time perhaps it was still maybe just possible to consider oneself to be of the left and to be a nationalist. That era has long finished.

Isidore the Farmer , June 20, 2018 at 1:31 pm GMT
I have started calling the mass media furies a 'propaganda blitz'. The recent explosion around child separation is a perfect example. It is a combination of major media outlets all going into a froth, the expert use of social media, and the complete shaming of any other viewpoint. They announce a crisis precisely at the time there is movement on an issue, as a means of achieving a purely political objective. Thus, this crisis was timed to coincide with immigration legislation being discussed again.

The left is getting more skilled at it, too, and is significantly helped by the suppression of right-wing accounts on social media platforms since November 2016. Trayvon was an early example of this, and they have only gotten better at using the tactics. The propaganda is often a mix of true and false components.

Even small-time progressive players like Russell Moore of the SBC successfully used this recently. They announced a crisis prior to their yearly convention (think voting day for the SBC), used friendly media to spread the word and erupt in hysteria, and used social media to bludgeon their political opponents. It was wicked, but HIGHLY effective.

As Steve likes to point out, we need a word for this. I am using 'propaganda blitz', because if you are on the receiving end it is akin to the blitzes over London in WWII, except instead of bombs it is 7-14 days of a brutal, propagandistic news cycle.

[Jun 19, 2018] How The Last Superpower Was Unchained by Tom Engelhardt

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... However, the truth – at least in retrospect – was that, in the Cold War years, the Soviets were actually doing Washington a strange, if unnoted, favor. Across much of the Eurasian continent, and other places from Cuba to the Middle East, Soviet power and the never-ending contest for influence and dominance that went with it always reminded American leaders that their own power had its limits. ..."
"... This, as the 21st century should have (but hasn't) made clear, was no small thing. It still seemed obvious then that American power could not be total. There were things it could not do, places it could not control, dreams its leaders simply couldn't have. Though no one ever thought of it that way, from 1945 to 1991, the United States, like the Soviet Union, was, after a fashion, "contained." ..."
"... In those years, the Russians were, in essence, saving Washington from itself. Soviet power was a tangible reminder to American political and military leaders that certain areas of the planet remained no-go zones (except in what, in those years, were called "the shadows"). ..."
"... The Soviet Union, in short, rescued Washington from both the fantasy and the hell of going it alone, even if Americans only grasped that reality at the most subliminal of levels. ..."
Jun 19, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Tom Engelhardt via The Asia Times,

Think of it as the all-American version of the human comedy: a great power that eternally knows what the world needs and offers copious advice with a tone deafness that would be humorous, if it weren't so grim.

If you look, you can find examples of this just about anywhere. Here, for instance, is a passage in The New York Times from a piece on the topsy-turvy Trumpian negotiations that preceded the Singapore summit. "The Americans and South Koreans," wrote reporter Motoko Rich, "want to persuade the North that continuing to funnel most of the country's resources into its military and nuclear programs shortchanges its citizens' economic well-being. But the North does not see the two as mutually exclusive."

Think about that for a moment. The US has, of course, embarked on a trillion-dollar-plus upgrade of its already massive nuclear arsenal (and that's before the cost overruns even begin). Its Congress and president have for years proved eager to sink at least a trillion dollars annually into the budget of the national security state (a figure that's still rising and outpaces by far that of any other power on the planet), while its own infrastructure sags and crumbles. And yet it finds the impoverished North Koreans puzzling when they, too, follow such an extreme path.

"Clueless" is not a word Americans ordinarily apply to themselves as a country, a people, or a government. Yet how applicable it is.

And when it comes to cluelessness, there's another, far stranger path the United States has been following since at least the George W Bush moment that couldn't be more consequential and yet somehow remains the least noticed of all. On this subject, Americans don't have a clue. In fact, if you could put the United States on a psychiatrist's couch, this might be the place to start.

America contained

In a way, it's the oldest story on Earth: the rise and fall of empires. And note the plural there. It was never – not until recently at least – "empire," always "empires." Since the 15th century, when the fleets of the first European imperial powers broke into the larger world with subjugation in mind, it was invariably a contest of many. There were at least three or sometimes significantly more imperial powers rising and contesting for dominance or slowly falling from it.

This was, by definition, the history of great powers on this planet: the challenging rise, the challenged decline. Think of it for so many centuries as the essential narrative of history, the story of how it all happened until at least 1945, when just two "superpowers," the United States and the Soviet Union, found themselves facing off on a global scale.

Of the two, the US was always stronger, more powerful, and far wealthier. It theoretically feared the Russian Bear, the Evil Empire , which it worked assiduously to " contain " behind that famed Iron Curtain and whose adherents in the US, always modest in number, were subjected to a mania of fear and suppression.

However, the truth – at least in retrospect – was that, in the Cold War years, the Soviets were actually doing Washington a strange, if unnoted, favor. Across much of the Eurasian continent, and other places from Cuba to the Middle East, Soviet power and the never-ending contest for influence and dominance that went with it always reminded American leaders that their own power had its limits.

This, as the 21st century should have (but hasn't) made clear, was no small thing. It still seemed obvious then that American power could not be total. There were things it could not do, places it could not control, dreams its leaders simply couldn't have. Though no one ever thought of it that way, from 1945 to 1991, the United States, like the Soviet Union, was, after a fashion, "contained."

In those years, the Russians were, in essence, saving Washington from itself. Soviet power was a tangible reminder to American political and military leaders that certain areas of the planet remained no-go zones (except in what, in those years, were called "the shadows").

The Soviet Union, in short, rescued Washington from both the fantasy and the hell of going it alone, even if Americans only grasped that reality at the most subliminal of levels.

That was the situation until December 1991 when, at the end of a centuries-long imperial race for power (and the never-ending arms race that went with it), there was just one gigantic power left standing on Planet Earth. It told you something about the thinking then that, when the Soviet Union imploded, the initial reaction in Washington wasn't triumphalism (though that came soon enough) but utter shock, a disbelieving sense that something no one had expected, predicted, or even imagined had nonetheless happened. To that very moment, Washington had continued to plan for a two-superpower world until the end of time.

America uncontained

Soon enough, though, the Washington elite came to see what happened as, in the phrase of the moment, " the end of history ." Given the wreckage of the Soviet Union, it seemed that an ultimate victory had been won by the very country its politicians would soon come to call "the last superpower," the " indispensable " nation, the " exceptional " state, a land great beyond imagining (until, at least, Donald Trump hit the campaign trail with a slogan that implied greatness wasn't all-American any more).

In reality, there were a variety of paths open to the "last superpower" at that moment. There was even, however briefly, talk of a "peace dividend" – of the possibility that, in a world without contesting superpowers, taxpayer dollars might once again be invested not in the sinews of war-making but of peacemaking (particularly in infrastructure and the well-being of the country's citizens).

Such talk, however, lasted only a year or two and always in a minor key before being relegated to Washington's attic. Instead, with only a few rickety "rogue" states left to deal with – like gulp North Korea, Iraq and Iran – that money never actually headed home, and neither did the thinking that went with it.

Consider it the good fortune of the geopolitical dreamers soon to take the reins in Washington that the first Gulf War of 1990-1991, which ended less than a year before the Soviet Union collapsed, prepared the way for quite a different style of thinking. That instant victory led to a new kind of militarized dreaming in which a highly tech-savvy military, like the one that had driven Iraqi autocrat Saddam Hussein's forces out of Kuwait in such short order, would be capable of doing anything on a planet without serious opposition.

And yet, from the beginning, there were signs suggesting a far grimmer future. To take but one infamous example, Americans still remember the Black Hawk Down moment of 1993 when the world's greatest military fell victim to a Somali warlord and local militias and found itself incapable of imposing its will on one of the least impressive not-quite-states on the planet (a place still frustrating that military a quarter-century later).

In that post-1991 world, however, few in Washington even considered that the 20th century had loosed another phenomenon on the world, that of insurgent national liberation movements, generally leftist rebellions, across what had been the colonial world – the very world of competing empires now being tucked into the history books – and it hadn't gone away. In the 21st century, such insurgent movements, now largely religious, or terror-based, or both, would turn out to offer a grim new version of containment to the last superpower.

Unchaining the indispensable nation

On September 11, 2001, a canny global jihadist by the name of Osama bin Laden sent his air force (four hijacked US passenger jets) and his precision weaponry (19 suicidal, mainly Saudi followers) against three iconic targets in the American pantheon: the Pentagon, the World Trade Center, and undoubtedly the Capitol or the White House (neither of which was hit because one of those jets crashed in a field in Pennsylvania). In doing so, in a sense bin Laden not only loosed a literal hell on Earth, but unchained the last superpower.

William Shakespeare would have had a word for what followed: hubris. But give the top officials of the Bush administration (and the neocons who supported them) a break. There had never been a moment like it: a moment of one. A single great power left alone, triumphant, on planet Earth. Just one superpower – wealthy beyond compare, its increasingly high-tech military unmatched, its only true rival in a state of collapse – had now been challenged by a small jihadist group.

To president Bush, vice-president Dick Cheney, and the rest of their crew, it seemed like nothing short of a heaven-sent opportunity. As they came out of the shock of 9/11, of that " Pearl Harbor of the 21st century ," it was as if they had found a magic formula in the ruins of those iconic buildings for the ultimate control of the planet. As secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld would instruct an aide at the Pentagon that day, "Go massive. Sweep it up. Things related and not."

Within days, things related and not were indeed being swept up. The country was almost instantly said to be "at war," and soon that conflict even had a name, the Global War on Terror. Nor was that war to be against just al-Qaeda, or even one country, an Afghanistan largely ruled by the Taliban. More than 60 countries said to have "terror networks" of various sorts found themselves almost instantly in the administration's potential gunsights. And that was just to be the beginning of it all.

In October 2001, the invasion of Afghanistan was launched. In the spring of 2003, the invasion of Iraq followed, and those were only the initial steps in what was increasingly envisioned as the imposition of a Pax Americana on the Greater Middle East.

There could be no doubt, for instance, that Iran and Syria, too, would soon go the way of Iraq and Afghanistan. Bush's top officials had been nursing just such dreams since, in 1997, many of them formed a think-tank (the first ever to enter the White House) called the Project for the New American Century and began to write out what were then the fantasies of figures nowhere near power. By 2003, they were power itself and their dreams, if anything, had grown even more grandiose.

In addition to imagining a political Pax Republicana in the United States, they truly dreamed of a future planetary Pax Americana in which, for the first time in history, a single power would, in some fashion, control the whole works, the Earth itself.

And this wasn't to be a passing matter either. The Bush administration's "unilateralism" rested on a conviction that it could actually create a future in which no country or even bloc of countries would ever come close to matching or challenging US military power. The administration's National Security Strategy of 2002 put the matter bluntly: The US was to "build and maintain" a military, in the phrase of the moment, " beyond challenge ."

They had little doubt that, in the face of the most technologically advanced, bulked-up, destructive force on Earth, hostile states would be "shocked and awed" by a simple demonstration of its power, while friendly ones would have little choice but to come to heel as well. After all, as Bush said at a Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in 2007, the US military was "the greatest force for human liberation the world has ever known."

Though there was much talk at the time about the "liberation" of Afghanistan and then Iraq, at least in their imaginations the true country being liberated was the planet's lone superpower. Although the Bush administration was officially considered a "conservative" one, its key officials were geopolitical dreamers of the first order and their vision of the world was the very opposite of conservative. It harkened back to nothing and looked forward to everything.

It was radical in ways that should have, but didn't, take the American public's breath away; radical in ways that had never been seen before.

Shock and awe for the last superpower

Think of what those officials did in the post-9/11 moment as the ultimate act of greed. They tried to swallow a whole planet. They were determined to make it a planet of one in a way that had never before been seriously imagined.

It was, to say the least, a vision of madness. Even in a moment when it truly did seem – to them at least – that all constraints had been taken off, an administration of genuine conservatives might have hesitated. Its top officials might, at least, have approached the post-Soviet situation with a modicum of caution and modesty.

But not George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and pals. In the face of what seemed like the ultimate in possibilities they proved clueless when it came to the possibility that anything on Earth might have a shot at containing them.

Even among their critics, who could have imagined then that, more than 16 years later, having faced only lightly armed enemies of various sorts, still wealthy beyond compare, still with a military funded in a way the next seven countries couldn't cumulatively match, the United States would have won literally nothing?

Who could have imagined that, unlike so many preceding imperial powers (including the US of the earlier Cold War era), it would have been able to establish control over nothing at all; that, instead, from Afghanistan to Syria, Iraq deep into Africa, it would find itself in a state of " infinite war " and utter frustration on a planet filled with ever more failed states , destroyed cities , displaced people , and right-wing "populist" governments, including the one in Washington?

Who could have imagined that, with a peace dividend no longer faintly conceivable, this country would have found itself not just in decline, but – a new term is needed to catch the essence of this curious moment – in what might be called self-decline?

Yes, a new power, China, is finally rising – and doing so on a planet that seems itself to be going down . Here, then, is a conclusion that might be drawn from the quarter-century-plus in which America was both unchained and largely alone.

The Earth is admittedly a small orb in a vast universe, but the history of this century so far suggests one reality about which America's rulers proved utterly clueless: After so many hundreds of years of imperial struggle, this planet still remains too big, too disparate, too ornery to be controlled by a single power. What the Bush administration did was simply take one gulp too many and the result has been a kind of national (and planetary) indigestion.

Despite what it looked like in Washington once upon a time, the disappearance of the Soviet Union proved to be no gift at all, but a disaster of the first order. It removed all sense of limits from America's political class and led to a tale of greed on a planetary scale. In the process, it also set the US on a path to self-decline.

The history of greed in our time has yet to be written, but what a story it will someday make. In it, the greed of those geopolitical dreamers will intersect with the greed of an ever wealthier, ever more gilded 1%, of the billionaires who were preparing to swallow whole the political system of that last superpower and grab so much of the wealth of the planet, leaving so little for others.

Whether you're talking about the urge to control the planet militarily or financially, what took place in these years could, in the end, result in ruin of a historic kind. To use a favored phrase from the Bush years, one of these days we Americans may be facing little short of "regime change" on a planetary scale. And what a piece of shock and awe that's likely to prove to be.

All of us, of course, now live on the planet Bush's boys tried to swallow whole. They left us in a world of infinite war, infinite harm, and in Donald Trump's America where cluelessness has been raised to a new power.

[Jun 19, 2018] Counterdrug Programs Come With Increased Drug Production - Where Does The Money Go

Notable quotes:
"... Here's a thought: If the USG was truly interested in controlling opium production in Afghanistan it would simply use the counternarcotics money to buy up the crop directly from the farmers. The price at that level would be incredibly cheap compared to the "street value" of the drug. The farmers would happily sell to such a reliable buyer and not need to fear the risk of military interference. The current Afghan government would likely earn the goodwill of the farmers and it would cut off funding to the Taliban. It will never happen, however; because our military project in Afghanistan is mostly about enriching private military contractors while keeping the the "threat" of terrorism alive and well. War is a racket. ..."
"... b, have you read "Whiteout" by Alexander Cockburn (RIP) and Jeffrey St. Clair? It was written decades ago but is still relevant. I'm sure the CIA DOES make money from drugs although the CIA black books budget is so large they hardly need the cash. But one imagines it's nice to have a few millions completely out of government accountability--for lining their own pockets if nothing else. ..."
"... I highly recommend Doug Valentine's book, "CIA as Organized Crime." CIA Director William Colby gave him free access to interview CIA officials who had been involved in the Phoenix program in South Vietnam. Since all those CIA officers/agents had Colby's blessing, they assumed Valentine was on their side. Oops! Bottom line: There is ZERO difference between CIA and the Mafia. They are essentially one and the same, though they generally have different spheres of action. One upon which they overlap is drug production, smuggling and distribution. ..."
"... I would add that there is ZERO difference between supra-national finance and the Mafia. For instance, the bank, HSBC was founded to launder opium money after Great Britain fought the Opium Wars forcing China to permit them to import opium into China. Former FBI Director and on again/off again hero of the partisans, James Comey left his career with the US Government to work for HSBC after they were finally fined for laundering cash from both drug smuggling and terrorist groups. His job was to help them "negotiate" the new "oversight" placed on the bank. ..."
"... John Ehrlichman, who served as President Richard Nixon's domestic policy chief admitted back in 1994 that the "War on Drugs" was actually a political tool to crush leftist protesters and black people. "We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did." ..."
"... Mike Ruppert was an associate of Gary Webb's, was a Los Angeles detective and knew a lot about the CIA's involvement in the Crips/Bloods Drug Wars and its massive importation of drugs into the nation. His investigation was used as his website URL , copvcia, although its name was From The Wilderness. Until 911, his investigation was his passion, then he discovered he had another and it was connected to the former. Here's a page many will want to view . It's hard not to reread the entire website. Unfortunately, Mike saved and only released much of the juicier evidence to his subscribers--he had to eke out a living in some manner. ..."
"... Back in 2002, when the poppy production too off, the idea of flooding Russia was in vogue, it may still be in the game. Transit through Iran to Turkey was also in play. Money laundering started out in "Polish Zlotys", through the banks there. ..."
"... I presume much of that counternarcotics money ends up being cash in hand to thousands of foot-soldiers working for local warlords in Afghanistan as farmers, security personnel, soldiers, prostitutes and what-not, in a way similar to how part of Victoria Nuland's $5 billion investment in Ukraine ended up as cash incentives to entice people from as far as Lvov to travel to Kiev to participate in the Maidan demonstrations over the winter of 2013 / 2014. ..."
"... This in addition to the billions being used to buy weapons, train and send jihadists to fight in other parts of western and central Asia, and line people's pockets at every stage of the drug money trail whether in Afghanistan, Wall Street or various tax havens around the planet. ..."
"... And to the east, I remember reading that one of the first things the US did was to build a bridge and highway towards the east; shortly thereafter, heroin flooded into Russia. ..."
"... Alfred W. McCoy is the authority on drugs and CIA. He's still doing great work, publishing books.His first, The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia is a classic.His latest, In the Shadows of the American Century, is brilliant analysis. Some videos on youtube, also. He has traveled, researched every ratline trail and outpost all over the globe. Read him if you want the real facts. ..."
Jun 19, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

james , Jun 18, 2018 1:30:38 PM | 2

thanks b... the speculation has always been in my mind anyway - that the money is controlled by the cia... covert money for covert projects and on and on it goes...
LXV , Jun 18, 2018 1:47:36 PM | 3
b wrote: "I am not aware of any sound evidence that shows that the CIA reaped financial profits from drug dealing."

Define 'sound evidence, b... For some, it's a kilo of stash; for others (like myself), it's suffice with the testimony of (suicided) insiders, like Gary Webb (RIP).

ben , Jun 18, 2018 2:06:01 PM | 4
james @ 2 said:" covert money for covert projects and on and on it goes..."

Yes, and what they don't spend on "projects", goes to their minions and sycophants..

ken , Jun 18, 2018 2:16:06 PM | 5
The Taliban curtailed the poppy growing without any problem. Shortly after the US invasion under the guise of capturing OBL. Almost 18 years later, long after the death of OBL (in reality and in US military BS) the poppy production has increased exponentially. There are Pics of US military personnel walking through poppy fields.
Other than drug production there is no need for the US to be in Afghanistan except maybe to use it as a launching platform to attack Iran. Drugs are an excellent source for funding black ops.

Not only is the US allowing the production, considering how easy it would be for them to kill the crops, and IMHO it as also assisting in the transportation of drugs to the West.

librul , Jun 18, 2018 3:16:16 PM | 11

b says the efforts appear counterproductive. Here is why:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/afghanistan-the-making-of-a-narco-state-20141204#

If you understand the Afghan government as a narco state, then the fact that opium production has actually increased –while the U.S. spent billions on counternarcotics efforts and troop numbers surged – starts to make sense. A completely failed state – Afghanistan in 2001 – can't really thrive in the drug trade. Traffickers have no reason to pay off a toothless government or a nonexistent police force. In such a libertarian paradise, freelance actors – like Saleem, the heroin cook – flourish.

But as the government builds capacity, officials can start to demand a cut. It's not that there's a grand conspiracy at the center of government, but rather that, in the absence of accountability and the rule of law, officials start to orient themselves around a powerful political economy. Big drug barons with links to the government take over the trade. People who don't pay, or who fall out with government officials, might find themselves killed or arrested.

In this light, U.S. counternarcotics programs, which have cost nearly $8 billion to date, and the Afghan state-building project in general, are perversely part of the explanation for the growing government involvement in the drug trade. Even the newly rebuilt Afghan Air Force has been investigated by the U.S. military for alleged trafficking. In many places, the surge had the effect of wresting opium revenue from the Taliban and handing it to government officials. For example, in Helmand's Garmsir District, which sits on key trafficking routes between the rest of the province and Baramcha, a big Marine offensive in 2011 finally pushed out the Taliban and handed the district back to the Afghan government. The result? The police began taking a cut from those drug routes. "There are families, as in Mafia-style, that have the trade carved up between them, and when some outsider tries to get in on it, they serve him up as a success for drug interdiction," one Western official who worked in Garmsir told me.

I just luv-ed this next paragraph. Glad I wasn't sipping Coca Cola
while I read it. Would have chortled cola out my nose!

Here is government BS-speak at it's vacuous best (enjoy):

The U.S. government, for its part, acknowledged that there are no quick solutions at hand. "The U.S. interagency is developing an updated counternarcotics strategy for Afghanistan," says Jen Psaki, the State Department's spokeswoman. "These are long-term efforts that build the foundation for eventual reductions in opium harvests."
Chris G , Jun 18, 2018 4:04:03 PM | 14
Here's a thought: If the USG was truly interested in controlling opium production in Afghanistan it would simply use the counternarcotics money to buy up the crop directly from the farmers. The price at that level would be incredibly cheap compared to the "street value" of the drug. The farmers would happily sell to such a reliable buyer and not need to fear the risk of military interference. The current Afghan government would likely earn the goodwill of the farmers and it would cut off funding to the Taliban. It will never happen, however; because our military project in Afghanistan is mostly about enriching private military contractors while keeping the the "threat" of terrorism alive and well. War is a racket.
WorldBLee , Jun 18, 2018 4:08:12 PM | 15
b, have you read "Whiteout" by Alexander Cockburn (RIP) and Jeffrey St. Clair? It was written decades ago but is still relevant. I'm sure the CIA DOES make money from drugs although the CIA black books budget is so large they hardly need the cash. But one imagines it's nice to have a few millions completely out of government accountability--for lining their own pockets if nothing else.
Daniel , Jun 18, 2018 4:32:10 PM | 17
I highly recommend Doug Valentine's book, "CIA as Organized Crime." CIA Director William Colby gave him free access to interview CIA officials who had been involved in the Phoenix program in South Vietnam. Since all those CIA officers/agents had Colby's blessing, they assumed Valentine was on their side. Oops! Bottom line: There is ZERO difference between CIA and the Mafia. They are essentially one and the same, though they generally have different spheres of action. One upon which they overlap is drug production, smuggling and distribution.

I would add that there is ZERO difference between supra-national finance and the Mafia. For instance, the bank, HSBC was founded to launder opium money after Great Britain fought the Opium Wars forcing China to permit them to import opium into China. Former FBI Director and on again/off again hero of the partisans, James Comey left his career with the US Government to work for HSBC after they were finally fined for laundering cash from both drug smuggling and terrorist groups. His job was to help them "negotiate" the new "oversight" placed on the bank.

Daniel , Jun 18, 2018 4:37:37 PM | 18
John Ehrlichman, who served as President Richard Nixon's domestic policy chief admitted back in 1994 that the "War on Drugs" was actually a political tool to crush leftist protesters and black people. "We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."
karlof1 , Jun 18, 2018 5:29:48 PM | 20
Mike Ruppert was an associate of Gary Webb's, was a Los Angeles detective and knew a lot about the CIA's involvement in the Crips/Bloods Drug Wars and its massive importation of drugs into the nation. His investigation was used as his website URL , copvcia, although its name was From The Wilderness. Until 911, his investigation was his passion, then he discovered he had another and it was connected to the former. Here's a page many will want to view . It's hard not to reread the entire website. Unfortunately, Mike saved and only released much of the juicier evidence to his subscribers--he had to eke out a living in some manner.

The CIA is the planet's #1 Terrorist Organization, and it has all 3 types of Weapons of Mass Destruction. It's often hard to determine which poses a greater threat to humanity: The CIA or its parent the Outlaw US Empire. If humanity's to have any chance at a viable future, both the CIA and its Imperial parent must be destroyed for their many crimes.

Ornot , Jun 18, 2018 5:49:10 PM | 21
Seymore Hersh first (to my knowledge) first looked at CIA drug links when people exited buildings not using the stairs.
https://www.nytimes.com/1975/07/10/archives/family-plans-to-sue-cia-over-suicide-in-drug-test-family-planning.html

That CIA was experimenting with narcotics as a tool seemed to have metasticised into something else during the Air America years, which in turn seems to have morphed via Barry Seal (& Gary Webb's investigation)and the Cocaine Coyboys onward into Silk Airways (famed by weapons to Syria scandal) -
https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/first/c/cockburn-white.html

https://www.globalresearch.ca/oliver-north-worked-with-cocaine-traffickers-to-arm-terrorists-now-hell-be-president-of-the-national-rifle-association-nra/5640431
Whatever the post WWII period there seems to be a airline moving illicit product(s) across borders and a rouge militia force hook up. While powder is not as convertable as say Bitcoin, it leaves no paper trail.

Good luck with the research - its a long dark deep rabbit hole, leading to many fingers in many pies.

https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB2/
https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2009/03/investigative-reporter-seymour-hersh-describes-executive-assassination-ring

Eugene , Jun 18, 2018 6:36:02 PM | 23
Back in 2002, when the poppy production too off, the idea of flooding Russia was in vogue, it may still be in the game. Transit through Iran to Turkey was also in play. Money laundering started out in "Polish Zlotys", through the banks there.

Addicts were given small sums to deposit in the banks, by the thousands, which didn't draw attention. A lot of the money was sent to the U.S. to buy "American Muscle Cars", which were then shipped back to the E.U. and resold again.

Pakistan was also a transit country where the "Labs" were first set up to process the opium to heroin. How time fly's when having fun. Addiction to "drugs" isn't the only addiction nor the addicts involved either. Only one leaf in the book of the minds of those who believe they are doing the right thing.

Jen , Jun 18, 2018 6:54:58 PM | 26
I presume much of that counternarcotics money ends up being cash in hand to thousands of foot-soldiers working for local warlords in Afghanistan as farmers, security personnel, soldiers, prostitutes and what-not, in a way similar to how part of Victoria Nuland's $5 billion investment in Ukraine ended up as cash incentives to entice people from as far as Lvov to travel to Kiev to participate in the Maidan demonstrations over the winter of 2013 / 2014.

Also a big portion of the counternarcotics dosh must be going to teams of people digging up and burning opium and also to teams of people planting new opium seeds in the areas where the first lot of opium was eradicated later on. Similar to stories people used to hear about what supposedly happened during the 1930s Great Depression, when teams of people were employed to dig ditches and then other teams of people were employed to fill up the ditches which would be dug up again at a later time.

This in addition to the billions being used to buy weapons, train and send jihadists to fight in other parts of western and central Asia, and line people's pockets at every stage of the drug money trail whether in Afghanistan, Wall Street or various tax havens around the planet.

frances , Jun 18, 2018 7:06:21 PM | 28
reply to:
".. and IMHO it as also assisting in the transportation of drugs to the West."
Posted by: ken | Jun 18, 2018 2:16:06 PM | 5

And to the east, I remember reading that one of the first things the US did was to build a bridge and highway towards the east; shortly thereafter, heroin flooded into Russia.

oldenyoung , Jun 18, 2018 7:08:31 PM | 29
The level of US "counter-narcotic" investment seems to be about right to support the GROWTH of the narcotics industry...not the otherway around...its black and its dirty

regards

OY

Mark2 , Jun 18, 2018 7:14:33 PM | 30
Every comment on this post is like a fine champagne of reality. how do people get by with out wanting to know the truth. keep the comments coming I need more! Brilliant links. The doors of perception just opened for me. Who the hell runs our TVs stations that they can turn a blind I to this lot.
-------
I to find great strength in music, to find the truth. For me it is reggae any group in society that has sufferd what we discuss on this site for 300 years, but have survived got stronger and put it to music, I feel needs listening to!!!
Daniel Bruno , Jun 18, 2018 7:51:32 PM | 32
The "War on Drugs" was conceived to put black people in jail en masse as Jim Crow came to an end. Nixon's aides admitted this. Read "The New Jim Crow" for the full story. Marijuana laws were first introduced in the early 20th century as a tool to arrest and deport Mexicans from the American southwest. Google it.

The bullshit "War on Drugs" is as phony as the bullshit "War on Terror" in the wake of 3 skyscrapers that were demolished and collapsed at freefall speed.

The real money is to be made in the bullshit wars spawned by these 2 hoaxes that boggle the mind in their scope.

Basically, these two cornerstones of American domestic and foreign policy are frauds of biblical proportions.

An empire built on these foundations will come crashing down as fast as WTC 7 on the afternoon of September 11, 2001.

0use4msm , Jun 18, 2018 8:35:04 PM | 33
"O my, cocaine" is an anagram of "CIA economy".

Various Contra-cocaine type operations of un/controlled shipments of drugs existed in the early 1990s, some of which existed in order to arm Bosnia (local fighters and foreign mujahideen), thereby undermining the UN's arms embargo of former Yugoslav states.

Between 1988 and 1992, 22 tons of cocaine was brought into the US via Venezuela by a team consisting of Mark McFarlin (head of the CIA's counter-narcotics center), Jim Campbell (the CIA's chief of station in Venezuela) and General Guillén (head of the Venezuelan National Guard in the pre-Chavez era).
Anti-Drug Unit of C.I.A. Sent Ton of Cocaine to U.S. in 1990

At roughly the same time Albanian mobsters had built a heroin smuggling network for the purpose of illegally supplying arms to the Bosnian mujahideen.
Drugs Paying for Conflict in Europe

In the summer of 1991, Dutch drug lord Klaas Bruinsma, who had connections with members of the Dutch elite (corporate and royal), the Colombian Cali cartel and the Yugoslav mafia, was assassinated by either former cop Martin Hoogland (possibly working for intelligence), or the Yugoslav mobster Branco Marianovic. In that same summer, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 713 (the Yugoslav arms embargo), and soon after elements within Dutch customs and police, in cooperation with Bruinsma's business heirs/infiltrators, started the controlled shipment of large amounts of cocaine (estimated 25,000 kilo) and hashish (estimated 500,000 kilo) under the name "Operation Delta". The customs officials involved in Operation Delta were most likely protected by their boss Fred Teeven, later rewarded by given the job of State Secretary for Security and Justice. Mabel Wisse-Smit, daughter of a top banker (possibly drug money launderer) and future sister-in-law of the current Dutch king, was first the lover of drug lord Bruinsma (until his assassination, possibly she was sent to spy on him) and then the lover of Wall St. banker Mohamed Sacirbey (Bosnia's ambassador to UN in 1992, Bosnia's foreign minister in 1995). Wisse-Smit (later a George Soros protégé) co-founded the Dutch charity foundation War Child, which was used as a cover for arms lobbying during the Bosnia war, and she is reported by Bosnian media to have been involved in a specific arms deal with Egypt.

Red Ryder , Jun 18, 2018 8:41:17 PM | 34
Alfred W. McCoy is the authority on drugs and CIA. He's still doing great work, publishing books.His first, The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia is a classic.His latest, In the Shadows of the American Century, is brilliant analysis. Some videos on youtube, also. He has traveled, researched every ratline trail and outpost all over the globe. Read him if you want the real facts.
Curtis , Jun 18, 2018 9:44:25 PM | 36
It's good to know so many are well informed on this. I've read Rupert/Webb's stuff and have Dark Alliance. There's a good movie/documentary out there about Webb but I can't recall the name right now. Levine wrote about his undercover work in South American being thwarted by the CIA. And Bo Gritz was trying to set up a deal where the US would buy up Khun Sa's opium before it could be distributed but the USG wasn't interested. The amazing thing about the Afghan ramp up in supply was seeing pictures of US soldiers patrolling in the middle of poppy fields. Meanwhile at home, congress takes bribes (lobbying efforts) to help protect the legal drug pushers from prosecution by the DEA shoving millions of pills across the country. A friend's term for this kind of thing is "racket science."
Lozion , Jun 18, 2018 9:56:06 PM | 37
@36 "Kill the messenger" with Jeremy Renner..
Pft , Jun 18, 2018 9:59:20 PM | 38
Red Ryder@34

Yeah, his updated edition is a must read. They do not handle the money directly, they let the guerillas/rebels/revolutionaries handle that as a reward and provide protection from legal authorities and access to markets using various agencies and mafia at both ends of the supply-distribution chain. The dollars from the drugs pay for the weapons and support. The profits go into nameless offshore Eurodollar accounts which then flow into London and Wall Street as eurodollar loans in many multiples of the deposits (not to be confused with the euro) to speculate in various markets and drive up asset prices. When the Taliban shut down opium production we had the Dot.com crash (coincidence?). 100 billion a year can generate 1 trillion in dollars for speculators, and that was sorely missed (along with Clinton running a surplus instead of a deficit)

There is so much evidence that in many places where they were or are engaged that drug flows in the region increased and production increased in those areas known for growing the stuff. Like any organization only those with a need to know have an idea and the majority are clean and without information

psychohistorian , Jun 18, 2018 10:11:18 PM | 39
While we are discussing history of the War on Drugs another example of a major consumer organization (at the time of print) being turned into a vacuous shell....

Licit and Illicit Drugs is a 1972 book on recreational drug use by medical writer Edward M. Brecher and the editors of Consumer Reports.

The WIkipedia summary
"
The book describes the effects and risks of psychoactive drugs which were common in contemporary use for recreational and nonmedical purposes.[2] The New York Times paraphrased some major arguments from the book, saying "'Drug-free' treatment of heroin addiction almost never works", "Nicotine can be as tough to beat as heroin", and "Good or bad, marijuana is here to stay. The billions spent to fight it are wasted dollars."[3] The book identifies marijuana as the most popular drug after tobacco, alcohol, and nicotine.[4] A reviewer for the Journal of the American Medical Association summarized it by saying that "Brecher holds that the division of drugs into licit and illicit categories is medically irrational and rooted mainly in historical and sociological factors."[5]
"

Daniel , Jun 18, 2018 10:52:53 PM | 40
karlof1. Amazing that you knew Mike. And yes, the willful ignorance is horribly frustrating.

The way I see it, almost all "Westerners" are willfully ignorant. We all must know that the only way we live to the "standards" we do is because of the plunder of both our colonial past and neoliberal present. But most choose to look aside.

For those who haven't seen it, please spend 17 minutes to see Mallence Bart-Williams give an incredible talk.

Alogon , Jun 19, 2018 12:58:19 AM | 41
I have nothing to add to this except to say great article b and excellent comments from posters.

[Jun 18, 2018] The next year the strategic position of Ukraine might get worse

Jun 18, 2018 | www.unz.com

Beckow , June 16, 2018 at 12:24 am GMT

If Kiev wants to attack Donbas they better hurry. After World Cup, and definitely next year when the pipelines bypassing Ukraine will be ready, Ukraine's strategic situation will get worse. We are in a transition phase: sh..t happened in 2013-15 that is impossible to undo, but there were fortunately constraints on all sides that prevented a meltdown. In a year or two most of those constraints will be gone.

Saker is correct that EU countries will not work with Russia. Blaming it all on Washington was always stupid – there are forces in Europe, in all countries, who want a confrontation with Russia. Any event, real or fake, will be used to escalate. West cannot lose this one without another fight. And if they sit on their hands, they will eventually lose with a disillusioned Ukraine and slowly disintegrating EU. Populist energy needs to be re-directed eastward, and for that a more aggressive policy is required. This is not pessimism, there simply is no way for EU elite to climb down. How could UK make up with Russia without looking like complete idiots? Or Macron and Merkel? The hostility is at this point inherent in the situation – what started out as a badly thought-out attempt to get some quick goodies (bases in Crimea, Nato expansion, sell weapons) has evolved into a real death spiral.

We are one Franz Ferdinand moment away from a catastrophe. Let's enjoy the games while we still can. Trump knows this, so he is trying desperately to organize a summit or send some messages of conciliation. But he is powerless and it might be too late for that. Hubris never dissipates, it requires a disaster and an elite turnover to cure hubris.

Mattheus , June 16, 2018 at 2:06 pm GMT
Saker is once again completely wrong. His theories fall short to explain lots of real events. He got hooked on his "Anglo-Zionist" theory and "one Hegemon", which is far from explaining the reality on the ground. There is no one single hegemon, but two powerful interest groups in the west. One of the power centers is dominated by the Rothschilds from the City of London and the other ruled by the Rockerfellers which is based in the US.
The powers described above are sometimes working in collusion but sometimes work against each other (They were in collusion during the Soviet Afghan war for instance). Currently, we don't see a collusion but a war being waged in between these two groups. I think it is highly self evident, so much so that it is happening almost all in the open. In the modern history we haven't witnessed such a openly fought war ever before (between these two powers). All is at stake and the war in between these two is vicious. Thus you can explain Trump's attitude towards EU, everlasting character assasination of Trump by certain opposing circles in the US, high level resignations, the state of confusion of Nato and much more. If this theory is right (and I think it is much more viable than any other theory that I came across in the Alt-Med), this makes Russia firmly embedded into one of the camps. Unfortunately, the position that Russia took makes him not a sovereign power but on contrary puts him into a subservient role. The late actions of Russia, especially in Syria, is quite telling. I know people who admire Russia get quite frustrated when they hear such a scenario and outcome, but this is possibly the only way Putin believes that Russia can survive. Thus it explains his latest house clean-up of Euroasian integrists. Even worse, if you believe in this scenario, it brings Russia and China against each other especially in the long run. This scenario also put a full stop to the idealist Euroasian multi-polar world order.
Here is the link to an older video in Russian with English subtitles. The guy's name is Andrei Fursov and he has some interesting things to say regarding this subject. This interview was just before Obama was elected but is still quite relevent. His newer videos seems to have lost steam, possibly because he is working for some state connected Russian institutions and think-thanks and thus I think he is somewhat restricted. After all it is again the famous "Game Theory", isn't it?
byrresheim , June 16, 2018 at 6:39 pm GMT
As long as the Author keeps talking about Ukronazis, we know that he is not at all prepared to see any problems on the Russian side at all.

Which serves devalue his argument, even if there are a lot of valid points otherwise.

Beckow , June 17, 2018 at 1:39 am GMT
@Philip Owen

I don't think you realize that armies need supplies. To break into Donbas cities would be hard enough, but to re-supply them would be impossible. Civilians would mostly evacuate, so there would be little to 'hide in'. Kiev cannot win militarily as long as Russia opposes it. Russia can always blast their bases from air, or with missiles. Don't kid yourself, if Russia has the will, they will prevail.

Since you mentioned 2014, there was a perfect opportunity for Maidanistas to avoid this. All they had to do was to be friendly and accommodating to its Russian minority. Offer them autonomy, re-assure them, promise that trade and ties with Russia would continue. Kiev did the exact opposite, an extremely bad tactic. US kept on telling them to cool it, that one doesn't win by attacking before ready. But in Kiev emotions prevailed, and so we are where we are.

Sooner or later a more accommodating government in Kiev will try the 'let bygones be bygones' tactic on Russia. If we are lucky enough to make it that far.

[Jun 18, 2018] ASSAD US and Israeli intervention prevents reconciliation in Syria (Interview) by Frank Sellers

Notable quotes:
"... Assad is adamant that the price demanded by the Americans, that of absolute US hegemony, is one that Syria will never pay ..."
"... For the Americans, there is a general principle they follow in dealing with any problem in the world. The only price they ask for is absolute hegemony, regardless of the issue and the place. Of course, we shall never provide that price; otherwise we wouldn't have fought this war for years . We have been fighting for the independence of Syrian decision-making, for the Syrian homeland, and for the unity of Syrian territory. As for Iran in particular, let me be very clear: the Syrian-Iranian relationship is a strategic one not subject to a deal in the south or in the north. This relationship, in terms of its implications and results on the ground, is linked to the present and future of the region ..."
Jun 18, 2018 | theduran.com

Assad is adamant that the price demanded by the Americans, that of absolute US hegemony, is one that Syria will never pay

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad revealed in a recent interview with Iranian media al-Alam TV that attempts at achieving non military resolutions to conflicts inside Syria via reconciliation is being actively prevented by intervention from Israel and the US. He is adamant that the price demanded by the Americans, that of absolute US hegemony, is one that Syria will never pay. Video of the interview is furnished below in English, courtesy of Press TV , followed by a transcript obtained from Syria 360 Internationalist News Agency . Added emphasis on certain statements is mine.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/RbLONDCe3Ro

13 June، 2018
Damascus, SANA

President Bashar al-Assad affirmed that the Syrian south is in front of two options; reconciliation or liberation by force, indicating that at this point, there are no concrete results for a simple reason which is Israeli and American interference, for they put pressure on the terrorists in that area in order to prevent reaching any compromise or peaceful resolution.

The President added in an interview given to Iran's Al-ALAM TV that the Syrian-Iranian relation is strategic not subject to a deal and it is linked to the present and future of the region , affirming that neither Syria nor Iran has floated this relationship on the international political bazaar for it to be subject to haggling.

President al-Assad affirmed that since the beginning of the war, particularly when it started to have a clear military nature on the southern front in particular, the Israelis used to shell Syrian forces continuously, and consequently provide direct support to the terrorists. Israeli artillery and aircraft are the terrorists' artillery and aircraft Despite Israeli support to the terrorists, we have been doing our job, and the Syrian Army is fighting its way towards the southern front, and has liberated a number of areas within the limits of its capabilities. So, with or without its approval, the decision is a Syrian one, and this is a national duty we shall carry out.

Following the full text of the interview;

Question 1: Mr. President, there are many issues which we will talk about, but in the light of the victories you have achieved, the main focus remains the south of Syria. What's happening exactly, or what is the nature of what is happening in the south of Syria?

President Assad: To put it simply, after the liberation of al-Ghouta, it was suggested that we should move south. We were faced with two options, as is the case in all other areas in Syria: reconciliation or liberation by force. At this point, the Russians suggested the possibility of giving reconciliation an opportunity, similar to what happened in other areas, in order to restore the situation that prevailed before 2011. In other words, for the Syrian Army to be deployed in that area, which is an area of confrontation with the Zionist enemy. And of course the terrorists should leave the area. This proposition suits us. Up till now, there are no concrete results for a simple reason which is Israeli and American interference; for they put pressure on the terrorists in that area in order to prevent reaching any compromise or peaceful resolution . That is how the situation stands now.

Question 2: So, it hasn't been decided whether to move towards a military operation or towards reconciliation?

President Assad: No, contacts are still ongoing between the Russians, the Americans, and the Israelis, while nobody is communicating with the terrorists, because they are mere tools, and they implement what their masters decide ultimately. This is what happened, i.e. there was an opportunity to reach reconciliation, but the American and Israeli interference prevented that possibility .

Question 3: Of course, this is the reality there. But on the other hand, there are those who talk about many things taking place in the south. Mr. President, is there a certain deal, what is the price? Is there really a price for concluding this deal in the south? Let me talk frankly about the issue of getting the Iranians to leave the southern region in return for al-Tanf, for example. What did the Americans demand, or let's say, what was the price the Americans asked to approve the reconciliation process in the south?

President Assad: For the Americans, there is a general principle they follow in dealing with any problem in the world. The only price they ask for is absolute hegemony, regardless of the issue and the place. Of course, we shall never provide that price; otherwise we wouldn't have fought this war for years . We have been fighting for the independence of Syrian decision-making, for the Syrian homeland, and for the unity of Syrian territory. As for Iran in particular, let me be very clear: the Syrian-Iranian relationship is a strategic one not subject to a deal in the south or in the north. This relationship, in terms of its implications and results on the ground, is linked to the present and future of the region. Consequently, it is not subject to the price tags of the international bazaar. Neither Syria nor Iran has floated this relationship on the international political bazaar for it to be subject to haggling. The proposition was made by the Israelis with the objective of provoking and embarrassing Iran. At the same time, this comes in line with the international propaganda campaign launched against Iran regarding the nuclear file. It is not a separate issue; for everything happening now is linked to Iran in order to create an international position against it. As for us in Syria, the decision concerning our land is an exclusively Syrian decision. We are fighting the same battle, and when we have a decision concerning Iran, we will talk about it with the Iranians and not with any other party .

Question 4: Of course, we will talk more about Iran and in more detail, but since we are talking about the southern front, let's explore it further. Practically, in the same context, there is the MOC which hasn't stopped its operations since the beginning of the war on Syria about eight years ago. It is working and is still active, and is directly linked to the Israelis. But we have noticed recently that it has been reactivated, and there are more communications. Mr. President, does this mean that the Syrian state is practically moving towards a military decisive action in the south regardless of the consequences, whether things reach a stalemate or not? Is a decisive action in the cards for the Syrian leadership?

President Assad: No, MOC has nothing to do with this decision. MOC has been linked to the presence and the role of the terrorists since the beginning of the war on Syria. That's why it existed: in order to lead them militarily. Consequently, the continued existence of this operations room means the continuation of the role given to these terrorists, i.e. they are equipped and prepared to carry out more terrorist acts. MOC is linked to the terrorists and not to the role of the Syrian state. Our role has nothing to do with it. Our decision has been clear from the beginning: we will liberate all Syrian lands. As to when to move south, north, east, or west, this is a purely military issue. But regardless of MOC, we have moved towards the south and we are giving the political process a chance. If that doesn't succeed, we have no other option but to liberate it by force.

Question 5: But there is a confrontation in the south, and the issue is not limited geographically to Syria in the larger political sense. There are the Americans, the Russians, the Iranians, the Israelis, and Hezbollah. All these parties are there in the area. What does that mean? How are you going to deal with this?

President Assad: You are talking about two axes: one supporting terrorism, and represented by the US, Israel, and some flunkies in the region including some Arab and non-Arab states, and an anti-terrorist axis. The first axis supports terrorism and seeks hegemony, while the second axis seeks independence. So, there can be only one result for this confrontation, i.e. the victory of one of these axes. At least, as far as the anti-terrorist axis is concerned, it will not give up the process of cleaning Syria and the region of terrorism and will not give up on the unity of Syrian territory .

As to the other axis, will it change as a result of the reality on the ground? Let's wait and see. But in terms of substance and convictions, it will not change, while in terms of the political practices dictated by reality and the facts on the ground, it might.

Question 6: Will the Americans leave al-Tanf?

President Assad: The Americans say they are ready, but everyone knows that the Americans are historically professional liars in politics. So why should we believe them? Also, we have to wait and see.

Question 7: Mr. President, what's happening now in Jordan? Is it linked to what's happening on the southern front in particular, i.e. is it linked to what is being plotted in that region, in your view?

President Assad: In fact, the only information we have is what we hear in the media. In any case, we wish Jordan stability, not chaos, because the latter will have a negative impact on us.

Question 8: Since we are talking about the south, let's close this file. Mr. President, what would make the Israeli occupation agree to the return of the Syrian Army to the borders, i.e. a return to the situation which existed at the beginning of 2011, after seven years of repeated Zionist attempts, directly and indirectly, to undermine the Syrian state, the regime in Syria, and stability in Syria. Why would it agree now to the return of the Syrian Army to the borders and to the occupied Golan?

President Assad: Certainly, neither conviction, morality, nor international law means anything to the Israelis. Since the beginning of the war, particularly when it started to have a clear military nature on the southern front in particular, the Israelis used to shell Syrian forces continuously, and consequently provide direct support to the terrorists. Israeli artillery and aircraft are the terrorists' artillery and aircraft. That applies to Jabhat al-Nusra of course . Nothing is going to change this Israeli approach. As far as we are concerned, Israel's approval had no role at all. Despite Israeli support to the terrorists, we have been doing our job, and the Syrian Army is fighting its way towards the southern front, and has liberated a number of areas within the limits of its capabilities. So, with or without its approval, the decision is a Syrian one, and this is a national duty we shall carry out.

Question 9: So, a return of the Syrian Army is better than having resistance in the Golan, for instance?

President Assad: For the Israelis?

Journalist: Yes.

President Assad: I think the two options are bad for the Israelis. Both of them are bad. Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah has repeatedly talked about Syria's relationship with the resistance and a Syrian role in the resistance. So, how would the Israelis choose between two bad things for them?

Question 10: As you said, Mr. President, Israel has financed, supported, and more dangerously was capable of enlisting a large number of Syrians, some of whom were treated inside occupied Palestine. They talked about it. In the future, how would you deal with this large number of Israeli agents? Maybe some of them were misled and Israel might have exploited the financial and living conditions of some; and some have chosen to side with the Israelis. How would you deal with them in the future?

President Assad: This is true; we cannot put everyone in the same basket. There are different reasons for moving in this wrong direction; and these people have wronged the homeland and every Syrian citizen. Ultimately, they are the children of this homeland, and we all bear responsibility for this problem, not only those who have done wrong. When crime, for instance, becomes widespread in a certain country, the whole society bears responsibility for this crime, not only the security agencies or the criminals themselves. The first thing that should be done is to accommodate these people. Second, we need to address the root causes which led to this case of weak patriotism. The causes here are many and complicated, and the scope of this interview doesn't allow for all of them to be mentioned.

Question 11: In the same context, while you are talking about restoring the Syrian air defense systems and confronting the Zionist occupation, statements have been made by leaders of the Israeli entity that they will strike at the depth of Syrian territory. How would you deal with that situation, particularly that balance has been achieved recently, i.e. balance between Israeli aggressions and Syrian responses?

President Assad: Basically, we haven't stopped responding. First of all, we haven't stopped fighting terrorists, and at the same time we haven't stopped responding to Israeli aggression within the capabilities available to us, militarily and technically. Moreover, the more these capabilities improve; the response will be better and higher. But in fact the strongest response to Israel now is to strike the Israeli army existing in Syria which consists practically of the terrorists .

Journalist: You consider them an Israeli army?

President Assad: Of course, for they are acting clearly and starkly in Israel's interest. The first acts they carried out were attacks against the air defense systems. What is the link between air defense systems and the terrorists acting as infantry on the ground? This was an Israeli order. It was an Israeli-American order because it is the same thing. So, they are Israel's army inside Syria; and the first strike against Israel, politically, militarily, and in every other area, is to strike Israel's terrorists inside Syria, whether they belong to ISIS, al-Nusra, or the other groups linked to the Israeli plan and strategy.

Journalist: If Israel escalates, are you prepared to respond more forcefully?

President Assad: This is what's happening. It is escalating, and we are responding. Ultimately, we are fighting the war within the capabilities available to us, and we are doing our best within these capabilities. A response does not need a political decision. I stress that responding or not responding is not a political decision. It is a national decision, and it was taken from day one. But implementing this decision depends on what we can do militarily and not politically.

Question 12: In terms of capabilities, there is one issue in the media which we are always following, i.e. the S300 Russian missiles. Russia says, "We will deliver these missiles", and then says, "We will not deliver them", which means that the issue is not clear. What is happening exactly? Why this Russian hesitation, in your view, in delivering the S300 missiles to Syria, while some other countries have been seeking S400, i.e. they are ahead of us in this regard.

President Assad: You know that military action and military considerations are part of political considerations. Consequently, a statement, even if it is of a military nature, carries at the same time political messages. So, why did the Russians say that they want to send or not send? This is a statement that the Russians should be asked about because it might be part of their political tactics. As to the military aspect of the statement, which concerns Syria, it's not our custom to talk about the weapon which will be delivered or not delivered. The evidence was that the weapons used in response to the last two aggressions, the tripartite aggression and after that the Israeli aggression, were not announced by Syria. We traditionally do not announce cases of a technical military nature.

Journalist: So, even the nature of the response is not linked to the issue of the S300 missiles?

President Assad: No. The same applies. Even if the S300 missiles will be provided or not provided, we will not say that they were delivered to Syria. A weapon is used when it must be used.

Journalist: Is there a possibility that you have developed certain weapons?

President Assad: This remains a possibility. In any case, the result is the same: weapons shouldn't be talked about until they are used. Weapons announce themselves only when they are used.

Question 13: Mr. President, let's return to the political aspect, since we are talking about the southern front. Regarding the general situation, in light of all that has been achieved on the Syrian arena today, the most prominent actor is the tripartite alliance, or what is being called the tripartite alliance. I mean Syria, Iran, and Russia. What is the nature of this alliance? Is it a temporary alliance, in the sense that it is linked to fighting terrorism or to certain developments on the Syrian arena? Recently, we have started to see – or let's say some have focused on certain points in order to show – a certain fracture in this alliance. What is your take on that and what is the actual reality of this alliance?

President Assad: If we talk first about the Syrian-Iranian part, for 40 years, and in the different conditions that the Middle East region has gone through, this alliance remained solid. So, there is no reason to say that it is temporary or otherwise. The new element in the war on Syria is the Russian element, and that's why this tripartite alliance came into existence. Our relationship with Russia is now about seven decades old. Despite the fluctuations and the fall of the Soviet Union, the rule of President Yeltsin, and the deterioration of these relations to a large degree for us, it has never reached the stage of reversing this relationship with Syria. Russia continued to deal with Syria as a friendly state, and we have imported everything from Russia, including weapons, during the different stages of the sanctions imposed on Syria. It is not in the nature of the Russians to build temporary or self-serving alliances or to sell out on relations in order to get deals done. The relationship is definitely a strategic one, but the political statements allowed for these speculations.

These statements also aim at sending messages in different directions. Maybe, sometimes the language or the choice of particular terminology might not be helpful and might take the statement in a different direction at odds with the content of the statement. This happens from time to time. However, these statements shouldn't be taken out of context: the Russian view of the relationship with Iran is a strategic one. As for Syria, the Russians do not interfere in Syrian affairs. If they have a certain opinion, they raise it with us and say that in the end, the decision is that of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian people. This is a constant principle for Russia. Therefore, the alliance is a strategic one, and if there are differences, such differences happen within the Syrian state, and you see differences within the Iranian state and within the Russian state. It is natural for us to differ on daily tactical details, for why conduct a dialogue if we agree on everything? We meet extensively in order to reach agreement.

Journalist: So, this tripartite alliance is being consolidated.

President Assad: Of course. This is dictated by reality, interest, and international changes that make it necessary for this alliance to be consolidated. As long as the other axis supports terrorism, and as long as we, together with Iran and Russia, feel the danger of terrorism, not only in Syria, but also on all these countries and on the whole world, and as long as Syria, Iran, and Russia realize the importance of abiding by international law, these facts make the existence of this alliance necessary.

Question 14: But there are those who say that Syria will get a price if the Iranians leave Syrian territories. Is there a certain political, moral, or military price in this regard?

President Assad: As I said in the beginning, as long as this relationship is not floated in the bazaar, they cannot offer a price, and the answer will be clear. That's why they don't dare suggest this price. This issue was raised by different countries, including Saudi Arabia for instance, at the beginning of the war, and not only at the beginning, but at different stages. The proposition was that if Syria cut its relationship with Iran, the situation in Syria will be normal. This principle is basically rejected by us.

Journalist: So, there were initiatives, so to speak, made in this regard by Saudi Arabia.

President Assad: During the war?

Journalist: Yes.

President Assad: Of course, more than once, and in a clear manner.

Journalist: Directly?

President Assad: Directly. The relationship with Iran was the basis for every proposition; and Saudi Arabia's position on this subject is public. I'm not revealing a secret.

Question 15: An issue is raised, whether in Syria, Iran, or Lebanon, about the nature of Iranian presence in Syria. Some call them Iranian advisors. Even the Syrian Foreign Minister used the same term. At the same time, we notice that there are Iranian martyrs. Frankly, Mr. President, what is the nature of Iranian presence in Syria now?

President Assad: The term adviser is sometimes used in a broad manner, i.e. these advisers have been with us, through the longstanding relationship with Iran, even before the war, because the military relationship is close. When a military formation moves to a fighting position, the adviser becomes a fighter. So, the word can be used in different senses. There are certainly Iranian advisers in Syria, and there are groups of Iranian volunteers who came to Syria, and they are led by Iranian officers. Iran has fought with and defended the Syrian people. It offered blood. That's why when we say "advisers" this is a generic term, but this doesn't mean that we are ashamed of any Iranian presence, even if it is official. But we use the word "advisers" because there are no regular Iranian fighting units in Syria.

Journalist: Full formations.

President Assad: Exactly. There are no battalions, or brigades, or divisions. First, we can't hide them, and then why should we be ashamed of that? When we invited the Russians legally to come to Syria, we were not ashamed of that. And if there were an Iranian formation, we would announce it, because such relations need agreements between the two states endorsed by parliaments. Such relations cannot be concealed.

Journalist: And you invited Iranian advisers to come?

President Assad: Of course, from the beginning we invited the Iranians, and then we invited the Russians. We needed the support of these countries, and they answered the call.

Journalist: Mr. President, you said more than once that there are no Iranian bases in Syria.

President Assad: That's correct.

Journalist: Why there are no Iranian bases, while we notice that there are a number of Russian bases?

President Assad: There's nothing that prevents the existence of such bases as long as Iran is an ally as is Russia.

Journalist: This means that if Iran requested the existence of such bases, you would agree?

President Assad: If we ask. We will ask them to agree. I mean that we could ask for the existence of such forces to support us. Iran has never asked and does not have an interest except in fighting terrorism. But the evolution of the war made it necessary to develop the nature of this presence.

This happened as far as the Russians are concerned. In the beginning, Russian support, like Iranian support, was different from what it is today. The support for terrorism has developed internationally and globally when the Syrian Army confronted those terrorists, and with that Russian and Iranian military presence developed. At a certain stage, we found – with the Russians of course – that the existence of air bases was necessary to provide air support to the Syrian Army. And now, if we find, in cooperation, coordination, or dialogue with the Iranians, that there is a need for Iranian military bases, we will not hesitate. But now, Iranian support in its present form is good and effective.

Question 16: Why haven't you visited Iran so far, although you visited Russia more than once?

President Assad: That's correct. In fact, there was a scheduled visit to Iran a few months ago, and it was postponed and not cancelled. It was postponed because of an emergency in Syria related to the development of battles. There is certainly no reason which prevents such a visit, and I'll visit Iran hopefully soon on the earliest opportunity. This is natural, but the issue is logistic, no more, no less.

Question 17: Mr. President, I move to another file. Last week, it was the Jerusalem International Day, and the Palestinian cause is going through its most difficult stages. We are talking about the "deal of the century", and moving the American Embassy to occupied Jerusalem. What do you have to say about Palestine? Is Syria still capable of supporting the Palestine cause? Basically, wasn't one of the most important objectives of the war on Syria to get Syria out of the axis of resistance and to prevent it from supporting resistance, whether in Lebanon or Palestine?

President Assad: The Palestine context, since 1948 up till now, has been a complicated one, because the regional context is complicated. Of course, it is complicated because the colonial West, which is particularly supportive of Israel, has always created elements which aim at one single thing. First, to drive to desperation the Arab citizen who is historically attached to the cause of Palestine and who has always considered it a pan-Arab cause that touched him even on the national level.

The other objective has been to distract the Arab peoples together with states or societies in general to marginal causes so that they do not have time to think about Israel. And they have succeeded to a great extent, most recently through the so-called Arab spring which has aimed at destroying the political, military, and psychological infrastructure of Arab societies.

Nevertheless, recent development have proven that the Arab people is still conscientiously attached to the cause of Palestine. As for Syria – since it has been part of these plots to undermine the Arab condition in general – first, for Syria to support the cause of Palestine, it should first of all destroy the Israeli army in Syria. Restoring stability in Syria, striking terrorism, and foiling the Israeli plot in Syria is certainly part of supporting the cause of Palestine. The support might be indirect with direct consequences, but these direct consequences are linked to the internal Palestinian condition. We shouldn't forget that the Palestinians are divided between groups which resist Israel and are genuinely linked to the cause of Palestine, and other groups which are against the resistance and support surrenderist and defeatist peace, while there are other groups which use resistance as a title in order to achieve their political objectives under the slogan of religion. This is of course the Muslim Brotherhood's approach.

Question 18: Are you prepared to offer whatever the resistance asks of you, whether in the form of political, military, or any other form of support?

President Assad: Politically, we haven't changed. The Palestinian question for us is still as it was ten years ago and decades ago. It hasn't changed. As to what we can offer, this has to do with two things: first, Syria's current capabilities; and there's no doubt that the priority is given now to cleaning Syria of terrorism. Second, it has to do with the Palestinian condition and the parties with which we can deal within the Palestinian arena.

Question 19: Since we are talking about resistance, there is the other side. In addition to some countries which stood beside Syria in fighting terrorism, there was also a role played by the resistance in Lebanon, particularly Hezbollah, which provided a great deal and contributed to fighting terrorism. What do you say, Mr. President, to resistance fighters and families of martyrs and the wounded?

President Assad: When all these groups of resistance get together to defend Syrian soil and Syrian citizens, including the Lebanese resistance and the brothers who came from Iraq some of whom reproached me for not mentioning them by name, I take this opportunity to stress that there are brothers from Iraq to whom we give the same weight of any resistance fighter who came from any other country.

There are also the families of resistance fighters who came from Iran and sacrificed their blood in Syria. We should put all these in the same basket next to the Syrian martyrs, fighters, and their families. To those I say that all the letters, the words, the sentences, and the whole of literature are much less than a single drop of blood. Therefore, words are of a much lesser value than what they have offered. What's more important is what history will write about them.

In fact, when we talk about writing history, we need to highlight that history needs a strategy and needs tactics, but the fact remains that strategy without implementation on the ground has no value. It remains mere thought which we might include in books and essays. But the reality is that these individuals in these countries, this group of resistance fighters, not politics, write history. I would like to use the answer to this question to express to them all my love, respect, and appreciation, and my reverence to the fighters, the wounded, and martyrs, and to all their families who are courage incarnated and who sent these individuals to Syria to defend it and fight terrorism, so that these families become models of morality and principles for present and future generations.

Question 20: Have you asked Hezbollah to leave Syria? A few days ago His Eminence Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah talked about this issue and said that nobody can get us out of Syria unless the Syrian leadership asked us to do so.

President Assad: The battle is long and ongoing. When we talk about this tripartite alliance – and if we consider it a quadruple alliance when we add Hezbollah, we talk about the tripartite alliance in terms of the states included, but in the end Hezbollah is a basic element in this war – the battle is long, and the need for these military forces will continue for a long time. When there is a need, and when Hezbollah, Iran, or others believe that terrorism has been eliminated, they will tell us that they want to go home. As Sayyed Hasan said, they have families and daily interests, which is normal, but it is still early to talk about this subject.

Question 21: Up till now, there are still areas under the control of terrorism and areas under occupation. At the same time, regretfully, some Arab countries, and here I am talking particularly about Saudi Arabia, announced that it is ready to send forcers to Syria. On the other hand, a few days ago popular tribal units were formed to resist occupation. Are these really popular resistance units? Do they receive support from the Syrian government? Does this mean that the army cannot liberate those areas, and that's why it is asking for the help of the tribes? What is the nature of this issue?

President Assad: There are different forms of this resistance which appeared a few years ago. In the beginning they were fighting ISIS before they started to fight the occupiers. They were against ISIS in the central and eastern regions, and there were cases where they appeared in other regions which were not given media coverage and about which we hear sometimes through information and indications.

Now, this situation has started to expand. So, it's not one single case. There are a number of cases which might be individual sometimes, or in the form of small groups not affiliated to an organization. In any case, our position as a state has been from the beginning to support any act of resistance, whether against terrorists or against occupying forces, regardless of their nationality, i.e. American, French, Turkish, or Israeli. We support these resistance forces based on our national role as a government.

Question 22: What about Saudi Arabia and sending Saudi forces to Syria?

President Assad: First, when we talk about a state, we should assume that such a state can take decisions independently. That's why we will not talk about the role of Saudi Arabia. You better ask me about the American decision on this issue.

Question 23: On the other hand, there are a number of Arab countries which we talk about and which had a role or contributed to the role or to the destruction of Syria. These countries are now trying to get to Syria through the reconstruction process. What do you say in this regard, particularly that these countries are the ones which have capital and huge financial power? How are you going to deal with that?

President Assad: Reconstruction in Syria is not a cause for concern for us. It needs two factors: first, the human factor which is more important than the financial factor. When a country like Syria possesses the human factor, the financial cost will be less when it comes to reconstruction. This is self-evident, and we possess all these factors despite the fact that many competent and qualified Syrians have immigrated because of the war.

But we still have the capability to start reconstruction. And the evidence is clear now, for the state is moving forward and reconstruction has begun. As to money, the Syrian people have financial capabilities, capital, most of which is not in Syria, but outside Syria. But there is capital waiting for reconstruction to begin, so it will begin investing. On the other hand, there are the friendly countries which have capabilities and have the desire; and we have the desire to have them participate in reconstruction, so that they benefit and we Syrians benefit from this process. In the end, we do not need those countries and we will never allow them to be part of reconstruction.

Journalist: Never?

President Assad: Absolutely.

Journalist: Not even if there was a need in this regard, I mean in terms of financial resources?

President Assad: Financial resources are not everything. As I said, this is available. There are different sources in the world and in Syria for capital.

Question 24: With these tough years, we are talking about the legendary steadfastness of the Syrian Army, the Syrian people, the Armed Forces. If you wanted to talk about two cases, the most difficult case or incident that you have encountered during these years, and on the other hand the best and most beautiful case.

President Assad: It is natural, at the heart of the military battle, for the best and worst cases to be linked to the development of the military battle. If I say that the worst cases were when terrorists used to control a certain area, this is self-evident, but it is related more to specific battles, particularly when the area is strategic or the city is big with a large population. Consequently, the impact will be much greater psychologically and in terms of morale.

But there was an ongoing situation which we are still living and we must think about: when a martyr or a group of martyrs fall, and this is ongoing on a weekly basis for us, we must think that a family lost a dear one who cannot be compensated. He might be compensated by achieving victory at a certain stage, but on the family, psychological and human level, you cannot compensate a dear one lost to a certain family, or maybe a friend. This is a very painful situation which we have lived and continue to live. This will not stop until the war itself stops. But there were painful cases at the beginning of the war, when you see this huge lack of patriotism. They were perhaps a minority, but a large minority, of individuals who were prepared to sell the homeland and trade it together with their principles, if they had ones, in return for money or a certain interest, in addition to a certain percentage of extremism.

On the other hand, there were victories, particularly when victories started in the city of al-Qsair in 2013, and culminated in the city of Aleppo in 2016, that was the beginning of the major victories. That was followed by Deir Ezzor, and today we are living the joy of liberating Damascus and its countryside. This is a situation we have all lived through, and you were with us, and I am sure you feel the same joy.

Question 25: Have you felt tired at a certain moment? Have you felt hesitant at a certain moment, in light of all the decisions you have taken, have you ever, even for a moment, thought of leaving? Haven't you said to yourself: let me save my family and resign, as some people did at a certain point in time?

President Assad: This question might be raised in a personal manner. When I am faced with a personal situation as an individual, I might feel despair after a few months. I might feel tired or bored or I might want to move to a different situation, or give up. That is possible.

Journalist: As an individual?

President Assad: Of course, as an individual, but the case you are proposing is not personal, it is national. Imagine yourself in a different condition, perhaps building something on your own. You feel tired, but when you see a large number of people helping you build it and share the same determination, you forget the tiredness.

Now we are in a national situation. We are talking about millions of Syrians. When you see a shell striking and victims falling anywhere in Syria, you feel frustrated. But when you see life being restored to the same area after one hour, your psychological condition changes. When you see that the electricity worker, the oil worker, the teacher, the employee, are moving side by side with fighters, moving without despair and without tiredness, how can you feel tired? This is a collective condition not related to me as a person. It has to do with our human condition when we are together as a society. How do we live? This defines whether you are tired or not. Would the Syrian society have arrived at this stage of despair and surrender, I would certainly have been with it. I would have surrendered because I do not have the necessary elements for steadfastness. This is self-evident.

Journalist: Thank you very much, Mr. President, for giving us this opportunity, and for your candidness in answering these questions. Thank you very much.

[Jun 18, 2018] Real Takeaway The FBI Influenced the Election of a President by Peter Van Buren

In a way we now can talk about Intelligence Industrial complex
Notable quotes:
"... The good news is the Deep State seems less competent than we originally feared. ..."
"... In a damning passage , the 568 page report found it "extraordinary and insubordinate for Comey to conceal his intentions from his superiors for the admitted purpose of preventing them from telling him not to make the statement, and to instruct his subordinates in the FBI to do the same. By departing so clearly and dramatically from FBI and department norms, the decisions negatively impacted the perception of the FBI and the department as fair administrators of justice." Comey's drafting of a press release announcing no prosecution for Clinton, written before the full investigation was even completed, is given a light touch though in the report, along the lines of roughly preparing for the conclusion based on early indications. ..."
"... Enough: The DOJ Must Show Its Cards to the American Public A Higher Loyalty is Jim Comey's Revenge, Served Lukewarm ..."
"... Attorney General Loretta Lynch is criticized for not being more sensitive to public perceptions when she agreed to meet privately with Bill Clinton aboard an airplane as the FBI investigation into Hillary unfolded. "Lynch's failure to recognize the appearance problem and to take action to cut the visit short was an error in judgment." Her statements later about her decision not to recuse further "created public confusion and didn't adequately address the situation." ..."
"... Page and Strzok also discussed cutting back the number of investigators present for Clinton's in-person interview in light of the fact she might soon be president, and thus their new boss. Someone identified only as Agent One went on to refer to Clinton as "the President" and in a message told a friend "I'm with her." The FBI also allowed Clinton's lawyers to attend her interview, even though they were also witnesses to a possible crimes committed by Clinton. ..."
"... Page and Strzok were among five FBI officials the report found expressed hostility toward Trump and have been referred to the FBI's internal disciple system. The report otherwise makes only wishy-washy recommendations about things every agent should already know, like "adopting a policy addressing the appropriateness of department employees discussing the conduct of uncharged individuals in public statements." ..."
"... In that sense, the IG just poured a can of jet fuel onto the fires of the 2016 election and walked away to watch it burn. ..."
"... One concrete outcome, however, is to weaken a line of prosecution for Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The chief Russiagate investigator has just seen a key witness degraded -- any defense lawyer will characterize Comey's testimony as tainted now -- and a possible example of obstruction weakened. ..."
"... The report thus underscores one of the stated reasons for Comey's dismissal. Firing someone for incompetence isn't obstructing justice; it's the boss' job. ..."
"... the most important conclusion of the report: there is no longer a way to claim America's internal intelligence agency, the FBI, did not play a role in the 2016 election. There is only to argue which side they favored and whether they meddled via clumsiness, as a coordinated action, or as a chaotic cluster of competing pro- and anti- Clinton/Trump factions inside the Bureau. And that's the tally before anyone brings up the FBI's use of a human informant inside the Trump campaign, the FBI's use of both FISA warrants and pseudo-legal warrantless surveillance against key members of the Trump team, the FBI's use of opposition research from the Steele Dossier , and so on. ..."
Jun 18, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
June 15, 2018 The good news is the Deep State seems less competent than we originally feared.

It will be easy to miss the most important point amid the partisan bleating over what the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General report on the FBI's Clinton email investigation really means.

While each side will find the evidence they want to find proving the FBI, with James Comey as director, helped/hurt Hillary Clinton and/or maybe Donald Trump, the real takeaway is this: the FBI influenced the election of a president.

In January 2017 the Inspector General for the Department of Justice, Michael Horowitz (who previously worked on the 2012 study of "Fast and Furious"), opened his probe into the FBI's Clinton email investigation, including public statements Comey made at critical moments in the presidential campaign. Horowitz's focus was always to be on how the FBI did its work, not to re-litigate the case against Clinton. Nor did the IG plan to look into anything regarding Russiagate.

In a damning passage , the 568 page report found it "extraordinary and insubordinate for Comey to conceal his intentions from his superiors for the admitted purpose of preventing them from telling him not to make the statement, and to instruct his subordinates in the FBI to do the same. By departing so clearly and dramatically from FBI and department norms, the decisions negatively impacted the perception of the FBI and the department as fair administrators of justice." Comey's drafting of a press release announcing no prosecution for Clinton, written before the full investigation was even completed, is given a light touch though in the report, along the lines of roughly preparing for the conclusion based on early indications.

Enough: The DOJ Must Show Its Cards to the American Public A Higher Loyalty is Jim Comey's Revenge, Served Lukewarm

Attorney General Loretta Lynch is criticized for not being more sensitive to public perceptions when she agreed to meet privately with Bill Clinton aboard an airplane as the FBI investigation into Hillary unfolded. "Lynch's failure to recognize the appearance problem and to take action to cut the visit short was an error in judgment." Her statements later about her decision not to recuse further "created public confusion and didn't adequately address the situation."

The report also criticizes in depth FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, who exchanged texts disparaging Trump before moving from the Clinton email to the Russiagate investigation. Those texts "brought discredit" to the FBI and sowed public doubt about the investigation, including one exchange that read, "Page: "[Trump's] not ever going to become president, right? Strzok: "No. No he's not. We'll stop it." Another Strzok document stated "we know foreign actors obtained access to some Clinton emails, including at least one secret message."

Page and Strzok also discussed cutting back the number of investigators present for Clinton's in-person interview in light of the fact she might soon be president, and thus their new boss. Someone identified only as Agent One went on to refer to Clinton as "the President" and in a message told a friend "I'm with her." The FBI also allowed Clinton's lawyers to attend her interview, even though they were also witnesses to a possible crimes committed by Clinton.

Page and Strzok were among five FBI officials the report found expressed hostility toward Trump and have been referred to the FBI's internal disciple system. The report otherwise makes only wishy-washy recommendations about things every agent should already know, like "adopting a policy addressing the appropriateness of department employees discussing the conduct of uncharged individuals in public statements."

But at the end of it all, the details really don't matter, because the report broadly found no political bias, no purposeful efforts or strategy to sway the election. In aviation disaster terms, it was all pilot error. Like an accident of sorts, as opposed to the pilot boarding drunk, but the plane crashed and killed 300 people either way.

The report is already being welcomed by Democrats -- who feel Comey shattered Clinton's chances of winning the election by reopening the email probe just days before the election -- and by Republicans, who feel Comey let Clinton off easy. Many are now celebrating it was only gross incompetence, unethical behavior, serial bad judgment, and insubordination that led the FBI to help determine the election. No Constitutional crisis.

A lot of details in those 568 pages to yet fully parse, but at first glance there is not much worthy of prosecution (though Attorney General Jeff Sessions says he will review the report for possible prosecutions and IG Horowitz will testify in front of Congress on Monday and may reveal more information.) Each side will point to the IG's conclusion of "no bias" to shut down calls for this or that in a tsunami of blaming each other. In that sense, the IG just poured a can of jet fuel onto the fires of the 2016 election and walked away to watch it burn.

One concrete outcome, however, is to weaken a line of prosecution for Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The chief Russiagate investigator has just seen a key witness degraded -- any defense lawyer will characterize Comey's testimony as tainted now -- and a possible example of obstruction weakened. As justification for firing Comey, the White House initially pointed to an earlier Justice Department memo criticizing Comey for many of the same actions now highlighted by the IG (Trump later added concerns about the handling of Russiagate.) The report thus underscores one of the stated reasons for Comey's dismissal. Firing someone for incompetence isn't obstructing justice; it's the boss' job.

It will be too easy, however, to miss the most important conclusion of the report: there is no longer a way to claim America's internal intelligence agency, the FBI, did not play a role in the 2016 election. There is only to argue which side they favored and whether they meddled via clumsiness, as a coordinated action, or as a chaotic cluster of competing pro- and anti- Clinton/Trump factions inside the Bureau. And that's the tally before anyone brings up the FBI's use of a human informant inside the Trump campaign, the FBI's use of both FISA warrants and pseudo-legal warrantless surveillance against key members of the Trump team, the FBI's use of opposition research from the Steele Dossier , and so on.

The good news is the Deep State seems less competent than we originally feared. But even if one fully accepts the IG report's conclusion that all this -- and there's a lot -- was not intentional, at a minimum it makes clear to those watching ahead of 2020 what tools are available and the impact they can have. While we continue to look for the bad guy abroad, we have already met the enemy and he is us.

Peter Van Buren, a 24-year State Department veteran, is the author of We Meant Well : How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People and Hooper's War : A Novel of WWII Japan. Follow him on Twitter @WeMeantWell .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

* * *

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

Harry S Nydick / June 17, 2018

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Now do you understand?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Jun 17, 2018] Ukraine as reflection of USA. When masters fall out their men get the clout by Mark Kravets

Dec 26, 2017 | medium.com

So-called Ukrainian 'maidans' have bored the world community to death. And the public has been taking the protests currently under way in Kiev for no more than traditional autumn and winter open-air parties, similar to the Parisian 'fire shows'. Meanwhile, much more significant confrontation has been taking place in Kiev, alongside with the circus of ex-president of Georgia Mikheil Saakashvili. An inner conflict between two anticorruption and power-wielding departments of the country is long overdue. In their relations with the media, both representatives of those organizations and members of various Verkhovna Rada fractions have been describing specific processes that are taking place in Ukraine as 'Makhnovshchina' or a war of all against all, literally speaking.

After returning from the international anti-corruption forum organized by the U.S. State Department, Nazar Holodnitsky, head of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAP) of Ukraine, stated in an interview to TSN , the Ukrainian TV channel, that a standoff of law enforcement agencies may escalate into a war harmful to entire Ukraine. Thus, a conflict between the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the General Prosecutor's Office (GPO) has evolved into a hybrid war with interrogations involving physical and mental pressure and mutual accusations of all sorts of evils. Delegates of both sides have simultaneously visited their U.S. sponsors and come back comforted with just another assurance of '1000% support'.

Such confrontation of the government institutions raises eyebrows, I must say. State Department has publicly been sympathized with both the corruption fighters and the General Prosecutor's Office upon condition of the settlement of conflict by legal means and punishment of officials guilty of criminal charges. Meanwhile, the FBI has also been drawn in this undeclared war. In June 2016, the FBI and NABU adopted the Memorandum of Understanding, which allows the FBI to assist NABU and SAP in the matter of investigations and implementation of anti-corruption actions. The Bureau's special agents and analysts have been working in NABU on a temporary rotational basis.

The mere presence of the FBI suggests an idea about another U.S. security service which has been standing invisibly by in Ukraine, since it gained independence. This is the CIA, a classic rival of the FBI. The very secret visit in 2014 of the former Central Intelligence Agency chief John O. Brennan preceded the beginning of active hostilities in Ukraine. The CIA stood behind the appointment of the recent Kiev government. It had also protected the acting president of the country from rivals, up to a certain time. For instance, they conduced to the resignation of Arseniy Yatsenyuk, a former rather ambitious Prime Minister of Ukraine who was in conflict with Petro Poroshenko and running for his post.

That helps explain the real cause of furious intransigence of NABU and the General Prosecutor's Office throwing wild accusations at each other. They have virtually been used by power-wielding structures and political forces of another state for a showdown. A never-ending internal fighting in the American national security environment has become the talk of the town being eventually accreted with new dirty wash. It seems that it has become more acute, with the passing of time.

For example, the FBI dealt a hard blow to the CIA bringing 12-count charges including conspiracy against the United States, conspiracy to launder money, false statements, and other against Paul Manafort, Donald Trump's former campaign chairman and his business associate, Richard Gates. His other partner, Rick Davis, McCain's campaign manager was involved as well. Manafort was renowned for his associations with the CIA and for consulting the Party of Regions which was led by Victor Yanukovych. It became clear who was he FBI's source of such detailed and valuable data after the statements by Artem Sytnyk , Director of NABU and Serhiy Leshchenko , a Ukrainian MP.

Nevertheless, the CIA won at this stage of confrontation, because Trump came to power. Even support to the current President of the USA prior to the elections wasn't of much assistance to the FBI Director Comey.

History has witnessed a number of episodes when Ukraine was a stage for showdown by political forces from other countries. It never ended peacefully. As far back as in the XVII century Ukrainian territory had become a theatre of operations owing to the bloody strife between Polish hetmans (high military commanders in the Army of the Kingdom of Poland) of Ukrainian and Cossack origin. As a result, lands of the Zaporizhian Host voluntarily pledged allegiance to Russia.

During World War II the Ukrainian people suffered much harder. At that time the Third Reich was intensely seeking for ways to weaken the USSR, even before it invaded Poland in 1939. It was decided to use the ancient divide-and rule tactics proven by Julius Caesar, involving gradual tearing away of territories with malcontent population. Ukraine was considered the most prospective area for fomenting disaffection.

However, there also was both ideological and political discord among the highest ranks of the Third Reich. Thus, Alfred Rosenberg, the main ideologue of Nazism, along with admiral Wilhelm Canaris (who was accused of 'spiritual instigation' of a plot against Hitler) were planning the establishment of Ukrainian buffer state controlled by the Third Reich. Using such promises they managed to recruit Andriy Melnyk, a central figure in the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), and notorious Stepan Bandera who, just like Mr. Yatsenyuk, was striving to lead the government in independent Ukrainian state. If the second one kept clinging to his aims all the time, Melnyk was good at matching to desires of his sponsors from Hitler's surrounding. When Himmler and Koch didn't recognize Rosenberg's ideas and wanted to weaken his power in the National Socialist Worker's Party, Melnyk was quick to assure them of his willingness to cooperate on any terms, especially when they let him know that Fuhrer didn't like the idea of a Ukrainian buffer state.

It is a paradox that those relations that had developed both within various branches of OUN-UPA and the Third Reich senior ranks coordinating them were similar to the recent situation in Ukraine. Ukrainian nationalist leaders were used not only for German purposes, but also for elimination of competitors in power. For instance, Rosenberg, after all, had to abandon his point of view. Many of his influential followers resigned just like chief Comey did to the delight of chief Pompeo, this May. Although NABU, the organization most thoroughly maintaining a steady U.S. course prepared for Ukraine, has been successfully continuing investigations, digging into Poroshenko who fell into disfavor for his poor record. And here you are, Marie Yovanovitch, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine and a close acquaintance of the U.S. president's national security advisor McMaster and Secretary of Defense Mattis has indirectly supported Saakashvili's demonstration. In September, Saakashvili hanged out happily with contenders of the recent president in future election Valentyn Nalyvaichenko and Andriy Sadoviy, in Lviv. Now a big friend of Senator McCain Yulia Timoshenko and a number of Verkhovna Rada MPs endorse him.

This mess of warring parties seems to be disordered and extremely headachy. The situation has been much worse for the number of competing forces and foreign organizations standing behind them in Ukraine was much greater during the Third Reich and it continues to be so at present. The recent Ukrainian bellum omnium contra omnes has been a reflection of competitive battle between various security and governmental agencies in the USA.

A single distinct and unequivocal fact is that being a neighbour of such a huge state as Russia, Ukraine was always suffering from those who wish to weaken that influential country. Over and over again throughout Ukrainian history the country was exploited, with nationalist sentiments artificially ignited and false promises made. Even 'humane' Rosenberg's scheme ascribed Ukraine the role of a mere supplier of raw materials and a buffer state between Germany and Eastern Slavic countries without any right to independence.

As such, the USA regards Ukraine as an administered territory which is useful for strategic and economic aims. They skillfully manipulate Kiev government with carrot and stick. Undesirable Ukrainian political puppet might be branded as corrupt and replaced by more manageable nominee, at any time. There is always a possibility to initiate another blood shedding Maidan with oppressions and civil war, in case of urgency. Today's Ukraine is no freer than it was in 1941, during the invasion of Nazi Germany. Melnyks, banderas, hetmans skoropadskies have been replaced by new 'heroes', who never changed their essence. For evanescent promises and artificially inflated ambitions they've been tearing the country apart without mercy either to each other, or their countrymen. Meanwhile, the world community has been watching with approval the beacon of democracy vigorously setting things to order in 'dark and ignorant' Ukraine. Each of them thinking, 'Better them than me.'

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

Jun 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

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

@mikkkkas

Dramatic shift in analysis of Saker,

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

Below the prudent lines of Saker quoted.

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

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

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

Honest writing of Saker.

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

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

[Jun 17, 2018] Optimism Caitlin Johnstone

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

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

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

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

[Jun 17, 2018] the dominant political forces in EU are anti-Russia

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... There is a strong, EU domestic anti-Russian population based on hundreds of years of history, resentment over losses (Germany, Poland, Sweden, Finland), self-brainwashing about perceived abuse (Poland, Baltics, eastern Europeans in general), hatred and contempt towards anything 'eastern', and the traditional anglo anti-Russian policies. Recently new emotional hatreds have been added with endless demonising Russia about xenophobia, hooligans, gays, stray dogs, anything the creative propagandists can push. Most Europeans turn out on reflection to be quite gullible and stupid. ..."
"... There are a few minor exceptions and some Latin nations are more level headed. There is also a minority view in the German world, mostly based on their business realism that is neutral toward Russia, but not pro-Russian. There will be no political rapprochement between EU and Russia. There will be better business relations because water flows downhill and EU-Russia economic ties are such an obvious fit. The cultural hatred and political hostility will go on. ..."
"... After WWII it took most Europeans less than a generation to revert to the traditional anti-Russian attitudes. In some cases, nations that were literally saved from extermination were more resentful than grateful. In Poland it took less than a year, in Czech Republic 20 years, but the old visceral hatreds emerged again. ..."
Jun 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

renfro

Saker is correct that EU countries will not work with Russia. Blaming it all on Washington was always stupid
Bullshit. ...try to keep up with whats actually happening.

U.S. Is Trying to Kill Major Gas Deal Between Russia and Germany
By Tom O'Connor On 5/18/18 at 2:41 PM
http://www.newsweek.com/us-trying-kill-major-gas-deal-between-russia-germany-934603

The U.S. has warned both Russia and Germany against pursuing a planned gas pipeline that would run between the two countries, threatening to impose sanctions and claiming the project would threaten the security of its European allies.

Construction has recently begun for the Nord Stream 2 project, a planned pipeline that would extend from Russia along an existing pipeline through the Baltic Sea into northeastern Germany. Once finished, Nord Stream 2 would reportedly double the amount of gas that Russia could provide Europe. State Department Deputy Assistant Secretary Sandra Oudkirk told reporters in Berlin Thursday that the project could bolster Russia's "malign influence" in the region and that Washington was "exerting as much persuasive power" as it could to stop it, according to the Associated Press.

Europe in diplomatic push to ease Russia sanctions | Financial Times

https://www.ft.com/content/9b9bbd3c-44a5-11e8-93cf-67ac3a6482fdApr 20, 2018 - A Europe-wide diplomatic push is under way to persuade the Trump administration to ease US sanctions targeting Russia, as fears mount that ...

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Jun 17, 2018] The Necessity of a Trump-Putin Summit by Stephen F. Cohen

Highly recommended!
Decimation of anti-war forces and flourishing of Russophobia are two immanent features of the US neoliberalism. As long as the maintinace fo the US global neoliberal empire depends of weakening and, possibly, dismembering Russia it is naive to expect any change. Russian version of soft "national neoliberalism" is not that different, in principle form Trump version of hard "netional neoliberalism" so those leaders might have something to talk about. In other words as soon as the USA denounce neoliberal globalization that might be some openings.
Notable quotes:
"... The New York Times ..."
Jun 06, 2018 | www.thenation.com

Ten ways the new US-Russian Cold War is increasingly becoming more dangerous than the one we survived.

  1. The political epicenter of the new Cold War is not in far-away Berlin, as it was from the late 1940s on, but directly on Russia's borders, from the Baltic states and Ukraine to the former Soviet republic of Georgia. Each of these new Cold War fronts is, or has recently been, fraught with the possibly of hot war. US-Russian military relations are especially tense today in the Baltic region, where a large-scale NATO buildup is under way, and in Ukraine, where a US-Russian proxy war is intensifying. The "Soviet Bloc" that once served as a buffer between NATO and Russia no longer exists. And many imaginable incidents on the West's new Eastern Front, intentional or unintentional, could easily trigger actual war between the United States and Russia. What brought about this unprecedented situation on Russia's borders -- at least since the Nazi German invasion in 1941 -- was, of course, the exceedingly unwise decision, in the late 1990s, to expand NATO eastward. Done in the name of "security," it has made all the states involved only more insecure.

  2. Proxy wars were a feature of the old Cold War, but usually small ones in what was called the "Third World" -- in Africa, for example -- and they rarely involved many, if any, Soviet or American personnel, mostly only money and weapons. Today's US-Russian proxy wars are different, located in the center of geopolitics and accompanied by too many American and Russian trainers, minders, and possibly fighters. Two have already erupted: in Georgia in 2008, where Russian forces fought a Georgian army financed, trained, and minded by American funds and personnel; and in Syria, where in February scores of Russians were killed by US-backed anti-Assad forces . Moscow did not retaliate, but it has pledged to do so if there is "a next time," as there very well may be. If so, this would in effect be war directly between Russia and America. Meanwhile, the risk of such a direct conflict continues to grow in Ukraine, where the country's US-backed but politically failing President Petro Poroshenko seems increasingly tempted to launch another all-out military assault on rebel-controlled Donbass, backed by Moscow. If he does so, and the assault does not quickly fail as previous ones have, Russia will certainly intervene in eastern Ukraine with a truly tangible "invasion." Washington will then have to make a fateful war-or-peace decision. Having already reneged on its commitments to the Minsk Accords, which are the best hope for ending the four-year Ukrainian crisis peacefully, Kiev seems to have an unrelenting impulse to be a tail wagging the dog of war. Certainly, its capacity for provocations and disinformation are second to none, as evidenced again last week by the faked "assassination and resurrection" of the journalist Arkady Babchenko.

  3. The Western, but especially American, years-long demonization of the Kremlin leader, Putin, is also unprecedented. Too obvious to reiterate here, no Soviet leader, at least since Stalin, was ever subjected to such prolonged, baseless, crudely derogatory personal vilification. Whereas Soviet leaders were generally regarded as acceptable negotiating partners for American presidents, including at major summits, Putin has been made to seem to be an illegitimate national leader -- at best "a KGB thug," at worst a murderous "mafia boss."

  4. Still more, demonizing Putin has generated a widespread Russophobic vilification of Russia itself , or what The New York Times and other mainstream-media outlets have taken to calling " Vladimir Putin's Russia ." Yesterday's enemy was Soviet Communism. Today it is increasingly Russia, thereby also delegitimizing Russia as a great power with legitimate national interests. "The Parity Principle," as Cohen termed it during the preceding Cold War -- the principle that both sides had legitimate interests at home and abroad, which was the basis for diplomacy and negotiations, and symbolized by leadership summits -- no longer exists, at least on the American side. Nor does the acknowledgment that both sides were to blame, at least to some extent, for that Cold War. Among influential American observers who at least recognize the reality of the new Cold War , "Putin's Russia" alone is to blame. When there is no recognized parity and shared responsibility, there is little space for diplomacy -- only for increasingly militarized relations, as we are witnessing today.
  5. Meanwhile, most of the Cold War safeguards -- cooperative mechanisms and mutually observed rules of conduct that evolved over decades in order to prevent superpower hot war -- have been vaporized or badly frayed since the Ukrainian crisis in 2014, as the UN General Secretary António Guterres, almost alone, has recognized : "The Cold War is back -- with a vengeance but with a difference. The mechanisms and the safeguards to manage the risks of escalation that existed in the past no longer seem to be present." Trump's recent missile strike on Syria carefully avoided killing any Russians there, but here too Moscow has vowed to retaliate against US launchers or other forces involved if there is a "next time," as, again, there may be. Even the decades-long process of arms control may, we are told by an expert , be coming to an "end." If so, it will mean an unfettered new nuclear-arms race but also the termination of an ongoing diplomatic process that buffered US-Soviet relations during very bad political times. In short, if there are any new Cold War rules of conduct, they are yet to be formulated and mutually accepted. Nor does this semi-anarchy take into account the new warfare technology of cyber-attacks. What are its implications for the secure functioning of existential Russian and American nuclear command-and-control and early-warning systems that guard against an accidental launching of missiles still on high alert?

  6. Russiagate allegations that the American president has been compromised by -- or is even an agent of -- the Kremlin are also without precedent. These allegations have had profoundly dangerous consequences, among them the nonsensical but mantra-like warfare declaration that "Russia attacked America" during the 2016 presidential election; crippling assaults on President Trump every time he speaks with Putin in person or by phone; and making both Trump and Putin so toxic that even most politicians, journalists, and professors who understand the present-day dangers are reluctant to speak out against US contributions to the new Cold War.

  7. Mainstream-media outlets have, of course, played a woeful role in all of this. Unlike in the past, when pro-détente advocates had roughly equal access to mainstream media, today's new Cold War media enforce their orthodox narrative that Russia is solely to blame. They practice not diversity of opinion and reporting but "confirmation bias." Alternative voices (with, yes, alternative or opposing facts) rarely appear any longer in the most influential mainstream newspapers or on television or radio broadcasts. One alarming result is that "disinformation" generated by or pleasing to Washington and its allies has consequences before it can be corrected. The fake Babchenko assassination (allegedly ordered by Putin, of course) was quickly exposed, but not the alleged Skripal assassination attempt in the UK, which led to the largest US expulsion of Russian diplomats in history before London's official version of the story began to fall apart. This too is unprecedented: Cold War without debate, which in turn precludes the frequent rethinking and revising of US policy that characterized the preceding 40-year Cold War -- in effect, an enforced dogmatization of US policy that is both exceedingly dangerous and undemocratic.

  8. Equally unsurprising, and also very much unlike during the 40-year Cold War, there is virtually no significant opposition in the American mainstream to the US role in the new Cold War -- not in the media, not in Congress, not in the two major political parties, not in the universities, not at grassroots levels. This too is unprecedented, dangerous, and contrary to real democracy. Consider only the thunderous silence of scores of large US corporations that have been doing profitable business in post-Soviet Russia for years, from fast-food chains and automobile manufacturers to pharmaceutical and energy giants. And contrast their behavior to that of CEOs of PepsiCo, Control Data, IBM, and other major American corporations seeking entry to the Soviet market in the 1970s and 1980s, when they publicly supported and even funded pro-détente organizations and politicians. How to explain the silence of their counterparts today, who are usually so profit-motivated? Are they too fearful of being labeled "pro-Putin" or possibly "pro-Trump"? If so, will this Cold War continue to unfold with only very rare profiles of courage in any high places? 9. And then there is the widespread escalatory myth that today's Russia, unlike the Soviet Union, is too weak -- its economy too small and fragile, its leader too "isolated in international affairs" -- to wage a sustained Cold War, and that eventually Putin, who is "punching above his weight," as the cliché has it, will capitulate. This too is a dangerous delusion. As Cohen has shown previously , "Putin's Russia" is hardly isolated in world affairs, and is becoming even less so, even in Europe, where at least five governments are tilting away from Washington and Brussels and perhaps from their economic sanctions on Russia. Indeed, despite the sanctions, Russia's energy industry and agricultural exports are flourishing. Geopolitically, Moscow has many military and related advantages in regions where the new Cold War has unfolded. And no state with Russia's modern nuclear and other weapons is "punching above its weight." Above all, the great majority of Russian people have rallied behind Putin because t hey believe their country is under attack by the US-led West . Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of Russia's history understands it is highly unlikely to capitulate under any circumstances.

  9. Finally (at least as of now), there is the growing war-like "hysteria" often commented on in both Washington and Moscow. It is driven by various factors, but television talk/"news" broadcasts, which are as common in Russia as in the United States, play a major role. Perhaps only an extensive quantitative study could discern which plays a more lamentable role in promoting this frenzy -- MSNBC and CNN or their Russian counterparts. For Cohen, the Russian dark witticism seems apt: "Both are worst" ( Oba khuzhe ). Again, some of this American broadcast extremism existed during the preceding Cold War, but almost always balanced, even offset, by truly informed, wiser opinions, which are now largely excluded.

Is this analysis of the dangers inherent in the new Cold War itself extremist or alarmist? Even SOME usually reticent specialists would seem to agree with Cohen's general assessment. Experts gathered by a centrist Washington think tank thought that on a scale of 1 to 10, there is a 5 to 7 chance of actual war with Russia. A former head of British M16 is reported as saying that "for the first time in living memory, there's a realistic chance of a superpower conflict." And a respected retired Russian general tells the same think tank that any military confrontation "will end up with the use of nuclear weapons between the United States and Russia."

In today's dire circumstances, one Trump-Putin summit cannot eliminate the new Cold War dangers. But US-Soviet summits traditionally served three corollary purposes. They created a kind of security partnership -- not a conspiracy -- that involved each leader's limited political capital at home, which the other should recognize and not heedlessly jeopardize. They sent a clear message to the two leaders' respective national-security bureaucracies, which often did not favor détente-like cooperation, that the "boss" was determined and that they must end their foot-dragging, even sabotage. And summits, with their exalted rituals and intense coverage, usually improved the media-political environment needed to enhance cooperation amid Cold War conflicts. If a Trump-Putin summit achieves even some of those purposes, it might result in a turning away from the precipice that now looms

[Jun 17, 2018] Can the EU become a partner for Russia by The Saker

Notable quotes:
"... comprador elite ..."
"... The bottom line is this: currently, the EU is most unlikely to become a viable partner for Russia and the future does look rather bleak. ..."
"... They do not want to humiliate us, they want to subdue us, solve their problems at our expense ..."
"... either Russia is a sovereign country, or there is no Russia ..."
Jun 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

... ... ...

First, there is no "EU", at least not in political terms . More crucially, there is no "EU foreign policy". Yes, there are EU member states, who have political leaders, there is a big business community in the EU and there are many EU organizations, but as such, the "EU" does not exist, especially not in terms of foreign policy. The best proof of that is how clueless the so-called "EU" has been in the Ukraine, then with the anti-Russian sanctions, in dealing with an invasion of illegal immigrants, and now with Trump. At best, the EU can be considered a US protectorate/colony, with some subjects "more equal than others" (say, the UK versus Greece). Most (all?) EU member states are abjectly obedient to the US, and this is no surprise considering that even the so-called "EU leader" or "EU heavyweight" – Germany – only has very limited sovereignty. The EU leaders are nothing but a comprador elite which doesn't give a damn about the opinions and interests of the people of Europe. The undeniable fact is that the so-called "EU foreign policy" has gone against the vital interests of the people of Europe for decades and that phenomenon is only getting worse.

Second, the single most powerful and unified organization in Europe is not even an EU organization, but NATO. And NATO, in real terms, is no less than 80% US . Forget about those fierce looking European armies, they are all a joke. Not only do they represent no credible force (being too small, too poorly trained, under-equipped and poorly commanded), but they are completely dependent on the US for a long list of critical capabilities and " force multipliers ": command, control, communications, intelligence, networking, surveillance, reconnaissance, target acquisition, logistics, etc. Furthermore, in terms of training, force planning, weapon systems procurement, deployment and maintenance, EU states are also totally dependent on the US. The reason? The US military budget totally dwarfs anything individual EU states can spend, so they all depend on Uncle Sam. Of sure, the NATO figurehead – the Secretary General – is usually a non-entity which makes loud statements and is European (I think of that clown Stoltenberg as the prefect example), but NATO is not run by the NATO Secretary General. In reality, it is run by the Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), who is the head of the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) and these guys are as red, white and blue as it gets. Forget about the "Eurocorps" or any other so-called "European armies" – it's all hot air, like Trudeau's recent outburst at Trump. In reality in the EU, as in Canada, they all know who is boss. And here is the single most important fact: NATO desperately needs Russia as justification for its own existence: if relations with Russia improve, then NATO would have no more reason to exist. Do you really think that anybody will let that happen? I sure don't! And right now, the Europeans are busy asking for more US troops on their soil, not less and they are all pretending to be terrified by a Russian invasion , hence the need for more and bigger military exercises close to the Russian border . And just to cover all its bases, NATO is now gradually expanding into Latin America .

Third, there is a long list of EU governments which vitally need further bad relationships with Russia . They include:

  1. Unpopular governments which need to explain their own failures by the nefarious actions of an external bogyman . A good example is how the Spanish authorities blamed Russia for the crisis in Catalonia. Or the British with their "Brexit". The Swedes are doing even better, they are already preparing their public opinion for a "Russian interference" in case the election results don't turn out to be what they need.
  2. Governments whose rhetoric has been so hysterically anti-Russian that they cannot possibly back down from it. Best examples: the UK and Merkel. But since most (but not all) EU states did act on the Skripal false-flag on the basis of the British "highly likely" and in the name of "solidarity", they are now all stuck as accomplices of this policy. There is no way they are simply going to admit that they were conned by the Brits.
  3. EU prostitutes : states whose only policy is to serve the US against Russia. These states compete against each other in the most abject way to see who can out-brown-nose each other for the position of "most faithful and willing loyal servant of the US". The best examples are, of course, the three Baltic statelets, but the #1 position has to go to the "fiercely patriotic Poles" who are now willing to actually pay Uncle Sam to be militarily occupied (even though the very same Uncle Sam is trying to racketeer them for billions of dollars ). True, now that EU subsidies are running out, the situation of these states is becoming even more dire, and they know that the only place where they can still get money is the US. So don't expect them to change their tune anytime soon (even if Bulgaria has already realized that nobody in the West gives a damn about it ).
  4. Governments who want to crack down on internal dissent by accusing any patriotic or independent political party/movement to be "paid by the Kremlin" and representing Russian interests. The best example is France and how it treated the National Front. I would argue that most EU states are, in one way or another, working on creating a "national security state" because they do realize (correctly) that the European people are deeply frustrated and oppose EU policies (hence all the anti-EU referendums lost by the ruling elites).

Contrary to a very often repeated myth, European business interests do not represent a powerful anti-russophobic force . Why? Just look at Germany: for all the involvement of Germany (and Merkel personally) in the Ukraine, for all the stupid rhetoric about "Russia being an aggressor" which "does not comply with the Mink Agreements", North Stream is going ahead! Yes, money talks, and the truth is that while anti-Russian sanctions have cost Europe billions, the big financial interests (say the French company Total) have found ways to ignore/bypass these sanctions. Oh sure, there is a pro-trade lobby with Russian interest in Europe. It is real, but it simply does not have anywhere near the power the anti-Russian forces in the EU have. This is why for years now various EU politicians and public figures have made noises about lifting the sanctions, but when it came to the vote – they all voted as told by the real bosses.

Not all EU Russophobia is US-generated , by the way. We have clearly seen that these days when Trump suggested that the G7 (or, more accurately, the G6+1) needed to re-invite Russia, it was the Europeans who said "nope!". To the extend that there is a "EU position" (even a very demure and weak one), it is mostly anti-Russian, especially in the northern part of Europe. So when Uncle Sam tells the Europeans to obey and engage in the usual Russia-bashing, they all quickly fall in line, but in the rare case when the US does not push a rabidly anti-Russian agenda, EU politicians suddenly find enough willpower to say "no". By the way, for all the Trump's statements about re-inviting Russia into the G6+1 the US is still busy slapping more sanctions on Russia .

The current mini-wars between the US and the EU (on trade, on Iran, on Jerusalem) do not at all mean that Russia automatically can benefit from this . Again, the best example of this is the disastrous G6+1 summit in which Trump basically alienated everybody only to have the G6 reiterate its anti-Russian position even though the G6+1 needs Russia far more than Russia needs the G7 (she really doesn't!). Just like the US and Israeli leaders can disagree and, on occasion, fight each other, that does not at all mean that somehow they are not fundamentally joined at the hip. Just think of mob "families" who can even have "wars" against each other, but that does not at all mean that this will benefit the rest of the population whom all mobsters prey upon.

The Ukrainian crisis will only benefit anti-Russian forces in Europe . There is a very high probability that in the near future the Ukronazi regime will try to reconquer Novorussia (DNR/LRN). I submit that the outcome of such an attack is not in doubt – the Ukronazis will lose. The only question is this: to whom will they lose:

I will admit that there is still a small possibility that a Ukronazi attack might not happen. Maybe Poroshenko & Co. will get cold feet (they know the real condition of the Ukie military and "dobrobat" death squads) and maybe Putin's recent not-so-veiled threat about " grave consequences for the Ukrainian statehood " will have the needed effect. But what will happen even if this attack does not take place? The EU leaders and the Ukronazi regime in Kiev will still blame Russia for the Ukraine now clearly being a failed state. Whatever scenario you find more likely for the Ukraine, things there will only get worse and everybody will blame Russia.

The crisis in Syria will only benefit anti-Russian forces in Europe. It is becoming pretty clear that the US is now attempting a reconquista of Syria or, at least, a break-up of Syria into several zones, including US-controlled ones. Right now, the US and the "good terrorists" have lost the war, but that does not stop them from re-igniting a new one, mostly by reorganizing, retraining, redeploying and, most importantly, re-branding the surviving "bad terrorists" into "good ones". This plan is backed by Saudi money and Israeli firepower. Furthermore, Russia is now reporting that US Special Forces are already working with the (new) "good terrorists" to – you guessed it – prepare yet another fake chemical attack and blame it on the Syrians. And why not? It worked perfectly already several times, why not do that again? At the very least, it would give the US another try at getting their Tomahawks to show their effectiveness (even if they fail again, facts don't matter here). And make no mistake, a US "victory" in Syria (or in Venezuela) would be a disaster not only for the region, but for every country wanting to become sovereign (see Andre Vltchek's excellent article on this topic here ). And, again, Russia will be blamed for it all and, with certifiable nutcasts like Bolton, Russian forces might even be attacked. As I wrote already many times, this is far from over . Just as in the Ukrainian case, some deal might be made (at least US and Russian military officials are still talking to each other ) but my personal opinion is that making any kind of deal with Trump is as futile as making deals with Netanyahu: neither of them can be trusted and they both will break any and all promises in a blink of an eye. And if all hell breaks loose in Syria and/or Iran, NATO will make sure that the Europeans all quickly and obediently fall in line ("solidarity", remember?).

The bottom line is this: currently, the EU is most unlikely to become a viable partner for Russia and the future does look rather bleak.

One objection to my pessimism is the undeniable success of the recent Saint Petersburg summit and the Parliamentary Forum. However, I believe that neither of these events was really centered around Europe at all, but about the world at large (see excellent report by Gilbert Doctorow on this topic here ). Yes, Russia is doing great and while the AngloZionist media loves to speak about the "isolation" of Russia, the truth is that it is the Empire which is isolated, while Russia and China are having tremendous success building the multi-polar world they want to replace the Empire with. So while it is true that the western leaders might prefer to see a liberal "economic block" in the new Russian government, the rest of the world has no such desire at all (especially considering how many countries out there have suffered terrible hardships at the hands of the WTO/WB/IMF/etc types).

Conclusion :

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

However, if the EU is, for all practical purposes, non-existent, Russia can, and will, engage with individual EU member states. There is a huge difference between, say, Poland and Italy, or the UK and Austria. Furthermore, the EU is not only dysfunctional, it is also non-viable. Russia would immensely benefit from the current EU either falling apart or being deeply reformed because the current EU is a pure creation of the US-backed Bilderberger types and not the kind of Europe the European people need. In fact, I would even argue that the EU is the single biggest danger for the people of the European continent. Thus Russia should use her resources to foster bi-lateral cooperation with individual EU member states and never take any action which would strengthen (or even legitimize) EU-derived organizations such as the EU Parliament, the European Court of Human Rights, etc. These are all entities which seek to undermine the sovereignty of all its members, including Russia. Again, Putin put it best when he recently declared that " either Russia is a sovereign country, or there is no Russia ".

Whatever the ideology and slogans, all empires are inherently evil and inherently dangerous to any country wanting to be truly sovereign. If Russia (and China) want to create a multi-polar world, they need to gradually disengage from those trans-national bodies which are totally controlled by the Empire, it is really that simple. Instead, Russia needs to engage those countries, political parties and forces who advocate for what de Gaulle called " the Europe of fatherlands ". Both the AngloZionist Empire and the EU are undergoing the most profound crisis in their history and the writing is on the wall. Sooner rather than later, one by one, European countries will recover their sovereignty, as will Russia. Only if the people of Europe succeed in recovering their sovereignty could Russia look for real partnerships in the West, if only because the gradually developing and integrating Eurasian landmass offer tremendous economic opportunities which could be most beneficial to the nations of Europe. A prosperous Europe " from the Atlantic to the Urals " is still a possibility, but that will happen only when the current European Union and NATO are replaced by truly European institutions and the current European elites replaced by sovereignists.

The people of Russia, EU and, I would argue, the United States all have the same goal and the same enemy: they want to recover their sovereignty, get rid of their corrupt and, frankly, treacherous elites and liberates themselves from the hegemony of the AngloZionist Empire. This is why pushing the issue of "true sovereignty" (and national traditional values) is, I believe, the most unifying and powerful political idea to defeat the Empire. This will be a long struggle but the outcome is not in doubt.

peterAUS , June 17, 2018 at 12:54 am GMT

The usual Saker, but, there are a couple of not bad snippets:

The EU leaders are nothing but a comprador elite which doesn't give a damn about the opinions and interests of the people of Europe.

The AngloZionist Empire is not based in the US, or in the EU, or Israel, or anywhere else on the planet. It is a trans-national entity with regional variations and which includes different interest groups under its umbrella.

They do not want to humiliate us, they want to subdue us, solve their problems at our expense".

As for this:

If Russia (and China) want to create a multi-polar world, they need to gradually disengage from those trans-national bodies which are totally controlled by the Empire, it is really that simple.

can't wait

Mattheus , June 16, 2018 at 2:06 pm GMT
Saker is once again completely wrong. His theories fall short to explain lots of real events. He got hooked on his "Anglo-Zionist" theory and "one Hegemon", which is far from explaining the reality on the ground. There is no one single hegemon, but two powerful interest groups in the west. One of the power centers is dominated by the Rothschilds from the City of London and the other ruled by the Rockerfellers which is based in the US.
The powers described above are sometimes working in collusion but sometimes work against each other (They were in collusion during the Soviet Afghan war for instance). Currently, we don't see a collusion but a war being waged in between these two groups. I think it is highly self evident, so much so that it is happening almost all in the open. In the modern history we haven't witnessed such a openly fought war ever before (between these two powers). All is at stake and the war in between these two is vicious. Thus you can explain Trump's attitude towards EU, everlasting character assasination of Trump by certain opposing circles in the US, high level resignations, the state of confusion of Nato and much more. If this theory is right (and I think it is much more viable than any other theory that I came across in the Alt-Med), this makes Russia firmly embedded into one of the camps. Unfortunately, the position that Russia took makes him not a sovereign power but on contrary puts him into a subservient role. The late actions of Russia, especially in Syria, is quite telling. I know people who admire Russia get quite frustrated when they hear such a scenario and outcome, but this is possibly the only way Putin believes that Russia can survive. Thus it explains his latest house clean-up of Euroasian integrists. Even worse, if you believe in this scenario, it brings Russia and China against each other especially in the long run. This scenario also put a full stop to the idealist Euroasian multi-polar world order.
Here is the link to an older video in Russian with English subtitles. The guy's name is Andrei Fursov and he has some interesting things to say regarding this subject. This interview was just before Obama was elected but is still quite relevent. His newer videos seems to have lost steam, possibly because he is working for some state connected Russian institutions and think-thanks and thus I think he is somewhat restricted. After all it is again the famous "Game Theory", isn't it?
renfro , June 17, 2018 at 5:34 am GMT
@Beckow

Saker is correct that EU countries will not work with Russia. Blaming it all on Washington was always stupid

Bullshit. try to keep up with whats actually happening.

U.S. Is Trying to Kill Major Gas Deal Between Russia and Germany By Tom O'Connor On 5/18/18 at 2:41 PM (http://www.newsweek.com/us-trying-kill-major-gas-deal-between-russia-germany-934603

The U.S. has warned both Russia and Germany against pursuing a planned gas pipeline that would run between the two countries, threatening to impose sanctions and claiming the project would threaten the security of its European allies.

Construction has recently begun for the Nord Stream 2 project, a planned pipeline that would extend from Russia along an existing pipeline through the Baltic Sea into northeastern Germany. Once finished, Nord Stream 2 would reportedly double the amount of gas that Russia could provide Europe. State Department Deputy Assistant Secretary Sandra Oudkirk told reporters in Berlin Thursday that the project could bolster Russia's "malign influence" in the region and that Washington was "exerting as much persuasive power" as it could to stop it, according to the Associated Press.

Europe in diplomatic push to ease Russia sanctions | Financial Times
https://www.ft.com/content/9b9bbd3c-44a5-11e8-93cf-67ac3a6482fdApr 20, 2018 – A Europe-wide diplomatic push is under way to persuade the Trump administration to ease US sanctions targeting Russia, as fears mount that

JR , June 17, 2018 at 7:55 am GMT
EU clueless?

http://www.imi-online.de/2015/06/26/expansion-assoziation-konfrontation/

Yes, the EU is immoral , imperialistic megalomaniac but definitely not clueless.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/war-in-ukraine-a-result-of-misunderstandings-between-europe-and-russia-a-1004706.html

Kiza , June 17, 2018 at 8:18 am GMT
@Beckow

Excellent comment as usual Beckow, I could have typed the same. In fact, I have been commenting online since 1992 that neither EU, nor most European states can be friends of Russia. This was based on how those treated Yugoslavia/Serbia during the recent Balkan wars that the same entities helped initiate. Because Serbia is Russia without nuclear weapons. Russia would have gotten exactly the same treatment (Barbarossa 2) as Yugoslavia if it did not have them. Nobody expected Russia to recover so quickly from Yeltsin and even develop the world leading stand-off weapons on a budget. This is the only reason that Barbarossa 2 will never happen. But they cannot stop hoping for a US-lead miracle.

Yet, the economic interest is there and if China and Russia manage to economically integrate Europe and Asia, then the Euro-doggies will stop yapping and biting at the Russian heels and will fall in line. What else could one expect from such pathetic shameless trash? Give the One-Road another 15 years and watch this unfurle.

Finally, although I believed that Ukronazis would attack Novorussians, I now think that Ukraine may have run out of suicidal dumb maniacs. It is much cheaper to make noise and beat your Galician chest then to engage the enemy protected by Russia. Ukraine is, unfortunately, already a total economic basket case, plus all One-Road plans circumvent it (as MH17 should have, due to instability). Will there ever be a better example than Ukraine of the benevolent influence of the Anglo-Zionist on a country?

The Anglo-Zionists versus OneRoad.
For more information disregard the dumb title and watch this Pepe Escobar interview: http://thesaker.is/interview-of-pepe-escobar-the-world-is-waiting-for-the-apocalypse-if-there-is-a-conflict-between-america-and-russia/
I watched his other interviews and it is interesting how Pepe is not so open when interviewed by the Westerners.

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

Dramatic shift in analysis of Saker,

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

Below the prudent lines of Saker quoted.

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

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

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

Honest writing of Saker.

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

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

jilles dykstra , June 17, 2018 at 9:56 am GMT
@Quartermaster

The CIA seems to have spent five billion $ in Ukraine.
Who wants to incorporate Ukraine in the west therefore is not clear, the USA, NATO or EU, or all of them ?
In any case, many in Europe see Putin just as an honest gas supplier.
Trump's gas is much more expensive.

Heros , June 17, 2018 at 10:03 am GMT

The usual Saker

Definitely. He stays well within the Judeo-Overton window. He is kosher, so to speak. Sure, like Alex Jones, he will make the occasional slap at Israel or Zionism, but he will not verge outside of the window's "Nazi Germany was the ultimate evil" or the holy 6 million martyrs. I also have never read any of his work where he delves into 9/11, and what it means about everything that has happened since.

You have three "not bad snippets" that I don't really agree with:

The EU leaders are nothing but a comprador elite which doesn't give a damn about the opinions and interests of the people of Europe.

It is not that they don't give a damn, it is that they take their orders from a higher source. Euro-serfs see the coerced passage of Lisbon and Maastricht, the ongoing 3rd world invasion, the restriction of free speech, the increasing criminality, the ECB destruction and removal of elected officials in Greece and Italy. They know it is a sham, they just don't understand why, because they are constantly being lied to. Saker is not helping here.

The AngloZionist Empire is not based in the US, or in the EU, or Israel, or anywhere else on the planet. It is a trans-national entity with regional variations and which includes different interest groups under its umbrella.

Saker is not willing to tell us exactly who this entity is. He is not going to take us outside of the Judeo-Overton window.

They do not want to humiliate us, they want to subdue us, solve their problems at our expense

With this dog whistle he is treading on thin ice. Sure, "their problems" could describe past crimes like Maidan that may be catching up with them, but it could also cover such things as Gaza, the Liberty, the King David Hotel, or even the targeting of Nagasaki in 1945. As usual though, he won't confront the serpent.

Jake , June 17, 2018 at 11:26 am GMT
"At best, the EU can be considered a US protectorate/colony, with some subjects "more equal than others" (say, the UK versus Greece)."

That nails it as well as it can be done, though I'd say that some states are far more equal than others and add Germany to the UK in that category.

Jake , June 17, 2018 at 11:57 am GMT
@jilles dykstra

Yes, but also while allowing Germany to dominate the EU in every way, especially economically to the detriment of other EU states.

Miro23 , June 17, 2018 at 12:50 pm GMT

The best examples are, of course, the three Baltic statelets, but the #1 position has to go to the "fiercely patriotic Poles" who are now willing to actually pay Uncle Sam to be militarily occupied (even though the very same Uncle Sam is trying to racketeer them for billions of dollars).

Talking about individual EU countries, the Poles need to realize that they're no longer dealing with Imperial Russia or the Soviet Union, and try exploring avenues for productive co-operation with Russia. It's working with "historic enemy" Germany, so why not with "historic enemy" Russia?

There are plenty of opportunities, with the first one surely being shutting down US bases on Polish territory and getting US missiles out of Poland. The current USA and the UK are under UZA management which is clearly hostile to everything modern Poland stands for.

bj , June 17, 2018 at 2:39 pm GMT
@Heros

"targeting of Nagasaki in 1945″ ..

"For targeting purposes, the bombing crew used St. Mary's Urakami Cathedral, the largest Christian church in East Asia. At 11:02 a.m., on Aug. 9, 1945, when the bomb was dropped over the cathedral, Nagasaki was the most Christian city in Japan."

https://consortiumnews.com/2014/08/09/the-very-un-christian-nagasaki-bomb/

annamaria , June 17, 2018 at 4:31 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

Hey, Quartermaster, why don't you tell us more about the amazing progress achieved by Ukraine after the Kagans-sponsored revolution of 2014? For instance, you could tell us (proudly?) about the rise of neo-Nazi power in Ukraine and about certain Kolomojsky, the Ukrainian/Israeli thug, and his financing of the Azov battalion.
The EU countries put people in prison for questioning the tight official narrative/numbers of holocaust biz.

The same AngloZionist "elites" are content with the desecration of Jewish cemeteries in Ukraine by the local neo-Nazis: http://www.stalkerzone.org/banderists-came-ukraine-march-center-odessa/

"Antisemitic Hate Crimes Thrive in Ukraine:" https://www.algemeiner.com/2017/04/21/antisemitic-hate-crimes-thrive-in-ukraine/
"Symbols of the 1st Galician SS Division are not considered to be Nazi symbols in Ukraine:" http://eu.eot.su/2017/05/20/symbols-of-the-1st-galician-ss-division-are-not-considered-to-be-nazi-symbols-in-ukraine/
"The roots of fascism in Ukraine: From Nazi collaboration to Maidan:" http://liberationschool.org/the-roots-of-fascism-in-ukraine/

annamaria , June 17, 2018 at 4:49 pm GMT
@byrresheim

What is wrong with using the word "Ukronazis?" How would you name the happy warriors beholden to the memory of the 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Galician)?

http://liberationschool.org/the-roots-of-fascism-in-ukraine/

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/09/stepan-bandera-nationalist-euromaidan-right-sector/

"The newly formed Ukrainian state will work closely with the National-Socialist Greater Germany, under the leadership of its leader Adolf Hitler which is forming a new order in Europe and the world and is helping the Ukrainian People to free itself from Moscovite occupation.
The Ukrainian People's Revolutionary Army which has been formed on the Ukrainian lands, will continue to fight with the Allied German Army against Moscovite occupation for a sovereign and united State and a new order in the whole world.

Long live the Ukrainian Sovereign United Ukraine! Long live the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists! Long live the leader of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and the Ukrainian people – STEPAN BANDERA" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Ukrainian_State_Act

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

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

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

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

After WWII it took most Europeans less than a generation to revert to the traditional anti-Russian attitudes. In some cases, nations that were literally saved from extermination were more resentful than grateful. In Poland it took less than a year, in Czech Republic 20 years, but the old visceral hatreds emerged again. My advise to Russia would be to mind its own business and not try to sacrifice for the others or to help them. It has always backfired because the cultural milieu in Europe is naturally resentful of Russia and the east in general. Business doesn't change that.

[Jun 17, 2018] Mr. Trump Attacks Aluminum, Russia Attacks The Debt by Tom Luongo

Notable quotes:
"... The net result will be more of the aluminum market will flow through the Yuan rather than the dollar, neatly avoiding sanctions and any future threats. Because with the insanity caused by the overnight chaos in April, any aluminum supplier/consumer will be wary of another such edict from the naked Emperor in D.C. ..."
"... Rusal will be one of the main beneficiaries since Russian banks are already sanctioned. ..."
"... Abusing your customers is never a winning marketplace strategy and that's exactly what Trump's sanctions policy is doing, abusing customers of the dollar. Trust has been the dollar's strongest attribute for a long time now and it is the primary reason why it has dominated trade and reserves. ..."
"... But there is a limit to how much your customers will take. And Trump is pushing well beyond that limit. And when the benefits of using the dollar are eclipsed by the liabilities, people will naturally shift away from it. ..."
"... Putin has and will use future mini-crises like this to further clean up the rot left over from the Yeltsin years, like Deripaska, while building a Russia insulated from future attacks like this. ..."
"... The struggle for most Americans regarding this issue is the fact that the Ministry of Truth has always told us "Russia Bad!" while "US Good!". The Ole good guy vs bad guy paradigm. I grew up in the 80's and am very familiar with that paradigm. I am an American through and through but our government has become the most corrupt bunch of whoring thieves on the planet. ..."
"... True Americans have awakened to realize the power of our corrupt government lies in the dollar hegemony. True Americans hate it, and hate the power and control it wields in our own lives. We see it at work around the world. We see DC squeeze our lives to subsidize it's world empire. An empire is seeks to maintain for various reasons that are debated regularly. ..."
"... The USA is drunk on power with their dollar as they see it as invincible. It will be their own undoing. The world is eager and preparing to drop/run/destroy the dollar. One day they'll all lick their wounds take their losses and forget the dollar completely. ..."
"... The US will have to do one of the hardest things in the history of the nation. She'll have to stop LYING to herself! All those recommending weaponization of the petrodollar, are charlatans. The USA cannot get through restructuring via antagonism, that only tightens the economic noose. ..."
"... What is needed, is bankruptcy protection, via honest cooperation with the emergent economic powers in the East. This comes with a price, retrenchment of imperium. This in turn, requires sobriety that, the game while not completely lost, as in national decomposition, is nevertheless, unwinnable, as in rebuilding can only follow retrenchment. ..."
"... Exceptionalism Delenda Est!... ..."
Jun 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Tom Luongo,

Looking at the unfolding trade war between Donald Trump and the world the phrase that should come to mind is "One good turn deserves another."

In the case of the insane sanctions on Oleg Deripaska and Russian Aluminum giant, Rusal, back in April, we finally got some clarity as to how Russia can and will respond to future events.

In yesterday's Treasury International Capital (TIC) report, we saw clearly that Russia activated its nearly $100 billion in U.S. Treasury debt to buy dollars in April.

More than $47 billion in U.S. debt was dumped into the market to cover the chaos engendered by Trump's overnight diktat for the world to stop doing business with Rusal.

Also of note, U.S. ally Japan continues to shed Treasuries at around 8-10 billion per month. Ireland dumped $17 billion and Luxembourg nearly $8 billion.

While China dropped $5 billion this is noise, ultimately as its holdings of U.S. debt have been stable for over a year now. What is interesting is Belgium, the home of Euroclear, seeing a $12 billion inflow. Likely that's where some of the Russian-held debt was traded to.

The Russians likely sold from their balance on reserve with the Federal Reserve. Here's the latest iteration of the chart I keep for just such an occasion.

Rusal's shares and bonds went bidless but the damage wasn't contained there as major Russian banks like VTB and Sberbank were hit hard as well. So, while Rusal didn't have much in the way of dollar-denominated debt. It did have major dollar-related obligations as accounts receivable on its balance sheet because of the sheer size of its trade conducted in dollars.

And that's why there was such an outflow from Russia's stock of Treasuries. But, here's the thing. It didn't matter one whit. Why? It didn't undermine Russia's Foreign Exchange Reserves.

No Dip in Russia's Foreign Exchange Reserves During Rusal Crisis

Russia just sold Treasuries into the market, raised dollars and swapped out Rusal's bonds, holding them as collateral for a Repo.

The Bank of Russia Intervened to keep Rusal and Other Banks Solvent by Dumping U.S. Treasuries

This went on for most of the month and into May. Zerohedge's reporting on this leads the way.

This mass dumping of U.S. debt caused the long end of the U.S. yield curve to blow out past significant resistance points, like the 10 year pushing above 3.05% in sympathy with the Fed's policy to dry up dollar liquidity. If this first-order analysis by Zerohedge is correct, then we can assume Russia has been holding a lot of long-dated Treasuries versus say China which we know has shortened up the average maturity of their massive bond portfolio.

In times past we may have not seen such a massive dump of U.S. debt by Russia. They may have simply sold dollars directly or swapped euros or yuan for them. But, these are different times. Trump has taken the use of sanctions to a level that hasn't been seen before.

Putin is the master of parallel aggression. You take an action against Russia, he will generally hit you back along some other vector.

In this case it was a direct confrontation to Trump's bringing the full weight of U.S. financial dominance down on its rivals and allies, who are all heavily exposed to Rusal's market position.

Russia is not out of the water with this situation which is why Oleg Deripaska, the majority owner of Rusal and the one targeted by the Trump administration, is looking still to find ways to satisfy the U.S.'s demands on this issue.

Putin's Pivot

But, don't think this isn't working to Putin's advantage as Deripaska is not one of his supposed favored oligarchs. This report from Bloomberg spelled out the situation well back in April.

As for Deripaska, he will get help from the Russian government again. {which he did, see above} Rusal has warned that the sanctions might mean a default on a portion of its debt. That's most likely to happen to its more than $1 billion in dollar-denominated debt. But, as ever, the company's biggest creditors are Russian state banks, and the Kremlin will keep Rusal solvent one way or another as it reorients toward Asian markets. It won't be a huge headache for Putin: He's seen worse, including with Rusal during the financial crisis.

And that's the most important part.

Once the current positions are wound down and the aluminum market adjusts to the new reality of U.S. hyper-aggression to restart an industry we really don't need (smelting aluminum? really?) just to satisfy Trump's outdated views on trade (which they are MAGA-pedes) Rusal's business will not be so U.S.-centric.

And therefore the world will become less exposed, over time, to the depredations of U.S. financial attack. I told you before that China has responded to this by issuing new yuan-denominated futures contracts for industrial metals.

Why do you think they did that?

Will it create pain in the short-term? Yes. Europe will experience even more of this as will Asia.

Will a lot of companies fear being sanctioned and fined by the U.S. for doing business with Rusal? Yes. It's happening now. Will this exacerbate underlying economic conditions in Europe? Of course.

But, if Deripaska submits, like it looks like he will, then the aluminum market will calm down and Trump's sanctions will look silly.

Sanctions Bite Both Ways

The net result will be more of the aluminum market will flow through the Yuan rather than the dollar, neatly avoiding sanctions and any future threats. Because with the insanity caused by the overnight chaos in April, any aluminum supplier/consumer will be wary of another such edict from the naked Emperor in D.C.

And, as such, they will diversify the currencies they buy and sell aluminum in. It won't be a sea change overnight. Those least exposed will jump ship first. Rusal will be one of the main beneficiaries since Russian banks are already sanctioned.

But it will be a trend, that once started will gain steam.

China can and will tie convertibility of its futures contracts to gold through the Shanghai exchange to allay worries about getting money out of the country.

Abusing your customers is never a winning marketplace strategy and that's exactly what Trump's sanctions policy is doing, abusing customers of the dollar. Trust has been the dollar's strongest attribute for a long time now and it is the primary reason why it has dominated trade and reserves.

But there is a limit to how much your customers will take. And Trump is pushing well beyond that limit. And when the benefits of using the dollar are eclipsed by the liabilities, people will naturally shift away from it.

Look at the TIC chart above and note the total. This is a $6.3 trillion synthetic short position against the dollar. He's inviting countries to dump treasuries to defend their currencies as the dollar strengthens while shifting their primary materials buying to the biggest rival's currency.

This is why Russia continues to run a very tight financial ship while it leads the charge away from the dollar. It's inviting customers into the ruble with both a strong national balance sheet and relatively higher interest rates. This has the U.S. fuming.

Putin has and will use future mini-crises like this to further clean up the rot left over from the Yeltsin years, like Deripaska, while building a Russia insulated from future attacks like this.

Remember, even the U.S. has limits. It cannot sanction people for refusing to trade in dollars. Even the U.S. doesn't have that power. It can try but it will fail. New systems, new banks, new institutions can always be created.

PrayingMantis -> cowdiddly Sun, 06/17/2018 - 09:24 Permalink

... " ... in the case of the insane sanctions on Oleg Deripaska and Russian Aluminum giant, Rusal, back in April, we finally got some clarity as to how Russia can and will respond to future events .. . " ...

... most recently, Trump had been focusing on protecting steel and "aluminum" on world trading ... could there be an underlying reason behind these sanctions? ... who is Trump really protecting here? ...

... let's follow the money ... these links might let us connect the (((dots))) ...

... >>> http://graphics.thomsonreuters.com/specials/MetalWarehousing.pdf (REUTERS/REUTERS STaff

Should the London Metal Exchange allow Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan and Glencore to own aluminium warehouses even as they trade the metal?
GOLDMAN'S NEW MONEY MACHINE: WAREHOUSES ) ...

... >>> http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20141120/NEWS01/141129992/senate-report-metro-detroit-warehouses-gave-goldman-sachs-influence

... (Senate report: Metro Detroit warehouses gave Goldman Sachs influence over aluminum pricing ) ...

... >>> https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/07/goldmans-secret-cash-cow-detroit-warehouses-full-metal/337401/ ... (Goldman's Secret Cash Cow: Detroit Warehouses Full of Metal ) ...

... >>> http://www.demos.org/blog/11/21/14/following-money-how-goldman-sachs-manipulates-commodity-prices ... (Following the Money: How Goldman Sachs Manipulates Commodity Prices ) ...

... why aluminum? ... why not any other commodities?

... ever wonder what Trump is up to now to please his talmudic Rothschild banksters overlords?

... you be the judge ....

bshirley1968 -> PrayingMantis Sun, 06/17/2018 - 10:21 Permalink

The struggle for most Americans regarding this issue is the fact that the Ministry of Truth has always told us "Russia Bad!" while "US Good!". The Ole good guy vs bad guy paradigm. I grew up in the 80's and am very familiar with that paradigm. I am an American through and through but our government has become the most corrupt bunch of whoring thieves on the planet.

True Americans have awakened to realize the power of our corrupt government lies in the dollar hegemony. True Americans hate it, and hate the power and control it wields in our own lives. We see it at work around the world. We see DC squeeze our lives to subsidize it's world empire. An empire is seeks to maintain for various reasons that are debated regularly.

The rub comes when we see that the only force capable of standing up to this corrupt empire is a country that we have been told all our lives is evil. Russia wasn't always the communist soviet union.....and is no longer that today. But in the minds of many Americans that is all that it will ever be. Russia has the resources, military, intelligence, and skill to control it's own destiny. It has everything it needs to tell the US empire, "No!" I respect that....admire that.....cheer that....and wish them success in their stand. For those of us looking for a way to bust the evil cabal now running our own country, Russia's rebellion of US dominance is a ray of hope. It's not that we don't love our own country or want to be Russians, but we don't care about supporting a world empire that requires wars, taxes, and a strategy that strip us of our individual sovereignty by contaminating our country with people that don't belong here and will never think like an American.

People need to put aside their "fan-boy" biases, drop the blind loyalty, and start dealing with reality. We are not rooting for Putin and Russia, rather we are rooting for the downfall of thus evil banking cartel that is slowly killing us all and taking more and more of our freedoms. To those of you that say that will cause pain and we STILL have the greatest country on earth, I say, somethings are worth the pain.....and we can be a lot better. We have got to change direction....and the sooner we get off this road of empire destruction, the better.

Raisin Hail -> PrayingMantis Sun, 06/17/2018 - 12:40 Permalink

Maybe it is because The Aluminum Company of America (formerly ALCOA now Arconic an others) is going broke. Check out their stock price for the last 10 years or so. Are they still part of the DOW Index? Bonehead move to include them years ago.

are we there yet -> Raisin Hail Sun, 06/17/2018 - 13:26 Permalink

If the US dollar weakens, then the US exports and jobs go up, while US imports go down.

Demologos -> Escrava Isaura Sun, 06/17/2018 - 10:04 Permalink

Trump is worth what, a couple of billion? And those assets are encumbered by a lot of debt held by US banks. That does not an oligarch make. When it comes to US oligarchs, Trump is a piker compared to the massive family trusts that can move markets and voting results.

... ... ...

PrivetHedge -> Demologos Sun, 06/17/2018 - 13:05 Permalink

Trump is worth exactly the debt that the Israeli Sheldon Adelson holds over him IIRC. Far from being independent he is owned by America's biggest parasite and enemy: Israel.

peopledontwanttruth -> 07564111 Sun, 06/17/2018 - 09:24 Permalink

The USA is drunk on power with their dollar as they see it as invincible. It will be their own undoing. The world is eager and preparing to drop/run/destroy the dollar. One day they'll all lick their wounds take their losses and forget the dollar completely.

The USA and Israel aka banksters will start WWIII to prove literally they will destroy the world if need be instead of lose their power over mankind

Scipio Africanuz -> Ambrose Bierce Sun, 06/17/2018 - 10:16 Permalink

The US will have to do one of the hardest things in the history of the nation. She'll have to stop LYING to herself! All those recommending weaponization of the petrodollar, are charlatans. The USA cannot get through restructuring via antagonism, that only tightens the economic noose.

What is needed, is bankruptcy protection, via honest cooperation with the emergent economic powers in the East. This comes with a price, retrenchment of imperium. This in turn, requires sobriety that, the game while not completely lost, as in national decomposition, is nevertheless, unwinnable, as in rebuilding can only follow retrenchment.

Now, US policy wonks must be imbibing some real potent hallucinogens, to be unable to see what's right in front of their noses that, no matter the strategy, if it's not one of cooperation, the game is forfeit! The only strategy that helps the US retain great power status, is one whereby clear eyed, hard nosed assessment of assets and liabilities, are carried out.

The East is helping the USA buy time, the exceptionalists are once again, squandering the opportunity, just like they did in 91. They somehow believe the US military can change the trajectory of events. This is not possible any longer except humanity signs up for civilizational extinction.

To cut a long story short, it's time to declare mea culpa, and request a recalibration of goals, objectives, tactics, and critically, strategy. The strategy going forward? Honest cooperation to resolve issues that are creating global tensions, foremost amongst them, the one where the West gets to live like kings, at the expense of billions. This is the major issue, and it cannot be resolved without humility on the part of the West, and indemnity on the part of victims.

Humanity will only move forward through forgiveness, which cannot be activated without contrition.

Exceptionalism Delenda Est!...

You Only Live Twice Sun, 06/17/2018 - 08:19 Permalink

If Russia is selling Treasuries, it may be ahead of the market selling to prevent losses down the road. There is a shift happening not just with Russia as the long-standing bankers like the Rothschilds, etc. have been also selling their UST holdings and moving the money to Asia as per their reports for the last year.

The other thing to watch is the Vienna OPEC meeting later this month. The Saudis and Russia have now setup a long-term partnership to control the Oil market, including speculation on the markets as of today's press, so a discussion of abandoning the Petrodollar may not be off the table as there are portions of that deal that have been announced as secretive and this may be part of the plan.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@Kiza

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

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

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

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

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

[Jun 17, 2018] On Polish Russophobia

Jun 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

Miro23 , June 17, 2018 at 12:50 pm GMT

The best examples are, of course, the three Baltic statelets, but the #1 position has to go to the "fiercely patriotic Poles" who are now willing to actually pay Uncle Sam to be militarily occupied (even though the very same Uncle Sam is trying to racketeer them for billions of dollars).

Talking about individual EU countries, the Poles need to realize that they're no longer dealing with Imperial Russia or the Soviet Union, and try exploring avenues for productive co-operation with Russia. It's working with "historic enemy" Germany, so why not with "historic enemy" Russia?

There are plenty of opportunities, with the first one surely being shutting down US bases on Polish territory and getting US missiles out of Poland. The current USA and the UK are under UZA management which is clearly hostile to everything modern Poland stands for.

[Jun 17, 2018] In the German parliament Merkel and her supporters battle to continue their anti German policy against the CSU even in the CDU (Merkel's party) there are courageous people who that remind Merkel by whom she is paid, and to who she has obligations.

Jun 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

jilles dykstra , June 17, 2018 at 11:16 am GMT

http://www.achgut.com/artikel/wir_truemmerfrauen_nach_dem_merkelsturz

Im Bundestag kämpfen Merkel und ihre Treuesten derweil darum, ihre Anti-Deutschland-Politik unter anderem gegen die CSU durchzusetzen -- sogar in der CDU gibt es erste Mutige, die sich daran erinnern, wer sie bezahlt und wem sie eigentlich verpflichtet sind.

Rough translation:

" In the German parliament Merkel and her supporters battle to continue their anti German policy against the CSU -- even in the CDU (Merkel's party) there are courageous people who that remind Merkel by whom she is paid, and to who she has obligations. "

There are German rumours that Merkel will fall this week.

Historians from time to time write how curious it is that apparently unrelated events in different parts of the world change history.

I wonder if the Trump election with the realisation, long overdue, in Germany, that the migrants are a burden in stead of a contribution to the economy, may combine to Merkel's fall,in her wake maybe the implosion of the EU, and the end of the euro.

It was Merkel who prevented Greece leaving the euro.

[Jun 16, 2018] Putin and orthodox religion

Jun 16, 2018 | www.unz.com

Frankie P

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

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

Frankie P

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

@Frankie P

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

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

Thankfully that chapter of history is over

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

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

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

[Jun 16, 2018] The Soviet Union has been gone for more than a quarter of a century and yet it is - to borrow a phrase from a popular Soviet song - is more alive than the living. The Soviet period has become a sort of a yardstick against which the modern Russia is compared in every area: culture, economy, moral climate, everything.

Notable quotes:
"... It is not "misunderstood" -- it is a complete caricature which now blows into the faces of those who helped to create it. Western Russia "expertise" is pathetic and some exceptions merely confirm the rule. Generally, the term "Russia scholar" when applied to most, in our particular case American, experts should be treated as a bad joke. This is not to mention that most of those "scholars" (with the exception of predominantly Jewish Soviet emigres, such as moron Max Boot) can not even speak, forget a complete command, Russian language. ..."
"... Quite a few grant-eating "liberals" inside Russia speak the language, but this does not make them any more competent. Basically, they illustrate the saying that "he, who pays the musicians, calls the tune". The same applies to "Russia scholars" residing in the US, regardless of their language proficiency. ..."
Jun 16, 2018 | www.unz.com

EugeneGur


The point is that Putin realizes that the Orthodox faith is the cultural framework of the Russian nation; its development historically, socially and culturally rest in the hands Orthodox Christianity.
No, it's not. No one can enter the same river twice. Russia will thankfully never go back to its Orthodox roots completely, although Orthodoxy will co-exist peacefully within the secular society. Putin's public insistence on rituals of the Orthodox faith is one of his least attractive features.

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

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

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

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 15, 2018 at 5:20 pm GMT

@EugeneGur

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

It is not "misunderstood" -- it is a complete caricature which now blows into the faces of those who helped to create it. Western Russia "expertise" is pathetic and some exceptions merely confirm the rule. Generally, the term "Russia scholar" when applied to most, in our particular case American, experts should be treated as a bad joke. This is not to mention that most of those "scholars" (with the exception of predominantly Jewish Soviet emigres, such as moron Max Boot) can not even speak, forget a complete command, Russian language.

AnonFromTN , June 15, 2018 at 5:46 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

Quite a few grant-eating "liberals" inside Russia speak the language, but this does not make them any more competent. Basically, they illustrate the saying that "he, who pays the musicians, calls the tune". The same applies to "Russia scholars" residing in the US, regardless of their language proficiency.

Andrei Martyanov , Website June 15, 2018 at 6:00 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

Quite a few grant-eating "liberals" inside Russia speak the language, but this does not make them any more competent. Basically, they illustrate the saying that "he, who pays the musicians, calls the tune". The same applies to "Russia scholars" residing in the US, regardless of their language proficiency.

Here, I have to politely disagree since Russian "liberals" both grant-supported and ones that are not is a separate animal altogether. First, most of them, grants or no grants, are the real deal, they got grants because they are the real deal, not the other way around, and causality in this case really matters.

I don't need even to know if Mr. Nekrasov or Gozman are grant-eaters, their hatred of everything Russian is palpable. The only weaker feeling than hatred they have is contempt. This cannot be hidden–it shines through. They do it for the idea and grants are just a bonus. It all goes back to Russian "Westerners" and liberals about whom Tyutchev (IIRC) left a profound paragraph.

[Jun 16, 2018] Current Russian regime got bad roots. It cares not for people. Current increase of retirement age is another testament to this

Russia still is a neoliberal country. What do you expect ?
It is interesting that Russia which oppose neoliberal globalization in foreign policy, implements neoliberal reforms within the country. The current pensoin reform is clienly neoliberal in spirit, even if it does not include privatization. there is a big different between those who work at factories and those who work at offices.
Notable quotes:
"... I don't share your and some other commenters' fixation on Jews. I believe it's a red herring. Elites, Jewish and gentile, are equally repulsive and guilty of most ills that afflict our world. Despite its many failings, one of the redeeming qualities of communism was that it called for confiscation of the possessions of moneyed elites. In reality, they were mostly hanged or shot. Considering what they are doing to the US and other countries, this was amply justified. ..."
"... Basically there were real issues behind those color revolutions in Ukraine and elsewhere but without progressive force caring about people there were ulterior forces that led those eruption of real grievances and these grievances are caused by the system of capitalism you have just described. Yours and other former Soviet citizens excellent education is another testament to communism regime. ..."
"... Regarding new found religious feelings. it is obviously all fake. ..."
"... I can't say that today's Russia is all bad or all good. I think open borders is a huge achievement. People have a chance to see the reality with their own eyes: wherever you go in Europe or Asia now, you meet lots of people from Russia, which means that they have the money to travel and an interest in other cultures, as you meet them in museums and at historical sites all over Europe. ..."
"... I do resent what current authorities did to the education system: they degraded it, ostensibly in an attempt to reform and make it more Western-like. I think these "reforms" were extremely ill-conceived, the school is becoming much worse (in fact, American-like, although it must be degraded a lot more to sink all the way down to the US level). ..."
"... I resent than instead of improving Russian Academy of Sciences (it was pretty bad in the USSR) they essentially emasculated it. If you go by publications, there is less decent research in Russia now than there was in the USSR. ..."
"... Huge inequality is another negative, especially considering that most oligarchs got rich by looting state property, and now continue to enrich themselves the same way (heads of most Russian corporations, state-owned and private, are nothing but thieves). That made Russia more US-like, but I consider that regress rather than progress. ..."
"... On the other hand, I consider it a huge achievement that in international affairs Russia today is pursuing its own interests, rather than engaging in a thankless task of saving the world. I subscribe to the Protestant dictum that "God helps those who help themselves", so whoever is worth saving will save themselves, and the rest be damned. ..."
Jun 16, 2018 | www.unz.com

AnonFromTN , June 15, 2018 at 2:40 am GMT

@Frankie P

Maybe it is presumptuous to express my opinion about another person's faith, but let me remind you that Putin was a KGB officer and a member of the communist party. As such, he was (or pretended to be) a militant atheist. Now he publicly goes to church and remains there throughout the service (mind you, Russian Orthodox Christmas and Easter services are all-night affairs). Thus, he either lied then or is lying now about his faith. Take your pick.

Yes, Orthodox Christianity was one of the pillars of Russian culture. But again, let me remind you that one of the greatest Russian writers, Leo Tolstoy, was excommunicated by the church. What's more, current patriarch Kirill, the head of the Russian Orthodox church, was photographed with a watch worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, owns an apartment in the center of Moscow, likely worth millions of $, and a collection or rare books in this apartment with a huge value. If you are a Christian, you should know that "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God" (Matthew 19:24; also Mark 10:25).

I don't share your and some other commenters' fixation on Jews. I believe it's a red herring. Elites, Jewish and gentile, are equally repulsive and guilty of most ills that afflict our world. Despite its many failings, one of the redeeming qualities of communism was that it called for confiscation of the possessions of moneyed elites. In reality, they were mostly hanged or shot. Considering what they are doing to the US and other countries, this was amply justified.

Sergey Krieger , June 15, 2018 at 9:25 am GMT
@AnonFromTN

I frankly do not think that communism requires redemption. It was first attempt at moving humanity towards next step in social evolution and it did not happen under the best conditions. It happened in the country ridden with accumulated problems from previous regime mishandling the country for a couple of centuries with those issues coming to a head and after so much pressure it resulted in massive eruption of violence which would have been even worse without Bolsheviks as it would lead to Russia disintegration and Russian state death., There would have happened something similar to modern Ukraine.

Basically there were real issues behind those color revolutions in Ukraine and elsewhere but without progressive force caring about people there were ulterior forces that led those eruption of real grievances and these grievances are caused by the system of capitalism you have just described. Yours and other former Soviet citizens excellent education is another testament to communism regime.

Current Russian regime got bad roots and I do not believe anything good will come out of these bad roots. The system is freakish and rotten at the core. It care s not for people. Current increase of retirement age is another testament to this. Bolsheviks when they started made their intentions rather obvious in destroyed and poor country. They assured real human rights while current system removed those rights and there is no guarantees that we as a soviet citizen used to enjoy. Obviously things were not perfect. They never are.

Regarding new found religious feelings. it is obviously all fake.

I also wonder what do you think of spontaneous life appearance? I read some books on this issue including Dawkins' and Behe, but considering your experience and professional background it would be very interesting to hear your thoughts.

AnonFromTN , June 15, 2018 at 4:21 pm GMT
@Sergey Krieger

I can't say that today's Russia is all bad or all good. I think open borders is a huge achievement. People have a chance to see the reality with their own eyes: wherever you go in Europe or Asia now, you meet lots of people from Russia, which means that they have the money to travel and an interest in other cultures, as you meet them in museums and at historical sites all over Europe.

I do resent what current authorities did to the education system: they degraded it, ostensibly in an attempt to reform and make it more Western-like. I think these "reforms" were extremely ill-conceived, the school is becoming much worse (in fact, American-like, although it must be degraded a lot more to sink all the way down to the US level).

I resent than instead of improving Russian Academy of Sciences (it was pretty bad in the USSR) they essentially emasculated it. If you go by publications, there is less decent research in Russia now than there was in the USSR.

Huge inequality is another negative, especially considering that most oligarchs got rich by looting state property, and now continue to enrich themselves the same way (heads of most Russian corporations, state-owned and private, are nothing but thieves). That made Russia more US-like, but I consider that regress rather than progress.

On the other hand, I consider it a huge achievement that in international affairs Russia today is pursuing its own interests, rather than engaging in a thankless task of saving the world. I subscribe to the Protestant dictum that "God helps those who help themselves", so whoever is worth saving will save themselves, and the rest be damned.

[Jun 16, 2018] Remember general plan Ost

Jun 16, 2018 | www.unz.com

Plan Ost , June 16, 2018 at 11:09 pm GMT

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

German Plan Ost to exterminate " inferior races "

Percentages of ethnic groups to be destroyed and/or deported to Siberia by Nazi Germany from future settlement areas.[15][16][3]

Ethnic group/Nationality Population percent subject to removal

Russians[17][16] 50–60% to be physically eliminated and another 15% to be sent to Western Siberia
Estonians[3][18] almost 50%
Latvians[3] 50%
Czechs[16] 50%
Ukrainians[16] 65%
Belarusians[16] 75%
Poles[16] 20 million, or 80–85%
Lithuanians[3] 85%
Latgalians[3] 100%

[Jun 16, 2018] White Helmets A tool for 'regime change' in Syria that's too important to stop funding

Notable quotes:
"... "The Pentagon planners have probably finally realized just how important the White Helmets are to the regime change operation," ..."
"... "The fact that they have been so successful in proving fake imagery and fake evidence just means that they can be relied upon whenever there is a need for a pretext for another missile attack or even a full-scale invasion." ..."
Jun 16, 2018 | www.rt.com

Washington's decision to resume funding for White Helmets after a brief freeze highlights how important the controversial group is for the US-promoted regime-change agenda, journalists and Syrian conflict observers have told RT. "The Pentagon planners have probably finally realized just how important the White Helmets are to the regime change operation," Mike Raddie, co-editor of BSNews and an anti-war activist, told RT. "The fact that they have been so successful in proving fake imagery and fake evidence just means that they can be relied upon whenever there is a need for a pretext for another missile attack or even a full-scale invasion."

The anti-war activist recalled how the so-called Syria Civil Defence units, better known as the White Helmets, have been instrumental in the justification of the US strikes on Syria in April of 2017, and the trilateral strikes by the UK, France, and the US in April 2018.

[Jun 16, 2018] FBI shelved probe into Clinton emails on Weiner laptop for Russiagate - DOJ report

Notable quotes:
"... "take immediate action on the Weiner laptop" ..."
"... "willing to take official action to impact a presidential candidate's electoral prospects." ..."
"... "Under these circumstances, we did not have confidence that Strzok's decision to prioritize the Russia investigation over following up on the [Hillary Clinton]-related investigative lead discovered on the Weiner laptop was free from bias," ..."
"... Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! ..."
Jun 16, 2018 | www.rt.com

The FBI's inquiry into hundreds of thousands of emails found on a laptop belonging to former Congressman Anthony Weiner may have been improperly shelved to focus on the agency's Russia investigation, a DOJ report states. A review of the FBI's investigations into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server by the DOJ inspector general concluded that federal investigators failed to "take immediate action on the Weiner laptop" due in part to a decision to "prioritize" the investigation into claims that Donald Trump " colluded" with Russia.

The FBI leadership waited nearly a month after receiving initial information about the laptop to reopen the investigation and notifying Congress about it, the IG report shows.

Read more
FBI agent's text to lover: 'We'll stop' Trump from becoming president

Citing text messages written by FBI agent Peter Strzok, who said in one message that he would "stop" then-candidate Trump from being elected, the report notes that federal investigators may have been "willing to take official action to impact a presidential candidate's electoral prospects."

"Under these circumstances, we did not have confidence that Strzok's decision to prioritize the Russia investigation over following up on the [Hillary Clinton]-related investigative lead discovered on the Weiner laptop was free from bias," the report concludes on page 329.

The contents of Weiner's laptop became the subject of widespread speculation during the FBI's 2016 probe into Clinton's private email server and alleged mishandling of classified data. Weiner, the now ex-husband of top Clinton aide and adviser Huma Abedin, became a person of interest for federal investigators after it was discovered that he had sent sexually explicit messages to a 15-year-old girl in 2016.

Weiner had resigned from Congress in 2011 after it was revealed he sent lewd photographs and messages to women.

In September 2016, as part of the investigation into his communication with the underage teen, an FBI agent in New York found hundreds of thousands of emails on Weiner's laptop that were possibly relevant to the Clinton investigation.

In December 2017, it was revealed that at least five of the emails stored on Weiner's laptop were marked "confidential" and involved delicate talks with Middle Eastern leaders and Abedin.

Weiner is currently serving a 21-month sentence in federal prison for sending obscene material to a minor.

The DOJ IG report also noted that then-FBI Director James Comey violated procedure in announcing to Congress that the bureau was reopening an investigation into Clinton's emails just days before the 2016 presidential election.

Clinton has repeatedly claimed that the announcement contributed to her loss to Trump.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

[Jun 16, 2018] Evil empire 2.0 West conjures up ghost of Soviet past to vilify Russia by Robert Bridge

Notable quotes:
"... "We are going to do the worst thing we can do to you. We are going to take your enemy way from you." ..."
"... "There's no way I would ever agree to give [Russia] that legitimacy," ..."
"... "The Soviet Union may have fallen, but the evil it represents is alive and well in Putin's Russia." ..."
"... "He is no friend of the United States," ..."
"... "He's dismembering democracies everywhere and trying to do so in our own backyard." ..."
"... In order to put to rest this tortured Soviet ghost, it needs to be reminded that the business of "dismembering democracies" ..."
"... "move to re-Sovietize the region." ..."
"... "In respect of Karl Marx, I think he must be turning in his grave to see what the country that was founded on many of his precepts is doing in the name of supporting Syria by condoning the use of chemical weapons on Syrian territory." ..."
"... "recapturing the Soviet position on the world stage." ..."
"... "America's Putin apologist" ..."
"... "The intelligence committees have never produced any evidence," ..."
"... "They never even did a forensic exam of the DNC computers." ..."
"... "genetically driven to co-opt." ..."
"... "The parting with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics will be long and difficult," ..."
"... "We must acknowledge that many will not believe or agree with the death warrant written in Minsk and confirmed in Alma-Ata." ..."
"... Like this story? Share it with a friend! ..."
Jun 16, 2018 | www.rt.com

Listening to Western media and politicians these days, you would never guess that nearly three decades ago the Soviet hammer and sickle lowered for the last time over the Kremlin, replaced by the Russian tricolor. Ironically, the collapse of the Soviet Union - an empire made up of 15 republics encompassing some 12 million square miles - has been far more difficult for­ the West to come to grips with than it has been for the Russian people, who witnessed the decline and fall firsthand. Indeed, many Westerners are ardent believers that the Soviet Union is still alive and kicking.

This apparent paradox was foreseen many years ago by the Soviet political scientist, Georgi Arbatov, when he told a US diplomat shortly after the collapse: "We are going to do the worst thing we can do to you. We are going to take your enemy way from you."

Thirty years later the West still revisits the grave of its former Soviet nemesis, yearning for its rise from the ashes. Just this week, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham conjured up the spirit of America's ex arch-enemy when responding to Donald Trump's suggestion that Russia be readmitted into the G7.

"There's no way I would ever agree to give [Russia] that legitimacy," Graham said . "The Soviet Union may have fallen, but the evil it represents is alive and well in Putin's Russia."

"He is no friend of the United States," he continued. "He's dismembering democracies everywhere and trying to do so in our own backyard."

In order to put to rest this tortured Soviet ghost, it needs to be reminded that the business of "dismembering democracies" has been solely the purview of the US and its NATO allies. At a time when the world lacked a countervailing force to check Western military aggression – which the Soviet Union duly provided – the West eagerly pursued a regime-change agenda that not only destroyed viable governments, like Iraq and Libya, but set in motion a migrant crisis that the European Union is at pains to control today. Read more Adam Scotti/Prime Minister's Office/Handout via Russia should be back in G7 as 'we spend 25% of time' talking about it anyway – Trump

For its part, Russia has resorted to military action against a foreign country on just one occasion. In August 2008, in response to a deadly attack on Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia, Russian forces entered Georgian territory. Even the EU concluded that the government of ex Georgian President, Mikhail Saakashvili, was to blame for sparking the five-day conflict.

So, what is the reason for Graham's gross distortion of the historical record? And why the apparent need to conflate modern, democratic Russia with the vanquished Soviet Union? For the answer, it is always helpful to follow the money trail, and unsurprisingly it leads straight to the door of America's largest defense contractors.

It is no secret that Lindsey Graham – perhaps second only to John McCain - is one of the most notorious war hawks in Washington. During his failed run for the 2016 presidential elections, the Super PAC supporting his bid collected $2.9 million, the bulk of which came from the coffers of defense contractors.

Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, another darling of the military industrial complex, who raked in just under $500 million from the defense industry for her presidential bid, was portraying Russia as some sort of Soviet-style menace as early as 2012.

Discussing Vladimir Putin's efforts to promote greater economic integration in Eurasia, Clinton depicted the venture as a "move to re-Sovietize the region." Unfortunately, no one challenged the Democrat to explain how one of the largest capitalistic ventures in the world could be confused with communism.

Clearly, Western leaders are intentionally dragging up memories of the bygone Cold War-era in order to incite an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty - the ultimate stimulant for military spending, corporate profit-taking and, last but not least, NATO sprawl up to Russia's border. For defense sector lobbyists, the rhetoric is music to the ears.

The majority of the Russian ad spend happened AFTER the election. We shared that fact, but very few outlets have covered it because it doesn't align with the main media narrative of Tump and the election. https://t.co/2dL8Kh0hof

-- Rob Goldman (@robjective) February 17, 2018

The threat of peace does not boost the bottom line of the defense contractors, who represent some of the most influential people in Washington, while the politicians who are most hawkish on foreign policy are richly rewarded. In short, it is a marriage made in hell, with a 'honeymoon' somewhere in the Middle East. Russia, due to its stunning resurgence, which was put on full display in Syria as it foiled another Western scheme for regime change, has also appeared on the radar.

Thus, we see Western politicians and pundits on both sides of the Atlantic attempting to make a strained connection between Russia and the Soviet Union, and even more now with 'Russiagate' and the Skripal saga in full hysteria mode. This is clearly being done in an effort to isolate Russia on the global stage.

Britain's Ambassador to the United Nations Karen Pierce, for example, in a heated debate with her Russian counterpart, Vassily Nebenzia, lectured Russia for its 'regrettable behavior' in Syria, saying : "In respect of Karl Marx, I think he must be turning in his grave to see what the country that was founded on many of his precepts is doing in the name of supporting Syria by condoning the use of chemical weapons on Syrian territory."

Read more Britain's Ambassador to the United Nations Karen Pierce. © Brendan McDermid 'Marx would be turning in his grave' – Britain's UN envoy appears to think she's debating Soviets

One wonders how such a high-ranking official could possibly understand what is happening in Syria today when the collapse of the Soviet Union seems to have escaped her attention. Meanwhile, perennial Russophobes, which make up the overwhelming majority of fellowship positions among US think tanks, regularly argue that Russia is somehow 'nostalgic for empire,' and determined to 'restore the glory of the Soviet times.'

Anne Applebaum, a member of the influential Council on Foreign Relations, gave a distorted version of reality on Ukrainian television, arguing that Vladimir Putin is interested in "recapturing the Soviet position on the world stage." There is just one problem with that position: Not a single thing the Russian leader has done or not done to date would reasonably support that thesis. But good luck finding an academic to challenge such misguided notions.

Whenever the tiny cadre of Western academics strays from the reservation and argues from the Russian perspective, they are exiled to academia's version of the Gulag Archipelago seldom to be heard from again. Stephen Cohen, emeritus at Princeton University and NYU, is referred to as "America's Putin apologist" among his peers for daring to suggest there might just be an alternative reality to the mainstream media madness we are being fed about 'Putin's Russia' on a daily basis.

Speaking on the subject of 'Russiagate,' Cohen acknowledged what so few academics have the intellectual courage to say: there is no evidence whatsoever to show that Putin ordered the hacking of the Democratic National Committee in 2016. "The intelligence committees have never produced any evidence," Cohen said . "They never even did a forensic exam of the DNC computers."

Obviously, this sort of 'crazy talk' is not well received in US policy circles, and if it were not for Cohen's serious credentials as a leading expert on Russia he would be simply 'exiled' from the mainstream discourse. That is because the US has entered a dark, unrecognizable place where top officials, like James Clapper, the former Director of National Intelligence, can actually describe the Russian people in racist overtones, saying they are "genetically driven to co-opt."

The reality is that the West is acquiring a dangerous totalitarian mindset (genetically driven?) in that it has become – similar perhaps to the Soviet times - nearly impossible to question anything that the mainstream media, think tanks and academia disseminates.

"The parting with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics will be long and difficult," Izvestia warned with uncanny foresight. "We must acknowledge that many will not believe or agree with the death warrant written in Minsk and confirmed in Alma-Ata."

Indeed, nostalgia for the Soviet times – complete with a new cold war and lucrative arms race - is so rampant in the West that its roots are beginning to crack through the surface. Such a repressive climate chokes off all any discussion that presents a challenge to the official narrative which proclaims, as absolute fact, that 'Russia is aspiring for Soviet-style empire,' a groundless assertion that is every bit as ridiculous as it is dangerous.

If the current trend towards the homogenization of thought continues - like a chapter torn from Orwell's 1984 - Westerners will awake one sunny morning to a shiny new totalitarian state of their own design and making, complete with jackboots on the streets, under an awning falsely proclaiming 'democracy'.

@Robert_Bridge

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Robert Bridge is an American writer and journalist. Former Editor-in-Chief of The Moscow News, he is author of the book, 'Midnight in the American Empire,' released in 2013.

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

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

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

@Carlton Meyer

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Jun 15, 2018] Russian President Putin's "direct line" discussion dominated by war danger and social crisis by Vladimir Volkov and Clara Weiss

Russia is a neoliberal country. Putin is practicing "soft national neoliberalism" which differs from Trump's "hard national neoliberalism" by more efforts to prevent the sliding of the standard of living of the population.
But still neoliberalism is neoliberalism and pension reform is what you have to expect.
Notable quotes:
"... In an attempt to present himself as the "voice of reason" in opposition to the aggressive and unpredictable policies of US president Donald Trump, Putin argued for every country to advance "its own interests" without resorting to "egotistical political methods." He further said, "Russia is regarded as a threat, because they perceive Russia as a rival. I believe that this is an erroneous policy, because one should not try and contain anyone, including Russia, but foster cooperation, which would produce a beneficial effect for the global economy." ..."
"... Meanwhile, Putin evidently avoided denouncing the imperialist powers and their blatant provocations and aggression. When asked about the Skripal case, an obviously staged provocation aimed at providing the pretext for a military build-up and confrontation with Russia, he only said that "we're dealing with something other than a military-grade agent." As long as Russia was not part of the investigation, he added, "it is difficult for us [the Russian government] to comment on anything." ..."
"... Finding itself increasingly encircled and pressured, the Kremlin has been feverishly working to find a rapprochement with imperialism by making limited concessions both in foreign policy and by undertaking steps to further open up Russia to foreign investors. ..."
"... As tensions between the United States and the EU are growing, the Kremlin is trying to exploit these inter-imperialist divisions to establish alliances with the major imperialist powers of Europe. The Kremlin is also appealing to far-right forces throughout Europe, including the National Front in France and the far-right government in Austria. ..."
"... Nor did Putin offer any concrete plans for the financial realization of his "May Decrees," which promised an improvement of the social situation. ..."
"... When asked about the raising of the retirement age, something that prime minister Medvedev recently indicated was actively being prepared, Putin refused to provide an assessment of the government's proposal in this regard, and instead made general remarks about how the welfare of the elderly had to be taken care of. In this way, he implicitly signaled his approval of plans that will lead to a significant decline in the living standards of tens of millions of people. ..."
"... Another major topic was the sharp rise in petrol prices: Between March 8 and June 8, the average price for one litre of petrol rose from 41,18 rubles (0.66 cents) to 45,28 rubles (0.72). In some regions it has surpassed 50 rubles (about 80 cents). ..."
"... Thus, the Nezavisimaya Gazeta ..."
"... The number of pediatricians in Russia has declined from 72,000 to 58,000 between 2000 and 2016, and between 2005 and 2014, the number of outpatient hospitals has declined by 2.4 times in the countryside, thus dramatically worsening the access to medical aid for children there. ..."
"... Currently, the creation of two off-shore havens in Russia is being discussed, one on the island Russii near Vladivostok, in the Far East, and the other one on the island Oktiabr'skii in the Kaliningrad oblast. The government is also rapidly preparing a bill which will allow the major companies to not disclose information about deals they are preparing. It would also allow companies that are considered vital to the functioning of the economy to muddle their property structure so as to avoid sanctions. ..."
Jun 15, 2018 | www.wsws.org

In a sign of increasing nervousness within the Kremlin, this "direct line," unlike previous ones, included no audience and journalists in the room from which Putin received and answered calls. Instead, the studio was equipped with screens and operators sitting behind them who were receiving video recordings, texts and other messages. Only select messages and questions were answered by Putin. The event was broadcast live on the country's major television channels and several radio stations.

The US-led imperialist encirclement of Russia and the danger of world war, a major and very real concern for the Russian population, were, along with the social crisis, the major theme of the "direct line."

In an attempt to present himself as the "voice of reason" in opposition to the aggressive and unpredictable policies of US president Donald Trump, Putin argued for every country to advance "its own interests" without resorting to "egotistical political methods." He further said, "Russia is regarded as a threat, because they perceive Russia as a rival. I believe that this is an erroneous policy, because one should not try and contain anyone, including Russia, but foster cooperation, which would produce a beneficial effect for the global economy."

To the question "Will there be a World War Three?" Putin responded by quoting Albert Einstein, who once said that while he didn't know what weapons might be used to wage a third world war, "World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." Putin then added: "World War Three could put an end to civilization as we know it. Understanding this should prevent us from extreme and very dangerous actions in the international arena that could threaten modern civilization."

Meanwhile, Putin evidently avoided denouncing the imperialist powers and their blatant provocations and aggression. When asked about the Skripal case, an obviously staged provocation aimed at providing the pretext for a military build-up and confrontation with Russia, he only said that "we're dealing with something other than a military-grade agent." As long as Russia was not part of the investigation, he added, "it is difficult for us [the Russian government] to comment on anything."

Having emerged out of the destruction of the Soviet state, and the restoration of capitalism in Russia, which was carried out hand-in-glove with the very governments and bourgeoisies that are now threatening to militarily attack and carve up the country, the Russian oligarchy is closely tied to the imperialist powers. Finding itself increasingly encircled and pressured, the Kremlin has been feverishly working to find a rapprochement with imperialism by making limited concessions both in foreign policy and by undertaking steps to further open up Russia to foreign investors.

As tensions between the United States and the EU are growing, the Kremlin is trying to exploit these inter-imperialist divisions to establish alliances with the major imperialist powers of Europe. The Kremlin is also appealing to far-right forces throughout Europe, including the National Front in France and the far-right government in Austria.

In these maneuvers, the Russian oligarchy is driven not least of all by growing social discontent at home, expressions of which dominated the "direct line" with Putin.

Putin's general evaluation of the situation in the country, which, in his words, was "moving in the absolute right direction" and was marked by "consistent economic growth" stood in stark contrast to the issues raised by people in their questions: the rapidly rising prices for public utilities, petrol and other products of mass consumption, the degradation of health care, education and the environment, the miserable wages of the majority of the population against the background of huge profits for the oligarchs, the lack of control over public officials and omnipresent corruption, as well as the plans of the government to increase the retirement age and raise taxes.

According to official statistics, the real income of Russians has declined by a total of some 11 percent over the past four years relative to their 2013 levels, before the crisis triggered by the Western sanctions and decline in oil prices began.

Despite the Kremlin propaganda about a "united people," Putin clearly showed in his answers which social interests he defends. He rejected the introduction of a progressive income tax and the nationalization of oil and other raw material resources companies. Nor did Putin offer any concrete plans for the financial realization of his "May Decrees," which promised an improvement of the social situation.

When asked about the raising of the retirement age, something that prime minister Medvedev recently indicated was actively being prepared, Putin refused to provide an assessment of the government's proposal in this regard, and instead made general remarks about how the welfare of the elderly had to be taken care of. In this way, he implicitly signaled his approval of plans that will lead to a significant decline in the living standards of tens of millions of people.

Another major topic was the sharp rise in petrol prices: Between March 8 and June 8, the average price for one litre of petrol rose from 41,18 rubles (0.66 cents) to 45,28 rubles (0.72). In some regions it has surpassed 50 rubles (about 80 cents). Putin said that this was "the result of incorrect, to put it mildly, regulation" and added that the necessary measures to reverse this process would be put in place. At the same time, he emphasized that the interests of the biggest oil companies, which are responsible for the recent price hike, were not to be touched.

Most questions that were raised in the "direct line" already troubled the population at the beginning of Putin's time in power, some 20 years ago. Since then, social inequality has continued to rise, and the situation in the key sectors of the economy, the conditions of basic infrastructure and in the social sphere have further deteriorated.

Thus, the Nezavisimaya Gazeta recently cited the following numbers with regard to health care: "Since 2000, the number of hospitals in Russia has declined by about 300 to 350 per year. In the past 16 years, their number has been reduced by a factor of five. Especially within the framework of the restructuring and optimization of the health care system, clinics in small towns in the countryside and villages are being shut down. The number of polyclinics has also significantly declined: of 21,300 only 18,600 remain."

The number of pediatricians in Russia has declined from 72,000 to 58,000 between 2000 and 2016, and between 2005 and 2014, the number of outpatient hospitals has declined by 2.4 times in the countryside, thus dramatically worsening the access to medical aid for children there.

At the same time, the government spares no money when it comes to supporting the oligarchs, banks and major businesses. The Russian Central Bank has recently spent 2,62 trillion rubles ($41.2 billion) to readjust three private banking groups. The "Vneshekonombank", a state enterprise with special status, which is directly led by the government, has received over 1 trillion rubles ($15.92 billion) from the state budget between 2016 and 2017, channelled through the Central Bank. By contrast, the latest social initiatives of the president to improve the demographic situation are estimated to cost some 80 billion rubles ($1.27 billion) per year.

The new Western sanctions against the Russian government and oligarchs that are connected with it will lead to new assaults by the Kremlin on the rights and living standards of the working class. The government has already announced that it will help the major business empires of the oligarchs that are being sanctioned, particularly Oleg Deripaska, who controls much of the aluminium industry, and Viktor Vekselberg, who is now the richest individual in Russia.

Currently, the creation of two off-shore havens in Russia is being discussed, one on the island Russii near Vladivostok, in the Far East, and the other one on the island Oktiabr'skii in the Kaliningrad oblast. The government is also rapidly preparing a bill which will allow the major companies to not disclose information about deals they are preparing. It would also allow companies that are considered vital to the functioning of the economy to muddle their property structure so as to avoid sanctions.

[Jun 15, 2018] The Guardian mounts defence of British government lies over Skripals by Jean Shaoul

Harding is definitely a joke. He is pretty pathetic easily jumping in and trying to milk any Russian scandal be in Litvinenko, Russiagate, Steele dossier, of Skripals. Any version of events that he approved can be instantly discarded a lie probably created with MI6 help. So he can serve as a kind of reliable negative indicator, if you wish.
Applebaum is more dangerous, but still she a typical rabid neocon without any "in depth" understanding of Russia. the net result of Skripal affair was poisoning Russian-British relation for decade or so. If this is the price Theresa May wanted to pay to stay in power she should be prosecuted for abuse of her office.
Notable quotes:
"... The Skripal case: A new Cold War? ..."
"... Applebaum now works at the London School of Economics where she heads, appropriately enough, a program on disinformation and 21st century propaganda. She is a virulent anti-communist and a ferocious warmonger, married to the former foreign minister of Poland. ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... editing, contextualising, explanation and redaction ..."
"... Answering a question about the government's use of D-Notices (Defence and Security Media Advisory Notice), Morris tried desperately to excuse press censorship. Contradicting reports that the government had issued two D-notices to prevent the media from identifying British intelligence service personnel Skripal was working with, he said there were "very few that we know about, only one." D notices had "changed" and are now "advisory." ..."
"... One audience member pointed out that since the poisoning had been unsuccessful, Russia might not have been responsible and that the government and media had taken the easy way out by blaming Russia. ..."
"... This was dismissed without a serious answer. The newspaper of what passes for the "liberal left" instead proceeded to solidify its alliance with the most right-wing layers of the US and British political and intelligence establishment by churning out anti-Russian propaganda of a distinctly McCarthyite character. ..."
Jun 12, 2018 | www.wsws.org

The Guardian's June 4 event, The Skripal case: A new Cold War? was a blatant attempt to propagandise against Russia in the interests of British imperialism.

The newspaper gave the platform to Anne Applebaum and Luke Harding along with two of its journalists, Caroline Bannock and Steve Morris, who had covered the Skripal story.

All have uncritically regurgitated the British government's unsubstantiated, contradictory and constantly shifting claims that the Russian-British double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Julia were poisoned with a Novichok nerve agent by the Putin regime.

Applebaum now works at the London School of Economics where she heads, appropriately enough, a program on disinformation and 21st century propaganda. She is a virulent anti-communist and a ferocious warmonger, married to the former foreign minister of Poland.

After the Russian annexation of Crimea, she called for "total war" against nuclear-armed Russia in a column in the Washington Post . Closely connected to the highest echelons of the US state, she is a member of key foreign policy think tanks and sits on the board of directors of the CIA-linked National Endowment for Democracy.

Harding, long time foreign correspondent for the Guardian , appears to have very close links to Britain's security services. He has authored books that can only be described as hatchet jobs on Julian Assange and Edward Snowden, aimed at discrediting them and facilitating their persecution by the US authorities, as well as innumerable propaganda pieces against Russia.

The Guardian itself has a long record of dutifully promoting the anti-Russian warmongering of both the US and British political establishments. It supported the Western-backed coup in Ukraine in 2014, using allegations of Russian aggression to press for punitive sanctions against Moscow, British participation in the US intervention in Syria against the Russian-backed regime of Bashar al-Assad, most recently following fake news of a chemical weapons attack on Douma. This is in addition to accepting uncritically the allegations of Russian interference in the US presidential election in 2016.

To underscore the Guardian's political loyalties, another invitee, although not on the platform, was Sir David Omand, from whom the Guardian has commissioned several articles over the years.

Omand is a former senior civil servant and head of the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), the intelligence and security organisation responsible for spying on people at home and abroad. He is currently a visiting professor at King's College London and vice-president of the Royal United Services Institute, the leading military think-tank.

It was GCHQ that in 2013 oversaw the operation to destroy the Guardian's hard drives and memory cards on two computers containing encrypted files from whistle-blower Edward Snowden, after the British government threatened to jail editor Alan Rusbridger and close the newspaper over its reporting of the Snowden revelations. The Guardian accepted this blatant censorship with only token protest.

The newspaper also has form on news control. It stated in 2010 in an infamous editorial about WikiLeaks, which had provided secret US diplomatic cables to the Guardian and four other news outlets, that it had only agreed to publish "a small number of cables" to control the political fall-out from the details of murder, torture, espionage and corruption they revealed. It added that the newspaper had exercised extreme discretion in the " editing, contextualising, explanation and redaction " of the documents. [emphasis added]

The Guardian is acutely aware of the widespread and entirely healthy scepticism towards anything the government says on Skripal, in the aftermath of lies such as the existence of Iraqi "weapons of mass destruction" in furtherance of Britain's warmongering. Indeed, the week before the June 4 event confirmed the need for the Guardian's services in propping up the government's campaign of lies.

The newspaper led on the report of the supposed murder of Russian journalist Arkady Babchenko at his apartment in Kiev as the assassination of yet another Putin critic, only for Babchenko to show up alive and well the very next day at a press conference about his "murder." Harding wrote lamenting that the stunt "would allow Russia and other unscrupulous governments to dismiss real events as fake."

At the event itself, focus was placed for the most part on calls to end Russian money laundering in London and avoiding wherever possible any direct examination of the Skripal case in favour of sweeping generalisations.

Applebaum rejected any possibility that the Kremlin was not involved in the Skripals' attempted assassination. She insisted that, having done a lot of research on how Russian propaganda works, "this was like watching a replay of MH17," the Malaysian passenger jet shot down over Eastern Ukraine. In that case, "Russia immediately put out dozens of stories, not just deny it, but using multiple sources, gave out dozens of stories to pollute media with so much nutty stuff in order to make people draw back and say believe it is all unknowable. That is their modus operandi, designed for a Russian audience."

Applebaum never indicated that the same might be said about the British government's line on the Skripal case!

Harding said that assassination was a traditional Russian method of dealing with opponents going back to Lenin and Stalin and was resurrected in the 1990s when Putin and ex-KGB people came to power. Unable to cite any example of Lenin assassinating anyone, he roamed willy-nilly through history citing various assassinations by Stalin, including that of Trotsky, and various more contemporary alleged assassinations as "proof" of his argument.

There were, he said, two theories about why Russia had tried to kill Skripal.

The first, which Harding rejected, was that after Skripal was released in a spy exchange, he broke the rules, remained active and embarked on the old spies' lecture trail. The second, which he "preferred," is that Skripal was "almost irrelevant": not so much the target but an instrument to frighten and intimidate anyone thinking of cooperating with the West, especially talking to the Mueller Inquiry in the US into the alleged Russian attempt to subvert the US 2016 election.

After these baseless ruminations, chairperson Mark Rice Oxley asked former GCHQ chief Omand, sitting in the audience, for his thoughts. Omand was enthused. "It's a great conversation. I agree with Luke's idea of implausible deniability. Hence the baroque method assassination. The point is to intimidate.

"I know the team that did the assessment of the nerve agent, attributing it to a Novichok agent and the Russian state. It was meticulous, like Sherlock Holmes, eliminating everything.

"No scientific theory is 100 percent reliable, but this was as close as it gets," he asserted.

He then admitted that it was entirely unclear how applying Novichok to a door handle would work!

Omand agreed with Harding that the British government "should go after the money," urging investigative journalists "to dig," saying it "would hurt the people in power around Putin."

Omand, responding to a question from the chair as to whether British public opinion would be in favour of increasing hostility to Russia, revealed the extent of the collaboration between the Guardian and Prime Minister Theresa May's Conservative government.

He said, "You are doing a good job in that regard. My fear is that if things worsen, it would be necessary to explain The Kremlin could miscalculate, for example with a cyber-attack. We could be moving into a dangerous period."

Applebaum interrupted, saying, "We know they could do that."

Some questions from the floor revealed public scepticism towards the government and media's coverage of the Skripal case.

Answering a question about the government's use of D-Notices (Defence and Security Media Advisory Notice), Morris tried desperately to excuse press censorship. Contradicting reports that the government had issued two D-notices to prevent the media from identifying British intelligence service personnel Skripal was working with, he said there were "very few that we know about, only one." D notices had "changed" and are now "advisory."

Other members of the audience asked where the Skripals were now, reports about them being given US passports and relocated to the US under fake names, the government's news management, whether it was coincidence that Porton Down, the government's chemical and biological military research institute, was so close to the incident, and that it had recently received additional funding of £48 million.

One audience member pointed out that since the poisoning had been unsuccessful, Russia might not have been responsible and that the government and media had taken the easy way out by blaming Russia.

This was dismissed without a serious answer. The newspaper of what passes for the "liberal left" instead proceeded to solidify its alliance with the most right-wing layers of the US and British political and intelligence establishment by churning out anti-Russian propaganda of a distinctly McCarthyite character.

[Jun 15, 2018] The Russian meddling fraud Weapons of mass destruction revisited by Andre Damon and Joseph Kishore

Notable quotes:
"... World Socialist Web Site ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... More fundamentally, the quarter-century of invasions and occupations that followed the dissolution of the Soviet Union is rapidly developing into a conflict between major nuclear-armed powers. The effort of the American ruling class to offset its economic decline using military force is leading mankind to the brink of another world war. As the National Defense Strategy, published less than a month before the release of the indictments, declared, "Inter-state strategic competition, not terrorism, is now the primary concern in US national security." ..."
"... The Mueller indictment is intended to provide an appropriate "narrative" for military aggression motivated by different aims. At the same time, it serves as a ready-made pretext for censorship and domestic repression that goes far beyond the extraordinary measures adopted under the framework of the "war on terror." Russia, the American people are supposed to believe, uses domestic social opposition to weaken the United States, rendering political dissent effectively treasonous. ..."
"... Already, this campaign has led the major US technology firms to implement far-reaching measures to censor political speech on the Internet. Google is manipulating its search results and Facebook is manipulating its news feeds, while seeking to turn the social media platform it has developed into an instrument of corporate-state surveillance. ..."
"... Now, the Democrats, along with their appendages among the organizations of the upper-middle class, are at the forefront of the campaign for war, employing neo-McCarthyite tactics to criminalize opposition while seeking to subordinate all popular opposition to the Trump administration to its right-wing and militarist agenda. ..."
Feb 20, 2018 | www.wsws.org

Fifteen years ago, on February 5, 2003, against the backdrop of worldwide mass demonstrations in opposition to the impending invasion of Iraq, then-US Secretary of State Colin Powell argued before the United Nations that the government of Saddam Hussein was rapidly stockpiling "weapons of mass destruction," which Iraq, together with Al Qaeda, was planning to use against the United States.

In what was the climax of the Bush administration's campaign to justify war, Powell held up a model vial of anthrax, showed aerial photographs and presented detailed slides purporting to show the layout of Iraq's "mobile production facilities."

There was only one problem with Powell's presentation: it was a lie from beginning to end.

The World Socialist Web Site , in an editorial board statement published the next day, declared the brief for war "the latest act in a diplomatic charade laced with cynicism and deceit." War against Iraq, the WSWS wrote, was not about "weapons of mass destruction." Rather, "it is a war of colonial conquest, driven by a series of economic and geo-political aims that center on the seizure of Iraq's oil resources and the assertion of US global hegemony."

The response of the American media, and particularly its liberal wing, was very different. Powell's litany of lies was presented as the gospel truth, an unanswerable indictment of the Iraqi government.

Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen, who rushed off a column before he could have examined Powell's allegations, declared, "The evidence he presented to the United Nations -- some of it circumstantial, some of it absolutely bone-chilling in its detail -- had to prove to anyone that Iraq not only hasn't accounted for its weapons of mass destruction but without a doubt still retains them. Only a fool -- or possibly a Frenchman -- could conclude otherwise."

The editorial board of the New York Times -- whose reporter Judith Miller was at the center of the Bush administration's campaign of lies -- declared one week later that there "is ample evidence that Iraq has produced highly toxic VX nerve gas and anthrax and has the capacity to produce a lot more. It has concealed these materials, lied about them, and more recently failed to account for them to the current inspectors."

Subsequent developments would prove who was lying. The Bush administration and its media accomplices conspired to drag the US into a war that led to the deaths of more than one million people -- a colossal crime for which no one has yet been held accountable.

Fifteen years later, the script has been pulled from the closet and dusted off. This time, instead of "weapons of mass destruction," it is "Russian meddling in the US elections." Once again, assertions by US intelligence agencies and operatives are treated as fact. Once again, the media is braying for war. Once again, the cynicism and hypocrisy of the American government -- which intervenes in the domestic politics of every state on the planet and has been relentlessly expanding its operations in Eastern Europe -- are ignored.

The argument presented by the American media is that the alleged existence of a fly-by-night operation, employing a few hundred people, with a budget amounting to a minuscule fraction of total election spending in the US, constitutes a "a virtual war against the United States through 21st-century tools of disinformation and propaganda" ( New York Times ).

In the countless articles and media commentary along this vein, nowhere can one find a serious analysis of the Mueller indictment of the Russians itself, let alone an examination of the real motivations behind the US campaign against Russia. The fact that the indictment does not even involve the Russian government or state officials is treated as a nonissue.

While the present campaign over Russian "meddling" has much in common with the claims about "weapons of mass destruction," the implications are far more ominous. The "war on terror" is exhausted, in part because the US is allied in Syria and elsewhere with the Islamic fundamentalist organizations it was purportedly fighting.

More fundamentally, the quarter-century of invasions and occupations that followed the dissolution of the Soviet Union is rapidly developing into a conflict between major nuclear-armed powers. The effort of the American ruling class to offset its economic decline using military force is leading mankind to the brink of another world war. As the National Defense Strategy, published less than a month before the release of the indictments, declared, "Inter-state strategic competition, not terrorism, is now the primary concern in US national security."

Russia is seen by dominant sections of the military-intelligence apparatus as a principal obstacle to US efforts to control the Middle East and to take on China -- and it is this that has been at the center of the conflict between the Democratic Party and the Trump administration.

There have already been a series of clashes in recent weeks between the world's two largest nuclear-armed powers. On February 3, a Russian close-air support fighter was shot down by al-Nusra Front fighters, which are indirectly allied with the United States in its proxy war against the government of Bashar Al-Assad. Then, on February 7 and 8, Russian soldiers were killed in US air and artillery barrages in Deir Ezzor, in what survivors called a "massacre." Both the US and Russian governments have sought to downplay the scale of the clash, but some sources have reported the number killed to be in the hundreds.

Even as US and Russian forces clashed in Syria, representatives of the Kremlin and the Pentagon sparred at the Munich security conference this weekend over the deployment and development of nuclear weapons. While accusing Russia of violating the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, Washington this month issued a nuclear posture review envisioning a massive expansion of the deployment of battlefield nuclear weapons.

The Mueller indictment is intended to provide an appropriate "narrative" for military aggression motivated by different aims. At the same time, it serves as a ready-made pretext for censorship and domestic repression that goes far beyond the extraordinary measures adopted under the framework of the "war on terror." Russia, the American people are supposed to believe, uses domestic social opposition to weaken the United States, rendering political dissent effectively treasonous.

Already, this campaign has led the major US technology firms to implement far-reaching measures to censor political speech on the Internet. Google is manipulating its search results and Facebook is manipulating its news feeds, while seeking to turn the social media platform it has developed into an instrument of corporate-state surveillance.

Even more extreme measures are being planned and implemented, motivated by the basic principle that the greater the lie, the more aggressive the methods required to enforce it. The target of the repressive measures is not Russia, but the American working class. The ruling elite is well aware that as it plots war abroad, it stands upon a social powder keg at home.

The working class must draw the necessary conclusions from its past experiences. In 2003, the Democratic Party supported the Bush administration's invasion of Iraq and provided it with the necessary political cover. Now, the Democrats, along with their appendages among the organizations of the upper-middle class, are at the forefront of the campaign for war, employing neo-McCarthyite tactics to criminalize opposition while seeking to subordinate all popular opposition to the Trump administration to its right-wing and militarist agenda.

... ... ...

[Jun 15, 2018] Russia, the Neoconservatives, and the Real Issues Involved by Boyd D. Cathey

Pathological Russophobia of neocons is explanation by two factors: (1) they are lobbyists for MIC and this is the way MIC wants the US foreign policy to be execute; (2) this is the way of earning money for people, many of whom are good no nothing else.
Notable quotes:
"... Beyond the ideological foundations for their hatred of nationalist Russia are economic considerations and the issue of who controls and manages the Russian economy: Wall Street and Bruxelles, or ..."
"... From the beginning of his tenure Putin has offered to cooperate with the United States in the fight against international Islamic terror, but each time it was the United States -- us -- who refused, including famously Paul Wolfowitz during the George W. Bush administration who replied to one such offer: "We don't need your assistance or intel." ..."
Jun 15, 2018 | www.unz.com

Almost one year ago the United States Congress (with only a handful of "nay" votes) adopted new and severe sanctions against Russia for its supposed attempt to influence and interfere in the 2016 national elections. Included in that legislation was a provision -- specifically placed there by Russophobe Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) -- that President Trump cannot alter or lift any of the sanctions without future Congressional approbation.

The government of Vladimir Putin, in response to this provocation, announced that the American diplomatic presence in Russia would be reduced by 755 persons, a drastic move by any standards. But we cannot say it was unexpected -- or undeserved.

That sanctions vote was fascinating as it illustrated during the first year of the contentious Trump presidency a rare point of political unity between the socialist Left, the Democrats and the mainstream media -- formerly noted for their "soft" and favorable attitude to the old and unloved Soviet Communist Russian regime -- and the conservative/GOP mainstream, dominated by the Neoconservatives. Of course, perspectives and approaches to the question differ, whether it was the Trump campaign that was colluding with Moscow, or if it was Hillary and the Clinton Foundation that had collaborated in some way, but their target remained the same: that man in the Kremlin and the country he governs.

One thing was clear: the result of the 2016 presidential election had the most unheard of and remarkable result in recent American political history: a de facto alliance of these supposedly antipodal political forces. And what we have witnessed is a phalanx of the pseudo-Right Neocons and the formerly pro-Soviet Left linked together, competing to see who could be more "anti" and who could come up with the more far-fetched Russia conspiracy theories, and -- as with the 2017 sanctions -- the latest unwarranted, over the top legislation.

Consider the recent -- but largely unreported -- formation of an umbrella group, the Renew Democracy Initiative (RDI), with the goal of "uni[ting] the center-left and the center-right." Its leaders include former John McCain foreign policy advisor Max Boot, The Washington Post 's Anne Appelbaum, Never Trumper Bill Kristol, former chess wizard Gary Kasparov, and Richard Hurwitz of Council on Foreign Relations. [See " Neocons & Russiagaters Unite! ," April 27, 2018] RDI's manifesto calls for "fresh thinking" and urges "the best minds from different countries to come together for both broad and discrete projects in the service of liberty and democracy in the West and beyond . Liberal democracy is in crisis around the world, besieged by authoritarianism, nationalism, and other illiberal forces. Far-right parties are gaining traction in Europe, Vladimir Putin tightens his grip on Russia and undermines democracy abroad, and America struggles with poisonous threats from the right and left."

Or, recall those on-camera Fox News Russia experts -- think here of General Jack Keane or the unhinged Colonel Ralph Peters who literally foamed at the mouth when talking about Putin, calling him "the new Hitler," and who asserted that Putin had committed "worse crimes" than the German dictator. (Peters is so anti-Russian that he finally left the Fox News network in March 2018 )

When Tucker Carlson on his prime time program last July 11, 2017, demanded that Peters provide facts and figures for his accusations, Peters immediately exploded and implied that program host Carlson was a "Hitler apologist." It was a classic argument and instance of reductio ad Hitlerum .

Of course, such examples aren't rare in the establishment "conservative movement" media. Pick up any issue of National Review or The Weekly Standard or listen to the Glenn Beck radio program and you can find the same hysteria, largely laced with faked quotes or disinformation (e.g., "Putin wants to re-establish the Soviet Union" or "Putin was head of the KGB" or "Putin has had his enemies assassinated," and so on, ad nauseum ).

Indeed, another ploy by Neocon pundits (and Congress) has been to parade Bill Browder, the grandson of American Communist Party boss Earl Browder, as a star witness to President Putin's nefarious dealings. Of course, it should be noted that Browder fils lost big time financially in his manipulations in Russia, as investigative journalists Philip Giraldi and Robert Parry have documented, and he is engaged in a vicious personal vendetta against Vladimir Putin.

For the Neoconservative leaders of what passes for "conservatism" these days, it is as if nothing has changed since 1991, since the ignominious fall of Communism. It's even arguable that their hostility to Moscow has increased since then.

Let me suggest several reasons for this: First, many of the more prominent Neoconservatives descend from Russian Jews from the Pale of Settlement, whose memories go back to the pre-Communist days of persecution and pogroms under the Tsars. They originally welcomed Lenin and the Communist regime as liberators and formed some of its staunchest supporters and apparatchiks in the regime of terror that followed (especially in the Cheka and KGB) until Josef Stalin unleashed a wave of anti-semitism after World War II. [See the partially translated excerpts from Solzhenitsyn's Two Hundred Years Together at: https://200yearstogether.wordpress.com , and the commentary ]

Putin, despite his strong support from native Russian Jews and from the Moscow Rabbinate, is a Russian nationalist and fervent supporter of the traditionalist Russian Orthodox Church, and those two factors bring up painful memories of the "bad old days" of discrimination and Jewish persecution for the Neocons.

A prime example of this comes in a recent volume authored by prominent Neocon journalist and homosexual activist (yes, the two traits often seem to go together), James Kirchick: The End of Europe: Dictators, Demagogues, and the Coming Dark Age, 2017). In his jumble of Neocon ideology and prejudice, Kirchick evaluates what for him seems to be happening ominously in Europe. He is deeply fearful of the efforts to "close borders" against Muslim immigrants from the Middle East. He blasts Marine Le Pen as a racist -- and most likely a subtle "holocaust denier!" -- and attacks the attempts in places like Hungary and Poland to reassert national traditions and Christian identity; for him these are nothing less than attempts to bring back "fascism."

Russia comes in for perhaps his harshest criticism, and the reason is unmistakable: Russia seems to be returning to its older national and pre-Communist heritage, to its age-old Orthodox Christian faith. Russians are returning by the millions to the church and the "old-time" religion. For Kirchick this can only mean one thing: the triumph of bigotry, anti-semitism, and "extreme right wing" ideology, and the failure of what he terms "liberal democracy and equality" (including, he would no doubt include, feminism, same sex marriage, across-the-board equality, and all those other "conservative values"!).

Kirchick's critique, shared by many of the leaders of the national Republican Party and dominating the pages of most establishment "conservative" publications and talk radio these days, joins him arm-in-arm with globalist George Soros in efforts to undermine the Russian state and its president all in the name of "democracy" and "equality." [See, " George Soros Aghast as Collapsing EU, while Russia Resurgent, " January 19, 2018]

But, just what kind of "democracy" and what kind of "equality" do Kirchick and Soros defend?

Beyond the ideological foundations for their hatred of nationalist Russia are economic considerations and the issue of who controls and manages the Russian economy: Wall Street and Bruxelles, or Russia, itself. Unlike the weak and pliant Boris Yeltsin, Putin the nationalist ended the strangle-hold of Russian industry, in particular control of Russia's important energy sector, by those few international businessmen, the oligarchs (many of them Jewish), most of whom fled the country. That could not stand! How dare Russia -- and its president -- oppose the economic diktats of Bruxelles and Wall Street!

Lastly, we should add one more reason for hostility, and that is Russia's remaining international presence, in particular, in Syria. It is very simple: you don't go from being one of the world's two "superpowers" to all of a sudden a second-rate, economically-handicapped "has been" without some remorse. As a patriot and nationalist President Putin has, understandably, attempted to reassert Russian prosperity and power -- certainly, not as much or in the same manner as the old Communist leaders. But, from his reasonable point of view, the largest country in the world does have interests, and not just in what goes on in neighboring nations where millions of Russians (formerly within Russia) reside, but also with long-time allies such as Syria.

Is not this same criterion true for the United States and its dealings with its neighbors and allies?

More, for the past twenty-five years Russia has experienced the poisoned tip of Islamic terrorism, domestically, including the brutal war in Tchechnya in the Caucasus region and the horrid bombings in the heart of the country, Moscow. From the beginning of his tenure Putin has offered to cooperate with the United States in the fight against international Islamic terror, but each time it was the United States -- us -- who refused, including famously Paul Wolfowitz during the George W. Bush administration who replied to one such offer: "We don't need your assistance or intel."

And thus, the revealing files on the Tsarnaev brothers (Boston bombing) were not received. But, as Neocon Charles Krauthammer once declared: "We live in a unipolar world today, and there is only ONE superpower, and that is the United States." That attitude was not received with equanimity by post-Communist Russia, a Russia that has discovered its heritage and its traditions and has asked for partnership with the United States, and not the hysteria we have witnessed in the United States sweeping aside all rationality.

Anon [425] Disclaimer , June 14, 2018 at 4:22 am GMT

The BitChute Interview
Carlton Meyer , Website June 14, 2018 at 4:50 am GMT
Ralph Peters is one of the nuttiest neocons around, and Fox was smart to dump him. I recall an article long ago where he suggested that the US Govt. should address the drug addition problem in the USA by assassinating drug dealers on the streets in the USA.

He lives off scraps from neocons by selling his soul for BS talking points and collects a monthly check from Uncle Sam after 20 years of sitting at a desk doing BS intel work, as I once did for a year. It seems he missed his chance at killing commies in Nam by touring Europe, as Fred Reed explained:

https://fredoneverything.org/dulce-et-decorum-est-if-someone-else-has-to-do-it/

Mikhail , Website June 14, 2018 at 6:18 am GMT
Nothing new in the above article. That such people are elevated to the stature of cushy mainstream propping and ridicule by some non-mainstream others is a tell all sign on what's wrong with the coverage.

Regarding this excerpt:

A prime example of this comes in a recent volume authored by prominent Neocon journalist and homosexual activist (yes, the two traits often seem to go together), James Kirchick: The End of Europe: Dictators, Demagogues, and the Coming Dark Age, 2017). In his jumble of Neocon ideology and prejudice, Kirchick evaluates what for him seems to be happening ominously in Europe. He is deeply fearful of the efforts to "close borders" against Muslim immigrants from the Middle East. He blasts Marine Le Pen as a racist -- and most likely a subtle "holocaust denier!" -- and attacks the attempts in places like Hungary and Poland to reassert national traditions and Christian identity; for him these are nothing less than attempts to bring back "fascism."

Russia comes in for perhaps his harshest criticism, and the reason is unmistakable: Russia seems to be returning to its older national and pre-Communist heritage, to its age-old Orthodox Christian faith. Russians are returning by the millions to the church and the "old-time" religion. For Kirchick this can only mean one thing: the triumph of bigotry, anti-semitism, and "extreme right wing" ideology, and the failure of what he terms "liberal democracy and equality" (including, he would no doubt include, feminism, same sex marriage, across-the-board equality, and all those other "conservative values"!).

Kirchick's critique, shared by many of the leaders of the national Republican Party and dominating the pages of most establishment "conservative" publications and talk radio these days, joins him arm-in-arm with globalist George Soros in efforts to undermine the Russian state and its president all in the name of "democracy" and "equality." [See, "George Soros Aghast as Collapsing EU, while Russia Resurgent," January 19, 2018]

But, just what kind of "democracy" and what kind of "equality" do Kirchick and Soros defend?

JRL promoted a recent Kirchick piece:

http://russialist.org/newswatch-the-soviet-roots-of-invoking-fears-about-world-war-iii-brookings-james-kirchick/

The rant of a coddled establishment chickenhawk, who is quite overrated, relative to the positions accorded to him (Nasty people don't deserve kindness.)

A suggestive dose of McCarthyism that simplistically references the Cold War period with present day realities, which include a subjectively inaccurate overview of what has transpired in Syria and Crimea. Put mildly, James Kirchick is quite ironic in his use of "lazy".

jilles dykstra , June 14, 2018 at 7:22 am GMT
To me it is all quite simple.
FDR's aim was to rule the war with junior aides USSR, China and a smaller Britain.
Stalin had other ideas.
Even in 1946 FDR's main backer, Baruch pleaded for a world government, a USA government, in my view.
Deep State still tries to impose this world government.
Despite Trump 'America first' we see a Bolton in the White House, as many see 'the neocons are back'.
Cannot see much difference between neocons and Deep State.
The big mistake of the British empire was unwillingless to realise that it could no longer maintain the empire.
This already began before 1914, when the two fleet standars became too expensive, the one fleet standard expressed the inability to maintain the empire.
Obama was forcedto reduce the two war standard to one and half.
What a half war accomplishes we see in Syria.
Alas, seldom in history did reason rule.
If it will in the present USA, I doubt it.
Milton , June 14, 2018 at 8:23 am GMT
Sanctions are always a prelude to war. Sanctions are in fact an act of war. Putin's mistake was in thinking he could reason with the Neoconservatives. The Neocons are not guided by pragmatic or rational concerns. Of course, many are starting to think Putin was just "part of the show" all along, as evidenced by his recent capitulation to Netanyahu.
Dante , June 14, 2018 at 9:40 am GMT
That was a very good read and you make some excellent observations, Certainly worth sharing, Thanks very much.
Renoman , June 14, 2018 at 9:51 am GMT
The American Government are a bunch of morons. I ask again "what has Russia ever done to the USA"? A real thin book as far as I can see, time to grow up and be big boys, there's money over there.
Jon Halpenny , June 14, 2018 at 10:48 am GMT
The American diplomat, Bruce P Jackson, who is credited with expanding NATO, made a statement several years ago. He heavily criticized Putin, saying he was responsible for "the largest theft of Jewish property since the Nazis."

So there we can see a motive for hatred of Putin.

War for Blair Mountain , June 14, 2018 at 11:06 am GMT
In 2018, Russia is Conservative Christian .

In 2018, America is homosexual-pedophile-mutilated tranny freak

Anon [436] Disclaimer , June 14, 2018 at 11:14 am GMT
@Milton

Bad start.

S=W-1

S=W

Which is it?

Kirt , June 14, 2018 at 11:15 am GMT
Excellent analysis by Dr. Cathey of the roots of the anti-Russian hysteria. This is also reflected in popular culture – Hollywood movies and the various spy/covert ops novels of people like Ted Bell and Brad Thor, who has hinted that he may run against Trump in the 2020 Republican primaries. Russians have replaced Arabs as the go-to villains.
Wizard of Oz , June 14, 2018 at 11:18 am GMT
@Jon Halpenny

Was Jackson referring to some of the oligarchs who had fallen out with Putin and was he suggesting Putin rather than the state benefitted? Would he have included the Orthodox Khordokovsky as Jewish?

Parbes , June 14, 2018 at 11:20 am GMT
The neocons are a collection of sick, murderous, fanatical supremacist ideologues who have turned the U.S. into the most despicable criminal regime on earth. Because of their control and influence over the U.S. imperial military/political assets, combined with their psychopathic mentality and ideology, these scumbags pose a clear threat to the entire world, but especially to Russia and Europe (and to the U.S. itself, of course). The irony in all of this is that, although these mostly Jewish bottom-feeders like to smear any foreign leader they'd like to demonize as "the new Hitler" etc., they themselves are more nefarious and dangerous to the planet than Hitler and his German Nazis ever were.

Nothing will change until the major members of the neocon collective start getting individually singled out and receiving the harsh punishments they deserve.

War for Blair Mountain , June 14, 2018 at 11:28 am GMT
Who wages war against Christian Russia every night on MSNBC?

Answer:The biological mutant IT .Rachel Maddow .an IT .

jilles dykstra , June 14, 2018 at 11:38 am GMT
@Jon Halpenny

I wonder what jewish property Putin stole.
In the USSR there was hardly any private property.
What was stolen, sold for ridiculously low prices, was state property, to former USSR managers, and/or foreign 'investors'.
As far as I understand it, some crooks have been persecuted.
Any foreigner who, after 1990, went to live in a former USSR state can explain it.
Some did to me.
Possibly Jackson is referring to how Putin threw out Soros, and his Open Society indoctrination organisation.
Hungary just now also threw him out.
Timmermans of the EU again threatened the E European nations, for refusing to let migrants enter.
Soros wants multi ethnic countries

Jake , June 14, 2018 at 11:48 am GMT
@jilles dykstra

"Cannot see much difference between neocons and Deep State."

And that means that the US Deep State can NOT have a Jewish creation, because it existed a long time before 1948, a long time before 1939, a long time before the creation of the Federal Reserve.

There is a reason that Neocons love Alexander Hamilton and Abraham Lincoln: the former was an apologist for the nascent American Deep State, and the latter its perfect tool right down to being ready and able to slaughter huge numbers of non-Elite whites so the then virtually 100% WASP-in-blood Elite Deep State could totally control the growing nation.

The source of the American Deep State is the same as England's Deep State: Oliver Cromwell's deal with Jews, a deal granting Jews special rights and privileges and made precisely in order to have the money to wage total war to exterminate non-WASP white Christian cultures and identities.

That is exactly what the Neocons are determined to continue, and they are correct whenever they assert that they are being loyal to the history and heritage of the Puritans and of Abraham Lincoln's Republican Party and of the US in the Spanish-American War, World War 1 and World War 2.

What is different about today's Neocons and, say, the growing number of Jews with major voices among the British Deep State at the height of Victorianism is that now the original junior partner has become the acting partner, the dominant partner.

But the original alliance is the same.

You cannot separate the Neocon problem from the WASP problem. You cannot solve the Neocon problem without also solving the WASP problem.

Anonymous [320] Disclaimer , June 14, 2018 at 12:26 pm GMT
Russia sucks. The only things beautiful about it are the natural landscapes and some of the women.

Russia treats it's poor with utter indifference. It's hospitals are pathetic.

Housing is drab and depressing.

Alcoholism, drug use and prostitution are rampant.

Unless you come from money in Russia, education and opportunity seems non existent. Save for the few poor exemplars.

Yet it has lots of weapons.

Russia is not a great country.

It's basically a bunch of white people acting black.

Quartermaster , June 14, 2018 at 12:30 pm GMT
@War for Blair Mountain

In 2018, Russia is Conservative Christian .

This is true only in the loosest sense. There is a huge difference between holding church membership, or attending church, and being a Christian. Putin may have done the 1st two, but the last is utterly unknown to him.

anonymous [739] Disclaimer , June 14, 2018 at 12:31 pm GMT
Can't believe any sane American thinks Russians – including beautiful Russian tennis players are more of a threat to us in 2018 then say M13 Gang banger invaders, Chicago Black street gangs, Afghan and Pakistani child rapists or just the sub Saharan Black African mobs with their machetes.

We commissioned some Farstar cartoons on this theme – seems pretty basic to me, but the J media mafia simply goes on and on – there is supposedly a Russian spy behind every bush, some Russians posted anti Hillary posts on Facebook – oh the horror!

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=wYcqmOzk&id=3B43263DD48F82D1FEC205044FBE66DCDA30A42F&thid=OIP.wYcqmOzkZCrNMrWlfuDUigHaJu&mediaurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.occidentaldissent.com%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2f2017%2f06%2frussians-out.jpg&exph=1280&expw=974&q=occidental+dissent+farstar&simid=607993335092480560&selectedIndex=3&ajaxhist=0

Quartermaster , June 14, 2018 at 12:37 pm GMT
While there is some "hysteria" when it comes to Russia, there is also much truth out there, some of which the author is willing to write off as little more than conspiracy theories.

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

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

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

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

DESERT FOX , June 14, 2018 at 12:42 pm GMT
The business of the Zionist controlled U.S. gov is WAR and this has been the agenda since 1913 and the establishment of the Zionist FED and the Zionist IRS and thus began the WAR agenda and the American people were set up to pay for the Zionist created wars and the Zionist agenda of a Zionist NWO.

Thus the Zionists need an enemy and have created enemies where none existed, the case in point being Russia and lesser created enemies the case in point being any given country in the Mideast that Israel and the Zionists wish to destroy. In the case of Russia the Zionists have the added incentive of trying to destroy a Christian country as Russia is now and historically has been Christian with the exception of the Satanist Zionist takeover of Russia in 1917 and the murder of some 60 million Russian people by the Satanist ie Zionist communists.

The U.S. gov is under satanic Zionist control and proof of this is the fact that Israel and the Zionist controlled deep state did 911 and got away with and every thinking person knows this to be the truth, may GOD help we the people of America.

Cleburne , June 14, 2018 at 1:35 pm GMT
@Jake

Jake:

While I defer to no one in my loathing and contempt for the WASPs of the Northeastern U.S., whose career of mischief began with the brutal war of conquest against my native South, I'd would like to point out what I see as some problems in your assigning to Oliver Cromwell to baleful title of WASP the first.

To wit: "Oliver Cromwell's deal with Jews, a deal granting Jews special rights and privileges."

This simply isn't true. Menasseh ben Israel did indeed present a "Humble Address on Behalf of the Jewish Nation" to the Lord Protector and the Counsel of State in 1655. Readmission was opposed by most of the English people and of the Puritan pastorate. However, there was no Act of Parliament, proclamation by Cromwell or notice from the Council of State allowing readmittance. Some historians have "deduced" that Cromwell have Menasseh "verbal assurance that they'd be allowed it, but those are deductions and speculation and no more. As far as sa subsequent petition for Jews to be allowed to practice Judaism in their homes and have a burial place outside the City of London, Cromwell referred that to the Council of State, which took no action.

Who did grant the Jews religious tolerance and naturalized a number of Jews by an Act of Parliament? Why, Charles II – after the Restoration.

You wrote: "made precisely in order to have the money to wage total war to exterminate non-WASP white Christian cultures and identities."

I can only assume you are referring to the Cromwellian conquest of Ireland, which began in May 1649. I assume you're aware that Ireland had been engulfed in a bloody and brutal civil war since 1641; indeed, one of the precipitating causes of the English Civil War was the matter of who would control the army raised to suppress the rebellion (Charles I or Parliament). Also as you know, England was swept by fear that Charles meant to bring an Irish army to England to suppress Parliament (and, indeed, there's probably more evidence that this was the actual case than there is that Cromwell cut a deal with the Jews). At any rate, there is no one single shred of evidence or even contemporary speculation that the Cromwellian conquest was at the behest of the Jews. It should be instead regarded in the context of the 17th century wars of religion, rather than 21st century conspiracy theory. Cromwell ended the civil war and pacified Ireland – in a brutal fashion, of course, but probably less vicious than Wallenstein in Germany.

Or are you referring to the Scots, crushed at Preston, Dunbar and Worcester? Again, the quarrel with the scots was over the matter of church governance, and the English unwillingness to impost the Presbyterian system on England. If Cromwell stood for anything, it was religious tolerance for the various sects that exploded after the Civil War; the sort of forced conformity demanded by the Scots displeased him (see the letters to Major Crawford in 1643).

And while both the New Englanders and English are labeled "Puritan," may I point out that the Puritan movement was a large one, with considerable variance. Cromwell favored tolerance and theologically tended toward a sort of univeralism (to judge by his pastors, eg Jeremiah Burroughs); I imagine that if he had gone to New England, he'd have been chased out along with Sarah Hutchinson and Roger Williams by the fanatical shits of Boston.

Boston is the "urgrund" of the WASP plague; not Cromwell. And while there's any number of things to fault him for, creation of the WASP was not one of them. In theological and existential terms, Cromwell and the New Model were probably closer to the Puritan "pioneers" of the Appalachian and Southern frontiers – many of whom were descended of troops planted in Ireland by Cromwell – and who of course made up the rank and file of the Confederate States Army.

You might want to take a look at the history of the Unitarian movement. You'd find everything you need to support your dislike of the WASP plaque there; I certainly have.

anon [228] Disclaimer , June 14, 2018 at 1:51 pm GMT
1 undermines democracy abroad, and America struggles with poisonous threats from the right and left."
Think of Israel. But no don't think of Isreal. That is anti Semitism
2 "Putin wants to re-establish the Soviet Union" or "Putin was head of the KGB" or "Putin has had his enemies assassinated," and so on, ad nauseum)."

Think of US – harking back to the past of Roosevelt and Reagan and Eisenhower or to Monroe

Think of Pap Bush working for CIA
Thinks of thousands of people – leaders, trade unionists, communist, socialists killed by USA

3 Bill Browder, the grandson of -- – have documented, and he is engaged in a vicious personal vendetta against Vladimir Putin."

Think of -
be afraid of the screwing the neocons They will move to China or India and denounce US sue the country, and poison the well of the democracy and the well of the justice ,media, religious organizations to get back at US

4 James Kirchick: -- efforts to "close borders" against Muslim immigrants "

Think of the perversions of the beliefs and attitudes within the psyche of this false man
He is of the same mindset that encourages Islamophobia among the clueless , zealous fervent bible thump er and among the poor indigent uneducated misinformed white populations of France USA Australia and Poland . He does same to the military and leftists secular outfit of Richard Dawkins .
He then encourages to dismember Arabs countries . The half-baked moron Richard Dawkins type, and military, and the white trash fall for it and get ready to pick up the gun for the invisible pervasive psychopathic chants of Kirchick. He also makes sure that each and every members of the opposite conflicting groups never stray way from kowtowing to Zionism who is the enemy of the Islam and the Christianity and the of the respective people.

Jews definitely feel comfortable in all weather and among the separates and in all kind of geography

anon [228] Disclaimer , June 14, 2018 at 1:56 pm GMT
4 Neocon Charles Krauthammer once declared: "We live in a unipolar world today, and there is only ONE superpower, and that is the United States."

And America felt validated , accepted and elevated by the media -mental -act of the bastards who should have met the fate of Saddam long time ago.

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

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

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

Anonymous [128] Disclaimer , June 14, 2018 at 2:30 pm GMT
The more Christian that country and its leaders become, the more the atheistic west hates them. Too bad "Uncle Joe" wasn't still the Premier. We would treat that murderous atheist as a beloved relative, maybe even hand him over half of eastern Europe like we did last time. Instead, we send in LGBT protesters to disturb their new found faith.
jilles dykstra , June 14, 2018 at 2:35 pm GMT
@Jake

From the other side of the Atlantic, what is the WASP problem ?
Whatever one thinks of the USA, protestants from NW Europe created the USA.
Their descendants, in my view, defend their culture.
Hardly any culture in the world goes under without a fight.
Some, maybe many, Germans, again the exception.

WHAT , June 14, 2018 at 2:40 pm GMT
@Anonymous

>muh bad housing
> muh alco and drugs
> muh poor
> muh no money fo dem pogroms
> muh weapons everywhere

I love how all this boilerplate wailing can be readily applied to US.

WHAT , June 14, 2018 at 2:44 pm GMT
Also waiting for that other nut who always comes with his tirades about "surrendering ukraine to Putin", no matter what article is about.
Mike something, was it?
Wally , June 14, 2018 at 3:01 pm GMT
@Carlton Meyer

"talking about Putin, calling him "the new Hitler," and who asserted that Putin had committed "worse crimes" than the German dictator."

Classic garbage in, garbage out.

fact: Hitler and the Germans did not, could not have committed the crimes they are alleged to have committed.

"we've often fantasized about drawing up an indictment against Adolf Hitler himself. And to put into that indictment the major charge: the Final Solution of the Jewish question in Europe, the physical annihilation of Jewry. And then it dawned upon us, what would we do? We didn't have the evidence."
- so called "holocaust historian" Raul Hilberg,

Revisionists are just the messengers, the absurd impossibility of the ridiculous 'holocaust' storyline is the message.

The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
See the 'holocaust' scam debunked here: http://codoh.com
No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com

Wally , June 14, 2018 at 3:07 pm GMT
"Neoconservatives descend from Russian Jews from the Pale of Settlement, whose memories go back to the pre-Communist days of persecution and pogroms under the Tsars. They originally welcomed Lenin and the Communist regime as liberators and formed some of its staunchest supporters and apparatchiks in the regime of terror that followed (especially in the Cheka and KGB) until Josef Stalin unleashed a wave of anti-semitism after World War II."

There is no proof of these "pogroms" and the fake "wave of anti-semitism after World War II".
The source of such claims are Jews who benefit / profit from making such claims.

Recall the fake '6M' since 1823.

http://www.codoh.com

Michael Kenny , June 14, 2018 at 3:11 pm GMT
The umpteenth serving of the classic US hegemonist pro-Putin/anti-EU line. The distinction is thus not between those who favour the maintenance of US global hegemony and those who oppose it. It is whether Putin is still useful as a battering ram to destroy the EU precisely so as to maintain US global hegemony into the indefinite future. The most logical explanation of the known facts surrounding the Ukrainian coup is that Victoria Nuland was in cahoots with Putin. Behind Nuland, of course were the US neocons. The split came when Putin waded into the Syrian civil war on Assad's side. By doing so he made himself a threat to Israel and, for the neocons, the whole point of maintaining US global hegemony is to prop up Israel. Logically, therefore, their priority became Putin's defeat and removal. The other side of the US hegemonist camp, which seems to be motivated by something like hubris or a master race delusion, still believes that Putin can be used to break up the EU. That's the position Mr Cathey is arguing.
I don't think Putin is still viable as an anti-EU battering ram. The American groups that have been financing far-right nationalism in Europe have got caught in the web of their own contradictions. On the one hand, they preach national identity and sovereignty to us but then, as Mr Cathey is doing here, they justify Putin's refusal to respect Ukrainian sovereignty and the Ukrainian national identity. Secondly, European nationalism is essentially "anti-other". That means that it is inherently anti-American, which makes newly nationalist Europe the inevitable enemy of US domination. It also means that anti-Semitism is inherent in European nationalism, which is probably what has Soros up in arms. The final contradiction is that, very often, the same people who preach nationalism at us in Europe preach white nationalism in the US. If white Americans are a single ethnic group and entitled to live in a single political entity, then we white Europeans must also be a single ethnic group and should also live in a single political entity (the EU, for example).
I never cease to be amused at the way in which the various American anti-EU scams cut across each other and cancel each other out!
Dan Hayes , June 14, 2018 at 3:13 pm GMT
@anon

anon[228]:

Actually within the last several years Putin also made the statement that there is only one superpower and it is the United States!

Cleburne , June 14, 2018 at 3:39 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

"WASP" in the "USA" refers fairly specifically to the Protestants of New England and New York who as a result of the War of Northern Aggression attained complete power over the development of the American empire. Their interests were concentrated in banking, railroads, industry and so on. While descended from the Puritans of New England, most of them had lost any traditional religious fervor by, oh, 1700 or so and gradually moved into loopy, nonsensical ideologies like Transcendentalism, Unitarianism, the Social Gospel, and various other creation-fixing endeavors like temperance, abolitionist, progressivism and so on. To them can be attributed the Gnostic notion of the United States as God's appointed righter of wrongs around the world, with quite coincidentally matched up with their commercial interests. On the whole about as nasty and horrible group of people that ever walked the earth; however. WASP does not include the white Anglo-Saxon Protestants of Appalachia, the Deep South, Texas and so on. The Bush family are WASPs. Robert E. Lee was not a WASP. Jake is correct to disdain them; he's wrong in saying Cromwell was the archetype.

anon [317] Disclaimer , June 14, 2018 at 3:53 pm GMT
@ Neoconservatives descend from Russian Jews from the Pale of Settlement.. yes but the Lenin crowd were from Salonkia (1908) and Hertzl's Germany @ many above Exactly, the by name, rank and serial number identification including dual nationalities, corporate by name ownership, board membership, and positions, management, advisory positions or whatever.

Deeper yet into the deep state might identify the corporate officers, directors and outside auditors who serve the needs of those identified. Bureaucrat who echo deep state intentions might be a problem?

Who cannot name the few corporations and their owners and directors that strongly support the neocon ideology on the Internet? Which does the intelligence gathering (spying), which processes the data(data mining), which produces and sells OS(limits user security), which makes sleuthing back doors for browsers and application software, which make the devices that negotiate the bits between hardware (CPU) and software (OS), you know one bit for you the user and a duplicate bit of your bit for deep state intelligence units.

At the next level is the global benefactors(Profiteers) . expensive war equipment makers, oil well production gear makers, robot makers, transport organizations, phantom for hire mercenary armies labor agencies, Democrat and Republican candidates managers to be placed on the "vote for 5 election" ballots, inventors of the fake, producers of "the fake" into propaganda, distributors of the propaganda designed fake news to masses in the public, and access managers who gate, for massive fees, lobbyist into see and deal with politicians, media giants, and power wielding bureaucrats.

As I looked through this list I realized that if the public were to deny its elected government authority to support its neocon capitalist, the entire economy would be forced to switch from Global to Domestic.. showering all kinds of benefits on the governed sheep . No wonder the government is so insistent: without globalism there is no neocon-ism, without neocon-ism open competition would flourish, the restrictions on human progress in copyrights and patents would disappear and prices would move from controlled levels to competitive levels.

But I do not think the neocons are "ideologues" ; unless lawless disregard for humanity in search of profit, is an ideology. I am not even sure they are tightly organized, they are not colonist, they are monopolist (meaning any profit potential (tangible or intangible) will soon belong to them or be within their control. They will write laws, or get nations to sanction, start wars, regime change, terrorize, whatever to advance and to protect their exclusive right to competition free profit making); you might call it ownership of all of the factors of production by whatever means is necessary. I look at them as capitalist, who have co-opted many different governments, who have forgone their humanity, who independently profiteer, interactively, and for a multitude of different reasons, to produce a common collective set of extremely effective outcomes.

nickels , June 14, 2018 at 4:34 pm GMT
Interesting, the video asserts that part of Leo Strauss's philosophy was the introduction of Plato's 'Noble Lie', which, in this case, was the bugaboo of an evil Russian Empire as a foil to bring Americans together and avoid the inevitable collapse of liberalism into nihilism. I wonder if anyone can confirm this as part of Strauss's gift the the neopsychoticons?

Also, pretty obvious reason for hatred of Russia is the closeness of the State and the Church. Strauss here talks about how the secular sphere has but one purpose, providing room for the meddlers to thrive:

Cyrano , June 14, 2018 at 4:37 pm GMT
The Neocons are mad at Russia for standing in their way of taking over the world. All in the name of "democracy" of course, nothing sinister there. Russia, and as a matter of fact, the whole world stood by and let the US have their way for almost 25 years. What did they accomplish? Diddly. So now, they want Russia to get out of the way for another (at least) 25 years, so they can spread some more "democracy". Let me tell you something, if they couldn't do it with virtually no opposition between 1991 -2014, and on a trillion dollar "defence" budgets, maybe there is something else that should be blamed other than Russia. Maybe it's their incompetence.
anon [228] Disclaimer , June 14, 2018 at 4:56 pm GMT
@Dan Hayes

Now tell us the difference or differences between the two.

anon [228] Disclaimer , June 14, 2018 at 5:02 pm GMT
@anon

James Kirchick: by encouraging balkanization of ME per the plans advocated by PNAC now FDD and Friends of Syria or SITE -Sharon-Netanahyu Joe Lieberman Kirchick favorite White Helmet or Jishs Fishas Islam Whitewash ludicrous Jihadist and cemented in stone by Yoneen Yidod ( or what ever is the name of that Jew ) sends those same muslims he encourages the "deplorable" to feel suspicious and hate and same time advocating the acceptance by the countries .

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

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

John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan , June 14, 2018 at 5:16 pm GMT
My favorite part of the Renew Democracy Initiative's manifesto:

10. The extremists share a disdain for the globalism on which modern prosperity is based. Whether they are far-left or far-right, they believe in top-down solutions to problems that can best be resolved through greater freedom, competition, openness and mobility . Both seek power without compromise or coalition and defer to the rule of law only when it strengthens their own position. These illiberal forces embrace divisive rhetoric that makes rational debate impossible. Indeed, they frequently reject established facts and scientific reasoning in favor of conspiracy theories and malicious myths. Liberal democracy must address the problems of those disadvantaged by economic change with practical programs grounded in fact and reason.

Amazing! There are two parts to this. The "openness and mobility" is a nod towards their status as rootless kosmopolity who destroy civil society and local communities in favor of a permanent, mobile underclass. But they actually imply that globalism is bottom-up; that globalism is the result of liberty and the free market. Such balls, these people.

John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan , June 14, 2018 at 5:18 pm GMT
@Carlton Meyer

I recall an article long ago where he suggested that the US Govt. should address the drug addition problem in the USA by assassinating drug dealers on the streets in the USA .

Wow. At least Rodrigo Duterte is kinda funny.

Anon [425] Disclaimer , June 14, 2018 at 5:21 pm GMT
"We live in a unipolar world today, and there is only ONE superpower, and that is the United States."

No, the ONE power is the Empire of Judea. US is its Jewel in the Crown.

Rurik , June 14, 2018 at 5:23 pm GMT

Russia seems to be returning to its older national and pre-Communist heritage, to its age-old Orthodox Christian faith. Russians are returning by the millions to the church and the "old-time" religion. For Kirchick this can only mean one thing: the triumph of bigotry, anti-semitism, and "extreme right wing" ideology, and the failure of what he terms "liberal democracy and equality".

more so even than any concern for Jewish supremacy or glorification of sodomy or all the other shibboleths oozing out of the gaping orifices of Jewish fudge packers like Kirchick, is a visceral, unearthly animosity (hatred) for the Western world and its (comparatively) beautiful, well-adjusted, happy and prosperous people.

Indeed, it is the 'happy' part that drives them insane with stinging malice and seething, rancorous rage.

I remember as a kid celebrating Christmas, and how the Jewish children I knew were not allowed. This is all part of the carefully constructed paradigm that the Jewish elite impose on their people to keep them resentful and envious. Eventually metastasizing into a deep-seated hatred.

They want to see all those ruddy-cheeked Christians pay! for their pain during those terrible years.

Like the boy who was picked last for sports or never 'got the girl', they develop a psychological imperium of wrath, which their religion bolsters in spades.

That is why when ever they get the drop on the Gentiles (who tormented them with good-natured hails of 'Merry Christmas!, which stung to their core, because all that love and happiness was not for them. ) – regardless of the obvious sincerity of the Christians. – [which made it even worse]

Eventually it roils and burns in their ids like an acid. And they want revenge. And that's why the Palestinians, and the Syrians and Lebanese are menaced day and night.

That's why the Russians and Ukrainians and Estonians and Poles, and so many others

suffered to monstrously under the cruel Jewish, Bolshevik yoke.

It has nothing to do with fear over a re-ascendant Russia. Hardly. That's laughable.

Rather, the reason they can't abide Russians going to church and thriving and prospering, is because it means the Russians have become happy again, and that drives them absolutely bonkers with murderous, Talmudic rage.

Them Guys , June 14, 2018 at 6:23 pm GMT
@Parbes

Good description of them. Basically I see all their anti Russian crap, as a revenge minded attitude so often seen from jews. They tried to overtake the largest nation, of mainly Whites and Christians, at least once prior to 1917 jewish revolt against Russia. That was I believe in 1905, it ended when the $$$ ended. But with another better funded, by usa and german fellow jew banksters, attempt in 1917.

Those Bolshevik jews took over Russia first, then every eastern nation which also was mainly a White and Christian peoples nation's. They did so basically by mass Murdering aprox 1/2 of orig populations in those nations. And now 100 years later, after Russian soviet commies has crashed, and a huge return to prior Christian ways etc, is going gangbusters Due to Bolsheviks and jews for the most part getting that Big Boot Out jews are so famous for.

So now here in America we have inherited most of those Children and especially Grand Kid jew commies of the Orig 100 years ago Russian Bolshevik butchers, torturers, and mass murderous bastards. And besides infiltrated into All what matters in usa society and govnt and culture, they also have as a "side agenda" of sorts a massive huge Lusting for typical jewish blood thirsty revenge upon Russia and its Christian Whites,and of course its leader Putin. Those jews had Russia in palm of hand, then totally Lost it. They began with around 8.5 to maybe 10-million jews in Russia/Poland soviet and today have around less than 27o,ooo total jews within Russia iirc.

Likely it was Putin more than all other issues or reasons those, mostly jewish swindlers, finally were also Booted Out and their scammed assets from their Raping of Russia resources etc Taken away from them Being such mamon/money worshipers they are also so famous for, no other thing would so piss them scamming jews off eh.

I also believe that after the jewish 1917 revolt in Russia, when top control jews there with plans to use control of Russia as largest nation on earth, to gain their foamed at mouth lust of a JWO control made reality. That it finally dawned on them that in order to Rule as a JWO one world govnt of jewry Vs all gentile others, they could never do so without a huge Navy like usa has.

You must have Navy ships to Carry Jet fighter planes To distant areas you wish to rule over, because most other nations wont simply agree to being jew-ruled with a JWO clan of fanatical jewry. Ergo you need also Ocean Waters, warm waters to Park said ships and navigate those waters to get to those other reluctant nations. Russia failed for such scheme plans for jewry.

So since so many of the tribe were in usa already .Just join fellow tribe in usa, and turn America and its military etc into a huge Tool of international jewry so to complete jwo plans that Russia didn't fulfill.

And both the agenda of jewish revenge, as well as their desired jwo plans probably play an equal part within those evil nasty minds that they are also so famous for having.

Dan Hayes , June 14, 2018 at 6:45 pm GMT
@anon

anon[228]:

In response to your query, the difference between the US and Russia is that in geopolitics the latter has performed well above the cards it has been dealt with.

John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan , June 14, 2018 at 6:48 pm GMT
@Cleburne

And where, dear sir, can we find any "religious fervor" in the likes of that beau ideal of the Southern antebellum statesman, John C. Calhoun? Calhoun began life as a Calvinist (a Presbyterian) and ended it as a kind of Unitarian. This is almost the exact trajectory as the religious life of the Boston Yankee culture. The Old Nullificator was backcountry Scotch-Irish – as opposed to WASP – but Unitarian crap is Unitarian crap no matter where it exists.

Calhoun was, of course, a giant among those of the 1830s and '40s who pushed the South from the 18th century American conception of slavery – as something that should be contained until its eventual death – to a new conception that exclaimed, vigorously, that slavery was a legitimate part of the American way of life. No, no. I cannot abide this poison. If you all want to condemn Hamilton and Sumner and all, go ahead. I'll agree. But when Lincoln – that flawed man – saw the original sin of the American republic as the protection of slavery, he was right. And he was neither fanatical nor alone in his view. To this day, we tend to conflate Lincoln and the anti-slavery bloc with the radical Republican abolitionist bloc. This is unfair.

General Meade, the victor of Gettysburg, was condemned by the radical Republicans in Congress because of their hatred for Lincoln. Some unity there.

The Anti-Federalist Marylander Luther Martin was right to criticize the powerful framers for allowing the slavery problem to go on, for enshrining it in the Constitution. Too many antebellum Southern elites decided that the likes of Martin were wrong.

You will find few "Northerners" more amenable to the South than me. I live only a few miles north of the Mason-Dixon. I count Confederate soldiers among my kin. One was even born in Pennsylvania, and fought in his own hometown during Lee's invasion.

But no one forced the state of South Carolina to fire at Fort Sumter. No one in the North forced the Southern elites to accept a conception of black slavery as a "positive good" (i.e. James Henry Hammond). The idea of a "War of Northern Aggression" is convenient and cute, but I live near Chambersburg, Pennsylvania. You may not have heard of its burning, but I have. And it attests to the truth, which is that if the South had the numbers the North had, then it would have done what you all so hate Sherman and Custer for doing in Georgia and the Shenandoah: burn, burn, burn. Perhaps there were just as many hell-fire and brimstone types in the South as there were in Boston.

P.S. Judah Benjamin. Apparently those Southern "Anglo-Saxons" (As General Lee described himself) weren't so uncomfortable with the Jewish folks.

AnonFromTN , June 14, 2018 at 6:51 pm GMT
There is a lot of truth in this piece, but I think that the overall spin is misleading. Putin's orthodox faith (likely pretended; he seems to be too intelligent for a true believer), history of Jewish persecution in Russia, etc., are secondary factors. The US elites (neocons are just one type of servants they hired) are mad that the world refuses to be unipolar. Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, and many lesser countries, arouse "righteous indignation" of the robbers because they refuse to let themselves be looted and bossed by the US elites. All sorts of thieves joined the choir: Jewish and gentile, "right" and "left", military and civilian, the only common denominator being that they stole a lot and resent being thwarted from stealing even more. Moreover, the almighty dollar is about to be exposed as a king with no clothes by various countries switching the trade to their own currencies, undermining the Ponzi schemes of the US dollar and US government debt. The hysterical US foreign policy in the last 10-15 years, with its mindless suicidal aggressiveness, is in fact death throes of an Empire that resents going down the drain, like all dominant Empires before it, but cannot do anything about inevitable course of history.
John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan , June 14, 2018 at 6:59 pm GMT
@Cleburne

P.S. Check this out for an opinion you may find controversial – but note the person posting his opinion is relying on primary sources: https://civilwartalk.com/threads/the-non-celtic-confederacy.120973/

Them Guys , June 14, 2018 at 7:07 pm GMT
@Wally

Wally, by keeping Americans always focused on Hitler and Nazis and SS storm troops, they will not have time, nor ever find out what the Real True 20th century crimes against humanity were. When starting in 1917 JEWS that invented communism, and Used it as main means to mass murder almost 1/2 of eastern euro nations and Russia itself Those crimes and mass killings jewry should get blame for makes whatever bads or evils done by Hitler and Nazis Pale in comparison, and makes german Nazis look like small kindergarten kiddies at play in back yard sand box with wooden swords.

Thanks to internet over past 15 years, many usa folks are waking up and getting very jewized up.

Which we know is main reason such massive attempts at internet censorship has been occurring. And is happening at a furious pace like no other agenda we have seen in our lives. Plus the EU and Canada nations non stop Prison terms for truth tellers of any jew issues. Soon to arrive here in usa with 99.9% of us senate and congress full approval votes when pressed by AIPAC and 599 Other jewish usa orgs.

We can toss out our sun glasses as our American future does Not look bright at all. Unless we see soon a massive wake up call and enough armed citizens willing to take back America. That too looks very dim so far.

SunBakedSuburb , June 14, 2018 at 7:47 pm GMT
I think Jake should say WASP elites rather than just WASP. The majority of the US Anglo-Saxon stock are working class and middle class who, along with the Catholic Irish, German, and Italian, have made this country what it is; and in their demographic decline we see the decline of the United States. The problem here and abroad are elites. Elites of any kind.
jack daniels , June 14, 2018 at 7:48 pm GMT
@Anon

In every political question we should remember to look past grandiose abstractions and see the operative gut loyalties, both our own and those of the competing sides. What is going on with Russia is simply Jewish mania to prevent Russia from being Russian and keep it under Jewish or surrogate rule. Similarly, NATO and the EU are now just enforcers of political correctness. The Slavs and other illiberal peoples of central and eastern Europe are to be re-subjugated now that Communism is not there to persecute the priests and re-educate the sexists. The author, in citing ancient persecutions of Jews to excuse the machinations of current Jews, attempts to meet his critic half-way. Some day perhaps we will be able to state the truth without the dance of apology.
Here is an analogy: Suppose in the 90s we thought it critical to weigh in on the Northern Irish Question. Suppose we had a Department of Irish Affairs to formulate US policy, and it was staffed by Clancy, Reilly, Finnegan, O'Toole and O'Meara. Would anyone hesitate to raise the issue of objectivity? Or suppose our middle-eastern team consisted of 5 guys named Muhammad. Do you think there might be questions?

Rurik , June 14, 2018 at 7:51 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

The US elites (neocons are just one type of servants they hired)

ah, so it was Dubya all along!

what a clever little schemer he was! Pretending all that time to be dumb as a rock, and a tool of organized Zionism, while he was using the neocons to his own advantage!

So while ((Wolfowitz and Feith and Pearl and Kristol)) were being schooled at the feet of ((Leo Strauss)), it was Dubya the college cheerleader all along who was the mastermind behind the Project for a New American Century and 9/11 !

sure, Goldman Sachs and Hollywood get federal subsidies, but it's the (dying) American middle class that has been exploiting the world's poor!

The hysterical US foreign policy in the last 10-15 years, with its mindless suicidal aggressiveness, is in fact death throes of an Empire that resents going down the drain,

what's been going down the drain has been the blood and tears and future of working class Americans, forced to suit up their children to go slaughter innocent Arabs and others in a transparent and treasonous policy intended to bolster Israel – at the direct and catastrophic expense of America and the American people.

I wonder, as the American people are taxed to the tune of billions every year, to send to Israel as tribute, is that also a case of US elites using Israel to their own devices? As Americas roads and bridges crumble, and veterans are denied care?

Or, is it just possible, that the ((owners)) of the Federal Reserve Bank, have used that printing press as a weapon to consolidate absolute power over the institutions of the ZUSA?

Do you suppose that when France bombs Libya or menaces Syria, that they're doing it to benefit the French elite? And that Israel is their dupe, who give them a pretext for doing so? Or that the French (and British and Polish and Ukrainian, etc..) elite are getting their marching orders from Jewish supremacist Zionists who're hell bent on using Gentile Christians to slaughter Gentile Muslims while they laugh and count the shekels? Eh?

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

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

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

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

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

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

redmudhooch , June 14, 2018 at 7:56 pm GMT
War on the poor and defenseless, it what the Neocon and Zionist-puppet traitors do best. Terrorists in Syria (white helmets) getting 7 million in new funding from Trump, just as Russia warns of new chemical attack false flag is in the works. Must kill evil dicktater Assad for protecting those Christians inside Syria

Russia Warns "Credible Information" Of Impending Staged Chemical Attack In Syria

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-06-14/russia-warns-credible-information-impending-staged-chemical-attack-syria

White House Tied to Terrorists, Trump Authorizes $6.6M in Aid to White Helmets

https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/06/14/white-house-tied-to-terrorists-trump-authorizes-6-6m-in-aid-to-white-helmets/

Starvation Holocaust in Yemen.

Yemen – The Starvation Siege Has Begun

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/06/the-starvation-siege-on-yemen-has-begun.html#more

By the time the American people realize that the war on terror was designed for them to be the final victim, it will be too late.

Anon [698] Disclaimer , June 14, 2018 at 8:19 pm GMT
@Rurik

Hell of a lot of projection in this comment

Cleburne , June 14, 2018 at 8:44 pm GMT
@John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

Thanks for your eloquent response. A few thoughts:

1. I wouldn't extend Calhoun's religion, ot the lack thereof, to the "common soldier" of the Confederacy. You might take a look at Fehrenbach's "Lone Star" history of Texas; he understands the "puritanism" of the South.

2.

But when Lincoln – that flawed man – saw the original sin of the American republic as the protection of slavery, he was right.

–> sorry, I don't think "original sin" is attributable to nations. History is a bloodbath, and always will be, and the whole notion that slavery is some sort of "sin" demanding atonement is quite ridiculous. That's the sort of gnosticism practiced by the Bostonians that played sure a huge part in causing the War of Nort.. er. War for Southern Independence. Far as antebellum slavery itself, might I recommend the work of Genovese and Fogelberg on the character of American slavery? A review of how exactly the victorious Yankees and their Republican bosses provided for the liberated slaves after Appomattox is enlightening.

3.

But no one forced the state of South Carolina to fire at Fort Sumter.

Saint Abe himself admitted he connived South Carolina into opening fire.

4.

I live near Chambersburg, Pennsylvania. You may not have heard of its burning, but I have.

So we have that in common!

5.

nd it attests to the truth, which is that if the South had the numbers the North had, then it would have done what you all so hate Sherman and Custer for doing in Georgia and the Shenandoah: burn, burn, burn. Perhaps there were just as many hell-fire and brimstone types in the South as there were in Boston.

This is speculation on your part, so hardly the truth. Stonewall Jackson, of course, would have been happy to bring fire and sword to the North. Probably Edward Ruffin, too. But at the same time, the South was primarily acting a defensive capacity during the war, not as a force of invasion.

5.a: "

Perhaps there were just as many hell-fire and brimstone types in the South as there were in Boston."

hellfire and brimstone in what sense?

6,

P.S. Judah Benjamin. Apparently those Southern "Anglo-Saxons" (As General Lee described himself) weren't so uncomfortable with the Jewish folks.

-- yes, AND? What's your point? what's this to do with anything? When the Confederate memorial in Beaumont, Texas was dedicated around the turn of the last century, the local rabbi gave opening remarks. Different creeds tended to get along somewhat better in Dixie. That's a well known fact.

7.

You will find few "Northerners" more amenable to the South than me. I live only a few miles north of the Mason-Dixon. I count Confederate soldiers among my kin.

I appreciate that, sincerely.

Cleburne , June 14, 2018 at 8:49 pm GMT
@John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

P.S. Check this out for an opinion you may find controversial – but note the person posting his opinion is relying on primary sources: https://civilwartalk.com/threads/the-non-celtic-confederacy.120973/

Why would I find that controversial? Are you suggesting I was arguing for a "celtic south"? I always thought the notion ridiculous. I know Grady McWhiney and others push it, but it's inaccurate to say the least.

Seamus Padraig , June 14, 2018 at 9:02 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

Khordokovsky's father was Jewish: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Khodorkovsky#Early_years_and_entrepreneurship_in_Soviet_Union

AnonFromTN , June 14, 2018 at 9:03 pm GMT
@Rurik

Elites are robbing Americans and foreigners alike. In fact, the US population gets some crumbs off elites' table, and enjoys higher living standards than it would have in fair global competition.
The overall educational level and the level of awareness of what's going on in the world in the US is dismal. Elites arranged that by maintaining pathetic education system and spreading lies via MSM; ignorant sheep are more likely to obey, and to approve of persecution of those "black sheep" who are less ignorant and don't buy the lies of the MSM. Did we see any protests against "Patriot Act" that trampled the very foundations of our Constitution? Sheep don't protest, they just follow the leader.

However, we have to remember that clueless ignoramus in the US gets 5-10 times more than similarly clueless ignoramus in China or India. Bush junior was genuinely dumb, but would he become US President without his family's ill-gotten riches, or without his ex-CIA chief daddy becoming the President first? Of course not, most morons in the US never fly that high. The only reason for his "success" is the fact that he was born into an elite family.

As far as Jews are concerned, this appears to be yet another red herring, like Russia-bashing. Are gentile Koch brothers or Walton family any better than the worst Jews in the US? They are just as selfish, greedy, and repulsive as George Soros or Sheldon Adelson.

See comment 51:

The problem here and abroad are elites. Elites of any kind.

[Jun 14, 2018] Abuse of sanctions

Jun 14, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

As I pointed out in my last comment on the previous Korea thread, only the UNSC sanctions are legal--Outlaw US Empire sanctions have no legal force outside its borders and can be freely ignored. It's entirely possible Russia will use its position as UNSC President this month to introduce a resolution canceling or greatly scaling back UNSC sanctions.

That almost the entire Imperial Establishment has given the Finger to the entire affair isn't being ignored by the rest of the world, the EU in particular.

Although short, the Global Times link I provided has useful information as does the Black Agenda Report item I linked to in my comment previous to my last on that thread.

I very much approve of b's linking what was just accomplished with the NPT and hope other writers pick it up and help further broadcast his very important point.

As for 100% denuclearization of Korea, lots of nuclear power plants will need to be replaced and decommissioned, and that will likely take several decades to attain.

One can hope that an historical movement's begun to finally decolonize those nations occupied by the Outlaw US Empire upon WW2's end. Admittedly, the Asian nations will find such a process much easier than those in Europe. I doubt I'll live to see it, but somehow I can't find any reason for Germany to continue being occupied in 2045, a full century after the end of WW2. But if Germany is to become free, it cannot afford any more Merkels.

Posted by: karlof1 | Jun 14, 2018 3:28:49 PM | 4

[Jun 14, 2018] Problem with US and British MSM control of narrative

Highly recommended!
Jun 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

PROBLEMS WITH THE NARRATIVE. No conclusive evidence to blame Russia for MH17 says Malaysia Transport Minister ; no evidence that Russia poisoned Skripals says German int source. What does Malaysia know? It's been kept out of the inquiry . As to the Skripals, well the G(7-1) says " no plausible alternative explanation ". (Once you've dug the hole, I guess you have to plausibly live in it.)

[Jun 13, 2018] The Roots of Argentina's Surprise Crisis

The root is neoliberal government that came to power in 2015
Notable quotes:
"... Why is any of this still "surprising" ..."
"... Economist Ha Joon Chang popularized the term "ladder kicking" to describe the way in which most developed countries used tariffs and trade restrictions to ascent to the top but are all for "free trade" now. ..."
"... Once again, so long as "Original Sin" is a reality, there is little hope. Keynes' BANCOR was the idea to begin to fix this, but short of some other global currency initiative, we're left to the International Finance Vultures as the primary arbiters of what's possible. ..."
Jun 13, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Synoia , June 13, 2018 at 10:25 am

Early measures included the removal of exchange-rate and capital controls

How does a county manage what it does not control?

ChrisAtRU , June 13, 2018 at 1:28 pm

Exactly see Trilemma .

Scott1 , June 13, 2018 at 6:34 pm

Thanks for the link. I will be spending some time thinking of what Argentina would best employ as best practices from where it is.
Would they be best off if they stopped issuing such high paying bonds? Should they pay them all off and stop with it. It does appear to me that issuing bond after bond is one of the single most dangerous things you can do.
It would appear to me to be a superior practice to sell what you produce for the best price you can get on the open markets and dictate the value of your currency.
I'll have to do some more study here.
Again, thanks for the link.

Lorenzo , June 13, 2018 at 6:31 pm

You're uttering the discourse of the most recalcitrant neo-liberal cum austerity-fundamentalists around.

The US doesn't tax soybean exports. Argentina needs to maximize its exports to earn foreign exchange.'

it's misleading to say the least to draw a comparison between how the US handles soybean exports and Argentina does it. They're around a quarter of the latter's exports, barely a hundredth of the latter's.

The US will never have forex issues, Argentina does have them, and they are very serious. You make it as if simply exporting commodities will fill the country's economy with USD, while in truth those dollars will be neatly parked in tax heavens. Eliminating tax and controls over Argentina's biggest exports -agricultural commodities- is in practice as if these commodities were produced not in this country but in some foreign territory over which only the very few who hold most of the land are sovereign. Which is what the current administration has been doing for the past two years.

You also make it as if the current situation where the value of the peso is given over completely to whatever short-term speculators feel like doing with it whenever LEBACs are due is more desirable than the capital controls imposed by the previous government. These prevented the hurtful rapid rise we're seeing in the exchange rate and reduced the negative consequences of the fiscal deficit thus allowing significant investment in and expansion of the real economy.

Addressing the fiscal deficit through increased value added and income tax is something that clearly benefits the owner over the working class and depresses private consumption. I can only sarcastically wonder who would want such a thing.

I don't feel the need or the duty to defend the previous government, but victimization of the Sociedad Rural is something I just lack the words to condemn strongly enough

ChrisAtRU , June 13, 2018 at 9:15 pm

NP. You're welcome. See my comment below. Unfortunately, the only way to win this game is not to play (by the vulture established rules).

Mickey Hickey , June 13, 2018 at 4:24 pm

Argentina is probably the most self sufficient country on earth. It has everything, fertile land that produces an abundance of wheat, barley, oats, rye, wine grapes. As well as oil, gas. uranium, silver, gold, lead, copper, zinc. Foreigners are well aware of the wealth in Argentina and are more than willing to lend to Argentinian governments and companies. This is why Cristina Kirchner refused to give in to the US vulture funds as it dissuaded foreigners from believing that reckless lending would always be rewarded. Macri ponied up, restarting the old familiar economic doom cycle. As always its the old dog for the long road and the pup for the puddle. Macri is now in a place that he chose, the puddle. As long as foreig lenders remain reckless Argentina will remain mired in the mud, well short of its potential. I was last there in 2008 when the country was booming. When I heard of Macri's plan to pay the vulture funds I knew they were headed for disaster. This is just the beginning.

JTMcPhee , June 13, 2018 at 5:39 pm

Those "foreign lenders" can't be called "reckless." Some, maybe most among them always seem to profit from the looting, whether by "bailouts" or "backstops" from governments like the US that for "geopolitical reasons" facilitate that lending, or by extortion after the first-round lenders (who know the risks, of course -- they are big boys and girls after all) have been forestalled.

Call them "wreckers," maybe. Like early denizens of the Florida Keys, and other places, who set fires or put up lamps that resembled lighthouses to lure passing ships onto the sands and rocks where their cargoes and the valuables of their drowned passengers and crews could be stripped.

Wayne Harris , June 13, 2018 at 4:54 pm

"so-called vulture funds"?

ChrisAtRU , June 13, 2018 at 8:33 pm

"so-called" Laughable

ChrisAtRU , June 13, 2018 at 6:37 pm

Why is any of this still "surprising" to anyone?! Most countries in the world (non G7/G8) are forced to go into foreign debt in order to pursue their "development" initiatives. They are told they can export themselves out of trouble but the "free trade" (more like unfair trade!) mantra puts them at a distinct disadvantage – "unequal exchange" was the term Marx used for it.

Economist Ha Joon Chang popularized the term "ladder kicking" to describe the way in which most developed countries used tariffs and trade restrictions to ascent to the top but are all for "free trade" now.

Once again, so long as "Original Sin" is a reality, there is little hope. Keynes' BANCOR was the idea to begin to fix this, but short of some other global currency initiative, we're left to the International Finance Vultures as the primary arbiters of what's possible.

[Jun 13, 2018] Was Hitler s Invasion of Russia Defensive, to Foil an Attack by Stalin

Notable quotes:
"... Times Literary Supplement ..."
"... title Der Eisbrecher: Hitler in Stalins Kaulkul ..."
"... The Chief Culprit ..."
"... Stumbling Colossus ..."
"... Stalin's War of Annihilation ..."
Jun 13, 2018 | russia-insider.com

The reviewer was Andrei Navrozov, a Soviet emigre long resident in Britain, and he opened by quoting a passage from a previous 1990 book review, published almost exactly twenty years before:

[Suvorov] is arguing with every book, every article, every film, every NATO directive, every Downing Street assumption, every Pentagon clerk, every academic, every Communist and anti-Communist, every neoconservative intellectual, every Soviet song, poem, novel and piece of music ever heard, written, made, sung, issued, produced, or born during the last 50 years. For this reason, Icebreaker is the most original work of history it has been my privilege to read.

He himself had written that earlier book review, which ran in the prestigious Times Literary Supplement following the original English publication of Icebreaker , and his description was not overblown. The work sought to overturn the settled history of World War II.

Icebreaker 's author, writing under the pen-name Viktor Suvorov, was a veteran Soviet military intelligence officer who had defected to the West in 1978 and subsequently published a number of well-regarded books on the Soviet military and intelligence services. But here he advanced a far more radical thesis.

The "Suvorov Hypothesis" claimed that during the summer of 1941 Stalin was on the very verge of mounting a massive invasion and conquest of Europe, while Hitler's sudden attack on June 22nd of that year was intended to forestall that looming blow. Moreover, the author also argued that Stalin's planned attack constituted merely the final act in a much longer geopolitical strategy that he had been developing since at least the early 1930s.

Following the Bolshevik Revolution, the new Soviet regime had been viewed with extreme suspicion and hostility by other European countries, most of which also regarded their own domestic Communist Parties as likely fifth columns. So to fulfill Lenin's dream and carry the revolution to Germany and the rest of Europe, Stalin somehow needed to split the Europeans, and break their common line of resistance. He allegedly viewed Hitler's rise as exactly such a potential "icebreaker," an opportunity to unleash another bloody European war and exhaust all sides, while the Soviet Union remained aloof and bided its strength, waiting for the right moment to sweep in and conquer the entire continent.

To this end, Stalin had directed his powerful German Communist Party to take political actions ensuring that Hitler came to power and then later lured the German dictator into signing the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact to divide Poland. This led Britain and France to declare war on Germany, while also eliminating the Polish buffer state, thereby placing Soviet armies directly on the German border. And from the very moment he signed that long-term peace agreement with Hitler, he abandoned all his defensive preparations, and instead embarked upon an enormous military build-up of the purely offensive forces he intended to use for European conquest. Thus according to Suvorov, Stalin ranks as "the chief culprit" behind the outbreak of World War II in Europe, and the updated English edition of his book bears that exact title.

To my great surprise I discovered that Suvorov's remarkable theories had gained enormous worldwide prominence since 1990, and had been widely discussed almost everywhere except in America and the other English-speaking countries. As Navrozov explained:

[The English edition of the] book sold 800 copies.

Some months later, a German edition of the book, under the title Der Eisbrecher: Hitler in Stalins Kaulkul , was published in Germany by a smallish house, Klett-Cotta, to timid and gingerly reviews. It sold 8,000 copies. In 1992, Suvorov's manuscript was delivered to a maverick publisher in Moscow, and at last the book saw the light of day in the original Russian, quickly selling out its first print run of 100,000 copies. In the years that followed, over five million copies have been sold, making Suvorov the most-read military historian in history.

And yet, in the nearly 20 years that have elapsed between Icebreaker 's launch in England and the present publication of The Chief Culprit , no British, American, Canadian, or Australian publisher saw fit to exploit potentially global interest in the drifting Icebreaker -- or to so much as touch Suvorov with a barge pole -- despite the fact that the almost unobtainable $20 copies of the long-out-of print Hamish Hamilton edition have been changing hands on the internet for upward of $500.

Since 1990, Suvorov's works have been translated into at least 18 languages and an international storm of scholarly controversy has swirled around the Suvorov Hypothesis in Russia, Germany, Israel, and elsewhere. Numerous other authors have published books in support or more often strong opposition, and even international academic conferences have been held to debate the theory. But our own English-language media has almost entirely blacklisted and ignored this ongoing international debate, to such an extent that the name of the most widely-read military historian who ever lived had remained totally unknown to me.

Finally in 2008, the prestigious Naval Academy Press of Annapolis decided to break this 18 year intellectual embargo and published an updated English edition of Suvorov's work. But once again, our media outlets almost entirely averted their eyes, and only a single review appeared in an obscure ideological publication, where I chanced to encounter it. This conclusively demonstrates that throughout most of the twentieth century a united front of English-language publishers and media organs could easily maintain a boycott of any important topic, ensuring that almost no one in America or the rest of the Anglosphere would ever hear of it. Only with the recent rise of the Internet has this disheartening situation begun to change.

Determining Stalin's true motives and the basis of his foreign policy during the 1930s is hardly easy, and his statements and actions are subject to multiple interpretations. Therefore, the theory that the dictator spent all those years deftly preparing the outbreak of World War II appears quite speculative to me. But the other central claim of the Suvorov Hypothesis -- that the Soviets were themselves on the verge of attacking when the Germans struck -- is an extremely factual question, which can be evaluated based on hard evidence. I find the case quite compelling, at least if the facts and details that Suvorov cites in support are not totally spurious, which seems unlikely with the Naval Academy Press as his publisher.

The Eastern Front was the decisive theater of World War II, involving military forces vastly larger than those deployed in the West or the Pacific, and the standard narrative always emphasizes the ineptitude and weakness of the Soviets. On June 22, 1941, Hitler launched Operation Barbarossa, a sudden, massive surprise attack on the USSR, which caught the Red Army completely unaware. Stalin has been regularly ridiculed for his total lack of preparedness, with Hitler often described as the only man the paranoid dictator had ever fully trusted. Although the defending Soviet forces were enormous in size, they were poorly led, with their officer corps still not recovered from the crippling purges of the late 1930s, and their obsolete equipment and poor tactics were absolutely no match for the modern panzer divisions of Germany's hitherto undefeated Wehrmacht . The Russians initially suffered gigantic losses, and only the onset of winter and the vast spaces of their territory saved them from a quick defeat. After this, the war seesawed back-and-forth for four more years, until superior numbers and improved tactics finally carried the Soviets to the streets of a destroyed Berlin in 1945.

Such is the traditional understanding of the titanic Russo-German struggle that we see endlessly echoed in every newspaper, book, television documentary, and film around us. But even a cursory examination of the initial situation has always revealed strange anomalies.

Many years ago, while in Junior High, I became an avid war-gamer with a strong interest in military history, and the Eastern Front of World War II was certainly a very popular topic. But every reconstruction of Operation Barbarossa always noted that the Germans owed much of their great initial success to the very odd deployment of the huge Soviet forces, which were all massed along the border in vulnerable formations almost as if preparing for an attack, and some writers casually suggested that this might have indeed been the case. But the sheer volume of supporting evidence amassed by Suvorov goes far beyond this sort of idle speculation, and he produces a historical picture radically different than what our standard accounts have always implied.

First, although there was been a widespread belief in the superiority of Germany's military technology, its tanks and its planes, this is almost entirely mythological. In actual fact, Soviet tanks were far superior in main armament, armor, and maneuverability to their German counterparts, so much so that the overwhelming majority of panzers were almost obsolescent by comparison. And the Soviet superiority in numbers was even more extreme, with Stalin deploying several times more tanks than the combined total of those held by Germany and every other nation in the world: 27,000 against just 4,000 in Hitler's forces. Even during peacetime, a single Soviet factory in Kharkov produced more tanks in every six month period than the entire Third Reich had built prior to 1940. The Soviets held a similar superiority, though somewhat less extreme, in their ground-attack bombers. The totally closed nature of the USSR meant that vast military forces remained entirely hidden from outside observers.

There is also little evidence that the quality of Soviet officers or military doctrine fell short. Indeed, we often forget that history's first successful example of a "blitzkrieg" in modern warfare was the crushing August 1939 defeat that Stalin inflicted upon the Japanese 6th Army in Outer Mongolia, relying upon a massive surprise attack of tanks, bombers, and mobile infantry. And Stalin apparently thought so highly of many of his top military strategists in 1941, that despite his huge initial losses, many of them remained in command and were eventually promoted to the highest ranks of the Soviet military establishment by the end of the war.

Certainly, many aspects of the Soviet military machine were primitive, but exactly the same was true of their Nazi opponents. Perhaps the most surprising detail about the technology of the invading Wehrmacht in 1941 was that its transportation system was still almost entirely pre-modern, relying upon wagons and carts drawn by 750,000 horses to maintain the vital flow of ammunition and replacements to its advancing armies.

Meanwhile, major categories of Soviet weapons systems seem almost impossible to explain except as important elements of Stalin's offensive plans. Although the bulk of the Soviet armored forces were medium tanks like the T-28 and T-34, generally far superior to their German counterparts, the USSR had also pioneered the development of several lines of highly specialized tanks, most of which had no counterpart elsewhere in the world.

(*) The Soviets had produced a remarkable line of light BT tanks, easily able to shed their tracks and continue on wheels, achieving a top speed of 60 miles per hour, two or three times faster than any other comparable armored vehicle, and ideally suited to exploitation drives deep into enemy territory. However, such wheeled operation was only effective on paved highways, of which Soviet territory had none, hence were ideally suited for travel on Germany's large network of autobahns . In 1941 Stalin deployed almost 6,500 of these autobahn -oriented tanks, more than the rest of the world's tanks combined.

(*) For centuries, Continental conquerors from Napoleon to Hitler had been stymied by the barrier of the English Channel, but Stalin was far better prepared. Although Stalin's vast USSR was entirely a land-power, he pioneered the world's only series of fully amphibious light tanks, able to successfully cross large rivers, lakes, and even that notoriously wide moat last successfully traversed by William the Conqueror in 1066. By 1941, the Soviets deployed 4,000 of these amphibious tanks, far more than 3,350 German tanks of all types used in the attack. But being useless in defense, they were all ordered abandoned or destroyed.

(*) The Soviets also fielded many thousands of heavy tanks, intended to engage and defeat enemy armor, while the Germans had none at all. In direct combat, a Soviet KV-1 or KV-2 could easily destroy four or five of the best German tanks, while remaining almost invulnerable to enemy shells. Suvorov recounts the example of a KV which took 43 direct hits before finally becoming incapacitated, surrounded by the hulks of the ten German tanks it had first managed to destroy.

Other evidence of the scale and intent of Stalin's armies in the summer of 1941 are equally telling:

(*) During the early years of World War II, the Germans effectively utilized paratroops and air-mobile forces to seize key enemy targets far behind the front lines during a major offensive, and this was an important component of their victories against France in 1940 and Greece in 1941. Such units are necessarily lightly armed and no match for regular infantry in a defensive battle; hence their only role is an offensive one. Germany entered the war with 4,000 paratroops, a far larger force than anything found in Britain, France, America, Italy, or Japan. However, the Soviets had at least 1,000,000 trained paratroopers, and Suvorov believes that the true total was actually closer to 2,000,000.

(*) Sometimes the production decisions of major weapon systems provide strong hints of the broader strategy behind their development. The most widely produced military aircraft in history was the heavily armored IL-2, a powerful Soviet ground-attack bomber that was originally designed as a two-man system, with the rear gunner able to effectively defend the plane against enemy fighters during its missions. However, Stalin personally ordered the design changed to eliminate the second man and defensive armament, which left the bomber extremely vulnerable to enemy aircraft once the war broke out. Stalin and his war-planners had seemingly banked on possessing near-total air supremacy during the entire course of any conflict, an assumption plausible only if the German luftwaffe were destroyed on the ground by a surprise attack on the very first day.

(*) There is considerable evidence that in the weeks prior to the German surprise attack, Stalin had ordered the release of many hundreds of thousands of Gulag prisoners, who were issued basic weapons and organized into NKVD-led divisions and corps, constituting a substantial part of the Second Strategic Echelon located hundreds of miles from the German border. These units may have been intended to serve as occupation troops, allowing the much more powerful front-line forces to press onward and complete the conquests of France, Italy, the Balkans, and Spain. Otherwise, I can find no other plausible explanation for Stalin's action.

(*) The planned invasion and occupation of a large country whose population speaks a different language requires considerable logistical preparation. As an example, prior to their attack the notoriously methodical Germans printed and distributed to their troops large numbers of German-Russian basic phrasebooks, allowing effective communication with the local Slavic villagers and townsmen. Ironically enough, at around the same time, the USSR seems to have produced very similar Russian-German phrasebooks, allowing conquering Soviet troops to easily make themselves understood to German civilians. Many millions of these phrasebooks had been distributed to Soviet forces on the German border during the early months of 1941.

Suvorov's reconstruction of the weeks directly preceding the outbreak of combat is a fascinating one, emphasizing the mirror-image actions taken by both the Soviet and German armies. Each side moved its best striking units, airfields, and ammunition dumps close to the border, ideal for an attack but very vulnerable in defense. Each side carefully deactivated any residual minefields and ripped out any barbed wire obstacles, lest these hinder the forthcoming attack. Each side did its best to camouflage their preparations, talking loudly about peace while preparing for imminent war. The Soviet deployment had begun much earlier, but since their forces were so much larger and had far greater distances to cross, they were not yet quite ready for their attack when the Germans struck, and thereby shattered Stalin's planned conquest of Europe.

All of the above examples of Soviet weapons systems or strategic decisions seem very difficult to explain under the conventional defensive narrative, but make perfect sense if Stalin's orientation from 1939 onward had always been an offensive one, and he had decided that summer 1941 was the time to strike and enlarge his Soviet Union to include all the European states, just as Lenin had originally intended. And Suvorov provides many dozens of additional examples, building brick by brick a very compelling case for this theory.

The book is not overly long, running perhaps 150,000 words, and $20 plus a few mouse clicks on Amazon will provide you a copy to read and judge for yourself. But for those who desire a simple summary, Suvorov's 2009 lecture at the Eurasia Forum of the Annapolis Naval Academy is conveniently available on YouTube, though slightly hindered by his weak English:

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

And also his C-SPAN Book TV lectures at the Woodrow Wilson Center:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Nj9Geqf3LB8

Controversial theories, even if backed by seemingly strong evidence, can hardly be properly evaluated until they have been weighed against the counter-arguments of their strongest critics, and this should certainly be the case with the Suvorov Hypothesis. But although the last three decades have seen the development of a large secondary literature, much of it sharply critical, nearly all this international debate has taken place in Russian, German, or Hebrew, languages that I do not read.

There are some exceptions. Several years ago, I came across a website debate on the topic, and one strong critic claimed that Suvorov's theories had been totally debunked by American military historian David M. Glantz in Stumbling Colossus , published in 1998. But when I ordered and read the book I was sorely disappointed. Although purporting to refute Suvorov, the author seemed to ignore almost all of his central arguments, and merely provided a rather dull and pedantic recapitulation of the standard narrative I had previously seen hundreds of times, laced with a few rhetorical excesses denouncing the unique vileness of the Nazi regime. Most ironically, Glantz emphasizes that although Suvorov's analysis of the titanic Russo-German military struggle had gained great attention and considerable support among both Russian and German scholars, it had been generally ignored in the Anglo-American world, and he almost seems to imply that it can probably be disregarded for that reason. Perhaps this attitude reflected the cultural arrogance of many American intellectual elites during Russia's disastrous Yeltsin Era of the late 1990s.

A far superior book, generally supportive of Suvorov's framework, was Stalin's War of Annihilation , by prize-winning German military historian Joachim Hoffmann, originally commissioned by the German Armed Forces and published in 1995 with an English revised edition appearing in 2001. The cover carries a notice that the text was cleared by German government censors, and the author's introduction recounts the repeated threats of prosecution he endured from elected officials and the other legal obstacles he faced, while elsewhere he directly addresses himself to the unseen government authorities who he knows are reading over his shoulder. When stepping too far outside the bounds of accepted history carries the serious risk that a book's entire print-run will be burned and the author imprisoned, a reader must necessarily be cautious at evaluating the text since important sections have been skewed or preemptively excised in the interests of self-preservation. Evaluating scholarly debates on historical issues becomes difficult when one sides faces incarceration if their arguments are too bold.

Can we say whether Suvorov is right? Since our information gatekeepers of the English-language world have spent the last three decades closing their eyes and pretending that the Suvorov Hypothesis does not exist, the near-complete absence of any substantial reviews or critiques makes it very difficult for me to come to any definite conclusion. But based on the available evidence, I believe it is far more likely than not that Suvorov's theories are at least substantially correct. And if so, our current understanding of World War II -- the central formative event of our modern world -- is entirely transformed.

Suvorov notes that treaties or pacts are traditionally named for the city in which they are signed -- the Warsaw Pact, the Baghdad Pact, the Munich Agreement -- and thus the so-called "Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact" signed in August 23, 1939 by which Hitler and Stalin agreed to the division of Poland should more properly be called "the Moscow Pact." As a direct result of that agreement, Stalin gained half of Poland, the Baltic States, and various other advantages, including a direct border with Germany. Meanwhile, Hitler was punished by declarations of war from France and Britain, amid worldwide condemnation as a military aggressor. Although Germany and Russia both invaded Poland, the latter managed to avoid being dragged into any war with Poland's erstwhile allies. Thus, the primary beneficiary of the Moscow Pact was clearly Moscow.

Given the long years of trench warfare on the Western front during the First World War, almost all outside observers expected the new round of the conflict to follow a very similar static pattern, gradually exhausting all sides, and the world has shocked when Germany's innovative tactics allowed it to achieve a lightening defeat the allied armies in France during 1940. But at that point, Hitler regarded the war as essentially over, and was confident that the extremely generous peace terms he immediately offered the British would soon lead to a final settlement. As a consequence, he returned Germany to a regular peacetime economy, choosing butter over guns in order to maintain his high domestic popularity

Stalin, however, was under no such political constraints, and from the moment he had signed his long-term peace agreement with Hitler in 1939 and divided Poland, he ramped up his total-war economy to an even higher notch. Embarking upon an unprecedented military buildup, he focused his production almost entirely upon purely offensive weapons systems, while even discontinuing those armaments better suited for defense and dismantling his defensive lines of fortifications. By 1941, his production cycle was complete, and he made his plans accordingly.

And so, just as in our traditional narrative, we see that in the weeks and months leading up to Barbarossa, the most powerful offensive military force in the history of the world was quietly assembled in secret along the German-Russian border, preparing for the order that would unleash their surprise attack. The enemy's unprepared air force was to be destroyed on the ground in the first days of the battle, and enormous tank columns would begin deep penetration thrusts, surrounding and trapping the opposing forces, achieving a classic blitzkrieg victory, and ensuring the rapid occupation of vast territories. But the forces preparing this unprecedented war of conquest were Stalin's, and his military juggernaut would surely have seized all of Europe, probably soon followed by the remainder of the Eurasian landmass.

Then at almost the last moment, Hitler suddenly realized the strategic trap into which he had fallen, and ordered his heavily outnumbered and outgunned troops into a desperate surprise attack of their own on the assembling Soviets, fortuitously catching them at the very point at which their own final preparations for sudden attack had left them most vulnerable, and thereby snatching a major initial victory from the jaws of certain defeat. Huge stockpiles of Soviet ammunition and weaponry had been positioned close to the border to supply the army of invasion into Germany, and these quickly fell into German hands, providing an important addition to their own woefully inadequate resources.

The enormous and fully-militarized resources of the Soviet state, supplemented by the contributions of Britain and America, did eventually turn the tide of battle and lead to a Soviet victory, but Stalin ended up with only half of Europe rather than its entirety.

Suvorov argues that the fatal weakness of the Soviet system was its total inability to compete with non-Sovietized states in the peacetime production of civilian goods, and because such states had still survived after the war, the Soviet Union was doomed to eventual collapse.

Navrozov, the Chronicles reviewer, is a Russian Slav and therefore hardly favorable to the German dictator. But he closes his review with a remarkable statement:

Therefore, if any of us is free to write, publish, and read this today, it follows that in some not inconsequential part our gratitude for this must go to Hitler. And if someone wants to arrest me for saying what I have just said, I make no secret of where I live.

mutthead52 • 9 days ago

I always absolutely trust revisionist anti-Russian history sourced from an ex-Russian self-exile living in the UK. Absolutely. It's vogue to be anti-Russian, you see--even if it sneaks in thru the back door cloaked as conservative anti-Stalinist anti-Communism--since most gringos think still Putin is a commie, it has the same effect as the rest of the current Russkie-bashing. And validates all that NATO on the Russkie borders stuff--just Western prudence, since the stalinist Russkie mindset never really changes, and a Ramstein/Polish invasion might really just be pre-emptive wisdom and save Europe.

chris chuba mutthead52 • 9 days ago

The Russian BT70 even had secret compartments that used English instead of the Metric system that would be only be useful after their wonderful Amphibian tanks crossed the English Channel :-)

I thought it was funny. Most of the Russian army wasn't even on the frontier at the time they were invaded.

eddie chris chuba • 9 days ago

Indeed, and much of that army's elite officer corp had been liquidated due to Stalin's paranoia, forcing Russia to settle for quantity over quality. He shot himself in the foot before the war even began.

NATOcracy eddie • 8 days ago

That's a myth. Some 40,000 were arrested, most of them returned on their posts.
There is a precise data about numbers of convicted or fired, year by year.
The Red army had 1.7 million soldiers in 1938 and more than a 5 million in 1941, that's why they were lacking a good officer cadre.

VeeNarian (Yerevan) eddie • 9 days ago

Yes, and it was such a master-stroke for Stalin to have all those Nazi forces cornered at Stalingrad. Not very credible, is it?
Stalin has to be credited for not leaving Moscow in 1941 as the Nazis hordes arrived at the suburbs. That must have had a huge moral impact on the successful defence of Moscow. However, this heroic defence would not have been needed if Stalin hadn't done away with most of his Army commanders in the first place.
I couldn't believe how he had to rescue Rokkosovsky from his own GuLag to lead the successful and long counter-attack from Stalingrad to Berlin.

Haut VeeNarian (Yerevan) • 8 days ago

Stalin was a psychopathic JEW Idiota Period,!

Brian Niziol VeeNarian (Yerevan) • 6 days ago

It matters little who your generals are if the supreme leader does not listen to them. Stalin wanted his army lined up against the border. Not good. It rejects successful doctrine that has served them well over the years. Zhukov did what he could removing some but not all of his important equipment from the border under a excuse he called practice maneuvers but not enough. It was not until the summer offensive of 42 that failed with dire consequences that Stalin started to let his generals control the battlefield. Stalingrad was another failure of German intelligence. They were reporting the Russians were on their last legs west of the Volga. The real situation was much different as the Nazi horde was to find out in the Don bend. The Red Army had 10 reserve armies comprising of around 1 million men. As early as 42 the Russians were out producing the Germans in almost everything including tanks of a higher quality than the Germans could bring on the battlefield. Of course the German high command had just fired the intelligence officer who told them what was close to the real situation but even he was well short of the mark. Replaced him with someone who told them what they wanted to hear who was a complete fool totally out of his league who had in the past kissed ass to get where he was. Later he went on to become the head of intelligence for NATO where he was still a fool. Rokkosovsky was put on ice Stalin viewed him as a troublemaker but most likely had a ideal he may need him in the future. Stalin can rightfully be called a lot of things but a fool is not one of them. He outmaneuvered Churchill and got all of what he wanted at Yalta. In Moscow he played Churchill knowing he had a weakness for booze. That was a gong show with poor Winston demanding to have is chief of staff see the Red Army order of battle which Stalin refused to show him. That was a reasonable request but Stalin did not trust him so uncle Joe started prodding Churchill with statements like get in the fight it is not so bad but you have to fight. One can only imagine Churchill's reaction he was outraged but that is what Stalin wanted. So Churchill stormed out of the supper and Stalin followed him and the 2 got down to some serious talk. Churchill was assured Russia would not fall and new armies were already taking up position that was good news but I doubt Churchill completely believed him. It was then Stalin was promised a second front on 43 at the latest. Churchill lied but his feet were put to the fire for the next 3 years by Uncle Joe. This constant sparing between Stalin and Churchill was quite interesting but make no doubt Stalin got the best of him.

arras eddie • 9 days ago

Except it's not true. Play Hide

Baron arras • 8 days ago

The guy in the clip is rather disingenuous in comparing the purges in the Red Army with those in other countries, (say) the dismissals in the US were because of age, the inability of many officers to switch to modern warfare, in the USSR these purges were for purely for political reasons, the impact on the moral of the officer corps was unimaginably negative, their freedom of action was self-curtailed, everyone was scared to death of being accused of treachery, often shot.

Also, what nobody mentions is that many of the top officers (including Tuchachevsky) did train in Germany (as did many German officers in Russia) before Hitler gained power. It was this in addition to the faked documents furnished by the the Heydrich's staff via the Czechs that led to the bloodbath of the top military.

kadosh eddie • 9 days ago

Not exactly paranoia! Hitler's obsession w. ability of German farmers to feed the nation was well known, therefore his ultimate attack on USSR (esp.fields of Ukraine) was known to his General Staff, which expected such action to begin in 1938, with the help of Ukra nationalists (now glorified by Kiev, Banderists lead by Suchachev) but still afraid of Soviet Army. So Himmler (w. Hitler's approval) delegated task of decimating that Soviet Army, before the actual shooting to his most able and indeed the smartest Nazi SD general Reinhard Heydrich.

So in 1937 his dept. prepared perfect 37pages document "proving" secret cooperation of Marshall Tuchachevskij (Chief of Staff) and numerous Soviet officers w. German military, including photos, signatures, agreements etc. Subsequently such document was "discovered" by the Czechoslovak milit. inteligence. Cs president Benes conveyed promptly such "document" to Stalin - and who was shot = 3 of 5 marshals!, 14 out of 16 Armies commanders. 8 Admirals, 60 out of 67Generals, 136 of 199
commanders of Divisions, etc. altogether over 35000 officers of Soviet Army was eliminated !!

Well - Soviets had NO army commanders and some silly double Soviet agent in UK, parroted by the author of this non-sense think that Stalin was ready to "attack" Europe? How??

They didn't even have trucks to move army - thanks to L&L they've bought about 18000 US trucks from USA - oh, so much b.s. presented in one article is sad.

John Joseph Sinclair kadosh • 9 days ago

US trucks from USA - 0h, so much b.s. Read Major Jordans Diary, it will dispel any notions of b.s.

Ivan Grozny John Joseph Sinclair • 8 days ago

According to (Soviet Hero) Marshall Zhukov, the 'western' allies supplied 18.700 airplanes, 10.800 armored vehicles (which the soviets didn't like), and 9.800 cannons - respectively, 12, 10.4, and 2 % of the Soviet material, an important but not decisive contribution. In other words, the Soviets would have defeated the Nazi without the 'western contribution'.

No matter what people say - the Soviett Union fought and defeated the Nazis! The Hollywood story of the D-Day and so on, is just that - a Hollywood story!

Manimal Ivan Grozny, 8 days ago

75-80% of German forces destroyed by the Red Army. The magnitude of the battles that are difficult to fathom.

And who won the WWII? Private Ryan.

[Jun 13, 2018] We Need Great Historians Like David Irving - Our Knowledge of WW2 Is Completely Wrong by Paul Craig Roberts

Jun 11, 2018 | russia-insider.com

"The history of WW II is incorrect ... it glorifies the victors and demonizes the vanquished ... Irving's histories are far more accurate than those written by court historians ... (who) teamed up with Zionists to smear and demonize the best historian of our time."

MORE: History Revisionist History

Ron Unz is one of the best men of our time. He searches for truth and he supports others who do the same. In this article, he comes to the defense of David Irving, the best historian of the 20th century. http://www.unz.com/announcement/the-remarkable-historiography-of-david-irving/

Zionists destroyed David Irving's livelihood with slander and libel, because he made public a letter from the former chancellor of Germany, Hitler's predecessor, to Winston Churchill, a letter that Irving found in the American publisher's file of Winston Churchill's history of the war, and which the publisher prevented Churchill from publishing in his history.

Churchill's career was funded by wealthy Jews who wanted war with Germany. Why do popular films and biographies hide this shocking fact?

The former chancellor of Germany, who escaped the Nazis and lived in England, wrote to Churchill that two of Hitler's financiers were Jews who managed two of the largest banks in Germany. One was a Zionist leader. The letter exists, and there is no reason to doubt its honesty. However, for making an important historical document public, Irving was labeled by a vicious propaganda campaign an "anti-semite" and "holocaust denier."

Irving simply thought that he was being an historian.

Another Irving honesty, the one that destroyed him, was that after 10 years of research he could not find one document that provided evidence for the claim that Hitler personally conducted the holocaust or that he even knew about it. Irving did find and report documents that he made available in which Hitler issues orders prohibiting extermination of Jews. Being truthfull does not make Irving a Hitler apologist.

Irving did not say that there was no holocaust, only that things happen in governments, just as they do in police forces https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/06/07/power-unaccountable-police-leads-criminality/ about which those in charge are not informed. I know for a fact that things happened during the Reagan administration of which the president was unaware.

The history of World War II is incorrect. It is written in a way that serves the interest of those who prevailed. It glorifies the victors and demonizes the vanquished. As the old adage goes, the victors write the history. In other words, the history is self-serving, not accurate. Irving's histories are far more accurate than those written by court historians. Consequently, the court historians teamed up with Zionists to smear and demonize the best historian of our time.

The two Irving lectures that Ron Unz has located and included are worth your attention. Irving explains why history written by professors is essentailly incorrect and why correct renditions are unacceptable to publishers and the ruling class.

Wars are great producers of lies because propaganda is necessary to motivate soldiers to fight and to ensure that populations accept the associated hardships. The use of history as propaganda prevents us from learning from history. Thus, we continue to make the same mistakes.

Source: Paul Craig Roberts

CHUCKMAN • 2 days ago ,

'The use of history as propaganda prevents us from learning from history. Thus, we continue to make the same mistakes.'

Yes, indeed.

I think it important to point out that our contemporary history - that is, journalism - suffers in precisely the same way. The accumulated stories of journalism, after all, in part become the stories of history.

There are many divisions of various characteristics among human minds, and I think a legitimate one is a basic divide between those who see truth as a basic pursuit and those who see manipulation of events as a basic pursuit, avoiding any concern with truth.

I am not sure that this is widely appreciated, but I think the division does relate to other basic psychological divisions.

Many of the people in any society who seek power tend to be either narcissists or even psychopaths, and we know how much concerned with truth such minds are. Indeed, in the extreme, for such people truth is just what they say it is, what we might call the ultimate egotism.

There is no cure for such people. We will always have some of them among us. Society must defend itself from them with forms of checks and balances never considered by the largely failed political system created by America's Founding Fathers.

But that is not an easy thing to do since such individuals are often people of great superficial charm and strong drives, qualities which contribute to success in politics.

Given a leader who has a rather dark agenda, the same qualities in others will make them attractive for appointment to various powerful offices. Just look at the entire recent crop of Trump appointments. You literally could not find a more hellish bunch.

So long as a nation like the United States accepts that it is desirable to pursue world empire, all of these factors automatically come into play. Dark operations abroad require the services of the people who otherwise would be the least desirable people in the world to appoint to anything.

And so long as you have such dark projects going, you will absolutely require a great deal of lies and cover-up so that the general population does not understand what is happening. Here, automatically, the press is enlisted. It cannot be allowed to honestly investigate and tell citizens the truth. It must support the lies and deception. It would be accused of disloyalty or even treason if it failed in its unwritten obligations.

I've said it many times, but it is worth saying again, that you cannot have both a world empire and a decent society. They are completely incompatible. Just look at an abomination like Guantanamo or the CIA's gulag of black sites for torture. How can such behavior in any way be compatible with the words of the Bill of Rights? Clearly, it cannot. So, taking all of your Nazi-like impulses and just moving them offshore, so average Americans do not have to see them, is okay?

There are a thousand matters such as that which arise in the course of empire, and they all involve lies and deception and hiding. Benghazi? I know what it was, but every American politician will continue to lie. Just as they all lie about the obvious provocations in Syria – all carried out by the mercenary-fake jihadi gangs America has always supported - with faked chemical attacks as an excuse to bomb poor Syria's army yet again while self-righteously proclaiming your own ethical "principles" of war.

I think ordinary Americans do not appreciate this truth fully, and there's almost no one "out there" in the press or in the ranks of academic history and certainly not in the kind of politics America practices – a political duopoly which literally floats on big money with both parties being equal supporters of empire and its associated utter lack of ethics - to tell them otherwise.

It is hard to feel even a small impulse of hope. If you choose to do evil – and by God, what else are matters such as Vietnam, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, or acceptance of the living hell into which the Palestinians are consigned? – then you cannot have an honest press nor, for the most part, honest historians.

It all starts with a corrupt political system, and America's politics are as utterly corrupt as you will find on the planet. They are completely governed by big money and the interests of big money. Everything else follows – the lies, the wars, the psychopaths serving, and an immense amount of killing and destruction.

No journalists and no historians, except a very few tolerated as outliers or eccentrics, can be expected to stand up to that.

Isabella Jones CHUCKMAN • 2 days ago ,

There is a lack of widespread understanding among the peoples of the current ruling Anglosphere - the "West". We know nothing about the power of symbols, about perception management [mind control via our perceptions of everything, which is what we mostly think with], nothing of the essential need to learn to grow spiritually, to have deeper understandings of how the world works, of Universal Laws and how to follow them and thus live in harmony with Nature and with each other.
We have no understanding of the power of sound, of the interaction of sound and patterns, and how this can be used. We are linear instead of complex thinkers, superficial instead of deep, and child-like instead of adult.
One of the major areas of total ignorance you touched on, Chuckman - that is of Systems. We dont teach or learn to apply Advanced Systems Theory - that everything is part of a systems, and smaller systems combine to form larger ones. Systems rule so much of social life, and we have no understanding of psychopathy, sociopathy, narcissims or the variety of dark mental and psychic derangements that we need to build systems to protect ourselves from - we dont even know how to protect ourselves from them.
As John Anthony West put it, "we think we are so smart, with our atom bombs, Disneyland, and stripped toothpaste" - compared to the Egyptians of Dynastic times, we are as ignorant as mushrooms.
And ignorance, in the end, kills you. And destroys your nation and legacy.

my2Cents Isabella Jones • 2 days ago ,

Hi there.....My experience of having lived in the US for 54 years is that THEY engage in linear thinking because real "THINKING" is to be avoided like the plague. We are spoonfed Myths...there is no Cause and effect. Everything happens in a vacuum.

We are exceptional.....Politics is basically a racket.....I saw some of it close up when my husband was an elected official. I have no reason to believe it is not taking place on the County Level, State level or the Federal Level. It's the system within which everyone is required to function. The system is criminal up close.

I have always been very active politically....but have decided I will no longer vote.

Freespirit my2Cents • 2 days ago ,

From SMEDLEY Butler, Marine Major General , USMC.:

" I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.

I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.

There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies; its "muscle men" to destroy enemies; its "brain men" to plan war preparations; and a "Big Boss", Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism!

It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty-three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high-class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers ..

In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for Capitalism. "

my2Cents Freespirit • 2 days ago ,

I have Smedley Butler's book "War is a Racket" in my Kindle as well as my Smart Phone. :-)

The author is an economist who served as assistant Treasury secretary in the Reagan administration, was associate editor at the Wall Street Journal, and is a former professor at Georgetown University. ( Full bio ).

Now retired, he is a prolific columnist for his personal site , with a very large following on the internet. He writes frequently about Russia.

[Jun 13, 2018] Sanction Trump not Bourbon

Highly recommended!
The term "national neoliberalism" should probably be adopted as the most succinct term for Trump economic policy
Notable quotes:
"... To paraphrase Ralph Nader, the U.S. corporate state is a two-headed beast. Sure, President Trump and the Republican Party are currently handing over public lands to oil and gas companies, eliminating net neutrality, introducing pro-corporate tax legislation, kowtowing to the military industrial complex, defunding the welfare state, and attempting to privatize education and deregulate finance. ..."
"... But let's not forget our recent Democratic presidents, for example, who are also guilty of empowering and enriching big business and disempowering and impoverishing ordinary Americans. ..."
"... In war the moral is to the material as 3 is to one, said Bonaparte. The neoliberal world order according the Bretton Woods and Washington cannot raise and apply enough material [bombings, drones, aircraft carrier intimidation THAAD in Korea are the ante] without destroying itself and in its throes the world. ..."
"... The U.S. trade deficit in goods, without services, was $810 billion. The United States exported $1.551 trillion in goods. It imported $2.361 trillion. The USA imports more than they export to: China, Japan, Canada, Germany and Mexico. USA top 5 Trade deficits: China $375 billion, Mexico $71, Japan $69, Germany $65, and Canada 18 billion. ..."
Jun 10, 2018 | angrybearblog.com
likbez, June 10, 2018 2:26 am

Trump behavior at Canadian G7 meeting was boorish, but it is logical and is consistent which his previous stance on globalization: he rejects neoliberal globalization.

Sasha Breger Bush proposed the term "national neoliberalism" to depict the transition from "classic neoliberalism" which has been started with the election of Trump.

I think the term really catches the essence of the election of Trump. and should probably be adopted as a succinct description of Trump economic policy.

The nationalism, xenophobia, isolationism, and paranoia of Donald Trump are about to replace the significantly more cosmopolitan outlook of his post-WWII predecessors. While Trump is decidedly pro-business and pro-market, he most certainly does not see himself as a global citizen.

Nor does he intend to maintain the United States' extensive global footprint or its relatively open trading network. In other words, while neoliberalism is not dead, it is being transformed into a geographically more fragmented and localized system (this is not only about the US election, but also about rising levels of global protectionism and Brexit, among other anti-globalization trends around the world).

I expect that the geographic extent of the US economy in the coming years will coincide with the new landscape of U.S. allies and enemies, as defined by Donald Trump and his administration.

See https://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/12/24/trump-and-national-neoliberalism

He elaborated on this in his more recent article ( http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2018/0118breger-bush.html )

But if we take seriously the idea that Trump is a consequence of the disintegration of American democracy rather than the cause of it, this "blame game" becomes especially problematic.

Partisan bickering, with one party constantly pointing to the other as responsible for the country's ills, covers up the fact that Democrats and Republicans alike have presided over the consolidation of corporate power in the United States.

To paraphrase Ralph Nader, the U.S. corporate state is a two-headed beast. Sure, President Trump and the Republican Party are currently handing over public lands to oil and gas companies, eliminating net neutrality, introducing pro-corporate tax legislation, kowtowing to the military industrial complex, defunding the welfare state, and attempting to privatize education and deregulate finance.

But let's not forget our recent Democratic presidents, for example, who are also guilty of empowering and enriching big business and disempowering and impoverishing ordinary Americans.

JackD, June 10, 2018 9:58 am

@Likbez: "Sure, President Trump, etc" is your important sentence. It is the immediate need. First things, first.

ilsm, June 10, 2018 3:12 pm

In war the moral is to the material as 3 is to one, said Bonaparte. The neoliberal world order according the Bretton Woods and Washington cannot raise and apply enough material [bombings, drones, aircraft carrier intimidation THAAD in Korea are the ante] without destroying itself and in its throes the world.

Trump is not tearing apart NATO anyone not earning money is a PNAC think tanks knows NATO has become an aggression against Russia with similar intent as Hitler.

Grabbing Sevastopol and aiding Russians in territory occupied by Kyiv are [bold] defensive moves. The threat of Chinese islands in the South China Sea is the US Navy super carriers intimidations has no career raiding Hainan.

rps, June 10, 2018 7:42 pm

I was curious if Yglesias is a Canadian since his editorial sided with the G7 leaders stance against Trump's fair-trade often labelled as 'protectionism' of USA industries. He's a New Yorker as I pondered what's his stake in this political tirade against Trump's pro-America versus anti-globalist policies?

It appears that the media has glided over the fact Trump had suggested to the other G7 leaders that all trade barriers, including tariffs and subsidies, be eliminated, ""You go tariff-free, you go barrier-free, you go subsidy free." Protectionist Canadian PM Trudeau howled at a press conference after Trump had left on his way to Singapore. Why? Is it because Trudeau is committed to the welfare of Canadians and their industries? How dare the president of the USA- in turn, advocate for citizenry and country as does his G7 counterparts for their countries.

The U.S. trade deficit in goods, without services, was $810 billion. The United States exported $1.551 trillion in goods. It imported $2.361 trillion. The USA imports more than they export to: China, Japan, Canada, Germany and Mexico. USA top 5 Trade deficits: China $375 billion, Mexico $71, Japan $69, Germany $65, and Canada 18 billion.

More fun & facts:

US citizens and their jobs were swindled with cheaper foreign goods flooding American businesses and stores as good manufacturing jobs headed overseas. Jobs that created the middle class and all their earned benefits and standard of living decreased/disappeared quickly with NAFTA and the WTO.

Concisely, trade deficits destroyed the middle class, the working class, blue collar, and in turn, increased poverty and homelessness. Destroyed small town anywhere in the USA with manufacturing and jobs fleeing overseas in search of cheap labor. Go travel across the USA and see the boarded up towns, walk the streets of Flint Michigan, Detroit, Martinsville Virginia, Gary Indiana, Freeport Il, etc. Throw a dart at a USA map and you'll hit a town devastated by 'free' to lose your job trade. In 2014, 2.3 million job losses due to trade with China. Job losses in the millions have been slowly replaced with 'service' jobs and/or $8.00 an hour part-time no benefits workers as the new norm.

Remember when Walmart's original slogan was "Buy American"? Sam Walton before he died, was big on "Buy American," and it appeared in signs in the stores and on TV ads. His heirs quickly changed it to "Buy Chinese" destroying the american dream and small town USA.

Yet Yglesias' preference is all for the unbalanced trade with our G7 frenemies and punishing a president who chooses fair trade practices to ensure US jobs for American citizens. Makes me wonder who or what Yglesias truly advocates for, the NWO or the country of origin on his passport?

"What we must do is this: revise our tariff on the basis of a reciprocal exchange of goods, allowing other Nations to buy and to pay for our goods by sending us such of their goods as will not seriously throw any of our industries out of balance Such objectives as these three, restoring farmers' buying power, relief to the small banks and home-owners and a reconstructed tariff policy, are only a part of ten or a dozen vital factors. But they seem to be beyond the concern of a national administration which can think in terms only of the top of the social and economic structure. It has sought temporary relief from the top down rather than permanent relief from the bottom up. It has totally failed to plan ahead in a comprehensive way. It has waited until something has cracked and then at the last moment has sought to prevent total collapse.

It is high time to get back to fundamentals. It is high time to admit with courage that we are in the midst of an emergency at least equal to that of war. Let us mobilize to meet it." "The Forgotten Man" speech, 1937. Franklin Delano Roosevelt

Since Clinton signed NAFTA in 1994 and the WTO, American jobs and industry left our shores seeking the lowest common denominator- cheap slave labor. To paraphrase FDR into the late 20th and early 21st century, "Clinton and his successors concern of their national administrations thought in terms only of the top of the social and economic structure. It has sought temporary relief from the top down rather than permanent relief from the bottom up.It has totally failed to plan ahead in a comprehensive way."

Bruce Webb, June 10, 2018 9:16 pm

Nothing personally Rps, but you do not get Triffin Dilemma and global reserve currency. Please no more NAFTA obsession when no jobs left with that deal and exports excelerated. The global reserve currency and booming financial markets create a surplus in services over goods. It also creates the need for a goods deficit to stabilize the financial system. You cannot wave a wand and cure something that cannot be cured. You need a major depression to rebalance and drive capital from america.

Bruce Webb, June 10, 2018 9:19 pm

Likbez, Neoliberalism IS American. Trump is pro-East Asia

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tags: CIA

[Jun 13, 2018] The Nationalism Versus Globalism Battles Yet to Come

Notable quotes:
"... By the way, the US provides 22% of NATO funding, a formula which is based on population. Thus, if the European members increased their contributions to NATO, the US contribution would also rise! ..."
"... Donald Trump will remain exasperated because he is fighting the good fight but not really understanding who his adversary's are. ..."
"... Foreign countries aren't taking advantage of the USA. American industrialists are taking advantage of the USA. Why does Apple make its iPhones in China? Why does Ford build so many of its SUVs in Mexico? Not because of the decisions those countries have made. It's because of the decisions American industrial leaders have made. ..."
"... The USA has a trade surplus with Canada. Trump lied about that. ..."
Jun 13, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Credit: Andrew Cline/Shutterstock

At the G-7 summit in Canada, President Donald Trump described America as "the piggy bank that everybody is robbing."

After he left Quebec, his director of Trade and Industrial Policy, Peter Navarro, added a few parting words for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau: "There's a special place in hell for any foreign leader that engages in bad faith diplomacy with President Donald J. Trump and then tries to stab him in the back on the way out the door. And that's what weak, dishonest Justin Trudeau did. And that comes right from Air Force One."

In Singapore, Trump tweeted more about that piggy bank: "Why should I, as President of the United States, allow countries to continue to make Massive Trade Surpluses, as they have for decades [while] the U.S. pays close to the entire cost of NATO-protecting many of these same countries that rip us off on Trade?"

To understand what drives Trump, and explains his exasperation and anger, these remarks are a good place to begin.

Our elites see America as an "indispensable nation," the premiere world power whose ordained duty it is to defend democracy, stand up to dictators and aggressors, and uphold a liberal world order.

They see U.S. wealth and power as splendid tools that fate has given them to shape the future of the planet.

Trump sees America as a nation being milked by allies who free-ride on our defense efforts as they engage in trade practices that enrich their own peoples at America's expense.

Where our elites live to play masters of the universe, Trump sees a world laughing behind America's back, while allies exploit our magnanimity and idealism for their own national ends.

The numbers are impossible to refute and hard to explain.

Last year, the EU had a $151 billion trade surplus with the U.S. China ran a $376 billion trade surplus with the U.S., the largest in history. The world sold us $796 billion more in goods than we sold to the world.

A nation that spends more than it takes in from taxes, and consumes more of the world's goods than it produces itself for export, year in and year out, is a nation on the way down.

We are emulating our British cousins of the 19th century.

Trump understands that this situation is not sustainable. His strength is that the people are still with him on putting America first.

Yet he faces some serious obstacles.

What is his strategy for turning a $796 billion trade deficit into a surplus? Is he prepared to impose the tariffs and import restrictions that would be required to turn America from the greatest trade-deficit nation in history to a trade-surplus nation, as we were up until the mid-1970s?

Americans are indeed carrying the lion's share of the load of the defense of the West, and of fighting the terrorists and radical Islamists of the Middle East, and of protecting South Korea and Japan.

But if our NATO and Asian allies refuse to make the increases in defense he demands, is Trump really willing to cancel our treaty commitments, walk away from our war guarantees, and let these nations face Russia and China on their own? Could he cut that umbilical cord?

Ike's secretary of state John Foster Dulles spoke of conducting an "agonizing reappraisal" of U.S. commitments to defend NATO allies if they did not contribute more money and troops.

Dulles died in 1959, and that reappraisal, threatened 60 years ago, never happened. Indeed, when the Cold War ended, our NATO allies cut defense spending again. Yet we are still subsidizing NATO in Europe and have taken on even more allies since the Soviet Empire fell.

If Europe refuses to invest the money in defense that Trump demands, or accept the tariffs America needs to reduce and erase its trade deficits, what does he do? Is he prepared to shut U.S. bases and pull U.S. troops out of the Baltic republics, Poland, and Germany, and let the Europeans face Vladimir Putin and Russia themselves?

This is not an academic question. For the crunch that was inevitable when Trump was elected seems at hand.

Trump promised to negotiate with Putin and improve relations with Russia. He promised to force our NATO allies to undertake more of their own defense. He pledged to get out and stay out of Mideast wars and begin to slash the trade deficits that we have run with the world.

That's what America voted for.

Now, after 500 days, he faces formidable opposition to these defining goals of his campaign, even within his own party.

Putin remains a pariah on Capitol Hill. Our allies are rejecting the tariffs Trump has imposed and threatening retaliation. Free-trade Republicans reject tariffs that might raise the cost of the items U.S. companies make abroad and then ships back to the United States.

The decisive battles between Trumpian nationalism and globalism remain ahead of us. Trump's critical tests have yet to come.

And our exasperated president senses this.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever. To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at www.creators.com.

Bradley June 12, 2018 at 6:10 am

America spends 3 times as much on defense as its allies because it is addicted to military spending. The solution is not to pressure other countries to acquire the same addiction. The solution is for America cut its own military spending.

This is just another example of America trying to "export" its domestic issues. Quit blaming foreigners and deal with your issues.

Joe the Plutocrat , says: June 12, 2018 at 6:58 am
"A nation that spends more than it takes in from taxes, and consumes more of the world's goods than it produces itself for export, year in and year out, is a nation on the way down. We are emulating our British cousins of the 19th century." never imagined I'd say this, but you are absolutely correct. of course you neglect to acknowledge, Trump himself is an "elite" and a "globalist". the fact his "game" is real estate, as opposed to governance is more of a semantic distinction than ideological. debt-fueled consumerism drives real estate just as it drives globalism. this is nothing new. add to this the pathological narcissism and the ability to leverage moral bankruptcy as he has the tax codes and bankruptcy laws, and voila, just another globalist in populist clothing. as I have maintained all along, he is not so much anti-establishment as he is an establishment of one – he simply thrives in a different type of swamp and favors a smaller oligarchy/plutocracy. and of course, there is the big news out of Singapore/Korea, but again, much of the 'spin' or upside cited in a denuclearized Korean peninsula involves the opportunity for North Korea to join the globalists at the globalists' table. one can only wonder if there will be Ivanka's handbags will be made in Panmunjom, and if Kim Jong Un will stay at the Trump hotel in DC? either way, you are correct he is the candidate the American people, and the globalists "elected".
JonF , says: June 12, 2018 at 8:35 am
One problem with Trump's rant: the US enjoys a small trade surplus with Canada.

Would someone please get this president some hard facts and drill him on them for however long it takes top get them fixed in his mind before he goes off half-cocked with any more nonsense?

Michael Kenny , says: June 12, 2018 at 10:36 am
As always, Mr Buchanan sets out his personal agenda and then claims that Trump promised to implement it if elected. The more Trump backs away from globalised free trade (if that's what he's really doing), the more that suits the EU. The "core value" of the EU is a large internal market protected by a high tariff wall. Globalization was rammed down an unwilling EU's throat by the US in the Reagan years and only the British elite ever really believed in it. As for NATO, nobody now believes that the US will honor its commitments, no matter how much Europe pays, so logically, the European members are concentrating their additional expenditure on an independent European defense system, which, needless to say, the US is trying to obstruct.

By the way, the US provides 22% of NATO funding, a formula which is based on population. Thus, if the European members increased their contributions to NATO, the US contribution would also rise!

Kent , says: June 12, 2018 at 11:17 am
Donald Trump will remain exasperated because he is fighting the good fight but not really understanding who his adversary's are.

Foreign countries aren't taking advantage of the USA. American industrialists are taking advantage of the USA. Why does Apple make its iPhones in China? Why does Ford build so many of its SUVs in Mexico? Not because of the decisions those countries have made. It's because of the decisions American industrial leaders have made.

Secondly, there is absolutely no threat to NATO from Russia or Putin. Europe could slash its already meager defense budget with only beneficial consequences. The same with Japan and S. Korea. None of these countries need US military help. There are no real military threats to these countries. US military spending has never been about defending other countries. It is about enriching the shareholders of American military contractors.

So here is the real world: The United States has established a "liberal rules-based global order" that allows wealthy American and European commercial interests to benefit mightily from trade, and property and resource control in foreign countries. And this order is maintained by US military power. That is why the US is "the one indispensable nation". We are the nation that is allowed to break the order, to be the bully, in order for the rules-based order to even exist. That's why we are beating up on countries that try to live outside of this order like Iran, NK, Venezuela, Russia and everyone else who don't fall in line.

So Donald Trump is fighting against the power elite of the United States, he just doesn't understand that. He is fighting against the most powerful people in the world, people who are well represented by both political parties. He can win this fight if he lets the average American on to this reality. And then leads them properly to a better, more balanced world. But I suspect that he would be assassinated if he tried.

bacon , says: June 12, 2018 at 11:26 am
In re NATO and other oversea DOD spending, the old saying "who pays, says" has a corollary. Who wants to say has to pay. The US, since WWII, has wanted, insisted, on being in charge of everything we touch. This costs a lot, not to mention it often doesn't work the way we want. It would be easy enough to stop spending all this money. The Pentagon and the military-industrial complex would have a conniption and those whose defense bills we've been paying would complain to high heaven, but Trump seems intent on trashing all those alliances anyway and also on spending more money on defense than even the Pentagon thinks they need.
GregR , says: June 12, 2018 at 11:31 am
Trade deficits don't work the way you think they work. In todays economy the traditional measures of deficits don't actually tell us much about what is going on.

Do you know what China does with that $350b trade surplus? A huge percentage of it is rolled back immediately into US Treasury bonds because we are the only issuer of credit in sufficient amounts and of suitable stability for them to buy. All of that deficit spending Trump and the Republicans in congress passed last year is being financed by the very trade imbalance that Trump is trying to eliminate.

But trade imbalances really don't tell us much about the flow of money. Most of the imbalance is created by US companies that have built factories in China to sell goods back to the US, then repatriate money back to the US in the form of dividends or stock buy backs (which are not counted in the trade balance at all).

At best trade balances tell us very little meaningful about what is really going on, but can be wildly deceptive. At worst they are an easy tool, for demogogs who have zero understanding of what is going on, to inflame other uninformed people to justify trade wars.

One Guy , says: June 12, 2018 at 1:27 pm
Interesting the things that Buchanan ignores (on purpose?). The USA has a trade surplus with Canada. Trump lied about that. There's nothing wrong with the USA spending less money to defend other countries. Trump doesn't have to insult our allies to do that.
Jim Houghton , says: June 12, 2018 at 1:49 pm
"Trump understands that this situation is not sustainable."

You give him more credit than he deserves. What he does understand is that while we're being the world's piggy bank, the American taxpayer is being the Military-Industrial Complex's piggy-bank and that's just fine with him. As it is with most members of Congress.

John S , says: June 12, 2018 at 1:56 pm
" our NATO allies cut defense spending again. Yet we are still subsidizing NATO in Europe "

Mr. Buchanan, like Trump, does not understand how NATO is funded. All NATO members have been paying their dues. In fact, many pay a greater proportion relative to GDP per capita than the U.S. does. Defense budgets are a different matter entirely.

Sam Bufalini , says: June 12, 2018 at 2:14 pm
Remind me again, who just raised the U.S. deficit by more than a $1 trillion over the next 10 years?
S , says: June 12, 2018 at 3:19 pm
This entire article seems to reduce complex issues into simple arithmetic. Economics and job creation is about much more than balance of payments both the author and the US president don't seem to realise this. Very shallow article.
Sean , says: June 12, 2018 at 5:35 pm
America has a trade surplus with Canada, but seems determined to rub it in.

Some background. As the glaciers retreated south at the end of the ice age, they scraped away Canada's topsoil and deposited it in America. Rural Canada has little arable areas; it's beef and dairy by necessity. Costs are high and there are ten Americans to every Canadian hence the subsidy. America subsidizes it's agriculture $55 billion annually.

Mia , says: June 12, 2018 at 8:24 pm
Great, if we're upset about having to protect our allies in the Pacific, let's change the Japanese constitution to allow them to have a real military again to defend themselves and give the South Koreans nukes to balance out the power situation between them and the Norks/ Chinese. (Why is it so little is ever said about China being a nuclear power?) This whole fantasy of denuclearization of the Korean peninsula is so naive it's laughable. If nukes exist, there will never be any permanent guarantee of anything, and other countries will just keep getting the bomb without our permission, like Pakistan and China. The genie is out of the bottle, so time to be brutally realistic about what we face and what can be done. We can whine all we want to about how it's not our responsibility, but then we expect other countries to be hobbled and still somehow face enemy powers.
LouisM , says: June 12, 2018 at 9:24 pm
Lets take a look at the growing list of nations shifting to the right (nationalism and populism) -The Czech, Slovak and Slovenia Republics Poland, Hungary, Switzerland, the US.

Nations shifting this year to the right (nationalism and populism) -Austria, Bavaria and Italy

Nations leaning to the right and leaning toward joining the VISEGRAD -Lithuania, Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Serbia and Greece

AS YOU CAN SEE THE PILLARS OF MARXIST / SOCIALIST / COMMUNIST OPEN BORDERS EUROPE/EU ARE BEING TAKEN DOWN. THE FIGHT WILL BE WITH FRANCE, GERMANY, BELGIUM, NETHERLANDS, BRITAIN, SWEDEN AND THE UNELECTED EU SUPERSTATE. RIGHT NOW THE FIGHT IS WITH THE POOR SOUTHERN AND EASTERN EUROPEAN INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS BUT EVENTUALLY IT WILL REACH A TIPPING POINT WHERE IT BECOMES AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT BUT ITS ONLY AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT FOR THE LEFT AS THE EU REACHES THE TIPPING POINT AND THE POWER SHIFTS TO THE RIGHT.

[Jun 13, 2018] Egor Kholmogorov Stalin Is Not Great, by Anatoly Karlin - The Unz Review

Notable quotes:
"... It is our joy that during the hard years of the war the Red Army and the Soviet people were led by the wise and experienced leader of the Soviet Union – the GREAT STALIN. ..."
"... "He found Russia working with wooden plows and left her equipped with atomic piles" ..."
"... "Wait, if the revolution hadn't happened, Russia would have simply frozen at 1913 levels forever?" ..."
"... "If Tsarist Russia was so industrially backward, where did her working class come from, with the Bolshevik Party as its self-proclaimed leadership?" ..."
"... physical eradication ..."
"... Petropavlovsk ..."
"... History of a Town ..."
"... so deep ..."
"... Map of the "Future Europe" (not like Wilhelm II would have liked it!) ..."
"... lesser ..."
"... starets ..."
"... Children of the Arbat ..."
"... In turn, this makes me wonder–had an independent Ukrainian state limited to central and western Ukraine been created, how viable would it have been? After all, this state would have been landlocked ..."
"... with the caveat that I do not consider it politically realistic even for the USSR ..."
Jun 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

Egor Kholmogorov: Stalin Is Not Great Anatoly Karlin June 8, 2018 6,500 Words 796 Comments

Vladislav Pravdin – GREAT STALIN (1949) . It is our joy that during the hard years of the war the Red Army and the Soviet people were led by the wise and experienced leader of the Soviet Union – the GREAT STALIN.

Translator's Foreword (Fluctuarius Argenteus)

And now for something completely different. Instead of snippets from larger works, here's Egor Kholmogorov's two-part takedown of the notion of "Stalin as a Russia national hero" merged into a single text.

The relationship of Russian nationalism and Neo-Stalinism is a torturous one. Modern Neo-Stalinism emerged in the early 2000s as one aspect of an anti-Yeltsinist and anti-Liberal consensus, an attempt to reconcile the Imperial and Soviet past under the banner of a broadly defined Russian patriotism and do away with the kind of historical nihilism that painted Stalin as the ultimate expression of a "millennium-old Russian yearning for slavery". Many, including the author of the article and its translator, paid lip service to this movement in their younger years.

By approximately 2005, the movement had gone mainstream, and by 2012, it completely morphed into a cancerous outgrowth. The nerve of early Neo-Stalinist rhetoric was the belief that Stalin had made a U-turn from (((Old Bolshevik cosmopolitanism))), legalised some forms of Russian national consciousness, and generally put Russian history back on track (i.e., was not true Marxism, and it was good ). The Neo-Stalinism of The New Tens is virulently hostile towards the slightest hint of Russian patriotism and a positive appraisal of pre-1917 Russia, going as far as to condemn liking Alexander Nevsky and Peter the Great (both lionised under Stalin) as "Vlasovism" (oh the sweet irony).

Needless to say, this text provoked some gnashing of teeth in the Neo-Stalinist camp.

AK's Foreword

After my takedown of Lenin , some people suggested that I extend it to Stalin. But what point is there when we have Kholmogorov? I agree with this 90%, down to the biographical details of my own modest (if still regrettable) quasi-Stalinophile sentiments a decade ago.

This is something that afflicted many Russian patriots of that time, being part of a general rejection of the Russophobic narratives of the liberal elites. Support for Stalin became intensely tribal, and a means to troll those people. However, it has now gone on for far too long. That particular culture war is no longer relevant, and lingering Stalinophilia now only serves to distort Russian history and Russia's self-image of itself. It is time to put that mustachioed, medals-bedecked Halloween costume back into the cupboard.

Although we may quibble with some details – I had quite a few myself as I edited this – this piece may be considered to be as close to a Russian nationalist statement on Stalin as any.

If you appreciate these translatinos, please feel free to give Kholmogorov a tip here: http://akarlin.com/donations-kholmogorov/

***

Part I: Pharaoh of the Plow and Atom

Original : https://tsargrad.tv/articles/faraon-sohi-i-reaktora_71311

38% of Russian citizens polled by Levada Center put Joseph Stalin at #1 among the greatest heroes of Russian and world history. He is followed by Putin, Pushkin, Lenin, Peter I, Gagarin, Leo Tolstoy, Georgy Zhukov, Catherine II, Lermontov, Lomonosov, Mendeleev, and even Brezhnev and Gorbachev. The only non-Russians who made it to the top are Napoleon, Newton, and Einstein.

Well well well This is an obvious disgrace. If trustworthy, it reveals than the average Russian doesn't have the vaguest idea about the course of Russian and world history and the true importance of historical figures. To be fair, sociologists aren't that far from the masses, mixing in the same poll politicians, generals, writers, and scientist, whose relative importance just can't be measured by the scale. Essentially, this a list of the best-advertised personalities.

The absolute disaster here is that, in 2017, almost a good half our citizens are confident enough to place Stalin at #1 in Russian and world history. Of course, the Generalissimo here is playing the part of an epic or even mythological hero; the details and real achievements do not matter. For our people, Stalin is a byword for "a strong Russia to be reckoned with in the global arena". And this strength acts as an acceptable rationale for everything else: millions of murdered Russians, from great scientists to common villagers, demolished churches and martyred priests, a completely fleeced countryside Everything is pardoned and justified, following Isaac Deutscher's formula : "He found Russia working with wooden plows and left her equipped with atomic piles" (which is frequently misattributed to Winston Churchill instead of this obscure Trotskyite and has "atomic piles" replaced with the "atomic bomb").

In other words, Stalin is seen by the Russian consciousness as the architect of our incredible grandeur, which was enabled by the tremendous industrial leap forward and Victory in the Great Patriotic War. This grandeur is enough to excuse his transformation of Russia into a hellish bloodbath of terror.

If we put mythological and epical thinking aside and deal with historical facts, is Stalin's #1 place among the greatest personalities in world history, afforded by our compatriots and sociologists, in any way justified?

I have never been into anti-Stalinist hysterics. I even published multiple articles calling to refrain from cartoonish nihilism while evaluating Stalin's contribution to our country's Victory in the Great Patriotic War. I am an even stauncher opponent of identifying Russia with Stalin, of using Stalin's horrifying atrocities as a pretext to erase our national heroism and demand "reparations", "territorial concessions", and other vile nonsense. I couldn't care less about Stalin being distasteful to other countries and nations – the Russians are blameless before them.

What really concerns me is Stalin's place in the history of the Russian people. And it is in this domain, no thanks to meddlesome "National Stalinists" who go as far as to put Stalin on icons , where the role of this historical figure is inflated to infinity and beyond. It now turns out that it wasn't Stalin's good fortune that the Russians stayed loyal to him during the military debacle of 1941, as he claimed himself in his famous Victory Toast . No, it was a great honor and mercy for the Russians on Stalin's part, because he condescended to rule them, shoot them, exile them where they could plow permafrost, let them get slaughtered in Nazi encirclements, and starve them with famines. It turns out that we Russians are allegedly unworthy of Stalin, our Messiah.

This boundless and hypertrophied propaganda poisoning the minds of our countrymen is sometimes even more obscene than the cult of the Great Leader as it existed in his lifetime. To heighten Stalin's pedestal, they keep placing more and more falsehood at its base, be it myths of a pathetic backward Tsarist Russia or new slander against victims of the regime, long rehabilitated by state security and never held in contempt by the nation or history. Even the greatest of victims, such as Nikolai Vavilov , are now dragged through the mud, and the most despicable of rogues, such as Trofim Lysenko , are now lionized, for the sole purpose of keeping Stalin's halo intact.

That is why we have to return to the question of Stalin the historical figure and not Stalin the myth, and enquire into the degree and character of his greatness.

The first foundation stone of Stalin's pedestal is the Industrialization. Allegedly, the very Russia that languished in backwardness under the pathetically incompetent Tsars made a huge industrial leap under Stalin, storming into global industrial leadership, beating Hitler, and becoming a superpower.

This claim is false in several respects. First, Tsarist Russia wasn't backward either in industry or in military technology. The country was developing dynamically, and there is no reason to suggest she would have reached a lower level of industrial progress than the one attained by the USSR in 1939. When we were little kids, Soviet textbooks hypnotized us with diagrams of industrial development compared to "Russia in 1913". And no one would pose the question: "Wait, if the revolution hadn't happened, Russia would have simply frozen at 1913 levels forever?" . And here's another naďve question no one came to ask Soviet history teachers: "If Tsarist Russia was so industrially backward, where did her working class come from, with the Bolshevik Party as its self-proclaimed leadership?"

Russian industrialization began in the 1890s mostly thanks to the efforts of Count Sergei Witte, who was a follower of the great German economist Friedrich List, the theorist of the forces of production (a term later plagiarized by Karl Marx) and protectionism. An active ally of Witte's was Dmitry Mendeleev, not only a famous chemist but also an economist who organised the Russian oil industry and also followed List's principles of economic protectionism.

Enjoying the complete support of Emperors Alexander III and Nicholas II, Witte achieved an impressive surge in industrial development. However, he was often criticised for overstraining the Russian peasantry to achieve said surge, which backfired with the unrest of 1905-06 that coincided with a cyclic crisis in world economy. In 1909, Russia saw the start of a new economic boom and a new wave of industrialization overseen by Peter Stolypin.

Stolypin's approach was much more merciful to the peasantry than Witte's. The countryside stopped being an economic donor and became a full-fledged partner, reaping the benefits of industrialization together with urban areas. The Great War, despite extreme conditions, gave an even greater boost to Russia's military and industrial development. It was was the Bolshevik Revolution, as well as the ensuing "War Communism" and Civil War, which caused the terrible desolation that almost plunged the country into a new Stone Age. As a member of the Bolshevik leadership, Stalin was directly responsible for that.

Evidently, to endure as a Great Power (and, consequently, protect the Bolshevik dictatorship from being deposed by a foreign invasion), Russia couldn't stay at the rock bottom where Bolshevism had flung her. Hence the idea of resuming industrialization, now under a new Communist management and based on Communist ideas. Stalinism didn't attempt anything new here, because industrialization had already been running for a quarter of a century under the Tsars and was in any case supported by all rival Communist factions. Stalin's contribution to industrialization is limited to inventing a new method, not based on strong-arming the countryside (as with Witte) or robbing it blind (as proposed by Trotsky and Pyatakov ).

Stalin's industrialization was powered by the physical eradication of the Russian countryside via forced collectivization, punitive expeditions, mass exile, famine, and terror. Yes, this method of industrialization had been previously unknown to the wider world and could be perfectly dispensed with, as demonstrated by Tsarist Russia. But can the invention of cannibalism be considered a contribution to the culinary arts? Probably not.

To Stalin's credit, he was very successful in simultaneously bleeding the country dry to gain funds for industrialization with exploiting the vicissitudes of the global market. The Great Depression engulfed the entire world, flooding the market with cheap imported machinery and tractors, as well as jobless American engineers. In this respect, Stalin's industrialization turned out to be cheaper for the USSR than if it had happened at the peak of the global business cycle. But let's not forget that Russian bread and Russian exports also became cheaper cheaper. To turn a profit, Soviet industrialization needed not just cheap labor, but a slave-like one, spurred by a famine stemming from Stalin's 1930-31 attempts at monopolizing global grain exports. As grain prices kept falling during the Great Depression, the Soviet Union was forced to increase export volume and thus physically decimate its own citizenry with starvation and terror.

In 1929, the Soviets exported 1.3 million metric tons of grain worth $68 a ton, earning $88 million. In 1930, the exports amounted to 4.8 million tons worth $45 to $60 a ton, netting a marvelous $288 million in profits. However, in October 1930, grain prices on the world market collapsed. After completely fleecing the peasantry and exporting 5.2 million tons, Stalin earned a paltry $72 million. At the same time, a mass urban exodus from the countryside required greater grain procurements for the domestic market as well. Combined with plummeting grain harvests in 1931-32, this would lead to a terrible famine, now appropriated by Ukrainian nationalists under the name of "Holodomor" and "genocide" (in reality, the Kuban and Volga regions didn't suffer any less).

Stalin's great contribution to industrialization consisted in employing slave labor not in a Bronze Age or plantation economy, but in an economy of the Industrial Age, a feat hitherto unknown to human history. Stalin surpassed the kings of Egypt because the Pharaohs used slave labor to build the Pyramids only in Soviet textbooks. In reality, the work teams of peasants that took part in those colossal construction projects were well remunerated and had decent working conditions by Ancient Egyptian standards. Stalin demonstrated that Southern slave owners could compete with the industry of the Union if only they had abandoned their paternalistic views of their slaves and sent them, overseen by cruel taskmasters, to build factories, roads, and mines

Low labor costs, achieved through extreme coercion and terror, did make the USSR capable of undertaking projects that hadn't been considered economically viable in Tsarist Russia, such as the Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Works, dependent on both Kuznetsk coal and Urals ore. When capital was the main factor of production, such projects wouldn't have made a profit. The historical Russian model of industrialization was capital-intensive: the Morozovs, Ryabushinkys, Tereschenkos, Putilovs, Konovalovs and other tycoons invested in costly machinery, often more advanced than in neighboring Germany. Based on this trend, the Russian-American economist Alexander Gerschenkron wrote of the advantages of "economic backwardness", that is, a belated industrialization.

The Bolsheviks blew the old Russian industry to smithereens. However, the Great Leader and the Great Teacher successfully triumphed over the laws of economics. The leading economic factor in Soviet industrial projects, in Soviet circumpolar canal-digging and railroad construction, was labor . Slave labor. The profitability of most industrial projects soared, as a train full of Gulag convicts acted as a replacement for costly machinery, which was doubly economical: money was saved on both expensive equipment and maintenance for the workers themselves.

Stalin sought to apply the same principle of making labor the main industrial factor while lowering the importance of capital everywhere, including science. Sharashkas and threats of arrest turned out to be a better stimulus for scientific progress, in the short run at least, than German sausages and American mansions with swimming pools. Alas, biology is different from mechanics: Vavilov couldn't get wheat chromosomes to vernalize even at gunpoint, which ended in his elimination and the rise of Lysenko, who promised to impose Stalinist labor discipline even on plant life

Is enriching global economic thought with the principle of forced labor superiority to the capital enough to make Stalin the greatest person in history? I don't think so. Russia used to have its own model of industrialization, which had produced excellent results and created an industrially developed economy integrated into the global economic system. Of course, it wasn't without its failings, and had patent elements of financial dependence. But didn't the USSR have the same kind of dependence on foreign credit, both during and after the industrialization, though only working harder to conceal it? Professor Katasonov's calculations reveal that all profits from Soviet exports, all the gold pillaged from the Church and the general populace, all the money made from art sales couldn't pay for the equipment imported by the USSR. This meant that the Soviets were systematically dependent on foreign loans, which Stalin himself acknowledged on multiple occasions in his correspondence. In this respect, the Great Leader merely differed from the Tsar in hiding his debts from the masses.

World War II caught Stalin's Soviet Union in the midst of an incomplete industrialization, dependent on foreign imports in many types of machinery, up to the eyes in debt, with a part of the populace – oftentimes the intellectually and economically superior one – exterminated or jailed, and with a unique slave-labor driven industrial economy. Any organic path of Russia's development, especially Stolypin's, would have given Russia much better historical prospects.

But perhaps the Stalinist Soviet Union developed some kind of unique technology that was beyond the powers of old Russia? Nope. Stalin did bequeath us the proverbial atomic piles, using slave labor and nuclear espionage to save the billions of dollars spent by the USA on the Manhattan Project, which the Soviets simply didn't have. God forbid me from chastising Stalin for that act of espionage – actually, it was one of his greatest and most innocent achievements that cost only two human lives (the Rosenbergs) and saved millions of them.

However, Stalin kept dreaming of Soviet battleships for the entirety of reign, but the USSR never managed to complete its large warships program. The naval contribution to the defense of Leningrad in WWII consisted of Gangut and Petropavlovsk , two Tsarist battleships built by Admiral Grigorovich and paid for by a Duma browbeaten into submission by Stolypin. Soviet aircraft carriers at that time were also a complete impossibility.

The story of Stalin's fighter planes turned into a tale of endless anguish for engineers, constructors, and pilots, which the Great Leader himself confirmed by mass imprisonment of the apparatchiks responsible for the wartime aircraft production (the so-called "Aviation Affair"). The same thing happened with bombers: It would suffice to mention that the Soviet Tu-4 was a reverse-engineered copy of the American B-29.

These examples have nothing to do with the myth of Russia's backwardness. Quite to the contrary: Russia, by virtue of NOT being a backward country and having amassed a huge intellectual and technological potential, could survive the emigration and mass murder of scientists and engineers and the savagery of the slave labor system, and advance to new technological horizons. However, almost all of these new horizons were revealed to us by "old-schoolers". The most prominent of the Soviet scientists involved in the nuclear and missile projects came almost exclusively from the ranks of the "enemy class

These examples have nothing to do with the myth of Russia's backwardness. Quite to the contrary: Russia, by virtue of NOT being a backward country and having amassed a huge intellectual and technological potential, could survive the emigration and mass murder of scientists and engineers and the savagery of the slave labor system, and advance to new technological horizons. However, almost all of these new horizons were revealed to us by "old-schoolers". The most prominent of the Soviet scientists involved in the nuclear and missile projects came almost exclusively from the ranks of the "enemy class" of the pre-revolutionary intelligentsia, receiving their education either before the Revolution or in the 1920s, when the old foundations of education hadn't been completely ruined. Without these human resources, Stalin wouldn't have had a shot at leaving Russia with atomic piles. The same atomic piles, however, could well have be developed by the same date by a Tsar Alexey Nikolayevich or Mikhail Alexandrovic h

By the way, about those plows that Stalin "found Russia" with. Indeed, Stalin took Russia with wooden plows from Lenin. And Lenin had grabbed Russia by the neck after she had lost her Tsar, under whose rule she had been a country with automobiles, armored cars, Sikorsky airplanes, early aircraft carriers, battleships and tank blueprints. And the truth is that Stalin took Russia from Lenin with plows and left her with the same implements. The plow was in use in 1953 just as in 1924, which isn't necessarily a bad thing (the sokha , the Russian light wooden plow, is better suited to certain soil types than heavier plows). All in all, measuring the trajectory of Stalinism in terms of plows and atomic piles is a gross oversimplification.

However, let us not lapse into slander and calumny by claiming that all Stalin's achievements came only as a result of cannibalism and mass destruction of his own citizens. After the war, many residential and industrial objects in the Soviet Union were erected by German POWs, following the same slave labor model. Some select citizens of the USSR whirled around Moscow in an Opels (rechristened Moskvitch) while sporting nice Carl Zeiss glasses. Stalinist industrialization got a new a material and moral resource: Victory. And that Cictory is what our compatriots deservedly count as one of Stalin's greatest achievements.

Can the victor in the greatest war in history not be named the greatest man in history? This is a story for our next article.

***

Part II: Stalin's Toxic Gifts

Original : https://tsargrad.tv/articles/otravlennye-podarki-stalina_71529

So, let's go back to Stalin as the "greatest person in Russian and world history". This reputation – to the degree that it actually exists among the populace and wasn't engineered by sociologists – dwells mostly upon the Soviet Victory in the Great Patriotic War. World War II being the greatest war ever waged by mankind, it seems reasonable and justified to hail the victor in this war as the greatest man ever.

There can be a lot of objections to this. First, the Great Patriotic War was just one part of World War II, won fair and square by the United States. The Americans, having lost the least amount of people by dint of replacing them with guns and dollars, using the Russians to do the bloody work, and stealing the thunder of their British allies, went on to become the masters of the postwar world order.

Even during the Cold War, the USSR was, for a long time, a mere challenger to American supremacy and not an equal contender. And we all know how this war ended for us. The US victory in WWII under President Roosevelt is undisputed. He died when their victory was a fait accompli , and President Truman took no new decisions of his own (Roosevelt would have probably nuked Hiroshima, too). But is Roosevelt the greatest person in history? Not quite! He keeps getting flak from the left and the right, even for his New Deal, even for his meagre concessions to the Soviets in Tehran and Yalta. Even in the US proper, his ranking among top US presidents never rises above #2, and usually he occupies the #3 spot.

Regarding Russia, her greatest pre-1941 war was the Patriotic War of 1812, greatest by the stature of the enemy (Napoleon, one of the greatest characters in history), by the size and the power of his Army of the Twelve Nations, the tragedy of the fall of the Russian capital, the charity and sacrifice of the nobility, the merchant class, and the peasantry, the complete destruction of the adversary – in all these respects, the "thunder of 1812" was historically unparalleled. Who won this war? Alexander I the Blessed. To quote Pushkin's lines, "he conquered Paris, he founded the Lyceum ".

But is this Emperor counted among the all-time greats of Russian history, according to Levada or whatever other poll? No. He is half-forgotten, his reputation destroyed by ignominious military settlements (still less outrageous than the Gulag), the infamy of Arakcheevschina (still not quite the Yezhovschina ), the sin of patricide[1] (is it worse than Patria-cide?), the ridicule of other, much less flattering Pushkin poems[2]. And if it is ever to be proven that he was already been canonised by the Orthodox Church as a saint and revered by the common folk under the name of Feodor Kuzmich[3], this glory and grace would only be bestowed upon his second life, granted to expiate the sins of the first.

Stalin founded no Lyceum, he created the sharashkas, and, to paraphrase Saltykov-Schedrin's History of a Town , "torched public schools and abolished (some of) the sciences". He didn't reach Paris but quite definitely conquered Berlin, a feat unseen since the days of Empress Elizaveta Petrovna, God bless her memory. He lucked out with his enemy – Hitler wasn't as great as Napoleon, but he was extraordinary vile towards the Russians and brought Russia untold of devastation. Before the invasion, his generals fulminated with very clear instructions: "war crimes in the East are not to be considered as such", "any cultural assets in the East do not matter". Anyone who would stand between Hitler and the Russians and organize resistance was deserving of great praise.

Stalin is deserving of such praise, too. He managed to collect himself and lead the struggle, distributing his forces so that Hitler's onslaught got bogged down in Russia's expanse and failing to reach any Russian capital except Kiev. He evacuated and thus preserve the bulk of Soviet industrial production. The army that he assumed supreme command of experienced almost no defeats after November 1942 and led an unstoppable march to the Elbe. Stalin was prudent enough to make peace with the Russian people and unfurl the banner of Russian patriotism – quickly furled back up after the war but not as completely, since no one dared to derogate the Russians as brazenly as in the 1920s and 1930s. Stalin was shrewd enough while dealing with the Alleis that the USSR ended the war with large, even somewhat excessive gains. It is historically disingenuous to deny Stalin these achievements, and it would be nothing but a parallel falsehood to the rising tide of diehard Stalinist lies, which provoked this essay in the first place.

If we are to speak of Stalin's greatness in world history and Russian history, his halo needs to be knocked down a couple of notches. Who is to blame but the country's political and military leader for allowing the claws of the German eagle to sink so deep into the chest of our eagle-turned-red-star? Who is to answer for the unthinkable casualties sustained by our army in the 1941 encirclements?

Of course, these losses can't be deemed "excessive". Modern calculations place Soviet and German irrevocable military losses at 11.5 million vs. 8.6 million, a ratio of 1:3 to 1. But what are these 3 million "surplus" dead if not the price paid for the chaos and incompetence reigning in 1941, especially in September and October, when the tide of the Blitzkrieg seemed to have been stemmed?

Yes, June 22, 1941 was a case of the Wehrmacht's military luck, intensified by a vile sneak attack. Luck has its place in warfare. But the encirclements near Kiev and Vyazma, the siege of Leningrad, to say nothing of the crushing 1942 defeats, were less a case of German good luck than our own failures.

The more one reads documents and memoirs, the clearer it is that Stalin's interference in warfare was incompetent, arbitrary, and short-sighted. He was intelligent, driven, obstinate, obsessive about details, and despotic, all great qualities for a general, but his mind was corrupted by Bolshevism, a belief that applying enough pressure is all it takes to achieve a result, and a resulting utopian mindset. His meticulousness often turned into nitpicking, and he would obsess over trivial details. In spite of the Neo-Stalinist mythology, his views were ideologically blinkered in many important questions. Given the conditions of a hyper-centralized system of military management, all of the Commander-in-Chief's foibles, all of his idiosyncrasies and fantasies took their greatly magnified toll on the real command of warfare. Yes, Stalin was smarter than Hitler, but setting the bar for greatness so low would be embarrassing even for the Generalissimo himself.

"It is all well and good", some might say, "and a lot of what you say might be true – but don't forget, the winner takes it all. "

Perhaps a winner does take it all, but it doesn't make him immune to criticism for misusing his spoils of victory. An untold loss of life, devastation, suffering, the horror of POW camps, occupation, and terror should have given the Russian a right to sizeable reparations. Did Stalin give its due to the nation he called "great" in his Victory Toast? Let's give an objective rundown of military gains and talk about Stalin's diplomacy.

When you hear any talk of Stalinism as an era when Russia was a Great Power to be reckoned with, you should realize that World War II started, and started the way it did, only because the pre-war Stalinist USSR was a pariah state, a rogue state written off by everyone. Through Foreign Affairs Commissar Maksim Litvinov, Stalin kept proclaiming a policy of collective defense, trying to cobble together anti-Fascist coalitions. He waged a "proxy war" with the Nazis in Spain, which was such an ideological trash fire that many past Republican sympathizers had to admit that Franco, a rational nationalist with a strong vision of unity, was better than bloodthirsty Red psychos. Nothing revealed the truth about Red methods for the European Liberal Left and pitted former fellow travelers against the Soviet Union quite like the Spanish Civil War.

When, in 1938, an agreement regarding the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia was reached in Munich, no one bothered to ask the opinion of the USSR, an alleged "Great Power".

When, in 1938, an agreement regarding the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia was reached in Munich, no one bothered to ask the opinion of the USSR, an alleged "Great Power". This pushed Stalin towards a reasonable and prudent idea: if you can't side with hyenas against a wolf, you pit the wolf against the hyenas. In his 1939 pact with Hitler, Stalin attempted, without a major war or sometimes without a single shot fired, to restore the territorial losses of 1918: the Baltics, Western Ukraine and Belarus, and Bessarabia. He bungled with Finland but at least got Vyborg back. He also grabbed what hadn't belonged to Russia but should have: Galicia and Bukovina (the latter would be cited by Hitler as a pretext for the invasion on June 22, 1941).

Was this return to imperial borders justified? It was. Did Stalin do well by this? Probably yes. Did those returned territories do any good for the Russians? Not at all. Stalin fixed the crimes and mistakes of Lenin, a fellow Bolshevik. He pushed the balance of Russian history from "in the red" to "zero". Doesn't sound much for a "great leader".

But what happened to the regathered lands? They were turned into ethnic republics that easily "de-occupied" themselves in 1991. Only tiny tracts of borderlands were annexed to the Pskov oblast. A once heavily Russified Vilna, recaptured from Poland, was given to the Lithuanian SSR. A Moldovan Republic was merged from Bessarabia and Transnistria, which is now on its way to fusing with Romania and dragging the Transnistrian Russians with it. However, Stalin's most toxic and jinxed gift of all was Galicia. The entirety of Ukrainiznig potential accumulated there over the course of Austrian and Polish dominance engulfed Soviet Ukraine and dragged it into the abyss of "anti-Moskalism". Stalin could fight the Banderites however he wanted, but, in the national absence of a Russian idea in the USSR, with Ukrainism propped up by all means possible, it became inevitable that Ukrainian identity would crystallize according to Galician precepts. Petro Poroshenko owes an enormous debt to Stalin, who enabled the Ukrainization of Ukrainizers.

All of these toxic gifts came with a terrible price, paid for by our people during the war. This price gave the Russians the right to expect even greater gifts, now destined only for the Russian people and no one else.

So what happened in reality? Pechenga, once the scene of St. Tryphon of Pechenga's ascetic devotion, became Russian once again. Another restoration of what had been ours before. Carpathian Ruthenia, however, despite the pleas of Rusyn delegates to incorporate their land into the RSFSR, was not united with Russia and sacrificed on the altar of Ukrainization.

The rest was a gift to Poland, that backstabber who managed to reap three harvests from the same field. In exchange for restoring to Russia what Lenin had given away with the Riga peace treaty , they occupied, with Stalin's consent, all of Eastern Germany, and expelled its ethnic German population, and gained highly developed industrial regions, and received the lion's share of East Prussia, and got the Augustów district back from the USSR, and kept running around the world for 80 years complaining about the "Russian occupation" and demanding Lvov and Grodno back. Talk about stuffing the goose! And who kept feeding that pocket monster as a ploy to appease the British? Stalin, that's who.

If there's ever a World War III, it will start with a NATO blockade of Kaliningrad. And Stalin would be to blame for that, because he stripped the Augustów district from Belarus and carved up East Prussia in such a way that our communications with Kaliningrad stretch through Lithuania, always eager to block them entirely. Another toxic gift, because Stalin didn't even believe that Prussia would not stay with the Russians forever. He wanted to trade it in exchange for German neutrality, which is why the first wave of Russian settlement there mainly consisted of exiles. As a result, it wasn't really Stalin's gift to the Russians but Adenauer's: the West German Chancellor wasn't swayed by the prospect of neutrality.

The same happened in the Far East. Stalin did the barest minimum of what every government of nationalist Russia would have done in a military grudge match against Japan: restoring the losses of the Russo-Japanese War and grabbing the Kuril Islands "for the trouble". However, even those gains were left in a suspended and toxic state. Instead of strong-arming Japan into accepting the totality of our gains without further delay, the peace treaty question was dragged out until it blossomed into the mythical problem of the so-called Northern Territories. Toxic gifts, here we go again.

Let's not forget the assets in Manchuria sacrificed in the name of solidarity with Red China – the Chinese Eastern Railway and Dalniy/Dalian, all the more frustrating because Manchuria's specificities made it possible to give it a sui generis status profitable to the Soviets.

What could have been : Map of the "Future Europe" (not like Wilhelm II would have liked it!)

For the USSR, WWII resulted in lesser territorial gains that would have been plausibly claimed by Russia at the end of the Great War, which was "surrendered" by the Bolsheviks in Brest-Litovsk. Almost everywhere he would go, Stalin only picked up what had been squandered by Lenin. He failed to gain from a crushing German defeat even a half of what could have and would have been acquired by the Tsar. Under the Tsar, Galicia would have been incorporated into Russia under a Russian banner (to say nothing of the Turkish Straits). The few acquisitions of the Soviet Empire actually beneficial for the Russians, such as Kaliningrad, turned out to be this way almost by pure happenstance.

As part of a package deal involving these gains, the Russians got a bunch of freeloaders that had to be schooled in the ways of Communism and kept in line at gunpoint (East Germany, Hungary, Czechoslovakia). And they had to be fed, fed, and fed once again. Exhausting the Russians under the burden of hangers-on in an incomprehensible Communist experiment is hardly a solid basis for greatness.

If we calculate the war losses of our nation and our more than modest gains, our victory was indeed Pyrrhic – as great as it was unprofitable. If it was indeed a historical comeback, it remedied not the historical faults of Tsarist Russia but those of Stalin's mentor Lenin, who had wrecked historical Russia both morally and territorially.

Let's give Stalin his due. He knew very well that he had started the war and had been rubbish at managing it. The Russians had every reason to give him the boot. He explicitly mentioned this in the Victory Toast: "A different people could have said to the Government: "You have failed to justify our expectations. Go away. We shall install another government which will conclude peace with Germany and assure us a quiet life."

However, Stalin also considered the Russians' understanding that "running away" from a world war, failing to complete it for a second time would be tantamount to ending our history as a great nation. This was evident to both people of intelligence and the national instinct of the masses. Even such a fervent anti-Communist as Ivan Ilyin wrote that a desertion similar to the one of 1917 was impossible, that one had to fight on and win. Stalin harnessed this resource of Russian prudence and patience to reap the laurels of victory. However, he failed to repay most of his "debts" to the Russians.

The war was barely over, but Marxist historians wasted no time in trampling all over the academic defenders of Russian Imperial legacy led by Academician Tarle . By Stalin's and Zhdanov's decree, the term "Russian nation-state" was almost completely purged from the historical idiom. Orthodox hierarchs were still needed for reasons of international diplomatic representation, but the persecution of the Church would make a comeback, including the closure of churches (bear in mind that most of the churches "opened under Stalin" were churches that reopened by themselves under German occupation, and churches reopened in Stalin-held territories were a drop in the ocean). Barely four years after the victory, state security boss Viktor Abakumov would torture those few Soviet apparatchiks who dared to have but a smidgen of Russian identity. Stalin would destroy his incredibly talented assistant Nikolay Voznesenskiy, ruining all chances of the USSR being led by an intellectually developed Russian person. In the USSR, a prison of the Russian people designed by Lenin and built by Stalin, they briefly opened a fresh-air shutter and then slammed it shut.

We, Russians, cannot elevate this man to the rank of the greatest genius in history while keeping a straight face. We cannot sell our memory – mutilated national livelihood, demolished churches, massacred priests and murdered scientists, engineers, and poets, our forefathers exiled to Siberia for refusing to give their last horse to Red activists – for a minute of Stalin's "Victory Toast".

Yes, we should be fair in our historical judgement and shouldn't defame Stalin with the fantasies of the "children of the Arbat"[4]. But we also should, with even greater force and rage, be fair in the opposite respect: never cutting Stalin any slack for his horrifying sins, mistakes, cruelties, and injustices, never forgetting just how many eggs he broke to make his omelet.

***

[1] Alexander I is widely accepted to have been complicit in the palace coup that led to the death of his father Paul I.

[2] For instance, in the so-called Chapter X of Eugene Onegin Pushkin described Alexander I as "a feeble and conniving ruler, a bald fop, the enemy of all work, crowned with glory by happenstance".

[3] Legend has it that Alexander I, remorseful of his past misdeeds and faced with a profound religious crisis, feigned his own death in 1825 and fled to Siberia, where he lived as a starets (mystic hermit) under the name of Feodor Kuzmich (died 1864). The Orthodox Church officially canonized Feodor Kuzmich as a saint in 1984 but rejects his identification with the Emperor.

[4] Reference to Anatoly Rybakov's 1987 novel Children of the Arbat (referring to a central Moscow street populated by high-ranking "Old Bolsheviks" after the revolution), a hallmark of Perestroika anti-Stalinism, where Stalin was portrayed as a one-dimensionally diabolical and sadistic figure.

melanf , June 8, 2018 at 10:26 am GMT

Boring and stupid propaganda, where the right reasons drown in lies and manipulation
Mikhail , Website June 8, 2018 at 10:57 am GMT

38% of Russian citizens polled by Levada Center put Joseph Stalin at #1 among the greatest heroes of Russian and world history. He is followed by Putin, Pushkin, Lenin, Peter I, Gagarin, Leo Tolstoy, Georgy Zhukov, Catherine II, Lermontov, Lomonosov, Mendeleev, and even Brezhnev and Gorbachev. The only non-Russians who made it to the top are Napoleon, Newton, and Einstein.

Well well well This is an obvious disgrace. If trustworthy, it reveals than the average Russian doesn't have the vaguest idea about the course of Russian and world history and the true importance of historical figures.

How trustworthy is it? Volgograd hasn't been renamed Stalingrad. The still popular in Russia Putin has spoken out against Stalin era oppression. By and large, the May 9 Victory Day honors the Russian people, without emphasizing Stalin.

A Moldovan Republic was merged from Bessarabia and Transnistria, which is now on its way to fusing with Romania and dragging the Transnistrian Russians with it.

Any polling support of this? At last glance, Moldovan support for becoming a part of Romania is closer to 15% than 33%. Either way, there's no majority. In addition, the Gagauz have a legit basis to break from Moldova, were it to merge with Romania. Never mind trying to get Pridnestrovie ( Transnistria ) to go along with such a move.

Pridnestrovie is ethnically pretty evenly distributed among Russiasn, Ukrainians and Moldovans, while having a pro-Russian outlook.

Upon further review, I came across this reference to a poll on Moldovan support for becoming a part of Romania:

https://sputniknews.com/europe/201803141062503935-moldova-romania-nato-unification-poll/

Still a clear minority, with a noticeably strong opposition in Gagauzia (under the control of Moldova) and the disputed territory of Pridnestrovie (which has essentially been separate from Moldova since the Soviet breakup).

Beckow , June 8, 2018 at 3:07 pm GMT

Stalin's great contribution to industrialization consisted in employing slave labor not in a Bronze Age or plantation economy, but in an economy of the Industrial Age Stalin surpassed the kings of Egypt because the Pharaohs used slave labor to build the Pyramids only in Soviet textbooks. In reality, the work teams of peasants that took part in those colossal construction projects were well remunerated and had decent working conditions by Ancient Egyptian standards

Really? ' Slave labor ' was never used to build Industry? This is just silly, and borders on its own nihilism. From pre-Victorian Britain to US company towns and China's recent out-sourcing paradise, the quasi-slave methods have always been used to build industry. There was nothing all that extra-ordinary about 1930′s Soviet Union, other than sheer size. That's how stuff gets built.

And the belated, romantic look at the builders of the Pyramids is neither here, nor there. We don't know, but I suspect the day to day conditions were not that great and probably approximated what peasants building endless dams in Soviet Union experienced.

Stalin was a Bolshevik and Bolshevism was a revenge, not an economic ideology.

Stalin's mind was corrupted by Bolshevism, a belief that applying enough pressure is all it takes to achieve a result

True, but why is there no mention of why tens of millions were ready for the revenge on the system? The life before Bolsheviks wasn't that great and WWI bloody mess was the last straw; the Bolshie nihilism came out of enormous suffering.

I often hear that it was 'about to get better', 'look at European welfare states' or New Deal. I wouldn't be so sure. After hundreds of years of not caring why would the elites voluntarily change the systems to be more broadly-based and spread the wealth? What makes people think that the 20th century enormous egalitarian progress was about to happen without the threat of Bolshevism, socialism of all kinds, Maoism, even fascism in its more populist forms?

We can see that right after the 'revenge' systems collapsed in the late 20th century, the elites immediately went back to restoring the wonderful neo-liberal systems from the early 20th century. There is no fear any more, so why not? Why not have it all? We are living in a transition era before the real consequences hit again. Beginnings are often fun, the neo-liberalism is a pyramid system with its asset privatisation and appreciation, there are lost of winners in the first few decades. But we are heading towards the same paralysis that spawned Bolshevism and other basically revenge philosophies. I would worry about that a lot more than about 'Lithuania' blocking the Augustow pass to Kaliningrad (Russia has planes and ships, don't they?).

songbird , June 8, 2018 at 3:10 pm GMT
@Mitleser

I wasn't even aware that Stalin had any connection to that idea. The way I had heard it, it was Beria who was favorable to German re-unification – but Khrushchev won the power struggle.

Beckow , June 8, 2018 at 3:37 pm GMT
@AP

You are really this clueless?

That means nothing, do you have a point? Would you like to be an English coal-miner in the early 19th century? Or a peasant on Polish latifundias in Galicia? Or work 12 hours a day for Foxconn in Shenzhen today?

Tens of millions out of hundreds of millions isn't much.

Ok, I can go with hundreds of millions seeking revenge on the system towards the end of WWI. They were clearly either a majority or close to it.

Beckow , June 8, 2018 at 3:50 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Russia had no choice but to fight to the end in WWII. Win or lose. If they lost they would be largely gone today, physically gone. And so would Poles, Czechs, Ukrainians and a few other ethnic groups.

Surviving is not an ' epic failure ', it is better that the alternative. The post-WWII settlement was about the best Russia could had done, small adjustments here and there, but they basically got it right. The issue was that they didn't know how to disengage and withdraw. By 1960′s they should had let go. On their own terms. And that wasn't Stalin's fault, but his successors.

"win back lost three provinces of Greater Romania"

That is tricky because one cannot really define Greater Romania or most other states in that region. There are no natural borders, the population was mixed. E.g. who does Silesia 'naturally' belong to? The shift of Poland westward was quite unnatural, but probably the best of all available options. I agree that adding Galicia to Ukraine was a disaster, but what was an alternative? You couldn't reunite 5-10 million Ukrainians with Poland. And they were not viable as a separate state at that time.

Mitleser , June 8, 2018 at 4:10 pm GMT
@Beckow

I agree that adding Galicia to Ukraine was a disaster, but what was an alternative?

Separate SSRs.

Gerard2 , June 8, 2018 at 4:44 pm GMT
Obviously Galicia is a sparsely populated and financially irrelevant shithole in Ukraine. It's political relevance is massively overrated ( plus many have left there to go to Russia or Poland) .the big problem is American money or organisations over there, not the political power of the individuals there.

[Hide MORE]

Obviously it's to do with American money because the "nationalism" of the fuckedup fake sytate of Ukraine makes even less sense if propagated by idiots from Galicia ( so does the fantasism about the Golodomor, for a region never touched by it)
The Soros/State Department for the orange revolution and other elections either side of it then criminally exaggeratd the number of people living there, and then under-exaggerated massively the amount of people in the most populous areas of Ukraine (Novorossiya 5 out of 7) hence why we had all these retarded lies about "120% turnout in Donetsk)

Beckow , June 8, 2018 at 6:20 pm GMT
@TP

I am not familiar with Herr Rudel, but let me try to explain:

Keeping Silesia as part of Germany after WWII was untenable – most Germans were expelled, or about to be driven out. Poles were very, very angry, and the resulting geography would threaten both shrunken Poland (Galicia was gone) and Czechoslovakia. Silesia reaches out quite far eastward.

Making it a part of East Germany would make E Germany too big for the Western allies. That could be reshuffled, but went against 'let's keep divided Germany as small as possible' attitude at Potsdam.

The option of having an independent Silesia, with 'Silesian' ethnicity (it does exist), was economically not viable: land-locked, surrounded, destroyed.

So what would be a better option than (re-)uniting it with Poland and allowing millions of Poles from the Galician east to move there? It has been relatively stable.

Beckow , June 8, 2018 at 6:26 pm GMT
@AP

You should cut it out, you are being irrelevant. I am talking 'industrialisation', that has happened in different countries at different times. I can find 'company towns' in US (Colorado mines ) that were brutally exploitative. And you can find huge relatively nice areas of Russia's industrialisation. Picking up the worst examples in one, and the best in another is not serious.

The 5-year old miners in England in 1840′s were not better off than most peasants in Russia sent to build a big dam. It was all sh..t, thus the revenge I mentioned today check out some working conditions in Asia, is Stalin responsible for that?

Marcus , June 8, 2018 at 6:30 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

So what? The Ukrainization had already wrought tremendous changes by 1932 when it was scaled back. And it seems obvious that Galicians would shift their attention east as they sought to break free of Poland and weren't powerful enough to stand on their own.

John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan , June 8, 2018 at 6:38 pm GMT
@Beckow

If your argument is that the "average" Stalinist experience for the working person was not any worse than the "average" experience in an industralizing country like America or Britain, then you are truly a comical, damned fool.

The whole point of what made the Soviet Union so bad was that the average was nasty, poor, and brutal beyond any other country in modern history.

For example. Digging a canal is always hard work. When the Erie Canal was built in New York State in the early 1800s, somewhere between 500 and 1,000 workers died during the process – virtually all of them during a malaria epidemic when working in a swampy area. A small pox epidemic is said to have killed about 1,200 Chinese coolies building the Transcontinental Railroad in America, and a few more may have died due to Indian attacks in the Nevada wilderness.

By contrast, death estimates for the Moscow-Volga canal alone range from as low as 30,000 (!) to around a million (!). So around a hundred years after less than a thousand Americans died on a big canal project, Stalin and his minions managed to exceed their death total by several tens of thousands. Why is this? With all of the technology developed by the 20th century, it still takes many more thousands of deaths to accomplish a big task? Couldn't great Comrade Stalin – friend of Russian people – do better than those awful western capitalist bosses?

Perhaps because capitalists in Britain and America actually fed their employees? Whereas Stalinist laborers could not eat?

On the other hand, sometimes Stalin could be quite, uh, paternalistic towards his beloved industrial slaves. For example, one P.I. Shcherbakov reports the following story from the building of the Moscow-Volga Canal: "On July, 4, 1934, Joseph Stalin himself had visited the construction site. Observing the foundation pit, he noticed that the inmates were working barefoot. Even if it was in summer, the weather was not very warm. Stalin immediately interrogated his retinue – the directors of the project – why the workers have no footwear. They stalled, saying that they had to bring too many workers on the site, and that the footwear was on the way. The Leader ordered abruptly the footwear to be delivered within two hours, and several men in charge for the provision to be shot. They were shot right away near the ditch."

Thorfinnsson , June 8, 2018 at 7:22 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Had Germany won WW1 (not going into WW2), it most certainly would have rearranged borders further to its liking. Reasonable failure.

Bethmann-Hollweg put forth Germany's demands with the Septemberprogramm .

They were:

France should cede some northern territory, such as the iron-ore mines at Briey and a coastal strip running from Dunkirk to Boulogne-sur-Mer, to Belgium or Germany.

France should pay a war indemnity of 10 billion German Marks, with further payments to cover veterans' funds and to pay off all of Germany's existing national debt. This would prevent French rearmament, make the French economy dependent on Germany, and end trade between France and the British Empire.

France will partially disarm by demolishing its northern forts.

Belgium should be annexed to Germany or, preferably, become a "vassal state", which should cede eastern parts and possibly Antwerp to Germany and give Germany military and naval bases.

Luxembourg should become a member state of the German Empire.

Buffer states would be created in territory carved out of the western Russian Empire, such as Poland, which would remain under German sovereignty "for all time".

Germany would create a Mitteleuropa economic association, ostensibly egalitarian but actually dominated by Germany. Members would include the new buffer states.

The German colonial empire would be expanded. The German possessions in Africa would be enlarged into a contiguous German colony across central Africa (Mittelafrika) at the expense of the French and Belgian colonies. Presumably to leave open future negotiations with Britain, no British colonies were to be taken, but Britain's "intolerable hegemony" in world affairs was to end.

The Netherlands should be brought into a closer relationship to Germany while avoiding any appearance of coercion.

Sounds a lot like the European Union.

Noteworthy that the German reparations' demand is about thirteen times smaller than Versailles imposed on the Germans (granted, the war was only a month old at the time). Land over money apparently.

Not listed here, but the Germans also intended to continue their Drang nach Osten by settling veterans in the east. Nothing like Generalplan Ost of course.

After the collapse of Russia, Germany started realizing some of these aims by setting up a network of puppet states in Eastern Europe ruled by German princes.

melanf , June 8, 2018 at 7:31 pm GMT
@John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

By contrast, death estimates for the Moscow-Volga canal alone range from as low as 30,000 (!) to around a million (!).

Well, a million is just nonsense. It's possible that 30,000 is also nonsense. In addition to the Erie canal there are unfortunately other examples

"A cruel tax and trade-usurious exploitation of the peasantry (in India) had caused widespread hunger . If 1825-1850. the famine twice struck the country and claimed 0.4 million human lives, in 1850-1875 famine killed 5 million, in 1875-1900. -- 26 million."
(ИСТОРИЯ ВОСТОКА IV Восток в новое время (конец XVIII -- начало XX в.) Книга 2)

The industrialization of Western Europe was accompanied by the murder (direct or indirect) of tens, maybe hundreds of millions of people. And America was part of the same system (the transatlantic slave trade was measured in numbers with six zeros)

Dmitry , June 8, 2018 at 7:49 pm GMT
@melanf

It's also not only in India, but industrialization in the UK was not following very 'ethical labour' inside the UK itself.

Revealed: Industrial Revolution was powered by child slaves

Child labour was the crucial ingredient which allowed Britain's Industrial Revolution to succeed, new research by a leading economic historian has concluded.

After carrying out one of the most detailed statistical analyses of the period, Oxford's Professor Jane Humphries found that child labour was much more common and economically important than previously realised. Her estimates suggest that, by the early 19th century, England had more than a million child workers (including around 350,000 seven- to 10-year-olds) – accounting for 15 per cent of the total labour force. The work is likely to transform the academic world's understanding of that crucial period of British history which was the launch-pad of the nation's economic and imperial power

Her work has revealed that during most of the 18th century only around 35 per cent of ten year old working-class boys were in the labour force while the figure for 1791-1820 (when large scale industrialisation started) was 55 per cent, rising to 60 per cent for the period of 1821-1850.

The number of eight-year-old working-class boys at work also rose substantially in that period – with around a third of them being part of the work force between 1791 and 1850 compared to less than 20 per cent before 1791.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/revealed-industrial-revolution-was-powered-by-child-slaves-2041227.html

melanf , June 8, 2018 at 8:10 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

So the much more industrially developed USSR killed about as high a percentage of its own people in famines as foreign colonizers killed Indians.

" We are 50-100 years behind the advanced countries. We must bridge that gap in ten years. Otherwise we will be destroyed " Stalin February 4, 1931

1931+10=1941

The British oligarchy (which killed many more people in British Empire) has no such excuse.

Thorfinnsson , June 8, 2018 at 8:15 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

There's no shortage of Russian heroes to choose from.

Seems like the state and its propaganda apparatus could simply emphasize other Russian heroes.

Best policy to Stalin is probably benign neglect. People don't respond well to having their idols destroyed, even if the idol is false.

And isn't this what Putin is doing anyway?

melanf , June 8, 2018 at 8:33 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

Best policy to Stalin is probably benign neglect.

For this purpose it is necessary to exterminate as rats the Russian liberal intelligentsia. Until this is done – Stalin will be a hero.

Mikhail , Website June 8, 2018 at 8:40 pm GMT
@AP

(there was basically zero support for Russian nationalists of course, with no substantial number of Ukrainians from Russian-ruled Ukraine joining the Whites)

You're big on giving personal anecdotes. I've heard from folks knowing the Whites in Ukraine, that Ukrainian was spoken among those with Russian Empire roots (not Galician) fighting on the side of the Whites. That recollection is quite believable given the actual circumstances.

Petliura's support was limited and his forces were unable to successfully defeat the Whites. Petliura's weakness explains his willingness to become Pilsudski's puppet in a move that saw Petliura recognizing all of Galicia going to Poland. In turn, the Galician Ukrainian Army en masse came under the command of the Russian Whites.

Beckow , June 8, 2018 at 8:45 pm GMT
@John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

If your argument is that the "average" Stalinist experience for the working person was not any worse than the "average" experience in an industralizing country like America or Britain

You provide a classical straw man diversion, so common among 'educated' in the West. No, my argument is that industrialization, then and now, in 19th century or in the 1930′s, is often a painful, violent, unpleasant process. I specifically mentioned China's today outsourced factories where people work 12 hours, jump from roofs, and live pretty close to a slave life. That was very common in 19th century England where 5-year olds were dropped to 'mine for coal'.

Your method is predictably faulty: pick a worst examples, worst place, worst time (1930′s) in Russia, exaggerate or quote ' some people say that maybe a 1 million died.. ' and compare it to heavily ' explained ' case in Britain or US, with allusions to 'malaria', etc.. and that gives you a self-satisfied feeling that, of course, the sh..t in Britain-US doesn't stink, and never did. Forget slavery, Victorian child labor, koolies, forget all of that and just focus razor-sharp on that 'Volga-canal'.

And you are surprised nobody takes you seriously? Fighting straw men is the true fools's errand

Beckow , June 8, 2018 at 8:52 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

It was a disaster because it created a dysfunctional Ukraine with populations quite different and attitudes that are hard to reconcile. But it took a few generations, in 1945 I still think it was the best among the available bad options.

If you ask me to start from scratch (that was not possible in 1945 with all the emotions), I would say that Galicia existence as a province of a larger 'Habsburg-lite' country might had worked the best. It would fit the pro-Western orientation of Galicians, keep them in 'Europe', and allow the east to rationally develop on its own. That was not an option in 1945, so we got the mess that we have today. It will get much worse before this is settled.

Mikhail , Website June 8, 2018 at 8:52 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

Here is a problem I see with what you are doing (this applies to Kholmogorov as well): you are tearing down an idol without offering anything in its place. Stalin for Russians is more than a war-time leader, he is a religious figure, a moustached Russian Jesus. Ukrainians, who reject Stalin are expected to worship Stepan Bandera, but what will Russians believe in? People in this part of the world have a need for some idols in their lifes.

Russians and Ukrainians have better alternatives than Stalin and Bandera to look to with pride.

Anatoly Karlin , Website June 8, 2018 at 8:58 pm GMT
@melanf

Why should the British oligarchy care about the plight of Indians?

Whom should it provide those excuses to, anyway?

It would only be comparable if the "British oligarchy" had starved a couple of million Englishmen to death (the English being the state-making people of Britain). However, as I recall, the last famine affecting ENGLAND occurred prior to the Black Death (!).

Mikhail , Website June 8, 2018 at 8:58 pm GMT
@Beckow

Stalin's heavy handedness in Galicia didn't help things from a Soviet and to a certain degree Russian viewpoint.

The Galician Ukrainians were generally not happy with being ruled by Poland. Having Russian speaking Soviets (including some Ukrainians) being brutal following Molotov-Ribbentrop and before the Nazi attack on the USSR, nurtured a convoluted image among those with a pro-Bandera/Captive Nations Committee sentiment.

Mr. Hack , June 8, 2018 at 9:04 pm GMT
@Beckow

But Galicians have by and large been content to develop within a Ukrainian state. They often refer to themselves as the 'Piedmont of Ukraine' and relish their role of being in the vanguard of Ukraine's national revival. In fact, I know of no Galician of any stature that has advocated Galicia apart from the rest of Ukraine – the Western Ukrainian Republic was an anomaly that lasted for a short time and was only to be a temporary solution for Ukraine's larger development.

Beckow , June 8, 2018 at 9:08 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

To provide context doesn't men defending something. Isolated thoughts often become just empty sloganeering. I have seen an estimate by an Indian historian that claimed that British Empire caused the death of 200 million people. From India to Africa, from America to Ireland.

Probably true, or maybe exaggerated, maybe it was only 100 million. People die for all kinds of reasons. French and Spanish (even Italians) can also be counted on causing millions and millions to die. The two objections that I hear is that it was long time ago and that it was 'not their own people'. Both are partially true, but not really relevant – Masais were being killed by Britain in 1950′s and Irish are kind of part of the family.

Context matters, but I disagree with 'hero Stalin' arguments – I generally dislike heroes of all kinds. And Stalin was a twerp, murderer and in many ways a failure. To defend him out of spite is silly. Let history take care of what happened. (I am also puzzled by Pushkin at #3, what gives? he was shot because he was inept in social situations, a hero? I suspect low level autism )

Dmitry , June 8, 2018 at 9:10 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

The Great Famine (Irish: an Gorta Mór, [anˠ ˈgɔɾˠt̪ˠa mˠoːɾˠ]) or the Great Hunger was a period of mass starvation, disease, and emigration in Ireland between 1845 and 1849.[1] It is sometimes referred to, mostly outside Ireland, as the Irish Potato Famine, because about two-fifths of the population was solely reliant on this cheap crop for a number of historical reasons.[2][3] During the famine, about one million people died and a million more emigrated from Ireland,[4] causing the island's population to fall by between 20% and 25%.[5]

Since the Acts of Union in January 1801, Ireland had been part of the United Kingdom. Executive power lay in the hands of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland and Chief Secretary for Ireland, who were appointed by the British government. Ireland sent 105 members of parliament to the House of Commons of the United Kingdom, and Irish representative peers elected 28 of their own number to sit for life in the House of Lords. Between 1832 and 1859, 70% of Irish representatives were landowners or the sons of landowners.[8]

Records show that Irish lands exported food even during the worst years of the Famine. When Ireland had experienced a famine in 1782–83, ports were closed to keep Irish-grown food in Ireland to feed the Irish. Local food prices promptly dropped. Merchants lobbied against the export ban, but government in the 1780s overrode their protests.[79] No such export ban happened in the 1840s.[80]

Throughout the entire period of the Famine, Ireland was exporting enormous quantities of food.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_(Ireland)

Beckow , June 8, 2018 at 9:15 pm GMT
@Mikhail

Stalin's heavy handedness in Galicia didn't help

Sure, it didn't help. Also Hitler's, Bandera's, Polish, and even Habsburg heavy handedness didn't help. Look around, most of history are stupid heavy-handed over-reaching acts

Beckow , June 8, 2018 at 9:21 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

Ok, but would you agree that Ukraine has had a few contradicting tendencies? Galicians are 10-15% of Ukraine and are totally Western-oriented. Donbass is not, no matter how you spin it. And Odessa, Kiev or Kharkov are also not quite in the ' West-is-best, and there can be nothing else ' camp. Thus today's difficulties in Ukraine.

The economic integration of the eastern 2/3 of Ukraine with Russia is real and hard to change without major living standards disruption. That says that a compromise, or some degree of decentralisation are required. Galicians and their allies don't want a compromise – they want it all. It will not work. It it will cause a lot of tears and regrets.

melanf , June 8, 2018 at 9:22 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Why should the British oligarchy care about the plight of Indians?
Whom should it provide those excuses to, anyway?
It would only be comparable if the "British oligarchy" had starved a couple of million Englishmen to death. However, as I recall, the last famine affected BRITAIN occurred prior to the Black Death (!).

This is a joke? The English common people of the times of James Watt, worked fifteen hours a day for a bowl of soup for the family. Children were chained to carts to carry coal and ore through narrow passages in the mines. Throughout England, concentration camps (work houses) were established. A little earlier White British were traded as cattle-raids were carried out in port cities to replenish the number of slaves on sugar cane plantations. But white slaves in the tropical climate died very quickly, so they were replaced by Negroes. British slave owners сonducted (as far as I know) even breeding work: white female slaves crossed with black slaves , to obtain the optimal breed.
Grigory Potemkin was going to buy several tens of thousands of Englishmen for the settlement of the Crimea and Novorossiya. Count Vorontsov (Russian Ambassador to England) managed to destroy this deal, otherwise in the Crimea would speak English.

In England there was no short-term mass famine (similar to the famine in Ireland in 1848-49) but monstrous living conditions killed the British monotonously and daily.

Marcus , June 8, 2018 at 9:23 pm GMT
@melanf

What a dumb comment. Most Russians have favorable opinions of Stalin, they are all madmen?

Cyrano , June 8, 2018 at 9:46 pm GMT
If my grandma had different genitalia, I would have called her a grandpa. I would have also grown up a very confused kid: Why do I of all kids have a transgendered grandma and is this a sign of the things to come?

Anyhow, my favorite theory about history is this: The most optimal history, with the best case scenario circumstances is the one that already happened. There is only one history and we can't improve on it based on our superior knowledge now.

Sure Russia could have benefited from having a less homicidal maniac as a leader, but you can't improve some parts of the equations that you don't like, without effecting the rest. Thank God that Russia was communist in WW2 and that Hitler used that as an excuse as to why he hated the Slavs – because of communism – yeah right.

Russia is not communist since 1991, why do they still hate them? Russia will be hated by the west no matter what kind of political system they have. It's called jealousy. By having communism it provided Hitler for an excuse to declare that to be the primary reason why the Russians have to be annihilated.

If the political system in Russia in WW2 was "democracy" – that might have lulled them into believing that when the going got tough, a "deal" could have been made with the Nazis (even Stalin tried to sue for peace with Hitler), or the west or whomever they might have ended up fighting in the revised version of history of WW2. By not having those delusional options that they – the Russians as a democracy can make a deal with the west which will save them – they might have avoided committing a national suicide.

Dmitry , June 8, 2018 at 9:56 pm GMT
@melanf

In England there was no short-term mass famine (similar to the famine in Ireland in 1848-49) but monstrous living conditions killed the British monotonously and daily.

England and Ireland were the same country (under the union – the United Kingdom), ruled from London – until 1922. (Part of Ireland – Northern Ireland – is still with the United Kingdom).

So there was a mass famine, in which 25% of the population fell in one republic of the United Kingdom, under the rule of London.

AP , June 8, 2018 at 10:04 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

Couple this with your observation that there was virtually no support for Russian nationalism in Ukraine, and what you have is a large area where in fact it appears that the Ukrainian national idea was quite popular.

In central Ukraine the Ukrainian idea was popular. An overwhelming majority of the people voted for Ukrainian parties, and they clearly had a Ukrainian self-identity. But unlike Galicians, or Poles, or Finns, they were less likely to fight and die for their national idea in 1917-1920. To be sure, this spirit was not absent – 100,000 volunteers isn't nothing. But it wasn't much either.

To put it in perspective – the two Donbas oblasts had 6.5 million people in 2013, compared to 27 or so million ethnic Ukrainians in the Russian-ruled parts of Ukraine. So about 1/4 the population. Donbas militias have about 40,000 troops. That would be equivalent to 160,000 troops in 1917 Ukraine. Now, there are numerous caveats – Russia lavishly supplies the Donbas militias, Ukrainian ones were on their own, and there are some pro-Kiev volunteers from Donbas whereas there were virtually no pro-Russian ones among Russian Empire Russians.

Of course, to repeat myself, there was basically zero sentiment among these people to fight for Russia. There were some Kadets from among ethnic Russians in Kiev but no pro-White military units of Ukrainians/Little Russians from Russian-ruled Ukraine. Even Makhno, already losing, murdered Wrangel's emissary's rather than join forces with him.

Dmitry , June 8, 2018 at 10:16 pm GMT
@melanf

Children were chained to carts to carry coal and ore through narrow passages in the mines.

At 2:10 in the video:

AP , June 8, 2018 at 10:25 pm GMT
@Mikhail

I've heard from folks knowing the Whites in Ukraine, that Ukrainian was spoken among those with Russian Empire roots (not Galician) fighting on the side of the Whites.

Name any military units from Russian Ukraine who fought on the side of the Whites. There were not. Zero. Some Ukrainian-speaking Cossacks from the Kuban did, but Kuban isn't in Ukraine.

the Galician Ukrainian Army en masse came under the command of the Russian Whites.

It's telling that only the Galicians (briefly) placed themselves under White command but no ethnic Ukrainian forces from Russian Ukraine ever did. Galicians did it after they became stateless (Petlura signed Galicia over to Poland in exchange for help against the Soviets) during a typhoid epidemic and received much-needed medicine from the Entente that the Whites had access to. I don't think they ever fought a battle for the Whites, although I may be mistaken on that point. The Whites disintegrated before the Galicians could get healthy.

Under similar circumstances some Galicians ended up fighting in the Red Army against Poland. One of the Red Galician commanders, Alfred Bizanz (an ethnic German), eventually made his way west and 20 years later become a commander of the Galician SS Division.

Mr. XYZ , June 8, 2018 at 10:36 pm GMT
: Out of curiosity–had Ukraine been smaller (no Galicia, Volhynia, Subcarpathian Ruthenia, Bessarabia, and northern Bukovina–for instance, had Hitler never become to power in Germany and there would have thus been no German-Soviet partition of Poland), and had Ukraine would have joined the Eurasian Economic Union after the collapse of the Soviet Union (if it would have still occurred in this scenario, that is), what do you think that the long(er)-term future of the Eurasian Economic Union would have looked like in this scenario?

Also, as a side note, it's interesting that, with the exception of Yekaterinoslav Guberniya, Ukrainian parties don't appear to have done very well in "Novorossiya" in the 1917 elections. Indeed, they failed to win in the Kharkiv Guberniya, in the Taurida Guberniya, and in the Kherson Guberniya.

In turn, this makes me wonder–had an independent Ukrainian state limited to central and western Ukraine been created, how viable would it have been? After all, this state would have been landlocked (I can't see Russia agreeing to give up Yekaterinoslav Guberniya considering that it would cut off the Taurida Guberniya, the Kherson Guberniya, and the Bessarabian Guberniya from the rest of Russia) and would have thus had to rely on Russia, Poland, or Romania for sea access.

Finally, off-topic, but as a side question–why exactly were Ukrainians outside of Galicia unwilling to fight en masse for the Ukrainian national cause in 1917-1920?

Thorfinnsson , June 8, 2018 at 10:39 pm GMT
@Cyrano

Sure Russia could have benefited from having a less homicidal maniac as a leader, but you can't improve some parts of the equations that you don't like, without effecting the rest. Thank God that Russia was communist in WW2 and that Hitler used that as an excuse as to why he hated the Slavs – because of communism – yeah right.

Russia is not communist since 1991, why do they still hate them? Russia will be hated by the west no matter what kind of political system they have. It's called jealousy. By having communism it provided Hitler for an excuse to declare that to be the primary reason why the Russians have to be annihilated.

Read Mein Kampf . The H-man didn't use communism as an "excuse". He openly planned to eliminate Russians because they stood in the way of his dream of a continental German Empire, and he considered slavs to be racially inferior (a view he reneged on at the end of his life for obvious reasons).

The idea that the West is "naturally" hostile to Russia is completely bogus. The American Empire has been mostly hostile to Russia since 1945, and yes for America communism was mostly (though not completely) an excuse. The "wise men" who formulated the doctrine of Containment admitted as much.

Prior to 1945 Russia was part of the normal European state system. Depending on the state of the times Russia could be friendly, isolated, allied, at war, etc. with any number of European states. Where was the implacable Western hatred of Russia exactly?

Germany fought two wars with Russia in the 20th century, but in the 19th century it was a German statesman (vom Stein) who convinced Tsar Alexander to join with Prussia in forming the Sixth Coalition to finally beat Napoleon. Only the year before one out of three soldiers in Napoleon's Grand Army had in fact been German!

Likewise Napoleon invaded Russia, but a century later France was Russia's greatest ally.

Mikhail , Website June 8, 2018 at 11:44 pm GMT
@AP

Awhile back, I had earlier presented those in the officer ranks of the White Russians with ties to Ukraine. You pooh poohed that by noting their ties to Russia proper (for lack of a better term) – which BTW was part of the same entity as much of what's now known as Ukraine.

That the White leadership was top heavy with folks from outside Ukraine doesn't mean that there wasn't a noticeable degree of rank and file White participation among people from the territory of what became the Ukrainian SSR – including individuals who'd qualify as being ethnic Ukrainian. Hence the previously noted recollection of Ukrainian being spoken among the Whites. I also know someone whose family joined the Whites after serving under Skoropadsky. That person's family has direct roots to Ukraine and has what's considered a typical Ukrainian surname. He has played a lead role in patriotic Russian anti-Communist emigre circles. Know some others with a similar background as well.

The Whites started their anti-Bolshevik opposition outside the territory of what became modern day Ukraine. The Russian Civil War era elections in Kiev didn't include a large segment of the overall population of what became the Ukrainian SSR and is therefore not so conclusive in determining public opinion at the time there. Hence, it's within reason to say (as has been previously stated by others) that a good number of folks on the territory of what became the Ukrainian SSR weren't so motivated to support any of the lead Russian Civil War era combatants.

Meantime, it's clear that Petliura lacked support on the territory he sought to represent. He was militarily no match for either the Whites or Reds. The latter two had support within what became the Ukrainian SSR. Despite their differences, the Whites and Reds each supported some form of Russo-Ukrainian togetherness which brings to mind Skoropadsky's edict for an All-Russian Federation , inclusive of Russia and Ukraine:

https://www.eurasiareview.com/22052011-pavlo-skoropadsky-and-the-course-of-russian-ukrainian-relations-analysis/

Due to the dominating German presence, Skoropadsky and the Whites had problems connecting. In addition, the Germans restricted the amount of weapons to Skoropadsky's forces – which was to greatly assist those who overthrew Skoropadsky as WW I came to an end.

On another matter you recently brought up, Makhno fought Petliura's forces. Makhno, was arguably more of an anarchist than a Ukrainian nationalist.

Beckow , June 9, 2018 at 12:31 am GMT
@Thorfinnsson

The idea that the West is "naturally" hostile to Russia is completely bogus

Let's drop the 'naturally' qualifier, since we wouldn't agree on how to define it. That leaves a question: has West been hostile to Russia? Yes, in the last 10-15 years, no sane person could deny it. Maybe there are reasons for it, but the hostility is undeniable – and it covers Brits, Americans, French, German, Spanish, and even Italians. Dutch, Swedes and Danish have also been hostile.

West claims that they would not be hostile if Russia ' would change its ways '. Interesting, by that standard we could all be friends. I always tell people ' if you do 100% what I want, and agree with me 100%, I will be your best friend' . To ask others to change is to admit that you dislike them as they are, thus logically, you simply dislike them.

The second weasel excuse is that West likes Russian people, just dislikes their government (for some strange reason always personalised as 'Putin'). We hear this less and less because it is so absurd – Russians have chosen the government, they agree with most main policies. Let's call spade a spade: West doesn't like Russia as it is.

How long has this been going on before 2000? Putting aside the communist era, one can find very strong anti-Russian sentiments in all main Western countries at least since late 18th century, with Britain being the outstanding hater. There were occasional opportunistic thaws when some country needed an ally, or needed something, but in general West was always quite hostile towards Russia. It is too big, it is Orthodox, it has its own vibe. From Napoleon, to Crimean War (West invaded to side with Ottoman Moslems to keep Russia from gaining influence in the Balkans), to Hitler's coalition

European Christian civilization will not prosper divided. West gleefully destroyed and abandoned Byzantium 500 years ago. They are making the same mistake today.

David In TN , June 9, 2018 at 1:35 am GMT
@Beckow

Herr Rudel was the "Stuka Pilot," the most highly decorated WW II German.

Mitchell Porter , June 9, 2018 at 2:28 am GMT
Maybe no-one here knows or cares, but I would be interested to know about the impact of the war with Germany on Marxist-Leninist ideology in Russia. It seems like the original Marxist conception was that the workers' revolution would just happen and spread until it was universal.

Then fascism was supposed to be a last-ditch defense of the system by the capitalists. So after an enormous war in which fascism was actually defeated – did they think that now the tide had turned? And with the disintegration of the European maritime empires, and with many of the newly independent countries turning towards socialism, an optimistic attitude (towards the eventual global victory of socialism) must have been possible for many decades Maybe I should read something by Suslov, I've heard that he was the ideological chief in the Brezhnev era.

AP , June 9, 2018 at 2:48 am GMT
@Mikhail

I asked a specific question:

Name the ethnic Ukrainian units or military formations from Russian ruled Ukraine that fought on the side of the Whites in 1917-1920.

You failed to do so.

Because there were none.

There was no widescale or even smallscale support for Russia among ethnic Ukrainians in Russian-ruled Ukraine. Only, perhaps, some individuals out of the millions. But you failed to provide even names of those so it must have been a small number indeed.

Saying you know someone or heard of someone doesn't count. Meanwhile, around 100,000 ethnic Ukrainians from Russian-ruled Ukraine did fight for various Ukrainian nationalist leaders from Russian-ruled Ukraine, such as Symon Petliura, or Danylo Zeleny (30,000 troops at peak). Not much from a territory of 27 million people, but more than the virtually zero who took up arms for Russia.

AP , June 9, 2018 at 3:01 am GMT
@Marcus

Makhno's wife was a Ukrainian-language teacher. His forces were basically neutral towards those of the Ukrainian nationalist Petliura while being bitterly opposed to the Whites; Makhno contributed to Denikin's defeat, and even when he was about to be defeated by the Bolsheviks he killed Wrangel's envoys rather than cooperate with the Whites.

Hyperborean , June 9, 2018 at 3:46 am GMT
@Beckow

(I am also puzzled by Pushkin at #3, what gives? he was shot because he was inept in social situations, a hero? I suspect low level autism )

Levada doesn't explicitly say 'heroes', just 'great personalities', so Pushkin would be considered due to his cultural contributions.

The polls are often based on the public's knowledge of historical figures, their perception of who is good and current societal moods (which is why Putin is a joint second place).

Interestingly, it appears Stalin had his own role in making Pushkin a great figure: https://www.rbth.com/arts/literature/2017/02/14/pushkin-soviet-god_701618

melanf , June 9, 2018 at 3:46 am GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Much as I love the idea of enslaving the English, all of this is something out of a parallel universe.

Oh really?

" Both in England and in France used all means in order to gain the right immigrants (slaves) In Bristol simply abducted men, women and children Under Cromwell held mass sending Scottish and Irish prisoners. From 1717 to 1779 Britain sent to the colonies 50 thousand exiles (as slaves), and in 1732 the humane Evangelist John Ogtrop founded a new colony in Georgia wanting to gather many prisoners for debt

Consequently, there was widespread and long-lasting white slavery it disappeared for economic reasons, not for racial ones ."

Fernand Braudel. -- Civilisation matérielle, économie et capitalisme, XVe-XVIIIe sičcle

There are many similar examples in this book. Here's another (not going to translate into English, as I don't have time):

" Задержанного бродягу пороли плетьми "прикованного палачом к задку телеги". Ему выбривали голову, его клеймили каленым железом; в случае рецидива его грозили повесить без суда и следствия или отправить на галеры – и запросто отправляли В 1547 г. английский парламент постановил, что бродяги будут не более не менее обращаться в рабство (эта мера была два года спустя отменена, так как не удалось решить вопрос с использованием этих рабов) идея витала в воздухе. Ожье Бузбек (представитель испанского короля при турецком султане) полагал что "ежели бы рабство применялось справедливо или мягче, как того требуют римские законы, не было бы необходимости вешать и карать всех тех, кои ничего не имея ничего кроме свободы и жизни становится преступником от нужды". И в конечном счете это решение возобладает в 17 веке ибо разве заключение в тюрьму и на каторжные работы это разве не рабство? Повсюду бродяг сажают под замок: в Италии в приюты для бедных, в Англии в работные дома (workhouse), в Женеве в исправительную тюрьму (Discipline), в Германии в исправительные дома (Zuhthauser), в Париже – в смирительные дома (maison de forse): в Гранд Опиталь созданный ради заключения там бедняков в 1662, в Бастилию, Венсенский замок, Сен-Лазар, Бисетр, Шарнтон, Мадлен, Сен-Пелажи. На помощь властям приходили также болезни и смерть И однако же ни неутомимая труженица-смерть, ни свирепые тюрьмы не искоренили зло Не взирая на экономический подьем, пауперизм усилился в 18 веке из за демографического роста Тысячи крестьян оказались выброшенными на дороги – наподобие того, как задолго до этого времени происходило в Англии с началом огораживаний. В 18 веке эта человеческая грязь от которой никому не удавалось избавится поглощала все: вдов, сирот, калек, беглых подмастерьев, священников без церковных доходов, стариков, погорельцев, жертв войн, обрюхаченных служанок, девиц матерей ото всюду прогоняемых и детей посылаемых за хлебом или на воровство Порядочные люди старались не думать о этих "подонках общества, отбросах городов, биче республик, материале для виселиц. Их столько и повсюду, что было бы довольно трудно их счесть, а годны они лишь на то, чтобы отправить их на галеры или повесить, чтобы служили примером "

melanf , June 9, 2018 at 3:55 am GMT
@melanf

And there are more radical statements

White Cargo is the forgotten story of the thousands of Britons who lived and died in bondage in Britain's American colonies.
In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, more than 300,000 white people were shipped to America as slaves. Urchins were swept up from London's streets to labor in the tobacco fields, where life expectancy was no more than two years. Brothels were raided to provide "breeders" for Virginia. Hopeful migrants were duped into signing as indentured servants, unaware they would become personal property who could be bought, sold, and even gambled away. Transported convicts were paraded for sale like livestock.
Drawing on letters crying for help, diaries, and court and government archives, Don Jordan and Michael Walsh demonstrate that the brutalities usually associated with black slavery alone were perpetrated on whites throughout British rule. The trade ended with American independence, but the British still tried to sell convicts in their former colonies, which prompted one of the most audacious plots in Anglo-American history.
This is a saga of exploration and cruelty spanning 170 years that has been submerged under the overwhelming memory of black slavery. White Cargo brings the brutal, uncomfortable story to the surface .

However, I did not read this book, perhaps the author of a falsifier like Solzhenitsyn. But the story about the failed purchase of two-legged cattle ("free" British) for the settlement of the Crimea – true. And this is the end of the 18th century.

Mikhail , Website June 9, 2018 at 4:32 am GMT
@AP

Your personal anecdotes haven't been shown to be more legit than the ones I've provided. Militarily, Petliura's forces did nothing of significance against the Whites and Reds for the reasons I mentioned. You fail to grasp the fact that people on what became Ukrainian territory fought on the White side. Such folks were typically never with Petliura – which is understandable given how many never supported him.

There's some difference on the actual number of Petliura's forces. Lehovich notes that just prior to Petliura's break with the Galician Ukrainians, he commanded a force of 35,000, of which 20,000 were Galician.

Hyperborean , June 9, 2018 at 4:33 am GMT
@iffen

People from the western-most part of the Ukraine, often noted for having a very strong Ukrainian national consciousness.

Mikhail , Website June 9, 2018 at 4:35 am GMT
@AP

Makhno fought against Petliura's forces. In exile, he associated with Russian anarchists.

Mikhail , Website June 9, 2018 at 4:56 am GMT
@AP

Wikipedia and other sources make note that Makhno fought Petliura's forces.

Upon Petliura's break with the Galician Ukrainian Army, the Whites severely beat his forces in the areas of Uman, Gaisin and Birsula. Thereafter, Petliura's forces retreated behind Polish lines.

Mikhail , Website June 9, 2018 at 5:39 am GMT
@AP

You're irrelevantly boorish, with an autistic trait by not acknowledging the obvious about folks ethnically akin to the territory of what became the Ukrainian SSR, who fought on the White side, without having previously been associated with Petliura, who lacked a good deal of popular support.

Their looting aside, what great battles did Zeleny's forces win? In comparison, Makhno had military significance in a way that Petliura and Zeleny didn't. Onc e again noting that Makhno was more of an anarchist than Ukrainian nationalist. The academically written works on the Russian Civil War give little comparative mention to Zeleny.

Mikhail , Website June 9, 2018 at 5:48 am GMT
@AP

Makhno lumped Denikin and Petliura together as negative forces to what he preferred.

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/makhno-nestor/works/1928/12/national-question.htm

From Wiki:

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

Makhno fought all factions which sought to impose any external authority over southern Ukraine, battling in succession the Ukrainian Nationalists, the Imperial German and Austro-German occupation, the Hetmanate Republic, the Russian White Army, the Russian Red Army, and other smaller forces led by Ukrainian otamans.

Denikin was militarily stronger than Petliura. That aspect motivated Makhno to concentrate more of his efforts against Denikin than Petliura.

Mikhail , Website June 9, 2018 at 5:52 am GMT
@AP

An autistic trait is the inability to not grasp a valid point that conflicts with a rehashed mantra. You've exhibited such much unlike myself.

Once again noting that folks ethnically akin to what became the former Ukrainian SSR fought on the White side, without having necessarily been associated with Petliura's forces or any other committed to a complete Ukrainian separatism from Russia – thereby explaining the accounts of Ukrainian being spoken among some Whites. Quite believable given Petliura's limited popularity.

Dmitry , June 9, 2018 at 5:55 am GMT
@AP

Fernand Braudel is not a bad/unreliable source – an academic historian from France.

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

Mikhail , Website June 9, 2018 at 5:58 am GMT
@AP

Your point being what? Makhno clearly didn't support Petliura, with yourself saying that some skirmishes between the two might've been evident.

Dmitry , June 9, 2018 at 6:11 am GMT
@AP

The British government sent British children as slaves (for "hard labour") in their empire into the 1960s.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/feb/24/child-migrant-programme-slavery

https://www.google.ru/search?newwindow=1&ei=UXAbW9WGLMLMwAKPqavIBQ&q=%22betrayed+children+sold+into+slavery+-+the+Australian%22&oq=%22betrayed+children+sold+into+slavery+-+the+Australian%22&gs_l=psy-ab.3 19052.32821.0.33000.60.55.4.0.0.0.328.7411.0j34j8j2.44.0&#8230 ;.0 1c.1.64.psy-ab..13.17.2257 0j0i67k1j0i10k1j0i22i30k1j33i160k1j0i22i10i30k1j0i8i13i30k1j0i13i30k1.0.XAL40lUpC78

Anatoly Karlin , Website June 9, 2018 at 6:28 am GMT
@Pseudonymic Handle

So, the russians invaded, looted and destroyed our countries and kept us imprisoned by force for 50 years in their dystopia and now they call us freeloaders that needed to be fed?

The USSR exported oil, gas, and other raw materials to COMECON members and got inferior, overpriced manufactured goods in return. The RSFSR was likewise one of only two net donors to the USSR. Moreover, in 1946-47, "conquered" East Germans were literally fed at the expense of starving Russians .

Consequently, Kholmogorov is perfectly correct.

So your real objection is "tone" or similar crap. This makes you the East European edition of an SJW.

Anatoly Karlin , Website June 9, 2018 at 6:39 am GMT
@melanf

Standard in the 18th century:

* Indentured servants – People *willingly* signed a contract to work for x number of years (as I recall, 3-5 was standard) in return for the Trans-Atlantic ticket. Well, labor laws were harsh then, no doubt about that.

* Press-ganging into the Royal Navy – Perhaps closer to "white slavery", but then again, you could look at it as a sort of roughhouse conscription. And they got paid once in service.

All of the rest was either (1) not slavery, or (2) much have been small-scale and untypical.

Anatoly Karlin , Website June 9, 2018 at 6:56 am GMT
@Dmitry

First off, we're talking about a replacement religion for the bozos who march around with Stalin icons.

But I'll defend them anyway.

First image has a powerful aesthetic that evokes the techpriests of the Adeptus Mechanicus in the Imperium of Man. Praise be to the Omnissiah!

This is also in line with Kholmogorov's vision of Atomic Orthodoxy , whereby our permanent nuclear stalemate leads to the primacy of ideological struggle. Psykers awake!

Second image is the book cover to a sci-fi novel by Alexander Zorich, which is a collective pen-name for a male and female writer from Kharkov. Their series takes place in the 27th century where Russia and Ukraine are united, and constitute a space empire.

DFH , June 9, 2018 at 7:14 am GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Press-ganging was doubtless unpleasant for those experiencing it, but was minor compared to the full-scale conscription present in every other European state.

Sending rebels and other criminals to America was obviously much more humane than the alternative of execution or mutilation. Georgia was actually founded by philanthropists to try and reform criminals, but failed like most such projects. There was of course nothing unique about this, the French attempt to try and populate Louisiana with prostitutes, among other criminals, is well-known.

Once again a double standard is applied to Britain.

Mikhail , Website June 9, 2018 at 9:40 am GMT
@AP

You completely flopped in trying to disprove the historically obvious:

- Petliura had limited support on the territory which became the Ukrainian SSR
- that resulted in his willingness to become Pilsudski's puppet.

If his vision was so popular, the Whites and Reds would've had a difficult time with him, which wasn't the case – partly on account of the Reds and Whites each finding support on the territory that became the Ukrainian SSR. As noted earlier, there was also the matter of many on the territory of what became the Ukrainian SSR, not being so supportive of any of the armed groups.

anonymous coward , June 9, 2018 at 10:57 am GMT
@iffen

What's a Galician?

Galicia is the North-Western part of the modern Ukrainian state. It was always part of Poland throughout history. They're distantly related to people in Ukraine proper, and were annexed to the Ukrainian SSR by Stalin in 1939.

They're the political and cultural driver behind a 'Western' orientation for Ukraine. Which is not surprising: they're just wanting to rejoin a historical greater Poland.

Which will happen sooner or later, one way or the other. Outright annexation is probably unfeasible today, so Poland as a 'plan B' is right now in the process of giving Galicians Polish citizenship.

melanf , June 9, 2018 at 12:34 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

These people (in very many cases) were not volunteers (read the quote carefully). Temporary slavery (7 years) on sugar cane plantations (where white people have been dying for 2 years) is an evil joke. There was (along with temporary) and permanent white slavery. And if you like the British Empire slavery, I have absolutely no idea what you're up against Stalin. Stalin's concentration camps were no worse than the British plantations. And of course, in both cases, the victims were "criminals".

German_reader , June 9, 2018 at 1:04 pm GMT
@DFH

Once again a double standard is applied to Britain.

I don't think that's the motivation in this case, it's rather an attempt to claim that whites were subject to slavery just as blacks (which isn't true, indentured servitude was limited in time). Part of the debate who's had it worse in American history, blacks or "white trash".

Thorfinnsson , June 9, 2018 at 1:07 pm GMT
@Dmitry

In reality, many were children of single mothers who had been forced to give them up for adoption in an era when their solitary status constituted a grave social stigma.

An excellent program that should immediately be revived, in other words.

Single mothers are parasites and a plague on society.

If a single mother is unable or refuses to marry prior to giving birth to her child, by law the child should be immediately confiscated from her and placed for adoption (alternatively, raised by the state as a janissary).

No abortion unless the child is mixed race or genetically unfit, as we want to inflict maximal emotional trauma on these whores rather than provide them with an easy way out.

German_reader , June 9, 2018 at 1:16 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

The USSR exported oil, gas, and other raw materials to COMECON members and got inferior, overpriced manufactured goods in return.

Even if that's true, the "freeloader" accusation is still grotesque, since those countries would have been economically much better off and enjoyed a higher standard of living outside the Soviet orbit. At the very least, it would be nice to acknowledge that the Soviet system was bad for everyone involved and Russians hardly its only victims.
Kholmogorov really comes across as incredibly autistic on these matters. Ok, he's writing for a Russian audience which likes that kind of narrative, I get that. But hard to see what's the point then of translating him into English, unless one wants to confirm the worst suspicions about Russian nationalists.

melanf , June 9, 2018 at 1:38 pm GMT
@German_reader

Kholmogorov really comes across as incredibly autistic on these matters. Ok, he's writing for a Russian audience which likes that kind of narrative, I get that. But hard to see what's the point then of translating him into English, unless one wants to confirm the worst suspicions about Russian nationalists.

Absolutely correct. But Kholmogorov is a very marginal figure in Russia.

Beckow , June 9, 2018 at 1:51 pm GMT
@Hyperborean

Levada doesn't explicitly say 'heroes', just 'great personalities', so Pushkin would be considered due to his cultural contributions

That clarifies it. But if you ask people about 'greatness', their answers are based on notoriety for some, admiration for others, sympathy, etc. I recently saw Pushkin on a list of African contributors to civilisation due to his partial Abyssinian ancestry. His story has always puzzled me.

Thorfinnsson , June 9, 2018 at 1:58 pm GMT
@German_reader

You're German . Other than some unhinged HIAG fanatics (are any left?), without exception even German nationalists are so traumatized by WW2 and the postwar denazification that none of you dare to assert yourselves. I see it as increasingly likely that we'll be forced to liberate you. Though perhaps you'll yet find your Stresemann.

Russians, and many other nationalities, aren't like that.

That said I'll agree that Russian nationalists in general (not just Kholmogorov) could use a better tone on certain subjects. They're particularly unhinged about the Baltic states, even people of mild temperament like Dmitri.

The loser countries between Germany and Russia of course object to this assertiveness. Boo-hoo. Try not being losers instead. The Poles to their credit do try.

Beckow , June 9, 2018 at 2:13 pm GMT

there were zero military units and virtually no Ukrainians from Russian-ruled Ukraine fighting for the Whites.

I am not sure people put that much thought into it. If they did, the Whites were socially very unsympathetic for most people. The uniforms, rituals, pomposity. A friend of mine is a descendant of a White Russian officer, he says he wouldn't fight with the Whites either, too snotty and you had to polish your boots.

Out of curiosity, how many people in Ukraine fought for the Reds? Since they won, there had to be a few. Or were they mostly Latvian riflemen with angry lapsed Jews as officers?

Mr. Hack , June 9, 2018 at 2:18 pm GMT
@German_reader

It's got to be his strong Christian Orthodox message. Don't forget, Kholmogorov stated that:

Petro Poroshenko owes an enormous debt to Stalin, who enabled the Ukrainization of Ukrainizers.

Don't forget, in the Russian nationalist parallel universe (for internal consumption only! Stalin was the father of the Ukrainian nation. I can't wait to get my hands on Karlin's magnum opus 'Putler, the Dark Lord of the Kremlin', where it will finally be revealed to whom exactly Putler owes his fortunes to. Is it just a coincidence that both Putler and Porkoshenko were implicated in the 'Panama papers' scandal, where both civic patriots, in their own right, were implicated in international money laundering projects? Seems like its been all quieted down since when it first surfaced in 2015?

German_reader , June 9, 2018 at 2:22 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

I see it as increasingly likely that we'll be forced to liberate you

No thanks, Americans "liberating" us is one of the main reasons for the mess we're in (interesting though that even Trump supporters have this messianic impulse to tell other peoples what to do, that seems to be an unchanging constant of the American character).
Look, I get how those "might is right" power fantasies are great fun on internet message boards, but they're not a sound basis for constructive and mutually beneficial European-Russian relations which is still what I want. It's not my business to tell Russians how to run their country or how to deal with their history, but I just don't see how a vision as one-sided as Kholmogorov's will do much good. I'm all for nationalism in the sense of rejecting mass immigration, multiculturalism etc., but do I want a return to pre-1914 nationalisms with all their national antagonisms? Given how it ended last time, certainly not.

Beckow , June 9, 2018 at 2:29 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

Russians have the same problem that Germans had: they are visibly impatient with smaller nationalities. Americans are like that too. It eventually backfires.

loser countries between Germany and Russia of course object to this assertiveness

You miss the longer historical picture if you dismiss us as 'loser countries'. In the last 100 years, by any standard, the big winners have been the smaller countries between Germany and Russia (or West and Russia). Politically, demographically, economically they have prospered beyond anything one would guess in 1900. This includes the endlessly demonised post-WWII period. They also probably have a better future than their western and southern neighbours. All we need is peace and well managed borders, and for the Western meddlers to mind their business.

Mr. Hack , June 9, 2018 at 2:30 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

Why do the German people continue to elect politicians and political parties that encourage the immigration patterns of third world refugees? Or are the results different than in France, where its plainly obvious that the country is descending into the sewers? (for some reason, one doesn't expect more from the French).

inertial , June 9, 2018 at 3:13 pm GMT
@German_reader

Even if that's true, the "freeloader" accusation is still grotesque, since those countries would have been economically much better off and enjoyed a higher standard of living outside the Soviet orbit.

You have to realize that Kholmogorov argues here with Stalinists . What kind of argument is likely to get through to them? Certainly not any of the regular anti-Stalin bromides that have currency in the West.

This whole thing is so out of context, I don't know why it was translated in the first place.

inertial , June 9, 2018 at 3:31 pm GMT
@Beckow

Russians have the same problem that Germans had: they are visibly impatient with smaller nationalities. Americans are like that too. It eventually backfires.

Actually, Russians are generally not like that. Or at least they weren't in the past. What you are seeing is a natural reaction to the messages the Russians were getting from the Eastern Europe in the past 30 years.

Mr. Hack , June 9, 2018 at 3:33 pm GMT
@inertial

This whole thing is so out of context, I don't know why it was translated in the first place.

What context? Although I find most of Kholmogorov's ideas to be infantile and unbelievable, I applaud Karlin for bringing it up here, outside of the ghetto that it was intended for. It's good to see just what sorts of idiotic ideas and concerns are circulating today in the parallel universe of the Russian nationalists. Keep doing it Anatoly!

German_reader , June 9, 2018 at 3:36 pm GMT
@inertial

You have to realize that Kholmogorov argues here with Stalinists. What kind of argument is likely to get through to them?

Complaining that Russians didn't get enough out of WW2 in territorial annexations is a really weird argument imo (Kholmogorov even complains about the loss of Russian influence in Manchuria does anybody in Russia care about this?).

The part about collectivization and industrialization is more relevant imo given the damage Stalinist methods caused to Russia itself (I know many Russian commenters here will disagree about that, and I'm not going to argue with them since that's an internal Russian debate as far as I'm concerned).

Thorfinnsson , June 9, 2018 at 4:11 pm GMT
@German_reader

What's weird about it? What the hell is the point of conquering Berlin and not getting anything out of it other than Konigsberg? The Russians might as well have made a separate peace after 1943.

Instead they quite literally wasted millions more men in order to impose communism in Eastern Europe, and proceeded even to impose yet another famine on their own people in order to shore up the ridiculous East German regime. If the Germans had won instead you can bet your country would've gotten something out of it.

for-the-record , June 9, 2018 at 4:36 pm GMT
@Dmitry

That's interesting, thanks. Haven't had time to read it yet but here is an article by the author cited above (Jane Humphries), from the Economic History Review , on the same subject, based on her book

http://pseweb.eu/ydepot/semin/texte1112/JAN2012CHI.pdf

German_reader , June 9, 2018 at 4:41 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

What the hell is the point of conquering Berlin and not getting anything out of it other than Konigsberg?

Well, what exactly should Russia have annexed then? And what would have been done to the non-Russian population already in place there? Forced population transfers like in East Prussia or former East Poland? If they had been left in place, that would obviously conflict with Russian nationalism in the narrow sense and be more in the tradition of multiethnic imperialism.

AP , June 9, 2018 at 4:48 pm GMT
@Beckow

Out of curiosity, how many people in Ukraine fought for the Reds? Since they won, there had to be a few. Or were they mostly Latvian riflemen with angry lapsed Jews as officers?

The Reds had a lot of ethnic Russian troops from cities like Kharkiv. There were a few ethnic Ukrainians fighting for the Reds (perhaps the most significant was Semyon Timoshenko, from Odessa region) but mostly it was a matter of anarchists or nationalists making temporary alliances with the Reds and placing themselves under Red command in order to keep the Whites out. Even some of the Galicians temporarily joined the Reds, in order to fight against Poland:

http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CR%5CE%5CRedUkrainianGalicianArmy.htm

One of the commanders of these Red Galicians would later be a commander in the 14th Waffen SS Divison Galicia.

Thorfinnsson , June 9, 2018 at 5:02 pm GMT
@German_reader

Kholmogorov apparently thinks the Tsarist WW1 war aims were good.

I'm not Russian, and I suggest that Karlin propose his own hypothetical war aims.

Had I been in Stalin's shoes, I would've concluded a separate peace with Germany as soon as practical. Russia is not a country which needs more territory, resources, and population. The blood letting from 1943-1945 were not worth anything which could have been obtained.

Essential aims would have been independent and neutral Central European buffer states, resumption of German-Russian trade, and German technological assistance.

If you want me to discuss "maximalist" objectives, I would've annexed everything up to the Elbe. Cities would be depopulated of unreliable nationalities and overtime replaced with East Slavs and other reliable groups. Peasants, farmers, etc. would continue to work their lands but for Russian barons. No peasant would be admitted to a city unless with Russian fluency and sincere profession of the Orthodox faith. Catholic and Protestant Churchs would be turned into Orthodox churchs. German technicians, scientists, machinists, and other skilled technical workers would be employed in Russian service under good conditions.

reiner Tor , June 9, 2018 at 5:12 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

Stalin couldn't really have concluded a separate peace with Hitler in 1943 (or anytime later).

1) The Western powers might've made a peace with Hitler themselves after this. Then Hitler would've destroyed the USSR, and Stalin would've made a fool of himself.
2) Hitler might've won the war in the West, and then turned once more on the USSR. You know the story from here on.
3) The Western allies might've defeated Hitler anyway, but would've been way more hostile to the USSR (which then would immediately be seen as a treacherous power willing to prop up Hitler despite having been attacked by him), the USSR would've received way less assistance from them (the bulk of it came 1943-45), would've been unable to steal the nuclear secrets (the Britons wouldn't have sold the designs of their jet engine, by the way), and so would've been much weaker relative to the victorious and way more hostile West.

As a bonus point, how would you sell the separate peace to your own population, which by that point in time properly hated the Germans, and with good reasons?

German_reader , June 9, 2018 at 5:15 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

I'm not Russian, and I suggest that Karlin propose his own hypothetical war aims.

That would indeed be interesting, and I'd also like to see specific statements about how one should have dealt with non-Russian populations in those areas.
In general, I find AK's stance on those issues somewhat contradictory. To me it seems like he's clearly a Russian ethnic nationalist. But then he lauds the multiethnic Tsarist empire with all its troublesome national minorities, and makes insinuations about lost chances for territorial annexations (as if Russia weren't a huge country even today) that would have brought even more non-Russians into that empire.

Thorfinnsson , June 9, 2018 at 5:17 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

This basically comes down to the thesis that Hitler was demonic and would return to finish off the USSR no matter what.

I'm highly skeptical of this thesis.

The Western allies had proven already in 1940 that they were completely unwilling to negotiate with Hitler. Granted, who knows what the reaction to a separate peace would have been.

Simpleguest , June 9, 2018 at 5:22 pm GMT
There is one simple criteria when truing to evaluate a ruler or a statesman. Just compare the country before and after him/her. In this sense Stalin is as great as Peter the Great, just not in name. No amount of "what if", "alternative history" or "cost and effect" analysis can change that.

Of the topic (or precisely on the topic) both Russian Empire and more recently Soviet Union collapsed, and there must have been a perfectly mundane reasons for that.
It's a duty of current generations to learn the good and bad from both, avoid pitfalls and continue forward. There was plenty that the empire left to the SU that it could build upon, just as there is quite a bit of legacy left by the Soviet Union that modern RF can rely on.

But, as someone here already mentioned here, and I agree, that is what Putin has been doing.

Marcus , June 9, 2018 at 5:23 pm GMT
@AP

I agree the Makhnovists fought mainly against the Whites, who were the biggest threat for them, but neutrality and occassional collaboration with the Petliurists was purely tactical.

Thorfinnsson , June 9, 2018 at 5:24 pm GMT
@German_reader

This isn't as big of a deal as you're making it out to be. The trouble is that people like us have created a mental anchor by settling on the term "nationalism".

A Russian ethnic nation-state is not necessarily more desirable than a Russian-dominated multiethnic empire, nor vice-a-versa. It depends on the particular circumstances and conditions.

Or to move over to your country, would a federal Europe be a bad thing if it was led by people with ideas more like yours or the Magyar Miracle rather than Jean Claude Juncker?

Steve Sailer likes to harp on the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis and points out that because "continentalism" isn't a political concept no one ever thinks of this. Hence the patriotic resistance in Europe gets itself into traps like Marine Le Pen campaigning for the abolition of the Euro.

for-the-record , June 9, 2018 at 5:28 pm GMT
@AP

Authors are filmmakers or something. Actual historians were not impressed. Sorry, you believe nonsense.

I'm afraid in this case your sense of nonsense is misplaced. I read the book a couple of years ago, and while it had its flaws I found it pretty convincing.

The fact that "actual historians" don't like it says nothing, since it is obviously an anti-PC book that could not possibly be embraced by the guardians of our past. However, before the "conventional wisdom" had coalesced to relegate it to the rubbish bin, an early review in the New York Times was far more favorable:

"White Cargo" is meticulously sourced and footnoted -- which is wise, given its contentious material -- but it is never dry or academic. Quotations from 17th- and 18th-century letters, diaries and newspapers lend authenticity as well as color. Excerpts from wills, stating how white servants should be passed down along with livestock and furniture, say more than any textbook explanation could. The authors are not only historians, but also natural storytellers with a fine sense of drama and character.

Despite the heaviness of the subject matter, their playful way with words and love of literary allusion come through. There are kidnapping victims of the kind written about in Daniel Defoe's "Colonel Jack," and a tumultuous ocean voyage that may have inspired Shakespeare's writing of "The Tempest."

What little discussion there is about this forgotten bit of American history is sometimes linked to those with ulterior political motives, usually interested in delegitimizing current-day discourse about race or the teaching of black history. "White Cargo," which was first published in Britain last year, has a refreshing sense of distance and neutrality. The authors take care to quote African-American sources and clearly state that they have no wish to play down the horrors of the much larger black slave trade that followed.

If anything, Jordan and Walsh offer an explanation of how the structures of slavery -- black or white -- were entwined in the roots of American society. They refrain from drawing links to today, except to remind readers that there are probably tens of millions of Americans who are descended from white slaves without even knowing it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/27/books/review/Lau-t.html

By the way, one of the authors that you so belittle last year published a very well-received book entitled The King's City: London under Charles II: A city that transformed a nation – and created modern Britain -- the third volume in his trilogy about Charles II (the first two written jointly in collaboration with the second author of White Cargo ).

reiner Tor , June 9, 2018 at 5:29 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

Hitler was demonic and would return to finish off the USSR no matter what

Not demonic, just driven by an ideology. He believed in his own mission to create the great Thousand Year Reich up to the Ural (and beyond, actually), and would've thought such a stroke of luck as a sign from Providence that he needs to press ahead with his plans. In any event, Hitler was unwilling to even seriously negotiate with Stalin, because he also didn't (and couldn't) trust Stalin, a man he'd already betrayed before. So the issue was mutual. Hitler was (must've been) afraid that Stalin would stab him in the back later. While Stalin was (must've been) afraid that Hitler would stab him in the back later, as he'd already done once.

But what did exactly the US or the UK gotten out of their victory? The US got some satellite states (just as the USSR), but because it was richer to begin with and didn't have an insane economic system, it could at least keep them after 1990. But those satellites were actually still unreliable from a US viewpoint. It's questionable if they will keep them another seven decades, I highly doubt it. In the meantime they opened up their borders to prove the world that they are not racists. They also opened up their markets to Japan and Germany and South Korea etc. to prop those countries up.

It seems to me that long term, the US got just as little from its victory as Russia. It might actually be totally destroyed ethnically, while Russia at least plausibly could stay Russian long term. If you compare ethnically Russian areas 1939 and 2018, they are almost the same. But ethnically white American areas 1939 vs. 2018, and it seems like the Americans were even bigger losers.

Thorfinnsson , June 9, 2018 at 5:40 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

People change their beliefs. Hitler for instance no longer consider slavs to be inferior at the end of his life. Supposing you're correct then we have my maximalist vision of a Russian Empire reaching the Elbe, ideally with a port on the North Sea as well if the army could've gotten there in time (plausible with a different offensive strategy in 1944-45).

But what did exactly the US or the UK gotten out of their victory? The US got some satellite states (just as the USSR), but because it was richer to begin with and didn't have an insane economic system, it could at least keep them after 1990. But those satellites were actually still unreliable from a US viewpoint. It's questionable if they will keep them another seven decades, I highly doubt it. In the meantime they opened up their borders to prove the world that they are not racists. They also opened up their markets to Japan and Germany and South Korea etc. to prop those countries up.

It seems to me that long term, the US got just as little from its victory as Russia. It might actually be totally destroyed ethnically, while Russia at least plausibly could stay Russian long term. If you compare ethnically Russian areas 1939 and 2018, they are almost the same. But ethnically white American areas 1939 vs. 2018, and it seems like the Americans were even bigger losers.

I have complained bitterly about this before. American foreign policy took a permanently fatal wrong turn with the election of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Previously American foreign policy had oscillated between isolationism and expansionism, but always with a clear pursuit of American self-interest. This was firmly established already in the 1790s, when George Washington flatly rejected airheaded nonsense about aiding revolutionary France b/c muh liberty.

After FDR American foreign policy pursued idealistic, errant nonsense. The only significant departures from that have been Nixon and Trump.

This started when FDR placed sanctions on Italy for the "crime" of invading Ethiopia. Willingly giving up commercial exports during the Great Depression.

The outrages continued with FDR's refusal to punish Mexico from expropriating American oil interests in 1938.

Our fate was sealed with the adoption of the Atlantic Charter (airheaded rubbish) and the passing of the Lend-Lease Program, where we gave weapons to countries fighting the Axis in exchange for nothing (other than a 99 year lease of some British bases). Why not instead demand Bermuda and the British West Indies?

The appropriate strategy in dealing with the Axis would've been either hemispheric defense (as proposed by the American First Committee) or joining them to dismember the British Empire.

for-the-record , June 9, 2018 at 5:40 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

I'm surprised you have such a PC view of American history. As multiple sources make clear, the information presented in White Cargo is correct -- large numbers of (white) people were effectively involuntarily "enslaved" in colonial America, in conditions that were no better (and often worse) than enslaved Africans.

Where do you think the word kidnap comes from?

Dmitry , June 9, 2018 at 5:44 pm GMT
@Yevardian

Surely his views and outlook are a little distinctive, in every country, not just Russia (or America). But it doesn't make them less entertaining/interesting/funny, etc.

From the perspective of a blog, if the viewpoint of the blogger is more frequently found in the public , then they would be easier to find, less rare – and there would be less reason for audience to visit the blog. If all the blogger's views are 'typical' – then why would anyone visit the blog? They could read the main news sites and encounter the identical content.

More generally, the more thinking or thoughtful people, will usually have more unusual and unpredictable combinations of views, which cannot be categorized into simple groups.

If you encounter that your views can 'map' predictably onto any political movement, common ideology, or political party in your country -then you need to question your views (and the influence of conformism in the predictability).

Beckow , June 9, 2018 at 5:47 pm GMT
@AP

Thanks. How does an anarchist-nationalist temporarily allied with the Reds look like in person? I am always amused by the ability of certain eastern European types to push the boundary of coherent thought. There is too much of something there, or maybe something missing. Many just want a gun to take a revenge on the crappy world.

It is not different today: there are Pan-Slavic nationalists who hate anything Russian (or even Polish), are fanatically pro-Western, loudly admire Israel and more quietly the Nazis, their economic policy is quasi-communist and social views are to the right of a 19th century pope. Quite a mess.

Mr. Hack , June 9, 2018 at 5:54 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

Cities would be depopulated of unreliable nationalities and overtime replaced with East Slavs and other reliable groups

I'm curious, just how exactly you envision the 'depopulation' of the indigenous nationalities to have taken place? Do you feel that a rather war weary Russia was really in any position to follow through on any such violent and crazy proposals? As far as 'reliable East Slav groups' we can see today how that ha turned out in Ukraine. As many others here have pointed out, did Russia really need extra territories? I can't figure out what motivates such malicious and incoherent ideas? Me thinks that Thorfinnsson should stick to the calculation of P/E ratios and not to international relations?

AP , June 9, 2018 at 5:56 pm GMT
@Beckow

Both Reds and anarchists were opposed to the landlords and capitalists, so they had common cause against the Whites and could cooperate against them in order to prevent White victory. Similarly, both Reds and non-Russian nationalists were opposed to the Whites who were Russian nationalists. In the Galicians' case, it was opposition to the Poles who had just conquered their country.

In reality cooperation between Reds and nationalists wasn't as substantial as between anarchists and Reds.

It wasn't the product of ideological twisting, it was simply a matter of – we hate them more than each other, so let's cooperate against them, for now.

Beckow , June 9, 2018 at 5:57 pm GMT
@inertial

natural reaction to the messages the Russians were getting from the Eastern Europe in the past 30 years

Possibly, although I would say that messages have been mixed. I have argued with my comprador friends that full devotion to the Atlanticist West limits one's options, that it is the worst game strategy, and that burning bridges is a often a bad idea. But rationality is in short supply when salmon buffets call and that umpteenth trip to a DC 3- star hotel for 'training' is dangled in front of them.

To be fair, Russians for most of the last 25 years were not that different, and would probably do it again. Human weakness has few boundaries.

ussr andy , June 9, 2018 at 6:00 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

OT [MORE]

http://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-rights-human-capital-problem/#comment-2353265

what exactly was the wrong way you were doing it? gradually turning the temp down then plateauing at ~20° when it becomes uncomfortable?

Beckow , June 9, 2018 at 6:07 pm GMT
@AP

1930s was typical and peak Stalinism

No, it was the peak, but it was not typical. 'Typical' is defined as 'faithfully representing'. 1930′s were an extreme, the 1917-1991 period as a whole was very different. So yes, you are cherry-picking. How about them 5-year olds in the British mines? Ok, with that?

Thorfinnsson , June 9, 2018 at 6:13 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

The war-weary Russian population would have been in need of vast reconstruction. And also the non-Russian populations of Europe. The workers of these conquered cities would've been very useful for that.

Depopulation isn't a euphemism here for execution or even necessarily deportations. Unlike Hitler and his gang I don't have fantasies of wiping people out.

Look instead at something like, say, the history of England and the establishment of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. The preceding Brittonic and Romano-British populations weren't eliminated at all. The ruling classes were replaced, the cities transformed, and overtime the countryside itself.

If Canute the Great had established a real dynasty then today there wouldn't even be an England, but not because demonic vikings had some demented plot to butcher every Englishman.

As far as I can tell Ukrainians were generally reliable in Tsarist and Soviet times.

And no, Russia didn't need extra territory. I said that myself. But I figured German_reader was curious about a maximalist proposal.

ussr andy , June 9, 2018 at 6:14 pm GMT
@ussr andy

on topic, Stalin kinda sucked, what with the random arrests, the Doctors' Affair, the random arrests, but with all the degeneracy and decivilization going on – rap battles, corruption, gopniks, RSP-shki, "kowtowing to the West" – you sometimes wish he was back.

inertial , June 9, 2018 at 6:14 pm GMT
@German_reader

I am sure it sounds weird to you, but what Kholmogorov is doing here, is telling the Stalinists that even by their own criteria their hero is a failure. What they say are his greatest achievements are not so great after all, even from the Imperial Stalinist POV.

Another way Kholmogorov likes to troll Stalinists is to take a Soviet accomplishment (like going into space) and credit Nicholas II.

Beckow , June 9, 2018 at 6:16 pm GMT
@AP

we hate them more than each other

You are getting warmer, it is about unbounded hatred. Any enemy will do. Did they have flow-charts mapping out the complexity? Or does this kind of well-calculated hatred come to them intuitively?

My intuition tells me that when you mess with people repeatedly, and they end up living worse and worse, at some point the ' kill them all ' mentality takes over. It happened in Ukraine in 1917-20, in WWII and after. I hope we can avoid it from happening again. But if Ukraine lives as today in 2020-25 (lousy living standards), if there are guns everywhere, something could spark the downward spiral again.

inertial , June 9, 2018 at 6:20 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Incidentally, I consider that Kaliningrad should be remained to it proper name.

Korolevets?

hem do what they will with Poland would have been particularly amusing. However, it was not politically realistic, even for a totalitarian system such as the USSR.

Mr. Hack , June 9, 2018 at 6:51 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

The war-weary Russian population would have been in need of vast reconstruction. And also the non-Russian populations of Europe. The workers of these conquered cities would've been very useful for that.

The populations of Russia and Eastern Europe had already been depopulated severely due to the savagery of the war. The returning Soviet soldiers, including the remnant of the remaining population, had their hands full with rebuilding of what was left of their own settlements, not in a position to 'repopulate' nor rebuild Eastern Europe without the direct participation of its own indigenous populations. A prolonging of the war at the expense of millions of more lives, either resettled (to where?) or exterminated, would not have been in the cards. Besides, what makes you think that Eastern Europe would have fared any better than it did, with a new race of Russian ubermensch calling all of the shots anyway? History has shown us that they did a rather lousy job of things in their own country and in those that it did end up controlling.

Thorfinnsson , June 9, 2018 at 6:57 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

The populations of Russia and Eastern Europe had already been depopulated severely due to the savagery of the war. The returning Soviet soldiers, including the remnant of the remaining population had their hands full with rebuilding of what was left of their own settlements, not in a position to 'repopulate' nor rebuild Eastern Europe without the direct participation of its own indigenous populations.

Take the conquered women as polygamous wives. Rapid repopulation follows.

A prolonging of the war at the expense of millions of more lives, either resettled (to where?) or exterminated, would not have been in the cards.

Hence why I suggested making peace in 1943.

Besides, what makes you think that Eastern Europe would have fared any better than it did, with a new race of Russian ubermensch calling all of the shots anyway? History has shown us that they did a rather lousy job of things in their own country and in those that it did end up controlling.

Did I say it would've fared better?

My point was that the whole point of winning a war is to get something out of it. Something that everyone aside from the Axis apparently did not understand.

I suppose the French did try to get something out of it, but their demands were ignored by the real victors.

Daniel Chieh , June 9, 2018 at 7:01 pm GMT
@Dmitry

I think that you assume that things have to make a lot more sense than they have to. The Adeptus Mechanicus is honestly not a terrible response to overwhelming complexity – which is pretty likely if we ever get to the point where we have code creating code creating code.

They're dealing with machines they don't fully understand, realize that it has very real "demons" within(viruses), and the safest way to handle it has just been to keep doing whatever works. Thus the stories of prayers ending with hitting the "on" switch: the functionality is still there, it has just been couched in ritual.

At some point, the only realistic way of handling it is ritual – which is very human anyway. I've been involved in a lot of pretty high tech stuff for awhile and while its not quite religious, the tendency toward some form of ritual really does gradually take over, even if we tend to call them procedures or "best practices." There's a lot of weirdness, cultishness and bubble insanity in SV, and this isn't even considering the more fringe things like transhumanism or immortality organizations.

Thorfinnsson , June 9, 2018 at 7:01 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Seems like a possible outcome of this proposed peace is a future war against Britain and Japan at the same time. Oddly, Russia might be able to gain America as an ally in such a conflict.

And obviously, heavy reparations to turbocharge Russia's continuing postwar industrialization.

Of what nature?

Anatoly Karlin , Website June 9, 2018 at 7:07 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

Unrealistically long time horizons. The US did of course unambiguously win the war – it accounted for something like 50% of world manufacturing production by 1945. It dominated all the markets. In the late 1940s-early 1950s, if it had really wanted to, it could have conquered the entire world and/or instituted a one world government. (The Soviet nuclear deterrent was not credible until 1955 or so).

To develop Thorfinnsson's idea of a 1943 Nazi-Soviet peace further ( with the caveat that I do not consider it politically realistic even for the USSR ):

First off, I do not think the Allies would have made a separate peace with the Nazis. Public opinion there mattered more, for obvious reasons (democracy), and it's not even clear that the Russians hated the Germans more (there are accounts of German POWs being treated generously – disgracefully – well, by elderly babushkas with low national consciousness).

With the Wehrmacht having its hands untied in the East, D-Day would no longer be feasible. However, the Manhattan Project would not be going away, with the result that a campaign of democidal atomic attrition against the German population would begin from 1945.

The Nazis are not limp-wristed like the Kaiser or even Hindenburg/Ludendorff and will hold onto power as German city after city gets wiped off the Earth.

At some point, Germany will be sufficiently weak for an Allied invasion to be possible, especially considering that there would have been years to prepare for it. Obviously, at this point, the USSR could use the opportunity to scavenge. Even the East Europeans will be less of a problem at this point, having been subjected to 2-3x the degree of democide by the Nazis as they were historically. There will at a basic level be much fewer of them. And they'd hate the Germans even more.

The USSR could have used the armistice with Germany to refocus on science spending and turbocharge the nuclear program, developing it earlier and having a credible deterrent by 1950 instead of 1955. So no Operation Unthinkable in principle (IRL, the USSR in reality seriously lucked out on that score!!).

utu , June 9, 2018 at 7:21 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

The USSR exported oil, gas, and other raw materials to COMECON members and got inferior, overpriced manufactured goods in return.

Moreover, in 1946-47, "conquered" East Germans were literally fed at the expense of starving Russians.

50/50= truths/myths. East Germans, Poles, Czechs, Hungarians have similar stories. They always blamed shortages on the so-called 'exports' to USSR. There were no noticeable Soviet products in stores there but plenty of Eastern Block products in Soviet Union.

inferior, overpriced manufactured goods in return

How anybody can determine what was overpriced or underpriced in the system of exchange they had? Eastern European products often were inferior with respect to the West but superior to what was being produced in the USSR. Muscovites were going crazy when shoes from Czechoslovakia or DDR were sold in few stores. Anybody lined up for Soviet products in Hungary or Poland. Perhaps for Sovetskoye Shampanskoye before the New Year's Eve

Buses and pharmaceuticals form Hungary, high-tech optical and electronics equipment from DDR, ship industry in Poland mainly functioning for USSR, more that 50% sulphuric acid used in the USSR was from Poland, CSFR motor vehicles, for example, passenger cars, trams, motorcycles , lathes, pumps , compressors. (10 min of googling).

Russian nationalist want empire but they do not know how they are going to run it. Actually they did not know in the past. They have never managed to culturally dominate people they subjugated except for some Siberian tribal people. One thing is true, the emotional prerequisite for Russians is to be loved and appreciated by the people they subjugated. When they see all the evidence to the contrary they display the spurned lover syndrome and show hurt ego how much they sacrificed for the subjugated and so on. You even detect it in Uber-rational A. Karlin. Americans have it too but to much lesser extent because they are much more secure in their beliefs. They do not have to support them by myths only. It suffices to look around and see how America is powerful and dominant. But the megalomania and some sense of missions are very similar among Russians and Americans. People from 'lesser' countries are fed up with it. Now they may sympathize with Russia in hope that counterbalancing of American power would be good but when they hear the nationalist imperial spiel like that of Kholmogorov they pause and have a second thought and may consider that beefing up Ukraine might be a very good thing after all and opening border with Mexico and turning the US into a Latin America might be a good thing after all from the point of view of small countries that want to have more sovereignty whether to create the ethno-state state or gay utopia or both.

Anatoly Karlin , Website June 9, 2018 at 7:24 pm GMT
@German_reader

1. Germany was not doing well at the start of 1917. AH and Turkey were doing catastrophically.

2. There is a difference between the degree of hurt you can expect if you sign an armistice when you're losing (applies to both Russia and Germany in 1918), and if you capitulate and/or are conquered (France in 1940 lost the bulk of its core territory, for instance).

Mikhail , Website June 9, 2018 at 7:25 pm GMT
@Beckow

Well a good enough number did fight on the White side, thereby explaining why they never lost to Petliura's forces, which were representative of a completely separatist Ukraine, until Petliura sold out to Pilsudski – in a move which saw the Galician Ukrainian Army en masse come under the command of the Whites.

German_reader , June 9, 2018 at 7:25 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

and it's not even clear that the Russians hated the Germans more (there are accounts of German POWs being treated generously – disgracefully – well, by elderly babushkas with low national consciousness)

iirc about 90% of the Germans taken prisoner by the Soviets in 1941-1943 didn't survive the war; it's also clear that German prisoners were frequently tortured and killed.
Not that I'm complaining, Germans started the war and if anything behaved worse. But you can't seriously believe that Russians felt less hatred for Germans than the British, let alone the Americans did. That's completely implausible.

Mikhail , Website June 9, 2018 at 7:29 pm GMT
@AP

There were a few ethnic Ukrainians fighting for the Reds

Another one of your gross understatements. Also keeping in mind that a number of folks from the territory of Russian Empire Ukraine could qualify as ethnic Ukrainian, but identified differently.

German_reader , June 9, 2018 at 7:30 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Why should Britain and France have supported the realization of such extreme war aims to the benefit of Russia? Their alliance with Russia was purely one of convenience, liberal opinion in the West despised Tsarism. And once the US had entered the war, the whole war was changed into a "crusade for democracy" anyway, which made such imperialist annexations even more unlikely.

Your idea of Tsarist Russia being unjustly robbed of great territorial gains is fantasy imo. The Bolshevik takeover was deplorable for many reasons, but not because Russia failed to gobble up even more land.

Dmitry , June 9, 2018 at 7:31 pm GMT
@Daniel Chieh

I think that you assume that things have to make a lot more sense than they have to. The Adeptus Mechanicus is honestly not a terrible response to overwhelming complexity – which is pretty likely if we ever get to the point where we have code creating code creating code.

They're dealing with machines they don't fully understand, realize that it has very real "demons" within(viruses), and the safest way to handle it has just been to keep doing whatever works. Thus the stories of prayers ending with hitting the "on" switch: the functionality is still there, it has just been couched in ritual.

At some point, the only realistic way of handling it is ritual – which is very human anyway. I've been involved in a lot of pretty high tech stuff for awhile and while its not quite religious, the tendency toward some form of ritual really does gradually take over, even if we tend to call them procedures or "best practices." There's a lot of weirdness, cultishness and bubble insanity in SV, and this isn't even considering the more fringe things like transhumanism or immortality organizations.

Atomic physics is a field already near theology.

The idea of future religions integrating such scientific concepts is something beautiful (and there was already something this in the Soviet Union).

There has to be some actual integration though.

You can't take current priests (low IQ, superstitious people who usually fail maths in school), and put them next to an abstract scientific concept like the word 'atom' – without making both sides look ridiculous.

It is like the arrangement most designed to turn them into an object for ridicule from educated people.

(Likewise photos of priests near to specific technology which was entirely created by Soviet trained people).

It is just like seeing the scene of primitive monkeys from the 2001 film.

Mikhail , Website June 9, 2018 at 7:32 pm GMT
@AP

When and where did he actually say such? That's something that svidos would tap dance on if actually true. As stated, should be viewed with suspicion.

Simpleguest , June 9, 2018 at 7:42 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

"It seems obvious that the ideal combination is both. And the *late* Russian Empire was in fact just that."

I agree with you that ideal combination would indeed be "both".
I am not sure that "late" Russian Empire was just that, though.
Perhaps, I am much too influenced by later Bolshevik propaganda, winners, after all, get the privilege to write the (hi)story.
But, most likely, the Russian Empire's fate is just another case of that famous "too little too late".

Russians, having the first hand experience of these, epic, failures of both the Empire and Soviet Union, have both the necessary perspective and hindsight to move on in much better future. We have to see if they have acquired the wisdom, too. Again, in this respect, and in my opinion, Putin has been doing a "hell of a job" so far.

Thorfinnsson , June 9, 2018 at 7:44 pm GMT
@German_reader

Russia was also crumbling even without the Bolsheviks. The Kerensky offensive was a catastrophe. Military discipline had completely evaporated.

Assuming the Russians had hung in long enough to participate at Versailles, I doubt they would've gained much. Britain and America would both oppose most of Russia's war aims. Certainly the idea that President Wilson and David Lloyd George would agree to transfer Constantinople to Russia is a fantasy.

Probably Russia would've gotten some more sullen Poles to administer, Galicia, and the rest of Armenia. And of course the reparations which the Germans would largely fail to pay.

Dismemberment of Germany like France and Russia wanted was never going to be tolerated by Britain or America.

German_reader , June 9, 2018 at 7:49 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Note that I posit a Cold War emerging between France/UK and Russia after the war.

Absent nuclear weapons, why exactly would that have stayed a Cold war in the 1920s/1930s and not become a hot one? Russia was seen as a potential rival to British imperial interests well before 1914 and would have been seen as an even greater threat in your scenario.

However, the great bulk of them relate to economic and political ones inherent to Communism (e.g. central planning; using your *own* population as disposable bodies

Obviously I agree about the defects of communism, but the insinuation that it would be ok to treat other populations as "disposable bodies" really irritates me what exactly would be your problem with the Nazis then, apart from the fact that they targeted Russians as a population to be disposed of? The general vibe I get from this thread is that any moral considerations would be for losers and cucks anyway.

Have to say, these insights into the views of Russian nationalists make me think it's probably better they're still fairly marginal in Russia and not looked kindly upon by the state.

Mr. Hack , June 9, 2018 at 8:33 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

The "sicko nationalist stuff bordering on fascism" is how statecraft was practiced from the Bronze Age to Bismarck.

If I understand you correctly, you're actually an American, and therefore I find it amusing that you subscribe to such 'tribal' worldviews. For all of its faults, 'American exceptionalism' which acts a an underlying motivator for American imperialism, does not include components of ethnic or national superiority (imperialism without the 'pure blood' racial component) that I think is a step in the right direction. For all of the criticism of the inclusion of different ethnicities in the make-up of American society (and I'm not a proponent of open borders, etc;), I think that a strong case can be made that one of the strengths of the vibrant, US nation, is its inclusion of all ethnicities. Although it's getting harder and harder, immigrants are still adding to the overall good of American society. US multiculturalism should not be a blueprint for all societies throughout the world, but it certainly will continue to slowly influence how many of the advanced countries of the world model their own societies. I strongly suspect that your own genetic make-up was formed through the melding of more than just your own German heritage that began over 5 centuries ago? Even Karlin's ethnic pedigree is far from 'pure' Russian, and the both of you don't seem to be any worse for the resulting cocktail?

Mr. Hack , June 9, 2018 at 8:44 pm GMT
@Mikhail

Here's the exact quotation, taken from Makhno's three volume autobiography:

One thing alone must bother me in publishing this outline, and that is that it does not come out in the Ukraine and in the Ukrainian language. The Ukrainian nation is advancing culturally step by step toward a full definition of its own individual essence and this [the memoirs, F.S.] could be important. That I cannot publish my writings in the language of my people is not my fault but that of the conditions in which I find myself.[68]

68. Makhno I, p. 6.

You owe me a pair of tap dancing shoes, Mickey!

German_reader , June 9, 2018 at 8:55 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Russia behaving like any normal European country *one century ago* with respect to war aims – note that Germany would have created a continental empire, and here is the French version

But how many Germans or Frenchmen are still going on about this as if it were relevant today? French and German nationalists have rather different concerns now, all this talk about territorial annexations and imperialism looks like out of another universe.

The problem isn't that Russian imperial elites a century ago had extreme ambitions (which backfired horrendously on them), the problem is that one can get the impression that Kholmogorov and others like him think like that even today.

This further reinforces my suspicions that Russia should not have any sentimental illusions about Europeans, even European nationalists.

Self-fulfilling prophecy "They'll hate us anyway, so why not give them a reason?". Hardly a constructive sentiment.

DFH , June 9, 2018 at 8:59 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

The "sicko nationalist stuff bordering on fascism" is how statecraft was practiced from the Bronze Age to Bismarck.

It wasn't though. The borders of France, for example, barely changed for centuries, despite being the most powerful nation in Europe. Louis XIV's attempt to acquire just Belgium and some German cities united all of Europe against him. Of course even those conquests which were made were within the framework of multi-national empires (which often disadvantaged the dominant ethnicity, if anything), rather than Assyrian-style subjugation.
Events like the Polish Partitions were unique and regarded as horrible.
I suppose this is the American educational system at work.

Thorfinnsson , June 9, 2018 at 9:01 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

Americans were mostly white supremacists and frequently Anglo-Saxon supremacists as well for more than three centuries.

The unforced error of admitting millions upon millions of non-Anglos from the 1840s through WW1 diluted the original American identity beyond the possibility of restoration, but mid-century experiences (Great Depression, WW2, mass media, space race, etc.) managed to forge a composite American nation.

But then America's elite threw it all in the trash by deciding that white supremacy was getting in the way of winning the ever important HEARTS AND MINDS of shithole countries like Upper Volta.

America isn't a blueprint for anyone, other than wreckers who want to break nations. It's a warning.

Too bad for Eurocucks that they're our vassal states and thus instead following us like lemmings off the cliff.

That's not to say that a focus on purity is necessarily desirable. Obviously such a focus in Russia or America today is ridiculous and counterproductive. But in a country like Sweden or Japan it isn't.

My family's genealogy is pretty well done, but no doubt if you go far enough back you'd be likely to find something more "exotic" than a German. Danes and Norwegians certainly; and possibly Scots, Dutchmen, and Walloons. Finns and Slavs less likely but who knows.

Anatoly Karlin , Website June 9, 2018 at 9:06 pm GMT
@German_reader

iirc about 90% of the Germans taken prisoner by the Soviets in 1941-1943 didn't survive the war

They were high but 90% sounds unlikely though it would be good if someone looked the figures up (though I dimly recall that might have been the case in the singular aftermath of Stalingrad).

Anyhow, the two situations are not comparable not even on account of the Nazis having been the ones who attacked as by the fact that the USSR faced a food crisis of its own. A few million died of food shortages within the USSR during 1941-43; IIRC, around half of all Gulag deaths ever also occurred during that period. It was undergoing a low-key famine of its own then (unlike Germany, which was well fed until late 1944). I mean yes, sovcucks will sovcuck, but I suppose even they draw the line at privileging captured enemy combatants over their "own" people.

I think it was in Beevor's Stalingrad there was some account of a German POW Wehrmacht doctor getting fed and clothed by Russian peasants to supplement his low rations. Certainly there was very little of that happening wrt Russian POWs in Germany.

Thorfinnsson , June 9, 2018 at 9:09 pm GMT
@DFH

The French themselves developed a concept known as the NATURAL BORDERS OF FRANCE , and the "natural" eastern border was the Rhine. And the Rhineland was completely German.

Napoleon succeeded in making that the eastern French border, but we know how that turned out.

What's unique about the Polish Partitions at all?

Thorfinnsson , June 9, 2018 at 9:13 pm GMT
@German_reader

This thread is about Joseph Stalin and thus involves the discussion of history .

No doubt French and German nationalists have views on the two World Wars as well.

Russia has territorial concerns France and Germany do not for the simple reason that the USSR collapsed and stranded millions of Russians outside Russia's borders. Russia's late historical development also means we have oddities like two pseudo-Russian nations on its border. The only comparable thing to this in France or Germany is, what, Corsica?

The situation of Russia today is comparable to that of Germany after 1919, not Germany after 1990.

German_reader , June 9, 2018 at 9:17 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

What's unique about the Polish Partitions at all?

How many other states of early modern Europe were gobbled up by their neighbors? It was quite exceptional.

DFH , June 9, 2018 at 9:19 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

The French made hardly any progress towards accomplishing that between Richelieu and Napoleon. Louis XIV only got Alsace and Louis XV Lorraine (part of a negotiated swap) and Corsica , over a span of almost 200 years. They couldn't even add the Spanish/Austrian Netherlands despite occupying them many times.
The revolutionary policy of annexation was obviously new (and not repeated in the 19th century) and ended in complete failure, with France being restored to pre-Revolutionary borders.

Frederick II's annexation of Silesia was also regarded as exceptional and shocking. All of this is despite Europe being more at war (and on a large scale) than not during the 17th and 18th centuries.

What's unique about the Polish Partitions at all?

Nothing like it was repeated (barring the very minor and ultimately irrelevant division of Venice). Austria and Russia couldn't even ever finish off the Ottoman Empire, despite having the idea since Potemkin and Catherine the Great.

German_reader , June 9, 2018 at 9:24 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

though I dimly recall that might have been the case in the singular aftermath of Stalingrad

Stalingrad is well known, only about 6000 of the Germans captured there survived; but iirc the same was true for Germans taken prisoner in 1941/1942 (the numbers weren't that high by WW2 standards, somewhat above 100 000, unfortunately I can't find a reference right now). Anyway, it could of course hardly be expected that the Soviet Union in 1941/42 would give much priority to caring for German pows, and in any case the policy changed during the later years of war; I also don't doubt that something like with the elderly Russian women you mentioned did happen. It just seems implausible to me that Russians could have felt less hatred for Germans than the western allies, when the entire character of the war in the east was different (mostly conventional war in the west vs. highly ideological war in the east that was waged as a war of extermination and conquest by the Germans).

Anatoly Karlin , Website June 9, 2018 at 9:26 pm GMT
@German_reader

But how many Germans or Frenchmen are still going on about this as if it were relevant today?

It is a concern in a historic context . I mean, the entire point of the second half of EK's article is that Stalinists say Stalin is good because he returned the Russian Empire to its older borders; EK points out that it was merely a rectification of Lenin's sabotage, came at a huge cost, and in the end turned out to be a toxic gift anyway.

What, exactly, is controversial about any of that? Modern Russian nationalists are quite open about having imperial ambitions on Belorussia, Novorossiya, and to a lesser extent, Northern Kazakhstan (fast becoming demographically unfeasible) and Malorossiya/Central Ukraine (has become politically unfeasible since 2014).

You are of course free not to like that, but, whatever. Romanian nationalists have imperial ambitions on their lost province of Moldova:

(Incidentally, Russian nationalists don't, aside from Transnistria; even though more Moldovans would vote to join Russia

[Jun 13, 2018] Stalin Gifted Hitler Victory in 1941 and It Cost Millions of Russian Lives

Notable quotes:
"... The Communist Soviet Union "achieved" the unprecedented feat in world history of losing 25 million civilians and soldiers (more than any country in any war) in a war it won and against an inferior enemy which it ultimately defeated albeit it should have done so at a far lower cost to its people as was easily possible ..."
"... I wrote the esssay above seven years ago working without the benefit of Roger R. Reese's extraordinary book Why Stalin's Soldiers Fought . If I had access to that work at the time I would have listed another reason of Soviet defeat in 1941 -- time and time again encircled Soviet units were ordered to break out of their encirclement and disintegrated in the attempt netting the enemy hundreds of thousands, even millions of captured prisoners of war with relative ease. A breakout is the most difficult maneuver in warfare as it demands attack, defense and retreat all be carried out simultaneously. It was a maneuver far beyond the capabilities of the encircled Red Army units of 1941, but Reese makes a convincing case these were very willing and more than capable of mounting an extended defense had the Soviet leadership only been willing to write them off as doomed and ordered them to hold out in a last stand instead. Having to deal with enormous pockets stretching over key infrastructure for an extended period of time would have dramatically slowed down the German blitzkrieg. As it was the pockets instead crumbled quickly as relatively cohesive large formations trying to carry out the orders disintegrated into small groups of soldiers which were then captured by better positioned and locally superior enemy forces one by one -- there were no mass surrender events which would have indicated a lack of will to fight on the part of the soldiers. ..."
"... At the time of writing I also in the interest of briefness omitted a point I now think quite key. The fact that in the six months of the war in 1941 the Soviet Union lost nearly the entirety of its pre-war army meant that 1942 and all subsequent years were extremely difficult. It meant the USSR had to construct a new army from scratch while simultaneously having to stave off a cohesive and aggressive 3-4 million strong invading force. On the one hand the men in newly-raised units needed time in barracks to train, acquire skills, get to know each other, and develop at least some loyalty to each other should they be expected to fight efficiently. On the other, it was imperative the Soviets throw something in the way of the advancing Germans right away lest these take yet more land, people and resources. The Soviet leadership compounded the problem by all too often ordering these haphazard units on the offensive increasing their already high rate of attrition further. As a result the Soviets had to effectively rebuild their army not once, but multiple times -- in this way the fateful Soviet blunders of 1941 and the pre-war continued to reverberate and extract a cost until the very end of the war albeit less with each passing year. ..."
Jun 13, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Stalin Gifted Hitler Victory in 1941 and It Cost Millions of Russian Lives The Soviet military debacle in Operation Barbarossa had less to do with Wehrmacht brilliance and more to do with self-inflicted Soviet blows Marko Marjanović 19 hours ago | 2,350 65 MORE: Politics In the Second World War the Soviet Union suffered an incalculable number of war death that is usually put at 27 million. i It was the largest death toll suffered by any country in any war. The war razed 1,710 cities and towns, 70,000 villages and hamlets and 100,000 collective farms on Soviet territory. ii In terms of protecting its citizens against other states the USSR can only be judged an utter failure.
The Communist Soviet Union "achieved" the unprecedented feat in world history of losing 25 million civilians and soldiers (more than any country in any war) in a war it won and against an inferior enemy which it ultimately defeated albeit it should have done so at a far lower cost to its people as was easily possible

The failure of the Soviet Union was all the greater because it was not a power that was simply powerless to do so. On the eve of the Second World War the USSR was larger by land mass than any other political entity in the world exempting the British Empire. It ranked third in the world by population size and by gross domestic product. It could boast the largest, most mechanized army in the world, an enormous heavy industry output and highly competent weapon designers.

To be sure the Soviet Union was also faced with its challenges. It had a very long border to secure. It had to contend with a two-pronged threat emanating from Tokyo on one side of the world and Berlin on the other. Enormous distances and subpar infrastructure impeded transport and communication. Most of its populace had little education and rarely handled modern machinery. What was to be its chief opponent, the German military, was experienced and proficient in the conduct of war.

These difficulties, however, were hardly insurmountable given the aforementioned strong points of the Soviet Union. Yet it would suffer a series of military defeats so catastrophic that at the greatest extent of Axis advance 68 million of its citizens would be subject to a deadly foreign occupation. iii What was the cause of Soviet military debacles that paved the way for suffering on such a scale?

No Sleeping Giant

When the National Socialists took power in Germany the Soviet Union was sufficiently alarmed to come out of international isolation and move closer to France. iv It interfered in the Spanish Civil War to stop a speedy defeat of the Republicans, hoping to in this way drive a wedge between Paris and London and Berlin and Rome. v It provided military aid to Chiang Kai-shek attempting to blunt Japanese expansionism in the Far East and offered itself as an ally to France in the Sudeten Crisis. vi It finally sought security by concluding non-aggression pacts with Germany (1939) and Japan (1941). The Soviet Union was not oblivious of international events, but was conscious of potential outside threats.

Between the years 1938 and 1940 the Soviet Union fought a war with Finland, an undeclared border war with Japan, forcefully annexed Bessarabia, the Baltic States and Ukranian and Belarusian areas of Poland. In 1930s it begun throwing much of its industrial capacity into armaments production so that by June 1941 it possessed 15,000 aircraft and 18,000 tanks -- more than all the rest of the world combined. vii The Soviet Union was pouring vast resources into its military, which had already fought to defended its borders as well as to expand them. It was anything but a complacent power that had not given thought to war.

Armed Forces

For much of the interwar period the Soviet armed forces consisted of two components. The smaller regular forces and the larger territorial forces. The later comprised a reserve army led by professional officers, but manned by part-timers who held on to their civilian jobs. In peacetime the territorial system represented a cheap method of training large numbers of men. In wartime it could quickly supplement the regular forces with second line units of some proves. In mid to late 1930s, however, the territorial army was swallowed up by the the regular forces. In this way the Soviet Union deprived itself of an organized reserve and became less able to fight an existential conflict on a short notice. viii

The Achilles' heel of the pre-war Red Army was the poor quality of its officer corps. The army had difficulties attracting and retaining officers. Up to 1936 the Soviet Union barred Cossacks, former nobles and bourgeois, that is the classes that had provided the Imperial army with the bulk of its officers, from military service. Among the remaining population there was little inclination for military profession, especially seeing that until mid 1930s the pay was better in industry. Those who could hope to succeed elsewhere were inclined to leave the profession or never take it up in the first place. This state of affairs, coupled with persistent forcing out of officers deemed politically unreliable, left the officer corps under strength, undereducated and suffering from high turnover rates. ix

Then in 1938 the Soviet Union launched an enormously ambitious program of military expansion. To the existing 98 pisions the Red Army in just two and a half years added another 205 for a total of 303 ground force pisions on the eve of war. x At least as of 1941, however, such a titanic army could not be adequately trained, supplied and led. Thebenefit of the expansion was therefore to a sizeable extent questionable.

One problem was that it further diluted the quality of an already mediocre officer corps. To fill tens of thousands of command positions being created every year the training of new officers had to be rushed, which reflected on its quality. As there was no way of attracting so many new candidates to the profession, most new officers served by compulsion. Most new officers were conscripts who had been elevated to junior commander and then officer rank. The extent of their officer training was a special course that lasted between three and six months. xi Many of the others were young Communists and Komsomols who were dispatched to abridged officer training programs in military schools as a way of fulfilling their obligation to the party. Even by taking such shortcuts officer shortages could not be eliminated entirely. On the eve of the war the infantry, which was the service branch most affected by shortages, had no more than 79% its prescribed number of officers. xii

The army then was conscripting a huge number of men and placing them under command of officers that had been promoted to posts for which they were barely qualified. One predictable consequence of this was the poor quality of training of the rank and file. The training of soldiers overseen as it was by thinly spread officers in over their heads left much to be desired. To make matters worse training was often impeded by equipment shortages, particularly of boots and coats, and the need to devote time to erecting quarters, messes, stables and supply dumps for the enlarged army. xiii Political indoctrination and growing food on unit farms represented additional distractions from acquiring military skills.

Increase in the size of the armed forces was done without an adequate increase in the ability of the rear services to supply the enlarged army and maintain its equipment in repair. It affected the planned modernization of the Red Army. With so many new units needed to be equipped old equipment could not be phased out. xiv Industry spewing out weaponry could not pause to retool for production of alternate, superior designs. When the war broke out the majority of the enormous Soviet tank and air fleets, albeit state of the art in mid 1930s, would already be outdated. The newer models had only begun entering service so that there had not yet been time enough to properly train the men operating them.

At around the same time the military was engulfed by the purges of the Great Retreat and dealt a severe, debilitating blow. Just as the expansion of the Red Army greatly increased the need for trained officers regime had many of them censured, imprisoned and shot. At their most severe in 1937 and 1938, the purges did not cease until after the German invasion of 1941. xv Over 34,300 officers were purged, albeit at least 11,600 were later reinstated, some of them after having endured torture. xvi By losing 23,000 badly needed officers the army was rid of experience and expertise that could not be adequately replaced. The purges hit party members the hardest and so disproportionately affected high-ranking and more experienced officers that were more valuable.

The purges did more to the Red Army than just deprive it of useful officers. Their psychological impact was paralyzing. The purges stifled initiative, lowered morale and sapped enthusiasm. xvii They hit research bureaus as well, inhibiting development of new weaponry and causing the Soviets to fall behind in aeronautics. xviii They devastated military intelligentsia by liquidating the Red Army's most advanced theoreticians, wiping out the Red Army's lead in conceptualizing combined arms warfare. As the works of uncovered enemies of the people were thrown out of circulation, theories that had been part of the Red Army's intellectual mainstay were now dangerous to voice. xix

Predictably given its state, the Soviet military did not give a good account of itself in the Winter War. As if to provide contrast the German military shortly thereafter stunned the world by defeating France in a rapid manner, paving the way for German hegemony in Europe. Stalin responded by ordering a sweeping reorganization of the Red Army. Mobilization plans were revised, war plans laid out anew, commanders replaced, mechanized corps re-established, personnel retrained, responsibilities shifted, units rearmed.

The program of reform sensibly aimed to remove deficiencies that had revealed themselves in the war with Finland. The sweeping nature of the reforms, however, caused transition shocks and threw the massive bureaucracy that was the Red Army into temporary disarray. To make matters worse the reorganization of the army was so widely conceived that it would not be complete until mid 1942. Thus in 1941 when the German attack occurred the Red Army was in a worse state than if reform had never been attempted. xx

In the 1930s the Soviet Union had clearly determined to respond to the deteriorating international situation by radically bolstering its military power. Its military spending rose steeply, it represented 3.4 percent of the state budget in 1933 but rose each year to reach a staggering 32.6 percent in 1940. xxi Expansion and reorganization of the army as well as the officer purge were measures central to its effort to enhance its military stature and were meant to decisively answer the question of its security. In its effort to prepare for war, however, the Soviet Union was aiming for more than it made sense to aim for given the time and resources available.

The Red Army in 1941 was a flawed force in a state of upheaval and nowhere yet ready for war. It was such precisely because of the combined shocks of an overly ambitious expansion, a sweeping reorganization and a murderous purge. The enormous scope and ambition of the effort to prepare the country for war actually worked against its purpose and undermined its effectiveness. On the eve of war Soviet defenses were nowhere near as robust as they should have been given the extent of energies invested into them.

Prelude to Invasion

Hitler begun planning an invasion of the Soviet Union as soon as France had fallen and committed committed to it by December 1940. xxii The attack, code named Operation Barbarossa, would commence next summer.

Information gathered by the Soviet intelligence on the German buildup and intentions in the east was plentiful. Detailed and accurate reports from agents and military attaches abroad were received warning of a planned invasion. Military commanders and party officials from the border areas submitted reports detailing preparations for war taking place across the border. The ever increasing density of incursions by German reconnaissance aircraft, sometimes to a depth of one hundred kilometers, readily testified to the intention of the Germans. Despite these and many other indicators Stalin stubbornly refused to believe Germany was preparing to strike. xxiii

Stalin had more than enough information needed to foresee the German attack. Red Army commanders G.K. Zhukov and S.K. Timoshenko did so albeit they were privy to far fewer intelligence reports than Stalin. When they asked for preparatory measures to be taken they were rebuked by the dictator. The difference between his army commanders and the dictator was Stalin's fear of disinformation. Facing a peculiar knowledge problem Stalin had access to vast number of various reports from his subordinates but no way of knowing if they were fully truthful or at least in part meant to mislead him. Consequentially he was inclined to mistrust reports and recommendations that went against his preconceptions. This being the case few would risk sowing suspicion about themselves in the dictator's mind by offering dissent. As a result albeit there were those who did not share Stalin's delusions, conditions for debate that may have swayed the dictator did not exist. Public debate on what the buildup meant was not possible in the state run press, and internal debate among officials was hampered by Stalin towering over the cowed state hierarchy.

As reorganization of the armed forces would not produce a truly combat capable Red Army until summer 1942 it had left the Soviet Union vulnerable. Aware of this weakness Stalin was extremely fearful of a war with Germany. This translated into an obsessive preoccupation with avoiding provocation that may give the Germans cause to attack and trigger a war he believed could be avoided. To this end severe restrictions were placed on the Red Army. It was to limit its air activity, it was not to take up defensive positions, it was not to speedily mobilize, it was not to fire on border violators. xxiv Stalin was pursuing a policy of appeasement that was so extreme it was detracting from the ability of the Soviet Union to defend itself.

At the same time the obligations of the Soviet Union under the Soviet-German commercial agreements were fulfilled to the letter. In the eighteen months before the German invasion, the Soviet Union shipped two million tones of petroleum products and various other raw materials to Germany. xxv These materials were difficult for Germany to obtain, but were critical to its industrial production and military buildup. Stalin hoped that by complying with the agreements he would help avoid war. As it was the supplies Germany received helped made its drive into the Soviet Union possible.

Appeasement could have its merits in the 1930s when Hitler was much less powerful and much more attuned to reality. Now that the victorious German armies had made him the master of Europe and his policies were guided by ideology and fantasy it is was positively nonsensical. It undermined any deterrent to attack the purged Red Army fresh from a fiasco in Finland still represented. Passivity of the Soviets in view of German border violations was interpreted as a weakness and made the war Stalin was hoping to avoid all the more certain. xxvi The Soviet Union was even now incredibly powerful, but Stalin was inadvertently encouraging Hitler to think the opposite.

At least one other aspect of Stalin's activity in the international sphere would come to haunt the USSR. His territorial appetites acted upon in 1939 and 1940 provided Germany with its key allies in the east. Soon after Stalin forced Romania to cede Bessarabia the Soviet Union, pro-Axis elements took power in Bucharest and entered Romania into the Axis. Finland likewise linked with Germany hoping to recapture the areas it had been forced to cede to the Soviet Union in the Winter War. The contribution of Finns and Romanians to Operation Barbarossa would add up to 650,000 invasion troops.

Soviet empire building of 1939-40 was the means by which Stalin, after alternatives had shown themselves to be lacking in his eyes, meant to attain security. xxvii Once more moving to tackle security challenges in a seemingly decisive manner played into German hands and made the Soviet Union less safe.

Invasion

German attack on the Soviet Union was launched on 22nd June 1941 and achieved surprise at every level. Because the Soviet state had cut the flow of information to its populace and army and sent them reassurances that proved deceptivethe Soviet Union accomplished the unlikely feat of being caught off guard by the largest military offensive in world history involving nearly 4 million troops.

When the war broke out only 2.8 million Soviet troops, of the 5.3 million total, were in theater and integrated into their units. xxviii Even these were mal-deployed. Based on Soviet war planning the greater part of Soviet strength in the west was in the region south of the Pripet Marshes, but the brunt of the German attack came north of it. xxix Early defense plans had been based on the correct assumption the main thrust was likeliest in the north, but had to be changed after Stalin signaled his disagreement. xxx

Red Army units were garrisoned rather than in the field, oftentimes with component units spread out over a large area. pisions were manned at half strength and lacked their full complement of artillery and ammunition. Particularly damaging was the severe shortage of trucks, radios and skilled radio operators. These deficiencies coupled with enemy activity, cumbersome organization and poor leadership meant resupply and command and control promptly broke down. xxxi

Units struggled for fuel and ammunition, some were without food. Performance of the Red Army hierarchy was poor and contributed to the confusion. Numerous tank formations greatly dissipated their strength before they ever met the enemy as they abandoned broken down vehicles on forced marches urgently moving into position. Others received changing, contradictory orders shifting the destination they were to move to, until they ran out of fuel and could move nowhere. xxxii

Operation Barbarossa ultimately failed to defeat the Soviet Union in a single blow as was its aim. It was a strategic failure for the Germans who had wildly underestimated the Soviets. The Soviet leadership for their part, however, wildly overestimated the Red Army. The Communist USSR with its can-do attitude had built an army geared for the attack, now that the war broke out it expected of its military to move on the offensive and carry the day.

Whenever possible Red Army Main Command threw units large and small into poorly coordinated counterattacks, counterstrokes and counteroffensives. These were bloody, suicidal affairs in which the Soviets were forsaking the one clear advantage they could still claim -- the advantage of fighting on the defense. One after another fronts, armies and corps would be sent into the teeth of the stronger, advancing enemy. xxxiii What ensued was a defeat in detail in which much of the massive Red Army was destroyed piecemeal. Numerous units were ground to dust attacking in appalling conditions that were crying out for defense or withdrawal.

By December 5 th , when it was finally stopped, Barbarossa had advanced more than 1,200 kilometers into the interior of the Soviet Union. It reached the outskirts of Moscow and delivered millions of people to the mercies of a lethal occupation. On the way it inflicted cumulative losses of 4.5 million on the Red Army including 2.3 million captured. xxxiv

The extent of the territory lost and the blow to the Soviet military delivered guaranteed a protracted and bloody campaign to force back the enemy. Before the end of the Soviet-German War the Red Army would emerge as an accomplished and enormously capable force, but in late 1941 this was still a long time into the future. Before then the Soviets would continue to blunder regularly and experience defeats and debacles that greatly added to the casualty lists and pushed back the day of triumph. These, however, did not have consequences quite as far reaching as the blunders of 1941 and the prior years.

Final Words

Red Army retarded by the Great Officer Purge, destabilized by an ill-timed reorganization, stunned by the artificial surprise of the June invasion and thrown against the attacker under an unrealistic comprehension of reality could barely keep from not being annihilated, it made a poor protector of Soviet Union and its populace.

Catastrophic defeat of the Soviet Union early in the war was to a large extent self-inflicted. Advantages the USSR held over competing powers were negated by its own leadership. Softening up the Red Army for Hitler, providing him with allies, supplying his industries and gifting the German army the element of surprise were blunders that cost millions of lives. The enormity of war death and suffering in the Soviet Union was as much a consequence of incompetence and paranoia of the Soviet leadership as of the invader.

In the end the invader was pushed back and vanquished through the superhuman effort on the part of the Soviet people, of the factory worker, the Red Army man and the partisan alike. The reason this effort needed to be so enormous was because it needed to not only drive back the Germans, but also make up for the failings of the Soviet state. The Soviet people had to fight the war in the worst of circumstances, stuck between the hammer of Nazi invasion and the anvil of Soviet arbitrariness and repression and suffered accordingly.

What scholars easily agree on is that for all its other faults the Soviet system was without equal in mobilization ability which ultimately saved it. Mobilization ability, however, is nothing more than ability of the state to place its populace between itself and its enemies. In demanding ever more sacrifices from its people to make up for its incompetence the USSR was indeed expert.

In the Soviet Union more of life went through the state than anywhere else in the world and still the state in a spectacular manner failed to protect its people against a power that could approximate neither the size of its armed forces, nor the size of its military production. That the country in the ensuing struggle nonetheless emerged victorious is a testament to the spirit and sacrifice of the Soviet people. That this people needed to bear such gruesome losses to do so, is a condemnation of the Soviet state that had nearly brought about their downfall.

PS.: I wrote the esssay above seven years ago working without the benefit of Roger R. Reese's extraordinary book Why Stalin's Soldiers Fought . If I had access to that work at the time I would have listed another reason of Soviet defeat in 1941 -- time and time again encircled Soviet units were ordered to break out of their encirclement and disintegrated in the attempt netting the enemy hundreds of thousands, even millions of captured prisoners of war with relative ease. A breakout is the most difficult maneuver in warfare as it demands attack, defense and retreat all be carried out simultaneously. It was a maneuver far beyond the capabilities of the encircled Red Army units of 1941, but Reese makes a convincing case these were very willing and more than capable of mounting an extended defense had the Soviet leadership only been willing to write them off as doomed and ordered them to hold out in a last stand instead. Having to deal with enormous pockets stretching over key infrastructure for an extended period of time would have dramatically slowed down the German blitzkrieg. As it was the pockets instead crumbled quickly as relatively cohesive large formations trying to carry out the orders disintegrated into small groups of soldiers which were then captured by better positioned and locally superior enemy forces one by one -- there were no mass surrender events which would have indicated a lack of will to fight on the part of the soldiers.

At the time of writing I also in the interest of briefness omitted a point I now think quite key. The fact that in the six months of the war in 1941 the Soviet Union lost nearly the entirety of its pre-war army meant that 1942 and all subsequent years were extremely difficult. It meant the USSR had to construct a new army from scratch while simultaneously having to stave off a cohesive and aggressive 3-4 million strong invading force. On the one hand the men in newly-raised units needed time in barracks to train, acquire skills, get to know each other, and develop at least some loyalty to each other should they be expected to fight efficiently. On the other, it was imperative the Soviets throw something in the way of the advancing Germans right away lest these take yet more land, people and resources. The Soviet leadership compounded the problem by all too often ordering these haphazard units on the offensive increasing their already high rate of attrition further. As a result the Soviets had to effectively rebuild their army not once, but multiple times -- in this way the fateful Soviet blunders of 1941 and the pre-war continued to reverberate and extract a cost until the very end of the war albeit less with each passing year.

i Michael Ellman and S. Maksudov, Soviet Deaths in the Great Patriotic War: A Note – Europe Asia Studies, July 1994

ii Velikaya Otechestvennaya vojna Sovetskogo Soyuza 1941 -- 1945: Kratkaya istoriya (Moscow: Voenizdat, 1984), 497

iii Soviet territory under Axis control in November 1942 was home to 45% of USSR's populuation pre-war. The number of people under occupation is this figure less evacuees (16.5 million) and conscripts.

iv In 1935 France and the Soviet Union concluded a pact of mutual assistance meant to contain Germany.

v A.J.P. Taylor, The Origins of the Second World War (1961; reprint, New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2005), 128

vi Ibid., 172, 177

vii David M. Glantz, Stumbling Colossus: The Red Army on the Eve of World War (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1998), 294

viii Roger R. Reese, Stalin's Reluctant Soldiers: A Social History of the Red Army, 1925-1941 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1996), 32-33

ix Ibid., 100-130

x Glantz, Stumbling Colossus, 34

xi Ibid., 160

xii Roger R. Reese, Soviet Military Experience: A History of the Soviet Army, 1917-1991 (London and New York: Routledge, 200), 99

xiii Reese, The Soviet Military Experience, 95 and Reese, Stalin's Reluctant Soldiers, 174, 179

xiv Reese, The Soviet Military Experience, 95

xv Glantz, Stumbling Colossus, 26, 189

xvi Reese, The Soviet Military Experience, 87

xvii Glantz, Stumbling Colossus, 31-33

xviii David M. Glantz and Jonathan M. House, When Titans Clashed: How the Red Army Stopped Hitler (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1995), 37

xix Richard W. Harrison Architect of Soviet victory: The Life and Theories of G.S. Isserson (Jefferson and London, McFarland & Company, 2010), 194, 199

xx Glantz, House, When Titans Clashed, 44

xxi Reese, Stalin's Reluctant Soldiers, 166

xxii David M. Glantz, Barbarossa: Hitler's Invasion of Russia 1941 (Strout: Tempus Publishing, 2001), 14

xxiii Glantz, Stumbling Colossus, 233-246

xxiv Ibid., 246, 256 and Glantz, Barbarossa, 30

xxv Ibid., 30-31

xxvi Glantz, Stumbling Colossus, 256

xxvii Vojtech Mastny, The Cold War and Soviet Insecurity: The Stalin Years (Oxford and New York, Oxford University Press, 1996), 14-16

xxviii Glantz, Stumbling Colossus, 295

xxix Pripet Marshes are wetlands covering nearly 100.000 square kilometers in southern Belarus and northern Ukraine.

xxx Glantz, Stumbling Colossus, 90-93

xxxi Ibid., 129

xxxii Ibid 134-135, 137 and Stalin's Reluctant Soldiers, 199

xxxiii Glantz, Barbarossa, 59

xxxiv G.F. Krivosheev, Soviet Casulties and Combat Losses in the Twentieh Century (Pennsylvania, Stackpole Books, 1997), 93

Source: Checkpoint Asia

[Jun 13, 2018] Germany Was Defeated on the Eastern Front, Not Normandy, by Eric Margolis - The Unz Review

Notable quotes:
"... Germany's mighty Wehrmacht, which included the Luftwaffe, was destroyed by Stalin's Soviet Union. The Red Army claims to have destroyed 507 German divisions, 48,000 German tanks, 77,000 German aircraft, and 100 divisions of Axis troops allied to Germany from Italy, Romania, Hungary, Slovakia, and Finland. ..."
"... Of Germany's 10 million casualties in WWII, 75% were inflicted by the Red Army. The once mighty Luftwaffe was decimated over Russia. Almost all German military production went to supplying the 1,600 km Eastern Front where Germany's elite forces were ground up in titanic battles like Kursk and Stalingrad that involved millions of soldiers. ..."
Jun 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

On my many walking visits to the vast Normandy battlefield in France, I kept recalling the ever so wise dictum of Prussia's great monarch, Frederick the Great: 'he who defends everything, defends nothing.' On this 74 th anniversary of the D-Day landings, it's well worth recalling the old warrior-king.

Adolf Hitler, a veteran of the infantry, should certainly have known better. Defending the European coast from Brittany to Norway was an impossibility given Germany's military and economic weakness in 1944. But he did not understand this. Having so brilliantly overcome France's Maginot Line fortifications in 1940, Hitler and his High Command repeated the same strategic and tactical errors as the French only four years later: not having enough reserves to effectively counter-attack enemy breakthrough forces.

Germany's vaunted Atlantic Wall looked formidable on paper, but it was too long, too thin, lacked defensive depth and was lacking in adequate reserve forces. The linear Maginot Line suffered the same failings. America's fortifications protecting Manila and Britain's 'impregnable' fortifications at Singapore also proved worthless. The Japanese merely marched into their undefended rears.

In 1940, the German Wehrmacht was modern history's supreme fighting machine. But only four years later, the Wehrmacht was broken. Most Americans, British and Canadians believe that D-Day was the decisive stroke that ended WWII in Europe. But this is not true.

Germany's mighty Wehrmacht, which included the Luftwaffe, was destroyed by Stalin's Soviet Union. The Red Army claims to have destroyed 507 German divisions, 48,000 German tanks, 77,000 German aircraft, and 100 divisions of Axis troops allied to Germany from Italy, Romania, Hungary, Slovakia, and Finland.

Few Americans have ever heard of the Soviet Far East offensive of 1945, a huge operation that extended from Central Asia to Manchuria and the Pacific. At least 450,000 Japanese soldiers were killed, wounded or captured by the Red Army, 32% of Japan's total wartime military losses. The Soviets were poised to invade Japan when the US struck it with two nuclear weapons.

Of Germany's 10 million casualties in WWII, 75% were inflicted by the Red Army. The once mighty Luftwaffe was decimated over Russia. Almost all German military production went to supplying the 1,600 km Eastern Front where Germany's elite forces were ground up in titanic battles like Kursk and Stalingrad that involved millions of soldiers.

Soviet forces lost upwards of 20 million men. Total US losses, including the Pacific, were one million. To Marshal Stalin, D-Day, the North African and Italian campaign were merely diversionary side-shows to tie down Axis forces while the Red Army pushed on to Berlin.

D-Day was without doubt one of the greatest logistical feats of modern military history. Think of General Motors versus the German warrior Siegfried. For every US tank the Germans destroyed, ten more arrived. Each German tank was almost irreplaceable. Transporting over one million men and their heavy equipment across the Channel was a triumph. But who remembers that Germany crossed the heavily defended Rhine River into France in 1940?

ORDER IT NOW

By June, 1944, German forces at Normandy and along the entire Channel coast had almost no diesel fuel or gasoline. Their tanks and trucks were immobilized. Allied air power shot up everything that moved, including a staff car carrying Marshal Erwin Rommel strafed by Canada's own gallant future aviator general, Richard Rohmer. German units in Normandy were below 40% combat effectiveness even without their shortages in fuel.

The Germans in France were also very short of ammunition, supplies and communications. Units could only move by night, and then very slowly. Hitler was reluctant to release armored forces from his reserves. Massive Allied bombing of Normandy alone killed 15,000 to 20,000 French civilians and shattered many cities and towns.

Churchill once said, 'you will never know war until you fight Germans.' With no air cover or fuel and heavily outnumbered, German forces in Normandy managed to mount a stout resistance, inflicting 209,000 casualties on US, Canadian, British, Free French and allied forces. German losses were around 200,000.

The most important point of the great invasion is that without it, the Red Army would have reached Paris and the Channel Ports by the end of 1944, making Stalin the master of all Europe except Spain. Of course, the Allies could have reached a peace agreement with Germany in 1944, which Hitler was seeking and Gen. George Patton was rumored to be advocating. But the German-hating Churchill and left-leaning Roosevelt were too bloody-minded to consider a peace that would have kept Stalin out of at least some of Eastern Europe.

[Jun 12, 2018] The real reason for which 'information apocalypse' terrifies the mainstream media

Highly recommended!
Jun 12, 2018 | failedevolution.blogspot.com

The real reason for which 'information apocalypse' terrifies the mainstream media In short: because they are rapidly losing the propaganda monopoly
by system failure

No matter how hard I tried, I couldn't find a source to inform me about the exact origin (who and when) of the term 'fake news'. Generally, the term became mainstream during the last years, and especially after some shocking events for the Western neoliberal establishment, like Trump's presidency and Brexit.

Very briefly, it appears that the term was suspiciously invented by the neoliberal apparatus to discredit people who supported such events, through social media and other Internet platforms completely independent from the mainstream media control. Of course, one can easily discredit this perception as 'conspiracy theory' or even 'fake news', as well.
While it's true that there has been a lot of hyperbole, misinformation and hard propaganda circulated inside the cyberspace, it seems that the 'fake news' term was expanded somehow to include even opinions and positions outside the dominant neoliberal orthodoxy expressed by the political center in the West.

What's perhaps most interesting in the whole story, is that the term 'fake news' eventually backfired against the establishment, as it was immediately adopted by the political 'extremes' outside the neoliberal center, to include the misinformation and the smearing campaigns by the mainstream media against those who didn't comply with the neoliberal narratives. Mainstream media propaganda is what brought us numerous wars and plenty of disaster in previous decades, after all.

numerous wars and plenty of disaster in previous decades, after all.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/7X-YAgYENdA


Now, a relatively new technology with its origins in the beginning of the previous decade, seems that it spreads a sort of panic among the mainstream media, often described as 'information apocalypse'.

As described by Guardian recently:

What is new is the democratisation of advanced IT, the fact that anyone with a computer can now engage in the weaponisation of information. 2016 was the year we woke up to the power of fake news, with internet conspiracy theories and lies used to bolster the case for both Brexit and Donald Trump. We may, however, look back on it as a kind of phoney war, when photoshopping and video manipulation were still easily detectable. That window is closing fast. A program developed at Stanford University allows users to convincingly put words into politicians' mouths. Celebrities can be inserted into porn videos. Quite soon it will be all but impossible for ordinary people to tell what's real and what's not.
What will the effects of this be? When a public figure claims the racist or sexist audio of them is simply fake, will we believe them? How will political campaigns work when millions of voters have the power to engage in dirty tricks? What about health messages on the dangers of diesel or the safety of vaccines? Will vested interests or conspiracy theorists attempt to manipulate them? Unable to trust what they see or hear, will people retreat into lives of non-engagement, ceding the public sphere to the already powerful or the unscrupulous?
The potential for an "information apocalypse" is beginning to be taken seriously. The problem is we have no idea what a world in which all words and images are suspect will look like, so it's hard to come up with solutions. Perhaps not very much will change – perhaps we will develop a sixth sense for bullshit and propaganda, in the same way that it has become easy to distinguish sales calls from genuine inquiries, and scam emails with fake bank logos from the real thing. But there's no guarantee we'll be able to defend ourselves from the onslaught, and society could start to change in unpredictable ways as a result.
The perspective described here is indeed frightening. Yet, what's really impressive in this article and in other similar articles by the big media on the Internet, is that there is a type of information elitism, implying that there is a media priesthood, which has the copyright of Truth. You can tell that by the fact that the article completely ignores the possibility that this technology could be used by the mainstream media too, to manipulate the public.

Inside this increasingly artificial reality, is there really anyone today who holds the keys of the 'ultimate' truth? I don't think so.

So, this bizarre panic around the mainstream media about this new, and indeed frightening technology, is not coming from their concern that you will be heavily misinformed. It's coming from the fact that they want the monopoly to misinform you. Because they know that after decades of lies and propaganda being upgraded to a literally scientific level, their credibility today has reached a record low.

Celebrities can be inserted into porn videos by anyone. I don't like it. I don't think is right.

Personalities should be protected and perhaps we need a new legislation code to achieve that.

But what about the mainstream media pundits who will use this frightening technology to grab the consent of the masses for another devastating war with millions of dead?

[Jun 11, 2018] Why Did the Soviet Union Collapse - YouTube

Mixture of interesting although almost irrelevant information about personalities such as Gorbachov and his wife (viewed over rose glasses) with some idiotic statements. Avoid.
The collapse of the USSR was the collapse of the society which ideology (Marxism-leninism) collapsed and replacement it with neoliberalism. Neoliberal counterrevolution.
Also the economics of the USSR was a war economics. Part of it was due to the threat from the West and embargo on high tech. Part due to own military-industrial complex. Agriculture was a failure. The net result was deterioration of he standard of living in 80th. People because seduced by western consumerism and elite was seduced by neoliberal ideology. So neoliberal revolution (counter-revolution) logically followed
Jun 11, 2018 | www.youtube.com

April 5, 2017
In this lecture, William Taubman, professor of Political Science at Amherst College and the Pulitzer Prize-winning author, sheds a light on how Mihail Gorbachev undermined the Soviet system in pursuit of his dream of the democratized country.

Scorpius , 6 months ago

The West will always hate Russia. Because the Soviet Union destroyed the colonial world order where the rules of the West. Despotism of the "white man" was destroyed, and enslaved peoples of Africa, Asia, Islamic world, Latin America was released. In the 19th century, the West ruled the world, now only n their historical lands. Russia has caused considerable damage to Western domination.

Lord pikkasso , 5 months ago

Why USSR collapsed according to America, Fake news. The USSR empire collapsed for the same reasons that European empires collapsed. The American empire has been in decline for a while now and will eventually collapsed too.

UserNameMandatory , 4 months ago

Good for insight into Gorbachev. That's all.

Michelle Rice , 3 months ago

Brezhnev started the ball rolling , USSR was already a sinking ship when Gorbachev took over , he was the fall guy !!!!

Daniel Wong , 1 month ago

The USSR was doomed to collapse. It is a totally corrupted union, with selfish leaders who lived in luxury while the people lived in poverty. However, it devoted its resources to military development. No extra resources were given to production of consumer goods and foods for the people. Its union comprises many countries with different races and cultures, which could never be reconciled. Its collapse is just a matter of time, and could not blame Gorbachev.

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

Jun 11, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

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

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

What's Putin's secret?

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

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

Russia's economy today:

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

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

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

Patrick Armstrong , a day ago

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Italy?

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

I seriously doubt it.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Trump assumes the mantle of Saint Ronald? Thank God.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Babak Makkinejad -> ultramaris , 9 hours ago
Indeed.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A couple of starting points if interested -

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

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

Bálint Somkuti , a day ago
Sir,

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

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

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

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

Soaring popularity of right-of-center
forces in several European nations, coupled with Putin's meeting with
Austrian Chancellor Kurz during his visit to Vienna.
http://en.kremlin.ru/events...

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

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

https://irrussianality.word...

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Jun 11, 2018] Stephen Kotkin Sphere of Influence I - The Gift of Geopolitics How Worlds are Made, and Unmade - YouTube

When discussing Russia Kotkin look like primitive and naive provincial. which most the US scholars are. He was unable to mention neoliberalism even once. Which completely discredit his as a scholar.
As one commenter quipped: "Insane introductory joke." If this is a professor, then US universities political department are just cheap propaganda outlets.
Jun 11, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Redžep , 10 months ago (edited)

Such a true agent of US hegemony and global capitalism - regardless of which oligarchic dynasty is in power in DC. But still, I can always personally respect a white Jewish liberal who can praise the Bolshevik revolution like Kotkin did in Stalin Vol. I.

Peter Knopfler , 1 year ago

USA WAR ECONOMY a 2 party system owned by one large military that says, "Full spectrum domination" we own the land,sea,air,cyber and outer space. We own the world. USA regime boots on the ground in over 150 countries large military bases 1000 spread around the world. USA owns United NATIONS and NATO pays most of the budget, pays to be the boss. However Europe military occupied by USA and silent hatred for USA keeps growing, brewing. Germany and Japan still USA regime military outposts. USA regime largest weapon sales always first to kill, nukes ,napalm, depleted Uranium, agent orange, cluster bombs, DRONE kills that flood Europe with refugees and fear. Thanks AMERICA.

Count Rufus , 6 months ago

Americans boast how they brought Soviet Union down. Only to form European Union under their nose. Lol. ..good job. Europe generally dislikes USA and has enough of US

aviomaster , 2 months ago

why all this ? A close relationship between Moscow and Europe would remove the rationale for America's military role in NATO and thereby its political influence in Europe. The US is prepared to plunge Europe into a war with Russia in order for Washington to preserve its hegemony over the transatlantic axis. The key issues are the prevention of Russia and Europe developing closer trade and political ties - stemming primarily from a vast trade in energy fuels; and, secondly, the survival of the American dollar as the world's reserve currency.

[Jun 11, 2018] Crimea and who won the cold War

Russia collapsed because its elite changed side and adopted neoliberalism. So the US did won the cold war, not question about it. Yeltsin and Russian constitution was the equivalent a signing of capitulation. And economic devastation the followed is equitant of full and unconditional capitulation.
Jun 11, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Besides being good and observant on a given topic (G7-SCO summits), the article in passing fixed two important facts, to which I drew attention.

(1) "...Russia had been kicked out after Crimea voted to join its motherland ".

(2) "...Years later the U.S. fell for the myth that it had 'won' the Cold War ".

Good to see here an accurate and correct wordings, not some usual [western] propaganda stamps aka "annexation of Crimea" or "occupied Crimea".
Good to see an adult and sober estimation of the event.
One might like or don't like it, but Crimea joined Russia in full accordance with international law.
A precedent for this appeared when the West recognized a separation of Kosovo from Serbia.
A [West's] decision on Kosovo clearly stated a primacy of the right of nations to self-determination over the territorial integrity of state.
At that time, Russia was warning that recognizing Kosovo the West opens the Pandora's box, and that possible results in the future can be regrettable and dangerous.
As usual, western elites were not listening. Well, they got a result in 2014.

Btw, one might notice that since 2014 no one (first of all Ukraine) ever tried to start a trial against Russia because of Crimea.
They could, for example, appeal to the ICC or ECHR. Why not?
If there would be any violations (from Russian side), the court, of course, would clearly state "Russia is guilty here, here and here..".
But no one ever appealed to the ICC or ECHR (or any other court\institution).
Because they know they will fail in court, since Russia did not violate any laws\norms of the international law.
That's why all they can do is just to scream about "Russian aggression" and "annexation of Crimea".

Btw, that's interesting (and very characteristic) - Ukrainian Nazi regime did not refuse to use courts to argue with a Russian company "Gazprom" on gas prices and other stuff. But they're refuse to use courts to dispute a legitimacy of Crimea's status.

-

The myth that US had 'won' the Cold War is another interesting moment. First of all, because the Cold War was not over. It's easy to prove by concrete facts. To name just a few:

  1. NATO was not dissolved and continued to expand to the East even after 1991, when the USSR collapsed.
  2. Russia still was under sanctions ("Jackson-Vanik amendment", repealed only in 2012) even after 1991, when the USSR collapsed.
  3. The West (in particular, the US) widely supported separatist sentiments & terrorists on Russian Caucasus in 90-es/early 2000-es.
  4. The US' meddling into a Russian elections (well-known story of 1996 President elections in Russia).
  5. NATO\US aggression against Yugoslavia in late 90-es, completely ignoring Russia's opinion & concern. Not mentioning bombardment of Saraevo in the middle of 90-es, again, ignoring Russia's opinion & concern.

The Cold War was never finished. In 90-es it was just transferred into some kind of a "lightened form", since Russia was weakened (but not defeated) by the collapse of USSR, therefore it was no need for the West to 'try hard' against Russia. Since 2000-es (unilateral withdrawal of the US from the ABM Treaty in 2002, aggression against Iraq in 2003 etc.) the Cold War "woke up" and was steadily increasing till our days.

That's why the US did not win the Cold War - you can't be a winner in the unfinished, continuous process. The results of WWII is a good example to compare (for Russia it's 1941-1945 war). There were concrete winners and there clearly was a side who lost the war. Those who lost the war signed a concrete documents, signed a capitulation. All these documents are official documents, they have a concrete names, signatures, dates, conditions etc.

So what's with "victory in Cold War"? Any concrete date of "victory"? Maybe there's some concrete documents signed by Russia (where the country admitts it lost the "Cold War")? Maybe some conditions for the "losing side" (that it must completely disarm, abandon the army, let foreign troops enter its territory or change its constitution etc.)? Maybe Russia lost its place\role in UNSC, and in the United Nations on the whole? Maybe there were some 'obligations' of Russia regarding a "winner side"?

For all questions the answer is no.

The problem is that from some moment the US unilaterally started to think they 'won' a Cold War (though, i repeat, the Cold War was not over, and Russia never admitted it lost any war). Some kind of a voluntary delusion, self-deception.
This gave birth to the unprecedented level of arrogance and impudence of the US leadership.
This arrogance and impudence now is the main factor of unstability of the worldorder.

-

The article itself is well written and observant, though i maybe disagree with some moments.
For example, that A.Merkel wished to use a suggestion to Russia to come back into G8 as a possible trump card\reward.
Of course, Merkel is not Otto von Bismarck or Helmut Kohl, but even with her level of political mastery i don't think she's SO naive\stupid to think this weak proposal to Russia would work.

Also, in my opinion a statement that "the West is Past" is too much.
It would be unreasonable to deny the West still have a lot advantages and impressive achievements - education, technologies, market, good & developed medicine, science, clever and qualified people, strong economics...
Plus, must not forget the West still control the main world media, and, in fact, form an everyday news agenda - i.e. controls the minds of most people.
I would say the West (the western political system, elites) is in serious crisis now - that's obvious, yes.
But i wouldn't say "the West is Past".

--

@ Madderhatter67, #10


They did win the Cold War. That's how they became the'sole superpower'.
Explained above in detail why you're wrong.

The US did not win the Cold War. It is a myth that they themselves came up with and sincerely believed in.

Posted by: alaff | Jun 11, 2018 9:22:36 AM | 109

[Jun 11, 2018] Is it any wonder why the G6+1 is becoming irrelevant?

Jun 11, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Here's point 13 of the Joint Communique issued by the G6+1 as provided by Southfront. How many BigLies can you find?

13. We urge Russia to cease its destabilizing behaviour to undermine democratic systems and its support of the Syrian regime. We condemn the attack using a military-grade nerve agent in Salisbury, United Kingdom. We share and agree with the United Kingdom's assessment that it is highly likely that the Russian Federation was responsible for the attack, and that there is no plausible alternative explanation. We urge Russia to live up to its international obligations, as well as its responsibilities as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, to uphold international peace and security. Notwithstanding, we will continue to engage with Russia on addressing regional crises and global challenges, where it is in our interests. We reiterate our condemnation of the illegal annexation of Crimea and reaffirm our enduring support for Ukrainian sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity within its internationally-recognized borders. We maintain our commitment to assisting Ukraine in implementing its ambitious and necessary reform agenda. We recall that the continuation of sanctions is clearly linked to Russia's failure to demonstrate complete implementation of its commitments in the Minsk Agreements and respect for Ukraine's sovereignty and we fully support the efforts within the Normandy Format and of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe for a solution to the conflict in Eastern Ukraine. Should its actions so require, we also stand ready to take further restrictive measures in order to increase costs on Russia. We remain committed to support Russian civil society and to engage and invest in people-to-people contact.

Is it any wonder why the G6+1 is becoming irrelevant?

james @89--

Your concerns were aired at the SCO by "Tajik President Emomali Rahmon spoke about the need to use environmentally friendly technology to enhance self-sufficiency and sustainable development across the SCO." Furthermore, Both Putin and Xi have taken the lead at SCO in calling for sustainable development, which means taking environmental impacts into the economic equation and not treating the environment as an unaffected externality as the West has always done. Since 2013, China's been #1 in solar production and implementation. I invite you to go to the Yandex search engine, type in China solar then select images to see some of the immense installations already constructed. FYI, China sees its air pollution problem as a form of poverty which must be eliminated if China is to become a truly prosperous nation as planned by 2025. Plus there's the pan-Asian philosophical outlook of humanity being within Nature and needing to remain in balance versus the Western credo of being set apart above Nature to become its master.

Posted by: karlof1 | Jun 10, 2018 4:50:49 PM | 89

[Jun 11, 2018] Atlantic Council Pro-NATO Pressure Group Uses Distortions to FIght 'Disinfor

Notable quotes:
"... raison d'être ..."
Jun 11, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

Fueling hysteria about "Russian disinformation," "Russian meddling," and "Russian propaganda" has quickly become a lucrative pastime. Now NATO's Atlantic Council has gathered the leading proponents under one umbrella.

"Russian's everywhere, everywhere Russians" – that's long been the mantra of NATO's propaganda wing, the Atlantic Council. And, since 1961, the American lobby group's raison d'être has been to convince the world that Moscow presents an existential threat to the rest of Europe.

And as NATO has expanded, the "think tank's" agitprop has evolved from the "reds in the bed" whispers of the Soviet-era to today's new racket: "disinformation."

This week, Atlantic Council announced a new initiative known as the "DisinfoPortal."

Their latest wheeze is pitched as "an interactive online guide to track the Kremlin's disinformation campaigns abroad." Something you can take to mean pretty much everything which contradicts NATO-friendly messaging, whether accurate or not.

[Jun 10, 2018] Some display a weird obsession with colonialism. In reality everyone's self-serving; the form changes but at the end of the day, that's nature. And evidently the West, whatever foibles it has, should at least make an effort to survive

Jun 10, 2018 | www.unz.com

GammaRay , June 9, 2018 at 3:07 pm GMT

@Daniel Chieh

There is no universal, global brotherhood of "nationalist, right-wing, anti-SJW" values as you seem to be trying to imply. The western far-right/alt-right is entirely self-serving and their appeals to some kind of global nationalistic ideology is basically just a thin facade that they promote in order to help generate support for their own self-serving agenda. The only reason that the western far-right wants to reach out for allies right now is because they are on the ropes and in a position of weakness; if the western far-right was instead in a position of strength then they would not hesitate to put their boot on your neck. You are quite naive if you don't think otherwise.

As an long time observer of the western far-right; its very clear that at the end of the day, it is not principles that they care about, it is only themselves. That in itself would be fine if they were upfront about it, however the problem is that they insist on being very deceptive about their true motives. As I have said in this post, and so many others; why is it that the far-right wants to postulate about "rights" and "fairness" when it comes to the preservation of the white race, but then when it comes to any other ethnic group on earth that has been negatively impacted by western colonialism the far-right just tells them to go fuck themselves? This tells you all you need to know about how the far-right really feels about its so called vaunted principles regarding racial/cultural preservation. They believe in it for themselves yes, but will be more than willing to compromise this belief when it comes to any others. You are missing the forest for the trees if you insist on adhering to notions of abstract jointly-held values at the expense of basic strategic interests; this is something I guarantee you is not lost on the western far-right.

You also assume that SJWism is going to spread to east asia and negatively affect the culture there in the same way that it has in the west. Is this or is this not the primary motivation why you seek an alliance with the western far-right? Have I understood your motive correctly? Going on the assumption that this is actually your motive; then why haven't you taken into account the fact that culturally and genetically speaking, east asians simply think differently than whites do? There is no reason to believe that SJWism is going to run as rampantly in east asia as it has in the west. It will gain a foothold that is for sure, but it won't gain the same kind of traction that it has in the west. Ideologies cannot completely change the essential natures of people, if this was the case then the alt-right (based on racial determinism) would not exist in the first place. Anyways this is a moot point; if the west fully declines then it would be unable to export its leftist ideals anyways, so I don't see what you're mad about.

Once again, to reiterate my original point. It is absurd for POC to assume that the western far-right in any way, shape or form represents their interests or at the very least is a neutral entity towards them. It is true that POC is a clumsy, extremely general term, but in this context it functions perfectly. The western far-right worldview is basically encapsulated as "whites vs all others"; therefore within this context, a pan non-white concept like POC is useful for working within such a stark, extremist ideological framework. What is playing out in the west right now is basically the west struggling with its own past actions; highly conscientious POC need to sit on the sidelines, shutup and let this play out on its own. There is no need to take sides here, the west made its own bed, let it sleep in it, this has nothing to do with POC.

GammaRay , June 9, 2018 at 3:45 pm GMT
@Anonymous

Most of us are against both 'invite the world' and 'invade the world'.

Im an old hand on the internet far-right/alt-right scene; what you said is generally true except with a major caveat. The alt-right is against invading the world only when it doesn't result in any net gain for the west. The alt-right doesn't actually have a principled stance against colonization/invading other countries; rather they are only against invading other countries when it inconveniences them, but when it happens to benefit them, they are fully supportive of all kinds of invasions. This is probably one of the things that disgusts me most about the alt-right is how they lack any kind of true, consistent moral foundation but like to act as if they do.

Its not really a useful argument to ask if something is really a grassroots thing or not. You could apply that same line of reasoning to anything to the extent where it could obscure the true reality of an event. Is globalization due to the actions of a jewish ruling class? Perhaps. But many on the alt-right still blame jews in general because they understand that there is something in jewish culture that is sympathetic to the globalization project overall. The same thing applies to western colonization as well. Regardless of what the western ruling class chose to do, there was an eager, sympathetic and compliant population which enabled western colonization to happen. If the population was not enthusiastic about the colonization project then the broad and thorough scale of european colonization would have been impossible otherwise.

The very act of colonizing and expansion is something that speaks to the very soul of western man. Most on the far-right fully agree with this sentiment btw and this is something that you see them say over and over. Simply trying to deflect all the blame on the ruling class and absolve the people actually carrying out actions is pretty disingenuous. The reality is, both the ruling class and its subjects are both equally culpable for european colonization. More importantly, I want to add that while colonialism may not have originated as a grassroots movement, it certainly had (and continues to have) grassroots support (especially among the far-right). Which is something that is equally important to consider (and equally damning as well)

Daniel Chieh , June 9, 2018 at 3:52 pm GMT
@GammaRay

You have a weird obsession with colonialism. Everyone's self-serving; the form changes but at the end of the day, that's nature.

You're just as self-serving, except that you've apparently have a global image of "POC" being united for some reason. And evidently the West, which for whatever foibles it has, shouldn't at least make an effort to survive?

God, that's stupid.

Misanthropy is the true answer.

GammaRay , June 9, 2018 at 4:33 pm GMT
@Daniel Chieh

Lol, you couldn't address any of my points, that's why you just throw everything out and take potshots at me.

The modern world, and nearly everything that unz.com is about ultimately goes back to colonialism. You could equally say that the writers on unz.com have a weird obsession with immigration/globalization. Likewise, I could equally say that you have some weird obsession with leftism. You see how flawed your logic is?

No, im not being self-serving here. I know that my usage of the term POC triggered your anti-left/anti-SJW sensibilities, but you're reading too much into the usage of a word. The term POC was used because it was appropriate for the context (as I explained in my reply to you and you conveniently ignored), not because I have an extreme left political orientation.

Once again, to reiterate my original point. It is absurd for POC to assume that the western far-right in any way, shape or form represents their interests or at the very least is a neutral entity towards them. It is true that POC is a clumsy, extremely general term, but in this context it functions perfectly. The western far-right worldview is basically encapsulated as "whites vs all others"; therefore within this context, a pan non-white concept like POC is useful for working within such a stark, extremist ideological framework. What is playing out in the west right now is basically the west struggling with its own past actions; highly conscientious POC need to sit on the sidelines, shutup and let this play out on its own. There is no need to take sides here, the west made its own bed, let it sleep in it, this has nothing to do with POC.

As for the west trying to make some effort to survive; I had never claimed that it should not. In fact I never made any argument to that effect in any of my comments on this article. In fact, I want you to prove me wrong . Since you seem so sure of your position, quote and paste where I clearly made an argument to the effect of the west should just give up and stop trying to survive. I'll be waiting.

You need to work on your reading comprehension. Clearly I have been making the argument that POC (I hope you get triggered by this) need to stop trying to prop up the west by rubbing shoulders with the alt-right and should instead sit back and watch things play out. This is not their fight. Making this argument is completely different than what you were trying to imply I was saying.

God, that's stupid

Daniel Chieh , June 9, 2018 at 5:08 pm GMT
@GammaRay

As I've said before, I give as much effort to a reply as I think a person deserves. Obviously you're not one of them, in no small part because of your insane fetish with "colonialism" – which I barely could care for.

Indeed, colonialism can be plenty helpful for improving the condition of a population objectively, which is surprising given that its goal is traditionally extractive but when the native elite is so incompetent or even more extractive of their population, then it is a net benefit to the population.

Not that I really care; I don't see anything fundamentally wrong with conquest. At the end of the day, competition is the means to determine which values and memes of humanity survive and by removing violence completely as a method, it leads to warping of the population.

I'm descended from mandarins; I have a pretty clear line of family history as far back as the Yuan. We've done beautiful things – marvelous terraced farms, canals that remain to this day, and a slew of impressive artwork. We've done terrible things – kept generations of illiterate serfs and bondsmen. "European colonialism" may hurt us, but the Cultural Revolution did a lot more damage and almost wiped us out. And we've invaded Vietnam, and I don't regret it: Annam, the peaceful south. Had the Ming held it, had it remained Chinese, its hard to argue that it would not be wealthier and more beautiful than it is now.

So no, I don't feel anything in common with your so-called POC. And your rants about colonialism only irritate me further. There are many terrible things in life and the world. And often, they are also beautiful and glorious things.

GammaRay , June 9, 2018 at 8:41 pm GMT
@Daniel Chieh

LOL. This is hilarious, keep backtracking. You obviously care because you bothered to reply in the first place. Tellingly, you were unable to address the most cogent points in the argument that I brought up against you in my previous replies and instead prefer to dissemble about something that has nothing to do with the original point of discussion. Don't think I didn't notice the (clumsy) sleight of hand. You try to act as if you're above replying to me but really the problem is that you're unable to argue against the points that I made. Its really that simple. If you were able to disprove my arguments then you would already be doing that instead of talking in circles about it.

Ethically speaking, colonialism is wrong. Doesnt matter who does it, white black or yellow. That being said, I understand the dark parts of human nature and why colonialism happens. Time and time again, I have clearly stated how the crux of my argument is the hypocrisy of the far-right when it comes to the topic of colonialism, not so much the act of colonialism itself. That's it. And I couldn't make my point any clearer. The onus falls on you, and not on I to correctly perceive this point. My problem is not that the west colonized the world (shit happens), my problem is that the far right wants to celebrate and condone colonialism (hence celebrate the historical destruction of other races and cultures) while simultaneously wanting to complain about their own racial displacement and cultural destruction (ironically brought about by globalization which in turn was brought about through western colonialism in the first place). The far-right has a major ideological consistency here which it is either blind to, or willfully ignores. I'm sorry but the western far-right can't have its cake and eat it too. It needs to clearly decide how they feel about the ethics of colonization and then take a principled and consistent stance on it.

Regardless, both in the comments for this post, and for the entirety of my posting history, my stance regarding colonization has been the same. It is you that has misunderstood it due to your faulty reading comprehension, and anybody who doubts my words is perfectly free to read my prior comments in this thread as well as look through my comment history as well. Therefore, the thrust of your reply completely misses the mark. I suspect however that your misunderstanding was intentional considering how clearly I made my point regarding colonialism in all of my posts. Regardless, why should anyone take what you have to say seriously when you have already demonstrated a clear tendency for poor reading comprehension or willful misperception? Don't forget about this:

You're just as self-serving, except that you've apparently have a global image of "POC" being united for some reason. And evidently the West, which for whatever foibles it has, shouldn't at least make an effort to survive?

God, that's stupid.

As for the west trying to make some effort to survive; I had never claimed that it should not. In fact I never made any argument to that effect in any of my comments on this article. In fact, I want you to prove me wrong . Since you seem so sure of your position, quote and paste where I clearly made an argument to the effect of the west should just give up and stop trying to survive. I'll be waiting.

I'm still waiting for you to clearly provide proof of your assertion that I implied the west should just give up; which in fact I never wrote anything to the effect of that, but in your rush to debunk me, you obviously missed that. The alt-right always prides itself on relying strictly on the facts, so please live up to this ethos. Everything I wrote is an open book, either prove your assertions or admit that you can't.

So no, I don't feel anything in common with your so-called POC. And your rants about colonialism only irritate me further. There are many terrible things in life and the world. And often, they are also beautiful and glorious things.

Nor do you have to feel anything in common with so-called POC. Do you think I care what you feel? You vastly overestimate your own importance. Remember, it was you who went out of you way to start up this dialogue with me, not I . I'm glad that my "rants" regarding colonialism irritate you. That being said, if they irritate you so much, instead of responding to them, please ignore them from now on. You are aware that you are not obligated to reply to anything I write, right?

GammaRay , June 9, 2018 at 8:41 pm GMT
@Daniel Chieh

True! There are many terrible things in life and the world, and also there are many glorious and beautiful things as well. I think it is beautiful that the west has lived at the expense of others for so long, and now we are reaching a point where everything that the west has done is now catching up with it in unexpected ways. It turns out the the universe has a sense of humor afterall. What goes up, must come down. This applies to all races and all civilizations. As humans, we must seek to live in harmony with each other, and not simply exploit and kill one another. There is beauty in seeking to rise above such primitive impulses, and if possible acting with understanding and compassion towards our fellow man. That is truly the meaning of "being civilized".

Truly I do not harbor ill-will against the west because it is western, rather I harbor ill-will towards the west because of its past actions and present attitudes. This is why I specifically target the far-right (because of their present attitudes about the west's past actions), as opposed to attacking all western people. I especially have a soft-spot for westerners that are able to genuinely feel remorse about the past. I strongly believe in the concept of forgiveness and letting things go, provided that the sentiment is genuine and mutual. Actually on that topic; even indifference is an acceptable emotion. I think its stupid to morally hold westerners to past events when even they are indifferent about their own racial/cultural future. I only stick it to the far-right because they automatically incur higher moral/ethical standards for themselves to meet when they want to start talking about the importance of having moral rights for racial/cultural survival.

That being said, the west has a tremendous amount of momentum from its past actions gathered against it; so it doesn't really matter how I feel, the west will still have to deal with everything that is happening to it and what is going to happen to it in the future. Nothing you say or do will impact this in any way, so you might as well enjoy the ride instead of complaining that I am pointing out inconvenient truths which harm your delicate sensibilities. Ironically those who complain most about fragile SJW snowflakes are those who get triggered the easiest themselves

In fact, looking at your history, you are a rare breed: you are a genuine, unironic anti-white crusader. You actually think there is something uniquely evil about "white people" and talk without any sense of contradiction that you have "extensive experience of white people."

The mind boggles.

It was a mistake to give you any time at all.

This is actually a lie what you have written. For your convenience, and for the convenience of anybody reading, I have provided the quote of what I had originally written which you are referring to:

GammaRay says:
April 29, 2018 at 7:04 pm GMT • 200 Words
@Wizard of Oz

This is an interesting question and definitely worth looking into. That being said, I do not buy into the reasoning that an exploding british population is the only or even major reason behind colonization. From learning about european culture, and understanding the general weltanschauung of white people, as well as from having extensive social experience with them; it is clearly evident to me that there is a strong extraversive, expansive component that exists in the white collective consciousness which under certain circumstances strongly compels them to colonize, displace and replace much more so than other races would do so under similar circumstances. What alt-righters/WN would call "ambition" and "drive", others might prefer to recognize it as "greed". Regardless of the semantic trivialities; it is clear that there is a strong internal drive within westerners that causes them to vigorously pursue both the physical and cultural colonization of "the other". This is not a negative or positive judgment though; it is merely intended to be understood as an objective observation.

What I had written clearly strives to be dispassionate and objective as opposed to the maniacal and frothing at the mouth anti-white diatribe that you are attempting to make it out to be.

Im sorry but the truth of the matter is that HBD is probably real; racial differences probably exist on a genetic level which influence the behavior and temperaments of different races and ethnic groups. The fact that whites are more likely to be domineering and have a tendency for colonizing "the other" does not make them evil; it is an impulse that can be channeled in both positive and negative ways. That being said, just because I bring up this inconvenient fact doesn't automatically make me racist or "anti-white". I am merely trying to work within a framework of reality, we have both multiple centuries of history to draw inferences from, as well as interpersonal anecdotal observations of white behavior both in real life as well as on the internet in spaces such as these. I don't think its very controversial that I am making observations based on noticing patterns. I mean, is noticing patterns illegal or something undesirable?

[Jun 09, 2018] Still Waiting for Evidence of a Russian Hack by Ray McGovern

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... That did not prevent the "handpicked" authors of that poor excuse for intelligence analysis from expressing "high confidence" that Russian intelligence "relayed material it acquired from the Democratic National Committee to WikiLeaks." Handpicked analysts, of course, say what they are handpicked to say. ..."
"... The June 12, 14, & 15 timing was hardly coincidence. Rather, it was the start of a pre-emptive move to associate Russia with anything WikiLeaks might have been about to publish and to "show" that it came from a Russian hack. ..."
"... "No one has challenged the authenticity of the original documents of Vault 7, which disclosed a vast array of cyber warfare tools developed, probably with help from NSA, by CIA's Engineering Development Group. That Group was part of the sprawling CIA Directorate of Digital Innovation – a growth industry established by John Brennan in 2015. [ (VIPS warned President Obama of some of the dangers of that basic CIA reorganization at the time.] ..."
"... "Scarcely imaginable digital tools – that can take control of your car and make it race over 100 mph, for example, or can enable remote spying through a TV – were described and duly reported in the New York Times and other media throughout March. But the Vault 7, part 3 release on March 31 that exposed the "Marble Framework" program apparently was judged too delicate to qualify as 'news fit to print' and was kept out of the Times at the time, and has never been mentioned since . ..."
"... "More important, the CIA reportedly used Marble during 2016. In her Washington Post report , Nakashima left that out, but did include another significant point made by WikiLeaks; namely, that the obfuscation tool could be used to conduct a 'forensic attribution double game' or false-flag operation because it included test samples in Chinese, Russian, Korean, Arabic and Farsi." ..."
"... The CIA's reaction to the WikiLeaks disclosure of the Marble Framework tool was neuralgic. Then Director Mike Pompeo lashed out two weeks later, calling Assange and his associates "demons," and insisting; "It's time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is, a non-state hostile intelligence service, often abetted by state actors like Russia."Our July 24 Memorandum continued: "Mr. President, we do not know if CIA's Marble Framework, or tools like it, played some kind of role in the campaign to blame Russia for hacking the DNC. Nor do we know how candid the denizens of CIA's Digital Innovation Directorate have been with you and with Director Pompeo. These are areas that might profit from early White House review. [ President Trump then directed Pompeo to invite Binney, one of the authors of the July 24, 2017 VIPS Memorandum to the President, to discuss all this. Binney and Pompeo spent an hour together at CIA Headquarters on October 24, 2017, during which Binney briefed Pompeo with his customary straightforwardness. ] ..."
"... Another false flag operation? Suddenly false flag operations have become the weapon of choice. Interestingly enough, they are nefariously (always) committed by the US or US allies. MH17 was a false flag with an SU-25 Ukraine jet responsible for downing the passenger jet (to blame Russia). All of the chemical attacks in Syria were false flag operations with the supply of sarin/chlorine made in Turkey or directly given to the "rebels" by the CIA or US allies. The White Helmets were of course in on all of the details. Assad was just simply not capable of doing that to "his" people. Forget that the sarin had the chemical signature of the Assad regime sarin supply. Next it was the snipers who used a false flag operation during the Maidan revolution to shoot protesters and police to oust Yanukovych. Only the neo-Nazis could be capable of shooting the Maidan protesters so they could take power. And then Seth Rich was murdered so he couldn't reveal he was the "real" source of the leak. This was hinted by Assange when he offered a reward to find the killers. ..."
"... The author tosses out that the DNC hack was (potentially) a false flag operation by the CIA obviously to undermine Trump while victimizing Russia. ..."
"... I don't seen any cause to say that any false-flag theory you don't like is merely "tossed out" propaganda. One cannot tell in your comment where you think the accounts are credible and where not. No evidence that the Syria CW attacks "had the chemical signature of the Assad regime sarin supply." ..."
"... There can be no doubt that counterintelligence tools would be pursued by our intelligence agencies as a means to create narratives and false evidence based on the production of false flags which support desired geopolitical outcomes. There would be a need to create false flags using technology to support the geopolitical agenda which would be hard or impossible to trace using the forensic tools used by cyber sleuths. ..."
"... Russia-gate is American Exceptionalism writ large which takes on a more sinister aspect as groups like BLM and others are "linked" to alleged "Russian funding"on one and and Soros funding on another ..."
"... (FWIW, this is a new neoliberal phenomenon when the ultra-rich "liberals" can quietly fund marches on Washington and "grassroots" networking making those neophyte movements too easy targets with questionable robust foundation (color revolutions are possible when anyone is able to foot the cost of 1,000 or 2000 "free" signs or t-shirts -- impecccably designed and printed. ..."
"... Excellent post. Thanks also for reminding me I need to revisit the Vault 7 information as source material. These are incredibly important leaks that help connect the dots of criminal State intelligence activities designed to have remained forever hidden. ..."
"... Actually, both Brennan and Hayden testified to Congress that only 3 agencies signed off on their claim. They also said that they'd "hand picked" a special team to run their "investigation," and no other people were involved. So, people known to be perjurers cherry picked "evidence" to make a claim. Let's invade Iraq again. ..."
"... Mueller is not interested in the truth. He can't handle the truth. His purpose is not to divulge the truth. He has no use for truthtellers including the critical possessors of the truth whom you mentioned. This aversion to the truth is the biggest clue that Mueller's activities are a complete sham. ..."
"... Thanks, Ray, for revealing that the CIA's Digital Innovation Directorate is the likely cause of the Russiagate scams. ..."
"... Your disclaimer is hilarious: "We speak and write without fear or favor. Consequently, any resemblance between what we say and what presidents, politicians and pundits say is purely coincidental." ..."
"... For whatever reason, Ray McGovern chose not to mention the murder of Seth Rich, which pretty clearly points to the real source of the leak being him, as hinted by Assange offering a reward for anyone uncovering his killer. The whole thing stinks of a democratic conspiracy. ..."
"... Ray, from what I have seen in following his writing for years, meticulously only deals in knowns. The Seth Rich issue is not a known, it is speculation still. Yes, it probably is involved, but unless Craig Murray states that Seth Rich was the one who handed him the USB drive, it is not a known. ..."
"... There is a possibility that Seth Rich was not the one who leaked the information, but that the DNC bigwigs THOUGHT he was, in which case, by neither confirming nor denying that Seth Rich was the leaker, it may be that letting the DNC continue to think it was him is being done in protection of the actual leaker. Seth Rich could also have been killed for unrelated reasons, perhaps Imran Awan thought he was on to his doings. ..."
"... Don't forget this Twitter post by Wikileaks on October 30, 2016: Podesta: "I'm definitely for making an example of a suspected leaker whether or not we have any real basis for it." https://www.wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/36082#efmAGSAH- ..."
"... Mueller has nothing and he well knows it. He was willingly roped into this whole pathetic charade and he's left grasping for anything remotely tied to Trump campaign officials and Russians. Even the most tenuous connections and weak relationships are splashed across the mass media in breathless headlines. Meanwhile, NONE of the supposed skulduggery unearthed by Mueller has anything to do with the Kremlin "hacking" the election to favor Trump. Which was the entire raison d'etre behind Rosenstein and Mueller's crusade on behalf of the deplorable DNC and Washington militarist-imperialists. Sure be interesting to see how Mueller and his crew ultimately extricate themselves from this giant fraudulent edifice of deceit. Will they even be able to save the most rudimentary amount of face? ..."
"... If they had had any evidence to inculpate Russia, we would have all seen it by now. They know that by stating that there is an investigation going on: they can blame Russia. The Democratic National Committee is integrated by a pack of liars. ..."
"... My question is simple, when will we concentrate on reading Hillary's many emails? After all wasn't this the reason for the Russian interference mania? Until we do, take apart Hillary's correspondence with her lackeys, nothing will transpire of any worth. I should not be the one saying this, in as much as Bernie Sanders should be the one screaming it for justice from the highest roof tops, but he isn't. So what's up with that? Who all is involved in this scandalous coverup? What do the masters of corruption have on everybody? ..."
Jun 09, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

If you are wondering why so little is heard these days of accusations that Russia hacked into the U.S. election in 2016, it could be because those charges could not withstand close scrutiny . It could also be because special counsel Robert Mueller appears to have never bothered to investigate what was once the central alleged crime in Russia-gate as no one associated with WikiLeaks has ever been questioned by his team.

Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity -- including two "alumni" who were former National Security Agency technical directors -- have long since concluded that Julian Assange did not acquire what he called the "emails related to Hillary Clinton" via a "hack" by the Russians or anyone else. They found, rather, that he got them from someone with physical access to Democratic National Committee computers who copied the material onto an external storage device -- probably a thumb drive. In December 2016 VIPS explained this in some detail in an open Memorandum to President Barack Obama.

On January 18, 2017 President Obama admitted that the "conclusions" of U.S. intelligence regarding how the alleged Russian hacking got to WikiLeaks were "inconclusive." Even the vapid FBI/CIA/NSA "Intelligence Community Assessment of Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent U.S. Elections" of January 6, 2017, which tried to blame Russian President Vladimir Putin for election interference, contained no direct evidence of Russian involvement. That did not prevent the "handpicked" authors of that poor excuse for intelligence analysis from expressing "high confidence" that Russian intelligence "relayed material it acquired from the Democratic National Committee to WikiLeaks." Handpicked analysts, of course, say what they are handpicked to say.

Never mind. The FBI/CIA/NSA "assessment" became bible truth for partisans like Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, who was among the first off the blocks to blame Russia for interfering to help Trump. It simply could not have been that Hillary Clinton was quite capable of snatching defeat out of victory all by herself. No, it had to have been the Russians.

Five days into the Trump presidency, I had a chance to challenge Schiff personally on the gaping disconnect between the Russians and WikiLeaks. Schiff still "can't share the evidence" with me or with anyone else, because it does not exist.

WikiLeaks

It was on June 12, 2016, just six weeks before the Democratic National Convention, that Assange announced the pending publication of "emails related to Hillary Clinton," throwing the Clinton campaign into panic mode, since the emails would document strong bias in favor of Clinton and successful attempts to sabotage the campaign of Bernie Sanders. When the emails were published on July 22, just three days before the convention began, the campaign decided to create what I call a Magnificent Diversion, drawing attention away from the substance of the emails by blaming Russia for their release.

Clinton's PR chief Jennifer Palmieri later admitted that she golf-carted around to various media outlets at the convention with instructions "to get the press to focus on something even we found difficult to process: the prospect that Russia had not only hacked and stolen emails from the DNC, but that it had done so to help Donald Trump and hurt Hillary Clinton." The diversion worked like a charm. Mainstream media kept shouting "The Russians did it," and gave little, if any, play to the DNC skullduggery revealed in the emails themselves. And like Brer' Fox, Bernie didn't say nothin'.

Meanwhile, highly sophisticated technical experts, were hard at work fabricating "forensic facts" to "prove" the Russians did it. Here's how it played out:

June 12, 2016: Assange announces that WikiLeaks is about to publish "emails related to Hillary Clinton."

June 14, 2016: DNC contractor CrowdStrike, (with a dubious professional record and multiple conflicts of interest) announces that malware has been found on the DNC server and claims there is evidence it was injected by Russians.

June 15, 2016: "Guccifer 2.0" affirms the DNC statement; claims responsibility for the "hack;" claims to be a WikiLeaks source; and posts a document that the forensics show was synthetically tainted with "Russian fingerprints."

The June 12, 14, & 15 timing was hardly coincidence. Rather, it was the start of a pre-emptive move to associate Russia with anything WikiLeaks might have been about to publish and to "show" that it came from a Russian hack.

Enter Independent Investigators

A year ago independent cyber-investigators completed the kind of forensic work that, for reasons best known to then-FBI Director James Comey, neither he nor the "handpicked analysts" who wrote the Jan. 6, 2017 assessment bothered to do. The independent investigators found verifiable evidence from metadata found in the record of an alleged Russian hack of July 5, 2016 showing that the "hack" that day of the DNC by Guccifer 2.0 was not a hack, by Russia or anyone else.

Rather it originated with a copy (onto an external storage device – a thumb drive, for example) by an insider -- the same process used by the DNC insider/leaker before June 12, 2016 for an altogether different purpose. (Once the metadata was found and the "fluid dynamics" principle of physics applied, this was not difficult to disprove the validity of the claim that Russia was responsible.)

One of these independent investigators publishing under the name of The Forensicator on May 31 published new evidence that the Guccifer 2.0 persona uploaded a document from the West Coast of the United States, and not from Russia.

In our July 24, 2017 Memorandum to President Donald Trump we stated , "We do not know who or what the murky Guccifer 2.0 is. You may wish to ask the FBI."

Our July 24 Memorandum continued: "Mr. President, the disclosure described below may be related. Even if it is not, it is something we think you should be made aware of in this general connection. On March 7, 2017, WikiLeaks began to publish a trove of original CIA documents that WikiLeaks labeled 'Vault 7.' WikiLeaks said it got the trove from a current or former CIA contractor and described it as comparable in scale and significance to the information Edward Snowden gave to reporters in 2013.

"No one has challenged the authenticity of the original documents of Vault 7, which disclosed a vast array of cyber warfare tools developed, probably with help from NSA, by CIA's Engineering Development Group. That Group was part of the sprawling CIA Directorate of Digital Innovation – a growth industry established by John Brennan in 2015. [ (VIPS warned President Obama of some of the dangers of that basic CIA reorganization at the time.]

Marbled

"Scarcely imaginable digital tools – that can take control of your car and make it race over 100 mph, for example, or can enable remote spying through a TV – were described and duly reported in the New York Times and other media throughout March. But the Vault 7, part 3 release on March 31 that exposed the "Marble Framework" program apparently was judged too delicate to qualify as 'news fit to print' and was kept out of the Times at the time, and has never been mentioned since .

"The Washington Post's Ellen Nakashima, it seems, 'did not get the memo' in time. Her March 31 article bore the catching (and accurate) headline: 'WikiLeaks' latest release of CIA cyber-tools could blow the cover on agency hacking operations.'

"The WikiLeaks release indicated that Marble was designed for flexible and easy-to-use 'obfuscation,' and that Marble source code includes a "de-obfuscator" to reverse CIA text obfuscation.

"More important, the CIA reportedly used Marble during 2016. In her Washington Post report , Nakashima left that out, but did include another significant point made by WikiLeaks; namely, that the obfuscation tool could be used to conduct a 'forensic attribution double game' or false-flag operation because it included test samples in Chinese, Russian, Korean, Arabic and Farsi."

A few weeks later William Binney, a former NSA technical, and I commented on Vault 7 Marble, and were able to get a shortened op-ed version published in The Baltimore Sun

The CIA's reaction to the WikiLeaks disclosure of the Marble Framework tool was neuralgic. Then Director Mike Pompeo lashed out two weeks later, calling Assange and his associates "demons," and insisting; "It's time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is, a non-state hostile intelligence service, often abetted by state actors like Russia."Our July 24 Memorandum continued: "Mr. President, we do not know if CIA's Marble Framework, or tools like it, played some kind of role in the campaign to blame Russia for hacking the DNC. Nor do we know how candid the denizens of CIA's Digital Innovation Directorate have been with you and with Director Pompeo. These are areas that might profit from early White House review. [ President Trump then directed Pompeo to invite Binney, one of the authors of the July 24, 2017 VIPS Memorandum to the President, to discuss all this. Binney and Pompeo spent an hour together at CIA Headquarters on October 24, 2017, during which Binney briefed Pompeo with his customary straightforwardness. ]

We also do not know if you have discussed cyber issues in any detail with President Putin. In his interview with NBC's Megyn Kelly he seemed quite willing – perhaps even eager – to address issues related to the kind of cyber tools revealed in the Vault 7 disclosures, if only to indicate he has been briefed on them. Putin pointed out that today's technology enables hacking to be 'masked and camouflaged to an extent that no one can understand the origin' [of the hack] And, vice versa, it is possible to set up any entity or any individual that everyone will think that they are the exact source of that attack.

"'Hackers may be anywhere,' he said. 'There may be hackers, by the way, in the United States who very craftily and professionally passed the buck to Russia. Can't you imagine such a scenario? I can.'

New attention has been drawn to these issues after I discussed them in a widely published 16-minute interview last Friday.

In view of the highly politicized environment surrounding these issues, I believe I must append here the same notice that VIPS felt compelled to add to our key Memorandum of July 24, 2017:

"Full Disclosure: Over recent decades the ethos of our intelligence profession has eroded in the public mind to the point that agenda-free analysis is deemed well nigh impossible. Thus, we add this disclaimer, which applies to everything we in VIPS say and do: We have no political agenda; our sole purpose is to spread truth around and, when necessary, hold to account our former intelligence colleagues.

"We speak and write without fear or favor. Consequently, any resemblance between what we say and what presidents, politicians and pundits say is purely coincidental." The fact we find it is necessary to include that reminder speaks volumes about these highly politicized times.

Ray McGovern works for Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Savior in inner-city Washington. He was an Army infantry/intelligence officer before serving as a CIA analyst for 27 years. His duties included preparing, and briefing one-on-one, the President's Daily Brief.

ThomasGilroy , June 9, 2018 at 9:44 am

"More important, the CIA reportedly used Marble during 2016. In her Washington Post report, Nakashima left that out, but did include another significant point made by WikiLeaks; namely, that the obfuscation tool could be used to conduct a 'forensic attribution double game' or false-flag operation because it included test samples in Chinese, Russian, Korean, Arabic and Farsi."

Another false flag operation? Suddenly false flag operations have become the weapon of choice. Interestingly enough, they are nefariously (always) committed by the US or US allies. MH17 was a false flag with an SU-25 Ukraine jet responsible for downing the passenger jet (to blame Russia). All of the chemical attacks in Syria were false flag operations with the supply of sarin/chlorine made in Turkey or directly given to the "rebels" by the CIA or US allies. The White Helmets were of course in on all of the details. Assad was just simply not capable of doing that to "his" people. Forget that the sarin had the chemical signature of the Assad regime sarin supply. Next it was the snipers who used a false flag operation during the Maidan revolution to shoot protesters and police to oust Yanukovych. Only the neo-Nazis could be capable of shooting the Maidan protesters so they could take power. And then Seth Rich was murdered so he couldn't reveal he was the "real" source of the leak. This was hinted by Assange when he offered a reward to find the killers.

The author tosses out that the DNC hack was (potentially) a false flag operation by the CIA obviously to undermine Trump while victimizing Russia. It must be the Gulf of Tonkin all over again. While Crowdstrike might have a "dubious professional record and multiple conflicts of interest", their results were also confirmed by several other cyber-security firms (Wikipedia):

cybersecurity experts and firms, including CrowdStrike, Fidelis Cybersecurity, Mandiant, SecureWorks, ThreatConnect, and the editor for Ars Technica, have rejected the claims of "Guccifer 2.0" and have determined, on the basis of substantial evidence, that the cyberattacks were committed by two Russian state-sponsored groups (Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear).

Then there was Papadopoulas who coincidentally was given the information that Russia had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. Obviously, they were illegally obtained (unless this was another CIA false flag operation). This was before the release of the emails by WikiLeaks. This was followed by the Trump Tower meeting with Russians with connections to the Russian government and the release of the emails by WikiLeaks shortly thereafter. Additionally, Russia had the motive to defeat HRC and elect Trump. Yesterday, Trump pushed for the reinstatement of Russia at the G-7 summit. What a shock! All known evidence and motive points the finger directly at Russia.

Calling everything a false flag operation is really the easy way out, but ultimately, it lets the responsible culprits off of the hook.

anon , June 9, 2018 at 11:28 am

I don't seen any cause to say that any false-flag theory you don't like is merely "tossed out" propaganda. One cannot tell in your comment where you think the accounts are credible and where not. No evidence that the Syria CW attacks "had the chemical signature of the Assad regime sarin supply."

CitizenOne , June 8, 2018 at 11:40 pm

There can be no doubt that counterintelligence tools would be pursued by our intelligence agencies as a means to create narratives and false evidence based on the production of false flags which support desired geopolitical outcomes. There would be a need to create false flags using technology to support the geopolitical agenda which would be hard or impossible to trace using the forensic tools used by cyber sleuths.

In pre computer technology days there were also many false flags which were set up to create real world scenarios which suited the geopolitical agenda. Even today, there are many examples of tactical false flag operations either organized and orchestrated or utilized by the intelligence agencies to create the narrative which supports geopolitical objectives.

Examples:

The US loaded munitions in broad daylight visible to German spies onto the passenger ship Lusitania despite German warnings that they would torpedo any vessels suspected of carrying munitions. The Lusitania then proceeded to loiter unaccompanied by escorts in an area off the Ireland coast treading over the same waters until it was spotted by a German U-Boat and was torpedoed. This was not exactly a false flag since the German U-Boat pulled the trigger but it was required to gain public support for the entrance of the US into WWI. It worked.

There is evidence that the US was deliberately caught "off guard" in the Pearl Harbor Attack. Numerous coded communication intercepts were made but somehow the advanced warning radar on the island of Hawaii was mysteriously turned off in the hours before and during the Japanese attack which guaranteed that the attack would be successful and also guaranteed that our population would instantly sign on to the war against Japan. It worked.

There is evidence that the US deliberately ignored the intelligence reports that UBL was planning to conduct an attack on the US using planes as bombs. The terrorists who carried out the attacks on the twin towers were "allowed" to conduct them. The result was the war in Iraq which was sold based on a pack of lies about WMDs and which we used to go to war with Iraq.

The Tonkin Gulf incident which historians doubt actually happened or believe if it did was greatly exaggerated by intelligence and military sources was used to justify the war in Vietnam.

The Spanish American War was ginned up by William Randolph Hearst and his yellow journalism empire to justify attacking Cuba, Panama and the Philippines. The facts revealed by forensic analysis of the exploded USS Maine have shown that the cataclysm was caused by a boiler explosion not an enemy mine. At the time this was also widely believed to not be caused by a Spanish mine in the harbor but the news sold the story of Spanish treachery and war was waged.

In each case of physical false flags created on purpose, or allowed to happen or just made up by fictions based on useful information that could be manipulated and distorted the US was led to war. Some of these wars were just wars and others were wars of choice but in every case a false flag was needed to bring the nation into a state where we believed we were under attack and under the circumstances flocked to war. I will not be the judge of history or justice here since each of these events had both negative and positive consequences for our nation. What I will state is that it is obvious that the willingness to allow or create or just capitalize on the events which have led to war are an essential ingredient. Without a publicly perceived and publicly supported cause for war there can be no widespread support for war. I can also say our leaders have always known this.

Enter the age of technology and the computer age with the electronic contraptions which enable global communication and commerce.

Is it such a stretch to imagine that the governments desire to shape world events based on military actions would result in a plan to use these modern technologies to once again create in our minds a cyber scenario in which we are once again as a result of the "cyber" false flag prepared for us to go to war? Would it be too much of a stretch to imagine that the government would use the new electronic frontier just as it used the old physical world events to justify military action?

Again, I will not go on to condemn any action by our military but will focus on how did we get there and how did we arrive at a place where a majority favored war.

Whether created by physical or cyberspace methods we can conclude that such false flags will happen for better or worse in any medium available.

susan sunflower , June 8, 2018 at 7:52 pm

I'd like "evidence" and I'd also like "context" since apparently international electoral "highjinks" and monkey-wrenching and rat-f*cking have a long tradition and history (before anyone draws a weapon, kills a candidate or sicc's death squads on the citizenry.

The DNC e-mail publication "theft" I suspect represents very small small potatoes for so many reasons As Dixon at Black Agenda Report put it . Russia-gate is American Exceptionalism writ large which takes on a more sinister aspect as groups like BLM and others are "linked" to alleged "Russian funding"on one and and Soros funding on another

https://www.blackagendareport.com/russia-gate-and-crisis-american-exceptionalism

(FWIW, this is a new neoliberal phenomenon when the ultra-rich "liberals" can quietly fund marches on Washington and "grassroots" networking making those neophyte movements too easy targets with questionable robust foundation (color revolutions are possible when anyone is able to foot the cost of 1,000 or 2000 "free" signs or t-shirts -- impecccably designed and printed.

Gary Weglarz , June 8, 2018 at 11:08 am

Excellent post. Thanks also for reminding me I need to revisit the Vault 7 information as source material. These are incredibly important leaks that help connect the dots of criminal State intelligence activities designed to have remained forever hidden.

Skip Scott , June 8, 2018 at 1:07 pm

I can't think of any single piece of evidence that our MSM is under the very strict control of our so-called intelligence agencies than how fast and completely the Vault 7 releases got flushed down the memory hole. "Nothing to see here folks, move along."

Realist , June 9, 2018 at 1:36 am

http://www.unz.com/mwhitney/dems-put-finishing-touches-on-one-party-surveillance-superstate/

Skip Scott , June 9, 2018 at 7:05 am

Mbob-

I don't think anyone can predict whether or not Sanders would have won as a 3rd party candidate. He ran a remarkable campaign, but when he caved to the Clinton machine he lost a lot of supporters, including me. If he had stood up at the convention and talked of the DNC skullduggery exposed by Wikileaks, and said "either I run as a democrat, or I run as a Green, but I'm running", he would have at least gotten 15 pct to make the TV debates, and who knows what could have happened after that. 40 pct of registered voters didn't vote. That alone tells you it is possible he might have won.

Instead he expected us to follow him like he was the f'ing Pied Piper to elect another Wall St. loving warmonger. That's why he gets no "pass" from me. He (and the Queen of Chaos) gave us Trump. BTW, Obama doesn't get a "pass" either.

willow , June 8, 2018 at 9:24 pm

It's all about the money. A big motive for the DNC to conjure up Russia-gate was to keep donors from abandoning any future
Good Ship Hillary or other Blue Dog Democrat campaigns: "Our brand/platform wasn't flawed. It was the Rooskies."

Vivian O'Blivion , June 8, 2018 at 8:22 am

An earlier time line.

March 14th. Popadopoulos has first encounter with Mifsud.

April 26th. Mifsud tells Popadopoulos that Russians have "dirt" on Clinton, including "thousands of e-mails".

May 4th. Trump last man standing in Republican primary.

May 10th. Popadopoulos gets drunk with London based Australian diplomat and talks about "dirt" but not specifically e-mails.

June 9th. Don. Jr meets in Trump tower with Russians promising "dirt" but not specifically in form of e-mails.

It all comes down to who Mifsud is, who he is working for and why he has been "off grid" to journalists (but not presumably Intelligence services) for > 6 months.

Specific points.

On March 14th Popadopoulos knew he was transferring from team Carson to team Trump but this was not announced to the (presumably underwhelmed) world 'till March 21st. Whoever put Mifsud onto Popadopoulos was very quick on their feet.
The Australian diplomat broke chain of command by reporting the drunken conversation to the State Department as opposed to his domestic Intelligence service. If Mifsud was a western asset, Australian Intelligence would likely be aware of his status.
If Mifsud was a Russian asset why would demonstrably genuine Russians be trying to dish up the dirt on Clinton in June?

There are missing pieces to this jigsaw puzzle but it's starting to look like a deep state operation to dirty Trump in the unlikely event that he went on to win.

Realist , June 8, 2018 at 4:28 pm

Ms. Clinton was personally trying to tar Trump with allusions to "Russia" and being "Putin's puppet" long before he won the presidency, in fact, quite conspicuously during the two conventions and most pointedly during the debates. She was willing to use that ruse long before her defeat at the ballot box. It was the straw that she clung to and was willing to use as a pretext for overturning the election after the unthinkable happened. But, you are right, smearing Trump through association with Russia was part of her long game going back to the early primaries, especially since her forces (both in politics and in the media) were trying mightily to get him the nomination under the assumption that he would be the easiest (more like the only) Republican candidate that she could defeat come November.

Wcb , June 8, 2018 at 5:25 pm

Steven Halper?

Rob Roy , June 8, 2018 at 1:33 am

I might add to this informative article that the reason why Julian Assange has been ostracized and isolated from any public appearance, denied a cell phone, internet and visitors is that he tells the truth, and TPTB don't want him to say yet again that the emails were leaked from the DNC. I've heard him say it several times. H. Clinton was so shocked and angry that she didn't become president as she so confidently expected that her, almost knee-jerk, reaction was to find a reason that was outside of herself on which to blame her defeat. It's always surprised me that no one talks about what was in those emails which covered her plans for Iran and Russia (disgusting).
Trump is a sociopath, but the Russians had nothing to do with him becoming elected. I was please to read here that he or perhaps just Pompeo? met with Binney. That's a good thing, though Pompeo, too, is unstable and war hungry to follow Israel into bombing yet another innocent sovereign country. Thank, Mr. McGovern for another excellent coverage of this story.

MLS , June 7, 2018 at 9:59 pm

"no one associated with WikiLeaks has ever been questioned by his team"

Do tell, Ray: How do you know what the GOP Congress appointed Special Prosecutor's investigation – with its unlimited budget, wide mandate, and notable paucity of leaks – has and has not done?

strgr-tgther , June 8, 2018 at 12:14 am

MLS: Thank you! No one stands up for what is right any more. We have 17 Intelligency agencies that say are election was stolen. And just last week the Republicans Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnel and Trey Gowdy (who I detest) said the FBI and CIA and NSA were just doing there jobs the way ALL AMERICANS woudl want them to. And even Adam Schiff, do you think he will tell any reporter what evidence he does have? #1 It is probably classified and #2 he is probably saving it for the inpeachment. We did not find out about the Nixon missing 18 minutes until the end anyways. All of these articles sound like the writer just copied Sean Hannity and wrote everything down he said, and yesterday he told all suspects in the Mueller investigation to Smash and Bleach there mobile devices, witch is OBSTRUCTION of justice and witness TAMPERING. A great American there!

Rob Roy , June 8, 2018 at 1:48 am

strgr-tgther:

Sean Hannity??? Ha, ha, ha.

As Mr. McGoven wrote .."any resemblance between what we say and what presidents, politicians and pundits say is purely coincidental."

John , June 8, 2018 at 5:48 am

Sorry I had to come back and point out the ultimate irony of ANYONE who supports the Butcher of Libya complaining about having an election stolen from them (after the blatant rigging of the primary that caused her to take the nomination away from the ONE PERSON who was polling ahead of Trump beyond the margin of error of the polls.)

It is people like you who gave us Trump. The Pied Piper Candidate promoted by the DNC machine (as the emails that were LEAKED, not "hacked", as the metadata proves conclusively, show.)

incontinent reader , June 8, 2018 at 7:14 am

What is this baloney? Seventeen Intelligence agencies DID NOT conclude what you are alleging, And in fact, Brennan and his cabal avoided using a National intelligence Estimate, which would have shot down his cherry-picked 'assessment' before it got off the ground – and it would have been published for all to read.

The NSA has everything on everybody, yet has never released anything remotely indicating Russian collusion. Do you think the NSA Director, who, as you may recall, did not give a strong endorsement to the Brennan-Comey assessment, would have held back from the Congress such information, if it had existed, when he was questioned? Furthermore, former technical directors of the NSA, Binney, Wiebe and Loomis- the very best of the best- have proven through forensics that the Wikileaks disclosures were not obtained by hacking the DNC computers, but by a leak, most likely to a thumb drive on the East Coast of the U.S. How many times does it have to be laid out for you before you are willing and able to absorb the facts?

As for Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan, (and Trey Gowdy, who was quite skilled on the Benghazi and the Clinton private email server investigations- investigations during which Schiff ran interference for Clinton- but has seemed unwilling to digest the Strozk, Page, McCabe, et al emails and demand a Bureau housecleaning), who cares what they think or say, what matters is the evidence.

I suggest you familiarize yourself with the facts- and start by rereading Ray's articles, and the piece by Joe diGenova posted on Ray's website.

Realist , June 8, 2018 at 4:12 pm

The guy's got Schiff for brains. Everyone who cares about the truth has known since before Mueller started his charade that the "17 intelligence agency" claim was entirely a ruse, bald-faced confected propaganda to anger the public to support the coup attempted by Ms. Clinton and her zombie followers. People are NOT going to support the Democratic party now or in the future when its tactics include subverting our public institutions, including the electoral process under the constitution–whether you like the results or not! If the Democratic party is to be saved, those honest people still in it should endeavor to drain the septic tank that has become their party before we can all drain the swamp that is the federal government and its ex-officio manipulators (otherwise known as the "deep state") in Washington.

Farmer Pete , June 8, 2018 at 7:30 am

"We have 17 Intelligency agencies that say are election was stolen."

You opened up with a talking point that is factually incorrect. The team of hand-picked spooks that slapped the "high confidence" report together came from 3 agencies. I know, 17 sounds like a lot and very convincing to us peasants. Regardless, it's important to practice a few ounces of skepticism when it comes to institutions with a long rap sheet of crime and deception. Taking their word for it as a substitute for actual observable evidence is naive to say the least. The rest of your hollow argument is filled with "probably(s)". If I were you, I'd turn off my TV and stop looking for scapegoats for an epically horrible presidential campaign and candidate.

strgr-tgther , June 8, 2018 at 12:50 pm

/horrible presidential campaign and candidate/ Say you. But we all went to sleep comfortable the night before the election where 97% of all poles said Clinton was going to be are next President. And that did not happen! So Robert Mueller is going to find out EXACTLY why. Stay tuned!!!

irina , June 8, 2018 at 3:40 pm

Not 'all'. I knew she was toast after reading that she had cancelled her election night fireworks
celebration, early on the morning of Election Day. She must have known it also, too.

And she was toast in my mind after seeing the ridiculous scene of her virtual image
'breaking the glass ceiling' during the Democratic Convention. So expensively stupid.

Realist , June 8, 2018 at 3:50 pm

Mueller is simply orchestrating a dramatic charade to distract you from the obvious reason why she lost: Trump garnered more electoral votes, even after the popular votes were counted and recounted. Any evidence of ballot box stuffing in the key states pointed to the Democrats, so they gave that up. She and her supporters like you have never stopped trying to hoodwink the public either before or after the election. Too many voters were on to you, that's why she lost.

Realist , June 8, 2018 at 3:57 pm

Indeed, stop the nonsense which can't be changed short of a coup d'etat, and start focusing on opposing the bad policy which this administration has been pursuing. I don't see the Dems doing that even in their incipient campaigns leading up to the November elections. Fact is, they are not inclined to change the policies, which are the same ones that got them "shellacked" at the ballot box in 2016. (I think Obama must own lots of stock in the shellack trade.)

Curious , June 8, 2018 at 6:27 pm

Ignorance of th facts keep showing up in your posts for some unknown reason. Sentence two: "we have 17 intelligency (sic) agencies that say ". this statement was debunked a long time ago.

Have you learned nothing yet regarding the hand-picked people out of three agencies after all this time? Given that set of lies it makes your post impossible to read.
I would suggest a review of what really happened before you perpetuate more myths and this will benefit all.

Also, a good reading of the Snowden Docs and vault 7 should scare you out of your shell since our "intelligeny" community can pretend to be Chinese, Russian, Iranian just for starters, and the blame game can start after hours instead of the needed weeks and/or months to determine the veracity of a hack and/or leak.

It's past trying to win you over with the actual 'time lines' and truths. Mr McGovern has re-emphasized in this article the very things you should be reading.
Start with Mr Binney and his technical evaluation of the forensics in the DNC docs and build out from there This is just a suggestion.

What never ceases to amaze me in your posts is the 'issue' that many of the docs were bought and paid for by the Clinton team, and yet amnesia has taken over those aspects as well. Shouldn't you start with the Clintons paying for this dirt before it was ever attributed to Trump?

Daniel , June 8, 2018 at 6:38 pm

Actually, both Brennan and Hayden testified to Congress that only 3 agencies signed off on their claim. They also said that they'd "hand picked" a special team to run their "investigation," and no other people were involved. So, people known to be perjurers cherry picked "evidence" to make a claim. Let's invade Iraq again.

More than 1/2 of their report was about RT, and even though that was all easily viewable public record, they got huge claims wrong. Basically, the best they had was that RT covered Occupy Wall Street and the NO DAPL and BLM protests, and horror of horrors, aired third party debates! In a democracy! How dare they?

Why didn't FBI subpoena DNC's servers so they could run their own forensics on them? Why did they just accept the claims of a private company founded by an Atlantic Council board member? Did you know that CrowdStrike had to backpedal on the exact same claim they made about the DNC server when Ukraine showed they were completely wrong regarding Ukie artillery?

Joe Lauria , June 8, 2018 at 2:12 am

Until he went incommunicado Assange stated on several occasions that he was never questioned by Muellers team. Craig Murray has said the same. And Kim Dotcom has written to Mueller offering evidence about the source and he says they have never replied to him.

Realist , June 8, 2018 at 3:40 pm

Mueller is not interested in the truth. He can't handle the truth. His purpose is not to divulge the truth. He has no use for truthtellers including the critical possessors of the truth whom you mentioned. This aversion to the truth is the biggest clue that Mueller's activities are a complete sham.

Miranda Keefe , June 8, 2018 at 3:28 pm

MLS wrote, "How do you know what the GOP Congress appointed Special Prosecutor's investigation – with its unlimited budget, wide mandate, and notable paucity of leaks – has and has not done?"

Robert Mueller is NOT a Special Prosecutor appointed by the Congress. He is a special counsel appointed by the Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein, and is part of the Department of Justice.

I know no one who dislikes Trumps wants to hear it. But all Mueller's authority and power to act is derived from Donald J. Trump's executive authority because he won the 2016 presidential election. Mueller is down the chain of command in the Executive Department.

That's why this is all nonsense. What we basically have is Trump investigating himself. The framers of the Constitution never intended this. They intended Congress to investigate the Executive and that's why they gave Congress the power to remove him or her via impeachment.

As long as we continue with this folly of expecting the Justice Department to somehow investigate and prosecute a president we end up with two terrible possibilities. Either a corrupt president will exercise his legitimate authority to end the investigation like Nixon did -or- we have a Deep State beyond the reach of the elected president that can effectively investigate and prosecute a corrupt president, but also then has other powers with no democratic control.

The solution to this dilemma? An empowered Congress elected by the People operating as the Constitution intended.

As to the rest of your post? It is an example of the "will to believe." Me? I'll not act as if there is evidence of Russian interference until I'm shown evidence, not act as if it must be true, because I want to believe that, until it's fully proven that it didn't happen.

F. G. Sanford , June 7, 2018 at 8:22 pm

There must be some Trump-Russia ties.
Or so claim those CIA spies-
McCabe wants a deal, or else he won't squeal,
He'll dissemble when he testifies!

No one knows what's on Huma's computer.
There's no jury and no prosecutor.
Poor Adam Schiff hopes McCabe takes the fifth,
Special council might someday recruit her!

Assange is still embassy bound.
Mueller's case hasn't quite come unwound.
Wayne Madsen implies that there might be some ties,
To Israelis they haven't yet found!

Halper and Mifsud are players.
John Brennan used cutouts in layers.
If the scheme falls apart and the bureau is smart,
They'll go after them all as betrayers!

They needed historical fiction.
A dossier with salacious depiction!
Some urinous whores could get down on all fours,
They'd accomplish some bed sheet emiction!

Pablo Miller and Skripal were cited.
Sidney Blumenthal might have been slighted.
Christopher Steele offered Sidney a deal,
But the dossier's not copyrighted!

That story about Novichok,
Smells a lot like a very large crock.
But they can't be deposed or the story disclosed,
The Skripals have toxic brain block!

Papadopolis shot off his yap.
He told Downer, that affable chap-
There was dirt to report on the Clinton cohort,
Mifsud hooked him with that honey trap!

She was blond and a bombshell to boot.
Papadopolis thought she was cute.
She worked for Mifsud, a mysterious dude,
Now poor Paps is in grave disrepute!

But the trick was to tie it to Russians.
The Clinton team had some discussions.
Their big email scandal was easy to handle,
They'd blame Vlad for the bad repercussions!

There must have been Russian collusion.
That explained all the vote count confusion.
Guccifer Two made the Trump team come through,
If he won, it was just an illusion!

Lisa Page and Pete Strzok were disgusted
They schemed and they plotted and lusted.
If bald-headed Clapper appealed to Jake Tapper,
Brennan's Tweets might get Donald Trump busted!

There had to be cyber subversion.
It would serve as the perfect perversion.
They would claim it was missed if it didn't exist,
It's a logically perfect diversion!

Ray McGovern , June 8, 2018 at 1:03 am

BRAVO, F.G. and thanks.
Ray

Rob Roy , June 8, 2018 at 1:41 am

F.G., you've done it again, and I might add, topped even yourself! Thanks.

KiwiAntz , June 7, 2018 at 7:30 pm

What a joke, America, the most dishonest Country on Earth, has meddled, murdered & committed coups to overturn other Govts & interfered & continues to do so in just about every Country on Earth by using Trade sanctions, arming Terrorists & illegal invasions, has the barefaced cheek to puff out its chest & hypocritcally blame Russia for something that it does on a daily basis?? And the point with Mueller's investigation is not to find any Russian collusion evidence, who needs evidence when you can just make it up? The point is provide the US with a list of unfounded lies & excuses, FIRSTLY to slander & demonise RUSSIA for something they clearly didn't do! SECONDLY, was to provide a excuse for the Democrats dismal election loss result to the DONALD & his Trump Party which just happens to contain some Republicans? THIRDLY, to conduct a soft Coup by trying to get Trump impeached on "TRUMPED UP CHARGES OF RUSSIAN COLLUSION"? And FOURTLY to divert attention away from scrutiny & cover up Obama & Hillary Clinton's illegal, money grubbing activities & her treasonous behaviour with her private email server?? After two years of Russiagate nonsense with NOTHING to show for it, I think it's about time America owes Russia a public apology & compensation for its blatant lying & slander of a innocent Country for a crime they never committed?

Sam F , June 7, 2018 at 7:11 pm

Thanks, Ray, for revealing that the CIA's Digital Innovation Directorate is the likely cause of the Russiagate scams.

I am sure that they manipulate the digital voting machines directly and indirectly. True elections are now impossible.

Your disclaimer is hilarious: "We speak and write without fear or favor. Consequently, any resemblance between what we say and what presidents, politicians and pundits say is purely coincidental."

Antiwar7 , June 7, 2018 at 6:23 pm

Expecting the evil people running the show to respond to reason is futile, of course. All of these reports are really addressed to the peanut gallery, where true power lies, if only they could realize it.

Thanks, Ray and VIPS, for keeping up the good fight.

mike k , June 7, 2018 at 5:55 pm

For whatever reason, Ray McGovern chose not to mention the murder of Seth Rich, which pretty clearly points to the real source of the leak being him, as hinted by Assange offering a reward for anyone uncovering his killer. The whole thing stinks of a democratic conspiracy.

And BTW people have become shy about using the word conspiracy, for fear it will automatically brand one as a hoaxer. On the contrary, conspiracies are extremely common, the higher one climbs in the power hierarchy. Like monopolies, conspiracies are central to the way the oligarchs do business.

John , June 8, 2018 at 5:42 am

Ray, from what I have seen in following his writing for years, meticulously only deals in knowns. The Seth Rich issue is not a known, it is speculation still. Yes, it probably is involved, but unless Craig Murray states that Seth Rich was the one who handed him the USB drive, it is not a known.

There is a possibility that Seth Rich was not the one who leaked the information, but that the DNC bigwigs THOUGHT he was, in which case, by neither confirming nor denying that Seth Rich was the leaker, it may be that letting the DNC continue to think it was him is being done in protection of the actual leaker. Seth Rich could also have been killed for unrelated reasons, perhaps Imran Awan thought he was on to his doings.

Unfettered Fire , June 8, 2018 at 10:44 am

Don't forget this Twitter post by Wikileaks on October 30, 2016: Podesta: "I'm definitely for making an example of a suspected leaker whether or not we have any real basis for it." https://www.wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/36082#efmAGSAH-

Unfettered Fire , June 8, 2018 at 10:47 am

" whether or not"?!! Wow. That's an imperialistic statement.

Drew Hunkins , June 7, 2018 at 5:50 pm

Mueller has nothing and he well knows it. He was willingly roped into this whole pathetic charade and he's left grasping for anything remotely tied to Trump campaign officials and Russians. Even the most tenuous connections and weak relationships are splashed across the mass media in breathless headlines. Meanwhile, NONE of the supposed skulduggery unearthed by Mueller has anything to do with the Kremlin "hacking" the election to favor Trump. Which was the entire raison d'etre behind Rosenstein and Mueller's crusade on behalf of the deplorable DNC and Washington militarist-imperialists. Sure be interesting to see how Mueller and his crew ultimately extricate themselves from this giant fraudulent edifice of deceit. Will they even be able to save the most rudimentary amount of face?

So sickening to see the manner in which many DNC sycophants obsequiously genuflect to their godlike Mueller. A damn prosecutor who was arguably in bed with the Winter Hill Gang!

jose , June 7, 2018 at 5:13 pm

If they had had any evidence to inculpate Russia, we would have all seen it by now. They know that by stating that there is an investigation going on: they can blame Russia. The Democratic National Committee is integrated by a pack of liars.

Jeff , June 7, 2018 at 4:35 pm

Thanx, Ray. The sad news is that everybody now believes that Russia tried to "meddle" in our election and, since it's a belief, neither facts nor reality will dislodge it. Your disclaimer should also probably carry the warning – never believe a word a government official says especially if they are in the CIA, NSA, or FBI unless they provide proof. If they tell you that it's classified, that they can't divulge it, or anything of that sort, you know they are lying.

john wilson , June 7, 2018 at 4:09 pm

I suspect the real reason no evidence has been produced is because there isn't any. I know this is stating the obvious, but if you think about it, as long as the non extent evidence is supposedly being "investigated" the story remains alive. They know they aren't going to find anything even remotely plausible that would stand up to any kind of scrutiny, but as long as they are looking, it has the appearance that there might be something.

Joe Tedesky , June 7, 2018 at 4:08 pm

I first want to thank Ray and the VIPS for their continuing to follow through on this Russia-Gate story. And it is a story.

My question is simple, when will we concentrate on reading Hillary's many emails? After all wasn't this the reason for the Russian interference mania? Until we do, take apart Hillary's correspondence with her lackeys, nothing will transpire of any worth. I should not be the one saying this, in as much as Bernie Sanders should be the one screaming it for justice from the highest roof tops, but he isn't. So what's up with that? Who all is involved in this scandalous coverup? What do the masters of corruption have on everybody?

Now we have Sean Hannity making a strong case against the Clinton's and the FBI's careful handling of their crimes. What seems out of place, since this should be big news, is that CNN nor MSNBC seems to be covering this story in the same way Hannity is. I mean isn't this news, meant to be reported as news? Why avoid reporting on Hillary in such a manner? This must be that 'fake news' they all talk about boy am I smart.

In the end I have decided to be merely an observer, because there are no good guys or gals in our nation's capital worth believing. In the end even Hannity's version of what took place leads back to a guilty Russia. So, the way I see it, the swamp is being drained only to make more room for more, and new swamp creatures to emerge. Talk about spinning our wheels. When will good people arrive to finally once and for all drain this freaking swamp, once and for all?

Realist , June 7, 2018 at 5:25 pm

Ha, ha! Don't you enjoy the magic show being put on by the insiders desperately trying to hang onto their power even after being voted out of office? Their attempt to distract your attention from reality whilst feeding you their false illusions is worthy of Penn & Teller, or David Copperfield (the magician). Who ya gonna believe? Them or your lying eyes?

Joe Tedesky , June 7, 2018 at 10:00 pm

Realist, You can bet they will investigate everything but what needs investigated, as our Politico class devolves into survivalist in fighting, the mechanism of war goes uninterrupted. Joe

F. G. Sanford , June 7, 2018 at 5:34 pm

Joe, speaking of draining the swamp, check out my comment under Ray's June 1 article about Freddy Fleitz!

Sam F , June 7, 2018 at 6:59 pm

That is just what I was reminded of; here is an antiseptic but less emphatic last line:
"Swamp draining progresses apace.
It's being accomplished with grace:
They're taking great pains to clean out the drains,"
New swamp creatures will need all that space!

Unfettered Fire , June 8, 2018 at 11:00 am

We must realize that to them, "the Swamp" refers to those in office who still abide by New Deal policy. Despite the thoroughly discredited neoliberal economic policy, the radical right are driving the world in the libertarian direction of privatization, austerity, private bank control of money creation, dismantling the nation-state, contempt for the Constitution, etc.

[Jun 09, 2018] Spooks Spooking Themselves by Daniel Lazare

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... the Obama administration intelligence agencies worked with Clinton to block " Siberian candidate " Trump. ..."
"... The template was provided by ex-MI6 Director Richard Dearlove , Halper's friend and business partner. Sitting in winged chairs in London's venerable Garrick Club, according to The Washington Post , Dearlove told fellow MI6 veteran Christopher Steele, author of the famous "golden showers" opposition research dossier, that Trump "reminded him of a predicament he had faced years earlier, when he was chief of station for British intelligence in Washington and alerted US authorities to British information that a vice presidential hopeful had once been in communication with the Kremlin." ..."
"... Apparently, one word from the Brits was enough to make the candidate in question step down. When that didn't work with Trump, Dearlove and his colleagues ratcheted up the pressure to make him see the light. A major scandal was thus born – or, rather, a very questionable scandal. Besides Dearlove, Steele, and Halper, a bon-vivant known as "The Walrus" for his impressive girth , other participants include: Robert Hannigan, former director Government Communications Headquarters, GCHQ, UK equivalent of the NSA. Alexander Downer, top Australian diplomat. Andrew Wood, ex-British ambassador to Moscow. Joseph Mifsud, Maltese academic. James Clapper, ex-US Director of National Intelligence. John Brennan, former CIA Director (and now NBC News analyst). ..."
"... Dearlove and Halper are now partners in a private venture calling itself "The Cambridge Security Initiative." Both are connected to another London-based intelligence firm known as Hakluyt & Co. Halper is also connected via two books he wrote with Hakluyt representative Jonathan Clarke and Dearlove has a close personal friendship with Hakluyt founder Mike Reynolds, yet another MI6 vet. Alexander Downer served a half-dozen years on Hakluyt's international advisory board, while Andrew Wood is linked to Steele via Orbis Business Intelligence, the private research firm that Steele helped found, and which produced the anti-Trump dossier, and where Wood now serves as an unpaid advisor . ..."
"... Everyone, in short, seems to know everyone else. But another thing that stands out about this group is its incompetence. Dearlove and Halper appear to be old-school paranoids for whom every Russian is a Boris Badenov or a Natasha Fatale . In February 2014, Halper notified US intelligence that Mike Flynn, Trump's future national security adviser, had grown overly chummy with an Anglo-Russian scholar named Svetlana Lokhova whom Halper suspected of being a spy – suspicions that Lokhova convincingly argues are absurd. ..."
"... As head of Britain's foreign Secret Intelligence Service, as MI6 is formally known, Dearlove played a major role in drumming up support for the 2003 Anglo-American invasion of Iraq even while confessing at a secret Downing Street meeting that "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the [regime-change] policy." When the search for weapons of mass destruction turned up dry, Clapper, as then head of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, argued that the Iraqi military must have smuggled them into neighboring Syria, a charge with absolutely no basis in fact but which helped pave the way for US regime-change efforts in that country too. ..."
"... Brennan was meanwhile a high-level CIA official when the agency was fabricating evidence against Saddam Hussein and covering up Saudi Arabia's role in 9/11. Wood not only continues to defend the Iraqi invasion, but dismisses fears of a rising fascist tide in the Ukraine as nothing more than "a crude political insult" hurled by Vladimir Putin for his own political benefit. Such views now seem distressingly misguided in view of the alt-right torchlight parades and spiraling anti-Semitism that are now a regular feature of life in the Ukraine. ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... describes Mifsud as "an enthusiastic promoter of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia" and "a regular at meetings of the Valdai Discussion Club, an annual conference held in Sochi, Russia, that Mr. Putin attends," which tried to suggest that he is a Kremlin agent of some sort. ..."
"... But WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange later tweeted photos of Mifsud with British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and a high-ranking British intelligence official named Claire Smith at a training session for Italian security agents in Rome. Since it's unlikely that British intelligence would rely on a Russian agent in such circumstances, Mifsud's intelligence ties are more likely with the UK. ..."
"... Stefan Halper then infiltrated the Trump campaign on behalf of the FBI as an informant in early July, weeks before the FBI launched its investigation. Halper had 36 years earlier infiltrated the Carter re-election campaign in 1980 using CIA agents to turn information over to the Reagan campaign. Now Halper began to court both Page and Papadopoulous, independently of each other. ..."
"... The rightwing Federalist website speculates that Halper was working with Steele to flesh out a Sept. 14 memo claiming that "Russians do have further 'kompromat' on CLINTON (e-mails) and [are] considering disseminating it." Clovis believes that Halper was trying "to create an audit trail back to those [Clinton] emails from someone in the campaign so they could develop a stronger case for probable cause to continue to issue warrants and to further an investigation." Reports that Halper apparently sought a permanent post in the new administration suggest that the effort was meant to continue after inauguration. ..."
"... Notwithstanding Clovis's nutty rightwing politics , his description of what Halper may have been up to makes sense as does his observation that Halper was trying " to build something that did not exist ." Despite countless hyper-ventilating headlines about mysterious Trump Tower meetings and the like, the sad truth is that Russiagate after all these months is shaping up as even more of a "nothing-burger" than Obama administration veteran Van Jones said it was back in mid-2017. Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller has indicted Papadopoulos and others on procedural grounds, he has indicted former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort for corruption, and he has charged a St. Petersburg company known as the Internet Research Agency with violating US election laws. ..."
"... As The Washington Post noted in an oddly, cool-headed Dec. 2 article , 2, 700 suspected Russian-linked accounts generated just 202,000 tweets in a six-year period ending in August 2017, a drop in a bucket compared to the one billion election-related tweets sent out during the fourteen months leading up to Election Day. ..."
"... Opposition research is intended to mix truths and fiction, to dig up plausible dirt to throw at your opponent, not to produce an intelligence assessment at taxpayer's expense to "protect" the country. And Steele was paid for it by the Democrats, not his government. ..."
"... Although Kramer denies it, The New Yorker ..."
"... But how could Trump think otherwise? As Consortium News founding editor Robert Parry observed a few days later, the maneuver "resembles a tactic out of FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover's playbook on government-style blackmail: I have some very derogatory information about you that I'd sure hate to see end up in the press." ..."
"... It sounds more like CIA paranoia raised to the nth degree. But that's what the intelligence agencies are for, i.e. to spread fear and propaganda in order to stampede the public into supporting their imperial agenda. In this case, their efforts are so effective that they've gotten lost in a fog of their own making. If the corporate press fails to point this out, it's because reporters are too befogged themselves to notice. ..."
"... "Russiagate" continues to attract mounting blowback at Clinton, Obama and the Dems. Might well be they who end up charged with lawbreaking, though I'd be surprised if anyone in authority is ever really punished. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-06-02/fbi-spying-trump-started-london-earlier-thought-new-texts-implicate-obama-white ..."
"... I've always thought that the great animus between Obama and Trump stemmed from Trump's persistent birtherist attacks on Obama followed by Obama's public ridicule of Trump at the White House Correspondants' Dinner. Without the latter, Trump probably would not have been motivated to run for the presidency. Without the former, Obama would probably not have gotten into the gutter to defeat and embarrass Trump at all costs. Clinton and Obama probably never recruit British spooks to sabotage and provide a pretense for spying on the campaigns of Jeb, Ted or Little Marco. Since these were all warmongers like Hillary and Obama, the issues would have been different, Russia would not have been a factor, and Putin would have had no alleged "puppet." ..."
"... The irony is that Clinton and Obama wanted Trump as her opponent. They cultivated his candidacy via liberal media bias throughout the primaries. (MSNBC and Rachel Maddow were always cutting away to another full length Trump victory speech and rally, including lots of jibber jabber with the faithful supporters.) Why? Because they thought he was the easiest to beat. The polls actually had Hillary losing against the other GOP candidates. The Dems beat themselves with their own choice of candidate and all the intrigue, false narratives and other questionable practices they employed in both the primaries and the general. That's what really happened. ..."
"... I agree that Hillary wanted Trump as an opponent, thought she could easily win. I've underestimated idiot opponents before, always to my detriment. Why is it that they are always the most formidable? The "insiders" are so used to voters rolling over, taking it on the chin. They gave away their jobs, replaced them with the service industry, killed their sons and daughters in wars abroad, and still the American people cast their ballots in their favor. This time was different. The insiders just did not see the sea change, not like Trump did. ..."
"... Long-time CIA asset named as FBI's spy on Trump campaign By Bill Van Auken https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/05/21/poli-m21.html ..."
"... What the MSM really needed was a bait which they could use to lure more dollars just like a horse race where the track owners needed a fast underdog horse to clean up. I believe the term is to be "hustled". The con men of the media hustlers decided they needed a way to cause all of the candidates to squirm uneasily and to then react to the news that Donald Trump was "in the lead". ..."
"... Those clever media folks. What a gift the Supreme Court handed them. But there was one little (or big) problem. The problem was the result of the scam put Trump in the White House. Something that no conservative republican would ever sign onto. Trump had spent years as a democrat, hobnobbed with the Clinton's and was an avowed agnostic who favored the liberal ideology for the most part. ..."
"... The new guy in the White House with his crazy ideas of making friends with Vladimir Putin horrified a national arms industry funded with hundreds of billions of our tax dollars every year propped up by all the neocons with their paranoid beliefs and plans to make America the hegemon of the World. Our foreign allies who use the USA to fight their perceived enemies and entice our government to sell them weapons and who urge us to orchestrate the overthrow of governments were all alarmed by the "not a real republican" peace-nick occupying the White House. ..."
"... It is probable that the casino and hotel owner in the White House posed an very threatening alternate strategy of forming economic ties with former enemies which scared the hell out of the arms industry which built its economy on scaring all of us and justifying its existence based on foreign enemies. ..."
"... So the MSM and the MIC created a new cold war with their friends at the New York Times and the Washington Post which published endless stories about the new Russian threat we faced. It had nothing to do with the 0.02% Twitter and Facebook "influence" that Russia actually had in the election. It was billed as the crime of the century. The real crime was that they committed the crime of the century that they mightily profited from by putting Trump in the White House in the first place with a plan to grab all the election cash they could grab. ..."
May 31, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

As the role of a well-connected group of British and U.S. intelligence agents begins to emerge, new suspicions are growing about what hand they may have had in weaving the Russia-gate story, as Daniel Lazare explains.

Special to Consortium News

With the news that a Cambridge academic-cum-spy named Stefan Halper infiltrated the Trump campaign, the role of the intelligence agencies in shaping the great Russiagate saga is at last coming into focus.

It's looking more and more massive. The intelligence agencies initiated reports that Donald Trump was colluding with Russia, they nurtured them and helped them grow, and then they spread the word to the press and key government officials. Reportedly, they even tried to use these reports to force Trump to step down prior to his inauguration. Although the corporate press accuses Trump of conspiring with Russia to stop Hillary Clinton, the reverse now seems to be the case: the Obama administration intelligence agencies worked with Clinton to block " Siberian candidate " Trump.

The template was provided by ex-MI6 Director Richard Dearlove , Halper's friend and business partner. Sitting in winged chairs in London's venerable Garrick Club, according to The Washington Post , Dearlove told fellow MI6 veteran Christopher Steele, author of the famous "golden showers" opposition research dossier, that Trump "reminded him of a predicament he had faced years earlier, when he was chief of station for British intelligence in Washington and alerted US authorities to British information that a vice presidential hopeful had once been in communication with the Kremlin."

Apparently, one word from the Brits was enough to make the candidate in question step down. When that didn't work with Trump, Dearlove and his colleagues ratcheted up the pressure to make him see the light. A major scandal was thus born – or, rather, a very questionable scandal. Besides Dearlove, Steele, and Halper, a bon-vivant known as "The Walrus" for his impressive girth , other participants include: Robert Hannigan, former director Government Communications Headquarters, GCHQ, UK equivalent of the NSA. Alexander Downer, top Australian diplomat. Andrew Wood, ex-British ambassador to Moscow. Joseph Mifsud, Maltese academic. James Clapper, ex-US Director of National Intelligence. John Brennan, former CIA Director (and now NBC News analyst).

In-Bred

A few things stand out about this august group. One is its in-bred quality. After helping to run an annual confab known as the Cambridge Intelligence Seminar, Dearlove and Halper are now partners in a private venture calling itself "The Cambridge Security Initiative." Both are connected to another London-based intelligence firm known as Hakluyt & Co. Halper is also connected via two books he wrote with Hakluyt representative Jonathan Clarke and Dearlove has a close personal friendship with Hakluyt founder Mike Reynolds, yet another MI6 vet. Alexander Downer served a half-dozen years on Hakluyt's international advisory board, while Andrew Wood is linked to Steele via Orbis Business Intelligence, the private research firm that Steele helped found, and which produced the anti-Trump dossier, and where Wood now serves as an unpaid advisor .

Everyone, in short, seems to know everyone else. But another thing that stands out about this group is its incompetence. Dearlove and Halper appear to be old-school paranoids for whom every Russian is a Boris Badenov or a Natasha Fatale . In February 2014, Halper notified US intelligence that Mike Flynn, Trump's future national security adviser, had grown overly chummy with an Anglo-Russian scholar named Svetlana Lokhova whom Halper suspected of being a spy – suspicions that Lokhova convincingly argues are absurd.

Halper: Infiltrated Trump campaign

In December 2016, Halper and Dearlove both resigned from the Cambridge Intelligence Seminar because they suspected that a company footing some of the costs was tied up with Russian intelligence – suspicions that Christopher Andrew, former chairman of the Cambridge history department and the seminar's founder, regards as " absurd " as well.

As head of Britain's foreign Secret Intelligence Service, as MI6 is formally known, Dearlove played a major role in drumming up support for the 2003 Anglo-American invasion of Iraq even while confessing at a secret Downing Street meeting that "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the [regime-change] policy." When the search for weapons of mass destruction turned up dry, Clapper, as then head of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, argued that the Iraqi military must have smuggled them into neighboring Syria, a charge with absolutely no basis in fact but which helped pave the way for US regime-change efforts in that country too.

Brennan was meanwhile a high-level CIA official when the agency was fabricating evidence against Saddam Hussein and covering up Saudi Arabia's role in 9/11. Wood not only continues to defend the Iraqi invasion, but dismisses fears of a rising fascist tide in the Ukraine as nothing more than "a crude political insult" hurled by Vladimir Putin for his own political benefit. Such views now seem distressingly misguided in view of the alt-right torchlight parades and spiraling anti-Semitism that are now a regular feature of life in the Ukraine.

The result is a diplo-espionage gang that is very bad at the facts but very good at public manipulation – and which therefore decided to use its skill set out to create a public furor over alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

It Started Late 2015

The effort began in late 2015 when GCHQ, along with intelligence agencies in Poland, Estonia, and Germany, began monitoring what they said were " suspicious 'interactions' between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents."

Since Trump was surging ahead in the polls and scaring the pants off the foreign-policy establishment by calling for a rapprochement with Moscow, the agencies figured that Russia was somehow behind it. The pace accelerated in March 2016 when a 30-year-old policy consultant named George Papadopoulos joined the Trump campaign as a foreign-policy adviser. Traveling in Italy a week later, he ran into Mifsud, the London-based Maltese academic, who reportedly set about cultivating him after learning of his position with Trump. Mifsud claimed to have "substantial connections with Russian government officials," according to prosecutors. Over breakfast at a London hotel, he told Papadopoulos that he had just returned from Moscow where he had learned that the Russians had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton in the form of "thousands of emails."

This was the remark that supposedly triggered an FBI investigation. The New York Times describes Mifsud as "an enthusiastic promoter of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia" and "a regular at meetings of the Valdai Discussion Club, an annual conference held in Sochi, Russia, that Mr. Putin attends," which tried to suggest that he is a Kremlin agent of some sort.

But WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange later tweeted photos of Mifsud with British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and a high-ranking British intelligence official named Claire Smith at a training session for Italian security agents in Rome. Since it's unlikely that British intelligence would rely on a Russian agent in such circumstances, Mifsud's intelligence ties are more likely with the UK.

After Papadopoulos caused a minor political ruckus by telling a reporter that Prime Minister David Cameron should apologize for criticizing Trump's anti-Muslim pronouncements, a friend in the Israeli embassy put him in touch with a friend in the Australian embassy, who introduced him to Downer, her boss. Over drinks, Downer advised him to be more diplomatic. After Papadopoulos then passed along Misfud's tip about Clinton's emails, Downer informed his government, which, in late July, informed the FBI.

Was Papadopoulos Set Up?

Suspicions are unavoidable but evidence is lacking. Other pieces were meanwhile clicking into place. In late May or early June 2016, Fusion GPS, a private Washington intelligence firm employed by the Democratic National Committee, hired Steele to look into the Russian angle.

On June 20, he turned in the first of eighteen memos that would eventually comprise the Steele dossier , in this instance a three-page document asserting that Putin "has been cultivating, supporting and assisting TRUMP for at least 5 years" and that Russian intelligence possessed "kompromat" in the form of a video of prostitutes performing a "golden showers" show for his benefit at the Moscow Ritz-Carlton. A week or two later, Steele briefed the FBI on his findings. Around the same time, Robert Hannigan flew to Washington to brief CIA Director John Brennan about additional material that had come GCHQ's way, material so sensitive that it could only be handled at "director level."

One player was filling Papadopoulos's head with tales of Russian dirty tricks, another was telling the FBI, while a third was collecting more information and passing it on to the bureau as well.

Page: Took Russia's side.

On July 7, 2016 Carter Page delivered a lecture on U.S.-Russian relations in Moscow in which he complained that " Washington and other western capitals have impeded potential progress through their often hypocritical focus on ideas such as democratization, inequality, corruption, and regime change." Washington hawks expressed " unease " that someone representing the presumptive Republican nominee would take Russia's side in a growing neo-Cold War.

Stefan Halper then infiltrated the Trump campaign on behalf of the FBI as an informant in early July, weeks before the FBI launched its investigation. Halper had 36 years earlier infiltrated the Carter re-election campaign in 1980 using CIA agents to turn information over to the Reagan campaign. Now Halper began to court both Page and Papadopoulous, independently of each other.

On July 11, Page showed up at a Cambridge symposium at which Halper and Dearlove both spoke. In early September, Halper sent Papadopoulos an email offering $3,000 and a paid trip to London to write a research paper on a disputed gas field in the eastern Mediterranean, his specialty. "George, you know about hacking the emails from Russia, right?" Halper asked when he got there, but Papadopoulos said he knew nothing. Halper also sought out Sam Clovis, Trump's national campaign co-chairman, with whom he chatted about China for an hour or so over coffee in Washington.

The rightwing Federalist website speculates that Halper was working with Steele to flesh out a Sept. 14 memo claiming that "Russians do have further 'kompromat' on CLINTON (e-mails) and [are] considering disseminating it." Clovis believes that Halper was trying "to create an audit trail back to those [Clinton] emails from someone in the campaign so they could develop a stronger case for probable cause to continue to issue warrants and to further an investigation." Reports that Halper apparently sought a permanent post in the new administration suggest that the effort was meant to continue after inauguration.

Notwithstanding Clovis's nutty rightwing politics , his description of what Halper may have been up to makes sense as does his observation that Halper was trying " to build something that did not exist ." Despite countless hyper-ventilating headlines about mysterious Trump Tower meetings and the like, the sad truth is that Russiagate after all these months is shaping up as even more of a "nothing-burger" than Obama administration veteran Van Jones said it was back in mid-2017. Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller has indicted Papadopoulos and others on procedural grounds, he has indicted former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort for corruption, and he has charged a St. Petersburg company known as the Internet Research Agency with violating US election laws.

But the corruption charges have nothing to do with Russian collusion and nothing in the indictment against IRA indicates that either the Kremlin or the Trump campaign were involved. Indeed, the activities that got IRA in trouble in the first place are so unimpressive – just $46,000 worth of Facebook ads that it purchased prior to election day, some pro-Trump, some anti, and some with no particular slant at all – that Mueller probably wouldn't even have bothered if he hadn't been under intense pressure to come up with anything at all.

The same goes for the army of bots that Russia supposedly deployed on Twitter. As The Washington Post noted in an oddly, cool-headed Dec. 2 article , 2, 700 suspected Russian-linked accounts generated just 202,000 tweets in a six-year period ending in August 2017, a drop in a bucket compared to the one billion election-related tweets sent out during the fourteen months leading up to Election Day.

The Steele dossier is also underwhelming. It declares on one page that the Kremlin sought to cultivate Trump by throwing "various lucrative real estate development business deals" his way but says on another that Trump's efforts to drum up business were unavailing and that he thus "had to settle for the use of extensive sexual services there from local prostitutes rather than business success."

Why would Trump turn down business offers when he couldn't generate any on his own? The idea that Putin would spot a U.S. reality-TV star somewhere around 2011 and conclude that he was destined for the Oval Office five years later is ludicrous. The fact that the Democratic National Committee funded the dossier via its law firm Perkins Coie renders it less credible still, as does the fact that the world has heard nothing more about the alleged video despite the ongoing deterioration in US-Russian relations. What's the point of making a blackmail tape if you don't use it?

Steele: Paid for political research, not intelligence.

Even Steele is backing off. In a legal paper filed in response to a libel suit last May, he said the document "did not represent (and did not purport to represent) verified facts, but were raw intelligence which had identified a range of allegations that warranted investigation given their potential national security implications." The fact is that the "dossier" was opposition research, not an intelligence report. It was neither vetted by Steele nor anyone in an intelligence agency. Opposition research is intended to mix truths and fiction, to dig up plausible dirt to throw at your opponent, not to produce an intelligence assessment at taxpayer's expense to "protect" the country. And Steele was paid for it by the Democrats, not his government.

Using it Anyway

Nonetheless, the spooks have made the most of such pseudo-evidence. Dearlove and Wood both advised Steele to take his "findings" to the FBI, while, after the election, Wood pulled Sen. John McCain aside at a security conference in Halifax, Nova Scotia, to let him know that the Russians might be blackmailing the president-elect. McCain dispatched long-time aide David J. Kramer to the UK to discuss the dossier with Steele directly.

Although Kramer denies it, The New Yorker found a former national-security official who says he spoke with him at the time and that Kramer's goal was to have McCain confront Trump with the dossier in the hope that he would resign on the spot. When that didn't happen, Clapper and Brennan arranged for FBI Director James Comey to confront Trump instead. Comey later testified that he didn't want Trump to think he was creating "a J. Edgar Hoover-type situation – I didn't want him thinking I was briefing him on this to sort of hang it over him in some way."

But how could Trump think otherwise? As Consortium News founding editor Robert Parry observed a few days later, the maneuver "resembles a tactic out of FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover's playbook on government-style blackmail: I have some very derogatory information about you that I'd sure hate to see end up in the press."

Since then, the Democrats have touted the dossier at every opportunity, The New Yorker continues to defend it , while Times columnist Michelle Goldberg cites it as well, saying it's a "rather obvious possibility that Trump is being blackmailed." CNN, for its part, suggested not long ago that the dossier may actually be Russian disinformation designed to throw everyone off base, Republicans and Democrats alike.

It sounds more like CIA paranoia raised to the nth degree. But that's what the intelligence agencies are for, i.e. to spread fear and propaganda in order to stampede the public into supporting their imperial agenda. In this case, their efforts are so effective that they've gotten lost in a fog of their own making. If the corporate press fails to point this out, it's because reporters are too befogged themselves to notice.

Daniel Lazare is the author of The Frozen Republic: How the Constitution Is Paralyzing Democracy (Harcourt Brace, 1996) and other books about American politics. He has written for a wide variety of publications from The Nation to Le Monde Diplomatique , and his articles about the Middle East, terrorism, Eastern Europe, and other topics appear regularly on such websites as Jacobin and The American Conservative.

Vivian O'Blivion , June 4, 2018 at 6:36 am

Interesting technical detail.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/04/mueller-russia-troll-case-620653

Mueller is trying to omit the normal burden of legal liability, "wilful intent" in his charges against the St Petersburg, social media operation. In a horrifically complex area such as tax, campaign contributions or lobbying, a foreign entity can be found guilty of breaking a law that they cannot reasonably have been expected to have knowledge of.

But the omission or inclusion of "wilful intent" is applied on a selective basis depending on the advantage to the deep state. From a practical standpoint, omission of "wilful intent" makes it easier for Mueller to get a guilty verdict (in adsentia assuming this is legally valid in America). Once the "guilt" of the St Petersburg staff is established, any communication between an American and them becomes "collusion".

This stinks.

Realist , June 3, 2018 at 4:50 am

"Russiagate" continues to attract mounting blowback at Clinton, Obama and the Dems. Might well be they who end up charged with lawbreaking, though I'd be surprised if anyone in authority is ever really punished. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-06-02/fbi-spying-trump-started-london-earlier-thought-new-texts-implicate-obama-white

I've always thought that the great animus between Obama and Trump stemmed from Trump's persistent birtherist attacks on Obama followed by Obama's public ridicule of Trump at the White House Correspondants' Dinner. Without the latter, Trump probably would not have been motivated to run for the presidency. Without the former, Obama would probably not have gotten into the gutter to defeat and embarrass Trump at all costs. Clinton and Obama probably never recruit British spooks to sabotage and provide a pretense for spying on the campaigns of Jeb, Ted or Little Marco. Since these were all warmongers like Hillary and Obama, the issues would have been different, Russia would not have been a factor, and Putin would have had no alleged "puppet."

The irony is that Clinton and Obama wanted Trump as her opponent. They cultivated his candidacy via liberal media bias throughout the primaries. (MSNBC and Rachel Maddow were always cutting away to another full length Trump victory speech and rally, including lots of jibber jabber with the faithful supporters.) Why? Because they thought he was the easiest to beat. The polls actually had Hillary losing against the other GOP candidates. The Dems beat themselves with their own choice of candidate and all the intrigue, false narratives and other questionable practices they employed in both the primaries and the general. That's what really happened.

backwardsevolution , June 3, 2018 at 2:50 pm

Realist – good post. I think what you say is true. Trump got too caught up in the birther crap, and Obama retaliated. But I think that Trump had been thinking about the presidency long before Obama came along. He sees the country differently than Obama and Clinton do. Trump would never have built up China to the point where all American technology has been given away for free, with millions of jobs lost and a huge trade deficit, and he would have probably left Russia alone, not ransacked it.

I saw Obama as a somewhat reluctant globalist and Hillary as an eager globalist. They are both insiders. Trump is not. He's interested in what is best for the U.S., whereas the Clinton's and the Bush's were interested in what their corporate masters wanted. The multinationals have been selling the U.S. out, Trump is trying to put a stop to this, and it is going to be a fight to the death. Trump is playing hardball with China (who ARE U.S. multinationals), and it is working. Beginning July 1, 2018, China has agreed to reduce its tariffs:

"Import tariffs for apparel, footwear and headgear, kitchen supplies and fitness products will be more than halved to an average of 7.1 percent from 15.9 percent, with those on washing machines and refrigerators slashed to just 8 percent, from 20.5 percent.

Tariffs will also be cut on processed foods such as aquaculture and fishing products and mineral water, from 15.2 percent to 6.9 percent.

Cosmetics, such as skin and hair products, and some medical and health products, will also benefit from a tariff cut to 2.9 percent from 8.4 percent.

In particular, tariffs on drugs ranging from penicillin, cephalosporin to insulin will be slashed to zero from 6 percent before.

In the meantime, temporary tariff rates on 210 imported products from most favored nations will be scrapped as they are no longer favorable compared with new rates."

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-economy-tariffs/china-to-cut-import-tariffs-for-some-consumer-goods-from-most-favored-nations-idUSKCN1IW1PY

Trade with China has been all one way. At least Trump is leveling the playing field. He at least is trying to bring back jobs, something the "insiders" could care less about.

I agree that Hillary wanted Trump as an opponent, thought she could easily win. I've underestimated idiot opponents before, always to my detriment. Why is it that they are always the most formidable? The "insiders" are so used to voters rolling over, taking it on the chin. They gave away their jobs, replaced them with the service industry, killed their sons and daughters in wars abroad, and still the American people cast their ballots in their favor. This time was different. The insiders just did not see the sea change, not like Trump did.

Abe , June 2, 2018 at 2:20 am

"Pentagon documents indicate that the Department of Defense's shadowy intelligence arm, the Office of Net Assessment, paid Halper $282,000 in 2016 and $129,000 in 2017. According to reports, Halper sought to secure Papadopoulos's collaboration by offering him $3,000 and an all-expenses-paid trip to London, ostensibly to produce a research paper on energy issues in the eastern Mediterranean.

"The choice of Halper for this spying operation has ominous implications. His deep ties to the US intelligence apparatus date back decades. His father-in-law was Ray Cline, who headed the CIA's Directorate of Intelligence at the height of the Cold War. Halper served as an aide to Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and Alexander Haig in the Nixon and Ford administrations.

"In 1980, as the director of policy coordination for Ronald Reagan's presidential campaign, Halper oversaw an operation in which CIA officials gave the campaign confidential information on the Carter administration and its foreign policy. This intelligence was in turn utilized to further back-channel negotiations between Reagan's campaign manager and subsequent CIA director William Casey and representatives of Iran to delay the release of the American embassy hostages until after the election, in order to prevent Carter from scoring a foreign policy victory on the eve of the November vote.

"Halper subsequently held posts as deputy assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs and senior adviser to the Pentagon and Justice Department. More recently, Halper has collaborated with Richard Dearlove, the former head of MI6, the British intelligence service, in directing the Cambridge Security Initiative (CSi), a security think tank that lists the US and UK governments as its principal clients.

"Before the 2016 election, Halper had expressed his view – shared by predominant layers within the intelligence agencies – that Clinton's election would prove 'less disruptive' than Trump's.

"The revelations of the role played by Halper point to an intervention in the 2016 elections by the US intelligence agencies that far eclipsed anything one could even imagine the Kremlin attempting."

Long-time CIA asset named as FBI's spy on Trump campaign By Bill Van Auken https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/05/21/poli-m21.html

CitizenOne , June 1, 2018 at 11:19 pm

Sorry for not commenting on other posts as of yet. But I think I have a different perspective. Russia Gate is not about Hillary Clinton or Putin but it is about Donald Trump. Specifically an effort to get rid of him by the intelligence agencies and the MSM. The fact is the MSM created Trump and were chiefly responsible for his election. Trump is their brainchild starlet used to fleece all the republican campaigns like a huckster fleeces an audience. It all ties to key Supreme Court rulings eliminating campaign finance regulations which ushered in the age of dark money.

When billionaires can donate unlimited amounts of money anonymously to the candidate of their choosing what ends up is a field of fourteen wannabes in a primary race each backed by their own investor(s). The only way these candidates can win is to convince us to vote. The only way they can do that is to spend on advertising.

What the MSM dreamed of in a purely capitalistic way was a way to drain the wallets of every single one of the republican Super PACs. The mission was fraught with potential checkmates. Foe example, there could be an early leader who snatched up the needed delegates for the nomination early on which would have stopped the flow of advertising cash flowing to the MSM. Such possibilities worried the MSM and caused great angst since this might just be the biggest haul they ever took in during a primary season. How would they prevent a premature end of the money river. Like financial vampire bats, ticks and leeches they needed a way to keep the money flowing from the veins of the republican Super PACs until they were sucked dry.

What the MSM really needed was a bait which they could use to lure more dollars just like a horse race where the track owners needed a fast underdog horse to clean up. I believe the term is to be "hustled". The con men of the media hustlers decided they needed a way to cause all of the candidates to squirm uneasily and to then react to the news that Donald Trump was "in the lead".

It was a pure stroke of genius and it worked so well that Carl Rove is looking for a job and Donald Trump is sitting in the White House.

Those clever media folks. What a gift the Supreme Court handed them. But there was one little (or big) problem. The problem was the result of the scam put Trump in the White House. Something that no conservative republican would ever sign onto. Trump had spent years as a democrat, hobnobbed with the Clinton's and was an avowed agnostic who favored the liberal ideology for the most part.

What to do? Trump was now the Commander in Chief and was spouting nonsense that the establishment recoiled at such as Trumps plans to form economic ties with Russia rather than continue to wage a cold war spanning 65 years which the MIC used year after year to spook us all and guarantee their billions annual increase in funding. Trump directly attacked defense projects and called for de-funding major initiatives like F35 etc.

The new guy in the White House with his crazy ideas of making friends with Vladimir Putin horrified a national arms industry funded with hundreds of billions of our tax dollars every year propped up by all the neocons with their paranoid beliefs and plans to make America the hegemon of the World. Our foreign allies who use the USA to fight their perceived enemies and entice our government to sell them weapons and who urge us to orchestrate the overthrow of governments were all alarmed by the "not a real republican" peace-nick occupying the White House.

What to do? There was clearly a need to eliminate this bad guy since his avowed policies were in direct opposition to the game plan that had successfully compromised the former administration. They felt powerless to dissuade the Administration to continue the course and form strategies to eliminate Iran, Syria, North Korea, Libya, Ukraine and other vulnerable targets swaying toward China and Russia. They faced a new threat with the Trump Administration which seemed hell bent to discontinue the wars in these regions robbing them of many dollars.

It is probable that the casino and hotel owner in the White House posed an very threatening alternate strategy of forming economic ties with former enemies which scared the hell out of the arms industry which built its economy on scaring all of us and justifying its existence based on foreign enemies.

So the MSM and the MIC created a new cold war with their friends at the New York Times and the Washington Post which published endless stories about the new Russian threat we faced. It had nothing to do with the 0.02% Twitter and Facebook "influence" that Russia actually had in the election. It was billed as the crime of the century. The real crime was that they committed the crime of the century that they mightily profited from by putting Trump in the White House in the first place with a plan to grab all the election cash they could grab.

In the interim, they also forgot on purpose to tell anyone about the election campaign finance fraud that they were the chief beneficiaries of. They also of course forgot to tell anyone what the fight was about for the Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch. Twenty seven million dollars in dark money was donated by dark money donors enabled by the Supreme Court's decisions to eliminate campaign finance regulations which enabled these donors to buy out Congress and elect and confirm a Supreme Court Justice who would uphold the laws which eliminate all the election rules and campaign finance regulations dating back to the Tillman Act of 1907 which was an attempt to eliminate corporate contributions in political campaigns with associated meager fines as penalties. The law was weak then and has now been eliminated.

In an era of dark money in politics protected by revisionist judges laying at the top of our federal judicial branch posing as strict constructionists while being funded by the corporatocracy that viciously fights over control of the highest court by a panicked republican party that seeks to tie up their domination in our Congress by any means including the abdication of the Constitutional authority granted to the citizens of the nation we now face a new internal enemy.

That enemy is not some foreign nation but our own government which conspires to represent the wealthy and the powerful and which exalts them and which enacts laws to defend their control of our nation. Here is a quote:

When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time, a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.

Frederic Bastiat – (1801-1850) in Economic Sophisms

Realist , June 1, 2018 at 4:32 am

Different journalist covering much the same ground:

http://www.unz.com/mwhitney/why-is-the-new-york-times-misleading-the-american-people-about-the-paid-informant-who-was-spying-on-the-trump-campaign/

"Russiagate" is strictly a contrivance of the Deep State, American & British Spookery, and the corporate media propagandists. It clearly needs to be genuinely investigated (unlike the mockery being orchestrated by Herr Mueller from the Ministry of Truth), re-christened "Intellgate" (after the real perpetrators of crime), pursued until all the guilty traitors (including Mueller) who really tried to steal our democratic election are tried, convicted and incarcerated (including probably hundreds complicit from the media) and given its own lengthy chapter in all the history books about "The Election They Tried to Steal and Blame on Russia: How America Nearly Lost its Constitution." If not done, America will lose its constitution, or rather the incipient process will become totally irreversible.

Vivian O'Blivion , June 1, 2018 at 6:25 am

Your timing of events is confused.
The deep state didn't try and steal the election because they were overly complacent that their woman would win. Remember, they didn't try to use the dodgy, Steele dossier before the election.
What the deep state has done is reactively try to overcome the election outcome by launching an investigation into Trump. The egregious element of the investigation is giving it the title "investigation into collusion" when they in all probability knew that collusion was unlikely to have taken place. To achieve their aim (removing Trump) they included the line "and matters arising" in the brief to give them an open ended remit which allowed them to investigate Trump's business dealings of a Russian / Ukrainian nature (which may venture uncomfortably close to Semion Mogilevich).
If as you state (and I concur) there was no Russian collusion, then barring fabrication of evidence by Mueller (and there is little evidence of that to date) you have nothing to worry about on the collusion front. Remember, to date, Mueller has stuck (almost exclusively) to meat and potatoes charges like tax evasion and money laundering. If however the investigation leads to credible evidence that Trump broke substantive laws in the past for financial gain, then it is not reasonable to cry foul.

Seer , June 1, 2018 at 7:02 am

The Deep State assisted the DNC in knocking out Sanders. THAT was ground zero. Everything since then has been to cover this up and to discredit Trump (using him as the distraction). Consider that the Deep State never bothered to investigate the DNC servers/data; reason being is that they'd (Deep State) be implicated.

Skip Scott , June 1, 2018 at 7:29 am

Very true Seer. That is the real genesis of RussiaGate. It was a diversion tactic to keep people from looking at the DNC's behavior during the primaries. They are the reason Trump is president, not the evil Ruskies.

Vivian O'Blivion , June 1, 2018 at 8:13 am

We all seem agreed that the Russia collusion is an exercise in distraction. I can't say I know enough to comment with authority on whether the DNC would require assistance from the deep state to trash Bernie. From an outsider perspective it looked more like an application of massively disproportionate spending and standard, back room dirty tricks.
There is a saying; don't attribute to conspiracy that which can be explained by incompetence. In this case, try replacing incompetence with MONEY.

dikcheney , June 2, 2018 at 5:09 pm

Totally agree with you Skip and the Mueller performance is there to keep up the intimidation and distraction by regularly finding turds to throw at Trump. Mueller doesnt need to find anything, he just needs to create vague intimations of 'guilty Trump' and suspicious associates so that no one will look at the DNC or the Clinton corruption or the smashing of the Sanders campaign.

Their actual agenda is to smother analysis and clear thinking. Thankfully there is the forensicator piecing the jigsaw as well as consortium news.

robjira , June 1, 2018 at 11:55 am

Spot on, Seer.

michael , June 1, 2018 at 4:49 pm

Those servers probably had a lot more pay-to-play secrets from the Clinton Foundation and ring-kissing from foreign big donors than what was released by Wikileaks, which mostly was just screwing over Bernie, which the judge ruled was Hillary's prerogative. Some email chains were probably construed as National Security and were discreetly not leaked.
The 30,000 emails Hillary had bit bleached from her private servers are likely in the hands of Russians and every other major country, all biding their time for leverage. This was the carrot the British (who undoubtedly have copies as well) dangled over idiot Popodopolous.

Uncle Bob , June 1, 2018 at 10:33 pm

Seth Rich

anon , June 1, 2018 at 7:42 am

Realist is likely referring to events before the election which involved people with secret agency connections, such as the opposition research (Steele dossier and Skripal affair).

Realist , June 1, 2018 at 9:32 am

Realist responded but is being "moderated" as per usual.

Realist , June 1, 2018 at 9:31 am

Hillary herself was a prime force in cooking up the smear against Trump for being "Putin's puppet." This even before the Democratic convention. Then she used it big time during the debates. It wasn't something merely reactive after she lost. Certainly she and her collaborators inside the deep state and the intelligence agencies never imagined that she would lose and have to distract from what she and her people did by projecting the blame onto Trump. That part was reactive. The rest of the conspiracy was totally proactive on her part and that of the DNC, even during the primaries.

Don't forget, the intel agencies led by Clapper, Brennan and Comey were all working for Obama at the time and were totally acquiescent in spying on the Trump campaign and "unmasking" the identities and actions of his would-be administration, including individuals like General Flynn. The cooked up Steele dossier was paid for by money from the Clinton campaign and used as a pretext for the intel agencies to spy on the Trump campaign. There is no issue on timing. The establishment was fully behind Clinton by hook or crook from the moment Trump had the delegates to win the GOP nomination. (OBTW, I am not a Trump supporter or even a Republican, so I KNOW that I "have nothing to worry about on the collusion front." I'm a registered Dem, though not a Hillary supporter.)

Moreover, if you think that Mueller (and the other intel chiefs) have been on the impartial up-and-up, why did the FBI never seize and examine the DNC servers? Why simply accept the interpretation of events given by the private cybersecurity firm (Crowdstrike) that the Clinton campaign hired to very likely mastermind a cover-up? That is exceptional (nay, unheard of!) "professional courtesy." Why has Mueller to this day not deposed Julian Assange or former British Ambassador Craig Murray, both of whom admit to knowing precisely who provided the leaked (not hacked) Podesta and DNC emails to Wikileaks? Why has Mueller not pursued the potential role of the late Seth Rich in the leaking of said emails? Why has Mueller not pursued the robust theory, based on actual evidence, proposed by VIPS, and supported by computer experts like Bill Binney and John McAfee, that the emails were not, as the Dems and the intel agencies would have you believe on NO EVIDENCE, hacked (by the "Russians" or anyone else) but were downloaded to a flash drive directly from the DNC servers? Why has Mueller not deposed Binney or Ray McGovern who claim to have evidence to bear on this and have discussed it freely in the media (to the miniscule extent that the corporate media will give them an audience)? Is Mueller after the truth, or is this a kangaroo court he is running? Is the media really independent and impartial or are they part of a cover-up, perpetrating numerous sins of both commission and omission in their highly flawed reportage?

I don't see clarity in what has been thus far been propounded by Mueller or any of Trump's other accusers, but I don't think I am the one who is confused here, Vivian. If you want to meet a thoroughly confused individual on what transpired leading up to this moment in American political history, just go read Hillary's book. Absolutely everyone under the sun shares in the blame but her for the fact that she does not presently reside in the White House.

Vivian O'Blivion , June 1, 2018 at 1:48 pm

You have presented your case with a great deal more detail and clarity than the original post that prompted my reply. You are also a great deal more knowledgeable than I on the details. I think we are 98% in agreement and I wouldn't like to say who's correct on the remaining 2%.
For clarity, I didn't follow the debates and wouldn't do so now if they were repeated. Much heat very little light.
The "pretext" that the intel agencies claim launched their actions against Trump was not the Steele dossier, at least that is what the intel agencies say. Either way your assertion that it was the dossier that set things off is just that, an assertion. I think this is a minor point.
On the DNC servers and the FBI we are 100% singing from the same hymn book and it all sticks. Mueller's apparent disinterest in the question of hack or USB drive does rather taint his investigation and thanks for pointing this out, I hadn't thought of that angle. I still think Mueller will stick to tax and money laundering and stay well clear of "collusion", so yes he may be running a kangaroo court investigation but the charges will be real world.
The MSM as a whole are a sick joke which is why we collectively find ourselves at CN, Craig Murray's blog, etc. I wouldn't like to attribute "collaboration" to any individual in the media. It was the reference to hundreds of journalists being sent to jail in your original post that set me off in the first place. When considering the "culpability" of any individual journalist you can have any position on a spectrum from; fully cognisant collaborator with a deep state conspiracy, to; a bit dim and running with the "sexy" story 'cause it's the biggest thing ever, the bosses can't get enough of it and the overtime is great. If American journalists are anything like their UK counterparts, 99% will fall into the latter category.
Don't have any issue with your final point. Hillary on stage and on camera was phoney as rocking horse s**te and everyone outside her extremely highly remunerated team could see it.
Sorry for any inconvenience, but your second post makes your points a hell of a lot clearer than the original.

Realist , June 1, 2018 at 4:26 pm

My purpose for the first post in this thread was to direct readers to the article in Unz by Mike Whitney, not to compress a full-blown amateur expose' by myself into a three-sentence paragraph. You would have found much more in the way of facts, analysis and opinion in his article to which my terse comments did not even serve as an abstract.

Quoting his last paragraph may give you the flavor of this piece, which is definitely not a one-off by him or other actual journalists who have delved into the issues:

"Let's see if I got this right: Brennan gets his buddies in the UK to feed fake information on Russia to members of the Trump campaign, after which the FBI uses the suspicious communications about Russia as a pretext to unmask, wiretap, issue FISA warrants, and infiltrate the campaign, after which the incriminating evidence that was collected in the process of entrapping Trump campaign assistants is compiled in a legal case that is used to remove Trump from office. Is that how it's supposed to work?

It certainly looks like it. But don't expect to read about it in the Times."

backwardsevolution , June 1, 2018 at 4:49 pm

Vivian – 90% of all major media is owned by six corporations. There most definitely was and IS collusion between some of them to bring down the outsider, Trump.

As far as individual journalists go, yeah, they're trying to pay their mortgage, I get it, and they're going to spin what their boss bloody well tells them to spin. But there is evidence coming out that "some" journalists did accept money from either Fusion GPS, Perkins Coie (sp) or Christopher Steele to leak information, which they did.

Bill Clinton passed the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that enabled these six media conglomerates to dominate the news. Of course they're political. They need to be split up, like yesterday, into a thousand pieces (ditto for the banks). They have purposely and with intent been feeding lies to the American people. Yes, some SHOULD go to jail.

As Peter Strzok of the FBI said re Trump colluding with Russia, "There was never any there, there." The collusion has come from the intelligence agencies, in cahoots with Hillary Clinton, perhaps even as high as Obama, to prevent Trump being elected. When that failed, they set out to get him impeached on whatever they could find. Of course Mueller is going to stick with tax and money laundering because he already KNOWS there was never any collusion with Russia.

This is the Swamp versus the People.

backwardsevolution , June 1, 2018 at 1:52 pm

Realist – another excellent post. "Is Mueller after the truth, or is this a kangaroo court he is running?" As you rightly point out, Mueller IS being very selective in what he examines and doesn't examine. He's not after the whole truth, just a particular kind of truth, one that gets him a very specific result – to take down or severely cripple the President.

Evidence continues to trickle out. Former and active members of the FBI are now even begging to testify as they are disgusted with what is being purposely omitted from this so-called "impartial" investigation. This whole affair is "kangaroo" all the way.

I'm not so much a fan of Trump as I am a fan of the truth. I don't like to see him – anyone – being railroaded. That bothers me more than anything. But he's right about what he calls "the Swamp". If these people are not uncovered and brought to justice, then the country is truly lost.

Realist , June 1, 2018 at 4:38 pm

Precisely. Destroy the man on false pretenses and you destroy our entire system, whether you like him and his questionable policies or not.

Some people would say it's already gone, but we do what we can to get it back or hold onto to what's left of it. Besides, all the transparent lies and skullduggery in the service of politics rather than principles are just making our entire system look as corrupt as hell.

michael , June 1, 2018 at 5:00 pm

When Mueller arrested slimy Manafort for crimes committed in the Ukraine and gave a pass to the Podesta Brothers who worked closely with Manafort, it was clear that Russiagate was a partisan operation.

backwardsevolution , June 1, 2018 at 6:17 pm

Michael – good point!

KiwiAntz , June 1, 2018 at 1:00 am

Its becoming abundantly clear now, that the whole Russiagate charade was had nothibg to do with Russia & is about a elaborate smokescreen & shellgame coverup designed to divert attention away from, firstly the Democratic Party's woeful defeat & its lousy Candidate choice in the corrupt Hillary Clinton? & also the DNC's sabotaging of Bernie Saunders campaign run! But the most henious & treacherous parts was Obama's, weaponising the intelligence agencies to spy (Halper) on the imaginary Mancharian Candidate Trump & to set him up as a Russia stooge? Obama & Hillary Clinton are complicent in this disgraceful & illegal activity to get dirt on Trump withe goal of ensuring Clinton's election win? This is bigger than Watergate & more scandalous? But despite the cheating & stacking of the card deck, she still lost out to the Donald? And this isn't just illegal its treasonous & willful actions deserving of a lengthy jail incarceration? HRC & her crooked Clinton foundation's funding of the fraudulent & discredited "Steele Dosier" was also used to implement Trump & Russia in a made up, pile of fictitious gargage that was pure offal? Obama & HRC along with their FBI & CIA spys need to be rounded up, convicted & thrown in jail? Perhaps if Trump could just shut his damn mouuth for once & get off twitter long enough to be able too get some Justice Dept officials looking into this, without being distracted by this Russiagate shellgame fakery, then perhaps the real criminal's like Halpert, Obama,HRC & these corrupt spooks & spies can be rounded up & held to account for this treasonous behaviour?

Sean Ahern , May 31, 2018 at 7:25 pm

Attention should be paid also to the role of so called progressive media outlets such as Mother Jones which served as an outlets for the disinformation campaign described in Lazare's article.
Here from David Corn's Mother Jones 2016 article:

"And a former senior intelligence officer for a Western country who specialized in Russian counterintelligence tells Mother Jones that in recent months he provided the bureau with memos, based on his recent interactions with Russian sources, contending the Russian government has for years tried to co-opt and assist Trump -- and that the FBI requested more information from him."
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/veteran-spy-gave-fbi-info-alleging-russian-operation-cultivate-donald-trump/

Not only was Corn and Mother Jones selected by the spooks as an outlet, but these so called progressives lauded their 'expose' as a great investigative coup on their part and it paved the way for Corn's elevation on MSNBC for a while as a 'pundit.'

Paul G. , May 31, 2018 at 8:46 pm

In that vein did the spooks influence Rachel Maddow or is her $30,000. a day salary adequate to totally compromise her microscopic journalistic integrity.

dikcheney , June 3, 2018 at 6:57 am

Passing around references to Mother Jones is like passing round used toilet paper for another try. MJ is BS it is entirely controlled fake press.

Abby , May 31, 2018 at 6:23 pm

Stefan Halper was being paid by the Clinton's foundation during the time he was spying on the Trump campaign. This is further evidence that Hillary Clinton's hands are all over getting Russia Gate started. Then there's the role that Obama's justice department played in setting up the spying on people who were working with the Trump campaign. This is worse than Watergate, IMO.

Rumors are that a few ex FBI agents are going to testify to congress in Comey's role in covering up Hillary's crimes when she used her private email server to send classified information to people who did not have clearance to read it. Sydney Bluementhol was working for Hillary's foundation and sending her classified information that he stole from the NSA.

Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills were concerned about Obama knowing that Hillary wasn't using her government email account after he told the press that he only found out about it at the same time they did. He had been sending and receiving emails from her Clintonone email address during her whole tenure as SOS.

Obama was also aware of her using her foundation for pay to play which she was told by both congress and Obama to keep far away from her duties. Why did she use her private email server? So that Chelsea could know where Hillary was doing business so she could send Bill there to give his speeches to the same organizations, foreign governments and people who had just donated to their foundation.

Has any previous Secretary of State in history used their position to enrich their spouses or their foundations? I think not.

The secrets of how the FBI covered for Hillary are coming out. Whether she is charged for her crimes is a different matter.

F. G. Sanford , May 31, 2018 at 7:48 pm

If Hillary paid a political operative using Clinton Foundation funds – those are tax exempt charitable contributions – she would be guilty of tax fraud, charity fraud and campaign finance violations. Hillary may be evil, but she's not stupid. The U.S.Government paid Halper, which might be "waste, fraud and abuse", but it doesn't implicate Hillary at all. Not that she's innocent, mind you

Rob , June 1, 2018 at 2:14 am

I need some references to take any of your multitude of claims seriously. With all due respect, this sound like something taken from info wars and stylized in smartened up a little bit.

chris m , May 31, 2018 at 2:52 pm

the idea that Stefan Halper was some sort a of mastermind spy behind the so called "Russiagate" fiasco
seems very implausible considering what he seems to have spent doing for the past 40 years
going back to the Iran hostage crisis of 1979-1980 and his efforts then.

i think he must have had a fairly peripheral role as to whatever or not was going on behind the scenes from 2016 election campaign, and the campaign to first stop Trump getting elected, and secondly, when that failed, to bring down his Presidency.

of course, the moment his name was revealed in recent days, would have shocked or surprised those of in the general
public, but not certainly amongst those in Government aka FBI/CIA/Military-industrial circles.

backwardsevolution , May 31, 2018 at 4:36 pm

chris m – Halper is probably one of those people who hide behind their professor (or other legitimate) jobs, but are there at the ready to serve the Deep State. "I understand. You want me to set up some dupes in order to make it look like there was or could be actual Russian meddling. Gotcha." All you've got to do is make it "look like" something nefarious was going on. This facilitates a "reason" to have a phony investigation, and of course they make it as open-ended an investigation as possible, hoping to get the target on something, anything.

Well, they've no doubt looked long and hard for almost two years now, but zip. However, in their zeal to get rid of their opponent, who they did not think would win the election, they left themselves open, left a trail of crimes. Whoops!

This is the Swamp that Trump talked about during the election. He's probably not squeaky clean either, but he pales in comparison to what these guys have done. They have tried to take down a duly-elected President.

F. G. Sanford , May 31, 2018 at 5:09 pm

His role may have been peripheral, but I seem to recall that the Office of Net Assessments paid him roughly a million bucks to play it. That office, run from the Pentagon, is about as deep into the world of "black ops" spookdom as you can get. Hardly "peripheral", I'd say.

backwardsevolution , May 31, 2018 at 7:13 pm

F. G. Sanford – yes, a million bucks implies something more than just a peripheral involvement, more like something essential to the plot, like the actual setting up of the plot. Risk of exposure costs money.

ranney , May 31, 2018 at 6:17 pm

Chris, I think the Halper inclusion in this complex tale is simply an example of how these things work in the ultra paranoid style of spy agencies. As Lazare explains, every one knew every one else – at least at the start of this, and it just kind of built from there, and Halper may have been the spark – but the spark landed on a highly combustible pile of paranoia that caught on fire right away. This is how our and the UK agencies function. There is an interesting companion piece to this story today at Common Dreams by Robert Kohler titled The American Way of War. It describes basically the same sort of mind set and action as this story. I'd link it for you if I knew how, but I'm not very adept at the computer. (Maybe another reader knows how?)

We (that is the American people who are paying the salaries of these brain blocked, stiff necked idiots) need to start getting vocal and visible about the destructive path our politicians, banks and generals have rigidly put us on. Does any average working stiff still believe that all this hate, death and destruction is to "protect" us?

backwardsevolution , May 31, 2018 at 7:07 pm

ranney – when you are on the page that you want to link to, take your cursor (the little arrow on your screen) to the top of the page to the address bar (for instance, the address for this article is:
"https://consortiumnews.com/2018/05/31/spooks-spooking ")

Once your cursor is over the address bar, right click on your mouse. A little menu will come up. Then position your cursor down to the word "copy" and then left click on your mouse. This will copy the link.

Then proceed back to the blog (like Consortium) where you want to provide the link in your post. You might say, "Here is the link for the article I just described above." Then at this point you would right click on your mouse again, position your cursor over the word "paste", and then left click on your mouse. Voila, your link magically appears.

If you don't have a mouse and are using a laptop pad, then someone else will have to help you. That's above my pay grade. Good luck, ranney.

irina , May 31, 2018 at 8:13 pm

If you are using a Mac, either laptop w/touch screen or with a mouse, the copy/paste function
works similarly. Use either the mouse (no need to 'right click, left click') or the touch screen
to highlight the address bar once you have the cursor flashing away on the left side of it.
You may need to scroll right to highlight the whole address. Then go up to Edit (there's also
a keyboard command you can use, but I don't) in your tool bar at the top of your screen.
Click on 'copy'. Now your address is in memory. Then do the same as described above to
get back to where you want to paste it. Put your cursor where you want it to be 'pasted'.
Go back to 'edit' and click 'paste'. Voila !

This is a very handy function and can be used to copy text, web addresses, whatever you want.
Explore it a little bit. (Students definitely overuse the 'paste and match style' option, which allows
a person to 'paste' text into for example an essay and 'match the style' so it looks seamless, although
unless carefully edited it usually doesn't read seamlessly !)

Remember that whatever is in 'copy' will remain there until you 'copy' something else. (Or your
computer crashes . . . )

ranney , June 1, 2018 at 3:39 pm

Irina and Backwards Evolution – Thanks guys for the computer advice! I'll try it, but I think I need someone at my shoulder the first time I try it.

backwardsevolution , June 1, 2018 at 8:53 pm

ranney – you're welcome! Snag one of your kids or a friend, and then do it together. Sometimes I see people posting things like: "Testing. I'm trying to provide a link, bear with me." Throw caution to the wind, ranney. I don't worry about embarrassing myself anymore. I do it every day and the world still goes on.

I heard a good bit of advice once, something I remind my kids: when you're young, you think everybody is watching you and so you're afraid to step out of line. When you're middle-aged, you think everybody is watching you, but you don't care. When you're older, you realize nobody is really watching you because they're more concerned about themselves.

Good luck, ranney.

irina , June 2, 2018 at 10:00 pm

I find it helpful to write down the steps (on an old fashioned piece of paper, with old fashioned ink)
when learning to use a new computer tool, because while I think I'll remember, it doesn't usually
'stick' until after using it for quite a while. And yes, definitely recruit a member of the younger set
or someone familiar with computers. My daughter showed me many years ago how to 'cut & paste'
and to her credit she was very gracious about it. Remember that you need a place to 'paste' what-
ever you copied -- either a comment board like this, or a document you are working on, or (this is
handy) an email where you want to send someone a link to something. Lots of other possibilities too!

mike , June 1, 2018 at 7:43 pm

No one is presenting Halper as a mastermind spy. He was a tool of the deep state nothing more.

Gary Weglarz , May 31, 2018 at 1:57 pm

It seems a mistake to frame the "Russiagate" nonsense as a "Democrat vs Republican" affair, except at the most surface level of understanding in terms of our political realities. If one considers that the Bush family has been effectively the Republican Party's face of the CIA/deep state nexus for decades, as the Clinton/Obama's have been the Democratic Party's face for decades now, what comes into focus is Trump as a sort of unknown, unexpected wild card not appropriately tethered to the control structure. Simply noting that the U.S. and Russia need not be enemies is alone enough to require an operation to get Trump into line.
This hardly means this is some sort of "partisan" issue as the involvement of McCain and others demonstrates.

One of the true "you can't make this stuff up" ironies of the Bush/Clinton CIA/deep state nexus history is worth remembering if one still maintains any illusions about how the CIA vets potential presidents since they killed JFK. During Iran/Contra we had Bush, the former CIA director now vice president, running a drugs for arms operation out the White House through Ollie North, WHILE then unknown Arkansas governor Bill Clinton was busy squashing Arkansas State Police investigations into said narcotics trafficking. Clinton obviously proved his bona fides to the CIA/deep state with such service and was appropriately rewarded as an asset who could function as a reliable president. Here in one operation we had two future presidents in Bush and Clinton both engaged in THE SAME CIA drug running operation. You truly can't make this stuff up.

Russiagate seems to be in the end all about keeping deep state policy moving in the "right direction" and "hating Russia" is the only entree on the menu at this time for the whole cadre of CIA/deep state, MIC, neocons, Zionists, and all their minions in the MSM. The Obama White House would have gladly supported Vlad the Impaler as the Republican candidate that beat Hillary if Vlad were to have the appropriate foaming at the mouth "hate-Russia" vibe going on.

backwardsevolution , May 31, 2018 at 7:18 pm

Gary – great post.

irina , May 31, 2018 at 8:18 pm

Roger that. I would really like to see an inquiry re-opened into the
teenage boys who died 'on the train tracks' in Arkansas during the
early years of the Clinton-Bush trafficking. Many questions are still
unanswered. Speculation is that they saw something they weren't
supposed to see.

Mark Thomason , May 31, 2018 at 1:12 pm

This all grows out of the failure to clean up the mess revealed by the Iraq fiasco. Instead, those who did that remained, got away with it, and are doing more of the same.

Babyl-on , May 31, 2018 at 12:46 pm

So, here is my question – Who, ultimately does the permanent/bureaucratic/deep/Imperial* state finally answer to? Who's interests are they serving? How do they know what those interests are?

It could be, and increasingly it looks as if, the answer is – no one in particular – but the Saud family, the Zionist cabal of billionaires, the German industrialist dynasties, the Japanese oligarchy and never forget the arms dealers, all of them once part of the Empire now fighting for themselves so we end up with the high level apparatchiks not knowing what to do or who to follow so they lie outright to Congress and go on TV and babble more lies for money.

It's a great contradiction that the greatest armed force ever assembled with cutting edge robotics and AI yet at the same time so weak and pathetic it can not exercise hegemony over the Middle East as it seems to desire more than anything. Being defeated by forces with less than 20% of the US spend.

Abby , May 31, 2018 at 6:36 pm

You're right. They answer to no one because they are not just working in this country, but they think that the whole world is theirs.

To these people there are no borders. They meet at places like the G20, Davos and wherever the Bilderberg group decides to meet every year. No leader of any country gets to be one unless they are acceptable to the Deep State. The council of foreign relations is one of the groups that run the world. How we take them down is a good question.

Abe , May 31, 2018 at 12:43 pm

Following the pattern of mainstream media, Daniel Lazare assiduously avoids mentioning Israel and pro-Israel Lobby interference in the 2016 presidential election, and the Israel-gate reality underlying all the Russia-gate fictions.

For example, George Papadopoulos is directly connected to the pro-Israel Lobby, right wing Israeli political interests, and Israeli government efforts to control regional energy resources.

Lazare mentions that Papadapoulos had "a friend in the Israeli embassy".

But Lazare conspicuously neglects to mention numerous Israeli and pro-Israel Lobby players interested in "filling Papadopoulos's head" with "tales of Russian dirty tricks".

Papadopoulos' LinkedIn page lists his association with the right wing Hudson Institute. The Washington, D.C.-based think tank part of pro-Israel Lobby web of militaristic security policy institutes that promote Israel-centric U.S. foreign policy.

https://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/hudson_institute/

The Hudson Institute confirmed that Papadopoulos was an intern who left the pro-Israel neoconservative think tank in 2014.

In 2014, Papadopoulos authored op-ed pieces in Israeli publications.

In an op-ed published in Arutz Sheva, media organ of the right wing Religionist Zionist movement embraced by the Israeli "settler" movement, Papadopoulos argued that the U.S. should focus on its "stalwart allies" Israel, Greece, and Cyprus to "contain the newly emergent Russian fleet".

In another op-ed published in Ha'aretz, Papadopoulos contended that Israel should exploit its natural gas resources in partnership with Cyprus and Greece rather than Turkey.

In November 2015, Papadapalous participated in a conference in Tel Aviv, discussing the export of natural gas from Israel with a panel of current and past Israeli government officials including Ron Adam, a representative of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Eran Lerman, a former Israeli Deputy National Security Adviser.

Among Israel's numerous violations of United Nations Resolution 242 was its annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights in 1981. Recent Israeli threatened military threats against Lebanon and Syria have a lot to do with control of natural gas resources, both offshore from Gaza and on land in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights region.

Israeli plans to develop energy resources and expand territorial holdings in the Syrian Golan are threatened by the Russian military presence in Syria. Russian diplomatic efforts, and the Russian military intervention that began in September 2015 after an official request by the Syrian government, have interfered with the Israeli-Saudi-U.S. Axis "dirty war" in Syria.

Israeli activities and Israel-gate realities are predictably ignored by the mainstream media, which continues to salivate at every moldy scrap of Russia-gate fiction.

Lazare need no be so circumspect, unless he has somehow been spooked.

Herman , May 31, 2018 at 4:13 pm

"Among Israel's numerous violations of United Nations Resolution 242 was its annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights in 1981. Recent Israeli threatened military threats against Lebanon and Syria have a lot to do with control of natural gas resources, both offshore from Gaza and on land in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights region."

And water. Rating energy and water, what's at the top for Israel. Israel would probably say both but Israel shielded by the US will take what it wants. That is already true with the Palestinians.. The last figure I heard is that the Palestinians are allocated one fifth per capita what is allocated to Israel's

mike k , May 31, 2018 at 11:59 am

A large swamp is actually an ancient and highly organized ecosystem. Only humans could create a lawless madness like Washington DC.

irina , May 31, 2018 at 8:24 pm

Yes that is a good description of a swamp. BUT, if it loses what sustains it --
water, in the case of a 'real' swamp and money in the case of this swamp --
it changes character very quickly and becomes first a bog, then a meadow.

I am definitely ready for more meadowland ! But the only way to create it
is to voluntarily redirect federal taxes into escrow accounts which stipulate
that the funds are to be used for (fill in the blank) Public Services at the
Local and Regional levels. Much more efficient than filtering them through
the federal bureaucracy !

Sam F , May 31, 2018 at 10:21 pm

But how would one avoid prosecution for nonpayment of taxes?
That seems a very quiet way to be rendered ineffective as a resister.

irina , June 1, 2018 at 2:30 am

The thing is, you don't 'nonpay' them. The way it used to work, through the
Con$cience and Military Tax Campaign Escrow Account, was that you filed
your taxes as usual. (This does require having less withholding than you owe).
BUT instead of paying what is due to the IRS, you send it to the Escrow Account.
You attach a letter to your tax return, explaining where the money is and why it
is there. That is, you want it to be spent on _________________(fill in the blank)
worthy public social service. Then you send your return to the IRS.

When I used to do this, I stated that I wanted my tax dollars to be spent to develop
public health clinics at neighborhood schools. Said clinics would be staffed by nurse
practitioners, would be open 24-7 and nurses would be equipped with vans to make
House Calls. Security would be provided.

So you're not 'nonpaying' your taxes, you are (attempting) to redirect them. Eventually,
after several rounds of letters back and forth, the IRS would seize the monies from the
escrow account, which would only release them to the IRS upon being told to by the
tax re-director. Unfortunately, not enough people participated to make it a going concern.
But the potential is still there, and the template has been made and used. It's very scale-
able, from local to international. And it would not take that many 're-directors' to shift the
focus of tax liability from the collector to the payor. Because ultimately we are liable for
how our funds are used !

Bill , June 2, 2018 at 3:19 pm

this was done a lot during the Vietnam conflict, especially by Quakers. the first thing, if you are a wage earner, is to re-file a W2 with maximum withholdings-that has two effects: 1) it means you owe all your taxes in April. 2) it means the feds are deprived of the hidden tax in which they use or invest your withholding throughout the year before it's actually due(and un-owed taxes if you over over-withhold). Pretty sure that if a large number of people deprive the government of that hidden tax by under-withholding, they will begin to take notice.

Abe , May 31, 2018 at 11:54 am

Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) is an intelligence agency of the government and armed forces of the United Kingdom.

In 2013, GCHQ received considerable media attention when the former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden revealed that the agency was in the process of collecting all online and telephone data in the UK. Snowden's revelations began a spate of ongoing disclosures of global surveillance and manipulation.

For example, NSA files from the Snowden archive published by Glenn Greenwald reveal details about GCHQ's Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group (JTRIG) unit, which uses "dirty trick" tactics to covertly manipulate and control online communities.

JTRIG document: "The Art of Deception: Training for Online Covert Operations"
https://edwardsnowden.com/docs/doc/the-art-of-deception-training-for-a-new.pdf

In 2017, officials from the UK and Israel made an unprecedented confirmation of the close relationship between the GCHQ and Israeli intelligence services.

Robert Hannigan, outgoing Director-General of the GCHQ, revealed for the first time that his organization has a "strong partnership with our Israeli counterparts in signals intelligence." He claimed the relationship "is protecting people from terrorism not only in the UK and Israel but in many other countries."

Mark Regev, Israeli ambassador to the UK, commented on the close relationship between British and Israeli intelligence agencies. During remarks at a Conservative Friends of Israel reception, Regev opined: "I have no doubt the cooperation between our two democracies is saving British lives."

Hannigan added that GCHQ was "building on an excellent cyber relationship with a range of Israeli bodies and the remarkable cyber industry in Be'er Sheva."

The IDF's most important signal intelligence–gathering installation is the Urim SIGINT Base, a part of Unit 8200, located in the Negev desert approximately 30 km from Be'er Sheva.

Snowden revealed how Unit 8200 receives raw, unfiltered data of U.S. citizens, as part of a secret agreement with the U.S. National Security Agency.

After his departure from GCHQ, Hannigan joined BlueteamGlobal, a cybersecurity services firm, later re-named BlueVoyant.

BlueVoyant's board of directors includes Nadav Zafrir, former Commander of the Israel Defense Forces' Unit 8200. The senior leadership team at BlueVoyant includes Ron Feler, formerly Deputy Commander of the IDF's Unit 8200, and Gad Goldstein, who served as a division head in the Israel Security Agency, Shin Bet, in the rank equivalent to Major General.

In addition to their purported cybersecurity activities, Israeli. American, and British private companies have enormous access and potential to promote government and military deception operations.

mike k , May 31, 2018 at 12:23 pm

Thanks Abe. Sounds like a manual for slave owners and con men. What a tangled wed the rich bastards weave. The simple truth is their sworn enemy.

Sam F , May 31, 2018 at 10:19 pm

Interesting that a foreign power would be given all US communications data, which implies that the US has seized it all without a warrant and revealed it all in violation of the Constitution. If extensive, this use of information power amounts to information warfare against the US by its own secret agencies in collusion with a foreign power, an act of treason.

Seer , June 1, 2018 at 7:18 am

This has been going on for a LONG time, it's nothing new. I seem to recall 60 Minutes covering it way back in the 70s(?). UK was allowed to do the snooping in the US (and, likely, vice versa) and then providing info to the US. This way the US govt could claim that it didn't spy/snoop on its citizens. Without a doubt Israel has been extensively intercepting communications in the US..

Secrecy kills.

Sam F , June 1, 2018 at 8:23 am

Yes, but the act of allowing unregulated foreign agencies unwarranted access to US telecoms is federal crime, and it is treason when it goes so far as to allow them full access, and even direct US bulk traffic to their spy agencies. If this is so, these people should be prosecuted for treason.

F. G. Sanford , May 31, 2018 at 11:36 am

To listen to the media coverage of these events, it is tempting to believe that two entirely different planets are being discussed. Fox comes out and says Mueller was "owned" by Trump. Then, CNN comes out and says Trump was "owned" by Clapper. Clapper claims the evidence is "staggering", while video clips of his testimony reveal irrefutable perjury. Some of President Trump's policies are understandably abhorrent to Democrats, while Clinton's email server and charity frauds are indisputably violations of Federal statutes. Democrats are attempting to claim that a "spy" in the Trump campaign was perfectly reasonable to protect "national security", but evidence seems to indicate that the spy was placed BEFORE there was a legitimate national security concern. Some analysts note that, while Mueller's team appears to be Democratic partisan hacks, their native "skill set" is actually expertise in money laundering investigations. They claim that although Mr. Trump may not be compromised by the Russian government, he is involved with nefarious Russian organized crime figures. It follows, according to them, that given time, Mueller will reveal these illicit connections, and prosecution will become inevitable.

Let's assume, for argument, that both sides are right. That means that our entire government is irretrievably corrupt. Republicans claim that it could " go all the way to Obama". Democrats, of course, play the "moral high ground" card, insinuating that the current administration is so base and immoral that somehow, the "ends justify the means". No matter how you slice it, the Clinton campaign has a lot more liability on its hands. The problem is, if prosecutions begin, people will "talk" to save their own skins. The puppet masters can't really afford that.

"All the way to Obama", you say? I think it could go higher than that. Personally, I think it could go all the way to Dick Cheney, and the 'powers that be' are in no mood to let that happen.

Vivian O'Blivion , May 31, 2018 at 12:19 pm

The issue as I see it is that from the start everyone was calling the Mueller probe an investigation into collusion and not really grasping the catch all nature of his brief.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017–present)

It's the "any matters arising " that is the real kicker. So any dodgy dealing / possible criminal activity in the past is fair game. And this is exactly what in happening with Manafort.
Morally you can apply the Nucky Johnson defence and state that everyone knew Trump was a crook when they voted for him, but legally this has no value.
There is an unpleasant whiff of deep state interference with the will of the people (electoral college). Perhaps if most bodies hadn't written Trump's chances off in such an off hand manner, proper due diligence of his background would have uncovered any liabilities before the election.
If there is actionable dirt, can't say I am overly sympathetic to Trump. Big prizes sometimes come with big risks.

David G , May 31, 2018 at 5:14 pm

My own feeling from the start has been that Mueller was never going to track down any "collusion" or "meddling" (at least not to any significant degree) because the whole, sprawling Russia-gate narrative – to the extent one can be discerned – is obviously phony.

But at the same time, there's no way the completely lawless, unethical Trump, along with his scummy associates, would be able to escape that kind of scrutiny without criminal conduct being exposed.

So far, on both scores, that still seems to me to be a likely outcome, and for my part I'm fine with it.

Vivian O'Blivion , June 1, 2018 at 5:29 am

My thoughts exactly. Collusion was never a viable proposition because the Russians aren't that stupid. Regardless of any personal opinion regarding the intelligence and mental stability of Donald Snr., the people he surrounds himself with are weapons grade stupid. I don't see the Russians touching the Trump campaign with a proverbial barge pole.

Bill , June 2, 2018 at 3:26 pm

it just happens that Trump appears to have been involved (wittingly or not), with the laundering a whole lot of Russian money and so many of his friends seem to be connected with wealthy Russian oligarchs as well plus they are so stupid, they keep appearing to (and probably are) obstructing justice. The Cohen thing doesn't get much attention here, but it's significant that they have all this stuff on a guy who is clearly Trump's bagman.

Steve Naidamast , May 31, 2018 at 3:15 pm

There is also quite an indication that the entire Mueller investigation is a complete smoke screen to be used as cannon fodder in the mainstream media.

On the one hand, Mueller and his hacks have found nothing of import to link Trump to anything close to collusion with members of the Russian government. And I am by no means a Trump supporter by any stretch of the imagination, except as a foil to Clinton. However, even my minimalist expectations for Trump have not worked out either.

In addition. the Mueller investigation has been spending what appears to be a majority of its time on ancillary matters that were not within the supposed scope and mandate of this investigation. Further, a number of indictments have come down against people involved with such ancillary matters.

The result is that if Mueller is going beyond the scope of his investigatory mandate, this may come in as a technicality that will allow indicted persons to escape prosecution on appeal.

Such a mandate, I would think, is the same thing as a police warrant, which can find only admissible evidence covered by the warrant. Anything else found to be criminally liable must be found to be as a result of a completely different investigation that has nothing to do with the original warrant.

In other words, it appears that the Mueller investigation was allowed to commence under a Republican controlled Congress for the very reason that its intent is simply to go in circles long enough for Republicans to get their agendas through, which does not appear to be working all too well as a result of their high levels of internecine party conflicts.

This entire affair is coming to show just how dysfunctional, corrupt, and incompetent the entirety of the US federal government has become. And to the chagrin of all sincere activists, no amount of organized protesting and political action will ever rid the country of this grotesque political quagmire that now engulfs the entirety of our political infrastructure.

Sam F , May 31, 2018 at 8:48 pm

Very true that the US federal government is now "dysfunctional, corrupt, and incompetent."
What are your thoughts on forms of action to rid us this political quagmire?
(other than ineffective "organized protesting and political action")
Have you considered new forms of public debate and public information?

Seer , June 1, 2018 at 7:34 am

All of this is blackmail to hold Trump's feet to the fire of the Israel firsters (such actions pull in all the dark swampy things). By creating the Russia blackmail story they've effectively redirected away from themselves. The moment Trump balks the Deep State will reel in some more, airing innuendos to overwhelm Trump. Better believe that Trump has been fully "briefed" on all of this. John Bolton was able to push out a former OPCW head with threats (knew where his, the OPCW head's children were). And now John Bolton is sitting right next to Trump (whispering in his ear that he knows ways in which to oust Trump).

What actual "ideas" were in Trump's head going in to all of this (POTUS run) is hard to say. But, anything that can be considered a threat to the Deep State has been effectively nullified now.

Vivian O'Blivion , June 1, 2018 at 8:22 am

Possible, but Manafort already tried to get his charges thrown out as being the outcome of investigations beyond the remit He failed.

Brendan , May 31, 2018 at 10:26 am

There's no doubt at all that Joseph Mifsud was closely connected with western intelligence, and with MI6 in particular. His contacts with Russia are insignificant compared with his long career working amongst the elite of western officials.
Lee Smith of RealClearInvestigations lists some of the places where Mifsud worked, including two universities:

"he taught at Link Campus University in Rome, ( ) whose lecturers and professors include senior Western diplomats and intelligence officials from a number of NATO countries, especially Italy and the United Kingdom.

Mifsud also taught at the University of Stirling in Scotland, and the London Academy of Diplomacy, which trained diplomats and government officials, some of them sponsored by the UK's Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the British Council, or by their own governments."

Two former colleagues of Mifsud's, Roh and Pastor, recently interviewed him for a book they have written. Those authors could very well be biased, but one of them makes a valid point, similar to one that Daniel Lazare makes above:
"Given the affiliations of Link's faculty and staff, as well as Mifsud's pedigree, Roh thinks it's impossible that the man he hired as a business development consultant is a Russian agent."

Politically, Mifsud identifies with the Clintons more than anyone else, and claims to belong to the Clinton Foundation, which has often been accused of being just a way of funneling money into Hillary Clinton's campaign.

As Lee Smith says, if Mifsud really is a Russian spy, "Western intelligence services are looking at one of the largest and most embarrassing breaches in a generation. But none of the governments or intelligence agencies potentially compromised is acting like there's anything wrong."

From all that we know about Joseph Mifsud, it's safe to say that he was never a Russian spy. If not, then what was he doing when he was allegedly feeding stories to George Papadopoulos about Russians having 'dirt' on Clinton?

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/05/26/the_maltese_phantom_of_russiagate_.html

David G , May 31, 2018 at 4:25 pm

I read somewhere that Mifsud had disappeared. Was that true? If so, is he back, or still missing?

Chet Roman , May 31, 2018 at 6:21 pm

Here are some excerpts that will answer your question from an article by Lee Smith at Realclearinvestigations, "The Maltese Phantom of Russiagate".

A new book by former colleagues of Mifsud's – Stephan Roh, a 50-year-old Swiss-German lawyer, and Thierry Pastor, a 35-year-old French political analyst – reports that he is alive and well. Their account includes a recent interview with him.

Their self-published book, "The Faking of Russia-gate: The Papadopoulos Case, an Investigative Analysis," includes a recent interview with Mifsud in which he denies saying anything about Clinton emails to Papadopoulos. Mifsud, they write, stated "vehemently that he never told anything like this to George Papadopoulos." Mifsud asked rhetorically: "From where should I have this [information]?"

Mifsud's account seems to be supported by Alexander Downer, the Australian diplomat who alerted authorities about Papadopoulos. As reported in the Daily Caller, Downer said Papadopoulos never mentioned emails; he spoke, instead, about the Russians possessing material that could be damaging to Clinton. This new detail raises the possibility that Mifsud, Papadopoulos' alleged source for the information, never said anything about Clinton-related emails either.

In interviews with RealClearInvestigations, Roh and Pastor said Mifsud is anything but a Russian spy. Rather, he is more likely a Western intelligence asset.

According to the two authors, it was a former Italian intelligence official, Vincenzo Scotti, a colleague of Mifsud's and onetime interior minister, who told the professor to go into hiding. "I don't know who was hiding him," said Roh, "but I'm sure it was organized by someone. And I am sure it will be difficult to get to the bottom of it."

Toby McCrossin , June 1, 2018 at 1:54 am

" The Papadopoulos Case, an Investigative Analysis," includes a recent interview with Mifsud in which he denies saying anything about Clinton emails to Papadopoulos. Mifsud, they write, stated "vehemently that he never told anything like this to George Papadopoulos.""

Thank you for providing that explosive piece of information. If true, and I suspect it is, that's one more nail in the Russiagate narrative. Who, then, is making the claim that Misfud mentioned emails? The only source for the statement I can find is "court documents".

Sam F , May 31, 2018 at 9:20 am

The election scams serve only to distract from the Israel-gate scandal and the oligarchy destruction of our former democracy. Mr. Lazare neglects to tell us about that. All of Hillary's top ten campaign bribers were zionists, and Trump let Goldman-Sachs take over the economy. KSA and big business also bribed heavily.

We must restrict funding of elections and mass media to limited individual donations, for democracy is lost.

We must eliminate zionist fascism from our political parties, federal government, and foreign policy. Obviously that has nothing to do with any ethnic or religious preference.

Otherwise the United States is lost, and our lives have no historical meaning beyond slavery to oligarchy.

Joe Tedesky , May 31, 2018 at 9:51 am

You are right Sam. Israel does work the fence under the guise of the Breaking News. Joe

Sam F , May 31, 2018 at 8:18 pm

My response was that Israel massacres at the fence, ignored by the zionist US mass media.

mike k , May 31, 2018 at 11:48 am

The extreme wealth and privileges of oligarchy depend on the poverty and slavery of others. Inequality of income is the root cause of most of our ills. Try to imagine what a world of economic equals would be like. No striving for more and more wealth at the expense of others. No wars. What would there be to fight over – everyone would be content with what they already had.

If you automatically think such a world would be impossible, try to state why. You might discover that the only obstacle to such a world is the greedy bastards who are sitting on top of everybody, and will do anything to maintain their advantages.

mike k , May 31, 2018 at 11:52 am

How do the oligarchs ensure your slavery? With the little green tickets they have hoarded that the rest of us need just to eat and have a roof over our heads. The people sleeping in the streets tell us the penalty for not being good slaves.

Sam F , May 31, 2018 at 12:50 pm

Very true, Mike. Those who say that equality or fairness of income implies breaking the productivity incentive system are wrong. No matter how much or how little wage incentive we offer for making an effort in work, we need not have great disparities of income. Those who can work should have work, and we should all make an effort to do well in our work, but none of us need the fanciest cars or grand monuments to live in, just to do our best.

Getting rid of oligarchy, and getting money out of mass media and elections, would be the greatest achievement of our times.

Joe Tedesky , May 31, 2018 at 5:30 pm

An old socialist friend of my dad's generation who claimed to have read the biography of Andrew Carnegie had told me over a few beers that Carnegie said, "that at a time when he was paying his workers $5 a week he 'could' have been paying them $50 a day, but then he could not figure out what kind of life they would lead with all that money". Think about it mike, if his workers would have had that kind of money it would not be long before Carnegie's workers became his competition and opened up next door to him the worst case scenario would be his former workers would sell their steel at a cheaper price, kind of, well no exactly like what Rockefeller did with oil, or as Carnegie did with steel innovation. How's that saying go, keep them down on the farm . well. Remember Carnegie was a low level stooge for the railroads at one time, and rose to the top .mike. Great point to make mike, because there could be more to go around. Joe

Steve Naidamast , May 31, 2018 at 3:16 pm

"We must restrict funding of elections and mass media to limited individual donations, for democracy is lost.

We must eliminate zionist fascism from our political parties, federal government, and foreign policy. Obviously that has nothing to do with any ethnic or religious preference."

Good luck with that!!!

Sam F , May 31, 2018 at 8:19 pm

Well, you are welcome to make suggestions on how to save the republic.

john wilson , May 31, 2018 at 9:10 am

The depths of the deep state has no limits, but as a UK citizen, I fail to see why the American "spooks" need any help from we Brits when it comes state criminal activity. Sure, we are masters at underhand dirty tricks, but the US has a basket full of tricks that 'Trump' (lol) anything we've got. It was the Russians wot done mantra has been going on for many decades and is ever good for another turn around the political mulberry tree of corruption and underhand dealings. Whether the Democrats or the Republicans win its all the same to the deep state as they are in control whoever is in the White House. Trump was an outsider and there for election colour and the "ho ho ho" look what a great democracy we are, anyone can be president. He is in fact the very essence of the 'wild card' and when he actually won there was total confusion, panic, disbelief and probably terror in the caves and dungeons of the deep state.

Realist , May 31, 2018 at 9:33 am

I'm sure the result was so unexpected that the shadowy fixers, the IT mavens who could have "adjusted" the numbers, were totally caught off guard and unable to do "cleanly." Not that they didn't try to re-jigger the results in the four state recounts that were ordered, but it was simply too late to effectively cheat at that point, as there were already massive overvotes detected in key urban precincts. Such a thing will never happen again, I am sure.

Sam F , May 31, 2018 at 9:36 am

It appears that UK has long had a supply of anti-Russia fearmongers, presumably backed by its anti-socialist oligarchy as in the US. Perhaps the US oligarchy is the dumbest salesman, who believes that all customers are even dumber, so that UK can sell Russophobia here thirty years after the USSR.

Bob Van Noy , May 31, 2018 at 8:49 am

"But how could Trump think otherwise? As Consortium News founding editor Robert Parry observed a few days later, the maneuver "resembles a tactic out of FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover's playbook on government-style blackmail: I have some very derogatory information about you that I'd sure hate to see end up in the press."

Perfect.
Recently, while trying to justify my arguement that a new investigation into the RFK Killing was necessary, I was asked why I thought that, and my response was "Modus operandi," exactly what Robert Parry learned by experience, and that is the fundamental similarity to all of the institutionalized crime that takes place by the IC. Once one realizes the literary approach to disinformation that was fundamental to Alan Dulles, James Jesus Angleton, even Ian Fleming, one can easily see the Themes being applied. I suppose that the very feature of believability offered by propaganda, once recognized, becomes its undoing. That could be our current reality; the old Lines simply are beginning to appear to be ridiculous

Thank you Daniel Lazar.

Sam F , June 1, 2018 at 8:39 am

The recognition of themes of propaganda as literary themes and modus operandi is helping to discredit propaganda. The similarities of the CW false-flag operations (Iraq, Syria, and UK), and the fake assassinations (Skripal and Babchenko) by the anti-Russia crowd help reveal and persuade on the falsehood of the Iraq WMD, Syria CW, and MH-17 propaganda ops. Just as the similarities of the JFK/MLK/RFK assassinations persuade us that commonalities exist long before we see evidence.

Bob Van Noy , June 1, 2018 at 1:11 pm

Many thanks Sam F for recognizing that. As we begin to achieve a resolution of the 60's Kllings, we can begin to see the general and specific themes utilized to direct the programs of Assassination. The other aspect is that real investigation Never followed; and that took Real Power.

In a truly insightful book by author Sally Denton entitled "The Profiteers" she puts together a very cogent theory that it isn't the Mafia, it's the Syndicate, which means (for me at least) real, criminal power with somewhat divergent interests ok with one another, to the extent that they can maintain their Own Turf. I think that's a profound insight

Too, in a similar vain, the Grand Deceptions of American Foreign Policy, "scenarios" are simply and only that, not a Real possible solution. Always resulting in failure

Sam F , June 1, 2018 at 9:23 pm

Yes, it is difficult to determine the structure of a subculture of gangsterism in power, which can have many specialized factions in loose cooperation, agreeing on some general policy points, like benefits for the rich, hatred of socialism, institutionalized bribery of politicians and judges, militarized policing, destruction of welfare and social security, deregulation of everything, essentially the neocon/neolib line of the DemReps. The party line of oligarchy in any form.

Indeed the foreign policy of such gangsters is designed to "fail" because destruction of cultures, waste, and fragmentation most efficiently exploits the bribery structure available, and serves the anti-socialist oligarchy. Failure of the declared foreign policy is success, because that is only propaganda to cover the corruption.

SocraticGadfly , May 31, 2018 at 8:48 am

You know, not only Gay Trowdy but even Dracula Napolitano think people like Lazare , McGovern, etc. are overblown on this issue.

backwardsevolution , May 31, 2018 at 1:47 pm

SocraticGadfly – Trey Gowdy hasn't even seen the documents yet, so he's hardly in a position to say anything. The House Intelligence Committee, under Chairman Nunes, are being stymied by the FBI and the Department of Justice who are refusing to hand over documents. Refusing! Refusing to disclose documents to the very people who, by law, have oversight. Nunes is threatening to hit them with Contempt of Congress.

Let's see the documents. Then Trey Gowdy can open his mouth.

Herman , May 31, 2018 at 8:32 am

What I take from this head spinning article is the paragraph about Carter Page.

"On July 7, 2016 Carter Page delivered a lecture on U.S.-Russian relations in Moscow in which he complained that "Washington and other western capitals have impeded potential progress through their often hypocritical focus on ideas such as democratization, inequality, corruption, and regime change." Washington hawks expressed "unease" that someone representing the presumptive Republican nominee would take Russia's side in a growing neo-Cold War

Mr. Page hit the nail on the head. There is no greater sin to entrenched power than to spell out what is going on with Russia. It helps us understand why terms like dupe and naïve were stuck on Carter Page's back.. Truth to power is not always good for your health.

Sam F , May 31, 2018 at 10:07 am

The tyrant accuses of disloyalty, all who question the reality of his foreign monsters.
And so do his monster-fighting agencies, whose budgets depend upon the fiction.

backwardsevolution , May 31, 2018 at 7:25 am

Daniel Lazare – good report. "It sounds more like CIA paranoia raised to the nth degree." This wasn't a case of paranoia. This was a blatant attempt to bring down a rival opponent and, failing that, the President of the United States. This was intentional and required collusion between top officials of the government. They fabricated the phony Steele dossier (paid for by the Clinton campaign), exonerated Hillary Clinton, and then went to town on bringing down Trump.

"Was George Popodopolous set up?" Of course he was. Set up a patsy in order to give you reason to carry out a phony investigation.

"If the corporate press fails to point this out, it's because reporters are too befogged themselves to notice." They're not befogged; they're following orders (the major television and newspaper outfits). Without their 24/7 spin and lies, Russiagate would never have been kept alive.

These guys got the biggest surprise of their life when Hillary Clinton lost the election. None of this would have come out had she won. During the campaign, as Trump gained in the polls, she was heard to say, "If they ever find out what we've done, we'll all hang."

I hope they see jail time for what they've done.

backwardsevolution , May 31, 2018 at 7:38 am

Apparently what has come out so far is just the tip of the iceberg. Some are saying this could lead all the way up to Obama. I hope not, but they have certainly done all they can to ruin the Trump Presidency.

JohnM , May 31, 2018 at 9:58 am

I'm adjusting my tinfoil hat right now. I'm wondering if Skripal had something to do with the Steel dossier. The iceberg may be even bigger than thought.

Sam F , May 31, 2018 at 10:18 am

It is known that Skripal's close friend living nearby was an employee of Steele's firm Orbis.

Chet Roman , May 31, 2018 at 2:58 pm

Exactly, his name is Pablo Miller and he is the MI6 agent who initially recruited Sergei Skripal. Miller worked for Orbis, Steele's company and listed that in his resume on LinkedIn but later deleted it. But once it's on the internet it can always be found and it was and it was published.

robjira , May 31, 2018 at 2:13 pm

John, both Moon Of Alabama and OffGuardian have had excellent coverage of the Skripal affair. Informed opinions wonder if Sergei Skripal was one of Steele's "Russian sources," and that he may have been poisoned for the purpose of either a) bolstering the whole "Russia = evil" narrative, or b) a warning not to ask for more than what he may have conceivably received for any contribution he may or may not have made to the "dossiere."

mike k , May 31, 2018 at 7:20 am

Interesting details in this article, but we have known this whole Russiagate affair was a scam from the get go. It all started the day after Trump's unexpected electoral win over Hillary. The chagrined dems came together and concocted their sore loser alibi – the Russians did it. They scooped up a lot of pre-election dirt, rolled it into a ball and directed it at Trump. It is a testament to the media's determination to stick with their story, that in spite of not a single scrap of real evidence after over a year of digging by a huge team of democratic hit men and women, this ridiculous story still has supporters.

David G , May 31, 2018 at 10:31 am

"It all started the day after Trump's unexpected electoral win over Hillary."

Not so.

Daniel Lazare's first link in the above piece is to Paul Krugman's July 22, 2016 NY Times op-ed, "Donald Trump, the Siberian Candidate". (Note how that headline doesn't even bother to employ a question mark.)

I appreciate that that Krugman column gets pride of place here since I distinctly remember reading it in my copy of the Times that day, months before the election, and my immediate reaction to it: nonplussed that such a risible thesis was being aired so prominently, along with a deep realization that this was only the first shot in what would be a co-ordinated media disinformation campaign, à la Saddam's WMDs.

Chet Roman , May 31, 2018 at 3:37 pm

Actually, I think the intelligence agencies' (CIA/FBI/DNI) plan started shortly after Trump gave the names of Page and Papadopoulos to the Washington Post (CIA annex) in a meeting on March 21, 2016 outlining his foreign policy team.

Carter Page (Naval Academy distinguished graduate and Naval intelligence officer) in 2013 worked as an "under-cover employee" of the FBI in a case that convicted Evgeny Buryakov and it was reported that he was still an UCE in March of 2016. The FBI never charged or even hinted that Page was anything but innocent and patriotic. However, in October 2016 the FBI told the FISA Court that he was a spy to support spying on him. Remember the FISA Court allows spying on him AND the persons he is in contact, which means almost everyone on the Trump transition team/administration.

Here is an excerpt from an article by WSJ's Kimberley Strassel:

In "late spring" of 2016, then-FBI Director James Comey briefed White House "National Security Council Principals" that the FBI had counterintelligence concerns about the Trump campaign. Carter Page was announced as a campaign adviser on March 21, and Paul Manafort joined the campaign March 29. The briefing likely referenced both men, since both had previously been on the radar of law enforcement. But here's what matters: With this briefing, Mr. Comey officially notified senior political operators on Team Obama that the bureau had eyes on Donald Trump and Russia. Imagine what might be done in these partisan times with such explosive information.

And what do you know? Sometime in April, the law firm Perkins Coie (on behalf the Clinton campaign) hired Fusion GPS, and Fusion turned its attention to Trump-Russia connections.

David G , May 31, 2018 at 4:56 pm

Most interesting, Chet Roman. Thanks.

My understanding is that Trump more or less pulled Page's name out of a hat to show the WashPost that he had a "foreign policy team", and thus that his campaign wasn't just a hollow sham, but that at that point he really had had no significant contact at all with Page – maybe hadn't even met him. It was just a name from his new political world that sprang to "mind" (or the Trumpian equivalent).

Of course, the Trump campaign *was* just a sham, by conventional Beltway standards: a ramshackle road show with no actual "foreign policy team", or any other policy team.

So maybe that random piece of B.S. from Trump has caused him a heap of trouble. This is part of why – no matter how bogus "Russia-gate" is – I just can't bring myself to feel sorry for old Cheeto Dust.

backwardsevolution , May 31, 2018 at 6:56 am

Kimberly Strassel of the Wall Street Journal had some good advice:

"Mr. Trump has an even quicker way to bring the hostility to an end.

He can – and should – declassify everything possible, letting Congress and the public see the truth.

That would put an end to the daily spin and conspiracy theories. It would puncture Democratic arguments that the administration is seeking to gain this information only for itself, to "undermine" an investigation.

And it would end the Justice Department's campaign of secrecy, which has done such harm to its reputation with the public and with Congress."

What do you bet he does?

RickD , May 31, 2018 at 6:44 am

I have serious doubts about the article's veracity. There seems to be a thread running through it indicating an attempt to whitewash any Russian efforts to get Trump elected. To dismiss all the evidence of such efforts, and , despite this author's words, there is enough such evidence, seems more than a bit partisan.

Paul E. Merrell, J.D. , May 31, 2018 at 6:55 am

What evidence? I've seen none so far. A lot of claims that there is such evidence but no one seems to ever say what it is.

backwardsevolution , May 31, 2018 at 7:06 am

RickD – thanks for the good laugh before bedtime. I'm with Mr. Merrell and I actually want to see some evidence. Maybe it was Professor Halper in the kitchen with the paring knife.

Realist , May 31, 2018 at 9:21 am

Unfortunately, what this guy says is what most Americans still seem to believe. When I ask people what is the actual hard evidence for "Russiagate" (because I don't know of any that has been corroborated), I get a response that there have been massive examples of Russian hacks, Russian posts, tweets and internet adverts–all meant to sabotage Hillary's candidacy, and very effective, mind you. Putin has been an evil genius worthy of a comic book villain (to date myself, a regular Lex Luthor). Sez who, ask I? Sez the trustworthy American media that would never lie to the public, sez they. You know, professional paragons of virtue like Rachel Maddow and her merry band.

Nobody seems aware of the recent findings about Halpern, none seem to have a realistic handle on the miniscule scope of the Russian "offenses" against American democracy. Rachel, the NY Times and WaPo have seen to that with their sins of both commission and omission. Even the Republican party is doing a half-hearted job of defending its own power base with rigorous and openly disseminated fact checking. It's like even many of the committee chairs with long seniority are reluctant to buck the conventional narrative peddled by the media. Many have chosen to retire rather than fight the media and the Deep State. What's a better interpretation of events? Or is one to believe that the silent voices, curious retirements and political heat generated by the Dems, the prosecutors and the media are all independent variables with no connections? These old pols recognise a good demonizing when they see it, especially when directed at them.

Personally, I think that not only the GOPers should be fighting like the devil to expose the truth (which should benefit them in this circumstance) but so should the media and all the watchdog agencies (ngo's) out there because our democracy WAS hijacked, but it was NOT by the Russians. Worse than that, it was done by internal domestic enemies of the people who must be outed and punished to save the constitution and the republic, if it is not too late. All the misinformation by influential insiders and the purported purveyors of truth accompanied by the deliberate silence by those who should be chirping like birds suggests it may well be far too late.

backwardsevolution , May 31, 2018 at 7:53 pm

Realist – a most excellent post! Some poll result I read about the other day mentioned that well over half of the American public do NOT believe what they are being told by the media. That was good to hear. But you are right, there are still way too many who never question anything. If I ever get in trouble, I wouldn't want those types on my jury. They'd be wide awake during the prosecution's case and fast asleep during my defense.

This is the Swamp at work on both sides of the aisle. Most of the Republicans are hanging Trump out to dry. They've probably got too much dirt they want to keep hidden themselves, so retirement looks like a good idea. Get out of Dodge while the going is good, before the real fighting begins! The Democrats are battling for all they're worth, and I've got to hand it to them – they're dirty little fighters.

Yes, democracy has been hijacked. Hard to say how long this has been going on – maybe forever. If there is anything good about Trump's presidency, it's that the Deep State is being laid out and delivered up on a silver platter for all to see.

There has never been a better chance to take back the country than this. If this opportunity passes, it will never come again. They will make sure of it.

The greatest thing that Trump could do for the country would be to declassify all documents. Jeff Sessions is either part of the Deep State or he's been scared off. He's not going to act. Rosenstein is up to his eyeballs in this mess and he's not going to act. In fact, he's preventing Nunes from getting documents. It is up to Trump to act. I just hope he's not being surrounded by a bunch of bad apple lawyers who are giving him bad advice. He needs to go above the Department of Justice and declassify ALL documents. If he did that, a lot of these people would probably die of a heart attack within a minute.

mike k , May 31, 2018 at 7:11 am

You sure came out of the woodwork quickly to express your "serious doubts" RickD.

Skip Scott , May 31, 2018 at 8:07 am

Please provide "such evidence". I've yet to see any. The entire prosecution of RussiaGate has been one big Gish Gallop.

strgr-tgther , May 31, 2018 at 9:39 pm

RickD – Thank you for pointing that out! You were the only one!!! It is a very strange article leaving Putin and the Russians evidence out and also not a single word about Stromy Daniels witch is also very strange. I know Hillary would never have approved of any of this and they don't say that either.

John , June 1, 2018 at 2:26 am

What does Stormy Daniels have to do with RussiaGate?

You know that someone who committed the ultimate war crime by lying us into war to destroy Libya and re-institute slavery there, and who laughed after watching video of a man that Nelson Mandela called "The Greatest Living Champion of Human Rights on the Planet" be sodomized to death with a knife, is somehow too "moral" to do such a thing? Really?

It amazes me how utterly cultish those who support the Red Queen have shown themselves to be – without apparently realizing that they are obviously on par with the followers of Jim Jones!

strgr-tgther , June 1, 2018 at 12:17 pm

That is like saying what does income tax have to do with Al Capone. Who went to Alctraz because he did not pay income tax not for being a gangster. So we know Trump has sexual relations with Stormy Daniels, then afterward PAID her not to talk about it. So he paid Story Daniels for sex! That is Prostitution! Same thing. And that is inpeachable, using womens bodies as objects. If we don't prosecute Trump here then from now on all a John needs to say to the police is that he was not paying for sex but paying to keep quiet about it. And Cogress can get Trump for prostitution and disgracing the office of President. Without Russia investigations we would never have found out about this important fact, so that is what it has to do with Russia Gate.

Paul E. Merrell, J.D. , May 31, 2018 at 4:53 am

Guccifer 2.0's American Fingerprints Reveal An Operation Made In The USA: https://disobedientmedia.com/2018/05/guccifer-2-0s-american-fingerprints-reveal-an-operation-made-in-the-usa/

[Jun 09, 2018] Shale Is a Debt-Fueled Mirage, and We re Running Out of Energy - Forget Your Flying Teslas by James Howard Kunstler

Notable quotes:
"... The author is a prominent American social critic, blogger, and podcaster , and one of our all-time favorite pessimists. We carry his articles regularly on RI . His writing on Russia-gate has been highly entertaining. ..."
"... He is one of the better-known thinkers The New Yorker has dubbed 'The Dystopians' in an excellent 2009 profile , along with the brilliant Dmitry Orlov, another regular contributor to RI (archive) . These theorists believe that modern society is headed for a jarring and painful crack-up. ..."
"... You can find his popular fiction and novels on this subject, here . To get a sense of how entertaining he is, watch this 2004 TED talk about the cruel misery of American urban design - it is one of the most-viewed on TED. Here is a recent audio interview with him which gives a good overview of his work. ..."
"... If you like his work, please consider supporting him on Patreon . ..."
"... Quite the opposite of a dilettante, Kunstler has dug into the research on oil and related energy technologies, and is extremely well-informed, writing books on the subject. What he says implies a massive wealth transfer to Russia, Iran, and the Middle East, as the wells start to dry up. ..."
Jun 09, 2018 | russia-insider.com

"Anyway, we're not going back to the Detroit of 1957. We'll be fortunate if we can turn out brooms and scythes twenty years from now, let alone flying Teslas." 10 hours ago | 1,690 41 MORE: Business The author is a prominent American social critic, blogger, and podcaster , and one of our all-time favorite pessimists. We carry his articles regularly on RI . His writing on Russia-gate has been highly entertaining.

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

You can find his popular fiction and novels on this subject, here . To get a sense of how entertaining he is, watch this 2004 TED talk about the cruel misery of American urban design - it is one of the most-viewed on TED. Here is a recent audio interview with him which gives a good overview of his work.

If you like his work, please consider supporting him on Patreon .

Quite the opposite of a dilettante, Kunstler has dug into the research on oil and related energy technologies, and is extremely well-informed, writing books on the subject. What he says implies a massive wealth transfer to Russia, Iran, and the Middle East, as the wells start to dry up.

The ill feeling among leaders of the G-7 nations -- essentially, the West plus Japan -- was mirrored early this morning in the puking financial market futures, so odious, apparently, is the presence of America's Golden Golem of Greatness at the Quebec meet-up of First World poobahs. It's hard to blame them. The GGG refuses to play nice in the sandbox of the old order.

Completely, totally, delusional

Like many observers here in the USA, I can't tell exactly whether Donald Trump is out of his mind or justifiably blowing up out-of-date relationships and conventions in a world that is desperately seeking a new disposition of things. The West had a mighty good run in the decades since the fiascos of the mid-20 th century. My guess is that we're witnessing a slow-burning panic over the impossibility of maintaining the enviable standard of living we've all enjoyed.

All the jabber is about trade and obstacles to trade, but the real action probably emanates from the energy sector, especially oil. The G-7 nations are nothing without it, and the supply is getting sketchy at the margins in a way that probably and rightfully scares them. I'd suppose, for instance, that the recent run-up in oil prices from $40-a-barrel to nearly $80 has had the usual effect of dampening economic activity worldwide. For some odd reason, the media doesn't pay attention to any of that. But it's become virtually an axiom that oil over $75-a-barrel smashes economies while oil under $75-a-barrel crushes oil companies.

Mr. Trump probably believes that the USA is in the catbird seat with oil because of the so-called "shale oil miracle." If so, he is no more deluded than the rest of his fellow citizens, including government officials and journalists, who have failed to notice that the economics of shale oil don't pencil out -- or are afraid to say.

The oil companies are not making a red cent at it, despite the record-breaking production numbers that recently exceeded the previous all-time-peak set in 1970. The public believes that we're "energy independent" now, which is simply not true because we still import way more oil than we export: 10.7 million barrels incoming versus 7.1 million barrels a week outgoing (US EIA).

Shale oil is not a miracle so much as a spectacular stunt: how to leverage cheap debt for a short-term bump in resource extraction at the expense of a future that will surely be starved for oil. Now that the world is having major problems with excessive debt, it is also going to have major problems with oil.

The quarrels over trade arise from this unacknowledged predicament: there will be less of everything that the economically hyper-developed nations want and need, including capital. So, what's shaping up is a fight over the table scraps of the banquet that is shutting down.

That quandary is surely enough to make powerful nations very nervous. It may also prompt them to actions and outcomes that were previously unthinkable. At the moment the excessive debt threatens to blow up the European Union, which is liable to be a much bigger problem for the EU than anything Trump is up to. It has been an admirably stable era for Europe and Japan, and I suppose the Boomers and X gens don't really remember a time not so long ago when Europe was a cauldron of tribal hatreds and stupendous violence, with Japan marching all over East Asia, wrecking things.

There is also surprisingly little critical commentary on the notion that Mr. Trump is seeking to "re-industrialize" America. It's perhaps an understandable wish to return to the magical prosperity of yesteryear. But things have changed. And if wishes were fishes, the state of the earth's oceans is chastening to enough to give you the heebie-jeebies. Anyway, we're not going back to the Detroit of 1957. We'll be fortunate if we can turn out brooms and scythes twenty years from now, let alone flying Teslas.

This will be the summer of discontent for the West especially. The fact that populism is still a rising force among these nations is a clue of broad public skepticism about maintaining the current order. No wonder the massive bureaucracies vested in that order are freaking out.

I'm not sure Mr. Trump even knows or appreciates just how he represents these dangerous dynamics.

Source: Kunstler.com

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

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

Charles is the founder and editor of Russia Insider . He can be reached at [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter and on Steemit .

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

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

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

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

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

We know. We watch who is saying what.

ORIGINAL POST , May 18, 2018:

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

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

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

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

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

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

NEWSWEEK:

* *

THE ECONOMIST:

* *

TIME MAGAZINE

This post first appeared on Russia Insider

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This post first appeared on Russia Insider

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

Hisham Saber John C Carleton • 7 days ago ,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ColMack Hisham Saber • 7 days ago ,

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

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

[Jun 09, 2018] What Goes Around: "Trampling on the Helpless Abroad" Comes Home

Notable quotes:
"... our government's support for Saudi Arabia and Egypt are not exceptions to the rule at all. They are the rule ..."
"... The problem here isn't just liberal hypocrisy and double standards. The deeper issue is that, as the great American iconoclast Mark Twain knew, you cannot maintain democracy at home while conducting an authoritarian empire abroad. ..."
"... "It was impossible," Twain wrote, "to save the Great Republic. She was rotten to the heart. Lust of conquest had long ago done its work; trampling upon the helpless abroad had taught her, by a natural process, to endure with apathy the like at home." ..."
"... "Just a decade after Twain wrote those prophetic words," the historian Alfred W. McCoy has observed , "colonial police methods came home to serve as a template for the creation of an American internal security apparatus in wartime." The nation's first Red Scare, which crushed left and labor movements during and after World War One, drew heavily on the lessons and practices of colonial suppression in the Philippines and Cuba. As McCoy shows in his latest book, In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of US Global Power , ..."
"... "The fetters imposed on liberty at home," James Madison wrote in 1799 , "have ever been forged out of the weapons provided for defense against real, pretended, or imaginary dangers abroad." Those are wise words well worth revisiting amidst the current endless Russiagate madness, calculated among other things to tell us that the FBI, the CIA, and the rest of the nation's vast and ever more ubiquitous intelligence and surveillance state are on our side. ..."
Jun 09, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

A final matter concerns the problem of imperial chickens coming home to roost. Liberals don't like to hear it, but the ugly, richly documented historical fact of the matter is that their party of binary and tribal choice has long joined Republicans in backing and indeed crafting a U.S. foreign policy that has imposed authoritarian regimes (and profoundly undemocratic interventions including invasions and occupations) the world over . The roster of authoritarian and often-mass murderous governments the U.S. military and CIA and allied transnational business interests have backed, sometimes even helped create, with richly bipartisan support, is long indeed.

Last fall, Illinois Green Party leader Mike Whitney ran some fascinating numbers on the 49 nation-states that the right-wing "human rights" organization Freedom House identified as "dictatorships" in 2016. Leaving aside Freedom House's problematic inclusion of Russia, Cuba, and Iran on its list, the most remarkable thing about Whitney's research was his finding that the U.S. offered military assistance to 76 percent of these governments. (The only exceptions were Belarus, China, Central African Republic, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Iran, Myanmar, North Korea, Russia, South Sudan, Sudan, and Syria.). "Most politically aware people," Whitney wrote:

"know of some of the more highly publicized instances examples of [U.S. support for foreign dictatorships], such as the tens of billions of dollars' worth of US military assistance provided to the beheading capital of the world, the misogynistic monarchy of Saudi Arabia, and the repressive military dictatorship now in power in Egypt apologists for our nation's imperialistic foreign policy try to rationalize such support, arguing that Saudi Arabia and Egypt are exceptions to the rule. But my survey demonstrates that our government's support for Saudi Arabia and Egypt are not exceptions to the rule at all. They are the rule ."

The Pentagon and State Department data Whitney used came from Fiscal Year 2015. It dated from the next-to-last year of the Obama administration, for which so many liberals recall with misplaced nostalgia. Freedom House's list should have included Honduras, ruled by a vicious right-wing government that Obama and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton helped install in a June 2009 military coup .

The problem here isn't just liberal hypocrisy and double standards. The deeper issue is that, as the great American iconoclast Mark Twain knew, you cannot maintain democracy at home while conducting an authoritarian empire abroad. During the United States' blood-soaked invasion and occupation of the Philippines, Twain penned an imaginary history of the twentieth-century United States. "It was impossible," Twain wrote, "to save the Great Republic. She was rotten to the heart. Lust of conquest had long ago done its work; trampling upon the helpless abroad had taught her, by a natural process, to endure with apathy the like at home."

"Just a decade after Twain wrote those prophetic words," the historian Alfred W. McCoy has observed , "colonial police methods came home to serve as a template for the creation of an American internal security apparatus in wartime." The nation's first Red Scare, which crushed left and labor movements during and after World War One, drew heavily on the lessons and practices of colonial suppression in the Philippines and Cuba. As McCoy shows in his latest book, In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of US Global Power , the same basic process -- internal U.S. repression informed and shaped by authoritarian and imperial practices abroad and justified by alleged external threats to the "homeland" -- has recurred ever since. Today, the rise of an unprecedented global surveillance state overseen by the National Security Agency has cost the US the trust of many of its top global allies (under Bush43 and Obama44, not just under Trump45) while undermining civil liberties and democracy within as beyond the U.S.

"The fetters imposed on liberty at home," James Madison wrote in 1799 , "have ever been forged out of the weapons provided for defense against real, pretended, or imaginary dangers abroad." Those are wise words well worth revisiting amidst the current endless Russiagate madness, calculated among other things to tell us that the FBI, the CIA, and the rest of the nation's vast and ever more ubiquitous intelligence and surveillance state are on our side.

Help Street keep writing at https://www.paulstreet.org/subscribe/

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Youknowho June 4, 2018 at 11:12 pm

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

'nough said.

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

Nonetheless,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Jun 06, 2018] Neoliberal Economics has a lot of similarities with Theology

Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Carlosthepossum -> innercity leftie , 3 Jun 2018 19:10

Economics has a lot of similarities with Theology.
People can believe whatever interpretation fits with their own indoctrination.
The difference being there is a truth to economics that seems to be invisible to most people, major economists included.
Your post highlights some of the stark realities that people just refuse to accept for some inexplicable reason.
Maybe the better economic managers will come to the rescue or maybe there will be a collective awakening when in a moment of clarity we start to realise how badly we have been conned.

[Jun 06, 2018] What is the "optimum" level of inequality in the society?

Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Janeee -> Jas636 , 3 Jun 2018 21:52

There are many societies that tolerate a certain degree of economic inequality, but still provide decent living conditions, services and infrastructure for most citizens. The notion that we either have extreme inequality or extreme poverty is empirically and morally empty.

[Jun 06, 2018] Where are the rational limits of libertarian vision?

Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Friarbird , 3 Jun 2018 21:42

Further down the thread, 'Weakaspiss' makes a pertinent observation; " government has forgotten they govern for all, and have a primary duty for those who are least able to prosper."

In fact, they've "forgotten" nothing.
Instead, they've fallen for the self-serving blandishments of Libertarian dogma.
Where have I learned of these ?
By reading the posts of GA's resident Libertarians.
The sub-texts of which are wonderfully instructive.

1. Nothing is more important than the individual.
2. And as an individual and a Libertarian, I am infinitely superior to you.
3. Plus I resent paying taxes, which are outright theft.
4. Since I believe, utterly without basis in reality, that taxes levied on hard-working, wonderful freedom-loving ME, sustain the likes of lazy, parasitical YOU.
5. Meanwhile, govt, if it cannot be destroyed, must always be demonised and underfunded. And so-called 'programs of public benefit' for the parasites--like Medicare, or the ABC-- must be sold outright to the private sector.
6. No I don't want to debate about it, if there's a chance I'll lose the argument.
My ego demands I win every time..
7. Certainly not with losers of lower social status, who were 'educated' in a union-run public school.
8. And don't even come near me, losers. Yuk ! You're probably not even white !
9. Because I socialise only within my own tribe, thank you very much.
10. Besides, you're probably living off my taxes.
11. Did I mention taxes somewhere ?
12. Taxes are theft.

Our conservatives have "forgotten" NOTHING.
Instead, they've fallen for a sociopathic ideology which tells them their least attractive impulses are positively praiseworthy.
Hence the nasty, ego-driven tone of current political life.
Injected directly into the bloodstream of our body politic by a Lying Rodent.
Its philosophy may be simply stated

Does your policy shit all over people you never cared for anyway ?
THEN DO IT.

[Jun 06, 2018] PossumBilly

Jun 06, 2018 | profile.theguardian.com

3 Jun 2018 23:25

This message is clear and concise. It is however never going to be heard beyond the 'Guardian'.

The MSM are hardly going to publish this article, nor are they going to reference it, why should they? It goes against everything they have been fighting for and the tin ear of their readership are unwilling to change teir views.

The only thing that they understand is money and the concentration of wealth. This misonception as Dennis So far this has been handed to them on a plate, the taxation system has enabled them to manipulate an multiply their earnings. So much of money the has nothing to do with adding value to this countries economy but is speculative in nature based on financial and overseas instruments.

No is the time for our government to take the lead and start as the Victorian ALP have done and invest in people and jobs on the back of strategic investment. It is a fallacy that governments don't create jobs they, through their policies do just that.

Friends of mine who make a living out of dealing both in stock and wealth creating schemes have no loyalty to this country, they are self motivated and libertarian in persuasion. "Government should get out of the way!" This is nothing short of scandalous.

Unless we stand up for our rights and a civil society that provides adequate provision for fair and balanced policy making,xwe will continue until we will see an implosion. History is littered with examples of revolution based on the kind of inequality we are seeing happen in this country. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

jclucas , 3 Jun 2018 23:25
It is indeed important to make the distinction between the ideology of neoliberalism - the ideology of private enterprise is good, and public spending is bad - and the operational system of crony capitalism - the game of mates played by government and the special interests.

And it is certainly equally important to call out the monumental hypocrisy involved in the government's application of the ideology's set of rules to the powerless and public and the government's application of corrupt practice rules to the special interests.

The system is destroying the egalitarian character of Australia and fanning the flames of nativist authoritarianism here.

But what's even more dangerous is the fundamental dishonesty that the system necessitates, and the alienating influence it has - on top of the growing economic inequality.

The system has destroyed the economic and environmental viability and sustainability of the planet on which human civilization depends.

What is becoming increasingly clear to more and more of the public is that - simple put- the system cannot be allowed to go on as it has been proceeding because it threatens the future of civilization on earth.

Change is imperative now. However, how that will unfold is unclear, as well as, the toll the destruc5turing system will take.

What is clear is that a great restructuring must happen - and soon.

Aldeano , 3 Jun 2018 23:20
The neo liberals are intent on defacing Australia. Their pusstulant tentacles stretch into our classrooms forcing our kids to believe in their god. They tell us that white millionaire farmers deserve refugee status and all the benefits bestowed on poor persecuted minorities. They tell us that the disgustingly rich deserve tax relief. Their's is a world where their children are entitled to safe electoral sets. But they can be defeated and sent to misery. We did it in the Same Sex Marriage fiasco and we can do it to their more insidious behaviours. Write to your local member. Barrage them with emails. Write to their propaganda Letters to the Editor. Donate to GetUp. Keep on keeping on.
Alan Ritchie -> Paul Felix , 3 Jun 2018 23:02
Neoliberalism, the dogma was was sourced from Milton Freidman's Monetarism economic theory. When it morphed into the 'Greed is Good' credo is unclear.
Guess you have to call the disease something, so Neoliberalism it is.
familygardener , 3 Jun 2018 20:37
So anyway.

Is capitalism stuffed?
There is much debate at the moment about which Party has the best economic plan going forward. The Coalition maintains that the best way is by giving large tax breaks to business.
This is currently being called 'Pre GST theory or old style trickle down economics'.
Lenore Taylor writes:
"The investment bank once chaired by Malcolm Turnbull has backed the view that much of the benefit from the Coalition's company tax cuts could flow to offshore investors, as the prime minister insisted his plan was the best way to ensure continued economic growth".
"The domestic benefits would be far bigger if companies used the tax cut to grow their business, but according to Goldman Sachs "survey evidence suggests that companies are less likely to voluntarily lower the dividend payment ratio", in other words, the real-world impact was likely to be closer to the scenario where 60% of the benefit flowed offshore"

https://theaimn.com/day-to-day-politics-is-capitalism-stuffed/

[Jun 06, 2018] "Neoliberalism will literally be the death of democracy." In fact, that was the plan.

Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Friarbird -> 64newc , 3 Jun 2018 17:56

"Neoliberalism will literally be the death of democracy."

In fact, that's the plan.
Openly alluded to by the IPA's Gary Johns;

".... a cardinal tenet of libertarianism is to keep democracy in its place, to regard it as an activity of limited application. Government's role is to depoliticise much of life, to make it less amenable to public dispute....."

From Margo Kingston's 'Not happy, John !' (2005).
Get on to the 'Catallaxy' site.
You'll soon find out what Libertarian sociopaths think of democracy.

Scryboy -> spharks , 3 Jun 2018 17:55
I actually think many people go along with neoliberalism because they perceive it will turn out well for them. It's the every man for himself Darwinian approach to life, but the LNP reflects that view most closely. It's the one where everyone is a welfare scrounger, but if for some reason you end up needing welfare, you deserve it because of all the tax you paid, even though you've been minimising your tax for decades.
64newc , 3 Jun 2018 17:44
Neoliberalism will literally be the death of democracy.

[Jun 06, 2018] The other great con is convincing the public that voting for anyone but the two major parties is "wasting your vote".

Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Purge, 3 Jun 2018 17:46

The other great con is convincing the public that voting for anyone but the two major parties is "wasting your vote". This political duopoly means only those interests are ever represented and that has also led to Australia's systematic decline. Yes it's true that the majors hold majority in parliament but we've already seen that voting below the line can work- Labour had to take notes from the Greens last time they held power. Despite how hopeless it all seems we do still have the power to affect change as long as we- all of us- stop swallowing the lies.
BobsWorth2 , 3 Jun 2018 17:35
The current two party system is like a coin. On one side we have the head of Malcolm Turnbull and on the other Bill Shorten. When it comes to the toss up the corporations and wealthy get to call heads.
BelindaJonas -> Tom Dalyell , 3 Jun 2018 17:30
There is perhaps more honour amongst thieves? Hard to imagine there being less.
B.J.

[Jun 06, 2018] When a country - a majority vote - knowingly, maliciously - and repeatedly - vote for an ideology of hate, exclusion and greed then what do you expect

Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Gekkko , 3 Jun 2018 19:22

When a country - a majority vote - knowingly, maliciously - and repeatedly - vote for an ideology of hate, exclusion and greed then what do you expect.

What did the majority vote not get in 2013 when they elected the Abbott Regime?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VN-hbWVXsyE

What red flags did they miss in that clip?

What did the majority vote actually not understand about the budget of 2014? This budget devastated this country and particularly Australian youth.

When a government turned on its own citizens - A nation of *LIFTERS (1%) and LEANERS (99%) * ( Hockey May 13, 2014) When Abbott very nearly withdrew all government aid to any Australian under 30yo http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-29/tony-abbotts-razor-gang-considered-welfare-ban-for-under-30s/9352888?pfmredir=sm

The LNP IPA have a strategy of pillage and plunder - the transfer of public wealth to the <1% richest and big corporations. They have provided the regulatory context and the ethics and morality that has allowed Australian business, big and small across the board to normalise wage-theft, the non payment of super, unpaid internships and the sort of behaviour commonly seen through the Banking RC.

What does the majority vote not see?

The neoliberal did not con us all - but it is clear that the majority vote is. A vote that has yet to account to all Australians for wrecking this country. A vote that supported the most corrupt government Australia has ever had. Don't think for a moment that that can go without a reckoning.

If you were even peripherally aware of history, you'd know that people subjected to lifelong exploitation, forced into a precarious existence or buried under annually compounding debts will, eventually, wheel guillotines into the town square and start taking names.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/25/see-you-in-the-town-square-peter-dutton-and-pauline-hanson

[Jun 06, 2018] It's apparent that elections can be won by throwing enough resources into well aimed propaganda

Slightly edited Guardian comment...
How many voters even have any idea of what "neoliberalism" is? I would be thinking not many, especially as the Murdoch press don't even use the term in their publications. They might feel the effects , but without any conceptualisation of its underpinning ideas and ideology be less likely to be able to identify policy which reflects neoliberal values. And I'm sure the powers that be like it that way.
Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Alan Ritchie , 3 Jun 2018 21:58

For that last 40 years some variant of neoliberalism has been the predominant dogma. Unfortunately once we moved on from hunter gatherer to an agriculture supported society we lost the connections to each other that existed at the tribal level. That sense of community does not flourish in our eight thousand year experiment with city based civilisation. It seems to only do so during times of disruption and war.

Personally my experience of living in a socially cohesive society was the 30 year period leading up to the reinfestation of the neoliberal curse that started in the 80's with Reagan and Thatcher.

So neoliberalism is the norm, socialism requires more work. We can't take it for granted that society will naturally gravitate towards egalitarianism.

Turnbull and his LNP cohort can openly mock the population with impunity safe in the knowledge that a small but powerful and rich minority, joined by group think and supported by exclusive membership institutions, schools, corporations, have a shared goal of controlling the monetary, economic system and government.

It's apparent that elections can be won by throwing enough resources into well aimed propaganda, (cue Murdoch). Cambridge Analytica was brutally effective at the last elections in the US and UK. Anyone who believes a similar scam won't be tried in Australia is being naive.
So people will still vote against their long term interests and we will likely still get another dose of self inflicted neoliberalism at the next election.

1MadUncle , 3 Jun 2018 21:51
The real problem will be that no where near enough voters will read this article or pieces like it. The Murdoch press for example would never publish it and the content won't be seriously discussed on morning TV. The ABC wouldn't dare mention a word of it.

I don't think it is all doom and gloom. I have 12 grandchildren, some now teenagers. They and their kind are smarter than we give them credit for and they won't put up with the crap we have bequeathed them. They don't get information from main stream media and although their social media contains an enormous amount of rubbish, embedded are real grievances about their lot in life. Soon they will vote. Goodbye and good riddance to the conservatives.

PDGFD1 -> sarkany , 3 Jun 2018 21:39

It is actually just a pan-national oligarchy, where legislatures and media are compromised into acceptance of destructive and unethical policies by Big Money.

Worthy of repetition since I'm not able to give you more than one 'uptick'.

In this instance, I very much suspect it will be the staggering load put on the natural environment that will spin the current "Eternal Empires" "down the sinkhole of history".
Sadly for everyone and everything else.

nogapsallowed , 3 Jun 2018 21:26
Neoliberalism wins by manipulating public distraction. The so-called reality shows of mainstream media are the furthest flight imaginable from lived experience, and even the serious news outlets succumb to the Peyton Place of Barnaby's baby and a disappeared Melania Trump. All of which makes a considered analysis such as the one republished here such a notable exception.
BlackAbbott -> familygardener , 3 Jun 2018 21:22
That man has the real meaning of neoliberalism. Neoliberal way is not incompatible with unions, wages, social services or governments that protect their citizens.


His way there should be no division and no angst of politics. Maybe that's where the problem is/ His way is not the way of modern politics and greed. Being rich does not mean being greedy. But that is what modern neoliberam with its free markets mantra have come to be seen as.

My Grandfather and Great Grandfather, would see this man as being correct with a very good attitude. He would see Wall St and many financial businesses as greedy and managed by bullies and tyrants.

[Jun 06, 2018] And everyone knows that the "trickle down" effect does not work but don't let this truth stand in the way of the neoliberals stampeding to the trough

Yep, this is a new form of crony capitalism.
Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

shirleytemple -> incompatible , 3 Jun 2018 18:03

And everyone knows that the "trickle down" effect does not work but don't let this truth stand in the way of the neoliberals stampeding to the trough.
incompatible , 3 Jun 2018 17:56
Since the 1980s, free markets have been promoted as the best way to generate wealth (which may be true) and the best way to help everyone in society since there will be more wealth to go around. That has turned out not to work so well, since the wealth doesn't "trickle down", but instead concentrates in fewer and fewer hands.
NickThiwerspoon , 3 Jun 2018 17:54
An excellent analysis. Neo-liberalism is a mechanism which transfers money from the poor to the rich. Far from "trickle down" it is in fact "siphon up".
BelindaJonas -> Colin Connelly , 3 Jun 2018 17:29
Therein lies the crux - to some folk (most, I would hesitate) money is a means of survival.
To others, (those obsessed with it) it's the source of power. Ergo, of course you can have too much money, since it is physically impossible to spend it. But at the same time, you cannot, if so compelled, have too much power.
Put simply, it is unadulterated GREED. An addiction, if you like.
And for that, there is no cure.
B.J.
morgey -> The Hope , 3 Jun 2018 18:02
'Aspiring to become rich' is the most vapid of all aspirations.
francis nongham , 3 Jun 2018 18:00
Privatization is one method of stealing the people's assessts and giving it to the wealthy through ownership of shares. The Lieberals talk of mum & dad investors yet 98% of Australian shares are owned by the wealthiest 1%
Rob Robinson , 3 Jun 2018 17:59
There are so many who believe they will benifit from these ideologies , that they reinforce those who promote them . They simply don't realise they are not part of the equation , and any benifit gained by them is simply incidental. The target recipients have always been the Corporate bodies and those with their finger in the pie . Not once , to my recollection, has the Australian people , in general terms , benifited from the sale of public companies , banks or infrastructure .
ramAustralia , 3 Jun 2018 17:56
Brilliant article, hits the nail on the head! Australia really did go "off the tracks" with the regime of John "Mugabe" Howard with a system of patronage, corruption, and systemic bribery which gave us a third world government. Like other "mineral resource rich, failed states" the nation's wealth has been mostly stolen.

[Jun 06, 2018] Seven signs of the neoliberal apocalypse Page 3 of 10 Discussion The Guardian

Jun 06, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

BlackAbbott -> ID2778880 , 27 Apr 2018 04:31

It's not about money. Ultimately, it's not even about the financial system.


But it is about money and about the financial system.
Neo-liberals see things as a dollar value only nothing else is of value. The fact that Macro economics is a social science is discarded and Micro-economics covers all that is of value. The financial system is critical because it is based on lies publicly. This is one of the reasons that power may indeed be defining. But the reason behind it is the lies of finance. The key ones being tax does not fund government and banks create instant money when they give a loan. The repayments cancel the money creation they do not get collected and put out as new loans. Like wise when the federal government spends it also creates new money and drains ot away by tax which destroys it. The federal government cannot save for a rainy day. Another financial one that needs dumping is the lie that a surplus is good. It is not. So yes finance is critical Power is a symptom of the lies. Not the cause.
As soon as they reality is accepted the whole driving force of neo-liberalism falls to bits. It is exposed. Its reason to sell assets vanishes (federally) The passing of costs to the states shows as political crap.
ID2778880 -> BlackAbbott , 27 Apr 2018 04:16
It's not about money. Ultimately, it's not even about the financial system. The real showdown will start with the fight over energy and resources.

Tightening energy and resource supply, associated with environmental degradation to obtain those resources and a still increasing world population will be the death of neo-liberalism. But in my view, it is unlikely to be replaced by Communism.

Laurence Bury , 27 Apr 2018 04:20
We would have to look back to before the OPEC oil shocks of the early 1970s and the emergence of the Asian Tigers to see a different model of capitalism dependent on the West having a competitive industrial base with mass employment therein.
Hence, it is Varoufakis who is an old skool, radical chic of precisely this era and the sub-concept of neoliberalism is only of use to neo-Marxists like himself. Perhaps he can go and govern class relations (or foment their conflict) in apparently thriving Australian industry however?
MuzzaC -> curiouswes , 27 Apr 2018 04:11

I believe fraud and corruption caused the great depression.

But this is a part of the myth of the free market. If a market is truly free, those with enough money will always be able to influence the market for their own benefit. As soon as this happens the market fails in its chief function of efficiently allocating scarce resources. That's why there are regulators and anti-monopoly legislation, etc. etc. We pay billions each year to keep capitalism from eating itself.

Self-serving behaviour is only corruption if it is illegal, otherwise it's called business. It is regulation that makes it illegal, which is why we need strong, democratic control.

So saying that the GD was caused by corruption is the same as saying that free-market capitalism got out of control of democratic regulation. Same thing, different name.

AdelaideRose , 27 Apr 2018 04:10
The end of neoliberalism can't come soon enough for me. People and communities have been destroyed for the benefit of a few who don't care about anything other than their own wealth and power. Time to give the power to the people.
curiouswes -> Powerspike , 27 Apr 2018 03:24

THIS is "neo-liberalism"

not to me; I think you have a conglomerate of ideas and policies, some of which I'd categorize as neoliberal, but things like "extreme individualism" have nothing to do with neo liberalism per se.

I think if you give too much power to the state, you'll wind up with authoritarianism. maybe that doesn't concern you, maybe it does. I believe in the concept of labor unions. However I also believe in freedom. It may not be in our long term interest to give up freedom for the sake of a better economic prospect today.

HauntedTupperware , 27 Apr 2018 03:18
It's not going to happen Van. Unfortunately, this is a globally integrated system, which dwarfs the power of national politics and national economies, with maybe the exception of the US, and look what's going on in the US. Donald Trump is the president. I mean, what does that say about the United States, that they've elected a leader like Trump? How does the saying go, "Cometh the hour, cometh the man?" I guess they must have a death wish, unfortunately, they're going to take mos of the world's population with them. I'm not necessarily a pessimist, but I think a rational analysis leads to the conclusion, that we're doomed.
vanbadham -> discuz , 27 Apr 2018 03:13
The neoliberals in the West - unlike, disgustingly, those in South America - won hegemony because they did as Gramsci and Dutschke advised the left; they made "a long march through the institutions". Journalists, histoIran's, philosophers and academics were as necessary to the movement as economists and politicians. It was what enabled them to win elections. As the man said - "from the prophets, deserts come."
woddles -> curiouswes , 27 Apr 2018 03:13
So, no point?
Marxism was a suggested response to rampant capitalism where only the very few at the top benefited from the toil of all others.
I would have thought it was obvious. Or maybe you don't understand Marxism?
TWOBOBS -> AndyPe , 27 Apr 2018 03:10
I would suggest you're not on the bottom of the pile either, if you are reading the Guardian and commenting on a computer or an iPhone. The reality is, capitalism has seen the halving of world poverty levels over the last 30 years, and poverty continues to fall. Are there serious problems with inequality in the west, and the world generally? Yes. Capitalism needs to evolve. Better tax regimes and systems for wealth redistribution are needed. Communism is not the answer.
nogapsallowed , 27 Apr 2018 03:01
Every political party is a "collective" of sorts. But as far as I can scan the wasteland of Australian politics, I can't find any that is shining a path towards "freedom and enjoyment."

We need to reconceive politics just as we must the banks, churches and other terminally infected institutions of our time.

Ramsterbigboy -> Kinxil , 27 Apr 2018 02:58
"but let's stop being full anti elite, neo liberalism allowed several, unfortunately not all, of us, to feel a bit special."

That is not Van's or the Guardian's way.

Van how many "people hate it"? have you counted them by any chance?

Powerspike , 27 Apr 2018 02:52
Neo liberal practices i.e. their 1% stranglehold on the economy, their ideology of winner take all, etc are incompatible with a modern nation state, with civilised values, and with a harmonious society.
They are destroying the state and society.
BlackAbbott -> curiouswes , 27 Apr 2018 02:52

Unfortunately many don't care about truth.


And that is the reason we have neo-liberalism. The truth is not seen.
Awabakali , 27 Apr 2018 02:51
The simplest and most apposite critique of unbridled Capitalism is that is ideologically bound to the notion that consuming is good, increased production and use of finite resources is good, cheap labour is good, tax is bad, and sharing is bad...and that if Capitalism continues apace in its present form it will lead to the total pollution of the earth, the disappearance of all wild animals and plants, the end of bees and pollination, the rise of rampant diseases uncontrolled by drugs that are not affordable to the world's poor, and the eventual extinction of humans. Capitalism is not only dangerous, it is myopically spectacularly insane. Psychology demonstrates that humans have 3 classic responses to a crisis:

1.Denial
2.Fantasy
3.Acceptance of reality and action


1980's Denial phase: "It is exaggerated by mad greenies and ain't happening."

1990's Fantasy phase: "Recycling and prayer will fix it all."

2018 Reality and Action phase: "We are in deep shit....literally...and we need radical immediate action by governments, corporations, educational institutions and individuals to save the planet and us. Want your great grandkids to be alive in 2080? Then get out there shouting....TODAY!!!!!

Kinxil , 27 Apr 2018 02:49
"People hate it". That kind of sentence which make you consider closing the tab. Your point is sensible, neoliberalism has generated lot of bothering issues, but if it didn't exist, I wouldn't have an affordable car and computer, and I wouldn't have a giant amount of choice for goods to consider. It's time it ends, or rather rethink itself, but let's stop being full anti elite, neo liberalism allowed several, unfortunately not all, of us, to feel a bit special.
TWOBOBS -> jungney , 27 Apr 2018 02:38

No-one group or class is but collective action will create a far brighter and healthier future than the current regime of every woman for herself.

There is nothing stopping people now getting together into cooperatives/collectives/communes to start businesses, buy homes, job share.

[Jun 06, 2018] Is fascism a logical next stage of the collapse of neoliberalism, like hapened in Waimar before?

Jun 06, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

quintal -> Alpo88 , 3 Jun 2018 15:56

Hi Alpo

Fascism is the word that most interests me when looking a the present trajectory in Australia

We're not there yet

And there's no one on the government benches who's a new Hitler or Stalin or Mussolini

But the next generation ..............

They make me uncomfortable. Some of the younger and as yet unheralded apparatchiks on the conservative fringe worry me. They're smart. Know the advertising and selling the message strategies. Have money and are well connected to the barons/oligarchs who pull the strings and they're ambitious.

Paradoxically a collapse of the Liberal Party will help them. In spite of it all we need a fiscally conservative, slightly socially conservative political movement in Australia but the drift to extremism is quite pronounced and profoundly worrying, especially in a time where climate change poses existential questions about our future.

This next election will not be a cakewalk. It'll be as bitterly fought as any in a generation and the consequences of a loss will be, for progressive forces, catastrophic.

cheers

Alpo88 , 3 Jun 2018 14:58
"Although people with low expectations are easier to con, fomenting cynicism about democracy comes at a long-term cost. Indeed, as the current crop of politicians is beginning to discover, people with low expectations feel they have nothing to lose."..... Yes, but that's part of the Devilish Plan: Why do you think that the Neoliberals and Conservatives spend so much time nurturing their relationship with both Police and the Army?.... They want to be sure that if their Neoliberal-Conservative project goes truly belly up, they will be the ones holding the guns.

Yes, it's sinister.... it's dangerous.... it's a time bomb, and we can only defuse it with the help of a majority of Australians waking up, standing up and Democratically vote against Fascism.

[Jun 06, 2018] The divisive societal aspects of free market fundamentalism

Jun 06, 2018 | profile.theguardian.com

AsDusty, 3 Jun 2018 17:43

Half the population prefers a politics that is racist and unethical, that demonises the poor and idolises the rich, that eschews community and embraces amoral individuality. These people don't care about the economic inconsistencies of neo-liberalism, they are far more attracted to the divisive societal aspects of free market fundamentalism.

[Jun 06, 2018] Stigmatization of poor as the way to justify and increase inequality

Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

ellaquint , 3 Jun 2018 19:35

Like Joe Hockey, Rinehart saw the problem of inequality as having more to do with the character of the poor than with the rules of the game:

They don't "see" it this way. They just say they see it this way to perpetuate that inequality. They know that their wealth depends on the labour of the other 95-99%.

To keep us all working and voting for their lackeys, they make promises of wealth if you are a persistent hard worker, never mentioning that the entire game depends on only a tiny minority ever reaching the top. No, the real people holding them back are those who don't work hard. Who don't contribute to the game. They're the ones to blame for why you're not levelling up. The true scapegoats.

It's one giant con and they know it.

[Jun 06, 2018] Victim blaming is a classic neo-con tactic, they seek to deflect from the impact of their heartless policies by demonising the victims, from the unemployed and those stuck in the welfare cycle to refugees trapped in offshore detention, indefinitely .

Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

reinhardpolley , 3 Jun 2018 17:18

Victim blaming is a classic neo-con tactic, they seek to deflect from the impact of their heartless policies by demonising the victims, from the unemployed and those stuck in the welfare cycle to refugees trapped in offshore detention, indefinitely . We've all seen how appalling their commentary can get, from Abbott and Hockey's "lifters and leaners" to Gina Mineheart's "two dollars a day" & "spend less time drinking or smoking and socialising" they show just how out touch they are. They honestly believe that people can lift themselves out of poverty if only they "spent more time working", ignoring the fact that many are working two jobs just to stay ahead.
Seems that on planet RWNJ there are more than 24 hours in a day..
OrwelHasNothingOnLNP -> w roberts , 3 Jun 2018 17:00
Half the population need welfare to survive.
1% have 90% of all the toys in the sandpit and won't share. They feel that they are entitled to all the toys.

[Jun 06, 2018] Neoliberalism idealises competition against each other to ensure the rights of the few, by suppressing our capacity to take responsibility together through cooperation and collaboration with each other.

Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

maven501 , 3 Jun 2018 22:54

This piece is well worth the reading particularly in light of the trashing of society's values we see played out in Trump's America. However, the writer's definition of "ideology " as a "system of ideas and ideals" even though it accords with the OED's, fails to take into account the current pernicious influence of the ideologue who distorts "ideology" into the "rationalisation of a suppression" as Joseph Dunne noted in his book, " Back to the Rough Ground" .

This is the most apt description of the modus operandi of today's neoliberalists - the justifying of their project to maximise wealth accumulation in their own self-interest by promoting the propaganda that we are powerless cogs in the machine of the economy , slaves to the whim of the omnipotent market, rather than active agents who wish to contribute to a flourishing society .

Neoliberalism idealises competition against each other to ensure the rights of the few, by suppressing our capacity to take responsibility together through cooperation and collaboration with each other.

This classic divide and conquer tactic will prevail only as long as we permit it.

Time to take a stand and be counted.

[Jun 06, 2018] The neoliberal mantra that "markets are always right" is just rubbish.

Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

DickTyger , 27 Apr 2018 00:27

I'm a conservative and I have an good economics degree. I have to say though that I don't understand neoliberalism at all.

As a example, when I was doing economics it was made very clear to me that natural monopolies (such as electricity and water) cannot be made into a competitive market (rather like trying to put lipstick on a pig). Similarly oligopolies introduce opportunities for price manipulation (e.g. the banks). The neoliberal mantra that "markets are always right" is just rubbish. Markets work well only when certain criteria are met.

Secondly, the right of workers to collectively bargain is fundamental to a well functioning market economy. Labour is one of the inputs to production and the workers have a right to a proper return on their labour. Individual workers have no real bargaining power and can only act collectively through unions.

Finally, the related casualisation of the workforce is a disaster for workers and the long-term interests of the economy. The stagnation of wages (and inflation) is one of the products of this strong trend to casualisation (my blood boils when I hear of examples of wage theft affecting vulnerable workers).

Income inequality is a product of a capitalist system. However, when the distribution of wealth becomes very badly skewed (such as in the USA) then the political system starts to break down. Trump was a beneficiary of this flawed income distribution. All Hillary Clinton was promising was "more of the same". In short, Bernie Sanders was right.

Walter Schadel, in his book, The Great Leveler (see below), points to the role of income inequality in driving revolutions and disruptions. There are lessons in this book for our current crop of politicians both on the left and the right.

https://press.princeton.edu/titles/10921.html

[Jun 06, 2018] Privatization as a "big con"

Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Beekeeper49 , 3 Jun 2018 19:32

Wow! Richard Denniss says it like it is, neatly summing up "the big con".

I believe Australia is being sold from under our feet. The big asset-strip is on. Why are we not benefiting from the mining boom? The answer lies in the way Rinehart companies and others like hers have been permitted to use Singapore or other low-taxing countries to minimise taxes. That these large companies should have the gall to demand large tax cuts as well is preposterous.

When headlines indulge in fear-mongering about China, why is angst directed at Dastyari for taking a relatively small donation, whilst at the same time the Australian government has approved a joint purchase of large swathes of the Australian outback by Rinehart and Chinese interests? Have we already forgotten the Darwin port deal? Why were Robb, Bishop and the Liberal Party allowed to benefit from deals or large donations from "Chinese interests"? Yet Bob Carr is being slammed for trying over many years to develop a more harmonious relationship with China?

Australians have told federal and state governments that they hate privatisation. Not content with selling off profitable businesses such as Medibank Private, the Liberal/National Party federal government is privatising its services. Detention centres and prisons acted as a stalking-horse for the creeping privatisation of jobs. Politicians assume most voters don't notice or care when government jobs in those sectors are privatised, but other government departments are following suit.

By permitting the Future Fund and superannuation funds to invest in tax havens, the federal government has opened the door to a growing trend. If my super fund uses the Cayman Island tax haven, it is easier to justify everyone else from the PM down to evade Australian taxes as well. More insidiously, tax havens make it easier to cheat creditors in bankruptcy cases, launder dirty money, break trade sanctions and much more. We aren't even aware of how these may be playing out behind closed doors in our name. The problem with allowing Rinehart to use Singapore or Turnbull to use the Cayman Island is that other companies and individuals will increasingly Do so, and in the end, everyone is doing it. And when will we take note of cryptocurrencies and how they can act like tax havens?

Our participation in wars not of our own making is also having dire results. Think of all the money spent and lives of servicemen destroyed by serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. Imagine if that money had instead been invested wisely in defence capabilities. And yet there we are, interfering in the South China Sea, trying to provoke China at Trump's behest, and it is not clear whether the Phillipines wants us there now anyway. And all the while, the cost of our participation in war games is crippling our ability to acquire defence assets, making us more reliant on the US.

The banking enquiry has only scratched the surface of how voters are being ripped off with impunity. There are growing demands that the superannuation industry, in particular retail funds, be subject to greater transparency and regulation. Yet Turnbull, Cash and colleagues prefer to direct their scorn at industry funds, simply because they are controlled by workers, via their unions.

We can sense "the big con" is all around us. We can almost smell it, so pungent is the air of exploitation, corruption and fraud. Hopefully Denniss will join others in focussing us more clearly on how we are being cheated of our birthright.

[Jun 06, 2018] Inverted totalitarism described by a Guardia commenter

Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Bearmuchly, 3 Jun 2018 16:37

Despite the huge changes in communication in the last several decades and the ever increasing levels of education in our society, politics have failed to engage the vast majority and that cohort of the cynical, the alienated, the disinterested, the lazy, the simply care less continues to grow.

In the last decade the only cause that evoked passion and engaged a larger number, finally forcing our elected members to act was same sex marriage .....a crescendo that took years to generate.

With the complicity of our media and the decline of that part of education that teaches analysis, social psychology and political philosophy (let alone teaches about basic political structures and mechanisms) our level of disengagement from the political process appears to be at an all time high. The performance of our legislators has become increasingly unaccountable and purely self interested .... we have re-created the "political class" of pre-war times where alienation was based on a lack of education and awareness and a sense of inferiority and powerlessness DESPITE our vastly improved communication, access to information and educational standards (not to mention affluence).

Basically, we have "dumbed down" to the extent where passion and ideology in politics is now the preserve of fewer and fewer. In a democracy this trend is of massive concern and a threat to its sustainability.... it also completely suits those that are focused on concentrating power and wealth... the more that don't give a toss the less likely you are to be encumbered by limitations, social considerations, ethics and morality.

Until we re-engage far larger numbers into the political process, raise the levels of awareness of political thought and choices, stop dumbing down and re-inject some broader passion and participation into our political processes then vested interests will continue to dominate.....and democracy will become increasingly undemocratic !

[Jun 06, 2018] The magic of Neoliberalism is to transform acts that should be illegal into legal ones

Notable quotes:
"... The magic of Neoliberalism is to transform acts that should be illegal into legal ones. In fact they do so explicitly as their argument for reducing taxation is exactly that of getting rid or decreasing the problem of illegal tax evasion.... so they say. Their problem is that we have no evidence that tax evasion decreases under Neoliberalism on top of the legal tax minimisation already provided. The only thing that happens under Neoliberalism is that the Tax Office tends to be under-resourced and everybody likes to conveniently look somewhere else. ..."
Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Alpo88 -> DesignConstruct , 3 Jun 2018 17:20

A "legal system of tax evasion", written like that, in quotes, is obviously a metaphor with an intended sarcasm. Clearly, logically, if a taxation system is legal, by using it you are not "evading" taxes, which is an illegal act.... Anyway, everybody seems to have understood my intention but you. Well, now you also know.

The magic of Neoliberalism is to transform acts that should be illegal into legal ones. In fact they do so explicitly as their argument for reducing taxation is exactly that of getting rid or decreasing the problem of illegal tax evasion.... so they say. Their problem is that we have no evidence that tax evasion decreases under Neoliberalism on top of the legal tax minimisation already provided. The only thing that happens under Neoliberalism is that the Tax Office tends to be under-resourced and everybody likes to conveniently look somewhere else.

DesignConstruct -> Alpo88 , 3 Jun 2018 16:52
A "legal system of tax evasion" is a non sequitur, what they have done is create a set of tax laws that enable more opportunities for tax avoidance by the well off, and Kerry very correctly took advantage of it. If you can, get a copy of the Senate hearing - it's gold.
Splatgadget -> NME765 , 3 Jun 2018 16:51
Agreed, but I'll raise you Kleptocracy.

[Jun 06, 2018] Friarbird

Jun 06, 2018 | profile.theguardian.com

3 Jun 2018 20:42

Coded language:
or,
how we bade farewell to publicly-owned electricity.

Part 1

The perceptions of George Orwell seem as valid now as then
Since he dealt with sly deceptions of tyrannical men
So 'Orwellian language', though imprinted on a page
Now has impacts universal, which resound in every age
And in ours, language functions like a fingerprint-free glove
To absolve of guilt the guilty as, imposed from up above,
Has come theft of public assets, for the benefit of those
To whom money by the truckload only ever upward flows.

By subversion of our usage may such larceny be won
And I speak as a Victorian, so know how it is done.
It begins when greedy forces, with a nose for seeking rent
Need to seize and reshape language to conceal true intent
So collusion is essential, 'twixt such forces and the man
Who will slake their gross desires. He's a poll-i-tish-i-an
It is he who'll grasp the nettle, perform tasks of Hercules
Telling punters it is raining, while upon their backs he pees

Yet his task is mitigated. Because, what should hove in sight,
But the money-driven think-tanks of the predatory Right
Which have spent long hours fixated by their loathing of the State
So won't even wipe their bottoms, unless at an outsourced rate.
Now the think-tanks wunderkinden turn to '1984'
Where they find therein a tactic once employed in days of yore
It's to pick out words and phrases from contemporary use
Then submit their basic meanings to an arse-about abuse

Yet an overarching irony attends this tour de force
Since there's precedents in stating that a cart is now a horse.
For who bastardised a language, drawing from their bag of tricks ?
It was Stalin and Vyshinsky, back in 1936
O the horror ! O the shamefullness ! That, Sons Of Liberty
Must resort to basing tactics on the Kremlin's tyranny !
It's a classic situation when rent-seeking runs amuck
But there's easy money looming, so who gives a flying f**k ?

So consumers are persuaded, via mantra-laden talk
That they come before big shareholders in London or New York
Thus, a host of euphemisms sugar-coat the bitter pill
To the melodies seductive of a loudly-ringing till
Hark to incantantions joyous and of outcomes bound to please !
'Competition', 'lower prices', 'market-based efficiencies'!
(Though their very warmth and fuzziness will reinforce the fact
They've dragooned the highest language to describe the lowest act.)

Part 2 to follow........

[Jun 06, 2018] Marx was keenly aware of capitalism's ability to innovate and adapt. But he also knew that capitalist expansion was not eternally sustainable.

Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Helicalgroove -> RangerX , 3 Jun 2018 17:03

"Karl Marx exposed the peculiar dynamics of capitalism, or what he called "the bourgeois mode of production." He foresaw that capitalism had built within it the seeds of its own destruction. He knew that reigning ideologies -- think neoliberalism -- were created to serve the interests of the elites and in particular the economic elites, since "the class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production" and "the ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships the relationships which make one class the ruling one." He saw that there would come a day when capitalism would exhaust its potential and collapse. He did not know when that day would come. Marx, as Meghnad Desai wrote, was "an astronomer of history, not an astrologer." Marx was keenly aware of capitalism's ability to innovate and adapt. But he also knew that capitalist expansion was not eternally sustainable. And as we witness the denouement of capitalism and the disintegration of globalism, Karl Marx is vindicated as capitalism's most prescient and important critic."

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/karl-marx-was-right-2 /

[Jun 06, 2018] Nationalism is a decision-making tool as it always poses a question; what is good for this country ?

This is not true: this question "what is good for the country" very soon mutates to "what is good for nationalists"
Jun 06, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

DesignConstruct -> quintal , 3 Jun 2018 17:39

We need a Nationalist government, which will automatically see itself as the mortal enemy of the primary Internationalist (there used to be a song about that) force in the world today, and which affects us greatly in terms of resource exploitation: Globalisation, or what we used to call 'multi national corporations' or 'international capital'.

Nationalism is a decision-making tool as it always poses a question; what is good for this country ?

DesignConstruct -> Alpo88 , 3 Jun 2018 17:24
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/we-need-real-leadership-and-real-democracy-from-our-politicians/news-story/f37a3a3951aa78df86892c71166fdbb5

When/if he mentions de-Globalisation, an Aus-Indonesian defence alliance, citizen initiated referenda, and a Constitutional ban on donations and parties , then people may listen, however he cannot be accused of being too imaginative or bright. He is however advocating authoritarianism not fascism.

quintal -> DesignConstruct , 3 Jun 2018 17:16
Hi DC

I halfway agree

We're not there yet

But .......

Fascism doesn't require a state sanctioned religion or suppression of religion

That said the Catholicism/fundamentalist Christian bent of the present cabinet and the demonisation of any green beliefs is uncomfortably close to what you describe

And the nexus between big business and govern, the destruction of public institutions, the reduction in the capacity of media to report truth and the vitriolic attacks on opponenents are straws in an ill wind

Cheets

Alpo88 -> DesignConstruct , 3 Jun 2018 17:11
You are right, it's not "fascismmmmmmmmmmmmmm".... it's Fascism. Which brings back to my memory what Tom Elliott (the son of Liberal Party former president John Elliott) wrote in the Herald Sun on 6 February 2015: "It's time we temporarily suspended the democratic process and installed a benign dictatorship to make tough but necessary decisions."

[Jun 05, 2018] The USA fear about Russia and the EU member states seems to be twofold: (1) more trade with Russia makes subjugation of Russia impossible; (2) more trade with Russia, and the railway connections with China, threaten to turn the USA into an economic backwater

Notable quotes:
"... Just yesterday Pieter Hoekstra, USA ambassador in the Netherlands, stated that Russia should be punished for MH17 by more sanctions, no new gas pipeline from Russia to Germany. What he did not say that this implies our buying of USA gas, 20% more expensive. The MH17 show, in my opinion is run like the Sept 11 show. Or even the holocaust show, constant reminders. ..."
"... The USA fear about Russia and the EU member states seems to be twofold: (1) more trade with Russia makes subjugation of Russia impossible; (2) more trade with Russia, and the railway connections with China, threaten to turn the USA into an economic backwater ..."
Jun 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

jilles dykstra , June 5, 2018 at 7:42 am GMT

Antony C. Sutton, ´Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution', 1974 New Rochelle, N.Y. describes how Wall Street supported bolshevism in order to prevent that German, suppose also Dutch and other, trade, with Russia was resumed.

WWII and the aftermath created the Atlantic alliance.

Just yesterday Pieter Hoekstra, USA ambassador in the Netherlands, stated that Russia should be punished for MH17 by more sanctions, no new gas pipeline from Russia to Germany. What he did not say that this implies our buying of USA gas, 20% more expensive. The MH17 show, in my opinion is run like the Sept 11 show. Or even the holocaust show, constant reminders.

The USA fear about Russia and the EU member states seems to be twofold: (1) more trade with Russia makes subjugation of Russia impossible; (2) more trade with Russia, and the railway connections with China, threaten to turn the USA into an economic backwater

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

* * *

MH17

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

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

* * *

North Korea

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

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

* * *

Crimea

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

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

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

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

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

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

Vote Patrick Little today CA

and f*ck Soros!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Lord Jacob Rothchild HATES Putin. Just look at the Yukos Oil case in the London courts. Try to find (keeps getting scrubbed) online The Sunday Times article from November 2, 2003 "Rothschild is the New Power Behind Yukos" for a rare glimpse behind the curtain. Vladimir Vladimirovich took back for the state Ł8,000,000,000 of shares, thought to be the property of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, but actually it emerged were controlled by Lord Rothschild. This is just one Rothchild-1990s-theft-repatriated that we know of. There would be more i suspect.

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

I will give him this, he named the problem

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

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

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

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

Fixed it for you.

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

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

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

Hey shitty Bukowski:

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

1. owned, or

2. managed, or

3. very disproportionately staffed,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

https://youtu.be/35_ztrvvlik

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Respect.

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

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

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

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

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

Edit: Actually should've said Cassius

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

"Putin laughs in face of journalists."

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

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

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

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

[Jun 05, 2018] Russophob claims: Russia has long been a colonial power. It simply expanded into its near abroad and has remained an empire in spite of the dissolution of the Tsarist/Soviet empire

Jun 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

Quartermaster

Another column by Girardi disconnected from reality and full of his bête noir, the neocons.

Russia has long been a colonial power. It simply expanded into its near abroad and has remained an empire in spite of the dissolution of the Tsarist/Soviet empire. Putin is just another thug that has imperial desires and is willing to steal his people blind to realize them. As a result, corruption runs rampant and the oligarchs enrich themselves at the expense of the Russian people who have, historically, simply been sheep.

I haven't seen any hatred that Giraldi imagines, but I have seen fear in Putin's neighbors, and concern in those who aren't nearby who hate to see people oppressed by thugs like Putin. Putin has invaded Ukraine, stealing the Crimea, and attempting to gain a land bridge by backing a fake revolt in the Donbas with Russian troops, mercenaries, and equipment.

Russian troops shot down MH-17. deal with it.

Curmudgeon , June 5, 2018 at 3:23 pm GMT

Putin is just another thug that has imperial desires and is willing to steal his people blind to realize them.

Other than reliable sources like John Brennan, James Clapper, the New York Times and the Washington Post , I presume you have evidence to share of this

Putin has invaded Ukraine,

and this.

stealing the Crimea

Two referenda are "stealing"?

a fake revolt in the Donbas with Russian troops, mercenaries, and equipment.

Well, the dead people in Donbas, and their families, would probably disagree it was fake, particularly since the victim of the US coup d'etat (with its mercenaries) and rightful President of Ukraine, Victor Yanukovich, was from Donbas. As for the allegations of Russian troops and equipment, I return to my request for evidence.

Russian troops shot down MH-17. deal with it.

... ... ...

[Jun 05, 2018] Seven signs of the neoliberal apocalypse Van Badham Opinion The Guardian

Jun 05, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

For 40 years, the ideology popularly known as "neoliberalism" has dominated political decision-making in the English-speaking west.

People hate it . Neoliberalism's sale of state assets, offshored jobs, stripped services, poorly-invested infrastructure and armies of the forcibly unemployed have delivered, not promised "efficiency" and "flexibility" to communities, but discomfort and misery. The wealth of a few has now swelled to a level of conspicuousness that must politely be considered vulgar yet the philosophy's entrenched itself so deeply in how governments make decisions and allocate resources that one of its megaphones once declared its triumph "the end of history".

ss="rich-link"> Australia needs tough cop to fight wage theft, Sally McManus says Read more

It wasn't, as even he admitted later . And given some of the events of the contemporary political moment, it's possible to conclude from auguries like smoke rising from a garbage fire and patterns of political blood upon the floor that history may be hastening neoliberalism towards an end that its advocates did not forecast.

Three years ago, I remarked that comedian Russell Brand may have stumbled onto a stirring spirit of the times when his "capitalism sucks" contemplations drew stadium-sized crowds. Beyond Brand – politically and materially – the crowds have only been growing.

Is the political zeitgeist an old spectre up for some new haunting? Or are the times more like a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, "the combination of inequality and low wage growth is fuelling discontent. Time to sing a new song."

In days gone past, they used to slice open an animal's belly and study the shape of its spilled entrails to find out. But we could just keep an eye on the news.

Here are my seven signs of the neoliberal apocalypse:

1. Girl crushes on Sally McManus

The first sign appears with the noise of thunder – personalised in the form of ACTU secretary, Sally McManus, and the trade union movement revival. No Australian of my own generation or younger would likely possess any cultural memory of a trade union leader as hero – let alone one whose packed-to-the-rafters appearance at Melbourne's Town Hall last week brought with it chants and pennants, t-shirts and cheers a column of selfie-hunters. "We want to see an end to neoliberalism!" she roared to wild applause in the barnstorming style that's drawing similar crowds across the country. You had to feel sorry for conservative commentator Janet Albrechtsen, who rode in to defend business-as-usual in a column entitled "I have to admit a slight girl-crush on ACTU boss Sally McManus". "She's really not my type," McManus retorted . Burnnnn.

Sally McManus (@sallymcmanus)

She's really not my type. pic.twitter.com/7aA1T6hab5

April 17, 2018
2. Yanis Varoufakis praises the Communist Manifesto

The second bears a great sword – and that's the dashing former finance minister of Greece, Yanis Varoufakis. As a scion of very modern political pedigree, he's an extraordinary (brilliant) choice to pen the new introduction to a re-released Marx and Engels' Communist Manifesto . A revolutionary provocation considered so incendiary it was banned on its 1848 publication, the book only achieved distribution when its entry into court documents as evidence of sedition legally enabled it to be printed again. Varoufakis's praise of it in his introduction is no less provocative; he sees the book as a work of prediction. "We cannot end this idiocy individually," he writes of our present capitalist iteration, "because no market can ever emerge that will provide an antidote to this stupidity. Collective, democratic political action is our only chance for freedom and enjoyment."

Sign up to receive the latest Australian opinion pieces every weekday

https://www.theguardian.com/email/form/plaintone/4160

3. Paul Keating's rejection

It was a year ago that a third sign first appeared, when the dark horse of Australian prime ministers, Paul Keating, made public an on-balance rejection of neoliberal economics. Although Liberal PM Malcolm Fraser instigated Australia's first neoliberal policies, it was Keating's architecture of privatisation and deregulation as a Labor treasurer and prime minister that's most well remembered. Now, "we have a comatose world economy held together by debt and central bank money," Keating has said, "Liberal economics has run into a dead end and has had no answer to the contemporary malaise." What does the disavowal mean? In terms of his Labor heir Bill Shorten's growing appetite for redistributive taxation and close relationship to the union movement, it means "if Bill Shorten becomes PM, the rule of engagement between labour and capital will be rewritten," according to The Australian this week. Can't wait!

4. Hipsters picket trendy cafe

The fourth sign comes as the death of a certain kind of pale passivity and acceptance of the status quo among the young. But much as Kendall Jenner got the mood so wrong when she tried to retail Pepsi through the form of a mock riot last year, this week the kids in Melbourne got the times very, very right. On Tuesday, a flash mob of young people descended on no less than hipper-than-hip Northcote coffee palace, Barry, demanding the instant redress of alleged unfair dismissal and wage theft from staff pay packets. Not so long ago, it was the Melbourne fashion for young people to sit at cafes and joke about how exploited at work they were. The evolution to shouty pickets and cafe shut downs indicate in a period of record low wage growth, the laughs have worn quite thin.

5. The reds are back under the beds

There's always a bit of judgment and vengeance inherent to the factional shenanigans of Australia's Liberal party, but its refreshed vocabulary warrants inclusion as the fifth sign. Michael Sukkar, the member for Deakin, has been recorded in a dazzling rant declaring war on a "socialist" incursion into a party whose leader is a former merchant banker who pledged to rule for "freedom, the individual and the market" the very day he was anointed. Sukkar's insistence is wonderful complement to the performance art monologues of former Liberal MP Bronwyn Bishop on Sky, where she weekly decries socialism is to blame for everything from alcoholism to energy prices. The reds may not be under the beds quite yet, but if Sukkar's convinced some commie pinkos are already gatecrashing cocktail events with the blue-tie set, they're certainly on his mind.

6. Tony Abbott becomes a fan of nationalising assets

Or maybe's Sukkar's right about the socialists termiting his beloved Liberal party. How else to explain the earthquake-like paradigm shift represented by the sixth sign? Since when do neoliberal conservatives argue for the renationalisation of infrastructure, as is the push of Tony Abbott's gang to nationalise the coal-fired Liddell power station? It may be a cynical stunt to take an unscientific stand against climate action, but seizing the means of production remains seizing the means of production, um, comrade. "You know, nationalising assets is what the Liberal party was founded to stop governments doing," said Turnbull, even as he hid in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains to weather – strange coincidence – yet another Newspoll loss.

ss="rich-link"> Yanis Varoufakis: Marx predicted our present crisis – and points the way out Read more 7. Blue-collar billionaires

In the established canon, the final sign, the seventh, installs new saints on to golden altars before praying supplicants. And I'd suggest some circumspection before the incense is lit and venerations begin. A clear electoral yearning for a sincere leadership of politics beyond the neoliberal frame has encouraged lying populists on the right, like the "blue-collar billionaire" opportunistic falsity of Trump. For a left regaining momentum, there's also danger; seizing at instant, available heroes propels into leadership politicians who are polarising and imperfect for the task.

The pressing need is not to pray for intercession; Varoufakis's call is right – "collective, democratic political action" is the genuine alternative, and it's broader democratic investment in the institutions of parties, movements, academies and media that always builds the world to come. That is, after all, what the neoliberals did. And look – just look – how far they got.

• Van Badham is a Guardian Australia columnist

sierrasierra , 27 Apr 2018 05:50

Neoliberalism so far and it's a rather interesting read if you follow global politics, yes countries like people have ' charts' and Australia's is realtively tame:

http://astrologyforaquarius.com/sky-watch-and-a-global-events-forecast/mars-cycle-january-29-2017-january-2-2019 /

ID2778880 -> DickTyger , 27 Apr 2018 05:48
This is absolutely true. Unintended consequences will always arise if the dim-witted tamper with complex systems they do not understand.

Brexit is a classic case. It has blown up in the faces of its proponents and the rather more level-headed among them are desperately trying to contain the spreading damage.

GraemeHarrison -> Weakaspiss , 27 Apr 2018 05:46
Ably assisted by Rupert's >75% control of print media... with his 'Get Bill' campaigns (first Hayden, later Shorten) with 'Get Juliar' in between! The masses are swayed by big media, enough to deliver the 1-3% needed to gain a parliamentary majority!
uhurhi , 27 Apr 2018 05:43
"new introduction to a re-released Marx and Engels' Communist Manifesto.
Collective, democratic political action is our only chance for freedom and enjoyment."

Might be true. But frightening that people should naively still think that democracy is to be found in the 'Dictatorship of the Proletariate' [ ie those who know what's good for you even if you don't like it ] of the Communist Manefesto after the revelations of what that leads to in the Gulag Arichipeligo , Mao's China , Pol Pot , Kim John - un . How quickly the world forgets. - you might just as well advocate Mein Kampf it's the same thing in the end !

curiouswes -> Jamie Richardson , 27 Apr 2018 05:42
I don't think socialism can work without giving up too much freedom. Once you are in the Leviathan's clutches, it is difficult to break free. In the USA, we have a great system. I call it socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor. It works great, but it only works great for 1% of the people.
Starwars102 -> Awabakali , 27 Apr 2018 05:40
https://mises.org/wire/real-relationship-between-capitalism-and-environment
This idea of Capitalism fundamentally and completely undermining the environment is a myth. You realise that the worst possible environmental degradation today occurs in extremely poor countries which have neither the economic base, nor the surplus money to care for the environment. Compound this with terrible legal systems in many of those countries and you get the economic degradation you have today.
GraemeHarrison -> Powerspike , 27 Apr 2018 05:36
The fact that multinationals are happy to take Australian minerals from the land, make money selling products to Australians, yet pay nil tax in Australia tells you everything you need to know about how much they care for our 'state and society'.
daily_phil , 27 Apr 2018 05:35
Does present day neo-liberalism actually qualify as a political movement?

Vested interests and the dollar seem to have all the power. Lies and deception are so common the truth is seen as the enemy. The voting public are merely fools for manipulation. Nah, neo-liberalism is not government, it is something far nastier, and clearly not what the public vote for, presuming a vote actually counts for anything anymore.

RedmondM -> charleyb23 , 27 Apr 2018 05:33
And while we are discussing totalitarian thugs how many died at the hands of Hitler, Mussolini, Pinochet, Peron, Marcos and others of the right?

The death toll of just Mao far exceeds the combined death toll of the the others you mentioned.

GraemeHarrison -> vanbadham , 27 Apr 2018 05:33
Plus, unlimited funding for elections has cemented capitalism's ability to 'buy' all the elections, and hold-captive all the regulators it needs. Without the Citizens United decision from right wing SCOTUS judges, US elections would be far more representative. Only in capitalism can one believe that "money equals free speech". No such provision is in the US constitution, so it is only these Bush-appointed judges who have determined that money can rule the people. Even more stupid are the countries that have followed the USA down this slippery slope. If you can fund politicians to undermine the ATO and ASIC, why not also allow corporations to just pay bribes to judges to get decisions they would like?
MuzzaC -> curiouswes , 27 Apr 2018 05:33
Thanks curiouswes. Nice to engage in a polite discussion for a change.

I think you are right, in that all revolutions are susceptible to falling to their own methods. Any mechanism for revolution legitimises the same mechanism for counter-revolution. This is why violent revolution leads to militarism and authoritarianism. I don't think anyone welcoming Lenin at the Finland Station did so because they wanted to live in a police state. By the same token, I don't think that Socialism is inherently linked to giving the state authoritarian power. In fact Socialism and democracy are perfectly compatible, because democracy (one citizen one vote) is the counterweight to capitalism (one dollar one vote).

As for globalism, it's the natural mode of capitalism and has been for centuries. Colonial expansion and capitalism became synonymous with things like the Dutch East India Company. Neoliberalism wants global reach for capital, but not for the regulators. They want keep their tax-haven cake and eat it too. Typically, what they want is less about a free market and more about freedom to game the market.

GraemeHarrison -> Confucion , 27 Apr 2018 05:27

Democracy paralyses

No, the current malaise is not 'due' to democracy, but despite it. America has unlimited political funding by capitalism to sway elections to their desires. Australia is in almost the same position, due to weak political funding reporting, and nil limits on what 'non-party' entities can spend on elections, or in the case of Rudd's removal, how just $45m in advertising by the MCA managed to remove a sitting PM, because the handful of MCA members did not want a resource tax. Our democracy has slipped into being a plutocracy (rule by the wealthy).
Robert Davie , 27 Apr 2018 04:54
Neoliberalism has inflicted a great deal of damage on western economies through the off-shoring of industries and jobs by the wealthy elites who were aided by the donor addicted political class. As a result, western democracies have weakened themselves in the eyes of the world community who now see us as examples of dysfunctional economies and governing methods. Who can blame them when the leading champion of the rules based order is so smitten with debt it must withdraw into itself under the threat of debt default.

The way forward for us is not to look back at what is lost but too look at developing new manufacturing industries and in particular, high technology manufacturing involving vehicles, batteries, solar panels, biotechnology and other related areas.

KCJ1951 , 27 Apr 2018 04:41
What is always revealing about Vanessa and her obsession with neoliberalism, is her intellectual dishonesty wrapped in a smattering of populist half-truths while ignoring any fact that might get in the way of the emotional narrative.
How successful were the largely populist socialist governments in latin America: Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Ecuador and, of course, the socialist paradise of Venezuela?
We don't have to go back 40 years Vanessa. A quick peek east across the Pacific to the last decade of failed populist socialist ideology in South America tells enough.
PS: Delighted to see that you are back to full health after the 2 months of "absolute hell" that you went through during the SSM postal survey - Q&A.
Peter Krall , 27 Apr 2018 04:40
Neoliberalism, capitalism even, may well be dying. But the spectre of socialism is dead. What you hear when kicking the cupboard is just the squeaking of the door, not the spectre supposedly rumoring inside.

Worse, socialism did not just disappear but considerable fractions degenerated into all kinds of zombies: you have the aggressive dreamers, who confound anecdotes about repair-cafes or school meals with economic modeling and won't accept any response but flattery (yes, the 'senior' economic commentator is an example). You have the fascists supporting Assad because he administrates the legacy of his Hitler-admiring father and people like the Eichmann-assistant Alois Brunner, and a lot of them identify as 'anti-imperialist left-wingers'. You have the naive nation-state nostalgics who believe the value of work can be increased by blocking immigration, ignoring that the assembly of a car for the German market can be done in the Netherlands or Slovakia just as well as in the UK.

To be sure: I know that persons like Varoufakis (or Badham) are neither fascists nor morons. I wished it were these people who shaped the society after the downfall of laissez-faire capitalism. But I fail to believe it. I believe that the end of laissez-faire capitalism will coincide with the rise of fascism. Thus, I propose to extend capitalism's life expectancy be shifting tax burdens from income and profit to wealth and to create a favorable environment for tech-addicted turbo-capitalism.

[Jun 05, 2018] Tim Winton on class and neoliberalism 'We're not citizens but economic players' Books The Guardian

Notable quotes:
"... • The Boy Behind the Curtain is published by Penguin Books and is available now ..."
Jun 05, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

he first page of Tim Winton's new essay collection, The Boy Behind the Curtain , sets a disturbing scene. A 13-year-old boy stands at the window of a suburban street, behind a terylene curtain, training a rifle on passersby.

"He was a fraught little thing," says Winton of that boy – the boy he used to be. "I feel related to him but I'm no longer completely him, thank god."

The passage opens a surprisingly intimate essay about the role of guns in Australian life, setting the tone for a collection being billed as Winton's most personal yet.

In spite of his inclination for solitude, Winton has spent much of his life in the spotlight. His first novel, An Open Swimmer, catapulted him into the public eye when it won the Vogel literary award in 1981, but it was his 1991 novel, Cloudstreet, that cemented his place in Australian letters. Winton has won the Miles Franklin award four times and been shortlisted twice for the Booker. His books have been adapted for film, TV and even opera .

ss="rich-link"> Island Home by Tim Winton review – a love song to Australia and a cry to save it Read more

The contradictions of having such a high-profile career while working in a quintessentially solitary artform are not lost on him. "I spend all day in a room with people who don't exist, and I'm not thinking about any public – but once the thing's done it goes out there and it has a public life over which I have no, or very little, control," he says.

On one reading, the boy with the rifle lurking out of sight, watching the world go by, could be a metaphor for the life of a reclusive writer. But Winton is quick to distinguish himself from such a reading. "I wouldn't like to see myself as somebody who was just cruelly observing the world behind the terylene curtain of art."

For Winton, the perceived lives of other writers always seemed completely unrelated to his own experience. "I grew up with a kind of modernist romantic idea of the writer as some kind of high priest, someone who saw themselves as separate and better, which I now find a bit repellent," he says. "I think that was something that was sold to us at school and certainly at university that writers were somehow aloof from the ordinary business of life; they didn't have to abide by the same rules as other people. The worse their behaviour off the page, the more we were supposed to cheer them on. Once I woke up to that idea as a teenager, I think I consciously resisted it."

Winton's own background was characterised by a working class sensibility and evangelical religion. His parents converted to the Church of Christ when he was a small boy, the circumstances and his experiences of which form the basis of a number of the previously unpublished essays in The Boy Behind the Curtain. As a result, when he finally did start writing, it was with a particularly industrious work ethic.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Tim Winton: 'There wasn't a lot of romance in my view of what writing was about.' Photograph: Hank Kordas

"I approached it like I was a tradesperson," he says. "It didn't necessarily involve FM radio played very loudly on a worksite; it didn't always require plumbers' crack or a hard hat and there was certainly no catcalling, but for the rest of it I went a different route. There wasn't a lot of romance in my view of what writing was about."

ss="rich-link"> A fish called Tim Winton: scientists name new species after novelist Read more

Yet it was finding words, what Winton calls "the enormous luxury of language", that took him from being a 13-year-old boy who watched strangers through the eye of a rifle – a boy who was "obviously insecure and feeling threatened and probably not quite one with the world" – to a well-adjusted adult.

The "emotional infancy of men" has a lot to answer for, he says, suggesting that it's something society would do well to pay more attention to in its early stages. "The lumpiness and surly silence of boys is not something we're sufficiently interested in. They're not sufficiently attractive to us until they become victims or dangerous brutes and bullies."

ass="inline-garnett-quote inline-icon ">

I think it's a mistake to think someone who doesn't say much doesn't have strong feelings

Tim Winton

Conflicted masculinity is recurring theme throughout Winton's fiction, and his characters often suffer as a result of their inability to articulate their feelings. "I think it's a mistake to think someone who doesn't say much doesn't have strong feelings," he says. "I think we stifle people's expression or we ignore people's signals of wanting to express things at our peril."

The distinct tenor of Winton's prose, a lyricism which manages to turn even the Australian vernacular into a kind of rough poetry, lends itself to the intimacy of the personal essay. The Boy Behind the Curtain contains a number of vignettes that reflect the imagery and landscape that characterises his fiction: hot bitumen roads through the desert; the churning ocean.

https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/287428716&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false

But there is also a clear political streak to Winton's nonfiction, and the inclusion of a number of more direct essays in this collection mean it's difficult to collapse the work under the category of memoir. Stones for Bread, for example, calls for a return to empathy and humanity in Australia's approach to asylum seekers. The Battle for Ningaloo Reef is a clear-eyed account of the activism that prevented a major commercial development from destroying a stretch of the Western Australian coastline. And Using the C-Word concerns that other dirty word that Winton believes we are avoiding: class.

"I think there are people talking about class but they're having to do that against the flow," Winton says. "We're living in a dispensation that is endlessly reinforcing the idea that we are not citizens but economic players. And under that dispensation it's in nobody's interest, especially those in power, to encourage or foster the idea that there's any class difference."

The market doesn't care about people, Winton argues, and neither is there any genius in it. "There's no invisible hand," he says. "And if there is one, it's scratching its arse."

It's clear to Winton that neoliberalism is failing, but not without casualties, two of which are very close to his heart: the arts and the environment.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Cover image for The Boy Behind The Curtain by Tim Winton. Photograph: Penguin

"People in the arts are basically paying the price for this new regime where we pay no tax and where we get less public service and more privatised service," he says. "The arts are last on, first off in people's minds and I think that's not just sad, it's corrosive. They're just seen as fluff, as fripperies, as indulgence, as add-ons and luxury. And I don't think the arts are luxury; I think they're fundamental to civilisation. It's just that under our current dispensation, civilisation is not the point; civilisation is something that commerce has to negotiate and traduce if necessary."

Winton is one of a number of high-profile critics of the Productivity Commission's proposals to allow the parallel importation of books , and a signatory to petitions opposing funding cuts to the Australia Council . But he has also been a grassroots activist in the area of marine conservation for over 15 years.

"I don't know if I'm an activist writer or just a writer who has an activist life on the side," he says.

ass="inline-garnett-quote inline-icon ">

I don't know if I'm an activist writer or just a writer who has an activist life on the side

Tim Winton

Years of lobbying by conservation groups and the general public contributed to the Labor government announcement in 2012 of 42 marine reserves in Australian waters , including over the entire Coral Sea. The Abbott government, however, implemented a review which, in September this year, recommended significantly scaling back those reservations . It was, says Winton, an act of cowardice.

"The Abbott review was basically all about applying inertia to imminent progress," Winton says. "We've gone from world leaders [in conservation] to being too frightened to lead."

When asked what role writing fiction plays in his activist work, Winton says it comes back to the idea of "keeping people's imaginations awake".

"Imagination is the fundamental virtue of civilisation. If people can't imagine then they can't live an ethical life."

• The Boy Behind the Curtain is published by Penguin Books and is available now

[Jun 05, 2018] Hating Russia is a Full-Time Job, by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... The neocons believe in only two things. First, that the United States is the sole world superpower, given license by something like a Divine Entity to exercise global leadership by force if necessary. That has been translated to the public as "American exceptionalism." Indeed, U.S. interventionism in practice has been by force majeure preferably as it leaves little room for debate or discussion. And the second neocon guiding principle is that everything possible must be done to protect and promote Israel. Absent these two beliefs, you do not have a neocon. ..."
"... Just yesterday Pieter Hoekstra, USA ambassador in the Netherlands, stated that Russia should be punished for MH17 by more sanctions, no new gas pipeline from Russia to Germany. What he did not say that this implies our buying of USA gas, 20% more expensive. The MH17 show, in my opinion is run like the Sept 11 show. Or even the holocaust show, constant reminders. ..."
"... The USA fear about Russia and the EU member states seems to be twofold: (1) more trade with Russia makes subjugation of Russia impossible; (2) more trade with Russia, and the railway connections with China, threaten to turn the USA into an economic backwater ..."
"... Precisely. US could eventually (20-30 years from now) turn into a country similar to many Latin American countries: rich in resources, demographically messy and ungovernable, weak infrastructure, but above all remote and quasi-provincial. ..."
"... The 'Atlanticist' project is meant to forestall the provincial Latin American future. Washington does have some tools: dollar domination, military force, Hollywood, technology. But none of those are necessarily sustainable without also actively messing up Euro-Russia-China economic convergence. It might require a war to delay the inevitable slow descend into a backwater across the Atlantic. ..."
"... Here's Irving Kristol, the godfather of neoconservatism, in an article for the NY Times, titled "Memoirs of a Trotskyist:" "I was graduated from City College in the spring of 1940, and the honor I most prized was the fact that I was a member in good standing of the Young People's Socialist League (Fourth International). This organization was commonly, and correctly, designated as Trotskyist (not "Trotskyite," which was a term used only by the official Communists, or "Stalinists" as we called them, of the day)" ..."
"... Here's a good PBS movie lauding these "intellectuals:" http://www.pbs.org/arguing/about.html ..."
"... There are probably five big reasons for all the Russia hate: ..."
"... 1. Keep the fracturing United States together by focusing on an external aggressor. ..."
"... 2. Keep the Europeans in line by making them afraid of the Russians. ..."
"... 3. This: "There are a huge number of cuckservatives who still think it is 1980. It isn't just neocons, but just about any cold-war cuckservative" -- geezer boomers who are having an end-of-life crisis. ..."
"... To some extent you're mistaking your target here. I'll readily agree the neo-cons amount to a Zionist cabal bent on perverting US conservatism into a tool to serve Israel. On the other hand, I think that spectacular figures dating from 1920 concerning Jews and Bolshevism should be checked. ..."
"... Jewish sympathy for Communism causes and is caused by Jewish antipathy to nationalism ..."
"... For example a piece in the Washington Post by Joseph Kraft of the ADA on the occasion of the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia advised non-intervention on the grounds that Communism wasn't so bad: it kept a lid on ancient ethnic hatreds. I have heard this line from many apologists for eastern European Communism. ..."
"... The anti-nationalist agenda dovetails with the liberal views of Jews on social issues, since the EU and NATO have become enforcers of political correctness, while the politically incorrect traditional attitudes of Slavic countries would likely be defended by nationalist parties. Many Jews would like to see ethnic Russians and their Orthodox church again subjugated or at least marginalized with a fellow Jew like Garry Kasparov in charge, and they aren't too keen on Catholicism either. ..."
"... It's unfortunate that the role of ethnic animosity in the panic over detente cannot be mentioned in polite society. It is the only factor that explains the datum of near-universal Jewish antipathy to Russia beginning after the collapse of Communism ..."
"... my opinion is that most such groups were used at the time by the national police and by the CIA to oppose people with more serious ideas, and the support for such groups at the time by CIA etc. in the U.S.A and in Europe is making serious cultural and sometimes violent (I see photos of Antlfa morons, etc., direct descendants) blowback. ..."
"... I think that people can be inclined to claim that everyone they don't like is a Jew. I also think that while Jews were certainly disproportionately represented among the Bolsheviks and the leftist revolutionary movements of the early twentieth century in general, these movements weren't overwhelmingly Jewish, nor even necessarily mostly Jewish except in the case of Hungary. ..."
"... With all due respect, current Russia-bashing in the US is not an issue of Jews vs non-Jews. It's more about the direct contradictions of the interests of the US as a country with those of the US as an Empire. It is in the best interests of the US as a country to maintain good working relationship with Russia, China, and others, both to achieve economic prosperity and to solve complex international problems. However, as an Empire, the US does not tolerate anyone refusing to toe the line, be it Russia, China, Iran, Syria, or even Venezuela. The fact that the US Empire is in decline makes its policy less and less rational, more and more hysterical. That's how all dominant Empires ended: not so much by being destroyed by opponents, but because of suicidal overreach. ..."
Jun 05, 2018 | www.unz.com
First of all not all neocon are Jews and not all jews are neocons. neocons are first and foremost lobbyists for MIC. This job does not require any ethic component. but it is very attractive for intellectuals who are not good for anything else, including many Jewish intellectuals ( Max Boot is a nice example of this trend; Rephrasing Tucker Carlson remark we can say that he is a neocon because he does not want to paint houses ;-)
Also the role on Jews in Russia during Perestroika and the dissolution of the USSR was enhanced by the fact that they were one of the few with strong connection to relatives in the USA who emigrated earlier under the USA pressure and this they have larger financial resources to operate with which was of tremendous importance during privatization. It is unclear how many of them were simply puppets of foreign interests, not an independent players. For example William Browder was probably closely connected to MI6.
It would interesting to see on the USA in 30 years -- in 2050. I wish I would be one of those people who do understand what is going on and were the USA is moving. I am not. The worst outcome based on current trends is that in 30 years from now the USA might turn into a country similar to large Latin American countries: demographically messy and ungovernable, with weak infrastructure, but above all quasi-provincial. Looks like the the US neoliberal elite (including Silicon Valley techno-elite) now tenaciously cling to the idea of "world superpower" and at the core that means maintaining technology superiority along with the controlling oil and gas deposits, first of all in the Middle Easts (with Israel and Saudi help) as well as weakening and, possibly, dismembering of Russia and China as two dangerous competitors alliance between which is very undesirable outcome for the USA and can make the USA irrelevant for Europe. Euromaidan was an important step in this direction on Russia front, a bold and brilliant political move if you ask me. Poor Ukrainians do not understand how they were played.

Having just returned from a trip to Russia, I am pleased to report that the Russian people and the officialdom that I encountered displayed none of the vitriol towards Americans that I half expected as a response to the vilifying of Moscow and all its works that pervades the U.S. media and Establishment. To be sure, many Russians I spoke with were quick to criticize the Trump Administration for its hot and cold performance vis-à-vis the bilateral ties to Moscow while also expressing mystification over why the relationship had gone south so quickly, but this anger over foreign policy did not necessarily translate into contempt for the American people and way of life that characterized the Soviet period. At least not yet.

Somewhat to my surprise, ordinary Russians were also quick to openly criticize President Vladimir Putin for his autocratic tendencies and his willingness to continue to tolerate corruption, but everyone I spoke to also conceded that he had generally acted constructively and had greatly improved life for ordinary people. Putin remains wildly popular.

One question that came up frequently was "Who is driving the hostility towards Russia?" I responded that the answer is not so simple and there are a number of constituencies that, for one reason or another, need a powerful enemy to justify policies that would otherwise be unsustainable. Defense contractors need a foe to justify their existence while congressmen need the contractors to fund their campaigns. The media needs a good fearmongering story to help sell itself and the public also is accustomed to having a world in which terrible threats lurk just below the horizon, thereby increasing support for government control of everyday life to keep everyone "safe."

And then there are the neocons. As always, they are a distinct force for creative destruction, as they put it, certainly first in line with their hands out to get the funding of their no-expenses-spared foundations and think tanks, but also driven ideologically, which has made them the intellectual vanguard of the war party. They provide the palatable intellectual framework for America to take on the world, metaphorically speaking, and constitute the strike force that is always ready to appear on television talk shows or to be quoted in the media with an appropriate intelligent sounding one liner that can be used to justify the unthinkable. In return they are richly rewarded both with money and status.

The neocons believe in only two things. First, that the United States is the sole world superpower, given license by something like a Divine Entity to exercise global leadership by force if necessary. That has been translated to the public as "American exceptionalism." Indeed, U.S. interventionism in practice has been by force majeure preferably as it leaves little room for debate or discussion. And the second neocon guiding principle is that everything possible must be done to protect and promote Israel. Absent these two beliefs, you do not have a neocon.

The founding fathers of neoconism were New York Jewish "intellectuals" who evolved (or devolved) from being bomb throwing Trotskyites to "conservatives," a process they self-define as "idealism getting mugged by reality." The only reality is that they have always been faux conservatives, embracing a number of aggressive foreign policy and national security positions while also privately endorsing the standard Jewish liberal line on social issues. Neocon fanaticism on the issues that they do promote also suggests that more that a little of the Trotskyism remains in their character, hence their tenacity and ability to slither between the Democratic and Republican parties while also appearing comfortably on disparate media outlets considered to be either liberal or conservative, i.e. on both Fox news and MSNBC programs featuring the likes of Rachel Maddow.

... ... ...

jilles dykstra , June 5, 2018 at 7:42 am GMT
Antony C. Sutton, ´Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution', 1974 New Rochelle, N.Y. describes how Wall Street supported bolshevism in order to prevent that German, suppose also Dutch and other, trade, with Russia was resumed.

WWII and the aftermath created the Atlantic alliance.

Just yesterday Pieter Hoekstra, USA ambassador in the Netherlands, stated that Russia should be punished for MH17 by more sanctions, no new gas pipeline from Russia to Germany. What he did not say that this implies our buying of USA gas, 20% more expensive. The MH17 show, in my opinion is run like the Sept 11 show. Or even the holocaust show, constant reminders.

The USA fear about Russia and the EU member states seems to be twofold: (1) more trade with Russia makes subjugation of Russia impossible; (2) more trade with Russia, and the railway connections with China, threaten to turn the USA into an economic backwater

Beckow , June 5, 2018 at 2:28 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

more trade with Russia, and the railway connections with China, threaten to turn the USA into an economic backwater

Precisely. US could eventually (20-30 years from now) turn into a country similar to many Latin American countries: rich in resources, demographically messy and ungovernable, weak infrastructure, but above all remote and quasi-provincial.

The 'Atlanticist' project is meant to forestall the provincial Latin American future. Washington does have some tools: dollar domination, military force, Hollywood, technology. But none of those are necessarily sustainable without also actively messing up Euro-Russia-China economic convergence. It might require a war to delay the inevitable slow descend into a backwater across the Atlantic.

Tarheel American , June 5, 2018 at 2:46 pm GMT
@Anonymous

It's not quite a secret. The fact is just hidden by the neocons and their enablers. They used to trumpet it, though. There's a quite robust body of evidence, including the principals themselves celebrating their communism, that shows the founders of neo-conservatism, Irving Kristol, et al were communists. Moreover, they were communists of the international revolution variety -- the flavor known as Trotskyism.

Here's Irving Kristol, the godfather of neoconservatism, in an article for the NY Times, titled "Memoirs of a Trotskyist:" "I was graduated from City College in the spring of 1940, and the honor I most prized was the fact that I was a member in good standing of the Young People's Socialist League (Fourth International). This organization was commonly, and correctly, designated as Trotskyist (not "Trotskyite," which was a term used only by the official Communists, or "Stalinists" as we called them, of the day)"

Here's a chart, helpfully prepared by the Washington Post, tracing the genealogy of neocons:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/02/01/GR2008020102389.html

Here's a good PBS movie lauding these "intellectuals:" http://www.pbs.org/arguing/about.html

nickels , June 5, 2018 at 3:26 pm GMT
I am currently reading "The Revolution Betrayed" by Trotsky. Trying to understand this Trotsky neocon link better and to determine to what extent it makes sense. One connection is certain: (1) Trotsky was completely insane. (2) Neocons are completely insane.
Crawfurdmuir , June 5, 2018 at 3:50 pm GMT

The Communist diaspora in Europe and America was also largely Jewish, including the cabal of founders of neoconservativism in New York City. The United States Communist Party was from the start predominantly Jewish. It was in the 1930s headed by Jew Earl Browder, grandfather of the current snake oil salesman Bill Browder, who has been sanctimoniously proclaiming his desire to punish Vladimir Putin for various alleged high crimes.

Earl Browder was not, so far as I know, born a Jew. While living in the Soviet Union he married a Russian Jewess named Raisa Berkman. One of their sons, Felix, married another Jewess, Eva Tislowitz, and Bill Browder was their son. He is matrilineally Jewish.

Apart from this minor quibble, the description of Bill Browder's career seems quite accurate.

Anon [144] Disclaimer , June 5, 2018 at 4:03 pm GMT
There are probably five big reasons for all the Russia hate:

1. Keep the fracturing United States together by focusing on an external aggressor.

2. Keep the Europeans in line by making them afraid of the Russians.

3. This: "There are a huge number of cuckservatives who still think it is 1980. It isn't just neocons, but just about any cold-war cuckservative" -- geezer boomers who are having an end-of-life crisis.

4. Greed. Russia has natural resources and wishes to export them to competing markets, undercutting our Ruling Class's cut.

5. Russia is traditionally white and nominally Christian, socially conservative. Leftists beat up on Russia as a proxy for beating up on traditional white Americans. Back when Russia started their anti-gay thing, American leftists went nuts on them. Of course, Saudi Arabia is much worse but we didn't hear anything about them because they aren't white and being critical in such a case would be waycist.

Colin Wright , Website June 5, 2018 at 4:21 pm GMT
@Florin N

'Read this re the origin of the neocon movement '

To some extent you're mistaking your target here. I'll readily agree the neo-cons amount to a Zionist cabal bent on perverting US conservatism into a tool to serve Israel. On the other hand, I think that spectacular figures dating from 1920 concerning Jews and Bolshevism should be checked.

jack daniels , June 5, 2018 at 5:14 pm GMT
Jewish sympathy for Communism causes and is caused by Jewish antipathy to nationalism on the part of gentiles. Many articles written during the Cold War attest to the Jewish fear that the demise of Communism would unleash anti-Semitism. For example a piece in the Washington Post by Joseph Kraft of the ADA on the occasion of the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia advised non-intervention on the grounds that Communism wasn't so bad: it kept a lid on ancient ethnic hatreds. I have heard this line from many apologists for eastern European Communism.

The anti-nationalist agenda dovetails with the liberal views of Jews on social issues, since the EU and NATO have become enforcers of political correctness, while the politically incorrect traditional attitudes of Slavic countries would likely be defended by nationalist parties. Many Jews would like to see ethnic Russians and their Orthodox church again subjugated or at least marginalized with a fellow Jew like Garry Kasparov in charge, and they aren't too keen on Catholicism either.

It's unfortunate that the role of ethnic animosity in the panic over detente cannot be mentioned in polite society. It is the only factor that explains the datum of near-universal Jewish antipathy to Russia beginning after the collapse of Communism . I hope this taboo is successfully challenged going forward, since, as a Christian, I am grateful for Russia as the only Christian power left in the world.

geokat62 , June 5, 2018 at 5:29 pm GMT
@jack daniels

Jewish sympathy for Communism causes and is caused by Jewish antipathy to nationalism on the part of gentiles.

Excellent insight.

Che Guava , June 5, 2018 at 5:39 pm GMT
@Tarheel American

I once found a real great Web page with a great graph, kind of a family tree of the various western Trot. groups at the time.

It was bizarre, but did not include the neocons, I suppose that was reasonable because it was only of claimed affiliates to the nonsensical 'Fourth International'.

Also not comprehensive, did not include the minor parties and groupuscules in Japan and Europe of the boomer gen. , nor the earlier Viet Trots. nor Sri Lanka, the only place they ever obtained political power except as agents in the shadows.

Of course, they have enormous power in the shadows in the state media in many places, EU, cabinets in many European nations, etc. Even without that, the chart and attached notes are bizarre enough.

The 'ite' 'ist' distinction among Trots is not just as you describe, they use it among themselves, too, at least in English, as one was explaining to me. Understood the words, not understanding the content at all.

Avoid Trots, their parties (as in social events) are miserable, and their households are like those of the worst cult religionists.

I make one exception, the HQ of the Kakumaru (Core Circle) is a few hundred meters from my house, they are all old people now, they used to have their newspaper for sale until recently. no more. I would buy it at times.

Have some sympathy, but my opinion is that most such groups were used at the time by the national police and by the CIA to oppose people with more serious ideas, and the support for such groups at the time by CIA etc. in the U.S.A and in Europe is making serious cultural and sometimes violent (I see photos of Antlfa morons, etc., direct descendants) blowback.

Colin Wright , Website June 5, 2018 at 5:40 pm GMT
@Charlie M.

' That's not how research works. You're searching for a low figure which will magically be reliable, right?'

I think that people can be inclined to claim that everyone they don't like is a Jew. I also think that while Jews were certainly disproportionately represented among the Bolsheviks and the leftist revolutionary movements of the early twentieth century in general, these movements weren't overwhelmingly Jewish, nor even necessarily mostly Jewish except in the case of Hungary.

Finally, I think the press tends to exaggerate, and that particularly in 1920, claiming that the Bolsheviks were Jews would have been a good way of vilifying the movement. After all, it remains one to this day.

So for all these reasons, while as I have said it is possible the figures are accurate, I don't think they should be accepted on faith.

It's all an interesting question. On the one hand, we have 'data' of dubious reliability. On the other hand, there's a decided reluctance among modern researchers to go into the question in detail.

geokat62 , June 5, 2018 at 5:40 pm GMT
Looks like Prof. Kevin MacDonald has freely endorsed this excellent article:
anon [317] Disclaimer , June 5, 2018 at 5:44 pm GMT
@Rational

responding to PG's comments and the comments of Rational Zionist, among them, being many NY Intellectuals, invented mugged reality (Neoconism), but party slithering is a another name for divide and conquer.

Fudmier's example as to how to control the vote:

You present an idea to 6 people (there are seven votes including yours, you are the one); virtually everyone is indifferent or against your idea. Before the vote, how can you make the outcome favorable to your side? Divide the opinions on a related subject so that the people must vote for your idea if they take a side on the related subject. I am always either a Democrat or a Republican, cannot vote for anything the other party presents, no matter how good it is. So make the idea Republican or Democratic.

them me Total vote for against my idea
no division 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total votes 7 Voted for me 1 (myself only) I lose
divide by party D R D R D R R Total votes 7. Voted for me (republican votes) 4 I win

As the simple analysis suggests: it is easy to win a vote when the idea is Glued to the two AAs (glue, attached, or associated). The unpopular idea Glued and attached or associated with the political party issue splits the vote (such activity divides and weakens the political power inherent in the voting power of the masses). For example, if we make the vote to turn off all of the drinking water. the only vote will be mine, but if we say turn off the drinking water to all but those who are green, we divide the vote. and control the outcome.

This brings us to the democratic dilemma: should the non green people be included in vote on that issue? In fact, it is exactly this problem that those who wrote the constitution intended to establish.

The aggressive foreign policies and national security positions mentioned by PG have been attached to the standard Jewish line; in other words the duty of a Jew to recognize him/herself as a Jew and to vote as a member of the clan has been glued to the AAs. It is nearly impossible to vote for Jewish interest and not vote to demolish Palestinian homes.

I am hoping this list can develop ways to analyse current events into a set of fair play rules, reading, learning and analyzing books, journals and events and writing about them is not enough; some kind of action is needed to bring into reality the findings of these readings, learning and analysis produce. The best way to offset misleading, false or invented propaganda is to force it to into a rule based debunking process. Simple rules that everyone can learn, understand and adopt.

Capitalist Russia and its resources represent a major competitor to the resources and schemes of the capitalist neocon led west. Hating Russia is like being a democrat or a republican, it keeps the pharaoh options open.

jilles dykstra , June 5, 2018 at 6:11 pm GMT
@Anon

What I miss is USA fear that the European states, as they did before 1917, will resume trade with Russia. Contrary to popular opinion, the Dutch Golden Century was not golden by trade to east or west Indies, but because we were halfway between the Iberian peninsula and the Baltic Sea.

This fear, I fear, now is intensified by the China Russia Iran railway facilities, with the Khazakstan dry port. If the important European countries turn around, the USA will become an economic backwater.

Just yesterday USA ambassador Pete Hoekstra tries to sell us expensive USA gas, 20% more expensive, to punish Russia for MH17. Another statement that shows that Russia had no interest whatsoever in shooting down MH17.
Pete does not seem to understand that he's urging the Netherlands to punish itself.
I'm ashamed, Pete must be a Frysian, like me, w're supposed to be intelligent persons.

jack daniels , June 5, 2018 at 6:32 pm GMT
@John Baker

There was also a coup in Hungary led by Bela Kun. I agree with you that the threat of Communism played a role in the rise of militant nationalism and its anti-Semitic aspect. The role of Jews in the leadership of every Communist uprising is crisply documented by Winston Churchill in his 1920 article http://www.fpp.co.uk/bookchapters/WSC/WSCwrote1920.html

Paul Johnson in Modern Times claims that Jews did not make up a large percentage of party members but that is less impressive than their domination of the top ranks. Germany in the 20s and 30s had an abundance of motives to support a strong nationalist leader since the terms of the Versailles Treaty were unjust and unendurable, and the solution seemed to involve at least the willingness to use force to remove the burden.

The democratic parties were insufficiently decisive and would likely have succumbed to Communist agitation or at best preserved a very unpleasant status quo. The weakness of Communism is that it reduces everything to economics and the material dimension. It demands the right to dictate without addressing the spiritual dimension of life.

Hitler, by contrast, appealed to national pride and national unity, in addition to the national need to escape from poverty. Today we see anti-racism being elevated into a quasi-religion that may be used to justify totalitarian policies. One benefit of this initiative is that it allows the elite to preserve the gap in material wealth between themselves and the victim class. Ending racism is less expensive than ending inequality!

anon [228] Disclaimer , June 5, 2018 at 7:02 pm GMT
@Colin Wright

Not only those two guys who made the claims. It was Churchill himself who made the same connection between Bolshevism and "international Jewry"

AnonFromTN , June 5, 2018 at 7:29 pm GMT
With all due respect, current Russia-bashing in the US is not an issue of Jews vs non-Jews. It's more about the direct contradictions of the interests of the US as a country with those of the US as an Empire. It is in the best interests of the US as a country to maintain good working relationship with Russia, China, and others, both to achieve economic prosperity and to solve complex international problems. However, as an Empire, the US does not tolerate anyone refusing to toe the line, be it Russia, China, Iran, Syria, or even Venezuela. The fact that the US Empire is in decline makes its policy less and less rational, more and more hysterical. That's how all dominant Empires ended: not so much by being destroyed by opponents, but because of suicidal overreach.

[Jun 05, 2018] Amid 'Russiagate' Hysteria, What Are the Facts

Notable quotes:
"... The New York Times ..."
"... Times ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... Citizens United ..."
"... Reagan and Gorbachev: How the Cold War Ended ..."
"... Superpower Illusions: How Myths and False Ideologies Led America Astray -- And How to Return to Reality. ..."
Jun 05, 2018 | www.thenation.com

Amid 'Russiagate' Hysteria, What Are the Facts? | The Nation

"W hom the gods would destroy, they first make mad."

That saying -- often misattributed to Euripides -- comes to mind most mornings when I pick up The New York Times and read the latest "Russiagate" headlines, which are frequently featured across two or three columns on the front page above the fold. This is an almost daily reminder of the hysteria that dominates our Congress and much of our media.

A glaring example, just one of many from recent months, arrived at my door on February 17. My outrage spiked when I opened to the Times ' lead editorial : "Stop Letting the Russians Get Away With It, Mr. Trump." I had to ask myself: "Did the Times ' editors perform even the rudiments of due diligence before they climbed on their high horse in this long editorial, which excoriated 'Russia' (not individual Russians) for 'interference' in the election and demanded increased sanctions against Russia 'to protect American democracy'?"

It had never occurred to me that our admittedly dysfunctional political system is so weak, undeveloped, or diseased that inept Internet trolls could damage it. If that is the case, we better look at a lot of other countries as well, not just Russia!

The New York Times , of course, is not the only offender. Its editorial attitude has been duplicated or exaggerated by most other media outlets in the United States, electronic and print. Unless there is a mass shooting in progress, it can be hard to find a discussion of anything else on CNN. Increasingly, both in Congress and in our media, it has been accepted as a fact that "Russia" interfered in the 2016 election.

So what are the facts?

It is a fact that some Russians paid people to act as online trolls and bought advertisements on Facebook during and after the 2016 presidential campaign. Most of these were taken from elsewhere, and they comprised a tiny fraction of all the advertisements purchased on Facebook during this period. This continued after the election and included organizing a demonstration against President-elect Trump. It is a fact that e-mails in the memory of the Democratic National Committee's computer were furnished to Wikileaks. The US intelligence agencies that issued the January 2017 report were confident that Russians hacked the e-mails and supplied them to Wikileaks, but offered no evidence to substantiate their claim. Even if one accepts that Russians were the perpetrators, however, the e-mails were genuine, as the US intelligence report certified. I have always thought that the truth was supposed to make us free, not degrade our democracy. It is a fact that the Russian government established a sophisticated television service (RT) that purveyed entertainment, news, and -- yes -- propaganda to foreign audiences, including those in the United States. Its audience is several magnitudes smaller than that of Fox News. Basically, its task is to picture Russia in a more favorable light than has been available in Western media. There has been no analysis of its effect, if any, on voting in the United States. The January 2017 US intelligence report states at the outset, "We did not make an assessment of the impact that Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election." Nevertheless, that report has been cited repeatedly by politicians and the media as having done so. It is a fact that many senior Russian officials (though not all, by any means) expressed a preference for Trump's candidacy. After all, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had compared President Putin to Hitler and had urged more active US military intervention abroad, while Trump had said it would be better to cooperate with Russia than to treat it as an enemy. It should not require the judgment of professional analysts to understand why many Russians would find Trump's statements more congenial than Clinton's. On a personal level, most of my Russian friends and contacts were dubious of Trump, but all resented Clinton's Russophobic tone, as well as statements made by Obama from 2014 onward. They considered Obama's public comment that "Russia doesn't make anything" a gratuitous insult (which it was), and were alarmed by Clinton's expressed desire to provide additional military support to the "moderates" in Syria. But the average Russian, and certainly the typical Putin administration official, understood Trump's comments as favoring improved relations, which they definitely favored. There is no evidence that Russian leaders thought Trump would win or that they could have a direct influence on the outcome. This is an allegation that has not been substantiated. The January 2017 report from the intelligence community actually states that Russian leaders, like most others, thought Clinton would be elected. There is no evidence that Russian activities had any tangible impact on the outcome of the election. Nobody seems to have done even a superficial study of the effect Russian actions actually had on the vote. The intelligence-community report, however, states explicitly that "the types of systems we observed Russian actors targeting or compromising are not involved in vote tallying." Also both former FBI director James Comey and NSA director Mike Rogers have testified that there is no proof Russian activities had an effect on the vote count. There is also no evidence that there was direct coordination between the Trump campaign (hardly a well-organized effort) and Russian officials. The indictments brought by the special prosecutor so far are either for lying to the FBI or for offenses unrelated to the campaign such as money laundering or not registering as a foreign agent.

So, what is the most important fact regarding the 2016 US presidential election?

The most important fact, obscured in Russiagate hysteria, is that Americans elected Trump under the terms set forth in the Constitution. Americans created the Electoral College, which allows a candidate with a minority of popular votes to become president. Americans were those who gerrymandered electoral districts to rig them in favor of a given political party. The Supreme Court issued the infamous Citizens United decision that allows corporate financing of candidates for political office. (Hey, money talks and exercises freedom of speech; corporations are people!) Americans created a Senate that is anything but democratic, since it gives disproportionate representation to states with relatively small populations. It was American senators who established non-democratic procedures that allow minorities, even sometimes single senators, to block legislation or confirmation of appointments.

Now, that does not mean that Trump's presidency is good for the country, just because Americans elected him. In my opinion, the 2016 presidential and congressional elections pose an imminent danger to the republic. They have created potential disasters that will severely try the checks and balances built into our Constitution. This is especially true since both houses of Congress are controlled by the Republican Party, which itself represents fewer voters than the opposition party.

I did not personally vote for Trump, but I consider the charges that Russian actions interfered in the election, or -- for that matter -- damaged the quality of our democracy ludicrous, pathetic, and shameful.

"Ludicrous" because there is no logical reason to think that anything that the Russians did affected how people voted. In the past, when Soviet leaders tried to influence American elections, it backfired -- as foreign interference usually does everywhere. In 1984, Yuri Andropov, the Soviet leader then, made preventing Ronald Reagan's reelection the second-most-important task of the KGB. (The first was to detect US plans for a nuclear strike on the Soviet Union.) Everything the Soviets did -- in painting Reagan out to be a warmonger while Andropov refused to negotiate on nuclear weapons -- helped Reagan win 49 out of 50 states.

"Pathetic" because it is clear that the Democratic Party lost the election. Yes, it won the popular vote, but presidents are not elected by popular vote. To blame someone else for one's own mistakes is a pathetic case of self-deception.

"Shameful" because it is an evasion of responsibility. It prevents the Democrats, and those Republicans who want responsible, fact-based government in Washington, from concentrating on practical ways to reduce the threat the Trump presidency poses to our political values and even to our future existence. After all, Trump would not be president if the Republican Party had not nominated him. He also is most unlikely to have won the Electoral College if the Democrats had nominated someone -- almost anyone -- other than the candidate they chose, or if that candidate had run a more competent campaign. I don't argue that any of this was fair, or rational, but then who is so naive as to assume that American politics are either fair or rational?

Instead of facing the facts and coping with the current reality, the Russiagate promoters, in both the government and the media, are diverting our attention from the real threats.

I should add "dangerous" to those three adjectives. "Dangerous" because making an enemy of Russia, the other nuclear superpower -- yes, there are still two -- comes as close to political insanity as anything I can think of. Denying global warming may rank up there too in the long run, but only nuclear weapons pose, by their very existence in the quantities that are on station in Russia and the United States, an immediate threat to mankind -- not just to the United States and Russia and not just to "civilization." The sad, frequently forgotten fact is that, since the creation of nuclear weapons, mankind has the capacity to destroy itself and join other extinct species.

In their first meeting, President Ronald Reagan and then General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev agreed that "a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought." Both believed that simple and obvious truth and their conviction enabled them to set both countries on a course that ended the Cold War. We should think hard to determine how and why that simple and obvious truth has been ignored of late by the governments of both countries.

We must desist from our current Russophobic insanity and encourage Presidents Trump and Putin to restore cooperation in issues of nuclear safety, non-proliferation, control of nuclear materials, and nuclear-arms reduction. This is in the vital interest of both the United States and Russia. That is the central issue on which sane governments, and sane publics, would focus their attention.

Jack F. Matlock Jr. Jack F. Matlock Jr., ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1987 to 1991, is the author of Reagan and Gorbachev: How the Cold War Ended and Superpower Illusions: How Myths and False Ideologies Led America Astray -- And How to Return to Reality.

[Jun 05, 2018] Putin said that Russia has been blocked from participating in the ongoing international investigation into the 2014 downing of flight MH17

Notable quotes:
"... We are still unable to get answers to some questions regarding the activities of Ukrainian air forces in that region, at that place and at that time. ..."
Jun 05, 2018 | www.youtube.com

MH17 (from the transcript Interview with Austrian ORF television channel )

Armin Wolf: One of the most complicated issues with regard to Russia is Ukraine. In 2014, Flight MH17 was shot down in Ukraine, 290 people died. The international investigative commission announced a few days ago that the jet was shot down by a Russian army missile system, that it was a convoy from Russia that had come to the Ukrainian insurgents in eastern Ukraine. There is a video; there are telephone conversations and dozens of eyewitnesses. You have been saying that this is not true for about a year but practically nobody believes your words.

Are you not thereby putting the veracity of Russian statements at stake? Maybe it is time to acknowledge that the insurgents in eastern Ukraine used Russian military equipment to commit that horrendous crime?

Vladimir Putin: I want to note that both sides to the conflict – the Ukrainian army and even Ukrainian volunteer battalions who are accountable to nobody save their commanders, and the Donbass militia, the armed units in Donbass – they all use Soviet and Russian-made weapons. All of them. The two sides have all sorts of systems – both firearms, aviation, and anti-aircraft systems. All of them were made in Russia.

Armin Wolf: But now they know what missile it was: a Buk system missile. It was a Russian army brigade in Kursk. This is known for a fact, yet you still deny it. Would it not be better to admit that the missile had indeed come from Russia? Would it not be better to officially acknowledge that Russia supported the insurgents in the east of Ukraine with weapons?

Vladimir Putin: If you collect all your patience and let me finish, you will find out my view on this issue.

As I said, both sides use Russian-made weapons, and the Russian army has exactly the same systems the experts are talking about, which were certainly manufactured in the former Soviet Union or in Russia. This is number one.

Number two. Russian experts have been denied access to the investigation, our arguments are not taken into consideration, and nobody in the commission is interested in hearing us out. Conversely, the Ukrainian side, which is a party interested in the results of the investigation, has access to it. Meanwhile, it is responsible at least for failing to prohibit civilian aircraft to fly in the conflict zone in violation of ICAO's international norms.

We are still unable to get answers to some questions regarding the activities of Ukrainian air forces in that region, at that place and at that time. The tragedy we are talking about is terrible, and I feel immensely sorry for the victims and their families, but this investigation must be objective and comprehensive.

Just a second, please, do not rush. Let me speak, otherwise we are going to have a monologue on your part instead of an interview.

Armin Wolf: Nevertheless, let me say briefly – yes, we know where the missile came from. But what do Holland, Australia or Malaysia have to gain by blaming Russia if it was not a Russian missile that belonged to the Russian army?

Vladimir Putin: We do not see it that way; we have a different point of view. You now listed countries that allegedly believe that it was a Russian missile and that Russia is implicated in that terrible tragedy. I regret to disappoint you. Quite recently, Malaysian officials declared that they do not see Russia's complicity in that tragic event; they have no proof that Russia is implicated. Are you really not aware of that? Did you not see the statements by Malaysian officials?

What do we think about this issue? If we really want to get to the bottom of things in that horrendous event and reveal all the factors that would allow us to render a final conclusion, all arguments should be taken into account, including the ones offered by Russia. And it would be entirely fair for Russian experts to have access to the investigation.

Armin Wolf: The international investigative commission now claims that they have in fact taken into account all arguments. Many people do not believe Russian arguments because a few years ago in Crimea you said that the famous "green men," the fighters in green uniforms without identifying insignia, were all local self-defense forces. But a little later it was revealed that they were indeed Russian soldiers. After that, you admitted many times that those were Russian army personnel even though you denied that earlier. Why should we believe you now?

Vladimir Putin: Now that you mentioned Crimea. Do you know that in the mid 2000s, right in the vicinity of Crimea, a Russian civilian jet was downed over the Black Sea? It was done by the Ukrainian army during a drill. And the first reaction of the Ukrainian officials was that Ukraine had nothing to do with it. A civilian plane was shot down en route from Israel to Russia. Everyone onboard died, of course. Ukraine flatly denied its involvement in that terrible incident but had to admit it later. And why should we believe Ukrainian officials? So in response to your question about Crimea, I put the ball back in your court.

Armin Wolf : I am not talking about Ukrainian officials, I am talking about you. You said many times in 2014 that you used the Armed Forces in Crimea to block Ukraine's interference. Later you admitted though that the Russian army was in Crimea, something you had denied before.

Vladimir Putin : Russian forces have always been stationed there. Look, I would like you to try to understand what was actually happening there, not just repeat these things mechanically. Russian forces have always been present in Crimea. Our military contingent was there.

One second, please, let me finish. Do you want to fire questions non-stop or hear my answers?

The first thing we did when the events in Ukraine began What kind of events? Let me tell you now, and you will say yes or no. It was an unconstitutional armed coup and seizure of power. Yes or no? Will you tell me?

Armin Wolf : I am not an expert on the Ukrainian Constitution.

Vladimir Putin : You do not have to be an expert on Ukraine; you just need to be an expert on law, on the constitutional law of any country.

Armin Wolf : I would not like to talk about Ukrainian politics, but about Russian politics. Allow me to phrase it differently. What should happen in order for Russia to return Crimea to Ukraine?

Vladimir Putin : There are no such conditions and there can never be.

I will tell you why. You interrupted me again, but if you actually let me finish, you would understand what I mean. I will still do it.

When the unconstitutional armed coup took place in Ukraine, and power changed hands by force, our army was legally deployed in Crimea – under the agreement on our military base there. The first thing we did was increase our contingent to guard our Armed Forces, our military facilities, because we immediately saw that they were being threatened. That is where it all began. I told you with confidence that there was no one else there, but our Armed Forces were there legally under an agreement.

Let me finish, for God's sake. ( Speaks German .) Seien Sie so nett, lassen Sie mich etwas sagen. [Please be so kind as to let me say something.]

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

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

[Jun 05, 2018] Vladimir Zhirinovsky BLASTS American exceptionalism

What is true is the Hilter's Drang nach Osten was inspiured by the sucess of the US setteles.
Notable quotes:
"... Благодарю вас уважаемые коллеги! Спаси Господи! ..."
"... Specifically, he quoted from American senator and historian Albert Beveridge who said in 1897 : ..."
"... It is an American question. It is a world question. Shall the American people continue their resistless march toward the commercial supremacy of the world? Shall free institutions broaden their blessed reign as the children of liberty wax in strength until the empire of our principles is established over the hearts of all mankind? ..."
"... That was a quote from the speech of a famous American senator, the entire speech is honestly quite frightening. It could literally be taken out of Mien Kampf had the references to America simply be changed to Germany. Later in the speech, it goes on to say : ..."
"... Has the Almighty Father endowed us with gifts beyond our deserts, and marked us as the people of His peculiar favor ..."
"... Fellow-Americans, we are God's chosen people .. ..."
"... We cannot retreat from any soil where Providence has unfurled our banner ; ..."
"... One of the most interesting observations Zhirinovsky had, was that exceptionalism seems to come from ignorance of the world, and it does seem that anti-intellectualism, identity politics, and a special lack of cultural awareness has helped create this concept. For example, the speech about exceptionalism does not mention the French or the British, because early American exceptionalism was in its roots, not a Trans-Atlantic idea. It was formed by Anti-Monarchist people, who believed it was their destiny to defy the world's traditions, and establish their own utopia. As a result, Americans do this day often instinctively believe in how many "rights" they have, and how "free" their country is, compared to the rest of the world. ..."
"... Americans think Europe is dirty, the world is filled with good for nothing barbarians, that they gained supremacy, and that the US is the Land of Milk and Honey, Cannan, a Big Israel. ..."
"... This is true. Many Americans genuinely feel that their country is so advanced and safe, whereas the rest of the world is scary and dangerous. This often wrong, and in actually dangerous places, like some countries the US invaded, they often only became dangerous AFTER America came, and brought freedom and democracy. ..."
"... They often say this completely ignorant of the fact that MANY countries have a higher living standard than the US. For example, the US is not even in the TOP 10 countries by living standards , compiled by this non-profit. According to the United Nations Human Development Index, the US is ONLY in the tenth place. ..."
"... American exceptionalism, according to Zhirinovsky, inspired Hitler, and we all know what he felt about other people's rights. ..."
Jun 04, 2018 | theduran.com

Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (a popular opposition party), appeared on the Russian evening news criticizing strongly American exceptionalism. It is worth noting briefly that Zhirinovsky leads an opposition party, and was the third most popular candidate in the Russian election.

Due to the fact he ran in the Russian election, he obviously ran against Putin, meaning Zhirinovsky is NOT for the record, a Kremlinbot these are the words of an opposition candidate, so the west should be careful what they wish for, when they wish for a different Russian leader.

Amercian exceptionalism is perhaps the greatest issue plaguing the American consciousness, and has been since the early days of manifest destiny. If anyone is wondering, that actually manifested itself, in the whole scale destruction of native American civilization, upon the bones of which America stands.

We've criticized American exceptionalism here at The Duran , because it's dangerous to the world, as well as to the rights of normal American civilians, who want to live in a peaceful earth, that hasn't been destroyed by the military-industrial complex. Exceptionalism creates in an individual, immense pride, not unlike that in Nazi Germany before the war, and as we've seen since the beginning, pride comes before the fall.

That is what I wrote in this article below , which was quoted here and here by major Russian news agencies. Благодарю вас уважаемые коллеги! Спаси Господи! That is thanks to YOUR readership by the way, and I am very grateful to everyone!

American Exceptionalism: Mike Pompeo says Americans must believe in the "essential rightness" of the USA

http://theduran.com/american-exceptionalism-mike-pompeo-says-americans-must-believe-in-the-essential-rightness-of-the-usa/embed/#?secret=FyNVVVCbMH

Zhirinovsky too noticed how exceptionalism inspired Hitler as well, in fact. Now, Vladimir Zhirinovsky weights in on exceptionalism:

Zhirinovsky was asked to comment on the American Idea of a "city on a hill", specifically, he was asked why many Americans feel this way. Zhirinovsky went back to history, which is one of the most forgotten yet most important fields of study, crucial to understanding everything in life. Specifically, he quoted from American senator and historian Albert Beveridge who said in 1897 :

It is an American question. It is a world question. Shall the American people continue their resistless march toward the commercial supremacy of the world? Shall free institutions broaden their blessed reign as the children of liberty wax in strength until the empire of our principles is established over the hearts of all mankind?

That was a quote from the speech of a famous American senator, the entire speech is honestly quite frightening. It could literally be taken out of Mien Kampf had the references to America simply be changed to Germany. Later in the speech, it goes on to say :

Has the Almighty Father endowed us with gifts beyond our deserts, and marked us as the people of His peculiar favor

[and close to the end it says:

Fellow-Americans, we are God's chosen people .. . We cannot retreat from any soil where Providence has unfurled our banner ; it is ours to save that soil for liberty and civilization. For liberty and civilization and God's promises fulfilled, the flag must henceforth be the symbol and the sign to all mankind.

This was written in 1897, and represents how deep-rooted and cult-like American Exceptionalism is, based on a pseudo-religious idea of the inherent superiority of a single nation.

One of the most interesting observations Zhirinovsky had, was that exceptionalism seems to come from ignorance of the world, and it does seem that anti-intellectualism, identity politics, and a special lack of cultural awareness has helped create this concept. For example, the speech about exceptionalism does not mention the French or the British, because early American exceptionalism was in its roots, not a Trans-Atlantic idea. It was formed by Anti-Monarchist people, who believed it was their destiny to defy the world's traditions, and establish their own utopia. As a result, Americans do this day often instinctively believe in how many "rights" they have, and how "free" their country is, compared to the rest of the world.

For example, Zhirinovsky said:

Americans think Europe is dirty, the world is filled with good for nothing barbarians, that they gained supremacy, and that the US is the Land of Milk and Honey, Cannan, a Big Israel.

This is true. Many Americans genuinely feel that their country is so advanced and safe, whereas the rest of the world is scary and dangerous. This often wrong, and in actually dangerous places, like some countries the US invaded, they often only became dangerous AFTER America came, and brought freedom and democracy.

It's not uncommon for Americans to talk about everything "over there", or "overseas" like its hell on earth, and for them to say "Thank God I live in America, I am so free and safe here."

They often say this completely ignorant of the fact that MANY countries have a higher living standard than the US. For example, the US is not even in the TOP 10 countries by living standards , compiled by this non-profit. According to the United Nations Human Development Index, the US is ONLY in the tenth place.

These are just simple examples from broader sources that know the real world.

Americans are perfectly within their rights to love their country. No one is arguing against this, nor does any peace-loving person want to take rights away from anyone else. The only issue is when one person, or group, believes they have the right to take away other people's rights.

American exceptionalism, according to Zhirinovsky, inspired Hitler, and we all know what he felt about other people's rights.

[Jun 04, 2018] Russiagate Manipulating Globalization

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Jun 04, 2018] Ryan Dawson And Michael Collins Piper Israel And JFK

Notable quotes:
"... Final Judgement: The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination was originally published 20 years ago in January. Michael Collins Piper in this book argued that the Israelis killed Kennedy. Vanunu endorsed Piper's book. ..."
"... A JFK researcher once wrote that Piper was on to something in his research linking Israel to the assassination of President. But he said that we had to proceed with caution. Because to be accused of anti-Semitism is about the same as being accused of being a child molester. ..."
Jan 24, 2014 | fromthetrenchesworldreport.com

Mordecai Vanunu was the original whistleblower. In 1986 he told the world that Israel had nuclear weapons publishing photos of the secret Dimona works in the British press. He said Prime Minister Ben Gurion ordered the assassination of JFK because the President opposed Israel's acquisition of nuclear weapons. Ben Gurion resigned in protest over JFK's Israeli policies. Vanunu also wrote a letter in 1997 saying that there was even a link between the assassination of Kennedy and Israel's launching of the 1967 war.

Final Judgement: The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination was originally published 20 years ago in January. Michael Collins Piper in this book argued that the Israelis killed Kennedy. Vanunu endorsed Piper's book.

The Oliver Stone movie JFK was the kosher version of the assassination. Piper does not dispute that Clay Shaw had connections to the CIA. But the film neglects Shaw's connections to the heart of the Israeli nuclear program. He was on the Board of Directors of Permindex, a Swiss assassination bureau. Permindex is an Israeli front and were not run by the CIA as Oliver Stone had said. A primary shareholder in Permindex was the Banque De Credit International of Geneva, founded by Tibor Rosenbaum, an arms procurer and financier for the Mossad. That bank was used by Meyer Lansky to launder hot money. Permindex was owned by CMC of Rome, which was founded by a Hungarian Jew named George Mandel who had deep connections with Israel and the Mossad. Mandel was the first man to start rumors about Auschwitz being a death camp. The Chairman of the Board at Permindex was Louis Bloomfield, a Canadian Jew and close associate of Edgar Bronfman. He also had long standing connections with the Rothschilds dating back before WW II.

The Stern family funded Clay Shaw's defense. They can be traced back to the Purple Gang of Detroit. The Stern family owned WDSU radio and TV stations in New Orleans. They ran stories on Lee Harvey Oswald who was a member of an FBI front group called the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. This gave Oswald the cover of being a Leftist while spying on American liberals. The Stern family was heavily invested in the NUMEC nuclear plant in Pennsylvania, which was the source of Israel's first nuclear bomb. NUMEC also dumped nuclear waste in Pennsylvania.

Piper said Clay Shaw might have had more to do with CIA-Mossad attempts to assassinate Charles De Gaulle than he did with the assassination of President Kennedy.

Ed Asner played Guy Bannister, the private detective, in the movie JFK. Bannister was a good friend ofKent and Phoebe Courtney. Bannister and the Courtneys were active in conservative politics. But the Courtneys did frustrate the work of people on the Right that the Anti-Defamation League did not like. Joe Pesci played David Ferrie in the movie JFK. He was a pilot and a friend of Lee Harvey Oswald. Bannister, Ferrie and Oswald spied on Leftists in New Orleans. Guy Bannister also was a friend of Botnick who was the head of the New Orleans of ADL office. The Courtneys, Bannister, Ferrie and Lee Harvey Oswald were actively spying on Leftists in New Orleans for the ADL and Botnick.

The producer of JFK was the Israel spy Arnon Milchan who sold nuclear triggers to Israel. A J Weberman, an Israeli citizen, was the first to say that District Attorney Jim Garrison had an unpublished manuscript that charged Israel was behind the assassination of President Kennedy.

John King offered Jim Garrison a judgeship to stop his investigation of Clay Shaw. King was a business partner of Bernie Cornfeld whose Investors Overseas Service was a 2.5 billion dollar fraud. It was a subsidiary of Permindex and was linked to Tibor Rosenbaum and the Mossad.

The London Jewish Chronicle denounced President Kennedy's UN delegation position that displaced Palestinians had the right to return to the land that Israel had illegally taken from them during the 1948 war. The Jewish Chronicle published this in London on November 22, 1963.

Adlai Stevenson, a former Presidential candidate, was the American UN ambassador at the time. Stevenson's son was also a Senator and opposed Israel's excesses. He was critical of Israel sinking the USS Liberty in the 1967 war, which killed 34 American sailors.

Lyndon Johnson said he wanted the USS Liberty to sink to the bottom of the Mediterranean even while the Israelis were attacking the ship. LBJ was sleeping with a former Irgun terrorist, Mathilde Krim. Her husband was one of LBJ's many Jewish advisers.

A JFK researcher once wrote that Piper was on to something in his research linking Israel to the assassination of President. But he said that we had to proceed with caution. Because to be accused of anti-Semitism is about the same as being accused of being a child molester.

.... ...

[Jun 03, 2018] "We're taking names..." Ambassador Nikki Haley

Notable quotes:
"... In Hillary's defense, by this point she probably would have had a brain aneurism or tumor or whatever was causing the neurological ticks she exhibited and we would be stuck with her vice president, whose name I cant recall (and dont care) and the same neocons in the cabinet. ..."
turcopolier.typepad.com

"Washington is exerting pressure on Turkey to make it abandon the plans to purchase Russia S-400 Triumf state-of-the-art air defense systems. So far, Ankara stood tall refusing to bow. US Congress is already considering the proposals on halting US arms sales to that country." Korzun "Unlike Turkey, India is not a NATO ally but its desire to acquire the Triumf triggers a negative reaction in the US. American lawmakers not only express concern over the planned deal but also issue warnings that sensitive American military technology may be banned from being shared with India in future.

According to House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry, "There is a lot of concern in the US administration and Congress with the S-400." India's decision will be made final before the October Russia-India summit. During the informal talks in Sochi in May 2018, President Putin and Prime Minister Modi discussed the ways to get around the US potential sanctions when the deal goes through. Both countries have pledged to jointly create a plan to keep it out of CAATSA.

New Delhi has just concluded price talks on the S-400 deal with Moscow, saying it will go ahead, no matter what the US says or does. Those who follow the news on arms trade know well that India is interested in purchasing 22 American Predator Guardian drones for its Navy. It's also willing to acquire the weapon the US has not sold anyone so far: 80-100 Avenger (Predator C) armed drones for the Air Force. The price may be as high as $8 billion .

The F-16 production on Indian soil is also in doubt. All these projects are questioned as the US sticks to its guns implementing the "do it or else" policy. But it will hardly work with India, a nation known for its independent foreign policy. It has never bowed to any pressure from outside since its independence.

Iraq, Egypt, the UAE, Qatar, Morocco, Indonesia and Vietnam are among the countries threatened by sanctions if they go on with the plans to purchase Russian weapons. Many of them are particularly interested in the S-400." Korzun https://southfront.org/us-warns-india-not-to-buy-russian-weapons/

-------------

America leads the way! Or else. Well, folks the international situation would be at least this bad with the wandering basket case Hillary Clinton in charge. It appears that Israel is wasting American money by maintaining its own ambassador at the UN since they already have Nikki Haley. They should make her status official and save money.

Yesterday she vetoed Kuwait's draft resolution on Gaza and was joined by no other country on that. Then she offered a US resolution condemning Hamas for the Palestinian deaths on the Gaza border and was joined by none. Not even the usual European toadies would sign up to support that. Haley must be planning to run for president on the new Ziotrumpian Party ticket. The control wielded by the Zionists over Trump appears to be complete at this point.

I doubt if Trump really understands anything about the Middle East. His "thinking" appears to be a melange and reflection of the Grima Wormtongue murmurings of his family members, the flickering images on the Fox channels, (Hannity the Wise, Jack Keane and Stewart Varney) and his own lack of a reflective mind.

The Saudis get s big response from him as well. But, after all, they have disposable cash. They don't have as much as they did, but they still have a lot. That counts in the narrow world of The Art of the Deal." In the arms trade, the objective seems to be to dragoon all these countries into accepting their roles as satrapies of the Peacock Throne, Will that work? We will see.

The name of US Pacific Command has been changed to US Indo-Pacific Command. I don't quite see the significance of that unless it is accompanied by AOR boundary changes in the Unified Command Plan (UCP). pl

ISL , a day ago

Dear Colonel,

Equally telling is that we were not even joined by the Solomon Islands, which to me indicates that the US is not even bothering to try.

Russian AD has gotten really good advertising in Syria, but somehow, whereas the US THAAD did not even try to shoot down Kim's missile. I suppose that is what happens when supporting US industries is from fact-free marketing and strong-arming sales "or else" rather than having the best. Sad. very sad.

In Hillary's defense, by this point she probably would have had a brain aneurism or tumor or whatever was causing the neurological ticks she exhibited and we would be stuck with her vice president, whose name I cant recall (and dont care) and the same neocons in the cabinet.

La plus sa change

DenLilleAbe , 5 hours ago
America is acting stupid as usual. It is becoming a rule now.

The US did not win WWII the provided material and little else (Apologies to the servicemen who gave their life, eternal respect from a former soldier, your sacrifice is not forgotten) but neither are the 22 million Russians Who died in the great War. Largely forgotten by the MSM. 22 million. It is an unnatural figure, that most Americans cant even comprehend, its a figure that is offensive!!

Yanks fok off, you have never seen blood on your soil, but you will, it is just a matter of time, inequalities growing and all, you will. And we will do nothing. You brought 75 years of destruction on us, ordinary people, enjoy your palms.
Written as a former NATO officer.

mariner , 13 hours ago
An Indian perspective

'Realising CAATSA's potential for damaging relations with key partners like India, Secretary of Defence James Mattis has been campaigning for a national security waiver from CAATSA for key allies, including in recent testimony before the US Congress.

However, Democratic Congresspersons are virulently opposed to any waiver that might allow Mr Trump's administration to bypass CAATSA. The Republicans might be more open to the notion of a waiver for a small handful of countries, but they do not want to give Mr Trump a free hand on Russia either.'

http://ajaishukla.blogspot....

[Jun 03, 2018] Brabantian

Jun 03, 2018 | www.unz.com

says: Website June 2, 2018 at 10:33 am GMT 200 Words More black-pilling for Putin fanboys, such as Unz's Andrei 'the Saker' Raevsky -

Putin & Moscow denounce Iran for anti-Israeli activity From retired Indian Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar, 'Russia Censures Iran' :

Close ties between Russia and Israel are sailing into full view it all does seem a cosy condominium between Putin and Netanyahu Extraordinary statements for an establishment think tank known to be close to the Kremlin:

The commentary contextualised Putin's recent call for the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Syrian soil. It openly rapped the Iranians on the knuckle: "Iran's operations in Syria go far beyond fighting terrorists and are hardly welcomed by anyone within the region and beyond. This heightens tensions in Israel's relations with its bitter rivals Serving as a platform for fighting the 'Zionist' enemy is something Syria needs the least."

Key elements [according to the Kremlin-tied think tank]:
a) Russia holds Iran as responsible for ratcheting up tensions with Israel;
b) Russia thoroughly disapproves of Syria being turned into a turf for Iran's policy of 'Resistance' against Israel; and,
c) Moscow expects the Assad regime to distance itself from Iran's anti-Israeli activities.

[Jun 03, 2018] Poland Under the Jewish Messiah, by Israel Shamir - The Unz Review

Jun 03, 2018 | www.unz.com

Anon [411] Disclaimer , June 2, 2018 at 5:46 am GMT

@Dimitrij

Polack is, effectively, almost any Polish national who dances upon the official fairy-telling narrative of Polish state puppeteers. In that Marvelous Universe, Poland is a truly indispensable part of the West, for its glorious deeds of once Saving the Christendom in Vienna, and containing the Bear all other time.

In reality, it is a loser entity that 'Cannot Into Space' on many historic occasions – mostly from building multi-ethnic empire to invading Russia. Poles suffer from being surrounded by equally capable neighbors, Russians and Germans. Chopin is good, but he is neither Mozart nor Chaikovsky, and to have such genii, one has to build empire first, and then enjoy imperial music and literature.

For the West, Poland is an 'useful idiot' or a dupe, never treated as equal partner. In Western (Capitalist) division of nations labor Poles are The Exploited. They are 1) cannon fodder from Vienna to Monte-Cassino 2) theater of war and destruction to prevent Russians from entering and destroying True Europe 3) cheap labor or preferrable white slaves 4) one who pays for everything. Today, option 3 is fullfilled, others are selected by the the West. Poland is a still a resource, and will be consumed by the West on any pretext. To the East, there is a Big Brother that has its own resources.

We Russians used to treat the Polish identity illness, by capturing Warsaw many times. The prognosis is still grave. Dear Polish brethren, we have no other options for you. Stick with the West, keep your Catholic dreams and continue to perish. When you go critical, we may think of surgery again.

El Dato , June 2, 2018 at 7:11 am GMT

The US decided, by promulgating Act 447, that a Polish Jew has never been a citizen of Poland; he was a member of Jewry, and his property should revert to Jewry, not to the Goyish Polish state.

It is nice that the US issues laws that are supposed to have effect in other states; the slightly tipsy Galactus of Democracy is in his Heaven, all is right with the World.

It means that they can seize property of recently deceased ones in the Homeland and embiggen the Tribe, But how are they going to enforce it in Poland? Sanctions? Threats to move NATO out of Poland? No F-35 for you?

(Also, did the Scriptures say anything about when the Monstrously Swollen Jewish Messiah will meet Ultra-Confucius for a Battle at the End of Times?)

Tom Welsh , June 2, 2018 at 8:33 am GMT
"Poland has no future as the forward base against Moscow "

That has to be the understatement of the century (so far).

Any place used as a "forward base against Moscow" will be flattened and incinerated.

As would American tanks about 30 seconds after they crossed the Russian border.

The King is A Fink , June 2, 2018 at 9:55 am GMT

The West pushed the Poles to rise against Germans in 1944, hoping to re-establish anti-Russian Poland once again, but did nothing when the rebels bled to death. (Well, not exactly nothing: they complained why Russian soldiers do not want to die for them).

Please do not forget the extraordinary role of the RAF and SAAF aircrews who flew supplies to the Home Army in Warsaw from bases in southern Italy. Many of them lost their lives and are buried in a Commonwealth cemetery in Krakow.

Romano , June 2, 2018 at 10:31 am GMT
Magnificent article . Pole troops even invaded Spain with Napoleon , those " catholic " Poles did not seem to feel bad for joining antichristian French revolutionary armies invading Catholic Spain .

Polish Pope John Paul II , Woytila , joined forces with Reagan and Thatcher , with the most wild anglosaxon imperialism , against the rest of the world . John Paul II , with his 27 year pontificate , left the Catholic Church devastated , the Catholic churches empty , the people faithless .

When Polacks , baltics , and other weirdo countries of eastern europe joined the EU I realized that the EU had no future .

Poland is a very sinister country , a factor of endless conflicts .

lavoisier , Website June 2, 2018 at 10:32 am GMT
This was fascinating and revealing.

To liken Jewry to a feudal order of obligations and ownership explains a lot about their collective behavior.

I hope the Polish people tell the United States to go to hell.

Perhaps there is little that we as Americans can do right now to stop the control freaks in our Zionist controlled government from behaving like ruthless feudal landlords, but I am hoping that the rest of the Western world removes the American boot off its neck and tells the US to -- - off.

[Jun 01, 2018] Debasing US Policy Discourse About Russia The Nation

Notable quotes:
"... The New York Times ..."
Jun 01, 2018 | www.thenation.com

Stephen F. Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at NYU and Princeton, and John Batchelor continue their (usually) weekly discussions of the new US-Russian Cold War. (You can find previous installments of these conversations, now in their fifth year, at TheNation.com .)

Baseless and reckless tropes about Russia, Cohen points out, have proliferated in the US political-media establishment during the new Cold War, and even more since Russiagate allegations began to circulate widely two years ago, in mid-2016. The worst of these tropes -- in effect an incitement to war -- is that "Russia attacked America during the 2016 presidential election." But there are others equally unfounded and almost as detrimental to Washington policy-making. Among them, as The Economist and The New York Times recently asserted, are that on today's "world stage" Russian President Vladimir Putin is a "pariah" and his country " isolated from the international community ." Indeed, the Times insisted, quoting a British intelligence chief, that Russia is " becoming a 'more isolated pariah.' "

These assertions are so detached from geopolitical realities that they may be expressions of some Putin-Russia Derangement Syndrome, as others have suggested. Consider only last week's St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, an annual event conceived by the Kremlin as a kind of Russian Davos. By most media accounts, including non-Russian ones, it was the best attended and most successful since 2014, when the West began imposing escalating economic sanctions on the country. Leaders of France, Japan, China, India, Saudi Arabia, and scores of less consequential states were there, along with innumerable international corporate executives, the director of the International Monetary Fund, and the president of Boeing, who declared that Russia " is a place for long-term partnership ." Judging by press reports, television footage, and transcripts of meetings, virtually all of them were eager for close encounters with the "pariah" Putin. Indeed, just prior to the event, Chancellor Angela Merkel and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi traveled to Sochi to meet separately with Putin. Again, all this against the backdrop of new financial and diplomatic sanctions rained on Russia by London and Washington and very perfunctory, if at all, implemented by their European "allies."

In reality, it is impossible to isolate Russia, the planet's largest territorial and most natural-resource rich nation. There is no "global politics," no "world order," without Russia. Its natural gas and oil resources, carried west and east through its far-flung networks of pipelines -- both existing ones and those under construction -- make such an effort an epic geopolitical folly. So too does Moscow's political-diplomatic influence in vital regions, from Europe, China, and Afghanistan to the Middle East. (Consider its crucial role, for example, in any crisis-resolution involving Iran or North Korea.) Much of this is due not primarily to Moscow's modernized conventional and nuclear weapons but to its foreign-policy philosophy under Putin. Simply put but often elaborated: In accord with national sovereignty, we are ready for good relations with any government that seeks good relations with us. Contrast this with Washington's longstanding ideological, highly militarized, and often hegemony-aspiring foreign-policy tenets.

As a result, unlike the Soviet Union, post-Soviet Russia has few, if any, unwilling allies, semi-allies, or partners in international affairs. China and Iran are big and important allies. Semi-allies and occasional partners include India and, of course, the other BRICs nations; Saudi Arabia, with whom Russia has cooperated in order to raise international oil prices; and Israel, whose prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was an honored guest in Moscow for Russia's most sacred memorial holiday, Victory Day, on May 9. America's European NATO allies may seem united in "isolating" Russia, but not the leaders of Hungary, the Czech Republic, or the president of France. Indeed, Emmanuel Macron, again accompanied by his wife, did a mini-version of his effervescent socializing with President Trump in Washington with Putin in St. Petersburg, while also signing a major energy deal with Russia and hoping that France will become " Russia's largest investor ." Another test of Europe's fidelity to the United States (and its devout UK partner) will come in July, when EU sanctions on Russia must be continued or terminated. A single "no" vote will end them. Until now, Europe has been swayed -- or coerced -- by Washington. But can the new government now being formed in Italy be made to conform, or other governments now rebelling against Trump's renewed sanctions on Iran, with which not a few European companies have highly profitable business relations? But can the new government now being formed in Italy be made to conform? And what of the other governments now rebelling against Trump's renewed sanctions on Iran, a nation with which not a few European companies have highly profitable business relations? Is, as an official Russian news agency hopes, an "anti-sanctions coalition" forming against the United States? If so, who would be isolated?

Where did the foolish notion of "isolating Russia" originate? This, at least, cannot be attributed to President Trump, but to President Obama. In April 2014, he made known, as reported by the Times , that henceforth his policy would focus on " isolating Russia by cutting off its economic and political ties to the outside world effectively making it a pariah state ." This was extremist folly, not, as the Times correspondent thought, " an updated version of the Cold War strategy of containment ." Containment was intended not to isolate the Soviet Union but to keep it from spreading its military and political influence beyond its own existing "bloc" of allies.

Washington and its allies have certainly tried to isolate "Putin's Russia." Hence the multiyear cascade of tantrum-like, pointless, mostly ineffective, even counterproductive sanctions. In addition, whether by chance or intent, political campaigns have erupted on the eve of Putin and Russia's emerging on "the world state" in ways that demonstrate their central role in international affairs. Thus the media campaign to frighten away visitors to the 2014 Sochi Olympics with reports that terrorist and homophobic attacks were certain to happen along with life-threatening mishaps due to "corrupt" construction. (None did.) Now, on the eve of the World Cup championship in Russia, there is perhaps a predictable new series of US media reports suggesting that Russia should be treated as a pariah nation: accounts of an attempted assassination of Sergei Skripal in the UK, an official story that has almost completely fallen apart, but not before having major diplomatic consequences ; a revived report that Moscow was behind the shoot-down of a Malaysian passenger jetliner over Ukraine in 2014, but without any new actual evidence; a revival of the malicious allegation that Putin and Russia itself are "fascist," without a word, of course, about an epidemic of anti-Semitic episodes and armed neo-Nazis in US-backed Ukraine; and a prominent Times opinion article warning that "L.G.T.B. people" may be in danger during the World Cup games.

An argument about the extent to which Russia is or is not isolated in the world today may seem marginal given the looming dangers inherent in the new Cold War. But even leaving aside the obscurant conceit that Washington and London are "the international community," it is indicative of the general degradation of American thinking and discourse about geopolitics and US foreign policy generally in mainstream media and politics. (There are, of course, many exceptions outside the mainstream, especially in scholarly publications.) Henry Kissinger once said, "The demonization of Vladimir Putin is not a policy. It is an alibi for not having one." The "isolated pariah" trope is part of that demonizing. But Kissinger was partially wrong: Washington has had Russia policies in the Putin era -- exceedingly ill-informed, unwise, and failed ones.

Stephen F. Cohen Stephen F. Cohen is a professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University and a contributing editor of The Nation .

[Jun 01, 2018] Sic Semper Tyrannis RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP 31 MAY 2018 (By Patrick Armstrong)

Jun 01, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

31 May 2018 RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP 31 MAY 2018 (By Patrick Armstrong) Russian flag

RUSSIA: REALITY AND ILLUSION. In my employed days (10 years ago this week!) we Russia hands would periodically be visited by someone from our Embassy who would tell us (expressing surprise) that Moscow was safe, interesting, the people "normal" and so on. I testily told one once that all he was telling us, who already knew this, was how bad Western (and Embassy) reporting was on the reality of Russia. Nicolai Petro has written a masterful piece on this persistence of an out-of-date and wrong-headed picture that is still the foundation of so much comment. "Paradigm blindness occurs when an event remains invisible because the observer has no context or expression for naming it. Simply put, Americans cannot talk about Russia as a democracy because there is no frame of reference for Russian democracy in their minds." He sadly concludes that "Russophobia is a chronic condition for American elites" and that it is "a by-product of American exceptionalism". You should read the original but Paul Robinson summarises it . I notice it all the time: to say "Russian elections" is to get a smile – "everybody knows" they don't have them, ditto "Russian law" and so on. An inadvertently hilarious illustration of self-deception masquerading as analysis can be found here : "Our foreign policy successes have been far more numerous than our mistakes, and the benefits of American involvement around the globe far outweigh the shortcomings", "Putin's Moscow has sought to rebuild Russia's prestige by challenging the United States in its Allies without moral constraint" and so on. In short: we bomb hospitals by mistake , Russians do it on purpose . Dangerous stuff to be thinking these days.

FOUR AT ONCE. Four Bulava ICBMs launched at once . That's potentially 24 150kt warheads. Maybe it's time to stare paying better – and less self-delusory – attention to Russia.

OOPS. The Russians claim to have two Tomahawk missiles from Syria; they say they will study them so as to better counter them . This will not bother the Pentagon which denies that any such thing happened .

SPIEF. Took place last week. May prove to be an event of some significance depending on Europe's reaction to Trump's cancellation of the Iran agreement and tariffs . Serious meetings with Japan , France and the IMF , China and, a few days before with India and Germany . Interesting that, no matter what, they come to talk to Putin sooner or later, isn't it? There's a new world a-borning but it will take a while yet.

SANCTIONS. Oleg Deripaska has resigned as CEO of Rusal ; the idea is that since the US has sanctioned him personally, the company can now function. But so long as the US sanctions random people for things Russia didn't do, who can say? Washington currently involves 20 countries in sanction s; or is it more ? You add it up . Once on the list, you never got off and Jackson-Vannik morphs into Magnitskiy.

MH17. Is back and just in time for the World Cup. Some old Bellingcat videos and a conveniently-just-discovered-somewhere-sometime 30-year old missile bit . Meanwhile Kerry's " we observed it " is nowhere to be seen and Ukrainian radar was " down for maintenance ". Who knew that the mighty US intelligence structure all comes down to social media and and one guy in the UK.

SKRIPALMANIA. " British Hostage Video Of Yulia Skripal Released ". But, as is argued here , maybe she bravely negotiated what she could say. I stick by what I said at the start and I am pleased to see that the readers of the Daily Mail (one of the few MTP outlets that still allows comments) are equally scornful . (PS: I especially enjoyed it when Lexus and Vovan got Johnson to promise: " evidence we many be able to produce in due course ". I thought they already had all the evidence). Craig Murray discusses .

SRIPAL KIEV. I don't know what the point of this idiotic death and resurrection was , but be assured that Putin will continue to be blamed for it. Stupidest take (so far): " The Babchenko stunt may end up feeding the Kremlin spin machine ": those pesky Russians will use our lies to prove that we lie.

PHONE PRANKS. Lexus and Vovan, pretending to be the Armenian PM, talk to Boris Johnson; the Foreign Office say it was the " latest desperate attempt by the Kremlin to save face" and Johnson figured it out pretty quickly . "Quickly" in this case being 18 minutes. You have to wonder: can anyone with an accent and a story get to talk these people? Lexus and Vovan have done this many times .

NEW NWO. Is Trump alienating allies? I suggested he is on purpose ; others notice it's happening . Either way, people are starting to consider life without Uncle Sam ensconced in the guest bedroom.

UKRAINE. It's not just "Putin trolls": from an American Jewish publication: " Violent Anti-Semitism Is Gripping Ukraine -- And The Government Is Standing Idly By ". The legacy of Nuland's "Revolution of Dignity": nazi recrudescence, war with Russia and – potentially worse – nuclear disaster .

[May 31, 2018] Journalists and academics expose UK's criminal actions in the Middle East by Julie Hyland

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The reports delivered during the four-hour meeting provided a devastating exposure of the connection between propaganda and censorship by the media and the warmongering of governments in Britain, the United States and across the world. ..."
"... Professor Piers Robinson (Chair in Politics, Society and Political Journalism) spoke on the rebranding of government propaganda as "public relations." Drawing on his research into the Iraq war, he cited material from the Chilcot Inquiry into the war confirming the systematic manipulation and exaggeration of "intelligence" on Iraq's supposed Weapons of Mass Destruction. This included discussions between the US and British governments over how the 9/11 terror attacks could be used for regime change operations, under the slogan of the "war on terror", which Robinson described as a propaganda slogan for mobilising support for military operations. ..."
"... Stuart gave a presentation on his examination of film recorded by BBC personnel at Atareb Hospital in Aleppo on August 26, 2013 purporting to show the aftermath of a napalm-style bombing by Syrian government forces. The footage was broadcast the same evening that parliament delivered a shock vote against a military attack on Syria. He showed that much of it was staged. Not only did this potentially include the use of military casualty trauma simulations, but BBC personnel were travelling in vehicles displaying ISIS flags and alongside senior members of the western-funded White Helmets. ..."
"... It was impossible to have a functioning democracy without a functioning fourth estate, he said. This had been the gold standard but was no longer the case. Henningsen noted widespread popular opposition to war in the US that successive presidential candidates had sought to manipulate, only to betray once in power -- from George W. Bush to Barack Obama and Donald Trump. ..."
"... The mainstream media have enormous assets and resources but claim democracy is threatened by "fake news", when they are the purveyors of fake news and the real threat to democracy. ..."
May 31, 2018 | www.wsws.org

"Government propaganda and the war on terror from 9/11 to Syria"

Media on Trial held a successful event in Leeds on Sunday, in the face of sustained efforts to prevent the meeting taking place.

The group was formed by Frome Stop War, based in Somerset. Working with academics, investigative journalists and other interested parties and individuals, and drawing on the illegal 2003 invasion of Iraq, Media on Trial seeks to "cultivate public scepticism when faced with establishment and corporate media's partisan reporting at times of conflict". It held well-attended meetings in Frome and London last year. Its success in exposing the ongoing regime-change operations in Syria, and government/media propaganda to this end, has made its members the subject of an organised media smear campaign, culminating in efforts to silence it altogether.

" Government propaganda and the war on terror from 9/11 to Syria" was booked at Leeds City Museum. But in an assault on free speech, Labour-run Leeds City Council in West Yorkshire cancelled the event .

Sheila Coombes speaking at Media on Trial

Sheila Coombes (Frome Stop War) has reported that the ban, made on May 3 -- World Press Freedom Day -- came after a series of attacks on several of the featured speakers by the Huffington Post , Guardian and Times newspapers as "Assad Apologists".

Among those targeted were Professor Piers Robinson (University of Sheffield), Professor Tim Hayward (University of Edinburgh) -- both of the Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media (WGSPM) -- and investigative journalist Vanessa Beeley.

Having travelled to Leeds to check out the venue, Coombes was told that Leeds City Council had cancelled the event, suggesting that "security issues" were involved. She was informed that it was a blanket ban and that no other council-run venue would host it.

Less than an hour after she had been informed, the Yorkshire Post ran an online article welcoming the ban, followed by a similar report in the Huffington Post . The speed of publication suggests that these media outlets were aware of the ban before Coombes herself had been informed.

Piers Robinson speaking at the Media on Trial event

Coombes reports that she was in contact with police regarding security arrangements for the event and that she had been informed by the police officer in charge that he had advised Leeds City Council there was "no intelligence to assess a threat". A second alternative private venue was also cancelled.

Media on Trial was forced to keep details of the third venue secret until shortly before it was due to open and restrict entrance to those who had already purchased tickets. The panel was eventually able to go ahead on Sunday at the Baab-ul-llm Islamic education centre, one of the few venues prepared to stand in defiance of this campaign of censorship. Approximately 200 people attended.

The reports delivered during the four-hour meeting provided a devastating exposure of the connection between propaganda and censorship by the media and the warmongering of governments in Britain, the United States and across the world.

Professor Piers Robinson (Chair in Politics, Society and Political Journalism) spoke on the rebranding of government propaganda as "public relations." Drawing on his research into the Iraq war, he cited material from the Chilcot Inquiry into the war confirming the systematic manipulation and exaggeration of "intelligence" on Iraq's supposed Weapons of Mass Destruction. This included discussions between the US and British governments over how the 9/11 terror attacks could be used for regime change operations, under the slogan of the "war on terror", which Robinson described as a propaganda slogan for mobilising support for military operations.

Robert Stuart is an independent researcher whose presentation on the "irregularities" in the BBC Panorama documentary, "Saving Syria's Children," encouraged film producer and writer Victor Lewis-Smith to tear up his BBC contract in disgust.

Robert Stuart speaking at the Media on Trial event

Stuart gave a presentation on his examination of film recorded by BBC personnel at Atareb Hospital in Aleppo on August 26, 2013 purporting to show the aftermath of a napalm-style bombing by Syrian government forces. The footage was broadcast the same evening that parliament delivered a shock vote against a military attack on Syria. He showed that much of it was staged. Not only did this potentially include the use of military casualty trauma simulations, but BBC personnel were travelling in vehicles displaying ISIS flags and alongside senior members of the western-funded White Helmets.

Professor Tim Hayward (Environmental Political Theory) questioned the morality of the media presenting information that was untrue and its implications for democracy and society. He questioned the media's complicity in glorifying jihadi figures, despite this being in contravention of the British governments' own anti-terror laws. He drew attention to broadcasts on Channel 4 that provided flattering accounts of British women signing up for jihad. The media were guilty of inverting the truth and placing a "lockdown" on information that breached the rudiments of journalistic integrity.

American journalist and broadcaster Patrick Henningsen (21st Century Wire), drew attention to the unprecedented conditions in which the meeting was being held, "in secret, in a tent".

It was impossible to have a functioning democracy without a functioning fourth estate, he said. This had been the gold standard but was no longer the case. Henningsen noted widespread popular opposition to war in the US that successive presidential candidates had sought to manipulate, only to betray once in power -- from George W. Bush to Barack Obama and Donald Trump.

The mainstream media have enormous assets and resources but claim democracy is threatened by "fake news", when they are the purveyors of fake news and the real threat to democracy.

Peter Ford is a former UK ambassador to Syria (2003–2006) and now Director of the British Syrian Society. He noted that the government had been forced to convene the Leveson Inquiry into the media after the phone-hacking scandal involving Murdoch's News of the World . But those actions were trivial in comparison with the real charge sheet that needed to be presented against the media: that of "war mongering and aiding and abetting war mongering".

Vanessa Beeley is an international investigative journalist and photographer who had reported from inside Syria (including East Aleppo), Egypt and Palestine. She played an important role in exposing Syria's White Helmets as an arm of western propaganda and regime change operations.

She delivered a moving account of the situation within Syria and the capital Damascus. In addition to detailing the role of the White Helmets and other institutions financed and backed by western governments, Beeley noted that, especially following the Second World War, pro-war propaganda was deemed a threat to peace. The Nuremberg Trials in 1946 characterised propaganda to facilitate war as a serious crime against humanity; one of the gravest that could be committed. Today, those who advocate peace and the defence of international law are smeared and silenced, while those who promote war are being lauded in the media.

In the short time available for questions, contributions were made, including the possibility of practical action against war-mongering.

Julie Hyland, speaking for the World Socialist Web Site , was greeted warmly by the audience for raising that the high point of the international campaign of smears and censorship is the attack on Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder who is in grave danger of eviction from the Ecuadorian Embassy and extradition to the United States.

Henningson replied that the embassy had determined to cut Assange's internet access and personal communications while Syria was being targeted for military strikes. "I don't underestimate the influence of Julian Assange at those critical times. His own website was taken offline as the air strike by the US, Britain and France were happening, along with several other web sites". He added, "Julian Assange is being silenced because they don't want someone like him to have a platform".

Video of the Media on Trial Leeds event can be viewed here

[May 29, 2018] Credible Report Alleges US Relocates ISIS from Syria and Iraq into Russia via Afghanistan

Notable quotes:
"... According to Russian and Chinese law enforcement agencies, militants fleeing by sea from Syria and Iraq follow a route from the Qasim port in the Pakistani city of Karachi to Peshawar, and are then distributed along the Nangarhar province in the east of the country. ..."
"... Since late 2017 the leaders of the Islamic State managed to transfer from Syria and Iraq to Afghanistan an additional 500 foreign fighters, including more than two dozen women. A source in one of the Russian law enforcement agencies says: "All of them are also in the province of Nangarhar. They are citizens of Sudan, Kazakhstan, Czech Republic, Uzbekistan, France and so on." ..."
"... Movement of militants to the north is planned to be organized in two directions. In Tajikistan, the radicals will penetrate the provinces of Nuristan and Badakhshan, and to Turkmenistan - through the provinces of Farah, Ghor, Sari-Pul and Faryab. ..."
"... Governor of Nangarhar Province, Gulab Mangal ..."
"... personally oversees militant activities in the region. ..."
"... Mangal has a long-standing relationship with the US intelligence services. In particular, he fought against the Soviet forces during the Afghan campaign of the USSR. Immediately after the US invasion in 2001, he was appointed as the head of the local government of the Pashtuns, the people to which he belongs. Also, Mangal is loved by the Western press. Most of the publications in the major American and British media contain exceptionally positive information about him, and the BBC called him "the hope of Helmand province," which Mangal previously headed. ..."
"... According to the Ministry of Defense of Afghanistan, in the near future the leadership of the Islamic State plans to expand the grouping by another 1.2 thousand militants. Most of them will also be located in the province, under the control of Gulab Mangal and his people. ..."
"... It is worth noting that the two largest US bases in Afghanistan are in the immediate vicinity of the Nangarhar province, which is hardly a coincidence. ..."
"... At the same time, the expert community points out that the pressure on Tajikistan and Turkmenistan will be only one of the vectors of the new hybrid attack on Russia. Director of the Center for Geopolitical Expertise Valery Korovin ..."
"... is confident that Moscow should prepare for a large-scale offensive of geopolitical opponents on all fronts: in Ukraine, possibly through Armenia, as well as a number of other post-Soviet countries. ..."
"... " Destabilizing the situation in Central Asia, the US and its allies will achieve several goals at once. First, in this way, Washington can distract Moscow and Tehran from Syria. Secondly, if the operation succeeds, a focus of instability will be created along the path of the One-Belt-One-Road project, which is designed to strengthen the economic and logistical integration of Eurasia. Afghanistan also borders Iran in the west, which opens a new front against Tehran. Starting with economic pressure through new sanctions, ending with "color revolutions" that will continue in the post-Soviet space, and direct aggression from American networks. Obviously, the United States did not seize Afghanistan, by rigging its military dictatorship there, in order to build democracy and civil society there. This is a springboard for the creation of terrorist networks, with the help of which the US is preparing an aggression against Iran and Russia." ..."
May 29, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

Eric ZUESSE | 26.05.2018 | WORLD / Middle East | FEATURED STORY Credible Report Alleges US Relocates ISIS from Syria and Iraq into Russia via Afghanistan

Katehon, a think-tank dedicated to the protection of nations' sovereignty against invasions and coups from abroad, headlined, on May 15th, "Special Services Agent: Attack on Russia Is Being Prepared" , and reported that [with editorial clarifications and links supplied by me in brackets]:

According to Russian and Chinese law enforcement agencies, militants fleeing by sea from Syria and Iraq follow a route from the Qasim port in the Pakistani city of Karachi to Peshawar, and are then distributed along the Nangarhar province in the east of the country.

Since late 2017 the leaders of the Islamic State managed to transfer from Syria and Iraq to Afghanistan an additional 500 foreign fighters, including more than two dozen women. A source in one of the Russian law enforcement agencies says: "All of them are also in the province of Nangarhar. They are citizens of Sudan, Kazakhstan, Czech Republic, Uzbekistan, France and so on."

Movement of militants to the north is planned to be organized in two directions. In Tajikistan, the radicals will penetrate the provinces of Nuristan and Badakhshan, and to Turkmenistan - through the provinces of Farah, Ghor, Sari-Pul and Faryab.

Governor of Nangarhar Province, Gulab Mangal [ Wikipedia says of him , "After the American led invasion in 2001 , he was appointed a Regional Coordinator of the Constitutional Loya Jirga in Paktia"], personally oversees militant activities in the region.

Mangal has a long-standing relationship with the US intelligence services. In particular, he fought against the Soviet forces during the Afghan campaign of the USSR. Immediately after the US invasion in 2001, he was appointed as the head of the local government of the Pashtuns, the people to which he belongs. Also, Mangal is loved by the Western press. Most of the publications in the major American and British media contain exceptionally positive information about him, and the BBC called him "the hope of Helmand province," which Mangal previously headed.

According to the Ministry of Defense of Afghanistan, in the near future the leadership of the Islamic State plans to expand the grouping by another 1.2 thousand militants. Most of them will also be located in the province, under the control of Gulab Mangal and his people.

It is worth noting that the two largest US bases in Afghanistan are in the immediate vicinity of the Nangarhar province, which is hardly a coincidence.

At the same time, the expert community points out that the pressure on Tajikistan and Turkmenistan will be only one of the vectors of the new hybrid attack on Russia. Director of the Center for Geopolitical Expertise Valery Korovin [and here is more about him] is confident that Moscow should prepare for a large-scale offensive of geopolitical opponents on all fronts: in Ukraine, possibly through Armenia, as well as a number of other post-Soviet countries. [Korovin states]:

" Destabilizing the situation in Central Asia, the US and its allies will achieve several goals at once. First, in this way, Washington can distract Moscow and Tehran from Syria. Secondly, if the operation succeeds, a focus of instability will be created along the path of the One-Belt-One-Road project, which is designed to strengthen the economic and logistical integration of Eurasia. Afghanistan also borders Iran in the west, which opens a new front against Tehran. Starting with economic pressure through new sanctions, ending with "color revolutions" that will continue in the post-Soviet space, and direct aggression from American networks. Obviously, the United States did not seize Afghanistan, by rigging its military dictatorship there, in order to build democracy and civil society there. This is a springboard for the creation of terrorist networks, with the help of which the US is preparing an aggression against Iran and Russia."

If this is true, then Trump is carrying through the plan that George Herbert Walker Bush initiated on the night of 24 February 1990 , to capture Russia, despite the termination of communism, the Soviet Union, and the Warsaw Pact, and despite the Soviet Union's departure from Afghanistan in 1989 , a year before Bush's secret plan was initiated.

Peter Korzun, my colleague at the Strategic Culture Fundation, has presented a case that "Despite its recent claims to the contrary, the US is hunkering down in Syria for the long haul." He noted that: "Last month US forces were also reported to be building a new outpost at the al-Omar oil field in southeastern Deir ez-Zor. They were deployed to positions around the Conoco and al-Jafreh oil fields. On April 7, the area around the oil fields in Deir ez-Zor was declared a military zone by the US-led SDF . That group has already clashed with Syrian forces in the fight to control the province."

On 25 June 2017, I noted that in December 2016, "Obama and Turkey's Erdogan, began their joint effort to relocate ISIS from Mosul Iraq, into Der Zor Syria, in order to culminate their (and the Sauds') joint plan to use ISIS so as to bring down Assad." And "Trump has been continuing Obama's Policy" of supporting Al Qaeda and even sometimes ISIS in Syria so as to carve out Syria's oil-producing region as a separate US-controlled nation, in the event that America and the Sauds fail to replace Assad in all of Syria.

Perhaps the US, which clearly was not satisfied when the Soviet side ended its side of the Cold War in 1991, is going all the way to seek a hot-war victory against Russia. Pushing Russia this hard and this far and this long -- using even the "Putin stole Crimea" hoax and other such hoaxes to justify 'restoring' a Cold War which was actually supposed to have ended when the Soviet Union's communism did -- suggests that Russia might soon need to respond in a direct military way, taking America's war as the existential threat to Russian national sovereignty over Russia, that it is. The alternative -- Russian surrender to the US -- seems far less likely, even though taking the war to America would entail global annihilation. Russia's President, Vladimir Putin, has said many times -- and the Russian public seems to be overwhelmingly supportive of him in this -- that for the US to push much farther in this direction will result in nuclear war, and that the US must recognize this fact. Trump seems not to recognize it.

[May 28, 2018] Shatter Syria into small statelets is the neocons goal; It was also one of the original goals of Iraq invasion too

Notable quotes:
"... Shatter Syria and Iraq Into Many Small Pieces ..."
"... By WashingtonsBlog ..."
"... February 25, 2016 ..."
"... With several of the "Clean Break" paper's authors now holding key positions in Washington, the plan for Israel to "transcend" its foes by reshaping the Middle East looks a good deal more achievable today than it did in 1996. Americans may even be persuaded to give up their lives to achieve it. ..."
"... "[T]he actual purpose was to blow the country to smithereens: to atomize it, and crush it, so that it would never rise again. ..."
"... "When we invaded and occupied Iraq, we didn't just militarily defeat Iraq's armed forces – we ..."
"... dismantled their army ..."
"... , and their police force, along with all the other institutions that held the country together. The educational system was destroyed, and not reconstituted. The infrastructure was ..."
"... , and never restored. Even the physical hallmarks of a civilized society – ..."
"... electrical plants ..."
"... water facilities ..."
"... – were bombed out of existence or else left to fall into disrepair. Along with that, the spiritual and psychological infrastructure that enables a society to function – the bonds of trust, allegiance, and custom – was ..."
"... , leaving Iraqis to fend for themselves in a war of all against all. ..."
"... By Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya , Global Research, November 2006) ..."
www.defenddemocracy.press
Shatter Syria and Iraq Into Many Small Pieces

By WashingtonsBlog
February 25, 2016

... ... ...

Its roots can be traced, at least in part, to a paper published in 1996 by an Israeli thinktank, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies. Entitled "A clean break: a new strategy for securing the realm", it was intended as a political blueprint for the incoming government of Binyamin Netanyahu . As the title indicates, it advised the right-wing Mr Netanyahu to make a complete break with the past by adopting a strategy "based on an entirely new intellectual foundation, one that restores strategic initiative and provides the nation the room to engage every possible energy on rebuilding Zionism "

***

The paper set out a plan by which Israel would "shape its strategic environment", beginning with the removal of Saddam Hussein and the installation of a Hashemite monarchy in Baghdad.

With Saddam out of the way and Iraq thus brought under Jordanian Hashemite influence, Jordan and Turkey would form an axis along with Israel to weaken and "roll back" Syria. Jordan, it suggested, could also sort out Lebanon by "weaning" the Shia Muslim population away from Syria and Iran, and re-establishing their former ties with the Shia in the new Hashemite kingdom of Iraq. "Israel will not only contain its foes; it will transcend them", the paper concluded.

***

The leader of the "prominent opinion makers" who wrote it was Richard Perle – now chairman of the Defence Policy Board at the Pentagon . Also among the eight-person team was Douglas Feith, a neo-conservative lawyer, who now holds one of the top four posts at the Pentagon as under-secretary of policy .

***

Two other opinion-makers in the team were David Wurmser and his wife, Meyrav (see US thinktanks give lessons in foreign policy , August 19). Mrs Wurmser was co-founder of Memri, a Washington-based charity that distributes articles translated from Arabic newspapers portraying Arabs in a bad light. After working with Mr Perle at the American Enterprise Institute, David Wurmser is now at the State Department, as a special assistant to John Bolton, the under-secretary for arms control and international security.

A fifth member of the team was James Colbert, of the Washington-based Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (Jinsa) – a bastion of neo-conservative hawkery whose advisory board was previously graced by Dick Cheney (now US vice-president), John Bolton and Douglas Feith.

***

With several of the "Clean Break" paper's authors now holding key positions in Washington, the plan for Israel to "transcend" its foes by reshaping the Middle East looks a good deal more achievable today than it did in 1996. Americans may even be persuaded to give up their lives to achieve it.

Read also: On Northern Syria Front Line, U.S. and Turkey Head Into Tense Face-off

(Before assuming prominent roles in the Bush administration, many of the same people – including Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, John Bolton and others – advocated their imperial views during the Clinton administration via their American think tank, the "Project for a New American Century".)

Thomas Harrington – professor of Iberian Studies at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut – writes :

[While there are some good articles on the chaos in Iraq, none of them] consider whether the chaos now enveloping the region might, in fact, be the desired aim of policy planners in Washington and Tel Aviv .

***

One of the prime goals of every empire is to foment ongoing internecine conflict in the territories whose resources and/or strategic outposts they covet .

***

The most efficient way of sparking such open-ended internecine conflict is to brutally smash the target country's social matrix and physical infrastructure.

***

Ongoing unrest has the additional perk of justifying the maintenance and expansion of the military machine that feeds the financial and political fortunes of the metropolitan elite.

In short divide and rule is about as close as it gets to a universal recourse the imperial game and that it is, therefore, as important to bear it in mind today as it was in the times of Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, the Spanish Conquistadors and the British Raj.

To those -- and I suspect there are still many out there -- for whom all this seems too neat or too conspiratorial , I would suggest a careful side-by side reading of:

  1. a) the "Clean Break" manifesto generated by the Jerusalem-based Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS) in 1996

and

  1. b) the "Rebuilding America's Defenses" paper generated by The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) in 2000, a US group with deep personal and institutional links to the aforementioned Israeli think tank, and with the ascension of George Bush Junior to the White House, to the most exclusive sanctums of the US foreign policy apparatus.

To read the cold-blooded imperial reasoning in both of these documents -- which speak, in the first case, quite openly of the need to destabilize the region so as to reshape Israel's "strategic environment" and, in the second of the need to dramatically increase the number of US "forward bases" in the region .

To do so now, after the US's systematic destruction of Iraq and Libya -- two notably oil-rich countries whose delicate ethnic and religious balances were well known to anyone in or out of government with more than passing interest in history -- , and after the its carefully calibrated efforts to generate and maintain murderous and civilization-destroying stalemates in Syria and Egypt (something that is easily substantiated despite our media's deafening silence on the subject), is downright blood-curdling.

And yet, it seems that for even very well-informed analysts, it is beyond the pale to raise the possibility that foreign policy elites in the US and Israel, like all virtually all the ambitious hegemons before them on the world stage, might have quite coldly and consciously fomented open-ended chaos in order to achieve their overlapping strategic objectives in this part of the world.

Antiwar's Justin Raimondo notes :

Iraq's fate was sealed from the moment we invaded: it has no future as a unitary state. As I pointed out again and again in the early days of the conflict, Iraq is fated to split apart into at least three separate states: the Shi'ite areas around Baghdad and to the south, the Sunni regions to the northwest, and the Kurdish enclave which was itching for independence since well before the US invasion. This was the War Party's real if unexpressed goal from the very beginning: the atomization of Iraq, and indeed the entire Middle East. Their goal, in short, was chaos – and that is precisely what we are seeing today.

Read also: Waeponizing Humiliation

***

As I put it years ago :

"[T]he actual purpose was to blow the country to smithereens: to atomize it, and crush it, so that it would never rise again.

"When we invaded and occupied Iraq, we didn't just militarily defeat Iraq's armed forces – we dismantled their army , and their police force, along with all the other institutions that held the country together. The educational system was destroyed, and not reconstituted. The infrastructure was pulverized , and never restored. Even the physical hallmarks of a civilized society – roads , bridges , electrical plants , water facilities , museums , schools – were bombed out of existence or else left to fall into disrepair. Along with that, the spiritual and psychological infrastructure that enables a society to function – the bonds of trust, allegiance, and custom – was dissolved , leaving Iraqis to fend for themselves in a war of all against all.

" What we are witnessing in post-Saddam Iraq is the erasure of an entire country. We can say, with confidence: We came, we saw, we atomized."

Why? This is the question that inevitably arises in the wake of such an analysis: why deliberately destroy an entire country whose people were civilized while our European ancestors were living in trees?

The people who planned, agitated for, and executed this war are the very same people who have advanced Israeli interests – at America's expense – at every opportunity. In " A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm ," a 1996 document prepared by a gaggle of neocons – Perle, Douglas Feith, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was urged to "break out" of Israel's alleged stagnation and undertake a campaign of "regime change" across the Middle East, targeting Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Iraq, and eventually Iran. With the exception of Iran – and that one's still cooking on the back burner – this is precisely what has occurred. In 2003, in the immediate wake of our Pyrrhic "victory" in Iraq, then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon declared to a visiting delegation of American members of Congress that these "rogue states" – Iran, Libya, and Syria – would have to be next on the War Party's target list.

( Indeed .)

And Michel Chossudovsky points out :

The division of Iraq along sectarian-ethnic lines has been on the drawing board of the Pentagon for more than 10 years .

What is envisaged by Washington is the outright suppression of the Baghdad regime and the institutions of the central government, leading to a process of political fracturing and the elimination of Iraq as a country .

This process of political fracturing in Iraq along sectarian lines will inevitably have an impact on Syria, where the US-NATO sponsored terrorists have in large part been defeated.

Destabilization and political fragmentation in Syria is also contemplated: Washington's intent is no longer to pursue the narrow objective of "regime change" in Damascus. What is contemplated is the break up of both Iraq and Syria along sectarian-ethnic lines .

The formation of the caliphate may be the first step towards a broader conflict in the Middle East, bearing in mind that Iran is supportive of the al-Maliki government and the US ploy may indeed be to encourage the intervention of Iran.

The proposed re-division of both Iraq and Syria is broadly modeled on that of the Federation of Yugoslavia which was split up into seven "independent states" (Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia (FYRM), Slovenia, Montenegro, Kosovo). According to Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, the re division of Iraq into three separate states is part of a broader process of redrawing the Map of the Middle East.

Read also: Statement from Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter on Current U.S.-North Korea Relations

The above map was prepared by Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters. It was published in the Armed Forces Journal in June 2006, Peters is a retired colonel of the U.S. National War Academy. (Map Copyright Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters 2006).

Although the map does not officially reflect Pentagon doctrine, it has been used in a training program at NATO's Defense College for senior military officers". (See Plans for Redrawing the Middle East: The Project for a "New Middle East" By Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya , Global Research, November 2006)

Breaking Apart Syria

Similarly, Neooconservatives in the U.S. and Israel have long advocated for the balkanization of Syria into smaller regions based on ethnicity and religion. The goal was to break up the country, and to do away with the sovereignty of Syria as a separate nation.

In 1982, a prominent Israeli journalist formerly attached to the Israeli Foreign Ministry allegedly wrote a book expressly calling for the break up of Syria:

All the Arab states should be broken down, by Israel, into small units . Dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unique areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel's primary target on the Eastern front in the long run.

It is well-documented that – in 1996 – U.S. and Israeli Neocons advocated : Weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria.As Michel Chossudovsky points out :

Destabilization and political fragmentation in Syria is also contemplated: Washington's intent is no longer to pursue the narrow objective of "regime change" in Damascus. What is contemplated is the break up of both Iraq and Syria along sectarian-ethnic lines.

In 2013, former Israeli diplomat Alon Pinkas said :

Let them both [sides] bleed, haemorrhage to death: that's the strategic thinking here. As long as this lingers, there's no real threat from Syria.

Indeed, in May 2015, one of the key architects of the Iraq war – John Bolton – said:

The Arabs divided between Sunnis and Shias – I think the Sunni Arabs are never going to agree to be in a state where the Shia outnumber them 3-1. That's what ISIS has been able to take advantage of.

I think our objective should be a new Sunni state out of the western part of Iraq, the eastern part of Syria run by moderates or at least authoritarians who are not radical Islamists. What's left of the state of Iraq, as of right now, is simply a satellite of the ayatollahs in Tehran. It's not anything we should try to aid.

In September 2015, Pentagon intelligence chief Lt. Gen. Vincent Stewart said that he has "a tough time" seeing either Iraq or Syria really coming back together as sovereign nations.

Dan Sanchez noted last week:

In general, Israel ideally prefers regime changes that result in the installation of stable puppets. That is Plan A. But Plan B is to balkanize . Better to divide and conquer than to countenance a "rogue" (independent) neighbor.

So it is noteworthy that Israel is endorsing its Plan B for Syria just when its enemies are making it plain that Plan A (" Assad Must Go ") is not happening any time soon.

And SecState John Kerry confirmed just yesterday that "Plan B" is to break Syria up into different states.

[May 28, 2018] Blockbuster The MH 17 False Flag, One of Many, Published in Russia by Gordon Duff

Sure looks now like a false flag operation. One of the sign of false flag operation is media hysteria immediately after the event. This holds true for MH17 tragedy.
Notable quotes:
"... MH 17 is simply another false flag operation, this one aimed at Russia as have so many recently. Russia's foreign ministry has begun addressing false flag terrorism and the US policy of staging terror attacks to blame on others after years of standing by silently. ..."
May 28, 2018 | www.veteranstoday.com

By Gordon Duff with New Eastern Outlook, Moscow

...The airliner was being directed on the same path used by SU 25 and SU 27 jets hitting the cities in the Donbass and Lugansk pockets.

The date now is May 25, 2018. BBC and Reuters have just announced that Russia is "liable" for the events of July 17, 2014, based on an investigation no one understands.

Malaysia had asked for an independent investigation but was warned off by the United States, told to keep quiet. I was part of the team Malaysia had sought to investigate the downing of MH 17, along with VT editor, Washington attorney Thomas Mattingly and a group of former FBI agents under ISI Corp.

Instead, the investigation was done by a Dutch group. It is clear, more than clear, that the United States was aware Kiev had down the plane and was leading a coverup, protecting Kiev and planning to use the incident to blame Russia.

Recent events makes this abundantly clear.

Blaming Russia is a way of life in Washington. Let's look at Ukraine and try to understand what was going on at the time.

... ... ...

The Dutch now claim that Russia had "infiltrated" air defense groups into Ukraine and chose to shoot down a Malaysian airliner for no imaginable reason. That motive, "no imaginable reason," should be a problem for both governments and the media, not that I use the term "should."

However, there is evidence, considerable evidence, that MH17 was downed by aircraft. We are going to examine this hypothesis and the reaction to it when it was brought up back in 2014.

.... ... ...

Conclusion

MH 17 is simply another false flag operation, this one aimed at Russia as have so many recently. Russia's foreign ministry has begun addressing false flag terrorism and the US policy of staging terror attacks to blame on others after years of standing by silently.

[May 27, 2018] Russia And Turkey Reach Deal On Southern Stream Gas Pipeline, Infuriate Washington Zero Hedge

May 27, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Russia And Turkey Reach Deal On "Southern Stream" Gas Pipeline, Infuriate Washington

by Tyler Durden Sun, 05/27/2018 - 11:00 26 SHARES

One and a half years after Russia and Turkey signed a deal to build the strategic "Turkish Stream" gas pipeline in October 2016 , putting an end to a highly contentious period in Russia-Turkish relation which in late 2015 hit rock bottom after the NATO-member state shot down a Russian jet over Syria, on Saturday Russian state energy giant Gazprom and the Turkish government reached a deal on the construction of the land-based part of the Turkish Stream branch that will bring Russian gas to European consumers.

According to Reuters , the two counterparts signed a protocol that would allow the construction, which was stalled by a legal rift over gas prices, to go forward. Gazprom and Turkey's state-owned BOTAS agreed on the terms and conditions of the project, Gazprom said in a statement , adding that the deal "allows to move to practical steps for the implementation of the project." The actual construction would be carried out by a joint venture called TurkAkim Gaz Tasima which will be owned by Gazprom and BOTAS in equal shares, Gazprom said.

Earlier on Saturday, Turkish president Erdogan said that Gazprom and BOTAS resolved a long-running legal dispute over import prices in 2015-2016, and as a result Turkey would gain $1 billion as part of the gas-price settlement reached with Gazprom, in which Turkey and the Russian natgas giant agreed on a 10.25% price discount for gas supplied by Russia in 2015 and 2016.

"We agreed on a 10.25% reduction in the price of natural gas in 2015-2016," Erdogan announced while speaking at a rally on Saturday. "We got our discount. We get about $ 1 billion worth of our rights before the election," the Turkish President said, as cited by Anadolu Agency.

BOTAS had refused to approve the building of the land-based part of the pipeline until the import price issue was resolved. Until now, it only permitted Gazprom to construct the undersea part of the line. The construction is currently underway.

Russia and Turkey officially agreed on the project, which consists of two branches, in October 2016. The first branch will deliver gas to Turkish consumers, while the second one will bring it to the countries in southern and south-western Europe. The European leg is expected to decrease Russia's dependence on transit through Ukraine. Each of the lines has a maximum capacity of 15.75 billion cubic meters a year.

Gazprom finished the construction of the deep-water part of the first line of the Turkish Stream in April. The first Russian gas could start flowing through both legs of the Turkish Stream by December 2019.

The greenlighting of the Turkish Stream project is sure to infuriate the US which previously announced it was considering sanctions of European firms that would participate in the Nothern Stream Russian gas pipeline.

President Trump went as far as to threaten Angela Merkel two weeks ago , telling her to either drop the Russian gas pipeline or the trade war with the US was set to begin.

How Europe reacts to US threats involving the Northern Stream and, soon, the Turkish Stream, will determine whether Europe will once again find itself a subservient vassal state to US military and energy lobbying powers, or if Brussels will side with Putin in this growing conflict, resulting in an unprecedented breach within the so-called " democratic west. "

[May 27, 2018] Putin: We're held hostage to political strife around Trump by IAN PHILLIPS

May 27, 2018 | www.yahoo.com

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday bemoaned troubled relations with the United States, saying Russia wants to improve them but is effectively held hostage by the disputes surrounding President Donald Trump.

Putin's comments in a meeting with top editors of international news agencies underlined how Russia's once-high hopes for improved relations under Trump have eroded. Although the Trump administration has imposed sanctions on Russia and expelled scores of its diplomats, Russian politicians generally portray Trump as blocked by domestic opposition from fulfilling his campaign promises of improving relations with Moscow.

Earlier in the day, speaking at an annual economic forum, Putin sharply criticized Trump's decision to pull out of the Iranian nuclear deal, saying it could trigger dangerous instability.

The Russian leader said the U.S. withdrawal from the 2015 agreement came even as the international nuclear watchdog confirmed that Tehran was fulfilling its obligations. "What should it be punished for, then?" Putin asked.

Trump's administration has demanded that Iran stop the enrichment of uranium and end its involvement in Syria, Yemen, Lebanon and Afghanistan in order to negotiate a new deal.

"If international agreements are revised every four years it would offer zero horizon for planning," Putin said. "It will create the atmosphere of nervousness and lack of trust."

In the meeting with editors, Putin declined to assess relations between Trump and North Korea's Kim Jong Un, but said the United States should not try to take a hard line with the country.

"In order to talk about a full denuclearization of North Korea, I believe we should give North Korea a guarantee of their sovereignty and inviolability," the Russian president said. "I am deeply convinced that if you don't impose anything, if you don't behave aggressively and if you don't corner North Korea, the result that we need will be achieved faster than many would think, and at less cost."

Putin also expressed frustration at having little contact with Trump and faulted the investigation into whether there was collusion between Trump's campaign and Russia and whether Russia tried to interfere with the 2016 U.S. election.

"We are hostages to this internal strife in the United States," Putin said. "I hope that it will end some day and the objective need for the development of Russian-American relationships will prevail."

At the economic forum, Putin also engaged in a tongue-in-cheek exchange with French President Emmanuel Macron, saying with a smile that Russia could help protect Europe if its rift with the U.S. widens over Iran.

"Don't you worry, we will help ensure your security," Putin said. Macron responded on a serious note that France and its allies could stand for themselves.

In his speech at the forum and during talks with Putin on Thursday, Macron called for closer ties between France and Russia despite their differences.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe also spoke at the forum and called for closer cooperation with Russia.

The presence of Macron and Abe and their statements in favor of cooperation were important for Putin, indicating that the U.S.-led efforts to isolate Russia face increasing obstacles.

The U.S. and its allies have hit Russia with several waves of sanctions that badly hurt its economy.

Putin sharply criticized the sanctions, saying they signal "not just erosion but the dismantling of a system of multilateral cooperation that took decades to build."

Putin told the editors that he would observe constitutional term limits that would prevent him from running for a new term in 2024. However, some observers have suggested he might seek to have the constitution changed.

On tensions with Britain over allegations that Russia was behind the March poisoning of a Russian former spy in Britain, Putin said there should "either be a joint, full-value, objective investigation or simply stop talking about this subject because it doesn't lead to anything except worsening relations."

Russia has repeatedly demanded that Britain let it take part in investigating the case.

[May 27, 2018] Intel Informants and Suspicious Contacts Echo Dark Pasts by Stephen F.Cohen

Eussiagete should be properly called Intelgate argues Professor Stephen F.Cohen. Halper and Mifsud invoke memories of Soviet surveillance state.
Notable quotes:
"... But the issue is not President Trump, support him or not. It is instead twofold: our own civil liberties; and, in regard to the Russiagate allegations made against him as a candidate and now as president, or against others under investigation, the organizations and media that no longer profess nor defend these liberties as basic principles of American democracy. ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... Even if there was such a "multiyear conspiracy," for example, how does the Times ..."
"... Gen. Michael Flynn did nothing wrong or unusual in talking with the Russian ambassador to Washington in December 2016. Other presidents-elected have established such "back channels" to Moscow, including Richard Nixon and Barack Obama. Carter Page was not "recruited by Russian spies. " Russian agents tried to do so, but he helped the FBI expose and arrest them. And Paul Manafort had not, during the time in question, "lobbied for pro-Russian interests in Ukraine. " Instead, he urged that country's president to accept an EU trading agreement that Putin strongly opposed. ..."
"... The Washington Post ..."
"... The new cult of Intel is a mainstream orthodoxy. ..."
"... Not a word about constitutional civil liberties in any of this media coverage, though surely the "informant" and "contacts" themes -- the Clinton-sponsored Center for American Progress has recently posted 70-plus purportedly suspicious "contacts" between Trump's people and Russia -- should have reminded some editors, writers, or producers about those practices during the McCarthy era. (For a powerful reminder, read former Nation ..."
"... Originally said to be a Russian intelligence "asset," some evidence has appeared that Mifsud actually worked for British intelligence. In any event, he has vanished. ) This should not surprise us. ..."
"... The Halper affair should compel each of us to decide whether or not top levels of US intelligence agencies -- what Cohen has been referring to as Intelgate -- have played an improper, or worse, role in what now may be the worst political crisis in modern American history: Russiagate. ..."
"... If I am not mistaken, by statute, the CIA is forbidden from operating in the United States itself. Not that that means much. Government a all levels seems to feel free to exceed their statutory and constitutional limits as they choose and nobody says BOO. What's the quickest way to destroy a society? Make compliance with the law discretionary for those of wealth and power. ..."
May 27, 2018 | www.thenation.com
Intel 'Informants' and 'Suspicious Contacts' Echo Dark Pasts | The Nation Stephen F.Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at NYU and Princeton, and John Batchelor continue their (usually) weekly discussions of the new US-Russian Cold War.

(You can find previous installments of these conversations, now in their fifth year, at TheNation.com .) Cohen has several reactions to the recent revelation that a longtime CIA-FBI "informant," professor emeritus Stefan Halper, had been dispatched to "interact" with several members of Donald Trump's campaign organization in 2016.

He discusses each of them:

In February , Cohen asked if "Russiagate" was largely "Intelgate," pointing to the roles then known to have been played by CIA Director John Brennan and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

The revelation about Halper, essentially an Intel undercover operative, is further evidence that US intelligence agencies were deeply involved in the origins and promotion of Russiagate allegations of "collusion" between Trump and the Kremlin.

(We do not know if others were deployed covertly to "investigate" the Trump campaign, what the two agencies did with Halper's information, or whether he was connected in any way to UK intelligence officer Christopher Steele and his "dossier.")

But the issue is not President Trump, support him or not. It is instead twofold: our own civil liberties; and, in regard to the Russiagate allegations made against him as a candidate and now as president, or against others under investigation, the organizations and media that no longer profess nor defend these liberties as basic principles of American democracy. (This may be another by-product of what someone has called a "Trump Derangement Syndrome.") -- The ACLU, for example, seems not to have loudly protested Intel or related transgressions in this regard, if at all. -- Still worse, in two articles and an editorial , The New York Times unconditionally defended Halper's clandestine mission.

It did so by stating the underlying Russiagate narrative as "facts" that "aren't disputed": "There was a sophisticated, multiyear conspiracy by Russian government officials and agents, working under direct orders from President Vladimir Putin, to interfere in the 2016 presidential election in support of Donald Trump.

" In fact, aspects of this narrative have been strongly questioned by a number of qualified critics, including Cohen, though their questioning of it is never printed in the Times .

Even if there was such a "multiyear conspiracy," for example, how does the Times know it was carried out under Putin's "direct orders"? In reality, that entire assumption is based solely on two seriously challenged sources: an "Intelligence Community Assessment" of January 2017 and Steele's dossier.

But they are enough for the Times to assert that Halper's targets had "suspicious contacts linked to Russia" -- that these Trump associates had "met with Russians or people linked to Russia. " Indeed, Times columnist Paul Krugman, once a distinguished Princeton professor and Nobel Prize winner, tweeted as Joseph McCarthy might have, calling it "treason. " (These allegations are so vague and capacious they could apply to encounters with many New York City taxi drivers. Certainly, they apply to Cohen himself, who has had scores of "meetings" and "contacts" with Russians over the years, including with "Kremlin-linked" ones. ) Indicative of its malpractice in covering Russia and Russiagate, the Times then proceeds to commit factual misrepresentations about three of Halper's targets.

Gen. Michael Flynn did nothing wrong or unusual in talking with the Russian ambassador to Washington in December 2016. Other presidents-elected have established such "back channels" to Moscow, including Richard Nixon and Barack Obama. Carter Page was not "recruited by Russian spies. " Russian agents tried to do so, but he helped the FBI expose and arrest them. And Paul Manafort had not, during the time in question, "lobbied for pro-Russian interests in Ukraine. " Instead, he urged that country's president to accept an EU trading agreement that Putin strongly opposed.

The Times ends by asserting that no information collected by Halper (or Steele) had been made public prior to the November 2016 election. In fact, an article alluding to such material was published as early as July 2016 by Franklin Foer and subsequently by Michael Isikoff and David Corn .

The Times itself ran a number of insinuating "Trump-Putin" stories; accusatory opinion pieces by former Intel chiefs, like the CIA's Michael Morell and the NSA's Michael Hayden ; and its own editorials prior to the election.

Indeed, the allegations were so well-known that in their August debate, Hillary Clinton accused Trump of being Putin's "puppet." -- Nor was the Times alone among media outlets that had once deplored civil-liberties violations but justified the Halper operation.

The Washington Post also unconditionally did so, as in a column by Eugene Robinson , who denounced critics of those Russiagate practices for "smearing veteran professionals" of the agencies. Had they not dispatched Halper, Robinson added, it "would have been an appalling dereliction of duty. " Proponents of civil liberties might consider his statement "appalling."

-- As usual, MSNBC and CNN were in accord with the Times and the Post. For instance, CNN's Don Lemon summoned James Clapper himself to vouch for Halper's undercover mission: "That's a good thing because the Russians pose a threat to the very basis our political system. " Lemon did not question Clapper's rationalizing or perspective, nor did he book anyone who might have done so. The new cult of Intel is a mainstream orthodoxy.

Not a word about constitutional civil liberties in any of this media coverage, though surely the "informant" and "contacts" themes -- the Clinton-sponsored Center for American Progress has recently posted 70-plus purportedly suspicious "contacts" between Trump's people and Russia -- should have reminded some editors, writers, or producers about those practices during the McCarthy era. (For a powerful reminder, read former Nation editor and publisher Victor Navasky's widely acclaimed Naming Names .)

But Cohen recalls instead the times he lived in Soviet Russia periodically from 1976 to 1982 when the authorities banned him from the country (until Mikhail Gorbachev came to power in 1985) among open dissidents and semi-closeted Communist Party nonconformists, under Brezhnev's "vegetarian" surveillance state. Cohen's Soviet Russian friends called it "vegetarian" because the era of Stalin's mass arbitrary arrests, torture, and executions had long passed. Suppression by the KGB now featured "softer" tactics, among them clandestine informers and accusations of "contacts with American imperialism and the CIA.

"Cohen was quickly instructed by his Moscow friends how to detect informers or, in any case, to be ever mindful they might be present even at intimate gatherings, even "friends. " And, as an American living among targeted individuals, he took every precaution to avoid being that damning "contact. " Nonetheless, in the end, Cohen was cited by the KGB in cases against at least two prominent dissidents, one jailed and the other hounded.(Both later became very prominent human-rights figures under Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin: one as head of the human-rights organization Memorial, the other as the founder of Moscow's Museum of the History of the Gulag.)

Surveillance was, of course, very different and far more consequential in the generally repressive pre-Gorbachev Soviet Union than in America today. But a number of episodes on both sides involved professors who were intelligence operatives. In the Russigate saga, there is already Halper and the still-shadowy Professor Joseph Mifsud, who befriended the very minor, very inexperienced, and hapless Trump "aide" George Papadopoulos. ( Originally said to be a Russian intelligence "asset," some evidence has appeared that Mifsud actually worked for British intelligence. In any event, he has vanished. ) This should not surprise us. Not all American or Russian intelligence officers are assassins, recruiters, or even spies. Some are highly qualified scholars who hold positions in colleges and universities, as has been the case both in Russia and in the United States.

As a result, Cohen himself has had over the years personal -- yes -- "contacts" with several Soviet and post-Soviet "intelligence officers. " Two held the rank of general, both were affiliated with higher-educational institutions (one as a professor), which is where Cohen first met them. Another general headed the former KGB (now FSB) archives. The others, more junior, were working on their doctoral dissertations (a prerequisite for advancement) in the same Stalin-era archive where Cohen was doing research for a book.

Cohen took many lunch and smoking breaks with them. Most of the discussions focused on knowledge about the Stalin Terror of the 1930s, though sometimes they did wander to current concerns -- including whether Cohen's native Kentucky bourbon was superior to Russian vodka. No "suspicious" subjects ever came up.

The Halper affair should compel each of us to decide whether or not top levels of US intelligence agencies -- what Cohen has been referring to as Intelgate -- have played an improper, or worse, role in what now may be the worst political crisis in modern American history: Russiagate.

Whatever we decide, no one, especially proponents of the anti-Trump "Resistance," should forget a 20th-century political lesson: The end rarely, if ever, justifies the means.

Intel 'Informants' and 'Suspicious Contacts' Echo Dark Pasts | The Nation Jeffrey Harrison says: May 23, 2018 at 6:21 pm

Thank you, Mr. Cohen. If I am not mistaken, by statute, the CIA is forbidden from operating in the United States itself. Not that that means much. Government a all levels seems to feel free to exceed their statutory and constitutional limits as they choose and nobody says BOO. What's the quickest way to destroy a society? Make compliance with the law discretionary for those of wealth and power.

Clark M Shanahan says: May 23, 2018 at 10:18 pm

Trump is obviously one of our most repugnant presidents. Yet, those turning a blind eye to this sad abuse of power should really worry about the future when our "intelligence" turns against their own beliefs/values. Did our forever obliging Obama sign off on this BS?

"obliging" to our Strangeloves and "security apparatus"..

[May 27, 2018] Sic Semper Tyrannis WAS GEHLEN A FRAUD (By Patrick Armstrong)

Notable quotes:
"... All of which leads me to this observation: German intelligence on the Soviet military was poor. ..."
May 27, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

WAS GEHLEN A FRAUD? (By Patrick Armstrong)

20170914 - Copy

For some years I have wondered about Gehlen and I have written this up for SST in order to get the opinions of such a well-informed group on the two questions I ask at the end.

Reinhard Gehlen (1902-1979) was a German General Staff officer who in July 1941 was assigned as senior intelligence officer to the Fremde Heere Ost (Foreign Armies East) intelligence section of which he took command about a year later. In April 1945 he was fired (or more likely, seeing the way things were going, quit) and resurfaced in May, surrendering to the US Army and offering his knowledge and organisation to the victors. His offer was accepted, his past and the past of his group cleansed, and eventually the Gehlen Organisation became the nucleus of the West German intelligence organisation and he became its boss. Wikipedia tells us he was forced out of that position in 1968 because his organisation had been penetrated by the Soviets and because of "poor leadership". For an anti-Soviet specialist, he did run a pretty sloppy outfit: vide Heinz Felfe , a Soviet agent who was brought into the Gehlen Organisation quite early in its history. He wrote a book in which he justified all this which I read years ago. Which all contributes to the question that I am asking you to comment on.

But before I get to the question, a vignette in a railway car in Finland. On 2 June 1942, a year after the German attack on the USSR, Hitler invites himself to Marshal Mannerheim's 75th birthday celebration. The Finns record the first eleven minutes of their conversation before the Germans catch them and the recording exists . This bit sets the scene:

They have the most monstrous armament that is humanly conceivable ('menschendenkbar') so if anybody had told me that one state if anybody had told me that one state can line up with 35.000 tanks (Hitler uses the word 'tank'), I had said 'you have gone mad'

Hitler continues expressing his astonishment at the Soviet armaments industry, complaining that the Germans have only "good weather armament". After other remarks indicating that he is beginning to realise that he is in a contest Germany cannot win, the recording ends.

All of which leads me to this observation: German intelligence on the Soviet military was poor.

If we look at the whole course of the war we see that almost all the surprises come from the Soviet side. While the initial attack surprised the Soviet leadership (although it did have quite a bit of intelligence of the coming attack), after that it's almost always the Germans who are surprised. Hitler's dumbfounded comments to Mannerheim shows there was no conception of the scale of Soviet industrial production, to say nothing of its surge capacity. David Glantz has convincingly argued that unexpected resistance in the Battle of Smolensk sealed the end of the hope of a quick victory . The appearance of unknown divisions in front of Moscow (thanks to a Soviet intelligence coup ) in the winter of 1941 was a surprise. The Stalingrad counter-attack was a surprise. The Soviets almost seem to have been aware of the Kursk battle plans before the German front line commanders were and again the counter attack was a surprise. Operation Bagration, perhaps the biggest military operation in history, while the Germans were expecting something, was another shattering surprise.

So, in a word, the Russian military intelligence has many surprises to its credit while Gehlen's FHO... not so many intelligence successes. (And taking Hitler's rant to Mannerheim into account, not at the beginning either.)

The Americans and the other Western allies were delighted with Gehlen's offer. Washington in particular had very little knowledge of the Soviets; indeed the FBI seems to have been only dimly aware that one of the most important Soviet defectors ever – Aleksandr Orlov – was living quietly in the USA. The British had some intelligence from earlier times from people like Bruce-Lockhart or Reilly but that was long out of date and it is unlikely that they had much in 1945. And, as we now know, British intelligence was practically a branch plant operation of Moscow Centre. Neither France nor Canada ( Gouzenko was September and had nothing much to offer on the Soviet Army) would have had anything to offer. So they were very happy to take up Gehlen's offer – a whole network of agents, knowledge, historical records, reputation and interrogation data: a treasure trove; offered for nothing except making the Nazi past disappear. One must assume that the Gehlen organisation became the primary source – if not the sole source – of information on the USSR's military.

I can't now find the reference but I remember being told by a specialist that there was an important meeting in the late 1940s chaired, as I recall, by Field Marshal Montgomery, that discussed what the nascent Western Alliance could do against a Soviet attack or military threat. The meeting assumed (I recall) that the Soviets could field 150 divisions on fairly short notice for an attack. The Western Allies couldn't possibly muster anything like that number. The conclusion was that any attack from the USSR could only be stopped by nuclear weapons. Who could have been the source of the 150 division figure other than Gehlen?

Now it is true that, in whatever country the Soviet Army had ended the war, "elections" were held in which socialist or communist parties came to power and stayed in power. (Austria being an exception). There were at least two ways that one could understand this extension of Soviet power. One was that they were the actions of an expansionist hostile power that fully intended to go all the way to Cape Finisterre if it could and, if not prevented, would. In such an case the Western Allies would be fully justified in forming an defensive alliance to deter Soviet expansion. The other possible interpretation was that, after such a hard victory in so fearfully destructive a war, Moscow was determined that never again would its neighbours be used as an assembly area and start line for the forces of another Hitler. Such an interpretation would call for quite another approach from the Western Allies. We all know which of the two interpretations was followed by the Western Allies. And who else would have encouraged that interpretation than their new expert on all things Soviet?

So we find two extremely important founding Cold War decisions taken right at the start: that Moscow was expansionist and that the Soviet Army was so powerful that nuclear weapons gave the only hope of stopping them. Each decision might well have been taken without him but it is surely reasonable to see Gehlen's hand in both.

So I have the following questions:

  1. Did Gehlen actually know anything about the Soviet Armed Forces or was he basically winging it all along?
  2. How influential was he in setting the course of the Cold War towards hostility and away from cooperation?

Posted at 04:12 PM in History , Intelligence , Patrick Armstrong | Permalink | 16 Comments

[May 27, 2018] America's Fifth Column Will Destroy Russia by Paul Craig Roberts

Highly recommended!
Paul Craig Roberts is right about dominance of neoliberal economics in Russia. But what is the alternative?
Notable quotes:
"... If the neoconservatives had self-restraint, they would sit back and let America's Fifth Column -- Neoliberal Economics -- finish off Russia for them. Russia is doomed, because the country's economists were brainwashed during the Yeltsin years by American neoliberal economists. It was easy enough for the Americans to do. Communist economics had come to naught, the Russian economy was broken, Russians were experiencing widespread hardship, and successful America was there with a helping hand. ..."
"... For example, neoliberal economics exposes Russia's currency to speculation, manipulation, and destabilization. Capital inflows can be used to drive up the value of the ruble, and then at the opportune time, the capital can be pulled out, dropping the ruble's value and driving up domestic inflation with higher import prices, delivering a hit to Russian living standards. Washington has always used these kind of manipulations to destabilize governments. ..."
"... Neo-liberal economics has also brainwashed the Russian central bank with the belief that Russian economic development depends on foreign investment in Russia. This erroneous belief threatens the very sovereignty of Russia. The Russian central bank could easily finance all internal economic development by creating money, but the brainwashed central bank does not realize this. The bank thinks that if the bank finances internal development the result would be inflation and depreciation of the ruble. So the central bank is guided by American neoliberal economics to borrow abroad money it does not need in order to burden Russia with foreign debt that requires a diversion of Russian resources into interest payments to the West. ..."
"... As Michael Hudson and I explained to the Russians two years ago, when Russia borrows from the West, the US for example, and in flow the dollars, what happens to the dollars? Russia cannot spend them domestically to finance development projects, so where do the dollars go? They go into Russia's foreign exchange holdings and accrue interest for the lender. The central bank then creates the ruble equivalent of the borrowed and idle dollars and finances the project. So why borrow the dollars? The only possible reason is so the US can use the dollar debt to exercise control over Russian decision making. In other words, Russia delivers herself into the hands of her enemies. ..."
"... Putin is struggling to have Russia integrated into the Western economic system while retaining Russia's sovereignty (an unrealistic goal), because Putin has been convinced by the element in the Russian elite, which had rather be Western than Russian, that Russia's economic development depends on being integrated into the Western economy. As the neoliberal economic elite control Russia's economic and financial policy, Putin believes that he has to accept Western provocations or forfeit his hopes for Russian economic development. ..."
May 25, 2018 | www.paulcraigroberts.org

This is the lecture I would have given if I had been able to accept the invitation to address the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum in Russia this weekend.

Executive Summary:

From the standpoint of Russia's dilemma, this is an important column. Putin's partial impotence via-a-vis Washington is due to the grip that neoliberal economics exercises over the Russian government. Putin cannot break with the West, because he believes that Russian economic development is dependent on Russia's integration within the Western economy. That is what neoliberal economics tells the Russian economic and financial establishment.

Everyone should understand that I am not a pro-Russian anti-American. I am anti-war, especially nuclear war. My concern is that the inability of the Russian government to put its foot down is due to its belief that Russian development, despite all the talk about the Eurasian partnership and the Silk Road, is dependent on being integrated with the West. This totally erroneous belief prevents the Russian government from any decisive break with the West. Consequently, Putin continues to accept provocations in order to avoid a decisive break that would cut Russia off from the West. In Washington and the UK this is interpreted as a lack of resolve on Putin's part and encourages an escalation in provocations that will intensify until Russia's only option is surrender or war.

If the Russian government did not believe that it needed the West, the government could give stronger responses to provocations that would make clear that there are limits to what Russia will tolerate. It would also make Europe aware that its existence hangs in the balance. The combination of Trump abusing Europe and Europe's recognition of the threat to its own existence of its alignment with an aggressive Washington would break the Western alliance and NATO. But Putin cannot bring this about because he erroneously believes that Russia needs the West.

If the neoconservatives had self-restraint, they would sit back and let America's Fifth Column -- Neoliberal Economics -- finish off Russia for them. Russia is doomed, because the country's economists were brainwashed during the Yeltsin years by American neoliberal economists. It was easy enough for the Americans to do. Communist economics had come to naught, the Russian economy was broken, Russians were experiencing widespread hardship, and successful America was there with a helping hand.

In reality the helping hand was a grasping hand. The hand grasped Russian resources through privatization and gave control to American-friendly oligarchs. Russian economists had no clue about how financial capitalism in its neoliberal guise strips economies of their assets while loading them up with debt.

But worse happened. Russia's economists were brainwashed into an economic way of thinking that serves Western imperialism.

For example, neoliberal economics exposes Russia's currency to speculation, manipulation, and destabilization. Capital inflows can be used to drive up the value of the ruble, and then at the opportune time, the capital can be pulled out, dropping the ruble's value and driving up domestic inflation with higher import prices, delivering a hit to Russian living standards. Washington has always used these kind of manipulations to destabilize governments.

Neo-liberal economics has also brainwashed the Russian central bank with the belief that Russian economic development depends on foreign investment in Russia. This erroneous belief threatens the very sovereignty of Russia. The Russian central bank could easily finance all internal economic development by creating money, but the brainwashed central bank does not realize this. The bank thinks that if the bank finances internal development the result would be inflation and depreciation of the ruble. So the central bank is guided by American neoliberal economics to borrow abroad money it does not need in order to burden Russia with foreign debt that requires a diversion of Russian resources into interest payments to the West.

As Michael Hudson and I explained to the Russians two years ago, when Russia borrows from the West, the US for example, and in flow the dollars, what happens to the dollars? Russia cannot spend them domestically to finance development projects, so where do the dollars go? They go into Russia's foreign exchange holdings and accrue interest for the lender. The central bank then creates the ruble equivalent of the borrowed and idle dollars and finances the project. So why borrow the dollars? The only possible reason is so the US can use the dollar debt to exercise control over Russian decision making. In other words, Russia delivers herself into the hands of her enemies.

Indeed, it is the Russian government's mistaken belief that Russian economic development is dependent on Russia being included as part of the West that has caused Putin to accept the provocations and humiliations that the West has heaped upon Russia. The lack of response to these provocations will eventually cause the Russian government to lose the support of the nationalist elements in Russia.

Putin is struggling to have Russia integrated into the Western economic system while retaining Russia's sovereignty (an unrealistic goal), because Putin has been convinced by the element in the Russian elite, which had rather be Western than Russian, that Russia's economic development depends on being integrated into the Western economy. As the neoliberal economic elite control Russia's economic and financial policy, Putin believes that he has to accept Western provocations or forfeit his hopes for Russian economic development.

Russian economists are so indoctrinated with neoliberal economics that they cannot even look to America to see how a once great economy has been completely destroyed by neoliberal economics.

The US has the largest public debt of any country in history. The US has the largest trade and budget deficits of any country in history. The US has 22 percent unemployment, which it hides by not counting among the unemployed millions of discouraged workers who, unable to find jobs, ceased looking for jobs and are arbitrarily excluded from the measure of unemployment. The US has a retired class that has been stripped of any interest payment on their savings for a decade, because it was more important to the Federal Reserve to bail out the bad loans of a handful of "banks too big to fail," banks that became too big to fail because of the deregulation fostered by neoliberal economics. By misrepresenting "free trade" and "globalism," neoliberal economics sent America's manufacturing and tradeable professional skill jobs abroad where wages were lower, thus boosting the incomes of owners at the expense of the incomes of US wage-earners, leaving Americans with the lowly paid domestic service jobs of a Third World country. Real median family income in the US has been stagnant for decades. The Federal Reserve recently reported that Americans are so poor that 41 percent of the population cannot raise $400 without selling personal possessions.

Young Americans, if they have university educations, begin life as debt slaves. Currently there are 44,200,000 Americans with student loan debt totalling $1,048,000,000,000 -- $1.48 trillion! https://studentloanhero.com/student-loan-debt-statistics/

In the US all 50 states have publicly supported universities where tuition is supposed to be nominal in order to encourage education. When I went to Georgia Tech, a premier engineering school, my annual tuition was less than $500. Loans were not needed and did not exist.

What happened? Financial capitalism discovered how to turn university students into indentured servants, and the university administrations cooperated. Tuitions rose and rose and were increasingly allocated to administration, the cost of which exploded. Today many university administrations absorb 75% of the annual budget, leaving little for professors' pay and student aid. An obedient Congress created a loan program that ensnares young American men and women into huge debt in order to acquire an university education. With so many of the well-paying jobs moved offshore by neoliberal economics, the jobs available cannot service the student loan debts. A large percentage of Americans aged 24-34 live at home with parents, because their jobs do not pay enough to service their student loan debt and pay an apartment rent. Debt prevents them from living an independent existence.

In America the indebtedness of the population produced by neoliberal economics -- privatize, privatize, deregulate, deregulate, indebt, indebt -- prevents any economic growth as the American public has no discretionary income after debt service to drive the economy. In America the way cars, trucks, and SUVs are sold is via zero downpayment and seven years of loans. From the minute a vehicle is purchased, the loan obligation exceeds the value of the vehicle.

The Wall Street Journal reports that Mike Meru, a dentist earning $225,000 annually, has $1,060,945.42 in student loan debt. He pays $1,589.97 monthly, which is not enough to cover the interest, much less reduce the principal. Consequently, his debt from seven years at the University of Southern California grows by $130 per day. In two decades, his loan balance will be $2 million. https://www.wsj.com/articles/mike-meru-has-1-million-in-student-loans-how-did-that-happen-1527252975

If neoliberal economics does not work for America, why will it work for Russia? Neoliberal economics only works for oligarchs and their institutions, such as Goldman Sachs, who are bankrolled by the central bank to keep the economy partially afloat. Washington will agree to Russia being integrated into the Western system when Putin agrees to resurrect the Yeltsin-era practice of permitting Western financial institutions to strip Russia of her assets while loading her up with debt.

I could continue at length about the junk economics, to use Michael Hudson's term, that is neoliberal economics. The United States is failing because of it, and so will Russia.

John Bolton and the neocons should just relax. Neoliberal economics, which has the Russian financial interests, the Russian government and apparently Putin himself in its grip, will destroy Russia without war.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SOURCE www.wsws.org

[May 27, 2018] Turning on Russia by Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould

Notable quotes:
"... By Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould ..."
"... Copyright © 2018 Fitzgerald & Gould All rights reserved. This article first appeared on Invisible History. ..."
"... Coming Next, Part 2: The post WWII global strategy of the neocons has been shaped chiefly by Russophobia against the Soviet Union and now Russia ..."
"... * Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould are the authors of Invisible History: Afghanistan's Untold Story , Crossing Zero The AfPak War at the Turning Point of American Empire and The Voice . Visit their websites at invisiblehistory and grailwerk .com ..."
May 27, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press

Turning on Russia 11/05/2018

In this first of a two-part series, Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould trace the origins of the neoconservative targeting of Russia.

By Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould
April 29.2018

The German newsmagazine Der Spiegel last September reported that, "Stanley Fischer, the 73–year-old vice chair of the U.S. Federal Reserve, is familiar with the decline of the world's rich. He spent his childhood and youth in the British protectorate of Rhodesia before going to London in the early 1960s for his university studies. There, he experienced first-hand the unravelling of the British Empire Now an American citizen, Fischer is currently witnessing another major power taking its leave of the world stage the United States is losing its status as a global hegemonic power, he said recently. The U.S. political system could take the world in a very dangerous direction "

With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the creation of the so called Wolfowitz Doctrine in 1992 during the administration of George Herbert Walker Bush, the United States claimed the mantle of the world's first and only. Unipower with the intention of crushing any nation or system that would oppose it in the future. The New World Order, foreseen just a few short years ago, becomes more disorderly by the day, made worse by varying degrees of incompetence and greed emanating from Berlin, London, Paris and Washington.

As a further sign of the ongoing seismic shocks rocking America's claim to leadership, by the time Fischer's interview appeared in the online version of the Der Spiegel , he had already announced his resignation as vice chair of the Federal Reserve -- eight months ahead of schedule. If anyone knows about the decline and fall of empires it is the "globalist" and former Bank of Israel president, Stanley Fischer. Not only did he experience the unravelling of the British Empire as a young student in London, he directly assisted in the wholesale dismantling of the Soviet Empire during the 1990s.

As an admitted product of the British Empire and point man for its long term imperial aims, that makes Fischer not just empire's Angel of Death, but its rag and bone man.

Alongside a handful of Harvard economists led by Jonathan Hay, Larry Summers, Andrei Shleifer, and Jeffry Sachs, in the "Harvard Project," plus Anatoly Chubais, the chief Russian economic adviser, Fischer helped throw 100 million Russians into poverty overnight – privatizing, or as some would say piratizing – the Russian economy. Yet, Americans never got the real story because a slanted anti-Russia narrative covered the true nature of the robbery from beginning to end.

As described by public policy scholar and anthropologist Janine R. Wedel in her 2009 book Shadow Elite: "Presented in the West as a fight between enlightenment Reformers trying to move the economy forward through privatization, and retrograde Luddites who opposed them, this story misrepresented the facts. The idea or goal of privatization was not controversial, even among communists the Russian Supreme Soviet, a communist body, passed two laws laying the groundwork for privatization. Opposition to privatization was rooted not in the idea itself but in the particular privatization program that was implemented, the opaque way in which it was put into place, and the use of executive authority to bypass the parliament."

Intentionally set up to fail for Russia and the Russian people under the cover of a false narrative, she continues "The outcome rendered privatization 'a de facto fraud,' as one economist put it, and the parliamentary committee that had judged the Chubais scheme to 'offer fertile ground for criminal activity' was proven right."

If Fischer, a man who helped bring about a de facto criminal-privatization-fraud to post-empire Russia says the U.S. is on a dangerous course, the time has arrived for post-empire Americans to ask what role he played in putting the U.S. on that dangerous course. Little known to Americans is the blunt force trauma Fischer and the "prestigious" Harvard Project delivered to Russia under the leadership of Boris Yeltsin during the 1990s. According to The American Conservative's James Carden "As the Center for Economic and Policy Research noted back in 2011 'the IMF's intervention in Russia during Fischer's tenure led to one of the worst losses in output in history, in the absence of war or natural disaster.' Indeed, one Russian observer compared the economic and social consequences of the IMF's intervention to what one would see in the aftermath of a medium-level nuclear attack."

Neither do most Americans know that it was President Jimmy Carter's national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski's 1970s grand plan for the conquest of the Eurasian heartland that boomeranged to terrorize Europe and America in the 21 st century. Brzezinski spent much of his life undermining the Communist Soviet Union and then spent the rest of it worrying about its resurgence as a Czarist empire under Vladimir Putin. It might be unfair to say that hating Russia was his only obsession. But a common inside joke during his tenure as the President's top national security officer was that he couldn't find Nicaragua on a map.

If anyone provided the blueprint for the United States to rule in a unipolar world following the Soviet Union's collapse it was Brzezinski. And if anyone could be said to represent the debt driven financial system that fueled America's post-Vietnam Imperialism, it's Fischer. His departure should have sent a chill down every neoconservative's spine. Their dream of a New World Order has once again ground to a halt at the gates of Moscow.

Whenever the epitaph for the abbreviated American century is written it will be sure to feature the iconic role the neoconservatives played in hastening its demise. From the chaos created by Vietnam they set to work restructuring American politics, finance and foreign policy to their own purposes. Dominated at the beginning by Zionists and Trotskyists, but directed by the Anglo/American establishment and their intelligence elites, the neoconservatives' goal, working with their Chicago School neoliberal partners, was to deconstruct the nation-state through cultural co-optation and financial subversion and to project American power abroad. So far they have been overwhelmingly successful to the detriment of much of the world.

From the end of the Second World War through the 1980s the focus of this pursuit was on the Soviet Union, but since the Soviet collapse in 1991, their focus has been on dismantling any and all opposition to their global dominion.

Pentagon Capitalism

Shady finance, imperial misadventures and neoconservatism go hand in hand. The CIA's founders saw themselves as partners in this enterprise and the defense industry welcomed them with open arms. McGill University economist R.T. Naylor, author of 1987's Hot Money and the Politics of Debt , described how "Pentagon Capitalism" had made the Vietnam War possible by selling the Pentagon's debt to the rest of the world.

"In effect, the US Marines had replaced Meyer Lansky's couriers , and the European central banks arranged the 'loan-back,'" Naylor writes. "When the mechanism was explained to the late [neoconservative] Herman Kahn – lifeguard of the era's chief 'think tank' and a man who popularized the notion it was possible to emerge smiling from a global conflagration – he reacted with visible delight. Kahn exclaimed excitedly, 'We've pulled off the biggest ripoff in history! We've run rings around the British Empire.'" In addition to their core of ex-Trotskyist intellectuals early neoconservatives could count among their ranks such establishment figures as James Burnham, father of the Cold War Paul Nitze, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson, Jeane Kirkpatrick and Brzezinski himself.

From the beginning of their entry into the American political mainstream in the 1970s it was known that their emergence could imperil democracy in America and yet Washington's more moderate gatekeepers allowed them in without much of a fight.

Peter Steinfels' 1979 classic The Neoconservatives: The men who are changing America's politics begins with these fateful words. "THE PREMISES OF THIS BOOK are simple. First, that a distinct and powerful political outlook has recently emerged in the United States. Second, that this outlook, preoccupied with certain aspects of American life and blind or complacent towards others, justifies a politics which, should it prevail, threatens to attenuate and diminish the promise of American democracy."

But long before Steinfels' 1979 account, the neoconservative's agenda of inserting their own interests ahead of America's was well underway, attenuating U.S. democracy, undermining détente and angering America's NATO partners that supported it. According to the distinguished State Department Soviet specialist Raymond Garthoff, détente had been under attack by right-wing and military-industrial forces ( led by Senator "Scoop" Jackson ) from its inception. But America's ownership of that policy underwent a shift following U.S. intervention on behalf of Israel during the 1973 October war. Garthoff writes in his detailed volume on American-Soviet relations Détente and Confrontation , "To the allies the threat [to Israel] did not come from the Soviet Union, but from unwise actions by the United States, taken unilaterally and without consultation. The airlift [of arms] had been bad enough. The U.S. military alert of its forces in Europe was too much."

In addition to the crippling Arab oil embargo that followed, the crisis of confidence in U.S. decision-making nearly produced a mutiny within NATO. Garthoff continues, "The United States had used the alert to convert an Arab-Israeli conflict, into which the United States had plunged, into a matter of East-West confrontation. Then it had used that tension as an excuse to demand that Europe subordinate its own policies to a manipulative American diplomatic gamble over which they had no control and to which they had not even been privy, all in the name of alliance unity."

In the end the U.S. found common cause with its Cold War Soviet enemy by imposing a cease-fire accepted by both Egypt and Israel thereby confirming the usefulness of détente. But as related by Garthoff this success triggered an even greater effort by Israel's "politically significant supporters" in the U.S. to begin opposing any cooperation with the Soviet Union, at all.

Garthoff writes, "The United States had pressed Israel into doing precisely what the Soviet Union (as well as the United States) had wanted: to halt its advance short of complete encirclement of the Egyptian Third Army east of Suez Thus they [Israel's politically significant supporters] saw the convergence of American-Soviet interests and effective cooperation in imposing a cease-fire as a harbinger of greater future cooperation by the two superpowers in working toward a resolution of the Israeli-Arab-Palestinian problem."

Copyright © 2018 Fitzgerald & Gould All rights reserved. This article first appeared on Invisible History.

Coming Next, Part 2: The post WWII global strategy of the neocons has been shaped chiefly by Russophobia against the Soviet Union and now Russia

* Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould are the authors of Invisible History: Afghanistan's Untold Story , Crossing Zero The AfPak War at the Turning Point of American Empire and The Voice . Visit their websites at invisiblehistory and grailwerk .com

Published at consortiumnews.com

[May 27, 2018] War, propaganda and smears An interview with Professor Piers Robinson by Julie Hyland

Notable quotes:
"... The following is the third part of a three-part interview with Professor Piers Robinson, an academic at the University of Sheffield and a member of the Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media. Parts one and two appeared on May 24 and May 25. ..."
"... We initially issued two briefing notes on Skripal. That was partly because some of the people in the Working Group who had been looking at chemical/biological events in Syria had relevant knowledge and were aware that what the British government was saying straight off was inaccurate, i.e., the idea that the nerve agent used was Russian and only the Russians could have produced it, etc. ..."
"... I did feel, because at the time the Syrian government was retaking large portions of territory, that the representation of Skripal might be being exploited as part of a broader propaganda drive against Russia (which was providing military support to Syria). ..."
"... If there was going to be an escalation in Syria, beyond the bombing that occurred, that would take us up against the Russians. There was a good possibility that the Skripal event was going to be exploited as part of a broader anti-Russian propaganda drive. ..."
"... when [Foreign Secretary] Boris Johnson pretty much said it was the Russians who must have poisoned the Skripals, that appeared to be a statement of certainty that was not warranted. And, of course, the recent history of Iraq and UK government claims regarding alleged WMD stockpiles was an important reminder that governments can be strongly motivated to distort and manipulate their claims, especially when intelligence is involved. ..."
"... I think the Skripal poisoning might be connected to events in the US. We do know, because Alex Thomson from Channel 4 tweeted on March 12 that the government had put a D-notice restriction on the reporting of [MI6 agent] Pablo Miller. Professor Paul McKeigue (University of Edinburgh) has issued a new briefing talking about this matter. ..."
"... Pablo Miller was Skripal's handler. He was connected to [former MI6 officer] Christopher Steele. He was responsible for the dossier alleging Trump's collusion with Russia. That, as I understand it, was a key part of initiating proceedings and investigations against Trump. It appears that the dossier was linked to the Democratic National Committee in that they apparently commissioned it. ..."
"... If it is the case that Skripal was in any way connected with that, it forms a possibility that there was a motive for someone other than Russia to have carried out the poisoning. ..."
"... More broadly, there is the possibility that the whole Russia-gate narrative is being used for bigger political purposes -- to influence Trump, to try and shore up action in the Middle East, perhaps on some level to distract Western publics from increasing awareness of how we have been involved in wars in the Middle East. ..."
May 26, 2018 | www.wsws.org

The following is the third part of a three-part interview with Professor Piers Robinson, an academic at the University of Sheffield and a member of the Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media. Parts one and two appeared on May 24 and May 25.

Julie Hyland: What is your estimation of the alleged poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal by Russia, and how do they relate to the war in Syria?

PR: We initially issued two briefing notes on Skripal. That was partly because some of the people in the Working Group who had been looking at chemical/biological events in Syria had relevant knowledge and were aware that what the British government was saying straight off was inaccurate, i.e., the idea that the nerve agent used was Russian and only the Russians could have produced it, etc.

I did feel, because at the time the Syrian government was retaking large portions of territory, that the representation of Skripal might be being exploited as part of a broader propaganda drive against Russia (which was providing military support to Syria).

If there was going to be an escalation in Syria, beyond the bombing that occurred, that would take us up against the Russians. There was a good possibility that the Skripal event was going to be exploited as part of a broader anti-Russian propaganda drive.

It's not something you can pinpoint for sure at this stage because you don't have access to the information. I don't think we will know the full truth of exactly what is happening for some time. But you can make an informed judgement call.

What we do know is that the claims being made at the time were not tenable. So when [Foreign Secretary] Boris Johnson pretty much said it was the Russians who must have poisoned the Skripals, that appeared to be a statement of certainty that was not warranted. And, of course, the recent history of Iraq and UK government claims regarding alleged WMD stockpiles was an important reminder that governments can be strongly motivated to distort and manipulate their claims, especially when intelligence is involved.

I think the Skripal poisoning might be connected to events in the US. We do know, because Alex Thomson from Channel 4 tweeted on March 12 that the government had put a D-notice restriction on the reporting of [MI6 agent] Pablo Miller. Professor Paul McKeigue (University of Edinburgh) has issued a new briefing talking about this matter.

Pablo Miller was Skripal's handler. He was connected to [former MI6 officer] Christopher Steele. He was responsible for the dossier alleging Trump's collusion with Russia. That, as I understand it, was a key part of initiating proceedings and investigations against Trump. It appears that the dossier was linked to the Democratic National Committee in that they apparently commissioned it.

If it is the case that Skripal was in any way connected with that, it forms a possibility that there was a motive for someone other than Russia to have carried out the poisoning.

More broadly, there is the possibility that the whole Russia-gate narrative is being used for bigger political purposes -- to influence Trump, to try and shore up action in the Middle East, perhaps on some level to distract Western publics from increasing awareness of how we have been involved in wars in the Middle East.

... ... ...

Ken Davis • 15 hours ago

An interview with Eva Bartlett https://ingaza.wordpress.co...
Ken Davis • 15 hours ago
In a related area that people don't usually connect, the same psychological warfare methods being used in the Middle East are being used in the attack on public education to privatize education globally.
FireintheHead • a day ago
I've had a degree of dialogue with Piers on Facebook .

Despite the fact that he has done some important work here regards state propaganda and Syria I have found his political positions very much the typical University sociology professor , where bourgeois ideology and Post modernism runs rampant .

Not immune to running off a line of expletives and ad hominems as if they constitute an argument, Piers came to the defence of Eva Bartlett and Vanessa Bealey when I had the audacity to make a distinction between the defence of Syria against US Imperialism and a defence of Assad per se and Putin

Both engaged in a somewhat lumpen diatribe on the question, despite the fact that I clearly never once promoted an Imperialist line . The situation was in fact reminiscent of what in more recent times the WSWS faced in regards Iran , when it seemingly ''had the audacity'' to support the Iranian working class against its own bourgeois rulers.

Skip • a day ago
Very nice interview. As a regular reader of the wsws most of what this man says is already understood. I will share this.

[May 27, 2018] Russia 'absolutely' rejects Dutch Aussie accusations it's responsible for MH17 downing

Notable quotes:
"... "Of course, without being able to be a full participant, Russia does not know to what extent the results of this work can be trusted," ..."
"... "responsible for its part in the downing of flight MH17" ..."
"... "The [Dutch] government is now taking the next step by formally holding Russia accountable," ..."
May 27, 2018 | www.rt.com

Moscow has rejected any involvement in the crash of flight MH17 in Ukraine after the Netherlands and Australia declared Russia "responsible" for the deployment of a BUK missile system that downed the jet in 2014. Moscow neither accepts nor trusts the results of an international investigation into the MH17 crash as it was not allowed to take part in it, according to the Russian president's spokesman Dmitry Peskov.

"Of course, without being able to be a full participant, Russia does not know to what extent the results of this work can be trusted," he said.

Peskov echoed the position of the Russian president Vladimir Putin who earlier said that, although Ukraine was included in the probe, Russia was barred from participating in establishing the truth.

Asked if he can confirm that Russia vehemently denies any involvement in the MH17 downing, Peskov replied "absolutely."

Earlier on Friday, Amsterdam and Canberra said Russia is "responsible for its part in the downing of flight MH17" following a Thursday press conference of the Dutch-led International Investigation Team (JIT). The latter concluded that a BUK missile system from a Russian 53rd brigade was transported to eastern Ukraine and used to down the passenger plane with more than 300 people onboard. The system was then said to have returned to Russia.

"The [Dutch] government is now taking the next step by formally holding Russia accountable," Dutch Minister of Foreign Affairs Stef Blok said in a statement. However, the Russian military earlier said that not a single weapons system crossed the border.

The allegation that the missile belonged to the Russian military had earlier been debunked by the Buk manufacturer, Almaz-Antey. Its real-time experiment showed that the projectile which hit MH17 (Boeing 777) was from an earlier generation and is no longer in service with the Russian military. It was found that the plane was likely shot down using an old 9M38 missile, not the newer type 9M38M1 with distinct butterfly-shaped metal fragments, which were allegedly recovered by the Dutch Safety Board.

Moreover, Almaz-Antey's findings , which analyzed the angle from which the projectiles entered the cockpit of the ill-fated flight, showed that the most probable location of the launch site could be only on Kiev-controlled territory. Untampered Russian radar data provided by Moscow led to similar conclusions.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 Ukrainian forces kept around 20 Buk systems, according to the Russian Defense Ministry. The military also stressed that Moscow has not supplied any new missiles to Ukraine since then

[May 25, 2018] British Hostage Video Of Yulia Skripal Released

Notable quotes:
"... Moon of Alabama ..."
May 25, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

The claims the British government made about the Skripal case are nonsensical. It is entirely possible that the Skipal's were victims of simple food poisoning or suffered from an overdose of Fenatnyl . The British government used the case to increase hostility towards Russia while diverting the public from its failures in the Brexit negotiations. There is historic precedence for such false accusations against the Russian state.

The Skripal case is also related to the "Dirty Dossier" the "former" British spy Christopher Steele created to defame U.S. President Donald Trump. Sergej Skripal may well have written parts of it . A fact which the British government is trying to hide .

The Skripal's were probably hurt. The British accusations against Russia caused huge damage in international relations. But the biggest casualty of the case might be the trustworthiness of the British media.

Where are the deep investigations, the intriguing questions, the door stepping of witnesses in this case? Why are no serious questions asked about the dubious claims made about the case? How did the Skripals survive a nerve agent "ten times as deadly as VX"? Why is there no further digging into the Steele dossier relation?

More questions need to be asked. Who is the media servicing with its obsequious behavior? Why?

---
Previous Moon of Alabama posts on the Skripal case:

March 8 - Poisioned British-Russian Double-Agent Has Links To Clinton Campaign March 12 - Theresa May's "45 Minutes" Moment March 14 - Are 'Novichok' Poisons Real? - May's Claims Fall Apart March 16 - The British Government's 'Novichok' Drama Was Written By Whom? March 18 - NHS Doctor: "No Patients Have Experienced Symptoms Of Nerve Agent Poisoning In Salisbury" March 21 - Russian Scientists Explain 'Novichok' - High Time For Britain To Come Clean (Updated) March 29 - Last Act Of 'Novichok' Drama Revealed - "The Skripals' Resurrection" March 31 - Hillary Clinton Ordered Diplomats To Suppress 'Novichok' Discussions April 3 - Operation Hades Blamed Russia - A Model For The 'Novichok' Claims? April 4 - It's The Cover-Up" - UK Foreign Office Deletes Tweet, Posts False Transcript, Issues New Lies April 5 - Novi-Fog™ In Fleet Street - Truth Cut Off April 6 - The Best Explanation For The Skripal Drama Is Still ... Food Poisoning April 7 - A Very British Farce April 12 - New Developments In The Skripal Drama - Police Statement, OPCW Report Release April 15 - Were the Skripals 'Buzzed', 'Novi-shocked' Or Neither? - May Has Some 'Splaining' To Do April 28 - The Silence Of The Skripals - Government Blocks Press Reports - Media Change The Record May 4 - Media Use Disinformation To Accuse Russia Of Spreading Such

Posted by b on May 24, 2018 at 06:35 AM | Permalink

Jen , May 24, 2018 7:21:59 AM | 2

Dear B,

On March 7, the British issued a D-notice (Defence and Security Media Advisory Notice) to the British press formally requesting that they refrain from mentioning the name of Sergei Skripal's former MI6 handler Pablo Miller or making any reference to him in their coverage of the poisoning case and the police investigation. A week later, a second D-notice was issued that reiterated the warning of the first D-notice and putting the press on notice not to publish any information that could lead directly or indirectly to the identification of Pablo Miller as Sergei Skripal's handler.
http://powerbase.info/index.php/DSMA_notice_7_March_2018
http://powerbase.info/index.php/DSMA_notice_14_March_2018

This explains why the British press, usually notorious for harrying people in the spotlight for interviews and gossipy information, have been noticeably reticent in approaching the Skripals - assuming of course, that they have access to them.

This would also explain why Julia Skripal was reading a prepared statement in the video and why her Reuters interview did not seem like a normal interview. She may have had a minder close by prepared to intervene in case the interviewer posed a question she was not allowed to answer.

Is anyone able to find out when the Reuters interview took place? If it took place some time ago, would the time between Julia Skripal's release and the interview have been long enough for Julia to recover to the extent where she looks well and appears not to be suffering traumatic after-effects? And why was it only released on May 23?

Robert Snefjella , May 24, 2018 8:57:43 AM | 14
The most plausible perpetrators of the original poisoning of the Skripals are some element of the dysfunctional and evil British deep state, which connects to the American deep state, which too is diabolical and dysfunctional.

The enormous resources, political and media and choreography and stream of lies, surrounding the Skripal affair make it obvious as a dysfunctional deep state project.

The alternative explanations: 1) that it was Russia, make no sense whatsoever; 2) that it was food poisoning is far fetched but possible, and might have been taken advantage of, and the policeman victim then added, to create the 'right' attempted murder mystery ambience.

That is, those who have been 'protecting' and controlling and hiding away and issuing statements for and 'restoring health to' the Skripals are very likely those who attacked them.

Father Skripal is a practised devious sort, who would know the ropes. Thet he is not just expendable, but an endangered loose end for various reasons now, including the Trump-Russia false flag.

Has Julia Skripal had unimpeded access to her father since their recovery? If so, a wink wink nod nod private whispered exchange between the two could have transformed the two into a potential team effort to stay alive by playing their parts.

If she has not been allowed or had available a moment of private exchange with father Skripal, then she might still know enough to understand that they are both in extreme danger.

Father Skripal can likely be bought off. That's what he does for as living. But can Julia?

P Walker , May 24, 2018 9:39:46 AM | 18
Starting to believe that the Skripals were going to transport Novichok somehow into Syria so that it could be used there In a staged event. The problem was that things may have gone sideways. Makes sense why the Russians issued a warning of a staged attack and how the Brits are keeping the couple incommunicado. The Russians could have known about the plot beforehand.

But it could just be my rampant paranoia.

Kalen , May 24, 2018 10:01:40 AM | 24
As I commented here before there are many plausible explanations much more probable than any of variants U.K. gov or media peddled. And this clear statement under duress sounding to similar British hostages taken by Saddam Hussein in 2003 declaring that they were healthy ate good food and were personal guests of Saddam and that they were free to leave anytime but since they enjoyed themselves immensely they would stay for a while and hence do not worry.

Sounds like Julia Skripal. To support this there is not emphasized fact that they both seem be to held in separate locations so they could not freely communicate much.

What is looks like that in this multiple bottom story something went wrong and some desperate solutions have been implemented. Because it is clear now that by keeping them alive that effectively cut off the family access while if dead family would have claimed bodies and all those lies would have been exposed, or it was all a false flag to redirect Skripal role in Trump dossier into made up Putin revenge on those who contributed to it.

Here is my take on all that, which may have not entirely happened as planed along the scenarios I and others including b proposes.
As far as theory how this happened. I see that Skripal was in it, in fact he prepared and tested appropriate dose for him as his daughter used as pawn to lend credibility and provide required Putin evil killing innocent narrative which would be absent if he just killed or hurt rogue agent.

Skipral himself calibrated that false flag dose of BZ or Fenantyl to make sure no permanent damage would be done to his daughter and then administered it himself to her and himself in controlled manner in public place so help would be coming immediately while in his car they could have possibly lie there for hours before being discovered.

In fact place where he lived Salisbury near Porton Downs was perfect for this since there was no way that doctors would misdiagnose them as military nerve agent victims which wrong treatment would possibly caused irreversible damage to victims as doctors would be more aggressive fearing immediate death of patients and also were immune to propaganda of Novichok crap since they were experts in this medical field as real and present danger, threat of exposure of Porton Downs employees was always there.

After recovery is was Skripal, trusted by her as her father, himself as part of psych op presented the narrative as Putin wanted to kill me and did not care that you happened to be with me at time of attack. I am so sorry, shit lies.

She was brainwashed or threatened some ways offered lucrative financial arrangement in the west decided to stay and followed MI6 instructions, fearing she could be killed upon meeting with Russian diplomats or even recruited family members or upon returning to Russia.

I do not think it would be far fetched to concoct such a thing or similar by MI6 as such stunts were done before like fake deaths or staged attacks but in this case the point was to fool British unwitting participants that nerve agent attack happenced as later they did later in Douma in amateurish way but still it worked as pretext to pre planed aggression on Syria as in case of Skripals pre planed diplomatic retaliation against Russia before any investigation was really commenced , such a thing only perpetrators of false flag themselves would do.

If Skripal was not on it why keep them alive witnesses of conspiracy since I could imagine as a father myself Skripal would,have been furious of MI6 discovering what amounted to attemp to kill his daughter and blame Putin one he learned that there was no Novichok crap or any military nerve agent used.

In fact Fenantyl is deadly if inappropriately handled what just few days after Skripal affair husband and wife overdosed on Fentanty in California and putting in critical condition their mother in law trying to revive them in the bedroom, children that never enter the room by looked through the Door who called 911 were also mildly exposed while a police officer who entered the room end up in hospital himself.

Whole house was immediately quarantined and covered by tent until, special unit arrived days later and only then police investigator entered premises. WImilar scenario unfolded in Salisbury.

What interesting that no emergency or medical personnel in hospital in UK as in California was hurt since they knew well how to deal with Fenantyl epidemic.

We must remember that despite crazy rhetoric we are dealing with risky but rational people who were not smart enough to concoct something that would go down the throuta of gullible public much more smoothly.


BM , May 24, 2018 10:55:51 AM | 29
Starting to believe that the Skripals were going to transport Novichok somehow into Syria so that it could be used there In a staged event.
Posted by: P Walker | May 24, 2018 9:39:46 AM | 18

At one point I saw a reference (on Sputnik I think, certainly a Russian source) that both Skripals Sergei and Yulia were under investigation by Russian intelligence for smuggling arms (I can't remember if there was a reference to chemical weapons but very possibly) into Syria. It was slightly mind-jarring at the time since it conflicted with the official position that Russia had (prior to the incident) no interest in Sergei Skripal. Otherwise I've seen nothing on that, perhaps because of a criminal investigation in progress in Russia.


Regarding the throat scar - I can imagine that was the result of surgery for long-term artificial respiration during the hospital-induced coma. If so, the alleged statement that "the clinical treatment was invasive, painful and depressing" was unequivacally originating from a technical and third-party source and definately not the patient. The doctor could well have used that phrase in discussions with government officials, who got so used to it they repeated it in composing an alleged statement for Yulia, but I am quite certain the patient herself would not describe it in such a way whether in English or Russian, and whether native English speaking or native foreign speaking. A patient's description would be much more focussed on the patient's experience (pain, discomfort, probable dryness of the mucosal membranes and side-effects resulting from that, etc) rather than "invasiveness" which was the first word in the statement and thereby the most emphasised.


It was always suspicious that Yulia was "discharged" from the hospital - and therefore away from her father - when her father was allegedly still under treatment. Yulia was alone in a foreign country, utterly isolated from friends, family and aquaintances, while her father was still in hospital undergoing "invasive, painful and depressing" treatment after an alleged state-sponsored assassination attempt - NO WAY! She would not leave her father voluntarily.


The statement that she does not want to be contacted by her cousin, grandmother, the Russian government or anyone else is the real killer of the fairy tale, and is the exact opposite of the compelling reality of such a traumatic episode. Is she supposed to believe her grandmother and cousin actively conspired in the assassination plot? There is absolutely know scenario that could explain such a wish.

Arioch , May 24, 2018 11:09:40 AM | 31
@S #16

i more like the "и принятия всего происшедшего." part. ('We need time for full revoery and for accepting all that happenned')

i bet it is as unrussian as unrussian can be.

it also is a bit confusing how she sternly repeats "no one should speak for us but ourselves" then she herself speak for her father.

Another giveaway is "grateful to Russian embassy" - "признательна Российскому посольству".
It is plain wrong. You do not write "russian" with capital letter in Russian.
And if you mean "Russian Embassy" as some kind of name - then bot hwords would be capital.
It is yet another case of "thinking English" when authoring this Russian letter from Russian woman to her Russian relatives...

karlof1 , May 24, 2018 11:14:51 AM | 32
Craig Murray again shoots massive holes into the hostage video and PR, further using semantics and discourse analysis to show the UK government at fault in this affair. A jointly written article by b and Craig would be a great read since their own investigations are very advanced, seemingly beyond all others. I for one find Craig's "lion cage" metaphor very convincing.

A conjecture: Teresa had it done to protect Hillary.

S , May 24, 2018 11:17:45 AM | 33
1. Why, out of all places in the UK, Skripal would settle down in Salisbury, the location of UK's CW labs? We're told that is because his handler, Pablo Miller, lived there. Fine, then the question becomes: why, out of all places in the UK, Pablo Miller was living close to UK's CW labs?

2. Why was it necessary to drag Yulia into this mess? A claim could be made that the alleged Russian assassins needed her to track the location where Sergei lived. But this was not her first visit to him, so alleged Russian assassins could have tracked his whereabouts long time ago, then waited for the best moment to kill him. Obviously, it would be better to kill him when he was alone, not with his daughter. Unless alleged Russian assassins, while she was still in Moscow, secretly poisoned some object that she then brought to her father. That is the only explanation why alleged Russian assassins would need Yulia. But British government is not claiming that; instead, they claim that a toxic substance was applied to the doorknob. Therefore, Yulia's presence was of no use to alleged Russian assassins. Then we must conclude that her presence was somehow needed by the British or third-party false-flaggers, or possibly by Sergei in case he was in on the plot. Otherwise, why not wait till she leaves?

3. The choice of CW to assassinate Skripal, the fact that he lived next to the main CW lab in UK (and one of the top CW labs in the world), and the fact that he and Yulia were poisoned at the end of a three-week CW military exercise in Salisbury Plains, taken together, form a combination that cannot be explained by mere coincidence. There must be a connection here. Could British intelligence plan all this 8 years ago when they were selecting the location where Skripal would live? Hell no. Therefore, it must have been the reverse: a decision was made to kill or "kill" Skripal and pin it on the Russians, then someone decided to use the fact that he was living close to the CW lab. However, if that's indeed what has happened, then it was a very flawed plan from the start, since all these coincidences would be readily apparent to outside observers. The poisoning false flag would work much better if Skripal was living in some other region of UK, and there was no CW exercise at the time of his poisoning. Therefore, either the plan was unintentionally dumb (because of incompetence), or it was intentionally dumb (people did not want to do it but could not reject the order, so they decided to sabotage it), or the original plan was entirely different, but it didn't work out, so they quickly improvised something else and failed to make it convincing due to lack of time.

Eric , May 24, 2018 12:01:40 PM | 38
Looking at the obvious tracheostomy scar left on her throat, Yulia must have lost all ability to breathe on her on without ventilatory assistance for some time. A tracheostomy is only performed after all effort to wean a patient off an endotracheal tube placed orally into the trachea at the time of respiratory failure is attempted. It seems to me this was much more than "food poisoning", and Yulia was in a deep coma for a prolonged duration.
This whole thing is very bizarre!
psychohistorian , May 24, 2018 12:19:46 PM | 41
Is Yulia Skripal this generations Patty Hearst with a large case of government induced Stockholm Syndrome?

I swear that Hollywood is behind the scenes of this Wag the Dog perfidy because it reads like sick soap opera that is all they are good at.

Tom Welsh , May 24, 2018 12:22:17 PM | 42
"Its sole argument is that the alleged nerve agent used was from a group of chemical agents which were originally developed in the Soviet Union".

By the same logic, the British government is to blame for poisoning everyone who has ever been harmed by VX or its derivatives.

Mishko , May 24, 2018 1:08:51 PM | 43
Sorry but can't resist: "Do you hear the lambs bleating, Yulia?"
John Gilberts , May 24, 2018 1:55:26 PM | 45
The Russian embassy seems curiously unwilling to file a habeus corpus application to produce the Skripals and enforce their consular rights. I wonder why?
alaff , May 24, 2018 2:04:00 PM | 46
It can be interesting/useful. Translated today's article in Russian newspaper "Komsomolskaya Pravda":

"KP"* exclusive: Victoria Skripal told that what her sister pronounced not her text in the videoclip.

Both specialists and average people right away noticed that [Yulia] Skripal was constrained, and a text which she has been pronounced was obviously written not by herself. Yulia's sister Viktoria [Skripal] appeared with the same suspicions. Here's what the woman told in exclusive interview during the "Komsomolskaya Pravda" radio air.

- Have you seen a written appeal?

- I saw only the appeal where she speaks. I'm glad she's alive and healthy. And i'm very happy she'd like to come back home.

- Maybe you've noticed some strangenesses in this appeal?

- You mean, strangenesses that she's reading a text?

- What makes you think she's reading a text?

- You don't have to be a great specialist [to notice this]. When a person drop his eyes, then lift up, then drop his eyes again. Do you know what is invasive therapy?

- No.

- Me too don't know. She too doesn't have a medical education. She is a geographer. I am an accountant. But i don't know what is invasive therapy. And it can't be a persons speaks so well, without mistakes. She has her favourite word. We all have our own parasite-word, right? She used it when she called me by telephone: "ну да, ну да" (Approximate English translation may be "yeah, yeah", or "well, yeah" - ed.). But here [in this appeal] she suddenly did not use her words. I.e. it's smoothly, in one breath. And a little bit slowly for her. Because [usually] she's chatter faster, when she's talking and nervous.

--

* "KP" - the newspaper "Komsomolskaya Pravda".

Original article - https://www.nnov.kp.ru/daily/26833.4/3873491/

S , May 24, 2018 2:23:22 PM | 48
@John Gilberts: A Russian article I've read today says the 1963 Vienna Convention does not apply since the Skripals are not under investigation by UK authorities. However, their relatives may go to a UK court to establish the status of the Skripals and request a meeting with them.
Ort , May 24, 2018 3:41:40 PM | 50
hoped a thread for Yulia's staged appearance would be forthcoming; because of the vicissitudes of timing, both B.'s observations and the comments have echoed my own reaction: in brief, this was at best another UK government/spook "tease".

Aside from joining the chorus, however, I find that I am even more skeptical than previously of the ostensible cumulative "facts" of the case. Yes, there are some established "knowns", but too much sketchy and dodgy filler material surrounding them.

Yulia's brief presentation was obviously meticulously staged. But nothing that occurred during the period of the Skripals' disappearance from public view should be presumed real, actual, and authentic-- including that tracheotomy scar.

Am I saying that "they" would fake the scar? No; hypotheses non fingo. I'm saying that the appearance of that scar should not prompt the otherwise "reasonable" surmise or assumption that it "proves" that Yulia actually received a tracheotomy, that her medical condition warrants it, etc.

I haven't seen any explanation for the circumstances behind Reuters hosting this tidy little performance. It manifestly is not a case of some intrepid reporter or news organization penetrating UK security and getting a "scoop".

As with the previous episodes, this "interview" raises more questions than it answers. Perhaps its perpetrators hope that it will convince complacent, submissive, incurious dullards that Yulia seems to have recovered nicely, and that there is no real mystery or scandal about the Skripals having been poisoned by some Russian operative.

From the resistance , May 24, 2018 4:35:41 PM | 52
@Posted by: BM | May 24, 2018 10:55:51 AM | 29

Agree, "invasive" is, most definitively, a very technical term used only in medical field by insiders to describe an agressive procedure, mostly consisting in introducing big tubes with/or cameras inside the body to explore or implant drainages or respirator tubes, which could imply secondary harm as a possibility but cnosidered less harmful than the necessity of the exploration or procedure fro the helath of the patient, and which due to that are performed under anesthesics.

No citizen strange to medical profession could anytime use such term, since it is not of public domain.

I agree also in that it is difficult believe that a young girl having passed through such "painful and depressing" experience would not have asked for her close relatives to come in her support, something that, btw, would have been recommended for any doctor or nurse loyal to their professional obligation with respect of the well being and full recovering of patients.
She is obviously quite depressed and most probably psychologically incapable of taking right decissions, or even counterproductive ones for her, as it usually happens under severe depression.....

IMO, she is held hostage and under menace of something..her statements sounded like recited by heart without any hint of personal emotion...She could be under psychiatric drugs, quite possible...

Arioch , May 24, 2018 5:12:00 PM | 56
https://m.facebook.com/alexander.bagaev.9/posts/1628144173974727

Here is yet another comparison of the two letters.
In Russian, by Russian :)

Arioch , May 24, 2018 5:12:00 PM | 56 karlof1 , May 24, 2018 5:12:50 PM | 57
"Wants to return home" is the big point not being raised according to Russian political scientist Igor Shatrov:

"It is unlikely that anyone would want to return to a country accused of poisoning her. Therefore for me, this phrase is the most significant statement that Julia made."

I must concur. But was that part of the script or said independently?

Scotch Bingeington , May 24, 2018 5:21:49 PM | 58
Seems like B is on a roll lately. That's excellent!

However, I can't agree with the hostage claim proposed here and in many other intelligent places any longer. For me, the Skripals being merely victims of greater powers involved in foul play, them being somehow held and silenced against their will - that's completely off the table.

It's hard to come to terms with it, but the Skripals have been in on the whole charade. Sergey has been from the beginning, probably in an instrumental way even, but to some degree Yulia must be complicit in the plot, too.

It's the way she behaves in the Reuters video. Her behavior is actually very straightforward and lighthearted - and coherently so. No gaps there. She sure shows signs of being a little nervous, but what media amateur wouldn't be in an interview situation. It's really only minor nervousness given the fact that the Skripals are at the center of so much international attention and that the Skripal case is a possible casus belli. She is unmistakably flirting with the camera and clearly enjoying the attention brought to her. You can't fake that.

The Russians (and the remaining Skripal family) will have to accomodate the fact that the Skripals are lost to them. They won't be coming back – because they wouldn't want to. That talk of returning to Russia "one day" is just that – talk, strategically placed into the statement and aimed at undermining the Russian ambassador's admirable persistence. Everything else that she says, or most of it, doesn't matter much. You all are perfectly right in your analysis of who actually wrote Yulia's script I think, but sadly it's way beside the point.

The Russian side has likely done so already, but if I were a Russian investigator, I'd have a look at how well in advance of the flight date Yulia's tickets were booked. The date as such might be of great importance, too. The Skripal ploy would have been given the green light by the time Yulia got on that plane. It would have been conceived much earlier and I'd check that against the airing (or finishing of the movie script) of that weird TV series B mentioned in one of his earlier articles. In all likelihood, Yulia booked a return ticket, but just for the sake of completeness, I'd check that, too. Also, what kind of health insurance did she take out for her trip abroad? Was it really the usual, the bare minimum, so as not to waste any money on it, or something more extensive? And how much luggage did she take with her, and what items (not just practical stuff, but some cherished things too, maybe)? Etc. etc.

Mark2 , May 24, 2018 5:31:12 PM | 61
HERE WE GO AGAIN!
BBC reporting a hoax phone call to Boris Johnson lasting 20 mins from Russian. Brit government blaming! Russia Kremlin

So in last 2 days they'v dug up the Scripals again,accused Russia of downing a plain with a missile,reports of new agression against Syria and as a diversion put N.koria back in the news.

The same old same old!

We will know see,, within hours maybe days a massive attack on Syria/Iran !

They just did the ground work- anti Russia properganda,public distraction.

I could weep

Daniel , May 24, 2018 6:14:13 PM | 67
It's great to see much skepticism here. I see no reason to accept that the alleged event happened in the first place. Great Britain, the US and Russia are all perfectly well able to assassinate a couple of civilians if that is their desire.

If these two are alive, I expect they were meant to be alive. If they were meant to be alive, I see no reason to risk their deaths by deliberately poisoning them (regardless of the agent used) and then letting them fall into the hands of an emergency room staff - who could themselves be poisoned or who might accidentally harm (even lethally) the "victims" by treating them for the wrong agent.

Daniel , May 24, 2018 6:18:41 PM | 68
All of the conjecture about Skirpal's ties to the "dodgy dossier" and even that the Clintons could be the culprits in the dirty deed is based on the belief that the US has two "major" political parties in serious opposition to one another. I see no evidence of that.

In this particular instance, we have the Clinton Crime family and The Donald - who have all been good friends for decades. Their daughters both stated during the campaign that they've been "best friends" since childhood. That could not have been possible with one of them living under Secret Service watch, even living in the White House - without close ties between their parents. Further, both Ivanka and Chelsea stated they expect to remain close friends even after the election.

This is just plain impossible to imagine if the "fire and fury" of the campaign and all the nasty stuff said during and since were even just exaggerations of real ideological differences.

I often describe US politics as akin to US football. The Eagles and the Bears both want to win any given game or championship. The teams get some bonuses for winning. But they are both playing the same game, and share the proceeds regardless. It used to be that the two "teams" had different owners (though of the same elite group), but at least since the rise of the Clinton/DLC, they even share owners, let alone ideologies and "long game" goals.

So I see no reason to believe any of the partisan kabuki theater that oozes out of our MSM.

Daniel , May 24, 2018 6:21:35 PM | 69
Arioch. Thanks for all of your erudite dissection of Yulia's words.
m , May 25, 2018 12:26:37 AM | 74
The most interesting aspect of the whole Skripal incident was the imposition of D notices on the media by the UK government. The reasoning was said to be to protect agent Miller but this was a lie as Miller's association with Skripal was previously well known and bound to come to the surface. No, the reasons for the D notices were to protect the government's bizarre narrative of lies and also the likely poisoner which would be our mysterious policeman caught up in the incident.
I strongly suspect the charade was intimately linked to british special forces captured unexpectedly in Gouta, Syria whilst assisting the local jihadis in preparing their next false flag chemical attack which would have brought in a massive western response to try and change the direction of the conflict. In other words an act of desperation which led to the comical situation of the authorities having to make the narrative up as they were going along.

It's a fact that allowing the media to swarm all over the place - even if controlled - would have invariably thrown up scenarios or situations which would have taken control of the narrative out of the government's hands.

[May 25, 2018] British Hostage Video Of Yulia Skripal was released on or nearly on the same day as a 'conclusive' report was issued stating a BUK missile launcher belonging to Russia was escorted by Russian military from Russia into Ukraine and used to shoot down Malaysia flight MH 17

May 25, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Quentin , May 24, 2018 10:58:32 AM | 30

This is all so delicious coming on or nearly on the same day as a 'conclusive' report was issued stating a BUK missile launcher belonging to Russia was escorted by Russian military from Russia into Ukraine and used to shoot down Malaysia flight MH 17. So there take that Russia even though you were not allowed to defend your version of events at the 'fair-and-balanced' international investigation. 'So what are you going to do about it?' Ukraine gets a free pass again.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/mh17-missile-ukraine-2014-russia-military-netherlands-deaths-investigation-a8366721.html

Coincidentally the World Football Cup begins in Russia in about three weeks. Who can honestly claim the West doesn't have all its ducks/dicks in a perfect row?

Julia Skripal's photo shoot was just embarrassing, so contrived and forced, a PR agency's hack piece.

'The mother and grandmother of Sergei and Julia Skripal aren't allowed to get in touch with them?', you say. 'Now you're really must think I'm stupid. In the West we are FREE.'

[May 24, 2018] That is one way of challenging the Western narrative about Ukraine and Crimea is through weighing up factual events, such as the CIA-backed false-flag sniper shootings of dozens of protesters in Kiev in February 2014.

May 24, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

Abe May 20, 2018 at 1:34 pm "Washington has shifted from tacit acceptance to an openly complicit policy in Israeli annexation of Palestinian territory, an annexation which has been going on for seven decades since the inception of the Israeli state in 1948. The now de facto American approval of the annexation of all Jerusalem marked by the opening of the US embassy is the culmination of 70 years of Israeli expansion and occupation.

"Meanwhile, Putin's unveiling this week of the bridge linking southern Russian mainland to the Crimea Peninsula is a timely reminder of the brazen hypocrisy of American and European states.

"Since Crimea voted in a referendum in March 2014 to rejoin its historic homeland of Russia, Washington and its allies have continually complained about Moscow's alleged 'annexation' of the Black Sea peninsula.

"Never mind that the Crimean people were prompted to hold their accession referendum following a bloody coup in Ukraine against an elected government by CIA-backed Neo-Nazis in February 2014. The people of Crimea voted in a peacefully constituted referendum to secede from Ukraine to join Russia, which it was historically a part of until 1954 when the Soviet Union arbitrarily assigned Crimea to the jurisdiction of the Soviet Republic of Ukraine.

"For the past four years, Western governments, their corporate news media and think-tanks, as well as the US-led NATO military alliance, have mounted an intense anti-Russian campaign of economic sanctions, denigration and offensive posturing all on the back of dubious claims that Russia 'annexed' Crimea.

"Relations between the US and the European Union towards Russia have descended into the freezer of a new and potentially catastrophic Cold War, supposedly motivated by the principle that Moscow had violated international law and changed borders by force. Russia's alleged 'annexation' of Crimea is cited as a sign of Moscow threatening Europe with expansionist aggression. Putin has been vilified as a 'new Hitler' or 'new Stalin' depending on your historical illiteracy.

"This Western distortion about the events that occurred in Ukraine during 2014, and subsequently, can be easily disputed with hard facts as a blatant falsification to conceal what was actually illegal interference by Washington and its European allies in the sovereign affairs of the Ukraine. In short, Western interference was about regime change; with the objective of destabilizing Moscow and projecting NATO force on Russia's borders.

:That is one way of challenging the Western narrative about Ukraine and Crimea. Through weighing up factual events, such as the CIA-backed false-flag sniper shootings of dozens of protesters in Kiev in February 2014. Or the ongoing Western-backed military offensive by Kiev's Neo-Nazi forces against the breakaway republics of Donbas in Eastern Ukraine.

"Another way is to ascertain the integrity of supposed Western legal principle about the general practice of annexation of territory.

"From listening to the incessant public consternation expressed by Western governments and media about Russia's alleged annexation of Crimea, one might think that the putative expropriation of territory is a most grievous violation of international law. Oh how chivalrous, one might think, are Washington and the Europeans in their defense of territorial sovereignty, judging by their seeming righteous repudiation of 'annexation'.

"However, this week's grotesque opening of the US embassy in Jerusalem accompanied by the massacre of protesting unarmed Palestinians shows that Western professed concerns about 'annexation' are nothing but a diabolical sham. In seven decades of expanding illegal occupation of Palestinian territory by the Israelis, Washington and the Europeans have enacted no opposition.

"But when it comes to Crimea, even though their case is not valid, the Western powers never stop hand-wringing about Russia's 'annexation' as if it was the biggest crime in modern history.

"Worse than hypocrisy, the US and European Union have been silently complicit in allowing Israel to continue annexing more and more Palestinian territory despite the stark violation of international law. Periodic massacres and whole populations held under brutal military siege in the Gaza Strip and West Bank have never registered any effective opposition from Western powers."

Gaza Massacre Exposes Western Hypocrisy on Russia's 'Annexation' of Crimea
By Finian Cunningham
https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/05/18/gaza-massacre-exposes-western-hypocrisy-russia-annexation-crimea.html

[May 24, 2018] Looks like Skripals are being detained against their will in order to keep them quiet about something

May 24, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Brendan , May 19, 2018 at 6:39 am

There are a number of reasons to suspect that Sergei Skripal was, and is, being silenced because of fears of what he might reveal about the Steele dossier. Although he is a minor character in this affair, there are many facts -- too many for me to go into here -- that connect him and his alleged MI6 handler Pablo Miller to Christopher Steele and the dossier.

The entire official story of what happened to Skripal in Salisbury on 4 March is unbelievable anyway, but the way that he and his daughter Yulia are now being kept incommunicado looks even more suspicious. The two of them are apparently not even speaking to their friends and family after being discharged from hospital, even though Yulia phoned her cousin Viktoria from the hospital in early April.

Add to this the fact that the British authorities are not doing anything to dispel doubts that the Skripals are acting of their own free will. They have made no effort to allow either the Russian embassy, or even an independent third party, to speak to either Sergei or Yulia.

This all suggests that the Skripals are being detained against their will in order to keep them quiet about something.

J. Decker , May 19, 2018 at 7:25 am

"British authorities have made no effort to allow either the Russian embassy, or even an independent third party, to speak to either Sergei or Yulia"

Isn't this disallowed in international relations? And why is Russia rolling over rather than taking the case to the Hague?

phillip sawicki , May 19, 2018 at 2:11 pm

Russia may have decided that taking it seriously would be a mistake by giving it too much attention with all the distortions that would arrive from the MSM. Putin is a Machiavellian and doesn't rush into things. I predicted weeks ago that we would hear about the miraculous efforts of British medicine to "rescue" the Skripals. That's what happened. The Skripals are being silenced rather than allowed to tell their story. Obvious beyond any doubt.

J. Decker , May 19, 2018 at 7:31 am

Brilliant piece Daniel Lazare. Many thanks! And as well to Consortium News for broadcasting. I am getting more than I give to you each month in support. You are a a light to us moths, most others have been put out.

Sam F , May 19, 2018 at 8:42 am

Yes, the isolation of the Skripals strongly suggests UK complicity in the whole incident.
The lack of transparency requires the presumption of wrongful intent.

robjira , May 18, 2018 at 11:17 pm

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/05/russian-spy-sergei-skripal-discharged-uk-hospital-180518135555333.html
They Live but are incarcerated. The depth to which the Lords of Capital (and we, who as a supine populace made all this possible) have sunk is appalling. I'm really afraid Russia may once again have to defend themselves against fascism.
I'm ashamed to be a taxpayer.

mike k , May 19, 2018 at 10:09 am

You can leave the "suggests" out of your accurate account. Everything you have said is simply a fact.

Jerry Alatalo , May 19, 2018 at 3:58 pm

Yulia and Sergei Skripal: The father and son whose whereabouts and physical condition are currently unknown, and whose important story is little-known, massively and scandalously suppressed and being kept from the awareness of the people of Earth.

Neither U.S. President Donald Trump, U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May nor France President Emmanuel Macron have offered anything approaching a public statement, by way of explanation -- over the now "vanished" Yulia and Sergei Skripal.

It is equally important to note and remember that none of these "leaders" have issued public statements with regard to the Douma, Syria confirmed false flag operation. In particular, they have not apologized for dangerously and illegally launching over 100 missiles on Syria based on an obvious lie.

***

Question:
Will Donald Trump, Theresa May and Emmanuel Macron rightfully provide their citizens in America, Britain and France with logical explanations for the massive unresolved controversies surrounding the Skripal and Douma events?

Answer:
Only if men and women around the Earth join, accumulate sufficient power, and demand legitimate, honest answers -- making it impossible for them to further obfuscate, deflect and/or otherwise ignore.

[May 24, 2018] Yulia has returned from the dead

May 24, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Rowan , May 23, 2018 2:19:32 PM | 1

Yulia has returned from the dead.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-russia-skripal-yulia-exclusiv/yulia-skripal-attempted-assassination-turned-my-world-upside-down-idUKKCN1IO2L5
Daniel , May 23, 2018 10:15:47 PM | 51
Thanks Rowan @1. Considering all the digital ink spilt at MoA over the Skirpal Affair, I expected this news to be highlighted.

This Yulia quote struck me:

"I don't want to describe the details, but the clinical treatment was invasive, painful and depressing... Our recovery has been slow and extremely painful."

Goodness! Considering the US Senate just confirmed a known torturer to run CIA, I must ask what kind of "treatment" Yulia received. I presume the neck scar is the result of endotracheal intubation?

And since visual imprints are so important in perception management, I found it interesting that this young woman, who was last reported in good health sitting on a park bench, is filmed in her "coming out" video sitting on a bench in a park-like setting. And she's writing what we must assume is the handwritten note released to the media - on a pad of paper sitting on the bench next to her! That's a very awkward way to write, especially since that note is is such legible, neat script.

The BBC article goes on to state:

"Meanwhile, work to decontaminate the Wiltshire city is still under way with the highest concentration of the Novichok found at the Skripals' front door."

Still decontaminating the town all this time later?

Jen , May 23, 2018 10:38:48 PM | 53
Rowan @ 1, Daniel @ 51: Julia Skripal appeared to be reading or following a prepared script. For someone who's been in a coma for 20 days, she looked very well indeed and does not appear to be suffering PTSD.

How would a person in a coma know if the treatment she was receiving was invasive, painful and depressing?

Novichok is supposed to be an unstable substance that degrades quickly in humid climatic conditions or in conditions where it comes into contact with water. Is Salisbury being decontaminated one brick tile, one shrub, one pigeon at a time?

Hmm .. this is what endotracheal intubation looks like but I can't see that a shunt has been made beneath the throat and between the collar bones. I too was curious about that neck wound.
http://drkashi.science/endotracheal-intubation/

[May 24, 2018] MSM misled their readers, they made fools of themselves, and they committed a crime against journalism. And now they're trying to dodge the blame

Notable quotes:
"... " . . . Nevertheless, their work is done. The poison seeds of their lies have been planted in millions of unquestioning U.S. brains, from the high and mighty to the average consumer of "news" and will continue to sprout and spread. More lies are needed to cover up the first lies and on and on and on it goes. . ." ..."
"... A lot of accusations that are not backed up by any evidence ..."
"... " personally i blame clinton" Personally I blame AIPAC, BIS, and the Shadow Masters Clinton is just another scapegoat-puppet. ..."
"... It was British Intelligence which first sounded the alarm wrt pre-candidate Trump due to his stated intention to establish a positive relationship with Putin and Russia, thus overturning the basis for the entire post-war paradigm based on the division of the world into East and West. ..."
"... In my view, the purpose of the congress authorized investigation is not to impeach POTUS. That would provide a precedent that neither the democrats, nor the republican would accept. Instead, the investigation is intended to discredit the president and by proxy, the republicans for the upcoming elections. ..."
May 24, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

jsinton , May 19, 2018 at 8:49 am

Since day one, I felt the entire Russia-gate fiasco was horse excrement. It just never passed the smell test. My suspicions were confirmed day by day as Mueller came up with nothing. To my amazement, the MSM pushed the story to the limit with no objectivity, agenda driven, politically motivated, journalistic suicide. They've shown themselves as the propaganda outlets they always were, but we were loath to admit.

Robert Emmett , May 19, 2018 at 8:43 am

"They misled their readers, they made fools of themselves, and they committed a crime against journalism. And now they're trying to dodge the blame."

That may well be. And Robert Parry meticulously documented such a case. Nevertheless, their work is done. The poison seeds of their lies have been planted in millions of unquestioning U.S. brains, from the high and mighty to the average consumer of "news" and will continue to sprout and spread. More lies are needed to cover up the first lies and on and on and on it goes. That's the nature of a infectious culture of lies. The cultured medium explodes, escapes the lab and runs rampant, leaving those who initiated the whole mess to scramble in a mad attempt to "save face". It wouldn't surprise me if the H-ill-re eventually becomes the first, and last, U.S. woman CEO to drop the big one. If you sometimes hear a faint glug-glug-glug pulsing in your ears, that's the sound of U.S. circling the drain.

mike k , May 19, 2018 at 10:03 am

Very well stated Robert. I like the virus metaphor for propaganda. It's like gossip -- spreading, infecting the gullible with lies .

Rob , May 19, 2018 at 1:51 pm

Excellent point. As you say, their work is done. The Russiagate meme is now firmly implanted in the minds of tens of millions of Americans, and nothing short of a public confession by the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton that they fabricated the story and fanned the flames in the media will dislodge it. I cannot envision any other means of killing this particular virus. All contrary facts and logic will be brushed aside as fake news created by Russian agents or stooges.

Dave P. , May 19, 2018 at 2:26 pm

Robert Emmet,

" . . . Nevertheless, their work is done. The poison seeds of their lies have been planted in millions of unquestioning U.S. brains, from the high and mighty to the average consumer of "news" and will continue to sprout and spread. More lies are needed to cover up the first lies and on and on and on it goes. . ."

Yes. You have summarized it very well. That is how it is in our home too. My wife had been listening to this for some time, Russia, Russia, Russia, and Putin , Putin, evil Putin destroying our democracy, and so on on TV and in Newspapers, that it has gone into the subconscious now. And I read that they, the Ruling Power Structures have done the same to people in Western Europe too.

j. D. D. , May 19, 2018 at 7:54 am

While many of the particulars are correct regaring the paucity of evidence against associates of the President, the author misses two key points, upon which the entire Mueller coup operation rests. First, that the campaign against Trump started not in the Clinton campaign or anywhere related, but rather in London with British intelligence, as the Guardian itself has boasted. Not only did MI6's Steele prepare the document that formed the basis of the allegations of "collusion" but it is well known that GCHQ's Hannigan met personally with Brennan in the summer of 2016 to sound the alarm with a "not yet with it" US intel community. Second, the basis of the investigation itself hinges on the alleged "hacking" of the Clinton/DNC emailswhich showed her to be a craven puppet of Wall Street, released just prior to the Democratic Convention. That entire scenario, that the source of the infamous emails were a result of "Russian hacking," was conclusively and repeatedly demolished on this website by fomer top NSA analyst William Binney, and his cohorts at the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

mike k , May 19, 2018 at 10:07 am

The Clinton campaign paid Steele to do his thing. Their operation against Trump began the day after his surprise victory.

backwardsevolution , May 19, 2018 at 9:16 pm

Their operation began long before Trump's victory. It began in earnest just a few days after Hillary Clinton was wrongfully exonerated, way back in July of 2016.

voza0db , May 19, 2018 at 6:29 am

The funniest part of all this nonsense is that the democrats are going to keep this Illusion of RUSSIAGATE alive until the next elections!
So after the next loss in the upcoming elections we all know who to blame for another democratic loss, right?!

RnM , May 19, 2018 at 3:34 am

You paint a nearly hopeless picture, Mike.

Let us all trust that Mr. Trump, who, despite the intentions of the Totalitarians outed in Daniel Lazare's fine summary article, is the DULY ELECTED POTUS (by the common folk -- no one has made a serious demonstration of vote counting fraud, from my recollections), continues in office.

The American Experiment (in enlightened governance of, by, and for the governed) is in grave jeopardy. The enemy of the Enlightenment's fine accomplishment is Monotheism, which is the philosophical parent of Monarchy, which is the civic governing manifestation of said religious thought patterns.

Sam F , May 19, 2018 at 8:52 am

I'll suggest that the "American Experiment" is threatened by money power, more than religion, although many fundamentalists are deluded to support zionism. Religion is a problem where it rationalizes simplistic political views, but the root causes are ignorance and selfishness. Monotheism is not really the problem now that there are few monarchies. The Enlightenment, and enlightenment of individuals, has many enemies.

mike k , May 19, 2018 at 10:12 am

The enemies of good government are the greedy and powerful oligarchs who hate democracy, and do everything to distort and destroy it. No need to drag monotheism into it.

RnM , May 19, 2018 at 4:25 pm

My career was spent working with local rural politics. Good governance is by far imperiled by corrupt locals on the take.

Also, Stalin did his purging by setting up secret local committees of three, who fed him names through a beaurocratic pipeline. The Big Guy gets the blame (or credit), but the little fellas do the dirty work.

Sam F , May 20, 2018 at 4:21 pm

You are very right about local government corruption, which may have factions based upon tribal loyalties, but is caused by poor moral standards throughout our society. Most local officials are elected with little or no public knowledge of who they are, and as a result are mere low-end power-seekers who will abuse whatever power they can get.

David G , May 19, 2018 at 2:50 am

"[The NY Times] article fails to mention that at the time the conversation with the Australian ambassador took place, the Clinton communications in the news were the 30,000 State Department emails that she had improperly stored on her private computer. Instead of spilling the beans about a data breach yet to come, it's more likely that Papadopoulos was referring to emails that were already in the news -- a possibility the Times fails to discuss."

I've been shouting just this at my TV set (oddly, to little effect). And the same goes for other allegedly damning references to "Clinton emails" in connection with the infamous Trump Tower meeting and probably elsewhere.

Thanks to Daniel Lazare for pointing it out.

Adrian E. , May 19, 2018 at 4:29 am

A lot of accusations that are not backed up by any evidence and some of which have officially been rejected by the officials that investigated the case (e.g. as far as France is concerned see https://www.yahoo.com/news/latest-putin-says-attempts-contain-russia-wont-101117186.html ).

But unfortunately, there are many people who don't care about evidence and rational inquiry, and they prefer believing in evidencefree conspiracy theories that match their prejudices. One accusation that is not backed up by any evidence is used to making other accusations that are not based on evidence look more likely.

voza0db , May 19, 2018 at 6:49 am

:lol: " A lot of accusations that are not backed up by any evidence " the good old PROPAGANDA ! It's alive and kicking

voza0db , May 19, 2018 at 6:47 am

Russia is in fact the only REAL EMPIRE in this world!

They hack and manipulate everything and everyone

Anna , May 19, 2018 at 8:26 am

Have you checked the number of US overseas military bases recently?
Do you know why the US Congress is called "Israel-occupied territory?"
Don't you love -- love! -- MSM.

voza0db , May 19, 2018 at 3:35 pm

Hello Anna!

I know that my written sarcasm is very bad sorry about that! And yes I do love MainShitMedia! Their the best.

Sam F , May 19, 2018 at 7:08 am

Try defining "hacking an election." The term pretends that a few techies tampered machines. In the US the election machine makers do that, no doubt, but not likely elsewhere. The US has a very long history of manipulating elections throughout the world and in the US. Even while it pretends to be "promoting democracy" it is installing dictators and faking elections.

The ultimate election hack is allowing big money to control mass media and political campaigns, as in the US.
Only when we restrict funding of mass media and elections to limited contributions will we restore democracy.

Realist , May 20, 2018 at 4:21 am

Washington and its media tools have hacked this guy's brain is what it amounts to.

They could tell the American public anything and have it believed, like, for instance, that the ideal gas law does not apply to inflated footballs in cold weather.

Realist , May 21, 2018 at 3:32 am

Correction: All your unfounded assertions are bogus. Just read this one simple piece that just came out for the accurate course of events.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-05-20/how-fbi-and-cia-restarted-cold-war-protect-themselves

David G , May 19, 2018 at 2:20 am

While I am fully on board with rubbishing Russia-gate as malignant nonsense, I do think it may be a mistake to rely too much on there turning out to be no nefarious nexus between Trump and Russia.

In Trump we have someone devoid of knowledge, sense, or character, an almost altogether wrong guy -- very much including his views on U.S. foreign policy -- who for some reason has a positive and constructive attitude toward Russia and Putin (though, of course, he has mostly gone along with the anti-Russia Beltway consensus in his actions as president when pressured).

It's possibly it's just an isolated, unexplained instance of Trumpian sanity, but to me it's at least as likely to be the result of greed or fear, based on some grubby link to Russia that is as yet undisclosed.

J. Decker , May 19, 2018 at 7:43 am

"who for some reason has a positive and constructive attitude toward Russia and Putin".

Maybe the reason is that Putin is one of history's penultimate statesman who presents the strongest opposition to the global war/banking beast and last bastion of hope? Time magazine's Most Powerful Man of the Year (or something like that as I wouldn't be caught dead reading it.

So does that make Trump a puppet for Russia or a keen observer?

David G , May 19, 2018 at 11:54 am

Do you think Cheeto Dust really capable of appreciating Putin for the reasons you cite?

"Keen" isn't a word that springs to my mind when I think of Trump.

backwardsevolution , May 20, 2018 at 2:32 am

David G -- maybe you need to oil your springs. When you're trying to navigate your way through the swamp, you tend to notice capable players who are doing it and admire them for it.

Anna , May 19, 2018 at 8:28 am

Let's begin with Uranium One and the $500.000 fee for a half-hour speech by Bill.

Mike From Jersey , May 19, 2018 at 1:59 pm

I am also a Green voter. When the choice became Hillary vs Donald that -- for me -- was the last straw. I de-registered as a Democrat and registered as a Green.

Skip Scott , May 21, 2018 at 7:32 am

Good for you Mike. I refuse to be a part of the "lesser of two evils" gambit any longer. Let's hope we can build a movement.

andrew , May 18, 2018 at 10:40 pm

the core accusations are
1. that the russians hacked the dnc, there is no evidence and no basis for this accusation. none.
2. that the russians spread a deadly fake news virus that was incredibly damaging to hillary's campaign. there is no evidence of this and it is a completely ridiculous idea if one just stops for a moment to contemplate the astronomical amount of fake news available at all times on the internet and television. what was the fake news lie that was so supremely effective? nobody knows. there wasn't one. there was for hillary unfortunately a real news truth about the dnc released by wikileaks but that was not from russians or a lie.
3. that the russians hacked the election. again absolutely no proof or evidence of this has been offered.

it is in fact a political witch hunt that has been incredibly destructive. it has distracted energy and attention away from real things that have happened. it has instigated proxy warfare with russia in syria. it has discredited journalism. it has made an honest man out of trump.

personally i blame clinton. this mendacious , self defeating , and bizarre ruse is so in keeping with so many of her and bill's greatest hits. these two people continue to damage the progressive movement . they won't go away it would seem. i hope after russiagate sputters to a stop the clintons will finally be finished.

David G , May 19, 2018 at 1:59 am

well said, andrew

RnM , May 19, 2018 at 4:37 am

A Witch Hunt, alright! Not FOR a witch, but BY a witch.

J. Decker , May 19, 2018 at 7:51 am

" personally i blame clinton" Personally I blame AIPAC, BIS, and the Shadow Masters Clinton is just another scapegoat-puppet.

j. D. D. , May 19, 2018 at 11:41 am

Yes, all true but you fail to identify the cause, which goes well beyond naming Russia as an excuse for Hillary's defeat. It was British Intelligence which first sounded the alarm wrt pre-candidate Trump due to his stated intention to establish a positive relationship with Putin and Russia, thus overturning the basis for the entire post-war paradigm based on the division of the world into East and West.

Jeff , May 19, 2018 at 11:59 am

Thanx, Andrew. You wrote the comment I was going to write. I do, however, have one nit. Russia-gate has not made an honest man out of Trump. Nothing could make an honest man out of Trump. He is nothing but an incompetent con artist whose real skill was getting people to lend him money after he had blown it all on bad deals and lousy management. I personally suspect that the connection between Trump and Russia is not with the Russian government but with the Russian oligarchs who are laundering their ill-gotten gains looting Russian state enterprises through Trump.

mike k , May 18, 2018 at 10:28 pm

The slimy rats always indulge in phony alibis for their criminal tricks. They should be investigated and charged with falsely accusing an elected President, in order to unseat him. Anyone who votes for a "democrat" in the future is just a simple clueless idiot. Trump is a horrible President, but this does not justify the criminal conspiracy to unseat him through slander and innuendo lacking any evidence whatever. The appointment of a "special council" was meant to change the result of the presidential election, and nothing else.

mike k , May 18, 2018 at 10:32 pm

If Trump were to be impeached on the basis of this phony witch hunt, it would be the end of whatever semblance we have of a democracy forever. The whole affair reminds me of the criminal removal of the President of Brazil recently.

Al Pinto , May 19, 2018 at 11:01 am

In my view, the purpose of the congress authorized investigation is not to impeach POTUS. That would provide a precedent that neither the democrats, nor the republican would accept. Instead, the investigation is intended to discredit the president and by proxy, the republicans for the upcoming elections.

The results of the investigations, actual and/or fabricated, will be invaluable campaign material for the democrats. Especially with the help of the main stream media, it's going to very effective headlines to grab the limited attention that most people in the US have for politics

Sam F , May 18, 2018 at 10:10 pm

The Russia-gate hysteria worked fine as a distraction from Israel-gate. All of Hillary's top ten donors were zionists, and Trump appointed Goldman Sachs to run the economy. Not that KSA, the MIC, or WallSt et al lost any bribery chances.

Russia-gate also pressured Trump into the zionist camp. Just what Israel ordered. Of course the US mass media are almost entirely owned by zionists. Mission accomplished; time to backtrack; we never really said that.

[May 24, 2018] There are some [inconclusive] signs that anti-Russian hysteria is weakening in the USA. Still The Empire is falling, and the Empire is blaming all it's idiotic decisions on the Russians

Notable quotes:
"... Back in 1973 there was a feeling of inevitability as the Watergate investigation progressed, every week more incriminating details that we know now came from inside the FBI. The Mueller probe, on the contrary, seems to be stumbling forward and not really getting anywhere as it goes fishing for info and issues like Stormy's accusations take over the news. ..."
"... Joe -- Russiagate was made up, fashioned out of nothing. If we want to talk about collusion, we need to talk about Uranium One. Now there's where some serious money changed hands, and the Clinton's hands are all over it. ..."
"... I think RussiaGate was invented also. I also think it's pretty obvious that Hillary gets a free get out of jail card when it comes to any FBI investigation over her. I also believe that if Trump were in cahoots with Putin, that Mueller by now would have revealed it, as Democrates would be whooping it up better than a homeless person hitting the super multi-million dollar lotto. ..."
"... The Empire is falling, and the Empire is blaming all it's idiotic decisions on the Russians. Our MSM which was always a subject of debate, has gone off the rails with this 24/7 anti-Trump, anti-Russian, news business. I'm suffering from all this hate aimed at Russia, and I'm believing that our MSM is winning on that front. Like I said, both Hillary and Donald's past practices may need investigated, but when will we Americans start discussing the many other issues of our day, is all I'm asking? ..."
"... No backwardsevolution the Empire is in trouble, and we are watching it make an ass out of itself while it goes down the drain. I'm sorry at this point in time I don't see any good guys, or gals. ..."
May 24, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Realist , May 20, 2018 at 3:44 am

It also seems that Yahoo also has the total (if not enthusiastic) support of Putin these days. Pretty tough to buck Israel and achieve peace in the Middle East when it has the full support of both the American Zionist oligarchs and the Russian Zionist oligarchs (who harbor most of their wealth in the West and represent the Atlanticist faction in Russia, in other words play for team USA) who probably comprise the largest and most influential power factions in both countries. No wonder AIPAC is the most powerful lobby whose existence is vehemently denied. If it comes to pass, World War III may essentially be fought because of perceived grievances by thin-skinned megalomaniacs like Adelson and Browder and their ability to wrap politicians around their pinkies using their billions in wealth. I think the Russians especially dislike being played by con-men like Browder, who gets full support from the bought-off American Congress.

voza0db , May 19, 2018 at 12:01 pm

GOOD NEWS EVERYONE!

Here's the solution to your RUSSIA HYSTERIA!

https://youtu.be/M7M4y8jEn_s

Lawrence Magnuson , May 19, 2018 at 11:34 am

Excellent in the facts and your conclusions. It is difficult to imagine what you have done in so few words -- summarize so clearly what became a maze of groundless speculation early on only to end as major byzantine monument to almost nothing but empty accusation, political invective, widespread loose talk and media posturing/gossiping. You described, in the end, a failed circus of second-rate illusions.

Mike From Jersey , May 19, 2018 at 10:07 am

The Times used to be a credible source of information. Now, I won't even read Times article unless it is on an issue in which I am very well versed. I simply don't want to be propagandized. And when I read an article in a matter in which I am well versed, I am often outraged at the slants and selective omissions.

Joe Tedesky , May 19, 2018 at 9:22 am

I have come to the conclusion that they are all bad, and that this constant pounding of Russia interference in our American political establishments is nonsense.

Whether it be Russia-Gate or Uranium One scandals, it always leads back to Russian collusion, or how Putin is hell bent on subverting American democracy. It's like the word come down from a Bilderberg high echelon get together where the supreme elite said, 'now you political puppies go fight amongst yourselves but remember Putin is our target'. After all Putin's handling of the Rothschild oligarchs is enough to get even the most least powerful leaders into hot water, let a lone the world's other nuclear super power. So Putin must go.

So while Palestinians this week died protesting their confinement, N Korea was insulted away from the negotiating table over a Gaddafi inspired threat, as Europeans looked for another currency to replace the U.S. Dollar, our American news media gave little time to those news stories, as it stayed stuck on Russia-Gate, or as FOX is attempting to do with their trying to launch a Hillary investigation into her poor use of computer servers added to her selling off uranium stock, we Americans are isolated by what really should matter. Please keep your eyes on the center ring, for what's around it doesn't matter, is the mantra.

What I'm saying, is that these scandals are in house fights, and that the MSM's circumventing of any real news, is just another way to dumb us Americans down. Not to say that investigating political chicanery isn't a priority, but should these investigations be so overwhelmingly reported over any or all other news? If you answered no to that, then should we next begin to wonder to what we are not being told, is exactly the very news we should be talking about?

phillip sawicki , May 19, 2018 at 2:02 pm

Back in 1973 there was a feeling of inevitability as the Watergate investigation progressed, every week more incriminating details that we know now came from inside the FBI. The Mueller probe, on the contrary, seems to be stumbling forward and not really getting anywhere as it goes fishing for info and issues like Stormy's accusations take over the news.

It's possible, I suppose, that Mueller will come up with something before November, but there's no sense of inevitability. How could there be? Sixty three American citizens voted for Trump. Bad news for the country, bad news for Clinton, bad news for the MSM, bad news for the Deep State. Ironies abound.

Joe Tedesky , May 19, 2018 at 2:58 pm

The one comparison between 1973 and 2018, is that they have the exact same calendar dates. In my mind, the only thing WaterGate has in common with Russia-Gate is that the MSM likes to say that the two scandals are the same. And why not, when you are huckstering the news to sell insurance and pharmaceutical commercials?

WaterGate was of course a break in, and finding Nixon's involvement was key. Russia-Gate wasn't a break in, and as Mueller's Investigation is struggling to find Russian collusion, Mueller gives the impression that he's on to something, when eventually we find out he has nothing. I mean the WaterGate investigation started out with the knowledge that there was a break in, but the Russia-Gate investigation began with lots of allegations with no proof to be found. WaterGate didn't, at least in my opinion, start out as a fishing expedition, but the Russia-Gate Investigation was not only a fishing expedition in as much as it has been a deep sea fishing trip at its best.

You pointed out the voter support of Trump phillip but might I reference you to the many who didn't vote, or at least the bunches of voters who left the presidential pick a blank? America is broken phillip, every institution and every agency which operates inside of it is too. In my estimation to make it right we Americans will need to go back to starting from scratch. Let it begin!

backwardsevolution , May 19, 2018 at 8:05 pm

Joe -- Russiagate was made up, fashioned out of nothing. If we want to talk about collusion, we need to talk about Uranium One. Now there's where some serious money changed hands, and the Clinton's hands are all over it.

What is comparable to Watergate, but a hundred times worse, is what is trickling out now and what the media have gone out of their way to cover up -- the plot by James Comey and other members of the FBI, John Brennan and others in the CIA, Clapper, the Department of Justice (Rod Rosenstein, Sally Yates, Loretta Lynch, Hillary Clinton) to overthrow a duly-elected President.

The Inspector General's report on the FBI and the Department of Justice's role in all of this is apparently damning. Some of these people may end up in jail.

I think Russiagate was invented because, as Hillary said, "If they find out what we've done, we'll all hang." She was trading favors with foreign governments in exchange for cash into the Clinton Foundation. That's why she was using a private server. She didn't want to use the government servers as they would have a back-up of her files, and when you're intent on stealing, the last thing you want is a "back-up" of your dirty dealings.

All of this Russiagate insanity has been one great big deflection away from the true crimes.

It looks like all of them are going to have a date with a Grand Jury.

Joe Tedesky , May 19, 2018 at 9:03 pm

I think RussiaGate was invented also. I also think it's pretty obvious that Hillary gets a free get out of jail card when it comes to any FBI investigation over her. I also believe that if Trump were in cahoots with Putin, that Mueller by now would have revealed it, as Democrates would be whooping it up better than a homeless person hitting the super multi-million dollar lotto.

The Empire is falling, and the Empire is blaming all it's idiotic decisions on the Russians. Our MSM which was always a subject of debate, has gone off the rails with this 24/7 anti-Trump, anti-Russian, news business. I'm suffering from all this hate aimed at Russia, and I'm believing that our MSM is winning on that front. Like I said, both Hillary and Donald's past practices may need investigated, but when will we Americans start discussing the many other issues of our day, is all I'm asking?

I'm tired of the constant insinuating that Trump is a Putin puppet, as I'm also experiencing fatigue over Hillary's being continually left off the hook. Although even more so, I'm sick of all of them, I'm just venting over our sad state of us citizens being well informed.

Good to hear from you backwardsevolution. Joe

backwardsevolution , May 19, 2018 at 9:48 pm

Joe Tedesky -- "Like I said, both Hillary and Donald's past practices may need investigated, but when will we Americans start discussing the many other issues of our day, is all I'm asking?"

Yes, you are so right, Joe, because those other issues are what the average American really cares about: the price of health care and housing, and whether they're going to be able to put food on the table.

Of course, had Donald Trump been colluding with the Russians, that certainly would have been of importance to the country, but they've been looking under every rock for almost two years now and haven't found anything. Well, Stormy Daniels did pop up, but, hey, Trump never professed to be an angel. All they've done is tied him up in knots and prevented him from dealing with the important issues. They have also left far too many Americans with the impression that he's a traitor when he's not, and by holding these charges above his head, they've probably pushed him into doing things that he wouldn't ordinarily have done.

If what I'm hearing about the Inspector General's report is anything close to the truth, then these people (the Deep State people I mentioned above) tried to overthrow a sitting President. These people are running a parallel government. That is very dangerous and will have to be dealt with severely, with criminal charges.

Hey, Joe, on that happy note, you have a good night.

Joe Tedesky , May 19, 2018 at 10:37 pm

I'm suffering from RussiaGate fatigue, like I said. I never bought into the Russian collusion thing. I'm more bothered by the forever nonsense the MSM has us on, where there is no closure. I mean you sit and listen to people like Rachel go through their hysterics and after 20 minutes per monologue she gives you nothing.

The Hillary crimes are frustrating because nothing comes of her getting to meet the hard justice she deserves. Seriously this evil witch starts a civil war withinside of our governments bureaucracy, and yet no one hears that much about it the way it's going down. On the other hand Donald Trump for mostly the bad of it, gets news coverage beyond what any America politician ever gets, and we're suppose to believe we are operating on normal.

No backwardsevolution the Empire is in trouble, and we are watching it make an ass out of itself while it goes down the drain. I'm sorry at this point in time I don't see any good guys, or gals.

I might add Trump's Middle East policies among his other hard nosed geopolitical endeavors leaves me exhausted trying to figure him out. Hillary should no doubt be in jail, but here we are still on the down low and nothing seems to be working as it should.

Thanks, I do value your opinion. Joe

backwardsevolution , May 19, 2018 at 11:38 pm

Joe Tedesky -- "I'm sorry at this point in time I don't see any good guys, or gals."

Yes, I agree. One good thing about Trump's presidency is that it has exposed the Deep State actors. These are the people who run the government, not the President, and it doesn't matter who is elected. If you don't play along, you're Kennedy'd! That's why so few good people ever vie for top positions; you get hammered.

Joe, the World Cup is coming and all is well! I'm going to knock off, watch some old videos, and get myself psyched up. Good talking to you, Joe, as always.

Realist , May 20, 2018 at 4:06 am

Watergate was focussed. Iran-Contra was focussed. Underlings were convicted in both on charges directly related to the main issues. Nixon resigned and Reagan retired, the Congress not having the will to impeach him, which would have been politically unpopular. "Out-of-the-loop" Bushdaddy saved himself from later impeachment by pardoning some key cabinet members under Reagan (most notably Caspar Weinberger). In contrast, Whitewater blossomed into a full-blown fishing expedition, as has so-called Russiagate. Ken Starr didn't just investigate a land deal or management of the White House travel office, but went over the lives of both Clinton's with a fine tooth comb, eventually precipitating impeachment charges over a stained blue dress. Now, I suppose, the Clinton's and their Democratic adherents feel that turnabout is fair play, though it is undoubtedly just as divisive and destructive to the country as their go round. The woman has obviously been traumatized during her years in the public arena and in the aftermath of the election, but she does the country a great disservice by pushing her vendetta.

Joe Tedesky , May 20, 2018 at 9:09 am

The Clinton pass was always going to be a problem, and many people knew that going into the 2016 Presidential Election Campaign. This didn't stop Hillary though. Why, many here on this comment board wrote with good reason why the Clintons should remain in retirement, but oh no Hillary was going to run come hell or high water. Only a sociopath would overlook so many good reasons of why not to run.

Great perspective Realist. One would think you had a scientific mind . oh wait you do. Joe

Herman , May 19, 2018 at 9:09 am

As I'm sure others commenters on this site will note, those guilty of trying to create a lynch mob and encourage hysteria, will as with Iraq WMD's, emerge unscathed, even more honored for their service to America. And with and increasing number of Americans, we will feel more and more that you cant believe anything anymore and that is a disastrous position to be in for a nation.

mike k , May 19, 2018 at 9:59 am

Herman, it has always been a mistake to rely on belief without careful examination. Plato said that the unexamined life is not worth living. Discerning the truth is intellectual work -- something our false educational system does not teach us to do. Those who learn to sort things out and demand the real truth are mostly self-educated. To wake others up who have been taught to conform and accept authorities, is a lengthy and often thankless task. The tenacity with which many hold onto their false beliefs, is a formidable obstacle to creating a new and better society. I wish I knew a way to accomplish this awakening of our fellows, but I do not. We are left with the option of shortcuts, which are no better than new forms of propaganda to compete with those our subjects have already incorporated in their thinking and character. Following a new leader or movement seems the most one can expect from our brainwashed brothers and sisters

[May 24, 2018] The diversion of Russia Gate is a continuation of former diversions such as the Tea Party which was invented by the banksters to turn public anger over the big banking collapse and the resulting recession into a movement to gain more deregulation for tax breaks for the wealthy

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... In the case of the fabricated Russia Gate narrative the results of the Trump election and widespread public distrust of the election process was turned into a new cold war with Russia which benefited major defense contractors and resulted in sanctions against Russia and huge windfalls for the Military Industrial Complex as the US ponied up to fund our national defense industry. ..."
"... We should by now be educated that major failures of our economy and political processes precipitated by government deregulation or corrupted elections will be used by the main stream media to create fictional enemies of our nation to turn public anger into a public movement to blame a target of opportunity which will benefit the wealth and power structures which is based on fiction and contrived plots to benefit the very powerful and wealthy organizations such as big banks and the military. ..."
"... The root cause of this is that they (the MSM) own the microphone. They have the ability to lie without rebuttal because they own that single megaphone to tell lies. They have the ability to create fictions and fantasies which go unchallenged because they own the megaphone. ..."
"... From our history: The creation of the Tea Party was a watershed moment where the big banks turned their bailout by the US government into a political movement which was manufactured by the press as a new and never heard about new political party (The Tea Party) into a political movement aimed to grant the big banks and wealthy Americans tax breaks which resulted in a 3.5 trillion bailout we are now on the hook for. ..."
"... How many news corporations supported the lies about WMDs and Iraq's secret stockpiles of Uranium and chemical weapons? The NY Times and the Washington Post were among the most fervent supporters of those lies and they have never acknowledged their errors. ..."
"... So it is with the Trump administration and the media's aim to turn our attention away from the real reasons our election system is corrupted by dark money by creating fake facts to convince us that Russia is a war monger which stole the election and must be countered by more massive military spending and a renewal of the old Cold War. ..."
"... The NY Times got it wrong in Iraq. They got it wrong in Ukraine. They got it wrong in the last election. They got it wrong on savings and loan deregulation under Reagan. They got it wrong on banking deregulation under Clinton. They got it wrong with Russia Gate. They have gotten it wrong so many times that the statement "they got it wrong" is a testament of their ability to fool us all. ..."
"... Yes, I continually read that the government was "in error", they "didn't understand", or "their models were incorrect". Yeah, sure, whatever you say. ..."
"... It's all just one big "Fleece the Sheep" game, except they can't let the sheep know they're being fleeced. Errors and omissions are all part of the game, and the media act to call the sheep to the starting line. ..."
"... Dan if Robert Blum had had his way the CIA would have been privately funded by secret donations. CIA got caught laundering money in the middle to late 60″s and as always CIA makes investigations go away. A recount of the episode can be found in Jane Mayers book Dark Money. The CIA wrote the book on laundering money. Then the ICIJ and the Paradise Papers expose how large the off shore industry is. ..."
"... I was convinced that Russiagate was a complete fabrication after reading the following penned by Caitling Johnstone:" this administration has already killed Russians in Syria, greatly escalated nuclear tensions with Russia, allowed the sale of arms to Ukraine, established a permanent military presence in Syria with the goal of effecting regime change, forced RT and Sputnik to register as foreign agents, expanded NATO with the addition of Montenegro, assigned Russia hawk Kurt Volker as special representative to Ukraine, shut down a Russian consulate in San Francisco and expelled Russian diplomats " ..."
"... Trump is a thug and a money laundering crook, not a machievelian plotter. His total ignorance of world politics is dangerously leading us to armagedden. ..."
May 24, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

CitizenOne May 20, 2018 at 1:32 am

The diversion of Russia Gate is a continuation of former diversions such as the Tea Party which was invented by the banksters to turn public anger over the big banking collapse and the resulting recession into a movement to gain more deregulation for tax breaks for the wealthy.

In the case of the fabricated Russia Gate narrative the results of the Trump election and widespread public distrust of the election process was turned into a new cold war with Russia which benefited major defense contractors and resulted in sanctions against Russia and huge windfalls for the Military Industrial Complex as the US ponied up to fund our national defense industry.

We should by now be educated that major failures of our economy and political processes precipitated by government deregulation or corrupted elections will be used by the main stream media to create fictional enemies of our nation to turn public anger into a public movement to blame a target of opportunity which will benefit the wealth and power structures which is based on fiction and contrived plots to benefit the very powerful and wealthy organizations such as big banks and the military.

Trump won because the media cleaned up big time by playing the Super PACs for suckers just as deregulation of the big banks enabled them to clean up by merging savings banks with investment banks which moved all the savings banks deposits into risky investments.

There is a clear and present danger born out and evidenced by former economic collapses that the media and the big financial institutions will create public relations campaigns based on the mantra of deregulation to swindle Americans even further. They have a proven ability to use their power to persuade Americans that some other reason is responsible for the latest swindle.

The root cause of this is that they (the MSM) own the microphone. They have the ability to lie without rebuttal because they own that single megaphone to tell lies. They have the ability to create fictions and fantasies which go unchallenged because they own the megaphone.

From our history: The creation of the Tea Party was a watershed moment where the big banks turned their bailout by the US government into a political movement which was manufactured by the press as a new and never heard about new political party (The Tea Party) into a political movement aimed to grant the big banks and wealthy Americans tax breaks which resulted in a 3.5 trillion bailout we are now on the hook for.

How many media/news organizations signed onto the Tea Party after the implosion of the banking industry and beat the drums to grant tax breaks for billionaires? All of them.

How many of the media corporations beat the drums to blame Russia for the election results which resulted in sanctions against Russia and a new Cold War with Russia which resulted in windfall profits for the defense industry? All of them.

How many news corporations supported the lies about WMDs and Iraq's secret stockpiles of Uranium and chemical weapons? The NY Times and the Washington Post were among the most fervent supporters of those lies and they have never acknowledged their errors.

The facts are clear in all of these major failures of our free press to get it right. In every case the media have conspired to fool most of the people into believing the lies of the government and the financial sectors published by main stream press as facts which are giant falsehoods.

The result of this collaboration between the press and the wealth in our nation has been to deceive us and to lead us down paths that twist our understanding to a new understanding that benefits the wealthy in times of prosperity and in times of crisis.

So it is with the Trump administration and the media's aim to turn our attention away from the real reasons our election system is corrupted by dark money by creating fake facts to convince us that Russia is a war monger which stole the election and must be countered by more massive military spending and a renewal of the old Cold War.

The NY Times got it wrong in Iraq. They got it wrong in Ukraine. They got it wrong in the last election. They got it wrong on savings and loan deregulation under Reagan. They got it wrong on banking deregulation under Clinton. They got it wrong with Russia Gate. They have gotten it wrong so many times that the statement "they got it wrong" is a testament of their ability to fool us all.

Reply

backwardsevolution , May 20, 2018 at 5:16 pm

CitizenOne – "'They got it wrong' is a testament of their ability to fool us."

Yes, I continually read that the government was "in error", they "didn't understand", or "their models were incorrect". Yeah, sure, whatever you say. They can't come out and inform us that they lied from the get-go because that would prove intent to deceive, so they cover up their tracks by saying they made an "error" whenever things fall apart, as they knew they would.

It's all just one big "Fleece the Sheep" game, except they can't let the sheep know they're being fleeced. Errors and omissions are all part of the game, and the media act to call the sheep to the starting line.

Dave P. , May 20, 2018 at 11:49 pm

Citizen One – Excellent post. Very informed comments indeed.

Skip Scott , May 21, 2018 at 7:15 am

Citizen One-

Great post. It reminded me of a joke I saw the other day:

"A unionized public employee, a member of the Tea Party, and a CEO are sitting at a table. In the middle of the table there is a plate with a dozen cookies on it. The CEO reaches across and takes 11 cookies, looks at the Tea Partier and says, "look out for that union guy, he wants a piece of your cookie."

munchma quchi , May 19, 2018 at 11:51 pm

re: "Without offering a shred of evidence, the FBI, CIA, NSA, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper issued a formal assessment on Jan. 6, 2017, that "Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election [in order] to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency." The "assessment" contains this disclaimer: " [You (the author) did not include a disclaimer. please remedy this.]

F. G. Sanford , May 20, 2018 at 9:39 am

Ms. Quchi,
I think the disclaimer said that intelligence assessments are based on sources, methods and interpretations and rely on raw data. It's raw, so it has to be properly marinated until it's fit for consumption. Addenda to the disclaimer indicate that the Intelligence Community will not accept outrageous conspiracy theories, noting specifically that, "They hate us for our freedom, and those weapons of mass destruction must be here somewhere." It's the standard "release from liability" which accompanies all official narratives. Kinda like eating tuna fish: It's pretty good once you get past the smell.

Chet Roman , May 20, 2018 at 11:35 am

Page 13 of the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) of Jan. 6, 2017
explains: "High confidence does not imply that the assessment is a fact or a certainty; such judgments might be wrong. Judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that show something to be a fact. Assessments are based on collected information, which is often incomplete or fragmentary, as well as logic, argumentation, and precedents."

robert e williamson jr , May 19, 2018 at 7:35 pm

Dan I really can not disagree with much you have to say here. Except there are a few things about this whole affair that bug the hell out of me. For instance the fact that the village idiot from new york spent over $400 million in cash the last 9 years before he ran for president.

Your effort here sounds quite a lot like whining about having nothing to report. Calm down these things take time. If Russia isn't to blame fine but Mueller is not talking and seems to be conducting himself very professionally.

Dan if Robert Blum had had his way the CIA would have been privately funded by secret donations. CIA got caught laundering money in the middle to late 60″s and as always CIA makes investigations go away. A recount of the episode can be found in Jane Mayers book Dark Money. The CIA wrote the book on laundering money. Then the ICIJ and the Paradise Papers expose how large the off shore industry is.

Trump like doing business with Russians during a time when Russian oligarchs were hiding the money they pulled from the Soviet coffers. I think it has gotten him in trouble.

Also interesting is the accounts of what has happen with the Inslaw / PROMIS case and Bill Hamilton. Was this software and early version of what CIA and NSA use to monitor the world now?

One last thing in your last paragraph here you claim the Dimocraps have gone off the deep end with the Russian Connection thing. Dan the dimocraps went off the deep end with their undying allegiance to Israel. And they do little damned else.

When this is finished if CIA allows the release of the Dogdamned files maybe we will learn what happened. Chill my brotha !

kntlt , May 20, 2018 at 6:14 pm

Listen to this man.

drC , May 19, 2018 at 7:27 pm

"The press, the intelligence community, and the Democrats" have committed FAR MORE than a mere "crime against journalism". For kryssakes, this isn't a debating society at Yale! They have provoked international tensions, suspicions and distrust that have pushed the world far closer to the brink of a third world war, damaging national economies across the globe & negatively impacting the lives of millions.

jose , May 19, 2018 at 6:30 pm

I was convinced that Russiagate was a complete fabrication after reading the following penned by Caitling Johnstone:" this administration has already killed Russians in Syria, greatly escalated nuclear tensions with Russia, allowed the sale of arms to Ukraine, established a permanent military presence in Syria with the goal of effecting regime change, forced RT and Sputnik to register as foreign agents, expanded NATO with the addition of Montenegro, assigned Russia hawk Kurt Volker as special representative to Ukraine, shut down a Russian consulate in San Francisco and expelled Russian diplomats "

Since the US national media have been aware of the lack of solid evidence against Russia allege meddling case, they now want to pretend it has not been their fault. Their sheer dishonesty underscores their deviant reporting.

ranney , May 19, 2018 at 5:54 pm

Joe, Abe, Andrew, Sam, Mike,

You are all correct in blaming the MSM for ignoring Israel in all this and whitewashing the main cause of our problems in the middle east. I agree that Russia has not been interfering in our politics any more than virtually all the other countries in the world who have embassys here and things they want to "lobby" for. I believe spying is universal and the US does it more than most, but everyone does it including Russia (and UK, France Germany Israel, Ukraine and on and on for everyone on the map).

What I find increasingly strange is the fact that the MSM and just about everyone else is ignoring the fact that Trump did indeed have business with Russia. He was trying to get permission and financial backing for a Trump tower to be built in Moscow. and he had been trying for a while before he even thought of running for president. THAT is what his now indicted lawyer was doing initially, along with others in Trump's employ. That is why there is indeed evidence of contact with Russians during the pre- campaign and during the campaign as well. Trump didn't want to lose this lucrative deal which, also involves money laundering and other illegal, and/or shady dealings.
I can't figure out why Muller hasn't subpoenaed or somehow got hold of Trump's tax returns. I'm pretty sure he'd find all the crimes we need to impeach him.

Trump is a thug and a money laundering crook, not a machievelian plotter. His total ignorance of world politics is dangerously leading us to armagedden. And I can't help but wonder why Muller is slow walking this whole investigation. I'm pretty sure he can see what I can see. Trump is a crooked, money launderer, ultra con man with his Trump towers and other ploys, and too dumb and ignorant of history and science to understand how dangerous the game he plays is to the world when he has the power of the presidency. But Muller knows that! So what else is really going on that explains why he has moved at snails pace to stop the damage?
Does anyone have a good guess at that? I'd really like to read it.

[May 23, 2018] Why Canada Defends Ukrainian Fascism by Michael Jabara CARLEY

Notable quotes:
"... The Liberal prime minister, William Lyon Mackenzie King, hobnobbed with Nazi notables including Adolf Hitler, and thought that his British counterpart Neville Chamberlain had not gone far enough in appeasing Hitlerite Germany ..."
"... persona non grata ..."
"... Some Canadians harboured illusions about the NDP as a progressive alternative to the Liberal and Conservative parties ..."
"... Identity politics and Canadian multiculturalism are now invoked to defend Ukrainian fascism celebrated in the streets of Kiev with torchlight parades and fascist symbols, remembering and celebrating Nazi collaborators and collaboration during World War II ..."
"... Any country sending representatives to Russia's celebration of the 70th anniversary of their victory against Adolf Hitler," ..."
"... in April 2015, "will be blacklisted by Ukraine." ..."
May 23, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

| 09.03.2018 | WORLD / Americas | FEATURED STORY

Canada has a reputation for being a relatively progressive state with universal, single-payer health care, various other social benefits, and strict gun laws, similar to many European countries but quite unlike the United States. It has managed to stay out of some American wars, for example, Vietnam and Iraq, portrayed itself as a neutral "peace keeper", pursuing a so-called policy of "multilateralism" and attempting from time to time to keep a little independent distance from the United States.

Behind this veneer of respectability lies a not so attractive reality of elite inattention to the defence of Canadian independence from the United States and intolerance toward the political and syndicalist left. Police repression against communist and left-wing unionists and other dissidents after World War I was widespread. Strong support for appeasement of Nazi Germany, overt or covert sympathy for fascism, especially in Québec, and hatred of the Soviet Union were widespread in Canada during the 1930s. The Liberal prime minister, William Lyon Mackenzie King, hobnobbed with Nazi notables including Adolf Hitler, and thought that his British counterpart Neville Chamberlain had not gone far enough in appeasing Hitlerite Germany. Mackenzie King and many others of the Canadian elite saw communism as a greater threat to Canada than fascism. As in Europe, the Canadian elite -- Liberal or Conservative did not matter -- was worried by the Spanish civil war (1936-1939). In Québec French public opinion under the influence of the Catholic Church hoped for fascist victory and the eradication of communism. In 1937 a Papal encyclical whipped up the Red Scare amongst French Canadian Catholics.

Rejection of Soviet offers of collective security against Hitler was the obverse side of appeasement. The fear of victory over Nazi Germany in alliance with the USSR was greater than the fear of defeat against fascism. Such thoughts were either openly expressed over dinner at the local gentleman's club or kept more discrete by people who did not want to reveal the extent of their sympathy for fascism.

The Liberal prime minister, William Lyon Mackenzie King, hobnobbed with Nazi notables including Adolf Hitler, and thought that his British counterpart Neville Chamberlain had not gone far enough in appeasing Hitlerite Germany

Even after the Nazi invasion of the USSR in June 1941, and the formation of the Grand Alliance against the Axis, there was strong reticence amongst the governing elite in Canada toward the Soviet Union. It was a shotgun marriage, a momentary arrangement with an undesirable partner, necessitated by the over-riding threat of the Nazi Wehrmacht. "If Hitler invaded Hell," Winston Churchill famously remarked, "I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons." Once Hitler was beaten, however, it would be back to business as usual. The Grand Alliance was a "truce", as some of my students have proposed to me, in a longer cold war between the west and the USSR. This struggle began in November 1917 when the Bolsheviks seized power in Petrograd; it resumed after 1945 when the "truce", or if you like, the Grand Alliance, came to a sudden end.

This was no more evident than in Canada where elite hatred of communism was a homegrown commodity and not simply an American imitation. So it should hardly be a surprise that after 1945 the Canadian government -- Mackenzie King was still prime minister -- should open its doors to the immigration of approximately 34,000 "displaced persons", including thousands of Ukrainian fascists and Nazi collaborators , responsible for heinous war crimes in the Ukraine and Poland. These were veterans of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), the Waffen SS Galicia and the Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), all collaborators of Nazi Germany during World War II.

The most notorious of the Nazi collaborators who immigrated to Canada was Mykhailo Chomiak , a mid-level Nazi operative in Poland, who came under US protection at the end of the war and eventually made his way to Canada where he settled in Alberta. Had he been captured by the Red Army, he would quite likely have been hanged for collaboration with the enemy. In Canada however he prospered as a farmer. His grand-daughter is the "Ukrainian-Canadian" Chrystia Freeland, the present minister for external affairs. She is a well-known Russophobe, persona non grata in the Russian Federation, who long claimed her grandfather was a "victim" of World War II. Her claims to this effect have been demonstrated to be untrue by the Australian born journalist John Helmer , amongst many others.

In 1940 the Liberal government facilitated the creation of the Canadian Ukrainian Congress (UCC) , one of many organisations used to fight or marginalise the left in Canada, in this case amongst Canadian Ukrainians. The UCC is still around and appears to dominate the Ukrainian-Canadian community . Approximately 1.4 million people living in Canada claim full or partial Ukrainian descent though generally the latter. Most "Ukrainian-Canadians" were born in Canada; well more than half live in the western provinces. The vast majority has certainly never set foot in the Ukraine. It is this constituency on which the UCC depends to pursue its political agenda in Ottawa.

In 1940 the Liberal government facilitated the creation of the Canadian Ukrainian Congress (UCC) , one of many organisations used to fight or marginalise the left in Canada, in this case amongst Canadian Ukrainians. The UCC is still around and appears to dominate the Ukrainian-Canadian community . Approximately 1.4 million people living in Canada claim full or partial Ukrainian descent though generally the latter. Most "Ukrainian-Canadians" were born in Canada; well more than half live in the western provinces. The vast majority has certainly never set foot in the Ukraine. It is this constituency on which the UCC depends to pursue its political agenda in Ottawa.

The Harper government allowed fund raising for Pravyi Sektor , a Ukrainian fascist paramilitary group

There is no political opposition in the House of Commons to these policies. Even the New Democratic Party (NDP), that burnt out shell of Canadian social democracy, supported the Harper government, at the behest of Mr. Grod, a Ukrainian lobbyist who knows his way around Ottawa. In 2015 the UCC put a list of questions to party leaders, one of which was the following: "Does your party support listing the Luhansk People's Republic and the Donetsk People's Republic as terrorist organizations?" The Lugansk and Donetsk republics are of course anti-fascist resistance movements that emerged in reaction to the violent coup d'état in Kiev. They are most certainly not "terrorist" organisations, although they are subjected to daily bombardments against civilian areas by Kiev putschist forces. Nevertheless, the then NDP leader, Thomas Mulcair, who would have agreed to almost anything to win power, answered in the affirmative. This must have been a moment of dismay for Canadians who still harboured illusions about the NDP as a progressive alternative to the Liberal and Conservative parties. How could it support a US/EU installed putschist regime which governs by intimidation and violence? In fact, it was a Conservative electoral strategy to obtain the votes of people of Ukrainian and East European descent by backing putschist Kiev and denouncing Russia. Mulcair was trying to outflank Harper on his right, but that did not work for he himself was outflanked on his left.

Some Canadians harboured illusions about the NDP as a progressive alternative to the Liberal and Conservative parties

In the 2015 federal elections the Liberals under Justin Trudeau, outwitted poor Mr. Mulcair and won the elections. The NDP suffered heavy electoral losses. Mulcair looked like someone who had made a Faustian bargain for nothing in return, and he lost a bid to remain as party leader. The Liberals campaigned on re-establishing better relations with the Russian Federation, but that promise did not hold up. The minister for external affairs, Stéphane Dion, tried to move forward on that line, but appears to have been stabbed in the back by Mr. Trudeau, with Ms. Freeland guiding his hand in the fatal blow. In early 2017 Dion was sacked and Freeland replaced him. That was the end of the Liberal promise to improve relations with the Russian government. Since then, under Freeland, Russian-Canadian relations have worsened.

The influential Mr. Grod appears to keep the Canadian government in his hip pocket. There are photographs of him side by side with Mr. Harper and then with Mr. Trudeau, with Ms. Freeland on his left. Mr. Grod has been a great success in backing putschist Kiev. Last summer Mr. Trudeau even issued a traditional Ukrainian fascist salute, "SlavaUkraini!" , to celebrate the anniversary of Ukrainian independence. The prime minister is a great believer in identity politics.

The latest gesture of the Canadian government is to approve $1.4 million as a three year grant to promote a "Holodomor National Awareness Tour". Ukrainian "nationalists" summon up the memory of the "Holodomor", a famine in the Ukraine in 1932-1933, deliberately launched by Stalin, they say, in order to emphasise their victimisation by Russia. According to the latest Stalin biographer, Steven Kotkin, there was indeed a famine in the USSR that affected various parts of the country, the Ukraine amongst other regions. Kazakhstan, not the Ukraine suffered most. Between five and seven million people died. Ten millions starved. "Nonetheless, the famine was not intentional. It resulted from Stalin's policies of forced collectivization ,"Kotkin writes, himself no advocate of the Soviet Union. Compulsion, peasant rebellion, bungling, mismanagement, drought, locust infestations, not targeting ethnicities, led to the catastrophe. "Similarly, there was no 'Ukrainian' famine," according to Kotkin, "the famine was [a] Soviet[-wide disaster]" ( Stalin , 2017, vol. 2, pp. 127-29). So the Liberal government is spending public funds to perpetuate a politically motivated myth to drum up hatred of Russia and to support putschist Kiev.

Identity politics and Canadian multiculturalism are now invoked to defend Ukrainian fascism celebrated in the streets of Kiev with torchlight parades and fascist symbols, remembering and celebrating Nazi collaborators and collaboration during World War II

The Canadian government also recently renewed funding for a detachment of 200 "advisors" to train Ukrainian militias, along with twenty-three million dollars -- it is true a pittance by American standards -- for "non-lethal" military aid, justified by Ms. Freeland to defend Ukrainian "democracy". Truly, we live in a dystopian world where reality is turned on its head. Fascism is democracy; resistance to fascism is terrorism. Identity politics and Canadian multiculturalism are now invoked to defend Ukrainian fascism celebrated in the streets of Kiev with torchlight parades and fascist symbols, remembering and celebrating Nazi collaborators and collaboration during World War II. " Any country sending representatives to Russia's celebration of the 70th anniversary of their victory against Adolf Hitler," warned putschist Kiev in April 2015, "will be blacklisted by Ukraine."

"The further a society drifts from the truth," George Orwell once said, "the more it will hate those that speak it." Well, here is one truth that Mr. Trudeau and Ms. Freeland will not want to hear, hate it or not: 42,000 Canadian soldiers, not to mention 27 million Soviet citizens, died during the war against the Axis. Memories must be fading, for now we have come to this pass, where our government is supporting a violent, racist regime in Kiev directly descended from that very enemy against which Canada and its allies fought during World War II.

[May 23, 2018] the unbalanced evolution of homo sapiens What happens when a country decides to decouple itself from the US-Saudi axis of evil

May 23, 2018 | failedevolution.blogspot.gr

What happens when a country decides to decouple itself from the US/Saudi axis of evil globinfo freexchange
T he role of Qatar and Saudi Arabia in the Middle East chaos is quite well known . Recall that in a letter of the Podesta email series, John Podesta admitted that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia we re helping ISIS. Podesta also mentioned that the US should exercise pressure to these countries in order to stop doing it: " ... we need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region. "
Of course Hillary Clinton wouldn't do anything about this problem too, as in another letter of the Podesta email series, it was revealed that Bill Clinton was receiving "expensive gifts" from the Qataris!
As reported by Antimedia , in 2009 Qatar proposed a pipeline to run through Syria and Turkey to export Saudi gas. Assad rejected the proposal and instead formed an agreement with Iran and Iraq to construct a pipeline to the European market that would cut Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar out of the route entirely. Since, Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia have been staunch backers of the opposition seeking to topple Assad. Collectively, they have invested billions of dollars, lent weapons, encouraged the spread of fanatical ideology, and helped smuggle fighters across their borders.
The Iran-Iraq pipeline will strengthen Iranian influence in the region and undermine their rival, Saudi Arabia -- the other main OPEC producer. Given the ability to transport gas to Europe without going through Washington's allies, Iran will hold the upper-hand and will be able to negotiate agreements that exclude the U.S. dollar completely.
Yet, less than a year ago, a crisis erupted between 'unholy' allies, apparently because Qatar has chosen to change camp and proceed into a deeper approach with Iran.
As reported by Guardian , Saudi Arabia and its allies have issued a threatening 13-point ultimatum to Qatar as the price for lifting a two-week trade and diplomatic embargo of the country, in a marked escalation of the Gulf's worst diplomatic dispute in decades. The onerous list of demands includes stipulations that Doha close the broadcaster al-Jazeera, drastically scale back cooperation with Iran , remove Turkish troops from Qatar's soil, end contact with groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood and submit to monthly external compliance checks. Qatar has been given 10 days to comply with the demands or face unspecified consequences.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/qj7RXa9bXPM


Then, apparently, Rex Tillerson tried to persuade Qatar to stay in the unholy alliance and move away from Iran a day after wrapping up discussions with the king of Saudi Arabia and other officials from Arab countries lined up against Qatar.
We can tell now that Qatar has not changed stance and chosen to continue its approach with the winning alliance in the Syrian battlefield. We have the first signs showing that the US empire and its allies in the Middle East will move against Qatar, beginning with a typical first step: propaganda war.
A Pentagon "propagandist," who previously headed a company that was paid half a billion dollars to produce fake terrorist videos in Iraq, was hired by a Dubai based company to create a film accusing Qatar of links to terrorism , the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has revealed.
Charles Andreae, the CEO of Andreae & Associates which was contracted to produce the film, used to work for PR firm Bell Pottinger, the UK PR firm that was payed $540 million dollars to create fake terrorist videos in Iraq.
The firm was employed to produce the anti-Qatari film amidst a diplomatic row in which the Saudi and UAE governments cut ties with Doha, which it accused of supporting terrorism. Qatar has strongly denied the accusation and accused its neighbours of fabricating stories. US intelligence agencies have since confirmed that the UAE orchestrated the hacking of Qatari government news and social media sites to justify its unprecedented attack against Qatar.
According to the Bureau, Andreae was given over $500,000 to produce a six-part film linking Qatar with global terrorism. The film, entitled "Qatar: A Dangerous Alliance," features a number of neo-conservative pundits making the UAE and Saudi case against Qatar in a 37-minute video.

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


Washington's double standards and hypocrisy are quite evident in this case too. After this crisis between allies erupted, a number of US officials immediately launched a series of statements through which they depicted Qatar as the sole supporter of terrorist groups in the Middle East. Again, Saudi Arabia, the most authoritarian regime in the region and probably the biggest supporter of jihadist extremists, was miraculously vanished from their radar and, naturally, the radar of the Western corporate media.
In case Qatar will not compromise and keep walking the path towards decoupling itself from the US/Saudi axis of evil, the next steps will be a new series of upgraded, Iranian-type sanctions, or even a military invasion as the last option. The only thing that can save Qatar for now is the fact that it hosts the largest US military base in the Middle East .

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

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

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

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

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

Heath,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[May 22, 2018] Cat fight within the US elite getting more intense

Highly recommended!
There is no question that Trump of over his head and folded early on, adopting the deep state foreign policy in even more militant incarnation the under Obama.
All those moves about "Russiagate" now is an empty sound or a cat fight of the faction of the US elite for contracts and sinecures in government.
Notable quotes:
"... Since being inaugurated, orange clown has reversed himself on the pre-election intimations and campaign promises that apparently got him elected. Instead of improving relations with Russia, he's made everything worse; he never misses a chance to provoke Russia. Instead of pulling out of Afghanistan, he's escalating that pointless war. He's increased the illegal, immoral and unconstitutional U.S. military occupation of Syria. He's escalating the genocidal war against Yemen. He's arming the corrupt puppet government in Kiev. He's already slaughtered more people with drone strikes than Obama did in eight years. He's surrounded himself with bloodthirsty psychopaths. He's trying to overthrow the Maduro government in Venezuela. He puts Israel first and America second (or lower) on the list. He wants more military spending. He seems to want a bigger, more powerful more and aggressive NATO, not the reverse. Rather than investigate 9/11, he studiously avoids the topic. Etc., etc., etc. ..."
"... From a "deep state" perspective, what is there to dislike about orange clown? How can the "deep state" have any kind of serious problem with someone who's making Obama look like Mister Rogers? ..."
"... Has the "deep state" deployed a "lone nut" against him? Apparently not. Is he being impeached? No. Is there even a hint of political opposition to his reckless, imperial "foreign policy"? No. Have any of his appointees been blocked? No. Has there been any kind of significant legal action against him challenging his blatantly unconstitutional military adventurism for example? As far as I know, no. ..."
"... Not where I live in the Northwest. I have spoken to people who are convinced Trump is "beyond guilty" of collusion. These people are either CNN watchers or work in IT. Everyday I go to the gym people are either watching CNN or MSNBC on their screen. ..."
"... How do you "manipulate" a reasonable person into flirting with planetary extinction? How can someone who actually cares about America be manipulated into risking war with Russia for no good reason? Such a person is not morally or mentally fit for the job of president in the first place. ..."
"... So in essence Trump's whole campaign platform was reversed by "deep state" "manipulation" but rather than surround himself with reasonable people, appeal to his supporters, investigate or threaten to investigate 9/11, or even resign (rather than become a mass-murderer), he decides to stay on because he enjoys killing people with drones and he loves the vacations, etc.? ..."
"... The more likely case is that orange clown's a con man whose whole campaign was a calculated bait and switch fraud from the beginning. And all this "out to get Trump" nonsense depicting Trump as hapless "victim" of the deep state is pure political theater. ..."
"... Michael Caputo now says he was approached by a SECOND recruiter, someone other than Halper. ..."
"... Yes, Halper was involved in getting President Carter's debate briefing book to the Reagan/ BUSH campaign ahead of the debate. He's been in there, connected, for years and years, a call-boy the players, the powers-that-be have at their disposal. ..."
"... Democrats and Republicans serve the same master, no difference, neither have real any real power. The Wall St bankers,, The Lobby, MIC, International Corporations call the shots. All the politicians are dirty, and deep state has plenty of blackmail info on ALL of them if they step out of line. They're only puppets for you to get angry at, and vote out to ease your anger. But nothing changes with elections because the ones with power are unelected, and never move. See Jim Traficant or JFK for what happens when one dares to tell the truth, or challenge the establishment. ..."
"... If Trump really wanted to change things, if he was the real deal, he would have Sessions start a new 9/11 investigation, and start imprisoning and executing the perps and traitors, all the way from Tel Aviv back home to Wall St. All of them. ..."
"... In fairness, his life expectancy after such an announcement would be about 6 minutes. Getting the public to realize the truth about 9/11 is the best chance I can see for real political change in the U.S., but hoping that anyone in Washington will lead the charge seems quite futile. A group of lawyers representing victims' families recently filed a petition for a new investigation – the media of course were not interested. It really comes down to spreading the word on the grassroots level. ..."
"... Halper was not a recruiter. He was there to collect information for the FBI, the very definition of a spy. ..."
"... The Democrats truly hate the whole concept of democracy. They've tried as best they can to ban democracy from their party. And now they've instituted both illegal campaign tactics before the election and a coup after the election to try to keep the power in the Democratic Party and the money flowing to them. ..."
"... Did Imram Awan leak the documents exposing that the DNC was colluding with the Clintons and rigging the primaries and convention in her favor? After all, that's where this all began. ..."
"... That was when Hillary came up with the idea to try to blame the Russians for the leaks and thus lead the world close to nuclear war for her own personal ambition. ..."
May 22, 2018 | www.unz.com

Originally from: Can We Call It a Coup Now, by Mike Whitney - The Unz Review

Svigor , May 20, 2018 at 9:44 pm GMT

So, help me out here – the only reason the NYT is even reporting on this is because Congress was closing in on this turd's identity, right?

"F.B.I. agents sent an informant to talk to two campaign advisers only after they received evidence that the pair had suspicious contacts linked to Russia during the campaign.

"Suspicious contacts" = Russians who talked to Trump's employees.

So the FISA surveillance, the national-security letters, the FBI informants and 18 months of relentless probing-harassment have all been justified on the basis of allegations about Russia hacking that may or may not have happened at all??

The one silver lining to all of this is that the GOP can to absolutely DRAG the Democrats about this in the next election. If the GOP is smart, they will not listen to a goddamn word coming out of the mouths of the Democrats or their (((Big Media))) mouthpieces during the 2020 election. They will not respond to a single point they have to make, except to call them hopelessly corrupt authoritarians who are unfit to govern until they come clean about their malfeasance and cut the rot from their ranks, and then spout their other talking points and drop the mic.

"According to people familiar with (General Michael) Flynn's visit to the intelligence seminar, the source was alarmed by the general's apparent closeness with a Russian woman who was also in attendance. The concern was strong enough that it prompted another person to pass on a warning to the American authorities that Mr. Flynn could be compromised by Russian intelligence, according to two people familiar with the matter."

*Facepalm*

These fucks are beyond parody now. We're literally ruled by corrupt morons, stooges, and degenerates.

"The cockblocking/penis-envy concern was enough for Stasi agents to follow up "

Renoman , May 20, 2018 at 10:03 pm GMT
I would be shocked if both political party's didn't have a myriad of spies in each other's campaigns dating back to Lincoln! Grow up people, there's a ton of money here.
Svigor , May 20, 2018 at 10:28 pm GMT
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/05/20/donald-trump-orders-justice-department-to-investigate-surveillance-of-trump-campaign/
anon [217] Disclaimer , May 22, 2018 at 4:30 am GMT
Rod Rosenstein is a traitorous weasel POS who never should've been appointed. Christopher Wray worked as a deputy to James Comey and is highly likely dirty and another deep state puppet. Mike Pence, Paul Ryan, McConnell, Pompeo, John Kelly, Kirstjen Nielsen, Gina Haspel, John Bolton, Nikki Haley, all are deep state puppets. Why does Trump keep appointing more deep state puppets to take over from the other deep state puppets?

I cannot for the life of me understand why Jeff Sessions continues to stick up for Rosenstein the weasel. My only explanation is that this whole thing is a coup set up by Deep State and Mike Pence from the get go so Pence can be president, and Sessions is in on the coup to keep his job.

I did not know it was Rosenstein's memo that prompted Trump to fire James Comey. Trump needs to bring that out in the open and let everyone know Rosenstein set him up. This POS weasel needs to go to jail. As long as he's still in the DOJ no real investigation of deep state will ever take place. We've got the fox guarding the hen house.

Carlton Meyer , Website May 22, 2018 at 4:40 am GMT
An equally interesting article can be found here:

https://theintercept.com/2018/05/19/the-fbi-informant-who-monitored-the-trump-campaign-stefan-halper-oversaw-a-cia-spying-operation-in-the-1980-presidential-election/

It notes that all the corporate media knows it was Halper, but they obey the Deep State and refuse to report this, pretending that evil Republicans are trying to out an innocent FBI spy. Even today, their coverage is "alleged" informant. For some reason, NBC News was the only "mainstream" team to ignore this absurd BS and report his name as part of the biggest news story of the decade. Note that Halper is not a Democratic Party mole, but a Bush family mole.

Doesn't Mueller have the self-respect to end his witch hunt and crawl back under a rock?

Bombercommand , May 22, 2018 at 5:46 am GMT
A very strong move by President Trump. It is a fact that the FBI sent an informant, Mr. Halper, to gather information on the Trump campaign. The FBI can plead it was to gather info on alarming Russians, but the informant my gather other info just as easily. If the FBI can send one, Halper, they can just as easily send another, or more unknown informants. This RussiaGate nonsense has always been a matter to be tried in the court of public opinion, by innuendo. Therefore President Trump's investigation can use the "have you stopped beating your wife?" method. Every time the FBI says no to a question it looks like they are lying to cover something bigger. Informants have Control Officers, who write reports to superiors, the reports make reference to code words, places and dates. Reports generate memos and orders. Everything becomes fuel for innuendo and the only out the FBI will have is "We honestly thought .but no, we found nothing".
Wizard of Oz , May 22, 2018 at 7:17 am GMT
@Renoman

A point well made in qualification of the merits of the article. Surely the author knows on reflection that no political party or campaign is going to forgo the chance of getting inside information on what their opponents are up to, including crimes – and spying.

Wizard of Oz , May 22, 2018 at 7:25 am GMT
@anon

Since Trump could do some shuffling so as to appoint an Attorney-General who wouldn't recuse himself or get rid of Rosenstein by appointing him a judge, or ambassador just for example maybe it is best to assume that the President doesn't feel immediately threatened and is reasonably confident that he can find and time his countermeasures satisfactorily. It is hardly beyond belief that there are Trump moles in Mueller's army who are assuring him that his instinct is right: apparent witch hunting persecution by Mueller is actually a harmless distraction and so good for him until the time is right to blow it up.

animalogic , May 22, 2018 at 7:44 am GMT
Considered in its entirety, this Trump/Russia business is indeed turning into the political crime (& shame) of the century. Were someone who had died in the 50′s to suddenly resurrect, they would suffer the equivalent of a psychotic episode or a bad LSD trip.
Its mind boggling to anyone even vaguely conscious .
Mr Trump needs to clean house: politiclly difficult, yes, but Trump needs to visit a Lehman Bros' moment on the DOJ, CIA & FBI.
No doubt the above toxic agencies will (again) spew forth the magic word: "Russia-Russia-Russia" to render all opposition impotent.
One may, of course, truly wonder whether a majority of citizens will awake & notice the stench of rotting democracy & having noticed, draw the correct conclusions and – finally – act .
The Alarmist , May 22, 2018 at 8:59 am GMT
@Svigor

Trump has surrounded himself with lifer Deep Staters who no doubt tell him that investigations and prosecutions will do grave harm to national security and, at the same time, would appear to be his own politically motivated witch hunt, the kind one sees only in third-world basket case countries, and that would reflect more poorly on him than on the actual cabal attempting to overthrow him and overturn his election.

But the actual collusion has become so obvious that he has to pull the trigger, because nobody else is going to. Sessions should have been all over this a year ago, but he too is a long-serving government employee, which suggests he is also of the swamp. As for Congress, a few brave souls, e.g. Nunes, have tried and have been exposed to withering fire from all sides.

Bob , May 22, 2018 at 11:00 am GMT
The purpose of the informant/spy was to "dirty" Page and Papadopoulos; to make them plausible suspects so that full use of the NSA database could be used on the Trump team both pre- and post-election and as far back in the past as they wanted to go. The warrants used on Page and Papadopoulos were counterintelligence warrants that allow using NSA resources on anyone "two hops" (two people) away from Page and Papadopoulos. "Two-hops" would easily include everyone near Trump even if Page and Papadopoulos had only minimal contact with the campaign. This is the heart of the crime. Page and Papadopoulos were used as place-holders to gather information on everyone near Trump. The informer was used to set those two up.
Ma Laoshi , May 22, 2018 at 1:36 pm GMT
Trump posting something on Twitter isn't "fighting back"–it's venting steam. As the article correctly states, letting the DOJ investigate itself is a joke. So Trump needed a Special Counsel of his own, and he needed him right after his inauguration. It may be that Trump likes a dose of Russia Scare to push overpriced American weapons and LNG to clueless Europeans. It may be that he's found out (or at least his people have) that he needs Deep-State sleaze for his anti-Iran campaign. It may be that Trump well knows he's vulnerable on nepotism, old NY Mob ties, and oh yeah some sexual peccadilloes, so he better play along and color within the lines. Or it may simply be that Trump is a moron without the attention span for anything beyond venting on Twitter.

It doesn't really matter now, the ship has sailed, he's gone too far in with "Putin-Assad baby killers" to return to sanity now.

Harold Smith , May 22, 2018 at 1:39 pm GMT
"After 18 months of withering attacks and accusations, Donald Trump has decided to get up off the canvas and fight back."

If "they" are really out to "get" orange clown, why don't "they" go after him for his impeachable war crimes in Syria, for example? Why don't "they" at least bring a lawsuit against him for his illegal, immoral and unconstitutional occupation of Syria?

Generally speaking, when one party ostensibly dislikes another party, and apparently seeks to "get" that party, isn't there usually some kind of plausible, identifiable reason for the enmity?

Since being inaugurated, orange clown has reversed himself on the pre-election intimations and campaign promises that apparently got him elected. Instead of improving relations with Russia, he's made everything worse; he never misses a chance to provoke Russia. Instead of pulling out of Afghanistan, he's escalating that pointless war. He's increased the illegal, immoral and unconstitutional U.S. military occupation of Syria. He's escalating the genocidal war against Yemen. He's arming the corrupt puppet government in Kiev. He's already slaughtered more people with drone strikes than Obama did in eight years. He's surrounded himself with bloodthirsty psychopaths. He's trying to overthrow the Maduro government in Venezuela. He puts Israel first and America second (or lower) on the list. He wants more military spending. He seems to want a bigger, more powerful more and aggressive NATO, not the reverse. Rather than investigate 9/11, he studiously avoids the topic. Etc., etc., etc.

From a "deep state" perspective, what is there to dislike about orange clown? How can the "deep state" have any kind of serious problem with someone who's making Obama look like Mister Rogers?

"In any event, Trump has decided to throw caution to the wind and go for broke. He's decided that the only way he's going to get his enemies off his back is by flushing them out into the open and subjecting their activities to public scrutiny."

Has the "deep state" deployed a "lone nut" against him? Apparently not. Is he being impeached? No. Is there even a hint of political opposition to his reckless, imperial "foreign policy"? No. Have any of his appointees been blocked? No. Has there been any kind of significant legal action against him challenging his blatantly unconstitutional military adventurism for example? As far as I know, no.

So how is anybody actually "[on] his back"?

anon [204] Disclaimer , May 22, 2018 at 1:49 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

3D chess, 4D chess or what is it up to now, 14D chess? Trumpistas have too much faith in their man. Trump is a businessman not a politician. He's in over his head. Just look at how easily he was goaded into canning James Comey that set off this whole sorry affair.

anon [204] Disclaimer , May 22, 2018 at 1:56 pm GMT
@animalogic

One may, of course, truly wonder whether a majority of citizens will awake & notice the stench of rotting democracy & having noticed, draw the correct conclusions and – finally – act.

Not where I live in the Northwest. I have spoken to people who are convinced Trump is "beyond guilty" of collusion. These people are either CNN watchers or work in IT. Everyday I go to the gym people are either watching CNN or MSNBC on their screen. Most Americans are brain dead sheeple.

phil , May 22, 2018 at 2:34 pm GMT
@Harold Smith

"Has the "deep state" deployed a 'lone nut' against him? Apparently not. Is he being impeached? No. Is there even a hint of political opposition to his reckless, imperial 'foreign policy'? No. Have any of his appointees been blocked? No. Has there been any kind of significant legal action against him challenging his blatantly unconstitutional military adventurism for example? As far as I know, no.

So how is anybody actually '[on] his back'?"

Answer: the Deep State obviously is on his back, It is has successfully manipulated him into a foreign policy that he did not want. He wanted an America First policy, but because of political blackmail and dishonest allegations about collusion with Russia, Trump has felt compelled to do what Zionists want in the Middle East. At home, massive legal immigration continues, there will be no mass deportations, and the border wall will not be built. The Democrats will be firmly entrenched after Trump is gone from the scene.

Harold Smith , May 22, 2018 at 3:13 pm GMT
@phil

"the Deep State obviously is on his back, It is has successfully manipulated him into a foreign policy that he did not want. "

Or so goes the Trump apologists' claim. But that's pure unfounded speculation.

How do you "manipulate" a reasonable person into flirting with planetary extinction? How can someone who actually cares about America be manipulated into risking war with Russia for no good reason? Such a person is not morally or mentally fit for the job of president in the first place.

So in essence Trump's whole campaign platform was reversed by "deep state" "manipulation" but rather than surround himself with reasonable people, appeal to his supporters, investigate or threaten to investigate 9/11, or even resign (rather than become a mass-murderer), he decides to stay on because he enjoys killing people with drones and he loves the vacations, etc.?

I think not. The more likely case is that orange clown's a con man whose whole campaign was a calculated bait and switch fraud from the beginning. And all this "out to get Trump" nonsense depicting Trump as hapless "victim" of the deep state is pure political theater.

John Q Public , May 22, 2018 at 3:29 pm GMT
"In an earlier version of this article I stated that the FBI planted a spy INSIDE the Trump campaign. This is not correct, which is why I asked editor Ron Unz to remove the article. The informant was not part of the Campaign but sought information from members of the Campaign."

Hyper-technical hair splitting that is ultimately false. The point of Halper's approaches were to recruit people in the campaign to provide information. Those recruits would have been spies. Michael Caputo now says he was approached by a SECOND recruiter, someone other than Halper.

jeff davis , May 22, 2018 at 4:02 pm GMT
Trump is head of the Executive Branch. The DoJ and FBI are part of the executive branch and subordinate to Trump. He can send 30-40 US Marshals to FBI headquarters, and to DoJ headquarters, and have them extract by force the necessary documents, and no one can say "boo!"

I wish he would.

The downside of course is that everyone in the media and in Congress would scream "tyrant!" So Trump currently is leaving them alone to continue digging their own grave with the Mueller/Russia witchunt, as the country moves towards the midterm elections.

Buzz Mohawk , May 22, 2018 at 4:04 pm GMT
@Carlton Meyer

Yes, Halper was involved in getting President Carter's debate briefing book to the Reagan/ BUSH campaign ahead of the debate. He's been in there, connected, for years and years, a call-boy the players, the powers-that-be have at their disposal.

Stefan Halper is one of the creepy-crawly things that have been living under the rock Donald Trump kicked over.

As Steve Sailer points out, Halper is the son-in-law of CIA man Ray. S. Cline, who was instrumental in the Bay of Pigs fiasco.

redmudhooch , May 22, 2018 at 5:07 pm GMT
Democrats and Republicans serve the same master, no difference, neither have real any real power. The Wall St bankers,, The Lobby, MIC, International Corporations call the shots. All the politicians are dirty, and deep state has plenty of blackmail info on ALL of them if they step out of line. They're only puppets for you to get angry at, and vote out to ease your anger. But nothing changes with elections because the ones with power are unelected, and never move. See Jim Traficant or JFK for what happens when one dares to tell the truth, or challenge the establishment.

9/11 and silence from both sides with regard to a real investigation into the biggest "terrorist" attack in US History, and the murder of 3000 Americans, this tells you who is in power, the people that pulled it off. Neither party supports a real investigation into this attack, they both work for the same people. The fact that the MSM still lies about it means they are also controlled by the goons. The FBI, CIA lies about it, and Muellers coverup of the crime tells you all of the "Intelligence" and "Law" enforcement agencies are also controlled by the same cabal.

Until they start telling the truth about 9/11, you can bet the same goons are still in charge, no matter who the president is, no matter which Democrat or Republican you elect, the shadow government, deep state are still calling the shots. If you do vote, vote 3rd party. The whole election system is rigged to keep out most anyone who might dare to challenge the establishment, thats why we only get lowlifes like Mitt Romney or the Cintons running for office year after year, out of millions of people the same dirtbags just won't go away.

Everything else is just noise, distractions from this reality. If Trump really wanted to change things, if he was the real deal, he would have Sessions start a new 9/11 investigation, and start imprisoning and executing the perps and traitors, all the way from Tel Aviv back home to Wall St. All of them.

WorkingClass , May 22, 2018 at 5:51 pm GMT
@Renoman

People who say nothing ever changes should read a history book.

Mike P , May 22, 2018 at 6:20 pm GMT

If Trump really wanted to change things, if he was the real deal, he would have Sessions start a new 9/11 investigation, and start imprisoning and executing the perps and traitors, all the way from Tel Aviv back home to Wall St. All of them.

In fairness, his life expectancy after such an announcement would be about 6 minutes. Getting the public to realize the truth about 9/11 is the best chance I can see for real political change in the U.S., but hoping that anyone in Washington will lead the charge seems quite futile. A group of lawyers representing victims' families recently filed a petition for a new investigation – the media of course were not interested. It really comes down to spreading the word on the grassroots level.

anon [217] Disclaimer , May 22, 2018 at 7:04 pm GMT
@John Q Public

Hyper-technical hair splitting that is ultimately false. The point of Halper's approaches were to recruit people in the campaign to provide information. Those recruits would have been spies. Michael Caputo now says he was approached by a SECOND recruiter, someone other than Halper.

Halper was not a recruiter. He was there to collect information for the FBI, the very definition of a spy.

anon [217] Disclaimer , May 22, 2018 at 7:17 pm GMT
@renfro

From the NYT:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/15/world/asia/trump-hotel-china-indonesia.html

Hatunggal Muda Siregar, a spokesman for MNC, said the theme park and the Trump properties are separate projects within the Lido development. The agreement with the Chinese company to build the theme park does not include any financing for the project, he said.

Mr. Trump's business dealings in Indonesia prompted scrutiny even before his inauguration, and he pledged not to embark on any new deals while in office. But the Trump Organization held onto the projects in Indonesia, saying the contracts with Mr. Hary were signed in 2015 and were binding.

Yet another nothing burger. This an old deal made before he even ran for president. The Chinese loan does not extend to building of the Trump properties. As the article repeatedly pointed out:

There isn't any evidence that the agreement with the construction company was intended to sway the Trump administration on any matters.

If there's no evidence, why report it at all? To give more ammo to people who are always for looking for any reason to disparage Trump, and only bother to read headlines.

Svigor , May 22, 2018 at 7:19 pm GMT
NPR had a great piece on this today. Smarmy Ray Suarez interviewing several lying swamp creatures. The bullshit was neck-deep.
Ozymandias , May 22, 2018 at 9:11 pm GMT
"It's worth noting, that the current Russia investigation is based on the dubious claim that Russia hacked DNC computers."

Imran Awan is not Russian, he's a Paki. And he didn't need to hack the DNC, Debbie Wasserman Schultz let him in and gave him the password. There, huge mystery solved.

Harold Smith , May 22, 2018 at 9:48 pm GMT
@anon

"Anyone who refers to Trump as 'orange clown' is obviously partisan to the point of not worth listening to."

You may be right about that; now that I think about it, it does seem too generous.

How about "teflon-don-the-con-man"; or, "the ignorant orange savage in the White House"? Of course there's always the Biblical description to fall back on: "the beast from the earth" (i.e. the second beast of Rev 13); will that work?

Theo Daio , May 22, 2018 at 9:58 pm GMT
Meanwhile, at the same time we also learn that there is evidence that there really was collusion between the Trump campaign and foreign powers that wanted to see it elected in return for favorable policies. But, the problem that the Deep State has is that the foreign powers were not the cartoon-pinup-all-purpose villan of the Russians. No, it was Israel and Saudi Arabia.

The point of all of this is that the United States is supposed to be a democracy which means that the government does what the people want it to do. The one thing that we are seeing is that nobody in Washington wants that. The Democrats truly hate the whole concept of democracy. They've tried as best they can to ban democracy from their party. And now they've instituted both illegal campaign tactics before the election and a coup after the election to try to keep the power in the Democratic Party and the money flowing to them.

But, it turns out Trump was off cutting deals with Israel and Saudi Arabia that now seem to have the USA headed straight into a disasterous war that was the last thing that voters wanted. The voters keep electing candidates who claim to be against these wars. The problem is that they whole bunch of them are a lot of liars, and the one and only thing they are truly against is democracy and letting the people have a say.

America desperately needs a Democracy Movement. One that cleans the temples of DC of all of the corrupt liars that currently rule us in both fake parties.

SunBakedSuburb , May 22, 2018 at 9:59 pm GMT
"He's decided that the only way he's going to get his enemies off his back is by flushing them out into the open and subjecting their activities to public scrutiny. It's a risky strategy "

It's the only strategy he can pursue. If he doesn't take the fight out into the open, where his enemies are vulnerable, they will bury him.

Akran Ahab , May 22, 2018 at 10:05 pm GMT
Did Imram Awan leak the documents exposing that the DNC was colluding with the Clintons and rigging the primaries and convention in her favor? After all, that's where this all began.

It was a bit before the conventions when those emails leaked. Hillary certainly knew that they could be the death of her lifelong quest to see how much she could steal as President. If the Bernie voters were upset that the whole fake primary and caucus process had been rigged all along and refused to support Hillary, then she was done as a Presidential contender.

That was when Hillary came up with the idea to try to blame the Russians for the leaks and thus lead the world close to nuclear war for her own personal ambition.

TG , May 22, 2018 at 10:34 pm GMT
You know it's funny, all those 'conservatives' screaming that Edward Snowden is a traitor, that we should trust the US government to spy on us in secret because national security demands it, etc. Because only bad people have something to hide, right?

And now we begin to see exactly what it means when the central government can essentially spy on anyone for any reason not so wonderful after all, is it?

There is an old saying that a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged, and a liberal is a conservative who's been arrested. I guess a civil libertarian is a national security hawk that's been spied on.

Per/Norway , May 22, 2018 at 11:22 pm GMT
@Harold Smith

I see your point, bread and circus for the people. I'm more worried about is Israel attacking Lebanon, tbh, dragging the entire ME in to the conflict ending up with trump/bibi and Erdogan stumbling us into a ww and/or financial breakdown.

renfro , May 22, 2018 at 11:56 pm GMT
@Theo Daio

America desperately needs a Democracy Movement. One that cleans the temples of DC of all of the corrupt liars that currently rule us in both fake parties

Yes indeed we do. The Dems are using the corruption theme, but of course they are hypocrites also and don't live up to ethical standards either. Still, maybe an election platform based on ITS THE CORRUPTION STUPID ..will open the eyes of some of our more mentally challenged voters.

Hate always works – Tump pretended he was going to drain the hateful deep state swamp to save his little people -- -so I guess the Dems can pretend they are going to kill the corrupt to save the little people.

Democrats Roll Out Anti-Corruption Message for 2018

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ /democrats_roll_out_anti-corruption_message_for&#8230 ;

1 day ago – Instead, Democrats are returning to an anti-corruption message that A decade later, Trump seized on a similar theme, directing voter ire at

renfro , May 23, 2018 at 12:19 am GMT
Mueller is the only admirable man in this mess. Trump's problem is he is for once up against an honest man, someone he cant threaten or bribe or bully.
Trump, as we say in the south, is white trash he is way out of his class with Mueller.

Mueller's investigation isn't going to 'wrap up' soon -- and Trump is still in peril

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-litman-mueller-anniversary-20180516-story.html

Anyone paying attention over the last year knows Mueller will not yield to political pressure. His investigators haven't leaked; they have ignored vicious personal attacks; they haven't veered in the slightest from prosecutorial professionalism.

So to "wrap it up," Trump would have to make a move, but will he?

The president and his lawyers are strategizing about whether he will agree to be interviewed by Mueller, either voluntarily or under subpoena. If he were to refuse, as the current swing of the pendulum suggests, and then try to end the probe, he would only seem more guilty and undermine his support even among Republicans. If his refusal were to lead, as expected, to a court battle, we would expect the Supreme Court to settle the issue. Any move by Trump to preempt it would again only undermine his credibility.

In addition, the president and his circle are well aware of how fast the midterm election is approaching and what effect an attempt to fire Mueller could have on the outcome. They want to avoid any action that would help the Democrats flip the House. Such a shift would change every calculation, not least because a Democratic majority could move to impeach the president early next year.

Of course, Trump may calculate that he could get away with firing Mueller now, if he moved quickly and the Republican leadership rallied to his side. But it is equally possible that Congress would respond with legislation to reinstate Mueller. Again, the field of battle would shift to the courts.

Most importantly, even a successful ouster of Mueller would not derail the investigation at this point. Too much evidence has been gathered, and too many prosecutors, who have surely considered and planned for the contingency, stand ready to carry on. Should Trump try to shutter the entire special counsel's office, a much graver and politically and legally riskier act than firing Mueller or Rosenstein, other divisions in the Department of Justice, in particular the Southern District of New York, would also be ready to take up the charge.

The strength of all that evidence, the careful work done thus far, and the indictments already filed are the special counsel's protection against "witch hunt" tweets and protestations that the investigation is already over with nothing to show for it.

In the course of the past year, we've learned not to underestimate what Mueller knows and what bombshell he may have prepared. It may involve the Russians and the campaign, it may involve obstruction of justice, but there are other relevant threads as well: the true motive behind the Seychelles meeting between Trump associate Erik Prince and the head of a Russian wealth fund, the hacking of Democratic Party emails and its links to Trump political advisor Roger Stone, the recent sale of Russia's state owned oil company to Qatar.

Last week we discovered that Mueller was way ahead of us on the huge payments made to Trump's personal lawyer Michael Cohen for access to the president. We don't yet know what he's found out from cooperating witnesses, including Michael Flynn and Rick Gates, that might point directly at the president. And there is still the possibility that Paul Manafort or Cohen could decide to cooperate with the investigation.

None of these threads signals Trump's removal from office. A conviction in the Senate, no matter what happens in the midterm, would require a good number of Republicans to turn against the president, which seems remote absent a smoking gun that proves grave criminal conduct. But it is more than plausible that the probe and associated investigations will result in additional indictments of Trump associates -- including Jared Kushner and Donald Trump Jr. -- and will leave Trump seriously wounded, an untenable candidate in 2020. Once he leaves office, his legal exposure, both civil and criminal, would skyrocket.

The "wrap it up" crowd is indulging in wishful thinking. The first anniversary of the Mueller investigation is unlikely to be the last.

Harry Litman teaches constitutional law at UC San Diego. He is a former U.S. attorney and deputy assistant attorney general.

Carroll Price , May 23, 2018 at 12:38 am GMT
@Harold Smith

A brilliant summation of who Trump is and what he's always been – an opportunist, Manchurian Candidate. The Deep State has done it to us again.

Shemp the Greatest Stooge , May 23, 2018 at 12:44 am GMT
@renfro

Renfro, only admirable man. what a card! will not yield. stop it, you're killin me!

https://digwithin.net/2018/04/08/muellers-history/

Renfro, man, dig us up more of that funny shit.

[May 21, 2018] There's no real Left in the UK anymore, either. The Blairites are still a force with the Labour party. Even the old Left newspapers - The Guardian, The Observer - are just neocon and neoliberal mouthpeces

May 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Bevin Kacon | May 20, 2018 1:50:01 PM | 12

There's no real Left in the UK anymore, either. The Blairites are still a force with the Labour party and that party is known as The Red Tories - especially in Scotland - for the obvious reason!

Even the old Left newspapers - The Guardian, The Observer - are no longer such, as has been evidenced of late. I no longer read the UK press - Private Eye is my 'paper' reading - and would not trust one word broadcast by the BBC and, I am sorry to say, Channel 4.

bevin , May 20, 2018 3:04:03 PM | 16
The Guardian and The Observer have never been socialist papers. They were liberal, just like the democrats in the United States were liberal. And liberals, who are the advance guard of capitalism, can hardly be called 'of the left'.
The only opponents of capitalism and imperialism are socialists or nationalists, of a kind rarely seen outside the third world periphery of the system since 1917.
Anyone who sees the fascists and crooks surrounding Trump as being opponents of anything except the human race is almost as daft as someone who sees the Democrats as part of the left.
But the real prize for idiocy goes to those sad souls who see the FBI, CIA, MI6 and their clones as anything but- deepest apologies here to the Mafia and their ilk- criminal gangs, of the worst kind.

[May 21, 2018] Sergei Skripal discharged from hospital

May 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: Ort | May 20, 2018 2:54:33 PM | 13

nofollow" href="https://www.rt.com/uk/427080-skripal-salisbury-nhs-poison/">"Sergei Skripal discharged from hospital after being poisoned by 'deadly' agent"
"Sergei Skripal discharged from hospital after being poisoned by 'deadly' agent"
_____________________________________

The link is to RT, in case anyone missed this report.

It's been a busy "news" week, between significant geopolitical events, the usual US school massacres, and the bread-and-circuses distraction of a UK Royal Wedding. Perhaps this is why the above-cited "news" didn't seem to get much attention.

I'll stop enclosing "news" in ironic quotation marks-- the " key on my laptop is buckling under the strain of overuse. But I used them because every fresh installment of alleged news about the Skripals simply extends, or exacerbates, the riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma that is l'affaire Skripal.

One reason for the lack of reaction to this latest "development" (those quotes needed again) is that it is shown through a glass darkly-- the glass being the government controlled and managed information bubble. Like the earlier "developments", it's eerily self-contained.

Like many barflies, I have my idiosyncratic axes to grind, soapboxes to climb, bees in my bonnet, etc. After the mysterious events of 9/11/2001, I coined the term "pernicious factoids" to describe the bits of manufactured falsehoods and disinformation used to construct and perpetuate bogus Official Narratives.

For example, not long ago a minor New York Times article about Lee Harvey Oswald's gravesite began with something like, "When Lee Harvey Oswald shot John F. Kennedy in Dealey Plaza...". This is a pernicious factoid; they remain embedded like toxic prions in the collective consciousness, and are regarded as reasonably true, correct, and meaningful.

Likewise, the other day the Russian ambassador to the UK, Alexander Yakovenko, gave a routine press conference. As usual, some wretched would-be UK journalist took issue with Yakovenko's reiterating that the Russians are required by law to interview the Skripals personally and directly to confirm their status and wishes.

The questioner hectored the ambassador with the point that Yulia Skripal had released statements through the police indicating that she, at least, did not wish to meet personally with Russian officials because she was afraid to do so.

Ambassador Yakovenko, also as usual, patiently-- and a bit too diffidently-- explained that a third-party statement is not the same as first-hand communication. I get it-- he's a "real" diplomat, not like the whacked-out modern Western berserker-diplomats. So he's not about to tear this bumptious idiot's head off.

But I wanted to scream. This is the way pernicious factoids work. Everybody in that room was at least willing to pretend that yeah, OK, Yulia actually did give the police that statement. Or a statement. Probably. But hmmm, if one really stops and thinks about it, everything the public has been told about the circumstances of the, er, events comes from official sources and/or highly-compromised and untrustworthy mass-media organizations.

So, the ostensibly remarkable development of Sergei Skripal's recovery from a "military-grade nerve agent" just circles around the disinformation/memory hole. And, since these virtual "developments" are largely fact-free, the stories usually pad out the minimal "news" by revisiting and reiterating the same festering gutpile of pernicious factoids we've been sorting through for months: the supposed doorknob-smearing, the peculiar aspects of the "poisoning", etc.

End of rant, but only because my " key is overheating and seizing up. ;)
_____________________________________

Bonus Fun Fact: I was curious about the context of Churchill's "riddle" quote, so I looked it up. According to the "Phrase Finder" website, it was uttered during an October, 1939 radio broadcast: "I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest."

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose! div

Bart Hansen , May 20, 2018 3:21:06 PM | 18
13 - On the Skripals, no reporter I have read on the release of either Skripal has bothered to wonder why there are no photos of them at all, especially of the normal press availability on the hospital steps thanking their doctors, no information on their whereabouts, health or future plans.

[May 20, 2018] Germany responds to USA's ultimatum about Nord Stream 2 project

May 20, 2018 | www.veteranstoday.com

https://us-u.openx.net/w/1.0/pd?plm=6&ph=2857f3e0-a998-4d70-b5c1-b19a3d6766a1

"The US is looking for sales markets. We can understand this, and we are prepared to take effort to ensure this gas reaches Germany easier. Presently, however, it remains much more expensive than the gas delivered via the pipeline," the minister told ARD.

In addition, if the US does not change its tactics of behaviour and continues thinking only of its economic interests, then Europe will act similarly, the minister added.

Earlier, Us officials said that the United Stats may impose sanctions on the companies involved in the implementation of the Nord Stream 2 project. US Assistant Secretary of State Sandra Oudkirk said that Washington could consider retaliatory measures within the framework of Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act. She explained the US position as follows: the construction of the gas pipeline will strengthen Europe's dependence on the Russian natural gas.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that Germany regards the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline as a safe economic project for Europe.

Nord Stream is an offshore natural gas pipeline from Vyborg in the Russian Federation to Greifswald in Germany that is owned and operated by Nord Stream AG. The project includes two parallel lines. The first line was laid by May 2011 and was inaugurated on 8 November 2011. The second line was laid in 2011-2012 and was inaugurated on 8 October 2012. At 1,222 kilometres (759 mi) in length, it is the longest sub-sea pipeline in the world, surpassing the Langeled pipeline. It has an annual capacity of 55 billion cubic metres (1.9 trillion cubic feet), but its capacity is planned to be doubled to 110 billion cubic metres (3.9 trillion cubic feet) by 2019, by laying two additional lines.

Source: Pravda Report

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

... ... ...

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

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

... ... ...

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Discard as pendantic in case.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

There are reasons for this, whether just or unjust.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We shall see what happens after the World Cup.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[May 20, 2018] The Russian-German Relationship Is in Free Fall

May 20, 2018 | nationalinterest.org

[May 20, 2018] Brussels Rises in Revolt Against Washington a Turning Point in the US-European Relationship

May 20, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

Sandra Oudkirk, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Energy, has just threatened to sanction the Europeans if they continue with the Nord Stream 2 pipeline project to bring gas in from Russia across the Baltic Sea. That country is also seen by the US as an adversary and its approach is by and large the same – to issue orders for Europe to adopt a confrontational policy, doing as it is told without asking too many questions.

Iran and Nord Stream 2 unite Moscow and Brussels in their opposition to this diktat. On May 17, Iran signed a provisional free-trade-zone agreement with a Russia-led Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) that seeks to increase the current levels of trade valued at $2.7 billion. The deal lowers or abolishes customs duties. It also establishes a three-year process for reaching a permanent trade agreement. If Iran becomes a member of the group, it would expand its economic horizons beyond the Middle Eastern region. So, Europe and Russia are in the same boat, both holding talks with Iran on economic cooperation.

[May 19, 2018] RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP 17 MAY 2018 (Patrick Armstrong)

May 19, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Russian flag

PUTIN'S PRIORITIES. For those who think Putin dreams every night of conquering Estonia or re-creating the Empire, here's his actual todo list : population growth; life expectancy; real wage growth; reduce poverty; housing; technology; economic growth; high-productivity export-oriented businesses. What Moscow wants is a quiet life to get on with making things better in Russia for Russians.

FOREIGN POLICY PRIORITIES. There is a certain amount of talk that Russia has "betrayed" Syria (or Donbass) or "backed down" or something. Apparently it should have turned on its military power and kept it going full throttle until victory. I believe this greatly oversimplifies reality; even childishly so. Moscow's most important foreign policy priority is the preservation of Russia. In the face of Washington's multi-faceted war against it, this is no easy task. While Russia is doing pretty well, one cannot forget the reality that Washington and its minions, while fading, still possess immense destructive military, financial and economic power. Therefore, prudence is essential. A direct shooting war would be disastrous for all; something that Moscow has little confidence that Washington understands . Moscow works to strengthen the multilateral system partly for its own sake ( it knows the cost of "exceptionalism" ) and partly as a countermove to Washington's schemes. Moscow believes that the US in its self-appointed role as "upholder and defender of the liberal world order" aka "rules-based order" has an inbuilt tendency to produce chaos and destruction. It has come to this point of view by observation, not by because it's innately "hostile" or "predatory" or "malign" . It didn't start out that way; here's a reminder of what Putin once expected from the USA . This entails a continual effort to balance competing powers – not too much of this, not too much of that – in order to preserve a tenuous peace (we see this especially in the Middle East today). The Soviets had an concept: "the correlation of forces" – the attempt to take everything that could affect an outcome into consideration; you may be sure that Putin's team is continually assessing it. To remind you of what he sees as his job: " I'm not your friend, I'm the President of Russia ".

CHURCH RESTORATION. When I was in Russia 20 years ago churches were being renovated everywhere. This shows some of the more dramatic restorations.

VICTORY DAY. Red Square parade . Immortal Regiment in Moscow , St Petersburg , Sevastopol , Surgut ,

KERCH BRIDGE. Putin formally opened the road part . The "country that doesn't make anything" has completed the longest bridge in Europe in two years. Newsweek , NYT and the Atlantic Council assure us it will fail and some random neocon wants Kiev to destroy it . Moscow has already thought of that .

SOCHI. Remember all that stuff about wasted money ? It was always about more than the Olympic complex itself – the ski resort is doing well .

MEDITERRANEAN. Always, Putin says, there will be Kalibrs there . Newton's Third Law.

PUTIN'S NEW WHEELS. Revealed at his inauguration last Monday. There will be other high-end luxury models . I can see them selling: twenty years of unrelenting hostility has (surprise!) made Russians more patriotic and it may become a fad for the rich to ditch their Mercs for "patriotic" cars.

AMERICA-HYSTERICA. Mueller's grand indictment of miscellaneous Russian entities for interference (probably actually a commercial marketing scheme ) was flimflam designed to keep the story going and he surely never expected to have to prove it. Well he has to: the catering company has produced lawyers and is demanding its day in court . And discovery. This should be a good laugh. Flynn's sentencing for "lying" has been again postponed . And his Manafort case isn't going well either . There's no there there.

NEW NWO. Trump walks out of the JCPOA, scorning Europe's pleas. Sanctions will follow and Washington will demand compliance from Europe (" secondary sanctions "). Will Europe knuckle under? Juncker , Merkel and Tusk talk tough but always before tough talk has preceded obedience: Washington's sanctions on Russia have cost Europe a lot but it still dutifully signs up for more. But maybe (maybe) Washington has gone too far this time: we have a report that sanctions will be defied and US court rulings will be ignored . Brzezinski observed that for American global dominance "the most dangerous scenario" would be a grand "antihegemonic" coalition of Russia, China and Iran. He was confident it could be averted by a "a display of US geostrategic skill". (!) His head would explode imagining a Russia-EU-China-Iran coalition.

© Patrick Armstrong Analysis, Canada Russia Observer

[May 18, 2018] The UK s obsession with the Russian bogeyman doesn t stack up by Mary Dejevsky

Notable quotes:
"... Now, it is hard to know what to make of all this, other than to point out that he was speaking to fellow security chiefs. Maybe, among themselves, they find it more morale-boosting to demonise an old enemy than to take on adversaries that have emerged more recently, are more complicated and against which they have so far perhaps had less success. ..."
"... the conclusion has to be that Russia is considered a "safe", useful, and almost eternal enemy by the UK's powers-that-be. Some of us may hope for something better, but it seems a long way away. ..."
May 14, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

The UK's obsession with the Russian bogeyman doesn't stack up Mary Dejevsky The head of MI5 has joined the security establishment's anti-Putin onslaught. But his organization agrees that Moscow is not the greatest threat

Today's speech by the head of MI5 , Andrew Parker, has been presented as a first – the first time the head of the UK's domestic intelligence service has delivered a speech abroad, specifically at a conference of security heads in Berlin. But this is the only respect in which it is a first. It might as accurately be described as the latest in a series of public utterances by UK intelligence chiefs and top brass, which began last autumn and continued with the head of GCHQ addressing a cybersecurity conference in Manchester last month.

"MI5 chief: Kremlin is 'chief protagonist' in campaign to undermine west" Read more

In part, this reflects a deliberate decision by the intelligence services and the government that they should be more open about what they do, with a view to gaining greater public understanding – and expanding recruitment at a time when they face competition for tech-savvy graduates from richer and less restrictive employers. But this season of intelligence and military speeches has also facilitated the communication of an apparently co-ordinated message. As a country, the UK now sees Russia as its prime adversary.

The poisoning of Sergei Skripal , the former Russian spy, and his daughter in Salisbury took the UK's official anti-Russia stance to new heights. And its diplomatic success in persuading so many other countries to expel Russian diplomats in protest – the biggest ever "collective expulsion of security agents", we were told – seems to have emboldened London to view itself as the potential leader of an international anti-Russia front, as the Guardian recently reported .

The invective produced by Parker today – and heavily sold to the media – was, in its way, extraordinary. In tone, it was quite different from the cold war register, which was formal and, well, cold. This attack was populist, direct, and far outside the diplomatic register. Here is just a sample.

The Kremlin was engaging in "deliberate, targeted, malign activity intended to undermine our free, open and democratic societies". The west had to "shine a light through the fog of lies, half-truths and obfuscation that pours out of their propaganda machine". Russia, he said caustically, had as one of its "central and entirely admirable aims to build Russian greatness on the world stage". But it had repeatedly chosen "to pursue that aim through aggressive and pernicious actions by its military and intelligence services". In so doing, it risked becoming "a more isolated pariah".

So long as the UK refuses consular access to Yulia Skripal, Russia can – with some justification – ask just who has a monopoly on a fog of lies.'

Now, it is hard to know what to make of all this, other than to point out that he was speaking to fellow security chiefs. Maybe, among themselves, they find it more morale-boosting to demonise an old enemy than to take on adversaries that have emerged more recently, are more complicated and against which they have so far perhaps had less success. There is a sense too, for the UK at least, that relations with Russia have been so bad for so long that magnifying the supposed Russia threat is a cost-free enterprise in diplomatic terms.

It might also be worth considering whether there are budgetary and Brexit angles. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US and the UK, in particular, scaled back their government-backed research on Russia and lost a great deal of expertise, which they are now trying to rebuild. That means they have to make a case for more taxpayers' money, and scare tactics are one way to do that. For the UK, there may also be the fear that it will find the European Union less inclined to keep London in the intelligence loop, and – at a time when the US is looking a far less reliable ally – it might make sense to play up the Russian bogeyman, not least as Vladimir Putin begins his fourth term in office. Nothing like starting as you intend to go on.

Yet it is still difficult to see the sense in this. Russia has become inured to UK scolding of this kind, and treats it with contempt – as its social media response to Parker's speech shows. What is more, so long as the UK maintains its silence on the Skripals' fate and refuses consular access to Yulia Skripal, Russia can – with some justification, I would argue – ask just who has a monopoly on a "fog of lies".

Nor will the tone necessarily chime well with official views of Russia in Germany and France, which are not necessarily less tough in practice, but certainly more nuanced, and better informed. The UK seems intent – despite recent legislation about dubious money in London – in keeping its diplomatic and business relations with Russia in separate boxes. Germany, for one, does not have that luxury.

The conclusion has to be that Russia is considered a 'safe', useful, and almost eternal enemy by the UK's powers-that-be

The UK's rhetorical onslaught on Russia is even more puzzling when you examine the security services' own priorities. "Is terrorism the biggest threat facing the UK?" visitors to the MI5 website are asked in a pop-up called "fact or fiction". Click no, and this is the response: "The biggest threat we currently face comes from international terrorist groups and individuals inspired by them. Terrorist organisations in Northern Ireland also continue to pose a serious threat."

Now it is true that the threat from terrorism and Islamic State was also broached by Parker in his speech, but this was not the section spun in advance to the media; it was not the aspect MI5 wanted above all to be noticed. So the conclusion has to be that Russia is considered a "safe", useful, and almost eternal enemy by the UK's powers-that-be. Some of us may hope for something better, but it seems a long way away.

• Mary Dejevsky is a former foreign correspondent in Moscow

[May 18, 2018] Guardian fake news. UK media tries to keep Skripal poisoning hoax alive (Video)

May 18, 2018 | theduran.com

Alex Christoforou with Alexander Mercouris discuss a recent Guardian post that claims 100 police have received psychological help after Salisbury attack.

Fake news, trying to create false connections between police psychological issues and a rather dubious UK poisoning false flag. Via The Guardian

Almost 100 Wiltshire police officers and staff have sought psychological support after the nerve agent attack in Salisbury, the Guardian can reveal.

Among those who have asked for help were officers who initially responded to the collapse of the former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, and those who were at or close to the various investigation sites in subsequent days and weeks.

Some reported feeling disorientated and anxious while others were concerned about the possible long-term health effects on the public.

While the Skripal poisoning story has faded from much of the mainstream media news cycle, as it was increasingly exposed as a complete hoax and embarrassment for the May government, the Guardian appears to be trying to resurrect "the Russians did" Novichok narrative.

Rick Oliver • 3 hours ago ,

It is about time your stupid leader and her clown were put on the stage to explain to all the world why they chose to defame the integrity of Russia in such an unbelievable set of circumstances that only children under the age of ten would not understand !! How can any Nation since this demonic happening , ever trust this self - centred Bozo from ever making a sensible judgement for the future of mankind !

louis robert • 13 hours ago ,

What a shameful staging! At the very least, try and respect children!... Keep them away from all that nonsense, Ms May!

André De Koning • an hour ago ,

UK has lost it completely and the Guardian has fallen prey to the CIA Mockingbird Operation (infiltration and manipulation of media). Used to be a good paper under Alan Rushbridger and protection of Snowden, Assange etc. Now it has lost it altogether with useless editorial board. The woman in charge must have something in common with Nikki Haley: incapable of nuance and irrationally convinced of her being right (without research lots of claims about Assad, Putin etc.).

Wesa F. André De Koning • 35 minutes ago ,

When ever I read such nonsense it always brings a smile as I think of what Clint Eastwood said in his summing up of Politicians and not in General.

[May 16, 2018] 'No focus on Russian activities' - Donald Jr. on Trump Tower meeting in interview transcripts -- RT US News

Notable quotes:
"... "hear them out." ..."
"... "no focus on Russian activities" ..."
"... "the most embarrassing thing you've ever asked me to do" ..."
"... "complete loss of time" ..."
"... "answered every question asked" ..."
"... "I appreciate the opportunity to have assisted the Judiciary Committee in its inquiry," ..."
"... "The public can now see that for over five hours I answered every question asked and was candid and forthright with the Committee." ..."
May 16, 2018 | www.rt.com

The 2016 Trump Tower meeting set up to reveal dirt on Hillary Clinton "infuriated" Jared Kushner, was a "waste of time" and had nothing to do with Clinton, according to transcripts of interviews with the meeting's participants. The US Senate Judiciary Committee has released more than 1,800 pages of transcripts, which provide new insight into the controversial meeting during which Donald Trump Jr, along with Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner and then campaign chairman Paul Manafort, was expecting to receive "dirt" on Hillary Clinton from Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya.

Overall, the newly-released documents seem to indicate that a short 20-minute meeting resulted in hours of interviews and thousands of pages of documents for little reason.

In the transcripts, Trump Jr. said that he was skeptical that Rob Goldstone, the publicist who had been the first to contact him about a meeting, had colleagues who possessed incriminating information about Clinton, but said felt he should at least "hear them out." Read more © RT 'Wasting taxpayers' money': Lawyer Veselnitskaya talks Trump's dossier & Fusion GPS

He also said that it was important to note that when he accepted the invitation to go to the meeting there was "no focus on Russian activities" surrounding the campaign and claimed that Goldstone had not even confirmed the names of the attendees who would join them at the meeting.

Goldstone had set up the meeting on behalf of Russian musical artist Emin Agaralov, the son of a wealthy Russian businessman, but revealed in his interview that he later told Agaralov that the meeting was "the most embarrassing thing you've ever asked me to do" given that it ended up having nothing to do with Clinton. Goldstone also revealed that Veselnitskaya's apparently Clinton-free presentation in the meeting had "infuriated" Kushner.

In another indication that the meeting was not supposed to be a top-secret attempt for the Trump campaign to collude with Russia, Goldstone also revealed that he "checked in" to Trump Tower on Facebook when he arrived.

In a supplemental interview, Goldstone also told investigators that Russian President Vladimir Putin was not able to meet Trump during the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow, but invited him through a phone call with his spokesman Dmitry Peskov, organized by Agaralov, to attend the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi instead. According to Goldstone, Peskov said Putin would be happy to meet him there -- but that meeting did not end up happening.

Anatoli Samochornov, a Russian translator who attended the meeting, said that no one present had said the Russian government either supported Trump or opposed Clinton for president. He also said there were no offers from the Russian side to release hacked emails, hack voting totals or anything else.

The other translator present, Ike Kaveladze, said he spoke to Agaralov about two hours after the meeting and told him it was a "complete loss of time" and a "useless" meeting.

The committee released the thousands of pages of transcripts along with hundreds of additional pages of related material, including the interviews with Goldstone, Russian-American lobbyist Rinat Akhmetshin and translators Samochornov and Kaveladze.

Read more A woman passes by the Al Jazeera America broadcast center in New York City, January 13, 2016 © Brendan McDermid 'Weapon of mass suppression': Russiagate now used to target any dissent in US – Max Blumenthal

The meeting has been the subject of controversy, particularly the question of whether then-candidate Trump knew about it. Special Counsel Robert Mueller has looked closely at the meeting as part of his investigation into alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election, which has not yet turned up any evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia.

Following the publication of the documents, Trump Jr. said they showed that he "answered every question asked" by the committee.

"I appreciate the opportunity to have assisted the Judiciary Committee in its inquiry," he said in a statement. "The public can now see that for over five hours I answered every question asked and was candid and forthright with the Committee."

Those who were present at the meeting said Veselnitskaya did not provide any 'dirt' on Clinton and instead focused on discussing the overturning of US sanctions placed on Russia under the Magnitsky Act. Those sanctions, which impose US entry bans and asset freezes on Russians alleged to have been involved in human rights abuses, are still in place and have since been expanded , most recently in December 2017 when five more Russian nationals were added to the Magnitsky List. 'No focus on Russian activities' - Donald Jr. on Trump Tower meeting in interview transcripts Democrats & Russians 'laughing' at 'witch hunt' collusion probe – Trump 'No focus on Russian activities' - Donald Jr. on Trump Tower meeting in interview transcripts 'Story of my meeting with Trump Jr. has been manipulated' - Russian lawyer Veselnitskaya

[May 16, 2018] Time changes: Professor Shephen Cohen became more popular among readers of unz.com

May 16, 2018 | www.unz.com

Dan Hayes , May 15, 2018 at 5:28 am GMT

n that Cohen tries to stay clear of anything outside his expertise, Russian history and geopolitics. Several times I've heard him fondly reminisce about being raised in Kentucky. So he may not be a complete Upper West Side liberal.

[May 15, 2018] Haley s Embarrassing Defense of the Gaza Massacre by Daniel Larison

Notable quotes:
"... Iran's actions in the region were not the subject of the meeting where Haley said this, and talking incessantly about Iran to avoid addressing the issue at hand has become a typical maneuver for Haley whenever U.S. clients commit some outrage that she would rather ignore. ..."
May 15, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Nikki Haley's response to yesterday's massacre in Gaza is to engage in whataboutism:

US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley slams Iran's "destabilizing conduct" amid Gaza protests https://t.co/QtArrPbJOq https://t.co/gC1niZnMiK

-- CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) May 15, 2018

The Trump administration's Iran obsession would almost be comical if it didn't have such a dangerous distorting effect on our foreign policy. Iran's actions in the region were not the subject of the meeting where Haley said this, and talking incessantly about Iran to avoid addressing the issue at hand has become a typical maneuver for Haley whenever U.S. clients commit some outrage that she would rather ignore. Whether she is busy whitewashing Saudi coalition crimes in Yemen or running interference for Israel after it massacres over 60 people, Haley's m.o. is to change the subject.

Haley also risibly claimed that Israel was acting with restraint yesterday:

"No country in this chamber would act with more restraint than Israel has. In fact, the records of several countries here today suggest they would be much less restrained," she said.

The ambassador's claim is absurd on its face, and it is an insult to the dozens of democratic states around the world that do not behave this way. Haley also ignores that there are no other states in the world that keep millions of people trapped in a blockaded enclave as Israel does with the inhabitants of Gaza. Not only would the vast majority of democratic governments not act as Israel's government has acted over the last few weeks, but none would have any need to confront massive protests from a population that has been deliberately starved and impoverished for more than a decade. The excessively violent response to the Gaza protests calls attention to the cruel policy of collective punishment imposed on all of the people living in Gaza, and there is no excuse for either of them.

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

caucus99percent.com

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

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

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

..

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

Posted by: Trisha Driscoll | May 11, 2018

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Putin has done more to stop, blunt or block US military aggression than any other country.

He picked Syria to put Russian military up against US military. If he had not not done so, the Syrians that are still dying due to the terrorists and their sponsors would, along with hundreds of thousands of others have been dead in the jihadist takeover in 2015.

the Palestinians? What is the rest of the world doing about this? How many other countries deal with Israel. What is you country doing for the Palestinians.

There have been many proposed resolutions against Syria in the UN but US has vetoed them all. Israel can be brought into line only when US power is destroyed.

Many of the worlds conflicts that exist today can never be resolved until US power is destroyed as it is the US that keeps those conflicts as open wounds.

For Russia putting all their efforts into say Palestine or Yemen and the many other conflicts is like running around putting out spot fires rather than catching the arsonist.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | May 11, 2018 9:02:14 PM |

..

Korybko interprets Russian signals as message to Assad to "compromise," which I don't agree with at all as such a "demand" backwalks numerous previous statements about Syria by Russia, which isn't normal Kremlin behavior. In essence, Korybko's arguing that the relationship between Zionists and Russia is more important than Russia's relations with Syria, Iraq, and Iran–a huge misread on his part, IMO.

Posted by: karlof1 | May 11, 2018

.

Strategic Culture's published a very powerful editorial. Teaser:

"The reckless, reprehensible behavior of the US towards international law, multilateralism and diplomacy – all of which it falsely projects onto Russia, China and others – is, or should be, a watershed moment for all of the world to recognize that such rogue conduct is intolerable and unacceptable.

"Either there is multilateral accord or there is not. Either there is a multipolar world as envisaged by a democracy of nations, or there is brutish hegemony of unipolar ambitions. The latter is not law-abiding. It is predicated on the brutish principle of "might is right". The world cannot afford such a hegemon for the sake of peace and survival."

It certainly echoes much of what's written by b and us Barflies.

Posted by: karlof1 | May 11, 2018

Russia's catching a lot of blogger-flak regarding its failure to go to war with Israel. That's not smart.

Here's the probable scenario as I see it, keeping in mind that the #1 priority for Russia is its own political interests and its own security, which is true of every country.

There are three allies concerned with Syria led by Russia, and including Turkey and Iran. Three unlkely allies, actually. But they are trying to get along, with Russia's objective a return of Syria to full sovereignty of all its territory, and a cessation of hostilities, with a Russian military presence. It's not been easy but there has been progress and it looks like Russia and its allies will be successful.

Iran has that objective too, but also has a strong interest in aiding Hezbollah as a powerful anti-Israel force. That includes provisioning Hezbollah in Syria with ballistic missiles.

Russia (in my probable scenario) said to Iran don't do that. It endangers our chief interest in Syria which is to win the war against US/Israel and end the warfare. Don't do anything that endangers that. But Iran did it anyhow, and has paid a price which Syria shares. And as a part of that, Russia has taken no action against Israel because it expected this might happen, that's why Iran was cautioned. Iran thought it could do whatever it wanted in Syria and it got burned.

So I say to anti-Russia bloggers, wake up and smell the coffee.

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 11, 2018

..

Here's what Putin said to Nuttyahoo according to Kremlin :

"Naturally, we will use your visit today to discuss bilateral relations and problems in the region. Unfortunately, the situation is very acute. I would like to express hope that you and I will not only manage to discuss, but also find solutions which will lead to a shift in the situation, and which will also allow us to find ways to resolve heated conflicts."

Putin's clearly aiming at de-escalation, while Nutty's all about escalating.

Posted by: karlof1 | May 11, 2018

I used to admire Korybko enormously, and I thought him a brilliant talent. I don't know what's happened in the last few months. Every one of his articles seems to be a mis-read. He's chosen a view of reality that I think is wrong, and everything he extrapolates from that is off-kilter.

We all choose at what level down the rabbit hole we want to go, but whatever it is, our predictions should accord with subsequent events, or we can know it's an inaccurate ledge to perch on. Korybko keeps saying there's a hidden agenda and a secret union between Israel and Russia that makes all the rest of the Syria campaign a sham. He's become as unreliable as Paul Craig Roberts at reading the true balances, and as unreliable, it pains me to say, as the Saker appears at times lately. They all call for the sky to fall tomorrow, or else say that it already has and the fix is in, and resistance is futile.

Miracles abound. But everyone is so damn gloomy. Is it a new CIA manic-depression drug? Radio waves? Crazy.

Posted by: Grieved | May 11, 2018

.

Too many cast Putin as Tsar; he is not. National security issues are discussed and solved by a council of same name through consensus. Same with Foreign Relations. One aspect of Russia that differs greatly from almost every Western nation is the Russian government acts in the best interest of all Russians , not just a select nomenclatura as in Outlaw US Empire and UK.

Posted by: karlof1 | May 11, 2018

During the course of the Ukraine war I, and I imagine many others, went through some of the feelings about Vladimir Putin that many people are expressing now. We grew impatient. We wanted Russia to go in and kick Porky's ass into the high heavens. We wanted the Chocolate King toasted. But Putin carried on with his minimalist strategy, his control over emotion and ego, his resource stinginess, providing just enough to the Donbas warriors, just enough. It was nail-biting and frustrating at times, but If Russia had gone into Ukraine, guns blazing (as Russia's enemies wanted) it would probably be bankrupt by now.

Scene change to Syria and we have the same minimum aircraft, troops, special forces Minimum but enough. Israel feels very strongly about the S-300. Putin and his generals have probably verified for themselves what they long suspected – that many products built by the US military industrials since the 1990s are pretty crap. Just look at the F-35 and the Boeing 787 "Dreamliner", which pilots and cabin crew refer to as the "binliner" due to its continuous faults. After a PHD on more-or-less this subject my humble self came to the same conclusion.

So do the Syrians really need the S-300 when they seem to be doing fine with what they have got? They could be beefed up with some Pantsirs and Buks. Why antagonize Israel needlessly? Why risk WWIII? Why risk Russia's World Cup – when sabotage and stealth are what the Israelis are best at? Why not just keep slipping Assad stuff that will keep the Israeli's guessing?

Posted by: Lochearn | May 11, 2018

.

@ Grieved who wrote: "Miracles abound. But everyone is so damn gloomy. Is it a new CIA manic-depression drug? Radio waves? Crazy."

The more the elite can rile the public with fear and anger against others the better their chances of manipulating events to their ends at least that is their plan and I am not seeing white flags yet.

Yes, we are in the middle of a watershed event for humanity where the real issue of whether a small elite continue to control the tools of finance is being fought as a battle between Israel et al and the rest of the world through Syria/Iran/??? That the issues are so intertwined and so misunderstood by the public is a human travesty that I attribute to brainwashing by the Western media.

The good thing about this situation is that we are in it because the old way is breaking down all around us and energy abounds for supporting structural change. For someone who has been watching and waiting for 40+ years, I am DAMN happy to see such an opportunity for human growth present itself in my lifetime.

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 11, 2018

@ 27

Peskov corrects :

May 11. /TASS/. The refusal to supply the S-300 air defense missile systems to Syria is not linked in any way with the recent visit by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Moscow, acting Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday.

Peskov commented on a statement, which acting Russian Presidential Aide for Military and Technical Cooperation Vladimir Kozhin gave in an interview with the newspaper Izvestia.

"Technologically, it is absolutely incorrect to link this [Kozhin's words] with Netanyahu's visit because the interview was given before Netanyahu's visit," the acting Kremlin spokesman pointed out.

Russia has never announced such deliveries and only specified that it reserves the right in the wake of US-led airstrikes against Syria to do everything possible in this situation.

In an interview published on Friday, Kozhin said that Russia was not delivering the S-300 air defense missile systems to Syria and no talks had been underway on their delivery thus far.

As the acting Kremlin spokesman added, the Syrian army "has everything it needs."

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated on April 16 that Russia was ready to consider all necessary steps to reinforce Syria's defense capabilities, including the delivery of the S-300 systems.

Unlike the West, RF does not pre-announce. Just do it!

Do you think Putin is pleased about this?

Israeli Weapons Among Arms Handed Over to Syrian Army By Terrorists in Damascus

Oh, not just medical aid!

Posted by: Likklemore | May 11, 2018

..

Explanation of Russia's approach by Andrei Korybko. Russia is taking a balance-of-power approach, not a bloc approach, to Syria. Hence its ambiguous stances towards Turkey, Iran, and Israel. Beyond what is required to defeat the Takfiris and assure the stability of the Syrian government, the rest is negotiable. Putin does not want the situation between Iran and Israel to escalate, and to that end is seeking greater influence in Syria vis-a-vis Iran.

http://www.eurasiafuture.com/2018/05/09/why-cry-its-great-news-that-trump-pulled-out-of-the-iran-deal/

..

Such a massive organized aggression has been inflicted on Syria, so much effort has been put into sujugating and destroying Syria, the Syrians have suffered so horribly. Years of economic warfare – sanctions, tens of thousands of mercenary madmen from dozens of countries deployed against Syria, entire cities destroyed, massive amounts of arms and financing provided to the madmen, global mass media disinformation deployed, oil stolen, thousands of US bombs dropped, continual Israeli attacks and subterfuge, NATO special forces deployed, massive mercenary underground construction project at Douma, false flags, Turkish aggression, Saudi complicity, and more.

And how do things stand, after seven years of this? Syrians are inspirational for their resistance, Syria is battered but winning, Russia's standing has risen as she has saved Syria, the mercenaries are largely eliminated or herded into specific areas; Israelis and Americans have lost yet more international standing, are more obviously outlaw regimes, and have lost self confidence; their military intimidation is more and more lacking in real authority. NATO is licking its wounds and is less cohesive, occupied Germany is showing signs of awakening, Turkey and the US are at odds, the British are a malicious joke, the Saudis are weaker, Iran and Lebanon are stronger, Iraqis despise the Americans, China is stronger.

Meanwhile, Russia too has been under US led economic warfare attack, and near global disinformation attack, and demonization. And yet she too is stronger in many ways than she was just a few years ago.

Posted by: Robert Snefjella | May 11, 2018

..

karlof1 @20

There's nothing in that statement that approves of Israel's attack. And informing Putin of a changed stance due to a perception that 'red lines' were crossed (red lines that would've been discussed weeks or months prior) would be positioned by Netanyahu as a courtesy ( when it is really just a sneaky attempt at battlefield advantage).

Here's a thought (not fully baked):the Russians have their eye on the ball. Those who are focused on Zionists as a problem for a West easily miss the fact that USA is a bigger problem for Russia than Israel. USA is the "power behind the throne". Zionists and neocons may manipulate that power but it is better for Russia to make an effort to separate Israel from the West. You catch more flies with honey.

If SCO becomes strong enough to offer meaningful security guarantees and Israel also has an opportunity to participate in lucrative economic opportunities in Eurasia then Israel might be enticed to end it's belligerent manipulation of US. It may require a new generation of leadership in Israel before that happens. Russia-China are playing long games.

Posted by: Jackrabbit

.

OJS:

So you run around spouting your hatred for Putin because he does not proclaim himself world policeman and and does not crap on about R2P. As he has said, he is not anybodies friend. He is the president of the Russian federation.

In this video I linked earlier, he plainly states his position on Israel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJnIsbo5uMs

Like it or not Putin recognizes and operates within International law and Russian law, and respects UN recognized borders. Putin, all the time he has been President has operated on the principle of evolution not revolution. He is not about to change now.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | May 11, 2018

The more the elite can rile the public with fear and anger against others the better their chances of manipulating events to their ends at least that is their plan and I am not seeing white flags yet.

Yes, we are in the middle of a watershed event for humanity where the real issue of whether a small elite continue to control the tools of finance is being fought as a battle between Israel et al and the rest of the world through Syria/Iran/??? That the issues are so intertwined and so misunderstood by the public is a human travesty that I attribute to brainwashing by the Western media.

The good thing about this situation is that we are in it because the old way is breaking down all around us and energy abounds for supporting structural change. For someone who has been watching and waiting for 40+ years, I am DAMN happy to see such an opportunity for human growth present itself in my lifetime.

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 11, 2018

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

I'll add a few other things that may or may not be of interest:

'Who we are, why we're digging: Team probing Syrian war & Skripal poisoning case reveal all', the UK working group on Syria, propaganda, and media, via RT (with this video, 9:26)

[May 15, 2018] Haley s Embarrassing Defense of the Gaza Massacre by Daniel Larison

Notable quotes:
"... Iran's actions in the region were not the subject of the meeting where Haley said this, and talking incessantly about Iran to avoid addressing the issue at hand has become a typical maneuver for Haley whenever U.S. clients commit some outrage that she would rather ignore. ..."
May 15, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Nikki Haley's response to yesterday's massacre in Gaza is to engage in whataboutism:

US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley slams Iran's "destabilizing conduct" amid Gaza protests https://t.co/QtArrPbJOq https://t.co/gC1niZnMiK

-- CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) May 15, 2018

The Trump administration's Iran obsession would almost be comical if it didn't have such a dangerous distorting effect on our foreign policy. Iran's actions in the region were not the subject of the meeting where Haley said this, and talking incessantly about Iran to avoid addressing the issue at hand has become a typical maneuver for Haley whenever U.S. clients commit some outrage that she would rather ignore. Whether she is busy whitewashing Saudi coalition crimes in Yemen or running interference for Israel after it massacres over 60 people, Haley's m.o. is to change the subject.

Haley also risibly claimed that Israel was acting with restraint yesterday:

"No country in this chamber would act with more restraint than Israel has. In fact, the records of several countries here today suggest they would be much less restrained," she said.

The ambassador's claim is absurd on its face, and it is an insult to the dozens of democratic states around the world that do not behave this way. Haley also ignores that there are no other states in the world that keep millions of people trapped in a blockaded enclave as Israel does with the inhabitants of Gaza. Not only would the vast majority of democratic governments not act as Israel's government has acted over the last few weeks, but none would have any need to confront massive protests from a population that has been deliberately starved and impoverished for more than a decade. The excessively violent response to the Gaza protests calls attention to the cruel policy of collective punishment imposed on all of the people living in Gaza, and there is no excuse for either of them.

[May 13, 2018] Xi Jinping The Emergence of Chinese Ultra-Nationalism by Sazzad Haider

Notable quotes:
"... Sazzad Haider is a writer and filmmaker living in Bangladesh. He edits The Diplomatic Journal. ..."
May 11, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org
Chinese leader Xi Jinping started his second term as President last month and delivered his speech with a nationalistic appeal stating China's desire to take up its "due place in the world." Xi seems to be taking the long way to achieve Chinese superiority all over the world. Xi began his new tenure in an ultra nationalistic manner rather than with a communist internationalist plea.

Prior to Xi's re-election, the Chinese Communist Party put "democratic weakness" aside as the Chinese parliament endorsed a new law including removing the restriction that had limited the presidency to two consecutive five-year terms. The Parliament justified the change as a necessity to line up the presidency with Xi's two other, more powerful, posts -- head of the party and of the military since they have no term limits.

The move was not unexpected; after his accession to power in 2012, Xi has chosen a rough, hard but consolidated long road to walk. His way has differed from the way of his last two predecessors. Xi's two precursors Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao strictly followed the rule of collective leadership which was introduced by Deng Xiaoping to dilute the one man autocracy of the Mao Zedong era by including a restriction limiting the presidency to two consecutive five-year terms. Following the ending of Deng era, the power transforming processes were kept free from disturbance.

After his ascent in power, Xi Jinping turned away from the path of his two predecessors and wanted to be a Chinese thinker, pathfinder and philosopher like Mao Zedong.

In 2013, Chinese President Xi Jinping adopted the concept of OBOR as one of the greatest investment projects in the history of the planet. Similarly, the USA launched the Marshall Plan for reconstruction of Western Europe after the end of Second World War; the USA invested US$ 13 billion dollars which is roughly equivalent to US$ 130 billion in today's money. According to news media China has already invested $ 1 trillion in OBOR and several trillion is due to be invested over the next decade.

Chinese OBOR has the basic objective to gain both political and economic supremacy over western countries. Following the Chinese revolution China's leadership strongly denounced western capitalism and vowed to fight against US led "imperialism" & "expansionism". Mao Zedong, founder of modern China emerged as a great competitor to US led capitalistic leadership. He introduced and developed the three world theory. According to his theory, the first world comprises USA led western countries, second world consisting of Soviet Union and its allies and all countries of Asia except Japan, all countries of Africa & Latin America are in third world. Mao Zedong intended to be the pathfinder for the third world countries to struggle against western exploitation. Since the foundation of new China, the Chinese leadership feels comfortable working with "third world" countries against western dominance. China played a vital role in the Korean War and also in the Vietnam War against US expansionism. China also wanted to export revolution to all third world countries but they were not successful due to the lack of Chinese financial capacity or to avoid direct conflict with other countries. Therefore, China's effort to export revolution was aired on propaganda machinery rather than practically. As an example the Indian Maoist faction only got moral support from China in the mid 60s, when they campaigned for an armed struggle to grow a communist regime.

It seemed, the Chinese leadership was waiting for favorable circumstance and opportunity to establish a proletarian third world.

After the death of Mao Zedong the Chinese leadership has gradually shifted from the policy of exporting revolution towards exporting Chinese industrial products to third world countries. China also shifted from a controlled economy to a free market economy. Under the communist party leadership China turned into a capitalist country. China has the world's fastest-growing economy with average growth rates of 10% over 30 years. The economic success of China has developed a geopolitical ambition like Mao's to be a world player.

Now China is at its most prosperous in its history and present President Xi Jinping is the most powerful leader after Mao Zedong. Under Xi's leadership, China has promoted vigorous growth of military might and geopolitical influence. President Xi's aspiration is boosting China to gain the prime role on the stage of the global power game and to subdue US dominance. The rivalry between the USA and China is on a range of different issues such as the South China Sea, cyber security, trade disputes, human rights and intellectual property rights.

After attaining power, Shifting from the previous policy of peaceful coexistence with its neighbors, Xi has introduced a nationalistic and aggressive stance in foreign policy regarding dealings with his counterparts. He is looking for geographical expansion of Chinese territory and increasing the Chinese influence all over the world. China already has claims over almost the entire South China Sea and its islands and reefs. The South China Sea is also claimed in part by the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Taiwan and Brunei. China has constructed three artificial islands in the South China Sea ignoring cries from its neighbors. Xi also took a very strong stance on the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands issue with Japan and declared an Air defense identification Zone in the area. Along with Japan, the US has opposed the Chinese actions in the South China Sea.

Responding to US criticism, China was critical of the presence of the U.S. in Asia Pacific Ocean waters and the US "strategic pivot" to Asia.

"Matters in Asia ultimately must be taken care of by Asians. Asia's problems ultimately must be resolved by Asians and Asia's security ultimately must be protected by Asians", Xi told a regional conference in Shanghai on 21 May 2014. Indicating the USA's interference in Asia Xi called on Asian countries to unite and forge a way together, rather than get involved with third party powers. Subsequent to this, Xi announced his One Belt and One Road initiatives to persuade the world.

The 'One Belt, One Road (OBOR) consists of two routes-one overland "Silk Road Economic Belt", another "21 st -Century Maritime Silk Road" in an objective to link China economically to Europe through countries across Eurasia, Africa and the Indian Ocean. The land corridors are China-Mongolia-Russia; China-Central Asia-West Asia; the China-Indochina peninsula; China-Pakistan; and Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar. The OBOR will integrate of the region into an interconnected economic area through building infrastructure, increasing cultural exchanges, and broadening trade. China is investing to build infrastructure such as railways, roads, ports, energy systems and telecommunications networks to implement OBOR. On the Maritime Silk Road, China will invest to improve efficiency and security of the major sea ports along the routes.

China's banks are providing massive funds for Chinese enterprise to construct infrastructure while the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) will provide loans for other countries. AIIB has issued the first loans for Indonesia, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Tajikistan. The Bank of China has clarified that the Renminbi (Chinese currency) will be the main trading and investment currency. Entering the Chinese Banks into new OBOR countries will promote the globalization of the Chinese economy. China also called upon Chinese expatriates to invest in OBOR projects.

The Chinese President has played his OBOR card when the USA, the prime competitor to China, got an egotistic and unpredictable President like Donald Trump. XI's OBOR initiatives are contending as the USA turns to isolationism and protectionism.

The USA and its allies are under threat of raising extreme nationalism and communalism. Donald Trump likes to appear as a nationalistic President rather than an international player. In the meantime, Donald trump decided to withdraw from the Paris climate treaty and ignore USA global responsibility. On the contrary Chinese President Xi asserted his eagerness to implement the Paris Climate treaty and intention to work with European leaders.

Emerging as European core ally, Xi also called for more Chinese responsibility for global issues.

Xi's stance on global affairs impacted positively on his OBOR initiatives. Now the relationship between China and Western Europe is at its highest level of cooperation since the Chinese revolution. Therefore China got a very positive response from Western Europe regarding OBOR initiatives.

So the conference on the Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation, which was held last May was participated in by representatives from all Western European countries including Swiss President Doris Leuthard, Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras, and Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni. Germany and France are not very enthusiastic about OBOR, but they look for business opportunities which would come from OBOR. In a nutshell, every country of the planet, even the USA private sector is keen to explore the cost and benefits of the enormously ambitious project. It is not surprising that the OBOR initiative has belted a wide range of countries from Asia and Africa to Europe and even South America.

Apart from heads of state, Executives of 61 international organizations attended the summit, including UN secretary general António Guterres, president of the World Bank Jim Yong Kim and managing director of the International Monetary Fund Christine Lagarde.

Leaders of ASEAN Countries including Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak, Vietnamese President Tran Dai Quang and Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen, participated in the OBOR summit and not surprisingly that they moved aside from their dispute with China on the South China Sea.

However, OBOR have been criticized for dominating tiny economies through long-term control of infrastructures, natural resources and associated land assets. China may control the OBOR countries market, labor and exports through transferring Chinese-own production units to those countries. Some also doubt the efficiency of Chinese Banks. Another allegation is that in the context of security measures the Chinese Liberation Army could dominate all the geographical routes of OBOR area and could intervene in internal affairs.

On the other side of coin, the OBOR countries will benefit from Chinese investment much more than from World Bank or IMF loans. So, the OBOR initiative is universally welcomed by both developed and developing countries. The Developing countries (Mao's Third World) have huge demands for infrastructure development and required funding, which they can easily obtain from the OBOR fund. Therefore the developing countries are very positive when they analyze the objectives of OBOR.

Historically, the Chinese Dragon used to shock the world when it woke up from hibernation. It woke up in 1949 from opium addiction and the Chinese Revolution (the first Dragon of New China) surprised the world. Again the Chinese Dragon hibernated in the 1960s following Mao Zedong's cultural- revolution. During the Cultural Revolution Mao Zedong closed the Chinese door for 10 years but surprisingly he initiated opening the door for imperialist 'puppet-tiger' USA through 'ping-pong' diplomacy. His step was very significant for awaking the new Chinese-Dragon.

The whole world was astonished again when the Chinese manufacturing dragon, the second dragon occupied the global market in 1980s. Nowadays, nobody can ignore Chinese commodities for even a single day.

The third dragon is Xi's OBOR initiatives, the world is waiting for the outcome of OBOR, which has already commenced its journey and roams across all the continents and oceans of the planet.

Sazzad Haider is a writer and filmmaker living in Bangladesh. He edits The Diplomatic Journal.

[May 13, 2018] Confusion over Netanyahu visit to Moscow and Putin passivity over recurrent Israeli strikes of Syria territory

Notable quotes:
"... Suppose there were no Russia in Syria, what would have happened? Libya would have been the fate. Most likely US would have recognized Golan Ht as Israel's. Oil harvesting companies would become more visible. Lebanon would have been in flames. Nothing else in ME. Some more terror attacks in EU may be. ..."
"... The real purpose of the Donald's missile-rattling is nothing more than helping Bibi Netanyahu keep his coalition of right wing religious and settler parties (Likud, United Torah Judaism, Shas, Kulanu and the Jewish Home) together, thereby maintaining his slim 61-vote majority in the 120-seat Knesset. ..."
"... Netanyahu's malefic political glue is the utterly false claim that Iran is an "existential threat" to Israel because it is hell-bent on getting the bomb. ..."
"... As a matter of record, of course, Netanyahu has been saying this since the early 1990s and he has always been wrong because there were never any facts or logic to support his blatant fear-mongering. ..."
May 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

Originally from: The Skripals will most likely never be allowed to talk, by The Saker - The Unz Review

There have been major developments this week, all of them bad, including Putin re-nominating Medvedev as his Prime Minister, and Bibi Netanyahu invited to Moscow to the Victory Day Parade in spite of him bombing Syria, a Russian ally, just on the eve of his visit. Once in Moscow, Netanyahu compared Iran to, what else, Nazi Germany . How original and profound indeed! Then he proceeded to order the bombing of Syria for a second time , while still in Moscow. But then, what can we expect from a self-worshiping narcissist who finds it appropriate to serve food to the Japanese Prime Minister in a specially made shoe ? The man is clearly batshit crazy (which in no way makes him less evil or dangerous). But it is the Russian reaction which is so totally disgusting: nothing, absolutely nothing. Unlike others, I have clearly said that it is not the Russian responsibility to "protect" Syria (or Iran) from the Israelis. But there is no doubt in my mind that Netanyahu has just publicly thumbed his nose at Putin and that Putin took it. For all my respect for Putin, this time he allowed Netanyahu to treat him just like Trump treated Macron. Except that in the case of Putin, he was so treated in his own capital. That makes it even worse.

[Interestingly, while whining about "Nazi Iran" Netanyahu did say something truly profound and true. He said " an important history lesson: when a murderous ideology emerges, one has to push back against it before it is too late". That is indeed exactly what most people across the world feel about Israel and its Zionist ideology but, alas, their voice is completely ignored by those who rule over them. So yes, it sure looks to me like it is becoming "too late" and that the consequences for our collective cowardice -- most of us are absolutely terrified from speaking the plain truth about our Zionist overlords - will cost us all a terrible price.]

Then, of course, there is Donald Trump pulling out of the so-called Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in spite of Iran's full compliance and in spite of the fact that the US does not have the authority to unilaterally withdraw from this multilateral agreement. But being the megalomaniac that he is, and not to mention the spineless lackey of the Israel Lobby, Trump ignored all that and thereby created further tensions between the US and the rest of the world whom the US will now blackmail and bully to try to force it to support the US in its rabid subservience to Israel. As for the Israelis, their "sophisticated" "strategy" is primitive to the extreme: first get Trump to create maximal tensions with Iran, then attack the Iranians in Syria as visibly and arrogantly as possible, bait the Iranians into a retaliation, then bellow "OI VEY!!!" with your loudest voice, mention the Holocaust once or twice, toss in a "6 million people" figure, and get the US to attack Syria.

How anybody can respect, nevermind admire, the Israelis is simply beyond comprehension. I sure can't think of a more contemptible, nasty, psychopathic gang of megalomanical thugs (and cowards) than the Israelis. Can you?

Nonetheless, it appears undeniable that the Zionists have enough power to simultaneously force not one, but two (supposed) superpowers to cave into their demands. Not only that, they have the power to do that while also putting these two superpowers on a collision course against each other. At the very least, this shows two things: the United States has completely lost its sovereignty and is now an Israeli protectorate. As for Russia, well, she is doing comparatively better, but the full re-sovereignization the Russian people have voted for when they gave their overwhelming support to Putin will not happen. A comment I read on a Russian chat put it: "Путин кинул народ -- мы не за Медведева голосовали" or " Putin betrayed the people -- we did not vote for Medvedev ". I am not sure that "betrayed the people" is fair, but the fact that he has disappointed a lot of people is, I think, simply undeniable.

It is still way too early to reach any conclusions at this point, and there are still way too many unknown variables, but I will admit that I am very worried and that for the first time in 4 years I am having major doubts about a fundamental policy decision by Putin. I sure hope that I am wrong. We will find out relatively soon. I just hope that this will not be in the form of a major war.

animalogic , May 11, 2018 at 8:14 am GMT

Paul Craig Roberts has repeatedly, for some years now, questioned Putin's apparent willingness to bend over backwards to placate his "partners" in the West.

PCR has maintained consistently that the West can not be trusted, that Russia's attempts at accommodation are taken as signs of weakness, acting only to embolden the West in its continuing vicious assaults.

Of course, Russia is playing for time: hoping that over time the strategic tables will increasing tip in its own & China's etc favour.
However, I suspect Saker & PCR are right: further submission will only lead to ever more vicious attacks. This is made all the worse by China's unwillingness to assert itself internationally as the 2nd largest economic power. (As if it can't see the US strategy, via tariffs etc to retard, if not destroy its future economic development)

One might have a tiny mite of hope that the West might ultimately act sanely. However, with the Zionists now pulling all the strings sanity is over & out.

Momus , May 11, 2018 at 8:20 am GMT
Netanyahu is regarded in Washington, and perhaps also Moscow, as almost Churchillian for his efforts to protect Israel and by extension the region and the US.

Who among us wants horizontal nuclear proliferation and a nuked up Iran armed with ICBM's?

Intelligent Dasein , Website May 11, 2018 at 9:45 am GMT
I've been
Intelligent Dasein , Website May 11, 2018 at 9:45 am GMT
I've been waiting to hear your take, Saker, since things are very bad indeed. I did not like what I saw happen on May 9th. Here is my very abbreviated take on it.

Bibi knows that he's pulled Trump fully into the Israeli orbit. He as much as told Putin he would attack Syria and dared him to do anything about it. If Putin responded with force, that would provide Israel and America with all the provocation they need to go all-in against Syria, Iran, and Russia, which is what the Ziocons were hoping to accomplish anyway. Putin, seeing all this and being the better man, can only sit back and take it. For now.

Bibi pissed in Putin's face and nobody could do a thing about it. But the whole world saw what happened and nobody with half a brain is on the side of the Israelis. I'm no longer upset that Putin didn't respond. He has admirable restraint and patience. The very hand of God Himself will move against the Israelis for all their crimes and treachery, and Putin will still be one of His chief instruments.

Robert Magill , May 11, 2018 at 10:01 am GMT

How anybody can respect, nevermind admire, the Israelis is simply beyond comprehension. I sure can't think of a more contemptible, nasty, psychopathic gang of megalomanical thugs (and cowards) than the Israelis. Can you?

Yes I can, Saker, you live among them.

Then, of course, there is Donald Trump pulling out of the so-called Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in spite of Iran's full compliance and in spite of the fact that the US does not have the authority to unilaterally withdraw from this multilateral agreement

.

See Club Orlov http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/ 5/10 regarding the 120+ billion of Iranian money we hold in dollars the dead broke US gets to keep by pulling out of the deal.

https://robertmagill.wordpress.com/2018/04/30/and-then-we-were-capitalists-or/

Rafael Martorell , May 11, 2018 at 10:23 am GMT
Good call. That is why we follow you Saker. It is the responsability of the american men to rebel and fix this goverment.

Im from cuba and the worst part here is that we have been delivered to be control and saked by people that we took the lunch from them when we where kids,in the school yard.

The Scalpel , Website May 11, 2018 at 11:32 am GMT
@utu

Agree. Putin seems to have rolled over and is crying uncle. Sad. Perhaps he is waiting until his new weapons are fully stockpiled before he makes any serious attempts to defend -- ultimately -- himself and his nation.

Without Russia putting some brakes on the Empire's unopposed oppressions, there is little hope for truth, justice, etc. in the world. There is no attempt to print the truth in national publications (that has been going on for a long time), and increasingly, little attempt to hide the fact that they are not printing the truth. The masses, instead of rebelling against obvious lies, seem to have internalized doublethink and do not have any significant impulse to rise up and defend their own interests. The propaganda is too thick, too strong, and too unopposed. Things look grim.

utu , May 11, 2018 at 11:45 am GMT
@Momus

Who among us wants horizontal nuclear proliferation and a nuked up Iran armed with ICBM's?

I think that would be a good check of Israel's power that could stabilize the ME and return to the path of development that existed there still till early 1980s when the process of destabilization began which was a part of the Yinon plan. If Israel remains the absolutely dominant power people in ME countries will be allowed to live in Hobbesian chaotic world only where they will be encouraged to engage in ethnic and sectarian fighting forever.

Anatoly Karlin , Website May 11, 2018 at 11:54 am GMT

How anybody can respect, nevermind admire, the Israelis is simply beyond comprehension.

Why not? Israel has been successfully expanding its territory, and getting two superpowers to cave into its demands (Saker's own words). That is pretty admirable in my book. This is certainly worth of both respect and admiration, even if one otherwise wishes to see Israel burn in a sea of atomic fire.

Anyhow, there's no reason for Russia to care. Increased American tensions with Iran will raise the price of oil. Also a reminder that the Kremlin couldn't care less about American murders of Russian mercenaries. So in what world will they concern themselves with Iranian ones.

A comment I read on a Russian chat put it: "Путин кинул народ -- мы не за Медведева голосовали" or "Putin betrayed the people -- we did not vote for Medvedev".

Ah yes, the сирийские братушки ("Syrian brothers"). Perhaps Western Russophiles consider them such, but few Russians do.

So The Saker is correct, Putin did not betray "his" people. (Well, he did, but that happened in 2014, not now).

utu , May 11, 2018 at 11:59 am GMT
@Intelligent Dasein

I'm no longer upset that Putin didn't respond. He has admirable restraint and patience. The very hand of God Himself will move against the Israelis for all their crimes and treachery, and Putin will still be one of His chief instruments.

This is your wishful thinking talking. You are still upset with Putin and you should be. May 9 parade with Netanyahu and bombing in Syria really looked very bad. To me it signified Putin's capitulation. At least it is the end game and Russia realized she was outplayed as she is apparently not ready to go all the way with the nuclear blackmail. Putin will stay put waiting for the stupid World Cup while Netanyahu will be escalating or some face saving measure will be found for Russia to withdraw from Syria or Russia will be invited to be a part of occupational government there.

Chinese looking from afar probably are disappointed but they never trusted Russian corrupt elite staying the course.

Passer by , May 11, 2018 at 6:20 pm GMT
Ex-Finance Minister Kudrin to head Accounts Chamber: http://tass.com/economy/1003887
anon [228] Disclaimer , May 11, 2018 at 10:28 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Suppose there were no Russia in Syria, what would have happened? Libya would have been the fate. Most likely US would have recognized Golan Ht as Israel's. Oil harvesting companies would become more visible. Lebanon would have been in flames. Nothing else in ME. Some more terror attacks in EU may be.

But would these have changed the internal dynamics within US ? No It would not. US would still be going down the path it has been and that path would still be what it is today at home and abroad.

Social anarchy, takeover of Democrats by non-whites , takeover of GOP by religious militant and bipartisan tax cutting for pro big business will continue unhindered . Is it good? No. But good for the destruction of the country. That is good . ME without USA would then look like no different until Russia also faces the same fate that has happened to Wiemar Germany and Egyptian/ Persian in the historical past.

ME Shoa will have to wait for few more decades

M7 , May 12, 2018 at 1:14 am GMT
How about Putin showing Bibi what is in store for who harms Russia ? I can see Putin talking in symbols.
jim76 , May 12, 2018 at 1:38 am GMT
on another note after seeing shabas putin next to netanyahu holding picture of a commie terrorist commissar let me say Saker the "ukronazis" have the stalinist russians pegged right thank God they left Russia some hope for a jew free state
https://news.antiwar.com/2018/05/11/putin-backs-off-giving-syria-s-300-systems-after-netanyahu-meeting/

De-escalation!

Realist , May 12, 2018 at 8:19 am GMT
@animalogic

Paul Craig Roberts has repeatedly, for some years now, questioned Putin's apparent willingness to bend over backwards to placate his "partners" in the West.

The problem isn't bending over backward .it's bending over forward.

Realist , May 12, 2018 at 8:22 am GMT
@Momus

Netanyahu is regarded in Washington, and perhaps also Moscow, as almost Churchillian for his efforts to protect Israel and by extension the region and the US.

Protecting Israel does nothing for the US.

El Dato , May 12, 2018 at 11:45 am GMT
https://theintercept.com/2018/05/11/american-saudi-arabia-weapons-deal-yemen-uae/

I wonder what Saudi Arabia and the UAE could want with 60'000 precision-guided munitions?

El Dato , May 12, 2018 at 12:21 pm GMT
Rather OT, but still. Probably worthy of Unz-topping:

The remarkable disappearing act of Israel's car-bombing campaign in Lebanon or: What we (do not) talk about when we talk about 'terrorism'

"With Sharon's backing, terrible things were done. I am no vegetarian, and I supported and even participated in some of the assassination operations Israel carried out. But we are speaking here about mass killing for killing's sake, to sow chaos and alarm, among civilians, too. Since when do we send donkeys carrying bombs to blow up in marketplaces?"

-- Mossad officer, quoted in Ronen Bergman's Rise and Kill First: The Secret History of Israel's Targeted Assassinations

Anomie.

AP , May 12, 2018 at 5:11 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

Ukrainian president and prime-minister are both Jews

Poroshenko being (half-) Jewish is fake news. Allegedly his father was Jewish and changed his surname. Actually this is his father:

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Порошенко,_Алексей_Иванович

The family originate from a Russian garrison-town on the Romanian border which had been populated by Ukrainians, Russian, Bulgarans, and no Jews.

There is even fake news that Parubiy is Jewish!

Both Poroshenko's parents are ethnic Ukrainians and he is an Orthodox Christian.

All the Ukrainian olygarchs, with the sole exception of Ahmetov, are Jews

Richest people in Ukraine:

Poroshenko -- Ukrainian
Akhmetov -- Tatar
Boholiubov -- Jewish
Tyhypko -- Ukrainian
Korban -- Jewish
Kosiuk -- Ukrainian
Zhevago -Russian
Novinsky -- Russian, major supporter of Russian Orthodox Church
Kolomoysky -- Jewish
Pinchuk -- Jewish
Tymoshenko- 1/2 Ukrainian, 1/4 Latvian, 1/4 Jewish (1/4 Jewish isn't Jewish)

So 4/11 are Jewish.

What is Russia's ratio?

Svigor , May 13, 2018 at 3:03 am GMT

[Interestingly, while whining about "Nazi Iran" Netanyahu did say something truly profound and true. He said "an important history lesson: when a murderous ideology emerges, one has to push back against it before it is too late". That is indeed exactly what most people across the world feel about Israel and its Zionist ideology but, alas, their voice is completely ignored by those who rule over them. So yes, it sure looks to me like it is becoming "too late" and that the consequences for our collective cowardice -- most of us are absolutely terrified from speaking the plain truth about our Zionist overlords - will cost us all a terrible price.]

Add to that the Jews' other genocidal favorites; diversity, multiculturalism, open borders, and anti-nationalism-fur-de-goyim.

Of course, Saker and his fellow cucked "Russian nationalists" don't add them, which is part of the reason that I'm indifferent to Russian nationalists anymore.

Then, of course, there is Donald Trump pulling out of the so-called Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in spite of Iran's full compliance and in spite of the fact that the US does not have the authority to unilaterally withdraw from this multilateral agreement.

Let's just say I'm not taking flatheads' word on this one.

In the meantime, I want to refocus on the Skripal case.

Only took you like a thousand words to get around to the point; congratulations.

Svigor , May 13, 2018 at 3:08 am GMT
@animalogic

This is made all the worse by China's unwillingness to assert itself internationally as the 2nd largest economic power. (As if it can't see the US strategy, via tariffs etc to retard, if not destroy its future economic development)

In reality the US strategy is now to be a bit less than a total globalist-run whorehouse. Which will probably be changed back with the next new president. China's main concern will be internal stability and security for the foreseeable future.

Svigor , May 13, 2018 at 3:13 am GMT
@Momus

Who among us wants horizontal nuclear proliferation and a nuked up Iran armed with ICBM's?

Who among us wants to admit that the ship has kinda sailed, given Israeli and Pakistani nukes?

Biff , May 13, 2018 at 4:58 am GMT
@Momus

Who among us wants horizontal nuclear proliferation and a nuked up Iran armed with ICBM's?

I would rather see Iran with nukes than Israel. The world would be a better place.

jilles dykstra , May 13, 2018 at 6:11 am GMT
One indeed can admire how a few thousand jews wield such power. I consider the rest of jewry as their victims.
But then, why not admire Hitler, he was on his own.
In both cases, disaster struck.

Jews still do not see that the present situation in the USA resembles the Weimar Republic. Henry Ford knew this quite well 'in the end most Jewish enterprises fail through overconfidence'. Possibly the first time was when they were, as is asserted, implicated in the murder of the Roman emperor. Rome twice sent big armies to Palestine. If Rome also invented Christianity to undermine them, it remains an interesting theory.

Daisy , May 13, 2018 at 6:11 am GMT
@Intelligent Dasein

I am inclined to agree with you Putin is smarter and would not/cannot fall for the bait. I believe history will confirm that he will save the human race from total annihilation that we possibly face in months/years to come. I was hoping that Trump would also be a force for good but my view is changing as each day passes. I do not understand the subservient position that the US takes with Israel. Yes there is an aggressive Zionist faction who control America and yes nobody dares speak out against them but there must come a time when enough is enough. Unfortunately if Trump meant it when he said he would drain the swamp he has been prevented from doing so.

Sam J. , May 13, 2018 at 6:55 am GMT
I wouldn't be too hard on Putin. I have a whacked theory that the Jews see the control of the USA slipping. 9-11 was a huge screw up and more and more people know. They had talked of moving to India or China but I don't think that will work. Neither will allow the same stunts they have pulled around Whites. I think the psychopathic Jews are breed to be a parasite on the White Man and it will never work elsewhere. So they're fucked. What can they do? Well if you're a psychopath then the best thing to do would be to start a China/Russia vs. USA nuke war and while this goes on nuke the Europeans, Arabs and maybe a little germ warfare thrown in for good measure. You sit in the middle and hunker down then start over.

Now this may be completely crazy but psychopaths are crazy by most peoples definition and the above is perfectly logical. Maybe Putin doesn't think of it in directly these terms like I laid out but he can't help but notice that these animals are off, a lot. The Jews position gets worse every single day. They will have no luck at all disarming the Americans and the internet, despite their censorship, can;t be completely closed down. Their media platform is failing. No one believes what they say.

We should get rid of the Jews. Peacefully if we can but by any means necessary. Jewish populations upon moving into another territory are in no way distinguishable from a tribe of psychopaths over the long term. No one wants to live with psychopaths.

El Dato , May 13, 2018 at 7:10 am GMT
@Svigor

Let's just say I'm not taking flatheads' word on this one.

Reminder that this is the task of the IAEA.

Which sadly doesn't have the permission to check Israel's nuclear 'nads.

Monty Ahwazi , May 13, 2018 at 7:33 am GMT
Mr Saker,
I agree with your first part of the article and if I may add, Putin is a corrupt capitalist much like his brother in the US, Trump! They do love wealth and power so much that they both are prime targets for corruption by the wealthy Z's. Now that they both have become pawns and subservient to a third party, the Z's are dancing in street for taking control of the 2 superpowers! The one point that I'd disagree with is about your concerns of the 2 super powers having to come closer to a potential military conflict! Since a third party has taken control of the two superpowers the 2 countries are NOT allowed to challenge each other militarily because there's zero or even less than zero benefits for the real people who are in charge!
chris , May 13, 2018 at 9:09 am GMT
@yurivku

It was a real stab in the back for our allies and that's really hard to see.

I definitely see yours and the Saker's arguments in making this point, however, personally, it all looks to me like act 1 of a bigger play. Like Trump, Putin seems to make his concessions up front, but there must, by necessity be a payback concession somewhere down the road; if their allowed survival itself isn't the original concession already.

The nature of the understanding between Russia and Israel, which has not been covered anywhere in the news, must ultimately not be so difficult to determine for journalists investigating it, if such journalists actually existed.

None of them has any interest in covering this, however, because: the west can't deviate from the onslaught of Russian vilification; Russia, doesn't want to show its vulnerabilities and Israel doesn't want to show its power.

But I suspect some of this will come to light as the next phase of operations against Iran.

El Dato , May 13, 2018 at 9:40 am GMT
David Stockman got it:

https://original.antiwar.com/David_Stockman/2018/05/11/the-deep-state-first-madness-on-both-ends-of-the-acela-corridor/

The mere threat of a military attack from the White House is madness because it arises from blatant lies that have absolutely nothing to do with US national security. Nor, for that matter, the security of any other country in the region, including Saudi Arabia and Israel.

The real purpose of the Donald's missile-rattling is nothing more than helping Bibi Netanyahu keep his coalition of right wing religious and settler parties (Likud, United Torah Judaism, Shas, Kulanu and the Jewish Home) together, thereby maintaining his slim 61-vote majority in the 120-seat Knesset.

Netanyahu's malefic political glue is the utterly false claim that Iran is an "existential threat" to Israel because it is hell-bent on getting the bomb.

But that's where the whopper comes in. It amounts to the ridiculous postulate that Iran is so fiendishly evil that if it is involved in the nuclear fuel cycle in any way, shape or form -- presumably even just operating a uranium mine -- it is only a matter of months before it will have a bomb.

As a matter of record, of course, Netanyahu has been saying this since the early 1990s and he has always been wrong because there were never any facts or logic to support his blatant fear-mongering.

But maybe this will blow the top on the economic fiction that's been going on since at leads Greenspan:

And that gets us to the madness at the other end of the Acela Corridor. On a day in which there was no good news whatsoever -- except that defense spending will go ever higher making the impending yield shock even worse -- the stock market rose by another 1%.

There is no mystery as to why, however. Honest price discovery and the discounting of real world information was totally destroyed by the Fed's monetary central planners years ago.

The only thing the casino discounts today is the trading points on the hourly, daily and weekly stock charts, and the presumption that both the fiscal and central banking branches of the state stand ready to "stimulate" whenever a serious breach occurs on the charts.

Nothing could be more mistaken -- and for reasons we will amplify upon in Part 2.

But the spoiler alert is this: The private sector is now swamped under record and unsustainable debt in both the household and business sectors. By succumbing to the most incendiary Deep State meme of all -- the Iranian Nuke lie -- the Donald has now made a public debt catastrophe an absolute certainty.

Pat Pappano , May 13, 2018 at 9:42 am GMT
It looks like a smackdown following the announcement of the superweapons. My thought on Putin's gloating show was why not keep these weaponse developments secret. Once the toothpaste is out of the tube you can't push it back in. One explanation may be that Putin thought he was in charge up to that point, but may have found out differently. I don't know if Russia has a Rothschild central bank. But agreed, it certainly looks bad. Plus Israel has hit Syria again. It all looks very bad.
Rabbitnexus , May 13, 2018 at 10:21 am GMT
@Momus

Don't be ridiculous,. Most of us would trust Iran with nukes even if they wanted them, which they do not, before the Zionist terrorist state. As the Saker said. "How anybody can respect, never mind admire, the Israelis is simply beyond comprehension. I sure can't think of a more contemptible, nasty, psychopathic gang of megalomaniacal thugs (and cowards) than the Israelis. "

ussia's objectives in Syria are not identical to their own? Are they not students of history?

I can only imagine the negotiations that went on in Russia among Netanyahu and company and the Russian government. I'm certain that Russia made assurances that it would not provide S-300 systems. What did Netanyahu have to pay for that? Perhaps assurances that he would stop pushing the Americans to bomb Syrian positions? I don't know. You have an imagination. Think of what Putin wants that Netanyahu could provide.

animalogic , May 13, 2018 at 11:42 am GMT
@Wally

I congratulate Mr Roberts for his courage.
"We must take it on faith alone."
I also agree with all his references to Israel. I loathe people who demand acts of faith (or self induced stupidity)

Iris , May 13, 2018 at 11:45 am GMT
@Pat Pappano

Yours is a very relevant point.

Russia has a national, sovereign, bank , led by a very competent economist, Elvira Nabiulina.

However, Russia's economy is not a match to its military status. Russia's entire GDP is lower than South Korea's, and is only slightly over twice the Pentagon's budget.

I think this is one of the reasons why President Putin must tread carefully: Russia's economy and internal stability are very vulnerable to external economic and financial pressure.

[May 13, 2018] Russia goals in Syria vs Iran and Hezbollah goals

May 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

Frankie P , May 13, 2018 at 11:00 am GMT

@utu

I am a supporter of the Resistance. I support resistance to American hegmony, the idea of a unipolar world with the rest of the nations following American dictates. I support resistance by American citizens against the ideas of American exceptionalism, ongoing foreign belligerence that benefits only the Military Industrial Complex and a certain "shitty little country in the Levant". I support resistance to the Zionist State, the ongoing crimes perpetrated by the Zionists against both the indigenous Palestinians in their own nation and against their neighboring Arab countries. I support American resistance to the stranglehold that supporters of Israel enjoy on the political system in the US.

Therefore, I support actors such as China and Russia in that they are cooperating to balance the unbridled hubris and exceptionalism of my country, providing a balance, a multi-polar future. Iran has become a lynchpin in this geopolitical competition, being positioned smack in the middle of a horizontal (OBOR/BRI initiative) and vertical (Russia's energy cooperation ideas) axis of the future.

I support Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon (Hizbollah) in their desire to remain independent, complete nations while supporting the Palestinians and fighting against the Zionists.

I am not so naive, however, to imagine that all the components of the resistance have similar goals in specific areas, in this case the Syrian situation. It is more than curious to see people saying that Putin "sold out" Syria and Iran. Do you not consider that Putin is acting for the benefit of the Russian nation and Russian interests, and not for the benefit of the rest of the resistance and their program? Do you not realize that without the Russian action in support of the Assad administration, he would certainly have lost his nation, a nation that would currently be a destabilized basket case, a series of fragments falling under control of various Sunnite head choppers, Kurdish militias, and government remnants?

It is important to consider the objectives of the resistance players in Syria, both short- and long-term. Russia's objectives in Syria have been to keep the nation united and integrated, under the control of the current legitimate government until democratic elections can be held at some future date. Russia wants to prevent a radical Sunni movement from threatening its southern flank, sending activists to radicalize the Sunni populations in its Caucasus region. Another more recent objective of Russia in this long-term goal is to keep the Americans out of Syria as much as possible, hoping that the cessation of military action and the return of Syrian government control will lead to removal of all US troops.

The Russian goals do NOT include the destruction of the Zionist State, the return of the Golan Heights to Syria, or the emancipation of the Palestinian people. It is very important to keep this in mind.

The goals of the providers of the boots on the ground that saved the Syrian government, namely Hizbollah, Iran, and the Iraqi Shiite militias, extend beyond the scope of the Russian goals, at least as far as long-term targets are concerned. These players certainly share the Russian goals of shoring up the Assad regime, destroying the Daesh forces, both mercenary and local, and returning Syria to the stable ally that it was. There are more goals for these forces, though, and these goals are clear for all to see.

Hizbollah wants the return of all Lebanese territory to Lebanon. Hizbollah, Iran, and Syria want the return of the Golan Heights to Syrian control. They rightfully see the stabilization of the situation in Syria, the massing of their forces, hardened, battle tested forces, as an excellent opportunity to engage Israel and take back territory.

They realize that the Syrian air defenses are much improved, and although Israel is still able to attack Syrian targets with impunity, there is more risk.

They have made plans and accumulated missiles, accurate, precision missiles that will be able to attack Israeli military positions in the Golan Heights, for example, the IDF electronic surveillance / EW positions on Mt. Hermon. These provide the Israelis with direct line-of-sight to most of the Damascus Plain. What would happen if Syria/Iran/Hizbollah used a precision missile strike to take out the Israeli's eyes, as well as the AD jammers and other equipment? All of these players also want a fair and just solution for the Palestinian people, the recovery of their ability to determine their own future on terms that are acceptable to them. I support these goals. I am not Putin.

Remember, an escalation in military action between the Israelis and the Syrian/Iranian/Hizbollah forces in southern Syria will be viewed by Russia as a greater risk for its own troops, and a greater chance that the US will interfere more forcefully in the country. The Russians want to avoid this. Do I like this? Of course not. Keep in mind my own views, and the forces of the resistance that I said that I support. Do I feel that the Russians sold out thier allies? No way. Do you really think that the generals of the IRGC and Hassan Nasrallah are unaware of the fact that R

[May 13, 2018] The Skripal Affair A Lie Too Far

"They are liars. And they know that they are liars," the late Egyptian writer and Nobel laureate Naguib Mahfouz once wrote: "And we know that they are liars. Even so, they keep lying...."
Notable quotes:
"... of a type developed by Russia ..."
"... The western modus operandi is the same in the Skripal case. The Tories rushed to conclusions and issued a 24-hour ultimatum to the Russian government to prove its innocence, or rather to admit its guilt. How was the so-called novichok delivered to London, did President Vladimir Putin authorise the attack, did Russia lose control of its stockpile? The prime minister and her foreign secretary had in effect declared Russia guilty as charged. No objective police investigation, no due process, no presumption of innocence, no evidence was necessary: it was "sentence first, verdict later", as the Red Queen declared in Alice in Wonderland . ..."
"... The Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, stated for the record that "as soon as the rumors, fed by the British leadership, about the poisoning of Skripal appeared, we immediately requested access to this [toxic] substance so that our experts could analyze it in accordance with the Convention on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons." After the British ambassador visited the Russian foreign ministry on 13 March to receive the formal Russian reply to the British ultimatum, the foreign ministry in Moscow issued a communiqué: " The [Salisbury] incident appears to be yet another crooked attempt by the UK authorities to discredit Russia. Any threat to take 'punitive' measures against Russia will meet with a response. The British side should be aware of that." The Russian government in fact proposed that the alleged poisoning of the Skripals should be examined by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in The Hague, according to procedures to which Britain itself had agreed when the OPCW was established in 1997. ..."
"... In the meantime, President Putin weighed in. "I guess any reasonable person [has] realised," he said, "that this is complete absurd[ity] and nonsense. [How could] anybody in Russia allow themselves such actions on the eve of the [Russian] presidential election and the football World Cup? This is unthinkable." In any police inquiry, investigators look for means, motive and opportunity. On these grounds did the trail of guilt lead to Moscow? ..."
"... The British PowerPoint presentation did not stop with its two main canards. It goes on to refer to "Russian malign activity" including, inter alia ..."
"... bourrage de crâne ..."
"... On 14 April, Minister Lavrov at a meeting in Moscow provided the answer. The substance used to attack the Skripals was laced with a substance know as BZ which incapacitates rather than kills and takes longer to work than an instant acting nerve agent which kills immediately. The United States, Britain and other NATO countries have developed this toxin and put it into service; the Soviet Union never did so. ..."
"... how did the perpetrators obtain the BZ toxin and bring it to Salisbury, did MI5 or MI6 authorise a false flag attack against the Skripals, or was it authorised by the British cabinet or by the prime minister alone? Or did British authorities lose control of their stockpiles? The trail of evidence does not lead to Moscow; it leads to London. ..."
"... A prima facie case can be made that the British government is lying about the Skripal affaire . Suspicion always falls upon those who act deviously, who hide behind clever turns of phrase and procedural and rhetorical smokescreens. British authorities are now saying that they have other top secret evidence, which explains everything, but unfortunately it can't be publicised. Nevertheless, the British government appears to have leaked it to the press. The Times published a story about a covert Russian lab producing nerve agents and it spread like wild fire across the Mainstream Media. The Daily Mirror put out a story about a Russian secret assassins' training manual. These stories are laughable. Is the Tory government that desperate? Is the British "everyman" that gullible? ..."
"... The secret assassin's manual reminds me of the 1924 "Zinoviev Letter", a counterfeit document produced by White Russians in Germany, purporting to demonstrate Soviet interference in British elections and planning for a socialist revolution. It was early days of "fake news". Parliamentary elections were underway in October 1924 and the Tories used the letter to attack the credibility of the Labour party. It was whipping up the red scare, and it worked like a charm. The Tories won a majority government. Soviet authorities claimed that the letter was bogus and they demanded a third party, independent investigation to ascertain the truth, just as the Russian government has done now. In 1924, the Tories refused, and understandably so, since they had a lot to hide. It took seventy-five years to determine that "the letter" was in fact counterfeit. ..."
"... déjà vu. ..."
"... "They are liars. And they know that they are liars," the late Egyptian writer and Nobel laureate Naguib Mahfouz once wrote: "And we know that they are liars. Even so, they keep lying...." ..."
"... The Tories are trying doggedly to maintain control of the narrative. Stakes are high for if it eventuates that the Tories have lied deliberately for political gain, at the risk of destabilising European, indeed world peace and security, the Tory government should be forced to resign and new elections, called. Then, the British electorate can decide whether it wants to be governed by reckless, mendacious Tory politicians who risk to provoke war against the Russian Federation. ..."
Apr 18, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

On 4 March 2018 it was a foggy day in southern England, and the MI6 Russian spy Sergei Viktorovich Skripal and his daughter Yulia stepped out for a stroll, stopped at the local pub in Salisbury, went to lunch at a nearby restaurant, and then took a walk in the park where they collapsed on a park bench. What had happened to them? Did they suffer from food poisoning? Or was Sergei Skripal involved in some dark affaire and the object of a hit by persons unknown, his daughter being an accidental victim?

The police received a call that day at 4:15pm reporting two people in distress. Emergency services were despatched immediately. The Skripals were rushed to hospital, while the local police launched an investigation. It began to look like attempted murder, but the police urged patience, saying it could take months before they might know what had happened and who, if anyone, was responsible.

The Conservative government decided that it did not need to wait for a police investigation. "The Russians" had tried to assassinate a former intelligence officer turned informant for MI6. Skripal went to jail for that, but was released four years later in an exchange of agents with the United States. Now, "the Russians," so the Tory hypothesis goes, wanted to settle old scores. Less than 24 hours after the incident in Salisbury, the British foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, suggested that the Russian government was the prime suspect in what looked like an attempt gone wrong to assassinate Sergei Skripal.

On 12 March the foreign secretary summoned the Russian ambassador to inform him that a nerve agent, A-234, had been used against the Skripals. How did you do it, Johnson wanted to know, or did the Russian government lose control of its stocks of chemical weapons? He gave the Russian ambassador 24 hours to respond. In point of fact, the Russian government does not possess any stockpiles of chemical weapons or nerve agents, having destroyed them all as of September 2017.

Later that day, the British prime minister, Theresa May, declared in the House of Commons that the Skripals, then said to be in a coma, were poisoned with "a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia " (italics added) called a 'novichok', a Russian word having various possible translations into English (beginner, novice, newcomer, etc.). May claimed that since the Soviet Union was known to have produced this chemical weapon, or nerve agent (also known as A-234), that it was " highly likely " that the Russian government was guilty of the attack on the Skripals.

Here is what the prime minister said in the House of Commons: "Either this was a direct act by the Russian State against our country. Or the Russian government lost control of this potentially catastrophically damaging nerve agent and allowed it to get into the hands of others." The hurried British accusations were redolent of those in 2014 alleging Russian government complicity or direct involvement in the shooting down of Malaysian Airlines MH 17 over the Ukraine. Within hours of the destruction of MH 17, the United States and its vassals, including Britain, accused Russia of being responsible.

The western modus operandi is the same in the Skripal case. The Tories rushed to conclusions and issued a 24-hour ultimatum to the Russian government to prove its innocence, or rather to admit its guilt. How was the so-called novichok delivered to London, did President Vladimir Putin authorise the attack, did Russia lose control of its stockpile? The prime minister and her foreign secretary had in effect declared Russia guilty as charged. No objective police investigation, no due process, no presumption of innocence, no evidence was necessary: it was "sentence first, verdict later", as the Red Queen declared in Alice in Wonderland .

On 13 March the Russian embassy informed the Foreign Office that the Russian Federation was not involved in any way with the Salisbury incident. We will not respond to an ultimatum, came the reply from Moscow. The eloquent Russian foreign ministry spokesperson, Mariia Zakharova, characterised the British démarche as a "circus show". Actually, Foreign Office clerks must have told Boris Johnson that Russia would not respond to such an ultimatum so that it was a deliberate British attempt to provoke a negative Russian reply.

The Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, stated for the record that "as soon as the rumors, fed by the British leadership, about the poisoning of Skripal appeared, we immediately requested access to this [toxic] substance so that our experts could analyze it in accordance with the Convention on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons." After the British ambassador visited the Russian foreign ministry on 13 March to receive the formal Russian reply to the British ultimatum, the foreign ministry in Moscow issued a communiqué: " The [Salisbury] incident appears to be yet another crooked attempt by the UK authorities to discredit Russia. Any threat to take 'punitive' measures against Russia will meet with a response. The British side should be aware of that." The Russian government in fact proposed that the alleged poisoning of the Skripals should be examined by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in The Hague, according to procedures to which Britain itself had agreed when the OPCW was established in 1997.

On 14 March the British government expelled 23 Russian diplomats, and a few days later the Russian side expelled 23 British diplomats and shuttered the offices of the British Council in Russia. At the same time, the British appealed to their allies and to the European Union to show solidarity by expelling Russian diplomats. Twenty-eight countries did so, though for most it was one or two expulsions, tokenism to appease the British. Other countries -- for example, Austria, Bulgaria, Greece, Portugal -- refused to join the stampede. Going over the top, the United States expelled sixty diplomats and closed the Russian consulate in Seattle. The Russians responded in kind with sixty expulsions and the closure of the US consulate in St. Petersburg. Momentum seemed to be building toward a major confrontation. The British prime minister even alluded to the possibility of military action .

In the meantime, President Putin weighed in. "I guess any reasonable person [has] realised," he said, "that this is complete absurd[ity] and nonsense. [How could] anybody in Russia allow themselves such actions on the eve of the [Russian] presidential election and the football World Cup? This is unthinkable." In any police inquiry, investigators look for means, motive and opportunity. On these grounds did the trail of guilt lead to Moscow?

Momentum is sometimes like a balloon, it blows up and then it suddenly bursts. The British case against Russia began to fall apart almost from the time it was made. In late March the Russian newspaper Kommersant leaked a British PowerPoint presentation sent to eighty embassies in Moscow. It asserted, inter alia , that the British chemical weapons facility at Porton Down had positively identified the substance, which allegedly poisoned the Skripals, as a Novichok, "developed only by Russia". Both these statements are false. On 3 April Porton Down stated publicly that it could not determine the origin of the substance that poisoned the Skripals. It also came out that the formula for making a so-called novichok was published in a book by a Russian dissident and chemist, Vil Mirzayanov, who now lives in the United States. You can buy his book (published in 2008), which includes the formula, on Amazon.com . In fact, any number of governments or smart chemists or even bright undergraduate chemistry students with the proper facilities could make this nerve agent. Amongst those governments having access to the original formula are Britain and the United States. The Russian embassy in London noted in a published report that "neither Russia nor the Soviet Union has ever developed an agent named 'Novichok'." The report further stated that "While Soviet scientists did work on new types of chemical poisons, the word 'Novichok' was introduced in the West in mid-1990s to designate a series of new chemical agents developed there on the basis of information made available by Russian expat researchers. The British insistence to use the Russian word 'Novichok' is an attempt to artificially link the substance to Russia."

The British PowerPoint presentation did not stop with its two main canards. It goes on to refer to "Russian malign activity" including, inter alia , the "invasion" of Georgia in 2008, the "destabilisation" of the Ukraine and the shooting down of MH17 in 2014, and interference in the US elections in 2016. All of these claims are audacious lies , easily deconstructed and unpacked. The referenced events are also unrelated to the Salisbury incident and were raised in an attempt to smear the Russian Federation. In fact, the British PowerPoint slides represent vulgar propaganda, bourrage de crâne , as preposterous as any seen during the Cold War.

As Minister Lavrov pointed out, the Skripal case should have gone for resolution to the OPCW in The Hague. Russia would then be directly involved in the investigation and would have access to the alleged toxin, and other evidence to try to determine what had happened and who were the perpetrators. The British government at first refused to go to the OPCW, and then when it did, refused to authorise the Russian government to have access to the alleged substance, which had sickened the Skripals. That idea is "perverse", said British authorities. Actually, not at all, it is the procedure laid out in OPCW statutes, to which Britain itself agreed but has refused to respect. When the Russian representative at the OPCW proposed a resolution to the executive council, that it should respect its own statutes, he could not obtain the required vote of approval. The British were attempting to hijack the OPCW as a potential tool against the Russian Federation. Thus far, that stratagem has not worked. On 12 April the OPCW released a report stating that it had "confirm[ed] the findings of the United Kingdom relating to the identity of the toxic chemical that was used in Salisbury ." The report said nothing about the origin of the so-called "toxic chemical". The British accusation against Russia thus remained unsubstantiated.

What I could not understand when I read the OPCW communiqué, is why the Skripals were still alive. The OPCW says that the toxic chemical used against the Skripals was "of high purity". Was it a nerve agent? Oddly, the OPCW published report avoids a straight answer. If it was a nerve agent, being of "high purity," it should have been instant acting and killed the Skripals almost immediately. Yet both have survived at the time of this writing. Something does not make sense. Of course, there could be a simple explanation for this puzzling mystery.

On 14 April, Minister Lavrov at a meeting in Moscow provided the answer. The substance used to attack the Skripals was laced with a substance know as BZ which incapacitates rather than kills and takes longer to work than an instant acting nerve agent which kills immediately. The United States, Britain and other NATO countries have developed this toxin and put it into service; the Soviet Union never did so. Traces of A-234 were also identified, but according to experts, such a concentration of the A-234 agent would cause death to anyone affected by it. "Moreover," according to the Russian embassy in London , "considering its high volatility, the detection of this substance in its initial state (pure form and high concentration) is extremely suspicious as the samples have been taken several weeks since the poisoning," Could Britsh authorities have tampered with the samples? The public OPCW report gives no details, and refers only to a "toxic chemical". Nor did the report say that the OPCW had submitted specimens of the substance to a well-known Swiss lab , which promptly reported back its surprising results. The OPCW authorities thus lied when they said that the tests "confirmed" the British identify of the "toxic chemical". Unless Porton Down knew that the substance used against the Skripals was a BZ type toxin, and so informed the OPCW, or, unless the Tory government lied in claiming publicly that it was a novichok nerve agent. The British attempted hijacking of the OPCW has compromised its independence, for the public report issued on 12 April is misleading. Moreover, since the BZ toxin is made by the US, Britain and other NATO countries, it begs the same questions, which the Tories put to Moscow: how did the perpetrators obtain the BZ toxin and bring it to Salisbury, did MI5 or MI6 authorise a false flag attack against the Skripals, or was it authorised by the British cabinet or by the prime minister alone? Or did British authorities lose control of their stockpiles? The trail of evidence does not lead to Moscow; it leads to London.

A prima facie case can be made that the British government is lying about the Skripal affaire . Suspicion always falls upon those who act deviously, who hide behind clever turns of phrase and procedural and rhetorical smokescreens. British authorities are now saying that they have other top secret evidence, which explains everything, but unfortunately it can't be publicised. Nevertheless, the British government appears to have leaked it to the press. The Times published a story about a covert Russian lab producing nerve agents and it spread like wild fire across the Mainstream Media. The Daily Mirror put out a story about a Russian secret assassins' training manual. These stories are laughable. Is the Tory government that desperate? Is the British "everyman" that gullible?

The secret assassin's manual reminds me of the 1924 "Zinoviev Letter", a counterfeit document produced by White Russians in Germany, purporting to demonstrate Soviet interference in British elections and planning for a socialist revolution. It was early days of "fake news". Parliamentary elections were underway in October 1924 and the Tories used the letter to attack the credibility of the Labour party. It was whipping up the red scare, and it worked like a charm. The Tories won a majority government. Soviet authorities claimed that the letter was bogus and they demanded a third party, independent investigation to ascertain the truth, just as the Russian government has done now. In 1924, the Tories refused, and understandably so, since they had a lot to hide. It took seventy-five years to determine that "the letter" was in fact counterfeit.

The Tories are again acting as if they have something to hide. It is déjà vu. Will it take seventy-five years to get at the truth? Are there any honest British cops, judges, civil servants ready to reveal the truth?

There is other evidence to suggest that the British narrative on the Salisbury incident is bogus. The London Metropolitan Police have sought to prevent any outside contact with the Skripals. They have taken away a recovered Yulia Skripal to an unknown location. They have until now denied Russian consular authorities access to a Russian citizen in violation of British approved consular agreements. Is there any chapter of international law, which the British government now respects? British authorities have denied access to Yulia Skripal's family in Russia; they have denied a visa to Yulia's cousin, Viktoria, to visit with her. Are British spooks grooming Yulia, briefing her to stay on the Tory narrative? Is she being manipulated like some kind of Manchurian Candidate? Have they induced her to betray her country in exchange for emoluments, a new identity in the United States, a house, a BMW and money? Are they playing upon her loyalty to her father? Based on a statement attributed to Yulia by the London Metropolitan Police, it begins to look that way . Or, is the message, sounding very British and official, quite simply a fake? The Russian embassy in London suspects that it is. What is certain is that British authorities are acting as though they have something to hide. Even German politicians, amongst others, have criticised the British rush to indict Russia. Damage control is underway. Given all the evidence, can any person with reasonable abilities to think critically believe anything the Tories are saying about the Salisbury affair?

"They are liars. And they know that they are liars," the late Egyptian writer and Nobel laureate Naguib Mahfouz once wrote: "And we know that they are liars. Even so, they keep lying...." Mahfouz was not writing about the British, but all the same, he could have been. Are not his well-known lines apposite to the present government in London?

The Tories are trying doggedly to maintain control of the narrative. Stakes are high for if it eventuates that the Tories have lied deliberately for political gain, at the risk of destabilising European, indeed world peace and security, the Tory government should be forced to resign and new elections, called. Then, the British electorate can decide whether it wants to be governed by reckless, mendacious Tory politicians who risk to provoke war against the Russian Federation.

Tags: OPCW UK May

[May 13, 2018] The Skripals will most likely never be allowed to talk by The Saker

Where are the Scripals? How are they feeling these days? (68 days and counting), Are they alive ?
Notable quotes:
"... To clarify: Sergei Skripal has been suspected of playing a role in concocting the fake "Steele dossier" that helped launch the Russiagate NARRATIVE. ..."
"... The "dossier" was also used by Comey's FBI to obtain FISA warrants to monitor Trump campaign communications. (The NSA had intercepts all along but Comey's FBI needed a "provenance.") ..."
"... Like the Hound of the Baskervilles, the absence of questions in the British media speaks volumes. "The truth is the first casualty in a war." ..."
May 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

... ... ...

In the meantime, I want to refocus on the Skripal case. There is one outright bizarre thing which I initially dismissed, but which really is becoming disturbing: the fact that the Brits are apparently holding Sergei and Iulia Skripal incommunicado. In other words, they have been kidnapped.

There was this one single telephone call between Iulia Skripal and her sister, Victoria, in which Iulia said that she was okay (she was clearly trying to reassure Victoria) but it was clear that she could not speak freely. Furthermore, when Victoria mentioned that she would want to visit Iulia, the latter reply 'nobody will give you a visa'. After that – full silence. The Russian consulate has been making countless requests to have a visit, but all that the Brits have done since is have Scotland Yard post a letter which was evidently not written by Iulia and which said " I have access to friends and family, and I have been made aware of my specific contacts at the Russian Embassy who have kindly offered me their assistance in any way they can. At the moment I do not wish to avail myself of their services, but, if I change my mind I know how to contact them ". What friends?! What family?! Nonsense!

Her sister tried to contact her many times through various channels, including official ones, and then in total despair, she posted the following message on Facebook:

" My darling sister, Yulia! You are not communicating with us, and we don't know anything about you and Sergey Victorivich. I know that I have no right to interfere in your affairs without asking your permission, but I worry too much. I worry about you and your dad. I also worry about Nuar. [Nuar is Yulia Skrial's dog, whom she left to stay at a kennel center, while she was traveling to the UK.] He is now at the dog hotel, and they want to get paid. We have to decide something what to do with him. I am ready to take him and to take care of him until you come back home. Besides Nuar, I am concerned about your apartment and your car. Nothing has been decided about their safety and maintenance. We can help with all that, but I need your power of attorney in my or my sister Lena's name. If you think that all of these is important, draw up a power of attorney form in a Russian consulate in any country. If you won't do that, we will understand and won't interfere in your affairs.

Vika "

No reply ever came.

I just entered the following query into Google: " Skripal ". April 10 th has an entry saying that she was released from the hospital. That is the most recent one I have found. I looked on Wikipedia , the same thing, there is nothing at all.

I have to admit that when I first heard the Russian complaints I figured that this was no big deal. I thought " the Brits told the Skripals that Putin tried to poison them, they are probably afraid, and possibly still sick from whatever it is which made them sick, but the Brits would never outright kidnap two foreign citizens, and most definitely not in such a public way ".

I am not so sure anymore.

First, let's get the obvious one out of the way: the fear for the security of the Skripals. That is utter nonsense. The Brits can organize a meeting between а Russian diplomat in the UK at a highly protected UK facility, with tanks, SAS Teams on the standby, helicopters in the air, bombers, etc. That Russian diplomat could speak to them through bullet-proof glass and a phone. And, since the Russians are all so dangerous, he can be searched for weapons. All which the Skripals need to do is to tell him/her "thank you, your services are not needed". Conversation over. But the Brits refuse even that.

But let's say that the Skripals are so totally terrified of the evil Russians, that they categorically refuse. Even by video-conference. It would be traumatic for them, right? Okay.

What about a press conference then?

Even more disturbing is that, at least to my knowledge, nobody in the western corporate media is asking for an interview with them. Snowden can safely speak from Russia and address even large conferences, but the Skripals can't speak to anybody at all?

But here is the worst part of this: it has been two months already since the Skripals are held in total secrecy by the UK authorities. Two months, that is 60 days. Ask any specialist on interrogation or any psychologist what kind of effect 60 days of "specialized treatment" can do to a person.

I am not dismissing the Russian statements about "kidnapping" anymore. What I see is this: on substance, the Skripal false flag has crashed and burned, just like MH17 or the Douma chemical attack, but unlike MH17 or Douma, the Skripals are two witnesses whose testimony has the potential to result in a gigantic scandal, not just for the May government, but for all those spineless Europeans who showed "solidarity" with Britain. In other words, the Skripals will probably never be allowed to speak freely: they must either be killed or totally brainwashed or disappeared. Any other option would result in a scandal of planetary magnitude.

I can't pretend like my heart goes out to Sergei Skripal: the man was an officer who gave an oath and who then betrayed his country to the British (he was a British agent, not a Russian one as the press writes). Those holding him today are his former bosses. But Iulia? She is completely innocent and as of April 5 th (when she called her sister Victoria), she was clearly in good health and with a clear mind. Now she has been disappeared and I don't know which is worse, the fact that she might never reappear or that she might one day reappear following months of British "counseling". As for her father, he paid for his betrayal and he too deserves a better fate than being poisoned, used and then disappeared.

In the big scheme of things (the Zionists war against our entire planet), two individuals like Sergei and Iulia Skripal might not matter. But I think that the least we can do is to remember them and their plight.

This also begs the question of what kind of society we live in. I am not shocked by the fact that the British state would resort to such methods (they have always used them). I am shocked that in a so-called western "democracy" with freedom, pluralism and "European values" (whatever that means) the Brits could get away with this.

How about some "solidarity" with the Skripals – you, Europeans?!

Bigly , May 11, 2018 at 4:29 am GMT

Victoria is not Yulia's sister.

Other than that, I share your sentiments regarding Putin.

Eagle Eye , May 11, 2018 at 8:18 am GMT
As noted on this site some three weeks ago, former British ambassador Craig Murray suggested some time ago that Sergei and Yulia Skripal were most likely murdered by Western secret services in order to keep the "Russiagate" fiction (somewhat) alive.

Sergei cannot win – even if he was NOT involved in Russiagate, murdering him creates flexibility to hang the story on him without contradiction. Yulia is icing on the cake – "Surely Her Majesty's Government wouldn't murder a pretty girl like Yulia!"

Rather bizarrely, it appears appears that all premises connected with the Skripals are to be demolished, purely to protect the public, you understand.

Eagle Eye , May 11, 2018 at 1:50 pm GMT
@Eagle Eye

To clarify: Sergei Skripal has been suspected of playing a role in concocting the fake "Steele dossier" that helped launch the Russiagate NARRATIVE.

The "dossier" was also used by Comey's FBI to obtain FISA warrants to monitor Trump campaign communications. (The NSA had intercepts all along but Comey's FBI needed a "provenance.")

Whether Skripal was actually involved in inventing the dossier or not, his absence will be used to milk the narrative afloat a little longer.

Like the Hound of the Baskervilles, the absence of questions in the British media speaks volumes. "The truth is the first casualty in a war."

aleksandar , May 11, 2018 at 5:11 pm GMT
Not a good idea to mix Putin/Satanahyu and the Skripals case. The Skripal deserve one article. Even if they are probably dead.
"Western values "
Antiwar7 , May 11, 2018 at 9:41 pm GMT
@Bigly

You're right. but to explain the error in English: She's her first cousin, and in Russian, cousins are referred to as brother and sister.

El Dato , May 11, 2018 at 9:42 pm GMT
This is going Reservoir Dogs faster than expected.

My popcorn is ready!

Apparently Americans are the usual thre-colored dumbfucks and have no clue what's going on.Grunt noises is all they still understand.

Democrats' lead melting ahead of midterms as Trump turns hawkish

John Brunner was a genius.

JR , May 12, 2018 at 11:28 am GMT
Russia should request a third party for instance a well known British public figure as an intermediary to contact Skripals on behalf of Russia. The UK wil not be able to claim that such figure will put undue pressure on the Skripals and would be forced to either facilitate contact or be exposed as actually kidnapping the Skripals.

Potential intermediaries Corbyn, Galloway, UN representative, Tulsi Gabbard. There are numerous candidates.

Sean , May 12, 2018 at 5:58 pm GMT

In other words, the Skripals will probably never be allowed to speak freely: they must either be killed or totally brainwashed or disappeared. Any other option would result in a scandal of planetary magnitude.

That certainly explains why Britain did not kill them with Novichok.

Cyrano , May 12, 2018 at 6:59 pm GMT
The British are working hard on new super-secret identities for the Scripals. They are so secret that even the Scripals would not be allowed to know them. Technically, the British could tell the Scripals their new identities, but then they would have to kill them, in order to keep them secret.
Eagle Eye , May 13, 2018 at 7:42 am GMT
@Svigor

Not sure what exactly you mean by "pending."

Do you really believe the Skripal's are still alive? Can we expect to see them in public?

The traditional rule is that a person may be declared dead after one year if he hasn't been heard of from people he would normally communicate with.

Saffer , May 13, 2018 at 10:57 am GMT
It is clear that every person including The Saker who write about the Skripals and Russian affairs do not have the in-depth knowledge of John Helmer the longest serving independent western journalist in Moscow. In this post by John Helmer dated 23/03/2018

http://johnhelmer.net/the-skripal-case-goes-to-court-for-the-first-time-new-uncertainties-for-the-british-and-russian-governments/#more-18920

he writes about the British Court of Protection's findings.

Below are two excerpts (in parenthesis his comments) but I implore you to read the whole article as well as other postings on the potential appointments in Putins new government.

"British High Court Justice David Williams has issued the first court adjudication of evidence presented by the British Government of what happened to Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal when they succumbed to poisoning in Salisbury on March 4. Following three days of closed-door hearings this week in London, the judge issued a ruling for publication yesterday."

"Representing the Skripals, Vikram Sachdeva QC told the judge "that in this case at present it did not appear practicable or appropriate to seek the views of others who might be interested in the welfare of Mr Skripal (his mother perhaps) or Ms Skripal (perhaps a fiancé).

Iris , May 13, 2018 at 11:26 am GMT
" the Skripals are two witnesses whose testimony has the potential to result in a gigantic scandal, not just for the May government, but for all those spineless Europeans who showed "solidarity" with Britain . "

Based on recent history, one can safely bet that there will be no scandal.

The bombing of the Lockerbie plane was an evil crime that took 270 innocent lives, and was attributed by the official UK/US intelligence centres to the former Libyan government under late President Gaddafi.

When this government came under NATO attack in 2011, its foreign minister Moussa Koussa defected and sought refuge in London. He had previously been head of Libyan secret services for 15 years (!!!), and as such, would have organised and supervised the Lockerbie "terror" attack.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/mar/31/moussa-koussa-foreign-minister-trial

What did the UK/US governments do with him? Send him to trial at the Hague? Of course not. He was sent to a safe heaven somewhere in the NATO proxy EAU.

Nobody cares about the victims of false flag attacks, quite the contrary: the less investigations, the more efficient the false flag.

[May 11, 2018] Protecting Israel Is Their Full-Time Job by Philip Giraldi

It is unclear to what extent Israel is given unfairly favorable treatment and to what extent it is the most useful allies (along with KSA) of f the USA in the middle East securing energy supplies to the according to Carter doctrine,
Notable quotes:
"... The latest outrage against the First Amendment comes from South Carolina, the home state of the arch-Zionist poseur and United Nations Ambassador extraordinary Nikki Haley. A new hate speech law was inserted in the state's recently approved annual budget. ..."
"... The legislation borrows from the U.S. State Department definition of anti-Semitism, which proscribes speech that "demonizes" or applies "double standards" to Israel "by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation" as anti-Semitic. ..."
"... While the State Department definition is a guideline, the South Carolina's specific inclusion of it in legislation makes explicit that criticism of Israel as hate speech can be subject to criminal penalties. It also is binding on all the states universities and educational institutions. ..."
"... The law was promoted by Alan Clemmons, a Mormon legislator who has led numerous delegations to Israel and who has been described as "Israel's biggest supporter in a U.S. state legislature." ..."
"... Normally foreign governments have what is referred to as sovereign immunity which prevents their being sued, but that all changed in the U.S. with the passage of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) of 2016, which permitted individual lawsuits in any federal court involving any government's alleged participation in international acts of "terrorism." This has resulted in a series of multi-billion-dollar lawsuits against Iran, the Palestinians and also Saudi Arabia. Many of the lawsuits have Israeli citizens as plaintiffs, suing in American courts. ..."
"... Indeed, it is far more plausible that Israel was involved in 9/11 than was Iran. Israel operated a massive spying operation directed against Arabs in the U.S. and several of its intelligence officers were seen in Jersey City to be filming themselves while dancing and cavorting in delight as the twin towers went down, suggesting some prior knowledge. ..."
"... But, of course, no one would be allowed to sue Israel in an American court. The 9/11 Commission failed to examine the case against Israel even though it allegedly sought to compile a "full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding" the attacks, but it did investigate the possible ties to Iran. It found the only evidence of any Iranian support to consist of certain 9/11 hijackers travelling through Iran on their way to Afghanistan without having their passports stamped. ..."
"... Israel is a fiscal off-shore through passage for decanting public funds to private hands, a physical vault to hold assets, reinsert assets into the global financial system. ..."
"... As imprecise as can be, but to popularize the situation: the before Castro, Cuba Mafia save haven. ..."
"... This is partly the explanation of "military capitalism" deployed rather recently in insider circles to capture an existing situation where the US is left to prop up it's financial make believe using military show of. That is partly why "war" is so publicly discussed, actions are leaked, this contrary to what real war requires, deep stealth. ..."
"... American "foreign aid" is prohibited from being given to any country that has not signed the "Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty" or refuses to abide by "International Atomic Energy Agency" (IAEA) guidelines regarding its nuclear devices. Guess what?? Israel does not abide by EITHER and still gets the majority of American "foreign aid". ..."
"... There are forty or so congressmen, senators and thousands of high-level policy "wonks" infecting the U S government who hold "dual citizenship" with Israel. Such dual citizenship only reinforces "split loyalty"–NOT upholding the interests of the United States, and must be strictly prohibited. ..."
"... Those holding dual citizenship must be required to renounce said foreign citizenship. Refusal to do so should result in immediate deportation with loss of American citizenship. Present and former holders of dual citizenship should not be allowed to serve in any American governmental capacity. ..."
May 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

Time to question the loyalty of some legislators and judges

I have a number of times discussed how the U.S. and other governments have legislated and otherwise promoted Jewish and Israeli interests in ways that most people would find unacceptable if they were aware of what exactly has been going on. Here in the United States, special Medicare coverage and immigration status have been granted, often concealed in other legislation, to benefit holocaust survivors and Russian Jews seeking to emigrate. State legislatures and the U.S. Congress have meanwhile been working hard to pass legislation that blocks and even criminalizes the non-violent Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) protests against Israeli behavior while universities have been banning anti-Israel demonstrators and groups on campus because they apparently are offensive to the sensitivities of some Jewish students.

The latest outrage against the First Amendment comes from South Carolina, the home state of the arch-Zionist poseur and United Nations Ambassador extraordinary Nikki Haley. A new hate speech law was inserted in the state's recently approved annual budget.

The legislation borrows from the U.S. State Department definition of anti-Semitism, which proscribes speech that "demonizes" or applies "double standards" to Israel "by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation" as anti-Semitic.

While the State Department definition is a guideline, the South Carolina's specific inclusion of it in legislation makes explicit that criticism of Israel as hate speech can be subject to criminal penalties. It also is binding on all the states universities and educational institutions.

The law was promoted by Alan Clemmons, a Mormon legislator who has led numerous delegations to Israel and who has been described as "Israel's biggest supporter in a U.S. state legislature."

Supporters of the Bill of Rights have been universally opposed to the bill, but pro-Israel groups have praised the initiative and are expecting a "new wave" of legislation all across the United States blocking any criticism of the self-described Jewish State. The Brandeis Center has enthused

"This bill gives South Carolina the tools to protect Jewish students' and all South Carolina students' right to a learning environment free of unlawful discrimination. We are hoping this momentous step will result in another national wave to, once and for all, begin defeating rising anti-Semitism."

Other states will undoubtedly follow the South Carolina lead, so it would appear that any criticism of Israel will become illegal in the public square if the many friends of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have their way. And they generally do get what they want from the federal level all the way down to the states and local communities, so be prepared.

Israel also is regularly exploiting the American legal system to punish countries that it has defined as its enemies. Its government sponsored lawfare organization called Shurat Hadin has initiated a number of lawsuits in U.S. courts to punish Palestinians and Iranians. Ironically, it is currently seeking to demonstrate that Hamas is committing war crimes in Gaza , where Israel has been using army snipers to kill unarmed demonstrators.

Other lawsuits filed on behalf of mostly Jewish Americans in U.S. courts seeking compensation from Iranians and Palestinians are also pending, with the tribunals in Manhattan particularly prone to being sympathetic to the plaintiffs. Last week, at the Federal Court for the Southern District of Manhattan, Judge George Daniels issued a default judgment relating to his 2011 determination that Iran and Hezbollah materially and directly supported al-Qaeda in the 9/11 attacks and are legally responsible for damages to the hundreds of family members of victims who are named in the case. The judge ordered Iran to pay $6 billion in compensation – "$12,500,000 per spouse, $8,500,000 per parent, $8,500,000 per child, and $4,250,000 per sibling" to the families and estates of the deceased. A 4.96 annual interest rate will also be applied to the amount, starting from September 11, 2001 to the date of the judgement."

Normally foreign governments have what is referred to as sovereign immunity which prevents their being sued, but that all changed in the U.S. with the passage of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) of 2016, which permitted individual lawsuits in any federal court involving any government's alleged participation in international acts of "terrorism." This has resulted in a series of multi-billion-dollar lawsuits against Iran, the Palestinians and also Saudi Arabia. Many of the lawsuits have Israeli citizens as plaintiffs, suing in American courts.

Though the lawsuit claimed, and Judge Daniels agreed, that Tehran had supported the 9/11 hijackers with training and other assistance, most authorities would question that judgement. Many would consider it to be ludicrous as Iranian Shi'ites were considered to be kill-on-sight heretics by al-Qaeda. The idea that Iran was somehow involved in 9/11 is in reality a ridiculous Israel Lobby contrivance that was first floated in 2015 by ex-CIA Director James Woolsey, a renowned Zionist stooge and conspiracy theorist who is viewed by many as not completely in possession of all his marbles.

Indeed, it is far more plausible that Israel was involved in 9/11 than was Iran. Israel operated a massive spying operation directed against Arabs in the U.S. and several of its intelligence officers were seen in Jersey City to be filming themselves while dancing and cavorting in delight as the twin towers went down, suggesting some prior knowledge.

But, of course, no one would be allowed to sue Israel in an American court. The 9/11 Commission failed to examine the case against Israel even though it allegedly sought to compile a "full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding" the attacks, but it did investigate the possible ties to Iran. It found the only evidence of any Iranian support to consist of certain 9/11 hijackers travelling through Iran on their way to Afghanistan without having their passports stamped.

In his Farewell Address President George Washington warned that

" a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation. As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot."

If one believes that deference to the special foreign interest of one powerful and wealthy segment of the population is appropriate in a democracy then I suppose the Jewish/Israeli pander has to be considered acceptable. I happen to believe that, as our first president so clearly articulated, it is not, particularly as much of the concession that Jews are somehow to be treated differently than the rest of the community due to their alleged victimhood contributes to a criticism-free ride for an Israel which is eagerly seeking a new war in the Middle East. It would be a war that the United States would inevitably get pulled into by Israel's friends in Congress and the media. It would also be catastrophic for all parties involved and it all starts with the belief that Israel should somehow be protected and its enemies punished while also being exempt from being made accountable for its actions.

Curmudgeon , May 8, 2018 at 4:57 am GMT

It's more than time to question, it's time to prosecute. If Alan Clemmons, or any other legislator, has gone to Israel, with any assistance from Israel financial or otherwise, then Clemmons (and others) have taken a bribe. Failure to prosecute, just as failure to enforce current immigration laws, is the road to anarchy.

As for Judge Daniels, I guess I could cut him some slack, given it's a default judgment, but that goes out the door if he was the judge that certified the case going forward in the first place. There is no prima facie evidence of Iran's involvement in 9/11, and therefore, false statements made in the statement of claim are a perversion of justice. A judge is supposed to rule on facts, not conjecture.

Brabantian , Website May 8, 2018 at 5:55 am GMT

75 years ago, people hid Jews to protect them from imprisonment and possible death by European-led jailers. Now in 2018, people are hiding Europeans to protect them from imprisonment and possible death by Jewish-led jailers

89-year-old Ursula Haverbeck-Wetzel is right now being hunted by German police at the behest of Jewish groups, because she did not show up at prison a few days ago, to serve a two-year-jail sentence for questioning the official narrative of the Jewish killings in World War II It is recognised by Jews and others that at her age, the long jailing may kill her

The 'International Auschwitz Committee' says German police should use 'high pressure' to find this elderly woman and imprison her, even though it may kill her

And yet Jews who speak like this claim they do not understand why people develop antipathy to Jews It is in fact the International Auschwitz Committee which is 'inciting anti-semitism', as they inspire Germans to hide elderly people from Jews 'like Anne Frank was hidden from Germans'

However much Ursula Haverbeck might be in error in her historical opinions, this is appalling and shocking treatment of a grandmotherly woman soon to be 90 years of age sending her very possibly to death for her ideas regarding an era to which she is a living personal witness (Haverbeck was born in 1928, and will turn age 90 this 8 November)

This reminds of the case of a World War II Jewish witness, a rabbi's son, who was with the Russian advance troops who liberated places like Auschwitz, Joseph Ginzburg – Joseph G Burg, direct interrogator of Auschwitz and other camp survivors The fiercely anti-Nazi and very Jewish Burg, said the Holocaust was an exaggeration, a fraud fabricated by Zionists, he wrote books on this, & had many of those books burned by the modern West German government tho the old Bonn regime never had the stomach to jail rabbi's son Joseph Ginzburg (1908-90), despite his holocaust denial

MarkinLA , May 8, 2018 at 6:22 am GMT
OT but since it seems Israel first stooge Insane McCain is finally going to meet Satan. What I want to know is, has anybody announced how they intend to handle all the people who want to piss on his grave? Will there be a lottery, will there be those "take a number" machines, will it be first come first served or will there be some kind of contest, like writing an essay?
jilles dykstra , May 8, 2018 at 6:48 am GMT
On the day of Sept 11, when I still, of course, believed the Muslim terror attack story, I said to my wife 'just Israel benefits'. I simply could not see how these Muslim attacks benefitted Muslims. No idea, at the time, as Anatol Lieven also did not have at the end of the month, his article 'New Cold War' in the then still independent Guardian, that these attacks would be used to justify wars on Afghanistan and Iraq.

It was 2004 when Hollings made his famous speech, promising war to AIPAC for the jewish vote, 'that is politics'.

Mark James , May 8, 2018 at 7:00 am GMT
I'm convinced the neocons will not pull this off this time . After many years of war a passive public may be catching on. I expect the price of oil to jolt upwards this afternoon. When people begin asking why the answers need to be that our "ally" Israel keeps threatening war if they don't get their way and Trump doesn't tear up the P5+1 treaty.

If your member of congress is either gung-ho on treaty repeal or even worse, talking about Iran regime change like Rudi , https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/trump-committed-to-iran-regime-change-giuliani-says-1.6055510 ,, tell him or her that we can and will do better and expect to vote accordingly.

animalogic , May 8, 2018 at 8:28 am GMT
@Brabantian

A 90 year old woman must "serve a two-year-jail sentence for questioning the official narrative of the Jewish killings in World War II "

This is surreal. Liberal democracy (what's left of it) down the rabbit hole. Imprisonment as a consequence of questioning history ? Yes, I know, Germany has its sensitivities, but should historical guilt excuse a vicious assault on core values & a vulnerable individual ?

m___ , May 8, 2018 at 8:34 am GMT
No context to the article that matters. Lost in deviations. The real issue: any transaction to and from Israel makes some Jewish and elite non Jewish Americans accessory. Israel is a fiscal off-shore through passage for decanting public funds to private hands, a physical vault to hold assets, reinsert assets into the global financial system.

As imprecise as can be, but to popularize the situation: the before Castro, Cuba Mafia save haven.

One must realize that when the dollar, as is happening looses part of it's reserve status(currently under way, partly global transactions start escaping the dollar accountability, thus leaving a smaller margin of cooking the books), there need to be a trustworthy insertion point into the Yuan, any digital currency, international financial markets, currency speculation for the elites of the West, evasion of embargos for the exeptionals.

This is partly the explanation of "military capitalism" deployed rather recently in insider circles to capture an existing situation where the US is left to prop up it's financial make believe using military show of. That is partly why "war" is so publicly discussed, actions are leaked, this contrary to what real war requires, deep stealth.

Israel is a Swiss knife for corporate international billionaires, no billionaires no Israel.

zendeviant , May 8, 2018 at 10:08 am GMT
Would the JASTA act open the way for litigation against Israel's involvement in 9/11? Of course, there would have to be a change in venue because the southern district of Manhattan is kind of evil's homecourt.

Might be just the right crack in the absurdity, to investigate, prosecute and sentence the perpetrators. I mean if they can go after a ninety year old woman, why not a geriatric Jerome Hauser, Dov Zakheim, etc?

Just spit-balling here, I'll go back to my observational pessimism

Tyrion 2 , May 8, 2018 at 10:51 am GMT
@Thomm

Or, it could just be that Unz believes in Aristotle's theory that adopting intellectual virtues is the best way to get to the truth.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_virtue

anarchyst , May 8, 2018 at 11:01 am GMT
American "foreign aid" is prohibited from being given to any country that has not signed the "Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty" or refuses to abide by "International Atomic Energy Agency" (IAEA) guidelines regarding its nuclear devices. Guess what?? Israel does not abide by EITHER and still gets the majority of American "foreign aid".

This prohibition also applies to countries that do not register their "agents of a foreign government" with the U S State Department. Guess what?? Israel (again) with its "American Israel Political Action Committee" (AIPAC) still gets "foreign aid" in contravention of American law..

There are forty or so congressmen, senators and thousands of high-level policy "wonks" infecting the U S government who hold "dual citizenship" with Israel. Such dual citizenship only reinforces "split loyalty"–NOT upholding the interests of the United States, and must be strictly prohibited.

Those holding dual citizenship must be required to renounce said foreign citizenship. Refusal to do so should result in immediate deportation with loss of American citizenship. Present and former holders of dual citizenship should not be allowed to serve in any American governmental capacity.

Momus , May 8, 2018 at 1:20 pm GMT
@anarchyst

The American Presidents Johnson and Nixon were satisfied with the Israeli explanation that they would not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons to the mid east. Successive administrations accept this declaration and are not interested in forcing them to join the IAEA.

Fair enough too given the history of their persecution and the massive contributions of Jewish brainpower to America's bomb project and many prior and subsequent, scientific, medical, legal and industrial efforts.

densa , May 8, 2018 at 5:36 pm GMT
@Anonymous

I hope not. There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come.

Thanks to Giraldi and all the commenters here who want to see our government function on our behalf. Right now it's riddled with treason. Despite large majorities of both parties consistently identifying money as corrupting our politics, bribery became normalized in part so that Jewish politics could prosper. Now we no longer even expect our representative to pretend.

ChuckOrloski , May 8, 2018 at 5:51 pm GMT
@Bardon Kaldian

Hi Bar Don Kaldian,

Below is a "crackpot" Israeli-commemoration that's way more than mere "irresponsible blabber."

https://m.jpost.com/Israel-News/In-honor-of-Trump-Jerusalem-square-near-American-embassy-named-for-him-554752

[May 10, 2018] MoA - Blumenthal, Norton, Khalek - The Turncoats Deliver A Poor Excuse - by Daniel

May 10, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Blumenthal, Norton, Khalek - The Turncoats Deliver A Poor Excuse - by Daniel

by Daniel
lifted from a comment

... ... ...

He says he "didn't think it was going to become, you know, the 7-year devastating conflict that it became." That is apparent. Libya was already descending into the F-UK-US "Mission Accomplished" with NATO bombers warming up to finish the job. Perhaps Max's dad had assured him that Syria would follow the same pattern his emails with Hillary Clinton show he had helped plan and define in Libya.

BTW: Has he ever addressed his father's role in the destruction of the once most prosperous country on the African continent? I haven't read or heard anything from Max on Syd Blumenthal's pre-Qaddafi "removal" explanation that Libya had to be destroyed to:

  1. Steal their nationalized oil.
  2. Confiscate the hundreds of tons of gold and silver Libya held.
  3. Prevent Libya from establishing a gold-backed currency and pan-African development bank to compete with the US petro-dollar and IMF, and lift Africa out of neo-colonial subservience.

Yeah. Max was "pretty quiet on Libya and not really - didn't really make any coherent statements on that either."

That newspaper that Max publicly maligned and quit ("grandstanding" as he now says) "had taken an anti-imperialist agenda." Did that paper ever reject any articles Max wrote defending "the Syrian revolution"? I didn't think so. Who had "an agenda"? Because it sure sounds like it was Max who was so focused on his new book release and two upcoming book tours that at the least he abandoned journalistic values. Or did he fear that "being associated" with a paper that also published articles critical of "the revolution" could hurt book sales?

After all, he thought it was all going to be over soon anyway.

It would also be nice for Max to explain why, once he changed his position on Syria after Russia had helped turn the tide, he, Ben and Rania scrubbed all their anti-Syrian/pro-"rebel" posts from the internet without explanation. How Orwellian.

Cont. reading: Blumenthal, Norton, Khalek - The Turncoats Deliver A Poor Excuse - by Daniel

Posted by b at 03:54 PM | Comments (98)

karlof1 , May 9, 2018 4:25:05 PM | 1

Syria isn't the only topic Blumenthal wrote lies about. Him, his cohort mentioned here, and many other presstitutes destroyed their credibility to the point where no deed no matter how valorous can regain it for them--By their actions, they committed journalistic suicide.

It appears greed yet again trumped integrity. It's always for A Few Dollars More.

UserFriendly , May 9, 2018 4:29:17 PM | 2
My only concern is that if this is the reception people can expect for changing their mind and talking about it does that discourage anyone else from doing the same?

Richard C , May 9, 2018 4:43:06 PM | 3
They should apologise to those they maligned. But is a vilificatory focus on the insufficiency of their repentance really helping the anti-imperialist cause?

ben , May 9, 2018 4:43:14 PM | 4
@ 2: excellent point..

Blumenthal, and his vocal support for the Palestinian people deserves kudos. If he has changed his stance on the Syrian debacle, good. I don't know too many people who are always
prescient enough to get everything right from the get-go, so, even without an apology, he deserves credit for finally getting it right.

Anon , May 9, 2018 4:50:13 PM | 5
b you are really beggin for problems, isnt this the second time you attack Blumenthal? Those people are the least to be attacked like this.

All have been wrong some time, me, even yourself, why rub it in like this?

Laguerre , May 9, 2018 4:57:05 PM | 6
re 5
All have been wrong some time, me, even yourself, why rub it in like this?
Does that mean you now support Asad? Difficult to believe.

james , May 9, 2018 5:04:28 PM | 7
hey daniel! nice to see that post you did on the other thread getting highlighted here!! kudos..

Tobin Paz , May 9, 2018 5:06:20 PM | 8
I became familiar with Max Blumenthal through Democracy Now. His position on Syria was inexplicably appalling, but at least he had the decency to eventually call them out:

Democracy Now & guest slammed for backing 'neocon project of regime change in Syria'

Daniel , May 9, 2018 5:10:21 PM | 9
b. I'm genuinely honored that you chose to post a comment of mine. Thank you. And thank you for correcting my errors in spelling Al Akhbar and Ben Norton's actual surname.


Once I catch up on the "news," I'll be back to check comments.

Your mother , May 9, 2018 5:14:01 PM | 10
I was a follower of Max before the 2011 turmoil. I thought he was OK. He knew what was going around in Palestine and I was pretty sure he was an advocate for the better. I dont know what to think anymore. What is right and what is wrong. Can someone enlighten me :-(

Yul , May 9, 2018 5:14:18 PM | 11
@ Daniel

Thank you for putting down what most of us who have been following The Arab spring since Tunisia know about those 3 turncoats aka Triumvirate.

@ Anon #5

Speak for yourself. Those who do follow the ME knew and realised what was the goal back in Dara'a in February 2011. It has started since 1980's and Assad didn't want to be another b---h of the US. Colin Powell thought he could sway him with threats back in 2003 and then Robert Ford - so called Ambassador went on with his task when he got the job in Damascus together with Eric Chevallier who was MAN enough to realise what was happening.

Hoarsewhisperer , May 9, 2018 5:20:43 PM | 12
Posted by: Daniel | May 9, 2018 5:10:21 PM | 9
(Thanks to b for the recognition)

I agree with b. Your comment was thorough, well-articulated and verifiable.
...and flushed out some Moral Equivalence ideologues of the Thomas L Friedman variety.

George Lane , May 9, 2018 5:22:36 PM | 13
Black Agenda Report of course has got it right since day one since Blacks more than any other group know not to trust Western establishment narratives and discourses on human rights and humanitarian intervention. Their articles on Libya from 2011 are but one proof of this.

Margaret Kimberley's latest on Trump and Israel is excellent as always: here.

NOBTS , May 9, 2018 5:24:10 PM | 14
Oh please! The first attack on Max Blumenthal was embarrassing enough. Moon of Alabama is very fortunate to have gained as much respect as it has; it's very foolish to squander people's patience with this vindictive tripe. By the way I'm also offended by the fact that someone presumed to edit my Nom de Comment "nationofbloodthirstysheep" when I made what I think was a useful comment on the Gulf of Scripal Incident. If I had wanted to post under the name" nation of sheep" I would have done so.

ToivoS , May 9, 2018 5:27:22 PM | 15
Max Blumenthal's support for the Palestians, especially those in Gaza, has been solid. As we all know Gaza is led by the Muslim Brotherhood. As we all should know is that it was the MB in Syria that began war against the Syrian government. It took about a year for Islamists mercenaries to arrive and begin to dominate the opposition to Assad's government. Of course, the Saudis and Qatar were financing the MB forces from the beginning.

I noticed that many westerners who were involved in Palestinian's struggle for their rights immediately backed the MB in Syria in the first year of the Syrian war. Recall how they came out and supported the MB when they seized the Yarmouk refugee camp in opposition to the Syrian government. Many good hearted, but absurdly naive, youthful people who supported the Palestians, came out and attacked Assad.

Max is one of those people. He is young and hopefully is capable of reform. We should accept his apology.

George Lane , May 9, 2018 5:27:39 PM | 16
I wasn't aware of Max Blumenthal saying "Alternet Grayzone is the only progressive outlet questioning the main line". I always prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt and respect how these writers have changed their minds and are sticking to it, but this statement leaves a bad taste in the mouth, considering the outlets that have been questioning it since the beginning. Perhaps he meant "mainstream-alternative progressive outlets", or "foundation-funded independent outlets". Thanks b and Daniel for the background of which I was not aware.

james , May 9, 2018 5:43:14 PM | 17
@2 userfriendly and @5 anon...

it is one thing for them to be wrong and another for them to never acknowledge it.. it is kinda like bush 2 and his war on iraq... no acknowledgement and as obama used to say, instead of accountability we just have to move on.. bullshit.. these folks would do well to acknowledge when they are wrong.. i don't know that any of them have..

james , May 9, 2018 5:44:58 PM | 18
@15 toivo. but did max apologize for being wrong and attacking others for 4 or so years? i never caught sight of that..

James , May 9, 2018 5:47:54 PM | 19
Unlike what people believe this came to the benefit of Iran, Russia and China and only affected the US http://www.eurasiafuture.com/2018/05/09/why-cry-its-great-news-that-trump-pulled-out-of-the-iran-deal/

Babyl-on , May 9, 2018 5:50:41 PM | 20
UserFriendly #2 and Richard C #3 -

I wish to identify myself with the remarks above.

This all sounds childish to me. Fixation on the degree of sincerity of an apology is for the playground. They had a view they changed their view from new evidence or by reflection or both. They may have done some harm by simply being human as we all can and do regularly, we humans being human and all.

NOBTS , May 9, 2018 5:55:12 PM | 21
These people fully acknowledged their error and were suitably contrite. One should bear in mind the fog of propaganda surrounding the so-called Arab spring; CIA Isis recruiters were very active in the pro-Palestinian movements. I actually knew some young people on the streets of Oakland and Berkeley who had been convinced that the Wahhabi Takfiris were a persecuted minority and were nearly swept away.

Laguerre , May 9, 2018 5:56:37 PM | 22
Let's be quite clear about this, even if it means going off-message. The Ba'thist regime is not very nice, but it's a million times better than a jihadi regime in Damascus. It's why Asad has retained the support of Syrians.

The Syrian students I know have been asked to repay their scholarships. Up to 300k euros. They can't and so are forced to remain refugees. Even the Alawites. It's not improbable that Asad will forgive them in the end, but suicides are in prospect. They could cope if it weren't for the war.

The war is going well, but hard on those conscripted. I wonder whether it isn't really a volunteer army now, after all the deaths. The hardened army is very small, but enough to knock off Ghouta, and enough to put a big hole in Idlib, some time ago. my opinion is that Idlib won't resist and will collapse, but we'll have to see.

ritzl , May 9, 2018 5:59:19 PM | 23
Thank you Daniel and b.

Peter Gose , May 9, 2018 6:00:39 PM | 24
While these three did get it wrong about Syria and may not have given the best explanations of what changed their minds, they actually come off as pretty contrite, more than I thought they would be capable of. The podcast is useful for exposing how the Syria issue has crippled the bds movement in North America and the role of gulf state money in that process. I look forward to what they have to say about the particularly insidious role of IS Trotskyism in destroying the anti-war movement in the anglophone world. Its fine to score points against these people for their very real past mistakes, but from an organizing point of view, what matters more is to understand the situation we're in now, and they are contributing. With formerly reliable outlets like Counterpunch getting worse on this issue with every passing day, it seems odd to be attacking those who have rectified their mistakes.

NOBTS , May 9, 2018 6:09:11 PM | 25
@24
"it seems odd to be attacking those who have rectified their mistakes. "
I certainly hope that it is just "odd". I would hate to have to think that the attacks were due to their relative effectiveness and the expanded reach of what they have to say. It's sad to consider that in the best case envy might be a motivation. The worst case is unthinkable.

karlof1 , May 9, 2018 6:09:49 PM | 26
Been a student of US History and its Empire since 1960s--50+ years--and I'm being told integrity no longer matters. Can someone tell me when the USA lost its integrity regarding its own basic law and the UN Charter it helped create, how hard it is to discover that fact, and why it matters? In our Orwellian Age, just how important is one's credibility, and why should we trust someone who sold hers/his for A Few Dollars More ?

Jonathan , May 9, 2018 6:26:19 PM | 27
@25 NOBTS,

Perhaps their heretofore "expanded reach" was dependent on their message of the moment's usefulness to the existing power structure and their willingness to sing on cue? It wouldn't be the first time political capital earned for good cause has been spent in favor of the enemy. Liberal "performative contrition" is meaningless. If those three have done it once, they'll do it again. They are now of no service to the people except as examples, and absolutely replaceable.

It's obvious you're trolling or shilling. Move on to your next assignment please.

dahoit , May 9, 2018 6:27:36 PM | 28
15;Hamas is a MB?egypt was under MB, since sisi had a strangle hold on goverment.

Jen , May 9, 2018 6:29:28 PM | 29
Thanks Daniel for your comment and to B who elevated it to a full post. Daniel's comment should serve as an inspiration to the rest of us!

While attacking Max Blumenthal, Ben Norton and Rania Khalek for their failure to apologise to people they had previously slandered on their podcast show may seem poor form, I think that what Daniel says and B adds is relevant information to consider "going forward", as the cliche goes, when next the trio cover another or a new Middle Eastern issue, or even revisit the situation in Syria if that should change. Will Blumenthal et al stand steadfast in their opinion or will they revert to supporting the forces trying to topple Assad if they sniff that the tide is turning against the SAA and its allies?

james , May 9, 2018 6:33:02 PM | 30
@29 jen.. i agree... it is worth reading daniels comment @163 in 'trump ends the nuclear deal' thread as well as @156 george lanes initial comments to this post of daniels too..

the pair , May 9, 2018 6:38:01 PM | 31
i usually try not to judge people by their family connections but blumenthal's dad is such a noxious neoliberal asshole it's hard to believe the apple could have fallen that far from the tree.

a lot of the so called "left" is also infected with the "every revolution is good cuz leaders are teh suck amirite?!?!?" disease. whether it's - as a great article i recently saw suggests - the residue of marxism or just teen angst writ large, they just assume any leader that isn't a 100% pinkwashed socialist-feminist-____ist should be overthrown by the "wisdom of the masses". too bad they fail to see the hands of the "elite" behind every protest and youtube meme.

this also explains the reflexive stupidity that oozes from western mouths every time putin is mentioned (because high approval ratings and legit election wins don't count if it's backwards gay-hating slavs).

while he and the others do write about israel, that falls into the "so you want a damn cookie?" category. opposing israel is opposing every foul part of human nature (especially historical european tendencies) distilled in one arid shithole of a colony pretending to be a country. his hissy fits about gilad atzmon aren't exactly profiles in courage either and offer a glimpse of the "third way" mentality he seems to have inherited from his father.

@14

BAR is indeed great. they have morals and convictions and they actually stick to them consistently. freedom rider is especially good and her recent piece on israel is as good or better than anything on mondoweiss or EI.

extra fun historical context:

the inhabitants of what is now called the GCC or gulf states or whatever were one of the heaviest users of african slaves during the slave trade. this included the barbary pirates that the US marines were basically created to destroy when they committed the dreadful sin of kidnapping white people from the southern beaches of europe. that's where the marine song comes from and the "shores of tripoli" and etc. so the marines have basically been killing muslims for hundreds of years.

as for why the arabian peninsula has so few black folks compared to the west: they castrated all the males. oddly, one slave helped the moors conquer spain (the term "moors" being that time's "muzzies").

Jackrabbit , May 9, 2018 6:52:47 PM | 32
UserFriendly @2: . . . If this is the reception people can expect for changing their mind . . .

Journos, pols, and other public figures that take strategic positions as it is convenient to them are deplorable.

Anyone that was honestly wrong would be contrite.

= = = =
Richard C @3: . . . Is a vilification focus . . . Really helping

Yes it is, especially for those taking strategic positions .

= = = =
Anon @5: All have been wrong some time . . .

Morons, trolls, and opportunists are right as often as a broken clock.

= = = =
NOBTS @14: . . . It's very foolish to squander people's patience with this vindictive tripe

I guess you have no family or friends among the millions dead injured and displaced.

= = = =
Babyl-on @20: They had a view they changed their view . . . being human and all

Not good enough Babyl-on. As a long time patron of the bar I think you should see that more clearly than others.

= = = =
Peter Gose @24: . . . They actually come off as pretty contrite . . . And they are contributing

I always feel that it is best to explain your mistakes and not simply apologize. Very instructive and restores confidence. And if they were "burned" by being misinformed, they should be / would be vindictive toward those that misled them.

NOBTS , May 9, 2018 6:54:28 PM | 33
@27
So... it suits the existing power structure that these people should be speaking relatively truthfully at this point? If that's the case then I suppose the majority of Moon of Alabama's followers ( I contributed €50 by the way) would be in the same boat. The only way I can see this working out for the ruling elite is if being on the right side i.e. the left side, is totally marginal and pathetic, so thoroughly divided and conquered as to be irrelevant.

somebody , May 9, 2018 7:03:22 PM | 34
Posted by: ToivoS | May 9, 2018 5:27:22 PM | 15

The context you give is correct. There was an Obama Muslim Brotherhood strategy. Libya was part of it.

Observer , May 9, 2018 7:15:53 PM | 35
Breaking:

In major escalation, Israel attacks southern Syria as Putin has bromance with Bibi Netanyahu

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-05-09/explosions-reported-israel-syria-border-israel-activates-emergency-sirens

Curtis , May 9, 2018 7:17:00 PM | 36
I read Max's book Goliath recently. It's very damning of the rightward turn of the Israeli govt AND the Israeli people. People in the US are nowhere near as xenophobic as a majority of Israelis are now. I admit I had not paid much attention to support he would have had for the "Syrian rebels." But the point is to be made and it would be interesting to know of his thoughts on his father's actions with respect to Libya. Maybe Max realizes he's late to the party and is having a me too moment.

somebody 34
The Team Obama love affair with MB was obvious. I thought it interesting that the Egypt military put a stop to their plans once they achieved power there. They were useful for the initial protest violence in Syria until more support could arrive.

Bruce Lesnick , May 9, 2018 7:24:40 PM | 37
Not all who identify as Trotskyist support the bankrupt position on Syria promoted by the ISO and, originally, by Blumenthal et al. See https://socialistaction.org/2018/05/08/big-stake-in-syria-war-for-the-1-and-the-99/ by Socialist Action. Also other, earlier Syria articles on that site.

In a future piece, I will address what Trotsky stood for and use that criteria to differentiate among the various groups that call themselves Trotskyist today.

George Lane , May 9, 2018 7:40:12 PM | 38
Bruce @37, this is true. The proud Trotskyists at the WSWS are consistently anti-war and have called out several socialist organizations for being pro-NATO intervention in Libya and Syria. I find their philosophical positions woefully reductive and uninteresting (one of them told me once that both "analytic" and "continental" philosophy are "non-sense" and that the only true philosophy is Marxism-Leninism-Trotskyism, and also that the Frankfurt school is the root of the perversion of Marxist philosophy), but nonetheless they do extremely admirable and important work in reporting on the ground in places like Amazon distribution centers or interviewing immigrant families terrorized by ICE. They have been speaking out loudly on Google censorship as well, which is laudable.

On this topic of pro-intervention leftists, see Whitney Webb's response to the open letter signed by Chomsky, Judith Butler, and others, calling for the humanitarian US military to save Rojava and "increase support for the SDF": here.

karlof1 , May 9, 2018 7:40:24 PM | 39
Thanks so much. The silence is deafening.

blues , May 9, 2018 7:44:05 PM | 40
Breaking:

It now appears as though a war may have broken out between Syria and Israel. Israel claims that "Iran" attacked it at the Syria/Israel border at the Golan Heights. See NOW (Syrian) News :

https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en

fast freddy , May 9, 2018 7:56:56 PM | 41
Notwithstanding Israel's attack on Syria, minutes ago, it should be noted, IMHO, that Max Blumenthal is simply a "Limited Hangout". And in it for a "Few Dollars More". h/t Karlof1

foo , May 9, 2018 7:58:35 PM | 42
Kinda like re-branding progressives.

JTMcPhee , May 9, 2018 8:05:53 PM | 43
So I read in "Breaking News" that IRANIANS have fired TWENTY MISSILES AT THE HOLY SACRED LAND OF ISRAEL. Or so it is claimed, along with how the "Iron Dome" intercepted most of them. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/05/breaking-iranian-forces-fire-20-rockets-into-israel-iron-dome-defense-sytem-employed-video/

Query whether "Iron Dome" is maybe a bit of a fraud, https://www.technologyreview.com/s/528916/israeli-rocket-defense-system-is-failing-at-crucial-task-expert-analysts-say/ , or whether "the hand of YHWH" is involved in shielding the Israelites, who claim to be YHS}WH's Chosen People, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2717659/Hand-God-prevents-rocket-striking-target-Israeli-Iron-Dome-operator-says-sudden-gust-wind-blew-missile-sea-defence-failed.html .

So the Likudniks, who most resemble the Israelites from the first eight or nine books of the Torah, violent, deceitful, putting the Philistines to the sword, taking their land and cattle and enslaving their women and children, always falling away from the Commandments but always forgiven by YHWH, are building another brick BS box to add to the structure that will, if the dual-citizens that stand atop our Imperial government have their way, lead to some kind of "war on Iran."

I wonder what it feels like to get vaporized in a nuclear explosion... Expect it won't hurt for long -- less painful than having to watch as the Fokkers who own us slow-walk all of us into economic and environmental collapse, maybe quick-stepping now toward an answer to that neocon-naive question, "What good are all these wonderful weapons for if we never USE them?" C;mon, all you Revelation Believers and Armageddonists, GET IT OVER ALREADY, WILL YOU? THE SUSPENSE IS KILLING US!

I long ago rejected the notion that there will be some kind of retribution in some kind of "afterlife" where the people who are bast@rds and sh!ts in this life have to atone, somehow. Anyone who might be a candidate for eternity in the fiery lake obviously shares that disbelief. Fork 'em, if only we could reach them and stop them somehow...

james , May 9, 2018 8:39:28 PM | 44
no proof necessary when israel makes a claim... and it becomes front page news immediately in the west.. lap it up baby...

james , May 9, 2018 8:42:58 PM | 45
oh and let me aim a quote from pat lang - "Any sort of incident or provocation will be accepted by the US as causus belli." that is indeed how low the usa has sunk to...

UserFriendly , May 9, 2018 8:43:43 PM | 46
Sigh. You'd think that the left, whose only real power comes from solidarity, would be natural coalition builders, but they aren't. I feel like all I ever see is ideological purity tests and an eagerness to shun and expel people over differences rather than try and reach people where they are and work to change their views to match your own. It just gets me so depressed because the right does not have this problem at all; the bible thumpers showed up en mass for the pussy grabber. I'll just add this to my list of reasons not to procreate and to commit suicide before the climate change shit hits the fan.

james , May 9, 2018 8:44:59 PM | 47
am i the only idiot here who thinks the idea of iran lobbing some missiles into israel from the golan heights is like an oversized pack of lies? maybe i should take out a regular subscription to the times of israel to get the '''real'''news..

David G. , May 9, 2018 8:46:22 PM | 48
This makes no sense at all. I can't even tell what we are supposed to be getting so angry about. Is it that these three people sound insufficiently repentant? Is it their tone of voice we are judging? Or is it that they took too long to reach their current positions? Personally I couldn't care less, as long as today they're pushing the conversation in a positive direction. And I don't think there are many people out there communicating more effectively than Blumenthal and Norton.

james , May 9, 2018 8:47:19 PM | 49
@47 userfriendly... bullshit.. it isn't about left and right..it is a lot more nuanced then you make it out to be..

Michael Murry , May 9, 2018 8:54:39 PM | 50
For JTMcPhee @44 regarding those "Revelation Believers and Armageddonists" who tipped the Electoral College scales in the U.S., giving the world All-About-Him instead of You-Know-Her : sort of like a choice between Genghis Khan and Atilla the Hun (or Hen).

Left Behind by Jesus

Jesus loves the rich, you know
Ask them, they will tell you so

Help the poor? Why that's a crime!
Best to work them overtime

Off the books, though, lest they say
That you owe them extra pay

Jesus loves those tax cuts, too
Just for some, though, not for you

See a poor kid that's a clerk?
Send him to Iraq to work

Jesus loves the army, see?
Just the place for you and me

Not the rich, though, they don't serve
What a thought! What perfect nerve!

If you think this life's a pain
Wait till Jesus comes again

Then on Armageddon Day
He will take the rich away

Sure, you thought that you'd go, too,
Not that you'd get one last screw

Just like your retirement
That the rich already spent

Jesus with the winners goes
Losers, though, just get the hose

What on earth would make you think
That your lord's shit doesn't stink?

After all he left you here
With the rich, so never fear

They'll upon your poor life piss
In the next life and in this

Jesus loves the rich, so there!
Don't complain it isn't fair

Jesus said to help themselves
Then he'd help them stock their shelves

So they did and he did, too
What has this to do with you?

Jesus loves the rich just fine
Why'd you think he pours their wine?

Jesus votes Republican
Ask them: they'll say "He's the One!"

Still a few loose coins around
That the rich have not yet found

Gotta go now, never mind
If you end up left behind

Michael Murry, "The Misfortune Teller," Copyright 2006

blues , May 9, 2018 9:00:48 PM | 51
>> UserFriendly | May 9, 2018 8:43:43 PM | 47

This "solidarity" concept is stupid. There are people who call themselves "leftists" who demand loyalty to Hillary. Um, no, we cannot have "solidarity" with Soros' minions. We never needed "solidarity" to begin with. No significant social movement ever really depended on "solidarity". We must think for ourselves, not just follow the party line.

Massinissa , May 9, 2018 9:01:03 PM | 52
@38 Wow, even the WSWS Trotskyists buy into that right wing shit about the Frankfurt School now? Man, that 'cultural marxism' conspiracy theory is so virulent even some Marxists believe it...

Kiza , May 9, 2018 9:15:03 PM | 53
The only surprising thing here is how many pro trolls jumped in the defense of the spent trio. The three have been used up, sacrificed by their owners and there is no going back. Most of the usual good commenters here understand this well - credibility is a bit like virginity - one can go onto an operating table to regain it, but it is never the same.

When will the ordinary people understand, like the smart commenters here, that many regime agents pose as anti-regime activists and journalists, to be sacrificed by their creators at some important moment. Internet is full of such.

George Lane , May 9, 2018 9:24:58 PM | 54
@38, Massinissa, yes they got a bit angry when I made that connection with right-wing libertarians and their Cultural Marxism argument about the Frankfurt school being the source of the downfall of Western civilization. To be fair, they would reject that whole argument as well, but they nonetheless hold the Frankfurt school to be a perversion of Marxist thinking to be rejected entirely, with no usefulness or value whatsoever.

jezabeel , May 9, 2018 9:27:33 PM | 55
I study and work with mental illness (mostly others' sometimes my own), and all I can say is, wow, Israel is a beautiful case. B.E.A.yoootiful!

Babyl-on , May 9, 2018 9:29:32 PM | 56
As I think further about all this, why do I give a fuck about these intramural cat fights among journalists and blogers. We the consumers are not in the least interested in your petty emotional bruises over improper apologies. This crap goes on day after day in the press - journalists carping at one another and pissing off everyone they subject to it. The Intercept practically has a section devoted to fights with other journalists. I want reporting, the reporting I have seen from those who are sullied here is of high quality nothing in it indicates duplicity of any kind instead it shows almost encyclopedic knowledge of the subject and issues. I am really not interested in the complete moral biography of each and every journalist, are you?

>>> blues , May 9, 2018 9:00:48 PM | 52
Clinton? left? LOL Thats the best laugh I've had in awhile. I meant the actual left.

Posted by: UserFriendly | May 9, 2018 9:43:41 PM | 57

>>> blues | May 9, 2018 9:00:48 PM | 52
Clinton? left? LOL Thats the best laugh I've had in awhile. I meant the actual left.

Posted by: UserFriendly | May 9, 2018 9:43:41 PM | 57 /div

Jen , May 9, 2018 9:50:21 PM | 58
James @ 30: Thanks for the tip and also for your consistent support for my comments across the MoA comments forums.

blues , May 9, 2018 10:03:12 PM | 59
/~~~~~~~~~~
As I think further about all this, why do I give a fuck about these intramural cat fights among journalists and blogers. We the consumers are not in the least interested in your petty emotional bruises over improper apologies. This crap goes on day after day in the press - journalists carping at one another and pissing off everyone they subject to it. The Intercept practically has a section devoted to fights with other journalists. I want reporting, the reporting I have seen from those who are sullied here is of high quality nothing in it indicates duplicity of any kind instead it shows almost encyclopedic knowledge of the subject and issues. I am really not interested in the complete moral biography of each and every journalist, are you?

Posted by: Babyl-on | May 9, 2018 9:29:32 PM | 57
\~~~~~~~~~~

As you "think further about all this", consider:

/~~~~~~~~~~
[....]

When will the ordinary people understand, like the smart commenters here, that many regime agents pose as anti-regime activists and journalists, to be sacrificed by their creators at some important moment. Internet is full of such.

Posted by: Kiza | May 9, 2018 9:15:03 PM | 54
\~~~~~~~~~~

Then ask: Is it really the case that "....many regime agents pose as anti-regime activists and journalists, to be sacrificed by their creators at some important moment"? Is that the case, or is it not? Because if it is, in fact, the case, then we must address it. I mean, it would be kind of stupid to just ignore that, right?

Well I have seen it several times with my own eyes. So as one of "we the consumers" I cannot just go and dismiss it as a "cat fight".

kooshy , May 9, 2018 10:06:31 PM | 60
I remember the first time Trump attacked Syrian forces was over a chocolate cake with chines president. Could this be the same treatment or a reply by Putin if he gave a green light to Syria they can reply in kind inside Israel, while Nuty is the guest of honor in Moscow?

Ikl , May 9, 2018 10:11:09 PM | 61
@kooshy
The ayrian government is not controlled by putin. They can choose to respond any way thry want to for the ongoing aggression and zionist invasion they dont need a "green light" from mosow you only need tosee how rt is covering the news to understand that russia has nothing to do with thi a

paul , May 9, 2018 10:21:22 PM | 62
I assume a commentator is controlled opposition until they prove otherwise.

blues , May 9, 2018 10:44:00 PM | 63
>> canthama | May 9, 2018 10:15:16 PM | 65

I don't assume a commenter is controlled opposition "until they prove otherwise". But for anyone named "Hal Turner" (the FBI's honeypot blogger), I have severe doubts to begin with.

WJ , May 9, 2018 10:46:09 PM | 64
UserFriendly @47,60,

What you say is true, sorry to say. One reason why it is true is that there has not been a viable American political left for at least a half century now and probably longer. There were some stirrings of legitimate left politics in a few of the civil rights groups (certainly not all) in the early 1960s, and for a long time the Black Panthers represented by far the healthiest left movement in the US since the 1920s-30s. But the mass potential for a real socialist politics came to an end, I think, with the assassination of King, and the local pockets of black nationalist resistance were bombed or shot or disappeared by FBI and police forces over the next decade. The remaining Vietnam anti-war movement was largely useless. Many of them are today the aging equestrians of the professional liberal #Resistance.

Occupy had some promise but was easily dissipated. The Democratic primaries demonstrated that a moderate social democrat could outearn corporate PAC financed tools via aattracting a huge number of small donations from people earning between 35K-100K (which is a *relatively* piss poor class of people, politically speaking). Some of this momentum carried over into socialist party gains and electoral victories in 2018, and in some states motivated a younger social democratic ("progressive" I suppose they call themselves) insurgency against Democratic Party empty suits. How lasting and successfull this development will prove to be is uncertain. My hope is that the 2020 Democratic primary season is much more destructive for internal party structure than that of 2016 was; ideally the party itself would implode, ceasing to exist altogether or remade entirely on an explicitly socialist, or at least social democratic platform, the #Resistance crew jumping over to the Republicans.

But I don't really expect any of this to happen.

WJ , May 9, 2018 11:27:13 PM | 65
NOBTS @69

Just go away. You are not going to fool anybody round here into taking you seriously with such comically C-grade troll phrases as "return to relevance" and "such a divisive post."

Robert Snefjella , May 9, 2018 11:31:25 PM | 66

From Ben Norton via the link given by b above ("this episode"):

"We have been criticized, mostly by people who I think have been somewhat unfair, but I think there are valid criticisms, in that early on in the conflict we were kind of knee jerk response supportive of the opposition out of the idea that this is like some progressive revolution against an evil authoritarian regime etc., you know believing a lot of those talking points which we now know are significantly more complex, if not just flat out false."

Charles Michael , May 9, 2018 11:35:30 PM | 67
to b:
are any reference to SST censured ?

Daniel , May 9, 2018 11:37:30 PM | 68
First, thanks to many MoA barflies for the kind words. I am far more often than not impressed with the knowledge and analytical abilities of those Bernhard has attracted to this site no doubt attracted by those same qualities in b. I have learned, and continue to learn much from y'all. So getting props from people I admire is really quite touching.

Most of the criticisms seem to be along the lines of 'we should not criticize people who change their minds lest we scare off others."

Of course we should encourage everyone to cut through the propaganda in every way we can. We are all swimming 24/7 in a 360 degree ocean of PR/Propaganda of a sort that Bernays and Goebbels could have only dreamt. I have no doubt that right this moment I hold some disinformation that was deliberately fed to me, and I hope that I am appreciative when someone else helps to lift a veil for me.

In fact, I have no doubt that some propaganda is designed for people like myself (and others here at MoA and elsewhere), whom the propagandists know are aware of their work, and so we are on the lookout for it. I'll return to that thought.

And when one has a breakthrough as profound as making a 180 degree turn on an issue so great as a war, I absolutely agree that we should welcome that person with warmth and love.

But I also believe we should be skeptical of EVERY journalist/opinion maker who has a substantial platform. For in all but the rarest of cases, the fact of having a substantial platform means having a substantial financial backing. Not all financial backing is dubious of course, but I think we all agree that critical thinking should always be engaged.

So, how should a journalist with a large following who is also a significant opinion maker handle reversing directions on a war? Should that person scrub all previous work from the internet, and just start writing the opposite?

Or should that person help others to have a similar epiphany (most especially those readers who had bought the product this journalist had been selling for the previous 5 years)? In teaching there is a method termed "guided discovery," whereby the teacher lays out a path for the students to use their own minds to come to the correct conclusion. I can think of no better time to use this method than when one is actually having that very same "discovery" process, or had just had it.

Max could have written articles revealing one piece of false propaganda after the other as he now says he and his cohorts did privately amongst themselves. Today, they complain that "leftists/progressives" attack them as "Assad apologists" and such. We all know that the first response to a new viewpoint that is opposite of one already deeply held is almost always rejection. And when the person presenting this new information had for years actually helped instill in the audience the opposite view, it's only normal for people to become suspect of the journalist's motives.

But that's not the path Max, (and Ben and Rania) chose. Was this a case of being a poor teacher, or something else possibly something a bit more sinister?

Let's consider other things in Max's record. ,

In an earlier comment, I described the disinformation in Max's book, "The 51 Day War" and in his characterization of fellow Jewish writer, Gilad Atzmon. At the least, as a journalist, Max should know better than to spread such incorrect and dangerous ideas.

And we cannot ignore that Max was amongst the first to blame a youtube video for the attack at the US Embassy Mission that killed Ambassador Stevens, his aid and later, two former Navy Seals (read: mercenaries). He wrote this even before the Obama Administration officially made that claim. How'd he know? And when his daddy sent Hillary Max's OpEd (and again Max's daddy had worked with Hillary Clinton in understanding why Libya had to be destroyed, and how to do that), Hillary wrote back,

"Your Max is a mitzvah!"

A Mitzvah is any one of the 613 Laws of Moses.

Another author Max vociferously and wrongly labels an "anti-Semite" and liar is Allison Weir. Everyone should read her in depth study of the origins of the Jewish State of Israel in the Levant, "Against Their Better Judgement" and frequent her website, ifamericansknew.org.

BTW: It was Max who coined the JSIL term for Israel which I frequently use. We can be critical of a source and still appreciative of useful and true information from that source. Even Controlled Opposition must reveal some true information not found in MSM in order to build the trust that allows them to then feed disinformation into our minds.

Check out this 4 minute video to see clearly how Max duplicitously slanders this good woman:

And here, Gilad explains quite well why he came to term Max an "anti-Zionism Zionist."


So, back to my earlier question, "what would a propaganda designed for people who already know the MSM is propaganda look like?" I think I may have provided at least one answer.

Chipnik , May 9, 2018 11:57:27 PM | 69
26

żWhen the Kent State Cambodian War protesters were shot in the back by the Natiinal Guard?

żWhen Billy Graham exorted 'Bomb the Gooks for Jesus!' at the Lincoln Memorial during those protests, and Time Magazine called him 'America's Preacher' while recently released tapes show Graham telling Nixon to nuke Hanoi??

żWhen thr Hells Angels beat that guy to death at Altamont while the Stones were pleased to introduce themselves?

żWhen has America NOT been a criminal enterprise?

Diana , May 10, 2018 12:07:46 AM | 70
I actually earned a degree in journalism, even though I went to an undistinguished university and was persecuted by the head of the department. I could never support myself as a journalist because unlike Max Blumenthal, I didn't have the resources to travel to other countries and just do journalism. I had to do something else to support myself. Nevertheless, I knew what was up in Syria the minute I saw that al Jazeera had started churning out anti-Assad propaganda: this was early in 2011, while Libya was still in turmoil. There is no excuse for anyone not to have paid attention to Libya--Thierry Meyssan barely escaped with his life after NATO put out an order to kill him! And there is no excuse for anyone to have seen Syria as anything else than an aggression by the U.S., NATO, the GCC and Israel. This is not about some naive kid (and Max Blumenthal is neither young nor naive) falling for romantic propaganda: it is about the son of a highly placed CIA employee who himself claims to be a journalist, and who was the closest advisor to Secretary of State Clinton on the Middle East. As Sidney Blumenthal's son, Max had the best education, a hell of a lot of exposure to the deep state, and is independently wealthy. With these privileges, why wasn't it him who was in Turkey reporting on the U.S., NATO and the World Health Organization sending weapons and terrorists into Syria? Why was it Serena Shim, someone that Turkey, with the nod of the CIA, could murder with impunity? And what is Blumenthal reporting on right now? Nothing that will risk his neck or his reputation, God forbid. Taking risks is for people like Shim, who lost her life, like Wassim Issa, who just lost both legs, like Vanessa Beeley, who has had her name dragged through the mud by FBI agent Sibel Edmonds and the entire British media establishment.

Porridge & Lager , May 10, 2018 12:13:48 AM | 71
The really funny thing here is you folks are ripping Blumenberg a new a**hole for "changing his mind" when you guys are so wrong about Syria. Blumenstock and his friends were closer to the truth before their conversion. That's right, the story you guys believe about Assad being a bit of a hard a** but a relatively benign dictator is pure fantasy.

The Syrian Ba'athist regime is renowned for its savage brutality against even suspected dissenters. How you people can explain away the well documented record of this violence says something about your echo chamber state of mind. And yes the Syrian government and its Russian patron target civilian areas and hospitals. Again, this is credibly documented. You are buying into a propaganda narrative. Vanessa Beeley, for example, is a Ba'athist stenographer who is not telling the whole story. Before you all start hollering, and throwing furniture let me ask how many Syrians post here? Right.

Nothing I can say will convince anyone to change their mind and that's okay because who am I and, besides, everyone here has the internet and knows how to use search. If you are brave or not completely brainwashed yet start with this article (you don't have to agree with everything in it) to get a sense of where your chosen narrative is at its weakest. https://www.thenation.com/article/the-debate-over-syria-has-reached-a-dead-end/
Have fun!

Chipnik , May 10, 2018 12:17:48 AM | 72
65

I wonder if Syria were to regain the Golan Heights of Syria and then blitzkreig beyond in a New 7 Day War, all the way to Haifa and beyond, whether the same Rabbinicals and Evangelicals who worship Zionism would defend Syria's right to 'the spoils of war' and then turn a blind eye as Syria blockades Haifa into a concentration camp the way Isreal has turned Gaza into one? Would they talk about Syrians being the New Chosen of Jaweh? Would they throw away their yarmulkels, and wear black and white Hezbullah scarves, just to be among the victors? Would Netanyahu be treated in the press like Arafat was treated, as a loser?

Andrew , May 10, 2018 12:19:11 AM | 73
#13 Thank you George.

Merlin2 , May 10, 2018 12:33:41 AM | 74
I tend to give thanks for small miracles, given the dire straights the world of journalism is in. Blessed are those who repent and at least max, Rhania and Ben appear to have sincerely repented the error of their early days, and max, in particular, has done some truly great work, exposing the Chemical false Flags and the White helmets for what they were and are. Sure, he and others stood on the shoulders of some braver and more perceptive souls such as Sharmine Narwani, Vanessa Beely and Eva Bartlett, among the very - so very - few who dared question the dominant narrative starting in 2011.

I also think that perhaps people don't realize just how difficult it was to be a western journalist/reporter and have any kind of career back in 2011/2012 while questioning the dominant narrative. Very very few did in the west, if truth be said. yes, there were Syrian connected reporters and opinionators like the Syrian perspective, MOA and a few, all too few, others. But one could count the English reporters of truth on one finger. Not just Syria, but also Libya and probably even Egypt. So, not everyone is super-brave from the get-go. not everyone has the analytic skills and integrity of "b", but then b is not stuck with writing for the Guardian, is he? And he and Ziad fadel hand Sharwani and those few others we heard from, many times did not earn their living from writing geopolitic (I think I need to add The Saker to the list. I believe I discovered him only in 2013 or so).

So, if some who first wandered in the desert got some kahunas later, it's definitely better than never. IMO, it's kind of small minded to excoriate those who failed to see the full picture back as it was happening. Me, I see the glass as half full rather than half empty, and as I sit here i can only wish for more converts to the truth. Say Monbiot of The Guardian? now, that would be nice, wouldn't it?

I also would like to remind people just how caught up so many western liberals were in the spectacle of the Arab Spring (that wasn't much in the end, and we should think long and hard about why that was so). We - as in many of us - projected our wishes upon the Arab millennials and students, but little did we do - as in any of us - to research the sad, tragic realities in their own countries. The dependence of Egypt on tourism for example all but doomed their spring to another long Winter. We, who have jobs and/or comfortable positions somewhere and/or comfortable enough retirement that allows some to post here (and post well and thoughtfully for many, which takes time and is definitely a luxury), how could we even imagine what it means to have so little that to lose that meager income from tourists is a catastrophe? In the end the majority of the Egyptians went for bread and butter or Sisi would not have prevailed (please don't read this as defense of the Sisi regime. It's just me trying to understand why the revolution in Egypt did not succeed). But all this happened back in 2011 to 2013, and Syria seemed like one more exclamation mark on some elusive "Arab Spring". Of course, it was no such thing but I only knew that from reading far more widely than most people do, and I wasn't a journalist trying to eke out a living either. As commenters we have the luxury of writing as we see fit, without fear of being fired. Anonymously too, most of us. But for reporters out in the open, I reckon it must have been a little harder.

Actually, I am trying to work up a little piece on the mysterious - and not so mysterious - reasons Syria became such a red line for writers of all kinds, that to cross it back in 2012-2015 meant vitriol in the mailbox and who knows what else. Sure it became easier in 2015 once the Russians stepped in, but I am trying to figure out why that was the case. What was so special about 2016, other than that was the year the russians really helped turn things around? and it was election season in the US too. Still, I am struglgling to wrap arms around this strange conundrum of why Syria?

Finally, speaking about red lines and daniel's comment. Gilad Atzmon is the most obvious case of a red line those who write in the open cannot cross. No matter how pro-palestinians and/or anti-zionists they are. Gilad is a lithmus test and has been for quite a while now. Just another somewhat strange phenomenon, and snother occasion for yet another piece (which I will write under still another name - for good reason. After all, the mere mention of the name Atzmon could be enough to get one kicked out of "polite' society....and I do like the free food and drinks served in those societies - now and then....).

Pespi , May 10, 2018 12:34:28 AM | 75
Cheers to b, and all the rest who opposed this war from the very start.

K.woods , May 10, 2018 12:55:21 AM | 76
This is not only suspiciously vindictive, it's a bore. Isn't there something more pernicious to explore than Max Blumenthal's lack of perfection? 1) The implication that he changes his positions for financial gain is laughable. If Max is trying to sell out, he's going about it all wrong. 2) He's under no obligation to explain his father's actions. 3) You seem to be implying that he was quiet about Libya because of his father's involvement. Isn't that what you're supposed to do if you have a conflict of interest? 4) You don't like the name "Moderate Rebels?" Dude your writing for a website called "Moon Over Alabama" Let's just agree to judge on content rather than title.

Jackrabbit , May 10, 2018 1:00:45 AM | 77
Porridge & Lager

. . . will make you fat and dim-witted.

Assad's opposition has turned him into a hero, not us. He is a veritable paladin next to the Jihadi headchoppers that would take over if he fell.

And how has regime-change ever helped anyway? Toppling Saddam was a disaster for USA in terms of international standing, financial cost, and the end result (increased Iranian influence). Libya after Qaddafi is a nightmare where ISIS conducts slave auctions. Afghanistan's 18-year war is a quagmire of dumbfuckery so profound that it is only talked about in hushed terms when reauthorizations are needed. In Ukraine, the West 'won' a money pit.

james , May 10, 2018 1:08:32 AM | 78
@61 jen.. thanks.. i am happy you are here!

@73 daniel. your question "what would a propaganda designed for people who already know the MSM is propaganda look like?" - the intercept?

@76 diana.. good post.. thanks..

@80 merlin.. thanks for your post.. i am still conflicted on the arab spring.. on the one hand it seemed like a natural occurrence.. on the other hand it seems like the powers that be were waiting to take advantage of it too, especially in the case of syria...i suppose we could give max, ben and rania a pass based on the general view that the arab spring was upon the middle east and everyone knew what a brutal dictator assad was.. i think a few folks woke up during the ukraine shakedown 2014, and they might have got to thinking that indeed the yinon plan was still on track or that general clarks comments which i quote here were indeed relevant.. "As I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and finishing off Iran."

that arab spring thing seemed like good cover for any number of tricks, not to mention regime change.. i have a hard time buying into the thought that someone who is supposed to cultivate critical thinking would overlook this myself.. maybe investigative reporters are supposed to skip the critical thinking class? i don't buy that myself.. i relate more to diana's comment @76 and think that it is fair to criticize max and any other number of public journalists, or bloggers.. i do it with other posters here and i get it when folks do it with b, as a few have here on this thread, even if i don't agree with them in this instance..

thanks to the many commentators here that continue to give me greater insight to overcome the blind spots that i carry around without being fully or even partly aware of them.. it's ongoing..

psychohistorian , May 10, 2018 1:46:50 AM | 79
@ Daniel with the posting....congrats!

I agree with your assertions about the paid shills of our world....they are paid to get out in front of trains not of their creation and start a parade.

Your posting has brought a new "class" of trolls to MoA. Maybe we can open some of their minds and they will quit their day jobs.

guidoamm , May 10, 2018 2:10:45 AM | 80
@77

Although par for the course for most people, your short sightedness, your disregard for factual evidence and your sheer inability for critical evaluation is exasperating.

It is because of people like you that offer sustenance to a predatory and exploitative elite that we find ourselves in the bind we are in.

People like you have completely bought into the narrative of the ostensible benevolence of presumably democratic governments. People like you have completely been sold on the desirability of the centralization of power. People like you have gladly waded into the self defeating fable of the righteousness of centralized education.

It is people like you that happily cheer-on our elites as they gradually divest society of their labor and their wealth by lowering interest rates artificially.

It is people like you that merrily support our elites as they progressively reveal themselves to be mere enforcers for predatory financial interests

It is people like you that rejoice in the orgy of government profligacy that gradually weighs down the creativity, the productivity and the mere right to existence of individuals the world over.

It is people like you that revel in the self declared virtue of transnational political entities that, time and again, are caught abetting and often, colluding with retrograde, sanguinary individuals the world over.

You are a deluded soul. Either that, or you have an agenda.

RogerK , May 10, 2018 2:31:22 AM | 81

I know how hard it is for people to change their views, my self included. Sure you could say Max and Co. should have known better but what does that say about 99% of journalists on this planet who still firmly sticks with and probably believes the official NATO propaganda narrative?

I think having an article and debating this is both helpful and informative. However resorting to name calling like "turncoats" implies playing for a team. Tribalism and partisan hackery is something we should avoid at all costs. I've been accused of being a Putin lover and Assad lover by those who cling to the NATO narrative. The truth is I think both as assholes but I also understand the position they are in.

Is the Baath regime ideal? Fuck no. Would a Muslim brotherhood Regime be better? Highly doubtful. Would Al-Nusra or and ISIS Regime bet better? WTF? are you kidding me?? There is no black and white here, but some are much more gray that others. Same goes for journalists and people, none of us are without flaws. But the ability to change your mind and correct course is a good property especially in a journalist. This "no true Scotsman" mentality is a luxury we can't really afford in the fight against the onslaught of corporate pro WAR media.

Anon , May 10, 2018 2:54:01 AM | 82
Serious tribalism here, quite ugly to see, no criticism is allowed.

People that are wrong must apologize lol, I mean get off your high horse.

Also attacking Blumenthal, Khalek, Norton, its like a teenager trying to pick a fight with a bodybuilder, and those who play with fire is going to be burnt himself by the same smearing.

Attacking people that is on your own side, also shows how misguided these blogposts are.

uncle tungsten , May 10, 2018 4:58:10 AM | 83
Tobin Paz #8

Democracy Now, pleeeeease the white wash agency for USA exceptionalism and other crimes against humanity. Next you'll be quoting the Guardian. Reposting content from either of these two is like passing round used toilet paper for another try.

Tuyzentfloot , May 10, 2018 5:21:10 AM | 84
I can understand the alround eagerness to condemn. It's a standard pattern of putting the bar very high for others. It's as people have to demonstrate how good they are themselves by condemning others. Julian Assange is far from perfect as well but he has done a huge service.
I think it was perfectly normal for a progressives to support the demonstrations and rebellion against Assad. This fit in with the Arab Spring and there was a legitimate aspiration for more democracy. There was also a violent component from the start , and there were strong exhortations to avoid all negotiations and avoid all compromise because Assad certainly was going to fall. It's to Max Blumenthal's credit that he caught on to the component which was there from the start and which quickly started to dominate: the intent , mostly from outside, to destroy or degrade the state. I think Blumenthal has done very good work on many fronts and I respect him.

I do not appreciate how he bashes people who have not caught on. It does not necessarily get easier over time to change your mind. The amount of propaganda on the issue has also increased. Once you're on the outside it's easy, but it is also easy to underestimate how hard it is to change your mind from the inside.

I understood the nature of the conflict from the start. Therefore I'm much smarter than Blumenthal. He should listen to me.

I can believe that Blumenthal is obfuscating his change of mind. But I've known about his change of mind for a long time from interviews so I never even noticed the obfuscation.
It's not pretty. Ok. So it's not pretty.

C , May 10, 2018 6:31:21 AM | 85
Fantastic piece by Daniel, it's nice to see that some people have some standards. Both Norton and Blumenthal have lied about various issues, not just Syria, though the way Max, Ben and Rania all changed positions at the same time on Syria is highly shady. Same with the deletion without explanation of their past work on Syria, Libya etc. Max has helped his war profiteer, Clinton employee father sell lies on various issues, we should't be grateful that he(or they) rebranded on Syria after he already did so much damage. We should be skeptical as to why.

uncle tungsten , May 10, 2018 6:41:54 AM | 86
#76 Thank you Diana. Perspective is everything. Max B has never been a journalist IMHO, merely a propagandist for the permanent state.

psychohistorian , May 10, 2018 6:59:49 AM | 87
@ Anon who wrote: "Attacking people that is on your own side, also shows how misguided these blogposts are."

Unless you want to replace global private finance with totally sovereign finance you are not on my side. Are you on my side Anon? Do you think Max B is on my side ?

Take your obfuscating BS to some other blog you come in and say is misguided.

Jen , May 10, 2018 7:43:33 AM | 88
As C @ 91 says, the fact that Max Blumenthal et al experienced their Damascene moment (cough, cough) at about the same time is suspicious in itself. The timing of that moment too, with the Russian entry into the Syrian war in September 2015 and the turnabout in Syria's fortunes that started soon after, must also be considered. One might almost have guessed that Blumenthal, Norton and Khalek were planning and co-ordinating their move together, and looking for the right moment.

They must surely know that they are playing the role of gatekeepers in demarcating how far dissent from the official narrative about Syria is allowed to go. The fact that some commenters here have taken their contrition at face value and question or criticise others who have reservations about the depth of the trio's actions demonstrates the power of that role, and why some of us might be justified in doubting their motives for acting the way they have.

Diana , May 10, 2018 12:07:28 PM | 89
Until Max Blumenthal does something that truly threatens the powers that be, like Thierry Meyssan and Serena Shim, I will regard him as another Sibel Edmonds--a government infiltrator posing as a dissident. By the way, if anyone wants to know what really happened at the beginning of the invasion of Syria, read Thierry Meyssan's writings from Libya and Damascus at the time: "John McCain, conductor of the Arab Spring" is amazing. So is another one Thierry published on Voltaire, The rebirth of the Syrian Arab Army https://www.voltairenet.org/article190703.html

james , May 10, 2018 12:35:14 PM | 90
@83 uncle tungsten.. i agree strongly with you there!

Anon , May 10, 2018 1:01:47 PM | 91
If Blumenthal, Norton, Khalek must apologize for being wrong, maybe its time to apologize that you were wrong about Trump?

Rob , May 10, 2018 1:37:24 PM | 92
This pissing contest comes off very much like the scene in Monty Python's "Life of Brian" in which members of the People's Front of Judea badmouth the Judean People's Front. The ultimate insult was to call anyone with a different opinion a "SPLITTER!" From my point of view, Max, Ben and Rania have their hearts in the right place. (Has no one heard their saber-like takes on Ukraine?) They are not the enemy. In "Brian's" time, it was Rome, and in our time it is the Western Empire. Let's all keep that in mind.

Piotr Berman , May 10, 2018 1:50:02 PM | 93
I agree with many posters here that the criticism of "prodigal children" of anti-imperialism should be measured. This is a political cause, and we are not assembling an elite force that can smash most entrenched enemies. Instead, we should strive to analyze the reality, spread the word and convert.

And we have to accept that we differ on many issues, and very often we differ with our own past position. Back when the issue was Kosovo intervention, I though that this is good idea. Now I know that "Beware the Greeks when they bring gifts [Trojan Horse, for those deficient in classics]" should get another corollary "beware imperialists when they care about human rights".

And it is not just vicarious imperialists or people who maintain civil relationship with members of Hamas who may wrongly generalize. Assuming that Muslim Brotherhood is always and everywhere a force of evil violates the good principle "location, location, location". Like Marxism, MB ideology has gamut of different trends, and it is a bit to its credit that in Syria it did such a miserable job, being outplayed by Salafist -- they do not do a good job as a warrior cult, they are actually too normal for that.

Piotr Berman , May 10, 2018 2:00:23 PM | 94
Anon @91: my sentiments exactly.

If moonofalabama has searchable archive, I was posting that it is immensely speculative that Trump is a lesser evil than Clinton, in particular, his consistent praise of Bolton puts under question mark all reasonable fragments of sentences that one could collect from his tweets and speeches. Domestically, the guy is a wrecking ball, internationally -- it is still a bit open issue, I hope for malignity mellowed by ineptitude, I mean, the outcome leave a chance for recovery. Then again, Clinton is much less smart than some think her to be, so the grounds for opposing her more than Trump were illusionary.

Rob , May 10, 2018 2:17:24 PM | 95
I meant to add to my previous post (92) that requiring absolute ideological purity has been deadly to the left ever since the left began. It is one of the main reasons why a broad-based leftwing movement has never taken hold and lasted. A pox on these sectarian ideological squabbles. If the left wants to win, it must put them aside once and for all.

lysias , May 10, 2018 2:21:42 PM | 96
Splintering the opposition is very much in the interest of the powers that be.

lysias , May 10, 2018 5:19:01 PM | 97
Malignity tempered by ineptitude. Sort of like how Victor Adler characterized Habsburg rule in Austria: "Despotismus gemildert durch Schlamperei."

Jackrabbit , May 10, 2018 8:13:37 PM | 98
Those who argue for leniency for Blumenthal and the others would have us overlook the MANY betrayals of other so-called progressives. Such betrayals are too frequent to be just a matter of 'bad apples' or 'bad judgement'.

These "turncoats" take strategic positions on issues to advance their career. Hillary, the "progressive that gets things done", and Obama, the "community organizer", are two notable examples. Another would be Bernie's 'sheepdog' betrayal of his Movement - even after it was clear that Hillary and the DNC had conspired against him. Such people slyly conflate progressive ideals with divisive identity politics. By throwing off the moral core of progressivism they advance the interests of TPTB. Their many loyal sycophants and apologists rush to defend the indefensible and try their best to muddy waters BUT WE KNOW THE GAME by now so fuck off! You can't piss down our backs and tell us it raining anymore.

'Progressive' pundits and journalists that become useful idiots instead of watchdogs are even worse because they claim to be truth-tellers. You don't get to lead the next parade after you've led people over a cliff.

[May 04, 2018] Media Use Disinformation To Accuse Russia Of Spreading Such by b

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... A McClatchy journalist investigated further and came to the same conclusion as I did. The 'leak' to the New York Times was disinformation. ..."
"... Russia has not pinned the Novichok to Sweden or the Czech Republic. It said, correctly, that several countries produced Novichok. Russia did not blame the UK for the 'nerve gas attack' in Syria. Russia says that there was no gas attack in Douma. ..."
"... The claims of Russian disinformation these authors make to not hold up to scrutiny. Meanwhile there pieces themselves are full of lies, distortions and, yes, disinformation. ..."
"... Wait for an outbreak of hostilities on the Ukraine-Donbass front shortly before the beginning of the World Cup competition which is as internationally important as the Olympic Games -- as they did in 2014 with Maidan and 2016 with the Sochi Winter Olympics drug uproar, the CIA will create chaos that will take the emphasis off any Russian success, since as to them, anything negative regarding Russia is a positive for them. ..."
"... No traces of chemical weapons have been found in Douma. This means that not only the US/UK/French airstrikes were illegal under international law but even their political justification was inherently flawed. Similarly, in the Salisbury affair, no evidence of Russian involvement has been presented, while the two myths on which the British case was built (the Russian origin of the chemical substance used and the existence of proof of Russian responsibility) have been shattered. ..."
"... Given the lack of facts, the Tory leadership seems to be adopting a truly Orwellian logic: that the main proof of Russian responsibility are the Russian denials! It is hard to see how they will be able to sell this to their international partners. Self-respecting countries of G20 would not be willing to risk their reputation. ..."
"... The detail of b's analysis that stands out to me as especially significant and brilliant is his demolition of the Guardian's reuse of the Merkel "quote." ..."
"... Related to the above, consider the nature of the recently christened thought-crime, "whataboutism." The crime may be defined as follows: "Whataboutism" is the attempt to understand a truth asserted by propaganda by way of relation to other truths it has asserted contemporaneous with or prior to this one. It is to ask, "What about this *other* truth? Does this *other* truth affect our understanding of *this* truth? And if so, how does it?" ..."
"... Whataboutism seems to deny that each asserted truth stands on its own, and has no essential relation to any other past, present, or future asserted truth. ..."
"... 1984, anyone? ..."
"... The absurd story that the OPCW says there was a 100gm/100mg who knows which on the door and other sites is just so stupid its painful. ..."
"... Presumably the Skripals touch the cutlery, plates and wine glasses in the restaurant, so why weren't the staff there infected as they must have had to pick up the plates etc after the meal. Even the door to the entrance of the restaurant should be affected as they would have to push it open, thus leaving the chemical for other people to touch. Nope, nothing in this stupid story adds up and the OPCW can't even get the amounts of the chemical right. ..."
"... Biggest problem with the world today is lazy insouciant citizens. ..."
"... One very important point Lavrov made was the anti-Russian group consists of a very small number of nations representing a small fraction of humanity; ..."
"... while they have some economic and military clout, it's possible for the rest of the world's nations to sideline them and get on with the important business of forming a genuine Multipolar World Order, which is what the UN and its Charter envisioned. ..."
"... Anything that may not confirm to the 'truth' as prescribed from above must be overwhelmed with an onslaught of more lies or, if that does not work, be discredited as 'enemy' disinformation. ..."
"... Yes, exactly. The Western hegemony, i.e. the true "Axis of Evil" led by the US, and including the EU and non-Western allies, have invented the Perpetual Big Lie™. ..."
"... Witnesses? They're either confederates, dupes, or terrified by coercion. Evidence and/or technical analysis? All faked! A nominally reliable party, e.g. the president of the Czech Republic, makes statements that undermine the Big Lie Nexus? Again-- he's either been bought off or frightened into making such inconvenient claims. Or he's just a mischievous liar. ..."
"... And, as I seemingly never get tired of pointing out, the Perpetual Big Lie™ strategy arose, and succeeds, because the "natural enemies" of authoritarian government overreach have been coerced or co-opted to a fare-thee-well. So mass-media venues, and even supposedly independent technical and scientific organizations, are part of the Perpetual Big Lie™ apparatus. ..."
"... Putting Kudrin -- an opponent of de-dollarization and an upholder of the Washington Consensus -- in charge of Russia's international outreach would be equal to putting Bill Clinton in charge of a girls' school. ..."
"... In the Guardian I only read the comments, never the article. Here, I read both. That is the difference between propaganda and good reporting. ..."
May 04, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

The Grauniad is slipping deeper into the disinformation business: Revealed: UK's push to strengthen anti-Russia alliance is the headline of a page one piece which reveals exactly nothing. There is no secret lifted and no one was discomforted by a questioning journalist.

Like other such pieces it uses disinformation to accuse Russia of spreading such.

The main 'revelation' is stenographed from a British government official. Some quotes from the usual anti-Russian propagandists were added. Dubious or false 'western' government claims are held up as truth. That Russia does not endorse them is proof for Russian mischievousness and its 'disinformation'.

The opener:

The UK will use a series of international summits this year to call for a comprehensive strategy to combat Russian disinformation and urge a rethink over traditional diplomatic dialogue with Moscow, following the Kremlin's aggressive campaign of denials over the use of chemical weapons in the UK and Syria.
...
"The foreign secretary regards Russia's response to Douma and Salisbury as a turning point and thinks there is international support to do more," a Whitehall official said. "The areas the UK are most likely to pursue are countering Russian disinformation and finding a mechanism to enforce accountability for the use of chemical weapons."

There is a mechanism to enforce accountability for the use of chemical weapons. It is the Chemical Weapon Convention and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). It was the British government which at first rejected the use of these instruments during the Skripal incident:

Early involvement of the OPCW, as demanded by Russia, was resisted by the British government. Only on March 14, ten days after the incident happened and two days after Prime Minister Theresa may had made accusations against Russia, did the British government invite the OPCW. Only on March 19, 15 days after the incident happen did the OPCW technical team arrive and took blood samples.

Now back to the Guardian disinformation:

In making its case to foreign ministries, the UK is arguing that Russian denials over Salisbury and Douma reveal a state uninterested in cooperating to reach a common understanding of the truth , but instead using both episodes to try systematically to divide western electorates and sow doubt.

A 'common understanding of the truth' is an interesting term. What is the truth? Whatever the British government claims? It accused Russia of the Skripal incident a mere eight days after it happened. Now, two month later, it admits that it does not know who poisoned the Skripals:

Police and intelligence agencies have failed so far to identify the individual or individuals who carried out the nerve agent attack in Salisbury, the UK's national security adviser has disclosed.

Do the Brits know where the alleged Novichok poison came from? Unless they produced it themselves they likely have no idea. The Czech Republic just admitted that it made small doses of a Novichok nerve agent for testing purposes. Others did too.

Back to the Guardian :

British politicians are not alone in claiming Russia's record of mendacity is not a personal trait of Putin's, but a government-wide strategy that makes traditional diplomacy ineffective.

Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, famously came off one lengthy phone call with Putin – she had more than 40 in a year – to say he lived in a different world.

No, Merkel never said that. An Obama administration flunky planted that in the New York Times :

Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany told Mr. Obama by telephone on Sunday that after speaking with Mr. Putin she was not sure he was in touch with reality, people briefed on the call said. "In another world," she said.

When that claim was made in March 2014 we were immediately suspicious of it:

This does not sound like typically Merkel but rather strange for her. I doubt that she said that the way the "people briefed on the call" told it to the Times stenographer. It is rather an attempt to discredit Merkel and to make it more difficult for her to find a solution with Russia outside of U.S. control.

A day later the German government denied (ger) that Merkel ever said such (my translation):

The chancellery is unhappy about the report in the New York Times. Merkel by no means meant to express that Putin behaved irrational. In fact she told Obama that Putin has a different perspective about the Crimea [than Obama has].

A McClatchy journalist investigated further and came to the same conclusion as I did. The 'leak' to the New York Times was disinformation.

That disinformation, spread by the Obama administration but immediately exposed as false, is now held up as proof by Patrick Wintour, the Diplomatic editor of the Guardian , that Russia uses disinformation and that Putin is a naughty man.

The British Defense Minister Gavin Williamson wants journalists to enter the UK reserve forces to help with the creation of propaganda:

He said army recruitment should be about "looking to different people who maybe think, as a journalist: 'What are my skills in terms of how are they relevant to the armed forces?'

Patrick Wintour seems to be a qualified candidate.

Or maybe he should join the NATO for Information Warfare the Atlantic Council wants to create to further disinform about those damned Russkies:

What we need now is a cross-border defense alliance against disinformation -- call it Communications NATO. Such an alliance is, in fact, nearly as important as its military counterpart.

Like the Guardian piece above writer of the NATO propaganda lobby Atlantic Council makes claims of Russian disinformation that do not hold up to the slightest test:

By pinning the Novichok nerve agent on Sweden or the Czech Republic, or blaming the UK for the nerve gas attack in Syria, the Kremlin sows confusion among our populations and makes us lose trust in our institutions.

Russia has not pinned the Novichok to Sweden or the Czech Republic. It said, correctly, that several countries produced Novichok. Russia did not blame the UK for the 'nerve gas attack' in Syria. Russia says that there was no gas attack in Douma.

The claims of Russian disinformation these authors make to not hold up to scrutiny. Meanwhile there pieces themselves are full of lies, distortions and, yes, disinformation.

The bigger aim behind all these activities, demanding a myriad of new organizations to propagandize against Russia, is to introduce a strict control over information within 'western' societies.

Anything that may not confirm to the 'truth' as prescribed from above must be overwhelmed with an onslaught of more lies or, if that does not work, be discredited as 'enemy' disinformation.

That scheme will be used against anyone who deviates from the ordered norm. You dislike that pipeline in your backyard? You must be falling for Russian trolls or maybe you yourself are an agent of a foreign power. Social Security? The Russians like that. It is a disinformation thing. You better forget about it.

c1ue , May 4, 2018 2:27:27 PM | 1

Excellent article, in an ongoing run of great journalism.
I am curious - have you read this? https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ST/
It purports to be a book by an American military man intimately familiar with the covert ops portion of the US government. The internal Kafka-esque dynamics described certainly feel true.
Mike Maloney , May 4, 2018 2:44:12 PM | 3
One of the reasons newspapers are getting worse is the economics. They aren't really viable anymore. Their future is as some form of government sanctioned oligopoly. Two national papers -- a "left" and a "right" -- and then a handful of regional papers. All spouting the same neoliberal, neoconservative chicanery.
CD Waller , May 4, 2018 2:57:20 PM | 4
Genuine journalist Matt Taibbi warned of this sort of branding of disparate views as enemy a month ago. He was also correct. Evil and insidious. The enemy of a free society.
chet380 , May 4, 2018 2:58:22 PM | 5
Wait for an outbreak of hostilities on the Ukraine-Donbass front shortly before the beginning of the World Cup competition which is as internationally important as the Olympic Games -- as they did in 2014 with Maidan and 2016 with the Sochi Winter Olympics drug uproar, the CIA will create chaos that will take the emphasis off any Russian success, since as to them, anything negative regarding Russia is a positive for them.
WJ , May 4, 2018 3:02:57 PM | 6
The later history of the 20th century will one day be read as the triumph and normalization of the Nazi state through liberal democratic capitalism.
Laguerre , May 4, 2018 3:07:19 PM | 7
I agree that it's difficult to see how the drive to renew the Cold War is going to be stopped. I presume that, with the exception of certain NeoCon circles, there isn't a desire for Hot War. Certainly not in the British sources you quote. Britain wouldn't want Hot War with Russia. It's all a question of going to the limit for internal consumption. Do a 1984, in order to keep the population in-line.
james , May 4, 2018 3:11:05 PM | 8
thanks b... i can't understand how any intelligent thinking person would read the guardian, let alone something like the huff post, and etc. etc... why? the propaganda money that pays for the white helmets, certainly goes to these outlets as well..

the uk have gone completely nuts! i guess it comes with reading the guardian, although, in fairness, all british media seems very skewed - sky news, bbc, and etc. etc.

it does appear as though Patrick Wintour is on Gavin Williamson's propaganda bandwagon/payroll already... in reading the comments and articles at craig murrays site, i have become more familiar with just how crazy things are in the uk.. his latest article freedom no more sums it up well... throw the uk msm in the trash can... it is for all intensive purposes, done..

mk , May 4, 2018 3:31:41 PM | 9
Meanwhile, OPCW chief Uzumcu seems to have been pranked again, this time by his own staff (this is how I interpret it):

He claimed that the amount of Novichok found was about 100 g and therefore more than research laboratories would produce, i.e. this was weaponized Novichok.

http://www.startribune.com/large-dose-of-nerve-agent-was-used-in-spy-s-poisoning-watchdog-says/481687061/

However, the story is being retracted right now because OPCW staff says it was only 100 mg .

Uzumcu looks like a fool.

b , May 4, 2018 3:49:03 PM | 10
The Russian embassy in the UK must be reading MoA. It just now tweeted this press release: Embassy press officer comments on the Guardian article concerning a new British anti-Russian strategy
Q: What is our reaction to the Guardian article on a "comprehensive strategy" to "deepen the alliance against Russia" to be pursued by the UK Government at international forums?

A: Judging by the publication, the main current challenge for Whitehall is to preserve the anti-Russian coalition that the Conservatives tried to build after the Salisbury incident. This task is challenging indeed. The "fusion doctrine" promoted by the national security apparatus has led to the Western bloc taking hasty decisions that, as life has shown, were not based on any facts.

No traces of chemical weapons have been found in Douma. This means that not only the US/UK/French airstrikes were illegal under international law but even their political justification was inherently flawed. Similarly, in the Salisbury affair, no evidence of Russian involvement has been presented, while the two myths on which the British case was built (the Russian origin of the chemical substance used and the existence of proof of Russian responsibility) have been shattered.

Given the lack of facts, the Tory leadership seems to be adopting a truly Orwellian logic: that the main proof of Russian responsibility are the Russian denials! It is hard to see how they will be able to sell this to their international partners. Self-respecting countries of G20 would not be willing to risk their reputation.

karlof1 , May 4, 2018 3:52:31 PM | 11
Hmmm... My reply to c1ue went sideways it seems. Yes, The late Mr. Prouty's book's the real deal and the website hosting his very rare book is a rare gem itself. Click the JFK at page top left to be transported to that sites archive of writings about his murder. The very important essay by Prouty's there too.
WJ , May 4, 2018 3:53:30 PM | 12
The detail of b's analysis that stands out to me as especially significant and brilliant is his demolition of the Guardian's reuse of the Merkel "quote."

This one detail tells us so much about how propaganda works, and about how it can be defeated. Successful propaganda both depends upon and seeks to accelerate the erasure of historical memory. This is because its truths are always changing to suit the immediate needs of the state. None of its truths can be understood historically. b makes the connection between the documented but forgotten past "truth" of Merkel's quote and its present reincarnation in the Guardian, and this is really all he *needs* to do. What b points out is something quite simple; yet the ability to do this very simple thing is becoming increasingly rare and its exercise increasingly difficult to achieve. It is for me the virtue that makes b's analysis uniquely indispensable.

Related to the above, consider the nature of the recently christened thought-crime, "whataboutism." The crime may be defined as follows: "Whataboutism" is the attempt to understand a truth asserted by propaganda by way of relation to other truths it has asserted contemporaneous with or prior to this one. It is to ask, "What about this *other* truth? Does this *other* truth affect our understanding of *this* truth? And if so, how does it?"

Whataboutism seems to deny that each asserted truth stands on its own, and has no essential relation to any other past, present, or future asserted truth.

Jose Garcia , May 4, 2018 3:56:03 PM | 13
1984, anyone?
john wilson , May 4, 2018 4:03:04 PM | 14
The absurd story that the OPCW says there was a 100gm/100mg who knows which on the door and other sites is just so stupid its painful. This implies that the Skripals both closed the door together and then went off on their day spreading the stuff everywhere, yet no one else was contaminated (apart from the fantasy policeman).

Presumably the Skripals touch the cutlery, plates and wine glasses in the restaurant, so why weren't the staff there infected as they must have had to pick up the plates etc after the meal. Even the door to the entrance of the restaurant should be affected as they would have to push it open, thus leaving the chemical for other people to touch. Nope, nothing in this stupid story adds up and the OPCW can't even get the amounts of the chemical right.

ken , May 4, 2018 4:03:13 PM | 15
The problem is,,, most know it's all BS but find it 'easier' to believe or at most ignore, as then there is no responsibility to 'do something'. Biggest problem with the world today is lazy insouciant citizens. (Yes,,, I'm a PCR reader) :))
karlof1 , May 4, 2018 4:05:15 PM | 16
b @10--

Did you catch the Lavrov interview I linked to on previous Yemen thread? As you might imagine, the verbiage used is quite similar. One very important point Lavrov made was the anti-Russian group consists of a very small number of nations representing a small fraction of humanity; and that while they have some economic and military clout, it's possible for the rest of the world's nations to sideline them and get on with the important business of forming a genuine Multipolar World Order, which is what the UN and its Charter envisioned.

I won't omit linking to Craig Murray's conclusion :

"I cannot sufficiently express my outrage that Leeds City Council feels it is right to ban a meeting with very distinguished speakers, because it is questioning the government and establishment line on Syria. Freedom of speech really is dead."

Ort , May 4, 2018 4:22:35 PM | 17
Anything that may not confirm to the 'truth' as prescribed from above must be overwhelmed with an onslaught of more lies or, if that does not work, be discredited as 'enemy' disinformation.
_______________________________________

Yes, exactly. The Western hegemony, i.e. the true "Axis of Evil" led by the US, and including the EU and non-Western allies, have invented the Perpetual Big Lie™.

This isn't a new insight, but it's worth repeating. It struck me anew while I was listening to a couple of UK "journalists" hectoring OPCW Representative Shulgin, and directing scurrilous and provocative innuendo disguised as "questions" to Mr. Shulgin and the Syrian witnesses testifying during his presentation.

It flashed upon me that there is no longer a reasonable expectation that the Perpetual Big Liars must eventually abandon, much less confess, their heinous mendacity. Just as B points out, there are no countervailing facts, evidence, rebuttals, theories, or explanations that can't be countered with further iterations of Big Lies, however offensively incredible and absurd.

Witnesses? They're either confederates, dupes, or terrified by coercion. Evidence and/or technical analysis? All faked! A nominally reliable party, e.g. the president of the Czech Republic, makes statements that undermine the Big Lie Nexus? Again-- he's either been bought off or frightened into making such inconvenient claims. Or he's just a mischievous liar.

And, as I seemingly never get tired of pointing out, the Perpetual Big Lie™ strategy arose, and succeeds, because the "natural enemies" of authoritarian government overreach have been coerced or co-opted to a fare-thee-well. So mass-media venues, and even supposedly independent technical and scientific organizations, are part of the Perpetual Big Lie™ apparatus.

Even as the Big Liars reach a point of diminishing returns, they respond with more of the same. I wish I were more confident that this reprehensible practice will eventually fail due to the excess of malignant hubris; I'm not holding my breath.

Passer by , May 4, 2018 4:24:44 PM | 18

Is Putin capitulating? Pro US Alexei Kudrin could join new government to negotiate "end of sanctions" with the West.

Former finance minister Alexei Kudrin will be brought back to "mend fences with the West" in order to revive Russia's economy. Kudrin has repeatedly said that unless Russia makes her political system more democratic and ends its confrontation with Europe and the United States, she will not be able to achieve economic growth. Russia's fifth-columnists were exalted: "If Kudrin joined the administration or government, it would indicate that they have agreed on a certain agenda of change, including in foreign policy, because without change in foreign policy, reforms are simply impossible in Russia," said Yevgeny Gontmakher . . . who works with a civil society organization set up by Mr. Kudrin. "It would be a powerful message, because Kudrin is the only one in the top echelons with whom they will talk in the west and towards whom there is a certain trust."

Putting Kudrin -- an opponent of de-dollarization and an upholder of the Washington Consensus -- in charge of Russia's international outreach would be equal to putting Bill Clinton in charge of a girls' school.

It would mark Putin's de facto collapse as a leader. We shall know very soon. Either way, if anyone wondered what the approach to Russia would be from Bolton and Pompeo, we now know: they will play very hard ball with Putin, regardless of what he does (or doesn't do), and with carefree readiness to risk an eventual snap.

https://archive.is/1Ynms#selection-1641.0-1641.66

Formerly T-Bear , May 4, 2018 4:57:25 PM | 21
@ 20 Laguerre

Certainly looks like @ 18 is a fine example of what b is presenting.

A good way to extract one's self from the propaganda is to refuse using whatever meme the disinformation uses, e.g. that Sergei Skripal was a double agent -- that is not a known, only a convenient suggestion.

Military intelligence is far better described as military information needed for some project or mission. Not surreptitious cloak and dagger spying. This is not to say Sergei Scripal was a British spy for which he was convicted, stripped of rank and career and exiled through a spy swap. To continue using Sergei Scripal was a double agent only repeats and verifies the disinformation meme and all the framing that goes with it. Find some alternative to what MSM produces that does not embed truthiness to their efforts.

Peter Schmidt , May 4, 2018 5:08:52 PM | 23
In the Guardian I only read the comments, never the article. Here, I read both. That is the difference between propaganda and good reporting.
Emily Dickinson , May 4, 2018 5:09:00 PM | 24
@Michael Weddington 19

I realize it's from one of the biggest propaganda organs in the world... take this New York Times report of the OPCW's retraction with a 100 grams -- 100mg? -- of salt:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/world/europe/opcw-skripal-attack.html

karlof1 , May 4, 2018 5:12:57 PM | 25
Passer by @18--

This same narrative was put forth in 2016 and is just as false now as then. As I posted on Yemen thread earlier, Putin on 5 May is likely to announce the formation of a Stavka.

Kudrin is a neoliberal and as such is an enemy of humanity and will never again be allowed to hold a position of power within Russia's government. Let him emigrate to the West like his fellow parasites and teach junk economics at some likeminded university.

jalp , May 4, 2018 5:30:35 PM | 26
Anyone seen this reported elsewhere? https://www.rt.com/news/425810-white-helmets-us-funding-freeze/

[May 04, 2018] Media Use Disinformation To Accuse Russia Of Spreading Such by b

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... A McClatchy journalist investigated further and came to the same conclusion as I did. The 'leak' to the New York Times was disinformation. ..."
"... Russia has not pinned the Novichok to Sweden or the Czech Republic. It said, correctly, that several countries produced Novichok. Russia did not blame the UK for the 'nerve gas attack' in Syria. Russia says that there was no gas attack in Douma. ..."
"... The claims of Russian disinformation these authors make to not hold up to scrutiny. Meanwhile there pieces themselves are full of lies, distortions and, yes, disinformation. ..."
"... Wait for an outbreak of hostilities on the Ukraine-Donbass front shortly before the beginning of the World Cup competition which is as internationally important as the Olympic Games -- as they did in 2014 with Maidan and 2016 with the Sochi Winter Olympics drug uproar, the CIA will create chaos that will take the emphasis off any Russian success, since as to them, anything negative regarding Russia is a positive for them. ..."
"... No traces of chemical weapons have been found in Douma. This means that not only the US/UK/French airstrikes were illegal under international law but even their political justification was inherently flawed. Similarly, in the Salisbury affair, no evidence of Russian involvement has been presented, while the two myths on which the British case was built (the Russian origin of the chemical substance used and the existence of proof of Russian responsibility) have been shattered. ..."
"... Given the lack of facts, the Tory leadership seems to be adopting a truly Orwellian logic: that the main proof of Russian responsibility are the Russian denials! It is hard to see how they will be able to sell this to their international partners. Self-respecting countries of G20 would not be willing to risk their reputation. ..."
"... The detail of b's analysis that stands out to me as especially significant and brilliant is his demolition of the Guardian's reuse of the Merkel "quote." ..."
"... Related to the above, consider the nature of the recently christened thought-crime, "whataboutism." The crime may be defined as follows: "Whataboutism" is the attempt to understand a truth asserted by propaganda by way of relation to other truths it has asserted contemporaneous with or prior to this one. It is to ask, "What about this *other* truth? Does this *other* truth affect our understanding of *this* truth? And if so, how does it?" ..."
"... Whataboutism seems to deny that each asserted truth stands on its own, and has no essential relation to any other past, present, or future asserted truth. ..."
"... 1984, anyone? ..."
"... The absurd story that the OPCW says there was a 100gm/100mg who knows which on the door and other sites is just so stupid its painful. ..."
"... Presumably the Skripals touch the cutlery, plates and wine glasses in the restaurant, so why weren't the staff there infected as they must have had to pick up the plates etc after the meal. Even the door to the entrance of the restaurant should be affected as they would have to push it open, thus leaving the chemical for other people to touch. Nope, nothing in this stupid story adds up and the OPCW can't even get the amounts of the chemical right. ..."
"... Biggest problem with the world today is lazy insouciant citizens. ..."
"... One very important point Lavrov made was the anti-Russian group consists of a very small number of nations representing a small fraction of humanity; ..."
"... while they have some economic and military clout, it's possible for the rest of the world's nations to sideline them and get on with the important business of forming a genuine Multipolar World Order, which is what the UN and its Charter envisioned. ..."
"... Anything that may not confirm to the 'truth' as prescribed from above must be overwhelmed with an onslaught of more lies or, if that does not work, be discredited as 'enemy' disinformation. ..."
"... Yes, exactly. The Western hegemony, i.e. the true "Axis of Evil" led by the US, and including the EU and non-Western allies, have invented the Perpetual Big Lie™. ..."
"... Witnesses? They're either confederates, dupes, or terrified by coercion. Evidence and/or technical analysis? All faked! A nominally reliable party, e.g. the president of the Czech Republic, makes statements that undermine the Big Lie Nexus? Again-- he's either been bought off or frightened into making such inconvenient claims. Or he's just a mischievous liar. ..."
"... And, as I seemingly never get tired of pointing out, the Perpetual Big Lie™ strategy arose, and succeeds, because the "natural enemies" of authoritarian government overreach have been coerced or co-opted to a fare-thee-well. So mass-media venues, and even supposedly independent technical and scientific organizations, are part of the Perpetual Big Lie™ apparatus. ..."
"... Putting Kudrin -- an opponent of de-dollarization and an upholder of the Washington Consensus -- in charge of Russia's international outreach would be equal to putting Bill Clinton in charge of a girls' school. ..."
"... In the Guardian I only read the comments, never the article. Here, I read both. That is the difference between propaganda and good reporting. ..."
May 04, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

The Grauniad is slipping deeper into the disinformation business: Revealed: UK's push to strengthen anti-Russia alliance is the headline of a page one piece which reveals exactly nothing. There is no secret lifted and no one was discomforted by a questioning journalist.

Like other such pieces it uses disinformation to accuse Russia of spreading such.

The main 'revelation' is stenographed from a British government official. Some quotes from the usual anti-Russian propagandists were added. Dubious or false 'western' government claims are held up as truth. That Russia does not endorse them is proof for Russian mischievousness and its 'disinformation'.

The opener:

The UK will use a series of international summits this year to call for a comprehensive strategy to combat Russian disinformation and urge a rethink over traditional diplomatic dialogue with Moscow, following the Kremlin's aggressive campaign of denials over the use of chemical weapons in the UK and Syria.
...
"The foreign secretary regards Russia's response to Douma and Salisbury as a turning point and thinks there is international support to do more," a Whitehall official said. "The areas the UK are most likely to pursue are countering Russian disinformation and finding a mechanism to enforce accountability for the use of chemical weapons."

There is a mechanism to enforce accountability for the use of chemical weapons. It is the Chemical Weapon Convention and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). It was the British government which at first rejected the use of these instruments during the Skripal incident:

Early involvement of the OPCW, as demanded by Russia, was resisted by the British government. Only on March 14, ten days after the incident happened and two days after Prime Minister Theresa may had made accusations against Russia, did the British government invite the OPCW. Only on March 19, 15 days after the incident happen did the OPCW technical team arrive and took blood samples.

Now back to the Guardian disinformation:

In making its case to foreign ministries, the UK is arguing that Russian denials over Salisbury and Douma reveal a state uninterested in cooperating to reach a common understanding of the truth , but instead using both episodes to try systematically to divide western electorates and sow doubt.

A 'common understanding of the truth' is an interesting term. What is the truth? Whatever the British government claims? It accused Russia of the Skripal incident a mere eight days after it happened. Now, two month later, it admits that it does not know who poisoned the Skripals:

Police and intelligence agencies have failed so far to identify the individual or individuals who carried out the nerve agent attack in Salisbury, the UK's national security adviser has disclosed.

Do the Brits know where the alleged Novichok poison came from? Unless they produced it themselves they likely have no idea. The Czech Republic just admitted that it made small doses of a Novichok nerve agent for testing purposes. Others did too.

Back to the Guardian :

British politicians are not alone in claiming Russia's record of mendacity is not a personal trait of Putin's, but a government-wide strategy that makes traditional diplomacy ineffective.

Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, famously came off one lengthy phone call with Putin – she had more than 40 in a year – to say he lived in a different world.

No, Merkel never said that. An Obama administration flunky planted that in the New York Times :

Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany told Mr. Obama by telephone on Sunday that after speaking with Mr. Putin she was not sure he was in touch with reality, people briefed on the call said. "In another world," she said.

When that claim was made in March 2014 we were immediately suspicious of it:

This does not sound like typically Merkel but rather strange for her. I doubt that she said that the way the "people briefed on the call" told it to the Times stenographer. It is rather an attempt to discredit Merkel and to make it more difficult for her to find a solution with Russia outside of U.S. control.

A day later the German government denied (ger) that Merkel ever said such (my translation):

The chancellery is unhappy about the report in the New York Times. Merkel by no means meant to express that Putin behaved irrational. In fact she told Obama that Putin has a different perspective about the Crimea [than Obama has].

A McClatchy journalist investigated further and came to the same conclusion as I did. The 'leak' to the New York Times was disinformation.

That disinformation, spread by the Obama administration but immediately exposed as false, is now held up as proof by Patrick Wintour, the Diplomatic editor of the Guardian , that Russia uses disinformation and that Putin is a naughty man.

The British Defense Minister Gavin Williamson wants journalists to enter the UK reserve forces to help with the creation of propaganda:

He said army recruitment should be about "looking to different people who maybe think, as a journalist: 'What are my skills in terms of how are they relevant to the armed forces?'

Patrick Wintour seems to be a qualified candidate.

Or maybe he should join the NATO for Information Warfare the Atlantic Council wants to create to further disinform about those damned Russkies:

What we need now is a cross-border defense alliance against disinformation -- call it Communications NATO. Such an alliance is, in fact, nearly as important as its military counterpart.

Like the Guardian piece above writer of the NATO propaganda lobby Atlantic Council makes claims of Russian disinformation that do not hold up to the slightest test:

By pinning the Novichok nerve agent on Sweden or the Czech Republic, or blaming the UK for the nerve gas attack in Syria, the Kremlin sows confusion among our populations and makes us lose trust in our institutions.

Russia has not pinned the Novichok to Sweden or the Czech Republic. It said, correctly, that several countries produced Novichok. Russia did not blame the UK for the 'nerve gas attack' in Syria. Russia says that there was no gas attack in Douma.

The claims of Russian disinformation these authors make to not hold up to scrutiny. Meanwhile there pieces themselves are full of lies, distortions and, yes, disinformation.

The bigger aim behind all these activities, demanding a myriad of new organizations to propagandize against Russia, is to introduce a strict control over information within 'western' societies.

Anything that may not confirm to the 'truth' as prescribed from above must be overwhelmed with an onslaught of more lies or, if that does not work, be discredited as 'enemy' disinformation.

That scheme will be used against anyone who deviates from the ordered norm. You dislike that pipeline in your backyard? You must be falling for Russian trolls or maybe you yourself are an agent of a foreign power. Social Security? The Russians like that. It is a disinformation thing. You better forget about it.

c1ue , May 4, 2018 2:27:27 PM | 1

Excellent article, in an ongoing run of great journalism.
I am curious - have you read this? https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ST/
It purports to be a book by an American military man intimately familiar with the covert ops portion of the US government. The internal Kafka-esque dynamics described certainly feel true.
Mike Maloney , May 4, 2018 2:44:12 PM | 3
One of the reasons newspapers are getting worse is the economics. They aren't really viable anymore. Their future is as some form of government sanctioned oligopoly. Two national papers -- a "left" and a "right" -- and then a handful of regional papers. All spouting the same neoliberal, neoconservative chicanery.
CD Waller , May 4, 2018 2:57:20 PM | 4
Genuine journalist Matt Taibbi warned of this sort of branding of disparate views as enemy a month ago. He was also correct. Evil and insidious. The enemy of a free society.
chet380 , May 4, 2018 2:58:22 PM | 5
Wait for an outbreak of hostilities on the Ukraine-Donbass front shortly before the beginning of the World Cup competition which is as internationally important as the Olympic Games -- as they did in 2014 with Maidan and 2016 with the Sochi Winter Olympics drug uproar, the CIA will create chaos that will take the emphasis off any Russian success, since as to them, anything negative regarding Russia is a positive for them.
WJ , May 4, 2018 3:02:57 PM | 6
The later history of the 20th century will one day be read as the triumph and normalization of the Nazi state through liberal democratic capitalism.
Laguerre , May 4, 2018 3:07:19 PM | 7
I agree that it's difficult to see how the drive to renew the Cold War is going to be stopped. I presume that, with the exception of certain NeoCon circles, there isn't a desire for Hot War. Certainly not in the British sources you quote. Britain wouldn't want Hot War with Russia. It's all a question of going to the limit for internal consumption. Do a 1984, in order to keep the population in-line.
james , May 4, 2018 3:11:05 PM | 8
thanks b... i can't understand how any intelligent thinking person would read the guardian, let alone something like the huff post, and etc. etc... why? the propaganda money that pays for the white helmets, certainly goes to these outlets as well..

the uk have gone completely nuts! i guess it comes with reading the guardian, although, in fairness, all british media seems very skewed - sky news, bbc, and etc. etc.

it does appear as though Patrick Wintour is on Gavin Williamson's propaganda bandwagon/payroll already... in reading the comments and articles at craig murrays site, i have become more familiar with just how crazy things are in the uk.. his latest article freedom no more sums it up well... throw the uk msm in the trash can... it is for all intensive purposes, done..

mk , May 4, 2018 3:31:41 PM | 9
Meanwhile, OPCW chief Uzumcu seems to have been pranked again, this time by his own staff (this is how I interpret it):

He claimed that the amount of Novichok found was about 100 g and therefore more than research laboratories would produce, i.e. this was weaponized Novichok.

http://www.startribune.com/large-dose-of-nerve-agent-was-used-in-spy-s-poisoning-watchdog-says/481687061/

However, the story is being retracted right now because OPCW staff says it was only 100 mg .

Uzumcu looks like a fool.

b , May 4, 2018 3:49:03 PM | 10
The Russian embassy in the UK must be reading MoA. It just now tweeted this press release: Embassy press officer comments on the Guardian article concerning a new British anti-Russian strategy
Q: What is our reaction to the Guardian article on a "comprehensive strategy" to "deepen the alliance against Russia" to be pursued by the UK Government at international forums?

A: Judging by the publication, the main current challenge for Whitehall is to preserve the anti-Russian coalition that the Conservatives tried to build after the Salisbury incident. This task is challenging indeed. The "fusion doctrine" promoted by the national security apparatus has led to the Western bloc taking hasty decisions that, as life has shown, were not based on any facts.

No traces of chemical weapons have been found in Douma. This means that not only the US/UK/French airstrikes were illegal under international law but even their political justification was inherently flawed. Similarly, in the Salisbury affair, no evidence of Russian involvement has been presented, while the two myths on which the British case was built (the Russian origin of the chemical substance used and the existence of proof of Russian responsibility) have been shattered.

Given the lack of facts, the Tory leadership seems to be adopting a truly Orwellian logic: that the main proof of Russian responsibility are the Russian denials! It is hard to see how they will be able to sell this to their international partners. Self-respecting countries of G20 would not be willing to risk their reputation.

karlof1 , May 4, 2018 3:52:31 PM | 11
Hmmm... My reply to c1ue went sideways it seems. Yes, The late Mr. Prouty's book's the real deal and the website hosting his very rare book is a rare gem itself. Click the JFK at page top left to be transported to that sites archive of writings about his murder. The very important essay by Prouty's there too.
WJ , May 4, 2018 3:53:30 PM | 12
The detail of b's analysis that stands out to me as especially significant and brilliant is his demolition of the Guardian's reuse of the Merkel "quote."

This one detail tells us so much about how propaganda works, and about how it can be defeated. Successful propaganda both depends upon and seeks to accelerate the erasure of historical memory. This is because its truths are always changing to suit the immediate needs of the state. None of its truths can be understood historically. b makes the connection between the documented but forgotten past "truth" of Merkel's quote and its present reincarnation in the Guardian, and this is really all he *needs* to do. What b points out is something quite simple; yet the ability to do this very simple thing is becoming increasingly rare and its exercise increasingly difficult to achieve. It is for me the virtue that makes b's analysis uniquely indispensable.

Related to the above, consider the nature of the recently christened thought-crime, "whataboutism." The crime may be defined as follows: "Whataboutism" is the attempt to understand a truth asserted by propaganda by way of relation to other truths it has asserted contemporaneous with or prior to this one. It is to ask, "What about this *other* truth? Does this *other* truth affect our understanding of *this* truth? And if so, how does it?"

Whataboutism seems to deny that each asserted truth stands on its own, and has no essential relation to any other past, present, or future asserted truth.

Jose Garcia , May 4, 2018 3:56:03 PM | 13
1984, anyone?
john wilson , May 4, 2018 4:03:04 PM | 14
The absurd story that the OPCW says there was a 100gm/100mg who knows which on the door and other sites is just so stupid its painful. This implies that the Skripals both closed the door together and then went off on their day spreading the stuff everywhere, yet no one else was contaminated (apart from the fantasy policeman).

Presumably the Skripals touch the cutlery, plates and wine glasses in the restaurant, so why weren't the staff there infected as they must have had to pick up the plates etc after the meal. Even the door to the entrance of the restaurant should be affected as they would have to push it open, thus leaving the chemical for other people to touch. Nope, nothing in this stupid story adds up and the OPCW can't even get the amounts of the chemical right.

ken , May 4, 2018 4:03:13 PM | 15
The problem is,,, most know it's all BS but find it 'easier' to believe or at most ignore, as then there is no responsibility to 'do something'. Biggest problem with the world today is lazy insouciant citizens. (Yes,,, I'm a PCR reader) :))
karlof1 , May 4, 2018 4:05:15 PM | 16
b @10--

Did you catch the Lavrov interview I linked to on previous Yemen thread? As you might imagine, the verbiage used is quite similar. One very important point Lavrov made was the anti-Russian group consists of a very small number of nations representing a small fraction of humanity; and that while they have some economic and military clout, it's possible for the rest of the world's nations to sideline them and get on with the important business of forming a genuine Multipolar World Order, which is what the UN and its Charter envisioned.

I won't omit linking to Craig Murray's conclusion :

"I cannot sufficiently express my outrage that Leeds City Council feels it is right to ban a meeting with very distinguished speakers, because it is questioning the government and establishment line on Syria. Freedom of speech really is dead."

Ort , May 4, 2018 4:22:35 PM | 17
Anything that may not confirm to the 'truth' as prescribed from above must be overwhelmed with an onslaught of more lies or, if that does not work, be discredited as 'enemy' disinformation.
_______________________________________

Yes, exactly. The Western hegemony, i.e. the true "Axis of Evil" led by the US, and including the EU and non-Western allies, have invented the Perpetual Big Lie™.

This isn't a new insight, but it's worth repeating. It struck me anew while I was listening to a couple of UK "journalists" hectoring OPCW Representative Shulgin, and directing scurrilous and provocative innuendo disguised as "questions" to Mr. Shulgin and the Syrian witnesses testifying during his presentation.

It flashed upon me that there is no longer a reasonable expectation that the Perpetual Big Liars must eventually abandon, much less confess, their heinous mendacity. Just as B points out, there are no countervailing facts, evidence, rebuttals, theories, or explanations that can't be countered with further iterations of Big Lies, however offensively incredible and absurd.

Witnesses? They're either confederates, dupes, or terrified by coercion. Evidence and/or technical analysis? All faked! A nominally reliable party, e.g. the president of the Czech Republic, makes statements that undermine the Big Lie Nexus? Again-- he's either been bought off or frightened into making such inconvenient claims. Or he's just a mischievous liar.

And, as I seemingly never get tired of pointing out, the Perpetual Big Lie™ strategy arose, and succeeds, because the "natural enemies" of authoritarian government overreach have been coerced or co-opted to a fare-thee-well. So mass-media venues, and even supposedly independent technical and scientific organizations, are part of the Perpetual Big Lie™ apparatus.

Even as the Big Liars reach a point of diminishing returns, they respond with more of the same. I wish I were more confident that this reprehensible practice will eventually fail due to the excess of malignant hubris; I'm not holding my breath.

Passer by , May 4, 2018 4:24:44 PM | 18

Is Putin capitulating? Pro US Alexei Kudrin could join new government to negotiate "end of sanctions" with the West.

Former finance minister Alexei Kudrin will be brought back to "mend fences with the West" in order to revive Russia's economy. Kudrin has repeatedly said that unless Russia makes her political system more democratic and ends its confrontation with Europe and the United States, she will not be able to achieve economic growth. Russia's fifth-columnists were exalted: "If Kudrin joined the administration or government, it would indicate that they have agreed on a certain agenda of change, including in foreign policy, because without change in foreign policy, reforms are simply impossible in Russia," said Yevgeny Gontmakher . . . who works with a civil society organization set up by Mr. Kudrin. "It would be a powerful message, because Kudrin is the only one in the top echelons with whom they will talk in the west and towards whom there is a certain trust."

Putting Kudrin -- an opponent of de-dollarization and an upholder of the Washington Consensus -- in charge of Russia's international outreach would be equal to putting Bill Clinton in charge of a girls' school.

It would mark Putin's de facto collapse as a leader. We shall know very soon. Either way, if anyone wondered what the approach to Russia would be from Bolton and Pompeo, we now know: they will play very hard ball with Putin, regardless of what he does (or doesn't do), and with carefree readiness to risk an eventual snap.

https://archive.is/1Ynms#selection-1641.0-1641.66

Formerly T-Bear , May 4, 2018 4:57:25 PM | 21
@ 20 Laguerre

Certainly looks like @ 18 is a fine example of what b is presenting.

A good way to extract one's self from the propaganda is to refuse using whatever meme the disinformation uses, e.g. that Sergei Skripal was a double agent -- that is not a known, only a convenient suggestion.

Military intelligence is far better described as military information needed for some project or mission. Not surreptitious cloak and dagger spying. This is not to say Sergei Scripal was a British spy for which he was convicted, stripped of rank and career and exiled through a spy swap. To continue using Sergei Scripal was a double agent only repeats and verifies the disinformation meme and all the framing that goes with it. Find some alternative to what MSM produces that does not embed truthiness to their efforts.

Peter Schmidt , May 4, 2018 5:08:52 PM | 23
In the Guardian I only read the comments, never the article. Here, I read both. That is the difference between propaganda and good reporting.
Emily Dickinson , May 4, 2018 5:09:00 PM | 24
@Michael Weddington 19

I realize it's from one of the biggest propaganda organs in the world... take this New York Times report of the OPCW's retraction with a 100 grams -- 100mg? -- of salt:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/world/europe/opcw-skripal-attack.html

karlof1 , May 4, 2018 5:12:57 PM | 25
Passer by @18--

This same narrative was put forth in 2016 and is just as false now as then. As I posted on Yemen thread earlier, Putin on 5 May is likely to announce the formation of a Stavka.

Kudrin is a neoliberal and as such is an enemy of humanity and will never again be allowed to hold a position of power within Russia's government. Let him emigrate to the West like his fellow parasites and teach junk economics at some likeminded university.

jalp , May 4, 2018 5:30:35 PM | 26
Anyone seen this reported elsewhere? https://www.rt.com/news/425810-white-helmets-us-funding-freeze/

[May 04, 2018] The Empire Is Crumbling, But Not Dead, and Desperate for War

May 04, 2018 | larouchepac.com

Let us review: Every effort by the British to bring down the government of the United States under President Donald Trump has failed. MI6 agent Christopher Steele's dodgy dossier now stands exposed as the only basis for the launching of Trumpgate by the corrupt Obama intelligence team, and the perpetrators are themselves now facing criminal prosecution; the Skripal case has disappeared from the media, as the connections to the same Christopher Steele were coming to the fore; the Syrian chemical weapons fraud concocted by the British-run White Helmets has now been exposed internationally as a Nazi-like staged affair to justify a military assault. That assault, in which Trump was tricked into going along with the British and the French, effectively declared that the international law established after World War II, through the United Nations, to prevent another world war, was dead.

The Empire will not go quietly into the night. Bibi Netanyahu's antics -- claiming "proof" that Iran is still developing nuclear weapons -- is being ridiculed even by former Israeli intelligence officials as re-packaged news, already known by the IAEA, and proving nothing. But the British have always used the Israeli right-wing, and the Saudi Royal family, to provoke divisions and, when necessary, to start wars. With Trump having cooperated with Putin in defeating ISIS in Syria, and swearing that he wants to get the U.S. out of Syria altogether and "stop being the world's policeman," the British are desperately pulling every possible string to drag the U.S. into more wars.

The same situation exists in Ukraine. Poroshenko today launched his "Joint Forces" operation, consolidating the National Guard, the National Police, and the disparate neo-Nazi militias under central army control, committed to a military solution to the Donbas.

A new war in Syria or Ukraine could quickly explode into war with Russia, and a new world war, this time with nuclear weapons.

And yet, as demonstrated in Korea, when the United States works with China and Russia, miracles can happen. The "permanent crisis" in Korea, like the "permanent crisis" in the Middle East -- both the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Sunni-Shi'a conflict -- have been intentionally maintained by the British and their assets as cockpits for war between East and West, to keep the major powers divided, to the benefit of the British Empire which controls the financial system centered in the City of London and Wall Street.

But the New Silk Road is threatening that "divide and conquer" mentality. The win-win policy of China's Belt and Road Initiative, transforming the "Third World" into modern agro-industrial nation states through modern infrastructure development, has demonstrated that conflicts based on ethnicity, religion, territorial issues and the like can be overcome based on advancing the common interests of all nations and all peoples.

The role of the United States in this global crisis is determining. With Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's historic summit with Xi Jinping last week, the three great cultures of Russia, China, and India are now working together in creating a New Paradigm for mankind. Lyndon LaRouche has long insisted that the "Four Powers" of Russia, China, India and the United States is the necessary combination needed to end the world of Empire once and for all.

President Trump has repeatedly stressed that being friends with Russia and China "is a good thing, not a bad thing," which is the core reason that British intelligence launched the Russiagate coup attempt in the first place. If Trump is to survive, the American people must identify the British role, free Trump of the British coup attempt, and back his best impulses to join fully with America's natural allies in Russia and China, through full participation in the New Silk Road.

LaRouchePAC organizers across the country are reporting the strong response to this call to end the Empire, to join the BRI, and to end the containment of the American people by the Wall Street-controlled "two-party system." Trump has, in this case, shown the way, attacking Republicans and Democrats with equal vigor when they peddle the need to confront Russia and China. The new paradigm is not only within reach, but is absolutely necessary if the British war plan is to be defeated.

[May 04, 2018] London-Based Empire Exposed Door Open for Trans-Atlantic Economic Change

May 04, 2018 | larouchepac.com

With well-deserved doubt greeting every strategic claim coming from the City of London and its allied forces on Wall Street and in Brussels, resulting from the ongoing exposure of their lies, e.g. on "Russiagate" and the use of "chemical weapons", there is an unprecedented opportunity to break with the Old Paradigm on its weakest flank, the lie that the economy is strong and growing.

[May 04, 2018] The Empire Based in London Won't Give Up: They Must, and Can Be Defeated

May 03, 2018 | larouchepac.com

https://www.youtube.com/embed/-yNuoa6qyFk?wmode=opaque&controls=&rel=0

With one provocation after another, each more transparently false than the previous one, the war faction of City of London imperial oligarchs and their Wall Street neo-con/neo-lib partners continue their efforts to sabotage the potential of the New Paradigm, which is emerging in Eurasia to be a worldwide movement, with breathtaking speed.

Though Russiagate, the Skripal poisoning, and the Douma chemical weapons False Flag hoax have been exposed as originating in the diseased minds of British intelligence circles, they are at it again, with Bibi Netanyahu claiming he has "proof" that Iran never ended its nuclear program, attempting to trap the U.S. into yet another disastrous war in the Middle East, and possible nuclear confrontation with Russia.

[May 04, 2018] Sic Semper Tyrannis The Skripals survived, but their cat and rodents ... not so much.

Notable quotes:
"... I am reading Taleb's recent book "Skin in the game" which has interesting material about the disconnection between risky behaviors and their consequences in modern USA. He also has a chapter about the mechanics involved in why minority viewpoints in our culture become dominant. It's an interesting read. ..."
"... Finally, the Police partially acknowledged their mistake and accused the Russians of not having been completely fair play. Indeed, these thuriferous bastards of Vlad the Impaler had put poison on the OUTDOOR handle of the front door of the house. It's infinitely subtle of these savages. The Brit Police did not suspect what strong part it had to make, the unexpected thwarting its learned calculations. Presumption, again and again. Nevertheless, the detectives are formal: the Russians did the trick well. The evidence is obvious. In this dramatic case, we are not going to make a comparison between insular and continental logic. The hour is too serious for these trifles. Lots of laughter. ..."
"... It's very difficult in any case to believe that such a notice could have been issued. Can't see why it would be needed. The scripting of the official story on such matters as this seems to be a joint enterprise between the media and the press officers. That's a time-honoured consensus so why would the media need bullying to stay in line? ..."
"... My personal view on all this is that the No. 10 press officers aren't that good at this new-fangled information stuff. They don't seem to have their hearts in it somehow. Time for them to go back to counting paperclips and for information campaigns to be handled by the experts. The BBC have a proven track record in this field and it's time that was officially recognised. ..."
May 03, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Sir Mark, bless him, has told an MP during a committee meeting, that the armed forces, MI-5, MI-6 and GCHQ do not know who or indeed what sickened the Skripals, pere et fille , in Salisbury. He doesn't seem to have mentioned the police. So, basically, pilgrims, Teresa May, the queen's first minister has insistently and incessantly accused the Russians of a crime of which our British cousins know precious little. In a closely related development, it is now revealed that the Britishers sealed up Skripal's house after the poisoning event leaving the black Persian shown above and two guinea pigs to die of thirst and hunger within. It would seem likely that they knew they were doing this since they would have searched the house first. No? Perhaps they thought that the cat might be a threat as a being of possible Iranian descent. This is impressive stuff. pl https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2018-05-01/uk-has-not-yet-identified-skripal-poisoning-suspects

Eric Newhill , 11 hours ago

These false flag ops are all so shabby in their execution. The lack of thoroughness and imagination on the part of the governments running them is really disappointing. For example, if I was running an investigation into the Skripal incident, I would have captured the cat and rodents and run pathology tests on them to see what bio/chem agents might be in their systems. Also, because they might escape and become a vector of further infection. That seems like it would be SOP. So I'd do it even if I knew the story was BS to create the appearance of reality. Then, I could always state that the pets should signs of Russian engineered bio/chem agents. Could even create a video of the pets dying some horrible death due to the agents. That's more better BS.
Threadzilla , 11 hours ago
And yet, this appears to be a lie as well. An earlier piece in the British news claims the pets were taken to Porton Down for examination and testing soon after the incident. Seems more likely they eliminated evidence and then came up with the cover story about how the animals were "forgotten about" and locked in the house for a month, implying totally unimportant for the investigation. http://metro.co.uk/2018/03/...
JohnA , 12 hours ago
I am truly dis-May-ed!

I hope she and Johnson pay the price for this folly. May it be steep! Very. very steep.

How these two suckered so many nations foolishly into sending diplomats home reflected respect for UK policy toward Russia. These nations will need to think long and hard about following any such UK lead in future.

This week, the US took down the Russian flag flying over Russian real estate in Seattle. Shameful!

Sid Finster -> JohnA , 9 hours ago
Sociopaths care nothing for law and everything for enforcement.
Jack , 4 hours ago
I don't know much about the dynamics of British politics but as a light observer of British news I wonder why Theresa May remains prime minister? She became prime minister after the historic Brexit vote. Promptly takes the country to an election and botches it for the Tories. Then bungles the Brexit negotiations. Runs a floundering government. Now comes up with accusations against the Russians in the Skripal affair with no evidence presented but looking more foolish as her story comes under scrutiny.
DH , 11 hours ago
Thirst, yes, hunger, not so much.
Tony , 11 hours ago
I am reading Taleb's recent book "Skin in the game" which has interesting material about the disconnection between risky behaviors and their consequences in modern USA. He also has a chapter about the mechanics involved in why minority viewpoints in our culture become dominant. It's an interesting read.
Sid Finster , 10 hours ago
http://www.theblogmire.com/...
France74 , 10 hours ago
A french view and laughter.

2 cats and 2 guinea pigs were locked up for 9 days in Skipal's house, in the hope of proving that the Russians are guilty.
When the police reopened the house, they found four bodies. the veterinary faculty is positive, both cats died of starvation. Guinea pigs, some say, began to be worked by hungry cats, accelerating their deaths. Unspeakable bloodshed. In this whole case, it's THE revolting detail, among many others. Poor beasts.

Finally, the Police partially acknowledged their mistake and accused the Russians of not having been completely fair play. Indeed, these thuriferous bastards of Vlad the Impaler had put poison on the OUTDOOR handle of the front door of the house. It's infinitely subtle of these savages. The Brit Police did not suspect what strong part it had to make, the unexpected thwarting its learned calculations. Presumption, again and again. Nevertheless, the detectives are formal: the Russians did the trick well. The evidence is obvious. In this dramatic case, we are not going to make a comparison between insular and continental logic. The hour is too serious for these trifles.
Lots of laughter.

kao_hsien_chih , 11 hours ago
Great. There was once a war for Jenkins' ear. I guess we should now have a nuclear war for Skripals' cat.
English Outsider -> kao_hsien_chih , 9 hours ago
Colonel,

There's talk of a D-Notice covering the Skripal affair. Seems unlikely. All concerned were being sat on quite satisfactorily anyway.

I Looked up D-notices on WIKI -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

Presumably there are bigger guns in the background if information that would really threaten national security or the lives of serving officers is in danger of being released. The D-Notice system itself seems to be a more or less voluntary affair -

https://www.theguardian.com...

It's very difficult in any case to believe that such a notice could have been issued. Can't see why it would be needed. The scripting of the official story on such matters as this seems to be a joint enterprise between the media and the press officers. That's a time-honoured consensus so why would the media need bullying to stay in line?

My personal view on all this is that the No. 10 press officers aren't that good at this new-fangled information stuff. They don't seem to have their hearts in it somehow. Time for them to go back to counting paperclips and for information campaigns to be handled by the experts. The BBC have a proven track record in this field and it's time that was officially recognised.

[May 04, 2018] Theresa May's Lies Must Stop by Matthew JAMISON

May 04, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

It would seem that the so-called British prime minister Theresa May, leader of the Conservative Party [who heads up a minority Tory Government only kept in power through a confidence and supply arrangement with the Democratic Unionist Party] has forgotten that there is such a matter as reality backed up by solid strong evidence and grounded in rational fact . It has been a consistent theme of my writings over the last near two years now that Theresa May is not only a light weight with little leadership talents, but also unhinged and dangerous. Indeed, Mrs. May has become something of a loose cannon on deck deluding herself to the truth of the matter that she badly messed up the General Election of 2017 and just about everything else she inherited as prime Minister and her time is long overdue to Leave 10 Downing Street.

One of the more alarming aspects of the near two-year-old nightmarish May Ministry has been the near total casual evisceration of consistent truth telling and consistency of position regarding fundamental political and philosophical questions of judgement and values which goes to the heart of Leadership. It has not just been the near complete collapse of the UK Government's negotiating position vis-à-vis Brussels and Michel Barnier. It has not been the incompetent and disastrous fashion Mrs. May has governed losing one Cabinet minister after another in rapid succession. It has not just been the lies that Theresa May has poured forth internally.

It has been the growth under Theresa May and her Home Office of almost Nazi style black op false flag operations and exercises - conducted by Mrs. May's personal Gestapo MI5 - as an instrument of government policy in order to control and manipulate the uneducated masses of the UK and turn the mass of the UK population into an even more disgusting Peter Bazgallete Endemol style Big Brother feeding frenzy dump. The distortion of mass public opinion in the UK and the dumbing down across all sections of society has been deeply disturbing and frustrating to watch, but not the least bit surprising. In Theresa May's extreme and increasingly desperate quest to hold on to the title and position of prime Minister, May has become even far more dangerous than I ever could have imagined. Theresa May is such a shallow empty third rate politician she will say anything and do anything to hold on to power just for the sake of it to spite her internal Tory Party enemies such as George Osborne. After less than two years in the job Theresa May has managed to achieve the unthinkable. She has made Gordon Brown's Premiership look like a model for stable Government.

May, after botching badly her gift of an early General Election from the powers that be in Washington DC, has basically conducted the most embarrassing and weak negotiation in modern political history with the European Union 27. Unable to deliver the massive majority that elements in DC and Berlin/Brussels were banking on, May has had to resort to increasingly wild, desperate and highly dangerous tactics to remain in Downing Street, attempting desperately to shore up and re-invigorate her obviously dying leadership and crumbling administration. Which brings us to the subject of Russia, a country and people I have tremendous respect and admiration for and has been treated terribly by the West where I grew up. I am appalled at how the Russian people have been treated and spoken of and harassed and targeted by the right wing English Tory Government of Theresa May. Where to begin with? Hillary Clinton's pathetic whinging and moaning blaming her loss on the Russians? Theresa May's bigoted, xenophobic, dangerous anti-Russian rhetoric? The EU's expansion and NATO encroachments right up to the borders of Russia itself in violation of understandings and promises made at the end of the last Cold War? The 'shock' doctrine capitalism of the West injected without proper thought and planning post-Gorbachev? Theresa May, let us be blunt, is in the pocket of certain deeply anti-Russian forces in Washington DC and Brussels. This group of 'foreign policy' and 'national security' experts and their allies who [seem to be everywhere] hate Russia. For what reason I think I know and it has all the hallmarks of Nazism.... all over it. It stinks to hell of Nazism.

Let us be very clear, Russia is not a threat to the UK and has not interfered or attacked UK vital national interests. Russia is not interested in attacking the UK or UK interests. Russia is not an enemy of all civilised freedom loving peoples. It is in fact a great guardian of them. And it has been treated terribly by the West, misunderstood and disrespected beyond belief. The so-called poisoning of Sergei Skripal was just that, so-called. It never happened. Sergei Skripal was not poisoned with Novichok. The nerve agent, if one was even used which I highly doubt, did not come from Russia. The chemical nerve agent is not Russian and did not come from Russian Labs. The Russian State and Russian Government had nothing to do with it. No Russian agents, assets, personnel were involved in this most disgusting, appalling, freak show pathetic English MI5/6 spectacle of Salisbury. One wonders since the English always boast non-stop about how great their country is and how their intelligence and security services are the best in the world. In fact they are rubbish. How could Britain's so-called domestic security service, the all seeing [supposedly], all hearing [supposedly], all knowing [supposedly] all mighty [supposedly] MI5 allow a chemical nerve agent like Novichok into the UK and then allow it to be transported to Salisbury and then administered first in Yulia Skripal's car, then it became the Mill Pub, then it became Zissi Reastaurant, then MI5/6 finally, finally settled on....the door handle. If this had really occurred like the English State and Establishment want us to believe and would have us believe then all of Salisbury would be dead by now if it had really been Novichok. It never happened. The whole Skripal affair was made up by the wildly anti-Russian CIA/BND controlled Theresa May and her English Nazi style lackeys whether they be in the English Government, media, local authorities, police or population at large - and their pay masters in DC and Brussels.

The whole Salisbury/Skripal affair was made up, plotted, stage managed and produced by British, American and German intelligence services. Everything the UK Government under Theresa May said about the Salisbury affair was pure lies, scripted and made up as talking points sent from Washington DC and Brussels. Everything May said, and Boris Johnson, and Amber Rudd and Philip Hammond with regards to Russia and the Salisbury affair was pure lies. The entire story the English put forward regarding the Salisbury affair kept changing and there were terrible inconsistencies. The whole episode from start to finish was a classic English Monty Python circus act. The Salisbury-Skripal affair was pure English Tory lies. Besides Theresa May who ran the Home Office when all these terrible things [apparently] were going on, knew all about it, did not lift a finger to stop it, did not put up a fight or even resign and lead a rebellion from the backbenches. Theresa May authorised everything she now claims is a terrible threat to UK National Security. The woman must go. .

The world was told by the British prime Minister the nerve agent used was a military grade Novichok chemical only from Russia. The creator of Novichok said if exposed to it you either die a painful slow death or if you do miraculously survive you will be a vegetable the rest of your life. So how come Yulia Skripal is up and singing and dancing and checking herself out of the hospital? And what about Sergei Skripal? I've lost track? Is he still in intensive care in the hospital? Or has he been able to miraculously recover and check himself out? And the police officer also made a very speedy recovery. The police have still not been able to find any suspects even though there is a huge and expensive massive police operation under way. The majority of the English police like MI5 are utterly useless. The Chief Executive of Porton Down stated that Porton Down was unable to verify that the Novichok chemical agent came from Russia. The OPCW review was completely flawed and biased against the Russian Government.

Yet Mrs. May seemed to be rather enjoying her pseudo-role as the new found Amazonian suffragette Wonder Woman FemiNazi, the instrument of the Americans and Germans to take down the 'Evil Empire' of the brilliant and visionary President Vladimir Putin who unlike Theresa May has got his country back strongly and proudly on its strong feet. I suppose Mrs. May was desperate for a 'Falklands' style moment to rescue her dying leadership, and for a brief time it seemed to be working. Mrs. May had successfully wiped off the media agenda any mention of the crucial and critical final stages of the UK-EU divorce negotiations. There had been a flurry of right wing press briefing against Jeremy Corbyn in the lead up to the Salisbury affair just like before the Manchester bombing during the General Election of 2017 which May called. May and her backers had calculated - that in order to bolster her position, take the fight to the Russians [which Mrs. Clinton was supposed to have done], weaken Jeremy Corbyn [which she failed to do fatally last year], change the UK narrative on Brexit and impress May's supporters - a black op false flag trashing Russia and the Russian people and the great Russian President on the eve of President Putin's historic fourth election victory and the glorious World Cup in Moscow - would do the trick nicely for Mrs. May's position. As I have been writing consistently, if Mrs. May is so desperate and crazy and power mad to hold on to her position that she is willing to start a war with a vastly superior and vastly stronger country like Russia, she has completely lost the plot and must go.

After May's appalling power grab at the EU27 Council Summit in March she could not believe her luck. The EU27 were all lined up behind her as the anti-Russian warrior princess egging her on to do their bidding in their unofficial war against Russia. This would be the new security role for Britain in Europe once out of the EU, the anti-Russian Trojan horse leading a robust and united anti-Russian global coalition in Europe and beyond to effect regime in the Kremlin on behalf of the EU and their American allies. Unfortunately for Mrs. May the wheels started to come off this unbelievable, wacky, crazy, ridiculous and extremely dangerous Anti-Russian foreign policy with another false flag black op in Syria this time. From Salisbury and all the lies the English told there we jumped to the sands of the Middle East and all the lies that the Americans have told there along with the British. I could not believe what was going on before my very eyes.

For a split second it looked like the world was on the brink of an all out war between American and Russia in the Middle East. Do Mrs. May and her supporters really want to start a Third World War in the Middle East just so she can pretend to be prime minister for a year or two more? Douma was carried out by German secret service intelligence, the BND, in conjunction with the CIA and MI6. Again, this was not the fault of the Russians or Assad Syrian forces, but rather US backed rebels. However, the consequences of Douma are even more profound geopolitically than what happens in some provincial English town. Theresa May has succeeded in driving a wedge between Trump and President Putin and has successfully destroyed any hope of a rapprochement and detente between Washington DC and Moscow. That is bad for the peace and security of the international order. Thanks Theresa! The world came very close to a possible nuclear confrontation between America and Russia, completely unthinkable during the last Cold War, in the sands of the Middle East only a couple of weeks ago. In this New Cold War, which is merely a preparation and build up phase to a much bigger confrontation, all the rules of the old Cold War have changed. I have never felt more ashamed and more embarrassed about being a British citizen in my life.

The anti-Russian bigotry and racism and xenophobia displayed by the English and their Government against the Russian people and Russian interests is not something I will ever forget and has been deeply disturbing, troubling and deeply concerning. I wonder where all this anti-Russian war mongering is leading? Meanwhile back on the domestic home front after the near clash between the USA and Russia was avoided, May's Government has been crumbling. May lost a senior Remain supporter, the Home Secretary Amber Rudd, and has boxed herself into a corner with her 'good friends' in the DUP who now realise May was just using them for her own ends and was prepared to drop them quickly once she had achieved what she was ordered to achieve by DC and Brussels. It will be fascinating to observe who survives this Theresa May Tory English MI5 car crash of Her Majesty's Government. But what I have seen of heard and experienced in England of the anti-Russian bigotry is something that will remain with me for a lifetime.

Tags: MI6 May

[May 04, 2018] In their March 15 letter, 39 US senators called on the Treasury and State Departments to utilize all the sanction tools at their disposal to fight the Nord Stream 2 project to bring cheap Russian gas to Europe.

May 04, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

In their March 15 letter , 39 US senators called on the Treasury and State Departments to utilize all the sanction tools at their disposal to fight the Nord Stream 2 project to bring cheap Russian gas to Europe. On March 29, US Ambassador to Russia Jon Huntsman told Russia's RBK TV that he cannot rule out the possibility that Russian assets in America could be seized over the Skripal case. If Washington goes that far, it will be pure highway robbery. And the response will not be long in coming. That interview took place right after the British parliament had announced an investigation into some money-laundering schemes allegedly associated with Russia. The UK government has unveiled its "Fusion Doctrine" to counter what it's calling Russian propaganda.

The US policy of making Europeans bow to pressure has been largely successful. The leading European powers -- the UK, Germany and France – -- are pushing to force the EU to impose new sanctions on Iran, in order to persuade the US not to pull out from the Iran nuclear deal. This is a last-minute attempt to keep the agreement in effect, as it is widely expected that President Trump will not certify it in May. Europeans may bow to American pressure in a bid to appease Washington, but Russia is also a party to the agreement, which cannot be scuttled without Moscow's consent. Adding additional conditions will violate the terms of the deal. It won't be supported internationally. If new Iran sanctions are introduced unilaterally by the West, the issue will become a bone of contention that will further worsen relations with Moscow.

[May 04, 2018] RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP 3 MAY 2018 (Patrick Armstrong)

Notable quotes:
"... © Patrick Armstrong Analysis, Canada Russia Observer ..."
May 04, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP 3 MAY 2018 (Patrick Armstrong)

Russian flag

MILITARY SPENDING. SIPRI says that Russia's defence budget has been cut by 20%, the first decrease since 1998 . The reason, I believe, is not the " economic problems" they suggest (always exaggerated by Western sources) but that the very big post-Soviet lag has been overcome. Modernisation and development certainly hasn't stopped: here are the latest AD improvements . By the way, Russia seems to be the only country in the world that has cut spending .

TECHNOLOGY. The Akademik Lomonosov , a floating nuclear power plant, has left St Petersburg for Murmansk where it will be fuelled . This is not the very first floating NPP , but it is by far the biggest. It will move to Kamchatka and provide power to settlements there. There will likely be more of them built.

SANCTIONS. Anti-Russia sanctions are partly based on the absurd assumption that Putin is a sort of criminal-in-chief surrounded by lesser criminals and if these lesser criminals can be hurt enough by sanctions, they will overthrow him. And so the attack on Oleg Deripaska and his Rusal company . Which is the second-largest aluminum producer in the world. With a lot of customers who won't be happy if it's driven out of business. Bloomberg is scornful: "a lack of expertise" . Two things are happening: Deripaska is t rying to sell some of the company and Washington has backed off a bit . So far Moscow hasn't reacted to the latest sanctions which, it should be clear, are hostile acts that have nothing to do with the ostensible reasons: Moscow is really being punished because it resists. Moscow did not interfere in the US election (and if it had, Clinton would have been the one: it had bought her once, why not again ?); the Minsk agreement doesn't even mention Russia and no one in the West cares what really happened in Crimea. I expect that, as usual, Moscow's reaction, when it comes, will surprise the West. John Helmer suggests EW in Syria . And when is Europe going to react to the fact that the anti-Russian sanctions hurt them more than either Russia or the USA? Some murmurings in Germany , but we've heard them before and they eventually knuckle down. But, given the unending torrent of anti-Trump propaganda, it may become more acceptable to question Washington's diktat. And, if Washington does pull out of the Iran agreement, the split could become very wide. Moscow may be waiting to see what happens then and tailor its response to widen the gap.

TELEGRAM STUPIDITY. Just gets worse and worse. And it's not working .

WADA YA KNOW. The sole source of the doping accusation backtracks . But that's OK: the purpose of propaganda is to leave a bad impression when the details have been forgotten.

PROBLEMS WITH THE NARRATIVE. Russia says it has a complete Tomahawk and that only 22/105 missiles hit anything , Pentagon denies . Russia brings the actual victims of the so-called CW attack to the Hague , FUKUS covers their eyes and ears .

SKRIPALS. Not news any more . Believing the government story requires an enormous amount of doublethink . Murray believes there's a connection to Steele, Orbis and the Dossier . Oh: it's apparently OK to leave this incredibly dangerous stuff around for 51 days before cleaning it up. Wearing your full protective suits. Well, some of you wearing them . Still more doublethink and crimestop required.

ARMENIA. What appears to be a colour revolution triggered by the long-time President's re-treading himself as Prime Minister continues. And you can't have a "peaceful" colour revolution without a little mysterious gunfire . Unlikely to have a happy ending for anybody in Armenia.

AMERICA-HYSTERICA. Do you think the Democrats are going to win the mid-term elections on a platform of " Because Putin stole the last election from us, you owe us this one "?

PUTIN DERANGEMENT SYNDROME. Metastasises: " Exposed: Russian Twitter bots tried to swing general election for Jeremy Corbyn ".

NEW NWO. " the erosion of U.S. military advantage in relation to China and Russia." US Defense Secretary . Not very PNAC , is it? And, in Yalta, the International Economic Forum attended by people from 71 countries ( last year 26 countries, the year before 13 .) A somewhat larger chunk of the "international community" that we hear so much of from FUKUS and friends, isn't it?

UKRAINE. The first US Javelin MAWs have been delivered. I don't expect them to make a battlefield difference (Russia is not actually attacking Ukraine with armoured formations) but it may encourage Kiev to think it has the green light to attack (it will be another defeat for Kiev). And morale is terrible – at least 554 suicides since the start of the war. (8.4K WIA and 3.7K KIA).

© Patrick Armstrong Analysis, Canada Russia Observer

[May 03, 2018] Tapper-Clapper Leak Proves Media, Intelligence 'Collaborated' to Make Russiagate

Notable quotes:
"... The leak, and the cover up, shows the "collaboration between the media and the intelligence community in building up Russiagate," ..."
"... The report also states that Clapper "subsequently acknowledged discussing the dossier with CNN journalist Jake Tapper and admitted that he might have spoken with other journalists about the same topic." ..."
May 03, 2018 | sputniknews.com

Former Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper, who landed a job at CNN in August 2017 after leaving the government, leaked information to CNN's Jake Tapper regarding the infamous Steele dossier and its salacious allegations against then-candidate Donald Trump - then denied his actions to Congress under oath.

The leak, and the cover up, shows the "collaboration between the media and the intelligence community in building up Russiagate," Max Blumenthal, a journalist and bestselling author, told Radio Sputnik's Loud & Clear.

... ... ...

The report also states that Clapper "subsequently acknowledged discussing the dossier with CNN journalist Jake Tapper and admitted that he might have spoken with other journalists about the same topic."

Blumenthal explained that the dossier was the catalyst for the Russiagate scandal.

"I think this should be a bigger scandal than it is," he told hosts Brian Becker and John Kiriakou.

See Also:

[May 03, 2018] Mueller's questions to Trump more those of a prosecuting attorney than of an impartial investigator by Alexander Mercouris

Highly recommended!
Mueller's proposed questions to Trump show that Trump remains Mueller's ultimate target
Notable quotes:
"... (1) Robert Mueller is in possession of no facts which have not previously been made public. ..."
"... (2) Donald Trump continues to be Robert Mueller's target ..."
"... Frankly they do not look like the sort of questions an investigator asks if he searching for the truth. Rather they look like cross examination by prosecuting Counsel. ..."
"... (3) Obstruction of Justice has replaced collusion with Russia as the focus of the Mueller probe ..."
"... the Russiagate investigation did become a criminal inquiry and not just a counterespionage inquiry. ..."
"... When he finished, I said that I agreed very much that it was terrible that his calls with foreign leaders leaked. I said they were classified and he needed to be able to speak to foreign leaders in confidence ..."
"... The memo shows Trump putting pressure on Comey to investigate the leaks and Comey resisting doing so. Whilst Comey purported to agree with Trump that the leaks were terrible and that the leakers should be punished, he resisted Trump's suggestion that the most effective way to go after the leakers was to go after the reporters they were leaking to. ..."
"... The reason Trump brought up the subject of Flynn was because his case was a particularly egregious example of a career that had been destroyed by unauthorised and illegal leaking. ..."
"... In addition Mueller wants to ask Trump questions about his thoughts about Comey and his reasons for dismissing Comey, all of which suggest an attempt to catch Trump in some sort of obstruction of justice charge in relation to the circumstances of Comey's dismissal, about which however see above. ..."
"... (4) The collusion narrative has collapsed ..."
"... The lawyer, Natalia V. Veselnitskaya, duped Don Jr. into setting up the meeting by claiming to have dirt on Hillary Clinton. In fact, the meeting was a bait and switch. It turned out the lawyer had no meaningful information to offer on Mrs. Clinton. Rather, she wanted to interest the Trump team in a Moscow initiative to allow American families to adopt Russian children. ..."
"... In contrast, Hillary Clinton's campaign actually helped pay for a dossier of almost entirely false accusations about Mr. Trump , some of which a British former intelligence official obtained from Russian contacts. ..."
"... Donald Trump has repeatedly referred to Mueller's investigation as a witch-hunt, and he is right. The questions Mueller is seeking to ask Trump confirm as much. ..."
May 03, 2018 | theduran.com

...Here is my take on these questions:

(1) Robert Mueller is in possession of no facts which have not previously been made public.

Every single one of the questions is obviously drawn on information which has already been made public and which has been widely discussed.

... ... ...

(2) Donald Trump continues to be Robert Mueller's target

Recently there have been media reports that Robert Mueller's investigators have informed Donald Trump that he is not a target of the Mueller investigation.

The highly aggressive questions Mueller wants to ask Trump however tell a very different story. The consistent theme behind them is of a Donald Trump who is very much at the centre of all sorts of nefarious activities. Frankly they do not look like the sort of questions an investigator asks if he searching for the truth. Rather they look like cross examination by prosecuting Counsel.

In light of this Trump's hesitation in submitting himself to an interview by Mueller in which these sort of questions are asked is fully understandable.

I suspect his lawyers are advising him against it.

(3) Obstruction of Justice has replaced collusion with Russia as the focus of the Mueller probe

When around the time of former FBI Director James Comey's admittedly botched dismissal the issue of obstruction of justice first arose, it seemed to me so farfetched that I could not bring myself to believe that Mueller or anyone else would seriously entertain it.

As I pointed out at the time the Russiagate investigation was at that point in time still a counterespionage inquiry rather than a crime inquiry, as had recently been confirmed by no less a person than James Comey himself in his March 2017 testimony to the House Intelligence Committee.

As it happens it is a moot point when exactly the Russiagate investigation did become a criminal inquiry and not just a counterespionage inquiry.

My guess is that no such formal decision was ever taken, but that Mueller himself simply decided as soon as he was appointed Special Counsel that he was conducting a criminal inquiry as well as a counterespionage inquiry. The point is apparently being pursued by Paul Manafort's lawyers in the case Mueller has brought against him. It will be interesting to see what comes of it. Irrespective of this, the fact that the Russiagate investigation was apparently still a counterespionage inquiry as opposed to a criminal inquiry when Comey was sacked made it impossible for me to see how Comey's sacking could amount to an obstruction of justice.

What I was of course at that time completely unaware of was of the discussions which had previously passed between Trump and Comey about General Flynn.

A memo Comey wrote up after one of these discussions has been seized on by Trump's critics as evidence that he attempted to block the FBI's investigation into whether or not General Flynn had committed an offence under the Logan Act by talking whilst a member of the Trump transition team to Russian ambassador Kislyak, and that this amounts to an obstruction of justice.

When early accounts of the contents of this memo appeared I expressed my strong doubt that its contents as they were being reported showed that there had been any obstruction of justice by Donald Trump of the investigation of General Flynn

..since Comey's note shows Trump neither instructing Comey nor requesting Comey to drop the investigation against Flynn, nor of Trump putting pressure on Comey to do so, but merely shows Trump expressing the "hope" Comey would do so, in any sane world no charge of obstructing justice or of perverting the course of justice brought upon it could possibly stick.

The redacted text of this and of Comey's other memos has now been published, and the relevant sections of the memo read as follows

He [Donald Trump – AM] began by saying he "wanted to talk about Mike Flynn". He then said that although Flynn "hadn't done anything wrong" in his call with the Russians (a point he made at least two more times in the conversation), he had to let him go because he misled the Vice-President and, in any event, he had concerns about Flynn, and had a great guy coming in, so he had to let Flynn go ..

..He then referred at length to the leaks relating to Mike Flynn's call with the Russians, which he stressed was not wrong in any way ("he made lots of calls"), but that the leaks were terrible.

I tried to interject several times to agree with him about the leaks being terrible, but was unsuccessful. When he finished, I said that I agreed very much that it was terrible that his calls with foreign leaders leaked. I said they were classified and he needed to be able to speak to foreign leaders in confidence ..

He then returned to the subject of Mike Flynn, saying that Flynn is a good guy, and has been through a lot. He misled the Vice-President but he didn't do anything wrong in the call. He said, "I hope you can see your way to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go." I replied by saying, "I agree he is a good guy", but said no more.

(bold italics added)

The entirety of the memo in fact shows that the main subject of the conversation and Donald Trump's major concern as of the time when the conversation took place was not General Flynn or the case against him but the systematic campaign of leaks which were undermining his administration.

The memo shows Trump putting pressure on Comey to investigate the leaks and Comey resisting doing so. Whilst Comey purported to agree with Trump that the leaks were terrible and that the leakers should be punished, he resisted Trump's suggestion that the most effective way to go after the leakers was to go after the reporters they were leaking to.

The reason Trump brought up the subject of Flynn was because his case was a particularly egregious example of a career that had been destroyed by unauthorised and illegal leaking.

In this Trump was undoubtedly right.

Over the course of this discussion – and obviously so as to emphasise the point -Trump made the further point – which is no longer disputed by anyone – that Flynn had done nothing wrong in his conversations with Kislyak, and had done nothing to deserve having his career and reputation destroyed by illegal leaking.

The memo shows that it was in the context of these observations about the way Flynn was brought down by illegal leaking that Trump made his comments about the investigation of Flynn.

Trump's point was that the investigation of Flynn for committing an offence under the Logan Act (initiated by former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates). coming on top of the illegal leaks which had destroyed his career, was tough on Flynn given that he had done nothing wrong.

Accordingly Trump said to Comey that he hoped Comey would be able to find a way to "letting [the case against Flynn] go".

It was a minor aside and it is unlikely Trump gave much thought to it. Certainly it was not intended as any sort of instruction to Comey to drop the inquiry, and the entirety of the text of the memo shows that Comey never thought it was.

In fact the memo shows that Comey agreed with Trump.

The words in the memo which I have highlighted ("I agreed very much that it was terrible that his calls with foreign leaders leaked. I said they were classified and he needed to be able to speak to foreign leaders in confidence") have attracted remarkably little attention. However they show clearly that Comey also thought that Flynn's conversation with Kislyak was lawful.

No other explanation for his words as he himself has reported them in his memo – "he needed to be able to speak to foreign leaders in confidence" – is possible.

In other words the memo shows that not only did Trump not instruct or request Comey to drop the investigation of Flynn or put pressure on Comey to do so, but on the contrary he and Comey had what was essentially a consensual conversation in which they both agreed with each other that (1) leaks are terrible; (2) Flynn had been appallingly treated by having his career and reputation destroyed by leaks; and (3) in his conversation with Kislyak Flynn had done nothing wrong.

Given that this is so it is simply impossible to see how an obstruction of justice charge can be put together from this material.

Nonetheless the drift of Mueller's questions to Trump suggests that this is still what Mueller is trying to do.

A disproportionate number of Mueller's questions concern Trump's various interactions with Comey. These include but are not limited to Trump's interactions with Comey which concerned Flynn.

In addition Mueller wants to ask Trump questions about his thoughts about Comey and his reasons for dismissing Comey, all of which suggest an attempt to catch Trump in some sort of obstruction of justice charge in relation to the circumstances of Comey's dismissal, about which however see above.

There is also a number of questions concerning Trump's sometimes fraught relationship with Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the clear implication of which is that Trump's widely known and publicly expressed anger about Sessions's decision to recuse himself from the Russiagate inquiry stems from anger that Sessions would no longer be able to protect Trump from it.

Even if that is so – which it probably is – I cannot see how it amounts to obstruction of justice. Anger that Sessions had recused himself from the Russiagate inquiry and would no longer be able to protect the President is surely no more than a thought crime even if it were true, which it probably is.

Last I heard thought crimes are not actionable in America. However,judging from his questions, Mueller still seems intent on pursuing this one.

(4) The collusion narrative has collapsed

By comparison with the disproportionate number of questions devoted to the obstruction of justice allegations, the questions about the alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia – the investigation of which was supposed to be the object of the Mueller inquiry – look threadbare.

All of them cover old ground, in which all the facts are known.

The first two questions concern the now notorious meeting in Trump Tower in June 2016 between Donald Trump Junior and the Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya. The lack of substance to this meeting, and the extent to which it is truly a non-story, has been brilliantly explained by Ronald Kessler in The Washington Times

When it comes to President Trump and the question of collusion with Russia , there is indeed a smoking gun. But it's not the June 2016 meeting that Donald Trump Jr. , along with campaign chairman Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner, held in Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer.

The lawyer, Natalia V. Veselnitskaya, duped Don Jr. into setting up the meeting by claiming to have dirt on Hillary Clinton. In fact, the meeting was a bait and switch. It turned out the lawyer had no meaningful information to offer on Mrs. Clinton. Rather, she wanted to interest the Trump team in a Moscow initiative to allow American families to adopt Russian children.

The meeting, which lasted 20 minutes, was the sort any political campaign or media outlet would have agreed to. Like investigative reporters, political operatives want to obtain tips, even if most of the time the proffered information turns out to be of no value. In this case, nothing came of the meeting. In contrast, Hillary Clinton's campaign actually helped pay for a dossier of almost entirely false accusations about Mr. Trump , some of which a British former intelligence official obtained from Russian contacts.

According to journalistic standards that existed decades ago, the fact that such a meeting took place would not have even been a story. The pretext for the meeting was a hoax, and nothing resulted from it. To suggest by running a story that there was something nefarious about it was unfair. But in today's politically charged media world, the meeting became an immediate sensation as part of a narrative -- pushed by the media and Democrats -- suggesting that the Trump campaign illegally colluded with Russia .

I have nothing to add to this masterful analysis save to say that the fact that Mueller is continuing to ask questions about a meeting at which exactly nothing happened is testimony to the hollowness of the whole collusion narrative the investigation of which Mueller's inquiry is supposed to be about.

Summary

When Robert Mueller was appointed Special Counsel I welcomed his appointment. What I had heard about Mueller suggested that he would be a safe pair of hands who would put the whole preposterous Russiagate conspiracy theory to bed. It is with frank embarrassment that I repeat what I wrote about him at the time of his appointment

.it is essential that with Comey gone the Russiagate investigation is put in the charge of a safe pair of hands, and of someone who will not be seen as the President's defender, and whose eventual findings are accepted, and Mueller seems by most accounts to be the sort of person to do that ..

Mueller appears to be a good choice for the job. He was a well regarded FBI director, staying in post from 2001 – when he was appointed by George W. Bush – until his retirement in 2013, when Comey replaced him. During that period he resisted the George W. Bush administration's attempts to introduce interrogation methods since characterised as torture as part of the so-called 'war on terror'. As someone well known to the staff of the FBI, he looks like the obvious person to do the job, and to steady the ship, and – hopefully – to bring some sanity to this investigation.

Mueller's job will now be to bring order to the mess Comey has created, and to bring the various investigations into Russiagate that Obama's Justice Department initiated to a proper close. If he does his job properly – and if he is left alone to do it – it should all be over by the summer.

It has long since become clear that far from Mueller being the safe pair of hands I took him for, he is someone who sees his task as protecting the Justice Department and the FBI (which he largely built up) from someone who he obviously considers to be an angry and potentially vengeful President. His proposed questions show that he still has the President in his sights, and that Mueller is pulling out all the stops to bring him down.

Donald Trump has repeatedly referred to Mueller's investigation as a witch-hunt, and he is right. The questions Mueller is seeking to ask Trump confirm as much.

[May 03, 2018] Skripal case British confirm they have no suspect; Yulia Skripal vanishes, no word of Sergey Skripal by Alexander Mercouris

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Testimony by Sir Mark Sedwill, British Prime Minister Theresa May's National Security Adviser, to the House of Commons Defence Committee on 1st May 2018 has now revealed that all the claims about a breakthrough in the Skripal case – not to mention the claims about "Gordon" aka "Mihails Savickis" – were (as I suspected) nonsense. ..."
"... In other words the investigation is going nowhere and has drawn a complete blank. ..."
"... All this comes hot on the heels of suggestions – which are very likely true – that the wall of silence which has recently descended on the British media's reporting of the Skripal case is the product of a British government D-Notice , ie. of a formal request by the British government to the media to limit their coverage of the Skripal story on grounds of national security. ..."
"... It has also been suggested that despite formal denials the most likely reason for the D-Notice is the desire of the British authorities to conceal a possible connection between Sergey Skripal, his former MI6 controller Pablo Miller, and Christopher Steele, the compiler of the Trump Dossier. ..."
May 02, 2018 | theduran.com

Amidst speculation that British government has imposed reporting restrictions, British authorities admit they have no suspect in Skripal case

A week ago the British media were full of reports from the usual anonymous sources of a breakthrough in the Skripal case.

Allegedly the British authorities by comparing CCTV pictures from Salisbury and details of travellers to and from Britain had been to identify the persons who were supposedly responsible for the attack on Sergey and Yulia Skripal. These stories came with further stories of a Russian James Bond style assassin – "Gordon" aka "Mihails Savickis" – who together with his team had supposedly carried out the attack. The stories about "Gordon" aka "Mihails Savickis" came with a bizarre identikit picture supposedly of him, which was too ridiculous to take seriously.

In an article I wrote for The Duran on 24th April 2018 I expressed skepticism about these claims

.it looks to me as if despite all the claims to the contrary the police investigation of the Skripal case has made little actual progress. The British seem to have little more knowledge of who carried out the attack on Sergey and Yulia Skripal and why than they did when the investigation began. Could it possibly be because they are looking in the wrong place?

Testimony by Sir Mark Sedwill, British Prime Minister Theresa May's National Security Adviser, to the House of Commons Defence Committee on 1st May 2018 has now revealed that all the claims about a breakthrough in the Skripal case – not to mention the claims about "Gordon" aka "Mihails Savickis" – were (as I suspected) nonsense.

Here is how Sir Mark Sedwill's testimony is reported by The Guardian

Police and intelligence agencies have failed so far to identify the individual or individuals who carried out the nerve agent attack in Salisbury, the UK's national security adviser has disclosed.

The comments by Sir Mark Sedwill punctured hopes that the police and other security agencies had pinpointed suspects but were withholding the name or names from the public.

Asked by an MP at a Commons defence committee hearing if he knew the individuals responsible, he replied curtly: "Not yet."

Sedwill, who coordinates the work of the MI6, MI5, the surveillance agency GCHQ and others, did not elaborate but among problems that have hampered the agencies is a lack of CCTV coverage in Salisbury compared with London. Known Russian spies based in Britain have also been investigated and ruled out.

In other words the investigation is going nowhere and has drawn a complete blank.

All this comes hot on the heels of suggestions – which are very likely true – that the wall of silence which has recently descended on the British media's reporting of the Skripal case is the product of a British government D-Notice , ie. of a formal request by the British government to the media to limit their coverage of the Skripal story on grounds of national security.

It has also been suggested that despite formal denials the most likely reason for the D-Notice is the desire of the British authorities to conceal a possible connection between Sergey Skripal, his former MI6 controller Pablo Miller, and Christopher Steele, the compiler of the Trump Dossier.

There are even suggestions that Sergey Skripal may have had a hand in producing the Trump Dossier, and that this was the reason for the attack on him.

Whilst all this may be true, I have to say that Sergey Skripal – identified as a British spy by the Russians in 2004 and isolated from Russia in the leafy British town of Salisbury since 2010 – seems an unlikely source for the Trump Dossier, largely fictitious though that strange concoction is.

[May 03, 2018] Despite all the propaganda, all the hysterical headlines, all the blatantly biased coverage, the British haven't bought it

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Inside the Tent gatekeepers have relentlessly attacked those brave individuals who have questioned the official narratives, but its these individuals- smeared as 'crackpots' and 'conspiracy theorists' who the public are turning to for their analysis. ..."
"... After the lies told about Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya people no longer tamely accept what the NeoCon Establishment tells us. ..."
"... We're at an 'Emperor's New Clothes' moment in British politics where more and more people have found the courage to say out loud 'The Emperor has no clothes!'. ..."
"... The elite have been lying to us and they know that we know they've been lying. The question is: what are we going to do about it?" ..."
May 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 | May 2, 2018 4:52:58 PM | 174

Neil Clark's become quite the critic of the Neoconism rife within May's UK. His conclusion provides grounds for optimism:

"Despite all the propaganda, all the hysterical headlines, all the blatantly biased coverage, the British haven't bought it. Literally or metaphorically. Inside the Tent gatekeepers have relentlessly attacked those brave individuals who have questioned the official narratives, but its these individuals- smeared as 'crackpots' and 'conspiracy theorists' who the public are turning to for their analysis.

Compare the number of retweets the former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray gets when he publishes on the Skripal case, with those who try and denigrate him. My own Twitter following has increased by several thousands since early March.

Citizen Halo got a big boost in followers after she was smeared by The Times. After the lies told about Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya people no longer tamely accept what the NeoCon Establishment tells us.

We're at an 'Emperor's New Clothes' moment in British politics where more and more people have found the courage to say out loud 'The Emperor has no clothes!'.

The elite have been lying to us and they know that we know they've been lying. The question is: what are we going to do about it?"

[May 03, 2018] The Skripal Case and Bombing Syria Six Things We Learned About Modern Britain

Brits reinvented McCarthyism...
May 03, 2018 | sputniknews.com

... ... ...

1. The presumption of innocence doesn't apply to NeoCon targets.

The Skripal and Douma Incidents Are Parts of One Plan to Bring Russia Down – Chemist Innocent until proven guilty? Not if you're in the line of fire of the Endless War Lobby, comrade. Russia was accused of trying to poison the Skripals before a proper criminal investigation had even begun. The Syrian government was blamed for a chemical weapons attack, before we had independently verification that a chemical weapons attack had even taken place. The 'Official Narrative' on both cases has unravelled spectacularly. No 'smoking gun' evidence of either Russian involvement in the Skripal case or of the Douma CW attack has been produced. On the contrary, witnesses testified last week at The Hague that the Douma attack didn't happen.

But we're expected not to notice -- as the news cycle -- conveniently for the accusers- moves on to other stories.

​2. Rupert Murdoch's Times newspaper plays an utterly pernicious role in British public life.

It was the Times which demanded action from Theresa May against Russia. It was the Times which has demanded (repeatedly, and again after the Skripal incident) that Ofcom acted against Russian media in the UK, such as RT. It was the Times, which accuses Russian media of peddling 'fake news', which reported Sergei Skripal as dead on its 12th March front page .

It was The Times which, on 14th March, falsely reported that 'almost 40' people had needed treatment in Salisbury, prompting Dr Stephen Davies, Comsultant in Emergency Medicine to write to the paper stating 'May I clarify that no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury and there have only ever been three patients with significant poisoning.'

​It was The Times, which on the day the US/UK and France launched illegal attacks on Syria in response to the unverified chemical weapons attack at Douma, carried a front page attack on British academics who dare to challenge the War Party line on Syria. It was The Times which smeared other critics of western foreign policy as 'Russian trolls', including a peace campaigner from Finland who had been battling cancer.

​John Wight has called the Times, the in-house organ of the neocon Henry Jackson Society. Its days as Britain's respected newspaper of record have certainly long gone.

​3. Britain is only what is called a 'Democracy'.

Labour Leader Under Fire From Party MPs for Stance on Skripal Poisoning

Just think back to that Parliamentary debate on 14th March. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn was attacked from his own side, for his cautious approach towards the government's unproven claims about the Skripal case. To add insult to injury a number of Labour MPs then signed Early Day Motion 1071 - which stated 'This House unequivocally accepts the Russian state's culpability for the poisoning of Yulia and Sergei Skripal'. Labour's Shadow Defence Secretary Nia Griffith showed her support for Theresa May by saying 'We very much accept what the Prime Minister said.'

Corbyn, coming under enormous Establishment pressure did buckle, saying the Russian authorities 'needed to be held to account', even though later he still quite rightly insisted that 'absolute evidence' was needed.

READ MORE: UK Shouldn't 'Rush Ahead of Evidence' in Skripal Investigation -- Jeremy Corbyn

In bombing Syria on 14th April, Theresa May not only refused to recall Parliament, she also ignored public opinion which showed only 20% in favour of air strikes. In a genuine democracy that would have ruled out action. But May treated public opinion with utter contempt. That wonderful passage from 'The Comments of Moung Ka' by the Edwardian comic writer Saki springs readily to mind.

'The people of Britain are what is called a Democracy' said Moung Ka. 'A Democracy?' questioned Moung Thwa. What is that?'

'A Democracy' broke in Moung Shooglay eagerly, 'is a community that governs itself according to its own wishes and interests by electing accredited representatives who enact its laws and supervise and control their administration. It's aim and object is government of the community in the interests of the community'.

'Then', said Moung Thwa, turning to his neighbour, 'If the people of Britain are a Democracy-'

'I never said they were a Democracy', interrupted Moung Ka placidly.

'Surely we both heard you!', exclaimed Moung Thwa.

'Not correctly, said Moung Ka; 'I said they are what is called a Democracy'.

4. The 'free press' doesn't act as you'd expect a 'free press' to act.

The striking thing about the Skripal case and Syria bombings from a journalist's point of view has been the uniformity of the media coverage.

Right-wing papers like the Telegraph and liberal ones like The Guardian have taken exactly the same stance ie anti-Russian and anti-Syrian government. Whether its because of DSMA-Notices (see 6, below), or not, there's been no proper questioning of the UK government's claims about Salisbury -- and not much on Syria either. Investigative journalism? What's that?

The mainstream media is actually less diverse in its opinions now (on the things that really matter) than at the time of the Iraq war where publications like the New Statesman (now a 'centrist' Blairite organ), spoke out strongly against intervention. If you want a different perspective on Skripals and Syria you have had to tune in to Russian media, such as Sputnik and RT, and that of course is threatened by the NeoCon Thought Police, who want everyone to be singing from the same pro-war hymn sheet.

5. The role of the security services in the promotion of 'official narratives' is very important.

Every time a wheel has come off the Skripal narrative, we've been fed information to bolster it from 'official sources'. After the head of Porton Down said that the laboratory there was unable to confirm that the nerve agent allegedly used to poison the Skripals came from Russia, the line was pushed that 'intelligence-led assessments' pointed to Russian guilt. Could we see these 'assessments'? Of course not! We just have to believe that they're there. Then as the 'nerve handle placed on the door' theory began to gain a head of steam we were told that 'British Intelligence' had 'evidence' that Russia had been testing the nerve agent on door handles prior to 3rd March. Could we see this 'evidence'? No, of course not.

Alex Thomson of C4 News reported on 12th March that a 'D-Notice' had issued by the UK authorities to stop the media from fully identifying Sergei Skripal's MI6 handler who lived nearby.

​Were other DSMA-Notices issued too regarding the reporting of Salisbury? If it was so clear that Russia did it, why would they bother?

6. The British public aren't mugs (or sheep).

​Despite all the propaganda, all the hysterical headlines, all the blatantly biased coverage, the British haven't bought it. Literally or metaphorically. Inside the Tent gatekeepers have relentlessly attacked those brave individuals who have questioned the official narratives, but its these

individuals- smeared as 'crackpots' and 'conspiracy theorists' who the public are turning to for their analysis. Compare the number of retweets the former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray gets when he publishes on the Skripal case, with those who try and denigrate him. My own Twitter following has increased by several thousands since early March. Citizen Halo got a big boost in followers after she was smeared by The Times. After the lies told about Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya people no longer tamely accept what the NeoCon Establishment tells us. We're at an 'Emperor's New Clothes' moment in British politics where more and more people have found the courage to say out loud 'The Emperor has no clothes!'. The elite have been lying to us and they know that we know they've been lying. The question is: what are we going to do about it?

Follow Neil Clark on Twitter

Support his AntiStalker Legal Fund (vs. a Times journalist)

The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Sputnik.

[May 01, 2018] Your assessment of Nikki Haley as a 'mental lightweight' is likely right

Notable quotes:
"... I expect that the poll was designed/targeted/conducted/processed with that reported result in mind ....what questions were asked? To whom did they ask the questions? How was the data massaged? And who funded it? Poor, or even middle class people never fund any polls, do they? I poked around a bit at the college that ran the poll but don't have the patience to find the answers to my own questions. ..."
May 01, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

@ anon with the Niki Haley approval rating of 63% etc.

I expect that the poll was designed/targeted/conducted/processed with that reported result in mind ....what questions were asked? To whom did they ask the questions? How was the data massaged? And who funded it? Poor, or even middle class people never fund any polls, do they? I poked around a bit at the college that ran the poll but don't have the patience to find the answers to my own questions.

The current geo-political world is exposing all sorts of folks that support what I call the God of Mammon narrative and their associated moral failings. As a species it is way past time that we confront the centuries old assumptions that make up our "social contract"...such as it is/is not.

The Netanyahoo circus is not the underlying friction in our world. The underlying friction in our world is about debt, global/local investment and the cost of doing business including geo-political stability. We have enough food to feed everyone but there are distribution problems because of greed and social control desires. The same is true for housing, health care, education, etc. Our current social contract precludes everyone from having all those things because our social contract says that in the Western world all the tools of finance shall be owned/controlled privately. And furthermore that social contract (didn't you sign it?) says that there are these rules called laws that give not only "ownership" but that ownership in perpetuity through other rules/laws of inheritance to individuals/families.

IMO, if we want to change the world for the better or ever to save our asses we need to confront the underlying social contract that none ever discuss openly.

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 1, 2018 1:35:14 AM | 129

@fastfreddy 17

Your assessment of Nikki Haley as a 'mental lightweight' is likely right. However zionists probably like that in their manchurian candidates. See this thread from the saker... note her zionist righthand man, jon lerner...


https://thesaker.is/moveable-feast-cafe-2018-04-23/

" Nikki Haley: Scarier than John Bolton?

https://www.globalresearch.ca/nikki-haley-scarier-than-john-bolton/5637795

"In the Trumpean world of all-the-time-stupid, there is, however, one individual who stands out for her complete inability to perceive anything beyond threats of unrelenting violence combined with adherence to policies that have already proven to be catastrophic. That person is our own Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, who surfaced in the news lately after she unilaterally and evidently prematurely announced sanctions on Russia. When the White House suggested that she might have been "confused" she responded that "With all due respect, I don't get confused."

For sure, neocon barking dog Bill Kristol has for years been promoting Haley for president, a sign that something is up as he was previously the one who "discovered" Sarah Palin. Indeed, the similarities between the two women are readily observable. Neither is very cerebral or much given to make any attempt to understand an adversary's point of view; both are reflexively aggressive and dismissive when dealing with foreigners and domestic critics; both are passionately anti-Russian and pro-Israeli. And Kristol is not alone in his advocacy. Haley regularly receives praise from Senators like South Carolina's Lindsey Graham and from the Murdoch media as well as in the opinion pages of National Review and The Weekly Standard.

Haley, who had no foreign policy experience of any kind prior to assuming office, relies on a gaggle of neoconservative foreign-policy "experts" to help shape her public utterances, which are often not cleared with the State Department, where she is at least nominally employed. Her speechwriter is Jessica Gavora, who is the wife of the leading neoconservative journalist Jonah Goldberg. "

"
Anonymous on April 26, 2018 · at 2:24 pm EST/EDT
One might be inclined to dismiss Haley as another sarah palin, not too bright. This shows she might become relevant as a zionist manchurian candidate. They already seem to be grooming her. See the article below about her key aide, jonlerner

Zionists may prefer not-too-bright frontmen because they can be more easily controlled, think georgewbush, ronaldreagan, donaldtrump etc someone who is too bright might think themselves out of their control e.g. billclinton started off strongly proisrael, but by the end he becoming more savvy about israel his wifes political ambitions may have shorted that,

https://forward.com/news/national/389760/5-things-to-know-about-nikki-haleys-jewish-right-hand-man-jon-lerner/

" 5 Things To Know About Nikki Haley's Jewish Right-Hand Man Jon Lerner

Nathan Guttman December 11, 2017

He holds a senior position in the Trump administration and has made a name for himself as one of the most successful political consultants, yet Jon Lerner, manages to steer clear from the spotlight. Currently serving as America's deputy ambassador to the United Nations, under Nikki Haley, Lerner, 49, was recently described in a New York Magazine article as "the No. 1 person [Haley] listens to," and with speculations that Haley's political ambition could lead her all the way to the White House, Lerner is the man to follow.

Here are a few facts about Jon Lerner:

He May Pave Haley's Road to the White House

The New York Magazine reported that Lerner "has a long-term plan for Haley, and he is there to make sure nothing derails it." This long term plan began back in South Carolina when Lerner managed Haley's 2010 successful gubernatorial race and maintained its momentum when she entered the Trump administration as top United Nations representative. Lerner was appointed deputy ambassador but stayed behind to run Haley's Washington office.

senator Jim DeMint, [described] Lerner as having "a very good strategic mind."

"Where I follow my gut, Jon relies on facts and the statistics he finds in his polling," Haley wrote in her 2012 autobiography "

Reply

Anonymous on April 30, 2018 · at 4:41 am EST/EDT
nikki haley is the most popular active politician in america, with 63% approval, trump 39% ( obama is top 66%) in one poll. perhaps this shows the ongoing crumbling of american democracy, the principled design of its fundamental institutions (like the elections, the press, the supremecourt etc) being massively gamed in reality by the minions of the 1%.., sad !!

http://theduran.com/americas-most-popular-politician-is-nikki-haley/ "

Posted by: anon | May 1, 2018 12:33:13 AM | 122

[May 01, 2018] I'm astonished that anyone would think that Putin doesn't understand the US or what is going on in the Syria theater.

Notable quotes:
"... Israel is annoying everyone in the Syrian theater. Note well that the scale of impact is in the "annoying" range. Kind of like the "bluster" of the US but even more constrained by forces on the ground all around it. ..."
"... No one in the region believes that Russia or Iran have failed at anything. Observers simply hope they have the good fortune to see the revenge, knowing that they may never know how Iran counters - if in fact it ever does. ..."
"... Russia is working to move the final resolution of Syria into political methods rather than military - this is very important to keep in mind with all appraisals of the situation. It's time to repeat that Russia is working for peace, not to win battles. The two efforts are very different, and create different tactics. ..."
"... I echo that feeling. The explosions in Hama and Aleppo, for which there still remains no official report, have kicked up rampant speculation and many strange comments on this site. ..."
"... The idea that Russia is all bluster, has no clue what's going on, has abandoned Syria, or that the whole Russian exercise is due to Putin "begging to be admitted in the Western Club," flies in the face of facts on the ground. ..."
"... Putin is where he says he is. He was already part of the club (G8) and he left because the club was filled with jackasses. Putin is forming his own club, with Xi. ..."
May 01, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Grieved | Apr 30, 2018 9:24:11 PM | 107

Thanks to posters for links to Garrie on a possible "white hat" false flag and to Magnier for a plum-rich storytelling of how Israel is on the losing end of a shift in the balance of power, something that as yet it cannot admit to itself.

Israel is annoying everyone in the Syrian theater. Note well that the scale of impact is in the "annoying" range. Kind of like the "bluster" of the US but even more constrained by forces on the ground all around it.

I'm astonished that anyone would think that Putin doesn't understand the US or what is going on in the Syria theater. Russian commanders are in constant contact with all forces that bear on the situation, including those of the US, and Israel. And Putin has spelled out on numerous occasions - in interviews, from the Valdai Club, from his remarks directly to journalists and his people - what the empire is doing.

No one has lost face in this latest event, except Israel with Netanyahu's inane presentation, currently being called out as empty by Europeans.

No one in the region believes that Russia or Iran have failed at anything. Observers simply hope they have the good fortune to see the revenge, knowing that they may never know how Iran counters - if in fact it ever does.

Russia is working to move the final resolution of Syria into political methods rather than military - this is very important to keep in mind with all appraisals of the situation. It's time to repeat that Russia is working for peace, not to win battles. The two efforts are very different, and create different tactics.

With each situation that Russia confronts, from military attacks to diplomatic property seizures, Russia looks for the peace dividend. Armchair punters are watching one horse race, while Russia is looking decades down the road and asking what it takes to create stability that endures, out of each situation.

Don Bacon , Apr 30, 2018 10:13:44 PM | 113
@Grieved 107

Yes, some don't appreciate the giant step that Putin took moving into Syria to oppose The Leader Of The Free World™ with its president Obama threatening that Russians would soon be going home in body-bags.

But Russia survived and endured, and made a major point that right can win over might.

The strategy was brave and the tactics were revolutionary, including the busing of combatants away from combat. Credit where credit is due, Putin is a winner at home and abroad, as in Syria (and Crimea, BTW).

Activist Potato | May 1, 2018 1:04:41 AM | 123

"I'm astonished that anyone would think that Putin doesn't understand the US or what is going on in the Syria theater." Posted by: Grieved | Apr 30, 2018 9:24:11 PM | 107

I echo that feeling. The explosions in Hama and Aleppo, for which there still remains no official report, have kicked up rampant speculation and many strange comments on this site.

The idea that Russia is all bluster, has no clue what's going on, has abandoned Syria, or that the whole Russian exercise is due to Putin "begging to be admitted in the Western Club," flies in the face of facts on the ground.

Putin is where he says he is. He was already part of the club (G8) and he left because the club was filled with jackasses. Putin is forming his own club, with Xi.

Castellio | May 1, 2018 1:14:02 AM | 125

Putin sees the west much more clearly than the west sees him.

[May 01, 2018] Your assessment of Nikki Haley as a 'mental lightweight' is likely right

Notable quotes:
"... I expect that the poll was designed/targeted/conducted/processed with that reported result in mind ....what questions were asked? To whom did they ask the questions? How was the data massaged? And who funded it? Poor, or even middle class people never fund any polls, do they? I poked around a bit at the college that ran the poll but don't have the patience to find the answers to my own questions. ..."
May 01, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

@ anon with the Niki Haley approval rating of 63% etc.

I expect that the poll was designed/targeted/conducted/processed with that reported result in mind ....what questions were asked? To whom did they ask the questions? How was the data massaged? And who funded it? Poor, or even middle class people never fund any polls, do they? I poked around a bit at the college that ran the poll but don't have the patience to find the answers to my own questions.

The current geo-political world is exposing all sorts of folks that support what I call the God of Mammon narrative and their associated moral failings. As a species it is way past time that we confront the centuries old assumptions that make up our "social contract"...such as it is/is not.

The Netanyahoo circus is not the underlying friction in our world. The underlying friction in our world is about debt, global/local investment and the cost of doing business including geo-political stability. We have enough food to feed everyone but there are distribution problems because of greed and social control desires. The same is true for housing, health care, education, etc. Our current social contract precludes everyone from having all those things because our social contract says that in the Western world all the tools of finance shall be owned/controlled privately. And furthermore that social contract (didn't you sign it?) says that there are these rules called laws that give not only "ownership" but that ownership in perpetuity through other rules/laws of inheritance to individuals/families.

IMO, if we want to change the world for the better or ever to save our asses we need to confront the underlying social contract that none ever discuss openly.

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 1, 2018 1:35:14 AM | 129

@fastfreddy 17

Your assessment of Nikki Haley as a 'mental lightweight' is likely right. However zionists probably like that in their manchurian candidates. See this thread from the saker... note her zionist righthand man, jon lerner...


https://thesaker.is/moveable-feast-cafe-2018-04-23/

" Nikki Haley: Scarier than John Bolton?

https://www.globalresearch.ca/nikki-haley-scarier-than-john-bolton/5637795

"In the Trumpean world of all-the-time-stupid, there is, however, one individual who stands out for her complete inability to perceive anything beyond threats of unrelenting violence combined with adherence to policies that have already proven to be catastrophic. That person is our own Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, who surfaced in the news lately after she unilaterally and evidently prematurely announced sanctions on Russia. When the White House suggested that she might have been "confused" she responded that "With all due respect, I don't get confused."

For sure, neocon barking dog Bill Kristol has for years been promoting Haley for president, a sign that something is up as he was previously the one who "discovered" Sarah Palin. Indeed, the similarities between the two women are readily observable. Neither is very cerebral or much given to make any attempt to understand an adversary's point of view; both are reflexively aggressive and dismissive when dealing with foreigners and domestic critics; both are passionately anti-Russian and pro-Israeli. And Kristol is not alone in his advocacy. Haley regularly receives praise from Senators like South Carolina's Lindsey Graham and from the Murdoch media as well as in the opinion pages of National Review and The Weekly Standard.

Haley, who had no foreign policy experience of any kind prior to assuming office, relies on a gaggle of neoconservative foreign-policy "experts" to help shape her public utterances, which are often not cleared with the State Department, where she is at least nominally employed. Her speechwriter is Jessica Gavora, who is the wife of the leading neoconservative journalist Jonah Goldberg. "

"
Anonymous on April 26, 2018 · at 2:24 pm EST/EDT
One might be inclined to dismiss Haley as another sarah palin, not too bright. This shows she might become relevant as a zionist manchurian candidate. They already seem to be grooming her. See the article below about her key aide, jonlerner

Zionists may prefer not-too-bright frontmen because they can be more easily controlled, think georgewbush, ronaldreagan, donaldtrump etc someone who is too bright might think themselves out of their control e.g. billclinton started off strongly proisrael, but by the end he becoming more savvy about israel his wifes political ambitions may have shorted that,

https://forward.com/news/national/389760/5-things-to-know-about-nikki-haleys-jewish-right-hand-man-jon-lerner/

" 5 Things To Know About Nikki Haley's Jewish Right-Hand Man Jon Lerner

Nathan Guttman December 11, 2017

He holds a senior position in the Trump administration and has made a name for himself as one of the most successful political consultants, yet Jon Lerner, manages to steer clear from the spotlight. Currently serving as America's deputy ambassador to the United Nations, under Nikki Haley, Lerner, 49, was recently described in a New York Magazine article as "the No. 1 person [Haley] listens to," and with speculations that Haley's political ambition could lead her all the way to the White House, Lerner is the man to follow.

Here are a few facts about Jon Lerner:

He May Pave Haley's Road to the White House

The New York Magazine reported that Lerner "has a long-term plan for Haley, and he is there to make sure nothing derails it." This long term plan began back in South Carolina when Lerner managed Haley's 2010 successful gubernatorial race and maintained its momentum when she entered the Trump administration as top United Nations representative. Lerner was appointed deputy ambassador but stayed behind to run Haley's Washington office.

senator Jim DeMint, [described] Lerner as having "a very good strategic mind."

"Where I follow my gut, Jon relies on facts and the statistics he finds in his polling," Haley wrote in her 2012 autobiography "

Reply

Anonymous on April 30, 2018 · at 4:41 am EST/EDT
nikki haley is the most popular active politician in america, with 63% approval, trump 39% ( obama is top 66%) in one poll. perhaps this shows the ongoing crumbling of american democracy, the principled design of its fundamental institutions (like the elections, the press, the supremecourt etc) being massively gamed in reality by the minions of the 1%.., sad !!

http://theduran.com/americas-most-popular-politician-is-nikki-haley/ "

Posted by: anon | May 1, 2018 12:33:13 AM | 122

[Apr 30, 2018] If Nikki Haley was supposedly voted most likable US politician

Apr 30, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Kalen , Apr 30, 2018 3:16:34 PM | 37

If Nikki Haley was supposedly voted most likable US politician hence I suggest, lock the US insane asylum and throw out the key, since now anything will be blabbermouthed and nothing of substance will really happen except some unwitting crisis actors will die, a fact of inhumane cruelty of imperial rulers.

Where are dire warnings from Russia about severe consequences if Syria attacked.
Russians lost credibility of their threats which is even worse if they have never made them.

I do not know what it would take for people to see what cruel charade all this is, what would it take for people to realize that it is all Roman type of theater of wilderness and pain and we are audience and targets of this propaganda of fear of global nuke war and destruction that they want us to believe is behind all this cruel soap opera.

There will be no global war since there are no fundamental conflicts within global elites despite what propaganda from all sides claims and that including b, trying to make sense of utter unadulterated nonsense of MSM, for those establishment people in west who are already in it are not idiots but rational people who do that immoral, opportunist job for money knowing what they lie about, knowing that there is no danger of global nuke catastrophe whatsoever, otherwise they would act more sober like it was during Cold War.

However, there is logic in this madness, namely to forcefully align nations with discredited ruling elites who attempt to take role of saviors, when no other method of control over population works any more and policies of deliberated destruction of welfare and civil society, openly provoked mass unrest or revolution and instigated natural growth of working class movements in self defense. Warmongering was classical ploy against discontented population used many times in history and nor mere speculation.

Spreading of fear of global anihilation among populations is the ultimate objective of this unheard of verbal and acting belligerence on world stage, which upon examination of basic socioeconomic facts especially soundness and calm of global financial system indicates mood of world peace and love among oligarchic elites who have a good thing going while sheeple are orderly dying of starvation and fear.

But I guess even on this quite brainy blog people are more interested in menacing tabloid surrealism than boring naked truth. Otherwise, b would not have much to write about in his devastating reports on masive MSM lying, with implicit hope that one day may be NYT writes some truth.

It ain's gonna happen b , their business is lies yo

[Apr 30, 2018] They got Putin by the balls with russia histing the Would Cup or something more complex is playing out in Syria and Iran

Apr 30, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Passer by , Apr 30, 2018 3:53:05 PM | 45

Putin blocking the delivery of S-300 in Syria against the demands of the Russian Military

This was discussed by Putin with General Staff chief Valery Gerasimov and Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu on April 20. The Russian military, they told the President, want the go-ahead to deploy S-300 missile batteries to cover Syrian and Iranian forces against US and Israeli attack from the air. They believe Israeli threats to attack the S-300 batteries as soon as they are operational are a bluff which Russia must call if Russia's positions in Syria, and Iran itself, are not to come under subsequent attack from the American-Israeli combination. Testing the threat in Syria, they argue, is the less threatening, less costly option than encouraging the Americans and Israelis to prepare their
offensive against Iran. Putin won't agree.

To respond to Putin's reluctance, the General Staff and the Defence Ministry have devised a step short of the S-300, but with potentially enough defensive power to intercept or deter American and Israeli air attacks. This is the deployment of more Russian electronic warfare systems with the capacity to jam the surveillance, targeting, fire control and command signals on which the attackers rely. It is the Samson Haircut option – deprive the giant of control of his firepower, blind him.

Silently, Putin has decided to protect Deripaska; not to call the US attack on Rusal an act of war; and to test the Americans with an offer of armistice. International bankers close to Russian business believe it is a Russian illusion that an armistice with the US can be anything but temporary; pursuing it is a miscalculation of US intentions, the sources add. They warn that new attacks will come.

http://johnhelmer.net/the-samson-haircut-option-one-step-before-russia-opens-fire-on-american-israeli-forces/#more-19116

Putin Reportedly "Ready For Deep Concessions", Seeks Deal With Trump

He understands Russia can't compete with the West economically and he doesn't plan to go to war with the West.

Kremlin has ordered officials to curb their anti-U.S. rhetoric.

Putin's decision explains why lawmakers Monday suddenly pulled a draft law that would've imposed sweeping counter-sanctions on U.S. companies, two of the people said.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-18/putin-reportedly-ready-deep-concessions-seeks-deal-trump

Russian Senators to soften counter sanctions against US

RBC: Russian senators to water down Moscow's response to US sanctions. Two Federation Council members told the newspaper that the final version of the amendments to the 'anti-sanctions' bill initiated by State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin and leaders of all parliamentary factions, will be "quite mild."

http://tass.com/pressreview/1001647

Russia not to take action against US diplomatic property - diplomat

More:
http://tass.com/politics/1002504

frances , Apr 30, 2018 4:02:55 PM | 48
Passer by | Apr 30, 2018 3:53:05 PM | 45
I believe Putin is playing for time. The March 1 weaponry display didn't include production numbers but I think it is a safe bet they don't exist in sufficient numbers..yet.

So US&Co have a small window left to create hell on earth for as many as possible and they IMO will hit Iran before the football playoffs that Putin so wants to go smoothly.

I would assume Iran is/was responsible for Iranian defense of these sites so I am surprised they didn't respond, maybe there was no time?? Couldn't Russia have warned them?? And does anyone know what weaponry the Russians brought into Syria recently under cover of smoke?

imoverit , Apr 30, 2018 4:20:46 PM | 55
@ frances

I think the World Cup is playing a big role in the decision making as you have said. There is a lot at stake: investments already made and international exposure also. I can't wait for it to be finished so we can get back to war !! (sarc)

karlof1 , Apr 30, 2018 4:45:37 PM | 61
Et al--

Russia began its Syria intervention with an S-400 deployed in Latakia and has introduced several more since, one being in Sept 2017 . Syria also has the BUK-M2E AA system and the Pantsir to go with its older and upgraded S-200 systems along with who knows what else. Just what was off loaded from Russian supply vessels under the cover of smoke last week (don't know if such veiling's continuing)? My guess is more AA systems of the type causing Zionists on both sides of Atlantic to freakout.

As for the Zionists attacking Iranian military bases, those Iran uses in Syria are joint-use with Syria regardless of what's said by Zionists; so, any such attack will need to be aimed at Iran proper. The consequences for the region would be horrible--particularly for Zionists and Saudis: Dimona would be leveled as would Saudi oil infrastructure. The fallout and other pollution would be appalling. If the Zionists want to keep their skin, they'll arrest Nutty before he gets his get-out-of-jail war started.

Zionists know they've lost and are contained and constrained, so they're moving into desperation mode. Too bad they lack the courage to put a pistol to their head and pull the trigger.

Jayhawk2018 , Apr 30, 2018 6:03:45 PM | 78
Russia could easily give Syria the s300 system. But Putin clearly does not want to hurt his buddy Netanyahu's feelings. They are always so chummy you can see there is a mutual respect between them whenever they meet. Russia is only in Syria to fight terrorism. They will obviously not confront Israel and go to war, and that is of course, understandable. But whats even worse is that they seem to refuse to give Syria/Iran the means to defend themselves from Israeli attacks.

If its true Putin is blocking the delivery himself against the request of the Russian Army, that is even more shameful. I guess in terms of preventing a World War, it is good that Putin is chummy with Netanyahu. However a regional war is looking very likely at this point. Unfortunately the only way Israel will learn is by being smashed in the teeth. I'm sure in time Syria, Iran or Hezbollah will have to teach them another lesson.

Pft , Apr 30, 2018 6:50:46 PM | 81
A lot of Russian oligarchs are dual Israeli or American -Russian citizens. Even in the Soviet era while they provided just enough support to prevent the Arab countries from being totally defeated they stopped short of giving them enough to threaten Israel or defeat them. Putin has made peace with a number of the oligarchs that remain in Russia but he has to take care not to get the pro Israeli -US faction riled or threaten their overseas financial interests which Trump has threatened to do with sanctions targeted at the oligarchs

So Russia will prevent Syria from being totally overwhelmed but concede the US the northeast oil rich fields and Israel gets the gas fields in Golan. They will allow isolated missile attacks and bombing by US and Israel that both resort to for show to appease their hawks. In the meantime if Assad has an accident or gets overthrown due to economic reasons then israel and US may get their puppet state and Russia/Iran may exit. Then on to Lebanon and Iran.

Wars are not fought to be won anymore. They are fought to be long lasting. Perpetual War Abroad is Peace at Home

[Apr 30, 2018] If Nikki Haley was supposedly voted most likable US politician

Apr 30, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Kalen , Apr 30, 2018 3:16:34 PM | 37

If Nikki Haley was supposedly voted most likable US politician hence I suggest, lock the US insane asylum and throw out the key, since now anything will be blabbermouthed and nothing of substance will really happen except some unwitting crisis actors will die, a fact of inhumane cruelty of imperial rulers.

Where are dire warnings from Russia about severe consequences if Syria attacked.
Russians lost credibility of their threats which is even worse if they have never made them.

I do not know what it would take for people to see what cruel charade all this is, what would it take for people to realize that it is all Roman type of theater of wilderness and pain and we are audience and targets of this propaganda of fear of global nuke war and destruction that they want us to believe is behind all this cruel soap opera.

There will be no global war since there are no fundamental conflicts within global elites despite what propaganda from all sides claims and that including b, trying to make sense of utter unadulterated nonsense of MSM, for those establishment people in west who are already in it are not idiots but rational people who do that immoral, opportunist job for money knowing what they lie about, knowing that there is no danger of global nuke catastrophe whatsoever, otherwise they would act more sober like it was during Cold War.

However, there is logic in this madness, namely to forcefully align nations with discredited ruling elites who attempt to take role of saviors, when no other method of control over population works any more and policies of deliberated destruction of welfare and civil society, openly provoked mass unrest or revolution and instigated natural growth of working class movements in self defense. Warmongering was classical ploy against discontented population used many times in history and nor mere speculation.

Spreading of fear of global anihilation among populations is the ultimate objective of this unheard of verbal and acting belligerence on world stage, which upon examination of basic socioeconomic facts especially soundness and calm of global financial system indicates mood of world peace and love among oligarchic elites who have a good thing going while sheeple are orderly dying of starvation and fear.

But I guess even on this quite brainy blog people are more interested in menacing tabloid surrealism than boring naked truth. Otherwise, b would not have much to write about in his devastating reports on masive MSM lying, with implicit hope that one day may be NYT writes some truth.

It ain's gonna happen b , their business is lies yo

[Apr 30, 2018] Western countries try to take Purin by the balls in Syria due to World Cup in Russia: Sochi events might be replayed

Apr 30, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

J Swift | Apr 30, 2018 6:30:45 AM | 46

Putin is no coward and no fool. It is hard not to suspect that his desire to see the World Cup be a success (not just financially, but in exposing Western regular people to Russia) is still a real constraint on Putin, and I think the iFUKUS group is beginning to feel that they have a window of opportunity here, too, and are trying to make the most of it.

That said, I imagine under the RF plan at least some S300s have made it to Syria, even if not officially "delivered" to the SAA yet, and more will continue to arrive, such that upon the close of the World Cup the delivery can be made overnight.

However, there will have to be a limit for Putin's ability to restrain the more hawkish in his camp, such that the Israelis in particular may jack around and manage to accelerate the official deployment and inevitable escalation that will come. But of course open war is what they want, the fools.

Anonymous_1 , Apr 30, 2018 4:52:48 AM | 45
So Israel attack again, and no one cares in the west/media/governments, what the hell is going on? This will destabilize Europe with more refugees, and strengthen ISIS and jihadist takeover.

As for Russia, they need to stop being dictated by what Israel/US/ wants, they look incredibly pathetic.

Will Russia Let Israel Dictate Syrian Survival, the S300 Issue

https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/04/24/will-russia-let-israel-dictate-syrian-survival-the-s300-issue/

Soon Assad will be bombed by Israel if Syria is not protected with defensive weapons.

[Apr 30, 2018] The CIA Democrats vs. Julian Assange - World Socialist Web Site

Apr 23, 2018 | www.wsws.org

The lawsuit filed by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), naming WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange as co-conspirators with Russia and the Trump campaign in a criminal effort to steal the 2016 US presidential election, is a frontal assault on democratic rights. It tramples on the First Amendment to the US Constitution, which establishes freedom of the press and freedom of speech as fundamental rights.

Neither the Democratic Party lawsuit nor the media commentaries on it acknowledge that WikiLeaks is engaged in journalism, not espionage; that its work consists of publishing material supplied to it by whistleblowers seeking to expose the crimes of governments, giant corporations and other powerful organizations; and that this courageous campaign of exposure has made both the website and its founder and publisher the targets of state repression all over the world.

Assange himself has been effectively imprisoned in the Ecuadorian embassy in London for the past six years, since he fled there to escape efforts by the British, Swedish and American governments to engineer his extradition to the United States, where a secret grand jury has reportedly indicted him on espionage and treason charges that could bring the death penalty. Since the end of March, the Ecuadorian government, responding to increasing pressure from US and British imperialism, has cut off all outside communication with him.

The reason for the indictment and persecution of Assange is that WikiLeaks published secret military documents, supplied by whistleblower Chelsea Manning, revealing US war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as diplomatic cables embarrassing to the US State Department because they detailed US attempts to manipulate and subvert governments around the world.

The Democratic National Committee on Friday filed a 66-page complaint that reeks of McCarthyism, with overtones of the Wisconsin senator's demagogy about "a conspiracy so vast" when he was spearheading the anticommunist witch hunts more than 70 years ago. After detailing a long list of supposed conspirators, ranging from the Russian government and its military intelligence agency GRU to the Trump campaign and Julian Assange, the complaint declares: "The conspiracy constituted an act of previously unimaginable treachery: the campaign of the presidential nominee of a major party in league with a hostile foreign power to bolster its own chance to win the Presidency."

[Apr 29, 2018] The Guardian has become tabloid.

Apr 29, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: Quentin | Apr 22, 2018 12:29:41 PM | 7

The Carla Ortiz and Jimmy Dore exchange is fascinating. Each in her/his own way is superb. The Guardian has become boulevard press = tabloid. Nearly every day before and even after the US election Mrs. Clinton gloated on the front page. Bernie Sanders was no where to be seen nearly until the election. Now the Guardian is priming its readers for the stomach-churning royal wedding coming up. No, no more Guardian for me. And they have the gall to ask for money to turn out articles praising the White Helemts. No! Curtis , Apr 22, 2018 12:32:23 PM | 8

Anonymous 4
BBC took on Vannessa Beeley recently, too. Will NYT and WaPo be next? The anti-Russia agenda continues along with the anti-truth-in-Syria agenda.

AriusAmerican 5
During the Bush II fiasco, there were anti-war protests. The protests disappeared after Obama took office. And he was given a Nobel Peace Prize for talking about peace. But everyone went along with Obama's wars. No protests. And that's how they like it. They want support and tend to get it from the MSM and party lackeys. And if they don't get support, the one thing they don't want are massive protests, calls to congress, etc. As long as there's little to no resistance their war agenda continues.

Curtis , Apr 22, 2018 12:49:24 PM | 9
PS
The HuffPoUK article tears into Beeley but at the bottom has a Russian submission to the Security Council of a report she did of the White Helmets. That report negates the article/story! HuffPoUK claims this is part two of a series and that part three will "look at evidence presented against the White Helmets." That should be interesting.

Anonymous2 | Apr 22, 2018 1:50:23 PM | 12

Curtis

"The anti-Russia agenda continues along with the anti-truth-in-Syria agenda."

I dont get it why these journalists are against finding out what happend (since we dont know that yet)? Most of these morons have no idea about the conflict at all, and all of a sudden start writing like they are veteran journalists and have profound knowledge about Syria.

Why is there such a hatred? Is it brainwashing?


[Apr 29, 2018] Macron The Last Multilateralist by Patrick J. Buchanan

He wants the return of France colonial glory.
Notable quotes:
"... Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, ..."
"... . To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at www.creators.com. ..."
Apr 27, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

"Together," President Macron instructed President Trump, "we can resist the rise of aggressive nationalisms that deny our history and divide the world."

In an address before Congress on Wednesday, France's Macron denounced "extreme nationalism," invoked the UN, NATO, WTO, and Paris climate accord, and implored Trump's America to come home to the New World Order.

"The United States is the one who invented this multilateralism," Macron went on, "you are the one now who has to help preserve and reinvent it."

His visit was hailed and his views cheered, but on reflection, the ideas of Emmanuel Macron seem to be less about tomorrow than yesterday. For the world he celebrates is receding into history. The America of 2018 is coming to see NATO as having evolved into an endless U.S. commitment to go to war with Russia on behalf of a rich Europe that resolutely refuses to provide for its own defense.

Since the WTO was created in the mid-90s, the U.S. has run $12 trillion in trade deficits, and among the organization's biggest beneficiaries -- the EU. Under the Paris climate accord, environmental restrictions are put upon the United States from which China is exempt. As for the UN, is that sinkhole of anti-Americanism, the General Assembly, really worth the scores of billions we have plunged into it?

"Aggressive nationalism" is a term that might well fit Napoleon Bonaparte, whose Arc de Triomphe sits on the Champs-Elysees. But does it really fit the Hungarians, Poles, Brits, Scots, Catalans, and other indigenous peoples of Europe who are now using democratic methods and means to preserve their national homes?

And the United States would seem an odd place to go about venting on "aggressive nationalisms that deny our history." Did Macron not learn at the Lycee Henri IV in Paris or the Ecole Nationale d'Administration how the Americans acquired all that land? General Washington, at whose Mount Vernon home Macron dined, was a nationalist who fought for six years to sever America's ties to the nation under which he was born. How does Macron think Andrew Jackson acquired Florida from Spain, Sam Houston acquired Texas from Mexico, and Winfield Scott and Zachary Taylor acquired the Southwest? By bartering?

Aggressive nationalism is a good synonym for the Manifest Destiny of a republic that went about relieving Spain of Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. How does Macron think the "New World" was conquered and colonized if not by aggressive British, French, and Spanish nationalists determined to impose their rule upon weaker indigenous tribes? Was it not nationalism that broke up the USSR into 15 nations?

Was not the Zionist movement that resurrected Israel in 1948, and in 1967 captured the West Bank and then annexed East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, a manifestation of aggressive nationalism?

Macron is an echo of George H.W. Bush who in Kiev in 1991 warned Ukrainians against the "suicidal nationalism" of declaring independence from the Russian Federation. "Aggressive nationalisms divide the world," warns Macron. Well, yes, they do, which is why we have now 194 members of the U.N., rather than the original 50. Is this a problem? "Together," said Macron, "we will build a new, strong multilateralism that defends pluralism and democracy in the face of ill winds."

Macron belongs to a political class that sees open borders and free trade thickening and tightening the ties of dependency, and eventually creating a One Europe whose destiny his crowd will forever control.

But if his idea of pluralism is multiracial, multiethnic, and multicultural nations, with a multilateral EU overlord, he is describing a future that tens of millions of Europeans believe means the deaths of the nations that give meaning to their lives.

And they will not go gently into that good night.

In America, too, millions have come to recognize that there is a method to the seeming madness of open borders. Name of the game: dispossessing the deplorables of the country they love.

With open borders and mass migration of over a million people a year into the USA, almost all of them from third-world countries that vote 70 to 90 percent Democratic, the left is foreclosing the future. They're converting the greatest country of the West into what Teddy Roosevelt called a "polyglot boarding house for the world." And in that boarding house the left will have a lock on the presidency.

With the collaboration of co-conspirators in the media, progressives throw a cloak of altruism over the cynical seizure of permanent power.

For, as the millions of immigrants here legally and illegally register, and the vote is extended to prison inmates, ex-cons, and 16-year-olds, the political complexion of America will come to resemble San Francisco.

End goal: ensure that what happened in 2016, when the nation rose up and threw out a despised establishment, never happens again.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever . To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at www.creators.com.

[Apr 29, 2018] Putin and Russia bashing is indeed perplexing. But it is not universal

Notable quotes:
"... BraaaaVO! Killer post....Ironically, at age 57, I NOW do what Russians TOLD ME they did over 30 years ago: Whatever I read in the papers or hear from the U.S. gov, I automatically believe the OPPOSITE! ..."
Apr 29, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Dan Good • 4 years ago ,

The Russia bashing is indeed perplexing. But it is not universal. One explanation is that Americans are afraid of the rivalry. Also Americans have been brought up with a negative imagine of "KGB" and it is impossible to shake this. Russia would love to be part of Europe and increase ties and business. Europe is game; but not USA. It represents a challenge to its own supremacy. I think this is the underlying problem. Putin came out of nowhere, as many of the "Putin Videos" show. His first priority was to rebuild the morale of the Russian army and to do this he picked on Chechnia. Perhaps today he would do things differently. He also turned on many oligarchs who had helped him. But he did this because he did not ask nor want their "help" which he considered self-serving; they wanted to control him, not the other way round. He may regret having been too hard on some (Boris Bereshovski for instance) but it had to be done. All these things played into the hands of the anti-Russians in US. One thing is sure. Neither Russia nor Putin had anything to do with the riots in Maidan which are the root cause of all the disasters occurring in that country. If Putin "took advantage" of the break-down in Kiev to retake Crimea so much to his credit. It was certainly not "planned". The State Dept got faked out. Now they are licking their wounds by Putin bashing day in day out. Rather pathetic really. The best would be to welcome Russia into the world economy. It can make a great contribution.

Patty Donovan Dan Good • 4 years ago ,

I was brought up to hate Russia, to fear Russia but not anymore! It was all lies and manipulation! Do not include all Americans because its just not true but yes, Russophobia is from decades and decades of brainshing in America.. Believe me, since literally the age of 5 I was taught to fear Russia.

From school drills in preparation of " Russia coming to get us" to Putin being a communist dictator to now, Russia is more dangerous than terrorists organization is ALL lies by our government and media! People need to wake the hell up !

It is our government bombing and invading countries, our government funding millions to Isreal to slaughter Palestines, funding Nazi Ukraine president to kill Russian speaking E Ukrainians!

Our government funded and trained ISIS! The world is not n chaos because of your government!

Samantha Dan Good • 4 years ago ,

Well, Washington D.C. IS afraid of rivalry.
Remeber the 1992 ,Wolfowitz Doctrine'? Even one of the mouthpieces, the NYT, was slightly disgusted.
The essence of that vile doctrine: do not allow any rival to rise and challenge US power, hegemony.

Patty Donovan Guest • 4 years ago ,

I am not at all afraid of Russia. In fact they're much like us , who want peace and wished our countries were friends and allies like we should be ! But NO ! We have twisted butthead warmongers who want to cause trouble and keep Russia down because heaven forbid they might be bigger and better than us! I say good for them ! We are NOT excepectionals , we should be equals !

Luketree14 Patty Donovan • 3 years ago ,

Totally agree, Patty

plamenpetkov Guest • 3 years ago ,

Guess what, the Russians are not afraid of USA either.

But we all ARE afraid of a wounded animal, they are the most dangerous. And USA is a wounded dying animal. I will be very surprised if humanity managed to avoid a nuclear war within the next 10 years. The fake "capitalism" is collapsing and the only way out is a major war.

teddyfromcd plamenpetkov • 2 years ago ,

IMO -- WHAT the americans among us are saying "'not afraid of russia\|"

is that they don't fear Russia the WAY the warmongers told them to fear Russia...

as if russians have some malicious nefarious intent towards americans...and they are right. americans should NOT fear russia nor russia americans in the sense that everyone are just PEOPLE -- ordinary folks who just want to grow up , live, have families and friends and work a good decent job, leave something for their children , etc..and then grow old with grace .

buit these warmongers of leaders are just so EVIL - who sit around with their cronies and their families and friends SCHEMING and makng their 'inner circle" decisions about 'shaping the world" as they see fit...and create MISERY for everyone.

Luketree14 plamenpetkov • 3 years ago ,

quote: "The fake "capitalism" is collapsing and the only way out is a major war."

No, as it is implied in your statement, a major war is not a way out. What is a way out, is a reinventing of a new economy!

plamenpetkov Luketree14 • 3 years ago ,

There is nothing being implied into my statement. "Capitalism" has ALWAYS been fake and bunch of lies. With a major war, they will be able to keep the charade a bit longer, the same way thy did it with WWII.

Jacques Cuse Luketree14 • 3 years ago ,

Venus Project? https://www.thevenusproject...

teddyfromcd Dan Good • 2 years ago ,

exactly

brilliant summation.

EUROPE and its ''invasion" by the USA is the USA'S STEPPING STONE and war front towards Moscow n order to rule over all of Eurasia -- all that resource and land, magine...

it is just a mirror of the USA'S ''conquering the west" ..by the other direction. as is JAPAN, peripeheral asian countries to china /russia is from the pacific end...

THAT'S really teh USA''s obsession - always was - and this has been OPENLY declared by no less than the likes of THEODORE ROOSEVELT, "the pacific shall be ours, the philippines shall be our doorstep and forever ours - and then on to the mainland of asia"...things of that kind...

no less than MANIFEST DESTINY to rule the world, or "OUR SOUTH AMERICAN BACKYARD"..

and were russia and europe to unite and have peaceful cooperation , trade, friendship and tighten their commonalities of cultures --

WHAT WOULD EUROPE AND EURASIA really need THE usa FOR?

DEFENSE AND SECURITY against WHOM exactly? a europe at peace with russia would SOON be a europe at peace WITH the middle east and africa -- and asia --

and the extremists would SO ISOLATED within that landmass they would simp;ly wither away for STARVATION as peoples ignore them

people who find meaningful decent jobs , children growing up with families intact and with futures to look forward to and travel everywhere their dreams allowed...etc...

WHAT WOULD the landmasses and their peoples and cultures NEED USA for? resources? technology? science? medicine/ / agriculture? food? ships? cars? .......security? defense/ ?

safety? rights? entertainment? cultural enrichment? stories? friends? nope

they would NOT NEED the USA at all. the wil.l welcome american FRIENDS and traders as it ought to be...but NOT as rulers and ''security and defense " SCAM ARTISTS.

THAT'S WHAT THE USA FEARS from russian/european integration...and become what it really IS..

AN OUTSIDER.

Jonathan Jarvis • 4 years ago ,

look at all the blogs/comments in Uk nationalistic papers eg Daily mail-readers comments are full of vile nonsense and insane idiocy-there is no hope of peaceful resolution Rus and west while ordinary people are so ill informed, do not even wish to understand, completely prejudiced, have such entrenched attitudes perpetuated by mass media, playstation/xbox games and zombie films exported from USA that have morally corrupted peoples and nations.

NGO's being funded by USA to subvert other states, look out for cyberwarfare too.

Please support The Saker too, very high intelligence from this analyst.

Rocky Racoon • 4 years ago ,

Just consider the speech's given by Western Leader's at the opening session of the UN recently -- Cameron posits critical thinking as being aligned with ISIS-Obama casting Russia as a threat equal to ISIS and Ebola

Rocky Racoon • 4 years ago ,

Just consider the speech's given by Western Leader's at the opening session of the UN recently -- Cameron posits critical thinking as being aligned with ISIS-Obama casting Russia as a threat equal to ISIS and Ebola, ...these statements are allowed to pass uncritically into the mainstream without a second thought. This depraved leadership sends shivers down my spine as it indicates just serious our problems are and how far down the rabbit hole we have fallen. Capitalism in crisis produces fascism at home and primitive accumulation in the form of Imperialism abroad. America is broke and going from Broke having invested trillions in PNAC they are doubling down on full spectrum dominance-a fallacy that will never be reached leaving poverty stricken societies in their wake. Societies akin to the Hunger Games-quasi-feudal fiefdoms only serfs had more rights than today's wage slaves-tenure on the land,access to the mode of production ability the keep and trade the fruits of their labour at least to an extent. The fall of the Soviet Union was a catastrophe for the workers of the world-Not only did we not get a peace dividend from the end of the cold war but a century of social gains won by labour have been rolled back to practically nothing the finishing touches being put into place with the free trade deals about to be unleashed upon the Western Worker-notice austerity was and is not an option for Putin's Russia-he has put his neck on the line for his people and his country and they will do the same for him and the Motherland.

America has to hire mercenaries to fight their battles which is why they can't win. And these false flags are getting a little tiresome. And Mr. Lavrov as FM he is the consummate diplomat, he does not brow beat or chest pound,nor does he humiliate his adversaries even though circumstances have offered him ample opportunities-people like MCCAIN OBAMA and KERRY embarrass themselves and their nation often enough without Russia having to add insult to injury-Russia is above that but truth telling is another matter and must be pursued no matter how embarrassing for certain parties the exercise maybe Russia does need to increase it's public relations budget every thing from student exchanges on up to film festivals Sochi would make an excellent venue for the glitterati......and serves as a reminder of just how immature the West truly is when one harken's back to the coverage of the Olympics. This Ukraine situation needs to be resolved in opposition to the fascists putsch ruling now before it blows up in all of our faces. Cohen nailed it-we are 5 min. to midnight and closing.

Our real enemy is not in the Kremlin or the Middle East-but right here on Wall Street and Pennsylvania Avenue-time for Occupy 2.0 with Agenda.

Webbily Rocky Racoon • 4 years ago ,

Yes, and Ebola isn't a real threat. The only reason it's in the US is because people have been idiots and have not taken the proper precautions. Russia has a vaccine ready to go. ISIS was created by the US, and they're not a real threat. I am not afraid of Russia or the KGB or Putin or Boris and Natasha. All of it is fear, fear, fear, fear, fear.

elizabeth Eva Young Rocky Racoon • 4 years ago ,

Oh Yes, and not forgetting the hybrid not so Holy Hollywood, the entertainment industry who of course are run by the Banksters. The missing link in humanity the genetic modification from apes to human form, the Banksters. Do you remember the "Man from Atlantis" and the "Planet of the Apes" and the oil magnets "Dallas"
https://encrypted-tbn1.gsta...
Play Hide

idiotland • 4 years ago ,

What this shows more than anything is how desperate the western elites are. They know Russia, China and others are rising powers and that the US empire's days are numbered. The dollar's reign as world reserve currency is coming to an end and they know that the US a busted, bankrupt economic house of cards that could completely collapse at any time taking down US power with it. Hence, the risk taking and recklessness. We're in a very dangerous time.

elizabeth wesley • 4 years ago ,

It just takes a few to manipulate the minds of public opinion and perception. That is mind control and you have to ignore mainstream media and go online to find unadulterated truth. Putin has other means to deal with the US; he doesn't have to stoop so low to call obama what he really is: an illegitimate child who became an illegitimate president, a man who came from nowhere and has nothing to offer but war with third world nations who have no nuclear defense. America is as confused as Africa and his zionist handlers like it that way.

Webbily • 4 years ago ,

Listen up, Russia! If you would just get your borders away from our military bases, that would be great.
Love,
Amerika

astoriava • 4 years ago ,

The basic problem is, and always will be, that people believe what they want to believe irregardless of facts, evidence, proof or common sense. The believe that which they think will benefit themselves, soothe their ego, fill their pockets, bring tem pleasure etc and deliberatly ignore, condemn, and close their eyes to learning something that may not fit that goal. They rationalize away their deliberate ignorance and refuse to look for truth under some morally relative "label" or "cause" so that they don't have to face truth about themselves and their true intentions.

Rose-Marie Mukarutabana • 4 years ago ,

The Valdai Speech is on the "President of Russia" website - or at least three quarters of it, with the rest still being translated from Russian: http://eng.kremlin.ru/news/...

Draft Resister • 4 years ago ,

Seriously, should this question even be asked? Of course intelligence agencies are trying to destabilize Russia.

Dragos • 4 years ago ,

The Economist is the voice of the british oligarchy and security services. They don't need to be advised by the CIA, because the English oligarchy is dictating US politics and strategy.

Incredulously Yours, Dragos • 2 years ago ,

It's the voice of the R O T H S C H I L D S .....

plamenpetkov • 3 years ago ,

Is the Pope Catholic? Do you even have to ask? After almost 25 years of documented USA lies against Iraq/Iran do we even have to discuss this?
documented USA/NATO lies that have been proven to be lies:
1990 babies taken out of incubators and left to die on cold hospital floor
1990-1999 Saddam working on nuclear weapons
2001 Osama engineered and did 9-11
2001-2003 Saddam has ties with Ali Queda
2001-2003 Saddam has weapons of mass distraction (Colin Powell, Bush jr, Cheney, Condy Rice, etc)
2002-2203 Saddam working on weapons of mass distraction
2002-2003 Saddam working on acquiring nuclear weapons
2001 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2001 Iran has ties with Ali Queda
2002 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2003 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2004 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2005 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2006 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2007 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2008 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2009 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2010 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2011 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2012 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2013 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2013 Assad gassed his own people (part 1)
2013 Assad gassed his own people (part 2)
2014 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2014 Assad gassed his own people (part 3)

Incredulously Yours, plamenpetkov • 2 years ago ,

BraaaaVO! Killer post....Ironically, at age 57, I NOW do what Russians TOLD ME they did over 30 years ago: Whatever I read in the papers or hear from the U.S. gov, I automatically believe the OPPOSITE! Auto-freakin'-matically.....works like a chahm...

Benjamin Netanyahu • 4 years ago ,

A very interesting professionally made video of the entire Valdai speech of the President of Russia (24 Oct 14) along with all the pointed questions asked of him by the Russian, Bulgarian, Palestinian, English, and American audience, and his complete answers to these, can be found at the "Vineyard of the Saker" site (h t t p : / / vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/... .

tiredofthemedialies • 3 years ago ,

Is the CIA Running a Defamation Campaign Against Putin?

No!! Fancy that!! Where have you been for the last 3 years? and why bring it up now? The CIA has been waging full-spectrum media warfare, propaganda, dis-information and covert destabilisation of Russia and the Russian president for many years. (What do you think they are paid for? making tea?)

Er, um • 3 years ago ,

It's just a coincidence that we chosen people own and run Newsweek, The Economist, The Daily Express, The Daily Mirror, The New York Times, The New York Post, The Washington Post, News International (The Sun Newspaper, Sky News, Fox News), The Independent, The London Evening Standard, the Los Angeles Times, The San Francisco Chronicle, ABC News, CBS News, NBC News, Bloomberg News, and Reuters. And run the BBC.

It's just a coincidence, goyim. Nothing to see here. Move along. And keep thinking what we tell you to think.

Jeremy Bourbon • 3 years ago ,

Russia is establishing a BRICS development bank and consequently becoming a threat to the IMF and WB, this is why the global eite want Putin removed and a puppet regime put in place.

Luketree14 • 3 years ago ,

It's also good to remember that this has been going on for years and years, and in spite of that, Pr. Vladimir Putin kept offering his friendship, insisting on the importance of collaboration, equal terms, exchange, peace, and even disarmament ! For years and years !

Soarintothesky • 3 years ago ,

Considerable Ukrainian money has gone into influencing US, EU and Israeli press and politicians ($12m to the Clinton foundation gets Hilary's attention). It is not necessary to invoke the CIA.

The remnants of Mockingbird work for defense institutes in Estonia, Universities in Azerbaijan and think tanks in Poland. It is not necessary to invoke the current US government. One thing fascinates me. Every year or so there is yet another negative biography of Putin. I do not believe the market is so big. Beresovsky started it - his cousin wrote the first one and claimed P had $40Bn without any evidence whatsoever. Did he fund the others too (there hasn't been one recently).

EVcine • 3 years ago ,

To our German friends on here I say...isn't it weird that no one is allowed to say the word "reunification" for Crimea and Russia
I do not recall a referendum for the DDR citizens.

deliaruhe • 3 years ago ,

Germany and most other EU countries are merely assisting in their own decline. Any country -- including mine -- that insists on continuing to play the role of vassal to Washington will enjoy the same fate that Washington is stupidly preparing for itself. The German government has to have a few screws loose to join Washington in driving Putin into the arms of the Chinese -- and taking his natural gas resources with him. Don't be surprised if Germans freeze in the dark this winter.

CassandraSays • 3 months ago ,

It goes on day and night in Russia, although that doesn't exclude an American origin.

There is no defamation of Putin that is not screamed from the rafters by the Russian liberati. The allegations of corruption, photoshopped pictures of Putin with women who can be found by an image search in the same pose and clothing embracing somebody else, the whole nine yards.

rosewood11 • 2 years ago ,

First off, I say this as a former bookseller, who spent major amounts of time shelving the magazines and newspapers. Newsweek is all but dead. Put a fork in it, it's done!!! I didn't know The Economist was a Rothschild publication until someone on here pointed it out. I did know, however, that most people consider it one of the most manifestly boring magazines on the planet. Finally, as regards the British tabloids shown and the American ones that didn't get mentioned, they are for people who have a little mind and a little time. My favorite one was The Weekly World News, now sadly gone. I know it transgressed the bounds of good journalism, but now I'll never know what became of "Bat Boy," the pregnant mummy (the museum janitor did it!!!) or the 12 US Senators who are actually space aliens. (Now, I know they're lying. There's way more than 12 of them!!!)

That said, when I see headlines like the ones shown here, I ignore them. Newsweek discredited itself long ago, and this presidential election cycle has done much in America to do the same for Big Media and both political parties. That's what made my family start listening to alternative media, and thank God for the Internet!!! The truth about Mr. Putin is out there for anyone who cares to look. I've had to work hard to convince a friend of Ukrainian descent that he's not the one screwing up their homeland, but they are beginning to question. I've also shocked several people out of their socks by telling them Mr. Putin is a devout Christian man. So far, I've found about 3 people out of 30 or so I've told this who had any inkling. And one of them is a pastor who won't tell his congregation!!!

The Russian people have a good leader. Would that America had one at least half as capable. Until then, follow the old adage: "Don't believe anything you hear, and only half of what you see!!!"

teddyfromcd • 2 years ago ,

IS THE CIA an american organization ? is it and the USA gov a ''legalized" criminal empire organization?

the answer to both is YES... therefore the answer to the question on impugning putin and russia is - YES.

Kjell Hasthi teddyfromcd • 2 years ago ,

There is a black defence budget on the level on the official one = not American money
(CAI agent told it. He had cancer and id not care about doing anything "unlegal" by telling it)

sepheronx • 2 years ago ,

Why bother asking this question now? Russians are fully aware, so is nearly everyone else. Hence why even with this defemation campaign, Putin hold far more popularity than nearly anyone else. The others who hold popularity are equally against the US and others (Fair Russia Party, Communist, etc). Only ones that sing the grace of US BS, Yabloko and other "liberal" parties/people, are 3%'ers. In other words, hated amongst majority of their population.

The thing about all these media campaigns that the west tries and does, which the Saker failed to state, is that they do not work. Essentially, all it will do is rally the Russians against others. As the newspapers love to demonize Putin, it is all written in English with few actually being translated. And when it does, it ends up as a laughing stock of the country. As well, it is barely working here. Yes, there are a few useful idiots around, we even see them on the comment sections here, but lets be frank - even westerns do not believe it. But if their intention is to destabilize Russia, then they are clearly not working. Putin's popularity back in 2011 was 65%. Now it is over 80%. Clearly, the west is doing him more favors than not.

If he ever even loses popularity, and someone else wins, guarantee it will either be the communists or the nationalists (fair russia). And that is when the west will be dealing with people who are going to make sure they go out of their way to hurt the US.

Helen • 3 years ago ,

Al western media is a propagandamachine for the american elite.We who read alternative media admire Putin and see him as mankinds biggest hope.

Webbily Guest • 4 years ago ,

Clearly it's Putin who has bombed six countries in seven years...or is it seven countries in six years. Whichever. He isn't bombing sovereign nations, and deciding that recognized leaders in sovereign states are the latest incarnation of Hitler and thus need to be sacrificed to the god Pele.

idiotland Igor • 4 years ago ,

He's a colossal scumbag for not doing what Washington says. He actually thinks that Russia should be sovereign country outside of the influence of the "exceptional" and "indispensable" nation. What a loser!

Webbily idiotland • 4 years ago ,

Igor is missing his drunk pal Boris.

Jack Bluebird • 2 years ago ,

Gorbachev is a traitor and dumbest person ever to walk this planet. The only thing that is unbelievable is the fact that everyone are buying into "american dishonesty" story when it is purely visible and understood that no one with a fraction of a brain would ever allow something of this magnitude to happen.( allowing Germany the country that wanted to obliterate Russia and USSR not even 50 years ago at that point ) to reunite based on verbal agreement. He should have been shot in the head the moment he landed back in the USSR for giving such approval without consultaing in detail Soviet Army generals and KGB directors.

People stop drinking KoolAid and open your eyes. gorbachev sold the whole USSR for few private "foundations".

May he rot in Hell forever.

astoriava Guest • 4 years ago ,

Do you unquestionably believe everything you are told to believe or can you start someday to think for yourself and look for logic, facts, evidence, multiple and oppositional sources of information and well founded deduction to make your decisions?

Webbily Guest • 4 years ago ,

What war has he started? What terrorists has he supplied weapons with? What minorities is he oppressing. Oh, d'ye mean the gays? You obviously haven't spent much time in the USA if you think everyone here is open-minded about homosexuality. Maybe in the cities on the coast but in the small towns of the rest of middle America, they are pretty conservative about that issue and openly so. I've met my fair share of homophobes in my lifetime and none of them were from Russia. I would say 50 percent of Americans disapprove of homosexuality, and attitudes have only changed somewhat in the past 10 years. All of those gay marriage bans were passed by voters, even in so-called "progressive" states like California, as recently as 2008. You think you can't get your butt beat for being gay in the United States? You think there aren't any anti-gay laws here? You think the anti-gay propaganda law in Russia is actually enforced? Sure, they could have a different attitude toward that sort of thing, but so could a lot of people. If someone is gay and is that concerned about their safety, stay out of Russia the same way you'd stay out of Utah. You're a person who thinks it's a human right to stage a gay pride parade, but if some idiot "girls" walk into a church and make fun of someone's religious beliefs, well they should be celebrated as heroes.
Who did he threaten to nuke? Got proof of that? I mean proof, not hearsay. Do you have a voice recording of Putin threatening to nuke people?
Stop calling him Putler. His brother was killed by the Nazis. You are ignorant. You must be confusing Putin with our current president, Obomba, and our last prezzident, Bushwacker.

Stop Bush and Clinton • 3 months ago ,

Another problem that needs to be fixed is their control over schools and universities.

An aspiring journalist who went through a lot of effort translating a Putin speech and commenting on it, then getting an F while watching the lazy guy sitting in the class next to him getting an A+++ for writing "Putin's speech translates to 'We'll steal Ukraine because we hate democracy. Heil Hitler! Death to America!' (and any other translation you may see is Russian propaganda, Russia controls the media worldwide), therefore we need to strengthen NATO and move troops directly to Russia's border to fight off that threat" probably learned the lesson before even starting his job.

Anthony Justice • 2 years ago ,

I'm British and the more the media attack Mr Putin the more I trust him! I think if Britain was involved in an altercation with Russia the public would not back it. People in the West feel very down trodden at the minute and if Britain doesn't leave Europe I think democracy will be questioned! It's time to live and let live and help each other instead of interfering, for me Mr Putin plays a good game and seems to be more realistic than our politicians, who knows but people across the world want peace and it's about time we demanded our governments stopped interfering. Every country has it's problems and could sort them out if they weren't too busy interfering over seas! War is horrific and must be avoided at all costs but greed will always motivate war. Someone invent a non-greedy pill please😀

ArnieLerma • 2 years ago ,

The US Secret Government hates PUTIN as much as they HATED JOHN F KENNEDY.

Shahna • 2 years ago ,

There is one little item the author is missing. The USA regards Russia and China as "existential threats to the USA" because they are existential threats to the USA. Without it's world hegemon and tight control on global trade, the US crumbles and fades away. Russia and China are slowly but surely, bit by bit, taking them away. Existential threat.

All living things, even empires, fight for their survival.

Shahna • 2 years ago ,

"Is the CIA Running a Defamation Campaign Against Putin?"
-------------------
On no. Every word the CIA says is true. Simple - it's true because they said it! American logic.

legal eagle • 2 years ago ,

"Is the CIA Running a Defamation Campaign Against Putin?" Do bears poo in the woods ?

stevor • 2 years ago ,

to attack the leader of a country is to attack the country? No, I don't think so. In the case of o'bama, to attack him is to HELP the country get out from under a LYING SCUMBAG FRAUD and to go back to following the Constitution!

Dennis De Jarnette • 2 years ago ,

The magazine cover lamenting the spies that run Russia caused me to chuckle. George Bush I ran the CIA.

AMHants • 2 years ago ,

Yes, but is it working?

There are many who believe the MSM and take what they say as Gospel, but there are also many that have woken from the zombie, media induced diet of the MSM and they are voicing their concerns and also given a different type of narative to counterbalance the MSM and that is also working.

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false."? William Casey, Director of CIA

How much money is the CIA, US, EU and Soros investing in their media disinformation programme? It is quite frightening when you look at the figures involved. Why do they need to do so?

This article goes back to 2011, I wonder how far it stretches in 21016?

Soros-Funded Lefty Media Reach More Than 300 Million Every Month... http://www.mrc.org/commenta...

Ironically, the more the MSM goes into a media frenzy with a story, I now always question the motives and reasons why and then completely dismiss the story.

http://rense.com/1.imagesH/...

http://www.isaiahexplained....

Vierotchka Dewey Olsen • 2 years ago ,

That's an extremely convoluted, circumlocutory and long-winded way of saying "History repeats itself"....

[Apr 29, 2018] Is the CIA Running a Defamation Campaign Against Putin by The Saker

Notable quotes:
"... ( Editors Note : Operation Mockingbird was a CIA program started in the 1950s to influence the US media, which was gradually exposed by investigative journalists starting in the late 60s, culminating in sensational televised congressional hearings in 1975 which shocked the nation, forcing the program's termination. Critics maintain that the same tactics have continued since, under different programs. Wikipedia ) ..."
"... nowadays a reporter is either unemployed or a prostitute ..."
Apr 29, 2018 | russia-insider.com

The latest hot topic in the Russian media. Russian politicians are talking about it. Historical precedent and behavior of Western media suggests that they are. The Saker Fri, Apr 22, 2016 | 52,080 195 MORE: Politics A major topic in the Russian media is mystification with how Putin is portrayed in the Western media.

Wildly popular at home, and seen as a decent, modest, an admirable person, and Russians don't understand how there can be such a disconnect with Western impressions.

Recently, leading Russian commentators and politicians have been suggesting that this can only be explained by a deliberate campaign to defame Putin, by governments or other groups.

Yesterday, at a briefing to foreign journalists, Sergey Ivanov, Putin's chief of staff, arguably the 2nd most powerful man in Russia, spoke of an "information war" consisting of "personal attacks" on Putin.

The western media hit a new low...
The day before another member of Putin's inner circle, Vyasheslav Volodin, made similar remarks , telling foreign journalists "an attack on Putin is an attack on Russia." The logic, they argue, is that by defaming the leader of a country, you weaken his power domestically by undermining popular support for him, and internationally, by rallying popular opinion to support policies against that country. The ultimate goal, they argue, is to weaken the country itself. They also talk about regime change. They argue that if one looks at the facts, that there is evidence of ongoing character assassination which cannot be explained by a vague popular zeitgeist in the West, but is more likely the result of a dedicated effort to introduce this defamation into the news flow.
Newsweek has been one of the most virulent Putin-bashers for years
The issue of manipulation of news by intelligence services has been in the news recently with revelations that the CIA and German Secret Service (GSS) have long-running programs to influence how media executives and top journalists convey and interpret the news, including direct cash payments. Here are some examples they point to: RI sat down with The Saker , a leading analyst of Russia in international affairs, and asked him what he thinks:

-----------------------------------

So, is there any credence to this line of thinking, or is this conspiracy theorists running wild?

There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that the US is waging a major psyop war against Russia, although not a shooting war, for now, and that what we are seeing is a targeted campaign to discredit Putin and achieve "regime change" in Russia or, should that fail, at the very least "regime weakening" and "Russia weakening".

And the Economist has been the very worst of them all...

So this is a US government program?

Yes, Putin is absolutely hated by certain factions in the US government two main reasons:

1. He partially, but not fully, restored Russia's sovereignty which under Gorbachev and Yeltsin had been totally lost Russia then was a US colony like Ukraine is today and,

2. He dared to openly defy the USA and its civilizational model.

a free and sovereign Russia is perceived by the US "deep state" as an existential threat which has to be crushed. this is a full-scale political assault on Russia and Putin personally.

So what the Russians are saying, that the constant personal attacks against Putin in the global media are partly the result of deliberate efforts by US intelligence services, basically, planted stories

Yes, absolutely

It seems like "Operation Mockingbird" all over again Are you aware of other instances aimed at Putin?

( Editors Note : Operation Mockingbird was a CIA program started in the 1950s to influence the US media, which was gradually exposed by investigative journalists starting in the late 60s, culminating in sensational televised congressional hearings in 1975 which shocked the nation, forcing the program's termination. Critics maintain that the same tactics have continued since, under different programs. Wikipedia )

Yes, of course. Since this defamation has very little traction with the Russian public Putin's popularity is higher than ever before .., there is an organized campaign to convince them that Putin is "selling out" Novorussia, that he is a puppet of oligarchs who are making deals with Ukrainian oligarchs to back-stab the Novorussian resistance

So far, Putin's policies in the Ukraine have enjoyed very strong support from the Russian people who still oppose an overt military intervention

but if Kiev attacks Novorussia again - which appears very likely - and if such an attack is successful - which is less likely but always possible - then Putin will be blamed for having given the Ukrainians the time to regroup and reorganize.

Warm and fuzzy...

So you are saying that if the Ukrainian military strengthens its position enough to deliver a serious blow to the East Ukrainians, the US can use this as a method to strike at Putin's support base

Yes, that's right ... t here are a lot of "fake patriots" in Russia and abroad who will reject any negotiated solution and who will present any compromise as a "betrayal". They are the "useful idiots" used by western special services to smear and undermine Putin.

Is it limited to government special ops, or are there other groups who might have an interest in doing this?

Yes, well here is something that most people in the west don't appreciate there is a major behind-the scenes struggle among Russian elites between what I call the "Eurasian Sovereignists" (basically, those who support Putin) and what I call the "Atlantic Integrationists" (those whom Putin refers to as the "5th column).

The western media talks about this as the struggle between Russian liberals and conservatives, reformers and reactionaries, right?

Well its sort of like that, but not exactly

The former see Russia's future in the Russian North and East and want to turn Russia towards Asia, Latin America and the rest of the world, while the latter want Russia to become part of the "North Atlantic" power configuration.

The Atlantic Integrationists are now too weak to openly challenge Putin - whose real power base is his immense popular support - but they are quietly sabotaging his efforts to reform Russia while supporting anti-Putin campaigns.

Regarding the revelations of CIA activities in Germany, do you think this is going on in other countries, in the US?

I am sure that this is happening in most countries worldwide. The very nature of the modern corporate media is such that it makes journalists corrupt.

As the French philosopher Alain Soral says " nowadays a reporter is either unemployed or a prostitute ". There are, of course, a few exceptions, but by and large this is true.

This is not to say that most journalists are on the take. In the West this is mostly done in a more subtle way - by making it clear which ideas do or do not pass the editorial control, by lavishly rewarding those journalists who 'get it' and by quietly turning away those who don't.

If a journalist or reporter commits the crime of "crimethink" he or she will be sidelined and soon out of work.

There is no real pluralism in the West where the boundaries of what can be said or not are very strictly fixed.

Ok, but is it like what has been revealed in Germany, similar specific operational programs in France, the UK, Italy, Latin America, etc.

Yes, one has to assume so – it is in their interests to have them and there is no reason for them not to.

As for the CIA, it de-facto controls enough of the corporate media to "set the tone". As somebody who in the past used to read the Soviet press for a living, I can sincerely say that it was far more honest and more pluralistic than the press in the USA or EU today.

Joseph Goebbels or Edward Bernays could not have imagined the degree of sophistication of modern propaganda machines.

If the US is doing it, can't one assume other governments are too? Are the Russians doing it against western leaders?

I think that all governments try to do that kind of stuff. However, what makes the US so unique it a combination of truly phenomenal arrogance and multi-billion dollar budgets.

The US "deep state" owns the western corporate media which is by far the most powerful media on the planet. Most governments can only do that inside their own country ... to smear a political opponent or discredit a public figure, but they simply do not have the resources to mount an international strategic psyop campaign. This is something only the US can do.

So foreign governments are at a great disadvantage in this arena vis-a-vis the US?

Absolutely. MORE:

Johnpd Guest • 4 years ago ,

Excellent. Another point to grasp is that the Banksters do not want a true capitalism, where inefficiency fails, & competition trims profits.
They want what we now have in the West : a crony corporatist state, where ever fewer giant globalist multinationals dominate both commerce & countries, pay no taxes, to the benefit of their CEOs , shareholders & their banksters.
In short, effectively, a Fascism.
Book : Pawns in the Game, by William Guy Carr. See where those "Atlantic Integrationists" came from.

FullDisclosure Guest • 4 years ago ,

Russia today is the only power standing up to the world oligarchy. If Russia falls then we will all be living as slaves behind a barb wired fence, with chips under our skin, etc. etc.

Webbily Guest • 4 years ago ,

Yes, and Russia has actually been making efforts to keep the dollar afloat, because they know the US hegemons will get even nastier of their precious dollar becomes worthless. Their goal isn't to integrate Ukraine into the EU. They want to create a failed state on Russia's border, and also hopefully engage them militarily in Syria and in places like Chechnya.

spin to win Guest • 3 years ago ,

I've heard tell...Russia's central banking institution does not belong to the state. Does this sound familiar? I do not believe that the international banking system give two turds about the affairs of Russia, unless...Russia moves to control it's own central bank, then there would be real war.
Bankers have no allegiance except to money

Yonatan spin to win • 2 years ago ,

It is headed by Chicago-school wannabes who follow the dictates of a banking system aimed at preversving the US banks at the expense of their onw country's economy.

Nabuliana (sp ?), the head of the Russian CB, knows she is on borrowed time but still keep favoring the US over Russia.

dixi3150 Guest • 3 years ago ,

The say a rat that is cornered can be very viscous, that's the US.

AMHants dixi3150 • 2 years ago ,

What is it they also say about dying Empires. The US did not retain Empire status for long, when you look at Russia and China, they are just a toddler on the block?

Incredulously Yours, dixi3150 • 2 years ago ,

Oh? Violent too....

Иван Guest • 3 years ago ,

Very interesting perspective.
I'm very curious to hear western comments on Russian conspiracy theories that Fed already owns Russia and current straggle is a straggle for independence. It seems wild but for people who view Federal Reserve Bank as a direct enemy of humanity it doesn't seem very far-fetched.

sixpack Иван • 2 years ago ,

WHEN PUTIN WAS ELECTED PRESIDENT of Russia in 2000, Russia was bankrupt. The nation owed $16.6 billion to the Rothschild-run International Monetary Fund while its foreign debt to the Rothschild-controlled Paris & London Club Of Creditors was over 36 billion dollars.

But Putin took advantage of the current boom in world oil prices by redirecting a portion of the profits of Russia's largest oil producer Gazprom so as to pay off the country's debt. The continual surge in oil prices greatly accelerated Russia's capacity to restore financial sovereignty.

By 2006 Putin had paid off Russia's debt to the Rothschilds. Russia's financial dependence on the Mafia financiers was now over. I doubt they've gotten another hold since then.

wilmers13 Guest • a year ago ,

You need to understand that President Putin's divorce is a private matter. In the Anglo World they stick their nose into these private matters but in Russia they do not. Who knows; there have been people who got divorced so the spouse would not cop it in the event of big problems. They even got married again later on. The Anglo World is also dumb, always behaving as if the removal of ONE man would cure something, e.g. Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad - nah. Or take Myanmar; if only the lady (whose name I cannot spell) would rule the country, everything would be fine. Nah - she's extremely racist and will not utter the name of one tribe 'Rohingyas'.

There is definitely a campaign against Russia and President Putin. For Germany it's the

Atlantik-Brücke which steers the press, in Australia the Australia-American Leadership Dialogue, something else in the other countries, just like the late Brian Crozier masqueraded as a journalist but was CIA funded. The campaign needs to be ignored although it is really peculiar that Bush Sr. was fine as CIA chief, and Putin as KGB officer was not. I'ts just the usual American double standards.

Shahna Guest • 2 years ago ,

(I think) .... Putin's divorce is not yours to wonder about or criticise.
'Sides, he said, at his last Q&A, he gets on better with his ex now than he did when he was married. That should be good enough for you.

teddyfromcd Guest • 2 years ago ,

I THINK the time has come for RUSSIA to play HARDBALL with teh us gov and cia, nsa. etc...

and that is to OPENLY , REPEATEDLY -- RIGHT AT THE LEVEL OF UN AND INTERNATIONAL FORUMS - RIGHT INTO any ''talks" between EU/WEST/ and relations with other nations

always INCLUDE , INSERT -- part of discussions -- teh CIA/US GOV /ENTITIES

attempts against russia.

MAKE IT very prominent that it can NOT be ignored no matter what the USA TRIES...

in order to puit FRONT AND CENTER in the world the attention on THE CIA.

don't let it remain ''incidental" topic to ''major issues"

rather -- make it A CENTRAL topic in every instance and keep throwing t at the USA so that all international meetings ALWAYS bring up

\
USA/CIA - USA,/CIA -- sabotage -- oh yet again another CIA operation in macedonia, oh another one in cnetral asia...etc....

let us remember --

2 cia emplyed ''pschiatrist/psychologists" who took care of the ''methodology" of CIA TORTURE are right now being sued in a US court that is forced to open hearings -- on the suit by former tortured detainees...

the PORTUGUESE AMERICAN woman - SOUSA -- is ordered to appear in an ITALIAN COURT to face her charges for conspiracy to kidnap, rendition , torture the arab/italian citizen

more and more will come, that is inevitable and the CIA ought to be BROUGHT BEYOND just ''topic of discussion" --but as the DEEP STATE that it is -- out into the open -- calling out, searchng out its operatives, officers, policy makers, amerifcan officials -- that' sort of thing...and the only way to do that is make it a WORLD GLOBAL CAUSE TO BRING UP in all matters of international governance and relations -- in press conferences...assemblies, treaties, etc...

Guest • 4 years ago ,

I just want to point out that German media is worst, because Germans need the most convincing to go to war with Russia. The western media now has to combat the anti-war tendencies they propagated onto Germans ever since the end of WW2. If you read the comments on all these anti-Putin propaganda articles, you can tell that Germans hate their own media for doing so.

Lisa Guest • 3 years ago ,

Hey, I`m from Germany (Stuttgart), and i can definitely say, that we Germans hate our media and get the informations we need from the Internet. Angela Merkel do what Obama says to her and we can do nothing. if we go to the street and make a Demonstration they say we are nazi or the media say nothing. many People (the old People) in Germany hate Putin and belive the lies from the media, but we, the young people dont belive the lies. We love Putin and wish Angela Merkel will be a little bit like Putin.

dixi3150 Lisa • 3 years ago ,

I'm also German (Lahr, Schwartzwald) and totally agree. NEVER watch German TV. It is like for imbeciles. Cooking, singing, festivals everything to keep us from thinking for ourselves. I also get all my info from sites like this one and many others. Love Putin and think Ouma Merkel sold out to the US.

Martin Alfven Haider dixi3150 • 3 years ago ,

Sounds like American tv. But without all the series about serial killers, violence and perversion. What they have done to us and our collective psyche here is sick, and demonic.

teddyfromcd Martin Alfven Haider • 2 years ago ,

but this is not just a problem IN america -- germane TV as some of our friends here have said - getng shallower -- IS A PART of the ''influence" of american ''way\" ..

to bring up mostly and primarily shallow past-times...that takes up LIFE HOURS...when you really count it,,,

ONE shallow pastime after another...the WORST imo,,,apart from these silly ''reality shows\" (which ARE copied throughout the world unfortunately in that desire to be ''more american" -- even in CHINA ) -

are these ''game shows" -- trivia shows..that used to be just CHILD'S play n the backyard and really is where they OUGHT to stay so children can be children...

but NATIONAL CULTURE? trivia shows? give me a BREAK!

but that's exactly what americana brings to societies..the HIGHLIGHTING AND GLORIFICATION OF SILLINESS and SHALLOWNESS as a NATIONAL ETHOS.

and a sure-fire way of turning out , reshaping and ''winning hearts and minds" by making them exposed - without choice really -- to ''the only games in town"

SILLY LITTLE GAMES that 'TRAIN the mind to become STUPID".

this - THIS is the great TRIUMPH of the american society over the world. where everything -- even WAR -- is now ''entertainment" - to be ''packaged" - promoted sold, and switched around like cotton candy by the powers that be...and deeper critical thought -- or honest simplicity of thought and discourse is ''NOT ALLOWED".

Seán Murphy dixi3150 • a month ago ,

You should see the satellite TV aimed at Britain and Ireland....

[Apr 29, 2018] The entire Liberal narratives around Vladimir Putin and Alexander Dugin are actually political reconstructions of the "Yellow Peril" stereotype

Notable quotes:
"... The entire Liberal narratives around Vladimir Putin and Alexander Dugin are actually political reconstructions of the "Yellow Peril" stereotype of the evil Asian who schemes to conquer the west, a viscous racist caricature straight out of the old dime magazine pulps. ..."
"... Originally Putin was depicted by liberals as merely a fiendish Asian criminal mastermind. After he finally started responding to the endless provocations, he became the terrible Fu Manchu, leader of a secret society of assassins, always plotting to destroy the west. Next to him is Alexander Dugin, a diabolical eastern sorcerer and leader of a fanatical sect. ..."
"... These sterotypes are 100% racist, and of the kind of brutal American "Yellow Peril" racism that justified both the mass internments of the Japanese in concentration camps and the nuclear genocide of two civilian cities. ..."
Apr 29, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Akira Kalashnikov • 2 years ago ,

The entire Liberal narratives around Vladimir Putin and Alexander Dugin are actually political reconstructions of the "Yellow Peril" stereotype of the evil Asian who schemes to conquer the west, a viscous racist caricature straight out of the old dime magazine pulps.

Originally Putin was depicted by liberals as merely a fiendish Asian criminal mastermind. After he finally started responding to the endless provocations, he became the terrible Fu Manchu, leader of a secret society of assassins, always plotting to destroy the west. Next to him is Alexander Dugin, a diabolical eastern sorcerer and leader of a fanatical sect.

Now (straight out of a Fu Manchu plotline) Putin is supposedly plotting to install his puppet as president of the United States.

These sterotypes are 100% racist, and of the kind of brutal American "Yellow Peril" racism that justified both the mass internments of the Japanese in concentration camps and the nuclear genocide of two civilian cities.

[Apr 29, 2018] Brussels is a real swamp

Apr 29, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Samantha patty donovan • 4 years ago ,

Agree, Patty.

The same for the un-elected Mandarins in Brussels. They are a real swamp. Lazy, clueless, overpaid and greedy still. They are powerhungry despite their tremendous lack of any political clout.

Vasalls through blackmail by 3 letter agencies?

The same for german Mrs. Merkel. Being a german citizen, I am ashamed of thus woman and her orwellian ,politics'.

Today, the former CEO of Thyssen-Krupp, Prof. Dr. Dieter Spethmann, a lawyer, called for her urgent removal from the job by publishing an Open Letter in mmnews (a blog).

EVcine Samantha • 3 years ago ,

Trust me on this Merkel is mild compared to Cameron, Obama, Harper and Abbott !

teddyfromcd Samantha • 2 years ago ,

there is a JUNIOR BRITISH MP -- WHO is assigned to BRUSSELS -- and has appealed to VOTERS for 'brexit" by saying "please put me out of a job"...

[Apr 29, 2018] A Fentanyl dealer sent to jail in Salisbury just a month earlier

Apr 29, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: CE | Apr 29, 2018 2:36:38 PM | 102

@Masshole|100

This one is from the correct Salisbury (UK) newspaper about a Fentanyl dealer sent to jail just a month earlier.

Just glad that our austerity victims still tend to be on Schnaps. ;o)

[Apr 29, 2018] MoA - The Silence Of The Skripals - Government Blocks Press Reports - Media Change The Record

Notable quotes:
"... Clinical Services Journal ..."
"... Salisbury Journal ..."
"... Salisbury Journal ..."
"... Moon of Alabama ..."
"... The media may be banned from reporting, but if my casual interactions with the UK populace are representative, the majority are highly sceptical of .gov - May / BJ 'Putin did it' accusations. ..."
"... One has to wonder why Russia is not calling Britain out on this obvious kidnapping. ..."
"... i had read craig murrays post earlier today...why are they covering up the fentanoyl angle? it's obvious! ..."
"... I think the policeman in this farce is key to everything. If the cause of the Skripal poisoning was fentenyal then why did the policeman become ill? ..."
"... Anyway, if it was a weapons grade chemical agent that the policeman was affected by, why was it he was able to leave hospital a few days later in full uniform looking a picture of health? ..."
"... Originally the story was he was somehow contaminated by the Skripals themselves, but as no one else in the contact chain was affected, and this notwithstanding the fact ambulance and medical had serious hand on contact was affected, it became clear that the policeman had to have another source of contamination. ..."
"... Thus; they invented the magic door knob story. Even this silly story is absurd. The police and the goons didn't investigate the door knob (actually, a door handle lever type) theory until 25 days later when rain and numerous people coming and going at the Skripals's would have worn off any contaminate from the door handle. ..."
"... By the way, they are now telling us the stuff on the door handle was a liquid. How do you get a liquid to stick of a shiny door handle? Apart from the silence of the press, the silence from the medical people is a factor also. They have not signed any official secrets act and they can't be issued with a D notice. ..."
"... the policemen appears like an inside prop for this false flag op... that is what it looks like to me.. forget about it, or him having any relevance or validity, if he is as i am suggesting.. ..."
"... It all seems amazing to me, what a strange world of collapsing empire we live in. Really, why don't the Russians demand at the UNSC the right to visit with Russian citizens? Call for a resolution demanding a visit and force them to veto. ..."
"... The US Drug Enforcement Agency claims that different kinds of Fentanyl, including something known as Carfentanil, can be absorbed through the skin or accidentally inhaled and cause death. ..."
"... Although the Skripal "op" was a success, the planned false flag didn't happen due to SAA's quick advance (with Russian help). Instead, a sloppy false flag was done at the very last minute in Douma just before the Jihadis gave up. This wouldn't save Ghouta so it was possibly motivated by the the desire to solidify anti-Russian sentiment created by the Skripal op. ..."
"... If we assume that the Skripals had been poisoned with fentanyl, we then have to explain how a doctor was able to give the Skripals first aid at the scene where they collapsed without being poisoned by fentanyl herself. ..."
"... @Jen16. Is it not possible the 'potency' of fentanyl is overstated in order to 'sell' the anti-dote? Much like the anthrax 'dote' after 911. I mean most dealers I have met aren't exactly stupid, that being said most aren't lab smart either, it would seem to me there would be a whole lot of dead dealers if 'traces' in the wind can kill. Then there is the anomaly of the Dr. and other's as you brought up in 16. Just a thought. FWIW. ..."
"... This charade has not gone well for May. It has raised serious doubts that the UK can ever be an ally of Trump. The Steele dirt dossier was an attack on Trump's family, presidential campaign and cripples his first term with purile Russia hatred. May and the espionage establishment are the enemy of the USA. After 250 years the British finally won the US war of independence and have enslaved the majority of its media outlets. ..."
"... The state exists to enforce the dominance of elites, all the rest is propaganda, misdirection, Obfuscation or terrorism up to and including total war. ..."
"... The young man Jamie Paine who first found the Skripals on the park bench got some liquid on his skin and apparently didn't suffer from it. ..."
"... The Devon Live report is still in its original form. It links to the first Wiltshire Police statement on the case and quotes from it. Curiously the link is dead. The first official police statement on the Skripal case is "currently unavailable". ..."
"... D-Notices are one of those evils that, once initiated, are never undone. It reminds me a bit of the fraudulent, gauzy "AUMF" used by the United States government as if it were a blank check written by God to wage imperialistic wars kinetic actions of aggression against anyone or anything it deems ripe for pillage or destruction-- at its sole pleasure and discretion, and for eternity. ..."
"... As it is, the D-Notices' ostensible "national security" rationale has proven to be mere camouflage for its true purpose: ensuring that malfeasant officials and operatives are "secure" in their depraved work, and are protected from all inquiries that might expose their heinous wrongdoing. Whoops! ..."
"... I do not know if fentanyl was found in OPCW sample, only British made BZ paralyzingly agent. The question is why? I think doctors in Salisbury who are trained with chemical nerve agents due to proximity to Porton Downs lab instantly knew there was no military nerve agent used there, would they also instantly know that it was Fentanyl since they faced epidemic of opioid overdoses. ..."
"... After recovery is was Skripal, trusted by her as her father, himself as part of psych op presented the narrative as Putin wanted to kill me and did not care that you happened to be with me at time of attack. I am so sorry, shit lies. She was brainwashed offered lucrative financial arrangement in the west decided to stay, thinking she could be killed upon returning to Russia. ..."
"... The fentanyl/BZ/Novichok angle seems eerily like the US/ZATO/MSM fallback position on the BUK missile scam for MH17. By insisting MH17 was brought down by SOME BUK, the story line never gets to the Ukie SU25s seen near MH17 on Russian commercial air-traffic tracking radar. ..."
"... The potential existence of Skripal's dead-man's-switch documentation may have extended well beyond the Steele scam, which would explain the urgency of the deed and why the Skripals are being held incommunicado. The search of the Skripal residence was to find that documentation, easy once the UK cordoned it off due to potential "chemical contamination". ..."
"... Why does this operation seem to have the malodorous stench of Berezovsky's spectre lingering in the background. While Berezovsky himself may be dead, it is safe to assume that remnants of his network are still around. If indeed the Skripals were poisoned, it could very well have been orchestrated by a rogue, non-state actor with embarrassing ties to MI6. In some ways it is reminiscent of the bungled Litvinenko operation (which the British gov't also covered up). ..."
"... Both Pablo Miller and Christopher Steele were known to be associated with Berezovsky. Steele, as his Mi6 handler, would probably have intimate knowledge of Berezovsky's connections and may well have used them as 'Russian sourced' material for his infamous Steele dossier. So Skripal, who consulted on the Steele dossier, is tied to both Miller and Steele who in turn are connected to remnants of Berezovsky's network. The 'suiciding' of Berezovsky (unless sanctioned by Mi6) suggests at least one group of players within this network who have their own agenda. ..."
"... It is possible that the Skripal case and the White Helmets Damascus chemical weapons likely false flag was an attempt of parts of the British (French) and US deep state to force Trump to remain in Syria. ..."
"... Skripal's "dead man switch" is pure fantasy. It assumes that a man who had betrayed his country and was merely an "asset" would be trusted with sensitive info. ..."
Apr 29, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Thretha May proved to be a very dangerous woman -- a real political mafiosy.

There has been no recent reporting on the Skripal case in which a British-Russian double agent and his daughter were poisoned in Salisbury, England. There even seem to be attempts to change the public record of the case.

The British government alleged that the Skripals were poisoned by Novichok, a deadly nerve agent, and blamed Russia for it. There are stiill many open questions to ask but the British media, otherwise not afraid of 'door stepping', are curiously uninterested. We already noted in early April that the British press was throwing Novi-Fog™ onto the public. It was repeating outrageous and illogical claims from "security services" but did no genuine reporting on the Skripal case.

Some photo editor made sense of what the "security services" said and introduced an April 5 London Times piece with a picture of a likely source of the alleged Novichok poison:


via D'Aramitz - bigger

Now the former British ambassador Craig Murray quotes Clive Ponting, another former senior civil servant, who suspects that the British government issued a D-Notice. Such a notice forbids British media to report on an issue. Murray also points to a tweet by Channel 4 correspondent Alex Thomson from March 12 in which Thomsen mentions a D-Notice specifically related to Mr. Skripal's MI6 handler:


bigger

The D-Notice attempt Thomsen mentioned was too late as some media had already reported the name of the Skripal's MI6 handler. We spelled it out on March 8.

One Pablo Miller, a British MI6 agent, had recruited Sergej Skripal. The former MI6 agent in Moscow, Christopher Steele, was also involved in the case. Skripal was caught by the Russian security services and went to jail. Pablo Miller, the MI6 recruiter, was also the handler of Sergej Skripal after he was released by Russia in a spy swap. He reportedly also lives in Salisbury. Both Christopher Steele and Pablo Miller work for Orbis Business Intelligence which created the "Dirty Dossier" about Donald Trump.

We early on suspected a relation between the "Dirty Dossier" and the Skripal affair:

Here are some question:

  • Did Skripal help Steele to make up the "dossier" about Trump?
  • Were Skripal's old connections used to contact other people in Russia to ask about Trump dirt?
  • Did Skripal threaten to talk about this?

If there is a connection between the dossier and Skripal, which seems very likely to me, then there are a number of people and organizations with potential motives to kill him. Lots of shady folks and officials on both sides of the Atlantic were involved in creating and running the anti-Trump/anti-Russia campaign. There are several investigations and some very dirty laundry might one day come to light. Removing Skripal while putting the blame on Russia looks like a convenient way to get rid of a potential witness.

Whistleblower Clive Ponting, quoted by Murray , now also suspects that the Skripal case was an 'inside' job that followed from the 'dirty dossier' fakery:

If [Sergej Skripal] was also involved in the 'golden showers' dossier then elements in the US would have a reason to act as well. The whole incident was an inside job not to kill him, hence the use of BZ, but to give him a warning and a punishment. The whole thing is being treated as though the authorities know exactly what went on but have to cover it up.
...
I meant to add that the policeman who 'just happened' to be around was almost certainly the special branch 'minder' who was keeping Yulia under surveillance. The media are not allowed to mention the existence of a D notice.

There is not only a very curious silence in British media about the Skripal case, but there seem to be active attempts to remove certain material about the case from the public.

In 2017 investigative journalist Dilyana Gaytandzhiev reported about massive air transports of weapons to Syrian 'rebels' under diplomatic cover and got fired over it. On April 26 she made another interesting find :

Dilyana Gaytandzhiev @dgaytandzhieva - 21:24 UTC - 26 Apr 2018

The #Skripals were allegedly exposed to the drug #Fentanyl, not the #Novichok nerve agent, according to information obtained from the UK Clinical Services Journal https://www.clinicalservicesjournal.com/story/25262/...

The Clinical Services Journal piece Gaytandzhiev had found is from March 5 2018, the day after the Skripal incident in Salisbury. In its original version it read:

Salisbury District Hospital declared a "major incident" on Monday 5 March, after two patients were exposed to an opioid .
...
It followed an incident hours earlier in which a man and a woman were exposed to the drug Fentanyl in the city centre. The opioid is 10,000 times stronger than heroin.

On April 27, a day after the above tweet:

Dilyana Gaytandzhiev @dgaytandzhieva - 12:12 UTC - 27 Apr 2018

The #Skripals were exposed to #Fentanyl, not #Novichok. After I published this information yesterday (26.04.) the Clinical Services Journal redacted it today https://www.clinicalservicesjournal.com/story/25262/...

I personally read the CSJ story after Gaytandzhiev's first tweeted it on the 26th. I can confirm that it was changed.

The top line in the CSJ quote above now reads:

Salisbury District Hospital declared a "major incident" on Monday 5 March, after two patients were exposed to what is believed to be an opioid .

The second line has been changed to:

It followed an incident hours earlier in which a man and a woman were exposed to a substance in the city centre.

All reference to Fentanyl as cause of the Skripal illness in a March 5 article has been removed between April 26 and April 27.

Archive.org has the original version as collected on April 26:


bigger

The changed version as now available at the Clinical Services Journal site:


bigger

One wonders why such a tiny magazine would bother to change an old story after some journalist tweeted about it.

The CSJ was not the only outlet which mentioned Fentanyl. The local Salisbury Journal reported it on March 5 and the piece is still up:

Police declared a major incident after a man in his 60s and a woman in her 30s were found unconscious on a bench in the shopping centre on Sunday.

Emergency services at the scene suspected the substance may have been a powerful drug called fentanyl , but nothing has yet been confirmed.

They were taken to Salisbury District Hospital where they are in a critical condition in intensive care.

In November 2017 the Salisbury Journal had reported about an unrelated fenatanyl overdose case . In 2016 Salisbury had a spike in Fentanyl OD cases. The local emergency services were surely aware of the symptoms and effects of such a substance.

Another local news site, Devon Live , headlined on March 5: Major chemical incident declared after 10 people vomited fentanyl and two are critically ill

It is understood that police suspect fentanyl, a synthetic opiate many times stronger than heroin, may have been involved . A man and a woman are in a critical condition and up to 10 other people are involved.
Officers and paramedics were called to The Maltings shopping centre in Salisbury after the man and a woman fell ill. The woman, who was unconscious, was airlifted to Salisbury district hospital at about 4.15pm, while the man was taken by ambulance.
...
It was recently reported that fentanyl has claimed the lives of at least 60 people in the UK over the last eight months.

The Devon Live report is still in its original form. It links to the first Wiltshire Police statement on the case and quotes from it. Curiously the link is dead. The first official police statement on the Skripal case is "currently unavailable".

The British press is now totally silent on the Skripal case. Craig Murray and another former senior civil servant suspect that the government gave order to not report on the issue. They also suspect, as we did early on, that the case is related to the fake "Dirty Dossier" which the Clinton campaign ordered up to use it against Donald Trump.

It is not understandable why the British government would give a silencing order if, as the government alleges, Russia caused the incident.

Why is no public investigation by the media allowed? Where is Yulia Skripal and what is the health status of Sergej Skripal? Why have they been silenced?

---
Previous Moon of Alabama posts on the Skripal case:

March 8 - Poisioned British-Russian Double-Agent Has Links To Clinton Campaign March 12 - Theresa May's "45 Minutes" Moment March 14 - Are 'Novichok' Poisons Real? - May's Claims Fall Apart March 16 - The British Government's 'Novichok' Drama Was Written By Whom? March 18 - NHS Doctor: "No Patients Have Experienced Symptoms Of Nerve Agent Poisoning In Salisbury" March 21 - Russian Scientists Explain 'Novichok' - High Time For Britain To Come Clean (Updated) March 29 - Last Act Of 'Novichok' Drama Revealed - "The Skripals' Resurrection" March 31 - Hillary Clinton Ordered Diplomats To Suppress 'Novichok' Discussions April 3 - Operation Hades Blamed Russia - A Model For The 'Novichok' Claims? April 4 - It's The Cover-Up" - UK Foreign Office Deletes Tweet, Posts False Transcript, Issues New Lies April 5 - Novi-Fog™ In Fleet Street - Truth Cut Off April 6 - The Best Explanation For The Skripal Drama Is Still ... Food Poisoning April 7 - A Very British Farce April 12 - New Developments In The Skripal Drama - Police Statement, OPCW Report Release April 15 - Were the Skripals 'Buzzed', 'Novi-shocked' Or Neither? - May Has Some 'Splaining' To Do

Posted by b on April 28, 2018 at 02:18 PM | Permalink

Comments next page "

Reload , Apr 28, 2018 2:55:50 PM | 1

The media may be banned from reporting, but if my casual interactions with the UK populace are representative, the majority are highly sceptical of .gov - May / BJ 'Putin did it' accusations.

Heard yesterday in the dispatch warehouse of a rural agri suply business I was collecting suplies from.
One warehousman to another- "Terry, where the hell is Jeff this morning?" reply from warehousman 2 "Off sick, poisoned by russians his Mrs says, proof is clasified, but he will be in next week"

Blue , Apr 28, 2018 2:58:07 PM | 2
One has to wonder why Russia is not calling Britain out on this obvious kidnapping. Can it be brought to the UN, security council or general assembly?
james , Apr 28, 2018 3:03:44 PM | 3
thanks b... the additional info is fascinating.. i had read craig murrays post earlier today...why are they covering up the fentanoyl angle? it's obvious!

b,

on another and important note - something is wrong with your site, with regard to making posts on the most recent open thread and even on the previous thread to this... some weird html script is showing up on both, but i was able to post earlier today on the previous thread...

john wilson , Apr 28, 2018 3:07:45 PM | 4
I think the policeman in this farce is key to everything. If the cause of the Skripal poisoning was fentenyal then why did the policeman become ill? Surely he wasn't taking this drug?

Anyway, if it was a weapons grade chemical agent that the policeman was affected by, why was it he was able to leave hospital a few days later in full uniform looking a picture of health?

Originally the story was he was somehow contaminated by the Skripals themselves, but as no one else in the contact chain was affected, and this notwithstanding the fact ambulance and medical had serious hand on contact was affected, it became clear that the policeman had to have another source of contamination.

Thus; they invented the magic door knob story. Even this silly story is absurd. The police and the goons didn't investigate the door knob (actually, a door handle lever type) theory until 25 days later when rain and numerous people coming and going at the Skripals's would have worn off any contaminate from the door handle.

By the way, they are now telling us the stuff on the door handle was a liquid. How do you get a liquid to stick of a shiny door handle? Apart from the silence of the press, the silence from the medical people is a factor also. They have not signed any official secrets act and they can't be issued with a D notice.

james , Apr 28, 2018 3:11:47 PM | 5
@4 john.. the policemen appears like an inside prop for this false flag op... that is what it looks like to me.. forget about it, or him having any relevance or validity, if he is as i am suggesting..
john wilson , Apr 28, 2018 3:20:25 PM | 6
Regarding my post above, it has to be said that this assumed 'assassin' must be the most incompetent one in the world. Surely the obvious way to get this fantasy weapons grade chemical to Skripal would be via a letter posted through the door, say, in the early evening. This way Skripal would have most likely died in his bed. By the way, it was a cold day so how did the 'assassin not know that the Skripals wouldn't be wearing gloves? Even the 'assassin' in this affair just doesn't add up. Questions, question, easily answered by lies, lies, and more lies
Babyl-on , Apr 28, 2018 3:27:04 PM | 7
It all seems amazing to me, what a strange world of collapsing empire we live in. Really, why don't the Russians demand at the UNSC the right to visit with Russian citizens? Call for a resolution demanding a visit and force them to veto.
psychohistorian , Apr 28, 2018 3:56:31 PM | 9
Thanks for doing your part to keep this false flag story alive.

It is interesting that Russia has not taken a stronger position in public about their treatment.

The UK folks sure seem to be getting away with killing this story and expect them to be successful if they can create another bigger wag the dog event.....not a good sign except as a good sign that the end is closer.

Don Bacon , Apr 28, 2018 4:21:41 PM | 10
DS Nick Bailey said, via an intermediary, that life will "probably never be the same." What an odd thing for a police sergeant to say (perhaps his last words).

from the Telegraph:

Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey was discharged from hospital two weeks ago and hasn't been heard from since, probably a result of the private session Bailey had with the Prime Minister prior to his release. Bailey wasn't even allowed to make a statement upon his discharge from hospital. In a statement read by Wiltshire Police Chief Constable Kier Pritchard on March 22, DS Nick Bailey said he recognises his life will "probably never be the same" and thanks the public for their "overwhelming" support. . . here .
And what "overwhelming" support from the public?
Peter L. , Apr 28, 2018 4:23:36 PM | 11
The US Drug Enforcement Agency claims that different kinds of Fentanyl, including something known as Carfentanil, can be absorbed through the skin or accidentally inhaled and cause death.

https://www.dea.gov/divisions/hq/2016/hq092216.shtml

In this DEA "Roll Call" video, a "DEA Officer Safety Alert", two law enforcement officers describe accidental Fentanyl poisioning.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Xi4A8S23Xo

(The DEA also reminds its officers to protect their canine companions! My respect for the DEA has increased 1000 fold.)

Do ex-spies ever get involved in the drug trade? Would accidental exposure to some kind of Fentanyl explain what happened to the law enforcement officer who was also affected?

Perhaps seafood poisoning is the second most parsimonious explanation.

Jackrabbit , Apr 28, 2018 4:45:59 PM | 12
It doesn't seem unreasonable to initially suspect fentanyl given that fentanyl has killed many people in UK and elsewhere. Food poisoning was also mooted early on due to Zizzi's poor health record. But these possibilities smell like distraction from the BZ finding.

AFAIK The best way to "set the scene" for a public spectacle would be an attack with a fast-acting agent at an opportune time and place. All other "theories" seem to me to be mis-direction/distraction.

A police officer (DS Bailey) makes a logical choice to deliver the incapacitating agent as he/she does not arouse suspicion when loitering and accosting the victims. If the victims fight back, the policeman might be exposed to some of the substance.

Since the British haven't had Yulia appear before even the most loyal media poodles, I suspect that the Skripals are dead.

I'm not convinced that the MI6 had anything to fear from the Steele dossier. To think that any US investigator would be allowed to freely interview Skripal, Steele, or other British "asset" seems a big stretch. And, if tying up loose ends of the Steele dossier was the motive, it would've been much easier and more effective to have Skripal die quietly (in bed of a heat attack) than publicly.

So I'm inclined to think that the "operation" was designed to discredit Russia prior to a planned false flag in Ghouta which was meant to forestall SAA defeat of the takfiri salafist Jihadis that controlled Ghouta. The confusion and apparent hurried nature of the "op" (as noted by Jen early on - one of my favorite commentators here) fits with this theory.

Although the Skripal "op" was a success, the planned false flag didn't happen due to SAA's quick advance (with Russian help). Instead, a sloppy false flag was done at the very last minute in Douma just before the Jihadis gave up. This wouldn't save Ghouta so it was possibly motivated by the the desire to solidify anti-Russian sentiment created by the Skripal op.

Anyway, that's my best guess as to what really happened. Another clusterfuck in a long line of clusterfucks.

Bakerpete , Apr 28, 2018 4:47:47 PM | 13
Related and a good interview. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4VjL2KdCjo
Don Bacon , Apr 28, 2018 5:02:39 PM | 14
And recall that PM May had that highly unusual private meeting with DS Bailey in hospital prior to his release.
Dmitry , Apr 28, 2018 5:06:09 PM | 15

On April 26th she made an interesting discovery? Really? What about this Russian guy who nobody bothers to read ? He is a pharmacologist and a knock-out coder and wrote about Fentanyl on April the 21st.

https://twitter.com/valeri_sukhov/status/987769057356255232

Jen , Apr 28, 2018 5:07:30 PM | 16
If we assume that the Skripals had been poisoned with fentanyl, we then have to explain how a doctor was able to give the Skripals first aid at the scene where they collapsed without being poisoned by fentanyl herself.

There have been reports from the US about police officers and emergency first response workers coming into contact with even very minute amounts of fentanyl and falling unconscious and needing first aid themselves. In one unusual incident, a police officer had been dealing with several cases, one of which involved coming in contact with someone who overdosed on fentanyl, and after several hours he brushed off what looked like dust particles from his uniform with his bare hand. He collapsed almost straight away and needed hospitalisation. The dust particles turned out to be fentanyl particles.

The doctor who gave first aid to the Skripals reported no ill effects; she turned herself in to Salisbury District Hospital after hearing that the couple had been poisoned by Novichok but she was found to be clear of any poisoning agent.

Tannenhouser , Apr 28, 2018 5:25:11 PM | 17
@Jen16. Is it not possible the 'potency' of fentanyl is overstated in order to 'sell' the anti-dote? Much like the anthrax 'dote' after 911. I mean most dealers I have met aren't exactly stupid, that being said most aren't lab smart either, it would seem to me there would be a whole lot of dead dealers if 'traces' in the wind can kill. Then there is the anomaly of the Dr. and other's as you brought up in 16. Just a thought. FWIW.
flamingo , Apr 28, 2018 5:59:01 PM | 19
This charade has not gone well for May. It has raised serious doubts that the UK can ever be an ally of Trump. The Steele dirt dossier was an attack on Trump's family, presidential campaign and cripples his first term with purile Russia hatred. May and the espionage establishment are the enemy of the USA. After 250 years the British finally won the US war of independence and have enslaved the majority of its media outlets.
et Al , Apr 28, 2018 6:07:39 PM | 20
I would say narrative . Keep it simple. Repeat. Anything that throws doubt or poses questions is submerged .

Curious that they went to the effort of shutting down the British press and the scrubbing from search results on skripal and pablo miller. The results for "pablo miller" in google news UK, US and others throw up almost identical results, even though I recall seeing his name via google news mentioned early on...

I bet it has nothing to do with the Brussels 'Right to be forgotten!' Directive being enforced...

But, when I look for him in Quant (under 'All') ...it throws up some interesting links, but nothing under the 'news'!:

Remember I wrote earlier that I was sure that I had seen Miller's name mentioned on google news earlier on? Well Quant threw this paywalled Daily Telegraph article from 7th March (loose the spaces):

Poisoned Russian spy Sergei Skripal was close to consultant
https://www. telegraph .co.uk/news/ 2018/03/07/ poisoned-russian-spy-sergei-skripal-close-consultant-linked/

By Robert Mendick, Chief Reporter Hayley Dixon Patrick Sawer, Senior Reporter and Luke Heighton

A security consultant who has worked for the company that compiled the controversial dossier on Donald Trump was close to the Russian double agent poisoned last weekend, it has been claimed.

The consultant, who The Telegraph is declining to identify, lived close to Col Skripal and is understood to have known him for some time.

Col Skripal, who is in intensive care and fighting for his life after an assassination attempt on Sunday, was recruited by MI6 when he worked for the British embassy in Estonia, according to the FSB, the Russian intelligence agency....
#####

It must have somehow slipped through, though probably because the you can't see 'pablo miller's name in the visible section.

There are some other juicy links from Qwant, including one from the Guardian in 2000 which names Miller:

( https://www. theguardian. com/ world/ 2000/ mar/ 25/russia. iantraynor1 ),

& this one:

https://www. ukcolumn. org/ article/ skripal-russian-web-or-rusi-web

...which is full of unverifiable claims, including that Putin was almost recruited to the UK! It always makes me laugh when they bring up the 'apartment bombings were an FSB false flag to attack Chechnya', but those same people don't even mention Basayev's invasion of Dagestan on the 7th August 1999 in support of his fellow jihadis who dreamed of a Caucasian Islamic Emirate in Russia's south, i.e. what was attempted in Syria these last few years. Keeping Russia weak, something entirely in keeping with US & UK interests...

I'm pleased to see Antwar.com's stalwart Justin Raimondo's piece come up too.

Observer , Apr 28, 2018 6:11:33 PM | 21
@Jen 16

Its unclear if that happened in all (100%) cases though. Its possible that only in certain percentage of such cases the rescuers were affected, and in some cases they were not.

Thus, a full statistic with such cases will have to be provided in order to be able to make conclusions about this.

GoraDiva , Apr 28, 2018 6:16:20 PM | 22
At this point, the main questions are "Where is Yulia Skripal and what is the health status of Sergej Skripal? Why have they been silenced?" What is Russia doing about the obvious abduction of its citizen? What a strange world we live in... And in case this escaped folks... a good account of mr. Steele - https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/christopher-steele-the-real-foreign-influence-in-the-2016-election/
BRF , Apr 28, 2018 6:34:48 PM | 23
The state exists to enforce the dominance of elites, all the rest is propaganda, misdirection, Obfuscation or terrorism up to and including total war.
Don Bacon , Apr 28, 2018 6:38:00 PM | 24
The young man Jamie Paine who first found the Skripals on the park bench got some liquid on his skin and apparently didn't suffer from it. From a March 8 BBC video -- ". . .man was frothing from the mouth, I got a little bit on my skin, it wasn't too much, I just brushed it off." That has never been mentioned in any recent news accounts that I've seen. We do have other articles mentioning Paine.
WJ , Apr 28, 2018 6:48:39 PM | 25
Jackrabbit @12,

Yes. I think that's right.

Pft , Apr 28, 2018 6:49:11 PM | 26
Lol. 1984 today. Winston working OT
karlof1 , Apr 28, 2018 6:55:14 PM | 27
Wow! Thanks for picking up and expanding on Murray's blog, b! The planet's populated with far too many evil English speaking people that must be culled from the herd--and soon!
Jackrabbit , Apr 28, 2018 6:57:16 PM | 28
Don Bacon @22: frothing at the mouth

I did an online search and I don't see frothing at the mouth or jerking motions as a symptom of fentanyl poisoning. Opiate OD results in dizziness, confusion, sleepiness and loss of consciousness, low blood pressure, slowed heartbeat and slow breathing, etc.

Also, there is a well-known antidote for fentanyl poisoning: naloxone (aka narcan), which could've been applied quickly. And, while I'm not an expert, I am not aware of people being in a coma for weeks due from a fentanyl OD. AFAIK, within days they are dead or recovered.

Tannenhouser , Apr 28, 2018 6:59:32 PM | 29
@DB22. The froth ties in with the Gouta shaving cream victims no?
Don Bacon , Apr 28, 2018 7:03:04 PM | 30
Yes
wagelaborer , Apr 28, 2018 7:09:27 PM | 31
Several people have asked why Russia has not raised the issue at the UNSC. I have heard them raise the issue at the UNSC, (I listened on Ruptly), and so did Lavrov and so did the Russian ambassador to Britain and so did Maria Zakarova.
The reason no one knows this is because the Mighty Wurlitzer of propaganda is controlled by the West, not Russia. If they don't report it, people think it didn't happen. But it did.
Vlad the Impeller , Apr 28, 2018 7:09:34 PM | 32
The Devon Live report is still in its original form. It links to the first Wiltshire Police statement on the case and quotes from it. Curiously the link is dead. The first official police statement on the Skripal case is "currently unavailable".

FYI: A copy of the web page has been preserved at the Wayback Machine

Tannenhouser , Apr 28, 2018 7:10:37 PM | 33
@DB. Froth is a good visual indicator, kinda like having a roach clip on your keychain when u cross a border.
It tells a story......... I doubt the Skirpals got a dose of Gillette.
Lozion , Apr 28, 2018 7:15:52 PM | 34
@21 Curious MoAites would like to know. Same with Assange..
Don Bacon , Apr 28, 2018 7:16:56 PM | 35
So the froth proves the fake attack, again.
Walstib , Apr 28, 2018 7:20:00 PM | 36
I am not sure I have seen this angle in the article or comments, fentanyl use would present the same triage symptoms as BZ. Seems chasing a fentanyl trail gets further from existing evidence.
Ort , Apr 28, 2018 7:29:40 PM | 37
D-Notices are one of those evils that, once initiated, are never undone. It reminds me a bit of the fraudulent, gauzy "AUMF" used by the United States government as if it were a blank check written by God to wage imperialistic wars kinetic actions of aggression against anyone or anything it deems ripe for pillage or destruction-- at its sole pleasure and discretion, and for eternity.

But I digress. Just as a matter of logic, it would seem as if the authorities who created and approved the "D-Notice" procedure presumed that the government would never become so tyrannical, despotic, and unethical that it would issue such mega-censorship diktats in bad faith-- i.e., to provide cover for illicit and illegal government conduct.

As it is, the D-Notices' ostensible "national security" rationale has proven to be mere camouflage for its true purpose: ensuring that malfeasant officials and operatives are "secure" in their depraved work, and are protected from all inquiries that might expose their heinous wrongdoing. Whoops!
______________________________________

That said, I also wonder about Russia's relative official deference, at least publicly, to the UK authorities' sequestering of the Skripals.

Given the absence of any domestic countervailing force to the British government's high-handedness-- the UK media consent-manufactories are complicit enough as it is, even without being gagged by D-Notices-- it would seem that the Russians are the only party able and willing to "raise a stink" beyond polite formal communications.

Perhaps the comparison is inapt, but compare OPCW representative Aleksandr Shulgin's recent presentation at the OPCW, and his comments about the faked chemical attack in Syria. They are directly, forcefully, and appropriately accusatory, and signal that the Russian government is weary of politely submitting to the UK's abusive and bellicose policies and conduct.

But there seems to be no corresponding inclination to press the UK authorities over the reprehensible and unconscionable kidnapping, or worse, of Russian citizens. 'Tis a puzzlement.

Kalen , Apr 28, 2018 7:47:47 PM | 38
I do not know if fentanyl was found in OPCW sample, only British made BZ paralyzingly agent. The question is why? I think doctors in Salisbury who are trained with chemical nerve agents due to proximity to Porton Downs lab instantly knew there was no military nerve agent used there, would they also instantly know that it was Fentanyl since they faced epidemic of opioid overdoses.

As far as theory how this happened. I see that Skripal was in it, in fact he prepared and tested appropriate dose for him as his daughter used as pawn to lend credibility and provide required Putin evil killing innocent narrative which would be absent if he just killed or hurt rogue agent.

Skipral himself calibrated that false flag dose of BZ or Fenantyl to make sure no permanent damage would be done to his daughter and then administered it himself to her and himself in controlled manner in public place so help would be coming immediately while in his car they could have possibly lie there for hours before being discovered.

In fact place where he lived Salisbury near Porton Downs was perfect for this since there was no way that doctors would misdiagnose them as military nerve agent victims which wrong treatment would possibly caused irreversible damage to victims as doctors would be more aggressive fearing immediate death of patients and also were immune to propaganda of Novichok crap since they were experts in this medical field as real and present danger, threat of exposure of Porton Downs employees was always there.

After recovery is was Skripal, trusted by her as her father, himself as part of psych op presented the narrative as Putin wanted to kill me and did not care that you happened to be with me at time of attack. I am so sorry, shit lies. She was brainwashed offered lucrative financial arrangement in the west decided to stay, thinking she could be killed upon returning to Russia.

I do not think it would be far fetched to concoct such a thing or similar by MI6 as such stunts were done before like fake deaths or staged attacks but in this case the point was to fool British unwitting participants that nerve agent attack happenced as later they did later in Douma in amateurish way but still it worked as pretext to pre planed aggression on Syria as in case of Skripals pre planed diplomatic retaliation against Russia before any investigation was really commenced , such thing only perpetrators of false flag themselves would do.

If Skripal was not on it why keep them alive as prime witnesses of conspiracy since I could imagine as a father myself Skripal being furious of MI6 amounted to attemp to kill his daughter and blame Putin one he learned that there was no Novichok crap or any military nerve agent used.

In fact Fenantyl is deadly if inappropriately handled what just few days after Skripal affair husband and wife overdosed on Fentanty in California and putting in critical condition their mother in law trying to revive them in the bedroom, children that never enter the room by looked through the Door who called 911 were also mildly exposed while a police officer who entered the room end up in hospital himself.

Whole house was immediately quarantined and covered by tent until, special unit arrived days later and only then police investigator entered premises.

What interesting that no emergency or medical personnel in hospital was hurt since they knew well how to deal with Fenantyl epidemic.

We must remember that despite crazy rhetoric we are dealing with risky but rational people.

bevin , Apr 28, 2018 7:55:58 PM | 39
Unless I am mistaken D Notices are issued by the Minister of Defence who, in this instance is the exceedingly high flying Tory Gavin Williamson. Williamson's previous job was as Tory Whip -- making sure that there were no rebellions among the MPs at a time when the May government hangs by a thread and is taking the most extraordinary measures to ensure that it does not lose a Paliamentary vote.

Williamson's claim to fame, and May's affection, was that he ran the Whip's office as a blackmail operation-spying on MPs and building dossiers featuring their errors, crimes and indiscretions. He was very good at this, May, though very unpopular, is spared the fate that Thatcher suffered-a vote of non confidence by the Tory MPs (the 1922 Committee)- because Williamson, a thug, has a blackmailer's 'hold' over most of his colleagues.

Using a D Notice in this matter is very unusual- quite how national security would suffer if the truth were to become widely known is difficult to imagine.

But thanks to the Israeli Embassy's million pound campaign against Corbyn, and a hundred Fifth Columnists on the Labour benches who prefer May to their party leader, and Williamson's mafia Parliament isn't working as it ought to.

A P , Apr 28, 2018 8:08:09 PM | 40
The fentanyl/BZ/Novichok angle seems eerily like the US/ZATO/MSM fallback position on the BUK missile scam for MH17. By insisting MH17 was brought down by SOME BUK, the story line never gets to the Ukie SU25s seen near MH17 on Russian commercial air-traffic tracking radar.

The pub seafood dish spiked with shellfish toxin is more likely, as it would need to be ingested with a time-lag after ingestion so mere contact on the bench would not be an issue. Mossad is too clever to leave anything easily traceable, and will keep injecting alternative story lines into the British "intel" system and the MSM.

It is obvious this was NOT a UK or even US/CIA/5-Eyes operation. The UK politicians and intel community had no idea, were caught totally flatfooted, so went to "trusted sources (Mossad) to find out what to say.

The ONLY way for the UK to manage this massive back-stab by the Rothschild-backed Israeli Zionists is to just shut down all access to any real info, so some BS stories will be thrown around to confuse the public and defuse any attempts by real investigators to piece together the real events.

The fact Skripal was probably involved in the Steele dossier scam may indicate the true source of the anti-Trump agenda. Why else would Mossad be moved to desperately silence Skripal, and his daughter on the potential scenario she knew and had come to pick up Skripal's dead-man's-switch documentation and take it back to Russia for safe-keeping. Imagine how upset Trumpty Dumbdy would be if he found out the Steele scam was ultimately set in motion by Nuttyyahoo, or rogue elements in the Israeli gov't/Mossad.

michaelj72 , Apr 28, 2018 9:01:28 PM | 41
"The first official police statement on the Skripal case is "currently unavailable"."

FYI: the first report is still available on the Way Back machine Web Archive here, and there are 5 "captures" but only 3 of those show the actual report (through March 2018), starting in April the text is not available any more....

link ">https://www.wiltshire.police.uk/article/1736/Major-incident-after-two-people-suspected-of-being-exposed-to-unknown-substance-in-Salisbury">link

michaelj72 , Apr 28, 2018 9:02:56 PM | 42
that link didn't come out/work right. sorry. This one appears to work ok

link ">https://www.wiltshire.police.uk/article/1736/Major-incident-after-two-people-suspected-of-being-exposed-to-unknown-substance-in-Salisbury">link

WJ , Apr 28, 2018 9:07:27 PM | 43
@34,

Yes. I think that's right and is consistent with Jackrabbit @12 and my own thoughts on the matter.

Tannenhouser , Apr 28, 2018 9:26:37 PM | 44
@33DB. Yes and no depending on where your personal belief fence may be. For myself not proves...... just seems conspicuously coincidental. Mind you, MSM never played it up to my knowledge... in either case so..... either way froth no froth all we really know is two family members from Russia spent time in a London hospital and the UK skreamed Russia did it way before any reasonable person could be exected to believe it, given the track record, after that who knows really.
V , Apr 28, 2018 11:59:32 PM | 45
Isn't it just amazing how May, doubling down on the false flag story, has been busted as a liar and she doesn't flinch.
A P , Apr 29, 2018 1:13:45 AM | 46
I was curious about the relationship between Trump and the Rothschilds, and why they might go to such lengths to get Mossad to go 100% rogue and pull off the Skripal attack.

A simple Dog Pile meta-search (Google will probably not give the same results for obvious reasons) found a story in wide blog circulation from Oct 2016 which said Trump had recently paid off his debt to the Rothschilds (probably through Goldman Sachs or the like). The interesting part is the article claims Trump had ALL Rothschilds banned from his Mar a Lago resort, the reputed quote from the Tweeter in Chief was "I grabbed Jacob (Rothschild) by the scruff of the neck and kicked him out the back door of Palm Beach of Florida society". Way to make enemies and influence friends there Donny-boy. The same article quotes a Trump tweet, "They do not own the world, and they do not have carte blanch to do whatever they want. If we do not challenge them there will be other issues. We will not be bullied by them!" http://harddawn.com/trump-banned-rothschilds/

Except for the Trump tweets, the rest of the election-run-up article is full of Trumpty Dumbdy hopium which has not panned out.

In an Infowars article: "The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), a company under the wing of The Economist, owned by the Rothschild banking family of England, has declared Donald Trump a "global risk"

https://www.infowars.com/rothschild-intel-unit-equates-donald-trump-to-jihadi-terror/

Can't see the Economist getting too far off-narrative with the Rothschild cabal, so this rings true.

So while Infowars and Hard Dawn are not anyone's first choice as sources, they are quoting Trump himself and a Rothschild media/propaganda organ.

Circle closed, Mossad did it. The UK MI6/5 and politicians didn't know what was happening until after Israeli/Mossad "trusted sources" gave May and Johnson the script to feed the MSM .

A P , Apr 29, 2018 1:35:22 AM | 47
The potential existence of Skripal's dead-man's-switch documentation may have extended well beyond the Steele scam, which would explain the urgency of the deed and why the Skripals are being held incommunicado. The search of the Skripal residence was to find that documentation, easy once the UK cordoned it off due to potential "chemical contamination".
Jen , Apr 29, 2018 1:43:29 AM | 48
Just to complicate the matter even more, I have found UK tabloid news reports online dated 7 - 8 March 2018 of a female office worker (who worked in the building next to the Zizzi's Restaurant franchise in Salisbury) who was taken to Salisbury District Hospital by paramedics. Links to the reports below:

The reports may not amount to much. The woman could have had a fainting reaction to something not related to the Skripal poisoning incident.

As of today (29 April 2018) the pizza restaurant remains closed. The uniforms of the staff who worked there on the Sunday when the Skripals ate at the restaurant were seized and burned by the authorities.

http://metro.co.uk/2018/03/11/zizzi-workers-uniforms-burned-poisoning-russian-spy-7379213/

Apparently traces of a nerve gas agent were said to have been found at the restaurant, in particular on and around the table where the Skripals ate their lunch (and which has since been incinerated).

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/11/russian-spy-attack-nerve-agent-traces-found-in-zizzi-restaurant

psychohistorian , Apr 29, 2018 2:58:59 AM | 49
@ Jen with interesting updates...thanks

Any word from the owner of the restaurant or workers laid off? Who pays to shut all them and their families up?

@ A P with the Trump/Rothschild conflict exposure......thanks

If a sane world made the tools of finance public utilities then these social retards would not have the means to plays these games on the backs of the rest of us.

somebody , Apr 29, 2018 3:29:20 AM | 50
Craig Murray is a hero.

It is obvious that Yulia Skripal's and her brother's ability to travel freely between both sides and keep their childhood friends in the secret service community would have cost their father dearly. He is described as a family man, and could easily be blackmailed with his family.

Pharmacist , Apr 29, 2018 3:31:52 AM | 51
Fentanyl OD would have very similar symptoms to BZ exposure. There is no doubt in my mind that the Skripals were exposed to BZ (as confirmed by Swiss lab) and Fentanyl was the obvious suspect for the medical staff who would not have had full toxicology report by the time initial report was made.
Anonymous2 , Apr 29, 2018 3:35:29 AM | 52
Seems like UK just started a propaganda campaing against Corbyn sigh, UK Media Claims 'Russian Bots' Tried to Influence Election to Support Corbyn https://sptnkne.ws/hwDC
somebody , Apr 29, 2018 3:52:28 AM | 53
51 OPCW says the BZ was in the control samples not the original. All you need to cheat would be one person to switch Novichok and original samples in the Dutch lab where the samples were split.
Pharmacist , Apr 29, 2018 4:25:54 AM | 54
A control sample that gives the same exact symptoms as the victims displayed. How convenient! Of all the millions of organic chemicals they could have chosen for a control sample........ I'll leave you with that thought.
somebody , Apr 29, 2018 4:59:19 AM | 55
Posted by: Pharmacist | Apr 29, 2018 4:25:54 AM | 54

Yep. And those were the blood samples not the soil samples.

Tuyzentfloot , Apr 29, 2018 5:29:32 AM | 56
I'm confused about dropping the Novichok hypothesis. The explanation of BZ poisoning has been dropped, fine. But what about the presence of A234? It's not because the initial report mentioned Fentanyl poisoning that this is correct. Fentanyl is a problem the doctors are familiar with as a 'live' social problem and it's easy to explain a new case with Fentanyl while in fact it's something else. So it is possible that afterwards the doctors changed their minds and saw no reason not to comply with pressure to correct the statement. I don't know if the symptoms the doctors were presented with were clear enough to exclude confusion.

Gareth Porter has an article about a batch of A234 which has been around since the nineties, probably in hands of Russian mafia, and which by now has been deteriorated and would have much less predictable effects when used.

There is a mention of the purity of the traces of A234. There are two interpretations of that: one is that it is fresh and contains little contaminations. Another is that it has in fact deteriorated very much but from the proportions of the components it is clear that it was once a pure product.

I would not exclude the possibility that a very old batch of A234 was used and that the British were convinced it was from russian origin and intended to take full advantage of this. It could be that they knew it had russian origin because they had been involved in acquiring the sample , or it was just a good guess, but the opportunistic use of the pretext is the same.

Mikael Kall , Apr 29, 2018 5:55:21 AM | 57
Here is some information from Pablo Miller: "Little was known about Miller's life outside his public clashes with the FSB. He served in the British Army as a member of the Royal Tank Regiment and the Royal Green Jackets before he joined the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in 1990. A veterans site for the Royal Tank Regiment shows a 1984 photograph of a Lt. Pablo Miller patrolling the Green Line in Cyprus, where Miller's LinkedIn profile indicates he served.

Diplomatic lists show Miller's first foreign posts after joining the FCO were in Nigeria, first in Abuja and later Lagos beginning in 1992 before he took a job as first secretary at the British embassy in Estonia in September 1997. He also served as a counsellor at the British embassy in Warsaw, Poland from 2010 through 2013." (....) In 2000, the FSB identified Miller as the "head of British intelligence in Tallinn," Estonia and accused him of recruiting an FSB officer later identified as Valery Ojamae." (Source: Daily Beast)
https://www.thedailybeast.com/pablo-miller-the-mystery-man-who-recruited-putins-poisoned-spy?source=facebook&via=mobile

pantaraxia , Apr 29, 2018 5:58:50 AM | 58
Why does this operation seem to have the malodorous stench of Berezovsky's spectre lingering in the background. While Berezovsky himself may be dead, it is safe to assume that remnants of his network are still around. If indeed the Skripals were poisoned, it could very well have been orchestrated by a rogue, non-state actor with embarrassing ties to MI6. In some ways it is reminiscent of the bungled Litvinenko operation (which the British gov't also covered up).

Both Pablo Miller and Christopher Steele were known to be associated with Berezovsky. Steele, as his Mi6 handler, would probably have intimate knowledge of Berezovsky's connections and may well have used them as 'Russian sourced' material for his infamous Steele dossier. So Skripal, who consulted on the Steele dossier, is tied to both Miller and Steele who in turn are connected to remnants of Berezovsky's network. The 'suiciding' of Berezovsky (unless sanctioned by Mi6) suggests at least one group of players within this network who have their own agenda.

pantaraxia , Apr 29, 2018 6:06:49 AM | 59
@8 mauisurfer

Many thanks for the article. Shocking but not surprising. Deserves widespread dissemination.

pantaraxia , Apr 29, 2018 6:25:19 AM | 60
@46 A P
re: Trump and the Rothschilds

Perhaps you would be considerate enough not to degrade the quality of MOA by posting 'information' sourced from obvious nutjobs such as your sourcing for ' Trump and the Rothschilds'. To quote a blog, which includes such gems as "FACT CHECK! 69 Million Illegal Alien Extraterrestrials Voted for Hillary: Mostly True", seems to indicate you are probably more suited to be commenting over there rather than on MOA.

Bakerpete , Apr 29, 2018 7:55:31 AM | 61
@somebody 53,
I've read that as well and every sensible lab worker will be rolling their eyes. Using a contaminant as a control is total bullshit.
Jen , Apr 29, 2018 8:02:29 AM | 62
Psychohistorian @ 49:

As far as I know, the workers at Zizzi's Restaurant in Salisbury were offered shifts in other Zizzi's Restaurant franchises.

Another article at Metro.co.uk dated 8 March 2018 was running with the notion that the nerve gas agent was put into their meal at the restaurant:

http://metro.co.uk/2018/03/08/russian-spy-daughter-pictured-zizzi-restaurant-centre-poison-probe-7371707/

That idea is probably more plausible than the food poisoning idea: the poison need not actually have been a nerve gas agent as long as it mimics the symptoms of shellfish poisoning. The only issue is, who would have put the poison into the food? If the staff had done it, someone would have noticed because there were no walls or other barriers between the kitchen and the dining area. One would also expect other diners to have had food poisoning although it's possible the Skripals were the only diners that day to have eaten seafood risotto. The second possibility is that someone was with the Skripals while they were having lunch and managed to pop something into their lunch while they were not looking.

Of course we would discount other alternatives: that the Skripals were poisoned at The Mill pub or on the park bench.

Jen , Apr 29, 2018 8:09:18 AM | 63
V @ 45: Why would we be surprised if Treason'n'Mayhem doesn't flinch if she's been busted for lying? She's had plenty of practice, another episode of lying is just part of the regular routine!
Noirette , Apr 29, 2018 8:10:11 AM | 64
Fwiw. DS Nick Bailey. I tend to believe that he was 'sickened,' was not a made-up character / a real person playing a hoaxy part / and so on.

1 He existed at the Wiltshire Police, enough on the net about him. At one point (2017) he was stationed very close to the 'park bench' spot. The photo seen everywhere is of an award ceremony for him for work leading to the arrest of a serial rapist. (2016) Imho his wife and children exist (no post about that.)

2 How, from where, etc. he arrived at the Skripal collapse park-bench on 4 March (if he did) is not mentioned in any news article. Expressions used: rushed / speeded / to help -- after coming to the aid of -- first cop on the scene -- after responding to the attack -- as the first response to the attack -- No other info. offered.

Was he on duty? Where was he? How did he arrive? What did he do? How did he get to the hospital? One article mentions TWO policemen as first responders, as one would expect. Who was the other one (if 1 = N. B.)? Almost no info about N.B. was given out. At some later point some articles suggested that he was not poisoned at the scene, or thru contact with the Skripals, but because he was the first plod to enter the Skripal house. (Imho this last story was pure speculation / made up, a sort of offshoot of the poisoned knob narrative. Whatever, if any, poisoning took place, was not at the house, but at the very earliest at the Zizzi restaurant.)

3 Couldn't find any 'witness' descriptions (e.g. doc who first dealt with Yulia) of the arrival of the police. Exceedingly strange. Perhaps some exist but I missed them..? One would expect: When DS Bailey and Plodue rushing to the scene of the deathly murderous attack realised some nerve agent was suspected a high alert priority emergency order was immediately called out for a helicopter .. Nothing like that. It is as if all the 'bystander witnesses' simply vanished at some point. I also looked for cell photos of the park-bench scene and only found ONE possible. Scroll down to pic of Sergei:

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/crime/witnesses-saw-woman-wearing-surgical-12176790

4 I found NO news about N.B. beyond the read-out declaration by police, and the annoucement that he left hosp. on 22 March. The few words available (visit of top plod to N. B. in hosp and declaration) "very anxious" - "completely surreal" - "life never the same again" - "find a new normal" seem to fit with..heh.. a lot of stuff incl. BZ, Fentanyl, and LSD, but not a deadly nerve agent. Heh, not worth much, just a few words. (see Don Bacon as well.)

All this, imho, signals a clumsy cover-up, gag orders, etc. Which points to unexpected results, plots gone wrong, clumsy exploitation of events, etc. No way a planned false flag type conspiracy. (I'm not keen on the links between Skripal and the Steele dossier.)

Blue , Apr 29, 2018 8:23:24 AM | 65
@31. ı think the issue we are wondering most about is the abduction of Yulia Skripal. We know they have addressed the poisoning issue at the UNSC, but wonder about Russia pressing for the illegal prevention of a Russian citizen accessing her government. There is zero evidence provided by the British government which suggests Yulia does not want contact, except the British governments' assertion to that effect. The word of the abductors is worthless.
jason , Apr 29, 2018 9:05:52 AM | 66
your dealing with ............criminals........... who are in charge of top level large organizations/departments called your government. criminals. the same for terrorists, which pre-9/11 was just criminals. your dealing with criminals/terrorist who have a hand in their media to be able to make you think in a hundred directions. which is not necessary.


First. How could UK and US not know about some mossad operation and was caught flat footed? There responses were quick enough to insinuate that russia did it again in syria not long after.


Second. How come skripal and his daughter haven't just come out for answers unless they were in on it? (how they were in, is not really important now, it is obvious, unless i hear a story about a russian immigrant jumping out of a window, I find her flying to UK was her one way trip now unless she proves otherwise)


Last. the fact the sample did contain a bit of everything suggests, their intention was to "hide". remember i said the cctv cameras would have been reviewed by now easily.

the hit on n.korea's brother? there was not really an intention to hide by their governance.

russia is doing good to ignore such banter, because it is really below the level of even petty criminals who do things out of necessity as compared to idiots who have power but still fk it all up. not that putin is not capable of this and probably has so before, but these actions or inactions speak about someone who is experienced.


On a side note. I viewed US campaign commercials and I saw the words two faced being used instead of highlighting what they had done or will do....... it has been a nice ride. i missed the old us but i won't regret her now. =(

AmsterJam , Apr 29, 2018 9:24:15 AM | 67
The original 5 March Wiltshire Police statement is still at WayBack Machine:
https://web.archive.org/web/20180305183334/https://www.wiltshire.police.uk/article/1736/Major-incident-after-two-people-suspected-of-being-exposed-to-unknown-substance-in-Salisbury ">https://www.wiltshire.police.uk/article/1736/Major-incident-after-two-people-suspected-of-being-exposed-to-unknown-substance-in-Salisbury">https://web.archive.org/web/20180305183334/https://www.wiltshire.police.uk/article/1736/Major-incident-after-two-people-suspected-of-being-exposed-to-unknown-substance-in-Salisbury
somebody , Apr 29, 2018 9:29:05 AM | 68
61) actually they do. This here is the OPCW publication on " on-site and off-site analysis"

They use "scheduled chemicals" for spiking controls which means chemicals that are on their chemical weapons list.

bevin , Apr 29, 2018 9:30:16 AM | 69
Craig Murray updates the story:

"UPDATE: Stupidly I had forgotten this vital confirmation from Channel 4 News (serial rebel Alex Thomson) of the D Notice in place on mention of Pablo Miller.
(Alex Thomson tweeted on March 12 that a D notice, to protect Skripal's handler,living nearby, had been imposed in the previous week)
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/

"Back then I did not realise what I now know, that the person being protected was Pablo Miller, colleague in both MI6 then Orbis Intelligence of Christopher Steele, author of the fabrications of the Trump/Russia golden shower dossier. That the government's very first act on the poisoning was to ban all media mention of Pablo Miller makes it extremely probable that this whole incident is related to the Trump dossier and that Skripal had worked on it, as I immediately suspected. The most probable cause is that Skripal – who you should remember had traded the names of Russian agents to Britain for cash – had worked on the dossier with Miller but was threatening to expose its lies for cash."

V , Apr 29, 2018 9:35:10 AM | 70
I think the best description of todays governments is a "Being There" moment. Idiots as savants, running governments...
morongobill , Apr 29, 2018 9:53:00 AM | 71
Starting to think that the "wayback machine" might be the next site to go lights out.
adamski , Apr 29, 2018 10:03:59 AM | 72
Fentanyl

A super strong opioid and therefore OD will involve loss, of consciousness, slowed breathing, pin point pupils and death. Fentanyl is usually administered via a transdermal patch i.e. across the skin but over an extended time period, although the junkies I worked with in Sydney had worked out how to extract the good stuff from the patch in an injectable form. Bang into your arm (or neck if you're hardcore).

Overdose is EASILY reversed by Narcan /naloxone injected IM. Kicks every opioid molecule off associated receptors.

I believe an aerosol form was used by Russian special forces in Moscow theatre siege. It incapacitated terrorists and hostages and unfortunately coused death by positional asphyxiation to a hundred or so hostages.

CE , Apr 29, 2018 10:09:02 AM | 73
I think the idea about Yulia visiting to take Sergei's dead-man-switch back to Russia is interesting. Reminded me of the report that they both had turned off their cell phones for four hours between the visit to the cemetery in the morning and showing up in city center in the early afternoon. Maybe they went for the documents Sergei had stored in a secret location and had them with them when they were taken out in the park.
lysias , Apr 29, 2018 10:10:01 AM | 74
Does the D notice indicate that it was really the UK government that was behind the Steele dossier?
Harry , Apr 29, 2018 10:13:37 AM | 75
@somebody | 68
61) actually they do. This here is the OPCW publication on "on-site and off-site analysis"

They use "scheduled chemicals" for spiking controls which means chemicals that are on their chemical weapons list.

Spiked samples at OPCW lab would show those control chemicals in a virgin state, and that's exactly what happened. Problem is, the evidence was exactly the opposite of what OPCW claimed. Swiss report showed Novichok was in a virgin state and pure form (definitely lethal to victims, if it was in their blood), that's an evidence IT WAS THE SPIKE, not BZ.

somebody , Apr 29, 2018 10:21:49 AM | 76
Posted by: Harry | Apr 29, 2018 10:13:37 AM | 75

We don't really know as the complete report is kept secret.

Peter AU 1 , Apr 29, 2018 10:21:56 AM | 77
According to the OPCW lab report the Russians got hold of, it sounded as though remnant traces of BZ where found plus a A-234 spike (in virgin state). But then medical journal has Fentanyl.

The Skripals knocked out with Fentanyl, OPOCW blood samples first spiked by MI6 with A-234 and then spiked by OPCW with a control substance?

Or Skripals knocked out with fast acting Fentanyl, then dosed with BZ, perhaps a day or two later?

vbo , Apr 29, 2018 10:28:49 AM | 79
@50 "Family man" Scripal...hmmm...they said that his wife and son are dead (for how long?)...Then they said that his daughter has been paid 200.000 in to her account as a money he received from the house sold after his divorce (with second wife that noone even mentioned or ...his dead wife? I assume one can not divorce his dead wife...) just before poisoning...
somebody , Apr 29, 2018 10:28:57 AM | 80
Posted by: lysias | Apr 29, 2018 10:10:01 AM | 74

Theresa May certainly thought Hillary Clinton would win

It is possible that the Skripal case and the White Helmets Damascus chemical weapons likely false flag was an attempt of parts of the British (French) and US deep state to force Trump to remain in Syria.

It looks like there has been a rift between military and intelligence services.

somebody , Apr 29, 2018 10:32:07 AM | 81
79 you are mixing father and son. The father never divorced.
m , Apr 29, 2018 10:36:45 AM | 82
@8,59

The originator of that story is the now deceased Joe Vialls. The text can be found here

https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_zion42.htm

vbo , Apr 29, 2018 10:45:54 AM | 83
I do not know about his daughter but it seems to me that he is definitely dead. Or they may made a deal to play this game for authorities and poisoning never actually happened. Blood samples were manipulated (and badly)... We may know more about this case after 50 years or so...Witnesses wouldn't talk scared for their lives. Time and events are running fast and public easily forgets what happened last week when new "event" plays next week. Hard to follow all these crooked actors on a political scene...But more and more people are dead and wars and "revolutions" are everywhere...I am afraid "chicken will come home" soon...
lysias , Apr 29, 2018 10:49:42 AM | 84
Such power as the UK has retained post-empire has rested on the special relationship with the U.S. The core of that special relationship has been cooperation between the intel agencies of the two countries. Before the election, the U.S. intel agencies very much opposed Trump, and since then they have very much been a part of the so-called resistance to him. It figures that the UK would want to assist them.
vbo , Apr 29, 2018 11:20:18 AM | 85
@ 79 What son? As I understand his son is dead and two of them visited cemetery where his son and wife are...and then again why this money is in his daughter's account?
vbo , Apr 29, 2018 11:23:55 AM | 86
I just found that his wife died in 2012 and his son died in 2017. That was his only son Alexandr.
A P , Apr 29, 2018 11:41:05 AM | 87
@ pantaraxia #60: Thanks for pointing that out. Seems the troll farms were/are working overtime, as I have now found "articles" which use nearly EXACTLY the same two quotes (with suitable substitutions), but attributed to Putin/Russia. Some days you get the bear, some days the bear gets you...

The Economist part? The fact that corporatist rag lies as much as any MSM... but the Economist also definitely toes the Rothschild propaganda line, so that article shows there is no love lost between them and Trump.

Despite this, my premise stands, if Skripal had damning evidence that the Steele scam and the larger "Russian collusion scam" was more than just theory, and linked the Dems/lawyers/spooks back to the Rothschilds, then we have the Zionist connection. Mossad does the Zionists' dirty work.

So what power-base comes out ahead on this episode? Not the UK for sure... they have been shown to be incompetent and not in control of what happens on their turf. The Dems don't gain, as this threw at least temporary focus back onto the nearly-forgotten-by-the-MSM Steele scam. Trump surely doesn't gain much, not enough to have the CIA do the deed. Even assuming the CIA would do as Trump asks. Russia/Putin had exactly zero to gain from this. It may even be a significant loss, because if Yulia was bringing back her father's dead-man-switch documents to Russia for safekeeping, there's a chance the FSB might have been able to get them.

Who's left? Given that the Rothchilds have declared Trump "a danger" via the Economist and elsewhere, one could easily imagine them trying to install, via Trump's impeachment, an even more rabid Zionist puppet in the form of Pence.

So confusion and disarray all 'round.

"By deception shalt you do war." The Mossad motto.

somebody , Apr 29, 2018 11:59:10 AM | 88
Posted by: vbo | Apr 29, 2018 11:20:18 AM | 85

sigh. The money is not in the daughter's account. She got power of attorney for her dead and divorced brother's account in Russia.

Jackrabbit , Apr 29, 2018 12:32:03 PM | 89
Peter AU 1 @77

The effects of BZ are felt about 1/2 hour after exposure and can last for weeks. Fentanyl could have immediate effect but those effects last only days.

Maybe it was an aerosol combination of the two?

Fentanyl is deadly but BZ is not.

Jackrabbit , Apr 29, 2018 12:37:09 PM | 90
Skripal's "dead man switch" is pure fantasy. It assumes that a man who had betrayed his country and was merely an "asset" would be trusted with sensitive info.

Whatever help Skripal may have provided to Steele is likely to have been tangential. Steele almost certainly had other sources that he could call on. But Skripal might make for a good fall guy.

dahoit , Apr 29, 2018 12:37:38 PM | 91
49;the games they on the backs of others. The artist was demonized for such at that.
Jackrabbit , Apr 29, 2018 12:42:25 PM | 92
Those who decry Russia's seeming inaction fail to consider that that keeping the Skripal's incommunicado is a provocation that is meant to illicit threats from Russia that could further the anti-Russian agenda. By keeping a cool head the Russians have avoided this trap.
Jackrabbit , Apr 29, 2018 12:51:25 PM | 93
BZ as control

No evidence was provided to support this. How many substances are on the control list? How many times has BZ been used as a control? Show us evidence of labs that have previously found BZ in samples provided by OPCW. Let independent journalists interview the technicians.

Jackrabbit , Apr 29, 2018 1:12:47 PM | 94
Harry @75

The lab found 'Novocho' in pure and I pure state. If we believe OPCW assertion that they have chain of custody (no reason not to at this point) then it's logical to conclude that the 'Novochok' Is likely to have been administered to Skripal shortly before the sample was taken.

This leads to the interesting question whether samples were taken from BOTH Skripal's or only Mr. Skripal. Prehaps Yulia was not given the 'Novochok' and that's why she "recovered" much sooner?

Jackrabbit , Apr 29, 2018 1:14:11 PM | 95
Typo. Should be "pure and impure"
Ort , Apr 29, 2018 1:30:16 PM | 96
@ Kalen | 38
_____________________________

I've gotten somewhat inured or indifferent to the endless, churning speculation about what happened to the Skripals, most of which relies upon manifestly unverified and untrustworthy reports from various complicit individuals and organizations with strong motivations to deceive the public. But your scenario is indeed novel and quite plausible, so thanks.

I was reminded of a UK journalist infogandist bumptiously questioning some Russian embassy official recently; this would-be reporter parried the Russian's complaint about Yulia's sequestration by sharply positing that Yulia may be averse to meeting with Russian embassy staff because she "is afraid for her life".

At the time, it was obvious enough that this reporter was advancing the narrative that demonizes the sinister Russians in every possible manner. But this tendentious query is certainly consistent with your idea that Yulia is being "played" by both her UK captors and a complicit father.
_____________________________

Regarding another line of speculation: I have no technical qualifications to assess the merits of the speculation about the toxic substances. But on general principles of rational skepticism, I strongly doubt the ambiguous suggestion that an old and/or significantly deteriorated quantity of A-234 or other "nerve agent", possibly possessed by expatriate Russian criminals and ne'er-do-wells, was used to poison the Skripals.

I concede that "anything" is possible . But it simply strikes me as implausibly far-fetched-- and, even worse, it obliquely reinforces the official Big Lie. That is, postulating the use of some deteriorated chemical weapon: 1) supports the preposterous original claim that a powerful nerve agent was indeed deployed, and; 2) supports the speculation that the UK government itself is really a victim, or target, of the "real" perpetrators.

The UK's official response is not that of an innocent party-- a target or victim-- determined to forthrightly and transparently determine the truth of the matter. Introducing the red herring of some malicious independent actor(s) using some mysterious supply of an unpredictable chemical weapon seems inherently disinformational, and further muddies the water.

Peter AU 1 , Apr 29, 2018 1:50:11 PM | 97
Jackrabbit, the policeman recovered quickly, perhaps a dose of Fentanyl only, whereas Skripals hit with Fetanyl, then later hit with BZ? Or all three hit with Fetanyl only Skripals recovering about the same time as policeman but held incommunicado.
From the medical journal it seems Fetanyl was the diagnosis (for all three?) in the first 24 hrs. BZ and A-234 only show up in the OPCW report?

Fetanyl in an aerosol, Skripals hit with it at the park bench, whatever it was delivered in left at the scene? Bailey first copper on the scene picks it up and gives himself a mild dose?

Piotr Berman , Apr 29, 2018 1:57:37 PM | 98
Re: BZ as control, Jackrabbit @93

IMHO, OPCW should release the primary data rather than edited conclusions. Scientifically, edited conclusions have no value without raw data being available and open to alternative analysis. For examples, the spectrum generated by a substance added to a blood sample after it is collected should be different from a substance that the subject had it his/her organism for several weeks before blood sample was collected. "Detecting" a substance covers a variety of possibilities. The phenomenon of bending interpretations according to a pet theory is actually frequent in science setting, but if findings are important, raw data is re-analyzed, additional experiments may be performed (e.g. is this stuff REALLY that toxic? can it have a delayed onset of symptoms? what is the chance of synchronized delayed onset?) Pet theories may misleadingly fit prior experience of the researchers, help getting funding, help financial stakes of a company etc., and in this case, promote a certain type of international crisis. Whatever the mischief potential there may be, releasing primary data became a standard for publications in biomedical research, and it should apply in this case too.

Peter AU 1 , Apr 29, 2018 1:58:28 PM | 99
Jackrabbit
or as you say a mix of Fetanyl and BZ, hospital blood tests picking up the Fetanyl but not checking for BZ? The policeman receiving a much lighter dose due to handling whatever was used to administer the stuff.
Masshole , Apr 29, 2018 2:10:20 PM | 100
In 2016 Salisbury had a spike in Fentanyl OD cases. The local emergency services were surely aware of the symptoms and effects of such a substance.

You might want to reconsider this argument. Your link from the local Newburyport Alefish wrap refers to Salisbury, Massachusetts, not England. By the way, we locals consider Fentanyl a perfectly acceptable response to Austerity.

[Apr 29, 2018] How False Flag Operations Are Carried Out Today

Notable quotes:
"... ruse de guerre ..."
"... Today's false flag operations are generally carried out by intelligence agencies and non-government actors including terrorist groups, but they are only considered successful if the true attribution of an action remains secret. ..."
"... That means that when the media is trumpeting news reports that the Russians or Chinese hacked into U.S. government websites or the sites of major corporations, it could actually have been the CIA carrying out the intrusion and making it look like it originated in Moscow or Beijing. Given that capability, there has been considerable speculation in the alternative media that it was actually the CIA that interfered in the 2016 national elections in the United States. ..."
Apr 29, 2018 | russia-insider.com

How False Flag Operations Are Carried Out Today "The lesson that should be learned from Syria and Skripal is that if "an incident" looks like it has no obvious motive behind it, there is a high probability that it is a false flag"

-- take it from Philip Giraldi, a veteran of the CIA of 20 years Philip Giraldi Sat, Apr 28, 2018 | 4,379 146 MORE: Politics False Flag is a concept that goes back centuries. It was considered to be a legitimate ploy by the Greeks and Romans, where a military force would pretend to be friendly to get close to an enemy before dropping the pretense and raising its banners to reveal its own affiliation just before launching an attack. In the sea battles of the eighteenth century among Spain, France and Britain hoisting an enemy flag instead of one's own to confuse the opponent was considered to be a legitimate ruse de guerre , but it was only "honorable" if one reverted to one's own flag before engaging in combat.

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

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

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

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

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

IllyaK • 2 days ago ,

The USA and other transgender members of the "international community" no longer require proof or evidence. They are conditioned to believe whatever dogshit lies the Jew media's queer coiffed henchmen say. No matter how ridiculous.So as long as they re-enforce the post-modern soullessness narrative of homosexual auto-eroticism.

There is a reason why TV shows like 'Dancing With The Stars' and 'reality' TV dominate the collective self-absorbed psyche of meathead robots: one hundred years of Jungian and Freudian conditioning bullshit feed their need for fantasy - anything to escape their reality of bad hair, 44" waist, drunkenness, base greed, and self-hatred. The Need for Greed.

Just cater to the uneducated swine's basest desires and they'll happily tongue their master's rectums.

The west is into scat porn, gay pride parades, "feeling good about yourself", self-help, getting pissed off at the Walmart crackheads because they don't stock dildos with the correct curvature you desire, etc.

Tell me how a defunct species of automatic self-loathing shit-eaters with a victim-complex can do anything But believe the sexy blonde bimbo with an Adam's Apple reciting today's talking points?

The craven papal Jew-worshiping west are quietly self-medicating into non-existence in their prophylactic hygienic masturbatory GMO ass-perfumed bubbles. Occasionally one of them goes apeshit and shoots-up a school or something.

And2 Russell McGinnis • a day ago ,

Chilling ..reading my own observations and semi formed opinion in someone else's point is ....chilling

Realist Joel Paul Stelt • 17 hours ago ,

Recent mass shooting have too many unanswered questions. Strange circumstances lead one to believe they are false flags to promote gun confiscation.

Billo Joel Paul Stelt • a day ago ,

Most of them were hoaxes.

Franz Kafka Joel Paul Stelt • a day ago ,

"...mind controlled automatons controlled through drugs and remote EM voices directing their behavior..."
That sounds like the job description of CIANN.

And2 IllyaK • a day ago ,

Dildos with the correct curvature .
Rothflmao
Been reading ya for years illya.
That was by far the most memorable line you've penned this year .
Great rant .

Jasonovich IllyaK • a day ago ,

Everything you said Illyak, resonates with me. Your words intelligently crafted. It is a reflection of Western Society, where virtual signalling has replaced honest discussion.

The Western media creates a vacuum and the masses get sucked into the void, they are in a vegetative state, they disengage with reality. Even when basic common-sense hits you in the face, these people have the tenacity to accept as gospel the liars and deceits of their Governments. If you hear BS repeatedly and you are of simple disposition, you will eventually eat the BS, you will speak it and accept it as de-facto.

Much of the West live in a distorted reality field, these people have been embellished on tropes of 'Western Values' and failing to operate within the parameters, will ultimately exclude you from the collective mainstream, thus rendering you a conspiracy theorist or deranged person and further more you will be considered as a maverick person, who's unable to inflict upon thyself 'victim masturbation' or accept that there are other groups (Jews) more deserving than you.

Anti_Globalista IllyaK • a day ago ,

In a few words: It is easy to rule morons, and sell them whatever you want.

Franz Kafka IllyaK • a day ago ,

Since they need no evidence of gender either, just a daily 'mood', their departure from 'reality' is not surprising.

tomo stojanovic Franz Kafka • a day ago ,

anything that makes Anglosheeple disconnect more from reality, from their own instincts and biology, and from other people is encouraged by the Empire of SLAVES

Tillthetruth IllyaK • a day ago ,

My only Flaw in your comment is the 44 inch waist as that is now about the size they Strive to Slim Down to now
A comment made on here about two year's ago has alway's stuck in my mind was "How come British Women's bottom's start behind Their knee's"

tomo stojanovic IllyaK • a day ago ,

as someone who spent more than a decade living in the US and as many years in the UK - I fully agree with your analysis. You just forgot to mention religion - and sexual mutilation of baby boys (only in the US are boys routinely circumcised as far as I know in all other places it's only Jews and Muslims who do it). Religion makes them slavish and fearful of their imaginary and other masters from early childhood.

IllyaK tomo stojanovic • a day ago ,

Circumcision is a brutal ancient practice that is no longer justifiable in modern civilization.

I have no problem with religion except for the evangelical cults like Catholicism and it's various psychotic offshoots. It's mostly paganistic.

Orthodox, Buddhism, Taoism, Shinto, the Eskimos...I/m ok with that.

Did you know that John XXIII was the ONLY non-Jewish pope?

Franz Kafka IllyaK • a day ago ,

Love your Nabokovian Jeremiad by the way!
"Occasionally one of them goes apeshit and shoots-up a school or something."
That reminds me of Winston in Nineteen Eighty Four.
The net was there to catch the outliers. In fact, the state ran the
'resistance'

Massi Gusoni Franz Kafka • a day ago ,

. In fact, the state ran the
'resistance'

Jed Grover IllyaK • 2 days ago ,

Not this American! I consider the tax extorting, mafia style Shameless Sam to be treasonous and should be on trial in an International court and many of the serial lying neocons who have been pushing our tyrannous foreign policy executed. The past five POTUS including Cheney and HRC should be held accountable.

IllyaK Jed Grover • 2 days ago ,

No member of The Tribe will ever be held accountable for anything, ever....unless they try taking on Russia. Then they will swing. And the world will rejoice.

And2 Jed Grover • a day ago ,

Not this Canadian.
Tho ..its a river to be pushed up a mountain for the rest of my folks to wake up .

Franz Kafka And2 • a day ago ,

Is it the Soma that Turdeau legalised that makes canadians so dopey?

And2 Franz Kafka • a day ago ,

Flouride..its everywhere up here.

Java Ape Timelord IllyaK • 2 days ago ,

Yeah, do not hold back lllyak

Scandinavia - Java Ape Timelord • 2 days ago ,

View Hide

Java Ape Timelord Scandinavia - • 2 days ago ,

The Labour party has become anti-labour (i.e. working class) and Liberal party (*1) has become anti-liberal (i.e. anto human rights).

*1 Tory in UK.

Dr. Pro Liv Scandinavia - • 2 days ago ,

This message is lacking viable alternative but still better than nothing.
"Falling" for Dr. Ron Paul would not be "dumb" at all.
It would have saved U.S. of coming collapse....But than why would I care?!
U.S. being aggressor Empire and all, they are doing me a favor really with their votes...
Trump
rimes
the swamp!

Robert Mcconnell IllyaK • 5 hours ago ,

Brilliant.

Realist IllyaK • 17 hours ago ,

"There is a reason why TV shows like 'Dancing With The Stars' and 'reality' TV dominate the collective self-absorbed psyche of meathead robots"

Exactly the majority of white Americans are shallow idiots. They are participating in their own genocide.

commonsenseadvocate IllyaK • 21 hours ago ,

I think you pretty much summed it up.

Barnabus IllyaK • a day ago ,

OMG thats awesome such eloquence

Tam Mailer IllyaK • 19 hours ago ,

LMAO

cap960 IllyaK • a day ago ,

Agree. Repeat a lie a 100 Times and people will believe it to be true...Lenin

CHUCKMAN • 2 days ago ,

Yes, the same tricks keep being played by those in power, and they include more than just false flags.

Why should that be so? Because they still work.

Even the relative failures like the recent one in Syria (relative failure because millions know it was a fraud) give arrogant leaders who want to do something a public excuse for doing it, even when the excuse is weak and subject to controversy. It is their own people they are largely aiming at, people breathing the same atmosphere of misinformation and suspicion.

As Lord Acton said, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

tomo stojanovic CHUCKMAN • a day ago ,

the bigger problem is that most (or all ) Americans I know don't actually want to hear about what is really going on.
They have been brainwashed from very early to value UNREALITY much more than the actual reality. Once you convince sheeple to think that way (and to actually fear reality) - they will happily lie to themselves - you don't even need to lie to them any more

[Apr 29, 2018] NEO - The Simple Truth of Vladimir Putin's Diabolical Plan by Phil Butler

Notable quotes:
"... "We believe that at the very least we should wait for the results of the UN inspection commission in Syria. I've already said I find it absolutely ridiculous that [Syrian] government's armed forces, which today are actually on an offense mission and in some regions have already encircled the so-called rebels and are finishing them off, that the Syrian army has used prohibited chemical weapons." ..."
Apr 29, 2018 | www.veteranstoday.com

In the New York Times last week, veteran reporter Neil MacFarquhar reminded us Vladimir Putin's "fight" with the West is isolating Russia. The Middle East expert's latest Russia hate also interpolated that the woeful isolation is failing to deter Putin. But what is it that Putin is fighting against? What is the so-called "West" trying to deter him from? Better still, where is the evidence of his cunning plan to destroy all?

I do not know why, but to my knowledge, no one has ever asked these simple questions. Here we are in a new and bitter Cold War, and nobody I can name has any reasonable explanation of what the fight is about.

There are allegations by the truckload. There's sanctions, proxy wars, terrorists scattered, CIA money spent, dignitaries tossed out on their ears, and ten thousand news outlets screaming "Putin foul" – but over what? You can't answer because it's all over nothing. Here's a brief history of the real crimes of Vladimir Putin.

In the early 2000s, Vladimir Putin was running a country almost destroyed by corruption, foreign interventions, and pirates bent on privatizing anything of value for western investors. The advance of the globalist doctrine had reached the borders of the country; wars were brewed in former Soviet republics where regime changes and color revolutions were not working.

The notorious Russian mob, the Israeli mob, anybody inside the country that could be bought by western pirates was taking a bite from the Russian legacy. Putin stepped in and sorted it out. Putin did not sell Russia out. This was a capital crime.

Later in the decade, Vladimir Putin proposed an initiative known as the "Vladivostok to Lisbon" protocol. The plan was for one gigantic Eurasian market worth tens of trillions of dollars. The plan was for a full and fair integration of Russia within the global context. Only the plan made Russia an integral partner rather than a network of small banana republics like Yugoslavia became.

The Putin plan would have assured almost unbreakable cooperation, prosperity, and peace. But the suggestion of such a thing to the existing world order was a heinous crime.

When 2009 rolls around and the world's fascination with then Prime Minister Putin grows. The New York Times back then questioned the Russian leader's work ethic. Western media reported Putin singing "Blueberry Hill" and playing the piano. And the Washington Post begins the rail about "Putin, the killer." Then in 2010, the heat was turned up.

US newspapers began the "huge protest" gambit, Putin the arch criminal became all the rage. The Vladimir Putin legend began to grow during this time. Rumors and speculation became the flavor of the day. Then in 2011, the Russian leader went so far as to criticize the West for the Libya regime change. And we all know how Libya turned out.

Starting in 2012 the mainstream media in the West began predicting the downfall of Vladimir Putin. The Economist titled its prediction. "The beginning of the end of Putin." So much for deep economic analysis and forecasting. It is in this year that Masha Gessen gets the big headlines for labeling Vladimir a "crime boss" and a homophobe.

Meanwhile, the real criminals like Mikhail Khodorkovsky gather steam for the lies and mudslinging to come. NPR and other corporate owned media get readers by labeling Putin a "street thug" and etc. But Putin won the election that year anyhow. And even though The Slate labeled him "Putin the pitiful," he somehow managed the biggest country in the world skillfully. Pussy Riot defiles a Russian Orthodox Church snagging some jail time, and down the rabbit hole we go.

Then in 2013 the world's biggest ever arch villain commits the ultimate sacrilege. At the moment then President Barack Obama is gathering his forces to invade Syria, Russia's leader pecks out a plea to the American people in the New York Times.

Then, on the eve of a fateful vote in the US Congress on Obama's decision to launch strikes against Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, Putin mediates by instigating a proposal for Syria to surrender all chemical weapons.

This was too much for the gilded world order; the gloves had to come off. Meanwhile, Obama and his CIA had already created the proxy war against Assad. But the American people were never told.

Funny isn't it, how overt Putin moves are eviler than covert killing by America? But Russia's leader became the alchemist of truth, look at his words of warning on alleged gas attacks back then:

"We believe that at the very least we should wait for the results of the UN inspection commission in Syria. I've already said I find it absolutely ridiculous that [Syrian] government's armed forces, which today are actually on an offense mission and in some regions have already encircled the so-called rebels and are finishing them off, that the Syrian army has used prohibited chemical weapons."

Almost a year passed until I first learned of the "hell bent" onslaught on anything attached to Vladimir Putin and Russia when the 2014 Sochi Olympics rolled around. The bristling gay globalists had no intention of letting the Russia people welcome the world to their country. Putin had to pay for his past daring.

So, Russia bashing took on a whole new meaning. Bad sportsmanship was also redefined when a people created a showpiece and an unparalleled spectacle, only to be insulted and criticized at every turn. Dog packs, unworking toilets, gay skier hunts, unfinished hotels, an environmental catastrophe once again wrought by our ghastly arch villain. The world order taught Putin a lesson in those days. "Mess with us, and we'll piss on your parade."

This was the message. Then the Euromaidan and an illegal regime change in the midst of an Olympics forced diabolical Putin's hand again. Instead of allowing Russia's most strategic position in the southwest to be taken over by NATO, he instead chose to secure it without firing a shot. Crimea should have been seeded to the global hegemony – but Putin dared to resist. For shame.

Since 2014 Vladimir Putin has been blamed for the downing of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 and without a smidgen of proof. He's had the gall to ask the world order "Do you even realize what you have done?" And this, before the mighty United Nations and in front of God and everybody else. Our crystal ball at The Economist proclaimed "Putin declares war on the West," and we believed them.

He revealed the United States was backing terrorism in the Middle East, and then he televised his forces destroying ISIS. In 2016 NBC News proclaimed; " US Officials: Putin Personally Involved in US Election Hack ." Amazingly, no pictures of Putin using his laptop to hack the DNC emerged.

And the people of the world failed to notice the lack of evidence. For nearly two years now the world has investigated Putin over alleged tampering in the US election. Can you guess what body of evidence has been shown officially or in the media?

Damn that Putin for being so flawless and diabolical a villain! His utter control of every evil deed on planet Earth is being hidden from us. And oh, so skillfully that armies of brilliant private eyes, investigative journalists, whistleblowers, think tanks, the CIA, the NSA, MI6, GCHQ, Mossad, the Pentagon, Naval Intelligence, Senate committees, or even David Copperfield can turn over one leaf of evidence.

This, my friends, is Putin's greatest delinquency against humanity. He is guilty as sin of the real delinquency, the sin of ancient logic. The reason there we cannot see proof of Putin's misdeeds is stunningly simple.

There is no proof.

Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, he's an author of the recent bestseller " Putin's Praetorians " and other books. He writes exclusively for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook."

[Apr 29, 2018] Donald Trump CNN's James Clapper Is 'a Lying Machine'

Apr 29, 2018 | www.breitbart.com

President Donald Trump berated former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper on Twitter Saturday after it was revealed he denied speaking to journalists about the contents of the unproven Democrat-funded "dossier" before admitting doing so.

"Clapper lied about (fraudulent) Dossier leaks to CNN," Trump wrote. "He is a lying machine who now works for Fake News CNN."

In a report released by the House Intelligence Committee, investigators wrote that Clapper "flatly denied" speaking to journalists about the dossier, despite admitting later in the interview that he discussed it with CNN's Jake Tapper:

Former DNI James Clapper first told the House Intel Committee he never discussed the dossier with journalists. Then he later admitted discussing the dossier with CNN's Jake Tapper around the time CNN reported that Obama and Trump got a briefing on it. pic.twitter.com/M09rQiiTf0

-- Kristina W⬛️g 🇺🇸 (@kristina_wong) April 27, 2018

After CNN reported on the dossier and BuzzFeed published the full document in January 2017, Clapper expressed "profound dismay" at the leaks, calling it "extremely corrosive and damaging to national security."

Clapper joined CNN as a national security analyst in August 2017.

"Clapper lied about (fraudulent) Dossier leaks to CNN" @foxandfriends FoxNews He is a lying machine who now works for Fake News CNN.

-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 28, 2018

[Apr 29, 2018] Immigration and identity politics

Apr 29, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

cynical_bystander -> StevoT , 24 Apr 2018 05:41

If you are saying that their expertise lies elsewhere, that is surely self-evident?
Crazymoomin , 24 Apr 2018 05:37

Working-class white people may claim to be against identity politics, but they actually crave identity politics.

I think they probably see it more of a "if you can't beat them, join them" scenario. They see the way the wind is blowing and decide if they want representation, they have to play the game, even if they don't really like the rules.

Ron Jackson -> CharlesBradlaugh , 24 Apr 2018 05:30
No sloth will make you live in poverty, unless you are actually the animal the sloth.
StevoT -> cynical_bystander , 24 Apr 2018 05:28
The detail. They don't know the detail. They don't have the expertise. Which is what this article is about.

They don't know what they're talking about, even if they do know what they want.

cynical_bystander -> StevoT , 24 Apr 2018 05:22
.... but see my previous post.

They know enough about the EU to know that it isn't one of their patrons and sponsors. They also know that Westminster have been systematically misrepresenting the EU for their own purposes for decades, and they can use the same approach.

What more is required?

CharlesBradlaugh -> Ron Jackson , 24 Apr 2018 05:15
are we supposed to be impressed by your middle income? Poverty is not caused by sloth.
CharlesBradlaugh -> Ron Jackson , 24 Apr 2018 05:12
This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards . Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs .
Ron Jackson -> CharlesBradlaugh , 24 Apr 2018 05:08
Not a fool and I don't hate anyone at 55 I have 1.2M in investments, I make 165k a year and pay 40k+ a year in taxes. I to come across people who live off of we everyday and expect to free load. I am not a blowhard just an engineer who pays for sloth.
KeyboardChimp , 24 Apr 2018 05:07
Non expert berating non experts. The Michael Massing paradox.
CharlesBradlaugh -> Ron Jackson , 24 Apr 2018 04:57
I've met many fools like you in my over 50 years on the planet, blowhards parading their ignorance as a badge of pride, thinking that their hatred of anyone not exactly like them is normal, mistaking what some cretin says on the far right radio for fact.

You people would be comical if not for the toxicity that your stupidity engenders.

Monkeybiz -> SteveofCaley , 24 Apr 2018 04:51
It's a play on the motto "One country under God". Rather clever, I thought.
Monkeybiz -> Andrew Nichols , 24 Apr 2018 04:50
Yes, there is a deep lack of context and hence dilution of meaning as a result
Monkeybiz -> Navarth , 24 Apr 2018 04:48
Al Jazeera tries to do a better job, at least providing a spectrum of opinion and a lot of depth in quite a few issues, something most other networks fail to do these days.
StevoT -> cynical_bystander , 24 Apr 2018 04:48
Don't think I am confusing anything.

My point was about expertise. Brexiteers have goals about which I agree with you.

My point is that they don't know about the subject, the EU, which they are using to achieve their goals.

Monkeybiz -> breitling1884 , 24 Apr 2018 04:47
Really? Were they repeated?
cynical_bystander -> StevoT , 24 Apr 2018 04:37
Don't fall into the associated trap either, of the false equation between STATED and ACTUAL goals.

Fox and Hunt are fully aware that to actually admit their actual goal, would be (probably) just about the only thing which would provoke an electoral backlash which would sweep the Conservatives from office. The NHS is proverbially "the nearest thing the English have, to a religion" and is a profoundly dangerous subject for debate.

Fox and Hunt may be weaving an incomprehensible web of sophistry and misdirection, but no part of it is accidental.

StevoT -> cynical_bystander , 24 Apr 2018 04:31
Don't disagree with this. Doesn't mean they know what they are talking about.
cynical_bystander -> StevoT , 24 Apr 2018 04:12
Please, please don't make the unfounded assumption that people like Fox, Johnson, Cameron et al are as stupid as they sometimes appear.

Fox and Hunt, in particular, know exactly what they are engaged in - a hard-right coup designed to destroy government control over the NHS and route its enormous cash flows into the pockets of their private, mostly American sponsors. It isn't necessary to look far, to discover their connections and patronage from this source.

Johnson is consumed by ambition, as was Cameron before him; like Cameron, he makes much of his self-presumed fitness for the role, whilst producing no supporting evidence of any description.

Brexit, as defined by its advocates, CANNOT be discussed precisely because no rational debate exists. It hinges upon the Conservative Party's only fear, that of disunity leading to Opposition. They see that Labour are 50-odd seats short of a majority, and that's ALL they see.

cynical_bystander -> aurelian , 24 Apr 2018 04:06
What in God's green world are you talking about? Did you read that before pressing "Post"? It's obvious that you have no knowledge whatsoever of the subject.

The "race riots" of the 1940s and 1950s were essentially about employment protection (the first, regarding the importation of Yemeni seamen into the North-East of England). The mostly Pakistani influx into the North-West of England was an attempt to cut labour costs and prop up a dying, obsolete industry, mortally wounded by the loss of its business model in the aftermath of Empire; an industry whose very bricks and mortar are long since gone, but the imported labour and their descendants remain... the influx of Caribbean labour into London and the South-East was focussed around the railways and Underground, to bolster the local labour force which had little interest in dead-end shift-work jobs in the last days of steam traction and the increasingly run-down Underground.

Labour, in those days, was strongly anti-immigration precisely because it saw no value in it, to their unionised, heavy-industry voter base.

Regarding the ideological, anti-British, anti-democratic nature of Labour's conversion to mass immigration, you need only read the writings and speeches of prominent figures of the day such as Roy Hattersley and Harriet Harman, who say exactly this, quite clearly and in considerable detail. Their ideological heirs, figures like Diane Abbot (who is stridently anti-white and anti-British), Andrew Neather and Hazel Blears, can speak for themselves.

sgwnmr -> SteveofCaley , 24 Apr 2018 03:50
I guess you're of the "when I'm doubt talk gibberish" school of argument capitulation.
StevoT , 24 Apr 2018 03:17
I was recently struck by this part of the Guardian obituary of Lady Farrington of Ribbleton:

' she possessed the important defining characteristic that, above others, wins admiration across all the red leather benches in the House of Lords: she knew what she was talking about'

Too often these days we are governed by people who don't know what they are talking about. Never has this been truer than the likes of Fox, Davis, Johnson, and other Brexiteers.

But this doesn't seem to matter much anymore. At times it seems that anyone can make generised assertions about something, without having to back them up with evidence, and then wave away questions about their veracity.

Opinion now trumps evidence regularly, even on the BBC where Brexit ideology is often now given a free pass. The problem for those of us who value expertise is that with the likes of Trump, and some EU Leavers, we are up against a bigotry which is evangelical in nature. A gospel that cannot be questioned, a creed that allows no other thinking.

SteveofCaley -> sgwnmr , 24 Apr 2018 02:37
The best you can do is complain about "this?" This WHAT? Try a noun. You're being an embarrassment to troglodytes everywhere. Don't just point and leap up and down. Your forefathers died in bringing you a language. Be an expressive hominid and name the thing that hurts.
gilstra , 24 Apr 2018 02:29
It seems at the moment the Guardian also suffers from a glut of experts without expertise. Not a day goes by that my jaw doesn't drop at some inane claim made by what seems to be a retinue of contributors who have neither good writing skills nor a particularly wide look on things. An example today: "Unlike Hillary Clinton, I never wanted to be someone's wife". How extraordinary. Who says she ever 'wanted to be someone's wife'? Maybe she fell in love with someone all those years ago and they decided to get married? Who knows. But sweeping statements like that do not endear you to quite a few of your once very loyal readers. It's annoying.
aurelian -> cynical_bystander , 24 Apr 2018 02:03
I think this posits an overriding explanation for people's actions that doesn't exist. Even the idea that immigration is a new liberal plot. Take the wind rush generation of immigrants while there was a Tory government at the time I think the idea this was an attempt to undermine white working class gains is provably nonsensical
cynical_bystander , 24 Apr 2018 01:21
The problem with this article, and the numerous other similar pieces which appear in the various editions of the Guardian on a "regular-and-often" basis, is that it completely avoids a very basic point, because it has no answer to it.

It is this.

The white British (and by extension, Western) populations never wanted mass immigration because they knew from the outset, that its purpose was to undermine the social and political gains they had wrested from the political and financial elite after 1945. They cared not at all for the fratricidal conflicts between alien religions and cultures, of which they knew little and regarded what they did know as unacceptable.

The US achieved a huge economic boom without it. Australia and New Zealand, Canada and the USA were popular destinations for the British population whose goal and mantra was "no return to the thirties" and who emigrated in large numbers.

White semi-skilled and unskilled (and increasingly, lower middle class) populations everywhere reject, and have always rejected third world mass immigration (and more recently, in some areas, mass emigration from the former Soviet Union) for the simple, and sufficient reason that they have no possible reason or incentive to support or embrace it. It offers them nothing, and its impact on their lives is wholly negative in practical terms - which is how a social group which lives with limited or no margins between income and outgoings, necessarily
perceives life.

Identity politics has no roots amongst them, because they correctly perceive that whatever answer it might produce, there is no possible outcome in which the preferred answer will be a semi-skilled, white family man. They inevitably pick up a certain level of the constant blare of "racist bigot, homophobe, Islsmophobia" from its sheer inescapability, but they aren't COMPLETELY stupid.

RalphDemming , 24 Apr 2018 01:00
Dumb and dumber writers...

[Apr 29, 2018] America is plagued by neocon experts without expertise

blowhards parading their ignorance as a badge of pride, thinking that their hatred of anyone not exactly like them is normal
Apr 29, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com
cynical_bystander -> StevoT , 24 Apr 2018 05:41
If you are saying that their expertise lies elsewhere, that is surely self-evident?
cynical_bystander -> StevoT , 24 Apr 2018 04:37
Don't fall into the associated trap either, of the false equation between STATED and ACTUAL goals.

Fox and Hunt are fully aware that to actually admit their actual goal, would be (probably) just about the only thing which would provoke an electoral backlash which would sweep the Conservatives from office. The NHS is proverbially "the nearest thing the English have, to a religion" and is a profoundly dangerous subject for debate.

Fox and Hunt may be weaving an incomprehensible web of sophistry and misdirection, but no part of it is accidental.

[Apr 29, 2018] Theresa May is especially good at vitriolic descriptions of entitities she wants the rest of us to hate and revile.

Apr 29, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Yaya April 22, 2018 at 9:22 am Good on Anon for not letting Israel off the hook!

I'm also pleased to see Margolis emphasize the role of Britain, and its talent for brutal name-calling. Theresa May is especially good at vitriolic descriptions of entitities she wants the rest of us to hate and revile. This was so evident in the speech her delegate gave to the OCPW (why that was even allowed is beyond me, since the OCPW is supposed to be impartial) that it was almost laughable. Well, I actually did laugh at one point.
https://www.yayacanada.ca/home/theresa-may-star-of-stage-screen-and-parliament

And kudos big-time to Consortium News for carrying on so beautifully the legacy of your lost leader. I particularly appreciated the sane and cogent articles concerning the so-called Russian Hack Myth, and keep them with others in sidebar of my blog.

[Apr 27, 2018] Atlantist Merkel on Iran deal

Apr 27, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

This so disgusting

Existing Iran deal 'not sufficient' to curb nuclear program - Merkel
https://www.rt.com/news/425345-existing-iran-deal-not-sufficient/

Posted by: test | Apr 27, 2018 2:31:46 PM | 123 karlof1 , Apr 27, 2018 3:00:58 PM | 124

test @123--

If Merkel refers to a total cessation of Iran's nuclear program, then she's technically correct. Except, the deal wasn't made to attain that outcome as Iran was not going to relinquish its rights under the NPT. And just what are "the problems with Iran" Merkel alludes to? Iran's helping to defeat NATO's terrorists within Iraq and Syria? Insisting the Outlaw US Empire obey International Law and abandon its illegal incursion into Syria? Trying to awaken the real International Community to the massive crime being committed daily in Yemen and the longstanding ongoing crime against Palestinian peoples by Zionists? Seems to me those are Merkel's problems, not a problem with Iran.

test , Apr 27, 2018 3:27:37 PM | 125
karlof1

Merkel is a symbol for Germany in this regard, a puppet to american interest, add to that the sucking up o israel and the result
is a vassal neocon-zionist warbent regime.
Will Germany be part of another conflict of war, this time with Iran? Crazy state (no offense to germans, this is the illogical behaviour by all of eu which of course not will follow Germany and thus US in its new warmongering).

[Apr 26, 2018] Even The Simpsons' writers weren't absurdist enough to come up with a President Haley.

Notable quotes:
"... Haley is a fool and grotesquely ignorant. ..."
"... She is a vile creature who has no contact with truth whatsoever. Does Trump not see this at all? Perhaps he does in a dim way, but by now he is so suborned and by the Deep State and depressed by the relentless opposition that he is probably glad no one is criticizing his U.N. appointment at least. ..."
"... Haley ran for governor of SC as the "tea party" candidate. She killed the careers of a number of would be Republican establishment politicians, which is why many voted for her. In other words, she is a total opportunist, a classic, typical unprincipled Republican. ..."
"... She has learned how to manipulate the system up to a certain point, but is too dumb to go any further. How sad that people like Adelson are able to buy elections. ..."
"... Ask Mike Pence. She's Pence's pick. Pence wants a fellow Ziocon stooge at the UN instead of pro Assad Tulsi Gabbard. ..."
"... She is not a moron; rather smart, clever and articulate riding on the wings of the jew to power. Immorality is her shield, no one her judge, americans a lower caste, the jew a higher caste. ..."
"... Nikki Haley is just a bit-part actress similar to the talented & useful woman featured in LeCarre's complex but educational novel "The Little Drummer Girl." ..."
"... Most men don't like their trophy wives either, that is, they like them at first but the match soon deteriorates from there. They tend to look good in the original packaging but are way overpriced and not worth the money. Buyers remorse is the rule rather than the exception. ..."
"... Nimrata the neocon harpy is just one of the gifts that the 1965 immigration and naturalization act keeps on giving. She's the Republican version of Hildabeast Clinton. ..."
"... "Nikki Haley in a nutshell: stupid; big mouth; infantile understanding of foreign affairs; easily manipulated; will do anything for more money and attention; and a total dumbshit sellout to Israel with zero integrity, morality, or empathy. " ..."
"... Hmmmm. A typical Trump appointee. Trump saw her qualifications and just had to have her on his team. He sees himself in her, y'know. ..."
"... The mistake here is to talk about the "US". The "US" (as in the population of the United States), have no to say in any of this. They voted against war but it was pointless (Trump is ramping up the pressure on Russia and Iran) and that crowd of US "consumers" is as politically useless as it gets. ..."
Apr 26, 2018 | www.unz.com

Fran800 , April 24, 2018 at 5:58 am GMT

I have noticed Haley's awfulness from the beginning, which I see is now 15 months. Awful though Bolton is, one feels that he has some knowledge that might even make him pull back from Armageddon (maybe, not sure).

But Haley is a fool and grotesquely ignorant. Notice how, in the alleged chemical attacks, she takes no thought or action at all to ascertain truth, but she outdoes herself trumpeting the harm caused, and the children suffering.

As if the fact that children are suffering somehow proves guilt. I can't imagine anything so ignorant.

She is a vile creature who has no contact with truth whatsoever. Does Trump not see this at all? Perhaps he does in a dim way, but by now he is so suborned and by the Deep State and depressed by the relentless opposition that he is probably glad no one is criticizing his U.N. appointment at least.

Realist , April 24, 2018 at 6:01 am GMT

Scarier Than John Bolton?

She's certainly dumber than Bolton.

Think of Nikki Haley for President!

If the electorate picks Haley, so be it.

NoseytheDuke , April 24, 2018 at 6:21 am GMT
@Fran800

Never dismiss the fool, for he wards no fear, no blame and and no trust. He sees no worth or value and can be swayed by the most trivial things. He seeks no reward but an emotional gratification. While these sound of a foe easily defeated the truth is oft the opposite for your threat and presence are fallen on the senseless. If you must fight a fool you must give him room and let hubris and frailty fight your war, otherwise, you must be swift, with out mercy and be able to ward the madness that will ensue.

I don't know who penned that but I think it's profound.

Pat Kittle , April 24, 2018 at 6:33 am GMT
Some of us once accepted the notion that when women got "empowered" the world would be a better place.
Anon [425] Disclaimer , Website April 24, 2018 at 6:45 am GMT
Nikki Haley's yappings are just the barking of a dog.

She has no agency. If she sounds 'scary', it's only because she is owned by Zionist globalist supremacists. If they ordered her to shut up and be nice to Russia and Iran, she will obey.

She has no mind of her own. Same with Bolton the Dolton.

Dan Hayes , April 24, 2018 at 6:56 am GMT
How did Nikki Haley ever manage to get elected in South Carolina?

Maybe for the same reason that Lindsey Graham gets reelected!

These two pliant tools are a very poor commentary on the political acumen of this states electorate!

Pissedoffalese , April 24, 2018 at 6:58 am GMT
And she's different from Samantha Power, how? Under Obomba

Or John Bolton under Bush the Lesser?

Seems to be a tradition in the making of putting the most arrogant, rude, least diplomatic, and aggressive person possible in the position of ambassador to the UN.

Has anybody ELSE been steady, three administrations, non-stop PUKING? Makes it clear, if nothing else, our "humanitarian" face has peeled off, revealing the brain-eating zombie underneath.

jilles dykstra , April 24, 2018 at 7:05 am GMT
When you confront staunch Israel supporters with the isolation of Israel in the world, as can be seen at UN voting, the answer is that this is because of the anti Israel Muslim bloc in the UN.
The weird thing about jews is that with all their cleverness they're unable to see reality.
Israel is right, the rest of the world is wrong.
Now even if this were the case, any sensible person would take reality into consideration.
Not so idiots as Netanyahu.
When the next jewish catastrophe has happened, jews again will see how how they are the eternal innocent victims, if then jews still will exist, as a nuclear world war is likely to kill any human being world wide.
Already around 1953 a USA diplomat said that Israel should behave as a small ME country, in stead of the head of an international group.
They still do not understand.
Pissedoffalese , April 24, 2018 at 7:12 am GMT
Once (Bolton) was kind of an anomaly, because, after all, it WAS Bush the Lesser.

But Nobel Peace Prize-sporting Obomba, puts in Power.

Now we got Haley.

Maybe TWICE is a co-inkydink, but this is absurd! Fucking EVERYBODY blows us away diplomatically! Who is worse? N. Korea does some wicked TWEETS, but their diplomats are circumspect. Ours are visibly RABID.

One of these days, someone is gonna put us out of their misery, and suck though it will, it will be highly deserved! Afterward, perhaps humans can progress once the USA is a giant smoking crater. Or at least D.C. Has ANYONE ever begged for it THIS bad? Ever?

Ludwig Watzal , Website April 24, 2018 at 7:52 am GMT
Nikki Haley is THE mouthpiece of the Zionist aggressive occupation regime. She serves its interests and acts to the detriment of the American people that have to carry the can for the partisanship with this rogue Zionist state. President Trump should sack her before she challenges him in the next presidential race. Haley will have the backing of the trigger-happy Ziocon establishment and the Zionist billionaires.

Together with John Bolton, they seem like the perfect "Doomsday Couple" to bring the U.S. down. Perhaps they are the last true believers in Zionism, the Jewish racist ideology, although both are not Jewish. It's not surprising that Jewish and American exceptionalism are similar in their racist beliefs.

Haley's behavior is hyperbolic, arrogant, and extremely dangerous to the reputation of the U. S. but it seems as if she acts according to the slogan: Freely you live, if you haven't a reputation to lose. But under the borderline Trump administration even a "un-American" behavior, it benefits the Zionist regime, seems acceptable.

So far, all so-called chemical weapons attacks by the al-Asad government were false flag attacks carried out either by al-Nusra, ISIS or al-Qaida terrorist organizations or by the "White Helmets" themselves that are a so-called a terrorist affiliate organization, disguised as paramedics, to draw the U. S. directly into the Syrian conflict.

Under Obama, they failed, and Trump made some symbolic bombings to pacify the trigger-happy Zionist lobby. How mentally deranged Haley seems, shows her arrogant statement: "We need to see Russia choose to side with the civilized world over an Assad government that brutally terrorizes its people."

With which "civilized world" should Russia take sides? Does Haley mean the U. S. or the Zionist occupation regime? The first one has slaughtered millions of people in endless wars, the later has been subjugated another people for over 50 years and destroyed its existence. This "civilized world" and its values are for the garbage dump.

Despite his twitter manticism, Trump was still a kind of common sense that can differentiate between the good for America in contrast to the good for Israel for the sake of the American people.

Achmed E. Newman , Website April 24, 2018 at 7:59 am GMT
Nikky Hailey is not only a stupid Globalist('s) bitch, but a traitor to the state of South Carolina. S. Carolinians will remember the flag.

Her appointment to the UN Ambassador position was the very 1st sign of President Trump's incompetence.

Mikhail , Website April 24, 2018 at 8:01 am GMT
@Duncan

Noeconservatives arguably don't have enough appeal for them to get the presidency. Unfortunately, they can still have clout as evidenced by Haley in her role and how the likes of MSNBC and CNN uncritically praise her.

On the subject of Haley:

https://www.eurasiareview.com/12042017-latest-bump-in-us-russian-relations-analysis/

http://www.eurasiareview.com/19042018-confronting-russia-in-syria-analysis/

falcemartello , Website April 24, 2018 at 8:30 am GMT
Well if she does make it to POTUS we have historical equivalence. The Dying days of the Roman western Empire. in the mid 4th century BC. Roman Empire at this stage had two imperial cities. one situated in ROME being hounded by the Goths and the other one in the East Byzantium present day Istanbul. The point is in the western dying Imperial days they put as emperor a child well Haley becomes POTUS one could only say History repeating itself. The scary thing about all this is pax-americana is slowly dying. Recent economic figures coming out of the west show this. All recent gains have nothing in common with industrial output. Profits are all related to the stockmarket grandest ponzi scheme in the history of western man.
Latest events from the Skripal imbroglio to Douma all show signs of desperation .
BY DECEPTION YOU MAY WAGE WAR.
Note the three countries that illegally bombed Syria on the sad nite of April 13th 2018 were the exact ring leaders to the total destruction of the highest standard of living of the African continent.
RINSE ,LATHER ,REPEAT.
Post Scriptum: It is sad and scary to see that from 1999 to this day not withstanding all the lies that NATO and FUKUS have spewed to the world and have been exposed as such we the sheeple can fall for the same trap.
THE WEST HAS ENTERED INTO THE WORLD OF ZOMBIES .
Critical thinking gets labelled as enemies of the state. Boy Goebbels must be so envious of recent events.
How Orwellian our western society has become.
Gordo , April 24, 2018 at 8:44 am GMT
"According to an international poll conducted in 2009, 58% of Indians expressed sympathy with Israel, compared with 56% of Americans"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India%E2%80%93Israel_relations

Just sayin.

mark green , April 24, 2018 at 8:46 am GMT
Another very good article by Philip Giraldi. If the US wasn't dominated by foreign agents and roving gangs of ziocon lobbyists, Giraldi would be widely respected, considered 'mainstream', and known to millions. But powerful forces are determined to prevent this.

What we get instead are empty suits reading scripts.

We live in an era where political extremism (aggressive war is a prime example of extremism) has been declared 'centrist' and 'moderate'. Advocates of non-intervention are labeled 'fringe'.

Political illusions happen. They happen by design.

Fortunately, Giraldi demonstrates a commendable ability to separate US interests from contrived foreign agendas. This is not often done. And he does it well.

For revealing this, Giraldi and a few other daring intellectuals have been defamed as 'far right'. Their sin? Telling the truth (to the best of their ability) about Zio-American malfeasance in American life and on the world stage.

Their quiet exile from the corridors of political power shows how debased and unmoored our culture has become. Giraldi's diminished status is the end-product of targeted censorship, economic sabotage, and strategic defamation. This phenomena affects us all.

What do we get instead?–delusional sell-outs like John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Hillary Clinton and Nikki Haley. Frauds all, including the journalists who adore them. The corruption in America is wide and deep.

Washington's queer political values are hopelessly under the thrall of liberal interventionists, ne0con militarists, televised war barkers, and deep state vampires. These amoral extremists have become America's political 'establishment'.

Trump notwithstanding, the Swamp, the alphabet government agencies, the two Parties, the major lobbies, donors, and NGOs (and of course, Big Media) are what rules America.

Average, non-organized voters have no political influence.

But it is our mainstream news and entertainment media that ultimately earns the most responsibility for Zio-Washington's trigger-happy embrace of aggressive militarism in all policies and instances that could affect Israel (which is virtually everything.)

This Zionist 'value' opens a very big door.

This commitment is a recipe for endless strife and intervention. Yet our media supports it. Continuously and uniformly.

And the chief beneficiary is (you guessed it).

Incredibly, Washington spends far more time agonizing over borders and security in the far-away shitholes (pardon the expression) than on our own southern border. Who dreamt up this ridiculous scheme?

This level of corrupt insanity did not happen by accident.

Incredibly, if enough empty suits and talking heads repeat a myth or falsehood enough times, it becomes 'true'. Voila! The magic of TV.

Political hallucinations and bizarre double standards become very real. Very 'true'.

Zio-America is morally-unhinged rogue superpower.

If you don't believe me, count the dead.

The Alarmist , April 24, 2018 at 10:31 am GMT
The problem with being arrogant when you are on top of the world is that you are remembered and reviled when you get knocked down a peg. The guys in the dock at Nuremburg learned that at the end of a rope. She'll never face that sort of justice, though, because we can't lose, right?
Greg Bacon , Website April 24, 2018 at 10:33 am GMT

The lack of any coherence in policy means that the State Department now has diplomats that do not believe in diplomacy and environment agency heads that do not believe in protecting the environment.

But I disagree, Mr. Giraldi! Their is coherence in State policy, that is to serve the State of Israel.

Nutty Nikki is idiotic, vindictive, hateful and very bellicose and would not hesitate to use our kids and tax dollars to support Apartheid Israel, and is loved by multi-billionaire Sheldon Adelson, which means she will be the next POTUS.

Anonymous [135] Disclaimer , April 24, 2018 at 12:10 pm GMT
Haley ran for governor of SC as the "tea party" candidate. She killed the careers of a number of would be Republican establishment politicians, which is why many voted for her. In other words, she is a total opportunist, a classic, typical unprincipled Republican.

She has learned how to manipulate the system up to a certain point, but is too dumb to go any further. How sad that people like Adelson are able to buy elections.

When is Trump going to prosecute Soros for conspiracy to interfere with the U.S. and other countries?

Sandy Berger's Socks , April 25, 2018 at 1:39 am GMT
There is no excuse for these awful appointments.

The lack of progress on immigration can, maybe, be explained as Trump faces fierce resistance, but Bolton, Haley, and Pompeo are unforced/forced errors, that will make it nearly immposible for him to keep his promise of ending these stupid wars.

Better than Hillary, but more than a little disappointing.

anon [248] Disclaimer , April 25, 2018 at 3:21 am GMT
Haley has too many skeletons in her closet to run for president. While running for SC governorship rumors of her affair with conservative blogger Will Folks surfaced. She tried to deny it of course, claiming to be "completely faithful" to her husband of 13 years, then Will Folks shared text messages and frequent, lengthy middle of the night phone calls between them, some as long as 180 minutes, all after 10pm (hey she had to put the kids to bed first):

https://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/HaireoftheDog/archives/2010/10/12/will-folks-releases-affidavit-detailing-haley-affair

And then, a second man, political consultant Larry Marchant, came out claiming he had one night stand with Haley. Of course, Haley also denied it.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/03/nikki-haley-affair-larry_n_599346.html

In his latest book, Michael Wolffe claimed that Nikki Haley had an affair with Trump, which Haley dismissed as "disgusting", one wonders if Trump took that as a compliment.

anon [248] Disclaimer , April 25, 2018 at 3:29 am GMT
@anon

Wouldn't surprise me one bit if Haley is sleeping with her current "advisor" at the UN (paid for by taxpayers btw) Jon Lerner, who she has also kindly shared with Mike Pence, one hopes only the advising part, not the bed, but who knows.

Something tells me she's sleeping with Netanyahu as well. She sure loves her Jewish men.

anon [248] Disclaimer , April 25, 2018 at 4:22 am GMT
@Buck Turgidson

Ask Mike Pence. She's Pence's pick. Pence wants a fellow Ziocon stooge at the UN instead of pro Assad Tulsi Gabbard.

anon [248] Disclaimer , April 25, 2018 at 4:34 am GMT
"Ambassadors" are supposed to make peace, but Trump who claimed he wanted to end all foreign wars end up with an ambassador to the World who only wants to make wars, with everybody! She even wanted Trump to send troops to Venezuela! Anytime Trump is within 10 ft of this mad woman, he's talking about bombing somebody.

Haley is the Ambassador of DEATH and DESTRUCTION.

RobinG , April 25, 2018 at 5:29 am GMT
@anon

Was there ever any evidence that Trump considered Tulsi for Amb. to UN? Wasn't that just goofy talk from Tulsi's fans?

I doubt she would have wanted it, anyway. Not exactly a step up, being appointed to a position from which you could be summarily dismissed .. as opposed to an elected official with a definite term and, other than pressure from the DNC – which she has handily bucked – freedom to express independent views.

Pandos , April 25, 2018 at 3:03 pm GMT
@Chris Bridges

She is not a moron; rather smart, clever and articulate riding on the wings of the jew to power. Immorality is her shield, no one her judge, americans a lower caste, the jew a higher caste.

follyofwar , April 25, 2018 at 5:38 pm GMT
@NoseytheDuke

I keep wondering why Trump has not fired that know-nothing. He's not been afraid to fire people for far less offenses against his Admin. I suspect that the Israel Lobby will not let him, and made him hire her in the first place. She used to be a "Never-Trumper," after all. In an otherwise fine piece, I wish that Giraldi would have opined as to why she's still there.

deschutes , April 25, 2018 at 6:11 pm GMT
Haley is a stupid, opportunistic woman who simply goes where the money is, and that is by doing the bidding of the Zionists in USA and Israel. The author even points out that her mentor is Zionist asswipe from the National Review Johah Goldberg's wife! She comes across as such a stupid woman that she perhaps doesn't realize she's being brainwashed and used as a UN mouthpiece of advance the Zionist Israeli agenda.

Nikki Haley in a nutshell: stupid; big mouth; infantile understanding of foreign affairs; easily manipulated; will do anything for more money and attention; and a total dumbshit sellout to Israel with zero integrity, morality, or empathy.

Well, what I'm trying to say, very sadly, is that this insufferable douchebag wench will most likely be your next president

anon [140] Disclaimer , April 25, 2018 at 7:06 pm GMT
@jacques sheete

Does a purportedly high IQ protect one from stupidity?

High IQ signals intelligence, but not wisdom. Wisdom comes from experience, and being able to apply your high IQ to learn from those experiences. Many high IQ people in fact lack practical wisdom a.k.a. common sense

...

ChuckOrloski , April 25, 2018 at 10:10 pm GMT
No doubt, it's hard especially for an ally (like me) to get under Philip Giraldi's thick-skin, but I am compelled to try now.

Nikki Haley is just a bit-part actress similar to the talented & useful woman featured in LeCarre's complex but educational novel "The Little Drummer Girl."

Indeed, she could become President of ZUS as could Oprah Winfrey. All originate from Jewish Central Casting, selection.

In closing, linked below is some homegrown CENSORSHIP originating from "The Land of Milk & Honey."

https://m.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Twitter-blocks-member-of-Knesset-who-said-Ahed-Tamimi-should-be-crippled-552625

That's all folks!

NoseytheDuke , April 25, 2018 at 10:11 pm GMT
@anon

Most men don't like their trophy wives either, that is, they like them at first but the match soon deteriorates from there. They tend to look good in the original packaging but are way overpriced and not worth the money. Buyers remorse is the rule rather than the exception.

Kratoklastes , April 25, 2018 at 11:27 pm GMT
@follyofwar

There are several reasons –

There are probably others – note that none of them has anything to do with diplomacy or international relations (except as a repudiation of the concepts).

Kratoklastes , April 25, 2018 at 11:31 pm GMT
Worse than Bolton? Hard to say.

Neither are effective at all: under both Bolton and now Haley (and "RicePower") the US has had to increase the baksheesh it distributes around the world in order to buy compliance and diplomatic support – they have, as a group been unable to slow the decline of US prestige.

So the 'operational' side of things is a wash.

Bolton's preternaturally unpersuasive, because he's a grotesque parody of a human being.

And there's where it gets interesting: there is upside risk to Haley if she were able to Clintonise herself – by which I mean behave more like Bill , not more like Hillary. If she was more 'aw-shucks', she would get more done (frankly I don't think that's her aim, because like all politicians she's interested in doing things for herself, not for her current boss).

Haley could be far more persuasive/effective because in her best moments she's quite personable (plus she's still very pretty when she turns on the charm, which is always a plus).

The downside is that her 'best' moments are very few and far between – she spends most of her time with that particularly waspish hate-face so common among formerly-pretty women who realise that their best years are behind them.

Frankly, the notion that she's a plausible presidential candidate is laughable: when the US does eventually elect a female president, the successful candidate will be whiter than the whitest Pilgrim.

It is beyond farcical to believe that the Republican voter base would elect a 'dusky' woman for the highest national office: bear in mind that Haley would be repudiated ex ante by Democrats because she's on the wrong side, and US presidential politics is almost entirely decided by base-mobilisation.

Deep down Haley probably realises this, and that will also be a source of rancour.

swimologist , Website April 26, 2018 at 12:22 am GMT
@Duncan

How exactly are these neocon Israel apologists created, vetted, accepted? It must be some weird ceremony that would make La Cosa Nostra look like a Ladies Garden Club invitation. By the way, 3,000 Palestinians weren't shot at the latest dustup.

KenH , April 26, 2018 at 12:51 am GMT
Nimrata the neocon harpy is just one of the gifts that the 1965 immigration and naturalization act keeps on giving. She's the Republican version of Hildabeast Clinton.

If she ever ascends to the throne in D.C. her "conservatism" will consist of militant philo-semitism while being liberal on social policy and a warhawk on foreign policy. Hannity will gush joyfully over her.

Twodees Partain , April 26, 2018 at 12:51 am GMT
@deschutes

"Nikki Haley in a nutshell: stupid; big mouth; infantile understanding of foreign affairs; easily manipulated; will do anything for more money and attention; and a total dumbshit sellout to Israel with zero integrity, morality, or empathy. "

Hmmmm. A typical Trump appointee. Trump saw her qualifications and just had to have her on his team. He sees himself in her, y'know.

Hibernian , April 26, 2018 at 2:09 am GMT
@exiled off mainstreet

You seem to be confusing the philosophy professor Van Den Haag with The Hague in The Netherlands.

Hibernian , April 26, 2018 at 2:22 am GMT
@JamesG

Patrick Fitzgerald of Scooter Libby Gate fame was a Manhattan doorman's son. The family lived in Brooklyn.

Miro23 , April 26, 2018 at 2:32 am GMT
@AnonFromTN

To keep the bluff going, the US can't afford to push the button. End of story.

The mistake here is to talk about the "US". The "US" (as in the population of the United States), have no to say in any of this. They voted against war but it was pointless (Trump is ramping up the pressure on Russia and Iran) and that crowd of US "consumers" is as politically useless as it gets.

Power in the US is held by a rabid crowd of Zionist who control Congress and the media, and THEY DECIDE what happens along the lines of "Israel First".

So your question should be, "To keep the bluff going, can Israel afford to push the (US) button?"

The answer could well be Yes.

1) Syria and Iran would be destroyed giving Israel undisputed dominance of the Middle East.

2) The US would be plunged into chaos and the COG (Continuity of Government) legislation installed by Reagan would come into play. This is basically an Emergency Dictatorship run from bunkers around the US, that the Zionists tried for on 9/11 (and failed to get) but would certainly achieve under this new scenario.

With totalitarian control of the United States, the Zionist Neo-Bolsheviks could do what they wanted with the remains of the US population, and who cares if 100 million Goys die in a nuclear exchange with Russia/China (which would also conveniently be in ruins).

[Apr 26, 2018] The Neocons' Next Nightmare Project Waffle House Bombardier for POTUS 2020 by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... National Review ..."
"... The Weekly Standard. ..."
"... So, Nikki Haley very much comes across as the neoconservatives' dream ambassador to the United Nations – full of aggression, a staunch supporter of Israel, and assertive of Washington's preemptive right to set standards for the rest of the world. And there is every reason to believe that she would nurture the same views if she were to become the neocon dream president. ..."
"... Bearing the flag for American Exceptionalism does not necessarily make her very good for the rest of us, who will have to bear the burdens and risks implicit in her imperial hubris, but, as the neoconservatives never feel compelled to admit that they were wrong ..."
Apr 26, 2018 | www.unz.com

She's clearly aiming for the Oval Office and would be the dream occupant for neocons

The musical chairs playing out among the senior officials that make up the President Donald Trump White House team would be amusing to watch but for the genuine damage that it is doing to the United States. The lack of any coherence in policy means that the State Department now has diplomats that do not believe in diplomacy and environment agency heads that do not believe in protecting the environment. It also means that well-funded and disciplined lobbies and pressure groups are having a field day, befuddling ignorant administrators with their "fact sheets" and successfully promoting policies that benefit no one but themselves.

In the Trumpean world of all-the-time-stupid, there is, however, one individual who stands out for her complete inability to perceive anything beyond threats of unrelenting violence combined with adherence to policies that have already proven to be catastrophic. That person is our own Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley , who surfaced in the news lately after she unilaterally and evidently prematurely announced sanctions on Russia. When the White House suggested that she might have been "confused" she responded that "With all due respect, I don't get confused." This ignited a firestorm among the Trump haters, lauding Haley as a strong and self-confident woman for standing up to the White House male bullies while also suggesting that the hapless Administration had not bothered to inform one of its senior diplomats of a policy change. It also produced a flurry of Haley for higher office tweets based on what was described as her "brilliant riposte " to the president.

One over-the-top bit of effusion from a former Haley aide even suggested that her "deft rebuttal" emphasizes her qualities, enthusing that "What distinguishes her from the star-struck sycophants in the White House is that she understands the intersection of strong leadership and public service, where great things happen" and placing her on what is being promoted as the short list of future presidential candidates.

For sure, neocon barking dog Bill Kristol has for years been promoting Haley for president, a sign that something is up as he was previously the one who "discovered" Sarah Palin. Indeed, the similarities between the two women are readily observable. Neither is very cerebral or much given to make any attempt to understand an adversary's point of view; both are reflexively aggressive and dismissive when dealing with foreigners and domestic critics; both are passionately anti-Russian and pro-Israeli. And Kristol is not alone in his advocacy. Haley regularly receives praise from Senators like South Carolina's Lindsey Graham and from the Murdoch media as well as in the opinion pages of National Review and The Weekly Standard.

The greater problem right now is that Nikki Haley is America's face to the international community, even more than the Secretary of State. She has used her bully pulpit to do just that, i.e. bully, and she is ugly America personified, having apparently decided that something called American Exceptionalism gives her license to say and do whatever she wants at the United Nations. In her mind, the United States can do what it wants globally because it has a God-given right to do so, a viewpoint that doesn't go down well with many countries that believe that they have a legal and moral right to be left alone and remain exempt from America's all too frequent military interventions.

Nikki Haley sees things differently, however. During her 15 months at the United Nations she has been instrumental in cutting funding for programs that she disapproves of and has repeatedly threatened military action against countries that disagree with U.S. policies. Most recently, in the wake of the U.S. cruise missile attack against Syria, she announced that the action was potentially only the first step. She declared that Washington was "locked and loaded," prepared to exercise more lethal military options if Syria and its Russian and Iranian supporters did not cease and desist from the use of chemical weapons. Ironically, the cruise missile attack was carried out even though the White House had no clue as to what had actually happened and it now turns out that the entire story, spread by the terrorist groups in Syria and their mouthpieces, has begun to unravel . Will Nikki Haley apologize? I would suspect that if she doesn't do confusion she doesn't do apologies either.

Haley, who had no foreign policy experience of any kind prior to assuming office, relies on a gaggle of neoconservative foreign-policy "experts" to help shape her public utterances, which are often not cleared with the State Department, where she is at least nominally employed. Her speechwriter is Jessica Gavora, who is the wife of the leading neoconservative journalist Jonah Goldberg. Unfortunately, being a neocon mouthpiece makes her particularly dangerous as she is holding a position where she can do bad things. She has been shooting from the lip since she assumed office with only minimal vetting by the Trump Administration, and, as in the recent imbroglio over her "confusion," it is never quite clear whether she is speaking for herself or for the White House.

Haley has her own foreign policy. She has declared that Russia "is not, will not be our friend" and has lately described the Russians as having their hands covered with the blood of Syrian children. From the start of her time at the U.N., Haley has made it clear that she is neoconservatism personified and she has done nothing since to change that impression. In December 2017 she warned the U.N. that she was "taking names" and threatened retaliation against any country that was so "disrespectful" as to dare to vote against Washington's disastrous recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital, which she also helped to bring about.

As governor of South Carolina, Haley first became identified as an unquestioning supporter of Israel through her signing of a bill punishing supporters of the nonviolent pro-Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, the first legislation of its kind on a state level. Immediately upon taking office at the United Nations she complained that "nowhere has the U.N.'s failure been more consistent and more outrageous than in its bias against our close ally Israel" and vowed that the "days of Israel bashing are over." On a recent visit to Israel, she was feted and honored by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. She was also greeted by rounds of applause and cheering when she spoke at the annual meeting of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in March, saying "When I come to AIPAC I am with friends."

Nikki Haley's embrace of Israeli points of view is unrelenting and serves no American interest. If she were a recruited agent of influence for the Israeli Mossad she could not be more cooperative than she apparently is voluntarily. In February 2017, she blocked the appointment of former Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad to a diplomatic position at the United Nations because he is a Palestinian. In a congressional hearing she was asked about the decision: "Is it this administration's position that support for Israel and support for the appointment of a well-qualified individual of Palestinian nationality to an appointment at the U.N. are mutually exclusive?" Haley responded yes, that the administration is "supporting Israel" by blocking every Palestinian.

Haley is particularly highly critical of both Syria and Iran, reflecting the Israeli bias. She has repeatedly said that regime change in Damascus is a Trump administration priority, even when the White House was saying something different. She has elaborated on an Administration warning that it had "identified potential preparations for another chemical weapons attack by the Assad regime" by tweeting " further attacks will be blamed on Assad but also on Russia and Iran who support him killing his own people." At one point, Haley warned "We need to see Russia choose to side with the civilized world over an Assad government that brutally terrorizes its own people."

At various U.N. meetings, though Haley has repeatedly and uncritically complained of institutional bias towards Israel, she has never addressed the issue that Israel's treatment of the Palestinians might in part be responsible for the criticism leveled against it. Her description of Israel as a "close ally" is hyperbolic and she tends to be oblivious to actual American interests in the region when Israel is involved. She has never challenged the Israeli occupation of the West Bank as well as the recent large expansion of settlements, which are at least nominally opposed by the State Department and White House. Nor has she spoken up about the more recent shooting of three thousand unarmed Gazan demonstrators by Israeli Army sharpshooters, which is a war crime.

Haley's hardline on Syria reflects the Israeli bias, and her consistent hostility to Russia is a neoconservative position. A White House warning that it had "identified potential preparations for another chemical weapons attack by the Assad regime led to a Haley elaboration in a tweet that " further attacks will be blamed on Assad but also on Russia and Iran who support him killing his own people." Earlier, on April 12, 2017 after Russia blocked a draft U.N. resolution intended to condemn the alleged Khan Shaykhun chemical attack, which subsequently turned out to be a false flag, Haley said , "We need to see Russia choose to side with the civilized world over an Assad government that brutally terrorizes its own people."

Haley is particularly critical of Iran, which she sees as the instigator of much of the unrest in the Middle East, again reflecting the Israeli and neocon viewpoints. She claimed on April 20, 2017 during her first session as president of the U.N. Security Council, that Iran and Hezbollah had "conducted terrorist acts" for decades within the Middle East, ignoring the more serious terrorism support engaged in by U.S. regional allies Saudi Arabia and Qatar. She stated in June 2017 that the Security Council's praise of the Iran Nuclear Agreement honored a state that has engaged in "illicit missile launches," "support for terrorist groups," and "arms smuggling," while "stok[ing] regional conflicts and mak[ing] them harder to solve." All are perspectives that might easily be challenged.

So, Nikki Haley very much comes across as the neoconservatives' dream ambassador to the United Nations – full of aggression, a staunch supporter of Israel, and assertive of Washington's preemptive right to set standards for the rest of the world. And there is every reason to believe that she would nurture the same views if she were to become the neocon dream president.

Bearing the flag for American Exceptionalism does not necessarily make her very good for the rest of us, who will have to bear the burdens and risks implicit in her imperial hubris, but, as the neoconservatives never feel compelled to admit that they were wrong , one suspects that Haley's assertion that she does not do confusion is only the beginning if she succeeds in her apparent quest for the highest office in the land. Worse than John Bolton? Absolutely.

Source: The Unz Review

[Apr 26, 2018] Even The Simpsons' writers weren't absurdist enough to come up with a President Haley.

Notable quotes:
"... Haley is a fool and grotesquely ignorant. ..."
"... She is a vile creature who has no contact with truth whatsoever. Does Trump not see this at all? Perhaps he does in a dim way, but by now he is so suborned and by the Deep State and depressed by the relentless opposition that he is probably glad no one is criticizing his U.N. appointment at least. ..."
"... Haley ran for governor of SC as the "tea party" candidate. She killed the careers of a number of would be Republican establishment politicians, which is why many voted for her. In other words, she is a total opportunist, a classic, typical unprincipled Republican. ..."
"... She has learned how to manipulate the system up to a certain point, but is too dumb to go any further. How sad that people like Adelson are able to buy elections. ..."
"... Ask Mike Pence. She's Pence's pick. Pence wants a fellow Ziocon stooge at the UN instead of pro Assad Tulsi Gabbard. ..."
"... She is not a moron; rather smart, clever and articulate riding on the wings of the jew to power. Immorality is her shield, no one her judge, americans a lower caste, the jew a higher caste. ..."
"... Nikki Haley is just a bit-part actress similar to the talented & useful woman featured in LeCarre's complex but educational novel "The Little Drummer Girl." ..."
"... Most men don't like their trophy wives either, that is, they like them at first but the match soon deteriorates from there. They tend to look good in the original packaging but are way overpriced and not worth the money. Buyers remorse is the rule rather than the exception. ..."
"... Nimrata the neocon harpy is just one of the gifts that the 1965 immigration and naturalization act keeps on giving. She's the Republican version of Hildabeast Clinton. ..."
"... "Nikki Haley in a nutshell: stupid; big mouth; infantile understanding of foreign affairs; easily manipulated; will do anything for more money and attention; and a total dumbshit sellout to Israel with zero integrity, morality, or empathy. " ..."
"... Hmmmm. A typical Trump appointee. Trump saw her qualifications and just had to have her on his team. He sees himself in her, y'know. ..."
"... The mistake here is to talk about the "US". The "US" (as in the population of the United States), have no to say in any of this. They voted against war but it was pointless (Trump is ramping up the pressure on Russia and Iran) and that crowd of US "consumers" is as politically useless as it gets. ..."
Apr 26, 2018 | www.unz.com

Fran800 , April 24, 2018 at 5:58 am GMT

I have noticed Haley's awfulness from the beginning, which I see is now 15 months. Awful though Bolton is, one feels that he has some knowledge that might even make him pull back from Armageddon (maybe, not sure).

But Haley is a fool and grotesquely ignorant. Notice how, in the alleged chemical attacks, she takes no thought or action at all to ascertain truth, but she outdoes herself trumpeting the harm caused, and the children suffering.

As if the fact that children are suffering somehow proves guilt. I can't imagine anything so ignorant.

She is a vile creature who has no contact with truth whatsoever. Does Trump not see this at all? Perhaps he does in a dim way, but by now he is so suborned and by the Deep State and depressed by the relentless opposition that he is probably glad no one is criticizing his U.N. appointment at least.

Realist , April 24, 2018 at 6:01 am GMT

Scarier Than John Bolton?

She's certainly dumber than Bolton.

Think of Nikki Haley for President!

If the electorate picks Haley, so be it.

NoseytheDuke , April 24, 2018 at 6:21 am GMT
@Fran800

Never dismiss the fool, for he wards no fear, no blame and and no trust. He sees no worth or value and can be swayed by the most trivial things. He seeks no reward but an emotional gratification. While these sound of a foe easily defeated the truth is oft the opposite for your threat and presence are fallen on the senseless. If you must fight a fool you must give him room and let hubris and frailty fight your war, otherwise, you must be swift, with out mercy and be able to ward the madness that will ensue.

I don't know who penned that but I think it's profound.

Pat Kittle , April 24, 2018 at 6:33 am GMT
Some of us once accepted the notion that when women got "empowered" the world would be a better place.
Anon [425] Disclaimer , Website April 24, 2018 at 6:45 am GMT
Nikki Haley's yappings are just the barking of a dog.

She has no agency. If she sounds 'scary', it's only because she is owned by Zionist globalist supremacists. If they ordered her to shut up and be nice to Russia and Iran, she will obey.

She has no mind of her own. Same with Bolton the Dolton.

Dan Hayes , April 24, 2018 at 6:56 am GMT
How did Nikki Haley ever manage to get elected in South Carolina?

Maybe for the same reason that Lindsey Graham gets reelected!

These two pliant tools are a very poor commentary on the political acumen of this states electorate!

Pissedoffalese , April 24, 2018 at 6:58 am GMT
And she's different from Samantha Power, how? Under Obomba

Or John Bolton under Bush the Lesser?

Seems to be a tradition in the making of putting the most arrogant, rude, least diplomatic, and aggressive person possible in the position of ambassador to the UN.

Has anybody ELSE been steady, three administrations, non-stop PUKING? Makes it clear, if nothing else, our "humanitarian" face has peeled off, revealing the brain-eating zombie underneath.

jilles dykstra , April 24, 2018 at 7:05 am GMT
When you confront staunch Israel supporters with the isolation of Israel in the world, as can be seen at UN voting, the answer is that this is because of the anti Israel Muslim bloc in the UN.
The weird thing about jews is that with all their cleverness they're unable to see reality.
Israel is right, the rest of the world is wrong.
Now even if this were the case, any sensible person would take reality into consideration.
Not so idiots as Netanyahu.
When the next jewish catastrophe has happened, jews again will see how how they are the eternal innocent victims, if then jews still will exist, as a nuclear world war is likely to kill any human being world wide.
Already around 1953 a USA diplomat said that Israel should behave as a small ME country, in stead of the head of an international group.
They still do not understand.
Pissedoffalese , April 24, 2018 at 7:12 am GMT
Once (Bolton) was kind of an anomaly, because, after all, it WAS Bush the Lesser.

But Nobel Peace Prize-sporting Obomba, puts in Power.

Now we got Haley.

Maybe TWICE is a co-inkydink, but this is absurd! Fucking EVERYBODY blows us away diplomatically! Who is worse? N. Korea does some wicked TWEETS, but their diplomats are circumspect. Ours are visibly RABID.

One of these days, someone is gonna put us out of their misery, and suck though it will, it will be highly deserved! Afterward, perhaps humans can progress once the USA is a giant smoking crater. Or at least D.C. Has ANYONE ever begged for it THIS bad? Ever?

Ludwig Watzal , Website April 24, 2018 at 7:52 am GMT
Nikki Haley is THE mouthpiece of the Zionist aggressive occupation regime. She serves its interests and acts to the detriment of the American people that have to carry the can for the partisanship with this rogue Zionist state. President Trump should sack her before she challenges him in the next presidential race. Haley will have the backing of the trigger-happy Ziocon establishment and the Zionist billionaires.

Together with John Bolton, they seem like the perfect "Doomsday Couple" to bring the U.S. down. Perhaps they are the last true believers in Zionism, the Jewish racist ideology, although both are not Jewish. It's not surprising that Jewish and American exceptionalism are similar in their racist beliefs.

Haley's behavior is hyperbolic, arrogant, and extremely dangerous to the reputation of the U. S. but it seems as if she acts according to the slogan: Freely you live, if you haven't a reputation to lose. But under the borderline Trump administration even a "un-American" behavior, it benefits the Zionist regime, seems acceptable.

So far, all so-called chemical weapons attacks by the al-Asad government were false flag attacks carried out either by al-Nusra, ISIS or al-Qaida terrorist organizations or by the "White Helmets" themselves that are a so-called a terrorist affiliate organization, disguised as paramedics, to draw the U. S. directly into the Syrian conflict.

Under Obama, they failed, and Trump made some symbolic bombings to pacify the trigger-happy Zionist lobby. How mentally deranged Haley seems, shows her arrogant statement: "We need to see Russia choose to side with the civilized world over an Assad government that brutally terrorizes its people."

With which "civilized world" should Russia take sides? Does Haley mean the U. S. or the Zionist occupation regime? The first one has slaughtered millions of people in endless wars, the later has been subjugated another people for over 50 years and destroyed its existence. This "civilized world" and its values are for the garbage dump.

Despite his twitter manticism, Trump was still a kind of common sense that can differentiate between the good for America in contrast to the good for Israel for the sake of the American people.

Achmed E. Newman , Website April 24, 2018 at 7:59 am GMT
Nikky Hailey is not only a stupid Globalist('s) bitch, but a traitor to the state of South Carolina. S. Carolinians will remember the flag.

Her appointment to the UN Ambassador position was the very 1st sign of President Trump's incompetence.

Mikhail , Website April 24, 2018 at 8:01 am GMT
@Duncan

Noeconservatives arguably don't have enough appeal for them to get the presidency. Unfortunately, they can still have clout as evidenced by Haley in her role and how the likes of MSNBC and CNN uncritically praise her.

On the subject of Haley:

https://www.eurasiareview.com/12042017-latest-bump-in-us-russian-relations-analysis/

http://www.eurasiareview.com/19042018-confronting-russia-in-syria-analysis/

falcemartello , Website April 24, 2018 at 8:30 am GMT
Well if she does make it to POTUS we have historical equivalence. The Dying days of the Roman western Empire. in the mid 4th century BC. Roman Empire at this stage had two imperial cities. one situated in ROME being hounded by the Goths and the other one in the East Byzantium present day Istanbul. The point is in the western dying Imperial days they put as emperor a child well Haley becomes POTUS one could only say History repeating itself. The scary thing about all this is pax-americana is slowly dying. Recent economic figures coming out of the west show this. All recent gains have nothing in common with industrial output. Profits are all related to the stockmarket grandest ponzi scheme in the history of western man.
Latest events from the Skripal imbroglio to Douma all show signs of desperation .
BY DECEPTION YOU MAY WAGE WAR.
Note the three countries that illegally bombed Syria on the sad nite of April 13th 2018 were the exact ring leaders to the total destruction of the highest standard of living of the African continent.
RINSE ,LATHER ,REPEAT.
Post Scriptum: It is sad and scary to see that from 1999 to this day not withstanding all the lies that NATO and FUKUS have spewed to the world and have been exposed as such we the sheeple can fall for the same trap.
THE WEST HAS ENTERED INTO THE WORLD OF ZOMBIES .
Critical thinking gets labelled as enemies of the state. Boy Goebbels must be so envious of recent events.
How Orwellian our western society has become.
Gordo , April 24, 2018 at 8:44 am GMT
"According to an international poll conducted in 2009, 58% of Indians expressed sympathy with Israel, compared with 56% of Americans"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India%E2%80%93Israel_relations

Just sayin.

mark green , April 24, 2018 at 8:46 am GMT
Another very good article by Philip Giraldi. If the US wasn't dominated by foreign agents and roving gangs of ziocon lobbyists, Giraldi would be widely respected, considered 'mainstream', and known to millions. But powerful forces are determined to prevent this.

What we get instead are empty suits reading scripts.

We live in an era where political extremism (aggressive war is a prime example of extremism) has been declared 'centrist' and 'moderate'. Advocates of non-intervention are labeled 'fringe'.

Political illusions happen. They happen by design.

Fortunately, Giraldi demonstrates a commendable ability to separate US interests from contrived foreign agendas. This is not often done. And he does it well.

For revealing this, Giraldi and a few other daring intellectuals have been defamed as 'far right'. Their sin? Telling the truth (to the best of their ability) about Zio-American malfeasance in American life and on the world stage.

Their quiet exile from the corridors of political power shows how debased and unmoored our culture has become. Giraldi's diminished status is the end-product of targeted censorship, economic sabotage, and strategic defamation. This phenomena affects us all.

What do we get instead?–delusional sell-outs like John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Hillary Clinton and Nikki Haley. Frauds all, including the journalists who adore them. The corruption in America is wide and deep.

Washington's queer political values are hopelessly under the thrall of liberal interventionists, ne0con militarists, televised war barkers, and deep state vampires. These amoral extremists have become America's political 'establishment'.

Trump notwithstanding, the Swamp, the alphabet government agencies, the two Parties, the major lobbies, donors, and NGOs (and of course, Big Media) are what rules America.

Average, non-organized voters have no political influence.

But it is our mainstream news and entertainment media that ultimately earns the most responsibility for Zio-Washington's trigger-happy embrace of aggressive militarism in all policies and instances that could affect Israel (which is virtually everything.)

This Zionist 'value' opens a very big door.

This commitment is a recipe for endless strife and intervention. Yet our media supports it. Continuously and uniformly.

And the chief beneficiary is (you guessed it).

Incredibly, Washington spends far more time agonizing over borders and security in the far-away shitholes (pardon the expression) than on our own southern border. Who dreamt up this ridiculous scheme?

This level of corrupt insanity did not happen by accident.

Incredibly, if enough empty suits and talking heads repeat a myth or falsehood enough times, it becomes 'true'. Voila! The magic of TV.

Political hallucinations and bizarre double standards become very real. Very 'true'.

Zio-America is morally-unhinged rogue superpower.

If you don't believe me, count the dead.

The Alarmist , April 24, 2018 at 10:31 am GMT
The problem with being arrogant when you are on top of the world is that you are remembered and reviled when you get knocked down a peg. The guys in the dock at Nuremburg learned that at the end of a rope. She'll never face that sort of justice, though, because we can't lose, right?
Greg Bacon , Website April 24, 2018 at 10:33 am GMT

The lack of any coherence in policy means that the State Department now has diplomats that do not believe in diplomacy and environment agency heads that do not believe in protecting the environment.

But I disagree, Mr. Giraldi! Their is coherence in State policy, that is to serve the State of Israel.

Nutty Nikki is idiotic, vindictive, hateful and very bellicose and would not hesitate to use our kids and tax dollars to support Apartheid Israel, and is loved by multi-billionaire Sheldon Adelson, which means she will be the next POTUS.

Anonymous [135] Disclaimer , April 24, 2018 at 12:10 pm GMT
Haley ran for governor of SC as the "tea party" candidate. She killed the careers of a number of would be Republican establishment politicians, which is why many voted for her. In other words, she is a total opportunist, a classic, typical unprincipled Republican.

She has learned how to manipulate the system up to a certain point, but is too dumb to go any further. How sad that people like Adelson are able to buy elections.

When is Trump going to prosecute Soros for conspiracy to interfere with the U.S. and other countries?

Sandy Berger's Socks , April 25, 2018 at 1:39 am GMT
There is no excuse for these awful appointments.

The lack of progress on immigration can, maybe, be explained as Trump faces fierce resistance, but Bolton, Haley, and Pompeo are unforced/forced errors, that will make it nearly immposible for him to keep his promise of ending these stupid wars.

Better than Hillary, but more than a little disappointing.

anon [248] Disclaimer , April 25, 2018 at 3:21 am GMT
Haley has too many skeletons in her closet to run for president. While running for SC governorship rumors of her affair with conservative blogger Will Folks surfaced. She tried to deny it of course, claiming to be "completely faithful" to her husband of 13 years, then Will Folks shared text messages and frequent, lengthy middle of the night phone calls between them, some as long as 180 minutes, all after 10pm (hey she had to put the kids to bed first):

https://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/HaireoftheDog/archives/2010/10/12/will-folks-releases-affidavit-detailing-haley-affair

And then, a second man, political consultant Larry Marchant, came out claiming he had one night stand with Haley. Of course, Haley also denied it.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/03/nikki-haley-affair-larry_n_599346.html

In his latest book, Michael Wolffe claimed that Nikki Haley had an affair with Trump, which Haley dismissed as "disgusting", one wonders if Trump took that as a compliment.

anon [248] Disclaimer , April 25, 2018 at 3:29 am GMT
@anon

Wouldn't surprise me one bit if Haley is sleeping with her current "advisor" at the UN (paid for by taxpayers btw) Jon Lerner, who she has also kindly shared with Mike Pence, one hopes only the advising part, not the bed, but who knows.

Something tells me she's sleeping with Netanyahu as well. She sure loves her Jewish men.

anon [248] Disclaimer , April 25, 2018 at 4:22 am GMT
@Buck Turgidson

Ask Mike Pence. She's Pence's pick. Pence wants a fellow Ziocon stooge at the UN instead of pro Assad Tulsi Gabbard.

anon [248] Disclaimer , April 25, 2018 at 4:34 am GMT
"Ambassadors" are supposed to make peace, but Trump who claimed he wanted to end all foreign wars end up with an ambassador to the World who only wants to make wars, with everybody! She even wanted Trump to send troops to Venezuela! Anytime Trump is within 10 ft of this mad woman, he's talking about bombing somebody.

Haley is the Ambassador of DEATH and DESTRUCTION.

RobinG , April 25, 2018 at 5:29 am GMT
@anon

Was there ever any evidence that Trump considered Tulsi for Amb. to UN? Wasn't that just goofy talk from Tulsi's fans?

I doubt she would have wanted it, anyway. Not exactly a step up, being appointed to a position from which you could be summarily dismissed .. as opposed to an elected official with a definite term and, other than pressure from the DNC – which she has handily bucked – freedom to express independent views.

Pandos , April 25, 2018 at 3:03 pm GMT
@Chris Bridges

She is not a moron; rather smart, clever and articulate riding on the wings of the jew to power. Immorality is her shield, no one her judge, americans a lower caste, the jew a higher caste.

follyofwar , April 25, 2018 at 5:38 pm GMT
@NoseytheDuke

I keep wondering why Trump has not fired that know-nothing. He's not been afraid to fire people for far less offenses against his Admin. I suspect that the Israel Lobby will not let him, and made him hire her in the first place. She used to be a "Never-Trumper," after all. In an otherwise fine piece, I wish that Giraldi would have opined as to why she's still there.

deschutes , April 25, 2018 at 6:11 pm GMT
Haley is a stupid, opportunistic woman who simply goes where the money is, and that is by doing the bidding of the Zionists in USA and Israel. The author even points out that her mentor is Zionist asswipe from the National Review Johah Goldberg's wife! She comes across as such a stupid woman that she perhaps doesn't realize she's being brainwashed and used as a UN mouthpiece of advance the Zionist Israeli agenda.

Nikki Haley in a nutshell: stupid; big mouth; infantile understanding of foreign affairs; easily manipulated; will do anything for more money and attention; and a total dumbshit sellout to Israel with zero integrity, morality, or empathy.

Well, what I'm trying to say, very sadly, is that this insufferable douchebag wench will most likely be your next president

anon [140] Disclaimer , April 25, 2018 at 7:06 pm GMT
@jacques sheete

Does a purportedly high IQ protect one from stupidity?

High IQ signals intelligence, but not wisdom. Wisdom comes from experience, and being able to apply your high IQ to learn from those experiences. Many high IQ people in fact lack practical wisdom a.k.a. common sense

...

ChuckOrloski , April 25, 2018 at 10:10 pm GMT
No doubt, it's hard especially for an ally (like me) to get under Philip Giraldi's thick-skin, but I am compelled to try now.

Nikki Haley is just a bit-part actress similar to the talented & useful woman featured in LeCarre's complex but educational novel "The Little Drummer Girl."

Indeed, she could become President of ZUS as could Oprah Winfrey. All originate from Jewish Central Casting, selection.

In closing, linked below is some homegrown CENSORSHIP originating from "The Land of Milk & Honey."

https://m.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Twitter-blocks-member-of-Knesset-who-said-Ahed-Tamimi-should-be-crippled-552625

That's all folks!

NoseytheDuke , April 25, 2018 at 10:11 pm GMT
@anon

Most men don't like their trophy wives either, that is, they like them at first but the match soon deteriorates from there. They tend to look good in the original packaging but are way overpriced and not worth the money. Buyers remorse is the rule rather than the exception.

Kratoklastes , April 25, 2018 at 11:27 pm GMT
@follyofwar

There are several reasons –

There are probably others – note that none of them has anything to do with diplomacy or international relations (except as a repudiation of the concepts).

Kratoklastes , April 25, 2018 at 11:31 pm GMT
Worse than Bolton? Hard to say.

Neither are effective at all: under both Bolton and now Haley (and "RicePower") the US has had to increase the baksheesh it distributes around the world in order to buy compliance and diplomatic support – they have, as a group been unable to slow the decline of US prestige.

So the 'operational' side of things is a wash.

Bolton's preternaturally unpersuasive, because he's a grotesque parody of a human being.

And there's where it gets interesting: there is upside risk to Haley if she were able to Clintonise herself – by which I mean behave more like Bill , not more like Hillary. If she was more 'aw-shucks', she would get more done (frankly I don't think that's her aim, because like all politicians she's interested in doing things for herself, not for her current boss).

Haley could be far more persuasive/effective because in her best moments she's quite personable (plus she's still very pretty when she turns on the charm, which is always a plus).

The downside is that her 'best' moments are very few and far between – she spends most of her time with that particularly waspish hate-face so common among formerly-pretty women who realise that their best years are behind them.

Frankly, the notion that she's a plausible presidential candidate is laughable: when the US does eventually elect a female president, the successful candidate will be whiter than the whitest Pilgrim.

It is beyond farcical to believe that the Republican voter base would elect a 'dusky' woman for the highest national office: bear in mind that Haley would be repudiated ex ante by Democrats because she's on the wrong side, and US presidential politics is almost entirely decided by base-mobilisation.

Deep down Haley probably realises this, and that will also be a source of rancour.

swimologist , Website April 26, 2018 at 12:22 am GMT
@Duncan

How exactly are these neocon Israel apologists created, vetted, accepted? It must be some weird ceremony that would make La Cosa Nostra look like a Ladies Garden Club invitation. By the way, 3,000 Palestinians weren't shot at the latest dustup.

KenH , April 26, 2018 at 12:51 am GMT
Nimrata the neocon harpy is just one of the gifts that the 1965 immigration and naturalization act keeps on giving. She's the Republican version of Hildabeast Clinton.

If she ever ascends to the throne in D.C. her "conservatism" will consist of militant philo-semitism while being liberal on social policy and a warhawk on foreign policy. Hannity will gush joyfully over her.

Twodees Partain , April 26, 2018 at 12:51 am GMT
@deschutes

"Nikki Haley in a nutshell: stupid; big mouth; infantile understanding of foreign affairs; easily manipulated; will do anything for more money and attention; and a total dumbshit sellout to Israel with zero integrity, morality, or empathy. "

Hmmmm. A typical Trump appointee. Trump saw her qualifications and just had to have her on his team. He sees himself in her, y'know.

Hibernian , April 26, 2018 at 2:09 am GMT
@exiled off mainstreet

You seem to be confusing the philosophy professor Van Den Haag with The Hague in The Netherlands.

Hibernian , April 26, 2018 at 2:22 am GMT
@JamesG

Patrick Fitzgerald of Scooter Libby Gate fame was a Manhattan doorman's son. The family lived in Brooklyn.

Miro23 , April 26, 2018 at 2:32 am GMT
@AnonFromTN

To keep the bluff going, the US can't afford to push the button. End of story.

The mistake here is to talk about the "US". The "US" (as in the population of the United States), have no to say in any of this. They voted against war but it was pointless (Trump is ramping up the pressure on Russia and Iran) and that crowd of US "consumers" is as politically useless as it gets.

Power in the US is held by a rabid crowd of Zionist who control Congress and the media, and THEY DECIDE what happens along the lines of "Israel First".

So your question should be, "To keep the bluff going, can Israel afford to push the (US) button?"

The answer could well be Yes.

1) Syria and Iran would be destroyed giving Israel undisputed dominance of the Middle East.

2) The US would be plunged into chaos and the COG (Continuity of Government) legislation installed by Reagan would come into play. This is basically an Emergency Dictatorship run from bunkers around the US, that the Zionists tried for on 9/11 (and failed to get) but would certainly achieve under this new scenario.

With totalitarian control of the United States, the Zionist Neo-Bolsheviks could do what they wanted with the remains of the US population, and who cares if 100 million Goys die in a nuclear exchange with Russia/China (which would also conveniently be in ruins).

[Apr 26, 2018] The Neocons' Next Nightmare Project Waffle House Bombardier for POTUS 2020 by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... National Review ..."
"... The Weekly Standard. ..."
"... So, Nikki Haley very much comes across as the neoconservatives' dream ambassador to the United Nations – full of aggression, a staunch supporter of Israel, and assertive of Washington's preemptive right to set standards for the rest of the world. And there is every reason to believe that she would nurture the same views if she were to become the neocon dream president. ..."
"... Bearing the flag for American Exceptionalism does not necessarily make her very good for the rest of us, who will have to bear the burdens and risks implicit in her imperial hubris, but, as the neoconservatives never feel compelled to admit that they were wrong ..."
Apr 26, 2018 | www.unz.com

She's clearly aiming for the Oval Office and would be the dream occupant for neocons

The musical chairs playing out among the senior officials that make up the President Donald Trump White House team would be amusing to watch but for the genuine damage that it is doing to the United States. The lack of any coherence in policy means that the State Department now has diplomats that do not believe in diplomacy and environment agency heads that do not believe in protecting the environment. It also means that well-funded and disciplined lobbies and pressure groups are having a field day, befuddling ignorant administrators with their "fact sheets" and successfully promoting policies that benefit no one but themselves.

In the Trumpean world of all-the-time-stupid, there is, however, one individual who stands out for her complete inability to perceive anything beyond threats of unrelenting violence combined with adherence to policies that have already proven to be catastrophic. That person is our own Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley , who surfaced in the news lately after she unilaterally and evidently prematurely announced sanctions on Russia. When the White House suggested that she might have been "confused" she responded that "With all due respect, I don't get confused." This ignited a firestorm among the Trump haters, lauding Haley as a strong and self-confident woman for standing up to the White House male bullies while also suggesting that the hapless Administration had not bothered to inform one of its senior diplomats of a policy change. It also produced a flurry of Haley for higher office tweets based on what was described as her "brilliant riposte " to the president.

One over-the-top bit of effusion from a former Haley aide even suggested that her "deft rebuttal" emphasizes her qualities, enthusing that "What distinguishes her from the star-struck sycophants in the White House is that she understands the intersection of strong leadership and public service, where great things happen" and placing her on what is being promoted as the short list of future presidential candidates.

For sure, neocon barking dog Bill Kristol has for years been promoting Haley for president, a sign that something is up as he was previously the one who "discovered" Sarah Palin. Indeed, the similarities between the two women are readily observable. Neither is very cerebral or much given to make any attempt to understand an adversary's point of view; both are reflexively aggressive and dismissive when dealing with foreigners and domestic critics; both are passionately anti-Russian and pro-Israeli. And Kristol is not alone in his advocacy. Haley regularly receives praise from Senators like South Carolina's Lindsey Graham and from the Murdoch media as well as in the opinion pages of National Review and The Weekly Standard.

The greater problem right now is that Nikki Haley is America's face to the international community, even more than the Secretary of State. She has used her bully pulpit to do just that, i.e. bully, and she is ugly America personified, having apparently decided that something called American Exceptionalism gives her license to say and do whatever she wants at the United Nations. In her mind, the United States can do what it wants globally because it has a God-given right to do so, a viewpoint that doesn't go down well with many countries that believe that they have a legal and moral right to be left alone and remain exempt from America's all too frequent military interventions.

Nikki Haley sees things differently, however. During her 15 months at the United Nations she has been instrumental in cutting funding for programs that she disapproves of and has repeatedly threatened military action against countries that disagree with U.S. policies. Most recently, in the wake of the U.S. cruise missile attack against Syria, she announced that the action was potentially only the first step. She declared that Washington was "locked and loaded," prepared to exercise more lethal military options if Syria and its Russian and Iranian supporters did not cease and desist from the use of chemical weapons. Ironically, the cruise missile attack was carried out even though the White House had no clue as to what had actually happened and it now turns out that the entire story, spread by the terrorist groups in Syria and their mouthpieces, has begun to unravel . Will Nikki Haley apologize? I would suspect that if she doesn't do confusion she doesn't do apologies either.

Haley, who had no foreign policy experience of any kind prior to assuming office, relies on a gaggle of neoconservative foreign-policy "experts" to help shape her public utterances, which are often not cleared with the State Department, where she is at least nominally employed. Her speechwriter is Jessica Gavora, who is the wife of the leading neoconservative journalist Jonah Goldberg. Unfortunately, being a neocon mouthpiece makes her particularly dangerous as she is holding a position where she can do bad things. She has been shooting from the lip since she assumed office with only minimal vetting by the Trump Administration, and, as in the recent imbroglio over her "confusion," it is never quite clear whether she is speaking for herself or for the White House.

Haley has her own foreign policy. She has declared that Russia "is not, will not be our friend" and has lately described the Russians as having their hands covered with the blood of Syrian children. From the start of her time at the U.N., Haley has made it clear that she is neoconservatism personified and she has done nothing since to change that impression. In December 2017 she warned the U.N. that she was "taking names" and threatened retaliation against any country that was so "disrespectful" as to dare to vote against Washington's disastrous recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital, which she also helped to bring about.

As governor of South Carolina, Haley first became identified as an unquestioning supporter of Israel through her signing of a bill punishing supporters of the nonviolent pro-Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, the first legislation of its kind on a state level. Immediately upon taking office at the United Nations she complained that "nowhere has the U.N.'s failure been more consistent and more outrageous than in its bias against our close ally Israel" and vowed that the "days of Israel bashing are over." On a recent visit to Israel, she was feted and honored by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. She was also greeted by rounds of applause and cheering when she spoke at the annual meeting of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in March, saying "When I come to AIPAC I am with friends."

Nikki Haley's embrace of Israeli points of view is unrelenting and serves no American interest. If she were a recruited agent of influence for the Israeli Mossad she could not be more cooperative than she apparently is voluntarily. In February 2017, she blocked the appointment of former Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad to a diplomatic position at the United Nations because he is a Palestinian. In a congressional hearing she was asked about the decision: "Is it this administration's position that support for Israel and support for the appointment of a well-qualified individual of Palestinian nationality to an appointment at the U.N. are mutually exclusive?" Haley responded yes, that the administration is "supporting Israel" by blocking every Palestinian.

Haley is particularly highly critical of both Syria and Iran, reflecting the Israeli bias. She has repeatedly said that regime change in Damascus is a Trump administration priority, even when the White House was saying something different. She has elaborated on an Administration warning that it had "identified potential preparations for another chemical weapons attack by the Assad regime" by tweeting " further attacks will be blamed on Assad but also on Russia and Iran who support him killing his own people." At one point, Haley warned "We need to see Russia choose to side with the civilized world over an Assad government that brutally terrorizes its own people."

At various U.N. meetings, though Haley has repeatedly and uncritically complained of institutional bias towards Israel, she has never addressed the issue that Israel's treatment of the Palestinians might in part be responsible for the criticism leveled against it. Her description of Israel as a "close ally" is hyperbolic and she tends to be oblivious to actual American interests in the region when Israel is involved. She has never challenged the Israeli occupation of the West Bank as well as the recent large expansion of settlements, which are at least nominally opposed by the State Department and White House. Nor has she spoken up about the more recent shooting of three thousand unarmed Gazan demonstrators by Israeli Army sharpshooters, which is a war crime.

Haley's hardline on Syria reflects the Israeli bias, and her consistent hostility to Russia is a neoconservative position. A White House warning that it had "identified potential preparations for another chemical weapons attack by the Assad regime led to a Haley elaboration in a tweet that " further attacks will be blamed on Assad but also on Russia and Iran who support him killing his own people." Earlier, on April 12, 2017 after Russia blocked a draft U.N. resolution intended to condemn the alleged Khan Shaykhun chemical attack, which subsequently turned out to be a false flag, Haley said , "We need to see Russia choose to side with the civilized world over an Assad government that brutally terrorizes its own people."

Haley is particularly critical of Iran, which she sees as the instigator of much of the unrest in the Middle East, again reflecting the Israeli and neocon viewpoints. She claimed on April 20, 2017 during her first session as president of the U.N. Security Council, that Iran and Hezbollah had "conducted terrorist acts" for decades within the Middle East, ignoring the more serious terrorism support engaged in by U.S. regional allies Saudi Arabia and Qatar. She stated in June 2017 that the Security Council's praise of the Iran Nuclear Agreement honored a state that has engaged in "illicit missile launches," "support for terrorist groups," and "arms smuggling," while "stok[ing] regional conflicts and mak[ing] them harder to solve." All are perspectives that might easily be challenged.

So, Nikki Haley very much comes across as the neoconservatives' dream ambassador to the United Nations – full of aggression, a staunch supporter of Israel, and assertive of Washington's preemptive right to set standards for the rest of the world. And there is every reason to believe that she would nurture the same views if she were to become the neocon dream president.

Bearing the flag for American Exceptionalism does not necessarily make her very good for the rest of us, who will have to bear the burdens and risks implicit in her imperial hubris, but, as the neoconservatives never feel compelled to admit that they were wrong , one suspects that Haley's assertion that she does not do confusion is only the beginning if she succeeds in her apparent quest for the highest office in the land. Worse than John Bolton? Absolutely.

Source: The Unz Review

[Apr 25, 2018] I'm as irritated as anybody by Brit-chauvinism, but their eminent contribution to the technical and philosophical foundations of modern society from Newton and Bacon through Locke, Smith, and Burke to Maxwell, Whitehead, and Turing is undeniable.

Before Great Britain became Petty Britain it was really great...
Apr 25, 2018 | www.unz.com

Thirdeye , April 26, 2018 at 12:11 am GMT

@L.K

I'm as irritated as anybody by Brit-chauvinism, but their eminent contribution to the technical and philosophical foundations of modern society – from Newton and Bacon through Locke, Smith, and Burke to Maxwell, Whitehead, and Turing – is undeniable.

[Apr 25, 2018] Trump can't keep the neocons off his back they are driving the bus. He's strapped into the driver's seat but isn't allowed to touch anything.

Apr 25, 2018 | www.unz.com

In an age of fake news, fake food, fake sex, Trump has taken the next logical step, by introducing fake war to keep the NeoCon Bastards off his back.

Noah Way , April 26, 2018 at 1:19 am GMT

@CanSpeccy

Trump can't keep the neocons off his back – they are driving the bus. He's strapped into the driver's seat but isn't allowed to touch anything.

This isn't 4D chess, it's hang on and try to survive. The last president who bucked the deep state was JFK.

[Apr 25, 2018] If Mattis didn't know about it, then he should have done and likewise with Trump

Apr 25, 2018 | www.unz.com

Some of you do not understand the degree of compartmentation in government. It is nothing like a monolith. The WHs are largely funded by USAID which is part of State Department, and administered by the UK. There is no particular reason why Mattis would know much about it. It is possible that Trump doesn't know much about it.

Herald , April 25, 2018 at 6:13 pm GMT

@Patrick Lang

If Mattis didn't know about it, then he should have done and likewise with Trump. Ignorance of the hard facts by either of these men is scarcely believable and even if true would be totally inexcuseable.

Randal , April 25, 2018 at 6:44 pm GMT
@RobinG

"Lange didn't support the strike but he saw it as the best of a lot of bad options."

Better than the option of allowing a real investigation?

At the crucial moment, Lang published the following on his website. More than likely it was seen by Mattis:

An appeal to James Mattis

I beseech you, sir, to consider the possibility that the supposed chlorine gas attack at Douma, Syria may have been a carefully constructed propaganda fraud on the part of the rebels encircled in Douma. Such a fraud would have as its purpose the elicitation of exactly the kind of response that we are seeing in the Western media. The rebels have been defeated in East Gouta Their fighters and families are being evacuated to Turkish occupied Jarabulus by air-conditioned bus. How would it benefit the Syrian government to make such an attack in this situation?

I hope that you will determine the exact facts of what occurred at Douma before any action is taken.

I recommend that you send someone competent to Syria to make an on the ground investigation.

W. Patrick Lang

Colonel (Ret.) US Army

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/an-appeal-to-james-mattis.html

L.K , April 25, 2018 at 7:19 pm GMT
@Herald

If Mattis didn't know about it, then he should have done and likewise with Trump. Ignorance of the hard facts by either of these men is scarcely believable and even if true would be totally inexcuseable.

So true but I'm pretty sure they knew.

JerseyJeffersonian , April 25, 2018 at 8:32 pm GMT
@RobinG

RobinG,

It were wise to consider that Mattis' access to information might be being impeded – actively and/or passively – by the NeoCon bitter enders installed during the previous administrations, people who believe that it is their job to do so. (We have been seeing this very thing from the bitter enders at the FBI and the "Justice" departments in their plotting against the new administration, yes? So you have an example of that right in front of your eyes.)

With that understanding, and given Col. Lang's likely experience of this sort of obstruction by hostile underlings, his appeal to Mattis might be seen as an admonition to dig a little deeper, & to press his underlings about their truthfulness. So, Mattis could indeed be misinformed, and precisely because of the compartmentalization that you accede. Hence the letter going hand in hand with his worries about active and/or passive obstruction in access to vital information, or the existence of contrary intelligence and interpretation.

[Apr 24, 2018] The Democratic Party has embraced the agenda of the military-intelligence apparatus and sought to become its main political voice

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... World Socialist Web Site ..."
"... The media campaign alleging Russian intervention in the 2016 US elections has been based entirely on handouts from the CIA, NSA and FBI, transmitted by reporters who are either unwitting stooges or conscious agents of the military-intelligence apparatus. This has been accompanied by the recruitment of a cadre of top CIA and military officials to serve as highly paid "experts" and "analysts" for the television networks ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... The CIA operation in 2018 is unlike its overseas activities in one major respect: it is not covert. On the contrary, the military-intelligence operatives running in the Democratic primaries boast of their careers as spies and special ops warriors. Those with combat experience invariably feature photographs of themselves in desert fatigues or other uniforms on their websites. And they are welcomed and given preferred positions, with Democratic Party officials frequently clearing the field for their candidacies. ..."
"... the Democratic Party has opened its doors to a "friendly takeover" by the intelligence agencies. ..."
"... The incredible power of the military-intelligence agencies over the entire government is an expression of the breakdown of American democracy. The central cause of this breakdown is the extreme concentration of wealth in the hands of a tiny elite, whose interests the state apparatus and its "bodies of armed men" serve. Confronted by an angry and hostile working class, the ruling class is resorting to ever more overt forms of authoritarian rule. ..."
"... But it is impossible to carry out this fight through the "axis of evil" that connects the Democratic Party, the bulk of the corporate media, and the CIA. The influx of military-intelligence candidates puts paid to the longstanding myth, peddled by the trade unions and pseudo-left groups, that the Democrats represent a "lesser evil." On the contrary, working people must confront the fact that within the framework of the corporate-controlled two-party system, they face two equally reactionary evils. ..."
Mar 13, 2018 | www.wsws.org
by Patrick Martin

In a three-part series published last week, the World Socialist Web Site documented an unprecedented influx of intelligence and military operatives into the Democratic Party. More than 50 such military-intelligence candidates are seeking the Democratic nomination in the 102 districts identified by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee as its targets for 2018. These include both vacant seats and those with Republican incumbents considered vulnerable in the event of a significant swing to the Democrats.

... ... ...

The media campaign alleging Russian intervention in the 2016 US elections has been based entirely on handouts from the CIA, NSA and FBI, transmitted by reporters who are either unwitting stooges or conscious agents of the military-intelligence apparatus. This has been accompanied by the recruitment of a cadre of top CIA and military officials to serve as highly paid "experts" and "analysts" for the television networks .

In centering its opposition to Trump on the bogus allegations of Russian interference, while essentially ignoring Trump's attacks on immigrants and democratic rights, his alignment with ultra-right and white supremacist groups, his attacks on social programs like Medicaid and food stamps, and his militarism and threats of nuclear war, the Democratic Party has embraced the agenda of the military-intelligence apparatus and sought to become its main political voice.

This process was well under way in the administration of Barack Obama, which endorsed and expanded the various operations of the intelligence agencies abroad and within the United States. Obama's endorsed successor, Hillary Clinton, ran openly as the chosen candidate of the Pentagon and CIA, touting her toughness as a future commander-in-chief and pledging to escalate the confrontation with Russia, both in Syria and Ukraine.

The CIA has spearheaded the anti-Russia campaign against Trump in large part because of resentment over the disruption of its operations in Syria, and it has successfully used the campaign to force a shift in the policy of the Trump administration on that score. A chorus of media backers -- Nicholas Kristof and Roger Cohen of the New York Times , the entire editorial board of the Washington Post , most of the television networks -- are part of the campaign to pollute public opinion and whip up support on alleged "human rights" grounds for an expansion of the US war in Syria.

The 2018 election campaign marks a new stage: for the first time, military-intelligence operatives are moving in large numbers to take over a political party and seize a major role in Congress. The dozens of CIA and military veterans running in the Democratic Party primaries are "former" agents of the military-intelligence apparatus. This "retired" status is, however, purely nominal. Joining the CIA or the Army Rangers or the Navy SEALs is like joining the Mafia: no one ever actually leaves; they just move on to new assignments.

The CIA operation in 2018 is unlike its overseas activities in one major respect: it is not covert. On the contrary, the military-intelligence operatives running in the Democratic primaries boast of their careers as spies and special ops warriors. Those with combat experience invariably feature photographs of themselves in desert fatigues or other uniforms on their websites. And they are welcomed and given preferred positions, with Democratic Party officials frequently clearing the field for their candidacies.

The working class is confronted with an extraordinary political situation. On the one hand, the Republican Trump administration has more military generals in top posts than any other previous government. On the other hand, the Democratic Party has opened its doors to a "friendly takeover" by the intelligence agencies.

The incredible power of the military-intelligence agencies over the entire government is an expression of the breakdown of American democracy. The central cause of this breakdown is the extreme concentration of wealth in the hands of a tiny elite, whose interests the state apparatus and its "bodies of armed men" serve. Confronted by an angry and hostile working class, the ruling class is resorting to ever more overt forms of authoritarian rule.

Millions of working people want to fight the Trump administration and its ultra-right policies. But it is impossible to carry out this fight through the "axis of evil" that connects the Democratic Party, the bulk of the corporate media, and the CIA. The influx of military-intelligence candidates puts paid to the longstanding myth, peddled by the trade unions and pseudo-left groups, that the Democrats represent a "lesser evil." On the contrary, working people must confront the fact that within the framework of the corporate-controlled two-party system, they face two equally reactionary evils.

Patrick Martin

[Apr 24, 2018] The Democratic Party has embraced the agenda of the military-intelligence apparatus and sought to become its main political voice

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... World Socialist Web Site ..."
"... The media campaign alleging Russian intervention in the 2016 US elections has been based entirely on handouts from the CIA, NSA and FBI, transmitted by reporters who are either unwitting stooges or conscious agents of the military-intelligence apparatus. This has been accompanied by the recruitment of a cadre of top CIA and military officials to serve as highly paid "experts" and "analysts" for the television networks ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... The CIA operation in 2018 is unlike its overseas activities in one major respect: it is not covert. On the contrary, the military-intelligence operatives running in the Democratic primaries boast of their careers as spies and special ops warriors. Those with combat experience invariably feature photographs of themselves in desert fatigues or other uniforms on their websites. And they are welcomed and given preferred positions, with Democratic Party officials frequently clearing the field for their candidacies. ..."
"... the Democratic Party has opened its doors to a "friendly takeover" by the intelligence agencies. ..."
"... The incredible power of the military-intelligence agencies over the entire government is an expression of the breakdown of American democracy. The central cause of this breakdown is the extreme concentration of wealth in the hands of a tiny elite, whose interests the state apparatus and its "bodies of armed men" serve. Confronted by an angry and hostile working class, the ruling class is resorting to ever more overt forms of authoritarian rule. ..."
"... But it is impossible to carry out this fight through the "axis of evil" that connects the Democratic Party, the bulk of the corporate media, and the CIA. The influx of military-intelligence candidates puts paid to the longstanding myth, peddled by the trade unions and pseudo-left groups, that the Democrats represent a "lesser evil." On the contrary, working people must confront the fact that within the framework of the corporate-controlled two-party system, they face two equally reactionary evils. ..."
Mar 13, 2018 | www.wsws.org
by Patrick Martin

In a three-part series published last week, the World Socialist Web Site documented an unprecedented influx of intelligence and military operatives into the Democratic Party. More than 50 such military-intelligence candidates are seeking the Democratic nomination in the 102 districts identified by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee as its targets for 2018. These include both vacant seats and those with Republican incumbents considered vulnerable in the event of a significant swing to the Democrats.

... ... ...

The media campaign alleging Russian intervention in the 2016 US elections has been based entirely on handouts from the CIA, NSA and FBI, transmitted by reporters who are either unwitting stooges or conscious agents of the military-intelligence apparatus. This has been accompanied by the recruitment of a cadre of top CIA and military officials to serve as highly paid "experts" and "analysts" for the television networks .

In centering its opposition to Trump on the bogus allegations of Russian interference, while essentially ignoring Trump's attacks on immigrants and democratic rights, his alignment with ultra-right and white supremacist groups, his attacks on social programs like Medicaid and food stamps, and his militarism and threats of nuclear war, the Democratic Party has embraced the agenda of the military-intelligence apparatus and sought to become its main political voice.

This process was well under way in the administration of Barack Obama, which endorsed and expanded the various operations of the intelligence agencies abroad and within the United States. Obama's endorsed successor, Hillary Clinton, ran openly as the chosen candidate of the Pentagon and CIA, touting her toughness as a future commander-in-chief and pledging to escalate the confrontation with Russia, both in Syria and Ukraine.

The CIA has spearheaded the anti-Russia campaign against Trump in large part because of resentment over the disruption of its operations in Syria, and it has successfully used the campaign to force a shift in the policy of the Trump administration on that score. A chorus of media backers -- Nicholas Kristof and Roger Cohen of the New York Times , the entire editorial board of the Washington Post , most of the television networks -- are part of the campaign to pollute public opinion and whip up support on alleged "human rights" grounds for an expansion of the US war in Syria.

The 2018 election campaign marks a new stage: for the first time, military-intelligence operatives are moving in large numbers to take over a political party and seize a major role in Congress. The dozens of CIA and military veterans running in the Democratic Party primaries are "former" agents of the military-intelligence apparatus. This "retired" status is, however, purely nominal. Joining the CIA or the Army Rangers or the Navy SEALs is like joining the Mafia: no one ever actually leaves; they just move on to new assignments.

The CIA operation in 2018 is unlike its overseas activities in one major respect: it is not covert. On the contrary, the military-intelligence operatives running in the Democratic primaries boast of their careers as spies and special ops warriors. Those with combat experience invariably feature photographs of themselves in desert fatigues or other uniforms on their websites. And they are welcomed and given preferred positions, with Democratic Party officials frequently clearing the field for their candidacies.

The working class is confronted with an extraordinary political situation. On the one hand, the Republican Trump administration has more military generals in top posts than any other previous government. On the other hand, the Democratic Party has opened its doors to a "friendly takeover" by the intelligence agencies.

The incredible power of the military-intelligence agencies over the entire government is an expression of the breakdown of American democracy. The central cause of this breakdown is the extreme concentration of wealth in the hands of a tiny elite, whose interests the state apparatus and its "bodies of armed men" serve. Confronted by an angry and hostile working class, the ruling class is resorting to ever more overt forms of authoritarian rule.

Millions of working people want to fight the Trump administration and its ultra-right policies. But it is impossible to carry out this fight through the "axis of evil" that connects the Democratic Party, the bulk of the corporate media, and the CIA. The influx of military-intelligence candidates puts paid to the longstanding myth, peddled by the trade unions and pseudo-left groups, that the Democrats represent a "lesser evil." On the contrary, working people must confront the fact that within the framework of the corporate-controlled two-party system, they face two equally reactionary evils.

Patrick Martin

[Apr 24, 2018] The Varieties of Russian Conservatism by Paul Grenier

Notable quotes:
"... Times Literary Supplement ..."
"... sine qua non ..."
"... The common good "cannot be reduced to the goods of individual private parties, and cannot be deduced from them. Just as the sum of the parts does not make up the whole, in the same way the sum of private interests may sometimes work even against itself it is the state that represents the common good." Isn't this something we can learn from in the West today? ..."
"... Russia's "[Christian] Orthodox spirit and the ethic of solidarity ..."
"... Like the Catholic Church, the Russian Orthodox Church has recently forged its own Social Concept of the ROC, which fleshes out this call for fairness as an aspect of human dignity. ..."
"... The City of Man ..."
"... Among Russia's virtues, it must be emphasized, is a far greater freedom of speech than it is typically given credit for. Russian participants in the Kaliningrad conference demonstrated a boldness of imagination, a variety and depth of thought on alternate futures for their country that is by no means always evident in political speech even in the United States. ..."
"... The author would like to thank Dr. Adrian Walker, Matthew Cooper and especially Dr. Matthew Dal Santo for their valuable suggestions and comments on an earlier draft. ..."
"... Paul Grenier is an essayist and translator who writes regularly on political-philosophical issues. ..."
Jun 19, 2015 | www.theamericanconservative.com
A staunchly traditional society grapples with modernity's disruptions, seeking conservatisms far beyond Putinism.

It's a truism that America is a liberal place. Americans emphasize the importance of the individual and tend to reject notions of hierarchy and authority. Russia by contrast is known to be a more conservative society, one where the interests of the group come ahead of those of the individual; and where, for centuries, respect for hierarchy and authority has usually been the norm.

All the same, the "news" of Russia's return to conservatism has hit many observers in the West like the proverbial ton of bricks. The typical response has been to blame the Russian president for steering Russia away from the liberal path, the path of becoming a " normal country" with "Western values."

Others have sought to understand Russian political culture on its own terms. A recent analysis ("The New Eurasians," Times Literary Supplement , May 13, 2015) stands out from the crowd by making a serious effort to read present-day Russian conservatism in its historical context. Lesley Chamberlain dismisses the glib reduction of Russia to its present-day leader. Russia, she writes, is not ruled by Vladimir Putin: to the contrary, "the power that rules Russia is tradition." Far from it being the case that a benighted Russian public is being led to conservatism artificially by its government, the reverse is the case: the vast majority of Russians, perhaps eighty percent "are intensely conservative."

Like most in the commentariat, Chamberlain finds cause for alarm in Russia's return to type. She worries about a Russia seeking to create "an alternative version of the contemporary Christian, or post-Christian, world, contiguous with but distinct from the West."

Chamberlain reduces today's incarnation of Russian conservatism to the more or less vague bundle of geographic and neo-imperial notions that goes by the name Eurasianism, often linked with the name of Alexander Dugin.

To be sure, anti-Western Eurasianism is part of contemporary Russian conservatism. But it is only one part. Excessive focus on this angle has created the impression that Dugin-esque Eurasianism is the only game in town when it comes to Russian conservatism. It isn't. It's not even the only version of what might be called the 'Russian national greatness' school of conservatism.

If we wish to understand Russia in something like its true complexity, we have to take the trouble to listen to it, to let it speak in its own voice instead of constantly projecting onto it all our own worst fears. Precisely because Eurasianism has already hogged all the attention, I won't deal with it here.

... ... ...

Liberal Conservatism

Some participants straddled several categories of conservatism at once. In other cases, for example that of the above-mentioned Makarenko, their thought fit neatly within a single category -- in his case, that of liberal conservatism.

For Makarenko, modern Russian political practice has far too utilitarian an attitude toward rule of law and democracy. If it can be demonstrated that the latter support state sovereignty, then all is well and good; but whenever either are perceived as a threat to the state -- then democracy and rule of law are always the ones that have to suffer. From his perspective, Russia would do better to learn from Burke, who looked not so much to the sovereignty of the state as to the sovereignty of the parliament .

Matveichev, no doubt the most eclectic thinker in the group, on certain subjects occupied the liberal end of the spectrum. For example, in an essay on corruption and the state, he approvingly cites the work of Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto to make the point that rule of law -- as it is practiced, nota bene , in the United States -- is the sine qua non of economic prosperity. What I found fascinating about Matveichev's position is that he then takes his argument in a Hegelian and Platonic direction.

It is the state -- not the market on its own -- that provides these all important forms , and bad as the corruption of state institutions may be, a bad form is nonetheless better than no form at all -- including for business. The common good "cannot be reduced to the goods of individual private parties, and cannot be deduced from them. Just as the sum of the parts does not make up the whole, in the same way the sum of private interests may sometimes work even against itself it is the state that represents the common good." Isn't this something we can learn from in the West today?

Left Conservatism

The "left conservatives" at the conference -- represented most prominently by Dr. Alexander Schipkov, an expert on Church-state relations -- are critical of liberal capitalism and indeed are also critical of the current Russian state to the extent that its "conservatism" is reducible merely to "family values" without including the all-important component of economic fairness. His views are close to that of Catholic Distributists as well as to those of "radical orthodox" theologians like William Cavanaugh and John Milbank.

According to Schipkov, Russians of various backgrounds (left and right, secular and religious, red and white) need to forge a common ethic. But in truth, Russia already has such an ethic, one that unifies all the disparate phases in its often tragic and contradictory history. Consciously playing off of Weber, Schipkov refers to Russia's "[Christian] Orthodox spirit and the ethic of solidarity ." In a fascinating essay on this same subject, Schipkov makes clear that his concept of solidarity owes much to the writings of the early 20th century German philosopher Max Scheler, who likewise had such a big impact on the thought of Pope John Paul II.

Though the Russian Church continues to play a defining role in the ethical formation of the nation -- no other pre-1917 institution, after all, still exists -- over time it will be replaced by other institutions, according to Schipkov. Like the Catholic Church, the Russian Orthodox Church has recently forged its own Social Concept of the ROC, which fleshes out this call for fairness as an aspect of human dignity.

Creative Conservatism

Because it tends to evoke the disastrous social and economic effects of "liberalisation" during the 1990s, the term "liberal" has become something of a swear word in today's Russia. But what, exactly, does this much reviled "liberalism" consist in? In my own presentation (English translation forthcoming at SolidarityHall.org ) I suggested that Russians need to define liberalism -- and conservatism -- more carefully, while distinguishing both from their ideological perversions.

To his credit, Oleg Matveichev has taken the trouble to craft a precise definition of the liberal doctrine of human nature in terms worthy of a Pierre Manent ( The City of Man ). According to Matveichev, liberalism reconceives the very essence of man as freedom, self-sufficiency, and self-definition. Seen through this liberal prism, the goal of our existence becomes self-emancipation from the chains of the past and the dead weight of tradition.

Having redefined the meaning of history, Matveichev continues, the "liberals" then set about condemning those who would thwart its "progress," dismissing them as "conservatives" and "reactionaries." Is it not time, Matveichev asks, to throw off the chains of this label invented for us by our adversaries? Why define ourselves as mere "conservatives"? Why not creatively reimagine an alternative 'meaning of history" ourselves?

Can conservatism be "creative?" And if so, how? Mikhail Remizov, president of the National Strategy Institute, answered, in effect, "how can it be anything else?" Critics on the left sometimes attack conservatism by saying, that conservatives do not preserve tradition, they invent it. Remizov dismisses the implied insult, because it demonstrates a misunderstanding of how traditions work: (re)invention " is the normal, creative approach to tradition." Remizov agrees with Hans-Georg Gadamer that sharply contrasting tradition and modernity is a silly and flat-footed way of looking at tradition, because the latter is always in any case a complex creative task of making adjustments and dialectical zig-zags. Such an understanding of culture and tradition as creativity fits, of course, quite nicely with the philosophy of Nicholas Berdyaev. It is hard to think of another thinker for whom creativity plays a more central role.

Alexei Kozyrev, associate dean of the philosophy department at Moscow State University, illustrated the same creative conservative principle when he spoke of the Russian Orthodox Church's Social Concept. The task of modern man, according to that document, is to find creative ways to retrieve the thought of the Church Fathers, for example that of Gregory of Nyssa, who counseled demonstrating our human dignity "not by domination of the natural world but by caring for and preserving it." The Social Concept likewise calls for defending the dignity of the unborn embryo and of the mentally ill. Here, in an unexpected twist, the Western environmental movement meets the pro-Life movement, challenging perhaps our own ideological boundaries.

... ...

Dialogue with Russia?

Lesley Chamberlain claimed that Russia is not a puzzle. In fact that is precisely what it is. As should be clear even from the above very partial survey, Russian conservatism, like Russia itself, embraces a contradictory collection of flaws and virtues. Both the flaws and the virtues are large.

Among Russia's virtues, it must be emphasized, is a far greater freedom of speech than it is typically given credit for. Russian participants in the Kaliningrad conference demonstrated a boldness of imagination, a variety and depth of thought on alternate futures for their country that is by no means always evident in political speech even in the United States.

For Western liberals, it is tempting to present Russian conservatism as always intrinsically dangerous. But I believe the loss is ours. Russian conservatism -- or at any rate important elements of it -- contains something potentially valuable to the West as it seeks to forge a strategy for dealing with the growing disorder in the world. What justifies engagement with Russia is before all else its ability to contribute to solving the problem that all of us face: how to devise a softer version of western modernity, one which allows for the preservation of tradition while simultaneously retaining what is most valuable in the liberal tradition.

The author would like to thank Dr. Adrian Walker, Matthew Cooper and especially Dr. Matthew Dal Santo for their valuable suggestions and comments on an earlier draft.

Paul Grenier is an essayist and translator who writes regularly on political-philosophical issues.

Andrew W June 19, 2015 at 9:03 am

@JonF

The presumption amongst Russian conservatives is not that Russia is perfect as it is but that Russia's foundational values are good. This is something they have in common with American conservatives, British Conservatives like Peter Hitchens, and probably most conservatives in most societies. They would also lament their social ills.

I am not going to accuse you of not having read the article, but that comment of yours could easily have been made by someone who simply read the title and jumped to the comments section.

Joseph Kellner , says: June 19, 2015 at 4:53 pm
The author's point on free speech is an important one – there is a lot of very deep and open discussion in Russia at the moment about the country's direction (including even television debates with ten times the intellectual content of what we find in the States). Putinism is not a clear ideological system, and for the most part there is no official orthodoxy being pressed on scholars or the public, many currents exist. Most of the major viable currents, as this article suggests, are variants of conservatism; Western-style liberal democracy has (at the moment) lost nearly all it's appeal to the intelligentsia and the average person alike.

Re: Jon F's comment – unfortunately, in my view he is right. We shouldn't believe that Russia is a place of thriving family values simply because they say it more often and louder. Statistics are not the best way to see this – I personally believe (from experience in the capital and the provinces) that if Russians divorce less, they cheat more. If they have fewer abortions, they have more children born into undesirable childhoods. Russian conservatism does have its virtues and the country must to admire, but respect for women and children are far from a given.

Cornel Lencar , says: June 21, 2015 at 3:26 pm
The tendency to see Russia in black/white only, with a pre-imposed bias is no different than the tendency to see the US (and sometimes the west) and its values in similar manichean perspectives. Adding depth and colour to the other takes work, and especially the willingness to empathise, even for a little while, in order to gain more understanding, before employing a critical eye. And from this perspective I think the article does a good job.
Paul Grenier , says: June 22, 2015 at 7:21 pm
W. Burns: I don't recall that specific issue raised at the conference, but the Revolution and subsequent experience is much debated, including in other writings by the participants, e.g. by Shchipkov (his preferred spelling btw, not my Schipkov), whose take is much like that of Berdyaev: the communist experience is in partial continuity with aspects of Russia's tradition, e.g. of economic 'fairness' (equalizing plots on the peasant commune, etc.) and privileging the group over the individual. I started with the analysis by L. Chamberlain in part because her wide lens-perspective helps make sense of that experience.
David Naas and Cornel Lencar: I wish there were more who shared your perspective. Thanks.
Regarding Russian values vs. practice, aspirations vs. real-world problems. Who among us is without sin? Is U.S. practice so pristine that we should disdain talking to the Russian side? That is the material point.
Since the conference I have continued reading the work of these (and other conference) attendees meant for a Russian audience. They are very, very far from smug about their internal problems; quite the contrary.
Dave P.: As far as I know, the conference Proceedings so far are only in Russian, but there are pretty detailed English-language abstracts. Try contacting ISEPR (their site, ISEPR.ru, also has an English-language version).

[Apr 24, 2018] Lavrov makes clear they only treat the dialogue with the military leadership seriously.

Notable quotes:
"... They have virtually given up on the political channels even through intermediaries like the EU). The only relationship left is that of military balance/confrontation. ..."
Apr 24, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: les7 | Apr 22, 2018 5:12:23 PM | 32

I just listened to Lavrov's interview with the BBC. Early on, when asked how he responds to waking up to a tweet that tells Russia to get ready for those nice new cruise missiles, Lavrov responds by distinguishing between the tweets and the dialogue between military leaders. Lavrov makes clear they only treat the dialogue with the military leadership seriously.

To me, while stated very subtly, this marks a profound shift in how Russia will interact with the US. They have virtually given up on the political channels even through intermediaries like the EU). The only relationship left is that of military balance/confrontation.

May those who have ears to hear, listen.

[Apr 24, 2018] Regime Change in Armenia PM Resigns After Mass Protests

It does not matter if protests are genuine or artificial. They will be co-opted and exploited by West in the most nefarious fashion with resulting drop of the standard of living or 90$ of population or even 99%. Ukraine is a good example here. This is a neoliberal Catch 22
NGO became completely infiltrated by intelligence agencies and as such have a huge destabilizing role in any protests. Providing both organizational and material help.
Notable quotes:
"... Western backed Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have been heavily involved in post Soviet Armenia's education system, community and charity works. These NGOs have been selling the public on the perception that Armenia's economic woes are directly the result of their corrupt, Russia friendly government, as well as Russia itself. ..."
"... Additionally, if these protests continue to move in a violent direction, and categorically seek regime change , if the government does not step down in favor of the opposition, but instead opts to call in the military to defend itself, then the situation could lead to a destabilization of the country . During such a period of chaos, it is not unthinkable that the Azerbs could seize the opportunity to launch a fresh campaign to take Nagorno Karabakh while Armenia's government and forces are concerned with preserving order elsewhere. ..."
"... Meanwhile, the well meaning populace of Armenia has no idea that their grievances are being played upon by international interests like a pawn on a global chess board. ..."
Apr 24, 2018 | russia-insider.com

"The people are against my rule," Sargsyan, who took office as prime minister after serving as Armenia's president for 10 years, said in a statement.

"I am leaving my post."

As Bloomberg reports, the announcement came as demonstrators flooded the streets of the capital, Yerevan, for an 11th day on Monday demanding Sargysan's resignation, and hours after police released opposition leader Nikol Pashinyan from overnight detention.

Pashinyan's arrest prompted the largest protest to date on Sunday , while scores of troops joined the anti-government movement on Monday for the first time.

Sargsyan's election as Prime Minister was largely perceived as a power grab because Sargsyan will largely retain the same powers that he held during his two terms in the Presidential capacity, and took place just after Armenia's April 9th transition from a presidential system to that of a prime ministerial one.

But as The Duran's Frank Sellers detailed previously, this social unrest (and now resignation) has all the markings of a Ukraine-esque Western-backed effort at regime change to once again disrupt Russia.

Western backed Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have been heavily involved in post Soviet Armenia's education system, community and charity works. These NGOs have been selling the public on the perception that Armenia's economic woes are directly the result of their corrupt, Russia friendly government, as well as Russia itself.

Hence, the concept that Sargsyan's government has only made matters for the population worse is the grievance upon which much of the unrest hinges. With Sargsyan seen as being in bed with the Russians, and his further development of Armenia's ties with Russia, these protests therefore possess a potentially disastrous outcome, both domestically, for the Armenians, and also geopolitically, as it threatens Russia's position in the region.

However, Armenia has been playing both sides of the fence in recent years, as it has additionally been moving closer to the European Union, signing itself to a Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement with the European bloc, attempting to deepen diplomacy and economic ties with the West, while simultaneously making commitments to Russia's economic initiatives in the region. Russia gets a villainous wrap over the fact that Russia is playing both sides of the Nagorno Karabakh-Azerb conflict, as Russia is the benefactor of both players, the common perception, derived from the propaganda of these NGOs, is that Russia benefits by stoking the conflict.

The situation, in effect, represents a powder keg scenario, with all the elements in place to provoke the necessary popular discontent that would play into an attempt at regime change.

And, indeed, this situation has all the markings of a color revolution, as the ring leader for this movement, Nikol Pashinyan, is already calling it a "velvet revolution", an allusion to the regime change that took place in Czechoslovakia in 1989.

Pashinyan has called upon protesters to obstruct roadways and prevent the opening of governmental offices, and has been so bold as to declare that the Armenian government "no longer holds legitimacy", and that all government agencies and police personnel should only be obedient to "committees" appointed by his revolution.

Keep in mind, however, that Sargsyan hasn't, thus far, broken any law, nor violated the Armenian constitution, so, Pashinyan's claim against Sargsyan's legitimacy can only be viewed as a baseless instigation for further violence and an obstinate unwillingness to look for a middle ground scenario, or peaceful resolution to the situation at hand. An unwillingness to compromise satisfies one of the key factors that is commonly seen in many color revolutions.

The typical manner in which Western backed color revolutions unfold is when a peaceful protest about legitimate grievances are hijacked to become the catalyst for a violent revolution. If we consider the EuroMaidan revolution that took place in 2014, a peaceful protest turned violent after the slaughter of the "heavenly hundred" by mystery snipers, killing police and protesters both, in order to help the conflict along to a point of no return to peace.

To date, the situation on the streets of Yerevan seems to be going in a similar direction, as the protests have already turned semi violent, with police officers sustaining knife wounds. Note that this sort of behaviour is foreign to the Armenian psyche. Western provocateurs are often present to stir up mayhem when these tragedies occur. Pictured here are some of the assailants, observe also that the fellow on the left is not an Armenian.

Sadly, as Sellers concludes, many Armenians are of the persuasion that by changing their government and rejecting Russia as Armenia's strategic partner, in favour of hopeful Western integration, Armenia will realize greater economic opportunity, and a vastly improved standard of living for the average Armenian.

However, what does history show us about just what Western-backed regime changes bring to their victim nation? Let's observe the economic situation in the Ukraine before and after the coup d'état, as reported by Vesti :

If we evaluate the results of the new government, they're simply disastrous for the country. In the year before the coup, the GDP was estimated at $180 billion, in 2017 it's expected to be half as much, $90 billion.

The average salary in the country was more than halved, from $408 per month to $196 last year. The exchange rate of the hryvna fell three and a half times, from 8 to 27 per dollar. As the main high-tech enterprises are destroyed, the economy acquired a colonial structure.

More and more raw materials are exported, being nearly 80% of exports. Half of this is agrarian. Total export volume fell by 57%. Foreign direct investment fell by at least four times, from 6 billion a year to one and a half. That's practically nothing. And out of this nothing, however, most of the investment still comes from Russia.

The national debt has been increasing all the time and has now become difficult to be paid back. It was 64 billion dollars which then became 80 billion. Many millions of its citizens have left the country in search of a better life. Some of them went to the West, some to Russia. The health system and the education system have deteriorated.

The system of legal proceedings as well. Corporate raiding became the norm. Corruption increased. The country broke into pieces.

Poroshenko and his team deceived everyone: the West, and Russia, and their people in terms of the country's prospects, the practices of the new government, and the Minsk Agreements.

An about-face with regards to Russia, and an adherence to the West, however, not only fails to present the economic outcome that many Armenians might hope for, but it presents a very real danger in the form of a greater escalation of conflict with its neighbor Azerbaijan , with regards to Nagorno Karabakh, the last such major conflict costed the lives of some 6,000 Armenians, and approximately 30,000 Azeris.

Additionally, if these protests continue to move in a violent direction, and categorically seek regime change , if the government does not step down in favor of the opposition, but instead opts to call in the military to defend itself, then the situation could lead to a destabilization of the country . During such a period of chaos, it is not unthinkable that the Azerbs could seize the opportunity to launch a fresh campaign to take Nagorno Karabakh while Armenia's government and forces are concerned with preserving order elsewhere.

Such a renewed conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan produces results that are simply unpredictable, concerning the geopolitical implications regarding the involvement of Russia and NATO, seeing as Armenia hosts Russian military bases, while Azerbaijan is host to a NATO base , but if the Armenians have broken off its relations with the Russians in the favor of the West, Russian involvement is left in a state of bewilderment, while the conflict devastates Russia's economic and military perspective in the region. This, therefore, holds the possibility of being the next proxy war between Russia and the West.

Therefore, these protests are exceedingly dangerous, not just for the region, but also relevant to the geopolitical balance of power between the east and west, due to the possibilities that could be unleashed if these protests escalate out of control. While protests against Sargsyan's government isn't anything new, considering the protests of recent years, the protests taking place at the present time differ from its predecessors in the sense that previous riots were confined only to Yerevan, whereas the current uprising is national in its scale, and therefore presents a much greater concern.

Meanwhile, the well meaning populace of Armenia has no idea that their grievances are being played upon by international interests like a pawn on a global chess board.

[Apr 24, 2018] America's Men Without Chests by Paul Grenier

Highly recommended!
The fact that 99.9% of neocons are chickenhawks and never experienced the level of sufferings the wat inflicts on people is defining chanracteristic of all US neocons. Especially female neocon -- a unique US breed.
Notable quotes:
"... At the core of the American philosophy is voluntarism, the justification of action based purely and simply on the will. ..."
"... The clearest and perhaps the best expression of American voluntarism come of age was expressed by Karl Rove during the George W. Bush administration, as reported by Ron Suskind in New York Times Magazine ..."
"... We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do. ..."
"... The point of the voluntarist order is to act, to impose one's will on global reality by any means necessary. The truth is not something to be understood, or grasped, still less something that should condition one's own actions and limit them in any way. Truth is reducible to whatever is useful for imposing one's will. ..."
"... For America's voluntarist order, whether these events as described are true in the objective sense is of no more importance than whether Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. You will recall that, just prior to the Iraq invasion, the CIA waterboarded Abu Zubaydah some 83 times in order to oblige him to confess a nonexistent connection between Saddam's Iraq, al-Qaeda, and chemical weaponry. That is voluntarism in action right there. "We're an empire now and we create our own reality." It was not a one-off. It is now the norm to make sure the facts are fixed to match the desired policy. ..."
"... Voluntarism is the fruit of an anti-civilization, and of a technological way of knowing, as the great Canadian philosopher George Grant put it, that bears a striking resemblance to what C.S. Lewis described in his pre- Nineteen Eighty-Four ..."
"... That Hideous Strength ..."
Apr 24, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

At the core of the American philosophy is voluntarism, the justification of action based purely and simply on the will. The distinguishing characteristic of voluntarism is that it gives pride of place to the will as such, to the will as power, the will abstracted from everything else, but especially abstracted from the good. The notion of the good is necessarily inclusive of the whole, of all sides. Concern exclusively for oneself goes by a different name.

The clearest and perhaps the best expression of American voluntarism come of age was expressed by Karl Rove during the George W. Bush administration, as reported by Ron Suskind in New York Times Magazine on October 17, 2004:

We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.

This oft-quoted statement is naively assumed to have been the expression of a single moment in American politics, rather than a summation of its ethos by one of its shrewder and more self-aware practitioners. The point of the voluntarist order is to act, to impose one's will on global reality by any means necessary. The truth is not something to be understood, or grasped, still less something that should condition one's own actions and limit them in any way. Truth is reducible to whatever is useful for imposing one's will.

We can see this voluntarism at work among our forebears. The Skripal affair in Britain led to almost immediate action -- the expulsion of 60 Russian diplomats from the United States alone -- well before the facts of this dubious incident, which has led to zero deaths, could be established. Indeed, when the leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, suggested first establishing what had happened and only then acting, he was widely accused of weakness. When one is "history's actor," action mustn't be delayed. That, after all, is the whole point.

The suffering of innocents should always concern us. But in Syria, the facts regarding who is the guilty party, including in this latest case of a gas attack in Douma, are very far from having been established. What's more, though reputable investigators such as Hans Blix and MIT's Theodore Postol have cast serious doubt on the reliability of the evidence linking such attacks to Assad's government, official accounts in the U.S. proceed as if there is not the slightest controversy about the matter.

For America's voluntarist order, whether these events as described are true in the objective sense is of no more importance than whether Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. You will recall that, just prior to the Iraq invasion, the CIA waterboarded Abu Zubaydah some 83 times in order to oblige him to confess a nonexistent connection between Saddam's Iraq, al-Qaeda, and chemical weaponry. That is voluntarism in action right there. "We're an empire now and we create our own reality." It was not a one-off. It is now the norm to make sure the facts are fixed to match the desired policy.

Voluntarism is the fruit of an anti-civilization, and of a technological way of knowing, as the great Canadian philosopher George Grant put it, that bears a striking resemblance to what C.S. Lewis described in his pre- Nineteen Eighty-Four anti-utopia That Hideous Strength . In that novel, the institution called N.I.C.E., like the U.S. foreign policy establishment today, is essentially a voluntarist bureaucracy run by men without culture, trained in technical sciences and sociology-like "disciplines" and "law" understood in a purely formalistic sense, who assume human affairs are understandable as aggregates of facts without value. Such "men without chests" (Lewis's phrase) live in a world where the good and the true have forever been severed of their mutually defining link. The resulting, essentially irrational world they inhabit is one that has only one logic left: that of will and power.

It is an American empire where we create our own reality, the mirror image of ourselves, and it is indeed precisely hideous. If the builders of empire continue to get their way, it may all soon enough come to a violent and ignominious end. Historians, if they still exist, will marvel at our folly.

Paul Grenier, an essayist and translator who writes regularly on political-philosophical issues, is founder of the Simone Weil Center for Political Philosophy.

Annette April 23, 2018 at 1:30 pm

For another outstanding account of 'a technological way of knowing', check out Jacques Ellul's 'The Technological Society'.

Not only was this incident fabricated, it was known the preparations were known in advance. I remember reading an article two weeks before Douma about the preparations for the fabrication. Felix Somary was quite right in writing in July 1914 that "the information available to insiders, and precisely the most highly placed among them, is all to often misleading" (quoted in Jim Rickards "The Road to Ruin").

Steph , says: April 23, 2018 at 2:47 pm
An excellent recommendation, Annette! And for the religiously-minded, Ellul's theological companion piece, The Meaning of the City, is also very good.
Emil Bogdan , says: April 23, 2018 at 2:57 pm
Volunteerism, voluntarism, the mysterious workings of the "will," we're famous for all of it, but this is not so uniquely American, Rove's comment reminds me of something that Tolstoy might put in Napoleon's mouth, actually. Pride, plus the tunnel-vision typical of technocrats, academics, specialists

Karl Rove is a man without a chest–a "chickenhawk," a proud and willful man puffed up on ignorance and willpower, wrecking the world–and nothing more than that, unless he wills it to be.

Mark Thomason , says: April 23, 2018 at 3:08 pm
Volunteerism is two things, Power to the Ladies Who Lunch, and we don't have to pay for a social safety net because somebody else will provide it voluntarily for free.

It has no larger meaning, and no role in foreign policy.

The foreign policy described here is just Smedley Butler's "racket" using US foreign policy and forces for private ends.

[Apr 23, 2018] Sentence First, Verdict After

See BBC interview . One really good sarcasm from Lavrov. Sergey Lavrov comperating UK beahviour with the famous Lewis Carroll's Alice In Wonderland episode in order to describe the new western 'weird logic' of 'Sentence First, Verdict After' has to be watched repeatedly by all...what a masterful HardTalk show...exposing the new bench mark in western international discourse.
Sergey Lavrov: No, I said "highly likely" as a new invention of the British diplomacy to describe why they punish people – because these people are highly likely guilty, like in Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll - when he described a trial. And when they discovered that the jury could be engaged, then the King said "Let's ask the jury" and the Queen shouted "No jury! Sentence first – verdict afterwards." That's the logic of "highly likely".
Question: Have you got one shred, shred of evidence to suggest British intelligence tried to kill Sergei Skripal?
Sergey Lavrov: There is an old Roman criteria "who is to benefit". The UK is grossly benefiting from the provocations both in Syria and in the United Kingdom itself.
Sergey Lavrov: That's a problem. First, the A-234 agent in highly pure form in high concentration is already raising suspicions.
Question: It came from Russia. In the former Soviet Union, you invented that.
Sergey Lavrov: Stephen, you are not factual. You may be hard talking, but you are not listening. This chemical substance indeed was invented in the Soviet Union, then one the inventors fled to the United States and made the formula public. And if you want to check before raising the issue, please do so, the United States patented this formula; and it was formally taken by United States special services or the army, I don't remember. But A-234 is a very light, I mean, it seriously damages a person, kills him of her, but it evaporates very fast; and the sample taken two weeks after the event cannot, according to our scientists, contain very high concentration.
Notable quotes:
"... 'No, no!' said the Queen. 'Sentence first -- verdict afterwards.' ..."
Apr 23, 2018 | adelaide.edu.au

'No, no!' said the Queen. 'Sentence first -- verdict afterwards.'

'Stuff and nonsense!' said Alice loudly. 'The idea of having the sentence first!'

'Hold your tongue!' said the Queen, turning purple.

'I won't!' said Alice.

'Off with her head!' the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. Nobody moved.

'Who cares for you?' said Alice, (she had grown to her full size by this time.) 'You're nothing but a pack of cards!'

[Apr 23, 2018] Lavrov is truly a class act. Intelligent, well read, humorous. He, and a very few like him, are all that's standing between us and oblivion

See BBC interview . One really good sarcasm from Lavrov. Sergey Lavrov comperating UK beahviour with the famous Lewis Carroll's Alice In Wonderland episode in order to describe the new western 'weird logic' of 'Sentence First, Verdict After' has to be watched repeatedly by all...what a masterful HardTalk show...exposing the new bench mark in western international discourse.
Sergey Lavrov: No, I said "highly likely" as a new invention of the British diplomacy to describe why they punish people – because these people are highly likely guilty, like in Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll - when he described a trial. And when they discovered that the jury could be engaged, then the King said "Let's ask the jury" and the Queen shouted "No jury! Sentence first – verdict afterwards." That's the logic of "highly likely".
Question: Have you got one shred, shred of evidence to suggest British intelligence tried to kill Sergei Skripal?
Sergey Lavrov: There is an old Roman criteria "who is to benefit". The UK is grossly benefiting from the provocations both in Syria and in the United Kingdom itself.
Sergey Lavrov: That's a problem. First, the A-234 agent in highly pure form in high concentration is already raising suspicions.
Question: It came from Russia. In the former Soviet Union, you invented that.
Sergey Lavrov: Stephen, you are not factual. You may be hard talking, but you are not listening. This chemical substance indeed was invented in the Soviet Union, then one the inventors fled to the United States and made the formula public. And if you want to check before raising the issue, please do so, the United States patented this formula; and it was formally taken by United States special services or the army, I don't remember. But A-234 is a very light, I mean, it seriously damages a person, kills him of her, but it evaporates very fast; and the sample taken two weeks after the event cannot, according to our scientists, contain very high concentration.
Sergey Lavrov: For a Brit, you have very bad manners. The Swiss laboratory report also said that, and in the first place, they found BZ, which was I think invented in the United States in 1955 and was among the equipment of the US and UK army. And we asked OPCW, whom we trust, whether this is true or not that in addition to A-234 there was also BZ discovered. And we are waiting a reply of OPCW, whom, of course, we trust, but we want to trust and verify.
Notable quotes:
"... Sergey Lavrov analogising from Lewis Carroll's Alice In Wonderland in order to describe the new western 'weird logic' of 'Sentence First, Verdict After' has to be watched repeatedly by all...what a masterful HardTalk show...exposing the new bench mark in western international discourse. ..."
Apr 23, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

les7 | Apr 22, 2018 5:12:23 PM | 33

I just listened to Lavrov's interview with the BBC. Early on, when asked how he responds to waking up to a tweet that tells Russia to get ready for those nice new cruise missiles, Lavrov responds by distinguishing between the tweets and the dialogue between military leaders. Lavrov makes clear they only treat the dialogue with the military leadership seriously.

To me, while stated very subtly, this marks a profound shift in how Russia will interact with the US. They have virtually given up on the political channels even through intermediaries like the EU). The only relationship left is that of military balance/confrontation.

May those who have ears to hear, listen.

MadMax2 , Apr 23, 2018 5:23:56 AM | 87

Wouldn't be surprised to discover it was an Aussie 'fixer' behind the hold up of the OPCW inspection team, Australia has been pretty much 100% compliant since being regime changed in 1974.

...

Your greatest friend, most staunch ally tells you the truth despite what may come. Sergey Lavrov analogising from Lewis Carroll's Alice In Wonderland in order to describe the new western 'weird logic' of 'Sentence First, Verdict After' has to be watched repeatedly by all...what a masterful HardTalk show...exposing the new bench mark in western international discourse.

The logic of 'highly likely.' No proof required.

Such honesty, what a friend... and the correct book to quote too...given the current ocean of media backed fantasy.

cdvision , Apr 23, 2018 6:02:44 AM | 88
MadMax2 @87

Indeed.

Lavrov is truly a class act. Intelligent, well read, humorous. He, and a very few like him, are all that's standing between us and oblivion.

@Madmax2 87

I agree that Australia with Turnbull and Bishop - especially the latter - in control is 100% onboard with the Deep State narrative - one just has to listen to the ABC to know that.

But since 1974? For all his faults, Fraser would have been opposed to what the US is doing. As Gough said, long after Fraser left office, "Malcolm is a much improved person." Fraser did much to assist in dismantling apartheid in South Africa and wrote a book espousing an independent foreign policy for Australia.

@Madmax2 87

I agree that Australia with Turnbull and Bishop - especially the latter - in control is 100% onboard with the Deep State narrative - one just has to listen to the ABC to know that.

But since 1974? For all his faults, Fraser would have been opposed to what the US is doing. As Gough said, long after Fraser left office, "Malcolm is a much improved person." Fraser did much to assist in dismantling apartheid in South Africa and wrote a book espousing an independent foreign policy for Australia. /div

[Apr 23, 2018] Democrat-pushed Mueller SPECTACLE continues to oppress the United States by Seraphim Hanisch

Notable quotes:
"... The Democrats are incredulous, one might suppose. They cannot seem to get over the fact that President Trump is simply not like they are. After all, their party rigged their own primary in 2016 to make sure that Hillary Rodham Clinton was to be the nominee. The Party threw their very popular candidate, Bernie Sanders, completely under the bus. Of course, he also opted to join them, despite his own campaign rhetoric being in stark contradiction with much of what Hillary's campaign was about. ..."
"... The suit's flamboyant charges made headlines, but that only served to obscure the real meaning. Namely, that top Dems are giving up their fantasies that special counsel Robert Mueller will deliver them from political purgatory by getting the goods on Trump. ..."
"... The trashy suit is their way of trying to keep impeachment and Russia, Russia, Russia alive for the midterms in case Mueller's probe comes up empty. ..."
Apr 23, 2018 | theduran.com

Recent move by Democrat Party to sue Trump, Russia and Wikileaks symptomatic as President Trump's campaign shows up clean

The Democrats are incredulous, one might suppose. They cannot seem to get over the fact that President Trump is simply not like they are. After all, their party rigged their own primary in 2016 to make sure that Hillary Rodham Clinton was to be the nominee. The Party threw their very popular candidate, Bernie Sanders, completely under the bus. Of course, he also opted to join them, despite his own campaign rhetoric being in stark contradiction with much of what Hillary's campaign was about.

The only thing they shared in common was a (D) by their name as candidate.

In Michael Goodwin's piece in the New York Post ,, the reason for the Democrat despair is given: Mueller is simply not finding anything wrong with President Trump's election campaign, no signs of collusion with Russian agencies or anything else. Mueller's bizarre and unbridled investigation is reeling along from person to person, looking for something but coming up empty save for minor process crimes which are themselves largely driven into existence by Mueller's questioning, a.k.a. interrogation techniques.

Says Goodwin:

In a move that reeks of desperation, the DNC filed a civil suit Friday against President Trump's campaign, Russia and WikiLeaks , alleging a vast (right wing!) conspiracy to tip the election to Trump.

The suit's flamboyant charges made headlines, but that only served to obscure the real meaning. Namely, that top Dems are giving up their fantasies that special counsel Robert Mueller will deliver them from political purgatory by getting the goods on Trump.

The trashy suit is their way of trying to keep impeachment and Russia, Russia, Russia alive for the midterms in case Mueller's probe comes up empty.

Truth be told, party leaders are right to be disheartened by setbacks in the War against Trump. For the second time, the president was told he is not a target of Mueller, this time by Rod Rosenstein, the deputy assistant attorney general who created Mueller.

While Trump could still become a target, the odds of that happening decline by the day.

... ... ...

[Apr 23, 2018] Is this the Salisbury poisonings Timeline from Mirror

Apr 23, 2018 | mirror.co.uk

Timeline

[Apr 23, 2018] The Tony Blair Rule: The Truth Takes 15 Years to Come Out, Skripal Countdown Starts Now - Simonyan

Highly recommended!
Yes 15 years s about right for false flag operations.
Apr 23, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

I just posted a link to a Vesti clip at the end of the previous thread, because it seems so relevant to b's message about the western crackdown on free speech in this information war. This open thread is coming so close on the heels of that wonderful article, that I want to double-post here as well as there.

Margarita Simonyan of RT says how she's trying to talk, not to power but to common people, because there are those among the common people who do speak up and who really do shape public opinion - not governments. She cited Roger Waters as an example, who was speaking at a concert and telling the truth about the White Helmets.

She said, someone has to read in order to speak. And someone has to write so someone can read:


The Tony Blair Rule: The Truth Takes 15 Years to Come Out, Skripal Countdown Starts Now - Simonyan

Posted by: Grieved | Apr 22, 2018 9:53:58 PM | 54

[Apr 23, 2018] Sentence First, Verdict After

See BBC interview . One really good sarcasm from Lavrov. Sergey Lavrov comperating UK beahviour with the famous Lewis Carroll's Alice In Wonderland episode in order to describe the new western 'weird logic' of 'Sentence First, Verdict After' has to be watched repeatedly by all...what a masterful HardTalk show...exposing the new bench mark in western international discourse.
Sergey Lavrov: No, I said "highly likely" as a new invention of the British diplomacy to describe why they punish people – because these people are highly likely guilty, like in Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll - when he described a trial. And when they discovered that the jury could be engaged, then the King said "Let's ask the jury" and the Queen shouted "No jury! Sentence first – verdict afterwards." That's the logic of "highly likely".
Question: Have you got one shred, shred of evidence to suggest British intelligence tried to kill Sergei Skripal?
Sergey Lavrov: There is an old Roman criteria "who is to benefit". The UK is grossly benefiting from the provocations both in Syria and in the United Kingdom itself.
Sergey Lavrov: That's a problem. First, the A-234 agent in highly pure form in high concentration is already raising suspicions.
Question: It came from Russia. In the former Soviet Union, you invented that.
Sergey Lavrov: Stephen, you are not factual. You may be hard talking, but you are not listening. This chemical substance indeed was invented in the Soviet Union, then one the inventors fled to the United States and made the formula public. And if you want to check before raising the issue, please do so, the United States patented this formula; and it was formally taken by United States special services or the army, I don't remember. But A-234 is a very light, I mean, it seriously damages a person, kills him of her, but it evaporates very fast; and the sample taken two weeks after the event cannot, according to our scientists, contain very high concentration.
Notable quotes:
"... 'No, no!' said the Queen. 'Sentence first -- verdict afterwards.' ..."
Apr 23, 2018 | adelaide.edu.au

'No, no!' said the Queen. 'Sentence first -- verdict afterwards.'

'Stuff and nonsense!' said Alice loudly. 'The idea of having the sentence first!'

'Hold your tongue!' said the Queen, turning purple.

'I won't!' said Alice.

'Off with her head!' the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. Nobody moved.

'Who cares for you?' said Alice, (she had grown to her full size by this time.) 'You're nothing but a pack of cards!'

[Apr 22, 2018] The Final Nail in the Russian Collusion Conspiracy Theory Coffin Comes at a Price by by Nathan McDonald

In no way MSM will drop "Russiagate" theme. They are way too invested in it. Douma attack changes nothing at all, contary to the author claims.
Notable quotes:
"... the Russian Conspiracy Theory -- rammed down the throats of everyone around the globe since Donald Trump was elected the 45th President of the United States -- has finally been laid to rest. ..."
"... Russia may or may not act, but it is rather unlikely that they will -- at least in the short term -- as the full combined might of the West is still an overwhelming force that no one nation can contend with. Russia knows this, and they are not stupid. But this is not to say that things cannot, nor will not, change in the future. ..."
"... Meanwhile, the chatter of Russian collusion, via the corrupt and dying MSM has petered out, as even those suffering from an extreme case of brainwashing find it hard to comprehend how a puppet can so easily slap its master across the face and get away with it. ..."
"... If President Trump was truly a puppet of Vladimir Putin -- or at least once was -- then parties in the know would have promptly released the evidence, destroying Trump in the process. The reason why it hasn't happened is simply because the evidence doesn't exist. ..."
"... Hilariously, it is the MSM who cry wolf about fake news and conspiracy theories, while at the same time, pushing their own half-truths, fake news and conspiracy theories. ..."
"... It is sad to see how far the "guardians of the truth" have fallen and how decadent the MSM has become. They are so greedy and corrupt that they have pushed us towards a path that places the West on the precipice of war with a global, nuclear power. ..."
"... The Demorats need impeachment to fire up their base and get their cash. They filed a lawsuit to generate propaganda points for the MSM to wallow in. ..."
"... The Main Stain Media are still pushing the Russia Narrative every chance they get, as a side show now, a little jab here a little jab there not really attached to anything. ..."
Apr 21, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Written by Nathan McDonald, Sprott Money News

Well, it came at a risk. It came at a gamble.

But the Russian Conspiracy Theory -- rammed down the throats of everyone around the globe since Donald Trump was elected the 45th President of the United States -- has finally been laid to rest.

With a resounding boom as the missiles landed in Syria, the hopes and dreams of the MSM proving that President Trump is simply a Russian puppet were shattered in one swift tactical strike.These strikes came at a great risk, as they hit key Syrian assets -- assets that President Putin and his Russian forces vowed to protect. Acting together with its joint allies , Britain and France, the United States struck out against Syria for what the Western Intelligence community claims were chemical attacks against the Syrian civilian population, orchestrated by its own government.

Whether or not these claims are true is debatable (and highly suspect) but regardless, the chips have fallen, and we are now in a precarious position as the West once again plunges itself, ham-fisted, back into the cold war era.

Russian leaders have vowed that there will be consequences for these acts against an ally they have sworn to protect. Yet to this date, no retaliation has seemed to occur.

Russia may or may not act, but it is rather unlikely that they will -- at least in the short term -- as the full combined might of the West is still an overwhelming force that no one nation can contend with. Russia knows this, and they are not stupid. But this is not to say that things cannot, nor will not, change in the future.

Still, this has come at a cost. Russia has once again been forced into further isolation, as its Western peers condemn their actions and threaten them with even more trade sanctions. Pushed to the point of desperation, who knows what actions they will take in the coming years?

Meanwhile, the chatter of Russian collusion, via the corrupt and dying MSM has petered out, as even those suffering from an extreme case of brainwashing find it hard to comprehend how a puppet can so easily slap its master across the face and get away with it.

If President Trump was truly a puppet of Vladimir Putin -- or at least once was -- then parties in the know would have promptly released the evidence, destroying Trump in the process. The reason why it hasn't happened is simply because the evidence doesn't exist.

Hilariously, it is the MSM who cry wolf about fake news and conspiracy theories, while at the same time, pushing their own half-truths, fake news and conspiracy theories.

It is sad to see how far the "guardians of the truth" have fallen and how decadent the MSM has become. They are so greedy and corrupt that they have pushed us towards a path that places the West on the precipice of war with a global, nuclear power.

The final nail in the Russian collusion coffin has been put in place, but at what cost?

Only time will tell.

Itinerant -> New_Meat • Sat, 04/21/2018 - 18:51 Permalink

A dumb article: The Russians have not vowed anything. As Lavrov has stated publicly, "there will be consequences" is a factual observation, not a vow to revenge anything. Revenge does not help. It is not the way Putin thinks -- Putin thinks in terms of interests and the trade off between risks/costs and benefits.

Arctic Frost -> Frilton Miedman • Sun, 04/22/2018 - 11:28 Permalink

"With 4 indictments, 2 guilty pleas, not sure how anyone thinks it's over. AS for the Syria attack. . . "

Four indictments that have NOTHING to do with Trump colluding with Russia and are SOLEY upon the people indicted. Two guilty pleas for "lying" which your side is advocating that lying is no longer an issue we should care about.

AS FOR SYRIA: Interesting you put the Syria strike on Putin when it was obviously led by Britain and France or are we now to believe they along with Trump are Putin puppets too? However, you do seem to be FINALLY admitting your "NGO"'s are nothing but state sponsored shams intent on manipulating the world wide masses to believe their propaganda. After all it was YOUR people who claimed there was a supposed chemical attack and demanded retaliation.

Keep spinning in circles, as the dog who chases his tail is in a world all of his own making.

Reaper • Sat, 04/21/2018 - 09:58 Permalink

BS. The neo-cons know the strike was deliberately ineffective. The Demorats need impeachment to fire up their base and get their cash. They filed a lawsuit to generate propaganda points for the MSM to wallow in.

JailBanksters • Sat, 04/21/2018 - 09:59 Permalink

The Main Stain Media are still pushing the Russia Narrative every chance they get, as a side show now, a little jab here a little jab there not really attached to anything.

We haven't seen anything like this since the Russians were accused of hacking the Federal Election, over to you Bob.

Well that's right Jim, and now for something completely different.

Written by Nathan McDonald, Sprott Money News

[Apr 22, 2018] The Investigative Committee of Russia has published a video covering the information it has collected so far while investigating the Skripal case

Notable quotes:
"... Elena Skripal has granted a power of attorney to Viktoria Skripal allowing her to represent Elena's interests in Russia and the UK (shown in the video at 4:43). That means that the UK government is not allowing a legal representative of Sergei's mother to visit him. ..."
Apr 22, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

S | Apr 22, 2018 2:44:33 PM | 18

The Investigative Committee of Russia has published a video covering the information it has collected so far while investigating the Skripal case: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7D6Z_yGEFSY (in Russian). Three interesting tidbits stand out:

1:40–2:10 Yulia's movements have been traced from the moment she got into a Moscow taxi to the moment she boarded the plane to London. Taxi driver's identity has been established, as well as the identities of all passengers who traveled on the same flight as Yulia; none of them have experienced any health issues. The video shows CCTV footage of Yulia going through the airport.

4:20–5:10 The British claimed that Skripals had no relatives to represent their interests. This claim allowed the authorities to obtain the court permission to take blood samples from unconscious Skripals. However, it was found that Skripals had two relatives living in Yaroslavl oblast: 89-year old mother of Sergei Skripal, Elena Skripal, and his niece, Viktoria Skripal. We already know that. Here's what's new: on April 5, Elena Skripal has granted a power of attorney to Viktoria Skripal allowing her to represent Elena's interests in Russia and the UK (shown in the video at 4:43). That means that the UK government is not allowing a legal representative of Sergei's mother to visit him.

7:29–8:21 According to Viktor Holstov, the head of the Center for Analytical Research on Conventions for the Prohibition of Chemical and Biological Weapons at the Russian Ministry of Industry and Trade, a 2009 US patent evaluating possible antidotes to organophosphorous agents states that the antidotes to nerve agents such as sarin and VX are ineffective against Novichok-class agents. To arrive at such a conclusion, obviously, Novichok-class agents had to be synthesized in the U.S.

[Apr 21, 2018] It s a tough old world and we are certainly capable of a Salisbury set-up and god knows what else in Syria.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... It is perfectly possible that the British government manufactured the whole Salisbury thing. We are capable of just as much despicable behavior and murder as the next. ..."
"... Tucker Carlson of Fox News has it nailed down.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M28aYkLRlm0 ..."
"... This "civil war" has been nothing but a war for Syrian resources waged by western proxies. ..."
"... So now, In desperation borne out of their impending defeat, the imperialists have staged a chemical attack in a last throw of the dice to gain popular support for an escalation in military intervention. Like military interventions of the past, it is being justified in the name of humanitarian intervention. ..."
Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

wheelbarrow1 , 13 Apr 2018 14:37

Why is the prime minister of the United Kinkdom on the phone discussing whether or not to bomb a Sovereign country with the highly unstable, Donald Trump?

Can she not make up her own mind? Either she thinks it's the right thing to do or it isn't. Hopefully, the person on the other end of the phone was not Trump but someone with at least half a brain.

Proof, let's have some proof. Is that too much to ask? Apparently so. Russia is saying it's all a put up job, show us your facts. We are saying, don't be silly, we're British and besides, you may have done this sort of thing before.

It is perfectly possible that the British government manufactured the whole Salisbury thing. We are capable of just as much despicable behavior and murder as the next.

Part of the Great British act's of bravery and heroism in the second world war is the part played by women agents who were parachuted into France and helped organize local resistance groups. Odette Hallowes, Noor Inayat Khan and Violette Szabo are just a few of the many names but they are the best known. What is not generally know is that many agents when undergoing their training in the UK, were given information about the 'D' day landings, the approx time and place. They were then dropped into France into the hands of the waiting German army who captured and tortured and often executed them.

The double agent, who Winston Churchill met and fully approved of the plan was Henri Dericourt, an officer in the German army and our man on the ground in France. Dericourt organized the time and place for the drop off of the incoming agents, then told the Germans. The information about the 'D' day invasion time and place was false. The British fed the agents (only a small number) into German hands knowing they would be captured and the false information tortured out of them.

Source :- 'A Quiet Courage' Liane Jones.

It's a tough old world and we are certainly capable of a Salisbury set-up and god knows what else in Syria.

I_Wear_Socks , 13 Apr 2018 14:37
From The Guardian articles today that I have read on Syria, it makes absolutely clear that if you in any way question the narrative forwarded here, that you are a stupid conspiracy theorist in line with Richard Spencer and other far-right, American nutcases.

A more traditional form of argument to incline people to their way of thinking would be facts. But social pressure to conform and not be a conspiratorial idiot in line with the far-right obviously work better for most of their readers. My only surprise it that position hasn't been linked with Brexit.

ChairmanMayTseTung , 13 Apr 2018 14:37
Did anyone see the massive canister that was shown on TV repeatedly that was supposed to have been air-dropped and smashed through the window of a house, landed on a bed and failed to go off.

The bed was in remarkable condition with just a few ruffled bedclothes considering it had been hit with a metal object weighing god knows what and dropped from a great height.

MartinSilenus -> ChairmanMayTseTung , 13 Apr 2018 14:36
"More than 40 years after the US sprayed millions of litres of chemical agents to defoliate"

The Defoliant Agent Orange was used to kill jungles, resulting in light getting through to the dark jungle floors & a massive amount of low bush regrowing, making the finding of Vietcong fighters even harder!

It was sprayed even on American troops, it is a horrible stuff. Still compared to Chlorine poison gas, let alone nerve gases, it is much less terrible. Though the long term effects are pretty horrible.

"Some 45 million liters of the poisoned spray was Agent Orange, which contains the toxic compound dioxin"
http://theconversation.com/agent-orange-exposed-how-u-s-chemical-warfare-in-vietnam-unleashed-a-slow-moving-disaster-84572

120Daze , 13 Apr 2018 14:36
Who needs facts when you've got opinions? Non more hypocritical than the British. Its what you get when you lie and distort though a willing press, you get found out and then nobody believes anything you say.anymore. The white helmets are a western funded and founded organisation, they are NOT independent they are NOT volunteers, The UK the US and the Dutch fund them to the tune of over $40 million. They are a propaganda dispensing outlet. The press shouldn't report anything they release because it is utterly unable to substantiate ANY of it, there hasn't been a western journalist in these areas for over 4 years so why do the press expect us to believe anything they print? Combine this with the worst and most incompetent Govt this country has seen for decades and all you have is a massive distraction from massive domestic troubles which the same govt has no answers too.
LiviaDrusilla -> Bangorstu , 13 Apr 2018 14:36
LOL are you having a larf?

The same organisation that receives millions of quid in funding from USAID?

Whose 'executive director' used to work for USAID?

Who have campaigned for 'no fly zones' (ie US bombing)?

Who are affiliated to the Iranian terrorist group MEK?

Who only happen to run hospitals in 'rebel' held areas?

You have a strange idea of 'politically neutral'. Your 'NGO' are fighting for an Islamist state. Enjoy them.

Dominique2 , 13 Apr 2018 14:32
https://www.theguardian.com/world/shortcuts/2013/sep/01/winston-churchill-shocking-use-chemical-weapons

""I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes," [Winston Churchill] declared in one secret memorandum."

The current condemnation by the international community and international law is good and needs enforcement. But no virtue signalling where there is none.

CaptTroyTempest -> StoneRoses , 13 Apr 2018 14:27
But we're still awaiting evidence that a chemical attack has been carried out in Douma, aren't we? And if an attack was carried out, by whom. But before these essential points are verified, you feel that a targeted military response is justified. Are you equally keen for some targeted military response for the use of chemical weapons, namely white phosphorus, in Palestine by the Israaeli military? Unlike Douma, the use of these chemical weapons in the occupied territories by the IDF's personnel is well documented. But we haven't attacked them yet. Funny that.
CMYKilla , 13 Apr 2018 14:26
Instead of "chemicals" why not just firebomb them - you know like we did to entire cities full of women and children in WW2?

Hamburg 27 July 1943 - 46,000 civilians killed in a firestorm
Kassel 22 October 1943 - 9,000 civilians killed 24,000 houses destroyed in a firestorm
Darmstadt 11 September 1944 - 8,000 civilians killed in a firestorm
Dresden 13/14th February - 25,000 civilians killed in a firestorm

Obviously we were fighting Nazism and hadn't actually been invaded - and he is fighting Wahhabism and has had major cities overrun...

Maybe if Assad burnt people to death rather than gassing them we would make a statue of him outside Westminster like the one of Bomber Harris?

Tom1982 , 13 Apr 2018 14:24
Remember the tearful Kuwaiti nurse with her heartrending story of Iraqi troops tipping premature babies out of their incubators after the invasion in 1990? The story was published in pretty much every major Western newspaper, massively increased public support for military intervention............................and turned out to be total bullshit.

Is it too much too ask that we try a bit of collective critical thinking and wait for hard evidence before blundering into a military conflict with Assad; and potentially Putin?

BlutoTheBruto , 13 Apr 2018 14:21
Didn't General Mattis quietly admit at there was no evidence for the alleged Sarin attacks last year by Assad?

http://www.newsweek.com/now-mattis-admits-there-was-no-evidence-assad-using-poison-gas-his-people-801542

Hmmmm.... call me skeptical for not believing it this time around.

AwkwardSquad , 13 Apr 2018 14:19
Well, this is the sort of stuff that the Israelis would be gagging for. They want Assad neutralised and they are assisting ISIS terrorists on the Golan Heights. They tend to their wounded and send them back across the border to fight Assad. What better than to drag the Americans, Brits and French into the ring to finish him off. Job done eh?

Are you sure you are not promoting an Israeli agenda here Jonathan?

Incidentantally what did we in the west do when the Iraqis were gassing the Iranians with nerve agents in the marshes of southern Iraq during the Iran Iraq War? Did we intervene then? No, we didn't we allowed it to happen.

I say stay out it.

dannymega -> fripouille , 13 Apr 2018 14:18
Come on frip, you have to admit there was absolutely no motive for Assad's forces to carry out this attack. Why do you think the Guardian and other main stream media outlets are not even considering the possibility the Jihadi rebels staged it to trigger western intervention? I know, I know.. it's all evil Assad killing his own people for no other reason than he likes butchering people... blah blah. The regime change agenda against Syria has been derailed, no amount of false flag attacks can change the facts on the ground.
Preshous , 13 Apr 2018 14:18
Tucker Carlson of Fox News has it nailed down.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M28aYkLRlm0
ChairmanMayTseTung , 13 Apr 2018 14:16
More than 40 years after the US sprayed millions of litres of chemical agents to defoliate vast swathes of Vietnam and in the full knowledge it would be have a catastrophic effect on the health of the inhabitants of those area, Vietnam has by far the highest incidence of liver cancer on the planet.

Then more recently we have the deadly depleted uranium from US shells that innocent Iraqis are inhaling as shrill voices denounce Assad.

CodeNameTwiglet , 13 Apr 2018 14:15
The Syrian people are heroically resisting and defeating western imperialism. This "civil war" has been nothing but a war for Syrian resources waged by western proxies.

So now, In desperation borne out of their impending defeat, the imperialists have staged a chemical attack in a last throw of the dice to gain popular support for an escalation in military intervention. Like military interventions of the past, it is being justified in the name of humanitarian intervention.

But if we have a brief browse of history we can see that US & UK governments have brought only death, misery and destruction on the populations it was supposedly helping. Hands off Syria.

[Apr 21, 2018] It s a tough old world and we are certainly capable of a Salisbury set-up and god knows what else in Syria.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... It is perfectly possible that the British government manufactured the whole Salisbury thing. We are capable of just as much despicable behavior and murder as the next. ..."
"... Tucker Carlson of Fox News has it nailed down.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M28aYkLRlm0 ..."
"... This "civil war" has been nothing but a war for Syrian resources waged by western proxies. ..."
"... So now, In desperation borne out of their impending defeat, the imperialists have staged a chemical attack in a last throw of the dice to gain popular support for an escalation in military intervention. Like military interventions of the past, it is being justified in the name of humanitarian intervention. ..."
Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

wheelbarrow1 , 13 Apr 2018 14:37

Why is the prime minister of the United Kinkdom on the phone discussing whether or not to bomb a Sovereign country with the highly unstable, Donald Trump?

Can she not make up her own mind? Either she thinks it's the right thing to do or it isn't. Hopefully, the person on the other end of the phone was not Trump but someone with at least half a brain.

Proof, let's have some proof. Is that too much to ask? Apparently so. Russia is saying it's all a put up job, show us your facts. We are saying, don't be silly, we're British and besides, you may have done this sort of thing before.

It is perfectly possible that the British government manufactured the whole Salisbury thing. We are capable of just as much despicable behavior and murder as the next.

Part of the Great British act's of bravery and heroism in the second world war is the part played by women agents who were parachuted into France and helped organize local resistance groups. Odette Hallowes, Noor Inayat Khan and Violette Szabo are just a few of the many names but they are the best known. What is not generally know is that many agents when undergoing their training in the UK, were given information about the 'D' day landings, the approx time and place. They were then dropped into France into the hands of the waiting German army who captured and tortured and often executed them.

The double agent, who Winston Churchill met and fully approved of the plan was Henri Dericourt, an officer in the German army and our man on the ground in France. Dericourt organized the time and place for the drop off of the incoming agents, then told the Germans. The information about the 'D' day invasion time and place was false. The British fed the agents (only a small number) into German hands knowing they would be captured and the false information tortured out of them.

Source :- 'A Quiet Courage' Liane Jones.

It's a tough old world and we are certainly capable of a Salisbury set-up and god knows what else in Syria.

I_Wear_Socks , 13 Apr 2018 14:37
From The Guardian articles today that I have read on Syria, it makes absolutely clear that if you in any way question the narrative forwarded here, that you are a stupid conspiracy theorist in line with Richard Spencer and other far-right, American nutcases.

A more traditional form of argument to incline people to their way of thinking would be facts. But social pressure to conform and not be a conspiratorial idiot in line with the far-right obviously work better for most of their readers. My only surprise it that position hasn't been linked with Brexit.

ChairmanMayTseTung , 13 Apr 2018 14:37
Did anyone see the massive canister that was shown on TV repeatedly that was supposed to have been air-dropped and smashed through the window of a house, landed on a bed and failed to go off.

The bed was in remarkable condition with just a few ruffled bedclothes considering it had been hit with a metal object weighing god knows what and dropped from a great height.

MartinSilenus -> ChairmanMayTseTung , 13 Apr 2018 14:36
"More than 40 years after the US sprayed millions of litres of chemical agents to defoliate"

The Defoliant Agent Orange was used to kill jungles, resulting in light getting through to the dark jungle floors & a massive amount of low bush regrowing, making the finding of Vietcong fighters even harder!

It was sprayed even on American troops, it is a horrible stuff. Still compared to Chlorine poison gas, let alone nerve gases, it is much less terrible. Though the long term effects are pretty horrible.

"Some 45 million liters of the poisoned spray was Agent Orange, which contains the toxic compound dioxin"
http://theconversation.com/agent-orange-exposed-how-u-s-chemical-warfare-in-vietnam-unleashed-a-slow-moving-disaster-84572

120Daze , 13 Apr 2018 14:36
Who needs facts when you've got opinions? Non more hypocritical than the British. Its what you get when you lie and distort though a willing press, you get found out and then nobody believes anything you say.anymore. The white helmets are a western funded and founded organisation, they are NOT independent they are NOT volunteers, The UK the US and the Dutch fund them to the tune of over $40 million. They are a propaganda dispensing outlet. The press shouldn't report anything they release because it is utterly unable to substantiate ANY of it, there hasn't been a western journalist in these areas for over 4 years so why do the press expect us to believe anything they print? Combine this with the worst and most incompetent Govt this country has seen for decades and all you have is a massive distraction from massive domestic troubles which the same govt has no answers too.
LiviaDrusilla -> Bangorstu , 13 Apr 2018 14:36
LOL are you having a larf?

The same organisation that receives millions of quid in funding from USAID?

Whose 'executive director' used to work for USAID?

Who have campaigned for 'no fly zones' (ie US bombing)?

Who are affiliated to the Iranian terrorist group MEK?

Who only happen to run hospitals in 'rebel' held areas?

You have a strange idea of 'politically neutral'. Your 'NGO' are fighting for an Islamist state. Enjoy them.

Dominique2 , 13 Apr 2018 14:32
https://www.theguardian.com/world/shortcuts/2013/sep/01/winston-churchill-shocking-use-chemical-weapons

""I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes," [Winston Churchill] declared in one secret memorandum."

The current condemnation by the international community and international law is good and needs enforcement. But no virtue signalling where there is none.

CaptTroyTempest -> StoneRoses , 13 Apr 2018 14:27
But we're still awaiting evidence that a chemical attack has been carried out in Douma, aren't we? And if an attack was carried out, by whom. But before these essential points are verified, you feel that a targeted military response is justified. Are you equally keen for some targeted military response for the use of chemical weapons, namely white phosphorus, in Palestine by the Israaeli military? Unlike Douma, the use of these chemical weapons in the occupied territories by the IDF's personnel is well documented. But we haven't attacked them yet. Funny that.
CMYKilla , 13 Apr 2018 14:26
Instead of "chemicals" why not just firebomb them - you know like we did to entire cities full of women and children in WW2?

Hamburg 27 July 1943 - 46,000 civilians killed in a firestorm
Kassel 22 October 1943 - 9,000 civilians killed 24,000 houses destroyed in a firestorm
Darmstadt 11 September 1944 - 8,000 civilians killed in a firestorm
Dresden 13/14th February - 25,000 civilians killed in a firestorm

Obviously we were fighting Nazism and hadn't actually been invaded - and he is fighting Wahhabism and has had major cities overrun...

Maybe if Assad burnt people to death rather than gassing them we would make a statue of him outside Westminster like the one of Bomber Harris?

Tom1982 , 13 Apr 2018 14:24
Remember the tearful Kuwaiti nurse with her heartrending story of Iraqi troops tipping premature babies out of their incubators after the invasion in 1990? The story was published in pretty much every major Western newspaper, massively increased public support for military intervention............................and turned out to be total bullshit.

Is it too much too ask that we try a bit of collective critical thinking and wait for hard evidence before blundering into a military conflict with Assad; and potentially Putin?

BlutoTheBruto , 13 Apr 2018 14:21
Didn't General Mattis quietly admit at there was no evidence for the alleged Sarin attacks last year by Assad?

http://www.newsweek.com/now-mattis-admits-there-was-no-evidence-assad-using-poison-gas-his-people-801542

Hmmmm.... call me skeptical for not believing it this time around.

AwkwardSquad , 13 Apr 2018 14:19
Well, this is the sort of stuff that the Israelis would be gagging for. They want Assad neutralised and they are assisting ISIS terrorists on the Golan Heights. They tend to their wounded and send them back across the border to fight Assad. What better than to drag the Americans, Brits and French into the ring to finish him off. Job done eh?

Are you sure you are not promoting an Israeli agenda here Jonathan?

Incidentantally what did we in the west do when the Iraqis were gassing the Iranians with nerve agents in the marshes of southern Iraq during the Iran Iraq War? Did we intervene then? No, we didn't we allowed it to happen.

I say stay out it.

dannymega -> fripouille , 13 Apr 2018 14:18
Come on frip, you have to admit there was absolutely no motive for Assad's forces to carry out this attack. Why do you think the Guardian and other main stream media outlets are not even considering the possibility the Jihadi rebels staged it to trigger western intervention? I know, I know.. it's all evil Assad killing his own people for no other reason than he likes butchering people... blah blah. The regime change agenda against Syria has been derailed, no amount of false flag attacks can change the facts on the ground.
Preshous , 13 Apr 2018 14:18
Tucker Carlson of Fox News has it nailed down.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M28aYkLRlm0
ChairmanMayTseTung , 13 Apr 2018 14:16
More than 40 years after the US sprayed millions of litres of chemical agents to defoliate vast swathes of Vietnam and in the full knowledge it would be have a catastrophic effect on the health of the inhabitants of those area, Vietnam has by far the highest incidence of liver cancer on the planet.

Then more recently we have the deadly depleted uranium from US shells that innocent Iraqis are inhaling as shrill voices denounce Assad.

CodeNameTwiglet , 13 Apr 2018 14:15
The Syrian people are heroically resisting and defeating western imperialism. This "civil war" has been nothing but a war for Syrian resources waged by western proxies.

So now, In desperation borne out of their impending defeat, the imperialists have staged a chemical attack in a last throw of the dice to gain popular support for an escalation in military intervention. Like military interventions of the past, it is being justified in the name of humanitarian intervention.

But if we have a brief browse of history we can see that US & UK governments have brought only death, misery and destruction on the populations it was supposedly helping. Hands off Syria.

[Apr 21, 2018] Growing disillusionment of mass audience in neoliberal MSM

Notable quotes:
"... I think the most amazing thing to come from this is that nobody believes politicians or the papers say, listen to any phone in radio show or read the comments below articles, nobody believes the government or msm. I wouldn't go to war for these fuckers. ..."
"... The media proclaimed the overthrow of the Mosadegh government in Iran as 'popular', the overthrow of Allende in Chile as legitimate, the Gulf of Tonkin affair as real, the WMDs of Iraq as existing, the evil of Qaddafi as intolerable, etc. ..."
"... Money, Oil, Carving Land Territory. ..."
"... Bombing a sovereign country without UN mandate is a war crime. It applies to UK and USA as well. But Brexit obsessed Brits think UK is above the International law. ..."
"... Has anyone asked.. why would Russia allow a chemical weapons attack in Syria only a few weeks after apparently launching a chemical weapons attack in Britain?.. something is not right here. ..."
"... The Putin regime may be nasty..but are they really that thick?? Remember remember 45 minutes to launch...(?) Tony Bliar is haunting me..and I suspect..the entire nation ..."
"... In the 1980s we sided with the jihadists and bin laden in Afghanistan. Which then was repaid with 9/11. Now we are siding with the jihadists in Syria. The blowback will be bigger than 9/11. ..."
"... I note it does refer (at para 44) to Assad's allegation that a video had been staged. It concludes that the patients on the video "appear relatively unaffected by the typical symptoms. No red eyes, tearing, paleness, sweating, cyanosis or breathing difficulties can be observed ..."
Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

David williams , 13 Apr 2018 15:23

Not a supporter of any of the criminal operations that masquerade as governments worldwide, but it's way past the time when I can believe a word the Western powers utter in their quest to spread their vile economic doctrine.
For me the biggest question now is how best to avoid financing the evil they perpetrate
dannymega , 13 Apr 2018 15:22
So the Russian military claimed a month ago that Syrian rebels were planning a chlorine chemical weapon attack somewhere in Syria, three weeks later a chemical weapon chlorine attack happens in Douma... but the UK government along with all the UK mainstream media do not question perhaps it's the Jihadi/rebels who staged this attack, they ALL automatically blame Assad? Stinks to high heaven.

TrickleDownClowns , 13 Apr 2018 16:18

I think the most amazing thing to come from this is that nobody believes politicians or the papers say, listen to any phone in radio show or read the comments below articles, nobody believes the government or msm. I wouldn't go to war for these fuckers.
Canajin , 13 Apr 2018 16:09

The media proclaimed the overthrow of the Mosadegh government in Iran as 'popular', the overthrow of Allende in Chile as legitimate, the Gulf of Tonkin affair as real, the WMDs of Iraq as existing, the evil of Qaddafi as intolerable, etc.

So, why is the media surprised when people lack trust in them about Syria?

GLT24 , 13 Apr 2018 16:09
Everywhere on the web the vast majority are vehemently opposed to military involvement .

Yet we have a PM and at least 300 MPs champing at the bit to get involved in military conflict that could obliterate these islands in a few minutes.

We are not under threat there might not have been a chemical attack and if there was we have no idea who the perpetrators were but it almost certainly was not Assad he had nothing to gain and everything to lose.

Trump announced he wanted the US out of Syria a couple of weeks ago not good news for the military industrial complex.

There is significant evidence that through the internet and social media the population are no longer fooled by the false flag operations of the deep state.

We in the U.K. have a significant problem who is a threat to all of us and that is the PM she was exposed during the election and over Brexit this must be the end it is totally unacceptable that we could get involved in an attack on another sovereign state who are no threat to us on the say so of a small number of MPs in a minority Government.

The duty of the Government is to protect its citizens not put their lives at risk to engratatiate themselves to a Foreign Power with a deranged egomaniac as it's President

MayThisBeLove -> zinopus , 13 Apr 2018 16:09
Because they are mostly Blairite warmongers who just repeat government press releases
ID5996032 , 13 Apr 2018 16:04
Assad's not your puppy. Mohammed Bin Salman is. BAE re-arms his jets between crop-burning sorties in Yemen. When you've stopped the Saudi starvation and brutalization of Yemen -which you can because your gavernment facilitates it - come back and we'll talk about Syria. Until then we'll assume that your lachrimose offerings on gassed babies is propaganda. And that's because it is.
algae64 -> rustledust74 , 13 Apr 2018 16:04

the Iranians are just as bad as the Saudis

Tehran has churches and synagogues all over the city. Riyadh does not. Religious tolerance is better than religious intolerance, IMO.
I don't have a problem with anyone talking to anyone about anything, as long as Britain hasn't declared war on the country they are talking to.
MayThisBeLove , 13 Apr 2018 16:04
If its down to believing Assad and common sense over Trust me Theresa and her unwillingness to refer the matter to Parliament and democracy ... then its Assad and common sense every time ... he may be a dictator but he's no idiot
PeterMarkham , 13 Apr 2018 16:03
What makes chemical weapons so much worse than any others? If we go into military action over this we will kill people but we won't use chemical weapons. Will that be alright then?
georgina45 -> anothernorthernmonke , 13 Apr 2018 16:03
Some think this is about oil and a pipeline going through the Middle East states and if it goes through the heart of Syria then Russia and Syria of control of the oil flow going into Europe.
Terry Haller -> 1of9monkeys , 13 Apr 2018 16:01
Any involvement Iran has in the region good or bad is at least understandable , it's their neighborhood and they were invited . It is more difficult to understand the presence or involvement of Britain or America or France or that other country we are not allowed to talk about.
Kokkos -> Brexshit , 13 Apr 2018 16:01
Money, Oil, Carving Land Territory.
Muphrid33 , 13 Apr 2018 16:01
What many people do not fully realize is that no leader, no matter how harsh or strong would have been able to survive the destruction that has overtaken Syria if he was considered responsible for it. His own people and armed forces would have thrown him out if he did not have their support.
MayThisBeLove , 13 Apr 2018 16:01
" And yet what was originally billed as a discrete military action to prevent an impending civilian slaughter in Benghazi escalated into a bombardment that led to regime change and mayhem. '

No , Johnathan , it was planned .. see the PNAC etc ...

LiviaDrusilla -> Fomalhaut88 , 13 Apr 2018 15:52
Why the obsession with Corbyn? He's the leader of the opposition. He's not the one clamorouring to send Britain to war on an extremely dodgy pretext.

But if you're going with that line of argument, why not send all the hacks cheerleading for war to do some 'behind the front lines' reportage with the Army of Islam? Always good to see things from different perspectives, though they might not survive to tell the tale.

yemrajesh -> LouisConn , 13 Apr 2018 15:52
Bombing a sovereign country without UN mandate is a war crime. It applies to UK and USA as well. But Brexit obsessed Brits think UK is above the International law.
leftylass62 -> diddoit , 13 Apr 2018 15:52
She knows many of her own party won't back her and the DUP voted against bombing Syria last time. Where's the millions it's going to cost coming from when we can't afford to give school kids a free dinner or pay for the NHS?
Patrick Moore , 13 Apr 2018 15:51
I really struggle to see to understand the argument for military action in Syria.

Firstly every time we intervene militarily we stuff it up and make matters ten times worse.

  1. Gulf War 1 - left Sadam in power, tens of thousands of Iraqis killed, pushed Sadam into being a major sponsor of anti Weatern terrorism and then the Kurds were abandoned to Sadam at the end of the war and massacred.
  2. Afghanistan - what the hell was that about? Trillions spent and it descended into Islamist anarchy within 5 minutes of us keaving.
  3. Gulf War 2 - set the Middle East on fire, total disintegration of Iraq, the death of millions of Iraqis and the rise of ISIS.
  4. Libya - failed state, massive refugee crisis.

But even if you assume that for once we can act militarily in a way that doesn't make the situation worse - what is it that we are trying to achieve?

Assad has won. The opposition has been killed or expelled from the country and the resistance is down to a few villages which are being mopped up.

The time for a military response was 7 years ago - it is an absolutely pointless waste of time now - unless the point is just to make us feel better about ourselves by "doing something".

Squiddlywidget , 13 Apr 2018 15:51

Has anyone asked.. why would Russia allow a chemical weapons attack in Syria only a few weeks after apparently launching a chemical weapons attack in Britain?.. something is not right here.

The Putin regime may be nasty..but are they really that thick?? Remember remember 45 minutes to launch...(?) Tony Bliar is haunting me..and I suspect..the entire nation

Kokkos -> LouisConn , 13 Apr 2018 15:50
There seem to be lot of deformed babies born in Iraq and Afganistan.
BoomersStealingMoney , 13 Apr 2018 15:50
In the 1980s we sided with the jihadists and bin laden in Afghanistan. Which then was repaid with 9/11. Now we are siding with the jihadists in Syria. The blowback will be bigger than 9/11.
zinopus , 13 Apr 2018 15:49
You either don't get it Jonathan, or you bury your head in the sand. WHO do you want to get rid of first: the head chopping thugs or someone else you can deal with later? This is not about who is the most desirable but who is for the time being the least worst? For a start you are ASSUMING that the now completely unproven "evidence" about chemical attacks is a given. IT IS NOT.

Almost every single point you make is based upon speculation, mainstream media assumptions or downright lies. Wake up please. For goodness sake why doesn't your newspaper have a single journalist who actually knows what is really going on in Syria?

ben_k11 , 13 Apr 2018 15:47
It is hard to be pro interventionist after the epical f up in Iraq and Libya, but it seems to me that Assad should and must get a hard punishment. Assad should not have WMDs since those weapons were handed over to be destroyed in Russia in 2014. Russia is a guarantor of this deal. Yet, Assad has and continues to use WMDs in the presence and I believe advice from the Russian military.

As for the military intervention itself I think Israeli's deep incursions in Syria and the bombing of military bases also used by Russian military have provided a lot of information about the capabilities and limitations of the Russian military technology deployed in Syria.

StephenDaedalus -> JackDowland , 13 Apr 2018 15:47

Sure, here's the UN OPCW investigation report which directly blames the Assad forces for chemical attacks. Take as much time as you need.

https://undocs.org/S/2016/738

I couldn't find the paragraph which directly blames Assad's forces.

I note it does refer (at para 44) to Assad's allegation that a video had been staged. It concludes that the patients on the video "appear relatively unaffected by the typical symptoms. No red eyes, tearing, paleness, sweating, cyanosis or breathing difficulties can be observed ....

[Apr 21, 2018] The UN Charter is very vague about a lot of things, but it's very clear about one thing, and that is, when is it legal to go to war

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

tc2011 , 13 Apr 2018 16:21

What Freedland and others are advocating is illegal. They have no moral or legal authority.

For the avoidance of any doubt or confusion, attacking a foreign country without legal basis under international law represents the "supreme international crime". The launching of an "aggressive war" is the "supreme crime" because it is the overarching offense which contains within itself "the accumulated evil of the whole" (e.g. rape, torture, murder, mass murder, ethnic cleansing, etc).

People were tried, convicted and hung at Nuremberg for the crime of waging wars of aggression (as well as crimes against humanity).

Regardless of how unpalatable we may find it, even the verified use of chemical weapons -be they by state or non-state actors - is not a legal basis to attack a country, any country.

As Phyllis Bennis, Fellow and Director of the New Internationalism Project at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, D.C., clearly explained (following the last alleged use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government, and subsequent military strike on the Syrian air base ordered by President Trump):

"The UN Charter is very vague about a lot of things, but it's very clear about one thing, and that is, when is it legal to go to war? When is it legal to use a military strike? There's only two occasions according to the UN Charter The UN Charter says, "A country can use military force under two circumstances: Number one, if the Security Council authorizes it." Number two, Article 51 of the UN Charter, which is about self-defence. But it's a very narrowly constrained version of self-defence It says very explicitly, "If a country has been attacked." "until the Security Council can meet, immediate self-defence is allowed." Neither of those two categories applied here. So, it was clearly an illegal act."

link

[Apr 21, 2018] This guy skipped past the censors. He explains how there has been lots of Western intervention against Syria.

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

GuardianFodder -> LeftOrRightSameShite , 13 Apr 2018 15:36

This guy skipped past the censors.

He explains how there has been lots of Western intervention against Syria.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-vwKk4pADCw

[Apr 21, 2018] White Helmets in Douma play the same role as Ahmed Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress played in Iraq WDM fiasco

It looks more and more that everything was staged and everything was controlled by Western intelligence agencies with the specific goal.
Notable quotes:
"... That kind of reminds me of when Ahmed Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress were explaining how to get rid of Saddam without plunging Iraq into mayhem and destabilising the wider region. ..."
"... If the price of selling arms to Saudi Arabia is having to stage nerve agent attacks in the UK and in Syria, one has to ask: Is it really worth it? ..."
Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Paul Crow , 13 Apr 2018 15:43

Read Robert Fisk in the Independent. He, as always, has nailed it. The Brits and the US have no authority to take action with their past record of use of Chemical and Atomic weapons.
Celtiberico , 13 Apr 2018 15:42

The Syrian Negotiation Commission has called for action to deter Assad from killing civilians. What they envisage is that each time Assad launches a deadly attack on noncombatants, allied forces reply by taking out one of the strategic assets he uses to kill civilians. It could be an airfield, it could be a command centre. If the target were aircraft, that would simultaneously inflict a cost on the regime and deprive it of the means of dropping its barrel bombs and toxic, yellow cylinders. The objective would be to make Assad pay a price for killing his own people, a price he has not paid until now. Eventually, or so runs the hope, he would be deterred.

That kind of reminds me of when Ahmed Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress were explaining how to get rid of Saddam without plunging Iraq into mayhem and destabilising the wider region.

Krautolivier , 13 Apr 2018 15:40
If the price of selling arms to Saudi Arabia is having to stage nerve agent attacks in the UK and in Syria, one has to ask: Is it really worth it?
oldeborr , 13 Apr 2018 15:38
The UK andcFrance bares a heavy responsibility for the current situation in Syria. The cavalier attitude that the ConDems took to international law during the Arab spring encouraged the Saudi s and their proxies to distablise the recognised Govt. Assad is no paragon of virtue, but prior to the insurgency steps were in place to make the country a better place for its citizens, and whilst its true poltical dissent was not allowed, people could live their lives and go about their business in safety.

[Apr 21, 2018] In an interview with The Guardian newspaper, Blix said, "I have my detractors in Washington. There are bastards who spread things around, of course, who planted nasty things in the media."

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

harveybrown , 13 Apr 2018 15:37

In an interview on BBC 1 on 8 February 2004, UN Weapons Inspector, Hans Blix accused the US and British governments of dramatizing the threat of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, in order to strengthen the case for the 2003 war against the government of Saddam Hussein.
Ultimately, no stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction were ever found.

In an interview with The Guardian newspaper, Blix said, "I have my detractors in Washington. There are bastards who spread things around, of course, who planted nasty things in the media."

[ It is interesting to note that Allan Ramsay likewise deplored "a friendly alliance between the camp and the counting-house" for exactly the same reasons (Letters on the Present Disturbances, p.34). Ramsay maintained that of the evil consequences of such alliance "the two last wars carried on by England against France and Spain, furnish a most melancholy illustration. To obtain the sole and exclusive commerce of the western world, in which the French and Spaniards were their rivals, was the modest wish of our merchants, in conjunction with our Americans. The fair, and truly commercial, method of effecting this would have been, by superior skill, industry and frugality, to have undersold their rivals at market: but that method appearing slow and troublesome to a luxurious people, whose extraordinary expences* required extraordinary profits, a more expeditous one was devised; which was that of driving their rivals entirely out of the seas, and preventing them from bringing their goods at all to market. For this purpose, not having any fleets or armies of their own, the powers of the State were found necessary, and they applied them accordingly" (ibid., pp.32 f.).

Knorr, K. E. 'Ch02-Part2 British Colonial Theories 1570-1850'. In British Colonial Theories, 1570-1850. The University of Toronto Press, 1944. ]

[Apr 21, 2018] Douma, US imperialism, and While Helmets

Sacrificing women and children to achieve nefarious goals such as preparing the ground for invasion dictated by economic or geopolitical interests is a typical Western intelligence agencies plot.
Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com
OlivesNightie , 13 Apr 2018 15:46

The notion of inaction, of standing by and watching as Assad kills and kills and kills, racking up a death toll in Syria of 500,000

On May 12, 1996, Madeleine Albright defended UN sanctions against Iraq on a 60 Minutes segment in which Lesley Stahl asked her "We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?" and Albright replied, "We think the price is worth it."'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbIX1CP9qr4

[Apr 21, 2018] The UN report on previous attacks confirmed that Assad's allegation that a video had been staged have solid ground. It concludes that the patients on the video "appear relatively unaffected by the typical symptoms.

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

StephenDaedalus -> JackDowland , 13 Apr 2018 15:47

Sure, here's the UN OPCW investigation report which directly blames the Assad forces for chemical attacks. Take as much time as you need.

https://undocs.org/S/2016/738

I couldn't find the paragraph which directly blames Assad's forces.

I note it does refer (at para 44) to Assad's allegation that a video had been staged. It concludes that the patients on the video "appear relatively unaffected by the typical symptoms.

No red eyes, tearing, paleness, sweating, cyanosis or breathing difficulties can be observed from the footage. The patients interviewed in the video show little or no signs of having been exposed to a toxic chemical".

This is also consistent with other documented attempts of video-making to trigger the western bombs.

Surely you can see why people might at least reserve judgment about the latest video emanating from Jaish al-Islam controlled territory?

[Apr 21, 2018] White Helmets tend to be hard line Islamists and send out propaganda videos

Notable quotes:
"... "Charities"? Lol. I'll bet money nearly all of those 'charities' are actually PR fronts for thuggish Islamist rebels. ..."
Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

LiviaDrusilla -> Bopstar, 13 Apr 2018 16:17

"Charities"? Lol. I'll bet money nearly all of those 'charities' are actually PR fronts for thuggish Islamist rebels.

A bit like how all the Syrians the Guardian manages to reach for 'skype interviews' are positively desperate for massive aeriel bombardment of their own country, chastising the west for not supplying the bearded types with anti-aircraft missiles and even suggesting targets for American bombs.

brambalus -> 1liesalot , 13 Apr 2018 16:16
I have recently taught two Syrian professionals. Of course Assad is evil, but they tell me that some of the rebel militias are much more brutal and intolerant than Assad and if they win Syria will go the way of Libya.

They also told me (which shocked me somewhat) that the White Helmets tend to be hard line Islamists and send out propaganda videos which Western media fail to question thoroughly.

[Apr 21, 2018] The couple Merkel/Sauer knows exactly how to evaluate that so-called evidence in Douma false flag

Apr 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Hmpf | Apr 20, 2018 5:51:46 AM | 165

@163 WillyW

Angela Merkel is not stupid - things are way worth than that.
She's got a PhD in physical chemistry, and what's rather mind-boggling in that context is the fact that her husband Joachim Sauer is a professor of chemistry and one of the worlds foremost experts in surface chemistry.
In the 2000s this guy was in the top 30 list of the worlds most extinguished chemists - let that sink in for a second.
The couple Merkel/Sauer knows exactly how to evaluate that so-called evidence, yet... - as I said the situation is way worse as generally anticipated.

[Apr 21, 2018] When the FO is headed by Boris 'Serial liar' Johnson it becomes very hard to know who to believe. But when neoliberal MSM cut somebody on air, you know is it better to beleave this guy

Notable quotes:
"... Sky News cuts of British General. https://southfront.org/sky-news-cuts-off-former-british-general-while-he-questiones-douma-chemical-attack / ..."
Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Kokkos , 13 Apr 2018 15:41

Sky News cuts of British General. https://southfront.org/sky-news-cuts-off-former-british-general-while-he-questiones-douma-chemical-attack /
TheKingOfHate , 13 Apr 2018 15:41
"Russian claims that UK staged Syria gas attack 'a blatant lie'"

When the FO is headed by Boris 'Serial liar' Johnson it becomes very hard to know who to believe.

JBigglesworth , 13 Apr 2018 15:41
Further to my post on Russell-Moyle's Tweet:

Lloyd Russell-Moyle
(@lloyd_rm)
It is worth noting that the British Government approved exports of dual use precursors for chemical weapons including sarin to Syria between 2004 and 2012, after the civil war began and after Assad was accused of using gas. CAEC report (2015): pic.twitter.com/TsvthAcZRR

April 13, 2018

Further down his thread is a tweet where someone has a screen-grab of a Mail Online story from 2013. It talks about leaked information about clearance given by the US Government for a British security company to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria in order to provide a pretext for bombing.

I have no idea whether this is true or whether it was genuinely from Mail Online, perhaps someone with more know-how than me could find out.

At first, I laughed at the Russian suggestion that the attack on Douma had been staged. Now I'm not so sure.

[Apr 21, 2018] Operation Timber Sycamore and Douma false falg

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Jay_Q123 , 13 Apr 2018 15:36

Your article appears to apportion blame solely to Assad and you don't even attempt to address the opposition in Syria. Nobody seriously questions that the Syrian governments war has killed many thousands and thousands of civilians. How can you not refer to the international jihad and the make up of these fighters, as well as the sieges they laid on villages, town and cities and the cruelty they inflicted upon the people?

The Syrian Arab Army is a composite of Sunni, Shia, Christians, and different ethnicity's, what convinces you that they have in any way wantonly killed civilians? The soldiers have family all over Syria, plus no mention of the 300,000+ civilians that have been liberated from Eastern Aleppo and Eastern Ghouta in the last several months.

I find this article very bizarre indeed. The most simple explanation for the disaster in Syria is that a sovereign state protected its national interest from an international contingent of mercenaries. There are Moroccans and Chechnyans, Uighurs and Brits, Saudis as well as Syrians in this armed army. What other options did a state such as Syria have when fighting against ISIS, Al Qaida, Al Nusra and 'The Army of Islam', Jaysh Al-Islam? All have which have direct connections to our major ally in the region, Saudi Arabia.

Somebody correct me if I am wrong but I can not find any reference at all to the enemy in this article. It's written as if the 8 year war has simply been an extermination war against civilians and completely out of context with reality.

Check out Operation Timber Sycamore for more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timber_Sycamore

BoomersStealingMoney , 13 Apr 2018 15:32
The west stoked and funded the Wahabists. Secular Asad is our buffer against the Saudi version of Islam.

Whatever happens we cannot let the Saud version of Islam win.

The Sauds have spread their Wahabi version of Islam using oil money. And we have armed the Sauds.

Justin Thyme , 13 Apr 2018 15:31
The USA and WMD@S

US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld helped Saddam Hussein build up his arsenal of deadly chemical and biological weapons. As an envoy from President Reagan 19 years ago, he had a secret meeting with the Iraqi dictator and arranged enormous military assistance for his war with Iran. Mr Rumsfeld, at the time a successful executive in the pharmaceutical industry, still made it possible for Saddam to buy supplies from American firms. They included viruses such as anthrax and bubonic plague, according to the Washington Post.
The USA provided $1.5 billion worth of Pathogenic, toxigenic and other biological research materials were exported to Iraq; 1985-89.

1) US based company, Alcolac International exported mustard gas to Iraq; 1987-88.
2) Almost 150 foreign companies supported Saddam Hussein's WMD program; 1975-
3) US directly attacked Iran by hitting Iran's oil platforms; 1987.
4) US directly attacked Iran's navy in unproportioned and unreasonable war; 1988.
5) US shot down Iranian civilian airliner in the Iranian territory; 1988.

This is the equivalent of a pathological paedophile giving a sermon against child abuse when the US preaches its corrupt moral practices regarding Syria!!!

[Apr 21, 2018] Russia has transferred forty Pantsir-S1 air defense systems to Syria' Air Defence

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

tayacase , 13 Apr 2018 15:50

Russia has transferred forty Pantsir-S1 air defense systems to Syria' Air Defence.
This is the latest air defence technology (the system is in service since 2012) - a combined short to medium range surface-to-air missile and anti-aircraft artillery weapon system against aircrafts, helicopters, precision munitions, cruise missiles and UAVs.

https://southfront.org/russia-delivered-40-pantsir-s1-air-defense-systems-to-syria-state-media /
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantsir-S1

[Apr 21, 2018] There's no good option in Syria by Jonathan Freedland

You face the same the liars with the sexed up dossier who went on to murder hundreds of thousands in Iraq and Libya. This is all too reminiscent of previous interventions
Consider WW1, Suez, Iran 1953, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Yemen and every other western militarily intervention in the ME - whether directly or by proxy - and identify one that hasn't just caused more instability, death, violence and displacement than there was already?
Apr 21, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

e are caught between a rock, in the form of the recklessness of Donald Trump, and a hard place, shaped by the cruelty of Bashar al-Assad. This is the choice that now confronts citizens and their representatives in Britain, France and the US. The reasons to resist signing up for any project led by Trump should be obvious, with the newly published testimony of James Comey, the FBI director he fired, providing a fresh reminder.

Trump is a congenital liar who is devoid of empathy, a narcissist with a nihilist's view of the world. These are not mere character defects; they have a bearing on the decisions the de facto leader of any action in Syria would take. Among the reasons I opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq was my fundamental distrust of George W Bush and his circle, especially on the matter of motive. Trump, with his tweeted mood swings – first, vowing to withdraw from Syria altogether, then threatening an imminent missile bombardment, then signalling a delay – makes Bush look like a statesman.

But even if a moral paragon were sitting in the Oval Office, there would be grounds for restraint. The record of past western military interventions in the Middle East is bloody and shaming, as the peoples of both Iraq and Libya can testify. Barack Obama, no gung-ho cowboy, was the commander-in-chief in the latter case. And yet what was originally billed as a discrete military action to prevent an impending civilian slaughter in Benghazi escalated into a bombardment that led to regime change and mayhem. It stands as a textbook illustration of western bombs' ability to make a bad situation worse.

LiviaDrusilla -> BullNakano , 13 Apr 2018 16:26

It's clear now that although Assad has 'won' the war a status quo of him ruling a predominately Sunni country can't be returned to. He seeks to terrorise and punish the Syrian people under the protection of Russia and Iran.

Even though the army which has made such huge sacrifices for the Syrian state is about 70% Sunni?

The US and her allies have to intervene, otherwise the rule of international law is worthless.

Why? Even if your premise above were true, which it isn't, why is it our job to intervene in every country with an imperfect system? Or are you proposing we bomb every Middle Eastern country where people are privileged and granted citizenship merely on account of their religion?

dannymega -> mjlnkc , 13 Apr 2018 16:26
Yes, because Assad wants to be bombed by the West just as he is winning, I know - makes perfect sense.
solidstae -> John Favre , 13 Apr 2018 16:25
I love these guys who won't do their own research. Why not? Axe to grind? This is just one example from 2013. There's more but I'm too busy to look up public shit for you.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi /

GLT24 -> Squiddlywidget , 13 Apr 2018 16:18
Spot on look what happened to Sadaam after he switched to the Euro for Iraq oil sales.
Ghaddafi had similar plans.
Without reserve currency status and petrodollar with US economy will collapse under the $21T dollar debt.
Russia and China have recently agreed a bilateral trade agreement which cuts out the dollar.
The US cannot permit this ...as always follow the money.
Some people murder others for political and ideological reasons the military industrial complex starts wars and conflicts ,murdering millions for profit....evil personified
Squiddlywidget , 13 Apr 2018 16:10
Could this whole drama be because China and Russia are ditching the petrodollar?
I watched the video of the attack and it looks fake to me.. those children are not crying because of chlorine.. they have their eyes wide open..first thing you do when you have chlorine in your eyes is touch your face and close your eyes..whole thing looks dodge..just my opinion. Those children are wide eyed and looking at the camera..something you wouldn't do if you'd just been gassed.

[Apr 21, 2018] The lesson the neo-cons learnt from the Iraq war is not that it was disastrous. It was only disastrous for the dead and maimed Iraqis, our own dead and maimed servicemen, and those whose country was returned to medievalism. It was a great success for the neo-cons, they made loads of money on armaments and oil.

Notable quotes:
"... The "Russian" attack in Salisbury is supposed to negate the "not our war" argument, particularly as a British policeman was unwell for a while. Precisely what is meant to negate the "why on earth are we entering armed confrontation with a nuclear power" argument, I do not know. ..."
"... Saudi Arabia has naturally offered facilities to support the UK, US and France in their attempt to turn the military tide in Syria in favor of the Saudi sponsored jihadists whom Assad had come close to defeating. That the Skripal and Douma incidents were preceded by extremely intense diplomatic activity between Saudi Arabia, Washington, Paris and London this year, with multiple top level visits between capitals, is presumably supposed to be coincidence. ..."
"... The notion that Britain will take part in military action against Syria with neither investigation of the evidence nor a parliamentary vote is worrying indeed. Without Security Council authorisation, any such action is illegal in any event. It is worth noting that the many commentators who attempt to portray Russia's veto of a Syria resolution as invalid, fail to note that last week, in two separate 14 against 1 votes, the USA vetoed security council resolutions condemning Israeli killings of unarmed demonstrators in Gaza. ..."
"... Hence the destruction of Libya was predicated on an entirely false "we have 48 hours to prevent the massacre of the population of Benghazi" narrative. Similarly this latest orchestrated "crisis" is being followed through into military action at a blistering pace, as the four horsemen sweep by, scything down reason and justice on the way. ..."
Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

dumbwaiter -> Kevin Watson , 13 Apr 2018 15:50

I'm going to post a comment by another user posted yesterday as he said it far more eloquently than I could

R Reddington InterestedReader2 1d ago


Your just another armchair warrior.

So you think going to war is a good idea well you first then and don't forget your flack jacket and rifle.

The media onslaught has moved past the attack in Salisbury by a "weapon of mass destruction" (quoting Theresa May) which could only be Russian, except that was untrue, and was extremely deadly, except that was untrue too. It now focuses on an attack by chemical weapons in Douma which "could only be" by the Russian-backed Assad regime, except there is no evidence of that either, and indeed neutral verified evidence from Douma is non-existent. The combination of the two events is supposed to have the British population revved up by jingoism, and indeed does have Tony Blair and assorted Tories revved up, to attack Syria and potentially to enter conflict with Russia in Syria.

The "Russian" attack in Salisbury is supposed to negate the "not our war" argument, particularly as a British policeman was unwell for a while. Precisely what is meant to negate the "why on earth are we entering armed confrontation with a nuclear power" argument, I do not know.

Saudi Arabia has naturally offered facilities to support the UK, US and France in their attempt to turn the military tide in Syria in favor of the Saudi sponsored jihadists whom Assad had come close to defeating. That the Skripal and Douma incidents were preceded by extremely intense diplomatic activity between Saudi Arabia, Washington, Paris and London this year, with multiple top level visits between capitals, is presumably supposed to be coincidence.

I am not a fan of Assad any more than I was a fan of Saddam Hussein. But the public now understand that wars for regime change in Muslim lands have disastrous effects in dead and maimed adults and children and in destroyed infrastructure; our attacks unleash huge refugee waves and directly cause terrorist attacks here at home. There is no purpose in a military attack on Syria other than to attempt to help the jihadists overthrow Assad. There is a reckless disregard for evidence base on the pretexts for all this. Indeed, the more the evidence is scrutinised, the dodgier it seems. Finally there is a massive difference between mainstream media narrative around these events and a deeply sceptical public, as shown in social media and in comments sections of corporate media websites.

The notion that Britain will take part in military action against Syria with neither investigation of the evidence nor a parliamentary vote is worrying indeed. Without Security Council authorisation, any such action is illegal in any event. It is worth noting that the many commentators who attempt to portray Russia's veto of a Syria resolution as invalid, fail to note that last week, in two separate 14 against 1 votes, the USA vetoed security council resolutions condemning Israeli killings of unarmed demonstrators in Gaza.

The lesson the neo-cons learnt from the Iraq war is not that it was disastrous. It was only disastrous for the dead and maimed Iraqis, our own dead and maimed servicemen, and those whose country was returned to medievalism. It was a great success for the neo-cons, they made loads of money on armaments and oil. The lesson the neo-cons learned was not to give the public in the West any time to mount and organise opposition. Hence the destruction of Libya was predicated on an entirely false "we have 48 hours to prevent the massacre of the population of Benghazi" narrative. Similarly this latest orchestrated "crisis" is being followed through into military action at a blistering pace, as the four horsemen sweep by, scything down reason and justice on the way.

[Apr 21, 2018] Orwell certainly chose his words well when he called the UK 'Airstrip One' in his book 1984. The UK government, the US neocons yapping little poodle.

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

RLB2808

, 13 Apr 2018 16:13
Orwell certainly chose his words well when he called the UK 'Airstrip One' in his book 1984. The UK government, the US neocons yapping little poodle. All cheered on by our always on message main stream media.

[Apr 21, 2018] CIA, MI6 and rebels: Rebels can be genuine protesters but they will brutally used by CIA and MI6 for nefarious purposes

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

junglecitizen -> LeftOrRightSameShite , 13 Apr 2018 15:44

We, along with the US, France and Gulf states have supported, armed and trained "rebels" in Syria the whole time. We've had, as have others, special forces operating inside Syria


So, there would never be rebellions against totalitarian dictators if it weren't for the CIA and MI6.

I don't buy this. It's very convenient if you're an anti-war person who doesn't want to face an ethical dilemma. But it's not real.

[Apr 21, 2018] The US, UK and France act like they own the world

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

CaptainBrown , 13 Apr 2018 16:07

Syria is surrounded by wealthy gulf countries, many of whom frequently buy weapons from the US and UK. They have the money, the firepower, and the space to not only house fleeing refugees, but also bomb Assad back to the stone age. They haven't, because they lack testicular fortitude and are always looking west for solutions.


The US, UK and France act like they own the world. Iran vs Iraq, the creation of Israel, and Saudi Arabia, Sykes-Picot - western countries played a major part in all of this. In the absence of evidence, it's about time we kept out of it.

[Apr 21, 2018] Eight fundamental British lies over the Skripal attack.

Apr 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 | Apr 19, 2018 1:07:42 PM | 74

Here we have a translated transcript of Shulgin's testimony at OPCW's Hague HQ where he points out the 8 fundamental British lies over the Skripal attack. He prefaces his remarks thusly:

"I would like to start my speech with the words that belong to the great thinker Martin Luther, "A lie is like a snowball: the further you roll it, the bigger it becomes".

"This wise aphorism is fully applicable to politics. He who has chosen the path of deception will have to lie again and again, making up explanations for discrepancies, spreading disinformation and doing forgery, desperately using all means to cover the tracks of the lies and to hide the truth.

"The United Kingdom has entered this slippery path. We can clearly see all of this on the example of the "Skripal case" fabricated by the British authorities, this poorly disguised anti-Russian provocation accompanied by an unprecedented propaganda campaign, taken up by a group of countries, and the finalized unprecedented expulsion of diplomats under a far-fetched pretext. Please, do not try to pass this group for the international community – it is far from that."

Bakerpete , Apr 19, 2018 9:55:05 PM | 138

A good statement.

http://thesaker.is/statement-of-a-shulgin-at-the-opcw-ec/

anti_republocrat , Apr 19, 2018 11:40:19 PM | 145
@ the pessimist | Apr 19, 2018 1:05:37 AM | 1

Not sure when Shulgin gave his statement, but today's briefing by Zacharova is even more impressive and revealing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8cjrgPc4Ew&feature=youtu.be&t=2026

It seems that BZ was detected not only by Spiez, but also by a lab in the Netherlands. The explanation given is that BZ was added to the specimens in order to validate the competence of the contracted labs. Furthermore, they attempted to explain away the existence of pristine Novichok in the specimens in a dosage that would have been fatal, thus confirming that the Spiez lab did indeed find such pristine Novichok. You can't make this sh*t up.

Oh, what a tangled web! The wonder is not so much that MI5/MI6 would perpetrate such a false flag, but that they would be so utterly incompetent about it.

anti_republocrat , Apr 19, 2018 11:47:20 PM | 147
@anti_republocrat | Apr 19, 2018 11:40:19 PM | 144

Clarification: The reference to "pristine" Novichok is that Spiez found the toxic agent in a non-degraded form that could not have survived either within the human body or in a collected specimen. They thought it was a contamination. My opinion is that it was added by the British before delivering the specimens, just to be sure the contracted labs would detect it. Also, the fact they claimed to have deliberately contaminated the specimens with BZ is a clear indication it could just as easily be that the BZ was there from the beginning and the actual contamination was with the agent from the Novichok family. Zakharova called it "weird." I'll say!

WJ , Apr 20, 2018 12:08:28 AM | 148
PavewayIV @143,
Funny you should mention a "preemptive protective attack." The Bush preemption doctrine must not have been found suitably effective for domestic propagandist purposes; as since then, if I am not mistaken, the preferred move has been to engineer an actual "event" that the US is forced to "respond" to. The WMD bombast fit the preemption doctrine. The relatively more modest "chemical attack" has the advantage of being easily produced whenever necessary. I think this development signals an advance in the rhetoric of propaganda between Bush II and Obama. Perhaps the PR folks judged Americans to be finally more stupid than malicious as a group. Optimistically put.

anti_republocrat @146

I believe there were four samples (2 bio, 2 enviro); I think it is likely that the 2 bio samples are the ones with BZ in the control. Why? Pure coincidence, procedure, unrelated to anything, etc. Or because the Skripals, and not their doorknob, were poisoned with BZ.

[Apr 21, 2018] Not everybody is affected by 24 by 7 neoMcCarthism in MSM. Some still want to compare views and watch RT

Now listening to RT reminds me BBC and Voice of America listeing in the USSR ;-) You definitly bacomes a dissident for doing that.
Notable quotes:
"... I watched RT for the first time last night and it was interesting. ..."
"... But right now its like we are being ruled by lunatics. It is absolutely sickening. Quite literally some moron in the White House is tweeting, 'My bombs are bigger than yours' and 'The missiles are coming.' ..."
Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com
georgina45 -> Squadra , 13 Apr 2018 15:45
I watched RT for the first time last night and it was interesting.

But right now its like we are being ruled by lunatics. It is absolutely sickening. Quite literally some moron in the White House is tweeting, 'My bombs are bigger than yours' and 'The missiles are coming.'

And they still let him in rule one of the most powerful countries on the Earth with a vast mass of WMD and Theresa May is trying reason with a fucking moron. Hey Guardian if Trump is talking like this my swearing is the least of our problems, so please don't moderate. We need someone to Moderate the madmen.

[Apr 21, 2018] I consider the term 'putinbot' - infantile and indicative of a lack of logical argumentation as it is - as a compliment, since it appears to be code for those who retain the ability to think for themselves and not fall glumly for the latest official line.

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

LiviaDrusilla -> SummerPatch , 13 Apr 2018 15:47

As I've said , I consider the term 'putinbot' - infantile and indicative of a lack of logical argumentation as it is - as a compliment, since it appears to be code for those who retain the ability to think for themselves and not fall glumly for the latest official line.


since the OPCW proved it was Putin who tried to murder British civilians with nerve agents.

Actually, they proved no such thing, but in any case it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

[Apr 21, 2018] I'd never really watched much RT news, but

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Squadra -> georgina45 , 13 Apr 2018 15:36

I'd never really watched much RT news, but intersting to see their extensive coverage of their diplomats who, despite not speaking English as native, can conduct hours of press conference in a civil and diplomatic fashion.
DemocraticFacade , 13 Apr 2018 15:36
May weeping for the innocents of Syria as she signs off on a conveyor belt of bombs to be dropped on innocents in Yemen. She's being raised up by the British media alongside Blair and Cameron as one of the greatest humanitarian of modern times.

[Apr 21, 2018] The vast majority of supposed 'NGO's' are fronts for jihadists 'rebels' who want an Islamist state

NGO now are favorite cover of intelligence agencies.
Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

MartinSilenus -> imperium3 , 13 Apr 2018 14:13

"Remarkable how Saddam Hussein gassing Iranian troops by the thousand, while world powers helped him do it and covered for him at the UN is treated as a minor exception to non-use of chemical"

He also used poison gas to kill thousands of his own Kurdish civilians, the Reagan administration was in many ways a moral cesspit. They knew exactly what he was doing. A spokesman said the Iranians - who never used Chemical Weapons on principle - used the poison gas, on Iraqi Kurds. I think Reagan never really understood this, that is my assessment of his character, he saw what reality he wanted to see, but nothing else.

LiviaDrusilla -> Bangorstu , 13 Apr 2018 14:12
There has been no independently gathered or assessed medical evidence. None.

What is this 'NGO' you speak of? The vast majority of supposed 'NGO's' are fronts for jihadists 'rebels' who want an Islamist state.

wryape , 13 Apr 2018 14:12
" Back then the death toll in Syria stood at around 100,000. More than 400,000 have died since that day. The proof is there if we can bear to look at it. Inaction, too, can be deadly"

And how many died after the war was "won" in Iraq. And how many would have died trying to remove assad. Toppling assad would almost certainly not have brought peace. Your analysis is simplistic and blinkered and definately doesn't contain any proof of anything. Sometimes there's just not a solution. The current proposed bombing campaign smacks of somethingmustbedoneism. Those responsible for the gas attacks must face justice. But it might have to be further down the line.

NHSmonami -> Laurence Bury , 13 Apr 2018 14:12
Western countries have been guilty of mudering hundreds of thousands in starting Middle East wars.

[Apr 21, 2018] Timber Sycamore

A classified U.S. State Department cable signed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reported that Saudi donors were a major support for Sunni militant forces globally, and some American officials worried that rebels being supported had ties to Al Qaeda.[14]
Notable quotes:
"... Read more at https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timber_Sycamore ..."
Apr 21, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press

Timber Sycamore 20/04/2018 Timber Sycamore was a classified weapons supply and training program run by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and supported by various Arab intelligence services, most notably that of Saudi Arabia . Launched in 2012 or 2013, it supplied money, weaponry and training to rebel forces fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in the Syrian Civil War . According to U.S. officials, the program has trained thousands of rebels. President Barack Obama secretly authorized the CIA to begin arming Syria's embattled rebels in 2013. [3] However, the CIA had been facilitating the flow of arms from Libya to Syria "for more than a year" beforehand in collaboration with "the UK ( United Kingdom ), Saudi Arabia and Qatar ."

The program's existence was suspected after the U.S. Federal Business Opportunities website publicly solicited contract bids to ship tons of weaponry from Eastern Europe to Taşucu , Turkey and Aqaba , Jordan. One unintended consequence of the program has been to flood the Middle East's black market with weapons including assault rifles, mortars and rocket-propelled grenades. The U.S. delivered weapons via Ramstein – supposedly in breach of German laws.

In July 2017, U.S. officials stated that Timber Sycamore would be phased out, with funds possibly redirected to fighting the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), or to offering rebel forces defensive capabilities.

... ... ...

According to American officials, the program has been highly effective, training and equipping thousands of U.S.-backed fighters to make substantial battlefield gains.[2][19] American officials state that the program began to lose effectiveness after Russia intervened militarily in the Syrian Civil War.[19] David Ignatius, writing in The Washington Post, remarked that while the CIA program ultimately failed in its objective of removing Assad from power, it was hardly "bootless": "The program pumped many hundreds of millions of dollars to many dozens of militia groups. One knowledgeable official estimates that the CIA-backed fighters may have killed or wounded 100,000 Syrian soldiers and their allies over the past four years."[8]

... ... ...

U.S.-backed rebels often fought alongside al-Qaeda's al-Nusra Front, and some of the U.S. supplied weapons ended up in the hands of the al-Nusra Front, which had been a major concern of the Obama administration when the program was first proposed.[10]

... ... ...

The program remains classified,[14][10] and many details about the program remain unknown, including the total amount of support, the range of weapons transferred, the depth of training provided, the types of U.S. trainers involved, and the exact rebel groups being supported.[18] However, The Canberra Times reported that two thousand tons of Soviet era weapons were delivered to Aqaba as recently as April 2016.

Read more at https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timber_Sycamore

[Apr 21, 2018] Neoliberal media and goverment talking points

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

creelo -> sejong , 13 Apr 2018 14:57

We're now in a strange position where the media is actually behind the government. May is doubtful about bombing because she's a politician and so has to constantly monitor her popularity, but the only people left still writing in 'newspapers' are still programmed to want war and bombing because it always used to sell.

"Since you're here..."

HarrytheHawk -> JackDowland , 13 Apr 2018 14:56
'There is overwhelming evidence...'

Where?

Let's see it.

You might want to show it to James Mattis while you're at it as he doesn't seem to be willing to settle for accusations.

Jazzfunk23 , 13 Apr 2018 14:56
The UN duly investigated and in October concluded unambiguously that the Assad regime had used sarin gas.

You omitted to mention that the same report also concludes that ISIL deployed Sulphur Mustard, isn't this the same gas that France claims to have evidence regarding the recent incident?

Besides, how much evidence do we need? Even before Douma, Assad's use of chemical weapons had been documented seven times this year alone.

The link you provided to back-up this claim contains no substantiative evidence to attribute those incidents to Assad.

Clearly both sides in this conflict appear to have used chemical weapons, making assumptions or false accusations of blame at this stage is incredibly dangerous. I'm in total agreement with Jeremy Corbyn, we need a solid investigation on which the international community can act. Any potential escalation of this awful conflict must be avoided at all costs, particularly when it involves a nuclear armed superstate, considering the on-going humaitarian crisis in Syria and how it has already affected the world. Furthermore we must not allow a cabinet of a minority government to make any final decisions on the UK involvement in further militrary action, our elected representatives MUST be allowed to debate and decide a course of action, otherwise our democracy is in a far worse state than I could have possibly imagined.

thatotherbloke , 13 Apr 2018 14:54
Theresa May leads a minority government propped up by an unlawful bung to a right wing extremist group. May, her Cabinet of half wits and her self serving party have a mandate for sweet FA, and that includes killing people in our name.
sejong , 13 Apr 2018 14:52
MSM has gone full neocon on Syria.

Bomb like it's 2003.

psoptim11 , 13 Apr 2018 14:52
There is massive, overwhelming opposition in the UK to May's attempt to join Trump & Macron in bombing Syria and to by-passing our democratic parliament, but who would have thought it?

The media are generally presenting Theresa May with a free ride to cause death and destruction on a massive scale. Claiming she's joining an international coalition (even though it consists of only 2 other countries) and having the backing of the Cabinet and therefore possessing the authority to go to war.

The reality is that she's virtually politically isolated and working in defiance of the British people. Labour - and most other opposition parties, including the Lib Dems, SNP, Plaid, and the Greens are totally against military intervention and calling for a full, democratic debate in Parliament.

Then the Conservative Party itself is bitterly divided over the issue.

And only 22% of British people would support the war effort, according to a poll in the Times.

The timing is being forced by Donald Trump and the US, so where's the substance in the Conservative claim that they're 'taking back control'?

And then any intervention is likely to cost billions, so what about The Deficit? And what about that magic money tree?

Moreover, the Government maintain we cannot allow such inhumanity in Syria to go unchallenged. So where is the outcry at defenceless citizens being killed in Gaza? And in Yemen? And in Saudi Arabia? What accounts for the blatant double standards? What are they not telling us?

And why does the British Goverment justicfy selling all these lethal and inhumance weapons to these countries in the first place?

Where is the media reminding the Government of what happened in Iraq, in Libya and in Afghanistan?, whenever we intervened?

Where is the media remembering the findings of the Chilcott Report?

If this was Labour nationalising the railways or expropriating land in an emergency bill to launch a massive house-building programme, the BBC and mass media would quote every adversary and critic they could muster and express total outrage at any attempt to by-pass Parliament.

The Syrian conflict is a hugely complex quagmire and we enter it at our peril. We need a much more objective Press to scrutinise Government policy, before this lunacy unravels and triggers a seriously calamitous hot war between the Superpowers, from which we'd all be losers.

Jeremy Corbyn is often mocked and scorned by the media for his measured reactions, but his call for the UK to use its influence to defuse tensions makes him one of the only responsible and mature political leaders around right now!!

dumbwaiter , 13 Apr 2018 14:52
The government and the BBC have been using the words "suspected chemical attack" in Syria and that Russia is "highly likely" to be responsible for the Salisbury affair.

Now if that isn't official doubt I don't know what is.

Still May happy to drop bombs on this basis without parliamentary approval (if Donald says so that is)!

[Apr 21, 2018] OK - its the We Cannot Do Nothing, Therefore We Must Do Something, Therefore We Must Bomb Them argument.

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

bubmachine , 13 Apr 2018 14:39

OK - its the We Cannot Do Nothing, Therefore We Must Do Something, Therefore We Must Bomb Them argument.

Convinced? No.

DZ76 , 13 Apr 2018 14:39
This is pathetic. The mouthpieces of the British government (Guardian and BBC) have spent the last week on a steady pendulum of demanding war, shitting themselves, then when the rhetoric calms down a bit, demanding war again. The U.K., its security agencies and its house-trained media are destabilising the world.

[Apr 21, 2018] How about some basic honesty about the role the US and it's allies have played in fostering and continue if this civil war

Notable quotes:
"... How about some basic honesty about the role the US and it's allies have played in fostering and continue if this civil war. That, coupled by a complete retreat of US imperial neoliberal ambitions across the entire region, you know, might just be incredibly effective ..."
"... Are we seriously going to pretend we and our allies haven't provided financial, technological, diplomatic, political and military support to this extremely heterogenous group of rebels, without which the whole uprising (a legitimate uprising, sure, but certainly not a viable one) would have been over in a few months, without any of the atrocities, tragedies and destruction of the past 6 years? ..."
"... For Europe and the US to have any credibility the double standards applied has to come to an end ..."
"... Sorry but the arguments in the article don't hold water. Reeks of the longstanding agenda of the war profiteers and the Clinton gang to invade this country. On hypocritical reasons. ..."
Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

HoublaHoubla , 13 Apr 2018 14:44

Here's an idea Jonathan for another solution. How about some basic honesty about the role the US and it's allies have played in fostering and continue if this civil war. That, coupled by a complete retreat of US imperial neoliberal ambitions across the entire region, you know, might just be incredibly effective
notndmushroom , 13 Apr 2018 14:42

But nor can we watch the brutal dictator slaughter his own people

Why not? We're watching Israelis shoot and kill unarmed Palestinians, we're watching our favourite Saudis bomb and kill Yemeni civilians, we're watching our Nobel-winning inspirational Myanmar leader oversee the persecution, massacre and forced displacement of an entire people, we're watching the North Korean leader oppress and starve his people while stepping closer to a nuclear war against a currently volatile superpower, we're watching the Philipino head of state launching a literal war against low-level drug dealers and junkies, we're watching several central Asian dictators imprison and torture dissidents and oppress their people while robbing them of their national wealth, we're watching the Chinese and Russian leaders do pretty much the same, we're watching the Turkish leader kidnap dissidents from EU countries, imprison thousands of alleged dissidents and invade a neighbouring country to fight against part of said countries' inhabitants, we're watching corrupt politicians, media and judges completing the final touches of a coup in the fifth largest country in the world, and then there's Africa, which is a whole other chapter.

What specifically is it about Syria that made you decide that yeah, all these things are pretty bad, but that's the one thing we really have to do something about?

Perhaps that was why, five years ago, the House of Commons voted to leave the Assad regime untouched. Back then the death toll in Syria stood at around 100,000. More than 400,000 have died since that day. The proof is there if we can bear to look at it. Inaction, too, can be deadly.

Inaction? Really? Are we seriously going to pretend we and our allies haven't provided financial, technological, diplomatic, political and military support to this extremely heterogenous group of rebels, without which the whole uprising (a legitimate uprising, sure, but certainly not a viable one) would have been over in a few months, without any of the atrocities, tragedies and destruction of the past 6 years?

fishandart , 13 Apr 2018 14:42
For Europe and the US to have any credibility the double standards applied has to come to an end. Israel has to comply with UN resolutions and the US has to stop using its veto to block those resolutions that seek to make Israel comply to international standards of acceptable behaviour.

If we can't do that we can forget getting Assad or Putin or anyone else to respect anything we have to say. As it stands the so called West has no moral authority in the Middle East.

Ziontrain , 13 Apr 2018 14:41

But nor can we watch the brutal dictator slaughter his own people

Why is this supposed slaughter such an imperative when we seem to approve of and even profit from selling weapons to slaughters elsewhere in the region

Sorry but the arguments in the article don't hold water. Reeks of the longstanding agenda of the war profiteers and the Clinton gang to invade this country. On hypocritical reasons.

[Apr 21, 2018] Pay for what? Be President of a country marked out for regime change by the West and successfully managing to fight off the West's proxy armies of terrorists over seven years in defence of that country?

Notable quotes:
"... Conveniently missing from this short history of Syria: That the US was actually heavily involved using the CIA in getting rid of Assad. Had that not been the case, perhaps there would have been no prolonged civil war. ..."
"... Oh, I know challenging the holy West and its exceptional leading nation is verboten nowadays, but can we at least be honest about what is really going on today? Syria is being punished for not joining the coalition of the willing in 2003 by being subjected to the same illegal war by false claim as Iraq was then. ..."
Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

MightyBuccaneer , 13 Apr 2018 14:14

Conveniently missing from this short history of Syria: That the US was actually heavily involved using the CIA in getting rid of Assad. Had that not been the case, perhaps there would have been no prolonged civil war.

It would be just another dictator, the likes of which can be found all over the world without columnists noticing it.

Strangely though, all that is deplored is that the US didn't do even more. That they didn't also do a full blown invasion.

NewWorldOutOfOrder , 13 Apr 2018 14:14
"Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship

Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

– Hermann Goering (as told to Gustav Gilbert during the Nuremberg trials)

Briar , 13 Apr 2018 14:14
Pay for what? Be President of a country marked out for regime change by the West and successfully managing to fight off the West's proxy armies of terrorists over seven years in defence of that country?

Oh, I know challenging the holy West and its exceptional leading nation is verboten nowadays, but can we at least be honest about what is really going on today? Syria is being punished for not joining the coalition of the willing in 2003 by being subjected to the same illegal war by false claim as Iraq was then.

solidstae , 13 Apr 2018 14:14
Assad has always acted in this like any other authoritarian government anywhere in the Middle East would, fighting a civil war. Israel is just as ruthless when facing a threat to its authority.

This mess was financed, planned, egged on and armed by the U.S., it's junior partners and its clients in Turkey and the Gulf. And it goes back years before the rebellion against Assad. The Wahabbi rebels have been given billions in cash, arms and training, funneled through Turkey and the Gulf states.

Now we have Washington, London and Paris shrieking outrage and promising revenge against a strongman they unleashed as the result of yet another regime change adventure. And then there's the incredible hypocrisy and cynicism of using Al-Qaeda affiliated actors to do it.

Assad's wartime iteration, like ISIS, is the result of American greed, ambition, pride and the old imperialist bent for aggression as a way of imposing its geopolitical will.

[Apr 21, 2018] These children are not the casualties of a gas attack

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

gragor , 13 Apr 2018 13:48

Watch the Unbearable video gain. The children are no foaming at the mouth, their colouration is not cyanotic, they do not appear to be in respiratory distress. The premise of the argument is not based on fact. These children are not the casualties of a gas attack. GROW UP and recognize the propaganda.
minutehands , 13 Apr 2018 13:38
The article takes a self-righteous moral high ground while calling for some vague affair of violence. I can't help but notice that these articles by people who pretend to be moderates and centrists have a habit of turning reality and morality on their head. It's dangerous and very Orwellian stuff.
entropyrules , 13 Apr 2018 13:44
The question that I struggle to answer is, "Are journalists like this actually duped by propaganda themselves, or are they knowingly part of the process of dissemination?"
What I do not struggle to see is that they are undoubtedly part of the prevailing neolib/neocon philosophy which we rapidly need to dismantle.
ChairmanMayTseTung , 13 Apr 2018 13:36
Cui bono?

Who would gain by getting the US back on the ground in Syria?
Who would gain from Russia and the US coming into conflict?

Rogue elements in the US?
Israel certainly
ISIS terrorists?
Saudi Arabia?

[Apr 21, 2018] It s a tough old world and we are certainly capable of a Salisbury set-up and god knows what else in Syria.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... It is perfectly possible that the British government manufactured the whole Salisbury thing. We are capable of just as much despicable behavior and murder as the next. ..."
"... Tucker Carlson of Fox News has it nailed down.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M28aYkLRlm0 ..."
"... This "civil war" has been nothing but a war for Syrian resources waged by western proxies. ..."
"... So now, In desperation borne out of their impending defeat, the imperialists have staged a chemical attack in a last throw of the dice to gain popular support for an escalation in military intervention. Like military interventions of the past, it is being justified in the name of humanitarian intervention. ..."
Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

wheelbarrow1 , 13 Apr 2018 14:37

Why is the prime minister of the United Kinkdom on the phone discussing whether or not to bomb a Sovereign country with the highly unstable, Donald Trump?

Can she not make up her own mind? Either she thinks it's the right thing to do or it isn't. Hopefully, the person on the other end of the phone was not Trump but someone with at least half a brain.

Proof, let's have some proof. Is that too much to ask? Apparently so. Russia is saying it's all a put up job, show us your facts. We are saying, don't be silly, we're British and besides, you may have done this sort of thing before.

It is perfectly possible that the British government manufactured the whole Salisbury thing. We are capable of just as much despicable behavior and murder as the next.

Part of the Great British act's of bravery and heroism in the second world war is the part played by women agents who were parachuted into France and helped organize local resistance groups. Odette Hallowes, Noor Inayat Khan and Violette Szabo are just a few of the many names but they are the best known. What is not generally know is that many agents when undergoing their training in the UK, were given information about the 'D' day landings, the approx time and place. They were then dropped into France into the hands of the waiting German army who captured and tortured and often executed them.

The double agent, who Winston Churchill met and fully approved of the plan was Henri Dericourt, an officer in the German army and our man on the ground in France. Dericourt organized the time and place for the drop off of the incoming agents, then told the Germans. The information about the 'D' day invasion time and place was false. The British fed the agents (only a small number) into German hands knowing they would be captured and the false information tortured out of them.

Source :- 'A Quiet Courage' Liane Jones.

It's a tough old world and we are certainly capable of a Salisbury set-up and god knows what else in Syria.

I_Wear_Socks , 13 Apr 2018 14:37
From The Guardian articles today that I have read on Syria, it makes absolutely clear that if you in any way question the narrative forwarded here, that you are a stupid conspiracy theorist in line with Richard Spencer and other far-right, American nutcases.

A more traditional form of argument to incline people to their way of thinking would be facts. But social pressure to conform and not be a conspiratorial idiot in line with the far-right obviously work better for most of their readers. My only surprise it that position hasn't been linked with Brexit.

ChairmanMayTseTung , 13 Apr 2018 14:37
Did anyone see the massive canister that was shown on TV repeatedly that was supposed to have been air-dropped and smashed through the window of a house, landed on a bed and failed to go off.

The bed was in remarkable condition with just a few ruffled bedclothes considering it had been hit with a metal object weighing god knows what and dropped from a great height.

MartinSilenus -> ChairmanMayTseTung , 13 Apr 2018 14:36
"More than 40 years after the US sprayed millions of litres of chemical agents to defoliate"

The Defoliant Agent Orange was used to kill jungles, resulting in light getting through to the dark jungle floors & a massive amount of low bush regrowing, making the finding of Vietcong fighters even harder!

It was sprayed even on American troops, it is a horrible stuff. Still compared to Chlorine poison gas, let alone nerve gases, it is much less terrible. Though the long term effects are pretty horrible.

"Some 45 million liters of the poisoned spray was Agent Orange, which contains the toxic compound dioxin"
http://theconversation.com/agent-orange-exposed-how-u-s-chemical-warfare-in-vietnam-unleashed-a-slow-moving-disaster-84572

120Daze , 13 Apr 2018 14:36
Who needs facts when you've got opinions? Non more hypocritical than the British. Its what you get when you lie and distort though a willing press, you get found out and then nobody believes anything you say.anymore. The white helmets are a western funded and founded organisation, they are NOT independent they are NOT volunteers, The UK the US and the Dutch fund them to the tune of over $40 million. They are a propaganda dispensing outlet. The press shouldn't report anything they release because it is utterly unable to substantiate ANY of it, there hasn't been a western journalist in these areas for over 4 years so why do the press expect us to believe anything they print? Combine this with the worst and most incompetent Govt this country has seen for decades and all you have is a massive distraction from massive domestic troubles which the same govt has no answers too.
LiviaDrusilla -> Bangorstu , 13 Apr 2018 14:36
LOL are you having a larf?

The same organisation that receives millions of quid in funding from USAID?

Whose 'executive director' used to work for USAID?

Who have campaigned for 'no fly zones' (ie US bombing)?

Who are affiliated to the Iranian terrorist group MEK?

Who only happen to run hospitals in 'rebel' held areas?

You have a strange idea of 'politically neutral'. Your 'NGO' are fighting for an Islamist state. Enjoy them.

Dominique2 , 13 Apr 2018 14:32
https://www.theguardian.com/world/shortcuts/2013/sep/01/winston-churchill-shocking-use-chemical-weapons

""I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes," [Winston Churchill] declared in one secret memorandum."

The current condemnation by the international community and international law is good and needs enforcement. But no virtue signalling where there is none.

CaptTroyTempest -> StoneRoses , 13 Apr 2018 14:27
But we're still awaiting evidence that a chemical attack has been carried out in Douma, aren't we? And if an attack was carried out, by whom. But before these essential points are verified, you feel that a targeted military response is justified. Are you equally keen for some targeted military response for the use of chemical weapons, namely white phosphorus, in Palestine by the Israaeli military? Unlike Douma, the use of these chemical weapons in the occupied territories by the IDF's personnel is well documented. But we haven't attacked them yet. Funny that.
CMYKilla , 13 Apr 2018 14:26
Instead of "chemicals" why not just firebomb them - you know like we did to entire cities full of women and children in WW2?

Hamburg 27 July 1943 - 46,000 civilians killed in a firestorm
Kassel 22 October 1943 - 9,000 civilians killed 24,000 houses destroyed in a firestorm
Darmstadt 11 September 1944 - 8,000 civilians killed in a firestorm
Dresden 13/14th February - 25,000 civilians killed in a firestorm

Obviously we were fighting Nazism and hadn't actually been invaded - and he is fighting Wahhabism and has had major cities overrun...

Maybe if Assad burnt people to death rather than gassing them we would make a statue of him outside Westminster like the one of Bomber Harris?

Tom1982 , 13 Apr 2018 14:24
Remember the tearful Kuwaiti nurse with her heartrending story of Iraqi troops tipping premature babies out of their incubators after the invasion in 1990? The story was published in pretty much every major Western newspaper, massively increased public support for military intervention............................and turned out to be total bullshit.

Is it too much too ask that we try a bit of collective critical thinking and wait for hard evidence before blundering into a military conflict with Assad; and potentially Putin?

BlutoTheBruto , 13 Apr 2018 14:21
Didn't General Mattis quietly admit at there was no evidence for the alleged Sarin attacks last year by Assad?

http://www.newsweek.com/now-mattis-admits-there-was-no-evidence-assad-using-poison-gas-his-people-801542

Hmmmm.... call me skeptical for not believing it this time around.

AwkwardSquad , 13 Apr 2018 14:19
Well, this is the sort of stuff that the Israelis would be gagging for. They want Assad neutralised and they are assisting ISIS terrorists on the Golan Heights. They tend to their wounded and send them back across the border to fight Assad. What better than to drag the Americans, Brits and French into the ring to finish him off. Job done eh?

Are you sure you are not promoting an Israeli agenda here Jonathan?

Incidentantally what did we in the west do when the Iraqis were gassing the Iranians with nerve agents in the marshes of southern Iraq during the Iran Iraq War? Did we intervene then? No, we didn't we allowed it to happen.

I say stay out it.

dannymega -> fripouille , 13 Apr 2018 14:18
Come on frip, you have to admit there was absolutely no motive for Assad's forces to carry out this attack. Why do you think the Guardian and other main stream media outlets are not even considering the possibility the Jihadi rebels staged it to trigger western intervention? I know, I know.. it's all evil Assad killing his own people for no other reason than he likes butchering people... blah blah. The regime change agenda against Syria has been derailed, no amount of false flag attacks can change the facts on the ground.
Preshous , 13 Apr 2018 14:18
Tucker Carlson of Fox News has it nailed down.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M28aYkLRlm0
ChairmanMayTseTung , 13 Apr 2018 14:16
More than 40 years after the US sprayed millions of litres of chemical agents to defoliate vast swathes of Vietnam and in the full knowledge it would be have a catastrophic effect on the health of the inhabitants of those area, Vietnam has by far the highest incidence of liver cancer on the planet.

Then more recently we have the deadly depleted uranium from US shells that innocent Iraqis are inhaling as shrill voices denounce Assad.

CodeNameTwiglet , 13 Apr 2018 14:15
The Syrian people are heroically resisting and defeating western imperialism. This "civil war" has been nothing but a war for Syrian resources waged by western proxies.

So now, In desperation borne out of their impending defeat, the imperialists have staged a chemical attack in a last throw of the dice to gain popular support for an escalation in military intervention. Like military interventions of the past, it is being justified in the name of humanitarian intervention.

But if we have a brief browse of history we can see that US & UK governments have brought only death, misery and destruction on the populations it was supposedly helping. Hands off Syria.

[Apr 21, 2018] In another development (probably to run with the Syria script) the UK announces it has a dossier that proves Russia was experimenting with delivering nerve agents from door handles.

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

ChairmanMayTseTung , 13 Apr 2018 13:27

In another development (probably to run with the Syria script) the UK announces it has a dossier that proves Russia was experimenting with delivering nerve agents from door handles.

Not as hilarious as breathlessly closing a children's playground near the Skripal's days after the event for "contamination checks" even though it had been raining in the days in between (the narrative was presumably the dastardly Russian agents planned to kill a few innocent kids for good measure).

[Apr 21, 2018] We are absolutely being lied to, left right and centre.

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

andersen100 -> zardos , 13 Apr 2018 14:05

We are absolutely being lied to, left right and centre.

People who actually know what is happening are being gagged, which is ironic in this digital age.

Time was that we kind of trusted our politicians- to some extent, anyway.

No longer, and especially when information is conveyed by tweets by possibly the most important person in the world.

We also have a Prime Minister who would like to bypass parliament at any given time.

honestjohn -> SummerPatch , 13 Apr 2018 14:00
'No one is suggesting they want to become new parties in the war.'

They have been involved from the start:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/29/syria-crisis-where-do-the-major-countries-stand
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23849587
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/05/world/middleeast/brutality-of-syrian-rebels-pose-dilemma-in-west.html ?
https://edition.cnn.com/2015/09/16/middleeast/syria-al-assad-interview/index.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_involvement_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War

fakeamoonlanding , 13 Apr 2018 14:02
As usual, our wise men are busy preparing the evidence dossier for this gas attack. Hacking someone's phone is now evidence of you delivering chemical weapon. I wonder how many doses of novichok NOTW managed to deliver to its phone hacking victims.
Анатолий Ямсков , 13 Apr 2018 14:01
Hope everyone understands that telling lies is not good, and it is especially disgusting when lies form the basic argument for launching a war or some prolonged military assaults.
Please, compare the articles, this one and those mentioned below, and judge for yourself whether J. Freedland can be trusted.
1. J. Freedland, about the West: "The notion of inaction, of standing by and watching as Assad kills and kills and kills, And yet that's what we've done".
O. Jones: "The US has been bombing the country and supplying arms to rebels for some time. Our client states ... have funnelled weapons and billions of dollars into the conflict, backing extremist groups responsible for multiple atrocities". https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/13/attack-syria-disastrous-warmongers-middle-east-unjust
2. J. Freedland: "The taboo on the use of such (chemical) weapons held, with exceptions, for nearly a century. It meant there was a limit".
For the actual details of such "limit" see: https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/theresa-may-syria-war-uk-chemical-weapons-attack-iran-iraq-thatcher-russia-a8300881.html
3. It looks like J. Freedland is sure only Assad "kills and kills and kills" in this civil war. Does anyone believe this, i.e. that the opposing jihadists have never killed during the war?
NoLivesMatter , 13 Apr 2018 13:59
Why the automatic evidence-free assumption that Assad must be responsible?

According to the New York Times, Islamic State have been behind 52 chemical attacks in Syria and Libya:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/21/world/middleeast/isis-chemical-weapons-syria-iraq-mosul.html

LiviaDrusilla -> ID9265089 , 13 Apr 2018 13:58

they're quite happy to gloss over the absolutely vile nature of Assad's regime.

Strawman. It's a nasty regime in all sorts of ways but no more so - probably less so - than many regimes enthusiastically supported and armed by the British government.


If we're talking about culpability, it's worth noting that the rebel groups have become radicalised over time -

That old fib! This was an Islamist uprising from day one. How does a liberal pro-democracy type suddenly morph into a bearded Islamist overnight?


And yes, we gave aid to the rebels. Did it prolong the war? Possibly.

Possibly? It didn't prolong the war, it pretty much caused the war.


Should we have done nothing? Possibly yes, but hindsight is always a wonderful thing.

Hindsight eh? So you thought "Yup, let's join in with the Saudis and other Gulf dictatorships in arming extremist Islamist rebels in a crucial Middle Eastern country. Nothing could possibly go wrong! That sort of thing has been a roaring success everywhere it's been tried."

Seriously. Talk some sense.

HerbGuardian , 13 Apr 2018 13:55
Make Assad pay ?.......pay for what Johnny .... for defending his people from murderous insurgents who are being constantly ferried into and supplied by hostile countries with the intent of horrifically slaughtering anyone they can get their claws on in order to initiate a reign of terror that they hope will weaken the moral of the people and the government? ......Jesus, I don't think I've read such a nastier piece of pure propaganda than this in the Guardian ever before.
imperium3 , 13 Apr 2018 13:55
Remarkable how Saddam Hussein gassing Iranian troops by the thousand, while world powers helped him do it and covered for him at the UN is treated as a minor exception to non-use of chemical weapons, whereas Assad's is some unprecedented crime.

And let's not pretend that Saddam paid for his use of chemical weapons - the West punished him for the transgression of threatening Saudi Arabia, nothing more.

OldDevil , 13 Apr 2018 13:54
In August 2012, as reported by the Times , William Hague writes that discussions are taking place with the Free Syrian Army:

"This week, on my instructions, my ambassador-level representative to the Syrian opposition has contacted and is meeting political elements of the Free Syria Army."
"We want to deter those committing war crimes by making it possible for them to be held to account. We will provide urgent training and equipment to Syrian human rights activists, including cameras, video recorders and forensic equipment.
The aim is to help them to document human rights violations, identify the military commanders responsible and gather medical forensic evidence to be used in trials. Britain has already trained more than 60 Syrian human rights activists to collect information to support criminal investigations. This new assistance will enable others to do the same."

The Guardian headline on this subject reads: "Syria: UK to give £5m to rebels":

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/aug/10/syria-aleppo-live

Cameras, video recorders and forensic equipment.

SMKirov , 13 Apr 2018 13:52
Why are the Guardian and its writers continuing to peddle the lie that the Syrian Government has been proved to have used chemical munitions? For seven long years now the Syrian people and their government have had to fight off a jihadi onslaught armed and financed by NATO and the Gulf autocracies. With help from Russia and Iran, they are winning: they have no need to use chemical weapons and they know that doing so is to invite intervention on the side of the Islamist terrorists. The terrorists, by contrast, know that their only chance lies in such intervention and that convincing the World that the Syrian Government has used chemical weapons is the best way to bring it about.

It is also obscene for Mr Friedland to ascribe all of the casualties of the Civil War to the Government while ignoring the terrorist tactic of occupying and defending populated areas. The Syrian Arab Army is no more responsible for the resulting casualties than were the pro Western forces for the destruction of Mosul during its liberation from ISIS. I am sick to the teeth of formerly respectable media like the Guardian and the BBC functioning as propagandists for jihadi murderers and terrorists, particularly now that doing so is pushing us towards a very dangerous international conflict.

kenna , 13 Apr 2018 13:41
I watched that idiot Jo Johnson last night going on about how the international community had banned chemical weapons in 1925 and no one pulled him up on it. Britain developed and stockpiled chemical weapons all through the 20th Century- the 'greatest' Britain of all time Churchill regularly argued for their use on 'lesser' races. The US (our allies in this) is the same US that dumped unbelievable amounts of agent orange on Vietnam at the same time it bombed a poor undeveloped country 'into the stone age'.

A woman in the audience pointed out the sheer hypocrisy of abhorring Asssad's actions (quite rightly) but at the same time arming the Saudis to kill more civilians and supporting the Israeli government (which whilst clearly not in the same league as Assad or the Saudis is still a major human rights violater). Unsurprisingly she was cut off and the 'left-wing' BBC moved on and ignored her points

diddoit , 13 Apr 2018 13:36
We went into Iraq because Blair warned, in the sternest terms, British cities could be under imminent attack from Iraqi WMD. How ridiculous do those grave statements, made to a hushed HoC, look today?
q321gg8cla -> tomprice129 , 13 Apr 2018 13:33
£35 billion arms contracts overseen by May,Johnson and Cameron to Saudia Arabia who are in Syria!Think about it !
Tom1982 , 13 Apr 2018 13:31
Graun, genuinely bugger off with this drumbeat for war. Seriously, hasn't the current murderous anarchy in Libya given you pause for thought?

There's no definitive evidence yet available that proves Assad's forces carried out a chemical attack. Furthermore, whilst it's not inconceivable that he did, it does seem to defy logic. Why invite Western intervention when you're winning the war? The Syrian opposition had far more to gain from the deployment of chemical weapons than Assad did.

Assad is a loathsome individual, but he's probably the only thing standing in the way of a Jihadist Theocracy being established in Syria. To put in bluntly, it's in our interests that he wins this war. The alternative is worse.

Denis61 , 13 Apr 2018 13:31
I wish I could say I was shocked by the latest pro war tub thumping by this increasingly unrecognisable paper. Sadly it's has become all too synonymous with its support for Theresa May and its attempts to persuade an unwilling public to join the hysteria. Freedland says that Assad's guilt is beyond doubt; no it isn't. He talks of the effectiveness of bombing in the Balkan conflict, conveniently ignoring Iraq and Syria. He ignores the obvious incentive for ISIS or perhaps he would prefer "rebels", to launch an attack in a a desperate attempt to recover a war they are losing. He ignores the war in Yemen and the murderous regimes around the world that we seem totally uninterested in putting right. No, Mr Freedland, I and I think many others are not giving Mrs May her Falklands moment at your behest.

[Apr 21, 2018] Macron as greedy neocon. His support of Douma false flag attack is related to selling weapons to Saudi monarchy

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

RudolphS 13 Apr 2018 16:17

Most baffling is is French president Emmanuele Macron's fierce reaction. There's no other nation which has suffered so much from terrorist attacks as France. And yet now its president is determined to use his fighter planes as the de facto airforce for the the jihadi extremists. Macron went even as far as making his statements with the Saudi prince at his side, the leader of a country which is known for funding the jihadis!

Weird times.

Jay_Q123 -> RudolphS 13 Apr 2018 16:25

Macron just got back from a few days hanging on out with the Saudi Arabian elite, who have

AndiMcDodle -> ManUpTheTree , 13 Apr 2018 14:51

Agreed Macron is so proud about the weapons Saudi Arabia bought of him. And strangely enough Saudi Arabia supports the ISIS head choppers in Syria, I think of a coincidence. And I didn't mention the gaz pipeline crossing Syria, that if Russia/Assad win, will be beyond the control of Europeans, a real bummer, given that Russia controls the supply east of Germany. I guess civilian death, is the only thing in the forefront of the France/UK/US preoccupations. Surely, they wouldn't condone civilians dying for geo-political reasons?
NapoleonXIV -> Richmar , 13 Apr 2018 14:48
Yes, I remember Rice, Cheney, Bush, and Rumsfeld telling the world that they had evidence that Saddam was hoarding WMD. I'm still waiting to hear what it was. Now M. Macron spouts the same ambiguous nonsense expecting us to take his word for it.

Trump publicly states that US troops are being withdrawn from Syria. The next thing you know, Assad is allegedly gassing civilians. That makes a whole lot of sense doesn't it? If there's a sure-fire way of making sure you're on the wrong end of a bit of American 'shock and awe,' it's gassing innocents. Assad must have a death wish; or so they'd have us believe. The more I read about this fiasco, the more I think David Icke is the most rational man on the planet.

Ziontrain -> rustledust74 , 13 Apr 2018 14:47
From Pinochet to Mobuto, Kagama and many more, I'd think you'd better to review what the policy of the west actually IS.

[Apr 21, 2018] But where is the incontrovertible proof that the regime is in fact responsible for the attack rather than 'rebel groups' now on the point of final defeat, who'd wish to draw in the major NATO powers

Western neoliberal governments lost the remnants of patina of legitimacy on international scene and now look like bloodthirsty predators, they always were.
Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Labourist , 13 Apr 2018 14:46

But where is the incontrovertible proof that the regime is in fact responsible for the attack rather than 'rebel groups' now on the point of final defeat, who'd wish to draw in the major NATO powers? Why would the regime afford the US, France and UK the pretext to do one thing that'd undermine Assad's otherwise certain victory? The timing seems odd indeed while Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Israel act with impunity against minority populations. Each of the latter has form and interest the destruction of Syria in this proxy war.
comrade1 , 13 Apr 2018 14:50
Let me see if I have this right....

The UK thinks it's "highly likely" Assad is to blame for the chemical attack. France says it has evidence Assad is responsible but won't say what it is. US Secretary of Defence Mattis believes a chemical attack took place but says there's no evidence. And depending on the day of the week, Russia believes there was either no chemical attack or if there was then it was staged by the UK.

And for good measure we appear to be going headlong into war on the basis of all this.

SMKirov -> ID9265089 , 13 Apr 2018 14:46
The UN investigations concluded that the chemicals had come from Syrian Army stocks which there wasn't much doubt about to start with. Where they were less conclusive was the matter of who had deployed them given the capture of large stocks of munitions by the terrorists early in the war. On the basis of cui bono? it seems more likely that it was the terrorist side who sought to provoke Western intervention by staging chemical incidents rather than the Syrian Government who had little to gain and much to lose from the use of any kind of WMD.
ReLuke631 , 13 Apr 2018 14:45
We never learn.

First Blair holding onto an idiot's shirt tails to attack a Middle Eastern country based on hearsay and no coherent withdrawal policy. Now we have May and Macron holding the hands of an even bigger idiot whose populist thoughts change by the minute so no hope of any withdrawal plan.

Does May and her hawks (Gove, Johnson) really want to be compared with Trump, Kim, Putin, Assad, W Bush, Blair et al in the history books?

solidstae , 13 Apr 2018 14:45
The rebels in Syria have a history of using sarin, chlorine and mustard gas against troops and civilians. But Washington, London and Paris are completely dummy on this. Not a whisper. Rather straight to accusations and threats against the regime they have been trying to overthrow for years.

I don't know who did it. But I know who lies every time they take a breath if they consider it in their interests. Truth is the first casualty. I don't believe any of them.

irishinrussia , 13 Apr 2018 14:45
Noticeable that the Guardian live coverage provides Western refutations of Russia's claims of evidence regarding a staged false attack, but doesn't actually cover the evidence the Russians have provided - testimony from medical staff who claim to be witnesses. Now I'm not so stupid as to take these claims as gospel, the Russians are just as capable as anyone of finding a couple of fake or pressured witnesses. However the failure of the Western press to even elaborate on the evidence, even just to ridicule and debunk it, is suspicious.

[Apr 21, 2018] Oceania was at war with Eurasia; therefore Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia

Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Amaranthus_ , 13 Apr 2018 15:04

It is getting very tiresome tying to read between the lines of what Britain, America, Russia, etc, etc, etc spin to us in a constant barrage of disposable half truths. The worrying part is that it is now harder then ever to gauge if these 'bastions of truth' really believe their own bullshit or not and end up dropping us all into a war of no return.

"Oceania was at war with Eurasia; therefore Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia."

tomspen -> dannymega , 13 Apr 2018 15:02
The White Helmets were set up by a Briton (I can't remember exactly but I think he was ex intelligence services). They've consistently been shown to have links with extremists. It wouldn't surprise me at all if what the Russians are claiming is accurate.
AndiMcDodle -> bobthebuilder234 , 13 Apr 2018 15:02
Well the problem is that the vast majority of Syrians support Assad. This chemical attack, if it is confirmed by the OPWC investigation, could have been staged by the ISIS head choppers, or it was Assad. Nobody has a clue, so we need an investigation and see, whether, this is just propaganda bullshit from the head choppers. One thing is sure, if you care about civilian life, the best option is to accept that Assad and Russia won. Else, well you a hypocrite, and you don't care about civilian lives at all, but care more about the UK/US and France gaining the geo-political upper hand, without a care in the world about civilian life. Hence, you just as big a sociopath than Assad.
diddoit , 13 Apr 2018 15:02
Tony Blair is still laughing at everyone too.

Ultimately, that is the problem. There is no mechanism in the UK to hold such people to any sort of account. No checks and balances.

carlevans -> tomspen , 13 Apr 2018 15:01
Yes Millions of Gallons of Chemicals were rained down on Vietnam including Agent Orange and Napalm during the war.
Plus White Phosphorous was used by the US in Iraq as an "anti-personnel" weapon.
120Daze -> GuardianOfTime , 13 Apr 2018 15:00
Look, the Russians have a microscopic force in Syria, about 30 jets, very low army presence, usually one soldier per SAA Unit. The West and especially that inadequate May can look good by bombing some camels and then letting the Daily Mail and the BBC do the rest. Yes the Russians have S400 missiles in Syria but only to protect important targets and they simply don't have enough missiles to shoot down 100+ allied cruise missiles. The Russkies will just have to take the hit (again) but it will change nothing in the long run, except relations will deteriorate even further.
Anyman , 13 Apr 2018 15:00
One has the impression poodles Macron and May, in their ridiculous eagerness to assist Trump with his nice new smart shiny social media bombing of Syria, appear pathetic, even stupid, for their precipitate grandstanding now that the USA has, for the time being, reigned back from an immediate punishing strike on Syria.
Cousin_Jack -> Etagere , 13 Apr 2018 14:59
The "slaughter his own people" phrase is western spin; even the anti-government SOHR quotes a more or less even split between government forces, rebels and civilians, which means as civil wars go, this one is comparatively humane.

Compare the death toll of hundreds on the final assault on Aleppo with that on Raqqa (thousands) or Mosul (tens of thousands) or the civilian toll in Indo-China and Korea (>10 million) and you'll realise the identity of the greatest war criminal of them all

[Apr 21, 2018] World War is Still in the Cards by Dan Glazebrook

Notable quotes:
"... Once underway, however, an Iranian-Israeli conflict could very easily draw in Russia and the US. ..."
"... Indeed, Putin reportedly warned Netanyahu last week that he can no longer expect to attack Syria with impunity. And once Israelis start getting killed by Russian hardware, it is hard to see how the US could not get involved. ..."
Apr 20, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

Just over a quarter-century before the outbreak of the First World War, global capitalism was in the throes of a deep economic crisis. This original 'Great Depression', which lasted from 1873 to 1896, saw tens of millions perish from famine as the 'great powers' shifted the burden as far as possible onto their colonies; whilst, at home, anti-systemic movements such as the 'New Unionism' burst onto the scene in the capitalist heartlands, presenting a serious challenge to bourgeois rule. Africa was torn apart by imperial powers desperate to secure monopoly access to its riches, and rivalries between these powers constantly threatened to erupt into outright war. In the midst of all this, one particularly astute political commentator gave a disturbingly prophetic insight as to how the crisis would ultimately be resolved, predicting a: "world war of an extent and violence hitherto unimagined. Eight to ten million soldiers will be at each other's throats and in the process they will strip Europe barer than a swarm of locusts. The depredations of the Thirty Years War compressed into three or four years and extended over the entire continent; famine, disease, the universal lapse into barbarism, both of the armies and people, in the wake of acute misery; irretrievable dislocation of our artificial system of trade, industry and credit, ending in general bankruptcy; collapse of the old states and their conventional political wisdom to the point where crowns will roll into the gutter by the dozen, and no one will be around to pick them up; the absolute impossibility of seeing where it will all end and who will emerge as victor from the battle; only one consequence is absolutely certain: general exhaustion and the conditions for the ultimate victory of the working class."

The commentator was Marx's lifelong collaborator Friedrich Engels. The accuracy of his prediction – right down to the numbers killed and the length of the war, not to mention the revolutions and collapse of empires that would result – is truly remarkable. Yet Engels had no crystal ball. What he foresaw was nothing more than the logical outcome of the workings of the global capitalist-imperialist system, which constantly and inexorably pushes towards world war.

The logic is basically this. Capitalism, with its combination of rapid technological progress plus derisory wage payments – both tendencies a 'natural' result of competition – leads to a situation where markets cannot be found for its goods. This is because capital's capacity to produce constantly outstrips the capacity of consumers to consume, as these very consumers are, in the main, the very workers whose wages are driven down, or who are made redundant altogether, by improved technology. Ultimately, this results in a crisis of overproduction, with markets glutted, and workers thrown out of work in their millions. Already in 1848, four decades before his prediction of world war, Engels (and Marx) had written that such crises tended to be "resolved" through "the enforced destruction of a mass of productive forces" – in other words, the wholesale closure of industry. Through closures of the most inefficient industries, surplus production would eventually be reduced, and profitability restored. But in so doing, capitalists were effectively increasing the concentration of capital in the hands of the most 'efficient' industries, whose productive capacity in the future would render the underlying contradiction yet more insoluble still, and were thereby "paving the way for more extensive and more destructive crises, and diminishing the means whereby crises are avoided". For Engels, the crisis underway by the 1880s was so extensive that the destruction of capital required to overcome it would take more than mere closures – it would take all-out war.

The destruction of capital, however, is not the only means by which to overcome overproduction crises. The other option, said Marx and Engels, is "the conquest of new markets or the more thorough exploitation of old ones". The period of the late-nineteenth century saw a renewed 'Scramble for Africa' as each imperial power sought to grab territories which might one day serve as both sources of raw materials and markets for surplus capital. In North America, the USA was completing its own colonisation of the West and South in imperial wars against the Native Americans and Mexico. By the close of the century, however, all the 'available' territories had been conquered. From then on in, argued Lenin, the capture of new colonies could only be at the expense of another colonial power – ushering in a new, imperial, phase of capitalism with an inbuilt drive towards world war.

We have now witnessed two episodes of this cycle of capitalist crisis mutating into world war, the second much more successful in terms of the destruction of capital than the first. Indeed it was so successful that it paved the way for a 'Golden Era' of capitalist prosperity lasting almost three decades. But then, once again, the inevitable crisis tendencies began to set in.

The colonial, imperialist nature of postwar capitalism has, to some extent, been disguised by the formal political independence of most of the formerly colonised world. With an unambiguous and unrivalled lead in technological capacity, the Western nations have not required direct colonisation in order to guarantee essentially 'captive' markets for their goods and capital. The former colonies have largely been dependent on products, finance and technology from the imperial world without the need for formal political control – and this dependence has been backed up with economic blackmail through international financial institutions such as the IMF and World Bank where possible, and direct military force against resistant nations where necessary.

Such dependence, however, has been decisively eroded since the beginning of the new millenium. The rise of China, in particular, has completely destroyed the West's monopoly on finance and market access for the global South: African, Asian and Latin American countries no longer have to rely on US markets for their goods or on World Bank loans for their infrastructure development. China is now an alternative provider of all these, and generally on far superior terms of trade than those offered by the West. In times of continued economic stagnation, however, this loss of their (neo)colonies is entirely unacceptable to the Western capitalist nations, and threatens the entire carefully crafted system of global extortion on which their own prosperity is based.

Increasingly unable to rely on economic coercion alone to keep countries within its 'sphere of influence', then, the West have been turning more and more to military force. Indeed, the US, UK and France have been permanently at war since the eve of the new millennium – starting with Yugoslavia, through Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Mali, Syria and Yemen (to say nothing of proxy wars such as that in the Congo, or the 'drone wars' waged in Pakistan, Somalia and elsewhere). In each case, the aim has been the same – to thwart the possibility of independent development. It is entirely indicative of this new era of decreasing economic power that several of these wars were waged against states whose leaders were once in the pocket of the US (Iraq and Afghanistan) or who they had hoped to buy off (Libya and Syria).

Thus, where it was once, at least in part, the product of productive superiority, the continued supremacy of the West in international affairs is increasingly reliant on military force alone. And even this military superiority is diminishing daily.

Predictions of the length of time left before the Chinese economy overtakes the US economy continue to shrink. In 2016, China's share of the world economy had grown to 15%, compared to the USA's 25%. But with a growth rate currently three times that of the USA, the difference is expected to decline rapidly; at this rate, the Chinese economy is on course to overtake that of the US by 2026 . In fact, once adjustments are made for purchasing power parity and differential prices, the Chinese economy is already larger . Furthermore, Chinese manufacturing output has been higher than that of the US for over a decade, and exports are one third higher, whilst China produces double the number of graduates annually than the US.

Such developments, however, are not of economic significance only: for it is only a matter of time before economic superiority is converted into military superiority. And this gives the US and its hangers-on an ever-diminishing window of opportunity in which to actually USE their military superiority in order to preserve their deteriorating global power.

Clearly the strategy hitherto has been to avoid direct war with China and its key ally Russia, and instead to focus on 'taking out' its real or potential allies amongst states less able to defend themselves. But Russia's role as a spoiler in the regime change operation in Syria has demonstrated to the US that this may no longer be possible. This has led to a split within the US ruling class on the issue of how to deal with Russia, with one side seeking to purchase Russian acquiescence to wars against Iran and China (advocated by the faction supporting Trump) and the other aiming to simply 'regime change' Russia itself (advocated by the Hillary faction). At the heart of both is the attempt to break the alliance between Russia and China, in the case of Hillary by pulling China away from Russia, and for Trump, pulling Russia away from China.

The point is, however, that neither strategy is likely to work, as clearly the breaking of the China-Russia axis is aimed at weakening both of them. Furthermore, even if Putin were prepared to ditch Iran, or even China, for the right price (such as lifting sanctions, or recognising Russian sovereignty over Crimea ), there is no way Congress would allow Trump to pay such a price. Trump would dearly love to offer to lift sanctions – but this is not within his gift; instead he can merely offer sops such as withdrawal from Syria, or pre-warning of missile attacks on Russia's allies – hardly enough to lure Russia into the suicidal severing of alliances with its most important allies.

This conundrum puts the unthinkable squarely on the agenda: direct war with Russia. The last month has shown clearly how, and how rapidly, this is developing. Britain's carefully calibrated efforts to create a worldwide diplomatic break with Russia can now clearly be seen as a prelude to what was almost certainly planned to be – and may yet become – an all-out war with Iran on the Syrian battlefield. This scenario appears to have been averted for now by Russia's refusal to countenance it, and the West's fear of launching such an operation in the face of direct Russian threats, but such incidents are only likely to increase. It is only a matter of time before Russia will be put to the test.

It is easy to see how the Syrian war could lead to a major escalation: indeed, it is difficult to see how it could not. In Washington, there is much talk of the need to 'confront' Iran in Syria, and recent Israeli attacks on Iranian positions in Syria indicate that they are itching to get this confrontation under way, with or without prior US approval. Once underway, however, an Iranian-Israeli conflict could very easily draw in Russia and the US. Russia could hardly be expected to stand back whilst Israel reversed all its hard fought gains of the past two and a half years – whilst demonstrating the feebleness of Russian 'protection' – and would likely retaliate, or at the very least (and more likely) provide its allies with the means to do so . Indeed, Putin reportedly warned Netanyahu last week that he can no longer expect to attack Syria with impunity. And once Israelis start getting killed by Russian hardware, it is hard to see how the US could not get involved.

This is just one possible scenario for the kind of escalation that would lead to war with Russia. Economic war with China is already underway, and US warships are already readying themselves to cut off China's supply lines in the South China Sea. Each specific provocation and escalation may or may not lead to a direct showdown with one or both of these powers. What is clear, however, is that this is the direction in which Western imperialism is clearly headed. It has built up its unparalleled armoury for one reason only – to protect its dominant world position. The time is soon coming when it will have to use it – and use it against a power that can actually fight back – whilst it still has a chance of winning.

An edited version of this article was originally published by Middle East Eye.

[Apr 21, 2018] Ultimately Trump is a typical playground bully

Apr 21, 2018 | theguardian.com
MetellusScipio, 13 Apr 2018 13:23
Ultimately Trump is a typical playground bully, he's a bullshitter, a blowhard. All talk. Trump was the same with Kim, and is the same with Putin and Assad.

Like all bullies underneath he is a coward, he threatens Putin with ridiculous teenager Tweet threats, but as soon as Putin but back Trump backpeddles.

Don't look to Trump for solutions.

[Apr 20, 2018] Haley has been an embarrassment for the US at the UN. It was thought that Haley could not be worse than Samantha Power, but she proved otherwise

Apr 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

Mikhail , Website April 19, 2018 at 12:56 pm GMT

Pretty much agree with the above article that brings into play points raised in this piece from 2015:

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2015/10/09/answering-russia-critics-on-syria.html

Unsurprising to see the likes of CNN and MSNBC siding with Haley. Trump should've dumped her awhile back. Contrary to the CNN/MSNBC spin, she has been an embarrassment for the US at the UN. Upon her UN appointment, it was thought that Haley couldn't be worse than Samantha Power.

During his presidential bid, Trump spoke of bringing in competent non-establishment types. The case for Jim Jatras as UN ambassador:

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/04/11/latest-bump-in-us-russian-relations.html

As noted, Tulsi Gabbard would've been a good selection as well.

The US didn't challenge Russia's more updated missile defense system in Syria shielding Russian forces. It's not like Washington can control everything.

Through their anti-Syrian proxies, the US has a roughly 30% control of Syria. A few days before the most recent alleged Syrian government chemical attack, Trump said he wanted out of Syria. I believe he was either duped into bombing, or knows that the chemical weapon claim is in the very suspect/outright BS ranges of probality.

Related:

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/04/17/latest-atlanticist-tough-guy-act.html

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/04/13/cruising-for-bruising-with-russia.html

At least one thing seems to have become clear. The enthusiasm for Trump fostering improved US-Russian relations has diminished.

Pardon some Captain Obvious moments.

[Apr 20, 2018] How about the West which has been trying to build a gas pipeline through Syria into Turkey to supply Europe with gas and break Russia's monopoly of European gas supplies.

Notable quotes:
"... How about the West which has been trying to build a gas pipeline through Syria into Turkey to supply Europe with gas and break Russia's monopoly of European gas supplies. Don't believe me read the Doha agreement where the west recognised the Syrian rebels, this pipeline was a pre requisite for that recognition. ..."
"... And why would Assad who is winning the war do the one thing that would give America and other western countries the chance to get involved because of outrageous moral indignation. Assad and Outing really aren't that stupid. ..."
Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

dumbwaiter -> Kevin Watson , 13 Apr 2018 15:31

How about the West which has been trying to build a gas pipeline through Syria into Turkey to supply Europe with gas and break Russia's monopoly of European gas supplies. Don't believe me read the Doha agreement where the west recognised the Syrian rebels, this pipeline was a pre requisite for that recognition.

Israel? which is not happy with Iran and Lebanon having a presence in Syria, worried that America was withdrawing.

AlQaeda or the Syrian Rebels, many are both who are losing the war and this is a last desperate attempt to drag in America and the west?

You've also got Turkey and the Kurds (the Kurds were abandoned by the West after they had fulfilled their useful purpose), both also players in the region but I can't see a motive here.

And why would Assad who is winning the war do the one thing that would give America and other western countries the chance to get involved because of outrageous moral indignation. Assad and Outing really aren't that stupid.

Any or all of the above could be the true motivation. I am no fan of Assad, Putin, or Trump or May (or the Blair clone Macron) but the question you have to ask yourself is who gains from this? And is. this in the interests of a resolution to a conflict, to your safety or is it something else?

[Apr 20, 2018] The most simple explanation for the disaster in Syria is that a sovereign state protected its national interest from an international contingent of mercenaries.

Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

harveybrown , 13 Apr 2018 15:37

In an interview on BBC 1 on 8 February 2004, UN Weapons Inspector, Hans Blix accused the US and British governments of dramatizing the threat of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, in order to strengthen the case for the 2003 war against the government of Saddam Hussein.
Ultimately, no stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction were ever found.

In an interview with The Guardian newspaper, Blix said, "I have my detractors in Washington. There are bastards who spread things around, of course, who planted nasty things in the media."

[ It is interesting to note that Allan Ramsay likewise deplored "a friendly alliance between the camp and the counting-house" for exactly the same reasons (Letters on the Present Disturbances, p.34). Ramsay maintained that of the evil consequences of such alliance "the two last wars carried on by England against France and Spain, furnish a most melancholy illustration. To obtain the sole and exclusive commerce of the western world, in which the French and Spaniards were their rivals, was the modest wish of our merchants, in conjunction with our Americans. The fair, and truly commercial, method of effecting this would have been, by superior skill, industry and frugality, to have undersold their rivals at market: but that method appearing slow and troublesome to a luxurious people, whose extraordinary expences* required extraordinary profits, a more expeditous one was devised; which was that of driving their rivals entirely out of the seas, and preventing them from bringing their goods at all to market. For this purpose, not having any fleets or armies of their own, the powers of the State were found necessary, and they applied them accordingly" (ibid., pp.32 f.).

Knorr, K. E. 'Ch02-Part2 British Colonial Theories 1570-1850'. In British Colonial Theories, 1570-1850. The University of Toronto Press, 1944. ]

Jay_Q123 , 13 Apr 2018 15:36
Your article appears to apportion blame solely to Assad and you don't even attempt to address the opposition in Syria. Nobody seriously questions that the Syrian governments war has killed many thousands and thousands of civilians. How can you not refer to the international jihad and the make up of these fighters, as well as the sieges they laid on villages, town and cities and the cruelty they inflicted upon the people?

The Syrian Arab Army is a composite of Sunni, Shia, Christians, and different ethnicity's, what convinces you that they have in any way wantonly killed civilians? The soldiers have family all over Syria, plus no mention of the 300,000+ civilians that have been liberated from Eastern Aleppo and Eastern Ghouta in the last several months.

I find this article very bizarre indeed. The most simple explanation for the disaster in Syria is that a sovereign state protected its national interest from an international contingent of mercenaries. There are Moroccans and Chechnyans, Uighurs and Brits, Saudis as well as Syrians in this armed army. What other options did a state such as Syria have when fighting against ISIS, Al Qaida, Al Nusra and 'The Army of Islam', Jaysh Al-Islam? All have which have direct connections to our major ally in the region, Saudi Arabia.

Somebody correct me if I am wrong but I can not find any reference at all to the enemy in this article. It's written as if the 8 year war has simply been an extermination war against civilians and completely out of context with reality.

Check out Operation Timber Sycamore for more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timber_Sycamore

[Apr 20, 2018] Should Assad subsequently fall - and that is the actual aim of intervention - then Syria will become another anarchic wasteland ruled over by fundamentalist warlords.

Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Vermithrax , 13 Apr 2018 15:39

Freedland recently put this argument on Newsnight.

It is flawed to the point of dishonesty.

He talks of removing assets as if the process was being conducted under laboratory conditions. There are ten nations enmeshed in a warzone with numerous factions under no one's control. It is magical thinking that cannot be achieved and will only result in rapid, uncontrolled escalation. The idea that there will be no collateral damage is laughable and I regret to suggest that it is deliberately misleading.

Moreover, in engaging Assad when he is on the brink of victory, the Syrian Civil War will be extended. The Syrian people will then pay the price.

Should Assad subsequently fall - and that is the actual aim of intervention - then Syria will become another anarchic wasteland ruled over by fundamentalist warlords. The spiral of migration will be renewed bringing loons wrapped in the dispossessed to our own streets. Worse, the militants next stop will be Lebanon and then Israel will be directly involved. Freedland advocates acting against Assad without even attempting to predict the consequences. At the very least I would expect the usual misdirection 'of course this time we must have a plan for rebuilding Syria', secure in the knowledge that by that time there will be another crisis and Syria can be left in entropy.

No good can come from military intervention. The satisfaction of commentators that the right thing has been done is an irrelevance. The right thing is always just public relations. Every bit of ruthless geopolitics has to have a casus belli to make the killing all righteous and unavoidable. It has always been thus. For resources to be expended on this kind of scale there has to be a rock solid bit of bankable realpolitik. In this case its the struggle for regional hegemony between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Syria can either be part of a supply chain selling Sunni gas/oil to Europe or Shi'a gas/oil to Europe. This is about killing Syrians for the glory of Saudi Arabia. You can see why there has to be a casus belli because thats not something that can be sold. We know the proceeds will go unmentioned into offshore havens and the London property market. Britain would derive no geopolitical benefit as a whole. The benefits would accrue only to a kleptocracy who think they have a right to use our country as a loan shark's leg-breaker.

It is therefore my contention that Freedland is promoting an immoral act that will have serious consequences without offering any serious improvement in the situation. This is arguably the most dangerous situation since the Cuban Missile crisis and an analysis that advocates pouring oil on the flames is either ridiculously stupid or calculatedly duplicitous.

thousandautumns -> balancedman , 13 Apr 2018 15:39
"Up to" 13,000 "opponents" killed over five years during a period of war. I'm assuming that number of "opponents" includes a large number of out and out terrorists who have thrown the country into chaos.
Brianto , 13 Apr 2018 15:39
What is Porton Down manufacturing?
oldeborr , 13 Apr 2018 15:38
The UK andcFrance bares a heavy responsibility for the current situation in Syria. The cavalier attitude that the ConDems took to international law during the Arab spring encouraged the Saudi s and their proxies to distablise the recognised Govt. Assad is no paragon of virtue, but prior to the insurgency steps were in place to make the country a better place for its citizens, and whilst its true poltical dissent was not allowed, people could live their lives and go about their business in safety.

[Apr 20, 2018] The Syrian situation was made far worse by the USA / France and the UK arming extremist Islamic groups during the ' Arab Spring ' in an attempt to depose the legitimate ruler of a sovereign nation.

Notable quotes:
"... The best solution being that he defeats all rebel forces as quickly as possible. The UN Chemical Weapons people can then go in ( or even before ) and try to collect some evidence. ..."
"... It is all about oil and supremacy in the region. Since when has our government or that of any western Country - cared about their people. Canon fodder - that is what we are. ..."
Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Artusov , 13 Apr 2018 15:56

'.....Given Russia's presence, it would not be easy...... '

Understatement of the century. If you start bombing strategic military targets you are quite, likely to hit Russian planes and troops.

As I said yesterday - What is the point ? Assad ( helped by his ally Russia ) has all but won the war ( which makes his use of chemical weapons surprising / a big mistake ) - The best solution being that he defeats all rebel forces as quickly as possible. The UN Chemical Weapons people can then go in ( or even before ) and try to collect some evidence.

Meanwhile, the Saudis are bombing Yemeni children with UK manufactured bombs.

The Syrian situation was made far worse by the USA / France and the UK arming extremist Islamic groups during the ' Arab Spring ' in an attempt to depose the legitimate ruler of a sovereign nation.

We don't say much about China's interference in Tibet these days, do we ?

Or the effect of Agent Orange in the Vietnam War ?

MartinSilenus -> Norman_Finklesteen , 13 Apr 2018 15:50
"here are many, many notable historians who state the death toll as high as 135,000 "

The biggest single death toll in WWII was the low level firebombing of Tokyo, large areas of Japans capital city were wiped out. With houses as flammable as you can ever imagine, an unimaginably horror filled event. The Japanese death toll was around 100,000 dead. You are saying more died in Dresden?

"On this day, U.S. warplanes launch a new bombing offensive against Japan, dropping 2,000 tons of incendiary bombs on Tokyo over the course of the next 48 hours. Almost 16 square miles in and around the Japanese capital were incinerated, and between 80,000 and 130,000 Japanese civilians were killed in the worst single firestorm in recorded history."
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/firebombing-of-tokyo

mudlark123 -> BoomersStealingMoney , 13 Apr 2018 15:50
It is all about oil and supremacy in the region. Since when has our government or that of any western Country - cared about their people. Canon fodder - that is what we are.
rockyrex -> LordThumpworthy , 13 Apr 2018 15:50
OK so let's attack Saudi for what they are doing in Yemen. And Myanmar for their behaviour. Then there's Mexico, where the cartels keep murdering people. Really, let's apply the same standards everywhere.

How will this proposed action change anything? The Syrians have hidden everything that matters, the Russians will get 90 minutes warning of the targets .... It's a PR exercise on the usual lines of "Something must be done .... this is something ..... "

[Apr 20, 2018] Russia has transferred forty Pantsir-S1 air defense systems to Syria' Air Defence

Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

tayacase

, 13 Apr 2018 15:50
Russia has transferred forty Pantsir-S1 air defense systems to Syria' Air Defence.
This is the latest air defence technology (the system is in service since 2012) - a combined short to medium range surface-to-air missile and anti-aircraft artillery weapon system against aircrafts, helicopters, precision munitions, cruise missiles and UAVs.

https://southfront.org/russia-delivered-40-pantsir-s1-air-defense-systems-to-syria-state-media /
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantsir-S1

[Apr 20, 2018] It is hard to be pro interventionist after the epical f*up in Iraq and Libya and previous chemical weapons false flag staged by jihadists

Israeli's deep incursions in Syria and the bombing of military bases also used by Russian military have provided a lot of information about the capabilities and limitations of the Russian military technology deployed in Syria.
Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

StephenDaedalus -> JackDowland , 13 Apr 2018 15:47

Sure, here's the UN OPCW investigation report which directly blames the Assad forces for chemical attacks. Take as much time as you need. https://undocs.org/S/2016/738

I couldn't find the paragraph which directly blames Assad's forces.

I note it does refer (at para 44) to Assad's allegation that a video had been staged. It concludes that the patients on the video "appear relatively unaffected by the typical symptoms. No red eyes, tearing, paleness, sweating, cyanosis or breathing difficulties can be observed from the footage. The patients interviewed in the video show little or no signs of having been exposed to a toxic chemical".

This is also consistent with other documented attempts of video-making to trigger the western bombs.

Surely you can see why people might at least reserve judgment about the latest video emanating from Jaish al-Islam controlled territory?

LiviaDrusilla -> SummerPatch , 13 Apr 2018 15:47
As I've said , I consider the term 'putinbot' - infantile and indicative of a lack of logical argumentation as it is - as a compliment, since it appears to be code for those who retain the ability to think for themselves and not fall glumly for the latest official line.

since the OPCW proved it was Putin who tried to murder British civilians with nerve agents.

Actually, they proved no such thing, but in any case it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

BoomersStealingMoney -> thousandautumns , 13 Apr 2018 15:47
I would like to cargo the arm chair generals into the battlefield of Syria. Let Assad deal with them.
OlivesNightie , 13 Apr 2018 15:46

The notion of inaction, of standing by and watching as Assad kills and kills and kills, racking up a death toll in Syria of 500,000

On May 12, 1996, Madeleine Albright defended UN sanctions against Iraq on a 60 Minutes segment in which Lesley Stahl asked her "We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?" and Albright replied, "We think the price is worth it."'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbIX1CP9qr4

Kokkos -> dharps , 13 Apr 2018 15:46
And who presents the Summons to the United States for Vietnam....and the other countries, where they used chemicals.
BabylonianSheDevil03 -> grumpybrewer , 13 Apr 2018 15:46
From tomorrow the weather in some parts of the UK stops being an utter bastard and starts to look like spring. The sun will get its hat on, hip, hip, hip, hooray! Go out and listen to the birds, look at the blossom. Lots of good in the world.
DZ76 -> DZ76 , 13 Apr 2018 15:46
Just in case anyone asks for an example of US diverging from Israeli objectives (I realise that I did not elucidate on that in my post), US air strikes have focused entirely on ISIS and have, up to now, left the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and Hezbollah alone. There's no doubt that the Americans are very closely tied to Israeli objectives, but they certainly aren't being controlled by a 'Zionist elite'.

America still fights for America. As I outlined above, it's really only the British government that doesn't appear to have anything even beginning to resemble an independent foreign policy.

BoomersStealingMoney , 13 Apr 2018 15:45
Not a single terrorist attack on British soil has been inspired by Shiah Islam. And yet we arm the Wahhabis to dislodge the secular Assad. Our government is crooked.
georgina45 -> Squadra , 13 Apr 2018 15:45
I watched RT for the first time last night and it was interesting.

But right now its like we are being ruled by lunatics. It is absolutely sickening. Quite literally some moron in the White House is tweeting, 'My bombs are bigger than yours' and 'The missiles are coming.' And they still let him in rule one of the most powerful countries on the Earth with a vast mass of WMD and Theresa May is trying reason with a fucking moron. Hey Guardian if Trump is talking like this my swearing is the least of our problems, so please don't moderate. We need someone to Moderate the madmen.

TheKingOfHate -> mikew67 , 13 Apr 2018 15:45
How do you compare a serial killer with twenty kills to one with one kills? Why, they're both serial killers. /That's/ how we compare the blood on our hands to those drenched to our shoulders.
billhicks00 , 13 Apr 2018 15:44
The red line is the use of chemical weapons it seems. Bullets, conventional weaponry and starvation are OK.
junglecitizen -> LeftOrRightSameShite , 13 Apr 2018 15:44

We, along with the US, France and Gulf states have supported, armed and trained "rebels" in Syria the whole time. We've had, as have others, special forces operating inside Syria

So, there would never be rebellions against totalitarian dictators if it weren't for the CIA and MI6. I don't buy this. It's very convenient if you're an anti-war person who doesn't want to face an ethical dilemma. But it's not real.
Celtiberico , 13 Apr 2018 15:42

The Syrian Negotiation Commission has called for action to deter Assad from killing civilians. What they envisage is that each time Assad launches a deadly attack on noncombatants, allied forces reply by taking out one of the strategic assets he uses to kill civilians. It could be an airfield, it could be a command centre. If the target were aircraft, that would simultaneously inflict a cost on the regime and deprive it of the means of dropping its barrel bombs and toxic, yellow cylinders. The objective would be to make Assad pay a price for killing his own people, a price he has not paid until now. Eventually, or so runs the hope, he would be deterred.

That kind of reminds me of when Ahmed Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress were explaining how to get rid of Saddam without plunging Iraq into mayhem and destabilising the wider region.

[Apr 20, 2018] Skripal and Douma incidents were preceded by extremely intense diplomatic activity between Saudi Arabia, Washington, Paris and London this year, with multiple top level visits between capitals, is presumably supposed to be coincidence.

Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

dumbwaiter -> Kevin Watson, 13 Apr 2018 15:50

I'm going to post a comment by another user posted yesterday as he said it far more eloquently than I could

R Reddington InterestedReader2 1d ago

Your just another armchair warrior.

So you think going to war is a good idea well you first then and dont forget your flack jacket and rifle.

The media onslaught has moved past the attack in Salisbury by a "weapon of mass destruction" (quoting Theresa May) which could only be Russian, except that was untrue, and was extremely deadly, except that was untrue too. It now focuses on an attack by chemical weapons in Douma which "could only be" by the Russian-backed Assad regime, except there is no evidence of that either, and indeed neutral verified evidence from Douma is non-existent. The combination of the two events is supposed to have the British population revved up by jingoism, and indeed does have Tony Blair and assorted Tories revved up, to attack Syria and potentially to enter conflict with Russia in Syria.

The "Russian" attack in Salisbury is supposed to negate the "not our war" argument, particularly as a British policeman was unwell for a while. Precisely what is meant to negate the "why on earth are we entering armed confrontation with a nuclear power" argument, I do not know.

Saudi Arabia has naturally offered facilities to support the UK, US and France in their attempt to turn the military tide in Syria in favour of the Saudi sponsored jihadists whom Assad had come close to defeating. That the Skripal and Douma incidents were preceded by extremely intense diplomatic activity between Saudi Arabia, Washington, Paris and London this year, with multiple top level visits between capitals, is presumably supposed to be coincidence.

I am not a fan of Assad any more than I was a fan of Saddam Hussein. But the public now understand that wars for regime change in Muslim lands have disastrous effects in dead and maimed adults and children and in destroyed infrastructure; our attacks unleash huge refugee waves and directly cause terrorist attacks here at home. There is no purpose in a military attack on Syria other than to attempt to help the jihadists overthrow Assad. There is a reckless disregard for evidence base on the pretexts for all this. Indeed, the more the evidence is scrutinised, the dodgier it seems. Finally there is a massive difference between mainstream media narrative around these events and a deeply sceptical public, as shown in social media and in comments sections of corporate media websites.

The notion that Britain will take part in military action against Syria with neither investigation of the evidence nor a parliamentary vote is worrying indeed. Without Security Council authorisation, any such action is illegal in any event. It is worth noting that the many commentators who attempt to portray Russia's veto of a Syria resolution as invalid, fail to note that last week, in two separate 14 against 1 votes, the USA vetoed security council resolutions condemning Israeli killings of unarmed demonstrators in Gaza.

The lesson the neo-cons learnt from the Iraq war is not that it was disastrous. It was only disastrous for the dead and maimed Iraqis, our own dead and maimed servicemen, and those whose country was returned to medievalism. It was a great success for the neo-cons, they made loads of money on armaments and oil. The lesson the neo-cons learned was not to give the public in the West any time to mount and organise opposition. Hence the destruction of Libya was predicated on an entirely false "we have 48 hours to prevent the massacre of the population of Benghazi" narrative. Similarly this latest orchestrated "crisis" is being followed through into military action at a blistering pace, as the four horsemen sweep by, scything down reason and justice on the way.

[Apr 20, 2018] The United States, fully aware it was Iraq who gased Kurds, accused Iran, Iraq's enemy in a fierce war, of being partly responsible for the attack. The State Department instructed its diplomats to say that Iran was partly to blame."

Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Andersie , 13 Apr 2018 14:45

I've just stumbled on this absolute gem, from the New York Times, 17/1/2003:

"Analysis of thousands of captured Iraqi secret police documents and declassified U.S. government documents, as well as interviews with scores of Kurdish survivors, senior Iraqi defectors and retired U.S. intelligence officers, show

(1) that Iraq carried out the attack on Halabja [a 1988 chemical attack on Kurdish villages that killed 5000 civilians], and

(2) that the United States, fully aware it was Iraq, accused Iran, Iraq's enemy in a fierce war, of being partly responsible for the attack. The State Department instructed its diplomats to say that Iran was partly to blame."

[Apr 20, 2018] The USA and WMD

Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Justin Thyme , 13 Apr 2018 15:31

The USA and WMD

@S

US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld helped Saddam Hussein build up his arsenal of deadly chemical and biological weapons. As an envoy from President Reagan 19 years ago, he had a secret meeting with the Iraqi dictator and arranged enormous military assistance for his war with Iran. Mr Rumsfeld, at the time a successful executive in the pharmaceutical industry, still made it possible for Saddam to buy supplies from American firms. They included viruses such as anthrax and bubonic plague, according to the Washington Post.
The USA provided $1.5 billion worth of Pathogenic, toxigenic and other biological research materials were exported to Iraq; 1985-89.

1) US based company, Alcolac International exported mustard gas to Iraq; 1987-88.
2) Almost 150 foreign companies supported Saddam Hussein's WMD program; 1975-
3) US directly attacked Iran by hitting Iran's oil platforms; 1987.
4) US directly attacked Iran's navy in unproportioned and unreasonable war; 1988.
5) US shot down Iranian civilian airliner in the Iranian territory; 1988.

This is the equivalent of a pathological paedophile giving a sermon against child abuse when the US preaches its corrupt moral practices regarding Syria!!!

[Apr 20, 2018] That is why Tony Blair, Jack Straw and Alistair Campbell fought so hard to oppose invasion of Iraq. I feel terrible for them

Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

ID3052003 , 13 Apr 2018 14:11

"Trump is a congenital liar who is devoid of empathy, a narcissist with a nihilist's view of the world. These are not mere character defects; they have a bearing on the decisions the de facto leader of any action in Syria would take. Among the reasons I opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq was my fundamental distrust of George W Bush and his circle, especially on the matter of motive. "

That is why Tony Blair, Jack Straw and Alistair Campbell fought so hard to oppose invasion of Iraq. In the end they had to resort an academic paper to do it. I feel terrible for them.

[Apr 20, 2018] A briefing room somewhere in Damascus

Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

ChairmanMayTseTung, 13 Apr 2018 13:18

A briefing room somewhere in Damascus

Assad: So tell me, what is the military situation?

Generals: We are winning and winning decisively Mr President and the terrorists are pulling out of East Ghoutta

Assad: Excellent news. I suggest we kill a few dozen innocent civilians in a gas attack to celebrate.

Generals: Mr President, this would be utter folly. It would serve no possible military purpose and would risk catastrophic air strikes against our military assets.

Assad: Do it anyway! ** strokes fluffy white cat with a Mwwahh, mwah, mwah. **

[Apr 20, 2018] Striking Syria now will not halt the suffering of the Syrian people

Notable quotes:
"... it's pretty obvious what the likes of Isis would have done to the non-extremists in Syria - the Christians and anyone not of their puritanical strain. ..."
"... Assad is no more a butcher than the countries that armed, trained and financed the rebels, the USA prominent among them ..."
"... The problem with Syria is from the start the West saw Assad as an easy domino that will fold like Saddam and Gadaffi ..."
"... Something I also notice not mentioned is the amount of billions that weapons manufacturers and their lackeys in the foreign office make out of these destabilized countries. ..."
"... When Hitler launched his V1 cruise missiles us killing 5,000 Londoners we called them a vengeance weapon... But somehow 70 years later cruise missiles are liberators when deployed by us. ..."
Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

beingsentient , 13 Apr 2018 13:12

The situation in Syria is more nuanced than just calling out Assad as a butcher of his own people. For one, he is a butcher of some of his own people, for many others he must seem like a saviour as without his regime's resistance it's pretty obvious what the likes of Isis would have done to the non-extremists in Syria - the Christians and anyone not of their puritanical strain.

The real issue is that the established powers are struggling to cope with a multi-polar world. It was only a few decades ago that the world's capitalists were looking forward to a 'new world order' without any serious opponents. But then things went wrong, and countries refused to lay down for their new masters. Not only that, but Russia re-awoke and rejected the funnelling of its wealth into the coffers of the West via a few carefully selected oligarchs. Putin is undoubtedly not to liberal tastes, but he is the kind of leader Russians are historically used to and who has put Russia back on the map as a world power.

Striking Syria now will not halt the suffering of the Syrian people, and it will place the whole world in jeopardy. The potential price is too high. The best thing that could happen now is that Trump is removed from office and replaced by a sane politician intelligent enough to look after America's interests peacefully. Would the Syrian rebels have even started their uprising if they hadn't thought that they would be backed-up by the liberal West? We should withdraw from Syria and allow history and the Syrian people to make their own peace from the rubble.

Andersie , 13 Apr 2018 13:12
The two main points of this argument are so hypocritical that I want to start yelling at the screen.

First, that Assad is a butcher because the war made half a million victims. No, Assad is no more a butcher than the countries that armed, trained and financed the rebels, the USA prominent among them. If they hadn't done that to advance their own strategic objectives and to topple dictator they didn't like (because there's a lot of dictators that they like), the war wouldn't have even started. The 500000 victims are on the US's conscience, not Assad's.

Second, the idea that "It is indeed strange, but the extra revulsion at the use of chemical weapons is not groundless. The taboo on the use of such weapons held, with exceptions, for nearly a century."

Respectfully, it's bullshit. It emerged in 2013 that Saddam was helped by the USA gassing 50000 Iranians, both soldiers and civilians, in the 1980s- with chemical weapons developed with the help of American, British and French companies, among others. Exactly those that find unacceptable now the idea that 40 civilians *might* have been killed in a chemical attack by the "butcher" Assad. So tell us, when are these countries going to bomb themselves, as a just retribution for their heinous crimes?

HellHoundOnMyTrail -> radical , 13 Apr 2018 13:10
But there is *no* evidence that Assad has even done this. On the contrary, Russia has even accused the U.K government of being complicit in Douma.

Just apply logic to this: why would Assad do this? He has, buttressed by Russia, all but 'won' this wretched, heartbreaking civil war. So, on the cusp, he decides do use chemical weapons which all but guarantees the U.S will stay in Syria funding the 'rebels' that he's fighting. Sorry, it's just ludicrous to think he would do this.

supercool , 13 Apr 2018 13:10
The problem with Syria is from the start the West saw Assad as an easy domino that will fold like Saddam and Gadaffi, but with one subtle difference Syria is a government that has the backing of Iran, Russia and Hezbollah from the start. That they will not let Assad fall easily to have a puppet regime installed in Damascus that will do the West's bidding. No way that was going to happen. Iran saw it as a chance to consolidate itself as a hegemon in he Middle East and Russia as chance for payback time for their humiliation in Iraq and Libya, they were treated as an irrelevant country.

Assad is lucky and knows it, the West does not seem to learn that their interventions are resented around the world and smacks of neo-colonialism. Syria is third time unlucky, Russia, Iran and Syria are goading the West. It is your move and one false move they will be laughing for a long time. Lesson in this is let countries resolve their problems by themselves, Syria will not be the first or last country to see the use of Chemical weapons. It is vile & disgusting way to attack civilians but remember we supplied Saddam the same weapons to attack Iran in the 1980's and the world did nothing then. The West is not part of the solution in Syria neither from the start or now. Read the history books on who put the Alwaites and Assad's in power. It was France, the same France claiming they have evidence against Assad now. Please!

CanWeNotKnockIt -> Etagere , 13 Apr 2018 13:09
What is your plan?
What is your aim?
Has recent history taught you nothing?
ManUpTheTree -> LeftOrRightSameShite , 13 Apr 2018 13:09
Something I also notice not mentioned is the amount of billions that weapons manufacturers and their lackeys in the foreign office make out of these destabilized countries.
jane carter , 13 Apr 2018 13:03
The West is capable of lying and fabricating reasons to go to war. The lies told to justify the invasion of Iraq in 2003 are evidence enough of that.
HelenWilsonMK , 13 Apr 2018 12:46
When Hitler launched his V1 cruise missiles us killing 5,000 Londoners we called them a vengeance weapon... But somehow 70 years later cruise missiles are liberators when deployed by us. The war crime committed by Bommer Harris on the people of Dresden shows you cannot bomb people into peace... So why are we still trying?

[Apr 20, 2018] Growing disillusionment of mass audience in neoliberal MSM

Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

David williams , 13 Apr 2018 15:23

Not a supporter of any of the criminal operations that masquerade as governments worldwide, but it's way past the time when I can believe a word the Western powers utter in their quest to spread their vile economic doctrine.
For me the biggest question now is how best to avoid financing the evil they perpetrate
dannymega , 13 Apr 2018 15:22
So the Russian military claimed a month ago that Syrian rebels were planning a chlorine chemical weapon attack somewhere in Syria, three weeks later a chemical weapon chlorine attack happens in Douma... but the UK government along with all the UK mainstream media do not question perhaps it's the Jihadi/rebels who staged this attack, they ALL automatically blame Assad? Stinks to high heaven.

[Apr 20, 2018] President Assad and his wife, daughter of a UK BP man lived comfortably near my brother in London's Chelsea for several years. Now he is the evil incarnate. This all reminds me that Imperial behaviour not much has changed since ancient times. It is about monopoly on plunder.

Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

harveybrown , 13 Apr 2018 15:29

President Assad and his wife, daughter of a UK BP man lived comfortably near my brother in London's Chelsea for several years.

This all reminds me that the roles may have reversed nowadays but otherwise not much has changed:

[ It is interesting to note that Allan Ramsay likewise deplored "a friendly alliance between the camp and the counting-house" for exactly the same reasons (Letters on the Present Disturbances, p.34). Ramsay maintained that of the evil consequences of such alliance "the two last wars carried on by England against France and Spain, furnish a most melancholy illustration.

To obtain the sole and exclusive commerce of the western world, in which the French and Spaniards were their rivals, was the modest wish of our merchants, in conjunction with our Americans.

The fair, and truly commercial, method of effecting this would have been, by superior skill, industry and frugality, to have undersold their rivals at market: but that method appearing slow and troublesome to a luxurious people, whose extraordinary expences* required extraordinary profits, a more expeditous one was devised; which was that of driving their rivals entirely out of the seas, and preventing them from bringing their goods at all to market. For this purpose, not having any fleets or armies of their own, the powers of the State were found necessary, and they applied them accordingly" (ibid., pp.32 f.).

Knorr, K. E. 'Ch02-Part2 British Colonial Theories 1570-1850'. In British Colonial Theories, 1570-1850. The University of Toronto Press, 1944. ]

[Apr 20, 2018] How come other countries are not getting involved in a Iraq 2.0 just the same warmongers who want to test their new toys... USA, France and us

Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

ISON2015 -> uncommodified , 13 Apr 2018 15:25

As much bad as Assad did, nothing is more worse than the killings on civilians done my the "freedom fighters". Why is it for us Syria so important? How come other countries are not getting involved in a Iraq 2.0 just the same warmongers who want to test their new toys... USA, France and us... fighting a fight that costs us so much, plus the Brexit, plus the eventual payment afterwards , I really do not understand. What the frick are we doing in Middle East? Is there a English colony that we have forgotten? Or a France colony or even a USA colony? This strikes me as a fight for either resources or for influence or for pleasing the master Israel. I am clear of how this White Helmets operate , Eva Bartlett told us, and do not forget that there are plenty of vids on the whole internet of how they operate "Lights camera action" actors.

[Apr 20, 2018] How neoliberal MSM twist facts

Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Ruby4 , 13 Apr 2018 14:15

Labour calls for the attack on Douma to be "fully investigated". That sounds unarguable. But then what? Jeremy Corbyn issued the same call after the chemical attack that killed at least 74 at Khan Sheikhoun a year ago: demanding there be a "UN investigation and those responsible be held to account". The UN duly investigated and in October concluded unambiguously that the Assad regime had used sarin gas. But Corbyn greeted that verdict with silence.

The report that Mr Freedland provides a link to, actually says:

"5. While the OPCW Fact-Finding Mission in the Syrian Arab Republic works to establish the facts surrounding allegations of the use of toxic chemicals for hostile purposes in the country, it is not mandated to reach conclusions about attributing responsibility for chemical weapons use. 1 Following a determination by the FactFinding Mission that a specific incident in the Syrian Arab Republic involved or likely involved the use of chemicals as weapons, the Mechanism conducts an investigation to identify, to the greatest extent feasible, the perpetrators, organizers, sponsors or those otherwise involved. In conducting its investigation, the Mechanism relies on findings of the Fact-Finding Mission regarding the use of chemicals as weapons in each incident and pursues a rigorous independent examination of the available information surrounding such use so as to identify, to the greatest extent feasible, those responsible."

It doesn't appear to be claiming to be concluding "unambiguously that the Assad regime had used sarin gas." Am I missing something here?

Mr Freedland's allegation that "Corbyn greeted that verdict with silence" is highly suspect:

"RT:Today, Moscow says it has evidence that rebels have used sarin gas. Earlier Britain said that Assad forces were behind the chemical attack. But why didn't Britain and the US come forward with the same sort of hard evidence that Russia has come forward with?

JC: That's an interesting question. I can't speak for the British or the US governments, but they made these allegations about the use of chemical weapons – and there are apparently stocks of chemical weapons being held in Syria, which may well have fallen into opposition hands, or may still be in government hands, or maybe both – but the assertion was made that they had been used. But no hard evidence came up, and indeed, there was a great deal of skepticism surrounding the evidence that was never presented. And the Russian evidence today appears much stronger, and they said they were going to put that evidence in the hands of the United Nations - that has got to be a good thing. However, proving or not proving this doesn't end the crisis, there has to be the rapid resumption of talks by Geneva too, all parties must be involved – including Iran. If we're to bring about a settlement, there's got to be involvement of Iran, as well as all the different parties in Syria."

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/syria-chemical-weapons-evidence-926 /

[Apr 20, 2018] As the British government release shedloads of crocodile tears over their paid for White Helmet video footage, and moan like spiteful children how they want to bomb more people, let look at some other inconvenient facts

Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Metreemewall , 13 Apr 2018 15:27

This post by Just in Thyme has just been mode rated:

"As the British government release shedloads of crocodile tears over their paid for White Helmet video footage, and moan like spiteful children how they want to bomb more people, let look at some other inconvenient facts.

The Yemeni Ministry of Human Rights announced on March 25 that the Saudi-led war had left 600,000 civilians dead and injured since March 2015. The United Nations says a record 22.2 million Yemenis are in need of food aid, including 8.4 million threatened by severe hunger. Meanwhile the Saudis shovel their bits of silver into the empty coffers of the NATO warmongers.

Who said money cannot buy influence, Its was the UK that backed Britain backed Saudi Arabia's election to the United Nations top human right's body as part of a vote trading deal – despite the Gulf State's appalling abuse record. Secret cables reportedly show that Britain approached Saudi Arabia about the trade ahead of the 2013 election for membership of the Human Rights Council (UNHRC). The Saudi regime has executed 135 people since January on charges ranging from murder to witchcraft.

The lynch mob government, we all voted for, and this is what democracy is really all about???"

Would anyone like to say why?

[Apr 20, 2018] Iran didn't instigate the Twin Towers or the London attacks, didn't instigate the invasion of Iraq, didn't instigate the overthrowing of Libya, didn't instigate the war in Syria, didn't instigate the war in Yemen and didn't fund and arm ISIS.

Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

denzel185 -> Guimard , 13 Apr 2018 15:29

Iran didn't instigate the Twin Towers or the London attacks, didn't instigate the invasion of Iraq, didn't instigate the overthrowing of Libya, didn't instigate the war in Syria, didn't instigate the war in Yemen and didn't fund and arm ISIS.

The gave support following US intervention. Mmm, I wonder why they have such an issue with the US?

http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/08/26/exclusive-cia-files-prove-america-helped-saddam-as-he-gassed-iran/

[Apr 20, 2018] In an age of fake news and endless propaganda it's very difficult these days to see the woods from the trees

When Hitler launched his V1 cruise missiles us killing 5,000 Londoners we called them a vengeance weapon...
Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Patrick Ryan , 13 Apr 2018 13:28

In an age of fake news and endless propaganda it's very difficult these days to see the woods from the trees... The words butcher and thug are easily thrown around in the Syrian civil war.
It appears some people have short memories as it wasn't that long ago when we were witnessing the alternative world of Islamic State in Syria. Head choppers running amok and anyone suspected of being gay being chucked off tall buildings. Women being flogged to death for trumped up charges of adultery. Kids having their hands cut off for stealing apples.
To make matters worse these sadistic psychopaths were armed and driving around in vehicles supplied by the West... It had developed into a living hell for many as the death cult of Isis took hold.
I remember the so called thug Putin saying someone had to take on these terrorists...
The West were reluctant to do the dirty work required... So it came down to Russia to get boots on the ground to help defeat Islamic State.
jparmetler , 13 Apr 2018 13:27
Why does the UK supply the terror supporters of the Arabian Peninsula with weapons while fighting and vilifying Assad? This is real hypocrisy. Yemenis suffer horrendously from Saudi attacks, the UK's close friends. Assad always guaranteed religious freedom and Syrians enjoyed much more freedom than any of the Middle Eastern countries.
Karega , 13 Apr 2018 13:23
What's actually is disconcerting is the fact that mainline media have taken the alleged chemical attack as a fact. They don't have their reporters on the ground or even Western military personnel in the area. But a claim and some unauthenticated videos from headchoppers are taken as a fact. A fact which is not allowed to be tested or critiqued. Does it mean they just want more bombs and missiles to hammer Syria and any reason/justification would do?

[Apr 20, 2018] Haley has been an embarrassment for the US at the UN. It was thought that Haley could not be worse than Samantha Power, but she proved otherwise

Apr 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

Mikhail , Website April 19, 2018 at 12:56 pm GMT

Pretty much agree with the above article that brings into play points raised in this piece from 2015:

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2015/10/09/answering-russia-critics-on-syria.html

Unsurprising to see the likes of CNN and MSNBC siding with Haley. Trump should've dumped her awhile back. Contrary to the CNN/MSNBC spin, she has been an embarrassment for the US at the UN. Upon her UN appointment, it was thought that Haley couldn't be worse than Samantha Power.

During his presidential bid, Trump spoke of bringing in competent non-establishment types. The case for Jim Jatras as UN ambassador:

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/04/11/latest-bump-in-us-russian-relations.html

As noted, Tulsi Gabbard would've been a good selection as well.

The US didn't challenge Russia's more updated missile defense system in Syria shielding Russian forces. It's not like Washington can control everything.

Through their anti-Syrian proxies, the US has a roughly 30% control of Syria. A few days before the most recent alleged Syrian government chemical attack, Trump said he wanted out of Syria. I believe he was either duped into bombing, or knows that the chemical weapon claim is in the very suspect/outright BS ranges of probality.

Related:

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/04/17/latest-atlanticist-tough-guy-act.html

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/04/13/cruising-for-bruising-with-russia.html

At least one thing seems to have become clear. The enthusiasm for Trump fostering improved US-Russian relations has diminished.

Pardon some Captain Obvious moments.

[Apr 20, 2018] Stench of hypocrisy British 'war on terror' strategic ties with radical Islam by John Wight

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... British governments, both Labour and Conservative, have, in pursuing the so-called 'national interest' abroad, colluded for decades with radical Islamic forces, including terrorist organizations. They have connived with them, worked alongside them and sometimes trained and financed them, in order to promote specific foreign policy objectives. Governments have done so in often desperate attempts to maintain Britain's global power in the face of increasing weakness in key regions of the world, being unable to unilaterally impose their will and lacking other local allies. Thus the story is intimately related to that of Britain's imperial decline and the attempt to maintain influence in the world. ..."
"... But whereas Sharif Hussein was a follower of orthodox Sunni Islam, Ibn Saud adhered to the radical doctrine of Wahhabism, which Winston Churchill was moved to describe as " bloodthirsty ..."
"... British support for the mujahideen, married to the huge support provided by Washington, was indispensable in the eventual success of these self-styled 'holy warriors' in taking control of a country that had embraced modernity and turning it into a failed state mired in religious oppression, brutality, backwardness and poverty. ..."
"... Britain, along with the US, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, covertly supported the resistance to defeat the Soviet occupation of the country. Military, financial and diplomatic backing was given to Islamist forces which, while forcing a Soviet withdrawal, soon organized themselves into terrorist networks ready to strike Western targets. ..."
"... Islamic resistance ..."
"... We trust the Western leaders are prepared for the enormous beneficial possibilities that could just possibly open up if the Afghan rebellion were to succeed. ..."
"... Manchester, England is home to the largest Libyan community in Britain, and there is strong evidence to suggest that when the Libyan uprising broke out MI6 facilitated the ability of Libyan Islamists in Britain to travel to Libya to participate in the fighting. Among them was Salman Abedi, who it is thought received military training in the country before being allowed to return to the UK thereafter. ..."
"... This brings us on to Syria and, as with Libya, the question of how so many British Muslims have been able to travel from the UK to Syria via Turkey to take part in the anti-Assad insurgency since 2011? It also brings into sharp focus a policy that has veered between the ludicrous and the reckless. ..."
"... As for the recklessness of Britain's actions in Syria, look no further than the country's recent participation in the illegal missile strikes that were carried out in conjunction with the US and France, justified on the basis of as yet unproven allegations that Syrian government forces had carried out a chemical weapons attack on Douma, just outside Damascus. The only beneficiaries of such actions by the Western powers are Salafi-jihadist groups such as ISIS (whom it was later reported took advantage of the missile strike to mount a short-lived offensive), Al-Nusra and Jaysh al-Islam. ..."
"... The latter of those groups, Jaysh al-Islam, is a Saudi proxy. It was the dominant group in Douma and throughout Eastern Ghouta until the district's liberation by the Syrian Army and its allies with Russian support. ..."
Apr 20, 2018 | www.rt.com

Britain's strategic relationship with radical Islam goes back decades and continues to this day. There is no more foul a stench than the stench of hypocrisy, and there is no more foul a hypocrisy than the British government painting Bashar al-Assad as a monster when in truth he and the Syrian people have been grappling with a twin-headed monster in the shape of Salafi-jihadi terror and Western imperialism. Both are committed to destroying Syria as an independent, non-sectarian state, and both are inextricably linked.

Author and journalist Mark Curtis charts in detail the contours of this history in his book 'Secret Affairs: Britain's Collusion with Radical Islam':

" British governments, both Labour and Conservative, have, in pursuing the so-called 'national interest' abroad, colluded for decades with radical Islamic forces, including terrorist organizations. They have connived with them, worked alongside them and sometimes trained and financed them, in order to promote specific foreign policy objectives. Governments have done so in often desperate attempts to maintain Britain's global power in the face of increasing weakness in key regions of the world, being unable to unilaterally impose their will and lacking other local allies. Thus the story is intimately related to that of Britain's imperial decline and the attempt to maintain influence in the world. "

As far back as the First World War, when the Middle East began to assume strategic importance in the capitals of Western imperial and colonial powers, the British ruling class went out of its way to identify and recruit loyal local proxies in pursuit of its regional objectives. Britain's relationship with the Arab tribal chief, Ibn Saud, who would go on to establish Saudi Arabia in the early 1930s, began in 1915 with the Darin Pact, demarcating the territory then controlled by Saud as a British protectorate.

The following year, the Arab Revolt against the Ottomans erupted. Begun and inspired by Saud's fierce rival, Sharif Hussein, head of the Hashemite Arab tribe, the revolt was heavily bankrolled and supported by the British – a period immortalized in the exploits of British military agent T E Lawrence, known to the world as Lawrence of Arabia.

But whereas Sharif Hussein was a follower of orthodox Sunni Islam, Ibn Saud adhered to the radical doctrine of Wahhabism, which Winston Churchill was moved to describe as " bloodthirsty " and " intolerant ." Regardless, when it came to its imperial interests there was no tiger upon whose back the British ruling class was not willing to ride during this period, and which, as events have proved, it has not been willing to ride since.

The most egregious example of this policy, one that continues to have ramifications today, was the support provided by the UK to the Afghan mujahideen in the late 1970s and 1980s. The insurgency's objective was the overthrow of Kabul's secular and left-leaning government, whose crime in the eyes of the Islamist insurgency's US and UK sponsors was that it had embraced the social and economic model of Moscow rather than Washington during the first Cold War.

British support for the mujahideen, married to the huge support provided by Washington, was indispensable in the eventual success of these self-styled 'holy warriors' in taking control of a country that had embraced modernity and turning it into a failed state mired in religious oppression, brutality, backwardness and poverty.

Mark Curtis again:

" Britain, along with the US, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, covertly supported the resistance to defeat the Soviet occupation of the country. Military, financial and diplomatic backing was given to Islamist forces which, while forcing a Soviet withdrawal, soon organized themselves into terrorist networks ready to strike Western targets. "

While Washington's primary role in channeling military and financial support to the Afghan mujahideen, known as Operation Cyclone , may until have succeeded in overshadowing London's role in this dirty war, declassified British government cabinet papers which were made public in 2010 and reported in the UK media make grim reading.

They reveal that three weeks after Soviet forces arrived in Afghanistan at the request of the Afghan government in Kabul, struggling to deal with an insurgency that had broken out in the countryside, the Thatcher government was planning to supply military aid to the " Islamic resistance ." A confidential government memo provides a chilling insight into the insanity that passed for official policy: " We trust the Western leaders are prepared for the enormous beneficial possibilities that could just possibly open up if the Afghan rebellion were to succeed. "

It will be recalled that out of the ensuing collapse of Afghanistan emerged the Taliban, under whose rule the country was turned into a vast militant jihadist school and training camp. Many of the most notorious Islamist terrorists began their careers there, fighting the Soviets and then later broadening out their activities to other parts of the region and wider world. In this regard, Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda loom large.

Other notorious names from the world of Salafi-jihadism for whom Afghanistan proved indispensable include the Jordanian Abu al-Zarqawi, who founded Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) during the US-UK occupation, an organization that would over time morph into ISIS.

Abdelhakim Belhaj and other Libyan Islamists cut their jihadist teeth in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Returning to Libya, they formed the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) in the eastern city of Benghazi. Though the group may have been disbanded in 2010, having failed to topple Gaddafi despite repeated attempts to assassinate the Libyan leader with, it's been claimed , the support of Britain's MI6, former members of the LIFG, including Belhaj, were important actors in the 2011 Libyan uprising.

By way of a reminder, the uprising in Libya started in Benghazi and would not have succeeded without the air support it received from NATO. Britain's then prime minister, David Cameron, was key in pushing for that air support and the sanction of the UN under the auspices of Security Council Resolution 1973. Though protecting civilians was central in wording of this UNSC resolution, it was shamefully distorted to justify regime change, culminating in Gaddafi's murder by the 'rebels.'

Staying with the LIFG, in the wake of the Manchester suicide-bomb attack in May 2017, which left 23 people dead and 500 injured, the fact that the bomber, a young Libyan by the name of Salman Abedi, was the son of a former member of the LIFG, did not receive anything like the media attention it should have at the time.

Manchester, England is home to the largest Libyan community in Britain, and there is strong evidence to suggest that when the Libyan uprising broke out MI6 facilitated the ability of Libyan Islamists in Britain to travel to Libya to participate in the fighting. Among them was Salman Abedi, who it is thought received military training in the country before being allowed to return to the UK thereafter.

This brings us on to Syria and, as with Libya, the question of how so many British Muslims have been able to travel from the UK to Syria via Turkey to take part in the anti-Assad insurgency since 2011? It also brings into sharp focus a policy that has veered between the ludicrous and the reckless.

Emblematic of the former was ex-prime minister David Cameron's claim , which he made during a 2015 Commons debate over whether the Royal Air Force should engage in air strikes against ISIS in Syria, that fighting as part of the Syrian were 70,000 moderates.

As for the recklessness of Britain's actions in Syria, look no further than the country's recent participation in the illegal missile strikes that were carried out in conjunction with the US and France, justified on the basis of as yet unproven allegations that Syrian government forces had carried out a chemical weapons attack on Douma, just outside Damascus. The only beneficiaries of such actions by the Western powers are Salafi-jihadist groups such as ISIS (whom it was later reported took advantage of the missile strike to mount a short-lived offensive), Al-Nusra and Jaysh al-Islam.

The latter of those groups, Jaysh al-Islam, is a Saudi proxy. It was the dominant group in Douma and throughout Eastern Ghouta until the district's liberation by the Syrian Army and its allies with Russian support.

Given the deep and longstanding ties between London and Riyadh; given the fact, reported towards the end of 2017, that British military personnel were embedded in a training role with Saudi forces in Yemen; given the news that a British special forces sergeant was killed in northern Syria at the end of March this year while embedded with the Kurds, revealing for the first time that British troops were operating in the country on the ground – given all that, the question of who else British special forces and military personnel may be embedded with in Syria is legitimate.

In the context of the British state's long and sordid history when it comes to riding the back of radical Islam in pursuit of its strategic objectives, readers will doubtless draw their own conclusions.

Read more

John Wight has written for newspapers and websites across the world, including the Independent, Morning Star, Huffington Post, Counterpunch, London Progressive Journal, and Foreign Policy Journal. He is also a regular commentator on RT and BBC Radio. John is currently working on a book exploring the role of the West in the Arab Spring. You can follow him on Twitter @JohnWight1

[Apr 19, 2018] Mad madam prostitute Nick Halley has to be soothed by Kudlow telling her she was not a demented rat.

Notable quotes:
"... So a choreographed coordinated attack works for Iran. Trump is happy. His base angry. His enemies can't go after him for few hours or days ..."
Apr 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

KA , April 19, 2018 at 1:53 am GMT

Iran doesn't want to escalate the situation and give Trump any leverage on Iran deal. Iran wants to deprive any moral political or legal supports from EU to USA on this. Trump pulls out. Rest remains same. This will give Iran moral political and legal authorities to pursue its nuclear program with China and Russia.

This will have domino effects on other areas of these 3 countries -- how to conduct business internationally.

So a choreographed coordinated attack works for Iran. Trump is happy. His base angry. His enemies can't go after him for few hours or days . Mad madam prostitute Nick Halley has to be soothed by Kudlow telling her she was not a demented rat.

[Apr 19, 2018] Merkel is a CIA asset. She has skeletons in her closet from her time in East Germany, and her meteoric rise to power was clearly engineered by a third party she herself lacked both the experience and the power base within the party for doing it herself

Judging from German press, Germany really looks like a US colony, not even vassal state.
Notable quotes:
"... She was promoted over Kohl's natural successor, Schaeuble, who was discredited using comparatively trifling allegations of accepting improper donations (aka bribes) on behalf of the party. ..."
"... Merkel has betrayed German interests at every turn, most blatantly in the context of the Greek debt fiasco and the refugee fake crisis. She goes along with imposing sanctions on Russia, which hurts export-oriented Germany like no other Western country. ..."
"... Merkel's selection as chancellor does not explain why German electorate keep electing her party as majority, which then is in the position to name her as chancellor. German people have been lobotomized and neutered after decades of Soros-Neocon brainwashing. ..."
Apr 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

WorkingClass , April 17, 2018 at 2:47 pm GMT

The most interesting aspect of this false response to a false flag attack is the non participation by Germany. Turkey has one foot in both camps. Germany will be next to turn. Time is working against Imperial Washington.

Mike P , April 18, 2018 at 5:50 pm GMT

@WorkingClass

German expat here.

Merkel is a CIA asset. She has skeletons in her closet from her time in East Germany, and her meteoric rise to power was clearly engineered by a third party -- she herself lacked both the experience and the power base within the party for doing it herself. She was promoted over Kohl's natural successor, Schaeuble, who was discredited using comparatively trifling allegations of accepting improper donations (aka bribes) on behalf of the party.

Merkel has betrayed German interests at every turn, most blatantly in the context of the Greek debt fiasco and the refugee fake crisis. She goes along with imposing sanctions on Russia, which hurts export-oriented Germany like no other Western country. At the same time, the "ultra-right" (i.e. common sense) party "Alternative fuer Deutschland" is forever mired in ridiculous infighting, which regularly escalates just ahead of elections -- funny how that is. Must be those meddling Russians.

Long story short, hell will freeze over before Merkel decides herself what is for breakfast, never mind for policy. I wish we could clone Putin and import him.

Avery , April 18, 2018 at 6:30 pm GMT
@Mike P

Merkel's selection as chancellor does not explain why German electorate keep electing her party as majority, which then is in the position to name her as chancellor. German people have been lobotomized and neutered after decades of Soros-Neocon brainwashing.

There is no other explanation for people who are committing slow self-extermination as a distinct ethnos. Same with the French electorate: they had a chance to elect a true French patriot and instead chose another globalist weirdo poodle.

Mike P , April 18, 2018 at 7:49 pm GMT
@Avery

Merkel's party has no majority – actually her party's share of the vote is at historic lows with less than one third (traditionally it was 45-50%). She has moved that formerly conservative party to the left by co-opting green and welfare agendas of the competing parties. The other formerly strong party, the Social Democrats, have been reduced to a status of auxiliaries in an eternal "grand coalition". In spite of infighting, the new "right-wing" AfD came in third in the last elections.

But of course, as you say, the people's failure to get rid of her is due in large measure to relentless media brainwashing, they swallow the refugee nonsense because it is subliminally suggested that it atones for the "holocaust" etc. I don't read a single German newspaper anymore, the manure is just too depressing.

Sean , April 18, 2018 at 8:39 pm GMT
@Mike P

Militarily subsidised by Nato, Germany spends next to nothing on its own defence and is keeping wages down even more than usual by importing immigrants, thereby aiding its deindustrialising of the rest of the EU. Russia is declining in national power compared to Germany by getting into silly pissing contests with America. Adolf Hitler always said it would be necessary to sacrifice millions of Germans to make Germany Great. He would approve of Merkel.

Mike P , April 18, 2018 at 9:47 pm GMT
@Sean

What keeps German wages down, in real terms, is the Euro, not the migrants.

You are correct on the neglect of the armed forces. I have griped about it often, but I have recently changed my tune. If the forces were indeed up to snuff, this would only cause the U.S. to "ask" for their deployment in their many endless idiotic wars. Letting the troops degrade to some sort of war museum on wheels is a sly way of getting out of that – can't deploy in the short term, sorry, no spark plugs, but will be more than happy to go along for the next war so I now see this as one of the few things Merkel got right.

[Apr 19, 2018] Theresa May ties with military-industrial complex

Apr 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

anon [107] Disclaimer , April 19, 2018 at 1:47 am GMT

@S. N.

UK PM's husband's Capital Group is largest shareholder in BAE, shares soar since Syrian airstrikes: https://www.rt.com/uk/424392-may-husbands-capital-group/

"Philip May, husband of the UK prime minister, works for a company that is the largest shareholder in arms manufacturer, BAE Systems, whose share price has soared since the recent airstrikes in Syria.
The company, Capital Group, is also the second-largest shareholder in Lockheed Martin -- a US military arms firm that supplies weapons systems, aircraft and logistical support. Its shares have also rocketed since the missile strikes last week. . . ."

h/t http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/real-reporting-on-syria-by-publius-tacitus.html

annamaria , April 19, 2018 at 2:14 am GMT
@Philip Owen

We have got it: Philip Owen believes religiously in the words of Theresa May, Boris Johnson, and Gavin Willaimson. And, of course, Blair is a paragon of honesty for Philip Owen.

What are you doing here, on the Unz Review? -- This is not a ziocon stink-tank source of (dis)information, and this is not the ziocons-controlled MSM's presstitutes' haven.

You make yourself ridiculous by parroting the MSM "wisdom." Your frustration over the impending defeat of "moderate" terrorists in Syria affects your reason and amplifies your rabid hatred of Russia. Don't expect any sympathy for your "victimhood" on this site.

This is the reality: "Salisbury Nerve Agent Attack Reveals $70 Million Pentagon Program at Porton Down," by Dilyana Gaytandzhieva – https://southfront.org/salisbury-nerve-agent-attack-reveals-70-million-pentagon-program-porton/

"Porton Down is just one of the Pentagon-funded military laboratories in 25 countries across the world, where the US Army produces and tests man-made viruses, bacteria and toxins in direct violation of the UN convention . These US bio-laboratories are funded by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) under a $ 2.1 billion military program– Cooperative Biological Engagement Program (CBEP), and are located in former Soviet Union countries such as Georgia and Ukraine, the Middle East, South East Asia and Africa.
The Pentagon-funded military facilities are not under the direct control of the host state as the US military and civilian personnel is working under diplomatic cover. The local governments are prohibited from public disclosure of sensitive information about the foreign military program running on their own territory."
– All statements in this article are sourced, unlike the pronouncement of the miserable puppets Blair, May, Johnson, and Willaimson.

[Apr 19, 2018] Mad madam prostitute Nick Halley has to be soothed by Kudlow telling her she was not a demented rat.

Notable quotes:
"... So a choreographed coordinated attack works for Iran. Trump is happy. His base angry. His enemies can't go after him for few hours or days ..."
Apr 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

KA , April 19, 2018 at 1:53 am GMT

Iran doesn't want to escalate the situation and give Trump any leverage on Iran deal. Iran wants to deprive any moral political or legal supports from EU to USA on this. Trump pulls out. Rest remains same. This will give Iran moral political and legal authorities to pursue its nuclear program with China and Russia.

This will have domino effects on other areas of these 3 countries -- how to conduct business internationally.

So a choreographed coordinated attack works for Iran. Trump is happy. His base angry. His enemies can't go after him for few hours or days . Mad madam prostitute Nick Halley has to be soothed by Kudlow telling her she was not a demented rat.

[Apr 18, 2018] How dare Larry Kudlow suggest Nikki got confused!!!

Notable quotes:
"... "She's done a great job," Kudlow said of Haley. "She's a very effective ambassador. There might have been some momentary confusion about that. But if you talk to Steve Mnuchin at Treasury and so forth, he will tell you the same thing. They're in charge of this. We have had sanctions. Additional sanctions are under consideration but not implemented, and that's all." ..."
Apr 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

dh | Apr 17, 2018 8:47:50 PM | 65

Confused!!! How dare Larry Kudlow suggest Nikki got confused!!!

>White House press secretary Sarah Sanders insisted more sanctions were merely under consideration. On Tuesday, top White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said Haley "got ahead of the curve."

"She's done a great job," Kudlow said of Haley. "She's a very effective ambassador. There might have been some momentary confusion about that. But if you talk to Steve Mnuchin at Treasury and so forth, he will tell you the same thing. They're in charge of this. We have had sanctions. Additional sanctions are under consideration but not implemented, and that's all."

Haley, speaking for the first time since the White House dialed back her claims, rejected the idea that she was confused.

"With all due respect, I don't get confused," Haley said in a statement read by Fox News' Dana Perino and confirmed by CBS News Tuesday.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/with-all-due-respect-i-dont-get-confused-nikki-haley-says-of-russia-sanctions/

[Apr 18, 2018] Russia retaliate Our Response to US Sanctions Will Be Precise And Painful

Apr 18, 2018 | community.oilprice.com

luckysoul777

Report post " What exactly do we get from Russian that we couldn't do without? " <== The willingness to ally with the U.S. vs the Chinese.

There is no denial of what Russia has done in the last few years, and it's wrong! However, what is entirely missing from the western media is the U.S. ambassador to the USSR, Jack Matlock, and George Kennan have been warning the American political elites since the 90's, prior to Putin was even known and in politics, that the American foreign policy is steering us straight into confrontations with Russia! It's not if but when it will happen REGARDLESS OF who is in Kremlin! Nobody cared to heed because we were indulging ourselves as the sole superpower in the world.

Neither has the American media reported even our old friend, Gorbachev, is praising Putin and has harsh words for the U.S. In a nutshell, the Russians don't like to be treated as a nobody country, ie. with decisions of world affairs already made and shoved at their face, and they can either put up or shut up! However, that is exactly how Washington has conducted business with Russia until the crisis in Ukraine in 2014. Would the American public put up with a revolution led by a Russian politician in Mexico City or Ottawa, even though it's Mexican or Canadians self-determination? Then what makes us think the Russians would tolerate John McCain leading an anti-Russian revolution in Kiev, even if it's Ukrainian self-determination? Don't forget the U.S. directly invaded Grenada when they were exercising their self-determination to ally with the USSR!

This is not about defending Russia. The Russians can take care of that themselves. Rather, can the U.S. afford to have Russia and China solidify their alliance again? It's already happening unless we can adopt a sensible Russian policy to turn it around. Who would you rather ally with? Someone (like the U.S.) who expects you to be a subordinate vs another (like China) who is willing to treat you as an equal?

One can certainly argue how it is possible to ally with a country like Russia, who sponsors dictators, meddles in our elections and tramples on other nation's self-determination. If you are willing to be honest with yourself, just Google it. There is not one thing we accuse of the Russians that our politicians are not doing it overseas, by MULTIPLE magnitude! The biggest gripe the Russians have toward the U.S. is "are you preaching democracy or hypocrisy?" Yes, one sin doesn't justify another, but why our politicians can't uphold this principle when they are committing treacheries overseas?

[Apr 18, 2018] Douma Chemical Attack False Flag Operation EXPOSED!

Looks like people were bombed and the shelter became full of dust and smoke. That led to some suffocations. Later this was played as chemical attack.
The scenario is classic. Put artillery near residential houses and mercilessly shell residential building on government side killing civilians. Wait for return fire which produce its own set of victims. Stage the false flag operation based on return fire victims and the fact that civilians suffered.
Apr 18, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Annie , 15 hours ago (edited)

Thanks for this video. I have had a gut-full of the west and it's lies to take over countries in the Middle East. It's making me sick. What's happening on a daily basis to the people of Palestine and Syria are war crimes, pure and simple.

The country I live in, Australia, is not on the side of the good guys. We were not on the right side in Libya and Iraq either. I'm so sick of this shit. This is all so the US and their creepy allies, including the head-choppin' Saudis, can put a pipeline through Syria to Europe to compete with Russia and so they can use Syria as a jumping off point to invade Iran. Poor Iran.

The CIA threw out their Democratically elected leader and installed a Dictator who they kept in place for 48 years, using the Shah's brutal secret police. The US hates the Iranians for chucking the puppet out. Iran had every right to do so. God knows how they must feel being under constant threat. Israel have been assassinating their citizens for years and launched the Stuxnet virus (with help from the US) to attack their infrastructure, accidentally infecting the world, including Australia at the time. Thanks to them, every group in the world now has the code for that virus. They modified the code and released it again behind Obama's back.

Israel's illegal nukes can't reach Iran but they will definitely use them against Iran if they can get into Syria to use it as a base for attack. Then what happens to the world? Israel have demonstrated clearly, their disinterest in Human Rights. The only people on the planet they care about are Israelis. Damn Israel and damn the US. Macron is a wanna-be Napoleon and Theresa May is Thatcher- Lite. Both of them are sucking on the tail-pipe of that clown, Trump and are keeping the world in a state of perpetual war. Hands off Syria, wankers!

madex4u , 6 hours ago

The western media has covered up so much lies about Syria and Iraq that only few still brainwashed people believe their fake news

M.K. Styllinski , 9 hours ago (edited)

Aside from this video, there is now overwhelming evidence confirming that this was yet another false flag chemical attack designed to demonise Assad. This isn't the first time. Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Iraq, the Balkans - all suffered a similar fate designed to hoodwink the public in supporting war and resource grab.

it was only a couple of years ago that Assad and Russia were subjected to the same scenario and proven to be utterly false. How long must we swallow these crimes? History is replete with the same state-sponsored crimes against populations. Governments are not acting in our best interests and never have.

Therefore, there is absolutely no excuse for people to believe the utter bullshit spread around the mainstream media which excels in poor journalism and is determined to push this disgusting propaganda on behalf of their respective governments and intel agencies.

Until the public is prepared to comprehend that such false flag attacks are a long used formula by US-NATO for carving up the Middle East then it will continue with impunity. I hope everyone shares this video on social media in order to counter lazy thinking and the obvious lies that characterize what passes for news.

ameen ayob , 3 hours ago

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/syria-chemical-attack-gas-douma-robert-fisk-ghouta-damascus-a8307726.html

[Apr 18, 2018] The Great American Unspooling Is Upon Us

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The New York Times ..."
"... collusion with Russia ..."
Apr 18, 2018 | russia-insider.com

With spring, things come unstuck; an unspooling has begun. The turnaround at the FBI and Department of Justice has been so swift that even The New York Times has shut up about collusion with Russia -- at the same time omitting to report what appears to have been a wholly politicized FBI upper echelon intruding on the 2016 election campaign, and then laboring stealthily to un-do the election result.

The ominous silence enveloping the DOJ the week after Andrew McCabe's firing -- and before the release of the FBI Inspector General's report -- suggests to me that a grand jury is about to convene and indictments are in process, not necessarily from Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller's office. The evidence already publicly-aired about FBI machinations and interventions on behalf of Hillary Clinton and against Donald Trump looks bad from any angle, and the wonder was that it took so long for anyone at the agency to answer for it.

McCabe is gone from office and, apparently hung out to dry on the recommendation of his own colleagues. Do not think for a moment that he will just ride off into the sunset. Meanwhile, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce Ohr, have been sent to the FBI study hall pending some other shoes dropping in a grand jury room. James Comey is out hustling a book he slapped together to manage the optics of his own legal predicament (evidently, lying to a congressional committee). And way out in orbit beyond the gravitation of the FBI, lurk those two other scoundrels, John Brennan, former head of the CIA (now a CNN blabbermouth), and James Clapper, former Director of National Intelligence, a new and redundant post in the Deep State's intel matrix (and ditto a CNN blabbermouth). Brennan especially has been provoked to issue blunt Twitter threats against Mr. Trump, suggesting he might be entering a legal squeeze himself.

None of these public servants have cut a plea bargain yet, as far as is publicly known, but they are all, for sure, in a lot of trouble. Culpability may not stop with them. Tendrils of evidence point to a coordinated campaign that included the Obama White House and the Democratic National Committee starring Hillary Clinton. Robert Mueller even comes into the picture both at the Uranium One end of the story and the other end concerning the activities of his old friend, Mr. Comey. Most tellingly of all, Attorney General Jeff Sessions was not shoved out of office but remains shrouded in silence and mystery as this melodrama plays out, tick, tick, tick.

None of this makes President Trump a more reassuring figure. His lack of decorum remains as awesome as his apparent lack of common sense. But he has labored against the most intense campaign of coordinated calumny ever seen against a chief executive and his fortitude, at least, is impressive. What is unspooling for him, and the body politic, are the nation's finances, and the dog of an economy that gets wagged by finance. Yesterday's 724-point dump in the Dow Jones Industrial Average is liable to not be a fluke event, but the beginning of a cascade into the pitiless maw of reality -- the reality that just about everything is grossly mispriced.

[Apr 18, 2018] I believe Stoicism has a great deal of value for modern man.

Apr 18, 2018 | thesaker.is

Rob from Canada on April 15, 2018 , · at 5:39 pm UTC

In my opinion, the ego becomes "mental" when it starts believing in duality, that it's the centre of the personality and in control. It's just the centre of the field of consciousness.

I believe Stoicism has a great deal of value for modern man.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5897dMWJiSM&t=333s

"The axiom of Maria. A precept in alchemy: "One becomes two, two becomes three, and out of the third comes the one as the fourth."
Jung used the axiom of Maria as a metaphor for the whole process of individuation. One is the original state of unconscious wholeness; two signifies the conflict between opposites; three points to a potential resolution; the third is the transcendent function; and the one as the fourth is a transformed state of consciousness, relatively whole and at peace."

­
Stuart Harlan Doblin on April 16, 2018 , · at 5:43 pm UTC
Good Day Rob from Canada – Stuart says, "Hi".

"In my opinion, the ego becomes "mental" when it starts believing in duality, that it's the centre of the personality and in control. It's just the centre of the field of consciousness."

Stuart begins: Our ego is a vestigal organ, long since gone by the by, and all that remains is a cell-wall-less gooey-plasma ready at the moment to luminesce and retire into nothingness.

I take it as axiotmatic that our Whole Mind cannot lose it Self.

OK, Rob from Canada, now to your opinions:

One: "the ego becomes "mental" when it starts believing in duality".
Two: "(the ego is) the centre of the personality".
Three: "(the ego is) in control".
Four: "(the ego) is the centre of the field of consciousness".

Regarding Point One: Please explain how fracturing an entirely mistaken ideal can lead to dualism and not chaos?
Two: "Who says?"
Three: "Of What?"
Four: An unconscious ideal cannot attain consciousness, except in illusions.

Barry on April 15, 2018 , · at 10:46 pm UTC
Hi Stuart! Here's my take on the issue of ego being mental, and from my own experience it is correct. With very little practice one can observe his thoughts and internal dialogue. It doesn't require meditation. It's simply a matter of paying attention to our internal dialogue. We all talk to ourselves. That internal dialogue is the ego talking to itself. The ego is a mental construction based on the brain's interpretation of it's experience since birth. So what are we witnessing the ego's internal dialogue and thoughts with? That's where our "spirituality" lies, regardless of religion or no religion. We all have immediate access to the witness to our own ego but few use it. The "witness" is silent. It observes and knows, but doesn't know how or why it knows. Call it "knowingness". That witnessing awareness is silent. Zen Buddhists call it the practice of "no mind". In modern sports it's called being in "The Zone". Though silent is is a very aware state of consciousness.
Instead of using our brain to think when we want to use it to think, we let the brain's ego think us and think our lives for us. Our ego is our own worst enemy. The ego never sees the "big picture" of all involved. The ego/mind is always insecure and spends it's life trying to compensate is some way or another to overcome it's basic insecurity.
Humans for the most part, identify with their mental chatter (the ego). Any real spiritual teaching, teaches us to identify, instead, with the observer of the ego, which is transcending the ego.
All the problems we face on this planet are because of insecure individual egos, grouping to form tribal egos, such as tribes of nationalism, tribes of religious beliefs, tribes of political beliefs, tribes of sports team fans. Egos tend to be competitive and want to be "one up" in some way. One can easily see that the party of Democrats has an ego identity as does the party of Republicans. Egos are mental creations. Mental creations are not necessarily true. They are beliefs about our perception, whether actually correct or not. The witness or observer we all have and share knows the truth of the moment and the appropriate action to take. Of all the books on Spiritual Practices I've read through the years (I'm 80), I recommend Eckhart Tolle's "The Power Of Now". The best to you!
Stiv R on April 16, 2018 , · at 1:59 am UTC
To Barry, thank you for your post. I have read Tolle's book too, about 8 years ago, and found it really making good sense to me. Your explanation of our internal dialogue not being who we really are, is very clear and well-said. These can be hard concepts to get one's head around. You did an admirable job of it in your post.
Thanks again for posting your thoughts.
Anonymous on April 16, 2018 , · at 5:12 am UTC
Insecure group think problems at the crux of existence.

Simple, profound and, also from my experience, true.

Thank you Barry.

Stuart Harlan Doblin on April 16, 2018 , · at 5:35 pm UTC
Barry, I pride myself in speaking to an octogenarian! "And from my own experience" .

"Here's my take on the issue of ego being mental, and from my own experience it is correct. With very little practice one can observe his thoughts and internal dialogue. It doesn't require meditation. It's simply a matter of paying attention to our internal dialogue. We all talk to ourselves. That internal dialogue is the ego talking to itself. The ego is a mental construction based on the brain's interpretation of it's experience since birth."

Barry, the internal dialogue of what you speak, is to me, your conscience and your inner self, not the ego talking to a hallucination of itself; for what can an illusion manifest but more illusions of : it : self.

The ego is a misprojection from our higher mind; ergo, not mind, but misunderstanding, illusion, maya, separate from reality, separate from us, not us, not anyone, just lost awareness with no where to settle but nonexistence from which it came.

Robin Gaura on April 17, 2018 , · at 5:51 pm UTC
Cool. I´d take it a bit further, though. Putting the mind on emptiness, the place without characteristics, in a deep meditative state. One sees the way things really exist, the way consciousness creates our reality, the truth of emptiness and karma. Its called entering the stream. The beginning of the transformation to the divine being. Its an experience that changes you forever.
Beyond words. Meditation is essential.

[Apr 18, 2018] The Rape of Russia, an Interview with F. William Engdahl (Audio)

Notable quotes:
"... What the US Government under George Herbert Walker Bush, Bush Senior organised together with CIA, old boy networks of his, in terms of the breaking up of the Soviet Union and the looting of the assets, this open theft, the destruction of pensions, security, the health system and everything. The only appropriate word is the rape of Russia. They just pondered anything that they could. ..."
"... And the West, the Bush networks recruited a handful of KGB agents around Yeltsin who literally promoted Yeltsin to the top when they engineered the August 1991 fake coup. ..."
"... And through that the – this network, this corrupt network within the KGB that was working with the CIA, working with General Philip, Bob [unclear] is one of them, so called at that time the KGB brain. He was head of the KGB Fifth Directorate controlling to roll this in. ..."
"... They engineered a complete opening up of the assets of the Russian Federation which called today the Russian Federation, the largest part of the former Soviet Union and they made it such that the Russian Federation would assume all of the debts of Ukraine, of Kazakhstan and the other socialist republics of the Soviet and all the assets, all the crucial assets that were within the Russian Federation so the aluminium Rusal that's in the headlines yesterday, the nickel, the oil, the gas, just hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars' worth of assets that came into Yeltsin's control. ..."
"... Soros was very intermittently tied with Jeffrey Sachs and the whole Harvard to become a shock therapy group and working with Lawrence Summers team at the US Treasury under Clinton. ..."
"... So, Chubais was as an adviser to Yeltsin at that time and the key person on the economy arranged the secret meeting with George Soros. And Soros agreed to finance of course on behalf of Yeltsin, the referendum campaign. So he funnelled money over a million dollars by some accounts to offshore accounts set up to be used by Chubais to buy media. ..."
"... In 1989 President George H. W. Bush began the multi-billion dollar Project Hammer program using an investment strategy to bring about the economic destruction of the Soviet Union including the theft of the Soviet treasury, the destabilization of the ruble, funding a KGB coup against Gorbachev in August 1991 and the seizure of major energy and munitions industries in the Soviet Union. ..."
"... Given the depth of the fall, the rise (under Putin) has been remarkable. ..."
Apr 18, 2018 | russia-insider.com

The Rape of Russia (full transcript)

Lars Schall: Hello ladies and gentlemen. I am now connected with F. William Engdahl, who has written a new book, Manifest Destiny: Democracy as Cognitive Dissonance. Hi William.

F. William Engdahl: Hello, Lars. Good to be with you again.

LS: Great to have you with us. And first off, let me read something to you and our audience that was written by the economist Dean Baker earlier this month.

As a long-term columnist at the NYT, Thomas Friedman apparently never feels the need to know anything about the topics on which he writes. This explains his sarcastic speculation that Putin could be a CIA agent since he has done so much to hurt Russia.

For all his authoritarian tendencies, it is likely that most Russians think primarily about Putin's impact on the economy, just as is typically the case among voters in the United States. On that front, Putin has a very good record.

According to data from the IMF Russia's economy had plunged in the 1990s under the Yeltsin presidency. When Putin took over in 1998, per capita income in the country had shrunk by more than 40 percent from its 1990 level. This is a far sharper downturn than the United States saw in the Great Depression. Since Putin took power its per capita income has risen by more than 115 percent, an average annual growth rate of more than 3.9 percent.

While this growth has been very unequal, that was also the case even as Russia's economy was collapsing under Yeltsin. The typical Russian has done hugely better in the last two decades under Putin than they did in the period when Yeltsin was in power.

For this reason, there are probably few Russians who would have sympathy for Friedman's speculation about Putin's ties to the CIA. The same would not be the case for Boris Yeltsin.

Now, I think this is a good starting point for our discussion William because in your book, you have a chapter entitled The Rape of Russia, the CIA's Yeltsin Coup d'état. Why do you talk about rape related to Russia?

FWE: What the US Government under George Herbert Walker Bush, Bush Senior organised together with CIA, old boy networks of his, in terms of the breaking up of the Soviet Union and the looting of the assets, this open theft, the destruction of pensions, security, the health system and everything. The only appropriate word is the rape of Russia. They just pondered anything that they could.

And what you just read from Mr. Friedman is of course horse rubbish but the real CIA asset of this whole collapse of the Soviet Union in the late 1980s was in fact Boris Yeltsin and the so called Yeltsin Family, the Yeltsin Mafia. And in my book, the Manifest Destiny book I document and detail at great lengths the relation of a handful of KGB very, very senior persons who worked with the Bush Senior old boys CIA networks in the West and their banks to create a group of oligarchs around Yeltsin, you know the famous Russian oligarchs, well, The New York Times and other Western Media portrayed them as Russian Mafia. They were kind of mafia but the real point was that they were a CIA-run mafia. They were run by the West. They betrayed their own country, their own people and literally stole billions and billions and billions of dollars of assets. And that's the reason for the title in that chapter.

LS: And Boris Yeltsin was very essential for this.

FWE: He was the key figure. He had been selected as a regional governor and brought into Moscow and a certain point Gorbachev saw him as a rising star and someone that could help with a little bit more liberal image as [unclear] was – the Russian economy was running into serious trouble in the '80s, the Star Wars of Reagan, the Nicaragua and above all the war in Afghanistan which is a CIA project with the Mujahideen, that took 10 years long that was bleeding the Soviet economy, the Soviet Union's Vietnam, as Brzezinski used to call it.

And the West, the Bush networks recruited a handful of KGB agents around Yeltsin who literally promoted Yeltsin to the top when they engineered the August 1991 fake coup. You remember, I'm sure many people remember the picture of Boris Yeltsin standing there courageously on top of a Soviet tank in front of the Russian White House or Soviet House, the Supreme Soviet building and reading a speech defying Gorbachev and so forth. Well, that was a KGB CIA-engineered coup d'état in June 1991. And through that the – this network, this corrupt network within the KGB that was working with the CIA, working with General Philip, Bob [unclear] is one of them, so called at that time the KGB brain. He was head of the KGB Fifth Directorate controlling to roll this in. And he later joined the [#inaudible 00:06:40-0#] oil and to this day he's still a member of the State Duma giving him prosecution immunity.

So, some of these people are still around after some 23, 25 years and incredibly enough but others of them have died off, have been killed, or murdered or whatever. But the operation that was done with Yeltsin, this corrupt KGB network working with the CIA financed Yeltsin's the silent seat of the presidency of the Russian Federation. And once they had their man in controlling the Russian Federation which is the largest of the former Soviet Union, the Socialist Republic, they were able to engineer through the international monetary fund that was mandated to oversee the transformation of the Soviet economy.

They engineered a complete opening up of the assets of the Russian Federation which called today the Russian Federation, the largest part of the former Soviet Union and they made it such that the Russian Federation would assume all of the debts of Ukraine, of Kazakhstan and the other socialist republics of the Soviet and all the assets, all the crucial assets that were within the Russian Federation so the aluminium Rusal that's in the headlines yesterday, the nickel, the oil, the gas, just hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars' worth of assets that came into Yeltsin's control.

LS: But those assets were sold to a price that was rather ridiculous.

FWE: Someone estimated that that gets into the whole coupon privatisation that was set up under Yeltsin in the '90s. The coupon privatisation issued one coupon to every single Russian man, woman and child 140 million in total. And the value of those coupons was such someone estimated that the totality of Russian Soviet's Fed assets or Russian Federation assets now was equal to the value of the stock at that point of General Electric Company on the New York Stock Exchange. I mean that's just laughable. Russia had financial bankruptcy because the shock therapy, the Jeffrey Sachs and others from Harvard and elsewhere brought in, George Soros and his pals. That created bankrupt companies that couldn't stand on their own and suddenly they had no, no resources. But the assets, the assets on the ground, the nickel, the aluminium, the uranium that Hillary Clinton knows more than a little bit about them, all of these were estimated to be in the trillions of dollars. And this is what the Bush operation aimed at. And they used NGOs, they used the National Endowment for Democracy, they used, George Soros' Open Society Foundation and so forth to bring this about.

LS: You've mentioned already the coup d'etat attempt of August 1991. Highly important for things to come was something that took place in early 1991 and that was the theft of the Soviet gold. Please tell us about this.

FWE: The, under the Soviet Union, this is a very crucial point about the transition that Washington forced on the Russian Federation because Yeltsin was, I think as long as he was well-supplied with vodka he didn't protest very much. But under the Soviet system and the Russian Federation took this over, there was a state bank, not a private central bank like the Federal Reserve or the European Central Bank today but a state bank that was an entity of the Russian State apparatus and that was called the Gosbank. And a man named Viktor Gerashchenko was the chairman of Gosbank at the time of Yeltsin's early start in 1991.

And Gerashchenko made a speech around that time in November of '91 to the Russian Duma or the parliament such as it was and said, "I have to report to you ladies and gentlemen that of perhaps 3,000 tons of Gosbank state-owned gold reserves, we have an estimated less than 400 tons that we can account for." And then he had to go to tell, shock members of parliament that he had no idea what happened to the missing gold, which of course was a lie. And Gerashchenko had created right after 1989 to prepare this coup d'etat coup, which was the CIA and Bush's old boys, he had created something called [unclear] on the Channel Islands in the Island of Jersey to handle the Russian foreign currency reserves.

And the Jersey was exempt from European supervision, so this was a perfect place to hide money, dirty money or stolen money and they managed something like $37 billion between 1993 and 1998. The Gerashchenko and the Gosbank even went to the lengths of hiring a New York Financial Detective firm called the Financial CIA back then called Jules Kroll Associate. And they were told to track the Soviet gold, find out what happened to it and something like $14 billion of communist party assets that were missing as well. And the Cruel which was tied with the CIA linked AIG Insurance Group Hank Greenberg whom you remember from the 2008 to the bail out of Henry Paulson.

LS: Yes.

FEW: The Kroll Associates after a few months announced that they had no results in the attempt to find the missing Soviet Gosbank gold. Then to add insult to injury, the IMF came in and rewrote the constitution of the Russian Federation under Yeltsin and took the power of money creation just like the Federal Reserve took the power of money creation from the congress in 1913. They took the power of money creation from the state and created the Russian Federation Central Bank, the Russian Central Bank and gave it a mandate for two things. One, to control inflation and the other to create currency stability.

Now, in Russia that day that meant stability of the ruble against the US dollar. So it effectively hammer-locked the Russian money creation into the US dollar. And unfortunately that constitution amendment holds until the present day. It's one of the difficulties that Vladimir Putin has been having to try to persuade the Independent Central Bank to lower interest rates more rapidly as inflation is simply managed as a problem in Russia in the last two years.

So, they looted the gold so that there would be no stability to the ruble. If you don't have any gold-backing, then western investors are going to lack confidence which is sort of what happened. And then they began working with very select western bankers to get their money out of Russia.

LS: And instrumental to get money out of Russia were Valmet and Riggs. Can you tell us please about some crucial personnel that was employed there at Valmet and Riggs?

FWE: Valmet Riggs was kind of a fusion of a Swiss bank and Riggs Bank of Washington D. C. And Riggs Bank, this is really quite a fascinating and very little discussed aspect of the reign of Russia back in the '90s.

So you have something called Riggs Bank in Washington and they were set up decades earlier since the 1960s CIA Bay of Pigs operation, they were known as the CIA tied bank. They invested the assets of people like Marcos of the Philippines until when he was close to the CIA. And there was a former NATO Ambassador named Alton Keel and in 1989 when the Soviet KGB generals and they had a group of protégés called the 'Kids' by George Bush Senior. The protégés were in their 30s and a couple of them were in their 40s but rather young. And they were the ones who were nominated to become the oligarchs, the frontal men for taking these state assets the aluminium, the oil assets and other things and looting the Russian Federation.

And Alton Keel just as the Russians were setting up men at a bank for the oligarchs to funnel their stolen assets, de facto stolen assets, Keel went from NATO and the National Security Council to become a head of international banking of Riggs Bank in Washington and its deputy chairman.

Now, it gets even more interesting because the international banking group of Riggs included a new entity that had been created called Riggs Valmet SA in Switzerland, and Riggs Valmet was set up by a man named Jonathan J. Bush, a private banker, who just happened to be the brother of George Herbert Walker Bush. So, Bush brother and Alton Keel set up Riggs Valmet, there was a money laundering apparatus in Geneva and Riggs then through their help bought the major share in Geneva Valmet to create Riggs Valmet.

So, you have the brother of the president of the United States up to his eyeballs in this whole Yeltsin CIA money laundering operation. And then Jonathan Bush was created CEO of something called Riggs Investment in Connecticut where he lived and at that point the looting and taking of the dollar assets out of Russia was just unstoppable. It was in the billions and tens of billions of dollars.

LS: William, there is one guy who was working closely with those people and he was working on Wall Street but later on he was personally recruited by George Tenet then the Director of CIA to become the number three at the CIA, and this is Alvin Bernard "Buzzy" Krongard.

FWE: Yes. We meet "Buzzy" Krongard at Bankers Trust, which bought up Alex Brown, and Krongard became vice chairman of Bankers Trust along with another charming character named Carter Beese. And at the time of the 1998 collapse of the ruble, Krongard was formally made, as you've pointed out, number three, the executive director at the CIA under George Tenet. So, it's a CIA network from beginning to end, from the banking side to you know the direct CIA side. You have Carter Beast, you have "Buzzy" Krongard, Jonathan Bush and Alton Keel and they were the ones working with Valmet as the Riggs Valmet Bank in Geneva to pull this money out through shell companies.

And the oligarchs, this is an interesting part of this whole thing that you know right now Theresa May and the foreign secretary Boris Johnson in the UK are accusing Putin of murdering almost everybody since the birth of Jesus Christ. And one of them was the person who had been the trusted bodyguard of one of the oligarchs living in London Boris Berezovsky.

And Berezovsky was one of the dirtiest of these oligarchs. He'd financed the Ukrainian Colour Revolution back in 2003, 2004 as a revenge against Putin because he at first thought Putin could be bought like Yeltsin and suddenly he realized that he was up against the faction of nationalists within of what had been the KGB but wanted to stabilise and preserve Russia as a functioning nation today. And so Mikhail Khodorkovskyi, Roman Abramovich, who is listed on the sanctions list yesterday, and Berezovsky were some of the leading oligarchs that were created by this Bush operation.

LS: And to jumpstart all of this, we have to talk about something that is well, that is stranger than fiction and that is something called for example "Yamashita's Gold". If our audience is interested in this, they could for example look for an article written by Chalmers Johnson, the famous Asian expert, The Looting of Asia, which was published at the London Review of Books on the 20 th of November of 2003 because then they can find something on this topic of Yamashita's gold on an instant basis in the internet ( https://www.lrb.co.uk/v25/n22/chalmers-johnson/the-looting-of-asia ). I think this is just fair

FWE: Yeah.

LS: because no one really is aware of this whole story. Please tell us about this.

FWE: The Yamashita Gold story is one of the, as you've said really incredible stories of post-World War II. During the Second World War, the Japanese Imperial Family looted the gold of occupied Arch of China, they looted the gold of all the parts of Asia that they had conquered.

LS: Basically from 1895 to 1945.

FWE: Yeah, yeah. And because they had no guarantee that Japan was going to win the war, the emperor ordered the gold to be hidden away in, mostly in the Philippines as far as we know and literally untold tons of gold were buried so deep underground in tunnels around the Philippines and the people who dug the tunnels in many cases were later shot you know so that they couldn't tell. But Marcos who was a CIA asset initially, the dictator of the Philippines through much of the '70s and into the '80s, yeah through the '70, Ferdinand Marcos somehow came upon some of this gold. So, the Japanese looted war body was buried in the early '40s before the end of the war on orders of Emperor Hirohito should they lose the war.

And at some point in the 1970s, Marcos discovered some of the sites where Hirohito's soldiers had buried the gold and the gold was stolen from China, Korea, Philippines, Indonesia and other countries occupied by the Japanese forces. And Marcos, and I think this is the major reason the CIA dumped him, got a little bit greedy and took that gold and started selling it under the market through selective secret Swiss banks. But he used the CIA asset, the Saudi billionaire named Adnan Khashoggi to help them get the gold under the market. And what he didn't realise was that Khashoggi would double cross him. He got a better deal from Bush Senior and the old boys.

LS: We have to say Khashoggi is a figure who is involved for example in B.C.C.I. and in Iran-Contra.

FWE: Back in the '70s he was involved in everything dirty that Bush and the CIA were involved in. B.C.C.I. Bank, the money laundering bank of the CIA, the arms deals, Khashoggi was a huge arms dealer during the Iran and Iraq war the CIA was feeding. He was involved in almost every dirty thing the CIA was doing.

LS: He was aware of this gold.

FWE: Supposedly he was helping Marcos to sell the gold out of the market. So he was not only aware of it, he was right in the middle of it. But then once Marcos was tackled by the CIA Bush got rid of Marcos in 1986. Then someone named Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Armitage and Khashoggi began to work with someone in Canada to create something called – Peter Munk was his name, a rather dubious businessman there – to found something called Barrick Gold of Canada and later it went on to become the world's largest gold mining company.

But Barrick Gold, all available evidence is that buried gold was used to melt down the – I don't want to get too much into the details of this but basically to melt down the Emperor Hirohito's gold that had been discovered by Marcos in the Philippines, to melt it down and use that as collateral for derivatives that would be the collateral used to take over the Russian Federation assets.

LS: The money was basically transformed into bank loans into Russia so that the would-become oligarch people could buy up those assets

FWE: Yes, exactly. So, Yegor Gaidar, the economic privatisation adviser of Yeltsin and his sidekick Anatoly Chubais privatisation had kind of guided this whole process together with Jeffrey Sachs and a group from Harvard University. #00:28:37-8#

LS: Yeah. Let us talk about this. This is known as Harvard Shock Therapy.

FEW: Well, the Jeffrey Sachs Shock Therapy, but the Harvard shock therapy is – well, what happened, the next phase of this incredible story and it's important to keep all this in mind, this is one reason that I wrote the book because of what was clear after the CIA coup d'etat of 2014 in Ukraine and all the sanctions against Putin's Russia and so forth, that if you don't understand what really happened in the '90s, the deep-seated hatred there is on these neoconservatives around Washington and their think tanks as well as, the US political establishment for Putin's Russia and the nationalism behind group Russia. You can't make much sense out of what's going on today with all these incredible lies and accusations against Russia for every crime under the book.

So, what happened is the, as I mentioned the IMF, the International Monetary Fund which had done a beautiful job for Washington in terms of, and George Soros and others in terms of looting the assets of the dead economies of Latin America, Yugoslavia, Poland and others during the oil crisis in the 1970s. The IMF was used and a group of economists around Jeffrey Sachs, a young professor at Harvard University then to impose what Sachs called shock therapy.

And the idea was that Sachs convinced Yeltsin, let prices rise through western market prices and this will increase the supply of goods, you know the stores had a paucity of goods back in the Soviet Times and get rid of trade barriers so foreign commodities could flow in to fill the shelves of Russian stores. The problem was that was a lie. The shops had been full. Okay, you could say it wasn't Kellogg's Corn Flakes and Fried Perdue Chickens or whatever, but they were full of Russian food products until November of '91 when Yeltsin announced that the exact date on December 31 st of 1991, that price controls would be suddenly lifted. So, shop owners immediately hid their goods and waited for December 31 st . So, suddenly the shops were empty and rationing was imposed and so forth. It's just unbelievable.

So, into this, this was Jeffrey Sachs on shock therapy and a group of Harvard University under the auspices of the Harvard Institute for International Development, a group of, among other things later documented CIA agents set up shop in Moscow and worked with Yeltsin's economic team Gaidar and Yegor Gaidar and Anatoly Chubais and themselves got in on the thunder the Russian East Harvard economist working. Now we have a transition in '93 through the Clinton Administration and there former Harvard professor and former World Bank Chief Economist Lawrence Summers became the deputy secretary of treasury responsible for the looting of Russia, effective and responsible for the gold economic transition in the Russian Federation.

And all of the key actors were named by Summers and they were all involved in the privatisation of Russia. They were all from this Harvard Mafia. For example of David Lipton, a former consulting partner of the Jeffrey Sachs, became deputy assistant secretary of treasure for former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe and Sachs himself was named Director of Harvard HIID that oversaw the looting of Russia through the voucher privatisation and so forth. And they got grants from the USAID, AID works very closely with the CIA in different parts of the world, this is documented. And so it was really a tight-knit cabal around Lawrence Summers that oversaw this complete theft through these pieces of paper called privatisation coupons.

And what you had was the economic situation under Yeltsin had become so severe I mean people literally they had no jobs because of the freeing up of prices, they could afford to buy little or nothing. So, most people, millions of Russians sold their privatisation vouchers on the street corners to the highest bidder. And of course the would-be oligarchs were the ones with hard currency dollars that they could buy these things up as you pointed out earlier when we talked about them. So, they had credits from their friends in the West, the Riggs Valmet and so forth to buy up these vouchers and therefore they were able when the cost came up, were able to simply steal the property titles, the ownership titles of some of the most valuable investor assets and mineral assets in the world.

LS: And we can talk about this as a classical case of leveraged buyout – even though it was a covered leveraged buyout, if it was?

FEW: Well, you could call it a leveraged buyout. I know Anne Williamson has used that term, the earlier descriptions of it. I think it was simply legalised theft, leveraged buyout gives it too much dignity. That was a term that was quite popular in the financial world back in the '80s and the early '90s. But whatever name you want to give it, it was certainly not a conventional leveraged buyout, it was bizarre in every sense of the word.

LS: An influential figure in this was mentioned by you already, George Soros. And in 1994, as you point out in your book, he was described with the following words from The Guardian in London, "Soros extraordinary role not only as the world's most successful investor but now possibly fantastically as the senior most powerful foreign influence in the whole of the former Soviet Empire, it tricks more suspicion than curiosity." What was he doing back then in Russia?

FWE: Soros was very intermittently tied with Jeffrey Sachs and the whole Harvard to become a shock therapy group and working with Lawrence Summers team at the US Treasury under Clinton. And in 1993 already the opposition inside what was left of Russia when the old communist party was in the Duma and so forth and the population generally was such that the opposition threatened to get out of hand and Yeltsin was forced to agree to hold a national referendum on the entire privatisation. So, this was in April of '93 and the referendum that was given to the population had four questions, yes or no. Do you support Yeltsin? Yes or no? Do you support Yeltsin's economic policy? Yes or no? Do you want early election for president? Yes or no? And do you want early elections for parliament? Yes or no?

So, Chubais was as an adviser to Yeltsin at that time and the key person on the economy arranged the secret meeting with George Soros. And Soros agreed to finance of course on behalf of Yeltsin, the referendum campaign. So he funnelled money over a million dollars by some accounts to offshore accounts set up to be used by Chubais to buy media. And so the media campaign and by this time most of the national media had been bought up by the oligarchs around Yeltsin so they were able to exercise undue influence. So they barely squeak through and got a yes to the privatisation scheme that Harvard, Jeffrey Sachs and George Soros and others had going on. And then of course Soros' company himself benefitted enormously from this privatisation just a little bit later when the auctions took place.

LS: A figure that connects yesterday with today is Vladimir Putin who came to international attention first in 1998, the same year when the ruble crisis took place.

FWE: This was 1999 and in August '98 you had the collapse of the ruble. This was part of the Bush "Operation Hammer's" original design. You had a huge scam going on in the GKO Russian Bond market where the interest rates were just unbelievably high. So, you had all sorts of hot money coming in, making profits and pulling it up including Soros Fund, quantum fund and so forth.

And finally, Yeltsin was getting near the end of his ability to hold this thing together. And he appointed in August '99, he appointed a young former KGB officer who served during the Cold War in East Germany named Vladimir Putin. And briefly Putin had been a deputy mayor in St. Petersburg and briefly had been the head of the successor to the KGB called FSB and the oligarchs around Putin, I've heard various Russian accounts have had this happen but Berezovsky, Brzezinski and other, the Yeltsin oligarchs thought they could take this young guy Putin and do business with him and you know that he was young and had no political base.

So, at that point Putin gave the ultimatum to Yeltsin, resign or face serious consequences and it turned out that Putin which has later been confirmed was the spokesperson for a nationalist faction within the intelligence community, a patriotic faction, call it what you want but Russian nationalist. And so Yeltsin was told, "If you resign and just get out of politics, we'll leave you alone." So he took the offer and ran. And before he did that he named Vladimir Putin as acting president until elections in March the following year.

So, Putin then came into power and called a meeting as it were of the most powerful oligarchs who had made staggering fortunes at the expense of Russia and he called them creators of a corrupt state through insider dealings and began criminal prosecution against oligarchs like Vladimir Gusinsky and Media-Most, a financial group led by Vladimir Potanin who is in the newspaper today and soon left an oil company controlled by a Roman Abramovich and Boris Berezovsky. So, at that point Putin began the uphill battle of trying to stabilise Russia as a functioning economy. And the recent re-election of Putin indicates that the Russian people by and large support that effort of Putin's.

LS: Meanwhile he also had to react to something new that was taking place then and that was NATO was marching east.

FWE: The negotiations and this is, has been confirmed by former US Ambassador to Russia Jack Matlock and that was the negotiations between the Bush administration in 1991 Germany and Gorbachev included a solemn guarantee as Jack Matlock, Ambassador Matlock who was in Moscow in '87 until '91 in this period. He said that we gave a categorical assurance to Gorbachev when the Soviet Union still existed that if United Germany was able to stay in NATO, NATO would not move eastward. So, of course that pledge like so many pledges of Washington under Bush successor governance was honoured in the breach and the newly created National Endowment for Democracy that I write about quite a bit in the Manifest Destiny.

You had, Vin Weber was the chairman of the NED at that time and he took US taxpayer money through the NED to supposedly bring democracy into former communist states. Then Weber was also a member of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), the neocon think tank which really shaped the personnel of George W. Bush in the year 2000 and 2001. And Vin Weber was also a lobbyist for the largest military industrial conglomerate of the US Lockheed Martin.

So, he was instrumental together with another military industrial Lockheed Martin, former Vice President for Strategy named Bruce Jackson, Bruce P. Jackson to promote back democracy in former communist countries including Russia. And they started the process of expanding NATO to the east in strict violation of the pledges that had been given back in the early '90s. So, by 2003, they had begun this whole expansion of NATO into Poland, into Hungary, all the former communist countries.

LS: And the countries at the Baltic Sea.

FWE: So, at the Baltic Sea right on the doorstep of the Russian Federation, and Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and so forth. And you began to see a very definite NATO encirclement of Russia. And then in 2003-2004, the National Endowment for Democracy, George Soros' Foundation, the whole arm of the fake democracy NGOs of Washington, began to create the so called Orange Revolution in Ukraine, and also the Rose Revolution in Georgia next door. And if you look at a map, if you bring a pro NATO government into power in Ukraine, this they did under Viktor Gerashchenko in 2004, then you're presenting a pretty formidable military threat to the national security of Russia.

Now, at that time 2003, Russia was in no shape to do much more than feebly protest as loud as they could but of course they were ignored. Then you had something quite dramatic in 2006, the end of 2006. The George W. Bush administration Donald Rumsfeld was Secretary of Defence back then announced that they were installing ballistic missile defence now I'll get to that in a minute but it's anything but defensive. In Poland, in the Czech Republic and that those anti-missile defence installations which included missiles would be aimed at a rogue nuclear attack from Iran.

In early 2007, Vladimir Putin personally came as president of Russia Federation to the Munich Security Conference, the International Security Conference held here in Munich Germany and gave a speech which really defines the security position of Russia right up to the present date. He said of course this is not aimed at Iran or North Korea as Washington says. That's a lie. It's like taking your right arm to scratch your left ear we say in Russian. It's aimed at Russia. And we consider this intolerable as a threat to our national security and we will be forced to respond.

LS: And it is aimed at Russia as a first strike possibility.

FWE: Yeah. Well, the point about the missile defence is I – in connection with the book, I interviewed, in an earlier book I wrote, I interviewed Colonel Robert Bowman who had been briefly the head of Ronald Reagan's Star Wars or missile defence programme. And became a very, very severe critic of the Bush administration's reckless policies withdrawing from the antiballistic missile ABM Treaty and so forth, said that missile defence is the missing link to Nuclear Primacy. First strike capability.

And that's something that Pentagon planners had been opting for since the 1950s. And he said, "If you can block the counterattack from your opponent and you then have this possibility to make a first strike and wipe them out because they can't simultaneously fire an effective counterstrike." So, that in a nutshell destroys the whole cold war doctrine of mutual and sure destruction that kept nuclear options off the table up until that time. And the Russians understand military strategy rather well I would say. And said, "This is simply intolerable. We have to respond and we will respond but in our own way and you will see."

LS: And the Russians have reacted.

B: The Russians have reacted, and if we can go for a minute up until the present

LS: Please

FEW: On March 1st Putin gave an address to the Federal Assembly in Moscow televised to the nation. The beginning part of the speech, his annual speech there, was about the Russian economy and plans for the future. This was shortly before the Russian elections that overwhelmingly gave him a new term. But the crucial part of that speech to the Federal Assembly was Russia's military technologies and this is as he put it. He referred to that 2007 speech in Munich and he said, "We said at that time that Russia would have to reply and since the expansion of NATO to the east which really to be honest that's – see there is no reason after 1991 or certainly after 2000 for the existence of NATO other than the reason given when NATO was created by the first secretary general of NATO to keep the Russians out the Germans down and the Americans in."

But Putin's speech talked about nuclear primacy and the Russian response and he outlined the military are the developments that they had quietly brought online since Washington tore up, unilaterally tore up the ABM Treaty in 2002/2003. So he outlined an awesome array of missiles, hypersonic low flying stealth missiles carrying nuclear warheads, unpredictable trajectories, invisible against perspective missile defence and air defence systems, unmanned submersible vehicles to great depth that could go many times higher than the speed of submarines cutting edge torpedoes just and commentators in the West like CNN. They said, "Oh, this is just bluff and so forth."

People who know Russian military technology and the intensity of the kind of research and development that's focused on defending the nation confirm that this is no joke. Hypersonic aircraft five times the speed of sound, that's hypersonic and they have something called the [unclear] which goes 10 times mark 10 and as Putin described it, "This missile flying 10 times faster than sound can manoeuvre in all phases of the flight trajectory, overcome all prospective and aircraft county missile defences in a range of 2000 kilometres."

He outlined about six or seven of these I would call them not even cutting edge, bleeding edge military technology and as The Saker commented in his blogpost after the speech, it's indeed set marching game over for the empire. There's no more military option against Russia.

This all is to make a point that the entire history up until now, these fake accusations of Putin would have an interest or Russia would have an interest to meddle with the US elections when you have a choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump to accuse Putin and Russia of international violations of law by allowing a referendum to take place in Crimea after the CIA coup d'etat in Kiev and now it's come out from actual mercenary snipers that were brought in from Georgia under [#inaudible 00:55:08-0#] umbrella that they were paid by the CIA or promised to be paid by cut outs to the CIA to create the Maidan Square February 2014 chaos that led to the collapse of the government and the coup d'etat.

So, you know, this is not Russia is the arch Evel Knievel looking for a fight every corner of the world. It's not Russia doing bad things in Syria. It's Russia trying to stop a NATO and Saudi and other embedded destruction of the Middle East and create some kind of peace and stability. And anyone modest to take the slightest bit of care and follow this, they can read a running commentary on my website williamengdahl.com but not only there, it's all over the place. You realise that the fake media is the media that dominates and is guided by NATO public relations strategy in the West and it's not the so called critical media that's being sanctioned and censored right now.

LS: Let's talk further about the present, William, by closing one circle of our interview. As we've discussed the Russian gold vaults were empty since the early 1990s. This has changed since basically the financial crisis broke out in 2007, 2008, 2009. Since then the Russian Central Bank is buying gold like basically no other nation in a very rapid tempo.

FWE: Since the financial crisis and especially since the opposition of sanctions after the annexation of Crimea in 2014, it's been the policy of the Russian Central Bank and the Russian Federation to buy as much gold for reserves of the ruble as they can get their hands on. And they are now I think number five or number six in the world in terms of gold reserves and correct me if I'm wrong but just slightly behind the people's republic of China which has also been vigorously adding gold towards Central Bank reserves for the yuan.

So, what Russia is doing is creating a buffer gold, by the way in my view has never ceased being an object of value to stand behind currencies. If you have currencies like the dollar after all this 1971 when Nixon took the dollar off the bread and wood, gold exchange [unclear], then if you have a military you might or manipulate the oil price petrodollar and so forth, you can create money if you have the reserve currency you can create money without them. So what the Russia is doing is creating a security in terms of its currency and now that security is probably going to be tested by the economic warfare division of the US Treasury in these new sanctions.

But Russia is merging together with China. Interestingly enough after 2014 when the CIA coup d'etat Ukraine took place, Putin responded not by getting bogged down in the destructive war inside the Eastern Ukraine but he responded by turning east, strengthening his relationships with China, with the new president of China then Xi Jinping bringing the Asian economic Union which Russia is the leading economy in, together with Belarus and Kazakhstan, Armenia and others, bringing that in a coherence with Xi Jinping's Belt and Road Initiative One Belt, One Road to link the infrastructure, the energy pipelines, the high-speed rail networks, the deep water ports and so forth to create a Eurasian, some people call it the land bridge but it's an economic space in Eurasia that would have the majority of the world's population, would have every raw material resource that the world needs including rare earth metals that China is world's leading supplier of at the moment.

And Russia has vast oil and gas reserves and military technology, civilian technology, an educated labour force that is probably one of the finest in the world and scientific country and so forth. And independent of the bankrupt economies of Britain and the United States and very rapidly of the European Union where this banking crisis has, since the crisis of 2008 has just been swept under the rug but it's ready to explode on a moment's notice. So, you have a depth loaded western NATO world. Let's call it a NATO world, a world of the NATO member countries and you have Russia together, which by the way, Russia has unbelievably small

LS: Debt.

FWE: National debt.

LS: Yes.

FWE: Something like 13 to 17% of the gross domestic product.

LS: And now they have this huge stock of gold relative to very little sovereign debt. It's almost ideal.

FWE: Yes, and that's by design. That is by Putin's intention to create this independence. And one thing, I am very often in Russia, have a very, very dear special friends in Russia over the years, the first time I was there was 1994. That was a vastly different, that was in the middle of the Yeltsin and the insanity. The Russians are very not only proud people but they are very determined and they protect their existence and have done that I would say for well over 1000 years going back to the great schism between the Western church in Rome and the Eastern Church in 1054. I think that was a pivotal date in modern history, the division there.

But certainly the Russians have gone through two World Wars and the rape of Russia under Yeltsin, unbelievable trials and tribulations and they are not shying away from defending their existence. That's something I think the west or certainly Washington with these neocons really doesn't have a sense of.

LS: One thing that I would like to ask you about as my final question is the following. You are a renowned expert for the geopolitics and the history of oil. And since this month we have a future's contract in Shanghai, denominated in yuan for oil and we also hear that the Chinese are planning to price oil that they import in yuan which is safe for this buying of oil internationally via yuan, Russia would be the candidate number one as the exporter?

FWE: Definitely. Most definitely and Russia and China are connecting their financial markets ever closer. The Russian government is the in the process sometime this year of issuing Russian bonds denominated new Chinese yuan. The announcing of the petrol yuan, the oil futures contracts being sold in Shanghai, ultimately it won't happen overnight but it's certainly off to a positive start in the marketing acceptance. That has the basis for taking oil sales.

Let's step back a moment to the 1970s and I document this at length in two of my books, Myths, Lies and Oil Wars and A Century of War. In the early 1970s when Nixon took the dollar off of gold, the dollar relative to the German mark and the Japanese yen dropped like a stone, something like 40% over a period of five or six months. And in order to stop that because the New York Banks were hurting quite a bit from that, there was a oil price shock that was orchestrated. I won't go into the details it's documented quite extensively in those two books of mine.

LS: And Sheikh Yamani had said something about this, too.

FWE: Yes. He invited me after reading my book to his annual energy retreat in London in 2000, September 2000. And then called me to a private dinner discussion at his home outside of London to talk about what I wrote about in the book. And he later went on CNN on an interview and mentioned my book by name. In the written transcript it's in there and in the television version they spliced it out so that you couldn't realise that it'd been in there. But Sheikh Yamani told me you are the first journalist or the first person outside of myself that writes correctly what happened with that oil shock. And that was manipulated by among others Henry Kissinger, the Secretary of State and by a group in the Atlantic establishment called the Bilderberg meeting in Saltsjöbaden, Sweden back in May of that period before the Yom Kippur War.

In any case, the US circles around Rockefeller, who at that point was the chairman of the board of USA Incorporated, I would say. They had engineered a 400% price rise in oil and to make sure that Germany and Japan and other countries wouldn't make deals to buy oil in German mark but keep the dollar demand high and the dollar value high. They send a delegation from the US Treasury to sign an agreement with the Saudi Arabian monetary agency for a new relationship taking surplus Saudi petrodollars or OPEC petrodollars and buying US government debt.

LS: Yeah, and outside of the normal auction to privileged conditions.

FWE: Yes. In return, Washington agreed to give the Saudis tens and billions of dollars of defence equipment.

LS: Yeah, and Saudi Arabia would use its status as a swing producer in OPEC that it would only accept dollars as a pricing for oil.

FEW: And the quid pro quo was after 1975, this was formalised that Saudis would as swing producer in OPEC guarantee that OPEC sold its oil only in dollars and that held up until the time of Saddam Hussein during the sanctions shortly before the US invasion and Saddam Hussein began buying oil through a French bank denominated in Euros and not in dollars.

LS: And he made a plus, he made a net plus because he did sell his oil in Euro.

FWE: Yeah, yeah. And so this, what that has done up until the present is prop up the US dollars despite the fact that the internal industrial economy import activity of the United States went down the tubes over the past 40 years since the taking the dollar off of gold and the, putting of English dollars for the world economy. So, the idea than China and Russia would trade in energy and that other economies would begin to sell oil to China, Iran for example is a prime candidate in the petro yuan not in petrodollars, this began slowly like acid drops begins to erode the reserve currency status of the US dollar. And if that goes, it's end game for the US as a financial global power.

LS: We have to make clear to our audience. The fact that you have to buy oil in dollar makes sure that you need dollar, that you acquire dollar in order to buy oil.

FWE: Yeah.

LS: And so if this mechanism goes, well then the US has a problem because the dollars that are floating around internationally would find their way back into the homeland of the US.

FWE: Well, the other thing is that in order to sell now you have under this wonderful Trumponomics as I call it, you have projections that the US annual government deficit, shortage of tax income from tax outgo, spending outgo will by 2020 exceed one trillion dollars a year for every year as far as the eye can see. And by end of 2020, 2028 I think was figured by the congressional budget office, the US public debt is estimated to be well over $33 trillion, it's 20 now, 38 maybe, it's just out of control. So, if the ability of the US dollar to command use in the world economy is severely undermined, you're going to have to raise interest rates so high to sell this debt and it just becomes dysfunctional.

LS: Yes, but you have already in the last few years interest rates payments on this already existing that of per annum $400 billion.

FWE: Yeah.

LS: And if interest rates go up

FWE: Yeah and that was under zero interest rates, but now, you know, if they have to put up interest rates to five, six, seven, 8% like it was in the 1980s. the whole thing just blows up sky high.

LS: And so coming back to gold, gold has the advantage relative to bonds or shares or the US dollar or other Fiat currencies that there is no counterparty risk. If you have the gold in physical form, there is no counterparty risk.

FWE: Right.

LS: So would you say that gold will be one of the ultimate winners of the ongoing financial crisis when it goes into full gear?

FWE: Well, it's documented that J. P. Morgan, Chase and other select banks with this collusion of the Federal Reserve have been artificially depressing the price of gold for years. Every time there's a new financial crisis, they intervene and keep gold within a very tight range. At a certain point that's not going to work anymore and then some people estimate to follow the gold markets much more than I do but it could quickly go up to $10,000 an ounce or even beyond that.

Be that as it may, gold as you point out has no counterparty risk and it's a historic store of value. It's one of the beautiful commodities out there and it has a special – the other just being special significance economically and historically, the other thing is that China is the number one mining producer of gold in the world today, not South Africa. South Africa has fallen far behind

LS: Yeah, and Russia is number three.

FWE: Russia is number three.

LS: And a lot of member states of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation are producers or are buying gold.

FWE: At the rail connections of the circle of the China Belt Road Initiative in part are aiming to go in the areas where there are known gold reserves but no infrastructure during the Soviet era to bring that gold down to market. So, we have an extremely fascinating prospect, not just for China and Russia, for the world really to build up instead of tear down, destroy and burn and bankrupt which is the only policy that Washington seems able to follow these days.

LS: Yeah. To sum it up with a famous Chinese proverb. "May you live in interesting times" – you and all the others.

FWE: We certainly do.

LS: Okay. great. Thank you very much, William, for this interview.

FWE: Thank you, Lars.

Omega • a day ago ,

Two things:

1. Operation Hammer:

In 1989 President George H. W. Bush began the multi-billion dollar Project Hammer program using an investment strategy to bring about the economic destruction of the Soviet Union including the theft of the Soviet treasury, the destabilization of the ruble, funding a KGB coup against Gorbachev in August 1991 and the seizure of major energy and munitions industries in the Soviet Union.

Those resources would subsequently be turned over to international bankers and corporations. On November 1, 2001, the second operative in the Bush regime, President George W. Bush, issued Executive Order 13233 on the basis of "national security" and concealed the records of past presidents, especially his father's spurious activities during 1990 and 1991.

http://www.conspiracyarchiv...

2. Why can't Putin touch Yeltsinist oligarchs:

Yeltsin's oligarchs remained as rich as they were; Yeltsin's family still possesses immense riches. And Putin does not dare to touch them. He goes hat in hand to open a Yeltsin's Memorial Centre; he is courteous with Yeltsin's widow and daughter. Putin's establishment cautiously avoided celebration, or even mention of the Revolution centenary, in keeping with Yeltsin's anticommunism. This is the Deal.

https://www.unz.com/ishamir...

Fraser • a day ago ,

Given the depth of the fall, the rise (under Putin) has been remarkable.

Guy Fraser • a day ago ,

The rise has been astounding and all because they have a leader that can't be bought , not corrupt and loves his country. That is why he literally was swept in in the last election. The Western leaders will not admit it but I am sure they are terribly envious .

Tommy Jensen • a day ago ,

Very good article to bring to RI also.

It open eyes on how the West political elite are a criminal rotten cancer syndicate and Georg Bush Sr. shows up to be even worse than the disgusting profile he already has in media and Georg Soros bad reputation gets confirmed.

No police or court are available to take this out. We only have John Connor or The One to count on.
Choice is the problem now. We will have to make a choice.

Play Hide
Nicole Temple • a day ago ,

The photo of Yeltsin and Clinton that accompanies this article should remind readers of this story:

https://viableopposition.bl...

There is something rotten in Washington and it has been in existence for decades.

Guy • a day ago ,

Great interview .William Engdahl is a very knowledgeable person. I have read a few of his books. Superb in my view.

Jimi Thompson • a day ago ,

Quite a few unknown tidbits for me in all of this... very eye-opening even for someone that is aware of the games being played at the higher levels.

To imagine all of what remains unknown, including many of the players, leaves much to the imagination.

[Apr 18, 2018] The magnitude and complexity of the task Russia took on when it agreed to intervene in Syria.

Edited for clarity...
Apr 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 18, 2018 4:28:52 AM | 105

The Colonial ratfuckers recent unprovoked, lie-based attack on Syria got me wondering about Russia's apparent impotence. I'm quite uncomfortable with that notion but can't dismiss it completely because I can't get a 'handle' on what Russia's strategy is.

Steve Gowans' latest commentary on Syria sets out his summary of US/NATO's Permanent War agenda in Syria.

https://gowans.wordpress.com/2018/04/16/a-prolonged-war-in-syria-is-on-the-us-agenda/

Despite its pessimism (if one takes it as a 'realistic' assessment), it goes a long way toward explaining the magnitude and complexity of the task Russia took on when it agreed to intervene in Syria.

Being pessimistic, it doesn't broach the subject of potential Bright Sides to the conflict, or the flaws in the US/NATO Strategy.

One rather obvious flaw which came to mind is the fact that Neoliberal Colonialism has inflicted pain on almost every country on the planet and have recently underlined their God-given right to continue doing so ad nauseum - without opposition or consequences.

[Apr 18, 2018] The USA as a huge, immensely strong, obnoxious drunk that is being belligerent and needs to be arrested

That's a clear exaggeration. But the fact that the US elite is in decline is undisputable. Trump as a leader of free world. give me a break.
Apr 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Bakerpete | Apr 18, 2018 9:01:53 AM | 117

@Hoarsewhisperer

While this isn't a great analogy consider the USA as a huge, immensely strong, obnoxious drunk that is being belligerent and needs to be arrested. The police show up, a bunch of them, and now need to corral the drunk. The drunk is so insensate that it can't feel any damage and the police need to be careful of how they use force. Generally the best outcome for the cops is the drunk trips and collapses whereby the police restrain him and hope he doesn't choke to death on his own vomit.

The USA is a zombie(drunk) country; dead but doesn't know it yet. Yet it is enormously significant in the world. If it suddenly collapses the rest of the world is going to be hugely impacted. While it has an enormous military it is extremely brittle and has virtually no depth; it can't sustain any meaningful military engagement for more than a couple of months.

Israel has created a really stupid situation for itself. It's dug this very small pit and stuffed it full of Jewish folk. A single nuke dropped on it would end the question of Israel. Yet the strut and bully like they are bullet proof.

In each case be too aggressive with them and they will panic. Conversely, and frustrating as hell, both the US and Israel have lots of leeway to cause mischief.

Russia and China are doing their best to patiently sheppard the USA along the path of its decline. They will grit their teeth and suffer humiliation but the alternative is a global economic collapse and many millions dying.

[Apr 18, 2018] Macron Napoleonic complex

Apr 18, 2018 | russia-insider.com

In the space of a few days Macron has:

Inadequacy much? How needy for recognition is this guy?

CHUCKMAN • 9 hours ago ,

France used to produce some pretty fine leaders, but lately, it's like a different place.

Hollande was the most ridiculous, gutless thing we ever saw. He was laughably pompous and ineffective and dishonest and even cowardly, vis a vis the US.

Macron probably ranks second worst. He's making a mess of France, he's blubbering all kinds of nonsense about the EU, he's busy putting troops in Syria against all international law, he is not liked by the people, and he is virtually a French doormat for America.

Sarkozy showed the odd bit of promise, but he was largely talk with no worthy efforts. And he was immensely corrupt. Imagine taking 20 million euros from Qaddafi and then participating in the scheme to kill him? Or the case of the senile woman who was France's wealthiest woman, from whom he took many millions for his campaigns, doing so in private without other members of the family or strict legal supervision.

Hard to see the same country we saw in de Gaulle's time and that of his immediate successors.

Muriel Kuri • 8 hours ago ,

'I am an equal of Putin' - well, he's right in a way - they're both leaders of a country. Beyond that, there is NO comparison. Maybe he admires Putin - which is good, if he tries to emulate him, even better because Putin, after all, is one of the few great current leaders of the world. Macron has a very long way to go, but with many years experience, if he gets the chance, MAY become a better leader than some, but never will be the match of Putin.

[Apr 18, 2018] Russia, China, Iran and others are increasingly concerned with curtailing the damage that the US can still inflict

Notable quotes:
"... The clearing of Ghouta puts a serious dent in this plan. Demoralizing the population of Damascus is now almost impossible. ..."
Apr 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
Jackrabbit , Apr 18, 2018 11:59:00 AM | 145
Don Bacon
PavewayIV

The West wins by making Syria a hell on earth. That means no reconstruction funding, no trade, and continuous harassment by "rebels".

The clearing of Ghouta puts a serious dent in this plan. Demoralizing the population of Damascus is now almost impossible.

But Lebanon is only about 15 miles from Damascus, and US/Israel would have to deal with Hez at some point anyway, so why not sooner rather than later?

Grieved | Apr 18, 2018 12:00:50 PM | 146

@131 WJ and 134 Don Bacon

I appreciate this discussion.

On a side note I would add that 3-4 years ago when Ukraine was boiling, much of the discussion by concerned people focused on countries outside of the US, and the damage caused by the US. The US, in this context, was largely regarded as an evil but coherent entity.

But that coherence has now come more and more into question. Discussion shifted gradually, as the US made more and more mistakes and lost battle after battle in so many theaters, and revealed itself as a failing actor. And in the last year or two there's much more discussion about the US itself, largely trying to pierce the obscurity of how that country is actually run and by whom. This shift was already happening, and Trump of course added to the fascination.

I was glad to see that gradual shift. To me it indicated the war itself was won, while many battles were yet to be fought. I think it's true that Russia, China, Iran and others are increasingly concerned with curtailing the damage that the US can still inflict. Every day they increase in actual, effective power, and the US decreases in that power. Yesterday's battle will be fought differently tomorrow, because the balance of that power will have shifted again by then.

Syria has been an enormously useful magnifying glass to show us so much about the relative power balances of many nations. And even as the US lashes out in its death throes, it is increasingly cornered and stymied. The same is true of Israel. It's reaching the point - if not already there - that every move made by the US will result in clear damage to itself, with no gain, and no damage to its targets.

The other side has had sufficient time to wargame countless contingencies, and think them through and make preparations for them. Increasingly, it gets to choose what damage to allow and what to stop, because the costs of every action have now been calculated - and the passage of time reduces the costs too, so the equation constantly updates.

This is true outside of Syria also, in all theaters and on many planes of activity.

[Apr 18, 2018] The US Deep State doesn't want to "conquer" any country. Then they'd have to pay the bill for the destruction they caused... think an actual Marshall Plan, not the Iraq and Afghan Debacles. It is not trying to "win". It is trying to destroy those countries' ability to function outside the iron-fist influence of the IMF/BIS

Notable quotes:
"... Trumpty Dumbdy is trapped, just trying to convince his base that he really is getting the US out ..."
Apr 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

A P | Apr 18, 2018 1:42:41 PM | 160

The US Deep State doesn't want to "conquer" any country. Then they'd have to pay the bill for the destruction they caused... think an actual Marshall Plan, not the Iraq and Afghan Debacles. It is not trying to "win". It is trying to destroy those countries' ability to function outside the iron-fist influence of the IMF/BIS/etc. banks/economy.

... ... ..

As for US operations in Syria being handed off "to others", i.e. to Prince's latest iteration of Blackwater/Xi/Academia, the last we heard of Erik was trying to sell a budget airforce/drone system to countries in Africa. What a joke.

Not going to happen in Syria, because Russia, Iran, Hezbolla and Syria would have no qualms about directly assaulting Prince's Kurd/Arab/Wahabbist mercenaries... Eric may be a self-serving parasite, but he's not stupid enough to directly take on the Russian military, or even the SAA for that matter. Especially with no NATO air cover...

Killary is not around to unilaterally impose a Libya-style no-fly-zone.

Trumpty Dumbdy is trapped, just trying to convince his base that he really is getting the US out of being Israel's and the Rothschilds' bitch, but that is not a potential reality.

It would involve dismantling the FED and cutting off the yearly $multi-billion military aid tap to Israel. I doubt he is smart or informed enough to comprehend the situation he is in. Any sane, intelligent person would walk away and tell the Zionist/Rothschild/Deep State to find another patsy.

[Apr 18, 2018] Count on an inverted yield curve and Treasury Department derivative losses in the trillions on interest rate swaps sold to Wall Street banks

Apr 18, 2018 | thesaker.is

Rob from Canada on April 15, 2018 , · at 2:06 pm UTC

Count on an inverted yield curve and Treasury Department derivative losses in the trillions on interest rate swaps sold to Wall Street banks.

Wall Street banks have been buying surplus US government debt that the world doesn't want to finance huge budget deficits over the last 10 years and the Treasury Department sold them insurance protection against capital loses on that debt.

A lot of malinvestment in fracking and share buybacks with borrowed money has overleveraged corporations. Personal debt, corporate debt and government debt compared to GDP are at 1929 levels and a lot of that debt will be uncollectible.

The USA has kicked the financial can down the road for 10 years. It created a huge asset inflation bubble with borrowed money ie all malinvestment via interest rate suppression by the Fed that will blow up when the yield curve goes inverted signifying a financial panic is underway. That is the demand for short-term money(to borrow) is greater than the supply of money to short-term borrow.(to lend)

All I have to do is look at the SPX chart of the SP500 to know the US is FUKUS. The bull market that started in 2008 has started a head&shoulders topping pattern. In 2019 I expect 52-week lows to be hit and a bear market worse the 2008 financial crisis to be underway.

­
guest on April 15, 2018 , · at 2:52 pm UTC
People keep tossing out "The US economy is tanking, it is going to implode/explode/crumble sooner or later" etc., etc. Such beliefs may be soothing to hold but they do not rest on knowledge or economic literacy. Briefly, here is why.

Economies do not tank because of massive credit. Money Supply = M1 + M2 + M3, where M3 is the outstanding credit in the economy. The US M3 is huge because the economy itself is huge. Modern economies have moved away from paper notes and in future all money supply will essentially be M2 + M3. M2 (total outstanding bank deposits) and M3 are in turn fusing into one as credit card payments replace the practice of mailing out cheques.

Nor is high foreign indebtedness in itself a sign of future imminent collapse. Yes, it is worryingly high presently, but no it is not imminent that some sort of disaster will befall the US Treasury. No one forces the rest-of-the world to buy US treasuries, bonds, and stocks. Yet governments, corporations, and individuals from all over the world line-up to buy these. Ask yourselves why. The answer is: Money and Capital flows to low risk and high return zones. This is how it always has been, and this is how it always will be. Why do Alibaba and the other Chinese majors seek listing on American stock exchanges?

Yes, there are plenty of things wrong with the USA, and yes it may end up paying a dear price for its arrogance, aggression, and cruelty all over the world (not to talk of its collapsing morality, ethics and social cohesion at home) but there is nothing the matter with its economy. Those who wait for its supposedly "Ponzi scheme" to collapse will wait to eternity, I am afraid.

­
Simon Chow on April 16, 2018 , · at 12:57 pm UTC
@guest. I think your conclusion that the US economy is not tanking is blinkered. The US economy tanked in 2008 and would had crashed into a worse depression had not the Chinese held up the US economy (the Chinese also held up Europe by holding up the German economy). Alibaba is not the biggest Chinese company to list in the US. The biggest which is twice as profitable, twice the market capitalisation of Alibaba(more than USD500 billion) and listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, is Tencent.

The US economy and the US dollar was viewed as safe haven becuase there was no alternative. The US dollar and the US economy became a bubble because of the global demand for the US dollar resulting from there being no alternative. Besides the use of the USD is enforced by the US military.

But, if you have been following the latest economic development, that had changed. The US economy is no longer the biggest, certainly not the strongest. The US dollar is no longer indispensable. It's value is now perched on the edge of a sharp slippery slope due to US financial mismanagement and profligacy ala the late great USSR!

Its stupendous, useless, egoistic and hubristic military spending and other factors will push the US economy down that very slippery slope to oblivion.

But China will be waiting at the bottom of that slope to cushion the fall!

­
pogohere on April 16, 2018 , · at 8:12 pm UTC
SIGNS THAT THE US DEBT-FUELED ECONOMY MIGHT ACTUALLY COLLAPSE

An Awara Accounting Study on US Economy 2018:
Signs that the US Debt-Fueled Economy Might Actually Collapse
Main findings:

US debt-to-GDP to reach 140% by 2024

Net increase in debt could be as enormous as $10 to 15 trillion in just five years 2019 to 2024

Federal budget interest expenditure could reach $1.5 trillion by 2028, 25% of the total

There has been no real GDP growth since at least 2007

Growth of government debt has exceeded even nominal GDP growth multiple times each year since 2007

US reporting on national debt and inflation full of tricks

War budgets ripping open huge deficits

Skyrocketing social spending leaves no room for deficit cuts

Unfunded liabilities now a reality as Social Security and Medicare funds dry up

https://www.awaragroup.com/blog/signs-that-the-us-debt-fueled-economy-might-actually-collapse/

­
Rob from Canada on April 15, 2018 , · at 10:17 am UTC
No, it's not over Saker, but compared to 2007 victory is in sight.

First, my opinion is that the Russia/China asymmetric attack on US dollar hegemony will create a second financial crisis next year, worse than the one in 2008.

Second, in my opinion, Russia and China are winning on the most important Grand Strategic/Moral level of warfare for global public opinion. The UN votes are illustrative of that moral victory. Also, Qatar, Turkey and the Philippines switching sides are examples of moral victory.

"Facts simply don't matter. And neither does logic. All that matters are perceptions!"
That's the perfect strategy to defeat yourself.

"Those who defeat others are strong, those who defeat themselves are mighty." Lao Tzu

Napolean marched into Russia in 1812 with lot's of allies but left several months later with none.

I agree with MK Bhadrakumar assessment of the strike on Syria over your assessment. It's a moral defeat for the F#$%ing stupidest, exceptional nation on the face of the earth.

http://blogs.rediff.com/mkbhadrakumar/2018/04/15/trump-opens-a-pandoras-box-in-middle-east/

Anonymous on April 15, 2018 , · at 10:29 am UTC
<>

Well, I'm not sure what old Lao was smoking on that day but if we replace the word "mighty" with "exceptional" then perhaps Trump fits the bill in a modern context.

Putin the Great vs Trump the Mighty (and Exceptional) who managed to defeat himself.

­
cdvision on April 15, 2018 , · at 3:32 pm UTC
Rob: my view exactly.

Russia and China have stopped buying US Treasuries, in fact are selling down for gold. The deficit if 1.3T will be more costly to fund, and the debt impossible to service. And China with the petro-yuan has tolled the death knell. Added to that is the dysfunction of the US political system. The mid-terms will be very interesting. I doubt Trump will see out 1 term, never mind 2.

And yes, the so-called US allies are fair weather friend.

­
Iris on April 15, 2018 , · at 7:24 pm UTC
Dear Saker;

Rob is right: the coming economic crisis will be nothing like 2007, or like any depression that occurred over the past century for that matter. It is the first time a cycle is ending with interest rates so low, so the trick of lowering them further cannot be used this time.
Even though hyperinflation is not happening because of globalised and cheap offer (Richard Duncan), Western economies are slowly collapsing under the burden of debt (Prof Steve Keen, Prof Michael Hudson).

The global Ponzi scheme will soon end, with major geopolitical consequence. The US, being given their history, will probably go to full blown war where this can bring most economic gains. The Chinese are fully aware of that, and are preparing for it All of their plans ( the OBOR initiative, the petro-yuan) depend on a strong Russia, The Chinese will not let Russia go down, their own survival depend on Russia.
All the best.

[Apr 18, 2018] The strategies put in place during the Yeltsin years to plunder the assets of the new CIS.

Apr 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Lozion | Apr 17, 2018 1:56:16 PM | 3

I know b is not fond of us posting content from other blogs but the Saker has just put up a must-read interview with a personal favorite author of mine, F. William Engdhal, entitled "The rape of Russia". Very informative, it documents the strategies put in place during the Yeltsin years to plunder the assets of the new CIS. Enjoy!

http://thesaker.is/the-rape-of-russia-saker-blog-exclusive-interview/

[Apr 18, 2018] A Note on KGB Style -- Central Intelligence Agency

Apr 18, 2018 | www.cia.gov

After collapse of the USSR the mount of infometion that has flown to the West is staggering. KGB might be then most open of intelleigence services in this sense. multiple defector probably created a very complete picture of the organization and its methods.

July 2, 1996

A NOTE ON KGB STYLE

Wayne Lambridge

The KGB like any enduring institution has a style, its own way of doing things. When we seek to understand the service and its officers, we should perhaps pay attention to how they do business as well as to what kind of business they do. This article is intended to raise the subject for discussion, to present largely one man's opinion. It is far from a definitive study.

By way of indicating something about KGB style, consider the implications for the organization as a whole of a communication system that carries one tenth or less as much traffic -- both electric and by pouch -- as its American equivalent. The KGB sends very few cables and its dispatches are infrequent. For maximum security, they are pouched on undeveloped microfilm, which is recovered and printed when the dispatch reaches its destination. Although Moscow headquarters does excellent and prompt printing, both exposure and development are sometimes haphazard in the field. Ten years ago, they were downright unreadable at times. Now, the quality is generally better. Volume, however, does not seem to have risen much.

The prints of the developed films are seen by the Rezident (the KGB Chief of Station) and by the case officer concerned. In large Rezidentury (KGB Stations) some intermediate may also read the traffic, but that is by no means always the case. The Rezident keeps a file -- sometimes in the form of notes or perhaps as copies of pertinent cables and dispatches -- for reference. The case officer keeps all his files in a briefcase or a notebook. Calling them "files" is perhaps misleading. It is better to say that the KGB officer keeps a movable In-Box. When a document leaves that box it is either returned to the Rezident or destroyed and the fact of destruction recorded. The case file is really in the case officer's head. The excellent memory that KGB officers often display concerning the details of their operations may well be traceable to the necessity of remembering the vital information on each operation that they cannot look up anywhere. Of course, when a new case officer replaces an old one, especially if the latter has been unable to brief his successor fully, complications may ensue. Illness, car accidents and PNG'ing have led to real chaos in some KGB operations when a harassed new man has tried to tie down the broken threads of a departed colleague's dropped contacts.

Although the amount of paper that he sees is small, the KGB case officer is held strictiy accountable for each sheet of it. When he destroys a document, a notation to that effect is included on a record. Even his scrap paper may bear a serial number and have to be accounted for. At the Moscow headquarters each document is sewn into the file by the senior officer directly responsible for the case. A special record of all documents in the file is kept by the case officer and its accuracy is regularly verified by the case officer's supervisor. Safe storage areas are locked and sealed with wax each night.

The ritual of sewing in the documents is often regarded as a waste of time by senior case officers in Moscow. Nevertheless, they would not dream of delegating the job. It seems to have a symbolic significance as an embodiment of both their authority and their responsibility.

The KGB case officer is his own intel assistant. At headquarters he does his own traces, gets his own documents from the archives and handcarries his own messages. Not too long ago, he also often wrote or typed his own dispatches. Even now he may write his own telegrams and personally take them and dispatches to his supervisor for review. In the field he is, if anything, even more responsible for doing everything connected with his operation except for technical surveillance and the like where he must call on experts.

The field case officer under official cover often works at his cover job about as much as do his colleagues who do not have intelligence responsibilities. This obligation is usually not as demanding on the case officer's time as it might first appear because KGB cover slots are usually selected so that cover duties complement intelligence tasks to a substantial degree. By contrast, other KGB officers have virtually no serious cover responsibilities and rely on the all-embracing security system of the Soviet colony to protect their true affiliation. In either case, the 'KGB officer is not expected to spend much time on the administrative or reporting aspects of his intelligence job. Within the limitations of his cover assignment, he is supposed to be out on the street, making contacts, working agents and performing other intelligence tasks, reporting only the highlights and the most crucial information back to headquarters.

In developing new sources, he will usually bring things along to the point where recruitment or some other substantial development is clearly foreseeable before asking for traces from headquarters or getting approval to go ahead with his plan. Local informers and support agents are sometimes picked up without reference to headquarters at all, except perhaps after the fact of recruitment. The KGB officer must account with some precision, however, for his operational expenditures and is usually quite limited in what he can spend for development prior to coming up with a concrete proposal for recruiting a source.

Once an agent is recruited or is established as a source, headquarters' control and demands for accountability are exacting, though never voluminous. For a recruited source with significant access, a senior officer, such as a branch chief or his deputy is specifically charged with responsibility for the case. Moscow's concern to insure that information is really coming from the source as described by the case officer and that the source is bona fide is very considerable. Somewhat by contrast, Moscow's requirements (outside of S&T operations) sometimes seem quite general, apparently leaving it up to the case officer and source to report what seems to them most important. On the other hand, reporting is expected to be factual and documentary, if possible. Sometimes the KGB seems obsessed with documents as the only reliable sources. Speculation is not usually encouraged.

In such a system of extreme compartmentation and vertical lines of communication and authority, the advisory role of staffs and other elements not within the chain of command is small. The First Chief Directorate, the foreign intelligence arm of the KGB, has a counterintelligence unit, for example, that actually takes over a case from the regular chain of command in the event that the agent appears to be doubled, compromised or in danger of compromise. The field case officer may remain the same, but in Moscow the Counterintelligence Service assumes full authority for directing the case. Deception and some types of complex political action operations often appear to be run directly by the headquarters element, Department A, that prepares the operation in Moscow. In such cases, of course, local assets of a Rezidentura may well be employed in support, but the operations are frequently run by specialists.

The typical KGB officer, trained in an environment where political agitation is part of daily fare, sees political action and propaganda as part of his regular routine. There are numerous examples of Soviet officers around the world who seem to concentrate almost exclusively on pushing the Soviet line on the issues of the day with whatever contacts they meet. To them the political approach is not something apart from spotting, developing, assessing, recruiting and agent handling. It is integral to that effort. Some do it crudely, some ineffectively, some with great skill. The point is that in almost all cases, it is a part of the operation.

In addition to politics, KGB recruiting and training of staff personnel emphasizes operational and area knowledge and experience from bottom to top. The main sources for new KGB officers are the institutes of International Affairs and Eastern Languages in Moscow. These institutions, which are better compared to the U.S. service academies than to other organizations of higher learning in America, prepare young Soviet citizens for careers abroad not only in the intelligence services, but for the foreign service, the Ministry of Foreign Trade, Radio Moscow, etc. Assignment of a student after graduation is worked out among the various consuming organizations. The students are under what amounts to military discipline and are required to accept the assignment given them. Few students, see much difference among the organizations these days except for differences in pay, length and location of overseas service and other practical matters.

In the course of their education the students learn two or three foreign languages well and study the history and culture of the area in which they specialize in considerable detail, although current politics is likely tobe a much weaker course than history. Access to native sources is still circumscribed. A substantial number of students go for a year or more as exchange students or as trainees with Soviet organizations working abroad. As a result, they often end up knowing the area, its language, its politics, customs, police systems, local geography and so on very well. Although the old-style Soviet intelligence officer who was raised in the shadow if not the institutions of the Komintern and could recruit agents through appeals to an international revolutionary ideology are long since past, the newest generation of Soviet intelligence officers can be quite effective by trading on their precise knowledge of target personalities and the problems and frustrations of the countries in which they operate.

A KGB officer is ranked in his service by two systems. He progresses up the ladder from junior lieutenant to senior lieutenant and so on up to colonel and general. At the same time, he is classified as a junior case officer, case officer or senior case officer and then as he progresses further by his position, such as Rezident, which he may hold. His pay depends on his ranking in both hierarchies and there is no necessary coincidence between where he stands in one and where he stands in the other. The operational designations are based on his experience and performance as an operator. His formal rank is largely based on length of service up through major or lieutenant colonel. The chain of command is designated through the operational positions rather than formal rank. For example, a major of State Security from some other part of the KGB might be transferred into the First Chief Directorate under the designation of junior case officer and find himself subordinate to a senior lieutenant who had attained the position of case officer.

The phenomenon of marked disparity between formal rank and operational designation was probably more common during the period of considerable expansion of the First Chief Directorate's personnel ten and more years ago than it is today. At that time officers from other branches of the service were being brought into the First Chief Directorate more frequently than they are now. Nevertheless, the emphasis on operational experience and operational ability continues to be a marked element of the KGB style. The top officers in the service, for example, usually involve themselves directly in operations. They meet and develop agent candidates, they recruit and they handle agents.

In part this is a consequence of the strongly operational orientation of the KGB as a whole. A direct involvement in operations comes naturally to almost everyone in the organization. This operational orientation is manifest also in the concentration of relatively few cases per case officer. Generally, one man may handle four or five agents or targets under development. He is not expected to spread his range of intelligence activities further, although he may well be encouraged to develop a large circle of casual contacts from whom a relatively small number of serious targets may be selected.

From the foregoing one can see that the typical KGB officer is a man who sees himself in a strict vertical chain of command. He expects to do everything necessary for his operation without much outside help, except in technical matters. Depending upon circumstances, the case officer may be closely guided by the Rezident in a particular operation, but he is not supposed to discuss it with anyone else. (Gossip and shop-talk are endemic, however, in part to overcome the excessive official compartmentation.) Although the case officer is held strictly to account for the results of his actions, he is not expected to report on day-to-day developments to headquarters and in fact the capacity of his communications system is far too limited to permit him to do so. He is street-oriented in the concept of his job and does not put in a lot of time at the desk writing reports, reading guidance from headquarters or maintaining his files. When he has a problem he takes it up with his boss and he is generally not expected to have many problems. He is supposed to know the difference between what he really needs consultation about and what he ought to be able to handle on his own.

His boss in turn has the responsibility of not only guiding the case officers that work for him, but of ensuring that vital information pertinent to the work of one case officer but acquired through another is made available. In both operational guidance and information sharing, the role of the Rezident is crucial. There is virtually no lateral distribution of communications and an extreme emphasis on compartmentation. Although the rigid compartmentation of the system is probably a major vulnerability, superiors both in the field and headquarters are usually able to keep up with each case because they are not overwhelmed with paper. Relatively primitive (in terms of capacity) communications equipment and the custom that each officer prepare his own reports and keep them brief make it possible for such reports as do get written to be read all the way up the chain of command. The general in command of the First Chief Directorate has been reported on several occasions as reading all the incoming traffic. Much of the outgoing traffic is also signed personally by him.

The strictness of the chain of command and the limited amount of communications place a great weight of responsibility on each Rezident and on each case officer. As with all Soviet officials, KGB case officers have a norm to fulfill for the year and are usually called to account for their activities during part of the annual home leave in the Soviet Union. In a system like that, if something goes wrong, someone must be found to have been responsible. This can encourage an extreme of caution, particularly when the relations between case officer and the Rezident are not of the best or when the headquarters desk officer is not cooperative and understanding of the problems in the field.

Although we are accustomed to think of Soviet organizations as highly impersonal, in the KGB personalities and the private connections of individual officers are often crucial to the success or failure of an operation -- or a career. In many ways, the KGB is an organization made to order for the man who wants to claim all the glory for himself and put all the mistakes on the backs of his subordinates. Family connections or other personal contacts have special significance in this sort of an organization because they can provide a secure and effective second channel for communication in a system in which there is otherwise only one narrow route watched over by jealous monitors for all the messages an officer may want to send.

The emphasis on the role of the individual in the organization also has its advantages, of course. A capable officer, particularly one from an influential family, working under a Rezident who knows his business and will accept responsibility is likely to find himself in a stimulating work environment that may compensate very well for shortcomings of the service or the Soviet system as a whole that might otherwise disturb him.

While the KGB style as outlined above is in many ways admirably suited to running operations, it appears to have limitations in the way it makes use of the product of its operations and in evaluating whether the operations themselves are really worthwhile. There are enough instances on record to permit the generalization that in political matters especially Moscow is often reluctant to receive bad news. The ambitious case officer may find himself frustrated by pressure to conform, either from his Rezident or from Moscow, when he tries to report things as he sees them. To a large degree this is probably an inevitable manifestation of the extreme isolation from the outside world in which the Soviet policy makers live and their lack of exposure to unwelcome information. In addition, the emphasis on operations as such and the overall environment of the KGB, which is predominantly an internal security, criminal investigation, and antisubversive organization, probably discourages the kind of critical intellect by whom frank reporting, regardless of its content, is most prized.

This last consideration, the emphasis on an investigative, operational style at the expense of analytical curiosity, may well be the source of considerable tension within the First Chief Directorate today. Bigoted and inflexible ultimate consumers are problems enough. But also the older generation of KGB officers, including many of today's Rezidenty, was largely trained in war time and internal security operations. Their juniors, speaking broadly, are more academically inclined, more tempted to discourse on their theories, more interested in foreign societies and politics per se and less dedicated to fulfilling the obligations of the party and the state. They are often perceptive and realistic about developments not only abroad, but also in their own country. Bearing in mind the importance of personal relations and the dependence of juniors on seniors in the rigid chain of command, the signs we see these days of tension and cynicism among these younger officers should not be surprising.

As they rise in the KGB, we may see some organizational changes over time. If these changes preserve the laconic style of communication while at the same time do away with some of the most cumbersome and archaic aspects of the communications and records keeping systems, the KGB could become an even more formidable institution than it is today. The problem of encouraging intelligence analysis and imaginative, critical thinking is a problem for Soviet society as a whole. As a part of that society, the KGB shares the problem, but probably not in greater degree than other Soviet institutions and possibly less than many.

Judgments about the influence the KGB style has on KGB officers as individuals, about the implications for KGB operations of the way they do business, about the relevance of the style to Western operations against Soviet targets, and about many other related matters lead us beyond the scope of this note which, as stated in the introductory paragraph, hopes only to raise an interesting topic for further comment. If this piece succeeds in making the point that KGB organizational style is important to Western intelligence and that we should concern ourselves with it more than we have, it will have served its purpose.

[Apr 18, 2018] The topic of China is delicate here in Russia. If one considers the total and basically psychotic enmity from the West, offer of friendship from China is a godsend.

Notable quotes:
"... The topic of China is delicate here in Russia. If one considers the total and basically psychotic enmity from the West, offer of friendship from China is a godsend. ..."
"... If you read very carefully the articles written by high level advisors of Putin, you would see that they harbor no illusions. Russia itself contains a significant number of former apparatchiks whose "Russian soul" evolved through the 1990s to a point exactly resembling what you described about the Chinese. I am convinced that president Putin is a patriot, and when he meets this type of people, he recognized right away what they were, whether they were Russian or Chinese. ..."
Apr 18, 2018 | thesaker.is

Antoni on April 15, 2018 , · at 10:49 am UTC

Shame on Arabs and China! My personal experience with Chinese convinced me that the real God for them is money. Beside collecting money by any means possible, these people have no other issue to talk or discuss. They had shown zero interest in the geopolitics or the dire situation of the planet, or suffering of humanity. They did not show any emotional or sentiment towards what is happening in the World.

Majority of them express some kind of inferiority complex towards West. China Will soon or later betray Russia, They do not think about any higher moral or human value, heroism, solidarity, except for collecting money.

But the Number one betrayal came from Arabs, 22 Arab countries, and some 90% of them are happy in their slave minded status. They are the biggest disgrace for humanity and Muslims. Some of them are more aggressive then their masters in the West.

If not for the virus of Wahabism which infected the body of many Muslims, there could emerge a true alliance of Orthodox Christians and True Muslims. Such an alliance would be undefeatable, even without money worshiping China.

Charles on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:31 pm UTC
Antoni, you know obviously what you are talking about. Especially since I myself am Chinese, and spent almost two decades coordinating the visit of Chinese officials and business folks to US, on behalf of the US government. This was my previous career, before I abandoned it and moved to Russia.

The topic of China is delicate here in Russia. If one considers the total and basically psychotic enmity from the West, offer of friendship from China is a godsend. One would not want to speak too undiplomatically about the Chinese mentality, and the current state of Chinese National psyche.

If you read very carefully the articles written by high level advisors of Putin, you would see that they harbor no illusions. Russia itself contains a significant number of former apparatchiks whose "Russian soul" evolved through the 1990s to a point exactly resembling what you described about the Chinese. I am convinced that president Putin is a patriot, and when he meets this type of people, he recognized right away what they were, whether they were Russian or Chinese.

The overseas Russian get very emotional at such trying times for their motherland. I more than relate to that. But they show a natural tendency to idealize everything about Russia, and gets instantly suspicious on hearing a different opinion. The same eagerness to believe is now extended to the new great Asian ally of Russia. I wrote something a couple of days ago to the same effect. The moderator even did not allow me to post. I hope now that this war charade has temporarily abated, the moderator would regain a minimal level of calmness and openness for dialogue.

Darius on April 15, 2018 , · at 3:30 pm UTC
"Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth." – Mahatma Gandhi

Hizbullah, Persia, Russia vs China

The real power and fearlessness is not about numbers. It is about soul and its vibrant energetic radiation.
How can a small movement of people like Hizbullah be more vibrant and fearless and outspoken against oppression and international criminals then the so called giant nation of China?
How could Bolivia a small nation can be so to the point then China?

How can Iran (Persia) with its 70 millions people and totally surrounded by Kosher Nostra mafia can be so brave and standing tall against the international oppressors of humanity in compare to China, which doing practically nothing?
It is not about numbers, it is about power of soul, about life philosophy, about way of life, about believe in true and one God. So that is way Persians historically influenced humanity more then anything China can dream of.
There is reason why King Cyrus, is mentioned several times in Bible. There is a reason why Saadi poetry about humanity is written in the entrance of UN:

Human beings are members of a whole,
In creation of one essence and soul.
If one member is afflicted with pain,
Other members uneasy will remain.
If you've no sympathy for human pain,
The name of human you cannot retain!

"Saadi Persian poet"

But perhaps, the most significant solid power and force which has not only the soul of justice, solidarity and humanity, but even instrument of physical power and ability to fight back a total war is Mother Russia. Despite its shortcomings, Russia is a gift from God, Russia is the historic Rom of our time, mentioned in Sura 30 of Quran (30:1-5 "To Whom Power Belongs" Declares the truth of the universe).

Russia may be is the second period of Zul-Qarnain mentioned in the Sura 18 of Quran. Russia is an exceptional Caucasian (White race, i personally do not believe in race ) people, (if we exclude Persians as Caucasians) which does not participate in the oppression of non-Europeans and blocking the total subjugation of planet by Western and its minions.

When you talk with Russians and Westerners, you will immediately recognize the difference. Russians are not arrogant and it is exactly what Quran describing a kind of Christians, who are not arrogant, but a people with love and affection. I have no illusions, but i talking in general terms, i talking about sum of all vectors and direction of this common vector.
Numbers are not important, historically majority always were wrong. Truth is still truth even you are a minority.

So, the conclusion is that, if I am right and if Russia is righteous and just and hold on rope of God, no force of this plant can defeat Russia. Russia does not need China, China is not a nation of ideology, faith or religion, they only believe in money, which is also the god of Western world and its minions. China is not a natural ally of Mother Russia, natural ally of Russia is nations with believe in God, justice, solidarity, soul and judgment day.
My personal encounter with Chinese convinced me that they have a completely different mindset and I was completely disappointed.

With love and respect to Russia and its heroic people

Charles on April 15, 2018 , · at 9:58 pm UTC
Yow Darius my man, you speak the truth. It is fire and light in one's soul, and nothing else. And if one might add, a preparedness to die, a simplicity and gentleness of character. Labels mean nothing.

Degeneration afflicted many nations, comes in many forms, it can be a well-mannered and finely dressed German so proud of himself, it can be an oily and greedy petty Chinese businessman, it can be a Mercedes driving Arab in front of some big hotel in Dubai.

Globalism is a satanic cult of our times. They are huge in numbers, but their souls are small, enslaved, and twisted. We have no fear of them. Keep well brother.

Ahmed on April 15, 2018 , · at 6:37 pm UTC
@Antoni

I agree with everything you said. I will take a more wait and see approach with China. I hope for the sake of the world they jump onboard. Ultimately the issue is materialism. The Anglo zios want to deal with a world in which everyone has a price on their head, so they can be easy to buyout and compromised. Since the Zionists are the one with the most capital, anyone who wants a piece of the world, will have to go through them. So that materialistic outlook the Chinese have, can be a huge opening for the zios to exploit.

The state of the Arab leaders are even more pitiful. A bunch of animals who are enslaved to their lusts, and desires. I would tell them to enjoy it, because their end will not be good. Most of them have sold out to the highest bidder(Zionists) a ling time ago.

Now the Wahhabi movement, what's left to say about this devious, malicious cult. If you're interested check this article out. It talks about the founder of the Wahhabi movement, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, and how he was in cahoots with British spy's who were looking for a way to bring down the ottoman empire. I have to do more research on this article, however as someone who has studied wahhabisim, I'm fairly certain it was a movement that had malicious intent from the beginning, regardless of the article I linked below. It's just somewhat hard to explain to non Muslim's because some of it deals with matters of theology. Anyways I enjoyed reading you're post. Peace my friend.

http://www.conspiracyschool.com/wahhabis

Pindos on April 15, 2018 , · at 10:49 am UTC
Imagine how many would die in a war. What is happening is acceptable and necessary losses. Russia and China understand this.
Anonymous on April 15, 2018 , · at 10:54 am UTC
Saker says "But what could the Russians have done?" is the right question.
Ans: Provide advanced defensive weapons well-ahead of time so that the Syrians themselves can impose a cost.

In addition what the Russians have already done, why is Russia not selling advanced anti-ship and anti-aircraft weapons to countries in the cross-hairs of the West? Often, they talk about selling S-300 to Syria. Now imagine, Syria has Bastion, anti-sub weapons, and S-300. There will be costs to the West in this case. I think, this possibility is something Russia can do. Why wait, as it is obvious that promises by the West are basically lies. (Despite, dismantling the CW, the same argument is used to justify the attack. The Skripal case uses this method against Russia itself.)

What has the Russians got by withholding the sale of such weapons? What is the Russian calculus?

Arioch on April 17, 2018 , · at 8:48 am UTC
> What has the Russians got by withholding the sale of such weapons?

Those weapons was not re-sold to USA to make them research it and either clone or devise countermeasures or both

James2 on April 15, 2018 , · at 10:55 am UTC
Russia may take the issue economic route

They should target key UK business Like BP and other British entities and exclude them from the Russian Market – force majeur can be put into effect

Then do the same with the French

They don't need China for this.

the pessimist on April 15, 2018 , · at 10:57 am UTC
The attack was pretty clearly highly coreographed and followed strict rules that were not violated. The US provided a turkey shoot for the Syrian AD restricting the missile flight path to lanes with no typical deviations to confuse the AD. I'm sure this is what the Russians required in order to guarantee no response from them.

So there are a number of important questions here.

There was insistence that an attack must occur, despite Russian objections. The US and Russian militaries worked out a way for this to occur as safely as possible. Good that they pulled it off safely as it implies a high level of competence and discipline on both sides.

It seems likely from public behavior that the Pentagon thought this a bad idea and was fully aware of the dangers.

Where is Trump on this and was he forced to acquiesce?

It also seems clear that the pressure on Russia has not diminished and that the 'allies' intend to try and force an agreement on Syria through Geneva process that partitions the country and likely deposes Assad.

The Russian side said that the president of Russia had been insulted/disrespected and that there would be consequences for this action.

There has not been much effective push back in Europe to this policy of direct confrontation.

China is wearing a mask in public but is not pleased and has offered some diplomatic support in public.

I rate the situation as highly dangerous, unpredictable, with a great deal going on behind the scenes.

the pessimist on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:33 am UTC
As an addendum b over at moa has pointed out in his summary that while the US Defense Dept is claiming only 3 targets Russian and Syrian sources claim many more, specifically airports. I also read that B1s, I believe, used laser guided bombs in the attack and I have no idea what the targets were as all discussion has focused only on the cruise missiles. Perhaps more sites were targeted than was agreed upon.

Also, regarding the Skripal poisoning, Russia has obtained the evidence of BZ use from the Swiss OPCW lab, perhaps through back channels. I see this as hopeful – Russia does have friends in Europe, although the remain afraid or without the power to assist openly.

the pessimist on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:57 pm UTC
Postings in various places suggest that the US deviated from the agreed on plan and that the Russian jets that scrambled near the end of the attack put a stop to further deviations. Perhaps a broken promise like this led to the specific assertions of disrespect.

Thanks to the Saker especially and all the commenters for this forum and the robust discussion.

Mark Hadath on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:04 am UTC
The Saker's frustration is clear and valid.

However, I think Russian behaviour is consistent with the long game strategy. Syria lost three buildings and its citizens were celebrating in the streets. The US had the bulk of its missiles shot down. This is quite simply posturing by the Empire. I don't think the last 48 hours add to the perception the US can whatever it wants whenever it wants. If anything its the opposite.

I think the US will try again. Its attempt will be no more powerful or successful than what just occurred. They will continue to do so for many years yet. They will continue the delusional narrative delivered ad nauseam to its own people for another decade at least.

My point is that as each month goes by, it matters less.

The American hrandstanding is becoming white noise.

I am encouraged by the last 48 hours. I admire Russian restraint. I have for years now and I expect to continue to do so for some time yet.

ReneR on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:04 am UTC
What Russia does imo is trying to buy time.

As former analyses of you spoke of, the russians Lack the number of planes etc the Wallstreet-fascists have. This time they will use to speed up the stuff they need. The stuff Putin spoke off in his march speech. The provocation as much to to with it I guess.

And time Saker is not at the Side of the US, as the petro dollar Will be replaced and their debts Will reach astronimical figures. Remember China is a creditor of this fascist regime. Simply stop funding this moron shit. Why did China buy worthless state-papers from the US??

The americans didnt dare to kill Any russian a hoge difference to the event Pompeo was bluffing about. So ..?

Nathan on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:22 am UTC
China bought the worthless state-papers from the US because it give it's leader's the good life and the illusion of great wealth. If they sell off the Treasuries than that illusion with evaporate in hyperinflation. The Russians are only waist deep into the Global Economy, they probably can crawl out with some effort -- the Chinese are up to their eyeballs in it, they cannot.
one minion on April 16, 2018 , · at 8:26 am UTC
China was being pragmatic and keeping its major market afloat. Little point in being the factory of the world if the world stops buying what you produce through lack of liquidity.
I have faith in the Chinese leadership–they are ordinary people like everyone else but their culture and mindset gives them a clever edge that the west has lost, long ago.
Guest on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:07 am UTC
China is not bowing down. They however don't play the game with the same strategy as Russia does.
Jacobs Ladder on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:13 am UTC
It is indeed not over, because in history there is seldom a clear beginning and an end.

However, the Saker is being too pessimistic. The FUKUS coalition avoided the Russian positions (ie showed a wariness and respect), and Syria did stand tall in defending herself.

For Russia to have taken the bait and reacted reflexively would have been counterproductive. As things stand, no escalation occurred, and Russia comes out looking cool-headed and mature. In effect the good guys.

The US is in sharp decline. It's current behaviour demonstrates that it is in the final stages of Empire. Time is on Russia and China's side. To engage the US unless absolutely necessary would work to favour the US and against the rising powers of China and Russia.

Martin Giuffrida on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:14 am UTC
Kevin Barrett re-posted a Gordon Duff censored article re the SAA capturing a Takfiri chemical weapons facility in East Ghouta with western weapon components and reporting the capture of AZ personnel:

https://kevinbarrett.heresycentral.com/2018/04/duff-fb/

Some excerpts:
"The Syrian Arab Army and with the help of Russian captured a shipment of chemical weapons destined for the Eastern Ghouta. These were British weapons produced at Porton Down in Salisbury.
"American, British and Israeli military personnel captured in Syria have confirmed they were ordered to stage chemical attacks in East Ghouta by their governments.
"The Americans are still being held along with Israeli's while British prisoners are being negotiated for. Sources in Damascus told us that representatives of Oman in Damascus approached the Russian Office of Reconciliation on behalf of Britain for the return of British chemical warfare personnel.
"The shells are identified as VX gas from British stockpiles.
"Russian officials in Syria informed Britain through Oman that they would have to directly deal with Syria for the return of their personnel. We have received no further information since, Damascus has remained silent on how or if negotiations were proceeding.
"Last week, VT Damascus received evidence that Americans, US Army Special Forces along with Israeli chemical weapons officers had been captured in East Ghouta. We were told that not only was a command facility captured with modern weapons but a stockpile of British made 81mm poison gas mortar shells, numbering in the hundreds, was seized as well.
"Videos were viewed by former MOD weapons specialists who identified the green stripe on the shells seized in East Ghouta as VX gas from British stockpiles."

Just pencil in that article.

My comment:
Regarding Russian response, my feeling is Russia recived plenty of assurance the US was unwilling to hit Russian facilities, and got special corridors for attacks. The Russians could sit this out and watch and the US failed in a major way again militarily against only Syrian defenses. I think it is a wise principle for Russia to avoid the temptation to reveal the real power of its weapons prematurely until there is a real need for them at which time they may be a rather significant surprise.
-Martin

Nathan on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:15 am UTC
Saker,

I view Russia's position as unassailable. After the bombing of Friday night is it even conceivable that the US could ever gain air superiority over the Russian homeland? Yes the attack was made with second-tier missiles at third-rate targets without the element of surprise and poorly coordinated, but it was still easily repelled by a combination of Soviet-era junk and modern EW equipment and radars. Even those in the West who are apathetic, if they are listening at all before they change the channel, must at some unconscious level realize that the US could not have a "perfect" air strike with over a hundred missiles and destroy only three unoccupied buildings.

A conventional WWIII of any length of time will destroy the Global Economy. The Russians will win easily simply because they are tougher and more prepared. They may not desire that outcome, but of all people they probably have the best chance to survive. Except if the nukes end up being released by accident or through escalation. So the Russians, being just about the only moral actors around, have a moral responsibility not to fight back until there is no other choice.

NOTE: Not that all western nations or the people within them are immoral actors, the greater population and smaller countries are just bystanders.

sallysdad on April 15, 2018 , · at 2:24 pm UTC
I am not convinced the US used second-tier missiles. These were launched from active duty warships and I can only assume it is the standard cruise missile weapon employed. There is way too much not yet known about the details of this operation.
If, and it is a big "if", the missiles moved along agreed corridors, it is not surprising so many were shot down.
As I say, so much is not yet known.
Nathan on April 16, 2018 , · at 12:21 am UTC
I always figure that the best stuff is under wraps, although available in no great quantity.

BTW, I think a technology that isn't discussed much is passive detection systems, which may have taken the element of surprise away from standoff weapons.

pogohere on April 16, 2018 , · at 8:46 pm UTC
The A-Ha Moment.

Sunday, April 15, 2018

Here comes this important question of purely tactical nature which many flag-waving uber-patriots miss completely, while, I am sure, Pentagon and not only, is puzzled with what went wrong. The question is not about excellent performance of Syrian AD–what and how about this performance are being unveiled with each passing hour. Russian EW? Absolutely, no doubt it. Massive shooting down of Tomahawks and Scalpel TLAMs? Absolutely. But, but what about JASSMs. It is conceivable that these were they Trump was bragging about in his idiotic twits when spoke about those "Smart" missiles that "are coming". There are still no firm numbers about the number of intercepted JASSMs, what is clear, however, is the fact that many of them were intercepted. If JASSM passes today for "Smart", it kind of puts good ol' Tomahawks, logically, into the category of "Dumb". Obviously, as latest Syria's experience shows, Tomahawks are not an overwhelming threat, as they were positioned as for decades, for truly (not in Saddam Hussein's, or, rather US media, way) highly integrated and EW capable air-defense system.

But JASSMs, "stealthy" and supposedly "Smart", even by preliminary data pouring in didn't fare much better than Tomahawks and this was against Syrian AD assets which are pretty damn old. So, what about "stealth"? Ah, but in the modern signal processing, including well developed now sensor-fusion (or data-fusion) techniques it really doesn't matter for advanced adversary. But that is purely technological aspect, however influential for operational and strategic levels. Truly global, geopolitical issue is this, as Apps concludes:

Therein lies one of the greatest challenges of this situation. In 1990, after Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, the George H. W. Bush administration was relieved to find that Russia – then still in the hands of Mikhail Gorbachev – was inclined to avoid turning the conflict into a Cold War-style standoff. In the years that followed, successive U.S. presidents became used to acting without such worries. Putin has now successfully signaled that those days are entirely over.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/search/label/JASSM

Izaates bar Monobazeus on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:16 am UTC
No it ain't over. It has just begun. Call it the great tribulation or Jacob's troubles or whatever you like but understand we have another half dozen years to go. In any event Daniel says Damascus will have terror fall upon it at night and become a smoking ruin byvmorning. So Damascus will fall to align reality with prophecy. The ultimate vanity.
Anonymous on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:17 am UTC
"The Chinese and the rest of them are not willing to do anything at this time to support Russia."

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-15/china-arrogant-us-has-record-launching-wars-deceptive-grounds

Anon on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:17 am UTC
Yes, it's over.

The recent events are complete theatre but the first act is about setting up the second act.

In the second act, America's tough actions force Iran Russia and Syria to the negotiating table where a grand accord is hammered out.

In the third act, the Empire cuts its losses and gets the fuck out of the ME because it no longer has interests there. Israel BTFO. KSA BTFO. They are really the worst allies ever.

In the epilogue Russia becomes the main broker in the ME and balances out the competing interests while keeping the peace. France and England BTFO. Nobody wants these douche bags around anymore. America goes back to squabbling in South America and Asia where it arguably does have strategic interests.

FURNARIUS on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:19 am UTC
The world Zio-Massonic movement has just shown that it can not dispense with provocations and plots that can unleash bloody world wars.

The United Nations are a farce and should be dismantled!

Just remembering, it is always England and Judea that press for war as they did in 1938-1939 or release the great and relentless butcher – the only true holocaust – 1914-1918 !

Jake on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:20 am UTC
There is another possibility: These "empty strikes" were strictly intended for domestic consumption. Consider: The US openly telegraphed the coming strikes. Syria and Russia cleared some areas for the West to hit that would result in no injuries to personnel and limited damage to infrastructure. The West dutifully hit those evacuated areas and proclaimed "Mission Accomplished". Syrians danced in the streets for "surviving" the missile strikes while Russia threatened consequences. What form those consequences take will tell us if these countries are merely dancing a rather peculiar dance together or whether they are about to starting fighting in earnest. So far Russia has been playing it cool as a cucumber, but these strikes – empty as they might have been – demand some sort of response or Russia will risk looking weak. The fly in the ointment is Israel and their attack on an Iranian base within Syria that reportedly killed 20 Iranian officers. Will that loss of life influence Russia's response after the West made every effort to avoid drawing blood?
Anonymous on April 15, 2018 , · at 3:59 pm UTC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF60VV3G3_Y
mike k on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:28 am UTC
Saker, many commenters here give me the impression that they will go to any lengths to reassure themselves that we are not teetering on the brink of all out nuclear war. All of their theories and reasonings seem to avoid facing that grim reality. Is that also your impression, or have I misjudged your position?
Simon Chow on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:30 am UTC
I think this blog may have misread China. I think I can read the Chinese mind and the 'Western' more subtly since I am ethnic Chinese but educated in the 'West'. But I follow Sun Tzu and therefore will not expound anymore on China's strategy as far as the Yanks are concern lest they are wised up.

Suffice to say that a catastrophic decline of the empire ala the Ottoman Empire which led to WW1 and WW2 due to fighting over the spoils, is on nobody's interests, not even Russia's.

The best case scenario is to ease the Yanks into a break-up ala the late great USSR.

China's economic, diplomatic and political strength will be critically needed to do this and to rebuild the new independent states of Western North America, Eastern North America and the Southern Confederation.

Anonymous on April 16, 2018 , · at 6:37 am UTC
A Chinese Empire with its new social contract would be like jumping from the frying pan into the fire.
Simon Chow on April 16, 2018 , · at 9:20 am UTC
Anonymous. No Chinese empire. The Chinese don't want to occupy other countries. Too troublesome ruling them. Philippines president Duterte recently suggested half-jokingly that the Chinese should just make the Philippines a Chinese province. China don't want that. Just to make the Philippines more prosperous and stable in order to trade with it – which is far better. If China wanted make the Philippines as its own province, She would have done so 600 years ago when Admiral Zheng He sailed his then unmatchable in the South China Sea and onwards to India, Persian Gulf, Africa and possibly beyond.
Bro 93 on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:35 am UTC
Over?

"It ain't over till it's over." Yogi Berra

Which means never, unless you're talking about the individual organism, is it "over".

So get over it never being over.

What would you (we) do if it were "over"? Contemplate our navels??

Oh, you mean stress inducing bluster , bluff and brinksmanship of a dying entity. What else has it got, except blowing itself and everybody else up?

Patience, perserverance. Look at the reaction in the US. Don't forget this terrain, even if Trump's Unreality Show self destructs.

Is there progress? I think there is. None but the most cretinous deplorables are so stupid as to cheer the Donald in the last week. Most are dismayed.

And even Alex Jones is allowing open talk of Israel's Empire role in putting DT on this war mongering course that those who buy his supplements refuse to buy .:

https://youtu.be/IabdFIMCTfM

Although Dr P is the one to explicitly state that Israel is a total liability.

So I wouldn't quibble too much about AJ and his mistakes and prejudices. Weaker on Israel than you would like but as good on Russia as you can expect.

Stupid on China. But Dr P isn't. And anyone watching can see that and see that AJ panders to his base's fears and prejudices.

But if they are wising up on Israel (as they have!) they can wise up on China and the whole picture, as well.

Who would want that process of improving consciousness to end, to be "over"??

To relax go back to what??

Actually, I like Snow Leopard's comment the most. And I am contemplating a surgical procedure on my navel, soon. It's just that Action is part of Being, and I see certain actions other than handwringing and brow wiping being more productive right now. Especially in terms of encouraging the process in the US where increasing numbers of people are realizing they have to think and act to grease the skids for the out of touch geriatrics like McCain, Feintsein, Pelosi, etc .or DT will go out with them, if he keeps acting just as ridiculously untruthful as they are.

one minion on April 16, 2018 , · at 9:16 am UTC
'ridiculously untruthful' -- - that and deceit is the sea that the Donald has swum in his entire life, do you really believe that he could recognise reality if it smashed him in the face like a two ton truck?
Precious little chance of that happening in this lifetime, I'd say. It is by now part of his cell make-up and ineradicable.
Ahsahyah on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:54 am UTC
The US has backed Russia into a DEEP, DEEP corner . Sooner or later Russia will have to respond to the AmeriKKKan madness or surrender and become a vassal State like Europe, Australia, Canada, Japan and South Korea .After Syria is Iran and China. If Russia goes so is China. Now is the time to stand upp to AmeriKKKa (the empire of chaos)
Check out the work of Dr. Paul Craig Roberts.org and Professor William Engdahl
Simon Chow on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:57 am UTC
All I can say at this stage is that Sun Tzu said not to fight out of anger, fear or enemy's provocation to a fight. Russia should stay cool. Pick carefully the battlefield (not necessarily a battlefield like Borodino), pick her own fight (not necessarily in the battlefield with guns and missiles but just as decisive) and pick the issues to fight for. This way retain the initiative and not let the enemy drive and maneuver Russia. Drive and maneuver the enemy instead.

The full-frontal 'love-in' with the Germans in WW2 is a no no type of war to be avoided. If unavoidable, must be very well prepared. But both the West and the semi-West seem addicted to the prospect of such an 'orgasmic' love-in. They seems locked into the paradigm of such logic. But beneath the rationalisation is simply a love for war.

Here is an extract from Richard Lovelace on the English Civil War. He reflects accurately on what, me as an Oriental, views as what drives the West's and the semi-West's mindset to war:

1) Tell me not (Sweet) I am unkind,
That from the Nunnery
Of thy chaste breast, and quiet mind,
To War and Arms I flee.

2) True, a new Mistress now I chase,
The first Foe in the Field;
And with a stronger Faith embrace
A Sword, a Horse, a Shield.

3) Yet this inconstancy is such
As you too shall adore;
I could not love thee, Dear, so much,
Loved I not War.

Some version replace the last line in stanza 3) with: "Loved I not Honour more". But you get the drift. "war" and "Honour" (in or through war), are essentially the same.

So Russians, please calm down.

Anonymous on April 16, 2018 , · at 1:29 am UTC
Speaking of Borodino, we must not lose sight of the fact that the Russians not only repelled Napoleon, but crushed him definitively in the end (thing somehow overlooked in 'histories' of the 1812-14 war genre 'War and Peace') and reorganized Europe on their own terms. Of course, it did not last too long (due to the usual British treachery), but the subsequent attempts to destroy Russia ended in the same way. Now if Hitler has not learned anything from Napoleon, how do you expect a Tramp like Donald, to learn anything from Hitler (and the Kaiser and Napoleon, for that matter)?
Simon Chow on April 16, 2018 , · at 6:32 am UTC
Yeah, the Yanks know about Borodino. So unlikely they will attack that way. They are trying to provoke Russia into making a mistake and self-impale!
one minion on April 16, 2018 , · at 9:31 am UTC
I am in complete agreement with you Simon. All indications are that Mr Putin and team has a firm grasp on reality also, whatever that may bring in the future. It may not be too pretty for the western sphere but delusion and rank stupidity never has a pretty outcome.
Albrecht on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:58 am UTC
Not over. Not even close. The reason this isn't over is that the causes and conditions causing the root of the problem have not been dealt with. The cause of the problem can only be dealt peacefully through diplomacy. In the Empire's current configuration diplomacy is near impossible as there is no competent partner to negotiate with on this side. The Empire will signal their openness to negotiation by removing Bolton aka Captain Crunch, Haley and their ilk. This doesn't seem likely and I'm not sure who a competent replacement would be.

In short, prepare for war.

Mike Reich on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:00 pm UTC
Russia needs to sell to Syria and to Iran ~30 nukes each plus delivery vehicles able to reach New York (thus also Israel, Paris, London). Also S400 systems to protect nukes enough to guarantee launch. Syria and Iran then declare next attack from any of the Gang of Four states will mean a nuclear response to all.
mikhas on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:01 pm UTC
You forgot to mention that without adults Mattis & Dunford, WW3 would have started the last time they "bombed" Syria, now because of they talked the volatile, impulsive and emotional Trump out of it, it landed on a compromise, on Moscow's terms.
Alan on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:06 pm UTC
The PRC is one of the only other 2countries that supported the Russian UN resolution, so it's not clear to me what the Saker is referring to re "just standing by" ? Do you expect PRC to send troops to Syria? has Syria or Russia made such a request or invitation? Do you know if such a move by the PRC has wide support by the Chinese public? Please do not respond with nonsense like public opinions don't matter in china. The Chinese government uses public opinion polls frequently and widely. Fact is I believe majority of Chinese are also affected by all the lies from the western msm, especially the well educated elites, most of whom studied in the West. This explains why their Global Times pieces tend to be much more pro Russia than their better educated elites
grrr on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:35 pm UTC
Diplomacy??? It degraded beyond recognition. We used to have the likes of Jeane Kirkpatrick. Now we have geniuses like Samantha Powers and Nikki Haley. We also had a joke of an ambassador to Saddam's Iraq that triggered 1-st Iraq war, although I tend to think (more and more lately) that her blurb to Saddam was a deliberate in order to advance Bush's understanding of his "new world order" idea.
Serbian girl on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:52 pm UTC
Yes, but the previous UNSC meeting where Russia submitted a text requesting a full and objective investigation of the chemical attack in Syria only Bolivia voted yes. China abstained! So Russia looked isolated just prior to the attack
Hydro on April 15, 2018 , · at 3:11 pm UTC
China abstained on the US-sponsored "poison pill" resolution which was set up to be vetoed, and allowed the US to say they tried to resolve the chemical attack diplomatically but since the resolution was vetoed the only avenue left is to retaliate by missile strikes. However, China voted FOR the "clean" Russian-sponsored resolution to investigate but this seems to be lost.
Serbian girl on April 15, 2018 , · at 9:29 pm UTC
Yes you are right. So there we're a total 4 resolutions. 3 resolutions on chemical weapons investigation and 1 on violation of international and UN charter.

For the chemical weapons: Russia submitted 2 resolutions and US 1. None of them passed. China abstained on one, the US one, which Bolivia and Russia vetoed. Here are the links:

Security council fails to adopt three resolutions on chemical weapons use in Syria
https://news.un.org/en/story/2018/04/1006991

And then there was last one on violation of international law and UN charter also didn't pass:

Russia's UNSC resolution calling to stop aggression against Syria does not receive enough votes
https://www.rt.com/news/424171-unsc-russia-resolution-syria/

grrr on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:19 pm UTC
It is impossible to quickly overcome a ~30 years misguided attempt to impose physical hegemony forever. No complex dynamical system deviates from stable trajectory for too long and too far without breaking apart. And since nobody wants (or foolish enough not to be afraid) of a WWIII (a.k.a. breaking the system apart), the US will be forced to change its guiding principle of perpetuating its sole hegemony. Hopefully sooner than later and peacefully.
ThereisaGod on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:21 pm UTC
Is Putin not putting himself at a huge disadvantage if he allows the carriers group now crossing the Atlantic to get close to Syria and Russia. As this confrontation is obviously not over should Russia not draw a red line at the straits of Gibraltar or somewhere?

I don't understand military issues but can see that the USA/UK/France cannot in the slightest way, be trusted to do anything other than wait for what they perceive to be a moment of advantage, then attack.

Coast Guard on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:34 pm UTC
I saw him in a fastboat carrying an RPG. He'll be stopping the carrier task force momentarily.
Don't worry. They won't get close to Syria.
Justice coming for US on April 15, 2018 , · at 1:22 pm UTC
I understand he has a "Dagger" or six under his arm. Not only will that stop the Carrier Group, it will place it where it belongs. At the bottom of the sea.
ReneR on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:24 pm UTC
Another possible option would be to simply bring the Warsaw pact again new life.

The US in the past didnt dare to attack pact-members in the cold war. Now we have a situation that the US considers other States as his toy for torture.

Syria, China Venezuela Belarus, and Donbass even North Korea should become members of it.

ThereisaGod on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:25 pm UTC
It is dreadful to have to wonder if the history of Donald Trump's ***** might play a major role in the continuance or otherwise of life on earth.
gatobart on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:29 pm UTC
Two days ago Vladimir Putin was handed the worst and most humilliating political (and military) defeat of his entire life, something that in other, more normal times, would have immediately forced a man in his stature to resign his post and go away (Chamberlain anyone ?) yet his own adoring fans seem to be the only ones who haven`t noticed it, preferring instead to keep living in that universe of denial they have been dwelling in for years already. What shows best the extent of this attitude of denial is the fact that they were gloating about the fact that Russia didnt even intervene–contrary to what the man himself had promised he would do only a month ago if one of Russia`s allies was attacked. By now is evident that his word is not worth the saliva that was wasted in saying it and that the US has absolutely no respect for him or for Russia. There are just two things to notice to see the truth in these words: a gloating, exulting Nimrata in the UNO, knowing well how cheap was for her and her country, or rather her neocon masters, this victory was (Russia didnt do a thing, so no WW3) and the headlines in the web "Russia furious". If there is still any doubt about this conclusion, well, beware, the Gang Of Three now plans to present to the UNSC a proposition celebrating the illegal attack on Syria of the 14th and they intend to invite ALL members of it, including Russia, to accept it and take it as a fait accompli. But that will be only a prelude for what is to come, which is of course the demand by the U.S. that the UNO accepts her way of conducting business as the norm, as something they will be able to do in every possible occasion they will wish to do it. Which means, more fake chemical attacks and more bombing in Syria until Russia is thrown out of the country. So much for our master chess player in the Kremlin. Only last year he was still insisting, against all caution and the warning of people as knowledgeable as PCR, that his first priority in foreign policy was a good relationship with Amerika, see how well he has done in this regard (Chamberlain anyone, again ?) All in all, things wont become better but much worse after this devastating defeat of the master chess player, they will only become worse until they get him and Russia cornered and with only two possible options, which we all know well. This is not about Russia being alone or being weaker than the US NATO gang, it is all about Putin`s deliberate policy of putting above everything else his vain and useless attempts at being respected and even liked by his worst enemies, the Western elites.
one minion on April 16, 2018 , · at 9:48 am UTC
I thank the gods that Mr Putin is not as simple minded as the picture you have just painted.
Nano Bagonghi on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:30 pm UTC
Regarding China. China it's a great and powerful nation with a vision and a strategy that span far in the future. His policy has always been to go on with extreme caution and as low as possibile exposure. First and foremost she takes care of his own interest, as any other, however. His main opponent is, that for sure, the "western" empire. In this long term fight, China finds herself in company of other nations who are fighting the same long term struggle. Yes, China doesn't share the same cultural, historical, ethnical heritage with Russia, wich in that regard is part of the Euro family, but shares a vital, long term surviving fight with Russia (and Iran, Syria). This is a matter of fact that can not be underestimated. So, in long term, and in spite of some annoying behavior, I'm quite sure that China will stand with Russia. I read that Chinese warships were placed in front of Syria together with Russian navy, maybe someone forgot that, this is a strong message to me.
one minion on April 16, 2018 , · at 9:51 am UTC
To me also, "This is a matter of fact that can not be underestimated."
Jean Lasson on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:31 pm UTC
Did you read this post from Paul Craig Roberts :
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/04/14/russias-humanity-moral-conscience-leading-war/ ?

I side with PCR. Only a public military humiliation can stop the Empire. Russia had a golden opportunity to inflict such an humiliation yesterday and she missed that opportunity.

Let's suppose that Russia downed as many attacking warplanes as possible, whatever their location was, plus a few ships like the USS Donal Cook. What would happen next ? Would the USA launch their strategic missiles on Russia ? I very much doubt it, since the US know as a hard fact that they would be destroyed in retaliation. MAD has been restored. The would have no military response at all and the whole world would see it. And this would have been the end of the Empire, with many vassals leaving it.

Of course, such strikes will happen again. Let's hope that Russia will strike back then.

Ozzie on April 15, 2018 , · at 10:12 pm UTC
The public is brainwashed because they are hooked to the mass media and they are the product of our "educational" system. Americans are about sports and shopping. A good portrait is the rabbits of Watership Down.

In 1958, I still believed that there was a significant intellectual difference between the American bourgeosie and the cattle one sees peering between the slats of large trucks as they contentedly munch hay on their way to the abattoir.–R. Oliver

mundanomaniac on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:32 pm UTC
Donald T' s inheritance was a loose canon. I'm sure he knew it when he ran, as a proved tower – builder, against floating sands and the satanic Hillary-fan-club.

America is in psychiatric treatment since 2014 by the spirit of the north.

April 14 was a peace of the art of political wisdom, 'taking two to tango
above the triggers of the planet's doom

Anonymous on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:34 pm UTC
London to Pressure Financially Russian Businessmen With Assets in UK – Reports

https://sputniknews.com/europe/201804151063587256-uk-russian-oligarchs-assets/

US to Impose Sanctions on Russia Over Support of Assad – Envoy to UN

https://sputniknews.com/us/201804151063584536-haley-us-troops-syria/

More sanctions against Russia to be announced on Monday – Haley

https://www.rt.com/usa/424212-us-sanctions-russia-haley/

Hank on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:35 pm UTC
Saker, no it is not over by a long shot. Haley again today (it appears she is running US foreign policy by herself) says empire gonna sanction Russia again via Treasury tomorrow. It looks like empire trying to ride the false flag chem thing to build a coalition of the "fools" against Russia or some kind of mass movement to give them cover for military action. They are furiously trying to bring massive pressure on the Russian leadership so they will back off and let them have Syria, admit US is almighty god and so they can then go after Iran. It seems US and Brits so knocked off balance by Putin and his election victory and weapons announcement that empire frantically trying to reassert that they and only they are the "decider" of right and wrong and what is moral and immoral. This will go on all of April and into May as Trump backs out of nuke deal with Iran. Then things will really get ugly and fast. And that doesn't even factor in North Korea.

I notice that Russian MOD states that the "allies" were configured to launch 300 missiles not the 110 that were sent. He indicates that they had poor planning and that no one was in charge. But, it may be that they have decided to come back for another hit when the next false flag chem attack is perpetrated probably soon. The chem thing is all they have that is working for them and that isn't much. I finally got emails announcing anti-war protests by ANSWER and I hope they will continue. I have been to some strong street actions with ANSWER in the past although impacting these monsters is nearly impossible.

I agree with you that Russia should flood both Syria and Iran with anti missile systems and they should do it now.

It looks like the Duma gonna finally sanction the US back with some pretty good things including stuffing US "intellectual" property rights in the US ass by turning Russian companies loose to use patents without paying license fees. They can also fuck up US space program and rocket programs.

Actually, Saker, I think what US empire is really up to is to create enough mass hysteria globally that they think they can build some kind of "coalition of the truly stupid" to attack Russia and take it. I honestly think they are that stupid and desperate. Because if that is not it then at some point they are going to have to back off, admit defeat and be seen as the losers they really are. They just don't have the basic decency to do that.

Best

Anonymous on April 15, 2018 , · at 3:44 pm UTC
Yes you are right about the U.S. intention to create mass hysteria , and a " coalition of the truly stupid."
The lead item on RNZ news at 5 a.m. this morning referred to the silly little girl who is currently P.M. of N.Z. condoning the U.K. /France / U.S. strike; presumably she will also support the Israel strike against Iranian assets in Syria.
Every day , the lies and propaganda start in NZ, and are halfway around the world before the truth gets out of bed.
Count on it. Thank you Rupert.
eagle eye on April 15, 2018 , · at 7:14 pm UTC
And Rupert's whores are at it in Australia as well, reporting on the grovelling snot bag Turnbull's obsequious offering of more Australian lives to lubricate the Anglo Zionist machine. I say lets put his kids in the first jet to attack Syrian positions and see if he still thinks it is worth the cost.

http://www.themercury.com.au/news/world/australia-poised-to-step-in-on-syria/news-story/8b6fbf8de47d22a197a9ce002cefcc77?utm_source=The%20Mercury&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=editorial

Anonymous on April 16, 2018 , · at 12:31 am UTC
In 2001 Australians have marched in their thousands to protest the imminent strike on Irak.
Today they blabbered non stop about the the 'tampered ball' and protesting the punishment of the cheaters and hounding the pedophile clergy.
lizzie dw on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:35 pm UTC
I appreciate your comments but do not share you perceptions. Reportedly, the USA informed Russia before they dropped the bombs. Does that make sense? Reportedly, they bombed a factory which has not been in use since 2013. Reportedly, either no one was killed or 4 unfortunate civilians were killed. Reportedly, no Russian personnel or equipment was affected. Reportedly, the 3 attacking countries dropped 103 bombs and 71 or 73 or whatever were intercepted, yet the USA said the complete opposite. "We are confident ..". Amazingly, the USA has developed a bomb, or a method of bombing, which, if it hits a factory producing chemical weapons and therefore is full of lethal substances, will not, repeat not, dissipate these into the air, thereby insuring that no one will be affected!!! (emphasis mine) I agree that some people might think that the attack actually did something, but who are they? Nobody I know. My perception is that people working in the our government are isolated and out of touch and they are the ones who had to be satisfied(?). I also think that Mr. Trump is so surrounded by liars that he can trust no one. He stated he wanted the US to leave Syria, then, shortly after, the USA performed this inane bombing attack. Maybe this is Mr. Trump's response to the immense pressure I think he gets from those around him. It was very confusing but certainly did not make me feel that our country is great again – I am just embarrassed. I feel very badly for the citizens of Syria who unfortunately live in a country located in the center of the world, surrounded by all that gas and oil.
ProtoSec on April 15, 2018 , · at 2:43 pm UTC
I have seen reports that said they did, and I have seen reports that Moscow was furious because they were not given notice on the deconfliction channel.

Its anyones guess which version is the truth,

metamars on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:39 pm UTC
"The western general public is so terminally zombified that false flag attacks can now be announced 4 weeks in advance"

Even though you live in the US, you seem sadly out of touch with what Americans know and believe. "America" is NOT your blog audience, any more than "America" is Donald Trump and the US State Department.

I found out last Thursday that my own mother took seriously the idea that Assad gassed people in Douma. So, yesterday I asked 4 of my coworkers what they thought about the US led missile attack. I was actually more interested in finding out whether they believed Assad had any culpability in Douma.

It turns out that everybody approved, including a guy that I knew for a fact was a Trump supporter (who, as a candidate, would not have approved of meddling in Syria, or at least pretended to be such). This particular guy explained by asking a question: "If you saw your neighbor beating his wife to a pulp, would you jump in to stop him, or just stand around and let it happen?"

The sense I got from everybody is that intervention was a moral act. Most zombies that I have seen in movies are, at best, amoral (assuming they have no agency).

Consequently, you are misusing the term "zombified"!

The appropriate term is "brainwashed". They believe in a pseudo-reality.

That is why the absence of a 4th category in your graph is potentially tragic. You are missing the category of communication/education, which would encompass benign (truthful) propaganda and benign (truthful) psyops, targeting the American public directly (American elites more indirectly). While this was better done as prevention, the resultiing de-legitimization of the American War Party could be thought of as retaliation.

To a person looking at things in a detached manner, prevention (going forward) is better than retaliation (looking backwards), but such considerations are secondary to solving the problem of the ignorance and brainwashing of American citizens. Doing so would provide at least fertile soil for the emergence of corrective political pressure from the bottom, up.

Do you SERIOUSLY think your own efforts, plus Russian government efforts in the form of rt.com and sputniknews.com, are sufficient to deprogram and educate Americans? (There is no disrespect for you efforts intended by asking this question.)

Then please do the following: learn how to use the video feature on your smart phone, or tablet; then do a walking video poll of passersby on some crowded street near you. (You probably won't be allowed to do so in a shopping mall, but it might be worth a try.) I suggest you use the same technique I used when doing a video poll of TPP awareness amongst the public (which proved, to my satisfaction, that polls showing popular acceptance were a complete fraud; most American HAD NEVER HEARD OF THE TPP, Pew notwithstanding). I asked people "May I ask you 1 yes/no question?" About half the people won't give you the time of day, even for that. Of those that do, maybe 1/3 will be interested in talking about it; typically, they they will ask the same question of you.

Afterwards, tabulate the results, upload the video to youtube, and write it up here.

Better yet, do this and ask you audience to do the same. Then, include the links to their youtube channels in your write-up.

You should try to get your results (which are almost sure to be similar to mine) to the Russian government, because they act AS IF they had the same viewpoint as you.

Putin could reach millions of Americans by tweeting to @realDonaldTrump, but doesn't bother. I have to wonder, why? If he assumed that the American public are all "zombies", instead of containing moral but brainwashed citizens in their 10's if not 100's of millions, then his lack of action would make more sense.

He'd be wrong, but at least his actions would logically follow from his mistaken notions.

DannyO on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:44 pm UTC
It is over. It was over in 2000 and the hammer came down in 2006. With the defeat of the anglo/zionists in Lebanon by Hezbollah it marked the beginning of the end for the occultists. Hezbollah was not actually fighting the iof but rather the combined forces of western zionist imperialism. And they won.
Iraq, Libya and now Syria are a direct result of the ouster of the baby killers from Lebanon. The chaos in the ME – the Arab bullshit spring – the propping up of the gulf monarchy muppets is panic mode by the zionist oligarchy. There is no policy only blind reactionary behaviour – this is evidenced even in the propaganda of the MSM which not only makes no sense but speaks continuous transparent lies.
The west has been forced to use moderate and not so moderate head chopper orc mercs to fight its battles. Proxy war by orc is a sign of desperation and with the collapse of the hegemon on the horizon.
The Russians and the axis of resistance is simply trying to mitigate the damage that the oligarchy can still do and keep the US and the western vassals from imploding.
Izaates bar Monobazeus on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:49 pm UTC
I think the UK is exhibiting signs of genuine fear because it has dawned on the UK elite after the miserable performance of their Three Amigo's missile strike that Russia has a special present for instigators of ww3.

The great harlot is going to fall. A smoking ruin no man will ever wish to tread. England has whored itself to the gallows.

ProtoSec on April 15, 2018 , · at 2:36 pm UTC
Mystery Babylon comes down in one hour.
One hour, that is all.
Francis Lee on April 16, 2018 , · at 2:07 am UTC
Yes, I also think that Russia is reserving a special treatment for the UK. Unfortunately I live in London!
Den Lille Abe on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:50 pm UTC
N, it is not over, that much , we agree on. But the Chinese, I believe are not short sighted nor are they stupid. The will probably not do much for Syria, but I think they will raise their voice immediately if Russia is seriously threatened. China knows if Russia falls, she is next. Iran knows this too. So I cant see other than these three will have to stand together. But other may join India, possibly, Pakistan, possibly. And possibly further some smaller countries.
But I am 100 % certain that in all these countries, the people, the knowledgeable of the people, we know that if we end up, in a unipolar world, we will be slaves and remain slaves, forever.
And those countries I just summed up are more than 3 Billion.
Brazil, Argentina, Peru, Who knows. But
Better die standing, than live crawling.

I think you underestimate how hated and despised the US is around the world. In most of the non western world, the United States story of oppression and murder is very well known and it is not forgotten. But fear keeps people in bondage, and the US has shown it will spare no excesses to reach its goal, so when the battle comes it will be long bloody and brutal.
And yes it will come.

Anonymous on April 15, 2018 , · at 9:25 pm UTC
From today's Global Times editorial, semi-official organ of the Chinese politburo:

"However, the stronger a country is, the greater the responsibility it has to maintain world peace and order. The military actions of the US and its allies have breached the framework of the United Nations and violated the foundation of modern international relations. If the will of Washington and the West represents the will of all mankind and they can punish whoever they want, why do we need the UN, or international law?

Without UN authorization, the US, UK and France behaved like rogues. No matter how touching the excuses they find for themselves, they cannot change the fact that they were lynching Syria without due evidence "

More of this in the UNSC please.

[Apr 18, 2018] Russian show with Yakov Kedmi really surprised and disturbed me

Apr 18, 2018 | thesaker.is

Paul II on April 15, 2018 , · at 10:40 am UTC

What about a fourth type of retaliation, cleaning out the financier/Zionist/pro-Western/liberal infestation inside Russia? This wouldn't require China's approval, and would lead to a much healthier and stronger Russia in the long run.

In my view, China has done far more to get itself out of AZ control and on the path to pursuing its national interests than Russia has. It is depressing to read most Russian blogs as they keep harping on what needed to be done years ago.

Martin Giuffrida on April 15, 2018 , · at 12:12 pm UTC
Yes and this Russian show with Yakov Kedmi really surprised and disturbed me:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwYcItJp4O8&t=1s

[Apr 18, 2018] More on the Skripal/Douma false flag connection

Apr 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Neve | Apr 16, 2018 3:52:13 PM | 2

Two great links at OffG

"The Skripal event and the Douma "gas attack" – two acts in the same drama?"
http://off-guardian.org/2018/04/14/the-skripal-event-and-the-douma-gas-attack-two-acts-in-the-same-drama/


"More on the Skripal/Douma false flag connection"
http://off-guardian.org/2018/04/15/46325/

[Apr 18, 2018] Chinese position of Douma false flag

Apr 18, 2018 | thesaker.is

Anonymous on April 15, 2018 , · at 9:55 am UTC

The Chinese newspaper the Global Times agrees with the Saker:

"Washington's attack on Syria where Russian troops are stationed constitute serious contempt for Russia's military capabilities and political dignity. Trump, like scolding a pupil, called on Moscow, one of the world's leading nuclear powers, to abandon its "dark path." Disturbingly, Washington seems to have become addicted to mocking Russia in this way. Russia is capable of launching a destructive retaliatory attack on the West. Russia's weak economy is plagued by Western sanctions and squeezing of its strategic space. That the West provokes Russia in such a manner is irresponsible for world peace Western countries continue bullying Russia but are seemingly not afraid of its possible counterattack. Their arrogance breeds risk and danger."

Graeme - Australia on April 15, 2018 , · at 5:28 pm UTC
Yes, I also follow the Global Times editorials, and have friends in China

Simon Chow nails it, in my opinion

America is playing checkers (or some other child's game). Russia is playing Chess, and we know how good they are at that. China is playing Chinese Chess and that is fking impossible to understand for a westerner subtle does not cover it .. and China has the father (godfather?) of all generals and military strategists, Sun Tzu . go figure

I agree, the fat lady is out there somewhere warming her vocal chords.

Sarmis2014 on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:30 pm UTC
Talking about chess In my humble opinion all the suffering and foreign occupation of Syria could end in less than a month if Russia would have the guts to threaten (behind closed doors or overtly) that if the attacks and occupation of Syria will not stop Russia will provide the weapons necessary to nullify the military superiority of Israel to all relevant enemy of Israel and of course to Syria. The timed leak in the news that Russia considers providing S-300 to Syrian is a good start but obviously not firm and strong enough, According to Paul Craig Roberts "to restate the point once again, the passivity of the Putin government in the face of Washington's aggressiveness is leading directly to nuclear war and the end of life on earth". I think Russia can be "passive" by not attacking US but can be very engage by threatening were it hurts the most the safety of Israel. Cheers
Anonymous on April 15, 2018 , · at 11:33 pm UTC
It is an old metaphor. I think it was used on Atimes years ago: Americans play Monopoly, Russians play chess. Someone added (it could have been me) and Chinese play Go! That was a response: Americans play poker, the game of the 'achievers'. The response was: Americans play poker with loaded dices' and if their bluff is called, they pull the gun and 'take it all'. If I am not mistaken, the verbal joust originated in Australia!
Graeme - Australia on April 16, 2018 , · at 1:13 am UTC
Yes, Go 围棋

From the rules:
• Sacrifice: Allowing a group to die in order to carry out a play, or plan, in a more important area.

Interesting

From the Global Times

'Drill a warning to secessionist forces'

The news that the People's Liberation Army will conduct live-fire military exercises in the Taiwan Straits on April 18 has shocked Taiwan. It is a clear warning against recent pro-independence activities on the island, especially head of Taiwan's administrative authority Lai Ching-te's advocacy for independence.

Secessionists should not fantasize that the US will come to their rescue, even though the US had passed the Taiwan Travel Act. National unity is in the core interest of China, which is determined and capable of shattering any foreign intervention. Once Beijing decides to take action, it won't be stopped by any other force.

We believe that if the mainland were to take a military strike against "Taiwan-independence" forces, Washington would have no effective means other than protest.

The planned military drills will be a reconfirmation of Beijing's bottom line. Let the bombing and shooting drills alert Taiwan, rather than letting them actually occur on the island. The mainland does not wish to end the Taiwan question with a military showdown, however, how the situation develops depends on how much rationality remains in the Taiwan administration.

The Ukraine, North Korea .. Sth China Sea .. Syria

Russia, cold war
China, trade war

America is somewhat busy at the moment.

Could it take on a direct confrontation over Taiwan?

I think Syria is too strategically important to be 'allowed to die' .. but, then, I cannot play Go

Interesting ..

Anonymous on April 16, 2018 , · at 1:56 am UTC
What about the 'rumors' that China will build a base in Vanuatu? "We would view with great concern the establishment of any foreign military bases in those Pacific Island countries and neighbours of ours," Mr Turnbull said. Ahem!
Graeme - Australia on April 16, 2018 , · at 4:20 am UTC
Yes, I wonder what Mr Turnbull would say if it was America doing the same thing?

Oh that's right . does not need to . already has a base here in Australia

Although, Australia has little choice, I believe. We still need a big brother. Although that is getting very very complicated.

Australia's geography will determine its future .. IS determining its future

Anonymous on April 16, 2018 , · at 10:54 pm UTC
Australia has a 'Big Moma' already, the owner of it, actually.
Anonymous on April 16, 2018 , · at 2:36 am UTC
Could America take on a direct confrontation over Taiwan?

If Taiwan is 500 kilometers off the coast from California, America just might give it a try. But alas, Taiwan is 500 kilometer off the coast from Fujian Province. Only a deranged America would take the bite. Let's see if America is deranged. Lately there are signs it is down that slippery slope.

Graeme - Australia on April 16, 2018 , · at 4:30 am UTC
What I meant, is the China is choosing its timing and confrontation very carefully

America is the next door neighbour who has watched the plum ripen every day, fearing that pesky Chinese neighbour will steal it and eat it

Not being careful, or just being plain dumb, the American knocked over a hornets nest and and now too busy dealing with the angry hornets to keep an eye on the plum

Timing is everything

[Apr 18, 2018] Voting in UN on Russian resolution

Apr 18, 2018 | thesaker.is

Serbian girl on April 15, 2018 , · at 10:17 am UTC

Excellent analysis by the Saker!

Here is a list of the non-permanent members of the UNSC: (the year indicates the end of their two year term)

Bolivia (2018)
Côte d'Ivoire (2019)
Equatorial Guinea (2019)
Ethiopia (2018)
Kazakhstan (2018)
Kuwait (2019)
Netherlands (2018)
Peru (2019)
Poland (2019)
Sweden (2018)

Every single country (!) on this list- except for Bolivia – abstained in the latest UNSC vote to stop aggression against Syria Russia, China, Bolivia voted in favor. USA, UK, France vited against. With just ONE vote the resolution would have passed

Kazakhstan is a member of the SCO..why did they not join Russia and China to support this resolution?? I am beginning to think the SCO is just hype.

One thing's for sure: I'm going to miss Bolivia when their term ends this year

Anonymous on April 15, 2018 , · at 1:28 pm UTC
Incorrect analysis.

The resolution was never going to pass. The US, the UK and France all posses the veto power of a permanent member of the UNSC. Thus, it does not matter how many voted in favor. The resolution was defeated.

I think I remember seeing at least one statement from another country that said that there was purpose of voting in favor of a veto'd resolution. Why bother. Especially when the US is infamous for blackmailing and armtwisting nations that vote against them. It was only a few months ago that Nutti Nikki declared the US was 'taking names' of those who opposed the.

There isn't any reason to vote for a resolution that is already and certainly veto'd. Actually, you see this alot also in bodies like the US Congress. Once a side has the votes to know they won (or lost), then a single vote doesn't mean anything. Thus a congressperson can vote a way that pleases the voters (or the lobbyists) and know that they are doing so with no impact on whether the measure passes or fails. You sometimes see members of congress voting for and against the same bill so they can take either position in the next campaign!

Serbian girl on April 15, 2018 , · at 3:20 pm UTC
Anonymous, you are of course correct. It's the SC and not the GA so any veto will bring down the resolution. Thank you for correcting my mistake. I also understand perfectly your point about tactical voting.

However:

It would send a powerful message to the empire (and the world) if Russia were not so isolated in her diplomatic efforts, even if a resolution is vetoed!..As Saker mentioned above noone seems to care about the higher values of international law. By keeping a low profile and abstaining these countries are basically confirming that there is no diplomatic way to stop the aggression.

tomo on April 15, 2018 , · at 6:36 pm UTC
what is happening to Russia funnily reminds me of what happened to me as a kid – I was maybe 9.
there was a bully in our neighborhood park where we used to play – he was 3 or 4 years older than most of us. He used to beat all of us individually (I was the youngest in the group) – but then I would come behind him when he was not looking and hit him with a brick etc.
so one day all the kids gathered (not sure whose idea it was – not mine – but I approved and joined them) and agreed to circle the bully and at 1..2..3..we were all to jump at him and to start beating him I thought it was a great idea.
so we went there and did that – 1..2..3 – I jumped on the bully and started kicking him – only to realize that everybody else just stayed where they were. I was the only one fighting him Even my brother didn't join me.
I hope the same thing does not happen to Russia – but if it does – just be prepared – and never trust psychopathic Anglo – west
Anonymous on April 15, 2018 , · at 1:33 pm UTC
Bolivia has a democracy that has elected governments that actually favor their people over corporations, and god forbid, that don't favor foriegn (American) corporations over their own people.

Thus, the US has already declared Bolivia an enemy. They don't seem to be number 1 on the American kill list, but they are already on the list.

Anonymous on April 15, 2018 , · at 1:46 pm UTC
At this point in time, the UNSC is blocked to both sides. Neither side can pass a UNSC resolution against the other. One side had 2 and now 3 vetos. The other side has 2 vetos. Nothing is passing.

Which means that neither side can claim UNSC sanction for their wars. Which in turn really makes any war illegal. Not that any of the Axis of Evil care about that. For the record, Trump violated the US Constitution in two ways (at least) by attacking Syria, thus, if the system were honest, he would now be impeached. Of course, the system is not honest, but it is highly rigged.

Since Russia and China don't seem to be starting any wars of aggression, that lack of ability to get a UNSC certificate for wars of aggression won't matter much to them. But, also don't expect them to pass anything condemning the Axis of Evil through the UNSC.

The UNSC is now only for making speeches. Both sides then use these messages in their psyOps operations. PsyOps is the right word because both sides now view propaganda as warfare by other means.

Vietnam brought forth the term "hearts and minds." That's what they psyOps wars are fighting over. The hearts and minds of everyone. Or at least those who are paying attention, and of course getting more to pay attention to your psyOps is a part of the battle as well.

The UNSC is thus a tool in these psyOps wars. The Russians make their case. Nutti Nikki screams, rants and threatens. Each is then used as propaganda both at their own people at home and at the rest of the world. It will stay that way as long as no one repeats the Soviet mistake of the Korean War era and gets so fed up with it that they don't bother to show up and cast their veto.

Anonymous on April 15, 2018 , · at 2:17 pm UTC
One interpretation of these comments is that diplomacy is just a bunch of fancy talk to create fodder for psyops. While NATO and other military organizations may view it that way, from another perspective, making speeches in a public meeting like this, where a resolution is on the line, can serve to entrench or resolve conflict. As part of a larger diplomatic strategy.
one minion on April 16, 2018 , · at 12:37 am UTC
The 'hearts and minds' concept originated in the Malaya campaign in the 50's–counter-insurgency–and it was never about hearts and minds, it was about 'killing people in order to save them'– a precursor of 'humanitarian intervention' –basic BS, in other words.
Part of the so-called psyop then was head-chopping of communist Chinese by the British soldiers, I seem to recall.
Francis Lee on April 15, 2018 , · at 1:55 pm UTC
Kazakhstan is one of the founding members of the Eurasian Economic Union. But it has always made its position clear that its membership is based upon economic and not political union. So its vote was not all that surprising. It's called hedging your bets.

[Apr 18, 2018] Possible sup ply of Russian S300 to Syria

Apr 18, 2018 | thesaker.is

Lysander on April 15, 2018 , · at 9:48 am UTC

Saker,

Russia has a lot of options and none of them involve attacking US/NATO forces directly. And General Rudskoy already hinted at one of them, the S300 to Syria and to possibly some other countries. A great idea, but only one of Russia's options.

Following from that, the first thing Russia should do, a long with Iran, Hizbullah and Syria, is exactly what it has been doing: securing more and more of Syria. Since the last time AZ axis did this, Syria's situation on the ground is much improved. By the next time they try, it will be much better still. Eyes on the prize.

Next, the S300. Russia has to impose a painful cost to the enemy without triggering a war. That's where Israel comes in. Russia needs to help Syria (Russia should not do this herself) to bring down a handful of Israeli jets and capture their pilots alive. You will see immediately of the situation changes once 2, 3 or 4 of those most precious of souls are captured. Your head will spin. They will trade whatever they have to to get them back. Capturing American pilots would not have anywhere near the same effect. And British or French pilots? Don't make me laugh. Nobody really cares about the hired help.

Russia also has the option of soft retaliation. The empire has troops all over the world and faces insurgencies in many places. I'm just sayin'. Sometimes accidents happen when you are fighting insurgencies.

Believe me, I understand how disgusted you are by the situation. But this has been Russia's role in the world forever. Defending Europe and the world from the mongols, the Prussians, the Swedes, Napoleon, the Turks, Hitler has earned Russia zero gratitude. But nevertheless, many of us see. Even I, who am not a Christian, can see the analogy clear as day.

Amir on April 15, 2018 , · at 10:36 am UTC
Sinking gas/oil platforms of Levithian field by "unknown assistants" might be a similar "symbolic" response. Similar to US attack of uninhibited buildings, this response by a third party against an ally of US (nominally ally, in reality the master) would send the message, without too much of a risk.
pogohere on April 16, 2018 , · at 8:24 pm UTC
Your comments about the Israeli reaction to the loss of its planes and the capture of their pilots is right. Read the Israeli press and especially the comments that follow the stories. Israeli hubris is not to be believed. The commenters (much less the article authors) can´t acknowledge that US missiles were shot down (albeit, with integrated modern radars, electronic interference, etc, acknowledged) by Syrians with Soviet era junk.

[Apr 18, 2018] The USA bombings do not hinder the progress of the Syrian army

Notable quotes:
"... Yes it is annoying that USA keeps bombing Syria, and yes it ruins the lives of the families that lose loved ones in such attacks. But they do not hinder the progress of the Syrian army. Which likely will have wrapped up everything that is politically easy to wrap up in Syria this year. The border with Israel, Idlib and the kurds being the last more politically difficult parts. ..."
Apr 18, 2018 | thesaker.is

Anonymous on April 15, 2018 , · at 9:40 am UTC

The consequence has not come yet. Those that expected that Russia would sink every American vessels and fire of off thermonuclear weapon at Washington, has no real connection to reality.

Such an action would be the dream of neocons and liberals in the western world. Russia will win as long as they can avoid a full on attack on Syria by USA and getting themselves dragged into a conflict with USA or one of its clients.

Yes it is annoying that USA keeps bombing Syria, and yes it ruins the lives of the families that lose loved ones in such attacks. But they do not hinder the progress of the Syrian army. Which likely will have wrapped up everything that is politically easy to wrap up in Syria this year. The border with Israel, Idlib and the kurds being the last more politically difficult parts.

In reality, Russia and Assad won from this attack I think, it made them look good internationally, it made USA look bad, Trumps supporters are in an uproar right now.. This is not like last year when the democrats supported his attack and his base kinda thought it was acceptable..

This time everyone thinks Trump is a lunatic, even his most fanatic supporters such as Alex Jones that has been being over backwards to protect Trump have lost hope in him

Here Alex actually cries when he finds out what Trump did
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Myz5vBDPH6c

When Russia unified with Crimea, it lost the international moral initiative which it had, now, it is absolutely regained it. This attack while it caused no damage to Russia or the war effort for Syria also gives Russia an excuse to do whatever it wants back.

The consequence of the USA strike could be something like.
1. Giving Syria better and "forbidden" in the style of S400 or S300.
2. Giving Syria more and more advanced pansirs.
3. Giving Syria advance anti-ship missiles, enabling them to take out every USA ship off their coast.
4. Arming groups that oppose USA over the world state actors or non-state actors, either covertly or openly with advanced weapons.
5. Revealing classified information about USA that perhaps USA got Russia to agree it would not reveal. Could be anything, proof perhaps that the USA gold reserve is empty perhaps that USA did 9/11, anything really.
6. A purge of USA backed fifth columnists inside of Russia.

The consequence will be something alone the line of causing long term severe consequence for USA but causing no problem for Russia or even being beneficial.

"Russia's ambassador to the U.S. warned there would be "consequences" for the strike on Syria, and that a "pre-designed scenario" was underway."
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/13/russia-warns-of-consequences-for-us-led-strike-on-syria.html

[Apr 18, 2018] There is nothing like American policies in the Trump era. Even the president is not necessarily the last word

Notable quotes:
"... Actually, there is nothing like "American policies" in the Trump era. The Washington Post carried two reports this week underlining the utter confusion within the Trump administration. Even the president is not necessarily the last word. ..."
"... One of these two astonishing reports titled Trump a reluctant hawk has battled his top aides on Russia and lost (here) narrates shocking details on how the former NSA in the White House HR McMaster simply hoodwinked a bumbling Trump into approving the proposal to expel 60 Russian diplomats from the US last month: ..."
"... The second WaPo report (here) narrates how even the famous Nikki Haley can no longer pretend to be Trump's authoritative voice. ..."
Apr 18, 2018 | blogs.rediff.com

Actually, there is nothing like "American policies" in the Trump era. The Washington Post carried two reports this week underlining the utter confusion within the Trump administration. Even the president is not necessarily the last word.

One of these two astonishing reports titled Trump a reluctant hawk has battled his top aides on Russia and lost (here) narrates shocking details on how the former NSA in the White House HR McMaster simply hoodwinked a bumbling Trump into approving the proposal to expel 60 Russian diplomats from the US last month:

The next day, when the expulsions were announced publicly, Trump erupted, officials said. To his shock and dismay, France and Germany were each expelling only four Russian officials The president, who seemed to believe that other individual countries would largely equal the United States, was furious that his administration was being portrayed in the media as taking by far the toughest stance on Russia

Growing angrier, Trump insisted that his aides had misled him about the magnitude of the expulsions. "There were curse words," the official said, "a lot of curse words."

The second WaPo report (here) narrates how even the famous Nikki Haley can no longer pretend to be Trump's authoritative voice.

I'm reminded of Roman Emperor Caligula (AD 37-41). He had a favorite horse by name Incitatus whom he once planned to designate as Roman consul. Caligula used to hold parties for friends in the steed's grand stables. In a fit of exuberant joy, he once named Incitatus a Minister of State.

The Trump presidency has not quite reached that point yet, but bizarre things are happening in the Washington Beltway – like in Caligula's decadent Rome in decline and fall. India will be well advised to keep distance.

[Apr 18, 2018] How dare Larry Kudlow suggest Nikki got confused!!!

Notable quotes:
"... "She's done a great job," Kudlow said of Haley. "She's a very effective ambassador. There might have been some momentary confusion about that. But if you talk to Steve Mnuchin at Treasury and so forth, he will tell you the same thing. They're in charge of this. We have had sanctions. Additional sanctions are under consideration but not implemented, and that's all." ..."
Apr 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

dh | Apr 17, 2018 8:47:50 PM | 65

Confused!!! How dare Larry Kudlow suggest Nikki got confused!!!

>White House press secretary Sarah Sanders insisted more sanctions were merely under consideration. On Tuesday, top White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said Haley "got ahead of the curve."

"She's done a great job," Kudlow said of Haley. "She's a very effective ambassador. There might have been some momentary confusion about that. But if you talk to Steve Mnuchin at Treasury and so forth, he will tell you the same thing. They're in charge of this. We have had sanctions. Additional sanctions are under consideration but not implemented, and that's all."

Haley, speaking for the first time since the White House dialed back her claims, rejected the idea that she was confused.

"With all due respect, I don't get confused," Haley said in a statement read by Fox News' Dana Perino and confirmed by CBS News Tuesday.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/with-all-due-respect-i-dont-get-confused-nikki-haley-says-of-russia-sanctions/

[Apr 17, 2018] Back to Brinkmanship by Jacob Heilbrunn

One interesting thing is that Trump is apparently hard at work pushing and pushing and pushing China to take Russia's side more forcefully. China ususally don't support Russia in UNSC. Most often Russia stands alone with Iran.
What we are observing is a slow collapse of The US-centered global neoliberal empire. Neoliberalism like Bolshevism before it is a self-defeating ideology that eats the flesh of society on which it parasites.
In a way Trump election is sign of this crisis, as well as attempt of some part of the US elite for find a way out of the current crisis, which started in 2008 with the collapse of neoliberal ideology.
Notable quotes:
"... Managerial Revolution ..."
Apr 17, 2018 | nationalinterest.org
You and the Atomic Bomb ," which he wrote two months after the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, George Orwell coined the term "cold war" to describe the new epoch that he saw emerging after the fall of Nazi Germany and the rise of the Soviet Union and the United States. He predicted that the bomb would "put an end to large-scale wars at the cost of prolonging indefinitely a 'peace that is no peace.'" It was this very scenario that he depicted in his dystopian novel 1984 , which drew on James Burnham's Managerial Revolution and features Eurasia, Oceania and Eastasia in a permanent standoff several decades after an atomic war. Any actual conflicts or skirmishes take place in borderlands that are located well away from the three main empires.

This cold peace was pretty much what obtained after 1945 in international affairs. The two superpowers, the Soviet Union and United States, avoided direct conflict. Instead, they used proxy powers and national liberation movements, mostly located in the Third World, to try and shift the correlation of forces, as the Kremlin used to call it, in their favor, whenever and wherever they could. The territory under their direct control was off limits -- the United States did not intervene during uprisings in the eastern bloc in East Germany, Hungary or Poland. The Kremlin confined itself to helping to fund communist parties in France and Italy, and to supporting the peace movement clandestinely. The peril of an atomic exchange was so immense that neither the Soviet Union nor the United States went to war over flashpoints such as Cuba and Berlin. What Orwell did not anticipate was that one side, the Soviet Union, would collapse completely, leaving the other as Mr. Big.

... ... ...

The war in Iraq was a fiasco. Afghanistan is a quagmire. In America, terms such as "regime change" have fallen into disrepute. The West has lost its confidence. Populists are looking for a way to escape the iron cage of modernity. The era of Reagan and Thatcher proclaiming the verity of the free market and the expansion of freedom seems almost as remote as the scientific laws of history that Marxists once propounded.

... ... ...

...President Donald Trump explained that he seeks to curb a new arms race that is "getting out of control," but also boasted that "we will never allow anybody to have anything even close to what we have." Already Trump has vastly expanded the American military budget, raising outlays to $700 billion for the fiscal year 2019. Trump, in a decision first approved by President Barack Obama, intends to devote $1 trillion to modernizing the American nuclear force over the next three decades.

... ... ...

With his combination of bluff and bombast, Trump could stumble into a calamitous two-front war in Asia and the Middle East.

Jacob Heilbrunn is editor of the National Interest.

[Apr 17, 2018] The Guardian view on bombing Syria: a decision for parliament. Editorial

Apr 17, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Theresa May's decision to authorise British military action over the skies of Syria by royal prerogative rather than obtaining the backing of parliament was the wrong thing to do. Even if the prime minister thinks it was done for the right reasons. It was wrong because the government's plans should have been articulated so that MPs could have had a chance to endorse – or reject – a motion to bomb Bashar al-Assad's weapons factories. It was wrong because there was no emergency – an exception used when after a debate MPs retrospectively endorsed action against Muammar Gaddafi's Libya . It was wrong because only prime ministers can recall parliament – and there was time to do so. It was wrong because decisions about how to police the unlawful use of weapons of mass destructive terror in Syria turn upon judgment rather than available facts.

Parliament is the best place to assess whether the use of military force serves the overall interests of a nation in such cases. This is especially true of a government without a majority of its own. Jeremy Corbyn's resurrection of an old idea for a war powers act , which would force the PM not to authorise the active and large-scale deployment of British forces overseas without the approval of the House of Commons, ought not to be dismissed.

But it should be accompanied by a wider recognition that the days of self-regulation of cabinet government are over. Observing the parliamentary convention would be better than creating an act where fractious disagreements over the precise nature of the circumstances in which the law is to be applied – especially in a situation as fluid and volatile as war – prevail.

[Apr 17, 2018] Who are top officials at OPCW and can we expect unparciality?

Notable quotes:
"... Indeed, and if A-234 is as strong as reported, it's likely any traces around the Skripals would have killed the first responders too. ..."
Apr 17, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

anon , Apr 15, 2018 1:36:09 PM | 39

@Peter AU 33

One of the Douma hospital medic interviews can be seen here, starting at about minute 1:36

https://www.rt.com/news/424047-russian-mod-syria-statement/

Ahmet Uzumcu, head of the OPCW, was also Turkish envoy to Israel, and also counsel in aleppo, syria

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

Carrie , Apr 16, 2018 6:59:57 AM | 69
Posted by: PavewayIV | Apr 15, 2018 5:21:47 PM | 61

PavewayIV thanks, as always I appreciate your thorough analysis.

...and in quantities that would have absolutely killed the Skripals given what was still there after two weeks...
Indeed, and if A-234 is as strong as reported, it's likely any traces around the Skripals would have killed the first responders too.

No doubt related to Lavrov's disclosure: this morning (and yesterday in the Sunday Times) nearly every national UK paper is running a front page version of this story: "Russia launches cyber war on UK with 'dirty tricks' campaign as PM to face Commons over Syria strikes" (taken from The Daily Telegraph). This meme is so widespread (BBC Radio 4 also) that, in itself, it looks like a co-ordinated attempt at scaremongering and misinformation.

It's designed to make people think that anything they read online that is contrary to the official FUKUS narrative about Russia/Syria can be given the term 'dirty trick' and dismissed. And by conflating the Skripal story with Syria (remember the messages about 'package delivered' picked up by '4-Eyes' in Cypress?) then anything Russia says about the Skripal affair is suspect and "not worthy of your consideration, dear reader".

I see that The Sun newspaper is now running with this news in it's online version:

RUSSIA and Syria have blocked chemical inspectors from investigating the site of a brutal chemical attack in Douma, Syria, reports claim.

Russia may even have compromised the site of the April 7 gas attack, according to Ahmet Uzumcu, Director general of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

"It's our concern they may have tampered with it to thwart the fact finding investigation," Mr Uzumcu is quoted as saying by NBC's Bill Neely.

Also see yesterday's important report by Elijah J Magnier. Ties stuff together.

Folks, in seeking out and highlighting the truth we going to have our work cut out for us here! [See "have your work cut out (for you)"

[Apr 17, 2018] Were the Skripals 'Buzzed', 'Novi-shocked' Or Neither - May Has Some 'Splaining' To Do

Notable quotes:
"... Moon of Alabama ..."
"... Did Spiez also do a DNA identification to ensure the TRACE metabolized samples actually came from the Skirpals, with no other DNA/chemical indicators which might indicate purposeful contamination or reformulation? Where did the "virgin" samples come from? The doorknob the Skirpals had not touched for longer than it takes for BZ to show symptoms? The chain of custody for all these samples should be 100% airtight, or all analysis is fatally flawed. ..."
"... This still reeks of a Mossad attack/disinfo operation, there are simply too many "flaws" in this to be unintentional. ..."
"... It is not only the current a Director-General who is a NATO-man, the PR women of OPCW was also on NATO payroll. Almost all international bodies are revolving doors for the Western paid personnel. Nobody does a truly honest job if they want the next appointment and advancement. Does anybody still remember the Brazilian Sergio de Mello? He revolved till he got blown up in Iraq. ..."
"... Ok. Ahmed Üzümcü is a former nato representative. This is interesting. What about the rest of the OPCW people? What about the OPCW teams inspecting Douma? Have they any non poodle nationality members? Does anybody know that? ..."
"... I can confirm that the chain of custody was 100% watertight, no worries there. Custody was 100% under iFUKUS control from the moment of contamination of the victims/environment until the completion of all tests and the publication of final reports. That is why the samples were spiked with fresh A-234. ..."
"... During a brief moment when I was viewing CNN yesterday (Alex Witt was playing bad cop most of the time, making sure Russia was suitably demeaned and excoriated for its evil ways) --but, iirc and I may not have done*, someone asked why the FUKUS would endanger people by blowing up locations the US stated they absolutely KNEW held chemical weapons and precursors. The reply was that the Pentagon was certain that since the locations were not in heavily populated areas that the breezes would disperse the poisons safely. ..."
"... The UN has been fully weoponized by the US and it's sock puppet partners in the west. The western powers completely ignore the UN charter while demanding absolute power through the UNSC. It is time for both Russia and China to leave the UN which will lead to a cascade of other countries leaving. It will also end any lingering belief in the legitimacy of the UN. ..."
"... Re: why hospital workers and others have not said anything about the Skripals' situation in a long time, it's very likely everyone, including patients and witnesses from Salisbury have been made to sign nondisclosure agreements. At least that's what happens in Brit series shown on Masterpiece Theatre. ..."
"... Also, DS Nick Bailey may have been sent to the house to get him exposed to whatever the chem agent was, part of being a way to draw attention away from the main site of exposure? BZ may explain the rather interesting description Bailey's written statement included: this line, and only this one, which described any physical or mental reactions he felt from his ordeal: ..."
"... Indeed, and if A-234 is as strong as reported, it's likely any traces around the Skripals would have killed the first responders too. ..."
"... Also see yesterday's important report by Elijah J Magnier. Ties stuff together. Folks, in seeking out and highlighting the truth we going to have our work cut out for us here! [See "have your work cut out (for you)" ..."
"... This is one of the few if only 'miracle recovery' situations in which the victims did not sit down for interviews. I imagine once they have been groomed enough they will sit down for an interview with a trusted news organization. ..."
"... The Spiez lab is a NATO lab. Even though Switzerland is "neutral", it is an associate member of NATO under the NATO Peace Partnership. Spiez has been involved in serious falsifications of analysis results for the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP)'s work on the use of uranium and depleted uranium weapons. ..."
"... In my opinion, the release of the real report to the Russians was the work of a whistle-blower, for the Spiez lab has highly trained people who take great pride in the generally impeccable quality of the lab's work and its repuration for such. Many of them would have been appalled that their lab was party to some sort of deception. ..."
"... Lavrov was right then, and he's right now. The "Joint Investigation Team" is actually "The Fix Is In Team". The official title is just for show, to make infoganda that impresses the ignorant, complacent, and submissive. It's exactly like the Big Lie that "17 intelligence agencies separately concluded that Russians meddled in US elections". ..."
Apr 17, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Were the Skripals 'Buzzed', 'Novi-shocked' Or Neither? - May Has Some 'Splaining' To Do

The Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation, Sergey Lavrov, threw a bombshell at the British assertions that the collapse of the British secret agent Sergej Skripal and his daughter Yulia on March 4 in Salisbury was caused by a 'Novichok' nerve agent 'of a type developed by Russia'. (See our older pieces, linked below, for a detailed documentation of the case.)

During a public speech yesterday Lavrov stated of the OPCW report:

[A] detailed and fairly substantial confidential version was distributed to the OPCW members only. In that report, in accordance with the OPCW way of conduct, the chemical composition of the agent presented by the British was confirmed, and the analysis of samples, as the report states, was taken by the OPCW experts themselves. It contains no names, Novichok or any other. The report only gives the chemical formula, which, according to our experts, points to an agent that had been developed in many countries and does not present any particular secret.

After receiving that report Russia was tipped off by the Spiez Laboratory or someone else that the OPCW report did not include the full results of its analysis.

According to Lavrov this is what the Spiez Laboratory originally sent to the OPCW:

"Following our analysis, the samples indicate traces of the toxic chemical BZ and its precursor which are second category chemical weapons. BZ is a nerve toxic agent, which temporarily disables a person. The psycho toxic effect is achieved within 30 to 60 minutes after its use and lasts for up to four days. This composition was in operational service in the armies of the US, the UK and other NATO countries. The Soviet Union and Russia neither designed nor stored such chemical agents. Also, the samples indicate the presence of type A-234 nerve agent in its virgin state and also products of its degradation. "

The "presence of type A-234 nerve agent", an agent of the so called 'Novichok' series, in its "virgin state", or as the OPCW stated in "high purity", points to later addition to the sample. The 'Novichok' agents are not stable. They tend to fall rapidly apart. Their presence in "virgin state" in a sample which was taken 15 days after the Skripal incident happened is inexplicable. A scientist of the former Russian chemical weapon program who worked with similar agents, Leonid Rink, says that if the Skripals had really been exposed to such high purity A-234 nerve agent, they would be dead.

The whole case, the symptoms shown by the Skripals and their recuperation, makes way more sense if they were 'buzzed', i.e. poisoned with the BZ hallucinogenic agent, than if they were 'novi-shocked' with a highly toxic nerve agent.

The Spiez Laboratory responded by not denying Lavrov's claims:

Spiez Laboratory @SpiezLab - 19:49 UTC - 14 Apr 2018

Only OPCW can comment this assertion. But we can repeat what we stated 10 days ago: We have no doubt that Porton Down has identified Novichock. PD - like Spiez - is a designated lab of the OPCW. The standards in verification are so rigid that one can trust the findings. #Skipal

Science Direct has several excerpts of reports about BZ. The basics:

Agent 15 is also called compound 3-quinuclidinyl benzilate, BZ, or "Buzz." It is a powerful chemical warfare agent. As one of the most potent psychoactive chemical agents, only a small amount of BZ is needed to produce complete incapacitation. When used as an aerosol, BZ is absorbed through the respiratory system (it has no odor). It can also be absorbed through the skin or the digestive system. It takes approximately 1 h for BZ to take effect, and the symptoms of exposure include confusion, tremors, stupor, hallucinations, and coma that can last for more than 2 days.

BZ is a psycho agent 25 times stronger than LSD. It was developed by the U.S. military as an incapacitating agent. At least 50 tons were produced and filled into weapon delivery systems. It was allegedly tested on U.S. soldiers in Vietnam:

Working with the CIA the Department of Defense gave hallucinogenic drugs to thousands of "volunteer" soldiers in the 1950's and 1960's. In addition to LSD, the Army also tested quinuclidinyl benzilate, a hallucinogen code-named BZ. Many of these tests were conducted under the so-called MKULTRA program, established to counter perceived Soviet and Chinese advances in brainwashing techniques. Between 1953 and 1964, the program consisted of 149 projects involving drug testing and other studies on unwitting human subjects. Although many human subjects were not informed or protected, Dr. Gottlieb defended those actions by stating "...harsh as it may seem in retrospect, it was felt that in an issue where national survival might be concerned, such a procedure and such a risk was a reasonable one to take."

This is what the military tried to achieve with BZ and other psycho agents.

BZ (and LSD) turned out to be impractical as battlefield weapons.

According to British parliament records BZ was also produced and tested, allegedly on unknowing civilians , by the British chemical weapon laboratory Porton Down.

The Russian Foreign Minister asserts that the OPCW suppressed the details of the Spiez Laboratory report:

Nothing is said whatsoever about a BZ agent in the final report that the OPCW experts presented to its Executive Council. In this connection we address the OPCW a question about why the information, that I have just read out loud and which reflects the findings of the specialists from the city of Spiez, was withheld altogether in the final document. If the OPCW would reject and deny the very fact that the Spiez laboratory was engaged, it will be very interesting to listen to their explanations.

The current Director-General of the OPCW is the Turkish carrier diplomat Ahmed Üzümcü who earlier served as the Turkish Permanent Representative to NATO.

I have no theory how the BZ or the A-234 made it into the OPCW samples or if the Skripals were really influenced by either of these poisons or are victims of simple shellfish poisoning. Your guess is a good as mine.

But the story the British government has so far told is full of holes and discrepancies and makes absolutely no sense at all. The suppression of the Spiez Laboratory report by the OPCW is a serious breach of its procedures.

The British Prime Minister Theresa May, and the OPCW, have some 'splainin' to do.

---
Previous Moon of Alabama posts on the Skripal case:

March 8 - Poisioned British-Russian Double-Agent Has Links To Clinton Campaign March 12 - Theresa May's "45 Minutes" Moment March 14 - Are 'Novichok' Poisons Real? - May's Claims Fall Apart March 16 - The British Government's 'Novichok' Drama Was Written By Whom? March 18 - NHS Doctor: "No Patients Have Experienced Symptoms Of Nerve Agent Poisoning In Salisbury" March 21 - Russian Scientists Explain 'Novichok' - High Time For Britain To Come Clean (Updated) March 29 - Last Act Of 'Novichok' Drama Revealed - "The Skripals' Resurrection" March 31 - Hillary Clinton Ordered Diplomats To Suppress 'Novichok' Discussions April 3 - Operation Hades Blamed Russia - A Model For The 'Novichok' Claims? April 4 - It's The Cover-Up" - UK Foreign Office Deletes Tweet, Posts False Transcript, Issues New Lies April 5 - Novi-Fog™ In Fleet Street - Truth Cut Off April 6 - The Best Explanation For The Skripal Drama Is Still ... Food Poisoning April 7 - A Very British Farce April 12 - New Developments In The Skripal Drama - Police Statement, OPCW Report Release

Posted by b on April 15, 2018 at 09:35 AM | Permalink

Comments

Charles M , Apr 15, 2018 9:39:35 AM | 1

Looks like someone really REALLY wants a hot war with Russia. I dont get why WW3 is so alluring.
Anon , Apr 15, 2018 9:45:47 AM | 2
Is there any reason to call for investigation when you have corrupt organs like OPCW that are as biased as any other western statehood on Russia? Russia working in 110% and get like 5% back if lucky.

Charles M

After years of hatred against Russia, WW3 seems pretty logical for the same brainwashed people that type the propaganda and those who reads it. Daily. This racism sooner or later leads to war, and extermination.

Madeira , Apr 15, 2018 9:45:53 AM | 3
A possible explanation for the apparent divergences between the OPCW report and the Russian claims of what the Swiss lab found:

1. The UK requests Porton Down to confirm the presence of A-234 (motivated no doubt by its "secret intelligence" that the Russians for 10 years had been building up a "small stockpile" for such purposes).

2. Porton Down confirms the presence of A-234. Whether or not it carried out additional tests to determine the presence of other possible toxic agents is uncertain.

3. The UK refuses to provide sample(s) to Russia, arguing that the "exchange of information and consultations" called for by Article IX of the Chemical Weapons Convention does not mean that they need to provide evidence to the "guilty party".

4. After much prodding by the Russians, the UK belatedly agrees to request "technical assistance" from the OPCW to confirm its findings. The precise form this request took is confidential, but one might surmise that it would have been: Please confirm the presence of the toxic substance A-234 which we have identified in the samples (with the understood message "no need to waste time and resources looking for other toxic substances").

5. As per its standard protocol, the OPCW sent out the samples to various "partner" laboratories, of which one was the Spiez laboratory in Switzerland, which is the government "ABC" lab (atomic, biological, chemical). They are asked to confirm (only) the presence of A-234.

6. For an unknown reason, the Spiez Laboratory exceeds its mandate and not only confirms the presence of A-234 but also traces of 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate, better known by its NATO code name BZ. The Spiez Laboratory sends its report to the OPCW.

7. The OPCW issues 2 reports (one private, the other confidential) on 12 April. In response to the specific request made by the UK, the OPCW truthfully confirms that the "toxic chemical identified by the United Kingdom" was indeed A-234. The formula for this "toxic chemical" was (apparently) provided in the confidential report.

8.The OPCW also provides the additional information that "this toxic chemical [i.e. A-234] was of high purity". And for those without the necessary scientific background to digest this statement, it helpfully adds that this technical conclusion was based on " the almost complete absence of impurities".

9. As the OPCW had not been asked to confirm the presence of any toxic chemical other than A-234, it naturally did not take into account the superfluous discovery by the Spiez Laboratory of traces of BZ.

10. The Russians obtain access to the Spiez Laboratory report -- from a "whistleblower" at the lab or the OPCW, or by "hacking".

Entirely implausible?

BX , Apr 15, 2018 9:56:01 AM | 4
"The standards in verification are so rigid that one can trust the findings." !!! I think they are saying "The standards in verification are so rigid that you can trust our findings" (i.e. BZ as well as A-234 in virgin *and* (!) degradation* stage. See also my comments to your previous post (towards the end of the list of comments).
JakeS , Apr 15, 2018 9:57:47 AM | 5
great investigative work - thanks. The Brit state keeping Julia Skirpal incommunicado surely adds to the likely guilt
BX , Apr 15, 2018 10:08:48 AM | 7
I believe you got the "virgin" state wrong. What this refers to is the state of the substance *before* drug metabolism, i.e. before the substance reacts to any great degree chemically within the body and "degrades". Spiez found A-234 prior to metabolism (virgin) and after metabolism (degradation) which might point to two separate points in time when these substances started reacting with chemicals within the body (yes, lastly, it all comes down to chemistry). Drug metabolism is why drug effects last only a limited time. When the substance is metabolized (degraded) its specific effects disappear. Here is the Wikipedia entry which is sufficient to give a general impression. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_metabolism
Bill , Apr 15, 2018 10:11:21 AM | 8
US and UK media will unlikely report it now, they are too busy driving the war machine, however the drip drip of evidence coupled with increasing memories of the Iraq dodgy dossier will eventually break through.
BX , Apr 15, 2018 10:13:18 AM | 9
Also, thank you for this vital information: "The current Director-General of the OPCW is the Turkish carrier diplomat Ahmed Üzümcü who earlier served as the Turkish Permanent Representative to NATO." This, to me, this goes a long way understanding recent reports of the OPCW DG regarding the 2 labs that were bombed. My, the puzzle is coming together!
BX , Apr 15, 2018 10:17:04 AM | 10
I am sorry for the many comments but it is not possible to edit comments or reply to them... "virgin state" is not the same as "high purity". The OPCW report does not echo the Spiez results when talking about "high purity" but London, just in more sophisticated way (i.e. not saying "military grade").
A P , Apr 15, 2018 10:23:09 AM | 11
Did Spiez also do a DNA identification to ensure the TRACE metabolized samples actually came from the Skirpals, with no other DNA/chemical indicators which might indicate purposeful contamination or reformulation? Where did the "virgin" samples come from? The doorknob the Skirpals had not touched for longer than it takes for BZ to show symptoms? The chain of custody for all these samples should be 100% airtight, or all analysis is fatally flawed.

This still reeks of a Mossad attack/disinfo operation, there are simply too many "flaws" in this to be unintentional.

"By way of deception, thou shalt do war."

farm ecologist , Apr 15, 2018 10:33:01 AM | 12
We don't know if OPCW found A-234 in the samples they took, or only in the ones that they were given by the British, which could easily have been tampered with.

(Note that there are numerous posts pertaining to this subject on the previous thread.)

Kiza , Apr 15, 2018 10:34:19 AM | 13
It is not only the current a Director-General who is a NATO-man, the PR women of OPCW was also on NATO payroll. Almost all international bodies are revolving doors for the Western paid personnel. Nobody does a truly honest job if they want the next appointment and advancement. Does anybody still remember the Brazilian Sergio de Mello? He revolved till he got blown up in Iraq.

Ultimately, it all comes down to unlimited printing of US$, used as confetti or in pallet loads to pay for corruption of everything. Through US$ petro and reserve currency status the nations are paying to be taken advantage off by global bankers of US, UK and Israel, including Russia and China. But do not tell me that organisations in the West are corrupt. Please show me just one which is not.

Jesrad , Apr 15, 2018 10:34:45 AM | 14
I wondered why the Skripals were said to be suffering from "hallucinations". I assumed that really meant they were just saying things that Airstrip One didn't like during their recovery, but apparently there was a pharmacological reason!

The 30-60 minute time frame for BZ also switches the focus back to the restaurant (Zizzi's?), and whoever they may have met there. Weren't the original reports that Sergei was acting erratically (hallucinations?) by the time he left the restaurant?

Ralf , Apr 15, 2018 10:38:04 AM | 15
If the Swiss laboratory got the facts right as presented by Lavrov, many things come out quite naturally, it seems to me. Here is my guess:

1. the Skripals were poisoned with this BZ stuff, not Novichok. Q1: Who did it?

2. Novichok was added to the blood probes that were analysed by Porton Down and the OPCW labs, after these probes were taken. The Skripals never came into contact with Novichok themselves. Q2: Who did the manipulation?

3. This means that in fact nobody wanted to kill the Skripals. It was a PR stunt from the very start in order to demonize Russia. Whether the Skripals conspire or not, is an open and quite irrelevant question. Q3: Who planned it?

4. The answer to Q3 can only lie in Britain: It was the British intelligence services - presumably under government supervision. Who else would have opportunity, motive and benefit of all this?

5. This also answers the question about the policeman who also showed symptoms: he was the guy who "poisoned" the Skripals with BX. He might just not have been careful enough, which is understanable if he is told that the stuff is not so dangerous. This answers Q1.

6. With respect to Q2, I very much hope that this was done in Porton Down, using their own samples of Novichok, because otherwise this dangerous stuff must have been transported from somewhere, risking, for instance, killing plane passengers etc., if something went wrong. I don't think that secret service people are willing to risk their own and the lifes of innocent people just for such a PR stunt. They surely reduced risks to anybody to a minimum.

From the resistance trench with love , Apr 15, 2018 10:38:12 AM | 16
@Posted by: Madeira | Apr 15, 2018 9:45:53 AM | 3
Entirely implausible?

Totally implausible, since, in sight of the development of events which have derived from the unsubstantiated accusation against Russia, it sounds quite weird that the OPCW, a supposedly independent international organism, would have ommited such a determinant information for, not only discharge the Russians of responsability, but also to apply a reasonable doubt about the responsability of many other states which right now have got dividens from the Skripal hoax by using it as an alibi to strikes Syria with missiles and remain illegaly in the country indefinitely.

I find totally weird as well that the OPCW did not disclose the totality of the analisis result, in spite of what the UK could have requested concretely from them, since they are not there to only hear the demands of the UK, but also from Russia, as part charged and also a memeber and sucriptor of the OPCW charter, the more when this country has been blamed without the opportune investigation of the facts.

As historical facts have already proven, the long hand of Bolton in the OPCW is obvious, and we have that he just landed in the DoS....That every European official is blackmailed by the US as a norm, so that favouring its geopolitial goals, even at the price of harming most the countries of the Euroepan officials blackmailed, is already of public domain as well....

adamski , Apr 15, 2018 10:39:10 AM | 17
Justa n aside but des anyone remember the film Jacobs Ladder? BZ was a key part of the story.
A P , Apr 15, 2018 10:49:36 AM | 20
And the answer to "who did it?" points squarely at Mossad. The UK spies/gov't were obviously caught flat-footed, had no idea it was going to happen, no internal script on which lies they had hard info about, relying on external "trusted sources".

"By deception thou shalt do war" Mossad's motto.

Pnyx , Apr 15, 2018 11:03:33 AM | 21
Ok. Ahmed Üzümcü is a former nato representative. This is interesting. What about the rest of the OPCW people? What about the OPCW teams inspecting Douma? Have they any non poodle nationality members? Does anybody know that?
blah , Apr 15, 2018 11:05:22 AM | 22
"And the answer to "who did it?" points squarely at Mossad."

If they were poisoned with Novichoks from the beginning then I could see Mossad. But if this BZ toxin then it MI6 because they would want to ensure the Skripals, their agents, and any civilians didn't die and only they would be able to uphold the PR narrative that it was Novichoks by controlling the samples and where they are tested.

mk , Apr 15, 2018 11:08:44 AM | 23
One group that could testify on Lavrov's claim is the personnel of Salisbury Hospital. Dr. Blanshard said that they consulted with experts in the whole world to improve the recovery of Julia Skripal. Certainly they can say if it was a BZ treatment or a Novichok treatment.

This looks like a Chessmate für May&co.

Peter AU 1 , Apr 15, 2018 11:12:24 AM | 24
The Novichok narrative was on designed to hold up for a short time. The Ghouta CW attack should have occurred at peak Novichok, drawing attention away, but was waylaid.

A-234 - there are many highly toxic chemical compounds but only few are developed as Chemical weapons. Many of the compounds have properties that make them unsuitable for deployment as CW's. A-234 compound and perhaps all of the compounds in the Russian scientists book may well have properties that make it/them unsuited to either assassination or as a WMD so a substitute was used.

Magnier has a new piece out which helps tie in the larger play that the Novichok narrative was part of. The larger play failed and now the Russians are hunting down the Brits and taking apart their narrative.

mwm , Apr 15, 2018 11:16:14 AM | 25
The picture of the Skripals was taken in the restaurant on that same day? or not, with the reflection in the mirror. With the new time frame for onset of drug reaction doesn't he become a "person of interest"?, this strange guy in the mirror?
Den Lille Abe , Apr 15, 2018 11:17:12 AM | 26
This is wild, I know: Who said anyone was poisoned?

Find anyone that can claim it please. Find any that saw them suffering from poison. Just do this please... Can you ?

dahoit , Apr 15, 2018 11:20:42 AM | 28
The missiles that targeted the chem warfare,they had a germ agent?hohohohoho.
The israelis doing it all.mossad.
Bayleaf , Apr 15, 2018 11:20:42 AM | 29
The official UK government's position was set out when it applied to the court in order to allow the taking of blood samples for the OPCW:

"The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent or closely related agent."

If it had been a "Novichock class nerve agent" they would have left it at that, so we can reasonably conclude that it was a "closely related agent".

But closely related in what sense, nobody is saying. This is a typical lawyer's manipulation of language and the criteria of the comparison are deliberately omitted. People naturally assume that it is closely related in a chemical sense but these are lawyers and the the meaning of the words is whatever they want it to be.

So how could a so-called "Novichok" be "closely related" to BZ? Well, one plausible explanation could be that the lawyers are actually saying they're both chemical agents designed to incapcitate. The phrase "closely related to" doesn't have to be anything to do with the chemical composition. Nobody lied but their "truth" is designed to give a completely misleading impression. That's lawyers for you.

It also allows the OPCW to agree with the UK government's position without actually lying.

Eric Bloodaxe , Apr 15, 2018 11:22:31 AM | 30
Salisbury False Flag

It is said that 11 UK/US officers 'handlers' of the moderate terrorists have been captured in a tunnel in East Ghouta (hmm, mayby). However, the US/UK bellicose rhetoric,two false flags and a Cruise missile show seem to fit the picture.
Russian FM Lavrov says the poison used in Salisbury on the Skripal's was not a Novachoc (VX type - fatal) but the toxin BZ (narcotic, hallucinogenic) and it is definitely US/UK (Hoffman-LaRosch developed in 1951).

A consultant (Davis) at the Salisbury hospital wrote a letter to the Times saying, "there are no patients suffering from nerve agents and only 3 who are poisoned". (fact, I saw the Times letter).

Wikipedia describes the effects of BZ and they exactly fit the delayed, narcotic hallucinogenic effect of BX (30mins to 4 hours post exposure). The physiological effects of BZ and VX differ markedly, which is how doctor Davis knew – he is 8 miles from the Porton Down chemical warfare plant and was therefore 'clued up'. Patients have recovered and VX etc. kills, stops muscle action, not a poison as such).

In the Independent (today, Comments under the Lavrov story, Sunday 15th) a bathroom fitter (Ollie Field) says he saw the Skripal's on the bench and thought they were 'whacked out' on heroin.

Douma False Flag.

The Russians have in their pocket (filmed I believe) a notable at the Douma (only) hospital (can't remember who) that has described the White Helmets filming as; a bomb destroyed the top floor of the hospital and the film crew moved bodies and kids to the basement and doused them with hoses and sprayed them with Ventolin (asthma inhaler – blue). This provided the film used to justify the Cruise missile attack Fri 13th. 2018.

The Russians have rumbled the Douma false flag and the OECD chemical weapons investigators are on their way to the Douma hospital (basement) to find no chemicals, they report in a few weeks.

Lavrov has said that the British ordered the Douma rebels to make a chemical warfare White Helmets type movie fast, in desperation, since the Russians/SAA forces attack was moving fast and they could obtain support bombing. The whole of East Ghouta has been taken by the SAA.

A decent video exposure on TV, or even a simple web search, completely debunks the 'White Helmets' that filmed the fake gas attack in the Douma hospital in East Ghouta. Re. my earlier email.

May didn't wait (in panic) for parliament approval and went ahead with military action (8 of our missiles wasted at £6.3M).
The 11 'handlers' (said to be officers) are not in the hands of the Russians (who have swopped theirs for ours previously) but are held by the SAA and could well have have spilled the beans. If they are paraded (filmed) and spill the beans things will get ugly for May et al.

Peter AU 1 , Apr 15, 2018 11:29:56 AM | 31
mwm 25

It is an old photo. I have seen photos of the inside of Salisbury Zizzi which has a very different interior decoration style. Zizzi's also do not have tableclothes and set tables. Empty table are always bare.

BM , Apr 15, 2018 11:42:42 AM | 32
The chain of custody for all these samples should be 100% airtight, or all analysis is fatally flawed.
Posted by: A P | Apr 15, 2018 10:23:09 AM | 11

I can confirm that the chain of custody was 100% watertight, no worries there. Custody was 100% under iFUKUS control from the moment of contamination of the victims/environment until the completion of all tests and the publication of final reports. That is why the samples were spiked with fresh A-234.

willem friso , Apr 15, 2018 12:58:22 PM | 37
Peter AU 1 33
The video of the two medics at the Douma hospital you can find at Voltaire Network, but they are in French. Hope you can understand French?
BM , Apr 15, 2018 12:59:11 PM | 38
The important part about the presence of unmetabolised A-234 in the samples is that it proves incontrovertably that the analysis was faked implicate the UK's claims. (By 'analysis' here I specifically mean the entire process from the taking of the samples up until the provision of the final report; the existence of the leak from Spiez implies that one or more chemists were doing their job honestly and therefore objected to the fabrications in the final published reports - indeed there could have been many people involved who were acting entirely honestly - but at some critical stage within the chain of custody the process was faked).

There are however two possibilities:

a) The samples taken by OPCW were deliberately spiked with a mixture of high purity virgin A-234 with metabolic derivatives (and/or non-metabolic disintegration products from the virgin A-234 since it is chemically not very stable??) AFTER the blood samples were taken from the Skripals.

b) The Skripals were injected with A-234 shortly (probably very few minutes) before the OPCW experts arrived to take the samples.

Lavrov's statement seems to imply that the blood samples contained both virgin i.e. unreacted A-234, and metabolic by-products of A-234 (i.e. chemicals produced by A-234 as it is broken down by the human body). The implications of that are very important - according to one expert comment I read somewhere (I can't remember where), these metabolic by-products would have to be in plausible proportions, which would be very difficult to mix in the test-tube (that expert cited a sports doping case where the analyst spiked the sample with pure un-metabilised doping drug from a laboratory sample, and was later convicted because he got it wrong). Maybe these certified OPCW labs are capable of mixing virgin A-234 and metabolic products in plausible proportions, but that sounds like "rocket science" to me, i.e. it is a very serious endeavour in itself. That implies that possibility (b) has to be taken seriously.

Even if the A-234 by-products were not metabolic by-products but simply the products of disintegration of A-234 through intrisic chemical instability (i.e. without biological activity) that would also have important implications - such faking would be vastly easier to accomplish but (it seems to me) would imply gross negligence on the part of the analysts unless the lack of METABOLIC by-products was spotted and explicitly drawn attention to as evidence of faking. According to reports, A-234 is metabolised quite rapidly, so the metabolic by-products should be produced very quickly and not much unreacted A-234 should remain.

In a previous comment I have already asserted that the phone call to Viktoria Skripal was faked from the British side by digitally altering the voice characteristics of another person (i.e. not Yulia Skripal) - the British have this capability and I have personally experienced it. To my mind the artificial police-managed statements allegedly made by Yulia Skripal, the denial of visa to Viktoria etc imply that she was by that time already irreversably incabable of making a statement by herself - i.e. either she was dead, or 'preserved' in a coma under life support.

I also think that the BZ was more likely administered by aerosol in the park - quite possibly by the mystery so-called "policeman" (actually from Porton Down or MI6?) - and the restaurant may well have been a decoy, otherwise the response latency for Sergei and Yulia would have been more divergent. That should be visible on cctv, but of course that will never come out. If the BZ was weaponised as an aerosol it would be absorbed very quickly, and the two victims would be affected at the same time.

* Disclaimer * - I am not an expert! Just an "armchair commenter". I hope "Old Microbiologist" will respond, as he obviously has detailed experience in this field.

Christian Chuba , Apr 15, 2018 1:54:57 PM | 40
It's getting clear to me now. There are 1980's hold overs on both sides of the pond in the CIA, MI6, and bureaucracies in both govts who believe that Trump / May are the new Reagan / Thatcher, destined to destroy Russia a second time. Now all they need is another Pope.

BTW I liked Reagan and the Pope (he lived long enough to condemn the Iraq war). Reagan knew how to keep the deep state in line but after we won the Cold War they took over the amateurs starting with Clinton.

So the deep state is unleashing hell on earth because they want to finish off Russia to achieve world domination.

jawbone , Apr 15, 2018 2:13:56 PM | 41
During a brief moment when I was viewing CNN yesterday (Alex Witt was playing bad cop most of the time, making sure Russia was suitably demeaned and excoriated for its evil ways) --but, iirc and I may not have done*, someone asked why the FUKUS would endanger people by blowing up locations the US stated they absolutely KNEW held chemical weapons and precursors. The reply was that the Pentagon was certain that since the locations were not in heavily populated areas that the breezes would disperse the poisons safely.

I somehow cannot believe anyone believes that, but, hey...true believers. Lies to get the West unto yet another illegal war.

*Hhmmm, maybe I heard that in response to questioning at the Pentagon briefing.

On the little broadcast news I caught, mostly there was chest thumping that the West's missiles so completely bested the Russian anti-missile equipment. Not a hair on their chinny-chin-chins (OK, West's missiles don't have hairs, but they are telling fairy tales) were even touched, according to the reporting based on Pentagon pronouncments.

Paul , Apr 15, 2018 2:21:52 PM | 42
OPCW "splainin to do"
It may be that the current OPCW head, like the last one, has children whose locations are known to John Bolton.
BraveNewWorld , Apr 15, 2018 2:23:19 PM | 43
The UN has been fully weoponized by the US and it's sock puppet partners in the west. The western powers completely ignore the UN charter while demanding absolute power through the UNSC. It is time for both Russia and China to leave the UN which will lead to a cascade of other countries leaving. It will also end any lingering belief in the legitimacy of the UN.

Some thing like the UN is needed but like the League of Nations before it, the past due date was long ago. It is time for a new organization to arise that takes into account the fact that the vast majority of the world lives in Asia and acknowledges the complete irrelevance of the General Assemble vs the power of the UNSC was a big mistake for the world as it was intended to be by the US.

If Russia and China proposed an organization that would give India, Pakistan, Latin America & Africa an actual stake in decisions as opposed to just being the victims as they are now, and the rest of the world a say rather than just an arbitrary security council, I think they would jump at it. With the vast majority of the world on board I think most of the Western states would eventually join. The US would never deem to join any thing where they don't have control. But they completely ignore the UN Charter & international law, contribute fewer peace keepers than Canada and don't pay their bills any way.

Party's over boys. Time to move on.

Paul , Apr 15, 2018 2:32:16 PM | 44
@ Bart Hansen:
You're right it's remarkable that the garrulous, ghoulish UK press has turned up no sensationalistic stories (fake or true) at all.

Not clear who anyone would come forward to... in fact perhaps scores have come forward. News blackout seems almost total.

Tuyzentfloot , Apr 15, 2018 2:36:10 PM | 45
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK201480/
says the latency can amount to several hours so I wonder if it can be made to match with the 'door handle' theory {or is that more than a claim}.
"it is currently used as a pharmacological tool (a muscarinic antagonist known as QNB)"
So BZ is over 50 years old, commercially available, and it can point to hm, anyone. Not even some bigger player with access to advanced laboratory.
Paul , Apr 15, 2018 2:44:19 PM | 46
@ BraveNewWord comment 45

Point well made. Although Russia and China have gone part way -- SCO, etc -- it may be the moment to go big -- an alternative to the UN, along the lines you've described. This might include the possibility of imposing tariffs on rogue states, as concerns the resolutions of such groups as the alt-UN climate convention, chemical weapons conventions, and an alt-WTO that can impose a financial transfer tax on all foreign exchange transactions so that the organization can be financing, and not have to go begging to Hegemon. Neutral or rotating sites (not NYC). etc. etc.

mali , Apr 15, 2018 2:44:31 PM | 47
: CNN journalist confirmed defintely CW used in Duma by sniffing a child's backpack somewhere in Northern #Syria on April 14

How low can MSM presstitutes go?

Laninya , Apr 15, 2018 3:17:24 PM | 48
Strike_Back:_Retribution ( a ten-part British-American action television series )
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_Back:_Retribution

According to the script:
Episode 6: ----> The novichiok is fake however...

Hmmmmm. Someone should check out that lab in Pripyat, Ukraine .

Carrie , Apr 15, 2018 3:19:16 PM | 49
I thought the statement from the Swiss Spietz lab, as read by Lavrov , contained a passage that sounded odd, out of place:
I will now be quoting what they sent to the OPCW in their report. You understand that this is a translation from a foreign language but I will read it in Russian, quote: "Following our analysis, the samples indicate traces of the toxic chemical BZ and its precursor which are second category chemical weapons. BZ is a nerve toxic agent, which temporarily disables a person. The psycho toxic effect is achieved within 30 to 60 minutes after its use and lasts for up to four days. This composition was in operational service in the armies of the US, the UK and other NATO countries. The Soviet Union and Russia neither designed nor stored such chemical agents. Also, the samples indicate the presence of type A-234 nerve agent in its virgin state and also products of its degradation." End of quote.

I was under the impression OPCW Labs (and OPCW itself) were only empowered to discover and reveal "if a chemical substance(s) was used and if so, what?" Isn't that why Porton Down has steadfastly refused to say "Russian/made in Russia" re the Salisbury A-234?

Lavrov states he is reading in Russian something translated from another language. However it seems unlikely that the sentences emboldened would cause any problems in translation? Perhaps it's a little Lavrov 'embroidery' to see who bites and how they bite?

james , Apr 15, 2018 3:31:54 PM | 51
thanks b.. i am particularly interested in what larvov has to say and the info he is in possession of...

@12 farm ecologist.. thanks for that bit of clarity on all this..

@13 kiza... thanks for your post as well.. that is how i see it too..

@24 peter.. i continue to see it the way you are framing it here as well... it was a double pronged game plan that went awry..

jawbone , Apr 15, 2018 3:32:28 PM | 52
Re: why hospital workers and others have not said anything about the Skripals' situation in a long time, it's very likely everyone, including patients and witnesses from Salisbury have been made to sign nondisclosure agreements. At least that's what happens in Brit series shown on Masterpiece Theatre.

Also, DS Nick Bailey may have been sent to the house to get him exposed to whatever the chem agent was, part of being a way to draw attention away from the main site of exposure? BZ may explain the rather interesting description Bailey's written statement included: this line, and only this one, which described any physical or mental reactions he felt from his ordeal:

I "People ask me how I am feeling - but there are really no words to explain how I feel right now. Surreal is the word that keeps cropping up - and it really has been completely surreal."

Surreal hallucinations?

james , Apr 15, 2018 3:34:50 PM | 54
@52 jawbone.. that is how i read all that too.. complete enforced silence of anyone involved with the skripal event... talk about democracy!!
Anon , Apr 15, 2018 3:36:14 PM | 55
Obviously Russia was correct in the BZ claim, the response by OPCW is disgraceful - apparently they are now in panic mode trying to come up with a explanation for BZ findings, apparently you cant trust organs like this today, totally biased.
TJ , Apr 15, 2018 3:43:13 PM | 56
@48 Laninya

Also the series was only 10 episodes and supposed to end last year, it was then split into 2 5 episode chucks so the series could end this year, much closer in time and memory to the Salisbury incident.

Foggy World , Apr 15, 2018 3:46:10 PM | 57
I read this chapter at another place last night and my head just swelled up with a song I learned as a child in Canada and I rearranged and typed it in their comments.

"And Theresa May rolled her wheel barrow, through streets wide and narrow, crying cockles and mussels alive, alive O."

The tune is perfect for the feelings that swept over me and the situation of a street fish monger peddling her wares truthfully or not seems to capture the huge pickle she has put herself into.

CanSpeccy , Apr 15, 2018 4:05:06 PM | 58
"I have no theory how the BZ or the A-234 made it into the OPCW samples or if the Skripals were really influenced by either of these poisons or are victims of simple shellfish poisoning. Your guess is a good as mine."

A-234 (Novichok) is an acetylcholine esterase inhibitor, that causes uncontrolled muscle contraction, and hence vomiting and convulsions. BZ is a paralytic agent, like botulinus toxin, that causes paralysis and, hence, in severe cases death by asphyxiation. Thus, A-234 and BZ are antagonists, meaning that one would be a logical thereapeutic treatment for poisoning by the other. There is no mystery therefore that both would be found in the Skripal blood samples. The question that remains unanswered is which was the poison an which the prescribed therapeutic agent.

dewn , Apr 15, 2018 4:43:28 PM | 59
Using BZ would also explain why they keep Skripals out of any media - a simple question from some journalist like "what did you feel" may lead to them mentioning hallucinations which immediately throws Novichok bull out of the window.
farm ecologist , Apr 15, 2018 4:56:08 PM | 60
CanSpeccy @58

While technically A-234 and BZ would be expected to cancel out each others' toxic effects, at least to some extent, A-234 would never be used therapeutically, and I'm pretty sure BZ also has no recognized medicinal uses (although it's a good experimental tool). I expect that any physician administering them to humans would lose his or her license, at a very minimum. In both cases, safer antidotes exist.

PavewayIV , Apr 15, 2018 5:21:47 PM | 61
Carrie@49 - When the OPCW sends teams to Syria on Fact Finding missions, the teams are given rather bizarre and restrictive mandates. The one you cite was from previous fact-finding mission.

The Porton Down analysis confirmation (collecting samples and distributing to OPCW labs) was in response to a technical assistance request by the UK delegation to the OPCW - something all OPCW members are allowed to do. We only know in general about what UK asked, not the specifics. The details of that request are unrelated to the mandate of the Fact Finding teams you cited.

The exact request made by the UK delegation is confidential. We can only guess what they asked by what they said in public. Likewise, we can only guess the details of those analysis by what the UK, the OPCW and Spiez lab said publicly. The lab can say whatever they want to the OPCW as part of their analysis. The OPCW has been usurped and is no longer impartial (my opinion, not legal fact). They insulate uncomfortable findings from the public with their bureaucracy and rules of confidentiality.

The OPCW members themselves could change that, but that would require a majority of the 192 members to agree on something. It's like expecting the government to un-corrupt itself after it has been usurped. There's simply too much at stake for the smaller nations (foreign aid, military assistance, lives of children in New York, etc.) to fix the OPCW machine.

Lavrov is saying there was a whistleblower who wanted to make known what was in the Spies Lab report. Their motivation was because they knew the OPCW was (or already did) cover up the BZ findings. Of course the OPCW shouldn't have covered that up from it's member states and those member states should object and demand the full report, but they never will. And for the exact same reasons they can't and will never fix the usurped machine itself.

What's most interesting is that, if the whistleblower/Lavrov claim about the Spiez Lab report is true,

1) It's solid proof of sample spiking. That would be the impossibly pure, un-degraded something-like-A-234 from blood, urine or tissue taken two weeks after the fact, and in quantities that would have absolutely killed the Skripals given what was still there after two weeks. Any reasonable lab would interpret that finding as such.

2) The BZ findings explain the Skripals initial condition, and implicate the US/UK/NATO who developed and weaponized it. The USSR never had BZ weapons or worked with BZ - that was the west.

Spiez Lab, to it's credit, knows exactly what kind of deception is going on. They apparently had no intention of weasel-wording their analysis or impugning their lab's credibility. IF they put those words in their analysis for the OPCW, then it was a kind of "In your face, LIARS" jab. The lab's lawyers would have approved - don't drag Spiez into your world domination schemes. The OPCW filtered that out in their public report, and have the same dilemma as any government agency confronted with whistleblower claims.

In the unusual and rare event that the Spiez analysis ever sees the light of day, the OPCW will be made to be the fall guy with much fanfare. Not the US or UK, who will just have to wait to see the results of an independent investigation into the matter. Five years at least - these things take time. For now, just deny something nobody is allowed to prove.

PW , Apr 15, 2018 9:34:37 PM | 62
Going out on a serious limb here.

But things start to make sense when you think of all the things that have occurred in the last few weeks.

The Russians warned of impending chemical weapons event in Syria, then the Skripals are found. This makes me wonder. Like father, like daughter? Were they blackmailed or willing participants? Was Yulia a mule for MI6 with her visit to her father as the cover for the operation? Was she tasked with transporting chemical weapons on behalf a looming Syria operation, of weapons produced at Porton Down? Having a Russian national manage to transit the material via certain points internationally, MI-6/FBI/CIA can then use her own itinerary to show how it originated from Russia. The same way Mueller and the FBI set up fake terrorist plots so they could get public convictions for the plotters the FBI created.

So what went wrong? Maybe the precursors were stored incorrectly. Maybe they mixed in a way that ended up not killing them. That's how they were able to "save" the Skripals in hospital, because they could tell the ER exactly what the agent was. If Novichok is so deadly, and since they didn't die, to me, that seems as plausible as anything else. I'm no expert in chemistry, so I'm not even sure it's possible for the two of them to become ill in this way.

Then, we had the Saudi Clown Prince all over Europe, and finally in Paris. We know MBS is the main benefactor for Jaesh al-Islam. SA could have been the coordinator to make the pieces fall into line. Getting Jaesh and the White Helmets ready to receive a gif from Porton Down. Dump the chemical weapon in a place, get some bodies to film, then wait for international teams to arrive to "discover" samples of A-234. The Jihadis in Syria have done this before in 2013.

One has to admit, if there was a gas attack in Syria, and it turned out to be A-234 Novichok, think of how that would have been such a bonanza for Trump, May, Macron, and the Saudi Clown Prince! But if the Skripals ended up incapacitated, it could explain why the scrambling of the staged international sh*tshow at the UN and the earnestness of the FUKUS reaction in all this. In desperation, they went back to the barrel bomb gambit, a substitute for what they had hoped to do, so then they can go straight into the airstrike.

Why do I think this? Makes sense that Yulia doesn't want to go back to Russia and why the British/Yanks are keeping her incommunicado. Maybe the Kremlin wants here back, for something more than just being a Russian national and why the MI-6/CIA won't let her go.

Speaking of which, it's possible the Russians, behind closed doors suspect this and played their cards well. This might help to explain why the reaction by the Russians was so muted for the strikes in Syria.

All of this is speculation, right up there with the thermite people, of course, but that's what everyone is trading in right now, including Paris, London and Washington.

Yeah, Right , Apr 15, 2018 9:36:05 PM | 63
If we assume - for arguments sake, if nothing else - that Lavrov's information is accurate then the Russians have played their hand in a masterly fashion.

After all, the only way Lavrov can have this information is if the Russians have an intelligence asset in place.

But where, exactly?

Because of the manner in which this information is released nobody knows if that asset is inside the Spiez labs (i.e. where the report originated) or at the OPCW (i.e. where the report was received and then censored).

So this puts everyone in a very difficult position because they don't know how much more information Lavrov has up his sleeve.

After all, if the source is at Spiez Labs then Lavrov is out of ammo, so to speak. The OPCW can claim that the BZ information was not confirmed by the other two labs and, therefore, it is right and proper that it be left out. Lavrov would be in no position to dispute that even if it were a flat-out lie.

But if the source is inside the OPCW then Lavrov may well have all three lab reports, in which case the OPCW would be falling into a trap of its own making if it tries to lie its way out of this. Lavrov would be able to cut them to ribbons by carefully releasing more info.

That, at least in my opinion, is why the Spiez is being so circumspect, and why the OPCW is doing a very good impersonation of a rabbit caught in headlights i.e. until they know where the source of this leak is they can't even begin to rough-up a cover-up.

somebody , Apr 15, 2018 10:13:21 PM | 66
Posted by: PavewayIV | Apr 15, 2018 5:21:47 PM | 61

It is interesting how the "very pure" stuff everybody agrees on is spun in different ways. "Very pure" was interpreted as meaning "can only have been produced by a state". But thinking about it - of course it is unlikely to have been found "pure" in a sample taken from the environment. Russian scientists including Mirzayanov seem to unite on not possible to have been found if Novichok on 19th with rain etc.

2 labs had the samples taken from environment, 2 labs had blood samples. Hardly anything will have been found in the blood samples.

james , Apr 15, 2018 10:16:46 PM | 67
this tells one all they need to know about the usa or the uks role in chemical weapon attacks..
Debsisdead , Apr 15, 2018 10:34:02 PM | 68
Althouth some may have had to sign Non Disclosures, it is difficult to understand why MI5 would even bother since undoubtedly many staff would refuse at from MI5's point of view totally un-necessary since post the consultant's letter to the Times the Home Office announced that any further leaks by staff would result in prosecution under the englander official secrets act .

This a particularly nasty piece of legislation that is an act of parliament dating back to part 1 of the 20th century euro war. Some people are asked to sign it but that is more about intimidation than legality since it applies to all public sector employees, contractors and consultants regardless.

I remember being made to sign it by HR ('personnel' in those days) after getting a telco techie job as a kid in the bad old days when Aoteraoa public servants were bound by the kiwi version (they now have the privacy act which is meant to be about freedom of information but is actually used by every govt agency spokesperson to hide their mistakes regardless giving out details of medical treatment is one of the big no-nos rightly so too, a nurse in Aotearoa only just missed out on getting slotted up for a good spell when she told a student's family at home in India that their daughter had dropped in to the public hospital where she worked for a termination. The girl copped big damages by kiwi standards).

Anyway england, as soon as the Home Secretary mumbled about the OS Act everybody including the media who can also be tossed into the slammer for the rest of their naturals for printing something that is covered by the Act, shut right up. Most especially the original doctor.

Carrie , Apr 16, 2018 6:59:57 AM | 69
Posted by: PavewayIV | Apr 15, 2018 5:21:47 PM | 61

PavewayIV thanks, as always I appreciate your thorough analysis.

...and in quantities that would have absolutely killed the Skripals given what was still there after two weeks...
Indeed, and if A-234 is as strong as reported, it's likely any traces around the Skripals would have killed the first responders too.

No doubt related to Lavrov's disclosure: this morning (and yesterday in the Sunday Times) nearly every national UK paper is running a front page version of this story: "Russia launches cyber war on UK with 'dirty tricks' campaign as PM to face Commons over Syria strikes" (taken from The Daily Telegraph). This meme is so widespread (BBC Radio 4 also) that, in itself, it looks like a co-ordinated attempt at scaremongering and misinformation.

It's designed to make people think that anything they read online that is contrary to the official FUKUS narrative about Russia/Syria can be given the term 'dirty trick' and dismissed. And by conflating the Skripal story with Syria (remember the messages about 'package delivered' picked up by '4-Eyes' in Cypress?) then anything Russia says about the Skripal affair is suspect and "not worthy of your consideration, dear reader".

I see that The Sun newspaper is now running with this news in it's online version:

RUSSIA and Syria have blocked chemical inspectors from investigating the site of a brutal chemical attack in Douma, Syria, reports claim.

Russia may even have compromised the site of the April 7 gas attack, according to Ahmet Uzumcu, Director general of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

"It's our concern they may have tampered with it to thwart the fact finding investigation," Mr Uzumcu is quoted as saying by NBC's Bill Neely.

Also see yesterday's important report by Elijah J Magnier. Ties stuff together. Folks, in seeking out and highlighting the truth we going to have our work cut out for us here! [See "have your work cut out (for you)"

qualtrough , Apr 16, 2018 7:12:27 AM | 70
This is one of the few if only 'miracle recovery' situations in which the victims did not sit down for interviews. I imagine once they have been groomed enough they will sit down for an interview with a trusted news organization.
Yonatan , Apr 16, 2018 1:29:48 PM | 72
BZ is not a hallucinogenic compound. It is a nerve agent with an unusual high ratio of lethal dose to symptomatic dose (~400:1). That means the key symptoms of nerve agent poisoning can be induced by exposure to low levels of agent way below the levels needed to kill someone. That would protect the attacker as well as not immediately killing the victims.

There was no audited chain of custody for the first samples so traces on Novichok could have been introduced between the taking of the samples (presumably by a phlebotomist at the hospital) and its arrival at Porton Down.

The only publicly announced CCTV footage (from a private camera) showed the Skripals en route from Zizzis to the park bench where they were found. The footage also showed a blonde haired women leaving the shop(?) hosting the private CCTV camera some minutes after the Skripals and following the same route. There are claims that she appeared to be carrying a face mask. She was listed as a person of interest by the local police, but there was no follow-up once the presence of nerve agent was made public.

This was all before Bailey came down with symptoms. This poisoning was presumably an unexpected complicating event for those running the false flag. From local media sources, it appears that he drove himself to Salisbury hospital early Monday morning (5 March probably before 10:00 am some 18 hours after the attack). The hospital entrance and his car were subsequently sealed off and decontaminated. It would be interesting to know the temporal relationship between his arrival and the knowledge that a nerve agent was used.

The false flaggers were then presented with a problem of explaining Bailey's delayed symptoms. The explanation would have to exclude the possibility of him being poisoned at the same time as the Skripals to avoid anyone regarding him as an eyewitness. An unidentified police officer turned up at the Skripal's house (mentioned in local media) around 5pm on Sunday shortly after the attack. The seems to have provided the false flaggers with a plausible (to them) source of poisoning, namely the door handle.

How did Bailey actually become contaminated? He was described as an early emergency services responder (local media). If he was first on the scene, one plausible explanation is that he was exposed to low amounts of BZ aerosal as one of the Skripals vomitted in his presence. We know from the nature of BZ that even low levels are capable of inducing symptoms, probably slowly progressive at those exposure levels. Local media photos of the hazmat crews show them putting a pile of sawdust/fine sand onto the ground adjacent to the bench, then scooping it up and putting it into an impermeable container which was then sealed for disposal. This supports the vomitting hypothesis, which was also observed by later passers by.

My hypothesis for events: The Skripals were exposed to an aerosol spray of low dose BZ sprayed into their faces by an unknown person (possibly the blonde woman) whilst sitting at the bench. Bailey was unintentionally contaminated by a similar lower level aerosol of BZ as he attended the vomitting Skripal. The desired story of pure Novichok poisoning could not be explained unless Bailey received a higher dose at a later time from a source that the Skripals were plausibly in contact with - hence the door handle hypothesis. The door handle hypothesis would also allow the false flaggers to direct attention away from the possiblity that the Skripals were attacked at the bench. The trail of the attacker (clearly part of the false flag team) could then be closed off and covered up.

Anon , Apr 16, 2018 1:55:48 PM | 73
So now Skripal himself is ok, God what a pathetic circus UK have put on.
irena , Apr 16, 2018 3:18:46 PM | 74
A-234 according to Mirzayanov and A-234 according to Hoenig have different structures. Mirzayanov claims that a number of weaker agents developed as part of the Foliant program were published in the open literature as organophosphate pesticides, in order to disguise the secret nerve agent program as legitimate pesticide research. So, it was made to be pesticides. And it can be produced as a number of different pesticides everywhere in the world.
Kaima , Apr 16, 2018 6:00:37 PM | 75
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/syria-chemical-attack-gas-douma-robert-fisk-ghouta-damascus-a8307726.html

Corroboration for Douma attack - no gas

Robet James Parsons , Apr 16, 2018 6:57:37 PM | 76
Entirely implausible?

Posted by: Madeira | Apr 15, 2018 9:45:53 AM | 3

and From the resistance trench with love | Apr 15, 2018 10:38:12 AM | 16

The Spiez lab is a NATO lab. Even though Switzerland is "neutral", it is an associate member of NATO under the NATO Peace Partnership. Spiez has been involved in serious falsifications of analysis results for the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP)'s work on the use of uranium and depleted uranium weapons.

E.g. the water samples that the UNEP took from missile craters in south Lebanon after the Israeli assault in August 2006 revealed low enriched uranium, which is what myself and two other independent researchers, Dai Williams and Dr Chris Busby, had found there. (Our samples were analyzed at Harwell in the United Kingdom.) However, what was announced in the preliminary report by the UNEP was NO radiation found.

We confronted the UNEP (Henrik Slotte, head of the Post-Conflict Intervention Unit, and Mario Buger, the technical officer), and they admitted that the water samples that they had taken from the craters had been carefully filtered before being tested. Under pressure from us, Burger returned, took more samples and had them tested properly, at Spiez. He also found low enriched uranium.

... ... ...

Robet James Parsons , Apr 16, 2018 7:06:42 PM | 77
POST SCRIPTVM

In my opinion, the release of the real report to the Russians was the work of a whistle-blower, for the Spiez lab has highly trained people who take great pride in the generally impeccable quality of the lab's work and its repuration for such. Many of them would have been appalled that their lab was party to some sort of deception.

This would also explain why they went ahead and analyzed the samples for things other than just what might have been requested, although I am inclined to believe that they were requested to analyze for everything. This would only heighten the indination of those who did the work upon discovering that an incomplete -- distorted -- report on thorough (gündlich) work had been sent to one of the states parties to the Convention that had a right to know everything.

Tranquillus , Apr 17, 2018 8:09:57 AM | 78
Lavrov expressed similar doubts about the independence of the international investigation into the shooting down of Malaysian airliner MH17 in 2014, after floating many alternative "theories".

"Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov says there are a lot of questions regarding the investigation into the downed MH17 Malaysia Airlines plane in eastern Ukraine, adding that it is not independent, not comprehensive and not truly international."
https://www.rt.com/news/311691-lavrov-mh17-malaysia-asean/

The Joint Investigation Team, consisting of the Netherlands, Malaysia, Ukraine, Belgium and Australia, concluded that MH17 was shot down by a Russian missile under the control of Donbas separatists. The Russian government continues to deny this.

jalp , Apr 17, 2018 9:47:41 AM | 79
My FB feed now has commercial media forwarding UK gov't claim that the Salisbury nerve agent was "delivered in liquid form", FWIW. So -- what (if anything) is that worth?
Ort , Apr 17, 2018 2:44:15 PM | 80
@ Tranquillus | 78
_________________________________

Lavrov was right then, and he's right now. The "Joint Investigation Team" is actually "The Fix Is In Team". The official title is just for show, to make infoganda that impresses the ignorant, complacent, and submissive. It's exactly like the Big Lie that "17 intelligence agencies separately concluded that Russians meddled in US elections".

[Apr 17, 2018] 'No release of chemicals is best proof there were none' employee of bombed Syrian research site

Apr 17, 2018 | www.rt.com

An engineer at the now-bombed-out research facility north of Damascus, which the US claims was the heart of Syria's chemical weapons program, says the labs were making medicine and testing toys for safety. RT Arabic correspondents have visited one of the main targets of the US-led missile attack on Syria, the Scientific Studies and Research Center in the Barzeh district in northern Damascus. The three-story building was pelted with 57 Tomahawk missiles launched from US warships and 19 air-to-surface missiles, the Pentagon said.

The massive bombardment left it lying in ruins, with its walls and roof almost completely collapsed and lab equipment scattered around.

The morning after the strike, several media outlets, including RT, AFP, CBS News and others were given a tour to the former research facility, now little more than a pile of rubble.

[Apr 17, 2018] False flags are real US has a long history of lying to start wars -- RT Op-ed

Notable quotes:
"... indulging an addiction ..."
"... in all probability ..."
"... casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation ..."
"... repeated acts of violence ..."
"... could be used in a deception operation designed to confuse enemy planes in the air, to launch a surprise attack against enemy installations or in a provocation operation in which Soviet aircraft would appear to attack US or friendly installations to provide an excuse for US intervention. ..."
Apr 17, 2018 | www.rt.com

Danielle Ryan is an Irish freelance journalist. Having lived and worked in the US, Germany and Russia, she is currently based in Budapest, Hungary. Her work has been featured by Salon, The Nation, Rethinking Russia, Russia Direct, teleSUR, The BRICS Post and others. Follow her on Twitter @DanielleRyanJ, check out her Facebook page, or visit her website: danielle-ryan.com Published time: 16 Apr, 2018 15:49 Get short URL False flags are real – US has a long history of lying to start wars FILE PHOTO: U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell holds up a vial that he described as one that could contain anthrax © Ray Stubblebine / Reuters Use of the term 'false flag' is often met with raised eyebrows and accusations of conspiracism. But false flags are a very real and very present feature of geopolitics -- and denying that is simply denying reality. Last week, the United States, along with the United Kingdom and France, bombed Syrian government targets, ostensibly in retaliation for an alleged chemical attack which was carried out one week before in the city of Douma.

The story we're told is simple: Syrian President Bashar Assad is an evil maniac who uses poison gas on his citizens for the sheer entertainment value. As neocon think tank the Atlantic Council put it last week, when Assad gasses people, he is simply " indulging an addiction " -- an addiction which he seems to have only recently acquired, given the fact that before Syria's war began, American journalists were busy praising the " educated " and " informed " Assad and marveling at the " phenomenal " levels of peace and religious diversity within Syria.

In 2006 Diane Sawyer praised Assad during a trip to Syria for the "phenomenal" levels of religious tolerance and peace in Syria. Funny how he turned into a monster at the exact moment Washington decided it was time for regime change. https://t.co/24qy6UtFez

-- Danielle Ryan (@DanielleRyanJ) April 14, 2018

Anyway, so intense is Assad's newfound desire for watching Syrian babies foaming at the mouth, that he is willing to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by deciding to use these weapons despite knowing it would provoke worldwide outrage and potentially a major US military effort to oust him. So, that's the story. Assad is a monster and the world must unite to stop him.

There are plenty of people who are less than convinced by this narrative, however. One of them is Peter Ford, the former British ambassador to Syria. Ford told BBC Radio Scotland that " in all probability " the alleged chemical attack never happened and that the video and image evidence used as proof by the US and its allies was falsified. There are others who believe that the attack could have been real, but that the perpetrators were anti-Assad rebels trying to provoke fresh military action from the US -- in other words, it was very possibly a false flag event which served its purpose perfectly.

One of the best questions to ask when something like this happens, is: Who benefits? Very clearly in this case, Assad has not benefited at all, but the rebel groups fighting against him have.

Whatever the truth about this alleged chemical attack, the notion of false flag events being used to prompt military action should not be met with such skepticism. The US has a long history of using lies (or 'fake news' you might call it) as a pretext for war. It is important to look at recent events in Syria within that context.

Nayirah testimony

Perhaps the most famous of all examples was the heart-wrenching testimony to Congress of a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl, identified only as Nayirah, which was used to sell the first Gulf War to the American people in October 1990. An emotional Nayirah told the Congressional Human Rights Caucus that she had witnessed Iraqi soldiers taking babies out of incubators and leaving them on the floor to die.

What Americans did not know, was that Nayirah was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the US and she had been coached by the American PR firm Hill and Knowlton. But before the details of the stunt and false testimony became widely known, it had already been used to sell America's war against Iraq in 1991.

In 1990 young Nayirah told of seeing Iraqi soldiers pull Kuwaiti babies out of incubators. Today our delivery of atrocity propaganda is more sophisticated, yet public credulity remains about the same. pic.twitter.com/l7UYmByl5D

-- U.S. Dept. of Fear (@FearDept) April 8, 2018
Operation Northwoods

In the 1960s, American military leaders devised plans to bomb US cities and blame Cuban leader Fidel Castro in order to manufacture public and international support for a war.

The plan was codenamed Operation Northwoods and what it advocated was nothing short of horrendous. The American military suggested sinking boatloads of Cuban refugees, hijacking planes and bombing Miami. The goal was to convince Americans that Castro had unleashed a reign of terror upon them.

The top brass were even willing to cause US military casualties by blowing up an American boat in Guantanamo Bay and blaming Cuba. Why? Because, as they put it, " casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation " and help manufacture support for war. The plans were quashed by President John F. Kennedy, who was assassinated one year later, leading some to speculate on a link between those events.

Gulf of Tonkin

Top US officials also distorted the facts in the lead-up to the Vietnam War and the media dutifully reported the official narrative as absolute fact, helping launch perhaps the most disastrous war in America's history.

On August 2, 1964, North Vietnamese torpedo boats attack the USS 'Maddox' while it was on " routine patrol " in international waters in the Gulf of Tonkin. Two days later, the US Navy reported a second " unprovoked " attack on the 'Maddox' and the USS 'Turner Joy' -- a second destroyer which had been sent in after the first attack. President Lyndon B. Johnson told the American people on TV that " repeated acts of violence " against the US ships must be met with a strong response. Soon after Johnson appeared on TV, Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which pre-approved any military action that he would take from that moment on.

The only problem was, there was no second attack on the US ships at all -- and the allegation that the first attack had been " unprovoked " was also a lie. In reality, the USS 'Maddox' had been gathering intelligence and providing it to South Vietnamese boats which were attacking North Vietnam. As for the second attack, the US boats had misinterpreted radio signals and radar images and spent two hours firing at nothing. Nonetheless, the " attack " was used to convince the American people to support war.

3. Given the folly of the British government over Iraq and Libya, and its undoubted misleading of the public over Iraq, it is perfectly reasonable to suspect it of doing the same thing again. Some of us also do not forget the blatant lying over Suez, and indeed the Gulf of Tonkin https://t.co/GLzyoPWaDG

-- Peter Hitchens (@ClarkeMicah) April 12, 2018
Soviet aircraft false flags

Recently declassified documents show yet more American false flag plotting, this time against the Soviet Union. A three-page memo , written by members of the National Security Council, suggested that the US government should acquire Soviet aircraft which would be used to stage attacks and provide the pretext for war.

Such aircraft, the memo said, " could be used in a deception operation designed to confuse enemy planes in the air, to launch a surprise attack against enemy installations or in a provocation operation in which Soviet aircraft would appear to attack US or friendly installations to provide an excuse for US intervention. "

The government even considered producing the soviet planes domestically in a massive covert operation. They went so far as to acquire estimates from the Air Force on the cost and length of time such an operation would take.

In a memo of undisclosed date, the US National Security Council suggested the government should either buy or covertly produce Soviet aircraft and use them to launch fake attacks, providing pretext for war https://t.co/d7fPLW6Fxw pic.twitter.com/tVnqbValPP

-- Danielle Ryan (@DanielleRyanJ) April 15, 2018

This is by no means an exhaustive list. Is there even any need to rehash the lies which were told in the lead-up to the Iraq war? The media here again swallowed the government's lies, one by one -- and 15 years later, the region is still suffering the consequences and very few lessons appear to have been learned.

These are not conspiracy theories. They are cold, hard evidence that the US has no qualms whatsoever about using false flag events and fake evidence to provide pretext for military action.

Continued lack of critical inquiry from the media, given the severe potential consequences of escalating the conflict in Syria, is tantamount to a crime.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

[Apr 16, 2018] BREAKING US media claims Nikki Haley is author of Trump's anti-Iran policies

Notable quotes:
"... Haley is known to be among the most hardened neo-cons in the Trump administration, with strong ties to the anti-Iranian American Israel lobby. ..."
"... Nikki Haley has often defied the moderate voice of Rex Tillerson and even James "Mad Dog" Mattis on a number of issues. Haley for example has repeatedly said that 'Assad must go', while Tillerson and Mattis have been far more realistic about the fact that President Assad will in all likelihood, continue to govern Syria for the foreseeable future. ..."
"... Nikki Haley also famously said that Russians cannot be trusted, while Rex Tillerson has worked closely (albeit usually through phone calls rather than grandiose public meetings) with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and was seen as instrumental in creating the joint Russian-US-Jordanian de-escalation zone in south western Syria. ..."
Oct 14, 2017 | theduran.com

The claims give insight into Trump's apparent defiance of his most senior Cabinet officials, Rex Tillerson and James "Mad Dog" Mattis.

by Adam , 14:09 4.8k Views

The US media outlet Politico has published claims based on internal White House leaks, which report that the controversial US Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, is the author of Trump's anti-JCPOA and broader anti-Iran policies, which were conveyed in his speech form the White House, yesterday evening.

Everything you need to know about Trump's de-certification of the JCPOA (Iran nuclear deal)

http://theduran.com/everything-you-need-to-know-about-trumps-de-certification-of-the-jcpoa-iran-nuclear-deal/embed/#?secret=xaZPdRsyGp

Haley is known to be among the most hardened neo-cons in the Trump administration, with strong ties to the anti-Iranian American Israel lobby. Her role as US Ambassador has been far more public than that of most of her predecessors. Many, including myself, suspect that Haley who has no previous foreign policy experience, is using her position at the UN to promote a future entry into elected politics at a Federal level.

President of the United States Nikki Haley–it could happen

http://theduran.com/president-of-the-united-states-nikki-haley-it-could-happen/embed/#?secret=93g295S6zE

According to Politico, in July of this year, Trump grudgingly certified the JCPOA under advice from Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary James "Mad Dog" Mattis. However, at the time, Haley was said to have volunteered to author an argument which could be employed in the future, which would attempt to justify a US de-certification of the JCPOA.

Politico reports ,

"At a mid-day meeting in the Oval Office in late July, U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley came to President Donald Trump with an offer.

Trump had grudgingly declared Tehran in compliance with the 2015 Iran nuclear deal earlier in the month, at the urging of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Secretary of Defense James Mattis. Trump hated the deal. But the two men pushed him to certify it, arguing in part that he lacked a strong case for declaring Iran in violation. A refusal to do so would have looked rash, they said, convincing Trump sign off for another 90 days.

Haley, in that July meeting, which also included National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster and Vice President Mike Pence, asked the president to let her make the case for decertification

'Let me lay a foundation for it', she said, according a source familiar with the proceedings. The president agreed.

Haley would become the administration's most vocal public proponent of decertification -- and Trump's favorite internal voice on Iran -- further boosting her standing with the president at a time when she is seen as a potential successor to Tillerson, whose tense relationship with Trump has burst into the open in recent days.

A month after her talk with Trump, Haley flew to Vienna to visit the headquarters of the International Atomic Energy Association, where she pressed officials about Iranian compliance with the deal. Soon after, she delivered a speech at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C., airing her "doubts and concerns" about the agreement.

Haley's role was described by a half-dozen administration officials who took part in the Iran policy review. While many of the president's cabinet members, aides, and advisers work to restrain his impulses, when it came to Iran deal Haley did the opposite -- channeling what many Democrats and even some Republicans consider the president's destructive instincts into policy".

The story from Politico which also argues that arch neo-con John Bolton pushed for a full withdrawal from the JCPOA from his position outside of the White House, follows may well known trends. This helps explain why Mattis recently stated that Iran is in compliance with the JCPOA and why Rex Tilleron's State Department has officially said the same.

Nikki Haley has often defied the moderate voice of Rex Tillerson and even James "Mad Dog" Mattis on a number of issues. Haley for example has repeatedly said that 'Assad must go', while Tillerson and Mattis have been far more realistic about the fact that President Assad will in all likelihood, continue to govern Syria for the foreseeable future.

She has also echoed Donald Trump's aggressive statements about North Korea, whereas Rex Tillerson has often repeated his view that the US does not and should not seek regime change in Pyongyang and instead will continue to pursue a diplomatic process.

Nikki Haley also famously said that Russians cannot be trusted, while Rex Tillerson has worked closely (albeit usually through phone calls rather than grandiose public meetings) with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and was seen as instrumental in creating the joint Russian-US-Jordanian de-escalation zone in south western Syria.

At one point, Rex Tillerson was said to have privately reprimanded Haley for inventing her own foreign policy without consulting her superiors at the State Department. However, it seems that in respect of Iran, Trump has overruled Tillerson and allowed Haley to take charge.

Haley later told journalists that she was offered the position of Secretary of State but turned it down, before being offered the position of Ambassador to the UN. Haley further attested that she sent Trump a list of demands that she never expected to be agreed upon, as a precondition for accepting her current position.

Nikki Haley was offered Secretary of States job and turned it down

http://theduran.com/nikki-haley-was-offered-secretary-of-states-job-and-turned-it-down/embed/#?secret=FF4q2WSDlC

Haley who has long been seen as a rogue figure in the Trump administration and one who is widely exceeding her authority, is apparently doing so with Donald Trump's approval.

With rumours swirling that Rex Tillerson planned on resigning, even before it emerged that he allegedly called Trump a "fucking moron", there is now an increased possibility that a hyper-neo-con, might soon become the chief foreign policy maker in a Trump administration that was elected on the basis of opposing the neo-con ideology.

With many Trump administration officials coming and going in short order, there is a very worrying possibility that Nikki Haley's role will only be enhanced in future months. This is dangerous not only for the United States, but for the wider world. Haley's inexperience is only matched by her zeal for bellicose measures against countries which have not done any harm to the American people. Such a person should not be anywhere near power, but it seems as though she has Trump's ear, far more than the vastly more mature Tillerson and Mattis.

[Apr 16, 2018] Russia's Red Lines in Relations with America by Stephen Lendma

Apr 16, 2018 | stephenlendman.org

n ( stephenlendman.org – Home – Stephen Lendman )

How much more US hostility toward Russia will it tolerate before declaring unacceptable red lines were crossed?

Washington and Moscow are on opposite sides of endless war in Syria – a US imperial project from day one of hostilities.

According to neocon Russophobe Nikki Haley and US ambassador to Moscow Jon Huntsman, further (illegal) Trump administration sanctions on Russia are coming, likely Monday.

They'll be imposed for Kremlin involvement in combating US-supported terrorists in Syria – cutthroat killers falsely called "rebels."

According to Haley, Russian enterprises allegedly "dealing with equipment related to Assad and any chemical weapons use" will be targeted.

No Syrian CWs exist, the nation's entire stockpile destroyed in 2014, confirmed by the OPCW. Yet according to Haley (and other lunatic fringe Trump administration Russophobes), Damascus has undisclosed CWs. Moscow is "covering this up."

The Big Lie persists. No evidence supports it. Facts on the ground never deter Washington from pursuing it diabolical imperial agenda.

US administrations and bipartisan congressional members consistently blame sovereign independent nations for US high crimes committed against them.

Haley falsely accused Moscow of aggressive behavior, turning truth on its head, claiming the Kremlin facilitated the alleged Douma CW incident.

Medical personnel on the ground treated no one for toxic poisoning, no one killed, ill or harmed, no CW residues found by Russian technical experts at the alleged site.

The false flag incident was staged to blame Syria and Russia for a nonevent – the Big Lie used as a pretext for US-led terror-bombing of Syrian sites, followed by more illegal sanctions on Moscow coming Monday.

On Sunday, OPCW inspectors arrived in Douma to inspect the site of the alleged CW attack, according to Syria's Deputy Foreign Minister Ayman Soussan.

AMN news said following US-led terror-bombing of Syrian sites, Russia is sending government forces more weapons and heavy equipment.

According to Southfront, the Pentagon lied, claiming all missiles fired struck Syrian targets – at the same time expressing concern about mission results.

An internal probe will be conducted to produce a more accurate after-action report, including why Syrian air defense systems downed most incoming missiles – reportedly 71 of 103 fired.

Washington intends permanent occupation of Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. According to Assad UN envoy Bashar al-Jaafari, one-third of the country is illegally occupied by US forces, adding:

Security Council debates omit discussing this key issue. Along with terrorists permanent SC members America, Britain and France support, Damascus faces "three aggressors:" Washington, London and Paris. "We are a state," Jaafari stressed, "the sovereignty of which has been violated by a permanent member of the UNSC."

The international community ignores this core issue of the conflict, along with US-led aggression, using terrorists as foot soldiers, pretending endless war is "civil."

After the latest US-led aggressive incident on a sovereign state, what's next? Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said the Kremlin has "obvious red lines," adding Moscow will do all it can to pull East/West relations out of a dangerous "political nosedive." Addressing the issue diplomatically assures continued failure, along with weakness, encouraging Washington to slam Russia and Syria harder.

Dealing with hegemonic America requires using the only language it understands – challenging it forcefully. Pursuing failed policies assures making a bad situation worse ahead. Washington isn't likely to step back from the brink unless pushed. Diplomacy is futile, accomplishing nothing, encouraging greater US hostility, including endless aggression in Syria and tough anti-Russia actions.

Washington's rage for global dominance likely assures an eventual East/West showdown. Responding weakly to hostile US actions assures more to come, likely harsher than already. When will Russia respond with toughness – better to risk it in Syria than be forced to act in defending its heartland.

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org ( Home – Stephen Lendman ). Contact at [email protected] .

My newest book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."

[Apr 16, 2018] But what neither the British Government nor the OPCW have, to the present, acknowledged is that blood samples from the Skripal's contained two nerve agents, A-234, aka Novichok, plus 3-Quinuclidinyl Benzilate, aka BZ or Buzz.

Apr 16, 2018 | www.unz.com

CanSpeccy , Website April 16, 2018 at 6:15 pm GMT

The technical ability of Porton Down to identify a chemical has never been in doubt, and the only "finding of the United Kingdom " the OPCW has confirmed is the identity of the chemical.

But what neither the British Government nor the OPCW have, to the present, acknowledged is that blood samples from the Skripal's contained two nerve agents, A-234, aka Novichok, plus 3-Quinuclidinyl Benzilate, aka BZ or Buzz.

Novichok is a convulsant (which acts by preventing the breakdown of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine at the neuromuscular junction, with the result that muscles go into full contraction, hence the symptoms of convulsions, vomiting, etc.), whereas BZ is a paralytic agent (which acts by binding to acetylcholine receptors at the neuromuscular junction without activating them, thereby preventing muscle contraction, hence the symptoms of paralysis and ultimately death by asphyxiation).

Thus, BZ will serve as an antidote to Novichok poisoning, wheras Novichok will serve as an antidote to BZ poisoning. So the presence of Novichok in the Skipal blood samples is not conclusive evidence that Novichok was the poison, rather than the antidote, as I have discussed here: 3-Quinuclidinyl Benzilate: The Antidote to Novichok , and here: Novichok: Russia's Antidote to Seafood Poisoning .

[Apr 16, 2018] Tracing the Rush to War by Craig Murray

Notable quotes:
"... And in the later articles posted here, he writes: "That puts Saudi Arabia (and its client jihadists), Saudi Arabia's close ally Israel, the UK and the USA all in the frame in having a powerful motive in inculcating anti-Russian sentiment prior to planned conflict with Russia in Syria. Any of them could have attacked the Skripals." ..."
Apr 16, 2018 | www.unz.com

I have never ruled out the possibility that Russia is responsible for the attack in Salisbury, amongst other possibilities. But I do rule out the possibility that Assad is dropping chemical weapons in Ghouta. In this extraordinary war, where Saudi-funded jihadist head choppers have Israeli air support and US and UK military "advisers", every time the Syrian army is about to take complete control of a major jihadist enclave, at the last moment when victory is in their grasp, the Syrian Army allegedly attacks children with chemical weapons, for no military reason at all. We have been fed this narrative again and again and again.

We then face a propaganda onslaught from neo-con politicians, think tanks and "charities" urging a great rain of Western bombs and missiles, and are accused of callousness towards suffering children if we demur. This despite the certain knowledge that Western military interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya have had consequences which remain to this day utterly disastrous.

I fear that the massive orchestration of Russophobia over the last two years is intended to prepare public opinion for a wider military conflict centred on the Middle East, but likely to spread, and that we are approaching that endgame. The dislocation of the political and media class from the general population is such, that the levers for people of goodwill to prevent this are, as with Iraq, extremely few as politicians quake in the face of media jingoism. These feel like extremely dangerous times.

Ronald Thomas West , Website April 16, 2018 at 4:58 am GMT

Precisely what is meant to negate the "why on earth are we entering armed confrontation with a nuclear power" argument, I do not know

Well, Craig, you could try bringing some heat here:

https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2018/04/15/what-can-be-known-vs-what-will-be-known/

^ It beats singing to the choir

ValmMond , April 16, 2018 at 5:08 am GMT
I stopped reading at:

"I have never ruled out the possibility that Russia is responsible for the attack in Salisbury"

Time for timid half-truths is over. If by now you haven't identified the Skripal affair as the joint UK/US production it is, Act I of the AngloZionist war on Syria, Russia and humanity, your analysis isn't worth the pixels it's written on. There is zero doubt. Case closed. Especially after this:

https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2018/04/15/swiss-governmental-lab-identifies-the-substance-used-on-the-skripal-case-as-being-linked-to-the-nato/

I wish you realize that appeals to skepticism and lines like "I'm not fan of Putin/Assad" get you nowhere. You are facing a brutal, fact-twisting, intellect-insulting, lying, propaganda machine. Any concession you make to their "arguments" comes with the smell of blood. They'll mock your "moderate" views and will try to make you look weak and foolish as Sky-news did. You can't be only half-brave, half-informed and half-right. And why engage those shameless liars if not to destroy completely their blatant lies?

Wally , April 16, 2018 at 5:44 am GMT
BREAKING: British-US Toxin, Not Novichok used in Salisbury Attack

https://principia-scientific.org/breaking-british-us-toxin-not-novichok-used-in-salisbury-attack/

Swiss lab says 'BZ toxin' used in Salisbury, not produced in Russia, was in US & UK service

jilles dykstra , April 16, 2018 at 7:39 am GMT
Who pulls the strings ?

When Hungary prepared democratically laws to stop Soros meddling in Hungary Soros phoned Brussels, spoke to Juncker and Tusk, the next day Timmermans tried to intimidate the Hungarian government.

Just now there have been Hungarian elections, anti migration and anti Soros Orban was elected.

European parliament member Sargenti now wants to take Hungary's voting right in the EU away.

Sargenti is on the 231 member list that seem to be followers of Soros.

As Jimmy Carter once said 'those that want war do not expect that they themselves are going to be hurt'.

That in the next world war anyone will be more than hurt, killed, the war mongers do not understand, cannot believe.

Randal , April 16, 2018 at 10:03 am GMT
@ZummaZero

Please, why don't you mention the other possibilities, instead of "the Russian one"?

Bit harsh to criticise Craig Murray on that score. I see your point, and it would be a valid point to raise with an establishment journo who has been generally an effective part of the anti-Russia propaganda campaign, but Murray has discussed the other options on many occasions (and been the brunt of some pretty harsh establishment bullying in response).

In this case, it can safely be regarded as just efficient writing.

Vojkan , April 16, 2018 at 11:12 am GMT
Even if Assad did use gas, which he obviously didn't, who the heck are the Americans, the British, and the French to lecture anyone on morality, given that they unlike Assad did practice chemical warfare, and killed uncounted millions around the globe with "conventional" means in order to loot them, and to "punish" Assad as the bankster with an Oedipus complex Macron put it?
Tsar Nicholas , April 16, 2018 at 11:21 am GMT
@ValmMond

I think you are being unfair.

Mr Murray lost his job because he stood up for the right thing in 2004 and he has been abused ever since. His sanity has been called into question ever since he suggested the British government weren't telling the truth. His brief period in an instiuttion after Blair sacked him has been brought up more than once.

I suspect Craig's position of apparent open-mindedness has arisen from a lengthy Sky News TV interview with the appalling Kay Burley. He was careful in an eighteen minute segment not to give cause for Burley to label him as a Putin bot. He was most careful not to take the focus off the weakness in the British government's position and I think that was correct.

As soon as you see the tissue of lies emanating from London the innocence of Moscow follows naturally. Mr Murray was correct not to allow himself to be provoked by Kay Burley and she was visibly annoyed by her failure.

Sky News tried to bury the confrontation but somebody recorded it and you can find the interview at craigmurray.org

TT , April 16, 2018 at 2:49 pm GMT

The ever excellent Campaign Against the Arms Trade is back in the English High Court again today in its continuing attempts to ban arms sales to Saudi Arabia. It is against UK law to sell arms to a country which is likely to use them in breach of international humanitarian law , and that Saudi Arabia consistently and regularly uses British weapons to bomb schools, hospitals and civilians is indisputable.

Why didn't the High Court ban arm sales to UK army, which is using them in breach of international humanitarian law, consistently & regularly since its colonial era, in Vietnam & Korea wars, Blair's Iraq WMD illegal war, Cameron's illegal Libya bombing, and now May's illegal attack to Syria.

Saudi arabia Yemen's war pale in comparison to UK long history of atrocities. What a British hypocrite law enacted in a kangaroo judicial system? A country of government infested with shameless warmonger liars & paedophiles, yet popularly elected by its people. What a great Anglosaxon-West civilization & glorious demoncrapcy system to be spread around the world for easy subversion & regime change.

Proven guilty Iraq war criminal Tony Blair is walking free, repeating his same lies again to push for illegal Syria attack. Yet not a single war protest from UK people. Touch a LBGT issue or Trumps visit, British will gone hysteria protest in London, oh what a great nation. World Capital of paedophiles, war criminals & pathological liars.

How can God save the Queen that connive criminals, with stolen wealth soaking with innocents blood.

EliteCommInc. , April 16, 2018 at 3:53 pm GMT
I appreciated the frame you provided. That's a very serious charge against Great Britain -- sadly, I found it a somewhat compelling and disconcerting.

I suspect that in all of this there are fears that it's a response to enemies without as opposed to enemies from within. I have no idea where this notion comes from -- that states can act as authority for UN missions without the consent of the UN. Great Britain's press here sounds very much like the legal gymnastic of the US to invade Iraq and has much weight -- I agree.

The chaos in Libya, Syria, the Ukraine is the direct result of US and EU manipulation. I just don't know how to support "wrongness" on so many levels and consider myself a person of integrity. The humanitarian crisis in all of the regions is exacerbated by our own violations of law and foreign policy best practices.

Pale hobo , April 16, 2018 at 4:10 pm GMT
Not a bad article, but superficial. Does not address the why question and the huge ideological difference between Russia and the 'West' which leads to war.
Zumbuddi , April 16, 2018 at 4:21 pm GMT
@ValmMond

Agree. Resisting lying provocation to war should be done with what ZUSA terms "moral clarity." Said another way, No Quarter, No Mercy. If the need is felt to characterize Assad, the only things that needs be said are that he is the legitimate leader of a sovereign nation, and that attempts to topple him, by ZUSA & Anglos, are in direct violation of United Nations charter.

Greg Bacon , Website April 16, 2018 at 5:02 pm GMT

I have never ruled out the possibility that Russia is responsible for the attack in Salisbury, amongst other possibilities.

And I have never ruled out the word which can not be spoken, that ISRAEL was behind both attacks, to justify getting their US/UK/French lackeys to do in Syria what they can not without taking losses, attacking Syrian cities with cruise missiles.

Poisoned toothpaste and exploding phones: New book chronicles Israel's '2,700' assassination operations

Poisoned toothpaste that takes a month to end its target's life. Armed drones. Exploding mobile phones. Spare tyres with remote-control bombs. Assassinating enemy scientists and discovering the secret lovers of Muslim clerics.

A new book chronicles these techniques and asserts that Israel has carried out at least 2,700 assassination operations in its 70 years of existence. While many failed, they add up to far more than any other western country, the book says.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/mossad-assassinations-israel-foreign-operations-arafat-book-shin-bet-ronan-bergman-interviews-a8181391.ht

The main beneficiary of the recent cruise missile attacks against Syria is Israel, so let's be honest and see what happens.

From an April 2003 Haaretz article:

The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish, who are pushing President Bush to change the course of history. Two of them, journalists William Kristol and Charles Krauthammer, say it's possible.

This is a war of an elite. [Tom] Friedman laughs: I could give you the names of 25 people (all of whom are at this moment within a five-block radius of this office) who, if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and a half ago, the Iraq war would not have happened.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/white-man-s-burden-1.14110

Mike P , April 16, 2018 at 7:37 pm GMT
@James Brown

So, aside from selling weapons to Syria and Iran – and thus, giving up control over those weapons – what exactly should Putin have done to continue receiving your approval? Start WW3?

Another question: if this is just a staged play of good cop, bad cop – why does the puppet master behind the scenes not advance the plot? Why the need for silly diversions into the bucolic English countryside, and for embarrassing cameos by French boy princes?

Mike P , April 16, 2018 at 8:36 pm GMT
@Stonehands

Not sure where you are from, but some countries – particularly those that have experienced it at home – consider war a serious business, not quite the same as a bar brawl in Dodge City.

Anon [425] Disclaimer , Website April 16, 2018 at 8:51 pm GMT
Western Media are turning into a Laughing Gas attack.
paul23 , April 16, 2018 at 8:58 pm GMT
I keep hearing that the Qatar – Europe pipeline is the source of the Syria War, what I cant understand if their so desperate for this why does it need to go through Syria, theres`s other ways like across SA and up the red sea?
Antiwar7 , April 16, 2018 at 9:03 pm GMT
@ZummaZero

In Murray's first post on the Skripal story, he lists other possible suspects as Orbis Intelligence (who produced the Steele dossier) and the state of Israel:

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/russian-to-judgement/

And in the later articles posted here, he writes: "That puts Saudi Arabia (and its client jihadists), Saudi Arabia's close ally Israel, the UK and the USA all in the frame in having a powerful motive in inculcating anti-Russian sentiment prior to planned conflict with Russia in Syria. Any of them could have attacked the Skripals."

SolontoCroesus , April 16, 2018 at 9:16 pm GMT
@Sean

The West would simply like him to meet his obligations and stop gassing people as there is an international agreement against killing people that way. Why can't he just stick to the normal use of high explosives to blast them to pieces?

Why can't he just stick to the normal use of high explosives to blast them to pieces?

Because that process is still under Israeli patent protection??

ValmMond , April 16, 2018 at 9:49 pm GMT
@Stonehands

Didn't he and various generals plainly state that retaliation would be swift and immediately delivered to any such platform?

Yes, if Russian military assets in Syria are targeted or hit. The US strike was the warfare equivalent of a plate smashing fit thrown by a hysterical tranny. Just a loud demonstration of impotence and fishing for attention. It's better handled unanswered. Now, if the tranny decides to go in a full abuser mode, Putin may seriously mess up her makeup.

[Apr 16, 2018] Also excellent is Stephen F Cohen, Failed Crusade: America and the Tragedy of Post-Communist Russia

Apr 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

mauisurfer | Apr 15, 2018 6:02:21 PM | 108

Serious suggestion for you read Gorbachev, His Life and Times by William Taubman

Taubman is prof at Amherst also wrote "Nikita Khruschev" which won a Pulitzer

Also excellent is Stephen F Cohen, Failed Crusade: America and the Tragedy of Post-Communist Russia

In USA people say "everyone is entitled to an opinion", so maybe you are entitled to your view.

In England, they say "you are not qualified to have an opinion", and maybe they are right about your views on Gorbachev, because I do not believe you have informed yourself about the Gorbachev era.

Please read these books and then tell us if your view is influenced by what they say. I found all of them free online, do you know where/how to look for them? Any decent library will have them.

[Apr 16, 2018] Alas, this is far from over! by The Saker

Russia can do nothing alone. NATO is way too strong.
Notable quotes:
"... my honor is called solidarity ..."
"... my honor is loyalty ..."
"... by not taking any action the Russians also failed to deter any future attacks. But what could the Russians have done? ..."
"... Sic transit gloria mundi ..."
"... Trump demonstrated that the U.S. can still bomb non nuclear countries without regard for the Constitution, international law or common decency. The Deplorables demonstrated that elections will not change anything. Only the death of the U.S. dollar will end Anglo/Zio Imperial aggression. ..."
"... Russia was outgunned, so they did not respond. It was probably a wise decision. They did damage control admirably, and now have an opportunity to improve the Syrian arsenal with obvious justification. ..."
"... Slowly but surely, Russia is tightening the noose in Syria. Air defenses are improving. ..."
"... My precious, too many players want to start a real war between the Mercans and Russians. Aside from the casual suspects (KSA and Israel), Chinese also objectively benefit from the confrontation, which explains their aloofness. Should this come to a nuclear war, Chinese will be the one and only winner. For this old smart monkey is still sitting on the tree, and nothing has changed since Chairman Mao times. ..."
"... For Iran, this war will certainly enhance the Iran-Russia axis and thus may postpone the US aggression. Turkey loves it too because it can play both sides. ..."
"... Ironically, only the USA and Russia will be the biggest losers regardless of the outcome. ..."
"... In UNSC, China has surprisingly took abstained neutral stand, allowing it to play the coordinator role & denying US UK Fr to get any legit for attack. This avoid relegating UNSC into two sides shouting. Nikki Harley was thus preempted her wish of striking with or without UNSC mandate since all ended agreed to let UN conduct independent inspection. Overall, this continue to lock US UK Fr inside UNSC framework. ..."
"... The general idea seems to be containment of Russia, hemming them in within their own borders and cutting them off from being able to extend their influence outward. ..."
"... As part of this any allies of theirs such as Syria come under attack; if the west can't own them then they're to be reduced to chaos and rendered into costly burdens for the Russians. ..."
"... It's all a very cynical and calculated plan that fits into the overall picture of encircling the Russians to stymie their development and influence. NATO expansion up to their borders, the Ukraine coup, encirclement, picking off vulnerable allies, economic warfare and political subversion without end, the pattern is clear. At some point an actual clash might come about, not necessarily now with Syria as the trigger but somewhere all along the entire line of points of friction. Unfortunately it seems inevitable that something bad is going to happen somewhere down the line as the irresistible force meets the immovable object. ..."
"... As a fervent anti-war activist since the sixties, I have been appalled at all the regime change the US has and continues to do around the world including both military covert operations and economic warfare. Well Putin had me at his 2007 Munich speech. ..."
Apr 15, 2018 | www.unz.com

Let's begin by a short summary of events.

About a month ago Nikki Haley announces to the UNSC that the USA is ready to violate the rules of this very self-same UNSC should a chemical attack happen in Syria Then the Russians announced that they have evidence that a chemical false flag is being prepared in Syria Then a chemical attack (supposedly) takes place (in a location surrounded and, basically, controlled by government forces!) The OPWC sends investigators (in spite of western powers loudly proclaiming that no investigation was needed) The AngloZionists then bomb Syria Next, the UNSC refuses to condemn the violation of its own rules and decisions Finally, the US Americans speak of a 'perfect strike'

Now tell me -- do you get a sense that this is over?

If you tell me that 32/103 is hardly perfect, I will reply that you are missing the point. In fact, if anything, 32/103 is further incentive to bomb again!

Let's look at the differently for a second and ask this: what has the AngloZionist attack actually demonstrated?

The western general public is so terminally zombified that false flag attacks can now be announced 4 weeks in advance The Europeans now live by the motto " my honor is called solidarity " (a variation of the SS motto " my honor is loyalty ") Led by the USA, western countries have no objections to wars started in violation of their own national laws The UN Security Council has no objections to wars started in violation of the UN Charter and International Law The PRC leaders, in their infinite wisdom, act as if they have nothing personal at stake and act like bystanders The Israelis, via the UN Neocons, are now in total control of the Empire and use it to "clean house" next door

Oh, I hear the objections. They go something like this:

But the attack was a dismal failure! So what? the Empire did not pay any price for executing it. But the US Americans did blink! The attacked from Jordanian airspace and from the Red Sea! They avoided the Russians completely! They are afraid of them! So what? They still bombed a Russian ally with total impunity. But, surely you are not suggesting that the Russians should have started a war against the USA over a strike which did not even kill a single person?

No, of course not, but by not taking any action the Russians also failed to deter any future attacks. But what could the Russians have done?

Now *that* is the right question!

Let's look at it a little closer. Roughly speaking, the Russians have a choice of 3 types of retaliatory measures: political, economic and military. However, each one of them has a specific set of prerequisites which are currently problematic to say the least:

Measures Political Economic Military
Prerequisites Assumes a minimal amount of decency, integrity and respect for the rule of law by the rest of the planet. Assumes that other countries, especially China, would be willing and able to support such measures. Assumes that Russia has the military capability to defeat the AngloZionist "coalition".
Current reality Russia can moan, bitch, complain, protest, appeal to higher values, logic or facts -- nobody gives a damn. The Chinese and the rest of them are not willing to do anything at this time to support Russia. Russia can militarily defeat the AngloZionists, but only by risking the future of our planet.

This really can be summarized a simple sentence: the AngloZionist Hegemony is a threat for the entire planet, but nobody besides Russia and Iran is willing to take it on. Ain't that an irony!

The so-called "Christian West" has become a willing host for its Zionist parasite and the only ones with the courage and moral integrity to take it on are Orthodox Christians and Muslims! Sic transit gloria mundi indeed

But what is even more important is this: while it is true that the US Neocons did not succeed in delivering the kind of massive attack they would have wanted to, and while it is true that the US attack was just about as lame as can be, you need to completely forget about these facts. Facts simply don't matter. And neither does logic. All that matters are perceptions!

And the perception is that "we" (the AngloZionist rulers and their serfs) "kicked" Assad's "ass" and that "we" will "do it again" if "we" feel like it. That is all that matters in the Empire of Illusions which the AngloZionist Hegemony has become.

As soon as you understand that, you also will have to agree that Trump was right: it was a "perfect strike" (again, not in reality, but in the world of illusions created around it).

So now we come full circle.

The AngloZionist Hegemony demands that the entire planet bows down and worships it . Except for Russia and Iran, everybody meekly goes down on their knees or, at most, meekly looks away. In their own delusional reality, the 'Mericans feel empowered to smack down Russia or Iran at anytime. There is nothing Iran can do to stop them, and while Russia can, she can only do that at the risk of the future of our entire planet.

Now you tell me -- do you really think this is over?

aleksandar , April 15, 2018 at 3:02 pm GMT

" There is nothing Iran can do to stop them "

That's clearly a civilian assertion. By no way, the US can defeat Iran, unless they are ready to send 500 000 grunts there. And they are not. No US president will survive a 10 000 body bag return.

They can use air power for sure, but that will never be enough to force Iran to bow.And I'm quite sure the Russian will provide them everything they have to help Iran.And China probably too.

Without even mentioning destruction of Barbaric Saudi and closin Ormuz strait. It's clearly not over but the US are not as powerful as you think.

Antonio , April 15, 2018 at 3:05 pm GMT
Well, firstly, I don't think the future of our planet is at risk, if you mean by that extinction of life on Earth. Current arsenals can't do that, even in the worst case scenario. Nor even can they extinct human race either. Lots of deaths? Yes, sure. Extinction? Nope.

Secondly, there is no rule of law because there is no punishment. Once punishment is delivered, things will change quickly. I agree with you that political or economical punishment will not work. But military punishment will do. Sink some US carriers or destroy some Israel bases, and you will see how they become well-behaved.

(BTW, the EU stopped being Christian long ago.)

Diversity Heretic , April 15, 2018 at 3:16 pm GMT
The best advice that I could give Russia would be what Reese says to Sarah Connor about the Terminator (substitute AngloZionist Empire).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKbZMIP4XUE

WorkingClass , April 15, 2018 at 3:36 pm GMT
Trump demonstrated that the U.S. can still bomb non nuclear countries without regard for the Constitution, international law or common decency. The Deplorables demonstrated that elections will not change anything. Only the death of the U.S. dollar will end Anglo/Zio Imperial aggression.
Anonymous [392] Disclaimer , April 15, 2018 at 3:52 pm GMT
Uhhh no.

It is not only Russia and Iran that does not bow down. North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, Phillipines, China etc. Etc. These countries have done as much as the Russians have. Its not like Russia sank a carrier or anything and it's not like Russia is defender of the world on a crusade to defend the planet. They are only acting because they are in the crosshairs.

If America was targeting Cuba, Russia would not say or do anything against America.

El Dato , April 15, 2018 at 7:56 pm GMT

If you tell me that 32/103 is hardly perfect

True if true. US says this was all in the pipe, 5 by 5:

Warship ruse and new stealth missiles: How the Syria attack unfolded

While both vessels [USS Winston Churchill, USS Donald Cook] carry as many as 90 Tomahawk missiles -- the main weapon used in the Friday evening strike on Syria -- neither ship in the end fired a shot. Instead, according to a person familiar with White House war planning, they were part of a plan to distract Russia and its Syrian ally from an assault Assad's government could do little to defend itself against.

It worked. Pentagon officials on Saturday said they faced little resistance to their targeted attack on what they said were three Syrian chemical weapons facilities. Most of the Syrian countermeasures, including defensive ballistic missiles, were fired after U.S. and allied weapons hit their targets, Lieutenant General Kenneth McKenzie said Saturday.

"No Syrian weapon had any effect on anything we did," McKenzie said. He described the joint U.S., French and U.K. strike as "precise, overwhelming and effective."

Where can I get correct assessments? For, umm . research yeah.

The Scalpel , Website April 15, 2018 at 8:17 pm GMT
Russia was outgunned, so they did not respond. It was probably a wise decision. They did damage control admirably, and now have an opportunity to improve the Syrian arsenal with obvious justification.

Slowly but surely, Russia is tightening the noose in Syria. Air defenses are improving. The next step is likely to be an arsenal of anti-ship missile's. If necessary ICBMs might follow some sort of mutual defense treaty.

At some point, Syria itself will be able to deliver the bloody nose to the USA that is so necessary for justice and world peace. That point will be reached when Syrian abilities to inflict pain outweigh the costs of escalation

JR , April 15, 2018 at 8:54 pm GMT
Probably Saker didn't see this yet.

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1098059.shtml

China supporting Russia using reasoning in line with the Saker.

Antonio , April 15, 2018 at 8:55 pm GMT
@El Dato

@ElDato: Try borrowing some observation time from these guys

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spot_Image https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RapidEye
peterAUS , April 15, 2018 at 9:26 pm GMT

Facts simply don't matter. And neither does logic. All that matters are perceptions!

Yup.

There is nothing Iran can do to stop them, and while Russia can, she can only do that at the risk of the future of our entire planet.

Not quite. Or, the regime in Kremlin could've stopped all this had it acted, properly , a couple of years ago. Opportunity missed.

Now you tell me -- do you really think this is over?

Of course not. This is just a starter.

aleksandar , April 15, 2018 at 10:06 pm GMT
@El Dato

Nowhere, stay tuned to Radio Pentagon, that's all you can understand anyway.

Smeagol , April 16, 2018 at 12:16 am GMT
My precious, too many players want to start a real war between the Mercans and Russians. Aside from the casual suspects (KSA and Israel), Chinese also objectively benefit from the confrontation, which explains their aloofness. Should this come to a nuclear war, Chinese will be the one and only winner. For this old smart monkey is still sitting on the tree, and nothing has changed since Chairman Mao times.

For Iran, this war will certainly enhance the Iran-Russia axis and thus may postpone the US aggression. Turkey loves it too because it can play both sides.

Ironically, only the USA and Russia will be the biggest losers regardless of the outcome. It seems they both realize that and are treading carefully. But can they manage to get out of the clinch? And for how long they can be avoiding the all-out conflict? So no, -- it's definitely ain't over. We hates it, but the best is yet to come.

Linda , April 16, 2018 at 4:52 am GMT
You forget ballsy little Bolivia defends Russia in UN with both votes and condemnation of barking Nikki. It looks like they are offering all they have -- moral condemnation of Empire and her vassals.
Linda , April 16, 2018 at 5:21 am GMT
This is a very interesting post from Zaid Fadel at Syrian Perspective. https://syrianperspective.com/2018/04/attack-on-syria-big-flop-air-defenses-robust-massive-failure-for-trump-may-macron-and-the-usual-gang-of-idiots.html

The reason I give it a lot of weight is that the night before the bombing, either Vanessa Beasley or Eva Bartlett called in to Israeli News Live and gave 12 points explaining what Syria was expecting to happen and it seems it pretty well went down as they had said. I'm sorry I can't find the broadcast link. Apparently the Russians said if the strike went into a second day they would strike back even if Russians were not hit. Looks like the "strike" was pretty well pre-determined by both sides.

Gave each side a look at the others capabilities and allowed US a chance to waste missiles and Northrup sell new ones. Same old, same old.

Every time my country says or does something insane (which is often) this Lee Greenwood song goes thru my mind with modified lyrics. "Ashamed to be an American, where I'm duped to think I'm free".

hunor , April 16, 2018 at 7:27 am GMT
" This is far from over ! "

How can it be over ? It is a war in progress. One side of the warring party is creating they own reality, and present it on the world stage with absolute conviction, and determination. This fake reality is part of the war game , it should not be considered as lies or staged events. It is war ! Fake reality is part of the repertoire , just like the missiles. It is war , no rules just brutal conflict.

The other side not understanding any of it. They are running around , like chickens in the rain. UNSC talk , talk and talk some more. Nobody give a them. They are counting how many missiles they intercepted , they are analyzing , they are theorizing . Do something you are about to be wiped off !

Robert Magill , April 16, 2018 at 10:50 am GMT
This is theatre;

Act 2 . China sells tickets. Total now of two hundred missiles used; nothing much destroyed. Top brass satisfied. Neocons, mollified. Audience, US, asleep in our seats as usual.

Act 3 . The big love scene: Trump and Putin do Romeo & Juliet, audience confused. Back to sleep. China offers no refunds.

https://robertmagill.wordpress.com/2018/04/15/women-of-the-world-summit-2/

TT , April 16, 2018 at 1:36 pm GMT

Measures Political Economic Military

Prerequisites

Current reality

The Chinese and the rest of them are not willing to do anything at this time to support Russia. Russia can militarily defeat the AngloZionists, but only by risking the future of our planet.

Saker correctly pointed out Russia is showing unnecessary weakness in only moaning & bitching with empty threats that nobody bother, relegating itself to a weakling gas station.

But to falsely accused China & the rest not willing to do anything at this time to support Russia is too far fetch, a foolish remark like a whining self pitied child blaming everyone for his own spilled milk.

Does Saker expect its few allies China, NK, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, SAA to launch attack on US Nato when RuA refused/not permit?

Economically, China is known to have financially back the entire costly war, signed numerous huge deals worth hundreds of Bil with Russia to booster its sanctioned economy, deliver re-construction materials, medicine & food for tens of millions soldiers & Syrians. A astromical cost.

Military, it has also supply lot of weapons & ammunition under so called old contract with SAA, sent in its most senior advisors & Special forces to help fighting & get train, esp to mop up Uyghur ISIS terrorists(CIA assets).

It even cut short a mammoth 40 vessels Liaoning a/c strike group drill in SCS to declare a unprecedented proximate live firing drill in Taiwan Straits, literally forcing existing USN three strike groups to tied down in SCS. This sent a very clear signal that if US start a hot war in Syria with Russia, China might open another war front to take back Taiwan which USM will be overstretched to defend.

Also China despatched its Defense Minister in a high profile visit to Russia, declaring its military solidarity with Russia against US tyranny (a rare glaring mentioned of US name directly) . This sent a very strong signal to USM, China may intervene directly or asymmetrically.

China also took an unusual hard stand in a looming trade war, threatened to fight at all cost without slight compromise, hence refusing Trumps any leeway to back down while he up ante to save face.

China foreign ministry further declare the trade war will not limit in trade but shall utilize all asymmetric tools, including non cooporation in strategic issues, sanction of US hugely profiting investments in China. Also Trumps redneck farming vote bank was purposely targeted to pressure him in coming Nov election. With China $4T war chess & US people resistance, US can ill afford to fight China if Syria war breakout. Every major war will see USD artificially hike >30% historically for expenditure mileage.

In UNSC, China has surprisingly took abstained neutral stand, allowing it to play the coordinator role & denying US UK Fr to get any legit for attack. This avoid relegating UNSC into two sides shouting. Nikki Harley was thus preempted her wish of striking with or without UNSC mandate since all ended agreed to let UN conduct independent inspection. Overall, this continue to lock US UK Fr inside UNSC framework.

China Prez Xi also in Baao seminar announced expedite opening of China huge financial market. This stirred the world into frenzy to prepare for huge investment, skillfully denied US ability to pull EU, Jp & others to joint US trade war. All US financier & trade bodies will loathe any trade or hot war that will derail their golden opportunity.

What else happen behind door we won't know. But whatever we can see now, China has done every heavy lifting it could, very comprehensive & well plan, short of attacking USM in Syria which it can't with limited projection force.

Yet Saker is accusing China & others are doing NOTHING to help Russia, when Putin is refusing to even take down a Israel airfield as a warning to USM. Killing a chicken to frighten the monkey.

Is Saker demonstrating a typical Russian nature, unappreciative & endless blaming, always ready to throw ally under bus? This might explain why Russia has few or no true trusted ally, even ex-Soviet countries. Assad Syria & Iran interest are seen routinely been sacrificed.

Will China one day decided Russia is not a trusted ally afterall to reconsider US G2 invitation?

TT , April 16, 2018 at 1:51 pm GMT
@Linda

I think one US ally in ME also abstained to refuse support of US proposal, Qatar?

c matt , April 16, 2018 at 2:51 pm GMT
@aleksandar

I think the point of the article was precisely that the US is not as strong as it thinks. Hence, the attack was all for "show" so the US can perpetuate the delusion it can handle Russia/Iran. The danger is that this delusion may cause a major misstep, especially if (when) the US starts believing it's own bullshit and really pokes the bear.

anonymous [187] Disclaimer , April 16, 2018 at 2:56 pm GMT
The general idea seems to be containment of Russia, hemming them in within their own borders and cutting them off from being able to extend their influence outward.

As part of this any allies of theirs such as Syria come under attack; if the west can't own them then they're to be reduced to chaos and rendered into costly burdens for the Russians.

It's all a very cynical and calculated plan that fits into the overall picture of encircling the Russians to stymie their development and influence. NATO expansion up to their borders, the Ukraine coup, encirclement, picking off vulnerable allies, economic warfare and political subversion without end, the pattern is clear. At some point an actual clash might come about, not necessarily now with Syria as the trigger but somewhere all along the entire line of points of friction. Unfortunately it seems inevitable that something bad is going to happen somewhere down the line as the irresistible force meets the immovable object.

Linda , April 16, 2018 at 3:18 pm GMT
The problem here is that moving to a multi-polar world will require many countries to contribute what and where they can as we fight a very entrenched international Cabal. But, the largest responsibility lies with the people living within the Evil Empire and its vassal states. Those whose counties are committing these atrocities need to step up and call foul on their own governments. This is difficult to do since the Project Mockingbird press continues to spew unbelievable lies on a non-stop basis. But those lies are getting more and more difficult to believe. Unless your brain is totally disconnected, you have to realize that what they are saying is inconsistent and illogical.

Besides calling and berating my representatives, signing petitions, etc. I have taken to wearing a teeshirt with a picture of Putin and the Russian bear (Putin in a suit, not riding the bear bare chested).

I wear it to all social events for the purpose of starting a discussion. Most Americans are not engaged. They have little trust in their government and most feel like there is nothing they can do about it. I live in the mountain west where people are more libertarian and more willing to fight. I try to provide them with ammunition and point them to places to go to get "real" news. I tell them not to "believe" any news, but get a variety of points of view and use their own minds to determine what is true.

A few years ago, I was very disturbed when I kept hearing Dr. Stephen Cohen say that Putin was the greatest statesman of our time. As I had studied Soviet history in school, I had sort of kept abreast of what was happening in Russia. As an economist, I was aware of how the West, especially the USA, came to help Russia with Democracy and "free markets". It was obvious to me that we were just assisting in selling Russia by the pound to the moneyed class. I had followed Dr. Cohen over the years as well. But sceptical of his assessment of Putin, I have gone back and watched and read almost everything Putin has said and watched what Russia has done and I believe Dr. Cohen is correct.

As a fervent anti-war activist since the sixties, I have been appalled at all the regime change the US has and continues to do around the world including both military covert operations and economic warfare. Well Putin had me at his 2007 Munich speech. The one the West called a rant.

Finally someone was calling out this criminal behavior on an international stage! Putin has continued with these messages and as far as I can see, Russia is operating accordingly. No one country, not Russia, not China, no one can destroy this international Cabal on its own. It will take a concerted effort of all peace seeking people from around the world to force their governments on a different path. Starting in my case with the people of the USA.

[Apr 16, 2018] Syria: chemical weapons inspectors barred from Douma site

That's very suspicious. Do Brits try top prevent OPCW team getting to the site?
Apr 16, 2018 | www.theguardian.com
Russia and the Syrian regime have been accused by western diplomats of denying chemical weapons inspectors access to sites in the town of Douma, where an attack killed dozens and prompted US-led missile strikes over the weekend.

Russia and Syria had cited "pending security issues" before inspectors could deploy to the town outside Damascus, said Ahmet Üzümcü, the director-general of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, at a meeting of the OPCW's executive council.

Syrian authorities were offering 22 people to interview as witnesses instead, he said, adding that he hoped "all necessary arrangements will be made to allow the team to deploy to Douma as soon as possible".

Meanwhile, the Trump administration delayed action on sanctions against Russians suspected of helping Syria's chemical weapons programme, contradicting remarks on Sunday by the US envoy to the UN, Nikki Haley.

[Apr 16, 2018] British Propaganda and Disinformation An Imperial and Colonial Tradition by Wayne MADSEN

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... For decades, a little-known section of the British Foreign Office – the Information Research Department (IRD) – carried out propaganda campaigns using the international media as its platform on behalf of MI-6. Years before Syria's Bashar al-Assad, Iraq's Saddam Hussein, Libya's Muammar Qaddafi, and Sudan's Omar al-Bashir became targets for Western destabilization and "regime change." IRD and its associates at the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) and in the newsrooms and editorial offices of Fleet Street broadsheets, tabloids, wire services, and magazines, particularly "The Daily Telegraph," "The Times," "Financial Times," Reuters, "The Guardian," and "The Economist," ran media smear campaigns against a number of leaders considered to be leftists, communists, or FTs (fellow travelers). ..."
"... After the Cold War, this same propaganda operation took aim at Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic, Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams, Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, Somalia's Mohamad Farrah Aidid, and Haiti's Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Today, it is Assad's, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban's, and Catalonian independence leader Carles Puigdemont's turn to be in the Anglo-American state propaganda gunsights. Even Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi, long a darling of the Western media and such propaganda moguls as George Soros, is now being targeted for Western visa bans and sanctions over the situation with Muslim Rohingya insurgents in Rakhine State. ..."
"... Through IRD-MI-6-Central Intelligence Agency joint propaganda operations, many British journalists received payments, knowingly or unknowingly, from the CIA via a front in London called Forum World Features (FWF), owned by John Hay Whitney, publisher of the "New York Herald Tribune" and a former US ambassador to London. ..."
Apr 16, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

When it comes to creating bogus news stories and advancing false narratives, the British intelligence services have few peers. In fact, the Secret Intelligence Service (MI-6) has led the way for its American "cousins" and Britain's Commonwealth partners – from Canada and Australia to India and Malaysia – in the dark art of spreading falsehoods as truths. Recently, the world has witnessed such MI-6 subterfuge in news stories alleging that Russia carried out a novichok nerve agent attack against a Russian émigré and his daughter in Salisbury, England. This propaganda barrage was quickly followed by yet another – the latest in a series of similar fabrications – alleging the Syrian government attacked civilians in Douma, outside of Damascus, with chemical weapons.

It should come as no surprise that American news networks rely on British correspondents stationed in northern Syria and Beirut as their primary sources. MI-6 has historically relied on non-official cover (NOC) agents masquerading primarily as journalists, but also humanitarian aid workers, Church of England clerics, international bankers, and hotel managers, to carry out propaganda tasks. These NOCs are situated in positions where they can promulgate British government disinformation to unsuspecting actual journalists and diplomats.

For decades, a little-known section of the British Foreign Office – the Information Research Department (IRD) – carried out propaganda campaigns using the international media as its platform on behalf of MI-6. Years before Syria's Bashar al-Assad, Iraq's Saddam Hussein, Libya's Muammar Qaddafi, and Sudan's Omar al-Bashir became targets for Western destabilization and "regime change." IRD and its associates at the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) and in the newsrooms and editorial offices of Fleet Street broadsheets, tabloids, wire services, and magazines, particularly "The Daily Telegraph," "The Times," "Financial Times," Reuters, "The Guardian," and "The Economist," ran media smear campaigns against a number of leaders considered to be leftists, communists, or FTs (fellow travelers).

These leaders included Indonesia's President Sukarno, North Korean leader (and grandfather of Pyongyang's present leader) Kim Il-Sung, Egypt's Gamal Abdel Nasser, Cyprus's Archbishop Makarios, Cuba's Fidel Castro, Chile's Salvador Allende, British Guiana's Cheddi Jagan, Grenada's Maurice Bishop, Jamaica's Michael Manley, Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega, Guinea's Sekou Toure, Burkina Faso's Thomas Sankara, Australia's Gough Whitlam, New Zealand's David Lange, Cambodia's Norodom Sihanouk, Malta's Dom Mintoff, Vanuatu's Father Walter Lini, and Ghana's Kwame Nkrumah.

After the Cold War, this same propaganda operation took aim at Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic, Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams, Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, Somalia's Mohamad Farrah Aidid, and Haiti's Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Today, it is Assad's, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban's, and Catalonian independence leader Carles Puigdemont's turn to be in the Anglo-American state propaganda gunsights. Even Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi, long a darling of the Western media and such propaganda moguls as George Soros, is now being targeted for Western visa bans and sanctions over the situation with Muslim Rohingya insurgents in Rakhine State.

Through IRD-MI-6-Central Intelligence Agency joint propaganda operations, many British journalists received payments, knowingly or unknowingly, from the CIA via a front in London called Forum World Features (FWF), owned by John Hay Whitney, publisher of the "New York Herald Tribune" and a former US ambassador to London.

It is not a stretch to believe that similar and even more formal relationships exist today between US and British intelligence and so-called British "journalists" reporting from such war zones as Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, and the Gaza Strip, as well as from much-ballyhooed nerve agent attack locations as Salisbury, England.

No sooner had recent news reports started to emerge from Douma about a Syrian chlorine gas and sarin agent attack that killed between 40 to 70 civilians, British reporters in the Middle East and London began echoing verbatim statements from the Syrian "White Helmets" and the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

In actuality, the White Helmets – claimed by Western media to be civilian defense first-responders but are Islamist activists connected to jihadist radical groups funded by Saudi Arabia – are believed to have staged the chemical attack in Douma by entering the municipality's hospital and dowsing patients with buckets of water, video cameras at the ready. The White Helmets distributed their videos to the global news media, with the BBC and Rupert Murdoch's Sky News providing a British imprimatur to the propaganda campaign asserting that Assad carried out another "barrel bomb" chemical attack against "his own people." And, as always, the MI-6 financed Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, an anti-Assad news front claimed to be operated by a Syrian expatriate and British national named Rami Abdel Rahman from his clothing shop in Coventry, England, began providing second-sourcing for the White Helmet's chemical attack claims.

With President Trump bringing more and more neo-conservatives, discredited from their massive anti-Iraq propaganda operations during the Bush-Cheney era, into his own administration, the world is witnessing the prolongation of the "Trump Doctrine."

The Trump Doctrine can best be explained as follows: A nation will be subject to a US military attack depending on whether Trump is facing a severe political or sex scandal at home.

Such was the case in April 2017, when Trump ordered a cruise missile attack on the joint Syrian-Russian airbase at Shayrat, Syria. Trump was still reeling from the resignation of his National Security Adviser, Lt. General Michael Flynn, in February over the mixing of his private consulting business with his official White House duties. Trump needed a diversion and the false accusation that Assad used sarin gas on the village of Khan Sheikoun on April 4, 2017, provided the necessary pabulum for the war-hungry media.

The most recent cruise missile attack was to divert the public's attention away from Trump's personal attorney being raided by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, a sex scandal involving Trump and a porn actress, and a "tell-all" book by Trump's fired FBI director, James Comey.

Although these two scandals provided opportunities for the neo-cons to test Trump with false flag operations in Syria, they were not the first time such actions had been carried out. In 2013, the Syrian government was blamed for a similar chemical attack on civilians in Ghouta. That year, Syrian rebels, supported by the Central Intelligence Agency, admitted to the Associated Press reporter on the ground in Syria that they had been given banned chemical weapons by Saudi Arabia, but that the weapons canisters exploded after improper handling by the rebels. Immediately, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and Syrian rebel organizations operating out of Turkey claimed that Assad had used chemical-laden barrel bombs on "his own people." However, Turkish, American, and Lebanese sources confirmed that it was the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) that had badly bungled a false flag sarin nerve agent attack on Ghouta.

Few Western media outlets were concerned about a March 19, 2013, sarin nerve agent by the Bashair al-Nasr Brigade rebel group linked to the US- and British-backed Free Syrian Army. The rebels used a "Bashair-3" unguided projectile, containing the deadly sarin agent, on civilians in Khan al-Assal, outside Aleppo. At least 27 civilians were killed, and scores of others injured in the attack. The Syrian Kurds also reported the use of chemical weapons on them during the same time frame by Syrian rebel groups backed by the United States, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia. The usual propaganda operations – Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, Doctors Without Borders, the BBC, CNN, and Sky News – were all silent about these attacks.

In 2013, April 2017, and April 2018, the Western media echo chamber blared out all the same talking points: "Assad killing his own people," "Syrian weapons of mass destruction," and the "mass murder of women and children." Western news networks featured videos of dead women and children, while paid propagandists, known as "contributors" to corporate news networks – all having links to the military-intelligence complex – demanded action be taken against Assad.

Trump, now being advised by the notorious neocon war hawk John Bolton, the new National Security Adviser, began referring to Assad as an "animal" and a "monster." Bolton, along with Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff Irving Lewis "Scooter" Libby, helped craft similar language against Saddam Hussein prior to the 2003 US invasion and occupation of Iraq. It was not coincidental that Trump – at the urging of Bolton and other neocons – gave a full pardon to Libby on the very same day he ordered the cruise missile attack on Damascus and other targets in Syria. Libby was convicted in 2005 of perjury and illegally disclosing national security information.

The world is being asked to take, at face value, the word of patented liars like Trump, Bolton, and other neocons who are now busy joining the Trump administration at breakneck speed. The corporate media unabashedly acts as though it never lied about the reasons given by the United States and Britain for going to war in Iraq and Libya. Why should anyone believe them now?

Tags: UK al-Assad Propaganda

Wayne MADSEN Investigative journalist, author and syndicated columnist. A member of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) and the National Press Club

[Apr 16, 2018] I suggest that Russia act as marginal producer and refuse to sell oil, gas or raw petroleum products for less than double the price of other suppliers.

Apr 15, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

honestann Sun, 04/15/2018 - 21:58 Permalink

I suggest that Russia act as "marginal producer" and refuse to sell oil, gas or raw petroleum products for less than double the price of other suppliers.

All of a sudden... thing will change.

After the treatment Russia has gotten for the past year or more, they are more than justified to adopt this policy.

[Apr 16, 2018] In late March, the U.S. State Department warned European corporations that they will likely face penalties if they participate in the construction of Russia's Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, on the grounds that the project undermines energy security in Europe

Apr 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

spyware-free -> Pernicious Gol Sun, 04/15/2018 - 16:47 Permalink

What's going on?
Read this:
"In late March, the U.S. State Department warned European corporations that they will likely face penalties if they participate in the construction of Russia's Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, on the grounds that "the project undermines energy security in Europe"

The Nord Stream 2 project and the denial of pipelines through Syria territory is what's eating at the zio-cons. This is power politics and Russia / China are too much of a threat.

Chupacabra-322 -> spyware-free Sun, 04/15/2018 - 17:43 Permalink

@ spy,

March, 14, 2017:

The Russian central bank opened its first overseas office in Beijing on March 14, marking a step forward in forging a Beijing-Moscow alliance to bypass the US dollar in the global monetary system, and to phase-in a gold-backed standard of trade.

Apr 3 2017 - Europe approves Nordstream 2 gas pipeline from Russia to Germany

April 6 2017 - need to attack Syria.

Coincidentally, with a new government a gas pipelin can be run from Qatar to Europe and cut-off Russian gas revenue.

Nord Stream 2 Project Gets Green Light From EU

https://sputniknews.com/europe/201704031052232006-nord-stream-eu-gas-pip ...

*Three Mediterranean EU countries and Israel agreed on Monday to continue pursuing the development of a gas pipeline ... EU countries and Israel ... April 3, 2017 ...*

EU, Israel agree to develop Eastern Mediterranean gas pipeline

https://www.rt.com/business/383410-eu-israel-mediterranean-gas-pipeline/

The Optics of the Inter National Geo Political Crises would suggest that The Criminal Oligarch Cabal Bankster Intelligence Deep State Crime Syndicate are going "All In."

Brace YourSelves.....

spyware-free -> Chupacabra-322 Sun, 04/15/2018 - 17:52 Permalink

The petroyuan project is the key. It will smash the petrodollar zio-world. Saddam Hussien thought of doing that in the 80's by consolidating Arab oil into a basket of currencies backed by gold. The problem for him was he was a disposable puppet and not able to defend that project. China and Russia are a different matter. It's driving the zios batty.

Chupacabra-322 -> spyware-free Sun, 04/15/2018 - 18:43 Permalink

And, the Yuan is now in the IMF basket of SDR's. Ultimately, the Petro Dollar will meet its demise & it will be decided by which is the cleanest, dirtiest shirt to put on among the SDR's.

[Apr 16, 2018] Trump Hits Russia With New Sanctions Over Syria Gas Attack

Apr 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Occams_Razor_Trader Sun, 04/15/2018 - 16:32 Permalink

Lindsey Graham with tits. Those who want war never have to fight it!

FBaggins -> Occams_Razor_Trader Sun, 04/15/2018 - 16:33 Permalink

I Am a Syrian Living in Syria: "It was Never a Revolution nor a Civil War. The Terrorists are sent by your Government"

American People, Please Help Us

by Mark Taliano

https://www.globalresearch.ca/i-am-a-syrian-living-in-syria-it-was-neve

Adolph.H. -> FBaggins Sun, 04/15/2018 - 16:34 Permalink

It would be legitimate to wonder if the U.S. MIC will stealthily add to the long list of sanctimonious sanctions the interdiction for any western vassal state to buy the vastly superior Russian weapon systems in a not so distant future. One can feel it coming. Needless to say this kind of short sighted vision will be the straw that will break the camel's back.

These sanctions are ultimately going to hurt more the USA than Russia because little by little countries are leaving the American sphere of influence for the more balanced and reasonable Eurasian one. Nobody wants to stay with a maniac like Nikki or a fool like trump...

The Americans will be begging to be integrated once they hit the bottom.

[Apr 16, 2018] Skripal and Yulia were poisoned by non-lethal toxin made in Britain, Russian foreign minister claims

Apr 16, 2018 | dailymail.co.uk

The Russian foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, claims former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, were poisoned by a non-lethal chemical made in Britain and the US.

Mr Lavrov says the pair were not attacked with novichock but instead with BZ - a toxin never developed in Russia - which a laboratory in Spiez, Switzerland, found.

'This formulation was in the inventory of the United States, Britain and other Nato states,' Mr Lavrov said.

[Apr 16, 2018] BREAKING US media claims Nikki Haley is author of Trump's anti-Iran policies

Notable quotes:
"... Haley is known to be among the most hardened neo-cons in the Trump administration, with strong ties to the anti-Iranian American Israel lobby. ..."
"... Nikki Haley has often defied the moderate voice of Rex Tillerson and even James "Mad Dog" Mattis on a number of issues. Haley for example has repeatedly said that 'Assad must go', while Tillerson and Mattis have been far more realistic about the fact that President Assad will in all likelihood, continue to govern Syria for the foreseeable future. ..."
"... Nikki Haley also famously said that Russians cannot be trusted, while Rex Tillerson has worked closely (albeit usually through phone calls rather than grandiose public meetings) with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and was seen as instrumental in creating the joint Russian-US-Jordanian de-escalation zone in south western Syria. ..."
Oct 14, 2017 | theduran.com

The claims give insight into Trump's apparent defiance of his most senior Cabinet officials, Rex Tillerson and James "Mad Dog" Mattis.

by Adam , 14:09 4.8k Views

The US media outlet Politico has published claims based on internal White House leaks, which report that the controversial US Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, is the author of Trump's anti-JCPOA and broader anti-Iran policies, which were conveyed in his speech form the White House, yesterday evening.

Everything you need to know about Trump's de-certification of the JCPOA (Iran nuclear deal)

http://theduran.com/everything-you-need-to-know-about-trumps-de-certification-of-the-jcpoa-iran-nuclear-deal/embed/#?secret=xaZPdRsyGp

Haley is known to be among the most hardened neo-cons in the Trump administration, with strong ties to the anti-Iranian American Israel lobby. Her role as US Ambassador has been far more public than that of most of her predecessors. Many, including myself, suspect that Haley who has no previous foreign policy experience, is using her position at the UN to promote a future entry into elected politics at a Federal level.

President of the United States Nikki Haley–it could happen

http://theduran.com/president-of-the-united-states-nikki-haley-it-could-happen/embed/#?secret=93g295S6zE

According to Politico, in July of this year, Trump grudgingly certified the JCPOA under advice from Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary James "Mad Dog" Mattis. However, at the time, Haley was said to have volunteered to author an argument which could be employed in the future, which would attempt to justify a US de-certification of the JCPOA.

Politico reports ,

"At a mid-day meeting in the Oval Office in late July, U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley came to President Donald Trump with an offer.

Trump had grudgingly declared Tehran in compliance with the 2015 Iran nuclear deal earlier in the month, at the urging of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Secretary of Defense James Mattis. Trump hated the deal. But the two men pushed him to certify it, arguing in part that he lacked a strong case for declaring Iran in violation. A refusal to do so would have looked rash, they said, convincing Trump sign off for another 90 days.

Haley, in that July meeting, which also included National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster and Vice President Mike Pence, asked the president to let her make the case for decertification

'Let me lay a foundation for it', she said, according a source familiar with the proceedings. The president agreed.

Haley would become the administration's most vocal public proponent of decertification -- and Trump's favorite internal voice on Iran -- further boosting her standing with the president at a time when she is seen as a potential successor to Tillerson, whose tense relationship with Trump has burst into the open in recent days.

A month after her talk with Trump, Haley flew to Vienna to visit the headquarters of the International Atomic Energy Association, where she pressed officials about Iranian compliance with the deal. Soon after, she delivered a speech at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C., airing her "doubts and concerns" about the agreement.

Haley's role was described by a half-dozen administration officials who took part in the Iran policy review. While many of the president's cabinet members, aides, and advisers work to restrain his impulses, when it came to Iran deal Haley did the opposite -- channeling what many Democrats and even some Republicans consider the president's destructive instincts into policy".

The story from Politico which also argues that arch neo-con John Bolton pushed for a full withdrawal from the JCPOA from his position outside of the White House, follows may well known trends. This helps explain why Mattis recently stated that Iran is in compliance with the JCPOA and why Rex Tilleron's State Department has officially said the same.

Nikki Haley has often defied the moderate voice of Rex Tillerson and even James "Mad Dog" Mattis on a number of issues. Haley for example has repeatedly said that 'Assad must go', while Tillerson and Mattis have been far more realistic about the fact that President Assad will in all likelihood, continue to govern Syria for the foreseeable future.

She has also echoed Donald Trump's aggressive statements about North Korea, whereas Rex Tillerson has often repeated his view that the US does not and should not seek regime change in Pyongyang and instead will continue to pursue a diplomatic process.

Nikki Haley also famously said that Russians cannot be trusted, while Rex Tillerson has worked closely (albeit usually through phone calls rather than grandiose public meetings) with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and was seen as instrumental in creating the joint Russian-US-Jordanian de-escalation zone in south western Syria.

At one point, Rex Tillerson was said to have privately reprimanded Haley for inventing her own foreign policy without consulting her superiors at the State Department. However, it seems that in respect of Iran, Trump has overruled Tillerson and allowed Haley to take charge.

Haley later told journalists that she was offered the position of Secretary of State but turned it down, before being offered the position of Ambassador to the UN. Haley further attested that she sent Trump a list of demands that she never expected to be agreed upon, as a precondition for accepting her current position.

Nikki Haley was offered Secretary of States job and turned it down

http://theduran.com/nikki-haley-was-offered-secretary-of-states-job-and-turned-it-down/embed/#?secret=FF4q2WSDlC

Haley who has long been seen as a rogue figure in the Trump administration and one who is widely exceeding her authority, is apparently doing so with Donald Trump's approval.

With rumours swirling that Rex Tillerson planned on resigning, even before it emerged that he allegedly called Trump a "fucking moron", there is now an increased possibility that a hyper-neo-con, might soon become the chief foreign policy maker in a Trump administration that was elected on the basis of opposing the neo-con ideology.

With many Trump administration officials coming and going in short order, there is a very worrying possibility that Nikki Haley's role will only be enhanced in future months. This is dangerous not only for the United States, but for the wider world. Haley's inexperience is only matched by her zeal for bellicose measures against countries which have not done any harm to the American people. Such a person should not be anywhere near power, but it seems as though she has Trump's ear, far more than the vastly more mature Tillerson and Mattis.

[Apr 15, 2018] The Trump Regime Is Insane by Paul Craig Roberts

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... People such as Stephen Cohen and myself, who were actively involved throughout the entirety of the Cold War, are astonished at the reckless and irresponsible behavior of the US government and its European vassals toward Russia. ..."
"... In this brief video, Stephen Cohen describes to Tucker Carlson the extreme danger of the present situation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvK1Eu01Lz0 Published on Apr 13, 2018 ..."
Apr 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

Craig Roberts • April 13, 2018

  1. Is it insane to push for war with Russia, a major nuclear power?
  2. Is it insane to threaten Russia and bring false charges against her?
  3. Is it insane to brag about killing "hundreds of Russians"? https://news.antiwar.com/2018/04/12/pompeo-russians-met-their-match-us-killed-hundreds-of-them/
  4. A normal person would answer "yes" to the three questions. So what does this tell us about Trump's government as these insane actions are the principle practice of Trump's government?
  5. Does anyone doubt that Nikki Haley is insane?
  6. Does anyone doubt that John Bolton is insane?
  7. Does anyone doubt that Mike Pompeo is insane?
  8. Does this mean that Trump is insane for appointing to the top positions insane people who foment war with a nuclear power?
  9. Does this mean that Congress is insane for approving these appointments?

These are honest questions. Assuming we avoid the Trump-promised Syrian showdown, how long before the insane Trump regime orchestrates another crisis?

The entire world should understand that because of the existence of the insane Trump regime, the continued existence of life on earth is very much in question.

People such as Stephen Cohen and myself, who were actively involved throughout the entirety of the Cold War, are astonished at the reckless and irresponsible behavior of the US government and its European vassals toward Russia. Nothing as irresponsible as what we have witnessed since the Clinton regime and which has worsened dramatically under the Obama and Trump regimes would have been imaginable during the Cold War. In this brief video, Stephen Cohen describes to Tucker Carlson the extreme danger of the present situation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvK1Eu01Lz0 Published on Apr 13, 2018

The failure of political leadership throughout the Western world is total. Such total failure is likely to prove deadly to life on earth.

[Apr 15, 2018] The Trump Regime Is Insane by Paul Craig Roberts

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... People such as Stephen Cohen and myself, who were actively involved throughout the entirety of the Cold War, are astonished at the reckless and irresponsible behavior of the US government and its European vassals toward Russia. ..."
"... In this brief video, Stephen Cohen describes to Tucker Carlson the extreme danger of the present situation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvK1Eu01Lz0 Published on Apr 13, 2018 ..."
Apr 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

Craig Roberts • April 13, 2018

  1. Is it insane to push for war with Russia, a major nuclear power?
  2. Is it insane to threaten Russia and bring false charges against her?
  3. Is it insane to brag about killing "hundreds of Russians"? https://news.antiwar.com/2018/04/12/pompeo-russians-met-their-match-us-killed-hundreds-of-them/
  4. A normal person would answer "yes" to the three questions. So what does this tell us about Trump's government as these insane actions are the principle practice of Trump's government?
  5. Does anyone doubt that Nikki Haley is insane?
  6. Does anyone doubt that John Bolton is insane?
  7. Does anyone doubt that Mike Pompeo is insane?
  8. Does this mean that Trump is insane for appointing to the top positions insane people who foment war with a nuclear power?
  9. Does this mean that Congress is insane for approving these appointments?

These are honest questions. Assuming we avoid the Trump-promised Syrian showdown, how long before the insane Trump regime orchestrates another crisis?

The entire world should understand that because of the existence of the insane Trump regime, the continued existence of life on earth is very much in question.

People such as Stephen Cohen and myself, who were actively involved throughout the entirety of the Cold War, are astonished at the reckless and irresponsible behavior of the US government and its European vassals toward Russia. Nothing as irresponsible as what we have witnessed since the Clinton regime and which has worsened dramatically under the Obama and Trump regimes would have been imaginable during the Cold War. In this brief video, Stephen Cohen describes to Tucker Carlson the extreme danger of the present situation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvK1Eu01Lz0 Published on Apr 13, 2018

The failure of political leadership throughout the Western world is total. Such total failure is likely to prove deadly to life on earth.

[Apr 15, 2018] Russia gas for Europe as a political tool of the USA to pressure Russia via its EU vassals

Notable quotes:
"... I think the only that would really cause the Russians serious economic hardship at this point would be a total EU embargo on Russian oil/natgas. That, of course, would cause the rest of Europe a fair amount of hardship, too, as they would then have to pay 3 or 4 times as much for frack-gas from the US. ..."
Apr 15, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

RaisingMac , 9 hours ago

I think the only that would really cause the Russians serious economic hardship at this point would be a total EU embargo on Russian oil/natgas. That, of course, would cause the rest of Europe a fair amount of hardship, too, as they would then have to pay 3 or 4 times as much for frack-gas from the US.
Tony -> RaisingMac , 7 hours ago
Of course, oil/gas being fungible, the EU in such an eventuality would buy higher priced gas/oil from us or someone and the Russians would just end up selling to other entities. Whatever we sell to Europe is fuel we can't sell to others and it's not like our export market is infinitely expandable. The EU has a huge need for natural gas which it mostly gets from Russia via pipeline. Even if the US had that much surplus capacity, it would take years to come up with the means to export that much LNG..

[Apr 15, 2018] We know this empire is destined to eat itself up due to greed and hubris. My only concern is how long that will take.

Notable quotes:
"... This is very clear path toward a confrontation with Russia. America is not going to stop . Russia continues to be punished because does not leave Syria and does not bow to America. ..."
Apr 15, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

serotonindumptruck -> Janet smeller Sun, 04/15/2018 - 16:44 Permalink

Russia knows that this diplomatic, economic, and military aggression will never stop. These military strikes and economic sanctions from the West represent the death throes of a dying empire. A dying empire is like a gravely wounded, cornered animal.

This is an extremely dangerous animal, because it is willing to arbitrarily kill anyone and anything before it dies.

serotonindumptruck -> spyware-free Sun, 04/15/2018 - 17:00 Permalink

I still believe that the USA and its European allies will be the first to use nuclear weapons.

Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping no doubt recognize the grave circumstances, and they are using the utmost restraint to avoid the provision of a military pretext that the West/USA is seeking in their effort to greatly escalate hostilities.

GoinFawr -> serotonindumptruck Sun, 04/15/2018 - 17:07 Permalink

" I still believe that the USA ... will be the first to use nuclear weapons . "

Eg. Nagasaki and Hiroshima

dirty fingernails -> serotonindumptruck Sun, 04/15/2018 - 17:12 Permalink

The US will only use nukes to secure their dominance. The people in change aren't beholden to any country or continent being filthy rich and/or dual citizens. So the plan is to deny the US an excuse to use nukes while cutting the empire off at the knees.

Otherwise, I agree it'll be a NATO country that nukes first. That's part of the desire to make smaller nukes. "Small" nukes are seen as a way to nuke but not start a global exchange. Fucking insane people gambling with all higher life forms.

Chupacabra-322 -> dirty fingernails Sun, 04/15/2018 - 17:38 Permalink

"Small Nuke."

You make it sound like she's just "a little pregnant."

dirty fingernails -> spyware-free Sun, 04/15/2018 - 17:01 Permalink

Russia will tolerate it as long as possible. The delay only weakens the US and allies. All have serious issues domestically and even alliances are strained. Don't interrupt when your enemy is making a mistake

serotonindumptruck -> dirty fingernails Sun, 04/15/2018 - 17:22 Permalink

That is certainly some excellent Sun Tzu advice.

However, Sun Tzu never calculated criminal insanity into his logical strategems.

When your enemy refuses to concede defeat, and is willing to suicide the entire world in their obstinance, the only winning move is not to play.

Pernicious Gol -> serotonindumptruck Sun, 04/15/2018 - 17:48 Permalink

He did talk about that.

dirty fingernails -> serotonindumptruck Sun, 04/15/2018 - 17:50 Permalink

True, but look around us. There is no need to nuke cities and military targets in the US. Shut down the electrical grid and the population would lose it in a matter of hours. Within days it would be chaos on so many levels that it would take a long time to recover. We really are our own worst enemies because we are so fractured and polarized of the stupidest shit.

serotonindumptruck -> dirty fingernails Sun, 04/15/2018 - 18:01 Permalink

If limited global depopulation is the ultimate goal, then yes, the USA will suffer the most due to the prevalence of firearms and the general hostility that is clearly evident within its citizenry.

That's obviously not the main objective for the warmongers and neocons in DC.

The ultimate objective is global dominance, and the complete and total subjugation of humanity.

Like I said, criminal insanity is the paradigm that rules the West.

Sid Davis -> serotonindumptruck Sun, 04/15/2018 - 16:55 Permalink

Cornered animal; that sounds like Trumps modus operandi. Notice that anyone who criticizes him gets lambasted with personal attacks instead of a reasoned response.

We need a President who understands freedom and who is a reasonable person, neither of which traits are possessed by Trump. He didn't win the election on his own qualification but on Hillary's lack of qualification. This speaks to the point, "The lesser of two evils is still evil".

Cosmicserpent -> Adolph.H. Sun, 04/15/2018 - 16:42 Permalink

We won't hit bottom without taking everyone with us. The Republic was lost when JFK was assassinated.

spyware-free -> Adolph.H. Sun, 04/15/2018 - 16:43 Permalink

This will work out about as good as Obama "isolating" Russia. Nothing more than a ziocon jerkfest.

khnum -> I woke up Sun, 04/15/2018 - 16:51 Permalink

That proposition plus a ban on all US agricultural produce is currently being put up in their parliament

veritas semper -> FBaggins Sun, 04/15/2018 - 17:43 Permalink

This is very clear path toward a confrontation with Russia. America is not going to stop . Russia continues to be punished because does not leave Syria and does not bow to America.

This recent American fiasco in Syria is just the opening overture. In May we have the moving of American embassy to Jerusalem and the unilateral withdrawal from Iran nuclear deal. I think we will not reach the end of the year without a big war : America is losing power and needs it.

Jumanji1959 -> FBaggins Sun, 04/15/2018 - 18:26 Permalink

Actually the terrorists were sent by Israel and more specifically, the Mossad, who trained them. Israel wants to expand its territory by committing a GENOCIDE.

keep the basta -> FBaggins Sun, 04/15/2018 - 20:25 Permalink

The chemical weapons organisation in Damascus and elsewhere in Syria found NO chemical weapons at the site the USA UK And FR bombed for that. The only chemical weapons are those found in the tunnels in East Ghouta after Syria bussed the militant occupiers away. The 40 tons of chemicals have manufactuer names, serial numbers and addresses eg Porton Down Salisbury.

Occams_Razor_Trader -> Occams_Razor_Trader Sun, 04/15/2018 - 16:38 Permalink

Cui Bono? Trump says he's going to pull out of Syria -- Things never looked better for Assad -- and he gets the bright idea, to turn the world against him by gassing gassing his own people? I'm not buying it. I-F-F (Israeli False Flag)

[Apr 15, 2018] Trump s in deep over his head. It was an open question whether he posed any genuine obstacle to neocons, but it seems more clear now that, one way or another, he has been brought more tightly under their control.

Apr 15, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

JohninMK -> Lumberjack Sun, 04/15/2018 - 16:52 Permalink

The sanctions will no doubt apply to the supplier of that high tech stuff in that chemical lab that the SAA discovered last month in Ghouta.

Just remembered, it was US made and sold through Saudi.

Lore -> JohninMK Sun, 04/15/2018 - 17:14 Permalink

Trump's in deep over his head. It was an open question whether he posed any genuine obstacle to the pathocracy, but it seems more clear now that, one way or another, he has been brought more tightly under their control. THAT, much more than any individual false-flags or other deceptions or wrongs, should be cause for the rational world to fear. The psychopaths are still on the march, and Trump is at least paying lip service to their chicanery. The further out on a limb he goes, the more reluctant and then helpless he will be to backtrack as pathology becomes more extreme and events escalate under their own momentum. With markets looking more precarious than ever, how long will it be before the psychopaths commit more and bigger false flags?

JohninMK -> Lore Sun, 04/15/2018 - 17:54 Permalink

Forgot to say that theses sanctions are downright embarrassing.

So we illegally attack a different country, that country's ally doesn't respond to our act of aggression, and we're now slapping sanctions on that country... for not responding to our attack? Not only sanctions but sanctions on products that both parties actually know aren't there. Unless the US is sanctioning the supply chain of swimming pool and industrial/domestic cleaning agents based on chlorine.

Brilliant just the way to get an agreement from them next time.

dirty fingernails -> JohninMK Sun, 04/15/2018 - 17:59 Permalink

They don't want any agreements except submission. Anything less is unacceptable.

veritas semper -> Lore Sun, 04/15/2018 - 18:04 Permalink

Trump had 1 BILLION $ in debt to the chosen banks ; maybe this can point toward whether or not he was part of the deep state from the beginning ? But ,does it matter any longer ?

the phantom -> chumbawamba Sun, 04/15/2018 - 16:48 Permalink

Sanctions... act of war. Dropping bombs on a sovereign country (without UN approval even)... act of war. Insulting foreign leaders and creating false flags to justify your illegal actions... act of war. Don't be fooled into thinking that just b/c Russia did not respond to the US actions, that "nothing happened". War has started, this is just the beginning.

If you think otherwise, you are a fool.

r0mulus -> Whoa Dammit Sun, 04/15/2018 - 16:41 Permalink

Here we go again- the ever-plotting West trying to create reality on the fly -- attempting to make the alleged chemical weapons attack into a fait accompli, painting the tape of reality with the shadow-puppets of the operation mockingbird-controlled, corporate (MIC) media!

Any good reason we shouldn't just start calling the 5(+1)-eyez media environment the Oceania State News Network (OSNN) right now?

veritas semper -> r0mulus Sun, 04/15/2018 - 18:16 Permalink

America starts the war on Syria, by financing, training, paying the terrorists . America builds military bases there.

And Syria , with help from her allies , still wins the war.

America asks her remaining terrorists there to plan, execute a false flag . As a casus belli.

America attacks , the coalition is small .

Syria stuns the world with her courage and old Soviet era air defense . The aftermath for America is embarrassing .

America gives sanctions to Syria because Syria defended herself , to Russia because Russia still doesn't bow .

Iran is next .

In May we will have further escalation.

[Apr 15, 2018] Haley announced new sanctions on the base of false flag Douma operation

Apr 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Anon , Apr 15, 2018 11:48:39 AM | 16

Putin: Further Western Strikes in Syria Contrary to Int'l Law Will Lead to Chaos https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201804151063585034-syria-actions-violations-chaos/

Haley responds: US to Impose Sanctions on Russia Over Support of Assad - Envoy to UN https://sputniknews.com/us/201804151063584536-haley-us-troops-syria/

Best wore if Haley catch a brain stroke, that would save peace.

[Apr 15, 2018] Wonder how Monbiot feels now Syrians are being killed by western bombs?

Apr 15, 2018 | off-guardian.org

Harry Stotle says April 14, 2018

Wonder how Monbiot feels now Syrians are being killed by western bombs?

Will he be slightly suspicious about the urgency of the attack (which took place just before the inspectors were due to go in) or indeed lack of parliamentary scrutiny about the necessity for such extreme measures, not to mention the potentially catastrophic consequences of provoking Russia?

The US is not under threat and neither is the UK – the Syrians have not asked for bombs to be dropped on them.

The information sources alleging the use of chemical weapons come from the same tainted Sunni extremists using weapons supplied by the west to destroy Yemen.

Francis Lee says April 14, 2018
Yep, those Jihadi pals of Monbiot and co, need all the help they can get now that they are losing the war against the legitimate government of Syria. Next time there is a jihadi outrage against London, Manchester, Paris or St.Tropez, let's see what the likes of Monbiot and the rest of the liberal-imperialist scum at the Guran has to say. This is Iraq all over again. Every time the US-NATO wants to bomb a recalcitrant country they invent a pretext. The Gulf of Tonkin incident, Saddams fabled WMDs and now the fake chemical attack in Syria. Is there anything worse than liberal imperialism? This has been a political game changer. It is now apparent beyond doubt that the liberals are on the side of the most vicious ultra-right warmongering crazies.
Jen says April 14, 2018
What I find troubling about George Monbiot's opinions on President Assad and his supposed habit of celebrating SAA victories by gassing the very people who voted him back as President in 2014 (maybe they can't get enough of being gassed by sarin and chlorine, eh, George?) is his use of strong and often bullying language towards critics like Tim Hayward, Patrick Henningsen and Vanessa Beeley. He has the hide to question Beeley on who funds her work and insinuates that she is in the pay of the Russian government. If he only stuck to his opinion and dubious Just War reasoning – he would be all for invading Syria if, say, Denmark or Sweden were in charge of leading the cavalry – at least he would be tolerable. But to tell Hayward that he should listen to a suspicious and sinister character like Oz Katerji – who openly flaunts his friendship with takfiris – "for [his own] sake" amounts to harassment.

Such behaviour seems borderline psychotic.

writerroddis says April 14, 2018
Quite.
vexarb says April 14, 2018
Meanwhile, back in the real Syria:

Briefing by official representative of Russian Defence Ministry Major General Igor Konashenkov Full Transcript

http://eng.mil.ru/en/news_page/country/more.htm?id=12171238@egNews

The Russian Centre for Reconciliation jointly with the Syrian authorities is completing the large-scale humanitarian operation in the suburbs of Damascus – the Eastern Ghouta. In total, 170,152 people have been evacuated during the operation, including 63,117 militants with their families.

All the settlements in the Eastern Ghouta are currently under the control of the Syrian government.

The Russian military police has been deployed in the Eastern Ghouta in order to monitor situation and maintain law enforcement.

As environment in the suburbs of Damscus stabilizing, people are making their way back home. In total some 63,000 people have return to their homes now. It makes a half of those who had left the area.

The Syrian government working on rehabilitation of destroyed civilian infrastructure. Power and water supply systems have been recovered; reconstruction is underway in the area. People are provided with medical assistance.

Thus, the present-day Eastern Ghouta is far from a "black hole" where no one could get to, but a capital suburb returning to peaceful life.

intergenerationaltrauma says April 14, 2018
Excellent article. I suppose I shouldn't be too terribly surprised by Monbiot's irrational and immoral stance on Syria, as it's lack of logic and ethical coherence dovetails nicely with his new found support for nuclear power as a solution to climate change – inspired no less by the events at Fukishima. Quite amazing actually!

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/mar/21/pro-nuclear-japan-fukushima

Kev says April 14, 2018
I used to respect Monbiot Silly me

If Monbiot wanted to find out what was happening he could find out just as easily as we found out. Hes a fake, a traitor and a supporter of the destruction of a securer democracy by British backed Al Qaeda terrorists on the orders of the zionist state.. There are no excuses.

I have nothing but contempt for Monbiot or the people he works for and nothing but respect for the Syrian people who stand against Monbiots head chopping, child killing, family burning, evil cannibalistic scum

Kathy says April 13, 2018
Some times people become so lost in their own ego through education and privilege that they no longer have capacity to recognize anything but hubris. The whole education system pushes this mindset through reward and accolade to the most susceptible students. This system encourages a level of blind faith in the theories that are taught to them to the the point that the student forgets that what they are being taught is only theory and indoctrination that they should have learned to question. These students are the ones that life opens up for. They are afforded the best jobs, high life styles, nice houses with big mortgages effectively trapping them in a spiders web that becomes difficult to escape from even if they do wake up. Deep down they realize that they are out of their depth but keep up the pretense. These people become the perfect mouth pieces for the state and don't even necessarily realize they have been hijacked and compromised by their status. This makes it difficult for them to recognize others opinions and to question them selves or the narrative they hold. To query there stance unhinges them. This is the point that they often become dogmatic, dismissive and angry . The worst ones are often the ones who see them selves as liberal as they really do believe that they have got where they are by being intelligent and informed. Guardian journalists seem particularly susceptible to this belief. The most sinister part about these journalists is they do manage to manipulate their readers on an insidious level lulling them with their {liberalism}.
Paul says April 13, 2018
I appreciate the force and elegance of Prof. Hayward's argumentation. I'm not sure, though, why he would stop at (or, for that matter, start with) the loyalty of the Syrian army. He was, after all, elected and even after several years of violence, it could probably be fairly plausibly confirmed (or disconfirmed), in principle at least, that he has majority (indeed increased) support among the population. Another argument subject to (dis)confirmation would be that a very significant number of the "rebels" and the vast bulk of their funding, training, weapons and diplomatic / media cover are not Syrian. They would not, then, be part of a rebellion but foreign mercenaries or (largely Salafist) fundamentalist legions in a regime change operation that happens to be consistent with American policy towards Syria since the 1940s.
Harry Law says April 13, 2018
During the time [around 2011] Monbiot was asking people about their opinions on Syria an opinion poll on Syria was published, "According to the latest opinion poll commissioned by The Doha Debates [ the sponsors of the debate no supporters of Assad by any means] Syrians are more supportive of their president with 55% not wanting him to resign". One of the main reasons given by those wanting the president to stay in power was fear for the future of the country". Then in the 2016 presidential election Assad won gaining 88% of vote. Followed by Parliamentary elections when the Ba'ath party won 200 out of 250 seats. The Syrian army is majority Sunni and the majority of the Government is Sunni. He has overwhelming support inside and outside Syria, in Lebanon for instance there was a huge turnout for Assad with tens of thousands queuing up to vote for him.
How anyone can voice support for the "rebels" is beyond me, since they are made up mostly of Jihadis who want to slaughter any opposition to themselves. They say so themselves.
Harry Law says April 13, 2018
Sorry Presidential elections were in 2014, the Parliamentary elections were in 2016.
Mulga Mumblebrain says April 13, 2018
Very early on in the jihadist attack on Syria, there was a massive demonstration in Damascus of two million, where a huge Syrian flag was held aloft by the crowd, in support of the Government. It was broadcast on the Austfalian SBS 'multicultural' TV as an 'ANTI-Assad' demonstration ie a complete LIE, but one as far as I know never acknowledged or retracted.
Thereafter, until today, the SBS, has been the vilest of all our filthy fakestream propagandists working for a takfiri victory. The Syrian Government is 'the regime'. The salafist child crucifiers 'rebels', the favoured media source the al-Jazeera sewer controlled by the vile Wahhabist Qatar regime, one of the prime sponsors of the death-squad butchers. The SBS even has a coterie of female voice-over operatives, whose histrionic utterances, spitting out the hate propaganda, often verge on hysteria.
I've often wondered why they took this position. I suspect Zionist influence, all pervasive in this country, but NEVER dared to be mentioned (the PM Turnbull represents the richest electorate in the country with a large Jewish constituency, and his groveling is epic)and Saudi. For decades the Sordid Arabians have been allowed to finance Wahhabist proselytisation in this country, including in Moslem schools, a decision of bizarre stupidity. As a result we sent scores of enthusiastic wannabe head-loppers to Syria, one of whom was photographed grinning as his seven year old son held up a severed head. While these butchers were used in Islamophobic hate propaganda, the scum death-squad army they were members of, was still afforded TOTAL support by the local fakestream as 'rebels' against 'animal Assad'.
writerroddis says April 13, 2018
This is excellent. Far from being 'too kind' to Monbiot, its restraint, both in tone and in substantive argument – not making claims that can't be defended, and being precise on such as the difference between high probability and empirical or logical certainty – is a great strength. Hayward stands head and shoulders above Monbiot not just in his arguments but in his scrupulous manner of advancing them.
stevehayes13 says April 13, 2018
Monbiot is a fake. His role is to help maintain the fiction that there is a diversity of opinions in the corporate media, which enables them to pretend there is no rational dissent from the official narrative when the pretend left and the centre and the right all agree, such as when they all say: Assad is bad.
Etegere says April 13, 2018
This is a very well put together piece on a very troubling individual. Monbiot has always been deeply suspicious in my view. He issues his statements (often lies) and never engages his critics, evidently viewing criticism as an intolerable offense. Not the behaviour of an honourable man.

I would very much like to see a follow-up piece similar to this but that looks wider and takes apart his deception on issues other than Syria.

Ultimately, he should not be working as a so-called journalist. His ability to push lies is deeply offensive to those of us with an interest in truth and integrity. He is truly a stain.

Binra (@onemindinmany) says April 13, 2018
The feeling I get from Tim Hayward's article is of lost love – but not in the romantic sense – for Monbiot – who he used to feel part of, believe in, stand side by side with? Is this a long letter TO G.M?

There's another feeling I get over the incitement to war on Syria – and that is of the many being forced, terrorized, or convinced at least that going along with the pressure to act out the line or at least not challenge it – is the choosing of a lesser evil.

However I do not see any convincing actors on the stage in the 'case' for making war on Syria. Only of assets by one means or another.

We may be misled about most everything, perhaps because the mind from its earliest adaptations to sense of loss of love, support and connection, learns to mask pain and seek protection in strategies of self justification.

Since the earliest catastrophic beginnings of the development of this peculiarly split human consciousness, the gods that terrorised us from above were sacrificed to in supplication of appeasement. So that which sends fire and plague is entreated to save us from it. Nothing has changed but the costumes of its human reenactments.

I feel it is time for a New Story.
Don't fight over narrative – just read where it comes from with some compassion. The promise of 'power and protection' reveals a hollow and pathetic dependency. We feed a monster as if to 'survive'.

The capacity for introspection is also the capacity to uncover a fundamental humanity within even the worst of times. Everyone acts in self interest as in that moment they define themselves to be in relation to it. The lie is considered bad to be exposed in – but necessary to hide by.

But if everything is subjugated to serve a lie (too big to fail) then there is nothing true – excepting the power to say so and enforce it, and is that not the 'thinking' to which we have been trained to suckle?

I cannot make another man (or woman's) choices. I can only live my own and by tasting the results, learn to make better choices. But this absolutely depends on self-honesty. We cannot lie to others and be true to ourself nor lie to ourself and be true to others. And if we try to make the lie true – we will project the mind of it into the perceptions of others – whether they extend a true willingness or a deceit – we wont be able to tell.
That is the recipe for hell – because everything reflects a hidden hate that 'threatens' to destroy or violate our defences. But the enemy is not 'OUT THERE!' – even if there are many with grievance.

The lie and the father of the lie sets us against our Self – each other and our world.
"No it doesn't – it protects me from chaos, powerlessness, humiliation and loss of self!"
Yet all these things has it delivered while pointing the finger away.
There is a heart prayer from Hawaii
The mind is erected against saying it:

"I'm sorry, please forgive me, I love you , thank you".

Mulga Mumblebrain says April 13, 2018
Monbiot sold out to protect his well-paying sinecure. Old story. Alternative possibility-blackmail or some other form of coercion.
Toby says April 14, 2018
[My first comment at this site.]

This is an excellent article among many here, but Binra's comment really resonates with me.

I see a direct link between:

unconditional love (love is unconditional, or it isn't love),
learning how to become part of love's continuing evolution,
learning how to avoid war.

For me, the quality of being that is love is the nature of the personal choices we each must make if we are to learn – both as individuals and by extension as larger groups – how to navigate the sinister and deceptive propaganda this article addresses, and hopefully put an end to it one day. We otherwise fall prey to its machinations and are lost to history's darker forces.

"I'm sorry, please forgive me, I love you , thank you".

Humility, love and gratitude are strong when undertaken with courage, perseverance and patience. This is not easy to do. But we know that. The right way is the hard way.

jag37777 says April 12, 2018
This article is too kind to Monbiot. He's a fake, always has been. And a nasty piece of work with it.
physicsandmathsrevision says April 12, 2018
Monbiot is, like Naom Chomsky, a Khazarian Jew. His (and Chomsky's) preferences are so defined.

Their sophistry and faux-empathy works endlessly towards a single end.

Support for the globalist finance plutocracy nexus that, like Monbiot and Chomsk, is (whatever their poses) the real enemy of all.

writerroddis says April 13, 2018
Congratulations! I've always argued for OG removing the 'dislike' button. You made a convincing case for keeping it.
Admin says April 13, 2018
to everything there is a season
mohandeer says April 14, 2018
Well sai Philip.
I wish he would revise something other than physics and maths – he's got a serious problem.
Mulga Mumblebrain says April 13, 2018
Cobblers. Probably hasbara to discredit this place.
Susanna Farley says April 14, 2018
"Monbiot is, like Noam Chomsky, a Khazarian Jew " What the hell has this to do with the point you are trying to make?

Are you trying to say that all Khazarian Jews (or all Jews?) "support the globalist finance plutocracy." etc.? Unlike the very justified condemnation of the massacre of unarmed Palestinian protesters at the Gaza/Israel border by the Israeli army, this is genuine anti-semitism.

It's fine to criticise Monbiot and Chomsky as individuals, however harshly. but there should be zero tolerance for attributing the "sophistry and faux-empathy" you see them exhibiting to their ethnicity.

The global capitalist elite are indeed our enemy. They are mostly white and male but share few other characteristics.

Mulga Mumblebrain says April 14, 2018
Susanna, that type of idiot with their stupid stereotyping of whole groups, are often, I suspect, frauds, sent to discredit those around them. So, some Ashkenazi Jews are descended from the Khazars who converted to Judaism. So what-as Shlomo Sand shewed, a number of groups over time converted to Judaism, when it was more proselytising than now, just as groups converted to Islam or Christianity. That makes no difference to how Chomsky acts (pretty well as far as I can see) or Monbiot (increasingly very badly, and shamefully).
alan moore says April 12, 2018
Page not Found ???
Vaska says April 12, 2018
Fixed. [A technical glitch we couldn't find an explanation for.]
Mulga Mumblebrain says April 12, 2018
Monbiot's arrogance is innate. It got him into strife when he tackled the formidable Edward S Herman over the phony Srebrenica 'genocide' and was savagely mauled, but, as expected, he declared himself the victor and retreated to smear his adversaries from the sidelines.
He propagandises as he must, or he'd get the Pilger treatment, and his nice sinecure at the Fraudian would disappear. And since the Sorosification and the other measures taken to turn the Fraudian into the sewer of disinformation and hate-mongering that it is today, working so frantically for a jihadist victory in Syria and Syria's vivisection, to the greater glory of Eretz Yisrael, Monbiot has simply goose-stepped ever further Right, as scores of his type have done, over the years.
vexarb says April 13, 2018
Polonius: This above all: to thine own self be true, And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any man. Farewell, my blessing season this in thee!

I have been thinking lately this might apply even to villains, as in Peer Gynt. Then if you are really strong black and white but sincere, the Divine Photographer has a chance to season you in acid gall and reduce you in sulfite until your positive emerges Lily White. But if you are just a misty inbetween maundering Boyg of a man, you have to resort to Photoshop to provide a fake identity.

"Those who were neither for God nor for Devil but only for themselves . So many, I had not thought Death had undone so many". -- Dante, The First Circle

vexarb says April 14, 2018
Sorry, the above post should have been addressed to Binra who said something similar to the advice Polonius gave Laertes. Ibsen's Peer Gynt goes further: even a villain who is true to himself may be valuable in the scheme of things; but people like the Fraudian journoes who just drift the way the wind blows are puffballs that carry no seed.
Mulga Mumblebrain says April 14, 2018
Puff-balls carry spore, not seeds. Fraudian presstitutes as a species of toadstool? I like it, very much.

[Apr 15, 2018] The Syria bombing is a disgraceful act disguised as a noble gesture by Moustafa Bayoumi

Apr 15, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

The US-led barrage shows just how little interest the global powers have in ending Syria's ghastly war

Contact author

@BayoumiMoustafa

Sat 14 Apr 2018 10.42 EDT Last modified on Sat 14 Apr 2018 13.52 EDT

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via Email View more sharing options Share on LinkedIn Share on Pinterest Share on Google+ Share on WhatsApp Share on Messenger Close 'Regional and global powers now exploit Syria for their own advantage and apportion out its territory for repeated bombing.' Photograph: Giuseppe Lami/EPA

The bombing of Syrian government targets by the United States, Britain, and France is a disgraceful and ineffectual act masquerading as a noble gesture. Far from preventing a more vicious war, the bombing instead legitimizes the continuation of the conflict. In fact, what this barrage of weapons really reveals is how little interest the global powers have in ending Syria's ghastly war.

ss="rich-link"> Syria: who are the key players in the conflict? Read more

Similar to the attacks on Syrian government targets that Donald Trump ordered just over a year ago, the airstrikes this time will not seriously damage Bashar al-Assad's larger military capacity, nor are they intended to. Instead, we're told that the western bombing campaign has specifically aimed munitions at locations where the storage and testing of chemical weapons occurs.

But wasn't last year's attack meant to put an end to Assad's use of chemical weapons, and aren't these the weapons that he was supposed to have destroyed under international auspices in 2014? At this rate, should we expect that an aerial bombing mission to finally and completely destroy Assad's chemical weapons will be launched every April?

The question is ridiculous, of course, but so is the idea that this attack will accomplish anything beyond boosting the war-making egos of its protagonists and enabling Assad, his reprehensible regime, and his allies to complain of being the perpetual victims of western aggression. Beyond the bombast on both sides, Syria's daily misery will continue.

These strikes mark the first timeTheresa May of Britain and Emmanuel Macron of France have committed their respective militaries into combat, and they have done so, according to May, "to protect innocent people in Syria from the horrific deaths and casualties caused by chemical weapons, but also because we cannot allow the erosion of the international norm that prevents the use of these weapons."

May's words might sound more intelligent than those of Donald Trump, who in his statement about the attacks told the American people: "Hopefully, someday we'll get along with Russia and maybe even Iran, but maybe not." But what May's words really reveal is not the ethical reasoning of a head of state but the devastating lack of moral concern by the international community when it comes to the people of Syria.

The fact that three of the world's most powerful militaries have now been mobilized into action, even for a limited campaign such as this one, to prevent "the erosion of the international norm" of using chemical weapons is far from comforting. Since the war began, Assad's regime has engaged in the repeated and dreadful use of barrel bombs and mass starvation, the systematic torture of thousands of citizens and the laying siege to multiple cities, the killing of hundreds of thousands of people and the displacement of more than half the population. Yet, all of this horror does not seem to "erode an international norm" and certainly has not motivated these western leaders to any meaningful action to end the war.

On the contrary, regional and global powers now exploit Syria for their own advantage and apportion out its territory for repeated bombing. At this point, the country has been bombed by the Assad regime, the United States, Britain, France, Russia, Iran, Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Bahrain, and the UAE.

Rather than limiting war, this latest bombing of Syria normalizes the war's ongoing brutality. Forget the chemical weapons for a moment. The bombing of Syria by the western powers essentially and unconscionably establishes near total warfare on civilians as an acceptable "international norm." Our politicians will wallow in their most recent action, calling the bombing a great success for our civilization. In fact, it's much more akin to our demise.

Moustafa Bayoumi is a Guardian US columnist

[Apr 15, 2018] Russia Has 'Irrefutable' Proof Syrian Gas Attack Staged by 'Foreign State' by Patrick Fleming

Apr 15, 2018 | russia-insider.com

In a shocking revelation yesterday, at a news conference in Moscow with Dutch politician Stef Blok, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that Russia has proof that the Syria gassing was a false flag staged by the 'special services of a foreign state':

"We have irrefutable evidence that it was another staging, and the special services of a state which is in the forefront of the Russophobic campaign had a hand in the staging,"

This is important because if Lavrov is not bluffing, and his record is excellent on this, he usually only says this kind of thing if he can back it up, it will be a political bombshell in the West over the coming weeks, where large segments of the electorate are furious at their governments for the missile attacks, and are questioning the justification for launching them.

Indeed, the only explanation of the attacks that makes any logical sense is that it was a false flag, because, as has been exhaustively discussed everywhere except the mainstream media (which for some reason avoids this speculation), Assad would have no conceivable motive for using gas, because he has won the war, and doing so would only bring in US intervention. The circumstances certainly do look like a classic false flag situation.

The main suspects for such a false flag would be, MI6, CIA, or Mossad, or some combination of them collaborating, as they often do. No other allied state, like Saudi Arabia or even ISIS would do this without approval and oversight from one of these big three.

On the surface it looks like the US/UK/French attack looks suspect at best, because it was rushed into action before any convincing proof was presented.

This post first appeared on Russia Insider

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

[Apr 15, 2018] BZ has a history. Lavrov has a strong point

Apr 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

AmsterJam | Apr 14, 2018 6:51:22 PM | 113

BZ has a history. Lavrov has a strong point

1. Psychochemical weapons:

[2009 Wikipedia cached page] https://web.archive.org/web/20120927170325/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychochemical_weapon#cite_note-11 ">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychochemical_weapon#cite_note-11">https://web.archive.org/web/20120927170325/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychochemical_weapon#cite_note-11

"The Iraqi weapon. The existence of a BZ-related compound, called Agent-15, in Iraq's arsenals was revealed in 1998 . Apparently, Iraq possessed large quantities of the agent since the 1980s. A document found by the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) in 1995 contained a brief reference to this agent and subsequent assessment of relevant scientific and other background material indicated the size of the stockpile. Soldiers of 3rd Infantry Division, Fort Stewart Georgia found facilities used for the production of these weapons. The facilities had been closed for several years before the invasion as dust almost a half inch thick was noted on everything. Records books of personnel who had entered the buildings and other project related equipment looked as though everything had been stopped suddenly and it did not appear that the research had ever progressed to a state of actual production ".

And from this [2014 Wikipedia cached page]: https://web.archive.org/web/20140618215854/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychochemical_weapon ">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychochemical_weapon">https://web.archive.org/web/20140618215854/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychochemical_weapon " Britain was also investigating the possible weaponization of LSD (lysergic acid diethylamide) and BZ (3-quinuclidinyl benzilate) as nonlethal battlefield drug-weapons Hungarian researcher Lajos Rosza wrote that records of Hungary's State Defense Council meetings from 1962 to 1978 suggest that the Warsaw Pact forum had considered a psychochemical agent such as Methylamphetamine as a possible weapon .. The United States eventually weaponized the chemical BZ for delivery in the M43 BZ cluster bomb until stocks were destroyed in 1989 ."

2. Zanders JP: CW Agent Factsheet - Agent-15: https://web.archive.org/web/20070613005906/http://www.sipri.org/contents/expcon/agent15.html ">http://www.sipri.org/contents/expcon/agent15.html">https://web.archive.org/web/20070613005906/http://www.sipri.org/contents/expcon/agent15.html ) "Little information is publicly known about Agent-15, except that it is closely related to BZ. The understanding of its physiological effects is based on studies with the latter agent. The existence of Agent-15 in Iraq's arsenals was revealed by the British Secretary of State George Robertson in a statement to the House of Commons on 9 February 1998. According to the statement, Iraq may have possessed large quantities of the agent since the 1980s. A document found by the UN Special Commission on Iraq ( UNSCOM ) in August 1995 contained a brief reference to Agent-15 and subsequent assessment of relevant scientific and other background material indicated the size of the stockpile."

3.. '3-Quinuclidinyl Benzilate': https://web.archive.org/web/20090423142234/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-quinuclidinyl_benzilate ">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-quinuclidinyl_benzilate">https://web.archive.org/web/20090423142234/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-quinuclidinyl_benzilate

"In February 1998, the British Ministry of Defence released an intelligence report that accused Iraq of having stockpiled large amounts of a glycolate anticholinergic incapacitating agent known as Agent 15.[citation needed] Agent 15 is an alleged Iraqi incapacitating agent that is likely to be chemically either identical to BZ or closely related to it. Agent 15 was reportedly stockpiled in large quantities prior to and during the Persian Gulf War. The combination of anticholinergic PNS and CNS effects aids in the diagnosis of patients exposed to these agents. Also in 1998, there were allegations that elements of the Yugoslav People's Army used incapacitating agents against fleeing Bosnian refugees during Srebrenica massacre in 1995 that caused hallucinations and irrational behavior. Physical evidence of BZ use in Bosnia is unsupported, however."

And from the current 2018 Wikipedia page on '3-Quinuclidinyl Benzilate': "The U.S. Army tested BZ as well as other "psycho-chemical" agents on human subjects at Edgewood Arsenal in Maryland from 1955 to 1975 , according to declassified documents."

'NUFF SAID !!

cj , Apr 14, 2018 7:00:45 PM | 115
Hi Paul,

the BZ was probably in the food at the restaurant (Zizzi) and they may have gotten a huge dose, it very potent. This would account for the delay -- restaurant to park bench, needs to be absorbed through the GI tract.

I don't believe the doorknob scenario-- I think you would have to have several milligrams of nerve agent in a skin permeable solvent DMSO or DMF plus gelling agent to make it stick and then it would have to be wet to transfer onto the skin and then get absorbed. First, the target might notice the handle is sticky and wash his/her hands in which case you get no effect if its done in a minute or so and the water is alkaline as it is in England. Then, assuming the gel isn't noticed the transfer would be pretty inefficient as the agent has to be absorbed from a small surface area through the keratin of the skin. If you got things just right, applied the novichok in a nice anhydrous solvent and no rain got in it and someone touched it before the solvent evaporated, then you might be able to give a lethal dose. Having said that, if you absorbed say 0.1mg or so the effects would be pretty immediate collapse in 15 mins or so. So in my opinion the doorknob scenario is rubbish-- if you could get it to work the Skripal that touched the handle would have collapsed before getting near the restaurant.

So I think that there are way too many variables that would need to be optimized to get a nice transfer. But if you managed to achieve this feat the target would be very sick in about 10 mins or so.

The way to use a nerve agent is to aerosolize it, then its easy to get 1-2mg into the lungs and onto the mucosa where it is absorbed very fast (Kim's brother), the transfer through the skin is much more difficult. So my bet is BZ in the food--a huge dose, hence the consulatant's letter saying its not an nerve agent. It's an anti-cholinergic (like atropin), not an anti-cholinesterase (nerve gas).

somebody , Apr 14, 2018 7:10:09 PM | 117
Posted by: frankthomas | Apr 14, 2018 6:36:20 PM | 104

It does matter as the politicians doing this need to get reelected.

It does not seem to have worked for Theresa May , I doubt it worked for Trump.

Paul , Apr 14, 2018 7:37:34 PM | 122
@ Paveway IV--the BZ / Novichok rundown was helpful. Thank you. Not sure that it exhausts it, but how could it...
Paul , Apr 14, 2018 8:11:01 PM | 129
@ Paveway IV -- comment 98 Paveway, I'm not sure whether you've seen Sushi's instalments in the "Curious Incident" series at the Saker, but perhaps you'd consider looking at the most recent one, instalment 8, and then examining the hypothetical narrative below.

Sushi, A superb instalment on a stellar "Curious Incident" series.

I am trying to construct a narrative that accounts for what we have plausible reason to infer, but which does not rely on any official interlocutors (except perhaps Boris Johnson, who may not be able to help himself) clearly lying.

First question--and I imagine you might cover this in your next instalment: Am I correct in thinking that BZ and any of the Novichok / Foliant series are simply not similar enough to be covered by Porton Down's public description of the substance "in question" as being: a) a Novichok b) or from that class of nerve agent c) or a closely related compound

BZ isn't a), isn't b) a nerve agent at all and c) is not closely related to any of the family of compounds that could be in any way considered a Novichok.

Inferences: 1) So, if the finding was actually BZ, when the OPCW confirms the UK's findings, the OPCW is not confirming any of the statements made along lines a), b) or c).

The OPCW, then, is not i) confirming that the substance is of a "type developed by Russia" and so it would seem are either, instead ii) confirming something the Salisbury medical personnel have been quoted as saying, or iii) confirming the findings of some other entity that can be plausibly glossed as having official ("UK") findings, or iv) are confirming UK findings not made public.

Which is to say that all along there have been at least two substances in play, and a bit of a bait and switch game, in which "it" is presumed to be specified but the descriptions are referring to another substance.

For example, the bait is Novichoks, etc. But when we think they are referring to a substance whose metabolites are found in the Skripals' biophysical samples, that substance may actually be bench-grade or lab-grade BZ. Some other sample--taken from a park bench, door knob, restaurant, cemetary headstone, or car ventilation system, may have been tested as containing highly pure (Porton Down lab-grade) A-234, for example.

Each time we think they are talking about one, they are talking about another, and we never really pause to re-examine which "it" they are referring to.

Not technically a lie, except perhaps what might initially seem like an "innocent" exaggeration--"weapons-grade" but actually this, as you note, is a big giveaway. The substance for which the OPCW is confirming the UK findings, is not weapons grade, but as they say, virtually without impurities. You are the only source I am aware of who has emphasized that weapons-grade is not, as the lay person might suppose, highly pure but is in fact marked by certain impurities from a full-scale production run and perhaps additionally to introduce changes of viscosity, etc.

Is any of this making sense, and does anything seem factually incorrect here?

Thirdeye , Apr 14, 2018 8:24:31 PM | 133
Russia announced today that the S-300 long-range air defense system would be provided to the Syrian air defenses. That would be a game-changer in terms of both detection and range. Israel is sure to be displeased because it puts Israeli and Lebanese airspace within range. S-300 radar could also be data-linked with the S-120 and S-200 systems. The increased risk to Israeli missions over Syria would be immense. IMO that counts as a "very serious consequence" of the raid. Russia had withheld that system as long as part of a bargaining strategy with FUKUS. After their display of malice and treachery, the lid on defensive aid to SYAAF has been removed.

Report from Southfront states that the cruise missiles had their targeting jammed by Russian EW, i.e. they were mostly wounded ducks by the time they reached Damascus. Syrian air defense was mostly preventing random ground strikes by off-target missiles, in addition to getting valuable training. That would explain something I observed in videos of the shootdowns, that a lot of the targets were on a high arc. That's not my understanding of how cruise missiles are supposed to be flying in the target area.

les7 , Apr 14, 2018 8:30:18 PM | 134
b

What I learned in many years of travel is that politicians in most of they world are profoundly aware of the long game. In NA (sorry Mexico) they seldom think past the next poll and never past the next round of elections. Sadly, it seems many commentators here reflect the same conclusion when they cannot see the long game that must be played to allow the empire to collapse. There will be thrashing about as the beast gets hyped with its' own version of weaponized LSD (MSM fear-mongering) and inevitably there will be casualties. No amount of showdown force will help while the beast is thrashing - it is impossible to constrain a person in the middle of a fit - and the patience to allow the episode to pass is exemplary. and necessary if we are to have a future with hope.

Putin and Xi are playing the long game, with profound grief it is Syria that bears the brunt of the thrashing. May it end quickly

Piotr Berman , Apr 14, 2018 8:45:02 PM | 136
BZ matches some known facts:

a. non-lethal but incapacitating b. hard to make a lethal overdose - safe for incapacitations, Skripals could get high dose to be incapacitated for many days, but suffer no permanent damage that was described for victims of "novichok" accidents -- like malfunction of the lab hood. c. delayed action d. very durable when spread on surfaces, water resistant -- English rain would not be a problem, and it would be detectable weeks after.

It is manifestly not an assassination weapon, but it could be considered to incapacitate terrorists or defenders in bunkers or tunnels, a ship crew etc., together with hostages, civilians etc.

PavewayIV , Apr 15, 2018 12:01:02 AM | 147
Paul@129 - Old Microbiologist and others are really the ones to ask but AFIK, a BZ molecule and FOLIANT nerve agents are entirely unrelated animals in a chemical sense. The only commonality comes when you consider them under the CWC's "certain toxic chemicals and their precursors" schedules. The OPCW considers certain incapacitating agents, including BZ, as potential chemical weapons. BZ is listed as a Schedule 2 Toxic Chemical. 'Novichoks' would be the higher risk/no non-CW use Schedule 1 list.

As far as the UK and OPCW parties playing deception by substitution or deception by omission in their public statements? I think that's exactly what Lavrov is hinting at. The UK is implying that only one chemical toxin - a nerve agent - was found and is being discussed. In hindsight, the odd use of 'military grade' might just mean 'weaponized'. In the case of BZ, the powder has to be micronized (ground up in a jet mill) to some ridiculously tiny size - like a micron - to travel deep into the lungs, but not so tiny that it is immediately exhaled. I imagine the purity can only be figured out by having enough undegraded substance to analyze. That's nearly impossible with a nerve agent with a half-life of hours. BZ has a half-life of weeks.

No idea if the two can be/were used together or separately or why they would even do that. The mere presence of both is what's interesting.

If they found both Novichok-whatever AND BZ, then the whole 'Made in Russia' claim falls apart. It doesn't mean the UK or US absolutely made it either, but sort of levels off the playing field. The fact that they are trying to keep everything about BZ secret means they were clearly being deceptive in order to blame Russia based on just the 'Novichok' part.

Now whether Lavrov's suggestion of BZ is accurate or whether the OPCW or UK will ever reveal the secret details remains to be seen.

Emily Dickinson , Apr 15, 2018 12:18:28 AM | 148
The official statement from the Russian Embassy to the UK:

https://www.rusemb.org.uk/fnapr/6486

The Russians explicitly state that the Swiss specialists found an "A-234 type" nerve agent in the samples, along with the BZ. The "A-234" is suspicious because it is a volatile substance, but was found in its "initial state (pure form and high concentration)" as well as with products of its decomposition. BZ better fits what happened to the Skripals. A-234 would not have remained in a pure state for so long -- and would have quickly killed the Skripals.

This makes the Spiez Labs statement sound even more extraordinarily coy than it did in the first place. It doesn't say that Spiez found a "Novichok"; it says Spiez trusts that Portdon Down did.

This seems to come down -- yet again -- to that word "Novichok." My reading: Spiez found, along with the BZ, an A-234-like compound, but did not want to get into a public argument about whether or not it was the precise compound developed long ago by the Soviet Union and loosely identified by some as one of the "Novichoks" (newcomers).

PavewayIV , Apr 15, 2018 12:19:41 AM | 150
The NYT's Best-Sellers lists undoubtedly includes one of my old favorites: The US Army's Medical Management of Chemical Casualties Handbook. Just the thing to curl up with before nodding off in your medically-induced coma.

Here's the 14 pages on BZ, but none of you are allowed to read it - unless you voted for Trump.

Don Bacon , Apr 15, 2018 12:25:58 AM | 151
There is no novichok. from the files.... In recent years, there has been much speculation that a fourth generation of nerve agents, 'Novichoks' (newcomer), was developed in Russia, beginning in the 1970s as part of the 'Foliant' programme, with the aim of finding agents that would compromise defensive countermeasures. Information on these compounds has been sparse in the public domain, mostly originating from a dissident Russian military chemist, Vil Mirzayanov. No independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published. (Black, 2016)
Don Bacon , Apr 15, 2018 12:27:07 AM | 152
...and we know that Mirzayanov was fed false information.

[Apr 14, 2018] Poison Gas Weapon Of Choice For "False News"

Notable quotes:
"... Authored by Peter Koenig via The Saker, ..."
"... But when such poison gas attacks are mere false flags, or by the new term, "false news", and are used to provoke war, perhaps an all annihilating war, then humanity has turned to what it never should have become – a lowly-lowly herd of brainless zombies. ..."
"... And the saga continues. The saga to drum up war. That's the purpose of it all. Nothing else – Russia, the evil nation, led by an evil leader, must be subdued and conquered. ..."
"... a totally and unprofessionally staged event. As Russian military quickly discovered and reported. ..."
"... The western aggressors, who seek a reason to mass bomb Syria into even more rubble, causing even more death and destitution ..."
"... the US economy is based on war, is based on weapon manufacturing and international banking which finances weapon manufacturing and the exploitation of mineral resources coveted by weapon manufacturing. ..."
"... But, please, do take all your fakeness, from money, to lies, to hypocrisy and more lies and coercion and sanctions and blackmail with you – never to surface again. And give peace a chance – for those who survive your (almost) terminal assault on humanity. ..."
Apr 14, 2018 | thesaker.is

Authored by Peter Koenig via The Saker,

Poison gas is not only deadly, it often provokes a slow suffocating death. That, perpetrated on innocent children, is particularly cruel.

But when such poison gas attacks are mere false flags, or by the new term, "false news", and are used to provoke war, perhaps an all annihilating war, then humanity has turned to what it never should have become – a lowly-lowly herd of brainless zombies.

Is that what we have become – brainless, greedy, selfish beings, no sense of solidarity, no respect for other beings; I am not even talking about humans, but any living being.

Poison gas, the weapon of choice for fear.

Poisoning in Salisbury of the former Russian double-agent, Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, visiting her dad from Moscow. Poisoning with a nerve gas, called Novichok that was allegedly made in Russia. In the meantime, we know that nerve gas made in the former Soviet Union, now non-existent in Russia, was military grade and deadly. The gas used for the alleged attack was not deadly. We also know by now that the UK – all of their highest officials, from PM May down the ladder, lied so miserably that they will have a hard time recovering. It will backfire. Unlike the foreign secretary, Johnson boy pretended their secret bio-gas / bio-weapon laboratory Porton Down, just 13 km down the road from Salisbury, where the pair was allegedly found unconscious on a park bench, assured him the gas was made in Russia. Alas, the laboratories chief chemists testified later to the media that they could not be sure that the substance was made in Russia. No, of course not.

In fact, Porton Down, working in close collaboration with the CIA, is a highly sophisticated chemical warfare facility that can easily make the gas themselves – at the grades they please, deadly or not so deadly, if it should serve a "false news" purpose – which this did.

Were father and daughter indeed poisoned? – This is a legitimate question. Who has seen them since the alleged poisoning occurred on 28 March? – They disappeared from the public eye. Apparently, they are both recovering, Yulia having been released from hospital a few days ago, but has not been seen by anyone in public, nor been able to talk to the media, lest she could say "something" the public is not allowed to know. Her father is also recovering and may be released soon – released from where? – Is this all a farce?

An aunt talked to Yulia from Moscow, where she noticed that Yulia was not free to talk. The aunt wanted to visit her niece in the UK but was obviously denied a visa.

Where are father and daughter? – Washington has "offered" them a new home and new identity in the US, to avoid further poisoning attempts how ridiculous! A blind man or woman must see that this is another farce, or more correctly, an outright abduction. The two won't have a chance to resist. They are just taken away – not to talk anymore to anyone ever. – That's the way the story goes. The lies are protected, and the "Russia did it" syndrome will prevail – prevail in the dumb folded public, in the herd of pigs that we all have become, as Goebbels would say.

And the saga continues. The saga to drum up war. That's the purpose of it all. Nothing else – Russia, the evil nation, led by an evil leader, must be subdued and conquered. But the empire needs the public for their support. And the empire is almost there. It disposes of a vicious media corporate army – that lies flagrantly about anything that money can buy. It's like spitting in the face of the world, and nobody seems to care, or worse, even to notice.

* * *

On the other side of the Mediterranean is Syria. A vast and noble country, Syria, with a leader who truly loves his people and country, a leader who has despite a foreign induced war – not civil war – a proxy war, instigated and funded by Washington and its vassal allies in Europe and the Middle East; Syria, a highly educated socialist country that has shared the benefit of her resources, free education, free medical services, free basic infrastructure, with her people. This Syria must fall. Such strength cannot be tolerated by the all-dominating west. Like Iraq and Libya, also socialist countries once-upon-a-time, and like Syria, secular Muslim nations, sharing their countries wealth with the people, such countries must fall.

According to Pentagon planners and those Zion-neofascist thinktanks that designed the PNAC (Plan for a New American Century), as the chief instrument of US foreign policy, we know since Wesley Clark, the former Supreme Allied commander and Chief of NATO in Europe (1997-2000) talked to Democracy Now in 2007, saying that within 5 years seven countries must fall, one of them is Syria.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/r8FhZnFZ6TY

Since 2011, the Syrian people have been bombarded by US and NATO and Saudi funded terrorists, causing tens of thousands of deaths, and millions of refugees. Now, even more blatantly, US bases are vying to occupying the northern third of Syria, totally illegally, but nobody says beep. Not even the UN.

The recent fake gas attack on Douma outside of Damascus, has allegedly killed 80 to 120 people, mostly women and children.

Of course, that sells best in the propaganda theatre – women and children. Strangely, like last time the infamous White Helmets discovered the gas victims, including a gas canister-like bomb laying on a bed, having been shot through the roof of a house a totally and unprofessionally staged event. As Russian military quickly discovered and reported. They called on an independent investigation, one that could not be bought and corrupted by Washington. President Assad invited a team of investigators to inspect the scene.

Instead of heeding this invitation, Trump, the bully, calls Mr. Assad an "animal" and a "monster", twittering his brainless aggressions throughout the world. Tell you what, Mr. Trump, Bashar al-Assad is a far better human being than you are a monster. You and your dark handlers don't even deserve being called human. Mr. Assad has regard and respect for his people, attempts to protect them and has so far succeeded with the help of Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, recovering the last bits of Syrian territory from the terrorist, except of course, the northern part, where the chief terrorist and the world's only rogue state has itself installed, the US of A. – Why in the world would Mr. Assad choose to gas his own people? Especially, when he is winning the war? – People, ask yourself, cui bono (who benefits?) and the answer is simple: The western aggressors, who seek a reason to mass bomb Syria into even more rubble, causing even more death and destitution . That's who.

While you, Donald, and those monsters that direct you from behind the scenes, have no, but absolutely no respect for your people, for any people on this globe, for that matter, not even for your kind, for your greed-no-end kind of elite, as you bring the world to the brink of an all-destructive, all killing annihilating war.

Since the other fake event, 9/11, we are, of course, already in a "soft version" of WWIII, but that's not enough, the United States needs a hard war, so badly it doesn't shy away from destroying itself. That's how blinded your own propaganda has made you Americans, you generals, you corporate "leaders" (sic-sic) – and all you Congress puppets. That is the sheer truth. You better read this and wake up. Otherwise your dead sentence is hastened by your own greed and ignorance.

Both Russia and the US drafted a Security Council Resolution – which of course are both not approved, with Nikki Haley lambasting Russia, accusing them of being responsible for the countless deaths in Syria – pointing again to the children and women, making up the majority. Again, it sells best in the world of psychological propaganda, while evil Nikki Haley knows very well who has caused all these deaths by the millions, destitution and refugees by the millions, tens of millions throughout the Middle East and the world – her own country, directly or through NATO, the European puppets allies and proxy wars, paid and funded by Washington and by elbow-twisting her vassals.

On 9 April – UNSC – while Nikki Haley, repeats and over-repeats her lies and fake accusations, the Russian Ambassador to the UN, Mr. Vassily Nebenzia, listens. And then in a twenty-minute statement of sheer intelligence, he dismantles all the lies, and lays bare the truth, about all the fakeness being played out internationally. The depth with which he addresses the assembly is concise and so brilliant, none of his UK, French and German counterparts could have ever come close to a statement of this magnitude and excellence. Even Ms. Haley can't help glancing over ever-so often to Vassily Nebenzia, as he speaks . Her eyes reveal some kind of hidden admiration for what he says. – After all, she can't be as dumb as she is paid for to look and sound.

By now anybody who dares not just reading and listening to the mainstream presstitute "fake news", but has the courage to dig into the truth news, RT, TeleSur, CGTN, PressTV – and a few others, or websites like Global Research, The Saker Blog, ICH, NEO, Greanville Post CounterCurrent, Dissident Voice and many other trustworthy sources – knows about the lies and the only, but the very only purpose these false flags cum false news serve: Provoking a war with Russia, subjugating and dividing Syria, and the Middle East and becoming the hegemonic masters of the universe.

For the simple reason, and hardly anybody talks or writes about it – the US economy is based on war, is based on weapon manufacturing and international banking which finances weapon manufacturing and the exploitation of mineral resources coveted by weapon manufacturing.

The entire war industry with all its associated civil services and industries, of banking, electronics, aviation, mining . makes up more than half of the US GDP – but of course, it's never broken down that way. The chosen people will control the world. Well, they do already – financially at least the western part of our globe. But it's not enough. They will not stop, before they burry themselves in their own-dug graves, or rather in one massive mass-grave. But, please, do take all your fakeness, from money, to lies, to hypocrisy and more lies and coercion and sanctions and blackmail with you – never to surface again. And give peace a chance – for those who survive your (almost) terminal assault on humanity.

[Apr 14, 2018] It might be that elder Skripal was being surveilled by FSB cause working with MI6 and Ukrainian regime. So Russian might have information both about hism and MI5/MI6 actions

Apr 14, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Apr 13, 2018 5:20:47 PM | 17

Thorvid @9--

Yes, shouting match must end.

Can't recall where I read this info, but elder Skripal was being surveilled by FSB cause working with MI6 and Ukrainian regime. So, he was being watched, but just how closely? Perhaps to the point where Russia knows UK's lying. In other words, Mr. Skripal remains in employ of MI6.

Laguerre , Apr 13, 2018 5:39:27 PM | 24
Will Russia be able to prove its claim of British involvement? If so could it free Yulia Scripal?
No way that Yulia Skripal is going to be released. Too dangerous. Absolutely everyone who was directly involved has been taken off-line, and not allowed to speak. The doctor who wrote the letter to the Times, the personnel of the hospital who treated the victims, the cop, and the Skripals themselves. No public word from any. It's a big effort by the authorities, which shows how sensitive they are.
Thorvid , Apr 13, 2018 5:53:45 PM | 29
karlof1 @17--

That would make scene and tie in with a couple of things i read/saw in the early days, sadly also can't recall where. That Mr Skripal was meeting regularly with MI6/5 handlers and was giving lectures to the military, which of course may explain why he is living in British military heartland.

[Apr 13, 2018] OPCW Confirms Salisbury Poisoning, Can't Say Where Poison Came From by Jason Ditz

Apr 12, 2018 | news.antiwar.com

The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has confirmed that the Skirpals were poisoned with a specific "toxic chemical," as alleged by the British government. Both public statement and classified version, however, decline to offer any specific theories on the origin of the poison.

That's a problem for Britain, which has been blaming the Russian government for the poisoning since long before testing began. They identified the poison as Novichuk, and concluded it was Russia's fault, despite there being other nations with access to the chemical.

British officials were quick to claim the OPCW report as vindication, since the classified version reportedly contained the chemical formula for the poison. Yet without any evidence on where it came from, they're really no better off than before.

The Skirpal poisonings were used by the British government to take major diplomatic measures against Russia. Russia has denied anything to do with the incident, and offered to help investigate. Britain has spurned that offer and continued to blame them.

[Apr 12, 2018] Trump chooses impulse over strategy as crises mount

Apr 12, 2018 | www.washingtonpost.com

In a White House known for chaos, the process of developing the U.S. response to the Syrian government's alleged latest gas attack was proceeding with uncharacteristic deliberation, including several national security briefings for President Trump.

But then Wednesday morning, Trump upended it all with a tweet -- warning Russia, the Syrian government's backer, to "get ready" because American missiles "will be coming, nice and new and 'smart!' "

White House advisers were surprised by the missive and found it "alarming" and "distracting," in the words of one senior official. They quickly regrouped and, together with Pentagon brass, continued readying Syria options for Trump as if nothing had happened.

But the Twitter disruption was emblematic of a president operating on a tornado of impulses -- and with no clear strategy -- as he faces some of the most consequential decisions of his presidency, including Syria, trade policy and the Russian interference probe that threatens to overwhelm his administration.

"It's just like everybody wakes up every morning and does whatever is right in front of them," said one West Wing aide, speaking on the condition of anonymity to share a candid opinion. "Oh, my God, Trump Tower is on fire. Oh, my God, they raided Michael Cohen's office. Oh, my God, we're going to bomb Syria. Whatever is there is what people respond to, and there is no proactive strategic thinking."

The president has been particularly livid in the wake of Monday's FBI raids on the home, office and hotel room of Cohen, his longtime personal attorney. In the days after, he has seriously contemplated a shake-up at the Justice Department in the hopes of curbing the expanding probe by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, whose referral led to the Cohen raids. Trump is considering firing Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein, who is overseeing the probe, several people familiar with Trump's private comments said.

By Trump's admission Wednesday on Twitter, Mueller's investigation into Russian election interference and possible obstruction of justice has consumed "tremendous time and focus." And in denying allegations of wrongdoing, the president seemed to equivocate in a parenthetical aside: "No Collusion or Obstruction (other than I fight back)," he wrote.

On trade, meanwhile, the president is grappling with the potential economic fallout of his threatened tariffs, especially within the agriculture sector, which could harm some of the rural states that carried him to electoral victory -- all against the backdrop of his ongoing effort to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement more favorably for the United States.

Trump also finds himself facing the surprise retirement of House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), signaling more turmoil for the fractious Republican Party heading into the midterm elections.

These and other pivotal developments come as many of the guardrails that previously helped stabilize the president -- from West Wing aides to clear policy processes -- have been cast aside, with little evident organization or long-term strategy emanating from the White House.

This portrait of Trump in the current moment comes from interviews with 21 administration officials, outsider advisers, lawmakers and confidants, many of them speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive details and conversations.

Save for his Wednesday morning tweet, the president's Syria deliberations have largely been the exception to the chaos engulfing the White House, underscoring the high stakes of a decision, White House officials said.

President Trump, second from right, speaks in the Cabinet Room of the White House on Monday. (Susan Walsh/AP)

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Wednesday afternoon that Trump continues to review options for a military strike in Syria and that his tweet should not be read as an announcement of planned action.

"We're maintaining that we have a number of options, and all of those options are still on the table," Sanders said. "Final decisions haven't been made on that front."

The National Security Council met Wednesday afternoon at the White House, chaired by Vice President Pence, to finalize options that could be presented to the president, Sanders said. She said Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, national security adviser John Bolton and other senior officials have been in regular contact with their counterparts from Israel, Saudi Arabia, France, the United Kingdom and other partners around the world as the administration weighs its military options for Syria.

Yet Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) said Wednesday afternoon that he had yet to hear from Trump or other administration officials about impending action in Syria.

"I have no idea. So far, it appears to me to be bluster," Corker said. "Then I saw a tweet come out about us working with Russia right after we're getting ready to bomb them, so I mean, who knows? Unfortunately, there are a lot of things announced by the administration that never come to pass or evolve."

The more general question of U.S. engagement in Syria has confounded and divided the administration. Officials at the White House and Pentagon, for instance, were blindsided by Trump's pronouncement at a rally in Ohio in late March that U.S. troops would be leaving Syria "very soon," and in the first hours after the speech, they scrambled to get a sense of what he meant.

Trump initially told aides that he wanted U.S. soldiers and Marines to leave in 48 hours -- an impossible timeline that alarmed the Pentagon and sent officials racing to dissuade him, two U.S. officials said.

Eventually, Mattis and others persuaded Trump to give the military another six months to wipe out the remnants of the Islamic State. The timeline was far from ideal but was viewed as a major victory compared with Trump's original timeline, officials said.

Senior U.S. officials describe a president who is operating largely on impulse, with little patience for the advice of his top aides. "A decision or statement is made by the president, and then the principals -- Mattis or Pompeo or Kelly -- come in and tell him we can't do it," said one senior administration official. "When that fails, we reverse-engineer a policy process to match whatever the president said."

On a potential shake-up at the Justice Department, Trump has been receiving a range of advice and has sent mixed signals about his intentions. Within the White House, advisers have largely counseled caution and urged him not to make changes. White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly and counsel Donald McGahn have tried to calm Trump several times, as has Ty Cobb, the White House lawyer handling the Russia probe.

Yet others, including many in the president's orbit who don't work in the White House, have counseled a more aggressive approach, saying the raid of Cohen's home and business crossed a line. This advice has left White House staff on edge, nervous about what the president might do.

Trump, for instance, yelled about Rosenstein and Attorney General Jeff Sessions for several hours Monday and has continued to complain about them since. But some described his complaints as just "venting," with one outside adviser saying that while the president is "steamed and unhappy," that doesn't necessarily mean he's prepared to take action.

"I heard or saw nothing that would suggest he was planning to make a change at the Department of Justice," said Alan Dershowitz, a retired Harvard Law School professor who dined at the White House with Trump on Tuesday night. He said they mainly discussed the Middle East and Russia.

Rosenstein, meanwhile, seems to have made peace with any eventuality, said one person who has had a conversation with him. He understands he might be squarely in Trump's crosshairs, and "is ready for whatever comes and confident in his own behavior."

Trump has also devoted a portion of his days to trade policy. Over the past eight weeks, the president has initiated trade disputes with several of the largest countries in the world, driving forward pronouncements without fully vetting most of them with key aides.

In some cases, he has backpedaled on his vow to impose steep tariffs on countries such as Germany, Canada and Mexico. But he has also refused to waive tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from Japan, a major U.S. security ally and trading partner.

Some Senate Republicans fear that Trump's loosely formed trade war with China could end up cratering the agriculture industry at a time when many Midwestern farmers are preparing to plant crops. China has promised to impose tariffs on U.S. farm exports as a way of retaliating against Trump's planned tariffs. The White House promised to backstop U.S. farm groups, but they have yet to share what they would do or how they would do it.

"I don't know what kind of cockamamie scheme we could come up with that would be fair," Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) said Tuesday.

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Tex.) was similarly frustrated by Trump's trade agenda. "I think the president has some ideas about trade that are not generally shared by the Republican conference," he said.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told his frustrated ranks during a closed-door lunch this week to call Trump and air their trade-related worries, according to a person familiar with the Kentucky Republican's remarks. Roberts and others planned to meet with Trump on Thursday to discuss the matter.

[Apr 12, 2018] This looks like war to me. The only question is how big and can it be confined to the ME and Mediterranean

Monica Lewinsky redux ?
Apr 12, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Pat Lang Mod , 13 hours ago

This looks like war to me. The only question is how big and can it be confined to the ME and Mediterranean.
im cotton -> Pat Lang , 9 hours ago
I am not under the illusion that the US is the cause of all the world's ills, but if our government had at least some half-sane foreign policy which involved cooperation with Russia and China--among other nations--on issues of mutual concern, the world would be a far better place. Instead it's nothing but our-way-or-the-highway confrontation.

Our exceptionalism blinds us to any consideration that there are other people, places, and nations with valid interests. Working through those interests with the goal of mutual benefit to all parties would truly make America great again, not this nonsense. The world is not always a zero sum game.

Randal -> Pat Lang , 12 hours ago
Wouldn't want to be in Putin's seat right now - he's got some very tough calls to make, and none of the choices are good.

If Russia were really the US's enemy, it might be argued that Trump had done good to put him in that position. But why on earth should Russia be regarded as an enemy of the US, except when the US chooses to make it one with actions like this proposed war against its ally?

Daily Planet Hashgraph rules a -> Pat Lang , 2 hours ago
Col Lang, thanks for all you've done in service to the U.S and continue to do by getting this message out to the rest of the nation through your network.
james -> Pat Lang , 4 hours ago
pat, i am going to go out on a limb and say i don't believe any attack will
happen soon.. if anything happens i think april 24th is close to the
time it will happen... and if that date passes, i think it is unlikely
to happen in the way it is being anticipated at present.. and - wait for it..... that is based off the astrology!
Timothy Hagios -> Pat Lang , 10 hours ago
What I see as a major factor is that Russia probably can't afford a small tit-for-tat exchange. If Russia and the US knock down a couple of each other's planes and then try to cool things off militarily, Russia will almost certainly face massive economic consequences, probably involving the cancellation of the Nord Stream II at a minimum. This means that Russia needs to either do nothing or respond with such force that the west cannot simply change tactics and critically escalate the economic pressure.
Kooshy -> Timothy Hagios , 7 hours ago
Did you had your dinner with Alan Deshowitz too ?
james -> Kooshy , 6 hours ago
based on their comments - they are essentially parroting israels hopes and wishes..
Sid Finster , 13 hours ago
Please do not misunderstand me, I respect your struggle, Colonel, even if it is futile.
Do you remember Iraq's desperate attempts to avoid war in 2003?

All those efforts, all the massive protests in the West were to no avail, because the Empire had made up its mind that it wanted war, and was perfectly willing to lie to get that war.

"Mobile WMD factories"

"Yellow cake"

"Aluminum tubes" ZOMG. Aluminum. Tubes.

In spite of crimes on a hitlerian scale, nobody in the United States or UK leadership paid any price at all, not on a personal level, not on a professional level. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Blair and the others walk the streets freely, treated as Elder Statesmen and Wise Leaders, in spite of the fact that they are directly responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths, trillions of dollars wasted, and not only that, but every doomsayer's prediction with regard to Iraq came to pass.

If the west had one tenth the respect for "the rule of law" that it professes, every last one of these Elder Statesmen and more would hang. At the same time, if Saddam Hussein truly had nuclear weapons, the west would have to think twice, just as it cannot force its will on North Korea.

The moral of this sad story? There is no reasoning with sociopaths. They can be dealt with only from a position of strength, if you have rewards to give them that they cannot otherwise take, or punishments to had out that they cannot avoid.

Reward and punishment is what sociopaths understand.

DH -> Sid Finster , 6 hours ago
""Aluminum tubes" ZOMG. Aluminum. Tubes."

lol seems like a lifetime ago. A sad development is that Rumsfeld's 'you to go war...' had entered the national psyche as a saying to be paraphrased. Guilty.

Artemesia -> Sid Finster , 6 hours ago
So who were the sociopaths in the room when Hitler allowed the British to depart Dunkirk; when Hitler offered numerous peace offers to Britain; when the German government offered more-than-generous terms to Poland to settle the Danzig question?
You wrote earlier, Sid Finster,
"Sociopaths care nothing for logic or morality of they stabs in the way of something they want. Like the Reichstag fire.
I don't understand why people refuse to see that we are run by sociopaths, or, at a minimum, by people indistinguishable from sociopaths."

In a recent comment the failure of comparison of Syria to the Reichstag fire was explained.
Reductio ad Hitlerum is equally intellectually suspect.

How did so many people get to be sociopaths? I suggest that one element is that almost the entire nation has been systematically misinformed about its own history, and trained like puppy-dogs to load all culpability on 'that guy,' thereby escaping accountability and also insight, characteristics of -- a sociopath.

Before we start diagnosing sociopathology and offering "reward and punishment" treatment, we might do well to do precisely what major decision makers in the current situation have failed to do: examine the situation from all sides, rationally, based on sound evidence (movies & TV don't count).

Rep. Carol Maloney and seven other congressmen are sponsoring the "Never Again Education Act" to "teach American Students about the Holocaust." https://www.algemeiner.com/... This is an extremely dangerous measure that must be struck down before it takes hold. The Holocaust is already taught in US public schools, and taught in a way that permits no critical analysis but only acquiescence. When a school district in California assigned students to study the issue and prepare a critical analysis of it, the school district was severely chastised, made to rescind and counteract the assignment, monitored for several years to ensure "Holocaust compliance." This is not an intellectually sound study of history, this is dogmatic tyranny. It produces --- sociopaths.

Timothy Hagios -> Sid Finster , 9 hours ago
On several occasions, I have encountered individuals who are psychologically incapable of constructing boundaries for their personal conduct. Instead of determining what they should not do for themselves, they rely on their boss (or anyone else who's above them) to knock them back when they go to far. And then they get to the top...
JoeC , 15 hours ago
Interesting develops in Russia reported by John Helmer - a potential major shift in power from oligarchs to defense interests and indications that the government to be formed by Putin will essentially be a war cabinet (and without Medvedev). All of this seems driven by the unrelating and largely imaginary criticism of Russia by the US, UK, etc. and the lack of any willingness to have honest assessments of the negative claims like the Syria "chemical attacks": http://johnhelmer.org/?p=17...
smoothieX12 . -> JoeC , 10 hours ago
Last Russian Presidential elections were not about electing the President of Russian Federation, they were about electing a Supreme Commander. Most Russians understand that, US national security apparatus and media do not. It is simply beyond their grasp and experiences.
Eric Newhill , 14 hours ago
I am afraid this is a fait accompli. Thank you for trying. At least your honor is clean, which is much more than can be said for too many in a position to influence. I weep for our nation.
As an aside, Trump won't be re-elected, but I don't think he cares at this point - he may not even complete his first term. PT was wrong. The coup has not failed. It marches on. Trump's lack of character has revealed itself. He should make a stand now on his principles. Engaging in war with Syria and Russia isn't going to save his presidency. They will overthrow him anyhow as an example of what will happen to anyone else that The People elect as oppose to the deep state.
Biggee Mikeee -> Eric Newhill , 11 hours ago
(aka mikee)

Eric:
I voted for Trump but he lost my support over a year ago.
Time to finally accept the fact that Trump has no principles.
Trump's statement last week about pulling troop's out of Syria was a half-assed attempt at cover for what came about a few days later. Mulshine's try at running interference for Trump is a comical continuation of that cover. It's a dog and pony show. Don't fall for it.

Who has the ultimate responsibility?

View Hide
Fred -> Eric Newhill , 12 hours ago
Eric,

Now everyone will have a reason to get rid of Trump, then bankrupt his family to boot. Not to worry, Bombing Bolton will win another war and we'll be greated as liberators from Damascus to Moscow. Evidence? Who cares if the evidence is even more fabricated than the Fusion GPS crap. Would anyone in the intellegence community lie? On a bright note Little Rocket Man won't have to worry about his future after Big Rocket Man proves his point.

Eric Newhill -> Fred , 9 hours ago
Fred,
Pour encourager les autres
John Minnerath -> Eric Newhill , 13 hours ago
Eric Newhill,
I fear you may be right. Trump is getting hammered from every side right now.
He may extricate himself, but the quicksand in the swamp is getting deeper.
Sid Finster -> John Minnerath , 13 hours ago
The funny part is that russiagate conspiracy theorists will scream "Putin puppet!" even as the ICBMs are launched. The "Trump is fighting the Deep State" conspiracy theorists will insist that this is eleven-dimensional chess or something equally stupid, even as they go up in a mushroom cloud.

At least it would be funny, if it were not actually happening.

Eric Newhill -> John Minnerath , 13 hours ago
John,

Then again, just when all appears lost a glimmer of hope is offered. Teresa May is hedging now. Maybe it wasn't gas. Maybe Assad didn't do it - inspectors are needed on the ground at the site: http://www.breitbart.com/lo...

chris chuba , 15 hours ago
This is my hometown guy. I was surprised by the number of people there (as well as other places) who are absolutely 100% convinced about the fact that there was a chemical attack and Assad must be guilty because they saw the footage of the victims foaming from their mouths on TV. Yikes.

Perhaps I should blame the networks. In all of the coverage that I saw, they simply streamed out the video as if it came from one of their foreign correspondents. If the networks had any sense of professionalism they would have put up a caption,

'This footage is unverified, it was obtained by rebel activists'

or words to that effect.

james -> chris chuba , 11 hours ago
get your white helmet videos!!!! hot off the press!!!!
james , 11 hours ago
thanks for stating all that pat.. i am happy to see your word is reaching some of the msm! can you get your press secretary to run your ideas by the nyt, wapo and wsj too? that would be a switch for what they regularly offer!
Pat Lang Mod -> james , 11 hours ago
I have been excluded from the MSM by the Ziocons. i don't know why Mulshine talks to me nor do I know why he and Tucker Carlson still are employed.
james -> Pat Lang , 11 hours ago
your comment confirms the idea that alternative views are not being heard in the msm... the msm appears to be one big hall of mirrors with generally the same message being sent out - one that conforms with the ziocons..
RaisingMac -> james , 9 hours ago
I may be dating myself here, but I can still remember 25 years ago, when Col. Lang was a regular guest on the old McNeill/Lehrer News Hour on PBS. He always gave excellent, informed commentary. I was so glad a couple of years ago, when--quite by accident--I found this blog on the internet. It's been a go-to source for me ever since. It's a pity that informed experts like Col. Lang aren't often featured by our MSM anymore; but the again, that's why I now mostly avoid the MSM.
Paul Mulshine -> james , 4 hours ago
I think the real problem is not so much ideology but the fact that the current crop of journalists have little experience with dust-ups in the "developing" world and therefore have to trust inside-the-Beltway "experts" who have no expertise.
VietnamVet , 9 hours ago
Colonel,

Thanks. You've kept your honor.

House Speaker Paul Ryan to retire. "Paul Ryan is abandoning the ship before it
sinks - Chicago Tribune". No doubt to get his cut. But, I guess he never got the briefing
that if the USA goes to war with the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin has more
than enough nuclear weapons to spare one to target Janesville, WI. Will he have time to realize that it all was for nothing?

Babak Makkinejad , 9 hours ago
All:

I believe this episode demonstrates the soundness of my observation a few months ago that the best course of action for the United States is to cut and run from Syria as well as Afghanistan and a number of other such places.

US has demonstrated that she could be easily manipulated and her actions could lead to World War III.

Sid Finster -> Babak Makkinejad , 5 hours ago
The neocons seem to see WWIII as a feature and not a bug.

Witness the articles suggesting that we can "win" a nuclear war. I am reminded of the scene from Dr. Strangelove when General Buck Turgidson suggested "not more than ten, twenty million dead, TOPS!"

Fred , 14 hours ago
Trump should fire a few generals and recall Dempsey back to duty.
DH -> Fred , 7 hours ago
"Kerry asks Dempsey to back him up Dempsey declines, causing Rand Paul's ally to burst out laughing." [I created this clip on C-SPAN, booya!]

https://www.c-span.org/vide...

RaisingMac -> Fred , 9 hours ago
Dempsey was good. So was Gen. Flynn.

[Apr 12, 2018] Does anybody in DC thinks what would be the consequence if Russian retaliate and fire at the missile launchers, are we ready to fold or we will go to war with Russia? what the F*ing morons run this country.

Notable quotes:
"... At the moment if I had to guess, it will be a decapitation strike at Damascus along with wide ranging attacks on Syrian air force targets and possibly other regime targets as well. And my guess is that the Russians probably won't respond beyond shooting down some of the incoming missiles. So like Shayrat, but rather more murderous and widespread. ..."
"... It should be remembered though that even if there is no big Russian retaliation, that doesn't mean the White House nutters were "right", any more than a man who pulls the trigger once in a game of Russian Roulette and gets away with it was "right". ..."
Apr 12, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Randal , 15 hours ago

" Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump

Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and "smart!" You shouldn't be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!

11:57 AM - Apr 11, 2018 "

By jingo!

Kooshy -> Randal , 12 hours ago
What does he mean "new" meaning new technology, and smarter? not like the ones he fired last year? So Russians should think twice if they can intercept and fold their hand. What does he think this is a poker game? what if they don't fold, does he think about that. Does anybody in DC thinks what would be the consequence if Russian retaliate and fire at the missile launchers, are we ready to fold or we will go to war with Russia? what the F*ing morons run this country.
Randal -> Kooshy , 10 hours ago
" What does he think this is a poker game? what if they don't fold, does he think about that. Does anybody in DC thinks what would be the consequence if Russian retaliate and fire at the missile launchers, are we ready to fold or we will go to war with Russia? "

Seems clear they think the Russians will fold, and if they don't they can be beaten in theatre at an acceptable cost.

Presumably they see the risks of escalation to regional war, or all out war, or even nuclear war as within acceptable bounds. Others might disagree with them (especially since the pot contains nothing worth having to justify the risk for ordinary folk), but they are the ones making the decisions.

Kooshy -> Randal , 7 hours ago
Yes some like Netanyahu and Alan Darshwitz think it's a bluff worthy of risk to pay, especially since Americans like me and you are the ones who will end up paying the price of their hand. Do you think it's a worth while bluff? Colonel Lang with more experience than any of decision makers, thinks not.
DH -> Randal , 12 hours ago
Still have my fingers crossed for a measured 'response' in the vein of the missiles that missed the deserted target after the first false flag gas attack. He and Putin may be on the same page.
Randal -> DH , 11 hours ago
Seems like a long shot to me, but your guess is as good as mine.

At the moment if I had to guess, it will be a decapitation strike at Damascus along with wide ranging attacks on Syrian air force targets and possibly other regime targets as well. And my guess is that the Russians probably won't respond beyond shooting down some of the incoming missiles. So like Shayrat, but rather more murderous and widespread.

Where we are the following morning, who knows? If Assad is still alive and the strikes aren't too extensive, nothing much is changed. Although of course if the anti-Syrian forces can stage one false provocation and get US intervention, they can stage another. And another, ad nauseam.

It should be remembered though that even if there is no big Russian retaliation, that doesn't mean the White House nutters were "right", any more than a man who pulls the trigger once in a game of Russian Roulette and gets away with it was "right".

Poul , 16 hours ago
Has Trump painted himself into a corner with rhetoric of this nature and made an attack unavoidable?

[Apr 12, 2018] Listening to Russian experts (short report about the mood on Russian prime time TV)

Notable quotes:
"... Next, there was an consensus view that pleading, reasoning, asking for fairness or justice, or even for common sense, was futile. The Russian view is simple: the West is ruled by a gang of thugs supported by an infinitely lying and hypocritical media while the general public in the West has been hopelessly zombified. The authority of the so-called "western values" (democracy, rule of law, human rights, etc.) in Russia is now roadkill. ..."
"... There was also a broad consensus that the US elites are not taking Russia seriously and that the current Russian diplomatic efforts are futile (especially towards the UK). The only way to change that would be with very harsh measures, including diplomatic and military ones. Everybody agreed that talking with Boris Johnson would be not only a total waste of time, but a huge mistake. ..."
"... Reach your own conclusions. I will just say that none of the "experts" was representing, or working for, the Russian government. Government experts not only have better info, they also know that the lives of millions of people depend on their decisions, which is not the case for the so-called "experts". Still, the words of these experts do reflect, I think, a growing popular consensus. ..."
Apr 12, 2018 | thesaker.is

They all agreed that the AngloZionist (of course, they used the words "USA" or "Western countries") was only going to further escalate and that the only way to stop this is to deliberately bring the world right up to the point were a full-scale US-Russian war was imminent or even locally started.

They said that it was fundamentally wrong for Russia to reply with just words against Western actions. Interestingly, there also was a consensus that even a full-scale US attack on Syria would be too late to change the situation on the ground, that it was way too late for that.

Another interesting conclusion was that the only real question for Russia is whether Russia would be better off delaying this maximal crisis or accelerating the events and making everything happen sooner. There was no consensus on that.

Next, there was an consensus view that pleading, reasoning, asking for fairness or justice, or even for common sense, was futile. The Russian view is simple: the West is ruled by a gang of thugs supported by an infinitely lying and hypocritical media while the general public in the West has been hopelessly zombified. The authority of the so-called "western values" (democracy, rule of law, human rights, etc.) in Russia is now roadkill.

There was also a broad consensus that the US elites are not taking Russia seriously and that the current Russian diplomatic efforts are futile (especially towards the UK). The only way to change that would be with very harsh measures, including diplomatic and military ones. Everybody agreed that talking with Boris Johnson would be not only a total waste of time, but a huge mistake.

To my amazement, the notion that Russia might have to sink a few USN ships or use Kalibers on US forces in the Middle-East was viewed as a real, maybe inevitable, option. Really – nobody objected.

Reach your own conclusions. I will just say that none of the "experts" was representing, or working for, the Russian government. Government experts not only have better info, they also know that the lives of millions of people depend on their decisions, which is not the case for the so-called "experts". Still, the words of these experts do reflect, I think, a growing popular consensus.

Source: The Saker

[Apr 11, 2018] Samantha Power Liberal War Hawk by Robert Parry

There is a special breed or neocon female warmonger in the USA -- chickenhawks who feed from crumbs of military industrial complex.
Is not Haley a replays of Samantha Powell ? The article remains mostly right is you simply replace the names...
Of cause, Haley is a little bit more obnoxious and has no respect for truth whatsoever. she can call while to be black with straight face.
Notable quotes:
"... Though Power is a big promoter of the "responsibility to protect" or "R2P" she operates with glaring selectivity in deciding who deserves protection as she advances a neocon/liberal interventionist agenda. She is turning "human rights" into an excuse not to resolve conflicts but rather to make them bloodier. ..."
"... Thus, in Power's view, the overthrow and punishment of Syria's President Bashar al-Assad takes precedence over shielding Alawites and other minorities from the likely consequence of Sunni-extremist vengeance. And she has sided with the ethnic Ukrainians in their slaughter of ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine. ..."
"... For instance, in a March 10, 2003 debate on MSNBC's "Hardball" show -- just nine days before the invasion -- Power said, "An American intervention likely will improve the lives of the Iraqis. Their lives could not get worse, I think it's quite safe to say." However, the lives of Iraqis actually did get worse. Indeed, hundreds of thousands stopped living altogether and a sectarian war continues to tear the country apart to this day. ..."
"... Similarly, regarding Libya, Power was one of the instigators of the U.S.-supported military intervention in 2011 which was disguised as an "R2P" mission to protect civilians in eastern Libya where dictator Muammar Gaddafi had identified the infiltration of terrorist groups. ..."
"... Urged on by then-National Security Council aide Power and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Obama agreed to support a military mission that quickly morphed into a "regime change" operation. Gaddafi's troops were bombed from the air and Gaddafi was eventually hunted down, tortured and murdered. ..."
"... Ukraina po-nad u-se! ..."
Jun 15, 2015 | consortiumnews.com

32 Comments

Exclusive: Liberal interventionist Samantha Power along with neocon allies appears to have prevailed in the struggle over how President Obama will conduct his foreign policy in his last months in office, promoting aggressive strategies that will lead to more death and destruction, writes Robert Parry.

Propaganda and genocide almost always go hand in hand, with the would-be aggressor stirring up resentment often by assuming the pose of a victim simply acting in self-defense and then righteously inflicting violence on the targeted group.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power understands this dynamic having written about the 1994 genocide in Rwanda where talk radio played a key role in getting Hutus to kill Tutsis. Yet, Power is now leading propaganda campaigns laying the groundwork for two potential ethnic slaughters: against the Alawites, Shiites, Christians and other minorities in Syria and against the ethnic Russians of eastern Ukraine.

Though Power is a big promoter of the "responsibility to protect" or "R2P" she operates with glaring selectivity in deciding who deserves protection as she advances a neocon/liberal interventionist agenda. She is turning "human rights" into an excuse not to resolve conflicts but rather to make them bloodier.

Thus, in Power's view, the overthrow and punishment of Syria's President Bashar al-Assad takes precedence over shielding Alawites and other minorities from the likely consequence of Sunni-extremist vengeance. And she has sided with the ethnic Ukrainians in their slaughter of ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine.

In both cases, Power spurns pragmatic negotiations that could avert worsening violence as she asserts a black-and-white depiction of these crises. More significantly, her strident positions appear to have won the day with President Barack Obama, who has relied on Power as a foreign policy adviser since his 2008 campaign.

Power's self-righteous approach to human rights deciding that her side wears white hats and the other side wears black hats is a bracing example of how "human rights activists" have become purveyors of death and destruction or what some critics have deemed " the weaponization of human rights. "

We saw this pattern in Iraq in 2002-03 when many "liberal humanitarians" jumped on the pro-war bandwagon in favoring an invasion to overthrow dictator Saddam Hussein. Power herself didn't support the invasion although she was rather mealy-mouthed in her skepticism and sought to hedge her career bets amid the rush to war.

For instance, in a March 10, 2003 debate on MSNBC's "Hardball" show -- just nine days before the invasion -- Power said, "An American intervention likely will improve the lives of the Iraqis. Their lives could not get worse, I think it's quite safe to say." However, the lives of Iraqis actually did get worse. Indeed, hundreds of thousands stopped living altogether and a sectarian war continues to tear the country apart to this day.

Power in Power

Similarly, regarding Libya, Power was one of the instigators of the U.S.-supported military intervention in 2011 which was disguised as an "R2P" mission to protect civilians in eastern Libya where dictator Muammar Gaddafi had identified the infiltration of terrorist groups.

Urged on by then-National Security Council aide Power and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Obama agreed to support a military mission that quickly morphed into a "regime change" operation. Gaddafi's troops were bombed from the air and Gaddafi was eventually hunted down, tortured and murdered.

The result, however, was not a bright new day of peace and freedom for Libyans but the disintegration of Libya into a failed state with violent extremists, including elements of the Islamic State, seizing control of swaths of territory and murdering civilians. It turns out that Gaddafi was not wrong about some of his enemies.

Today, Power is a leading force opposing meaningful negotiations over Syria and Ukraine, again staking out "moralistic" positions rejecting possible power-sharing with Assad in Syria and blaming the Ukraine crisis entirely on the Russians. She doesn't seem all that concerned about impending genocides against Assad's supporters in Syria or ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine.

In 2012, at a meeting hosted by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, former U.S. Ambassador Peter W. Galbraith predicted "the next genocide in the world will likely be against the Alawites in Syria" -- a key constituency behind Assad's secular regime. But Power has continued to insist that the top priority is Assad's removal.

Similarly, Power has shown little sympathy for members of Ukraine's ethnic Russian minority who saw their elected President Viktor Yanukovych overthrown in a Feb. 22, 2014 coup spearheaded by neo-Nazis and other right-wing nationalists who had gained effective control of the Maidan protests. Many of these extremists want an ethnically pure Ukrainian state.

Since then, neo-Nazi units, such as the Azov battalion, have been Kiev's tip of the spear in slaughtering thousands of ethnic Russians in the east and driving millions from their homes, essentially an ethnic-cleansing campaign in eastern Ukraine.

A Propaganda Speech

Yet, Power traveled to Kiev to deliver a one-sided propaganda speech on June 11, portraying the post-coup Ukrainian regime simply as a victim of "Russian aggression."

Despite the key role of neo-Nazis acknowledged even by the U.S. House of Representatives Power uttered not one word about Ukrainian military abuses which have included reports of death squad operations targeting ethnic Russians and other Yanukovych supporters.

Skipping over the details of the U.S.-backed and Nazi-driven coup of Feb. 22, 2014, Power traced the conflict instead to "February 2014, when Russia's little green men first started appearing in Crimea." She added that the United Nations' "focus on Ukraine in the Security Council is important, because it gives me the chance on behalf of the United States to lay out the mounting evidence of Russia's aggression, its obfuscation, and its outright lies. America is clear-eyed when it comes to seeing the truth about Russia's destabilizing actions in your country."

Power continued: "The message of the United States throughout this Moscow-manufactured conflict and the message you heard from President Obama and other world leaders at last week's meeting of the G7 has never wavered: if Russia continues to disregard the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine; and if Russia continues to violate the rules upon which international peace and security rest then the United States will continue to raise the costs on Russia.

"And we will continue to rally other countries to do the same, reminding them that their silence or inaction in the face of Russian aggression will not placate Moscow, it will only embolden it.

"But there is something more important that is often lost in the international discussion about Russia's efforts to impose its will on Ukraine. And that is you the people of Ukraine and your right to determine the course of your own country's future. Or, as one of the great rallying cries of the Maidan put it: Ukraina po-nad u-se! Ukraine above all else!" [Applause.]

Power went on: "Let me begin with what we know brought people out to the Maidan in the first place. We've all heard a good number of myths about this. One told by the Yanukovych government and its Russian backers at the time was that the Maidan protesters were pawns of the West, and did not speak for the 'real' Ukraine.

"A more nefarious myth peddled by Moscow after Yanukovych's fall was that Euromaidan had been engineered by Western capitals in order to topple a democratically-elected government."

Of course, neither of Power's points was actually a "myth." For instance, the U.S.-funded National Endowment for Democracy was sponsoring scores of anti-government activists and media operations -- and NED President Carl Gershman had deemed Ukraine "the biggest prize," albeit a stepping stone toward ousting Russian President Vladimir Putin. [See Consortiumnews.com's " A Shadow US Foreign Policy ."]

Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland was collaborating with U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt how to "midwife" the change in government with Nuland picking the future leaders of Ukraine "Yats is the guy" referring to Arseniy Yatsenyuk who was installed as prime minister after the coup. [See Consortiumnews.com's " The Neocons: Masters of Chaos ."]

The coup itself occurred after Yanukovych pulled back the police to prevent worsening violence. Armed neo-Nazi and right-wing militias, organized as "sotins" or 100-man units, then took the offensive and overran government buildings. Yanukovych and other officials fled for their lives, with Yanukovych narrowly avoiding assassination. In the days following the coup, armed thugs essentially controlled the government and brutally intimidated any political resistance.

Inventing 'Facts'

But that reality had no place in Power's propaganda speech. Instead, she said:

"The facts tell a different story. As you remember well, then-President Yanukovych abandoned Kyiv of his own accord, only hours after signing an agreement with opposition leaders that would have led to early elections and democratic reforms.

"And it was only after Yanukovych fled the capital that 328 of the 447 members of the democratically-elected Rada voted to strip him of his powers including 36 of the 38 members of his own party in parliament at the time. Yanukovych then vanished for several days, only to eventually reappear little surprise in Russia.

"As is often the case, these myths reveal more about the myth makers than they do about the truth. Moscow's fable was designed to airbrush the Ukrainian people and their genuine aspirations and demands out of the Maidan, by claiming the movement was fueled by outsiders.

"Yet, as you all know by living through it and as was clear even to those of us watching your courageous stand from afar the Maidan was made in Ukraine. A Ukraine of university students and veterans of the Afghan war. Of Ukrainian, Russian, and Tatar speakers. Of Christians, Muslims, and Jews. "

Power went on with her rhapsodic version of events: "Given the powerful interests that benefited from the corrupt system, achieving a full transformation was always going to be an uphill battle. And that was before Russian troops occupied Crimea, something the Kremlin denied at the time, but has since admitted; and it was before Russia began training, arming, bankrolling, and fighting alongside its separatist proxies in eastern Ukraine, something the Kremlin continues to deny.

"Suddenly, the Ukrainian people faced a battle on two fronts: combating corruption and overhauling broken institutions on the inside; while simultaneously defending against aggression and destabilization from the outside.

"I don't have to tell you the immense strain that these battles have placed upon you. You feel it in the young men and women, including some of your family members and friends, who have volunteered or been drafted into the military people who could be helping build up their nation, but instead are risking their lives to defend it against Russian aggression.

"You feel it in the conflict's impact on your country's economy as instability makes it harder for Ukrainian businesses to attract foreign investment, deepens inflation, and depresses families' wages. It is felt in the undercurrent of fear in cities like Kharkiv where citizens have been the victims of multiple bomb attacks, the most lethal of which killed four people, including two teenage boys, at a rally celebrating the first anniversary of Euromaidan.

"And the impact is felt most directly by the people living in the conflict zone. According to the UN, at least 6,350 people have been killed in the violence driven by Russia and the separatists including 625 women and children and an additional 1,460 people are missing; 15,775 people have been wounded. And an estimated 2 million people have been displaced by this conflict. And the real numbers of killed, missing, wounded, and displaced are likely higher, according to the UN, due to its limited access to areas controlled by the separatists."

One-Sided Account

Pretty much everything in Power's propaganda speech was blamed on the Russians along with the ethnic Russians and other Ukrainians resisting the imposition of the new U.S.-backed order. She also ignored the will of the people of Crimea who voted overwhelmingly in a referendum to secede from Ukraine and rejoin Russia.

The closest she came to criticizing the current regime in Kiev was to note that "investigations into serious crimes such as the violence in the Maidan and in Odessa have been sluggish, opaque, and marred by serious errors suggesting not only a lack of competence, but also a lack of will to hold the perpetrators accountable."

Yet, even there, Power failed to note the growing evidence that the neo-Nazis were likely behind the crucial sniper attacks on Feb. 20, 2014, that killed both police and protesters and touched off the chaos that led to the coup two days later. [A worthwhile documentary on this mystery is " Maidan Massacre ."]

Nor, did Power spell out that neo-Nazis from the Maidan set fire to the Trade Union Building in Odessa on May 2, 2014, burning alive scores of ethnic Russians while spray-painting the building with pro-Nazi graffiti, including hailing the "Galician SS," the Ukrainian auxiliary that helped Adolf Hitler's SS carry out the Holocaust in Ukraine.

Listening to Power's speech you might not even have picked up that she was obliquely criticizing the U.S.-backed regime in Kiev.

Also, by citing a few touching stories of pro-coup Ukrainians who had died in the conflict, Power implicitly dehumanized the far larger number of ethnic Russians who opposed the overthrow of their elected president and have been killed by Kiev's brutal "anti-terrorism operation."

Use of Propaganda

In my nearly four decades covering Washington, I have listened to and read many speeches like the one delivered by Samantha Power. In the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan would give similar propaganda speeches justifying the slaughter of peasants and workers in Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala, where the massacres of Mayan Indians were later deemed a "genocide." [See Consortiumnews.com's " How Reagan Promoted Genocide ."]

Regardless of the reality on the ground, the speeches always made the U.S.-backed side the "good guys" and the other side the "bad guys" even when "our side" included CIA-affiliated "death squads" and U.S.-equipped military forces slaughtering tens of thousands of civilians.

During the 1990s, more propaganda speeches were delivered by President George H.W. Bush regarding Panama and Iraq and by President Bill Clinton regarding Kosovo and Yugoslavia. Then, last decade, the American people were inundated with more propaganda rhetoric from President George W. Bush justifying the invasion of Iraq and the expansion of the endless "war on terror."

Generally speaking, during much of his first term, Obama was more circumspect in his rhetoric, but he, too, has slid into propaganda-speak in the latter half of his presidency as he shed his "realist" foreign policy tendencies in favor of "tough-guy/gal" rhetoric favored by "liberal interventionists," such as Power, and neoconservatives, such as Nuland and her husband Robert Kagan (whom a chastened Obama invited to a White House lunch last year).

But the difference between the propaganda of Reagan, Bush-41, Clinton and Bush-43 was that it focused on conflicts in which the Soviet Union or Russia might object but would likely not be pushed to the edge of nuclear war, nothing as provocative as what the Obama administration has done in Ukraine, now including dispatching U.S. military advisers.

The likes of Power, Nuland and Obama are not just justifying wars that leave devastation, death and disorder in their wake in disparate countries around the world, but they are fueling a war on Russia's border.

That was made clear by the end of Power's speech in which she declared: "Ukraine, you may still be bleeding from pain. An aggressive neighbor may be trying to tear your nation to pieces. Yet you are strong and defiant. You, Ukraine, are standing tall for your freedom. And if you stand tall together no kleptocrat, no oligarch, and no foreign power can stop you."

There is possibly nothing more reckless than what has emerged as Obama's late-presidential foreign policy, what amounts to a plan to destabilize Russia and seek "regime change" in the overthrow of Russian President Putin.

Rather than take Putin up on his readiness to cooperate with Obama in trouble spots, such as the Syrian civil war and Iran's nuclear program, "liberal interventionist" hawks like Power and neocons like Nuland with Obama in tow have chosen confrontation and have used extreme propaganda to effectively shut the door on negotiation and compromise.

Yet, as with previous neocon/liberal-interventionist schemes, this one lacks on-the-ground realism. Even if it were possible to so severely damage the Russian economy and to activate U.S.-controlled "non-governmental organizations" to help drive Putin from office, that doesn't mean a Washington-friendly puppet would be installed in the Kremlin.

Another possible outcome would be the emergence of an extreme Russian nationalist suddenly controlling the nuclear codes and willing to use them. So, when ambitious ideologues like Power and Nuland get control of U.S. foreign policy in such a sensitive area, what they're playing with is the very survival of life on planet Earth the ultimate genocide.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America's Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com ). You also can order Robert Parry's trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America's Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here .

incontinent reader , June 15, 2015 at 6:14 pm

It's too bad that people like Nuland and Power have not not been subjected to a retributive justice in which they would be forced to feel the same pain that they inflict, or, if that is too much to ask, then just to 'disappear (quietly) in the sands of time' to save their victims from more misery.

Roberto , June 15, 2015 at 10:03 pm

These dopes have no idea that the compensation is forthcoming.

Debbie Menon , June 17, 2015 at 4:04 pm

I would like to propose a new lobby that would also be based on a non-address, X Street.

X Street recognizes that the wars fought by the United States since 2001 have brought no benefit to the American people and have only resulted in financial ruin,

NATO no longer has any raison d’etre and is needlessly provoking the Russians through its expansion. X Street calls on the United States to dissolve the alliance.

X Street recognizes that America’s lopsided support of the state of Israel has made the United States a target of terrorism, has weakened the US’s international standing and damaged its reputation, and has negatively impacted on the American economy.

Washington will no longer use its veto power to protect Israeli interests in the UN and other international bodies.

The United States will publicly declare its knowledge that Israel has a nuclear arsenal and will ask the Israeli government to join the NPT regime and subject its program to IAEA inspection.

X Street believes that nation building and democracy promotion by the United States have been little more than CIA/MOSSAD covert actions by another name that have harmed America’s reputation and international standing.

The National Endowment for Democracy should be abolished immediately.

MikeH , June 16, 2015 at 7:12 pm

I would think that most people have heard of near death experiences.

One feature of such experiences which has sometimes been reported, and which I find very interesting, is that of the life review, which focuses on the deeds a person has done throughout his or her life, the motives of the deeds, and the effects of the deeds on others. It has been reported, for instance, that people have re-experienced their deeds not only from their own perspective but from the perspective of others whom one's deeds have affected.

There is a youtube video about this, titled The Golden Rule Dramatically Illustrated, and featuring NDE researcher Dr. Kenneth Ring.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tiKsKy7lFw

Anonymous , June 20, 2015 at 10:23 pm

There are no such thing as "liberal war hawks", their policies simply based on idiocy where as the result they need to be called "liberals", depending on kind of government that govern a corrupt and bankrupt system. American capitalism is one of those system. These people simply lacking a vision for their understanding that they are "liberal". They might be a social liberalists when it come to people's rights in living the way of life they chose, otherwise it was Bill Clinton who used such "liberal" idea by politicalizing using liberalism for his gain, these people follow the same path, but they will backstab people as they have in the past and as they do now.

michael , June 15, 2015 at 6:26 pm

If a coup had not been instigated by the west on Russia's border, installing Nazis a different more positive outcome might be available, I am quite sure there are Ukrainians who did not want this and wanted a more independent Ukraine, but that is not what happened! How were the Russians supposed to react? The United States has 1000 military bases around the world, border most countries, completely encircle Iran, press right up to Russia's borders and encircle China. Again how are the Russians supposed to React? If this was Mexico the place would be decimated by the Americans and laid to waste just like Iraq!

hbm , June 15, 2015 at 6:41 pm

Looney bleeding-heart Irishwoman with husband Arch-Neocon lunatic Cass Sunstein shaping her opinions and directing her fanaticism.

That's all one really needs to know.

Nibs , June 16, 2015 at 12:28 pm

Exactly, everywhere there is a goy neocon, just look a little further for the malign influence. You can always find it. Soros was here too, also in the attempted "colour revolution" in Macedonia. They intend to make out like bandits, big big money. Of course, as mentioned elsewhere, they are physical cowards and prefer to send ordinary Americans to do their fighting and bleeding for them.
It's somewhat startling after Iraq that they are still there.
But, and forgive the conspiracy angle, I don't believe this is unconnected to the Epstein sex scandal: just see who visited and is therefore target of blackmail.

Paulrevere01 , June 15, 2015 at 6:50 pm

and this warmonger-doppleganger-to-Nuland-Kagen is married to Grand-Censor-Cass-des-Hubris-Sunstein more black eyes for Yale and Harvard.

dahoit , June 16, 2015 at 11:12 am

Yes,the Zionist poison ivy league strikes again,with more Zionist stool pigeons to come.Close down education for sale vs.for knowledge,it produces zombie quislings.

Larry , June 15, 2015 at 7:12 pm

. and even if the U.S. neocon policy in Ukraine succeeds and a shooting war with Russia is somehow avoided, then the American neocons will still neither be sated or placated. Like the bloodthirsty jackals they are, these neocons will be only emboldened, and their next coup in Russia's natural security sphere will be the straw that breaks the nuclear camels' backs. They must be deterred or stopped.

Debbie Menon , June 19, 2015 at 12:33 am

In some tabulations the neocon hijacking of US policy on behalf of Israel has resulted in American gifts to Iran of Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Lebanon, and quite likely Israel. And that's for starters. The rest will implode and do we then have a Persian Empire.

It looks like a lot of clouds gathering on the horizon, and I cannot say that I find much fault with Pillar's assessment.

The stakes are too high and for all the macho talk all are rightfully very weary of lighting the match.

I rather doubt that there would be much left for anyone to add to their empire. Miles of ruins and deserts, glazed by nuclear fires do not make for very useful Imperial digs.

I just pray that we are both wrong.

Abe , June 15, 2015 at 7:58 pm

Liberal interventionism is simply left-wing neocon thinking.

The Ambassador from Hell returns to the scene of the crime:
Remarks at the October Palace in Kyiv, Ukraine (June 11, 2015)
http://usun.state.gov/briefing/statements/243583.htm

“Many eyewitnesses among the Maidan protesters reported snipers firing from the Hotel Ukraina during the massacre of the protesters, specifically, about killing eight of them. Bullet holes in trees and electricity poles on the site of the massacre and on the walls of Zhovtnevyi Palace indicate that shots came from the direction of the hotel. There are several similar recorded testimonies of the eyewitnesses among the protesters about shooters in October Palace and other Maidan-controlled buildings.â€

The “Snipers’ Massacre†on the Maidan in Ukraine
By Ivan Katchanovski, Ph.D.

Boris M Garsky , June 15, 2015 at 8:06 pm

There is nothing to say about Powers; no doubt where she gets her marching orders and script. However, there is no excuse for being ignorant on the topic of her rantings. I challenge anyone, anywhere to spontaneously assemble and move 100,000 people, even a few blocks, on 24 hours notice. If you can do it, you are the court magician exemplar. Can't be done. Never has been done; it takes months to years of preparations and organization before implementation. Yanuckovich was the target of assassination; they weren't taking chances. No doubt that the Russians told him to skedaddle; that his life was in danger. Doesn't sound spontaneous to me; sounds like a well planned operation gone wrong- right initially, but wrong eventually. I think that Obama is simply posturing until the west can figure out how to extricate themselves from another fine mess they got themselves into- AGAIN!

F. G. Sanford , June 15, 2015 at 8:26 pm

I remember during my college days watching "student government" personalities – usually rich kids with no real problems – hurl themselves into impassioned frenzies over some issue or another. Usually, they were political science(sic) or psychology majors who were also active in the Speech and Theater Department. The defining characteristic of their existence was to obtain a podium from which to make impassioned pleas to their fellow students in an effort to demonstrate a proclivity for "leadership". Almost any issue would do. Samantha Power reminds me of one of those students – ostensibly seeking a role which, if she could have her way, would make her the prime catalyst in a pivotal issue at the epicenter of a maelstrom that steers the course of human history. That kind of learned, practiced, studied and rehearsed narcissism doesn't always work out so well. Maybe because the most successful examples are actually clinical sufferers of…real narcissism. When Power's 'facts' are compared to reality, the obvious conclusions suggest a range of interpretations from delusional psychosis to criminal perjury. Or, is this a carefully crafted strategy? "Yats" has recently resorted to the last rabbit he can pull out of a hat: he's turned on the printing presses to pay the bills, and a currency collapse is imminent. The Nazi factions are impatient with the regime's lack of progress, the people are disgruntled, those two million refugees have mostly fled to Russia for protection, Northern Europe is being inundated with prostitutes, drug dealers and the creme de la creme of organized crime from the former Warsaw Pact countries, and in the South, refugees from NATO destabilizations in North Africa and the Middle East have become an explosive issue. Racism, nationalism and the resurgence of openly fascist political activity is burgeoning. Europe is boiling with rage. Has Power actually seen the writing on the wall? If so, why not an impassioned campaign to remind the Ukrainians they have broken institutions, corrupt oligarchs, unscrupulous kleptocrats, internal corruption and foreign aggression working against them? And by the way, they've failed to adequately investigate those Nazi atrocities. None of this could POSSIBLY be the fault of U.S. meddling or failed diplomacy. Nope, they brought it on themselves, but we did everything we could to try and help. The makings of TOTAL collapse are at hand, and one little fillip could bring down the whole house of cards. So, "You Ukrainians need to stand tall for your freedoms", and if anything goes wrong, you have nobody to blame but yourselves. Maybe Sammy isn't so delusional after all.

Gregory Kruse , June 16, 2015 at 1:01 pm

She's not delusional, she's just channeling Aleksander Mikhaajlovich Bezobrazov. I guess that does make Obama the Tsar.

Mark , June 15, 2015 at 8:53 pm

All anyone needs to understand about American foreign policy is that anything, including genocide, is not only acceptable but promoted if it serves "America's corporate or favored campaign funding special interests". The only real principle in play for all colluding parties -- corporate, mass media, complicit foreign governments (sycophants) and both major domestic political parties -- is to "win" by compromising or sacrificing everything and everyone required to serve the insatiable hunger for ungodley wealth and (abusive) power accumulation.

The entire American culture has been corrupted by propaganda and what is irrational human nature and instinct concerning these matters -- to be accepted among our peers by following the heard -- this reality is being used by the "ruling class" to play the public like a disposable three dollar fiddle, while they, our "rulers", impose death and destruction along with economic and military tyranny, directly or by proxy, wherever and whenever they can get away with it.

Bob Loblaw , June 15, 2015 at 9:41 pm

Two words
Electromagnetic Pulse
One well placed warhead will cripple us to the point that we destroy ourselves.

While crude islamists can't pull it off a Russian device is within reach.

Abe , June 15, 2015 at 10:48 pm

As a human-rights entrepreneur who is also a tireless advocate of war, Samantha Power is not aberrant. Elite factions of the human-rights industry were long ago normalized within the tightly corseted spectrum of American foreign policy.

Samantha Power and the Weaponization of Human Rights
by Chase Madar
http://www.counterpunch.org/2009/09/10/samantha-power-and-the-weaponization-of-human-rights/

ltr , June 16, 2015 at 11:04 am

Thank you for this important reference.

Abe , June 15, 2015 at 10:58 pm

Power advocates for what she calls "tough, principled, and engaged diplomacy." A more accurate set of adjectives would be "belligerent, hypocritical, and domineering." The thrust of her work is to make perpetual war possible by designating genocide – real or merely ideologically constructed – the supreme international crime, instead of war itself. (Under current international law war itself is the "supreme international crime.") That way the U.S. can perpetually make war for the noblest of purposes without regard for anachronisms like national sovereignty. Is it any wonder Democrats love her?

A Diplomat From Hell: Samantha Power and The Quest For Eternal War
By Michael Smith
http://legalienate.blogspot.com/2013/06/samantha-power-and-imperial-delusion.html

Abe , June 16, 2015 at 12:14 am

The military deployment of US-NATO forces coupled with “non-conventional warfare†â€"including covert intelligence operations, economic sanctions and the thrust of “regime changeâ€â€" is occurring simultaneously in several regions of the world.

Central to an understanding of war, is the media campaign which grants it legitimacy in the eyes of public opinion. War has been provided with a humanitarian mandate under NATO’s “Responsibility to Protect†(R2P). The victims of U.S. led wars are presented as the perpetrators of war.

The Globalization of War
By Michel Chossudovsky
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=74&v=34j2Rf-IvJQ

onno , June 16, 2015 at 5:35 am

It sounds to me that these neocons have 2 things in common. They were all born post WW II and have not experienced any war at home and grew up in a nice suburban area without street crimes. They NEVER were confronted with families who lost their loved ones in US 'lost' wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan that were initiated WITHOUT UN approval and brought home young soldiers who had lost their limps and were handicapped for the rest of their lives. But just to keep US defence industry turning out hefty profits.

Secondly, they have watched to many Hollywood movies showing the superior US army beating the 'evil' empire (Reagan) meaning Soviet Union. USA never honoured their agreements with Gorbachev to keep NATO out of Eastern Europe. President Putin learned his lessons, he built a strong military with technological advanced equipment so his country will NOT be run over again by the West such as Napoleon and Hitler did murdering 25 million Russians. President Putin and the Russians want to live in peace they have suffered too much in the past.

It's US and its vassal NATO aggression in the World and now in Ukraine that make the Russian show their power and demonstrating 'don't fool with us' . US MSM propaganda in Europe is losing its effects and people realizing US geopolitical or colonization aggression in the world while losing US dominance as well. Like Abraham Lincoln said: You can lie to some people all the time and you can lie to all the people some time, but you cannot lie to all the people all the time! However with today's powerful media TV and radio it will take some more time. But Russia's RT News is changing this and gives the audience News contradicting US MSM propaganda such as NYT and WP which have been brainwashing the public for so long at the discretion of Washington's neocons. And US taxpayers are paying the bill, wake up America!

Peter Loeb , June 16, 2015 at 6:46 am

DISTRACTION FROM PALESTINIAN/ISRAELI CONFLICT

Excellent profiles and analyses by Mr. Parry as we have all come
to expect.

"[Power] added that the United Nations focus on Ukraine in the
Security Council.." from Parry above.

Here one MUST add the unsaid "and never, never on Palestine/
Israel"! After all, the US has continued time and again to block
investigation by the Security Council of Israeli actions in that
sphere. Evidently Israel maintains according to Power and
many others that Israel with US support are by definition exempt
from any and all rules of international law, application to save
lives in Palestine, attempts to establish a Mideast Nuclear
Free Zone and much much more. The distraction provided
by Ukraine is not only significant for the people of Ukraine but
is cleverly designed to distract all world and domestic opinion
from the atrocities carried on daily by Israel in Palestine both
past, present and future.

-- -Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA

Gregory Kruse , June 16, 2015 at 10:28 am

She's like John Bolton in drag.

Abe , June 16, 2015 at 5:52 pm

She is the walrus, goo goo g'joob.

Sammy too "seems averse to compromise, and is apparently committed to the belief that the U.N. and international law undermine U.S. interests" (aka Israeli interests)
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/03/21/boltonism

"“Remarks such as the references to the 1967 borders show Obama’s continuing lack of real appreciation for Israel’s security.†-- Bolton, 2011, interview for National Review online

"There will never be a sunset on America’s commitment to Israel’s security. Never.†-- Power, 2015, speech at American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference

ltr , June 16, 2015 at 11:02 am

What a thoroughly amoral person Samantha Power is, all pretense, all hypocrisy, all for selectively determining which lives are worth allowing.

Wm. Boyce , June 16, 2015 at 11:14 am

Another example of the lack of differences between Democrats and Republicans when it comes to the empire's foreign policy. It's all about controlling regions and resources, and fueling the U.S. arms industry.

Brendan , June 16, 2015 at 4:29 pm

Samantha Power: "The facts tell a different story. As you remember well, then-President Yanukovych abandoned Kyiv of his own accord, only hours after signing an agreement with opposition leaders that would have led to early elections and democratic reforms."

There are some glaring omissions in Power's 'facts'. She doesn't explain why Yanukovych suddenly fled Kyiv, so soon after an agreement with opposition leaders that allowed him to remain as president for several more months.

She didn't mention the rejection of that agreement by the far-right militias who threatened to remove Yanukovych from office by force if he did not resign by 10 am that day.

That threat might explain his sudden departure. It also might also indicate that his departure wasn't really "of his own accord".

Brendan , June 16, 2015 at 4:34 pm

Samantha Power: "And it was only after Yanukovych fled the capital that 328 of the 447 members of the democratically-elected Rada voted to strip him of his powers "

The problem with that was that the members of parliament did not have any authority to strip the president of his powers in the way they did. The only possible conditions to remove a presidential from office are listed in the Ukrainian constitution:

Article 108. The President of Ukraine shall exercise his powers until the assumption of office by the newly elected President of Ukraine.
The authority of the President of Ukraine shall be subject to an early termination in cases of:
1) resignation;
2) inability to exercise presidential authority for health reasons;
3) removal from office by the procedure of impeachment;
4) his/her death.

Yanukovych was not dead and neither was he unable to exercise his presidential authority due to health reasons. He never resigned, and in fact continued to state that he was the only legitimate president.

He was not removed from office by the procedure of impeachment, which includes a number of stages, as described in Article 111 of the constitution (see link below). The decision on the impeachment must be adopted by at least three-quarters of the members of parliament. The number given by Samantha Power was less than three-quarters.

Samantha Power, along with the vast majority of the western media, described the overthrow of President Yanukovych as a normal democratic vote by parliament. To use Mrs Power's words, "The facts tell a different story". The facts say that it was an unconstitutional coup.

http://web.archive.org/web/20140321165941/http://www.president.gov.ua/en/content/chapter05.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20140405140914/http://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/30130.html

cathy , June 22, 2015 at 1:29 am

All of these conflicts seem to be designed to clean out, not only the people, but entire cultures in the regions.

Americans should take heed. What we see the oligarchic criminals in the U.S. doing overseas, is coming to a town near you, or maybe your own town. Why else do you think they have been dismantling the Constitution and militarizing communities? It looks like it will be sooner than expected, too.

hammersmith , June 23, 2015 at 10:31 pm

The Bush administration was "little boys on Big Wheels," as one former member described it; The Obama administration is little girls on Big Wheels.

Roberto , June 15, 2015 at 10:03 pm

These dopes have no idea that the compensation is forthcoming.

Debbie Menon , June 17, 2015 at 4:04 pm

I would like to propose a new lobby that would also be based on a non-address, X Street.

X Street recognizes that the wars fought by the United States since 2001 have brought no benefit to the American people and have only resulted in financial ruin,

NATO no longer has any raison d’etre and is needlessly provoking the Russians through its expansion. X Street calls on the United States to dissolve the alliance.

X Street recognizes that America’s lopsided support of the state of Israel has made the United States a target of terrorism, has weakened the US’s international standing and damaged its reputation, and has negatively impacted on the American economy.

Washington will no longer use its veto power to protect Israeli interests in the UN and other international bodies.

The United States will publicly declare its knowledge that Israel has a nuclear arsenal and will ask the Israeli government to join the NPT regime and subject its program to IAEA inspection.

X Street believes that nation building and democracy promotion by the United States have been little more than CIA/MOSSAD covert actions by another name that have harmed America’s reputation and international standing.

The National Endowment for Democracy should be abolished immediately.

MikeH , June 16, 2015 at 7:12 pm

I would think that most people have heard of near death experiences.

One feature of such experiences which has sometimes been reported, and which I find very interesting, is that of the life review, which focuses on the deeds a person has done throughout his or her life, the motives of the deeds, and the effects of the deeds on others. It has been reported, for instance, that people have re-experienced their deeds not only from their own perspective but from the perspective of others whom one's deeds have affected.

There is a youtube video about this, titled The Golden Rule Dramatically Illustrated, and featuring NDE researcher Dr. Kenneth Ring.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tiKsKy7lFw

Anonymous , June 20, 2015 at 10:23 pm

There are no such thing as "liberal war hawks", their policies simply based on idiocy where as the result they need to be called "liberals", depending on kind of government that govern a corrupt and bankrupt system. American capitalism is one of those system. These people simply lacking a vision for their understanding that they are "liberal". They might be a social liberalists when it come to people's rights in living the way of life they chose, otherwise it was Bill Clinton who used such "liberal" idea by politicalizing using liberalism for his gain, these people follow the same path, but they will backstab people as they have in the past and as they do now.

michael , June 15, 2015 at 6:26 pm

If a coup had not been instigated by the west on Russia's border, installing Nazis a different more positive outcome might be available, I am quite sure there are Ukrainians who did not want this and wanted a more independent Ukraine, but that is not what happened! How were the Russians supposed to react? The United States has 1000 military bases around the world, border most countries, completely encircle Iran, press right up to Russia's borders and encircle China. Again how are the Russians supposed to React? If this was Mexico the place would be decimated by the Americans and laid to waste just like Iraq!

hbm , June 15, 2015 at 6:41 pm

Looney bleeding-heart Irishwoman with husband Arch-Neocon lunatic Cass Sunstein shaping her opinions and directing her fanaticism.

That's all one really needs to know.

Nibs , June 16, 2015 at 12:28 pm

Exactly, everywhere there is a goy neocon, just look a little further for the malign influence. You can always find it. Soros was here too, also in the attempted "colour revolution" in Macedonia. They intend to make out like bandits, big big money. Of course, as mentioned elsewhere, they are physical cowards and prefer to send ordinary Americans to do their fighting and bleeding for them.
It's somewhat startling after Iraq that they are still there.
But, and forgive the conspiracy angle, I don't believe this is unconnected to the Epstein sex scandal: just see who visited and is therefore target of blackmail.

Paulrevere01 , June 15, 2015 at 6:50 pm

and this warmonger-doppleganger-to-Nuland-Kagen is married to Grand-Censor-Cass-des-Hubris-Sunstein more black eyes for Yale and Harvard.

dahoit , June 16, 2015 at 11:12 am

Yes,the Zionist poison ivy league strikes again,with more Zionist stool pigeons to come.Close down education for sale vs.for knowledge,it produces zombie quislings.

Larry , June 15, 2015 at 7:12 pm

. and even if the U.S. neocon policy in Ukraine succeeds and a shooting war with Russia is somehow avoided, then the American neocons will still neither be sated or placated. Like the bloodthirsty jackals they are, these neocons will be only emboldened, and their next coup in Russia's natural security sphere will be the straw that breaks the nuclear camels' backs. They must be deterred or stopped.

Debbie Menon , June 19, 2015 at 12:33 am

In some tabulations the neocon hijacking of US policy on behalf of Israel has resulted in American gifts to Iran of Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Lebanon, and quite likely Israel. And that's for starters. The rest will implode and do we then have a Persian Empire.

It looks like a lot of clouds gathering on the horizon, and I cannot say that I find much fault with Pillar's assessment.

The stakes are too high and for all the macho talk all are rightfully very weary of lighting the match.

I rather doubt that there would be much left for anyone to add to their empire. Miles of ruins and deserts, glazed by nuclear fires do not make for very useful Imperial digs.

I just pray that we are both wrong.

Abe , June 15, 2015 at 7:58 pm

Liberal interventionism is simply left-wing neocon thinking.

The Ambassador from Hell returns to the scene of the crime:
Remarks at the October Palace in Kyiv, Ukraine (June 11, 2015)
http://usun.state.gov/briefing/statements/243583.htm

“Many eyewitnesses among the Maidan protesters reported snipers firing from the Hotel Ukraina during the massacre of the protesters, specifically, about killing eight of them. Bullet holes in trees and electricity poles on the site of the massacre and on the walls of Zhovtnevyi Palace indicate that shots came from the direction of the hotel. There are several similar recorded testimonies of the eyewitnesses among the protesters about shooters in October Palace and other Maidan-controlled buildings.â€

The “Snipers’ Massacre†on the Maidan in Ukraine
By Ivan Katchanovski, Ph.D.

Boris M Garsky , June 15, 2015 at 8:06 pm

There is nothing to say about Powers; no doubt where she gets her marching orders and script. However, there is no excuse for being ignorant on the topic of her rantings. I challenge anyone, anywhere to spontaneously assemble and move 100,000 people, even a few blocks, on 24 hours notice. If you can do it, you are the court magician exemplar. Can't be done. Never has been done; it takes months to years of preparations and organization before implementation. Yanuckovich was the target of assassination; they weren't taking chances. No doubt that the Russians told him to skedaddle; that his life was in danger. Doesn't sound spontaneous to me; sounds like a well planned operation gone wrong- right initially, but wrong eventually. I think that Obama is simply posturing until the west can figure out how to extricate themselves from another fine mess they got themselves into- AGAIN!

F. G. Sanford , June 15, 2015 at 8:26 pm

I remember during my college days watching "student government" personalities – usually rich kids with no real problems – hurl themselves into impassioned frenzies over some issue or another. Usually, they were political science(sic) or psychology majors who were also active in the Speech and Theater Department. The defining characteristic of their existence was to obtain a podium from which to make impassioned pleas to their fellow students in an effort to demonstrate a proclivity for "leadership". Almost any issue would do. Samantha Power reminds me of one of those students – ostensibly seeking a role which, if she could have her way, would make her the prime catalyst in a pivotal issue at the epicenter of a maelstrom that steers the course of human history. That kind of learned, practiced, studied and rehearsed narcissism doesn't always work out so well. Maybe because the most successful examples are actually clinical sufferers of…real narcissism. When Power's 'facts' are compared to reality, the obvious conclusions suggest a range of interpretations from delusional psychosis to criminal perjury. Or, is this a carefully crafted strategy? "Yats" has recently resorted to the last rabbit he can pull out of a hat: he's turned on the printing presses to pay the bills, and a currency collapse is imminent. The Nazi factions are impatient with the regime's lack of progress, the people are disgruntled, those two million refugees have mostly fled to Russia for protection, Northern Europe is being inundated with prostitutes, drug dealers and the creme de la creme of organized crime from the former Warsaw Pact countries, and in the South, refugees from NATO destabilizations in North Africa and the Middle East have become an explosive issue. Racism, nationalism and the resurgence of openly fascist political activity is burgeoning. Europe is boiling with rage. Has Power actually seen the writing on the wall? If so, why not an impassioned campaign to remind the Ukrainians they have broken institutions, corrupt oligarchs, unscrupulous kleptocrats, internal corruption and foreign aggression working against them? And by the way, they've failed to adequately investigate those Nazi atrocities. None of this could POSSIBLY be the fault of U.S. meddling or failed diplomacy. Nope, they brought it on themselves, but we did everything we could to try and help. The makings of TOTAL collapse are at hand, and one little fillip could bring down the whole house of cards. So, "You Ukrainians need to stand tall for your freedoms", and if anything goes wrong, you have nobody to blame but yourselves. Maybe Sammy isn't so delusional after all.

Gregory Kruse , June 16, 2015 at 1:01 pm

She's not delusional, she's just channeling Aleksander Mikhaajlovich Bezobrazov. I guess that does make Obama the Tsar.

Mark , June 15, 2015 at 8:53 pm

All anyone needs to understand about American foreign policy is that anything, including genocide, is not only acceptable but promoted if it serves "America's corporate or favored campaign funding special interests". The only real principle in play for all colluding parties -- corporate, mass media, complicit foreign governments (sycophants) and both major domestic political parties -- is to "win" by compromising or sacrificing everything and everyone required to serve the insatiable hunger for ungodley wealth and (abusive) power accumulation.

The entire American culture has been corrupted by propaganda and what is irrational human nature and instinct concerning these matters -- to be accepted among our peers by following the heard -- this reality is being used by the "ruling class" to play the public like a disposable three dollar fiddle, while they, our "rulers", impose death and destruction along with economic and military tyranny, directly or by proxy, wherever and whenever they can get away with it.

Bob Loblaw , June 15, 2015 at 9:41 pm

Two words
Electromagnetic Pulse
One well placed warhead will cripple us to the point that we destroy ourselves.

While crude islamists can't pull it off a Russian device is within reach.

Abe , June 15, 2015 at 10:48 pm

As a human-rights entrepreneur who is also a tireless advocate of war, Samantha Power is not aberrant. Elite factions of the human-rights industry were long ago normalized within the tightly corseted spectrum of American foreign policy.

Samantha Power and the Weaponization of Human Rights
by Chase Madar
http://www.counterpunch.org/2009/09/10/samantha-power-and-the-weaponization-of-human-rights/

ltr , June 16, 2015 at 11:04 am

Thank you for this important reference.

Abe , June 15, 2015 at 10:58 pm

Power advocates for what she calls "tough, principled, and engaged diplomacy." A more accurate set of adjectives would be "belligerent, hypocritical, and domineering." The thrust of her work is to make perpetual war possible by designating genocide – real or merely ideologically constructed – the supreme international crime, instead of war itself. (Under current international law war itself is the "supreme international crime.") That way the U.S. can perpetually make war for the noblest of purposes without regard for anachronisms like national sovereignty. Is it any wonder Democrats love her?

A Diplomat From Hell: Samantha Power and The Quest For Eternal War
By Michael Smith
http://legalienate.blogspot.com/2013/06/samantha-power-and-imperial-delusion.html

Abe , June 16, 2015 at 12:14 am

The military deployment of US-NATO forces coupled with “non-conventional warfare†â€"including covert intelligence operations, economic sanctions and the thrust of “regime changeâ€â€" is occurring simultaneously in several regions of the world.

Central to an understanding of war, is the media campaign which grants it legitimacy in the eyes of public opinion. War has been provided with a humanitarian mandate under NATO’s “Responsibility to Protect†(R2P). The victims of U.S. led wars are presented as the perpetrators of war.

The Globalization of War
By Michel Chossudovsky
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=74&v=34j2Rf-IvJQ

onno , June 16, 2015 at 5:35 am

It sounds to me that these neocons have 2 things in common. They were all born post WW II and have not experienced any war at home and grew up in a nice suburban area without street crimes. They NEVER were confronted with families who lost their loved ones in US 'lost' wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan that were initiated WITHOUT UN approval and brought home young soldiers who had lost their limps and were handicapped for the rest of their lives. But just to keep US defence industry turning out hefty profits.

Secondly, they have watched to many Hollywood movies showing the superior US army beating the 'evil' empire (Reagan) meaning Soviet Union. USA never honoured their agreements with Gorbachev to keep NATO out of Eastern Europe. President Putin learned his lessons, he built a strong military with technological advanced equipment so his country will NOT be run over again by the West such as Napoleon and Hitler did murdering 25 million Russians. President Putin and the Russians want to live in peace they have suffered too much in the past.

It's US and its vassal NATO aggression in the World and now in Ukraine that make the Russian show their power and demonstrating 'don't fool with us' . US MSM propaganda in Europe is losing its effects and people realizing US geopolitical or colonization aggression in the world while losing US dominance as well. Like Abraham Lincoln said: You can lie to some people all the time and you can lie to all the people some time, but you cannot lie to all the people all the time! However with today's powerful media TV and radio it will take some more time. But Russia's RT News is changing this and gives the audience News contradicting US MSM propaganda such as NYT and WP which have been brainwashing the public for so long at the discretion of Washington's neocons. And US taxpayers are paying the bill, wake up America!

Peter Loeb , June 16, 2015 at 6:46 am

DISTRACTION FROM PALESTINIAN/ISRAELI CONFLICT

Excellent profiles and analyses by Mr. Parry as we have all come
to expect.

"[Power] added that the United Nations focus on Ukraine in the
Security Council.." from Parry above.

Here one MUST add the unsaid "and never, never on Palestine/
Israel"! After all, the US has continued time and again to block
investigation by the Security Council of Israeli actions in that
sphere. Evidently Israel maintains according to Power and
many others that Israel with US support are by definition exempt
from any and all rules of international law, application to save
lives in Palestine, attempts to establish a Mideast Nuclear
Free Zone and much much more. The distraction provided
by Ukraine is not only significant for the people of Ukraine but
is cleverly designed to distract all world and domestic opinion
from the atrocities carried on daily by Israel in Palestine both
past, present and future.

-- -Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA

Gregory Kruse , June 16, 2015 at 10:28 am

She's like John Bolton in drag.

Abe , June 16, 2015 at 5:52 pm

She is the walrus, goo goo g'joob.

Sammy too "seems averse to compromise, and is apparently committed to the belief that the U.N. and international law undermine U.S. interests" (aka Israeli interests)
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/03/21/boltonism

"“Remarks such as the references to the 1967 borders show Obama’s continuing lack of real appreciation for Israel’s security.†-- Bolton, 2011, interview for National Review online

"There will never be a sunset on America’s commitment to Israel’s security. Never.†-- Power, 2015, speech at American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference

ltr , June 16, 2015 at 11:02 am

What a thoroughly amoral person Samantha Power is, all pretense, all hypocrisy, all for selectively determining which lives are worth allowing.

Wm. Boyce , June 16, 2015 at 11:14 am

Another example of the lack of differences between Democrats and Republicans when it comes to the empire's foreign policy. It's all about controlling regions and resources, and fueling the U.S. arms industry.

Brendan , June 16, 2015 at 4:29 pm

Samantha Power: "The facts tell a different story. As you remember well, then-President Yanukovych abandoned Kyiv of his own accord, only hours after signing an agreement with opposition leaders that would have led to early elections and democratic reforms."

There are some glaring omissions in Power's 'facts'. She doesn't explain why Yanukovych suddenly fled Kyiv, so soon after an agreement with opposition leaders that allowed him to remain as president for several more months.

She didn't mention the rejection of that agreement by the far-right militias who threatened to remove Yanukovych from office by force if he did not resign by 10 am that day.

That threat might explain his sudden departure. It also might also indicate that his departure wasn't really "of his own accord".

Brendan , June 16, 2015 at 4:34 pm

Samantha Power: "And it was only after Yanukovych fled the capital that 328 of the 447 members of the democratically-elected Rada voted to strip him of his powers "

The problem with that was that the members of parliament did not have any authority to strip the president of his powers in the way they did. The only possible conditions to remove a presidential from office are listed in the Ukrainian constitution:

Article 108. The President of Ukraine shall exercise his powers until the assumption of office by the newly elected President of Ukraine.
The authority of the President of Ukraine shall be subject to an early termination in cases of:
1) resignation;
2) inability to exercise presidential authority for health reasons;
3) removal from office by the procedure of impeachment;
4) his/her death.

Yanukovych was not dead and neither was he unable to exercise his presidential authority due to health reasons. He never resigned, and in fact continued to state that he was the only legitimate president.

He was not removed from office by the procedure of impeachment, which includes a number of stages, as described in Article 111 of the constitution (see link below). The decision on the impeachment must be adopted by at least three-quarters of the members of parliament. The number given by Samantha Power was less than three-quarters.

Samantha Power, along with the vast majority of the western media, described the overthrow of President Yanukovych as a normal democratic vote by parliament. To use Mrs Power's words, "The facts tell a different story". The facts say that it was an unconstitutional coup.

http://web.archive.org/web/20140321165941/http://www.president.gov.ua/en/content/chapter05.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20140405140914/http://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/30130.html

cathy , June 22, 2015 at 1:29 am

All of these conflicts seem to be designed to clean out, not only the people, but entire cultures in the regions.

Americans should take heed. What we see the oligarchic criminals in the U.S. doing overseas, is coming to a town near you, or maybe your own town. Why else do you think they have been dismantling the Constitution and militarizing communities? It looks like it will be sooner than expected, too.

hammersmith , June 23, 2015 at 10:31 pm

The Bush administration was "little boys on Big Wheels," as one former member described it; The Obama administration is little girls on Big Wheels.

[Apr 11, 2018] Is Theresa May as more evil than Hillary Clinton?

Apr 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

Jake , April 10, 2018 at 11:38 am GMT

Theresa May as more evil than Bill Clinton? That will sound odd to some, but I think it is true. Hillary is the pure evil half of the Clinton marriage. Bill is simply charming and filled with a desire to amass enough power to have a group adore him as he finds new panties to explore.

May is English, and she has the very long line of Brit Empire secret service evil at her disposal. And her move is a bold one. What it means is that she is signaling that at least if she is PM, the UK could replace the US as Fearless Leader of the actual New World Order...

[Apr 11, 2018] Samantha Power Liberal War Hawk by Robert Parry

There is a special breed or neocon female warmonger in the USA -- chickenhawks who feed from crumbs of military industrial complex.
Is not Haley a replays of Samantha Powell ? The article remains mostly right is you simply replace the names...
Of cause, Haley is a little bit more obnoxious and has no respect for truth whatsoever. she can call while to be black with straight face.
Notable quotes:
"... Though Power is a big promoter of the "responsibility to protect" or "R2P" she operates with glaring selectivity in deciding who deserves protection as she advances a neocon/liberal interventionist agenda. She is turning "human rights" into an excuse not to resolve conflicts but rather to make them bloodier. ..."
"... Thus, in Power's view, the overthrow and punishment of Syria's President Bashar al-Assad takes precedence over shielding Alawites and other minorities from the likely consequence of Sunni-extremist vengeance. And she has sided with the ethnic Ukrainians in their slaughter of ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine. ..."
"... For instance, in a March 10, 2003 debate on MSNBC's "Hardball" show -- just nine days before the invasion -- Power said, "An American intervention likely will improve the lives of the Iraqis. Their lives could not get worse, I think it's quite safe to say." However, the lives of Iraqis actually did get worse. Indeed, hundreds of thousands stopped living altogether and a sectarian war continues to tear the country apart to this day. ..."
"... Similarly, regarding Libya, Power was one of the instigators of the U.S.-supported military intervention in 2011 which was disguised as an "R2P" mission to protect civilians in eastern Libya where dictator Muammar Gaddafi had identified the infiltration of terrorist groups. ..."
"... Urged on by then-National Security Council aide Power and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Obama agreed to support a military mission that quickly morphed into a "regime change" operation. Gaddafi's troops were bombed from the air and Gaddafi was eventually hunted down, tortured and murdered. ..."
"... Ukraina po-nad u-se! ..."
Jun 15, 2015 | consortiumnews.com

32 Comments

Exclusive: Liberal interventionist Samantha Power along with neocon allies appears to have prevailed in the struggle over how President Obama will conduct his foreign policy in his last months in office, promoting aggressive strategies that will lead to more death and destruction, writes Robert Parry.

Propaganda and genocide almost always go hand in hand, with the would-be aggressor stirring up resentment often by assuming the pose of a victim simply acting in self-defense and then righteously inflicting violence on the targeted group.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power understands this dynamic having written about the 1994 genocide in Rwanda where talk radio played a key role in getting Hutus to kill Tutsis. Yet, Power is now leading propaganda campaigns laying the groundwork for two potential ethnic slaughters: against the Alawites, Shiites, Christians and other minorities in Syria and against the ethnic Russians of eastern Ukraine.

Though Power is a big promoter of the "responsibility to protect" or "R2P" she operates with glaring selectivity in deciding who deserves protection as she advances a neocon/liberal interventionist agenda. She is turning "human rights" into an excuse not to resolve conflicts but rather to make them bloodier.

Thus, in Power's view, the overthrow and punishment of Syria's President Bashar al-Assad takes precedence over shielding Alawites and other minorities from the likely consequence of Sunni-extremist vengeance. And she has sided with the ethnic Ukrainians in their slaughter of ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine.

In both cases, Power spurns pragmatic negotiations that could avert worsening violence as she asserts a black-and-white depiction of these crises. More significantly, her strident positions appear to have won the day with President Barack Obama, who has relied on Power as a foreign policy adviser since his 2008 campaign.

Power's self-righteous approach to human rights deciding that her side wears white hats and the other side wears black hats is a bracing example of how "human rights activists" have become purveyors of death and destruction or what some critics have deemed " the weaponization of human rights. "

We saw this pattern in Iraq in 2002-03 when many "liberal humanitarians" jumped on the pro-war bandwagon in favoring an invasion to overthrow dictator Saddam Hussein. Power herself didn't support the invasion although she was rather mealy-mouthed in her skepticism and sought to hedge her career bets amid the rush to war.

For instance, in a March 10, 2003 debate on MSNBC's "Hardball" show -- just nine days before the invasion -- Power said, "An American intervention likely will improve the lives of the Iraqis. Their lives could not get worse, I think it's quite safe to say." However, the lives of Iraqis actually did get worse. Indeed, hundreds of thousands stopped living altogether and a sectarian war continues to tear the country apart to this day.

Power in Power

Similarly, regarding Libya, Power was one of the instigators of the U.S.-supported military intervention in 2011 which was disguised as an "R2P" mission to protect civilians in eastern Libya where dictator Muammar Gaddafi had identified the infiltration of terrorist groups.

Urged on by then-National Security Council aide Power and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Obama agreed to support a military mission that quickly morphed into a "regime change" operation. Gaddafi's troops were bombed from the air and Gaddafi was eventually hunted down, tortured and murdered.

The result, however, was not a bright new day of peace and freedom for Libyans but the disintegration of Libya into a failed state with violent extremists, including elements of the Islamic State, seizing control of swaths of territory and murdering civilians. It turns out that Gaddafi was not wrong about some of his enemies.

Today, Power is a leading force opposing meaningful negotiations over Syria and Ukraine, again staking out "moralistic" positions rejecting possible power-sharing with Assad in Syria and blaming the Ukraine crisis entirely on the Russians. She doesn't seem all that concerned about impending genocides against Assad's supporters in Syria or ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine.

In 2012, at a meeting hosted by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, former U.S. Ambassador Peter W. Galbraith predicted "the next genocide in the world will likely be against the Alawites in Syria" -- a key constituency behind Assad's secular regime. But Power has continued to insist that the top priority is Assad's removal.

Similarly, Power has shown little sympathy for members of Ukraine's ethnic Russian minority who saw their elected President Viktor Yanukovych overthrown in a Feb. 22, 2014 coup spearheaded by neo-Nazis and other right-wing nationalists who had gained effective control of the Maidan protests. Many of these extremists want an ethnically pure Ukrainian state.

Since then, neo-Nazi units, such as the Azov battalion, have been Kiev's tip of the spear in slaughtering thousands of ethnic Russians in the east and driving millions from their homes, essentially an ethnic-cleansing campaign in eastern Ukraine.

A Propaganda Speech

Yet, Power traveled to Kiev to deliver a one-sided propaganda speech on June 11, portraying the post-coup Ukrainian regime simply as a victim of "Russian aggression."

Despite the key role of neo-Nazis acknowledged even by the U.S. House of Representatives Power uttered not one word about Ukrainian military abuses which have included reports of death squad operations targeting ethnic Russians and other Yanukovych supporters.

Skipping over the details of the U.S.-backed and Nazi-driven coup of Feb. 22, 2014, Power traced the conflict instead to "February 2014, when Russia's little green men first started appearing in Crimea." She added that the United Nations' "focus on Ukraine in the Security Council is important, because it gives me the chance on behalf of the United States to lay out the mounting evidence of Russia's aggression, its obfuscation, and its outright lies. America is clear-eyed when it comes to seeing the truth about Russia's destabilizing actions in your country."

Power continued: "The message of the United States throughout this Moscow-manufactured conflict and the message you heard from President Obama and other world leaders at last week's meeting of the G7 has never wavered: if Russia continues to disregard the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine; and if Russia continues to violate the rules upon which international peace and security rest then the United States will continue to raise the costs on Russia.

"And we will continue to rally other countries to do the same, reminding them that their silence or inaction in the face of Russian aggression will not placate Moscow, it will only embolden it.

"But there is something more important that is often lost in the international discussion about Russia's efforts to impose its will on Ukraine. And that is you the people of Ukraine and your right to determine the course of your own country's future. Or, as one of the great rallying cries of the Maidan put it: Ukraina po-nad u-se! Ukraine above all else!" [Applause.]

Power went on: "Let me begin with what we know brought people out to the Maidan in the first place. We've all heard a good number of myths about this. One told by the Yanukovych government and its Russian backers at the time was that the Maidan protesters were pawns of the West, and did not speak for the 'real' Ukraine.

"A more nefarious myth peddled by Moscow after Yanukovych's fall was that Euromaidan had been engineered by Western capitals in order to topple a democratically-elected government."

Of course, neither of Power's points was actually a "myth." For instance, the U.S.-funded National Endowment for Democracy was sponsoring scores of anti-government activists and media operations -- and NED President Carl Gershman had deemed Ukraine "the biggest prize," albeit a stepping stone toward ousting Russian President Vladimir Putin. [See Consortiumnews.com's " A Shadow US Foreign Policy ."]

Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland was collaborating with U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt how to "midwife" the change in government with Nuland picking the future leaders of Ukraine "Yats is the guy" referring to Arseniy Yatsenyuk who was installed as prime minister after the coup. [See Consortiumnews.com's " The Neocons: Masters of Chaos ."]

The coup itself occurred after Yanukovych pulled back the police to prevent worsening violence. Armed neo-Nazi and right-wing militias, organized as "sotins" or 100-man units, then took the offensive and overran government buildings. Yanukovych and other officials fled for their lives, with Yanukovych narrowly avoiding assassination. In the days following the coup, armed thugs essentially controlled the government and brutally intimidated any political resistance.

Inventing 'Facts'

But that reality had no place in Power's propaganda speech. Instead, she said:

"The facts tell a different story. As you remember well, then-President Yanukovych abandoned Kyiv of his own accord, only hours after signing an agreement with opposition leaders that would have led to early elections and democratic reforms.

"And it was only after Yanukovych fled the capital that 328 of the 447 members of the democratically-elected Rada voted to strip him of his powers including 36 of the 38 members of his own party in parliament at the time. Yanukovych then vanished for several days, only to eventually reappear little surprise in Russia.

"As is often the case, these myths reveal more about the myth makers than they do about the truth. Moscow's fable was designed to airbrush the Ukrainian people and their genuine aspirations and demands out of the Maidan, by claiming the movement was fueled by outsiders.

"Yet, as you all know by living through it and as was clear even to those of us watching your courageous stand from afar the Maidan was made in Ukraine. A Ukraine of university students and veterans of the Afghan war. Of Ukrainian, Russian, and Tatar speakers. Of Christians, Muslims, and Jews. "

Power went on with her rhapsodic version of events: "Given the powerful interests that benefited from the corrupt system, achieving a full transformation was always going to be an uphill battle. And that was before Russian troops occupied Crimea, something the Kremlin denied at the time, but has since admitted; and it was before Russia began training, arming, bankrolling, and fighting alongside its separatist proxies in eastern Ukraine, something the Kremlin continues to deny.

"Suddenly, the Ukrainian people faced a battle on two fronts: combating corruption and overhauling broken institutions on the inside; while simultaneously defending against aggression and destabilization from the outside.

"I don't have to tell you the immense strain that these battles have placed upon you. You feel it in the young men and women, including some of your family members and friends, who have volunteered or been drafted into the military people who could be helping build up their nation, but instead are risking their lives to defend it against Russian aggression.

"You feel it in the conflict's impact on your country's economy as instability makes it harder for Ukrainian businesses to attract foreign investment, deepens inflation, and depresses families' wages. It is felt in the undercurrent of fear in cities like Kharkiv where citizens have been the victims of multiple bomb attacks, the most lethal of which killed four people, including two teenage boys, at a rally celebrating the first anniversary of Euromaidan.

"And the impact is felt most directly by the people living in the conflict zone. According to the UN, at least 6,350 people have been killed in the violence driven by Russia and the separatists including 625 women and children and an additional 1,460 people are missing; 15,775 people have been wounded. And an estimated 2 million people have been displaced by this conflict. And the real numbers of killed, missing, wounded, and displaced are likely higher, according to the UN, due to its limited access to areas controlled by the separatists."

One-Sided Account

Pretty much everything in Power's propaganda speech was blamed on the Russians along with the ethnic Russians and other Ukrainians resisting the imposition of the new U.S.-backed order. She also ignored the will of the people of Crimea who voted overwhelmingly in a referendum to secede from Ukraine and rejoin Russia.

The closest she came to criticizing the current regime in Kiev was to note that "investigations into serious crimes such as the violence in the Maidan and in Odessa have been sluggish, opaque, and marred by serious errors suggesting not only a lack of competence, but also a lack of will to hold the perpetrators accountable."

Yet, even there, Power failed to note the growing evidence that the neo-Nazis were likely behind the crucial sniper attacks on Feb. 20, 2014, that killed both police and protesters and touched off the chaos that led to the coup two days later. [A worthwhile documentary on this mystery is " Maidan Massacre ."]

Nor, did Power spell out that neo-Nazis from the Maidan set fire to the Trade Union Building in Odessa on May 2, 2014, burning alive scores of ethnic Russians while spray-painting the building with pro-Nazi graffiti, including hailing the "Galician SS," the Ukrainian auxiliary that helped Adolf Hitler's SS carry out the Holocaust in Ukraine.

Listening to Power's speech you might not even have picked up that she was obliquely criticizing the U.S.-backed regime in Kiev.

Also, by citing a few touching stories of pro-coup Ukrainians who had died in the conflict, Power implicitly dehumanized the far larger number of ethnic Russians who opposed the overthrow of their elected president and have been killed by Kiev's brutal "anti-terrorism operation."

Use of Propaganda

In my nearly four decades covering Washington, I have listened to and read many speeches like the one delivered by Samantha Power. In the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan would give similar propaganda speeches justifying the slaughter of peasants and workers in Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala, where the massacres of Mayan Indians were later deemed a "genocide." [See Consortiumnews.com's " How Reagan Promoted Genocide ."]

Regardless of the reality on the ground, the speeches always made the U.S.-backed side the "good guys" and the other side the "bad guys" even when "our side" included CIA-affiliated "death squads" and U.S.-equipped military forces slaughtering tens of thousands of civilians.

During the 1990s, more propaganda speeches were delivered by President George H.W. Bush regarding Panama and Iraq and by President Bill Clinton regarding Kosovo and Yugoslavia. Then, last decade, the American people were inundated with more propaganda rhetoric from President George W. Bush justifying the invasion of Iraq and the expansion of the endless "war on terror."

Generally speaking, during much of his first term, Obama was more circumspect in his rhetoric, but he, too, has slid into propaganda-speak in the latter half of his presidency as he shed his "realist" foreign policy tendencies in favor of "tough-guy/gal" rhetoric favored by "liberal interventionists," such as Power, and neoconservatives, such as Nuland and her husband Robert Kagan (whom a chastened Obama invited to a White House lunch last year).

But the difference between the propaganda of Reagan, Bush-41, Clinton and Bush-43 was that it focused on conflicts in which the Soviet Union or Russia might object but would likely not be pushed to the edge of nuclear war, nothing as provocative as what the Obama administration has done in Ukraine, now including dispatching U.S. military advisers.

The likes of Power, Nuland and Obama are not just justifying wars that leave devastation, death and disorder in their wake in disparate countries around the world, but they are fueling a war on Russia's border.

That was made clear by the end of Power's speech in which she declared: "Ukraine, you may still be bleeding from pain. An aggressive neighbor may be trying to tear your nation to pieces. Yet you are strong and defiant. You, Ukraine, are standing tall for your freedom. And if you stand tall together no kleptocrat, no oligarch, and no foreign power can stop you."

There is possibly nothing more reckless than what has emerged as Obama's late-presidential foreign policy, what amounts to a plan to destabilize Russia and seek "regime change" in the overthrow of Russian President Putin.

Rather than take Putin up on his readiness to cooperate with Obama in trouble spots, such as the Syrian civil war and Iran's nuclear program, "liberal interventionist" hawks like Power and neocons like Nuland with Obama in tow have chosen confrontation and have used extreme propaganda to effectively shut the door on negotiation and compromise.

Yet, as with previous neocon/liberal-interventionist schemes, this one lacks on-the-ground realism. Even if it were possible to so severely damage the Russian economy and to activate U.S.-controlled "non-governmental organizations" to help drive Putin from office, that doesn't mean a Washington-friendly puppet would be installed in the Kremlin.

Another possible outcome would be the emergence of an extreme Russian nationalist suddenly controlling the nuclear codes and willing to use them. So, when ambitious ideologues like Power and Nuland get control of U.S. foreign policy in such a sensitive area, what they're playing with is the very survival of life on planet Earth the ultimate genocide.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America's Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com ). You also can order Robert Parry's trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America's Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here .

incontinent reader , June 15, 2015 at 6:14 pm

It's too bad that people like Nuland and Power have not not been subjected to a retributive justice in which they would be forced to feel the same pain that they inflict, or, if that is too much to ask, then just to 'disappear (quietly) in the sands of time' to save their victims from more misery.

Roberto , June 15, 2015 at 10:03 pm

These dopes have no idea that the compensation is forthcoming.

Debbie Menon , June 17, 2015 at 4:04 pm

I would like to propose a new lobby that would also be based on a non-address, X Street.

X Street recognizes that the wars fought by the United States since 2001 have brought no benefit to the American people and have only resulted in financial ruin,

NATO no longer has any raison d’etre and is needlessly provoking the Russians through its expansion. X Street calls on the United States to dissolve the alliance.

X Street recognizes that America’s lopsided support of the state of Israel has made the United States a target of terrorism, has weakened the US’s international standing and damaged its reputation, and has negatively impacted on the American economy.

Washington will no longer use its veto power to protect Israeli interests in the UN and other international bodies.

The United States will publicly declare its knowledge that Israel has a nuclear arsenal and will ask the Israeli government to join the NPT regime and subject its program to IAEA inspection.

X Street believes that nation building and democracy promotion by the United States have been little more than CIA/MOSSAD covert actions by another name that have harmed America’s reputation and international standing.

The National Endowment for Democracy should be abolished immediately.

MikeH , June 16, 2015 at 7:12 pm

I would think that most people have heard of near death experiences.

One feature of such experiences which has sometimes been reported, and which I find very interesting, is that of the life review, which focuses on the deeds a person has done throughout his or her life, the motives of the deeds, and the effects of the deeds on others. It has been reported, for instance, that people have re-experienced their deeds not only from their own perspective but from the perspective of others whom one's deeds have affected.

There is a youtube video about this, titled The Golden Rule Dramatically Illustrated, and featuring NDE researcher Dr. Kenneth Ring.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tiKsKy7lFw

Anonymous , June 20, 2015 at 10:23 pm

There are no such thing as "liberal war hawks", their policies simply based on idiocy where as the result they need to be called "liberals", depending on kind of government that govern a corrupt and bankrupt system. American capitalism is one of those system. These people simply lacking a vision for their understanding that they are "liberal". They might be a social liberalists when it come to people's rights in living the way of life they chose, otherwise it was Bill Clinton who used such "liberal" idea by politicalizing using liberalism for his gain, these people follow the same path, but they will backstab people as they have in the past and as they do now.

michael , June 15, 2015 at 6:26 pm

If a coup had not been instigated by the west on Russia's border, installing Nazis a different more positive outcome might be available, I am quite sure there are Ukrainians who did not want this and wanted a more independent Ukraine, but that is not what happened! How were the Russians supposed to react? The United States has 1000 military bases around the world, border most countries, completely encircle Iran, press right up to Russia's borders and encircle China. Again how are the Russians supposed to React? If this was Mexico the place would be decimated by the Americans and laid to waste just like Iraq!

hbm , June 15, 2015 at 6:41 pm

Looney bleeding-heart Irishwoman with husband Arch-Neocon lunatic Cass Sunstein shaping her opinions and directing her fanaticism.

That's all one really needs to know.

Nibs , June 16, 2015 at 12:28 pm

Exactly, everywhere there is a goy neocon, just look a little further for the malign influence. You can always find it. Soros was here too, also in the attempted "colour revolution" in Macedonia. They intend to make out like bandits, big big money. Of course, as mentioned elsewhere, they are physical cowards and prefer to send ordinary Americans to do their fighting and bleeding for them.
It's somewhat startling after Iraq that they are still there.
But, and forgive the conspiracy angle, I don't believe this is unconnected to the Epstein sex scandal: just see who visited and is therefore target of blackmail.

Paulrevere01 , June 15, 2015 at 6:50 pm

and this warmonger-doppleganger-to-Nuland-Kagen is married to Grand-Censor-Cass-des-Hubris-Sunstein more black eyes for Yale and Harvard.

dahoit , June 16, 2015 at 11:12 am

Yes,the Zionist poison ivy league strikes again,with more Zionist stool pigeons to come.Close down education for sale vs.for knowledge,it produces zombie quislings.

Larry , June 15, 2015 at 7:12 pm

. and even if the U.S. neocon policy in Ukraine succeeds and a shooting war with Russia is somehow avoided, then the American neocons will still neither be sated or placated. Like the bloodthirsty jackals they are, these neocons will be only emboldened, and their next coup in Russia's natural security sphere will be the straw that breaks the nuclear camels' backs. They must be deterred or stopped.

Debbie Menon , June 19, 2015 at 12:33 am

In some tabulations the neocon hijacking of US policy on behalf of Israel has resulted in American gifts to Iran of Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Lebanon, and quite likely Israel. And that's for starters. The rest will implode and do we then have a Persian Empire.

It looks like a lot of clouds gathering on the horizon, and I cannot say that I find much fault with Pillar's assessment.

The stakes are too high and for all the macho talk all are rightfully very weary of lighting the match.

I rather doubt that there would be much left for anyone to add to their empire. Miles of ruins and deserts, glazed by nuclear fires do not make for very useful Imperial digs.

I just pray that we are both wrong.

Abe , June 15, 2015 at 7:58 pm

Liberal interventionism is simply left-wing neocon thinking.

The Ambassador from Hell returns to the scene of the crime:
Remarks at the October Palace in Kyiv, Ukraine (June 11, 2015)
http://usun.state.gov/briefing/statements/243583.htm

“Many eyewitnesses among the Maidan protesters reported snipers firing from the Hotel Ukraina during the massacre of the protesters, specifically, about killing eight of them. Bullet holes in trees and electricity poles on the site of the massacre and on the walls of Zhovtnevyi Palace indicate that shots came from the direction of the hotel. There are several similar recorded testimonies of the eyewitnesses among the protesters about shooters in October Palace and other Maidan-controlled buildings.â€

The “Snipers’ Massacre†on the Maidan in Ukraine
By Ivan Katchanovski, Ph.D.

Boris M Garsky , June 15, 2015 at 8:06 pm

There is nothing to say about Powers; no doubt where she gets her marching orders and script. However, there is no excuse for being ignorant on the topic of her rantings. I challenge anyone, anywhere to spontaneously assemble and move 100,000 people, even a few blocks, on 24 hours notice. If you can do it, you are the court magician exemplar. Can't be done. Never has been done; it takes months to years of preparations and organization before implementation. Yanuckovich was the target of assassination; they weren't taking chances. No doubt that the Russians told him to skedaddle; that his life was in danger. Doesn't sound spontaneous to me; sounds like a well planned operation gone wrong- right initially, but wrong eventually. I think that Obama is simply posturing until the west can figure out how to extricate themselves from another fine mess they got themselves into- AGAIN!

F. G. Sanford , June 15, 2015 at 8:26 pm

I remember during my college days watching "student government" personalities – usually rich kids with no real problems – hurl themselves into impassioned frenzies over some issue or another. Usually, they were political science(sic) or psychology majors who were also active in the Speech and Theater Department. The defining characteristic of their existence was to obtain a podium from which to make impassioned pleas to their fellow students in an effort to demonstrate a proclivity for "leadership". Almost any issue would do. Samantha Power reminds me of one of those students – ostensibly seeking a role which, if she could have her way, would make her the prime catalyst in a pivotal issue at the epicenter of a maelstrom that steers the course of human history. That kind of learned, practiced, studied and rehearsed narcissism doesn't always work out so well. Maybe because the most successful examples are actually clinical sufferers of…real narcissism. When Power's 'facts' are compared to reality, the obvious conclusions suggest a range of interpretations from delusional psychosis to criminal perjury. Or, is this a carefully crafted strategy? "Yats" has recently resorted to the last rabbit he can pull out of a hat: he's turned on the printing presses to pay the bills, and a currency collapse is imminent. The Nazi factions are impatient with the regime's lack of progress, the people are disgruntled, those two million refugees have mostly fled to Russia for protection, Northern Europe is being inundated with prostitutes, drug dealers and the creme de la creme of organized crime from the former Warsaw Pact countries, and in the South, refugees from NATO destabilizations in North Africa and the Middle East have become an explosive issue. Racism, nationalism and the resurgence of openly fascist political activity is burgeoning. Europe is boiling with rage. Has Power actually seen the writing on the wall? If so, why not an impassioned campaign to remind the Ukrainians they have broken institutions, corrupt oligarchs, unscrupulous kleptocrats, internal corruption and foreign aggression working against them? And by the way, they've failed to adequately investigate those Nazi atrocities. None of this could POSSIBLY be the fault of U.S. meddling or failed diplomacy. Nope, they brought it on themselves, but we did everything we could to try and help. The makings of TOTAL collapse are at hand, and one little fillip could bring down the whole house of cards. So, "You Ukrainians need to stand tall for your freedoms", and if anything goes wrong, you have nobody to blame but yourselves. Maybe Sammy isn't so delusional after all.

Gregory Kruse , June 16, 2015 at 1:01 pm

She's not delusional, she's just channeling Aleksander Mikhaajlovich Bezobrazov. I guess that does make Obama the Tsar.

Mark , June 15, 2015 at 8:53 pm

All anyone needs to understand about American foreign policy is that anything, including genocide, is not only acceptable but promoted if it serves "America's corporate or favored campaign funding special interests". The only real principle in play for all colluding parties -- corporate, mass media, complicit foreign governments (sycophants) and both major domestic political parties -- is to "win" by compromising or sacrificing everything and everyone required to serve the insatiable hunger for ungodley wealth and (abusive) power accumulation.

The entire American culture has been corrupted by propaganda and what is irrational human nature and instinct concerning these matters -- to be accepted among our peers by following the heard -- this reality is being used by the "ruling class" to play the public like a disposable three dollar fiddle, while they, our "rulers", impose death and destruction along with economic and military tyranny, directly or by proxy, wherever and whenever they can get away with it.

Bob Loblaw , June 15, 2015 at 9:41 pm

Two words
Electromagnetic Pulse
One well placed warhead will cripple us to the point that we destroy ourselves.

While crude islamists can't pull it off a Russian device is within reach.

Abe , June 15, 2015 at 10:48 pm

As a human-rights entrepreneur who is also a tireless advocate of war, Samantha Power is not aberrant. Elite factions of the human-rights industry were long ago normalized within the tightly corseted spectrum of American foreign policy.

Samantha Power and the Weaponization of Human Rights
by Chase Madar
http://www.counterpunch.org/2009/09/10/samantha-power-and-the-weaponization-of-human-rights/

ltr , June 16, 2015 at 11:04 am

Thank you for this important reference.

Abe , June 15, 2015 at 10:58 pm

Power advocates for what she calls "tough, principled, and engaged diplomacy." A more accurate set of adjectives would be "belligerent, hypocritical, and domineering." The thrust of her work is to make perpetual war possible by designating genocide – real or merely ideologically constructed – the supreme international crime, instead of war itself. (Under current international law war itself is the "supreme international crime.") That way the U.S. can perpetually make war for the noblest of purposes without regard for anachronisms like national sovereignty. Is it any wonder Democrats love her?

A Diplomat From Hell: Samantha Power and The Quest For Eternal War
By Michael Smith
http://legalienate.blogspot.com/2013/06/samantha-power-and-imperial-delusion.html

Abe , June 16, 2015 at 12:14 am

The military deployment of US-NATO forces coupled with “non-conventional warfare†â€"including covert intelligence operations, economic sanctions and the thrust of “regime changeâ€â€" is occurring simultaneously in several regions of the world.

Central to an understanding of war, is the media campaign which grants it legitimacy in the eyes of public opinion. War has been provided with a humanitarian mandate under NATO’s “Responsibility to Protect†(R2P). The victims of U.S. led wars are presented as the perpetrators of war.

The Globalization of War
By Michel Chossudovsky
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=74&v=34j2Rf-IvJQ

onno , June 16, 2015 at 5:35 am

It sounds to me that these neocons have 2 things in common. They were all born post WW II and have not experienced any war at home and grew up in a nice suburban area without street crimes. They NEVER were confronted with families who lost their loved ones in US 'lost' wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan that were initiated WITHOUT UN approval and brought home young soldiers who had lost their limps and were handicapped for the rest of their lives. But just to keep US defence industry turning out hefty profits.

Secondly, they have watched to many Hollywood movies showing the superior US army beating the 'evil' empire (Reagan) meaning Soviet Union. USA never honoured their agreements with Gorbachev to keep NATO out of Eastern Europe. President Putin learned his lessons, he built a strong military with technological advanced equipment so his country will NOT be run over again by the West such as Napoleon and Hitler did murdering 25 million Russians. President Putin and the Russians want to live in peace they have suffered too much in the past.

It's US and its vassal NATO aggression in the World and now in Ukraine that make the Russian show their power and demonstrating 'don't fool with us' . US MSM propaganda in Europe is losing its effects and people realizing US geopolitical or colonization aggression in the world while losing US dominance as well. Like Abraham Lincoln said: You can lie to some people all the time and you can lie to all the people some time, but you cannot lie to all the people all the time! However with today's powerful media TV and radio it will take some more time. But Russia's RT News is changing this and gives the audience News contradicting US MSM propaganda such as NYT and WP which have been brainwashing the public for so long at the discretion of Washington's neocons. And US taxpayers are paying the bill, wake up America!

Peter Loeb , June 16, 2015 at 6:46 am

DISTRACTION FROM PALESTINIAN/ISRAELI CONFLICT

Excellent profiles and analyses by Mr. Parry as we have all come
to expect.

"[Power] added that the United Nations focus on Ukraine in the
Security Council.." from Parry above.

Here one MUST add the unsaid "and never, never on Palestine/
Israel"! After all, the US has continued time and again to block
investigation by the Security Council of Israeli actions in that
sphere. Evidently Israel maintains according to Power and
many others that Israel with US support are by definition exempt
from any and all rules of international law, application to save
lives in Palestine, attempts to establish a Mideast Nuclear
Free Zone and much much more. The distraction provided
by Ukraine is not only significant for the people of Ukraine but
is cleverly designed to distract all world and domestic opinion
from the atrocities carried on daily by Israel in Palestine both
past, present and future.

-- -Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA

Gregory Kruse , June 16, 2015 at 10:28 am

She's like John Bolton in drag.

Abe , June 16, 2015 at 5:52 pm

She is the walrus, goo goo g'joob.

Sammy too "seems averse to compromise, and is apparently committed to the belief that the U.N. and international law undermine U.S. interests" (aka Israeli interests)
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/03/21/boltonism

"“Remarks such as the references to the 1967 borders show Obama’s continuing lack of real appreciation for Israel’s security.†-- Bolton, 2011, interview for National Review online

"There will never be a sunset on America’s commitment to Israel’s security. Never.†-- Power, 2015, speech at American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference

ltr , June 16, 2015 at 11:02 am

What a thoroughly amoral person Samantha Power is, all pretense, all hypocrisy, all for selectively determining which lives are worth allowing.

Wm. Boyce , June 16, 2015 at 11:14 am

Another example of the lack of differences between Democrats and Republicans when it comes to the empire's foreign policy. It's all about controlling regions and resources, and fueling the U.S. arms industry.

Brendan , June 16, 2015 at 4:29 pm

Samantha Power: "The facts tell a different story. As you remember well, then-President Yanukovych abandoned Kyiv of his own accord, only hours after signing an agreement with opposition leaders that would have led to early elections and democratic reforms."

There are some glaring omissions in Power's 'facts'. She doesn't explain why Yanukovych suddenly fled Kyiv, so soon after an agreement with opposition leaders that allowed him to remain as president for several more months.

She didn't mention the rejection of that agreement by the far-right militias who threatened to remove Yanukovych from office by force if he did not resign by 10 am that day.

That threat might explain his sudden departure. It also might also indicate that his departure wasn't really "of his own accord".

Brendan , June 16, 2015 at 4:34 pm

Samantha Power: "And it was only after Yanukovych fled the capital that 328 of the 447 members of the democratically-elected Rada voted to strip him of his powers "

The problem with that was that the members of parliament did not have any authority to strip the president of his powers in the way they did. The only possible conditions to remove a presidential from office are listed in the Ukrainian constitution:

Article 108. The President of Ukraine shall exercise his powers until the assumption of office by the newly elected President of Ukraine.
The authority of the President of Ukraine shall be subject to an early termination in cases of:
1) resignation;
2) inability to exercise presidential authority for health reasons;
3) removal from office by the procedure of impeachment;
4) his/her death.

Yanukovych was not dead and neither was he unable to exercise his presidential authority due to health reasons. He never resigned, and in fact continued to state that he was the only legitimate president.

He was not removed from office by the procedure of impeachment, which includes a number of stages, as described in Article 111 of the constitution (see link below). The decision on the impeachment must be adopted by at least three-quarters of the members of parliament. The number given by Samantha Power was less than three-quarters.

Samantha Power, along with the vast majority of the western media, described the overthrow of President Yanukovych as a normal democratic vote by parliament. To use Mrs Power's words, "The facts tell a different story". The facts say that it was an unconstitutional coup.

http://web.archive.org/web/20140321165941/http://www.president.gov.ua/en/content/chapter05.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20140405140914/http://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/30130.html

cathy , June 22, 2015 at 1:29 am

All of these conflicts seem to be designed to clean out, not only the people, but entire cultures in the regions.

Americans should take heed. What we see the oligarchic criminals in the U.S. doing overseas, is coming to a town near you, or maybe your own town. Why else do you think they have been dismantling the Constitution and militarizing communities? It looks like it will be sooner than expected, too.

hammersmith , June 23, 2015 at 10:31 pm

The Bush administration was "little boys on Big Wheels," as one former member described it; The Obama administration is little girls on Big Wheels.

Roberto , June 15, 2015 at 10:03 pm

These dopes have no idea that the compensation is forthcoming.

Debbie Menon , June 17, 2015 at 4:04 pm

I would like to propose a new lobby that would also be based on a non-address, X Street.

X Street recognizes that the wars fought by the United States since 2001 have brought no benefit to the American people and have only resulted in financial ruin,

NATO no longer has any raison d’etre and is needlessly provoking the Russians through its expansion. X Street calls on the United States to dissolve the alliance.

X Street recognizes that America’s lopsided support of the state of Israel has made the United States a target of terrorism, has weakened the US’s international standing and damaged its reputation, and has negatively impacted on the American economy.

Washington will no longer use its veto power to protect Israeli interests in the UN and other international bodies.

The United States will publicly declare its knowledge that Israel has a nuclear arsenal and will ask the Israeli government to join the NPT regime and subject its program to IAEA inspection.

X Street believes that nation building and democracy promotion by the United States have been little more than CIA/MOSSAD covert actions by another name that have harmed America’s reputation and international standing.

The National Endowment for Democracy should be abolished immediately.

MikeH , June 16, 2015 at 7:12 pm

I would think that most people have heard of near death experiences.

One feature of such experiences which has sometimes been reported, and which I find very interesting, is that of the life review, which focuses on the deeds a person has done throughout his or her life, the motives of the deeds, and the effects of the deeds on others. It has been reported, for instance, that people have re-experienced their deeds not only from their own perspective but from the perspective of others whom one's deeds have affected.

There is a youtube video about this, titled The Golden Rule Dramatically Illustrated, and featuring NDE researcher Dr. Kenneth Ring.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tiKsKy7lFw

Anonymous , June 20, 2015 at 10:23 pm

There are no such thing as "liberal war hawks", their policies simply based on idiocy where as the result they need to be called "liberals", depending on kind of government that govern a corrupt and bankrupt system. American capitalism is one of those system. These people simply lacking a vision for their understanding that they are "liberal". They might be a social liberalists when it come to people's rights in living the way of life they chose, otherwise it was Bill Clinton who used such "liberal" idea by politicalizing using liberalism for his gain, these people follow the same path, but they will backstab people as they have in the past and as they do now.

michael , June 15, 2015 at 6:26 pm

If a coup had not been instigated by the west on Russia's border, installing Nazis a different more positive outcome might be available, I am quite sure there are Ukrainians who did not want this and wanted a more independent Ukraine, but that is not what happened! How were the Russians supposed to react? The United States has 1000 military bases around the world, border most countries, completely encircle Iran, press right up to Russia's borders and encircle China. Again how are the Russians supposed to React? If this was Mexico the place would be decimated by the Americans and laid to waste just like Iraq!

hbm , June 15, 2015 at 6:41 pm

Looney bleeding-heart Irishwoman with husband Arch-Neocon lunatic Cass Sunstein shaping her opinions and directing her fanaticism.

That's all one really needs to know.

Nibs , June 16, 2015 at 12:28 pm

Exactly, everywhere there is a goy neocon, just look a little further for the malign influence. You can always find it. Soros was here too, also in the attempted "colour revolution" in Macedonia. They intend to make out like bandits, big big money. Of course, as mentioned elsewhere, they are physical cowards and prefer to send ordinary Americans to do their fighting and bleeding for them.
It's somewhat startling after Iraq that they are still there.
But, and forgive the conspiracy angle, I don't believe this is unconnected to the Epstein sex scandal: just see who visited and is therefore target of blackmail.

Paulrevere01 , June 15, 2015 at 6:50 pm

and this warmonger-doppleganger-to-Nuland-Kagen is married to Grand-Censor-Cass-des-Hubris-Sunstein more black eyes for Yale and Harvard.

dahoit , June 16, 2015 at 11:12 am

Yes,the Zionist poison ivy league strikes again,with more Zionist stool pigeons to come.Close down education for sale vs.for knowledge,it produces zombie quislings.

Larry , June 15, 2015 at 7:12 pm

. and even if the U.S. neocon policy in Ukraine succeeds and a shooting war with Russia is somehow avoided, then the American neocons will still neither be sated or placated. Like the bloodthirsty jackals they are, these neocons will be only emboldened, and their next coup in Russia's natural security sphere will be the straw that breaks the nuclear camels' backs. They must be deterred or stopped.

Debbie Menon , June 19, 2015 at 12:33 am

In some tabulations the neocon hijacking of US policy on behalf of Israel has resulted in American gifts to Iran of Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Lebanon, and quite likely Israel. And that's for starters. The rest will implode and do we then have a Persian Empire.

It looks like a lot of clouds gathering on the horizon, and I cannot say that I find much fault with Pillar's assessment.

The stakes are too high and for all the macho talk all are rightfully very weary of lighting the match.

I rather doubt that there would be much left for anyone to add to their empire. Miles of ruins and deserts, glazed by nuclear fires do not make for very useful Imperial digs.

I just pray that we are both wrong.

Abe , June 15, 2015 at 7:58 pm

Liberal interventionism is simply left-wing neocon thinking.

The Ambassador from Hell returns to the scene of the crime:
Remarks at the October Palace in Kyiv, Ukraine (June 11, 2015)
http://usun.state.gov/briefing/statements/243583.htm

“Many eyewitnesses among the Maidan protesters reported snipers firing from the Hotel Ukraina during the massacre of the protesters, specifically, about killing eight of them. Bullet holes in trees and electricity poles on the site of the massacre and on the walls of Zhovtnevyi Palace indicate that shots came from the direction of the hotel. There are several similar recorded testimonies of the eyewitnesses among the protesters about shooters in October Palace and other Maidan-controlled buildings.â€

The “Snipers’ Massacre†on the Maidan in Ukraine
By Ivan Katchanovski, Ph.D.

Boris M Garsky , June 15, 2015 at 8:06 pm

There is nothing to say about Powers; no doubt where she gets her marching orders and script. However, there is no excuse for being ignorant on the topic of her rantings. I challenge anyone, anywhere to spontaneously assemble and move 100,000 people, even a few blocks, on 24 hours notice. If you can do it, you are the court magician exemplar. Can't be done. Never has been done; it takes months to years of preparations and organization before implementation. Yanuckovich was the target of assassination; they weren't taking chances. No doubt that the Russians told him to skedaddle; that his life was in danger. Doesn't sound spontaneous to me; sounds like a well planned operation gone wrong- right initially, but wrong eventually. I think that Obama is simply posturing until the west can figure out how to extricate themselves from another fine mess they got themselves into- AGAIN!

F. G. Sanford , June 15, 2015 at 8:26 pm

I remember during my college days watching "student government" personalities – usually rich kids with no real problems – hurl themselves into impassioned frenzies over some issue or another. Usually, they were political science(sic) or psychology majors who were also active in the Speech and Theater Department. The defining characteristic of their existence was to obtain a podium from which to make impassioned pleas to their fellow students in an effort to demonstrate a proclivity for "leadership". Almost any issue would do. Samantha Power reminds me of one of those students – ostensibly seeking a role which, if she could have her way, would make her the prime catalyst in a pivotal issue at the epicenter of a maelstrom that steers the course of human history. That kind of learned, practiced, studied and rehearsed narcissism doesn't always work out so well. Maybe because the most successful examples are actually clinical sufferers of…real narcissism. When Power's 'facts' are compared to reality, the obvious conclusions suggest a range of interpretations from delusional psychosis to criminal perjury. Or, is this a carefully crafted strategy? "Yats" has recently resorted to the last rabbit he can pull out of a hat: he's turned on the printing presses to pay the bills, and a currency collapse is imminent. The Nazi factions are impatient with the regime's lack of progress, the people are disgruntled, those two million refugees have mostly fled to Russia for protection, Northern Europe is being inundated with prostitutes, drug dealers and the creme de la creme of organized crime from the former Warsaw Pact countries, and in the South, refugees from NATO destabilizations in North Africa and the Middle East have become an explosive issue. Racism, nationalism and the resurgence of openly fascist political activity is burgeoning. Europe is boiling with rage. Has Power actually seen the writing on the wall? If so, why not an impassioned campaign to remind the Ukrainians they have broken institutions, corrupt oligarchs, unscrupulous kleptocrats, internal corruption and foreign aggression working against them? And by the way, they've failed to adequately investigate those Nazi atrocities. None of this could POSSIBLY be the fault of U.S. meddling or failed diplomacy. Nope, they brought it on themselves, but we did everything we could to try and help. The makings of TOTAL collapse are at hand, and one little fillip could bring down the whole house of cards. So, "You Ukrainians need to stand tall for your freedoms", and if anything goes wrong, you have nobody to blame but yourselves. Maybe Sammy isn't so delusional after all.

Gregory Kruse , June 16, 2015 at 1:01 pm

She's not delusional, she's just channeling Aleksander Mikhaajlovich Bezobrazov. I guess that does make Obama the Tsar.

Mark , June 15, 2015 at 8:53 pm

All anyone needs to understand about American foreign policy is that anything, including genocide, is not only acceptable but promoted if it serves "America's corporate or favored campaign funding special interests". The only real principle in play for all colluding parties -- corporate, mass media, complicit foreign governments (sycophants) and both major domestic political parties -- is to "win" by compromising or sacrificing everything and everyone required to serve the insatiable hunger for ungodley wealth and (abusive) power accumulation.

The entire American culture has been corrupted by propaganda and what is irrational human nature and instinct concerning these matters -- to be accepted among our peers by following the heard -- this reality is being used by the "ruling class" to play the public like a disposable three dollar fiddle, while they, our "rulers", impose death and destruction along with economic and military tyranny, directly or by proxy, wherever and whenever they can get away with it.

Bob Loblaw , June 15, 2015 at 9:41 pm

Two words
Electromagnetic Pulse
One well placed warhead will cripple us to the point that we destroy ourselves.

While crude islamists can't pull it off a Russian device is within reach.

Abe , June 15, 2015 at 10:48 pm

As a human-rights entrepreneur who is also a tireless advocate of war, Samantha Power is not aberrant. Elite factions of the human-rights industry were long ago normalized within the tightly corseted spectrum of American foreign policy.

Samantha Power and the Weaponization of Human Rights
by Chase Madar
http://www.counterpunch.org/2009/09/10/samantha-power-and-the-weaponization-of-human-rights/

ltr , June 16, 2015 at 11:04 am

Thank you for this important reference.

Abe , June 15, 2015 at 10:58 pm

Power advocates for what she calls "tough, principled, and engaged diplomacy." A more accurate set of adjectives would be "belligerent, hypocritical, and domineering." The thrust of her work is to make perpetual war possible by designating genocide – real or merely ideologically constructed – the supreme international crime, instead of war itself. (Under current international law war itself is the "supreme international crime.") That way the U.S. can perpetually make war for the noblest of purposes without regard for anachronisms like national sovereignty. Is it any wonder Democrats love her?

A Diplomat From Hell: Samantha Power and The Quest For Eternal War
By Michael Smith
http://legalienate.blogspot.com/2013/06/samantha-power-and-imperial-delusion.html

Abe , June 16, 2015 at 12:14 am

The military deployment of US-NATO forces coupled with “non-conventional warfare†â€"including covert intelligence operations, economic sanctions and the thrust of “regime changeâ€â€" is occurring simultaneously in several regions of the world.

Central to an understanding of war, is the media campaign which grants it legitimacy in the eyes of public opinion. War has been provided with a humanitarian mandate under NATO’s “Responsibility to Protect†(R2P). The victims of U.S. led wars are presented as the perpetrators of war.

The Globalization of War
By Michel Chossudovsky
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=74&v=34j2Rf-IvJQ

onno , June 16, 2015 at 5:35 am

It sounds to me that these neocons have 2 things in common. They were all born post WW II and have not experienced any war at home and grew up in a nice suburban area without street crimes. They NEVER were confronted with families who lost their loved ones in US 'lost' wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan that were initiated WITHOUT UN approval and brought home young soldiers who had lost their limps and were handicapped for the rest of their lives. But just to keep US defence industry turning out hefty profits.

Secondly, they have watched to many Hollywood movies showing the superior US army beating the 'evil' empire (Reagan) meaning Soviet Union. USA never honoured their agreements with Gorbachev to keep NATO out of Eastern Europe. President Putin learned his lessons, he built a strong military with technological advanced equipment so his country will NOT be run over again by the West such as Napoleon and Hitler did murdering 25 million Russians. President Putin and the Russians want to live in peace they have suffered too much in the past.

It's US and its vassal NATO aggression in the World and now in Ukraine that make the Russian show their power and demonstrating 'don't fool with us' . US MSM propaganda in Europe is losing its effects and people realizing US geopolitical or colonization aggression in the world while losing US dominance as well. Like Abraham Lincoln said: You can lie to some people all the time and you can lie to all the people some time, but you cannot lie to all the people all the time! However with today's powerful media TV and radio it will take some more time. But Russia's RT News is changing this and gives the audience News contradicting US MSM propaganda such as NYT and WP which have been brainwashing the public for so long at the discretion of Washington's neocons. And US taxpayers are paying the bill, wake up America!

Peter Loeb , June 16, 2015 at 6:46 am

DISTRACTION FROM PALESTINIAN/ISRAELI CONFLICT

Excellent profiles and analyses by Mr. Parry as we have all come
to expect.

"[Power] added that the United Nations focus on Ukraine in the
Security Council.." from Parry above.

Here one MUST add the unsaid "and never, never on Palestine/
Israel"! After all, the US has continued time and again to block
investigation by the Security Council of Israeli actions in that
sphere. Evidently Israel maintains according to Power and
many others that Israel with US support are by definition exempt
from any and all rules of international law, application to save
lives in Palestine, attempts to establish a Mideast Nuclear
Free Zone and much much more. The distraction provided
by Ukraine is not only significant for the people of Ukraine but
is cleverly designed to distract all world and domestic opinion
from the atrocities carried on daily by Israel in Palestine both
past, present and future.

-- -Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA

Gregory Kruse , June 16, 2015 at 10:28 am

She's like John Bolton in drag.

Abe , June 16, 2015 at 5:52 pm

She is the walrus, goo goo g'joob.

Sammy too "seems averse to compromise, and is apparently committed to the belief that the U.N. and international law undermine U.S. interests" (aka Israeli interests)
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/03/21/boltonism

"“Remarks such as the references to the 1967 borders show Obama’s continuing lack of real appreciation for Israel’s security.†-- Bolton, 2011, interview for National Review online

"There will never be a sunset on America’s commitment to Israel’s security. Never.†-- Power, 2015, speech at American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference

ltr , June 16, 2015 at 11:02 am

What a thoroughly amoral person Samantha Power is, all pretense, all hypocrisy, all for selectively determining which lives are worth allowing.

Wm. Boyce , June 16, 2015 at 11:14 am

Another example of the lack of differences between Democrats and Republicans when it comes to the empire's foreign policy. It's all about controlling regions and resources, and fueling the U.S. arms industry.

Brendan , June 16, 2015 at 4:29 pm

Samantha Power: "The facts tell a different story. As you remember well, then-President Yanukovych abandoned Kyiv of his own accord, only hours after signing an agreement with opposition leaders that would have led to early elections and democratic reforms."

There are some glaring omissions in Power's 'facts'. She doesn't explain why Yanukovych suddenly fled Kyiv, so soon after an agreement with opposition leaders that allowed him to remain as president for several more months.

She didn't mention the rejection of that agreement by the far-right militias who threatened to remove Yanukovych from office by force if he did not resign by 10 am that day.

That threat might explain his sudden departure. It also might also indicate that his departure wasn't really "of his own accord".

Brendan , June 16, 2015 at 4:34 pm

Samantha Power: "And it was only after Yanukovych fled the capital that 328 of the 447 members of the democratically-elected Rada voted to strip him of his powers "

The problem with that was that the members of parliament did not have any authority to strip the president of his powers in the way they did. The only possible conditions to remove a presidential from office are listed in the Ukrainian constitution:

Article 108. The President of Ukraine shall exercise his powers until the assumption of office by the newly elected President of Ukraine.
The authority of the President of Ukraine shall be subject to an early termination in cases of:
1) resignation;
2) inability to exercise presidential authority for health reasons;
3) removal from office by the procedure of impeachment;
4) his/her death.

Yanukovych was not dead and neither was he unable to exercise his presidential authority due to health reasons. He never resigned, and in fact continued to state that he was the only legitimate president.

He was not removed from office by the procedure of impeachment, which includes a number of stages, as described in Article 111 of the constitution (see link below). The decision on the impeachment must be adopted by at least three-quarters of the members of parliament. The number given by Samantha Power was less than three-quarters.

Samantha Power, along with the vast majority of the western media, described the overthrow of President Yanukovych as a normal democratic vote by parliament. To use Mrs Power's words, "The facts tell a different story". The facts say that it was an unconstitutional coup.

http://web.archive.org/web/20140321165941/http://www.president.gov.ua/en/content/chapter05.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20140405140914/http://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/30130.html

cathy , June 22, 2015 at 1:29 am

All of these conflicts seem to be designed to clean out, not only the people, but entire cultures in the regions.

Americans should take heed. What we see the oligarchic criminals in the U.S. doing overseas, is coming to a town near you, or maybe your own town. Why else do you think they have been dismantling the Constitution and militarizing communities? It looks like it will be sooner than expected, too.

hammersmith , June 23, 2015 at 10:31 pm

The Bush administration was "little boys on Big Wheels," as one former member described it; The Obama administration is little girls on Big Wheels.

[Apr 11, 2018] Female neocon warmongers from Fox look like plastered brick walls – heartless and brainless.

Highly recommended!
This is US specific bank of chickenhawks, who feed from MIC cramps. this breed is really entrenched in State Department too (Madeleine Albright, Nuland, Powell, Haley, etc)
Notable quotes:
"... War and peace! About 75% of the on-air personalities on Fox Jews are women. Do any of them have a peaceful brain cell – it appears not. They are all 100% on message – bomb Syria! ..."
"... It is feminism gone mad – the traditional female role of hope for peace has been extinguished in America. How sad – how unnatural – how dangerous – how bloody – dare we call them names? ..."
Apr 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

Art , Next New Comment April 11, 2018 at 11:18 pm GMT

War and peace! About 75% of the on-air personalities on Fox Jews are women. Do any of them have a peaceful brain cell – it appears not. They are all 100% on message – bomb Syria!

It is feminism gone mad – the traditional female role of hope for peace has been extinguished in America. How sad – how unnatural – how dangerous – how bloody – dare we call them names?

Think Peace -- Art

annamaria , Next New Comment April 12, 2018 at 12:02 am GMT
@Art

American female anchors on MSM look like plastered brick walls – heartless and brainless.

[Apr 11, 2018] An interesting perspective on why the crisis has escalated to this point is made by Adam Garrie

Syria invasion by the USA with Arab monarchies and several Western "partners in crime" is nothing but an attempt to correct disastrous results of Saddam removal which essentially gave the country for free to Iran. Not they try to convert Syria into Sunni country hostile to Iraq/Iran and that requires removal of secular Assad government.
Apr 11, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Apr 11, 2018 1:29:37 PM | 99

An interesting perspective on why the crisis has escalated to this point is made by Adam Garrie along the lines of Zhirinovsky's nationalist critique of Putin's policy/rhetoric to NATO/Outlaw US Empire acts. Excerpt:

"In respect of Syria, Russia is guilty of presuming that in fighting a war against terrorism that the entire world ought to have supported, that even its enemies in the US and Europe would somehow allow Russia to go about its business in Syria, owing to the greater good of eliminating terrorist groups like Daesh, al-Qaeda and their clones from the face of the earth.

"This was a false premise from the beginning as Russia should have known all too well. Russia should not have been so naive in presuming a nonchalant attitude from the western, as when it comes to the western imperial quest for global dominance, they will do anything to subdue Russia, no matter how many objectively gruesome allies the west will need to associate itself with in the process. There is even a clear blueprint regarding this western attitude. Its author was an English academic called Halford Mackinder whose so-called "heartland theory" portrayed Russia as a necessary "pivot area" that western imperialists would need to subdue in their wider ambition to conquer China and the wider Asian world."

There are some aspects of this position I agree with. But then neither Garrie, Zhriniovsky or I are Russia's President having to weigh a great number of issues, which is why I find it difficult to criticize Putin/Lavrov's overall efforts and thrust. China's Xi now appears to be willing to emerge from behind the shadows to exert its pressure on events. As I alluded to in my comment above, it's quite likely Russia will encourage/allow Syria to use its anti-ship missiles in retaliation, which subtly shifts the dynamic.

Timothy Hagios | Apr 11, 2018 2:41:46 PM |

Russia's main impediment is that it cannot allow the conflict to become purely economic, as it is more vulnerable economically than militarily.

Thus Russia needs to respond to an attack either by doing nothing or by striking with such force that the West is not given the option of creating an economic blockade while maintaining its economic advantages.

One option would be to strike Saudi oil fields, which would be devastating to the West without necessarily leading to a full-blown nuclear war.

[Apr 11, 2018] I think that the read target of attack in Syria is the Nord Stream II pipeline.

Apr 11, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Hagios | Apr 11, 2018 8:50:17 AM | 58 I think that the read target here is the Nord Stream II pipeline. They're currently unwilling to cancel it out of economic considerations, but they think that they could get away with cancelling it if NATO attacks Syria and Russia responds with "unprovoked aggression." NATO's attack IMO will be just large enough that Russia has to respond, then Trump and co. will cease further military action and continue with economic warfare.

Posted by: Timothy

[Apr 11, 2018] German MSM - leftish or rightish, doesn't matter - mindlessly repeat what our US colonial masters are telling them to

Notable quotes:
"... There is not a shred of independent, intelligent journalism left anywhere around here - and interestingly there is an amazing number of people who have completely given up believing the MSM and/or our government. ..."
Apr 11, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Martin MS | Apr 11, 2018 2:17:21 PM | 86

@ BM: My take on the situation in Germany: the MSM - leftish or rightish, doesn't matter - mindlessly repeat what our US colonial masters are telling them to.

There is not a shred of independent, intelligent journalism left anywhere around here - and interestingly there is an amazing number of people who have completely given up believing the MSM and/or our government.

But what can you do when the published opinions are completely manufactured and anyone has to suppose his neighbours all believe this idiocy?

Hmpf | Apr 11, 2018 2:06:44 PM | 113

@73 aaaaa

That's a bit of a stretch. Germans were demoralized long before, as each sane person knew the war will end in defeat from mid'42 on. Back in the days I had the somewhat questionable pleasure of talking to German ex-soldiers (two of my grand-uncles) that were deployed to the Eastern Front. Compared to the kind of warfare that was going on there, the fighting in the west and south was almost akin to being on vacation - I'm serious about that.

On average the Soviets, mainly comprised of todays Russian peoples, lost 16-18000 people a day, this is evidence of the fierceness of fighting and, also, to what amount of a beating the Russians can take without losing sight of their goal.

The Soviet Union did the real fighting against German forces. At all times there'd been about 85% of all German forces deployed to the east, without this there would had been no bombing campaign against Germany simply because the number of fighter aircraft available against allied bombers would had been overwhelming.

Except for a few elite units, hastily re-deployed from the east, the main force was inexperienced draftees with both a lack of proper training and equipment. All other experienced units stayed east in a desperate attempt to hold back the red army as long as any possible.

A very good friend of mine, who died a couple years back at age 84, was one of these unfortunate souls. When he turned 17 in late Dec.'44 he received an official letter that read 'A gift from the Fuhrer' - it was his draft note. That's been the kind of opponent the western allies faced late in the war, a bunch of badly under-equipped troops consisting of exhausted regulars and youths, that were scared shitless (his words, not mine).

Russia's a different kind of animal. They won WWII - European theater almost singlehandedly but had to pay dearly.

[Apr 11, 2018] There's a subconscious racism in the way [neo]liberal westerners treat Russia.

Apr 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

unpc downunder , April 10, 2018 at 8:53 pm GMT

There's a subconscious racism in the way [neo]liberal westerners treat Russia. Saudis execute gays and transsexuals but the West focuses on Russian "homophobia," which amounts to little more than discouraging gay pride marches and sexual orientation education to children. China has open censorship of the media and doesn't even have elections, yet the West imposes sanctions on semi-democratic Russia and trades freely with China. Islamists are taking over in Turkey, yet liberal westerners attack the Russian Orthodox Church for spreading moderately conservative values.

Basically Russia is bad because it's a white country that's relatively conservative and does things a bit differently than other white countries. Non-white countries can do whatever they like because they aren't white as so can't be expected to live up to western liberal values.

[Apr 11, 2018] Skripals Are a Case of Implausible Deniability for the Brits by David Macilwain

Looks like not only "Theresa May and Boris Johnson knowingly collaborated with covert agencies to launch the most dangerous and dirty conspiracy since the "Great Syrian Conspiracy" – or since 9/11". They also tried to connect Russia to false flag attack performed by White Helmets in Syria.
Notable quotes:
"... Taking the first question – who was responsible – the options have been considered widely by others, with a preference depending on one's particular prejudices, perhaps more than logical analysis would demand. Oddly it seems, while mainstream observers have no reservation in holding Vladimir Putin directly responsible for ordering "the attack" (we may call it that without specifying other details on which we have no reliable or credible evidence), "pro-Russian" analysts seem reluctant to hold Theresa May or Boris Johnson directly accountable. ..."
"... Admittedly, were Putin to have ordered this assassination attempt on Skripal, it would only class him as – well, "like Putin". But to claim that Theresa May and Boris Johnson knowingly collaborated with covert agencies to launch the most dangerous and dirty conspiracy since the "Great Syrian Conspiracy" – or since 9/11 – is a far more serious accusation ..."
"... When blood tests revealed that all the 40 people who had gone to Salisbury hospital believing they may have been suffering from "Novichok" exposure were uncontaminated, a natural reaction should surely have been to gently backtrack, realising that the suspected chemical attack was not very serious, and may even have been due to some other "related agent" – as stated by Porton Down – which wouldn't implicate Russia. ..."
"... It might be overlooked here that we are only considering whether Theresa May and Boris Johnson didn't know what their own intelligence agencies were doing. It is another leap again to consider a situation where those intelligence agencies were also in the dark – as might have been the case if this was an operation devised by the CIA or Mossad without the knowledge of MI5 or MI6. ..."
"... Would those agencies – whose record of intelligence gathering and espionage is formidable – not have considered it strange that an ally's operatives chose to knock off one of their spies in a way that would have framed them as responsible – given the aforementioned proximity of Porton Down? Barring some inexplicable act of sabotage or retribution, only an enemy of the UK could do such a thing, but that of course is the least plausible explanation; Skripal wasn't their spy. ..."
"... Sadly in the light of all these options, we must conclude not only that the UK launched this provocation, but that it was a well-planned and coordinated conspiracy directed at Russia in which leaders and senior ministers were complicit. ..."
"... The alleged crimes for which Russia must be punished include other crimes for which it was not responsible, such as "invading Ukraine" (did I miss that?) shooting down MH17 by proxy, and "meddling" in elections, including their own. Given that Russia has already been punished severely for these aberrations, it is hard to believe that the UK and its allies would have conspired once again as a pretext merely for further punishment for the same crimes; there must be some other and far more serious pretext for this scheme. ..."
"... Is it not significant that the selected tag for the UK operation is "the first use of a chemical weapon in Europe since WW2"? What is the constant refrain we hear from the West and its agents in Syria, other than "Chlorine" attacks, and "Chemical Weapons" being used by the Syrian army against civilians? Is it not more than coincidental that the main source of these stories, of Syria still using Chemical Weapons – and now with Russian assistance ..."
"... Since the Syrian Army launched its campaign to liberate Eastern Ghouta, there has been an incredible propaganda campaign from the MSM here in Australia – and across the Western media – driven by headline video reports every day showing supposed bombing aftermaths in which almost the only people present seem to be White Helmets operatives and young children. News readers now even refer to the White Helmets without having to explain every time that they are "Civil Defence Volunteers". ..."
"... with their bare hands! ..."
Mar 31, 2018 | russia-insider.com

As we conclude that agents in, or allied to, the UK conducted the "Skripal Operation" as a provocation, logical conclusions follow; this is a well organised and determined plan with dangerous intent.

As more and more outlandish and implausible details of the alleged poisoning of the Skripals by an alleged Russian nerve agent emerge, and the already miniscule possibility that the Kremlin was somehow responsible is reduced to a vanishing point, our focus needs to turn to examining the details of what really happened here. It is all too easy to be drawn into this circus show, which almost seems to be playing with our imaginations.

How for instance could "they" tell that Sergey Skripal had touched his front door with his right hand, while Yulia had touched it with her left, when they were allegedly contaminated with the alleged nerve agent? Is this just to distract us from the inexplicable idea that the Skripals were hit with the most deadly nerve poison known to man, but remained unaffected for two hours?

All these details help us to establish is that the whole story is false – but we already knew that within hours of hearing about it; rather this helps us to consolidate our presumption of Russian innocence into certainty.

In fact, while the realisation that agents or states allied to the US/UK, acting with or without their governments' consent or knowledge confected this scheme to further their interests is shocking enough, it is only the first step in analysing the conspiracy. The important questions that must now be answered are these:

Who was responsible? How long were they planning this? What is their prime motive? In addition we should consider how they intend to manage the contingencies, particularly if the targeted countries do not behave as they predict, or if other unforeseen events force an alteration to their plans.

Most importantly, we should appreciate that those responsible for launching this exceptionally provocative and dangerous conspiracy quite clearly intend to prevail, by whatever means necessary. This may well include further false flag attacks, or "provocations" as Russians call them, so being forewarned is to be forearmed.

Taking the first question – who was responsible – the options have been considered widely by others, with a preference depending on one's particular prejudices, perhaps more than logical analysis would demand. Oddly it seems, while mainstream observers have no reservation in holding Vladimir Putin directly responsible for ordering "the attack" (we may call it that without specifying other details on which we have no reliable or credible evidence), "pro-Russian" analysts seem reluctant to hold Theresa May or Boris Johnson directly accountable.

Admittedly, were Putin to have ordered this assassination attempt on Skripal, it would only class him as – well, "like Putin". But to claim that Theresa May and Boris Johnson knowingly collaborated with covert agencies to launch the most dangerous and dirty conspiracy since the "Great Syrian Conspiracy" – or since 9/11 – is a far more serious accusation .

So this is not a claim that we can make lightly, nor seriously consider except in the absence of any other "plausible explanation". The question must be – "is it possible that such a well-organised and fiendishly criminal conspiracy could take place under the noses of those leaders without their knowledge?" We might call this "implausible deniability".

To conclude that this is possible, and that the UK's leaders have been kept – to some degree at least – in the dark about the plan so that they can speak with the conviction of the ignorant, does not answer this question except to pose another, which is this:

Would a normally intelligent and reasonable person, albeit with a heavy burden of political allegiances and agendas, rush to accuse a foreign state of organising a terrorist attack on their country before there was any conclusive evidence, or even any evidence at all of their responsibility?

Would May or Johnson not have asked – at least privately – the same questions that we have all asked, such as "why on earth would Putin do something like this now?" or "what could Skripal have done or be about to do that would force the FSB to eliminate him?" They might also wonder why Skripal's assassins chose such a stupid way to fail to kill him – why not simply bump him off with a bullet, after inviting him to somewhere more convenient than a shopping centre?

But of course the most obvious question these hopelessly ill-informed leaders must have asked would be this – why would the Russians try to kill one of their old spies with a novel nerve agent only a few miles from the only place in Europe that would be able to identify it?

It beggars belief! And it gets worse – this was only what May and Johnson needed not to know in the first week.

When blood tests revealed that all the 40 people who had gone to Salisbury hospital believing they may have been suffering from "Novichok" exposure were uncontaminated, a natural reaction should surely have been to gently backtrack, realising that the suspected chemical attack was not very serious, and may even have been due to some other "related agent" – as stated by Porton Down – which wouldn't implicate Russia.

But far from it – the public alarm was exacerbated by a circus of white and green men with gas masks wrapping up cars and other suspect objects in plastic and taking them away, while the leaders started doubling down on the accusations against the Kremlin. Admittedly this was politically convenient, with the Russo-phobic UK wanting to bad-mouth Putin in the run up to Russian Presidential election. But hardly worth risking a military confrontation with Russia - unless that's what they wanted.

It might be overlooked here that we are only considering whether Theresa May and Boris Johnson didn't know what their own intelligence agencies were doing. It is another leap again to consider a situation where those intelligence agencies were also in the dark – as might have been the case if this was an operation devised by the CIA or Mossad without the knowledge of MI5 or MI6.

To consider that possibility – that both the leaders and intelligence services in the UK were only reacting to what they genuinely perceived as a Russian sponsored chemical weapon attack – is however obligatory, as that is what the UK and its allies are implicitly and explicitly claiming.

It must also be true that this claim – of "innocence" by MI5 and MI6 - must be demonstrated before we can conclude that other leaders in Europe and the US and Australia – who received their information from these intelligence services – are equally in the dark about the perpetrators of this crime, and innocent of complicity in it.

Would those agencies – whose record of intelligence gathering and espionage is formidable – not have considered it strange that an ally's operatives chose to knock off one of their spies in a way that would have framed them as responsible – given the aforementioned proximity of Porton Down? Barring some inexplicable act of sabotage or retribution, only an enemy of the UK could do such a thing, but that of course is the least plausible explanation; Skripal wasn't their spy.

Sadly in the light of all these options, we must conclude not only that the UK launched this provocation, but that it was a well-planned and coordinated conspiracy directed at Russia in which leaders and senior ministers were complicit.

All this of course is only to affirm the conclusions and statements of the Russian Foreign Ministry and Russian intelligence services. (though one only needs a little "intelligence" to do this).

But it is far from the end of the matter. And again we may draw some serious conclusions from the mendacious pronouncements of the UK government, broadcast around the world following the distribution of their "talking points".

The alleged crimes for which Russia must be punished include other crimes for which it was not responsible, such as "invading Ukraine" (did I miss that?) shooting down MH17 by proxy, and "meddling" in elections, including their own. Given that Russia has already been punished severely for these aberrations, it is hard to believe that the UK and its allies would have conspired once again as a pretext merely for further punishment for the same crimes; there must be some other and far more serious pretext for this scheme.

The idea that this was done for some trivial reason – such as spoiling Putin's party at the World Cup, or even to stir up dissent against him amongst Russians – would be juvenile, and quite obviously unproductive.

Something far more "Syrious" perhaps, to be equally juvenile? That Russia's actions in Syria were conspicuously missing from the UK's initial accusations looks like an attempt to conceal their true agenda.

Is it not significant that the selected tag for the UK operation is "the first use of a chemical weapon in Europe since WW2"? What is the constant refrain we hear from the West and its agents in Syria, other than "Chlorine" attacks, and "Chemical Weapons" being used by the Syrian army against civilians? Is it not more than coincidental that the main source of these stories, of Syria still using Chemical Weapons – and now with Russian assistance – comes from the UK's very own news and propaganda agency on the ground in Syria – the White Helmets?

Since the Syrian Army launched its campaign to liberate Eastern Ghouta, there has been an incredible propaganda campaign from the MSM here in Australia – and across the Western media – driven by headline video reports every day showing supposed bombing aftermaths in which almost the only people present seem to be White Helmets operatives and young children. News readers now even refer to the White Helmets without having to explain every time that they are "Civil Defence Volunteers".

And every so often, to jog our memories of the White Helmets' heroic actions, we are subjected to their "fire-hose porn" from Khan Shaikoun, as they treat the supposed victims of a Sarin attack with their bare hands!

That for me at least, is a bridge too far.

[Apr 11, 2018] Why the Latest Syria Gas Attack Allegations Are Almost Certainly Bunk

Apr 11, 2018 | russia-insider.com

First, the reports are "unverified", according to The Wall Street Journal [1] and British Foreign Office [2] and are unconfirmed, according to the US State Department [3]. What's more, The New York Times noted that it "was not possible to independently verify the reports," [4] while The Associated Press added that "the reports could not be independently verified." [5]

Second, according to The Wall Street Journal, it isn't "clear who carried out the attack" [6] assuming even that one was carried out.

Third, the "unverified photos and videos" [7] which form the body of (unverified) evidence, were produced by two groups which have an interest in fabricating atrocities to draw the United States more deeply into the Syrian conflict. Both groups, the White Helmets and Syrian American Medical Society, are funded by Western governments [8], which openly seek regime change in Syria and therefore have an interest in producing a humanitarian pretext to justify stepping up their intervention in the country. The Western government-funded White Helmets and Syrian American Medical Society are allied with anti-government jihadists and are active only "in opposition-controlled areas." [9] They, too, are clearly interested parties.

Trump's recent musings about ending the US military occupation of nearly one-third of Syrian territory, including the country's richest oil fields, was swiftly met by Pentagon opposition, led by US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. The US president reluctantly accepted a continued occupation, so long as it ends in a matter of months rather than years.

Fabricating an atrocity would pressure Trump to maintain the US occupation indefinitely and possibly escalate US military intervention in Syria, much to the pleasure of Islamist insurgents, their White Helmet and Syrian American Medical Society allies, and US war planners.

If that is the intention, the maneuver appears to have met with success. Trump reacted on Twitter to the unverified (and unverifiable) reports, by dehumanizing Syrian president Bashar al-Assad as an "animal," who the US president said was responsible for a "humanitarian disaster for no reason whatsoever." That the US State Department acknowledged that the reports were unconfirmed failed to restrain the "shoot-from-the-hip" Trump.

Fifth, a chemical attack by the Syrian government would be manifestly self-defeating, and therefore would seem to be highly unlikely. The Syrian Arab Army is on the cusp of an all but inevitable victory in Eastern Ghouta. Why would it cancel its gains by handing the United States a pretext to continue its military intervention in Syria, in the aftermath of Trump signalling his intention to withdraw US troops?

Seventh, much of the discourse about chemical weapons in Syria implicitly assumes the Syrian government has them, despite the country cooperating with the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons to eliminate them years ago.

Finally, allegations of chemical weapons use are routinely made against the Syrian government, and while, through repetition, have been transfigured into received truths, have all proved to be unverified. Jim Mattis acknowledged this at a February 2 news conference.

Q: Just make sure I heard you correctly, you're saying you think it's likely they have used it and you're looking for the evidence? Is that what you said?

SEC. MATTIS: We do not have evidence of it we're looking for evidence of it .

Q: So the likelihood was not what your -- you're not characterizing it as a likelihood? I thought I used -- you used that word; I guess I misunderstood you.

SEC. MATTIS: Well, there's certainly groups that say they've used it. And so they think there's a likelihood, so we're looking for the evidence.

Q: So there's credible evidence out there that both sarin and chlorine --

SEC. MATTIS: No, I have not got the evidence, not specifically. I don't have the evidence.

What I'm saying is that other -- that groups on the ground, NGOs, fighters on the ground have said that sarin has been used. So we are looking for evidence. I don't have evidence, credible or uncredible. [11]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but neither is it evidence of guilt. The complete lack of evidence, along with a political context that favors the production of spurious allegations, suggests that the latest chemical weapons claims are -- like all that have preceded them -- dubious at best.

Source: What's Left

1. Raja Abdulrahim, "Dozens killed in alleged chemical-weapons attack in Syria," The Wall Street Journal, April 8, 2018.
2. Ben Hubbard, "Dozens suffocate in Syria as government is accused of chemical attack," The New York Times, April 8, 2018.
3. Hubbard.
4. Hubbard.
5. Zeina Karam and Philip Issa, "Syrian rescuers say at least 40 people killed in eastern Ghouta has attack," The Associated Press, April 8, 2018.
6. April 8.
7. Abdulrahim, April 8.
8. Raja Abdulrahim, "Syria airstrikes hit hospitals in rebel territory," The Wall Street Journal, February 5, 2018; Louisa Loveluck and Erin Cunningham, "Dozens killed in apparent chemical weapons attack on civilians in Syria, rescue workers say," The Washington Post, April 8, 2018.
9. Abdulrahim, April 8; Abdulrahim, February 5.
10. Hubbard.
11. Media Availability by Secretary Mattis at the Pentagon, Secretary of Defense James N. Mattis, Feb. 2, 2018,

[Apr 11, 2018] The Skriptal caper looks like kindergarten stuff compared to that 1965 genocide.

Apr 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

denk , April 11, 2018 at 3:35 am GMT

Regarding fukus shenanigans,
How could we omit the CIA/MI6 'greatest hit ', the 1965 genocide of 3M Indonesians 'leftists suspects' ,
The mother of all regime changes ???

The Skriptal caper looks like kindergarten stuff compared to that 1965 genocide.

fukus orchestrated that bloodbath to remove prez Sukarno cuZ he's pro Beijing.
MI6 planted disinfo in HK media about an imminent China sponsored coup , supported by ethnic Chinese fifth columns.
CIA planted 'evidence' of Chinese supplied arms , to be conveniently 'discovered' by Indon police . [1]
That devious plot provoked a bloodbath by jihadists death squads against the PKI communists members and ethnic Chinese indons.

CIA whistle blower, John Mcgehee,

The Indonesian covert action of 1965, reported by Ralph McGehee, who was in that area division, and had documents on his desk, in his custody about that operation. He said that one of the documents concluded that this was a model operation that should be copied elsewhere in the world. Not only did it eliminate the effective communist party (Indonesian communist party), it also eliminated the entire segment of the population that tended to support the communist party – the ethnic Chinese, Indonesian Chinese. And the CIA's report put the number of dead at 800,000 killed. And that was one covert action. We're talking about 1 to 3 million people killed in these things.

[2]

[1]
U.S. officials were particularly interested in linking the September 30th plotters to Beijing. They helped to spread stories about China's alleged involvement and reported on caches of weapons purportedly "discovered" by the Indonesian army with the hammer and sickle conveniently stamped on them. "

We have bonanza chance to nail chicoms on disastrous events in Indonesia ," Green wrote the State Department. He urged a "continuation [of] covert propaganda" as one of the "best means of spreading [the] idea of chicom complicity

https://monthlyreview.org/2015/12/01/the-united-states-and-the-19651966-mass-murders-in-indonesia/

[2]

http://www.whale.to/b/stockwell1.html

'Company ' veterans are so proud of that CIA'S greatest hit,
they still reminiscent fondly over it around the water cooler, until this very day.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

[Apr 11, 2018] This unscrupulous false flag op, crying foul and smearing the innocent for the crime they committed relentlessly is a special signature of the British/Anglo culture and trait.

Apr 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

Joe Wong , April 11, 2018 at 12:37 am GMT

@Anonymous

Your decrying confirms that the British has done something wrong and they did poison Skripals in Salisbury England. This unscrupulous false flag op, crying foul and smearing the innocent for the crime they committed relentlessly is a special signature of the British/Anglo culture and trait. The following history provides the evidence the above is not allegation but fact.

Nov 24, 1784, a British gunner on the ship "Lady Hughes" fired cannon against Chinese law and killed two Chinese in Guangzhou. The British refused to hand over the gunner to the Chinese authority for trail and called up few hundred armed sailors to stop the Chinese authority from searching the perpetrator in the British warehouses and living compound.

Anyhow the British was outwitted and the perpetrator was tried by the Chinese, convicted and executed in according to the Chinese law; during that time the British law also gave death penalty for the same crime.

The British had been trampling other people's sovereignty and law like India with impunity for a couple of hundreds of years already by then. Never a British was tried and punished for the crimes, murder or not, they committed since they supplanted the Spanish. British viewed themselves above all human beings and not bound by any other people's law. The execution of the gunner made the British Council of Supercargos feel humiliated and devastated as well as being impotent and incompetent in the eyes of their superiors in London and their peers (other Europeans) in Guangzhou.

In order to cover their crimes and failures, the megalomaniac British decried Chinese legal system was barbaric and sanguinary relentlessly like Anonymous[338] is doing here to Russia. All the Europeans jumped on the British mudslinging bandwagon for the effort to gain extraterritoriality in China, so they could steal, loot, plunder, etc. Chinese wealth with impunity like Elizabeth I's Sea Dogs. Soon after the "Lady Hughes" incident the view that entire Chinese legal system was barbaric and sanguinary or there is no law in China become the dominant representation of China ever since.

The British then engineered Opium Wars for the vengeance of their "Lady Hughes" humiliation, and set to destroy the last nation denying their piracy and other unscrupulous deeds on the moral high ground. If history can be any guidance, the Anglo is not going to stop at smearing Russia; more vicious plot is going to come.

[Apr 11, 2018] The toxin involved in classic shellfish poisoning is a naturally occurring neurotoxin, Saxitoxin, which agent remains toxic even after boiling or steaming, exactly the food preparation techniques likely to be employed in preparing shellfish for consumption. This is, indeed, what makes it so pernicious.

Apr 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

JerseyJeffersonian , April 11, 2018 at 12:00 am GMT

@Simon in London

Bernhard over at his blog, Moon of Alabama, is advocating for the poisoning being real, but being traceable to shellfish poisoning. The Skripals had a shellfish dish at a local restaurant about 40 minutes prior to their discovery on the park bench. While very serious, and potentially fatal, if addressed with respiratory and cardiac support in a timely fashion, this poisoning is survivable.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/04/the-best-explanation-for-the-skripal-drama-is-food-poisoning.html

The toxin involved in classic shellfish poisoning is a naturally occurring neurotoxin, Saxitoxin, which agent remains toxic even after boiling or steaming, exactly the food preparation techniques likely to be employed in preparing shellfish for consumption. This is, indeed, what makes it so pernicious.

That the Brits, primed for lies in aid of the Hate On The Rooskies campaign, lit on their story is unsurprising. Of course, the denial of the authorities at the hospital that anyone , the Skripals and the supposedly affected policeman, was suffering from exposure to a chemical weapon, along with the refusal of Porton Down officials to lend credence to the hoo haw that this was surely traceable to Novichok series chemical agents identifiably produced by the Russians kind of shot some holes in the big lies.

Anyway, cast an eye at the post at Moon of Alabama. Bernhard is pretty damn good at winnowing facts from the chaff of propaganda, and when he makes a mistake, he openly confesses it instead of doubling down on a falsehood.

[Apr 11, 2018] Liars Lying About Nearly Everything by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... Repeated requests by Russia to obtain a sample of the alleged nerve agent for testing have been rejected by the British government in spite of the fact that a military grade nerve agent would have surely killed both the Skripals as well as anyone else within 100 yards. ..."
"... It does look rather like those Syrian chemical weapon attacks that happen whenever the rebels are about to be defeated. ..."
"... Actually, I think that in the end Russia has to thank the British for sending a great message to her traitors and gangsters. ..."
Apr 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

Moving along to the present, we have Prime Minister Theresa May. May has been in serious trouble, politically speaking. After losses suffered in the recent parliamentary elections, she is clinging to power and is increasingly unpopular even within her own Conservative Party. So what do you do when you are in trouble at home? You create a foreign crisis that you have to deal with. If you are someone as venal as former American President and bottom feeder Bill Clinton you accomplish that end by firing off a few cruise missiles at a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan and at some mud huts in Afghanistan. If you are Theresa May, you up the ante considerably, coming up with a powerful enemy who is threatening you, enabling you to appear both resolute and strong in confronting a formidable foe. That is precisely what we have been seeing over the past month relating to the alleged poisoning of former Russian intelligence agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia.

There is quite a bit that is odd about the Skripal case. Even the increasingly neoconnish Guardian newspaper has conceded that "the British case [against Russia] has so far relied more heavily in public on circumstantial evidence and secret intelligence." And secret intelligence, so called, has all too often been the last refuge of a scoundrel whenever a government is selling snake oil to the public. In this case, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson rushed to judgement on Russia less than forty-eight hours after the Skripals were found unconscious on a bench in Salisbury England, too soon for any chemical analysis of the alleged poisoning to have taken place.

Theresa May addressed Parliament shortly thereafter to blame the Kremlin and demand a Russian official response to the event in 36 hours, even though she had to prevaricate significantly, saying that the apparent poisoning was "very likely" caused by a made-in-Russia nerve agent referred to by its generic name Novichok. She nevertheless rallied the backbenchers in Parliament, who responded with a lot of hearty "Hear! Hear!" endorsements. When Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn attempted to slow the express train down by suggesting that it might be wise to wait in see what the police investigation uncovered, he was hooted down. The British media was soon on board with a vengeance, spreading the government line that such a highly sensitive operation would require the approval of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin himself. The expulsion of Russian diplomats soon followed.

One of the strangest aspects of the Skripal case is what is going on now that daughter Yulia will soon be out of the hospital and Sergei is no longer in critical condition. A cousin Viktoria Skripal has offered to fly in from Moscow to provide support for her family, but it is believed that she will not be able to receive a visa from the British. Russian television aired a recording of a phone call between the two cousins in which Yulia said that she was disoriented but improving and that neither she nor her father had suffered permanent damage from the poisoning. The call ended abruptly and Viktoria Skripal believes that it was scripted by the British government on a controlled phone line.

Repeated requests by Russia to obtain a sample of the alleged nerve agent for testing have been rejected by the British government in spite of the fact that a military grade nerve agent would have surely killed both the Skripals as well as anyone else within 100 yards. As the latest British account of the location of the alleged poison places it on the door handle of the Scripals' residence, the timetable element is also unconvincing. That means that the two would have spent three hours, including a stop at a pub and lunch, before succumbing on a park bench. Military grade nerve agents kill instantly.

A request to have the testing done by the politically neutral Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons is in progress, but there is little enthusiasm from the British side, which does not want a Russian observer to participate in the process. The May government has already established its own narrative and certainly would have plenty to hide if the whole affair turns out to be fabricated. And fabricated it might have been as the nerve agent, if it actually exists, could have been manufactured almost anywhere.

The head of Britain's own chemical weapons facility Porton Down has contradicted claims made by May, Foreign Minister Boris Johnson, and British Ambassador in Moscow Laurie Bristow. The lab's Chief Executive Gary Aitkenhead has testified that he does not know if the nerve agent was actually produced in Russia, a not surprising observation as the chemical formula was revealed to the public in a scientific paper in 1992 and there are an estimated twenty countries capable of producing it. There are also possible stocks of Novichok remaining in independent countries that once were part of the Soviet Union, to include Russia's enemy du jour Ukraine, while a false flag operation by the British themselves, the CIA or Mossad, is not unthinkable.

The resort to official Orwellian govspeak by the British is remarkable throughout the process, but is particularly painful reading regarding the treatment of the Skripals' pets, two guinea pigs and a cat. A spokesman for the Department of the Environment reported that "The property in Wiltshire was sealed as part of the police investigation. When a vet was able to access the property, two guinea pigs had sadly died. A cat was also found in a distressed state and a decision was taken by a veterinary surgeon to euthanize the animal to alleviate its suffering. This decision was taken in the best interests of the animal and its welfare."

So the presence of squadrons of technicians and cops in the residence did not permit anyone to take a minute to feed the cat and guinea pigs. And the cat was killed as a purely humanitarian gesture – it's "best interest" was apparently to die. Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

Finally, the best argument against the British government's evasions about what took place in Salisbury on March 4 th remains the question of motive. So the British would have one believe that Vladimir Putin personally ordered the killing of a former British double agent who had been released from a Kremlin prison in a spy swap and who was no longer capable of doing any damage to Russia. He did that in spite of the fact that he had an election coming up and would be the host of the World Cup in the summer, an event that he would want to go smoothly. So he deliberately shot himself in the foot on both counts, allegedly because he wanted to send a message to traitors and also because just can't help himself since he is a vindictive KGB type whose impulses are pure evil. Does that make sense to the reader? It doesn't to me.
Mulegino1 , April 10, 2018 at 4:49 am GMT

A great man once wrote that the "big lie" had a force of credulity among the broad masses, as the latter were wont to engage in lying about minor quotidian matters of little or no significance while the big lies were engaged in by the mainstream press, dominated by the usual tribal suspects...
Reactionary Utopian , April 10, 2018 at 4:57 am GMT

Does that make sense to the reader?

No, it doesn't.

But here's something else I don't quite understand:

To be sure, President Donald Trump has been exceptional in that he has followed through on some of the promises he made in his campaign, insisting periodically that he has to do what he said he would do. Unfortunately, those choices he has made to demonstrate his accountability to his supporters have been terrible, including moving the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, threatening to end the Iran nuclear agreement and building a wall along the Mexican border.

Now, Trump is a sense-free random number generator, I will fully agree. But you list three "choices he has made" that you describe as "terrible:" the US embassy move to Jerusalem, the threats against Iran, and "building a wall along the Mexican border." The first two Trump has done, and I agree that "terrible" is the right word to describe them. The third thing -- the border wall -- he hasn't done. And had he done so, it wouldn't have been "terrible" it would have been the obvious and sensible thing to do. I think he clearly isn't serious about building the wall, as far as one can discern the intentions of so random an individual. But your list presents three items in parallel, with one item being quite unlike the others.

Z-man , April 10, 2018 at 5:05 am GMT
Logic escapes the rabid Neocons, anti Christian Russia crowd and their paid henchmen, or henchgirls , the likes of Linda Graham. (Grin) Unfortunatley the now feckless Trump is going to go along with this British yarn and the Neocon wish of destroying Syria.

BTW as of this post your site has still not recovered from the cyber attack it had today.

Corvinus , April 10, 2018 at 5:21 am GMT
"So the British would have one believe that Vladimir Putin personally ordered the killing of a former British double agent who had been released from a Kremlin prison in a spy swap and who was no longer capable of doing any damage to Russia. He did that in spite of the fact that he had an election coming up and would be the host of the World Cup in the summer, an event that he would want to go smoothly. So he deliberately shot himself in the foot on both counts, allegedly because he wanted to send a message to traitors and also because just can't help himself since he is a vindictive KGB type whose impulses are pure evil. Does that make sense to the reader?"

Absolutely. Under the Putin regime, the body count of his enemies has grown. He put the "de Thirty-four Russian journalists in the last decade just somehow "died". Occam's Razor applies here.

Consider also that Putin played a major role in the Russian "Deep State".

windowoneurasia2.blogspot.com/2018/04/russia-has-deep-state-too-and-putin-has.html

Jon Baptist , April 10, 2018 at 5:27 am GMT
It makes complete sense if one simply looks at the British Establishment's prior behavior of intentionally starting world wars at the order of the Society of the Elect. It's all in the CFR's archives. Their guilt in starting WW1 is emphatically admitted and documented in roughly the first 200 pages of the following book. http://www.carrollquigley.net/pdf/Tragedy_and_Hope.pdf
Who is in the Society of the Elect? Read the back pages of http://www.carrollquigley.net/pdf/The_Anglo-American_Establishment.pdf
Anonymous [280] Disclaimer , April 10, 2018 at 5:33 am GMT
It's surreal to watch such staggering levels of dishonest incompetence among our globalist "elites".

This is worrying. Nobody is that stupid so it's more like they don't care about credibility going forward. Like it won't matter.

Kiza , April 10, 2018 at 5:40 am GMT
We have moved way beyond the Skripals case now. Simply put, if US shoots in Syria, Russia will shoot back this time, yes back at US. USS Donald Duck has been placed as a bait to be sent to the bottom of Mediterrenain sea by the Russians, similar to Arizona et al at Pearl Harbour.

Many dissenter websites are currently under attack by the cyber forces of the Western regimes and Israel, one of them being this one. Another site under attack is my favorite johnhelmer.com. In addition to saying that he is under attack, the current message from John is:
WHEN THE RULE OF LAW WAS DESTROYED IN SALISBURY, LONDON AND THE HAGUE, AND THE RULE OF FRAUD DECLARED IN WASHINGTON, THAT LEAVES ONLY THE RULE OF FORCE IN THE WORLD. THE STAVKA MET IN MOSCOW ON GOOD FRIDAY AND IS READY. THE FOREIGN MINISTRY ANNOUNCED ON SUNDAY "THE GRAVEST CONSEQUENCES". THIS MEANS ONE AMERICAN SHOT AT A RUSSIAN SOLDIER, THEN WE ARE AT WAR. NOT INFOWAR, NOT CYBERWAR, NOT ECONOMIC WAR, NOT PROXY WAR. WORLD WAR.

The West is utterly bankrupt, morally as well as financially and we are experiencing the Western remedial plan and actions – war!

annamaria , April 10, 2018 at 5:52 am GMT
"In 2016 an official British government inquiry determined that Bush and Blair had indeed together rushed to war. The Global Establishment has nevertheless rewarded Tony Blair for his loyalty with Clintonesque generosity. He has enjoyed a number of well-paid sinecures and is now worth in excess of $100 million."
– The character of Blair and the Establishment is well established: Blair is a major war criminal supported by the major war profiteers. His children and grandchildren are a progeny of a horrible criminal.
What is truly amazing is the complacency of the Roman Catholic Church that still has not excommunicated and anathematized the mass murderer. Blair should be haunted and hunted for his crimes against humanity.
With age, Blair's face has become expressively evil. His wife Theresa Cara "Cherie" Blair shows the same acute ugliness coming from her rotten soul of a war profiteer.
Blanco Watts , April 10, 2018 at 6:34 am GMT
The UK is governed by the same Neo-liberal psychotic cabal that runs the US, Israel and France.
quasi_verbatim , April 10, 2018 at 7:01 am GMT
The Skripals are to be disappeared. Their home, the pub and the restaurant are to be demolished. This is a Tarantino cleanup. Move on.
JR , April 10, 2018 at 7:06 am GMT
Keep in mind how long ago all this is: Skripal was recruited around 1990 and arrested in 2004. Guess that the Russian attitude towards Skripal took the chaos of the 90′s as mitigating circumstances into account.

Skripal served his sentence of only 13 years till 2010 when he was pardoned and given the option to leave. Russia did not revoke Skripal's citizenship. The UK issued Skripal a passport too. On arrival in the UK Skripak was extensively debriefed by UK intelligence services. Skripal has lived for 8 years in the UK now.

And now out of the blue this incident nicely dovetailing with May ratcheted up anti Russia language only a few months before this false flag incident and the rapidly failing traction of the Steele/Orbis/MI6 instigated Russia collusion story on the basis of that fake Trump Dossier. By the way Orbis affiliated Steele and Miller have been among Skripal's handlers.

Realist , April 10, 2018 at 7:50 am GMT
Why anybody would believe anything Western governments say is beyond me.
animalogic , April 10, 2018 at 8:28 am GMT
Good article. The Skipnal affair has been an utter disgrace from day one. May & Boris are a shame on the UK fully reminesent of that utter dog, Blair. The fact that the msm still babbles on about Russia & Skipnal is indicative of their monumental contempt for the public & factual balanced reporting .well what's new, I guess ?
Ronald Thomas West , Website April 10, 2018 at 8:43 am GMT
From the Steele dossier lies falling apart to the Skripal lies falling apart to the 'Assad did it' lies falling apart:

https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2018/04/08/open-letter-to-die-linke/

Paul Craig Roberts is correct when quoting The Saker:

"The Russian view is simple: the West is ruled by a gang of thugs supported by an infinitely lying and hypocritical media while the general public in the West has been hopelessly zombified." -- The Saker

I expect that makes the Russians right

OMG , April 10, 2018 at 10:35 am GMT
These ridiculous, suicidal gas attacks by Assad seem to coincide not only with battleground victories against the head-choppers, but co-incidentally with Israel's murderous attacks on unarmed Palestinians "throwing stones".

What nobody seems to have picked up is the emphasis – and red lines – on Gas; gas, gas attacks. Why is gas so much worse than being dismembered, disembowelled, and mutilated by high explosives? Certainly I would favour unconsciousness and death by gas before being smashed to pieces by depleted uranium.

These relentlessly repeated claims are an exercise with the dual purpose of providing a subliminal message about the greatest tragedy in human history, repeated ad nauseam. The massive 'gassing' of European Jews some 65 years ago. Lest we forget.

Greg Bacon , Website April 10, 2018 at 11:14 am GMT
Until some kind of sanity returns to this planet and war mongering gangsters like the Bush and Clinton Mobs, Blair, Obama and a host of Pentagon generals, along with their boot-licking MSM are indicted, tried for crimes against humanity and war crimes, found guilty and sentences carried out, there will be no peace on Earth, just an endless series of False Flags, hysterical reactions by the ones who were behind the False Flags and more wars.
jilles dykstra , April 10, 2018 at 11:19 am GMT
@OMG

Churchill used poison gas in Damascus in 1918. He defended what he did in parliament.

jilles dykstra , April 10, 2018 at 11:23 am GMT
@Jon Baptist

Balfour already in 1907 announced war against Germany: Patrick J. Buchanan, 'Churchill, Hitler and "The unnecessary war", How Britain lost its empire and the west lost the world', New York, 2008, Balfour, to US ambassador Henry White, 1907, page 48/ 49

Anon [436] Disclaimer , April 10, 2018 at 11:23 am GMT
@Anonymous

Because if it is a put up job by the CIA or MI6 part of the plot would have been that they weren't actually killed. And if the perpetrators were other than those what motive would the government have for pretending they were alive?

Simon in London , April 10, 2018 at 11:25 am GMT
It does look rather like those Syrian chemical weapon attacks that happen whenever the rebels are about to be defeated.

I am pretty sure that it was not ordered within the British government and that most of the British government don't know where it came from, but are willing to believe it was Russia.

While the CIA does have plenty of form on assassinations, the risk if they were found to be assassinating in Britain seems quite high due to the close CIA links with the UK intelligence sector. But CIA agents could have paid someone else to do it.

Mossad is the one group that can act freely in the UK, has a record of assassinating scientists, engineers etc here, and unlike CIA, can take the risk of being caught. So it's a possibility – OTOH Israel has shown a lot less anti-Russian hatred than the US Deep State has.

Normally I'd assume it was indeed Russia – I thought there was plenty of evidence the Polonium poisoning was Russia – and it still seems possible, but US or Mossad must be at least equally likely in this case. It's just possible it could have been British initiated but I doubt it.

I do think it's most likely the person who actually poisoned them was not an employee of any agency.

Jake , April 10, 2018 at 11:38 am GMT
Theresa May as more evil than Bill Clinton? That will sound odd to some, but I think it is true. Hillary is the pure evil half of the Clinton marriage. Bill is simply charming and filled with a desire to amass enough power to have a group adore him as he finds new panties to explore.

May is English, and she has the very long line of Brit Empire secret service evil at her disposal. And her move is a bold one. What it means is that she is signaling that at least if she is PM, the UK could replace the US as Fearless Leader of the actual New World Order...

tjm , April 10, 2018 at 11:39 am GMT
@Bill jones

THANK YOU, anyone who give Chump credit for anything, is either a useful idiot, or controlled opposition.

Trump is, like Obama and H. Clinton (and Bush and B. Clinton Reagan though total control of US government had not yet occurred then) a Zionist agent.

The media is very good at giving these traitors cover, Obama was the "peace President/Constitutional scholar, as he made war and shredded the Constitution...

tjm , April 10, 2018 at 12:05 pm GMT
@Simon in London

Agreed, but as an American, I think our CIA is nothing more than a branch of the Israeli government...

Giuseppe , April 10, 2018 at 12:10 pm GMT
I challenge anyone to name a modern war prosecuted by the US government and its allies that did not involve at its root the direct fabrication of blatant lies on enormous levels, both as a casus belli and also to manipulate public opinion in favor of hostilities.

The clandestine activity represented by these *provocations* isn't even good spycraft. The Skripal case and the latest use of chlorine gas in Syria are risible, clumsy, amateur attempts to wangle the empire into war that the callowest rube could see through. And yet, it's working its magic on the media. The politicians, suborned by the war machine, give unanimous bipartisan assent.

What the hell is going on?

JoaoAlfaiate , April 10, 2018 at 12:35 pm GMT
@Giuseppe

Saddam's WMD, Gulf of Tonkin, etc., etc. And now a ridiculous false flag attack in Syria. Did it take place at all? But the narrative is all. The press in the USA is more effectively controlled and conformist than in Germany in the late 1930s and nobody goes around beating up journalists or sending them to a KZ. The Syrian Gov't is winning the civil war, things are going well but what Assad really needs is to have the crap bombed out of his military by Uncle Sam. What transparent bullshit.

Mike Sylwester , Website April 10, 2018 at 12:43 pm GMT
The Moon of Alabama website has been doing great work criticizing the Skripal yarn.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/04/the-best-explanation-for-the-skripal-drama-is-food-poisoning.html#more

jacques sheete , April 10, 2018 at 12:43 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

Churchill advocated both the use of gas as well as terror, so I find it interesting that so many suddenly tender hearted "officials" and war criminals now affect squeamishness regarding the use of it, yet fail to condemn Israel for its hideous, terroristic use of white phosphorous among other crimes

Winston S. Churchill: departmental minute (Churchill papers: 16/16) 12 May 1919 War Office
I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas.

I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror

from Companion Volume 4, Part 1 of the official biography, WINSTON S. CHURCHILL, by Martin Gilbert (London: Heinemann, 1976)

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article999.htm

jacques sheete , April 10, 2018 at 12:50 pm GMT
@Giuseppe

What the hell is going on?

Nothing new. Same ol same ol.

But how are things going up here? what is Athens about?

Phi. Oh, nothing new; extortion, perjury, forty per cent, face-grinding.

-Lucian of Samosata, MENIPPUS, A NECROMANTIC EXPERIMENT, ~150 AD

http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/luc/wl1/wl176.htm

jacques sheete , April 10, 2018 at 1:05 pm GMT
@JoaoAlfaiate

The press in the USA is more effectively controlled and conformist than in Germany in the late 1930s

Who controlled the press there and then?

What can be said about the control and conformity of the Soviet, British and American press of the time?

and nobody goes around beating up journalists or sending them to a KZ.

That's probably because the usual thugs don't need to do that any longer since they control virtually everything.

A couple of anecdotes to illustrate my point.:

2 of the reasons we don't hear much about mobsters these days are that the press and judiciary are owned by them and if you do get something published, you run the risk of getting snuffed. They probably don't stop at mere blinding anymore.

Victor Riesel was an American newspaper journalist and columnist who specialized in news related to labor unions. In 1956 a mobster threw sulfuric acid in his face on a public street in Chicago causing his permanent blindness.

"Treason is a strong word, but not too strong to characterize the situation in which the Senate is the eager, resourceful, and indefatigable agent of interests as hostile to the American people as any invading army could be." This indictment launched a nine-part series of articles entitled "Treason of the Senate."

-David Graham Phillips, Cosmopolitan magazine, February 1906

In 1911 Phillips was shot multiple t imes by Fitzhugh Coyle Goldsborough, a Harvard-educated scion of a prominent Maryland family ,at Gramercy Park in New York City.

Joe Hide , April 10, 2018 at 1:34 pm GMT
Good article.
Still, you authors need to start digging deeper. Trump and his Allies are putting on an amazing show / act to distract their ( and Humanities going back generations) hidden enemies.

The Bad Guys have for millennia weoponized information, convincing the public, reporters, and journalists that the rabbit hole ends here, that they don't need to dig any deeper, to just accept this slightly deeper layer of the onion. That warm and fuzzy feeling from scratching just a little deeper into to information matrix, isn't enough anymore. You guys have the intelligence, experience, and ability just do it please!

Vojkan , April 10, 2018 at 1:48 pm GMT
Actually, I think that in the end Russia has to thank the British for sending a great message to her traitors and gangsters. Apart from the Skripal case, the UK seems up to confiscate the wealth Russian expats in the UK looted back home. On the one hand, it's ~ $10bn worth that will be definitely lost for Russia, on the other if the UK's treatment of Skripal and runaway oligarchs won't heal Russian traitors and gangsters from their blissful enamourment with England's climate, I don't know what will.
anonymous [107] Disclaimer , April 10, 2018 at 1:50 pm GMT
@Mike P

I can't find the comment because the comment archive is down -- I think it was annamaria who reported that the British were holding assets of Russian oligarchs and that Russia wanted the funds back. The speculation was that Teresa May would take possession of the assets.

As these two articles state, most of the Russian billionaire oligarchs are Jewish

US Treasury Putin List Features Jewish Billionaires Times of Israel

https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-treasurys-putin-list-features-jewish-billionaires/

In pictures: Russia's oligarchs Luke Harding (2007) The Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/jul/02/russia.lukeharding1

So at least (conspiracy theory) part of the Skripal scheme is for Teresa May to be an angel and return their assets to the Jewish billionaires who stole Russian wealth fair and square.

Jake , April 10, 2018 at 2:12 pm GMT
@tjm

The CIA, the Mossad, and the Saudi General Intelligence Presidency are all children of British secret service.

EliteCommInc. , April 10, 2018 at 2:12 pm GMT
I am very fond of the British. They have provided a good deal of what makes the US a healthy and blessed place to live.

But I will admit that I was disappointed in PM Blair on the Iraq invasion and that of Afghanistan. It seemed so blatantly obvious to me, that I thought there was no way the prime minister would buy in. I was wrong. But then who would have believed that the Tory's would abandon natural relations for same sex relations, muchless marriage.

It's unclear how to respond when the leadership is so afraid that they advance anything to avoid grappling with hard reality. PM May has the hurdle of guiding Great Britain out of the EU.

I wonder if all of this is to avoid that.

God save the Queen.

Moi , April 10, 2018 at 2:13 pm GMT
@Reactionary Utopian

I too noticed that and agree with you. Do not understand why the National Guard can only serve in a supportive, non-enforcement role on the border. Heck, every nation uses its military to guard its borders. We need to send our military to guard our border. It's really very simple–no one can enter the US unless they have been admitted legally.

Another thing I don't understand is how these "sanctuary" cities can so blatantly flout federal law by sheltering illegals from ICE or any federal law enforcement agencies. If any city does so, the federal government should put them on notice that ALL federal funds will be cut off.

Rurik , April 10, 2018 at 2:17 pm GMT
@Randal

I watched Tucker Carlson last night as well.

He makes great points, and I'm encouraged that he's allowed to do so on to a big and important audience.

I remember when his predecessor, Bill O'Rielly, claimed to have seen the evidence of Saddam's WMD, and told his audience, on the run up to war, and I was appalled. As indeed, it turned out he too was lying.

When the ZUSA was entrenched in the highly profitable war on Vietnam, there seemed to be no way to end it. Protests in the streets and at the universities, and anger at the war and war pig$ seemed to no avail.

But then a phenomena began. Fragging.

one wonders .

at seven minutes in, Carlson interviews a senator. The senator does his best to lie and deceive, as only a ZUS senator can. But Tucker eviscerates him on screen.

now if this senator, and others like him, were themselves put into peril by these serial, treasonous wars for Israel, would they still be so keen to have Americans die, slaughtering innocent people- to bolster and benefit the main enemy of America; Israel?

I imagine the parent of a young American, who's life was sacrificed to augment the career of Lindsey Graham. Or other Americans who're fed up with the endless wars for Israel, and are willing to do something about the treasonous scum who're demanding and foisting all of these Satanic wars.

Just as Tucker says, any general who advocates for these wars, should be required to actually visit a battlefield, so too I wonder about the politicians, and how they eventually have to go home, and live among their constituents. What if some of the worst of them, like Graham for instance, were to actually suffer some consequence for all the evil he's done, and continues to do?

Of course I'm not advocating anything illegal. Just ruminating on potential solutions to the Eternal Wars for Israel – which are nothing more or less than a continuation of the first two World Wars (for Israel) duh

END the FED!

(or watch your nation bankrupted and looted and made to die for Israel)

Santana , April 10, 2018 at 2:36 pm GMT
@Anonymous

Come on yankee , ( as you say USA is a country of unbridled greed. An insatiable appetite for blood , land , alcohol ,and loot ) . Just return California , Arizona , New Mexico , Florida , Nevada , Utah , Colorado and Louisiana to Mexico , and Alaska to Russia ) , and then, only then , you can talk .

PS , and do not forget to close the 8OO occupation bases the US has around the world , you will save a lot of money

JoaoAlfaiate , April 10, 2018 at 2:40 pm GMT
@jacques sheete

The intent of my post was to show that the MSM here is conformist and doesn't like to stray far from what the USG is claiming and what other journalists are writing. Rather than explore the topics you raise, as worthy of exploration as they might be, I thought I'd offer what newspapers around the USA were saying about Saddam's WMD after Powell's UNSC speech; seems a bit more germane.

The Powell evidence will be persuasive to anyone who is still persuadable.

The Wall Street Journal

Piling fact upon fact, photo upon photo Wednesday, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell methodically demonstrated why Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein remains dangerous to his own people, Iraq's neighbors

The Los Angeles Times

On Wednesday, America's most reluctant warrior, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, presented succinct and damning evidence of Saddam's enormous threat to world peace.

Arizona Republic

Saddam Hussein's illicit arsenal of biological and chemical weapons, as well as the equally illicit means that he possesses to deliver them, poses a tangible and urgent danger to U.S. and world security. Millions of innocent lives are at risk.

Dallas Morning News

At some point, the world chooses to believe President George W. Bush and Secretary Powell or the international community chooses to side with Saddam Hussein and those who broadcast his lies to the world. Powell has painstakingly presented a strong case against Iraq.

Greenville News/South Carolina

Iraq is busted. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell laid out the case clearly. No one hearing Powell's presentation to the United Nations Security Council could doubt Iraq's actions and intentions.

Jacksonville Times-Union/Florida

The threat is real and at our door. Sept. 11, 2001, stripped away the belief that the United States can peacefully coexist with evil. Prove it, they said. Powell has.

Charleston Daily Mail/West Virginia

We are a country always loath to fight unless provoked. The reluctance of Americans to initiate a war needlessly does the nation credit. But this is not a needless war, nor is it unprovoked. Powell laid out the need, and explained the provocation, in step-by-step fashion that cannot be refuted without resorting to fantasy.

Chicago Sun-Times

The Dispatch repeatedly has called on the Bush administration to make a compelling case that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein is developing weapons of mass destruction and hiding these efforts from U.N. inspectors. Yesterday, Secretary of State Colin Powell made that case before the Security Council.

Columbus Dispatch

Powell has methodically proved Iraq's failure to comply with U.N. mandates. With each passing day, Iraq's own choices move it closer to a war that full compliance would prevent.

Indianapolis Star

Secretary of State Colin Powell's 90-minute presentation to the U.N. Security Council, buttressed with surveillance photographs and recorded phone conversations, should remove all doubt that Iraq's Saddam Hussein has developed and hides weapons of mass destruction, in violation of U.N. resolutions.

Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel

Powell's speech to the U.N. Security Council presented not just one 'smoking gun' but a battery of them, more than sufficient to dispel any lingering doubt about the threat the Iraqi dictator poses.

Denver Post

The United States has made a compelling case that Iraq has failed to rid itself of weapons of mass destruction. This failure violates the U.N. Security Council resolution of late last year which ordered Iraq to disarm. As a consequence and it is a grave one, the Security Council must act now to disarm Iraq by force.

Salt Lake City Tribune

Powell has connected enough dots to tie Iraq to al-Qaeda and show that this alliance is a threat to all of Europe as well as the United States.

Manchester Union Leader

In fact, the speech provided proof that Saddam continues to refuse to obey U.N. resolutions. Any amount of time he has now to comply fully and openly with U.N. demands should be measured in days or a few weeks – and no longer.

Portland Press-Herald/Maine

annamaria , April 10, 2018 at 2:44 pm GMT
On the British Establishment:

The Skripal affair is better understood in the context of "sir" Savile' knighthood -- when the influential pedophile had been raping and molesting kids for 40 years and none stood up to the criminal. The BBC has dutifully refused to publish anything that would upset "sir" Savile. The Scotland Yard looked the other way -- precisely as the Establishment ordered them to do. Savile' specialty were orphans. He was the embodiment of British Establishment.

The British Establishment has done with the concepts of honor. The loudest lying voices against Russia belong either to the whoring "aristocrats," who found that war profiteering (by any means) pays well, or the opportunistic parvenu like Gavin Williamson representing the vulgarity and intellectual inadequacy of the Establishment.

Rurik , April 10, 2018 at 2:46 pm GMT
@jacques sheete

the Senate is the eager, resourceful, and indefatigable agent of interests as hostile to the American people as any invading army could be."

-David Graham Phillips, Cosmopolitan magazine, February 1906

and to think that was over a hundred years ago

they've only gotten better at it with time

if you read The Protocols, one thing that I remember was the contemptuous way it referred to the goyim as having the minds and souls of beasts. Lumbering, mindless cattle, chewing their cud in a kind of catatonic stupor.

what else can we conclude about the kind of people who would vote for Lindsey Graham or John McCain? These guys get reelected again and again.

The saddest and most tragic thing about The Protocols is that the goyim seem to be as accommodating to the Elders as any farm animal can be. At least a pig might be apprehensive of the trip to the slaughter house. I remember a video where a pig jumped out of a moving truck, and walked off. But the goyim suit up their children and hand them over as cannon fodder, to be slaughtered on behalf of their enemies.

In the last century, there may have been an excuse for not knowing the nature of the ZUS government, being as ((they)) controlled virtually every source of information.

But today it's all out there. Today everybody knows that all of these wars are for Israel, at the direct expense of America's blood and treasure and (I won't say good) name.

And yet, (especially from the Christian churches) the call to suit up the young people to die in more wars- slaughtering innocents – for our enemies, will resound in the nation.

If I were a British soldier, told to kill some Russian soldier, because Putin is Hitler.. as my daughter languishes in a mental hospital, having been gang raped into a shell of a human being, and my son was brutalized by a British aristocrat, but now I'm called up to kill Russians in a contrived World War, to benefit the pedophile Peerage and their ((patrons)), I don't know how I'd resist pointing that weapon away from the Russian, and towards England's true enemies.

FB , April 10, 2018 at 2:53 pm GMT
@Corvinus

Corv anus dumps a megaload of BS on unsuspecting Unz readers

' Under the Putin regime, the body count of his enemies has grown.

He put the "de Thirty-four Russian journalists in the last decade just somehow "died". Occam's Razor applies here '

anonymous [397] Disclaimer , April 10, 2018 at 3:13 pm GMT
Like a gullible person I at first accepted that there was indeed some event that involved the Skripals. Now I wonder if the entire thing was a scripted hoax, that nothing had hit them, that it's all fake. It wouldn't be surprising. We seem to be in an age of rule by sociopaths whose only compass is that of power and riches. The populations of our countries are being hustled along for the benefit of the few. This can't have a happy ending for the majority of people. The much vaunted democracy of the west looks like just a fixed shell game.
gwynedd1 , April 10, 2018 at 3:22 pm GMT
@Mulegino1

The little lie is more difficult because the veracity thereof may be observed. A large lie or untruth is more difficult to observe. Such as what is visible from outer space is not something anyone can falsify.

FB , April 10, 2018 at 3:29 pm GMT
Justin Raimondo has just done a U turn on 'president' Dump

' doesn't this prove I was wrong about Trump and his movement all along?

I was very wrong to discount the role of character, personality, and intelligence: Trump is simply not fit to be President '

Raimondo's reaction to Dump's incredible imbecility re the Syria 'chemical attacks '

' A child could see through the fake "chemical attack" supposedly launched by Bashar al-Assad just as his troops defeated the jihadists and Trump said he wanted out of Syria '

Yes anyone watching that white helmets footage is immediately cringing for those poor kids being abused as props in a macabre stage play

How stupid is Dump anyway ?

That's the question

annamaria , April 10, 2018 at 3:45 pm GMT
@Anonymous

"More occupation and killing in Crimea "
-- Evidence? It seems that you are very upset that the Kagans' cookies did not deliver.
"One Year Later, Crimeans Prefer Russia:" https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-02-06/one-year-later-crimeans-prefer-russia
"How Crimeans See Ukraine Crisis:" https://consortiumnews.com/2016/02/11/how-crimeans-see-ukraine-crisis/
"A Pew poll from April 2014 revealed that 91 percent of Crimean respondents believed the referendum was free and fair, 93 percent had confidence in Putin, and 85 percent believed Kiev should recognize the results.
Another poll in June 2014, this one from Gallup , showed 94 percent of ethnic Russians in Crimea thought the referendum reflected the views of the people and 68 percent of ethnic Ukrainians in Crimea agreed . The poll found that 74 percent believed that joining Russia would make life better.
A GfK poll from February 2015, sponsored by a pro-Ukrainian group in Canada, revealed 93 percent of Crimeans endorsed the referendum."
-- Still not enough for you?
"Ukraine [post-Maidan] under pressure from West over corruption:" http://www.newindianexpress.com/world/2017/dec/07/ukraine-under-pressure-from-west-over-corruption-1721487.html
"Enough documents have been released -- citing coup-backed snipers killing dozens of protesters, US embassy officials planning false flag attacks, extremists downing a passenger airliner and NATO peddling falsified intelligence -- to make it very clear that the "coup" is more of an invasion than anything else.
The term, roughly translated as Revolution of Dignity, was cooked up at the Jamestown Foundation in Washington, well in advance of Victoria Nuland's assumption of the throne as de facto "Queen of the Ukraine," lording over her subjects, playing the role of "donut dollie."
The roots of the conflict in the Ukraine with thousands dead and the threat of, minimally, a wider regional conflict, are attributable to extremist elements in the United States -- those faces and voices seen and heard promoting the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, the supporters of ISIS/Al Qaeda in Syria -- and the cheerleaders of the continued genocide against the Palestinian people."

https://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/03/07/neo-ukraine-fighting-the-spin/

"In 1950, the Nuremberg Tribunal defined Crimes against Peace, in Principle VI, specifically Principle VI(a), submitted to the United Nations General Assembly, as:
(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i)."

Dave Bowman , April 10, 2018 at 3:48 pm GMT
@annamaria

Bravo, indeed, Annamaria. Beautiful, perfect, resounding, harsh, unforgiving words for a pair of worthless human vermin masquerading as civilised, intelligent professionals with a moral compass.

The pair of them – and the entire wide set and grouping of their self-loathing, White-hating racist political henchmen, hangers-on, groupies, freeloaders and Labour party pirates and race traitors who have brought my nation to the brink in every possible way should be publicly hanged and left to rot.

Better still that none of the Moslem-loving filth had ever been born.

[Apr 11, 2018] The Russians are Flabbergasted, by Israel Shamir

This is just neoliberal Inquisition in action
Notable quotes:
"... The details of Skripal case are very entertaining, but not necessary for our understanding. The case was used to install in minds the connection between chemical poisoning and Russia. It is unfair, for Russians destroyed all their chemical poisons under the eyes of Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) inspectors, but life is often unfair. ..."
"... The attack had never occurred at all, but it was duly reported by the pro-Western media. Thus the game came to a close. Skripal Affair established the connection of Russia and chemical weapons, Eastern Ghouta allowed to use this connection in order to attack Russia. ..."
"... We should not overestimate importance of these media events. The leading Western powers and their media refused to consider different explanations, refused an open inquiry, they went for jugular. Russia has been demonised in 2018, like Germany was demonised in 1940. It was a long and cautious labour. Have a look at this site theday.co.uk -- it is a site for school children and their teachers. You'll be amazed to discover its fervent hatred of Russia and Putin being pumped into hearts and heads of young generation. Such a long planning can't be dependent on an event like poisoning of an ex-spy or even on the fall of a Syrian underground fortress. ..."
"... we prefer a more simple explanation: Jews are well integrated into Western elites, and they promote and support the goals of these elites. ..."
"... metum Judaeorum ..."
"... Israel Shamir can be reached at [email protected] ..."
Apr 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

The diplomats' expulsion flabbergasted the Russians. For days they went around scratching their heads and looking for an answer: what do they want from us? What is the bottom line? Too many events that make little sense separately. Why did the US administration expel 60 Russian diplomats? Do they want to cut off diplomatic relations, or is it a first step to an attempt to remove Russia from the Security Council, or to cancel its veto rights? Does it mean the US has given up on diplomacy? (The answer "it's war" didn't come to their minds at that time).

The astonished Russians responded all right. They also expelled 60 diplomats, and they made it painful: all US diplomats engaged in the political department of the Moscow Embassy were on the non-grata list. The Political department consisted of three sections, dealing with foreign policy, internal Russian politics and military analysis; the most important centre of data collection, of liaison with Russian politicians, of military consequences, of Syria and Ukraine, of North Korea and China, experienced first-class intelligence officers and field hands -- all gone, including their Political Officer Christopher Robinson (POL). The Russians expelled Maria Olson, the Embassy's well-known spokesperson, and the Ambassador's interpreter. They closed down St Petersburg Consulate, an important centre for connecting, influencing and interacting with the opposition in this 'second capital' of Russia. The US has lost many of its Moscow hands, people who knew Russia and had developed personal relations with important Russians. It will take a lot of time and effort for the US State Department and intelligence agencies to get back to the positions they had lost. The Brits who initiated the deportations also lost about fifty of their Moscow Embassy staff.

Surprisingly, the mass deportation of so many Russian diplomats had little effect on the Russian people, as this strike had been neutralised by another painful event, by the Kemerovo Mall blaze killing 64 cinema-goers including over 40 children. The blaze, even if it weren't arson (it has not been proven yet) had triggered a massive onslaught of fake news and internet trolls on the people of Russia. A million underfed Ukrainians were deployed by the Western psywar on the web to tell the Russians that hundreds of their children had been incinerated, and that their authorities lie to them. This operation revealed the level of influence and integration the Western spy agencies have in Russia.

Kemerovo was a good choice for the operation: it is the only ethnic-Russian region ruled by an old-style local hero who had outlived his wits, the only region that reported indecently (and unrealistically) high support for Putin in the recent elections, a depressive region of mines and miners with a big potential for trouble.

Putin managed it rather well by coming personally and dealing with the situation hands on. He learned the ropes since 2000, when, at the dawn of his first presidential term, the Kursk submarine went down with all hands. Putin stayed away from the sailors' families, and acted callous, people said. "It had sunk", Putin replied to the question "What happened to Kursk ?" (It is said USS Memphis had fired a torpedo at the submarine, causing the disaster, while the new president had been reluctant to aggravate relations with Clinton Administration). Now, in 2018, he was very good, full of empathy and consideration, conveying strength and decisiveness.

Whatever American agency carried out the psyop around Kemerovo, it was very successful, but its success undermined another operation, that of the Russian diplomats' expulsion. The Russians did not pay it sufficient attention.

The alleged reason for the expulsion, the poisoning of Sergey Skripal and his daughter, made very little sense. Even if the old spy were bumped off by his erstwhile employers, such a reaction would be excessive by all means. He was not a Napoleon (poisoned by the Brits 200 years ago), not a prince of blood, not a great inventor nor a successful spy. He was a retired ex-spy, a wash-out. Anyway he didn't die, he was just sick for a while. Perhaps he ate something in the pub that didn't agree with him. This is the opinion of his niece, Victoria, who is the only person alive who had been in contact with the Skripals since their alleged hospitalisation.

This affair is so obscure that it beats Rashomon anytime. Russian reporters went around Salisbury and noticed many incongruences. It is not certain whether Skripals were poisoned at all, and where they are. Their pets survived the deadly poison, and they had to be destroyed. This piece of black Russian humour had been forwarded a lot around the net:

Skripal had been poisoned by a most powerful poison, 2 grams will kill half a country instantly! The Russians

- poisoned him in the restaurant

- no, on the bench

- no, in the car

- No, the door handle was smeared

- No, the suitcase was poisoned

- No, everything in the house was poisoned.

- Oh, and buckwheat was poisoned,

- but they did not die instantly, but walked around somewhere for four hours,

- but the policeman that discovered them almost died on the spot,

- but the poison was instantly identified,

- an antidote was instantly introduced, and Skripals and the policeman were saved;

- The policeman had been discharged next day!

- But they were in coma, and they will never recover!

- but no, the daughter had recovered fast!

- Oh, and dad is revived a miracle!

- and they both are quickly recovering, your strongest poison is useless.

- the restaurant had been surrounded by police in spacesuits

- the park had been surrounded by police in spacesuits

- the house had surrounded by police in spacesuits

- they are in spacesuits, since the poison is deadly dangerous, but next to them are policemen without protection

- The bench was cut down and removed: it's such a terrible poison that the bench retained its toxic quality for two weeks;

- but the cat had survived in the poisoned house the policeman had touched Skripal and nearly died, and the cat survived and the guinea pigs would survive, but they were all forgotten, and died of hunger in the house;

- and their remains were immediately burned, as they are poisoned by the strongest poison;

- For two weeks they were poisoned by the strongest poison and survived, and now they had to be urgently cremated;

- Only guinea pigs died, the cat survived all this poison. It was stressful and hungry, so they killed it and cremated to make it certain nobody will find the secret etc etc.

The true hero of Skripal saga is the British ex-Ambassador Craig Murray , who followed the developments and unveiled many of its inconsistencies and outright lies. You may read his articles and twits to learn the details.

Julia Skripal took a daring step: she called her cousin Viktoria in Moscow. Their conversation is an amazing document. Julia says that she and her father are in good health; she doubts Viktoria will be allowed to visit her. Indeed, the British government refused to grant her visa. The feeling is that Julia is imprisoned.

I spoke with a retired Russian counter-intelligence officer who is familiar with the subject. He told me Russia never had a Novichok toxic substance: this name was given by counter-intelligence to A-232 in order to trace the leaks. It worked: a man called Vil Mirzayanov, an administrator in the chemical labs, leaked the Novichok story, and thus he was apprehended and arrested. A-232 had been produced in small amounts in 1990s, and some of it could be stolen and sold in these horrible years, when a full colonel of Russian intelligence had to moonlight as a taxi driver to supplement his measly $46 monthly salary. In those years, the poison could be indeed made available, and in one case it was used by criminals. Theoretically it is not impossible that some of this poison could have been saved and stored by some criminals; alternatively, it was available to the Americans who dismantled the labs in 1992. Anyway we have no independent proof that Skripals were poisoned by anything at all. If they survive, if the British and the American intelligence services don't kill them, perhaps we shall know more. We can definitely exclude the possibility that Russian state agents would go to Britain to poison an old spy who had been pardoned by Russian president years ago. Even if he was active in producing Christopher Steele's Trump ("Golden Rain") file, the Russians would have no compelling reason to kill him at all, and in such an odd way in particular. "If we would kill him, he would stay killed", concluded my interlocutor.

The details of Skripal case are very entertaining, but not necessary for our understanding. The case was used to install in minds the connection between chemical poisoning and Russia. It is unfair, for Russians destroyed all their chemical poisons under the eyes of Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) inspectors, but life is often unfair.

The connection between chemical poisoning and Russia had been prepared for the forthcoming event. Eastern Ghouta was an important and well entrenched location of the Syrian rebels. Being within easy reach from Central Damascus, it provided the rebels with a chance to seize power in the Syrian capital. As the Syrian army with Iranian and Russian support advanced into Eastern Ghouta, they learned of the rebel plans to stage a false flag chemical weapon attack, as they already had done a few times in past. President Putin warned of such a possibility at his joint (with President Erdogan and President Rouhani) press conference in Ankara last week, a few days before the alleged attack.

The attack had never occurred at all, but it was duly reported by the pro-Western media. Thus the game came to a close. Skripal Affair established the connection of Russia and chemical weapons, Eastern Ghouta allowed to use this connection in order to attack Russia.

We should not overestimate importance of these media events. The leading Western powers and their media refused to consider different explanations, refused an open inquiry, they went for jugular. Russia has been demonised in 2018, like Germany was demonised in 1940. It was a long and cautious labour. Have a look at this site theday.co.uk -- it is a site for school children and their teachers. You'll be amazed to discover its fervent hatred of Russia and Putin being pumped into hearts and heads of young generation. Such a long planning can't be dependent on an event like poisoning of an ex-spy or even on the fall of a Syrian underground fortress.

The planners of a war on Russia have utilised fear of anti-Semitism for their purposes. I called this method Anti-semitism Weaponised . Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, has been blocked and contained by accusations of anti-Semitism. He was the only leader able to stop Britain's descent into war with Russia. Other Labour MPs and activists have been attacked over alleged anti-Semitism issue, and -- what a coincidence! -- practically all of them were against demonising Russia; while Friends of Israel -- whether Conservative or Labour -- were viciously anti-Russian.

This is a correlation that will be discussed at another time, but it is far from obvious one. Russia has no anti-Semitism; the Russian president is friendly to Israel and to the powerful Jewish Chabad movement. Russia has no white nationalism, and little of the alt-right. However, this correlation exists. Shall we explain it by Jewish hatred of the Orthodox Church, as this Church (active in Russia, Greece, Palestine and Syria) hasn't been Jewified. Or should we prefer a more simple explanation: Jews are well integrated into Western elites, and they promote and support the goals of these elites.

However, people who can withstand accusations of anti-Semitism are the strongest enemies of the ruling power; they stand against the war with Russia and against attack on Syria, as the Haaretz newspaper explained in an article called White Supremacists Defend Assad, Warn Trump: Don't Let Israel Force You Into War With Syria . The article continues: "Alt-right calls Saturday's chemical attack in Damascus suburb a false flag operation, claiming it's an effort by Israel and 'globalists' to keep U.S. troops in Middle East" It quotes David Duke and other untouchables as the only people who reject Israeli narrative.

Not being a white supremacist (probably I do not qualify) I still applaud these brave men when they say and do the right thing. Sensitivity to anti-Semitism accusation is a strong vulnerability of character. Though people like Corbyn have their heart in the right place, they are weak on this point, and the enemy uses this weakness to neutralize them. There are people in the left that are not afraid of any accusation, but there aren't many who are resistant to metum Judaeorum .

Let us hope and pray we shall survive the forthcoming cataclysm.

Israel Shamir can be reached at [email protected]

This article was first published at The Unz Review .

[Apr 11, 2018] On The Threshold Of War by Paul Craig Roberts

Notable quotes:
"... There is no longer any doubt that the criminally insane government in Washington is driving the world to the last war. ..."
"... False information is being planted about the alleged use of chlorine and other toxic agents by the Syrian government forces. The latest fake news about a chemical attack on Douma was reported yesterday. These reports are again referenced to the notorious White Helmets, which have been proved more than once to be working hand in glove with the terrorists, as well as to other pseudo-humanitarian organisations headquartered in the UK and the US. ..."
"... We have to say once again that military interference in Syria, where Russian forces have been deployed at the request of the legitimate government, under contrived and false pretexts is absolutely unacceptable and can lead to very grave consequences. ..."
"... Above are two of the three most intelligent and reliable Russian experts. The third is Professor Stephen Cohen, who worries, as I do, that an arrogant Washington drowning in hubris is provoking Russia to war. ..."
"... See here for example ..."
"... Nikki Haley's threats against Russia in the UN do not support Doctorow's hopes that reason will prevail in Washington. The crazed bitch said that the US will act against the "monster" Assad with or without the UN. ..."
Apr 11, 2018 | www.paulcraigroberts.org

UPDATE: There is no longer any doubt that the criminally insane government in Washington is driving the world to the last war.

UPDATE: As Americans we must face the possibility that we have a criminally insane government in Washington that is leading the world to destruction.

A Russian Government Press Release :

False information is being planted about the alleged use of chlorine and other toxic agents by the Syrian government forces. The latest fake news about a chemical attack on Douma was reported yesterday. These reports are again referenced to the notorious White Helmets, which have been proved more than once to be working hand in glove with the terrorists, as well as to other pseudo-humanitarian organisations headquartered in the UK and the US.

We recently warned of the possibility of such dangerous provocations. The goal of these absolutely unsubstantiated lies is to protect the terrorists and the irreconcilable radical opposition that has rejected a political settlement, as well as to justify the possible use of force by external actors.

We have to say once again that military interference in Syria, where Russian forces have been deployed at the request of the legitimate government, under contrived and false pretexts is absolutely unacceptable and can lead to very grave consequences.

This is John Helmer's interpretation of the warning :

"WHEN THE RULE OF LAW WAS DESTROYED IN SALISBURY, LONDON AND THE HAGUE, AND THE RULE OF FRAUD DECLARED IN WASHINGTON , THAT LEAVES ONLY THE RULE OF FORCE IN THE WORLD. THE STAVKA [the high command of the Russian armed forces] MET IN MOSCOW ON GOOD FRIDAY AND IS READY. THE FOREIGN MINISTRY ANNOUNCED ON SUNDAY "THE GRAVEST CONSEQUENCES".

THIS MEANS ONE AMERICAN SHOT AT A RUSSIAN SOLDIER, THEN WE ARE AT WAR. NOT INFOWAR, NOT CYBERWAR, NOT ECONOMIC WAR, NOT PROXY WAR. WORLD WAR."

I hope that the situation is not this severe.

On The Threshold of War

"The Russian view is simple: the West is ruled by a gang of thugs supported by an infinitely lying and hypocritical media while the general public in the West has been hopelessly zombified." -- The Saker

"The US generals, unlike the US politicians and media and US administration, are risk-averse if the outcome may be catastrophic." -- Gilbert Doctorow

Above are two of the three most intelligent and reliable Russian experts. The third is Professor Stephen Cohen, who worries, as I do, that an arrogant Washington drowning in hubris is provoking Russia to war.

The Saker has concluded that the Russians have concluded that it has been a mistake to put up with Washington's lies, insults, and orchestrated events and have decided that if the dumbshit Americans attack Syria, Russia is going to take out the US forces involved.

Doctorow has concluded that as dumbshit as Washington is, the US Joint Chiefs of Staff have more sense and will not go along with an attack on a Russian ally.

I hope that Doctorow is correct. However, with that crazed demented warmonger John Bolton sitting in the White House next to Trump, who enjoys the role of tough guy, I am more scared by The Saker's reading than I am reassured by Doctorow's.

There are reports, the validity of which I cannot confirm at this time, that the entirety of the Russian military has been put on high alert, not merely the Russian forces in Syria. See here for example .

Nikki Haley's threats against Russia in the UN do not support Doctorow's hopes that reason will prevail in Washington. The crazed bitch said that the US will act against the "monster" Assad with or without the UN.

Tough man Trump, sitting next to the crazed warmonger Bolton, declared that the alleged chemical attack in Syria "will be met and it will be met forcefully. We can't let atrocities like we all witnessed we can't let that happen in our world, especially because of the power of the US, we are able to stop it."

There was NO chemical attack by Syria. I know that for an absolute 100% fact. I would bet my life on it. Yet here is the US president declaring a total non-fact to be something "we all witnessed." Little wonder that the Russians have concluded that the West is ruled by a gang of thugs supported by an infinitely lying and hypocritical media while the general public in the West has been hopelessly zombified.

If Doctorow is not correct that a sane US Joint Chiefs of Staff will prevail over the crazed President and his National Security Adviser, we are headed for war.

It is a war that the US will not win.

Notice, dear readers, that there is no mention of this pending crisis in the Western media. Instead the media whether CNN or the BBC has as the lead news story the FBI's raid on Trump's lawyer.

Insouciant Americans is too mild, isn't it. Clueless is the correct word.

[Apr 10, 2018] The Ghouta Massacre near Damascus on Aug 21, 2013 was not a sarin rocket attack carried out by Assad or his supporters. It was a false-flag stunt carried out by the insurgents using carbon monoxide or cyanide to murder children and use their corpses as bait to lure the Americans into attacking Assad.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... "The primary conclusion of this study, based on a pharmacological analysis of the video and photographic evidence, is that the Ghouta Massacre near Damascus on Aug 21.2013 was not a sarin rocket attack carried out by Assad or his supporters. It was a false-flag stunt carried out by the insurgents using carbon monoxide or cyanide to murder children and use their corpses as bait to lure the Americans into attacking Assad." ..."
Apr 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Imagine , a day ago

"Murder in the Sun Morgue" by Dr. Denis O'Brien (neuropharmacology expert):

"The primary conclusion of this study, based on a pharmacological analysis of the video and photographic evidence, is that the Ghouta Massacre near Damascus on Aug 21.2013 was not a sarin rocket attack carried out by Assad or his supporters. It was a false-flag stunt carried out by the insurgents using carbon monoxide or cyanide to murder children and use their corpses as bait to lure the Americans into attacking Assad."

288 pp. analysis. Also, some had slit throats:

https://www.scribd.com/document/230748990/Murder-in-the-SunMorgue

[Apr 10, 2018] Ukraine is a debilitated state, created under Soviet auspices, hampered by a difficult Soviet inheritance, and hollowed out by its own predatory elites during two decades of misrule. But it is also a nation that is too big and independent for Russia to swallow up

Apr 10, 2018 | www.foreignaffairs.com

Ukraine is a debilitated state, created under Soviet auspices, hampered by a difficult Soviet inheritance, and hollowed out by its own predatory elites during two decades of misrule. But it is also a nation that is too big and independent for Russia to swallow up. Russia, meanwhile, is a damaged yet still formidable great power whose rulers cannot be intimidated into allowing Ukraine to enter the Western orbit. Hence the standoff. No external power or aid package can solve Ukraine's problems or compensate for its inherent vulnerabilities vis-à-vis Russia. Nor would sending lethal weaponry to Ukraine's brave but ragtag volunteer fighters and corrupt state structures improve the situation; in fact, it would send it spiraling further downward, by failing to balance Russian predominance while giving Moscow a pretext to escalate the conflict even more. Rather, the way forward must begin with a recognition of some banal facts and some difficult bargaining.

Russia's seizure of Crimea and intervention in eastern Ukraine do not challenge the entire post-1945 international order. The forward positions the Soviet Union occupied in the heart of Europe as a result of defeating Nazi Germany were voluntarily relinquished in the early 1990s, and they are not going to be reoccupied. But nor should every detail of the post–Cold War settlement worked out in 1989–91 be considered eternal and inviolate. That settlement emerged during an anomalous time. Russia was flat on its back but would not remain prostrate forever, and when it recovered, some sort of pushback was to be expected.

Something similar happened following the Treaty of Versailles of 1919, many of the provisions of which were not enforced. Even if France, the United Kingdom, and the United States had been willing and able to enforce the peace, their efforts would not have worked, because the treaty had been imposed during a temporary anomaly, the simultaneous collapse of German and Russian power, and would inevitably have been challenged when that power returned.

Territorial revisionism ensued after World War II as well, of course, and continued sporadically for decades. Since 1991, there have been some negotiated revisions: Hong Kong and Macao underwent peaceful reabsorption into China. Yugoslavia was broken up in violence and war, leading to the independence of its six federal units and eventually Kosovo, as well. Unrecognized statelets such as Nagorno-Karabakh, part of Azerbaijan; Transnistria, a sliver of Moldova; Abkhazia and South Ossetia, disputed units of Georgia; and now Donetsk and Luhansk, parts of Ukraine -- each entails a story of Stalinist border-making.

The European Union cannot resolve this latest standoff, nor can the United Nations. The United States has indeed put together "coalitions of the willing" to legitimize some of its recent interventions, but it is not going to go to war over Ukraine or start bombing Russia, and the wherewithal and will for indefinite sanctions against Russia are lacking. Distasteful as it might sound, Washington faces the prospect of trying to work out some negotiated larger territorial settlement.

Such negotiations would have to acknowledge that Russia is a great power with leverage, but they would not need to involve the formal acceptance of some special Russian sphere of interest in its so-called near abroad. The chief goals would be, first, to exchange international recognition of Russia's annexation of Crimea for an end to all the frozen conflicts in which Russia is an accomplice and, second, to disincentivize such behavior in the future. Russia should have to pay monetary compensation for Crimea. There could be some federal solutions, referendums, even land swaps and population transfers (which in many cases have already taken place). Sanctions on Russia would remain in place until a settlement was mutually agreed on, and new sanctions could be levied if Russia were to reject negotiations or were deemed to be conducting them in bad faith. Recognition of the new status of Crimea would occur in stages, over an extended period.

It would be a huge challenge to devise incentives that were politically plausible in the West while at the same time powerful enough for Russia to agree to a just settlement -- and for Ukraine to be willing to take part. But the search for a settlement would be an opportunity as well as a headache.

NATO expansion can be judged to have been a strategic error -- not because it angered Russia but because it weakened NATO as a military alliance. Russia's elites would likely have become revanchist even without NATO's advance, because they believe, nearly universally, that the United States took advantage of Russia in 1991 and has denied the country its rightful place as an equal in international diplomacy ever since. But NATO expansion's critics have not offered much in the way of practicable alternatives. Would it really have been appropriate, for example, to deny the requests of all the countries east of Germany to join the alliance?

Then as now, the only real alternative was the creation of an entirely new trans-European security architecture, one that fully transcended its Cold War counterpart. This was an oft-expressed Russian wish, but in the early 1990s, there was neither the imagination nor the incentives in Washington for such a heavy lift. Whether there is such capacity in Washington today remains to be seen. But even if comprehensive new security arrangements are unlikely anytime soon, Washington could still undertake much useful groundwork.

Critics might object on the grounds that the sanctions are actually biting, reinforced by the oil price free fall -- so why offer even minimal concessions to Putin now? The answer is because neither the sanctions, nor the oil price collapse, nor the two in conjunction have altered Russia's behavior, diminished its potential as a spoiler, or afforded Ukraine a chance to recover.

Whether they acknowledge it or not, Western opponents of a negotiated settlement are really opting for another long-term, open-ended attempt to contain Russia and hope for regime change -- a policy likely to last until the end of Putin's life and possibly well beyond. The costs of such an approach are likely to be quite high, and other global issues will continue to demand attention and resources. And all the while, Ukraine would effectively remain crippled, Europe's economy would suffer, and Russia would grow ever more embittered and difficult to handle. All of that might occur no matter what. But if negotiations hold out a chance of somehow averting such an outcome, they are worth a try. And the attempt would hold few costs, because failed negotiations would only solidify the case for containment in Europe and in the United States.

It is ultimately up to Russia's leaders to take meaningful steps to integrate their country into the existing world order, one that they can vex but not fully overturn. To the extent that the Ukraine debacle has brought this reality into sharper focus, it might actually have been useful in helping Putin to see some light, and the same goes for the collapse of oil prices and the accompanying unavoidable devaluation of the ruble. After the nadir of 1998, smart policy choices in Moscow, together with some lucky outside breaks, helped Russia transform a crisis into a breakthrough, with real and impressive steps forward. That history could replay itself -- but whether it will remains the prerogative of one person alone.

[Apr 10, 2018] Amazing Paul Joseph Watson video exposes false flag Syrian chemical weapons hoax

Notable quotes:
"... This funding was used, if not entirely, then in part to finance the White Helmets. The Syrian Civil Defense Force website lists Chemonics as its primary supporter alongside NGO Mayday Rescue, who operate out of offices in Turkey, Jordan and Dubai. ..."
"... Academy Award winning ..."
Apr 10, 2018 | theduran.com

Via RT

The specialists "found no traces of the use of chemical agents" after searching the sites, the statement said. The center's medical specialists also visited a local hospital but found no patients that showed signs of chemical weapons poisoning. "All these facts show that no chemical weapons were used in the town of Douma, as it was claimed by the White Helmets ," the statement said, referring to the controversial "civil defense" group that was among the first to report about the alleged attack.

" All the accusations brought by the White Helmets, as well as their photos allegedly showing the victims of the chemical attack, are nothing more than a yet another piece of fake news and an attempt to disrupt the ceasefire ," the Reconciliation Center said.

Via Disobedient Media

The Syrian Civil Defense Force (aka the White Helmets) is funded in part by United States Agency for International Development (USAID) . Included here are two links showing contracts awarded by USAID to Chemonics International Inc. (DBA Chemonics).

This funding was used, if not entirely, then in part to finance the White Helmets. The Syrian Civil Defense Force website lists Chemonics as its primary supporter alongside NGO Mayday Rescue, who operate out of offices in Turkey, Jordan and Dubai.

Zerohedge concludes

Of course, that didn't stop Netflix from producing an Academy Award winning documentary about the White Helmets. We're sure recently added board member and former Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice is happy considering all of the taxpayer money the previous administration spent funding the group.

#WhiteHelmets psywar continues. Embedded with Al Nusra/Al Qaeda, funded by UK,US,Holland, EU over $ 60m. pic.twitter.com/lB78N0FOUr

-- vanessa beeley (@VanessaBeeley) September 8, 2016

[Apr 10, 2018] There was no chemical weapons attack," Nebenzia told the council. "Through the relevant channels we already conveyed to the US that airstrikes under mendacious pretext against Syria where, at the request of the legitimate government of a country, Russian troops have been deployed could lead to grave repercussions."

There is an interesting, probably greased by US and Uk governments money, connection between Guardian and white Helmets
Apr 10, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

"There was no chemical weapons attack," Nebenzia told the council. "Through the relevant channels we already conveyed to the US that armed forces under mendacious pretext against Syria – where, at the request of the legitimate government of a country, Russian troops have been deployed – could lead to grave repercussions."

A few hours earlier, Donald Trump said his administration was on the brink of deciding its response to the Douma attack. "We are meeting with our military and everybody else, and we'll be making some major decisions over the next 24 to 48 hours," he said at a cabinet meeting. "We are very concerned when a thing like that can happen. This is about humanity and it can't be allowed to happen."

Pressed by reporters, Trump went further, saying: "We'll be making that decision very quickly, probably by the end of today. But we cannot allow atrocities like that. Cannot allow it."

Trump ordered airstrikes against a Syrian airbase after a previous chemical weapons attack, in April last year. The latest use of poison gasprovoked from Trump unprecedented direct criticism of Putin, something he had previously been at pains to avoid.

... ... ...

In his address, Nebenzia suggested a visit to Douma by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) might be possible under Syrian and Russian military protection. The UK envoy to the UN, Karen Pierce, said the Russian proposal was "an offer worth pursuing" but she added that OPCW inspectors would have to have complete freedom of action and of access.

[Apr 10, 2018] Russia controls Douma, guarantees impartial investigation; that makes US attack MORE likely

Apr 10, 2018 | theduran.com

As a result of the total surrender of the Jihadis previously in control of Douma on Sunday, it is the Russian military who this time are in control of the alleged crime scene.

This has put the Russians in a position where for the first time they are able both to invite the OPCW inspectors to attend the crime scene and to provide them with protection if they are there, whilst at the same time monitoring and supervising their work.

If the chemical attack on Douma really is fictitious – as the Russians insist it is – then for the first time their control of the crime scene puts the Russians in a strong position to prove it.

The point was made forcefully by Russia's UN ambassador Vassily Nebenzia at the UN Security Council session today, and it also received indirect backing from the UN Secretariat, who admitted that they could not confirm that a chemical weapons attack had happened, and who called upon all sides to show restraint until a proper investigation of the incident had taken place.

Nebenzia followed this up by inviting OPCW inspectors to the scene as early as tomorrow Tuesday.

By now it should surprise no-one that the fact that the Russians are in control of the crime scene and may on this occasion be able to prove conclusively that no chemical weapons attack happened in Douma, instead of deterring a US attack, is actually making it more likely.

This is because the credibility of the various 'witnesses' to the Douma attack – who are of course the same witnesses who were previously 'witnesses' to the 2013 East Ghouta and the 2017 Khan Sheikhoun attacks – is now on the line, as is the credibility of those Western governments – first and foremost the US government – who believed or who pretended to believe them.

I would add that not only is the credibility of the US government and of other Western governments on the line. So is the credibility of Western journalists who also believed or pretended to believe the 'witnesses'. That more than anything else explains the hysteria of the last 24 hours, with the extraordinary warlike statements from Donald Trump and Nikki Haley , and from certain Western journalists .

On any logic, since what actually happened in Douma is unconfirmed and disputed, and since the conditions for an objective investigation this time are there, the correct and proper thing to do is for no action to be taken until that investigation has taken place.

The reason that logic is not being followed, and why against all reason a military strike is likely, is because those who want a military strike do not want an objective investigation to take place, which might expose them as having acted previously on a false basis.

In other words, the military strike is not intended to punish the perpetrators of the alleged chemical strike in Douma. It is intended to make an objective investigation impossible.

There is something genuinely bizarre about the latest threatened military strike.

The Battle of East Ghouta is over. The Jihadis there – following their capitulation in Douma – have lost. A military strike now really would be a case of closing the stable door after the horse has bolted, and its military rationale appears to be non-existent. Moreover Donald Trump – the man who is supposed to be the President of the United States – was only a few days ago saying that US troops would be withdrawn from Syria "very soon".

Yet the US looks likely to launch a military strike – one which the Russians are warning risks dangerous escalation – not because it has any clear policy which requires such a strike, but because it is alarmed by a possible loss of face.

When a nuclear powered superpower launches military strikes for such frivolous reasons the situation in the world has become very bad and dangerous indeed

[Apr 10, 2018] Britain's Poisoned Spy Case Latest Episode in Western Anti-Russia Inquisition

Theresa May really looks like a Grand Inquisitor. Coupled play such a role in any movie ;-). Johnson hardly...
Notable quotes:
"... Russia is being put on the rack over the mysterious poisoning of a former Kremlin spy exiled to Britain. ..."
Apr 10, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

Like a Medieval inquisition bereft of any due legal process, Russia is being put on the rack over the mysterious poisoning of a former Kremlin spy exiled to Britain.

No evidence is presented, just piles of innuendo and Russophobia heaped up into a bonfire. The prosecution is based solely on pejorative accusations, and the accused – Russia – is not permitted to fairly contest the incriminating information.

This is the same playbook as seen over alleged Russian "meddling" in the US and European elections over the past two years. Western politicians, intelligence services, think-tanks and media are chock-full of allegations and innuendo of "Russian influence campaigns". But no evidence is ever presented. Not a scrap, not a scintilla. It's a case of presumed guilt, and a conviction verdict without any facts.

It's the same inquisitorial echo stemming from the unsolved downing of the Malaysian airliner in July 2014 over Eastern Ukraine, killing nearly 300 people. Recall how British media were within days of that tragedy irresponsibly peddling disgraceful headlines claiming "Putin shot down passenger airliner".

This week, British Prime Minister Theresa May's addressed parliament accusing Moscow of responsibility for the alleged murderous attack on former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter in the southern England town of Salisbury on March 4.

[Apr 10, 2018] Skripal Poison Case Becoming British Hostage Scenario

Apr 10, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

Far from the Skripal father and daughter being the alleged victims of a Russian assassination plot, it now seems increasingly apparent that they are being held against their will by Britain's authorities. In short, hostages of the British state.

From the outset of the alleged poisoning incident in Salisbury on March 4, the official British narrative has been pocked suspiciously with inconsistencies. The lightning-fast rush to judgment by the British government – within days – to blame the Kremlin for "a brazen murder attempt" was perhaps the main giveaway that the narrative was following a script and foregone conclusion to incriminate Russia.

[Apr 10, 2018] If Putin indeed wanted to deal with Trump, why abort all such prospects with a poison gas murder of a has-been KGB agent in Britain, America's foremost ally?

May be a more correct hypothesis that explains Trump behaviour in Skripal case and Douma supposed gas attack is that Trump was a false flag from the beginning. Being a newcomer to politics he, like Obama before him, was a perfect bait and switch" candidate. Hillary statement that he is "unfit for office" proved to be true, but in a different sense then Hillary implied: in foright policy he proved to be copycat of Hillary, save sex change operation.
Notable quotes:
"... One month after that attack, which Prime Minister Theresa May ascribed to Russia and Foreign Minister Boris Johnson laid at the feet of Putin himself, questions have arisen: If the nerve agent used, Novichok, was of a military variety so deadly it could kill any who came near, why is no one dead from it? Both the target, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter Yulia are recovering. ..."
"... If the deadly poison was, as reported, put on the doorknob of Skripal's home, how did he and Yulia manage to go to a restaurant after being contaminated, with neither undergoing a seizure until later on a park bench? ..."
Apr 10, 2018 | original.antiwar.com

[Apr 10, 2018] Liars Lying About Nearly Everything by Giraldi

Apr 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

"So Donald Trump turns out to be a pretty good liar, even if one has to take into account the fact that he frequently has no idea what he is talking about. But the prize for lying at a high level has to go to the British as related to what has been going on both in the Middle East, with Russia, and also in Britain itself. Former Prime Minister Tony Blair was the first master at dissimulation in 2002 when his intelligence chief Sir Richard Dearlove told him that the Bush White House had decided on war and "the intelligence and facts were being around the policy" regarding Iraq, meaning that it was ignoring the information that did not support its desire to create a pretext for invading the country and removing Saddam Hussein. Blair presumably could have derailed the ill-fated invasion by refusing to go along with the venture, which was a war crime, but instead he fully supported George W. Bush in the attack and thereby had a hand in America's worst foreign policy disaster ever. In 2016 an official British government inquiry determined that Bush and Blair had indeed together rushed to war. The Global Establishment has nevertheless rewarded Tony Blair for his loyalty with Clintonesque generosity. He has enjoyed a number of well-paid sinecures and is now worth in excess of $100 million." Giraldi

-------------

The British would lie? Surely not! pl

http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/liars-lying-about-nearly-everything-2/

Sid Finster , 4 hours ago

I honestly don't understand why people refuse to acknowledge that we in the West are ruled either by sociopaths, or by people who are functionally indistinguishable from sociopaths.

This is nothing unique to the United States. Every empire and its rulers were ever thus. What is different is that the American Empire is larger and more universal in scope and has more tools of propaganda, control, surveillance and destruction at its fingertips than a Stalin or a Genghis Khan ever dreamed of.

Hubris and sociopathy explain all of the actions that the American Empire has taken to date, and explain what the Empire will do next.

Ani , 4 hours ago
Has the US brass succumbed to ziocons? https://www.zerohedge.com/n...
The main questions on the social media: "Why the US is in Syria?" and "Is a war in Syria in America's interests?"

[Apr 10, 2018] Yulia is out of hospital and in hiding

Apr 10, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

hopehely | Apr 10, 2018 2:57:40 PM | 13

Yulia is out of hospital and in hiding
That is what they say. I will believe when I see a video footage with her in it. Even then I will not believe 100%. We should never forget that we deal with evil pathological liars, crooks and swindlers.

mk , Apr 10, 2018 3:05:47 PM | 14

This part of the statement of Dr. Blanshard, medical director of Salisbury hospital, is remarkable:

"While I won't go into great detail about the treatment we've been providing, I will say that nerve agents work by attaching themselves to a particular enzyme in the body which then stops the nerves from working properly. This results in symptoms such as sickness, hallucinations and confusion. Our job in treating the patients has been to stabilise them– ensuring that the patients could breathe and that blood could continue to circulate. We then needed to use a variety of different drugs to support the patients until they could create more enzymes to replace those affected by the poisoning. We also used specialised decontamination techniques to remove any residual toxins."

https://www.england.nhs.uk/south/2018/04/10/updates-on-the-salisbury-incident-7/

There was no need for her to go in detail about Julia's recovery, but she did, and what she says fits much more a food poisoning from fish or shellfish than a military nerve agent. The bombshell is at the end. "Toxin" is a poison generated by a plant or animal, i.e. a biological poison. Novichok is no toxin. Doctors are used to formulate careful and precise.

In my eyes this statement is a slap in the face of the British government and its Novichok story and a sign that it's going to collapse soon.

Bakerpete , Apr 10, 2018 3:34:21 PM | 19
Hallucinations is it?
"Nerve agents work by attaching themselves to the particular enzymes in the body, which then stop the nerves from functioning. This results in symptoms such as sickness and hallucinations. Our job in treating the patients is to stabilise them, ensuring that they can breathe and blood can continue to circulate."

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/10/yulia-skripal-discharged-from-hospital-salisbury-attack-nerve-agent

Scotch Bingeington , Apr 10, 2018 3:38:07 PM | 20
mk | 14

Yes, absolutely.

I was very skeptical at first, but I've come to regard something food-related as most likely, like people here at the MoA have proposed. 'b' plus I think 'Jen', is that her name?

It struck me as conspicuous that Blanshard wouldn't just state what substance exactly they were dealing with, if said substance was indeed some manufactured military nerve agent. But since the British government have flung their reputation and credibility down Big Ben by coming up with this Novichok nonsense, Blanshard can't say anything other than what she did say.

Also there's no mention of 'poisoning', 'attack' or some such term, which would indicate a perpetrator actively and intentionally bringing the Skripals into contact with the substance. It's just 'incident'. Adding to that, the phrase "have been exposed to" suggests 'environmental' to me, and that's what food-borne is.

[Apr 10, 2018] The photograph of the wing is particularly interesting to me. The impression I get is that the scoring along the wing towards the pilot's cabin seems to be cut by a projectile that is stable in flight and is smooth on its surface.

Apr 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Tidewater , 4 years ago

I don't want to respond to such a fine philosophical essay like a police reporter hack--which I have been-- but I have just discovered that an airlines pilot named Peter Haisenko argues that the Malaysian flight was brought down by cannon fire. In a follow-up to his original blog post he reports that he has taken a look at the whole question of this ground attack plane's capabilities. By 1984 Jane's had evaluated the SU-25 as having a maximum flight altitude of 10,670 meters. All a pilot would need would be oxygen; which brings to mind that at 29,000 feet a climber on Everest can survive with an oxygen bottle. Global Research --which I read cheerfully but with caution-- has picked up on Peter Haisenko and on the Canadian investigator's remarks.

The photograph of the wing is particularly interesting to me. The impression I get is that the scoring along the wing towards the pilot's cabin seems to be cut by a projectile that is stable in flight and is smooth on its surface. I would guess that shrapnel would have left an entirely different marking line. It would cut more erratically and deeply. I have a piece of wood made into a small table that is a vivid reminder of what a projectile--a rifle bullet in this case--will do when the bullet hits one plane on almost exactly the same plane. Leaving an accident which is a little startling to see. My piece of wood is quite beautifully carved by design on most of it and with an ancient patina; it came from an Buddhist stupa in a temple in Burma that was destroyed in WWII, evidentally burned. It took me a while to figure out why that wing photo bothered me.

I think this thing is going to be as big as the JFK assassination.

zanzibar , 4 years ago
David

Thanks for this very thoughtful note!

At the link below Pater Tenebrarum writes that an OSCE monitor notes the evidence of holes on the cockpit which seems like machine gun fire. This fits closely with TTGs note of an Ukrainian fighter trailing MH17. Apparently, there is a theory that the fighter aircraft and a missile launcher on the ground were coordinating to bring down an aircraft that had Putin returning from South America.

http://www.acting-man.com/?p=32159

With respect to the lead up to the Great War, I am glad you bring up Colingwood. I agree with two of his points - one, events spin out of control; two, "..the hard sciences had caused in man's ability to control nature, and the complete absence of any corresponding increase in man's ability to understand and control human affairs." I have noted for some time that while the human being has developed his intellect substantially, he himself has not "evolved" much in the past 5,000 years. There is an immense role that ambition, ego, greed, fear, jealousy, hate and other human traits

[Apr 10, 2018] Boeing angle of MH17 crash

Apr 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

VietnamVet , 4 years ago

Anna-Marina,

My Dad worked for Boeing. I was shocked when I read that they were not sending representatives to the crash investigation. They're the real experts on the 777. As a major stakeholder they know everything the US government knows; maybe more. Either the corporate need to distance itself from the crash overrides their responsibility to help to find the truth and tell the families why their loved ones died and prevent it from occurring again or the US government told them to stay away. This and the muddled information released so far adds to my feeling of unease that the shoot down was a purposeful act in the rush to war with Russia instead of a terrible accident caused by Ukraine allowing commercial flights to fly over a combat zone.

Anna-Marina , 4 years ago
This new article at CounterPunch suggests a new line of explanation for the MH17 tragedy.
"There have been two or three pieces of fuselage that have been really pock-marked. It almost looks like machine gun fire; very, very strong machine gun fire that has left these unique marks that we haven't seen anywhere else."
One of the questions that this article posts is why Boeing does not want to investigate the downing of its own plane. Yet the most puzzling part of the story is the US complete lack of cooperation re satellite images of the plane and its demise.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/08/04/was-malaysia-flight-17-shot-down/

[Apr 10, 2018] Clearly, the US govt is leading this propaganda attack. If the US has evidence LET THEM PRESENT IT. The Russian have presented their evidence for inspection.

Nothing changed for all those years. There is no real progress in the investigation. Dutch proved to bee complete stooges, following the party line. The Idea that Russian somehow got BUK battery (several units of it as it includes a separate radar truck) into very densely populated area of Donbass with a lot of intelligence assets managed to get it back to Russia undetected is still circulating. No visible smoke trail from the rocket is another interesting fact. The fact that Western media instantly started shouting "Russia, Russia" is also undisputable. And that fact the USA hide the evidence is undisputable too. To say nothing about behaviour Ukrainian authorities, who had hidden everything related to the incident with total impunity. Looks more and more like another JFK story.
Notable quotes:
"... Its very, very notable that the incessant drone of accusations coming from these western corporate media outlets are based on 0, none, Nil, No "evidence" at all -only more baseless accusations from the state department and nameless, faceless, "official" cited in corporate media reports, with the same TOTAL lack of substantiation. ..."
"... The more I think about it, the more it seems to me that if indeed elements among the Kiev authorities are responsible, it will be very difficult to suppress the fact. ..."
"... One thing I can be sure of, if there was any evidence supporting a shooot down by a fighter, it will vanish once the CIA and MI6 are through with it. ..."
Apr 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

MiKE , 4 years ago

"The Su25 and the shadowy companion plane which Russian claim exist"....

are recorded on Russian military signals evidence (radar tracking). This is not some "he said she said" CNN equivalency. Also, I believe the (increasingly credible) air - air shoot-down hypothesis involving these two (tracked ,recorded, identified) Su25 aircraft, makes the claim that the crime was committed by at least 1 (Su25) firing its 30mm automatic cannons ("machine guns") and NOT a rocket or missile. Somehow you failed to mention that either in your report or in a reply to a comment that brought up the OSCE reps' "machine gun" statement - specifically. Also your constant insistence on characterizing all Russian media as "possibly state controlled" is, I think, a misleading strategy.

Is Russian media "state controlled" ? Is the Russian media that you refer to "state controlled" ? Moreover, after witnessing the staggering, sickening, completely unprofessional US/EU media propaganda storm being unleashed,I have no doubt at all that British and American corporate media are "state controlled". They have done nothing but widely disseminate prepared US state department accusations and PR releases .

Its very, very notable that the incessant drone of accusations coming from these western corporate media outlets are based on 0, none, Nil, No "evidence" at all -only more baseless accusations from the state department and nameless, faceless, "official" cited in corporate media reports, with the same TOTAL lack of substantiation.

Clearly, the US govt is leading this propaganda attack. If the US has evidence LET THEM PRESENT IT. The Russian have presented their evidence for inspection.

az , 4 years ago
Thank you for this excellent post and discussion.

"if indeed elements among the Kiev authorities are responsible, it will be very difficult to suppress the fact."

Here (

Play
David Habakkuk , 4 years ago
Tidewater,

As a sometimes television current affairs 'hack' who benefited enormous from having spent time as a graduate trainee on the Liverpool Echo, and later spent happy hours delving into the underworlds of local politics in London and Birmingham, the last thing I would be stupid enough to do would be to contemptuous of a 'police reporter hack.' A major problem with much of the MSM today is that those producing it are no longer down-to-earth, in the way that old-style newspaper reporters commonly were.

The piece to which 'Ingolf' links below, and also if I recall right an earlier comment he posted, argues that the impression that the patterns of damage match those one would expect from cannon is unfounded. It is also not clear to me whether an Su-25 operating at the limits of its altitude range, could use a cannon effectively (as distinct from a rocket.) That said, at the moment it seems to me sensible not to rule anything out until we have unambiguous evidence.

As to the scale of the furore which may be about to break, I think you could well be right. It may still be that I, and TTG, and others on this blog sceptical about the conventional wisdom about the MH17 affair are barking up the wrong tree. But if we are not, Western governments may have backed themselves into a corner. The more I think about it, the more it seems to me that if indeed elements among the Kiev authorities are responsible, it will be very difficult to suppress the fact.

Ingolf , 4 years ago
For those who haven't yet seen it, the Saker has a "detailed expert analysis" of the MH17 downing.

I've only read some of it so far (it's a 25 page PDF report) but it looks useful.

http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com.au/2014/08/detailed-expert-analysis-of-mh17-downing.html

walrus, 4 years ago

I second what VietVet said, I am totally surprised that Boeing would not send a representative to the crash site and be part of the investigative team. This omission smells to high heaven.

Boeing advice would be needed for, among other things, the determination of the point or points of impact of the warhead, the failure modes of the various parts of the structure and the sequence in which they failed.

This information is needed to correlate the debris field with the point of impact of the missile and to determine the ultimate critical issue of the direction from which the missile was travelling when it detonated.

I am already suspicious that this was a Ukranian false flag operation because I believe that initial indications are that the missile may have come from behind the aircraft from Ukrainian territory. Shrapnel evidence suggests that the cockpit and nose took the brunt of the blast. Since the operating principle of the proximity fuze is to detonate at the point of closest approach to the target - identified when the range, as measured by the fuze radar, just starts to open, then the explosion near the front of the plane is consistent with an approach from the rear. If the missile approached from the front - rebel held territory, I would have expected the blast to be towards the rear of the aircraft.

I would hope that someone with more technical knowledge can disprove my speculation.

One thing I can be sure of, if there was any evidence supporting a shooot down by a fighter, it will vanish once the CIA and MI6 are through with it.

[Apr 10, 2018] Novi-Fog In Fleet Street - Truth Cut Off

Notable quotes:
"... Opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn, who's skepticism convinced 165 countries to not fall for Boris Johnson's lies, says that Johnson has to answer "serious questions". The spin-masters of the May government throw Novi-Fog™ into Fleet Street to prevent that. ..."
"... Operation 'Save Boris' fills the Fleet Street papers with more lies. It claims that secret intelligence, which can not even be shown to the opposition leader, proves that Russia tested how to smear the nerve agent 'Novichok' on doorknobs ..."
"... Theresa May's government is in serious trouble. It tries to spin its way out of its lies. But the time is working against it. The fog will rise ..."
"... Moon of Alabama ..."
"... Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness Against Thy Neighbor--a mortal sin. ..."
"... The Telegraph today answered critics that are demanding proof , saying that no beyond-a-reasonable-doubt proof is required because governments are not held to that standard. So what standard should a government be held to a) by other governments? And b) by the people that they represent? They didn't bother to say but the impression I got is "trust us". They are tone deaf. Public trust is worn thin. Do they think we have forgotten being lied into Iraq? Their incessant spying and propaganda? Western support for ISIS criminality? Clinton-DNC collusion? And much more! ..."
"... I would guess the Skripals and the policeman would have a full time minder at their sides to ensure they say nothing that busts the narrative. ..."
"... It might have been pesticide poisoning . If doctors guessed correctly they would have been able to treat it. Pesticide poisoning happens a lot by accident in rural households. ..."
"... Novichok shares characteristics with pesticides so laboratory results may very well be something that can be a pesticide - or Novichok. ..."
"... Good reminder that we fight bees with a "military grade weapon". ..."
"... reminded me of the passport that survived the 9/11 twin towers attack in the USA. ..."
"... I think bevin's correct--Brexit, Corbyn and further vilification of Russia are the motives driving this SNAFU. ..."
"... Russia convened an OPCW Special Executive Council meeting in The Hague on April 4, for "addressing the situation around allegations of non-compliance with the Convention made by one State Party against the other State Party with regard to the incident in Salisbury" on March 4. . . here ..."
"... This is a post by a novelist (red flag, I know) with obv. no credibility that claims that Novichok was in fact the name of a KGB operation to locate leakers in their chemical research staff by feeding disinfo about a chemical super-weapon, and that Mirzayanov (an analytical chemist not directly involved in research or production) was ID'd as a leaker as a result, and turned into a disinfo dispenser. ..."
"... The Skripals apparently ordered seafood risotto at Zizzi's Restaurant in Salisbury. If you look up Zizzi's Restaurant menus on Google, you will see the menus mention risotto with mussels. ..."
"... Mussels can carry algae-related toxins that can cause (among other things) nausea, vomiting and (depending on the toxin involved) even brain damage, memory loss and death. Usually the symptoms set in about half an hour after eating so knowing when the Skripals had lunch and when they arrived at the park bench is critical. ..."
"... The grechka is problematic - how did the policeman get ill? ..."
"... The guinea pigs died from thirst? You'd think if there was nerve gas contamination in the house somewhere, thirst would be the last thing they'd die of. ..."
"... If police had visited the house on March 4, immediately or almost immediately after the Skripals were found, surely they would have found the animals in good condition? Sergei Skripal had apparently had the animals brought over from Russia at considerable expense to himself. One assumes he must have been quite attached to them. Yet when the animals are found, they are malnourished and starving or dead from thirst? ..."
"... So what was DS Nick Bailey doing if he didn't go to the house on March 4? When was he stricken with nerve gas poisoning? ..."
"... Its a common Western practice to point finger to enemies military or research facility. They win regardless of circumstances. ..."
"... Only two words: perfidious Albion... always was and always will be. And this is how the west spins off into the dustbin of history... the newbie way. ..."
"... Folks, the reason for all this anti-Putin nonsense is the one fact that the Syrian government now holds over 11 British officers who were liaised with the terrorists in the Ghouta. ..."
"... And they were caught out of uniform, such that they could be executed as spies under international law. Isn't that a howler?" ..."
"... What sort of libretto would Gilbert and Sullivan compose for this fiasco. Could The Onion do better? Reminds me of Cheech & Chong's skits. ..."
"... If all dogs of wars are now unleashed following some absurd false flag as murky and grotesque as the Skippy affair... we, as human species, are absolutely doomed to live in hell for quite sometimes. ..."
"... The only thing that has been officially confirmed is that blood tests showed breakdown products of organophosphates that were believed to come from a "Novichok class nerve agent or closely related agent." I still do not think they have found novichok anywhere in the environment or have collected a sample that could be independently verified to be novichok in some foreign laboratory. At least we have not seen any official confirmation that such a sample exists. Nor have we received information on exactly what compound this "novichok" is claimed to be. ..."
"... I suspect the traces of "novichok" found all over the place, from the Zizzi restaurant to the door handle, are just some ordinary organophosphate pesticide. ..."
"... The Skripals are suffering from "paralytic shellfish poisoning" they received from saxitoxin or tetrodotoxin in the seafood in the Risotto Pesce they ate at the Zizzi restaurant. The Skripals received traces of some organophosphate pesticide from the flowers they left at the graves in the morning. They then left trace on the door handles of the BMW. A video show the BMW driving away from Sergei Skripl's house at 14:55 in the afternoon. This would mean that they visited the house after leaving the pub and entering the Zizzi restaurant, leaving further organophosphate traces on the door knob of the house. ..."
"... Thanks 'B' for keeping the torch lit and shine thru the british lies .. it is so lame and amateurish and i agree for years these propagandist been doing their job the 'easy way' and now they been exposed by the still thinking crowd in the net.. ..."
"... This would suggest that if the breakfast cereal brought to the UK from Russia for Sergei Skripal is tested for "Novichok", it will also test positive for traces of "Novichok". (Unless of course Lord President Vlademort rids the entire Russian Federation of all its agricultural pests with a magnanimous wave of his hand and the utterance of a secret spell.) ..."
Apr 05, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Having been caught lying and covering up his lies about the Salisbury incident, the British Foreign Minister Boris Johnson decided to attack :


bigger

A pity endeavor. It were the lies of Theresa May and Boris Johnson that convinced the other countries , not any factual evidence:

BERLIN (Reuters) - Britain needs to show proof that Russia was behind last month's poisoning of a former Russian double agent and his daughter in England, the German government's coordinator for Russia said on Thursday.

Gernot Erler said pressure was rising on Prime Minister Theresa May's government after Britain's military research centre, at Porton Down, said on Tuesday it could not say yet whether the nerve agent used in the attack had been produced in Russia.

" That contradicts what we had previously heard from British politicians and will certainly raise the pressure on Britain to show further proof that the traces plausibly point to Moscow ," Erler told German broadcaster ARD.

Armin Laschert, head of Germany's most populous state North Rhine-Westphalia and near to Merkel, also questioned the British behavior.

The international loss of trust for the British claims is serious. Unless the UK government comes up with a very plausible story with some real evidence behind it no serious European official will lend it any further support. And no, holding up a tube of white powder will not be enough.

via @Propagandaschau - bigger

Opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn, who's skepticism convinced 165 countries to not fall for Boris Johnson's lies, says that Johnson has to answer "serious questions". The spin-masters of the May government throw Novi-Fog™ into Fleet Street to prevent that.

Operation 'Save Boris' fills the Fleet Street papers with more lies. It claims that secret intelligence, which can not even be shown to the opposition leader, proves that Russia tested how to smear the nerve agent 'Novichok' on doorknobs:

Police said last week they believed Russian ex-double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter were poisoned at home in Salisbury via their front door.

Now agents have confirmed that Putin's scientists carried out experiments looking at its effectiveness on door handles before the March 3[sic!] attack.

A security source told the Daily Mail: "We have intelligence that goes beyond Russia made Novichok and stockpiled it.

" We have evidence that they also explored using it as an assassination weapon including on areas such as door handles and everyday objects. "

"Putin's scientists" experimented and found that two persons leaving a home will both touch the exterior doorknob and reliably infect themselves with a rain-resistant, "military grade" nerve agent which several hours later has a similar sudden effect on a 33 year old healthy women and a 66 year old man with serious diabetes. That indeed sounds quite plausible to me (not).

More Novi-Fog™:


bigger

The Times was told that the spies found the source of the nerve agent. But the piece is extremely vague and makes little sense:

There are two different sources: 1. "Security services" which say they know the source but neither name it, nor pin the location to Russia and 2. a Whitehall spin-master who points to Russia.

Some photo editor made sense of what the "security services" said and introduced the Times piece with a picture of the likely source:


via D'Aramitz - bigger

Behind the wall of Novi-Fog™ all the outrageous claims the government made about the case get pushed down the memory hole.

Meanwhile Victoria Skripal, a cousin of Yulia Skripal, claims to have been called by Yulia and told that everything is fine. In response(?) the Metropolitan Police claims to have a statement from Yulia in which she also says that everything is fine. Neither claim is verifiable and both might well be wrong.

Theresa May's government is in serious trouble. It tries to spin its way out of its lies. But the time is working against it. The fog will rise:

What will the British government to get out of this situation?

---
Previous Moon of Alabama reports on the Skripal case:

Posted by b on April 5, 2018 at 03:41 PM | Permalink

Comments

dr sapperstein , Apr 5, 2018 3:58:03 PM | 1

d notice
simple and effective. It has a chilling effect

the gladio diversion crew productions have moved on today it is the knife crime menace in london.all contained on the salisbury front no dissent in the media places that count.

move along please

Red Ryder , Apr 5, 2018 4:06:40 PM | 2
Highly Likely is Extremely Likely a Lie. UK is definitely evil. The Atlantic Alliance is definitely evil.

Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness Against Thy Neighbor--a mortal sin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9cPnL6ep7E

psychohistorian , Apr 5, 2018 4:08:07 PM | 3
Thanks for continuing to hammer on this perfidy by the British puppets and their masters.

At the end of your posting you asked what the British government will do to get out of this situation and I can only expect them to try and top the situation with something to shift focus and so it has to be Huuuuuuge....and not likely in a good way....sigh

When do the aliens come in and save us from our species stupidity?

Formerly T-Bear , Apr 5, 2018 4:08:38 PM | 4
Only a top to bottom regime change will make Britain great again.
Jackrabbit , Apr 5, 2018 4:16:56 PM | 5
The Telegraph today answered critics that are demanding proof , saying that no beyond-a-reasonable-doubt proof is required because governments are not held to that standard. So what standard should a government be held to a) by other governments? And b) by the people that they represent? They didn't bother to say but the impression I got is "trust us". They are tone deaf. Public trust is worn thin. Do they think we have forgotten being lied into Iraq? Their incessant spying and propaganda? Western support for ISIS criminality? Clinton-DNC collusion? And much more!

The link to Sputnik has a link to the video of the Russian TV show but no English subtitles. Is the an English transcription anywhere? According to the transcription of the recorded conversation, it is Yulia initiated the phone call and I would think it was the UK that recorded the call and sent it to Russian TV. I would guess the Skripals and the policeman would have a full time minder at their sides to ensure they say nothing that busts the narrative.

Peter AU 1 | Apr 5, 2018 4:18:24 PM | 6 /

The link to Sputnik has a link to the video of the Russian TV show but no English subtitles. Is the an English transcription anywhere?
According to the transcription of the recorded conversation, it is Yulia initiated the phone call and I would think it was the UK that recorded the call and sent it to Russian TV. I would guess the Skripals and the policeman would have a full time minder at their sides to ensure they say nothing that busts the narrative.

Gerd Müller , Apr 5, 2018 4:20:59 PM | 7
As said before, no #Novichok was used. The Skripals could recover.Now the relative in Moskow asked, what was the order in the restaurant Zizzi. I think it was severe illness after Meal mess. Toad in the Pond? Not on the list of Zizzi.
mischi , Apr 5, 2018 4:25:46 PM | 8
does salmonella cause frothing of the mouth? botulism? I don't think so. Both can be deadly though
Anonymous , Apr 5, 2018 4:26:33 PM | 9
The British police have finally started a proper investigation. It has had immediate results, when absolute proof of Russia's involvement was found under the bench where the Skirpals fell unconscious.

https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/a073irl/78622176/268527/268527_600.jpg

Emmanuel Goldstein , Apr 5, 2018 4:57:09 PM | 10
The cracks are starting to show. No evidence. No serious facts. We continue on regardless pumping out the big lies.....Do they think we don't remember Tony Blair on Iraq, the rush into Afghanistan, the wilful destruction of Libya, which once had the highest human development index in Africa, the near destruction of Syria triggering a huge migrant crisis. The HMG view on all of these has been an inversion of the truth. I stopped beleiving anything any British government says to me after Iraq, and my default setting on this affair was 'false flag'. The Russian ambassador was given over ninety minutes of airtime this afternoon on Sky and acquitted himself very well, posing, to a Brit, very logical and sensible questions. When is he going to move Writ of Habeus Corpus for the Skripals? The guy has quite a sense of humour and the irony would be sublime...
michael d , Apr 5, 2018 4:57:16 PM | 11
So there we were after 1 month waiting for a man with a name and a job title to actually say it was Novichok, and finally one came along presented as the head of Porton Down.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/garyaitkenhead/

Turns out:

Shame Sky didn't bother to ask if he works in Porton Down - I doubt he does.
Even greater shame no one has asked for a chemist from Porton Down to speak up. Maybe Corbyn will ask that, but right now the pro-Israel lobby is flat out to shut him up in case he mentions Palestine.

Reality Check , Apr 5, 2018 4:57:38 PM | 12
So, let me get this straight in my head for once. The Brits 'knew' even before this incident that Russia had been experimenting with doorknobs as delivery agents of this novichok stuff, yet it took them weeks, and dozens of alternate theories, to yell 'eureka, I finally have it. I'll go test the doorknobs now.'

Yep, that makes sense.

Tom Welsh , Apr 5, 2018 5:01:15 PM | 13
"We knew... pretty much... likely". That really says it all.
Somebody , Apr 5, 2018 5:02:03 PM | 14
Link to English language transcript for Yulia's phone conversation-

http://theduran.com/breaking-yulia-skripal-phone-call-leaked-everyones-health-is-fine-will-be-discharged-soon/

Ort , Apr 5, 2018 5:04:57 PM | 15
It were the lies of Theresa May and Boris Johnson that convinced the other countries, not any factual evidence...
______________________________________________

True enough, but I think it's more correct to say that the lies coerced the other countries rather than "convinced" them.

That is, they weren't "convinced" in the sense of "rationally persuaded". They were "convinced" the way fictional Mafia Don "convinced" stubborn or reluctant parties by "making them an offer they can't refuse".

As I say, perhaps this is just a matter of semantics. I suppose that if one tells lies while twisting one's interlocutor's arm sharply, the interlocutor may be "convinced" as much by the pain as the merits of the lies.

I think the feckless response is driven by seeing the handwriting on the wall, not necessarily believing what's being written.

james , Apr 5, 2018 5:05:55 PM | 16
the uk gov't is in trouble.. no amount of msm cover up is going to work.. they are on shaky ground..

as karlof1 shared earlier on the previous thread - craig murray is all over this doorknob bs and more..

james , Apr 5, 2018 5:07:34 PM | 17
btw - the un speech from the uk and usa were ridiculous... someone ought to get a manuscript of there words earlier today at the un special meeting on this and tear them apart... ripe for the taking...
somebody , Apr 5, 2018 5:14:41 PM | 18
7/8

It might have been pesticide poisoning . If doctors guessed correctly they would have been able to treat it. Pesticide poisoning happens a lot by accident in rural households.

Novichok shares characteristics with pesticides so laboratory results may very well be something that can be a pesticide - or Novichok.

The binary versions of the agents reportedly uses acetonitrile and an organic phosphate "that can be disguised as a pesticide precursor."

Mirzayanov gives somewhat different structures for Novichok agents in his autobiography to those which have been identified by Western experts.[53] He makes clear that a large number of compounds were made, and many of the less potent derivatives were reported in the open literature as new organophosphate insecticides,[54] so that the secret chemical weapons program could be disguised as legitimate pesticide research.

Good reminder that we fight bees with a "military grade weapon".

Hoarsewhisperer , Apr 5, 2018 5:20:19 PM | 19
Boris needs to grow a brain. "28 other countries have been so convinced..." is a pretty limp-wristed claim to brag about when one considers that if the evidence was overwhelmingly Q.E.D. then 194 other countries would be convinced. And Boris could just STFU and wouldn't need to say anything.
james , Apr 5, 2018 5:22:46 PM | 20
and what has happened to the pet? how does one spell 'cover up' in the uk??
flamingo , Apr 5, 2018 5:36:13 PM | 22
Thank you anonymous #9. I was expecting a mushroom and that reminded me of the passport that survived the 9/11 twin towers attack in the USA.

These malign fools are klutzes and for that we should be either thankful or terrified. My first thought on reading b's headline was a rough Brexit will follow.

Blessings on your day b.

Daniel , Apr 5, 2018 5:39:30 PM | 23
So, a tad more than 10% of the countries in the world are going along with this provocation. But, as when Ms. Clinton recently stated that she "won" in all the districts that matter (tripling down on driving that wedge between the "Party of the People" and the actual people), the countries that are playing along are the only ones that matter.

Meanwhile: Syria, Ukraine, Israeli slaughtering of unarmed protesters and passing laws to "finish 1948," Turkey, Honduras, Venezuela, Brazil (coup regime set to imprison second former leftist President), mass labor unrest in France, 3 US States school systems shut down by wild cat strikes, etc. etc. etc.

Oops. My dogs see a squirrel. Gotta go.

karlof1 , Apr 5, 2018 5:58:17 PM | 24
The only Truth being ascertained in this SNAFU are the lies being unmasked. The diatribes by UK/US "ambassadors" at UNSC are utterly inane compared to Russian rationality. Germany's essentially said UK's provided zero evidence to back its very serious accusations and the vast majority of the world agrees. Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior, and both the UK and Outlaw US Empire are guilty of casting Big Lies very often to further their Imperialistic Outlaw behavior since 1945--and that's precisely what's being done now.

I think bevin's correct--Brexit, Corbyn and further vilification of Russia are the motives driving this SNAFU.

CE , Apr 5, 2018 6:04:48 PM | 25
Typo: der Stinker heisst Laschet, nicht Laschert.
Don Bacon , Apr 5, 2018 6:07:39 PM | 26
The OPCW Director has said that "The mandate of the FFM [Fact-Finding Mission] is confined to establishing only the fact of the use of chemical weapons" and not to determine accountability. But the recent meeting on April 4 was to consider the UK charges against Russia, which had EU and US backing.

from a document....

Russia convened an OPCW Special Executive Council meeting in The Hague on April 4, for "addressing the situation around allegations of non-compliance with the Convention made by one State Party against the other State Party with regard to the incident in Salisbury" on March 4. . . here

No doubt Mr. Johnson's remarks were considered and proof demanded. There has been no report on the meeting yet, which should show up here .

Galvanise , Apr 5, 2018 6:15:21 PM | 27
Hi MoA, I wanted to share a funny but tinfoil-y theory that came up on the Russian web very early in the Skripal affair. Briefly, that Novichok was a bogus gas and a KGB psy op to begin with.

https://m.facebook.com/lazarchuk.andrey/posts/2054379401482631

This is a post by a novelist (red flag, I know) with obv. no credibility that claims that Novichok was in fact the name of a KGB operation to locate leakers in their chemical research staff by feeding disinfo about a chemical super-weapon, and that Mirzayanov (an analytical chemist not directly involved in research or production) was ID'd as a leaker as a result, and turned into a disinfo dispenser.

Literally a conspiracy theory (also might be unironic disinfo in itself), but just think how absolutely fucking hilarious it would be if it turned out that (a) novichok really is bogus and (b) without knowing that, the Brits tried a false flag with what they thought was a hype Russian superpoison but was actually rubbish unable of killing a 66 y.o. diabetic.

Also, it does kinda play into OPCW's continued refusal to add Novichok to their CW list, despite years of Mirzayanov's advocacy and even having the formulas.

Posting translation below:

"The tail has wagged the god:

Don't ask for my source, won't give it away anyway. Everything written below is vastly different from what you can find online.

'1. As far back as the early 1980's the Soviet Army stopped considering [chemical weapons] as a worthwhile weapon in a real war. Around 83-84 a decision was made to stop supplying the army with CWs, decreasing operational stocks of it and moving CW from the armed forces to long-term storage and weapon disposal facilies. From that time to 1996 no new CW items were supplied to the army, as well as no instruction materials on usage or defense against them.

2. Mirzoyanov's specialty is analytical chemistry, he was never involved in neither theoretical R&D nor production. He spent the entire 80's in the First Department.

3. In the second half of the 80's KGB launched a wide-scale disinformation operation, which also had a side objective - expose leaks. They developed two dozen bogus but very detailed projects for "new chemical superweapons, which cannot be detected by existing NATO dectors and which is impossible to defend against" (NOVA with its variants, "Novichok" with variants, ASD and others). It was "Novichok" that passed through Mirzoyanov's hands.

4. R&D and production facility in Kantyubek was reoriented from testing and producing CW and BO [military equipment?] to producing herbicides and defoliants - mainly for the cotton industry's needs.

5. Mirzoyanov was immediately identified as a leaker, removed from any materials with a real basis behind them in 1990, and fed a disinformation channel since. In '92 he voluntarily exposed himself by publishing his famous article. Form this moment on "Novichok" reaches the realm of mass media. In '95 NYT writes about the "new Russian superweapon."

6. NATO had spent $10 bln. creating countermeasures for a fake CW.

7. What really happened in Salisbury is absolutely unclear; the victims' behavior, the actions of the police, medics, or special services doesn't all fit into a comprehensible picture. Poisoning by a synthetic neurotoxin, analogous to that of the fugu fish, seems more or less probable.

Summarizing briefly: "Novichok" is not the name of a chemical weapon, but a KGB operation cypher, developed to expose leaks and feed disinformation.'"

Galvanise , Apr 5, 2018 6:17:06 PM | 28
*gah, "The tail has wagged the dog", obviously.
Jen , Apr 5, 2018 6:18:27 PM | 29
Gerd Muller @ 7, Mischi @ 8:

The Skripals apparently ordered seafood risotto at Zizzi's Restaurant in Salisbury. If you look up Zizzi's Restaurant menus on Google, you will see the menus mention risotto with mussels.

Mussels can carry algae-related toxins that can cause (among other things) nausea, vomiting and (depending on the toxin involved) even brain damage, memory loss and death. Usually the symptoms set in about half an hour after eating so knowing when the Skripals had lunch and when they arrived at the park bench is critical.

https://www.emedicinehealth.com/wilderness_shellfish_poisoning_gastrointestinal/article_em.htm#causes_and_symptoms_of_shellfish_poisoning

Unfortunately the table where the Skripals had lunch has now been destroyed. The park bench has been removed from the shopping mall and who knows what state it's in now?

Also what appears to have been ignored in the official account is whether the Skripals had lunch on their own or if there was someone else with them at the cemetery, at the restaurant, at the pub or later in the shopping mall. That someone need not have accompanied them to all four spots where they went on March 4.

Babyl-on , Apr 5, 2018 6:19:42 PM | 30
I agree with just about everyone here one way or another, but propaganda works and they have the media - they are scoring points.

I watched the Security Counsel meeting this afternoon and I must say the Russians did not do themselves any favors, he was rambling, sputtering and all over the map. Did not even mention that this agent can be made in many places and other details. The British argument was polished and thorough, it will convince a great many.

They have lost much but not all of their control of the narrative.

c1ue , Apr 5, 2018 6:26:28 PM | 31
What's really funny and sad is how the story keeps changing.

Do a search for Skripal poisoning and read through the first 2 or 3 pages - you'll see that at various times, it is the Skripal's car door handle, then it is their house door handle, then it is in their buckwheat (grechka).

The car door is problematic - it was raining.

The house door is problematic - since when do both people leaving both grasp the door handle? Unless maybe they're OCD.

The grechka is problematic - how did the policeman get ill?

Seems pretty weak all around, especially now that Porton Down has specifically stated that there is no evidence of manufacture in Russia.

Petri Krohn , Apr 5, 2018 6:33:54 PM | 32
The London Times now claims the novichok was made in Russia in the closed town of Shikhany , formerly known as Volsk-18.

Agent used in Salisbury made at Russia's Shikhany military research base: Times - Reuters

(Reuters) - A Russian military research base was identified as the source of the nerve agent used in Salisbury, England, at a British intelligence briefing for the country's allies, the Times of London reported on Thursday.

The gathering was used to persuade world leaders that Moscow was behind the poisoning and said that the Novichok chemical was produced at the Shikhany facility in southwest Russia, the Times said. The briefing included suggestions that Shikhany had been used during the past decade to test whether the nerve agent could be utilized for assassinations abroad, the newspaper said.

The Guardian made the same claim already on March 14th. I do not know if there is any real information or even guesswork here. Both Britain and Russia may have only one chemical weapons research facility each.

Rob , Apr 5, 2018 6:38:50 PM | 33
So now the standard has been lowered to a "plausible" connection to Russia. That allows for wild conjecture that will leave the public even more confused and, ultimately, disinterested. The term "Novi-fog" well describes the Tories' desperate effort to escape blame for their massive screw-up.
Jen , Apr 5, 2018 6:40:41 PM | 34
James @ 20, 21: The guinea pigs died from thirst? You'd think if there was nerve gas contamination in the house somewhere, thirst would be the last thing they'd die of.

Even the story about the animals' fate looks as if it had been cobbled together at the last minute.

If police had visited the house on March 4, immediately or almost immediately after the Skripals were found, surely they would have found the animals in good condition? Sergei Skripal had apparently had the animals brought over from Russia at considerable expense to himself. One assumes he must have been quite attached to them. Yet when the animals are found, they are malnourished and starving or dead from thirst?

So what was DS Nick Bailey doing if he didn't go to the house on March 4? When was he stricken with nerve gas poisoning?

Harry , Apr 5, 2018 6:54:16 PM | 35
@ Petri Krohn | 32

Its a common Western practice to point finger to enemies military or research facility. They win regardless of circumstances.

a) They have a specific location to point to, which "prove" they have intel.
b) If an enemy refuse access to secure facility, that means "they have something to hide."
c) If an enemy allows access and they find nothing, they simply say enemy "has hidden it somewhere else", plus they can spy on all the other research in that facility.

US does it all the time as well, whether its Iraq, or Iran (Parchin saga is of an epic proportions), etc.

GoraDiva , Apr 5, 2018 6:55:04 PM | 36
Only two words: perfidious Albion... always was and always will be. And this is how the west spins off into the dustbin of history... the newbie way.
karlof1 , Apr 5, 2018 6:59:25 PM | 37
The following is from Ziad at SyrPers :

"Folks, the reason for all this anti-Putin nonsense is the one fact that the Syrian government now holds over 11 British officers who were liaised with the terrorists in the Ghouta. They were captured 2 weeks ago by Syrian Army commandos and are being held in separate jails around the Damascus area inside heavily guarded military bases. The Brits want them badly before they are used to implicate England in the mess it helped to create in Syria. Damascus won't budge on this issue and, evidently, the English are assuming Moscow is not putting pressure on Dr. Assad to release them to Old Blighty. Too bad. And they were caught out of uniform, such that they could be executed as spies under international law. Isn't that a howler?"

I posted about this possible angle several days ago when word of captured ZioNATO operatives were more rumor-like; instead, here Ziad makes a definite statement of fact. IMO, if the Syrians do have these spies--and I really hope they do--given the nature of the war waged against Syria, they will not let them go for any bargain.

It seems English speakers are professional prevaricators -- I certainly had problems with truth-telling until about age 20. Otherwise, why the myth that the young George Washington being unable to tell a lie? Yet another lie to cover for endless prevarication.

francesca , Apr 5, 2018 7:08:22 PM | 38
pretty sure the Russians listed the Shikhany facility for the OPCW when they did their verification and monitoring of Destruction of Russian Chemical warfare stockpiles. Bullshit again , I'm picking, and not even very well researched
Don Bacon , Apr 5, 2018 7:08:51 PM | 39
@29
Food poisoning? Would the police lie? (trick question). Mar 11, 2018 - Traces of the nerve agent used to poison former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia has been discovered at the Zizzi restaurant where they last ate, police have said.

Zizzi food poisoning complaints from Trip Advisor (undercooking):
> Zizzi - The Strand
73-75 Strand, London WC2R 0DE, England (Covent Garden)
November 12, 2016 via mobile
Regrettably our visit last night will be the last! Clearly have food poisoning this morning from undercooked chicken in the Strozzapretti Pesto, we didn't have lunch so this can be the only place it's originated from.
Safe to say I'll be stuck in bed today!
> Zizzi Union Square, Aberdeen AB11 5RG, Scotland
Having been to Zizzis in St Andrews on numerous occasions we decided to go here before the cinema . .pizza/calzone and chicken pasta for me...Half an hour into the film my stomach started churning and I felt nauseous. Got home and have had extreme diahorrea and abdo pain all night. Since all I had yesterday was cereal and toast and jam I think it's safe to conclude I picked this up at zizzis. DON'T GO....

james , Apr 5, 2018 7:17:40 PM | 40
@34 jen... it is a really poorly written script and appears to be changing quite regularly.... none of it adds up and as many of us here have said - we are calling bullshit on most all of it.. the story on the pets is further proof that none of this story holds up with any scrutiny..
karlof1 , Apr 5, 2018 7:34:11 PM | 41
What sort of libretto would Gilbert and Sullivan compose for this fiasco. Could The Onion do better? Reminds me of Cheech & Chong's skits.
Dilara , Apr 5, 2018 7:52:03 PM | 42
@ 27
Chemical weapon named Novichok – a reality check - April 01, 2018 by Eugenia for the Saker Blog is a long article and the following part of it would fit to your story or confirm it:

Mirzayanov claimed that the Soviet Union developed a binary nerve agent 8-10-times more potent that the American VX. A binary agent is a compound produced in a chemical reaction from two benign precursors right before use. Such agents offer obvious advantages: the production is much easier with no extraordinary safety precautions required, storage is also much simplified, no need to stockpile the actual chemical weapons agent (CWA), there is no problem with stability of the CWA, et cetera. The US spent significant resources on the binary CWA program of its own. Interestingly, in the original publications of 1992 the agent in question was simply referred to as binary agent. The name Novichok first surfaced in the 1994 report by Lev Feodorov about the chemical weapons in Russia. According to Vladimir Uglev, a chemist who worked at the same institute as Mirzayanov on the new series of CWA, the official name of the program was Foliant. Mirzayanov later confirmed that.

The believable part of the story is that the Soviet Union and later Russia would have a successful chemical weapons program similar to that in the US. Uglev specifically stated that the Foliant program was meant as the answer to the American VX agent. The quantities of the agents produced ranged from several milligrams to kilograms, and several hundreds compound were supposedly synthesized – all this points to the development stage of the program. There is no indication that any of the agents were ever weaponized, i.e. munitions for delivery of the CWA to the enemy were designed, except for the statements of Mirzayanov. However, by his own admission, he wasn't involved in weaponization, and, thus, he is unlikely to have a firsthand know-ledge about it. Remarkably, Uglev said that although his group developed several deadly substances, attempts to develop binary formulations failed, and no binary agents were ever produced.

Uglev's statements regarding his work are much more specific than Mirzayanov's and, thus, more believable. Besides, Uglev, unlike Mirzayanov, was involved in the actual development of the agents. Mirzayanov's job, as the Head of the Counterintelligence Department, was to control the space around the institute, and he had no part in developing the technology.

Don Bacon , Apr 5, 2018 7:55:53 PM | 43
@42
Also it's been established that novichok doesn't exist.
WorldBLee , Apr 5, 2018 7:57:39 PM | 44
The UK long ago voted in the highest chambers of power to manifest a Trexit, the exit from all forms of the truth. Every day they prove this more and more.
kpax , Apr 5, 2018 8:00:17 PM | 45
@ Galvanise #28
Indeed the tail has wagged the God but first and foremost the tail has done the Devil's work. If all dogs of wars are now unleashed following some absurd false flag as murky and grotesque as the Skippy affair...
we, as human species, are absolutely doomed to live in hell for quite sometimes.

When all it takes is a couple of goofs strained by some remnants from Vicky's cookies virus pleagues, we are issuing a no-parole sentence on all human beings... further to be condemned for centuries, our heads hidden in some 'Novi-fogs' of wars... or another.

Perhaps some sort of British standards of living, permanently under some kind of... 'foog'. We have recently learned from the Pope there is no Hell to go to (cos' we already are in living hell). Then, Foggy Paradise must be empty, deprived from any kind of wisdom.

Petri Krohn , Apr 5, 2018 8:34:42 PM | 47
The only thing that has been officially confirmed is that blood tests showed breakdown products of organophosphates that were believed to come from a "Novichok class nerve agent or closely related agent." I still do not think they have found novichok anywhere in the environment or have collected a sample that could be independently verified to be novichok in some foreign laboratory. At least we have not seen any official confirmation that such a sample exists. Nor have we received information on exactly what compound this "novichok" is claimed to be.

I suspect the traces of "novichok" found all over the place, from the Zizzi restaurant to the door handle, are just some ordinary organophosphate pesticide.

A POSSIBLE SCENARIO

The Skripals are suffering from "paralytic shellfish poisoning" they received from saxitoxin or tetrodotoxin in the seafood in the Risotto Pesce they ate at the Zizzi restaurant. The Skripals received traces of some organophosphate pesticide from the flowers they left at the graves in the morning. They then left trace on the door handles of the BMW. A video show the BMW driving away from Sergei Skripl's house at 14:55 in the afternoon. This would mean that they visited the house after leaving the pub and entering the Zizzi restaurant, leaving further organophosphate traces on the door knob of the house.

Lufasu Mafalu , Apr 5, 2018 9:01:07 PM | 48
Thanks 'B' for keeping the torch lit and shine thru the british lies .. it is so lame and amateurish and i agree for years these propagandist been doing their job the 'easy way' and now they been exposed by the still thinking crowd in the net..

BTW anyone here know why Col Patrick Lang disable comments on SST ? is he afraid of people posting facts and truth in his site ?

Jen , Apr 5, 2018 9:12:09 PM | 49
Petri Krohn @ 47: I'd say your story is the most credible interpretation of all the "evidence".

This would suggest that if the breakfast cereal brought to the UK from Russia for Sergei Skripal is tested for "Novichok", it will also test positive for traces of "Novichok". (Unless of course Lord President Vlademort rids the entire Russian Federation of all its agricultural pests with a magnanimous wave of his hand and the utterance of a secret spell.)

The police officer DS Nick Bailey who was hospitalised may have had an allergic reaction to the pesticide or to something else in the Skripal house.

Mischi , Apr 5, 2018 9:12:49 PM | 50
the Lithuanian PM has asked for concrete proof of Russia's guilt https://sputniknews.com/world/201804061063260917-lithuania-russia-skripal-case/

[Apr 10, 2018] Arguing with Great Britain is like playing chess with a pigeon

Mar 31, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

DillyDilly -> IH8OBAMA Sat, 03/31/2018 - 17:37 Permalink

By now, Russia should have learned that arguing with GB is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how good you are, the bird is just gonna knock all the pieces over, shit on the board, and strut around as if it won anyway.

https://pics.me.me/sull-gazing-com-arguing-with-idiots-is-like-playing-

[Apr 10, 2018] Skripal Poison Case Becoming British Hostage Scenario by Finian CUNNINGHAM

Apr 09, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

The British denial of a visitor visa to a Skripal family relative from Russia is fueling concern that the whole affair is far more sinister than what the British government and media have been claiming.

Far from the Skripal father and daughter being the alleged victims of a Russian assassination plot, it now seems increasingly apparent that they are being held against their will by Britain's authorities. In short, hostages of the British state.

From the outset of the alleged poisoning incident in Salisbury on March 4, the official British narrative has been pocked suspiciously with inconsistencies. The lightning-fast rush to judgment by the British government – within days – to blame the Kremlin for "a brazen murder attempt" was perhaps the main giveaway that the narrative was following a script and foregone conclusion to incriminate Russia.

Last week, the saga took several significant twists raising more doubts about the official British narrative. First, British scientists at the Porton Down warfare laboratory admitted that they hadn't in fact confirmed the alleged nerve agent used against the Skripals originated from Russia. That admission spectacularly exposed earlier British government claims as false, if not barefaced lies.

Secondly, it emerged that potentially key witness-material was destroyed by the British. Three pet animals in the Salisbury home of Sergei Skripal were declared dead and their remains incinerated. Autopsies could have shed light on the nature of the alleged nerve agent used against the Skripals. Why were the animal remains incinerated? And why did the British authorities disclose the fate of the animals only after the matter was raised by the Russian envoy to the UN Security Council on Thursday?

Thirdly, there is the strangely callous way that the British authorities have refused a visitor visa to a Skripal family relative from Russia who was intending to fly to England to be with her relatives while they are reportedly recuperating from the alleged poison attack.

Russian national Victoria Skripal revealed on Friday to Russian news media that she was refused a visa by British authorities to visit her relatives – cousin Yulia and uncle Sergei – who are reportedly confined to a hospital in Salisbury.

The day before her visa application was rejected, Victoria had a brief telephone conversation with Yulia. It appears that Victoria recorded the conversation and made it available to Russian media to broadcast. The transcript shows that Yulia's words were guarded. She was obviously not comfortable with speaking freely. Their phone call ended abruptly. But she did manage to advise her cousin in Russia that the latter would probably not be granted a visitor visa. Why would she say such a thing?

British media quickly tried to smear the Russian cousin, Victoria. A BBC journalist said that the British authorities "suspected that Victoria was being used as a pawn by the Kremlin". Russian's foreign ministry hit back at that suggestion, saying it was a despicable slur.

For her part, Victoria Skripal told Russian media that she thinks the British authorities have "something to hide" by refusing to grant her a permit to Britain in order to visit her cousin and uncle. Was her visa application rejected by the British authorities because she had the "audacity" to record the phone call with her cousin and make it available to Russian media?

Far more plausible is not that Victoria is a "Kremlin pawn" but that the British fear that Victoria would not be a "London pawn". The worst thing for the British authorities would be for an independent-minded Skripal relative coming to the Salisbury hospital and asking critical questions about the nature of why her relatives are being held there.

It would be interesting to see what would happen if several other Skripal relatives in Russia were to make similar applications for visitor visas to Britain. Surely, the British authorities could not turn them all down?

For over a month now since the March 4 incident in Salisbury, the Russian consular representatives in Britain have not been allowed access to the Skripal pair, allegedly being treated in hospital.

Fair enough, Sergei Skripal is a disgraced former Russian spy who had been living in England for nearly eight years. He was exiled there by Moscow as part of a spy-swap with Britain's foreign intelligence MI6 whom Skripal had served as a double agent. It is believed he was given British citizenship by the London authorities.

However, his daughter, 33-year-old Yulia, is a citizen of the Russian Federation. She was visiting her father on holiday when the pair became ill – apparently from exposure to a nerve agent – while sitting in a public park in Salisbury.

Yulia and the Russian authorities are therefore entitled under international law to have consular contact. The Russian embassy in London has been repeatedly denied access by the British authorities to one of its citizens. On the face of it, that is an outrageous breach of international law by the British.

Significantly, Yulia did not express to her cousin during their phone conversation that she did not want to see the Russian consular people. That phone call was obviously initiated by Yulia. Her Russian-based cousin at one point asked her, "Is this your phone?".

How Yulia got use of the phone is a good question. Was it a hospital staff member who felt obliged to allow her a quick call home? Evidently, the call was held in a rushed manner, and Yulia felt constrained to talk in detail about her confinement. And why would she warn her cousin in Russia that the latter would not be given a visa before the application result was known?

It is speculated in British media – most probably at the behest of briefings by shadowy state officials – that Yulia Skripal does not want to see her cousin, or the Russian consular representatives. Even though Yulia did not express that in her phone call. If Yulia didn't want to see her cousin, why would she bother calling her, apparently out of the blue?

The speculation about Yulia's preferences are based on the official British premise that the Russian state attempted to carry out an assassination with a toxic chemical on her father. It is therefore insinuated by the official British narrative that Yulia would not want to see the Russian authorities.

But that logic depends entirely on the plausibility of the British version of events. That is, that a Russian state operation used a Russian nerve agent to try to kill Sergei Skripal, and his daughter as collateral damage.

That British version has relied totally on assertion, innuendo and unverified claims made by politicians briefed by secret services. Claims which we are now seeing to be unfounded, as the Porton Down scientists disclosed last week.

At no point have the British produced any evidence to substantiate their high-flown allegations against Russia. Indeed, Britain refuses to give Russia access to alleged samples in order to carry out an independent chemical analysis.

The entire British case relies on a presumption of guilt and a despicable prejudice towards Russia as a malicious actor. That's it entirely. British prejudice and contempt for due process.

However, what if the Russian government were correct? What if the British state carried out a macabre false flag operation by stealthily injuring the Skripals with some kind of chemical in order to blame it on Russia? For the plausible purpose of adding one more smear campaign in order to demonize and delegitimize Russia as an international power.

No doubt, the situation is disturbing and disorientating especially for Yulia Skripal who apparently was simply visiting her father in England for a happy family reunion.

More sinister, however, is the apparent lack of free will being afforded to Yulia Skripal. The British official position simply conflates their innuendo of a Russian plot, an innuendo which is increasingly untenable.

The denial of a visitor visa to Yulia's family relatives from Russia points to the sinister conclusion that the British authorities are engaging in a macabre propaganda stunt. Moreover, a propaganda stunt involving the criminal assault on a Russian citizen and the ongoing illegal detention of that citizen.

[Apr 10, 2018] A Very British Farce

Apr 10, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mark J. Doran wrote this very British farce. (Publish here with his permission.)

SERGEI: I'm not dead!

MORTICIAN: What?

CUSTOMER: Nothing - here's your ninepence.

SERGEI: I'm not dead!

MORTICIAN: Here - he says he's not dead!

CUSTOMER: Yes, he is. The 'Times' said so. March 12th. Front page. Trust me: he's dead.

SERGEI: I'm not!

MORTICIAN: He isn't.

CUSTOMER: Well, he will be soon. It was a Novichok nerve agent. There's no treatment, and no recovery is possible.

SERGEI: It was just the prawns, that's all! I'm getting better!

CUSTOMER: No, you are not. It was 'military grade', 8 times stronger than VX. You were dead in seconds.

MORTICIAN: Oh, I can't take him like that - it's against regulations.

SERGEI: How's my daughter? And what about my pets?

CUSTOMER: Oh, don't be such a baby.

MORTICIAN: I can't take him ...

SERGEI: I feel fine! I want to go back to Russia!

CUSTOMER: Oh, do us a favor ...

MORTICIAN: I can't.

CUSTOMER: Well, can you hang around a couple of minutes? He won't be long. We've someone coming over ...

MORTICIAN: I think I'll write a letter to the 'Times'.

CUSTOMER: No you bloody won't. Look at the trouble the last one caused.

b adds:

Yes, the scene is somewhat familiar. https://youtu.be/lDnS4pkmzis

[Apr 10, 2018] Israeli officials have called on the US to attack the Syrian Army, following what they called a "shocking attack" in Douma

Notable quotes:
"... So the idea that the Israelis were trying to provoke a response directed against US assets in order to escalate the conflict seems plausible. But Syria didn't play. ..."
"... Seems like Israel was used to do the dirty work and get Trump out of the corner he had rapidly painted himself into. Trump's response to the fake Douma chemical attack was so over the top that he would have had to carry out a major attack on Syria to justify it. Major meaning much larger than the last one with 59 tomahawks. So probably a hundred tomahawks at least and against a more important target than last time. This the Russians have said they will not allow. So what to do? Have Israel launch a rather minor harassing attack against a base well away from Damascus and so relieve the pressure on Trump to do something. ..."
Apr 10, 2018 | thesaker.is

pessimist on April 09, 2018 , · at 1:21 am UTC

From RT: https://www.rt.com/news/423532-israel-syria-strike-us/

" Israeli officials have called on the US to attack the Syrian Army, following what they called a "shocking attack" in Douma. Israel's own crackdown on Gaza protesters was "self-defense" and not worthy of attention, they said.

Washington must launch a strike against Damascus in response to the alleged chemical attack in the city of Douma, the Israeli Strategic Affairs and Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan told the Army Radio on Sunday, commenting on the reports coming from anti-government groups in Syria. Erdan also said he personally hopes that the US would take military action against the Syrian government, which he blamed for the attack, the Jerusalem Post reports. The minister added that the Douma incident shows the "need" for a US troop buildup in Syria.

The Israeli construction minister and former IDF major general, Yoav Galant, went even further and called for a military strike aimed directly against the Syrian president. "[Bashar] Assad is the angel of death, and the world would be better without him," Galant said. The Israeli opposition leader Isaac Herzog called on the US to take "decisive military action" against Syria."

So the idea that the Israelis were trying to provoke a response directed against US assets in order to escalate the conflict seems plausible. But Syria didn't play.

Confusion about the number, type, and source of missiles, and the fate of the synchronized ISIS attacks in various accounts.

Ngoyo on April 09, 2018 , · at 6:40 am UTC
Seems like Israel was used to do the dirty work and get Trump out of the corner he had rapidly painted himself into. Trump's response to the fake Douma chemical attack was so over the top that he would have had to carry out a major attack on Syria to justify it. Major meaning much larger than the last one with 59 tomahawks. So probably a hundred tomahawks at least and against a more important target than last time. This the Russians have said they will not allow. So what to do? Have Israel launch a rather minor harassing attack against a base well away from Damascus and so relieve the pressure on Trump to do something.

So far I'd say it looks like this is what happened. If so then the Russians wisely allowed Trump to save face. Hopefully that will allow things to blow over. Next couple days should tell.

[Apr 10, 2018] False Flag Chemical Attack In Douma Staged So Neocons Can Justify Invasion Of Syria

Notable quotes:
"... The Powers That Be ..."
"... Zio-Anglo-American Axis ..."
"... Greater Israel ..."
"... New World Order ..."
"... Syrian Observatory for Human Rights ..."
"... Given the Operation Gladio infrastructure that has been painstakingly put into place over years by NATO throughout the Levant, it's very easy to conduct these false flag attacks without being caught in the act. Of course, they are never perpetrated without detection since the CIA, MI6 and MOSSAD have their fingerprints all over these purposefully shocking assaults. ..."
"... "tore through a 50th-floor apartment in Trump Tower" ..."
"... Trump also went along with the patently false accusations that the British government aimed at Russia for the poisoning of the Skripals. Not only did Trump unquestioningly agree with the UK's absurd conclusions, he also expelled 60 Russian diplomats and officers based on an outright lie. ..."
Apr 10, 2018 | themillenniumreport.com

We live in an age when it is virtually impossible to confirm whether these incessant terrorist attacks are real or hoaxes. The Powers That Be have repeatedly demonstrated their capability and willingness to implement totally fake terror events. They have also shown their utter inhumanity in the execution of deadly and destructive terrorist operations.

The recent chemical attack in Douma, Syria could be either of these. However, that's not the point here. The critical issue is that these chemical attacks are being used by the Western powers to justify their illegal invasions of Syria. Even President Trump appears to be fully on board with this conspiratorial plot. Why is Trump aggressively pushing the Neocon agenda in Syria?

The Zio-Anglo-American Axis is quite determined to complete their Greater Israel project even though Putin's Russia has already wrecked their plans once. See: Putin's Russia Blows Up Scheme For 'Greater Israel'

Ever since Trump was elected, the same Zionist Neocons under W. Bush have been appointed to various positions in the West Wing. John Bolton is only the most recent and notorious of these hardcore warmongers. "Bolton appointment proves that Trump is being blackmailed! -- Q²

This continual stacking of the Trump administration with Russophobes and Iran haters is by purposeful design. It's also no accident of presidential fate that the Trump has allowed himself to be used to promote war for Israel. In fact, this particular date with Armageddon has been planned for centuries by the NWO globalist cabal.

The United States, United Kingdom and Israel have proven to the world community of nations that they will execute any false flag attack anywhere, anytime to advance their New World Order agenda. A big piece of that agenda is the Greater Israel project. Hence, the whole world has been witness to one false flag chemical attack after another.

The ZAAA leadership knows that photos of 'apparently' poisoned children -- piled on top of each other -- is guaranteed to trigger a knee-jerk reaction by the false accusers against the innocent accused. The British have established a whole network of fraudulent witnesses on the ground and throughout the UK who routinely provide false testimony about these staged chemical attacks. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights is one of those fake organizations; so are the utterly bogus White Helmets .

Given the Operation Gladio infrastructure that has been painstakingly put into place over years by NATO throughout the Levant, it's very easy to conduct these false flag attacks without being caught in the act. Of course, they are never perpetrated without detection since the CIA, MI6 and MOSSAD have their fingerprints all over these purposefully shocking assaults.

Why does President Trump always go along with these false accusations?

This crucial question must be answered and dealt with sooner than later. The link that follows discloses information that ought to concern every patriot who voted for Trump to stop the wars: Trump's Syria "Withdrawal" Was Textbook US Deception

The timing of Saturday night's fire that "tore through a 50th-floor apartment in Trump Tower" is quite suspicious. Is someone basically telling the POTUS to go with the Neocon plan to invade Syria or else his real estate -- worldwide -- will become vulnerable to arson and other 'mishaps'?

Trump also went along with the patently false accusations that the British government aimed at Russia for the poisoning of the Skripals. Not only did Trump unquestioningly agree with the UK's absurd conclusions, he also expelled 60 Russian diplomats and officers based on an outright lie.

The entire Novichok nerve agent affair can now be seen in its proper light. The British intelligence community carried out the attempted murder of the Russian double agent for various reasons; however, the most important was to smear the Kremlin. By flooding the mainstream media with false stories about the chemical poisoning by Russia, the real perps made it easier to associate the chemical attack in Douma with Putin's government.

KEY POINT: Skripal Affair Is Really About Toppling Theresa May's Government, Sabotaging Brexit

This plot will only thicken until the West has finished its conquest of the Middle East. Russia especially remains a target of the Neocon Zionists. The globalists will not rest until President Putin's government has been completely overthrown. They will employ every strategy and tactic necessary to force a regime change in Moscow as this article delineates: STRATFOR Chief Reveals Zio-Anglo-American Plot For World Domination .

The following SOTN article has been reposted in its entirety for those who want to read the real back story.

[Apr 10, 2018] Full frontal assault from Russia today on Skripls front

Apr 10, 2018 | thesaker.is

Veritas on April 09, 2018 , · at 6:06 am UTC

Various news sources (RT, TASS) quoting the Russian MOD etc. all confirming it was Israeli F-15's:

https://sputniknews.com/world/201804091063353921-russia-israel-syria-airbase-attack/

No Russian casualties – but some as a couple of missiles hit the Western edge of the base and casualties for SAA.

Full frontal assault from Russia today:

1) Releasing of information on deaths of Russians in UK:

https://www.rt.com/news/423554-litvinenko-polonium-london-berezovsky/

https://sputniknews.com/world/201804091063355141-uk-russia-skripal-litvinenko-berezovky/

2) Russia has called a meeting of UNSC about International peace

https://sputniknews.com/us/201804091063350511-trum-macron-agree-response-syria/

US and France co-ordinating their positions

https://www.rt.com/news/423539-red-crescent-ghouta-no-chemical/

Red Crescent confirms no chemical use in Ghouta

3) In addition to Russian MOD clarification above and MOFA

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201804091063352207-daesh-offensive-missile-attack/

Daesh attacks after air strike and

Lavrov stressing again today that Russia warned of the chemical attack false flag weeks ago ..

Paulv on April 09, 2018 , · at 1:09 pm UTC
Russia should have pulled out of START weeks ago and tested nukes. Maybe they could today

[Apr 09, 2018] Portonblimp Down Episode 2 - A Tale By Boris Johnson - Craig Murray

Apr 09, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

"Comrade Putin, we have successfully stockpiled novichoks in secret for ten years, and kept them hidden from the OPCW inspectors. We have also trained our agents in secret novichok assassination techniques. The programme has cost hundreds of millions of dollars, but now we are ready. Naturally, the first time we use it we will expose our secret and suffer massive international blowback. So who should be our first target? The head of a foreign intelligence agency? A leading jihadist rebel in Syria? A key nuclear scientist? Even a Head of State?"

"No, Tovarich. There is this old retired guy I know living in Salisbury. We released him from jail years ago "

"With respect Comrade Putin, are you sure he is the most important target to reveal a programme we have put so much resource into for ten years?"

"Yes. I sit here every day and I cannot concentrate on the affairs of Russia or the World as all the time am thinking of Sergei Skripal. I should never have let him out of jail to spend his life buying lottery tickets and eating in Zizzis. But you must make absolutely certain to kill him."

"Don't worry Comrade Putin, we have been training in secret novichok assassination techniques for ten years. We even have an detailed manual explaining our methods. We will spread the novichok on his outside door handle (fiendish laugh)."

"Are you sure comrade? Is there not a danger it will wash off or get diluted?"

"No Comrade Putin, it never rains in England."

That is, genuinely, in every detail the official British government version of what happened in Salisbury, including the ten year programme and the secret assassination manual.

Despite this story being one of the most improbably wild conspiracy theories in human history, it is those who express any doubt at all as to its veracity who are smeared as "conspiracy theorists" or even "traitors".

All copyright on this article is waived. Feel free to use, translate and republish as you wish.

[Apr 09, 2018] New photos reveal Robert Mueller and Paul Manafort both worked with former Ukraine President in 2013

Apr 09, 2018 | theduran.com

Special Counsel Robert Mueller charged Paul Manafort, President Trump's former Campaign Manager, for working with former Ukrainian Presidnet Viktor Yanukovych in 2013.

Mueller failed to mention that he also worked with Yanukovych in 2013 six months before John Brennan, John McCain, Victoria Nuland, and their EU partners, lead a bloody neo-nazi coup to overthrow the Yanukovych government.

Last week a memo was released showing Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein directing the Mueller investigation to look into allegations that Paul Manafort

"Committed a crime or crimes arising out of payments he received from the Ukrainian government before and during the tenure of President Viktor Yanukovych."

According to the The Gateway Pundit , in the memo there is no indication that Rosenstein or Mueller offered that Mueller interacted with the former Ukrainian President as well. But then again, Rosenstein and Mueller have so many conflicts of interest in this case that it is accurately labeled a "witch hunt".

Jack Posobiec tweeted out over night the link between Mueller and Yanukovych

Robert Mueller is prosecuting Manfort for doing work in Ukraine for Viktor Yanukovych back in 2013

Here is Robert Mueller hanging out in Ukraine with Viktor Yanukovych back in 2013

What is going on here? pic.twitter.com/HQZ1zzjctR

-- Jack Posobiec (@JackPosobiec) April 6, 2018

The Ukrainian Embassy in the United States shared on Facebook a picture of Robert Mueller with the President Yanukovych in 2013. The post was dated June 6, 2013

"We are grateful to American side for support of our efforts aimed at settlement of frozen conflicts, ensuring control over conventional arms in Europe and combating trafficking. We count on further support and cooperation with USA within the OSCE in order to enhance stability and security in the area which is under jurisdiction of the given organization," the President said at the meeting with FBI Director Robert Mueller.

The Head of State reminded that since the beginning of 2013, Ukraine had been presiding in the OSCE. "We determined priorities of our presidency in close cooperation with member-states of the OSCE. I am pleased to note that we have a constructive cooperation with Washington in this sphere," the President emphasized.

"Ukrainian-American cooperation efficiently develops in many spheres of mutual interest. Your visit is very interesting for Ukraine and relations between our law enforcement bodies have established good traditions of cooperation and communication in the course of 20 years. I am confident that there is a potential for further broadening of cooperation," Viktor Yanukovych said.

He stressed that Ukraine paid particular attention to the issue of combating terrorism. We have adopted a number of documents aimed at increasing the efficiency of such work.

"The level of cooperation between central executive governmental bodies involved in anti-terrorist actions is pretty high. The Security Service elaborated respective documents, they were reviewed and approved by respective Presidential Decree," the Head of State noted.

The President emphasized that Ukraine is very close to signing the Association Agreement with the EU in November. "There are some preparations left but I hope that we will fulfill everything and sign the Agreement," he said.

In his turn, FBI Director Robert Mueller expressed gratitude to the President of Ukraine for the assistance provided after the explosions in Boston. "I would like to focus on the most important issue for us – the issue of combating terrorism. I would like to say thank you for the assistance provided to us after the Boston Marathon," he noted.

FBI Director also informed that in the course of his meetings in Ukraine, he planned to discuss a number of issues of mutual interest.

Who only knows what the issues of mutual interest were!

Via The Gateway Pundit

This is not the first interaction Mueller had with the Russians. In 2009 Mueller hand delivered uranium to the Russians on an airport tarmac per the request of Hillary Clinton. Mueller also was Head of the FBI when the Obama Administration sold 20% of US uranium to the Russians in the Uranium One deal.

Mueller also reportedly visited Moscow before he visited the Ukrainian President in 2013.

How can Mueller be investigating Manfort for business with the Ukraine and Russia when Mueller is as suspect as Manafort ever was? Shut it down!

[Apr 09, 2018] The West has a strategy to support an insurgency using the leftovers and Kurds

Notable quotes:
"... Israel has the leftover al Nusra and AQ in the southwest to keep the 4th DEZ in turmoil at Daraa and Suweida. ..."
"... Please allow me to rephrase your statement that Putin has "never shown courage". The correct statement is that Putin has "never done anything stupid". Now, that makes sense. See the difference? ..."
Apr 09, 2018 | thesaker.is

Larchmonter445 on April 08, 2018 , · at 11:14 pm UTC

One common sense thought: no one wants a bigger or wider war. There is no nation that can handle it. The West has a strategy to support an insurgency using the leftovers and Kurds. We know the Kurds in Syria will not fight Assad's forces.

So, there are probably 30,000 fighters of various sorts the US and Turkey are still feeding and using.

As for the air space over Syria, that will eventually close to the US. All Putin has to do is move S 400 75-100 kms closer toward the East border from the West enclaves where they now defend.

The US will be grounded, unable to support their 14+ bases, and will have to leave.

Israel has the leftover al Nusra and AQ in the southwest to keep the 4th DEZ in turmoil at Daraa and Suweida.

But no one wants to put their Armed Forces into Syria.

So, what happens tonight and the next few days is missiles strikes, unless Bolton can convince the Military to do something enormous with a huge air strike. How Putin handles this depends on casualties and losses of Russian forces.

Since Russian advisers, Military Police and Reconciliation Officers are all over Syria North to South, West to East, it will be sheer luck that none are struck by cruise missiles or other weapons if they come into play.

The Lord Has Risen, and the forces of evil are rabid for more Death and Destruction.

Varughese on April 09, 2018 , · at 12:36 am UTC
Not exactly sure. Putin can move S-400 close to US presence but in order to Ground US, he needs to send a message saying that he can shoot them. And in all these episodes Putin never showed the courage. So you could place S-500 on door step of US airbase but still they will continue flying!
Anonymous on April 09, 2018 , · at 8:18 pm UTC
Please allow me to rephrase your statement that Putin has "never shown courage". The correct statement is that Putin has "never done anything stupid". Now, that makes sense. See the difference?
Taras 77 on April 09, 2018 , · at 3:06 am UTC
It is hard for me to put into words the utter disgust and anger I feel towards the zio con clowns in wash dc being led by the nose by Israel/mossad. But I guess, what the hell-zios do not care what average americas think or feel-they are the fodder..

Waiting to see what the Russians decide to do: http://johnhelmer.org/

Anonymous on April 09, 2018 , · at 3:25 am UTC
Might be Israeli that pretends to be USA hoping that Syria or Russia will think it is USA and fire at USA forces causing a wider war.. Israel has actually done actually this before.

Actually, Russia just said ti as well: https://www.rt.com/news/423545-israel-planes-syria-strike/

[Apr 09, 2018] Trump to Decide Soon Whether to Retaliate for Barbaric Act in Syria

Chemical false flag attacks is the traditional way Syria islamists are calling for the US air support. From comments: "After all they had lost in Douma - there were no point in Syrian gas attack - the fighting was done. Jaish al Islam must be having a great laugh at our expensive for falling for their trick of gassing their own people. Let us not help the Islamists."
Anther interesting comment: "With "experts" at president's disposal, seems to me moment Trump announced Syrian withdrawal, at least one should have anticipated - based on past occurrences - a gas attack aimed to engage US and therefore maintain US presence."
And another " including their mouthpieces at the times manufacture a chemical attack and claim Assad -- who has no reason whatsoever to do such things -- is some horrible monster that deserves to have bombs rained down on him. How totally corrupt the MIC has become."
That act reported by White helmets looks like a classic MI6 provocation. Russian investigation has shown that no attack took place. Moreover the rumors about this false flag were circulating long ago. Russians warned about this possiblity a month or so ago telling the jihadists prepare such provocation. Looks like all that was needed for Trump is a plausible justification -- the desire to "decapitate" Assad is too strong to resist.
Notable quotes:
"... Syria is a crappy place primarily because of insane overpopulation and limited water. Getting Assad out is not going to help with population or with water. Moving the entire Syrian population to Europe could be done and they are working on that. ..."
"... With "experts" at president's disposal, seems to me moment Trump announced Syrian withdrawal, at least one should have anticipated - based on past occurrences - a gas attack aimed to engage US and therefore maintain US presence. ..."
Apr 09, 2018 | www.nytimes.com

President Trump on Monday denounced the suspected chemical weapons attack that killed dozens of people in Syria over the weekend as a "barbaric act," and said he will make a decision in the next 24 to 48 hours about whether to retaliate militarily as he did to a similar assault last year.

is a trusted commenter Providence 6 hours ago

Congress has skirted their responsibility to authorize war in Syria and Trump is suggesting taking actions that could drag us into a deep and costly war. The American people deserve to hear this debated in Congress.

angel98 nyc 6 hours ago

Retaliate? They don't even know for sure who it was, could well have been an ally. The place is a mess of competing outside forces.

Retaliate - and therein lies the problem. Too much to ask that for once they think, discuss, decide a long term policy with other countries. Last time the 45th tried 'me-big-man-with-bomb' there was no follow up, nothing was done, what was the point? Look at me I have the biggest, noisiest fire cracker! Pathetic. Careless. Irresponsible. Uniformed. Murderous. The list is endless.

HenryJ Durham 5 hours ago

I suppose the President can launch a missile attack, or any military action, based on whatever authority from Congress permitted the US military to be fighting in Syria in the first place. The more fundamental issue is that Congress long ago ceded to the President its constitutional responsibility to declare war . This must be corrected with checks restored on the President's power to deploy the military at will. Otherwise, the US will continue to be in a perpetual state of war, which may be good for the extended military supply industry but damaging to country as a whole.

michael new york city 5 hours ago

What if.....what if this chemical attack was sanctioned not by Assad but by a state or a non-state force that wants the U.S. to retaliate?
Just why did this chemical attack follow Trump's announced desire to get out of Syria?
Why, also, is Israel urging us to attack now? Could it be to distract from the human rights catastrophe in Gaza?
We all know what John Bolton would have us do.
Where's the proof that this was Assad's work? More WMD ?

Ed Watters San Francisco 3 hours ago

Trump wined and dined MBS of Saudi Arabia who has been conducting airstrikes on Yemen with hundreds of casualties, as high as 68 civilian deaths in one day. It would be hard to imagine a better example of hypocrisy.

Llewis N Cal 1 hour ago

Syria is a part of a complex series of issues that make up the problem of Middle Eastern diplomacy. Trump does not have the capacity to manage any of this. Selling arms to the Saudis to continue their war in Yemen added to the Syrian problem. The cholera epidemic in Yemen is a form of biological warfare that is killing more civilians than chemical warfare in Syria. Starving the population of Yemen is also warfare. By supporting the Saudis we have lost the moral high ground in Syria.

Hector Bellflower 16 minutes ago

Was it the rebels again? Or is it chlorine again? Chlorine is used for several commercial and health purposes--to clean bottles, to clean water, and for refrigeration. So it is quite easy for a bomb or explosive to hit a container and then there is a serious gas problem. If pool acid and chlorine are stored together it might be worse when mixed. I do not believe Assad needs to use chemicals because he has Russians who will do air strikes on his enemies. I call fake news.

AGC Lima 16 minutes ago

The solution to Syria was obvious years ago, if you just wanted to see the obvious. And that was Syria as it had been for years, in peace, secular, under a government of Assad who, eventually, knew it had to evolve into a more democratic regime . Now that has changed, and all to Israel´s advantage. It seems as if the whole world has forgotten that the whole Middle East problem was born, and is still the Occupation of Palestinian Land. Israel is a thorn in Arab Middle East.The only one that has attacked ALL its neighbours !

judyweller Cumberland, MD 45 minutes ago

We should do nothing. We need to leave Syria to the Syrian. We can't and musn't involve our military in every tragedy in the world. There is no doubt in my mind that if we mistakenly and stupidly attack the Syrian Army we are aiding the Jihadist who planned thit attack. After all they had lost in Douma - there were no point in Syrian gas attack - the fighting was done. Jaish al Islam must be having a great laugh at our expensive for falling for their trick of gassing their own people. Let us not help the Islamists.

H. Torbet San Francisco 56 minutes ago

The US government LIES about everything. We know this. This has been proved repeatedly.

Yet, here we are with the US government, and its stenographers in the mainstream media, i.e., the stuff that's not Fake News, right, assuring us that Assad gassed his own people. Again.

Even if we could believe this, or even if we gave the government the benefit of the doubt for . . . what? . . . its integrity?, we are after all exceptional, right, how is this America's business?

Yes, other countries shouldn't gas their own people. But countries shouldn't commit war crimes either, and that goes on every day. America is as dirty as any other country. Despite our treaty obligations, even torture is legal here.

We're supposedly the richest country in the world, but we can barely keep our streets paved and lit. And not only that, but it is a proven fact that one dollar invested in domestic economics brings back much more return than one dollar spent on bombs. Trump is right. We need to stomp the madness in the Middle East. The oil companies can pay for their own security with all of the money they don't pay in taxes.

Right now our cities are clogged with people living in tents and defecating on the sidewalks and in the streets. Look at old pictures from the Depression. It looks the same today.

Let's deal with the real problems.

Pepperman Philadelphia 1 hour ago

The left is seeing Russians responsible for every wrong in the world. The right sees itself as the rescuer of the wrongs of the world. I pray that this does not move this country into a war with Russia.

Tony E Rochester, NY 1 hour ago

This nation needs a "policy". Something with careful thought and backed by facts, expert analysis, and wisdom; Aim first and carefully.

A "Shoot from the Hip" flourish that can be touted at the next Trump self congratulatory ego rally Will Not Do. Either this nation has a leader or it doesn't - Trump's move!

Cari408 Los Angeles 1 hour ago

One of the few things I liked about Trump was his anti-involvement stance in the middle east. We have SO MUCH to fix and worry about at home. Nothing that Trump does on immigration, environment, or anything else will make me more angry than dragging us into another war.

Jim Houghton 1 hour ago

I don't see any ink being given to the very likely possibility that the gas attack was a ploy by rebels to get the US (and their air cover) to stick around. If you ask the question, "Who benefits?" the Assad regime had nothing to gain by gassing a few civilians -- they're about to win the war, so why would they? OTOH, the rebels need us badly, and know that we will reflexively blame Assad.

Whole Grains USA 1 hour ago

Just a few days ago, Trump talked about withdrawing from Syria. Now, he says he will decide whether to attack Syria within the next couple of days. One day we're out, the next day we're in. And just a few days ago, Trump said he didn't like to reveal his military plans in advance. Now, he is announcing to the world that he is consideration retaliation against Syria. His contradictions make the U.S. look as if it is led by a very confused commander in chief.

david rush seattle 1 hour ago

Yes, chemical weapons are barbaric, but who launched the attack? Which faction in this complicated civil war? How does trump know the answer to this question when no one else does? Why would the U.S. "retaliate" based on speculation, especially after trump recently said, "we need to get out of there and leave it to someone else"? What good would military action do at this point? Are we anxious to put our "expensive new military" to the test? So many questions...and an administration unable / unwilling to answer them. Too bad trump can't simply tweet his way out of this one...

John Pittsburgh/Cologne 1 hour ago

The U.S. should respond militarily to Syria's gas attack only on two conditions:

1. The leaders of all key U.S. allies (European countries, Canada, Japan, S. Korea, Australia, etc.) sign a joint declaration of support for the action.

2. Each of these countries pays a population-weighted share of the expense of the U.S. military operation.

We are either all in this together, or it's not worth doing.

Let's find out if our allies are willing to back up their pious declarations of condemnation.

Willie Rowe Madison, Wi 48 minutes ago

His action was to support ISIS there among other things. You feel he should have kept supporting ISIS?

Student Nu Yawk 2 hours ago

I don't get it. Subjecting people, women, children and even men, to crushing, burning, lacerating and penetrating wounds is par for the course. It's war after all. But poison! Oh the (in)humanity!

Also, anyone think it's weird that Assad does this just when the US is making motions to pull out?

It is impossible to know what is really going on as the world's powers continue to fight this proxy war. The only thing that is certain is the continued suffering of the Syrian people - including the poor sods who will be conventionally incinerated by American "retaliation" in a day or so.

. . 2 hours ago

NYT, CNN, Twitter: Nothing fishy here. Everything makes total and complete sense

Douglas Girardot Connecticut 2 hours ago

The President should have no authority to declare war or commit troops, period. So far, there has been no urgent "national emergency," as required by the War Powers Resolution, which would justify the President to effectively declare war unilaterally and yet here we are, with presidents on both sides completely ignoring the Constitution, using the WPA as an enabler to bypass the text which says that only Congress can declare war.

e.s. cleveland, OH 2 hours ago

Seems Israel and Saudi Arabia can bomb/kill at will and we just acquiesce.

as new york 2 hours ago

Saddam used gas on the Iranians and we were good with that. It is not clear about this gas in Syria. These "freedom fighters" have no compunction about using civilians as human shields. How do we know the truth? They are various branches of Al Quaeda and given their huge birth rate they don't seem to place much weight on human life in the here and now....maybe they focus on the afterlife more. So why can't we just leave Assad alone and let him be the strong man there? Yes Syria is a crappy place primarily because of insane overpopulation and limited water. Getting Assad out is not going to help with population or with water. Moving the entire Syrian population to Europe could be done and they are working on that.

Bobby H Massachusetts 2 hours ago

Trump says he was getting us out of Syria. Much to my relief to this endless war.

And I'm pretty sure the president of Syria, Assad, whose regime has been under attack by both the US supported Syrian rebels and their ISIS allies did not want the US on their soil. So why would he do something like this? I don't believe he did. By the way if the US was not meddling over in the M.E. there would be no refugees and fewer immigrants.

Rob Pittsburgh 2 hours ago

"Conventional" deaths by artillery and bullets are perfectly acceptable - when bodies are vaporized, ripped and torn apart unrecognizably. But use a deadly gas and leave the corpses in "beautiful" condition - there you have crossed the line mister.

RR Wisconsin 2 hours ago

Lemme get this straight: The US policy doesn't care *how many* Syrians were killed; it only cares *how* they were killed? Nothing good can come from such an ethically bankrupt policy.

e.s. cleveland, OH 57 minutes ago

I would rather have Assad than those Jihadists the U.S., Israel, Saudi Arabia, etc. are backing. Just ask the Christians in Syria.

max byrd davis ca 2 hours ago

The president does not have the authority to bomb whenever he wants. If we had a Congress, it would its responsibility to authorize military action.

jhanzel Glenview, Illinois 2 hours ago

As painful as it is, the possession of chlorine is not in violation of the standards we all signed in to to stop chemical and biological weapons. Hence, the agreement under Obama, by almost all standards, worked well. Or at least unless we wanted a few hundred thousands troop on the ground to search the entire country. This use of chlorine is. Maybe Trump will propose a huge tariff on chlorine exports to Syria?

David Eike Virginia 2 hours ago

What is the logic for Assad to provoke the US right after Trump announces his intention to withdraw? Would it not be more strategic for the regime to hold off until US troops were withdrawn and then go after the rebels? Does Assad assume that the US response will be more moderate if we still have troops in country? Any chance this was a rogue action to delay or reverse US plans to withdraw? If so, who benefits from US continuing to maintain troops in Syria?

bmck Montreal 2 hours ago

With "experts" at president's disposal, seems to me moment Trump announced Syrian withdrawal, at least one should have anticipated - based on past occurrences - a gas attack aimed to engage US and therefore maintain US presence.

[Apr 09, 2018] When Military Leaders Have Reckless Disregard for the Truth by Bruce Fein

Highly recommended!
Apr 09, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
To borrow from the British definition of an ambassador, United States military leaders are honest soldiers promoted in rank to champion war with reckless disregard for the truth. This practice persists despite the catastrophic waste of lives and money because the untruths are never punished. Congress needs to correct this problem forthwith.

General Joseph F. Dunford, Jr., chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, exemplifies the phenomenon. As reported in The Washington Post , Dunford recently voiced optimism about defeating the Afghan Taliban in the seventeenth year of a trillion-dollar war that has multiplied safe havens for international terrorists, the opposite of the war's original mission. While not under oath, Dunford insisted, "This is not another year of the same thing we've been doing for 17 years. This is a fundamentally different approach [T]he right people at the right level with the right training [are in place] "

There, the general recklessly disregarded the truth. He followed the instruction of General William Westmoreland who stated at the National Press Club on November 21, 1967 that the Vietnam War had come to a point "where the end begins to come into view." The 1968 Tet Offensive was then around the corner, which would provoke Westmoreland to ask for 200,000 more American troops. The Pentagon Papers and Lieutenant General H.R. McMaster's Dereliction of Duty have meticulously documented the military's reckless disregard for the truth throughout the Vietnam War.

Any fool can understand that continuing our 17-year-old war in Afghanistan is a fool's errand. The nation is artificial. Among other things, its disputed border with Pakistan, the Durand Line, was drawn in 1896 between the British Raj and Afghan Amir Abdur Rahmen Khair. Afghanistan's population splinters along tribal, ethnic, and sectarian lines, including Pushtans, Uzbeks, Hazara, Tajiks, Turkmen, and Balochi. Its government is riddled with nepotism, corruption, ineptitude, and lawlessness. Election fraud and political sclerosis are endemic. Opium production and trafficking replenish the Taliban's coffers.

The Afghan National Army (ANA) is a paper tiger. Desertion and attrition rates are alarming. Disloyalty is widespread. American weapons are sold to the Taliban or captured. ANA soldiers will not risk that last full measure of devotion for an illegitimate, unrepresentative, decrepit government.

The Taliban also has a safe haven in Pakistan. A staggering portion -- maybe up to 90 percent -- of United States assistance to Afghanistan is embezzled, diverted, or wasted. John Sopko, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), related to Chatham House in London that "SIGAR was finding waste, fraud, and abuse nearly everywhere we looked in Afghanistan -- from the $488 million worth of aircraft that couldn't fly, to the navy the U.S. bought for a landlocked country, to the buildings the U.S. paid for that literally melted in the rain ."

"The Taliban are getting stronger, the government is on the retreat, they are losing ground to the Taliban day by day," Abdul Jabbar Qahraman, a retired Afghan general who was the Afghan government's military envoy to Helmand Province until 2016, told the New York Times last summer. ISIS has now joined the Taliban and al-Qaeda in fighting the United States. Secretary of Defense General James Mattis conceded to Congress last June that "we are not winning in Afghanistan right now," but added polyannaishly, "And we will correct this as soon as possible." Only two months earlier, the Defense Department insisted that dropping the Mother of All Bombs on Afghanistan would reverse the losing trend.

Upton Sinclair sermonized: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." Thus do military leaders deceive themselves about futile wars to extract more spending, to maintain their professional reputations and public stature, and to avoid the embarrassment of explaining to Congress and the American people that astronomical sums have been wasted and tens of thousands of American soldiers have died or were crippled in vain.

To deter such self-deception, Congress should enact a statute requiring the retirement without pension of any general or admiral who materially misleads legislators or the public about prospective or ongoing wars with reckless disregard for the truth. That sanction might have prompted General Dunford to acknowledge the grim truth about Afghanistan: that the United States is clueless about how to win that war.

Bruce Fein was associate deputy attorney general under President Reagan and is the founding partner of Fein & DelValle PLLC.

[Apr 09, 2018] Skripal might be connected with Ukrainian oligarchs such a Pelepelichniy, killed in London in 2012

Mar 30, 2018 | svpressa.ru

By the way, the Vice President of the Association of veterans of special services Berkut Valery Malevanny spoke about the same, about the Ukrainian trace in an interview with "SP". According to him, Skripal once worked for the Ukrainian mafia. Namely: on the oligarch Alexander Perepelichny who was killed in 2012 in London under unclear circumstances.

Was published reports on the financial status Skripal. It turns out that he has a house in Britain for 270 thousand pounds, a house in Spain for 210 thousand pounds, and a Bank account is 450 thousand pounds. Where does a simple British intelligence officer get that kind of money?

In addition, according to MI-5, Skripal regularly flew to Kiev and Odessa. Most likely, it was about establishing smuggling channels.

So, the Finns have every reason to question the British version of the poisoning of an ex-GRU officer.

[Apr 09, 2018] There is no doubt that Trump is an elite "false flag". Someone who was intended to be simply PORTRAYED as being anti-establishment, but in reality, one who carried out and amplified everything the establishment wanted. But neoliberal elite overplayed its hand by encouraging hateful anti-Trump rhetoric so much that now everything that Trump will do will garner massive opposition.

Trump as a "false flag operation," That's rich ;-)
Notable quotes:
"... So the paradox is this: how are the elites herding people towards a new war, while at the same time encouraging thoughts and movements which will be a solid opposition block against military action? ..."
"... Concur. Clinton is sociopathic. Trump is narcissistic. The Deep State uses both. The former willing tool, she cares nothing for anyone but herself. The latter, the psychologists in CIA have his profile and manipulate him like a woman with a velvet glove. His inadequacies are easily stroked. ..."
Apr 09, 2018 | thesaker.is

therealestg9 on April 08, 2018 , · at 11:21 pm UTC

There is no doubt that Trump is an elite "false flag". Someone who was intended to be simply PORTRAYED as being anti-establishment, but in reality, one who carried out and amplified everything the establishment wanted. That much is clear and solidified now.

But here is the real strangeness in the situation:

A quick scan of Twitter and Facebook commentary on this new Syria situation shows that a clear majority of Americans are opposed to anything that Trump touches. And this includes military action in Syria, as evidenced from the social media postings. What was once a simple matter of anti-war opposition has turned into a magnified anti-war plus anti-Trump opposition.

So the paradox is this: how are the elites herding people towards a new war, while at the same time encouraging thoughts and movements which will be a solid opposition block against military action?

I think a rational explanation is that the elites simply got overconfident. They overplayed their hand. It will indeed come back to bite them. The American people, whether pro-Trump or anti-Trump, will resist any military action in Syria no matter what. The elites will have to stop this movement and come up with a new strategy towards war.

vot tak on April 09, 2018 , · at 12:37 am UTC
T9

"There is no doubt that Trump is an elite "false flag". Someone who was intended to be simply PORTRAYED as being anti-establishment, but in reality, one who carried out and amplified everything the establishment wanted. That much is clear and solidified now."

Exactly. The main reason trump is better than Clinton, in my opinion, is all that opposition to Trump we see, would not be there against a Clinton regime. Both in the u.s. and international in the west.

Larchmonter445 on April 09, 2018 , · at 7:35 am UTC
Concur. Clinton is sociopathic. Trump is narcissistic. The Deep State uses both. The former willing tool, she cares nothing for anyone but herself. The latter, the psychologists in CIA have his profile and manipulate him like a woman with a velvet glove. His inadequacies are easily stroked.
Ahmed on April 09, 2018 , · at 11:05 am UTC
Larchmonter – "His inadequacies are easily stroked." lol I think Stormy Daniels would concur.

[Apr 09, 2018] "His inadequacies are easily stroked." I think Stormy Daniels would concur

Notable quotes:
"... Concur. Clinton is sociopathic. Trump is narcissistic. The Deep State uses both. The former willing tool, she cares nothing for anyone but herself. The latter, the psychologists in CIA have his profile and manipulate him like a woman with a velvet glove. His inadequacies are easily stroked. ..."
Apr 09, 2018 | thesaker.is

Larchmonter445 on April 09, 2018 , · at 7:35 am UTC

Concur. Clinton is sociopathic. Trump is narcissistic. The Deep State uses both. The former willing tool, she cares nothing for anyone but herself. The latter, the psychologists in CIA have his profile and manipulate him like a woman with a velvet glove. His inadequacies are easily stroked.
Ahmed on April 09, 2018 , · at 11:05 am UTC
Larchmonter -- "His inadequacies are easily stroked." lol I think Stormy Daniels would concur.

[Apr 09, 2018] Guardian neoliberal presstitutes still call Magnitsky a lawyer and financial racketeer Browder a victim. Magnitsky he was Broder tax avoidance accountant and was an auditor by training

Nov 18, 2017 | www.theguardian.com

Originally from: Putin accuses British anti-corruption campaigner Browder of three murders World news The Guardian

The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, has accused prominent British businessman Bill Browder of being a "serial killer" – the latest extraordinary attempt by the Kremlin to frame one of its most high-profile public enemies.

Court documents seen by the Observer reveal that Russian state investigators have named Browder, a London-based hedge fund manager, as the suspect behind the mysterious murders of three men.

All three deaths are linked to a £174m fraud believed to have involved Russian officials -- a crime that was uncovered by Browder's Russian lawyer, Sergei Magnitsky, in 2008. Magnitsky was subsequently imprisoned on charges widely considered to be false, and died in jail amid claims he was tortured.

Browder, once the largest foreign portfolio investor in Russia, has infuriated Putin by lobbying western governments to punish those responsible for Magnitsky's death. A number of countries have imposed sanctions on individuals believed to be involved.

[Apr 09, 2018] First strike temptation and MAD

Apr 09, 2018 | southfront.org

[Apr 09, 2018] Skripal Case 'Sounds Like the Story Put Forth About Litvinenko'

Notable quotes:
"... *Mr. Dunkerley is recognized internationally for his research and publications about the 2006 Alexander Litvinenko polonium poisoning. ..."
Apr 09, 2018 | sputniknews.com

Sputnik: But in the case of Litvinenko there's a huge study, it was one of the most thorough investigations that was conducted by the British, Sir Robert Owen was in charge of that, although he came to the conclusion that there was sufficient evidence heard in open court to build a strong circumstantial case against the Russian state. Do you see any parallels between the two cases? Many people criticized Britain for giving an inadequate response to the Litvinenko case, do you think that they're compensating for that now?

William Dunkerley: The Litvinenko case, as far as the public description of what happened, was a hoax in my view. There was no factual basis, the coroner's inquest didn't start until around five years after his death and before the inquest opened, the British prosecutor Ken Macdonald had said that he had grave suspicions there was Russian state involvement, grave suspicions is a long way from having a case, so I don't think that anything that transpired with Robert Owen's inquest or inquiry has any legitimacy. He was definitely on a witch hunt looking for Russian state involvement. I was involved with an effort to get that witch hunt called off and had probably 50 interactions between me and the chancellor's office Chris Grayling and then Home Secretary Theresa May, and ultimately got them to come along with the view that I had taken about the case; that Owen was conducting a witch hunt that he wasn't authorized to do. Theresa May reprimanded Owen for that in the end and subsequently Owen agreed to remove the search for Russian culpability from the scope of his inquest. That happened at the end of 2013.

*Mr. Dunkerley is recognized internationally for his research and publications about the 2006 Alexander Litvinenko polonium poisoning.

[Apr 09, 2018] Russian Prosecutor General Threatens to Release May's Secret Correspondence

Apr 09, 2018 | sputniknews.com

Deputy Russian Prosecutor General Saak Karapetyan has addressed the case, surrounding the alleged poisoning of former spy Sergei Skripal, who reportedly is no longer in critical condition. Russian Prosecutor General has accused Britain of violating international law by classifying Sergei Skripal's, as well as Alexander Litvinenko and Boris Berezovsky cases.

The cases of former intelligence officers Sergei Skripal and Alexander Litvinenko, as well as the case of former Russian businessman Boris Berezovsky , have been unfolding under the same scenario, unfounded accusations are followed by the demands for sanctions against Moscow, Karapetyan said Monday.

"The anti-Russian campaign around former officer Skripal and his daughter was unfolded by the UK authorities under a scenario similar to that already used in unfounded accusations against Russia over the alleged attempted murder of Boris Berezovsky in London in 2003 and the circumstances of the death of Alexander Litvinenko in the United Kingdom in November 2006," Karapetyan told a briefing.

The official noted that in all three cases the demands to introduce sanctions against Russia had followed groundless claims of Russia's involvement.

On Berezovsky Case

Berezovsky was granted an asylum even though the UK Interior Ministry didn't find any evidence that there was an assassination attempt on the former Russian businessman, the official noted.

Russia hasn't received any documents, concerning the death of tycoon Berezovsky and its cause, Karapetyan noted, adding that Russia submitted 39 requests to the UK for the period from 2006 to 2011 on Berezovsky.

READ MORE: Skripal Case 'Sounds Like the Story Put Forth About Litvinenko' -- Analyst

Berezovsky was most interested in killing former Russian intelligence officer Alexander Litvinenko in November 2006, advisor to Russian Prosecutor General Nikolai Atmonyev said Monday.

"I have every reason to assert that Berezovsky was interested in eliminating Litvinenko at that time," Atmonyev told a briefing.

[Apr 09, 2018] Publication by the USA formula of Novichok was probably a fake as in case it is real it put Israel into tremendous danger

Notable quotes:
"... Basically, Mirzayanov claims that it is relatively easy to make the Novichok nerve agents. So, some enterprising Arabs could buy a few chemists to make a few tons of it and then spray it all over the little Satan. Do you really think that the Jews who run the United States would allow the publication of information that could lead to thousands of deaths in Israel? ..."
"... Remember, Mirzayanov was given residence (and a University position) in the United States after he was kicked out of Russia. There are also a number of "people who should know" that have stated that there is zero solid evidence for the existence of the Novichok nerve agents. For example: Robin Black in Development, Historical Use and Properties of Chemical Warfare Agents (2016): ..."
"... "In recent years, there has been much speculation that a fourth generation of nerve agents, 'Novichoks' (newcomer), was developed in Russia, beginning in the 1970s as part of the 'Foliant' programme, with the aim of finding agents that would compromise defensive countermeasures. Information on these compounds has been sparse in the public domain, mostly originating from a dissident Russian military chemist, Vil Mirzayanov. No independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published." ..."
"... "There has never been a 'Novichok' research project conducted in Russia,... But in the West, some countries carried out such research, which they called 'Novichok,' for some reason." ..."
Apr 09, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Slack Jack -> Slack Jack Mon, 04/09/2018 - 09:54 Permalink

Remember, the evil people, Theresa May, Stoltenberg, Trump and the rest, are damning Russia with obvious lies.

The Novichok nerve agents don't even exist.

HERE IS THE PROOF:

The Novichok nerve agents are supposedly much more toxic than the nerve gases VX or Sarin (and yet the Skripals are still alive!?).

Mirzayanov's book, published in 2008, contains the formulas he alleges can be used to create Novichoks. In 1995, he explained that "the chemical components or precursors" of Novichok are "ordinary organophosphates that can be made at commercial chemical companies that manufacture such products as fertilizers and pesticides."

https://www.amazon.com/State-Secrets-Insiders-Chronicle-Chemical/dp/143

Basically, Mirzayanov claims that it is relatively easy to make the Novichok nerve agents. So, some enterprising Arabs could buy a few chemists to make a few tons of it and then spray it all over the little Satan. Do you really think that the Jews who run the United States would allow the publication of information that could lead to thousands of deaths in Israel?

Do you really think they would protect the publisher of such information by giving him residence in the United States?

Remember, Mirzayanov was given residence (and a University position) in the United States after he was kicked out of Russia. There are also a number of "people who should know" that have stated that there is zero solid evidence for the existence of the Novichok nerve agents. For example: Robin Black in Development, Historical Use and Properties of Chemical Warfare Agents (2016):

"In recent years, there has been much speculation that a fourth generation of nerve agents, 'Novichoks' (newcomer), was developed in Russia, beginning in the 1970s as part of the 'Foliant' programme, with the aim of finding agents that would compromise defensive countermeasures. Information on these compounds has been sparse in the public domain, mostly originating from a dissident Russian military chemist, Vil Mirzayanov. No independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published."

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/the-novichok-story-is-i

And, Alexander Shulgin, Russia's representative to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (2018):

"There has never been a 'Novichok' research project conducted in Russia,... But in the West, some countries carried out such research, which they called 'Novichok,' for some reason."

CONCLUSION: The Novichok nerve agents don't even exist.

[Apr 09, 2018] Putin really dropped the ball on the Libya No-Fly Resolution trusting the evil empire

Apr 09, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Circe , Apr 8, 2018 3:59:20 PM | 93

Putin really dropped the ball on the Libya No-Fly Resolution trusting the evil empire. Now the stakes
are even higher. The absolute worse news in all this is that Trump is bringing in Bolton as his lunatic
wing man at the worst possible time when things were looking like they were wrapping up in Syria.
Bolton is the male version of Hillary on steroids. Trump is going to hide behind Bolton's
mustache - you know, me good cop; Bolton bad cop; IOW, don't blame me for what needs to be done. Trump gifted
Jerusalem to Netanyahu, and now he's going to gift him Syria too. The Iran deal will
also get scrapped soon and that's more gasoline on a fire that's about to get out of control. Here's one way
to distract from the Mueller investigation; start a war and rally the county under
a common cause: war with Syria, ergo Russia and then Iran.

It's as I said from day one: Trump can't help himself; he's always been a Zio-con and Adelson
is getting his money's worth. It's all going to happen as I always said it would. Trump was the perfect puppet.

Trump will look like the savior of the realm; a role his big fat ego always dreamed of and won't resist.

Now, there still might be a way out of this potential catastrophe. Admit it, wouldn't it be nice if Putin
really was holding back something big regarding Trump?

*sigh* - if only! Very soon would be a good time to drop it. Manafort?

James , Apr 8, 2018 4:35:09 PM | 99

Circe Medvedev was President

However the responsibility for what happened in Libya is with the western poweres of NATO

they. dropped the bombs and armed the jihadis.

The blame lies with them not Russia

As for the tone of the rest of your post-

War is not a pissing contest

It involves loss of life destruction of families, communities, countries.

Russia has a reason to be there - what is the agenda of the western powered beyond destroying a country like they did Libya

[Apr 09, 2018] The specialist chemical weapons investigators did not gain access to the Skripal residence UNTIL APRIL 4

Apr 09, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

jawbone | Apr 8, 2018 6:01:04 PM | 21

@ 17 -- There seem to be lots of weasely things being said about the fate of the Skripal pets. The big, fluffy black cat with amber eyes should in no way whatsoever have suffered such depletion of calories that he had to be put down. I fear he was sent to Porton Down to be "studied," and then "put down."

If there was a water source --dripping faucet, water closet, most houses have some place a pet can drink from other that his water bowl-- a cat can survive weeks. My Maine Coon disappeared, but showed up about 3-4 weeks later, ragged coat, unkempt, very thin, but, when given saline solution by the vet, immediately began to act more normal. Took a while to get her muscle mass rebuilt, but she survived.

An article from The Sun, dated April 5th, has a photo of Nash Van Drake (what a pretty cat), and states the specialist chemical weapons investigators did not gain access to the Skripal residence UNTIL APRIL 4TH!!! We know from photographs that lots of folks wearing moons suits were around for weeks -- why was nothing done to care for the pets?

I can't find it now through google, but I read a comment or tweet from a vet who had made repeated offers to care for the pets. These pets should never have suffered to the extent they did.

Someone in power did not want anyone outside those with enforced silence agreements to see those pets.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5983643/skripals-beloved-cat-nash-van-drake-had-to-be-secretly-put-down-following-the-poison-attack/

The sickly mog was transported to the Ministry of Defence res­earch laboratory at Porton Down to be tested, where he was found to be severely malnourished.

The lab's top veterinary officer ruled the pet was in so much pain he should be put down.

His body was then immediately incinerated to avoid contamination from the deadly nerve agent Novichok.

Sergei's guinea pigs were also destroyed at the top secret military research facility.

(If there is a hell, may these animal abusers end up there with long and miserable afterlives.)

[Apr 09, 2018] Portonblimp Down Episode 2 - A Tale By Boris Johnson - Craig Murray

Apr 09, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

"Comrade Putin, we have successfully stockpiled novichoks in secret for ten years, and kept them hidden from the OPCW inspectors. We have also trained our agents in secret novichok assassination techniques. The programme has cost hundreds of millions of dollars, but now we are ready. Naturally, the first time we use it we will expose our secret and suffer massive international blowback. So who should be our first target? The head of a foreign intelligence agency? A leading jihadist rebel in Syria? A key nuclear scientist? Even a Head of State?"

"No, Tovarich. There is this old retired guy I know living in Salisbury. We released him from jail years ago "

"With respect Comrade Putin, are you sure he is the most important target to reveal a programme we have put so much resource into for ten years?"

"Yes. I sit here every day and I cannot concentrate on the affairs of Russia or the World as all the time am thinking of Sergei Skripal. I should never have let him out of jail to spend his life buying lottery tickets and eating in Zizzis. But you must make absolutely certain to kill him."

"Don't worry Comrade Putin, we have been training in secret novichok assassination techniques for ten years. We even have an detailed manual explaining our methods. We will spread the novichok on his outside door handle (fiendish laugh)."

"Are you sure comrade? Is there not a danger it will wash off or get diluted?"

"No Comrade Putin, it never rains in England."

That is, genuinely, in every detail the official British government version of what happened in Salisbury, including the ten year programme and the secret assassination manual.

Despite this story being one of the most improbably wild conspiracy theories in human history, it is those who express any doubt at all as to its veracity who are smeared as "conspiracy theorists" or even "traitors".

All copyright on this article is waived. Feel free to use, translate and republish as you wish.

[Apr 08, 2018] Russia Will Never Be Our Friend, We'll Slap Them When Needed

Looks like Haley is competing with Boris Johnson in diplomatic skills
Apr 07, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Originally from: ISRAEL is our GREAT FRIEND RUSSIA can NEVER be our FRIEND, we'll SLAP them when Needed -- NIKKI HALEY

Nikki Haley has erupted in another fiery Russophobic rant, warning that Russia will "never be America's friend." Moscow can try to behave "like a regular country," but the US will "slap them when we need to," Haley said.
The US ambassador to the UN is not known for her friendly stance toward Moscow, but her new take on US-Russia relations stands out among even her most rabid ramblings. Speaking at Duke University in North Carolina on Friday, Haley admitted that friendly relations with Russia is an unlikely prospect, adding that the Trump team has done more against Moscow than any other administration since Ronald Reagan's tenure.

"Russia's never going to be our friend," Haley told students at a Q&A session, responding to a question about "holding Russia
accountable" for alleged meddling in the 2016 presidential election. The diplomat said Washington still works with Moscow "when we need to, and we slap them when we need to."

She then raised the stakes further: "Everybody likes to listen to the words. I'm going to tell you – look at the actions," Haley urged. "We expelled 60 Russian diplomats/spies, we have armed Ukraine so that they can defend themselves," she added.

According to the UN envoy, the US is doing "two things Russia would never want us to do," namely enlarging the military and expanding its energy policy. "So, this president has done more against Russia than any president since Reagan," she asserted.

"You haven't seen the end of what this administration will do to Russia. You will continue to see that play out," she stressed.
Cooling down the degree of Russia-bashing in her speech, Haley said the US and Russia do cooperate on Afghanistan and Africa, looking out for areas of mutual interest. Meanwhile, she claimed, "our relations with Russia depend solely on Russia."

[Apr 08, 2018] Prime Minister May is seen at around beating the cat against a wall.

Apr 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: librul | Apr 7, 2018 9:05:48 AM | 4

Prime Minister May is seen at around the 0:40 (depending upon clip version) mark beating the cat against a wall.

Also, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g is the "Burn the Witch" scene. With Putin as the witch it is a fair representation of the type of justice and deep thought applied to the Skripal case.

mike k , Apr 7, 2018 9:30:10 AM | 6
First as tragedy, then as farce.......
Saul , Apr 7, 2018 10:00:16 AM | 7
Reminds me of the Monty Python dead parrot sketch...

[Apr 08, 2018] Syria - Timelines Of Gas Attacks Follow A Similar Scheme

From comments: "I was quite surprised the rebels actually went ahead with the so-called gas attack. They didn't, US-France-UK-(Turkey) did. The rebels are the ones with guns and ammo, the alliance are the ones with actors and cameras. "
Notable quotes:
"... If Trump possesses one talent it must surely be the ability to spot a Con Artist pulling a fast one. If he can't connect the same dots that b has just done then Trump has to be an idiot, and I don't for a second believe that he is an idiot. ..."
"... Just one thing that I should point out: the Syrian Observatory is NOT claiming that there has been a chemical weapons attack on Douma. ..."
"... But the claim that those suffocations were the result of chlorine attack is being made by the white helmets, not (at least so far) by the SOHR. ..."
"... The best time for Putin to respond to a Western provocation isn't now, it's when he effectively has hundreds of thousands of Western hostages in his country - June/July. ..."
"... For White Helmets read Britain. They are British created, funded and operated. May's Government has to be deep in this as well. ..."
"... Never forget that May, Cameron and other conservative MPs crossed the floor of parliament and voted for Blair and the illegal attack on Iraq when Labour MPs refused to support him. ..."
"... I hope that this "news" will just fade away. Sad fact is that whatever Russians say or do it doesn't really matter anymore. A narrative and a rhetoric coming from the US is now at the so low level that any diplomatic language or a talk is rendered obsolete. ..."
"... I also think that is is not up to Trump, but more off to a military and the dark powers around Trump, that he doesn't really understand, to decide what is happing next. If anything. ..."
"... The hostage here is the world cup itself, just as the 2014 Olympics were. And in retrospect it was probably a mistake for Russia to host them, but then who could have predicted all this back in 2007 or 8? ..."
"... At any rate, Russia should resist provocations games or not. Retaliation, if any, should be covert and deniable. Unless the west is dumb enough to openly attack Russian forces. Then a hammer blow to the face is appropriate. ..."
"... If there was such a FF 'gas attack' as we have just seen in Syria while the World Cup was on and the US/UK response (as we've heard previously from Russian/Syrian sources) was to initiate strikes against Syrian Government installations, and then Russia has promised to respond if any of their personnel were killed in these strikes the Russians reserve the right (as they have repeatedly started) to strike back against any US/UK targets responsible for the strikes - ie - shooting US/UK planes out of the sky or sinking US/UK warships, destroyers or carriers in the Eastern Mediterranean. ..."
"... If that level of escalation were to occur (and take note I'm not saying it will because I don't believe Putin will take this bait), but if it were, where could the escalation lead on the part of the US/UK?? ..."
"... These areas are intensely scrutinized by the Russians and the SAA, drones, satellite. It would be good to get some footage of the White Helmets staging this, but of course they are embedded with all the rest of the fighting men elsewhere and are never anywhere near where all the children tend to be targeted. ..."
"... I am confident that JAYSH was not going to negotiate, until after they had finished the "job" for their paymasters...once that was completed, they are ready to negotiate again... ..."
"... But The Donald is saying that there are women and children amongst those affected by the supposed attack, but other sites are reporting on the astonishing fact that there are only children in the broadcast footage.. what amount to a staged play like that of Goutha years ago... ..."
"... July 16, 2017. Newswire. CIA Director Admits Fooling Trump Over Syrian Chemical Weapons Story ( ) The false flag attack, which actually originated from CIA rebel groups in the region, resulted in Trump launching Tomahawk missiles into Syria, killing 15 civilians. Posted because of some interest despite misleading title and dubious source. http://yournewswire.com/cia-trump-syria-chemical-weapons/ ..."
"... I am afraid. Have not been this afraid since election night when Hillary was almost elected. The world lucked out and survived to live another day. Has our luck run out? ..."
"... Sigh, here we go again, just like Skripal case, west acts with propaganda and psyops without any evidence. The stupid TRUMP will of course bomb Syria again along with the disgusting Macron cheered by EU and western media. ..."
"... In the US when a murder occurs and a suspect apprehended there is a trial that can take weeks or months, and the prosecution and the defense present their expert Witnesses. Then at the end of all that a jury usually decides where the person is guilty or not. On the other hand, when a crime is alleged in another country far far away from the US, such as an alleged gas attack in Syria, within days we know exactly who is responsible and on that basis are willing to commit arms, troops and spend billions of dollars to kill people in large quantities and destroy a country. One would think that given the stakes involved a little bit more care might be taken. ..."
"... "Gas" scares the bejesus out of rubes. Makes Great Drama. Triggers, then reinforces historical themes. "The fiend! He gassed his own people!" "Gas Chambers" (Cant' go there!). If there's gas, well, by golly there's got to be a ham-handed, asymmetrical "response" (motherfocker of all bombs!) from the "International Community". ..."
"... BTW, kudos to those who pegged the Skripal incident as prelude to some sort of chemical incident in Syria. It couldn't have been scripted better for a TV program. Oh, wait... ..."
"... The point is that the Russians have been preparing for just such an event for months. Was it not two months ago that the Russians put troops into Damascus to prevent a decapitating strike? A US strike would be a sort of Kursk Offensive, attacking into a well-prepared defence. ..."
Apr 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

March 30 2017: U.S. priority on Syria no longer focused on 'getting Assad out': Haley

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The United States' diplomatic policy on Syria for now is no longer focused on making the war-torn country's president, Bashar al-Assad, leave power, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations said on Thursday, in a departure from the Obama administration's initial and public stance on Assad's fate.

April 4 2017: Suspected gas attack in Syria reportedly kills dozens

World leaders expressed shock and outrage Tuesday at reports of a suspected chemical attack in northwestern Syria that killed scores of civilians, with one UK official suggesting the incident amounted to a war crime.

April 7 2017: Trump launches attack on Syria with 59 Tomahawk missiles

The U.S. military attacked a Syria-government airfield with 59 Tomahawk missiles on Thursday evening.

April 10 2017: US envoy Nikki Haley says Syria regime change is inevitable

The US ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, has told CNN that removing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from power is a priority, cementing an extraordinary U-turn in the Trump administration's stance on the embattled leader.

The Khan Sheikhun incident had been faked. An international investigation found that half of the alleged casualties arrived in hospitals before the incident was said to have happened. Nothing followed after Haley's last announcement. The administration was apparently not willing to go beyond the one-off strike. The flip-flop was attributed to confusion or infighting within the Trump administration.

Qualtrough , Apr 8, 2018 6:48:54 AM | 1

There apparently is no limit to the number of lies that Americans will believe, as long as they are told to them by their government.
cdvision , Apr 8, 2018 6:53:42 AM | 2
I have the feeling that Russia is loosing patience, and if the US try something it will be big trouble. The speed with which Ghouta was taken caused problems for the West. I hope Russia will clean up Syria quickly; I think we are approaching a decisive moment.
DENNIS RHODES , Apr 8, 2018 7:24:43 AM | 3
All of these world leaders walk in lockstep together following the script handed to them. I would leave Damascus in a hurry if I was living there. The Zionists want to fulfil Isaiah 17.
bolasete , Apr 8, 2018 7:35:07 AM | 4
now we know why the skripals happened. the west is now, today, intent on russia's destruction. putin 'dies' or the west dies. not since the 1950's era of hiding under desks in elementary school have i felt as though i am living in the 'end times.'
Yeah, Right , Apr 8, 2018 7:45:54 AM | 5
If Trump possesses one talent it must surely be the ability to spot a Con Artist pulling a fast one. If he can't connect the same dots that b has just done then Trump has to be an idiot, and I don't for a second believe that he is an idiot.

Surely this is a golden opportunity for Trump to go off-script and shaft those who are trying to con him.

All it would take is one twitter post from him stating that only an dimwit would fall for such an obvious trap, and he will turn the tables on anyone who shouts that The USA Must Do Something About This!!!!!

Trump's retort would be devastating: there ya' go, Dimwit Number One.

Yeah, Right , Apr 8, 2018 8:12:22 AM | 6
Just one thing that I should point out: the Syrian Observatory is NOT claiming that there has been a chemical weapons attack on Douma.

It is claiming that there have been excessive civilian deaths, sure, including a large number who have suffocated in their shelters.

But the claim that those suffocations were the result of chlorine attack is being made by the white helmets, not (at least so far) by the SOHR.

Julian , Apr 8, 2018 8:24:27 AM | 7
World Cup starts on June 14. Do you really think Putin/Russia will do anything to jeopardize the hosting of that event this close to the finish line?

I really doubt it.

Who in Russia would be held responsible if a conflict started and the World Cup in Russia was cancelled??

Which Russian politician would be blamed by the people???

Putin will do nothing and will not be provoked. Do you know the best time to respond? It is actually during the World Cup when hundreds of thousands of EU and foreign nationals will be in Russia - effectively hostages that prevent the West taking over action against Russia - yep, it's that simple.

The best time for Putin to respond to a Western provocation isn't now, it's when he effectively has hundreds of thousands of Western hostages in his country - June/July.

Emily , Apr 8, 2018 8:28:21 AM | 8
Yeah/7: For White Helmets read Britain. They are British created, funded and operated. May's Government has to be deep in this as well.

Never forget that May, Cameron and other conservative MPs crossed the floor of parliament and voted for Blair and the illegal attack on Iraq when Labour MPs refused to support him.

Without Theresa May and David Cameron, Blair wouldn't have had the authority to attack.
The Iraqi blood is on her hands.
And Libyan blood.
And Syrian blood.
And now Salisbury and this.

The woman is a dangerous psychopath.

laserlurk , Apr 8, 2018 8:29:40 AM | 9
I hope that this "news" will just fade away. Sad fact is that whatever Russians say or do it doesn't really matter anymore. A narrative and a rhetoric coming from the US is now at the so low level that any diplomatic language or a talk is rendered obsolete.

UK will trumpet this as there is no tomorrow while Skripal case is, in their eyes, hopefully blurring away. Or so they might think.

I also think that is is not up to Trump, but more off to a military and the dark powers around Trump, that he doesn't really understand, to decide what is happing next. If anything.

lysander , Apr 8, 2018 8:49:04 AM | 10
@8, that is impossible. There is no way Russia will harm any of the soccer fans or stop them from leaving if they choose to leave.

The hostage here is the world cup itself, just as the 2014 Olympics were. And in retrospect it was probably a mistake for Russia to host them, but then who could have predicted all this back in 2007 or 8?

At any rate, Russia should resist provocations games or not. Retaliation, if any, should be covert and deniable. Unless the west is dumb enough to openly attack Russian forces. Then a hammer blow to the face is appropriate.

Julian , Apr 8, 2018 9:00:56 AM | 12
Re: Posted by: lysander | Apr 8, 2018 8:49:04 AM | 11

With due respect I think you misunderstand what I'm saying about 'hostages'.

If there was such a FF 'gas attack' as we have just seen in Syria while the World Cup was on and the US/UK response (as we've heard previously from Russian/Syrian sources) was to initiate strikes against Syrian Government installations, and then Russia has promised to respond if any of their personnel were killed in these strikes the Russians reserve the right (as they have repeatedly started) to strike back against any US/UK targets responsible for the strikes - ie - shooting US/UK planes out of the sky or sinking US/UK warships, destroyers or carriers in the Eastern Mediterranean.

If that level of escalation were to occur (and take note I'm not saying it will because I don't believe Putin will take this bait), but if it were, where could the escalation lead on the part of the US/UK??

Could it lead to Western military strikes of some sort or another?

Could it do that next week? Maybe.

Could it do that while Russia is hosting the World Cup worth hundreds of thousands of Western nationals in Russia? Of course not. The Western route of escalation is therefore blunted while the World Cup is being hosted while there is no such barrier on Russian response to Western provocation while the World Cup is being hosted.

Ie - if Russia did respond to US/UK strikes against Syria whilst the World Cup was being hosted by sinking a couple of US destroyers, what would happen then?

Perimtr , Apr 8, 2018 9:27:18 AM | 13
Given the level of Western insanity and the frequency of the outrages being perpetrated, I don't think we will have to wait several months to see all hell break loose.
b , Apr 8, 2018 9:38:31 AM | 14
Interfax
04/08 15:30 Russian Foreign Ministry warning: Military intervention in Syria under fabricated pretexts can have gravest consequences
Curtis , Apr 8, 2018 9:41:31 AM | 15
WaPo and NYT led the way on this story at news.google. WaPo said that Washington based non-profit Syrian-American Medical Society (SAMS) issued a joint statement with "opposition-linked Civil Defense" (the usual suspects - The White Helmets). There are lots of details on the attacks and damage at Douma but only a tiny mention that Jaish al-Islam launched rockets into densely populated Damascus. Why are there no reports of death and damage in those areas? And where did SAMS come from?
alaff , Apr 8, 2018 9:45:39 AM | 16
Worth to check out - East Ghouta, Syria. Report of Chinese analysts examined by Russian leading Middle East expert (UK/US military advisers in Syria, "Skripal case" hysteria etc.)

https://vimeo.com/263728681

Curtis , Apr 8, 2018 9:47:37 AM | 17
bolasete 4 re: end times
(though I hate to quote from Marvel/DC movie-verse) ...
Batman: We tend to act like the Doomsday Clock has a snooze button.
che , Apr 8, 2018 9:57:26 AM | 18
This is Trump's big chance to redeem himself with the U.S. military ( after "mindlessly" declaring his wish to leave Syria and the entire area ) and get down on his knees and suck Pentagon cock. He will obligingly do this ( as his girlfriends and wife do for him ) and "allow " ( as if he has a choice ) the U.S. war machine, to which he has conceded all civilian control, to respond to the obviously faked and staged false flag chemical attack, in any way they see fit. Russia has already announced that if their troops in Syria are attacked they will respond by Removing the source of that attack, i.e., sinking the ship that launched the missiles. So the U.S. military has lit the fuse and as has worried all of us for a very long time : God only knows where this is headed.
Gravatomic , Apr 8, 2018 9:57:51 AM | 19
These areas are intensely scrutinized by the Russians and the SAA, drones, satellite. It would be good to get some footage of the White Helmets staging this, but of course they are embedded with all the rest of the fighting men elsewhere and are never anywhere near where all the children tend to be targeted.

It's anybody's guess with Trump, remember he said he liked the element of surprise, well, it's hard to spring a surprise when the MSM, in Europe particularly, is literally screaming for a military response with top page headlines.

It was interesting last night watching various outlets over there and how from a seedling article, a little sidebar headline no pics, then came a weed of propaganda, they began every 3-4 hours nudging it to the top and the accusations got wilder and and wilder, ie calling it a 'nerve agent'...

morongobill , Apr 8, 2018 9:58:35 AM | 20
I think the fog is clearing on Trump's thoughts on the matter with his fierce tweet storm mentioning "Animal Assad."

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-08/trump-threatens-assad-putin-over-syrian-chemical-attack-russia-warns-gravest

This is starting to get serious.

Commenting is now turned back on at SST, look forward to b and others commenting there again. I think the whole idea there was to be like the Louis Rukeyser show in the old days, genteel host and guests, just an opinion, didn't work out.

oldenyoung , Apr 8, 2018 10:07:22 AM | 22
I am confident that JAYSH was not going to negotiate, until after they had finished the "job" for their paymasters...once that was completed, they are ready to negotiate again...

I would recommend not negotiating with Jaysh until the hostages have been released...I think their attitude will change quickly now that they are surrounded and no escape/rescue is possible...i wonder how many state agents are stuck inside douma? going to be very embarassing...and it sounds like SAA has a few in custody already...

regards

OY

somebody , Apr 8, 2018 10:09:04 AM | 23
Posted by: b | Apr 8, 2018 9:38:31 AM | 14

Yep, that is how WWIII starts, if they continue like this.

Sasha S , Apr 8, 2018 10:09:06 AM | 24
"I think the fog is clearing on Trump's thoughts on the matter with his fierce tweet storm mentioning "Animal Assad.""

But The Donald is saying that there are women and children amongst those affected by the supposed attack, but other sites are reporting on the astonishing fact that there are only children in the broadcast footage.. what amount to a staged play like that of Goutha years ago...

lysander , Apr 8, 2018 10:23:37 AM | 25
@ Julian, 12.

I think I understand your post better now, thanks for the clarification. I'm not sure that it makes a difference where the tourists are if I understand your 2nd comment correctly. If envision an escalation to full on war, then it really doesn't matter if the soccer fans are at home getting disintegrated by Russian nukes or in Russia getting disintegrated by American nukes.

So might as well wait until the finals.

Noirette , Apr 8, 2018 10:25:31 AM | 26
July 16, 2017. Newswire. CIA Director Admits Fooling Trump Over Syrian Chemical Weapons Story ( ) The false flag attack, which actually originated from CIA rebel groups in the region, resulted in Trump launching Tomahawk missiles into Syria, killing 15 civilians. Posted because of some interest despite misleading title and dubious source. http://yournewswire.com/cia-trump-syria-chemical-weapons/
dh , Apr 8, 2018 10:26:22 AM | 27
@19 Traffic down most likely. Hard to see the colonel retiring gracefully. Let's see how long he lasts this time....he makes a great target.
Don Bacon , Apr 8, 2018 10:31:06 AM | 28
Let's look on the bright side.

SecDef Mattis is a key player in this drama. Mattis didn't buy the fake attack a year ago which no doubt contributed to the flashy but ineffective US response. Putting the blame for this latest fake attack on Russia and Iran (a difference this time) suggests an asymmetric non-military response, one designed to grab headlines and then be forgotten. Trump has sanctioned Russia three times in the past month and bragged about it, so Putin is now his go-to enemy when fake news arises. That Trump strategy (or lack of it) strengthens Russia domestically and internationally, especially with China, so it works for Putin.

Carrie , Apr 8, 2018 10:35:37 AM | 29
Excellent reporting – as always – from Vanessa Beeley on the ground. Several posts from
Vanessa Beeley in Ghouta and Damascus
Breadonwaters , Apr 8, 2018 10:36:44 AM | 30
Perhaps the British false flag poisoning may have a dampening effect on world reaction to this false flag. There are many governments with egg on their face after rushing to throw out the russ diplomats.
psychohistorian , Apr 8, 2018 10:38:16 AM | 31
Thanks for the reporting b. It is looking like positions are hardening on both sides. Lets hope the bully side loses.
fast freddy , Apr 8, 2018 10:42:14 AM | 32
RE: World cup and potential hot war

Affluent Anglo Soccer guests in Russia would be need be detained for their own safety - a kind of twist on R2P. Very embarrassing for elite US, UK, EU jet-setting soccer fans to be detained for an indeterminate period. But for their own safety! Here, enjoy your borscht and caviar.

Don Bacon , Apr 8, 2018 10:42:40 AM | 33
re: SST
"17 million page views for SST and gone -- I am leaving you. Guest authors, commenters and the various troll nations may continue if you wish. I may start another blog under "Pat Lang's Blog" but there will not be comments. pl" -- Jun 8, 2017
Ghost Ship , Apr 8, 2018 10:47:01 AM | 34
The SAA launching a chemical attack on Douma makes no sense. The intention with chemical weapons was to deny areas of land to opposing forces. Now that most modern armies are supplied with effective protection against chemical weapons for individuals and vehicles, area denial no longer works except to the extent that wearing chemical protection suits hinders movement but this applies to both sides so nobody benefits and nobody loses.
librul , Apr 8, 2018 10:49:09 AM | 35
I am afraid. Have not been this afraid since election night when Hillary was almost elected. The world lucked out and survived to live another day. Has our luck run out?
Anon , Apr 8, 2018 10:50:55 AM | 36
Sigh, here we go again, just like Skripal case, west acts with propaganda and psyops without any evidence. The stupid TRUMP will of course bomb Syria again along with the disgusting Macron cheered by EU and western media.
fast freddy , Apr 8, 2018 10:55:05 AM | 37
che 18

That is the most plausible scenario. The "intensity" of the US "response" to the False Flag gas (always gas!) attack. remains to be seen. Pummeling airstrips are generally good stagecraft/showmanship and little else. Airstrips are quickly repaired and back up to speed in short order.

M , Apr 8, 2018 10:55:42 AM | 38
May be coincidental (not) but John Bolton takes his seat as the National Security Advisor tomorrow. I wonder if Ramjet will take his proton pill?
b , Apr 8, 2018 10:56:53 AM | 39
No gas attack says SOHR: Syrian Gov't: Rebels to Give Up Last Ghouta Suburb
Beirut (AP) -- An alleged gas attack killed at least 40 people in the eastern suburbs of Damascus, as Syrian rebels agreed to give up their last foothold in the area, medics and state media reported on Sunday.

...

Meanwhile, state news agency SANA said the Army of Islam group agreed to leave Douma on Sunday, after three days of intensive government shelling and bombardment.

...
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said at least 80 people were killed in Douma on Saturday, including around 40 who died from suffocation. But it said the suffocations were the result of shelters collapsing on people inside them.

"Until this minute, no one has been able to find out the kind of agent that was used," said Mahmoud, the White Helmets' spokesman, in a video statement from Syria.

Anon , Apr 8, 2018 10:59:08 AM | 40
Remember this bullshit is a friggin reprise of what happened on 1 year ago!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Shayrat_missile_strike

"The 2017 Shayrat missile strike took place on the morning of 7 April 2017,[1][4] ..the strike was executed under responsibility of U.S. President Donald Trump, as a direct response to the Khan Shaykhun chemical attack that occurred on 4 Apri"

Give Syria S-400 damnit!

sermon , Apr 8, 2018 10:59:10 AM | 41
miss match in timings damn it. The syria event production should have happened same day as bell pottinger salsbury thus creating another libya quick all in nato depleted uranium party. with movie play and tv show timing and script and emotion are critical for engagement.
emotion is the gelling agent for consent that is why so many tv and radio news pundit are actor not journalist
Qualtrough , Apr 8, 2018 11:00:00 AM | 42
In the US when a murder occurs and a suspect apprehended there is a trial that can take weeks or months, and the prosecution and the defense present their expert Witnesses. Then at the end of all that a jury usually decides where the person is guilty or not. On the other hand, when a crime is alleged in another country far far away from the US, such as an alleged gas attack in Syria, within days we know exactly who is responsible and on that basis are willing to commit arms, troops and spend billions of dollars to kill people in large quantities and destroy a country. One would think that given the stakes involved a little bit more care might be taken.
fast freddy , Apr 8, 2018 11:02:01 AM | 43
"Gas" scares the bejesus out of rubes. Makes Great Drama. Triggers, then reinforces historical themes. "The fiend! He gassed his own people!" "Gas Chambers" (Cant' go there!). If there's gas, well, by golly there's got to be a ham-handed, asymmetrical "response" (motherfocker of all bombs!) from the "International Community".
Red Ryder , Apr 8, 2018 11:06:44 AM | 44
Happy Easter to all our Orthodox Christian friends around the globe. The message is 'never lose hope or live in fear'. Christ leads in this eternal battle against evil and Satan's minions. This war has brought all civilizations of the land together. The dying civilization of the ocean will wreck havoc until it expires. There are many paths to that ruin.

Confronting the Son of God is assuredly one of them. Naturally, the devils have chosen Orthodox Easter to launch this latest perfidy against Russia.

Rob , Apr 8, 2018 11:06:52 AM | 45
@morongobill #19. There is often a stark difference between what Trump says or tweets and what he actually does. Often he is speaking and acting for the benefit of various target audiences, sometimes on opposite sides, simultaneously. However, his bellicose response to the alleged chemical attacks in Syria is cause for worry. Trump is a bully, and he would not wish to appear weak by backing down from explicitly threatening rhetoric. Besides, he doesn't give a damn about killing Syrians or anyone else.

BTW, kudos to those who pegged the Skripal incident as prelude to some sort of chemical incident in Syria. It couldn't have been scripted better for a TV program. Oh, wait...

Anon , Apr 8, 2018 11:10:21 AM | 46
Trump is so stupid its amazing, I have given up on this moron, not only does he threaten Russia and Syria but he threats to bomb again!

President Trump: Will Meet Putin Soon "To Discuss The Arms Race, Which Is Getting Out Of Control"
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/03/20/president_trump_will_meet_putin_soon_to_discuss_the_arms_race_which_is_getting_out_of_control.html

Trump 'ideally' wants US troops out of Syria within 6 months
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/05/trump-ideally-wants-us-troops-out-syria-within-6-months.html

fast freddy , Apr 8, 2018 11:10:27 AM | 47
Brilliant Wordsmithery: Covfefe Normal Genius Trump discovers alliteration with "Animal Assad". That's Dr. Animal Assad.
Mina , Apr 8, 2018 11:11:08 AM | 48
Just a couple of days ago, the Syrian observatory was acknowledging the hostages problem: http://english.ahram.org.eg/News/295020.aspx

And 2 days ago bbc arabic was running a headline all day about Russian mercenaries flow to Syria on regular commercial flights. There s a whole world out there in the propaganda addressed to Arab viewers. No time to check if alarabiyya and Aljazeera are now broadcasting the vids from duma 24/7 as they used to do

WorldBLee , Apr 8, 2018 11:24:21 AM | 51
Trump is a like a wind-up doll in that he can be easily led astray due to his complete lack of knowledge of foreign and military affairs. Just tell him children have been "gassed" and he gets angry and wants to strike back. The super hawks can thus wind up him whenever they really need to him to do something stupid. (I mean, other than the normal stupid things he does all the time on his own.)
psychohistorian , Apr 8, 2018 11:30:07 AM | 53
What will empire do now?

I don't see it as an Israel issue but a "who controls the tools of human exchange" issue that may be about to evolve.....or not

Certainly the entitlement of some folks will be affected by making finance a global public utility but I think that is a good thing....

Think of the potential of our species if we can evolve beyond the "social contract" we operate under currently....I am excited about the potential and measured about the chances of it all happening.

n , Apr 8, 2018 11:30:39 AM | 54
we need to come together as a world community forget about yesterdays semite children of palastine slaughter and deal with animal assad and the more important children of ghouta

Israeli officials: U.S. must strike in Syria
"Assad is the angel of death, and the world would be better without him."

The United States must attack the regime of Bashar Assad in Syria in response to the regime chemical gas strike on the Syrian town Douma that killed more than 70 people, Strategic Affairs and Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan said Sunday.

Speaking on Army Radio, Erdan, who is Netanyahu's number two in Likud, said he hoped US military action against the Assad regime would be taken again, as it was when the regime used chemical weapons against its people in the past.

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Israeli-officals-US-must-strike-in-Syria-549144

Grieved , Apr 8, 2018 11:42:43 AM | 55
@24 Noirette - thanks for that link to the story of how Pompeo gamed Trump into the missile launch (not to call it a "strike") against Syria last year. I must keep that one for reference.

Good that Trump got those tweets off his chest. We can rest easier now. I wonder if he ever will understand how he's being played by the people around him? His sentimentality seems to be a weakness they can easily leverage.

Nothing will happen, of course. As lysander suggests, Russia probably will inflict some covert pain on US interests, while as b reports the FM has already warned of consequences if the US should be stupid enough to do something overt. I really like lysander's image of the hammer blow to the face as Russian retaliation.

Friends, we are seeing the last days of false flags and the last days of the world caring about western propaganda. How many Russian diplomats are left for vassal nations to expel? How many times can the UK government disgrace itself, or Trump have a meltdown on Twitter - and nothing serious ever happens? How many times do we need to see a fleet turn back from Korea - even assuming it could find its way there in the first place - or US missiles fail to strike their targets, whether in Syria or Yemen?

The greater the bluster, the more crystalline the result of no-result appears to the cooler heads of the world. Which shows that even when the dog doesn't bark in the night, still the caravan moves on.

Don Bacon , Apr 8, 2018 11:52:39 AM | 57
@Noirette 24
Help me out here -- how did Pompeo admit fooling Trump?
Hoarsewhisperer , Apr 8, 2018 11:56:27 AM | 58
Posted by: et Al | Apr 8, 2018 8:55:04 AM | 11
(..inundated by a chorus...I yield. pl)

Commendably quick, forthright and unequivocal.
One imagines it wasn't easy.

Don Bacon , Apr 8, 2018 12:08:02 PM | 59
It's the comedy hour in Washington.

from The Hill

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) tore into President Trump after he put blame on former President Obama following reports of a chemical attack in Syria.
"Dear @realDonaldTrump: Remember when you launched cruise missiles at a largely empty field in Syria? That unconstitutional act didn't do very much," Lieu tweeted.

"Remember when you said last week that US is leaving Syria in six months? So what is your plan? You're the President now. Remember?"

Trump took to Twitter Sunday to condemn the attacks and rail against Obama. "If President Obama had crossed his stated Red Line In The Sand, the Syrian disaster would have ended long ago! Animal Assad would have been history!" Trump tweeted, referring to Syrian President Bashar Assad. . . here

dh , Apr 8, 2018 12:15:59 PM | 60
@49 "Just tell him children have been "gassed" and he gets angry and wants to strike back."

He does have a couple of options...neither very appealing. He can ignore the 'gas attack' and be called callous and uncaring. He can hold off and ask for more evidence and get told he's soft on Putin/Assad.

Alain , Apr 8, 2018 12:16:43 PM | 61
Imho i find the us statement pretty "soft". "verification" is better than "russia/assad did it". i don't think the us is going to "strike". the military paradigm has changed. they know, we hope.
Zico , Apr 8, 2018 12:17:39 PM | 62
Convenient timing to take the focus away for the IDF shooting Palestinian kids and journalist or the botched Skripal show. The new memo is Assad, gas, Iran, Russia, Putin - repeat.

Look everybody, over there!!!

You gotta hand it to these guys. They've perfected the art of fooling the masses very well.

imo , Apr 8, 2018 12:18:53 PM | 63
"Is Trump really willing to escalate towards that?"

More than likely willing and able to take it right up to the wire in the lead up to (and during)
the 2018 FIFA World Cup in Russia between 14 June to 15 July 2018.
Putin will be at his weakest. UK farce was just an appetizer.

Don Bacon , Apr 8, 2018 12:23:57 PM | 64
State : "We continue to closely follow disturbing reports on April 7 " . . .which we write, and we decided this time to pile on Russia. . ."Russia has breached its commitments to the United Nations as a framework guarantor. It has betrayed the Chemical Weapons Convention . . . yadda yadda". . . here
somebody , Apr 8, 2018 12:25:14 PM | 65
It is over. "Rebels" agreed to be deported to Idlib and release hostages.
Anon , Apr 8, 2018 12:25:49 PM | 66
Alain

I think you are badly wrong, US, France have said they would strike weeks before this, and now it happens, they will strike.

Noirette , Apr 8, 2018 12:40:51 PM | 68
Don Bacon, 55, Idk. link I posted seemed interesting enough.

There is no straight admission of course (re. > Pompeo fooling Trump) and the whole story may be made up,
but it has the the ring of truth in the sense that it fits with the US top echeleons are mired in dire,
multiple, crossed, struggles. The various factions of the US PTB are not unified, and fighting secretly under the radar,
there is no unified position from the US, so not from the UK either.

Ok?

Rob , Apr 8, 2018 1:10:36 PM | 69
@psychohistorian (67) Thanks very much for that posting of actual events on the ground in Douma. They are further reason to believe that the alleged chemical gas attack was not the work of the Syrian army. Clearly, the rebels were on the ropes and ready for a knockout blow. We must ask: What might the Syrian government have gained by poisoning civilians and incurring the wrath and condemnation of the "civilized" world? Absolutely nothing! From a military standpoint, it was completely unnecessary, and from a public relations standpoint, a predictable disaster. Hence, being rational actors, they would never have chosen to use chemical weapons under the circumstances. Why is this so hard for Western nations and their media to understand? The only reason that I can give is that it is in their interest not to understand. It does not comport with their agenda, which is to topple Assad and weaken Russia.
james , Apr 8, 2018 1:31:58 PM | 71
thanks b and thanks for the many insightful comments...

of course isis is being coddled by the west as a tool for the same agenda that has never been dropped... same deal the freaks in douma that are unwilling to negotiate... ditto oldenyoungs comments @22... don't worry oy - russia can see thru that..

@27 dh - yes.. we will see how long that lasts.. i made a comment, but it didn't show yet.. the guy is a crank at this point..

@30 Breadonwaters.. good point, but i wouldn't count on it.. the endless propaganda and false flags are relentless and i see no sign of it stopping.. maybe if the white helmets funding dried up, but that is highly unlikely as well..

@33 don bacon.. sst - 'as the stomach turns' a soap opera that periodically does or doesn't run..

@62 zico... i always ask the question 'what would israel want here?'...

meme , Apr 8, 2018 1:33:55 PM | 72
Is Trump about to have an interview with Mueller soon? Is he also trying to set up the US military to get a bloody nose in Syria? .. so that he can fire a few generals and to try and get back on his campaign promises about pulling back foreign wars?
Don Bacon , Apr 8, 2018 1:43:27 PM | 73
@Noirette 68
Ok?
Weeelll, okay. . . I will continue to value your comments.
Probably the main point here is that the CIA can't be trusted, which in its history has resulted in several comeuppances, and should again.
Don Bacon , Apr 8, 2018 2:09:25 PM | 76
Pat Lang: "Animal" Assad? Our beloved president has once again been watching a bit too much TV news. Does it ever occur to him to pick up the secure phone and call the watch officer at CIA, NSA or wherever and ask if they think the news reports are correct?

Sure, Pat. If we can't trust the Intelligence Community, then whom can we trust? Our own lyin' eyes?

Duglarri , Apr 8, 2018 2:11:20 PM | 77
Amazing. Absolutely amazing. There is a chance Assad did this -- but here's also a chance he would walk in front of a moving train, or jump out of an airplane. The question is, why? There's no military advantage to this. None. On the other hand, there is stupendous value to terrorists to conduct a false flag attack.

Americans. Being played by a fiddle, like complete idiots, for... ever.

NemesisCalling , Apr 8, 2018 2:26:02 PM | 80
As I recall, just a few weeks ago, the US was hitting the "Attack No.Ko." circuit hard. Not much came of it, as usual, and to what end DJT thinks these venting moments will lead, I don't have a clue. But it does follow that not much will come of this other than us plebs wondering why we have to live under this looming threat of annihilation. At the very least, maybe a few tomahawks will be unleashed on a few targetted shit-shacks which are being used by sheep herders. Wrong time to take a crap! The MSM needs a rating boost and exploding outhouses with a million-dollar tomahawk might be able to beat "American Idol" tonight. I'd tune in.
bruno , Apr 8, 2018 2:26:11 PM | 81
Duh, here we go again. Syria with help of Russian aerospace forces are winning the war. Why use WMD that would invite US retaliation??????The discredited NeoCons are not happy with the state of Syria instigated war.Again regime is winning.... And lo and behold Trumpster called for withdrawal of US forces that are illegally occupying a sovereign country. What are the NeoCon /Likudniks e to do???.Well..... stage a false flag opps of course. Syria was always the low hanging fruit on way to war with Iran folks.........
spudski , Apr 8, 2018 2:54:17 PM | 83
@ karlof1 75

I think there would be great personal danger to VVP if he went to DC.

Anon , Apr 8, 2018 3:04:54 PM | 84
spudski

Indeed, something Ive also thought about, I would never put my foot in the US if I were the leader of Russia.

I dont see them meeting now when Trump blow it over and over, Trump never seems to learn or he doesnt care, maybe the generals, and state dep. is in charge of the foreign policy. Hes just a puppet?

daffyDuct , Apr 8, 2018 3:13:15 PM | 85

White Helmets and the Mannequin Challenge. Something to remember at times like these.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zgl271A6LgQ

Perimetr , Apr 8, 2018 3:15:04 PM | 86
Regardless of who makes the decisions in the US, I seriously doubt that the Russians will back down from their thrice stated threat of direct retaliation against US forces, should the US hit Russian military personnel. The Russian red line has clearly been drawn and if the US crazies choose to cross it, look out.
Babyl-on , Apr 8, 2018 3:26:12 PM | 87
I watched the Security Counsel meeting the other day and I thought Russia really blew it. The Russian ambassador was sputtering and stammering and all over the map and did not provide or mention the ample evidence of the widespread ability to make these chemicals or any other evidence. While the British simply had to stay on script. Russia looked bad in my view.

Now, with the new "chemical attack" in recent hours BoJo is already calling for a prompt investigation and warns - Russia should not be allowed to stall it. Why was not Russia out first calling for an independent investigation and demanding proper procedures and observers?

Russia can't continue to just stand there and get punched.

Bakerpete , Apr 8, 2018 3:26:21 PM | 88
A question I've been mulling over for sometime that may appear unrelated to this thread but does have a general bearing.
In the lead up and during WW2, when did the German population begin to realize they were the bad guys?
Laguerre , Apr 8, 2018 4:04:41 PM | 94
I was quite surprised the rebels actually went ahead with the so-called gas attack. I suppose some sort of combination between a hard-line faction in Douma, desperate about being about to lose their last foothold, and nutters in the US, like Bolton. Far too late.

The point is that the Russians have been preparing for just such an event for months. Was it not two months ago that the Russians put troops into Damascus to prevent a decapitating strike? A US strike would be a sort of Kursk Offensive, attacking into a well-prepared defence.

I remain convinced that Trump is psychologically unwilling to go ahead with a major war, whatever the people around him.

Anon , Apr 8, 2018 4:18:09 PM | 96
Laguerre

Trump have recently added Bolton, Pompeo, I mean come on, its obvious that Trump have no "psychologically unwilling" traits about bombing another nation. He have done it before and will do it again, but beside its not only about Trump but also the ugly little guy in France, Macron that are as warmongering on Syria.

Laguerre , Apr 8, 2018 4:19:25 PM | 97
This gas attack is also, from the US point of view, a sort of "surge". An unwillingness on the part of the US to admit defeat. Something has to be done to put the US, currently losing, back into the game. Just that facing up to Russia is a bit more complicated than beating up poorly armed Arab tribes.
Don Bacon , Apr 8, 2018 4:22:27 PM | 98
@ Laguerre 94
I was quite surprised the rebels actually went ahead with the so-called gas attack. They didn't, US-France-UK-(Turkey) did. The rebels are the ones with guns and ammo, the alliance are the ones with actors and cameras.
frances , Apr 8, 2018 4:40:01 PM | 100
I am a bit confused, did the rebels agree to return to the agreement they defaulted on before or after the supposed "gas" attack? If before, it was a ruse (or the west set the up), if after, they may have been told by Russia to return to the agreement or be slaughtered. We live in interesting times and I am most unhappy about it.

[Apr 08, 2018] The UK and France are in deep economic trouble and need an external enemy such as Russia using an incident such as the Skripal affair to deflect the people from focusing on removing their government leaders

Notable quotes:
"... The UK and France are in deep economic trouble and need an external enemy such as Russia using an incident such as the Skripal affair to deflect the people from focusing on removing their government leaders. If all else fails, the UK Royals will have a couple of weddings and babies to take up the front pages for most of this year. Meanwhile, like the Skripals, several UK/EU agents involved in the HillaryGate Steele dossier trail of evidence such as Christophe Steele, Joseph Mifsid, and Gianni Pittella have disappeared: ..."
"... In the UK case of May and BoJo, any alternative will result in a continuation of the decline of the society. To be honest, much of the decline is baked in structural with the loss of income from former "slave" colonies and the decline of North Sea oil and gas reserves. Staying in the EU against the will of the people will continue to further drain resources to Germany, which has structurally colonialized Western Europe. ..."
"... France, like the UK, has extracted the wealth from their former colonies and facing a reduction in tribute from these sources. Macron has attempted to maintain control of some colonies such as Mali and really wants to conquer Syria. I suspect the meetings between Macron and MbS will result in an agreement for Saudi Arabia to buy French weapons while France getting financial aid to expand French troop bases in Syria. ..."
"... Almost all sectors of the French society are protesting against the neo-feudal policies of Macron, FIRE economy participants and his dwarves in the National Assembly. There are strikes among: ..."
"... The EU is also experiencing internal dissent with the Visegrad four (Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic and Slovakia) plus Italy and Austria and thus needs an external enemy to distract its members. I suspect that a Ukrainian invasion of DPR/LPR will once again be used as a flash point create "two minutes of hate" against Russia ..."
Apr 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Krollchem , Apr 8, 2018 5:18:42 PM | 18

The UK and France are in deep economic trouble and need an external enemy such as Russia using an incident such as the Skripal affair to deflect the people from focusing on removing their government leaders. If all else fails, the UK Royals will have a couple of weddings and babies to take up the front pages for most of this year. Meanwhile, like the Skripals, several UK/EU agents involved in the HillaryGate Steele dossier trail of evidence such as Christophe Steele, Joseph Mifsid, and Gianni Pittella have disappeared:

https://disobedientmedia.com/2018/04/all-russiagate-roads-lead-to-london-as-evidence-emerges-of-joseph-mifsuds-links-to-uk-intelligence/

https://via.hypothes.is/https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertonardelli/the-mysterious-professor-at-the-center-of-the-russia-trump?utm_term=.paVe5QKjLR#.imWM6VNRLp

https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertonardelli/the-mysterious-professor-at-the-center-of-the-russia-trump?utm_term=.paVe5QKjLR#.imWM6VNRLp

In the UK case of May and BoJo, any alternative will result in a continuation of the decline of the society. To be honest, much of the decline is baked in structural with the loss of income from former "slave" colonies and the decline of North Sea oil and gas reserves. Staying in the EU against the will of the people will continue to further drain resources to Germany, which has structurally colonialized Western Europe.

France, like the UK, has extracted the wealth from their former colonies and facing a reduction in tribute from these sources. Macron has attempted to maintain control of some colonies such as Mali and really wants to conquer Syria. I suspect the meetings between Macron and MbS will result in an agreement for Saudi Arabia to buy French weapons while France getting financial aid to expand French troop bases in Syria.

Somehow, the current revolution in France is blacked out in the Western Media. Videos of the current revolution are common on Youtube such as: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g21_myERteQ

Almost all sectors of the French society are protesting against the neo-feudal policies of Macron, FIRE economy participants and his dwarves in the National Assembly. There are strikes among:

For a schedule of the rolling strikes in France see: http://www.cestlagreve.fr/

Macron has already deployed the CRS assassins and the street war will begin when EU police and military invade to crush to protestors. This will be far more violent than May 1968 and may usher in the 6th Republic. Unfortunately, Macron would prefer the cities to burn rather than resign and turnover the government to the President of the Senate.

The EU is also experiencing internal dissent with the Visegrad four (Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic and Slovakia) plus Italy and Austria and thus needs an external enemy to distract its members. I suspect that a Ukrainian invasion of DPR/LPR will once again be used as a flash point create "two minutes of hate" against Russia :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4zYlOU7Fpk

These EU conflicts will not end peacefully as the system will fight back rather than step aside.

[Apr 08, 2018] Is Theresa "cat killer" may a dangerous female psychopath?

Notable quotes:
"... For White Helmets read Britain. They are British created, funded and operated. May's Government has to be deep in this as well. ..."
"... Never forget that May, Cameron and other conservative MPs crossed the floor of parliament and voted for Blair and the illegal attack on Iraq when Labour MPs refused to support him. ..."
Apr 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Emily , Apr 8, 2018 8:28:21 AM | 8

Yeah/7: For White Helmets read Britain. They are British created, funded and operated. May's Government has to be deep in this as well.

Never forget that May, Cameron and other conservative MPs crossed the floor of parliament and voted for Blair and the illegal attack on Iraq when Labour MPs refused to support him.

Without Theresa May and David Cameron, Blair wouldn't have had the authority to attack.

The woman is a dangerous psychopath.

[Apr 08, 2018] Another false flag ? So while the negotiations with radical Islamist to leave the area were going supposedly Syria was attacking them some sort of chemical bombs?

Apr 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

jawbone | Apr 8, 2018 2:16:44 PM | 8

Yes, and Trump is throwing shit and having a fit.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Trump+tweets&oq=Trump+Tweets&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j0l5.3987j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

CNN on the tweeting:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/08/politics/donald-trump-syria-assad/index.html

FOX News:

http://fox5sandiego.com/2018/04/08/trump-tweets-big-price-after-reports-of-syrian-chemical-attack/

So nice of him to toss off t hreats on Orthodox Easter Sunday. What a guy.

Who's influencing him? Bolton? FOX? Pompeo? Where does Mattis stand?

Wonder who is actually influencing him.

****
Interesting article at RT about Jaysh al-Islam coming to an agreement with the Syrian government to leave Duma/Douma and go to Jarablus.
Published time: 8 Apr, 2018 13:56
Edited time: 8 Apr, 2018 15:05

The Islamist group is to leave Douma for the city of Jarablus within 48 hours, SANA reported, citing an official source. It said a deal to release all the prisoners has been reached. Damascus agreed to negotiate with one of the last major militant groups holding out in Douma in a bid to protect civilians and liberate abductees

The radical Islamist group, which has been accused of using civilians as human shields, earlier agreed to leave the enclave of Eastern Ghouta near the Syrian capital. Jaysh al-Islam will have to clear barricades and provide maps of minefields that they have laid in the area. The militants were set to begin withdrawing from the city of Douma on Sunday, the head of the Russian Defense Ministry's Syrian Reconciliation Center, Major General Yury Yevtushenko has said.

So...were the negotiations going on while supposedly Syrian was attacking with some sort of chem bombs?? Weird.

Also, the number of injured and dead has escalated very unbelievably. From about 15 to thoursands!!

somebody , Apr 8, 2018 3:01:17 PM | 9
8 the "chemical attack" was part of the negotiations. Trump is talking tough but Russia made a believable threat to hit back.

Posted by: Pat Bateman | Apr 8, 2018 1:08:29 PM | 2

Yes, there is a "strategy" to pretend Russia is a criminal worse than other countries. They even mentioned the word "weapons of mass destruction" again. It is a very real campaign in a run up to war.

This here from the opcw meeting

"It is regrettable to say that our Western partners had tried to disrupt today's session. In the beginning they offered to observe a minute of silence in memory of people killed in Khan Sheyhun, Idlib province, Syria. We proposed them to hold a moment of silence to remember all victims of chemical weapons, primarily in Vietnam, Cambodia, Iran, Iraq, and our partners somehow felt uncomfortable. [They] don't want to remember all victims of chemical weapons," said Shulgin."

It has become this transparent.

oldenyoung , Apr 8, 2018 4:41:47 PM | 16
There have been some pretty radical reports at VeteransToday. is there anyone that can verify these claims? or even a good German speaker that can read the labels on chemical munitions seized by the SAA...or any other supporting reports of captured US UK ISRAELI chemical experts in East Ghoutta?

https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/04/08/proof-intel-drop-trump-bolton-behind-syria-chemical-attacks-confirmed/

regards

OY

[Apr 08, 2018] The negotiations with rebels about the surrender were close to completion when the false flag was staged

Apr 08, 2018 | www.google.com

jawbone | Apr 8, 2018 2:16:44 PM | 8

CNN on the tweeting:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/08/politics/donald-trump-syria-assad/index.html

FOX News:

http://fox5sandiego.com/2018/04/08/trump-tweets-big-price-after-reports-of-syrian-chemical-attack/

So nice of him to toss off t hreats on Orthodox Easter Sunday. What a guy. Who's influencing him? Bolton? FOX? Pompeo? Where does Mattis stand? Wonder who is actually influencing him.

****

Interesting article at RT about Jaysh al-Islam coming to an agreement with the Syrian government to leave Duma/Douma and go to Jarablus.

Published time: 8 Apr, 2018 13:56

Edited time: 8 Apr, 2018 15:05

The Islamist group is to leave Douma for the city of Jarablus within 48 hours, SANA reported, citing an official source. It said a deal to release all the prisoners has been reached. Damascus agreed to negotiate with one of the last major militant groups holding out in Douma in a bid to protect civilians and liberate abductees

The radical Islamist group, which has been accused of using civilians as human shields, earlier agreed to leave the enclave of Eastern Ghouta near the Syrian capital. Jaysh al-Islam will have to clear barricades and provide maps of minefields that they have laid in the area. The militants were set to begin withdrawing from the city of Douma on Sunday, the head of the Russian Defense Ministry's Syrian Reconciliation Center, Major General Yury Yevtushenko has said.

So...were the negotiations going on while supposedly Syrian was attacking with some sort of chem bombs?? Weird.

Also, the number of injured and dead has escalated very unbelievably. From about 15 to thousands!!

[Apr 08, 2018] The farce continues. As the Skripals are apparently alive and well the British government has a problem

Notable quotes:
"... I don't think this Skripal incident was staged. They went out for dinner. Caught very bad food poisoning. British intelligence and May's government jumped on this incident to blame it on Russia. May's poll number were down, and her handling of British exit from the EU was horrendous. This gave her all she needed to get back on her feet politically. ..."
"... White helmets and the Coventry MI6 asset not working in unison. I take it the Ghouta gas attack was supposed to have occurred at the peak of the Russia=novichok meme somewhere between 12th-20th March. ..."
"... Whereas it's clear that Bojo and the Tin Lady are playing a weak hand badly -- and have only been spared by the appalling complicity of virtually the entire panoply of Western media as information warfare adjuncts -- which is in itself a stunning and sickening display of power–it's not clear that Russia has played a stronger hand much more ably ..."
"... The UK and France are in deep economic trouble and need an external enemy such as Russia using an incident such as the Skripal affair to deflect the people from focusing on removing their government leaders. If all else fails, the UK Royals will have a couple of weddings and babies to take up the front pages for most of this year. Meanwhile, like the Skripals, several UK/EU agents involved in the HillaryGate Steele dossier trail of evidence such as Christophe Steele, Joseph Mifsid, and Gianni Pittella have disappeared: ..."
"... The EU is also experiencing internal dissent with the Visegrad four (Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic and Slovakia) plus Italy and Austria and thus needs an external enemy to distract its members. I suspect that a Ukrainian invasion of DPR/LPR will once again be used as a flash point create "two minutes of hate" against Russia ..."
Apr 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

The farce continues. As the Skripals are apparently alive and well the British government has a problem. When they talk and tell the world that it was actually food poisoning and not a chemical weapon attack that hit them, the government of Theresa May is toast. The Skripals have to be kept isolated and eventually vanished . The CIA might give them a new identity or lock them into one of its black sites. The Skripals house and the Zizzy restaurant are to be destroyed. (Who will kill the hospital doctors?)

The "doorknob" theory the UK spread to explain the alleged injury of one policeman is so outrageously stupid that many doubt it. To counter the mistrust, HMG comes up with an even more implausible explanation :

Russian agents watched Sergei Skripal for a fortnight and chose to strike on a Sunday morning so no postmen or delivery men would be exposed accidentally to the nerve agent. Any third parties touching the door handle before the Skripals would have required the agents to reapply the gel to the door handle, at the risk of being seen doing so.

Sure, that's why so many neighbors spoke of foreigners milling around in the street for two weeks (not). And its why there was such a large manhunt right after the incident happened (not).

Veterinarians in Salisbury post on Facebook that they had contacted the police several times immediately after they learned that the Skripals were admitted into hospital. They offered to take care of their cats and guinea pigs. The police did not react at all. One cat escaped, the Guinea pigs died of thirst and the cat left behind was so starved that it had to be put down.

james , Apr 8, 2018 12:57:31 PM | 1

thanks b.. great work as always...

i don't get it that britian is offering the skripals a new residence in the usa, or that they are destroying their house... is destroying and getting rid of the evidence all that have? i am sure they would like to get rid of the skripals too, not to mention the doctors and whoever else that doesn't go along with the official script...

Pat Bateman , Apr 8, 2018 1:08:29 PM | 2
Has the penny dropped yet b that the Skripal episode was designed to condemn the Syrian Government ahead of another staged chemical attack - this time to be hit hard. Those damn Russians are launching chemical attacks in Britain, and now they are supplying chemicals to the regime to poison Syrian children...

It makes the shit stick.

Jose Garcia , Apr 8, 2018 1:13:47 PM | 3
I don't think this Skripal incident was staged. They went out for dinner. Caught very bad food poisoning. British intelligence and May's government jumped on this incident to blame it on Russia. May's poll number were down, and her handling of British exit from the EU was horrendous. This gave her all she needed to get back on her feet politically.
Pat Bateman , Apr 8, 2018 1:27:57 PM | 4
James Landale, BBC diplomatic correspondent writes
"For Russia, how far is it prepared to defend its allies' apparent use of chemical weapons when its own apparent use of a nerve agent in the UK is subject to so much global condemnation?"

Yes, the shit has stuck.

Peter AU 1 , Apr 8, 2018 1:46:21 PM | 5
Once the Skripals have been vanished, there would no longer be any reason to keep them alive.
The Douma FF - too little too late? White helmets and the Coventry MI6 asset not working in unison. I take it the Ghouta gas attack was supposed to have occurred at the peak of the Russia=novichok meme somewhere between 12th-20th March.
laserlurk , Apr 8, 2018 1:49:23 PM | 6
b.

Very nice writing, wit and "ohrwoerm" in general here.

I doubt that anything dramatic will happen in Syria on behalf of US retaliation or anything sinister in that direction..
US and others have their people in Assad opposing forces and they know exactly what is going on - on the ground.

What will be interesting is to observe how two Russian citizens will vanish and how the truth will be pushed under the carpet while Russia will not let this just go.

I am still trying to find the plausable connection between the two. Could somebody elaborate such option?

Paul , Apr 8, 2018 1:58:16 PM | 7
Whereas it's clear that Bojo and the Tin Lady are playing a weak hand badly -- and have only been spared by the appalling complicity of virtually the entire panoply of Western media as information warfare adjuncts -- which is in itself a stunning and sickening display of power–it's not clear that Russia has played a stronger hand much more ably .

In sum, the questions, criticisms and suggested avenues of response suggested here, as well as at the Off-Guardian, John Helmer's blog, the Saker, MoA, and strategic culture.org (anyone who hasn't seen Rob Slane's 50 questions there really should), has been much richer and potentially more efficacious than Russia's official demarches have so far been.

At the very least, can a writ of habeus corpus be filed? It will be clear to most of the world by now that the UK does not want the Skripals to be heard from directly unless and until their statements will not be those of "tools of the Kremlin." (But it may be that the Russians are not so keen that they be heard from either, until what they will say can be determined.)

I would have to think that this trial balloon to have the Skripals relocated with new identities would be recognized by them as a threat (since at that point they will have been disappeared). If the Russians are hesitating about what they might say, and about having a writ of habeus corpus filed, the implied threat from the USUK might be enough to persuade the Skripals that if they have information embarrassing for the USUK (or for Russia, for that matter), they had better speak out now, before they are disappeared.

james , Apr 8, 2018 3:04:46 PM | 10
craig murrays latest from today..
Maracatu , Apr 8, 2018 3:24:10 PM | 11
Is anybody getting the shivers like I am?
Russian forces deployed in Syria, including S-400 and Pantsir-S1 air defense systems and Sukhoi Su-30SM multirole fighters, have been put on a combat alert , according to reports appearing from local sources in the country's provinces of Tartus and Latakia where Russian military facilities are located.
Grieved , Apr 8, 2018 3:48:47 PM | 12
@11 Maracatu

The US is getting shivers. The knowledge that Russia is on combat alert - which I accept as true - must be scaring the shit out of the US generals. Who wants to make the next call, which ends in death? None of those chickenhawks, for sure.

Grieved , Apr 8, 2018 4:11:35 PM | 13
If you watched Part 1 of the new "Putin" documentary by Andrei Kondrashev a couple of weeks ago, you may not know that Part 2 is now out, at the Vesti YouTube channel:

Putin 2

and if you didn't watch Part 1, here it is too:

Putin

If you're a fan, you'll find these two videos very inspiring. We've seen numerous snippets from the past life of Putin, and anecdotes, but Kondrashev has pulled together more complete narratives and interviews, including with Putin. Kondrashev is the guy who made "Crimea - the Way Home" and was interviewing Putin in that one. They obviously have a good relationship. The scale of Putin's achievement is almost impossible to grasp, and his sheer humanity is amazing. He came from the honest, working poor, and has never lost this connection, never stopped being one of them.

ConfusedPundit , Apr 8, 2018 4:31:50 PM | 14
The Russians now officially want their money back (approx. 8.6b dollars) from Britain. (One of the reasons why the Brits wrote the Skripal script? Preemptive strike?) The Coalition will hit SR sooner or later. Israel will move 40km into SR soil and call the new area a buffer zone (between Golan Heights and the remaining Assad territory).

BTW, Somali authorities seize millions of dollars from UAE plane in Mogadishu.

laserlurk , Apr 8, 2018 4:41:06 PM | 15
@ConfusedPundit

Sources, pretty please.

Krollchem , Apr 8, 2018 5:18:42 PM | 18
The UK and France are in deep economic trouble and need an external enemy such as Russia using an incident such as the Skripal affair to deflect the people from focusing on removing their government leaders. If all else fails, the UK Royals will have a couple of weddings and babies to take up the front pages for most of this year. Meanwhile, like the Skripals, several UK/EU agents involved in the HillaryGate Steele dossier trail of evidence such as Christophe Steele, Joseph Mifsid, and Gianni Pittella have disappeared:

https://disobedientmedia.com/2018/04/all-russiagate-roads-lead-to-london-as-evidence-emerges-of-joseph-mifsuds-links-to-uk-intelligence/

https://via.hypothes.is/https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertonardelli/the-mysterious-professor-at-the-center-of-the-russia-trump?utm_term=.paVe5QKjLR#.imWM6VNRLp

">https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertonardelli/the-mysterious-professor-at-the-center-of-the-russia-trump?utm_term=.paVe5QKjLR#.imWM6VNRLp">https://via.hypothes.is/https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertonardelli/the-mysterious-professor-at-the-center-of-the-russia-trump?utm_term=.paVe5QKjLR#.imWM6VNRLp

In the UK case of May and BoJo, any alternative will result in a continuation of the decline of the society. To be honest, much of the decline is baked in structural with the loss of income from former "slave" colonies and the decline of North Sea oil and gas reserves. Staying in the EU against the will of the people will continue to further drain resources to Germany, which has structurally colonialized Western Europe.

France, like the UK, has extracted the wealth from their former colonies and facing a reduction in tribute from these sources. Macron has attempted to maintain control of some colonies such as Mali and really wants to conquer Syria. I suspect the meetings between Macron and MbS will result in an agreement for Saudi Arabia to buy French weapons while France getting financial aid to expand French troop bases in Syria.

Somehow, the current revolution in France is blacked out in the Western Media. Videos of the current revolution are common on Youtube such as: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g21_myERteQ

Almost all sectors of the French society are protesting against the neo-feudal policies of Macron, FIRE economy participants and his dwarves in the National Assembly. There are strikes among:

For a schedule of the rolling strikes in France see: http://www.cestlagreve.fr/

Macron has already deployed the CRS assassins and the street war will begin when EU police and military invade to crush to protestors. This will be far more violent than May 1968 and may usher in the 6th Republic. Unfortunately, Macron would prefer the cities to burn rather than resign and turnover the government to the President of the Senate.

The EU is also experiencing internal dissent with the Visegrad four (Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic and Slovakia) plus Italy and Austria and thus needs an external enemy to distract its members. I suspect that a Ukrainian invasion of DPR/LPR will once again be used as a flash point create "two minutes of hate" against Russia:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4zYlOU7Fpk

These EU conflicts will not end peacefully as the system will fight back rather than step aside.

Jackrabbit , Apr 8, 2018 5:34:35 PM | 19
b: . . . The Skripal's are apparently alive and well

I don't think we should assume that that is true.

Wouldn't their pets have been treated better if the authorities expected them to live?
- if they participated in the farce, they would have given some thought to their pets;
- if they were attacked or simply used for propaganda purposes, the authorities would care for their pets so as to not further offend them.

Yulia's phone call was weird. Why would she tell her cousin that she won't get a visa? Now the British are arranging for the Skripal's to disappear into witness protection. Will the Skripal's ever be allowed to make a public appearance and face questions from reporters? It appears that that they won't be allowed to. Either they are already dead or the British fear what they might say if they make a public appearance.

Some mentioned on one of MoA's Skripal threads that we have to be careful about what we believe and what we assume given that the authorities and press have proven to be biased. Sounds like good advice.

It seems clear that escalation in Syria direct public attention away from Skripal's /Salisbury. I don't think it's too much of a stretch (given all that has happened) to think that that was planned for.

The US, Australia, Canada and 16 EU states are among the countries which have expelled Russian envoys. Of the sixteen Commonwealth realms, with Queen Elizabeth II as their head of state, fourteen of them have Russian embassies. But only three of the fourteen (UK, Canada, Australia) have joined the expulsion.
One of the remaining eleven rebel countries, New Zealand, provided a reason. PM Ardern-- "While other countries have announced they are expelling undeclared Russian intelligence agents, officials have advised there are no individuals here in New Zealand who fit this profile. If there were, we would have already taken action."

Posted by: Don Bacon , Apr 8, 2018 5:48:26 PM | 20

The US, Australia, Canada and 16 EU states are among the countries which have expelled Russian envoys. Of the sixteen Commonwealth realms, with Queen Elizabeth II as their head of state, fourteen of them have Russian embassies. But only three of the fourteen (UK, Canada, Australia) have joined the expulsion.
One of the remaining eleven rebel countries, New Zealand, provided a reason. PM Ardern-- "While other countries have announced they are expelling undeclared Russian intelligence agents, officials have advised there are no individuals here in New Zealand who fit this profile. If there were, we would have already taken action."

Posted by: Don Bacon | Apr 8, 2018 5:48:26 PM | 20 /div

jawbone , Apr 8, 2018 6:01:04 PM | 21
@ 17 -- There seem to be lots of weasely things being said about the fate of the Skripal pets. The big, fluffy black cat with amber eyes should in no way whatsoever have suffered such depletion of calories that he had to be put down. I fear he was sent to Porton Down to be "studied," and then "put down." If there was a water source --dripping faucet, water closet, most houses have some place a pet can drink from other that his water bowl-- a cat can survive weeks. My Maine Coon disappeared, but showed up about 3-4 weeks later, ragged coat, unkempt, very thin, but, when given saline solution by the vet, immediately began to act more normal. Took a while to get her muscle mass rebuilt, but she survived.

An article from The Sun, dated April 5th, has a photo of Nash Van Drake (what a pretty cat), and states the specialist chemical weapons investigators did not gain access to the Skripal residence UNTIL APRIL 4TH!!! We know from photographs that lots of folks wearing moons suits were around for weeks -- why was nothing done to care for the pets?

I can't find it now through google, but I read a comment or tweet from a vet who had made repeated offers to care for the pets. These pets should never have suffered to the extent they did.

Someone in power did not want anyone outside those with enforced silence agreements to see those pets.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5983643/skripals-beloved-cat-nash-van-drake-had-to-be-secretly-put-down-following-the-poison-attack/

The sickly mog was transported to the Ministry of Defence res­earch laboratory at Porton Down to be tested, where he was found to be severely malnourished.

The lab's top veterinary officer ruled the pet was in so much pain he should be put down.

His body was then immediately incinerated to avoid contamination from the deadly nerve agent Novichok.

Sergei's guinea pigs were also destroyed at the top secret military research facility.

(If there is a hell, may these animal abusers end up there with long and miserable afterlives.)

jawbone , Apr 8, 2018 6:10:13 PM | 22
I was trying to get through to the Veterans Today link in #16 can't get through, either using the link or the URL for the site. Just got a 524 Error.

Anyone get through?

OY, any really important things you can post?

Norwegian , Apr 8, 2018 6:22:48 PM | 23
@22
The VT site is really slow, but it works. It looks explosive if true.
It links to this video in arabic which shows chemical weapons made in Germany and England (Salisbury!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=0&v=oEhUk73t8BA
oldenyoung , Apr 8, 2018 6:25:08 PM | 24
and now there is this from South Front...

https://southfront.org/russian-forces-in-syria-are-on-combat-alert-as-us-considers-list-of-targets-to-attack-government-forces-reports/

hope this is just exaggerated...otherwise things are getting hardened fast...

PS...will try to paste some from VT...@22

Laguerre , Apr 8, 2018 6:31:57 PM | 25
re krollchem 18
The UK and France are in deep economic trouble
Britain is, France isn't. Britain destroyed its industrial sector under Thatcher, and has nothing to offer faced with Brexit. France has a vast agricultural sector which they can fall back on. The French like revolutions, that's why the present troubles. Here's a video declaring revolution, from my university, if you can cope with the French, note the dog: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHaV3Hm5g2A.
oldenyoung , Apr 8, 2018 6:33:22 PM | 26
@22 text only...lots of good photos there...site is there for me. but it is very slow...


Last week, Russia and Syria announced the capture of British chemical weapon stockpiles in East Ghouta along with the capture of a "coalition" command and chemical weapons facility with all personnel. Taken from the combined statement censored from the western press, from March 25, 2018

"The Syrian Arab Army and with the help of Russian captured a shipment of chemical weapons destined for the Eastern Ghouta. These were British weapons produced at Porton Down in Salisbury. Russian suspects that the Skripal incident is related as by their records, Skiripal was working at Porton Down as a chemical weapons trafficker in partnership with a Ukrainian firm. Russia denies attacking Skripal but admits he was under surveillance for his activities involving support of terrorism in Syria and arms trafficking.

Russia also confirms that there are British, American, Israeli and Saudi intelligence officers who were caught by the Syrian army in one of the heavily fortified operations rooms during the invasion of the Syrian army and its allies of the East Ghouta."

VT asked the Syrian government for serial numbers and closeup photographs of chemical weapons used. Syria sent them to us today.

Today, the Syrian Army captured the following German made poison gas shells, shipped into Syria though Ukraine and Turkey and delivered to Jeish al Islam by a US CH53 helicopter, according to statements "allegedly" gotten from POW interrogations.

American, British and Israeli military personnel captured in Syria have confirmed they were ordered to stage chemical attacks in East Ghouta by their governments.

oldenyoung , Apr 8, 2018 6:35:39 PM | 27
@ 22 rest of text

The Americans are still being held along with Israeli's while British prisoners are being negotiated for. Sources in Damascus told us that representatives of Oman in Damascus approached the Russian Office of Reconciliation on behalf of Britain for the return of British chemical warfare personnel.

The shells in the above video are identified as VX gas from British stockpiles.

Russian officials in Syria informed Britain through Oman that they would have to directly deal with Syria for the return of their personnel. We have received no further information since, Damascus has remained silent on how or if negotiations were proceeding.

We do know that US Representative Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, a US Army combat veteran of Iraq, met with both President Assad and Donald Trump, in order to arrange for covert exchange, for substantial financial consideration, of captured Americans.

Initial introductions for this meeting were done by VT.

Israel bought back a Brigadier General (they claimed he was a colonel) in 2015 that we know about.

The recent gas attack in Syria, timed as the last terrorists were surrendering for relocation inside the Douma region of the Ghouta pocket, was planned personally by nominated presidential advisor John Bolton and President Donald Trump personally, according to highly placed sources.

Our sources in Russia, highest level, told us the attack was coming based on information they received from US and Israeli prisoners taken in East Ghouta after an evacuation attempt failed.

US casualty announcements in this effort have been released over the past few days as happening in other areas to cover US complicity in terrorism. This dishonors families of the dead, not just in the misuse of service members to support terrorism but in lying to families about combat deaths. This shame goes directly to coward Trump!

"The Marine Corps identified four Marines killed on Tuesday in a CH-53E Super Stallion helicopter crash near El Centro, Calif. The Marines were assigned to Marine Heavy Helicopter Squadron (HMH) 465, Marine Aircraft Group 16, 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar.

"The loss of our Marines weighs heavy on our hearts," Maj. Gen. Mark Wise, commanding general of 3rd MAW, said in a statement.
"Our priority is to provide support for our families and HMH-465 during this critical time."

The four Marines killed in the crash were Capt. Samuel A. Schultz, First Lt. Samuel D. Phillips, Gunnery Sgt. Derik R. Holley and Lance Cpl. Taylor J. Conrad."

Other US casualties were listed as a US Air Force F16 that allegedly crashed at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada and up to 6 Americans who the US claims were killed by "Kurdish forces" in the north of Syria.

All died in a failed combined US/Israel rescue operation to remove not only communications and command personnel but also chemical weapons operations teams as well.

Last week, VT Damascus received evidence that Americans, US Army Special Forces along with Israeli chemical weapons officers had been captured in East Ghouta. We were told that not only was a command facility captured with modern weapons but a stockpile of British made 81mm poison gas mortar shells, numbering in the hundreds, was seized as well.

Video's were viewed by former MOD weapons specialists who identified the green stripe on the shells seized in East Ghouta as VX gas from British stockpiles.

The Obama administration investigated alleged chemical attacks in 2012 and 2013 and advised Syria to turn over chemical stockpiles as a way of discouraging terrorists from continuing to stage chemical attacks to blame on Damascus.

Most efforts had their roots in Britain's MI6 and its affiliates, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and the White Helmets.

The US is currently facing combined military operations against its occupied zone in Syria by Iraq, Syrian and Russian forces. The US has been told to remove forces from Syria or face a wider conflict.

The US and Russia have been at war against one another inside Syria for about a month now.

More coming

ConfusedPundit , Apr 8, 2018 6:40:06 PM | 28
@laserlurk | Apr 8, 2018 4:41:06 PM | 15

Didn't want to clutter my post with links simply because a Copy&Paste from my post into google search bar would provide anyone with the related sources.

Russia's Prosecutor General Yury Chaika demanded Britain to return more than 500 billion rubles to the Russian Federation withdrawn by Russian citizens who are hiding from Russian justice

https://www.vedomosti.ru/politics/news/2018/04/08/756142-genprokuratura-prizvala-britaniyu-vernut-dengi

Somalia: Airport Security Seize Millions of Dollars of Cash sent by UAE

http://hornobserver.com/articles/782/Somalia-Airport-Security-Seize-Millions-of-Dollars-of-Cash-sent-by-UAE-amid-Political-Standoff

[Apr 08, 2018] I would add to your list of possible MH17 culprits several global corporations; the one's I have in mind, cannot be completely identified to a single nation in the world

Apr 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

smellyoilandgas.com , April 5, 2018 at 7:49 pm GMT

@Hepp

I think the question of what is best for the world is best left to the 8 million that live in it; humanity should decide on its government every ten years.

The nation state system fosters uncontrolled capitalism. The nation state system is a middle man between the global wealth of a very few and the slave poverty of the mass of 8 billion.. The problem with capitalism is that it is such a powerful system of economics nothing can block its path.

Uncontrolled, capitalism is like the game of monopoly: in that game, payment is due to the capitalist owner at most landing spots on the playing board; unless the party landing on such spot already owns the spot landed on with each turn at play. In the end, the game of monopoly wipes out everyone; it transfers everyone's wealth to but one player, the winner. Everyone else is a broke worthless loser.

Without internationally enforced rules that prevent powerful, large mega monopolies corporations (the public is unable to vote to change the corporate nature or to restructure by voting those Board of Directors who mange the mega-corporation) to reach the size of nation states and to amass the much more capital to burn than most nation states, nothing is going to change. Bottom up insistence that nations write laws to control the mega-capitalist powered, monopoly secured corporations go unheeded because no politicians or group of politicians is strong enough to write laws that the nations can enforce, hence mega corporations are virtually operating in a completely lawless environment { meaning mega corporations can do whatever they want }. There is no nation powerful enough to reel in many very large corporations; those certain few corporations own and enjoy the security from competition that monopolies guarantee in most of the extremely profitable markets in the world.

No one, including Russia and China can expect to survive trying to compete against the masses of capital, the earning capacities and the wealth building power of monopolies. Monopolies rule the nation state law makers , not the other way around. If I were you, I would add to your list of possible MH-17 bashers several global corporations; the one's I have in mind, cannot be completely identified to a single nation in the world because they are so large they own the lawmakers, most of the assets and all of the earning power in many of the nations.
One the 9/11 clouds is the possible corporate involvement.

[Apr 08, 2018] The Netherlands objected most to sanctions, our export to Russia. The 300 deaths changed that literally overnight.

Apr 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

jilles dykstra , April 4, 2018 at 2:26 pm GMT

There are three possibilities: Rebels shot, our thought they shot, at an Ukrainian bomber, and hit a passenger plane A Ukrainian bomber used the passenger plane as shield, in the expectation that the rebels would not fire A western plane deliberately shot down the plane, possibly a stealth plane.

That the plane was ordered to fly lower by Kiev air control might support the last two possibilities.

In any case, neither the rebels, nor the Russians had any interest in shooting down the plane. The western interest at the time was clear, the Netherlands objected most to sanctions, our export to Russia. The 300 deaths changed that literally overnight.

What never has been explained was the telephone call from prime minister Rutte to vice prime minister Asscher, at the time on holiday on vacation in the south of France.

Rutte phoned Asscher on his mobile, but asked him to call back on a land line 'so that the Russians could not listen in'.

What at the afternoon of the crash was so secret that the Russians were not allowed to hear, I have just the suspicion that Rutte told Asscher that the Russian had to be blamed.

The Dutch investigation, with suspect Ukraine, drags on until now.

... ... ...

[Apr 08, 2018] A person who lost someone in that crash would like to know the truth, rather than "official" US BS.

Apr 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

Rurik , April 2, 2018 at 4:19 pm GMT

@AnonFromTN

Don't they want to know who killed them?

no, not if you pay them enough money

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/mh17-compensation-could-hit-1nbspbillion-in-latest-disaster-for-malaysia-airlines/news-story/6b553d929d3de6fba845dfd0ae346562

(just like with 9/11)

http://www.latimes.com/la-110804compensation_lat-story.html

the wreckage of MH17 was obviously riddled with machine gun fire

only Ukraine could have done that

the way the zio-west immediately blamed Putin proved it was all a lie

it was the zio-west that foisted the political strife in Ukraine

it was the zio-west that allowed the Ukraine to have veto power over the "investigation" into the shooting down of MH17

the whole thing is a devil's farce

just like all the other atrocities and war crimes committed in this century by the zio-fiend

AnonFromTN , April 3, 2018 at 12:55 am GMT
@Rurik

You are even more cynical than I am. I have no doubt that the politicians, Dutch, US, Australian, Ukrainian, and all others, are totally amoral and unscrupulous. Naturally, they are all venal. As the US saying goes, "honest politician is the one who, once bought, stays bought".
But I thought that a person who lost someone in that crash would like to know the truth, rather than "official" US BS. It would be sad to think that none of almost 300 people on board had anyone who cared about them more than about money. If I were related to any of the victims, I'd feel vindictive. I'd want to kill whoever is responsible, not whoever the liars found it expedient to blame. And I'd make damn sure I know who planned this provocation and who executed it in cold blood.

[Apr 08, 2018] The conversation (mentioned in this article) between the Estonian Foreign Affairs Minister Urmas Paet and EU Foreign Policy chief Catherine Ashton.

Apr 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

Tom Van Meurs , Website March 31, 2018 at 3:36 am GMT

In my blog 'contraviews' http://www.contraviewing.blogspot.com post 148 you will find a recording of the conversation (mentioned in this article) between the Estonian Foreign Affairs Minister Urmas Paet and EU Foreign Policy chief Catherine Ashton. Go to the year 2014 in the margin and scroll down to post 148. One may find more interesting articles on MH17.

[Apr 08, 2018] Expropriation of many of Russian oligarch is on the agenda

Notable quotes:
"... Russian oligarchs and elites who profit from this corrupt system will no longer be insulated from the consequences of their government's destabilizing activities. ..."
Apr 08, 2018 | theduran.com

The Russian government operates for the disproportionate benefit of oligarchs and government elites. The Russian government engages in a range of malign activity around the globe, including continuing to occupy Crimea and instigate violence in eastern Ukraine, supplying the Assad regime with material and weaponry as they bomb their own civilians, attempting to subvert Western democracies, and malicious cyber activities.

Russian oligarchs and elites who profit from this corrupt system will no longer be insulated from the consequences of their government's destabilizing activities.

[Apr 08, 2018] The Skripal Affair is a Hoax. If Russia is "No Longer to Blame", What Next Global Research - Centre for Research on Globaliz

Notable quotes:
"... By Stephen Lendman , April 05, 2018 ..."
"... "Russia is to blame" said Theresa May, without a shred of evidence. The UK government's baseless accusations have led the expulsion of Russian diplomats by 20 countries (18 countries of the EU, plus Canada and the US). and Moscow has responded by expelling Western diplomats. ..."
Apr 08, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

Skripal could not under any circumstances have been poisoned by a dangerous nerve agent at his home.

Why?

Because the deadly nerve gas agent would have acted immediately and Skripal would not have been able to go from his home (in his BMW or otherwise) to the shopping mall where he was subsequently found (sitting on a bench) and taken to hospital together with his daughter Yulia.

" experts believe that such gases can kill people within a few minutes. Skripal simply did not have time to walk to a restaurant or shopping center, where he was eventually found."

See the incisive article by Bassid al Khalili : U.K. is Lying: If Skripal was Poisoned at His Home, The Agent Used against Him Cannot be Nerve Gas Global Research, April 4, 2018)

If Skripal and his daughter had been poisoned by a nerve agent (at his home), he would have been found at his home rather than on a bench in the shopping mall. This in itself disqualifies the official reports.

It also suggests that The Porton Down statement to the effect that "Russia was not the source of the nerve agent" is a "red herring" (totally irrelevant). Why. Because the evidence amply confirms that Skripal and his daughter were not poisoned by a nerve gas at Skripal's home.

This obvious fact –which has not been the object of media coverage– is that Scotland Yard's counterterrorism report on the "Russian hit squad" is not only fake , it invalidates the UK government's "official" narrative, which is also fake. The lie discredits the lie.

Lest we forget, this latest fake Scotland Yard counterterrorism report was preceded by a string of "authoritative" (UK police, government) statements (analyzed and compiled by Stephen Lendman):

First it was claimed father and daughter Skripal were poisoned by a military-grade nerve agent while eating lunch at a Salisbury restaurant.

The narrative switched to Yulia unwittingly transporting the nerve agent planted in her luggage on her flight from Moscow to London.

The story then shifted to Skripal's BMW, the deadly toxin smeared on its handle ,

Next came the claim about the nerve agent perhaps in aerosolized form affecting them through the vehicle's ventilation system.

The latest official version claims the alleged nerve agent was smeared on the front door of Skripal's home.

If any of the above accounts were valid, the Skripals, Bailey and at least 38 reported others exposed to the same toxin would be dead – surely many others as well.

Yet a month later, no one died. Bailey recovered enough to be discharged from hospitalization. Yulia's doctor said she improved markedly. Days earlier, Sergey was reported in stable condition.

Bombshell Report: Yulia Skripal Says Her Father is "All Right"

By Stephen Lendman , April 05, 2018

Russia was not the Source of the Nerve Agent: The Porton Down Statement. Boris Johnson and the Foreign Office

Her Majesty's Foreign office is in crisis as a result of Porton Down's statement to the effect that Russia was not the source of the nerve gas.

The justification for expelling Russian diplomats from a number of EU countries no longer holds? There is no proof that the nerve gas was from Russia.

Will Boris Johnson be forced to resign?

"Russia is to blame" said Theresa May, without a shred of evidence. The UK government's baseless accusations have led the expulsion of Russian diplomats by 20 countries (18 countries of the EU, plus Canada and the US). and Moscow has responded by expelling Western diplomats. Now that the hoax has been fully revealed. What next? Boris Johnson has been asked to explain. A political upheaval in several European countries? Will diplomatic relations be normalized following these revelations? Unlikely unless there is a backlash from the EU governments which were deliberately misled by the U.K.

Screenshot RT

At the moment both the UK government and the media are in denial. The latest statement from Theresa May's office emphasizes that "[the UK government has] knowledge that within the last decade, Russia has investigated ways of delivering nerve agents probably for assassination " (quoted by the Washington Post, April 4, 2018)

The Media's Double Standards in the Coverage of Important Events. The Skripal Novichock affair versus the Gaza Massacre

A sick Russian double agent and his daughter recovering in hospital, blamed on Vladimir Putin

Versus

14 innocent Palestinians killed and more than 750 wounded

The "Gaza Massacre" is not front page news. It does not make the tabloids. "Israel is not to Blame".

Yet these killings were ordered by the Netanyahu government.

Should these 20 Western countries not contemplate the timely expulsion of Israeli diplomats?

[Apr 08, 2018] Porton Down Lab behind Skripal poison probe has dark history of human testing

Notable quotes:
"... inquisitive inquirer ..."
"... If you like this story, share it with a friend! ..."
Apr 08, 2018 | www.rt.com

The Porton Down lab at the center of the Skripal poisoning case has a dark history of secret government-run human testing. The human trials were conducted as part of the UK's war preparation against the Soviet Union. The military laboratory at Porton Down was the hub of Britain's biological weapons trials between 1939 and 1989. Ministry of Defence scientists conducted chemical experiments on at least 20,000 military personnel and more than 100 secret germ warfare tests on members of the public in preparation for a feared chemical attack from the Soviet Union.

This year, the lab was thrust back into the headlines when it was given the responsibility of determining the substance used to poison Sergei and Yulia Skripal. The lab's chief executive has since confirmed the team are unable to identify the " precise source " of the nerve agent, and the Foreign Office has denied claiming it was from Russia – despite Boris Johnson's assertions on just that point.

The government-run experiments on military personal seriously breached ethical standards, according to an official report released in 2006. It followed years of complaints from veterans claiming to have suffered lasting damage to their health as a result of the trials. During the experiments Porton scientists dripped liquid nerve gas on the bare arms of 440 men and at one point tested nerve gas on eight men without the trial participants knowing what it really was. Six men were exposed to mustard gas for five consecutive days – three of whom suffered burns to their scrotums. Around 450 men had their eyes exposed to sarin nerve gas.

READ MORE: Did Boris Johnson lie that lab told him Russia was source of Salisbury nerve agent? (WATCH VIDEO)

A 60-page government report released in 2002 detailed tests which exposed millions of people to harmful substances. The tests consisted of releasing potentially dangerous chemicals and microorganisms over vast areas of Britain – unbeknownst to the population below.

It also revealed that military personnel were instructed to tell any " inquisitive inquirer " that the trials were part of a research project into weather and air pollution.

Designed to test Britain's vulnerability if deadly clouds were released over the country, in most cases trials used alternatives to biological weapons such as serratia marcescens bacteria or zinc cadmium sulphide, which was dropped on the public in huge amounts to mimic germ warfare.

The government insisted the chemical involved was safe, however cadmium is recognised as a cause of lung cancer and was considered a chemical weapon during World War II. Families living in the tested areas who have children born with birth defects have demanded a public inquiry.

A guard at one of the lab entrances at Porton Down, October 1968. © C. Woods / Getty Images

In another trial a military ship sprayed bacteria including e.coli and bacillus globigii, which mimics anthrax, over a five to 10-mile radius along the south coast of England between 1961 and 1968, exposing more than 1 million people to the micro-organisms. In trials designed to test the vulnerability of government buildings and public transport, bacteria were released on the London Underground, traveling about 10 miles.

READ MORE: Down & out at Porton Down: Embarrassment for the UK's 'Rush to Blame Russia' brigade

The report also confirmed that during World War II Porton Down produced millions of cattle cakes spiked with anthrax which could be dropped into Germany to kill livestock on a mass scale.

Ulf Schmidt, Professor of Modern History at the University of Kent, estimated in his 2015 book 'Secret Science,' that up to 30,000 secret chemical warfare experiments were carried out during that time period at Porton Down. It has also been claimed in most cases the military men were not given enough information to properly give consent.

The 100-year-old lab has a reported annual budget of £500 million and employs 3,000 scientists. In 2008 the Ministry of Defence awarded £3 million in compensation to 360 tested veterans without admitting liability.

If you like this story, share it with a friend!

[Apr 08, 2018] Prime Minister May is seen at around beating the cat against a wall.

Apr 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: librul | Apr 7, 2018 9:05:48 AM | 4

Prime Minister May is seen at around the 0:40 (depending upon clip version) mark beating the cat against a wall.

Also, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g is the "Burn the Witch" scene. With Putin as the witch it is a fair representation of the type of justice and deep thought applied to the Skripal case.

mike k , Apr 7, 2018 9:30:10 AM | 6
First as tragedy, then as farce.......
Saul , Apr 7, 2018 10:00:16 AM | 7
Reminds me of the Monty Python dead parrot sketch...

[Apr 08, 2018] The manipulation and exploitation of the MH17 incident by the Dutch seems to rival that of Skripal incident by the UK

Russian foreign ministry presentation provided sensational new details during ambassador briefing claiming that the USA know about the fact that Boing was short down before Boeing fall on he ground. And deliberately hide satellite information that they have about the incident that establishedd the sequnce of events in this shooting Live Russian MFA summons foreign ambassadors to a meeting on Skripal case -- statement - YouTube
Notable quotes:
"... The Dutch simply accepted that the Ukraine lost all relevant radar data. ..."
Apr 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

JR , March 26, 2018 at 7:18 am GMT

The lengths Dutch Prime Minister publicly went (serving quote 'geopolitical interests') to get the EU-Ukraine association agreement ratified the clear rejection by advisory referendum notwithstanding, ought to make any well informed reader suspicious of how far Rutte went out of public sight to serve those same 'geopolitical interests' by manipulating both the investigation and public opinion in relation to MH17.

Rutte recently demonstrated his fealty to those 'geopolitical interests' again. When asked if new evidence was presented in the Skripal case to justify the Netherlands support for the UK, Rutte answered that 'such evidence wasn't necessary because May had stated that it was highly likely that Russia was responsible'.

The Dutch Government got a UN mandate to perform the investigation and as such that part of the investigation had to be transparent.

Clearly to serve those 'geopolitical interests' the Dutch separated the technical investigation from the legal liability investigation. The technical investigation was performed under the UN mandate and the second legal liability investigation was organized separate from any UN mandate.

The Dutch, Australian, Belgium government colluded with the Ukrainians to organize a 'Joint Investigation Team' which under the cover of performing a legal investigation refuses any transparency and at regular intervals hints that indictments are close but not there yet.

Also the Dutch Transport Safety Board technical investigation has concluded that the UkSATSE should have closed the Air Control area above Eastern Ukraine, but the Dutch government has thus far never taken any action to hold the Ukrainians responsible for that failure even when 3 days before MNH17 a AN-24 was downed from 6500m and UkSATSE (joint civil-military ATC) continued to control some 100 civil air liners a day over that area.

The Dutch simply accepted that the Ukraine lost all relevant radar data.

JR , March 27, 2018 at 6:40 am GMT
Actually this "Who shot down MH17?" is the wrong question.

The question is "Who is liable?".

Shooting down aircraft above a war zone is SOP. If a civilian air liner is guided and controlled over such war area where 3 days earlier an AN-24 has been downed from 6500m one really ought to question the competence and liability of the ATC involved. That ATC authority UkSATSE as a joint civil-military ATC was fully informed about the situation and still continued to guide some 100 civil air liners ad day for three days over that war zone.

Shooting down a civil air liner over a war zone is tragic but not necessarily always a crime. There was no motive for the East Ukrainians, but as shown by the relentless exploitation by the Kiev puppet regime this Kiev regime most definitely had a motive.

Any liability investigation with the Ukrainian secret service as an investigator like in the Dutch/Australian/Ukraine Joint investigation Team simply can't be trusted to even look for the truth. The JIT was set up with the intention of evading the transparency requirements associated with the UN mandated investigation.

CanSpeccy , Website March 29, 2018 at 2:42 am GMT
@JR

Actually this "Who shot down MH17?" is the wrong question.

The question is "Who is liable?".

In which connection, as may already have been noted:

Malaysia Airlines filed a flight plan requesting 35,000 feet through airspace but was told [by Ukrainian air traffic control] to fly at 33,000

AnonFromTN , March 30, 2018 at 6:54 pm GMT
Thinking people smelled a rat in the case of MH17 straight off. No sensible person can fail to smell it now. Just a few considerations:

1. Donbass freedom fighters (and, by extension, Russia) were blamed by the US, its vassals, and its client states like Ukraine even before the debris cooled down. Only the perpetrators could have known designated "guilty party" without any investigation.

2. Satellite pictures promised by Kerry four years ago never materialized. The only logical conclusion is that the perpetrators were not those accused by the US, and the pictures would have revealed real perpetrators, which the US did not want to happen.

3. Malaysia, the owner of that airplane, was not allowed to participate in the investigation. Apparently, someone was afraid that it might not play ball. This can only happen when the "investigators" meant to hide the truth, not to reveal it.

4. The UK, Australia, the Netherlands, and one of the suspects, Ukraine, signed a non-disclosure agreement. It makes no sense unless one or more of the signatories is guilty.

5. The "investigation" is going on for four years, longer than any investigation in the history of civil aviation. The experience shows that a lot less time is needed to uncover the truth. Thus, the length of this "investigation" shows that the real purpose is cover-up.

6. Ukraine never provided the records of pilots' communications with air traffic controllers, or any other air traffic control records. Thus, it must have had something to hide.

One can continue in this vein, but what's the point? Suffice it to say that all international airlines drew their conclusions: they fly over Russia, but avoid Ukrainian airspace, like they avoid Iranian and North Korean airspace. Sapienti sat.

JR says: March 31, 2018 at 5:18 pm GMT • 100 Words
@AnonFromTN

Thinking people smelled a rat in the case of MH17 straight off. No sensible person can fail to smell it now. Just a few considerations:
1. Donbass freedom fighters (and, by extension, Russia) were blamed by the US, its vassals, and its client states like Ukraine even before the debris cooled down. Only the perpetrators could have known designated "guilty party" without any investigation.
2. Satellite pictures promised by Kerry four years ago never materialized. The only logical conclusion is that the perpetrators were not those accused by the US, and the pictures would have revealed real perpetrators, which the US did not want to happen.
3. Malaysia, the owner of that airplane, was not allowed to participate in the investigation. Apparently, someone was afraid that it might not play ball. This can only happen when the "investigators" meant to hide the truth, not to reveal it.
4. The UK, Australia, the Netherlands, and one of the suspects, Ukraine, signed a non-disclosure agreement. It makes no sense unless one or more of the signatories is guilty.
5. The "investigation" is going on for four years, longer than any investigation in the history of civil aviation. The experience shows that a lot less time is needed to uncover the truth. Thus, the length of this "investigation" shows that the real purpose is cover-up.
6. Ukraine never provided the records of pilots' communications with air traffic controllers, or any other air traffic control records. Thus, it must have had something to hide.
One can continue in this vein, but what's the point? Suffice it to say that all international airlines drew their conclusions: they fly over Russia, but avoid Ukrainian airspace, like they avoid Iranian and North Korean airspace. Sapienti sat.

See my comment nr 230: There is not one investigation. The Dutch manipulated this into two separate investigations. There was a technical UN mandated transparent Dutch Safety Board investigation. The Dutch organized a second criminal investigation together with Australia, Belgium and the Ukraine and instigated A Joint Investigation Team (JIT).

https://www.government.nl/latest/news/2017/07/05/jit-countries-choose-the-netherlands-for-mh17-crash-prosecution

The manipulation and exploitation of the MH17 incident by the Dutch seems to rival that of Skripal incident by the UK.

https://www.government.nl/search?keyword=mh17

Rurik, April 2, 2018 at 4:19 pm GMT • 100 Words
@AnonFromTN

Yes. I can understand the Dutch government: they serve the US overlords first and foremost. They don't give a hoot about the lives of ordinary Dutch people. What I do not understand is the behavior of the people who lost loved ones in MH17 crash. Don't they want to know who killed them? Don't they object to being grist for the mill of amoral and cynical politicians?

Don't they want to know who killed them?

no, not if you pay them enough money

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/mh17-compensation-could-hit-1nbspbillion-in-latest-disaster-for-malaysia-airlines/news-story/6b553d929d3de6fba845dfd0ae346562

(just like with 9/11)

http://www.latimes.com/la-110804compensation_lat-story.html

the wreckage of MH17 was obviously riddled with machine gun fire

peterAUS , April 3, 2018 at 6:18 pm GMT

@AnonFromTN

Well, actually I believe that those points do not contradict my theory.
You:

1. Donbass freedom fighters were blamed by the US, its vassals, and its client states like Ukraine even before the debris cooled down. Only the perpetrators could have known designated "guilty party" without any investigation

Me:
1. Donbass freedom fighters were blamed by the US, its vassals, and its client states like Ukraine even before the debris cooled down. They saw, on their monitors, what happened.
You:
2. Satellite pictures promised by Kerry four years ago never materialized. If they could prove that Donbass freedom fighters were the perpetrators, these pictures would have been publicized by the US more than any Hollywood movie. My conclusion is that the perpetrators were not those accused by the US, and the pictures would have revealed real perpetrators, which the US did not want to happen.
Me:
2. Satellite pictures promised by Kerry four years ago never materialized. They could've pointed to actual surveillance capabilities of the US, either way.
You:
3. Malaysia, the owner of that airplane, was not allowed to participate in the investigation. Apparently, someone was afraid that it might not play ball. This can only happen when the "investigators" meant to hide the truth, not to reveal it
Me:
3. Malaysia, the owner of that airplane, was not allowed to participate in the investigation. The investigation was supposed to be as impartial as possible. Interested parties were kept out as much as possible.
Etc .

No need to keep see-sawing this. Being done plenty of times before and it is being done, as we speak, all over Internet.

You believe what you will; I do the same.

Moving on.

AnonFromTN , April 3, 2018 at 7:41 pm GMT
@peterAUS

Laughable arguments.

1. If anyone on the US/Ukraine side saw on their screens anything that could place the blame on Donbass freedom fighters and/or Russia, they would have presented their evidence straight away. The US and its vassals (e.g., UK) go into lengthy hysterics even when they have no evidence whatsoever (US elections in 2016, Skripal affair, etc).

2. The US was so eager to hide its surveillance capabilities that Kerry blabbered about it from the get go. Then presented zilch. Very believable.

3. If Malaysia was excluded to make the investigation impartial, than Ukraine, Netherlands, Australia, and UK should have been excluded, as well. The investigation should have been conducted by a party who has no stake in the matter. Instead, it is conducted by one of the prime suspects and countries who lost citizens in that crash. For four years! With non-disclosure agreement, to boot. Inspires lots of confidence.

I am sure your responses to the rest would be just as "convincing".

expat47 , April 7, 2018 at 1:51 pm GMT

Why on earth would Russia gain anything from shooting down the plane? Western sanctions assault on the Russian Federation had been ongoing for some time before this incident. The US is willing to kill its own people, ala 9/11. The deep state is malicious and dangerous and it is the alt internet that makes our use of same to glean information that we would never to see in the MSM. The US has been trying to provoke Russia into a war and Putin hasn't taken the bait. The senseless idiots in the west don't seem to realise that Russian nuclear weaponry is supperia to our own and life on earth would surely end; except for the wealthy elites who run our country who would be safe in our D.U.M.B's

[Apr 07, 2018] 'Russia Will Never Be Our Friend, We'll Slap Them When Needed' Waffle House Waitress on the Loose

Apr 07, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Nikki Haley has erupted in another fiery Russophobic rant, warning that Russia will "never be America's friend." Moscow can try to behave "like a regular country," but the US will "slap them when we need to," Haley said.

The US ambassador to the UN is not known for her friendly stance toward Moscow, but her new take on US-Russia relations stands out among even her most rabid ramblings. Speaking at Duke University in North Carolina on Friday, Haley admitted that friendly relations with Russia is an unlikely prospect, adding that the Trump team has done more against Moscow than any other administration since Ronald Reagan's tenure.

"Russia's never going to be our friend," Haley told students at a Q&A session, responding to a question about "holding Russia accountable" for alleged meddling in the 2016 presidential election. The diplomat said Washington still works with Moscow "when we need to, and we slap them when we need to."

She then raised the stakes further: "Everybody likes to listen to the words. I'm going to tell you – look at the actions," Haley urged. "We expelled 60 Russian diplomats/spies, we have armed Ukraine so that they can defend themselves," she added.

"You haven't seen the end of what this administration will do to Russia. You will continue to see that play out," she stressed. Cooling down the degree of Russia-bashing in her speech, Haley said the US and Russia do cooperate on Afghanistan and Africa, looking out for areas of mutual interest. Meanwhile, she claimed, "our relations with Russia depend solely on Russia."

The topic of Russia-bashing and Moscow's alleged interference in US democratic processes seems far away from dwindling, despite no solid evidence being presented so far to the public. Moscow has repeatedly brushed off the claims. "Until we see facts, everything else will be just blather," Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said in Munich last month.

However, there could be signs of improvement on the horizon. Donald Trump has recently suggested meeting Russian leader Vladimir Putin in Washington, DC. In March, he said the two leaders "will be meeting in the not too distant future to discuss the arms race which is getting out of control." Putin and Trump have so far met twice.

The first meeting occurred during the G20 summit in Germany last July, and the second took place on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Vietnam in November. President Putin, as well as several Russian officials, has continuously signaled Moscow's readiness to improve ties with the US and the West, based on trust and respect.

[Apr 07, 2018] Latest US sanctions on Russia: incitement to a coup and a new form of protectionism by Alexander Mercouris

The US lost proper timing for the coup -- it was possible in 2011-2012 timeframe. Now hardly. And if one think that Russian oligarchs will sitting quietly while the West expropriate their money, think again. China banks do exist, if I am not mistaken. And some other nations also have pretty developed financial sector.
I do not think that Russia should or can cut ties with the USA. Dependence of the US technological sector is substantial and cutting the ties might backfire. This is the calculation of the UIS lawmakers, who enjoyed the impunity of the unipolar moment. But bumerang always retrun. sooner or later.
Notable quotes:
"... The latest sanctions seem concerned as much with protecting the US's economic positions as punishing Russia ..."
"... Russian oligarchs and elites who profit from this corrupt system will no longer be insulated from the consequences of their government's destabilizing activities. ..."
"... irrespective of anything they do ..."
Apr 07, 2018 | theduran.com

The latest sanctions seem concerned as much with protecting the US's economic positions as punishing Russia

The latest round of sanctions the US Treasury has imposed on Russia are a strange affair.

Earlier rounds of sanctions have been linked to specific acts of real or alleged Russian misbehaviour e.g. the death of Sergey Magnitsky, the Crimean crisis, the war in the Donbass, the shooting down of MH17, and the alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 US Presidential election.

This latest round of sanctions is different in that it is not directly linked to any Russian action – real or alleged – at all. Nor are the people sanctioned – for example the Russian businessman Oleg Deripaska – directly accused of anything.

In place of any specific accusation against Russia or any of the individuals concerned, here is how a statemen t from US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin justifies the latest sanctions

The Russian government operates for the disproportionate benefit of oligarchs and government elites. The Russian government engages in a range of malign activity around the globe, including continuing to occupy Crimea and instigate violence in eastern Ukraine, supplying the Assad regime with material and weaponry as they bomb their own civilians, attempting to subvert Western democracies, and malicious cyber activities. Russian oligarchs and elites who profit from this corrupt system will no longer be insulated from the consequences of their government's destabilizing activities.

(bold italics added)

In other words Russia is a bad corrupt country which does lots of bad things around the world of which the US disapproves. Anyone in Russia who is rich ("an oligarch") and is therefore "profiting from this corrupt system" is in some way responsible and risks being sanctioned irrespective of anything they do unless this changes.

The implication is that if they do not want to be sanctioned the "oligarchs" must overthrow Russia's government.

The latest sanctions are therefore an incitement to a coup. All other steps the US has taken having failed , Russia's businessmen ("oligarchs") are now being told that unless they engineer the overthrow of Russia's government they will be sanctioned.

The first thing to say about this policy is that it is decades out of date.

There was a time in the 1990s when a small group of stratospherically wealthy and corrupt individuals really did control Russia's government.

By way of example, most of the people who met in the Kremlin during the 1998 financial crisis to decide whether or not to devalue the ruble were not members of the government or even officials, and the meeting during which the decision was finally taken to devalue the ruble was chaired not by a government minister but by the former Acting Prime Minister of Russia Yegor Gaidar, who at the time was neither a member of the government nor an official, but who was merely an adviser of Russia's President, Boris Yeltsin, who was at the time away reviewing the fleet.

The decision was in fact made by the same small group of wealthy and corrupt individuals who at that time really did control Russia's government, meeting informally under Gaidar's chairmanship, and not through the official structures.

It is not a misconception to call these individuals "oligarchs". In the 1990s that is exactly what they were. The most politically powerful amongst them – Boris Berezovsky – was not even properly speaking a businessman.

That is not the situation in Russia today. A person like Oleg Deripaska – the aluminium magnate whose name appears on the latest sanctions list – may be a person of great influence and power. However he does not control Russia's government, and has no means to do so.

I should say that I first came across the suggestion that the "oligarchs" could be mobilised to overthrow President Putin or force him to reverse his policies by imposing sanctions upon them in early 2014 at the start of the Ukrainian crisis.

As I recall reports appeared in the media that the German intelligence agency the BND was advising Chancellor Merkel that if the EU imposed sanctions on Russia the "oligarchs" would either force President Putin to change course or would overthrow him in order to save their fortunes.

Many rounds of sanctions later one might suppose that that theory had been tested to destruction. However Steven Mnuchin's statement suggests that faith in it dies hard.

The latest round of sanctions the US has imposed on Russian businessmen and their companies will not weaken President Putin's position or that of the Russian government, and will not affect Russia's economy.

As China's semi-official English language newspaper Global Times has recently pointed out, Russia – unlike countries like Iran – has a big largely self-sufficient continental sized economy possessing immense scientific, technological and natural resources, making it therefore largely immune to sanctions.

As for the wealthy Russian individuals who the latest sanctions are targeting, the reason so many of them keep money abroad is not because they control Russia's government, but because they do not control it, and do not wholly trust it.

The result is that they have been squirreling away much of their money abroad, beyond their government's reach.

Now what they are discovering is that their money is at far greater risk of being seized by the US government than by their own – something the Russian government has been telling them for years – so that it is in fact safer kept at home than it is squirreled away abroad.

AM Hants VeeNarian (Yerevan) • 16 hours ago ,

Do not think Russia is in the mood to be Diplomatic or generous. Though, they will always be polite and show their manners and respect for International Law, up on the world stage. Do believe the UK and US have seriously crossed the red line. Short term pain for long term gain, so comes to mind.

Raycomeau AM Hants • 8 hours ago ,

With Theresa May and Donald Trump as leaders it is no wonder the world is in such a mess. Putin is the only adult left to lead on the world stage. We will do better listening to Putin. The history of the warmongers (UK and USA ) should never be ignored...

AM Hants Raycomeau • 7 hours ago ,

Must, admit, I find it so reassuring the way that President Putin and President Xi-Jinping, work together. Plus, President Duterte, he might be tactless, but, unlike Trump, he comes across trustworthy and with a love of his nation and people. Not forgetting President Assad, all Syria has been through, yet, he will not leave his people and neither will his family. It is nice to see a different form of politician, that is managing to come through and help another learn from their values.

Together, with the fact that President Putin, would not be where he is, without a very confident and strong team behind him.

louis robert • 14 hours ago ,

"Russia won't "be spoken to in the language of sanctions"..."?

IT'S ABOUT TIME!!!

No country that has self-respect, no respectable person can possibly accept to be spoken to and treated generally in that disgustingly arrogant, beyond contemptuous manner. The terms and acts of abuse used by the Empire's representatives, including in the most "prestigious" international institutions, have by now gone way too far repeatedly (a euphemism!!!), with no limit in sight.

It is time for Russia and Russians to impose respect to those creatures come straight out of the Empire's swamps and sewers! Being treated as they now accept to be treated by the Empire is beyond unacceptable. To hear Russia's highest representatives refer to such despicably disgusting bullies as "partners" is not amusing anymore. Only unbearably painful...

Time to STOP playing the part of the poor victim of the Empire (US+EU+NATO+other bits...). Time to adopt China's model, China now promising to hit the Empire hard and till the very end of that war on tariffs. "Even if the Trump administration wants to take the trade war to the direction that bilateral trade and investment is suppressed to zero, China will meet all the challenges."

[Apr 07, 2018] Richest one percent will own two-thirds of all wealth by 2030 by Michael Savage

Neoliberalism as a social system is self-destructive -- similar to Trotskyism from which it was derived.
World leaders urged to act as anger over inequality reaches a 'tipping point'
Typical neoliberal mantra "need to rise productivity" is a typical neoliberal fake: look at Amazon for shining example here.
Notable quotes:
"... The real focus of our taxation system should be to tax wealth and recipients of silly amounts of annual income. ..."
"... Ur talking about something called "Reagan-nomics" or what was commonly and lovingly referred to as "trickle down economics". After the destruction of unionized labor, years of globalization, record profits for corporations & wall street and a high octane doze of Reagan / Thatcher Neoliberalism, "trickle down" has obviously been a complete failure. ..."
Apr 07, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

An alarming projection produced by the House of Commons library suggests that if trends seen since the 2008 financial crash were to continue, then the top 1% will hold 64% of the world's wealth by 2030. Even taking the financial crash into account, and measuring their assets over a longer period, they would still hold more than half of all wealth.

Since 2008, the wealth of the richest 1% has been growing at an average of 6% a year – much faster than the 3% growth in wealth of the remaining 99% of the world's population. Should that continue, the top 1% would hold wealth equating to $305tn (Ł216.5tn) – up from $140tn today.

BrianSand , 7 Apr 2018 14:53

The population of third world countries is skyrocketing. The population of developed countries, outside the importation of poor immigrants, is static. The top 1% of world population will continuously become comparatively richer as long as this is the case.
feliciafarrel -> apaliteno , 7 Apr 2018 14:50

but there's no way the UK has 10 million of the world's richest 75 million.

You need Ł550,000 to be in the top 1% in the world.

In the UK there are 27m households with an average of 1.94 adults per household.

25% of households have Ł550,000 or more.

That means 6.75m households are in the top 1% of the world, At 1.94 adults per household, that's 13,000,000 people.

However, assuming households are not 'legal people' but the adults within them are, then you'd have to divide household income by the number of adults (1.94) to get the wealth per person. So to reach Ł550,000 per person, a household would have to have net wealth of Ł1.067m, and only 10% of households have that wealth.

10% of 27m is 2.7m and that equates to only 5,240,000 people.

So in terms of households we easily reach 10m mark, but in terms of individual people, you are correct, it is 'only' 5.24m. Still and awful lot of people though.

Landlord52 -> Whattayagonnado huh , 7 Apr 2018 14:46
A single mother get Ł20k on benefits per years. Over 18 years that is Ł360,000. She has two kids, so that iwill cost Ł3,000 in education per years. 2 kids x 14 years x Ł3,500 per years = Ł98,000. We pay for child birth costs, free vaccinations, anti-natal care, free prescriptions, free eye care, free dental care, free school meals, we pay her countal tax bil. Plus if she is lucky, she get a free Ł450,000 council home.

Even if she works for a few years, it will never be enough to pay what she has received from the state. PLus we have to make provisions for her pension and her elderly care, meals on wheels, elderly health care etc...

That is easily Ł1m to Ł2million per single mother....

yeah... we are such a terrible society....

PotholeKid -> counttrumpage , 7 Apr 2018 14:45
The plebs are well on the way to figuring it out alright and so have the 1%. That's we now live under a militarized surveillance state which serves the elites.. Think again if voting will ever change this.. Bernie was doomed from the getgo.
hundredhander , 7 Apr 2018 14:42
I think the principle here is that the longer this goes on and the greater inequality becomes then the more extreme will be the countervailing force.

It is in everybody's interest that the world becomes fairer. That governments govern in the interests of as many people as possible. That public services like health and education are available to all regardless. That taxes are progressive and that governments have international treaties to deal with tax avoidance and evasion. That our democratic processes are as robust as possible and that all our organs of state are as transparent as possible and open to scrutiny to the public.

If the accumulation of wealth on this scale continues unabated it will end in tears... inevitably.

Furthermore I believe that there is a relationship between inequality - and all the things that go with it and follow from it - and environmental degradation.

Greater fairness between individuals and between countries is, in my opinion, one of the essential requirements for us to surmount the epic problems that we face in the world today.

DogsLivesMatter , 7 Apr 2018 14:41
I think most of us have are aware of what really happens at Davos. The wealthy and powerful are cooking up more schemes to screw the 99% over. Your Bono's and your Bill Gates are no friends to the working class or the working poor. Take Jeff Bezos for example. He has a mass of wealth totaling $112 Billion.

Jeff Bezos, or even Bill Gates could do that in an instant and still have Billions to spare. The super rich don't care about "regular" people, and never have.


Peter Rabbit ComfortablyPlumb 7 Apr 2018 14:25

This is the Osborne analogy regurgitated.

If you live in a Ł2.5 million house, you are wealthy, not average or poor. To be wealthy is not some form of human rights entitlement, especially if it is at the cost of the overwhelming majority. This concept is known as "greed" and "selfishness". Obviously your mantra is that of Gordon Gekko "greed is good".

The real focus of our taxation system should be to tax wealth and recipients of silly amounts of annual income.

All these arguments are dated and are applicable to the Thatcher era of the early 1980s which has long gone and is not going to return. The problem facing our society currently is run away social and economic inequality and the entrenchment of substantial wealth for a very small number of people which is fuelling generational social and inequality.


TakoradiMan BrotherLead 7 Apr 2018 14:24

I presume that most those living in the U.K. will fall within top 1% which the Guardianista loath so much.

I'm sorry but this post is utterly clueless.

To be in the top 1% you need to have a household income of well over Ł50k per annum (closer to Ł100k I suspect - no one here has yet given very authoritative figures); only a fraction of the UK population are that well off.

AnneK1 Landlord52 7 Apr 2018 14:24

Except that they don't and the charities have to come along and ask us for more money because the public sector haven't used tax revenue efficiently. I would say Britain's ineffective public sector are the greatest threat to Corbyn's chances of forming the government we need to rid us of these dangerous Tories.

PeterlooSunset 7 Apr 2018 14:24

The richest 1% own the corporate media (including the private equity firms keeping the Guardian afloat) that keep telling us we have to focus our attention on identity politics while they loot all the wealth.


prematureoptimsim -> Inthesticks 7 Apr 2018 14:23

Ur talking about something called "Reagan-nomics" or what was commonly and lovingly referred to as "trickle down economics". After the destruction of unionized labor, years of globalization, record profits for corporations & wall street and a high octane doze of Reagan / Thatcher Neoliberalism, "trickle down" has obviously been a complete failure.

U need proof ? Just examine recent history of presidential elections. . . .

  1. Barack Obama - ( Mr. Hope and Change )
  2. Donald Trump - ( Mr. Make America Great Again ).

And in the end it's the same as it ever was. The rich get richer and. . . . Well u know the rest. Good luck to u. Enjoy ur crumbs.

[Apr 07, 2018] The Best Explanation For The Skripal Drama Is Still ... Food Poisoning

Notable quotes:
"... A friend of this blog, Tore ..."
"... Noirette , TomGard ..."
"... What is the treatment? ..."
"... xcerpts of CIA inventory 1 , 2 . ..."
"... Associated Press ..."
Apr 07, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Doctors at the Salisbury District Hospital announced today that Sergej Skripal's health is rapidly improving. He and his daughter Yulia will likely be well again.

It is unlikely that any targeted poisoning with a real 'military grade' nerve agent would have allowed for such an outcome. This brings us back to food poisoning as a possible cause of the Skripals' ordeal.

A friend of this blog, Tore , sent us his considerations which we publish below. He suggest that shellfish poisoning, which is caused by a neurotoxin known as Saxitoxin or STX, is the real culprit of the Skripal incident. He explains how this would fit to the observable behavior of the British government and other participants in the drama. In my view his theory has significant merit.

On Wednesday the niece of Sergej Skripal, Viktoria Skripal, received a phone call from Yulia Skripal. She was interviewed by a Russian TV station and suggested that food poisoning might have been the real cause of the calamities her relatives were in:

"Did they eat a dish that one cannot eat, or is it banned in England?

"The first signs when they were found were very similar to fish poisoning."

Victoria intended to visit the UK and to bring Yulia back home to Moscow. The United Kingdom just rejected Victoria Skripal's visa application because she "did not comply with the immigration rules." No further explanation was given.

For those who have not read our previous posts on the issue we offer a short recap of the case. Regular readers may want to scroll down to Tore 's part.

Sergej and Yulia Skripal were found on a public bench in Salisbury at about 4pm on March 4. They had collapsed, were conscienceless and were brought into emergency care at the Salisbury District Hospital. Local media wrote of a potential Fentanyl overdose.

Half an hour before the Skripal's collapsed they had eaten at Zizzi, a seafood and pizza outlet.

Over the next days the British government started to make a fuzz about the case. Sergej Skripal was a British spy who had been caught in Russia, put into jail and, in 2010, exchanged for Russian spies. The British government hinted of Russian involvement in the Salisbury incident.

But that story smelled fishy from its very beginning. To target an exchanged spy would guarantee that no further exchanges would ever happen. Sergej Skripal had links to the "dirty dossier" about Donald Trump that was created for the Hillary Clinton campaign. Russia had no good motive, others potentially had one. If there was something nefarious going on it seemed unlikely that Russia was involved.

I now believe that the British government jumped onto the case because it needed to divert attention from the seriously bad results of the Brexit negotiations in Brussels. There are local elections coming up in May and Theresa May's Tory party was lagging in the polls. (There may have been additional reasons related to a planed 'chemical weapon' surprise in the east-Ghouta campaign in Syria.)

Whatever it was - the spin-masters in Downing Street 10 saw a chance to convert the poisoning of the Skripals into something big that would help their political aims. The general push was to blame Russia. The idea to speak of the fearsome nerve-agent 'Novichok' came from a spy drama that had just run on British TV.

On March 12 the British Prime Minister Theresa May spoke in Parliament and claimed that the Skripals were 'attacked' with 'Novichok', a "military grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia". It was her "45 minutes" moment . Russia was declared guilty without any evidence. Britain and other NATO countries expelled Russian diplomats.

'Novichok' is a name for a group of chemicals that are indeed deadly. But Russia never had a 'Novichok' program. It had worked on a different class of chemicals than the ones described in Vil Mirzayanov's 'Novichok' book . Moreover, if 'Novichok' chemicals were involved than Russia was only one of many suspect. The formulas for 'Novichoks' are known, various military laboratories have made some and any decent organic chemistry laboratory can create them too. The U.S., which had produced some of the 'Novichok' agents for itself, had long told its diplomats to avoid any discussions about them.

The first serious unraveling of the dubious case came on March 18 when a doctor at the Salisbury District Hospital publicly denied that any of its patients had been hurt by a nerve agent. We wrote at that time:

Commentator Noirette had suggested here that the Skripal case was about food poisoning or a food allergy, not nerve agents. The Skripals had visited a fish restaurant one hour before they were found. The letter points into a similar direction. Food poisoning would also explain why a doctor who gave emergency help to the unconscious Yulia Skripal for over 30 minutes was not effected at all.

To my best knowledge none of the main stream media picked up on the doctor's letter.

Then a miracle happened. On March 29, just in time for the Roman Christian Easter, the doctors in Salisbury said that Yulia Skripal was no longer in a critical condition. We headline: Last Act Of 'Novichok' Drama Revealed - "The Skripals' Resurrection" :

It seems that the 'Novichok' fairy-tale the British government plays to us provides for a happy ending - the astonishing and mysterious resurrection of the victims of a "military grade" "five to eight times more deadly than VX gas" "nerve agent" "of a type developed by" Hollywood.

Happy Easter!

The alleged nerve agent should have killed anyone who came even into slight contact with it. Survival did not fit to the earlier claims by the British government.

Now, just in time for the Orthodox Christian Easter, the condition of Sergej Skripal is reported to be rapidly improving. Another Resurrection! Hallelujah!

In my view all the stories we were told about 'Novichok', the 'doorknob' or a 'Russian attack' are fairy tales. They simply do not make sense.

Commentators of this blog, Noirette , TomGard and others, had discussed several theories of food poisoning. Food poisoning makes sense but none of the ones discussed here fitted the picture of the case. Last week Tore , a friend of this blog from Norway, sent me his theory which makes eminent sense to me.

---
Tore writes :

Craig Murray's described the pressure on Porton Down to establish that a nerve agent was used in the alleged Skripal attack. I use 'alleged attack', because there is a fair chance that this was no attack, only a serious food poisoning from the very start.

The Skripals had a seafood risotto pesce with king prawns, mussels and squid rings at Zizzi, as reported here in the Daily Mail on March 6.

This is a dish with a well known reputation as a source of shellfish poisoning.

The Skripals were okay when they arrived, okay when they left, and passed out 40 minutes later on the bench with symptoms similar to a paralytic reaction from shellfish poisoning (PSP) :

Symptoms of PSP could begin within a few minutes and up to 10 hours after consumption.

Symptoms of PSP can include:
...
...
Respiratory difficulty, salivation, temporary blindness, nausea and vomiting may also occur.

In extreme cases, paralysis of respiratory muscles may lead to respiratory arrest and death within two to twelve hours after consumption. Seriously affected people must be hospitalized and placed under respiratory care.

Another official PSP Fact Sheet (pdf) provides:

What is the treatment?

Unfortunately, there is no antidote for PSP toxins; however, supportive medical care can be life saving . For example, persons whose breathing muscles become paralyzed can be put on a mechanical respirator and given oxygen to help them breath, and people who develop a cardiac arrhythmia (abnormal heart rhythm) can be given medications to stabilize their heart rhythm.

The similarity with symptoms and effect derived from a nerve agent are striking, but no surprise:

In fact the substance at work in a case of paralytic seafood poison is a neurotoxin called Saxitoxin (STX) which is among the most potent poisons found in nature. It works the same way as a nerve agent: It acts on the neurons, preventing normal cellular function and leading to paralysis and in worst case death. In fact Saxitoxin is so potent that it was weaponized by the U.S. and used as a chemical weapon - a nerve agent.

The U.S. developed Saxitoxin into a chemical weapon in the 1960s. The U.S. military designation is TZ. It was also used by the CIA for covert operations and liquidations as evidenced by the Church commission - see: E xcerpts of CIA inventory 1 , 2 .

Serotoxin is registered by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) as evidenced in the Wikipedia article Saxitoxin . The agent stays active even after boiling or steaming.

Now back to Porton Down and the pressure to come up with the 'traces of a nerve agent'. The Saxitoxin could obviously pass as a nerve agent, because it is a nerve agent - but without mention of its origin - the food poisoning.

The nerve agent claim was released by police on March 7, three days after the incident.

According to the Daily Mail article mentioned above, the hospital alarmed the police the day after, on March 5, when the staff became aware of Skripal's 'spy credentials', probably through BBC which first brought the news. This means Porton Down at the most had two days from first tests to the conclusion 'nerve agent' announced on the 7th.

This also implies that the hospital probably treated the Skripals for a food poisoning from the start, until they became aware of Skripals credentials the day after. This fits with the letter to the Times from Stephen Davies, the hospital doctor.

(The timeline used above is from the Associated Press ' Key moments in the case of former spy Sergei Skripal .)

The media storm had been going on for a week when Theresa May on March 12 entered parliament and announced the 'Novichok'. The blame had been on Russia from the first moment.

Speculation:

Now suppose the government in the meantime had become aware they had a weak case from the start - because they had rushed Porton Down to a premature conclusion?

There would be no way back for May. The die had been cast. The government had walked out on a limb from the start, now they had to continue the theater by naming the agent.

No nerve agent would suit their narrative better than 'Novichok'. Developed in USSR, a substance with some foggy features and many variants - as opposed to other more well known agents with distinct features. And most important an agent that is not listed in OPCW and which was deliberately chosen to confuse. [b adds: 'Novichok' was also known to the British and U.S. public as a 'fearsome Russian agent' through a current spy drama on TV. It increased the propaganda value.]

The initial reluctance to involve the OPCW also fits into this picture: the decision to involve OPCW came after May had landed the Novichok claim in parliament on March 12.

The day before, on March 11, police found traces of a nerve agent in the Zizzi restaurant.


Note that the police inside is unprotected - bigger

Did they find the mussel in the risotto? Or 'Novichok'?

More than three weeks into the investigation this is, as far as I know, the only confirmed police find of traces of the nerve agent. Zizzi fits in perfectly as the origin of the poisoning considering the 40 minutes it took before the Skripals passed out on the bench. Though I wonder how a "military grade nerve agent", destined to kill instantly on the battlefield, took that long to incapacitate the Skripals.

I am no doctor, nor a specialist in chemistry - only a retired journalist working with open sources. There are so many curiosities with this case, so many speculations, ...

Here in Norway we have an expression called blodtåke - best translated as blood fog - when all the media are rushing blindly in one direction, without asking the most elementary questions.

After I wrote this they found 'Novichok' on the door of the Skripals' home, which makes it even more unlikely, considering the time frame.

Did they have to divert attention from the restaurant as origin of the poisoning?

There are of course some holes in the above - just regard this as an idea to go along the line of food poisoning.

End of Tore's deliberations.
---

b here:

Tore's theory of food poisoning with Saxitoxin makes sense. It is a fitting explanation for what happened in Salisbury and for the murky tale the British government tries to sell.

(update)

Commenters noted that the theory does not immediately explain what happened to Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, who was also treated in the hospital but less severely effected than the Skripals. Off-Guardian noted on March 23:

It was announced today that Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey – allegedly the third victim of the alleged "nerve agent" poisoning in Salisbury, UK – has been released from hospital.

Bailey did not speak to the press, and no photographs or film of him leaving the premises and going home have yet emerged.
...
Where Bailey was poisoned, and how he was poisoned is still not clear – which is puzzling of itself. Was it while attending the Skripals as a first-responder, as claimed by Theresa May (improbable on the face of it, since CID officers in Britain do not act as first-responders). Or did he, on the contrary," have no direct contact with the Skripals ", as put out by the Daily Mail? Was he poisoned while searching the Skripals home ? Or was it somewhere else entirely?

And why did he become poisoned when no one else at the scene, and indeed no one else anywhere in Salisbury fell ill, or even showed signs of contamination in their bloodwork?

If Bailey was on the scene on Sunday afternoon, it was likely not because he was on duty, but because he happened to be in the area. Did he have a private lunch? At Zizzi's? With mussels? We do not know and the government won't say.

(end update)

One of these days the Skripals, Nick Bailey, the doctors at the hospital, or some of the people at Porton Down will talk and let us know the truth.

The Zizzi website says that the restaurant in Salisbury is still - four and a half weeks after the incident - "temporarily closed". If it served healthy food and the Skripals were really poisoned by touching a doorknob at their home why would that still be the case?

But do not take off your tinfoil hat just yet.

If Saxitoxin was the cause of the Skirpals' illness, the story has still potential for a decent spy drama. Was the poison in the mussels Zizzi's served of natural occurrence, or had someone at the CIA rummaged through its old inventory? Who applied the dosage?

In another message Tore notes that there is a foreign member in the British Joint Intelligence Commission which advises Downing Street:

Ever since World War II, the chief of the London station of the United States Central Intelligence Agency has attended the JIC's weekly meetings.

These connections might yet bring us back to Skripal's participation in the 'dirty dossier' about Trump which MI6 agent Chris Steele prepared for the Hillary Clinton campaign. The U.S. and the British intelligence services under Clapper and Brennan waged a war against then candidate Donald Trump. They did not want him to win the election under any circumstance. Were the Skripals late casualties of this fight?

But no. I would not trust that story any more than I trust the British government's current tale.

Another possible explanation, more likely that the election manipulation mentioned above, is a false flag incident solely created to incriminate Russia. It would be a reproduction of the 1994 Operation Hades , a highly propagandized case made up by the German spy service BND to incriminated Russia with a (faked) plutonium smuggling case.

Then again - if it looks like food poisoning, Occam's razor says, it might just be that - food poisoning.

The Skripals' beloved animals though, were admittedly killed by the British government. The Skripal's should sue the responsible persons to hell for committing this murder and for lying about its circumstances.

[Apr 07, 2018] As Skripal-Gate Collapses, Will May's Government Be Next by Tom Luongo,

The level of the USA support suggests that this is a wishful thinking. Who corralled the EU nations to join GB in this mess?
Apr 07, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Authored by Tom Luongo,

The United Kingdom is headed for a break-up. Not today or tomorrow, mind you but, sooner than anyone would like to handicap, especially in this age of coalition government at any cost.

By responding to the alleged poisoning of former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia with histrionics normally reserved for The View, Theresa May's government has set the stage for its own collapse.

Government's fall when the people lose confidence in them. May has bungled everything she has touched as Prime Minister, from Brexit talks and her relationship with Donald Trump to her response (or lack thereof) to the escalating level of domestic terrorism and her pathetic campaign during last year's snap election.

When I confront such obvious ineptitude it's not hard to believe that wasn't the plan to begin with.

Since her initial meeting with Donald Trump after his election where it looked like the two would get along, May has become more and more belligerent to both him and his base. While he continues to affirm our special relationship "The Gypsum Lady" as I like to call her makes mistake after mistake.

The latest of which is pushing everyone east of the Dneiper River in Ukraine to denounce the Russians and President Vladimir Putin personally for this alleged poisoning in Salisbury a month ago.

The result of which was the largest round of diplomatic expulsions in a century, if not ever.

And now that the whole "Russia did it" narrative has been skewered by May's own experts at Porton Downs, she stands alone along with her equally inept and embarrassing Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson.

The calls for their jobs will only intensify here.

Tinker, Tailor, Traitor, Spy

The whole thing felt from the beginning like a bad Ian Fleming novel. I said from the beginning this this was a classic false flag to gin up anti-Russian fervor while May's negotiator betrayed Brexit and pushed to remove Russian businesses from doing business in London.

I'm sorry but it's not a stretch to think this whole thing was cooked up by MI-6. In fact, that's been my operating assumption for a month now.

The problem was, until a few days ago, I didn't have a good enough reason why.

Putting diplomatic pressure on Russia on behalf of the U.S.'s crazed neoconservative Deep State just didn't seem like a big enough reward. Neither did cutting Russian businesses out of European banks to stop contractor and creditor payments associated with the Nordstream 2 pipeline.

Those things felt like nice bonus objectives but not main goals.

And it wasn't until the lead scientists at Porton Downs left May, Johnson and Williamson out to hang on Monday that the full operation became clear. By stating that they could not confirm the origin of the Novichok nerve agent used in the attack on the Skripals the Porton Downs officials destroyed the credibility of The Gypsum Lady's government.

Therefore, this operation was always about undermining May's government to the point of a no-confidence vote. This would then be the ultimate betrayal of Brexit in order to preserve the U.K.'s position in the European Union, which is favored by the political and old-monied British elite.

In short, this was a coup attempt.

And don't think for a second that this is not plausible. Remember it was Margaret Thatcher's own most trusted people who betrayed her to get the U.K. into the European Union in the first place. This was why they brought down The Iron Lady.

So, here's the scene:

May and Johnson both get told by trusted advisors that there is incontrovertible proof of Russia's hand in this. They go with this information with confidence to parliament, the U.N., high-level meetings with foreign leaders and the press.

They convince their allies to stand strong against the evil Russians who is everyone's bid 'baddie' at this point.

Trump has to go along with this nonsense even though he is obviously skeptical otherwise there will be an uproar in the U.S. press about him betraying our most trusted ally for his puppet-master Putin.

To be honest, I don't think these bozos, May and Johnson, were in on the plan. I think they were being played all along and now will be the patsies.

Just like May was played last year, calling for snap elections. The minute she called them there were terror attacks all over London, marches against her over public safety. A media campaign which puffed up Jeremy Corbyn, who they are now destroying for his rightful trepidation about this fairy tale MI-6 is spinning.

The goal was to weaken May and get Labour back in charge. Corbyn would then be cast aside and a Tony Blair clone installed as Prime Minister to scuttle Brexit and restore order to the galaxy, Europe. Unfortunately, the DUP got enough of the vote to re-elect a very weakened May and things have limped along for nearly a year.

Crisis on Infinite Empires

The problem with this however, is like all plans of those desperate to cling to vestiges of former glory (and the U.K. is definitely the poster child for that), is the crisis of confidence it will engender.

Make no mistake, Brexit was no mistake.

It's what the people of Britain wanted and they want it more now than in 2016. So, they don't dare call for a new referendum. But, they are also looking at a third parliamentary vote in as many years.

And that doesn't scream confidence no matter how much markets would prefer the legal status quo. Opposition to Brexit comes from the entrenched monied power, not from any adherence to globalist ideology.

But, if Brexit is betrayed through this hackneyed farce of a spy thriller, it won't sit well with the British people. Scotland's call for a second referendum will continue to grow and the Pound will fall alongside the competitiveness of British labor still trapped within a euro-zone that has done nothing but choke the life out of the economy.

The Pound will begin to sink into irrelevancy as this unfolds. It won't happen overnight, but we will look back on these events and see them as the trigger points for the path of history.

Between these things and the toxic levels of political correctness as it pertains to Muslim immigration, the insanity of London liberals and the de facto police state the U.K. has become and you have a recipe for political unrest that will not be pretty.

Brexit was meant to be the peaceful revolution that put the nail in the coffin of the march to one world government. It is about to be nullified.

When it is the sun will finally set on what's left of the British Empire.

Support this work by signing up with my Patreon Page and gain access to the Gold Goats 'n Guns Investment Newsletter, the Private Blog as well as our private community on Slack.

Occident Mortal -> Manthong Sat, 04/07/2018 - 15:30 Permalink

Theresa May and Boris Johnson are just not very competent. At all.

That's all you need to know to understand Brexit and Skripal case.

chunga -> Occident Mortal Sat, 04/07/2018 - 15:35 Permalink

Sergei Skripal's pets die after investigators sealed off home despite vet warning

https://www.rt.com/uk/423359-skripal-salisbury-pets-die/

The revelation that the animals had died caused considerable reaction on social media with many wondering why it had taken officials so long to find the animals despite so much police activity at the home.

solidtare -> chunga Sat, 04/07/2018 - 15:39 Permalink

"Bring down the government" - isn't that the point of all this.

Well, actually, a second Brexit referendum is, "the point".

Boris took the bait "hook, line and sinker."

No Boris, or rather, Boris the disgraced clown, then maybe we rethink Brexit.

Boris was the target.

two hoots -> solidtare Sat, 04/07/2018 - 15:45 Permalink

Shows how easily we can be led, have be led, to war(s). War is hidden agendas from every player.

eforce -> two hoots Sat, 04/07/2018 - 15:46 Permalink

The EUSSR will be destroyed, there were attempts by UKIP and various others to democratize it a decade or two ago and they were unsucessful, the protocols says that all states must be democratic before world government can be implemented, both the EUSSR and PRC stand in their way.

solidtare -> two hoots Sat, 04/07/2018 - 15:57 Permalink

This is political theater.

It all is.

Note the use of the words:

"Actors", "Narrative" "arc", "story", "backstory", "script"

It is all a game with these people and they figure their opponents get the joke.

http://www.unz.com/pcockburn/the-appointments-of-bolton-and-pompeo-brin

"In another major misjudgement by the US in January, the supposedly moderate Secretary of State Rex Tillerson announced that the US would be keeping its forces in Syria after the defeat of Isis, and intended to get rid of President Bashar al-Assad and roll back Iranian influence. This ambition was largely fantasy , but the Russian and Turkish reaction was real . Four days after Tillerson's arrogant declaration, the Turkish army poured into northern Syria with Russian permission and within two months had eliminated the enclave of Afrin, inhabited by Kurds who are the only US ally in Syria. "

Buckaroo Banzai -> chunga Sat, 04/07/2018 - 15:55 Permalink

They obviously wanted the poor defenseless pets out of the equation. I guess them surviving was somehow not good for the narrative.

Miserable cunts.

Crazy Or Not -> Buckaroo Banzai Sat, 04/07/2018 - 16:24 Permalink

Can't vivisection them if they're still alive. My guess this is a policy thing - still cunts.

northern vigor -> macholatte Sat, 04/07/2018 - 15:46 Permalink

She may be inept, and pathetic but she doesn't hold a candle to the PM Dumbpuck of Canada.

Ex-Oligarch -> northern vigor Sat, 04/07/2018 - 16:29 Permalink

Yeah, but it's only Canada, eh.

GUS100CORRINA -> Decoherence Sat, 04/07/2018 - 15:36 Permalink

As Skripal-Gate Collapses, Will May's Government Be Next?

My response: ENGLAND is CORRUPT and an UNGODLY place to live. If you have been paying attention, it was these S.O.B.s who were spying on TRUMP under the direction of the "OBOZO" administration.

This kind of thing really angers the SHIT out of me. Since when does ENGLAND have any input into AMERICA's POTUS election process. BASTARDS!!!

I HOPE THE WHOLE DAMN COUNTRY CRASHES and BURNS. JAMES BOND can go pound salt.

[Apr 07, 2018] Food poisoning returns as the main hypothesis in Skripal case

So in this case the chain of events looks like: food poisoning -> discovery that the incident can be used as for the nasty PR campaign against Russia and save May government -> Novichok claims -> Novichok contamination
The deafening silence of neoliberal MSM is an interesting sign that something went wrong with the PR attack on Russia.
Notable quotes:
"... I doubt that the police were responsible, though it is inevitable that they will be saddled with the blame. I have no doubt that there are police procedures that would see the police remove all pets before sealing a premises. But I doubt very much that the police were anything other that props by that stage i.e. they were not doing anything by the book but, rather, they were Doing As They Were Told. ..."
"... IMHO it could have been food poisoning and it fits the timing perfectly but doesn't explain all the other traces of whatever agent they are presenting as evidence. I still feel that these idiots used an old stock of Foliant agents recovered during the cleanup of the Uzbekistan lab. I believe that Porton Down made their own stock from the formulae they recovered. This doesn't explain the presence of the Novichok A234 which was never developed or a part of the Soviet research.It was developed at Edgewood Arsenal back in the late 90's and published back then. However, the weasel wording of the claims by DSTL are that is was highly likely (read that as we are guessing) that there was Novichok or from the novichok family (meaning it could also be anything). I am a scientists and we use very precise language when describing something. I also have a forensic background and you would never put something like this vague report out there. It is actually embarrassing to be this vague and it would be tossed as evidence. ..."
"... There is not one single mention of a poisoned spy Skripal story nowhere near headline or important news columns to be noticed or seen. Like the story never happened. I am saying the BBC, The Guardian and CNN just forgot that there was any news concerning Russia poisoning or even mention of it. Really? ..."
"... The simplest explanation why the British government should have taken food poisoning as an opportunity for a global PsyOp in a manner, that was definitely highly unprofessional and panic-like, is still the repeated Russian warnings of an imminent large-scale chemical False Flag attack in Syria, to which an attack on the government district was to follow, plus ..."
"... On the other hand, Russia would not waste the opportunities of the evidence on Public Relation. The Kremlin would refer it to reasonably selected confidential military and civil contacts within the EU to bolster the rifts within the imperial camp, especially transatlanticists and their opponents in the European Council. Brexit could have become even more detrimental for the UK. ..."
"... How does Yulia Skripal know that "nobody here" will give her cousin a visa? Is she familiar with the intricacies of the Visa process? The whole phone call sounds like the acoustic equivalent of the device ships in StarTrek have installed - a deflector shield. Calm down things, make her cousin not apply for a visa. This phone call came (just like that) after her cousin started to go public in Russia and probably was identified as a potential disruptor. Yulia Skripal tried to make her not apply for a visa - by assuring her everything and everyone is OK (including Sergey) and then, when Victoria insisted, tackling the Visa issue right away - don't apply the message is, no need to come to the UK and see me. It appears this had to be avoided at all costs. ..."
"... Skripal and a 33-year-old woman are believed to have come into contact with a poisonous substance at the city's Zizzi restaurant, which has since been closed by emergency teams. ..."
Apr 07, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

VietnamVet , Apr 7, 2018 12:46:39 AM | 73

Thanks to MoA, the government/media Salisbury England Information Operation doesn't add up. If exposed to military grade nerve agent 5-8 times more toxic than America's VX, the Skripals and first responders would be dead. If food poisoning, there should be more victims at Zizzi's but not the police detective. Clearly the story was made up fast without the facts. Their pets were incinerated for god's sake. The observable goal of the British Hierarchy is to stress Russia with more sanctions and to escalate the Syrian world war plus a cover up PM May's catastrophic handling of Brexit.

As documented here, there are too many coincidences to be happenstance. I am leaning towards an oligarch faction contracted out a mob hit to take out a "contributor" to Steele's Dodgy Dossier to give it credence and scare the crap out of everyone else involved. The Established as an afterthought tasked the incident to promote their greater ambitions.

Peter AU 1 , Apr 7, 2018 12:52:55 AM | 74
From Tore's PSP link

'Health Canada advises Canadians to limit their consumption of lobster tomalley to the equivalent of one lobster tomalley daily for adults, due to the possible presence of PSP. Health Canada has recommended that children not consume lobster tomalley.'


No notice on limiting shellfish - only lobster re PSP at that link. If bivalve shellfish could be more toxic than lobster, would a limit also have been mentioned? By weight, if shellfish acquire similar or less toxicity than lobster then the Skripals must have had a good feed of mussels.

Harry , Apr 7, 2018 12:55:09 AM | 75
@ cdvision | 56

If Skripals werent in it from the start, they will HAVE to say whatever UK tells them to, otherwise they might "relapse" and no Easter miracles this time. At least until they get out of UK. If they will refuse to leave UK because they "fear evil ruskies", then we will know it was all a sham.

@ Yeah, Right | 67

Same thing I was thinking, it doesnt make any sense. Bottom line: police sealed pets to starve to death (due to neglect?), and poor cat which was still alive was killed too. Any normal person by seeing hungry cat would give her food, but no, it was "more merciful" just to kill it. Worse than animals.. And of course, to avoid any investigation later, burned them.

Peter L. , Apr 7, 2018 1:08:02 AM | 76
I searched using Google for "saxitoxin deaths frequency," which turns up lots of papers on the subject. From the abstract of one titled, "Marine algal toxins: origins, health effects, and their increased occurrence" and published in 2000:
"Over the past three decades, the frequency and global distribution of toxic algal incidents appear to have increased, and human intoxications from novel algal sources have occurred. This increase is of particular concern, since it parallels recent evidence of large-scale ecologic disturbances that coincide with trends in global warming."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1637787/

The paper suggests such poisoning is rare, but obviously it is possible. Further browsing for "shellfish poisoning" and so forth indicates that such poisoning is frequent enough for health agencies and governments to warn people about it. Perhaps one could calculate the frequency by which Russia poisons people, and compare the frequency with which people are accidentally poisoned by saxitoxin to form a better judgment of the situation.

(First time leaving a comment on this blog. I found your blog somewhat recently because of Naked Capitalism, and having been reading your posts ever since. )

Hoarsewhisperer , Apr 7, 2018 1:28:40 AM | 77
...
They cannot hide from the truth. The whole world is watching. No one believes Highly Likely.
...
Posted by: Red Ryder | Apr 6, 2018 6:16:45 PM | 11

Especially when one recalls that 'Highly Likely' is the tr-r-raditional excuse used by the Judeo-Christian Barbarians, since 2001, for slaughtering 'suspects' (from a safe distance) without properly identifying them.

All those Afghan Wedding parties, Chelsea Manning's infamous Collateral Murder gun-sight video in Iraq. And the CIA's Drone campaign is ongoing.

wrw , Apr 7, 2018 1:36:28 AM | 78
Sorry, but the odds of these two getting food poisoning is one thing but they just happen to be THE SKRIPALS! getting food poisoning? - no way! Even if there was bad mussels or even if dozens came down with food poisoning, still THE SKRIPALS just happen to eat there - what are the odds? IMPOSSIBLE!

UNLESS... the food poisoning was intentional (to silence him re Steele) and then blame Russia. But if food poisoning was the method, then TPTB would have known better than to go the nerve agent route. UNLESS... they planned it all along to plant nerve agent but not use it on the Skripals due to the danger posed to others.

Jen , Apr 7, 2018 1:55:52 AM | 79
Peter L @ 76:

British celebrity chef Heston Blumenthal's old Fat Duck restaurant was hit by a massive shellfish poisoning incident that made 529 diners ill in 2009.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/sep/11/heston-blumenthal-fat-duck-poisoning

In that case the culprit was norovirus (bane of passenger cruise liners, I believe) transmitted through raw oysters, improperly prepared razorback clams and staff practices (such as staff working while they were still sick) that enabled the spread of the norovirus.

Jen , Apr 7, 2018 2:05:54 AM | 80
WRW @ 78: Isn't it just possible that if the Skripals had had food poisoning, their condition would have been treated the same as any other patient with food poisoning - but once hospital staff noticed that Sergei Skripal had some connection with British security through checking his medical records, they called police and from then on the Skripals were treated differently from other patients, and were kept confined or sedated while the authorities decided that they must have been targeted by Moscow or saw an opportunity to bash the Russians?

Sometimes, sooner or later, incidents can happen in such a way that most observers would believe there must be more to them than coincidence and that such incidents must have been planned. They needn't be planned - all that's needed is someone or a group of people looking for opportunities to exploit situations, use innocent victims and throw blame onto third parties.

Hoarsewhisperer , Apr 7, 2018 2:37:49 AM | 81
...
The truth is that (while China may eclipse the US by 2150) it is very likely that this will be Russia's century. I believe the west know this very well and will do everything they can to capture Russia's resources and that means continuing isolation of, and tension and conflict with, Russia.

Btw: If you add Chinese industry, Russian resources and OBOR together it is obvious that the end of western dominion of the world is coming to an end and that, unfortunately, greatly increases the risk of a major war.

Posted by: Ace | Apr 6, 2018 9:07:04 PM | 48

That makes a certain amount of sense but overlooks a vital component of the current World Order. If the current World Order wasn't dominated and controlled by Greedy Rich Pigs then TRADE would be the friendly and logical way to address any global imbalances in local water, food and resources availability (to which one could add Funds/Finance).
The underlying problem is, imo, the factoid that the Greedy Rich Pigs crowd got rich by monopolising essential industries and resources centuries ago and don't want to surrender their 'right' to OWN everything of value, including politicians, and to continue their Command of the Gravy Train.

Yeah, Right , Apr 7, 2018 2:43:24 AM | 82
@75 "police sealed pets to starve to death"

I doubt that the police were responsible, though it is inevitable that they will be saddled with the blame. I have no doubt that there are police procedures that would see the police remove all pets before sealing a premises. But I doubt very much that the police were anything other that props by that stage i.e. they were not doing anything by the book but, rather, they were Doing As They Were Told.

Hoarsewhisperer , Apr 7, 2018 2:54:33 AM | 83
Greedy Rich Pigs.
It was neither coincidence nor happenstance that inspired Orwell to cast 'un-clean' pigs as the movers & shakers in Animal Farm.
somebody , Apr 7, 2018 2:58:32 AM | 84
80
Being close to Porton Down, the hospital must have all kinds of procedures to deal with chemical accidents.

Anyway, here is the US patent for the treatment of "Novichok"

Oh all those experts..... no antidote, only Russian ....

Old Microbiologist , Apr 7, 2018 3:06:13 AM | 85
IMHO it could have been food poisoning and it fits the timing perfectly but doesn't explain all the other traces of whatever agent they are presenting as evidence. I still feel that these idiots used an old stock of Foliant agents recovered during the cleanup of the Uzbekistan lab. I believe that Porton Down made their own stock from the formulae they recovered. This doesn't explain the presence of the Novichok A234 which was never developed or a part of the Soviet research.It was developed at Edgewood Arsenal back in the late 90's and published back then. However, the weasel wording of the claims by DSTL are that is was highly likely (read that as we are guessing) that there was Novichok or from the novichok family (meaning it could also be anything). I am a scientists and we use very precise language when describing something. I also have a forensic background and you would never put something like this vague report out there. It is actually embarrassing to be this vague and it would be tossed as evidence.

What I think happened was they used old stock (which would have the correct chemical fingerprint from Russia having been made there in the first place) but after 38 years the potency is way off. If the agent was in fact 10 times stronger than VX then perhaps there was just enough potency left to cause what we saw in the Skripals. This, of course, assumes that the UK attacked them in the first place which explains their certainty of what agent it was. However, if it was in fact A234 then you could never attribute this to Russia as it is actually an American product. If it was one of the original Foliant agents that is something different but that is not what was claimed. The finding of agent on the doorknobs is ridiculous and a very bad misstep by the UK. These agents are viscous (like honey) and smell horrible similar to your household bug sprays. Putting it on a doorknob would be patently obvious to anyone touching the door and you would examine the goo on your finger and smell it. Obviously, this didn't happen. So, if agent is present on the doorknob then it was deliberately put there well after the fact. These agents can be soluble in water (2 of the Foliant agents are water soluble and 2 are not). If so, it was raining in Salisbury which would have removed it by rainfall dilution. If it isn't water soluble it was there for 3 weeks.

The persistence of these agents in the environment is not long and it rapidly begins to decompose, especially if in the presence of sunlight (UV), and disappears. When salting a battlefield with nerve agent we expect it to remain lethal for 72 hours. These weapons are designed specifically to keep the enemy forces from travelling through a contaminated area and the purpose of chemical agents is denial of terrain. You use it when you have a front line which is too large to defend with your forces at hand or to funnel the enemy attack into an area where you have amassed your defenses. This is what this stuff is designed to do. You can also use it to mess up rear area support operations but that is a secondary use. Think of it as an aerial delivered (artillery or aircraft) temporary minefield. The key word being temporary. After all, this is the territory you are fighting over and it is useless if it is permanently poisoned. As the FEBA moves you may end up occupying that area in the days following a defensive operation. It is possible; however, to attack through a contaminated area and modern tanks now have air filtration and all combat troops have MOPP gear which will protect a soldier in that environment. However, anyone who has practiced infantry assaults wearing full MOPP gear knows how awful that is and how ineffective you are as a soldier. It is hot, heavy, with poor visibility in a full mask, not to mention inadequate breathing which is rough at best, plus you are also carrying your basic load so it is an awful experience. Also by doctrine attacking forces need to have a 3 to 1 force superiority to be successful and things like chemical agents on the battlefield are force multipliers whereas attacking forces operating a full MOPP are suffering a force detractor. My point is it is an effective way to mount a defense and no one would willingly attack through a contaminated area.

So, I see many problems trying to put this together and all of them add up to me to be a false flag operation which was botched. All the subsequent actions by the UK government including denial of consular privileges to see their citizens, failure to follow fixed procedures as mandated by the CWC, long delay in reporting to the OPCW, failure to provide any physical evidence (GC-MS printouts would be enough), taking the investigation away from the police, not mounting a manhunt for the perpetrators, changing story over time and the miraculous recovery of the victims all indicate to me a completely botched operation. I feel sorry for the British citizens having a government as inept as this is. Of course, mine (the USA) is far worse but I always respected the UK as being somewhat responsible. Now it looks like it has fallen down to American levels of ineptitude.

Blue , Apr 7, 2018 3:09:34 AM | 86
Michael Hudson's take on Skripal poisoning.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/49159.htm
Al-Pol , Apr 7, 2018 3:12:14 AM | 87
Binary food-poisoning anyone ? With all this talk about creating these mysterious binary nerve agents, did anyone consider a similar scenario involving two separate strains of bacteria (or even two of the same/similar strain), from two separate foods.

The Russians and Eastern Europeans spend a lot of time preserving foods (for their long cold winters) and they can become a source for the Clostridium botulinum bacteria to grow in. So for breakfast the Skripals have some pickles that Yulia brought with her and a few hours later the botulinum toxin begins to affect them, but only mildly. Their seafood risotto also happens to contain traces of Clostridium botulinum and that combined with the original is enough to knock them out 30 minutes or so later.

Botulism can be hard to track down, but when you have the world's leading experts on it just down the road at Porton Down it should be easy to get a quick positive test and to have all the information necessary to treat any victims.

But can you imagine what would happen if you tell the world that a Russian spy has been poisoned with botulinum toxin, just a few miles away from the world's leading reasearch centre for that toxin. A different explanation is needed and a quick flood of DSMA-Notices needs to be issued to prevent any unwanted details emerging whilst the new explanation is being created.

Bailey the other poisoning victim may have had just a mild dose from the seafood risotto.

somebody , Apr 7, 2018 3:19:12 AM | 89
Deutsche Welle article - in German

claiming that Theresa May got European support by claiming they could prove that the Skripal poison came from Russia (vetoed by Porton Down). The article asks for an independent investigation. Deutsche Welle is the German equivalent of BBC.

m , Apr 7, 2018 3:21:20 AM | 90
@yeah right 55 Yep I think you are on the right track

@wrw 78 Yes you too

I would like to see the cash register bill for the lunchtime meal at zizzi - I would be particularly interested in number of diners

I believe our det sgt hero was a minder and may also have been present at said lunch. Would explain a lot wouldn't it?

notheonly1 , Apr 7, 2018 3:40:03 AM | 91
How about a case of inconceivable coincidence?

The Skripals were on the 'kill list' for the known reasons regarding the Steele dossier. Yulia was just collateral damage. Porton Down had the substance and it was applied to the house door after the Skripals had left to go about what they had planned to do.

Unscripted, the Skripals come down with a food poisoning from eating at the restaurant. They are unable to return home, where they would have been poisoned by whatever services involved. But the cop goes there and comes into contact with whatever was applied there.

Noteworthy is of course, that any assassination will not be perpetrated based on a 10% chance of succeeding. The people with the abilities to take somebody out do just that. Although it must also be mentioned that assassinations by means of causing cancer in the victim are very popular in the valuable West.

Just a thought to connect the dots.

somebody , Apr 7, 2018 3:51:18 AM | 92
Posted by: Old Microbiologist | Apr 7, 2018 3:06:13 AM | 85

I think its military use has shifted since WWI. It is used on civilian populations for ethnic cleansing, on underground makeshift facilities like tunnels and in PR.

laserlurk , Apr 7, 2018 3:55:29 AM | 93
It is Saturday April 7th. Europe 10:00.

There is not one single mention of a poisoned spy Skripal story nowhere near headline or important news columns to be noticed or seen. Like the story never happened. I am saying the BBC, The Guardian and CNN just forgot that there was any news concerning Russia poisoning or even mention of it. Really?

Ghost Ship , Apr 7, 2018 3:58:06 AM | 94
Posted by: MadMax2 | Apr 6, 2018 6:40:36 PM | 17
Brexit has been game over'd.

I'm not so sure. There are increasing demands to have another referendum over the Brexit "package". Also, one thing the Conservative Brexiters have overlooked is what happens when the Labour Party forms a government? Inside the EU there are strict limits and controls to what it could do to return the UK from a neo-liberal economy to either a social democratic or democratic socialist economy. Once the UK leaves the EU all those limits and controls disappear, which is probably why Corbyn is ambivalent about Brexit - he knows we need to remain part of Europe but not part of the neo-liberal EU ruled by a quasi-dictatorship in Brussels.

BTW, the UK has been the United States' enforcer inside the EU since it joined. When the UK voted for Brexit, I suspect that deep-state Washington thought that Poland could take over as enforcer , but the nationalist politicians in Poland are just not up to the job. So what could deep-state Washington do? Discredit Theresa May as she is probably the only Conservative politician capable of getting terms for Brexit that the British electorate will accept? Put in her place a thoroughly damaged Boris Johnson who would screw it up completely?

TomGard , Apr 7, 2018 4:08:55 AM | 95
b,
your "best explanation ... " label is a little deceptive, as you yourself concede in the last paragraphs of your piece. Food poisoning explains the recovery of the Skripals, the conflicting allegations about means and location of the poisoning and the lies and secrecy about DS Baileys alledged affection by the poison, nothing more.

The simplest explanation why the British government should have taken food poisoning as an opportunity for a global PsyOp in a manner, that was definitely highly unprofessional and panic-like, is still the repeated Russian warnings of an imminent large-scale chemical False Flag attack in Syria, to which an attack on the government district was to follow, plus numerous reports of the capture of British Special Forces in Ghouta, which were, with due reservations, relayed by Maxim A. Suchkov. Suchkov is not in a position to indulge in levity in such a case.

On the other hand, Russia would not waste the opportunities of the evidence on Public Relation. The Kremlin would refer it to reasonably selected confidential military and civil contacts within the EU to bolster the rifts within the imperial camp, especially transatlanticists and their opponents in the European Council. Brexit could have become even more detrimental for the UK.

b , Apr 7, 2018 4:09:51 AM | 96
The more I read about it that better is the fit:
Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning

Clinical Presentation:
Ingestion of molluscs contaminated with PSP results in the following clinical picture (Bower et al, 1981, Kao 1993). Five to 30 minutes from consumption, there is slight perioral tingling progressing to numbness which spreads to face and neck to moderate cases. In severe cases, these symptoms spread to the extremities with incoordination and respiratory difficulty. There are medullary disturbances in severe cases evidenced by difficulty swallowing, sense of throat constriction, speech incoherence or complete loss of speech, as well as brain stem dysfunction. Within 2-12 hours, in very severe cases, there is complete paralysis and death from respiratory failure in absence of ventilatory support. After 12 hours, regardless of severity, victims start to recover gradually and are without any residual symptoms within a few days (Bower et al, 1981, ILO 1984, Halstead 1988).

This fits the eyewitness reports of the Skripals on the bank. A women who had watched them said they were behaving erratic before collapsing. She thought they were way out on drugs.
Piotr Berman , Apr 7, 2018 4:12:13 AM | 97
"I suspect that deep-state Washington thought that Poland could take over as enforcer, but the nationalist politicians in Poland are just not up to the job."

It is debatable if the current Polish government is barking mad or batshit insane, but in either case, they lack influence on other countries that an "enforcer" needs. In any case, what would an "enforcer" enforce? On most matters, the French are eager to please and Germans usually follow the suit, even if Merkel utters something feisty in a biergarten on occasion.

BX , Apr 7, 2018 4:25:10 AM | 98
We still do not know for a fact how the Skripals were poisoned (several avenues of "investigation" - buckwheat, door handle, gift, something in a suitcase) and how Detective Sergeant Bailey fits into this picture. If he was in the house (early stories suggested this) how did he get in and was he there on his own? Was he in the house at all? Where was he?

The ER consultant and his letter. There is no follow-up by media. There is apparently no official reaction to the letter. This letter is the only half-way external confirmation there were 3 people with considerable poisoning. Maybe this letter is not a white hat letter?

I think it is best to just take a step back and look at this from some distance. You then realize there is not a single thing here you can be sure about. There are no facts; whatever there is is presented by British government agents (that includes Porton Down). The "defense" cannot get hold of anything to build a meaningful defense on. Embassy is denied access. Close relatives are denied access.

How does Yulia Skripal know that "nobody here" will give her cousin a visa? Is she familiar with the intricacies of the Visa process? The whole phone call sounds like the acoustic equivalent of the device ships in StarTrek have installed - a deflector shield. Calm down things, make her cousin not apply for a visa. This phone call came (just like that) after her cousin started to go public in Russia and probably was identified as a potential disruptor. Yulia Skripal tried to make her not apply for a visa - by assuring her everything and everyone is OK (including Sergey) and then, when Victoria insisted, tackling the Visa issue right away - don't apply the message is, no need to come to the UK and see me. It appears this had to be avoided at all costs.

Followed by an official confirmation Sergey is recovering, too.

Someone decided that they could not keep the Skripals in intensive care forever since somehow the doubt is more widespread than expected? Now it is about calming things down? All is well since the Skripals are fine? Damage control mission?

Someone had a look at Yulia's social media account after March 4.

Sergey Skripal is totally dependent on the UK.

I don't think the animals are dead.

cdvision , Apr 7, 2018 4:42:02 AM | 99
What torpedoes the food-poisoning theory is that the UK response was so quick, coordinated and word perfect - till Boris overstepped the mark (he is just an attention seeking buffoon). So whatever transpired they knew it was coming.

What is odd is that the Skripals are still alive. Maybe its the special Russian DNA. Thankfully, the medics in Salisbury declined to go with the official line, and stated so, publicly, early on. The Skripals could, plausibly, have been taken to Porton Down for sSpecialist treatment", like the Guinea Pigs (it seems the pets have been incinerated - ie destruction of evidence).

There is more to this than food poisoning.

b , Apr 7, 2018 4:48:10 AM | 100
adding to my comment @96

March 6 - 'He looked out of it' Witness says Russian spy Sergei Skripal slumped on Salisbury bench

Freya Church, from Salisbury, said: "On the bench there was a couple, an older guy and a younger girl.

She was sort of leant in on him, it looked like she had passed out maybe.

"He was doing some strange hand movements, looking up to the sky. It looked like they had been taking something quite strong."

Sergei Skripal was found unconscious on a shopping centre bench in Salisbury, Wiltshire, along with a woman he is thought to know.

Skripal and a 33-year-old woman are believed to have come into contact with a poisonous substance at the city's Zizzi restaurant, which has since been closed by emergency teams.

[Apr 06, 2018] As Skripal-Gate Collapses so Will the May Government by Tom Luongo

An interesting hypothesis: May, Johnson and Williamson might be deceived by their own advisors. In tyhis case this is an operation directed at undermining May's government to the point of a no-confidence vote in order to stop Brexit and to preserve the UK's position in the European Union, which is favored by the political and financial elites.
But I doubt the Corbin is the person the British neoliberal want in power.
Notable quotes:
"... And it wasn't until the lead scientists at Porton Downs left May, Johnson and Williamson out to hang on Monday that the full operation became clear. By stating that they could not confirm the origin of the Novichok nerve agent used in the attack on the Skripals the Porton Downs officials destroyed the credibility of The Gypsum Lady's government ..."
"... Therefore, this operation was always about undermining May's government to the point of a no-confidence vote. This would then be the ultimate betrayal of Brexit in order to preserve the U.K.'s position in the European Union, which is favored by the political and old-monied British elite. ..."
"... May and Johnson both get told by trusted advisors that there is incontrovertible proof of Russia's hand in this. They go with this information with confidence to parliament, the U.N., high-level meetings with foreign leaders and the press. They convince their allies to stand strong against the evil Russians who is everyone's bid 'baddie' at this point. ..."
"... Trump has to go along with this nonsense even though he is obviously skeptical otherwise there will be an uproar in the US press about him betraying our most trusted ally for his puppet-master Putin ..."
"... But, if Brexit is betrayed through this hackneyed farce of a spy thriller, it won't sit well with the British people. Scotland's call for a second referendum will continue to grow and the Pound will fall alongside the competitiveness of British labor still trapped within a euro-zone that has done nothing but choke the life out of the economy. ..."
"... Between these things and the toxic levels of political correctness as it pertains to Muslim immigration, the insanity of London liberals and the de facto police state the U.K. has become and you have a recipe for political unrest that will not be pretty. Brexit was meant to be the peaceful revolution that put the nail in the coffin of the march to one world government. It is about to be nullified. When it is the sun will finally set on what's left of the British Empire. ..."
"... That was my gut feeling from the beginning, that it was the MI6 for some internal stuff. I didn't think of Brexit but it makes sense. Either way, Britain has already since decades been geopolitically irrelevant other than as the empire's muscle's sidekick. ..."
"... More like we have privatised so much of our intelligence services, just like the US has got the private sector, working on around 80% of their intelligence. Leaving it to those with minimal knowledge, but, experts in the art of spin, as Elliot Higgins, with his Google Software Certificate, comes to mind. Just one of the experts of the day, with a similar set of skills. ..."
"... Why did British government killed Skirpal's pests? Police search of the Skripal's house was so thorough that in a month they couldn't find his cat and 2 guinea pigs. Now, the police issued the statement full of lies. ..."
"... More then 2/3 of ALL financial transactions are done through the City of London, and the EU has, although there are several contenders, not yet transferred all this to the European Mainland to any major financial center on the Mainland! ...Frankfurt am Main and Paris are the top two contenders. ..."
"... Johnson, as a supervisor for MI6, then is some they want to get rid of? ..."
"... One can look back a few month's before Salisbury and see May out of the blue ratcheting up her Russophobia during speeches on Youtube. Keep in mind that as Home minister from 2010-2016 May must have had direct relations with MI5. ..."
"... Also her carefully scripted language more implying than direct stating offers her a plausible deniability just like Blair exploited. So the fault can be shifted to faulty intelligence or experts. So presenting May as a victim is 'highly likely' too generous. My guess is that she was involved from its inception. ..."
"... May goes to see the EU leaders, next stage signed off, but, we are left in ignorance and low and behold, so many Russian Diplomats are expelled from US and EU nations, just a couple of days after May has been horsetrading? ..."
"... The EU will never be what you Spaniards and we Croats want. We would like something like the US of Europe. All people to be equal. Sweden, Denmark, Germany... want a lot of bantustans in Europe. The name bantustan was used in the RSA during apartheid when they had created a lot of independent states in order to exploit them. My question to you is - if you were a Dane would you like to share "all spoils" with third world countries like Bulgaria, Romania...and tomorrow Bosnia, Macedonia...etc? ..."
"... There is another cover-up taking place in May's government in the midst of the Skripal hysteria, and that is of the decades-old sex rings (organized by Asian Muslims, according to what I have read) that have raped between 1,000-1500 girls in three English towns. It is a sensitive issue, but should rightfully be reported. ..."
"... My only problem with this article is if May's government fails, then there is a serious risk for the globalists that a more ardent Brexiter may end up leading the party! ..."
Apr 06, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Putting diplomatic pressure on Russia on behalf of the U.S.'s crazed neoconservative Deep State just didn't seem like a big enough reward. Neither did cutting Russian businesses out of European banks to stop contractor and creditor payments associated with the Nordstream 2 pipeline.

Those things felt like nice bonus objectives but not main goals.

And it wasn't until the lead scientists at Porton Downs left May, Johnson and Williamson out to hang on Monday that the full operation became clear. By stating that they could not confirm the origin of the Novichok nerve agent used in the attack on the Skripals the Porton Downs officials destroyed the credibility of The Gypsum Lady's government .

Therefore, this operation was always about undermining May's government to the point of a no-confidence vote. This would then be the ultimate betrayal of Brexit in order to preserve the U.K.'s position in the European Union, which is favored by the political and old-monied British elite.

In short, this was a coup attempt.

And don't think for a second that this is not plausible. Remember it was Margaret Thatcher's own most trusted people who betrayed her to get the U.K. into the European Union in the first place. This was why they brought down The Iron Lady.

So, here's the scene:

May and Johnson both get told by trusted advisors that there is incontrovertible proof of Russia's hand in this. They go with this information with confidence to parliament, the U.N., high-level meetings with foreign leaders and the press. They convince their allies to stand strong against the evil Russians who is everyone's bid 'baddie' at this point.

Trump has to go along with this nonsense even though he is obviously skeptical otherwise there will be an uproar in the US press about him betraying our most trusted ally for his puppet-master Putin .

To be honest, I don't think these bozos, May and Johnson, were in on the plan. I think they were being played all along and now will be the patsies.

Just like May was played last year, calling for snap elections. The minute she called them there were terror attacks all over London, marches against her over public safety. A media campaign which puffed up Jeremy Corbyn, who they are now destroying for his rightful trepidation about this fairy tale MI-6 is spinning.

The goal was to weaken May and get Labour back in charge. Corbyn would then be cast aside and a Tony Blair clone installed as Prime Minister to scuttle Brexit and restore order to the galaxy, Europe. Unfortunately, the DUP got enough of the vote to re-elect a very weakened May and things have limped along for nearly a year.

Crisis on Infinite Empires

The problem with this however, is like all plans of those desperate to cling to vestiges of former glory (and the U.K. is definitely the poster child for that), is the crisis of confidence it will engender. Make no mistake, Brexit was no mistake. It's what the people of Britain wanted and they want it more now than in 2016. So, they don't dare call for a new referendum. But, they are also looking at a third parliamentary vote in as many years.

And that doesn't scream confidence no matter how much markets would prefer the legal status quo. Opposition to Brexit comes from the entrenched monied power, not from any adherence to globalist ideology.

But, if Brexit is betrayed through this hackneyed farce of a spy thriller, it won't sit well with the British people. Scotland's call for a second referendum will continue to grow and the Pound will fall alongside the competitiveness of British labor still trapped within a euro-zone that has done nothing but choke the life out of the economy.

The Pound will begin to sink into irrelevancy as this unfolds. It won't happen overnight, but we will look back on these events and see them as the trigger points for the path of history.

Between these things and the toxic levels of political correctness as it pertains to Muslim immigration, the insanity of London liberals and the de facto police state the U.K. has become and you have a recipe for political unrest that will not be pretty. Brexit was meant to be the peaceful revolution that put the nail in the coffin of the march to one world government. It is about to be nullified. When it is the sun will finally set on what's left of the British Empire.

Media Watch • 10 hours ago ,

The problem with this "they made May do it" narrative is that she (and Bojo the blowhard) were clearly no reluctant stooges. They were relishing their chest thumping, Russia hating roles, and it is easier to believe they were in fact the architects not the pawns.

I think Craig Murray understands it best when he said the government had put pressure on Porton Down scientists to say the agent was made in Russia. Even the Aitkenhead interview had the fingerprints of government handlers all over it, when, after "finishing" the interview and taking down the camera, they had to set it up again - it was in a different position - in order to coerce Aitkenhead to make the absurd claim that it could only have been made by a state actor.

So it looks like a government orchestrated provocation for political reasons - to puff up May's "tough" credentials, and get the UK punching above its weight in the international arena. But all it has really done is strain the already fraying relationship between the Nato states.

Ciao Bella Media Watch • 9 hours ago ,

.....it could only have been made by a state actor.....About twenty state actors can produce it, including Porton Down / the UK.
So it means nothing for people who can think, on the other hand it means a lot for MSM propaganda and sheepishly population.

Mike • 5 hours ago ,

George Galloway said it best. Paraphrasing : "England wants you to believe that a military grade nerve agent that is classified 10 times more potent than VX, did not kill anyone? They want you to believe that the nerve agent was on the door handle so when the Shripal's left the house, the father closed the door and his daughter needed to doubled checked if it was closed? Really? So, it was so deadly that they managed to get to the car, disappear for a few hours, then went to a pub followed by a restaurant where, amazingly enough, they felt well enough to eat a full meal and finally both of them fell at the same time on a park bench over 4 hours later? Not one investigator or police that went to the Shripal house, during the investigation got sick?

If you believe that story, you are not a sheep, you are an idiot!"

Serg Derbst • 8 hours ago ,

That was my gut feeling from the beginning, that it was the MI6 for some internal stuff. I didn't think of Brexit but it makes sense. Either way, Britain has already since decades been geopolitically irrelevant other than as the empire's muscle's sidekick.

It never had a vision for Europe (other than to start wars in it since centuries) and never really wanted to be part of it. What is Britain anyhow except for a very beautiful country? Isn't that enough? Why do you always have to be important? Look at Portugal, this often overlooked small country at the edge of Europe where the sun sets in the ocean as otherwise only in California. We used to be the world's number one empire once, then number two, and now? It is certainly going to be the place I want to spend my retirement in. Great weather, rough sea, beautiful beaches, amazing food, and one of the most friendly people in all of Europe. What's an empire good for?

The problem is that these rich people cannot appreciate anything. Here in Hamburg our old Hanseatic money is modeled very much after the British way. Golfing, rowing, tennis, hockey, private boarding schools, the whole shebang. I've been to school with a lot of them and noticed that they all have this aura of lost sadness that can only be filled by greed and artificial importance in artificial clubs and such.

A lot of my classmates ended up managing hedge funds in London, prior to 2008 at least. They still eradiate this cold, empty sadness, but they meet annually in Bangkok for guess what. I prefer to appreciate the simple things and instead of clinging to a distant past the British elites would do well to make room for their common people to do the same, for example by providing for affordable housing in their cities, especially in London.

Tom Luongo Serg Derbst • 32 minutes ago ,

Sergei, neither did I and that was the part that was distressing me for the past couple of weeks. Then it finally hit me while I was on YouTube livestreaming about this... and I thought... "Yeah, that's the missing piece."

The rest of your comment is fantastic, thanks!

Howard Douglas • 9 hours ago ,

The only part I disagree with is that which the writer states May and Johnson were actually in on this sell out of Britain. Boris is a buffoon, for working with May, so is Gove and so are all (who claimed to be BREXITEERS) but as yo whether Johnson is actually in on it, I will give him the benefit of the doubt. Let's face it though his reputation is ruined and permanently so as a result of enigmatic blaming the Russians for this gross miscarriage of justice (guilty until proven innocent).

As for #ShariaAppeaserMay she is the 'woman' behind keeping the UK in and will be 'the women' who breaks the UK apart. She is bungling, useless and a traitor to this country and all the foolhardy have stood by and watche her complete and utter uselessness be the badge Britain wears in future. The Russians are laughing as #theMaybot destroys her own and UK credibility, she was a liar, remonaner and appeaser from the beginning.

It won't be long, the country can only be saved by Divine Intervention.

Tom Luongo Howard Douglas • 34 minutes ago ,

I didn't say they were in on this. Actually I made it a point not to say that. "To be honest, I don't think these bozos, May and Johnson, were in on the plan. I think they were being played all along and now will be the patsies."

Thanks for reading and commenting.

c • 7 hours ago ,

MOSCOW, April 6. /TASS/. The cat and two guinea pigs Sergei Skripal had kept in his home might have proved an important piece of evidence in the case of the former GRU colonel's poisoning, because the animals died under very strange circumstances, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on her Facebook page, adding that did not happen because they were cremated.

"At first sight this may look a reason for another portion of key-witnesses-have-been-eliminated jokes," she said. "In reality, though, they were really 'crucial pieces of evidence,' if it is true a poisonous substance, according to some versions, might have been used inside Skripal's house."

Strange search

Zakharova was surprised that the pets reportedly died because they had remained inside the house all alone without being taken care of.

"How is that? The house was searched but the pets remained unnoticed. The pets of a man who was suspected to have been poisoned with a nerve gas?!" she said.

Also, Zakharova raised doubts why the cat was euthanized at the Porton Down chemical laboratory.

"Is this Britain's usual way of treating house pets? Is it quite common?" she asked.

"That is not all," Zakharova went on to say. "According to media rumors, the guinea pigs and the cat were cremated. In other words, destroyed, although the pets' bodies might have served a crucial piece of evidence in the poisoning case."

Zakharova said that according to Russian sources, the British Broadcasting Corporation (the BBC) did know that pets were remaining in Skripal's house, but kept quiet about that. "We would like to hear explanations," she added.

More:
http://tass.com/politics/99...

JPH • 8 hours ago ,

Advice to May and Boris: When you're is such a hole, keep digging. LOL! The moral victor is Corbyn and that may translate in dumping the Blairite backstabbers within Labour and perhaps a real victory at elections. The upcoming local elections next month may serve as an indication.

Michael Droy • 9 hours ago ,

Ridiculous.

Just for the record - Brexit talks are easy - they went from the win-lose battle of a cash payment a long while ago and have been on win-win negotiations ever since. The only rule in these negotiations is that everyone must claim victory over everything so the publicity is very different from the facts.

AM Hants • 9 hours ago ,

Sorry Tom, I do not agree. More like we have privatised so much of our intelligence services, just like the US has got the private sector, working on around 80% of their intelligence. Leaving it to those with minimal knowledge, but, experts in the art of spin, as Elliot Higgins, with his Google Software Certificate, comes to mind. Just one of the experts of the day, with a similar set of skills.

Now why does Elliot Higgins remind me Atlantic Council, NATO and those behind the Great Israel Project, so come to mind? So where do Boris and May fit in and who are they loyal to? If you look at the demonization of Corbyn, together with how they are using the anti-Semitic card, to go with the Zionist led media, hysteria, behind Jeremy.

The Skripals and Salisbury Plain, were meant to complement another false flag that was due to go down. Only Russia and Syria prevented it from happening, before those running the other part of the script, received the message.

How would things have gone, if there was a chemical weapons incident, on the scale of say 9/11, that happened in Syria, with a minor story, set up at the same time, to accuse Russia of a CW incident in the UK?

Tim Bell
Bell Pottinger
PR Media Management Litvinenko and good friend Boris Berezovsky
Sans Frontieres
Doctors Without Borders
Journlists Without Borders
White Helmets
Atlantic Council
NATO
Trump Dossier
Christopher Steele
Sergei Skripal
Ukraine
Salisbury Plain and the list goes on

How does it all fit in, with other stories that are running?

All Russiagate Roads Lead To London: Evidence Emerges Of Mifsud's Links To UK Intelligence... https://www.zerohedge.com/n...

Jeish Al-Islam's Chemical Weapons Production Workshops Discovered in Eastern Ghouta
The Syrian army found a number of workshops and facilities in Eastern Ghouta of Damascus that had been used by Jeish al-Islam terrorist group to produce chemical weapons and toxic gases... https://www.veteranstoday.c...

.............................................................

What happened to Bell Pottinger?

Despots and
Rogues, Met Its
End in South Africa
The British firm Bell Pottinger, hired by
three brothers now caught up in a nationwide
corruption scandal, helped drive racial
tensions to levels not felt since apartheid... https://www.nytimes.com/201...

Michael Droy AM Hants • 9 hours ago ,

"The Skripals and Salisbury Plain, were meant to complement another false flag that was due to go down. Only Russia and Syria prevented it from happening, before those running the other part of the script, received the message."
This part at least sounds like a very good explanation.

AM Hants Michael Droy • 9 hours ago ,

assumption on my part and I did enjoy Tom's article.

Tom Luongo AM Hants • 30 minutes ago ,

AM,
You may be right about the motivations behind this being a bit more murky than I put it in the article. I'm willing to admit I may be wrong here. It's part of what I do, take things and spin out plausible scenarios.

The net effect, however, will be as I laid out, the loss of confidence in the U.K. government, it's further isolation and subservience to both the U.S. and the EU will hasten its demise now that it's alienated both China and Russia over this idiotic incident.

USA vassal • 10 hours ago ,

Why did British government killed Skirpal's pests? Police search of the Skripal's house was so thorough that in a month they couldn't find his cat and 2 guinea pigs. Now, the police issued the statement full of lies.

Boris Jaruselski • 10 hours ago ,

I wouldn't worry much about the May government, ...it was doomed to fail much sooner, then later from the day they assumed office, but what the world, and particularly Europe should be VERY afraid of: the collapse of GREAT @#$%& BRITAIN!

Why? ...what's that piddy little island off the European Mainland got, that the rest of Europe don't, ...right?

More then 2/3 of ALL financial transactions are done through the City of London, and the EU has, although there are several contenders, not yet transferred all this to the European Mainland to any major financial center on the Mainland! ...Frankfurt am Main and Paris are the top two contenders.

If Great Britain goes to the dogs, all hell is going to break loose on the Mainland!

outsider • 3 minutes ago ,

Thierry Meyssan article, "Theresa May's Foreign Policy" is worth a read : www.voltairenet.org/article...

F*** NATO • 6 minutes ago ,

We learn that this hoax is indeed a hoax: Russian TV Releases Phone Call Of 'Poisoned' Yulia Skripal Saying Her And Her Father Are 'Fine'

"Everything's ok. He's resting now, having a sleep. Everyone's health is fine, there's nothing that can't be put right. I'll be discharged soon. Everything is ok."

TONY LANE • an hour ago ,

it is always Hard to bring the truth to the People when you have the Paedophile Protection Network the BBC, protecting all the Criminal low lifes and sowing the seeds of discontent, because people tend to believe what they hear First before the begin to analyse it, But I beleive that we have a Criminal Government whom have lied and lied and lied, first lie the Grenfell tower the death figures are a lie i would have said it was between 300 and 500 and possibly Higher, she is Lying about Brexit and she does have the Choice to leave it Without Paying a penny for a Union that was created and Controlled by the USA, And now we have the poisoning of Skripal and His Daughter, because the poison clearly came from Porton Down, because the have the Antidote and have always had it as they have Always had the Poison and it was clearly implemented by MI6, as was the Poison's that Porton Down were Spraying on their own people 40 and 50 Years Ago when the had little van's Running About The Countryside spraying out toxic poisons that was the Precurser to chemtrail's, think of all the worst things that Porton Down can do, and all your Gueses could be Right, To Put It In Spades Porton Down Stinks to High Heaven And Should Have Been Shut Down 50 years Ago, they have murdered hundreds of People in the Name Of National Security, the list of lies goes On and On and On.

Eugene TONY LANE • 23 minutes ago ,

T.L. Thanks for good post. Since I am quite an old man, please, could you next time make a gap between paragraphs?
Cheers.

Kjell Hasthi • 5 hours ago ,

Interesting views from Tom Luongo

- I'm sorry but it's not a stretch to think this whole thing was cooked up by MI-6.

Johnson, as a supervisor for MI6, then is some they want to get rid of?

JPH Bruno • 4 hours ago ,

The message contradicts their narrative.

JPH • 8 hours ago ,

One can look back a few month's before Salisbury and see May out of the blue ratcheting up her Russophobia during speeches on Youtube. Keep in mind that as Home minister from 2010-2016 May must have had direct relations with MI5.

Also her carefully scripted language more implying than direct stating offers her a plausible deniability just like Blair exploited. So the fault can be shifted to faulty intelligence or experts. So presenting May as a victim is 'highly likely' too generous. My guess is that she was involved from its inception.

AM Hants Enrrique Costas • 9 hours ago ,

The Brexit reshuffles world geopolitics by Thierry Meyssan... https://www.voltairenet.org...

The rest of BREXIT does not matter, for those concerned. However, the BREXIT talks were not going that well. Remember, the EU and all their demands, when we just had to sit tight, keep the cheque book closed, retain our fishing rights, post exit, walk away from the legal loopholes, concerned with the EU and the EU gets nought, as we toddle off, in March 2019. In the meantime, May goes to see the EU leaders, next stage signed off, but, we are left in ignorance and low and behold, so many Russian Diplomats are expelled from US and EU nations, just a couple of days after May has been horsetrading?

Enrrique Costas AM Hants • 8 hours ago ,

We will see what comes next. I think that the €urozone will not only survive but enlarge to Sweden and Denmark. It is true that the €urozone only can continue as a European Federation, but a European Federation is inevitable if we want Europe to have a say in global affairs, with a GDP similar to China in size and a much higher income per head.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

qop Enrrique Costas • 7 hours ago ,

The EU will never be what you Spaniards and we Croats want. We would like something like the US of Europe. All people to be equal.
Sweden, Denmark, Germany... want a lot of bantustans in Europe. The name bantustan was used in the RSA during apartheid when they had created a lot of independent states in order to exploit them. My question to you is - if you were a Dane would you like to share "all spoils" with third world countries like Bulgaria, Romania...and tomorrow Bosnia, Macedonia...etc?

Even today, as it is, by law you as EU citizen are not allowed to stay more than three months - let's say in Italy - if you don't comply some requirements, like a proof that you work, that you seek a job, that you study... Try to open a bank account in Italy without those requirements.

No chance. EU - to my opinion is a big delusion. Artisans cannot benefit because of language barriers, poor organization to find a job...Highly skilled people are not needed...

Enrrique Costas qop • 7 hours ago ,

In many areas, there are less differences between EU member states than between US states...

qop Enrrique Costas • 7 hours ago ,

Well, why don't you educate me / us?

Just imagine this scenario... The US says to Spain or to Croatia - Whoever wants from now on can go to the US...but will not get the American citizenship. The person is only eligible to seek work...once you get the job you can stay/work forever.

How many people would go? How many skills are marketable? No single layer, social worker, teacher, administrator, policeman, government employee, psycholog, politician...would go. Etc....

JPH Enrrique Costas • 8 hours ago ,

Actually Corbyn has no love for our neo-liberal EU.

Valeria Nollan • 2 hours ago ,

There is another cover-up taking place in May's government in the midst of the Skripal hysteria, and that is of the decades-old sex rings (organized by Asian Muslims, according to what I have read) that have raped between 1,000-1500 girls in three English towns. It is a sensitive issue, but should rightfully be reported. The U.K. press is not reporting much on it, and the American MSM has been silent. Think about it: the uproar created about the fates of two people (Skripal and his daughter), but the suffering of potentially 1500 girls suppressed. This is a disgrace. But the British people know and are demanding a fuller investigation into these crimes.

Nightcrawler136 • 8 hours ago ,

My only problem with this article is if May's government fails, then there is a serious risk for the globalists that a more ardent Brexiter may end up leading the party!

[Apr 06, 2018] It is now beyond any reasonable doubt that the claims of the Conservative government of Theresa May charging Russia with responsibility for the poisoning of the Skripals are fabrications

After the Skripal affair, is any more proof required that nothingin neoliberal MSM can be taken at face value? Looks like their motto is "if at first you don't succeed, lie, lie again."
Notable quotes:
"... So politically devastating is the exposure of Britain's lies that yesterday the Foreign Office deleted a text it sent out on March 22 declaring that the "analysis by world-leading experts at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down made clear that this was a military-grade novichok nerve agent produced in Russia." ..."
"... The emergency session of the OPCW called at Russia's request received no answers to the serious questions Moscow insisted Britain had to address. Instead, the UK's representative said Russia could not take part in a joint investigation with Britain into the Skripal affair, as it was "a likely perpetrator." This was given unqualified backing by an EU spokesperson, who demanded that Russia respond to the UK's "legitimate questions" about its alleged continued production of novichoks. ..."
"... No less implicated in this criminal affair is the corporate media, especially the New York Times, which has spent the past month disseminating the raw propaganda issued by London and Washington and baying for Moscow's punishment. At no point did the Times raise a single question about the reliability of the claims of the May government. And now its response to the refutation of the lies is to ignore and bury Aitkenhead's statement. The role of the corporate media in the Skripal provocation confirms the political purpose of the hysterical campaign it has been leading against "fake news," and its insistence that social media be regulated, restricted and monitored. ..."
Apr 05, 2018 | www.wsws.org
The lies of the imperialist powers over the Skripal affair unravel by Robert Stevens

... ... ...

On Tuesday, Gary Aitkenhead, chief executive of the UK's chemical weapons facility, the Porton Down Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, told Sky News that scientists had "not verified the precise source" of the material used in the attack in Salisbury on March 4. Aitkenhead's statement came on the eve of the convening at Moscow's request of the Organisation for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) at The Hague, which would have exposed the UK government's case. But this resort to damage control only underscores the monstrous hoax perpetrated by the British and American governments and their European allies.

May told parliament on March 12 that Porton Down was "absolutely categorical" that the "nerve agent" used on the Skripals had come from Russia. "Based on the positive identification of this chemical agent by world-leading experts at Porton Down," she said, "the government has concluded that it is highly likely that Russia was responsible" for an "attempted murder" on British soil.

Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson told German broadcaster Deutsche Welle on March 20 that "the people from Porton Down" were "absolutely categorical" that the source of the nerve agent used against the Skripals was Russia. "I asked the guy myself," he said, "and he said 'there's no doubt.'"

So politically devastating is the exposure of Britain's lies that yesterday the Foreign Office deleted a text it sent out on March 22 declaring that the "analysis by world-leading experts at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down made clear that this was a military-grade novichok nerve agent produced in Russia."

... ... ...

The emergency session of the OPCW called at Russia's request received no answers to the serious questions Moscow insisted Britain had to address. Instead, the UK's representative said Russia could not take part in a joint investigation with Britain into the Skripal affair, as it was "a likely perpetrator." This was given unqualified backing by an EU spokesperson, who demanded that Russia respond to the UK's "legitimate questions" about its alleged continued production of novichoks.

No less implicated in this criminal affair is the corporate media, especially the New York Times, which has spent the past month disseminating the raw propaganda issued by London and Washington and baying for Moscow's punishment. At no point did the Times raise a single question about the reliability of the claims of the May government. And now its response to the refutation of the lies is to ignore and bury Aitkenhead's statement. The role of the corporate media in the Skripal provocation confirms the political purpose of the hysterical campaign it has been leading against "fake news," and its insistence that social media be regulated, restricted and monitored.

... ... ...

[Apr 05, 2018] Steve Coll's Directorate S is Disturbing Account of U.S. Mistakes After 9/11 by Mark Perry

Notable quotes:
"... Directorate S: The C.I.A. and America's Secret Wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Steve Coll, Penguin Press, 784 pages ..."
Apr 05, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

'Ghost Wars' author on the secret war behind the war in Afghanistan

U.S-trained Afghan Army troops. Credit: USMC Cpl. John Scott Rafoss/public domain Directorate S: The C.I.A. and America's Secret Wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Steve Coll, Penguin Press, 784 pages

Twelve days after 9/11, on the night of September 23, 2001, the CIA's Islamabad station chief, Robert Grenier, received a telephone call from his boss, Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet. "Listen, Bob," Tenet said, "we're meeting tomorrow at Camp David to discuss our war strategy in Afghanistan. How should we begin? What targets do we hit? How do we sequence our actions?"

Grenier later wrote in his book, 88 Days to Kandahar , that while he was surprised by the call he'd been thinking about these same questions -- "mulling them over and over and over," as he later told me -- so he was ready. President George Bush's address to the U.S. Congress just a few days before, Grenier told Tenet, was a good start: demand that Afghanistan's Taliban ruler, Mullah Omar, turn bin Laden over to the United States. If he refused, the U.S. should launch a campaign to oust him. Grenier had thought through the plan, but before going into its details with Tenet he abruptly stopped the conversation. "Mr. Director," he said, "this isn't going to work. I need to write this all down clearly." Tenet agreed.

Grenier set to work, and over the next three hours he laid out the battle for Afghanistan. Included in the paper was a detailed program of how the CIA could deploy undercover teams to recruit bin Laden's enemies among Afghanistan's northern Tajik and Uzbek tribes (an uneasy coalition of ethnic militias operating as the Northern Alliance), supply them with cash and weapons, and use them in a rolling offensive that would oust the Taliban in Kabul. With U.S. help, which included deploying American Special Forces teams (under CIA leadership) coupled with American airpower, the Northern Alliance (more properly, the United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan) would start from its Panjshir Valley enclave in Afghanistan's far northeast and, recruiting support from anti-Taliban forces along the way, roll all the way into Kabul.

Grenier gave the eight-page draft paper to his staff to review, then sent it to Tenet in Washington, who passed it through the deputies committee (the second-in-command of each of the major national security agencies), then presented it to Bush. "I regard that cable," Grenier wrote, "as the best three hours of work I ever did in my twenty-seven-year career."

Three days after the Tenet-Grenier telephone conversation, on September 26, the CIA landed a covert-operations team in Afghanistan to recruit local allies in the hunt for bin Laden. The quick action was impressive, but then events slowed to a crawl. It wasn't until October 20 that the first U.S. Special Forces team linked up with anti-Taliban rebels, and it took another week for U.S. units to land in strength. But by early November al Qaeda was on the run and the Taliban's grip on the country was slipping away. On November 13, militias of the Northern Alliance seized Kabul. The Taliban was defeated, its badly mauled units fleeing south and east (its last bastion, in the south, fell on December 6), and into nearby Pakistan, while what remained of al Qaeda holed up in a series of cave complexes in the Spin Ghar mountain range of eastern Afghanistan.

By almost any measure, the CIA-led anti-al Qaeda and anti-Taliban offensive (dubbed Operation Enduring Freedom by George Bush) marked a decisive victory in the war on terror. The U.S. had set out a plan, marshaled the forces to carry it out, and then seen it to completion.

But this triumph came with problems. The first was that the offensive was hampered by Washington infighting that pitted the CIA against a puzzlingly recalcitrant U.S. military and a carping Donald Rumsfeld, who questioned George Tenet's leadership of the effort. This bureaucratic squabbling, focused on just who was responsible for what (and who exactly was running the Afghanistan war), would remain a hallmark of American efforts well into the Obama administration. The second problem was that Afghanistan's southern Pashtun tribes were only marginally included in the effort, and they remained suspicious of their northern non-Pashtun counterparts. The mistrust, CIA officers believed, would almost certainly plant the seeds of an endless inter-tribal Afghan conflict, embroiling the United States in an effort to prop up an unpopular Kabul government. The third problem was Pakistan -- or, more precisely, Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency, the ISI, and the ISI's "Directorate S," responsible for covertly supplying, training, and arming Pakistan's Islamist allies, including the Pashtun-dominated Taliban.

♦♦♦

The intractability of these variables, and America's 17-year effort (sometimes focused but often feckless) to resolve them, form the basis of Steve Coll's Directorate S , a thick but eminently readable account of America's Afghanistan misadventure. While Directorate S stands alone as a comprehensive exposition of the Afghanistan conflict dating from 9/11, it's actually a follow-on of Ghost Wars , Coll's Pulitzer Prize-winning 2004 narrative of America's efforts to oust the Soviets from Afghanistan following their invasion in December 1979. Given the breadth of Coll's dual treatments and the depth of his research, it's likely that these books will remain the standard exposition of the period for years to come.

While the focus of Directorate S is on Pakistan and its shady intelligence services, each of the obstacles that confronted the United States in Afghanistan from the moment the Taliban abandoned Kabul is embraced in detail. These obstacles included America's post-9/11 attention deficit disorder (the pivot away from al Qaeda to Iraq was being considered in Washington even as the Northern Alliance cleared the Afghan capital) and the deeply embedded antipathy toward the new Kabul government among Pakistani-supported southern tribesman. Thus, after the United States ousted al Qaeda and its Taliban supporters, it embarked on a program to strengthen the new Kabul government, anointing Hamid Karzai as Afghanistan's president and pledging billions in reconstruction aid. And so, or so it seemed, everything had gone as planned. The Taliban was routed; al Qaeda was on the run; a new anti-terrorism government was in place in Kabul; and the United States had signed Pakistan on as a willing accomplice. On May 1, 2003, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld declared an end to major combat operations in Afghanistan. The war was over. Won.

But of course it wasn't.

Coll's account provides a disturbing catalogue of the U.S. mistakes in the wake of the Taliban defeat. Almost all of them are well known: Hamid Karzai, the consensus choice of a grand assembly (a loya jirga) as Afghanistan's interim president, proved to be a weak leader. The monies appropriated for Afghanistan's postwar reconstruction were woefully inadequate for the task -- "laughable," as one U.S. official put it. American soldiers responsible for countering the Taliban's return (and hunting al Qaeda terrorist cells) were thinly and poorly deployed (and, after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, of secondary importance in the Pentagon). Tentative Taliban efforts to engage the United States in political talks were summarily and unwisely spurned. Allegations of prisoner abuse at U.S. detention facilities consistently undermined U.S. legitimacy. American funds were funneled into Afghan ministries laced with corrupt officials. Afghani poppy production increased, despite faint-hearted U.S. eradication efforts. And U.S. counter-terrorism actions proved ham-handed and caused preventable civilian casualties, pushing Afghanis into a resurgent anti-Kabul resistance.

More crucially, Pakistan's unstinting support for America's Afghanistan efforts proved to be anything but unstinting. The reason for this was not only entirely predictable but was actually the unintended result of the American victory. When the Northern Alliance and U.S. airpower pushed what remained of the Taliban (along with the remnants of al Qaeda) out of Afghanistan, they pushed them into Pakistan, creating conditions that, as Coll tells us, "deepened resentment among Pakistan's generals, who would come to see their country's rising violence as a price of American folly . . ." Put simply, for the United States to seal the Operation Enduring Freedom victory, it had to ensure that its effects did not spill over into the one nation that could ensure that its victory would, in fact, be enduring. That didn't happen. The result was that the Taliban was able to rebuild and rearm its networks not only in Pakistan, and under the eyes of the ISI, but also in Afghanistan.

It might have been otherwise. During a series of discussions I had about America's intervention in Afghanistan in the months immediately following 9/11, a number of currently serving and former senior U.S. officials told me they believed that, given enough time, the Taliban might well have handed bin Laden over to the Americans, obviating the need for a full-on invasion. One of these officials was Milton Bearden, a famed CIA officer (his close friends refer to him as "Uncle Milty") who, during his time as a station chief in Pakistan, had helped to head up the CIA's war against the Soviets in the mid 1980s.

♦♦♦

After 9/11, Bearden recharged his Pakistan and Afghanistan networks in an effort to convince the Taliban that turning bin Laden over to the Americans was a better option than the one they were facing. All the while, Bearden kept senior U.S. officials apprised of what he was doing, even as he was attempting to head off their rush to war. Bearden told me that, while his efforts had not reached fruition by the time the Bush White House had decided on a course of action, he believes the United States had not fully explored all of its options -- or thought through the long-term impact of its intervention. "I don't know what would have happened, I don't know," he says wistfully, "but I think we have a handhold in history. We should have seen what was coming." He notes that Alexander the Great "took one look at Afghanistan's mountains and decided against it. He thought his whole army could get swallowed up in there, and he wasn't going to take that chance. So, well, you tell me if I'm wrong, but Alexander was no slouch, right?"

Not everyone agrees with this, of course. The dissenters include Robert Grenier, the first drafter of what became the American war plan. Taliban leader Mullah Omar, he told me, was committed to his pledge to protect Osama bin Laden; he viewed it as a blood oath that could not be broken. Moreover, argues Grenier, "Omar viewed himself as a kind of world historical figure, a person on whom the axis of history would turn." One result was that he believed his fight against the Americans would be epochal.

That said, Grenier believes America's foray into Afghanistan, and the mistakes that followed, might at least have been dampened by a more diligent focus on the inherent divisions of Afghan society. "We [at the CIA]," he told me several months ago, "were very aware that the march of the Northern Alliance into Kabul would likely create real difficulties in the south. And we tried to slow it, precisely for this reason. But events overtook us, and it just wasn't possible. So, yes, things might have been otherwise, but in truth we just don't know."

The value in Coll's Directorate S comes not from the elegant telling of a story not fully known, but from the dawning realization that Afghanistan is the kind of lock for which there is no key. There is no reason to believe that a different outcome would have ensued if other events had intruded -- for example, more personnel, money, focused diplomacy, or robust and disciplined enemy-defeating and nation building; or that our war there and the occupation that followed would have yielded the same results that we realized in, say, Japan after 1945. The real hubris here is not that we tried and failed but that we thought we could actually succeed. Afghanistan is simply not that kind of place.

There is a term of art for this in the military, which found its first usage in Iraq in 2009, when U.S. commanders adopted it as an appreciation of what could and could not be accomplished. Instead of focusing on defeating corruption, inefficiency, disunity, and poor leadership, the focus shifted almost exclusively to dampening violence, to keeping the doors to Iraq open even as its factions battled for its control. More importantly, the adoption of the phrase marked the abandonment of high expectations and an embrace of realism. The United States would have to yield the business of replicating a Western-style democracy on the banks of the Euphrates. That goal, if it was going to be accomplished at all, would have to be realized by the Iraqis.

Analyst Anthony Cordesman, one of America's premier military thinkers, adopted the phrase and applied to Afghanistan in 2012 in an essay he entitled, "Time to Focus on 'Afghan Good Enough.'" His plan was simply stated but had all the elegance of actually working: keep the Taliban out of Kabul and the major cities, preserve the central and provincial government even in the face of endemic corruption, and work to provide security to large numbers of Afghanis. Cordesman conceded that this was not the kind of victory that Americans had hoped for on September 12. And it was difficult to describe the outcome as even vaguely passable -- or "good." But it was far better than adopting goals that could not be realized or embracing an illusion that disappeared even as it was grasped. For the time being at least, it would have to be "good enough."

Mark Perry is a foreign policy analyst, a contributing editor to The American Conservative and the author of The Pentagon's Wars .

[Apr 05, 2018] Resurgence of nationalism put neoliberal globalism

This Guardian pressitute can't even mentions the term neoliberalism, to day noting to accept that neoliberalism now experience a crisis (which actually started in 2008)
Globalization blowback will not totally bury neoliberal globalization, but it puts some limits on transnational corporations racket...
Apr 05, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Originally from The demise of the nation state By Rana Dasgupta

hat is happening to national politics? Every day in the US, events further exceed the imaginations of absurdist novelists and comedians; politics in the UK still shows few signs of recovery after the " national nervous breakdown " of Brexit. France " narrowly escaped a heart attack " in last year's elections, but the country's leading daily feels this has done little to alter the " accelerated decomposition " of the political system. In neighbouring Spain, El País goes so far as to say that "the rule of law, the democratic system and even the market economy are in doubt"; in Italy, "the collapse of the establishment" in the March elections has even brought talk of a "barbarian arrival", as if Rome were falling once again. In Germany, meanwhile, neo-fascists are preparing to take up their role as official opposition , introducing anxious volatility into the bastion of European stability.

But the convulsions in national politics are not confined to the west. Exhaustion, hopelessness, the dwindling effectiveness of old ways: these are the themes of politics all across the world. This is why energetic authoritarian "solutions" are currently so popular: distraction by war (Russia, Turkey); ethno-religious "purification" (India, Hungary, Myanmar); the magnification of presidential powers and the corresponding abandonment of civil rights and the rule of law (China, Rwanda, Venezuela, Thailand, the Philippines and many more).

What is the relationship between these various upheavals? We tend to regard them as entirely separate – for, in political life, national solipsism is the rule. In each country, the tendency is to blame "our" history, "our" populists, "our" media, "our" institutions, "our" lousy politicians. And this is understandable, since the organs of modern political consciousness – public education and mass media – emerged in the 19th century from a globe-conquering ideology of unique national destinies. When we discuss "politics", we refer to what goes on inside sovereign states; everything else is "foreign affairs" or "international relations" – even in this era of global financial and technological integration. We may buy the same products in every country of the world, we may all use Google and Facebook, but political life, curiously, is made of separate stuff and keeps the antique faith of borders.

Yes, there is awareness that similar varieties of populism are erupting in many countries. Several have noted the parallels in style and substance between leaders such as Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, Narendra Modi, Viktor Orbán and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. There is a sense that something is in the air – some coincidence of feeling between places. But this does not get close enough. For there is no coincidence. All countries are today embedded in the same system, which subjects them all to the same pressures: and it is these that are squeezing and warping national political life everywhere. And their effect is quite the opposite – despite the desperate flag-waving – of the oft-remarked " resurgence of the nation state ".

[Apr 05, 2018] The Globalisation: the rise and fall of an idea that swept the world

Apr 05, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

The future of economic globalisation, for which the Davos men and women see themselves as caretakers, had been shaken by a series of political earthquakes. "Globalisation" can mean many things, but what lay in particular doubt was the long-advanced project of increasing free trade in goods across borders. The previous summer, Britain had voted to leave the largest trading bloc in the world. In November, the unexpected victory of Donald Trump , who vowed to withdraw from major trade deals, appeared to jeopardise the trading relationships of the world's richest country. Forthcoming elections in France and Germany suddenly seemed to bear the possibility of anti-globalisation parties garnering better results than ever before. The barbarians weren't at the gates to the ski-lifts yet – but they weren't very far.

In a panel titled Governing Globalisation , the economist Dambisa Moyo , otherwise a well-known supporter of free trade, forthrightly asked the audience to accept that "there have been significant losses" from globalisation. "It is not clear to me that we are going to be able to remedy them under the current infrastructure," she added. Christine Lagarde, the head of the International Monetary Fund, called for a policy hitherto foreign to the World Economic Forum : "more redistribution". After years of hedging or discounting the malign effects of free trade, it was time to face facts: globalisation caused job losses and depressed wages, and the usual Davos proposals – such as instructing affected populations to accept the new reality – weren't going to work. Unless something changed, the political consequences were likely to get worse.

The backlash to globalisation has helped fuel the extraordinary political shifts of the past 18 months. During the close race to become the Democratic party candidate, senator Bernie Sanders relentlessly attacked Hillary Clinton on her support for free trade . On the campaign trail, Donald Trump openly proposed tilting the terms of trade in favour of American industry. "Americanism, not globalism, shall be our creed," he bellowed at the Republican national convention last July. The vote for Brexit was strongest in the regions of the UK devastated by the flight of manufacturing. At Davos in January, British prime minister Theresa May, the leader of the party of capital and inherited wealth, improbably picked up the theme, warning that, for many, "talk of greater globalisation means their jobs being outsourced and wages undercut." Meanwhile, the European far right has been warning against free movement of people as well as goods. Following her qualifying victory in the first round of France's presidential election, Marine Le Pen warned darkly that "the main thing at stake in this election is the rampant globalisation that is endangering our civilisation."

It was only a few decades ago that globalisation was held by many, even by some critics, to be an inevitable, unstoppable force. "Rejecting globalisation," the American journalist George Packer has written, "was like rejecting the sunrise." Globalisation could take place in services, capital and ideas, making it a notoriously imprecise term; but what it meant most often was making it cheaper to trade across borders – something that seemed to many at the time to be an unquestionable good. In practice, this often meant that industry would move from rich countries, where labour was expensive, to poor countries, where labour was cheaper. People in the rich countries would either have to accept lower wages to compete, or lose their jobs. But no matter what, the goods they formerly produced would now be imported, and be even cheaper. And the unemployed could get new, higher-skilled jobs (if they got the requisite training). Mainstream economists and politicians upheld the consensus about the merits of globalisation, with little concern that there might be political consequences.

Back then, economists could calmly chalk up anti-globalisation sentiment to a marginal group of delusional protesters, or disgruntled stragglers still toiling uselessly in "sunset industries". These days, as sizable constituencies have voted in country after country for anti-free-trade policies, or candidates that promise to limit them, the old self-assurance is gone. Millions have rejected, with uncertain results, the punishing logic that globalisation could not be stopped. The backlash has swelled a wave of soul-searching among economists, one that had already begun to roll ashore with the financial crisis. How did they fail to foresee the repercussions?

[Apr 05, 2018] Sic Semper Tyrannis RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP 5 APRIL 2018 (Patrick Armstrong)

Apr 05, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

UKRAINE. An American survey shows that the mood in Ukraine is bad and expecting worse . Well, that's one post-Maidan Ukraine expectation that will be fulfilled. Nadia Savchenko, a former Ukrainian hero, has been arrested in Ukraine on terrorism charges. She dares to suggest that the massacre was a false flag . (Read Ivan Katchanovski's paper : "This academic investigation concludes that the massacre was a false flag operation, which was rationally planned and carried out with a goal of the overthrow of the government and seizure of power. It found various evidence of the involvement of an alliance of the far right organizations, specifically the Right Sector and Svoboda, and oligarchic parties, such as Fatherland. Concealed shooters and spotters were located in at least 20 Maidan-controlled buildings or areas". Here are confessions by some of the snipers that your local news outlet has been too busy to tell you about.)

[Apr 05, 2018] The British Empire Is Un-Masked, But Desperate

Apr 05, 2018 | larouchepac.com

The British Imperial Lords are in a state of shock. Their frantic effort to save the Empire came crashing down Tuesday when the scientists at Porton Down refused to lie for the Empire -- refused to say that the nerve agent in the Skripal case came from Russia. Recall that it was David Kelly, the head of the Defence Microbiology Division at Porton Down and a member of the inspection team in Iraq, who blew the whistle on Tony Blair's "sexed up" dossier claiming that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. As a scientist he refused to lie. Kelly was "suicided" as a result, and the illegal and genocidal war went on.

This time, neither George W. Bush nor Barack Obama are around to provide cover for the Empire's lies. President Trump, to the dismay of the British and American oligarchs and press whores, has refused to say (or tweet) a word about the Russian role in the Skripal case. He spoke to Putin after the incident without mentioning it, and, just yesterday, told the press yet again that "getting along with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing."

[Apr 05, 2018] The Three Most Important Aspects of the Skripal Case so Far and Where They by Rob Slane

Highly recommended!
The absurd speed at which the British Government reacted to the incident probably means that the event was coordinated with the USA. the fact that The British Government's ignoring of legal frameworks and protocols points to existence of a plan how to fuel this incident to the British equivalent of Russiagate, facts be damned.
That returns us to the classic question Cue bono? When British government supported by the USA demanded that the Western nations join in blaming Russia, with no evidence whatsoever only half the EU nations went along, and, while Trump allowed his Administration to expel Russian diplomats, he himself laid no blame on the Russians, and announced that Moscow could replace their diplomats.
The UK's chemical weapons experts issues a statement which shown that Prime Minister May clearly jumped the gun. The question is Why? She probably understood the flimsiness of the evidence better then nobody. So why "end justifies the means" act on her part?
That suggest that we are witnessing just initial steps of multi-step gambit and there can be more victims is this story. Please remember that Dr. David Kelly was "suicided" after testifying against Blair's "sexed up dossier" that lead to the Iraq War.
Notable quotes:
"... Not only has the British Government acted with lightning speed, it has also ridden roughshod over a number of international legal agreements and protocols. ..."
"... according to the British Government's own timeline , it wasn't until March 14th – the day that Mrs May formally announced the culpability of the Russian State to Parliament – that she actually wrote to the OPCW to involve them in the case. This is, I understand, contrary to the obligations Britain has as a member of the OPCW, and signatory to the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). ..."
"... In addition, the British Government has refused to provide evidence to the Russian Government. Again, my understanding is that this is contrary to the protocols set out in the CWC ..."
"... Why, if it was so sure of its claims, did the British Government feel the need to ignore international agreements to which it is a signatory, and instead act in this opaque and frankly suspicious manner? ..."
"... As mentioned above, the Chief Executive of Porton Down, Gary Aitkenhead has confirmed that the laboratory was unable to identify the origin of the substance used to poison the Skripals. ..."
"... In other words, according to the door theory, the two of them were poisoned by a military grade nerve agent, which then took over three hours to have any effect. Odd, wouldn't you say? ..."
"... Therefore, if they were poisoned at the front door, this would mean that not only did the two of them feel little or no effects for the three hours or so that followed, but it would also mean that a large 66-year-old man and an averagely built 33-year-old woman, of different height, weight and metabolism, somehow succumbed to the effects of poisoning at exactly the same time, some three hours or so later. Again, is that not very odd? ..."
"... Perhaps it is possible to survive a miniscule dose of such a nerve agent. The problem with this is that according to many earlier claims, there were significant traces of the substance in various parts of the City of Salisbury, which indicates that it cannot have been a very miniscule amount that they came into contact with at the door. Which means that we are being asked to believe that they were poisoned by "more than a miniscule amount" of this deadly poison, but both somehow survived, despite neither receiving an antidote (a fact now confirmed by Gary Aitkenhead). Does that not seem improbable? ..."
"... Another possibility – that the British Government or intelligence services were behind the incident – has been given great credibility by the British Government itself, in its absurdly quick reaction to the incident and its blatant ignoring of legal protocols. ..."
"... If British intelligence had planned a hit job on Mr Skripal using a military-grade nerve agent "of a type developed by Russia", in order to then pin the blame on the Russian Government, I doubt very much that Mr Skripal and his daughter would still be alive, or that the explanation for where the poison was administered would be changing on a daily basis, or that the British Government's evidence to other countries would have been as risible as it was (unless of course our intelligence agencies are as incompetent as such a scenario would require them to be, that is). ..."
Apr 04, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

I have now asked a total of 50 questions around the Skripal case, which you can find here and here . Having gone back through these questions, as far as I can see only three have been answered by the release of public information or events that have transpired. These are:

On the first two points we are now told that Yulia Skripal's condition has significantly improved to the point where she is said to be recovering well and talking. However, although this provides something of an answer to these questions, it also raises a number of others. Is she finally being allowed consular access? Is she being allowed to speak to her fiancé, her grandmother, or her cousin by telephone? Most importantly, how does her recovery comport with the claim that she was poisoned with a "military-grade nerve agent" with a toxicity around 5-8 times that of VX nerve agent?

On the other point, we do now have a definitive answer from none other than the Chief Executive of the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) at Porton Down, Gary Aitkenhead : No, Porton Down was not able to identify the substance as being produced or manufactured in Russia.

It is important that reasonable questions continue to be raised, as they not only help clarify the actual issues, but the answers -- or lack thereof -- are also a good barometer as to how the official narrative stacks up. As a keen observer of the case -- especially since it took place just a few hundred yards from my home in Salisbury -- I have to say that the official narrative of the British Government has not stood up to even the most cursory scrutiny from the outset. In fact, there are three crucial issues that serve to raise suspicions about it, and to my mind these issues are the most important aspects of the case so far:

Let's just look at these in turn.

1. The absurd speed at which the British Government reacted to the incident

I remain astonished at the manner and the speed with which the British Government reacted to this incident. There was the speed with which the Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, first pointed the finger of culpability, less than 48 hours after the incident, and before any investigation or analysis of the substance had taken place. There was the speed with which Porton Down was apparently able to analyse and identify the substance, even though it is set to take the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) at least three weeks to carry out a similar identification. There was the speed with which the British Government officially accused the Russian Government of being behind the incident, and the 36-hour ultimatum given to it to prove its innocence without being given any of the evidence that apparently showed its culpability. There was the speed with which the British Government, armed with evidence that looked like it was put together by a rather dull 14-year-old on work experience , managed to convince a number of other countries to expel diplomats, including 60 from the United States.

Why, if it was so sure of its claims, did the British Government feel the need to act so hastily and recklessly, rather than await the results of the investigation?

2. The British Government's ignoring of legal frameworks and protocols

Not only has the British Government acted with lightning speed, it has also ridden roughshod over a number of international legal agreements and protocols.

Firstly, there is the involvement of the OPCW. What ought to have happened is the British Government should have invited the OPCW in as part of the investigation immediately upon suspicion of the use of a nerve agent. However, according to the British Government's own timeline , it wasn't until March 14th – the day that Mrs May formally announced the culpability of the Russian State to Parliament – that she actually wrote to the OPCW to involve them in the case. This is, I understand, contrary to the obligations Britain has as a member of the OPCW, and signatory to the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC).

In addition, the British Government has refused to provide evidence to the Russian Government. Again, my understanding is that this is contrary to the protocols set out in the CWC.

The British Government has also refused to grant the Russian Embassy in London consular access to two Russian nationals, Sergei and Yulia Skripal, which it is legally obliged to do under Articles 36 and 37 of the 1963 Vienna Convention and Article 35 (1) of the 1965 Consular Convention.

Why, if it was so sure of its claims, did the British Government feel the need to ignore international agreements to which it is a signatory, and instead act in this opaque and frankly suspicious manner?

3. The number of oddities and discrepancies in the official narrative

The speed of apportioning blame and the ignoring of international legal agreements might not have looked nearly as suspicious had the narrative presented by the British Government and the facts on the ground been in harmony with one another. But they have not been. Instead, many of the actual events that have transpired over the weeks since the incident was first reported simply do not fit the overarching explanation given. Below are five of the most important:

1. As mentioned above, the Chief Executive of Porton Down, Gary Aitkenhead has confirmed that the laboratory was unable to identify the origin of the substance used to poison the Skripals. This is in direct contradiction to the claims made by the Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, who said the following on the Andrew Marr Show on 18th March :

Obviously to the best of our knowledge this is a Russian-made nerve agent that falls within the category Novichok made only by Russia, and just to get back to the point about the international reaction which is so fascinating
If it's made only by Russia, as Mr Johnson claimed, then it must have originated in Russia. Right? Yet Mr Aitkenhead says they were unable to identify where it was made.

Then in an interview with Deutsche Welle two days after his above comments, Mr Johnson was categorical about the source of the nerve agent as being Russian. Here's the exchange:

Interviewer: You argue that the source of this nerve agent, Novichok, is Russia. How did you manage to find it out so quickly? Does Britain possess samples of it?

Johnson: "Let me be clear with you When I look at the evidence, I mean the people from Porton Down, the laboratory "

Interviewer: "So they have the samples

Johnson: "They do. And they were absolutely categorical and I asked the guy myself, I said, 'Are you sure?' And he said there's no doubt."

Who "the guy" is, perhaps we'll never know. The cleaner perhaps? I suppose a politician of Mr Johnson's calibre will happily try to weasel his way out of the implications of what he said. But to us lesser mortals, it does rather look like he was deliberately misleading, doesn't it

2. Much of the investigation initially concentrated on where the Skripals were poisoned. Amongst the suggestions made were the bench on which they collapsed, the Zizzi restaurant where they had eaten, Ms Skripal's luggage or Mr Skripal's car. Then, some 24 days after the incident, it was announced that a high concentration of the "military-grade nerve agent" had been found on the front door, and that this was the likely place of poisoning. Yet it is known that after leaving the house, Mr Skripal and his daughter drove into the City Centre, went to the Mill pub, and then to the restaurant where they ate a meal together. In other words, according to the door theory, the two of them were poisoned by a military grade nerve agent, which then took over three hours to have any effect. Odd, wouldn't you say?

3. Furthermore, it has been stated that the two of them became ill at the same time on the bench in the Maltings. Therefore, if they were poisoned at the front door, this would mean that not only did the two of them feel little or no effects for the three hours or so that followed, but it would also mean that a large 66-year-old man and an averagely built 33-year-old woman, of different height, weight and metabolism, somehow succumbed to the effects of poisoning at exactly the same time, some three hours or so later. Again, is that not very odd?

4. The claim that they were poisoned by a military grade nerve agent, of a type said to be 5-8 times the toxicity of VX nerve agent, is itself surely open to question. Both Mr Skripal and his daughter not only survived, but Yulia Skripal is now said to be sitting up and talking just weeks later. Perhaps it is possible to survive a miniscule dose of such a nerve agent. The problem with this is that according to many earlier claims, there were significant traces of the substance in various parts of the City of Salisbury, which indicates that it cannot have been a very miniscule amount that they came into contact with at the door. Which means that we are being asked to believe that they were poisoned by "more than a miniscule amount" of this deadly poison, but both somehow survived, despite neither receiving an antidote (a fact now confirmed by Gary Aitkenhead). Does that not seem improbable?

5. The official explanation – that this was planned and authorised at the highest level within the Russian Government – would lead one to believe that the action was carried out by top level agents of the FSB. Yet the mode of attack – nerve agent apparently smeared or sprayed on the door – has to be one of the least effective methods that could be used to assassinate anyone. For a start, it rains a lot in Salisbury, and it did indeed rain on the day of the poisoning. If the substance was left at the front door (assuming it was the outside), the attacker(s) could have had no guarantee that it would not be washed off before Mr Skripal touched it. Nor could they have had any guarantee that he, as opposed to his daughter or perhaps a delivery person etc, would come into contact with it. And of course there is the fact that Mr Skripal is still alive. Does any of this seem consistent with the narrative of a professional, Kremlin-authorised hit-job.

Conclusion

Where does this leave us? The official narrative would have us believe that the Russian Government authorised the killing of a has-been (former?) MI6 spy, who it had freed in 2010 and who presumably posed no threat to it, just a week before the Russian election and weeks before the World Cup, using a nerve agent with an exclusively Russian signature, in a way (on the door) that could not guarantee the intended target would touch it. This would be difficult enough to swallow by itself, but the British Government's rush to judgement, disregard for law, and the many discrepancies in the actual events themselves make this scenario absurdly implausible.

Another possibility – that the British Government or intelligence services were behind the incident – has been given great credibility by the British Government itself, in its absurdly quick reaction to the incident and its blatant ignoring of legal protocols. These actions were bound to fuel suspicions about the possibility of its own involvement, and I have to say that such suspicions are absolutely legitimate precisely because of the way it has behaved. However, it must be said that the oddities and discrepancies in the case don't lend themselves very well to the idea of a carefully planned false flag. If British intelligence had planned a hit job on Mr Skripal using a military-grade nerve agent "of a type developed by Russia", in order to then pin the blame on the Russian Government, I doubt very much that Mr Skripal and his daughter would still be alive, or that the explanation for where the poison was administered would be changing on a daily basis, or that the British Government's evidence to other countries would have been as risible as it was (unless of course our intelligence agencies are as incompetent as such a scenario would require them to be, that is).

My hunch -- and it is just that -- is that Mr Skripal himself was perhaps still working for British intelligence, and may have been in possession of a nerve agent. Somehow, this involvement went wrong, and he ended up accidently poisoning himself and his daughter on the bench in The Maltings. The Government then scrambled to concoct a story in order to cover up the real story of a Russian working for MI6 and handling nerve agents, and so quickly decided to point the finger at that most convenient scapegoat, the Russian Government.

The reason that I'm attracted to this possibility is that it explains all three aspects I have described above, and which I think are the most important aspects of the case. The rush to judgement -- which looked like panic-mode to me -- could have been an attempt to divert attention away from the investigation looking at the possibility of Mr Skripal having military grade nerve agent in his possession. The ignoring of international legal protocols, at least for a time, could have been done to ensure that the case was not probed by any outside body, which may well have exposed discrepancies. And it could also explain many of the oddities mentioned above, such as traces of nerve agent apparently being found in various places in Salisbury, since these could have come about because Mr Skripal was in possession of some sort of nerve agent when he left his house that day.

As I say, this is just a hunch and purely speculative. I am probably wrong. But unless the British Government is able to produce far better evidence than it has so far produced, to back up the claims it has made, I shall consider it a more credible possibility than the one they have sold to the British public.

Reprinted with permission from The BlogMire .

Related

[Apr 05, 2018] An Interview with Retired Russian General Evgeny Buzhinsky The National Interest

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Paul Saunders, associate publisher of the ..."
"... , interviewed retired Russian general Evgeny Buzhinsky. Buzhinsky retired from the Russian Armed Forces in 2009 as a lieutenant general. ..."
Apr 05, 2018 | nationalinterest.org

Paul Saunders, associate publisher of the National Interest , interviewed retired Russian general Evgeny Buzhinsky. Buzhinsky retired from the Russian Armed Forces in 2009 as a lieutenant general.

Paul Saunders: You said recently that the confrontation between the United Kingdom and Russia over the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury could lead to "the last war in the history of mankind." What did you mean by that?

https://lockerdome.com/lad/9521689830966886?pubid=ld-7032-4043&pubo=http%3A%2F%2Fnationalinterest.org&rid=nationalinterest.org&width=617

Evgeny Buzhinsky: I'm sorry, but the BBC correspondent understood me incorrectly. It is not between Russia and the UK: it is between Russia and the so-called collective West, led by the United States by the way. This incident was a crime. In investigating this sort of crime, any investigator must ask some questions: who stands to benefit? What's the motive? For President Putin, believe me, he is the last man on Earth to try to do such a terrible thing on the eve of the Russian presidential elections and the eve of the soccer championship in Moscow. This is a blatant provocation, but what is the aim of this provocation? I don't know if you've heard the "breaking news" that the British military laboratory said that there are no clues that indicate that this poison is of Russian production, which is not surprising to me. So no proof, no evidence, yet the British government said that "we collected information" -- what information? -- "and on the basis of that information we are sure this crime was committed by Russians."

The question always asked these days if this is a new Cold War or a second Cold War. I always state that its worse! In the time of the Cold War, everything was clear: an ideological confrontation, but there were definite truths, definite red lines, no threats, no sanctions. No cases such as recently, with U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham has called to press Russia, to isolate Russia, to economically corner Russia. In my view, it is a very dangerous game to try to corner and isolate Russia.

Paul Saunders: In your statement though, you seem to suggest that you see a possibility of a real military conflict between Russia and the West. How do you think something like that could come about?

Evgeny Buzhinsky: The first place where such a conflict could come about is in Syria. Recently, some days ago, when the Russians spoke to Dunford [Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford] after the Americans threatened to strike the center of Damascus, and Russia made a public statement that if the United States strikes the center of Damascus, where Russian servicemen are located, where the headquarters where Russian police and advisors are, then Russia will strike back against the cruise missiles and the carriers of the cruise missiles. In my view, this is very dangerous since U.S. cruise missiles are launched from warships.

Paul Saunders: So you view that statement by Gen. Valery Gerasimov, the chief of the Russian General Staff, as a very serious threat?

Evgeny Buzhinsky: Yes, it's serious. And I don't think he was joking or just making a statement to surprise some Americans. No, I am absolutely sure he was serious.

While we're on Syria, there is the subject of chemical weapons. I do appreciate that our gathered intelligence indicates and can warn the world that terrorists, not the Syrian government, are the ones deploying chemical weapons in certain locations in provocative attacks. This results in TV crews being in the right place at the right times, preventing such provocations. But I think that with such confrontational circumstances that the United States could decide to strike Damascus.

Paul Saunders: And in that situation, the Russian military would follow through on General Gerasimov's statement? Many people in the United States would say to themselves that Russia has a really powerful military force, but President Putin is ultimately a very pragmatic person who knows that Russia's economy is less than 5 percent of the combined U.S. and European economies and he would never risk a war like that.

Evgeny Buzhinsky: In the case of war, the economy doesn't matter. 5 percent, 2 percent, 3 percent, it doesn't matter. Because if it ends in war, it will be a very very short war. Do you think that Russia will go to war with United States for months or years? Of course not.

Paul Saunders: Are you suggesting it would become a nuclear war or it would end very quickly because of the nature of modern warfare and the conventional weapons at the disposal of the United States and Russia?

Evgeny Buzhinsky: It is very difficult to predict, but I am sure that any military confrontation will end up with the use of nuclear weapons between the United States and Russia. I don't believe that a nuclear confrontation can be controlled; this is an illusion on the part of the United States.

Paul Saunders: Do you see any dangers elsewhere apart from Syria?

Evgeny Buzhinsky: Possibly Ukraine, if the United States interferes. Ukraine started this, Russia answered. But I don't think that's very likely.

Paul Saunders: Turning back to the dispute surrounding Mr. Skripal, the United Kingdom called for solidarity among its allies. Most of the NATO countries also expelled Russian diplomats. The United States certainly expelled a very considerable number and also closed the consulate in Seattle. What impact do you think that had inside Russia? What message did the Russian government and the Russian people take from that strong, coordinated response? Evgeny Buzhinsky: First of all, I repeat: what happened with Mr. Skripal was a planned provocation. I don't know if the UK was alone in planning this, but it is a clear-cut provocation attempting to demonize and isolate Russia. To find a pretext for expelling Russian diplomats. This is why I am unsure where this confrontational path can lead. What would be next? For example, now the United States is thinking about their response; they will expel another round of Russian diplomats. Russia would expel another fifty. Then the United States would expel another fifty. After that, then what? A freezing of diplomatic relations?

Paul Saunders: Turning back, you mentioned the idea that this all started with a British provocation, and it certainly seems to be a widespread view in Russia that this was some kind of provocation, what do you think would be the motive of the British government to do something like that?

https://lockerdome.com/lad/9521689830966886?pubid=ld-7032-4043&pubo=http%3A%2F%2Fnationalinterest.org&rid=nationalinterest.org&width=617

Evgeny Buzhinsky: Well, no offense meant, but I believe that move by Theresa May was coordinated with Washington. A lot of Russian experts and observers think so. What was the motive? I don't know, maybe it was an attempt to divert attention from the internal problems that Theresa May is facing. For example, what was the first item on the agenda during the last EU summit? Brexit terms, including conditions that aren't favorable for Britain. And after this provocation? Russia, with discussions about European solidarity against it instead of talking about Brexit. Maybe that was the real motive.

Paul Saunders: As you can imagine, very few people in the United States or Britain find it plausible that the British government would do something like that. Do you think there is any evidence that would suggest something like that may have happened, beyond your view that there was not really a motive for Russia to do something like that and there is a motive for the UK?

Evgeny Buzhinsky: I must tell you frankly: I know some people from our intelligence services, and they're very concerned. Because Mr. Skripal was exchanged via the illegal program spy swap, there is a worry that this could endanger or ruin the entire mechanism of exchange. What is the use of this mechanism if people will be killed afterwards? On the Russian side, there is no motive whatsoever. On the British side, we can only guess.

Image: Reuters

[Apr 05, 2018] Nerve agent attack? This ridiculous story is collapsing. MH17 stayed on message throughout (except for a slip-up in the Dutch report: see port engine intake) but this one was incoherence and absurdities from the start. When that story bursts, then what? It seems that sports are the greatest threat to world peace.

Notable quotes:
"... he Chinese side came to let the Americans know about the close ties between the Russian and Chinese armed forces ." Step by step. ..."
"... GERMANY. Expel 4 diplomats to show "solidarity", approve Nord Stream . Does that make sense? ..."
"... © Patrick Armstrong Analysis, Canada Russia Observer ..."
Apr 05, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com
... ... ...

SKRIPALMANIA . Years of flaccid acquiescence by MSM stenographers have made the anti-Russia fabulists sloppy: after some wavering on thallium and Scaramella, the Litvinenko story settled down; We are reminded of a similar anti-Russia fabrication in 1994 . What next? Re-writing history, of course . Or pretending it away . Craig Murray is the best single source: not wrong yet.

SPORTING DANGERS. Ever notice the coincidences? Georgia's invasion timing ? Just when the lies about Sochi are revealed it's time to move the narrative to Ukraine? Ban Russia from the Olympics but clear it after. The soccer World Cup will be held in Russia in a couple of months and it will be held in a dozen Russian cities; the world will see that they're not miserable s -- holes full of wretched people suffering under Putin's boot. What to do? This is too big a deal for the governments of soccer-mad countries to dare to boycott. Nerve agent attack? When that story bursts, then what? It seems that sports are the greatest threat to world peace.

WADA YA KNOW? Norwegian asthmatics win ! What a good thing only Russians dope, isn't it?

AMERICA-HYSTERICA. We have an interesting American poll showing that an increasing number of Americans believe that there is a "deep state" . Here's the poll; read it for yourself . How could that be?

WESTERN VALUES ™ . Remember due process? Presumption of innocence? International agreements? Vienna Convention? Rule of law? Beijing remembers: see below.

NEW NWO. China weighs in on Skripalmania reminding us that no matter how subservient NATO allies may be, the rest of the world is less impressed: " Over the past few years the international standard has been falsified and manipulated in ways never seen before ." The petroyuan moves a step closer with the opening of an oil futures market in Shanghai . With the gold-yuan exchange in Hong Kong already functioning , it's only a matter of deciding the right time to connect the two . The Chinese Defence Minister visits Moscow: " T he Chinese side came to let the Americans know about the close ties between the Russian and Chinese armed forces ." Step by step.

GERMANY. Expel 4 diplomats to show "solidarity", approve Nord Stream . Does that make sense?

UKRAINE. An American survey shows that the mood in Ukraine is bad and expecting worse . Well, that's one post-Maidan Ukraine expectation that will be fulfilled. Nadia Savchenko, a former Ukrainian hero, has been arrested in Ukraine on terrorism charges. She dares to suggest that the massacre was a false flag . (Read Ivan Katchanovski's paper : "This academic investigation concludes that the massacre was a false flag operation, which was rationally planned and carried out with a goal of the overthrow of the government and seizure of power. It found various evidence of the involvement of an alliance of the far right organizations, specifically the Right Sector and Svoboda, and oligarchic parties, such as Fatherland. Concealed shooters and spotters were located in at least 20 Maidan-controlled buildings or areas". Here are confessions by some of the snipers that your local news outlet has been too busy to tell you about.)

© Patrick Armstrong Analysis, Canada Russia Observer

[Apr 05, 2018] It's The Cover-Up - UK Foreign Office Deletes Tweet, Posts False Transcript, Issues New Lies

Notable quotes:
"... Moon of Alabama ..."
Apr 05, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

"It's The Cover-Up" - UK Foreign Office Deletes Tweet, Posts False Transcript, Issues New Lies

It's Not The Crime, It's The Cover-Up :

When a scandal breaks, the discovery of an attempt to cover up is often regarded as even more reprehensible than the original deeds.

The British government is trying to cover-up the lies it made with its false allegations against Russia. The cover-up necessitates new lies some of which we expose below.

Yesterday the head of the British chemical weapon laboratory in Porton Down stated that the laboratory can not establish that the poison used in the alleged 'Novichok' attack in Salisbury was produced by Russia. This was a severe blow to the British government allegations of Russian involvement in the poisoning of Sergej and Yulia Skripal.

Now the British government tries to hide that it said that the poison used in the Salisbury was 'produced in Russia' and that Porton down had proved that to be the case. The government aligned media are helping to stuff the government lies down the memory hole.

We all need to make sure that the new lies get exposed and that the attempts to change the record fail.

Yesterday the British Foreign Office deleted this from its Twitter account:


bigger

The March 22 tweet was part of a now interrupted thread which summarized a briefing on the UK government's response to the Salisbury incident given by the British Ambassador to Russia, Dr Laurie Bristow, to the international diplomatic community in Moscow.

After the silent scrubbing of the record was publicly questioned the Foreign Office admitted that it deleted the tweet:

After it emerged on Wednesday that the tweet had been deleted, the Foreign Office said the post was removed because it "did not accurately report" the words of Laurie Bristow, the UK's ambassador to Russia, which the tweet was supposed to be quoting.

Hmm - fool me once ...

All the tweets in the thread used quotation marks, but none was a literal reproduction of the ambassador's briefing. Only one of the tweets was deleted. A look at the transcript and video of the briefing shows that all the tweets , including the deleted one, "accurately reported" the speech. The cover-up of the false statement the ambassador made thus includes at least one new lie.

The original tweet said "Analysis by world-leading experts at the Defense Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down made clear that this was a military-grade Novichok nerve agent produced in Russia . .."

The transcript of the briefing in Moscow - "exactly as it was delivered" - is (still) available at the Foreign Office website.


bigger

The ambassador, reading from a prepared script, recapitulates the event and, according to the posted transcript, then says:

Four days later the analysts at Porton Down, the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory in the UK, established and made clear that this was a military-grade chemical weapon. One of the Novichok series; a nerve agent as I said produced in Russia . Porton Down is an Organisation for Prohibition of Chemical Weapons accredited and designated laboratory.
..
First, there is no doubt that the weapon used in the attack was the military-grade nerve agent from the Novichok series. This has been confirmed by specialists, our specialists. An Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons mission is in the UK now to independently confirm this analysis.

There is also no doubt that Novichok was produced in Russia by the Russian state.

The last line in the -"exactly as it was delivered" - transcript is false. Here is my transcription from a short Foreign Office video of the briefing ( saved copy ) which includes the uncut passage of the last two paragraphs quoted above:

... there is no doubt that the weapon used in the attack was the military-grade nerve agent from the Novichok series. This has been confirmed by specialists, our specialists. On Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons mission is in the UK now to independently confirm this analysis.

There is also no doubt that the Novichok was produced in Russia by the Russian state.

The written "exactly as it was delivered" transcript of the briefing says "... that Novichok was produced ...". At 0:20 in the video I clearly hear the ambassador saying "... that the Novichok was produced ...". A tiny but very important difference.

The person who put the official captions on the official Foreign Office video agrees with what I hear and transcribed.


bigger

The ambassador referred to " the Novichok", the Novichok he specifically mentioned earlier in the speech. The Novichok that he said had been detected by Porton Down. The transcript on the Foreign Office website leaves out the definite article "the". It makes it look as if the ambassador referred to some unspecified batch of the substance.

The deleted tweet was a faithful rendition of what the ambassador said, it "accurately reported" it. The transcript the Foreign office posted on its website is false. The ambassador clearly accused Russia of having produced the very batch that Porton Down analyzed.

Three days earlier Bristow's boss, Foreign Minister Boris Johnson, made the same false claim (vid at 5:32) in an interview with DW .

Porton Down has now said that it made no such claim. The ambassador's claim was false. The Foreign Office attempt to cover this up by deleting its tweet and by posting a not-so-exact transcript only amplifies the falsehood of the original claims.

The briefing continued to emphasize the "produced in Russia" meme. The phrase occurs four times.

...
Russia's claims that Novichok could have been produced elsewhere have no credibility. We have no information to indicate that this agent could have been produced anywhere else except in Russia. So we have no doubt that the nerve agent was produced in Russia .
...
So the fact that the Novichok was produced in Russia , the fact that Russia has a history of state-sponsored assassinations, and the fact that Russia has responded with the usual playbook of disinformation and denial left us with no choice but to conclude that this amounts to an unlawful use of force by the Russian state against the United Kingdom.

The Foreign Office may want to claim that all the above uses of "produced in Russia" were only references to decades old research and development in the Soviet Union, not to the "Skripal" case. The highlighted details shows that this is not the case. Any listener to the briefing surely got the impression that the UK ambassador was talking about the specific batch analysed by Porton Down.

It highlighted paragraph of Ambassador Bristow's briefing includes several other lies. 'Novichok' agents can and have been produced in other countries than Russia.

In 2016 five nerve agents of the 'Novichok' series were synthesized by Iranian scientists in cooperation with the OPCW. Details of their production process were published . In 1998 the US Army's Edgewood Chemical and Biological Center produced and catalogued 'Novichok' agents. It added the data for the substances to the National Institute of Standards and Technology Mass Spectral Library. The data was later removed and U.S. diplomats were ordered to suppress all international discussion about 'Novichok' agents.

The U.S. military chemical weapon laboratories work in close cooperation with Porton Down. Porton Down continues to receive tens of millions of U.S. military research money for its chemical weapon experiments including tests on animals. The UK government surely knew that 'Novichok' agents can and have been produced by other actors than Russia.

British and U.S. media aligned with the ongoing anti-Russia campaign now downplay the earlier claims of the British government.

BBC Radio 4 news at 6:31am today made this comical effort :

"... Russia requested the meeting to address the UK government's suggestion that it was behind the poisoning ..."

The British government did not make a mere "suggestion". Its ambassador and other officials stated outright that Russia was the culprit:

"... the fact that the Novichok was produced in Russia .. left us with no choice but to conclude... "

The New York Times today also uses the "suggestion" wording (one wonders who 'suggested' that):

The British authorities have blamed Russia for the March 4 poisoning, with Foreign Minister Boris Johnson suggesting it was " overwhelmingly likely " that President Vladimir V. Putin had ordered the attack.

On March 16, when the NYT first wrote about Johnson's claims against Russia, it surely did not convey that they were only 'suggestive':

Mr. Johnson's remarks were a significant escalation in the dispute between London and Moscow, directly linking the Russian leader to the poisoning of Sergei V. Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, in the English city of Salisbury.

The British Prime Minster herself went way further than just 'suggesting' that Russia was guilty:

[T]he Government have concluded that it is highly likely that Russia was responsible for the act against Sergei and Yulia Skripal.

Based on that 'conclusion' the British government threw out 23 Russian diplomats from their embassy in London. There was nothing 'suggestive' with that.

Off-Guardian points out that another tactic to divert from the earlier false claims is to now declare Russia guilty of not cooperating with the investigation:

The UK's flagrant hysteria of the last weeks, the war cries and spittle-flecked abuse is all being airbrushed away and being replaced with the idea the UK simply requested Russian co-operation and Russia refused – preferring to make nasty insinuations instead.

To claim that Russia did not cooperate is another lie told to cover up for the now debunked ones. The Chemical Weapons Convention, which Britain and Russia have signed, dictates the procedures that must be taken when chemical weapon allegations are made. They foresee the involvement of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).

It was the British government that rejected the involvement of the OPCW in the investigation. It only agreed to do so after Russia insisted on it :

[Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov] added that a case of alleged use of chemical weapons should be handled through the proper channel, being the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) – of which both Russia and Britain are members.

"As soon as the rumors came up that the poisoning of Skripal involved a Russia-produced agent, which almost the entire English leadership has been fanning up, we sent an official request for access to this compound so that our experts could test it in accordance with the Chemical Weapons Convention [CWC]," Lavrov said. So far the request has been ignored by the British side, he added.

The request from the British government to the OPCW was sent on March 14 , ten days after the incident happened, two days after the Prime Minister made her "highly likely" claims against Russia and one day after Lavrov publicly insisted on OPCW involvement.

It is obviously the British government which at first rejected OPCW involvement and not the Kremlin.

The OPCW is by statute a technical agency, not a court. It will release a technical assessment of the involved agent and not a judgment on responsibility or guilt.

The attempted cover-up by the Foreign Office of the lies the British government spread about the case has already failed. To play down the original strong claims against Russia as mere 'suggestions' is comical. Allegations that Russia was or is holding up a serious international investigation are also false. It was Britain which at first rejected the CWC and OPCW involvement.

The fact that the British government even makes these attempts must be seen as acknowledgement that it has no case and lied in it its official statements to the global public. It now covers its trail with more lies.

What else is the British government lying about?

---
Previous Moon of Alabama reports on the Skripal case:

Posted by b on April 4, 2018 at 04:18 PM | Permalink Daniel , Apr 4, 2018 5:03:11 PM | 8

I posted the following on a earlier b blog, but since this "news" story continues, it seems appropriate to repeat.

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.
~ Edward Bernays, "Propaganda," 1928

"We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out."
~ Karl Rove

And yet, here we are, almost a century after Edward Bernays wrote a book on how the masses are manipulated, and more than a decade after "Bush's Brain" mocked us, here we are "judiciously studying" Empire's past action.

Meanwhile, Empire is acting, and "the masses" are acting and reacting across the globe. And almost no one knows who pulls the strings, let alone are we organizing to overturn their rule.

[Apr 05, 2018] Couldn't May government come up with a better fake story?

Apr 05, 2018 | sputniknews.com

"Boris Johnson continues to convince everyone the British side supposedly sent Russia a list of questions to which it still hasn't received any answers. Everything in fact is completely the opposite. As I said, we never received any list of questions and I turn to the British side, if you have such a list of questions, please tell us, please list those questions," he said.

Regarding the UK's insistence that Moscow coordinated the attack, he asked, "Couldn't you come up with a better fake story?"

The UK is engaged in a propaganda war against Russia, Nebenzya asserted, aiming to discredit the country globally. But even propaganda wars are dangerous.

[Apr 05, 2018] An extreme Russophobia based on the most flimsiest of evidence that threaten a full scale nuclear conflagration, which is an existential threat

Notable quotes:
"... Russian gangsters &/or their capitalist counterparts, who have connections with state actors ..."
"... One should be mindful that the chemical components or precursors of A-232 or its binary version novichok-5 are ordinary organophosphates that can be made at commercial chemical companies that manufacture such products as fertilizers and pesticides. ..."
"... The largest concentration was on their house door. ..."
"... It would be easy to place it there if it were in gel form in the dead of night. ..."
"... the attack was carried out by another state or a non-state entity which had found the technical details of the Russian agent and manufactured its own stocks without being discovered, and had a motive for the attack. ..."
"... What actually happens is it completely distorts the narrative of what people think about things ..."
"... ex falso quodlibet ..."
"... The only thing that makes any sense is the accusation of chemical poisoning by a state power carries with it a level of condemnation that is beyond redemption. It is THE RED LINE. ..."
"... Never knew NC had so many CW/BW experts lurking ..."
"... I'd be mortified that someone carried this over a border ..."
"... But in the meantime, senior leadership has to be terrified (as we all should be too) and given a lot of leeway to figure this out. ..."
Apr 05, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Christopher Dale Rogers , April 4, 2018 at 4:17 am

Yves,

Many thanks for making an objective assessment of recent events within the UK that do have major economic and geopolitical consequences, particularly the growing demand to confront Putin for crimes most are oblivious too, that actual transgressions, rather than an extreme Russophobia based on the most flimsiest of evidence that threaten a full scale nuclear conflagration, which is an existential threat – and still they warmonger.

It is all rather more pernicious than this. essentially we seem to be sleepwalking into a 'Totalitarianism of the Centrists', whereby democratic outcomes must be denied, any dialogue outside what they deem correct suppressed via the imposition of censorship to save us from our own opinions, whilst professing a love for liberty and equality – forget wealth inequality.

We have dived down a rabbit hole where the Overton Window has narrowed to an extent where light itself cannot penetrate, such are the centrists so assured of their righteousness, which is to all intent and purposes a cult – one we are required to obey without question.

Time after time since the British electorate shocked a complacent establishment by voting to exit the EU, we have witnessed a torrent of abuse heaped on those who dare to disagree. We witnessed the gerrymandering and utter corruption of the Democratic Party Primaries, we have witnessed the demonisation and desire to null and void the US November Presidential vote, and we have witnessed within the UK not only a desire to void the EU vote, but the outcome of elections even within political groupings, namely the UK's Labour Party.

Indeed, such is the desire by the Establishment to remove Jeremy Corbyn, that the entire cannon of the MSM has been directed against him, whilst the Establishment forces within the Parliamentary Labour Party have stooped to ever more devious depths to undermine and eradicate the Leftist threat, to the extent of issuing early day motions giving carte blanche to a government to wage war on Putin and Russia.

Should UK political events be of interest to Naked Capitalism and its readers above economic consideration being given to Brexit?

In a nutshell, yes they do, because if the UK's Establishment fail to eradicate Corbyn, and by chance he should enter Number 10, the global elite, Atlanticist and full ecosystem of the Totalitarian Centrists have a real challenge on their hands to maintain an iron consensus that's existed for 40 years if any breach to this comes into existence – Corbyn acting as a Standard for others in the West who are sick and tired of an economic system that does not work, unless of course you belong to that small minority referred too as the 1%.

Greg Gerner , April 4, 2018 at 8:08 am

+ 1,000,000. Many thanks.

templar555510 , April 4, 2018 at 9:32 am

Thank you Christopher for a superb, excellently put comment. This is what Tariq Ali calls the ' Extreme Centre ' and how right you and he are. But neoliberalism is a Berlin Wall and with each day that passes another brick falls out and one day, not so long away I believe, it will crumble because it can no longer stand the strain of the forces marshalled against it. They may be disparate at present , but such is the nature of political ' moments' throughout history that at some point coherence occurs spontaneously and the ' ancien regime' topples.

Christopher Dale Rogers , April 4, 2018 at 11:46 am

Templar,

I must confess I've not read any of Tariq Ali's material for a while, essentially, and since january, I've just witnessed such a full-on Establishment assault on Jeremy Corbyn, with little or no scrutiny whatsoever of the actual Prime Minister, that its become alarming. And with so much evidence now at hand both sides of the Atlantic, conclusions must be drawn, namely, our liberal democracy is presently dead – if it were not for the Internet and independent Blogs, we really would be living a Soviet era dystopia.

David , April 4, 2018 at 6:31 am

This article is not very useful, because it muddles together three separate issues, for some of which there is evidence and for others only conjecture. A better source for trying to understand what's going on is this blog , written by an OPCW specialist.
I have no particular technical insight into this case, or CW in general, and I don't know who carried out the attack, although I do have a little experience of how governments work. But we need to get three things sorted out from each other.
First, according to open sources, and at least one leaked US diplomatic telegram, the Soviet Union did indeed develop new types of chemical agent in the 1970s and 80s for use in a future war, which were both more lethal than existing agents, and also exempt from the likely provisions of the Chemical Weapons Convention then being negotiated. This suggestion no longer seems to be controversial. Again, according to open sources, these agents did not need to be declared to the CWC, and seem not to have been. It has been suggested that they were destroyed anyway, but we do not know, and if they were not, there was no violation of the Convention. Thus, the statements by the OPCW and the UK Ambassador last year would be technically true if Russia had destroyed all stocks of agents declared under the CWC, but not stocks of these new agents. There have been allegations that the composition of these agents, and perhaps information on their manufacture and use, may have been passed to other nations, or been stolen by them. But there is no confirmation of this and no specific nations or non-state actors have been mentioned. It remains a possibility, though. Because of this uncertainty, Porton Down has said that the agent used was "of a type developed by Russia." Because it's hard to prove a negative, we don't know, and may never know, if it was also produced elsewhere. Thus the new Porton Down statement about which people are getting so excited, but doesn't actually change anything.
Secondly, it's conceivable that the UK or some other country had completely separate information about Russian assassination plans. If so, it would not be the kind of thing that would ever be made public, so that remains supposition. But if you look at the UK government statements, they don't suggest this. May used the terms "plausible explanations" on 12 March. In the technical sense, her statement was probably correct: either the agent was used by the Russians (not necessarily the government) or it was used by someone who had acquired the formulas and production techniques from them. She was grandstanding, of course, but it's hard to see what a third alternative would have been: a third country independently developing exactly the same chemical agents seems very unlikely and there's no evidence for it.
Finally, politics, and here everything is speculation. It's hard to see what possible motive the Russians would have for this attack, but anything else is just supposition, if not actually wild speculation.
So shorn of the sabre-rattling the UK government position amounts to saying, "We know the Russians developed these agents" (accepted) "we believe they failed to destroy them" (quite possibly true but we have no means of knowing) and "there is no evidence that anyone else has them" (accepted). The leap from this to blaming the Russian government, and dragging in Putin, on the other hand, is pure inference, and pure politics.
I don't know whodunnit. The problem is that, whilst the evidence against the Russians (in the wider sense) is ambiguous, and it seems impossible to find a reasonable motive, there's even less direct reason to suspect any other specific actor.

Bill Smith , April 4, 2018 at 6:58 am

So Novichok "does not figure in the Annex on Chemicals of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)"? Does "does not figure" mean not included? If it is not included does that mean not banned?

Has there been any roughly similar events in Russia itself? The one that came to mind and I looked up was Ivan Kivelidi. But that was cadmium poisoning I believe, so other than an similarly obscure method, different.

PlutoniumKun , April 4, 2018 at 8:36 am

I'm no expert on the Convention, but my understanding of it is that there are no 'banned' substances as such, but 'controlled' substances, on the understanding that signatories are permitted to have small quantities of nerve agents for research purposes. Hence the Iranians, quite legally, made five variations of Novichuks (in very small quantities) and declared them without anyone making a fuss over it. The Convention has a series of schedules of chemicals which must be declared and facilities storing or manufacturing these compounds must be available for OPCW inspection.

The Treaty also has an 'all other compounds' category that includes any organophosphate which would cover non-scheduled chemicals. So far as I'm aware the obligation is to declare stockpiles and manufacturing facilities of these and allow them to be open for inspection, but there would obviously be a huge number of such facilities, including most pesticide factories worldwide.

So far as I'm aware – and I can stand corrected on this – it is not 'illegal' to have a non-scheduled substance, but there is an obligation to declare the manufacturing facilities. Again, I can stand corrected on this, but I believe some of the Novichuks were added to Schedule I after the Iranians reported that they'd synthesized them.

Paul Whittaker , April 4, 2018 at 9:02 am

I read somewhere recently that this nerve agent was developed in Uzbekistan (or one of the other Stan's) and that the production facilities had been cleaned out by the US military, as the the satellite is now one of their allies? The article also claimed that most agricultural pesticide producers could formulate is as it is related to insecticides used on crops.

Pat , April 4, 2018 at 7:10 am

Unless said actors had either produced false evidence in an attempt to justify military actions before OR was known to make false accusations in order to condemn states they were planning to attack. See US and UK in 2001. Add that this time around the UK Prime Minister has every reason to try to distract her country from her incompetence and her government's dishonest public policy, see Brexit, and there is a great deal of reason to suspect that the real culprits have nothing to do with the state actor they are accusing.

jsn , April 4, 2018 at 12:33 pm

The tangency of the victims to the Steele Dossier suggests multiple levels of political misdirection.

In the photo at the top, is that 12 Grimmauld Place coming into view just to the left of the front door?

PlutoniumKun , April 4, 2018 at 7:12 am

Thanks David, just one clarification:

There have been allegations that the composition of these agents, and perhaps information on their manufacture and use, may have been passed to other nations, or been stolen by them. But there is no confirmation of this and no specific nations or non-state actors have been mentioned.

At least one other nation has synthesised small quantities – Iran . They synthesised at least five of them apparently for the purpose of researching antidotes and they provided the information to the OPCW. Plus we know from reports 10 years ago that US researchers had full access to the Uzbekistan labs where they were apparently manufactured.

I can't find the link now, but I believe it was inferred from some statements that in the past Porton Down had in fact synthesized similar compounds, at the very least so they could develop techniques for identifying them.

David , April 4, 2018 at 8:00 am

Yes, I didn't want to write a long essay and anyway it's not my subject, but it's worth pointing out that nations are allowed a Single Small Scale Facility on their territory for, among other things, making and studying Schedule 1 chemicals (the most dangerous) for protective and other reasons. I've just looked up the reference in the CWC So many countries have technical facilities which could, in theory, produce small volumes of these new agents as well. I hadn't seen the particular report you mention, but I think the basic point stands – that there's nothing in the public domain to suggest that anyone has an offensive programme producing more than a few grams of these agents for protective purposes. And according to the CWC, these sites have to be inspected regularly. If these agents are not in fact illegal under the CWC (which seems to be the case) then various nations might reasonably try to synthesise small quantities for protective purposes, but I imagine it would be very hard to hide the capacity to produce quantities useful for operations. But is there a chemical engineer in the house?

Jesper , April 4, 2018 at 9:21 am

Quantities needed for operations are on the scale of grams (based on the toxicity of the substance). Industrial amounts were not used so looking for industrial capacity to produce might be interesting but I don't see the relevance of doing so.

jsn , April 4, 2018 at 12:36 pm

PK,
This may be what you were looking for .

Bill Smith , April 4, 2018 at 12:50 pm

"US researchers had full access to the Uzbekistan labs"

In the books I mentioned elsewhere the labs had been abandoned years earlier with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Most of the equipment and documentation had been removed with the departing Soviets.. So yeah, the US had full access to the wreckage and learned things but it was considerably different that access to a working lab.

Donald , April 4, 2018 at 7:16 am

I thought the article here was fine. Your summary didn't add anything except your opinion that the evidence slightly favors Russia as the culprit. What, for instance, is the problem with a third country developing exactly the same chemical agent? My impression was that the formula is known. And all suggested motives are wild speculation.

I have no problem saying there is a reasonable chance Russia did it, but there is also a reasonable chance someone else did it.

David , April 4, 2018 at 8:13 am

I think your last paragraph is very reasonable. But I don't think you understood what I was saying, or perhaps I wasn't clear.
The British accusation, once you get past the flag-waving and heavy-breathing, amounts to saying that one of two things happened. Either (1) the Russian government did it or (2) someone else did it making use of either the technology or the actual agents developed by the Russians. In the first case they argue that the Russians are directly guilty, in the second that they are sort of vicariously guilty, like someone who leaves a gun lying around, or the instructions on how to make a bomb. The only other possibility, it seems to me, is that another country, in complete isolation from the Russians, and unknown to anybody, developed precisely similar agents and had a reason to use them last month. The evidence for that is, well, not very great.
The main problem, as I suggested, is mixing these sorts of arguments with political ones as though they were the same. The kind of argument that worries me (though not found on NC, I'm happy to say) amounts to saying "I loath May, she's having a rough time with Brexit, the US lied about WMD in Iraq in 2002 therefore the Russians didn't do it, therefore the British did." These are the sorts of arguments that we should leave to the CT sites to play with.

PlutoniumKun , April 4, 2018 at 8:45 am

I understand what you are saying and I agree with your caution on this, but I don't think I'd agree that the evidence isn't great that other countries have similar agents. I think its clear that within chemical warfare circles, the cat has been out of the bag, so to speak, for many years. The evidence would suggest that certainly the US, UK and Iranians have been studying the compounds and have presumably produced small amounts to do so.

I think the British allegations (1) and (2) as you outline them are only the 'probable' evidence if strong evidence is produced that the chemical used is closely related to Russian (or Uzbek) manufactured stocks – i.e. it has the 'chemical fingerprint' of Russian Novichok. The statement made yesterday by Porton Down came I think very close to stating that this could not be established.

If you are to use Occams Razor, and work on the assumption that the act was carried out by a non-State agent (or a rogue element with State connections), then that would suggest the source was from the research facility an hours walk away from the assassination attempt, not the alleged ones 5,000 km away.

larry , April 4, 2018 at 9:35 am

How would they obtain it? A more plausible hypothesis is that Russian gangsters &/or their capitalist counterparts, who have connections with state actors, some of whom have a long standing grudge against Skripal, could have carried out the act. I am not saying that they did, only that they have a strong motive and possibly the opportunity.

integer , April 4, 2018 at 10:01 am

Russian gangsters &/or their capitalist counterparts, who have connections with state actors

Assuming you're talking about capitalists that had connections to Russian gangsters like Berezovsky, Bill Browder is the man you should be looking at.

Bill Smith , April 4, 2018 at 12:55 pm

Or just plan old Russian gangsters.

"Putin's Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia?" covers some Putin's old KGB / gangster connections there.

jsn , April 4, 2018 at 1:51 pm

As noted elsewhere in this thread, all it takes is a decent lab to produce this stuff from the information published on it by the people who developed it. As PK suggests, Occam's Razor in this instance takes its edge from the very nearby UK chemical weapons facility that made some effort to down play the information published by the inventors of these agents back when they published.

See: diptherio
April 4, 2018 at 9:25 am

ricken , April 4, 2018 at 10:00 am

My understanding of these agents is that they are a group of agents with a similar basic structure. Their general formula has been published. A chemical engineer should comment on how difficult it is to synthesize them. But keeping in mind that a Japanese fringe group was able to synthesize a nerve agent, my guess is , not very. If the Iranian government is able to synthesize it, then certainly any large university program in the west can. If they are variants of organo phosphorus compounds, as most nerve agents are, then add fertilizer and chemical companies to that list.
The absence of any such evidence,of their synthesis outside of USSR, means nothing. We do not know what the defense and security establishments in most countries are doing. How many knew of a weaponized anthrax program at Fort Derrick?

Many actors have a reason to discredit Russia/ Putin. You think otherwise?

Sid Finster , April 4, 2018 at 10:44 am

So every time someone is murdered with a US made weapon or poisoned with US made chemicals, or even with chemicals originally invented in the US, sanctions against the United States are justified, if not WWIII, right?

Christopher Dale Rogers , April 4, 2018 at 7:56 am

David,

The best analysis in the UK has been on Craig Murray's Blog, including full transcripts appearing from the Sky News press interview and other media sites giving a UK Gov. version – Murray used his own FCO contacts and his website and views have been 100% spot on to date.

David , April 4, 2018 at 8:18 am

Can't agree, I'm afraid. Murray is good on other things, but here I think he's simply misunderstood what the UK government was alleging, as I pointed out in comments last week.

Quentin , April 4, 2018 at 8:04 am

David says: '( ) according to open sources, and at least one leaked US diplomatic telegram, the Soviet Union did indeed develop new types of chemical agent in the 1970s and 80s for use in a future war, which were both more lethal than existing agents, and also exempt from the likely provisions of the Chemical Weapons Convention then being negotiated.'

I want to get one thing straight: Were the Soviets in the process of developing or trying to do so or did they actually successfully make such chemical weapons? I can only suppose these chemical weapons were in the pipeline when the Chemical Weapons Convention was finalised and therefore couldn't be listed because they didn't (yet) exist. If so, how do we know that the Soviets/Russians ever had such weapons? Looking around, I get the impression there is some uncertainty about the history of Novichok, even though its Russian name works prejudicially against Russia. However that may be, it is hard to accept that other states hadn't made the same 'type of' weapon. After all, how is an antidote possible if the poison is not known. Or is France involved? Everyone seems to assume that the nerve agent came from outside the UK. Well, how would it every have physically been brought across the UK border. Or was it manufactured there? Maybe for sale on the streets of London–or even somewhere in the vicinity of Salisbury.

David , April 4, 2018 at 8:39 am

My understanding from what's been published is that the agents were developed in the 70s and 80s, and their development was finished by the time of the CWC, which they were anyway planned to circumvent. I think it's right to say that you don't necessarily "make" and stock CW, because the literature suggests that they decay rather quickly. So whether the Russians actually had stocks, or merely the capacity to make them when they needed them, I can't say, and I doubt if there are many people who know. I think the antidote thing is a bit of a red herring. These are not poisons. Nerve agents like VX and Sarin worked by paralysing the muscles, and I remember that during the Cold War (and perhaps since) NATO troops carried atropine injectors to try to counteract the effects. If these agents worked in the same way, then I'm not sure there's an "antidote" – more like generic types of emergency treatment which might save your life.

Quentin , April 4, 2018 at 8:50 am

David: 'My understanding from what's been published is that the agents were developed in the 70s and 80s, and their development was finished by the time of the CWC, which they were anyway planned to circumvent.'

You mean the Soviets then agreed to the CWC without declaring their operational 'Novichok' or their tested procedure to make them. Is this how it went? I really want clarity on this point. The same CWC last year certified that the Soviet Union's successor state, the Russian Federation of course, had destroyed all its chemical weapons. It seems to be that a lot of individuals want to have everything all ways to pin the Skripals' attack on Russia. France hovers in the background here and on Syria.

Quentin , April 4, 2018 at 8:54 am

David: 'My understanding from what's been published is that the agents were developed in the 70s and 80s, and their development was finished by the time of the CWC, which they were anyway planned to circumvent.'

You mean the Soviets then agreed to the CWC without declaring their operational 'Novichok' or their tested procedure to make them? Is this how it went? I really searching for clarity on this point. The same CWC last year certified that the Soviet Union's successor state, the Russian Federation of course, had destroyed all its chemical weapons. It seems to be that a lot of individuals want to have everything all ways to pin the Skripals' attack on Russia. France hovers in the background here and on Syria.

Bill Smith , April 4, 2018 at 9:19 am

Read the second half of the book "The Dead Hand". While not talking about this agent it covers a lot of this ground. Also "Biohazard" by Alibek and Handelman and "State Secrets" by Vil Mirzayanov. All published about a decade ago.

Anyone know of any other books that more or less cover this topic?

"The same CWC last year certified that the Soviet Union's successor state, the Russian Federation of course, had destroyed all its chemical weapons."

The CWC only certifies destruction of declared chemical weapons. Is this stuff on the list of chemical weapons?

brightdark , April 4, 2018 at 8:06 am

Why would Putin take the risk and do it? Simple, he's done similar things before and gotten away with it.

makedoanmend , April 4, 2018 at 8:44 am

I wonder is this the biggest tell that the average punter must keep an open mind?

Cui Bono?

What benefit accrued to the Russians – diplomatic storm, threat of more sanctions, possible war?

Of course, if one thinks that Vlad Putin is evil incarnate and loves killing for the sake of it without thinking about the wider repercussions, and that the rest of the Russian establishment has absolutely no influence or input into their government, the contention is perfectly valid. (And of course it helps if we ignore that other governments in the world have been reported to "eliminate" people they find threatening to their interests or for other reasons.)

Pookah Harvey , April 4, 2018 at 2:46 pm

One scenario that might seem plausible has to do with the Steele Dossier. If Steele's information is correct and Putin does have a sexual and financial blackmailing dossier on Trump then, as Moon over Alabama has pointed out, the Skripals probably were deeply involved in providing the information to Steele..

The fact that this information was available to a fairly low level intelligence probe would indicate that it is widely known in Russian Intelligence.

Why would such a powerful blackmailing dossier be so widely known? Remember when it was produced. You have a buffoon reality TV star with political connections that will jump into any honey-pot intelligence operation you provide. So salacious sexual tapes might easily have been passed around for entertainment value when Trump would have been considered a low value asset. Times have changed. Blackmail only works if the blackmailer controls the flow of the blackmailing information. Putin would want to clamp down on any more leaks about a Trump dossier. Hence both Skripal and his daughter would be blatantly targeted with a Russian audience in mind. This is what will happen if you leak no matter where you go..

If Steele was able to obtain information about a Trump dossier then US intelligence certainly has much more. Releasing the information that Trump is a "Manchurian Candidate" in our current political situation would provoke a civil war. The Intelligence community could try to cut the legs out from under Putin's dossier by pushing the Russian collusion story on Trump's election. Any pro-Russian actions Trump makes will look suspicious to the general public.. This would also explain the unprecedented attacks by former American Intelligence chiefs on Trump. i.e. Ex CIA Chief Brennan's recent twee t "When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history."

This does seem to tie a lot of things together.
1. Why Putin would assassinate the Skripals in such an open manner.
2. The push by Intelligence Services on the story of Russian tampering in the election with little real evidence.
3. The unprecedented personal attacks on Trump from Clapper and Brennan.

Anyway it's something to think about.

jsn , April 4, 2018 at 6:21 pm

I love it! It's wonderfully baroque and it redeems our top spooks!

Do you really think it's possible for Trump to be embarrassed by any of his past behavior?

Pookah Harvey , April 4, 2018 at 7:35 pm

It seems to me that attractive Russian agents who where trying to get their target into the most embarrassing sexual activities would be very successful with Trump. Also remember Don Jr. and Eric have both spent quite a bit of time in Russia. Also it seems almost sure that the Russians would have enough information on money laundering to send the whole family to jail. Who knows how much that could influence Trump's decision making.

gallam , April 4, 2018 at 9:34 pm

The problem with that narrative is that none of the three people apparently poisoned by one of the most dangerous chemicals known to man have actually died. Indeed, two out of three have recovered in less time than some people take to recover from flu.

Pookah Harvey , April 4, 2018 at 10:36 pm

A less than fatal dose is maybe what was planned. From the Guardian :

"Circles appeared before my eyes: red and orange. A ringing in my ears, I caught my breath. And a sense of fear: like something was about to happen," Andrei Zheleznyakov told the now-defunct newspaper Novoye Vremya, describing the 1987 weapons lab incident that exposed him to a nerve agent that would eventually kill him. "I sat down on a chair and told the guys: 'It's got me.'"

By 1992, when the interview was published, the nerve agent had gutted Zheleznyakov's central nervous system. Less than a year later he was dead, after battling cirrhosis, toxic hepatitis, nerve damage and epilepsy.

Only time will tell the final effects of the attack. This seems like a very horrible end, worse then a simple assassination.

Using Novichok points the finger at Russia but also gives them a credible deniability, (other countries can produce the agent). The target audience (Russians who know of the dossier) will very clearly understand the warning.

Again this is only a scenario. But I feel that it is as plausible as any other put forward. My other favorite is Moon of Alabama's guess that Israel might have done it .

Sid Finster , April 4, 2018 at 10:46 am

Rather, Putin has been accused of similar things. Let's not kid ourselves – no evidence has been made public, other than hyperventilation and unsubstantiated claims.

hemeantwell , April 4, 2018 at 5:51 pm

Why would Putin take the risk and do it?

Exactly. Russia Hate proponents have banked heavily on blaming them or their allies for chemical attacks -- this and in Syria –that only appear foolish in terms of any plausible benefit/risk calculation and which are very open to false flagging. As noted above, the conduct of the hate campaigns, in which a rush to judgement and attacks on appeals to caution predominate, is simply alarming to see in societies that are familiar with the value of careful evidentiary procedures and supposedly take them seriously. That this is coupled with an utterly hypocritical anti-"fake news" campaign makes the situation seem all the more desperate.

My impression is that we are witnessing a barrage strategy, in which a succession of disputable accusations is made and each successive "crime" is used to undermine the possibility of reconsidering the previous charge. I don't think of this as hysteria, but as generating an atmosphere in which the threat of a charge of disloyalty and excommunicative punishment, at least, begins to haunt us. As I've probably said before, one of the Frankfurt School takes on fascist ideology was that in a sense it really wasn't one. At its core it was not systematic, but an assertion of a demand to obedience. The fascist would blabber on until someone objected, and then they would laugh and show them their pistol. As determined by the Extreme Center, Russia-focused public discourse is headed in that direction.

integer , April 4, 2018 at 8:12 am

Jiri Matousek accused the US of weaponizing novichoks at the Edgewood Chemical Biological Center, as detailed in cables released by Wikileaks. Hard to imagine why a Czech scientist would make that claim for no reason. While it's always pragmatic to refrain from rushing to judgement, one of the issues with always insisting on authoritative sources as evidence before reaching any conclusions is that the people who have the most to lose from that sort of information being made available to the public are the same people that have disproportionate control over the so-called authoritative sources.

diptherio , April 4, 2018 at 9:25 am

According to the Russian who developed the chemicals, literally anybody with a modern chemistry lab could produce them. Also, the chemical structures were published over a decade ago.

One should be mindful that the chemical components or precursors of A-232 or its binary version novichok-5 are ordinary organophosphates that can be made at commercial chemical companies that manufacture such products as fertilizers and pesticides. (Mirzayanov, 1995).

Soviet scientists had published many papers in the open literature on the chemistry of such compounds for possible use as insecticides. Mirzayanov claimed that "this research program was premised on the ability to hide the production of precursor chemicals under the guise of legitimate commercial chemical production of agricultural chemicals".

As the structures of these compounds have been described, any organic chemist with a modern lab would be able to synthesize bench scale quantities of such a compound. Indeed, Porton Down must have been able to synthesize these compounds in order to develop tests for them. It is therefore misleading to assert that only Russia could have produced such compounds.
http://syriapropagandamedia.org/working-papers/doubts-about-novichoks

TimmyB , April 4, 2018 at 12:50 pm

The claim that "there is no evidence that anyone else has them" (Novichok) is completely false. The formula for making so-called Novichok nerve agents has been published in a book that was sold to the public. Iran publicly admitted making such agents years ago to test them.

Moreover, the UK would need to manufacture Novichok so it could have samples to test. Simply put, if the UK didn't manufacture Novichok and run tests on it, then it would have no way of knowing what Novichok type nerve agents look like in a blood sample.

Please note that since it is impossible to prove a negative, for example, prove Martians never landed on Earth, Russia will never be able to prove it did NOT poison these people. That is why our courts don't require criminal suspects they didn't commit a crime. Instead, the state must provide evidence that the suspect is guilty. Putting the burden on Russia to provide evidence to disprove its guilt is a propaganda trick.

Bill Smith , April 4, 2018 at 12:58 pm

Or access to gas chromatography data from someone else?

As to Martians, check Weekly World News. They have pictures :)

Ahimsa , April 4, 2018 at 6:45 am

Did Putin really threaten to have traitors killed?
https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/40900/did-putin-threaten-to-have-traitors-assassinated

I tried posting this before but it got lost in the intertubes. Suffice it to say, the reported quote is: not a direct quote, a poor translation, out of context, and not refering to Skripal.

At the time of the otiginal interview, the media reported the complete oposite meaning, i.e. Putin says Russian sexret service don't kill traitors!

integer , April 4, 2018 at 7:42 am

Occam's razor suggests, to me at least, that the poisoning of the Skripals occurred at the Salisbury Zizzi restaurant. Interestingly, the Zizzi restaurant chain was recently (Feb, 2015) purchased by Bridgepoint Capital, a private equity firm with headquarters in London. Bridgepoint appears to have some connections to the UK government, for example Sir Stuart Rose (knighted in 2008), who sits on the Conservative Bench at the House of Lords, was appointed to an advisory role in 2010 .

Anyways, just a data point, maybe the Skripals were poisoned somewhere else, but I'd be intersested to hear if any of the UK-based NC commentariat are familiar with Bridgepoint Capital, and if they know of any other connections to the UK government or intelligence agenices that Bridgepoint has.

larry , April 4, 2018 at 8:55 am

The largest concentration was on their house door. Bridgepoint is a bit of a stretch. That hypothesis is not supported by invoking Occam's Razor.

integer , April 4, 2018 at 9:07 am

The largest concentration was on their house door.

Says who? No need to answer, as I know who said it; they are not even close to being reliable sources of information. The house door claim has only recently been made, after the claims that it was the car ventlation system, car door handle, Yulia Skripal's luggage, and Russian porridge(!). My understanding is that these kinds of substances are very volatile, so please enlighten me how it could reliably be established that it was the front door handle of Sergei Skripal's house that contained the highest concentration of novichok four weeks after the poisoning took place? FWIW there are photos of police officers standing by that front door without any protection that were taken shortly after the poisoning occurred.

Adding: In case you missed it, my reference to Occam's razor referred to where the Skripals were poisoned.

larry , April 4, 2018 at 9:46 am

Ah. The police were also standing near the bench where they collapsed. I don't think that shows much. The house door possibility was only recently made because it seems that they had to have comapred all the sites they had been to before they could say that. It would be easy to place it there if it were in gel form in the dead of night. The car door handle could be explained by the agent coming off his hand, so this is consistent, though that does not mean it is true. The others were speculation and clearly so. Russian porridge was ridiculous.

Occam's Razor also can lead to suggesting that they were poisoned where they were because he lived there and therefore an easier target there. Porton Down could be an accidental coincidence. Why he chose to live there is another question.

integer , April 4, 2018 at 10:13 am

It would be easy to place it there if it were in gel form in the dead of night.

Exactly, but not necessarily the night before the Skripals were poisoned. My suggestion is that the poisoning occurred at Salisbury Zizzi restaurant, and that, in light of the establishment's narrative having come apart at the seams since then, evidence has subsequently been planted, perhaps, as you speculate, via the placement of a novichok gel on Sergei Skripal's front door handle.

I mean, seriously, how likely is it that Sergei and Yulia would simultaneously collapse on a park bench hours after one of them touched a nerve agent covered door when they left the house that morning?

larry , April 4, 2018 at 12:14 pm

Not likely, I agree, if the attempted assassination was professionally carried out. But what if it wasn't and the agent was substandard in qualtiy? I haven't seen anything myself about the quality of the agent itself.

integer , April 4, 2018 at 12:56 pm

How many people does it take to close a door? The point I am trying to make is that both Yulia and Sergei ate at Zizzi bar, presumably at the same time, and then they collapsed, simultaneously, half an hour later on a park bench. Occam's razor suggests they were poisoned during that meal. Also, and this is drawing a longer bow, Bridgepoint owns the Zizzi chain and has connections to the UK government, thus, someone at Bridgepoint may have facilitated the poisoning by, say, allowing someone from MI5 or MI6 to be there when it was suspected Sergei and Yulia would be visiting, seeing as it was apparently well known that the Salisbury Zizzi restaurant was Sergei Skripal's favorite place to dine.

pretzelattack , April 4, 2018 at 1:12 pm

or even what the agent is, exactly.

TimmyB , April 4, 2018 at 12:53 pm

The "police" standing near the bench didn't collapse. Instead, one officer, the one who went into the home to search it, collapsed.

Carolinian , April 4, 2018 at 8:03 am

Moon of Alabama on the growing possibility that the whole thing is a false flag.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/04/operation-hades-a-model-for-the-novichok-case-.html#more

The post includes a John Helmer link.

http://johnhelmer.net/yulia-skripal-is-not-allowed-to-telephone-her-grandmother/

PlutoniumKun , April 4, 2018 at 8:14 am

MoA has been all over the place on this issue, he's been casting out a new theory nearly every day, many of which are as far fetched as the 'Putin did it' ones.

integer , April 4, 2018 at 8:27 am

Fair enough, however each change in direction has been accompanied by a summary of why the change in direction has been made. b at MoA may not be perfect, but it's pretty clear he disseminates information in good faith, which is more than can be said about any MSM outlet.

Carolinian , April 4, 2018 at 9:22 am

On the contrary I'd say he's merely been offering altenative possibilities to the hysteria and to the near impossibility that "Putin did it."

It's the MSM that speaks with certainty at every turn despite facts unknown. As someone pointed out the once ubiquitous word "alleged" seems to have disappeared from our mainstream journals.

Sid Finster , April 4, 2018 at 10:48 am

Alternative theories are perfectly acceptable, even if those theories are themselves mutually exclusive.

If either "Yves pulled the rigger or maybe Lambert did it", it can't be both Yves and Lambert, but in either case it wasn't me.

jabawocky , April 4, 2018 at 8:09 am

'Yesterday, the Guardian drily reported that the absolute confidence with with the UK government had pinned the poisoning on the Russian state was looking ill-founded'

I just think that's misleading, because there was never an assertion from the UK Government that scientists at Porton Down had unambiguously pinned the origin of the nerve agent as from Russia, only that the scientists had identified it as a nerve agent that had previously been developed in Russia. I don't think the article says the conclusion was ill-founded either in so many words, more that it overeggs the significance of the new statement, as David points out above.

Porton Down worked fast to identify the agent, so they pretty much must have had a sample to use as a standard. To pinpoint the origin they would need previous analysis of multiple batches to determine discriminatory trace signatures. As these are binary agents it would be especially challenging and quite time-consuming, if it was even possible.

Analysis is likely to be based on intelligence as to who was known to have samples of the agent, and who had motive to take out Skripal, not the science at Porton Down. It is not unreasonable to want to keep this information out of the public domain. This means it is unlikely that we will ever be shown proof, or be able to assess for ourselves the quality of the evidence. However, we equally cannot conclude from this that the evidence does not exist, and one must presume that the EU and USA were convinced enough by the evidence they were shown to join the UK in direct action.

What s clear is that the UK is a dangerous place for former Russian spies.

PlutoniumKun , April 4, 2018 at 8:17 am

Boris Johnson actually did state explicitly in Parliament that Porton Down had pinned the origin of the nerve agent as being from Russia, but they've quietly stepped back from that, even deleting tweets that repeated the claim.

larry , April 4, 2018 at 8:56 am

PK, no one can believe a word Johnson says.

Yves Smith Post author , April 4, 2018 at 10:57 am

The press treated Johnson's statement as definitive, particularly in the US.

gallam , April 4, 2018 at 9:41 pm

The press in the UK treated the statement as definitive too. They are now trying to pretend that he was referring to something else in the statement he made by carefully editing the question asked by the interviewer.

Chris , April 4, 2018 at 8:30 am

Vodka was 'developed' in Russia and is produced around the world. Same with 'Novichok'?

Colonel Smithers , April 4, 2018 at 9:42 am

Thank you, Chris.

Novichok? That sounds suspiciously and probably tastes like the Creamichoc dispensed by that vending machine down the corridor.

Eustache De Saint Pierre , April 4, 2018 at 9:20 am

Isn't this just another situation like MH-17, & the supposed Syrian Sarin gas attacks in which the actual facts are obscured in a political fog ? Perhaps we will never know in any concrete way the actual truth of the Salisbury affair or the other examples, but there does appear to a lack of the concept of reasonable doubt which doesn't stop the guilty till proven innocent lynch mob from pointing accusatory fingers at their favourite big bad wolves.

One thing I am sure of is that Putin is not a fool & due to that conclusion I would ask " Cui Bono ? ". A question that I was it seems under the mistaken impression was always asked when trying to prove motive & I cannot think of any way that the affair would profit the alleged white cat stroker, although I can certainly see how as part of the constant demonisation of Russia, it profits the mudslingers, which is how I will refer to them until they provide the sort of proof needed in the opposite of a kangaroo court.

I don't think it will result on it's own in a possible demonstration of the actual capability of Russia's new weaponry, but I worry that it is another incremental step up a ladder to nowhere good. Not likely the that the tin pot poodle will send an empty aircraft carrier to the Crimea, but likely more of the same which appears to be resulting in Russia becoming more self sustaining, while increasingly being able to hit back in ways that of course wont hurt those with access to bunkers in any serious way.

It is about faith at the end of the day, as people will believe which version of the truth suits them – after all we appear to be in a war if only a phony one – but the fog where the truth is the first casualty is real enough.

Colonel Smithers , April 4, 2018 at 9:40 am

Thank you, Eustache.

With regard to MH aircraft, how about the one missing in the Indian Ocean?

Debris from an aircraft washes up frequently along the African coast from the Horn to the Cape and the archipelagos to the east, including Mauritius, Rodrigues and Reunion.

Meteo France (Reunion) and France 2 (Envoye Special) are sitting on a report that suggests the debris is coming from the direction of the Maldives and Chagos / Diego Garcia, due to currents, and the state of decomposition and what's growing on the debris suggests its coming from tropical waters mid-Ocean and in a timescale similar to when that MH Boeing 777 disappeared.

The wild goose chase south west of Australia was a way of diverting attention and allowing the black box battery to run out of juice.

integer , April 4, 2018 at 10:32 am

Thank you, Colonel.

Tony Abbott was happy to engage in that wild goose chase; every dollar he spent was one dollar closer to impoverishing Australia and making us peasants see the light of the Catholic church. Just ask Bob Santamaria, or George Pell, for that matter.

Eustache De Saint Pierre , April 4, 2018 at 10:58 am

& thank you Colonel – it does appear to me that one should carry a box of salt for immediate use in times like that of present hysteria, to be used when proven liars make knee jerk accusations, while of course keeping in mind that those who constantly Cry Wolf in such matters could actually be telling the truth.

Schevardnardze once stated after the wall fell to a group of assembled Westerners that they had lost their much needed bogeyman – I guess we now have him back as a replacement for a series of inadequate pretenders.

Synoia , April 4, 2018 at 11:36 am

Nice runway at Diego Garcia.

One should search for Uinterruptable Autopilot (Not a Tesla feature) and contemplate on who has the power to trigger it's use.

I do wonder who or what was on the flight going to China.

Jeff , April 4, 2018 at 9:35 am

I almost stopped reading after the first line:

The UK Government has not presented conclusive evidence that the nerve agent used in the attempted assassinations of Sergey Skripal and his daughter Yulia originated in Russia, let alone that the Russian state was responsible for these crimes

.
The UK Government has not presented any evidence that a nerve agent was used, no evidence that it was military grade and no evidence that it was from Russia. All we know is a doctor stating some poisoning was detected.
MoA has all the links and details as to why it is such a blatant lie.
As to what did really happen, why the UK government set up such a scam, and why did so many countries fall so quickly in line, many theories abound. I would exclude the 'Russian state' here, as they can only loose and have nothing to gain.

third time lucky , April 4, 2018 at 11:21 am

+1

Stephen Gardner , April 4, 2018 at 9:35 am

Let me see. Who should we give the benefit of the doubt? The nations that attacked Iraq and unleashed jihadi violence based on a lie or the guy who stood up like an adult and prevented the fall of the only truly secular state left in the Middle East?

David , April 4, 2018 at 10:01 am

Ok, let me wield Occam's razor myself.
I don't think anyone seriously (and no I don't mean Johnson) is suggesting that only Russia ever did or ever could manufacture these agents. Their existence has been known for a while, and according to experts the formulas have been published, so at least in theory they could be made by other states/actors assuming they were bloody careful. As PK has noted, the Iranians, at least, seem to have made them in very small quantities. So in the end we have three groups of hypotheses, if we exclude accidents, food poisoning, witchcraft etc. :
– the attack was carried out by part of the Russian state, by some other Russian group (Mafia?) or some other unidentified group (not necessarily Russian) with direct access to the agent itself in some stored form.
– the attack was carried out by another state or a non-state entity which had found the technical details of the Russian agent and manufactured its own stocks without being discovered, and had a motive for the attack.
– the attack was carried out by another state or non-state entity that had quite independently developed an agent amazingly and coincidentally similar to the Russian agent without being discovered and had a motive for the attack.
The third seems to me to be barely conceivable, and the second to rely on a motive which so far no-one has even suggested. The first, to be honest, seems unlikely, but maybe some variant of it is the least unlikely of the three. Somebody must have done it, after all.
Incidentally, Cui Bono is not a logical argument or a principle of proof, just a point of departure for enquiry.

Martin Finnucane , April 4, 2018 at 10:29 am

[T]he second [scenario] [seems to] rely on a motive which so far no-one has even suggested Yes, it has been suggested: false flag. But that would just be crazy talk, right?

"Besides, nowadays, almost all capable people are terribly afraid of being ridiculous, and are miserable because of it."
― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov

Eustache De Saint Pierre , April 4, 2018 at 10:40 am

Neverthess, Cui Bono is I believe a useful tool in an attempt to define guilt & as for the evidence in terms of the alleged nerve agent itself – is Porton Down what one would describe as being an independent expert ? I did read somewhere that there is an international agreement which comprises of samples in such incidents being sent to an agreed independent laboratory for testing, which if true is a path the UK Gov has decided not to follow. I also wonder about the toxicity of whatever agent was used due to the survival of the daughter, which does not seem to correspond with what I have read about the deadliness of Novichok & other varieties of nerve gas – amateurish at the very least which for me doesn't fit that old KGB dog.

I don't know who carried at the attack but as you are admitting there is reasonable doubt & i would suggest that in a proper court of law the case for the prosecution would be about as watertight as a sieve.

From RT via Zerohedge so perhaps caution needed, but if true – a sign of a backdown ?

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-03/russia-demands-uk-apologize-after-scientists-stunning-admission-about-skripal

begob , April 4, 2018 at 11:20 am

Somebody must have done it, after all.

But what was "it"? Far as I can tell, the only deed that nobody is disputing is that three people were treated in hospital for poisoning by a chemical agent. It's like tossing a deck of cards in the air and trying to read them all before they hit the ground.

gallam , April 4, 2018 at 9:47 pm

Strictly speaking, the three were treated for poisoning, not necessarily by a chemical agent. It could be they ate a bad pork pie.

integer , April 4, 2018 at 11:25 am

> the attack was carried out by another state or a non-state entity which had found the technical details of the Russian agent and manufactured its own stocks without being discovered, and had a motive for the attack.

As I'm sure you are aware, these technical details were published in a book written by Vil Mirzayanov that was published in 2008 (IIRC) and has been available to the public since then. In any case, watching Gavin "go away and shut up" Williamson react like a scorned schoolboy who thought being one of the popular kids would be enough to allow him to dictate the narrative was enlightening to me. I would suggest you spend some time learning how to watch the way people carry themselves, rather than just accepting what they say at face value.

" What actually happens is it completely distorts the narrative of what people think about things "

– Gavin Williamson comparing Russia's POV on the Skripal case to Nazi propaganda

Filiform Radical , April 4, 2018 at 12:33 pm

Cui Bono is not a logical argument or a principle of proof, just a point of departure for enquiry.

Could you clarify what you mean by this? To me, noting that Putin would have less of a motivation to do this than, well, anyone who wanted to damage Russia's standing in the international community and, based on that, reducing one's estimate of the likelihood that he was actually responsible seems like an entirely reasonable thing to do. In what sense is it not a logical argument to make?

larry , April 4, 2018 at 12:39 pm

You are right about the context though the point made is technically correct.

Filiform Radical , April 4, 2018 at 1:00 pm

Again, technically correct in what sense? My issue is I don't really understand the point being made here. Is it that cui bono is not a formal rule of inference in the same sense that, say, ex falso quodlibet is? If so, true, but largely irrelevant in a context such as this one, where a meaningful formal proof of any claim is essentially impossible. If not, what is being said?

David , April 4, 2018 at 1:06 pm

Yes, it's a simple and common logical error. "X benefited from this, so they obviously did it." Whereas the correct statement would be "X benefited from this so we should look to see whether there is any actual evidence that they did it." It's a staple of all conspiracy theories: the classic example is the September 2001 attacks on New York and Washington. "The Bush administration benefited from this so they must have done it." And there are plenty of others.

pretzelattack , April 4, 2018 at 1:10 pm

so suggesting that the russians did it because he was a double agent, absent other evidence of what it was, exactly, and who had it, is fallacious.

David , April 4, 2018 at 1:19 pm

Absent any hard evidence, yes, if you argue that the Russians benefited from it, which I frankly doubt.

Filiform Radical , April 4, 2018 at 2:11 pm

This seems a rather uncharitable interpretation of the discussions being had here. You're correct that, if someone were to bring up some specific non-Russian actor and assert that they were obviously the perpetrator because they benefited, they would be in the wrong. Correct me if I've missed someone, though, but I don't think any of the commentariat are arguing that we know with certainty that some such actor was behind the attack.

The point, instead, is that we should keep an open mind as to who carried it out, since there's no substantial evidence backing the official narrative or any particular counter-narrative. Asking "Cui bono?" is simply one way of countering the nonsensical, but widely held, idea that no real evidence is needed because the Russians are obviously to blame; in point of fact, if one puts proper thought into the motivations of the various parties involved and the evidence that is available, this explanation seems less likely than many, though not impossible. The bottom line is that, if the UK wants its accusations to be credible, it must provide more evidence than it has thus far.

David , April 4, 2018 at 2:19 pm

Agreed. It's a way of countering lazy thinking, and I would instance subtle and not-so-subtle hints that the UK government might have dunnit, which requires at least a few elements of proof rather than just assertions. I think the argument is actually more powerful if reversed, though, which is that in principle the list of potential perpetrators should be limited to those who stood to benefit in some way. I'm not sure that Russia even makes it to the starting line on that basis.

RenoDino , April 4, 2018 at 10:07 am

Can we all agree there has been a rush to judgment and that very rush to judgment has seriously undermined the credibility of the accusations? We went from chemical poisoning to Putin in a matter of minutes with nothing in between. No perpetrators, no witness statements, and no release of evidence. The conclusions seem to predate the crime, the denunciations and diplomatic expulsions coming even before the source of the poison was discovered on the door. Having unpacked the bag of accusations, the various elements don't seem to neatly fit back into the bag they came out of. And nothing frustrates real criminal investigators more than lack of motivation. There is no reason to murder the victims let alone in the manner ascribed.

The only thing that makes any sense is the accusation of chemical poisoning by a state power carries with it a level of condemnation that is beyond redemption. It is THE RED LINE. History tells us that the mere mention of such use renders immediately a judgment of guilt. There is no going back. Normalization of relations is no longer an option. We must confront absolute evil with all means necessary before we all end up writhing on the floor in a pool of our own vomit, blood, and excrement delivered by an unseen power.

raoul , April 4, 2018 at 10:47 am

good stuff. where ya been? miss your insightful commentary.

'all means necessary' only otherwise includes that third box, the first two being ballot box and soap box (this, and other forums).

jsn , April 4, 2018 at 1:38 pm

All happening at the precise moment May needs a major distraction to avoid being confronted by the Ultras in her capitulation to the EU, coincident with awkward questions about the Steele Dossier being asked across the Atlantic.

Cui bono? Heard much on those stories lately? Just sayin'

Andrew Watts , April 4, 2018 at 1:43 pm

The only thing that makes any sense is the accusation of chemical poisoning by a state power carries with it a level of condemnation that is beyond redemption. It is THE RED LINE.

Isn't that the whole point of this "Russia did it!" narrative though? A few columnists were openly celebrating the fact that Trump wouldn't be able to have a private meeting with Putin after this story broke. They're forgetting that it's Trump and it can still happen regardless.

Matthew G. Saroff , April 4, 2018 at 10:23 am

Also, if this stuff is 5x more powerful than VX, how did they set up a dose level that sickened, but has not killed any of the targets?

We are talking a difference of a few hundreds of micrograms between lethal and dehabilitating.

LD50 for VX is 10 mg, which means that for Novichuk it is on the order of 2mg (2000 μg) (5x more potent according to reports),

It is not unreasonable to assume that a difference of 200 μg or so, about 0.000007054 ounces is the difference, and not one, but two targets threaded this needle.

whine country , April 4, 2018 at 11:23 am

Excellent point! But remember the idea that the public will accept the current narrative is based on the fact that most Americans still believe that Boris and Natashia are prototypical Russian agents in terms of competency.

larry , April 4, 2018 at 10:24 am

Richard North has a fascianting blog post today about the Skripal affair at eureferendum.com. The post is titled, Salisbury: A crumbling ediface of lies.

Jesper , April 4, 2018 at 10:35 am

Seems so many crazy theories abound that I might offer up one myself :-)

The motive was love. One of the Skripals had an affair with an employee at the nearby research facility. The cheated spouse found out and decided to end the affair. This unbalanced individual stole poison from the research facility and then proceeded to try to kill the Skripals.
The research facility would of course not admit that poison could be stolen so the killer gets away with it as the facility provides the perfect cover – it could not happen.

That crazy theory has probably been discarded for the more probable: A foreign government decided to go 'Bond-villain' or rather 'Austin Power -villain' when a simple knifing would have ensured the deaths. What is the point of a deed if it isn't done with flair and high risk of failure?

begob , April 4, 2018 at 11:33 am

The Sun has an even more fevered scenario – the mother of the daughter's FSB lover arranged a hit on her from Moscow. I've noticed some of the more lurid rumours are sourced in that paper, then picked up by the rest of the media.

tc , April 4, 2018 at 10:36 am

Never knew NC had so many CW/BW experts lurking.

The issue with this stuff is how to deliver it, not in the manufacture. If I was in UK's security services, I'd be mortified that someone carried this over a border, carried it around the UK and finally delivered it to a target without any of their sensors anywhere or systems picking it up. That alone should frighten us.

The other major issue is when the public disbelieves senior leadership so quickly on something this serious, that's a major concern especially as the disbelief is fueled by an adversary.

integer , April 4, 2018 at 10:46 am

> Never knew NC had so many CW/BW experts lurking

NC has a lot of political pragmatists that demand facts rather than propaganda lurking. If you feel the need to equate that to NC commenters assuming they are CW/BW experts then that's on you.

> I'd be mortified that someone carried this over a border

Which would be a fair reaction, however there is no evidence that any nerve agent was carried over the UK's border.

Stephen Gardner , April 4, 2018 at 12:51 pm

Not only that but the only evidence we have of what it was that poisoned those people is being held by the British government. The same people who were up to their elbows in lies on the Iraq deal. And to answer TC's point. Yes, everyone should disbelieve our leadership quickly. They have repeatedly proven themselves untrustworthy. They manipulate us with fear and they use modern techniques of advertising to march us all in the same direction. Putin is the good guy in the Middle East and no amount of fear-mongering can make me doubt the facts on the ground in favor of the idiots that brought us al qa'eda by feeding the jihadis in Afghanistan and da'esh by feeding jihadis in Iraq and Syria. Cynical use of dangerous crazies against governments our leaders perceive to be threats to their plans for world domination is both dangerous and stupid.

David , April 4, 2018 at 1:17 pm

Not the same people. The government in 2002 was led by one T Blair, a Labour politician, who was willing to overlook falsehoods perpetrated by the US so as not to lose a position of influence in Washington. Some of the present government were at school then, I think.

pretzelattack , April 4, 2018 at 2:20 pm

the brits still seem to be at washington's beck and call, witness the years long persecution of julian assange, as well as pushing the "white hats" propaganda in syria. nothing has changed there.

Stephen Gardner , April 4, 2018 at 2:28 pm

I guess you are still laboring under the delusion that the identity of the employees of the powerful and moneyed interests that call the shots matters. Blair is an employee of the people whose votes count–the guys who vote with money. You and I vote with ballots. How many ballots does it take to buy a condo in the Virgin Islands?

Sid Finster , April 4, 2018 at 10:52 am

That assumes without evidence that the substance was not in fact manufactured in the UK.

Martin Finnucane , April 4, 2018 at 10:54 am

Is this irony or sarcasm? I get those mixed up. Kierkegaardean levels of the same, whichever it is.

Quentin , April 4, 2018 at 11:04 am

tc rightly asks how the stuff got into the UK if it wasn't produced there. I know nothing about chemistry or chemical weapons. Yet I can ask questions in response to the answers I've heard: this stuff is so absolutely fatal that to me it seems inconceivable that it could be transported by the usual plane, boat, train entering the UK; or being made of two (?) substances that seem readily available as pesticides and/or fertiliser the nerve poison could have been made inside the UK itself. So which is it: in or outside the UK.? In the last instance the explanation for how it entered the UK is the absolute whopper I'm waiting for.

Quentin , April 4, 2018 at 11:14 am

I add: one way or the other there can only be questions of negligence, incompetence, failure on the part of the state to protect its inhabitants from such harm: chemical weapons are not just available for the asking on the streets of London; border guards, police, intelligence agencies, etc. have failed. Who is responsible? This reminds me of those Saudis who somehow learned how to fly aircraft into high buildings and succeeded in doing so. How did they do it? Who failed in their duty to prevent the crime?

fajensen , April 4, 2018 at 3:58 pm

chemical weapons are not just available for the asking on the streets of London

Uh. Yes they are.

Fentanyl (cancer painkiller) and the much more toxic Carfentanil (Elephant tranquilliser) are sold on the street by drug pushers. Carfentanil in particular has a lower LD 50 than VX!

Sid Finster , April 4, 2018 at 12:56 pm

*if* it wasn't produced there.

We don't know that it wasn't.

Mel , April 4, 2018 at 12:12 pm

the disbelief is fueled by an adversary

Which adversary yet to be announced. Time for this again, I guess. Now is the Age of Advertising. There's a major adversarial component ( Caveat emptor ) in ordinary business, and some ad-smarts are necessary for self preservation.

Peter Drucker:

Indeed the danger of total propaganda is not that the propaganda will be believed. The danger is that nothing will be believed and that every communication becomes suspect. In the end, no communication is being received. Everything anyone says is considered a demand and is resisted, resented, and in effect not heard at all. The end results of total propaganda are not fanatics, but cynics–but this, of course, may be even greater and more dangerous corruption.
Management – Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices by Peter Drucker

Hannah Arendt has said something similar, he might have picked up the idea from her.

Patrick Armstrong argues that just trying to argue this story on some kind of merits, as we're doing here, is some kind of mistake.

templar555510 , April 4, 2018 at 2:31 pm

Good comment Mel. Can't disagree with Drucker here. Arendt called her book on Eichmann ' The Banality of Evil ' . As Jordan Peterson said recently she might have more profitably called it ' The Evil of Banality ' which is pretty much where we are now with the ' News ' and so simply attempting to analyse any part of this particular story rather than accepting just the ' known , knowns ' is a waste of energy .

Stephen Gardner , April 4, 2018 at 12:43 pm

The analysis of this case does not revolve around expert opinion on chemical warfare. The only people who have the chemical evidence are the British government. And they have proven quite unreliable in the past. Furthermore, one need no expertise in CW to know that the western allies have lied before, probably will lie again and to know that Putin does nothing in a rash manner. That's why I believe the Russian government and disbelieve the British government. It has nothing to do with CW. Sadly for the west, Putin has been the adult in the room all along. His actions in Syria were measured and made perfect sense. The west, however, decided repeat the mistakes of Afghanistan in the 80s and support the very guys who brought jihad to the west. Our leadership has failed us and the world. Putin is doing the right thing in Syria and that's why the west is trying to blame him for everything with the possible exception of the Lindbergh kidnapping. It is disturbing to me that we are so tribal that people here in the west can't see that.

pretzelattack , April 4, 2018 at 1:11 pm

we don't even know what the stuff is, absent independent testing. as i understand it the british government hasn't made samples available despite being required to do so.

David (1) , April 4, 2018 at 10:57 am

Hats off to the people at Porton Down.
I can imagine how much pressure was applied to influence their decision.
Thankfully, they were braver than people like Colin Powell.

Sid Finster , April 4, 2018 at 12:57 pm

I am sure that they are getting quite a talking to as we speak.

Expect them to magically reverse their position so that WWIII can proceed apace.

The Rev Kev , April 4, 2018 at 11:01 am

"And any developments of such geopolitical importance wind up having economic effects." I'll say! In 51 weeks May and her government are going to be grasping for any ally that they can find while fending off all those wanting to put the boot in. Russia may have been willing to provide a few loans or deliveries of LPG gas on credit but I would say that bridge has been well and truly burned. May and Johnson essentially used flamethrowers on it. Maybe then they can take note of Saudi Arabia and gather up any remaining Russian oligarchs, stick them in the Mayfair, and hang them upside down until they cough a few billion up for Her Majest's Treasury.
Look, the whole fiasco was bogus from start to finish. Boris Johnson is now lying his face off by saying that he never actually said that the Russians did it (he did) and May is backtracking as the Salisbury attack is now coming under international scrutiny. I would like to see if I cannot place the whole thing into some sort of context. May fingered the Russians from the get-go and the usual suspects all signed up for her accusations. Dare I say it, as if there was some sort of coordination behind the scenes. Trump not only ran with it, he jumped into a Humvee and then floored it. Treaties and diplomatic practices have been ignored or trashed on both sides of the Atlantic so I am wondering what was the benefit that hoped to be gained.
There is the disruption of the upcoming FIFA games (as happened with the Olympics) but that would only be a side benefit. It may be that the west wants to occupy eastern Ukraine with a UN force (NATO in disguise) and this effort would have helped neutralize the Russians. It may be to distract the Russians from Syrian but that is coming to a close. What I do wonder is something that has been brought up several items and that a "reform" of the UN Security Council has been suggested. Either Russia would be kicked out or perhaps there would be a majority rule introduced to neutralize both China and Russia here. If Russia was under international suspicion, it may have helped give the impetus for this "reform" to be carried out. Maybe not a compelling theory but you do not organize an international effort on this scale without some major benefit in mind.

Quentin , April 4, 2018 at 11:20 am

You gave me a good laugh: 'neutralise both China and Russia' on the Security Council by introducing a majority rule. Maybe that will end up neutralising the US, the UK and some other bigwigs instead? No we're supposed to buy into the prejudice that things only go wrong at the UN because of Russia and China? I'm doing my best to maintain a semblance of sanity and I'm failing badly.

The Rev Kev , April 4, 2018 at 6:13 pm

No, my idea is that both Russia and China block many votes that would give legal cover to illegal actions in the UN that it is a hindrance to the west. Libya is an example when the west gets what it wants by lying to both countries what a Resolution is all about. Remember the number of times that the west wanted to put Syria on the hit list because they "gassed their own people" and bomb the Syrian Army? Ask Nikki Haley how she feels about Russia in the UN Security Council. Most of those that sit on the UN Security Council are either western countries or vassal countries, hence a desire for a majority vote instead of having to have all members agree to an action.

Tinky , April 4, 2018 at 11:15 am

I'd say that Dmitry Orlov covered the topic well, and soon after the ludicrous charges were being bellowed by the U.S. and U.K. governments.

Here is just one point that he made, a point that should, on its own, raise extremely serious doubt about Russian government involvement:

Then there is the question of timing. Russia's presidential elections will take place in just a few days, on March 18. This is a particularly inopportune time to cause an international scandal. What possible urgency could there have been behind killing a pardoned former spy who no longer possessed any up-to-date intelligence, was living quietly in retirement, and at that moment was busy having lunch with his daughter? If the Russian government were involved in the poisoning, what possible reason could have been given for not waiting until after the election?

You can read the rest here:

http://cluborlov.blogspot.pt/2018/03/false-flags-for-newbies.html

Andrew Watts , April 4, 2018 at 2:17 pm

Unlike Orlov I can believe that Russia is behind this incident. When the Romanovs were Czars and still in charge it wasn't a good idea to talk smack about or cross Mother Russia. But I'm pretty sure that if Putin ordered somebody killed that they'd already be dead. The fact that British spies have been acting like a crazy ex-lover ever since Brexit leads me to think it isn't Putin. It isn't hard to imagine that the Brits would leave a dead animal on somebody's porch, or a park bench, with the way they've acted.

Steele didn't write his dossier and start interfering in the US presidential election until Brexit occurred. For all the media hysteria on this side of the pond about foreign influence during our election they blithely ignore the fact that Steele wasn't alone and another "former" British spook from GCHQ involved himself in our domestic politics. They haven't attempted this kind of operation in the US since WWII when they attempted to smear Adolf Berle and torpedo Henry Wallace's political career / presidential campaign as far as I know.

On the other hand, their "willing handmaidens" in the US intelligence community are receiving a taste of their just deserts. How many of them openly fantasized about murdering Snowden?

tc , April 4, 2018 at 11:20 am

Y'all are kinda running with a narrative thats presented from talking heads. Sad! Its doesnt matter if its X mg, or door handles or someone said this or that or wave an agreement signed before cocktails.

The real issue is that someone has this stuff near a major city, is walking/driving around with it, and knows how to deploy it safely against a target who is security conscious. And no one is sure who it is or how much of it they have. So, quarantining a likely suspect makes a lot of sense – you can always say ooppss, sorry Boris. But in the meantime, senior leadership has to be terrified (as we all should be too) and given a lot of leeway to figure this out.

integer , April 4, 2018 at 11:37 am

But in the meantime, senior leadership has to be terrified (as we all should be too) and given a lot of leeway to figure this out.

Unless senior leadership are responsible for what happened, or they gave their blessings, explicit or otherwise, to those who carried out the deed.

Yves Smith Post author , April 4, 2018 at 2:04 pm

I see you don't follow this site. We are not "running a narrative". Go check our New Cold War section in Links We've been regularly featuring articles from people who were skeptical of the "Putin done it" claims from the get go, when that was a very much a minority view.

Stephen Gardner , April 4, 2018 at 2:37 pm

No one except the British government has the evidence of a) what the substance was b) how it got there and c) how sick the Skripals really are. Note that they have not been allowed visits from their government nor have they been allowed to be interviewed or even pictured in the press. Anyone who believes the British government even one iota is very gullible indeed. Naivete in great abundance here. Assuming that when Blair left the lies left with him. Wow! Just wow!

Graham , April 4, 2018 at 11:26 am

Amongst all the learned posturing about "who done it" there are some much simpler questions that need to be asked, and answered.

The UK lab states that the nerve agent was from the Novichuk "family". Irrespective of which nerve agent it was, how did it end up in a UK city, who brought it there, and how did an ex Russian spy, his daughter and a British Police Officer end up in hospital having come in to contact with said compound???

Novichuk is not available in B&Q or Homebase (DIY stores for non-UK readers) It is a military grade nerve agent and not something than be cooked up in the average terrorist kitchen, and is quite likely to kill whoever is handling it, let alone the target.

In the 70's I spent time in the British Army in W Germany running around in my "noddy suit" (NBC protective clothing which we hoped would work!!) in anticipation of the Warsaw Pact putting in to effect its threat to be at the Channel ports within 5 days of any conflict starting. We knew that Chemical and Biological weapons were likely to be used by Warsaw Pact troops to contaminate our supply depots, and the Soviets knew that NATO would probably use tactical nuclear weapons to stop the enemy tank armies. The chemical weapons would probably arrive by artillery shells, but the downside to using such weapons is that once used, the threat of death is the same for both sides.

There was a previous killing of an ex-Soviet spy in London using Polonium. The availability of polonium is about the same as laying your hands on a nerve agent IE, State Players Only.

The targets were the same, ex Soviet citizens who had been spying for the other side, and caught and expelled from Russia. As the UK had given citizenship and refuge to the ex spies, one has to ask who would be interested in killing them in vengeance?

Given that there are very few sources for Novichuk, and its use as targeted on a former Russian spy living in a very pleasent British Cathedral city, the conclusions are very limited.

pretzelattack , April 4, 2018 at 1:07 pm

we dont even know what was used, so how can we say "there are few sources" for it? that means we don't know who used whatever it was, we certainly can't conclude it was the russians.

Graham , April 4, 2018 at 1:28 pm

Because the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom made a statement to Parliament stating that the agent concerned came from the Novichuk family.

If you don't believe the UK PM then perhaps you might understand why many in the UK and Europe also do not believe the statements made by the President of Russia and the Russian Government.

The attempted murder of a British Citizen and his Russian daughter and a British Police Officer is a very serious matter, but for a Prime Minister to lie to Parliament is a resignation matter, and possibly cause for a General Election. Politicians lie much of the time or are "economical with the truth" but you cannot deliberately lie to Parliament and expect to survive!

pretzelattack , April 4, 2018 at 2:12 pm

yeah the president of the us made statements about saddam wmd's, and so did the prime minister of the uk. and yet, both survived and prospered. i don't believe politicians's statements, i believe evidence. so far, no convincing evidence has been provided.

Sid_finster , April 4, 2018 at 4:12 pm

Lying to Parliament is allowed, admirable even, in pursuit of the "right" objective.

Witness T. Blair.

David , April 4, 2018 at 1:14 pm

There have been suggestions that these were binary agents, similar to those developed by the US in the 1980s, which consist of two agents which are only lethal when mixed together. If they were brought into the UK, then they would have been safe to carry and not aroused suspicion. In any case, in years of travel into and out of the UK I have never seen anything resembling a CW detector. Mixing them together would have been a different issue, of course

Graham , April 4, 2018 at 2:09 pm

I was due to mix up some binary agents in the morning to repair a ding in my bumper. The two part epoxy resin will hopefully not decimate the neighbourhood, and I will try not to get it on my hands (sic!!)

Synoia , April 4, 2018 at 11:42 am

The time line looks suspect. I read the man and his daughter left their hone in the morning and collapsed at 5pm.

VX kills quickly.

The time line suggestes a poison ingested and activated in the gut by digestion.

Susan the other , April 4, 2018 at 11:54 am

I'm skeptical of international rules against nerve agents. Clearly something administered by someone made the Skirpals deathly ill. Little story: When I was 20 the military screwed up a test of nerve agent at Dugway Proving Grounds. It was carried by the wind beyond its test range and killed a large herd of sheep. Dead as rocks. So two years ago when that very hearty band of Central Asian antelope, the Saiga, were all found mysteriously dead – all of them – and the incident was determined to have been caused by some fungus or virus, I was more than a little suspicious. Close to that time there were teams of western researchers looking at the Aral Sea and how to bring it back to life since it is currently a veritable toxic waste dump, now an almost dry sea bed and the toxins are blown around capriciously by the wind. People conducting research there were Americans. No doubt some Brits as well. And now the Skirpals? Sorry to connect such estranged dots. Just thinkin.

Graham , April 4, 2018 at 12:47 pm

In 1942 the British Government tested what the effect of anthrax would be if used in WW2 on a small Scottish island. The island is still uninhabited and anthrax spores can still be found.

Chemical warfare was used in WW1 with devastating effect on the troops concerned, hence the concerns in WW2 and later that an enemy might use them again. So devastating and unpredictable are things like poison gas that neither side used them in WW2, but the threat or possibility of its use had a considerable effect on the UK civilian population who all had to carry gas masks at all times.

It is the possibility of an enemy using Chemical and Biological weapons which causes fear in a population, far beyond the effects of it actually being used.

The UK became used to the threat of IRA bombings on the mainland and the population coped with that and persevered, but as the PM stated to Parliament, the Salisbury incident was the first time that someone had deployed a nerve agent on UK soil, and that is the question that must be answered. Who manufactured and/or released the nerve agent to someone to deploy against a UK target who was a former Russian spy who had worked for the UK. This was not a random attack on the Underground or Parliament, but a targeted attack on a single family, and this is not the first time a former Russian spy has been killed in the UK using a means only available to a State Player.

larry , April 4, 2018 at 12:58 pm

Or someone who had access to a state player or &c.

Graham , April 4, 2018 at 1:41 pm

I would have thought that authority to deploy a nerve agent on foreign soil, especially against a NATO nuclear power, would have to be given at Presidential/Prime Minister level in any government. Given the paranoia of such weapons falling in to the wrong hands, the politicians are not likely to delegate use authority outside their office.

The US doctrine is that Chemical and Biological weapons are no different than Nuclear weapons and the response will be the same. This is because the US destroyed their stockpiles of chemical and bio weapons.

pretzelattack , April 4, 2018 at 2:14 pm

oh like the russians did.

Tinky , April 4, 2018 at 2:17 pm

That is not entirely true (bold emphasis mine):

The United States declared a large chemical arsenal of 27,770 metric tons to the OPCW after the CWC came into force in 1997. Along with Russia, the United States received an extension when it was unable to complete destruction of its chemical stockpiles by 2012. A 2016 OPCW report declared that the United States had destroyed approximately 90 percent of the chemical weapons stockpile it had declared as the CWC entered into force ; nearly 25,000 metric tons of the declared total of 27,770. The United States has destroyed all of Category 2 and Category 3 weapons and is projected to complete destruction of its Category 1 weapons by 2023 ;.

source: https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/cbwprolif

nervos belli , April 4, 2018 at 5:32 pm

Novichok poisons were used by a non-state player in the 90s. It killed a banker and his secretary in Moscow. Either by a business rival or personal matter apparently. The russian police back then questioned all the scientists who were in the Novichok program.
So what you write is patently untrue, historically and of course on its face. Someone in Porton Down, in Iran, in the US, Uzbekistan or of course Russia (probably more but those we at least know of) could get their hands on it for their own ends. Even if it's just something as simple as to sell it for cold hard cash to some "friend".

Please remember the anthrax scare in the US in the early 2000s: those were US made spores but we can assume not even evil mastermind Cheney would have done this. Compared to Cheney, Putin should be sainted or just given a Nobel.

David , April 4, 2018 at 1:11 pm

Actually, CW has generally been pretty ineffective militarily, and counter-measures were quickly developed in WW1. There are no proven examples of it having influenced the outcome of a major engagement in the 20th century, with the possible exception of one point in the Iran/Iraq War in the 1980s. It's subject to all sorts of problems of weather, wind direction etc. In the Cold War, the Soviets planned to use absolutely enormous quantities of it (thousands of tonnes) but essentially as a nuisance, to force NATO troops to fight in NBC suits, rather than in the expectation of causing enormous casualties. As you say, the main effect of CW is fear, and we've certainly had that.

Third Time Lucky , April 4, 2018 at 1:36 pm

It was extremely effective, even in primitive form, in WWI, that's why it was banned* from war (but not on civilians/civil war) afterward. Bad for MIC business.

*still didn't stop Churchill, Mussolini, Truman.

David , April 4, 2018 at 2:08 pm

Sorry, it caused a lot of fear when it was first used, but counter-measures were developed very quickly. Covering your face with a urine-soaked cloth was as effective as anything. CW was considered inhuman, which is why there were measures to ban it, and it's potential effectiveness was massively overestimated in the 1930s. It was fear of the potential effects, rather than actual experience, which was important.

Graham , April 4, 2018 at 2:19 pm

There would have been an ample supply of urine soaked cloth if the "gas, gas, gas" alarm turned out to be for real!!

Third Time Lucky , April 4, 2018 at 6:58 pm

Dude, your willful ignorance is showing.

Covering your face with a urine-soaked cloth was as effective as anything

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-25843294

And pretty much everything else you posted is just as suspect and ill researched.

Sid Finster , April 4, 2018 at 12:52 pm

"Conclusive Evidence is Lacking" makes the UK government's case sound stronger than it is, as if all that were needed were a few more pieces of the puzzle to fit and this thing would be air tight.

Rather, as John Laurits has pointed out, the UK government has not presented ANY evidence other than their say-so.

Sid Finster , April 4, 2018 at 1:44 pm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Kelly_(weapons_expert)

What happened to the last weapons scientist to question the dominant narrative.

Otherwise, presented without comment.

pretzelattack , April 4, 2018 at 2:13 pm

putin must have done it, cause hey why not.

Graham , April 4, 2018 at 2:29 pm

There is a considerable difference between who authorised such an operation, and the people who actually carried out the attack.

You need one man or woman, probably the HOS, to authorise a nerve agent attack on the soil of a NATO nuclear armed power.

You would probably need 5 people to actually carry out the attack on the ground and the actual nerve agent could have come in to the UK in a Diplomatic Bag. The actual on-site team could be from the security service of the country who authorised the attack and who probably supplied the nerve agent, or the actual on-site team could have been from a third party country who have friendly relations with those wanting the attack carried out.

I seem to remember that the Bulgarians have form in doing sub-contract killings with an umbrella!!

nervos belli , April 4, 2018 at 5:36 pm

There is no sub contract killing by bulgarians. The one killed back then was a bulgarian dissident, attacking the bulgarian government or rather their elite persons back then and killed by bulgarians for bulgarian reasons.
Yes, the KGB delivered the weapon, but as people wrote before: whenever someone now kills with a gun, we blame the chinese, not the gunman. After all, they invented gunpowder.

I think this idea has great potential. China needs to be put in its place anyways.

Tobin Paz , April 4, 2018 at 2:12 pm

As an observer on this out of control train called humanity, I stand in awe of the collective gullibility of Western societies. This is same country and media that was complicit in the Iraq war

Tony Blair 'Could Face War Crime Charges' As Result of Iraq Inquiry

Former UK prime minister Tony Blair could face war crimes charges as a result of the long-anticipated Chilcot report into the 2003 invasion of Iraq, a Liberal Democrat peer told the House of Lords on Tuesday.

The BBC And Iraq: Myth and Reality

The second-worst case of denying access to anti-war voices was ABC in the United States, which allowed them a mere 7 per cent of its overall coverage. The worst case was the BBC, which gave just 2 per cent of its coverage to opposition views – views that represented those of the majority of the British people.

Libyan war

U.K. Parliament report details how NATO's 2011 war in Libya was based on lies

"Libya: Examination of intervention and collapse and the UK's future policy options," an investigation by the House of Commons' bipartisan Foreign Affairs Committee, strongly condemns the U.K.'s role in the war, which toppled the government of Libya's leader Muammar Qaddafi and plunged the North African country into chaos.

The Top Ten Myths in the War Against Libya

By June 10, Cherif Bassiouni, who is leading a UN rights inquiry into the situation in Libya, suggested that the Viagra and mass rape claim was part of a "massive hysteria".

The BBC went on to add another layer just a few days after Bassiouni humiliated the ICC and the media: the BBC now claimed that rape victims in Libya faced "honour killings". This is news to the few Libyans I know, who never heard of honour killings in their country.

and the savage assault on Syria:

EXCLUSIVE: Britain drops 3,400 bombs in Syria and Iraq – and says no civilians killed

The vast quantities of ordnance dropped since the start of Operation Shader against IS in 2014 seriously undermines the claim by ministers that the RAF has not caused any civilian casualties in the three-year-long bombing campaign, and has prompted calls for an investigation.

BBC Panorama team embedded with Islamic State partner group

Scenes in the 2013 BBC Panorama special Saving Syria's Children reveal that the award-winning team of reporter Ian Pannell and cameraman Darren Conway OBE were embedded with jihadi group Ahrar al-Sham which, according to Human Rights Watch, had three weeks earlier worked alongside Islamic State (IS) and al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra as one of "the key fundraisers, organizers, planners, and executors" of an attack in which at least 190 civilians were killed and over 200 – "the vast majority women and children" – were kidnapped.

All these interventions are violations of international law and war crimes.

IF the British intelligence services were involved in the Skripal case they have quite the wicked sense of humor why on earth would Putin in the midst of an international demonization campaign and on the eve of Russian elections and World Cup attempt to kill a Russian ex-spy with a Russian nerve agent eight years after being released?

jsn , April 4, 2018 at 3:29 pm

Putin was obviously trying to ingratiate himself to Theresa May by drawing attention away from her capitulation on Brexit, and to Robert Mueller by drawing attention away from the fact that his Trump investigation is based on BS possibly about to be outed by the no longer talking Skripal.

There has been no real information provided at all, why should any of this be believed at all? It's all one world threatening, "look at that over there!!!" distraction.

Your links to prior deceptions are an excellent frame through which to view the whole kerfuffle.

David , April 4, 2018 at 3:51 pm

I'm not unsympathetic, but let's not overstate it. The first is just grandstanding which has no legal basis. The second is bad behaviour by the BBC but is by no stretch of the imagination a crime, the third is true but there's no actual crime involved, the rape myth is despicable but it's not a crime to spread it, the fourth is not proof of anything and ignores the fact that the law of war recognises it is not possible to avoid non-combatant deaths altogether, and the last, whilst showing questionable judgement by the BBC wouldn't be a crime committed by their journalists even if it were true.
No matter how unlikely the idea that the Russian government was responsible may appear , "British governments and the BBC have done or said bad things in the past" is not an argument in this case. There are better ones.

nervos belli , April 4, 2018 at 5:40 pm

The attack against Libya by UK and France was a war crime, any way you slice it.
The handling of the UN resolution about a no fly zone for Libya was a further war crime or international crime.
The attack by Britain on Iraq was a clear war crime.

We live thankfully in a post Nuremberg world. Unless it's a "Nuremberg only applies to losers". That one you have to decide for yourself.

Eustache De Saint Pierre , April 4, 2018 at 6:27 pm

Yes the law only applies to losers as opposed to the winners as in Libor rate rigging, sanction busting, money laundering bankers & the like, unless as in the cases of Madoff & the Shrek guy you are foolish enough to rob the wealthy.

As David states in the eyes of the law none of examples above from foreign interventionism are crimes in the legal sense. They are merely examples of moral bankruptcy which it appears to me at least is nowadays one of the qualities required in order to become a winner or to at least hang on to one's rice bowl. It is sad that success is apparently measured by comparison to those who at least in my opinion, appear to consist mainly of dead fish eyed slaves to power & unsatiable appetite.

pretzelattack , April 4, 2018 at 6:36 pm

why wasn't the invasion a war crime? have bush and cheney visiting switzerland recently? nobody is going to prosecute them for it, since the us is still the dominant military power, but doesn't mean they didn't commit a crime.

Eustache De Saint Pierre , April 4, 2018 at 8:42 pm

It was a crime in my view, but in terms of the law in which David was judging the events nobody was prosecuted, as the law is only for the losers like Saddam Hussein, Milosevich etc. I was perhaps rather clumsily attempting to make the point that the law is the winning elites ass, & those who serve their interests, also gain a certain amount of absolution from what I would describe as variations of immorality.

pretzelattack , April 4, 2018 at 6:34 pm

what do you mean it has no legal basis. the invasion of iraq was a war crime, and blair facilitated it. aggressive war is not legal under the un charter.

JustSaying , April 4, 2018 at 5:06 pm

cui bono?

who benefits from stirring up trouble between EU/NATO and Russia?

Don't be surprised if it's a small country actor.

synoia , April 4, 2018 at 8:11 pm

Good question

A: Not Russia.

Follow the money! , April 4, 2018 at 7:43 pm

https://democracyatwrkleftout.libsyn.com/the-hudson-report-the-economics-behind-the-skirpal-poisoning

Hudson has interesting things to say about this

The Rev Kev , April 4, 2018 at 8:45 pm

France seems to be getting a free pass in the news about the Salisbury investigations. Just why exactly did the British need to call in the French in the first place? What knowledge did they have that the British did not have at their chemical warfare establishment just up the road from Salisbury? I know that they were involved in declaring Sarin to be identified going by the sample as supplied by the Jihadists from Syria from a chemical attack. Did that 'expertise' help them to be qualified in identifying the sources of chemical attacks? The Russians were certainly interested to know-
https://eadaily.com/en/news/2018/04/01/russian-embassy-sends-questions-on-skripal-case-to-french-foreign-ministry

[Apr 05, 2018] Accuse the other side of what you are doing

Apr 05, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

serotonindumptruck -> strannick Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:25 Permalink

One of the scientists at Porton Down, Gary Aitkenhead, should probably take out additional life insurance policies.

https://www.therussophile.org/porton-down-unable-to-link-novichok-to-ru

HowdyDoody -> serotonindumptruck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:40 Permalink

Gary Aitkenhead is not a scientist. He is the head of Porton Down. He used to be an EO in Motorola communications division.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prHoy-BP5W4

Frito -> serotonindumptruck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:42 Permalink

If he fails to keep his mouth shut I wouldn't be surprised to learn in the tabloids in the near future of his (sadly fatal) penchant for auto-erotic asphyxiation.

FBaggins -> Sy Kloine Bee Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:09 Permalink

""Johnson also said that "none of us have forgotten" about the "barbaric" chemical weapons attack in Syria a year ago.""

Translation: "none of us have forgotten" about the "barbaric" chemical weapons attack in Syria a year ago "which was done by our Al Qaeda and ISIS proxies with the help of our special forces stationed in Syria."

Omen IV -> FBaggins Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:51 Permalink

"to obscure the truth and confuse the public," Johnson said"

to add to your comment - this would be standard issue Clinton speak - accuse the other side of what you are doing in real time !

the disease of bullshit spreads world wide as Democracy is gamed to the nine's

Dickweed Wang -> FBaggins Wed, 04/04/2018 - 20:10 Permalink

<--- I'm sick and tired of the west's lying bullshit

<--- My government would never lie about something so serious

Killdo -> FBaggins Wed, 04/04/2018 - 20:32 Permalink

that's all they learn in boarding schools - how to lie and lie and be good psychopaths: charming, fake, easy to bribe and natural traitors, obsessed with money and status.

And above all how to develop that exhagarated catatonic accent so valued by Anglosheeple

I know many of these Public school boys - from Malborough, Harrow etc

Jack Oliver -> Sy Kloine Bee Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:18 Permalink

If Russia has any 'novichok' -well - it should send it straight to BORIS !!

holgerdanske -> Sy Kloine Bee Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:47 Permalink

Boris+May=political poison, unnerving agents, they must go

JRobby Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:02 Permalink

The wallpaper and whitewash won't stick if they are in on it.

johnnycanuck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:02 Permalink

Goebbels wouldn't have allowed anyone to interfere with his propaganda either.

The Big Lie works seamlessly if you control the media barkers.

serotonindumptruck -> johnnycanuck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:08 Permalink

Is it any wonder why TPTB want total control and dominion over the internet?

johnnycanuck -> serotonindumptruck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:17 Permalink

Nope, and if you look closely, TPTB are mostly Corporations or support mechanisms now.

Swamp Monsters.

Kefeer -> johnnycanuck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:46 Permalink

Look no further than you local electric and gas suppliers who are likely publicly traded with a monopoly on the most traded commodities in the world. Why does a human necessity have a monopoly - follow the money.

RagnarRedux -> johnnycanuck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:18 Permalink

The NS's were describing "The Big Lie" technique as the Modus Operandi of Jewry, not advocating using it themselves!

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v02/v02p-35_Brandon.html

https://www.historiography-project.com/misc/biglie.php

manofthenorth Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:02 Permalink

"All your evidence belongs to us"

serotonindumptruck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:06 Permalink

Boris Johnson is a colossal joke.

He declares Russia guilty as charged with absolutely no evidence, no legitimate investigation, and no due process of law.

dirty fingernails -> serotonindumptruck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:17 Permalink

This means there will be a bigger false flag soon. Gotta get eyes off of this mess

Brazen Heist -> dirty fingernails Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:20 Permalink

Lol....that's what I think, from my experience with dealing with retarded psychopaths. They just don't back down until you directly address them and call them out on their bullshit, or just plain fucking slam them against the wall.

So err...is it going to be an "accidental" nuclear launch or dirty bomb, or I don't know.....a Russian ISIS attack? The possibilities are endless with these slimey limey cunts. They're barely out of the European Union, yet are already faltering like a mule loaded with lead.

dirty fingernails -> Brazen Heist Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:34 Permalink

Agreed, and some just go nuts when called out. It's worse than just the Brits. Trump is clearly somewhat on board, and Macron seems to want a distraction, too.

Brazen Heist -> dirty fingernails Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:45 Permalink

Trump is in love with himself, Macron is in love with a granny, and Boris Johnson belongs to the fucking zoo with the gorillas.

What a world we live in, when the voices of reason are coming from Russia, China and Iran, and the irrational tantrum turd throwing is coming from the West.

Delusions of grandeur comes to mind.

Jack Oliver -> dirty fingernails Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:23 Permalink

Yes - Something BIG before the World Cup in June !!

I'm waiting for the FUCKING riots when Britain - Brazil - France - Germany etc - tell their people that they won't be going to the World Cup !

Viva 'La Revolution' !

I doubt they have factored in the 'People Power' response !

These nations live and breath soccer !

johnnycanuck -> serotonindumptruck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:26 Permalink

May I remind you of 59 cruise missiles, and the Chocolate Cake saga.

And of course Ivanka, the latest replacement for the daughter of the Ambassador from Kuwait. Of Hill and Knowlton fame.

" no evidence, no legitimate investigation, and no due process of law . "

serotonindumptruck -> johnnycanuck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:42 Permalink

I concur.

I might also politely remind you and others of Russia's ability to disable the US Aegis missile system, including the Raytheon Tomahawk missile using a highly advanced electronic warfare suite known as Khibiny.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8s4sKAMgYsU

GreatUncle -> serotonindumptruck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:38 Permalink

You do not need due process to hang him now neither :-) Ain't that cute when the process of law finally breaks down. Happens when you support banksters operating a ponzi scheme to rob people...

man of Wool -> serotonindumptruck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 20:25 Permalink

Stupid cunt is a better description. He is supposed to be the number 1 diplomat but he is a classic attention seeking snowflake who wants to be PM.

He blamed Russia immediately. Then tells everyone not to be Russiaphobic and then the stupid cunt compares attending the WC the same as Hitler's 1936 Olympics.

Guy is out of his depth and making Britain look stupid.

francis scott -> man of Wool Wed, 04/04/2018 - 20:36 Permalink

Boris was just reading his lines in the script.

No one is making Britain look stupid. Britain

does that all by itself.

Obamanism666 Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:06 Permalink

Portland Down say they do not know where the nerve agent was manufactured (Portland down would have the records of OPCW to check). Maybe Russia would have the data relating the nerve agent to a NATO stockpile. Note: If the nerve agent was so deadly how come the person delivering it; is not ill?

Escapedgoat -> Obamanism666 Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:38 Permalink

It is PORTON DOWN not "Portland" Down

crazzziecanuck -> Obamanism666 Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:38 Permalink

Given this talk about "military-grade", it sounds more like something an American MIC manufacturer would make. Overpriced and ineffective when used.

Three people affected. Hours after contact. Yet all three survived, in spite of the lack of antidote, as the BBC has reported. Doesn't sound pretty "military-grade" to me. And if it is "military grade", should we even be shitting our pants at the constant fearmongering over WMDs? If this is what military grade is capable of for terrorism, we're clearly spending way to much money for this particular threat, now aren't we?

HowdyDoody -> crazzziecanuck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:47 Permalink

I don't buy the 'no antidote' business. Nerve agents work by blocking receptors in the nervous system. Atropine breaks this block restoring normal nervous system action. The cop who was affected was talking within days yet the Skirpals were unconscious for weeks, until Julia Skirpal made a 'miraculous' recovery. Did the cop get atropine?

FlKeysFisherman Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:34 Permalink

This propaganda campaign is embarrassing. These goofy bastards can't even pull this off without looking completely incompetent.

It's no wonder the Tribe has complete control of these losers.

[Apr 04, 2018] Russian Gas Transit Via Ukraine Set For Major Slump

Apr 04, 2018 | oilprice.com

Transit of Russian natural gas via Ukraine will be reduced to just about 10-12 billion cubic meters annually after the completion of two new pipelines -- Turkish Stream and Nord Stream 2. That's what Gazprom's chief executive Alexei Miller told a Russian TV channel yesterday, confirming Kiev's fears that Nord Stream 2 will deprive it of a lot of income in the form of transit fees.

The significance of the new figure can easily be seen when compared with the transit quantities for last month: Gazprom sent 8.1 billion cubic meters of gas via Russia's eastern neighbor in March, a 21.3-percent increase on the year. In other words, when Turkish Stream and Nord Stream 2 are ready, Ukraine will receive something like a 12th of its current annual gas transit revenues from Gazprom.

This is reason enough for Kiev to be so vocally against Nord Steam 2, but unfortunately for Ukraine, Germany is just as vocally supportive of the project, of which it will be the biggest beneficiary. The expanded Nord Stream pipeline will have a capacity of 110 billion cubic meters annually.

Still, Miller said, not all transit via Ukraine will be suspended. "We are not saying we will stop entire transit via Ukraine, since there are neighboring countries that border Ukraine on the side of Europe. Naturally, supplies to these European countries will continue via Ukraine."

While the news is bad for Ukraine, it makes sense for Russia as European countries eagerly seek alternatives to Russian gas, including the "neighboring countries that border Ukraine," notably Poland. Yet Germany is by far Gazprom's biggest client in Europe and Russian gas is the cheapest for Europe's largest economy, hence the support for a project seen as controversial by the European Commission.

Turkish Stream, for its part, will send Russian gas to the European part of Turkey up to the border with Greece, to supply gas to southeastern Europe. Its capacity is much smaller than Nord Stream's, but still larger than the future transit via Ukraine, at 15.75 billion cubic meters of gas.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

[Apr 04, 2018] Standard Clinton speak - accuse the other side of what you are doing in real time

Apr 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

serotonindumptruck -> strannick Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:25 Permalink

One of the scientists at Porton Down, Gary Aitkenhead, should probably take out additional life insurance policies.

https://www.therussophile.org/porton-down-unable-to-link-novichok-to-ru

HowdyDoody -> serotonindumptruck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:40 Permalink

Gary Aitkenhead is not a scientist. He is the head of Porton Down. He used to be an EO in Motorola communications division.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prHoy-BP5W4

Frito -> serotonindumptruck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:42 Permalink

If he fails to keep his mouth shut I wouldn't be surprised to learn in the tabloids in the near future of his (sadly fatal) penchant for auto-erotic asphyxiation.

FBaggins -> Sy Kloine Bee Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:09 Permalink

""Johnson also said that "none of us have forgotten" about the "barbaric" chemical weapons attack in Syria a year ago.""

Translation: "none of us have forgotten" about the "barbaric" chemical weapons attack in Syria a year ago "which was done by our Al Qaeda and ISIS proxies with the help of our special forces stationed in Syria."

Omen IV -> FBaggins Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:51 Permalink

"to obscure the truth and confuse the public," Johnson said"

to add to your comment - this would be standard issue Clinton speak - accuse the other side of what you are doing in real time !

the disease of bullshit spreads world wide as Democracy is gamed to the nine's

Dickweed Wang -> FBaggins Wed, 04/04/2018 - 20:10 Permalink

<--- I'm sick and tired of the west's lying bullshit

<--- My government would never lie about something so serious

Killdo -> FBaggins Wed, 04/04/2018 - 20:32 Permalink

that's all they learn in boarding schools - how to lie and lie and be good psychopaths: charming, fake, easy to bribe and natural traitors, obsessed with money and status.

And above all how to develop that exhagarated catatonic accent so valued by Anglosheeple

I know many of these Public school boys - from Malborough, Harrow etc

Jack Oliver -> Sy Kloine Bee Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:18 Permalink

If Russia has any 'novichok' -well - it should send it straight to BORIS !!

holgerdanske -> Sy Kloine Bee Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:47 Permalink

Boris+May=political poison, unnerving agents, they must go

JRobby Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:02 Permalink

The wallpaper and whitewash won't stick if they are in on it.

johnnycanuck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:02 Permalink

Goebbels wouldn't have allowed anyone to interfere with his propaganda either.

The Big Lie works seamlessly if you control the media barkers.

serotonindumptruck -> johnnycanuck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:08 Permalink

Is it any wonder why TPTB want total control and dominion over the internet?

johnnycanuck -> serotonindumptruck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:17 Permalink

Nope, and if you look closely, TPTB are mostly Corporations or support mechanisms now.

Swamp Monsters.

Kefeer -> johnnycanuck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:46 Permalink

Look no further than you local electric and gas suppliers who are likely publicly traded with a monopoly on the most traded commodities in the world. Why does a human necessity have a monopoly - follow the money.

RagnarRedux -> johnnycanuck Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:18 Permalink

The NS's were describing "The Big Lie" technique as the Modus Operandi of Jewry, not advocating using it themselves!

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v02/v02p-35_Brandon.html

https://www.historiography-project.com/misc/biglie.php

manofthenorth Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:02 Permalink

"All your evidence belongs to us"

[Apr 04, 2018] Russia Denied Request To Join OPCW Investigation Into Skripal Poisoning

Looks like projection but in reality this is a false flag. Projection implies an unawareness of one's own self. They know they did it.
The UK government has effectively repudiated the OPCW treaty by refusing to follow the reporting and investigation procedures set out in the treaty.
Apr 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Fifteen countries voted against Russia's bid, while six voted for it and 17 abstained.

"Unfortunately, we haven't been able to have two-thirds of the votes in support of that decision. A qualified majority was needed," Russian ambassador Alexander Shulgin told reporters, adding " Russia as well as other states that are members of the Executive Committee have been pushed aside from this investigation ."

UK's Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson brushed aside Russia's request, calling it a "ludicrous proposal" designed to "undermine" the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) investigation.

"Russia has had one goal in mind since the attempted murders on UK soil through the use of a military-grade chemical weapon - to obscure the truth and confuse the public," Johnson said. " The international community has yet again seen through these tactics and robustly defeated Russia's attempts today to derail the proper international process ." Johnson also said that "none of us have forgotten" about the "barbaric" chemical weapons attack in Syria a year ago.

"After the OPCW-UN investigation found that the Syrian regime was responsible, Russia blocked that body from doing any more work," he said.

Russia wants to discuss a letter sent by UK Prime Minister Theresa May to the UN Security Council which says it's "highly likely" that Moscow was behind last month's nerve agent attack.

Meanwhile , as we reported yesterday , the chief scientist from the UK's Porton Down military laboratory facility, Gary Aitkenhead, told Sky News that they had been unable to prove that the novichok nerve agent used to poison Sergei and Yulia Skripal came from Russia.

"We were able to identify it as novichok, to identify that it was military-grade nerve agent," Aitkenhead said. " We have not identified the precise source, but we have provided the scientific info to government who have then used a number of other sources to piece together the conclusions you have come to. "

**PAGING COLIN POWELL. IS THERE A MR. POWELL IN THE BUILDING?**

The Porton Down chief scientist said that establishing the Novichok's origin required "other inputs," some of which are intelligence based and which only the government has access to.

Aitkenhead added: " It is our job to provide the scientific evidence of what this particular nerve agent is, we identified that it is from this particular family and that it is a military grade, but it is not our job to say where it was manufactured ."

So whose job is it to determine where the Novichok was manufactured?

That said, it was also noted that the nerve agent involved required "extremely sophisticated methods to create, something only in the capabilities of a state actor," and that there is no known antidote to Novichok - nor was any administered to either of the Skripals.

Aitkenhead would not say whether the Porton Down facility had manufactured or maintained stocks of Novichok - long rumored to be the case.

" There is no way anything like that could have come from us or left the four walls of our facility ," said the chief.

Boris Johnson has come under fire since the Porton Down chief's statement, as Johnson lied, saying in an interview two weeks ago that Porton Down officials told him there was "no doubt" that the nerge agent came from Russia .

The Foreign Office told Sky News that Johnson "misspoke," which is apparently UK officialspeak for "he totally lied, but nobody will hold him accountable for it."

Perhaps Johnson "misspoke" in his rush to locate a hairbrush?

Sy Kloine Bee Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:02 Permalink

Nobody believes them anymore, and they know it. They just lie because they have to tell you something.

Got The Wrong No -> Sy Kloine Bee Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:07 Permalink

The British version of the Mueller investigation

Lost in translation -> Got The Wrong No Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:09 Permalink

Russia should wash its hands of OPCW - quit and never return.

Slack Jack -> Pol Pot Wed, 04/04/2018 - 20:31 Permalink

The evil people, Theresa May, Stoltenberg, Trump and the rest, are damming Russia with obvious lies.

The Novichok nerve agents probably don't even exist.

HERE IS THE PROOF:

The Novichok nerve agents are supposedly much more toxic than the nerve gases VX or Sarin.

Mirzayanov's book, published in 2008, contains the formulas he alleges can be used to create Novichoks. In 1995, he explained that "the chemical components or precursors" of Novichok are "ordinary organophosphates that can be made at commercial chemical companies that manufacture such products as fertilizers and pesticides."

https://www.amazon.com/State-Secrets-Insiders-Chronicle-Chemical/dp/143

Basically, Mirzayanov claims that it is relatively easy to make the Novichok nerve agents.

So, some enterprising Arabs could buy a few chemists to make a few tons of it and then spray it all over the little Satan.

Do you really think that the Jews who run the United States would allow the publication of information that could lead to thousands of deaths in Israel?

Do you really think they would protect the publisher of such information by giving him residence in the United States?

Remember, Mirzayanov was given residence in the United States after he was kicked out of Russia.

There are also a number of "people who should know" that have stated that there is zero solid evidence for the existence of the Novichok nerve agents. For example: Robin Black in Development, Historical Use and Properties of Chemical Warfare Agents (2016):

"In recent years, there has been much speculation that a fourth generation of nerve agents, 'Novichoks' (newcomer), was developed in Russia, beginning in the 1970s as part of the 'Foliant' programme, with the aim of finding agents that would compromise defensive countermeasures. Information on these compounds has been sparse in the public domain, mostly originating from a dissident Russian military chemist, Vil Mirzayanov. No independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published."

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/the-novichok-story-is-i

And, Alexander Shulgin, Russia's representative to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (2018):

"There has never been a 'Novichok' research project conducted in Russia,... But in the West, some countries carried out such research, which they called 'Novichok,' for some reason."

CONCLUSION: The Novichok nerve agents don't even exist.

philipat -> EuroPox Wed, 04/04/2018 - 19:45 Permalink

The use of the "projection" technique (essentially accusing your opponents of doing the very things you yourself are doing) in official circles has become widespread. It's biggest proponent is, of course, Shitlery who, as an example, recently accused Trump of using his position to enrich himself and his family (Um....?). Now BoJo has the chutzpah to accuse Russia of obfuscation and lies. Same technique. Specifically:

" Russia has had one goal in mind since the attempted murders on UK soil through the use of a military-grade chemical weapon - to obscure the truth and confuse the public," Johnson said. " The international community has yet again seen through these tactics and robustly defeated Russia's attempts today to derail the proper international process ."

And, of course, psychopaths actually believe their projections which allows them to speak with a straight face. And the MSM, naturally, just blindly "reports" what they say. The internet is the only source of real information and the true investigative journalism of any integrity. Which is, of course, why they are trying so hard to censor and close the sources of truth.

Killdo -> philipat Wed, 04/04/2018 - 20:22 Permalink

you can see here their modus operandi - one of the first NSA leaks by Snowden/Greenwald. There is a slide there called the Gambits For Deception - all the tricks are there - how to never admit when caught lying, how to cover the small move by the big one - basically all the BS this fat ugly clown is using are there:

https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/

scroll down and look for slides from 5 Eye meetings

JohnFrodo -> philipat Wed, 04/04/2018 - 20:24 Permalink

projection is everything. America banned the Huwawie Chinese cell phone because they thought it was a threat. What are all those Apples in China? Not even to speak about domestic use.

[Apr 04, 2018] How to Debunk the Skripal Poisoning Lie - Advice from an Expert

Notable quotes:
"... I think the Skripal story is where the liars finally meet their Waterloo. They got away with MH17, with Litvinenko, with killing Nemtsov, with Magnitsky, with using gas in Syria ... They got away with the snipers on Maidan Square. There is much more stretching back over the years Iraq, Georgia 2008 etc, but I don't want to belabor the point. ..."
"... contemptuous mockery ..."
"... That's not what the Porton Down chief said 3 April.. He said they could not identify the poison as having been manufactured in Russia. Johnson said a fortnight ago that he was told at Porton Down that there was no doubt about where it had come from. Am I missing something? Is that not an outright lie that he told Nemtsov's daughter in the interview and others? ..."
Apr 04, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Points 2 and 3 really struck me, because, if he is right, than a large part of the effort in the alt-media to rebut this nonsense is in fact only doing more harm.

I think the Skripal story is where the liars finally meet their Waterloo. They got away with MH17, with Litvinenko, with killing Nemtsov, with Magnitsky, with using gas in Syria ... They got away with the snipers on Maidan Square. There is much more stretching back over the years Iraq, Georgia 2008 etc, but I don't want to belabor the point.

Skripal is just another miserable false flag right from their playbook followed up with a timed avalanche of lies in the media, and you can see how, considering what they got away with before, they think they can pull it off again.

Here is Armstrong's advice :

  1. It's obvious nonsense brought to you by proven liars.
  2. The point of propaganda is to leave an impression after the details have been forgotten.
  3. To get involved in discussing the minutiae of the story is to help the propagandists' aims.
  4. Therefore treat it as a badly constructed story that is failing to convince.
  5. Do this by analyzing the comments on the news stories which (at least the ones I've looked at) show that people are skeptical.
  6. Also mock the meanderings of the story: At the restaurant! In the car! On the doorstep! Incredibly lethal but strangely ineffective. Miraculous recovery of daughter. Baby wipes as effective protection. Reminiscent of White Helmets and their flip flops, rubber gloves and paper masks; but, come to think of it, it's the same authors in both stories. Who, after so many lies, are becoming overconfident and sloppy.

It's a startlingly incompetent theatrical production and should be responded to with contemptuous mockery .

This post first appeared on Russia Insider

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

Lord Snooty • 4 hours ago ,

Liar!

Johnson has now clearly been exposed as a liar in this Nemtsova interview [20 March, 2018] with him on DW:

Nemtsova: You argue that the source of this nerve agent, Novichok, is Russia. How did you manage to find it out so quickly? Does Britain possess samples of it?

Johnson: Let me be clear with you When I look at the evidence, I mean the people from Porton Down, the laboratory

Nemtsova: So they have samples

Johnson: They do. And they were absolutely categorical and I asked the guy myself, I said, "Are you sure?" And he said there's no doubt. We have very little alternative but to take the action that we have taken. But I must say the difference between this time and what happened 12 years ago with Alexander Litvinenko is also that there is much more sympathy in the international community, far more understanding of the kind of behaviour that Russia has been engaged in in the last few years. And round the table in Brussels, talking to all the other European countries, there's hardly anybody who hasn't experienced directly or indirectly some kind of malign or disruptive behaviour.

Again:

Nemtsova's question to Johnson:

You argue that the source of this nerve agent, Novichok, is Russia. How did you manage to find it out so quickly?

Johnson's answer:

When I look at the evidence, I mean the people from Porton Down, the laboratory they were absolutely categorical and I asked the guy myself, I said, "Are you sure?" And he said there's no doubt.

That's not what the Porton Down chief said 3 April.. He said they could not identify the poison as having been manufactured in Russia. Johnson said a fortnight ago that he was told at Porton Down that there was no doubt about where it had come from. Am I missing something? Is that not an outright lie that he told Nemtsov's daughter in the interview and others?

View Hide
Guy Lord Snooty • 2 hours ago ,

I would be very careful about pursuing this line of reasoning. From my understanding due to the fact that the substance didn't kill them instantly this means it's impossible that such a nerve agent was used. If we accept what this specialist from Porton Down Say's that means that we are conceding that he actually DID indeed receive such a nerve agent from the crime scene which is in itself a lie.

Formula: Concede to 1 lie whereby the line of reasoning rests on the presumption of a non sequiter.

Basically this scientist is still either lying or more likely he was handed fake evidence due to the chain of custody issue.

mmm if anybody is generally in touch with Mr Armstrong i would urge him to add this line of reasoning to his points.

IMO the use of term false flag is devastating to the case is it implies that the attack took place but the purpose was to blame the pesky Putinites however this is far less plausible (occams razor and whatnot) than THEY JUST SIMPLY MADE IT UP, as they're very well known to do in the past. I.e. colin Powell presenting a vial of white powder VS Colin Powel sneaking the alleged wmd's into the country and screaming "look! They dun have it!!!". This is especially important considering that there has been NO EVIDENCE OF AN ACTUAL ATTACK TAKING PLACE, which is basically what we need to take them to task for.

Scandinavia - Lord Snooty • 2 hours ago ,

View Hide

Rick0Shea Scandinavia - • 42 minutes ago ,

Boris has his hand on MBS's junk? Hashtag #metoo.

Tommy Jensen • 2 hours ago ,

Note that comments in most Western media are CENSURED.
Comments that jeopardize the decided narrative are simply deleted and profiles with repeated "wrong opinions" (its normally people who refer to facts) are simply kicked out without explanation.
It happens in "Daily Beast", m.m. and in about all Scandinavian newspapers.

Magna Farta Tommy Jensen • 5 minutes ago ,

Well, it's harder to 'massage' posts than it is the 'news' of the original article.

Tillthetruth Tommy Jensen • 29 minutes ago ,

I am 58 and have Never seen the Real Truth the Full Truth only LIES put in such a way that if they get Totally Caught they can disclaim the Lies then the show goes on. bbc - msm all liar's and working for the british "regime's"

Tommy Jensen • 2 hours ago ,

You can only use these debunk tools with open minded free people.

To question the government and authorities as written in MSM is impossible.

Any attempt by you or anybody to question the MSM narrative will make people feel unsafe and uncomfortable and make them reject you because you/we have made them feel uncomfortable.

Even with close friends, you can pursuade them to question the narrative and feel doubt about the case, but they will still refuse to make a personal stand because it jeopardize their relationship with the power.
"If the Authorities lie there is probably a good reason for it, in any case its not my business".

Western people are brainwashed to the state of Matrix and its done by semantics where Authority has decided which words are negative and which words are positive.
This leads peoples thoughts through planned pipes with stop and contra valves like in a drainage system where you will feel uncomfortable if you use words the power has decided are negatives.

You can see the absurd result on West television shows.
ISIS members are excused in MSM because "its their culture", "they have had a bad childhood", "we try to resocialise them", saying Authority give them a cover and positive perception.
Muslim women with scarf are smeared in MSM as a "threat to our western values" and "oppressed by men" giving people a negative perception.
When you now speak with Western people they will feel negative and look down on intelligent moslem women and feel positive and admire mass murders because the System has dictated this perception. Pure Matrix.

mis dos centavos • 7 minutes ago ,

BoJo the British Clown and his entourage, in refusing to provide samples and/or their analysis to Russia, has apparently never heard of the concept of 'discovery', where the accused is afforded a review of all 'evidence' against them.

The Brits have now effectively turned the Magna Carta into the Magna Farta. This is no laughing matter.

Opera • an hour ago ,

This is one of a few outlets where can people freely comment.
This is the only place where I comment and I am quite happy to stay here.

quasi_verbatim • 2 hours ago ,

Poor old Bodgers.

Munchausens, Bullingdonianism, Megalomania and Brexit Trainwreck Derangement Syndrome in combination is not a pretty sight.

Aged Warrior • 3 hours ago ,

This is not an isolated false flag. Allegedly the Baldrick styled cunning plan is just a lead up to Theresa's ff nuke attack on London to be blamed on Russia. The Satanic Tory Party have really sunk to the depths of psychopathic paranoid insanity. Will The Queen save us?

Lord Snooty Aged Warrior • an hour ago ,

No, but this is what she probably thinks of her Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs: View Hide

[Apr 04, 2018] Operation Hades - A Model For The 'Novichok' Case

Notable quotes:
"... You argue that the source of this nerve agent, Novichok, is Russia. How did you manage to find it out so quickly? Does Britain possess samples of it? ..."
"... So they have the samples ..."
"... Moon of Alabama ..."
Apr 04, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

(This is a 'working thread' to collect various items related to the alleged 'Novichok' incident in Salisbury and the fate of the British spy Sergej Skripal and his daughter Yulia. For a wider overview of the case please check our longer write-ups linked at the end of this post.)

The Russian government sent fourteen specific questions to the British government and thirteen questions to the OPCW . There seems to be some French involvement in the investigation of the alleged nerve agent and Russia ask why that is the case.

Alexander Yakovenko, the Russian ambassador to Britain, further increased the pressure on Theresa May by publicly asserting that the Skripal case was a 'provocation' carried out by British intelligence.

Telepolis points out (in German) that this would not be the first time that a 'western' service would stage such a 'provocation'. The Skripal case is indeed quite comparable to Operation Hades .

On August 10 1994 German officials in Munich 'found' 363 grams of plutonium on a plane coming from Moscow. They immediately asserted, that the plutonium 'must' have come from a Russian reactor. There was a lot of media panic, international political noise and condemnation of Russia.


Time Cover August 29 1994

This put pressure on the Russian government to increase its security at its nuclear sites. The U.S. offered to 'help' with nuclear security and thus got easy access to Russia's nuclear secrets. The case broke in the mid of the federal election campaign in Germany and helped chancellor Kohl to get re-elected.

Months later first leaks appeared, enterprising reporters dug deeper into the story and it started to unravel.

Der Spiegel filled ten pages (in German) with the explosive story.

SPIEGEL Cover May 10 1995
"The BND's Nuke Hustle"
"How German secret agents invented the plutonium hazard"

It turned out that the plutonium was not from Russia but had been planted by the German equivalent of the MI6, the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND). Later leaks and counter-leaks created a convoluted story to hide the truth behind it. A parliamentarian commission investigated the case but the Kohl government eventually shut it down without any political consequences. Shortly thereafter the deeply involved BND head, Bernd Schmidbauer, was sent into retirement.

The Russian depict the 'Novichok' case as a staged 'provocation'. There is a historic antetype for such a 'provocation' by a 'western' intelligence service. That gives the Russian claim some significant merit.

---

It took only nine month for the 1994 'Operation Hades' story to fall apart. The 'Novichok' fairy-tale may now see an even earlier end.

Sky News Breaking @SkyNewsBreak - 2:59 PM - 3 Apr 2018

Chief executive of Porton Down research laboratory has told Sky News scientists have not been able to prove the Novichok nerve agent used to poison Sergei and Yulia Skripal came from Russia or establish its country of origin

Mind the gap, Mrs. May. Mind the credibility gap.

Video of Mr. Aitkenhead's Sky News interview. (Nice word play included : He only provides scientific evidence. The government may additionally have 'other' (i.e. unscientific) evidence to make a case.)

In light of the Proton Down statement we can now state that Boris Johnson, on March 20 on DW , proved to be an 'absolutely categorical' liar:

You argue that the source of this nerve agent, Novichok, is Russia. How did you manage to find it out so quickly? Does Britain possess samples of it?

BJ: Let me be clear with you When I look at the evidence, I mean the people from Porton Down, the laboratory

So they have the samples

BJ: They do. And they were absolutely categorical and I asked the guy myself, I said, "Are you sure?" And he said there's no doubt.

In the interview Boris Johnson tried to preemptively put any eventual fault in the case on Porton Down. Today he received the response.

Payback is a bitch, Mr Johnson. A biting bitch.

---

The Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media , a number British academics, published an update to their briefing 'Doubts about Novichoks' at Tim Hayward's site.

The update carefully distinguishes and discusses the various chemical substances and research programs relevant to the British 'Novichok' claims. The 'Novichok' nerve agents Vil Mirzayanov describes in his book seem to differ from the substances other Russian scientists talked about in their recent interviews. The U.S. though, as well as other countries, has evidently worked on some of the substances described by Mirzayanov and concealed these efforts from the OPCW. The Working Group concludes:

The UK government has asserted that "No country bar Russia has combined capability, intent and motive" to carry out the Salisbury poisonings. Published studies show that these compounds can be synthesized at bench scale (sufficient for an assassination) in other countries. The UK government's declared case therefore rests only on subjective judgements of "intent and motive", which are open to question.

---

A few days ago Victoriya Skripal, a cousin of Yulia Skripal, was interviewed by the Russian website MKRU (Ru). The Stalkerzone provides an English translation of the full interview . From it we learn that:

Victoriya Skripal apparently also did an interview with the Mail Online (or the Mail plagiarized its piece from MKRU ). There seems to be no additional information in it.

---

British officials spread various theories about where and how the Skripal's were poisoned. According to 'official' leaks to the British press the alleged nerve agent was smeared to the door of Sergej Skripal's car, was in a pizza, in Yulia Skripal's luggage or perfume, or in the car's air vent. I may have been sprayed by a mini drone, or the stuff was smeared onto to the doorknob of Skripal's house or maybe it was, as claimed yesterday, in buckwheat cereals brought from Russia on Sergej Skripal's request.

In my view none of these explanation is plausible. The multitude of the discussed possibilities alone shows that either no one has a clue of what happened and how it happened, or someone is trying to bury the case in a heap of misinformation. We shall call this phenomena 'Novi-fog'. It unmasks headlines like this one as mere propaganda: Poisoned Door Handle Hints at High-Level Plot to Kill Spy, U.K. Officials Say . "It was on the doorknob (maybe)! Thus Putin himself did it!"

---

John Helmer, who reports from Moscow, documents that the British government is breaking several British laws as well as international agreements by keeping the family and the consular service of the Russian embassy in Britain away from the Skripals.

---

Previous Moon of Alabama reports on the Skripal case:

Posted by b on April 3, 2018 at 12:23 PM | Permalink

DomesticExtremist , Apr 3, 2018 12:35:13 PM | 1

Porton Down CEO states "we cannot prove the 'novichok' was made in Russia".
Followed by many weasel words.
May's argument seems to be collapsing.
WorldBLee , Apr 3, 2018 12:50:59 PM | 2
"Spy Poisoning Saves May from Losing Power" - that is an honest headline that you'll never see in the UK press.
Gareth , Apr 3, 2018 12:52:06 PM | 3
From the Guardian, Porton Down experts claim the nerve agent was Novichok but say they can't prove it was produced by Russia. Also, Yulia seems to have recovered spontaneously from the alleged military grade nerve agent as no antidote is available to counteract the effects. That's some military grade weapon!

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/03/porton-down-experts-unable-to-verify-precise-source-of-novichok

b , Apr 3, 2018 12:52:13 PM | 4
@1 thanks! Just added that news to the piece.
Sid2 , Apr 3, 2018 1:03:41 PM | 5
b's comment = a key distinction--

"The UK government's declared case therefore rests only on subjective judgements of "intent and motive", which are open to question."

This is the crux of the matter, with nothing to indicate otherwise as to a definitive case.

Further confirmed by today's report that the source of the poison cannot be id'd.

Christian Chuba , Apr 3, 2018 1:12:35 PM | 6
The OPCW should test it against the known samples held by the British. This is an obvious step for them and is quit telling that they are not doing this. The full OPCW interview is still very hawkish ... https://news.sky.com/story/porton-down-experts-unable-to-identify-precise-source-of-novichok-that-poisoned-spy-11315387

1. They are going with the 'it's military grade and must have been made by a state actor' (test Porton Down)

2. They will meet with the British secret services to see what other evidence they have.

DomesticExtremist , Apr 3, 2018 1:20:55 PM | 7
May has Wil.E.Coyote moment:
No 10 tries to calm Russia row amid cold war rhetoric
Downing Street has issued a plea for "proportionate" action from Russia to the Salisbury poisoning row after its foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, warned that relations with the west are now worse than during the cold war.

That's not "novichok" darling, that's "chutzpah".

Red Ryder , Apr 3, 2018 1:26:34 PM | 8
It is Highly Likely that the British did it.
They had the means, the manpower, the interest, and a purpose (motive).
The proof is they can't prove that anyone else, much less the Russians did it.
They were 8miles away with all the technical means to produce a poison.

They have acted like any criminal does when exposed. They blame others, particularly, their obsessed enemy against whom they have acted vilely and criminally before.

So, elementary police work, fundamental analysis points only to the UK for the Salisbury attempted assassination of their own paid stooge and his hapless daughter.

They did it to blame Russia. Case closed.

Fatima Manoubia , Apr 3, 2018 1:31:25 PM | 9
Just as in the case of the Germans, the US was the most beneffited from the false flag op, since that way gained access to Russian nuclear facilities.
This time around this was plotted to justify a false flag chemical attack on Ghouta who could have justified their illegal and unjustifiable stand in Syria, as well, as spreading a thick fog over the presence and capture of their coalition´s SF in the terrain which would be an scandal in case of becoming of public knowledge after the terrorist attacks that have been place so far in European soil since 9/11 2001, an definitive crushing for the low rates of popularity for both, May and Trump, not to mention Macron who just have suffered some several weeks of general strike against his draconian ( to French standards ) labour reforms, and which where nowhere mentioned in the "alt-media" since there was much more important issues to report about, like the Skripal case....

IMNSHO, the main sin of V.V.Putin was not included in the part of his 1st March speech of adress to the nation about state-of-the-art thachtical weapons, but in the first part related to the necessity of betterment of people´s living conditions, by increasing wages and housing access and conditions of habitability for families and young people, grant access of those gifted to all the varied scoop into the Russian educational system so as nobody with will and capacity gets out without the possibility of developing its strenghts, improvement on health care system and elders care system so as life expectancy spands increasingly, favour maternity conditions for working couples, and so on, and so on...

You have that this was broadcasted to the four winds, so as, everybody with a Smartphone or IT connection could test that while in the US and especialy in Europe, the so called "welfare state" is being dismantled at galloping pace, without nothing left to loot from the working masses except the pensions system, and this only at few corners of Europe, here they come, not only the Chinese, trying to get increasing number of people from amongst their millions of citizens out of poverty every year, but now also, as in the times of the USSR, Russia is offering just the contrary to what the Western powers, in their obscene richness, are offering ot their enslavized working masses.

Now, you tell me that the class strugle has finished and has no sense nowadays....Of course, nobody from the upper middle class who were those which in the higuest numbers voted for Trump, in the hope that that way they would achieve a considerable lowing in taxes, is going to tell you about this. You will onkly learn it from your peers, those who use Twitter, even at the risk of being targetted by the same Intelligence Services who perform the flase flags ops to obnubilate you and act as attack dogs of the elites trying to shut up and demonize every time one of your peers shows its nose at their "blogs".....

Piotr Berman , Apr 3, 2018 1:33:41 PM | 10
"Porton-Down experts unable to verify the source of Novichok". From what I read, this is simple not possible. The chemical was made in a lab more than 20 years ago, so there would have to be a new batch. No samples from the previous lab were ever collected in the West; instead, Western experts either had samples from an industrial facility in Uzbekistan that does not exists anymore or samples they they had made themselves. Thus Porton-Down could check if it was their own product (unless someone made another batch there without telling the colleagues and using different sources of "raw" materials), and provide the history of the substance by citing Mirzayanov.

It is different if we are talking about large stocks military of poison that was either used before or had samples collected by
outsiders like OPCW. But every laboratory batch can be different.

That said, governments that joined UK in expelling Russian diplomats will probably stick to "belief" in the argument about "the only suspect that had all three: motivation, technical ability and characteristic brutality". I expect Boris Johnson 20 years from now claiming that "knowing all the facts, he would do the same thing" and he could even slavishly imitate Tony Blair "I passionately believe that ...".

Peter AU 1 , Apr 3, 2018 1:35:30 PM | 11
Gary Aitkenhead CEO of DSTL bio

https://www.gov.uk/government/people/gary-aitkenhead
"Gary has spent his career in the development and supply of mission-critical wireless communications solutions to public safety, industrial and transportation sectors.

He has previously held senior global positions at Sepura and at Motorola Solutions, where he had commercial responsibility for sales, services, operations and product management.

As Dstl's Chief Executive, Gary will lead an organisation of over 3,800 scientists and engineers providing specialist, and in many cases world-leading expertise, across a wide-range of disciplines...."

psychohistorian , Apr 3, 2018 1:39:50 PM | 12
@ b who wrote:
"
Mind the gap, Mrs. May. Mind the credibility gap.
"

When one relies on a series of lies to move the public instead of truthful need, you can end up twisting slowly in the wind, like May is currently doing.....couldn't happen to a nicer puppet.

What a circus! Too bad it is so meaningful to humanities future. And now the Pope has taken away the revenge of Hell for these folks. It is almost like there is no incentive to do good and avoid evil.

librul , Apr 3, 2018 1:46:44 PM | 13
Often wondered what the planned abort scenario was for 9/11 .

If the CIA etal had indeed wired the towers with explosives how would they go about deinstalling said explosives if there
had been a major muck up and the plans for 9/11 were called off or delayed?

"Training exercises" is a good cover.

When Mossad was caught by an alert bystander planting a bomb under a car in Tel Aviv, it was later announced that it had all been a "training exercise gone awry".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8377746.stm


When bomb parts (not yet assembled) mailed to the US embassy in Tunisia were discovered by Fedex workers at Charles de Gaulle
airport the ready explanation was...you guessed it..."training exercise gone awry".
https://www.yahoo.com/news/tempers-flare-paris-airport-fake-bombs-found-070909988.html

You are probably aware that there were training exercises held in New York just before 9/11.

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a090801laguardiaexercise&scale=0

"September 8, 2001: Bioterrorism Exercise Is Held at a New York Airport
Edit event

A training exercise is held at New York's La Guardia Airport, based around the scenario of a terrorist attack with a biological weapon"

And, you probably recall that active anthrax was being shipped, although "no one was at fault", for years all over the place.
That is, anthrax created by the Pentagon that was "believed to be inactive" was actually live anthrax and being shipped around the world. But no one was at fault.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/pentagon-blames-anthrax-fiasco-on-no-one

Thus, if someone decided to pull the plug on 9/11 and had to remove the explosives from the towers they could have declared
"training exercise has gone awry". The Pentagon could merely declare that they had held an adjunct exercise in the towers and what the biological terror exercise thought was inactive anthrax was actually live and the
towers would need to be evacuated while decontamination took place.

That could have been the abort scenario to 9/11 .

AriusArmenian , Apr 3, 2018 1:52:11 PM | 14
What does this and other reports tell us about the UK?
That it is owned and operated by criminal vermin.
Like the US.
These vermin are psychopaths or at least sociopaths.
They have murdered millions since the end of Cold War v1.
They intend to murder millions more in Cold War v2 (not so cold!) before they are neutralized.
I hope my children survive until those vermin are eradicated.
Arioch , Apr 3, 2018 1:52:17 PM | 15
> The Russian government sent fourteen specific questions to the British government and thirteen questions to the OPCW.

Not quite. There are also few questions EXPLICITLY asked to France itself.
And i already mentioned it in a recent post comments.

http://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/3150139?p_p_id=101_INSTANCE_cKNonkJE02Bw&_101_INSTANCE_cKNonkJE02Bw_languageId=en_GB

I believe this is worth being explicitly mentioned too.


PS. i heard OPCW promised answer their part before end of the day

thanks b for staying on top of this... it bears ongoing scrutiny and you are good at that!@

Posted by: james , Apr 3, 2018 1:55:22 PM | 16

thanks b for staying on top of this... it bears ongoing scrutiny and you are good at that!@

Posted by: james | Apr 3, 2018 1:55:22 PM | 16 /div

james , Apr 3, 2018 1:56:35 PM | 17
@ 15 arioh... thanks for stating that again.. in fact russia has asked britian, france and opcw questions... wonder who says what when?
jayc , Apr 3, 2018 2:17:56 PM | 18
"Porton Down chief executive Gary Aitkenhead said scientists at the lab 'have not verified the precise source, but we provided the scientific information to the government who have then used a number of other sources to piece together the conclusions that they have come to.'"
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/top-russian-diplomat-britain-poisoned-spy-54198504

i.e. The British government's assertions are based exactly on subjective interpretations of supposed motive and method. The repeated "no other plausible explanation" - which the French officials are now parroting - continues to place the onus on Russia to prove the negative. It's a neat trick, as long as the media faithfully sticks to the talking points. Which they will. Soon there will be an attempt to re-focus the topic away from annoying details towards the alleged "pattern of aggression", such as May's statements today that "standing up to Russia" will continue at least through Putin's new term.

Den Lille Abe , Apr 3, 2018 2:22:28 PM | 19
The story just grows more and more embarrassing. I mean. if you want to frame someone, at you get your act together!! no plodders!
And the the eternal Bumbling Boorish turns up, spout liars as never before!
Please FO Britain out to somewhere Titanic sank and do the same. You will not be missed and the air in Europe is cleaner than without Minitrumpistan.
Den Lille Abe , Apr 3, 2018 2:28:16 PM | 20
And the this guy figuring as a foreign minister is an A grade +++ certified liar and cheat.
Moodies says so.
Den Lille Abe , Apr 3, 2018 2:30:44 PM | 21
Saw it was on BBC (Big British Cunts) too, I wonder who will highlight the complicity.
Clueless Joe , Apr 3, 2018 2:41:07 PM | 22
These idiots will lose face in an epic proportion when if one can prove Russia didn't do it, considering how much fuss they made and how they humiliated Russia by expelling scores of diplomats. And Russia will be able to openly ask for some kind of excuse or reparation of a high order.

Meanwhile, the UK government seems to be glad to bury yet another case of mass gang-rapes of British girls in yet another British town, because, fuck a thousand of their young citizens, when a couple of foreigners get food-poisoning or whatever it's obviously of highest importance...

Peter AU 1 , Apr 3, 2018 2:50:10 PM | 23
It seems Novichok are the chemicals described in Mirzanyanov's book and are different to those described by Russian/Soviet scientists who actually researched and developed various compounds.
US/UK ensured no discussion or research into any of these compounds took place at OPCW and elsewhere.
An ace tucked up their sleeve for future use.

With the UK now backing down? - or at least its case starting to fall apart - on its novichok made in Russia claims, the ace has been used and nothing to show for it. It makes me think a CW attack in Ghouta with very large number of victims was to be the pretext for an almost instant attack on Syria and the Russian forces there.
I suspect Russian intel operations are as good as their weapons systems so they most likely took out whatever crew of jihadists were to poison the victims. Then came the direct Russian warning to the US and after that the sacking of Tillerson followed a few days later by the sacking of McMaster.

chet380 , Apr 3, 2018 2:55:47 PM | 24
From the a portion of the Mercouris article, it appears that the High Court Judge was misled by counsel as to the applicability of the Consular Conventions, because they had not been incorporated into British domestic law -- this is false as they had been so incorporated.
Counsel for the Official Solicitor, the agency representing MS. Skripal's interests, is duty bound to inform the Judge about his error immediately after learning of it.
Peter AU 1 , Apr 3, 2018 2:57:15 PM | 25
To add to my post @23 If the UK novichok narrative was a prep for the main play in Syria then the narrative would only need to hold up for a couple of weeks, when attention would shift to a large CW attack in Ghouta quickly followed by a US attack on Syria.
K , Apr 3, 2018 3:01:09 PM | 26
https://tomgard.blog/
Very interesting material, albeit in German. It may be that the GB´s amok run against Russia could have to do with British, Israeli and US soldiers or consultants, who were arrested in Ghouta after the Islamists lost.
SteLe , Apr 3, 2018 3:03:24 PM | 27
As soon as i read the Telepolis article this morning, i just was stunned.
Despite me being of 6 or 7 years old at the time, i remember the media hype... And while i wasnt able to connect the dots myself, because i obviously wasnt old enough the graps the details or even the story at the time, i find it strange, that NO ONE in german MSM could see the parallels, other then the small, non MSM Telepolis outlet (Which is one of the few german media sources i follow daily).

Anyway, good to see, that this article has become known to B... As i think this is a big part of the puzzle.

Let the play unravel.

Formerly T-Bear , Apr 3, 2018 3:07:58 PM | 28
A supposition:

Suppose there were no military grade nerve poison, at least originally and whatever such poison that was 'found' had been planted at a later time as required by the story told the public. The refusal to provide samples to Russia or admit qualified people in to see the victims and take stock of their medical conditions is exactly what would cover such a scenario, and the later application of referenced stock would be likely exposed if Russian scientists were to obtain samples.

How to cover one's posterior? How better than invite a close 'friend' to come in and also do 'certified' testing on the samples you give them that confirm by 'independent' scientific authority exactly your shabby, falling apart story. The world has some cop-on that Macron's integrity has been and still is a marketable product at modest price and would go to any length to accommodate a fine fellow PM as is Theresa May in her hour of need; she after all gave a billion Pounds Sterling to DUP to join her to continue her stewardship of the British Parliament, for Macron's assistance (read French establishment under Macron's direction) several multiples of the DUP's haul could be made available at moment's notice - funny how public treasuries work in such emergency.

What a fine kettle of fish the PM and her Parliament has made of that now 'Scuppered Isle' (or was that sceptre'd isle?). Buckingham Palace might consider dismissing the current Parliament and suggest to the subjects not to return most of the incumbents, or else Charles will be king. That ought to keep the hoi polloi in line.

cdvision , Apr 3, 2018 3:12:41 PM | 29
Peter AU 1 @23 - thats my conclusion as well.

RT quotes Murray on the Porton Down statement:

"If you watch the interview, the sentence where he says it would probably need a state to make it is tacked on to the end. If you look closely, not only has the shot changed, the camera and tripod have actually moved. I strongly suspect government handlers who would have been in that room watching him were unhappy with his interview and wanted something which implicated Russia more, so added a bit onto the end."

et Al , Apr 3, 2018 3:15:54 PM | 30
https://news.sky.com/story/porton-down-experts-unable-to-identify-precise-source-of-novichok-that-poisoned-spy-11315387

" ...It's Novichok or from that family... " he says later but at the beginning he says 'it is Novichok'. Does he mean the known variants of Novichok or 'similar' agents?

Not to mention what does "We have not identified the precise source..." mean? Precise source of where the agent came from or precise type of 'Novichok or novichok family'? It's not like the interviewer made an effort to find out.

Oh, and it appears that the video skips or is edited at 00:46 seconds but there is no skip in audio.

et Al , Apr 3, 2018 3:21:25 PM | 31
And I don't know if it is how they did the video, but the background looks as if it is videoshopped in. Gary has very sharp lines around him. Maybe it is just 'enhanced' but it still looks odd to me.

Vis the 00:46 skip/edit he's saying:

"and that it's, uh" - skip/edit - "military grade agent..". Did he fluff his lines?

karlof1 , Apr 3, 2018 3:28:43 PM | 32
librul @13--

The nanothermite used was applied as paint, so it would be extremely hard to remove. Also, it must be recalled that preparations for 911 occurred during Clinton's presidency, thus begging three questions: Did Clinton know? Did Gore know? Did Bush know? The Saudis were clearly involved as it was a Saudi company that did the "remodeling" work at the Trade Complex.

Killing/Murdering innocents for political goals seems to be a pastime only associated with European nations and their spawn, like the Outlaw US Empire.

Kudos to b for recalling this previous false flag example of a very similar type!!

MoA has outstanding detectives! Too bad we're not actually employed so the Truth can be told.

Posted by: karlof1 , Apr 3, 2018 3:31:45 PM | 33

MoA has outstanding detectives! Too bad we're not actually employed so the Truth can be told.

Posted by: karlof1 | Apr 3, 2018 3:31:45 PM | 33 /div

Ghost Ship , Apr 3, 2018 3:36:55 PM | 34
>>>> Peter AU 1 | Apr 3, 2018 2:57:15 PM | 25
Too late for East Ghouta CW black op as the final transfer of jihadists has already started - why would Syria or Russia use CW against defeated groups?
1st batch of Jaish al-Islam rebels and their families have left Douma Wafideen crossing in preparation for their transfer to Jarablus

A couple of days ago the jihadists tried to stage an 'incident' involving jihadists with suicide belts blowing themselves up on buses transferring families to Idlib but Syrians and Russians were tipped off perhaps by high-ranking double agents within jihadist groups and forty suicide belts and their wearers were captured, so no atrocity.
Peter AU 1 , Apr 3, 2018 3:46:47 PM | 35
Aitkenhead uses the term Novichok. Novichock is supposedly a family or group of chemicals each having a specific name or designation code. UK has specifically accused Russia of using agent A-234, yet it seems Porton Down cannot narrow the substance down to a specific chemical compound withing a group.

The original statement from Porton Down was "Novichok or similar chemical", meaning they cannot even say what chemical group the substance analysed belongs to.

Laguerre , Apr 3, 2018 3:57:08 PM | 36
So May now says they have other evidence that it was the Russians wot did it (intelligence, but not to be revealed). It's ridiculous.

There are no new photos of the sufferers. Neither of the cop, who is supposed to have got out of hospital, nor of Yulia, who is said to have come back to consciousness. Not a single sign. Something is seriously wrong with the public explanation. The cop, being apparently in reasonable health, should have been able to give an interview, but no, it hasn't been done.

Peter AU 1 , Apr 3, 2018 4:07:20 PM | 37
In the questions Russia has put to OPCW, the last four...

10. Has the OPCW's Technical Secretariat approved the disclosure of the investigative material by the UK to the EU countries (according to available information, France has become fully involved in the investigation)?

http://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/3150201
11. Has France notified the OPCW's Technical Secretariat of its involvement in the technical assistance as requested by the UK?

12. Has France provided its material on the investigation, if any, to the OPCW's Technical Secretariat?

13. Can the OPCW's Technical Secretariat provide the French investigative material, if any, to Russia for perusal? If not, why?
..........

Does Russia suspect the OPCW has subcontracted the Skripal investigation to France?

james , Apr 3, 2018 4:20:39 PM | 38
@36 laguerre... lets face it.. they are making shit up! door handle may-boris-my ass..

and - the uk are running rough shod over basic legal procedure on allowing russia access to all of this..

uk - dark age mentality, thanks may and boris the idiot...

somebody , Apr 3, 2018 4:21:06 PM | 39
Who tricked Boris Johnson and May into this? When BND and Kohl did the plutonium stuff they could be sure Russia would play along - and they did though it might have cost Kohl something in negotiations.

What did it cost May to get EU countries and the US along?

And what does it all mean now ?

The development came as a former Russian general warned the response to the Salisbury the attack could trigger "the last war in the history of mankind".

Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Evgeny Buzhinsky said the West was "cornering Russia and to corner Russia is a very dangerous thing".

He added: "If the situation develops in the way it is now, it will end up in a very bad outcome."

Write a hundred times: It is not possible to start a war against Russia, it is not possible to start a war against Russia and China, it is not possible to start a war against Russia and China and Iran .....

james , Apr 3, 2018 4:24:25 PM | 40
@37 peter - last question.. it appears there is some concern over the impartiality and objectivity of the opcw.. as we saw in the case of khan shaykhun, "The OPCW-UN Joint Investigative Mechanism,[15][16][17][18] the governments of the United States, United Kingdom, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, France, and Israel, as well as Human Rights Watch have attributed the attack to the forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad" in spite of the fact it was the town was held by al nusra!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khan_Shaykhun_chemical_attack

i think russia is right to be skeptical of the opcw's impartiality and objectivity here...

A P , Apr 3, 2018 4:28:19 PM | 41
The integrity of the Porton Down scientists has thrown a wrench into the Mossad plan. Mossad got away with it in the Litvinenko caper, so rinse and repeat with a new "Russia-only poison".

The non-scientist Brits don't have any answers beyond what the Zionist/US/NATO Deep State told them to say because Mossad did it, probably without UK gov't knowledge at even the highest/secret levels. (Easier to ask forgiveness than permission) The various "locations/methods' being floated would have been salted with chemical "indicators" by Mossad to make the confusion of potential scenarios plausible for the presstitutes and politicios to regurgitate on-cue.

Occam's Razor at work.

karlof1 , Apr 3, 2018 4:30:25 PM | 42
As I understand it, Porton Down must have a sample of A-234 in order to be able to identify the agent used in the attack as A-234--a record of the fingerprint to match the recovered fingerprint. However, Porton Down's saying it does not have any samples of A-234; so, if it lacks samples, how can it discover the match?

The there's the further BS about the Skripals not having any close relatives or others able to help.

Lies, Lies, Lies!

Oh, and did you hear what China's Defense Minister, currently visiting Moscow, has said : "The Chinese side came [to Moscow] to let the Americans know about the close ties between the Russian and Chinese armed forces." I really doubt he's lying.

Bart Hansen , Apr 3, 2018 5:04:07 PM | 43
39 - "Russia doesn't start wars - Russia ends wars"
Tom , Apr 3, 2018 5:18:07 PM | 44
Over at John Delacour's twitter site, he asks a simple question, "A simple question for @MetPoliceUK, @WiltshirePolice, @BorisJohnson/#Fakes_R_us et al.
Where was Sergey #Skripal's car going at 2:55pm on Sunday 4th April when you assure us he was eating risotto chez Zizzi?

There is a video clip from the Daily Mirror allegedly showing Skripal's car. John has done lots of good work with the CW attacks in Syria. This dog is not letting go of the bone.

#9 Fatima Manoubia excellent post.
#23 Peter AU Syria and perhaps some local politics, Brexit, EU, discrediting Corbyn.

Don Bacon , Apr 3, 2018 5:21:49 PM | 45
@Laguerre 36
The cop, being apparently in reasonable health, should have been able to give an interview, but no, it hasn't been done.
PM May had a private meeting with DS Bailey on March 15 in hospital, before he was released. Quite unusual. There's no other reason than collusion, as May herself might say.
Daniel , Apr 3, 2018 5:26:12 PM | 46
So, what headline does BBC America post to tell its readers that Porton Down can't determine where the alleged poison came from?

"Russian spy: Source of nerve agent 'not identified'"

For the 1/2 to 3/4 of news consumers who only read the headline, it looks like just another spurious denial by "the Russians."

lysias , Apr 3, 2018 5:29:19 PM | 47
Porton Down, or the Israeli counterpart at Nes Ziyona? Israel has not signed the chemical weapons ban, and is not subject to inspection by the OPCW.
Don Bacon , Apr 3, 2018 5:33:35 PM | 48
Regarding impartiality and honesty, they are rare if not unknown qualities in every government agency everywhere (based on my small sampling). Nearly everybody has a price. One must get an informed opinion from a source that couldn't benefit from a wrong decision, and wouldn't suffer from an honest one. That's difficult, but not impossible. In this case where could one find an impartial lab for the test and evaluation? Perhaps in China or India.
Meanwhile my guess is that Porton was given an order to report (1) novichok and (2) Russia, and they came most of the way with novichok, and probably Russia given #10's deduction powers from the indicators provided.
Daniel , Apr 3, 2018 5:36:08 PM | 49
OT, but since I loves me some irony:

BBC headline :
Florida shooting: Students defy transparent school bags rule


"The rules about the clear rucksacks, which were provided free to students, came into effect on Monday as classes resumed after the spring break. Other security measures announced last month include mandatory new ID badges for students, with plans also in place for airport-style metal detectors.

"But students have argued that the new bags will not prevent future attacks and infringe their privacy."

Permafrost , Apr 3, 2018 6:11:20 PM | 50
Mr. Corbin missed an excellent opportunity to score a goal!
Instead, he preferred to join the warmongers on duty, even after asking for care in the investigations.
Like anyone without a spine, he was swept away by general hysteria.
Curtain, Mr. Corbin...
Sad.
Toxik , Apr 3, 2018 6:13:28 PM | 51
good point that Boris is liar. well for that matter, its now the entire British Government that's lying.
dahoit , Apr 3, 2018 6:28:52 PM | 52
47;In speaking of israel,nehroo is in deep shite,own party is up in arms,at nehroo attempt a fix with un in attempting the African crisis.
likklemore , Apr 3, 2018 6:33:00 PM | 53
Madame May is not walking back on any of this. She has doubled down: Daily Express UK, reporting on Mr. Aitkenhead's interview with SkyNews, has this morsel:

Porton Down experts NOT able to prove Salisbury nerve agent was Russia made
LINK


[.]

Mr Aitkenhead added there was no known antidote to novichok, and that none has been administered to either Sergei or Yulia Skripal. He declined to say whether the lab had developed or keeps stocks of novichok, but rejected suggestions it had come from Porton Down.

[.]The latest developments come after retired Russian Lieutenant-General Evgeny Buzhinsky warned that relations between Russia and the West could become "worse" than the Cold War and "end up in a very, very bad outcome"
Mr Buzhinsky told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "A real war, worse than a cold war is a real war, it will be the last war in the history of mankind."

A Downing Street spokesman responded: "As the Prime Minister has made clear, the UK would much rather have in Russia a constructive partner ready to play by the rules.

"But this attack in Salisbury was part of a pattern of increasingly aggressive Russian behaviour, as well as a new and dangerous phase in Russian activity within the continent and beyond.

"As the Prime Minister has said, we must face the facts, and the challenge of Russia is one that will endure for years to come."

OPCW said its executive council would meet in the morning in The Hague to discuss the UK's Government's claim that Russia was behind the attack.

I have a few questions for Madame May. Recall you stated this nerve agent {Novichok} was 5 to 8x more toxic than VX? Mr. Aitkenhead has stated "there was no known antidote to novichok, and that none has been administered to either Sergei or Yulia Skripal."

The Skripals are alive, Yes!? Daughter Yulia is up, eating, talking. How is that for a miracle?.
I read one report Yulia's social media account was accessed while she was in a coma. Lazarus.

Ali , Apr 3, 2018 6:39:04 PM | 54
@dahoit 52

What Israel is deep in is spelled with two 'i's

Fatima Manoubia , Apr 3, 2018 6:42:13 PM | 55
This is what they are trying to hide:

Apart from general movilizations of elders in Spain claiming for pensions of dignity and for maintaining the public pension system which saw several days of demonstrations which conflued with the women´s day demonstrations...

General strike at AmazonSpain:

https://twitter.com/pechosboys/status/976207765013172230

https://twitter.com/comunistasmijas/status/981254740406390785

But, then, FRA3 AmazonGermany joins the strike in support of AmazonSpain...

https://twitter.com/pechosboys/status/975769208423354368

Several general strikes in France during the last month of March. The strike of the French railway workers, which will last until June, has the support of students, elders, hospital staff and postal workers. That's how the French streets are today.

https://twitter.com/pechosboys/status/976785878080245760

https://twitter.com/pechosboys/status/976786774713421824

https://twitter.com/pechosboys/status/976856517839347712

https://twitter.com/CgtTuifrance/status/981201000907378689

https://twitter.com/pechosboys/status/981167309061439488

https://twitter.com/pechosboys/status/980904992352632832

And at other locations, other events were happening...which left underreported to the people:

Argentina commemorated the Day of Memory, Truth and Justice, where "NUNCA MAS" was a clamor...

https://twitter.com/pechosboys/status/977979771224297472

New demonstrations and protests in Athens against electronic auctions of foreclosed homes and allowing the participation of foreign capital. #Greece

https://twitter.com/pechosboys/status/976890170753593344

Meanwhile in Yemen....

https://twitter.com/pechosboys/status/977954817762123776

Meanwhile in the Russian Federation...

https://twitter.com/pechosboys/status/977580364368699397


james , Apr 3, 2018 6:45:37 PM | 56
@46 daniel.. that bbc headline ""Russian spy: Source of nerve agent 'not identified'" tells one all they need to know of what a lying sack of bs the uk has become on all levels, but especially it's public state run media... the bbc tries to be as pathetic as may and boris and succeeds!!

@47 lysias... your comment is worth repeating.. not enough folks know this.. " Israel has not signed the chemical weapons ban, and is not subject to inspection by the OPCW." immediate suspicion ought be cast on israel as a consequence... what a friggin' team player they are hey? i guess that is why the usa/canada and a bunch of other loser nations love them so much!

@53 likklemore.. quote from the article ""As the Prime Minister has made clear, the UK would much rather have in Russia a constructive partner ready to play by the rules." what bullshite! she means like how israel plays by the rules, by not being a member of the opcw and not being subject to inspection... what a gang of lousy thiefs and liars they all are!

[Apr 04, 2018] Russian aviation experts: Israeli-made Python air-to-air missile (fired from Israeli-upgraded Su-25 Scorpion) may have downed MH17

Apr 04, 2018 | russia-insider.com

AM Hants Bad boy!! Otto!! • 15 hours ago ,

Have you seen this. Off topic, but, might interest you. How fast does a BUK fly? How fast does a python fly?

Missile Allegedly Used to Down MH17 Invisible Due to Speed – Dutch Prosecutors... https://sputniknews.com/eur...

Bad boy!! Otto!! AM Hants • 14 hours ago ,

No clue how fast a BUK flies.....As for snakes, I can´t recall any that have developed the ability to fly, and I´m certain Pythons haven´t. I`m not saying they don´t, but I just never come across one that does....I´ll look into it.

Hmm an invisible BUK missile. Well it could be....There is yet anyone to come forward that has seen it taking off. Not a single person......No sound......No contrail......Nothing.....No surprises it wasn´t seen by radar. It wasn´t there.

AM Hants Bad boy!! Otto!! • 13 hours ago ,

Here is a flying python.

Russian aviation experts: 'Israeli-made Python air-to-air missile (fired from Israeli-upgraded Su-25 Scorpion) may have downed MH17'... https://www.sott.net/articl...

Govert AM Hants • 4 hours ago ,

Going off-topic, your hobby, isn't it, Anne-Marie? Anyway, as your quoted sputnik article writes:

"However, Russian arms manufacturer Almaz-Antey, which developed the Buk missile system, has rejected these findings, saying that three simulations showed that the missile was launched from the Zaroshchenske area, which was controlled by Ukraine's army at the time of the downing"

Clearly the (their, A-A's) discussion is not what type of missile system. They (or rather their bosses) only want the missile to have been launched from "Ukraine's army controlled" area. Why do you want to keep the fantasies and lies alive? Btw, here is the official news release: https://www.om.nl/actueel/n... Link to a more detailed report near the bottom.

Bad boy!! Otto!! Govert • 3 hours ago ,

LMAO...How did I know I´d find you here trolling AM?

Anyway AA has always said IF it was a BUK missile, and as no Russian officials in any capacity has been allowed near the wreckage in the hands of the lying war criminal dutch government, It would be impossible for them to make a conclusive analysis.

Btw, We are familiar with your "reports"....Not worth the paper they are written on.

And finally banderite, as this case has yet to see the inside of a court of Law, it is all bullshit till it does.

Any dates for that court hearing yet?...And I do mean an open and transparent court hearing and not some kangaroo court favoured by the Brits when they "tried" the Litvenko case.

Govert Bad boy!! Otto!! • an hour ago ,

"Banderite"? What or who is a "banderite"?

So A-A - that has co-operated with the DSB in their investigation into what downed the MH17- did an expensive research on their own, doing experiments, writing a report, giving presentations, came to their conclusions about the type of BUK and the launch location, and then would say "IF it was a BUK". Ha ha ha, now that is a ridiculous conditional statement! Only fools believe that. "If it was a BUK"... LMAO... It was a BUK, cockroach, and it came from Russia in the night before, with a Russian crew. They fired at what they thought to be a Ukrainian military aircraft and killed almost 300 innocent people, almost 200 from my country. IF the "case will not see the inside of a court of Law", it is due to the obstructions and the protection that these cowards get from your paradise that has already vetoed a UN tribunal and announced that it will not hand over any suspects, cockroach.

Bad boy!! Otto!! Govert • an hour ago ,

That´s more like it banderite...I do like a bit of a spirited debate.

However...:-( it does seem to be the case you have spent more time concentrating on calling me a "cockroach" than concentrating on what this debate is about....I did tell you many times you aren´t terribly bright, and as such I would suggest you concentrate on giving more thought to the question in hand rather than thinking of childish insults in order to get some sort of angry response from me...ain´t gonna happen banderite...you are nowhere near clever enough.

Any how banderite poofter...the main thrust of my argument, was the fact, no Russian official in any capacity was allowed anywhere near the wreckage in the possession of the lying war criminal dutch government to make an accurate analysis of what may have brought the aeroplane down.

Can you confirm this is the case? And try not to obfuscate...You will not be able to throw me off the scent. Oh, btw....How is russie russie?...Poor sod got banned the other day. :-(
LMAO!!!!
Didn´t slavko get banned as well?
Holy crap...we´re running out of trolls.

Govert Bad boy!! Otto!! • 7 minutes ago ,

I would suggest you concentrate on giving more thought to the question in hand rather than thinking of childish insults You took the words right out of my mouth.... thanks, cockroach.

Russian officials? LMAO. Wasn't the area where the plane crashed controlled by "separatists" and vacationers? To whom did these bell boys want to hand over the "black boxes" initially? What were these bell boys doing with - and near the pieces of wreckage in those first days?

Again, no idea what or who a "banderite" is, nor what or who a "russie russie" is, but looking at the definition of what is seen as a "cockroach" here, you are exactly that, a cowardly cockroach even. However... it does seem to be the case you have spent more time concentrating on discussing banned commenters than concentrating on what this debate is about. (What happened to "Otto310" by the way?) Thanks.

Bad boy!! Otto!! AM Hants • 6 hours ago ,

ahhh, that sort of Python. I do so apologise, I must admit to feeling a little wary last night.It had been a long day. I thought you mean´t the wriggly hissing type of Python.
Well, it is now a new day, and feeling refreshed and ready for a this new day after a good nights sleep, I am now a little more compis mentis than last night.
I have seen that report.To me there is a flaw. It does not mention bullet holes, and there are definitely some holes in the aircraft that are perfectly round, depending from which angle the bullets were fired from, which could not have come from a BUK.
There are two reports that corroborate the other.
This one is probably the first to go against the official line, by Peter Haisenko.
https://www.anderweltonline...
and then there is this one.
https://cassad-eng.livejour...
Both are very good and seem to make a lot of sense.

Btw, normally I would be bidding you a good night.
But not now...So...Good morning AM!

[Apr 03, 2018] Belarus Expels Moscow Diplomats 'Leading Russia Expert' Falls for Cheeky April Fool's Joke

With such "leading experts"...
Someone should tell Elliot Higgins over at Bellingcat that if he's been trying to geolocate the expelled Russian diplomats in Belarus , he can stop now.
Notable quotes:
"... "leading specialist" ..."
Apr 03, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Anders Aslund's deep knowledge of Eastern European politics was no match for April Fool's, when the supposedly all-knowing Russia commentator fruitlessly cheered fake news about Belarus expelling Russian diplomats.

Aslund, who was presented by the American think tank the Atlantic Council as a "leading specialist" on Russian economic policy and Eastern Europe in general, has been featured on the BBC, CNN and the Washington Post as a commentator on Russian President Vladimir Putin's administration.

The prank was carried out by Martin Kragh, of the Swedish Institute of International Affairs, who tweeted: "Breaking: Belarus expels 5 Russian diplomats in solidarity with the UK. 'Russia is on the wrong side of history,' says [President Aleksandr] Lukashenko."

Aslund even commentated on the 'development,' stating that it revealed how Putin had "profoundly" isolated his country. "This is not 'Global Russia' but Russia alone," he added.

Kragh later revealed his tweet to be a prank by alluding to the date it was posted - April 1st - a day for playing practical jokes and spreading hoaxes.

[Apr 03, 2018] The Shocking Diplomatic Incompetence of Theresa May and Boris Johnson

Notable quotes:
"... In relations between countries, politics is known as diplomacy, and it is a formal art that relies on a specific set of instruments to keep countries out of war. These include maintaining channels of communication to build trust and respect, exercises to seek common ground, and efforts to define win-win scenarios to which all sides would eagerly agree, including instruments for enforcing agreements. ..."
"... This is not incompetence. They are doing exactly as their masters demand. Makes them look like bumbling fools, but hey, that's what happens when one sells their ass and soul ..."
"... You're not thinking. Deliberate Boris buffoonery is all part of the scam ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Since 1977, US diplomatic history has been, to one extent or another, a history of fantastic blunders. Dmitry Orlov Mar 16, 2018 | 12,197 99

There is the famous aphorism by Karl von Clausewitz: "War is the continuation of politics by other means." This may be true, in many cases, but it is rarely a happy outcome. Not everybody likes politics, but when given a choice between politics and war, most sane people will readily choose politics, which, even when brimming with vitriol and riddled with corruption, normally remains sublethal.

He's the best his neocon masters could come up with

In relations between countries, politics is known as diplomacy, and it is a formal art that relies on a specific set of instruments to keep countries out of war. These include maintaining channels of communication to build trust and respect, exercises to seek common ground, and efforts to define win-win scenarios to which all sides would eagerly agree, including instruments for enforcing agreements.

Diplomacy is a professional endeavor, much like medicine, engineering and law, and requires a similarly high level of specialized education. Unlike these other professions, the successful exercise of diplomacy demands much greater attention to questions of demeanor: a diplomat must be affable, personable, approachable, decorous, scrupulous, levelheaded in a word, diplomatic. Of course, in order to maintain good, healthy relations with a country, it is also essential that a diplomat fluently speak its language, understand its culture and know its history. Especially important is a very detailed knowledge of the history of a country's diplomatic relations with one's own country, for the sake of maintaining continuity, which in turn makes it possible to build on what has been achieved previously.

Complete knowledge of all treaties, conventions and agreements previously entered into is, obviously, a must. Sane people will choose politics over war, and sane (that is, competently governed) nations will choose diplomacy over belligerence and confrontation. An exception is those nations that cannot hope to ever win the game of diplomacy due to an acute shortage of competent diplomats. They are likely to strike out in frustration, undermining the very international institutions that are designed to keep them out of trouble. It then falls upon their more competent counterparts in other nations to talk them off the ledge. This may not always be possible, especially if the incompetents in question can't be made to appreciate the risks they are taking in blindly striking out against their diplomatic counterparts.

If we look around in search of such incompetently governed nations, two examples readily present themselves: the United States and the United Kingdom. It is rather challenging to identify the last moment in history when the US had a Secretary of State that was truly competent. To be safe, let's set it as January 20, 1977, the day Henry Kissinger stepped down from his post. Since then, US diplomatic history has been, to one extent or another, a history of fantastic blunders. For example, as far back as 1990 US Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie told Saddam Hussein, "[W]e have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait," in effect giving the green light to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and setting off the cascade of events that has led to the current sad state of affairs in the region.

Another highlight was Hillary Clinton, whose only credentials had to do with a sort of fake noblesse , stemming from her marriage to a former president, and who used her position as Secretary of State to enrich herself using a variety of corrupt schemes. Among the lower ranks of the diplomatic corps, most ambassadorships went to people with no diplomatic education or experience, whose only qualifications had to do with electoral fundraising on behalf of whoever happened to occupy the White House and other partisan political considerations. Few of these people are able to enter into a meaningful dialogue with their counterparts.

Most are barely able to read a programmatic statement of policy from a piece of paper handed them by a staffer. In the meantime, the UK establishment has been gradually decrepitating in its own inimitable post-imperial fashion. Its special relationship with the US has meant that it had no reason to maintain an independent foreign policy, always playing second fiddle to Washington. It has remained as a US-occupied territory ever since World War II, just like Germany, and, deprived of its full measure of sovereignty, could allow its international organs to slowly atrophy from disuse. The benefit of this arrangement is that it has allowed the collapse of the British Empire to proceed in slow motion -- the slowest and longest collapse in the long history of empires.

What little competence there was left gradually drained away in the course of the UK's temporary dalliance with the European Union, due to end next year, during which most of the rest of UK's sovereignty was signed away by treaty, and most questions of international governance were relinquished to unelected bureaucrats in Brussels. And now, at the end of this long process of degeneration and decay, we have in the person of the Foreign Minister a clown by the name of Boris Johnson. His equally incompetent boss Theresa May recently saw it fit to very loudly and publicly violate the terms of the Chemical Weapons Convention to which the UK is a signatory. To recap, Theresa May claimed that a certain Russian-cum-British spy living in the UK was killed using a nerve agent made in Russia, and gave Russia 24 hours to explain this situation to her satisfaction. Russia is likewise a signatory to the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), and had destroyed all 39,967 metric tons of its chemical weapons by September 27, 2017.

On that occasion, The Director-General of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), Ambassador Ahmet Üzümcü, stated: "The completion of the verified destruction of Russia's chemical weapons programme is a major milestone in the achievement of the goals of the Chemical Weapons Convention. I congratulate Russia and I commend all of their experts who were involved for their professionalism and dedication." The US is yet to destroy its stockpiles, preferring to squander trillions on useless ballistic defense systems instead of living up to its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention. Here is precisely what Theresa May did wrong. Under the terms of the CWC, the UK was obligated to provide Russia with a sample of the nerve agent used, along with all related evidence uncovered in the course of the investigation.

After that, the treaty gives Russia 10 days to respond. Instead, May provided no evidence, and gave Russia 24 hours to respond. When Russia formally requested to see the evidence, this request was refused. We can only guess at why she refused, but one reasonable supposition is that there is no evidence, because:

In considering all of the above, healthy skepticism is called for. All we have so far is an alleged double murder, no motive, doubtful means, over 140 million suspects (anyone who's Russian?), and public statements that amount to political theater. As far as repercussions, there is very little that the UK government can do to Russia. They kicked out a few dozen Russian diplomats (and Russia will no doubt reciprocate); the Royal Family won't be attempting the World Cup in Russia this summer (not a great loss, to be sure); there are also some vague threats that don't amount to anything. But that's not what's important. For the sake of the whole world, (former) great powers, especially nuclear ones, such as the US and the UK, should be governed with a modicum of competence, and this show of incompetence is most worrying. The destruction of public institutions in the US and the UK has been long in the making and probably can't be undone. But the least we can do is refuse to accept at face value what appear to be blatant fabrications and provocations, demand compliance with international law, and keep asking questions until we obtain answers.

Orlov is one of our favorite essayists on Russia and all sorts of other things. He moved to the US as a child, and lives in the Boston area.

He is one of the better-known thinkers The New Yorker has dubbed 'The Dystopians' in an excellent 2009 profile , along with James Howard Kunstler, another regular contributor to RI (archive) . These theorists believe that modern society is headed for a jarring and painful crack-up. He is best known for his 2011 book comparing Soviet and American collapse (he thinks America's will be worse). He is a prolific author on a wide array of subjects, and you can see his work by searching him on Amazon.

He has a large following on the web, and on Patreon, and we urge you to support him there , as Russia Insider does. His current project is organizing the production of affordable house boats for living on. He lives on a boat himself. If you haven't discovered his work yet, please take a look at his archive of articles on RI . They are a real treasure, full of invaluable insight into both the US and Russia and how they are related.

John C Carleton • 17 days ago ,

This is not incompetence. They are doing exactly as their masters demand. Makes them look like bumbling fools, but hey, that's what happens when one sells their ass and soul to the evil of zionism.

Canosin John C Carleton • 17 days ago ,

are you earnestly saying that Boris and Trashy are competent diplomats and politicians..... :-)
Boris is the perfect baffoon..... a complete embarrassment of British diplomacy..... whereas the unelected PM Trashy May is in a long row of PM one of the most incompetent, besides the ugliness, embarrassing PM in British history..... bad choices..... bad masters

Charles Crosby Canosin • 17 days ago ,

You're not thinking. Deliberate Boris buffoonery is all part of the scam, just like that Commie Marxist lard arse Prescott in Blair's circus show and George Brown in the Wilson circus show. They haul these treacherous pieces of filth out just to take the piss out of the dumb voters.

Desert Mary Canosin • 12 days ago ,

Well, you cant blame them...they are following in lock-step what their masters have ordered...neither the US or the UK has any diplomacy...they have opted for invading and decimating the defenseless of the world whose countries hold many valuable resources

peter gill Canosin • 15 days ago ,

I am trying to make up my mind if Johnson is a buffoon or just trying to pretend he is.

enriqueferro peter gill • 5 days ago ,

Britain is no serious country, sort of Gilbert & Sullivan comedy... Just imagine if Russia had appointed as Foreign Affairs a certain Zhirinovski. Would it be taken seriously? Likewise the UK. Only May's political buddies pretend to follow her absurdity, because they feel obliged to cover her fiasco, lest they look too embarrassed...

[Apr 03, 2018] Russia's Reaction to the Insults of the West Is Political Suicide

Notable quotes:
"... Dear President Putin, Dear Mr. Lavrov, Let them! Let them holler. Let them rot in their insanity . – Respond to the UK no longer with words but with deeds, with drastic deeds. Close their embassy. Give all embassy staff a week to vacate your country, then you abolish and eviscerate the embassy the same way the US abolished your consulates in Washington and San Francisco – a bit more than a year ago. ..."
"... Stealing is in their blood. Mr. Putin, You don't need to respond to their lowly abusive attacks, slanders, lies. ..."
Apr 03, 2018 | russia-insider.com

That is foolish sign of weakness . As if Russia was still believing in the goodness of the west, as if it just needed to be awakened. What Russia is doing, every time, not just in this Skripal case, but in every senseless and ruthless attack, accusations about cyber hacking, invading Ukraine, annexing Crimea, and not to speak about the never-ending saga of Russia-Gate, Russian meddling and hacking into the 2016 US Presidential elections, favoring Trump over Hillary. Everybody with a half brain knows it's a load of crap. Even the FBI and CIA said that there was no evidence. So, why even respond? Why even trying to undo the lies, convince the liars that they, Russia, are not culpable? Every time the west notices Russia's wanting to be a "good neighbor" – about which the west really couldn't care less, Russia makes herself more vulnerable, more prone to be accused and attacked and more slandered. Why does Russia not just break away from the west? Instead of trying to 'belong' to the west? Accept that you are not wanted in the west, that the west only wants to plunder your resources, your vast landmass, they want to provoke you into a war where there are no winners, a war that may destroy entire Mother Earth, but they, the ZionAnglo handlers of Washington, dream that their elite will survive to eventually take over beautiful grand Russia. That's what they want.

The Bashing is a means towards the end. The more people are with them, the easier it is to launch an atrocious war. The Skripal case is typical. The intensity with which this UK lie-propaganda has been launched is exemplary. It has brought all of halfwit Europe – and there is a lot of them – under the spell of Russia hating. Nobody can believe that May Merkel, Macron are such blatant liars that is beyond what they have been brought up with. A lifelong of lies pushed down their throats, squeezed into their brains. Even if something tells them – this is not quite correct, the force of comfort, not leaving their comfort zone- not questioning their own lives – is so strong that they rather cry for War, War against Russia, War against the eternal enemy of mankind. – I sadly remember in my youth in neutral Switzerland, the enemy always, but always came from the East. He was hiding behind the "Iron Curtain". The West is fabricating a new Iron Curtain. But while doing that, they don't realize they are putting a noose around their own neck. Russia doesn't need the west, but the west will soon be unable to survive without the East, the future is in the east – and Russia is an integral part of the East, of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), that encompasses half the world's population and controls a third of the world's economic output. Mr. Putin, you don't need to respond to insults from the west, because that's what they are, abusive insults. The abject slander that Johnson boy threw at you is nothing but a miserable insult; you don't need to respond to this behavior. You draw your consequences.

Dear President Putin, Dear Mr. Lavrov, Let them! Let them holler. Let them rot in their insanity . – Respond to the UK no longer with words but with deeds, with drastic deeds. Close their embassy. Give all embassy staff a week to vacate your country, then you abolish and eviscerate the embassy the same way the US abolished your consulates in Washington and San Francisco – a bit more than a year ago.

Surely you have not forgotten. Then you give all Brits generously a month to pack up and leave your beautiful country (it can be done – that's about what Washington is forcing its vassals around the globe to do with North Korean foreign laborers); block all trade with the UK (or with the entire West for that matter), block all western assets in Russia, because that's the first thing the western plunderers will do, blocking Russian assets abroad. Stealing is in their blood. Mr. Putin, You don't need to respond to their lowly abusive attacks, slanders, lies.

You and Russia are way above the level of this lowly western pack. Shut your relation to the west. You have China, the SCO, the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), Russia is part of the OBI – President Xi's One Belt Initiative – the multi-trillion development thrive, emanating from China, connecting continents – Asia, Africa, Europe, South America – with infrastructure, trade, creating hundreds of millions of decent jobs, developing and promoting science and culture and providing hundreds of millions of people with a decent life. What would the west do, if suddenly they had no enemy, because the enemy has decided to ignore them and take a nap? China will join you. Everything else, responding, justifying, explaining, denying the most flagrant lies, trying to make them believe in the truth is not only a frustrating waste of time, it's committing political suicide. You will never win. The west doesn't give a hoot about the truth – they have proven that for the last two thousand years or more. And in all that time, not an iota of conscience has entered the west's collective mind. The west cannot be trusted. Period.

or sign up with Disqus or pick a name
Disqus is a discussion network

Read full terms and conditions

NMGOM • 14 days ago ,

Peter Koenig - - -

All your points are valid. I am an American who is truly embarrassed by this ridiculous anti-Russian
"theater" in the West. I am at a loss for words about this. Have never seen anything so unprofessional and hysterical from supposed career diplomats. Is this irrational, hostile "feeding frenzy" an admission that the time for the West is over on the world stage, and the future ow belongs to Russia and China?

===================

Alec White NMGOM • 14 days ago ,

Yes, the West is on its last legs. Everything - from dreadful demography to desperate economic policies to comically unhinged foreign policy - screams unfolding catastrophe. Anti-Russian hysteria is simply an effort to consolidate atomizing societies. It won't work. You can't fool all the people all the time, after all.

LD Alec White • 14 days ago ,

If the Empire falls it wil bring everything and everyone down, wilfully

Nationalist Globalist Oligarch LD • 14 days ago ,

All Empires fall, it isn't an issue of "if" but only of "when".

temujin1970 LD • 14 days ago ,

That's is what I am afraid of.

Paw Canosin • 14 days ago ,

Orchestrated attack , organized, planned before and not the first one
.They try to accumulate so many provocations /with so many mostly innocent victims/ , so they can later attack by force.
They loosing big. By going low and lower..
And they are mad and want to show at the same time what unbelivable trash , they are and what dirt they can produce...That is the end of them...
British were poodles /Blair/ and now they act as a chorus /with others/ of hyenas and rats...
Huge contrast with dignified and intelligent behaviour of Russians.
.It speaks to the world.

[Apr 03, 2018] Russian Exodus from the West

How one can claim that Russia does not need West, if almost all technology is from the West.
Apr 03, 2018 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

Russian Exodus from the West

By Peter Koenig

April 01, 2018 " Information Clearing House " - By now the West – the US, Canada, Australia and the super-puppets of Europe, overall more than 25 countries – has expelled more than 130 Russian diplomats. All as punishment for Russia's alleged nerve gas poisoning of a former Russian / MI6 double-agent, Sergei Skripal (66) and his daughter Yulia (33), who was visiting her father from Moscow.

Sergei Skripal lived in the UK for the last seven years, ever since President Putin lifted his prison sentence in 2010 in a spy swap with the UK. The pair, father and daughter, was allegedly discovered on 4 March slumped on a park bench in Salisbury, England, not far from Sergei's home. Apparently traces of the same nerve agent were found at the Skripal home's door.

Russia in the meantime has started in a tit-for-tat move expelling western diplomat s – in a first round 60, plu s closing the US Consulate in St. Petersburg. According to Mr. Lavrov, more will most likely follow. – There will be an exodus and a counter-exodus of diplomats, west-east and east-west. It looks like a Kindergarten at play – but is of course a blatant provocation by the west on Russia and a continuation of the vilification of President Putin – especially after he has just been reelected with an overwhelming majority of over 76%. It's a provocation with zero substance, to further justify an escalating NATO aggression against Russia. The war-bells are ringing – for a lie, an abject farce, visible to a child. Only the blind, those puppets, because out of fear or out of stupidity, who do not want to see – are supporting this new US instigated, UK executed drive against Russia. The nerve gas, called Novichok, had been produced by the Soviet Union in the 1970s, but was subsequently banned and destroyed under international supervision. The 'inventor' of Novichok lives apparently in the US. Mr. Putin said, if the military-grade Novichok would have been used, the only form the USSR ever produced, there would have been no survivors.

What hardly anybody talks about is that the secretive UK Defense (War) Ministry's laboratory of Porton Down , is but 13 km away from where father and daughter were allegedly found unconscious on a park bench. Porton Down is a highly sophisticated chemical and biological weapons lab that entertains contracts with the Pentagon of more than US$ 70 million for carrying out "experiments", including on humans and animals. Porton Down has the capacity to produce Novichok.

See t he full story on Porton Down, by Bulgarian investigative journalist , Dilyana Gaytandzhieva –

https://southfront.org/salisbury-nerve-agent-attack-reveals-70-million-pentagon-program-porton/ .

At this point there is no prove – other than what the police reported – that Sergei and Yulia Skripal were found on that dubious park bench. There are no civil witnesses. The UK government does not disclose where the two are treated, what their current health status is. Only on the repeated insistence of Mr. Lavrov that according to an agreement between the UK and Russia (the USSR) in the 1960s, both countries have the right to inquire and investigate about the wellbeing of their respective citizens, an official statement on 29 March from the UK said that Yulia is doing better and is on her way to recovery, while her father is still in critical but stable conditions (The Guardian, 29 March 2018). Is it true? – What if one or both recover and have enough memory of the events to go public?

What if the two have indeed been poisoned at Sergei's home, or abducted and brought to the Porton Down laboratory to be infected with the nerve gas and then later dumped to the park bench? Why does the UK not disclose any 'evidence' they apparently have against Russia? – No details of where the two are being treated? – No visits allowed. Russia's offer to collaborate in the investigation is laughed off and refused. Is this a well-orchestrated MI6 / CIA false flag, followed by outrageous lambasting by the UK's highest leadership against Russia and her newly re-elected President Putin?

This criminal propaganda event is so full of lies, false accusations and deceit, pulling along more than 25 (so far) western nations to condemn and sanction Russia in unison for something Russia has with absolute certainty not committed. Just apply logic – a tough challenge, I know, these days for the dumb-folded west – but logic would tell a child that there is no sense, absolutely no sense, for Russia to carry out such an evil act. So, the usual question is: cui bono – who benefits? – And the answer is also crystal clear: Profiting from this sham are the war-mongering US / NATO and their miserable vassal-allies – spineless for years – following lies, their governments are fully aware of the lies, of the untruth Russia is accused of.

Adding injury to insult is Ecuador's new President, Lenin Moreno, who a few days ago has shut up Julian Assange, Wikileaks editor, who is in political asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London since July 2012. Under Moreno's gag-order, Assange is no longer allowed to communicate with anybody in any form and shape and cannot receive visitors. The official reason for Moreno – who has clearly become a traitor on his people – is that Assange tweeted a protest against the arrest in Germany of Catalonian ex-leader, Carles Puigdemont. Moreno has condemned Assange to a sort of isolation prison in the Ecuadorian Embassy. Who gave Moreno orders to do so? – Well, I leave the guessing up to you. In any case Moreno has become a prostitute as are most of the western world "leaders".

The real reason is most likely Assange's strong critique of the UK government, especially PM Teresa May and her Foreign and Defense Ministers, for their vitriolic and unjustified accusations and slandering of Russia and particularly of President Putin in the Skripal poison case. Assange cannot leave the embassy for fear of being arrested and extradited to the US, where he may face torture and worse, possibly the death penalty.

Diplomatic Relations

Let's take this a step further. Diplomatic relations between the west and Russia have totally fallen apart. The doors are closed. Russia doesn't need the west. But the west, especially Europe, badly needs and will every day more need Russia, a close ally and trading partner for hundreds of years. The west, eventually abandoned and every day more enslaved by Washington with weaponized refugees, with false flag terror attacks, leading to increased militarization, to oppression and censorship, privatization of public goods and infrastructure – Greece is but an example – and strangulation by Wall Street private banking and troika (IMF, European Central Bank, European Commission) imposed debt, the west will beg Russia to open her doors and show them her kindness – the kindness and openness Russia has been demonstrating to the west over the past almost 20 years, despite flagrant western abuse and demonization no end.

The western Anglo-Zionist-led empire will collapse. It's a mere question of time but collapse it will. Today, not only a few, but all western "leaders" (sic) know that they are committing suicide by teaming up with destructive Washington – and this against the will of the majority of the European people. – Yet, they push a long this path of auto-destruction. Why? – Have they been personally threatened, or else lavishly rewarded if they follow the dictate of deep state-led White House and Pentagon?

The day may come when the west will knock desperately at Russia's door – please talk to us, we need you . But this may happen only if they have not let themselves be pulled into the abyss of annihilation by Washington. Their stupidity may just do that – another few lies, accusing Russia of crimes against humanity she didn't commit and prompting a war, an all-destructive nuclear war. The pretext could be another false flag Syrian sarin attack on "her own people", wrongly blaming Bashar al-Assad; or a missile landing in Israel, blaming Iran with the same no-proof propaganda fervor applied by the UK in the Sergei and Yulia Skripal case; or North Korea – in the course of negotiations between Trump and Kim Jong-un next month (April), the US / west launches a false flag missile, for example, from Guam, that lands in Japan, destroying infrastructure and killing people, blaming it immediately on DPRK, without any evidence whatsoever, but with a rigorous campaign UK-style, to the point that nobody dares to contradict the obvious lie.

What if the current UK virulent and violent Russia slandering campaign is but a dry-run for much worse to come? – By now the mental state of western society is at the level of Hitler's Propaganda Minister, Goebbels', statement – "Let me control the media, and I will turn any Nation into a herd of Pigs". Yes, that's what the west has become, a herd of pigs.

Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst. He is also a water resources and environmental specialist. He worked for over 30 years with the World Bank and the World Health Organization around the world in the fields of environment and water. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for Global Research; ICH; RT; Sputnik; PressTV; The 21st Century; TeleSUR; The Vineyard of The Saker Blog; and other internet sites. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed – fiction based on facts and on 30 years of World Bank experience around the globe. He is also a co-author of The World Order and Revolution! – Essays from the Resistance .

The views and opinions expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of Information Clearing House.

[Apr 03, 2018] Russian ministers suggest that British secret services carried out Skripal poisoning to distract from Brexit. No 10 tries to calm Russia row amid cold war rhetoric by Pippa Crerar and Patrick Wintour

Notable quotes:
"... Speaking in Moscow, Lavrov said there was "a lot of talk about a 'cold war', about the situation being worse than it was during the classic cold war, because then there were some rules, and some decency was observed". ..."
"... It came as a former Russian military official Lt-Gen Evgeny Buzhinsky warned that the conflict could even end up as "the last war in the history of mankind". In a thinly veiled threat, he said the diplomatic crisis could result in a "very, very bad outcome" and accused the west of "cornering Russia" which, he argued, was a "very dangerous thing". ..."
"... The deputy foreign minister, Alexander Grushko, called the poisoning of Sergei Skripal a "provocation arranged by Britain" in order to justify high military spending because "they need a major enemy". ..."
"... Russia is also keeping up the pressure on the UK to provide consular access to Skripal's daughter, Yulia, now she is recovering in a Salisbury hospital. ..."
"... Lavrov said it was outrageous that the UK was not letting diplomatic staff see Yulia Skripal . The Russian embassy in London claims the UK is in breach of article 36 of the Vienna convention by refusing consular access to a Russian national. ..."
"... Russia also warned it would not accept any international scientific findings on the nerve agent used to poison the Skripals unless its scientists were involved in testing the nerve agent samples. Moscow spelt out its conditions for cooperation before an emergency meeting it has convened for Wednesday of the executive of the Organisation for Prevention of Chemical Weapons in The Hague. ..."
"... Alexander Shulgin, Russia's permanent representative to the OPCW, complained that Russian scientists have been barred from the tests owing to British objections. ..."
Apr 03, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Russian ministers suggest that British secret services carried out Skripal poisoning to distract from Brexit

Tue 3 Apr 2018 10.03 EDT Last modified on Tue 3 Apr 2018 12.34 EDT Downing Street has issued a plea for "proportionate" action from Russia to the Salisbury poisoning row after its foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, warned that relations with the west are now worse than during the cold war.

Theresa May is visiting Scandinavia next week with the international security threat from Russia expected to be at the top of the agenda.

Her one-day visit to Denmark and Sweden was announced after Lavrov appeared to suggest that UK secret services may have been involved in the 4 March attack on a former Russian spy and his daughter in Salisbury. He said the incident could have been "beneficial" to the British government to distract attention from Brexit .

Speaking in Moscow, Lavrov said there was "a lot of talk about a 'cold war', about the situation being worse than it was during the classic cold war, because then there were some rules, and some decency was observed".

He added: "I believe that our western partners, I mean primarily the United Kingdom, the United States and some countries that blindly follow them, have cast away all decency, they are resorting to open lies, blatant misinformation."

It came as a former Russian military official Lt-Gen Evgeny Buzhinsky warned that the conflict could even end up as "the last war in the history of mankind". In a thinly veiled threat, he said the diplomatic crisis could result in a "very, very bad outcome" and accused the west of "cornering Russia" which, he argued, was a "very dangerous thing".

The deputy foreign minister, Alexander Grushko, called the poisoning of Sergei Skripal a "provocation arranged by Britain" in order to justify high military spending because "they need a major enemy".

However, Downing Street in effect called for calm at its weekly briefing for political reporters, simply saying it expected the wider dispute with Russia would not be settled for a long time. A No 10 spokesman said: "We need to respond in a proportionate way to this aggressive behaviour from Russia and that's what we're doing."

He added: "As the prime minister has made clear, the UK would much rather have in Russia a constructive partner ready to play by the rules. But this attack in Salisbury was part of a pattern of increasingly aggressive Russian behaviour, as well as a new and dangerous phase in Russian activity within the continent and beyond. As the prime minister has said, we must face the facts, and the challenge of Russia is one that will endure for years to come."

Russia is also keeping up the pressure on the UK to provide consular access to Skripal's daughter, Yulia, now she is recovering in a Salisbury hospital.

Reports from Russia claim that a cousin has contacted the British and Russian authorities to be given permission to go to the UK to be by her bedside.

Lavrov said it was outrageous that the UK was not letting diplomatic staff see Yulia Skripal . The Russian embassy in London claims the UK is in breach of article 36 of the Vienna convention by refusing consular access to a Russian national.

Downing Street raised the possibility that the 33-year-old may have requested that consular access be denied. It said access was based on a number of considerations "including consent from the individual".

Russia also warned it would not accept any international scientific findings on the nerve agent used to poison the Skripals unless its scientists were involved in testing the nerve agent samples. Moscow spelt out its conditions for cooperation before an emergency meeting it has convened for Wednesday of the executive of the Organisation for Prevention of Chemical Weapons in The Hague.

The OPCW is the internationally recognised body responsible for overseeing the 1997 chemical weapons convention and has been testing samples provided by British scientists from the Skripals.

The first results about the nature of the poison - which the UK believes to be novichok, a nerve agent of Russian origin – are expected in days. Alexander Shulgin, Russia's permanent representative to the OPCW, complained that Russian scientists have been barred from the tests owing to British objections.

[Apr 03, 2018] Russia is accusing Britain of staging and US of exploiting Skripal poisoning

Overview of skeptical press
Notable quotes:
"... by Tyler Durden 04/01/2018 ..."
"... By Chris Marsden ..."
Apr 03, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press
Russian Envoy to US: Skripal Case Pretext to Launch Long-Planned Smear Campaign

01.04.2018
 The Russian Ambassador to the United States, Anatoly Antonov, said on Sunday that the Skripal case was a pretext to carry out a provocation against Russia that has been in the planning stages for a long time.
"The developments in the United Kingdom served just as a pretext to carry out a provocation against Russia that was planned a long time ago. We have closely monitored, who attended the US Embassy in Moscow recently, what kind of people [attended it]," Antonov said in an interview with Russia's Channel Five.
Read more at https://sputniknews.com/us/201804011063108307-russia-usa-envoy-pretext-skripal/

Russia Claims Skripal Poisoning Was Staged By UK Intelligence

by Tyler Durden
04/01/2018
Russia's Ambassador to the UK, Alexander Yakovenko, says that London's reluctance to share information on the March 4 poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal has led Moscow to suggest that London authorities actually perpetrated the crime.
"We have very serious suspicion that this provocation was done by British intelligence," Yakovenko told Russia's NTV channel – adding however that Moscow had no direct proof, but that the UK's behavior constitutes strong circumstantial evidence in support of their theory.
Read more at https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-01/russia-claims-skripal-poisoning-was-staged-uk-intelligence

Yulia Skripal "improving rapidly": The unravelling of the Russian Novichok narrative

By Chris Marsden
31 March 2018
When placed in the context of the global anti-Russia propaganda campaign spearheaded by Britain's Conservative government, Thursday saw the greatest Easter miracle since Christ rose from the dead.
For weeks, the world's media has cited uncritically government claims that double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, were poisoned March 4 with a "weapons grade" nerve agent, known as a Novichok.
The agent was described as so deadly that the comatose Skripals were unlikely to ever recover, and that if they did they would be brain damaged and physically compromised. On Wednesday there were even media headlines that their life support might have to be turned off.
Read more at https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/03/31/yuli-m31.html Russian MFA Releases 14 Questions Addressed to UK on 'Fabricated Skripal Case'

31.03.2018
 The complete list of questions has been published on the Russian Foreign Ministry's website.
On March 31, the Embassy of the Russian Federation in London sent a note to the British Foreign Service with a list of questions regarding the 'fabricated Skripal case '.
Russia is asking the UK to explain why Moscow was denied consular access to the Skripal case, why France was involved in the investigation, what made the Britons believe that the nerve agent was of Russian origin and does the UK have samples of the so-called "Novichok."
Yet another question focuses on the information about the antidotes used to treat the Skripals and the fact that the UK medics had possession of these substances on site.
Read more at https://sputniknews.com/russia/201803311063103452-russia-uk-skripal-case-russian-ministry-questions/

Which countries are expelling Russian diplomats?

31 Mar 2018
Twenty-five European countries, Australia, Canada and the US have announced that they will be expelling 123 Russian diplomats over the coming week.
Days later Russia responded in kind, expelling an equal number of diplomats from those countries, except Belgium, Hungary, Georgia and Montenegro. It also announced that the UK diplomatic mission to Moscow will have to cut staff by another 50 diplomats.
Last week, the UK expelled 23 Russian officials . In addition, Bulgaria and Luxemburg recalled their ambassadors from Moscow for consultations.
Read more at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/03/countries-expelling-russian-diplomats-180326191614898.html

Last Act Of 'Novichok' Drama Revealed – "The Skripals' Resurrection"

March 29, 2018
It seems that the 'Novichok' fairy-tale the British government plays to us provides for a happy ending – the astonishing and mysterious resurrection of the victims of a "military grade" "five to eight times more deadly than VX gas" "nerve agent" "of a type developed by" Hollywood.
Read more at http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/03/she-is-risen-last-act-of-novichok-drama-revealed-the-skripals-resurrection.html#more

[Apr 03, 2018] NATO and Novichok

Notable quotes:
"... Published at http://tass.com/politics/996756 ..."
Mar 29, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press

31/03/2018

Diplomat reminds that NATO inherited Czechoslovakia's chemical industry potential

March 29, 2018

Earlier NATO slashed the staff of the Russian mission to 20 from 30

MOSCOW, March 29. /TASS/. NATO countries are using the chemical industry potential of the Czech Republic and its developments in the sphere of protection from chemical warfare agents, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Thursday.

The diplomat thus commented on the statement by the Foreign Ministry of Russia, which mentioned the Czech Republic among the countries that had been developing the nerve agent called Novichyok and used, as the UK claims, to poison former Russian military intelligence officer Sergei Skripal.

"The work codenamed Novichyok was conducted in Great Britain, the US, the Czech Republic and Sweden. The results achieved by these countries to create new chemical agents of this type are reflected in more than 200 open sources of NATO countries," the spokeswoman said, noting that Czechia had been carrying out research into chemical protection within the Warsaw Treaty Organization.

"In all media outlets, there are publications on this theme, which say that after the organization's dissolution, the Czech scientific potential in this field was sought by its new western partners and inherited by NATO," Zakharova said.

The Czech army performed special missions in the Middle East, including the work to eliminate the consequences of the use of chemical weapons in Kuwait, the Russian Foreign Ministry's spokeswoman said.

The publications existing in the media on the activity of scientific centers for the study of chemical warfare agents in the Czech Republic make it possible to conclude that "an important place in this research is held by nerve agents called Novichyok according to the western classification, the Russian diplomat noted.

Read also: Why we shouldn't now leave the Euro!

Thus, Czech scientists were numerously awarded grants of the NATO Science Committee. Also, the NATO center for the protection against mass destruction weapons operates in the town of Vyskov on Czech territory, Zakharova said.

"The development of antidotes and the so-called binding substances and ferments to absorb the components of nerve agents is a separate area of the research of [Czech] toxicologists. The Czech side is conducting research in close cooperation with NATO structures," Zakharova said, noting that "the free possession by the Czech chemists of the characteristics of Novichyok-type chemical agents "is evidence that this information is widely accessible."

"No one has accused or is accusing Prague of anything. We never make any accusations as compared to British colleagues. We only say that even in the media space – and this is not propaganda, these are not Russian media outlets but these are Czech publications – there is a large amount of materials confirming the Czech potential in the sphere of chemical research. This simply has to be taken into account," the Russian diplomat concluded.

Diplomats' expulsion and Skripal case

On March 4, former Russian military intelligence officer Sergei Skripal, who was earlier sentenced in Russia for spying for the UK, and his daughter Yulia were found unconscious on a bench near the Maltings shopping center in Salisbury, UK. Police said they had been exposed to the impact of a nerve agent.

UK's top officials claimed later that the nerve agent had allegedly been developed in Russia. Prime Minister Theresa May, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson and others rushed to accuse Russia of being involved, while failing to produce any evidence.

Read also: Regarding the resolution of the Parti de Gauche to submit a motion on the expulsion of SYRIZA from the EL

Moscow refuted the accusations of involvement in the incident and stated that neither the Soviet Union nor Russia have ever done research into that toxic chemical.

Without providing any proof, London expelled 23 Russian diplomats and suspended all planned high-level bilateral contacts. Moscow reciprocated with expelling 23 British diplomats, ordering the closure of Britain's consulate in St. Petersburg and terminating the operations of the British Council in Russia.

On March 26, the United States declared 60 Russian diplomats personae non gratae. Among them were 46 diplomats from the embassy in Washington, two from the consulate general in New York and 12 more from Russia's mission to the United Nations.

Germany, Canada, Poland and France followed suit by expelling four Russian diplomats each. Lithuania, Moldova and the Czech Republic expelled three diplomats, while Australia, Albania, Denmark, Spain, Italy and the Netherlands – two. Belgium, Hungary, Ireland, Latvia, Macedonia, Norway, Romania, Finland, Croatia, Sweden and Estonia each ordered the expulsion of one Russian envoy. Meanwhile, Ukraine made the decision to expel 13 Russian diplomats.

NATO slashed the staff of the Russian mission to 20 from 30. Bulgaria and Luxembourg recalled their envoys for consultations.

Russia's Foreign Ministry promised that those countries' hostile steps would not be left unanswered.

Published at http://tass.com/politics/996756

[Apr 03, 2018] A very strange coincidence exercise TOXIC DAGGER on the eve of Skripal poisoning

Notable quotes:
"... Dstl works with Marines on UK's biggest annual chemical warfare exercise ..."
Mar 04, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press

Dstl works with Marines on UK's biggest annual chemical warfare exercise

20 February 2018
From: Defence Science and Technology Laboratory

40 Commando Royal Marines and The Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl) have staged the UK's biggest annual exercise to prepare troops for Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) operations. Exercise TOXIC DAGGER is supported by Dstl, along with Public Health England (PHE) and The Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE), and is the largest exercise of its kind in the country.

Specialists in CBRN from Dstl and AWE are able to create realistic exercise scenarios based on the latest threat information. Completing the training and exercising against these scenarios provides a challenging programme for the Royal Marines to demonstrate their proficiency in the methods to detect, assess and mitigate a CBRN threat.

The three-week programme included Company-level attacks and scenarios concerning CBRN vignettes, concluding with a full-scale exercise involving government and industry scientists and more than 300 military personnel.

Major Rob Garside, from 40 Commando Royal Marines, said:

Working with Dstl means we have the most up-to-date information and a realistic exercise. This ensures we are well prepared for a CBRN operating environment. It is vital we can make rapid decisions and are able to protect and support specialists who come in to deal with any incident. On operations these specialists are on hand to advise and we must ensure we already have a strong understanding of their capabilities and what they require of us as a military force.

The Dstl lead for CBRN exercises said:

40 Commando would be first on the ground in the event of a CBRN incident. We ensure they're up to date on the latest threats and make the exercise truly realistic. They not only have to provide a fighting force in an unstable environment, they must also be able to assess the scene and know what they're dealing with.

Read also: US and European military operations in West Africa set the stage for broader war

That's where Dstl, PHE, AWE and the Defence CBRN Centre come in, as we provide the technical information the Marines require.

Find out more about Dstl's CBRN work

[Apr 03, 2018] Moscow Confronts London With 14 Questions on Skripal False Flag - Fabrication

Notable quotes:
"... fabricated case against Russia." ..."
"... "Have the samples of a chemical warfare agent of this type or its analogues been developed in France and if so, for what purpose?" ..."
"... "provocation," ..."
Apr 03, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Russia's Embassy in London has sent a list of 14 questions to the UK Foreign Ministry, demanding that it reveals details of the investigation into the nerve-agent poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter.

The questions , provided in full below, include a demand to clarify whether samples of the nerve agent А-234 (also known as "Novichok") have ever been developed in the UK. The embassy's statement calls the incident that started the recent diplomatic row a " fabricated case against Russia."

1. Why has Russia been denied the right of consular access to the two Russian citizens, who came to harm on British territory?

2. What specific antidotes and in what form were the victims injected with? How did such antidotes come into the possession of British doctors at the scene of the incident?

3. On what grounds was France involved in technical cooperation in the investigation of the incident, in which Russian citizens were injured?

4. Did the UK notify the OPCW (Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) of France's involvement in the investigation of the Salisbury incident?

5. What does France have to do with the incident, involving two Russian citizens in the UK?

6. What rules of UK procedural legislation allow for the involvement of a foreign state in an internal investigation?

7. What evidence was handed over to France to be studied and for the investigation to be conducted?

8. Were the French experts present during the sampling of biomaterial from Sergei and Yulia Skripal?

9. Was the study of biomaterials from Sergei and Yulia Skripal conducted by the French experts and, if so, in which specific laboratories?

10. Does the UK have the materials involved in the investigation carried out by France?

11. Have the results of the French investigation been presented to the OPCW Technical Secretariat?

12. Based on what attributes was the alleged "Russian origin" of the substance used in Salisbury established?

13. Does the UK have control samples of the chemical warfare agent, which British representatives refer to as "Novichok"?

14. Have the samples of a chemical warfare agent of the same type as "Novichok" (in accordance to British terminology) or its analogues been developed in the UK?

A similar list, containing 10 questions , was sent to the French Foreign Ministry by the Russian Embassy in Paris. According to the document, Moscow wanted to know on what grounds France was involved in the British investigation into the Skripal poisoning.

Russia also demanded explanations on what made French experts conclude that the substance used in Salisbury attack was nerve agent А-234 and that it was of Russian origins. The final question on the list read: "Have the samples of a chemical warfare agent of this type or its analogues been developed in France and if so, for what purpose?"

Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, were discovered on a bench in Salisbury in early March, with the UK claiming a Soviet-designed nerve agent was used against them. Without a proper investigation being carried out, London said it was "highly likely" that Russia was responsible for the attack and introduced sanctions against the country, including the expulsion of Russian diplomats.

Moscow has denied all accusations, decrying them as a "provocation," and demanded proof from the British side. However, London refused to cooperate with Russia on the case, denying its consular staff access to Russian citizen Yulia Skripal and turning down the request to provide a sample of the toxic substance in question.

Source: RT

[Apr 03, 2018] This Washington Post Headline Is Fake News

Highly recommended!
Apr 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

This Washington Post Headline Is Fake News

On March 30 the Washington Post , the blog site of Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, published a report about the expulsion of some 'western' diplomats from Russia. The move was an expected and proportional retaliation for the expulsion of Russian diplomats from some 'western' countries.

The piece was originally published under the headline:

One by one Russia tells European ambassadors of latest diplomatic expulsions

This is visible in the web-address (URL) of the piece which was formed from the original headline when it was first published.

.../washingtonpost.com/world/europe/one-by-one-russia-tells-european-ambassadors-of-latest-diplomatic-expulsions/2018/03/30/...

The editors apparently disliked the original headline. It was factually correct but did not create enough reason to hate Russia. The original headline was therefore replaced with a factually false one:


bigger

One by one, European ambassadors learn they're being expelled from Russia

For the record: "They", i.e. the ambassadors, learned of no such thing. Russia has not expelled any ambassador. The report below the false headline does not claim that Russia did such.

The blatant falsehood of the headline was immediately pointed out in the comments to the piece. The @WashingtonPost Twitter account was notified of the 'mistake'.

Three days later the Post has not taken any corrective action. The fake news headline is still up on its website. Most visitors of the Washington Post site will not read the piece. They skim the headlines of the site and get a daily dosage of Russia-hate from it.

The slogan of the Post , prominently displayed under its name, is " Democracy Dies in Darkness ". When it peddles such sable propaganda it becomes obvious that the paper hates democracy and an informed public. To curry favor with thuggish tyrants, as Post owner Bezos does, is obviously more profitable than factual reporting.


bigger

The next time the Post laments about fake news and asks for censoring blogs like ours, the above shall be thrown into its face.

Posted by b on April 3, 2018 at 12:26 AM | Permalink Doug Colwell , Apr 3, 2018 12:51:37 AM | 1

The phrase "democracy dies in darkness" actually makes sense when you realize they are expressing it as a triumph.
psychohistorian , Apr 3, 2018 1:30:48 AM | 2
But since Bezos and MBS can't go to hell because the Pope says it doesn't exist, it is all good, right?

Can I have more myth, propaganda and BS please.........../snark

[Apr 03, 2018] Russian Ambassador to UK: Russia Strongly Suspects Skripal Poisoned by British Secret Services

Apr 03, 2018 | russia-insider.com
Pravda.ru ) 14 hours ago | 1,631 105 MORE: Politics There are serious reasons to believe that the "Skripal case" was a "provocation" of British special services, Russian Ambassador to Great Britain Alexander Yakovenko said in his interview with NTV.

"We have very serious suspicions that this provocation was carried out by British special services. They refuse to cooperate with us, nor do they give us any facts on the matter," he said.

Yakovenko noted that the UK is experiencing "a very difficult situation now" for two reasons. The first one is connected with the country's exit from the European Union (Brexit).

"In Brussels, when the statement on the Skripals was made, the topic of Brexit was not raised at all, while there were very important agreements made at that time on further negotiations between the UK and the EU - that is, the topic went into the shadows," he stressed.

me title=

The second reason, the diplomat believes, is connected with the role of Great Britain in the West. "When the national security concept was approved and, later, [British Prime Minister] Theresa May confirmed this, the British took on the leading role in the so-called containment of Russia," he said.

However, according to Yakovenko, in order to restrain Russia, "a powerful provocation is required to ensure that this position is supported by both the parliament and the people."

He added that Russia "will not let the UK out of the legal field." "The British will have to answer for this, so we are now choosing which way we are going," he added.

Last week, Alexander Yakovenko said that the British authorities used the name "Novichok" to "artificially associate the incident with Russia." According to the Ambassador, British Foreign Minister Boris Johnson, referring to the nerve agent, used the name A-234 at a personal meeting.

[Apr 03, 2018] Strange coinsidence: toxic dagger exersize and the skripals poisoning

Apr 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

james | Apr 1, 2018 1:48:18 PM | 8

i can't get it out of my mind the coincidence of toxic dagger and the skripal as excuse to ostracize russia further..

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/exercise-toxic-dagger-the-sharp-end-of-chemical-warfare

i am sorry.. the timing just seems too coincidental... i guess i will be labeled a conspiracy theorists, as opposed to a coincidental theorist..

james , Apr 2, 2018 12:50:14 AM | 48

messed the link.. here it is straight.. sorry

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/exercise-toxic-dagger-the-sharp-end-of-chemical-warfare

[Apr 03, 2018] Exercise TOXIC DAGGER - the sharp end of chemical warfare

Highly recommended!
Apr 03, 2018 | www.gov.uk
Exercise TOXIC DAGGER - the sharp end of chemical warfare

Dstl works with Marines on UK's biggest annual chemical warfare exercise Published 20 February 2018

From:
Defence Science and Technology Laboratory
40 Commando Royal Marines and The Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl) have staged the UK's biggest annual exercise to prepare troops for Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) operations. Exercise TOXIC DAGGER is supported by Dstl, along with Public Health England (PHE) and The Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE), and is the largest exercise of its kind in the country.

Specialists in CBRN from Dstl and AWE are able to create realistic exercise scenarios based on the latest threat information. Completing the training and exercising against these scenarios provides a challenging programme for the Royal Marines to demonstrate their proficiency in the methods to detect, assess and mitigate a CBRN threat.

The three-week programme included Company-level attacks and scenarios concerning CBRN vignettes, concluding with a full-scale exercise involving government and industry scientists and more than 300 military personnel.

Major Rob Garside, from 40 Commando Royal Marines, said:

Working with Dstl means we have the most up-to-date information and a realistic exercise. This ensures we are well prepared for a CBRN operating environment. It is vital we can make rapid decisions and are able to protect and support specialists who come in to deal with any incident. On operations these specialists are on hand to advise and we must ensure we already have a strong understanding of their capabilities and what they require of us as a military force.

The Dstl lead for CBRN exercises said:

40 Commando would be first on the ground in the event of a CBRN incident. We ensure they're up to date on the latest threats and make the exercise truly realistic. They not only have to provide a fighting force in an unstable environment, they must also be able to assess the scene and know what they're dealing with.

That's where Dstl, PHE, AWE and the Defence CBRN Centre come in, as we provide the technical information the Marines require.

Find out more about Dstl's CBRN work

[Apr 03, 2018] It turns out that Yulia Skripal logged into her social media account while in a coma

Apr 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mischi | Apr 1, 2018 6:11:45 PM | 28

It turns out that Yulia Skripal logged into her social media account while in a coma.

https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/03/curiouser-and-curiouser-yulia-skripal-logged-into-vk-while-in-coma/

John Gilberts , Apr 2, 2018 3:51:19 AM | 54
Yulia Skripal Is Not Allowed To Telephone Her Grandmother

http://johnhelmer.net/yulia-skripal-is-not-allowed-to-telephone-her-grandmother/

[Apr 03, 2018] Yulia Skripal "improving rapidly" The unravelling of the Russian Novichok narrative by Chris Marsden

Notable quotes:
"... All over the world there is deep skepticism regarding the claims made by the UK government. This is more than justified. The faces may have changed since Blair's Labour Party produced its "dodgy dossiers" to justify war against Iraq in 2003, but not the hypocrisy, scheming and intrigue that the British bourgeoisie have developed to a fine art. ..."
Mar 31, 2018 | www.wsws.org

When placed in the context of the global anti-Russia propaganda campaign spearheaded by Britain's Conservative government, Thursday saw the greatest Easter miracle since Christ rose from the dead.

For weeks, the world's media has cited uncritically government claims that double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, were poisoned March 4 with a "weapons grade" nerve agent, known as a Novichok.

The agent was described as so deadly that the comatose Skripals were unlikely to ever recover, and that if they did they would be brain damaged and physically compromised. On Wednesday there were even media headlines that their life support might have to be turned off.

Yet Thursday saw reports from Salisbury NHS foundation trust that 33-year-old Yulia is no longer in a critical condition and was "conscious and talking."

Yulia's apparent recovery blows a hole in an official narrative that, by rights, should sink it forever. Instead, as has happened on repeated occasions, the story will no doubt be modified as required. Nothing must be allowed to prevent the UK, in alliance with the United States, from continuing its push for further economic sanctions and the expulsion of diplomats to justify pre-existing plans for military aggression on Russia's borders and in the Middle East.

There are innumerable inconsistencies, contradictions and flat out lies in the case made against Russia. Above all there has been no convincing political explanation advanced as to why Russia would target the Skripals.

Nor is there anything linking the attempted murder of the pair to anyone -- least of all the Russian state and the government of President Vladimir Putin. For the government, everything hangs on the single assertion, based on undisclosed "findings" from Britain's Porton Down chemical weapons facility, that the Novichok nerve agent used was "of a type" developed in Russia and was so sophisticated, and its delivery so complicated, that a "state actor" must have been involved.

Maintaining this lie has involved an accumulation of smaller lies, which depended on their being accepted without question by the media. Even before the news regarding Yulia, this web of deceit was in danger of unravelling.

Initial reports after the March 4 discovery of the Skripals reported as the likely cause of their illness a "white powder" that was identified as the "opioid fentanyl." It was not until March 6 that Russia was officially suggested for possible involvement and March 7 before the Metropolitan Police first stated that a nerve agent was used.

On March 8, it was announced that a police officer, later named as Sgt. Nick Bailey, was seriously ill in hospital because he was one of the first responders to the incident. Police added that 21 people had received (unspecified) treatment.

Four days later, March 12, with hundreds of police and military personnel roaming Salisbury dressed in biohazard suits, sealing off the bench area where the Skripals were found, cordoning off the Zizzi restaurant at which they had dined earlier, etc., Prime Minister Theresa May told Parliament that Porton Down had identified the nerve agent as of Russian origin. It was therefore "highly likely" that Russia was responsible for the poisoning.

Russia has repeatedly denied possession of Novichoks, which were developed in the former Soviet Union. It has pointed out that other states now hostile to Russia, including Ukraine, could have possession and that its formula and the scientists involved are now both available to the UK and the US.

However, the issue raised by recent events is whether there is any proof whatsoever that a military-grade nerve agent was involved in the assassination attempt. Three related issues are of significance -- what a Novichok is, how it is delivered and what it is supposed to do.

After its supposed identification, Novichok was described as being "five to 10 times more lethal" than VX and sarin and, like them, either a liquid or a gas.

One of its creators, Vil Mirzayanov, who defected to the US, was interviewed March 16 by the Guardian , describing it as the "most powerful and unique chemical weapon in the world. "

No non-state actor had the capability of "weaponising" Novichok. "You can kill yourself it is impossible without high technical equipment No one country has these capabilities like Russia, because Russia invented, tested and weaponized Novichok."

"I believe they brought [in a] binary version," Mirzayanov said. "It's two ampules, small containers, like a big bullet, put them together in a spray or something, and after that, some mechanism which is mixing them, a couple seconds and after that you're shooting It could touch any skin and in a couple minutes would take effect."

Upon exposure "the effects are fast and dramatic." The nervous system is hit, victims are unable to breathe, they "cough and foam at the mouth," the "effects on the digestive system trigger vomiting," "muscles convulse Many of those affected will wet themselves and lose control of their bowels."

Given this account, the story of white powder naturally had to be abandoned. And it had to be explained how a Novichok was delivered in a way that allowed for such complexities and still meant that the Skripals left home for seven hours, during which time they went to the local pub, had a meal at a restaurant and only then collapsed.

The first story was that Yulia had unwittingly brought the agent into the country after it was planted in her suitcase. The second story is that it was placed on the Skripal's clothes -- supposedly accounting for the delayed impact. The third was that it was pumped as a gas through the air conditioning of the Skripal's car.

None of this made sense and things worsened after no one else suffered any ill effects. Various figures were given of hospital attendees, but all were released without treatment. On March 22, DS Bailey left Wiltshire Hospital -- making his own recovery several days in advance of Yulia.

Amid this debacle, May spoke in Parliament Tuesday boasting of the expulsions of 100 Russian diplomats by 18 nations, including 60 told to quit the US.

Speaking at the start of a debate on national security and Russia, May declared that Sergei and Yulia Skripal "remain critically ill in hospital. Sadly, late last week, doctors indicated that their condition is unlikely to change in the near future, and they may never recover fully."

If Yulia's recovery two days later were not embarrassing enough, the police also chose that day to announce that the delivery of the Novichok to its intended victims had been carried out by smearing it on the front door of Sergei's house!

No explanation was offered as to how this unsophisticated ruse remained undiscovered for weeks, or why no one other than the Skripals and DS Bailey had been impacted. Instead, the Metropolitan Police terrorist unit announced that it was now cordoning off a children's play area near the Skripal's home, while handing back control of the London Road cemetery, where Sergei's wife and son are buried, the Maltings shopping centre and the Ashley Wood complex to the Wiltshire police.

All over the world there is deep skepticism regarding the claims made by the UK government. This is more than justified. The faces may have changed since Blair's Labour Party produced its "dodgy dossiers" to justify war against Iraq in 2003, but not the hypocrisy, scheming and intrigue that the British bourgeoisie have developed to a fine art.

[Apr 03, 2018] Was the Alleged Skripal Poisoning Incident an Elaborate Hoax by Stephen Lendman

Notable quotes:
"... Was whatever happened on March 4 to father and daughter Skripal something other than what the official narrative reported? ..."
"... On March 31, Fort Russ reported that Yulia Skripal , Sergey's daughter, "visited her 'Vkontakte' (social media) page on the morning of March 7" – three days after the alleged poisoning incident. The official narrative claimed she and her father were in a coma, poisoned by a deadly military-grade nerve agent. It's possible someone else hacked into her site, but for what reason, surely not UK or US operatives, wanting no information conflicting with the official narrative getting out. If hacking occurred, forensic analysis could determine it, nothing suggesting it so far. ..."
"... On March 29, Salisbury District Hospital Dr. Christine Blanshard explained Yulia's condition improved markedly. She's "conscious and talking," no longer in critical condition. Was she ever as ill as officially reported, or if so, what is the hospital's diagnosis? Will Sergey Skripal's condition be reported improved ahead, recovering steadily? ..."
"... Clearly, whatever may have affected them wasn't a military-grade nerve agent. They and other Salisbury residents they had contact with would have been dead in minutes if poisoned by something this deadly. A few obvious lessons can be drawn from the above information. Never accept official narratives at face value on most everything – including major media reports. Most often they're meant to deceive, not accurately explain things. ..."
"... The alleged Skripal incident is the latest US/UK political assault on Russia – public enemy number one in Washington and London. Almost surely more provocative shoes will drop ahead, likely more serious, the trend heading in this direction. If Washington could pull off the elaborate mother of all 9/11 false flags, most Americans still believing the official Big Lie, staging the Skripal affair by the US and Britain would be simple by comparison. Escalating US/UK-led hostility toward Russia heads things perilously toward East/West confrontation – the ominous risk of nuclear war. ..."
Apr 02, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

Was whatever happened on March 4 to father and daughter Skripal something other than what the official narrative reported?

Did anything at all happen? Were the Skripals poisoned or ill for another reason? Did Britain conceal the truth about the whole ugly business – a scheme to frame Russia for what it had nothing to do with?

When inflammatory headlines unquestionably support the official narrative, bet on disinformation and Big Lies substituting for truth-telling.

Russia was framed for perhaps what never happened – at least not as officially claimed.

On March 31, Fort Russ reported that Yulia Skripal , Sergey's daughter, "visited her 'Vkontakte' (social media) page on the morning of March 7" – three days after the alleged poisoning incident. The official narrative claimed she and her father were in a coma, poisoned by a deadly military-grade nerve agent. It's possible someone else hacked into her site, but for what reason, surely not UK or US operatives, wanting no information conflicting with the official narrative getting out. If hacking occurred, forensic analysis could determine it, nothing suggesting it so far.

On March 29, Salisbury District Hospital Dr. Christine Blanshard explained Yulia's condition improved markedly. She's "conscious and talking," no longer in critical condition. Was she ever as ill as officially reported, or if so, what is the hospital's diagnosis? Will Sergey Skripal's condition be reported improved ahead, recovering steadily?

Clearly, whatever may have affected them wasn't a military-grade nerve agent. They and other Salisbury residents they had contact with would have been dead in minutes if poisoned by something this deadly. A few obvious lessons can be drawn from the above information. Never accept official narratives at face value on most everything – including major media reports. Most often they're meant to deceive, not accurately explain things.

The alleged Skripal incident is the latest US/UK political assault on Russia – public enemy number one in Washington and London. Almost surely more provocative shoes will drop ahead, likely more serious, the trend heading in this direction. If Washington could pull off the elaborate mother of all 9/11 false flags, most Americans still believing the official Big Lie, staging the Skripal affair by the US and Britain would be simple by comparison. Escalating US/UK-led hostility toward Russia heads things perilously toward East/West confrontation – the ominous risk of nuclear war.

That's the scary reality ahead if madness defining US policy isn't curbed.

*

Region: Europe , Russia and FSU Theme: Media Disinformation , US NATO War Agenda In-depth Report: FAKE INTELLIGENCE

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the CRG, Correspondent of Global Research based in Chicago.

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org ( Home – Stephen Lendman ). Contact at [email protected] .

My newest book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

[Apr 03, 2018] UK investigators set to hide the truth, not find it Litvinenko's father on Skripal case

Notable quotes:
"... "nuclear terrorism." ..."
"... "the first offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since World War II." ..."
"... "deals with its enemies." ..."
"... "They realized that they have screwed up big time [with the Litvinenko poisoning] and decided to change their tactics a bit. Therefore, they do not show [any evidence] now, but keep it all in secret waiting for Russia to react to it. If there was, as they say, the 'Russian trace' there, everything would have been clear long time ago," ..."
"... "It's the same with Sasha [Aleksandr], if there was the 'Russian trace,' it would emerge over and over again up to this day. But the Scotland Yard was not looking for a criminal. Scotland Yard was covering the tracks," ..."
"... "Now they do not want to show these tracks altogether, since they know they will have to cover them up the same way as with Sasha." ..."
"... "It will be very difficult to hide it all. And they will eventually fail. They will be caught, and Theresa May will be very ashamed. And this clown, their Foreign Minister [Boris Johnson] – he will be very ashamed too." ..."
"... "They are hostages, all of them are hostages of the American authorities, who strive for the world dominance. As long as that's the case – they will kill the Russians, they'll kill anybody who's against it," Litvinenko said. The wealthy Russians in the UK "are all dependent on the authorities... They are being kept only for their money. And when something happens, they will be blatantly robbed, like it happened to Berezovsky." ..."
"... "It's not beneficial for them if Skripal stays alive. And this girl – she knows nothing. Skripal knows. She simply came to visit her father and got into this," Litvinenko said. "They'll let his daughter walk away, probably. But if she knows anything, she won't get out of it either." ..."
Apr 03, 2018 | www.rt.com

Fugitive Russians in the UK are effectively "hostages" of Western spy agencies, the father of Alexander Litvinenko, an intelligence officer who was poisoned in London a decade ago, told RT, sharing his insight on the Skripal case. Walter Litvinenko used to support the theory of Russia's involvement in the 2006 poisoning of his son, Alexander, in London, but he changed his mind after years of analyzing the inconsistencies of the investigation. London said that the fugitive Russian intelligence officer was poisoned with a highly radioactive Polonium-210. Despite an inconclusive investigation, it pinned the blame on Moscow, while the incident was branded as the first ever act of "nuclear terrorism." Russia has vehemently denied the allegations of its involvement in the incident. Read more UK may have staged Skripal poisoning to rally people against Russia, Moscow believes

The poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, in Salisbury on March 4, was, in turn, labeled "the first offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since World War II." While it bears similarities to the poisoning of Litvinenko, it was handled with different tactics, Walter Litvinenko told RT.

Litvinenko senior says the poisoning of his son was designed as a widely-publicized false-flag operation to show the world that Moscow was extremely "cruel," and the way that it allegedly "deals with its enemies." The ongoing Skripal scandal, in its turn, was launched to provoke a reaction from Russia, he believes.

"They realized that they have screwed up big time [with the Litvinenko poisoning] and decided to change their tactics a bit. Therefore, they do not show [any evidence] now, but keep it all in secret waiting for Russia to react to it. If there was, as they say, the 'Russian trace' there, everything would have been clear long time ago," Litvinenko said.

He believes that, given the different goal, the ongoing investigation is significantly less transparent than it was back in 2006, since it is easier to hide the truth from the beginning than to try and swipe it under the rug afterward.

"It's the same with Sasha [Aleksandr], if there was the 'Russian trace,' it would emerge over and over again up to this day. But the Scotland Yard was not looking for a criminal. Scotland Yard was covering the tracks," Litvinenko stated. "Now they do not want to show these tracks altogether, since they know they will have to cover them up the same way as with Sasha."

READ MORE: Russian embassy in UK warns citizens about possible provocations in Britain

The Skripal scandal would eventually backfire on those who initiated it, Litvinenko said. "It will be very difficult to hide it all. And they will eventually fail. They will be caught, and Theresa May will be very ashamed. And this clown, their Foreign Minister [Boris Johnson] – he will be very ashamed too."

Devil's bargain

Litvinenko, who lost his son after the former officer of the Russian security service FSB fled Russia for London and cooperated with MI6 and Spanish police, says people like Alexander find themselves in a situation where they effectively become hostages of foreign governments and intelligence agencies. He said it applies to both the rich and powerful who have left Russia after having run-ins with the law, such as the late oligarch Boris Berezovsky, as well as less prominent citizens such as Sergei Skripal.

Read more Inspectors from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) arrive in Salisbury, UK March 21, 2018. © Peter Nicholls Russia has 13 questions to OPCW over Skripal case

"They are hostages, all of them are hostages of the American authorities, who strive for the world dominance. As long as that's the case – they will kill the Russians, they'll kill anybody who's against it," Litvinenko said. The wealthy Russians in the UK "are all dependent on the authorities... They are being kept only for their money. And when something happens, they will be blatantly robbed, like it happened to Berezovsky."

The fugitive oligarch, once one of the wealthiest Russians, was found dead at his home in the UK in 2014. The investigation did not conclusively determine whether he hanged himself with a scarf, or if he was strangled. Prior to his mysterious death, Berezovsky had lost most of his assets and his wealth waned.

Given the previous suspicious deaths of Russian nationals on British soil, Skripal's fate looks quite grim, Litvinenko believes. The daughter of the former double agent, Yulia, however, might get out of this situation alive, as she was seemingly in the wrong place at the wrong time. Assuming she was of no interest to the intelligence services, the recent reports on Yulia's conditions improving do not look that "miraculous," Litvinenko said.

"It's not beneficial for them if Skripal stays alive. And this girl – she knows nothing. Skripal knows. She simply came to visit her father and got into this," Litvinenko said. "They'll let his daughter walk away, probably. But if she knows anything, she won't get out of it either."

[Apr 02, 2018] Belarus Expels Moscow Diplomats 'Leading Russia Expert' Falls for Cheeky April Fool's Joke

With such "leading experts"...
Notable quotes:
"... "leading specialist" ..."
Apr 02, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Anders Aslund's deep knowledge of Eastern European politics was no match for April Fool's, when the supposedly all-knowing Russia commentator fruitlessly cheered fake news about Belarus expelling Russian diplomats.

Aslund, who was presented by the American think tank the Atlantic Council as a "leading specialist" on Russian economic policy and Eastern Europe in general, has been featured on the BBC, CNN and the Washington Post as a commentator on Russian President Vladimir Putin's administration.

[Apr 02, 2018] Diplomatic Madness the Expulsion of Russian Diplomats by Binoy Kampmark

Notable quotes:
"... Issues of politicised intelligence are always matters of convenience for a particular state. The vision of a balanced intelligence officer conveying material to an obligingly balanced politician is one best done with. ..."
"... Veteran cynics of this are bound to point out that Russian surveillance of US citizens is less developed than Washington's own vast capacities, aided on by the not-so-humble types in Silicon Valley. As President George W. Bush erred with unintended accuracy, the enemies of the United States "never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people -- and neither do we." ..."
"... Impairing Russia's intelligence gathering capacities is only going to be a temporary measure at best, a pruning of the tree rather than a savaging to its roots. "It is likely," suggests Alexey D. Muraviev, "they will restore their intelligence-gathering capacity very quickly." ..."
"... The latest staging of moral outrage is dangerous in one fundamental aspect. It is a show that diplomacy is being abandoned, adding more succour to the image of Russia as unrepentant villain and the West, more broadly described, as appropriately righteous. Such a stance ignores the more constructive role played by Moscow in security issues and debates, be it North Korea, Iran or anti-terrorist initiatives. The Kremlin, far from being discouraged in standing down, will undoubtedly do the reverse. Dogma and politics, for the moment, are in the ascendancy. ..."
Apr 01, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

How gloriously brave it seemed, some 23 nations coming together like a zombie collective to initiate a fairly ineffectual action in of itself: the expulsion of Russian diplomats or, as they preferred to term it, intelligence operatives.

It all began in celebratory fashion in Britain, when Prime Minister Theresa May decided to push the issue with the expulsion of 23 in the wake of the poisonings of Sergei Skripal, his daughter Yulia, and Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey. Russia, in a reciprocal effort, retorted in kind.

Since then, the number of states similarly inclined to reduce Russia's diplomatic set has grown.

This is a time for mania, and the Trump administration will not be far behind in participating in anything that reeks of it. From the United States, 60 have been ordered to leave, including 12 at the United Nations. 16 EU countries and six non-EU members have also joined in the fun.

Issues of politicised intelligence are always matters of convenience for a particular state. The vision of a balanced intelligence officer conveying material to an obligingly balanced politician is one best done with.

The invasion of Iraq in 2003 by a triumvirate of states from the Anglosphere who all, in parts, ignored, distorted, and manufactured suitable "intelligence" in the name of eradicating weapons of mass destruction, attests to that need. Be wary of the misuse or use of material concerned with chemical weapons or other such WMDs.

The latest expulsions have an air of rhythmic repetition. Even Seumas Milne, a spokesman for Jeremy Corbyn of Britain's Labor opposition, saw a troubling parallel. There is, he noted , "a history in relation to weapons of mass destruction and intelligence which is problematic, to put it mildly."

Never you mind that. UK foreign secretary Boris Johnson deems "the smug, sarcastic response that we've heard from the Russians" as evidence of guilt, a distinctly low threshold of evidentiary vigour. States are taking sides and extolling the virtues of "international rules" and "shared security".

For all that, China and India have stood back; certain European states refuse to follow suit, preferring caution. A club with certain credentials for membership has formed, with sides being taken. All of this has taken place on faith.

Political advantage is already being claimed by May, suggesting that there is something far bigger than those poisonings that took place in sleepy Salisbury. This is a government on life support barely holding the Brexit process together. A good show was required, and May is delivering it. With implausible confidence, she has told parliamentarians that Russia's western spy network had been "dismantled".

What Britain can do, the United States can do boisterously better, and Washington made a good fist of it by sending sixty Russian diplomats packing. The Seattle consulate office would close. One administration official suggested that the move was occasioned by "its proximity to one of our submarine bases and Boeing."

This adds to the emerging story of some grand ploy supposedly to impair Russian espionage capabilities, ostensibly to punish it for using a nerve agent on British soil. The expulsions "make the United States safer by reducing Russia's ability to spy on Americans and to conduct covert operations that threaten America's national security."

Veteran cynics of this are bound to point out that Russian surveillance of US citizens is less developed than Washington's own vast capacities, aided on by the not-so-humble types in Silicon Valley. As President George W. Bush erred with unintended accuracy, the enemies of the United States "never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people -- and neither do we."

Impairing Russia's intelligence gathering capacities is only going to be a temporary measure at best, a pruning of the tree rather than a savaging to its roots. "It is likely," suggests Alexey D. Muraviev, "they will restore their intelligence-gathering capacity very quickly."

The spectacle of certain smaller powers, subservient to the Anglo-American line, has also become tediously predictable. Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and Foreign Minister Julie Bishop took their spots on the pro-expulsion train. The number leaving Canberra, two "undeclared intelligence officers," is unimpressive and tokenistic.

The joint statement by Turnbull and Bishop is a point-by-point regurgitation of Johnson's presumptuous gruel. The decision "reflects the shocking nature of the attack -- the first offensive use of chemical weapons in Europe since World War II, involving a highly lethal substance in a populated area, endangering countless other members of the community."

The latest staging of moral outrage is dangerous in one fundamental aspect. It is a show that diplomacy is being abandoned, adding more succour to the image of Russia as unrepentant villain and the West, more broadly described, as appropriately righteous. Such a stance ignores the more constructive role played by Moscow in security issues and debates, be it North Korea, Iran or anti-terrorist initiatives. The Kremlin, far from being discouraged in standing down, will undoubtedly do the reverse. Dogma and politics, for the moment, are in the ascendancy.

[Apr 02, 2018] The Shocking Diplomatic Incompetence of Theresa May and Boris Johnson

Notable quotes:
"... Orlov is one of our favorite essayists on Russia and all sorts of other things. He moved to the US as a child, and lives in the Boston area. ..."
"... He is one of the better-known thinkers The New Yorker has dubbed 'The Dystopians' in an excellent 2009 profile , along with James Howard Kunstler, another regular contributor to RI (archive) . These theorists believe that modern society is headed for a jarring and painful crack-up. ..."
"... He is best known for his 2011 book comparing Soviet and American collapse (he thinks America's will be worse). He is a prolific author on a wide array of subjects, and you can see his work by searching him on Amazon. ..."
"... He has a large following on the web, and on Patreon, and we urge you to support him there , as Russia Insider does. ..."
"... His current project is organizing the production of affordable house boats for living on. He lives on a boat himself. ..."
"... If you haven't discovered his work yet, please take a look at his archive of articles on RI . They are a real treasure, full of invaluable insight into both the US and Russia and how they are related. ..."
Apr 02, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Since 1977, US diplomatic history has been, to one extent or another, a history of fantastic blunders. Dmitry Orlov Mar 16, 2018 | 12,197 99 Orlov is one of our favorite essayists on Russia and all sorts of other things. He moved to the US as a child, and lives in the Boston area. He is one of the better-known thinkers The New Yorker has dubbed 'The Dystopians' in an excellent 2009 profile , along with James Howard Kunstler, another regular contributor to RI (archive) . These theorists believe that modern society is headed for a jarring and painful crack-up.

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

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

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

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

There is the famous aphorism by Karl von Clausewitz: "War is the continuation of politics by other means." This may be true, in many cases, but it is rarely a happy outcome. Not everybody likes politics, but when given a choice between politics and war, most sane people will readily choose politics, which, even when brimming with vitriol and riddled with corruption, normally remains sublethal.

He's the best his neocon masters could come up with

In relations between countries, politics is known as diplomacy, and it is a formal art that relies on a specific set of instruments to keep countries out of war. These include maintaining channels of communication to build trust and respect, exercises to seek common ground, and efforts to define win-win scenarios to which all sides would eagerly agree, including instruments for enforcing agreements.

Diplomacy is a professional endeavor, much like medicine, engineering and law, and requires a similarly high level of specialized education. Unlike these other professions, the successful exercise of diplomacy demands much greater attention to questions of demeanor: a diplomat must be affable, personable, approachable, decorous, scrupulous, levelheaded in a word, diplomatic. Of course, in order to maintain good, healthy relations with a country, it is also essential that a diplomat fluently speak its language, understand its culture and know its history. Especially important is a very detailed knowledge of the history of a country's diplomatic relations with one's own country, for the sake of maintaining continuity, which in turn makes it possible to build on what has been achieved previously. Complete knowledge of all treaties, conventions and agreements previously entered into is, obviously, a must.

Sane people will choose politics over war, and sane (that is, competently governed) nations will choose diplomacy over belligerence and confrontation. An exception is those nations that cannot hope to ever win the game of diplomacy due to an acute shortage of competent diplomats. They are likely to strike out in frustration, undermining the very international institutions that are designed to keep them out of trouble. It then falls upon their more competent counterparts in other nations to talk them off the ledge. This may not always be possible, especially if the incompetents in question can't be made to appreciate the risks they are taking in blindly striking out against their diplomatic counterparts.

If we look around in search of such incompetently governed nations, two examples readily present themselves: the United States and the United Kingdom. It is rather challenging to identify the last moment in history when the US had a Secretary of State that was truly competent. To be safe, let's set it as January 20, 1977, the day Henry Kissinger stepped down from his post.

Since then, US diplomatic history has been, to one extent or another, a history of fantastic blunders. For example, as far back as 1990 US Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie told Saddam Hussein, "[W]e have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait," in effect giving the green light to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and setting off the cascade of events that has led to the current sad state of affairs in the region. Another highlight was Hillary Clinton, whose only credentials had to do with a sort of fake noblesse , stemming from her marriage to a former president, and who used her position as Secretary of State to enrich herself using a variety of corrupt schemes.

Among the lower ranks of the diplomatic corps, most ambassadorships went to people with no diplomatic education or experience, whose only qualifications had to do with electoral fundraising on behalf of whoever happened to occupy the White House and other partisan political considerations. Few of these people are able to enter into a meaningful dialogue with their counterparts. Most are barely able to read a programmatic statement of policy from a piece of paper handed them by a staffer.

What little competence there was left gradually drained away in the course of the UK's temporary dalliance with the European Union, due to end next year, during which most of the rest of UK's sovereignty was signed away by treaty, and most questions of international governance were relinquished to unelected bureaucrats in Brussels. And now, at the end of this long process of degeneration and decay, we have in the person of the Foreign Minister a clown by the name of Boris Johnson. His equally incompetent boss Theresa May recently saw it fit to very loudly and publicly violate the terms of the Chemical Weapons Convention to which the UK is a signatory.

To recap, Theresa May claimed that a certain Russian-cum-British spy living in the UK was killed using a nerve agent made in Russia, and gave Russia 24 hours to explain this situation to her satisfaction. Russia is likewise a signatory to the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), and had destroyed all 39,967 metric tons of its chemical weapons by September 27, 2017. On that occasion, The Director-General of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), Ambassador Ahmet Üzümcü, stated: "The completion of the verified destruction of Russia's chemical weapons programme is a major milestone in the achievement of the goals of the Chemical Weapons Convention. I congratulate Russia and I commend all of their experts who were involved for their professionalism and dedication." The US is yet to destroy its stockpiles, preferring to squander trillions on useless ballistic defense systems instead of living up to its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention.

Here is precisely what Theresa May did wrong. Under the terms of the CWC, the UK was obligated to provide Russia with a sample of the nerve agent used, along with all related evidence uncovered in the course of the investigation. After that, the treaty gives Russia 10 days to respond. Instead, May provided no evidence, and gave Russia 24 hours to respond. When Russia formally requested to see the evidence, this request was refused. We can only guess at why she refused, but one reasonable supposition is that there is no evidence, because:

In considering all of the above, healthy skepticism is called for. All we have so far is an alleged double murder, no motive, doubtful means, over 140 million suspects (anyone who's Russian?), and public statements that amount to political theater. As far as repercussions, there is very little that the UK government can do to Russia. They kicked out a few dozen Russian diplomats (and Russia will no doubt reciprocate); the Royal Family won't be attempting the World Cup in Russia this summer (not a great loss, to be sure); there are also some vague threats that don't amount to anything.

But that's not what's important. For the sake of the whole world, (former) great powers, especially nuclear ones, such as the US and the UK, should be governed with a modicum of competence, and this show of incompetence is most worrying.

This post first appeared on Russia Insider

[Apr 02, 2018] Cold War had some rules, now UK US have dropped all proprieties Russian FM

Notable quotes:
"... "There has been a lot of talk that the situation is worse than it was during classic 'Cold War,' because some rules and proprieties were followed then," ..."
"... "dropping all proprieties" ..."
"... "blatant lies and disinformation." ..."
"... "taking it out on diplomats" ..."
"... "children's games" ..."
"... "an honest conversation" ..."
Apr 02, 2018 | www.rt.com

Russia's top diplomat has lashed out at UK and US rhetoric against Moscow over the poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal, saying it's worse now than it was during the Cold War. "There has been a lot of talk that the situation is worse than it was during classic 'Cold War,' because some rules and proprieties were followed then," Sergey Lavrov said on Monday. Read more Inspectors from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) arrive in Salisbury, UK March 21, 2018. © Peter Nicholls Russia has 13 questions to OPCW over Skripal case

He also accused Britain, the US and other Western powers of "dropping all proprieties" and of spreading "blatant lies and disinformation."

The poisoning of Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury in early March has led to the worst diplomatic row between London and Moscow in years. British accusations of using a military grade nerve-agent against the former spy have been repeatedly denied by Moscow. However, the blame game triggered an escalation of tensions between Russia and other Western powers, including the US and a number of EU states, who followed in Britain's footsteps by showing Russian diplomats the door.

On Monday, Lavrov reiterated that all such allegations must be backed by facts. When a country lacks facts, it starts "taking it out on diplomats" who are actually tasked with mending relations, said the foreign minister.

Lavrov also accused the UK and US of playing "children's games" instead of providing evidence. Moscow had earlier called for a meeting of the UN chemical-weapons watchdog, the OPWC, on April 2 to have "an honest conversation" about the Skripal case; but noted that Britain seemed to have no interest in establishing the truth.

[Apr 02, 2018] 'UK investigators set to hide the truth, not find it' Litvinenko's father on Skripal case -- RT World News

Notable quotes:
"... "nuclear terrorism." ..."
"... "the first offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since World War II." ..."
"... "deals with its enemies." ..."
"... "They realized that they have screwed up big time [with the Litvinenko poisoning] and decided to change their tactics a bit. Therefore, they do not show [any evidence] now, but keep it all in secret waiting for Russia to react to it. If there was, as they say, the 'Russian trace' there, everything would have been clear long time ago," ..."
"... "It's the same with Sasha [Aleksandr], if there was the 'Russian trace,' it would emerge over and over again up to this day. But the Scotland Yard was not looking for a criminal. Scotland Yard was covering the tracks," ..."
"... "Now they do not want to show these tracks altogether, since they know they will have to cover them up the same way as with Sasha." ..."
"... "It will be very difficult to hide it all. And they will eventually fail. They will be caught, and Theresa May will be very ashamed. And this clown, their Foreign Minister [Boris Johnson] – he will be very ashamed too." ..."
"... "They are hostages, all of them are hostages of the American authorities, who strive for the world dominance. As long as that's the case – they will kill the Russians, they'll kill anybody who's against it," Litvinenko said. The wealthy Russians in the UK "are all dependent on the authorities... They are being kept only for their money. And when something happens, they will be blatantly robbed, like it happened to Berezovsky." ..."
"... "It's not beneficial for them if Skripal stays alive. And this girl – she knows nothing. Skripal knows. She simply came to visit her father and got into this," Litvinenko said. "They'll let his daughter walk away, probably. But if she knows anything, she won't get out of it either." ..."
Apr 02, 2018 | www.rt.com

Fugitive Russians in the UK are effectively "hostages" of Western spy agencies, the father of Alexander Litvinenko, an intelligence officer who was poisoned in London a decade ago, told RT, sharing his insight on the Skripal case. Walter Litvinenko used to support the theory of Russia's involvement in the 2006 poisoning of his son, Alexander, in London, but he changed his mind after years of analyzing the inconsistencies of the investigation. London said that the fugitive Russian intelligence officer was poisoned with a highly radioactive Polonium-210. Despite an inconclusive investigation, it pinned the blame on Moscow, while the incident was branded as the first ever act of "nuclear terrorism." Russia has vehemently denied the allegations of its involvement in the incident. Read more A police notice is attached to screening surrounding a restaurant which was visited by former Russian intelligence officer Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia. Salisbury, Britain, March 19, 2018. © REUTERS/Peter Nicholls UK may have staged Skripal poisoning to rally people against Russia, Moscow believes

The poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, in Salisbury on March 4, was, in turn, labeled "the first offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since World War II." While it bears similarities to the poisoning of Litvinenko, it was handled with different tactics, Walter Litvinenko told RT.

Litvinenko senior says the poisoning of his son was designed as a widely-publicized false-flag operation to show the world that Moscow was extremely "cruel," and the way that it allegedly "deals with its enemies." The ongoing Skripal scandal, in its turn, was launched to provoke a reaction from Russia, he believes.

"They realized that they have screwed up big time [with the Litvinenko poisoning] and decided to change their tactics a bit. Therefore, they do not show [any evidence] now, but keep it all in secret waiting for Russia to react to it. If there was, as they say, the 'Russian trace' there, everything would have been clear long time ago," Litvinenko said.

He believes that, given the different goal, the ongoing investigation is significantly less transparent than it was back in 2006, since it is easier to hide the truth from the beginning than to try and swipe it under the rug afterward.

"It's the same with Sasha [Aleksandr], if there was the 'Russian trace,' it would emerge over and over again up to this day. But the Scotland Yard was not looking for a criminal. Scotland Yard was covering the tracks," Litvinenko stated. "Now they do not want to show these tracks altogether, since they know they will have to cover them up the same way as with Sasha."

READ MORE: Russian embassy in UK warns citizens about possible provocations in Britain

The Skripal scandal would eventually backfire on those who initiated it, Litvinenko said. "It will be very difficult to hide it all. And they will eventually fail. They will be caught, and Theresa May will be very ashamed. And this clown, their Foreign Minister [Boris Johnson] – he will be very ashamed too."

Devil's bargain

Litvinenko, who lost his son after the former officer of the Russian security service FSB fled Russia for London and cooperated with MI6 and Spanish police, says people like Alexander find themselves in a situation where they effectively become hostages of foreign governments and intelligence agencies. He said it applies to both the rich and powerful who have left Russia after having run-ins with the law, such as the late oligarch Boris Berezovsky, as well as less prominent citizens such as Sergei Skripal.

Read more Inspectors from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) arrive in Salisbury, UK March 21, 2018. © Peter Nicholls Russia has 13 questions to OPCW over Skripal case

"They are hostages, all of them are hostages of the American authorities, who strive for the world dominance. As long as that's the case – they will kill the Russians, they'll kill anybody who's against it," Litvinenko said. The wealthy Russians in the UK "are all dependent on the authorities... They are being kept only for their money. And when something happens, they will be blatantly robbed, like it happened to Berezovsky."

The fugitive oligarch, once one of the wealthiest Russians, was found dead at his home in the UK in 2014. The investigation did not conclusively determine whether he hanged himself with a scarf, or if he was strangled. Prior to his mysterious death, Berezovsky had lost most of his assets and his wealth waned.

Given the previous suspicious deaths of Russian nationals on British soil, Skripal's fate looks quite grim, Litvinenko believes. The daughter of the former double agent, Yulia, however, might get out of this situation alive, as she was seemingly in the wrong place at the wrong time. Assuming she was of no interest to the intelligence services, the recent reports on Yulia's conditions improving do not look that "miraculous," Litvinenko said.

"It's not beneficial for them if Skripal stays alive. And this girl – she knows nothing. Skripal knows. She simply came to visit her father and got into this," Litvinenko said. "They'll let his daughter walk away, probably. But if she knows anything, she won't get out of it either."

[Apr 02, 2018] Exercise TOXIC DAGGER - the sharp end of chemical warfare - GOV.UK

Apr 02, 2018 | www.gov.uk

News story

Exercise TOXIC DAGGER - the sharp end of chemical warfare

Dstl works with Marines on UK's biggest annual chemical warfare exercise Published 20 February 2018

From:
Defence Science and Technology Laboratory
Marines in CBRN kit on Exercise Toxic Dagger
40 Commando Royal Marines and The Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl) have staged the UK's biggest annual exercise to prepare troops for Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) operations. Exercise TOXIC DAGGER is supported by Dstl, along with Public Health England (PHE) and The Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE), and is the largest exercise of its kind in the country.

Specialists in CBRN from Dstl and AWE are able to create realistic exercise scenarios based on the latest threat information. Completing the training and exercising against these scenarios provides a challenging programme for the Royal Marines to demonstrate their proficiency in the methods to detect, assess and mitigate a CBRN threat.

The three-week programme included Company-level attacks and scenarios concerning CBRN vignettes, concluding with a full-scale exercise involving government and industry scientists and more than 300 military personnel.

Major Rob Garside, from 40 Commando Royal Marines, said:

Working with Dstl means we have the most up-to-date information and a realistic exercise. This ensures we are well prepared for a CBRN operating environment. It is vital we can make rapid decisions and are able to protect and support specialists who come in to deal with any incident. On operations these specialists are on hand to advise and we must ensure we already have a strong understanding of their capabilities and what they require of us as a military force.

The Dstl lead for CBRN exercises said:

40 Commando would be first on the ground in the event of a CBRN incident. We ensure they're up to date on the latest threats and make the exercise truly realistic. They not only have to provide a fighting force in an unstable environment, they must also be able to assess the scene and know what they're dealing with.

That's where Dstl, PHE, AWE and the Defence CBRN Centre come in, as we provide the technical information the Marines require.

Find out more about Dstl's CBRN work

[Apr 02, 2018] The UK's persecution of Russia arises from two unreported incidents in Syria during operations in Eastern Ghouta

All this "door knob" hypothesis smells with MI5/MI6 falsification. An interesting note about stupid and evil presstitutes in NYT, who bought it.
Notable quotes:
"... The Skripal attack was clearly a total cock-up but that didn't matter. All the UK/US wanted was an/any excuse to vilify Russia – no evidence required, it is all Kabuki. That is why the 5-eyes (excluding NZ) and Nato (excluding Turkey) fell in line with the recent expulsions – no evidence required. The whole point was to show Putin that 'the West' doesn't need evidence – the more ridiculous the better! Everyone knows that Russia didn't do it... but will kick Russia anyway, if it continues on its current path. ..."
"... As for the Skripal "script" and its timing, my speculation is that its purpose was to set the stage for a false flag chemical attack to be blamed on Russia supported Damascus to sell an offensive from the southern flank by US forces in Jordan while missile strikes rained from the Eastern Med ..."
"... Graham: US leaving Syria would be 'single worst decision' Trump could make -- Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Sunday cautioned President Trump against pulling American troops out of Syria, saying that doing so would be "a disaster in the making." ..."
"... Again the US has supported anti-government forces and invaded a foreign country, destroyed part of it while killing, injuring and displacing millions of people. The locals want the US out. Wouldn't we? ..."
"... NYT has a bombshell scoop! A material so poisonous that the Skripals have not died, and was spread by allegedly "[going] up to the front door" and smearing it on their outside door handle. This kind of stealth could only come from Russia and Putin... Bonus points attempted by doing a Nexis word search on what the CIA liars said regarding DNC emails.. ..."
"... So the Prime Minister said that Porton Down had positively identified the substance as a Novichok nerve agent. The statement from Porton Down says that their tests indicated that it was a Novichok agent or closely related agent. Are these two statements saying exactly the same thing? . . here ..."
"... If the nerve agent is so potent per NYT description, how came the Skripals went to the pub and restaurant having beers and food with no signs of discomfort after having touched the nerve agent smeared on their house door? ..."
"... This is nerve agent not timebomb. Just how stupid can NYT let itself be? ..."
Apr 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

miss lacy | Apr 1, 2018 8:37:03 PM | 34

@Lozion, no. 31 What do you think of the veracity of the following comment recently posted on Zero Hedge? Sorry, I have no links - just the comment:

'The UK's persecution of Russia arises from two unreported incidents in Syria during operations in Eastern Ghouta. In late February, the SAA's special force unit trapped a group of UK Special Forces in a siege, near Kafr Batna settlement. That incident occurred a few days after another unit of UK Special Forces was captured near Nashabiyah!

London didn't want to deal with Assad and sought to negotiate their release with Russia, with Oman as a mediator. Moscow replied that it was the jurisdiction of Syrian military authorities. Mattis's visit to Oman on March 11 was to attempt to secure the release of a US officer and two Israelis also captured in the same operation in Eastern Ghouta.

The UK and US governments (deep state?) see risks rising in Syria and since Russia refuses to back down, pressure on other fronts had to be increased to raise the stakes for Moscow.

The Skripal attack was clearly a total cock-up but that didn't matter. All the UK/US wanted was an/any excuse to vilify Russia – no evidence required, it is all Kabuki. That is why the 5-eyes (excluding NZ) and Nato (excluding Turkey) fell in line with the recent expulsions – no evidence required. The whole point was to show Putin that 'the West' doesn't need evidence – the more ridiculous the better! Everyone knows that Russia didn't do it... but will kick Russia anyway, if it continues on its current path.

Speculation: was the Skripal plan put together by the CIA (deep state) and MI6 (with UK government support) behind Trump's back, which pretty much forced him to go along with the expulsions etc., is that one of the reasons why he has now announced US troops will be leaving Syria altogether?'

Lozion , Apr 1, 2018 9:26:59 PM | 36

@33 miss lacy. Well, yes there have been reports of captured UK and other SF in East Ghouta along with denials so its confusing. There most probably were a few caught but this is such a delicate political matter that their release is I think negotiated in secret by the parties involved. A grey area seems to exist around SF since no one wants to have theirs paraded as war trophies, a tacit agreement of "dont ask, dont tell" is likely enforced.

As for the Skripal "script" and its timing, my speculation is that its purpose was to set the stage for a false flag chemical attack to be blamed on Russia supported Damascus to sell an offensive from the southern flank by US forces in Jordan while missile strikes rained from the Eastern Med but this was scraped in the nick of time due to the SAA's faster advance then expected and capture of militants chemical labs, leaving the UK to deal with the mess created by the failed op.

My opinion is that we went through a real CLOSE CALL around mid-March but thanks to Gerasimov, Shoigu and Rudskoy multiple warnings and rapid pace of the EG operation, we are still here to discuss it..

Don Bacon , Apr 1, 2018 9:52:33 PM | 37
news headline:

Graham: US leaving Syria would be 'single worst decision' Trump could make -- Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Sunday cautioned President Trump against pulling American troops out of Syria, saying that doing so would be "a disaster in the making."

Which means it's probably a good idea. The claim in Washington is that Obama made a mistake in pulling troops out of Iraq. In fact, he had no choice because Bush-II had signed a treaty (w/o Senate advice & consent) to pull out in December 2010. So it was done. Obama had no choice.

Syria isn't the same, but it's similar. Again the US has supported anti-government forces and invaded a foreign country, destroyed part of it while killing, injuring and displacing millions of people. The locals want the US out. Wouldn't we?

I'm reminded of what Mike Hastie said. "One day while I was in a bunker in Vietnam, a sniper round went over my head. The person who fired that weapon was not a terrorist, a rebel, an extremist, or a so-called insurgent. The Vietnamese individual who tried to kill me was a citizen of Vietnam, who did not want me in his country. This truth escapes millions." --Mike Hastie, U.S. Army Medic, Vietnam 1970-71

daffyDuct , Apr 1, 2018 10:20:27 PM | 38
NYT has a bombshell scoop! A material so poisonous that the Skripals have not died, and was spread by allegedly "[going] up to the front door" and smearing it on their outside door handle. This kind of stealth could only come from Russia and Putin... Bonus points attempted by doing a Nexis word search on what the CIA liars said regarding DNC emails..

"LONDON -- British officials investigating the poisoning of Sergei V. Skripal, a former Russian double agent, believe it is likely that an assassin smeared a nerve agent on the door handle at his home. This operation is seen as so risky and sensitive that it is unlikely to have been undertaken without approval from the Kremlin, according to officials who have been briefed on the early findings of the inquiry.


Because the nerve agent is so potent, the officials said, the task could have been carried out only by trained professionals familiar with chemical weapons. British and American officials are skeptical that independent actors could have carried out such a risky operation or obtained the agent without approval at the highest levels of the Russian government -- almost exactly the same phrase that American intelligence agencies used in October 2016, when they first attributed the hacking of emails from the Democratic National Committee to a team of Russian hackers.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/01/world/europe/russia-sergei-skripal-uk-spy-poisoning.html

Don Bacon , Apr 1, 2018 10:22:08 PM | 39
Rob Slane has 20 more questions on Skripal:

Here's #4:

In her statement to the House of Commons on 12th March 2018, the British Prime Minister, Theresa May stated the following:

"It is now clear that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia. This is part of a group of nerve agents known as 'Novichok '. Based on the positive identification of this chemical agent by world-leading experts at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down" [my emphasis added].
In the judgement at the High Court on 22nd March on whether to allow blood samples to be taken from Sergei and Yulia Skripal for examination by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), evidence submitted by Porton Down to the court (Section 17 i) stated the following:
"Blood samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analysed and the findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound . The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent or closely related agent " [my emphasis added].
So the Prime Minister said that Porton Down had positively identified the substance as a Novichok nerve agent. The statement from Porton Down says that their tests indicated that it was a Novichok agent or closely related agent. Are these two statements saying exactly the same thing? . . here
Don Bacon , Apr 1, 2018 10:27:51 PM | 40
@37 ...re: door handle, grabbed by both father and daughter exiting the apartment

Novichok nerve agents . . .Within the environment, these agents react with water to degrade, including moisture in the air, and so in the UK they would have a very limited lifetime.

mali , Apr 2, 2018 5:58:01 AM | 58
"Because the nerve agent is so potent, the officials said, the task could have been carried out only by trained professionals familiar with chemical weapons. "

daffyDuct @37
-------------------------------------------------
If the nerve agent is so potent per NYT description, how came the Skripals went to the pub and restaurant having beers and food with no signs of discomfort after having touched the nerve agent smeared on their house door?

This is nerve agent not timebomb. Just how stupid can NYT let itself be?

Happy Easter everyone!

[Apr 02, 2018] Strange coinsidence: toxic dagger exersize and the skripals poisoning

Apr 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

i can't get it out of my mind the coincidence of toxic dagger and the skripal as excuse to ostracize russia further..

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/exercise-toxic-dagger-the-sharp-end-of-chemical-warfare

i am sorry.. the timing just seems too coincidental... i guess i will be labeled a conspiracy theorists, as opposed to a coincidental theorist..

Posted by: james | Apr 1, 2018 1:48:18 PM | 8

[Apr 02, 2018] Belarus Expels Moscow Diplomats 'Leading Russia Expert' Falls for Cheeky April Fool's Joke

Apr 02, 2018 | russia-insider.com

[Apr 02, 2018] I think the Kiev side had been directing airliners across the war zone along the path of planned bombing runs to allow Ukraine military jets to fly the same course *below* the airliner and use the airliner's much bigger radar signature (huge compared to a military jet) as protection i.e. if a missile was fired and missed it might lock on to the airliner instead.

Apr 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

anon Disclaimer , January 5, 2015 at 10:57 am GMT

The Ukraine military shot down another airliner some years before when a missile aimed at a training drone missed and locked on to the airliner.

I think the Kiev side had been directing airliners across the war zone along the path of planned bombing runs to allow Ukraine military jets to fly the same course *below* the airliner and use the airliner's much bigger radar signature (huge compared to a military jet) as protection i.e. if a missile was fired and missed it might lock on to the airliner instead.

I don't think the US side wants to admit their allies were using airliners as human shields and the Russians don't want to admit their surface to air missiles ignore civilian IFF (as they must in a war zone) hence why both side's stories feel unconvincing.

Apart from the politics it's important because if missiles treat civilian IFF as foe then it means airliners need to be kept a very long way from any mid-tech war zone.

Jonathan Revusky , December 6, 2014 at 7:42 am GMT
@AlMiller

The parallels are pretty clear. In the case of both 9/11 and this Malaysian airliner, the western mainstream media had their story ready to go as soon as it happened. And then when all the evidence starts accumulating that this story is untrue, cannot possibly be true, they simply ignore all of it. In fact anybody who brings it up is immediately tarred as a "conspiracy theorist".

That's what about it. (Shrug)

[Apr 02, 2018] The Kiev regime had no need to put anti-aircraft batteries in the area at all, but they did!

Apr 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

MarkU , February 8, 2015 at 1:07 pm GMT

@Anonymous

Re: "The Ukraine would have no need to shoot AA missiles since so called Rebels had no air force at the time "

The Kiev regime had no need to put anti-aircraft batteries in the area at all, but they did!

Please everybody, get real.

Its been months since the shooting down of MH 17 and despite all the accusations made by the US government and the Kiev regime at the time, not one single piece of credible evidence has been produced. Obviously the information is being suppressed, and even more obviously it is not being withheld to protect the rebels or the Russians.

Captain John Charity Spring MA , February 8, 2015 at 10:56 pm GMT
Alternative theory.

MH17 was downed near Soledar and Artimovsk.

Under Artimovsk there is a gigantic weapons cache. Is it possible that the plane was downed so that Western investigators could look into an inventory of that site and assess what the Separatists removed from said weapons dump? Chemical, Nuclear, Biological weapons stocks?

The HQ for the crash site investigation was set up in Soledar which is a very close to the Salt Mine cave entrance.

The passengers were just collateral damage in the contest over weapons stocks.

[Apr 02, 2018] Malaysia has been cut out of the investigation, why? For refusing to prejudge the outcome?

Apr 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

Ronald Thomas West , Website November 29, 2014 at 12:42 pm GMT

Malaysia has been cut out of the investigation, why? For refusing to prejudge the outcome?

http://journal-neo.org/2014/11/28/mh17-malaysia-s-barring-from-investigation-reeks-of-cover-up/

[Apr 02, 2018] Yet another theory of SU-25 role in shooing

Apr 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

Sure Thing , March 7, 2015 at 3:48 am GMT

And here is an assessment of the non-surface-to-air-BUK (or 'red herring') theory, going with the pics and reports of two fighter jets -Ukrainian – seen on each side of MH-17 :

Ray B. March 07, 2015
Here is my analysis, from an ex-Boeing aero engineer standpoint:
The Boeing 777 was initially at 33,000 feet. The aircraft, therefore, was above the Su-25's ceiling, as listed at wikipedia. (Service ceiling: 7,000 m (22,965 ft) clean,
5,000 m (16,000 ft) with max weapons) I am aware of the Comments both that this is an artificial, CIA-changed figure and that Su-25 pilots have reached at least 30,000 feet with supplemental oxygen. For the purpose here, it does not matter. I am presuming the Su-25 was carrying only two R-60 air-to-air missiles, which are low drag. So, the service ceiling in this case would have been around 21-22,000 feet. (The upgrades to the Su-25 did not include engine or aerodynamic changes, so are unlikely to have increased the ceiling.) The 777 was well within reach of the R-60s, though (66,000 ft, Mach 2.7). As a non-maneuvering, transport aircraft, it would have been laughably easy to hit. I would have salvoed both missiles, both for increased hit-chance and to avoid coming back with only one missile (very noticeable, as opposed to just empty pylons). The above would tie-in with ret. Col Zhilin's testimony. Most reports indicate the accompanying-fighter was closing from the rear, which is the most advantageous for infrared guidance. With infrared guidance, the missile would home-in directly on the hottest area – the engine exhaust. The warhead would probably detonate in the exhaust cone or adjacent to it. In the Boeing 777, the engine is slung well out in front of the wing. The expanding-rod warhead would rip up the engine but probably not take out the wing or flight control cabling. The 'hit' (or hits) might indeed be survivable. Today's jet engines are built with FAA-mandated 'containment shields'.

They are meant to contain high-velocity fan/compressor/turbine blades if something causes them to shear off. They are basically armored 'cans' surrounding the rotating

parts. A missile detonating inside this 'can' might have the expanding-rods contained, rather than punching through the nacelle and into the fuselage. If detonating on the far side of the 'can' from the fuselage, much the same result Also, Zhilin says, " the Boeing turned 180 degrees to the left." This would be the direct result of losing thrust on the left engine. The pilots were probably more concerned with staying in the air (under control) than their heading http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/
commercial/startup/pdf/777_perf.pdf "Engine-out altitude capability (MTOW, ISA + 10°C) Basic: 16,200 ft Maximum Weight: 15,600 ft" After the 777's engine was hit and disabled by the R-60, the 777 would have descended to around 15-16,000 feet. That is the standard one-engine-out 'cruise' altitude as above. It may have been lower with the damage.

If I were the pilot, I would have been on a circling descent through and below that altitude, looking for a nearby airport or good field. Since the R-60 has
such a small warhead, the pilots may not even have known they were hit by a missile and assumed a simple engine-out problem. That could account for the lack of initial reporting.

This descent would have put the 777 well within the Su-25's (wikipedia) altitude capability. So, it would have been possible at that point to conduct a 'strafing' run with the 30mm cannon. With the 777 turning, that may have presented the opportunity for whatever angle shot the fighter pilot wanted. As various Commenters have noted, there seems to have been a concentration on the cockpit and avionics bay. (Grrr.)

Unfortunately, with the 'secrecy agreement' in place, I see no way that any important evidence will be revealed, barring a Snowden-like mass-release by someone with a Conscience
Reply

Am off to Asia Times with this too.

[Apr 02, 2018] BUK missle smooketrail is demonstratively absent

Notable quotes:
"... One of the most salient points I find, is the fact that no vapour trail had been observed or photographed from the ground. A vapour condensation trail remains visible for quite some time and is visible for I would think at least 15 minutes. ..."
Apr 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

Contraviews , Website October 2, 2016 at 10:31 pm GMT

@Contraviews
Someone may already have commented on it, but it's impossible to read all the comments.

One of the most salient points I find, is the fact that no vapour trail had been observed or photographed from the ground. A vapour condensation trail remains visible for quite some time and is visible for I would think at least 15 minutes.

Surely in this day and age when virtually everyone carries a cell phone capable of making pictures, such evidence should be available. But apparently there is not.

As a test it would be interesting if Russia would in front of the international press test fire a BUK missile.

I would very much appreciate comments on this particular aspect of the catastrophe. Thank you in anticipation.

The JIT in its 29/9 report showed a picture of a smoke trail. If that had been the smoke trail of the BUK that alledgedly shot down MH 17 than that picture would without a shadow of doubt been splashed over al the western media within hours. Hundreds may by thousands would have seen it and scores of pictures and videos would have been taken. The very fact that JIT now comes up with a smoke trail (which could have been taken any where) proves that it is a fake. If that is a fake all the other pictures are most likely fakes. Mr Eliot Higgins should have done better.

Ronald Thomas West , Website June 3, 2015 at 11:13 am GMT
Russia states they have a Ukrainian witness backing the SU 25 combat jet shoot-down of MH 17

http://rt.com/news/264545-mh17-investigators-key-witness/

Sure Thing , March 12, 2015 at 11:29 pm GMT
Still think it was a BUK? Think again.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/how-the-malaysian-airlines-mh17-boeing-was-shot-down-examination-of-the-wreckage/5435094

[Apr 02, 2018] The manipulation and exploitation of the MH17 incident by the Dutch seems to rival that of Skripal incident by the UK

Apr 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

Ronald Thomas West , Website November 27, 2016 at 1:24 pm GMT

Despite the Dutch whitewash (report) which could only be called the 'likely' & 'probably' 'we love to point any finger at Putin report', material at odds with the western line continues to come out:

https://southfront.org/mh17-ukraine-plane-crash-additional-details-revealed-exclusive-photos-from-the-scene/

Ronald Thomas West , Website January 30, 2017 at 10:10 am GMT
The Dutch investigators "can't decipher" the radar data provided by the Russians. As well, Dutch police have confiscated from journalists raw footage of new witness interviews that will no doubt be shared with Ukraine as a party to the investigation, endangering those persons who provided the information on condition of confidentiality:

https://www.rt.com/news/375556-mh17-radar-investigation-decipher/

Ronald Thomas West , Website December 28, 2017 at 10:10 pm GMT
Leaked documents from the government at Kiev on the MH 17 shoot down by Ukrainian jet fighter:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/leaked-documents-ukrainian-air-forces-shot-down-mh17-confirms-conspiracy-and-guilt.497767/

Ronald Thomas West , Website March 19, 2018 at 4:41 pm GMT
Man identified as pilot who shot down MH 17 'commits suicide'

https://sputniknews.com/europe/201803191062694528-voloshin-mh17-suspected-suicide/

^

JR , March 26, 2018 at 7:18 am GMT
The lengths Dutch Prime Minister publicly went (serving quote 'geopolitical interests') to get the EU-Ukraine association agreement ratified the clear rejection by advisory referendum notwithstanding, ought to make any well informed reader suspicious of how far Rutte went out of public sight to serve those same 'geopolitical interests' by manipulating both the investigation and public opinion in relation to MH17.

Rutte recently demonstrated his fealty to those 'geopolitical interests' again. When asked if new evidence was presented in the Skripal case to justify the Netherlands support for the UK, Rutte answered that 'such evidence wasn't necessary because May had stated that it was highly likely that Russia was responsible'.

The Dutch Government got a UN mandate to perform the investigation and as such that part of the investigation had to be transparent.

Clearly to serve those 'geopolitical interests' the Dutch separated the technical investigation from the legal liability investigation. The technical investigation was performed under the UN mandate and the second legal liability investigation was organized separate from any UN mandate.

The Dutch, Australian, Belgium government colluded with the Ukrainians to organize a 'Joint Investigation Team' which under the cover of performing a legal investigation refuses any transparency and at regular intervals hints that indictments are close but not there yet.

Also the Dutch Transport Safety Board technical investigation has concluded that the UkSATSE should have closed the Air Control area above Eastern Ukraine, but the Dutch government has thus far never taken any action to hold the Ukrainians responsible for that failure even when 3 days before MNH17 a AN-24 was downed from 6500m and UkSATSE (joint civil-military ATC) continued to control some 100 civil air liners a day over that area. The Dutch simply accepted that the Ukraine lost all relevant radar data.

JR , March 26, 2018 at 1:22 pm GMT
@anon

http://uksatse.ua/index.php?s=94a63ae71adf1e881cd1901e2276a734&act=Part&CODE=247&id=272&lang=en

News
4th June 2014
UkSATSE ensures safety in Ukrainian sky under any conditions
Ukrainian State Air Traffic Services Enterprise (UkSATSE) informs that the enterprise keeps on providing the whole range of air navigation services. It ensures flight safety in the airspace of Ukraine, airdromes of Ukraine and in the international airspace over the high seas at the relevant level. Moreover, UkSATSE ensures trouble-free operation of branches of Joint Civil-Military System of Air Traffic Management of Ukraine irrespective of foreign interference in work of air traffic services bodies in Crimea and at the East of Ukraine.

JR , March 27, 2018 at 6:40 am GMT
Actually this "Who shot down MH17?" is the wrong question.

The question is "Who is liable?".

Shooting down aircraft above a war zone is SOP. If a civilian air liner is guided and controlled over such war area where 3 days earlier an AN-24 has been downed from 6500m one really ought to question the competence and liability of the ATC involved. That ATC authority UkSATSE as a joint civil-military ATC was fully informed about the situation and still continued to guide some 100 civil air liners ad day for three days over that war zone.

Shooting down a civil air liner over a war zone is tragic but not necessarily always a crime. There was no motive for the East Ukrainians, but as shown by the relentless exploitation by the Kiev puppet regime this Kiev regime most definitely had a motive.

Any liability investigation with the Ukrainian secret service as an investigator like in the Dutch/Australian/Ukraine Joint investigation Team simply can't be trusted to even look for the truth. The JIT was set up with the intention of evading the transparency requirements associated with the UN mandated investigation.

CanSpeccy , Website March 29, 2018 at 2:42 am GMT
@JR

Actually this "Who shot down MH17?" is the wrong question.

The question is "Who is liable?".

In which connection, as may already have been noted:

Malaysia Airlines filed a flight plan requesting 35,000 feet through airspace but was told [by Ukrainian air traffic control] to fly at 33,000

AnonFromTN , March 30, 2018 at 6:54 pm GMT
Thinking people smelled a rat in the case of MH17 straight off. No sensible person can fail to smell it now. Just a few considerations:
1. Donbass freedom fighters (and, by extension, Russia) were blamed by the US, its vassals, and its client states like Ukraine even before the debris cooled down. Only the perpetrators could have known designated "guilty party" without any investigation.
2. Satellite pictures promised by Kerry four years ago never materialized. The only logical conclusion is that the perpetrators were not those accused by the US, and the pictures would have revealed real perpetrators, which the US did not want to happen.
3. Malaysia, the owner of that airplane, was not allowed to participate in the investigation. Apparently, someone was afraid that it might not play ball. This can only happen when the "investigators" meant to hide the truth, not to reveal it.
4. The UK, Australia, the Netherlands, and one of the suspects, Ukraine, signed a non-disclosure agreement. It makes no sense unless one or more of the signatories is guilty.
5. The "investigation" is going on for four years, longer than any investigation in the history of civil aviation. The experience shows that a lot less time is needed to uncover the truth. Thus, the length of this "investigation" shows that the real purpose is cover-up.
6. Ukraine never provided the records of pilots' communications with air traffic controllers, or any other air traffic control records. Thus, it must have had something to hide.
One can continue in this vein, but what's the point? Suffice it to say that all international airlines drew their conclusions: they fly over Russia, but avoid Ukrainian airspace, like they avoid Iranian and North Korean airspace. Sapienti sat.
Tom Van Meurs , Website March 31, 2018 at 3:36 am GMT
In my blog 'contraviews' http://www.contraviewing.blogspot.com post 148 you will find a recording of the conversation (mentioned in this article) between the Estonian Foreign Affairs Minister Urmas Paet and EU Foreign Policy chief Catherine Ashton. Go to the year 2014 in the margin and scroll down to post 148. One may find more interesting articles on MH17.
JR , March 31, 2018 at 5:18 pm GMT
@AnonFromTN

See my comment nr 230: There is not one investigation. The Dutch manipulated this into two separate investigations. There was a technical UN mandated transparent Dutch Safety Board investigation. The Dutch organized a second criminal investigation together with Australia, Belgium and the Ukraine and instigated A Joint Investigation Team (JIT).

https://www.government.nl/latest/news/2017/07/05/jit-countries-choose-the-netherlands-for-mh17-crash-prosecution

The manipulation and exploitation of the MH17 incident by the Dutch seems to rival that of Skripal incident by the UK.

https://www.government.nl/search?keyword=mh17

AnonFromTN , March 31, 2018 at 6:18 pm GMT
@JR

Yes. I can understand the Dutch government: they serve the US overlords first and foremost. They don't give a hoot about the lives of ordinary Dutch people. What I do not understand is the behavior of the people who lost loved ones in MH17 crash. Don't they want to know who killed them? Don't they object to being grist for the mill of amoral and cynical politicians?

[Apr 02, 2018] Iether Russia and China stick together or might be devoured by the West one by one, with Russia first onthe list

Notable quotes:
"... You think in one dimensional. The warfare & alliance is moving very dynamic, Russia & China are working in all fronts together if you watch carefully. Military & energy are appetizer. Petrol Yuan & BRI are main course. Joint dev of C929 civil plane, space program, agri, .its Eurasia century. ..."
"... Skripal false flag & 2 dozen countries expelling diplomats is full display of bizarre brute force destroying entire international norms. You need to resist before more countries succumb to West pressure. ..."
"... If West can orchestrate diplomatic boycott of Russia, won't China be next? When you see smoke, there is fire. When neighbor house is burning, it will spread to yours. But here you are saying, not my problem let China save its own ass until fire spread to yours. ..."
Apr 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

TT , April 1, 2018 at 3:48 am GMT

@Arioch

Oh, we have a copypaste contest? Okay then, i'd copy here my reply at saker's blog too.

No, i just wanna remind you again, Russia & China have to fight as a team, each with their best strength, Russia-military, China-economic.

> China will be blackmailed into submission.
Wooop! Then it is not "existential threat" for China.
Clash for power, clash for sovereignty, clash of prosperity -- but not for survival.

If one energy supply is been fully controlled, you are doomed.

> Russia & China are working closely

Which does not mean China's role is making harsh dyplomatic statements in favor of Russia. At least it was not so before today. So i think it is not today either.

It has very wide implication, West is able to pressure dozens of countries to bend on false flag, it will spread further to Asia & elsewhere. China will be next. Nib the bud.

Also remember that Chinese social mindset is build upon idea of "indebting with gifts and aids" and then requesting payback when they need it.

Since when has the West & Russians, or anyone are more kind than Chinese, giving without expectation of return of at least gratitude from a Russian like you?

Which means Russia should be very wary about accepting any help from China unless it wishes to be seen by China as a deeply indebted beggar incapable of sustaining itself.

Yes Russia should, there is never free lunch. But would it be better for Russia to team up with China to enjoy economic benefits at fair term with a safe South border, than getting raped by the West again with another hostile South neighbor (China could join West to plunder Russia, taking back outer Manchuria Siberia land).

And since diplomatic situation for Russia is not deadly critical I do not think Russia needed that newspaper article. If Russia would request China's support of the kind -- it would be in official diplomatic venues like UN.

No need to wait for UK US to close all Russia embassies with global sanction like what NK get. See further my friend.

> Russia needs to save Syria for its own skin
> Iran needs to save its skin

But is it so for China? Is China in critical need of sovereign and friendly Syria? I doubt it.

Sure Syria is not China concern, but for aftermath implications.

- Stop West eastward aggression. - BRI node in ME - Uyghur terrorists - West control of all ME Energy supply

Was that article reaction to some new threat to Syria, to russia, or to China itself? And i believe in the latter option. This article is not linked to any recent events around Russia, it is caused by Sino-American relations shift.

You think in one dimensional. The warfare & alliance is moving very dynamic, Russia & China are working in all fronts together if you watch carefully. Military & energy are appetizer. Petrol Yuan & BRI are main course. Joint dev of C929 civil plane, space program, agri, .its Eurasia century.

Skripal affair is much less than Olympics was. Even European states many did not jumped Skripal wagon.

who care about Olympics beside some bruise Russkies pride, Skripal false flag & 2 dozen countries expelling diplomats is full display of bizarre brute force destroying entire international norms. You need to resist before more countries succumb to West pressure. Open your narrow vision.

-- but if Russia would soemhow gets politically isolated from the West, what bad is it for China? Russia would become more dependent on China, like many of the trade with West would had to go through Chinese "laundry". China gets more influence over Russia. Russia gets much more limited in its options. Good (for China) develoment, why hurry to cancel it before Russia even asked for ?

You have asked yourself a good qn, why not joint the West vultures to feast on Russia bear? Sure, West aggression to Russia is godsend gift to China. But Chinese leaders think further than greedy West capitalist. Better to have strong Russia as safe Northern backyard than a Nato military threat encirclement (which Russia dream to join but too bad, rejected)

> You are silly self center viewer

Frankly, it is exactly the opposite here.
It is you who claim Russia being behing that article in Global Time.
It is me who claims Russia has no any relation to the timing and wording of that article.

I never claim Russia is solely behind that article. Its entire geopolitical dynamic situation. If West can orchestrate diplomatic boycott of Russia, won't China be next? When you see smoke, there is fire. When neighbor house is burning, it will spread to yours. But here you are saying, not my problem let China save its own ass until fire spread to yours.

> China special force is operating in Syria.
Maybe it is, but seems no one ever saw those operations.

Open secret. Like Russia, its to fight Chinese terrorists there instead of in China. Also real war game training by Russia, too good deal to miss.

> Lot of weapons supply to SAA.

Maybe they are, but can you name those Chinese weapons and show me where SAA is employing it?

It was reported in open news, Syria visited Beijing, then China announced it had old weapon contracts to fulfil..who will pay? Likely those infantry weapons, ammunition, artillery, TAW, uniform & gears, whatever construction materials while Russia take care of high tech equip like S400.

> always throwing allies under bus whenever possible,

.because Putin is evil and just enjoys every opportunity to do bad thing. Always.
I wish i would hear somethign remotely creative from you.

> hence Russia deserve to be raped by West like 1990 is natural.

Oh, i see. Yet another russophobic preaching that "Russians should repent and repay, repay, and repent", then frustrated when Russia shrugs this lecture off.

I'm Russophile & Putin's fan if you read my comments history. But fact is Russia did that, which is foolish short sighted. If West has offered Russia G8 on equal term + Nato, Russia won't hesitate to throw Syria, Iran, China immediately under bus. Then be ready for another rape fantasy. The West just don't love Russians, no matter how much she plead & give.

If all Russians think like you, now let China get all the blows since its their trade war, so Russkies should rest & enjoy the firework, then another bigger 1990′s rape is awaiting your country.

You have just shown Chinese what its like to be in alliance with Russia.

[Apr 02, 2018] The West wants to neutralize China. Russia is the threat to those plans because it could act as a bridge to Europe to China

Notable quotes:
"... It doesn't matter that China has a larger economy. Their economy can be suffocated so long as they are denied a link to Europe through Eurasia. ..."
Mar 31, 2018 | www.unz.com

Anonymous [276] Disclaimer , March 31, 2018 at 7:56 pm GMT

@myself

The point is not to block off China, the point is to block off China AND Russia from Europe. Also trade from other Eurasian countries is going to be discouraged unless it goes through the Straits that the West controlls, but obviously Russia and China are the big players here.

Russia has a lot of gas and natural resources that the West and ME countries do not want going to Europe.

And, as you said, the west has many ways of neutralizing China. So to the West, Russia is the bigger threat since either country could act as a bridge to Europe but Russia has many more paths of creating these links than China has.

Anonymous [392] Disclaimer , March 31, 2018 at 3:57 am GMT
@myself

Russia is being singled out, and is being targeted before China, because of Mackinder and the need to control the "Heartland". Read up on Mackinder as he has a huge influence on the west.

The empire sees Russia as the greater threat because only Russia and not China is a threat to control the Heartland and thus the world. This is the real motivation behind everything.

It doesn't matter that China has a larger economy. Their economy can be suffocated so long as they are denied a link to Europe through Eurasia.

[Apr 02, 2018] Russia v the West: Is this a new Cold War? by Jonathan Marcus

It is really strange the BBC sometimes can still publish decent article of such subject and do not just repeat Foreign Office talking points.
Notable quotes:
"... There is a very different balance of forces between Russia and the West. Russia also has very limited "soft power", lacking an attractive internationalist ideology to "sell" around the world. ..."
"... If the Cold War was a battle for global dominance between two universalist ideologies - capitalism and communism - what then is today's competition between Russia and the West really about? ..."
"... But beyond that, policy towards Moscow needs to be thought through from the fundamentals, bearing in mind that the repercussions from the chaotic collapse of the Soviet Union are still very much playing out some three decades later. ..."
Mar 31, 2018 | www.bbc.com

Relations between Russia and the West are at a new low. But how should we describe the current situation?

There's a lot of loose talk about a new "Cold War" - a comparison of present-day tensions to the bitter ideological and military rivalry that existed between the Soviet Union and the West from the 1950s to the end of the 1980s.

But such comparisons may be misleading.

"The Cold War," says Michael Kofman, a senior research scientist at the CNA Corporation and a fellow at the Wilson Center's Kennan Institute, "was a competition resulting from a bipolar system, where two superpowers, both with economic and military advantages, were competing to shape international politics.

"Their universalist ideologies made this competition inevitable, as did the distribution of power at the time."

In contrast, he says, today's competition is not the result of a balance of power, or universalist ideology per se, but "conscious decisions made by leaders, the strategies they pursued and a series of definable disagreements in international politics". And these were not "destined or inevitable".

'Soft power'

So, while Mr Kofman believes the stakes could prove significant for the United States, the scale and existential nature of the conflict is nothing like the Cold War, nor is Russia in any position to fundamentally alter either the balance of power or the structure of the current international systems. "In short," says Mr Kofman, "the causes and character of the conflict are different."

During the real Cold War there was an armed peace in Europe, while the real battles were fought out across the globe from Angola to Cuba and the Middle East. Today's battle lines are generally much closer to Russia's own borders - Georgia and Ukraine.

There is a very different balance of forces between Russia and the West. Russia also has very limited "soft power", lacking an attractive internationalist ideology to "sell" around the world.

If the Cold War was a battle for global dominance between two universalist ideologies - capitalism and communism - what then is today's competition between Russia and the West really about?

Mr Kofman says that, for Russia, "it is about its survival as a power in the international order, and also about holding on to the remnants of the Russian empire".

"Russian leaders," he says, "are desperate to avert the further fragmentation of Russian influence and territory. They see no way to do this without maintaining buffer states and imposing their will on neighbours to secure their borders."

For the United States, Mr Kofman says, this is a confusing conflict. "One aspect of it", he says, "is a classic tale of hubris and over-extension; that is, too much liberal ideology and not enough thinking about international politics.

"Without any powers to contest American influence for two decades, Washington rightfully took advantage to build what it wanted, but all expansion of influence and power must eventually come with increasing cost, and those costs are starting to multiply in spades."

'Enemy deprivation syndrome'

It is increasingly clear that Russia, and China too for that matter, have not underwritten, and do not subscribe to, the liberal underpinnings of the post-Cold War order. And there is no way for the West to impose its will on these powers. So, in this sense, "great power politics" are back.

But many commentators say the West too has some responsibility for the current situation and playing up the new Cold War idea may only make matters worse.

Lyle Goldstein, a research professor at the US Naval War College, says: "Many in the West seemed to have succumbed to 'enemy deprivation syndrome' after the Cold War. Many national security specialists seem to yearn for a more simple threat that is easily characterised."

Situations in Georgia and Ukraine "seemed to offer the requisite storyline for new Cold War", he says. "However, these situations are incredibly complicated. And those most familiar with the region understand that both situations are a result of the rapid collapse of the Soviet Union with related identity and border issues."

So, what kind of power is Russia today? Mr Kofman describes it as "a weak great power." He says it is "consistently underrated because it historically lags behind the West in technology, political and economic sophistication, but Moscow consistently punches above its economic weight in the international system".

Russia is not, he says, "a declining regional power; quite the contrary".

"Indeed, after a period of internal balancing, military reforms and modernisation, Russia is more than capable of holding ground in its historic backyard, projecting power to other adjacent regions, and, as can be seen. reaching out to exact punishment on distant adversaries via non-military means."

In Nato countries, there is much talk about spending more on defence and of gearing up again to fight what's called a "peer competitor". For that, read Russia.

Some extra defence spending may well be needed - Western allies were far too quick to seek a peace dividend in the wake of the Cold War. But just what kind of military threat does Russia pose to Nato?

Prof Goldstein says Russia's forces are substantially weaker in the aggregate than those of the US and Nato. However, he adds: "Russia has invested wisely in the last 15 years, so that it has preserved certain niche capabilities that give it some advantages."

For example, Nato does not have a real counter to the Russian Iskander tactical nuclear system, and this could pose dilemmas for Nato commanders regarding whether to capitulate or escalate. Russia also has impressive capabilities in artillery and electronic warfare.

'Wars of choice'

But its capacities in cyber- and information warfare are most apparent and pose some of the most pressing challenges. Again, the media and think tanks alike are awash with discussions of an apparently new phenomenon - so-called "hybrid warfare" - a melding and blurring of the boundaries between peace and war at which Russia is perceived to be the new master.

As Mr Kofman notes, "no great power is a monochromatic threat". "In truth," he says, "Russia is both a potent military power in its near-abroad, just as it has the proven ability to conduct political warfare, cyber-warfare, and readily contest the information domain."

But Mr Kofman dismisses the fixation with hybrid warfare, saying this is "just an unintelligible Western reaction, after decades of wars of choice against paltry adversaries, to confrontation with another power that is capable across the full spectrum of conflict".

Prof Goldstein, too, says the obsession with hybrid warfare is problematic. "The real danger," he says, "is miscalculation that could set off a hot war that escalates out of control in either Syria or, most dangerously, in Ukraine."

'Calling Nato's bluff'

The so-called "hybrid" war in Ukraine has been actually shown to be "real war with mostly conventional forces", Prof Goldstein says. Indeed, he argues persuasively that the reason the US and Nato did not contest the Crimea annexation had nothing to do with "hybrid war" and everything to do with the actual military balance and the fact that Crimea and eastern Ukraine were perceived to be a part of Russian "core interests". The Kremlin, he says, "simply called Nato's bluff".

Another problem is that the West may not be using the correct tools in its efforts to influence Russia's behaviour. Indeed, it may not be entirely clear as to what it actually wants from Russia.

"Most of the tools used thus far are about assurance of allies and solving problems in alliance politics," Mr Kofman says, "but there is no discernible theory for how to influence Russian behaviour."

"Diplomatic measures," he says, "are good at maintaining political unity, but nobody in leadership even knows what they want from Moscow. Just trying to get Russia to 'stop' or to retire from international politics, or to capitulate in Ukraine, is not serious thinking - to put it mildly."

Diplomatic expulsions send signals about unity and resolve, but they are unlikely to change minds in Moscow. Most of the experts I speak to say that it is only economic leverage that will compel Russia to weigh up the true cost of its actions.

But beyond that, policy towards Moscow needs to be thought through from the fundamentals, bearing in mind that the repercussions from the chaotic collapse of the Soviet Union are still very much playing out some three decades later.

[Apr 02, 2018] How the East can save the West by The Saker

Notable quotes:
"... Frankly, Saker reads too much into this Chinese article. It is not about Russia. It is not because Skrypal hoax dialed ritual Russophobia over eleven. It just is a coincidence. Yet before loosing the elections Hillary was promising military war with Russia. Yet before winning the elections Trump was promising economic war with China. ..."
"... Russia`s biggest weakness is the incompetent, useless leaders they had from the 80`s to Yeltsin. The mess that the USSR left behind with unstable states on its borders with no treaty to prevent NATO expansion was a huge gift to the US that just keeps giving!! ..."
"... I`ll go as far as saying this gift to the US might lead to Russia`s end as a country in its present form. You can hardly blame the US I mean in 1990 Russia agreed to basically throw the towel in and live in a US dominated world in practice. Whatever they say about promises at the time that lasted for as long as their breath was warm ..."
"... the problem right now is the Imperial US (ruled from Israel). If it succeeds in destroying Russia, then the Chinese are irrelevant, and have nothing to say about anything. ..."
"... The US public are irretrievably useless and are going to have to go the whole way, with WW3 and/or an economic collapse, with the best bet being on WW3 (which they may well lose). ..."
Apr 01, 2018 | www.unz.com

Europe: My honor is solidarity!

"That tells you all you need to know about the difference between modern Britain and the government of Vladimir Putin. They make Novichok, we make light sabers. One a hideous weapon that is specifically intended for assassination. The other an implausible theatrical prop with a mysterious buzz. But which of those two weapons is really more effective in the world of today?".

(Boris Johnson)

Let's begin this discussion with a few, basic questions.

Question one: does anybody sincerely believe that "Putin" (the collective name for the Russian Mordor) really attempted to kill a man which "Putin" himself had released in the past, who presented no interest for Russia whatsoever who, like Berezovsky , wanted to return back to Russia , and that to do the deed "Putin" used a binary nerve agent? Question two: does anybody sincerely believe that the British have presented their "allies" (I will be polite here and use that euphemism) with incontrovertible or, at least, very strong evidence that "Putin" indeed did such a thing? Question three: does anybody sincerely believe that the mass expulsion of Russian diplomats will somehow make Russia more compliant to western demands (for our purposes, it does not matter what demands we are talking about)? Question four: does anybody sincerely believe that after this latest episode, the tensions will somehow abate or even diminish and that things will get better? Question five: does anybody sincerely believe that the current sharp rise in tensions between the AngloZionist Empire (aka the "West") does not place the Empire and Russia on collision course which could result in war, probably/possibly nuclear war, maybe not deliberately, but as the result of an escalation of incidents?

If in the zombified world of the ideological drones who actually remain in the dull trance induced by the corporate media there are most definitely those who answer "yes" to some or even all of the questions above, I submit that not a single major western decision maker sincerely believes any of that nonsense. In reality, everybody who matters knows that the Russians had nothing to do with the Skripal incident, that the Brits have shown no evidence, that the expulsion of Russian diplomats will only harden the Russian resolve, that all this anti-Russian hysteria will only get worse and that this all puts at least Europe and the USA, if not the entire planet, in great danger.

And yet what just happened is absolutely amazing: instead of using fundamental principles of western law (innocent until proven guilty by at least a preponderance of evidence or even beyond reasonable doubt), basic rules of civilized behavior (do not attack somebody you know is innocent), universally accepted ethical norms (the truth of the matter is more important than political expediency) or even primordial self-preservation instincts (I don't want to die for your cause), the vast majority of western leaders chose a new decision-making paradigm which can be summarized in two words:

"highly likely" "solidarity"

This is truly absolutely crucial and marks a fundamental change in the way the AngloZionist Empire will act from now on. Let's look at the assumptions and implications of these two concepts.

First, "highly likely". While "highly likely" does sound like a simplified version of "preponderance of evidence" what it really means is something very different and circular: "Putin" is bad, poisoning is bad, therefore it is "highly likely" that "Putin" did it. How do we know that the premise "Putin is bad" is true? Well -- he does poison people, does he not?

You think I am joking?

Check out this wonderful chart presented to the public by "Her Majesty's government" entitled "A long pattern of Russian malign activity":

In the 12 events listed as evidence of a "pattern of Russian malign activity" one is demonstratively false (2008 invasion of Georgia), one conflates two different accusations (occupation of Crimea and destabilization of the Ukraine), one is circular (assassination of Skripal) and all others are completely unproven accusations. All that is missing here is the mass rape of baby penguins by drunken Russian sailors in the south pole or the use of a secret "weather weapon" to send hurricanes towards the USA. You don't need a law degree to see that, all you need is an IQ above room temperature and a basic understanding of logic. For all my contempt for western leaders, even I wouldn't make the claim that they all lack these. So here is where "solidarity" kicks-in:

"Solidarity" in this context is simply a "conceptual placeholder" for Stephen Decatur 's famous " my country, right or wrong " applied to the entire Empire. The precedent of Meine Ehre heißt Treue just slightly rephrased into Meine Ehre heißt Solidarität also comes to mind.

Solidarity simply means that the comprador ruling elites of the West will say and do whatever the hell the AngloZionists tell them to. If tomorrow the UK or US leaders proclaim that Putin eats babies for breakfast or that the West needs to send a strong message to "Putin" that a Russian invasion of Vanuatu shall not be tolerated, then so be it: the entire AngloZionist nomenklatura will sing the song in full unison and to hell with facts, logic or even decency!

Solemnly proclaiming lies is hardly something new in politics, there is nothing new here. What is new are two far more recent developments: first, now everybody knows that these are lies and, second, nobody challenges or debunks them. Welcome to the AngloZionist New World Order indeed!

The Empire: by way of deception thou shalt do war

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar and the father of it.

(John 8:44)

ORDER IT NOW

Over the past weeks I have observed something which I find quite interesting: both on Russian TV channels and in the English speaking media there is a specific type of anti-Putin individual who actually takes a great deal of pride in the fact that the Empire has embarked on a truly unprecedented campaign of lies against Russia. These people view lies as just another tool in a type of "political toolkit" which can be used like any other political technique. As I have mentioned in the past, the western indifference to the truth is something very ancient coming, as it does, from the Middle-Ages: roughly when the spiritual successors of the Franks in Rome decided that their own, original brand of "Christianity" had no use for 1000 years of Consensus Patrum . Scholasticism and an insatiable thrust for worldly, secular, power produced both moral relativism and colonialism (with the Pope's imprimatur in the form of the Treaty of Tordesillas ). The Reformation (with its very pronounced Judaic influence) produced the bases of modern capitalism which, as Lenin correctly diagnosed, has imperialism as its highest stage. Now that the West is losing its grip on the planet (imagine that, some SOB nations dare resist!), all of the ideological justifications have been tossed away and we are left with the true, honest, bare-bones impulses of the leaders of the Empire: messianic hubris (essentially self-worship), violence and, above all, a massive reliance on deception and lies on every single level of society, from the commercial advertisements targeted at children to Colin Powell shaking some laundry detergent at the UNSC to justify yet another war of aggression.

Self-worship and a total reliance on brute force and falsehoods -- these are the real "Western values" today. Not the rule of law, not the scientific method, not critical thought, not pluralism and most definitely not freedom. We are back, full circle, to the kind of illiterate thuggery the Franks so perfectly embodied and which made them so infamous in the (then) civilized world (the south and eastern Mediterranean). The agenda, by the way, is also the same one as the Franks had 1000 years ago: either submit to us and accept our dominion, or die, and the way to accept our dominion is to let us plunder all your riches. Again, not much difference here between the sack of the First Rome in 410, the sack of the Second Rome in 1204 and the sack of the Third Rome in 1991. As psychologists well know, the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.

Interestingly, the Chinese saw straight through this strategic psyop and they are now sounding the alarm in their very official Global Times : (emphasis added)

The accusations that Western countries have hurled at Russia are based on ulterior motives, similar to how the Chinese use the expression "perhaps it's true" to seize upon the desired opportunity. From a third-person perspective, the principles and diplomatic logic behind such drastic efforts are flawed, not to mention that expelling Russian diplomats almost simultaneously is a crude form of behavior. Such actions make little impact other than increasing hostility and hatred between Russia and their Western counterparts ( ) The fact that major Western powers can gang up and "sentence" a foreign country without following the same procedures other countries abide by and according to the basic tenets of international law is chilling. During the Cold War, not one Western nation would have dared to make such a provocation and yet today it is carried out with unrestrained ease. Such actions are nothing more than a form of Western bullying that threatens global peace and justice. ( ) It is beyond outrageous how the US and Europe have treated Russia. Their actions represent a frivolity and recklessness that has grown to characterize Western hegemony that only knows how to contaminate international relations. Right now is the perfect time for non-Western nations to strengthen unity and collaborative efforts among one another. These nations need to establish a level of independence outside the reach of Western influence while breaking the chains of monopolization declarations, predetermined adjudications and come to value their own judgment abilities. ( ) The West is only a small fraction of the world and is nowhere near the global representative it once thought it was. The silenced minorities within the international community need to realize this and prove just how deep their understanding is of such a realization by proving it to the world through action.

As the French say " à bon entendeur, salut! ": the Chinese position is crystal clear, as is the warning. I would summarize it as so: if the West is an AngloZionist doormat, then the East is most definitely not.

[Sidebar: I know that there are some countries in Europe who have, so far, shown the courage to resist the AngloZionist Diktat . Good for them. I will wait to see how long they can resist the pressure before giving them a standing ovation]

The modern Ahnenerbe' Generalplan Ost

The decision, therefore, lies here in the East; here must the Russian enemy, this people numbering two hundred million Russians, be destroyed on the battlefield and person by person, and made to bleed to death

(Reichsführer Heinrich Himmler)

Still, none of that explain why the leaders of the Empire have decided to engage in a desperate game of "nuclear chicken" to try to, yet again, force Russia to comply with its demands to "go away and shut up". This is counter-intuitive and I get several emails each week telling me that there is absolutely no way the leaders of the AngloZionist Empire would want a war with Russia, especially not a nuclear-armed one. The truth is that while western leaders are most definitely psychopaths, they are neither stupid nor suicidal, and neither were Napoleon or Hitler! And, yes, they probably don't really want a full-scale war with Russia. The problem is that these rulers are also desperate, and for good cause.

Let's look at the situation just a few months ago. The US was defeated in Syria, ridiculed in the DPRK, Trump was hated in Europe, the Russians and the Germans were working on North Stream, the British leaders forced to at least pretend to work on Brexit, the entire "Ukrainian" project had faceplanted, the sanctions against Russia had failed, Putin was more popular than ever and the hysterical anti-Trump campaign was still in full swing inside the USA. The next move by the AngloZionist elites was nothing short of brilliant: by organizing a really crude false flag in the UK the Empire achieved the following results:

The Europeans have been forced right back into the Anglosphere's fold ("solidarity", remember?) The Brexiting Brits are now something like the (im-)moral leaders of Europe again. The Russians are now demonized to such a degree that any accusation, no matter how stupid, will stick. In the Middle-East, the US and Israel now have free reign to start any war they want because the (purely theoretical) European capability to object to anything the Anglos want has now evaporated, especially now that the Russians have become "known chemical-criminals" from Ghouta to Salisbury At the very least, the World Cup in Russia will be sabotaged by a massive anti-Russian campaign. If that campaign is really successful, there is still the hope that the Germans will finally cave in and, if maybe not outright cancel, then at least very much delay North Stream thereby forcing the Europeans to accept, what else, US gas.

This is an ambitious plan and, barring an unexpected development, it sure looks like it might work. The problem with this strategy is that it falls short of getting Russia to truly "go away and shut up". Neocons are particularly fond of humiliating their enemies (look at how they are still gunning for Trump even though by now the poor man has become their most subservient servant) and there is a lot of prestige at stake here. Russia, therefore, must be humiliated, truly humiliated, not just by sabotaging her participation in Olympic games or by expelling Russian diplomats, but by something far more tangible like, say, an attack on the very small and vulnerable Russian task force in Syria. Herein lies the biggest risk.

The Russian task force in Syria is tiny, at least compared to the immense capabilities of CENTCOM+NATO. The Russians have warned that if they are attacked, they will shoot down not only the attacking missiles but also their launchers. Since the Americans are not dumb enough to expose their aircraft to Russian air defenses, they will use air power only outside the range of Russian air defenses and they will use only cruise missiles to strike targets inside the "protection cone" of the Russians air defenses. The truth is that I doubt that the Russians will have the opportunity to shoot down many US aircraft, at least not with their long-range S-300/S-400 SAMs. Their ubiquitous and formidable combined short to medium range surface-to-air missile and anti-aircraft artillery weapon system, the Pantsir, might have a better chance simply because it's location is impossible to predict. But the real question is this: will the Russians shoot back at the USN ships if they launch cruise missiles at Syria?

My strictly personal guess is that they won't unless Khmeimim, Tartus or another large Russian objective (official Russian compounds in Damascus) are hit. Striking a USN ship would be tantamount to an act of war and that is just not something the Russians will do if they can avoid it. The problem with that is this restraint will, yet again, be interpreted as a sign of weakness, not civilization, by the "modern Franks" (visualize a Neanderthal with a nuclear club in his fist). Should the Russians decide to act à la American and use violence to "send a message", the Empire will immediately perceive that as a loss of face and a reason to immediately escalate further to reestablish the "appropriate" hierarchy between the "indispensable nation" and the "gas station masquerading as a country". So here is the dynamic at work

Russia limits herself to words of protests ==>> the Empire sees that as a sign of weakness and escalates

Russia responds in kind with real actions==>> The Empire feels humiliated and escalates

Now look at this from a Russian point of view for a second and ask yourself what you would do in this situation?

The answer, I think, is obvious: you try to win as much time as possible and you prepare for war. The Russians have been doing exactly that since at least early 2015.

For Russia this is really nothing new: been there, done that, and remember it very, very well, by the way. The "western project" for Russia has always been the same since the Middle-Ages, the only difference today is the consequences of war. With each passing century the human cost of the various western crusades against Russia got worse and worse and now we are not only looking at the very real possibility of another Borodino or Kursk, and not even at another Hiroshima, but at something which we can't even really imagine: hundreds of millions of people die in the course of just a few hours.

How do we stop that?

Is the West even capable of acting in a different way?

I very much doubt it.

The one actor who can stop the upcoming war: China

There is one actor which might, perhaps, stop the current skid towards Armageddon: China. Right now, the Chinese have officially declared that they have what they call a " comprehensive strategic partnership of cooperation " later shortened to " strategic partnership ". This is a very apt expression as it does not speak of an "alliance": two countries of the size of Russia and China cannot have an alliance in the traditional sense -- they are too big and different for that. They are, however, in a symbiotic relationship, that both sides understand perfectly (see this White Paper for details). What this means in very simple terms is this: the Chinese cannot let Russia be defeated by the Empire because once Russia is gone, they will be left one on one with a united, triumphal and infinitely arrogant West (likewise I would argue that Russia cannot afford to have Iran defeated by the Empire for exactly the same reasons, and neither can Iran let the Israelis destroy Hezbollah). Of course, in terms of military power, China is a dwarf compared to Russia, but in terms of economic power Russia is the dwarf when compared to China in this "strategic community of interests". Thus, China cannot assist Russia militarily. But remember that Russia does not need this if only because military assistance is what you need to win a war. Russia does not want to win a war, Russia desperately needs to avoid a war! And here is where China can make a huge difference: psychologically.

Yes, the Empire is currently taking on both Russia and China, but everybody, from its leaders to its zombified population, seems to think that these are two, different and separate foes. [We can use this opportunity to most sincerely thank Donald Trump for so "perfectly" timing his trade war with China.] They are not: not only are Russia and China symbionts who share the same vision of a prosperous and peaceful Eurasia united by a common future centered around the OBOR and, crucially, free from the US dollar or, for that matter, from any type of major US role, but Russia and China also stand for exactly the same notion of a post-hegemonic world order: a multi-polar world of different and truly sovereign nations living together under the rules of international law. If the AngloZionists have their way, this will never happen. Instead, we will have the New World Order promised by Bush, dominated by the Anglosphere countries (basically the ECHELON members, aka the "Five Eyes") and, on top of that pyramid, the global Zionist overlord. This is something China cannot, and will not allow. Neither can China allow a US-Russian war, especially not a nuclear one because China, like Russia, also needs peace.

Conclusion

I don't see what Russia could do to convince the Empire to change its current course: the US leaders are delusional and the Europeans are their silent, submissive servants. As shown above, whatever Russia does it always invites further escalation from the Empire. Of course, Russia can turn the West into a pile of smoldering radioactive ashes. This is hardly a solution since, in the inevitable exchange, Russia herself will also be turned into a similar pile of smoldering radioactive ashes by the Empire. In spite of that, the Russian people have most clearly indicated by their recent vote that they have absolutely no intention of caving in to the latest western crusade against them. As for the Empire, it will never accept the fact that Russia refuses to submit. It therefore seems to me that the only thing which can stop Armageddon would be for the Chinese to ceaselessly continue to repeat to the rulers of the Empire and the people of the West what the wrote in the article quoted above: that " The West is only a small fraction of the world and is nowhere near the global representative it once thought it was" and "the silenced minorities within the international community need to realize this and prove just how deep their understanding is of such a realization by proving it to the world through action."

History teaches us that the West only strikes against those opponents it sees as defenseless or, at least, weaker. The fact that the Popes, Napoleon or Hitler were wrong in their evaluation of the strength of Russia does not change this truism. In fact, the Neocons today are making exactly the same mistake. So telling them about the fact that Russia is much stronger than what the western propaganda says and which, apparently, many western rulers believe (you always end up believing your own propaganda), does not help. Russian "reminders of reality" will do no good simply because the West is out of touch with reality and lacks the ability to understand its own limitations and weaknesses. But if China stepped in and conveyed that crucial message " The West is only a small fraction of the world " and that the rest of the world will prove this " through action " then other countries will step in and a war can be averted because even the current delusion-based "solidarity" will collapse in the face of a united Eurasia.

Russia alone cannot continue to carry the burden of stopping the messianic psychopaths ruling the Empire.

The rest of the world, led by China, now needs to step in to avert the war.

NoseytheDuke , March 30, 2018 at 6:49 am GMT

This plan for global dominance has been over 100 years in the making and has already cost over 100 million lives so far. How likely is it for them to back off now? The Chinese are far from stupid so it will be interesting to see how they view the situation and act.

I've stated previously that the people who really can put a halt to it are Americans themselves but it won't be easy. The ideal situation would be a mass mutiny of US military personnel and the line, The Empire: by way of deception thou shalt do war should probably read, The Israeli Empire: by way of deception thou shalt do war. It would be useful to repeat this ad nauseam until it truly sinks in for US military personnel that the US is a supplicant to Israel and to understand who they will be fighting and dying for. A mass mutiny would be the best way to save their families and future.

Anon [425] Disclaimer , March 30, 2018 at 7:16 am GMT
Again, not much difference here between the sack of the First Rome in 410, the sack of the Second Rome in 1204 and the sack of the Third Rome in 1991. As psychologists well know, the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.

But all three Romes were empires too filled with lies.

yurivku , March 30, 2018 at 11:00 am GMT
Oh, appears it's China who should do something !

But I think that if stupid westerners won't wake up, -- nobody will help. China is big and possibly can think that in world where no Russia, no Europe nor US/Canada are exist, some place will still be for China.

It's "higly posssible" a mistake, but if silly westerners will continue to munch their MSM grass their shadows will be printed on the walls of history.
Actually they deserve to be.

Seamus Padraig , March 30, 2018 at 11:53 am GMT

"Solidarity" in this context is simply a "conceptual placeholder" for Stephen Decatur's famous "my country, right or wrong" applied to the entire Empire.

Kind of disappointed in the Saker here. Just like liberals, he omits the rest of Decatur's famous toast: "Our country -- in her intercourse with foreign nations, may she always be in the right , and always successful, right or wrong. [ Emphasis mine. ]" Decatur was not trying to encourage amoral behavior, such as that which we now see with the AngloZionists running Washington.

By the way, I've heard the Russians are now telling a joke about Boris Johnson: they're saying he was poisoned with durachok (bonehead)!

Issac , March 30, 2018 at 3:53 pm GMT
China has deep ties to the western empire. Russians would be drinking too deeply from their own propaganda to miss this fact. Indeed, the latest crippling of Trumpist reform was lead by heavily Chinese invested men Ryan and McConnell. Israel has a strong grip on US foreign policy for obvious reasons, but Israel has no reason to see Russia bullied into submission. China does.

It should be plain to any objective observer of global politics that the west is internally incoherent and will wane in power by the crush weight of demographic change alone. China observes this and realizes the only long-term competitor to their ascendant position, one generation hence, is an independent Russia. Far better for the Chinese that Russia is mortally wounded or harried into Chinese vassal status before the west breaks down into a third world non-entity.

Fran Macadam , March 30, 2018 at 5:22 pm GMT
The real reasons for the expulsions is the revelation of Russia's next generation war weapons. It was taken up as an invitation to fight, not to make peace, and making it as hard as possible for Russians to either influence opinion or gather information.

Somebody wanted Skripal dead, and while it may be a useful false flag provocation, with his involvement with the Steele Dossier a possible trigger, it could be serving more than one purpose. As usual, we are assigning to the Russkies both more omnipotence and stupidity than is merited. I supoose it is our own elites who believe their omniscience in surveilling all of us means they are also smarter than the rest of us. Maybe

Boris M Garsky , March 30, 2018 at 6:18 pm GMT
Well said and accurate. There is no consensus among the hoipolloi with the neocon push for war. This will never come about. The west is desperate, no doubt, and will continue to beat its chest, much to its own detriment. If the west intended on war, it would have come about. Time is not on their side. The neocons have backed themselves into a corner and, therefore, must create chaos, camouflage, obfuscation, in order to bamboozle the world until they can safely go back into their holes. Most likely, they are looking for concessions. Remember the Wasserman-Schuiltz spy scandal? Remember the many deadly false flags being exposed to the public for what they are?
Arioch , Website March 30, 2018 at 6:25 pm GMT
Frankly, Saker reads too much into this Chinese article. It is not about Russia. It is not because Skrypal hoax dialed ritual Russophobia over eleven. It just is a coincidence. Yet before loosing the elections Hillary was promising military war with Russia. Yet before winning the elections Trump was promising economic war with China.

USA ruling 1% was making a strategic choice year ago.

When Trump got elected he inherited the raging war. He could not stop it, obviously. Then he turned it overboard. He started demanding so many wars at once that US Army got overstretched and paralyzed. Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Itan, Yemen, Korea, new European garrisons . Trump send Army to prepare to war everywhere and now Pentagon can not scratch together enough forces to attack anywhere specifically.
By his "clumsy and incompetent bravado" Trump neutralized the army, made and exposed it as incapable pretend-force.

Now Trump can switch to his programme -- economic war with China.

And that is why Chinese diplomats and media run crazy. Now it is their war, not Russia's. Now their tails are on the line. Now Russia mostly can move to backlines to lick wounds while China would exchange blows and collect bruises.

This turned recent Chinese statements so bald and pushing. This, and not a concern for Russia.

JVC , March 30, 2018 at 6:42 pm GMT
something the Russians might consider -- immediately cutting off all gas to Europe and restoring such service for payment only in gold or the new "petrol yuan" . Europe depends heavily on that Russian Gas, and such a move would re-align some European thinking. Replacing it with US provided LPG would take far too long and be much more expensive having to be shipped by sea

In fact, maybe if Russia, China, the other brics and aligned countries suddenly cut off all ties to the west, it would hasten the coming economic collapse of the EU and US, and that dreamed of multipolar world would arise from the ashes.
Better that than the ashes of a nuclear exchange I would think.

CARLOS231 , March 30, 2018 at 6:57 pm GMT
China is too smart to show its hand yet, they are building their economic & military strength quietly, they don't want to scare the westerners yet with threats.

Russia`s biggest weakness is the incompetent, useless leaders they had from the 80`s to Yeltsin. The mess that the USSR left behind with unstable states on its borders with no treaty to prevent NATO expansion was a huge gift to the US that just keeps giving!!

I`ll go as far as saying this gift to the US might lead to Russia`s end as a country in its present form. You can hardly blame the US I mean in 1990 Russia agreed to basically throw the towel in and live in a US dominated world in practice. Whatever they say about promises at the time that lasted for as long as their breath was warm .

Carlton Meyer , Website March 30, 2018 at 9:16 pm GMT
How the East Can Save the West

A couple centuries ago the phrase "The White Man's Burden" was used to explain why citizens of Western nations must devote resources to civilize the world. Gore Vidal used "The Yellow Man's Burden" to explain why citizens of Asian nations were devoting so much wealth to keep the USA and much of Europe wealthy. If our citizens suddenly lost 30% of their annual income due to tax increases and spending cuts needed to truly balance our national budgets, they would be outraged. They might learn that this was the result of "free trade", which might result in revolution and wars. Those who have profited off "free trade" by selling out their citizens know its best to let the working class learn this truth slowly.

_____________________

Trump's proclamation to pull out of Syria may be good news, but probably not. He hired psychopath Bolton, so we can assume the US military is just consolidating forces in Iraq to hold off attacks whilst they bomb, bomb, bomb Iran. The Iraqis aren't our allies, they just act to get free stuff, and they will know we are not bombing Iran to save Iranians. It might be wise to get our troops out of Iraq too!

____________________________

To answer:

Let's begin this discussion with a few, basic questions.

Question one (thru five): does anybody sincerely believe

Yes, this bimbo does, and she's the State Department spokesman. The State Department is still infected with Clinton-hysteria and uses sexy women to spin lies so the foreign press doesn't laugh and scorn absurd BS too loudly. The American press are just stenographers and eagerly copy her lies. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dL9UxED4uuI

Sergey Krieger , March 30, 2018 at 9:50 pm GMT
The problem is that Russia/USSR submitted once and the West think it can be achieved again. Hence everything must be made clear. No partners word should be used and the West must be clearly warned that violence of unimaginable level will be used if they dare and what will follow if Russian force anywhere attacked and that any use of nukes against Russia means the end of humanity.

Unfortunately acting adequately and carefully Russia never was able to avoid war. It is in the books. Right now bets are life on earth hence being too careful and being perceived as weak is a bad thing. Russia IMHO must act boldly. Respond to USA and UK harassment by cutting diplomatic relations and giving straight terse warning.

myself , March 30, 2018 at 10:27 pm GMT
@Godfree Roberts

I think what disturbs China about this whole situation regarding the ENTIRE Western world (US, Canada, Western Europe, Australia) is not simply that it is an overreaction to Russia, but the whole idea that one particular people -- the Russian people -- have once again been SINGLED OUT for collective intimidation and eventually for possible dismemberment.

China has very long and very bitter experience of this itself. In the 19th century, the imperial powers, for some reason, ganged up on China.

In other parts of the world, the experience of other backward peoples was with but ONE particular Empire (ex. only the Americans vs the Amerinds, only the Spanish in South America, only Great Britain in India and Australia, only Russians in Central Asia and Siberia, and only Japanese in Korea. The British, French, Germans, Italians and Belgians each had separate RIVAL spheres in Africa, and ditto for South-East Asia.

But when it came to China, ALL these competing powers set aside their differences. It's as if they said to each other "Hey, China is so enormous and juicy, we should not fight among ourselves, there's enough for everyone!" Unbelievably vicious.

And now, we see the same pattern. the whole Western world against Russia. I think in this instance, the Han don't need anyone to tell them what to think -- it is 100% certain they do not approve of what the collective West is doing.

Miro23 , March 30, 2018 at 10:37 pm GMT

But if China stepped in and conveyed that crucial message "The West is only a small fraction of the world"

They can do better than this, and explicitly state that a nuclear war with Russia is a nuclear war with China -- just to make it clear -- and let the US do some more realistic calculations.

Seamus Padraig , March 30, 2018 at 10:45 pm GMT
@Issac

Israel has a strong grip on US foreign policy for obvious reasons, but Israel has no reason to see Russia bullied into submission.

Sure they do: Syria.

Seamus Padraig , March 30, 2018 at 10:47 pm GMT
@Arioch

"war is a path of deceit. When you are strong -- pretend weak ."

Am familiar with Sun-tzu a well. But what are you saying here? That the UK is stronger than Russia. I would definitely have to disagree with that proposition!

Miro23 , March 30, 2018 at 11:06 pm GMT
@Issac

It should be plain to any objective observer of global politics that the west is internally incoherent and will wane in power by the crush weight of demographic change alone. China observes this and realizes the only long-term competitor to their ascendant position, one generation hence, is an independent Russia.

Maybe, but the problem right now is the Imperial US (ruled from Israel). If it succeeds in destroying Russia, then the Chinese are irrelevant, and have nothing to say about anything.

myself , March 30, 2018 at 11:15 pm GMT
Something just occurred to me.

The recent THREATENED tariffs have an INTERESTING TIMING to them. It is being used by Washington to convince China to stay passive as the West takes down Russia. Conversely, if China "bends the knee", then the West promises that the threats won't materialize. (The West loves worthless promises). Washington calculates that the mere threat of tariffs will make China stand by as a neighbor is destroyed. Any turmoil in your neighbor's house, spills over into yours whether you want it to or not. A neighbor is a neighbor, period.

And THAT, IMHO, is why the protectionist threats are happening NOW. Don't get me wrong, the tariffs were going to happen anyway, eventually. China, whatever it does, cannot escape them.

But to threaten a trade war RIGHT NOW with the one power guaranteed to be Russia's economic lifeline (we know that China couldn't care less what Russia does in its backyard, in the Ukraine) while preparing to attack Russia itself? Well, the whole thing is WAY TOO OBVIOUS.

And if someone like me can see, so can a lot of other people in Moscow and Beijing. Washington thinks its being "smart", but they are so ridiculously easy to read.

myself , March 30, 2018 at 11:24 pm GMT
@Seamus Padraig

No, not that UK is really stronger than Russia but appears weaker. It's that the West is actually not capable of defeating Russia but loudly shouts that it CAN defeat them easily, and tries to look powerful and intimidating to Russia. In this situation, the weaker-positioned West pretends to Russia that we are stronger, and we want Russia to believe us. That way, it won't come to actual war, and we think Russia will back down. It's an extremely risky plan.

Miro23 , March 30, 2018 at 11:26 pm GMT
@peterAUS

That could, perhaps, take minds of US citizens from shopping and social media to, perhaps, more serious matters.

Won't hold my breath.

Taking everything into account, I think the you're right. The US public are irretrievably useless and are going to have to go the whole way, with WW3 and/or an economic collapse, with the best bet being on WW3 (which they may well lose).

myself , March 30, 2018 at 11:39 pm GMT
In fact, it's very possible RUSSIA is NOT, at this time, the target of Western aggression. Sure, the West shall SURELY try to destroy Russia, but the urgency is not there YET. Maybe the real target right now is CHINA, shortly to have the world's largest economy in absolute terms. They must be destroyed NOW! The West is trying to cut a deal with Russia: "Stab China in the back, and bow down to us. You can live A LITTLE LONGER, before we come for you. Otherwise we get pissed and kill you TODAY".

An entirely plausible master-plan from Washington, London and Paris. Also a pretty transparent one, if it's the case. The problem with this "Divide and Conquer" plan, aside from being easy to read, is that it counts on both Russia and China to be dumb enough to believe they are not BOTH in the cross-hairs. How stupid does the West think China and Russia are?

myself , March 30, 2018 at 11:47 pm GMT
@Miro23

It would have a psychological effect, at most. Russia has 5,000 warheads, China only admits to having around 500 or 600 strategic city-killers. They may have more, but if you don't admit something it doesn't count for deterrence. Maybe a decade from now, as China builds its arsenal, the statement could be much more effective.

Mikel , March 31, 2018 at 12:09 am GMT
No, the Chinese are surely disgusted with this bullying behavior of the West (even many Europeans are, just read the comments to the news in the different media outlets) but China cannot seriously confront the West. That would make them lose trillions of dollars in exports and investments and put an abrupt end to their miraculous but still ongoing economic development. Not gonna happen anytime soon.

The situation will continue to deteriorate until some sort of modus vivendi is reached (like at the beginning of the first Cold War). Or perhaps it's just been too long since the last World War and the time is ripe for the next one.

As for the Skripal murder attempt, it's hard to imagine Putin ordering it at this time and in that manner but it's not that hard to imagine someone from the Kremlin sewers being behind it.

In the somewhat less likely scenario of a false flag operation, I would consider an Israeli asymmetrical response to the recent downing of their jet by the Syrians with obvious help from the Russians. They have plenty of experience in extraterritorial assassinations and more than enough knowledge to fabricate a Russian-like nerve agent.

Franklin , March 31, 2018 at 12:22 am GMT
@Anon

I respect and value Saker as a commentator on Russian and military affairs. Those are his areas of expertise and professional experience. I do not value him as a historian, because there enters into his writing a clear bias. I respect the fact of his commitment to his Orthodox faith, but I don't appreciate being almost hammerlocked into having to take a side in his prejudices.

He has a way of lumping 1,000 years of exceedingly complex history into what amounts practically to silly formulas that remind one of adolescent pique. West is characterized by "thuggery," whereas the "East," is presumably the source -- and is possibly the monopoly -- of the virtues Saker has in mind, while Western-like manifestations of military violence and conquest are unknown there.

And there is this pearl: "Scholasticism and an insatiable thrust for worldly, secular, power produced both moral relativism and colonialism " This is downright embarrassing in its silliness. Of course, after deep study of Aquinas or Bonaventure the light comes on: moral relativism! Clearly, subtlety and essential distinctions are not the Saker's strong points, to say the least, when it comes to registering his annoyance and bitterness in his 1000 year view of "the West," whereas sweeping and frankly spectacularly inept generalizations are. One is really tempted to accuse him of a lack of intellectual integrity when it comes to these matters.

At root, Saker is a highly emotional and touchy "rooter" for Orthodoxy. Fine, that's his right, but he is no scholar. One looks in vain either for impartiality, for breadth and depth of understanding and sympathy, and hence for generosity of spirit. Thankfully, there are many great scholars of history, East and West.

Johann Ricke , March 31, 2018 at 1:01 am GMT
@myself

In the 19th century, the imperial powers, for some reason, ganged up on China.

That's the opposite of reality. If they had ganged up on China, each would have taken large piece for itself. In reality, they were overawed by China, and tried to preserve it much as they tried to preserve Ottoman rule against both breakup and dismemberment by Russia. The Ottomans were too far gone, so they failed in both respects. But they did manage to prevent China's breakup while failing to keep Russia from annexing a large chunk of Chinese territory.

Heck, they even helped China defeat the millenarian Taiping rebels who racked up a large body count during their rebellion. Note that when the Jurchens detected internal rebellion during the Ming dynasty, they waited until the imperial armies were occupied with rebel suppression before delivering the coup de grace to the Ming dynasty. The Western powers were too tied up competing with each other to really cooperate in anything more than avenging the honor of their envoys and getting trading posts set up on Chinese territory.

myself , March 31, 2018 at 2:06 am GMT
@Johann Ricke

By "ganging up" I refer to the way in which China was COLLECTIVELY FORCED to extend any and all concessions granted any single Imperial Power to ALL Imperial powers. And all the Imperial powers were on-board with this policy , again as a unified group.

For example, if Russia forced a railroad treaty on China, China by unequal, at-gun-point "Treaty" with the Eight Powers (at the time Great Britain, France, Japan, Germany, Russia, The United States, Austria-Hungary and Italy) would also have to grant EVERYONE railroad concessions in their respective zones.

Or say if China was forced to open trade relations by America, China would automatically be forced to open trade to EVERYONE ELSE , and even the instigators in that case, the United States, would force China to do it. All in the name of the relevant Treaties, of course.

Also by mutual agreement among the imperial powers, they would not support China in any efforts to get better terms in any negotiation with any other power . So Russia refused to, say provide support for Chinese efforts to fend off the Japanese, though normally it might have done so. This was because, both being part of the Imperial Powers grouping, Russia and Japan had agreed to co-exist in mutual exploitation of China.

It was all designed so that China would have no ability to shift its favor diplomatically from one power to another, but had to negotiate from a position of deliberately imposed weakness. Diplomacy was the only tool available to China in that execrably weak state, pathetic as that tool was. By collective agreement among the Empires, that tool was taken away.

In effect, exploitation of China became a COOPERATIVE project between such disparate rivals as Britain, France and Germany, or United States, Japan and Russia. Such a thing, of a coordinated desire to apportion one country among many, was not seen anywhere else in the Colonial Age .

That is my meaning when I referred to the Empires "ganging up" on China.

Issac , March 31, 2018 at 2:37 am GMT
@Miro23

How absurd. The foremost producer of virtually all modern goods is irrelevant without Russia? A weakened Russia is a boon to Chinese expansion into their desired role as Eurasian leader state. The only irrelevant nations are in the West as their post-national suicide becomes all the more certain.

Anonymous [392] Disclaimer , March 31, 2018 at 4:03 am GMT
@Issac

Ridiculous, China needs Russia as Russia is a perfect complement to Chinas weaknesses. In fact, neither China nor Russia could have picked a better strategic partner than each other as neither country could confront the West on it's own but together the West cannot topple either nation. No other combination between countries would provide near as much synergies.

China is not looking to expand into Russia. Why would they when they have a shrinking population. They are expanding into the SCS in order to keep their oil lines free.

The real strategic advantage Russia and China have with each other is the OBOR. This is key to everything and is the reason why the West is targeting Russia so aggressively.

myself , March 31, 2018 at 8:13 am GMT
@Anonymous

If Mackinder's Heartland theory is at play, and you want to cut China off from Europe, taking down Russia would seem to be an enormous effort to accomplish that. There are much easier ways. Why not just lobby your European "allies" not to trade at all with China? Mission accomplished, and no war with Russia as a bonus. If the EU won't follow the Empire's orders, you need to take out not only Russia, but probably Pakistan, and all the Central Asian nations, plus Iran and Turkey. If not, and you only destroy one or a few of these, China's One Belt One Road reaches Europe anyway.

Also don't forget the outright blockade of China's maritime trade to be conducted by the U.S. Navy -- kind of an act of war in itself.

Seems far easier, if you want to slow China down, to just ORDER America's NATO allies to stop all trade with China. The rest of the world all together won't be able to fill the gap, not any time soon.

Voila, you lower China's GDP growth by some significant percentage, using just strong-arm diplomacy in Europe.

Buys America another full decade as number one economy, maybe.

myself , March 31, 2018 at 8:29 am GMT
In the fevered dreams of Western strategists, they hope for Russia and China to turn on each other, sparing the Atlantic powers the trouble. Then, they come in and pick up the pieces. They hope to replicate the success of Britain in playing off France against Germany pre-World War One. The problem is they have in fact encouraged the Sino-Russian strategic alignment, not hindered it.

No matter, after all, there can never be such a thing, thought the British, of a long-term common interest between France and Germany -- a "European Union" will never come about. French and Germans naturally hate each other! Right?

And how did Britain make out with that thinking? How will America make out in coming decades? In geopolitics, not that well. Not as long as we are short-sighted.

Anon [384] Disclaimer , March 31, 2018 at 2:11 pm GMT

"solidarity"

Those with the power, and the happily ruled, have always needed synonyms for "obedience." Solidarity is a choice in line with our social-mediatic times and the related communication standards.

Herald , March 31, 2018 at 3:36 pm GMT
@myself

As well as being extremely risky it's also bloody stupid and doomed to failure.

Arioch , March 31, 2018 at 3:40 pm GMT
@Seamus Padraig

I mean, like i said above, Johnson and other western politicians are not "boneheads" (intellectually weak) as you said, no, they are smart (intellectually strong) and pretending, faking their intellectual weakness (appearance of stupidity)

Sean , March 31, 2018 at 5:35 pm GMT
Answers:-
One and two. Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean there is no chance of a mistake, and the standard necessary for thinking Putin responsible is less than what would be needed for finding him guilty in a court of law. He cannot hide behind his country and diplomatic immunity while claiming the protection of British Law for evidence necessary to convict someone on trial for a capital offence.

Three. We want nothing from Russia , for indeed they have nothing to offer. To go away and shut up is the most they can do, and that is why are sending the worst of the Russian goons back were they came from, whether they want to go back or not (they would love to stay in London*).

Four. Punishment is essential, otherwise they will see weakness.

Five. No chance of nuclear war or any other kind or war. Russia is destined to become the lonely old man of Europe. It has nothing anyone wants at the price of being treated like an imbecile, and our diplomats dislike living there*).

Arioch , March 31, 2018 at 8:22 pm GMT
@TT

Oh, we have a copypaste contest? Okay then, i'd copy here my reply at saker's blog too.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[MORE]
> China will be blackmailed into submission.

Wooop! Then it is not "existential threat" for China.
Clash for power, clash for sovereignty, clash fo prosperity -- but not for survival.

> Russia & China are working closely

Which does not mean China's role is making harsh diplomatic statements in favor of Russia. At least it was not so before today. So i think it is not today either. Also remember that Chinese social mindset is build upon idea of "indebting with gifts and aids" and then requesting payback when they need it. Which means Russia should be very wary about accepting any help from China unless it wishes to be seen by China as a deeply indebted beggar incapable of sustaining itself. And since diplomatic situation for Russia is not deadly critical I do not think Russia needed that newspaper article. If Russia would request China's support of the kind -- it would be in official diplomatic venues like UN.

> Russia needs to save Syria for its own skin
> Iran needs to save its skin

But is it so for China? Is China in critical need of sovereign and friendly Syria? I doubt it.

> China has been backing up with big cheque book for last few years, signing hundreds of billions deal with upfront payments to prop Russia economy for prolong war.

Which is very important, but is not diplomatic statements nor Chinese newspaper articles.

That is exactly the Chinese role in this fight like i said many times before -- economic and financial warfare is Chinese responsibility, while military and diplomatic warfare is Russian's.

> Global times news mostly reflected the China think tank policy that they wish to propagate to English speaking world.

And here we are getting back to the topic. Why such a harsh, explicitly worded article did appeared today? Was it because of Russia or of China itself? Was that article reaction to some new threat to Syria, to russia, or to China itself?
And i believe in the latter option. This article is not linked to any recent events around Russia, it is caused by Sino-American relations shift.

> China has sensed West is tightened noose around Russia to cut it off from world, seeing from Olympic & now the Skirpal circus

Skripal affair is much less than Olympics was. Even European states many did not jumped Skripal wagon. Additionally, if Russia would be "cut off from Western world" -- what the West did not dared to do even in 2014 on the height of Crimea and MH17 accusations and on the hopes of "gas station" imminent and fast collapse, so would hardly dare now just because some Skripal -- but if Russia would somehow gets politically isolated from the West, what bad is it for China? Russia would become more dependent on China, like many of the trade with West would had to go through Chinese "laundry". China gets more influence over Russia. Russia gets much more limited in its options. Good (for China) development, why hurry to cancel it before Russia even asked for ?

> Trade war will be too bloody for the world

Yes, but the said trade war is not having Russia as primary adversary -- Russian economy i not that significant to the western world, and for USA in particular it has but zero significance. The trade war we see igniting -- is the war against China. China can no more be "wise monkey up the trees", when USA moved their chaingun aim from Russia onto China. Now China is being shot at, and the article is Chinese response to China being attacked. Not to anything around Russia.

> You are silly self center viewer

Frankly, it is exactly the opposite here. It is you who claim Russia being behind that article in Global Time. It is me who claims Russia has no any relation to the timing and wording of that article.

> China special force is operating in Syria.

Maybe it is, but seems no one ever saw those operations.

> Lot of weapons supply to SAA.

Maybe they are, but can you name those Chinese weapons and show me where SAA is employing it?

> Lot of money pump in to sustain Syria war,

If they are, then China does it part of the fight, good. Like USA supplied money and material to fighting European states during WW2. However that has no relation with the Global Times article being discussed.

> always throwing allies under bus whenever possible,

.because Putin is evil and just enjoys every opportunity to do bad thing. Always. I wish i would hear somethign remotely creative from you.

> hence Russia deserve to be raped by West like 1990 is natural.

Oh, i see. Yet another russophobic preaching that "Russians should repent and repay, repay, and repent", then frustrated when Russia shrugs this lecture off.

Vidi , March 31, 2018 at 8:34 pm GMT
@Anonymous

And, as you said, the west has many ways of neutralizing China.

Don't forget that China has an enormous internal market too, which in time should be larger than the U.S. and EU combined. European countries that stay out of this vast and rapidly growing market will be cutting their own throats. Good luck convincing them to do that.

[Apr 02, 2018] Russophobia Anti-Russian Lobby and American Foreign Policy by A. Tsygankov

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... I wanted to investigate whether the growing volume of criticism toward Russia, sometimes by people who could hardly claim to be knowledgeable about the country, concealed a political agenda. ..."
"... I discovered evidence of Russophobia shared by different circles within the American political class and promoted through programs and conferences at various think tanks, congressional testimonies, activities of NGOs, and the media. Russophobia is not merely a critique of Russia, but a critique beyond any sense of proportion, waged with the purpose of undermining the nation's political reputation. ..."
"... To these individuals, Russophobia is merely a means to pressure the Kremlin into submitting to the United States in the execution of its grand plans to control the world's most precious resources and geostrategic sites. In the meantime, Russia has grown increasingly resentful, and the war in the Caucasus in August 2008 has demonstrated that Russia is prepared to act unilaterally to stop what it views as US unilateralism in the former Soviet region. ..."
"... Anti-American attitudes are strongly present in Russian media and cultural products, as a response to the US policies of nuclear, energy, and military supremacy in the world. Extreme hegemonic policies tend to provoke an extreme response, and Russian nationalist movements and often commentators react harshly to what they view as unilateral encroachment on Russia's political system and foreign policy interests. Russia's reactions to these policies by the United States are highly negative and frequently inadequate, but hardly more extreme than the American hegemonic and imperial discourse. ..."
"... The central objective of the Lobby has been to preserve and strengthen America's power in the post-Cold War world through imperial or hegemonic policies. The Lobby has viewed Russia with its formidable nuclear power, energy reserves, and important geostrategic location as a major obstacle in achieving this objective. Even during the 1990s, when Russia looked more like a failing state3 than one capable of projecting power, some members of the American political class were worried about the future revival of the Eurasian giant as a revisionist power. In their percep- tion, it was essential to keep Russia in a state of military and economic weakness-not so much out of emotional hatred for the Russian people and their culture, but to preserve American security and promote its val- ues across the world. To many within the Lobby, Russophobia became a useful device for exerting pressures on Russia and controlling its policies. Although to some the idea of undermining and, possibly, dismembering Russia was personal, to others it was a necessity of power dictated by the realities of international politics. ..."
"... According to this dominant vision, there was simply no place in this "New American Century" for power competitors, and America was destined eventually to assume control over potentially threatening military capabilities and energy reserves of others. As the two founders of the Project for the New' American Century (PNAC), William Kristol and Robert Kagan, asserted when referring to the large military forces of Russia and China, "American statesmen today ought to recognize that their charge is not to await the arrival of the next great threat, but rather to shape the international environment to prevent such a threat from arising in the first place."4 ..."
"... Russia was either to agree to assist the United States in preserving its world-power status or be forced to agree. It had to either follow the U.S. interpretation of world affairs and develop a political and economic system sufficiently open to American influences or live as a pariah state, smeared by accusations of pernicious behavior, and in constant fear for its survival in the America-centered world. As far as the U.S. hegemonic elites were concerned, no other choice was available. ..."
"... This hegemonic mood was largely consistent with mainstream ideas within the American establishment immediately following the end of the Cold War. For example, 1989 saw the unification of Germany and the further meltdown of the Soviet Union, which some characterized as "the best period of U.S. foreign policy ever."5 President Jimmy Carter's former national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski envisioned the upcoming victory of the West by celebrating the Soviet Union's "grand failure."6 ..."
"... Charles Krauthammer, went as far as to proclaim the arrival of the United States' "unipolar moment," a period in which only one super- power, the United States, would stand above the rest of the world in its military, economic, and ideological capacity ..."
"... The mid-1990s saw the emergence of post-Soviet Russophobia. The Lobby's ideology was not principally new, as it still contained the three central myths of Sovietophobia left over from the Cold War era: Russia is inherently imperialist, autocratic, and anti-Western. This ideology now had to be modified to the new conditions and promoted politically, which required a tightening of the Lobby's unity, winning new allies within the establishment, and gaining public support.15 ..."
"... During the period of 2003-2008, Vice President Richard Dick Cheney formed a cohesive and bipartisan group of Russia critics, who pushed for a more confrontational approach with the Kremlin. ..."
"... Cheney could not tolerate opposition to what he saw as a critical step in establishing worldwide US hegemony. He was also harboring the idea of controlling Russia's energy reserves.91 ..."
"... In Russia, however, the Cold War story has been mainly about sovereignty and independence, rather than Western-style liberalism. To many Russians it is a story of freedom from colonization by the West and of preserving important attributes of sovereign statehood. ..."
"... In a world where neocolonialism and cultural imperialism are potent forces, the idea of freedom as independence continues to have strong international appeal and remains a powerful alternative to the notion of liberal democracy. ..."
"... The West's unwillingness to recognize the importance of this legitimizing myth in the role of communist ideology has served as a key reason for the Cold War.5 Like their Western counterparts, the Soviets were debating over methods but not the larger assumptions that defined their struggle. ..."
"... Yet another analyst wrote "at the Cold War's end, the United States was given one of the great opportunities of history: to embrace Russia, the largest nation on earth, as partner, friend, ally. Our mutual interests meshed almost perfectly. There was no ideological, territorial, his- toric or economic quarrel between us, once communist ideology was interred. We blew it. We moved NATO onto Russia's front porch, ignored her valid interests and concerns, and, with our 'indispensable-nation' arrogance, treated her as a defeated power, as France treated Weimar Germany after Versailles."114 ..."
Jun 09, 2017 | www.amazon.com

It was during the spring of 2006 that I began this project. I wanted to investigate whether the growing volume of criticism toward Russia, sometimes by people who could hardly claim to be knowledgeable about the country, concealed a political agenda.

As I researched the subject, I discovered evidence of Russophobia shared by different circles within the American political class and promoted through programs and conferences at various think tanks, congressional testimonies, activities of NGOs, and the media. Russophobia is not merely a critique of Russia, but a critique beyond any sense of proportion, waged with the purpose of undermining the nation's political reputation.

... ... ....

Although a critical analysis of Russia and its political system is entirely legitimate, the issue is the balance of such analysis. Russia's role in the world is growing, yet many U.S. politicians feel that Russia doesn't matter in the global arena. Preoccupied with international issues, such as Iraq and Afghanistan, they find it difficult to accept that they now have to nego- tiate and coordinate their international policies with a nation that only yesterday seemed so weak, introspective, and dependent on the West. To these individuals, Russophobia is merely a means to pressure the Kremlin into submitting to the United States in the execution of its grand plans to control the world's most precious resources and geostrategic sites. In the meantime, Russia has grown increasingly resentful, and the war in the Caucasus in August 2008 has demonstrated that Russia is prepared to act unilaterally to stop what it views as US unilateralism in the former Soviet region.

And some in Moscow are tempted to provoke a much greater confrontation with Western states. The attitude of ignorance and self-righteousness toward Russia tells us volumes about the United States' lack of preparation for the twenty-first century's central challenges that include political instability, weapons proliferation, and energy insecurity. Despite the dislike of Russia by a considerable number of American elites, this attitude is far from universally shared. Many Americans understand that Russia has gone a long way from communism and that the overwhelming support for Putin's policies at home cannot be adequately explained by high oil prices and the Kremlin's manipulation of the public-despite the frequent assertions of Russophobic observers.

Balanced analysts are also aware that many Russian problems are typical difficulties that nations encounter with state-building, and should not be presented as indicative of Russia's "inherent drive" to autocracy or empire. As the United States and Russia move further to the twenty-first century, it will be increasingly important to redefine the relationship between the two nations in a mutually enriching way.

Political and cultural phobias are, of course, not limited to those of an anti-Russian nature. For instance, Russia has its share of America-phobia -- a phenomenon that I have partly researched in my book Whose World Order (Notre Dame, 2004) and in several articles. Anti-American attitudes are strongly present in Russian media and cultural products, as a response to the US policies of nuclear, energy, and military supremacy in the world. Extreme hegemonic policies tend to provoke an extreme response, and Russian nationalist movements and often commentators react harshly to what they view as unilateral encroachment on Russia's political system and foreign policy interests. Russia's reactions to these policies by the United States are highly negative and frequently inadequate, but hardly more extreme than the American hegemonic and imperial discourse.

The Anti-Russian Lobby

When the facile optimism was disappointed, Western euphoria faded, and Russophobia returned ... The new Russophobia was expressed not by the governments, but in the statements of out-of-office politicians, the publications of academic experts, the sensational writings of jour- nalists, and the products of the entertainment industry. (Rodric Braithwaite, Across the Moscow River, 2002)1

....

Russophobia is not a myth, not an invention of the Red-Brovvns, but a real phenomenon of political thought in the main political think tanks in the West . .. [T]he Yeltsin-Kozyrev's pro-U.S. "giveaway game" was approved across the ocean. There is reason to say that the period in ques- tion left the West with the illusion that Russia's role was to serve Washington's interests and that it would remain such in the future. (Sergei Mikoyati, International Affairs /October 2006j)2

This chapter formulates a theory of Russophobia and the anti-Russian lobby's influence on the U.S. Russia policy. 1 discuss the Lobby's objec- tives, its tactics to achieve them, the history of its formation and rise to prominence, and the conditions that preserved its influence in the after- math of 9/11.1 argue that Russophobia has been important to American hegemonic elites in pressuring Russia for economic and political conces- sions in the post-Cold War era.

1. Goals and Means

Objectives

The central objective of the Lobby has been to preserve and strengthen America's power in the post-Cold War world through imperial or hegemonic policies. The Lobby has viewed Russia with its formidable nuclear power, energy reserves, and important geostrategic location as a major obstacle in achieving this objective. Even during the 1990s, when Russia looked more like a failing state3 than one capable of projecting power, some members of the American political class were worried about the future revival of the Eurasian giant as a revisionist power. In their percep- tion, it was essential to keep Russia in a state of military and economic weakness-not so much out of emotional hatred for the Russian people and their culture, but to preserve American security and promote its val- ues across the world. To many within the Lobby, Russophobia became a useful device for exerting pressures on Russia and controlling its policies. Although to some the idea of undermining and, possibly, dismembering Russia was personal, to others it was a necessity of power dictated by the realities of international politics.

According to this dominant vision, there was simply no place in this "New American Century" for power competitors, and America was destined eventually to assume control over potentially threatening military capabilities and energy reserves of others. As the two founders of the Project for the New' American Century (PNAC), William Kristol and Robert Kagan, asserted when referring to the large military forces of Russia and China, "American statesmen today ought to recognize that their charge is not to await the arrival of the next great threat, but rather to shape the international environment to prevent such a threat from arising in the first place."4

Russia was either to agree to assist the United States in preserving its world-power status or be forced to agree. It had to either follow the U.S. interpretation of world affairs and develop a political and economic system sufficiently open to American influences or live as a pariah state, smeared by accusations of pernicious behavior, and in constant fear for its survival in the America-centered world. As far as the U.S. hegemonic elites were concerned, no other choice was available.

This hegemonic mood was largely consistent with mainstream ideas within the American establishment immediately following the end of the Cold War. For example, 1989 saw the unification of Germany and the further meltdown of the Soviet Union, which some characterized as "the best period of U.S. foreign policy ever."5 President Jimmy Carter's former national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski envisioned the upcoming victory of the West by celebrating the Soviet Union's "grand failure."6

In his view, the Soviet "totalitarian" state was incapable of reform. Communism's decline was therefore irreversible and inevitable. It would have made the system's "practice and its dogma largely irrelevant to the human conditions," and communism would be remembered as the twentieth century's "political and intellectual aberration."7 Other com- mentators argued the case for a global spread of Western values. In 1990 Francis Fukuyama first formulated his triumphalist "end of history" thesis, arguing a global ascendancy of the Western-style market democracy.®

... ... ...

Marc Plattner declared the emergence of a "world with one dominant principle of legitimacy, democracy."9 When the Soviet system had indeed disintegrated, the leading establishment journal Foreign Affairs pronounced that "the Soviet system collapsed because of what it was, or more exactly, because of what it was not. The West 'won' because of what the democracies were-because they were free, prosperous and successful, because they did justice, or convincingly tried to do so."10 Still others, such as Charles Krauthammer, went as far as to proclaim the arrival of the United States' "unipolar moment," a period in which only one super- power, the United States, would stand above the rest of the world in its military, economic, and ideological capacity.11

In this context of U.S. triumphalism, at least some Russophobes expected Russia to follow the American agenda. Still, they were worried that Russia may still have surprises to offer and would recover as an enemy.12

Soon after the Soviet disintegration, Russia indeed surprised many, although not quite in the sense of presenting a power challenge to the United States. Rather, the surprise was the unexpectedly high degree of corruption, social and economic decay, and the rapid disappointment of pro-Western reforms inside Russia. By late 1992, the domestic economic situation was much worsened, as the failure of Western-style shock ther- apy reform put most of the population on the verge of poverty. Russia was preoccupied not with the projection of power but with survival, as poverty, crime, and corruption degraded it from the status of the indus- trialized country it once was. In the meantime, the economy was largely controlled by and divided among former high-ranking party and state officials and their associates. The so-called oligarchs, or a group of extremely wealthy individuals, played the role of the new post-Soviet nomenklatura; they influenced many key decisions of the state and suc- cessfully blocked the development of small- and medium-sized business in the country.13 Under these conditions, the Russophobes warned that the conditions in Russia may soon be ripe for the rise of an anti-Western nationalist regime and that Russia was not fit for any partnership with the United States.14

The mid-1990s saw the emergence of post-Soviet Russophobia. The Lobby's ideology was not principally new, as it still contained the three central myths of Sovietophobia left over from the Cold War era: Russia is inherently imperialist, autocratic, and anti-Western. This ideology now had to be modified to the new conditions and promoted politically, which required a tightening of the Lobby's unity, winning new allies within the establishment, and gaining public support.15

... ... ...

The impact of structural and institutional factors is further reinforced by policy factors, such as the divide within the policy community and the lack of presidential leadership. Not infrequently, politicians tend to defend their personal and corporate interests, and lobbying makes a difference in the absence of firm policy commitments.

Experts recognize that the community of Russia watchers is split and that the split, which goes all the way to the White House, has been responsible for the absence of a coherent policy toward the country. During the period of 2003-2008, Vice President Richard Dick Cheney formed a cohesive and bipartisan group of Russia critics, who pushed for a more confrontational approach with the Kremlin. The brain behind the invasion of Iraq, Cheney could not tolerate opposition to what he saw as a critical step in establishing worldwide US hegemony. He was also harboring the idea of controlling Russia's energy reserves.91

Since November 2004, when the administration launched a review of its policy on Russia,92 Cheney became a critically important voice in whom the Lobby found its advocate. Secretaries of State Condoleezza Rice and, until November 2004, Colin Powell opposed the vice president's approach, arguing for a softer and more accommodating style in relations with Moscow.

President Bush generally sided with Rice and Powell, but he proved unable to form a consistent Russia policy. Because of America's involvement in the Middle East, Bush failed to provide the leadership committed to devising mutually acceptable rules in relations with Russia that could have prevented the deterioration in their relationship. Since the end of 2003, he also became doubtful about the direction of Russia's domestic transformation.93 As a result, the promising post-9/11 cooperation never materialized. The new cold war and the American Sense of History

It's time we start thinking of Vladimir Putin's Russia as an enemy of the United States. (Bret Stephens, "Russia: The Enemy," The Wall Street Journal, November 28, 2006)

If today's reality of Russian politics continues ... then there is the real risk that Russia's leadership will be seen, externally and internally, as illegitimate. (John Edwards and Jack Kemp, "We Need to Be Tough with Russia," International Herald Tribune, July 12, 2006)

On Iran, Kosovo, U.S. missile defense, Iraq, the Caucasus and Caspian basin, Ukraine-the list goes on-Russia puts itself in conflict with the U.S. and its allies . . . here are worse models than the united Western stand that won the Cold War the first time around.

("Putin Institutionalized," The Wall Street Journal, November 19, 2007) In order to derail the U.S.-Russia partnership, the Lobby has sought to revive the image of Russias as an enemy of the United States. The Russophobic groups have exploited important differences between the two countries' historical self-perceptions, presenting those differences as incompatible.

1. Contested History

Two versions of history

The story of the Cold War as told from the U.S. perspective is about American ideas of Western-style democracy as rescued from the Soviet threat of totalitarian communism. Although scholars and politicians disagreed over the methods of responding to the Soviet threat, they rarely questioned their underlying assumptions about history and freedom.' It therefore should not come as surprise that many in the United States have interpreted the end of the Cold War as a victory of the Western freedom narrative. Celebrating the Soviet Union's "grand failure"-as Zbigniew Brzezinski put it2-the American discourse assumed that from now on there would be little resistance to freedom's worldwide progression. When Francis Fukuyama offered his bold summary of these optimistic feelings and asserted in a famous passage that "what we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War... but the end of history as such,"3 he meant to convey the disappearance of an alternative to the familiar idea of free- dom, or "the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government."4

In Russia, however, the Cold War story has been mainly about sovereignty and independence, rather than Western-style liberalism. To many Russians it is a story of freedom from colonization by the West and of preserving important attributes of sovereign statehood.

In a world where neocolonialism and cultural imperialism are potent forces, the idea of freedom as independence continues to have strong international appeal and remains a powerful alternative to the notion of liberal democracy. Russians formulated the narrative of independence centuries ago, as they successfully withstood external invasions from Napoleon to Hitler. The defeat of the Nazi regime was important to the Soviets because it legitimized their claims to continue with the tradition of freedom as independence.

The West's unwillingness to recognize the importance of this legitimizing myth in the role of communist ideology has served as a key reason for the Cold War.5 Like their Western counterparts, the Soviets were debating over methods but not the larger assumptions that defined their struggle.

This helps to understand why Russians could never agree with the Western interpretation of the end of the Cold War. What they find missing from the U.S. narrative is the tribute to Russia's ability to defend its freedom from expansionist ambitions of larger powers. The Cold War too is viewed by many Russians as a necessarily defensive response to the West's policies, and it is important that even while occupying Eastern Europe, the Soviets never celebrated the occupation, emphasizing instead the war vic- tory.6 The Russians officially admitted "moral responsibility" and apolo- gized for the Soviet invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia.7 They may be prepared to fully recognize the postwar occupation of Eastern Europe, but only in the context of the two sides' responsibility for the Cold War. Russians also find it offensive that Western VE Day celebrations ignore the crucial contribution of Soviet troops, even though none of the Allies, as one historian put it, "paid dearer than the Soviet Union for the victory. Forty Private Ivans fell in battle to every Private Ryan."8 Victory over Nazi Germany constitutes, as another Russian wrote, "the only undisputable foundation of the national myth."9

If the two sides are to build foundations for a future partnership, the two historical narratives must be bridged. First, it is important to recognize the difficulty of negotiating a common meaning of freedom and accept that the idea of freedom may vary greatly across nations. The urge for freedom may be universal, but its social content is a specific product of national his- tories and local circumstances. For instance, the American vision of democracy initially downplayed the role of elections and emphasized selection by merit or meritocracy. Under the influence of the Great Depression, the notion of democracy incorporated a strong egalitarian and poverty-fighting component, and it was not until the Cold War- and not without its influence-that democracy has become associated with elections and pluralistic institutions.10 Second, it is essential to acknowledge the two nations' mutual respon- sibility for the misunderstanding that has resulted in the Cold War. A historically sensitive account will recognize that both sides were thinking in terms of expanding a territorial space to protect their visions of security. While the Soviets wanted to create a buffer zone to prevent a future attack from Germany, the Americans believed in reconstructing the European continent in accordance with their ideas of security and democracy. A mutual mistrust of the two countries' leaders exacerbated the situation, making it ever more difficult to prevent a full-fledged political confronta- tion. Western leaders had reason to be suspicious of Stalin, who, in his turn, was driven by the perception of the West's greed and by betrayals from the dubious Treaty of Versailles to the appeasement of Hitler in Munich. Arrangements for the post-World War II world made by Britain, the USSR, and the United States proved insufficient to address these deep-seated suspicions.

In addition, most Eastern European states created as a result of the Versailles Treaty were neither free nor democratic and collaborated with Nazi Germany in its racist and expansionist policies. The European post-World War 1 security system was not working properly, and it was only a matter of time before it would have to be transformed.

Third, if an agreeable historical account is to emerge, it would have to accept that the end of the Cold War was a product of mutually beneficial a second Cold War, "it also does not want the reversal of the U.S. geopolitical gains that it made in the decade or so after the end of the Cold War."112 Another expert asked, "What possible explanation is there for the fact that today-at a moment when both the U.S. and Russia face the common enemy of Islamist terrorism-hard-liners within the Bush administration, and especially in the office of Vice President Dick Cheney, are arguing for a new tough line against Moscow along the lines of a scaled-down Cold War?"113

Yet another analyst wrote "at the Cold War's end, the United States was given one of the great opportunities of history: to embrace Russia, the largest nation on earth, as partner, friend, ally. Our mutual interests meshed almost perfectly. There was no ideological, territorial, his- toric or economic quarrel between us, once communist ideology was interred. We blew it. We moved NATO onto Russia's front porch, ignored her valid interests and concerns, and, with our 'indispensable-nation' arrogance, treated her as a defeated power, as France treated Weimar Germany after Versailles."114

[Apr 02, 2018] Why the Elite hate Russia

Notable quotes:
"... Although Russia simply is just a country in the wrong place at the wrong time (which, throughout Russian history, seems to be a theme for them) - there really is a reason the Elite hate Russia. It's not because they're Xenophobic, although there's that too - it's because of several key factors that make Russia a unique power in the world, compared to similar countries. ..."
"... Russia has banned a pro-democracy charity founded by hedge fund billionaire George Soros, saying the organization posed a threat to both state security and the Russian constitution. ..."
"... Plain and simple, the [western] Elite do not control Russia. While there are backchannels of Russian oligarchs that work directly with Western Rothschild interests, for example, they simply don't have the same level of control as they do European countries, like Germany for instance. Or another good example is China, there's this fanatical talk that China can dump US Treasuries blah blah blah the fact is that China is completely dependent on USA and US Dollars, and will be for the rest of our lives. Maybe in 1000 years in the Dong Dynasty still to come they will rule the world but it's not going to happen anytime soon. ..."
Oct 27, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com
In our previous article The Secret Truth about Russia Exposed, we elaborated on how Russia is a convenient enemy for politicians and specifically the Democratic party, to create an enemy that really, well - doesn't exist to distract and confuse voters.

But like with any 'enemy' if you bomb a village, you may have some pissed off villagers. As we explain in our best selling book Splitting Pennies - the world doesn't work the way you see on TV - in fact, it works more closely as seen on Zero Hedge.

Although Russia simply is just a country in the wrong place at the wrong time (which, throughout Russian history, seems to be a theme for them) - there really is a reason the Elite hate Russia. It's not because they're Xenophobic, although there's that too - it's because of several key factors that make Russia a unique power in the world, compared to similar countries.

1. Russia is an independent country. It's not possible to manipulate Russia via external remote control, like it is most countries. The Elite don't like that! Russia kicked out Soros "Open Society":

Russia has banned a pro-democracy charity founded by hedge fund billionaire George Soros, saying the organization posed a threat to both state security and the Russian constitution. In a statement released Monday morning, Russia's General Prosecutor's Office said two branches of Soros' charity network - the Open Society Foundations (OSF) and the Open Society Institute (OSI) - would be placed on a "stop list" of foreign non-governmental organizations whose activities have been deemed "undesirable" by the Russian state.

2. Russia is not easy to cripple via clandestine means, whether it be CIA, MI6, or outright military conflict. Some other BRICs however, that's not the case. Say what you will about Russia's military - it's on par and in many cases, advanced, compared to the US military. And that's not AN opinion, that's in the opinion of top US military commanders:

Late in September, we brought you " US Readies Battle Plans For Baltic War With Russia " in which we described a series of thought experiments undertaken by The Pentagon in an effort to determine what the likely outcome would be should something go horribly "wrong" on the way to landing the US in a shooting war with Russia in the Balkans.

The results of those thought experiments were not encouraging. As a reminder, here's how Foreign Policy summed up the exercises:

3. Russian culture, and language, is too complex for the average "Elite" who pretends to be internationally well versed because they had a few semesters of French. For example, when the diplomat Clinton was Secretary of State, she presented a reset button translating the opposite meaning... ooops.

"I would like to present you with a little gift that represents what President Obama and Vice President Biden and I have been saying and that is: 'We want to reset our relationship, and so we will do it together.' ...

"We worked hard to get the right Russian word. Do you think we got it?" she asked Lavrov, laughing. "You got it wrong," said Lavrov, as both diplomats laughed.

"It should be "perezagruzka" [the Russian word for reset]," said Lavrov."This says 'peregruzka,' which means 'overcharged.'"

Yes, it's almost a certainty that if Clinton by some horrible fate is President there will be Nuclear war. Wars have been started over much more subtle mistakes. One would think, that Clinton would have had an advisor CHECK THIS before presenting it in a public ceremony, in front of reporters? How much more blatantly unprofessional can one be? If politicians worked in the private sector, they wouldn't last a day! How do these people advance so far in politics?

4. Plain and simple, the [western] Elite do not control Russia. While there are backchannels of Russian oligarchs that work directly with Western Rothschild interests, for example, they simply don't have the same level of control as they do European countries, like Germany for instance. Or another good example is China, there's this fanatical talk that China can dump US Treasuries blah blah blah the fact is that China is completely dependent on USA and US Dollars, and will be for the rest of our lives. Maybe in 1000 years in the Dong Dynasty still to come they will rule the world but it's not going to happen anytime soon.

Russia is one of the most highly misunderstood cultures in the West. Which is strange, because Russia is more like America than any European country:

There have been numerous interesting situations where Russia helped America and America helped Russia on a number of levels, to learn more about it checkout the following books:

Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution . Armand Hammer: The Untold Story

Most interestingly, during the Nixon administration Kissinger was prodding Nixon to partner with Russia that would, in Kissinger's view would create an unstoppable alliance, that no one could compete with such a superpower axis. But, it didn't happen, as there were 'neo-cons' who were against it, mostly Polish Catholics who have some deep genetic fear of any culture using the Cyrillic alphabet.

Nixon instead chose China (what a mistake!) and created Forex. But the point being that, through a small slip of fate, "China" may have been in this alternative Kissinger reality the 'Great Evil Enemy' hacking our elections, as we drive across the Alaskan-Siberian highway without any speed limit, oil would be ten cents a gallon, and we wouldn't need to war with the Middle East.

To learn more about how the world really works, checkout Splitting Pennies the book , or checkout Fortress Capital Trading Academy.

[Apr 02, 2018] Confronting Russophobia by Srdja Trifkovic

Notable quotes:
"... The roots of Russophobia's emotional appeal to the left seem clear: It comes as a huge mental relief to the ultrasensitive liberal mind to be able to hate an outside group with impunity, and even to appear virtuous in the process . Of course, the object of that animus is a Christian and European nation that stubbornly refuses to be postmodernized, or become gripped by self-hate and morbid introspection; a nation not ashamed of its past and unwilling to surrender its future to alien multitudes; a nation where nobody obsesses over transgender bathrooms, microaggressions, and other "issues" indicative of a society's moral and intellectual decrepitude. ..."
"... The liberals' ideological and emotional Russophobia has blended seamlessly with the bread-and-butter hostility to Russia shared by Deep State operatives in the intelligence and national-security apparatus, in the military-industrial complex, and in the congressional duopoly. ..."
"... The late Anna Politkovskaya thus wrote in the Los Angeles Times 12 years ago that "it is common knowledge that the Russian people are irrational by nature." It is impossible to imagine a mainstream publication publishing a similar statement about Jews or Muslims. ..."
"... Cheesepopes be gaslighting ..."
"... Nothing give a NYC Wall Street banker more of a wet dream than the possibility of war between the goy. Oil, white slaves, truly a banker's dream come true. ..."
Apr 23, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
by Srdja Trifkovic via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

There is a paranoid, hysterical quality to the public discourse on Russia and all things Russian in today's America. The corporate media machine and its Deep State handlers have abdicated reason and common decency in favor of raw hate and fear-mongering. We have not seen anything like it before, even in the darkest days of the Cold War.

The roots of Russophobia's emotional appeal to the left seem clear: It comes as a huge mental relief to the ultrasensitive liberal mind to be able to hate an outside group with impunity, and even to appear virtuous in the process . Of course, the object of that animus is a Christian and European nation that stubbornly refuses to be postmodernized, or become gripped by self-hate and morbid introspection; a nation not ashamed of its past and unwilling to surrender its future to alien multitudes; a nation where nobody obsesses over transgender bathrooms, microaggressions, and other "issues" indicative of a society's moral and intellectual decrepitude.

The liberals' ideological and emotional Russophobia has blended seamlessly with the bread-and-butter hostility to Russia shared by Deep State operatives in the intelligence and national-security apparatus, in the military-industrial complex, and in the congressional duopoly. The result is a surreal narrative that mixes supposedly unprovoked "Russian aggression" in Ukraine, hostile intent in the Baltics, serial war crimes in Syria, political destabilization in Western Europe, and gross interference in America's "democratic process". The result is an altogether fictitious "existential threat," which has made President Trump's intended détente with Moscow impossible. He may have been serious about turning over a new leaf, but the Deep State counterpressure proved just too great. A solid rejection front emerged, left and right, conservative and liberal, which extends even into his own team and finally inhibited him from making moves that could have appeared too friendly to Putin.

The Russophobes' narrative is unrelated to Russia's actual policies. It reflects a deep odium of the elite class toward Russia-as-such. That animosity has been developing in its current form since roughly the time of the Crimean War, when in his Letters From Russia the Marquis de Custine said that the country's "veneer of European civilization was too thin to be credible."

"No human beings, black, yellow or white, could be quite as untruthful, as insincere, as arrogant-in short, as untrustworthy in every way-as the Russians," President Theodore Roosevelt wrote in 1905. John Maynard Keynes, after a trip to the Soviet Union in 1925, wondered whether the "mood of oppression" might be "the fruit of some beastliness in the Russian nature." J. Robert Oppenheimer opined in 1951 that, in Russia, "We are coping with a barbarous, backward people." More recently, Sen. John McCain declared that "Russia is a gas station masquerading as a country." "Russia is an anti-Western power with a different, darker vision of global politics," Slate wrote in early 2014, even before the Ukrainian crisis reached its climax.

This narrative has two key pillars. In terms of geopolitics, we see the striving of maritime empires-Britain before World War II, and the United States after - to "contain" and if possible control the Eurasian heartland, the core of which is of course Russia. Equally important is the already noted cultural antipathy, the desire not merely to influence Russian policies and behavior but to effect an irreversible transformation of Russia's identity. Some of the most viscerally Russophobic stereotypes come from Russia herself, from those members of Moscow's "intelligentsia" who feel more at home in New York or London than anywhere in their own country. The late Anna Politkovskaya thus wrote in the Los Angeles Times 12 years ago that "it is common knowledge that the Russian people are irrational by nature." It is impossible to imagine a mainstream publication publishing a similar statement about Jews or Muslims.

The Russophobic frenzy comes at a cost. It further devalues the quality of public discourse on world affairs in the United States, which is already dismally low. It has already undermined the prospects for a mutually beneficial new chapter in U.S.-Russian relations, based on a realist assessment that those two powers have no "existential" differences - and share many actual and potential commonalities. It perpetrates the arrogant delusion that there is a superior, "Western" model of social and cultural thought and action that can and should be imposed everywhere, but especially in Russia.

Saddest of all, Russophobic mania prolongs the European civil war that exploded in July 1914, continued in 1939, and has never properly ended - not even with the fall of the Berlin Wall. It would be in the American interest, as well as Russia's and Europe's, for that conflict to end, so that the existential challenge common to all- that of resurgent jihad and Europe's demographic crisis - can be properly addressed.

francis soyer , Apr 23, 2017 7:28 PM

Cheesepopes be gaslighting

Blue Balls -> francis soyer , Apr 23, 2017 7:35 PM

Nothing give a NYC Wall Street banker more of a wet dream than the possibility of war between the goy. Oil, white slaves, truly a banker's dream come true.

Ramesees -> Blue Balls , Apr 23, 2017 7:39 PM

We don't have to go to war with Russia, but let's agree that Russia is, at a minimum, a rival.

Lumberjack -> Ramesees , Apr 23, 2017 7:40 PM

Wrong. China is.

Ramesees -> Lumberjack , Apr 23, 2017 7:43 PM

Russia has its own interests, just like the United States. Sometimes our interests align, more often they do not.

How is that any different than China, other than Russia's demographic death spiral that will eliminate them as a rival in 50-75 years?

knukles -> Ramesees , Apr 23, 2017 7:46 PM

Why can't we all just get along?

Dizzy Malscience -> knukles , Apr 23, 2017 8:16 PM

..it seems like our foreign policy is like an angry poor, innocent "motorist", whacked out on amphetamines, speeding over 100 mph and destined to drown in his liberal negro lottery swimming pool.

Volkodav -> Ramesees , Apr 23, 2017 8:09 PM

missed fact Russian demographic is much improve

sure better than europe

Centerist -> Volkodav , Apr 23, 2017 8:24 PM

Da, comrade. Russian demographic is much improve. Population shrink less fast now.

Lumberjack -> Lumberjack , Apr 23, 2017 8:10 PM

Comment: why US allies Israel, Saudi Arabia are cosying up to China

http://m.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/2082673/comment-w...

Furthermore...

Breaking:

The United States is closely watching a recent increase in piracy off the coast of Somalia, a senior U.S. military official said on Sunday as Defense Secretary Jim Mattis visited an important military base in Djibouti.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-mattis-africa-idUSKBN17P0C7?utm_ca ...

-----

Hate to use huffpo but this is relevent...

Why China and Saudi Arabia Are Building Bases in Djibouti http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-braude/why-china-and-saudi-arabi_b_ ...

Then this:

http://thediplomat.com/2017/02/the-chinese-navys-djibouti-base-a-support ...

malek -> Ramesees , Apr 23, 2017 7:49 PM

"Russia is, at a minimum, a rival."

If I ignore your bullshit "but at the maximum..." implication:

So what do you conclude from that. Is it a bad thing to have rivals? Should we strive to turn every remaining rival into a vassal? Is there a limit on methods allowed toward a rival?

Centerist -> Ramesees , Apr 23, 2017 8:20 PM

I'll give you a green arrow to make up for the narrow-mindedness of the simpletons who all gave you red arrows.

We don't need a war with Russia, and the US won't instigate one, either. The juice wouldn't be worth the squeeze.

With all of that being said, Russia is a rival to the US in other parts of the world. The US isn't the only country with a desire for influence around the world.

As much as there is a "Russo-phobia" being perpetuated in the US, you can bet a buck that there is an "Ameri-phobia" being perpetuated out there.

The big difference is that in Russia, they don't have message boards full of people sh*tting on their own country.

Lumberjack -> Centerist , Apr 23, 2017 9:03 PM

They will accomplish the war by proxy.

Centerist -> Lumberjack , Apr 23, 2017 9:17 PM

Well, that is kind of how major powers compete for influence. It takes two to tango. We can't exactly engage in war by proxy if the Russians aren't involved in it, too.

monk27 -> Blue Balls , Apr 23, 2017 7:49 PM

I hate to say it but the so called "elites", in charge of our beloved deep state controlling everything, are quite stupid -- This continuous news hysteria, against whatever subject du jour our intelligentsia decides to float publicly, proves beyond any reasonable doubt that said "elites" suffer from a combination of low IQ, partial education (at best !), and high self-delusion... We might get to witness nuclear war, just because our "elites" are too idiotic to realize what a nuclear war really is...

dsty , Apr 23, 2017 7:29 PM

Yes ZH, tell us once again how wonderful and humane Putin's Russia is.

Don't forget the loving relationship he has with little Kimmy of NK.

Billy the Poet -> dsty , Apr 23, 2017 7:34 PM

I see no such thing in this article. Can you provide quotes to support your criticism?

rccalhoun -> dsty , Apr 23, 2017 7:39 PM

dsty-- ZH does promote putin too much (ZH bias), but ZH is correct in that the MSM has the full court press on to instigate

and insult russia in any way possible.

my question; why the fuck does the USSA stick their fucking nose into everything? if the USSA wants supreme power...then go

conquer these nations and see how that works out.

Justin Case -> rccalhoun , Apr 23, 2017 7:47 PM

They stick their hook nose into everything because they want to own the whole 4th rock from the sun. These people are ill, very ill and as I read these comments it's obvious that some just don't get it yet.

Pure Evil -> Justin Case , Apr 23, 2017 7:59 PM

If we're the fourth rock from the sun, then the other three rocks between us and the sun are.......Venus, Mercury and ?

Implied Violins -> Pure Evil , Apr 23, 2017 9:03 PM

Nibiru. Or Wormwood. Nemesis? Planet X?? Ah fuck it.

knukles -> rccalhoun , Apr 23, 2017 7:48 PM

Which tells us that since we all live rent free in Tyler's pro-Russian basement, that we're now on 2 different sets of lists? That's disturbing.

Brazen Heist -> dsty , Apr 23, 2017 7:40 PM

Do tell us of that more loving butt-buddy relationship the US government has with the Wahhabi terrorist state.

Squid Viscous -> dsty , Apr 23, 2017 8:08 PM

Dsty, dirty stinking tacky yid?

35 Whelen , Apr 23, 2017 7:39 PM

"haven't seen anything like this since the darkest days of the cold war" ... that's because the media was by and large pro-Soviet.

Normalcy Bias , Apr 23, 2017 7:41 PM

All of this B.S. Russophobia evolved from a convenient distraction from the CONTENT of the leaked DNC emails, and has been amplified because of the symbiosis with Neoconservative/Globalist strategies.

dilligaff , Apr 23, 2017 7:42 PM

What amazes me is how well the propaganda seems to be working. There's a bunch of old farts (not that I'm really young!) at the gym every morning talking about how awesome it is that we bombed Syria and it'll show that bastard Putin we're tough and mean business. "America, Fuck yeh!" I wanted to ask them if they were mentally defective or just fucking retards...

Justin Case -> dilligaff , Apr 23, 2017 7:49 PM

Typical merica pie. Fuck tarts

UncleChopChop -> dilligaff , Apr 23, 2017 7:50 PM

sad

monk27 -> dilligaff , Apr 23, 2017 7:51 PM

Propaganda works very well with stupid subjects; the dumber the better...

Reaper -> dilligaff , Apr 23, 2017 7:58 PM

They "think/emote" alike, because each fears the others would otherwise discover their real ignorance.

Reaper , Apr 23, 2017 7:42 PM

Hate = emote. Emote = antithesis of reason. Hate controls the hater. Ergo, the creators of the hate control the haters.

medium giraffe -> Reaper , Apr 23, 2017 8:02 PM

Pretty much. Society has opted to run on emotion rather than fact, emotional manipulation being the key part of the most popular forms of entertainment. Sadly this bleeds into our dealings with each other which are increasingly emotional or insulting. Most of human behaviour and attitudes are due to fear, particularly the egoic fear of inadequacy. As a control mechanism, fear is a formidable tool. But fear is also a choice.

Reaper -> medium giraffe , Apr 23, 2017 8:18 PM

Fear is less effective tool than respect, especially in diplomacy. http://www.businessinsider.com/dale-carnegie-on-habits-of-influential-pe...

aloha_snakbar , Apr 23, 2017 7:44 PM

"Say Russia one more time... I DARE you"...

IranContra , Apr 23, 2017 7:50 PM

The Strategic Culture Foundation who published this piece has an evil agenda, and they are not even friends of Putin. They are very subtle warmongers. You will see when the time comes.

Putin was duped by Iran in Syria, Iran got Syria, not Putin. Trump and Saudi can give Russia what it needs to survive, if Putin stops being duped by deceptive hegemonial Iran.

Billy the Poet -> IranContra , Apr 23, 2017 7:56 PM

The Saudis gave us September 11 -- the gift that keeps on giving. But I doubt that Putin's jealous.

earleflorida -> IranContra , Apr 23, 2017 8:39 PM

"Iran approves six presidential candidates-- blocks Ahmadinejad"

have you any ideal how powerful this nutjob was? ahmadinejab was so powerful at one tyme he challenged the actual ayatollah position as last word! now, this guy was nuts!!! http://news.antiwar.com/2017/04/20/iran-approves-six-presidential-candidates-blocks-ahmadinejad/

sbenard , Apr 23, 2017 8:00 PM

This reminds me of when the ZerroHedge owners mentioned that Bloomberg article several months back that involved an interview of a former Zero Hedge writer blowing the lid off this place. He mentioned how pro-Russia the ZH owners were. This article suggests that he may have been right after all!

number06 -> sbenard , Apr 23, 2017 8:10 PM

Its pretty obvious many around here are in the superbowl ring stealing midgets pocket

stpioc -> sbenard , Apr 23, 2017 8:16 PM

Here is that article showing the Russiophile Zerohedgers:

http://rightwingers.org/forums/thread-156.html

Yea, we shouldn't be afraid of a country with nukes, that invades it's neigbours, has an uber crony economy the size of Italy's, dominated by oligarchs in mining and the obligation to keep friendly with the Kremlin or risk being put in jail and have your assets taken away on trumped up charges. The country that murders it's opponents and critics with nasty stuff like Polonium, even abroad, that interferes in others elections with misinformation campaigns and troll factories, that is on the side of the ayatolla's of Iran and the mass murderer in Syria, helping him by bombing hospitals and refugees, only to be "recognized as a player again on the world stage" A coutry of alcoholics with one of the lowest life expectancy in the developed world. Really, a model state.

As Paul Graig Roberts, the inhouse idiot here noted, Putin for the Nobel peace price!

Neochrome -> stpioc , Apr 23, 2017 8:33 PM

Which of the above does NOT apply to US and even worse?

Volkodav -> sbenard , Apr 23, 2017 8:24 PM

maybe here is one few places balance from the foamy mouth MSM

ZH far more logic, reason informed visitors

momprayn , Apr 23, 2017 8:28 PM

Wikileaks has disclosed the tactic to blame Russia for the election results, Trump's collusion, etc. back to spring of 2016 --- I remember when they started making those "Russia" comments. They wanted to start the thoughts about him/his staff being in collusion with the Russians. That was to hopefully make more decide not to vote for him and in case he won, use it to prove election fraud, treason and somehow impeach him.

Those who know about the Globalists NWO agenda, Deep State, Neocons, etc. realize we've all been lied to about Russia (among all the other lies) since the end of the Cold War. for "their" agenda purposes - need for continuous wars for MIC, etc. also. Putin is not as portrayed at all. Russia is not the "big bad Commie" beast that wants to take over the world as they want us to believe to "justify" another war.

Putin is an Eastern Orthodox Chrsitian who protects Christians, hates and fights terrorists and Globalism. He is not a Globalist. We have those goals in common and Pres. Trump and Putin would be a fantastic duo that when united, terrorism and Globalism would finally be dealt death blows,

Our enemies within know that and therefore they're trying to do everything they can to hurt that relationship and not let it happen because it would mean finally - the end of their evil world order plan.

VW Nerd -> momprayn , Apr 23, 2017 8:45 PM

Excellent assessment. I'll have to share it with my sister. She's a Republican Russia/Iran/Syria hater.

Neochrome , Apr 23, 2017 8:34 PM

Amount of pressure applied commensurate to strength of a country in question. For some of them all it takes is a stern talk from the ambassador, Russia right now is safely beyond the US ability to apply the required pressure, including the threat of Nuclear War. What is happening instead is that world being interconnected the way it is, applying pressure at hardened point that is Russia is also increasing pressure at other weaker points as well, pretty much all over the world. EU and NATO are posturing against Russia in display of lunacy that is symptomatic for the West, it seems that God is taking away humans ability to reason. Day 1, Russia announces indefinite cuts of gas supplies to Europe, stocks crater, world economy craters, Russia and China who were hoarding gold watch the West collapse like a house of cards while passing the popcorn. The End.

earleflorida -> Neochrome , Apr 23, 2017 8:51 PM

"Where Empires go to Die?"?!?

Afghanistan is about to go full retard again, as taliban cuts ussa out of heroin billions--- as our afghan troops turn their weapons on their masters[1]

seems, we bunker-busted the wrong cavity?

http://news.antiwar.com/tag/afghanistan/

Spinkbottle , Apr 23, 2017 8:51 PM

The Jewish media has been obsessed with this business about Russia allegedly influencing the recent 2016 U.S. election. This obsession has concealed the real problem with foreign influence over the American electoral system. It isn't Russian influence that's the problem, it is Israeli influence that's the problem.

Below is a list of stories showing how Israelis or Jews substantively connected to Israel have been subverting the American electoral process.

https://www.dailystormer.com/israel-is-the-main-foreign-power-subverting-the-american-election-system/

globalintelhub , Apr 23, 2017 8:55 PM

Read it and weep www.splittingpennies.com

Son of Captain Nemo , Apr 23, 2017 8:59 PM

You know we will have turned the corner when Donald Trump gives the American people a "Fireside Chat" and tells the public the real reasons the media spearheads a constant barrage of hate filled anti-Russian LYING PROPAGANDA filled rhetoric... BECAUSE

A) THEY ARE THE WORLDS LEADER IN OIL PRODUCTION B) HAVE NO DEBT C) HAVE THERE OWN BALANCE OF PAYMENT CREDIT SYSTEM MIR THAT WILL REPLACE THE WESTERN CENTRAL BANK(S) SYSTEM "SWIFT"

And after he delivers that truthful message he will NEVER BE ALLOWED TO EVER AGAIN... He will probably be shot like HOWARD BEALE in the movie NETWORK... Or WWWIII will be LAUNCHED!!!

[Apr 02, 2018] Russia Has 14 Questions On Fabricated Skripal Case

Mar 31, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Russia's embassy in London has sent a list of questions, 14 to be specific, to the British Foreign Ministry on the poisoning of Sergey and Yulia Skripal – which include a demand to clarify whether samples of the nerve agent "Novichok" have ever been developed in the UK.

The Russian embassy's statement calls the incident that started the recent diplomatic row a " fabricated case against Russia."

The questions published by the Russian Foreign Ministry's official website have been translated below:

  1. Why has Russia been denied the right of consular access to the two Russian citizens, who came to harm on British territory?
  2. What specific antidotes and in what form were the victims injected with? How did such antidotes come into the possession of British doctors at the scene of the incident?
  3. On what grounds was France involved in technical cooperation in the investigation of the incident, in which Russian citizens were injured?
  4. Did the UK notify the OPCW (Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) of France's involvement in the investigation of the Salisbury incident?
  5. What does France have to do with the incident, involving two Russian citizens in the UK?
  6. What rules of UK procedural legislation allow for the involvement of a foreign state in an internal investigation?
  7. What evidence was handed over to France to be studied and for the investigation to be conducted?
  8. Were the French experts present during the sampling of biomaterial from Sergey and Yulia Skripal?
  9. Was the study of biomaterials from Sergey and Yulia Skripal conducted by the French experts and, if so, in which specific laboratories?
  10. Does the UK have the materials involved in the investigation carried out by France?
  11. Have the results of the French investigation been presented to the OPCW Technical Secretariat?
  12. Based on what attributes was the alleged "Russian origin" of the substance used in Salisbury established?
  13. Does the UK have control samples of the chemical warfare agent, which British representatives refer to as "Novichok"?
  14. Have the samples of a chemical warfare agent of the same type as "Novichok" (in accordance to British terminology) or its analogues been developed in the UK?

The Duran's Alexander Mercouris added some necessary points to the growing mystery and confusion of the Skripal poisoning:

These theories have included claims that Sergey and Yulia Skripal were (1) sprayed with the supposedly deadly chemical by a passer-by; (2) sprayed with the supposedly deadly chemical by an aerial drone; (3) contaminated by the supposedly deadly chemical which was brought from Russia in Yulia Skripal's suitcase where it had been hidden by some third party; and (4) were poisoned by having the supposedly deadly chemical somehow inserted into Sergey Skripal's car.

The British and other critics of Russia have recently taken to citing as 'proof' of Russian guilt the fact that the Russians have supposedly been proposing various theories about who might have poisoned Sergey and Yulia Skripal.

The British – who unlike the Russians have control of the crime scene and samples of the poison – have however been at least as busy proposing various theories about how Sergey and Yulia Skripal were poisoned.

In both cases the fact that the Russian media and the British media – though not it should be stressed the Russian or British governments – have been busy engaging in their respective speculations about who who and how Sergey and Yulia Skripal were poisoned is not proof of guilt.

Rather it suggests ignorance, which if anything (especially in Russia's case) is an indicator of innocence.

As I have said on many occasions, it is the guilty who so far from engaging in a variety of different speculations tend to come up with a single alternative narrative to explain away the facts, which they then pass off as the truth in order to provide themselves with an alibi.

As to the present theory – that Sergey and Yulia Skripal came into contact with the chemical agent on their front door – note the following:

(1) The British police have not said whether the chemical agent was smeared on the outside of the door or on the inside of the door.

If it was smeared on the outside of the door, then it was an extremely reckless act which might have easily poisoned a delivery person to the house such as a postman.

If it was smeared on the inside of the door, then whilst it might have been placed there by a burglar, the greater probability must be that it was placed there by a visitor.

If so then it is likely that either Sergey or Yulia Skripal or possibly both of them have some knowledge of the identity of this person. That might make the fact that Yulia Skripal is said to be recovering and is now conscious a matter of great importance for the solution of this mystery.

(2) If Sergey and Yulia Skripal really were poisoned with the chemical agent by coming into contact with it because it was smeared on their front door, then that would mean that the chemical agent took 7 hours to take effect.

Russian ambassador to Britain Alexander Yakovenko has claimed that the British authorities have told him that Sergey and Yulia Skripal were poisoned by nerve agent A-234, a Novichok type agent which is supposedly "as toxic as VX, as resistant to treatment as soman, and more difficult to detect and easier to manufacture than VX".

I am not a chemist or a chemical weapons expert, but such a slow acting poison seems at variance with the descriptions of A-234 and VX which I have read.

(3) The suggestion that Sergey and Yulia Skripal were poisoned by coming into contact with the chemical agent on their front door must for the moment be treated as no more than a theory. It does however appear to confirm the presence of the chemical agent in the house.

If the latest theory that Sergey and Yulia Skripal were poisoned by coming into contact with a chemical agent smeared on their front door begs many questions, then the news that Yulia Skripal is apparently recovering well from the effect of her poisoning, and is now conscious and speaking and is no longer in intensive care, though extremely welcome, in some ways adds further to the mystery.

EuroPox -> chunga Sat, 03/31/2018 - 16:54 Permalink

The Russians have also sent a list of 10 questions to the French. Just why were they involved at all? I think we should be told.

Question 10 is: "Have the samples of a chemical warfare agent of this type or its analogues been developed in France and if so, for what purpose?"

LOL!

Link to questions to France:

http://www.mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw

Sorry cannot find an English version yet.

Vote up! 6 Vote down! 0

Sudden Debt -> Dickweed Wang Sat, 03/31/2018 - 18:04 Permalink

They control the media...

even if the lies are proven, 90% of the popualation won't see the proof...

And they know it.

Hell, first time they said "Russia" in the investigation, I knew it was a hoax.

And then they started blasting Russia in every TV show, comedy show, news... you name it.

They really really really want a war.

And if we don't have a WOIII in the next 10 years, the world population will be to big to be fed. Yep, there's actually a timer that says there's an endgame.

khnum Sat, 03/31/2018 - 16:41 Permalink

Definately a story the BBC wont cover.

ISEEIT Sat, 03/31/2018 - 16:42 Permalink

This is so much bigger than 95% of the American 'population' realizes.

If you believe in God....Or even just don't know....

Please begin praying that the satanist/globalist retreat.

If they do not...Direct shooting...and soon after nuclear hot war shall commence.

The Russian people will not capitulate. China understands exactly what the reality is, and likely a tandem response is locked and loaded.

The psychopaths must be stopped. They've been outmaneuvered, and by all but psycho standards, have lost.

Now is literally perhaps the most dangerous moment of human history.

Like I said...Pray.

khnum -> ISEEIT Sat, 03/31/2018 - 16:46 Permalink

Yes these morons are playing with 7 billion lives and yes it is time to pray,to pray for their demise ,but dont live in fear if your numbers up its up dont let them manage you through fear.

Dark star Sat, 03/31/2018 - 16:45 Permalink

No one in the UK believes or trusts May and her Government. No one.

It kind of begs the question; On who's behalf is May governing the Country?

It isn't ours; we won't benefit from WWIII.

The government is now the people's enemy; May will be the death of us; not the Russians.

HowdyDoody -> Dark star Sat, 03/31/2018 - 17:12 Permalink

"On who's behalf is May governing the Country?"

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/01/18/24CF8CF200000578-0-image-a-47

iClaudius Sat, 03/31/2018 - 16:52 Permalink

The biggest problem the Russians have, and have had in a number of situations, is that they present well formed arguments and questions that, unfortunately, require a modicum of intelligence and effort to follow. The UK and US governments are simply appealing to the lowest denominator with jingoistic, shallow, junk - as usual; but it works!

Reaper Sat, 03/31/2018 - 17:56 Permalink

How could the emergency doctors so quickly identify this as a particular chemical agent and its source, when no Brit doctors have never seen such poison or its effects? Who identified the agent so quickly?

saldulilem -> Reaper Sat, 03/31/2018 - 18:33 Permalink

It was all in the care package

Joiningupthedots Sat, 03/31/2018 - 20:42 Permalink

You heard from me already ad I'll say it again.

The political careers of May, Johnson and Williamson are going to die on this calamity when the truth is finally outed.

The three not so wise monkeys attempted to take NATO to an Article 5 war footing against Russia.

What are they thinking about?

They have avoided using all of the historically established legal channels and protocols to push through their criminal enterprise.

All three have much to answer for and in the fullness of time history will judge them for the absolute amateur village idiots they truly are.

When the truth comes out there may well be extremely serious criminal charges being levelled at people who thought they were untouchable.

This is most definitely not in the UK National Interest as one would say.

FoggyWorld Sat, 03/31/2018 - 21:12 Permalink

So many of the answers are at website: Moon of Alabama.

It's downright depressing. Start with the Russian who originally developed it moved to the USA in the early 1990's.

We are being sold a bill of goods by Theresa the Incompetent May and there just is no excuse for Trump's not having it all checked out.

DjangoCat Sat, 03/31/2018 - 22:06 Permalink

I confess to an immediate bias in this matter. The entire charade has false flag written all over it and has been obvious since a week after the incident.

What interests me here is the insistence on the French involvement. I confess an immediate bias against Macron, by the way.

Who is pushing here?

[Apr 02, 2018] The UK has been quite brazen about flaunting 500 years of jurisprudence (innocent until...) and multiple international rules/laws and customs. In my view this is Imperial behavior

Apr 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: Babyl-on | Mar 31, 2018 9:23:43 AM | 12

@2-Gravatomic ---

The UK has been quite brazen about flaunting 500 years of jurisprudence (innocent until...) and multiple international rules/laws and customs.

In my view this is Imperial behavior. The AngloZionist/Wahhabi Empire coming out into the open. No need to bother hiding behind "democracy" any more no need to honor "the rule of law" except to disgrace it.

Invasions and belligerence, aggression against all opponents - open demand for "Global full spectrum domination." nothing will stand in the way - starve millions in Yemen so what its nothing to the willingness to slaughter in the tens of millions to achieve regime change in Moscow and Peking.

[Apr 02, 2018] Nerve agents are bioavailable from the gut - that is, they can absorb into the body after being eaten

Apr 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Don Bacon | Mar 31, 2018 1:58:46 PM | 44 .

. .Eating in the restaurant might have brought the stuff into their system. 36, 39
from Scientific American
Nerve agents are bioavailable from the gut - that is, they can absorb into the body after being eaten. That route of delivery isn't well studied, but is consistent with the slightly slower onset of symptoms in Sergei and Julia Skripal. In comparison, nerve agents administered via aerosol or spray are effective very quickly -- Kim Jong-Nam died shortly after facial exposure to nerve agent VX in a Malaysian airport. . . here

[Apr 02, 2018] Seems Vil Mirzayanov gave the US the recipe and US forked out 6 million USD to get additional intelligence. Then, radio silence.

Apr 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

I wondered why the OPCW did not add "Novichok" because it never had been synthesized. Vil himself said it was tested on dogs in Uzbekistan. This explains it.

So, why would the US and the UK not want the new guy on the block be known?


1998. I believe Vil Mirzayanov had come to the US before 1998.

"The fact is that back in 1998 when we looked through another version of the spectral library, which was published by the National Bureau of Standards of the United States (NBS), we found a substance there that we found interesting since it was an organophosphorus substance. And we realized that it must have a strong lethal effect. Now it turns out that, judging by the name of this substance, it was just the same nerve agent, A-234," Igor Rybalchenko said."

"The most interesting detail in this story is in the following versions of the database, which usually only expand, they are constantly replenished, more and more substances, we did not find this record. And I can't explain where is it now," the Russian military chemist said."

https://sputniknews.com/world/201803251062885016-a-234-skripal-poisoning-us/

1999. The US and Uzbekistan sign bilateral agreement:

"Earlier this year, the Pentagon informed Congress that it intends to spend up to $6 million under its Cooperative Threat Reduction program to demilitarize the so-called Chemical Research Institute, in Nukus, Uzbekistan. Soviet defectors and American officials say the Nukus plant was the major research and testing site for a new class of secret, highly lethal chemical weapons called ''Novichok,'' which in Russian means ''new guy."

https://www.nytimes.com/1999/05/25/world/us-and-uzbeks-agree-on-chemical-arms-plant-cleanup.html

Seems Vil gave the US the recipe and US forked out 6 million USD to get additional intelligence. Then, radio silence.

+++

From the start, the Salisbury incident and the warnings by Russia over potential false flags involving chemical weapons in East Ghouta seemed to be linked to me, like accusing your enemy of what you yourself are doing; at the minimum, discredit Russia, at the maximum, be able to claim Russia planted evidence.

A bird carried this into my inbox today.

https://cont.ws/@adeptdao/899795

Posted by: BX | Mar 31, 2018 1:49:29 PM | 42

[Apr 02, 2018] So what threat is the US using that caused Macron to turn so quickly, Ecuador to suddenly cut off all communication to Assange, European countries to expel Russian diplomats and a few other things that has happened

Apr 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

So what threat is the US using that caused Macron to turn so quickly, Ecuador to suddenly cut off all communication to Assange, European countries to expel Russian diplomats and a few other things that has happened. Makes me wonder if the US neo-cons and the anglo elite are about to go for broke. Perhaps try and pull a blatant coup in the US or start a major war or both.

Posted by: AriusArmenian | Mar 31, 2018 11:56:52 AM | 29

The US and its Anglosphere and EU vassals are doubling down into a much more dangerous stage of confrontation with the coalescing multifarious East.

They thought that using nazis and fascists to take control of Ukraine would break Russia. They thought that breaking apart Syria would open the way to Iran. They thought that threatening to annihilate would break North Korea. They threaten China with trade wars. But with each attack the East coalesces further and gains more strength.

The US led West is probing to find the weak link to break apart the East to thereby pick up the pieces. The West projects its internal disintegration onto the rest of the world.

annie , Mar 31, 2018 12:06:14 PM | 30

Mirzanayov uploaded novichok fomulas are not terrorist weapons on youtube Mar. 1, 2009. this was likely the "Canadian delegate" reference.
Some people in Washington adviced me not include Novichok formulas in my book State Secrets: An Insider's Chronicle of the Russian Chemical Weapons Program because they could be used by terrorists. I'm explaning that this argument out of touch. Novichok chemical agents cannot be produced by any terrorists because of insurmontable difficulties of their production without highly educated personell, scientists and engineers. This argument is prventing to put Novichok agents under the Control of Chemical Weapons Convention.
karlof1 , Mar 31, 2018 12:17:03 PM | 31
One reason for hushing up Mirzayanov's book is, as Russia has already noted, it provides a blueprint for terrorists to design CW nerve agents--it abets terrorism--which is against the law. And that begs the question, why hasn't Mirzayanov been arrested along with the publisher? Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying USG was responsible for financing the book's publication, but I can't find the link to that currently.

IMO, USG wanted no novichok sample in OPCW database as it wanted to use it without being caught. IMO, Iran did its work as a result of the Zionist's murders of Iranian scientists. The cables present an excellent example of the ways USG is able to frame issues in order to cover up its international transgressions and illegalities--yet further proof as if more were needed proving it most certainly is the Outlaw US Empire.

[Apr 02, 2018] The simplest explanation of Skripal incident may be that there was no nerve gas agent of any kind (Novichok or otherwise)

British did performed nasty experiments on humans involving sarin in the past
Notable quotes:
"... Whatever affected the Skripals initially could have been food poisoning or a reaction to having something put in their drinks. We do not know if the Skripals were acting on their own while visiting the cemetery, eating at Zizzi's Restaurant in Salisbury, having drinks at The Mill (or Mill's) and then walking to the park bench at Maltings shopping pall where they were later found unconscious. The fact that the table at Zizzi's where the two ate has been taken away and apparently is now incinerated should arouse suspicion. Suppose there was a third person at the table with them? ..."
"... As far as is known, skin contact with a nerve gas agent is just as deadly as ingesting it through the lungs. There is the case of a young RAF engineer, Ronald Maddison, who volunteered for a trial back in the 1950s conducted by British authorities at the Porton Down laboratory. He was told the trial was to test a flu vaccine. During the trial two drops of sarin were dropped onto his skin. He died nearly straight away. ..."
www.moonofalabama.org

Jen | Mar 31, 2018 6:30:12 PM | 79

Commenters @ 9, 36 and 39:

Simplest explanation may be that no nerve gas agent of any kind (Novichok or otherwise) was used.

Whatever affected the Skripals initially could have been food poisoning or a reaction to having something put in their drinks. We do not know if the Skripals were acting on their own while visiting the cemetery, eating at Zizzi's Restaurant in Salisbury, having drinks at The Mill (or Mill's) and then walking to the park bench at Maltings shopping pall where they were later found unconscious. The fact that the table at Zizzi's where the two ate has been taken away and apparently is now incinerated should arouse suspicion. Suppose there was a third person at the table with them?

There is that photo (from a source which an Australian-based MoA commenter - BTW not me - posits may be connected to Cambridge Analytica) of the Skripals which MoA put up on a recent post, said photo having been taken on the day the Skripals were found poisoned. The photo shows a reflection of someone in the mirror behind the Skripals with a camera.

After being hospitalised, the Skripals could have been kept under heavy sedation even after the initial poisoning episode passed.

As far as is known, skin contact with a nerve gas agent is just as deadly as ingesting it through the lungs. There is the case of a young RAF engineer, Ronald Maddison, who volunteered for a trial back in the 1950s conducted by British authorities at the Porton Down laboratory. He was told the trial was to test a flu vaccine. During the trial two drops of sarin were dropped onto his skin. He died nearly straight away.

I should think if atropine is applied to the nervous system a week or two after the initial exposure to complete the enzyme chain reactions that enable normal breathing, that's being a bit tardy. The nerve gas works by disrupting the enzyme actions, causing muscles that control breathing to remain contracted and in effect become paralysed. The person dies from asphyxiation caused by this paralysis. That's my understanding anyway - I'm not a physician.

[Apr 02, 2018] Kivelidi case

Apr 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

@bjd (6)

Do we know who investigated the murder of said mobster and how it came in the open that it was a 'novichok' class agent? Was it Russian authorities/police?
Yes, Russian state agencies investigated. Three agencies gave chemical analysis evidence to the Kivelidi case: The Forensic Institute of the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs, The Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and even the State Research Institute for Organic Chemistry & Technology itself (that is, the body who the nerve agents' creators supposedly worked for). All agreed that the substance uncovered in Kivelidi's phone was "a highly toxic organophosphate compound of a kind used in the production of chemical weapons". As far as I can tell, though, only Mirzayanov categorised the compound later as a "Novichok". The term didn't appear in the original case, I don't think. It was, however, determined that the dose consisted of a 5mm droplet that worked immediately and killed Kivelidi within a few days, and his secretary even sooner.

The theories of high-profile lawyer Boris Kuznetsov are interesting in this case. He represented Khutsishvili, the man finally charged with Kivelidi and his secretary's murder (but released early). Kuznetsov's principal idea seems to be that Leonard Rink was offered a deal by the FSB. Rink is known only to have served a one year sentence for producing and selling nerve agents on the black market (supposedly 8-9 ampules). He was used as evidence against Khutsishvili, essentially incriminating himself as supplier of the nerve agent through an intermediary, only for charges against him for other sales and trafficking of poisons to expire years later without prosecution. Rink got off scot free in the end.

Kuznetsov, who has fled Russia (one of his highest profile cases was representing the families of the submariners killed in the Kursk fiasco), reckons the true recipient of Rink's leaked nerve agents were rogue FSB, with Khutsishvili the fall guy. An interesting minor character in the Kivelidi case was Kivelidi's bodyguard - whose first day at work was the day of his client's poisoning, and who quit the very next day. And who, Kuznetsov alleges, turned out to be a former KGB officer in the same division as Lugovoi, the man later at the centre of the Litvinenko poisoning case.

God only knows...

I've taken this information from several Kuznetsov interviews in the Russian press and a review of the Kivelidi case court documents from Novaya Gazeta (which describes at one point the period of onset for that category of poison as 0.5 to 5 hours).

Posted by: Crndbeef | Mar 31, 2018 6:00:26 PM | 77 hojo , Mar 31, 2018 6:02:36 PM | 78

b@7 - The claim about the banker murdered with a novichok-like substance (which is what bjd@6 was asking about) is in the link you provided for the Soviet scientist Vladimir Uglev , not in the link to the machine-translation of the Leonid Rink interview.

Unfortunately all the article had to say about this was in the following paragraph (which doesn't fully answer bjd's questions):
" One of these substances was used to poison the banker, Ivan Kivelidi and his secretary in 1995. A cotton ball, soaked in this agent, was rubbed over the microphone in the handset of Kivelidi's telephone. That specific dose was developed by my group, where we produced all of the chemical agents, and each dose which we developed was given its own complete physical-chemical passport. It was therefore not difficult to determine who had prepared that dose and when it was developed. Naturally, the investigators also suspected me. I was questioned several times about this incident. "

[Apr 02, 2018] I suspect the main event was Ghouta that has been foiled, perhaps by discovering the chemicals or the sacking of Tillerson or both. Skripals poisoning was just a prepartion for that

That explains "solidarity" action on such a non-existent proof of the crime: everything was prepared for larger event in Ghouta
Apr 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Peter AU 1 | Mar 31, 2018 5:58:52 PM | 75

After keeping the chemicals developed in the soviet union buried for so long, to the extent of ensuring OPCW did not look into or list it, why blow it just on the Skripals just to kick a few diplomats out? The Skripal operation is more like an operation to get it in the public eye and associated with Russia before the main event. I suspect the main event was Ghouta and has been foiled, perhaps by discovering the chemicals or the sacking of Tillerson or both.

karlof1 , Mar 31, 2018 6:55:30 PM | 81
This short Twitter thread focuses on Uk's motive for attack on Skripals. East Ghouta's liberation has seen the capture of several UK/NATO special ops personnel: "#UK's persecution of Russia" has to do w/ serious, underreported development in #Syria that occurred shortly before #Salisbury." A Russian analyst named Satanovsky is being cited; perhaps Yevgeny Satanovsky of Moscow's Middle East Institute. The scenario's certainly plausible.

[Apr 02, 2018] It's 911 all over again...

Mar 30, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Hoarsewhisperer | Mar 30, 2018 8:58:44 PM | 180 ...

The vile Ruskies are capable of nefarious activities that cannot be proven using ordinary legal standards, say, by finding a proof, but now NATO allies got wiser and decided to move forward without falling for "Putin's trap", i.e. delaying any response until some proofs are found. No, no, no! The very fact that nothing concrete can be found attests to the skill of perpetrator, and the combination of (1) ability (2) motivation and (3) brutality leaves only one possible culprit. ... Posted by: Piotr Berman | Mar 30, 2018 5:32:52 PM | 162

Yes! It's 911 all over again... Everyone was quick to forget that, despite the scale of the damage, 911 was simply a criminal act and should have been the subject of a very thorough Police/judicial investigation with unlimited power to subpoena witnesses and suspects - to seek incontrovertible "evidence".

FSFF , Mar 31, 2018 12:57:40 AM | 190

cdvision @174

There is no doubt that this has been in the pipeline for quite a while & that it has gone tits up. Everything else is speculation, guess work and intuition.

It is such a tortured, black comedy, obviously poorly accepted by everyone except the US and UK, it cannot be taken seriously.

Which is also why it cannot be the prelude to a war with Russia and China. If this carnival of liars is deemed the causus belli of WWIII, it is a crude insult to every American sailor who was killed in service at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, the last real causus belli.

I, for one, hope it is the absolutely necessary precursor to a military take-over of the US government by patriotic officers in the armed forces who are watching Mueller's investigation unfold who have heard all the lies told by the leaders of the FBI & CIA.

They are already aware of the corruption of the Members of Congress having seen how the procurement of weapon systems is based not on quality but on the location of military factories in their districts.

I believe the Deep State supports this coup d'etat as the only means of getting America back on sound financial footing in an age when the population explosion has just signaled the end of capitalism as we knew it in the last century and the end of enough easy to find and produce oil.

I also believe that the Arab Spring was the code name for the neocon's premeditated destruction of the Middle East, turning nations into piles of rubble for the express purpose of creating a tidal wave of refugees into the low birthrate nations of Eastern Europe, where their presence alone was sure to raise the GDPs of their new homes in OCEANIA.

Yes, I believe that the only alternative to WWIII is the gradual creation of Orwell's NINETEEN EIGHTY-FOUR with US, UK & EU the core of Oceania.

OCEANIA -- the worst, most repressive of Orwell's three Super States.

[Apr 02, 2018] The problem of collapsing of two people virtually in sync -- that suggest application of aerosol or pills taken by both Skripals directly on the bench as they have different body mass and different age and should react differently to anything that does not have an immeduate effect

Apr 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

nationofbloodthirstysheep | Mar 31, 2018 5:33:53 PM | 71

Maybe I'm technically off-topic in regard to today's MOA post, I tend to regard any MOA Skripal post to be part of a continuing discussion.

It seems to me that what one might call "synchrony of affect" would be such an obvious contradiction to "doorknob" or any other delayed reaction thesis that it would have been covered, and probably has been, by now somewhere in the Skripal thread.

In case it hasn't, here's the obvious:

Apparently both Skripals were stricken almost simultaneously within a few minutes of appearing perfectly fine on CCTV. The latest UK theory has it that they both touched a doorknob a number of hours earlier! a woman in her 30s and a man twice her age both succumbed to a poison on that doorknob within a minute or two of each other - several hundred minutes later!

Engineering a toxin capable of producing that effect must've been incredibly complex; probably the product of a brilliant mind, Boris Johnson's perhaps.

My top three picks are 1: Bad clams in the Risotto 2: Aerosol in the face in front of the bench 3. All fake, staged by the white helmets.

S | Mar 31, 2018 6:48:13 PM | 80

@71 That's a great point. Given their difference in weight, Sergei and Julia could not have possibly collapsed in sync 7 hours after touching the door knob. The only explanation for such a perfectly simultaneous onset of symptoms -- if they were poisoned at all -- is something happening to them shortly before they collapsed.

somebody , Mar 31, 2018 7:21:27 PM | 85
@S | Mar 31, 2018 6:48:13 PM | 80

I doubt the nervous system is influenced by weight.

This here is OPCW

The route for entering the body is of importance for the period required for the nerve agent to start having effect. It also influences the symptoms developed and, to some extent, the sequence of the different symptoms. Generally, the poisoning works faster when the agent is absorbed through the respiratory system than via other routes. This is because the lungs contain numerous blood vessels and the inhaled nerve agent can therefore rapidly diffuse into the blood circulation and thus reach the target organs. Among these organs, the respiratory system is one of the most important. If a person is exposed to a high concentration of nerve agent, e.g., 200 mg sarin/m3 (see table) death may occur within a couple of minutes.

Poisoning takes longer when the nerve agent enters the body through the skin. Nerve agents are more or less fat-soluble and can penetrate the outer layers of the skin. However, it takes some time before the poison reaches the deeper blood vessels. Consequently, the first symptoms do not occur until 20-30 minutes after the initial exposure but subsequently the poisoning process may be rapid if the total dose of nerve agent is high. The toxic effect of nerve agents depends on them becoming bound to an enzyme, acetylcholinesterase, and thereby inhibit this vital enzyme's normal biological activity in the cholinergic nervous system.

[Apr 02, 2018] The photo of "The deadly doorknob" dated March 7

Apr 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlofi1. I've read of captures/deaths of US/UK/Israeli Special Ops in Syria multiple times, but never an "official" acknowledgement from any side. I expect at least some of these stories are true, which tells me that no one is being completely honest publicly about what's going on there.

Further down that Twitter feed you posted I saw this photo of The deadly doorknob dated 7 March.

https://twitter.com/MSuchkov_ALM

Posted by: Daniel | Mar 31, 2018 9:02:09 PM | 95

[Apr 02, 2018] Russia 'Novichok' Hysteria Proves Politicians and Media Haven't Learned the Lessons of Iraq by Patrick Henningsen

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Russian conspiracy ..."
"... La Résistance ..."
"... espionage – ..."
"... Reds under the bed. The Russian are coming, etc. ..."
"... shoulder to shoulder. ..."
Mar 31, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

The current state of anti-Russia hysteria is reminiscent of earlier dark chapters of American history, including the rush to war in Iraq of the early 2000s and McCarthyism of the 1950s, Patrick Henningsen observes.

If there's one thing to be gleaned from the current atmosphere of anti-Russian hysteria in the West, it's that the US-led sustained propaganda campaign is starting to pay dividends. It's not only the hopeless political classes and media miscreants who believe that Russia is hacking, meddling and poisoning our progressive democratic utopia – with many pinning their political careers to this by now that's it's too late for them to turn back.

As it was with Iraq in 2003, these dubious public figures require a degree of public support for their policies, and unfortunately many people do believe in the grand Russian conspiracy , having been sufficiently brow-beaten into submission by around-the-clock fear mongering and official fake news disseminated by government and the mainstream media.

What makes this latest carnival of warmongering more frightening is that it proves that the political and media classes never actually learned or internalized the basic lessons of Iraq , namely that the cessation of diplomacy and the declarations of sanctions (a prelude to war) against another sovereign state should not be based on half-baked intelligence and mainstream fake news . But that's exactly what is happening with this latest Russian 'Novichok' plot.

Admittedly, the stakes are much higher this time around. The worst case scenario is unthinkable, whereby the bad graces of men like John Bolton and other military zealots, there may just be a thin enough mandate to short-sell another military conflagration or proxy war – this time against another nuclear power and UN Security Council member.

Enter stage right, where US President Donald Trump announced this week that the US is moving closer to war footing with Russia. It's not the first time Trump has made such a hasty move in the absence any forensic evidence of a crime. Nowadays, hearsay, conjecture and social media postings are enough to declare war. Remember last April with the alleged "Sarin Attack" in Khan Sheikhoun , when the embattled President squeezed off 59 Tomahawk Cruise missiles against Syria – a decision, which as far as anyone can tell, was based solely on a few YouTube videos uploaded by the illustrious White Helmets . Back then Trump learned how an act of war against an existential enemy could take the heat off at home and translate into a bounce in the polls. Even La Résistance at CNN were giddy with excitement and threw their support behind Trump, with some pundits describing his decision to act as "presidential."

As with past high-profile western-led WMD allegations against governments in Syria and Iraq (the US and UK are patently unconcerned with multiple allegations of 'rebel' terrorists in Syria caught using chemical weapons ), an identical progression of events appears to be unfolding following the alleged 'Novichok' chemical weapon poisoning of retired British-Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury, Wiltshire on March 4.

Despite a lack of evidence presented to the public other than the surreptitious "highly likely" assessments of British Prime Minister Theresa May and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, President Trump once again has caved into pressure from Official Washington's anti-Russian party line and ordered the expulsion of 60 Russian diplomats – whom he accused of being spies. Trump also ordered the closure of the Russian consulate in Seattle, citing speculative fears that Russia might be spying on a nearby Boeing submarine development base. It was the second round of US expulsions of Russian officials, with the first one ordered by the outgoing President Obama in December 2016, kicking out 35 Russian diplomats and their families (including their head chef) and closing the Russian Consulate in San Francisco, with some calling it "a den of spies".

Trump's move followed an earlier UK action on March 14th, which expelled 23 Russian diplomats also accused of being spies. This was in retaliation for the alleged poisoning of a retired former Russian-British double agent in Salisbury, England.

The 'Collective' Concern

It's important to understand how this week's brash move by Washington was coordinated in advance. The US and the UK are relying on their other NATO partners, including Germany, Poland, Italy, Canada, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands, Estonia and Lithuania – to create the image of a united front against perceived 'Russian aggression.' As with multilateral military operations, multilateral diplomatic measures like this are not carried out on a whim.

Aside from this, there are two seriously worrying aspects of this latest US-led multilateral move against Russia. Firstly, this diplomatic offensive against Russia mirrors a NATO collective defense action, and by doing so, it tacitly signals towards an invocation of Article 5. According to AP , one German spokesperson called it a matter of 'solidarity' with the UK. Statements from the White House are no less encouraging:

"The United States takes this action in conjunction with our NATO allies, and partners around the world in response with Russia's use of a military grade chemical weapon on the soil of the United Kingdom -- the latest in its ongoing pattern of destabilizing activities around the world," the White House said . "Today's actions make the United States safer by reducing Russia's ability to spy on Americans, and to conduct covert operations that threaten America's national security."

What this statement indicates is that any Russian foreign official or overseas worker in the West should be regarded as possible agents of espionage. In other words, the Cold War is now officially back on.

Then came this statement: "With these steps, the United States and our allies and partners make clear to Russia that its actions have consequences."

In an era of power politics, this language is anything but harmless. And while US and UK politicians and media pundits seem to be treating it all as a school yard game at times, we should all be reminded that his is how wars start.

The second issue with the Trump's diplomatic move against Russia is that it extends beyond the territorial US – and into what should be regarded at the neutral zone of the United Nations. As part of the group of 60 expulsions, the US has expelled 12 Russian diplomats from the United Nations in New York City. While this may mean nothing to jumped-up political appointees like Nikki Haley who routinely threaten the UN when a UNGA vote doesn't go her way, this is an extremely dangerous precedent because it means that the US has now created a diplomatic trap door where legitimate international relations duties are being carelessly rebranded as espionage – done on a whim and based on no actual evidence.

By using this tactic, the US is casting aside decades of international resolutions, treaties and laws. Such a move directly threatens to undermine a fundamental principle of the United Nations which is its diplomatic mission and the right for every sovereign nation to have diplomatic representation. Without it, there is no UN forum and countries cannot talk through their differences and negotiate peaceful settlements. This is why the UN was founded in the first place. Someone might want to remind Nikki Haley of that.

On top of this, flippant US and UK officials are already crowing that Russia should be kicked off the UN Security Council. In effect, Washington is trying to cut the legs out from a fellow UN Security Council member and a nuclear power. This UNSC exclusion campaign been gradually building up since 2014, where US officials have been repeated blocked by Russia over incidents in Syria and the Ukraine . Hence, Washington and its partners are frustrated with the UN framework, and that's probably why they are so actively undermining it.

Those boisterous calls, as irrational and ill-informed as they might be, should be taken seriously because as history shows, these signs are a prelude to war.

Also, consider the fact that both the US and Russia have military assets deployed in Syria. How much of the Skripal case and the subsequent fall-out has to do with the fact that US Coalition and Gulf state proxy terrorists have lost their hold over key areas in Syria? The truly dangerous part of this equation is that the illegal military occupation by the US and its NATO ally Turkey of northeastern Syria is in open violation of international law, and so Washington and its media arms would like nothing more than to be history's actor and bury its past indiscretions under a new layer of US-Russia tension in the Middle East.

Another WMD Debacle?

Is it really possible to push East-West relations over the edge on the basis of anecdotal evidence?

Former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray , highlighted the recent British High Court judgement which states in writing that the government's own chemical weapons experts from the Porton Down research facility could not categorically confirm that a Russian 'Novichok' nerve agent was actually used in the Salisbury incident. Based on this, Murray believes that both British Prime Minster Theresa May and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, and Britain's deputy UN representative Jonathan Allen – have all lied to the public and the world when making their public statements that the Russians had in fact launched a deadly chemical weapons attack on UK soil. Murray states elaborates on this key point:

"This sworn Court evidence direct from Porton Down is utterly incompatible with what Boris Johnson has been saying. The truth is that Porton Down have not even positively identified this as a 'Novichok', as opposed to "a closely related agent". Even if it were a 'Novichok' that would not prove manufacture in Russia , and a 'closely related agent' could be manufactured by literally scores of state and non-state actors.

"This constitutes irrefutable evidence that the government have been straight out lying – to Parliament, to the EU, to NATO, to the United Nations, and above all to the people – about their degree of certainty of the origin of the attack. It might well be an attack originating in Russia, but there are indeed other possibilities and investigation is needed. As the government has sought to whip up jingoistic hysteria in advance of forthcoming local elections, the scale of the lie has daily increased."

Murray has been roundly admonished by the UK establishment for his views, but he is still correct to ask the question: how could UK government leaders have known 'who did it' in advance of any criminal forensic investigation or substantive testing by Porton Down or an independent forensic investigation by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)?

One would hope we could all agree that it's this sort of question which should have been given more prominence in the run-up to the Iraq War. In matters of justice and jurisprudence, that's a fundamental question and yet, once again – it has been completely bypassed.

Murray is not alone. A number of scientists and journalists have openly questioned the UK's hyperbolic claims that Russia had ordered a 'chemical attack' on British soil. In her recent report for the New Scientist , author Debora MacKenzie reiterates the fact that several countries could have manufactured a 'Novichok' class nerve agent and used it in the chemical attack on Russians Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury.

"British Prime Minister Theresa May says that because it was Russia that developed Novichok agents, it is 'highly likely' that Russia either attacked the Skripals itself, or lost control of its Novichok to someone else who did . But other countries legally created Novichok for testing purposes after its existence was revealed in 1992, and a production method has even been published."

The New Scientist also quotes Ralf Trapp, a chemical weapons consultant formerly with the OPCW, who also reiterates a point worth reminding readers of – that inspectors are only able to tell where molecules sampled in Salisbury have come from if they have reference samples for the ingredients used.

"I doubt they have reference chemicals for forensic analysis related to Russian CW agents," says Trapp. "But if Russia has nothing to hide they may let inspectors in."

Even if they can identify it as Novichok, they cannot say that it came from Russia, or was ordered by the Russian government, not least of all because the deadly recipe is available on Amazon for only $28.45 .

It should be noted that a substantial amount of evidence points to only two countries who are the most active in producing and testing biological and chemical weapons WMD – the United States and Great Britain. Their programs also include massive 'live testing' on both humans and animals with most of this work undertaken at the Porton Down research facility located only minutes away from the scene of this alleged 'chemical attack' in Salisbury, England.

Problems with the Official Story

If we put aside for the moment any official UK government theory, which is based on speculation backed-up by a series of hyperbolic statements and proclamations of Russian guilt, there are still many fundamental problems with the official story – maybe too many to list here, but I will address what I believe are a few key items of interest.

The UK police have now released a statement claiming that the alleged 'Novichok' nerve agent was somehow administered at the front door of Sergie Skripal's home in Wiltshire. This latest official claim effectively negates the previous official story because it means that the Skripals would have been exposed a home at the latest around 13:00 GMT on March 4th, and then drove into town, parking their car at Sainsbury's car park, then having a leisurely walk to have drinks at The Mill Pub, before for ordering and eating lunch at Zizzis restaurant, and then finally leaving the Zizzis and walking before finally retiring on a park bench – where emergency services were apparently called at 16:15 GMT to report an incident.

Soon after, local police arrived on the scene to find the Skripals on the bench in an "extremely serious condition." Based on this story, the Skripals would have been going about their business for 3 hours before finally falling prey to the deadly WMD 'Novichok'. From this, one would safely conclude that whatever has poisoned the pair was neither lethal nor could it have been a military grade WMD. Even by subtracting the home doorway exposure leg of this story, the government's claim hardly adds up – as even a minor amount of any real lethal military grade WMD would have effected many more people along this timeline of events. Based on what we know so far, it seems much more plausible that the pair would have been poisoned at Zizzis restaurant, and not with a military grade nerve agent.

When this story initially broke, we were also told that the attending police officer who first arrived on the scene of this incident, Wiltshire Police Detective Sgt. Nick Bailey – was "fighting for his life" after being exposed to the supposed 'deadly Russian nerve agent'. As it turned out, officer Bailey was treated in hospital and then discharged on March 22, 2018. To our knowledge, no information or photos of Bailey's time in care are available to the public so we cannot know the trajectory of his health, or if he was even exposed to the said "Novichok'.

In the immediate aftermath, the public were also told initially that approximately 4o people were taken into medical care because of "poison exposure". This bogus claim was promulgated by some mainstream media outlets, like Rupert Murdoch's Times newspaper . In reality, no one showed signed of "chemical weapons" exposure, meaning that this story was just another example of mainstream corporate media fake news designed to stoke tension and fear in the public. We exposed this at the time on the UK Column News here:

To further complicate matters, this week we were told that Yulia Skripal has now turned the corner and is in recovery, and is speaking to police from her hospital bed. If this is true, then it further proves that whatever the alleged poison agent was which the Skripals were exposed to – it was not a lethal, military grade nerve agent. If it had been, then most likely the Skripals and many others would not be alive right now.

Unfortunately, in this new age of state secrecy, we can expect that most of the key information relating to this case may be sealed indefinitely under a national security letter. In the case of Porton Down scientist David Kelly , the key information is sealed (hidden) for another 60+ years (if we're lucky, we might get to see it in the year 2080). This means that we just have to take their word for it, or to borrow the words of the newly crowed UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson – any one asking questions, "should just go away and shut up." Such is the lack of decorum and transparency in this uncomfortably Orwellian atmosphere.

While Britain insists that it has 'irrefutable proof' that Russia launched a deadly nerve-gas attack to murder the Skripals, the facts simply do not match-up to the rhetoric.

The Litvinenko Conspiracy

It's important to note that as far as public perceptions are concerned, the official Skripal narrative has been built directly on top of the Litvinenko case.

In order to try and reinforce the government's speculative arguments, the UK establishment has resurrected the trial-by-media case of another Russian defector, former FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko, who is said to have died after being poisoned with radioactive polonium-210 in his tea at a restaurant in London's Mayfair district in late 2006.

Despite not having any actual evidence as to who committed the crime, the British authorities and the mainstream media have upheld an almost religious belief that the Russian FSB (formerly KGB), under the command of Vladimir Putin, had ordered the alleged radioactive poisoning of Litvinenko.

The media mythos was reinforced in 2016, when a British Public Inquiry headed by Sir Robert Owen accused senior Russian officials of 'probably having motives to approve the murder' of Litvinenko. Again, this level of guesswork and speculation would never meet the standard of an actual forensic investigation worthy of a real criminal court of law, but so far as apportioning blame to another nation or head of state is concerned – it seems fair enough for British authorities.

Following the completion of the inquiry, Sir Robert had this to say: "Taking full account of all the evidence and analysis available to me, I find that the FSB operation to kill Litvinenko was probably approved by Mr Patrushev and also by President Putin."

Contrary to consensus reality (popular belief), Owen's inquiry was not at all definitive. Quite the opposite in fact, and in many ways it mirrors how the Skripal case has been presented to the public. Despite offering no evidence of any criminal guilt, Owen's star chamber maintained that Vladimir Putin "probably" approved the operation to assassinate Litvinenko. Is "probably" really enough to assign guilt in a major international crime? When it comes to high crimes of state, the answer seems to be yes .

According to Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova , that UK inquiry was "neither transparent nor public" and was "conducted mostly behind doors, with classified documents and unnamed witnesses contributing to the result "

Zakharova highlighted the fact that two key witnesses in the case – Litvinenko's chief patron, a UK-based anti-Putin defector billionaire oligarch named Boris Berezovsky, and the owner of Itsu restaurant in London's Mayfair where the incident is said to have taken place, had both suddenly died under dubious circumstances.

The British authorities went on to accuse two Russian men in the Litvineko murder – businessman Andrey Lugovoy and Dmitry Kovtun. Both have denied the accusations. Despite the lack of any real evidence, the United States Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control blacklisted both Lugovoi and Kovtun, as well as Russian persons Stanislav Gordievsky, Gennady Plaksin and Aleksandr I. Bastrykin – under the Magnitsky Act , which freezes their assets held in American financial institutions, and bans them from conducting any transactions or traveling to the United States.

Notice the familiar pattern: even if the case is inconclusive, or collapses due to a lack of evidence, the policies remain in place.

Despite all the pomp and circumstance however, Owen's official conspiracy theory failed to sway even Litvinenko's own close family members. While Litvinenko's widow Marina maintains that it was definitely the Russian government who killed her husband, Alexsander's younger brother Maksim Litvinenko, based in Rimini, Italy, believes the British report "ridiculous" to blame the Kremlin for the murder of his brother, stating that he believes British security services had more of a motive to carry out the assassination.

"My father and I are sure that the Russian authorities are not involved. It's all a set-up to put pressure on the Russian government," said Litvinenko to the Mirror newspaper, and that such reasoning can explain why the UK waited almost 10 years to launch the inquiry his brother's death.

Maxim also said that Britain had more reason to kill his brother than the Russians, and believes that blaming Putin for the murder was part of a wider effort to smear Russia. Following the police investigation, Alexander's father Walter Litvinenko, also said that he had regretted blaming Putin and the Russian government for his son's death and did so under intense pressure at the time.

For anyone skeptical of the official proclamations of the British state and the mainstream media on the Litvinenko case, it's worth reading the work of British journalist Will Dunkerly here .

With so many questions hanging over the actually validity of the British state's accusations against Russia, it's somewhat puzzling that British police would say they are still 'looking for similarities' between the Skripal and Litvinenko cases in order to pinpoint a modus operandi.

The admission by the British law enforcement that their investigation may take months before any conclusion can be drawn also begs the question: how could May have been so certain so quick? The answer should be clear by now: she could not have known it was a 'Novichok' agent, no more than she could know the 'Russia did it.'

A Plastic Cold War

Historically speaking, in the absence of any real mandate or moral authority, governments suffering from an identity crisis, or a crisis of legitimacy will often try and define themselves not based on what they stand for, but rather what (or who) they are in opposition to. This profile suits both the US and UK perfectly at the moment.

Both governments are limping along with barely a mandate, and have orchestrated two of the worst and most hypocritical debacles in history with their illegal wars in both Syria and Yemen. With their moral high-ground a thing of the past, these two countries require a common existential enemy in order to give their international order legitimacy. The cheapest, easiest option is to reinvigorate a framework which was already there, which is the Cold War framework: Reds under the bed. The Russian are coming, etc.

It's cheap and it's easy because it has already been seeded with 70 years of Cold War propaganda and institutionalized racism in the West directed against Russians. If you don't believe me, just go look at some of the posters, watch the TV propaganda in the US, or read about the horrific McCarthyist blacklists and political witch hunts. I remember growing up in America and being taught "never again" and "we're past all of that now, those days of irrational paranoia are behind us, we're better than that now." But that madness of the past was not a fringe affair – it was a mainstream madness, and one which was actively promoted by government and mainstream media.

You would have to be at the pinnacle of ignorance to deny that this is exactly what we are seeing today, albeit a more plastic version, but just as immoral and dangerous. Neocons love it, and now liberals love it too.

Dutifully fanning the flaming of war, Theresa May has issued her approval of the NATO members diplomatic retaliation this week exclaiming, "We welcome today's actions by our allies, which clearly demonstrate that we all stand shoulder to shoulder in sending the strongest signal to Russia that it cannot continue to flout international law."

But from an international law perspective, can May's 'highly likely' assurances really be enough to position the west on war footing with Russia? When Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn asked these same fundamental questions on March 14th, he was shouted down by the Tory bench, and also by the hawkish Blairites sitting behind him.

Afterwards, the British mainstream press launched yet another defamation campaign against Corbyn, this time with the UK's Daily Mail calling the opposition leader a "Kremlin Stooge", followed by British state broadcaster the BBC who went through the effort of creating a mock-up graphic of Corbyn in front of the Kremlin (pictured above) apparently wearing a Russian hat, as if to say he was a Russian agent . It was a new low point in UK politics and media.

Considering the mainstream media's Corbyn smear alongside the recent insults hurled at Julian Assange by Tory MP Sir Alan Duncan who stood up in front of Parliament and called the Wikileaks founder a "miserable worm", what this really says is that anyone who dares defy the official state narrative will be beaten down and publicly humiliated. In other words, dissent in the political ranks will not be tolerated. It's almost as if we are approaching a one party state.

Would a UN Security Council member and nuclear power really be so brazen as to declare de facto war on another country without presenting any actual evidence or completing a genuine forensic investigation?

So why the apparent rush to war? Haven't we been here before, in 2003? Will the people of the West allow it to happen again?

As with T2ony Blair's WMD's in 2003, the British public are meant to take it on faith and never question the official government line. And just like in 2003, the UK has opened the first door on the garden path, with the US and its 'coalition' following safely behind, shoulder to shoulder. In this latest version of the story, Tony Blair is being played by Theresa May, and Jack Straw is being played by Boris Johnson.

On the other side of the pond, a hapless Bush is hapless Trump. Both Blair and Straw, along with the court propagandist Alastair Campbell – are all proven to have been liars of the highest order, and if there were any real accountability or justice, these men and their collaborators in government should be in prison right now. The fact they aren't is why the door has been left wide open for the exact same scam to be repeated again, and again.

Iraq should have taught us all to be skeptical about official claims of chemical weapons evidence, and to face the ugly truth about how most major wars throughout history have waged by the deception – and by western governments. What does it tell us about today's society if people still cannot see this?

That's why it was wrong to let Blair, Bush and others off the hook for war crimes. By doing so, both the British and Americans are inviting a dark phase of history to repeat itself again, and again.

It's high time that we break the cycle.

Author Patrick Henningsen is a global affairs analyst and founder of independent news and analysis site 21st Century Wire, and host of the SUNDAY WIRE weekly radio show broadcast globally over the Alternate Current Radio Network (ACR).

Stephen J. , March 31, 2018 at 3:43 pm

The War Criminals are all in Solidarity with each other.
See more at link below.
http://graysinfo.blogspot.ca/2018/03/solidarity-among-war-criminals.html

Leo , March 31, 2018 at 8:33 pm

Trump is a businessman, and the biggest and most profitable business is a military spending. PR and advertising campaigns (like Salisbury ) are just a part of the game to keep wheels moving.

Leo , March 31, 2018 at 9:15 pm

One more note. At first I was puzzled by the stupidity of those who produced this cheap B-movie scenario of this Skipal show. Now I must admit that they are much smarter than I previously thought. As Joseph Goebbels said, the more unbelievable lie the easier to make people believe in it. And that is very simple to explain. Those who would try to analyse the unanalysable will not be able to come to a definite conclusion and there will be always a room for a doubt. Good job!

Abby , April 1, 2018 at 1:01 am

Moon of Alabama has been covering this and the latest post shows that this was planned as far back as 2009. Hillary is involved with this and while she was SOS she told her staff not discuss the book that had the information on how to make the poison. This is a little convenient, don't you think?

Good grief, there are so many holes in this story that I'm just frankly dumbfounded that people can't see through them. The timeline of where they got poisoned and then the number of people who had been exposed to it kept going up.

geeyp , April 1, 2018 at 3:03 am

To Stephen J. Gray: I agree with you 200%, and have said the exact same thing for years now. What a let down when the last President declared justice was off limits for these scoundrels! How the world could look now if justice was served then! Patrick J. Henningsen's piece here and his site 21st Century Wire, along with working with Vanessa and Eva, fill us in on what has transpired in Syria more than any other place, and I am pleased to see him represented here. I also love seeing him on "Crosstalk" on RT.

glitch , April 1, 2018 at 5:29 am

Second this!

Stephen J. , April 1, 2018 at 9:40 am

Hi geeyp, I believe we are ruled by total evil. Hopefully, there will be a day of reckoning and these villains will be put on trial.

http://graysinfo.blogspot.ca/2014/12/will-there-be-day-of-reckoning.html

Anna , April 1, 2018 at 4:18 pm

The current crop of "leaders" in the UK share the same trait -- the complete lack of dignity. It seems that immorality has become a prerequisite for entering the UK politics. Guess, The Friends of Israel have succeeded in educating Brits in accordance with Mossad' ethics, "By way of deception thou shalt do war."

Realist , March 31, 2018 at 4:51 pm

There is always reality and, offered in its place, the risible Washington narrative. Clearly, the world knows the difference just about every time, yet the world hegemon and its NATO vassals insist on the preposterous mythology and most of the rest go along out of fear. It's a frustrating trap that honest and rational people everywhere are forced to accept, unless they want to war in one form or another with the great bully. You go along with the Red Queen's six impossible things imagined before breakfast or it's off with your head!

We know the identities of the figureheads in whose name these outrages are promulgated–moral sell-outs for political grandeur like D.J. Trump, Nikki Haley and now John Bolton. What piques my curiosity would be the names of those powers lurking in the shadows who pull the strings of these figureheads. Who are the psychopaths that have been firmly directing Washington's endless wars with no deviation in their prosecution regardless of campaign promises, elections and warm bodies occupying offices? Who are the monsters that have put us on a certain collision course for nuclear war with Russia ginned up with an un-ending litany of lies, frame-ups, false narratives and aggressive military moves? Would it be people we've heard about? Is Sheldon Adelson essentially the defacto czar of the "Western alliance?" Or is he also only a front for truly Deep Slimeballs pulling the strings at the depths of the Deep State?

If the pope's pronouncements on hell, which presently has some prominent Catholics disconcerted that pain and suffering forever and ever without end is not a reasonable position for an all-knowing and all-loving diety to take, is the likely truth then, for many unfortunates, hell actually ends when their stay on earth is terminated courtesy of the blood-thirsty Washington maniacs who play god.

Sam F , April 1, 2018 at 8:17 am

Yes, the ultimate influencers are the great question. Those who follow the money and follow the motive find the nature of oligarchy and its factions, if not its commanders. Our tyranny is a subculture of bullies using all available forms of power: direct force, economic power, social, and information power, and in all modes of bribery, threat, and deception. We owe everything to our gangsters.

Abe , March 31, 2018 at 5:09 pm

"The fact that the alleged creator of Novichok agents – Vil Mirzayanov – fled to and currently lives in the United States suggests the West has both knowledge of and the means to create Novichok agents themselves.

"The UK's presumption that "only Russia" could have produced the agents when the creator of Novichok lives in the United States – and British labs clearly have access to the poison – is at face value contradictory and dishonest.

"Since the UK has refused to produce any tangible evidence, including producing samples under its obligations to the Chemical Weapons Convention, all that is left for the international community to consider is the source of these accusations. [ ]

"Just as the US and UK did during the lead up to the Iraq War in 2003, an avalanche of propaganda is being produced to stampede the world into backing whatever long-ago elected course of action the West has decided to take against Russia.

"In the hindsight of whatever course of action the UK and its allies decide to take in the coming days, weeks, and months based on the Skripal incident, who will play the role of 'Curveball' who supposedly duped Theresa May in making her Powell-style accusations before declaring her Bush-style retaliation?

"And considering the ramifications for the West regarding its lies in the lead up to Iraq and the fallout the West has faced in the aftermath of Iraq's destruction, what do Western policymakers expect to gain from an incident many times more transparently staged and self-serving against a world increasingly skeptical of their claims and actions?"

WMD Lies Strike Again: The Skripal Incident
By Tony Cartalucci
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2018/03/wmd-lies-strike-again-skripal-incident.html

Bob H , March 31, 2018 at 6:00 pm

"The fact that the alleged creator of Novichok agents – Vil Mirzayanov – fled to and currently lives in the United States suggests the West has both knowledge of and the means to create Novichok agents themselves." very significant fact .if it was reported before, it flew right by me, although I was aware that Western "scientists" took samples of the Aral Sea stockpile during Yeltsin's chaotic administration.

Fred , March 31, 2018 at 7:08 pm

Here's a link to Moonof Alabama discussing Soviet defector Vil Mirzanyanov who wrote a book about his chemical work for the USSR; he now lives in Princeton, NJ.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/03/russian-scientists-explain-novichok-high-time-for-britain-to-come-clean.html

Bob H , March 31, 2018 at 8:39 pm

Thanks Fred, the Zakharova interview was particularly revealing considering that the "Russian sounding" name "Novichok" was invented by Western sources, the Tory claim reeks of tampering with the facts. It reminds me of the sloppy "Steele investigation" into alleged Russian hacking where a trail of Russian "clues" seemed to be inserted by Christopher Steel's Fusion GPS. The fact that Steele himself is linked to both MI-6 and the DNC effort to hang Hillary's election loss on Putin should shift all suspicion onto the accusers, but.alas, the msm is not in the business of informing the public.

Abby , April 1, 2018 at 1:02 am

Moon of Alabama has updated the information on this and links it to Hillary. Gee, what a surprise, ehh?

Kathryn , March 31, 2018 at 11:13 pm

Even MORE interesting is that when she was US Sec of State, she along with the UK "ordered Diplomats To Suppress 'Novichok' Discussions! http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/03/clinton-state-department-discouraged-novichok-discussion.html#more

Bob H , April 1, 2018 at 1:14 am

Thanks Kathryn, both the article and the comment thread raise a lot of questions(the thread never ends). Many of the comments seem to be from people with considerable knowledge of the chemical composition and its possible effects,

Curious , March 31, 2018 at 9:01 pm

As the article states above, the book and recipe re: Vil Mirzayanov can be bought on Amazon for $28.45. This information has certainly been known by chemists worldwide.

Zachary Smith , March 31, 2018 at 5:32 pm

The UK police have now released a statement claiming that the alleged 'Novichok' nerve agent was somehow administered at the front door of Sergie Skripal's home in Wiltshire. This latest official claim effectively negates the previous official story because it means that the Skripals would have been exposed a home at the latest around 13:00 GMT on March 4th, and then drove into town, parking their car at Sainsbury's car park, then having a leisurely walk to have drinks at The Mill Pub, before for ordering and eating lunch at Zizzis restaurant, and then finally leaving the Zizzis and walking before finally retiring on a park bench – where emergency services were apparently called at 16:15 GMT to report an incident.

This is the material for a badly written cheap novel, yet the Brits have been pushing it and their Allies have been pretending to believe it. WHY is the big question I'd like to have answered. There were dozens of ways the Skripals could have been quietly murdered, yet somebody decided to use a method designed to gain maximum publicity.

In order to try and reinforce the government's speculative arguments, the UK establishment has resurrected the trial-by-media case of another Russian defector, former FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko, who is said to have died after being poisoned with radioactive polonium-210 in his tea at a restaurant in London's Mayfair district in late 2006.

Given a high probability Israel murdered Arafat with Polonium two years earlier, it was just naturally the turn of the Russians to be the villains. Likely blame was assigned by the Brits using the same method as now – Write the names of all the possible nations who could have done the deed on large pieces of paper. Tape the ones with "Russia" on the south side of a room, and those with all the other suspects on the north side. Make sure your blindfolded dart thrower is pointed south, and you've solved the mysteries of the two deadly poisons.

Bob H , March 31, 2018 at 6:16 pm

Maxim Litvinenko's opinion on his brother's poisoning and his father's regretting being coerced by British authorities into believing his son was targeted by Putin add a particularly relevant wrench into the Tory narrative. Thank you, Patrick Hennigsen, for some very trenchant insights into the web of intrigue.

mrtmbrnmn , March 31, 2018 at 6:52 pm

Vietnam: The Gulf of Tonkin Attack of the Radar Blips (Hanoi Bridge For Sale Cheap!) Gulf War I (Kuwaiti babies pitched out of incubators), Iraq War: Saddam Has WMDs! (Baghdad Bridge For Sale Cheap!), Putin Invades Crimea (Kiev Bridge For Sale Cheap!) Syrian Sarin Gas Attacks (White Helmet videos at 11), Putin Novichoks Ex-Russian Spy (double agent) & daughter in Salisbury UK (Theresa May: "Who ya gonna believe, me or your lying eyes") And, of course, now and forever, Trump = Putin. The hits just keep coming. Shades of the Reichstag Fire and Poland Invades Germany. Rogue Nation USA and its pusillanimous NATO "partners" continuously spew out lies to their ever-gullible Gen Pop, because it works! Again and again and again.

Jeff , March 31, 2018 at 7:24 pm

Where, pray tell, is the UN in all this? The United States has been fomenting coups and "regime changes" for decades. The UN should be standing up and calling the US out instead of supinely agreeing to eject 10 Russian delegates to the UN.

geeyp , April 1, 2018 at 3:18 am

Jeff: Agreed. The UN has lost the plot for some time now. Their mission was peace originally, and the US can't have that. Nicki Hoeky is clueless and is not doing a damn thing to help us.

Dave P. , March 31, 2018 at 8:29 pm

"By using this tactic, the US is casting aside decades of international resolutions, treaties and laws. Such a move directly threatens to undermine a fundamental principle of the United Nations which is its diplomatic mission and the right for every sovereign nation to have diplomatic representation. Without it, there is no UN forum and countries cannot talk through their differences and negotiate peaceful settlements. This is why the UN was founded in the first place. Someone might want to remind Nikki Haley of that."

Reminding Nikki Haley would not make any difference. Nikki Haley does not have the intelligence, knowledge, character or any capacity for deep thinking. Nor does his boss possess much of it. John Bolton has no regard for U.N., and is completely devoid of any humanitarian impulses. He is as close as it could be of being considered as a complete barbarian. There is Mike Pompeo there sitting at the table. You know how he is like. So, there you have it.

And there is nothing to cheer about across the Atlantic. Theresa may, Boris Johnson, Gavin Williamson . . . It is as bad as it gets. Merkel, Macron, Stoltenberg, and the rest of the Flock in those Vassal States follow the orders.

As Henneningsen points out in the article, this latest provocation by The West, in all probability this staged event at Salisbury, is indeed very dangerous. World may be edging towards a nuclear war. There are no sane voices left in the Ruling Establishments in The West.

Joe Tedesky , April 1, 2018 at 1:26 am

Dave I agree. In fact Dave, if you were the international war criminals of all time then wouldn't it be wise to destroy the very fabric of what stands for international justice? It's either the UN, or NATO, and in this case it's destroy the UN in order to drag down more allied nations into this carnival of destruction under the banner of NATO. So I agree Dave, it isn't to how it appears that TPTB want to bring the UN down, as it is that the TPTB are taking the UN down as we speak of this heavy conundrum being laid before us. Believe it not, in Sheldon's eyes Nikki is doing a fantastic job of it.

We are going to war Dave. We are fast moving towards that place where the closer we get to war that the more criticism of war will be deemed traitorous. Starting to paying attention will have a whole new meaning. Joe

Dave P. , April 1, 2018 at 3:02 am

Joe, yes, you are right on that; they are taking the UN down as we speak . Under Bush, when Bolton was at UN, they were talking about dissolving the UN. Immediately after this staged event in Salisbury, the British politicians were talking about kicking Russia out of UN Security Council. It all seems preplanned.

Russia is the biggest country in the World, its population is more than twice that of U.K. and also of France. Its GDP (in PPP) is one and one half times of U.K's. And most of the U.K.'s economy is Finance and Tourism, and London being the World Center of money laundering, and residence of all these oligarchs/financial crooks, and Corrupt Elite from all over the third world countries; you name it all this ill gotten wealth is pouring into London. It is amazing that the Ruling Elite in U.K. are talking as if they are still in the nineteenth or early twentieth century – ruling over a good portion of the World. It seems to me that if the shooting starts, U.K's paper economy is going to crumble.

Unfortunately, there is not much out there to hope for. They – The West – are going not only to take the UN down, but take the World down with it into some type of dark ages again.

mike k , March 31, 2018 at 8:47 pm

Nothing new to readers here, but of course it's all true. The Empire seeks more war.
Has it ever been otherwise?

mike k , March 31, 2018 at 9:20 pm

Politicians and the media are not there to learn anything but how to make money and gain more power through the corrupt, lying games they play. They all made money off the Iraq war, and that is all they care about, period.

Syd , March 31, 2018 at 9:34 pm

Don't the Brits realize that if there's any kind of shooting war with Russia, and any Russian city is attacked,that the Russians can and will bomb British cities to retaliate, not to mention the resulting ecalation,almost certainly up to nuclear? Why aren't a million Brits on the streets demanding peaceful resolution of this and future crises?

jose , March 31, 2018 at 9:52 pm

Dear Sad: your question may sound simple but it is a complex one;It involves numerous factors interwoven that create the right conditions for war. I think that Brits are not on the streets might be due to apathy, ignorance, disinterest, or sheer historical amnesia. According to Richard Sanders, "The historical knowledge of how war planners have tricked people into supporting past wars, is like a vaccine. We can use this understanding of history to inoculate the public with healthy doses of distrust for official war pretext narratives and other deceptive stratagems. Through such immunization programs we may help to counter our society's susceptibility to "war fever."

jose , March 31, 2018 at 9:43 pm

I believe that these war mongers cannot help themselves when it comes to lying and deceiving their own people to promote war. Consequently, it is up to the people to put a stop to their nefarious ambitions; According to Richard Sanders, "Military plotters know that the majority would never support their wars, if it were generally known why they were really being fought
If asked to support a war so a small, wealthy elite could shamelessly profit by ruthlessly exploiting and plundering the natural and human resources in far away lands, people would 'just say no.'" If people chose to be spectators rather than participants into their own affairs, then they deserve what is coming to them. It is simple math.

Skeptigal , March 31, 2018 at 10:14 pm

An excellent analysis, I always enjoy reading your articles, thank you.

The perpetrators do not care whether the allegations can be supported by evidence or if the science makes sense or if there's a logical motive. All that's important is that the damage is done and the endgame achieved. The attack has to be blatant to ensure attention is focused on it and fingers are pointed in the right direction. Government officials can always rely on the MSM and the brain dead public to support them. People are easily propagandized. A video on propaganda by Dr. Jerry Kroth on 21st Century Wire is well worth watching. Whoever is behind the incident get away with it because they feel they are above all laws.

In the Skripal case, once again all the mindless sheeple have the wool pulled over their eyes, while bleating their approval of the excessive measures taken by the UK and allies that are disproportionate to the crime. Not long ago, our local TV station had an online poll asking people if they agree with expelling the Russian diplomats and 81% replied "yes". Many of the comments on the MSM sites are very negative toward Russia over this incident.

History will repeat itself again and again, a long as anyone questioning the official narrative is attacked and discredited, people are fed propaganda, media is censored, and the laws and justice system fail again and again.

Abby , April 1, 2018 at 12:54 am

Will the people of the USA believe another WMDs lie? Of course they will. They have been doing it since Herheinous lost the election. They are believing that because she lost. Can anyone imagine what they would say if it was Trump throwing out these ridiculous lies? They'd say that he is nuts for even thinking it.

The PTB knew that people would never believe another WMDs type story so they came at people with this softer WMDs type propaganda and lo and behold they are buying it. SMDH!

jimbo , April 1, 2018 at 2:36 am

"carnival of warmongering"

A better title IMO.

I chat online and hang out here in Japan with a number Brits and North Americans and they don't seem to care or scoff at my thoughts which wholeheartedly go along with Patrick's, (whom, along with the UK Column team, have podcasts which I never miss.) It seems people have shut off their critical thinking abilities and when I pipe up with my line about how a huge psy-op is being played on us by our own governments (which admittedly to a "normy" does sound whacky), after the scoffing and incredulousness at how evil Russia could possibly be innocent, they will end the discussion with a sure fire discussion ender: they don't give a shit. I am truly privileged to be alive in this amazing present with the greatest toys and gizmos ever invented and yet there's Trump and May and my "friends" pissing in my sandbox. WTF??? How can the words and deeds my heroes like John Lennon and MLK be suddenly wrong? Maybe we should all stop giving a shit about this crap. My mother, a firebrand back in the day, is blissfully unaware of anything due to Alzheimer's and she's fine! But Mom wouldn't have scoffed. I'd have had a loving fellow traveler had she not been stricken. Maybe the most irksome thing is how people are profiting off these lies and dangerous provocations. Conspiracy theory skeptics always say that someone would have talked. That this crap is happening under our noses with only some outlets of the alternative media "saying something" still it goes on and maybe only a war will shake them hard enough to be "woke." Or not. One thing is how much fun the alternative side is. I used to like to read "Consumer Reports" and loved how they got away with ripping apart cars that real companies surely sweated bullets to make. I also liked the way they lauded some products. Nowadays, CR would be a sometimes right but still fake consensus driver like "Snopes" or "Vice News." While I'm rambling, a shout out to James Corbett. You have got to see his dissection of the Sibel Edmunds Twitter melt down.

geeyp , April 1, 2018 at 3:49 am

Yes, I agree with you. I quit paying attention long ago (approximately 12 years ago) to the msm, of whom I used to work with. The most useful thing for me is to not give a shit what they do. It seems to help; I don't have the funding to fight them, though I can counter anyone who might defend them. You mentioned "Consumer Reports" and fake news, refresh my memory, were they also along with either "Popular Science" or "Popular Mechanics" agreeing with the NIST lie that fires destroyed the three towers?

Emmet Sweeney , April 1, 2018 at 3:22 am

The political class in America and UK do what their Zionist paymasters tell them. They're not stupid, they know perfectly well Russia had nothing to do with this.

LookHow , April 1, 2018 at 5:42 am

We have to stop putting the blame on our politicians and take responsibility as a people. It is clear that our elected officials serve somebody else's agenda so we have to change the system. We need to create a democracy where decisions such as diplomatic relations, is voted upon by the people. A more direct democracy is possible today and we need it.

'Herman , April 1, 2018 at 10:02 am

Don't believe in mass insanity? You should. We all should. Even considering the most dastardly murder of someone, what type of reasoning would lead us to risk the murder of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or millions. We have to acknowledge that it is not about them, it is about us, that we are willingly being led toward the precipice and feeling self righteous in doing so.

Jessika , April 1, 2018 at 2:37 pm

These politicos didn't care to learn any lessons from Iraq! They will lie about anything to retain power. Their 'overlords' who control them pull their marionette strings.

At "The Duran" website Alexander Mercouris has a piece titled "Furious China Ramps Up Support for Russia on Skripal, Calls West's Actions 'Outrageous' ". The Global Times, English language organ of China's ruling Communist Party, published a scorching op-ed and 13 paragraphs are printed in Mercouris' piece. It is well worth reading, as is The Duran a good site to know of. Some very powerful points are made in the piece, please read it.

Not even mentioned in that piece is that China has just launched the petroyuan as exchange for oil purchase, and Russia is their largest supplier of oil. Other countries that are sick of Western bullying are also attempting to get off the dollar and China has leverage to aid them. So does Russia, which has no debt. The US as a debtor nation relies only on its guns to maintain dominance. The West is a 'beast' lashing out to keep control.

[Apr 02, 2018] The Litvinenko Conspiracy

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... In order to try and reinforce the government's speculative arguments, the UK establishment has resurrected the trial-by-media case of another Russian defector, former FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko, who is said to have died after being poisoned with radioactive polonium-210 in his tea at a restaurant in London's Mayfair district in late 2006. ..."
Mar 31, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

The Litvinenko Conspiracy

It's important to note that as far as public perceptions are concerned, the official Skripal narrative has been built directly on top of the Litvinenko case.

In order to try and reinforce the government's speculative arguments, the UK establishment has resurrected the trial-by-media case of another Russian defector, former FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko, who is said to have died after being poisoned with radioactive polonium-210 in his tea at a restaurant in London's Mayfair district in late 2006.

Despite not having any actual evidence as to who committed the crime, the British authorities and the mainstream media have upheld an almost religious belief that the Russian FSB (formerly KGB), under the command of Vladimir Putin, had ordered the alleged radioactive poisoning of Litvinenko.

The media mythos was reinforced in 2016, when a British Public Inquiry headed by Sir Robert Owen accused senior Russian officials of 'probably having motives to approve the murder' of Litvinenko. Again, this level of guesswork and speculation would never meet the standard of an actual forensic investigation worthy of a real criminal court of law, but so far as apportioning blame to another nation or head of state is concerned -- it seems fair enough for British authorities.

Following the completion of the inquiry, Sir Robert had this to say: "Taking full account of all the evidence and analysis available to me, I find that the FSB operation to kill Litvinenko was probably approved by Mr Patrushev and also by President Putin."

Contrary to consensus reality (popular belief), Owen's inquiry was not at all definitive. Quite the opposite in fact, and in many ways it mirrors how the Skripal case has been presented to the public. Despite offering no evidence of any criminal guilt, Owen's star chamber maintained that Vladimir Putin "probably" approved the operation to assassinate Litvinenko. Is "probably" really enough to assign guilt in a major international crime? When it comes to high crimes of state, the answer seems to be yes .

According to Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova , that UK inquiry was "neither transparent nor public" and was "conducted mostly behind doors, with classified documents and unnamed witnesses contributing to the result "

Zakharova highlighted the fact that two key witnesses in the case -- Litvinenko's chief patron, a UK-based anti-Putin defector billionaire oligarch named Boris Berezovsky, and the owner of Itsu restaurant in London's Mayfair where the incident is said to have taken place, had both suddenly died under dubious circumstances.

The British authorities went on to accuse two Russian men in the Litvineko murder -- businessman Andrey Lugovoy and Dmitry Kovtun. Both have denied the accusations. Despite the lack of any real evidence, the United States Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control blacklisted both Lugovoi and Kovtun, as well as Russian persons Stanislav Gordievsky, Gennady Plaksin and Aleksandr I. Bastrykin -- under the Magnitsky Act , which freezes their assets held in American financial institutions, and bans them from conducting any transactions or traveling to the United States.

Notice the familiar pattern: even if the case is inconclusive, or collapses due to a lack of evidence, the policies remain in place.

Despite all the pomp and circumstance however, Owen's official conspiracy theory failed to sway even Litvinenko's own close family members. While Litvinenko's widow Marina maintains that it was definitely the Russian government who killed her husband, Alexsander's younger brother Maksim Litvinenko, based in Rimini, Italy, believes the British report "ridiculous" to blame the Kremlin for the murder of his brother, stating that he believes British security services had more of a motive to carry out the assassination.

"My father and I are sure that the Russian authorities are not involved. It's all a set-up to put pressure on the Russian government," said Litvinenko to the Mirror newspaper, and that such reasoning can explain why the UK waited almost 10 years to launch the inquiry his brother's death.

Maxim also said that Britain had more reason to kill his brother than the Russians, and believes that blaming Putin for the murder was part of a wider effort to smear Russia. Following the police investigation, Alexander's father Walter Litvinenko, also said that he had regretted blaming Putin and the Russian government for his son's death and did so under intense pressure at the time.

For anyone skeptical of the official proclamations of the British state and the mainstream media on the Litvinenko case, it's worth reading the work of British journalist Will Dunkerly here .

With so many questions hanging over the actually validity of the British state's accusations against Russia, it's somewhat puzzling that British police would say they are still 'looking for similarities' between the Skripal and Litvinenko cases in order to pinpoint a modus operandi.

The admission by the British law enforcement that their investigation may take months before any conclusion can be drawn also begs the question: how could May have been so certain so quick? The answer should be clear by now: she could not have known it was a 'Novichok' agent, no more than she could know the 'Russia did it.'

[Apr 02, 2018] Why British elite needs Skripal case by Ann Baker

Slightly edited Google translation
Mar 29, 2018 | annbeaker.livejournal.com

This is a hypotheses about why he will not die and how he can be used after magical resurrection. just a hypotheses.

I think the most close analogy is Stormy Daniels case Trump bullied by the prostitute with whom long ago he had a fling and now she's suing him on the issue of contract what was signed by her to keep her silent.

So she took money from him for silence, then and now she did not return the money and freely slings mud. Since the civil suit it can last years and years this is a defamation by any other name. And one tells the stripper (her current occupation after glorious porno star career) got so much many to her lawyers! And with around 300 dollars per hour, even the cheapest lawyer costs substantial sum for piece of paper he produces and each court meeting he attends.

The idea is that if Trump does not want to resign, let's create him enough stress so that he can enjoy the ride. The former stripper is perfect for this dirty role as she has not decency by definition. She can act scandalous and dirty, as she was trained by her craft.

In this sense West can't get to Putin private life, his whole personal life a secret and he sits in Russia/ Or Skripal is a good substitute to Stormy Daniels in this particular case. They can street him for a long time, like they did previously with Litvinenko and MH17.

After Skripal magically recovers he like Story can hire advocates and sue Putin. And money magically will be available. As well as maybe a support group of activists from the White helmets. Lawsuits will be filed against Putin in courts of London and European curt for human rights, and several other courts, you name it. In short everywhere to provide the maximum coverage in mass media and make that scandal as louder and as dirty as possible. How long many British elite want to play this record is unclear, but want to play it very loud for sure.

The goal is simple. Get on Putin nerves. Isolate him by harassing anyone who tries to cooperate with him. for example if Merkel wants to shake hands with Putin Western MSM will scream and see Merkel shakes hands with the poisoner! Remember there is a case against him in the court of London about Skripal poisoning.

Everybody should stand against the tyrant! Who not with us, is the Putinist! Who would not jump is Moskal! And so 100,000 times. Until total exhaustion. Like a pack of dogs hunt a fox. In the end, creating nervousness and uncertainty make difficult to impossible any constructive dialogue with the West. And meantime British tilt the situation in their favor in EU too.

Moreover, the series of expulsions of ambassadors is not over. The British now need to rebuild the iron curtain, at least a part of it. This way it is easiest to lie and deceive British public. If nobody travels to Russia personally, you can tell a lot of takes with impunity. This is how they play North Korea card, and with repeat this with Russia.

The question arise. What is the counter game against perfidious Albion, if such counter-game exists?

[Apr 02, 2018] Who Shot Down Flight MH17 in Ukraine by Ron Unz

Notable quotes:
"... The New York Times ..."
"... The Wall Street Journal ..."
"... Huffington Post ..."
Aug 14, 2014 | www.unz.com

Ukraine?

237 Comments Reply

Last year I published Our American Pravda , making the case for the utter corruption and unreliability of the mainstream American media, both in the past and especially in recent years. The enormous lacunae I daily noticed in the pages of The New York Times , The Wall Street Journal , and other leading media outlets were a major motivation behind my creation of The Review , whose readership has grown enormously in recent weeks.

A perfect example of this dangerous MSM "conspiracy of silence" may be found in the growing confrontation with Russia over Ukraine, greatly accelerated by the death of almost 300 passengers aboard Malaysian Airlines Flight 17, shot down last month over Eastern Ukraine. The American media and its Western counterparts have almost unanimously placed the blame on anti-government rebels backed by Russia, and darkly insinuate that Russian President Vladimir Putin has the blood of those hundreds of innocent lives on his hands. London's once-respected Economist magazine has repeatedly run shrill covers promoting the great threat of Putin and Russia to world peace, even featuring a photo of the former under the stark title "A Web of Lies." There is the serious likelihood of a renewed Cold War against Russia and with the neoconized Republicans in Congress proposing legislation to incorporate Ukraine as an American military ally and deploy American forces there, the actual possibility of a military clash near the Russian border.

As readers know, I have been overwhelmingly consumed with my own software work in recent months and aside from closely reading the NYT and WSJ every morning, have devoted little time or effort to following the disastrous Ukraine situation. But just carefully reading between the lines of our elite MSM outlets and glancing at a few contrary perspectives presented on alternative websites have left me highly suspicious of our media narrative, leading me to wonder where the finger of guilt actually points.

For example, according to the official American story, MH17 was downed by rebels armed with a BUK anti-aircraft missile battery. As it happens, the pro-American Ukraine government possesses a large inventory of exactly those weapons, while it is far from clear that the rebels have a single unit, let alone the expertise to operate such sophisticated devices. Furthermore, there apparently exists radar evidence demonstrating that Ukraine fighter planes were in the immediate vicinity of MH17 just before it was shot down and there are firsthand reports from investigators on the ground that portions of the crashed fuselage showed strong evidence of having been hit the sort of heavy machine-gun fire employed in air combat. I find it extremely suspicious that the American government has repeatedly refused to release the evidence supporting its narrative, while the Russian government has released copious evidence supporting its contrary perspective.

We must bear in mind that the downing of MH17 and the deaths of the hundreds of mostly European passengers came as a fortuitous stroke of fortune for the embattled Kiev government and its neoconservative American backers, given that Germany and most of the other major European governments had just balked at approving the harsh anti-Russian economic sanctions being proposed by the White House. Cui bono ?

Furthermore, this terrible suspicion that 300 innocent lives may have been sacrificed in a ghastly false-flag operation by an American-supported government is somewhat buttressed by earlier events. Consider that the overthrow of the democratically-elected and neutralist Ukrainian government was sparked by the massive bloodshed that erupted between riot police and pro-American demonstrators in the Kievan capital, as many hundreds on both sides were suddenly killed or wounded by an outbreak of heavy gunfire over a couple of nights. I found it very intriguing that soon afterward an intercepted telephone call between the pro-Western foreign minister of Estonia and European High Commissioner Catherine Ashton, later confirmed to be genuine, revealed that the bullets found in the bodies of both government police and anti-government demonstrators had apparently come from the same guns. The most plausible explanation of this strange detail is that the snipers responsible were professionals brought in to cause the massive bloodshed necessary to overthrow the government, which is exactly what soon followed. Again cui bono ?

Am I certain about these facts, let alone the analysis built upon them? Absolutely not! As emphasized, I've been entirely preoccupied with other matters over the last few months. But if such obvious suspicions are apparent to someone who occasionally glances at the news reports out of the corner of his mind's eye, the total silence of the American media and its huge corps of full-time professional journalists constitutes a very telling indictment. Personally, I think there's a high likelihood that forces aligned with current pro-Western regime were responsible for the massacre in Kiev's Maidan Square and a better than fifty-fifty chance they more recently shot down MH17, but I really can't be sure about either of these things. However, I am absolutely 100% certain that the American MSM has been revealed as a totally worthless source of information on these crucial world events, although it can be relied upon to provide every last detail of Robin Williams' troubled life or the endless foibles of the Kardashians.

In the interests of providing our readers at least some access to alternate accounts of why we may now be heading into a new Cold War against Russia -- or even a hot one -- I've recently republished a couple of Mike Whitney's fine Counterpunch columns on the mysteries of Flight MH17 , which cautiously raised questions rather than claimed to answer them, as well as those of the redoubtable Paul Craig Roberts.

Aside from attracting considerable debate from our website's often "excitable" commenters, whose views range from the sensible to the deranged, our Whitney columns regarding MH17 had a far more important consequence. One of our left-liberal readers was shocked to read facts totally absent from the pages of The Nation , the Huffington Post , or any of the other left-liberal sites she visits. Out of curiosity, she contacted a very prominent left-liberal American academic, someone with special expertise in exactly that area of Europe. To her considerable surprise, he largely confirmed the outlandish "conspiracy theory," saying that the evidence increasingly indicated that the American-backed Kiev government had shot down Flight MH17, either accidentally or otherwise.

Based on his remarks, it sounded like he and his friends had devoted 100x the time and effort that I had to investigating the incident, thereby reassuring me that my casual conclusions were at least not wholly ridiculous. Yet it also appeared that neither he or any of the other American experts in his circle who apparently share his views had seen fit to publish their opinions in any of the numerous media outlets to which they have easy access, presumably for fear of being denounced and stigmatized as "conspiracy nuts." They may regard the possibility of an American military confrontation with nuclear-armed Russia as a terrible danger, but it pales compared to the horrifying risk that the 22-year-old bookers at MSNBC chat shows might decide to put a black mark down next to their names.

The following day I lamented this cowardice of our intelligentsia to another prominent liberal academic with whom I'm friendly, and he immediately sent me the draft by a friend of his on that very topic that I am now greatly honored to publish. Most of the dead on MH17 were Dutch citizens and Karel van Wolferen ranks as one of the world's most prominent Dutch journalists, winner of major awards and someone whose numerous books that have sold well over a million copies worldwide. His article describes the evidence regarding MH17, but more importantly focuses on the totally corrupted worlds of journalism and politics that have enabled this dangerous situation to develop.

I urge everyone to read van Wolferen's long and thoughtful piece and ask themselves why such basic facts and simple analysis appear nowhere within the mainstream American media. Given his standing and his credibility, the New York Times should have long since featured his byline on a major opinion piece, and the absence constitutes powerful evidence. During our disastrous Iraq War the American media applied exactly the same boycott to the views of my old friend Bill Odom, the three-star general who had run the NSA for President Ronald Reagan and ranked as one of Washington's leading experts on national security issues. Our totally incompetent ruling elites refuse to let discordant voices puncture their bubble of unreality.

For those readers who refuse to admit the possibility that our vaunted MSM might conceal such vital facts, consider the important point I made at the beginning of my 2013 article . In recent years, leading scholars have conclusively established that for a decade or two during the 1930s and 1940s, a small network of Communist spies quietly gained substantial control of our national government in Washington, DC, successfully diverting the actions of the United States to their own nefarious ends. If our mainstream media had failed to notice or report that situation at the time and then spent the next half century ridiculing anyone who suggested this possibility, why should anyone believe that the media can be trusted on the question of who actually shot down Flight MH17 in Ukraine? Our American Pravda indeed.

The Ukraine, Corrupted Journalism, and the Atlanticist Faith By

UPDATE: Our long, detailed article by distinguished Dutch journalist Karel van Wolferen has had enormous traffic, and is now on the verge of becoming the most heavily read piece in the history of our young webzine, while the nearly 600 Tweets it has so far received indicatie distribution comparable to that of a major New York Times article. All this has happened in just the last couple of days.

Furthermore, just as I had hoped, the very lengthy comment threads of the two articles have provided a wealth of additional information, far beyond anything I had previously encountered, given my slight familiarity with this issue.

First, I learned that a group of highly-experienced former intelligence officers from the CIA, FBI, NSA, and other government agencies has issued a public statement sharply criticizing the lack of evidence substantiating the claims made by American government officials.

http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/77302/77302/#more-77302

Also, the blogsite of Col. Patrick Lang, a very highly regarded former Defense Intelligence official, has published a lengthy and detailed analysis of the MH17 Incident, raising many of the same issues:

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2014/08/on-truth-and-honor-the-mh17-shootdown-and-the-centenary-of-world-war-i-.html#more

Furthermore, one of the commenters on our website, who purportedly has a military intelligence background, pointed us to the very detailed analysis he had published on his own blogsite regarding MH17:

http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2014/07/19/black-boxes-dark-arts-geopolitics/

And I also discovered that a prominent leftist journalist had also published a lengthy reconstruction of the shoot-down:

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/08/systematically-reconstructing-shoot-malaysian-airliner-guilt-clear-damning.html

Although I claim no great expertise in military affairs, these analyses certainly seem to strengthen my suspicions that the Official Story almost universally accepted by the Western MSM is far from solid and may indeed be a ridiculous fabrication. I urge others to follow the links I have provided, and draw their own conclusions, perhaps different from my own. But they should ask themselves why so many highly-regarded former U.S. intelligence professionals would be raising these serious doubts and why our mainstream media has totally failed to report them.

As for me, I've noticed a curious fact. It appears that the people and organizations promoting the current Official Line on Ukraine have a huge overlap with the people and organizations that promoted the disastrous Iraq War, based on the notorious WMD Hoax. Meanwhile, the people providing serious skepticism about government accusations regarding MH17 are exactly the same people who raised doubts and skepticism about Iraq's alleged WMD and the wisdom of attacking Iraq, while being just as totally ignored by the MSM then as now.

Since none of the Iraq War or WMD Hoax culprits ever received proper punishment for their crimes, they've mostly remained alive and free and able to promote equally disastrous foreign policy adventures in the media they continue to control. But that doesn't mean we must be so gullible as to believe what they say.

Going forward, the crucial unknown is whether our timorous media or even its ideological fringes, will begin to seriously report these issues, or whether they'll all get into line just as they did during the WMD Hoax.

UPDATE 2:

Scott Horton has a podcast interview of Karel van Wolferen

http://scotthorton.org/interviews/2014/08/15/081514-karel-van-wolferen/

[Apr 02, 2018] Trump has shown that he'll bend quickly to neocon pressure, with increased interest in foreign war

Notable quotes:
"... North Korea's negotiating position has not really changed with the announcement. They have repeatedly said for years they are willing to agree to denuclearization of the Peninsula in return for security guarantees. I find the media trumpeting this as a new development rather vexing. Anyways, China has been putting the screws on them since about September/October (Apparently, they told Kim Jongun they know they can't overthrow the DPRK government, but they can get rid of him personally), which is also why there have not been any new nuclear tests. ..."
"... I think Yves has got it right: USA threatens PRC with tariffs, so PRC pressures NK to make concessions to the USA. i.e. Two big guys screwing the little guy. ..."
"... In the USA, imperialist machtpolitik is a thoroughly bipartisan affair. It doesn't matter how faithfully NK or PRC might fulfill obligations. Trump's successors, whoever they may be, will simply apply more pressure and demand more concessions. They won't stop until somebody else stops them. ..."
Apr 02, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Larry , March 30, 2018 at 8:04 am

I believe Trump could negotiate a deal. But I also believe he could blow up the whole talk before it even happens. He has shown that he'll bend quickly to neocon pressure, with increased interest in foreign war (Bolton hiring) and the ramping up of hostilities by bouncing Russians from the U.S. over the phony poisoning story in the UK.

a different chris , March 30, 2018 at 8:48 am

I don't disagree with your comment, but not comfortable with the term "bend to". Trump gets enamored with different people at different times, but he always is looking down at them. They may get enough rope to scare the rest of us, but they are still on a rope.

Bolton is horrible, but a lot of other horrible people have come and gone in this really quick year.

cocomaan , March 30, 2018 at 11:15 am

Bolton is horrible but probably won't last long. Nobody at Trump's ear has, including his own children.

Trump just announced that we're withdrawing from Syria. That's more than Obama ever did.

Part of being a nationalist demagogue is that you're not as interested in foreign wars unless they enrich the country. Not a single one of our wars does that. There's nothing interesting in mercantilism, for instance, that we can't do at home (drill baby drill).

I'm not saying I agree with that view, I'm just saying that if he's a nationalist demagogue, it only follows that he's not interested in, uh, "non-for-profit warmaking".

sgt_doom , March 30, 2018 at 2:57 pm

I am NO Trump fan or voter, but it does appear that he's the first one to apply sanctions to those specific Chinese banks handling the trade with North Korea.

Arizona Slim , March 30, 2018 at 6:32 pm

Uh-oh, I find myself agreeing with something that Trump is doing. Does that make me a backward deplorable?

Al Swearengen , March 30, 2018 at 8:45 am

(Somewhat) OT, but it strikes me that the best way to look at Trump is through the lense of what he is – the US version of Sylvio Berlusconi. A sleazy billionaire Oligarch with no core principles and a fondness for Bunga Bunga parties.

Rather than as LITERALLY HITLER as per the verbiage of hashtag the resistance.

Thus, rather than as a crazed madman bent on "evil" at all times one wonders whether Mr. Bunga Bunga would do a deal with Lil' Kim. Sure he would, assuming that the ruling military Junta allows him to. It might be in the interest of the latter to de-escalate this particular hotspot (as NK crisis/hype fatigue may set in) and simply push Iran as the next flashpoint to hype.

sgt_doom , March 30, 2018 at 2:59 pm

Indeed! They even sound quite similar -- I recall in a speech that Berlusconi gave when he was still the Italian president and the Italian left was screaming for his resignation, Sylvio claimed such demands were making him uneasy, since if he was to go home, and he had 20 homes, it would be difficult for him to decide which house or mansion to go to!

Brooklin Bridge , March 30, 2018 at 9:05 am

It seems the bottom line for negotiations with North Korea have little to do with this article which covers Trump's thoughts on nuclear proliferation between major powers that have massive stockpiles.

North Korea is mainly interested in protecting itself from regime change and from becoming a US outpost (as in target) butt up against China. It is hard to believe that Kim Jong-Un would get any advantage whatsoever out of dismantling his nuclear arsenal, however small. One assumes he is aware of Gaddafi in particular and US's track record on keeping it's promises – particularly over the span of different administrations – in general.

Brooklin Bridge , March 30, 2018 at 9:13 am

The above comment assumes full disarmament as the minimum condition of any "negotiation" since Trump has gone so far out of his way to make that clear.

Yves Smith Post author , March 30, 2018 at 12:06 pm

Oh, and now see the lead story at the Financial Times, China uses economic muscle to bring N Korea to negotiating table:

China virtually halted exports of petroleum products, coal and other key materials to North Korea in the months leading to this week's unprecedented summit between Kim Jong Un, the North Korean leader, and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping.

The export freeze -- revealed in official Chinese data and going much further than the limits stipulated under UN sanctions -- shows the extent of Chinese pressure following the ramping up of Pyongyang's nuclear testing programme. It also suggests that behind Mr Xi's talk this week of a "profound revolutionary friendship" between the two nations, his government has been playing hard ball with its neighbour.

https://www.ft.com/content/8a2b2696-33f7-11e8-ae84-494103e73f7f

Yves Smith Post author , March 30, 2018 at 11:24 am

I would normally agree but Kim Jong-Un was just summoned to China. Not even given a state visit. The Chinese announced North Korea would denuclearlize:

North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un pledged his commitment to denuclearization and to meet U.S. officials, China said on Wednesday after his meeting with President Xi Jinping, who promised China would uphold friendship with its isolated neighbour.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-missiles-china/china-says-north-koreas-kim-pledged-commitment-to-denuclearization-idUSKBN1H305W

China has heretofore pretended that it couldn't do anything about North Korea. It looks like Trump's tariff threat extracted China jerking Kim Jong-Un's chain as a concession. I don't see how Kim Jong-Un can defy China if China is serious about wanting North Korea to denuclearlize. Maybe it will merely reduce its arsenal and stop threatening Hawaii (even though its ability to deliver rockets that far is in doubt) and just stick to being able to light up Seoul instead.

Brooklin Bridge , March 30, 2018 at 2:25 pm

Agree. I wasn't aware of the details you mention above regarding the export freeze. (I won't use Google and my normal 'trick' doesn't work to get around FT's paywall – and I won't use the trial membership either). I'm hopeless.

Anyway, you make a very convincing case. I can only imagine that Kim Jong Un is one miserable scared rat. My point about a "silk noose" below was perhaps on the mark.

neo-realist , March 31, 2018 at 12:47 am

Kim might agree on paper or through an insincere promise to denuclearize, but I don't see a closed authoritarian regime like the North agreeing to an inspection regime that would insure that such a pledge would be lived up to. Reduction, but build-up on the sly w/o inspections.

China may be interested in a deal to the extent that it prevents a bloody war breaking out that they'll probably expend manpower to help clean up and it insures the security of a North Korean buffer that keeps American troops off their border; After all, they've got to keep the powder dry for "reunification" with Taiwan.

I also don't believe that the US would agree to concessions, such as removing American troops from the peninsula. the pentagon wouldn't like it, the hawks around Trumps wouldn't like it, and I believe the SK leadership would not be too crazy about the potential ramifications for their security with such an agreement.

Travis Bickle , March 30, 2018 at 9:19 am

But, can Trump (by extension, the US), make an agreement that can be relied on over its term?

For any hope of NK trusting any deal with the US he would have to stand by the Iranian deal. Then there's Bolton and the Neocon Will To War, for deeply pathological reasons which by nature cannot be debated.

In this case, the mere possibility of a "deal" is possible, but only if there is a third party to hold both of them to it.

Hello China?

ambrit , March 30, 2018 at 10:02 am

Did the Chinese call Kim to Beijing to reassure him? Carrot AND stick.

Brooklin Bridge , March 30, 2018 at 10:43 am

Presentation of a silk noose perhaps?

Brooklin Bridge , March 30, 2018 at 11:05 am

That's the crazy thing about this. What possible inducement could Kim Jong-Un have gotten to attend his own funeral? Why would anyone trust the US an inch?

I suppose if he can keep his own people in a suspended state of extreme propaganda, then he might be vulnerable to his own medicine, but that seems at odds with his behavior so far (such as the assassination of his uncle). If anything, he would be especially leery of anything coming out of the US.

And then can he really be that psyched out by Bolton, Pompeo and Torture Lady so that good cop Trump can hand him is own death certificate with a space for his signature?

Travis Bickle , March 31, 2018 at 2:15 pm

Whatever happened during this China trip, the overarching theme must have been how to manage the US. Here's one rough scenario:

NK 'disarms' to some definition, under the auspices of China, acquiring in return an explicit Chinese security umbrella for the buffer it presents between them and SK. Nobody really wants a unified Korea in any case. In return, the US vacates SK militarily, ever so discretely and over time.

Done correctly, and with the finesse necessary for Trump, China is in a position to extract all sorts of concessions from the US on other fronts as well. Nothing positive is going to happen here without China, and they hold most of the cards. If nothing positive happens, we have to consider the pressure that'd build on Trump to do something, anything, and that probably being something rash. (Better a big disaster over there than a mammoth one over here thinking).

gearandgrit , March 30, 2018 at 9:46 am

"he can't go willy nilly and set nukes a-flying just because it struck him as a good idea that day."

I mean sure. His "button" isn't literally connected to a missile somewhere, but he sure as hell can ask that nukes be fired whenever and wherever he wants. You could argue that someone in the chain of command would prevent that from happening, but that's more of a hope than a guarantee. For a really good read on how this all works and the history of the nuclear program I highly recommend https://www.amazon.com/Command-Control-Damascus-Accident-Illusion/dp/0143125788

With Bolton on board and seemingly everyone with half a brain, a little logic and the ability to hold their tongue for more than about 5 seconds out, I highly doubt anything will come of these negotiations. In fact, I'm more worried that the US will get steamrolled by China and NK.

Yves Smith Post author , March 30, 2018 at 11:13 am

That isn't true. See the link I provided, which you clearly did not bother to read. Various people can refuse his order as illegal. Former Secretary of State Jim Baker, in a Financial Times, before Trump was elected, said the same thing. Bolton is the National Security Adviser. He may have a lot of informal power by having direct access to the President, but he does not tie in to the formal chain of command, either at the DoD or State.

gearandgrit , March 30, 2018 at 12:09 pm

Oh I read it and I've read many other articles and a lot of non-fiction on the issue. Again, I would call your position and the position of this article hopeful at best. Trump has the football, he has the codes in his jacket pocket and everyone responsible for carrying out the order to launch has been raised up through a military system that ensures no one questions an order from their superior. Relying on various people to refuse his order as illegal in this system is not a fail-safe I feel comfortable with. I do find it interesting that you just assume I didn't read the article as if this one article is the end all be all on the subject.

David , March 30, 2018 at 12:31 pm

The article seems a bit confused about what it's trying to say. Stopping nuclear proliferation has been a major policy priority of the US and other western governments since the 1960s, and if I recall correctly it was one of Bolton's priorities when he was in Bush the Lesser's administration. It's something in which all of the declared nuclear powers have an interest, because the smaller the number of nuclear powers in the world, the greater the difference between them and the rest. This is much more important than wild fantasies about rogue attacks: if N Korea becomes a de facto nuclear power like India, Israel and Pakistan, then all sorts of other countries might be tempted to have a go, starting with S Korea (which has the capacity and has been caught cheating before). Whilst this risk is objectively small, an end to the NK programme would make it even smaller. I suspect the deal will be that NK denuclearizes and China guarantees its security: a non-nuclear NK will be even more of a client state than it is now.
Nuclear competition among the superpowers is quite different and involves a whole set of different issues.

Synoia , March 30, 2018 at 1:18 pm

since one of Trump's salient characteristics is to have no enduring principles

I beg to differ. He most certainly has enduring principles:

1. My Children
2. Me
3. My current wife.
4. My money

The exact order is debatable, situational, and probably not provable.

Edward E , March 31, 2018 at 3:20 pm

5. My Wall

Less warfare = more wall
But remember the last time Trump said something in Syria's favor? A chemical attack happened in small village for no logical reason and the hawks immediately took to framing Assad. Trump then backed off and took harder line on Assad, launching missiles into Syria.

So I'm inclined to think he wants a deal. But look out for screaming hawks immediately trying to scuttle anything.

Tomonthebeach , March 30, 2018 at 2:15 pm

Perhaps 30 years ago, Trump was an international defense luminary, but I see little evidence of the boasted emotional control and cool Trump claimed. He is unarguably a successful grifter. Is that what it takes to make peace? What happens when the other guy realizes he has been lied to by a congenital liar? Back to square 1.

In my take, the recent meeting between the heads of China and N Korea just Trumped any leverage the US might have had in peace talks. Trump will be there only if a scapegoat is needed. Both S. Korea and Japan have expressed doubts about our reliability as a defense shield against powerful China – Japan and the Koreans' neighbor. What Little Rocketman has likely achieved is diplomatically checkmating the US. Now Trump's tariff threats serve only to push US allies in the region closer to China. Should that turn out to be the case, the economic repercussions are as dangerous and unpredictable as nukes in the air or as Trump himself. I sure hope I got this all wrong.

RBHoughton , March 30, 2018 at 7:51 pm

"no enduring principles" is a feature of politicians everywhere today. Their concern is to represent the rich and their qualification is to present those biased arguments in a way that beguiles the electorate into supposing its a good idea for them as well. Step Two is the "who would have thought it?" response after the country catches on.

In former times the candidate for public office would assert his principles on the hustings and the voters would remember what they knew of him before voting. Sure, there were ambitious unreliable people who were willing to exchange their reputations for office but they were few. We should get back to those days.

We allowed our merchants and spooks to drive USSR to the precipice without any thoughts about the nukes they had. It appeared then that warheads supposedly in Ukraine were missing. We will likely discover what happened to them in due course. It is possible that surveillance of communications is the main reason they are not a thread for the time being but that does not mean they have dropped out of existence.

Thank you NC for introducing an issue that should concern economists as much as everyone else.

Coldhearted Liberal , March 30, 2018 at 8:57 pm

North Korea's negotiating position has not really changed with the announcement. They have repeatedly said for years they are willing to agree to denuclearization of the Peninsula in return for security guarantees. I find the media trumpeting this as a new development rather vexing. Anyways, China has been putting the screws on them since about September/October (Apparently, they told Kim Jongun they know they can't overthrow the DPRK government, but they can get rid of him personally), which is also why there have not been any new nuclear tests.

Don't forget the United States has itself promised to denuclearize, under the NPT.

Plenue , March 31, 2018 at 2:08 am

It would certainly bring me great pleasure if Trump of all people were to bring about some great positive change in regards to the Forever War with North Korea. Imagine all the whining liberals if Trump, unlike Obama, actually did something worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize.

Roland , March 31, 2018 at 3:42 pm

I think Yves has got it right: USA threatens PRC with tariffs, so PRC pressures NK to make concessions to the USA. i.e. Two big guys screwing the little guy.

PRC and NK leaders might think that all they have to do is get through a short patch of bad weather until 2020. If so, they are badly kidding themselves.

In the USA, imperialist machtpolitik is a thoroughly bipartisan affair. It doesn't matter how faithfully NK or PRC might fulfill obligations. Trump's successors, whoever they may be, will simply apply more pressure and demand more concessions. They won't stop until somebody else stops them.

[Apr 01, 2018] Solidarity among War Criminals by Stephen J. Gray

Notable quotes:
"... In summing up, we are expected to believe that Russia is responsible for an attack in Salisbury, England. Meanwhile, the war criminals in our midst are responsible for attacks and heinous crimes against humanity, and the evidence [6] is available for all to see. In fact, I believe we need to put our present day war criminals on trial. Therefore, I ask, 'Do We Need Present Day Nuremberg Trials"? [7] ..."
Mar 30, 2018 | graysinfo.blogspot.ca

"Because of the nerve poison attack, NATO also imposed punitive measures against Russia. Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg announced that seven employees of the Russian NATO representation would be deprived of accreditation. In addition, the Russian delegation will be limited to 20 of the current 30 employees. The NATO countries had already condemned the attack on Skripal earlier this month and expressed their solidarity with Great Britain...." 29.03.2018 http://www.dw.com/de/russland-schlie%C3%9Ft-us-konsulat-in-st-petersburg/a-43190085

It must have been very heartening for the war gangs and war criminals of NATO [1] to see the solidarity of their members all voicing their criticism of Russia despite there being no proof that Russia was behind this attack in Salisbury, England. Oh well, to paraphrase an old saying, "war criminal birds of a feather always stick or fly, bomb, and kill together."

Their frenzy of solidarity was a sight to see, war criminals, torturers, child killers, trainers and supporters of terrorists, murderers, killers of civilians, assassins, killers of children with drones, suppliers of arms to head chopping dictators, and on and on goes the list that these heinous hypocrites with fancy titles [2] are culpable of. They also could be called: "The Self Righteous War Criminals That Murdered Millions" [3]

"The U.S. government leads the world in assassinations. No other regime can come close in this remarkable achievement. Every month, there are new assassinations. The process never stops. People are being assassinated on a regular basis by national-security state officials. The assassinations include American citizens. State-sponsored assassinations have become an ordinary part of American governmental life. The U.S. government also leads the world in bombings. Every day, new bombs are dropped on people. We don't even know how many people are being killed by the bombs. We don't know who the victims are. It doesn't really matter...." Jacob G. Hornberger, September 23, 2014 http://fff.org/2014/09/23/national-security-patriotism-and-treason/

The powerful are not being held to account for the massive destruction, killings, bombings' and invasions they perpetrated. The homeless and stateless are now wandering the earth as a result of devious conspiracies by those in power. These dishonourable "leaders" bask in the limelight of the world stage. Real life abominable actors in this real production of evil personified. Some of them even offer to "help" in this hellish tragedy of refugees that they diabolically created. Hypocrites, dressed in expensive suits, with fancy titles to their names, pretending to be "humanitarians." Therefore, one has to ask: "Are We Seeing Government By Gangsters"? [4]

There is overwhelming evidence that our tax dollars are paying for treasonous acts by our so-called leaders. These "leaders" are reportedly arming and training terrorists. Unfortunately the corporate media are covering up the crimes of those in power. Meanwhile the people are too busy watching basketball games, hockey games, Olympic games, football games, baseball games, political games, and numerous other games provided to distract their attention to what is really happening in this war criminal controlled world. See links below for evidence of the treason and treachery of "leaders" past, and presently in positions of power that are responsible for the plotting and planning of illegal wars and the deaths of millions. See Article: "The Treason and Treachery Paid for By Our Tax Dollars." [5]

"They parade, posture, and preen on the world stage War criminals and their "allies" that should be caged Total evil rules a system that is depraved and rotten Ethics and morals have long since been forgotten"... http://graysinfo.blogspot.ca/2018/03/are-they-training-terrorists-in-secret.html

In summing up, we are expected to believe that Russia is responsible for an attack in Salisbury, England. Meanwhile, the war criminals in our midst are responsible for attacks and heinous crimes against humanity, and the evidence [6] is available for all to see. In fact, I believe we need to put our present day war criminals on trial. Therefore, I ask, 'Do We Need Present Day Nuremberg Trials"? [7]

Because based on the evidence, never have so many war criminals and villains been elected to public office and given the title, "honourable."

Stephen J. Gray March 30, 2018.

Endnotes:

Links of interest below:

[Apr 01, 2018] The New Cold War and the Endless Criminalization of Russia

Notable quotes:
"... The mass expulsion this week of some 130 Russian diplomats by Britain, the United States and other NATO allies is but the latest step in a long campaign to criminalize Russia. Like past ruses to demonize Russia, this latest effort will also fail. Because they are based on lies and deception. ..."
"... This week, the British government published a six-page briefing on the March 4 incident in Salisbury, where Sergei Skripal (66) and his 33-year-old daughter Yulia were apparently exposed to a nerve poison. The briefing issued by London was the basis for some 25 other states joining in the campaign to expel Russian diplomats from their territories, and to echo British accusations that Moscow is guilty of an assassination attempt. ..."
"... One assertion in the briefing is that British scientists at top-secret chemical warfare laboratories at Porton Down – eight miles from Salisbury – "positively identified military-grade Novichok". The latter chemical is reputedly a potent nerve toxin. Another British government assertion is that "Novichok is a group of nerve agents developed only [sic] by Russia". That last assertion is patently false. Any number of states could synthesize the organophosphate compound whose chemical formula has been publicly known for years. ..."
"... The campaign to convict Russia over an alleged assassination plot relies entirely on the say-so of British authorities who neither present evidence nor permit independent verification of their claims. That is an outrageous arrogance and abuse of legal norms by the British state. ..."
"... Compounding the mockery of due process, the British government's briefing this week launched into a tangential litany of other alleged "Russian malign activity". Russia was accused of "assassinating Alexander Litvinenko in 2006" – another former spy apparently poisoned on British territory. That case is far from proven, relying again solely on official British claims. ..."
"... The British authorities claim that one of their "measured and proportionate responses" to their insane accusations against Russia is the "dismantling of the network of Russian intelligence operatives in the UK". That is tantamount to a self-license for more British transgressions. ..."
Apr 01, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

The mass expulsion this week of some 130 Russian diplomats by Britain, the United States and other NATO allies is but the latest step in a long campaign to criminalize Russia. Like past ruses to demonize Russia, this latest effort will also fail. Because they are based on lies and deception.

However, it is absolutely reprehensible that these anti-Russian states are ramping up international tensions by trampling all over legal and diplomatic norms with wild, unsubstantiated accusations against Moscow.

On the back of British claims that Russia was somehow involved in a murder plot against a former Russian spy living in England, and his daughter, a whole host of NATO and European Union member states have compounded diplomatic sanctions against Moscow.

This is way more dangerous than the old Cold War. Because the erosion of legal and diplomatic norms by the US-led NATO powers are making repercussions unpredictable and unrestrained.

The whole affair is bizarre beyond words; yet, largely at the behest of the British government, international relations with Russia have been plunged into dire condition. Russia is being condemned without any evidence or due process. This is a dangerous anti-Russia witch-hunt conducted on a global scale.

This week, the British government published a six-page briefing on the March 4 incident in Salisbury, where Sergei Skripal (66) and his 33-year-old daughter Yulia were apparently exposed to a nerve poison. The briefing issued by London was the basis for some 25 other states joining in the campaign to expel Russian diplomats from their territories, and to echo British accusations that Moscow is guilty of an assassination attempt.

Any objective reading of Britain's so-called "intelligence briefing" could only elicit a response of contempt and derision. It is but a superficial sketch, containing errors and based on the usual tenuous innuendo and assertion that the British government has been proffering since the March 4 incident. There is no verifiable proof to support the very grave allegations Britain is making against Russia. Yet this risible "briefing" is the supposed basis for an international campaign to criminalize Russia.

One assertion in the briefing is that British scientists at top-secret chemical warfare laboratories at Porton Down – eight miles from Salisbury – "positively identified military-grade Novichok". The latter chemical is reputedly a potent nerve toxin. Another British government assertion is that "Novichok is a group of nerve agents developed only [sic] by Russia". That last assertion is patently false. Any number of states could synthesize the organophosphate compound whose chemical formula has been publicly known for years.

If the British scientists positively identified Novichok, as is claimed, then they must have had a standard sample of the chemical in their possession in order to conduct an analysis. If so, that then contradicts the assertion that Russia is the only source of such a chemical – a claim which Moscow, in any case, categorically denies.

There are many other flaws in the British briefing which render the document a joke on legal standards.

Preposterously, this travesty is being used to mount an international campaign to condemn Russia with far-reaching repercussions for global peace.

Let's deal with some facts, instead of being railroaded by official British assertions and claims for which they do not permit independent verification.

The fact is that a Russian citizen, Yulia Skripal, is detained in England, supposedly in a hospital, along with her British naturalized father. The Skripal family relatives in Russia have reportedly not been given any information by the British authorities on Yulia's exact condition.

Nearly four weeks after the alleged incident on March 4, the Russian authorities have still not been given consular access to one of its citizens who is being de facto detained on British soil. That is a gross violation of the Vienna Convention governing consular rights.

More sinisterly, it is the British authorities who should be held responsible for any ill-fate of Yulia and her father.

The campaign to convict Russia over an alleged assassination plot relies entirely on the say-so of British authorities who neither present evidence nor permit independent verification of their claims. That is an outrageous arrogance and abuse of legal norms by the British state.

Compounding the mockery of due process, the British government's briefing this week launched into a tangential litany of other alleged "Russian malign activity". Russia was accused of "assassinating Alexander Litvinenko in 2006" – another former spy apparently poisoned on British territory. That case is far from proven, relying again solely on official British claims.

Other outlandish, indeed slanderous, British accusations included Russia "shooting down" a Malaysian airliner over Ukraine in 2014; interfering in the US elections; cyberattacks on Germany, Denmark, Estonia and Britain; "occupation of Crimea in February [sic] 2014"; and "invasion of Georgia in 2008".

All these claims have been rigorously denied or disproven by Russia. It is staggering that the British government in a supposed "intelligence briefing" could cite these hackneyed claims as somehow lending substantiation to the bizarre poisoning incident related to the Skripals.

It is truly astounding, not to say perplexing, that international law and diplomatic norms are being so brutalized on the basis of brazen lies and incompetence.

The British authorities claim that one of their "measured and proportionate responses" to their insane accusations against Russia is the "dismantling of the network of Russian intelligence operatives in the UK". That is tantamount to a self-license for more British transgressions.

British Prime Minister Theresa May also this week in a phone call with US President Donald Trump reportedly discussed drawing up more sanctions on Russia to eject "spy networks" from their respective countries.

So, Russian diplomats are being re-defined as "spies". Again, this is self-license for more provocations, and, worse, the erosion of diplomatic channels for possible correction.

What this amounts to is a new, unfettered phase in American, British and NATO efforts to criminalize Russia. Criminalization run amok. Is there any limit to the insanity? No, disturbingly, this is a subjective tailspin with no limit – until a head-on crash.

The list of "malign activity" cited above in the British briefing are all past examples of NATO information warfare – or more bluntly, propaganda lies and falsehoods.

Those efforts have failed in their objective to subjugate and cow Russia into submission towards US and NATO dominance. Russia's military intervention in Syria to nullify NATO's dirty covert war for regime change against the Assad government is perhaps the clearest demonstration of Russia's effective defiance.

Out of frustrated failure to defeat Russia through demonization, the information warfare has been wantonly stepped up in attempts to criminalize Moscow and President Vladimir Putin.

Britain and its allies assert "there can be no other plausible explanation" for the poisoning of the Skripals other than Russian culpability. Wrong. A far more plausible explanation is that Britain and its allies are engaged in a scurrilous, illegal campaign to criminalize Russia.

Britain likes to claim a noble heritage of democratic politics, philosophy and law. Arguably, the British are entitled to that claim.

There again, the British also have a more dubious heritage of piracy and state-sponsored skulduggery. This latter tradition seems more on display in the new and much more dangerous Cold War against Russia.

[Apr 01, 2018] Expulsion of Russian diplomats portends troubled times by M K Bhadrakumar

Notable quotes:
"... Nonetheless, curiously, the EU countries by and large made only 'token' expulsions. As many as 7 EU countries simply moved on by expelling one Russian diplomat each. Having said that, the pressure campaign is continuing and the likelihood of more EU countries joining the expulsion cannot be ruled out. ..."
"... By the way, even PM May claims only that it is "highly likely" that there was Russian involvement (not excluding rogue elements.) Yet, a cardinal principle in Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence is that no one is deemed guilty unless proven guilty. ..."
"... THE SKRIPAL AFFAIR ..."
"... 30 Questions That Journalists Should Be Asking About the Skripal Case .) ..."
"... To my mind, this entire controversy snowballed into a litmus test of the Euro-Atlantic partnership – in particular, the US' trans-Atlantic leadership – at a defining moment when Britain is giving up EU membership ..."
Mar 27, 2018 | blogs.rediff.com

The mass expulsion of Russian diplomats by some countries of the European Union and North America on Monday is an unprecedented and intriguing development.

First, the US alone accounts for some two-thirds of the expulsion – 60 diplomats. Curiously, even Britain, which is apparently the aggrieved party in the Skripal affair, expelled less than half that number – 23. Broadly, however, this is an Anglo-American move with which a number of EU countries and Canada display solidarity.

Second, President Trump is apparently more loyal to Her Majesty in the Buckingham Palace than Prime Minister Theresa May. This gives an intriguing twist to the tale. Why is there such an excessive interest on the part of Washington, especially at a time when the fervor of the Anglo-American kinship has significantly dampened during the Trump era? (President Trump is yet to visit the UK.) Is it a massive diversionary tactic by the White House the day after porn star Stormy Daniels took Trump's pants off in her TV interview on '60 Minutes' ? Or, is this yet another attempt by Trump to flaunt that he isn't 'soft' on Russia? Or, is it the Deep State in action – as the closure of the Russian consulate in Seattle might well suggest? There are no easy answers.

Third, only less than half the 28 member countries of the EU have signaled support for the Anglo-American campaign over the spy incident. There is much reluctance or skepticism within the EU about what is going on. Surprisingly, though, Germany, which had voiced skepticism at an early stage, has now joined the pack. Which probably shows that there has been immense pressure from Washington and London.

Nonetheless, curiously, the EU countries by and large made only 'token' expulsions. As many as 7 EU countries simply moved on by expelling one Russian diplomat each. Having said that, the pressure campaign is continuing and the likelihood of more EU countries joining the expulsion cannot be ruled out.

Austria has point-blank refused to join. (So has Turkey, which virtually rules out a NATO stance, which requires unanimous support from all member countries.) What is truly extraordinary is that the circumstances surrounding the alleged poisoning an MI6 double agent of Russian extraction are still shrouded in mystery.

The British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn openly cautioned against rushed judgment in a piece in the Guardian newspaper, here .

By the way, even PM May claims only that it is "highly likely" that there was Russian involvement (not excluding rogue elements.) Yet, a cardinal principle in Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence is that no one is deemed guilty unless proven guilty.

Indeed, a range of explanations is possible as to what really might have happened in Salisbury. Read an excellent analysis by the respected British scholar on Russia Richard Sakwa, Professor of Russian and European Politics at the University of Kent and Associate Fellow of Chatham House, titled THE SKRIPAL AFFAIR , here .

Even in America, there are voices of scepticism. An enterprising columnist drew up 30 questions that beg an answer. (See the column by Bob Slane featured on the website of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, titled 30 Questions That Journalists Should Be Asking About the Skripal Case .) To my mind, this entire controversy snowballed into a litmus test of the Euro-Atlantic partnership – in particular, the US' trans-Atlantic leadership – at a defining moment when Britain is giving up EU membership. This is one thing.

But, more importantly, does the build-up portend something far more sinister than one would anticipate? One particular passage from Prof. Sakwa's essay becomes a chilling reminder about what may be lying in the womb of time:

"The only question is whether the confrontation will dissipate, as it did over Agadir in 1911, or whether this is the Sarajevo slow-burning crisis that could explode into flame at some later point Will it be another case of the sinking of the Maine in 1898, where the subsequent public hysteria provoked war against Spain only to be discovered later that the ship's ammunition stores had accidentally exploded; or a Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964, which was also a false flag operation but provoked the escalation of the Vietnam War.

The West may be 'uniting' against Russia, as The Times put it on 16 March, but to what purpose."

Posted in Diplomacy , Politics .

Tagged with Brexit , New Cold War , Skripal incident .

No comments "

By M K Bhadrakumar – March 27, 2018

[Apr 01, 2018] Russia reads the riot act to US

Notable quotes:
"... Therefore, Moscow's decision to give back to the Americans fully in their own coin marks a new stage. First, Russians have assessed that the controversy over the Skripal spy case is in reality an Anglo-American joint venture – and not a solo act by London. Evidently, the feedback from various European capitals would be that they came under immense American pressure to follow the US-UK lead and expel Russian diplomats. Which means there is a deliberate American strategy to degrade Russia's relations with the West. There is really no sense in Moscow trying to salvage the situation by making conciliatory moves. ..."
"... Second, Russians are no longer making a distinction between President Trump and the so-called Deep State in America. They will henceforth attack Trump's policies on merit. Put differently, Trump cannot have it both ways – being pally with Vladimir Putin on the phone while also acting bloody-mindedly toward Russia on the policy front. The Russians couldn't care a damn anymore as to who is the "real Trump" or whether he is only trying to placate the "swamp" in the Beltway. ..."
"... Third, most important, Russia is assessing that the only language Washington understands is the language of strength. This of course has profound consequences for regional and international security. Indeed, there are serious limitations today to the US' capacity to browbeat Russia. The US policies are inconsistent and fickle whereas Russian foreign policy is rational, coherent and stable. The American society is hopelessly split and polarized whereas Russian society is consolidated and stands united. Trump can never match anywhere near the groundswell of support Putin enjoys from the Russian nation. ..."
"... On the other hand, China has signaled its interest to further strengthen the quasi-alliance with Russia. The Chinese Ministry of Defence said on Thursday that Beijing and Moscow will "jointly defend the interests of the two states and also maintain regional and global peace and stability." No doubt, it is a hugely resonant statement in the prevailing backdrop. The Chinese Defence Minister Wei Fenghe is visiting Moscow next week. ..."
"... Significantly, the Russian note verbale on Thursday declaring the expulsion of 60 American diplomats gives a pointed warning to the Trump administration that any seizure of Russian assets in the US "will lead to a serious deterioration in bilateral relations, which will result in dire consequences for global stability." ..."
Apr 01, 2018 | blogs.rediff.com

The video of Pakistan Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi nonchalantly zipping up his trousers at the JFK airport in New York after the frisking when he landed on American soil recently, gives a dismal feeling. But one would say, 'No surprises here!' No, I'm not making a 'anti-Pakistan' statement. Frankly, 90 percent of the Indian elite would also any day be only too eager to unzip their trousers if that was what was needed to be permitted to enter the US. Remember the famous incident of the stripping of an Indian Defence Minister right down to his underwear at the JFK airport?

It is in their DNA – be it Abbasis or Bhatias and Suris. Pathetic. Their argument is a familiar one – only the West can provide us investments and new technology, management practices and facilitate integration into global technological chains. Of course, Indian pundits went overboard by expounding that the George W Bush administration was determined to make their country a 'great power' and a 'counterweight' to China, and make it America's 'natural ally' and so on.

That is why this morning's news of the expulsion of 60 American diplomats posted in Russia brings cheer. To be frank, I was skeptical whether Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov would be able to keep his word when he said earlier this week that Russia would retaliate. The point is, Russia also has its fair share of the 'westernists' among its elite. Even after all that has happened in Russia's relations with the US in the recent years and notwithstanding the foul air that envelops them, there are Russian strategists who still argue that America is an indispensable partner for Russia.

Therefore, Moscow's decision to give back to the Americans fully in their own coin marks a new stage. First, Russians have assessed that the controversy over the Skripal spy case is in reality an Anglo-American joint venture – and not a solo act by London. Evidently, the feedback from various European capitals would be that they came under immense American pressure to follow the US-UK lead and expel Russian diplomats. Which means there is a deliberate American strategy to degrade Russia's relations with the West. There is really no sense in Moscow trying to salvage the situation by making conciliatory moves.

Second, Russians are no longer making a distinction between President Trump and the so-called Deep State in America. They will henceforth attack Trump's policies on merit. Put differently, Trump cannot have it both ways – being pally with Vladimir Putin on the phone while also acting bloody-mindedly toward Russia on the policy front. The Russians couldn't care a damn anymore as to who is the "real Trump" or whether he is only trying to placate the "swamp" in the Beltway.

Third, most important, Russia is assessing that the only language Washington understands is the language of strength. This of course has profound consequences for regional and international security. Indeed, there are serious limitations today to the US' capacity to browbeat Russia. The US policies are inconsistent and fickle whereas Russian foreign policy is rational, coherent and stable. The American society is hopelessly split and polarized whereas Russian society is consolidated and stands united. Trump can never match anywhere near the groundswell of support Putin enjoys from the Russian nation.

In geopolitical terms, the US' transatlantic leadership role is shaky. Interestingly, while making token expulsion of Russian diplomats on Monday, Germany also simultaneously gave the final clearance for the construction of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project from Russia, defying the US opposition. French President Emmanuel Macron just signaled his plan to visit Russia in May. Austria point blank turned down the US-UK demarche seeking expulsion of Russian diplomats. May 12 becomes a crucial dateline: if Trump tears up the Iran nuclear deal, there may be mutiny by the US' European allies.

On the other hand, China has signaled its interest to further strengthen the quasi-alliance with Russia. The Chinese Ministry of Defence said on Thursday that Beijing and Moscow will "jointly defend the interests of the two states and also maintain regional and global peace and stability." No doubt, it is a hugely resonant statement in the prevailing backdrop. The Chinese Defence Minister Wei Fenghe is visiting Moscow next week.

In strategic terms, too, the new weapon systems developed by Russia (announced by Putin on March 1) reinforce the country's capacity to maintain global strategic balance for the foreseeable future. The hypersonic missiles, in particular, are unique and can be decisively lethal in a Russia-US confrontation.

Significantly, the Russian note verbale on Thursday declaring the expulsion of 60 American diplomats gives a pointed warning to the Trump administration that any seizure of Russian assets in the US "will lead to a serious deterioration in bilateral relations, which will result in dire consequences for global stability."

Read the defiant remarks by Lavrov regarding the expulsion of American diplomats.

[Apr 01, 2018] Trouble for big tech as consumers sour on Amazon, Facebook and co

Those companies are way too connected with intelligence agencies (some of then are essentially an extension of intelligence agencies) and as such they will be saved in any case. That means that chances that it will be dot com bubble burst No.2 exist. but how high they are is unclear.
Apr 01, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Trump is after Amazon, Congress is after Facebook, and Apple and Google have their problems too. Should the world's top tech firms be worried?

rump is going after Amazon; Congress is after Facebook; Google is too big, and Apple is short of new products. Is it any surprise that sentiment toward the tech industry giants is turning sour? The consequences of such a readjustment, however, may be dire.

Trump lashes out at Amazon and sends stocks tumbling

Read more

The past two weeks have been difficult for the tech sector by every measure. Tech stocks have largely driven the year's stock market decline, the largest quarterly drop since 2015.

Facebook saw more than $50bn shaved off its value after the Observer revealed that Cambridge Analytica had harvested millions of people's user data for political profiling. Now users are deleting accounts, and regulators may seek to limit how the company monetizes data, threatening Facebook's business model.

On Monday, the Federal Trade Commission confirmed it was investigating the company's data practices. Additionally, Facebook said it would send a top executive to London to appear in front of UK lawmakers, but it would not send the chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, who is increasingly seen as isolated and aloof.

Shares of Facebook have declined more than 17% from the close on Friday 16 March to the close on Thursday before the Easter break.

Amazon, meanwhile, long the target of President Trump's ire, saw more than $30bn, or 5%, shaved off its $693bn market capitalization after it was reported that the president was "obsessed" with the company and that he "wondered aloud if there may be any way to go after Amazon with antitrust or competition law".

Shares of Apple, and Google's parent company Alphabet, are also down, dropping on concerns that tech firms now face tighter regulation across the board.

For Apple, there's an additional concern that following poor sales of its $1,000 iPhone X. For Google, there's the prospect not only of tighter regulation on how it sells user date to advertisers, but also the fear of losing an important Android software patent case with the Oracle.

Big tech's critics may be forgiven a moment of schadenfreude. But for shareholders and pension plans, the tarnishing of tech could have serious consequences.

Apple, Amazon and Alphabet make up 10% of the S&P 500 with a combined market capitalization market cap of $2.3tn. Add Microsoft and Facebook, with a combined market value of $1.1tn, and the big five make up 15% of the index.

Overall, technology makes up 25% of the S&P. If tech pops, the thinking goes, so pops the market.

"We're one week into a sell-off after a multi-year run-up," says Eric Kuby of North Star Investment Management. "The big picture is that over the past five years a group of mega cap tech stocks like Nvidia, Netflix, Facebook have gone up anywhere from 260% to 1,800%."

Confess -> Nedward Marbletoe , 1 Apr 2018 16:12

The post office is a service for citizens. It operates at a loss. Being able to send a letter across the country in two days for fifty cents is a service our government provides. Amazon is abusing that service. It's whole business model requires government support.
Byron Delaney , 1 Apr 2018 15:59
Amazon's spending power is garnered simply from its massively overalued stock price. If that falls, down goes Amazon. Facebook is entirely dependent on the postive opinion of active users. If users stop using, down goes Facebook's stock price, and so goes the company. It's extremely fragile. Apple has a short product cycle. If people lose interest in its newest versions, its stock price can tank in one year or so. Google and Microsoft seem quite solid, but are likely overvalued. (Tesla will most likwly go bankrupt, along with many others.) If these stocks continue to lose value, rwtirement funds will get scary, and we could enter recession again almost immediately. Since companies such as Amazon have already degraded the eatablished infrastructure of the economy, there may be no actual recovery. We will need to change drastically in some way. It seems that thw wheels are already turning, and this is where we are going now - with Trump as our leader.
lennbob , 1 Apr 2018 15:58
'Deutsche Bank analyst Lloyd Walmsley said: "We do not think attacking Amazon will be popular."'

Lloyd Walmsley hasn't spent much time in Seattle, apparently. The activities of Amazon and Google (but especially Amazon) have all contributed to traffic problems, rising rents and property prices, and gentrification (among other things) that are all making Seattle a less affordable, less attractive place to live. That's why Amazon is looking to establish a 'second headquarters' in another city: they've upset too many people here to be able to expand further in this area without at least encountering significant resistance. People here used to refer to Microsoft as 'the evil empire'; now we use it to refer to Amazon. And when it comes to their original business, books, I and most people I know actively avoid buying from Amazon, choosing instead to shop at the area's many independent book stores.

PardelLux , 1 Apr 2018 15:54
Dear Guardian,
why do you still sport the FB, Twitter, Google+, Instagramm, Pinterest etc. buttons below every single article? Why do you have to do their dirty work? I don't do that on my webpages, you don't need to do neither. Please stop it.
Alexander Dunnett , 1 Apr 2018 15:42
Not being a Trump supporter, however there is a lot of sense in some of the comments coming from Trump,. Whether he carries through with them , is another subject.


His comment on Amazon:- " Unlike others, they pay little or no taxes to state or local governments, use our postal system as their delivery boy (causing tremendous loss to the US) and putting many thousands of retailers out of business."

Who can argue against that? Furthermore, the retailers would have paid some tax!

Talk about elephants in the room. What about the elephants who were let out of the room to run amuck ? Should it not have been the case of being wise before the event , rather than after the event?

Neovercingetorix , 1 Apr 2018 15:20
A quasi-battle of the billionaires. With Bezos, there's the immediate political element in Bezos' ownership of the clearly anti-Trump Washington Post, which has gone so far as to become lax in editorial oversight (eg, misspelling and even occasional incomplete articles published in an obvious rush to be first to trash POTUS), but there are other issues. Amazon's impact on physical retail is well-documented, and not so long ago (ie, before Trump "attacked" Amazon"), it was sometimes lamented by those on the American left, and Trump is correct in that critique, provided one believes it is valid in the first place. Amazon does have a lot of data on its customers, including immense expenditure information on huge numbers of people. What kinds of constraints are there in place to protect this data, aside from lawyer-enriching class action suits? Beyond that, there's also online defense procurement, worth hundreds of billions in revenue to Amazon in the years to come, that was included in the modified NDAA last year. Maybe that is on Trump's mind, maybe not, but it should probably be on everyone's mind. Maybe the Sherman Antitrust Act needs to be reinvigorated. It would seem that even Trump's foes should be willing to admit that he gets some things right, but that now seems unacceptable. I mean, look at the almost knee-jerk defense of NAFTA, which way back when used to be criticized by Democrats and unions, but now must be lionized.
Byron Delaney , 1 Apr 2018 14:46
If Amazon can get cheaper shipping than anyone else and enable manufactuers to sell direct, they can sell more than anyone else as long as consumers only buy according to total price. This means two things. One, all retailers as well as distributors may be put out of business. Two, the success of Amazon may rely almost entirely on shipping costs. American consumers also will need to forego the shopping experience, but if they may do so if they're sarisfied with remaining in their residences, workplaces, and cars most of the time. This is the case in many places. People visit Starbucks drive thrus and eat and drink in their cars. If Amazon owns the food stores such as Whole Foods and Starbucks, it's a done deal. Except for one thing. If this happens, the economy will collapse. That may have already happened. Bezos is no rocket scientist.

[Apr 01, 2018] Problems with Russia-China relations

Apr 01, 2018 | www.unz.com

Issac , March 31, 2018 at 10:15 pm GMT

@Anonymous

You're reading your own narrative rather than what's in front of you. Russia isn't going to up and blow away no matter what. Their relationship with China is a matter of course as well, though you vastly over-state the supposed synergy between the two.

My point is that a diminished Russia is obviously no threat to China and clearly in the long term interests of China if they wish to be the chief architect and manager of the Eurasian belt of which they have become enamored.

Taken in broader strokes, a world in which nuclear apocalypse isn't on the menu, due to elites favoring their own survival, is one in which the West invariably declines into obscurity due to their ruling class having no qualms about destroying their nations and states in the name of near term personal benefits. In such a world the only question is who will take the leading role of new geopolitical master.

China is already poised for this position, but having an assuredly weakened Russian gives them the sort of leverage they need to siphon out more Eurasian trade profits for their own geopolitical aims. Geopolitical top players don't simply seek a sufficient position from which to bargain. They seek a position from which the results of said bargain are largely foregone.

And this is entirely consistent with Chinese foreign policy toward the West and Russia. The former is a dead man walking with no chance of rebelling against Beijing's economic control. The latter is a future regional partner whom they would very much like to see as a junior when the time comes for them to abandon the western financial system and asset their peerless status.

utu , April 1, 2018 at 12:53 am GMT
@Issac

Exactly. Very good points. China wants weaker Russia. However China can't allow Russia to submit to the US that's why they will be propping Russia just enough so Russia does not fold too soon. The US and China have one common objective: they do not want Russia to hook up with EU and Germany. Russia+EU would be the only third power that could challenge both the US and China. That's why China is happy with Zio-Amercian meddling in Central Europe by playing Poland and Hungary against both Germany and Russia as the wedge between them.

China does not trust Russia because they know how avaricious, unpatriotic and devoid of any deeper nationalist doctrine and thus how unreliable are Russian elites. They know it because they know their own Chinese elites with respect to which they must use many tools to discipline them, the tools that Russia lacks because there sis no supreme ideological authority. There in Russia nobody really knows who suppose to discipline whom and why.

Saker as usual is naive and let his wishful thinking hijack his analytical abilities.

[Apr 01, 2018] Russia China are working closely to counter the West for existential threat

Apr 01, 2018 | www.unz.com

TT , March 31, 2018 at 6:19 pm GMT

@Arioch

Russia & China are working closely to counter the West for existential threat, deeper & broader than what your self centered mind can imagine. Russia needs to save Syria for its own skin, and its last ME bastion of influence. When Syria down, Israel & Saudi gas will pipe to EU & cut off Russia lucrative EU gas deal & influence. Iran will be next to attack, hence complete ME oil & gas come under US UK Fr control, which can be utilized to sabotage Russia oil export.

China will be then blackmailed into submission for oil supply. Iran will be surrounded by US allied forces everywhere, fighting West moderate terrorists. Its existential war in Syria against West hedgmon control for Russia, China & Iran, not just propping up Assad. Russia has overwhelming sufficient military capability to fight US allies, backed by war hardened powerful Iran, SAA army, Hezbollah & Iraq Shiah fighters unmatched ground force.

USM knows it can't win such war without nuke, so it has to find either face saving exit or contented with current occupied oil rich land. It got nothing to do with Trumps stupidity to overstretch its military as you imagine.

China has been backing up Russia with big cheque book for last few years, signing hundreds of billions deals with upfront payments to prop Russia economy for prolong war.

Global times news mostly reflected the China think tank policy that they wish to propagate to West English speaking world. China has sensed West is hysteria tightening noose around Russia in EU foolish solitude movement with UK.

When Russia is down, China is next, vice versa. China special force has been operating in Syria to fight terrorists. Lot of weapons ammunition supply to SAA. Lot of money pump in to sustain Syria war & feed millions of Syrians. Who else do you think is paying these bills, West controlled UN Red cross?

Now China is largest economy & market by PPP term, with 50% w/w mfg capacity, its capable to inflict unacceptable damage to US economy in trade war. EU, Japan & Korea all have huge parts export to China for assembly, so none wanted the disastrous trade war that will suck down global trade.

So Trumpets is blowing hot air only to blackmail China, soon it will back down as WH already delay any tariffs to after June, seeking dialogue eagerly with Beijing.

You are just silly self centered like those Russians always throwing allies under bus, hence Russia will find it has no true ally and will forever licking its wounds alone until slaughtered by West.

[Apr 01, 2018] Is a New War Against Russia in Ukraine Unfolding Before Our Eyes by by John McMurtry

This is definitely cancer stage of neoliberalism, but I doubt that there is connection between Skripal poisoning and Ukraine.
Also why the USA served as the catalyst for coming nationalists to power in 2014 the process started long ago with Yushchenko and to a certain extent is typical for all post Soviet republics, including Kazakhstan and Belorussia. they all try to distance themselves from Russia to prove their sovereignty. The low intensity warfare in Donetsk is the only differentiator, but even this remind attempt of Georgia to subdue South Ossetia in the past and Karabah conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Still the author is definitely a brilliant writer and thinker he describes geopolitical tensions really well
Notable quotes:
"... has to have such a war-drum distraction to survive. ..."
"... Social, Humanitarian and Cultural Affairs Committee of the UN General Assembly ..."
Apr 01, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

As usual there is amnesia of the ever-recurring big-lie pretext, the need for another crisis to keep the two-billion-dollar a day NATO war machine going, the baleful puppet moves of Canada in the process, the crisis of legitimacy of the lead attacker's government, and the silent diversion from the whole nightmare scenario unfolding by all NATO-member governments, mass media and even 'peace activist' organisations.

This time the big-lie pretext is about the alleged poisoning by the Kremlin/Putin of a double-agent, usually a stock move in the espionage entertainments, but here with no evidence of the claimed origin of the lethal nerve-agent, but rather expert denial within British defence and weapons research itself, with devious political word games to get around the absence of any corroborated evidence in familiar denuciations of Russia full of aggression and hate. Not even a death is recorded while US-led nd UK-armed ally forces are still mass-murdering poor civilian Yeminis, drone-murdering endless targets and civilians abroad, continuing on unblamed for the ongoing NATO-executed eco-genocides of Iraq and Libya societies, and on the 19-years anniversary of the mass bombing of, once again a society, Yugoslavia, with the most evolved social infrastructures of health, education, housing and life security in the region.

What this latest war pretext for US and NATO-backed aggression is really about is justifying more war in the Ukraine now that the massive war preparations along all of Russia's Western borders following the self-declared Nazi-led and proven US- orchestrated and commanded mass-murder coup d'etat in February 2014 . As usual there is amnesia of the ever-recurring big-lie pretext, the need for another crisis to keep the two-billion-dollar a day NATO war machine going, the baleful puppet moves of Canada in the process, the crisis of legitimacy of the lead attacker's government, and the silent diversion from the whole nightmare scenario unfolding by all NATO-member governments, mass media and even 'peace activist' organisations.

This time the big-lie pretext is about the alleged poisoning by the Kremlin/Putin of a double-agent traitor, usually a stock move in the espionage entertainments. Yet here there is no confirmed evidence whatever of the claimed origin of the lethal nerve-agent, but rather expert denial within British defence and weapons research itself that is silence in the press, with devious political word games crafted to get around the absence of any corroborated facts in the familiar denuciations of Russia full of team aggression and hate. Not even a death is recorded while US-led nd UK-armed ally forces are still mass-murdering poor civilian Yeminis, drone-murdering endless targets and civilians abroad, continuing on unblamed for the ongoing NATO-executed eco-genocides of Iraq and Libya societies, and on the 19-years anniversary of the mass bombing of Yugoslavia -- once again a socialist society with the most evolved social infrastructures of health, education, housing and life security in the region.

What this latest war pretext for US and NATO-backed aggression is really about is justifying more war in Ukraine now that the massive war preparations along all of Russia's Western borders following the self-declared Nazi-led and proven US- orchestrated and commanded mass-murder coup d'etat in February 2014 . As always, this US-directed mass murder was reverse-blamed on the ever shifting Enemy face -- Russia's allied but duly elected government of the Ukraine. It was only after this violent-coup Nazi-led and US directed overthrow of the elected government of the very resource-rich Ukraine -- "the breadbasket of Europe" and sitting on newly discovered rich fossil fuel deposits -- that Russia annexed its traditional territory of the Crimea next to Eastern Ukraine, the latter after the violent coup put under the rule of a US-Nazi-led government until its people fought back with Russia assistance for the now NATO-targeted zones of the new Donetsk and Lugansk republics.

What is new now is that we are about to enter yet another NATO-member war build-up against the cornerstone of Western ideology, the designated Enemy Russia. As usual there is amnesia of the ever-recurring big-lie pretext, the need for another crisis to keep the two-billion-dollar a day US-led NATO war machine going, the baleful puppet moves of Canada in the process, the crisis of legitimacy of the lead attacker's UK government, and silent diversion from the whole nightmare scenario unfolding in NATO-member states, mass media and even 'peace activist' organisations.

Cui Bono?

The UK and the US followed by Canada and some of the EU have by expulsion of Russia diplomats prepared the diplomatic way for war in the Ukraine to seize back these lost coup-territories, and it will be in the name of "freedom", "human rights" and "the rules of civilised nations". But there is much officially suppressed colour to the warring parties political conflict which reveals who the truly heinous suppressor of human rights is. Under mass media and corporate-state cover, the US-UK-NATO axis about to make war in Ukraine is doing so under the factually absurd but non-stop pretext of "Russia aggression" constructed out of the double-agent poisoning affair, with the guilty agents and poison having no proof but the ever louder UK-led and NATO-state assertion of it in unison. Yet there is a clear answer to the cui bono question -- which party does all this benefit? Clearly once the question is posed, as opposed to completely gagged in the corporate press, Theresa May's slow-motion collapsing Tory government -- now even challenged for its fraudulent Brexit referendum protecting the big London banks from EU regulation -- has to have such a war-drum distraction to survive. The old war of aggression pattern reverse-blamed on the official enemy unwinds yet again.

It is revealing in this context how Canada's government has no such ruler need of war -- unless it be its Ukraine-descendent Foreign Minister up front and the very powerful and widely Nazi-sympathizing Ukraine Liberal vote bank and leadership brought to Canada after 1945 to overwhelm the preceding active socialist Ukrainian community in Canada. Canada's government -- not its people -- is in any case used to being a puppet regime in foreign affairs as a twice-colonized rule by big business (why the NDP is not allowed to govern unless so subjugated).

The Human Rights Question

In light of all of this suppressed factual background and motive for more war in Ukraine which is unspeakable in the official news, interaction with the United Nations is of revealing interest. While it has been the cover for US-led NATO executed genocidal wars of aggression in the past as in Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yugoslavia and Korea, the pretexts of 'human rights', 'responsibility to protect' and 'stopping communist aggression', which are in fact always been the spectacular opposite on the ground in terms of diseased, mass-murdered and destituted bodies, these pretexts may not sell well when the background facts are no longer suppressed from public view.

It is worthwhile recalling how Science for Peace leadership used to be against but has since Afghanistan collaborated with these false-pretext wars in sustaining their illusions and thus the war crimes and crimes against proceeding underneath them.

The NATO-executed Ukraine war now being orchestrated is especially revealing in its actual record of 'protecting human rights' through 'international law' and 'norms of civilised nations'. Completely buried in official records is a United Nations resolution n on Ukraine that the US and Canada repudiated on November 20 2015 after the US-led bloody coup d'etat in Ukraine was in full motion of claiming all the vast tracts of land and resources that were Russia-speaking territory in the past.

The resolution was straightforwardly against "Nazi symbols and regalia" as well as "holocaust denial". The Social, Humanitarian and Cultural Affairs Committee of the UN General Assembly overwhelmingly voted for a resolution to enable measures against "the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that facilitate the escalation of modern forms of racism, xenophobia and intolerance". A total of 126 member-states of the UN voted for it for the second time. Over 100 countries voted for a similar resolution in 2014 including "denial of the holocaust and glorification of the Nazi movement, former members of the Waffen SS organization, including the installation of memorials to them, and post-coup attempts to desecrate or destroy the monuments to those who fought against Nazism in Ukraine during World War II".

How could any civilised state vote against these United Nations Resolutions for human rights as Canada and the US have done and stood by ever since? Well instituted group hatred of the officially designated enemy can justify anything whatsoever, and does so right into next NATO-executed orgy of war crime and crimes against humanity, again inside Europe itself flaunting reverse-blame lies and slogans as red meat for psychotically trained masses. It is not by accident that Canada's Foreign Minister is in this near century-old Nazi loyalist vs Russia-speaking conflict was before her appointment the "proud "granddaughter of a leading Nazi war propagandist during its occupation of Poland and Ukraine described as a "fighter for freedom".

Yet on the other hand, we must not lose ourselves in ad hominem responsibility. Crystina Freeland, her Canada name, is interestingly propagandist in itself from her birth -- Christian Free Land -- but not observed in the corporate press. Minister Freeland is only a symptom of something far deeper and more systemically murderous and evil in state-executed unlimited greed and immiserization of innocent millions of people masked as 'human rights' , 'freedom' and 'rule of law' . Her more sinister double in the US is also a renamed person of the region, Victoria Nuland (read New Land) who orchestrated the whole 2014 mass-murder coup in Ukraine and now tub-thumps on public television for the 'need to teach Putin and Russia a hard lesson', aka another war attack by US-led NATO on Russia's borders.

The difference now is that the absurd pretext and geostrategic mechanisms now in motion beforehand can be seen in front of our eyes -- that is, if we can still see through the engineered prism of the US-UK led NATO war machine. This alone will stop it.

John McMurtry is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada whose work is translated from Latin America to Japan. His most recent book is The Cancer Stage of Capitalism: From Crisis to Cure .

[Apr 01, 2018] Escalation in West-Russia tension is frightening dangerous former diplomats -- RT World News

Notable quotes:
"... "I live near Seattle and I particularly am not being hurt. The next time I have to go to Russia I can get a visa someplace else," ..."
"... "it is almost certainty that so-called diplomats on both sides were in fact spies" ..."
"... "that is what nations do." ..."
"... "Russia has spies, in this country, we have spies in their country, I suspect people from Malawi have spies in this country It is just part of statecraft," he said. And the first thing you do when you are going tit-for-tat, is you should throw the other fellow's spies out." ..."
"... "I looked at a formula of Novichok nerve agent; it is very unstable, it is very dangerous stuff to handle, you have to be an expert to handle it or you will kill yourself. The question is, why on Earth – if you want to assassinate Mr. Skripal and his daughter – you would use such a dangerous weapon. He is sitting on a park bench, why not just walk up behind him and shoot him in the back of the head? I've come to the conclusion that basically the nerve agent was used because the person that did it knew it would be traced back to the Kremlin. Because this stuff actually was invented, made, and weaponized originally by the Russians. I don't care what the OPCW, that international organization, says in two weeks The stuff was Novichok, but that doesn't mean Russians did it," ..."
"... "it was some false flag operation by someone who just wanted to increase the chaos between the US and Russia." ..."
"... "reserve the right to respond." ..."
"... "We have one more consulate in Russia, we have one more consulate here [in Houston]. We can close that. We can send your ambassador home, persona non grata. You could close our remaining consulate in Yekaterinburg. And you could declare our ambassador persona non grata. And it goes on and on," ..."
"... "What I find most alarming – both in terms of the politicians and spokespeople on both sides, and the whole lot of the media – is that nobody seems to understand the danger of these steady escalations. And that is the real danger," ..."
"... "in solidarity with the UK." ..."
"... "Russian relationships with Canada are very deteriorated and this is not going to help them. On the features of having deteriorated relations is that embassies have much less to do. Bouncing four people either way isn't going to make a lot of difference as far as activities are concerned. But it is a deplorable situation. And people have to get their heads together and work out the rules of the game so something like this never happens again," ..."
"... "There's got to be communication to work things out. Not just on this but on a very complicated world, on increasing distrust, particularly on the part of Western politicians," ..."
"... "the competitive rhetoric and threats" ..."
"... "It's becoming not just childish, but really very frightening," ..."
Apr 01, 2018 | www.rt.com

RT asked former US diplomat John Graham how these measures will affect relations between Washington and Moscow and the processing of visas to Russian citizens wanting to visit the US. Read more

"I live near Seattle and I particularly am not being hurt. The next time I have to go to Russia I can get a visa someplace else," he said.

But what is important to understand is the reality behind all the smokescreens, Graham pointed out.

In his opinion, "it is almost certainty that so-called diplomats on both sides were in fact spies" as "that is what nations do."

"Russia has spies, in this country, we have spies in their country, I suspect people from Malawi have spies in this country It is just part of statecraft," he said. And the first thing you do when you are going tit-for-tat, is you should throw the other fellow's spies out."

The second thing, he continued, is about the 'whodunit' aspect of the former double agent poisoning in Salisbury, England.

"I looked at a formula of Novichok nerve agent; it is very unstable, it is very dangerous stuff to handle, you have to be an expert to handle it or you will kill yourself. The question is, why on Earth – if you want to assassinate Mr. Skripal and his daughter – you would use such a dangerous weapon. He is sitting on a park bench, why not just walk up behind him and shoot him in the back of the head? I've come to the conclusion that basically the nerve agent was used because the person that did it knew it would be traced back to the Kremlin. Because this stuff actually was invented, made, and weaponized originally by the Russians. I don't care what the OPCW, that international organization, says in two weeks The stuff was Novichok, but that doesn't mean Russians did it," he told RT.

Graham does not rule out that "it was some false flag operation by someone who just wanted to increase the chaos between the US and Russia."

The US State Department was quick to react to Moscow's decision to expel 60 American diplomats, saying they "reserve the right to respond."

Graham said that this escalation between Russia and the US could go on and on and warned about the danger of the situation.

"We have one more consulate in Russia, we have one more consulate here [in Houston]. We can close that. We can send your ambassador home, persona non grata. You could close our remaining consulate in Yekaterinburg. And you could declare our ambassador persona non grata. And it goes on and on," he said.

"What I find most alarming – both in terms of the politicians and spokespeople on both sides, and the whole lot of the media – is that nobody seems to understand the danger of these steady escalations. And that is the real danger," Graham said.

Expulsion of Russian diplomats 'a sign of how close to the brink of a major war the world is coming' (Op-Ed by @JimJatras ) https://t.co/SwI1HWd7Dn

-- RT (@RT_com) 27 марта 2018 г.

Meanwhile, the diplomatic standoff between Moscow and Western countries can also affect Russia's relations with Canada, according to Jeremy Kinsman – former Canadian ambassador to Russia, Canadian high commissioner to the United Kingdom (2000–2002), and Canadian ambassador to the European Union (2002–2006).

Read more © Vladimir Konstantinov Got a problem? Just blame Russia

Earlier in the week, Canada said it would expel four Russian diplomats "in solidarity with the UK." That means that Russia will tell four Canadian diplomats to leave its soil.

"Russian relationships with Canada are very deteriorated and this is not going to help them. On the features of having deteriorated relations is that embassies have much less to do. Bouncing four people either way isn't going to make a lot of difference as far as activities are concerned. But it is a deplorable situation. And people have to get their heads together and work out the rules of the game so something like this never happens again," Kinsman said.

Commenting on the entire situation, he noted that the expulsion of diplomats is not the most dangerous thing – but the absence of communication is.

"There's got to be communication to work things out. Not just on this but on a very complicated world, on increasing distrust, particularly on the part of Western politicians," he said.

Kinsman underlined that "the competitive rhetoric and threats" between Russia and Western countries have to stop.

"It's becoming not just childish, but really very frightening," he added.

Unproven allegations against Trump and Putin are risking nuclear war - Stephen Cohen

[Apr 01, 2018] US spy agencies make 'outrageous' attempts to recruit expelled Russian diplomats Moscow

Notable quotes:
"... "a sharp increase in provocative actions against Russian diplomats in the US." ..."
"... "There's been a whole string of outrageous episodes" where the Russian diplomats "were offered 'help' – and not for free, but in exchange for secret relations 'on a mutually beneficial basis,'" ..."
"... "pulling a scheme" ..."
"... "the official authorities unjustly expelling Russian diplomats and the increasingly aggressive American security services immediately attempting to take advantage of this difficult moment for our people." ..."
"... "thinly levied" ..."
"... "such behavior looks cynical and disgusting as if Washington has completely ceased to understand the bounds of common decency." ..."
Apr 01, 2018 | www.rt.com

Published time: 30 Mar, 2018 19:14 Edited time: 31 Mar, 2018 09:21 Get short URL The Russian Embassy in Washington DC. © CHRIS KLEPONIS / AFP The American intelligence services are hastily trying to recruit Russian diplomats expelled from the US over the Skripal case, Russia's Foreign Ministry said, slamming Washington's behavior as cynical and indecent. The ministry sounded the alarm over "a sharp increase in provocative actions against Russian diplomats in the US." The ministry said that after the announcement that 60 Russian diplomats are set to leave the US, American secret services have "feverishly" been trying to contact them with various proposals. Read more © Sergey Kovalev Moscow expels diplomats of countries that kicked out Russians over Skripal case

"There's been a whole string of outrageous episodes" where the Russian diplomats "were offered 'help' – and not for free, but in exchange for secret relations 'on a mutually beneficial basis,'" the ministry said in a statement .

Moscow accused the US of "pulling a scheme" that involved the "the official authorities unjustly expelling Russian diplomats and the increasingly aggressive American security services immediately attempting to take advantage of this difficult moment for our people." The ministry described the American ploy as "thinly levied" and fruitless, adding that "such behavior looks cynical and disgusting as if Washington has completely ceased to understand the bounds of common decency."

Earlier this week, the US announced it would expel 60 Russian diplomats and close Russia's consulate in Seattle, as the Trump administration fulfilled the UK's calls to punish Russia over its alleged involvement in the poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal on British soil. In a tit-for-tat response, Russia said on Thursday that 60 American diplomats would have to leave the country, and it would also close the US consulate in St. Petersburg.

READ MORE: Russia to close US consulate in St. Petersburg, expel 60 diplomats as Washington did – Lavrov

In early March, Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, were poisoned in Salisbury with what the UK called a Soviet-designed nerve agent. Without a proper investigation being carried out, London accused Moscow of being behind the attack, expelled Russian diplomats and introduced other restrictions against the county. Britain urged its allies to follow suit and sanction Moscow as well, with German, France and Poland being among the countries to show Russian diplomats the door.

[Apr 01, 2018] UK may have staged Skripal poisoning to rally people against Russia, Moscow believes

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... "We have very serious suspicion that this provocation was done by British intelligence," Yakovenko told Russia's NTV channel. He clarified that Russia has no direct proof of this suspicion, but the behavior of the British government constitutes strong circumstantial evidence in support of this theory. ..."
Apr 01, 2018 | www.rt.com

"We have very serious suspicion that this provocation was done by British intelligence," Yakovenko told Russia's NTV channel. He clarified that Russia has no direct proof of this suspicion, but the behavior of the British government constitutes strong circumstantial evidence in support of this theory.

The diplomat added that London had gained both short-term and long-term benefits from the poisoning. The short-term gain is that Theresa May's government managed to spin this story to whip up support both at home and in Europe, while sidelining its failures to negotiate more favorable terms for exiting the European Union, Yakovenko said. The long-term benefit is that it improved London's standing in the ongoing confrontation between the West and Russia.

"The Britons are claiming a leading role in the so-called containment of Russia. To win support from the people and the parliament for this containment of Russia, a serious provocation was required. And the Britons may have done a really savage one to get this support," he said.

The ambassador said that details of British investigations into the deaths of several high-profile people with Russian ties have been kept from the public. These include former Russian intelligence officer Aleksandr Litvinenko, Georgian tycoon Badri Patarkatsishvili, fugitive Russian businessman Boris Berezovsky and Russian whistleblower Aleksandr Perepilichny. He said he hoped there would be a public disclosure of relevant facts in relation to the Skripal case.

"I am sure Russia will not allow the Britons to escape the legal field. They will have to give answers," he said.

After the poisoning in Salisbury, the UK convinced some of its allies to follow its lead by expelling Russian diplomats. The US was the most receptive to the call, kicking 60 Russians out of the country, which dwarfed the UK's expulsion of 23 people. European countries that chose to show solidarity with London expelled between one and four diplomats each. Ukraine expelled 13.

Russia hit back with reciprocal expulsions of foreign diplomats. It also demanded that Britain downsize its diplomatic mission in Russia to that of Russia in Britain, affecting over 50 jobs.

See also:

[Mar 31, 2018] It sounds as if MI6 tries to make Russian businessmen confess if they are for or against Putin

Mar 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Earlier in the month, he was paraded in the UK media as an example of Russian exiles in fear for their lives. The UK tabloids are running this story about the exiles going into hiding in Europe from MI6.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/russian-businessman-on-vladimir-putin-12238329

Posted by: Les | Mar 31, 2018 1:45:15 PM | 41 somebody , Mar 31, 2018 2:36:29 PM | 45

41

It sounds as if MI6 tries to make Russian businessmen confess if they are for or against Putin .

So some people are very serious about this new cold war.

[Mar 31, 2018] I believe that the Western campaign to permanently undermine and diminish Russian competition in international sports events is intended to finally exhaust the Russian government's residual good will and patience, and provoke some "unacceptable" hostile response

Mar 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: Ort | Mar 30, 2018 8:40:37 PM | 178

@ oneil , 116

Thanks for the thoughtful response. I appreciate it, and the entire discussion thread.

@ mali | 109; Maximus | 159

I'm a resolutely non-athletic male, turning 63 next month, and don't follow sports, either domestic or international.

I begin thus to say that I'm not normally disposed to be particularly sensitive or sympathetic to matters involving athletic competition-- especially decadent institutions like the Olympics and comparable bloated sports spectacles.

Even so, it's been terribly clear to me that the US-dominated Western Hegemony (which includes "Five Eyes" allies, e.g. Australia) have long mounted an insidious, reprehensible attack on Russia by targeting Russia's traditional national embrace of sports.

For some reason, despite my above-cited antipathy to professional sports, I find it absolutely galling and appalling that innocent Russian athletes have been victimized by international sports organizations, and odious frauds like Richard McLaren. McLaren, as I presume most readers here know, is the architect of a slanderous report that makes the most of Russia's admitted difficulties with doping.

I believe that the Western politicians and state-security executives concluded that gratuitously and cruelly trashing Russia's national reputation, effectively, er, poisoning the collective reputation of its athletes, and subjecting both Russian sports organizations and individual competitors to unjust and humiliating scrutiny and sanctions would be the ultimate provocation.

That is, I believe that the Western campaign to permanently undermine and diminish Russian competition in international sports events is intended to finally exhaust the Russian government's residual good will and patience, and provoke some "unacceptable" hostile response. This is all the more likely because Putin is himself an enthusiastic athlete as well as an old-fashioned patriotic Russian citizen; his enemies may well believe that bullying and abusing "his" young competitors right in front of his eyes will eventually trigger a rash and intemperate response.

Again, although a non-sportsman I am deeply disgusted by what amounts to obvious "hitting below the belt", and attempting to obscure heinous misfeasance with the usual ladled-on bumptious sanctimoniousness.

It seems quite plausible that at least one of the motivations for the Skirpal Follies is to spoil the World Cup in order to further torment Russia.

@ oneil | 116

Thanks for the thoughtful response. I appreciate it, and the entire discussion thread.

@ mali | 109; Maximus | 159

I'm a resolutely non-athletic male, turning 63 next month, and don't follow sports, either domestic or international.

I begin thus to say that I'm not normally disposed to be particularly sensitive or sympathetic to matters involving athletic competition-- especially decadent institutions like the Olympics and comparable bloated sports spectacles.

Even so, it's been terribly clear to me that the US-dominated Western Hegemony (which includes "Five Eyes" allies, e.g. Australia) have long mounted an insidious, reprehensible attack on Russia by targeting Russia's traditional national embrace of sports.

For some reason, despite my above-cited antipathy to professional sports, I find it absolutely galling and appalling that innocent Russian athletes have been victimized by international sports organizations, and odious frauds like Richard McLaren. McLaren, as I presume most readers here know, is the architect of a slanderous report that makes the most of Russia's admitted difficulties with doping.

I believe that the Western politicians and state-security executives concluded that gratuitously and cruelly trashing Russia's national reputation, effectively, er, poisoning the collective reputation of its athletes, and subjecting both Russian sports organizations and individual competitors to unjust and humiliating scrutiny and sanctions would be the ultimate provocation.

That is, I believe that the Western campaign to permanently undermine and diminish Russian competition in international sports events is intended to finally exhaust the Russian government's residual good will and patience, and provoke some "unacceptable" hostile response. This is all the more likely because Putin is himself an enthusiastic athlete as well as an old-fashioned patriotic Russian citizen; his enemies may well believe that bullying and abusing "his" young competitors right in front of his eyes will eventually trigger a rash and intemperate response.

Again, although a non-sportsman I am deeply disgusted by what amounts to obvious "hitting below the belt", and attempting to obscure heinous misfeasance with the usual ladled-on bumptious sanctimoniousness.

It seems quite plausible that at least one of the motivations for the Skirpal Follies is to spoil the World Cup in order to further torment Russia.

/div

[Mar 31, 2018] In America, jails and prisons have become the nation's de facto mental healthcare providers and the results are chilling by Alisa Roth

Mar 31, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Across the country, correctional facilities are struggling with the reality that they have become the nation's de facto mental healthcare providers, although they are hopelessly ill-equipped for the job. They are now contending with tens of thousands of people with mental illness who, by some counts, make up as much as half of their populations .

Little acknowledged in public debate, this situation is readily apparent in almost every correctional facility in the country. In Michigan, roughly half of all people in county jails have a mental illness, and nearly a quarter of people in state prisons do. In 2016, the state spent nearly $4m on psychiatric medication for state prisoners. In Iowa about a third of people in prison have a serious mental illness; another quarter have a chronic mental health diagnosis.

Meanwhile, nearly half of the people executed nationwide between 2000 and 2015 had been diagnosed with a mental illness and/or substance use disorder in their adult lives. When a legal settlement required California to build a psychiatric unit on its death row at San Quentin the 40 beds were filled immediately.

The mental health crisis is especially pronounced among women prisoners: one study by the US Bureau of Justice Statistics found that 75% of women incarcerated in jails and prisons had a mental illness, as compared with just over 60% and 55% of men, respectively. A more recent study showed that 20% of women in jail and 30% in prison had experienced "serious psychological distress" in the month before the survey, compared with 14% and 26% of men, respectively.

Although the overall number of people behind bars in the US has decreased in recent years, the proportion of prisoners with mental illness has continued to go up. In 2010, about 30% of people at New York's Rikers Island jail had a mental illness; in 2014, the figure rose to 40% , and by 2017, it had gone up to 43%. Studies of the most frequently arrested people in New York, Los Angeles and elsewhere have found that they are far more likely than others to have mental illness, to require antipsychotic medications while incarcerated and to have a substance use problem.

That there are so many people with mental illness locked in our jails and prisons is but one piece of the crisis. Along with race and poverty, mental illness has become a salient feature of mass incarceration, one that must be accounted for in any discussion about criminal justice reform.

Mental illness affects every aspect of the criminal justice system, from policing to the courts to prisons and beyond. Nor are the effects limited to the criminal justice system; many people with mental illness cycle back and forth between jail or prison and living in the community.

The racial inequity of the criminal justice system has been widely noted: it is estimated that one out of every three African American men and one of every six Hispanic men born in 2001 will be arrested in their lifetimes.

But for Americans with serious mental illness, it is estimated that as many as one in two will be arrested at some point in their lives. It's not just arrests. One in four of the nearly 1,000 fatal police shootings in 2016 involved a person with mental illness, according to a study by the Washington Post. The Post estimated that mental illness was a factor in a quarter of fatal police shootings in 2017, too.

People with mental illness are among the most disadvantaged members of our society, and when they end up in the criminal justice system, they tend to fare worse than others. People with mental illness are less likely to make bail and more likely to face longer sentences. They are more likely to end up in solitary confinement, less likely to make parole and more likely to commit suicide.

Yet jail and prison have become, for many people, their primary means of getting mental healthcare. Their experiences offer an especially eye-opening view of a criminal justice system that today houses more than two million people and costs us hundreds of billions of dollars a year.

[Mar 31, 2018] Merkel and Skripal poisoning -- a despicable position of German neolineral elite

The problems with Germany is that it does not have any independent press... German MSM are probably worse then the USA MSM in being neoliberal stooges, if not to say prostitutes.
Also Merkel is a staunch neoliberal politician hell bent on neoliberal globalization and who still cling to power and tried to use the USA as a leverage to stay in power
Notable quotes:
"... So in a certain sense, I can imagine that the Russians feel really betrayed by this kind of behavior by Merkel. Now, Merkel has a specific background. You know, many people have always asked themselves, what makes this woman tick? Nobody has been able to answer that question in any satisfying way. But I think the Russians really feel betrayed. ..."
"... Merkel is just obviously following like a puppy-dog -- even though puppies are cuter than Mrs. Merkel, I would say. But I think it's a serious matter, and I think people should absolutely not fall for this, because these are the kinds of things which can get out of control and be the trigger for a new world war, and who would want that? ..."
Mar 31, 2018 | larouchepac.com

How To Outflank Mad Theresa May's March to World War III LaRouchePAC

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think the case of France is a little bit more complicated, because Macron, who had a slightly different emphasis on the cooperation with the New Silk Road and China, than Merkel, for example; the French Foreign Minister Yves Le Drian just announced that Macron will go to Moscow in May. So I think that that looks a little bit different than Mrs. Merkel, who -- really, I mean, it's a complete shame, and obviously this new "Grand Coalition" government, which is not so grand, given the fact that they are all falling in the polls like a stone; I think this is really a reflection of the fact that there is presently no German elite worth being called the name.

And I think that people in Germany should really not accept that. The history of the German-Russian relationship, given the fact that there were two world wars, the Second World War being an unbelievable memory in every Russian person; and then the fact that Russia agreed to the German unification, without any shots being fired or tanks being deployed, -- you know, in a peaceful way. Russia gave up East Germany and agreed to the unification, and received promises at that time that NATO would never be expanded to the borders of Russia, a promise which was broken. And then you had all these escalations.

So in a certain sense, I can imagine that the Russians feel really betrayed by this kind of behavior by Merkel. Now, Merkel has a specific background. You know, many people have always asked themselves, what makes this woman tick? Nobody has been able to answer that question in any satisfying way. But I think the Russians really feel betrayed.

And I think the German people should go back to the kind of Ostpolitik, at minimum, which was characteristic for German attitude for a very long time, to have a policy of good-neighborliness, of peaceful dialogue, of cooperation. And I think this is really, really important that the population in Germany does not fall in line with this aggressive British policy which Merkel is just obviously following like a puppy-dog -- even though puppies are cuter than Mrs. Merkel, I would say. But I think it's a serious matter, and I think people should absolutely not fall for this, because these are the kinds of things which can get out of control and be the trigger for a new world war, and who would want that?

[Mar 31, 2018] France enters the game with Skripal poisoning

Mar 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Arioch | Mar 31, 2018 7:01:49 PM | 83

Now Russian Foreign Ministry also asks 10 questions to France directly.

www.translate.ru -> http://www.mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/3150139

I found no ready-made english translation yet

bjd , Mar 31, 2018 7:27:57 PM | 86
@Arioch (83)

Google Translate:

Questions of the Russian Party to France on the fabricated UK against Russia "The Case of the Violins"

618-31-03-2018

On March 31, the Embassy of the Russian Federation in Paris sent a note to the French Foreign Ministry with a list of questions to the French side on the "trick of the Skrypals" trumped up against Russia:

1. On what basis was France involved in technical cooperation in the UK investigation of the Salisbury incident?

2. Did France send an official notification to the OPCW on the connection to technical cooperation in the investigation of the Salisbury incident?

3. What evidence was transferred to France by the UK in the framework of technical cooperation?

4. Did the French specialists attend the sampling of the biomaterial from Sergei and Yulia Skripaly?

5. Was the study of French biomaterials by Sergey and Yulia Skripaly conducted by French specialists? If so, in which laboratory?

6. On the basis of what signs did the French experts conclude that a combatant poisonous substance such as "Newbie" (in British terminology) or its analogues was used?

7. What expertise does France have in the field of studying warfare agents of this type or its analogues?

8. On the basis of what signs (markers) did the French specialists establish the "Russian character" of the origin of the substance used in Salisbury?

9. Does France have control samples of the combatant poison agent "Rookie" (in British terminology) or its analogues?

10. Have any samples of a chemical warfare agent of this type or its analogues been developed in France, if so, for what purposes?

[Mar 31, 2018] One strange thing though. All of this happened within a few miles of the UK's main chemical weapons research station, and there was a simulated chemical weapon attack being conducted at the same time in Salisbury. Oh, and there was a TV program running an episode with a similar theme, in a three part series bracketing the incident.

Mar 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

If only we could go back to the original John Thaw/ Kevin Whatley Inspector Morse team of a quarter century ago:

The old Jaguar sways around a corner.

Voice of Morse in the background. Just one thing Lewis, I've been meaning to ask you for a long time. Why do they call it the UK? It's not a kingdom, it's a Queendom and has been for what, at least my life time?

Right you are sir, but what with British accents and all, it might be confusing. Queendom sounds a bit like that rubber thingy that you put on your pee pee for sex.

Speak for yourself Lewis.

Dot dot dot dash dash. The theme music rings out in Morse code. How I miss John Thaw.

Posted by: mireille | Mar 31, 2018 4:10:32 PM | 61

[Mar 31, 2018] Obviously the Russians know something, just wonder what it is.

Mar 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

J Swift | Mar 31, 2018 3:56:28 PM | 56

Very interesting twist--that governments would have been denying the existence of Foilant agents precisely because they were having success in developing new weapons along those lines. Also interesting is the new "14 Questions" reported by RT, the Duran, etc.:
1. Why has Russia been denied the right of consular access to the two Russian citizens, who came to harm on British territory?

2. What specific antidotes and in what form were the victims injected with? How did such antidotes come into the possession of British doctors at the scene of the incident?

3. On what grounds was France involved in technical cooperation in the investigation of the incident, in which Russian citizens were injured?

4. Did the UK notify the OPCW (Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) of France's involvement in the investigation of the Salisbury incident?

5. What does France have to do with the incident, involving two Russian citizens in the UK?

6. What rules of UK procedural legislation allow for the involvement of a foreign state in an internal investigation?

READ MORE: Skripal case becomes even weirder

7. What evidence was handed over to France to be studied and for the investigation to be conducted?

8. Were the French experts present during the sampling of biomaterial from Sergey and Yulia Skripal?

9. Was the study of biomaterials from Sergey and Yulia Skripal conducted by the French experts and, if so, in which specific laboratories?

10. Does the UK have the materials involved in the investigation carried out by France?

11. Have the results of the French investigation been presented to the OPCW Technical Secretariat?

12. Based on what attributes was the alleged "Russian origin" of the substance used in Salisbury established?

13. Does the UK have control samples of the chemical warfare agent, which British representatives refer to as "Novichok"?

14. Have the samples of a chemical warfare agent of the same type as "Novichok" (in accordance to British terminology) or its analogues been developed in the UK?

Not only are many of the questions very good ones, and ones that have been raised in this bar, but what is up with the sudden appearance of so many questions about France. Obviously the Russians know something, just wonder what it is.

[Mar 31, 2018] FBI Director Mueller testified to Congress that Saddam Hussein was responsible for anthrax attack! That was Mueller's role in selling the "intelligence" to invade Iraq.

Highly recommended!
Mar 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Steve McIntyre | Mar 31, 2018 9:47:15 AM | 15

It took a long time before the 2001 US anthrax attacks were solved. (The initial attribution was totally wrong.) The ultimate explanation was that an anthrax scientist (Bruce Ivins) was worried that funding for his research would be cut back. A similar motive cannot be excluded out of hand for Skripals, especially given proximity of Porton Downs. Already, there has been a huge infusion of cash into Porton Downs, as there was into anthrax research after Ivins' attack. A quote from https://www.wcpo.com/news/our-community/from-the-vault/from-the-vault-local-scientists-hatred-for-uc-sorority-led-to-national-panic-terror-attack.

FBI Director at the time, Robert Mueller -- yes, that Robert Mueller -- said Ivins' livelihood was in jeopardy when the Department of Defense wanted to end anthrax vaccinations because of side effects later called "Gulf War Syndrome." And when the U.S. was attacked on Sept. 11, Ivins capitalized on the paralyzing fear sweeping the nation.

"The anthrax vaccine program to which he had devoted his entire career was failing," according to the "Amerithrax" report from the Justice Department. "Short of some major breakthrough or intervention, he feared that the vaccine research program was going to be discontinued."

After the anthrax attacks in 2001, however, Ivins' program experienced a rebirth.

ToivoS , Mar 31, 2018 12:55:28 PM | 37

b comments that the case against Ivins (yes, made by Mueller, that Mueller) was all bullshit. At the time I too looked into the case that they had against him. What was completely wrong was that Ivins had prepared the Anthrax spores in his personal lab. I too read the FBI report that described the equipment in that lab. Having experience in this field, I found it was very close to impossible for him to have prepared the samples that were used in the anthrax attacks. However, the facilities at Fort Dietrick do have that capacity. If Ivins used those facilities it would not have been possible for him to use them without accomplices or at the least without witnesses to his use of those facilities.

That is what the Mueller report covered up at the very least. It remains quite possible that Ivins was not involved at all.

Ort , Mar 31, 2018 2:46:44 PM | 46
B. and others have already noted that the official conclusion that Bruce Ivins committed suicide is, in a word, bogus.

But I can't resist adding the piquant detail that the authorities claimed that he killed himself with an overdose of Tylenol with codeine. Despite the presence of some codeine, Tylenol is a truly odd choice for suicide. It is potentially toxic, and overdoses cause liver damage that can be eventually fatal-- but overdoses are reportedly painful to endure, and are by no means sure to be fatal.

We're expected to believe that Ivins was so distraught and irrational that he "chose" this means because he wanted to "sleep", and was either oblivious or indifferent to the above-cited drawbacks.

Yet, Ivins was a microbiologist, vaccinologist, and senior biodefense researcher at the United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases. He presumably had, or could easily acquire, an understanding of the effects of Tylenol-- and he had a laboratory full of ultra-lethal toxins to boot. Yet when the moment of truth came, he reached for a bottle of... Tylenol?

It's déjà vu all over again. How many "other ones" do Western authorities think we have to pull?

Daniel , Mar 31, 2018 5:59:27 PM | 76
b @20. Thanks for setting the record straight on the UNSOLVED Anthrax terrorist attack in the US. FBI Director Mueller testified to Congress that Saddam Hussein was responsible! That was Mueller's role in selling the "intelligence" to invade Iraq. Once it became known that the anthrax came from the US Army, he tried to pin it on an innocent man and then closed and buried the case.

[Mar 31, 2018] British elite started to worry about possible toxic fall out from Skripal

Russian elite already views May's government as bandits, who staged this despicable provocation. So stakes for British elite are very high.
And the way May government tried to capitalize on this "poisoning" is really like going "all in". May clearly went what French call "va bank". Reckless statement of Johnson, who is a very weak diplomat, but no fool, if a clear testament that they expect to prevail with pretty weak cards. With ultimate reliance on power of the USA to secure favorable outcome.
Looks more and more that this is a part of Russiagate, or color revolution against Trump, however you want to call the effort: the collusion between the intelligence heads of the Obama administration with British intelligence to oust President Trump.
The Russian Foreign Ministry is now openly pointing the possibility of a UK intelligence involvement. That sheds a very bad light on EU vassals who without any questioning and with any proof immediately fell into line behind Theresa May.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry even said this was a tool used by the Europeans and the United States to try to get unity at a point when they were completely disunified. And this is the old geopolitical game, that in order to create unity you create a war, and then everybody has to fall into line before attacking Iran.
Compare with Ron Paul views on this incident: www.youtube.com
Notable quotes:
"... The UK foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, in a speech late on Wednesday waxed lyrical about how the Skripal episode represented a turning point in the west's approach to Russia, but his officials are aware that this mood can easily dissipate as other considerations, such as commerce, energy security or the Middle East come into play. ..."
"... The UK will try to push for further measures against Russia at the June meeting of the EU heads of state. If it is ambitious, it may may challenge German support for Nord Stream 2, the gas pipeline from Russia that could put European energy demand at the mercy of Moscow. ..."
Mar 31, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

That does not mean the crisis will necessarily end there, or that the crisis is contained.

Russia, whose standing among the international community is badly damaged, is determined to do go further to clear its name, or at least throw up enough chaff so that a chunk of western public opinion doubts the British intelligence service's account of Skripal's poisoning. Moscow has already suggested a meeting on Monday of the executive of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to have "an honest conversation" about the poisoning.

The OPCW is studying samples – provided by the UK – of the novichok nerve agent allegedly used, but does not have the ability to judge the identity of the person that placed the agent by the door of Skripal's house . But the Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, is determined to put the UK on the defensive and has already claimed that "if our western partners dodge the meeting then it will be further evidence that every thing that is happened is a provocation".

Russia has also responded to the apparent recovery of Yulia Skripal, who was poisoned alongside her father. She may be able to provide insights into how the poisoning occurred, or even reveal whether she knows of some other motive by some other non-state actor.

The British intelligence services will be debriefing her as soon as her health permits. It would clearly be a huge embarrassment for the UK government if it emerged she believed the Russian state was not involved.

As it is, the UK government is aware that some allied leaders, despite the public show of solidarity, face skeptical voters at home who are either against a confrontation with Vladimir Putin, or expect more convincing proof to be provided.

The UK foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, in a speech late on Wednesday waxed lyrical about how the Skripal episode represented a turning point in the west's approach to Russia, but his officials are aware that this mood can easily dissipate as other considerations, such as commerce, energy security or the Middle East come into play.

The UK will try to push for further measures against Russia at the June meeting of the EU heads of state. If it is ambitious, it may may challenge German support for Nord Stream 2, the gas pipeline from Russia that could put European energy demand at the mercy of Moscow.

... ... ...

[Mar 31, 2018] Russia Has 14 Questions On Fabricated Skripal Case

Mar 31, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Russia's embassy in London has sent a list of questions, 14 to be specific, to the British Foreign Ministry on the poisoning of Sergey and Yulia Skripal – which include a demand to clarify whether samples of the nerve agent "Novichok" have ever been developed in the UK.

The Russian embassy's statement calls the incident that started the recent diplomatic row a " fabricated case against Russia."

The questions published by the Russian Foreign Ministry's official website have been translated below:

  1. Why has Russia been denied the right of consular access to the two Russian citizens, who came to harm on British territory?
  2. What specific antidotes and in what form were the victims injected with? How did such antidotes come into the possession of British doctors at the scene of the incident?
  3. On what grounds was France involved in technical cooperation in the investigation of the incident, in which Russian citizens were injured?
  4. Did the UK notify the OPCW (Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) of France's involvement in the investigation of the Salisbury incident?
  5. What does France have to do with the incident, involving two Russian citizens in the UK?
  6. What rules of UK procedural legislation allow for the involvement of a foreign state in an internal investigation?
  7. What evidence was handed over to France to be studied and for the investigation to be conducted?
  8. Were the French experts present during the sampling of biomaterial from Sergey and Yulia Skripal?
  9. Was the study of biomaterials from Sergey and Yulia Skripal conducted by the French experts and, if so, in which specific laboratories?
  10. Does the UK have the materials involved in the investigation carried out by France?
  11. Have the results of the French investigation been presented to the OPCW Technical Secretariat?
  12. Based on what attributes was the alleged "Russian origin" of the substance used in Salisbury established?
  13. Does the UK have control samples of the chemical warfare agent, which British representatives refer to as "Novichok"?
  14. Have the samples of a chemical warfare agent of the same type as "Novichok" (in accordance to British terminology) or its analogues been developed in the UK?

The Duran's Alexander Mercouris added some necessary points to the growing mystery and confusion of the Skripal poisoning:

These theories have included claims that Sergey and Yulia Skripal were (1) sprayed with the supposedly deadly chemical by a passer-by; (2) sprayed with the supposedly deadly chemical by an aerial drone; (3) contaminated by the supposedly deadly chemical which was brought from Russia in Yulia Skripal's suitcase where it had been hidden by some third party; and (4) were poisoned by having the supposedly deadly chemical somehow inserted into Sergey Skripal's car.

The British and other critics of Russia have recently taken to citing as 'proof' of Russian guilt the fact that the Russians have supposedly been proposing various theories about who might have poisoned Sergey and Yulia Skripal.

The British – who unlike the Russians have control of the crime scene and samples of the poison – have however been at least as busy proposing various theories about how Sergey and Yulia Skripal were poisoned.

In both cases the fact that the Russian media and the British media – though not it should be stressed the Russian or British governments – have been busy engaging in their respective speculations about who who and how Sergey and Yulia Skripal were poisoned is not proof of guilt.

Rather it suggests ignorance, which if anything (especially in Russia's case) is an indicator of innocence.

As I have said on many occasions, it is the guilty who so far from engaging in a variety of different speculations tend to come up with a single alternative narrative to explain away the facts, which they then pass off as the truth in order to provide themselves with an alibi.

As to the present theory – that Sergey and Yulia Skripal came into contact with the chemical agent on their front door – note the following:

(1) The British police have not said whether the chemical agent was smeared on the outside of the door or on the inside of the door.

If it was smeared on the outside of the door, then it was an extremely reckless act which might have easily poisoned a delivery person to the house such as a postman.

If it was smeared on the inside of the door, then whilst it might have been placed there by a burglar, the greater probability must be that it was placed there by a visitor.

If so then it is likely that either Sergey or Yulia Skripal or possibly both of them have some knowledge of the identity of this person. That might make the fact that Yulia Skripal is said to be recovering and is now conscious a matter of great importance for the solution of this mystery.

(2) If Sergey and Yulia Skripal really were poisoned with the chemical agent by coming into contact with it because it was smeared on their front door, then that would mean that the chemical agent took 7 hours to take effect.

Russian ambassador to Britain Alexander Yakovenko has claimed that the British authorities have told him that Sergey and Yulia Skripal were poisoned by nerve agent A-234, a Novichok type agent which is supposedly "as toxic as VX, as resistant to treatment as soman, and more difficult to detect and easier to manufacture than VX".

I am not a chemist or a chemical weapons expert, but such a slow acting poison seems at variance with the descriptions of A-234 and VX which I have read.

(3) The suggestion that Sergey and Yulia Skripal were poisoned by coming into contact with the chemical agent on their front door must for the moment be treated as no more than a theory. It does however appear to confirm the presence of the chemical agent in the house.

If the latest theory that Sergey and Yulia Skripal were poisoned by coming into contact with a chemical agent smeared on their front door begs many questions, then the news that Yulia Skripal is apparently recovering well from the effect of her poisoning, and is now conscious and speaking and is no longer in intensive care, though extremely welcome, in some ways adds further to the mystery.

EuroPox -> chunga Sat, 03/31/2018 - 16:54 Permalink

The Russians have also sent a list of 10 questions to the French. Just why were they involved at all? I think we should be told.

Question 10 is: "Have the samples of a chemical warfare agent of this type or its analogues been developed in France and if so, for what purpose?"

LOL!

Link to questions to France:

http://www.mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw

Sorry cannot find an English version yet.

[Mar 31, 2018] Possible links of Skripal to Steele dossier

This is not very plausible hypothesis... But the fact that Steele indeed was "curator" of Skripal in Moscow (and later at MI6 Russian desk) is true.
Notable quotes:
"... Important to note, too, this report says, is that absolutely no one in the West is even bothering to ask why Russia would break the first cardinal rule of "spy etiquette" in targeting a spy involved in a spy-swap -- which neither the Soviet Union or Russia has done even once in over 70 years ..."
"... Professor Anthony Glees, the director of the Center for Security and Intelligence Studies at the University of Buckingham, points out by correctly stating that if the Russia did, indeed, poison Skripal, "no one will ever do a swap with them again" -- and who asks the logical question: "If Russia had really wanted to kill Skripal, why didn't they execute him when they had him in custody?" ..."
"... With Michel Chossudovsky, the award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, having just warned that "the entire Western world is insane, and that the Western politicians, and presstitutes who serve them, are driving the world to extinction", this report concludes, among the handful of experts left to explain where this current Russia hysteria in the West is leading to is the former President Ronald Reagan administration official Paul Craig Roberts -- and whose warning issued, just days ago, is both simple and dire: "World War III Is Approaching". ..."
Mar 31, 2018 | yournewswire.com

Not being told the peoples in the West, this report notes, is that Sergei Skripal was a former Russian military intelligence officer who was recruited by MI6 to be a double agent -- and whose recruitment to spy for MI6 was masterminded by MI6 agent Pablo Miller who worked directly under the "Trump Dossier" creator , and MI6 officer, Christopher Steele -- with Sergei Skripal, also, working for Orbis Business Intelligence , Christopher Steele's outfit that put together the infamous dossier on Trump, that both MI6 spies Steele and Miller worked for too .

Though the specifics of the offer made to the FSB by Sergei Skripal in order to secure his returning home to Russia remain more highly classified than this general report allows, it does confirm that Yulia Skripal was discussing this issue with her father, on 4 March, when they were both attacked and left in critical condition -- with the Telegraph news service in London then documenting that all internet links between Sergei Skripaland Christopher Steele's Orbis Business Intelligence were being taken down.

At the same time all the internet links between Sergei Skripal and the creators of the fake "Trump Dossier" were being scrubbed from existence, this report continues, the British government suddenly began blaming Russia for the nerve gas attack on him and his daughter -- but when Russia asked for evidence proving this, the British outright refused to produce it as the Chemical Weapons Convention, that the UK has signed, along with Russia, demands they do -- and when questioned in the British Parliament by Labor Leader Jeremy Corbyn as to why this was so, saw Prime Minister Teresa May's forces jeer and shout him down -- followed by British Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson saying "Russia should go away and shut up".

With President Putin stating in the Security Council meeting that he was " extremely concerned " by the destructive and provocative stance of the UK, this report continues, the British government, nevertheless, has continued to ratchet up it hysteria by blocking a United Nations Security Council draft sponsored by Russia calling for an "urgent and civilized investigation" incident in line with international standards -- and that led Russian Senator Sergey Kalashnikov to warn:

The West has launched a massive operation in order to kick Russia out of the UN Security Council Russia is now a very inconvenient player for the Western nations and this explains all the recent attacks on our country.

Important to note, too, this report says, is that absolutely no one in the West is even bothering to ask why Russia would break the first cardinal rule of "spy etiquette" in targeting a spy involved in a spy-swap -- which neither the Soviet Union or Russia has done even once in over 70 years -- and as Professor Anthony Glees, the director of the Center for Security and Intelligence Studies at the University of Buckingham, points out by correctly stating that if the Russia did, indeed, poison Skripal, "no one will ever do a swap with them again" -- and who asks the logical question: "If Russia had really wanted to kill Skripal, why didn't they execute him when they had him in custody?"

Other logical questions about this supposed nerve gas attack on Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia being suppressed in the West, this report notes, are those such as:

  1. Did Skripal help Steele to make up the "dossier" about Trump?
  2. Were Skripal's old connections used to contact other people in Russia to ask about Trump dirt?
  3. Did Skripal threaten to talk about this?
  4. Was the lonely old man Sergei Skripal preparing to go back to his homeland Russia?
  5. Did he offer some kind of "gift" as apology to the Russian government that his trusted daughter would take to Moscow?
  6. Did someone find out and stop the transfer?

With Michel Chossudovsky, the award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, having just warned that "the entire Western world is insane, and that the Western politicians, and presstitutes who serve them, are driving the world to extinction", this report concludes, among the handful of experts left to explain where this current Russia hysteria in the West is leading to is the former President Ronald Reagan administration official Paul Craig Roberts -- and whose warning issued, just days ago, is both simple and dire: "World War III Is Approaching".

[Mar 31, 2018] It's 911 all over again...

Mar 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Hoarsewhisperer | Mar 30, 2018 8:58:44 PM | 180 ...
The vile Ruskies are capable of nefarious activities that cannot be proven using ordinary legal standards, say, by finding a proof, but now NATO allies got wiser and decided to move forward without falling for "Putin's trap", i.e. delaying any response until some proofs are found. No, no, no! The very fact that nothing concrete can be found attests to the skill of perpetrator, and the combination of (1) ability (2) motivation and (3) brutality leaves only one possible culprit.
...
Posted by: Piotr Berman | Mar 30, 2018 5:32:52 PM | 162

Yes! It's 911 all over again...
Everyone was quick to forget that, despite the scale of the damage, 911 was simply a criminal act and should have been the subject of a very thorough Police/judicial investigation with unlimited power to subpoena witnesses and suspects - to seek incontrovertible "evidence".

[Mar 31, 2018] What Russia is experiencing right could serve as a reflection of how other non-Western nations can expect to be treated in the not-to-distant future

Mar 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Peter AU 1 | Mar 30, 2018 8:24:32 PM | 177

Mercouris has reprinted an article in full from the Global Times. It looks like the Skripal rubbish has been the catalyst for the creation of a defensive block of nations. The relevant section...

http://theduran.com/furious-china-ramps-support-russia-skripal/

"Until a new line of allies emerges, multi-national associations like BRICS, or even the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, need to provide value to those non-Western nations and actively create alliances with them.

What Russia is experiencing right could serve as a reflection of how other non-Western nations can expect to be treated in the not-to-distant future. Expelling Russian diplomats simultaneously is hardly enough to deter Russia. Overall, it's an intimidation tactic that has become emblematic of Western nations, and furthermore, such measures are not supported by international law and therefore unjustified. More importantly, the international community should have the tools and means to counterbalance such actions."

[Mar 31, 2018] Unproven Allegations Against Trump and Putin Are Risking Nuclear War by Stephen F. Cohen

This is a fight to save Us led global neoliberal empire. Nothing more nothing less. Cohen is right about connections between Skripal case and Russiagate. Skripal case is a British attempt to save Russiagate.
Notable quotes:
"... Diplomacy kept the nuclear peace during the preceding Cold War, but the mass expulsions -- even pending the Kremlin's response -- seriously undermines the diplomatic process. They even criminalize it, as illustrated by denunciations of Trump's phone conversation with Putin and by widespread political-media demands after he expelled a large number of Russia's diplomats that he do "more" -- such demands ranging from more sanctions on Russia to more military responses in Syria, Ukraine, and elsewhere -- to prove he is not under Putin's control. ..."
"... Identifying all expelled diplomats as "intelligence officers" is also misleading. Posting intelligence officers as diplomats has long been a mutual de facto arrangement tacitly, if not explicitly, agreed upon and known by both sides. Moreover, the designation might apply to embassy officials who study the other country's economic, social, cultural, or political life. They gather and report "information." ..."
"... Recently, US-backed proxies apparently killed a number of Russian citizens also operating there. The Kremlin, through its Ministry of Defense, issued an ominous warning: If this happens again, Moscow will strike militarily not only at the proxies but also at US forces in the region who provided the weapons and launched the missiles. The same razor's edge could easily occur where the United States and Russia are also eyeball-to-eyeball, as in Ukraine or the Baltic region. (Again, as Trump is being crippled to the extent that he probably could not negotiate a crisis the way President Kennedy did the 1962 Cuban missile crisis.) ..."
"... the extreme demonization of Putin and growing Russophobia in the United States are elevating today's small, less formidable Russia into a threat even graver than was the Soviet Union, against which US nuclear weapons were developed and intended. And this, again, in the context of diminished diplomacy and Trump's diminished capacity to negotiate. ..."
Mar 31, 2018 | www.thenation.com

"Russiagate" and the Skirpal affair have escalated dangers inherent in the new Cold War beyond those of the preceding one.

1. "Russiagate" and the attempted killing of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in the UK have two aspects in common. Both blame Putin personally. And no actual facts have yet been made public.

§ Having discussed the fallacies of "Russiagate" often and at length, Cohen focuses on the Skripal affair. Putin had no conceivable motive, especially considering the upcoming World Cup Games in Russia, which both the government and the people consider to be very prestigious and thus important for the nation. No forensic or other evidence has yet been presented as to the nature of the purported nerve agent used or whether Russia still possesses it; or, even if so, whether Russia really is the only state whose agents did so; or when, where, and how it was inflicted on Skripal and his daughter; or why they and many others said to have been affected by this "lethal" agent are still alive. Nonetheless, even before the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons has issued its obligatory tests, and while refusing to give the Russian government a required sample to test, the British leaders declared that it was "highly likely" Putin's Kremlin had ordered the attack.

§ Nonetheless, on this flimsy basis, Western governments, led by the UK and reluctantly by the Trump administration, rushed to expel 100 or more Russian diplomats -- the greatest number ever in this long history of such episodes.

§ It should be noted, however, that not all European governments did so, and a few others in only a token way, thereby again revealing European divisions over Russia policy.

2. This episode increases the risk of nuclear war between the United States and Russia.

§ Ever since the onset of the Atomic Age, the doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction has kept the nuclear peace. This may have changed in 2002. when the Bush administration unilaterally withdrew from, thereby abrogating, the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Since then, the United States and NATO have developed 30 or more anti-missile defense installments on land and sea, several very close to Russia. For Moscow, this was an American attempt to obtain a first-strike capability without mutual destruction. The Kremlin made this concern known to Moscow many times since 2002, proposing instead a mutual US-Russian developed anti-missile system, but was repeatedly rebuffed.

§ On March 1, Putin announced that Russia had developed nuclear weapons capable of eluding any anti-missile system, described it as a restoration of strategic parity, and called for new nuclear-weapons negotiations.

§ American mainstream political and media elites derided Putin's announcement. Following the evaluation of several American nuclear experts, four Democratic senators appealed to (now former) Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to (in effect) respond positively to Putin's appeal. Nothing came of it. Shortly after the Russian presidential election on March 18, President Trump himself, in a congratulatory call to Putin, proposed that they meet soon to discuss the "new nuclear arms race." Trump was widely traduced as having revealed further evidence that he was "colluding" with Putin, perhaps § The result has been, reflected in the mass expulsion of Russian diplomats, even more fraught US-Russian relations and with them, of course, the increased risk of nuclear war.

3. Many Americans, including political and media elites who shape public opinion, have been deluded into thinking, especially since the pseudo–"American-Russian friendship" of the Clinton 1990s, that nuclear war now really is "unthinkable." That the mass expulsion of diplomats was merely "symbolic" and of no real lasting consequence. In reality, it has become more thinkable.

§ Diplomacy kept the nuclear peace during the preceding Cold War, but the mass expulsions -- even pending the Kremlin's response -- seriously undermines the diplomatic process. They even criminalize it, as illustrated by denunciations of Trump's phone conversation with Putin and by widespread political-media demands after he expelled a large number of Russia's diplomats that he do "more" -- such demands ranging from more sanctions on Russia to more military responses in Syria, Ukraine, and elsewhere -- to prove he is not under Putin's control.

( Identifying all expelled diplomats as "intelligence officers" is also misleading. Posting intelligence officers as diplomats has long been a mutual de facto arrangement tacitly, if not explicitly, agreed upon and known by both sides. Moreover, the designation might apply to embassy officials who study the other country's economic, social, cultural, or political life. They gather and report "information." )

§ In this connection, historians remind us of how the great powers gradually "slipped" into World War I. The lesson is the crucial role of diplomacy, now being undermined. Consider, for example, Syria. Recently, US-backed proxies apparently killed a number of Russian citizens also operating there. The Kremlin, through its Ministry of Defense, issued an ominous warning: If this happens again, Moscow will strike militarily not only at the proxies but also at US forces in the region who provided the weapons and launched the missiles. The same razor's edge could easily occur where the United States and Russia are also eyeball-to-eyeball, as in Ukraine or the Baltic region. (Again, as Trump is being crippled to the extent that he probably could not negotiate a crisis the way President Kennedy did the 1962 Cuban missile crisis.)

4. The causes of the new risks of nuclear war are not "symbolic" but real and primarily political.

§ As diplomacy is diminished, the militarization of US-Russian relations increases.

§ Every weapon developed as extensively as have been nuclear weapons have eventually been used. Washington dropped two atomic bombs, genetic predecessors of their nuclear offspring, on Japan in 1945. (Before 1914, some people thought gas, the new weapon of mass destruction, would never be widely used in warfare.)

§ On both sides today, but especially in Washington, there is talk of developing "more precise nuclear warheads" that could be usable. Use of even a "small, precise" nuclear weapon would cross the Rubicon of apocalypse.

§ Meanwhile, the extreme demonization of Putin and growing Russophobia in the United States are elevating today's small, less formidable Russia into a threat even graver than was the Soviet Union, against which US nuclear weapons were developed and intended. And this, again, in the context of diminished diplomacy and Trump's diminished capacity to negotiate.

Stephen F. Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian Studies and Politics at NYU and Princeton

[Mar 31, 2018] 'Is this poker or intl. relations': Moscow reacts on calls to accept that it is guilty in Skripal case

Notable quotes:
"... "Are we playing cards here or dealing with serious matters? Is this a game of poker or international relations?" Maria Zakharova said when asked by Sky News correspondent John Sparks if Moscow accepted that "Russia has a serious credibility problem," ..."
"... "Is it a sort of international game within the rules set by the UN Charter or, alternatively, is it an unrestricted use of force and pressure?" she said, questioning the behavior of the UK and the US. ..."
"... Zakharova explained that "for decades, it was the West that taught others, including Russia, that force should not be used. Neither should political or ideological pressure." Yet, she noted when Moscow accepted the Western rules and "became an open and transparent international player," and showed that the world can be "multi-polar," then it "felt no longer being accepted." As an example, she mentioned the US interfering in Russia's energy supply deals with Europe. ..."
"... Zakharova then asked the British journalist a question: "Do you think that after the anti-Iraq campaign, Western nations – the nations that were part of the coalition – deserve being trusted?" ..."
"... But Sparks refused to answer, saying that he wasn't a representative of the British government. And when offered to share his personal opinion on the matter, he replied: "That's not my concern. That's not why I am here. I think you are deflecting." ..."
"... She said that countries that refuse to cave into this pressure and spoil relations with Moscow, like Turkey, "show a responsible approach to international law." Zakharova warned that "tomorrow or the day after tomorrow any country could become a victim of a provocation," like the one Russia currently faces. ..."
Mar 31, 2018 | www.rt.com

It is more appropriate to question the credibility of the West, which pressures other countries to express "solidarity" and invade Iraq on a false pretext, than that of Russia, the spokeswoman for the Foreign Ministry said. "Are we playing cards here or dealing with serious matters? Is this a game of poker or international relations?" Maria Zakharova said when asked by Sky News correspondent John Sparks if Moscow accepted that "Russia has a serious credibility problem," as a large group of countries simply don't believe its denials in the case of the poisoning of double agent Sergei Skripal.

"Is it a sort of international game within the rules set by the UN Charter or, alternatively, is it an unrestricted use of force and pressure?" she said, questioning the behavior of the UK and the US.

Read more Moscow calls for meeting of OPCW on April 2 over ex-spy Skripal poisoning

Zakharova explained that "for decades, it was the West that taught others, including Russia, that force should not be used. Neither should political or ideological pressure." Yet, she noted when Moscow accepted the Western rules and "became an open and transparent international player," and showed that the world can be "multi-polar," then it "felt no longer being accepted." As an example, she mentioned the US interfering in Russia's energy supply deals with Europe.

Zakharova then asked the British journalist a question: "Do you think that after the anti-Iraq campaign, Western nations – the nations that were part of the coalition – deserve being trusted?"

But Sparks refused to answer, saying that he wasn't a representative of the British government. And when offered to share his personal opinion on the matter, he replied: "That's not my concern. That's not why I am here. I think you are deflecting."

Speaking about the solidarity of a large group of countries, she said that this is something that should not come out of "pressure," as it happened after former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, were poisoned with a Soviet-designed nerve agent in Salisbury in early March. Zakharova said the way counties expelled between one to four diplomats at different times and under different pretexts, shows that it was done "under colossal pressure."

READ MORE: '100 suspicions don't make proof': Moscow quotes Dostoyevsky in reply to Boris Johnson over Skripal

She said that countries that refuse to cave into this pressure and spoil relations with Moscow, like Turkey, "show a responsible approach to international law." Zakharova warned that "tomorrow or the day after tomorrow any country could become a victim of a provocation," like the one Russia currently faces.

[Mar 31, 2018] Possibility of ISIS trace in Skripal poisoning, if it ever occurred

Notable quotes:
"... As I pointed out a couple of weeks back, for me the most likely suspect for the Skirpal poisoning was a headchopper who was getting trained in chemical warfare at Porton Downs. The wannabe mass muderer went into town for a spot of luncheon and was angered by the sound of two people talking Russian, his last lab in Gouta had been bombed by Russians, so he sloshed a few drops of nerve juice onto the Skirpals fettucine marinaras while they were distractedly arguing over exchange rates thw rouble to quid rate has been going up and down quicker than whore's drawers since the moronic englanders blindly backed brexit). ..."
"... It is the proximity of Salisbury to Porton Downs that is the biggest unanswered 'coincidence' in this affair, leading one to conclude that the Skipals may merely have been an unfortunate target of convenience. ..."
Mar 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: Debsisdead | Mar 30, 2018 10:41:56 AM | 113

@carrie | Mar 30, 2018 9:40:24 AM | 110

As I pointed out a couple of weeks back, for me the most likely suspect for the Skirpal poisoning was a headchopper who was getting trained in chemical warfare at Porton Downs. The wannabe mass muderer went into town for a spot of luncheon and was angered by the sound of two people talking Russian, his last lab in Gouta had been bombed by Russians, so he sloshed a few drops of nerve juice onto the Skirpals fettucine marinaras while they were distractedly arguing over exchange rates thw rouble to quid rate has been going up and down quicker than whore's drawers since the moronic englanders blindly backed brexit).

Now it is true I may have been jesting when I first posted that hypothesis but it has considerably more logic to it than anything maybot has claimed, and is supported by evidence that America had been supplying CW manufacturing equipment to jihadist chem warfare factories. They have also been subcontracting out their chem and bio jobs to Porton - most likely since the embarrassment caused at their own facility back in the noughties when some of the bio worker/s posted out the homebrand anthrax to assorted media and political figures who they didn't appear like very much, if at all.

It is the proximity of Salisbury to Porton Downs that is the biggest unanswered 'coincidence' in this affair, leading one to conclude that the Skipals may merely have been an unfortunate target of convenience.

A scene somewhat along the lines of the bloke from Syria hypothesis also explains the englander government's hamfisted and deceitful actions. Making a loud noise about the victims while failing to mention Porton Downs proximity to Salisbury for the first couple of weeks has created a big distraction away from something which is at heart just another USuk fuck-up.

[Mar 31, 2018] The term 'nerve agent' entered the Skripal narrative on 7th, and as far as I can find in looking up news articles from that time period, is also the day when the poisoned policeman entered the narrative.

Mar 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Mar 30, 2018 12:12:55 PM | 120

March 7 is interesting. The term 'nerve agent' entered the Skripal narrative on 7th, and as far as I can find in looking up news articles from that time period, is also the day when the poisoned policeman entered the narrative.

118
March 7 is interesting. The term 'nerve agent' entered the Skripal narrative on 7th, and as far as I can find in looking up news articles from that time period, is also the day when the poisoned policeman entered the narrative.

[Mar 31, 2018] Nick Bailey's hospitalization

Notable quotes:
"... At the moment, it seems the policeman was poisoned on the 5th or 6th when there where already pics of people in protective suits. The story on the policeman has chopped and changed a lot - he was a first responder, he was poisoned at the house ect ect. ..."
"... I should have highlighted that DS Bailey was initially discharged from hospital after a check up. ..."
"... Chemical weapons attack field drill on the same day. ..."
"... "I think the confusion in the policeman part of the narrative is that he was poisoned perhaps two day later, and had to be fitted into the narrative retrospectively." ..."
"... I think the policeman was thrown into the mix because the female doctor who gave the girl cpr on the spot, the ambulance attendees and driver were all right as rain. They needed another "on the scene" victim to drown out the obvious, that whatever "it" was was not contagious. There is also the young man who first found them who said he got spittle on his sleeve from the male but brushed it off (with his bare hand) and that was that. Whatever it is, it is clearly not the super awesome awful evil Russian elixir. ..."
Mar 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

jawbone | Mar 30, 2018 12:52:47 PM | 125

Re: DS Nick Bailey's hospitalization

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/nick-bailey-discharged_uk_5ab3dcede4b0decad047d95d

HuffPo has him entering hospital on March 4, but no mention of his going to the Skripal residence. "He was taken to Salisbury District Hospital after responding to the attack" on the Skripals. So, to emergency some time after initially responding to the couple on March 4 and released on March 22. No mention of his going to the house.

Bailey's statement was read by Chief Constable Kier Pritchard and, to my ear, it sounded like a careful, well written PR release. Basically little information. The experience was "surreal" came the closest to describing how he felt. And that's the part usually run on the broadcast TV news I saw. No mention of how he was treated, whether he had any physical therapy. Has anyone heard he speak? or is that area of lingering effects of the exposure to...whatever it was?

Peter AU 1 , Mar 30, 2018 1:14:20 PM | 128
Jawbone, the article you link to is dated march 22. Articles dated 5th/6th of march are needed.

At the moment, it seems the policeman was poisoned on the 5th or 6th when there where already pics of people in protective suits. The story on the policeman has chopped and changed a lot - he was a first responder, he was poisoned at the house ect ect. I think the confusion in the policeman part of the narrative is that he was poisoned perhaps two day later, and had to be fitted into the narrative retrospectively.

somebody , Mar 30, 2018 1:25:44 PM | 130
@125

I assume it is true that the police officer caught it from the door handle same as the front door being the place of the strongest distribution of the chemical agent as this fact does not support any proof of Russian state involvement. Quite the contrary - it works more like a Mafia warning, whoever might get it the postman, a neighbour, Skripals does not matter.

There is this guy and he is from Uzbekistan .

He spent long years in Europe before he returned to Russia. So I suppose he features in all kinds of secret service files.

Don Bacon , Mar 30, 2018 2:23:37 PM | 137
several snippets on DS (Detective Sgt) Bailey

> It is confirmed that a police officer, later confirmed as DS Nick Bailey, is fighting for his life in hospital.-- Mar 8

> The pair are in a critical condition in a local hospital. A police officer who helped investigate is in serious condition, and a total of 21 people have received medical treatment. Former London police chief Ian Blair said Friday that a police officer who is in serious condition visited Skripal's house -- perhaps a hint that the nerve agent may have been delivered there. Blair told BBC radio that Det. Sgt. Nick Bailey "has actually been to the house, whereas there is a doctor who looked after the patients in the open who hasn't been affected at all. There may be some clues floating around in here." -- Mar 9

> DS Nick Bailey is seriously ill in hospital having visited the home of Skripal after the defector and his daughter were found slumped on a bench in Salisbury, Wiltshire, on Sunday afternoon. Investigators want to know whether Bailey visited the scene where the two Russians were found and was poisoned there or by items there, or whether the officer was contaminated on his visit to Skripal's home. Sources say that, while it is not certain, it is believed more likely that Bailey became contaminated on his visit to the home. -- Mar 9

> But last night it emerged the police officer who also fell ill after responding to the incident, visited Mr Skripal's home before he collapsed. Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey remains in a serious condition in hospital. According to reports, he tended to the victims at the scene and then visited both the Skripal home.A source told The Times: "He was at both places. "First he was where they collapsed, trying to help them, then he went to the house, in that order." -- Mar 10

> DS Bailey, who was among the first to attend to Mr Skripal and his daughter Yulia, before possibly examining their red BMW, where it is thought the nerve agent Novichok may have been placed, was initially discharged from hospital after a check up. He later admitted to Accident and Emergency at Salisbury District Hospital feeling extremely unwell. DS Bailey is now described as in a stable condition -- Mar 15

> Concern for the family of the police officer who went to the aid of the poisoned Russian spy has grown after Army and police sealed off his street and began work to remove his car for examination. Speculation grew that Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey may have carried traces of the nerve agent Novichok home with him after attempting to resuscitate Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia. -- Mar 15

> PM Theresa May visits Salisbury and meets privately with DS Nick Bailey . His car is removed from his home as part of the investigation.-- Mar 15

> The police officer who was hospitalized after rushing to help a former Russian spy and his daughter suffering from a poison attack in Salisbury, England, was discharged Thursday [Mar 22]. Bailey was treated at Salisbury District Hospital for several weeks after being exposed to the same deadly and rare nerve agent that the U.K. government says was used to target former intelligence officer Sergie Skirpal, 66, and Yulia, 33. -- Mar 22

Don Bacon , Mar 30, 2018 2:27:01 PM | 138
@137

I should have highlighted that DS Bailey was initially discharged from hospital after a check up.

frances , Mar 30, 2018 2:36:46 PM | 139
Chemical weapons attack field drill on the same day.

Krollchem | Mar 30, 2018 12:23:13 AM | 78

There is always a "drill" taking place in the immediate vicinity addressing the same problem (terrorists, shooters, CW) whenever these events happen isn't there? A drill was happening on 9/11 and has been every time right up to the latest at a Florida school.

cdvision , Mar 30, 2018 3:02:21 PM | 144
I detect that the medics at Salisbury are not reading from the official script. Someone mentioned Yulia has been moved from Salisbury hospital. This is worrying. Hope she doesn't suddenly have a relapse.
frances , Mar 30, 2018 3:13:30 PM | 147
"I think the confusion in the policeman part of the narrative is that he was poisoned perhaps two day later, and had to be fitted into the narrative retrospectively."

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Mar 30, 2018 1:14:20 PM | 128

I think the policeman was thrown into the mix because the female doctor who gave the girl cpr on the spot, the ambulance attendees and driver were all right as rain. They needed another "on the scene" victim to drown out the obvious, that whatever "it" was was not contagious. There is also the young man who first found them who said he got spittle on his sleeve from the male but brushed it off (with his bare hand) and that was that. Whatever it is, it is clearly not the super awesome awful evil Russian elixir.

Don Bacon , Mar 30, 2018 3:19:50 PM | 148
@jb 145

On Bailey -- Telegraph .

[Mar 31, 2018] SKRIPALMANIA by Patrick Armstrong

Notable quotes:
"... contemptuous mockery ..."
"... From the beginning this story had more holes than a block of swiss cheese. It has only gotten worse with a cast of characters descending into buffoonery. ..."
"... No amount of mockery will make those shameless ashamed. The US, Britain and their fellow travelers have spent so much time and energy in falsehoods they no longer know what truth and reality are. This extends across the spectrum from foreign affairs to economics and finance. Falsity pervades. It is all about PR and marketing now. Baghdad Bob is us. ..."
Mar 31, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

SKRIPALMANIA by Patrick Armstrong

1. It's obvious nonsense brought to you by proven liars.
2. The point of propaganda is to leave an impression after the details have been forgotten.
3. To get involved in discussing the minutiae of the story is to help the propagandists' aims.
4. Therefore treat it as a badly constructed story that is failing to convince.
5. Do this by analysing the comments on the news stories which (at least the ones I've looked at) show that people are sceptical.
6. Also mock the meanderings of the story: At the restaurant! In the car! On the doorstep! Incredibly lethal but strangely ineffective. Miraculous recovery of daughter. Baby wipes as effective protection. Reminiscent of White Helmets and their flip flops, rubber gloves and paper masks; but, come to think of it, it's the same authors in both stories. Who, after so many lies, are becoming overconfident and sloppy.

It's a startlingly incompetent theatrical production and should be responded to with contemptuous mockery .

JohnA , 30 March 2018 at 01:37 PM

Spontaneous mockery:

Skripal Case: How UK 'Explains' Why Russia Is to Blame in 1-Minute Video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=47&v=yClMsr6ZfvM

jsn , 30 March 2018 at 02:17 PM

And now back to your regularly scheduled Easter Weekend.
(thanks for weighing in!)

Doug Colwell , 30 March 2018 at 02:50 PM

Thank you Mr. Armstrong. It is reassuring to know that there are some here in Canada who question the prevailing narrative. I find it deeply troubling that we have abandoned the principal of due process. Where will that end?

FB Ali

What Ms Nauert and her bosses are missing is that very few people take the USA seriously any more in the international sphere. No wonder Putin is so amused in that video JohnA linked to (@ #1).

About the only thing left for the US establishment to make people take them seriously is to threaten to blow up the world. The trouble is they don't even realise that this will be the end result if they use the nukes they like to wave around. That's what Putin has been trying to make them understand - so far without much success.

Jony Kanuck , 30 March 2018 at 03:30 PM

Patrick,

From the beginning this story had more holes than a block of swiss cheese. It has only gotten worse with a cast of characters descending into buffoonery. We've been educating the masses for how many years. For sure they haven't read enough poetry:

Died some, pro patria,
non "dulce" non "et decor" . . .
walked eye-deep in hell
believing in old men's lies, then unbelieving
came home, home to a lie,

Ezra Pound from Hugh Selwyn Mauberly

Petrel , 30 March 2018 at 03:34 PM

The overall story given us is that Julia Skripal journeys to her father -- a convicted and released British agent-- from Russia to Salisbury. The following morning they visit her mother's grave north of town, drive to an Italian eatery in downtown Salisbury (all caught on security cameras) and walk past more security cameras through a public passageway to a downtown, riverside park. They sit down on a park bench and 15 - 20 minutes later pass out. A patrolling policeman tries to rouse them, calls Emergency Services and has them transported to hospital. Another policeman, a detective, is sent to the Skripal house and immediately falls ill. (So the mystery poison takes 4 hours to affect the Skripals and 15-30 minutes to affect the detective.)

Before any blood tests are done, the UK Prime Minister denounces Russia for using a Soviet researched, but never manufactured nerve agent, with a name invented by a BBC TV thriller-series 5 month earlier. The following day, the chief medical doctor of the Salisbury hospital denies that the Skripals and the detective were treated for any nerve agent. Meanwhile the Russians demanded that the British abide by a signed anti-chemical weapon convention and turn over whatever blood or other evidence backing the claim to an international agency. The Russians also demand Consular access to Julia Skripal, still a Russian citizen.

A month later, the British grant permission for the relevant International chemical watchdog to search for evidence. By now whatever evidence lay around the Skripals in their house, car, cemetery, restaurant and in their blood is long-gone history. (Since the Skripals have been heavily sedated for the period, we and they don't know what else has been injected into them since they passed out.)

My personal theory is that Skripal, a British double-agent, agreed to ingest poison, something like Valium, after he and his daughter had lunch. They moved to the park bench and waited for the material to render them unconscious, as the Skripal house was somehow poisoned, awaiting the detective's arrival.

What Prime Minister May et al did not know about was the existence of a Chemical Weapons Treaty, an agency in Belgium to enforce the Treaty and a protocol to follow. Russia invoking the Treaty caught them flat-footed, hence the hysterical behavior and statements by the Prime Minister, Foreign Minister and a month-long delay before the international agency was allowed access to the still comatose Skripals.

catherine , 30 March 2018 at 04:02 PM

Said May:

"Blood samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analyzed and the findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound. The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent or closely related agent"

Or a "related compound" or "related agent"? I imagine there are quite a few countries that have related agents. I think if the Kremlin poisoned Skripal they would have made sure he died from it and didn't recover. Sounds like a set up to me.

Jack , 30 March 2018 at 05:34 PM

Patrick

No amount of mockery will make those shameless ashamed. The US, Britain and their fellow travelers have spent so much time and energy in falsehoods they no longer know what truth and reality are. This extends across the spectrum from foreign affairs to economics and finance. Falsity pervades. It is all about PR and marketing now. Baghdad Bob is us.

Big business are managed such that their stock is the product. Management's are incentivized to make that product rise not to insure the business of products that satisfy consumer needs and wants. There is no incentive to build intergenerational franchises. The Wall St mindset of making a quick buck has permeated everywhere.

Old notions of honor and stewardship have gone the wayside. I was born in the Depression and grew up in a different era. The world has changed in many ways yet the fundamental principles remain although temporarily masked by hubris. Thucydides observations of human nature ring true millenia later.

Patrick Armstrong

If you discuss it as if it were serious, you keep the story alive. From a propaganda point the story is simple: Putin=Russia=Enemy. Argue with the details and you become part of a discussion on how much of an enemy? and enemy in other cases but not this and so on.

Much better to robustly assume anyone of sense understands the story is a lie and laugh at how idiotic anyone who believes it is.

[Mar 31, 2018] Russia to Britain - Prove your own spies did not poison Skripal

Mar 28, 2018 | www.legitgov.org

The Russian Foreign Ministry on Wednesday demanded London prove British spies did not poison a former double agent in England, saying in the absence of such proof it would regard the incident as an attempt on the lives of Russian citizens. Ties between London and Moscow are badly strained by the poisoning of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury. Britain alleges Russia was to blame, but Moscow says it had no involvement. "An analysis of all the circumstances...leads us to think of the possible involvement in it (the poisoning) of the British intelligence services," the foreign ministry said in a statement.

[Mar 31, 2018] Questioning the Conventional Wisdom of Russian Spy's Poisoning -- Interview with Craig Murray

It looks more and more plausible that this is a pretty audacious provocation similar to Steele dossier and "DNC hack" (whcih actually was a leak)
Notable quotes:
"... I'm not saying the Russians didn't do it, I am saying there are other possibilities. We are not supposed to assign responsibility for crime in this way, saying there is a bad guy in the neighborhood and therefore it must be him. So far, there has been no real evidence at all that it was the Russian state that did it. ..."
"... It looks to many people like this may just be a silly amateur mixture of different insecticides. ..."
"... Other questions arise. The British government has been telling us that this is ten times more powerful than a standard nerve agent. Thankfully, so far, nobody has been killed. Why isn't this deadly agent more effective? Why is it that the doctor who administered first aid to Yulia Skripal was completely unaffected, even though he had extensive physical contact with her? ..."
"... if you were Vladimir Putin and you had this secret nerve agent, why would you blow your cover by using it on this retired spy who you released from prison years ago? The whole scenario is utterly implausible. ..."
"... Another false flag like they did with Iraq and literally the same criminals and co conspirators. ..."
Mar 26, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

... ... ...

Craig Murray: I'm not saying the Russians didn't do it, I am saying there are other possibilities. We are not supposed to assign responsibility for crime in this way, saying there is a bad guy in the neighborhood and therefore it must be him. So far, there has been no real evidence at all that it was the Russian state that did it.

I find it remarkable that the very day this happened the British government was announcing that it was the Russian state that was behind this. They couldn't possibly have had time to analyze any of the evidence. It is as though this is being used as a trigger to put prearranged anti-Russian measures into place and to "up" the Cold War rhetoric. You can't help get the feeling that they are rather pleased this has happened and were even expecting it to happen.

DB: This is coming out of the European Union today: "The European Union strongly condemns the attack that took place against Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury, England on March 4 that also left a police officer seriously ill. The lives of many citizens were threatened by this reckless and illegal action. The European Union takes extremely seriously the UK government's assessment that it is highly likely that the Russian Federation is responsible."

CM: This phrase "highly likely" admits that they don't have the evidence to back this up. It's a speculation.

DB: They say that the poison is consistent with what the Russians have used in the past.

CM: The claim is that this is one of a group of nerve agents known as a Novichok. The Novichok program was being run in the 1980's by the Soviets. The idea was to develop chemical weapons which could be quickly put together from commercial pesticides and fertilizers. They came up with a number of theoretical designs for such weapons.

Until now, the official position of the British government and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons was that there was doubt as to whether they actually produced any of these. As of now, they haven't been put on the banned list, precisely because the scientific community has doubted their existence. So the British government's ability on day-one to identify this was quite remarkable.

Novichok is not a particular weapon but a class of weapon. Russia is by no means the only country capable of producing this kind of weapon. In 2016, the Iranians succeeded in producing several Novichok weapons and they reported their results to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. Their motivation was that they were concerned that they themselves might be attacked by chemical weapons, possibly from Israel. There are at least a couple dozen countries who have the technical capability to create this type of nerve agent.

In order to take blood samples from the Skripals, who were both in a coma, doctors had to get court approval. And in giving evidence to the High Court, two scientists stated that the Skripals had been poisoned by a Novichok nerve agent or a "closely related agent." It looks to many people like this may just be a silly amateur mixture of different insecticides.

Other questions arise. The British government has been telling us that this is ten times more powerful than a standard nerve agent. Thankfully, so far, nobody has been killed. Why isn't this deadly agent more effective? Why is it that the doctor who administered first aid to Yulia Skripal was completely unaffected, even though he had extensive physical contact with her?

DB: But some people will say that the only country that would want to silence a former Russian spy would be Russia.

CM: Our foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, has gone on record as saying that the Russians have been secretly stockpiling this chemical weapon for a decade and have had a secret program of assassination techniques. But if you were Vladimir Putin and you had this secret nerve agent, why would you blow your cover by using it on this retired spy who you released from prison years ago? The whole scenario is utterly implausible.

Why would Russia wish to ruin its international reputation with this entirely gratuitous violence against an old spy? Skripal was exchanged as part of a spy swap. If people are going to swap spies and then kill them, there won't be any spy swaps in the future. A KGB person like Putin is the last person who is going to destroy the system of spy swaps.

Randy Credico: Mr. Murray, there has been a concerted effort to defame you and undermine your credibility. What effect has this had on you and your family?

CM: It has been really quite unpleasant. The mainstream media has permitted no doubt at all. All of them are just printing government propaganda. I went on social media to post my doubts about this story being too convenient and too easy. My first piece on this, "Russian to Judgment," had millions of viewers. That brought upon me the wrath of the establishment. I became the recipient of hundreds of pieces of Twitter abuse in which I was called a nut and a conspiracy theorist.

RC: Who stands to benefit from this attack?

CM: It adds fuel to the new Cold War. The armaments industry are the primary people who benefit. This kind of thing is very good for defense budgets. It is very good news for the spies and security services. Here in the UK the industry employs over 100,000 people. In a country of 60 million, this is a strong and very highly paid interest group. All of these people are seeing a major ramping up of their budgets. When the people feeding-in the intelligence are the same people who are benefiting financially from that story, then you have to worry. And particularly for right-wing politicians this is a cheap way of getting support.

DB: Mr. Murray, I don't think that we can separate this from the so-called "Russiagate frenzy." Can you state unequivocally that there were substantial leaks from the DNC, as opposed to hacks?

CM: I can promise you that what came out of the DNC were leaks. They were from somebody who legally had access to the information. It was not an outside hack, not by the Russians, not by anyone.

... ... ...

Dennis J. Bernstein is a host of "Flashpoints" on the Pacifica radio network and the author of Special Ed: Voices from a Hidden Classroom . You can access the audio archives at www.flashpoints.net .

nonsense factory , March 30, 2018 at 4:41 pm

Without a public inquiry and the presentation of the raw analytical data that whoever did the forensics collected, the method they used, the testimony of the technician involved under oath – standard criminal justice procedures – there's really no basis for making any claims at this point.

What that reveals is that the British tabloid press and the British government have some kind of agenda that they're pushing with this story; Cold War 2.0 seems to be the name of the game. There's nothing new about this strategy, it's been going on ever since Putin rejected ExxonMobil's bid for a 51% controlling stake in Yukos in 2003, and soon after, arrested Khodorkovsky and exiled Berezovsky and Gusinsky. Ho hum.

Abe , March 30, 2018 at 4:53 pm

"Considering the lack of actual evidence the UK has provided and the British government's verified history of fabricating claims regarding the use of WMDs to advance it and its allies' geopolitical agendas – the burden of proof never rested upon Russia.

"Just as the US and UK did during the lead up to the Iraq War in 2003, an avalanche of propaganda is being produced to stampede the world into backing whatever long-ago elected course of action the West has decided to take against Russia.

"In the hindsight of whatever course of action the UK and its allies decide to take in the coming days, weeks, and months based on the Skripal incident, who will play the role of 'Curveball' who supposedly duped Theresa May in making her Powell-style accusations before declaring her Bush-style retaliation?

"And considering the ramifications for the West regarding its lies in the lead up to Iraq and the fallout the West has faced in the aftermath of Iraq's destruction, what do Western policymakers expect to gain from an incident many times more transparently staged and self-serving against a world increasingly skeptical of their claims and actions?

"Still, the accusations are serious and the prepared responses from the West will assuredly further endanger global peace and stability. That the alleged attack took place on British soil means that – unlike in Syria – there is no UNSC the West must pass through before taking matters into its own hands.

"This fact alone – following years of frustration in the face of Russia's veto power upon the UNSC in regards to Syria – makes the nature of the Skripal incident even more suspicious. The UK appears to have a pretext and a clear path toward escalation before it – how far it and its allies are prepared to go remains to be seen."

WMD Lies Strike Again: The Skripal Incident
By Tony Cartalucci
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2018/03/wmd-lies-strike-again-skripal-incident.html

jose , March 30, 2018 at 9:30 pm

Dear Abe: you make very good points that can be easily verified. Personally, I believe that this article goes beyond lying and fake news: It reminds me of the term GASLIGHTING which "is a form of manipulation that seeks to sow seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or in members of a targeted group, hoping to make them question their own memory, perception, and sanity. Using persistent denial, misdirection, contradiction, and lying, it attempts to destabilize the target and delegitimize the target's belief." In a sane world, people should demand from the British government hard evidence so it's accusation of Russia being the culprit could be credible. Instead, we only read innuendo, speculation, and fabrication. The burden of proof should rest on the accuser (England) not Russia (target). Good post Abe.

john wilson , March 30, 2018 at 5:14 pm

My concern is the chain of custody of the Skripal's blood samples. I would hope that the UN chemical weapons inspectors would be present at the taking of the blood samples and take them away themselves. If they are just given the samples taken by the hospital earlier and these samples have been handled by 'government people', then they will most certainly have been spiked with the nerve agent in question. One way or another, May's criminal government operatives won't let there be any possibility of the sample being found not to have nerve agent in them.

Sam F , March 30, 2018 at 7:46 pm

Yes, there should be a UN standard of evidence and provenance thereof, beneath which accusations cannot be made and retaliations are considered aggressions. That would discourage false-flag provocations.

Brendan , March 30, 2018 at 5:56 pm

The official British narrative of what happened in Salisbury is just physically impossible, if you think about the supposed version of events:

Someone, and possibly a second person, makes contact with an extremely powerful nerve agent that has been placed on a door knob. Several hours later, after travelling in a car, drinking in a pub, eating in a restaurant and walking through a park, the two people are critically injured when the nerve agent suddenly kicks into action. This effect probably happens within less than a minute, since neither of them was able to call for help. Nobody else at the scene is affected, not even a doctor who physically handles one of the victims while treating them.

To top it off, more than three weeks later, one of the victims makes a rapid recovery, apparently in a single day, and is able to eat, drink and talk.

This amazing recovery from a lethal nerve agent is the kind of event that would normally be expected to make headlines as The Miracle of Salisbury. However it only gets mentioned as a minor item in media reports, in spite of the huge amount of coverage given to the poisoning and its political consequences.

The media seems afraid to even acknowldge that there's something unusual about this whole story. If they did, they'd have to ask certain questions: Is that how military grade nerve agents really work? Are our governments telling us lies?

Zachary Smith , March 30, 2018 at 7:35 pm

This amazing recovery from a lethal nerve agent is the kind of event that would normally be expected to make headlines as The Miracle of Salisbury .

A drop of nerve gas will kill in seconds, and the Evil Russian Poison was at least ten times as powerful, and one of the Skiprals has started to recover. A blurb and a headline I saw recently:

"She Is Risen!"

Last Act Of 'Novichok' Drama Revealed – "The Skripals' Resurrection"

The people involved now have a problem of gracefully backing away from this nutty story.

Zachary Smith , March 30, 2018 at 7:37 pm

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/03/she-is-risen-last-act-of-novichok-drama-revealed-the-skripals-resurrection.html

Tom Welsh , March 30, 2018 at 5:56 pm

"I find it remarkable that the very day this happened the British government was announcing that it was the Russian state that was behind this".

Exactly like MH17. I am surprised Mr Murray did not mention the parallel himself.

Tom Welsh , March 30, 2018 at 6:02 pm

"What if you were subpoenaed before Congress, would you take the fifth or would you tell that story?"

As Mr Murray is not a US citizen, I don't think Congress has any power to subpoena him. And he certainly couldn't "take the fifth", which is a constitutional protection available only to US citizens.

At a time when the US government is trying to set itself up as some kind of world government, it is extremely important to be perfectly clear about the limits of its power and authority.

Sam F , March 30, 2018 at 9:38 pm

Congress could ask him to cooperate, or request his subpoena via diplomatic channels under bilateral treaties. I don't know whether (under UK law) he could be penalized for claiming a bad memory, but coerced testimony could not be used against him in the US. Constitutional rights explicitly apply to all persons, not just US citizens.

David G , March 30, 2018 at 10:29 pm

"And he certainly couldn't 'take the fifth', which is a constitutional protection available only to US citizens."

Just as a point of information, that is categorically false.

But I hope the ambassador doesn't find himself in front of any U.S. Congressional panel or grand jury if his position is that he will assert that the DNC documents were a leak and not a hack, and then refuse to go into any further detail. A person can get into legal trouble that way.

Benjamin aye , March 30, 2018 at 6:08 pm

The truth concerning this skripal case is that the Russians are not involved in this poisoning.threr are some concept to understanding this situation.first after the incident the British government knew immediately the sort of nerve agent that was used to poison them.if the British on its own have not work on such agent it will be quite difficult to know immediately. This is because you must have a sample of the original so u can make comparison to ascertain your findings. Secondly there is a report that said that the skripal first had contact of the nerve agent at door post of his house,so how is it possible that they went to the cementary without having contact there,went to a cafe without having contact there and visited other places without making contact with the people there. As at these points the agent radiant level is still pretty high yet nobody had contacted the gas but hours later a police person that came to their rescue contact it.there is an irony to this case. Thirdly according to get experts concerning the novirchok nerve agents they are ten time powerful than the VX agents.if a VX agent that was use against the brother of north Korea takes 10minutes to die after been attack with the VX them with novirchok it should take a minute to end their lives.so how come they were Abel to survive,from the deadly reputation accord to the novirchok nerve agents where did the British get the antidote to the nerve agents. fouthly.this skripals case have have another conspiracy theory that is yet to be attained.it wasn't by accident that skripals were targeted.in order to removed the public attentions from the fallout of briext, to increased the defence budgets,to rally around the NATO sportive alliances which will show to the British pollution that after briext the UK can still muscle up allies to it aid.

backwardsevolution , March 30, 2018 at 6:27 pm

George Galloway, British politician and former candidate for the mayor of London, said:

"Why do I not believe you? Let me count the ways. You're not looking for anyone in connection with the attack on the Skripals. There is no manhunt, no all points alert, no description, no identikit drawing, no CCTV. No suspects. That means you already know what happened. #Russia"

Dick , March 30, 2018 at 7:10 pm

Choose for yourself which of the following Seven Rules of Propaganda apply to the current Skripal affair:

Avoid abstract ideas – appeal to the emotions. – When we think emotionally, we are more prone to be irrational and less critical in our thinking; making it easier for the citizenry to believe the absurd!

Constantly repeat just a few ideas. Use stereotyped phrases. – This could be stated more plainly as 'Keep it simple, stupid!' or 'Lie, lie lie, repeat, repeat, repeat'.

Give only one side of the argument and obscure history. – Any historical perspective is ignored keeping the citizenry focused on the here and now.

Demonize the enemy or pick out one special "enemy" for special vilification. – Putin and Russia; enough said.

Appear humanitarian in work and motivations. – Used this technique to validate foreign interventions or ongoing conflicts where the term 'Right to Protect' for justification.

Obscure one's economic interests. – For example, the invasion of Iraq was all about oil and the control over the resources; not WMD.

Monopolize the flow of information. – This mainly entails setting the narrative by which all subsequent events can be based upon or interpreted in such a way as to reinforce the narrative. The narrative does not need to be true; in fact, it can be anything that suits the monopoliser as long as it is based loosely upon some event. It is critical to have at least majority control of media and the ability to control the message so the flow of information is consistent with the narrative.

Sam F , March 30, 2018 at 8:32 pm

The Iraq war motive was the Israeli plan to fragment surrounding states, as they have long done. Oil companies could expect no low price deals from a country in need of reconstruction, and in fact the US oil companies did not get much of the oil even at competitive prices. The "It's the oil, stupid" concept is just zionist propaganda.

Zachary Smith , March 30, 2018 at 7:18 pm

CM: I think that the Russians have the sense not to overreact.

Overreaction is bad, but if I were sitting in Russian ruling councils, I'd be pushing for either a severe restriction of diplomatic relations with the UK, or a complete cut-off. The "mother country" has gone ape****, and is clearly the ringleader for whatever it is that's happening. The latest provocation by the Brits has been to order the crew off a just-landed Russian airliner, and conduct a "search".

Scotland Yard has denied its officers carried out a search of the plane.

A spokeswoman told Daily Star Online: "I've spoken to our control room at London Heathrow and have confirmed that it is not our force."

The Foreign Office told the BBC that Border Force officals boarded the flight and Aeroflot was "willing to cooperate with UK authorities if explanation given".

The pilot refused to leave, so they kept him in the cockpit while the "Border Force" did whatever they were doing. Planting evidence? Wouldn't put it past them.

Again, at a minimum I'd cut the diplomatic staff of the UK in Russia to the Ambassador and maybe one secretary. But I'd favor sending them all home and doing any necessary communications second-hand through the Swiss Embassy.

Zachary Smith , March 30, 2018 at 7:19 pm

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/692750/russian-plane-inspected-british-police-london-airport-refuse-leave-news

Sam F , March 30, 2018 at 8:19 pm

One advantage of diplomatic restraint in such a case is that the provocateur discredits himself, whereas escalation serves as distraction. So Russia may wait until the baselessness of the hysteria becomes clear to the public. The aircraft cockpit search shows hysteria and malice without reason, like the final stages of a witch-hunt craze. If not verified as CW, or nothing but "trust us" emerges, the witch hunters will be discredited.

I like the hypothesis that a US/UK/Israeli agent/employee (at Porton Down lab if it was CW) did this on his own initiative, taking the Skripal house as a convenient target, just to make a splash and a provocation. For example, a zionist UK grad student at Porton Down. Others there or among his associates would likely have spoken about such incidents. Quite possibly a connection with the many false-flag CW incidents in Syria by US/UK/Israeli supported "rebels." This would certainly be a focus of any serious investigation.

Jeff , March 30, 2018 at 9:03 pm

Mr. Murray is a very polite soul. At this point, quite frankly, I'm terrified. Up to this point, the reality is that we have been beating up on little countries who don't have a prayer of fighting back. Russia and China are not those countries. I don't know how many nuclear weapons China has but Russia has enough to destroy the United States. Again, I don't know about China but I know that Russia has non-nuclear weapons that can reach the US. Both separately and together they can seriously hurt the United States. I see no need to get into that kind of pissing contest.

David G , March 30, 2018 at 10:39 pm

Regarding your feeling of terror, Jeff, to quote the comic/movie "Watchmen": "Don't be alarmed. That indicates only that you are still sane."

Stephen J. , March 30, 2018 at 9:20 pm

March 30, 2018
"Solidarity among War Criminals"

"Because of the nerve poison attack, NATO also imposed punitive measures against Russia. Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg announced that seven employees of the Russian NATO representation would be deprived of accreditation. In addition, the Russian delegation will be limited to 20 of the current 30 employees. The NATO countries had already condemned the attack on Skripal earlier this month and expressed their solidarity with Great Britain ."

It must have been very heartening for the war gangs and war criminals of NATO [1] to see the solidarity of their members all voicing their criticism of Russia despite there being no proof that Russia was behind this attack in Salisbury, England. Oh well, to paraphrase an old saying, "war criminal birds of a feather always stick or fly, bomb, and kill together."
[read more at link below]
http://graysinfo.blogspot.ca/2018/03/solidarity-among-war-criminals.html

Randal Marlin , March 30, 2018 at 10:36 pm

Craig Murray's makes an important observation concerning the official language about the Skripal poisoning and the language used by media.

Official language, as he notes, talks about "a weapon of a type developed by Russia." But newspapers and some politicians use the expression "Russian weapon," or "a weapon that could only have come from Russia." I find it hard to believe that British and U.S. scientists could not duplicate or come up with an equally toxic equivalent to a Novichok nerve agent.

What I do see is the same kind of repetition of the "Russians did it" meme to reinforce an anti-Russian and anti-Putin mind-set. The same kind of repetition was used to get people to accept the "weapons of mass destruction" deception supporting the U.S. second Iraq war in 2003.

This forms one part of a collage of different Putin-implicating events all of which collectively propagate the image of a power-hungry, dangerous man who must be stopped. Georgia and Ukraine are cited, but without careful attention to circumstances, so that he appears much more evil than a full understanding of events would warrant.

The outrage against Putin's alleged "meddling" in the last U.S. presidential election seems greatly overblown when weighed against the U.S. meddling in the Russian presidential election of 1996, where U.S. advisors reportedly helped Boris Yeltsin get re-elected (Time Magazine, cover story, July 15, 1996). He turned out to be a disaster for Russia, leading to support of Vladimir Putin .

What I like about Consortium News is that it seems to understand the danger of letting contestable factual claims go unchallenged, letting them crystallize into settled beliefs in people's minds. The danger is that a set of beliefs will be widely enough held that only a few more prods, tied to deeply held beliefs about American exceptionalism, will lead the U.S. into war yet again, against more formidable foes than hitherto and with even more disastrous results.

When alleged facts are contestable, and have bearing on important political matters, reasons for doubting them should be kept alive. The mass media prefer simplicity, because most people find complexity off-putting. But policies founded on illusions do not hold out much promise of a peaceful world.

All of this is not to sing praises of Putin, who has a lot of blood on his hands, but to prevent misunderstandings that make another world war more possible. Thanks again to Craig Murray and Consortium News.

Jean , March 30, 2018 at 11:00 pm

Another false flag like they did with Iraq and literally the same criminals and co conspirators. Remember Colon Powell at the U.N. with his vials of talc and artists renditions of mobile labs, nice brush work. The anthrax was made in a US military lab.They even tried to blame a Muslim scientists for stealing it. More lies.

[Mar 31, 2018] Salisbury Incident Report: Hard Evidence For Soft Minds

Notable quotes:
"... This 6-paged PDF is a powerful evidence of another intellectual low of British propaganda machine. Open it and you can tell that substantially it makes only two assertions on the Skripal case, and both are false ..."
"... The fifth version is a rather more elaborate development of the previous point. There is circumstantial evidence, a version outlined by the Daily Telegraph , that Skripal may have had a hand in devising Christopher Steele's 'Trump Dossier'. ..."
"... The authors of this "report" mixed up a very strange cocktail of multitype allegations, none of which have ever been proven or recognized by any responsible entity ..."
Mar 39, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Via Oriental Review,

The UK government's presentation on the Salisbury incident, which was repeatedly cited in recent days as an "ultimate proof" of Russia's involvement into Skripal's assassination attempt, was made public earlier today.

This 6-paged PDF is a powerful evidence of another intellectual low of British propaganda machine. Open it and you can tell that substantially it makes only two assertions on the Skripal case, and both are false:

First.

Novichok is a group of agents developed only by Russia and not declared under the CWC " – a false statement . Novichok was originally developed in the USSR (Nukus Lab, today in Uzbekistan, site completely decommissioned according to the US-Uzbekistan agreement by 2002). One of its key developers, Vil Mirzayanov , defected to the United States in 1990s, its chemical formula and technology were openly published in a number of chemical journals outside Russia. Former top-ranking British foreign service officer Craig Murray specifically noted this point on March 17:

Craig Murray

I have now been sent the vital information that in late 2016, Iranian scientists set out to study whether novichoks really could be produced from commercially available ingredients. Iran succeeded in synthesizing a number of novichoks. Iran did this in full cooperation with the OPCW and immediately reported the results to the OPCW so they could be added to the chemical weapons database.

This makes complete nonsense of the Theresa May's "of a type developed by Russia" line, used to parliament and the UN Security Council. This explains why Porton Down has refused to cave in to governmental pressure to say the nerve agent was Russian. If Iran can make a novichok, so can a significant number of states .

Second.

" We are without doubt that Russia is responsible. No country bar Russia has combined capability, intent and motive. There is no plausible alternative explanation " – an outstanding example of self-hypnosis. None of the previous items could even remotedly lead to this conclusion. The prominent British academician from the University of Kent Prof. Richard Sakwa has elaborated on this on March 23 the following way:

Rather than just the two possibilities outlined by Theresa May, in fact there are at least six, possibly seven. The first is that this was a state-sponsored, and possibly Putin-ordered, killing This version simply does not make sense, and until concrete evidence emerges, it should be discounted

The second version is rather more plausible, that the authorities had lost control of its stocks of chemical weapons. In the early 1990s Russian facilities were notoriously lax, but since the 2000s strict control over stocks were re-imposed, until their final destruction in 2017. It is quite possible that some person or persons unknown secreted material, and then conducted some sort of vigilante operation

Third.

The third version is the exact opposite: some sort of anti-Putin action by those trying to force his policy choices

Forth

The fourth version is similar, but this time the anti-Putinists are not home-grown but outsiders. Here the list of people who would allegedly benefit by discrediting Russia is a long one. If Novichok or its formula has proliferated, then it would not be that hard to organise some sort of false flag operation. The list of countries mentioned in social media in this respect is a long one. Obviously, Ukraine comes top of the list, not only because of motivation, but also because of possible access to the material, as a post-Soviet state with historical links to the Russian chemical weapons programme. Israel has a large chemical weapon inventory and is not a party to the OPCW; but it has no motivation for such an attack (unless some inadvertent leak occurred here). Another version is that the UK itself provoked the incident, as a way of elevating its status as a country 'punching above its weight'. The British chemical weapons establishment, Porton Down, is only 12 kilometres from Salisbury. While superficially plausible, there is absolutely no evidence that this is a credible version, and should be discounted.

Fifth.

The fifth version is a rather more elaborate development of the previous point. There is circumstantial evidence, a version outlined by the Daily Telegraph , that Skripal may have had a hand in devising Christopher Steele's 'Trump Dossier'.

The British agent who originally recruited Skripal, Pablo Miller, lives in Salisbury, and also has connections with Orbis International, Steele's agency in London. In this version, Skripal is still working in one way or another with MI6, and fed stories to Steele, who then intervenes massively in US politics, effectively preventing the much-desired rapprochement between Trump and Putin. Deep anger at the malevolent results of the Steele and British intervention in international politics and US domestic affairs prompts a revenge killing, with the demonstration effect achieved by using such a bizarre assassination weapon.

Sixth.

The sixth version is the involvement of certain criminal elements, who for reasons best known to themselves were smuggling the material, and released it by accident. In this version, the Skripals are the accidental and not intended victims. There are various elaborations of this version, including the activities of anti-Putin mobsters. One may add a seventh version here, in which Islamic State or some other Islamist group seeks to provoke turmoil in Europe.

Do you wish to know our refutations of any other substantial "hard evidence" against Russia in the UK paper? Sorry, but that is all. The primitive information warriors in what used to be the heart of a brilliant empire, today are incapable of designing an even slightly plausible (they love this word, right?) document on a super-politicized case.

What follows is even more depressing. Slide 3 is dedicated to some sort of anatomy lesson:

Slide 4 seemingly represents a real "honey trap". Just look at it:

The authors of this "report" mixed up a very strange cocktail of multitype allegations, none of which have ever been proven or recognized by any responsible entity (like legal court or dedicated official international organization). Of course we are not committed to argue on every cell, but taking e.g. " August 2008 Invasion of Georgia " we actually can't understand why the EU-acknowledged Saakashvili's aggression against South Ossetia is exposed here as an example of "Russian malign activity"

Have you totally lost your minds, ladies & gentlemen from the Downing Street?

Brazen Heist Fri, 03/30/2018 - 10:11 Permalink

The Russians did it....because, the Russians are baddies!

- Sighed, the echo chamber of American butt kissers.

[Mar 30, 2018] Forth Reich plans to attack Russia

Notable quotes:
"... what purpose does Nato serve? it seems like a perfect wedge serving the USA's foreign policy objectives in isolating Russia.. what amazes me is the willingness of the poodles to go along with this.. obviously the military industrial complex is well served by this as well.. what would happen if Russia was to have good relations with the rest of Europe on all levels? would this somehow interfere with the role the usa has had with these same countries since ww2? at this point nato seems very redundant and only of value as i have stated above.. ..."
"... The deciders have been weeding out the intelligent, principled, honest, and patriotic individuals from the positions of influence in order to ensure that only the mediocrities and pliable opportunists were "elected" for the important governmental positions in the "rest of Europe." ..."
"... Part of the background to Gorbachev's approach at the time was the advice he was getting -- very bad advice, it now seems clear, with hindsight wisdom -- in particular from Georgy Arbatov, the long-serving head of the Institute of the USA and Canada. ..."
"... As it happened, Arbatov was completely and utterly wrong. The liquidation of the security posture inherited from the Stalinist period, followed by the break-up of the Soviet Union and the abandonment of communism, in no ways decreased Western hostility to Russia. The seething and near unanimous hatred of Putin is greater by far than that towards any of the leaders of the old Soviet Union. ..."
"... The truth, it turned out, was that people like Gorbachev and Arbatov were naive fools. ..."
Mar 26, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Not only was there a pledge to halt any eastward expansion of NATO. It was clearly understood that Ukraine would be a permanent buffer state between NATO and Russian borders. During the early days of the Clinton Administration, the U.S. launched the Partnership for Peace, which was presented as an alternative to NATO expansion. Russia was promised membership in the new security structure.

While some American officials, including military flag officers, called for the dismantling of NATO at the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, others argued that NATO had an important mission: To assure that there was no new outbreak of war on the European continent. NATO was the only treaty organization under which the United States maintained a presence in Europe. There was legitimate concern that, after two world wars in the 20th century broke out in Europe, it was appropriate to maintain a watchful eye that no new conflict erupted among the contending European states. Given the Balkan Wars of the early 1990s, this was not an outlandish concern. Ultimately, according to the logic of those promoting a continuation of NATO, Russia could be incorporated in a new security architecture. In effect, under a revived American-Russian cooperation, war in Europe would be a permanent thing of the past.

This narrative may seem absurd by today's circumstances. But there is now a growing body of declassified documents that confirm that there was a gentlemen's agreement that there would be no further eastward expansion of NATO, and that the Partnership for Peace would be the anchor of a new Eurasian security architecture to prevent the outbreak of future wars, and to build new cooperative relations in the economic and political spheres as well.

The National Security Archive, hosted at George Washington University ([email protected]) has recently obtained and posted a number of documents from U.S. and Russian files from the early 1990s, recounting this story. They can be found under the headline "NATO Expansion: What Yeltsin Heard." They are well-worth reading for anyone looking for a way out of the current madness New Cold War rhetoric coming from Washington, Berlin, London, Paris and Moscow.

Anna , 22 March 2018 at 11:58 AM

"... there is now a growing body of declassified documents that confirm that there was a gentlemen's agreement that there would be no further eastward expansion of NATO..."

-- Guess there are no gentlemen left among the US deciders... Cannot be too much of reminding about the zionization of the US army: https://israelpalestinenews.org/fighting-israels-wars-u-s-military-government-become-zionized/

David E. Solomon , 22 March 2018 at 12:48 PM
Harper, Thanks very much for posting this piece. Somehow, I always thought (probably naively), that the agreement was always a well known fact. I often wondered why our esteemed leaders broke it. Why the desire to reduce the Russians to total insignificance?

Thanks again.

David

james , 22 March 2018 at 01:48 PM
thanks harper.. this "gentlemen's agreement" story seems to rear it's ugly head every so often.. as an outsider it would seem to me that there has been an ongoing concerted effort to not let any friendly relationships between russia and the rest of europe develop.. i can only think that this has been the intent of nato, especially since the changes in the russia from 89 onward...

what purpose does Nato serve? it seems like a perfect wedge serving the USA's foreign policy objectives in isolating Russia.. what amazes me is the willingness of the poodles to go along with this.. obviously the military industrial complex is well served by this as well.. what would happen if Russia was to have good relations with the rest of Europe on all levels? would this somehow interfere with the role the usa has had with these same countries since ww2? at this point nato seems very redundant and only of value as i have stated above..

LeaNder , 22 March 2018 at 02:30 PM
Harper, this has been the lonely argument of Harald Kujak and a select few public others for a longtime over here in Germany.

Yesterday I witnessed a debate under the header: Who is more dangerous Trump or Putin? on German TeVe.

The British representative invited, the expert on British intelligence, argued he couldn't understand in the least the German public. Seems 'poll wise' the vast majority of Germans considers Trump more dangerous then Putin. There were phases in his talk were he seemed to get exhausted and tried to address us more directly via our conscience/soul: We have to stand up bold against Russian aggression, since it does not necessarily mean war, but if you do it in a united fashion the other side will fold.

Meanwhile on another public channel a day earlier, second vs. first, a prominent German economist seemingly joined Trump*. Strictly this is only to

*
http://klauskastner.blogspot.de/2018/03/prof-sinn-agrees-with-president-trump.html

Strictly it was part of the promotion of his latest book, something in like in search of the truth. As economist he is obviously aware of matters that lately were alluded to here via OECD. In fact it was the context of the first question to him.

*****
concerning European foreign policy, by now it feels the east dictates it to a large extend, led by Poland.

r whitman , 22 March 2018 at 05:39 PM
I seem to remember that Yeltsin specifically asked that Russia be allowed to join NATO and was turned down. The creation of an alternate organization was suggested, probably the Partnership for Peace.
Max , 22 March 2018 at 07:01 PM
I was unaware of the "gentlemen's agreement," but it makes sense, and Matlock's testimony is good enough for me. NATO was a cold war construct, and with the end of the cold war, NATO could have been dismantled as the relic of a previous age. But institutions die hard and those vested in them seek to maintain their budgets and find new missions to justify their existence. European countries have indeed had a long history of conflict, and the alliance did seem effective at maintaining the peace in Europe. Many of the new post-Communist governments in the former Soviet Bloc also wanted in. It wasn't all our own doing.

The Partnership for Peace was another post-cold-war construct that gave the old school in Garmish a new mission and something else to do. I think it might have been possible to bring Russia in, but was that the purpose of an expanded NATO and the Partnership for Peace, or was it aimed at isolating Russia and ensuring a perpetual western domination?

The Orange Revolution in Ukraine seems to have been the tipping point Did we play a clandestine role in that? I frankly don't know, but I suspect we did. Then came Putin's assertion of Russian interests in the Crimea and in Eastern Ukraine. And here we are, witnessing the revival of populist nationalisms in many places, including the USA.

These pose a challenge to the post-cold-war "new world order" (I'm citing President #41) which likely will be less and less pretty as it gains momentum. It might have been easier to have abided by that "gentleman's agreement," and the issues we face to day might have been avoided. But then there would have been other issues. We are humans after all and seem to like "issues."

Anna -> james... , 22 March 2018 at 09:02 PM
"...what would happen if Russia was to have good relations with the rest of Europe on all levels?"

The non-obedient leaders of such countries in the "rest of Europe" would have been compromised and removed from the positions of power by the deciders. Take a closer look at May, Johnson, and, particularly, Gavin Williamson. Do they look like the persons of integrity and able leaders? Was not Macron competitor conveniently (and fraudulently) compromised during the last elections? Were not the Swedes ordered to keep the ridiculous lawsuit against Assange?

The deciders have been weeding out the intelligent, principled, honest, and patriotic individuals from the positions of influence in order to ensure that only the mediocrities and pliable opportunists were "elected" for the important governmental positions in the "rest of Europe."

Anna -> Max... , 22 March 2018 at 09:26 PM
"Did we play a clandestine role in that? I frankly don't know, but I suspect we did. Then came Putin's assertion of Russian interests in the Crimea and in Eastern Ukraine."

Why don't you do some minor research on the "clandestine role?' The materials are in abundance and are widely available on the internet.
For example:

Peter AU , 23 March 2018 at 01:14 AM
Max commented on the orange revolution, not the maidan.
Balint Somkuti, PhD , 23 March 2018 at 02:24 AM
There has been innumerous stories circulating about the West's broken promises towards Russia. To be honest I thought most of them was fake and the russians were making them up to to ease their pain felt about the loss of an empire.

Now based on the above the opposite seems to be true.

I just dont come to understand at all how can a once superpower with 1000s of nuclear warheads can downplayed for decades. I just don't get it.

The ignorant western elite should heed the old szekler saying: "The bear is not a toy!"

hemeantwell -> David E. Solomon... , 23 March 2018 at 08:37 AM
Yes, a very worthwhile reminder, thanks. It should be run every day on the front page of major news outlets for the next year. Ignorance of NATO's failure to sustain that accord becomes a Pandora's box of bear-filled nightmares.

"Why the desire to reduce the Russians to total insignificance?"

Your question provides the answer. The US and NATO aimed for a Russian government run by natural resource-vending oligarchs. China would have been raised from its understudy role to serve as an excuse for big ticket military spending.

fanto , 23 March 2018 at 09:05 AM
Anna
@11
...The deciders have been weeding out ...that is very important observation. The other half of that sentence is ´..who is weeded in..´ for example, in Germany, the current new government has a social democrat at minister of finance, but he nominated a guy from Goldman Sachs - Jörg Kukies. What more can be said?
fanto , 23 March 2018 at 09:07 AM
sorry, again not written properly - it should be - but he nominated as his undersecretary a guy from Goldman Sachs
LondonBob -> r whitman... , 23 March 2018 at 09:13 AM
I remember some bigwig, I want to say Scowcroft but can't really remember, said the reason Russia wasn't allowed in to NATO is that they would be an alternate power centre to the US within NATO. NATO is really there to assert US primacy over Europe. The Russia nonsense keeps Europe divided and under the thumb, reconciliation between Germany and Russia is an abiding fear for some.

NATO expansion was largely the result of extensive lobbying of the US Senate by American arms and manufacturers in the 1990s, exposed by the New York Times at the time, as well as for domestic political reasons to make Clinton look tough. Now it has all become a self fulfilling prophesy by creating an adversary in Russia.

David Habakkuk , 23 March 2018 at 10:14 AM
All,

Prior to the 'Briefing Book' to which 'Harper' linked, the National Security Archive published, last December, one entitled 'NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard.'

(See https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early .)

A crucial point not mentioned in the -- generally excellent -- introduction to this series of documents is that Gorbachev did not even ask for the verbal assurances he was given to be put in writing.

This, incidentally, is a matter which Putin raised in his interviews with Oliver Stone. In these, his comments on almost all the people discussed -- up to and including John McCain -- are restrained and emollient. His contempt and distaste for Gorbachev, however, shine through.

Part of the background to Gorbachev's approach at the time was the advice he was getting -- very bad advice, it now seems clear, with hindsight wisdom -- in particular from Georgy Arbatov, the long-serving head of the Institute of the USA and Canada.

In a letter to the 'New York Times' in December 1987, in response to a column by William Safire, which was headlined 'It Takes Two to Make a Cold War', Arbatov made clear that Gorbachev was intended to, as it were, 'walk away', from the Cold War. And he wrote:

'And here we have a "secret weapon'" that will work almost regardless of the American response -- we would deprive America of The Enemy. And how would you justify without it the military expenditures that bleed the American economy white, a policy that draws America into dangerous adventures overseas and drives wedges between the United States and its allies, not to mention the loss of American influence on neutral countries? Wouldn't such a policy in the absence of The Enemy put America in the position of an outcast in the international community?'

(See https://www.nytimes.com/1987/12/08/opinion/l-it-takes-two-to-make-a-cold-war-963287.html .)

As it happened, Arbatov was completely and utterly wrong. The liquidation of the security posture inherited from the Stalinist period, followed by the break-up of the Soviet Union and the abandonment of communism, in no ways decreased Western hostility to Russia. The seething and near unanimous hatred of Putin is greater by far than that towards any of the leaders of the old Soviet Union.

The truth, it turned out, was that people like Gorbachev and Arbatov were naive fools.

What however then becomes material is that if Western behaviour makes clear that those who sought good relations with us were indeed such, it really is very foolish to expect that Russians will vote for such people.

Something that saddens me somewhat is that, as became clear if one probed, a strong undercurrent in the thinking of people like Arbatov was the belief that, although this had not been Stalin's intention, his post-war policies had gratuitously wrecked the relationship with the United States built up during the wartime 'Grand Alliance.'

I have difficulty thinking of any more promising way causing people to abandon such beliefs than allying with those who venerate Stepan Banderistas in an attempt to bring the Crimea into NATO. One thought people might be aware that Sevastopol is the scene of two great sieges, by the French, Ottomans and British in 1854-5, and by the Germans, Romanians and Italians from December 1941 to July 1942.

In both cases, the city fell. In the latter, however, the defenders tied up Erich von Manstein -- one of the greatest exponents of mobile warfare -- and the German Eleventh Army for seven crucial months, which among other things made a major contribution to the fact that Stalingrad did not fall, and the Germans were decisively defeated there.

Max -> Anna... , 23 March 2018 at 10:15 AM
I am certainly aware of the role that Nuland and the State Department and the Obama administration in general played in supporting the Orange Revolution. What I don't know is what "clandestine" efforts--cash payments, secret promises, etc.--other elements of our government may or may not have played. I suspect we did, but I don't know and for this, open research is difficult to conduct.
james -> Anna... , 23 March 2018 at 11:52 AM
anna - we see this much the same.. this is an organized move on the part of the west to isolate Russia... i don't think it is working.. they have resorted to dirty tricks to get the same result.. it isn't working either..
b , 23 March 2018 at 12:34 PM
Here is the link to the National Security Archive summary with the relevant documents:

NATO Expansion: What Yeltsin Heard

LeaNder , 23 March 2018 at 12:39 PM
Now that matters are heating up in Europe-Russia relations, strictly along the lines of the representative in the political talksshow circle, I talked about above, was Prof. Glees, he speaks German has a semi-German background. Apparently was more frequently present on German media, got glimpses. DW? Didn't take a closer look.

Prof. Anthony Glees - Buckingham University:
https://www.buckingham.ac.uk/directory/professor-anthony-glees/

Strictly two of his arguments stuck out for me. One challenged how it would be challenged here, Iraq, anyway:

a) it is no doubt significant that it only happened 7 km/?miles? from Porton Down. What was he doing there?
b) if the Foreign Minister speaks he has relevant intelligence information.

Apparently the EU followed the latter argument.

JW -> Anna... , 23 March 2018 at 12:59 PM
Anna, re #11. There is very little 'weeding out from positions of influence' as you suggest. The political preselection process ensures that such people do not actually get started on the train, but in most cases they have already left as soon as they arrived, having seen, to them, the nauseous and noxious collection of people with whom they would otherwise spend years rubbing shoulders.
You will not find a Teddy Roosevelt or a George Washington in the current era.
Babak Makkinejad , 23 March 2018 at 01:18 PM
All:

I think you are underestimating the demand side of NATO expansion; many Eastern European states wanted to be included in NATO - for reasons of both security and prestige (of being associated with the dominant civilization on Earth and the Winners of the Cold War). In fact, EU membership, NATO, and Plato went together - it was an act of joining (or re-joining) the "Civilization".

et Al , 23 March 2018 at 01:56 PM
I seem to recall that the purely European WEU (Western European Union) was touted as replacement for NATO that would be purely European and built up, so there would have been at least some discussion. I wonder what the dynamics of that fail were and if there are any public documents that highlight it?
Jubal , 23 March 2018 at 02:34 PM
Stalin promised free elections in these exact same eastern European countries now conquered by Nato only 45 years earlier. Instead he delivered murder, gulags, rape and ethnic cleansing. Because of his total obliteration of any opposition, the postwar history today is still corrupted with Stalin's and the Bolshevic's lies. Not to mentioned all those falsely charged and executed at Nuremburg.

Take Stalin himself. Many Russians would claim that his continuing murder of millions after the war was already won cannot be blamed on Russia or Russians. They claim it was the USSR that perpetrated these deeds. But many of these same Russians suffer from nostalgic delusions about the good old days under "Uncle Joe".

Casey , 23 March 2018 at 02:35 PM
Yeah, I'd say they're moving from worse to as bad as it gets, as Mr. Global sets up a coordinated, simultaneous, four-front attack (Syria, Ukraine, Iran, DPRK) on Rus allies, along with their various false-flag absurdities. We'd better hope any adults left in the room put Mr. Global in the psych ward, and real soon.
Anna -> Jubal... , 23 March 2018 at 06:09 PM
I wonder, what nation makes your cultural/genetic roots. According to your post, your people have been ruled by angelic creatures.
turcopolier , 23 March 2018 at 06:15 PM
b

what link? pl

JohnA , 23 March 2018 at 08:55 PM
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2018-03-16/nato-expansion-what-yeltsin-heard this one.....b had it embedded.
JW , 23 March 2018 at 09:13 PM
A handshake agreement to limit the eastward expansion of NATO ? This handshaking was going on while Western commercial interests were penetrating, en-masse, the newly de-Sovietised economies of Russia and the CIS states and that alone should have been a hint of what was to come. I'd suggest that Putin was not one to miss that hint.
Power depends on domination and monopolisation of resources, people and ground, or at least in an interim period denying their exploitation by competitors such as their contemporary owners. Control of or denial of use of the wealth of Eurasia, the greatest land mass on the planet, is the key to hegemonic control of the planet for an inestimable time interval, and numerous routes have and will be tried to achieve this objective.
With that in mind, could anyone really express surprise at some long ago handshakes and broken agreements made to Boris Yeltsin and a bunch of bewildered former Soviet bureaucrats ? The Chinese has long since learned the lesson.
guidoamm , 24 March 2018 at 01:13 AM
A blast from the, albeit recent, past.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/8144154/Nato-must-continue-operations-beyond-our-borders.html

"[...] Anders Fogh Rasmussen said alliance members must be willing and able to exercise military power "beyond our borders" to combat threats such as terrorism and missile attacks."

"[...] By contrast, Britain and the US believe that to remain relevant, Nato must be prepared to tackle potential security threats beyond its members' borders."

"[...] Afthanistan could serve a template (sic) for future threats and Nato's response to them."

No mention of course of who defines what may or may not represent a threat.

Note also the author's opinion that Afghanistan is to be held up as a model of how to go about things. The MIC's dream come true.

g

b , 24 March 2018 at 06:14 AM
I linked it above as HTML link under "NATO Expansion: What Yeltsin Heard" Works in my browser. Here is the raw link:
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2018-03-16/nato-expansion-what-yeltsin-heard
Sarah B , 24 March 2018 at 08:41 AM
Whatever aliby is offered to explain whatever promise ever made by the US and Western allies on whatever issue is difficult to take into account, since their very way of procceed have been consistently always the same.

On historical facts on inteventions by US Imperialism in Russian sphere of influence and everywhere, I bring in this Spanish translation of 56 chapter of the book "Killing Hope" by Wiliam Blum, currently discontinued, with the following comment by the editor of the blog which made the effort:

The recent American Empire (chapter 56 of Assassinating Hope, by William Blum)

"The way Bush and his people managed to deflect America's anger from Bin Laden to Saddam Hussein is one of the greatest public relations sorcery tricks in history." John le Carré, quoted by Blum.

Note from the blog editor : We offer the last chapter of William Blum's book on interventions by the CIA and the US Army since the end of World War II. In this chapter that closes his book, Blum tells us about the recent American "Empire", from 1992 to 2002. It is obvious that between 2002 and 2016 many events have taken place in the world, linked to US imperialism. The last 13 years are not reflected since Blum's book was finished writing in 2003 and published in 2004. Even so, it is a chapter that we can extrapolate perfectly to understand US imperialism. since then. Perhaps, everything that Blum describes has been accentuated more and more in recent years. It is, then, a text that maintains its relevance.

The term "Empire" applied to the United States it began being used by critics of imperialism. However, as Blum tells us, more and more apologists of US foreign policy are using it proudly; recognize and defend such imperial reality.

"The American Empire" is the last chapter of Blum's book. It closes a magnificent and indispensable work whose knowledge and diffusion are required if we want to understand the contemporary world. It is not possible to understand international relations, peaceful or violent, outside of imperialism, just as it is not possible to understand capitalism outside of the latter.

Documentary reference: William Blum: "The North American Empire from 1992 to the present" , in "Killing Hope. Interventions of the CIA and the United States Army since the Second World War" , chap. 56, pp. 460 to 471. Editorial Oriente, Santiago de Cuba (Cuba), 2005 (original in English: William Blum, "Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II" , Common Courage Press, 2004).
Digitization source and corrections (cite and keep the hyperlink): Blog Del Viejo Topo.
Images, captions and bold: they are our addition.
Other chapters of the book: to access other chapters published on the blog, see the index at the end and click on the hyperlinks that are active."

http://blogdelviejotopo.blogspot.com.es/2016/05/el-imperio-norteamericano-reciente-cap.html

LeaNder -> David Habakkuk ... , 24 March 2018 at 09:46 AM
David, I am familiar with the argument you refer to in the last paragraph. It surfaced in looks at the larger ideological battle at the time as far as the more then extreme Nazi propaganda was 'echoed' or found supporters for historical reasons e.g. in Hungary and/or the Ukraine, arbitrarily. The larger "Judeo-Bolshevik" complex. I have a deep inner resistance to where it feels it would end theoretically. Had they taken a different route they could have made it? Seriously? They should have?

Along these lines, I am not sure either, if I want to reduce Ukrainians collectively to Banderistas. Fact seems that obviously everyone in Russia is anti-Nazi, which includes the extreme right.

*******
Prof Glees alluded to several people beyond the more spectacular cases in the UK. Eight, I seem to remember. Only three were mentioned: Litvinenco, Skripal and Berezovsky's (suicide)*. Not sure if Glees does include him in this list. unfortunately no one asked him for a list. Who else does he have in mind?

Arbitrary google search:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/13/russian-exile-nikolai-glushkov-found-dead-at-his-london-home

Glushkov? Who else may be on his mind?

* Now, if anything wouldn't a service use something less spectacular then Polonium and whatever poison gas?


janes -> David Habakkuk ... , 24 March 2018 at 02:20 PM
david, it is always interesting and informative reading your comments.. thanks for making them.. i struggle with the idea that anyone is is idealistic is being naive.. this is how it would appear gorbachev has to be taken, but i struggle with it regardless, as i am attached to the idealism that is built into his way of thinking as you outline here.. at what point does humanity seek an alternative to war and the build up and preparation for war which is the basis for NATO? as john lennon said 'give peace a chance'.. i think gorbachev did this..

i read today an article by peter hitchens where he mentions "Nato is the real barrier to peace" -
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2018/03/peter-hitchens-the-patriotic-thought-police-came-for-corbyn-you-are-next.html

would the usa ever let europe drop nato? would europe ever recognize how it is a block to greater peace in europe? or, do bigger fences make better neighbours?

pat mentioned you might do a thread on the skripal / uk dynamic at some point.. i hope you do... thanks..

Jubal , 24 March 2018 at 03:28 PM
@Anna, RE: "roots"

Actually, the bezirk of which I am a citizen and taxpayer was once the oldest Republic in Europe. Some Alemeni hill volk and some lake dwellers managed to purchase their freedom from the Habsburgs in about 1350. This Free Republic existed for centuries until its representatives arrived late at the Congress of Vienna in 1817. Our Republic was lost in the same way that Switzerland was lost when it joined the UN.

Switzerland had a long history of preventing rulers and powerful cliques from gaining a monopoly on power. Unfortunately, that history has been discarded in favor of giving up sovereignty to globalist agendas like refugee settlement, global warming, tax law, and here specifically: to NATO empire building (Switzerland is active in "defending" Kosovo).

[Mar 30, 2018] Top Spymaster Explains How Russian Intelligence Sees the US

This an old but pretty interesting article. Very well thought out and insightful analysis of American thinking and objectives regarding their obsession with world hegemony, and Control of vital global resources, a very dangerous period now threatens The Russian people and their resource rich land.
US Policy towards Russia today simply continues US Policy towards the USSR during the Cold War
Notable quotes:
"... The American leadership clearly also disliked the prospects of Russia's collaboration with China and India, the introduction of the practice of summits in the BRICS format, the successful activity of other organizations in which Russia occupies leading positions (the CSTO [Collective Security Treaty Organization], the SCO [Shanghai Cooperation Organization], and the EAEC [Eurasian Economic Community]), and the formation of the Customs Union. ..."
Mar 30, 2018 | russia-insider.com
This is an edited version of an interview Nikolai Patrushev, the Secretary of Russia's Security Council, gave to the official government newspaper Rossiskaya Gazeta.

Patrushev is one of Putin's most important advisors on national security. His position is similar in some ways to that of the US President's National Security Adviser .

As important about what Patrushev does, is who he was. He is Russia's most senior intelligence official.

He has served continuously in intelligence since he joined the KGB in 1975 and was from 1999 to 2008 chief of Russia's FSB – the successor organization to the KGB. He left this post to become the Secretary to Russia's Security Council.

One of Patrushev's key jobs is to collate intelligence information provided by Russia's various intelligence agencies and to provide it to Putin and to Russia's other key foreign policy decision makers.

In this interview Patrushev gives insight into what Russia's intelligence agencies are telling the Kremlin. Thus we learn that Russian intelligence:

  1. Did not expect Yanukovych to fall because of the Maidan protests;
  2. Did however warn the Kremlin long ago that a pro-Western coup in Ukraine was only a question of time because of massive US subversion in the country.

We also get an idea of how Russian intelligence sees the world.

According to its view US hostility to Russia is an unvarying "constant" because Russia, irrespective of its system of government, resists US policies aimed at achieving world hegemony and because the US wants to control Russia's immense natural resources in order to seal its hegemony.

Russia's ties to China and India and the emergence of the BRICS bloc have merely provoked the US to intensify its campaign against Russia. Events such as the war in Afghanistan in the 1980s, the rebellion in Chechnya in the 1990s, the Georgian attack on South Ossetia in 2008 and the February coup this year in Ukraine, are all simply manifestations of US policies targeted at Russia.

One does not have to agree with every part of this view. For example the claim that the USSR collapsed because of a US engineered fall in oil prices as part of some carefully thought out US "strategy of vulnerabilities", though widely believed and not just in Russia, is a myth and serves as a typical case of a spymaster's belief in external, conspiratorial causes for events that actually had purely domestic, structural and sometimes even accidental causes.

Patrushev also undoubtedly overstates the degree of coherence in US policy and the extent to which US policy is always and invariably hostile to Russia.

There is however much that is compelling about this view and it is easy to understand why within Russia it is becoming increasingly influential.

From a Russian point of view it is not difficult to see US policy since the USSR's break up (eg. NATO's eastern expansion, the tearing up of the ABM Treaty and positioning of anti-ballistic missiles in eastern Europe, the US support for "colour revolutions" in the countries of the former USSR, the US support for anti-government groups within Russia itself, the US's wars of intervention in many parts of the world and last but by no means least the ferocious US media campaign against Russia) as unremittingly hostile towards Russia.

For the increasing number of Russians who hold this view (including its intelligence community) the US backed coup in Ukraine was the final proof.

Russian Intelligence failed to Predict Yanukovych's February Overthrow

Our specialists were warning of the high probability of an escalation of the situation in Ukraine in the context of political and economic instability, particularly under external influence. At the same time it should be acknowledged that the probability of an imminent instant seizure of power in Kiev with the support of militant groups of open Nazis was not considered at that time. Let me remind you that prior to the coup you mentioned, Moscow was implementing in full all its partnership commitments to Kiev.

We were constantly providing material and financial aid, without which Ukraine was in no condition to cope with economic difficulties that had become chronic in nature. To support our neighbours, material and financial resources amounting to tens of billions of dollars were mobilized. Unfortunately for many people in Ukraine this aid became, in time, so customary that its importance for the country's survival was simply forgotten.

Russian Intelligence Did Predict a Pro US Coup in Ukraine

As for longer-term predictions, the Ukraine crisis was an entirely expected outcome of systematic activity by the United States and its closest allies.

For the past quarter of a century this activity has been directed towards completely separating Ukraine and the other republics of the former USSR from Russia and totally reformatting the post-Soviet space to suit American interests. The conditions and pretexts were created for colour revolutions, supported by generous state funding.

Thus, Victoria Nuland, US assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, has repeatedly stated that during the period 1991 through 2013 Washington spent 5bn dollars on "supporting the desire of the people of Ukraine for stronger, more democratic government".

According to figures from open sources alone, for instance US Congress documents, the total amount of state funding for various American programmes of "aid" to Ukraine in the period 2001 through 2012 came to at least 2.4bn dollars. That is comparable with the annual budget of some small countries. The US Agency for International Development spent about 1.5bn dollars, the State Department nearly half a billion, and the Pentagon more than 370m dollars.

According to congressional records, organizations such as the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the Peace Corps, and the Open World Centre took part in Ukrainian aid programmes, in addition to the well-known USAID and other departments. It is not hard to guess for whom and why American volunteers and staffers of diplomatic missions have been "opening the world" throughout the 23 years since the breakup of the Soviet Union.

.. as a result of this activity ..an entire generation was raised that is completely poisoned with hatred of Russia and with the mythology of "European values". It has not yet realized that these values, even in the positive sense of the term, are not actually designed for Ukrainians. Nobody intends to set about boosting living standards in Ukraine or establishing these young people in Europe, which is itself having great difficulty coping with extremely serious challenges and threats.

The Coup in Ukraine is a Disaster First and Foremost for Ukraine itself

I think the "sobering up" of the Ukrainians will be harsh and painful. It remains to be hoped that this will happen relatively quickly, and a whole string of objective factors could promote that. I would like to note another factor that is of fundamental significance. Irrespective of the subsequent development of events, the significance of the one for the other – Russia and Ukraine – will persist. Ukraine will simply not be able to develop successfully without Russia, whether anyone likes it or not .

Whereas for Russia the total severance of links would be a painful blow, for Ukraine it would be disastrous. It is no accident that current President Petro Poroshenko was obliged, in the wake of his ousted predecessor, to raise the question of postponing the implementation of economic section of the already signed association agreement between Ukraine and the EU . It is to be expected that the victory euphoria of other Kiev rulers will also give way to more sober assessment of the real state of affairs .

US Policy towards Russia today simply continues US Policy towards the USSR during the Cold War

... if the catastrophe in Ukraine had not happened some other grounds would have been found to step up the policy of "containment" of our country. This course has been pursued unswervingly for many decades; only the forms and tactics of its implementation change.

As you know, after World War II the confrontation between the USSR and the West headed by the United States took the form of a "cold war". The military-political component of this standoff was entrusted to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), formed on the initiative of the United States on 4 April 1949. An analysis of NATO's practical activity indicates that in creating the alliance the United States was pursuing two main objectives.

First, a military bloc directed against the USSR was formed under American leadership.

Second, Washington forestalled the emergence in Western Europe of an autonomous grouping of states that could have competed with the United States. It should be recalled that the territory of the United States itself, which essentially established unilateral military control over the allies, is not included in NATO's zone of responsibility.

After the breakup of the USSR and the termination of the Warsaw Pact, which united Europe's socialist countries and which by definition represented the main danger to NATO, not only was the bloc not disbanded, it began to expand even more in quantitative and military terms.

The US Engineered the USSR's Collapse by Identifying its "Points of Vulnerability"

In the cold war period a whole string of ideological doctrines emerged in the West that served as justification for an anti-Soviet political course. One of the authors of this kind of research was Zbigniew Brzezinski, an American political scientist and statesman of Polish extraction. He established the so-called strategy of "vulnerabilities" in relation to the USSR, and under President Reagan this became the basis of American policy towards our country .The identification and definition of "vulnerabilities" and the task of organizing ways of converting them into substantial problems for the USSR were entrusted to the US Central Intelligence Agency.is work, first and foremost economists but also experts from the business world who had real experience of business wars with competitors. As a result of large-scale analytical work, the USSR's "vulnerabilities" in the political, economic, ideological, and other spheres were defined and systematically studied.

Our country's main "vulnerability," as defined by the CIA, was its economy. After detailed modelling, the American experts identified its "weakest link", namely the USSR budget's extremely high dependence on the export of energy resources. A strategy of provoking the financial and economic bankruptcy of the Soviet state was formulated, envisaging two interconnected objectives: the bringing about of a sharp reduction in revenue to the USSR's budget from foreign trade, combined with a substantial increase in expenditure on resolving problems created from outside.

A reduction in world oil prices was envisaged as the main measure for reducing the income side of the budget. This was successfully achieved by the mid-1980s when, as a result of US collusion with the rulers of a number of oil extracting countries, an artificial surplus of crude was created on the market and oil prices fell almost by a factor of four.

A growth in the Soviet Union's expenditure was provoked in several areas: the transition from the strategy of American opposition to the USSR in Afghanistan to the strategy of dragging it deeply into the Afghan war; the incitement of antigovernment demonstrations in Poland and other states in the socialist camp with a view to provoking Moscow into additional expenditures on stabilizing the situation in Eastern Europe; the whipping up of the arms race, among other things by introducing the SDI [Strategic Defence Initiative] bluff, and so forth.

It should be said that at that time the Americans succeeded in achieving their objectives. The outcome of their activity was a substantial excess in the USSR's expenditure over income, which ultimately provoked a profound economic crisis that extended into the political and ideological spheres. Shortsighted attempts by the Soviet leadership to alleviate the situation through foreign financial aid gave Washington additional levers of influence over Moscow. The "recovery" measures proposed by the West and implemented through the IMF and the World Bank to liberalize foreign trade without a smooth transition from the previous monopoly system led to the final collapse of the economy.

In the assessment of American experts, it was the strategy of "vulnerabilities", which demonstrated the colossal effectiveness of economic variety of cold war compared with "hot" war,that was decisive in promoting the elimination of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact.

The US Backed Coup in Ukraine and Sanctions are part of a US Strategy of "Points of Vulnerability" aimed at Russia

The coup d'etat in Kiev, accomplished with clear US support, followed the classical pattern tried and tested in Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East. But never before has such a scheme affected Russian interests so profoundly.

Analysis shows that by provoking Russia into retaliatory steps the Americans are pursuing the very same objectives as in the 1980s with regard to the USSR. Just like back then, they are trying to identify our country's "vulnerabilities". At the same time, incidentally, they are pursuing the objective of neutralizing European economic competitors who have, in Washington's opinion, grown excessively close to Moscow.

Washington has always sought to have levers of pressure on Russia. Thus, in 1974 the famous Jackson-Vanik Amendment was adopted, restricting trade relations with our country. It appeared to have completely lost its relevance immediately after the breakup of the USSR, but it was still in force right up to 2012, when the so-called "Magnitsky List" was promptly adopted in its place.

The current sanctions are in the same category. The US Administration's activity in the Ukrainian sphere is taking place within the framework of an updated White House foreign policy course aimed at holding on to American leadership in the world by means of the strategic containment of the growing influence of the Russian Federation and other centres of power. In this context Washington is actively making use, on its own terms, of NATO's potential, seeking to use political and economic pressure to prevent any vacillations on the part of its allies and partners.

Yugoslavia was a Dress Rehearsal and Russia's Weaknesss under Yeltsin let it Happen

In the 1990s the Russian Federation, for well-known reasons of an internal and external nature, lost the dominant influence in the Balkans that the Soviet Union had enjoyed and embarked on the path of conciliation with the West. It was in the Balkans that the unilateral and totally uncompensated surrender by Russia of its positions in the international arena was manifested most distinctly. In 1991-1996 the bodies that shaped our country's foreign policy did not officially even have any such concept as "national interest". They nurtured groundless expectations of gratitude for obedience from the Western partners and some kind of special benefit for our country from close and unconditional cooperation with the United States. In practice our American partners almost immediately stopped taking us seriously and only gave us a condescending "slap on the shoulder", so to speak, from time to time.

The NATO bloc, under cover of peacekeeping and without encountering serious objections from our side, operated increasingly confidently outside its own zone of responsibility, sought the rights to lease strategic infrastructure facilities for lengthy periods, and effectively brought the organs of military command and control of a number of Balkan countries under its own control by various means. The Alliance's subunits became firmly established in the region. Other states taking part in peacekeeping missions, including Russia, set themselves no such objectives, having reconciled themselves to the role of junior partners and preferring not to see the self-evident fact: The war in the Balkans could perfectly well be regarded as a rehearsal and a prologue to larger-scale steps to redivide the world.

The US "War on Terror" Gave Russia only a Temporary Respite

Encouraged by the weakening and subsequent elimination of the USSR, American ruling circles did everything possible to ensure dominance over the major sources of raw materials resources in our country and in Central Asia, as well as the transit routes for their export. Washington planned to extend its sphere of direct influence to the regions of the Black Sea, the Caucasus, and the Caspian.

All these territories were named a US zone of strategic national interests. The only remaining obstacle to the realization of the Americans' plans to take complete control of the corresponding deposits and transport corridors was Russia, which preserved its military potential to inflict unacceptable damage on the United States.

American strategists saw the solution to this difficulty in the final collapse of the system of state power and the subsequent dismemberment of our country . The first region that was supposed to leave Russia was the North Caucasus.

Particular importance was attached to Chechnya, which declared its independence and was temporarily under the effective control of the West. Extremists and their supporters in Russia were offered support by the special services of Britain, the United States, and allies in Europe and the Islamic world.

In these conditions the Russian leadership adopted a firm, principled stance of defending the unity of the state. Ultimately, as a result of the firm political will displayed by Russian President Vladimir Putin and at the cost of enormous efforts, it proved possible to stop attempts to detach Chechnya from Russia and then to consolidate the Republic's place within the Federation.

After 11 September 2001 the world community recognized the terrorist threat as the main threat and a global threat, reaching the understanding that countering this threat requires common efforts. As a result there was, in particular, a slight weakening of the West's attacks on Russia because of its campaign against international terrorists in the Caucasus, while we did not object to the operation by the Americans and their allies in Afghanistan. The announcement of the formation of a broad antiterrorist coalition followed.

At that time Washington displayed a certain readiness to collaborate, although in actual fact it did not intend to abandon the policy of "containment" with regard to Russia. More and more new NATO facilities moved up to our borders. International law was supplanted by the law of force (let us recall the aforementioned dismemberment of Yugoslavia, followed by Serbia, the occupation of Iraq, and the invasion of Afghanistan by the so-called coalition forces).

Russia's post 1999 Revival and its forging Alliances with China, India and the other BRICS Has Alarmed the US

After 7-8 August 2008, when the Georgian leadership, with US support, attempted to annihilate South Ossetia, the world once again changed substantially.

Everything was staked on surprise. The Georgian dictator believed that a military incursion on the opening day of the international Olympic Games would put Russia in a difficult position, and the Georgians, taking advantage of this, would carry out their "blitzkrieg". However, the Russian leadership reacted promptly to the sharp deterioration in the situation and the necessary measures were adopted to halt the aggression.

After the August events in the Caucasus, Washington was clearly alarmed by Russia's obvious intention to take its place among the world powers of the 21st century and uphold the principle of equal opportunities and full autonomy in global politics. And also to convert the state's financial income from the exploitation of natural resources into real economic and defence potential and human capital.

The American leadership clearly also disliked the prospects of Russia's collaboration with China and India, the introduction of the practice of summits in the BRICS format, the successful activity of other organizations in which Russia occupies leading positions (the CSTO [Collective Security Treaty Organization], the SCO [Shanghai Cooperation Organization], and the EAEC [Eurasian Economic Community]), and the formation of the Customs Union.

In the context of the growing world financial and economic crisis, major new players in the international arena such as the PRC, India, Brazil, and Iran as well as the growing economies of Southeast Asia and South Korea became increasingly significant factors for the United States. Hence, incidentally, the emergence of new conceptual principles such as the American-Chinese special partnership, the strategic collaboration between the United States and India, the establishment of direct dialogue between Washington and Iran, and so forth.

Indications of the need to resume the beneficial dialogue with Russia on a whole range of issues began to emerge from the new administration of President Barack Obama. This positive inclination on the part of the American authorities could only be welcomed.

However, it soon became clear that Washington is not inclined towards real cooperation. It confined itself to mere statements of friendliness and the devising of certain negotiation tracks from which the benefit to Russia, in the end, proved almost zero. After a while even totally nonbinding positive dialogues of this kind came to an end and the US attitude towards our country began once again to be reminiscent of cold war times.

The US aims to gain Control of Russia's Energy, Food and Water Resources to Seal its Domination

specialists are certain that no real substitute for hydrocarbons as the basis of power generation will emerge in the next few decades. Furthermore the understanding prevails in the West that the total capacity of nuclear, hydro, wind, solar, and other power stations will meet no more than one-fifth of world demand.

Nor should another important aspect be forgotten. In the modern world we can observe a steady growth in the shortage of food and drinking water for the growing population of the planet. The absence of the most elementary means of existence pushes desperate people into manifestations of extremism and involvement in terrorism, piracy, and crime. This is one reason for the acute conflicts between countries and regions and also for mass migration.

The shortage of water and irrigated land is not infrequently the cause of friction, for instance, between the Central Asian republics. The problem of water resources is acute in a number of other countries in Asia and particularly in Africa.

Many American experts, in particular former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, assert that there are vast territories "under Moscow's power" that it is incapable of exploiting and which therefore "do not serve the interests of all humanity". Assertions continue to be heard about the "unfair" distribution of natural resources and the need to ensure so-called "free access" to them for other states.

The Americans are convinced that people must be thinking in similar terms in many other states, particularly those neighbouring on Russia, and that in the future they will, as is nowadays the custom, form "coalitions" to support the corresponding claims on our country. As in the case of Ukraine, it is proposed to resolve problems at Russia's expense but without taking its interests into account.

The Threat to Russia from the US is "Constant" and "Thaws" Never Last

Even during periods of a relative thaw in relations between Russia (the USSR) and the United States, our American partners have always remained true to such notions.

Therefore irrespective of the nuances in the behaviour of the Americans and their allies the Russian leadership still faces this task as a constant: To guarantee the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Motherland, to defend and multiply its riches, and to manage them correctly in the interests of the multiethnic people of the Russian Federation.

This post first appeared on Russia Insider

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

[Mar 30, 2018] McCabe and US revenge for FIFA decision

Notable quotes:
"... In 2003, he became the supervisory special agent of the Eurasian Organized Crime Task Force, a joint operation with the New York City Police Department. ..."
"... In early 2010, Randall, then 28, was assigned to a specialized group of FBI agents in lower Manhattan. The Eurasian organized crime unit, led by a veteran mob investigator named Michael Gaeta, scrutinized criminal groups from Georgia, Russia and Ukraine that were running sophisticated scams in the U.S. As Randall and Gaeta linked street-level criminal operators to figures in Eastern Europe's business and political elite, they started piecing together a string of rumors that led them to an unsettling conclusion: Russia might be bribing its way to host the 2018 World Cup. ..."
Mar 30, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

add to 115
Andres McCabe legal fund for battle with Trump reaches 300000 in hours

McCabe says he was fired as FBI deputy director because he is a crucial witness in Russia investigation While he was the FBI's deputy director, McCabe was deeply involved in overseeing investigations related to former secretary of state Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server, and whether Russia colluded with Trump's campaign. Trump has denied any collusion occurred and Russia has denied meddling.

McCabe and the Steele Dossier

and

Mr. McCabe began his career as a special agent with the FBI in 1996. He first reported to the New York Division, where he investigated a variety of organized crime matters. In 2003, he became the supervisory special agent of the Eurasian Organized Crime Task Force, a joint operation with the New York City Police Department.

So they infiltrated them?

Posted by: somebody | Mar 30, 2018 12:35:41 PM | 122

somebody , Mar 30, 2018 12:46:41 PM | 123
add to 122

The FBI versus FIFA

In early 2010, Randall, then 28, was assigned to a specialized group of FBI agents in lower Manhattan. The Eurasian organized crime unit, led by a veteran mob investigator named Michael Gaeta, scrutinized criminal groups from Georgia, Russia and Ukraine that were running sophisticated scams in the U.S. As Randall and Gaeta linked street-level criminal operators to figures in Eastern Europe's business and political elite, they started piecing together a string of rumors that led them to an unsettling conclusion: Russia might be bribing its way to host the 2018 World Cup.

[Mar 30, 2018] Nick Bailey's hospitalization

Mar 30, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: jawbone | Mar 30, 2018 12:52:47 PM | 125

Re: DS Nick Bailey's hospitalization

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/nick-bailey-discharged_uk_5ab3dcede4b0decad047d95d

HuffPo has him entering hospital on March 4, but no mention of his going to the Skripal residence. "He was taken to Salisbury District Hospital after responding to the attack" on the Skripals. So, to emergency some time after initially responding to the couple on March 4 and released on March 22. No mention of his going to the house.

Bailey's statement was read by Chief Constable Kier Pritchard and, to my ear, it sounded like a careful, well written PR release. Basically little information. The experience was "surreal" came the closest to describing how he felt. And that's the part usually run on the broadcast TV news I saw. No mention of how he was treated, whether he had any physical therapy. Has anyone heard he speak? or is that area of lingering effects of the exposure to...whatever it was?

ninel , Mar 30, 2018 1:13:27 PM | 127

Peter AU 1 , Mar 30, 2018 1:14:20 PM | 128
Jawbone, the article you link to is dated march 22. Articles dated 5th/6th of march are needed.
At the moment, it seems the policeman was poisoned on the 5th or 6th when there where already pics of people in protective suits. The story on the policeman has chopped and changed a lot - he was a first responder, he was poisoned at the house ect ect. I think the confusion in the policeman part of the narrative is that he was poisoned perhaps two day later, and had to be fitted into the narrative retrospectively.
somebody , Mar 30, 2018 1:25:44 PM | 130
125 I assume it is true that the police officer caught it from the door handle same as the front door being the place of the strongest distribution of the chemical agent as this fact does not support any proof of Russian state involvement.

Quite the contrary - it works more like a Mafia warning, whoever might get it the postman, a neighbour, Skripals does not matter.

There is this guy and he is from Uzbekistan .

He spent long years in Europe before he returned to Russia. So I suppose he features in all kinds of secret service files.

Don Bacon , Mar 30, 2018 2:23:37 PM | 137
several snippets on DS (Detective Sgt) Bailey
> It is confirmed that a police officer, later confirmed as DS Nick Bailey, is fighting for his life in hospital.-- Mar 8
> The pair are in a critical condition in a local hospital. A police officer who helped investigate is in serious condition, and a total of 21 people have received medical treatment. Former London police chief Ian Blair said Friday that a police officer who is in serious condition visited Skripal's house -- perhaps a hint that the nerve agent may have been delivered there. Blair told BBC radio that Det. Sgt. Nick Bailey "has actually been to the house, whereas there is a doctor who looked after the patients in the open who hasn't been affected at all. There may be some clues floating around in here." -- Mar 9
> DS Nick Bailey is seriously ill in hospital having visited the home of Skripal after the defector and his daughter were found slumped on a bench in Salisbury, Wiltshire, on Sunday afternoon. Investigators want to know whether Bailey visited the scene where the two Russians were found and was poisoned there or by items there, or whether the officer was contaminated on his visit to Skripal's home. Sources say that, while it is not certain, it is believed more likely that Bailey became contaminated on his visit to the home. -- Mar 9
> But last night it emerged the police officer who also fell ill after responding to the incident, visited Mr Skripal's home before he collapsed. Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey remains in a serious condition in hospital. According to reports, he tended to the victims at the scene and then visited both the Skripal home.A source told The Times: "He was at both places. "First he was where they collapsed, trying to help them, then he went to the house, in that order." -- Mar 10
> DS Bailey, who was among the first to attend to Mr Skripal and his daughter Yulia, before possibly examining their red BMW, where it is thought the nerve agent Novichok may have been placed, was initially discharged from hospital after a check up. He later admitted to Accident and Emergency at Salisbury District Hospital feeling extremely unwell. DS Bailey is now described as in a stable condition -- Mar 15
> Concern for the family of the police officer who went to the aid of the poisoned Russian spy has grown after Army and police sealed off his street and began work to remove his car for examination. Speculation grew that Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey may have carried traces of the nerve agent Novichok home with him after attempting to resuscitate Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia. -- Mar 15
> PM Theresa May visits Salisbury and meets privately with DS Nick Bailey . His car is removed from his home as part of the investigation.-- Mar 15
> The police officer who was hospitalized after rushing to help a former Russian spy and his daughter suffering from a poison attack in Salisbury, England, was discharged Thursday [Mar 22]. Bailey was treated at Salisbury District Hospital for several weeks after being exposed to the same deadly and rare nerve agent that the U.K. government says was used to target former intelligence officer Sergie Skirpal, 66, and Yulia, 33. -- Mar 22
Don Bacon , Mar 30, 2018 2:27:01 PM | 138
@137
I should have highlighted that DS Bailey was initially discharged from hospital after a check up.
frances , Mar 30, 2018 2:36:46 PM | 139
Chemical weapons attack field drill on the same day.
Krollchem | Mar 30, 2018 12:23:13 AM | 78
There is always a "drill" taking place in the immediate vicinity addressing the same problem (terrorists, shooters, CW)whenever these events happen isn't there? A drill was happening on 9/11 and has been every time right up to the latest at a Florida school.
Mina , Mar 30, 2018 2:45:05 PM | 140
Yet a new low

Https://www.rt.com/news/422811-britain-plane-russia-provocation/

Maybe its time for Russia to offer scholarships to foreign scientists? I suspect many would like to join Snowden and others

cdvision , Mar 30, 2018 3:02:21 PM | 144
I detect that the medics at Salisbury are not reading from the official script. Someone mentioned Yulia has been moved from Salisbury hospital. This is worrying. Hope she doesn't suddenly have a relapse.
frances , Mar 30, 2018 3:13:30 PM | 147
"I think the confusion in the policeman part of the narrative is that he was poisoned perhaps two day later, and had to be fitted into the narrative retrospectively."
Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Mar 30, 2018 1:14:20 PM | 128
I think the policeman was thrown into the mix because the female doctor who gave the girl cpr on the spot, the ambulance attendees and driver were all right as rain. They needed another "on the scene" victim to drown out the obvious, that whatever "it" was was not contagious. There is also the young man who first found them who said he got spittle on his sleeve from the male but brushed it off (with his bare hand) and that was that. Whatever it is, it is clearly not the super awesome awful evil Russian elixir.
Don Bacon , Mar 30, 2018 3:19:50 PM | 148
@jb 145
On Bailey -- Telegraph .

[Mar 30, 2018] Russia expels diplomats in tit-for-tat action over Salisbury attack by Patrick Wintour and Shaun Walker

Russia now openly accused Britain in the attempt to kill Skripals. Also each new British version of poisoning have larger and larger holes in it. Britain tries to deflect accusations
Many people now view May Skripals gambit (in which Skripals were just pawns -- unclear winning or unwilling) as an attempt to save Russiagate in the USA -- operation conduction jointly with rogue elements of the USA intelligence agencies against Trump.
Notable quotes:
"... Mikhailov said Theresa May should resign for misleading world opinion. ..."
Mar 30, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Zakharova said nobody had cancelled the agreement, which she said still had force in international law. The UK is likely to argue that an agreement between the UK and the Soviet Union is not enforceable in court and there is no reason to give Russia access to a woman it apparently tried to kill. Russia challenged claims made by Dean Haydon, Britain's counter-terror police chief, that the Skripals first came into contact with the nerve agent from their front door .

... ... ...

"Traces of the nerve agent have been found at some of the other scenes detectives have been working at over the past few weeks, but at lower concentrations to that found at the home address," Haydon said on Wednesday.

Maj-Gen Alexander Mikhailov, from the Russian security agency FSB, claimed that if it was true the poisoning had happened on the doorstep then the Skripals would have died instantly and would not made it as far as the park where they were found slumped on a bench.

Mikhailov said Theresa May should resign for misleading world opinion.

Both sides are waiting for a report from the OPCW, which sent experts to visit the scene in Salisbury and is studying samples of the nerve agent.

Dmitry Peskov, the press secretary of Russian president Vladimir Putin, said it was difficult to guess what other options for anti-Russian measures Britain could take.

"As for the UK, due to the fact that now it is a fairly unpredictable country in relations with the Russian Federation, it is difficult for us to judge what other options can be considered, and what can be the basis for this," Peskov said.

See also:

May considers banning City of London from selling Russian debt

[Mar 30, 2018] Skripal was a traitor who got caught, convicted, jailed and then exchanged, not a defector

Mar 30, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Lyttenburgh 29 March 2018 at 12:16 PM

"a former Russian intelligence defector "

Skripal never defected - he was caught spying for Britain in Russia in 2004, judged and sentenced and then exchanged in 2010. He is a traitor who got caught. Not a defector.

[Mar 30, 2018] Possible Skripal's connection to the Brexit negotiations

Mar 30, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

ninel | Mar 30, 2018 1:13:27 PM | 127

CrossTalk on Anti-Russia Hysteria: Crisis Point?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYSGf-Ia1-8

The first speaker makes some good points in his first and second turn, especially Skripal's connection to the Brexit negotiations.

[Mar 30, 2018] Salisbury nerve agent attack Kremlin says UK must prove it did not poison spy by Alix Culbertson

Notable quotes:
"... The Russian foreign ministry also said in the absence of that evidence it will consider the case a murder attempt on Russian citizens as part of a "massive political provocation". ..."
Mar 28, 2018 | news.sky.com

Russia has said the UK most prove British intelligence services did not poison former spy Sergei Skripal.

The Russian foreign ministry also said in the absence of that evidence it will consider the case a murder attempt on Russian citizens as part of a "massive political provocation".

Russia's accusation is its bluntest yet as it continues to deny involvement in the poisoning of former double agent Mr Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury on 4 March.

[Mar 30, 2018] Definitely UK false flag MI6 operation that must have CIA cooperation. Very dangerous. The US and its Anglosphere and EU vassals must be desperate.

Mar 30, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: AriusArmenian | Mar 30, 2018 1:35:30 PM | 132 carrie , Mar 30, 2018 1:53:19 PM | 134

jawbone | Mar 30, 2018 12:03:54 PM | 118

Facebook link doesn't work for me; so add to 118

Bulgarian journalist Gaytandzhieva confronts Robert Kadlec over the US secret bio-weapons

carrie , Mar 30, 2018 2:02:40 PM | 136
For completeness, add this resource to 110 and 118, it's the first report by Dilyana Gaytandzhieva, The Pentagon Bio-Weapons

Haven't time to read it myself just now but... for those who have...

[Mar 30, 2018] MH17 was an anglo/US hit job

Notable quotes:
"... MH17 was an anglo/US hit job. I start to see now why no Australian rep went with the Malaysians to collect the victims and the planes black boxes. The Dutch at least had the decency to go with the Malaysian's and pick up their own people. ..."
"... With Novichok, it only took a couple of days to get the EU on board so I think plenty of planning by UK and fellow travelers in the US before the Skripal's were poisoned. ..."
Mar 30, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Peter AU 1 , Mar 29, 2018 6:04:40 PM | 50

MH17 was an anglo/US hit job. I start to see now why no Australian rep went with the Malaysians to collect the victims and the planes black boxes. The Dutch at least had the decency to go with the Malaysian's and pick up their own people.

With MH17 it took two weeks to push the EU into sanctioning Russia which and only then so called international team and Australian reps went to the site.

With Novichok, it only took a couple of days to get the EU on board so I think plenty of planning by UK and fellow travelers in the US before the Skripal's were poisoned.

[Mar 29, 2018] There is no hope for the survival of the Skripols

Mar 29, 2018 | russia-insider.com
Garry Compton tom • 15 hours ago ,

There is no hope for the survival of the Skripols - they have been transferred to a Veterans Hospital in the US.

[Mar 29, 2018] What a pack of miserable liars. And the Europeans playing along

Mar 29, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Vera Gottlieb • 12 hours ago ,

Don't know where he is. The UK trying to cover up something by any chance??? What a pack of miserable liars. And the Europeans playing along...follow the leader. Dumb, dumber, dumbest.

Trauma2000 Vera Gottlieb • 12 hours ago ,

What is absurd in all this is that; whilst the British have been a HateMachien fuelled vendetta against Russia for more than a century, the Europeans are not.

The HateMachine (the MSM ZioMedia) has been at the centre of every war for the last 150 years. What I don't understand is why the Europeans don't realise this.

The HateMachine is used to fuel every crises that Europe encounters. Why do the Europeans not realise that by buying into the HateMachine Russophobe antics of the U.K, they are giving credence to it and the lies that the U.K. perpetuates.

This HateMachine lie factory is used every time the U.K. wants to achieve something. It's called Blood Libel. When with the Europeans realise that the target isn't really Russia. When will the Europeans realise that the HateMachine target is Europe? The Russophobe racism is just the pretext, the pretext to get Europe to DO WHAT LONDON WANTS.

Get with the program Europe. You have been duped. You got shafted. You got spun so bad by the ZioMedia and you don't even realise it.

Europe is the one that will miss out. Not having Russia as an integrated component of Europe has cost the 'Europeans' hundreds of billions, probably trillions, of Euro's as well as their long term security.

Europe could have been number one as an integrated unit with Russia. But, now there is the perfect storm. You have driven Russia into the arms of China. And it is only because you (Europe) lack the intelligence to see through the oldest trick in the book: Nationalistic fuelled Fear Racism. You are a victim of the HateMachine. You were always the target. It is you they are trying manipulate. It is you that has been duped by then THINNEST, most BASELESS of lies the ZioMedia have ever come up with. Two people, who aren't important, got poised by a drug the UK won't identify, by perpetrators they REFUSE to identify, for an UNKNOWN MOTIVE, at at time that benefits the ZioEmpire and no-one else.

Get with the program. Europe, you got shafted. You are schmuks. You got duped; conned, had the wool pulled over your eyes; and it's going to cost you trillions in lost business and the future of your nation.... All because you really are quite STUPID!

[Mar 29, 2018] Britain targets 700 wealthy Russian investors in Britain - Fort Russ

Mar 29, 2018 | www.fort-russ.com

British Interior Minister Amber Rudd said that her agency's employees will check 700 Russians who received investment visas prior to 2015, promising to invest Ł 2 million ($ 2.8 million) or more in the UK. The system of issuing investment visas has been tightened since its introduction. However, there are fears that it could still allow corrupt officials and illegal money to enter the UK. (Since when did they ever care about that? Most crooks seeks asylum in the UK and are easily granted it, as "enemies of Russia.")

Prime Minister Teresa May said earlier that in London "there is no place" for corrupt Russian elites or their money.

The United Kingdom believes that Russia is involved in the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal. Nobody knows where the Skripals are – not even their own families. Media states they are in a coma and are unable to give evidence.

May also warned that London would freeze Russian state assets if they "threaten life or property of British nationals or residents of the country."

Meanwhile, Russian investments are losing ground in Britain. In 2014, the Kingdom tightened the rules for issuing visas to wealthy Russians, as well as anti-money laundering legislation. Additional checks led to the fact that fewer foreigners began to apply for British visas, including Russians, Transparency International UK data show.

According to the brokerage company Hamptons International, the proportion of Russians among luxury buyers in London has declined over the past three years.

Mr. Costelol • 4 hours ago ,

Freezing "State assets" under whatever pretext, is an act of war, but then again so are "sanctions".

worldblee • 4 hours ago ,

But money laundering is the UK's biggest business! How will they survive without it, unless they're planning a Saudi-style MBS "harvest" of assets from Russian lawbreakers and oligarchs seeking sanctuary in the UK?

[Mar 29, 2018] US Announces Expulsion Of 60 Russian Diplomats, Over Dozen Of States Follows. What Is Behind

On March 26, U.S. President Donald Trump ordered the expulsion of 60 Russian diplomats and the closure of the Russian consulate in Seattle.
Notable quotes:
"... [ Russia's Long Road Toward Resurgence ] ..."
Mar 29, 2018 | southfront.org

"The United States takes this action in conjunction with our NATO allies and partners around the world in response to Russia's use of a military-grade chemical weapon on the soil of the United Kingdom , the latest in its ongoing pattern of destabilizing activities around the world," the White House's Press Secretary said in a statement.

On the same time, 15 EU member states, Canada and Ukraine also announced the expulsion of Russian diplomats: Poland [4 diplomats], Lithuania [3 diplomats], Latvia [1 diplomat], Estonia [1 diplomat], Germany [4 diplomats], France [4 diplomats], Denmark [2 diplomats], Ukraine [13 diplomats], the Czech Republic [3 diplomats], the Netherlands [2 diplomats], France [4 diplomats], Italy [2 diplomats], Canada [4 diplomats], Romania [1 diplomat], Finland [1 diplomat], Croatia [1 diplomat] and Sweden [1 diplomat].

"Fourteen out of 28 EU member-states have decided to expel diplomats from the Russian Federation as a measure of solidarity with London on the Skripal case Additional measures, including further sanctions within the common EU framework, cannot be excluded in the coming days and weeks," European Council President Donald Tusk said commenting on the decision of the EU states.

The expulsion of Russian diplomats are publicly justified by the so-called Skripal case.

Hint: Former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were allegedly poisoned by a military-grade nerve-agent in the UK. The British government accuses Russia of being behind this incident, but provided no evidence to confirm this claim. Despite this, the US and other Western states also rushed to accuse Moscow.

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas explained the decision saying that "the facts and evidence suggest that Russia is behind this attack." This was the first time in the modern history after the World War 2 after such a decision was explained by a " suggestion ", without any investigation, arrests or production of evidence.

The Ukrainian regime used the Skripal case to further decrease the diplomatic relations with Russia.

"In response to the cynical chemical attack in Salisbury, Ukraine, in a spirit of solidarity with our British partners and trans-Atlantic allies, and in coordination with the EU countries, has decided to expel 13 Russian diplomats Our diplomatic relations with the Russian Federation have been de-facto frozen , as you know," Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko wrote in his Facebook.

It is important to note that 12 of the 60 diplomats expelled from the US formed part of the Russian mission to the United Nations . This move is in contrary to the basic norms of the international law.

On the same time, more and more experts and media outlets point out multiple strange facts surrounding the Skripal case and question the alleged Russian involvement in it. Some of them go further drawing attention to a possible British trance behind the poisoning and describing the incident as a pre-planned provocation.

Some experts suggest that the observed events were a pre-planned move by the Euro-Atlantic establishment. It is aimed at isolating Russia and undermining the international relations system established in the second half of 20th century and the start of the 21th century.

Considering the scale of the diplomats' expulsion, it can be observed that the national elites of the EU members states are not happy with the current situation. However, they are forced to obey to the Euro-Atlantic establishment, mostly represented by the US and the UK.

On the other hand, the global goal of this move is to increase pressure on the Western society and to shape the relations among Western states in order to strengthen the "new" global order. This will include a full dominance of the Euro-Atlantic establishment in the info sphere and will exploit the image of the foreign enemy to justify the total control over the society. In other words, the Euro-Atlantic establishment will attempt to expand a model of the society of fear tested in Ukraine during the past 4 years to the entire Euro-Atlantic world.

The Skirpal case is one of the steps en route to this global goal. SF forecasted a possible escalation caused by such events following the presidential election in Russia in its documentary released on March 17. [ Russia's Long Road Toward Resurgence ] In the future, it will likely be possible to observe more steps in this direction made by the Euro-Atlantic establishment.

Rüdiger Preiss • 3 days ago ,

Dear USA, if you think that this will make you more popular in the wide world, you are wrong.

telemetrie Rüdiger Preiss • 3 days ago ,

Russia should retaliate but not 1:1, but cut ties with West countries completely.
In fact, Russia is already in war with the West and diplomacy doesn't matter any more.
It is wasting of time. Russia still hopes, that soft approach will give them some advance. They are wrong. West must be punished with brutal force as West doesnt understand anything else then brutal force.

Casimiro telemetrie • 3 days ago ,

No. Russia shall not respond to those stupid provocations and continue to act quietly. There will be more provocations in the future. Russia will show the world how responsible and cold blooded it is, unlike the West.

As a Western European, I can notice a gap between us the citizens and the foreign policy of our stupid leaders. The gap is bigger day by day. Russians noticed it also. All they will have to do is to wait for our failed democracy to show its natural limit. People in France doesn't want to hear about NATO anymore. No one in Italy would go at war under the NATO banner, specially not against Russia.

[Mar 29, 2018] She Is Risen! - Last Act Of 'Novichok' Drama Revealed The Skripals' Resurrection

From comments: "...the incident is a clear false flag to mark Russia as an aggressor nation. The issue serves as the dead cat on the table. "
Notable quotes:
"... Moon of Alabama ..."
"... Seems to me the behavior of the British government, including the infantile stupidity of Boris Johnson, points directly at its (the government's) culpability versus say Russian gangsters with a grudge against Sergei. I base this on these behaviors of secrecy, inconsistency, incomplete information, leaping to accusations plus heroizing the officer and now the hospital staff. Indeed bless me "she is risen" b! How sweet! (BTW this last is sardonic; I'm very happy Yulia is making it.) ..."
"... The term is attributed to Lynton Crosby, a political strategist who has managed campaigns of right-of-centre parties in several countries. Boris Johnson, who employed Crosby during London mayoral elections explains the term thus: ..."
"... "There is one thing that is absolutely certain about throwing a dead cat on the dining room table – and I don't mean that people will be outraged, alarmed, disgusted. That is true, but irrelevant. The key point, says my Australian friend, is that everyone will shout, 'Jeez, mate, there's a dead cat on the table!' In other words, they will be talking about the dead cat – the thing you want them to talk about – and they will not be talking about the issue that has been causing you so much grief." ..."
"... If Yulia Scribal fully recovers she will be subjected to one of the most intensive debriefing sessions of all time. Imagine her saying she wants to see the Russian ambassador or even Putin because she felt unsafe in the UK. Or causes the UK of attacking her! ..."
"... "To respond to it rationally, as Russia tries to do, makes little sense." Exactly. Tit for tat isn't enough. It's a matter of dignity to stop completely any contact with governments behaving that low. The message delivered must be unmistakably clear. ..."
"... in the last year and a few months, a shift in the balance of power has been happening, global movement toward allying with Russia-China. ..."
"... I predicted early on in this affair that the Skirpals would amazingly "recover" - because there was no poison attack of any kind, just a shoddy attempt at a false flag event. The Skirpals were in on it from the beginning. ..."
"... Novichok is said to be highly toxic and lethal when absorbed through the skin, but it's interesting that the young man Jamie Paine who first found the Skripals on the park bench got some liquid on his skin and apparently didn't suffer from it. From a March 8 BBC video -- ". . .man was frothing from the mouth, I got a little bit on my skin, it wasn't too much, I just brushed it off." That has never been mentioned in any recent news accounts that I've seen. We do have other articles mentioning Paine. ..."
"... UK have stated A-234 was the agent used. According to the Russian scientists book A-234 is volatile, it would evaporate relatively quickly. On the poisoning, food poisoning or deliberate depends on if the narrative was opportunistic or planned. I think the narrative was planned before hand which would make it deliberate poisoning. From what I make of it, their symptoms are similar to organophosphate pesticide poisoning, and that would fit with Porton Down term of "or similar chemical". ..."
"... MH17 was an anglo/US hit job. I start to see now why no Australian rep went with the Malaysians to collect the victims and the planes black boxes. The Dutch at least had the decency to go with the Malaysian's and pick up their own people. ..."
"... As I repeated already many times here it is a moderate overdose, volunteer or not of fentanyl and then they were kept in medically induced coma for weeks not to be able repudiate their lies ..."
"... There is a lot of somewhat pointless discussion about nerve agents, do Novichoks exist, who makes them, feasibility of production etc, etc. To a certain extent, this is all irrelevant as the incident is a clear false flag to mark Russia as an aggressor nation. The issue serves as the dead cat on the table ..."
"... @ francis 11: Excellent point, a poisoned door knob should have afflicted only one of them ..."
"... It seems like every time the Brits try to revise the story, it gets worse! ..."
"... Lastly, there are several reports that the US leaned on virtually everyone in the world very, very hard to attempt to drum up "support" for May. In my experience, you only get so many over-the-top favors to ask/demand, and the US had to burn one to try to save their sanctions. ..."
Mar 29, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

"She Is Risen!" - Last Act Of 'Novichok' Drama Revealed: "The Skripals' Resurrection"

It seems that the 'Novichok' fairy-tale the British government plays to us provides for a happy ending - the astonishing and mysterious resurrection of the victims of a "military grade" "five to eight times more deadly than VX gas" "nerve agent" "of a type developed by" Hollywood.

Happy Easter!

Yulia Skripal no longer in critical condition, say Salisbury doctors

The condition of Yulia Skripal, who was poisoned with a nerve agent in Salisbury along with her father, is improving rapidly , doctors have said.

Salisbury NHS foundation trust said on Thursday the 33-year-old was no longer in a critical condition, describing her medical state as stable.

Christine Blanshard, medical director for Salisbury district hospital, said: "I'm pleased to be able to report an improvement in the condition of Yulia Skripal. She has responded well to treatment but continues to receive expert clinical care 24 hours a day."
...
Her father's condition is still described by the hospital as critical but stable.

Only yesterday the Skripals chances to survive was claimed to be 1 out of 99. Nerve agents are deadly weapons. A dose of ten milligram of the U.S. developed VX nerve agent will kill 50% of those exposed to it. The 'Novichok' agents are said to be several times more deadly than VX.

It seems less and less likely that the British government claim about 'Novichok' poisoning is actually true. Way more likely are other explanations, for example food poisoning or an allergic shock soon after eating out at a fish restaurant.

The claims of a nerve agent and 'Novichok' seem to have been taken from the script of the British-American spy drama Strike Back ( clip ) which recently ran on British and U.S. TV. The sole purpose of the 'Novichok' drama is to implicate and damage Russia.

As the former MI6 spook Alastair Crooke writes :

The evidence is beside the point: here was the opportunity to close-off Trump's 'illusion' of a possible détente with Russia. The narrative is all. We will likely never know the full story.

Yulia and Sergej Skripal were found unconscious on the afternoon of March 4.

The U.S. State Department says that its campaign to use the Skripal incident as a tool against Russia started on March 6, only two days after the incident and six full days before the British government raised accusations against Russia.

In her press briefing on March 27 the U.S. State Department spokeswomen Heather Nauert talked about the coordinated ousting of Russian diplomats by some "western" countries:

Our Deputy Secretary Sullivan, Assistant Secretary Wess Mitchell, and many others in the building across the interagency process have worked tirelessly over the past three weeks to achieve this unprecedented level of cooperation and also coordination. The end result – 151 Russian intelligence personnel sent home to Moscow – is a testimony of how seriously the world takes Russia's ongoing global campaign to undermine international peace and stability, to threaten the sovereignty and security of countries worldwide, and to subvert and discredit Western institutions.

The above quote is from Nauert's prepared remarks, not the more free wheeling Q&A section.

The British prime minister made her allegations against Russia only on March 12 :

"It is now clear that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a military grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia.

This is part of a group of nerve agents known as 'Novichok'."

(See our earlier pieces, linked below, for many details on 'Novichok' and its history.)

May's announcement was similar to Tony Blair's "45 minutes" claim. A lie, concocted in a common propaganda operation with the U.S. government. As the Downing Street Memos said of the preparations for the war on Iraq:

C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam , through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.

bigger

There are several details that debunk the 'Novichok' thesis.

The specialists in the British chemical weapon laboratory in Porton Down, which gets millions of U.S. military research dollars, did not agree with the 'Novichok' claim for whatever effected the Skripals. May's phrase "of a type developed by Russia' was politically negotiated. As ambassador Craig Murray provided :

I have now received confirmation from a well placed FCO source that Porton Down scientists are not able to identify the nerve agent as being of Russian manufacture , and have been resentful of the pressure being placed on them to do so. Porton Down would only sign up to the formulation "of a type developed by Russia" after a rather difficult meeting where this was agreed as a compromise formulation.

But was there really a nerve agent involved?

A doctor who administered first aid to Yulia Skripal for 30 minutes was not effected at all. The emergency services suspected the victims had received on overdose of fentanyl.

Doctor Steven Davies, who leads the emergency service of the Salisbury District Hospital, wrote in a letter to the London Times :

Sir, Further to your report "Poison exposure leaves almost 40 needing treatment", (Mar 14), may I clarify that no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury and there have only been ever been three patients with significant poisoning.

A Court of Protection judgment about the Skripals issued on March 22 quotes as witness a Porton Down chemical and biological analyst:

Blood samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analysed and the findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound . The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent or closely related agent .

"Indicated exposure" is a rather weak formulation. It means that no 'novichok' was found but decomposition products of something that may have been a nerve agent or not. A blood sample may "test positive" for all kinds of stuff but that does not say anything about the amount or about the lethality of any of the "positive tested" elements. The 'Novichok' nerve agents are organophosphates like many of the usual insecticides are. These break down relatively fast. A walk through a field freshly sprayed with some insecticide or the domestic use of such a product might leave similar decomposition products in the bloodstream as a nerve agent attack.

The Court of Protection also said that no relative or friend contacted the authorities about the Skripals. That was evidently false (ru).

Today, 25 days after the incident, the police say they suspect that the Skripals were poisoned from the front door of their home. Today, 25 days after the incident, they removed the front door. I believe that this decision was based on a "most plausible story" guess and not on material evidence. If the door had tested positive for a nerve agent it would have been removed weeks ago. This is, like those people in high protection suits roaming around Salisbury, just theater.

The Skripals were said to have left their home at 9:00am in the morning. They collapsed relatively sudden at 4:00pm in the afternoon. Is this seven hour delay consistent with being severely affected by a "military grade" highly toxic nerve agent? I doubt it.

But even if a nerve agent of the 'novichok' type was involved the jump to allegations against Russia is completely baseless. David B. Collum is Professor for Organic Chemistry at Cornell University. He really, really knows this stuff:

Dave Collum @DavidBCollum - 12:54 AM - 27 Mar 2018
I will say it again: Anybody who tells you this nerve agent must have come from Russia is a liar--a complete and utter liar. They are simple compounds.

The Skripals are getting better. Good for them. But their resurrection from certain death is a further dint in the British government's claim of 'nerve agent' 'of a type developed by Russia'.

The whole anti-Russian campaign constructed out of it is just ridiculous and deeply dishonest. The five page propaganda handout the British provided to other governments is a joke. It provided no solid facts on the case. To respond to it rationally, as Russia tries to do, makes little sense .

An editorial (recommended) in the Chinese Global Times captures the utter disgust such behavior creates elsewhere:

The fact that major Western powers can gang up and "sentence" a foreign country without following the same procedures other countries abide by and according to the basic tenets of international law is chilling.
...
Over the past few years the international standard has been falsified and manipulated in ways never seen before.
...
It is beyond outrageous how the US and Europe have treated Russia. Their actions represent a frivolity and recklessness that has grown to characterize Western hegemony that only knows how to contaminate international relations. Right now is the perfect time for non-Western nations to strengthen unity and collaborative efforts among one another.

Resurrection or not - the result of the 'Novichok' nonsense will not be to our 'western' favor.

---

Previous Moon of Alabama reports on the Skripal case:

Posted by b on March 29, 2018 at 02:59 PM | Permalink

Comments

james , Mar 29, 2018 3:07:44 PM | 1

this story was bullshit from the get go and a frame up of russia, but now the lid comes off to reveal more craziness.. wow..

thanks b.. it is deeply dishonest as you state... none of these state actors are going to take back any of there actions or words on any of this either... that is the really disgusting part... again, it is an issue of no accountability and actions absent facts that the west are operating on f/t... very disturbing.. white helmets is one thing... getting the leaders of western dumbocracy to act according to propaganda 101 is another thing... no one can take any of these western countries seriously again, but until the next episode - and there will be more, no doubt - it is the same as usual....

i note pat lang has nothing to say on it.. he seems too busy holding up his idea of the good ole' days when there were good people and bad people.. too bad the usa has sunk to such a deplorable state..

ex-SA , Mar 29, 2018 3:12:20 PM | 2
Magic of Easter !?
Peter AU 1 , Mar 29, 2018 3:19:25 PM | 3
Her resurrection also comes not long after it was determined OPCW could take blood samples. As it took three weeks with constant Russian pressure to have OPCW involved, her resurrection may not have been part of the original narrative.
lysias , Mar 29, 2018 3:20:06 PM | 4
Remember, Trump, in his telephone call congratulating Putin after March 12, refused the instructions of his aides to bring up the Salisbury event.
Ort , Mar 29, 2018 3:26:52 PM | 5
As the saying goes, the fun never stops! A stalwart minority of "alternative" news and analysis sites like MOA has published compelling critiques of this rotten Western Hegemony-pimped Big Lie from the beginning.

The UK authorities' campaign of simultaneously suppressing factual information and instead bloviating a series of dodgy claims, outright falsehoods, and escalating scurrilous smears kept both critics and the public off balance for a long time.

But it was predictable that events-- facts on the ground-- would eventually emerge that could not be explained away by more facile nonsense and rhetorical Russophobic Sturm und Drang.

So I again pose the question I've been nattering on about for weeks now: since the UK government chose to put itself far out on a greasy limb, what is their anticipated endgame?

Unlike the US, older governments in the UK and EU have a tradition of resigning in the face of scandal-- once attempts to weather the scandal have been exhausted, at any rate.

It would be delicious to see the despicable Gorgon May and UK Village Idiot Laureate Boris Johnson get their well-deserved comeuppance. In fact, it would be too good to be true.

Thus, I assume that the Big Liars will somehow contrive to "tough it out", and double down on the facile nonsense and rhetorical Russophobic Sturm und Drang.

FSFF , Mar 29, 2018 3:31:54 PM | 6
Well, MI6, to move this farce along, must have given Yulia some of the antidote for the nerve agent they gave her and her father almost a month ago. The US and UK have been working on a diabolical 'coma inducing' nerve agent since the CIA sent Otto Warmbier to Pyongyang with an early version of what they poisoned the Skripals with.

Whether Yulia wakes up and starts screaming "Russia did it" or implies it, remembering seeing a Russian diplomatic limousine speed off after she and her father sniffed the gorgeous bouquet of poisoned flowers.

But we're just going to have to wait to see what the latest twist in the plot PM Miss Marple has invented for the whole world to start "oohing" and "ahhing" about.

dh , Mar 29, 2018 3:35:23 PM | 7
A lot depends now on Yulia. Has she been following the news? Will she say anything to implicate Russia? A cynic might even suggest her recovery is conditional.
Neve , Mar 29, 2018 3:40:43 PM | 9
"Why did UK court say "limited evidence" Skripals have relatives while cousin interviewed in UK media?"

https://off-guardian.org/2018/03/28/skripal-relatives/

Sid2 , Mar 29, 2018 3:43:20 PM | 10
from b's last link:

There's no logic in it; it doesn't make sense, and I don't think it needs to make sense, because essentially what the media is doing is propagandizing the population in favor of the madman theory. That's critical to do when you're trying to start aggression against a country. We had it with Gaddafi, we had it with Saddam Hussein, with Assad, with Kim Jong-un. 'These are madmen who are irrational. We cannot do business with them. We cannot make a deal with them. They do crazy things that make no sense.' This is exactly what the propaganda is doing; I'm just surprised that more people aren't questioning it, [since it's been] done over and over and over.

Right on.

frances , Mar 29, 2018 3:44:13 PM | 11
b-thank you for staying on this who-done-it
Just a thought; only one of them would have closed the door, so how can two be poisoned??
les7 , Mar 29, 2018 3:47:16 PM | 12
@1 this story was bullshit from the get go..."

True, but this is bullshit with a purpose.

This is part of a media background buzz against which a false flag (probably in Ukraine) will appear just as the World Cup event gains world wide media traction.

I believe that rather than follow the previous two olympic models, where the false flag of country-sponsored doping was endlessly repeated with decreasing effect, this false flag attack will come during the event, creating a shame-filled spectacle of the semi-final teams withdrawing and flying home in protest against Russian response - no matter what it may be.

Gerd Müller , Mar 29, 2018 3:49:32 PM | 13
The resurrection of Julia is a miracle. All resurrections are. In the night of easter , Mr. Skripal may recover also. I hope, there is a press conference soon. A tweet said, her first words were :" It tastet not as chicken"
Les , Mar 29, 2018 3:53:45 PM | 14
My cynical guess is that the next twist and turn in this story will be that she becomes the Bana Al-Abed of the poisoning saga. The story was dying, and this is just the next phase.
Bart Hansen , Mar 29, 2018 3:54:55 PM | 15
6: Will May's hasty hysteria negate her chances of being made a dame?
Jen , Mar 29, 2018 3:57:18 PM | 16
The thought has occurred to me that perhaps Sergei and Yulia Skripal are being subjected to isolation, sedation and other forms of sensory deprivation that were the hallmark of psychological experiments conducted in the US, Canada and possibly Britain over at least two decades from the 1950s on as part of the MK ULTRA program and related programs. Keeping Yulia Skripal in isolation for three weeks while claiming that she was in critical condition and then announcing a change in her condition might fit the bill.

I should add that I have always suspected that what caused the Skripals to fall unconscious in the first place was food poisoning.

DNJ , Mar 29, 2018 4:00:47 PM | 17
"Stable" and "improving" do not exclude the possibility of severe brain injury and total disability. It is not unusual for such cases to be initially reported as "critical", and later stable or improving after immediate medical risks pass, but then one hears nothing more about them (in ordinary cases) because neural recovery stalls. Fingers are crossed however; there is still hope.

That aside, the reporting here on this case has been invaluable.

che , Mar 29, 2018 4:00:51 PM | 18
Perhaps Mr. Moon has already addressed this somewhere, >?, however I have a question. So they are moving all these criminals and families to Idlib; but that is still inside Syria, so what is the plan there ? Are they going to accede Idlib to these people ? Of course there are other problems like how to get Turkey and the U.S. out of country, and what to do with the traitorous Kurds aligned with the U.S., nothing very resolved there as to an outcome. I just keep reading they are allowing terrorists to vacate out to Idlib, but what could be the end game there ? Carpet bombing ?
Don Bacon , Mar 29, 2018 4:01:52 PM | 19
re: perhaps Sergei and Yulia Skripal are being subjected to isolation 16

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said at a news conference in Moscow that "we have again demanded to be guaranteed access to Yulia as she is a Russian citizen. I hope the British side can fulfill its obligations under the Vienna Convention on diplomatic relations."

FSFF , Mar 29, 2018 4:08:21 PM | 20
#15

Good question. I don't think Orwell tells us whether or not the monarchy survives the transition of Air Strip One to Big Brother's rule.

Fatima Manoubia , Mar 29, 2018 4:08:55 PM | 21
Posted by: dh | Mar 29, 2018 3:35:23 PM | 7
....A cynic might even suggest her recovery is conditional.

Then, call me a cynic...Indeed I have become one since 5 years already in the world of the "alt-media"....The first thing I thought of this "sudden" recovery is its possible relation with the claim by dozens of states on seeing proofs of the assertions of the UK officials, especially after many in the EU have "suffered", according with words whispered into Russian Foreign Ministry officials´ ears, an "unsurmontable pressure" to join the ferenzy in the expelling of diplomats...Take into account that some European countries have only accepted expelling one or two diplomats...

We are not sure that the Skripals were not into the play themselves...

Another possibility, in case they are not into the play, may be that Yulia could be being blackmailed for to corroborate UK claims, under the menace of her father not recovering ever....

To this point, I fear, any dirty trick/foul play by the UK / US must be taken into consideration.. I wonder whether they can fall lower already...

lysias , Mar 29, 2018 4:10:07 PM | 22
The reports are that she is talking, which means that she retains a significant amount of mental capacity.

What excuse can now be given for refusing to allow admission to a Russian consul?

Don Bacon , Mar 29, 2018 4:18:02 PM | 25
Who needs evidence in a nation of outlaws?

NYTimes, Mar 29: The British government has not made its evidence public, but has shared it with major allies, who have said that they agree with London's conclusions. -- here

State Dept Briefing, Mar 27:

QUESTION: Another one on Russia. You talk about certainty about knowing that Russia was responsible. Can you say anything about the process that got you to – the U.S. to certainty?

MS NAUERT: Well, we stand strongly with our ally, with the UK. And when the UK tells us that they have proof that they know Russia was responsible, we have every reason to believe them. -- here

nonsense factory , Mar 29, 2018 4:20:11 PM | 26
The problem with this whole story is the complete lack of public information on the specifics. First, let's consider the general case of poisoning with organophosphates - with range in toxicity from the common organophosphate pesticides, which many people have heard of, like malathion and chlorpyrifos (implicated in many farmworker posionings) through to the highly toxic German 'G-Agents' (invented by German chemists and stockpiled by the Nazis in World War II), i.e. sarin and tabun and soman, and further derivatives like VX and the claimed Novichok agents, synthesized by British and Soviet weapons programs during the Cold War. These vary in terms of the small carbon fragments surrounding the organophosphate core of the molecule

So, given a sample of clothing or something similar contaminated with an organophosphare, how does one analyze it and determine the molecular structure? It's the same for the pesticide as for the nerve agent, you use analytical chemical techniques, which are found in the scientific literature, for example:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0026265X11001111

"A new single-drop microextraction (SDME) followed by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry techniques were used to determine the dimethoate, methyl parathion, ethion (organophosphates) and permethrin (pyrethroid) pesticides in water samples. The parameters linearity, linear range, precision, accuracy, sensitivity and robustness were studied for validation of the SDME/GC–MS method."

GC-MS is just gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, a common analytical method for the analysis of volatile chemicals. You want to use the clothing on the victim or hair or skin swabs, since once in the bloodstream, these compounds may be actively degraded after exerting their effects (i.e. you'd find metabolites). The results of the analysis are compared to known libraries of organophosphate toxins to determine their identity, If Porton Down scientists and technicians are competent, they will have created such libraries of all know OP toxins for the purpose of rapid identification (this is their job description)

So the first thing to do would be to isolate the victim's clothing and conduct forensic analysis, right? So where is that data, where are those results? They exist, but have not been presented; this is understandable since such evidence should be presented at a trial or inquiry. In a public inquiry or lawsuit or criminal case related to pesticide poisoning, all this evidence would be presented to the judge/jury and the analyst who did the work would be called to the stand to present his or her forensic work, they'd be cross-examined in detail, etc. Only then would guilt or innocence be determined, that's the normal course of events.

This has all been completely bypassed in favor of hysterical propaganda speeches, as far as I can see. There's nothing reliable to base any opinion about what happened yet on. So everyone trying to use this event for their own PR agendas, they're just playing some game. The only way to sort it out is to have a public inquiry, and the way things are going, arguments about 'national security' and 'state secrets' will be used to prevent the analytical data from being shown to the public.

Regardless, that's what needs to happen.

Sid2 , Mar 29, 2018 4:20:40 PM | 27
Seems to me the behavior of the British government, including the infantile stupidity of Boris Johnson, points directly at its (the government's) culpability versus say Russian gangsters with a grudge against Sergei. I base this on these behaviors of secrecy, inconsistency, incomplete information, leaping to accusations plus heroizing the officer and now the hospital staff. Indeed bless me "she is risen" b! How sweet! (BTW this last is sardonic; I'm very happy Yulia is making it.)

The context now stretches forward to failure of "diplomacy" coming up in April-May in North Korea as Kim gathers his alliance closer to his vest, and whether EU countries will back out of the Iran deal, with Mattis constrained to withhold much madder dogs in Bolton-Pompeo who will likely be calling for military response. The attitudes I detect in both British and US State Department "thinking" suggest a chortling hubris not ready for a very serious comeuppance. Donald, I think, will wilt further.

Don Bacon , Mar 29, 2018 4:21:14 PM | 28
So now Russia has said they will boot 150 westerners, plus close the St Petersburg consulate, and the US is claiming foul because . . .there's no reason to do so!
nonsense factory , Mar 29, 2018 4:30:51 PM | 29
P.S. An interesting example of a organophosphate poisoning scenario is here, it's very similar to the course the case appears to have taken with the younger Skripal.
https://www.poison.org/articles/2010-jun/pesticide-and-nerve-agent-commonality

One of the child's physicians consulted the medical toxicologist at Poison Control to discuss the child's care and to ask how long the atropine and pralidoxime should be continued. The medical toxicologist explained that malathion can stay in fatty tissue such as the brain for up to 14 days and that there are case reports of needing to use these antidotes for up to 30 days.

Incidentally, claims that only state actors can make nerve agents are unreliable; this chemistry is widely known and is all based on the same general concept of organophosphate synthesis of pesticides. Sarin synthesis was conducted by IG Farben affiliates in the early 1940s on a very large scale; the main issue is making sure the chemists aren't killed while making the stuff. The basic protocol and lists of required equipment can be found by anyone with a library card and an internet connection, and as long as they have the equivalent of a college organic chemistry degree, they'll be able to understand it.

The Japanese cult Aum Shinrikyo managed it (they had an experienced chemist in the cult). In addition, small sealed glass vials of this stuff could have made it onto the international market after the breakup of the Soviet Union; that's a normal means of storing small amounts of such toxic chemicals for analytical purposes.

Of course, if it turns out to have been sarin instead of some other mystery OP nerve agent. . . Wait and see, I suppose.

michael d , Mar 29, 2018 4:30:56 PM | 30
Obviously a fake story and Novichok doesn't seem to exist.

But we are still debating the extent to which Russia is an aggressive nation - this is superb work by the black PR forces of the West.
We should be debating just how US&Nato are aggressive towards Russia. Very Very in any objective view.

daffyDuct , Mar 29, 2018 4:31:55 PM | 31
Daughter is conscious and talking.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/29/yulia-skripal-conscious-talking-nearly-month-chemical-attack/

Also from the story:

"NHS officials are also understood to be monitoring several people for signs of health problems after coming into potential contact with the Novichok agent. They are thought to include neighbours, postal staff, the first uniformed officers to arrive at the scene."

Weren't they supposed to wash their clothes weeks ago, or burn them? If the poison was still in the environment, then why are people allowed to walk about in town. Why was the town promoting free parking to lure back visitors.

http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/2018-03-24/free-car-parking-as-shoppers-return-to-salisbury/


Darn it, it's so confusing!

daffyDuct , Mar 29, 2018 4:34:43 PM | 32
Sorry - mis-quoted the article. NHS is looking at just a few individuals a month after the incident.
AM , Mar 29, 2018 4:34:55 PM | 33
Boris Jonhson and "a dead cat on the table" strategy
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/9906445/This-cap-on-bankers-bonuses-is-like-a-dead-cat-pure-distraction.html

The term is attributed to Lynton Crosby, a political strategist who has managed campaigns of right-of-centre parties in several countries. Boris Johnson, who employed Crosby during London mayoral elections explains the term thus:

"There is one thing that is absolutely certain about throwing a dead cat on the dining room table – and I don't mean that people will be outraged, alarmed, disgusted. That is true, but irrelevant. The key point, says my Australian friend, is that everyone will shout, 'Jeez, mate, there's a dead cat on the table!' In other words, they will be talking about the dead cat – the thing you want them to talk about – and they will not be talking about the issue that has been causing you so much grief." http://www.dailymirror.lk/article/When-the-dots-are-connected-you-get-a-dead-cat-147293.html

Quentin , Mar 29, 2018 4:37:00 PM | 34
Are we supposed to believe that Russia brought a nerve agent into the UK just to attack the Skripals? Or did a Russian agent buy it on the street in London or even get it from a clandestine Russian chemical weapons factory in the UK? Someone has literally made this up out of whole cloth. I find it especially farcical that the chemical is always labeled 'weapons grade': now you must be looking under your bed every night before you go to sleep. 'Schoolyard grade' would be the most benign category.

If Yulia Scribal fully recovers she will be subjected to one of the most intensive debriefing sessions of all time. Imagine her saying she wants to see the Russian ambassador or even Putin because she felt unsafe in the UK. Or causes the UK of attacking her!

dh , Mar 29, 2018 4:43:19 PM | 35
@34 "Or causes (accuses) the UK of attacking her!"

In that case I think we can expect a dramatic relapse.

ashley albanese , Mar 29, 2018 4:46:55 PM | 36
Side2 27
The Australian foreign minister equivocated on the Skripal case . She pointedly observed that non Russian government state players could have been behind the attack. Australians - some of us - are acutely aware that the 'western ' world may be overextended and moving towards some sort of (catastrophic ? ) military defeat .

Australia , as in 1942 at Singapore may find herself very much alone . Many see the Skripal embroglio as a sign the US / Anglo world is panicking and malfunctioning !

jawbone , Mar 29, 2018 4:49:07 PM | 37
WHen did the DI Nick Baily who fell ill, supposedly from the same poison as the Skripals, actually go to the Skripal residence?

Was there someone adding to the amount of whatever it was which made 3 people ill, ensuring that someone besides the two Skripals got sick to some extent

The Daily Mirror doesn't mention the DI in its timeline.

Business Insider simply skips directly from 4:15PM, March 4 to March 5th's local police declaration of "major incident."

The timing is good -- wouldn't want to claim Yulia has improved on Good Friday.

Pnyx , Mar 29, 2018 4:53:27 PM | 38
"To respond to it rationally, as Russia tries to do, makes little sense." Exactly. Tit for tat isn't enough. It's a matter of dignity to stop completely any contact with governments behaving that low. The message delivered must be unmistakably clear.
imoverit , Mar 29, 2018 5:02:35 PM | 40
It was food poisoning wasn't it ? Fish I believe. That's also Easter-ish eh !
jawbone , Mar 29, 2018 5:09:49 PM | 41
Ew: #39 -- Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey. Not DI

Also, has it been confirmed by any authority that Bailey did indeed go to he residence? Guardian reported they were told he did...so is this just being buried? Or it's an inaccurate report?

Sid2 , Mar 29, 2018 5:14:29 PM | 42
@36 Ashley seems to me neocon-ism has been unraveling fast, a sign of it Trump's victory with follow-up the diminished success of the US military in Syria ("success" that is in terms of State Department Clinton-style regime change policies etc). At the same time, in the last year and a few months, a shift in the balance of power has been happening, global movement toward allying with Russia-China.

The trend for the West and its State Department geniuses is downward, weakening, at which point the cornered beast may turn (or want to turn)even more vicious. So to the propaganda. If the Skripal affair is result of food poisoning, say, not something plotted, it has been (and will be) leaped onto with a very large and flush-faced "Aha!" type behavior to get JQ Public in line. It's particularly disturbing to find the low-level of "intelligence" being exhibited by these "leaders" who are stupid enough to provoke something really serious. The Russians meanwhile are enhancing their popularity by being rational and leader-like.

mike k , Mar 29, 2018 5:35:01 PM | 43
I predicted early on in this affair that the Skirpals would amazingly "recover" - because there was no poison attack of any kind, just a shoddy attempt at a false flag event. The Skirpals were in on it from the beginning.
nonsense factory , Mar 29, 2018 5:35:53 PM | 44
@DaffyDuct

As wikipedia notes, the main difference between sarin-like OP agents and VX-like OP agents is that the former is more gas-like, and the latter more liquid-like:

"The danger of VX, in particular, lies in direct exposure to the chemical agent persisting where it was dispersed, and not through its evaporating and being distributed as a vapor (i.e., it is not a "vapor hazard"). VX is considered an area denial weapon due to these physical and biochemical characteristics."

Since nobody has said anything about the claimed 'Novichok' agents. The (so far completely unsupported) claim is this (link below):

"The nerve agent used in an attack on Sergei and Yulia Skripal was part of the Novichok family, the British government has revealed. This group of nerve agents was developed in Russia as part of a secret chemical weapons programme codenamed 'Foliant' in the 1970s and 80s."

Not much of a 'reveal', more like a 'claim.' This is an interesting bit of Cold War history though; US and British bioweapons and chemical weapons programs were most active from the late 1940s to the late 1960s, while the Soviet ones were ramped up from the 1970s to the 1980s (see Foliant, Biopreparat). Crazy bastards,, wasn't getting torched with nuclear weapons enough? Of course, the CIA and KGB were big advocates of the bio/chem approach, for dirty tricks, which extended to using drugs like LSD on unsuspecting politicians, etc. Sociopathic lunatics, the lot of them.

Regardless, nobody knows if the claimed agent was liquid-like, in which case, it could be tracked all over the place by people's shoes, etc. None of it really makes much sense at this point, and without a public inquiry, it probably never will. No plans for one of those anytime soon, is there?

"Scientists at Porton Down would have been able to identify the agent, he adds, because the laboratory has been assembling information on potential threats for decades. 'What they will have done is made these chemicals, suspecting they were part of the Soviet or Russian arsenal,' Hay says. Then chemists at Porton Down would have 'assessed their structure and put them into a library of reference materials', he adds."

https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/russian-novichok-nerve-agent-linked-to-attack-on-ex-spy/3008773.article

So yes, some of these materials could have walked out of Porton Down, that's possible. Wonder if they're taking an inventory? Not that they'd ever say.

FSFF , Mar 29, 2018 5:42:29 PM | 45
@21 Fat Man

The Skripals must have been in on it. Blackmail not necessary. Money Will do. Yulia wakes up first. She is more sympathetic than him. Now there can be only one murder charge and if he wakes, only attempted murder. I just read about Otto Warmbier. In a coma for 16 months in North Korea; dead 6 days after being returned home. Did anyone see his body? Open casket or closed? Cremated? Given antidote and new identity?

THERE IS NOTHING CIA & MI6 WILL NOT STOOP TO

mauisurfer , Mar 29, 2018 5:45:15 PM | 46
FSFF @ 45: the Warmbier family refused to allow autopsy
flamingo , Mar 29, 2018 5:45:58 PM | 47
Farce is the primary thought, black farce. Sometimes I see May acting as Mr Steptoe Snr in that ridiculous British comedy, Steptoe and Son (decades ago).

I guess there will be savings for the western fools with less diplomats and then the Russian Federation will have many less meddlers to shadow around. So good economic outcomes all round, sigh.

There is no clown hat that I can imagine that would be silly enough to suit May, Johnson, or Nikki Haley. I can imagine the Australian foreign minister wearing something inspired by a galah and kangaroo tail, with a hint of emu neck and head. It might be a fun competition to sponsor same though.

Don Bacon , Mar 29, 2018 5:53:16 PM | 48
Novichok is said to be highly toxic and lethal when absorbed through the skin, but it's interesting that the young man Jamie Paine who first found the Skripals on the park bench got some liquid on his skin and apparently didn't suffer from it. From a March 8 BBC video -- ". . .man was frothing from the mouth, I got a little bit on my skin, it wasn't too much, I just brushed it off." That has never been mentioned in any recent news accounts that I've seen. We do have other articles mentioning Paine.

Paine is also mentioned in a March 6 euronews article:

Eyewitness Jamie Paine raised the alarm in the southern English city.

"It was like her body was dead," he said, of the woman, who police says was known to Skripal. "Her legs were really stiff... you know when animals die, they have rigor mortis. Both her legs came together when people pulled (her), and when she was on the floor her eyes were just completely white. They were wide open but just white and frothing at the mouth. Then the man went stiff: his arms stopped moving, but he's still looking dead straight." . . here

And also in a March 6 CBS news article:

''When she was on the floor, her eyes were just completely white," said Jaime Paine, who found the couple and alerted police. "They were wide open but just white and (she was) frothing at the mouth. Then the man went stiff. His arms stopped moving, but he's still looking dead straight." . . here . . . and another on March 12.

Peter AU 1 , Mar 29, 2018 5:53:56 PM | 49
UK have stated A-234 was the agent used. According to the Russian scientists book A-234 is volatile, it would evaporate relatively quickly. On the poisoning, food poisoning or deliberate depends on if the narrative was opportunistic or planned. I think the narrative was planned before hand which would make it deliberate poisoning. From what I make of it, their symptoms are similar to organophosphate pesticide poisoning, and that would fit with Porton Down term of "or similar chemical".
Peter AU 1 , Mar 29, 2018 6:04:40 PM | 50
MH17 was an anglo/US hit job. I start to see now why no Australian rep went with the Malaysians to collect the victims and the planes black boxes. The Dutch at least had the decency to go with the Malaysian's and pick up their own people.

With MH17 it took two weeks to push the EU into sanctioning Russia which and only then so called international team and Australian reps went to the site.

With Novichok, it only took a couple of days to get the EU on board so I think plenty of planning by UK and fellow travelers in the US before the Skripal's were poisoned.

somebody , Mar 29, 2018 6:08:51 PM | 51
Posted by: dh | Mar 29, 2018 3:35:23 PM | 7

Last time I checked British private intelligence contractors followed opposite goals. Not to mention the split in British "elites". Theresa May waited before the jumped - or rather was pushed - from March 3 to March 12. If she is lucky she can get rid of Boris Johnson over this.

FSFF , Mar 29, 2018 6:44:25 PM | 52
46 mauisurfer: Then Otto probably had a face lift and is working in the ME now for the CIA.
Kalen , Mar 29, 2018 6:53:30 PM | 53
As I repeated already many times here it is a moderate overdose, volunteer or not of fentanyl and then they were kept in medically induced coma for weeks not to be able repudiate their lies, even thinking of killing them eventually but when their narrative fell apart regardless they are no longer needed as props of this abhorrent false flag ploy and in fact they are suppose to recover somewhat otherwise they would have to send bodies to Russia which would authoritively debunk U.K. lies.
TooMuchTruthiness , Mar 29, 2018 7:21:51 PM | 54
There is a lot of somewhat pointless discussion about nerve agents, do Novichoks exist, who makes them, feasibility of production etc, etc. To a certain extent, this is all irrelevant as the incident is a clear false flag to mark Russia as an aggressor nation. The issue serves as the dead cat on the table.

If setting up Russia as an aggressor nation is the aim of the exercise, how could organizers create the scenario? The story line apparently chosen is that the victims were poisoned with a military grade weapon that could only be produced by Russia.

The OPCW-sanctioned samples will show that the material given to Porton Down did indeed contain Skirpal DNA removing the prime objection of tampering as a possible means by which the supposed nerve agent was found in the sample. Ipso facto - the samples were not tampered with and 'Russia done it'.

The Skirpals are then no longer needed and their statements after recovery can be dismissed as the result of slight brain damage arising from OPCW-verifed posioning by proven Russian nerve agent.

The reality - they could have been poisoned by common organophosphate weedkiller. These products are readily available and are capable of leaving traces in the blood stream similar to a real nerve agent, just waiting to be detected by the likes of Porton Down.

Signs & symptoms of weed killer poisoning

"Initially, this type of poisoning can cause watery eyes and excess salivation . Breathing difficulties often occur. Individuals affected by these poisons sometimes experience nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and stomach cramps. In addition, the fingernails and lips can become blue. The person might develop a headache and feel both dizzy and weak . They might also experience anxiety, convulsions and possibly slip into a coma . Organophosphate is especially dangerous because it can be easily absorbed through the skin and cause paralysis and death in a short period of time. ... Severe poisoning can lead to permanent paralysis or brain damage ."

Most of the publicly described symptoms before and after hospital admission are covered. It would also explain the presence of apparent nerve agent degradation products in the blood. And it would also not endanger the general public. Post-incident hype about passers-by being affected could be created safe in their knowledge that there will be no problems from masses of people dying or overwhelming the medical services with associated high public/media interest and troublesome relatives.

One question - how could the hypothetical 'military grade nerve agent' aka weedkiller be applied to the Skirpals and the Skirpals alone without endangering the person who carried out the attack? If the person was known to the Skirpals, (s)he could get close without arising suspicion. (S)He would then be in a position to dose both with a suitable amount of poison.

How about accidental self-poisoning during the incident? The attacker might wear some kind of hand protection but the poison may be dispersed into his/her face, for example. The person would move away from the crime scene to avoid appearing to be a victim/witness and being questioned. The possible later appearance of symptoms would be planned for. The attacker could attend hospital some time later once the nature of the chemical agent was known publicly, allowing him/her to be treated with the antidote (atropine injection?) in hospital and probably make a safe and quick recovery. Maybe in these circumstances, (s)he would treat themselves at the first sight of symptoms using a disposable atropine autoinjector then call for help if necessary?

All purely hypothetical of course.

Peter AU 1 , Mar 29, 2018 7:36:50 PM | 55
54
Accurate doses in their meals. "How about accidental self-poisoning during the incident?" If it's a pesticide or herbicide organophosphate farmers would, or would have, used the shit.
karlof1 , Mar 29, 2018 8:19:49 PM | 56
And so at least one of the many Big Lies begins to unravel. Time for a No Confidence vote and subsequent change in government. Does anyone know what % of UK believes this May/Johnson Big Lie?
Debsisdead , Mar 29, 2018 9:27:36 PM | 60
The more I consider the Skirpal fantasy, the more convinced I am that the pending world cup final was one of the primary drivers behind the frame up.

... ... ...

J Swift , Mar 29, 2018 9:30:43 PM | 61
At this point there are so many points that are patently ridiculous about this whole Skripal affair it's hard to know how to summarize it...good job, b. A few random thoughts:

@ francis 11: Excellent point, a poisoned door knob should have afflicted only one of them. But more to the point, now that the killer plot du jour is the home door, it leads to more incompatible "facts." In order for May and friends to have even a speck of justification for rushing to judgment rather than investigating, they were stuck with the narrative that they were poisoned, and it had to be a "military grade" (implicitly ruling out all the regular people who wanted Skripal dead) "nerve agent" (really scary like only war criminals use) and "of a kind invented in the USSR" (implying this particular sample must have come from Russia). But by picking an obscure, originally Soviet agent, they are stuck with incredibly deadly, quick acting, volatile, etc.

So if one Skripal was poisoned with something that the lab janitor said would have killed him or her before they could get to their car, and just the residue from this evaporating substance would seriously sicken a strapping young detective within minutes, forcing him to the hospital, how did the Skripal(s) getting the full dose traipse around town half a day, even feeling a bit peckish so as to stop at two different places to eat and drink? You simply can't have it both ways, May. It seems like every time the Brits try to revise the story, it gets worse!

Also, it's so easy to get caught up in the "means" of the mystery, because it is so laughably preposterous, but we should never forget the "motive." On the part of the RF, not only zero (hell, he only had a half dozen years left on his original sentence--not a death sentence), but less than zero to do something at the worst possible time from a Russian point of view (right before election, with EU support for sanctions fading fast, NordStream 2 finally looking to be past all hurdles, etc.). The flip side of that coin shows that this bad timing was indeed what was critical to the Brits and US--why else they just HAD to immediately expel diplomats, etc? After all, if they were indeed quite sure the Russians had done it, wouldn't there be every reason in the world to proceed with a very public investigation, dragging Putin's name through the mud, actually prolonging the affair, and THEN expel diplomats and anything else you want to do once you've proven to the world what shits the Ruskies are?

The hastily thrown together (and now falling apart) "crisis" might be because the other, more carefully planned black eyes for election eve Russia fell apart at the last minute. There was a major nerve gas false flag (serendipitous) and follow-up military strikes set in Syria, but the SAA advanced too quickly and probably along with special ops folks managed to prevent the three planned attacks. Not only did the US/Israel/NATO lose the chance to besmirch Russia and strike Syria hard, it was such a screw up some are saying it cost Tillerson his job.

Then there was the attack on the Donbass, which was fully prepped to spring just before the election -- troops and heavy weapons had massed at the borders, US weapons had arrived, even lanes through mine fields had been cleared, Porky had his orders. But then the DPR (with FSB help, no doubt) discovered the traitors in the LPR government who had planned to sabotage defenses, there are reports of a near mutiny among regular Ukie soldiers who didn't feel like getting chewed up again, and then an actual coup against Porky was barely foiled --all sufficient that the Ukrainian op fizzled.

No doubt the US and NATO were aghast that their two carefully planned March surprises were no-gos. So when something happened to the Skripals, I suspect the powers that be thought "well, it ain't much, but we can make it work!"

Lastly, there are several reports that the US leaned on virtually everyone in the world very, very hard to attempt to drum up "support" for May. In my experience, you only get so many over-the-top favors to ask/demand, and the US had to burn one to try to save their sanctions. They may have got their wish short term, but they may hear a lot more "no"s next time they want something--especially if this ultimately turns out to be a massive embarrassment as is likely.

[Mar 29, 2018] Russia Protests against officials erupt in wake of Kemerovo fire by Clara Weiss

Neoliberalism bites Russia hard. Although number of victims is much smaller that from car incidents in one year.
Hopefully there will be some pushback against neoliberalism in Russia after this insdent.
Notable quotes:
"... According to data by the International Association of Fire and Rescue Services from 2014, 10,069 people a year die in fires in Russia, which has a population of 140 million. By contrast, in the United States, which has a population of 320 million, the annual death toll for fires is 3,275. ..."
"... Workers are also faced with dangerous conditions at their work places, with the annual death toll in workplace accidents estimated to be at least 15,000. One particularly deadly disaster occurred near Kemerovo, which is a major industrial and coal mining center in Siberia, in 2010 when at least 66 workers were killed and 99 injured in an explosion at the Raspadskaya mine. ..."
Mar 20, 2018 | www.wsws.org

The horrific fire at the Kemerovo "Winter Cherry" shopping mall and entertainment center on Sunday, March 25, has brought social and political tensions in Russia to a boiling point.

On Tuesday, March 27, several thousand people in Kemerovo protested in the city center, calling for the resignation of local authorities. Throughout the country, people are outraged over the obvious criminality that lay behind the total disregard of fire regulations at the mall, and the attempts by officials to cover-up the magnitude of the disaster.

The mall, which is co-owned by the billionaire Denis Shtengelov, had no functioning fire alarm and sprinkling system. Exits were blocked as fire and toxic smoke were filling the building. People had to evacuate on their own, with some jumping out of the windows to escape (see also: " At least 64 dead, including many children, in horrific shopping mall fire ").

The fire spread to over 1,000 square meters and was not extinguished for well over 12 hours. Not a single major local official appeared at the scene of the tragedy as it was evolving. Parents had to wait for over six hours before receiving any information from the police. Residents have also reported that the police seized phones from eyewitnesses trying to record footage and take pictures of the fire.

There has been an enormous outpouring of solidarity from local residents, with hundreds volunteering to donate blood, groceries or otherwise help the families of the victims.

The causes of the fire remain unclear. The TV channel Rossiya 24 reported the most likely cause was an electrical fault, as is the case in the majority of deadly fires in Russia. Five officials have been arrested, including the director of the mall, and might be charged with involuntary homicide by the Investigation Committee.

So far, 64 dead have been confirmed, among them 41 children. Only 25 of them have been identified. According to officials, 69 people were hospitalized and 38 are reported missing. About two thirds of these are youth and children under 18 -- dozens were under 10 and several were under 5.

... ... ...

On Tuesday, Putin flew to Kemerovo to visit some of the victims, lay flowers at the memorial, and publicly discipline and chide the regional authorities -- his usual procedure in every emergency that threatens an eruption of social tensions in Russia. In a televised meeting with local ministers, Putin, forced to state the obvious, grumbled that the fire was due to "some criminal negligence". He declared Wednesday, March 28, a national day of mourning, and urged people to only trust official information about the fire.

... ... ...

Mayor Seredyuk agreed to go to the morgue with a number of protesters so that they could see for themselves the number of bodies which turned out to be less than 64...

One relative of victims of the fire said: "We know for sure that there are more victims Have you seen how the fire was extinguished? They didn't extinguish it. ...Why were there no helicopters?... All of this because of negligence and corruption I want the truth!"

The demonstration, which had not been allowed by the authorities, lasted for over ten hours. Toward the end, deputy governor Tsviliev got on his knees to beg the crowd for forgiveness.

Other spontaneous memorial gatherings, attracting thousands of people, took place on Tuesday in Moscow and St. Petersburg. Smaller memorial meetings have taken place throughout the world.

The memorial meeting in Moscow proceeded largely in silence, but here too calls for the resignation of Tuleev as well as Putin were voiced. In a cynical maneuver, the right-wing liberal politician Alexei Navalny, who, despite his social-Darwinist, anti-immigrant and far-right nationalist views, has been heavily promoted by the Western media over the past years, joined the meeting with his wife.

For Navalny and other liberal oppositionists to denounce the government over the Kemerovo fire and decry "corruption" is entirely hypocritical. It is the kind of predatory capitalist policies that the liberal opposition advocates and helped implement in the 1990s that have created the conditions for disasters like the Kemerovo fire. Their response is shaped by a mixture of fear of a broader movement by the working class outside their control, on the one hand, and, on the other, the hope to exploit popular dissatisfaction to advance their own reactionary agenda and pressure the Kremlin.

The situation in Kemerovo and Russia as a whole remains extremely tense. YouTube videos about the protest in Kemerovo reached up to two and a half million viewers within just a few hours. In hundreds of commentaries on video and news reports, people are voicing their outrage at local officials and the Kremlin.

Anger about the Kemerovo Tragedy is so great not least because the fire, while particularly horrific, was not unique. Workers in Kemerovo and throughout the country understand the fire to be symptomatic of the disastrous and life-threatening state of the country's infrastructure that they and their families face on a daily basis.

Multiple fires have taken the lives of hundreds of people over the past two decades. According to data by the International Association of Fire and Rescue Services from 2014, 10,069 people a year die in fires in Russia, which has a population of 140 million. By contrast, in the United States, which has a population of 320 million, the annual death toll for fires is 3,275.

Workers are also faced with dangerous conditions at their work places, with the annual death toll in workplace accidents estimated to be at least 15,000. One particularly deadly disaster occurred near Kemerovo, which is a major industrial and coal mining center in Siberia, in 2010 when at least 66 workers were killed and 99 injured in an explosion at the Raspadskaya mine.

These conditions are not just the result of corruption. Rather, the all-pervasive corruption is itself only a symptom of the degenerate and criminal state of capitalism as it was restored by the Stalinist bureaucracy in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The restoration of capitalism not only did not bring "democracy", it was also accompanied by the systematic destruction of the productive relations and forces created by the October Revolution and decades of work by the Soviet working class. This process was accompanied by the dismantling of the cultural and social infrastructure, including cultural palaces, hospitals, kindergartens, schools, etc.

In industrial cities like Kemerovo, which was a center of the USSR-wide miners' strike in the late 1980s, the social devastation has been particularly severe.

The oligarchy, which has emerged out of this orgy of plunder and social devastation, as well as aspiring smaller businessmen, have been allowed to run loose. Safety regulations in factories, schools and public spaces are constantly and systematically disregarded, with the "businessmen" working hand in glove with local authorities.

While Russia is a particularly stark example, similar conditions exist and endanger the lives of workers throughout the world, as the deadly Grenfell Fire in the middle of London last summer, and factory fires in Bangladesh in recent years have shown. Everywhere, the lives and interests of working people are subordinated to an ever-more reckless and criminal bourgeoisie in pursuit of private profit. Only a united struggle by workers internationally against the capitalist system can prevent the reoccurrence of deadly disasters like the Kemerovo fire.

[Mar 29, 2018] Medvedev betrayal of Lybia and Syria

This post is clumsy but it raises several important question.
Neither Assad, nor Kaddafi are/were saints, but illusions about the USA, France and "European allies" (a pack of predators which decided to devour Lybia ) were really a disaster. Why Medvedev did that ? Is he really that stupid ? Or so brainwashed by neoliberal ideology ?
Notable quotes:
"... Just to remind people's that in 2011 it was Medvedev representative of Russian western oligarchic lobby (friendly with Obama and neocons) in Kremlin who was in charge during Arab Spring. ..."
"... It is well documented fact that Assad pleaded with Medvedev in March 2011 for Moscow to deliver already ordered and paid for in 2008 dozens of new combat helicopters as well as massive amount of parts to refurbish and upgrade Russian made warplanes that were also withheld not to upset Israel and US at that time. ..."
"... None of that happened at that time, while at the same time Quadaffi was thrown under the bus by Russians and Chinese UN non veto of the planned NATO agression on Libya, appeasement or coincidence? ..."
Mar 29, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Kalen | Mar 28, 2018 8:32:31 PM | 38

Just seven years past and despite unquestioned positive role that Russian played in Syria mostly to reduce pain and suffering of Syrian people what I read here is unnecessary whitewashing of Russian initial stand that did nothing but encouraged US and NATO gangsters to reek chaos that caused tens of thousands dead and injured

Just to remind people's that in 2011 it was Medvedev representative of Russian western oligarchic lobby (friendly with Obama and neocons) in Kremlin who was in charge during Arab Spring.

It is well documented fact that Assad pleaded with Medvedev in March 2011 for Moscow to deliver already ordered and paid for in 2008 dozens of new combat helicopters as well as massive amount of parts to refurbish and upgrade Russian made warplanes that were also withheld not to upset Israel and US at that time.

Assad was not invited to Moscow at that time while he repeatedly declared that his military will be able to defeat terrorist insurgence financed by the CIA in a matter of weeks if Syrian Army is resupplied and paid for already contracts executed.

None of that happened at that time, while at the same time Quadaffi was thrown under the bus by Russians and Chinese UN non veto of the planned NATO agression on Libya, appeasement or coincidence?

Russian got their pay off for playing western game in MENA when in 2012 Putin was barely elected in a quite ridiculous political charade facing CIA/Soros funded failed Moscow Spring which actually started slippery slope of open western anti-Russian hysterical embellishments.

What was even more puzzling for those not so sophisticated political analysts was Putin inconsistent actions and declarations especially in regard to Syria between 2012 and 2014 when he joined US phony peace talks and calling on Assad removal from his post in a some sort of democratic process only to find out that US do not want peace in Syria but some Saudi run fiefdom friendly to Israel.

The same appeasement to the west was in Putin attitude to Ukraine until 2014 and its 23 millions of ethnic Russians tolerating rapidly growing western financed Nazism as well his tolerance of Russia connected Ukrainian oligarchic theft that plunged the country into economic depression enabling political instability.

At that time Russian minorities in Baltic States were also viciously attacked by security forces as well by discriminating Nuremberg-like laws making them, most born there, second class citizen restricted in ownership and civil rights to organize and to maintain their culture and language.

All those Putin foreign policies of weakness and submission to the west and that included reluctance in approach to alliances with China were in sharp contrast to his extreme push to revamp entire military of Russian with enormous for Russia military investments and extremely rationalizing it giving them 5 year term to accomplish massive changes while dropping hype about future fancy technologies for simple solutions that effectively will defend the country from western aggression.

Putin knew what was coming so why Kremlin policies of appeasement and hence encouragement of bullying and aggression. Who was really in charge?

In fact Putin reacted only when Russian vital national security was directly threatened in 2014 in Crimea where navy bases are located and in 2015 when he realized that western trained and funded terrorist army commanded by Chechnya Russian speaking terrorists is being prepared to invade Chechnya after Assad was deposed and the only Mediterranean navy base was threatened.

As always in history policy of appeasement of a bully leads to the same thing ultimate confrontation, more delayed more costly it is.

So is Putin as Xi for that matter is about to submit their nations to the western oligarchy even more for their personal advancement at the global oligarchic table or they split which means war.

I do not think war is coming they have too good thing going and their power is not threatened by the enslaved people.

[Mar 29, 2018] Anglo-American Money Owners Organized World War II

Mar 29, 2018 | southfront.org

[Mar 29, 2018] The US is by no means a "functioning democracy with proper rule of law". More like a corrupt plutocracy

Mar 29, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Aseoria -> ID6902426 , 28 Mar 2018 12:48

The US has been cracking down on protected First Amendment rights for years now. Just heard that someone was kicked off the post office lawn last week for protesting, so FIrday's peace vigil may be at risk again.We haven't had any problems with the police harassing us for probably 12 years, but that may be raising its head again.

The US government has a lot to answer for in terms of press freedom and its reaction to organized protest. One only need remember the clusterfuck at Standing Rock during the final months of Obama's presidency to see that this country has major problems with racism, violence, liberty, equality, fraternity. The US is by no means a "functioning democracy with proper rule of law". More like a corrupt plutocracy riding full-speed into overt fascism, where who you know and who you blow makes the most difference if you wind up in trouble with the law.

I never take First Amendment rights for granted. I am totally aware that if you don't use your rights, and often, you lose them. I have never had an account on Facebook, but sometimes I cruise other people's pages to the extent that Zuckerburg will allow without gathering my information(or maybe they can get it if you just look at a page). Always thought it was a supremely wrong idea to allow your identity to be taken away by some fat cat with a clever idea.

[Mar 29, 2018] Germany - if I remember correctly - was instrumental on behalf of her client state Croatia in persuading the US to acquise in the destruction of Yugoslavia.

Mar 29, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: ashley albanese | Mar 28, 2018 6:47:49 PM | 33

Germany - if I remember correctly - was instrumental on behalf of her client state Croatia in persuading the U S to acquise in the destruction of Yugoslavia.
Many could see at the time that this would unravel all the balances put into place after the travail of World War 2 . So it is proving to be . The German peoples' for whatever reasons have a history of 'overeach'. On one hand the Germans are now - after millennium - within settled borders but the political and economic wisdom and patience still seems lacking .

ashley albanese | Mar 28, 2018 6:47:49 PM | 33

[Mar 29, 2018] Cultural Marxism and identity politics

Mar 29, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Raoul Duke -> milgram , 28 Mar 2018 08:47

It has nothing to do with marxism. I think "cultural marxism" is used in the same context.

It's basically just a label used by right-wingers to describe all the identity politics etc that faux lefties like the neoliberal democrats engage in to distract their voters from looking at actual leftist economic policies. So instead of trying to narrow the gaps between economic classes it's focuses on giving all identities, cultures and subcultures equal worth.

If that makes sense.. My vocabulary kind of lacked the words I was looking for to try to give a good description just now.. (English being my 2nd language an all)

[Mar 29, 2018] With false flags there always seems to be a drill going on at the same time, a drill that weirdly, and coincidentally of course, mimics the reality that follows (the list is long and easy to Google)

That's an interesting observation. Drill to protect against the exact event that happened. That help to supress internal investigation, if some details of the plot are accidentally leaked and some people inside start asking questions.
Mar 29, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: Lochearn | Mar 28, 2018 4:33:23 PM | 11

Off topic, but I think this is important. With false flags there always seems to be a drill going on at the same time, a drill that weirdly, and coincidentally of course, mimics the reality that follows (the list is long and easy to Google). So we have the poison incident in Salisbury that stinks to high heaven, but no mention of a drill.

Then I came across a statement by the Royal Navy that a drill had taken place on Salisbury plain at the same time as the poison incident:

https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activity/news/2018/march/06/180306-toxic-storm-for-royal-marines-in-major-chemical-exercise

Lochearn , Mar 28, 2018 4:49:42 PM | 13
What purpose does the training exercise or "drill" in a false flag perform? From my research I can say, first, it is to protect a participant who is arrested by police showing up: "Hey, I'm on a drill, here's my badge." Secondly it allows control, key people in place, over the whole scenario: "Move on, nothing to see here." Maybe there are other reasons.

[Mar 29, 2018] This whole thing is one HUGE false flag, from start to where ever it finishes. The lies are so thick that they obscure all vision. If any of that family (father or daughter) still possess a Russian passport, then they are still citizens of Russia and the UK government is REQUIRED to release them and information.

Mar 29, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Poindexter • 15 hours ago ,

This whole thing is one HUGE false flag, from start to where ever it finishes. The lies are so thick that they obscure all vision. If any of that family (father or daughter) still possess a Russian passport, then they are still citizens of Russia and the UK government is REQUIRED to release them and information. But that will not be forthcoming.
The sooner the Kremlin lowers the boom, the better; the longer this stretches out, the more obscure the facts become and the closer we come to global annihilation.
DOES ANYONE realize that the poison was found in their home??? That is how the policeman made contact with it. THAT alone implies that the victims MAY have been complicit in their own poisoning !?

William Toffan Poindexter • 13 hours ago ,

That is very interesting regarding the policeman's exposure. If true, and I'm confident it is, it puts the boots to Canadian media accounts of the Skripal's enjoying the sunshine on a park bench - only to be sprayed in the face from an aerosol device - carried by a Russian agent. I also cannot dismiss the highly coincidental plot of a British TV detective show - aired in November, 2017 - of a "Novichok" attack in Great Britain. I'm not looking for weak conspiratorial links, but I cannot dismiss them either.

Alberto • 15 hours ago ,

The Russian government is not involved. The man was retired and all happened a long time ago. The only thing that I don't feel comfortable with is why attack her daughter. She is totally innocent.
Logic indicates that some of those who were affected by the betrayal (he was a traitor) found at last an opportunity to settle old acccounts whithout the Russian government knowing it.
Of course the West is using this attack to lay blame on Putin, they found a golden opportunity to throw dirt at him and continue with the demonization. It is my hunch that he is very angry at those who did it.
Britain can't point the finger without providing Russia with all the evidence.
I don't believe in false flag theories in this case, as the West would be sending a wrong message to those potential recruits (more Russian traitors).

Brampton Bob • 8 hours ago ,

Has anyone bothered to ask the Russians whether the have an antidote for this agent they're alleged to have produced?

[Mar 29, 2018] Salisbury Nerve Agent Attack Reveals $70 Million Pentagon Program At Porton Down

Notable quotes:
"... Dilyana Gaytandzhieva is a Bulgarian investigative journalist and Middle East Correspondent. Over the last two years she has published a series of revealing reports on weapons smuggling . Two months ago South Front published her investigation into the Pentagon bio laboratories in 25 countries across the world. Her current report provides an overview of the Pentagon-funded experiments at the secretive UK military laboratory Porton Down near Salisbury, where an ex-Russian spy and his daughter were allegedly poisoned with a nerve agent. ..."
"... By Dilyana Gaytandzhieva exclusively for SouthFront ..."
"... Twitter/@dgaytandzhieva ..."
"... The Porton Down Lab is located just 13 km from the site where Sergei Skripal and his daughter were found and from where they were rushed to hospital. ..."
Mar 29, 2018 | southfront.org

Dilyana Gaytandzhieva is a Bulgarian investigative journalist and Middle East Correspondent. Over the last two years she has published a series of revealing reports on weapons smuggling . Two months ago South Front published her investigation into the Pentagon bio laboratories in 25 countries across the world. Her current report provides an overview of the Pentagon-funded experiments at the secretive UK military laboratory Porton Down near Salisbury, where an ex-Russian spy and his daughter were allegedly poisoned with a nerve agent.

By Dilyana Gaytandzhieva exclusively for SouthFront

Twitter/@dgaytandzhieva

The Pentagon has spent at least $70 million on military experiments involving tests with deadly viruses and chemical agents at Porton Down – the UK military laboratory near the city of Salisbury. The secretive biological and chemical research facility is located just 13 km from where on 4 th March former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were found slumped on a bench following an alleged Novichok nerve agent poisoning.

Salisbury Nerve Agent Attack Reveals $70 Million Pentagon Program At Porton Down Salisbury Nerve Agent Attack Reveals $70 Million Pentagon Program At Porton Down

The Porton Down Lab is located just 13 km from the site where Sergei Skripal and his daughter were found and from where they were rushed to hospital.

Information obtained from the US federal contracts registry reveals that the Pentagon's Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) has funded a number of military projects performed at the UK Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) , or Porton Down, over the last decade. Among them: experimental respiratory infection of non-human primates (marmosets) with Anthrax, Ebola virus, Marburg virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus, Western equine encephalitis virus, and Eastern equine encephalitis virus. The US Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) has also funded experiments on animals which were exposed to chemical agents such as Sulfur Mustard and Phosgene gas. Phosgene gas was used as a chemical weapon during World War I where it was responsible for about 85 % of the 100,000 deaths caused by chemical weapons.

DTRA has also been granted full access to DSTL scientific and technical capabilities, and test data under a 2011 contract for the collaboration and exchange of scientific and technical capabilities with the UK Ministry of Defence.

At least 122,000 animals used for military chemical and biological experiments at Porton Down

Animal experiments are classified as confidential in the UK. Under section 24 of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, it is a criminal offence to disclose certain information about animal experiments in the UK.

Data obtained via the Freedom of Information Act though gives an idea of the dimensions of military chemical and biological experiments carried out at Porton Down. A total of 122,050 animals have been exposed to deadly pathogens, chemicals and incurable diseases over the last decade (2005-2016).

[Mar 29, 2018] Possibility of completely staged by intelligence services event

Mar 29, 2018 | southfront.org

[Mar 29, 2018] We Don t Even Know Where He Is: Sergei Skripal s Russian Family Speak Out

Mar 29, 2018 | russia-insider.com

On Thursday, High Court Justice David Basil Williams handed down a ruling on the medical condition of the Skripals. It contained evidence from the consultant treating them in Salisbury District Hospital, which stated that the facility had "not been approached by anyone known to the patients to enquire of their welfare."

Ross Cassidy, a haulage contractor, has been Sergei Skripal's neighbor since 2010. He said that he has been prevented from visiting Skripal and his daughter Yulia in hospital, and that he believes they are so critically ill there is no hope they will be revived.

"That is misinformation, because we care," he told Sky News, referring to the consultant's statement. "I asked the police several times if we could go and see them, quietly and away from the media, but I was told quite categorically that we were not allowed. We asked the question and the answer was 'No.'"

"We've already been told they will be severely mentally impaired and I don't think they would want that. I think death would probably be merciful."

Three weeks after the A-234 nerve-agent (also known as Novichok) attack in Salisbury, Sergei and his daughter Yulia remain in a critical condition. According to court documents, Sergei is listed as unable to communicate.

Meanwhile in Russia, the Skripals' extended family say that they have been unable to find out where exactly Sergei and Yulia even are. "I would like to know how [Sergei and Yulia] are – where they are," Sergei's niece, Viktoria Skripal, said.

"We are all grown-ups and we don't believe in miracles, but I can't stop thinking maybe it's not them. Maybe a miracle will happen and it'll turn out not to be them. Maybe they'll get better. But everyone is saying that even if they recover, the long-term prognosis is not good.

Viktoria said that if she could go to the UK to see them, she would – but her number-one priority is to protect Sergei's ailing mother from finding out about her son's attack. The family fears the news could prove fatal for the 90-year-old woman.

"Our priority is to protect our grandmother, so that she does not hear anything. She will not know until the very last moment," Viktoria said. "She will know when this situation is somehow resolved; that is, if there is a logical end. If the story ends badly, we will tell her that they fell ill."

Viktoria Skripal said that, while she was unsure who was responsible for the nerve-agent attack, she did say that her uncle had never expressed fears for his safety and did not consider himself to have any enemies.

"Who did it? I don't really know. Our side say it was the British secret services, the British say it was the Russians. I don't know and I don't want to hazard a guess.

"Even if the special services did it – why is it so clumsy? I believe that it was beneficial to some third party to quarrel between the two countries. Someday we will get answers to all the questions."

wilmers13 Bryce Hopkins • 5 hours ago ,

Former Australian diplomat Tony Kevin callled it a false flag operation on ABC TV 24. He also called it a play at which the Brits are so good at.

D. John Bryce Hopkins • 14 hours ago ,

Amen!!

tom • 15 hours ago ,

The Salisbury doctor says that no one has been admitted suffering from nerve gas poisoning, and only three people have been treated for poisoning (of a different kind, presumably).

But the UK government says that the Skripals were attacked with a novichok agent "of a type developed in Russia" - and apparently knew this with high confidence within a few days, although OPCW will take weeks to identify the poison.

The lawyer for the government said in court that no one has asked to see the Skripals.

But the Russian embassy has asked repeatedly, and now we learn that Mr Skripal's neighbour has asked and been turned away by police.

Who the hell do those people think they are fooling? Their lies are impossible to conceal or reconcile.

Great Expectations tom • 10 hours ago ,

The Skripals seem to have become government property and no one is asking why.

Yoast Yoast • 16 minutes ago ,

The daughter would be the only direct family with visiting rights, very convenient that she has been attacked too.

courtney harlowe • 15 hours ago ,

The Skripals are probably being held in an apartment with military guards on them....unable to even see daylight lest they flag someone on the street, or they are in such a remote area,perhaps being held in a bunker type of place.
Yes its a bit 'Hollywood' but is it that far out of the realm of possibility given the lengths the US &_UK governments seem willing to go to to demonize Russia? They may have even been killed by the UK govt....we know this happens.The family is absolutely in the right to question & they deserve answer, closure....what can we do here?
How are we to help these people get answered,I am American and I have had to watch this evil demonization of Russia ramp up with every day...its gone from haha,Trump has a man crush on Putin to possible murder of these people in an effort to boost some political agenda.Its time for someone to explain...

Poruchik Rzhevskiy courtney harlowe • 15 hours ago ,

The problem for the Brits and yanks is that theatre may pass for "evidence" once. And it's been used and the bitches were caught red-handed. They keep at it - only punish themselves by loss of the remainders of credibility.

D. John Poruchik Rzhevskiy • 14 hours ago ,

That is assuming they ever had any credibility to start with.

William Toffan courtney harlowe • 13 hours ago ,

Congratulations on retaining your critical thinking skills, Courtney. You should run for President, even if overqualified.

bob courtney harlowe • 15 hours ago ,

no courtney, they're unfortunately beyond all help, and will be shortly wheeled out in this macabre theatre show in the 3rd act, so the whole world can see how " evil" Putin and Russia are, its all very carefully orchestrated for maximum propaganda effect

Scotch Bingeington courtney harlowe • 14 hours ago ,

Or in some place like the Bahamas, sipping cocktails on the beach. A Moscow Mule perhaps?

John C Carleton • 15 hours ago ,

Brits have made as big a fools out of themselves as their zionist cousins in Washington DC have.

Great Expectations John C Carleton • 11 hours ago ,

When you say Brits, please refer to our cretinous government? Until the anti-Russia troll factories began work on the popular press comments, just a few days ago, it was evident that ordinary Brits were having none of it. Clearly that didn't please our overlords, so they brought in the trolls.

John C Carleton Great Expectations • 9 hours ago ,

i consider a person to be English, Irish, Scotch or Welsh, unless they drank the empire kool aid.
i also make the distinction between real Americans and USA loving pedophiles, sheep and never do wells.

Curtis Walker • 15 hours ago ,

Haha looks like the UK needs to plug a lot of holes in this farce they've created

Jed Grover Curtis Walker • 14 hours ago ,

The hole is far too big to plug. Hopefully UK's Banker entitlement program is about to crash. Shameless Sam and its 20 NATO Mafia style looting collusionors dramatizing another WMD illusion. The west has gone pathetic and rabid. The photo is impressive!

Gano1 • 15 hours ago ,

1) No pictures of anyone in hospital.
2) No interview with the Policeman released from hospital.

AM Hants Gano1 • 13 hours ago ,

None of it adds up. Together with the fact that Russia got rid of their chemical weapons. Unlike the US, who have also invested $70 million, in Porton Down,

There is a seriously good article, over on South Front, which raises many more questions. Not forgetting Ukraine, and the American bio-weapons laboratories in Ukraine. No doubt, which is why Urkraine were sending chemical weapons to Syria.

Canister of chemical weapons, with love from Ukraine to Syria.

View Hide
Trauma2000 AM Hants • 12 hours ago ,

Gold Hants. You've struck GOLD. Keep up the fantastic posts. I always read your stuff.

AM Hants Trauma2000 • 11 hours ago ,

Thank you, copy and paste and share the work, others provide.

The article is seriously good and well worth reading. Had the 'WOW' factor.

bob Gano1 • 15 hours ago ,

the world will get plenty of photos after OPCW "report" , its pure, post normal, post evidence theatre, then all those countries that didn't expel Russian diplomats can also pile in, oh, plus boycott World Cup

Dee Wrench • 15 hours ago ,

It's all theater. Never happened... it's that simple.

1691 • 15 hours ago ,

Litvinenko was poisoned with polonium, a radioactive element and still there were plenty of videos of him in the news although he should have been isolated. Even his wife and son were filmed with him in hospital. Why such secrecy now? I suspect that Skripal and daughter have played their parts in this scenario and are now enjoying the money they were paid for this simple act. Was his daughter single?

SkyPointer • 13 hours ago ,

The complete lack of the Skripals' current hospital images is so very telling. Think about it, Alexander Litvinenko's death bed pictures (him still alive and blinking) were posted all over the media as much as they could be to make sure the narrative of "evil Russia" is kept in the memories of all who don't bother to look into the facts (the majority). These images are so vital to keeping the West is good vs. Russia is bad narrative alive and well ahead of the facts. If they could post pictures of the Skripals, they absolutely would, as this is a huge advantage to a retarded narrative. So this in itself (lack of pictures broadcast on a continuous cycle to the entire world to paint Russia as the demon lair before the world cup starts) is extreme proof that something is very wrong with their cooked up and ridiculous narrative.

Koroviev,Behemoth&Woland LLP • 9 hours ago ,

Salisbury Nerve Agent Attack Reveals $70 Million Pentagon Program At Porton Down

The Pentagon has spent at least $70 million on military experiments involving tests with deadly viruses and chemical agents at Porton Down – the UK military laboratory near the city of Salisbury. The secretive biological and chemical research facility is located just 13 km from where on 4th March former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were found slumped on a bench following an alleged Novichok nerve agent poisoning.
https://www.naturalblaze.co...

[Mar 29, 2018] Can I speak to Theresa?

Mar 29, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Eol Awki • 10 hours ago ,

The phone rings in Downing Street.
- Can I speak to Theresa?
- She's asleep
- If she wakes up tell her Vladimir called
- What do you mean „if"?

Isabella Jones Eol Awki • 3 hours ago ,

Eol Awki, I read your comment above from my phone while laying in a dentist chair waiting for needles, drills --- and I laughed so much i nearly fell out. Of course, I was a bit "wired" anyway, but it was quite an achievement for which I would like to thank you - very much.

Eol Awki Isabella Jones • 2 hours ago ,

Very happy to have brought some relief to you at a critical moment, Isabella.... ;-)

This was a Russian joke going around that my wife passed over to me. I, too, almost fell off my chair!

Isabella Jones Eol Awki • 2 hours ago ,

Ah, Russian. I might have guessed - I love the Russian sense of humour.

[Mar 29, 2018] 'No slither of evidence' against Russia over Skripal attack, George Galloway tells RT

Now the question is: did "bench incident" existed at all ? Was everything staged?
Mar 29, 2018 | russia-insider.com

RT (VIDEO)... https://www.rt.com/uk/42256...

Peter Paul 1950 AM Hants • 8 hours ago ,

Galloway already had a video up a couple of days after the occurrence ... he was always pointing out that the Skripals were poisoned AFTER they had already returned to their home ... no talk about a park bench at all ... now more info is coming out that there was a training exercise that took place the day before the event ... so it's all according to the usual scripting ... and the usual Hollywood set with all the usual crisis actors .... should have been red-flagged before it started ... and send out the safety car ... like follow the leader and do not pass ...

AM Hants Peter Paul 1950 • 8 hours ago ,

I read about the military exercise, the day before. Always happens. Never thought I would end up having so much respect for George Galloway, but, he is the only UK politician or ex-politician, that I actually respect.

[Mar 29, 2018] About Origin of the saying "On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog"

Mar 29, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

poozler , 28 Mar 2018 19:06

"On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog" is not a joke; it is a caption from a very famous New Yorker cartoon by Peter Steiner. It is also not 15 years old; it was published in July 1993. Get your facts here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_knows_you%27re_a_dog

[Mar 29, 2018] Speaking of "smart toasters" this 'daily show' clip from 15 years ago is a gut-busting hoot.

Mar 29, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Leo Douglas , 28 Mar 2018 15:23

speaking of "smart toasters" this 'daily show' clip from 15 years ago is a gut-busting hoot.
i rarely if ever post links in comment sections, but this ties in quite nicely with this article!!

cheers^
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/jpo4t4/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-lies-of-the-machines

[Mar 29, 2018] An Echo is Fine...

Mar 29, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Mark Holmes , 28 Mar 2018 10:21

13. An Echo is Fine...

This list item brought to you by A partnership with Amazon and the NSA.

[Mar 28, 2018] Why You Should Never Watch RT -- Ever! by Neil Clark

Dec 07, 2017 | www.strategic-culture.org

The latest piece by Mr. Cyril Waugh-Monger, a very important newspaper columnist for the NeoCon Daily, a patron of the Senator Joe McCarthy Appreciation Society and author of 'Why the Iraq War was a Brilliant Idea' and 'The Humanitarian Case for Bombing Syria.'

... ... ...

Fleecing Rabbi Guest • 3 years ago ,

BBC propaganda machine is not that far behind. In the recent global IGNORANCE INDEX ... US had the honor of being the 2nd most ignorant after Italy...

[Mar 28, 2018] UK Government Preparing to Confiscate Russian Capital 'of Dubious Origin'

Notable quotes:
"... enforce a newly passed law that will allow the government to confiscate or freeze any Russian capital "of dubious origin" - a measure clearly intended to permit a crackdown on Russian oligarchs living in London. ..."
"... Carrying out such a crackdown would be one way to show that the UK government is interested not only in the perfunctory expulsion of diplomats, but also the in making life more difficult for some Russian oligarchs and other businessmen who call London home. ..."
Mar 28, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Sword of Damocles to be held over the heads' of Russian oligarchs in London and ensure they remain anti-Putin Tyler Durden 18 hours ago | 3,018 98 Countries around the world have announced that they would expel Russian diplomats in a show of solidarity with the UK, but now the Queen's government is taking things one step further :

It's preparing to enforce a newly passed law that will allow the government to confiscate or freeze any Russian capital "of dubious origin" - a measure clearly intended to permit a crackdown on Russian oligarchs living in London.

According to Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson, warrants for the seizure of Russian capital and assets of doubtful origin have already been issued, according to Sputnik News. The goal is to ensure that any property attained by unknown means is registered, according to the law. Williams said during his speech that Russia's goal was to divide Europe, but that actions of solidarity by Estonia and other European countries have shown "that's not possible."

Wilson promised that the government would work diligently during the coming days and weeks until this problem is solved. Relations between the two countries have markedly worsened since the poisoning of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia earlier this month. Prime Minister Theresa May has said she's doubtful Skripal will recover - and that more than 100 bystanders have sought medical treatment.

The Russian side has denied all the accusations and suggested participating jointly in the investigation. However, Moscow's request for samples was ignored. Moscow in turn also expelled 23 UK diplomats and ordered the British Council to stop its activities in Russia in response to London's move.

Williamson has been a fan of bellicose language toward Russia in the wake of the attack.

He famously said earlier this month that Russia "should go away and shut up" while responding to a question about Moscow's statements that it would expel British diplomats (which it did), as RT notes.

Carrying out such a crackdown would be one way to show that the UK government is interested not only in the perfunctory expulsion of diplomats, but also the in making life more difficult for some Russian oligarchs and other businessmen who call London home.

slavix 18 hours ago ,

Brits are all for expropriating expropriated :) (Sounds familiar?)
Will they return the stolen wealth to the Russian people? Not a chance ;)

Vtran slavix • 17 hours ago ,

Not just Stolen wealth of Russia

What about the Stolen Wealth from the African, Asian country's ?

Mr. Costelol Vtran • 17 hours ago ,

Yes, Serbian gold as well.... the list is long.

tom Mr. Costelol • 12 hours ago ,

Libyan gold, saved up by Colonel Qadafi to provide backing for his planned "African dinar"...

mark tom • 8 hours ago ,

Britain even confiscated (stole) a ship load of Libyan bank notes that had been printed in the UK for the Libyan Government.

Media Watch • 17 hours ago ,

I hope they do pursue this, as the fallout would be most interesting. Russian oligarchs have been laundering money through the London banks, enriching estate agents, law firms and bankers on the way. Will they now realize that the UK no longer has property rights? Of course, they will start repatriating their wealth. This is good for Russia and very bad for the UK. The loss of confidence in UK protecting property rights would take a beating, as it would be recognised, quite rightly, as a country of dubious jurisprudence that is applied in an ad hoc and political manner.

When you consider that a lot of the UK's income is derived from money laundering (despite the governments ludicrous attempts at corralling individual accountants and bookkeepers to act as unpaid policemen overseeing small businesses, while allowing billions to go through the property markets), the outcome for the economy is negative.

And non Russian foreign investors may remember the old saying - first they came for the Russians, but I didn't care because I was not a Russian.

AM Hants Media Watch • 12 hours ago ,

Actually, not only will it be humouress and keep us entertained, but, how many other oligarchs, who invested in the UK and our corrupt politicians, react when they see how easy it was for the Government of the day to confiscate their ill-gotten gains?

Russian zionists, fleeced by British zionists, watched by the international zionists, that flock to the UK. A dog eat dog world.

Guy AM Hants • 5 hours ago ,

Kinda makes you wish they would eat each other up and do the world a big favor.

AM Hants Guy • 5 hours ago ,

You have a point and that would be bliss.

Guy Media Watch • 5 hours ago ,

The Russian Federation had offered amnesty to the oligarchs if they would repatriate the money that had been pilfered from the Russian state during the 1990s and onwards ,basically during the Yeltsin days . Too bad they did not take advantage of the offer .

Boris Jaruselski • 18 hours ago ,

It wasn't all that long ago, that the Brit's cousins to the east, have also confiscated 'dubious' capital, and have exterminated the original owners, ...which had NOTHING to do with any politics whatsoever, but ALL to do with GREEEEEED!

Nationalist Globalist Oligarch • 15 hours ago ,

So a pack of thieves threatens to steal the ill gotten gains of a pack of thieves?

Sad, I thought the "Russian" oligarch could only trust the legal system of the West?

Perhaps this will teach the worthless "Russian" oligarchs to invest their loot in Russia instead of the UK?

zencowboy61 Nationalist Globalist Oligarch • 15 hours ago ,

Excellent point....You want to play with rothschilds fake money ...you will goose step in line with the company policy...or we take back our monopoly money.

Nationalist Globalist Oligarch zencowboy61 • 15 hours ago ,

Clearly that is how the rules are set up, which is a shame no bothered to notice before they swore off their own economy, at least the Chinese weren't so gullible, thankfully they ran over the CIA agent on Tienanmen Square!

AJ Nationalist Globalist Oligarch • 12 hours ago ,

I doubt these oligarghs would keep all their booty in one country for this exact reason. They likely have stashes all over the world, Switzerland, Kayman Islands, shell companies acting as fronts etc

Linda Wren AJ • 9 hours ago ,

Exactly.

wilmers13 AJ • 2 hours ago ,

The owner of the shopping centre that burned in Siberia has businesses in Australia.

Стефан Евгений Nationalist Globalist Oligarch • 7 hours ago ,

Putin, warned them years ago this can happen.

mark Nationalist Globalist Oligarch • 8 hours ago ,

Perhaps they will kidnap all these oligarchs, take them to the Dorchester, hang them upside down and turn them over to Blackwater torturers until they hand over their billions.

It worked fine in Shady Wahabia.

URSULARICHES mark • 7 hours ago ,

I know someone's dad who alleges to have been in the British army working for top American officers in NK, as a chef. He claims to have been unfairly tortured. One of his sons hobbies involves torturing people, rapes, threatening their kids, electric shocks to the head, e;ectric shocks to puppies, lacing foodstuffs with dried and wet anti freeze, antifreeze in pets water bowls, managing to sneak into homes in different ways, lots of injections including psychoactive drugs and caustic soda. He also at least used to hypnotize kids to commit suicide and he has drowned a nun in Hereford. The air conditioning system of one's car is tampered with and carpets covered in mercury from old thermometers and light bulbs. You are really unwell and do not know why and your memory is tampered with and obliterated. LNA Chichester UK. Check your home for nasty bogeymen and bolt the doors once in. If your keys go missing even for half an hour, replace them or get special keys which cannot readily be copied.

mark Nationalist Globalist Oligarch • 8 hours ago ,

You can't steal my money!
I stole it fair and square!

Nightcrawler136 • 17 hours ago ,

In the first week of this Charade Ł7billon pounds left the UK all Russian money, does make me wonder how much more liquidity the UK Banks have to lose before May etc realise their shooting themselves in the foot again! 😂

Mr. Costelol Nightcrawler136 • 17 hours ago ,

I'm not so interested in British liquidity but British loonacy - they want others to do the shooting amongst themselves. Ukraine comes to mind? DPRK, Iran, Yemen, Serbia, Africa (pick a spot).... are all candidates.

Nightcrawler136 Mr. Costelol • 16 hours ago ,

I live in the UK the government has gone mad, Corbyn is the only voice of reason left and he's a bloody idiot!

Guy Nightcrawler136 • 5 hours ago ,

I don't agree that Corbyn is an idiot . He has to watch how he plays his cards so that he wins the next election .Which he will by the way. But they are after him big time .He has a lot of forces working against him .A Corbyn win would be good for the people of the UK IMHO.

Mr. Costelol Nightcrawler136 • 16 hours ago ,

I agree, decent folk avoid entering politics, yet we all are threatened by the political circus. Heaven, help us.

zencowboy61 Mr. Costelol • 15 hours ago ,

circus yes...in america just getting into politics on a local town or country level brings with it so many perks its like a fire sale..I have a friend he got elected to a town board..all of a sudden he has all types of new projects going up around his house.....its a fire sale for those in govt.

Canis Major Nightcrawler136 • 13 hours ago ,

ahahaaaaa

1691 • 18 hours ago ,

What's new? The monarchy is used to live on stealing. I don't care about the oligarchs but still, this is nothing but stealing.

Silovik 1691 • 17 hours ago ,

you dont care about the oligarchs ,but cares the Kremlin

Le Ruse • 18 hours ago ,

Quote:It's preparing to enforce a newly passed law that will allow
the government to confiscate or freeze any Russian capital "of dubious
origin" - a measure clearly intended to permit a crackdown on Russian
oligarchs living in London.
I'm all for it ??
Let the criminal piece of shit be robbed by their "friends" !!
Dog eat dog !!
The best move that Mother Theresa can make ...

AM Hants Le Ruse • 12 hours ago ,

AS Nightcrawler states, Magintsky Law, that Browder was so desperate to get passed. Who are his biggest cheerleaders? Just a con, for politicians to go pillaging.

Why was he thrown out of Russia and why was he thrown out of America?

Those Russians, who made it to the UK, were thrown out of Russia. So they either send their money and investments back to Russia, which keeps the Kremlin happy, or it gets confiscated, which also keeps the Kremlin happy. Where will they go next?

Le Ruse AM Hants • 5 hours ago ,

AM.. The putrid swamp creatures are BROKE !! In the old time, they could sail & pillage other countries (China Opium Wars ect..ect..) But today, they can only , like rats go against each other ?? Can't pillage Russia, Gospodin Putin put a stop to it .. Can't pillage China, Chinese people & leaders got wise to it .. So rob from Russian plutocrats ? & then NOVICHOK them ??
& it's fine with me, if its' fine with you ??

Robert Mcconnell • 18 hours ago ,

I guess they are presuming this will pressure Russia, somehow. Perhaps the Russ ollies would blame Putin for not bending the knee? I don't know. Anyway this is all somewhat mind bogglingly insane, I've never ever seen such a wretchedly desperate performance from any guvmint anywhere at any time and I've been around a while.

BaBa Robert Mcconnell • 17 hours ago ,

"guess they are presuming"

Guessing and presuming are always strategic disadvantages but forms of "thinking", although often magical.

Perhaps the opponents are illustrating another strategic disadvantage "involuntary reaction".

The opponents should be appreciated for the opportunities they continue to afford others.

The opponents are self-designated "lands of opportunities".

[Mar 28, 2018] Britain Has No Clue Why It's Punishing Russia by Mark Galeotti

Firs of all Mark Galeotti is very weak. That's incurable.
I want your money poor Pinocchio -- that the new slogan of May government. Kind of compensation for Brexit losses at Russian oligarchs expense.
What Russophobe Galiotti does not understand is that this another nail in the coffin of neoliberalism. As soon as you start to distriminate between oligarche neoliberalism stops and nationalism starts
Notable quotes:
"... Of course, the irony is that by driving out Russian money, London would in part be doing Putin's work for him ..."
"... He has launched a " de-offshorization " campaign to try to persuade, cajole, and intimidate oligarchs and minigarchs into bringing their money back home. Along with the stabilization of the economy as a whole, this has had some limited success. While more than $31 billion flowed out of the country last year alone, this is a dramatic fall from 2014's $154 billion . ..."
"... The thought that Britain would actually be returning capital into Putin's grasp may be an uncomfortable one. After all, a third possible policy goal would be actively to seek to undermine the regime in Moscow. ..."
Mar 28, 2018 | foreignpolicy.com

This is also a project in which further international cooperation would be crucial. Chasing that money and the influence it buys out of London but seeing it find comfortable new homes in Paris, Frankfurt, and New York is only half the job done and will do little to chasten Moscow. Although it will be difficult to persuade others to turn away tempting business, the unexpected support Britain is receiving from European Union partners in particular suggests this may be an opportune moment to convince them that in its experience this money is too toxic to be safe and that this is a Western, not just a British, problem.

Of course, the irony is that by driving out Russian money, London would in part be doing Putin's work for him . Since 2014, the Russian economy has been in the doldrums. Furthermore, Putin is a man who understands power better than economics, and he is unhappy to see elites stash their money outside his grasp.

Putin is a man who understands power better than economics, and he is unhappy to see elites stash their money outside his grasp.

He has launched a " de-offshorization " campaign to try to persuade, cajole, and intimidate oligarchs and minigarchs into bringing their money back home. Along with the stabilization of the economy as a whole, this has had some limited success. While more than $31 billion flowed out of the country last year alone, this is a dramatic fall from 2014's $154 billion .

The thought that Britain would actually be returning capital into Putin's grasp may be an uncomfortable one. After all, a third possible policy goal would be actively to seek to undermine the regime in Moscow. Overt efforts at regime change would be dangerous and likely counterproductive, but London may feel that it should not pass up opportunities to weaken the Kremlin

London may feel that it should not pass up opportunities to weaken the Kremlin
, in the hope that this may tame its appetite for playing confrontational geopolitics.

... ... ...

Mark Galeotti is a senior research fellow at the Institute of International Affairs Prague and a visiting fellow with the European Council on Foreign Relations.

[Mar 28, 2018] Forget policies, the Stormy Daniels affair shows how far US politics has sunk by Ben Jakobs

Mar 28, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

As the porn star's allegations show, discourse in Washington is shifting to something more tawdry and celebrity-oriented

... The idea of a porn star appearing on network television to share details of a sexual encounter with the US commander in chief would have been intellectually confounding at any other moment in time. Instead, the interview, which took place only few days after a former Playboy playmate, Karen McDougal , talked about her affair with Trump, seemed a part of the everyday political landscape in 2018.

... Trump may seem like an aberration but instead he may be an inflection point. It's possible that after over two centuries of presidential campaigns with governors, senators and the occasional general, American politics is shifting to something more tawdry and more celebrity-oriented. The often spoken and rarely met ideal in the United States is that political debates should be about issues. But, after a political campaign where candidates debated penis size on a debate stage, it may be the legacy of Trump that politics has permanently descended to locker-room talk.

[Mar 28, 2018] Russia's ambassador to the US has criticized the expulsion of 60 diplomats, blaming Washington for undermining what little remains of Russia-US relations and promising an appropriate response to the hostile move.

Notable quotes:
"... "I can say that the US understands nothing other than strength. I think that the response should be adequate. Moscow will take the appropriate decision. I think, even just as a citizen of the Russian Federation, that such provocative unreasonable steps cannot be left unanswered," ..."
"... "I mentioned in my statement to the State Department that I consider these actions counterproductive," ..."
"... "I said that the United States took a very bad step by cutting what very little still remains in terms of Russian-American relations." ..."
"... "I want to underline that as of today there is no single bit of evidence of Russian interference in the [Skripal] case investigation, nor of Russian involvement in the tragedy that occurred in [Salisbury]," ..."
"... "I want to underscore the most optimal approach to solving the so-called Skripal case is a calm, professional investigation within the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, where all interested countries are represented." ..."
"... If you like this story, share it with a friend! ..."
Mar 28, 2018 | www.rt.com

"I can say that the US understands nothing other than strength. I think that the response should be adequate. Moscow will take the appropriate decision. I think, even just as a citizen of the Russian Federation, that such provocative unreasonable steps cannot be left unanswered," Russia's Ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov told reporters.

The envoy was summoned to the US State Department earlier on Monday, where he was told that the US was expelling 48 Russian diplomats. Later, Antonov was notified that Washington had declared 12 Russian diplomats at the UN persona non grata.

Read more The Russian consulate in Seattle that US President Donald Trump ordered to be closed on March 26, 2018 © Google Maps 'Against common sense and intl law': Russia to retaliate over diplomats' expulsion by UK allies

"I mentioned in my statement to the State Department that I consider these actions counterproductive," Antonov said. "I said that the United States took a very bad step by cutting what very little still remains in terms of Russian-American relations."

Expressing strong criticism of the US move to expatriate Russian diplomats and shut the Russian consulate in Seattle by April 2, Antonov also called for an impartial investigation into the poisoning of former Russian-UK double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, which Washington has used as a pretext. Skripal was poisoned in the British town of Salisbury on March 4, with London laying the blame squarely on Moscow.

"I want to underline that as of today there is no single bit of evidence of Russian interference in the [Skripal] case investigation, nor of Russian involvement in the tragedy that occurred in [Salisbury]," the diplomat said. "I want to underscore the most optimal approach to solving the so-called Skripal case is a calm, professional investigation within the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, where all interested countries are represented."

If you like this story, share it with a friend!

[Mar 28, 2018] How Iraq War destabilized the world and why the neocons aren't finished yet by Rania Khalek

Notable quotes:
"... "The invasion of Iraq is often spoken of in the United States as a 'blunder,' or even a 'colossal mistake.' It was a crime. Those who perpetrated it are still at large. Some of them have even been rehabilitated thanks to the horrors of Trumpism and a mostly amnesiac citizenry." ..."
"... "axis of evil" ..."
Mar 26, 2018 | www.rt.com

The Iraq War architects have been thoroughly rehabilitated and are planning their next adventure, even as the catastrophic ramifications of their crimes continue to reverberate around the world. Last week marked the 15th anniversary of the American invasion of Iraq in 2003. April 9 will be the 15th anniversary of the fall of Baghdad. The consequences of these events are still playing out today, from Mali to Niger, to the Philippines. Iraq has never recovered and is only beginning to emerge from the trauma, while American officials plan the next military adventure.

Writing in the New York Times, Iraqi novelist Sinan Antoon observed : "The invasion of Iraq is often spoken of in the United States as a 'blunder,' or even a 'colossal mistake.' It was a crime. Those who perpetrated it are still at large. Some of them have even been rehabilitated thanks to the horrors of Trumpism and a mostly amnesiac citizenry."

The rehabilitation of the neocons

Indeed, the rise of Trump has provided the cabal of Iraq War architects with a rebranding opportunity. After their utter failure in Iraq, these people were largely disgraced and no longer taken seriously outside of right-wing circles. But Trumpism, and the desire of liberals to oust the current president, has led to an anti-Trump coalition which includes at its helm many of the instrumental figures behind the Iraq invasion. The list includes David "axis of evil" Frum, former speechwriter to President George W. Bush and now a senior editor at the Atlantic, as well as neoconservative think tanker Bill Kristol, and George W. Bush , who is now celebrated as a pragmatic leader – even by nostalgic Democrats who contrast him with Trump.

Read more Remember when Trump was anti-Iraq War? Bolton hire just tip of iceberg in policy U-turn

Trump's victory in the Republican primary on a seemingly isolationist platform, which was obviously a facade, sent many of these neoconservatives running toward Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee. Those who lined up behind Clinton have since been embraced by the Democratic establishment, while the more extreme neoconservative hawks who stuck by the Republican Party have effectively inserted themselves into the Trump administration. The most recent and terrifying of these is John Bolton, former US ambassador to the UN. Bolton played a key role in politicizing the intelligence that was used to mislead the public about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. And now he is Trump's national security advisor.

Bolton is a neoconservative extremist who has never seen a country he didn't want to bomb. On the top of his hit list is Iran and North Korea, though Bolton has expended most of his energy agitating for the US to bomb Iran , which he seeks to hand over to the Mujahedin E Khalq (MEK), a cultish group of Iranian exiles that has received backing from Israeli intelligence and was formerly classified as a terrorist organization by the United States.

In light of the Iraq war anniversary and the recent appointment of Bolton, it's a good time to survey the damage that neocons such as Bolton caused in Iraq. The war left an estimated 1 million Iraqis dead , 4.5 million displaced, 5 million orphaned, some 2 million widowed, and caused birth defects and cancer rates in some Iraqi cities that are significantly worse than those seen in the aftermath of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan at the end of the Second World War.

Read more 'Epidemic of birth defects & cancer in Iraq after US-led war'

But the destruction reaches far beyond just Iraq.

The new Jihad

The irony is that Trump's rise to the presidency is in many ways the fault of the Iraq War architects. Their policies in Iraq, which were recycled in Libya and Syria, led to the rise of Islamic State and the refugee crisis that fueled right-wing populists such as Trump and his counterparts in Europe. The war in Iraq revived a jihadist movement that was dead after the first few months of the war on Afghanistan, opening the floodgates to jihadists and their supporters from around the world.

When the US dismantled the Iraqi state in 2003, instead of replacing it with a functioning government it punished Sunni areas and installed a sectarian Shiite regime comprised of exiles with no popular support in the country. The US essentially created a new category known as the Sunni Arab and, where the state collapsed, it was Al-Qaeda who would fight on their behalf. The inflammation of sectarian fears and lack of security resulted in a power vacuum that opened the floodgates to Al-Qaeda in Iraq and ignited a gruesome civil war . AQI eventually morphed into the Islamic State of Iraq. Before morphing into ISIS, ISI established an Al-Qaeda offshoot in Syria called Jabhat al-Nusra, the strongest and most disciplined armed opposition group in the country.

ISIS and Al-Qaeda groups cultivate and thrive off of stateless zones as well as a Sunni Arab victimhood narrative , which started with the execution of Saddam Hussein and has been propagated throughout the region by popular gulf-funded religious figures and media outlets such as Al Jazeera Arabic .

Read more Fallujah battle toxic legacy: 'Damage done to DNA'

Beheadings became a hallmark of the Al Qaeda branch in Iraq under Abu Musab al-Zarqawi who, unlike Osama bin Laden began to focus on fighting the near enemy -- the Arab dictatorships, secular people and minorities -- as opposed to the far enemy of the infidel west. We would later see these beheadings in ISIS propaganda videos aimed at terrifying the west. There was a theory in the past in bin Laden's era that you should fight the far enemy, the west, before the near enemy. But under this new and evolved Al Qaeda, whether in Iraq or Yemen or Mali, we saw local franchises focused on slaughtering their fellow countrymen, with particular genocidal hatred for Shias.

The American occupation of an Arab country fueled this Salafi jihadist movement on a global scale. The occupation led to sympathy for this Iraqi jihad throughout the Muslim world, which meant foreign fighters coming in and a huge amount of funding from the gulf.

This global war on terror framework was also implemented by the US in countries such as Somalia and Yemen and across North Africa as well.

The Iraq War gave us Donald Trump

In spite of America's criminal disaster in Iraq, Barack Obama continued to implement regime change policies in both Libya and Syria by funding and arming right-wing insurgencies made up of none other than Al-Qaeda affiliates, the very ideology the US was supposedly fighting in its global war on terror. Like in Iraq, US intervention led to the rise of a failed state in Libya and in much of Syria.

Read more Israeli ex-defense minister says Trump's new NSC adviser Bolton was pushing him to strike Iran

In Syria, these failed state zones were then filled by thousands of foreign fighters coming in from the Turkish border, which the US tolerated as a means to put pressure on the Syrian regime, hoping the regime would offer concessions, which of course it never did. ISIS eventually took over many of these failed state areas and began kidnapping westerners and the group made millions of dollars in ransom money as a result.

The massive refugee flows which resulted from the US encouraging war and regime change in the Middle East led to the destabilization of much of Europe and to some extent, the rise of Donald Trump, who campaigned on the fear-mongering of ISIS, refugees and Muslims. You can trace all these and other terrible consequences to the US decision to encourage war and state collapse rather than to prioritize stability and order in the Middle East. It all started with the Iraq War.

The gift that keeps on giving

The ramifications of the Iraq War are still playing out today, having inspired Salafi jihadist movements from the Philippines to Mali and even Niger , where US soldiers were recently killed by jihadists.

Moreover, the war in Iraq, according to the very people who architected it, has strengthened Iran in the region. That isn't necessarily a bad thing given that Iran and its partners, such as Hezbollah and the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), were crucial to defeating ISIS in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. But a strengthened Iran is a nightmare for the US as it threatens American, Saudi and Israeli hegemony in the region. So, the Iraq war planners are using the strong position of Iran – created by neoconservative policies – to push for a war with Iran. They've also expanded their hit list to include Russia, who they're still hoping to escalate against in Syria.

With Bolton as Trump's national security advisor, a war with Iran is now much more likely. For the war industry and the neocons who lobby for it, the Iraq war they started is the gift that keeps on giving.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Rania Khalek is an American journalist, writer and political commentator based in the Middle East.

[Mar 27, 2018] An important British diplomat saw British control of the greater part of the world as the natural order of things

Notable quotes:
"... If the USA empire could have been established and maintained, without a CIA, I doubt. Empires are ruthless, 'perfidious Albion' was the expression for the British empire. ..."
Mar 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

jilles dykstra , Next New Comment March 27, 2018 at 5:24 pm GMT

@redmudhooch

Depends on what you see as bad. If the USA empire could have been established and maintained, without a CIA, I doubt. Empires are ruthless, 'perfidious Albion' was the expression for the British empire.

Ian Hernon, 'Britain's Forgotten Wars, Colonial Campaigns of the 19th Century', 2003, 2007, Chalford -- Stroud

How an important British diplomat saw British control of the greater part of the world as the natural order of things

Lord Vansittart, 'The Mist Procession, The autobiography of LORD VANSITTART', London 1958

Great pity that death prevented the biography from going furher than 1938.

The machinations of Vansittart during the thirties are described in

Philip M. Taylor, 'The Projection of Britain, British Overseas Publicity and Propaganda 1919-1939′, Cambridge 1981
and Lawrence R. Pratt, 'East of Malta, West of Suez', London, 1975

The ideas of Vansittart's friend Leeper one finds in Sir Reginald Leeper, 'When Greek Meets Greek', London 1950

He more or less ruled Greece from 1945 to say 1950.

[Mar 27, 2018] Perfidious Albion: An Introduction to the Secret History of the British Empire

Mar 27, 2018 | thesaker.is

Abraxas on March 26, 2018 , · at 2:01 pm UTC

This is why Britain is called Perfidious Albion = dirty politics.

Search for article: Perfidious Albion: An Introduction to the Secret History of the British Empire
https://redice.tv/news/perfidious-albion-an-introduction-to-the-secret-history-of-the-british-empire

Mulga Mumblebrain on March 26, 2018 , · at 4:01 pm UTC
Two reasons for the descent of 'the West' into neo-Nazism stand out. First, the West was ALWAYS fascistic, racist, hyper-aggressive, destructive, parasitical and genocidal. Just summon up the shades of the hundreds of millions killed, directly or indirectly, through Western Imperialism, colonialism, settler genocide and economic exploitation even to the extent of causing Holocausts of mass death through famine, as in India, and ask them about the great and glorious West and its stinking 'Moral Values'. Not to forget the tens of millions of Westerners themselves killed in Western internecine wars, or through class hatred, or herded into gas-chambers or made to lie in mass graves then be shot along with their children because they were of the wrong religion, or the same, but they crossed themselves in the wrong direction. German Nazism simply expressed a rather pure essence of true 'Western' moral values, and its mission, and many of its personnel and methods, were simply taken over the USA after WW2.
Of course, the non-Western world was not a collection of lands of milk and honey, but by any rational calculus Western ideology involves a qualitatively different and incessant aggression and cancerous expansion, as manifest in that prototypical Western creation-capitalism. There the lust and capacity for total destruction, as EVERYTHING, living and inanimate is transmuted into the dead stuff of money, is unbounded, but this planet being finite, and the exploiters not having yet escaped to bleed alien worlds anew white and lifeless, capitalism has only succeeded in drowning us on this planet in the waste and filth of its excesses, of which poisoning we will shortly succumb.
And, second, the rise to global dominance through control of Western politics, fakestream media and the other brainwashing mechanisms and finance, of the Zionazi elite centred in Israel, and in the Jewish Diaspora elites, has delivered a final coup de grace to the West, and hence, the world that the West is now in the process of attacking, everywhere, for the crimes of not obeying orders from the likes of vermin like Theresa May, John Bolton and the execrable Macron.
These Zionazi elites are pretty unprecedented in their absolute arrogance and never-ending demands. Currently they have embarked on a veritable firestorm of hatred, invective and false accusations in order to destroy Jeremy Corbyn in the UK. If they cannot destroy Corbyn, they are very happy to destroy UK Labour, because they no longer control it as they did under their stooge, Blair. The whole stinking process is operating in open collusion with the UK fakestream media hate-machine, the reeking corpse of the late UK Guardian leading the way. The Jewish elite grandees leading the onslaught openly declare that it is UK Labour support for the Palestinians and 'Leftwing policies' and criticism of Israel that is motivating their typical exercise in Talmudic hatred. So, the work of hundreds of thousands of Labour supporters invigorated by Corbyn, who have worked, honestly and determinedly, over years and decades, to attempt to make the UK a better, more decent, society that the filthy dystopia created by the Tories and Blairites, is to all be destroyed by a tiny cabal of racist supremacists who see all goyim as their inferiors. A cabal that does not even represent all Jews, although they typically claim that they do, a favourite tactic of these anti-goyite thugs. Many Jews support Corbyn, knowing full well that he is a life-long anti-racist, unlike the Zionazi thugs who traduce him, who are among the vilest racists extant.
This Zionazi thuggery, and numerous other examples like the criminalisation of the BDS Movement or ANY criticism of Israel or Zionazism, as 'antisemitic', is bound to create a good deal of hatred in return. But that is PRECISELY what the Zionazi elites WANT-hatred is the very essence of their existence. Hatred of the Palestinians. Hatred of Arabs. Hatred of Moslems. Hatred of any goyim that do not share these hatreds, or dare to oppose Zionazism. These people, and they do only represent a fraction of Jewry, just as the worst of any community are only a generally small fraction, are the most dangerous and destructive creatures in existence, in my opinion. They hate Russia for thwarting their ambitions to destroy Syria as they did Iraq and Libya. They hate China for not ever going to become supine stooges like the Western kakastocrats. And, as Bibi, Bennett, Sharon, Begin and scores of other hideous Zionazi psychopaths show, they mix a series of ancient and modern psychoses into a maelstrom of hatred and destructiveness seen in policies like the Samson Option, the Oded Yinon Plan and the drive for endless war against their myriad goy enemies, that simply guarantees Israel's eventual destruction, and that, so they often promise, of us all.
Occasional Poster on March 26, 2018 , · at 5:05 pm UTC
To all friends on this blog,

Look beyond the superficial details of the West's hostile actions, and take heart. NOTHING has changed about the West's intentions to Russia, other than that the pretence is over. West is full of good people, but the leaderships kneel to a hidden power. It has been that way for a long time.

The worst possible strategic position was for Russia not to know that, or to be divided by an enduring pro-west movement.

Russia is now besieged, but it always was, without really knowing it. Now there is clarity, and the country can unite.

So take heart. Even on this blog, some will not be able to come to terms today, with West's treachery. As a Serb, I saw it all before, it is not new, it was always there. Russia was always in the cross-hairs, and now it is their turn again.

There is one chain of command in the west, and it is indeed an empire. If Russia has awoken from it's naivety, slumber, and need to believe in an imaginary friend, who always had a hidden knife, then we are good.

I expect every effort will now be made to derail the world cup. Pardon the pun, but it will be another own goal. Zog showed itself, and we can see its true intentions.

Muriel on March 26, 2018 , · at 5:36 pm UTC
Yes, Russia was naive in it's belief that the US was their 'partner'. I cringe every time I hear Putin say that. US is NOT their partner, does NOT want Russia to be sovereign, wants only a vassal Russia, where everything is open to their taking. I'm glad that Putin and many Russians are now losing some of their naivety and are finally realizing that US does NOT have Russia's interests at heart at all, but is, in reality, a treacherous, envious rival that would love to see all Russians bleed and die, if that meant US could take over the land and assets. The vassal EU and the totally repugnant UK are willing to follow US lead anywhere it takes them – even like lemmings over a cliff, which is what's happening now. The cliff is WWIII of which there will be NO winners.
Ky on March 26, 2018 , · at 8:04 pm UTC
England is not vassal but master who is running the show of hatred and inciting usa to fight her war against russia and chi
Anonymous on March 26, 2018 , · at 11:24 pm UTC
England is the most deeply penetrated of the British colonies. The British 'City of London' is the heart of darkness.
Anonymous on March 26, 2018 , · at 9:07 pm UTC
Putin was making an offer when he referred to the 'west' as partners. Take it in that regard. Putin does not seem to be silly nor naive. But by referring to the west as partners, he was extending an olive branch and make an offer to the west. That offer has by now obviously been declined.
proper gander on March 26, 2018 , · at 6:13 pm UTC
@ Occasional Poster

I knew the world cup was unlikely when the US was knocked out from qualifying by .. Guatemala. It was the biggest dive ever in football. No complaints back home from a cancellation, I thought.

TRM on March 26, 2018 , · at 8:59 pm UTC
T&T knocked them out. 2-1 was the score.
Anonymous on March 26, 2018 , · at 9:16 pm UTC
The world cup is proceding as planned. A nuclear war might prevent it, but otherwise its still on.

Notice that all that's been done is 'diplomatic boycotts'. That's a purely symbolic measure, and all it means is that Russia won't have to host a group of government officials who otherwise would take an all expense paid vacation to a futbol tourney.

The English football coach said very openly that he doesn't care what BoJoke says or thinks. And there is no way the English would withdraw their futbol team. Germany is also very unlikely to refuse to defend their championship. German fans are highly unlikely to pass up a short trip to see their team play. And so far even German politicians aren't going the symbolic diplomatic boycott route. Same with most other EU countries.

ioan on March 26, 2018 , · at 5:33 pm UTC
What is going on against Corbyn is disgusting, it seems they have gone now in a frontal attack on all fronts.
It is a sign that something is nearing it's end phase.
TRM on March 26, 2018 , · at 8:57 pm UTC
https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/MURDER.HTM

Gengis Khan was not western. The Chinese are not western. The Soviets were not western (not Russian either BTW).

It is a human condition that every group is guilty of.

Anonymous on March 26, 2018 , · at 10:24 pm UTC
The west funded and supported the Russian revolution and installed the communists. Those communists were also harbored in the west before the revolution. Germany and the U.S. were financially backing that coup.

[Mar 27, 2018] Perfidious Albion The Fatally Wounded British Beast Lashes Out LaRouchePAC

Mar 18, 2018 | larouchepac.com
20180318-perfidious-albion-leaflet-1.pdf

by Barbara Boyd, [email protected]

This statement explores the strategic significance of major events in the world starting in February of 2018. Our goal is to precisely situate Theresa May's March 12–14 mad effort to manufacture a new "weapons of mass destruction" hoax using the same people (the MI6 intelligence grouping around Sir Richard Dearlove) and script (an intelligence fraud concerning weapons of mass destruction) which were used to draw the United States into the disastrous Iraq War. The Skripal poisoning fraud also directly involves British agent Christopher Steele, the central figure in the ongoing coup against Donald Trump. This time the British information warfare operation is aimed at directly provoking Russia while maintaining their targeting of the U.S. population and President Trump.

As the fevered war-like media coverage and hysteria surrounding the case makes clear, a certain section of the British elite seems prepared to risk everything on behalf of their dying imperial system. Despite the hype, economic warfare and sanctions appear to be the British weapons of choice. Putin, as we shall see, recently called the West's nuclear bluff. With their Russiagate coup against Donald Trump fizzling, exposing British agent Christopher Steele and a slew of his American friends to criminal prosecution, a new tool was desperately needed to back the President of the United States into the British geopolitical corner shared by most of the American establishment. The tool is an intelligence hoax, a tried and true British product.

According to the British spy tale, a former Russian military intelligence colonel, Sergei Skripal who spied for Great Britain in Russia from the early 1990s until 2004 was poisoned, along with his daughter, on March 4 in Salisbury, England, using a nerve agent "of a type developed by the former Soviet Union." In 2010, Skripal had been exchanged in a spy swap between the United States and Russia. He had served six years in a Russian prison for spying for Britain. He had been living in the open in Britain for the last eight years. Skripal's MI6 recruiter and handler, Pablo Miller, listed himself as a consultant to Orbis Business Intelligence, Christopher Steele's British company, on his LinkedIn profile. When the Telegraph called attention to the Orbis reference, it was removed from the LinkedIn profile. Steele, who worked on the Trump dossier through his company Orbis, has denied that Miller worked directly on the Trump dossier.

Theresa May and her foreign minister Boris Johnson insist there is only one person who could be responsible for the poisoning, described as an act of war, and that is Vladimir Putin. No evidence has been offered to support this claim. In fact, there is a substantial doubt whether the putative nerve agent, Novichok, even exists. No plausible motive has been provided as to why Putin would order such a provocative murder now, ahead of the World Cup, when the Russiagate coup against him in the United States has lost all momentum. Rather than following the protocols of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, which require that evidence of the alleged agent be presented to Russia, the eccentric and unpopular May instead delivered an ultimatum to Russia and whipped up war fever throughout the UK. She now seeks to pull Donald Trump and NATO into ever more aggressive moves against Russia.

Thus, just like Christopher Steele's dirty dossier against Donald Trump, the British claims against Putin are an evidence-free exercise of raw power. The Anglo- American establishment instructed us, with respect to Steele: "trust him, ignore the stinky factless content presented in this dossier, just note that he is backed by very important intelligence agencies who could cook your goose if you object." The same can be said for Teresa May's crazed assertions now.

A short statement of the reasons why the British are now staging the Skripal provocation can be found in a March 14 London Sunday Telegraph call to arms by Allister Heath, who rants: "We need a new world order to take on totalitarian capitalists in Russia and China Such an alliance would dramatically shift the global balance of power, and allow the liberal democracies finally to fight back. It would endow the world with the sorts of robust institutions that are required to contain Russia and China Britain needs a new role in the world; building such a network would be our perfect mission." Across the pond, as they say, a similar foundational statement was made by 68 former Obama Administration officials who have formed a group called National Security Action, aimed at securing Trump's impeachment and attacking Russia and China.

As visitors to the LaRouchePAC website know, Russia and China have embarked on a massive infrastructure building project in Eurasia, the center of all British geopolitical fantasies since the time of Halford MacKinder. Moreover, China's Belt and Road Initiative now encompasses more than 140 nations in the largest infrastructure-building project ever undertaken in human history. This project is a true economic engine for the future, while neo-liberal economies continue to see their productive potentials sucked dry by the massive mound of debt they have created since the 2008 financial collapse. This debt is now on a hair trigger for implosion. It is estimated by banking insiders that the City of London is sitting on a derivatives powderkeg of $700 trillion with over-the-counter derivatives accounting for another $570 trillion. The City of London will bear the major impact of the derivatives collapse.

In this strategic geometry, President Trump's support of peaceful collaboration with Russia during the campaign and his personal friendship with President Xi, marked him for the relentless coup against him waged by the British and their U.S. friends.

On top of that, President Putin delivered a mammoth strategic shock on March 1, showing new Russian weapons systems based on new physical principles which render present U.S. ABM systems and much of current U.S. war-fighting doctrine obsolete, together with the vaunted first strike capacity with which NATO has surrounded Russia. Not only is the West sitting on a new financial collapse; its vaunted military superiority has just been flanked.

It is very clear that a strategic choice now confronts the human race. In 1984, Lyndon LaRouche wrote a very profound document, "Draft Memorandum of Agreement Between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R." In it, he developed the concrete basis for peace between the two superpowers at the moment when the U.S. had adopted the LaRouche/Reagan doctrine of strategic defense. Both Reagan and LaRouche had proposed that the Russians and the United States cooperate in building and developing strategic defense against offensive nuclear weapons based on new physical principles, thereby eliminating the threat of nuclear annihilation.

According to the LaRouche Doctrine, "The political foundation for durable peace must be: a) the unconditional sovereignty of each and all nation states, and b) cooperation among sovereign states to the effect of promoting unlimited opportunities to participate in the benefits of technological progress, to the mutual benefit of each and all."

Both China, in President Xi's October Address to the Party Congress, and Russia, in Putin's March 1 address, have set a course to produce "technological progress capable of being shared in by all," outlining major infrastructure projects and dedicating massive funding to exploring the frontiers of science, technology, and space exploration. Donald Trump, in both his campaign and his presidency, has embraced similar views. The British and their American friends, however, are devotees of a completely different and failing economic system, a system soundly rejected in Brexit, the election of Donald Trump, and most recently in the Italian elections.

Just look at the events of February and March from this standpoint. It is no accident that Christopher Steele turns up, smack dab in the middle of the Skripal poisoning hoax.

The Coup Against Trump Begins to Be Reversed; British Are Exposed as Actual U.S. Election Meddlers

On February 2, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released a memo demonstrating that the Obama Justice Department and FBI committed an outright fraud on the FISA court in obtaining surveillance warrants on Carter Page, a volunteer to Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign. The bogus warrant applications relied heavily on the dirty British dossier authored by MI6's "former" Russian intelligence chief, Christopher Steele, who had been paid by Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee, to paint Donald Trump as a Manchurian candidate, a pawn of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

According to the House Intelligence memo and other aspects of its investigation, Steele confided to Bruce Ohr, a high official in the DOJ, that he, Steele, hated Trump with a passion and would do "anything" to prevent Trump's election. Steele was using the fact of an FBI investigation of his allegations as part of a "full spectrum" British information warfare campaign conducted against candidate Trump with the full complicity of Obama's intelligence chiefs. 1 Peter Van Buren, "Christopher Steele: The Real Foreign Influence in the 2016 U.S. Election?" American Conservative, February 15, 2018. None of the true facts about the actual motive for, and sponsors of, the DOJ applications about Carter Page were revealed to the FISA Court in the filings made by former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, former FBI Director James Comey, or current Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

The House Intelligence Committee memo was quickly followed by a declassified letter on February 5, in which Senators Chuck Grassley and Lindsay Graham referred Christopher Steele to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution based on false statements he made to the FBI about his contacts with the news media. No doubt the criminal referral sent chills down the spines not only of Christopher Steele and his British colleagues but also of those Obama officials conspiring against Trump.

In the same week, House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes announced that he would be conducting investigations of the role of the Obama State Department and intelligence chiefs in the circulation and use of Christopher Steele's dirty dossier. These investigations have been widely reported to focus on John Brennan and James Clapper: Brennan for widely promoting the dirty British work product and Clapper for leaks associated with BuzzFeed's publication and legitimization of the dirty British work product. Remind yourself every time you hear media explosions against Trump by either Clapper (Congressional perjurer and proponent of the theory that the Russians are genetically predisposed to screw the United States) or Brennan (gopher for George Tenet's perpetual war and torture regime and Grand Inquisitor for Barack Obama's serial assassinations by baseball card). They are next in the barrel, so to speak.

The January 11, 2017 BuzzFeed publication of the Steele dossier was meant to permanently poison Trump's incoming administration and is the subject of libel suits in both Florida and London. In the London case, the British are ready to invoke the Official Secrets Act to protect Christopher Steele. In the Florida case, Steele has been ordered to sit for deposition despite numerous delays and stalling tactics.

The Congressional investigation of the State Department is focused on John Kerry, Kerry's aide Jonathan Winer, Victoria Nuland, and Clinton operative Cody Shearer. Nuland utilized Christopher Steele as a primary intelligence source while running the U.S. regime change operations in Ukraine in alliance with neo-Nazis. She greenlighted Steele's initial meetings with the FBI about Donald Trump. Winer deployed himself to vouch for Steele with various news publications collaborating with British agent Steele and his U.S. employer, Fusion GPS, in Steele's media warfare operations against Trump.

On March 12, the House Intelligence Committee announced that it had completed its Russia investigation. It stated that it found "no collusion, coordination, or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia." Its draft final report was to have been provided to the Democrats on the Committee on March 13 for comment and then submitted to declassification review.

On March 15, four U.S. Senators from the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senators Chuck Grassley, Lindsey Graham, John Cornyn, and Thom Tillis, called for the appointment of a Special Counsel to investigate the DOJ and FBI with respect to the Russiagate investigation. They particularly focused on the use of the Steele dossier, FISA abuse, the disclosure of classified information to the press, and the criminal investigation and case of former Trump National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. Separately, House Oversight Chairman Trey Gowdy and House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte have asked the Justice Department to appoint a Special Counsel on similar grounds.

On March 16, James Comey's Deputy FBI Director, Andrew McCabe, was fired as the result of recommendations by the FBI's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR). The OPR recommendation resulted from Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz's investigation of McCabe's actions with respect to the Clinton email investigation and the Clinton Foundation. McCabe claimed that this was part of a plot against himself, Comey, and Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Michael Horowitz, however, is an actual Washington straight shooter appointed to his post by Barack Obama. The OPR is the FBI's own disciplinary agency. Horowitz's report is expected to be extremely critical of McCabe, citing a "lack of candor," (i.e., lying) with respect to the investigation. Whatever the corrupt media might claim, the facts here have been thoroughly investigated by McCabe's former FBI subordinates. They think his lies and other actions disgrace the FBI and don't entitle him to a pension.

Horowitz's report on the Clinton investigations, which already unearthed the texts between former Russiagate lead case agent Peter Strzok and his mistress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, proclaiming their hatred of Donald Trump and the need for an "insurance policy" against his election, is expected to be released very soon. According to the House Intelligence Committee, the Strzok/Page texts also reveal that Strzok was a close friend of U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras. Contreras sits on the FISA court, took Michael Flynn's guilty plea, and then promptly recused himself from Michael Flynn's case for reasons which remain undisclosed.

Despite its exoneration of the President, and thorough discrediting of the British Steele operation, the House Intelligence Committee dangerously accepts the myth that the Russians hacked the Democratic National Committee, the DCCC, and the emails of Clinton Campaign Chairman John Podesta, and then provided the hacked information to WikiLeaks for publication. It states, however, that Putin's intervention was not in support of Donald Trump, as previously claimed by Obama's intelligence chiefs. The Senators seeking a new Special Counsel also salute this dangerous fraud.

As we have previously reported, the myth that Putin hacked the Democrats and provided the hacked emails to WikiLeaks, has been substantively refuted by the investigations of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. In summary, the evidence points to a leak rather than a hack in the case of the DNC. Further, the NSA would have the evidence of any such hack or hacks, according to former NSA technical director Bill Binney, and would have provided it, even if in a classified setting. It is clear that the NSA has no such evidence. It is also clear that the U.S. and the British have cyber warfare capabilities fully capable of creating "false flag" cyber war incidents.

North Korea Talks Planned; Russia and China Continue to Create the Conditions for a New Human Renaissance

In addition to the fizzling of the coup, the Western elites otherwise suffered through February and March. To the shock of the entire smug Davos crowd, Donald Trump, working with Russia, China, and South Korea, appears to have gotten Kim Jong-un to the negotiating table concerning denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. Substantive talks have been scheduled for May. The breakthrough was announced by President Trump and South Korea on March 8.

On March 1, President Putin gave his historic two-hour address to the Russian assembly and the Russian people. Like President Xi's address to the Chinese Party Congress in October of 2017, Putin focused on the goal of deeply reducing poverty in Russian society. Xi vowed in October to eliminate it from Chinese society altogether. In addition, Putin emphasized that Russia would undertake a huge city-building project across its vast rural frontiers and dramatically expand its modern infrastructure, including Russia's digital infrastructure. He put major emphasis on directing funds to basic scientific and technological progress. He emphasized that harnessing and stimulating the creative powers of individual human beings was the true driver of all economic progress. Those knowledgeable in the West could not help but recognize the suppressed formulas for continuing economic prosperity advocated by Alexander Hamilton and advanced by Lyndon LaRouche.

China's Belt and Road Initiative also continued to advance. Great infrastructure projects are popping up throughout the world, including most specifically in Africa, which had been consigned to be a permanent primitive looting ground for Western interests. Among the recent breakthroughs is the great project to refurbish Lake Chad, a project known as "Transaqua," involving the Italian engineering firm Bonifica, the Chinese engineering and construction firm PowerChina, and the Lake Chad Basin Commission, which represents the African countries directly benefiting from the project.

But the biggest strategic news of the last six weeks was contained in the last part of President Putin's speech. He showed various weapons, developed by Russian scientists in the wake of the U.S. abrogation of the ABM treaty and the Anglo-American campaign of color revolutions and NATO base-building in the former Soviet bloc. The weapons, based on new physical principles, render U.S. ABM defenses obsolete, together with many utopian U.S. war fighting doctrines developed under the reigns of Obama and Bush. Putin emphasized that the economic and "defense" aspects of his speech were not separate. Rather, the scientific breakthroughs were based on an in-depth economic mobilization of the physical economy. He stressed that Russia's survival was dependent upon marshaling continuous creative breakthroughs in basic science and the high technology spinoffs which result, and their propagation through the entire population. He stressed that such breakthroughs are the product of providing an actually human existence to the entire society.

Compare what Russia and China have set out to accomplish with the physical economy of the earth, and the second and third paragraphs of Lyndon LaRouche's prescription for a durable peace in the LaRouche Doctrine: "The most crucial feature of present implementation of such a policy of durable peace is a profound change in the monetary, economic, and political relations between dominant powers and those relatively subordinated nations often classed as 'developing nations.' Unless the inequities lingering in the aftermath of modern colonialism are progressively remedied, there can be no durable peace on this planet.

"Insofar as the United States and the Soviet Union acknowledge the progress of the productive powers of labor throughout the planet to be in the vital strategic interests of each and both, the two powers are bound to that degree and in that way by a common interest. This is the kernel of the political and economic policies of practice indispensable to the fostering of a durable peace between those two powers."

This is the perspective which has the British terrified and acting out, insanely. Were Trump, Putin, and Xi to enter into negotiations based on the LaRouche Doctrine, a breakthrough will have occurred for all of mankind, a breakthrough to a permanent and durable peace. No neo-liberal, post-industrial, unipolar order can match this, no matter how much Mr. Heath, Ms. May, or Boris Johnson rant and rave about it.

Christopher Steele's British Playground

As is well known by now, Christopher Steele was a long time MI6 agent before "retiring" to form his own extremely lucrative private intelligence firm. The firm is said to have earned $200 million since its formation. Steele was an MI6 agent in Moscow around the time Skripal was recruited. He also later ran the MI6 Russia desk and would have known everything there was to know about Skripal. Pablo Miller, who recruited Skripal, according to his LinkedIn profile, worked for Steele's firm and lived in the same town as Skripal.

Since Steele has been discredited in the United States, a huge fawning publicity campaign has been undertaken on his behalf. The campaign involves journalists who have collaborated directly with Steele in his smear job against Trump. Books by Luke Harding and Michael Isikoff seek to rebuild Steele's reputation. A fawning piece by Jane Mayer in the New Yorker , as implausible as it is long, has been foisted on the public for the same reason. There are some fascinating facts, however, in all this fawning prose:

Steele described his business to Luke Harding as primarily providing research and reports to competing and feuding Russian oligarchs, many of whom use London as a base of operations. This is obviously a perfect cover for intelligence operations. It is also a very violent theater of operations. The oligarchs intersect both Western intelligence operations and Russian organized crime. They engage in deadly gang warfare.

Steele and his partners are mentored by Sir Richard Dearlove, former head of MI6 and a critical player in the infamous "sexing up" and fabrication of the claim that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, creating the rationale for the disastrous and genocidal Iraq War.

Steele had been tasked to claim that Russia was interfering in Western elections during the entire post-Ukraine coup time frame in which this black propaganda line began to be circulated widely. According to Jane Mayer's account, Steele called this Project Charlemagne, completing his report in April, 2016, just before he undertook his hit job against Donald Trump. In his report, Steele claimed that Russia was interfering in the politics of France, Italy, the United Kingdom, Germany, and Turkey. He claimed that Russia was conducting social media warfare aimed at "inflaming fear and prejudice and had provided opaque financial support to favored politicians." He specifically targeted Silvio Berlusconi and Marine La Pen. Steele also suggested that Russian aid was given to "lesser known right wing nationalists" in the United Kingdom and elsewhere, implying that the Russians were behind Brexit, with an overall goal of destroying the European Union.

Aside from Skripal's relationship to the central figure in the British led coup against Donald Trump, there are questions whether the nerve agent the British claim was used on the Skripals even exists, and even more troubling questions for Theresa May's "Russia did it" claim, if it does.

Former British Ambassador Craig Murray reports that the British chemical weapons laboratory at Porton Down, just 8 miles from where the Skripals were found, is unsure about what substance, if any, was actually involved in the Skripal poisoning. According to Murray's sources at Porton Down, the scientists were pressured to say that it was a nerve agent of a "type developed by Russia." This is supposed to refer to a whole family of chemical weapons, the Novichoks, which were supposedly produced in the 1980s in a Soviet laboratory in Uzbekistan. This production facility was completely dismantled by the United States, according to multiple accounts. Dr. Robin Black, Head of the Detection Laboratory at Porton Down as of 2016, and a colleague of the murdered British Iraq War dissident David Kelly, called the existence of Novichoks speculative, noting that "no independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published."

The main account supporting the existence of the chemical weapons cited by Theresa May was written by a Soviet dissident chemist named Vil Mirzayanov who now lives in the United States and published a book about his work at the Uzbekistan laboratory. In his much-publicized book, Mirzayanov sets out the formulas for the claimed substances. According to the Wall Street Journal of March 16, that publicity led to Novichok's chemical structure being leaked, making it readily available for reproduction elsewhere. Ralf Trapp, a France-based consultant and expert on the control of chemical and biological weapons, told the Journal, "The chemical formula has been publicized and we know from publications from then-Czechoslovakia that they had worked on similar agents for defense in the 1980s . I'm sure other countries with developed programs would have as well."

But it does not seem that those "other countries" include Russia. The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the independent agency charged by treaty with investigating claims like those just made by the British government, certified in September of 2017 that the Russian government had destroyed its entire chemical weapons program, inclusive of its nerve agent production capabilities. In addition to Mirzayanov, Seamus Martin, writing in the Irish Times of March 14, posits, based on personal knowledge, that Novichoks were widely expropriated by East Bloc oligarchs and criminal elements in the Russian economic chaos of the 1990s.

Thus, Novichoks are the product of the mind of a dissident Russian chemist living in the United States whose formulas have been widely copied by other countries, according to the press accounts. Porton Downs, the very laboratory now asserting their existence, stated as of 2016 that even this published "fact" was to be substantially doubted.

Further trouble for May's attempted hoax is found in the condition of the Skripals and a police officer who went to their home. All were made critically ill, although they are still alive. Yet emergency personnel who treated the Skripals, allegedly the victims of a deadly and absolutely lethal nerve poison, suffered no ill effects whatsoever.

The Skripal poisoning is being compared in the British press to the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko in 2006. The former KGB and FSB officer was granted asylum in London and worked for the infamous anti-Putin British intelligence directed oligarch Boris Berezovsky in information warfare and other attacks on the Russian state, inclusive of McCarthyite accusations against any European politician seeking sane relations with Putin.

Litvinenko's case officer was none other than Christopher Steele, and Christopher Steele conducted MI6's investigation of the case, which, of course, found Putin himself culpable. Berezovsky's use of the disgraced British PR firm Bell, Pottinger is also credited with a significant role in public acceptance of this result. Berezovsky was a prime suspect in organizing the murder of American journalist Paul Klebnikov. Many believe that Berezovsky arranged Litvinenko's demise. Berezovsky himself died in Britain in mysterious circumstances following the loss of a major court case to another Russian oligarch, Roman Abramovich.

In the parliamentary debate in which Theresa May issued her provocation, opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn cautioned against a rush to judgment and pointed to the bloody playing field of Russian oligarchs and Russian organized crime as alternative areas for investigation. Had Corbyn added to that mix, "Western intelligence agencies," he would have been entirely on the right track. Corbyn also pointed out that these oligarchs had contributed millions to May's Conservative party. The reaction by the British media, May's conservatives, and Tony Blair's faction of the Labor Party was to paint Corbyn as a Putin dupe, including photo-shopped images of the Labor leader in a Russian winter hat in front of the Kremlin widely circulated in the news media.

The insane McCarthyite reactions to Corbyn's simple statements of fact show that he hit the nail on the head. If you want to find Skripal's poisoners, then, like Edgar Allen Poe, you must take in the whole picture first. The field of play involves the British intelligence services and the anti-Putin Russian oligarchs who service each other, acting on behalf of British strategic objectives. It is no accident that the coup against Donald Trump and the latest British intelligence fraud, putting the entire world in peril, absolutely intersect one another.

[Mar 27, 2018] Pretty slick operation of foreign office which bind EU to anti Russian course

Mar 27, 2018 | eadaily.com

Russian foreign Ministry spokesman Maria Zakharova commented on the decision on the mass expulsion of Russian diplomats from EU countries in connection with the position of solidarity in the case of poisoning ex-Colonel of GRU Sergei Skripal.

"When London leaves the EU, nothing will bind him to obligations within the framework of a common foreign policy. Want to begin the game closer, I will want to delete. But the remaining countries in the European Union will be bound by the circular ties of anti-Russian solidarity, once imposed by the British. Looks like Britain out those counties under "All as one, and all under one -- the new motto presented by London to Brussels, -- Zakharova explained. -- Brexit has not been canceled, and the divorce process is in full swing. That means that the country which leaves the European Union, exploits the factor of solidarity and imposes the remaining deterioration in relations with Russia."

As reported by Colossal today, Donald Tusk announced the beginning of the campaign of anti-Russian solidarity of the EU in connection with the "business Skripal". Russian diplomats will be sent to 14 EU countries, as well as Canada. Earlier, the United States announced the expulsion of 60 employees of the diplomatic mission of the Russian Federation and the suspension of the Russian Consulate in Seattle.

More details: https://eadaily.com/ru/news/2018/03/26/zaharova-massovaya-antirossiyskaya-solidarnost-vygodna-londonu-no-ne-es

[Mar 27, 2018] The Threat to Western Democracy Starts at Home by Shlomo Ben-Ami

Notable quotes:
"... Daily Mail ..."
"... Scars of War, Wounds of Peace: The Israeli-Arab Tragedy ..."
Mar 26, 2018 | www.project-syndicate.org

The Western liberal order is not in crisis because of Russian disinformation campaigns and electoral interference. Western democracies must take responsibility for a crisis that, ultimately, is homegrown – nurtured by its leaders' own failure to confront effectively the challenges of globalization.

MADRID – Four days before the United Kingdom's 1924 election, the Daily Mail published a letter purportedly written by Comintern Chairman Grigori Zinoviev, calling on British Communists to mobilize "sympathetic forces" in the Labour Party to support an Anglo-Soviet treaty and to encourage "agitation-propaganda" in the armed forces. The letter was found to be fake – forged by anti-Bolshevik White Russians or perhaps Britain's own secret service – but not before it caused the defeat of the UK's first Labour government.

Today's Russian disinformation campaigns, part of the Kremlin's hybrid war against Western democracies, seem to have much in common with the infamous Zinoviev letter. But is their impact really comparable? Would Western democracies really look different today without Russian subterfuge?

According to Gérard Araud, France's ambassador to the United States, Russian electoral interference and manipulation, if left unchecked, could pose an "existential threat" to Western democracies. In other words, an autocrat ruling over an impoverished country with an oil-addicted economy smaller than that of Brazil is supposed to be capable of bringing down the world's major democracies.

France's own presidential election last year seems to challenge Araud's reading. Russia's cyber-campaign against the centrist Emmanuel Macron – meant to aid the far-right candidate Marine Le Pen – included everything from the publication of baseless claims that Macron is gay to the diffusion of fake documents claiming that he has an offshore bank account. Yet, today, Macron is France's president, and Le Pen is struggling to rebrand her party.

This is not to say that Russia cannot be a dangerous spoiler. Nor is it to diminish the risks of social media warping users' view of reality by facilitating the spread of biased and even outright false news (though many experts believe that the Internet is far more effective at producing "slacktivism" than actual political mobilization).

But the Western liberal order is not in crisis because of Russia. Western democracies must take responsibility for a crisis that, ultimately, is homegrown – nurtured by its leaders' own failure to confront effectively the challenges of globalization.

The most worrying feature of the 2016 US presidential election was not the Russian trolls and bots that attempted to sow opposition to Hillary Clinton. Rather, it was that 61 million American citizens blindly believed the flagrant lies of Donald Trump, the most uneducated and mendacious presidential candidate in US history. It did not help, of course, that Clinton – enabled by an obstinate Democratic Party establishment – ran a weak and visionless campaign that ignored the mounting anger of millions of voters who felt left behind by globalization.

Moreover, it was not Russian President Vladimir Putin who created the ethical crisis afflicting Western capitalism. That was achieved by US bankers, who, taking advantage of deregulation and financial interconnectedness, misguided the global economy to the 2008 financial meltdown. US politicians then refused to implement adequate new banking regulations, much less punish those who had caused the crisis and profited handsomely along the way. In Europe, similar ethical and political failures in response to globalization have fueled widespread support for populists of the right and left.

Populist parties once confined to the political fringe did not win nearly half the vote in Italy's recent election because of Russian disinformation campaigns. They won because of mounting anger toward a corrupt political establishment that has failed to address major economic problems, from financial instability to high youth unemployment. Italy's persistent regional inequalities were also on vivid display: whereas the prosperous north favored the anti-immigrant League party, the more populist Five Star Movement received most of its support in the poorer south.

Putin may benefit from such electoral outcomes, but that doesn't make him responsible for them. National politicians – from the Brexiteers to Trump – are the ones espousing divisive policies, refusing to acknowledge the importance of cooperation and ethics in policymaking, lambasting traditional elites and state institutions, and praising autocrats, including Putin himself. The campaign slogan of Italy's League party – "Italians first" – could not be a more direct tribute to Trump's nationalist approach.

Media have served to reinforce these narratives. Yes, Russians have been found to be behind some of the "fake news" spread via social media. But in the UK, for example, tabloids owned by Rupert Murdoch and Jonathan Harmsworth, better known as Lord Rothermere, did much more to sow opposition to the European Union before the Brexit vote.

History, too, has played a role. The Euroskepticism of Eastern Europe's "illiberal democracies" reflects deep-seated religious and authoritarian traditions, which have impeded these societies' internalization of the EU's post-modern culture of secular tolerance and universal values. Poland's combination of fierce anti-Russian sentiment and extreme religious nationalism illustrates this dynamic.

The fact is that the West is beset by deep social inequalities, reinforced in recent decades by poorly managed globalization. At the same time, its political establishment has become increasingly disconnected from the public, much as it did in interwar Europe – a development that fueled the rise of fascism and populist authoritarianism . This dynamic is particularly apparent in the EU, where many decisions are in the hands of a distant and unaccountable bureaucracy lacking in sufficient democratic legitimacy.

Russia does not pose an existential threat to Western democracy. The Soviet Union represented a far more formidable challenge, and it ended up collapsing under the weight of its own economic failure. Russia's internal problems – not just economic stagnation, but also demographic decline – are of a similar scale.

But this does not mean that Western democracy is safe. To protect it, Western leaders must confront their own shortcomings. That means upgrading institutions, improving democratic accountability, reducing economic and social inequality, and striving to ensure that globalization works for all.

[Mar 27, 2018] Stumbling into a War with Russia

Notable quotes:
"... "Now a new Cold War might be different in many respects than the old one. First of all, a very different balance of forces. Second, the absence of an attractive international ideology on the Russian side. Third, obviously, Russia is much more exposed to the West than during the original Cold War, but also, fewer rules and, I think, perhaps more emotions on both sides and increasingly hostile emotions on both sides." ..."
"... While many in Washington believe that Russia would fold if the United States stood up to the Kremlin, the recent Russian presidential elections on March 18 seem to show that Russian president Vladimir Putin has a much stronger mandate than many Western observers might have expected. As Beebe -- former head of the Central Intelligence Agency's Russia desk -- noted, Putin performed much better in the Russian elections than analysts expected. ..."
"... Part of the reason that Putin did so well was because of the alleged Russian attack on Skripal, since the Russian population generally does not believe that their government was involved. ..."
"... Indeed, Russian liberals faired exceedingly poorly in the elections at least in part because of the "rally around the flag" effect, Beebe said. ..."
"... The idea that Russia is under siege by hostile foreign powers greatly contributed to high voter turnout in the Russian elections and for far greater support for Putin himself. ..."
Mar 27, 2018 | nationalinterest.org

"I don't think many of us would question that we do face a new Cold War," Dimitri Simes, Center for the National Interest president and chief executive officer, said during a lunchtime panel on March 26.

"Now a new Cold War might be different in many respects than the old one. First of all, a very different balance of forces. Second, the absence of an attractive international ideology on the Russian side. Third, obviously, Russia is much more exposed to the West than during the original Cold War, but also, fewer rules and, I think, perhaps more emotions on both sides and increasingly hostile emotions on both sides."

The Possibility of a Conflict

Simes, who recently returned from a trip to Russia, said that while the Kremlin is held in low regard by Washington, those feeling are mirrored in Moscow. Indeed, tensions between the two nuclear-armed great powers are so high that analysts are openly wondering if there could be some sort of military confrontation between Washington and Moscow.

... ... ...

Putin is in a Strong Position

While many in Washington believe that Russia would fold if the United States stood up to the Kremlin, the recent Russian presidential elections on March 18 seem to show that Russian president Vladimir Putin has a much stronger mandate than many Western observers might have expected. As Beebe -- former head of the Central Intelligence Agency's Russia desk -- noted, Putin performed much better in the Russian elections than analysts expected.

... ... ...

Simes noted that Putin performed better than expected with parts of the Russian electorate where he traditionally has not fared well, such as in Moscow and with Russians living abroad. Part of the reason that Putin did so well was because of the alleged Russian attack on Skripal, since the Russian population generally does not believe that their government was involved.

Indeed, Russian liberals faired exceedingly poorly in the elections at least in part because of the "rally around the flag" effect, Beebe said. Beebe noted that part of the issue is that neither the United States or Britain has presented concrete evidence that Russia conducted the attack. The information that is publicly available is cause for a high degree of suspicion that Russia was behind the attack, Beebe said, however, it is not evidence in and of itself.

The idea that Russia is under siege by hostile foreign powers greatly contributed to high voter turnout in the Russian elections and for far greater support for Putin himself. "I was at a postelection party for journalists where a lot of opposition people, candidates, their surrogates were present, and they were all saying, 'We lost a lot of voters during the last days before the election because of this British incident,'" Simes said.

[Mar 27, 2018] Indian Punchline - Reflections on foreign affairs by M K Bhadrakumar

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The mass expulsion of Russian diplomats by some countries of the European Union and North America on Monday is an unprecedented and intriguing development. ..."
"... Is it a massive diversionary tactic by the White House the day after porn star Stormy Daniels took Trump's pants off in her TV interview on '60 Minutes' ? Or, is this yet another attempt by Trump to flaunt that he isn't 'soft' on Russia? Or, is it the Deep State in action – as the closure of the Russian consulate in Seattle might well suggest? There are no easy answers. ..."
"... THE SKRIPAL AFFAIR ..."
"... 30 Questions That Journalists Should Be Asking About the Skripal Case .) ..."
"... To my mind, this entire controversy snowballed into a litmus test of the Euro-Atlantic partnership – in particular, the US' trans-Atlantic leadership – at a defining moment when Britain is giving up EU membership. ..."
"... "The only question is whether the confrontation will dissipate, as it did over Agadir in 1911, or whether this is the Sarajevo slow-burning crisis that could explode into flame at some later point. ..."
"... Will it be another case of the sinking of the Maine in 1898, where the subsequent public hysteria provoked war against Spain only to be discovered later that the ship's ammunition stores had accidentally exploded; or a Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964, which was also a false flag operation but provoked the escalation of the Vietnam War. ..."
"... The West may be 'uniting' against Russia, as The Times ..."
Mar 27, 2018 | blogs.rediff.com

The mass expulsion of Russian diplomats by some countries of the European Union and North America on Monday is an unprecedented and intriguing development. First, the US alone accounts for some two-thirds of the expulsion – 60 diplomats. Curiously, even Britain, which is apparently the aggrieved party in the Skripal affair, expelled less than half that number – 23. Broadly, however, this is an Anglo-American move with which a number of EU countries and Canada display solidarity.

Second, President Trump is apparently more loyal to Her Majesty in the Buckingham Palace than Prime Minister Theresa May. This gives an intriguing twist to the tale. Why is there such an excessive interest on the part of Washington, especially at a time when the fervor of the Anglo-American kinship has significantly dampened during the Trump era? (President Trump is yet to visit the UK.)

Is it a massive diversionary tactic by the White House the day after porn star Stormy Daniels took Trump's pants off in her TV interview on '60 Minutes' ? Or, is this yet another attempt by Trump to flaunt that he isn't 'soft' on Russia? Or, is it the Deep State in action – as the closure of the Russian consulate in Seattle might well suggest? There are no easy answers.

Third, only less than half the 28 member countries of the EU have signaled support for the Anglo-American campaign over the spy incident. There is much reluctance or skepticism within the EU about what is going on. Surprisingly, though, Germany, which had voiced skepticism at an early stage, has now joined the pack. Which probably shows that there has been immense pressure from Washington and London.

Nonetheless, curiously, the EU countries by and large made only 'token' expulsions. As many as 7 EU countries simply moved on by expelling one Russian diplomat each. Having said that, the pressure campaign is continuing and the likelihood of more EU countries joining the expulsion cannot be ruled out. Austria has point-blank refused to join. (So has Turkey, which virtually rules out a NATO stance, which requires unanimous support from all member countries.)

What is truly extraordinary is that the circumstances surrounding the alleged poisoning an MI6 double agent of Russian extraction are still shrouded in mystery. The British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn openly cautioned against rushed judgment in a piece in the Guardian newspaper, here . By the way, even PM May claims only that it is "highly likely" that there was Russian involvement (not excluding rogue elements.) Yet, a cardinal principle in Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence is that no one is deemed guilty unless proven guilty.

Indeed, a range of explanations is possible as to what really might have happened in Salisbury. Read an excellent analysis by the respected British scholar on Russia Richard Sakwa, Professor of Russian and European Politics at the University of Kent and Associate Fellow of Chatham House, titled THE SKRIPAL AFFAIR , here .

Even in America, there are voices of scepticism. An enterprising columnist drew up 30 questions that beg an answer. (See the column by Bob Slane featured on the website of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, titled 30 Questions That Journalists Should Be Asking About the Skripal Case .)

To my mind, this entire controversy snowballed into a litmus test of the Euro-Atlantic partnership – in particular, the US' trans-Atlantic leadership – at a defining moment when Britain is giving up EU membership. This is one thing. But, more importantly, does the build-up portend something far more sinister than one would anticipate? One particular passage from Prof. Sakwa's essay becomes a chilling reminder about what may be lying in the womb of time:

"The only question is whether the confrontation will dissipate, as it did over Agadir in 1911, or whether this is the Sarajevo slow-burning crisis that could explode into flame at some later point.

Will it be another case of the sinking of the Maine in 1898, where the subsequent public hysteria provoked war against Spain only to be discovered later that the ship's ammunition stores had accidentally exploded; or a Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964, which was also a false flag operation but provoked the escalation of the Vietnam War.

The West may be 'uniting' against Russia, as The Times put it on 16 March, but to what purpose."

[Mar 27, 2018] A New Cold War With Russia No, It's Worse Than That

Trump proved to be a new Obama. change we can believe in. Elections in the USA became complete farce and neoliberal elite became both danger tot he USA and humality. Imitation of Perfidious Albion behaviour is a tight rope from fall from which can destroy the country and the civilization.
Mar 27, 2018 | www.nytimes.com

From the Kremlin's perspective, it is the United States that first upended previous norms, when President George W. Bush withdrew the United States from the Antiballistic Missile accord, an important Cold War-era treaty, in 2002 . Russia, Mr. Kurilla said, does not like the rules of the American-dominated order that have prevailed since then, "and wants to change them."

One rule that Russia has consistently embraced, however, is the principle of reciprocity, and the Kremlin made clear on Monday that it would, after assessing the scale of the damage to its diplomat corps overseas, respond with expulsions of Western diplomats from Russia.

The Russian Parliament also weighed in, with the deputy head of its foreign affairs committee, Aleksei Chepa, telling the Interfax news agency that Russia would not bow to the West's diplomatic "war." Russia, he said, "will not allow itself to be beaten up, the harder they try to intimidate us, the tougher our response will be."

When Britain expelled 23 Russian diplomats this month in response to the nerve agent attack in Salisbury, England, Moscow not only evicted an equal number of British diplomats, but ordered the closing of the British Council, an organization that promotes British culture and language.

... ... ...

Russia's Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, posted a message on Facebook sneering at the European Union for showing solidarity with Britain at a time when London is negotiating its exit from the bloc. Britain, she wrote, is "exploiting the solidarity factor to impose on those that are remaining a deterioration in relations with Russia."

While President Trump has expressed a curious affinity with Mr. Putin and raised expectations of improved relations, the Russian leader has always been more measured. The underlying mistrust seemed to be reinforced on Monday by Russia's ambassador in Washington, Anatoly Antonov, who told the Interfax news agency that "what the United States of America is doing today is destroying whatever little is left in Russian-U.S. relations."

[Mar 27, 2018] Trump, 14 EU Nations Expel Russian Diplomats and Recall Ambassadors

Notable quotes:
"... None of that proves Russia is innocent. None of this means the US and EU should appease every Russian move or irredentist motive. None of it implies the Russians shouldn't be monitored, balanced, and carefully watched in Europe and the Caucasus. However, before unilaterally escalating an already alarmingly tense situation between NATO and Russia, shouldn't we at least wait until all the evidence is in? ..."
Mar 27, 2018 | original.antiwar.com

by Maj. Danny Sjursen

Before all the far-from-indisputable-evidence is even in, the U.S. and European Union seem intent on escalating tensions and risking conflict with nuclear-armed Russia – that's politics not prudence!

Why a new Cold War ? Why now? This morning, Americans awoke to news that the supposedly Russia-supplicant Trump administration, along with 14 other EU nations, will expel scores of Russian diplomats. The announcement , which Russia called a "provocative gesture," and vowed to retaliate against, constitutes the largest collective expulsion of Russian Intel officers in history.

This very serious action follows on the heels of Russian intelligence's alleged role in the nerve-agent-attack – which Russia denies – on Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, on UK soil. Maybe Russia was behind the attack, maybe it wasn't; but, it seems, we'd want to be sure and have indisputable evidence before embarking on what the Russian foreign ministry correctly labeled "a confrontational path."

More alarmingly, Russia's neighbors, Poland, Latvia, and Lithuania, withdrew their ambassadors from Moscow on Monday – a move all but tantamount to breaking off diplomatic relations. With US and NATO troops now forward deployed in these former Warsaw Pact states, Russian and US military personnel staring each other down across the Euphrates River, and US airstrikes having recently killed scores of Russian mercenaries in Syria, are we now on a path to Cold (or Hot!) War?

Look, maybe Russia is behind these attacks, maybe all the MSNBC-Russia-Gate-Hysteria is all justified. But isn't this hasty, serious action a bit premature? Don't we want to be sure? As for the 2016 elections, Mueller's investigation in not yet complete and when it comes to "collusion" there's plenty of smoke, maybe, but very little fire. As for the UK poisoning attack, despite Britain's consistent, confident allegations of Russian guilt, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) won't even have the substance test results back for some 2-3 weeks .

It seems likely that rather than prudently, patiently (you know diplomatically!) waiting for definitive, corroborating chemical and intelligence evidence before further escalating tensions with the Russian bear, what we're seeing is President Trump's team making a political move. Embattled and scandal- ridden – who else saw 60 Minutes last night – this administration likely feels compelled to take some drastic action to prove (again) that they're not in cahoots with Putin. Is that any way to run foreign policy? Well, it is, in this era of hyper-partisan, role-swapping (wait the Dems are Russia hawks now?!?), battle stations politicization!

I watch the news (CNN and MSNBC are the worst culprits) enough to know that it is currently all-Russia, all the time. The American public is led to believe, by those outside, and in some cases – like the National Defense Strategy (NDS) – inside, the administration, that Russia is a born again Soviet Union and Putin the new Stalin incarnate. The Russkies are out for world domination again, a "revisionist power" as the NDS labels them. Hold on though; take a breath. Is that actually true?

As I've written in these pages , the threat and supposedly malign intentions of Russia and China have been highly inflated by hawks on both sides of the political aisle. In fact, Russia has recently announced plans to cut military spending over the next five years. As it stands, Russia is in many ways punching above its weight to begin with. With an economy comparable in size to that of Spain or Italy, military spending just a fraction of the US, and facing a demographic "perfect storm" of high mortality and low fertility, Russia has neither the means nor motivation to conquer Central Europe.

The United States, on the other hand, spends more on its military than the next several nations – China, Russia, India, Germany, Saudi Arabia, the UK, Japan and France – combined. Furthermore, a majority of the recent $1.3 trillion US omnibus spending bill goes straight to the warfare (welfare) state – the military and VA. Who exactly holds the aggressive cards here?

None of that proves Russia is innocent. None of this means the US and EU should appease every Russian move or irredentist motive. None of it implies the Russians shouldn't be monitored, balanced, and carefully watched in Europe and the Caucasus. However, before unilaterally escalating an already alarmingly tense situation between NATO and Russia, shouldn't we at least wait until all the evidence is in?

Prudence not politics should be the name of the game.

Major Danny Sjursen, a regular AntiWar.com contributor, is a U.S. Army officer and former history instructor at West Point. He served tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan. He has written a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghost Riders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge . He lives with his wife and four sons in Lawrence, Kansas. Follow him on Twitter at @SkepticalVet and check out his new podcast "Fortress on a Hill," co-hosted with fellow vet Chris 'Henri' Henrikson.

[ Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author, expressed in an unofficial capacity, and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. government.]

Copyright 2018 Danny Sjursen

[Mar 27, 2018] Brzezinski's Heritage West Wants Total Partition and Defeat of Russia

Notable quotes:
"... The views and opinions expressed by Srdja Trifkovic are those of the speaker and do not necessarily reflect those of Sputnik. ..."
Mar 03, 2018 | sputniknews.com
1 5 0 On Monday, a number of European countries, as well as the United States and Canada, announced they were expelling Russian diplomats over the Skripal case. Radio Sputnik discussed the significance of the diplomatic response by the Western powers with Srdja Trifkovic, a US journalist and writer on international affairs. Sputnik: What is your overall assessment about what has happened with this diplomatic response by so many countries? How significant is it?

Srdja Trifkovic: The overall impression is that rational discourse has given way to collective hysteria and that it is indeed remarkable. The extent to which the bandwagon has successfully started rolling while we don't even have elementary answers to the questions concerning the case itself.

The second important and discouraging aspect is that continental European countries have followed the Anglo-American lead in Russophobia and this represents a further trial of the Atlanticist domination over Europe. It is indeed remarkable when both Germany and France, the putative leaders of independent European foreign policy, have been reduced to the status of automatic followers of the lead supported by Washington especially when we bear in mind that the initial round of sanctions in 2014 against Russia was dictated by the United States which had nothing to lose in the proceedings and to the detriments of Europeans' interests.

So overall I think that, one we have the hysterical phase of Russophobic discourse in the West which is not amenable to any rational arguments and two, we have a successful degradation of European diplomacy to the status of pliant satellites comparable to East Germany and Bulgaria vis-à-vis Brezhnev.

Sputnik: Do you think there was some classified evidence that was presented that proves beyond a shadow of doubt that Russia was involved or do you think that the fact that there are 11 countries who have not joined in the protest perhaps hints at the fact that this was not the case?

Srdja Trifkovic: Well, first of all, I would say that President Putin, Foreign Minister Lavrov and others would not have made such categorical denials of Russian involvement if there was any possibility of a smoking gun which could effectively show to the world that they were not telling the truth.

And secondly, it is always possible to present some equivocal evidence in the form that even if that indicates the modus operandi of intelligence agencies nevertheless does not disclose outright state secrets. In fact, we've seen that in the past and I don't think that it would be possible for such confidential information to be disclosed to the diplomats and foreign ministers of EU countries as divergent as the 27 are, without risking these very sources.

So I really believe that if you look at the countries which have taken measures against Russia, they almost read like who is who of those who are prepared to follow the US lead and if you look at those reluctant to do so, including Austria, Hungary, Cyprus, Greece, we are looking at those who actually have a more independent foreign policy. So I don't think it's a reflection of the quality of possible intelligence, it is simply a reflection of the determination of decision-makers of those countries to preserve a modicum of independence.

Sputnik: What would you say about the level to which the actions that were actually taken by individual countries? What can you say about the numbers game that's being played? What do you think determined the number of diplomats?

Srdja Trifkovic: Some of these countries are absolutely insignificant countries like the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, which also expelled one Russian and it's just a pathetic non country. On the other hand in the United States obviously it is a matter of regret that President Trump's initially stated intention to have detente with Russia has been subverted by the deep state, it is a long story but now we have really reached the end of the road with the appointment of Pompeo to State Department and Bolton as the national security adviser.

So we can really look at Trump as the would-be drainer of the swamp who has been swallowed by the swamp. And I think that we are in for a long haul. I was in Moscow two weeks ago and coming again next week and sometimes I am surprised that some of my Russian interlocutors are insufficiently aware of the animosity or end of the rule Russophobic sentiment that currently prevails among the Western elites, both political and academic and media. It's almost pathetic when some Russians still use the term "our Western partners," because for partnership you need to have a modicum of mutual respect and trust and these people really seriously want to destroy Russia.

They want to delegitimize the Russian political system and process as we have seen with the public commentary on President Putin's re-election and they want nothing short of regime change, which would then lead to a permanent and irreversible change of Russia's national character and possibly the country's partition along the lines allocated by Zbigniew Brzezinski. With these people partnership is impossible and Russia needs to be prepared for a long and sustained period of confrontation .

The views and opinions expressed by Srdja Trifkovic are those of the speaker and do not necessarily reflect those of Sputnik.

[Mar 27, 2018] West pushing anti-Russia conspiracy theories for achieving political economic advantage

Notable quotes:
"... "should go away and shut up;" ..."
"... "[Sergei Skripal] was handed in to Britain as a result of an exchange. So, why should Russia hand in a man that is of any importance or that is of any value? It's unimaginable. If he's handed in – so Russia quits with him. He's of zero value or zero importance," ..."
"... "America stands ready to help Poland and other European nations diversify their energy supplies so that you can never be held hostage to a single supplier," ..."
"... "If we want to have the United States' LNG supplies in Central Europe, we also want to see the United States getting tough on Nord Stream 2, which means getting tough on Russia," ..."
"... "getting tough on Russia." ..."
"... "The draft law makes clear that they're pursuing economic interests and we think that's not acceptable," ..."
"... "Aggressively combining foreign policy issues with American economic interests and saying: 'We want to drive Russian gas out of the European market so we can sell American gas there is definitely not something we can accept.'" ..."
"... "We are determined to maintain open channels of dialogue with Russia," ..."
Mar 27, 2018 | www.rt.com

Once again, the West has tossed out the democratic baby with the bath water, scapegoating Russia for a mysterious crime on UK territory without a shred of evidence. To understand why, just follow the money. Any hope that Western capitals would come to their democratic senses and demand that PM Theresa May provide some proof that Russia was behind an alleged assassination attempt on Sergei Skripal, a former Russian intelligence officer turned British spy, were dashed on Monday. Sixteen EU states fell in lockstep behind the US and UK, taking the dramatic measure of banishing Russian diplomats.

Breaking: US to expel 48 Russian embassy workers in Washington, D.C. and 12 at the Russian mission to the U.N. U.S. says they were intel officers using diplo status as cover. pic.twitter.com/mRuwY8Tes6

-- Patrick Tucker (@DefTechPat) March 26, 2018

Meanwhile, back in the land of the free, Trump enthusiastically joined the inquisition, saying he would expel 60 Russian diplomats 'personae non grata,' and shut down the Seattle consulate. Good to see that the American leader practices cool-headed moderation in times of uncertainty.

Short of an actual military conflict with Russia, it would be hard to imagine the situation getting any worse. Most worrisome is the peddling of pulp-fiction conspiracy theories against Russia, which compels Western officials to compensate for their wild imaginations with hysterical, inflammatory outbursts that border on sheer madness.

How else to explain the comment by UK Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson, who spoke like a kid at the playground when he said Russia "should go away and shut up;" or that of Boris Johnson, the British foreign minister, who had the audacity and historical ignorance to compare Russia's hosting of this year's World Cup to the 1936 Olympics in Nazi Germany.

So, what is motivating self-satisfied Western countries, like the US and Britain, to forward such slanderous claims against Russia without a hint of legal due process? After all, it cannot be denied that Russia would have stood to gain nothing from targeting Skripal.

"[Sergei Skripal] was handed in to Britain as a result of an exchange. So, why should Russia hand in a man that is of any importance or that is of any value? It's unimaginable. If he's handed in – so Russia quits with him. He's of zero value or zero importance," Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said in an exclusive interview with RT.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/7ATdRpvQKvI

When we ask the question, 'Cui bono' – who stands to benefit the most from an assassination attempt on a man of absolutely no consequence to Moscow – the most credible answer always comes back to 'Russia's accusers.'

Follow the money

Since Washington has taken by far the severest steps against Russia over the Skripal fallout, it would be fair to ask if the US stands to gain anything from the wave of Russophobia now sweeping the West, which got its start, incidentally, as a direct result of 'Russiagate.'

Against the backdrop of the Skripal scandal are extremely lucrative gas contracts with EU countries that Russia has dutifully fulfilled since the Soviet heydays. Today, Russia supplies about 40 percent of Europe's gas. The US, however, with its fracking-backed liquefied natural gas (LNG) program, is anxious to get a piece of the pie.

In July, Donald Trump paid a visit to Poland, where he pledged to boost exports of LNG to Central Europe, as well as challenge Russia's market on energy supplies.

"America stands ready to help Poland and other European nations diversify their energy supplies so that you can never be held hostage to a single supplier," Trump told reporters after talks with Polish President Andrzej Duda.

The comment was odd since, even at the height of the Cold War, Europe never froze due to its gas being turned off in the middle of the night by Moscow.

Read more © Joshua Roberts Entangling alliances or scoring at home? Why US went out of its way with Russian diplomat expulsions

Marek Matraszek, founder of the lobby firm CEC Government Relations, offered a very disturbing comment about Washington's push to supply LNG to Europe.

"If we want to have the United States' LNG supplies in Central Europe, we also want to see the United States getting tough on Nord Stream 2, which means getting tough on Russia," Matraszek said .

I am very curious to know exactly what Matraszek had in mind when he spoke about "getting tough on Russia." Would he approve of the current bilateral breakdown between the nuclear powers? I certainly hope not.

In light of the massive prospects for gross profit on the European continent, would Western capitals not be tempted – tempted, at the very least – to deny Moscow the benefit of the doubt whenever highly suspicious criminal cases arise, like the present one regarding Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia?

In an effort to slander Russia and push it out of lucrative markets, they may be tempted to milk the situation for all its worth – which is exactly what is happening now. To doubt that possibility would require a deep misunderstanding of the geopolitical realities as they have played out over the course of the last decade, complete with a massive propaganda campaign aimed at everything related to Russia – from the Olympic Games to anti-terrorist operations in Syria to criminal cases in foreign lands.

Meanwhile, as the showdown between the US and Russia over EU gas supplies festers, especially in light of Nord Stream 2, the German-Russia venture that would double direct Russia gas supplies, the ongoing US sanction regime against Russia is beginning to look suspect.

Commenting on Trump's passage in August of brand new sanctions against Russia, then German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel was brave enough to mention the elephant in the room.

"The draft law makes clear that they're pursuing economic interests and we think that's not acceptable," he said .

"Aggressively combining foreign policy issues with American economic interests and saying: 'We want to drive Russian gas out of the European market so we can sell American gas there is definitely not something we can accept.'"

Meanwhile, it is not only in the energy sector where the United States - and to a lesser degree the UK - stands to gain from wrecked relations with Russia, but in the defense sector as well.

The UK regularly ranks as Europe's leading weapons exporter, behind the United States globally, which remains the world's leading arms exporter. Much of the expenditure comes from NATO member states, which were just put on notice by Trump to keep their military spending at 2 percent of GDP, at the very same time Washington was going out of its way to portray Russia as a belligerent nation, when it has been the West that has been hell-bent on fomenting regime change around the world. Now that's certainly an interesting sales strategy.

Romanian Prime Minister @VioricaDancila said that the government decisions to purchase #HIMARS missile systems and multirole corvettes were important steps in improving the capability of the Romanian armed forces as a @NATO and EU member #defence pic.twitter.com/EEYk4Sk5MR

-- Radio Romania International (@RRInternational) February 15, 2018

Can this propaganda campaign against Russia work? I believe the answer is no, for many reasons. First, it is not just the Russians who understand that they are being played by major powers in a conspicuous attempt to gain geopolitical and economic advantage.

Thus far, nearly half of the EU's member states have refrained from committing a gesture of "solidarity" with London, deciding not to expel Russian diplomats. Those 'conscientious objectors' are: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Greece, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal, Slovakia and Slovenia.

"We are determined to maintain open channels of dialogue with Russia," Austrian government spokesperson Peter Launsky-Tieffenthal told RIA Novosti.

In many ways, this represents a victory for Russia – albeit a bittersweet one – that London failed to get so many countries on board its anti-Russia juggernaut.

This needs to be emphasized. The majority of the EU countries did not join in this mass expulsion. As for those that did, expulsions were mostly pro forma, undertaken in order to keep the British happy. Why then the wildly disproportionate response from Trump? https://t.co/4FldvIS80W

-- George Szamuely (@GeorgeSzamuely) March 26, 2018

Second, Russia is actively diversifying its economy away from Western markets in preparation for a worse-case scenario. For example, the "$55bn Power of Siberia pipeline will start carrying gas 3,000km to China next year. The company is also spending $13bn on a pipeline to Turkey," the Financial Times reported.

Finally, as Russia understands that they are up against some very dishonest players, the country has made tremendous inroads to producing many of the things it once depended upon imports to have, and we are not just talking about cheese. The Russian authorities have even prepared a backup plan in the event that Russia is terminated from the SWIFT international payment system. Although, of course, Russia would prefer not to have to take such drastic steps, the unfortunate situation in many Western capitals, where otherwise intelligent people are pointing fingers and hurling unfounded accusations at Russia, without critical evidence or due process – once hallmarks of the Western judicial system – make such steps absolutely vital.

All things considered, Russia will survive this storm, as it has done so many other times in the past against far graver enemies, and stronger than ever.

@Robert_Bridge

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Trends: Facebook West pushing anti-Russia conspiracy theories for achieving political & economic advantage Comparing Russia to Nazi Germany is 'disgusting' – Kremlin on Johnson's 'Hitler' remarks

[Mar 27, 2018] You will gain a better understanding of Vladimir Putin if you study his career as a sportsman, 3rd degree blackbelt Judoka than by sifting through his career as an ex-spy.

Mar 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

ThreeCranes , March 27, 2018 at 1:23 pm GMT

You will gain a better understanding of Vladimir Putin if you study his career as a sportsman, 3rd degree blackbelt Judoka than by sifting through his career as an ex-spy.

First of all, Judo is a sport. It's not a "martial art". It's not meant to maim or injure–though of course, people do get injured because they get thrown. Every particular technique that could inevitably result in injury has been culled from the sport. You don't "practice" Judo, you "play" it–literally, that's what they say when talking about participation.

Practice sessions are democratic. Everyone practices against everyone else. Of course, this results in mismatches as rank beginners will at some point be paired up with advanced players. But this mismatch doesn't result in humiliation because the advanced take special pains to play cleanly, pull their throws i.e. execute them perfectly so the person thrown can land without injury to themselves and it also is an opportunity for every good Judoka to teach the novices.

There are some people who come to Judo who don't fit in. They standout because they can be seen really playing rough with those who are lower in rank than them. But this doesn't go unnoticed. As people cycle through opponents during the practice session, the bully will eventually be paired up with someone who is better than they are. And they will be taught a lesson. Either they learn and conform to the rules or they never show up again. Judo weeds out opportunistic bullies.

Now I hope the above helps people better understand Putin. To sum up: he is competitive but will try to win fairly, within the prescribed rules. He won't tolerate bullying by the stronger over the weaker, will, in fact, come to the aid of the weaker. Has a strong sense of tradition, of belonging to a school of thought and action that is greater than himself and that is worth preserving for its own sake, believes and more importantly, knows through experience, that belonging to such a school improves individual character. He is competent. I've seen film of him in practice and his technique is quite good. His third degree black belt was honestly earned, it wasn't an honorary award.

From the above it can be seen why he would have little respect for the current crop of weak, cowardly, politicians who rule America, lacking as they are in discipline, integrity and dedication to a larger, noble cause. He would, in fact, find it hard not to hold them in contempt but, keeping his eyes on the long-term goals of what's good for his country, masters his emotions when dealing with them face to face.

[Mar 27, 2018] Russia Must Consider Death Penalty For Negligent Building Contractors And Maintenance Operators Eurasia Future

Notable quotes:
"... "Negligence is the cause. All norms are written. But the way we treat these [security] norms is the catastrophic cause of the tragedy we have witnessed today". ..."
"... The tragedy in Kemerovo could have been easily prevented if corrupt and avaricious building contractors did not cut corners during construction. Likewise, the operators of the shopping centre were further negligent in failing to maintain effective fire alarms, sprinkler systems and well lit escape routes in the event of an emergency. ..."
"... While Russia has laws on the books designed to ensure the safety of large public structures, these laws need to become far more elaborate. Both new and old laws must be enforced much more acutely. Furthermore, Russian authorities should consider far harsher penalties for violations in construction and building maintenance up to and including a re-introduction of the death penalty for those found guilty of gross negligence. ..."
Mar 27, 2018 | www.eurasiafuture.com

Russia Must Consider Death Penalty For Negligent Building Contractors And Maintenance Operators Written by Adam Garrie on 2018-03-26 More in Asia:

The death toll from a fire at a shopping centre in the Siberian city of Kemerovo continues to rise. At the latest count, 64 are dead. Most of the victims were young children. Deadly blazes in shopping centres, apartment buildings and other public structures have become far too common in Russia. The authorities must take drastic steps to save the lives of innocent civilians when public structures become death traps. A video first posted on Telegram shows how rapidly the fire spread as the centre was consumed by smoke.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/3lCwRDWGWQA

There is a common thread of negligence in the construction and maintenance of large public structures that has thus far been insufficiently addressed by the authorities. Firefighters have identified highly flammable thermal insulation as being the main reason that the fire spread so quickly and proved difficult to extinguish. Meanwhile, eye witnesses report that fire alarms failed to sound, while some emergency exit doors were locked from the inside.

Russia's Ombudsmen for Children, Anna Kuznetsova has been perfectly clear that negligence is the reason that what could have been an easily contained fire turned into a deadly inferno. She stated,

"Negligence is the cause. All norms are written. But the way we treat these [security] norms is the catastrophic cause of the tragedy we have witnessed today".

The tragedy in Kemerovo could have been easily prevented if corrupt and avaricious building contractors did not cut corners during construction. Likewise, the operators of the shopping centre were further negligent in failing to maintain effective fire alarms, sprinkler systems and well lit escape routes in the event of an emergency.

While Russia has laws on the books designed to ensure the safety of large public structures, these laws need to become far more elaborate. Both new and old laws must be enforced much more acutely. Furthermore, Russian authorities should consider far harsher penalties for violations in construction and building maintenance up to and including a re-introduction of the death penalty for those found guilty of gross negligence.

A society is only as strong as its infrastructure and at present, the Russian authorities, particularly at a local and regional level have themselves been derelict in their duties to ensure safe public spaces and homes for the Russian people.

The deterrent quality of the death penalty in cases of negligence should not be underestimated. Corrupt building and maintenance companies will only cut corners and use inferior construction products, while failing to safely maintain structures if they think that they can get away with it. If strict prosecutions of all those responsible for the shopping centre inferno are not pursued to the furthest extent of the law, they will have gotten away with mass murder and others will continue to priorities saving money over saving lives.

Russia must take immediate steps to inspect all large public structures throughout the country, force urgent repairs when necessary and prosecute all those who continue to be negligent. Anything less will represent a total abrogation of government responsibility to the people.

[Mar 27, 2018] Fifteen Years Ago, America Destroyed My Country by SINAN ANTOON

Notable quotes:
"... My short visit only confirmed my conviction and fear that the invasion would spell disaster for Iraqis. Removing Saddam was just a byproduct of another objective: dismantling the Iraqi state and its institutions. That state was replaced with a dysfunctional and corrupt semi-state. ..."
"... Paul Bremer III, the head of the Coalition Provisional Authority, announced the formation of the so-called Governing Council in July 2003. The names of its members were each followed by their sect and ethnicity . Many of the Iraqis we spoke to on that day were upset with institutionalization of an ethno-sectarian quota system. Ethnic and sectarian tensions already existed, but their translation into political currency was toxic. Those unsavory characters on the governing council, most of whom were allies of the United States from the preceding decade, went on to loot the country, making it one of the most corrupt in the world. ..."
"... The next time I returned to Baghdad was in 2013. The American tanks were gone, but the effects of the occupation were everywhere. I had low expectations, but I was still disheartened by the ugliness of the city where I had grown up and horrified by how dysfunctional, difficult and dangerous daily life had become for the great majority of Iraqis. ..."
"... I didn't expect the beautiful Basra I'd seen on 1970s postcards. That city had long disappeared. But the Basra I saw was so exhausted and polluted. The city had suffered a great deal during the Iran-Iraq war, and its decline accelerated after 2003. Basra was pale, dilapidated and chaotic thanks to the rampant corruption. Its rivers are polluted and ebbing. ..."
"... Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion) , and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter . ..."
Mar 19, 2018 | www.nytimes.com
Photo
A statue of Saddam Hussein in front of the burning National Olympic Committee in Baghdad in 2003. Credit Tyler Hicks/The New York Times

When I was 12, Saddam Hussein, vice president of Iraq at the time, carried out a huge purge and officially usurped total power. I was living in Baghdad then, and I developed an intuitive, visceral hatred of the dictator early on. That feeling only intensified and matured as I did. In the late 1990s, I wrote my first novel, "I'jaam: An Iraqi Rhapsody," about daily life under Saddam's authoritarian regime. Furat, the narrator , was a young college student studying English literature at Baghdad University, as I had. He ends up in prison for cracking a joke about the dictator. Furat hallucinates and imagines Saddam's fall, just as I often did. I hoped I would witness that moment, whether in Iraq or from afar.

I left Iraq a few months after the 1991 Gulf War and went to graduate school in the United States, where I've been ever since. In 2002, when the cheerleading for the Iraq war started, I was vehemently against the proposed invasion. The United States had consistently supported dictators in the Arab world and was not in the business of exporting democracy, irrespective of the Bush administration's slogans. I recalled sitting in my family's living room with my aunt when I was a teenager, watching Iraqi television and seeing Donald Rumsfeld visiting Baghdad as an emissary from Ronald Reagan and shaking hands with Saddam . That memory made Mr. Rumsfeld's words in 2002 about freedom and democracy for Iraqis seem hollow. Moreover, having lived through two previous wars (the Iran-Iraq war of 1980 to 1988 and the Gulf War of 1991), I knew that the actual objectives of war were always camouflaged by well-designed lies that exploit collective fear and perpetuate national myths.

I was one of about 500 Iraqis in the diaspora -- of various ethnic and political backgrounds, many of whom were dissidents and victims of Saddam's regime -- who signed a petition: "No to war on Iraq. No to dictatorship." While condemning Saddam's reign of terror, we were against a "war that would cause more death and suffering" for innocent Iraqis and one that threatened to push the entire region into violent chaos. Our voices were not welcomed in mainstream media in the United States, which preferred the pro-war Iraqi-American who promised cheering crowds that would welcome invaders with "sweets and flowers." There were none.

The petition didn't make much of an impact. Fifteen years ago today, the invasion of Iraq began.

Three months later, I returned to Iraq for the first time since 1991 as part of a collective to film a documentary about Iraqis in a post-Saddam Iraq. We wanted to show my countrymen as three-dimensional beings, beyond the binary of Saddam versus the United States. In American media, Iraqis had been reduced to either victims of Saddam who longed for occupation or supporters and defenders of dictatorship who opposed the war. We wanted Iraqis to speak for themselves. For two weeks, we drove around Baghdad and spoke to many of its residents. Some were still hopeful, despite being drained by years of sanctions and dictatorship. But many were furious and worried about what was to come. The signs were already there: the typical arrogance and violence of a colonial occupying power.

Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, the Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.

My short visit only confirmed my conviction and fear that the invasion would spell disaster for Iraqis. Removing Saddam was just a byproduct of another objective: dismantling the Iraqi state and its institutions. That state was replaced with a dysfunctional and corrupt semi-state. We were still filming in Baghdad when L. Paul Bremer III, the head of the Coalition Provisional Authority, announced the formation of the so-called Governing Council in July 2003. The names of its members were each followed by their sect and ethnicity . Many of the Iraqis we spoke to on that day were upset with institutionalization of an ethno-sectarian quota system. Ethnic and sectarian tensions already existed, but their translation into political currency was toxic. Those unsavory characters on the governing council, most of whom were allies of the United States from the preceding decade, went on to loot the country, making it one of the most corrupt in the world.

We were fortunate to have been able to shoot our film in that brief period during which there was relative public security. Shortly after our visit, Iraq descended into violence; suicide bombings became the norm. The invasion made my country a magnet for terrorists ("We'll fight them there so we don't have to fight them here," President George W. Bush had said), and Iraq later descended into a sectarian civil war that claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of civilians and displaced hundreds of thousands more, irrevocably changing the country's demography.

The next time I returned to Baghdad was in 2013. The American tanks were gone, but the effects of the occupation were everywhere. I had low expectations, but I was still disheartened by the ugliness of the city where I had grown up and horrified by how dysfunctional, difficult and dangerous daily life had become for the great majority of Iraqis.

My last visit was in April 2017. I flew from New York, where I now live, to Kuwait, where I was giving a lecture. An Iraqi friend and I crossed the border by land. I was going to the city of Basra, in the south of Iraq. Basra was the only major Iraqi city I had not visited before. I was going to sign my books at the Friday book market of al-Farahidi Street, a weekly gathering for bibliophiles modeled after the famous Mutanabbi Street book market in Baghdad. I was driven around by friends. I didn't expect the beautiful Basra I'd seen on 1970s postcards. That city had long disappeared. But the Basra I saw was so exhausted and polluted. The city had suffered a great deal during the Iran-Iraq war, and its decline accelerated after 2003. Basra was pale, dilapidated and chaotic thanks to the rampant corruption. Its rivers are polluted and ebbing. Nonetheless, I made a pilgrimage to the famous statue of Iraq's greatest poet, Badr Shakir al-Sayyab.

One of the few sources of joy for me during these short visits were the encounters with Iraqis who had read my novels and were moved by them. These were novels I had written from afar, and through them, I tried to grapple with the painful disintegration of an entire country and the destruction of its social fabric. These texts are haunted by the ghosts of the dead, just as their author is.

No one knows for certain how many Iraqis have died as a result of the invasion 15 years ago. Some credible estimates put the number at more than one million. You can read that sentence again. The invasion of Iraq is often spoken of in the United States as a "blunder," or even a "colossal mistake." It was a crime. Those who perpetrated it are still at large. Some of them have even been rehabilitated thanks to the horrors of Trumpism and a mostly amnesiac citizenry. (A year ago, I watched Mr. Bush on "The Ellen DeGeneres Show," dancing and talking about his paintings.) The pundits and "experts" who sold us the war still go on doing what they do. I never thought that Iraq could ever be worse than it was during Saddam's reign, but that is what America's war achieved and bequeathed to Iraqis.

Sinan Antoon ( @sinanantoon ) is the author, most recently, of the novel "The Baghdad Eucharist." Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion) , and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter .

[Mar 27, 2018] Within a week after Brennan's 'routine' visit in April 2014 to the Ukraine the Ukrainian army launched a civil war. That was within 2 weeks of the CIA instigated coup an the end of February 2014

Mar 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

JR , Next New Comment March 27, 2018 at 6:24 am GMT

Within a week after Brennan's 'routine' visit in April 2014 to the Ukraine the Ukrainian army launched a civil war. That was within 2 weeks of the CIA instigated coup an the end of February 2014.

[Mar 27, 2018] 'Generation Putin' Gives West the Boot

Notable quotes:
"... Russians between 18 and 24 are the most likely to approve of Putin -- guranteing the consequences of present western hostility towards Russia will continue to reverberate for decades ..."
Mar 27, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Russians between 18 and 24 are the most likely to approve of Putin -- guranteing the consequences of present western hostility towards Russia will continue to reverberate for decades

Leading American, British, and Australian publications, such as the Wall Street Journal , the Australian , and the Daily Telegraph , almost simultaneously published materials with the same message: "A new generation of Russia chooses Putin, not iPhones. This generation is terrible, there is no hope for it."

"Putinagers," with an exception of some pro-Western outcasts, turned out to be not to the foreign researchers' liking. There is a suspicion that there is a certain connection between the process of acquaintance of our Western "partners" with young Russians and how their approach to anti-Russian information policy has changed.

Previously, in the vast majority of cases, our opponents tried to stick to the classical principle of American propaganda of the Cold War era, which stated that it was always necessary to divide and put the people against their leadership, emphasizing the oppression and powerlessness of people who crave liberation from the tyrannical and cruel Soviet and then Russian leaders. However, now there is a kind of rollback to earlier primitive forms of propaganda, so Russians are often being demonized already "wholesale," without much division on those who lead and those who vote.

Apparently, earlier on they tried to incite the younger generation, which grew up on the dubious information diet consisting of social media, Hollywood movies, and infectious YouTube videos, against the government, which would bring on a repeat destruction of the Russian statehood.

These hopes were actively fueled by the "expert community" consisting of so-called political emigrants, from Masha Gessen to Chichvarkin, as well as by many anti-government activists within Russia itself. Their hope that this new generation would follow the Maidan path and would want to "trade their homeland for an opportunity to feel like Europeans" to some extent was justified. In many countries, from Egypt to Ukraine, it was young people who drove destructive political processes that were actively fueled from outside.

But in the case of Russia, the West sustained not only catastrophic, but also a very visual breakdown of its scheme.

The Wall Street Journal reports that according to the polls of the Levada center, Vladimir Putin's approval rating is the highest among an age group of 18 to 24 years and is 86%, which simply tears into flaps American ideas about what young Russians, who grew up in the era of the Internet should be like.

American journalists conducted a series of interviews with these youngest Russians and noted that they appreciate the opportunities that they have and that their parents did not have, as well as them being very skeptical about revolutions, preferring evolutionary changes for the better.

"Putin's popularity is undeniable, especially among young people," states The Australian, a flagman of Australian press. "In Russian "a generation Putin" is more active than their parents and more pro Kremlin than their parents," regrets the Daily Telegraph in Britain.

Gradually, our Western partners begin to realize that Putin is not a historical aberration, but a historical regularity. And all that they do not like in Putin, in fact, refers not only and not so much to him as a politician and statesman, but to the Russians as a whole. For a long time, Western experts perceived the Russian leader as the embodiment of the resentment of a generation that couldn't forget the trauma of the collapse of the USSR. But it is now clear that Putin is the voice of values and ideals shared by Russians of all ages. Many in the West hoped that the revival and activation of Russia on the international scene is a temporary phenomenon that they could just endure and wait it out. Now it turns out that to wait for a new opportunity to get Russia in exchange for "jeans" is no longer sensible. This brings out their outright rage.

A traditional passion of Western politicians and media for demonizing Putin is gradually complemented by a willingness, or even an active desire, to stigmatize all Russians as a whole. Of recent examples we can recall the statement of Alexander Pechtold, the leader of "Democrats 66" one of the ruling parties of the Netherlands who had found an original way to justify a lie that discredited the Minister Halbe Zijlstra. The latter, as we remember, admitted that for many years he had lied about meeting with Vladimir Putin and that he personally heard about the plans of the Russian President for the Baltic States. Speech in support of his fellow liar Pechtold ended with the phrase: "I have never met a Russian who would correct his mistakes." The Dutch politician would hardly have an audacity or the courage to make a similar statement about any other ethnic group. This sad trend is already too visible to be ignored.

It may seem that switching the propaganda machine to the total denigration of all Russians is a purely irrational move. But it's only at first glance. Such strategy has its advantages. At a minimum, it is much more convenient and efficient to frighten Western people with "Russians as a whole" and "thousand-year Imperial ambitions of Russia" than to concentrate exclusively on Putin.

Our opponents think that have a chance to put pressure on the unique pressure point of our civilization, the desire to "be good." The USSR fell not only because of the betrayal of the elites, or a desire to trade our country for 300 varieties of sausage, not only due to the economic difficulties, but also because a certain part of society believed that we collectively should "become good" in the eyes of the so-called "civilized world".

Perhaps it is for the sake of repeating the sweet success if the Cold War, that West constantly shames us, and especially our young people, and demands repentance for everything -- great and small, real and imaginary.

For the victory in the Great Patriotic war and for poisoning of Skripal, for Rodchenkov's doping scheme, and Putin's behavior, for "Gazprom" and "millennial Russia's Imperial ambitions," for all the historical resentment of the Baltic border states and so on. Therefore, we, as a society, are simply obliged to explain to our young citizens that we, the Russians, are all right and we owe nothing to anyone. And that those who wish to instill in us some sort of national guilt, need to be firmly rejected and offered to look in the mirror and to see in there millions of corpses of Libyans and Iraqis, the ashes of Odessa, and deeper, severed hand of servants from the Belgian rubber plantations. It is desirable that our new generations would develop a strong reflex: when the collective West shames them, it fact it is trying to grab their wallet.

Judging by the portrait of our new generation, drawn by the Western media, Russia's future is in safe hands, in the hands of active, patriotic, rational and very inventive young Russians.

Unfortunately, our geopolitical opponents are not ready to leave future Russia in peace. This means that today's young people will have to come up with methods and technologies necessary to protect themselves, their loved ones, their cities and villages, and their country. They will have to conduct acts of industrious, scientific and military heroism. They will have to win in a tough global economic, scientific and military competition. They will have to invent new weapons, new ideologies and new financial instruments. The younger generation of Russians will have a complicated but incredibly interesting collective biography. We can place our trust in our young people. They can handle it.

[Mar 27, 2018] Entangling alliances or scoring at home Why US went out of its way with Russian diplomat expulsions

16 EU states now expelling 33 Russian diplomats
Notable quotes:
"... "intelligence officers" ..."
"... In addition to expelling the diplomats, Trump ordered the closure of the Russian consulate in Seattle, Washington. The decision cited the consulate's proximity to a US submarine base and to Boeing production facilities, implying the diplomats were really intelligence operatives. ..."
"... That was echoed by White House deputy press secretary Raj Shah, who told reporters the expulsion is aimed at "significantly degrading their intelligence capabilities around the world, not just in the US." ..."
"... "coordinated with NATO allies," ..."
"... "brazen and reckless" ..."
"... "highly likely" ..."
"... "Thousand-year Reich" ..."
"... "joined at the hip" ..."
"... "entangling alliances," ..."
"... "blindly follow the principle of Euro-Atlantic unity at the expense of common sense, the rules of civilized state-to-state dialogue and the principles of international law," ..."
"... "up to the Russian government and up to Putin," ..."
"... "special relationship" ..."
"... "What we are witnessing now is part of a long-term program of unbridled Russophobia," ..."
"... "what took so long" ..."
"... "Russian oligarchs" ..."
"... "The Roman Empire had no need for diplomacy. Nor does the United States, ..."
Mar 27, 2018 | www.rt.com

The decision to expel 60 Russian diplomats suggests that President Donald Trump is either following the siren call of 'entangling alliances,' or taking the lead in escalating the conflict with Moscow to appease domestic critics. Not only did Trump's order affect more than twice as many diplomats as the March 14 move by London, it accounts for more than half of the total Russian diplomats expelled by various US allies on Monday. Monday's action is the biggest expulsion of alleged "intelligence officers" since the Cold War and the largest in US history, according to US ambassador to Russia, Jon Huntsman.

Though Trump campaigned on the "America First" foreign policy , openly critical of the nation-building and "humanitarian" interventions his predecessors engaged in, little of that remains after the first year of his presidency. The media and the opposition Democrats appear to have buttonholed the president with never-ending accusations that he is somehow "soft" on Russia.

Read more 2017 could have been year Russia and US made up. Now they stand on brink of new Cold War

In reality, the current administration has taken the hostility toward Moscow, inherited from Barack Obama's second term, and turned it up a notch, from pressuring Russian media to register as foreign agents and approving the sale of anti-tank missiles to Ukraine, to expelling more Russian diplomats and shutting down consulates .

In addition to expelling the diplomats, Trump ordered the closure of the Russian consulate in Seattle, Washington. The decision cited the consulate's proximity to a US submarine base and to Boeing production facilities, implying the diplomats were really intelligence operatives.

That was echoed by White House deputy press secretary Raj Shah, who told reporters the expulsion is aimed at "significantly degrading their intelligence capabilities around the world, not just in the US."

Shah said the move was "coordinated with NATO allies," and represented a US response to Russia's "brazen and reckless" actions, namely, the alleged nerve agent attack that reportedly injured former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury, UK, three weeks ago.

16 EU states now expelling 33 Russian diplos
🇩🇪 Germany 4
🇵🇱 Poland 4
🇨🇵 France 4
🇨🇿 Czech 3
🇱🇹 Lithuania 3
🇮🇹 Italy 2
🇩🇰 Denmark 2
🇳🇱 Netherlands 2
🇪🇸 Spain 2
🇱🇻 Latvia 1
🇫🇮 Finland 1
🇪🇪 Estonia 1
🇷🇴 Romania 1
🇸🇪 Sweden 1
🇭🇷 Croatia 1
🇭🇺 Hungary 1

-- Danny Kemp (@dannyctkemp) March 26, 2018

British authorities have asserted that Russia was "highly likely" to have been behind the incident, but have refused to provide any evidence to back up Prime Minister Theresa May and Foreign Minister Boris Johnson's words. Johnson even went so far as to compare Russian President Vladimir Putin to Adolf Hitler - twice! - though it was Russia that carried the disproportionate burden in defeating Hitler's "Thousand-year Reich" in the Second World War.

On March 14, May ordered the expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats. Russia retaliated by expelling the same number of British diplomats, as well as shutting down the consulate in St. Petersburg and British Council operations in Russia.

Seasoned observers of international relations might note that it is usually Britain that follows the US lead – whether in the 1999 attack on Yugoslavia, the 2003 invasion of Iraq, or the 2011 regime change operation in Libya – and not the other way around. Yet, according to White House's Shah, the US is "joined at the hip" with the UK on this. What gives?

This needs to be emphasized. The majority of the EU countries did not join in this mass expulsion. As for those that did, expulsions were mostly pro forma, undertaken in order to keep the British happy. Why then the wildly disproportionate response from Trump? https://t.co/4FldvIS80W

-- George Szamuely (@GeorgeSzamuely) March 26, 2018

America's first president, George Washington, warned way back in 1796 of the danger of "entangling alliances," which would draw the newly created country into foreign wars on behalf of allied governments. Such alliances would also lead to poor relations with other nations and distort US policies to favor the wishes of its allies over the will of the American people.

Yet today's US policymakers, from the highest officials of the Trump administration to the NeverTrump think-tanks, treat it as an article of faith that the US is strong because it has entangling alliances with countries all over the world, and a military presence all over the planet.

Read more US abusing its rights as host country by expelling Russian diplomats at UN – Russia's UN envoy

Washington and other allies of London "blindly follow the principle of Euro-Atlantic unity at the expense of common sense, the rules of civilized state-to-state dialogue and the principles of international law," the Russian Foreign Ministry said , condemning the expulsions.

Shah's comments, that the US relationship with Russia is entirely "up to the Russian government and up to Putin," as if Washington had no agency in the matter, certainly seems to suggest that Trump is all tangled up in the "special relationship" with London.

However, there is also the possibility that Trump or some of his advisers are pursuing hostility towards Moscow in order to counter the narrative of 'Russian collusion' – which originated from the Hillary Clinton campaign after the humiliating loss in the 2016 election, and continues to be pushed by many in the US media and the Democratic party.

"What we are witnessing now is part of a long-term program of unbridled Russophobia," Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told Rossiya-1 TV.

Reporters covering the White House presented a good example on Monday. In the rare moments when they digressed from discussing Trump's alleged affair with porn star Stormy Daniels, reporters mostly wanted to know "what took so long" to expel the diplomats and why more is not being done against Russia. CNN's Jim Sciutto finally got a question, only to demand more sanctions against "Russian oligarchs" and Putin personally.

No matter what Trump does against Russia, it fails to mollify his critics, who see evidence of his "collusion" with Moscow in absolutely everything.

Closing Russia's consulate in Seattle hurts Americans in our Northwest who want to visit Russia, not Putin's oligarchs. Typical misdirection by Trump Administration.

-- Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) March 26, 2018

Trump didn't have an option to keep the 60 Russian spies posing as diplomats in the US, but I guarantee he looked for one. He also hasn't criticized Putin or implemented all of the sanctions Congress passed against Russia. Trump's a traitor & shouldn't be president. #ImpeachTrump

-- Scott Dworkin (@funder) March 26, 2018

Whatever the intent behind Monday's decision, its timing and execution were certainly problematic. The expulsion of diplomats came as Russia was collectively mourning the deaths of 64 people, many of them children , in a mall fire in the Siberian city of Kemerovo. Adding insult to injury sounds like really poor diplomacy, no matter who's behind it.

Then again, as the former UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali noted in his 1999 memoir, Washington sees no need for diplomacy when power will do.

"The Roman Empire had no need for diplomacy. Nor does the United States, " wrote Boutros-Ghali.

[Mar 27, 2018] Integrity Has Vanished From The West by Paul Craig Roberts,

Mar 27, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored Among Western political leaders there is not an ounce of integrity or morality . The Western print and TV media is dishonest and corrupt beyond repair. Yet the Russian government persists in its fantasy of "working with Russia's Western partners." The only way Russia can work with crooks is to become a crook. Is that what the Russian government wants?

Finian Cunningham notes the absurdity in the political and media uproar over Trump (belatedly) telephoning Putin to congratulate him on his reelection with 77 percent of the vote, a show of public approval that no Western political leader could possibly attain. The crazed US senator from Arizona called the person with the largest majority vote of our time "a dictator." Yet a real blood-soaked dictator from Saudi Arabia is feted at the White House and fawned over by the president of the United States.

The Western politicians and presstitutes are morally outraged over an alleged poisoning, unsupported by any evidence, of a former spy of no consequence on orders by the president of Russia himself. These kind of insane insults thrown at the leader of the world's most powerful military nation -- and Russia is a nation, unlike the mongrel Western countries -- raise the chances of nuclear Armageddon beyond the risks during the 20th century's Cold War. The insane fools making these unsupported accusations show total disregard for all life on earth. Yet they regard themselves as the salt of the earth and as "exceptional, indispensable" people.

Think about the alleged poisoning of Skirpal by Russia. What can this be other than an orchestrated effort to demonize the president of Russia? How can the West be so outraged over the death of a former double-agent, that is, a deceptive person, and completely indifferent to the millions of peoples destroyed by the West in the 21st century alone. Where is the outrage among Western peoples over the massive deaths for which the West, acting through its Saudi agent, is responsible in Yemen? Where is the Western outrage among Western peoples over the deaths in Syria? The deaths in Libya, in Somalia, Pakistan, Ukraine, Afghanistan? Where is the outrage in the West over the constant Western interference in the internal affairs of other countries? How many times has Washington overthrown a democratically-elected government in Honduras and reinstalled a Washington puppet?

The corruption in the West extends beyond politicians, presstitutes, and an insouciant public to experts. When the ridiculous Condi Rice, national security adviser to president George W. Bush, spoke of Saddam Hussein's non-existent weapons of mass destruction sending up a nuclear cloud over an American city, experts did not laugh her out of court. The chance of any such event was precisely zero and every expert knew it, but the corrupt experts held their tongues. If they spoke the truth, they knew that they would not get on TV, would not get a government grant, would be out of the running for a government appointment. So they accepted the absurd lie designed to justify an American invasion that destroyed a country.

This is the West. There is nothing but lies and indifference to the deaths of others. The only outrage is orchestrated and directed against a target: the Taliban, Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Iran, Assad, Russia and Putin, and against reformist leaders in Latin America. The targets for Western outrage are always those who act independently of Washington or who are no longer useful to Washington's purposes.

The quality of people in Western governments has collapsed to the very bottom of the barrel. The British actually have a person, Boris Johnson, as Foreign Secretary, who is so low-down that a former British ambassador has no compunction in calling him a categorical liar. The British lab Porton Down, contrary to Johnson's claim, has not identified the agent associated with the attack on Skirpal as a Russian novichok agent. Note also that if the British lab is able to identify a novichok agent, it also has the capability of producing it, a capability that many countries have as the formulas were published years ago in a book.

That the novichok poisoning of Skirpal is an orchestration is obvious. The minute the event occurred the story was ready. With no evidence in hand, the British government and presstitute media were screaming "the Russians did it." Not content with that, Boris Johnson screamed "Putin did it." In order to institutionalize fear and hatred of Russia into British consciousness, British school children are being taught that Putin is like Hitler.

Orchestrations this blatant demonstrate that Western governments have no respect for the intelligence of their peoples. That Western governments get away with these fantastic lies indicates that the governments are immune to accountability. Even if accountability were possible, there is no sign that Western peoples are capable of holding their governments accountable. As Washington drives the world to nuclear war, where are the protests? The only protest is brainwashed school children protesting the National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment.

Western democracy is a hoax. Consider Catalonia. The people voted for independence and were denounced for doing so by European politicians. The Spanish government invaded Catalonia alleging that the popular referendum, in which people expressed their opinion about their own future, was illegal. Catalonian leaders are in prison awaiting trial, except for Carles Puigdemont who escaped to Belgium. Now Germany has captured him on his return to Belgium from Finland where he lectured at the University of Hesinki and is holding him in jail for a Spanish government that bears more resemblance to Francisco Franco than to democracy. The European Union itself is a conspiracy against democracy.

The success of Western propaganda in creating non-existent virtues for itself is the greatest public relations success in history. Tags Politics

[Mar 27, 2018] The Skripal Case: It Looks Like Mrs May Has Some Explaining to do!

Notable quotes:
"... I do not know who poisoned the Skripals, how it was done, or for what reason. I continue to keep an open mind. But I do know one thing. It looks like Mrs May has some explaining to do. ..."
Mar 27, 2018 | www.theblogmire.com

On Monday 12th March , the Prime Minister of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Theresa May, stood up in Parliament and made the following claim as part of her 36-hour ultimatum to the Russian Federation:

"Mr Speaker, this morning I chaired a meeting of the National Security Council in which we considered the information so far available. As is normal, the Council was updated on the assessment and intelligence picture, as well as the state of the investigation.

It is now clear that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia. This is part of a group of nerve agents known as 'Novichok' .

Based on the positive identification of this chemical agent by world-leading experts at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down ; our knowledge that Russia has previously produced this agent and would still be capable of doing so; Russia's record of conducting state-sponsored assassinations; and our assessment that Russia views some defectors as legitimate targets for assassinations; the Government has concluded that it is highly likely that Russia was responsible for the act against Sergei and Yulia Skripal [my emphasis]."

In her statement to the House on 14th March , she reiterated the claim, as follows:

"Mr Speaker, on Monday I set out that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a Novichok: a military grade nerve agent developed by Russia [my emphasis]."

Let's break this down. The three key parts of Mrs May's claim are as follows:

  1. That the experts at Porton Down had made a positive identification of the substance used to poison Mr Skripal and his daughter, Yulia.
  2. That this positive identification concluded that it was a military-grade nerve agent .
  3. That this positive identification was that the substance was part of a group of nerve agents known as 'Novichok' .

In a judgement at the High Court on 22nd March on whether to allow blood samples to be taken from Sergei and Yulia Skripal for examination by the OPCW, the evidence submitted by Porton Down (in section 17 i), stated the following:

"Blood samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analysed and the findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound . The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent or closely related agent [my emphasis]."

Let's break this down. The three key parts of the evidence given by Porton Down to the High Court are as follows:

  1. That the analysis at Porton Down indicated the substance used to poison Mr Skripal and his daughter, Yulia.
  2. That this indication was not able to positively identify whether the substance used was actually a nerve agent (much less a military-grade nerve agent), and left open the possibility that it may have been a related compound .
  3. That this indication could not positively identify whether the substance was part of a group of nerve agents known as 'Novichok', or whether it was a closely related agent .

Mrs May's statement claims positive identification of a military grade nerve agent of the "Novichok" class of chemical weapons. Porton Down's evidence to the High Court shows that no such positive identification took place.

Two statements. Both cannot be true.

I do not know who poisoned the Skripals, how it was done, or for what reason. I continue to keep an open mind. But I do know one thing. It looks like Mrs May has some explaining to do.

[Mar 27, 2018] 30 Questions That Journalists Should be Asking About the Skripal Case

Notable quotes:
"... nerve agent poisoning ..."
"... of a type ..."
"... developed by Russia ..."
"... made only by Russia ..."
Mar 27, 2018 | www.theblogmire.com

There are a lot of issues around the case of Sergei and Yulia Skripal which, at the time of writing, are very unclear and rather odd. There may well be good and innocent explanations for some or even all of them. Then again there may not. This is why it is crucial for questions to be asked where, as yet, there are either no answers or deeply unsatisfactory ones.

Some people will assume that this is conspiracy theory territory. It is not that, for the simple reason that I have no credible theory -- conspiracy or otherwise -- to explain all the details of the incident in Salisbury from start to finish, and I am not attempting to forward one. I have no idea who was behind this incident, and I continue to keep an open mind to a good many possible explanations.

However, there are a number of oddities in the official narrative, which do demand answers and clarifications. You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist or a defender of the Russian state to see this. You just need a healthy scepticism, "of a type developed by all inquiring minds!"

Below are 30 of the most important questions regarding the case and the British Government's response, which are currently either wholly unanswered, or which require clarification.

1. Why have there been no updates on the condition of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in the public domain since the first week of the investigation?

2. Are they still alive?

3. If so, what is their current condition and what symptoms are they displaying?

4. In a recent letter to The Times , Stephen Davies, Consultant in Emergency Medicine at Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust, wrote the following:

"Sir, Further to your report ("Poison exposure leaves almost 40 needing treatment", Mar 14) may I clarify that no patients have experienced nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury and there have only ever been three patients with significant poisoning."

His claim that " no patients have experienced nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury" is remarkably odd, as it appears to flatly contradict the official narrative. Was this a slip of the pen, or was it his intention to communicate precisely this -- that no patients have been poisoned by a nerve agent in Salisbury?

5. It has been said that the Skripals and Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey were poisoned by "a military grade nerve agent". According to some claims, the type referred to could be anywhere between five and eight times more toxic than VX nerve agent. Given that just 10mg of VX is reckoned to be the median lethal dose , it seems likely that the particular type mentioned in the Skripal case should have killed them instantly. Is there an explanation as to how or why this did not happen?

6. Although reports suggested the involvement of some sort of nerve agent fairly soon after the incident, it was almost a week before Public Health England issued advice to those who had visited The Mill pub or the Zizzi restaurant in Salisbury on the day that the Skripals fell ill. Why the delay and did this pose a danger to the public?

7. In their advice, Public Health England stated that people who had visited those places, where traces of a military grade nerve agent had apparently been found, should wash their clothes and:

"Wipe personal items such as phones, handbags and other electronic items with cleansing or baby wipes and dispose of the wipes in the bin (ordinary domestic waste disposal)."

Are baby wipes acknowledged to be an effective and safe method of dealing with objects that may potentially have been contaminated with "military grade nerve agent", especially of a type 5-8 times more deadly than VX?

8. Initial reports suggested that Detective Sergeant Bailey became ill after coming into contact with the substance after attending the Skripals on the bench they were seated on in The Maltings in Salisbury. Subsequent claims, however, first aired by former Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Lord Ian Blair on 9 th March , said that he came into contact with the substance at Sergei Skripal's house in Christie Miller Road. Reports since then have been highly ambiguous about what should be an easily verifiable fact. Which is the correct account?

9. The government have claimed that the poison used was "a military grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia ". The phrase "of a type developed by Russia" says nothing whatsoever about whether the substance used in the Salisbury case was produced or manufactured in Russia. Can the government confirm that its scientists at Porton Down have established that the substance that poisoned the Skripals and DS Bailey was actually produced or manufactured in Russia?

10. The former ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, has claimed that sources within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) have told him that scientists at Porton Down would not agree to a statement about the place of origin of the substance , because they were not able to establish this. According to Mr Murray, only under much pressure from the Government did they end up agreeing to the compromise wording, "of a type developed by Russia", which has subsequently been used in all official statements on the matter. Can the FCO, in plain and unambiguous English, categorically refute Mr Murray's claims that pressure was put on Porton Down scientists to agree to a form of words and that in the end a much-diluted version was agreed?

11. On the occasion that the FCO did attempt to refute Mr Murray's claims , the wording they used included a straightforward repetition of the same phrase – "of a type developed by Russia". Is the FCO willing and able to go beyond this and confirm that the substance was not only "of a type developed by Russia", but that it was "produced" or "manufactured" in Russia?

12. Why did the British Government issue a 36-hour ultimatum to the Russian Government to come up with an explanation, but then refuse their request to share the evidence that allegedly pointed to their culpability (there could have been no danger of their tampering with it, since Porton Down would have retained their own sample)?

13. How is it possible for a state (or indeed any person or entity) that has been accused of something, to defend themselves against an accusation if they are refused access to evidence that apparently points to their guilt?

14. Is this not a clear case of the reversal of the presumption of innocence and of due process?

15. Furthermore, why did the British Government issue an ultimatum to the Russian Government, in contravention of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) rules governing such matters, to which both Britain and Russia are signatories, and which are clearly set out in Article 9, Paragraph ii of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)?

16. Given that the investigation, which has been described by the man leading it as being "an extremely challenging investigation" and as having "a number of unique and complex issues", and given that many of the facts of the case are not yet known, such as when, where and how the substance was administered, how is it possible for the British Government to point the finger of blame with such certainty?

17. Furthermore, by doing so, haven't they both politicised and prejudiced the investigation?

18. Why did the British Government feel the need to come forward with an accusation little more than a week into the investigation, rather than waiting for its completion?

19. On the Andrew Marr Show on 18 th March, the Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, stated the following:

"And I might just say in response to Mr Chizhov's point about Russian stockpiles of chemical weapons. We actually had evidence within the last ten years that Russia has not only been investigating the delivery of nerve agents for the purposes of assassination, but it has also been creating and stockpiling Novichok."

Where has this intelligence come from and has it been properly verified?

20. If this intelligence was known before 27 th September 2017 – the date that the OPCW issued a statement declaring the completion of the destruction of all 39,967 metric tons of chemical weapons possessed by the Russian Federation – why did Britain not inform the OPCW of its own intelligence which apparently contradicts this claim, which they would have had a legal obligation to do?

21. If this intelligence was known after 27 th September 2017, why did Britain not inform the OPCW of this "new" information, which it was legally obliged to do, since it allegedly shows that Russia had been lying to the OPCW and had been carrying out a clandestine chemical weapons programme?

22. Also on the Andrew Marr show, Mr Johnson made the following claim after a question of whether he was "absolutely sure" that the substance used to poison the Skripals was a "Novichok":

"Obviously to the best of our knowledge this is a Russian-made nerve agent that falls within the category Novichok made only by Russia, and just to get back to the point about the international reaction which is so fascinating."

Is the phrase "to the best of our knowledge" an adequate response to Mr Marr's request of him being "absolutely sure"?

23. Is this a good enough legal basis from which to accuse another state and to impose punitive measures on it, or is more certainty needed before such an accusation can be made?

24. After hedging his words with the phrase, "to the best of our knowledge", Mr Johnson then went beyond previous Government claims that the substance was "of a type developed in Russia", saying that it was "Russian-made". Have the scientists at Porton Down been able to establish that it was indeed "Russian-made", or was this a case of Mr Johnson straying off-message?

25. He also went beyond the previous claim that the substance was "of a type developed in Russia" by saying that the substance involved in the Skripal case "falls within the category Novichok made only by Russia "? Firstly, is Mr Johnson able to provide evidence that this category of chemical weapons was ever successfully synthesised in Russia, especially in the light of the OPCW's Scientific Advisory Board stating as recently as 2013, that it has "insufficient information to comment on the existence or properties of 'Novichoks ' "?

26. As Craig Murray has again pointed out , since its 2013 statement, the OPCW has worked (legally) with Iranian scientists who have successfully synthesised these chemical weapons. Was Mr Johnson aware that the category of "Novichok" chemical weapons had been synthesised elsewhere when he stated that this category of chemical weapons is "made only by Russia"?

27. Does the fact that Iranian scientists were able to synthesise this class of chemical weapons suggest that other states have the capabilities to do likewise?

28. Is the British Government aware that the main plant involved in attempts to synthesise Novichoks in the 1970s and 1980s was based not in Russia, but in Nukus in Uzbekistan?

29. Does the fact that the US Department of Defence decontaminated and dismantled the Nukus site, under an agreement with the Government of Uzbekistan , make it at least theoretically possible that substances or secrets held within that plant could have been carried out of the country and even back to the United States?

30. The connection between Sergei Skripal's MI6 recruiter, Pablo Miller , who also happens to live in Salisbury, and Christopher Steele, the author of the so-called "Trump Dossier", has been well established , as has the fact that Mr Skripal and Mr Miller regularly met together in the City . Is this connection of any interest to the investigation into the incident in Salisbury?


If there are any journalists with integrity and inquisitive minds still living in this country, I would be grateful if they could begin doing their job and research the answers to these sorts of questions by asking the appropriate people and authorities.

Here are my previous pieces on the Skripal case:

More from TheBlogMire . Britain , International Relations , Justice , Russia , Uncategorized Boris Johnson , Novichok , OPCW , Salisbury , Sergei Skripal , Stephen Davies , Theresa May , Yulia Skripal 9 thoughts on "30 Questions That Journalists Should be Asking About the Skripal Case"
  1. P.E. Ace says: March 26, 2018 at 12:40 pm The government (incl Porton Down) have no proof novichok was used: a cautious and not even cynical interpretation of the Court of Protection judgment regarding evidence in the Skripal case points to bluffing on the side of May, Johnson and Williamson. It all comes down to the use of the word "related" and the words "closely related".

    According to the judgement, the Porton Down Chemical and Biological Analyst provided following evidence:

    "Blood samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analysed and the
    findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound."

    "The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent or closely
    related agent."

    The quotes are from paragraph 17 in Mr Justice Williams's judgement issued 22 March 2018.

    https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/sshd-v-skripal-and-another-20180322.pdf

    Macron, Merkel and Trump now weigh extradition of Russian diplomats based on the UK government's hasty conclusion that novichok was used.

    Please also note that the formula for novichok can be found in Mirzayanov's book that you can buy on the US site of Amazon. I was able to see the formula in the Appendix via amazon's browsing facility (chemical A-232). Reply

  2. Stewart Dredge says: March 25, 2018 at 7:05 pm Some more questions:
    Why was there no massive police "national manhunt" after the event?
    A person or persons armed with "the deadliest nerve agent known to man" had just carried out a botched attempted murder on the streets of an English town and was presumably still at large. He/she/they had failed in their task and was/ were presumably desperate and on the run. Did they still carry the lethal substance? Were they perhaps infected themselves? Were they a danger to other Russian dissidents, police or members of the public?
    So why does there appear to have been little or no attempt to identify, find and arrest them? Why no request for anyone witnessing anything suspicious or warnings not to approach anyone behaving strangely?
    Also, why are journalists not behaving the way journalists do in such circumstances? Why are Mr Skripals Salisbury friends not being door-stepped to ask about what he is like, whether he ever talks about his past, his family or his hopes for the future. Why are they not asking his neighbours about the sort of people, if any, come and go at his house. He seems to have been a friendly, gregarious chap who often drank with friends at the local pub. What did the bar staff and the other regulars make of him?
    And what about the "shouting" incident in the restaurant? One member of staff appears to have reported "He started screaming. He just didn't look right.' Where are the media interviews with staff and diners to expand upon this? Why are the UK media and police acting so unlike the UK media and police normally act after such incidents?
    I am no conspiracy theorist and I do not believe that any government could successfully "silence" hundreds of police officers and journalists even if one wanted to. It may be that the UK authorities know exactly what happened and are playing a long, waiting game. But the utterances of May, Johnson and co suggest otherwise. It may be that the OPCW will clarify everything but Johnson's utterances about the substance being proved to be a novichok and that only the Russians can make it are false and demonstrably so the public's confusion can only continue. Reply
    1. Rob Slane says: March 25, 2018 at 7:15 pm Thanks Stewart. These are very good questions. The ones regarding the lack of "manhunt" are especially good and to the point. I am thinking of a follow-up set of questions, and if you don't mind, I might use this one (accredited to you, of course).

      Like you, I am no conspiracy theorist, but there is something extraordinary about the facts (or lack of them) in this case, that really don't add up.

      Best wishes,

      Rob Reply

      1. Stewart Dredge says: March 26, 2018 at 7:59 pm Many thanks. Please use what you require, Paul. Reply
        1. Stewart Dredge says: March 26, 2018 at 8:26 pm .or Rob even! 😀
  3. mikhas says: March 24, 2018 at 11:54 am Another inconsistency is that there are many pictures showing police and others running around in Hazmat suits together with f.ex the fire brigade that clearly do not. Shouldn't they all wear such suits? Even May were strutting around with no protection at all

    If a military grade nerve agent was used everybody in the vicinity of the attack, including the murderer should have died and the entire town evacuated Reply

  4. Gerd Müller says: March 23, 2018 at 9:27 pm what is with eating fish in zizzi resataurant and drinking cold beer and then ending vomitting on a bench in a park? Too much TV on novochock in England Reply
  5. steve Hayes says: March 21, 2018 at 11:24 am The fact that the corporate media are not asking these (and other) question is not because they are stupid; it is because they are paid propagandists.

    We cannot expect them to report accurately. But what we can do is learn from the history of their mendacious journalism.

    http://viewsandstories.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/the-war-on-iraq-has-anyone-learned.html Reply

  6. Ray Joseph Cormier says: March 21, 2018 at 12:41 am Buy the same logic Russia is guilty because they developed the chemical weapon 30 years ago, then England is guilty of the murder of Kin Jong Un's half brother by VX in Malaysia because it was developed in England. Reply
Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

[Mar 27, 2018] Our mutual friend Elliott Higgins" works for the Atlantic council

Mar 27, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

col from OZ , Mar 21, 2018 9:38:04 PM | 87

Don 60 re Huntsman

"our mutual friend Elliott Higgins" works for the Atlantic council, that's when he not ginning up (original) false Ghouta chemical attack and falsifying and photo shopping evidence on the MH17 (which was carried out by Ukraine.)

[Mar 27, 2018] Perfidious Albion The Fatally Wounded British Beast Lashes Out by Barbara Boyd

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Skripal's MI6 recruiter and handler, Pablo Miller, listed himself as a consultant to Orbis Business Intelligence, Christopher Steele's British company, on his LinkedIn profile. When the Telegraph called attention to the Orbis reference, it was removed from the LinkedIn profile. Steele, who worked on the Trump dossier through his company Orbis, has denied that Miller worked directly on the Trump dossier. ..."
"... Theresa May and her foreign minister Boris Johnson insist there is only one person who could be responsible for the poisoning, described as an act of war, and that is Vladimir Putin. No evidence has been offered to support this claim. In fact, there is a substantial doubt whether the putative nerve agent, Novichok, even exists. ..."
"... Rather than following the protocols of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, which require that evidence of the alleged agent be presented to Russia, the eccentric and unpopular May instead delivered an ultimatum to Russia and whipped up war fever throughout the UK. ..."
"... Thus, just like Christopher Steele's dirty dossier against Donald Trump, the British claims against Putin are an evidence-free exercise of raw power. The Anglo- American establishment instructed us, with respect to Steele: "trust him, ignore the stinky factless content presented in this dossier, just note that he is backed by very important intelligence agencies who could cook your goose if you object." The same can be said for Teresa May's crazed assertions now. ..."
"... Steele was an MI6 agent in Moscow around the time Skripal was recruited. He also later ran the MI6 Russia desk and would have known everything there was to know about Skripal. Pablo Miller, who recruited Skripal, according to his LinkedIn profile, worked for Steele's firm and lived in the same town as Skripal. ..."
"... Since Steele has been discredited in the United States, a huge fawning publicity campaign has been undertaken on his behalf. The campaign involves journalists who have collaborated directly with Steele in his smear job against Trump. Books by Luke Harding and Michael Isikoff seek to rebuild Steele's reputation. A fawning piece by Jane Mayer in the New Yorker , as implausible as it is long, has been foisted on the public for the same reason. There are some fascinating facts, however, in all this fawning prose: ..."
"... Steele and his partners are mentored by Sir Richard Dearlove, former head of MI6 and a critical player in the infamous "sexing up" and fabrication of the claim that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, creating the rationale for the disastrous and genocidal Iraq War. ..."
"... Aside from Skripal's relationship to the central figure in the British led coup against Donald Trump, there are questions whether the nerve agent the British claim was used on the Skripals even exists, and even more troubling questions for Theresa May's "Russia did it" claim, if it does. ..."
"... Dr. Robin Black, Head of the Detection Laboratory at Porton Down as of 2016, and a colleague of the murdered British Iraq War dissident David Kelly, called the existence of Novichoks speculative, noting that "no independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published." ..."
"... The Skripal poisoning is being compared in the British press to the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko in 2006. The former KGB and FSB officer was granted asylum in London and worked for the infamous anti-Putin British intelligence directed oligarch Boris Berezovsky in information warfare and other attacks on the Russian state, inclusive of McCarthyite accusations against any European politician seeking sane relations with Putin. ..."
"... Litvinenko's case officer was none other than Christopher Steele, and Christopher Steele conducted MI6's investigation of the case, which, of course, found Putin himself culpable. Berezovsky's use of the disgraced British PR firm Bell, Pottinger is also credited with a significant role in public acceptance of this result. Berezovsky was a prime suspect in organizing the murder of American journalist Paul Klebnikov. Many believe that Berezovsky arranged Litvinenko's demise. Berezovsky himself died in Britain in mysterious circumstances following the loss of a major court case to another Russian oligarch, Roman Abramovich. ..."
"... In the parliamentary debate in which Theresa May issued her provocation, opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn cautioned against a rush to judgment and pointed to the bloody playing field of Russian oligarchs and Russian organized crime as alternative areas for investigation. Had Corbyn added to that mix, "Western intelligence agencies," he would have been entirely on the right track. ..."
"... The insane McCarthyite reactions to Corbyn's simple statements of fact show that he hit the nail on the head. If you want to find Skripal's poisoners, then, like Edgar Allen Poe, you must take in the whole picture first. The field of play involves the British intelligence services and the anti-Putin Russian oligarchs who service each other, acting on behalf of British strategic objectives. It is no accident that the coup against Donald Trump and the latest British intelligence fraud, putting the entire world in peril, absolutely intersect one another. ..."
Mar 18, 2018 | LaRouchePAC
Skripal Poisoning a Desperate British Attempt to Resurrect Their American Coup

by Barbara Boyd, [email protected]

This statement explores the strategic significance of major events in the world starting in February of 2018. Our goal is to precisely situate Theresa May's March 12–14 mad effort to manufacture a new "weapons of mass destruction" hoax using the same people (the MI6 intelligence grouping around Sir Richard Dearlove) and script (an intelligence fraud concerning weapons of mass destruction) which were used to draw the United States into the disastrous Iraq War. The Skripal poisoning fraud also directly involves British agent Christopher Steele, the central figure in the ongoing coup against Donald Trump. This time the British information warfare operation is aimed at directly provoking Russia while maintaining their targeting of the U.S. population and President Trump.

As the fevered war-like media coverage and hysteria surrounding the case makes clear, a certain section of the British elite seems prepared to risk everything on behalf of their dying imperial system. Despite the hype, economic warfare and sanctions appear to be the British weapons of choice. Putin, as we shall see, recently called the West's nuclear bluff. With their Russiagate coup against Donald Trump fizzling, exposing British agent Christopher Steele and a slew of his American friends to criminal prosecution, a new tool was desperately needed to back the President of the United States into the British geopolitical corner shared by most of the American establishment. The tool is an intelligence hoax, a tried and true British product.

According to the British spy tale, a former Russian military intelligence colonel, Sergei Skripal who spied for Great Britain in Russia from the early 1990s until 2004 was poisoned, along with his daughter, on March 4 in Salisbury, England, using a nerve agent "of a type developed by the former Soviet Union." In 2010, Skripal had been exchanged in a spy swap between the United States and Russia. He had served six years in a Russian prison for spying for Britain. He had been living in the open in Britain for the last eight years. Skripal's MI6 recruiter and handler, Pablo Miller, listed himself as a consultant to Orbis Business Intelligence, Christopher Steele's British company, on his LinkedIn profile. When the Telegraph called attention to the Orbis reference, it was removed from the LinkedIn profile. Steele, who worked on the Trump dossier through his company Orbis, has denied that Miller worked directly on the Trump dossier.

Theresa May and her foreign minister Boris Johnson insist there is only one person who could be responsible for the poisoning, described as an act of war, and that is Vladimir Putin. No evidence has been offered to support this claim. In fact, there is a substantial doubt whether the putative nerve agent, Novichok, even exists. No plausible motive has been provided as to why Putin would order such a provocative murder now, ahead of the World Cup, when the Russiagate coup against him in the United States has lost all momentum. Rather than following the protocols of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, which require that evidence of the alleged agent be presented to Russia, the eccentric and unpopular May instead delivered an ultimatum to Russia and whipped up war fever throughout the UK. She now seeks to pull Donald Trump and NATO into ever more aggressive moves against Russia.

Thus, just like Christopher Steele's dirty dossier against Donald Trump, the British claims against Putin are an evidence-free exercise of raw power. The Anglo- American establishment instructed us, with respect to Steele: "trust him, ignore the stinky factless content presented in this dossier, just note that he is backed by very important intelligence agencies who could cook your goose if you object." The same can be said for Teresa May's crazed assertions now.

A short statement of the reasons why the British are now staging the Skripal provocation can be found in a March 14 London Sunday Telegraph call to arms by Allister Heath, who rants: "We need a new world order to take on totalitarian capitalists in Russia and China Such an alliance would dramatically shift the global balance of power, and allow the liberal democracies finally to fight back. It would endow the world with the sorts of robust institutions that are required to contain Russia and China Britain needs a new role in the world; building such a network would be our perfect mission." Across the pond, as they say, a similar foundational statement was made by 68 former Obama Administration officials who have formed a group called National Security Action, aimed at securing Trump's impeachment and attacking Russia and China.

As visitors to the LaRouchePAC website know, Russia and China have embarked on a massive infrastructure building project in Eurasia, the center of all British geopolitical fantasies since the time of Halford MacKinder. Moreover, China's Belt and Road Initiative now encompasses more than 140 nations in the largest infrastructure-building project ever undertaken in human history. This project is a true economic engine for the future, while neo-liberal economies continue to see their productive potentials sucked dry by the massive mound of debt they have created since the 2008 financial collapse. This debt is now on a hair trigger for implosion. It is estimated by banking insiders that the City of London is sitting on a derivatives powderkeg of $700 trillion with over-the-counter derivatives accounting for another $570 trillion. The City of London will bear the major impact of the derivatives collapse.

In this strategic geometry, President Trump's support of peaceful collaboration with Russia during the campaign and his personal friendship with President Xi, marked him for the relentless coup against him waged by the British and their U.S. friends.

On top of that, President Putin delivered a mammoth strategic shock on March 1, showing new Russian weapons systems based on new physical principles which render present U.S. ABM systems and much of current U.S. war-fighting doctrine obsolete, together with the vaunted first strike capacity with which NATO has surrounded Russia. Not only is the West sitting on a new financial collapse; its vaunted military superiority has just been flanked.

It is very clear that a strategic choice now confronts the human race. In 1984, Lyndon LaRouche wrote a very profound document, "Draft Memorandum of Agreement Between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R." In it, he developed the concrete basis for peace between the two superpowers at the moment when the U.S. had adopted the LaRouche/Reagan doctrine of strategic defense. Both Reagan and LaRouche had proposed that the Russians and the United States cooperate in building and developing strategic defense against offensive nuclear weapons based on new physical principles, thereby eliminating the threat of nuclear annihilation.

According to the LaRouche Doctrine, "The political foundation for durable peace must be: a) the unconditional sovereignty of each and all nation states, and b) cooperation among sovereign states to the effect of promoting unlimited opportunities to participate in the benefits of technological progress, to the mutual benefit of each and all."

Both China, in President Xi's October Address to the Party Congress, and Russia, in Putin's March 1 address, have set a course to produce "technological progress capable of being shared in by all," outlining major infrastructure projects and dedicating massive funding to exploring the frontiers of science, technology, and space exploration. Donald Trump, in both his campaign and his presidency, has embraced similar views. The British and their American friends, however, are devotees of a completely different and failing economic system, a system soundly rejected in Brexit, the election of Donald Trump, and most recently in the Italian elections.

Just look at the events of February and March from this standpoint. It is no accident that Christopher Steele turns up, smack dab in the middle of the Skripal poisoning hoax.

The Coup Against Trump Begins to Be Reversed; British Are Exposed as Actual U.S. Election Meddlers

On February 2, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released a memo demonstrating that the Obama Justice Department and FBI committed an outright fraud on the FISA court in obtaining surveillance warrants on Carter Page, a volunteer to Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign. The bogus warrant applications relied heavily on the dirty British dossier authored by MI6's "former" Russian intelligence chief, Christopher Steele, who had been paid by Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee, to paint Donald Trump as a Manchurian candidate, a pawn of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

According to the House Intelligence memo and other aspects of its investigation, Steele confided to Bruce Ohr, a high official in the DOJ, that he, Steele, hated Trump with a passion and would do "anything" to prevent Trump's election. Steele was using the fact of an FBI investigation of his allegations as part of a "full spectrum" British information warfare campaign conducted against candidate Trump with the full complicity of Obama's intelligence chiefs. 1 Peter Van Buren, "Christopher Steele: The Real Foreign Influence in the 2016 U.S. Election?" American Conservative, February 15, 2018. None of the true facts about the actual motive for, and sponsors of, the DOJ applications about Carter Page were revealed to the FISA Court in the filings made by former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, former FBI Director James Comey, or current Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

The House Intelligence Committee memo was quickly followed by a declassified letter on February 5, in which Senators Chuck Grassley and Lindsay Graham referred Christopher Steele to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution based on false statements he made to the FBI about his contacts with the news media. No doubt the criminal referral sent chills down the spines not only of Christopher Steele and his British colleagues but also of those Obama officials conspiring against Trump.

In the same week, House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes announced that he would be conducting investigations of the role of the Obama State Department and intelligence chiefs in the circulation and use of Christopher Steele's dirty dossier. These investigations have been widely reported to focus on John Brennan and James Clapper: Brennan for widely promoting the dirty British work product and Clapper for leaks associated with BuzzFeed's publication and legitimization of the dirty British work product. Remind yourself every time you hear media explosions against Trump by either Clapper (Congressional perjurer and proponent of the theory that the Russians are genetically predisposed to screw the United States) or Brennan (gopher for George Tenet's perpetual war and torture regime and Grand Inquisitor for Barack Obama's serial assassinations by baseball card). They are next in the barrel, so to speak.

The January 11, 2017 BuzzFeed publication of the Steele dossier was meant to permanently poison Trump's incoming administration and is the subject of libel suits in both Florida and London. In the London case, the British are ready to invoke the Official Secrets Act to protect Christopher Steele. In the Florida case, Steele has been ordered to sit for deposition despite numerous delays and stalling tactics.

The Congressional investigation of the State Department is focused on John Kerry, Kerry's aide Jonathan Winer, Victoria Nuland, and Clinton operative Cody Shearer. Nuland utilized Christopher Steele as a primary intelligence source while running the U.S. regime change operations in Ukraine in alliance with neo-Nazis. She greenlighted Steele's initial meetings with the FBI about Donald Trump. Winer deployed himself to vouch for Steele with various news publications collaborating with British agent Steele and his U.S. employer, Fusion GPS, in Steele's media warfare operations against Trump.

Horowitz's report on the Clinton investigations, which already unearthed the texts between former Russiagate lead case agent Peter Strzok and his mistress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, proclaiming their hatred of Donald Trump and the need for an "insurance policy" against his election, is expected to be released very soon. According to the House Intelligence Committee, the Strzok/Page texts also reveal that Strzok was a close friend of U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras. Contreras sits on the FISA court, took Michael Flynn's guilty plea, and then promptly recused himself from Michael Flynn's case for reasons which remain undisclosed.

Despite its exoneration of the President, and thorough discrediting of the British Steele operation, the House Intelligence Committee dangerously accepts the myth that the Russians hacked the Democratic National Committee, the DCCC, and the emails of Clinton Campaign Chairman John Podesta, and then provided the hacked information to WikiLeaks for publication. It states, however, that Putin's intervention was not in support of Donald Trump, as previously claimed by Obama's intelligence chiefs. The Senators seeking a new Special Counsel also salute this dangerous fraud.

As we have previously reported, the myth that Putin hacked the Democrats and provided the hacked emails to WikiLeaks, has been substantively refuted by the investigations of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. In summary, the evidence points to a leak rather than a hack in the case of the DNC. Further, the NSA would have the evidence of any such hack or hacks, according to former NSA technical director Bill Binney, and would have provided it, even if in a classified setting. It is clear that the NSA has no such evidence. It is also clear that the U.S. and the British have cyber warfare capabilities fully capable of creating "false flag" cyber war incidents.

North Korea Talks Planned; Russia and China Continue to Create the Conditions for a New Human Renaissance

In addition to the fizzling of the coup, the Western elites otherwise suffered through February and March. To the shock of the entire smug Davos crowd, Donald Trump, working with Russia, China, and South Korea, appears to have gotten Kim Jong-un to the negotiating table concerning denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. Substantive talks have been scheduled for May. The breakthrough was announced by President Trump and South Korea on March 8.

On March 1, President Putin gave his historic two-hour address to the Russian assembly and the Russian people. Like President Xi's address to the Chinese Party Congress in October of 2017, Putin focused on the goal of deeply reducing poverty in Russian society. Xi vowed in October to eliminate it from Chinese society altogether. In addition, Putin emphasized that Russia would undertake a huge city-building project across its vast rural frontiers and dramatically expand its modern infrastructure, including Russia's digital infrastructure. He put major emphasis on directing funds to basic scientific and technological progress. He emphasized that harnessing and stimulating the creative powers of individual human beings was the true driver of all economic progress. Those knowledgeable in the West could not help but recognize the suppressed formulas for continuing economic prosperity advocated by Alexander Hamilton and advanced by Lyndon LaRouche.

China's Belt and Road Initiative also continued to advance. Great infrastructure projects are popping up throughout the world, including most specifically in Africa, which had been consigned to be a permanent primitive looting ground for Western interests. Among the recent breakthroughs is the great project to refurbish Lake Chad, a project known as "Transaqua," involving the Italian engineering firm Bonifica, the Chinese engineering and construction firm PowerChina, and the Lake Chad Basin Commission, which represents the African countries directly benefiting from the project.

But the biggest strategic news of the last six weeks was contained in the last part of President Putin's speech. He showed various weapons, developed by Russian scientists in the wake of the U.S. abrogation of the ABM treaty and the Anglo-American campaign of color revolutions and NATO base-building in the former Soviet bloc. The weapons, based on new physical principles, render U.S. ABM defenses obsolete, together with many utopian U.S. war fighting doctrines developed under the reigns of Obama and Bush. Putin emphasized that the economic and "defense" aspects of his speech were not separate. Rather, the scientific breakthroughs were based on an in-depth economic mobilization of the physical economy. He stressed that Russia's survival was dependent upon marshaling continuous creative breakthroughs in basic science and the high technology spinoffs which result, and their propagation through the entire population. He stressed that such breakthroughs are the product of providing an actually human existence to the entire society.

Compare what Russia and China have set out to accomplish with the physical economy of the earth, and the second and third paragraphs of Lyndon LaRouche's prescription for a durable peace in the LaRouche Doctrine: "The most crucial feature of present implementation of such a policy of durable peace is a profound change in the monetary, economic, and political relations between dominant powers and those relatively subordinated nations often classed as 'developing nations.' Unless the inequities lingering in the aftermath of modern colonialism are progressively remedied, there can be no durable peace on this planet.

"Insofar as the United States and the Soviet Union acknowledge the progress of the productive powers of labor throughout the planet to be in the vital strategic interests of each and both, the two powers are bound to that degree and in that way by a common interest. This is the kernel of the political and economic policies of practice indispensable to the fostering of a durable peace between those two powers."

This is the perspective which has the British terrified and acting out, insanely. Were Trump, Putin, and Xi to enter into negotiations based on the LaRouche Doctrine, a breakthrough will have occurred for all of mankind, a breakthrough to a permanent and durable peace. No neo-liberal, post-industrial, unipolar order can match this, no matter how much Mr. Heath, Ms. May, or Boris Johnson rant and rave about it.

Christopher Steele's British Playground

As is well known by now, Christopher Steele was a long time MI6 agent before "retiring" to form his own extremely lucrative private intelligence firm. The firm is said to have earned $200 million since its formation. Steele was an MI6 agent in Moscow around the time Skripal was recruited. He also later ran the MI6 Russia desk and would have known everything there was to know about Skripal. Pablo Miller, who recruited Skripal, according to his LinkedIn profile, worked for Steele's firm and lived in the same town as Skripal.

Since Steele has been discredited in the United States, a huge fawning publicity campaign has been undertaken on his behalf. The campaign involves journalists who have collaborated directly with Steele in his smear job against Trump. Books by Luke Harding and Michael Isikoff seek to rebuild Steele's reputation. A fawning piece by Jane Mayer in the New Yorker , as implausible as it is long, has been foisted on the public for the same reason. There are some fascinating facts, however, in all this fawning prose:

Steele described his business to Luke Harding as primarily providing research and reports to competing and feuding Russian oligarchs, many of whom use London as a base of operations. This is obviously a perfect cover for intelligence operations. It is also a very violent theater of operations. The oligarchs intersect both Western intelligence operations and Russian organized crime. They engage in deadly gang warfare.

Steele and his partners are mentored by Sir Richard Dearlove, former head of MI6 and a critical player in the infamous "sexing up" and fabrication of the claim that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, creating the rationale for the disastrous and genocidal Iraq War.

Steele had been tasked to claim that Russia was interfering in Western elections during the entire post-Ukraine coup time frame in which this black propaganda line began to be circulated widely. According to Jane Mayer's account, Steele called this Project Charlemagne, completing his report in April, 2016, just before he undertook his hit job against Donald Trump. In his report, Steele claimed that Russia was interfering in the politics of France, Italy, the United Kingdom, Germany, and Turkey. He claimed that Russia was conducting social media warfare aimed at "inflaming fear and prejudice and had provided opaque financial support to favored politicians." He specifically targeted Silvio Berlusconi and Marine La Pen. Steele also suggested that Russian aid was given to "lesser known right wing nationalists" in the United Kingdom and elsewhere, implying that the Russians were behind Brexit, with an overall goal of destroying the European Union.

Aside from Skripal's relationship to the central figure in the British led coup against Donald Trump, there are questions whether the nerve agent the British claim was used on the Skripals even exists, and even more troubling questions for Theresa May's "Russia did it" claim, if it does.

Former British Ambassador Craig Murray reports that the British chemical weapons laboratory at Porton Down, just 8 miles from where the Skripals were found, is unsure about what substance, if any, was actually involved in the Skripal poisoning. According to Murray's sources at Porton Down, the scientists were pressured to say that it was a nerve agent of a "type developed by Russia." This is supposed to refer to a whole family of chemical weapons, the Novichoks, which were supposedly produced in the 1980s in a Soviet laboratory in Uzbekistan. This production facility was completely dismantled by the United States, according to multiple accounts. Dr. Robin Black, Head of the Detection Laboratory at Porton Down as of 2016, and a colleague of the murdered British Iraq War dissident David Kelly, called the existence of Novichoks speculative, noting that "no independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published."

The main account supporting the existence of the chemical weapons cited by Theresa May was written by a Soviet dissident chemist named Vil Mirzayanov who now lives in the United States and published a book about his work at the Uzbekistan laboratory. In his much-publicized book, Mirzayanov sets out the formulas for the claimed substances. According to the Wall Street Journal of March 16, that publicity led to Novichok's chemical structure being leaked, making it readily available for reproduction elsewhere. Ralf Trapp, a France-based consultant and expert on the control of chemical and biological weapons, told the Journal, "The chemical formula has been publicized and we know from publications from then-Czechoslovakia that they had worked on similar agents for defense in the 1980s . I'm sure other countries with developed programs would have as well."

But it does not seem that those "other countries" include Russia. The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the independent agency charged by treaty with investigating claims like those just made by the British government, certified in September of 2017 that the Russian government had destroyed its entire chemical weapons program, inclusive of its nerve agent production capabilities. In addition to Mirzayanov, Seamus Martin, writing in the Irish Times of March 14, posits, based on personal knowledge, that Novichoks were widely expropriated by East Bloc oligarchs and criminal elements in the Russian economic chaos of the 1990s.

Thus, Novichoks are the product of the mind of a dissident Russian chemist living in the United States whose formulas have been widely copied by other countries, according to the press accounts. Porton Downs, the very laboratory now asserting their existence, stated as of 2016 that even this published "fact" was to be substantially doubted.

Further trouble for May's attempted hoax is found in the condition of the Skripals and a police officer who went to their home. All were made critically ill, although they are still alive. Yet emergency personnel who treated the Skripals, allegedly the victims of a deadly and absolutely lethal nerve poison, suffered no ill effects whatsoever.

The Skripal poisoning is being compared in the British press to the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko in 2006. The former KGB and FSB officer was granted asylum in London and worked for the infamous anti-Putin British intelligence directed oligarch Boris Berezovsky in information warfare and other attacks on the Russian state, inclusive of McCarthyite accusations against any European politician seeking sane relations with Putin.

Litvinenko's case officer was none other than Christopher Steele, and Christopher Steele conducted MI6's investigation of the case, which, of course, found Putin himself culpable. Berezovsky's use of the disgraced British PR firm Bell, Pottinger is also credited with a significant role in public acceptance of this result. Berezovsky was a prime suspect in organizing the murder of American journalist Paul Klebnikov. Many believe that Berezovsky arranged Litvinenko's demise. Berezovsky himself died in Britain in mysterious circumstances following the loss of a major court case to another Russian oligarch, Roman Abramovich.

In the parliamentary debate in which Theresa May issued her provocation, opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn cautioned against a rush to judgment and pointed to the bloody playing field of Russian oligarchs and Russian organized crime as alternative areas for investigation. Had Corbyn added to that mix, "Western intelligence agencies," he would have been entirely on the right track. Corbyn also pointed out that these oligarchs had contributed millions to May's Conservative party. The reaction by the British media, May's conservatives, and Tony Blair's faction of the Labor Party was to paint Corbyn as a Putin dupe, including photo-shopped images of the Labor leader in a Russian winter hat in front of the Kremlin widely circulated in the news media.

The insane McCarthyite reactions to Corbyn's simple statements of fact show that he hit the nail on the head. If you want to find Skripal's poisoners, then, like Edgar Allen Poe, you must take in the whole picture first. The field of play involves the British intelligence services and the anti-Putin Russian oligarchs who service each other, acting on behalf of British strategic objectives. It is no accident that the coup against Donald Trump and the latest British intelligence fraud, putting the entire world in peril, absolutely intersect one another.

[Mar 26, 2018] United front against Kremlin is a coup for Theresa May by Catherine Philp

Looks like this is carefully planned operation, not an incident
Mar 26, 2018 | thetimes.co.uk

United front against Kremlin is a coup for Theresa May

Catherine Philp, Diplomatic Correspondent

The largest mass expulsion of Russian spies from the West is a significant diplomatic achievement for Theresa May at a time when she could badly use one.

Her failure to persuade Donald Trump to back the Paris climate agreement or make him see the wisdom of the Iran nuclear deal has undermined Britain's claim to act as a bridge between Europe and the United States.

Similarly, Brexit means Britain is loosening its bonds with Europe, relinquishing its role in steering the EU's relations with the rest of the world.

[Mar 26, 2018] The US expulsions were part of "a coordinated effort"

You are guilty because I am hungry: neoliberal Forth Reich punishes dissident Russia.
Mar 26, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

The Russian government called the expulsions "a provocative gesture" and said it would retaliate in kind, raising the prospect of further tit-for-tat expulsions, as the US and Europe left the door open for additional measures. The Kremlin said Vladimir Putin would make the final decision, and the Russian embassy in the US launched a poll on Twitter asking which US consulate in Russia should be closed.

The US has ordered the expulsion of 60 Russian officials who Washington says are spies, including a dozen based at the United Nations, and told Moscow to shut down its consulate in Seattle, which would end Russian diplomatic representation on the west coast.

The EU members Germany, France and Poland are each to expel four Russian diplomats with intelligence agency backgrounds. Lithuania and the Czech Republic said they would expel three, and Denmark, Italy and the Netherlands two each. Estonia, Latvia, Croatia, Finland, Hungary, Sweden and Romania each expelled one Russian. Iceland announced it would not be sending officials to the World Cup in Russia .

Ukraine, which is not an EU member, is to expel 13 Russian diplomats, while Albania, an EU candidate member, ordered the departure of two Russians from the embassy in Tirana. Macedonia, another EU candidate, expelled one Russian official.

Canada announced it was expelling four diplomatic staff serving in Ottawa and Montreal who the Canadian government said were spies. A pending application from Moscow for three more diplomatic posts in Canada is being denied.

Raj Shah, a White House spokesperson, told reporters Monday that the US expulsions were part of "a coordinated effort".

He added that Donald Trump "spoke with many foreign leaders, European allies and others and encouraged them to join with the United States in this announcement".

[Mar 26, 2018] Trump orders expulsion of 60 Russian diplomats, closure of Seattle consulate -- RT US News

Notable quotes:
"... abused their privilege of residence" ..."
"... "engaged in espionage activities that are adverse to our national security." ..."
Mar 26, 2018 | www.rt.com

President Donald Trump has ordered the expulsion of 60 Russian diplomats and the closure of the Russian consulate in Seattle. It comes in response to the poisoning of Sergei Skripal in Salisbury, which the UK has blamed on Russia. The move follows major diplomatic pressure by the UK on its allies to follow their lead in expelling Russian diplomats. The Russian embassy in Washington had previously urged Trump not to heed the "fake news " on Skripal's poisoning.

British Prime Minister Theresa May has accused Moscow of being behind the poisoning of the former spy Skripal and his daughter in the town of Salisbury in early March.

Breaking: US to expel 48 Russian embassy workers in Washington, D.C. and 12 at the Russian mission to the U.N. U.S. says they were intel officers using diplo status as cover. pic.twitter.com/mRuwY8Tes6

-- Patrick Tucker (@DefTechPat) March 26, 2018

Of the 60 diplomats expelled, 12 formed part of the Russian mission to the United Nations. In a statement, US ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley said the 12 Russians in question had " abused their privilege of residence" in the US and had "engaged in espionage activities that are adverse to our national security."

[Mar 26, 2018] Paul Craig Roberts Washington Has Declared Hegemony Or War

Mar 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

by Tyler Durden Sun, 03/25/2018 - 20:30 3 SHARES Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,

I agree with Stephen Lendman (below) that the Russian government's efforts to deal with the West on the basis of evidence and law are futile. There is only one Western foreign policy and it is Washington's. Washington's "diplomacy" consists only of lies and force. It was a reasonable decision for Russia to attempt diplomatic engagement with the West on the basis of facts, evidence, and law, but it has been to no avail. For Russia to continue on this failed course is risky, not only to Russia but to the entire world.

Indeed, nothing is more dangerous to the world than Russia's self-delusion about "Western partners." Russia only has Western enemies. These enemies intend to remove the constraint that Russia (and China) place on Washington's unilateralism. The various incidents staged by the West, such as the Skirpal poisoning, Syrian use of chemical weapons, Malaysian airliner, and false charges, such as Russian invasion of Ukraine, are part of the West's determined intent to isolate Russia, deny her any influence, and prepare the insouciant Western populations for conflict with Russia.

To avoid war Russia should turn her back, but not her eyes, on the West, stop responding to false charges, evict all Western embassies and every other kind of presence including Western investment, and focus on relations with China and the East. Russia's attempt to pursue mutual interests with the West only results in more orchestrated incidents. The Russian government's failure to complete the liberation of Syria has given Washington Syrian territory from which to renew the conflict.

The failure to accept Luhansk and Donetsk into Russia has provided Washington with the opportunity to arm and train the Ukrainian army and renew the assault on the Russian populations of Ukraine. Washington has gained many proxies for its wars against Russia and intends to use them to wear down Russia. Israel has demanded that Washington renew the attacks on Iran, and Trump is complying. Russia faces simultaneous attacks on Syria, Iran, and the Donatsk and Luhansk Republics, along with troubles in former Central Asian republics of the Soviet Union and intensified accusations from Washington and NATO.

The crazed neoconservatives, such as Trump's National Security Adviser John Bolton, think that Russia will buckle under the strains, sue for peace, and accept US hegemony. If this assumption is incorrect, the outcome of Washington's hostile actions against Russia is likely to be nuclear war. The side that Stephen Lendman and I are talking is neither the side of Washington nor Russia, but the side of humanity and all life against nuclear war.

How the Russian government could ignore the clearly stated US hegemony in the 1992 Wolfowitz Doctrine is a mystery.

The Wolfowitz doctrine states that the US's primary goal is "to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union." The doctrine stresses that "this is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to general global power." In the Middle East and Southwest Asia, Washington's "overall objective is to remain the predominant outside power in the region and preserve US and Western access to the region's oil." The doctrine also states that the US will act to restrain India's alleged "hegemonic aspirations" in South Asia, and warns of potential conflicts requiring military intervention with Cuba and China.

By "threat" Wolfowitz does not mean a military threat. By "threat" he means a multi-polar world that constrains Washington's unilateralism. The doctrine states that the US will permit no alternative to US unilateralism. The doctrine is a statement that Washington intends hegemony over the entire world. There has been no repudiation of this doctrine. Indeed, we see its implementation in the long list of false accusations and demonizations of Russia and her leader and in the false charges against Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Venezuela, China, Iran, and North Korea .

If Russia wants to be part of the West, Russia should realize that the price is the same loss of sovereignty that characterizes Washington's European vassal states.

* * *

Neocon Takeover of Washington Completed

by Stephen Lendman

Pompeo at State and Bolton as Trump's national security advisor completed the neocon takeover of Trump's geopolitical agenda. Wall Street is running domestic affairs.

The combination represents a major setback for world peace and stability. Greater aggression is likely, along with the triumph of neoliberal harshness over social justice, presenting a dismal and frightening state of affairs.

What to expect ahead? War in Syria is more likely to escalate than wind down, an unthinkable US/Russia confrontation ominously possible.

The Iran nuclear deal is either doomed, or likely to be gutted by Washington, accomplishing the same thing -- with only tepid, ineffective opposition from P5+1 countries Britain, France and Germany.

The EU most often bends to Washington's will when enough pressure is applied.

A relatively quiet Ukraine period could explode in greater Kiev war on Donbass, US-supplied heavy weapons and training aiding the aggression.

A Kim Jong-un/Trump summit is likely to fail to step back from the brink on the Korean peninsula, falsely blaming the DPRK for hostile US actions.

It'll prove again Washington can never be trusted, its commitments are consistently breached when conflicting with its imperial objectives.

A possible trade war with China would be hugely destabilizing, along with being economically harmful to both countries and the global economy.

Further EU/US sanctions and other harsh measures are likely to be imposed on Russia over the Skripal affair, an escalated attempt to isolate the country and inflict economic harm -- despite Western nations knowing Moscow had nothing to do with what happened.

Theresa May-led Tories are considering tough actions against Russia over the incident. So are other EU countries and Washington.

On Friday, State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said the Trump administration is considering a range of options against Moscow over the Skripal affair -- "both to demonstrate our solidarity with our ally and to hold Russia accountable for its clear breach of international norms and agreements."

No breach occurred. Neocons running US foreign policy don't let facts and rule of law principles compromise their imperial objectives.

Theresa May provided Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron with cooked results of Britain's investigation so far into the Skripal affair -- "convincing" them the false accusations are "well-grounded," despite knowing UK claims are pure rubbish.

Macron issued a deplorable statement, saying "there is no plausible explanation" for what happened to the Skripals other than Kremlin responsibility -- abdicating to US/UK-led Russophobic hostility.

On the world stage, Trump is hostage to neocon dark forces controlling him. Relations with Russia, China, and other sovereign independent nations are likely to worsen, not improve.

Unthinkable nuclear war remains an ominous possibility. Russia's only option is building on its alliance with China and other allies, staying committed to respond firmly to US-led Western harshness against its sovereignty.

Virtually no possibility for improved Russian relations with Washington and Britain exists. It's fruitless pursuing it.

German and other European dependence on Russian energy, mainly gas, offers only slim hope for improving things with these countries.

Looking ahead, prospects for world peace and stability are dismal. US-led Western hostility toward Russia could erupt in open conflict by accident or design.

The unthinkable could become reality. Preparedness should be Moscow's top priority given the real danger it faces.

[Mar 26, 2018] Russia Could Seize UK Business Assets If West Slaps Economic Sanctions, Senator Warns

Mar 26, 2018 | huffingtonpost.co.uk

Russia could seize the assets of European and American companies operating in the country in retaliation for any economic sanctions imposed by the West amid tensions over the Ukraine crisis, a top Russian senator has warned.

Andrey Klishas, chairman of the upper house committee on constitutional law, told RIA Novosti that a team of lawyers are preparing a federal bill that would enable Russian president Vladimir Putin and the government to confiscate foreign-owned property in Russia, including assets owned by private companies.

"All sanctions must be mutual," Klishas said. "We are only suggesting that instead of threatening each other with sanctions we should together with our partners calmly read the Ukrainian Constitution and understand what has happened in this sovereign country".

"The main thing we are trying to achieve, whether our European and American partners want it or not, is to make others listen to our legal arguments and adequately react to them."

Conservative MP Brooks Newmark, a member of parliament's influential Treasury Select Committee, suggested that the UK could hit Russian business assets and bank accounts in turn.

- ADVERTISEMENT -

javascript:void(0)

He told HuffPostUK: "We can economically hurt Putin and his cronies as well, we can put a huge amount of economic pressure on them. They have enormous business interests in the UK and bank accounts here, too."

The White House earlier this week called off trade talks with Russia. President Barack Obama warned earlier this week that if Russia 'continued on its current trajectory" then the US was prepared to impose "a whole series of steps -- economic, diplomatic -- that will isolate Russia and will have a negative impact on Russia's economy and its standing in the world."

In response, foreign minister Sergey Lavrov told the UN Human Rights Council: "Those who try to interpret the situation as a type of aggression and threaten sanctions and boycotts, are the same who consistently have encouraged the sides to refuse dialogue and have ultimately polarised Ukrainian society."

A spokesman for the Russian Foreign Ministry said: "Moscow has explained to the Americans, repeatedly and demonstrably, why their one-sided punitive measures are not matching the standards of civilized relations between nations. If this fails to take effect, we will have to retaliate, and not necessarily in a mirror way."

[Mar 26, 2018] Theresa May devious plot was to blame Russia for a "chemical attack on Britain" which is an act of war and then invoke NATO Article 5 and impose draconian sanctions on Russia, which allow confiscation of Russian assets in Britain and at the same time protect Britain from the direct retaliation

Notable quotes:
"... What matters is the referenced "aide memoire" which the Russian MFA produced for distribution to the ambassadors for conveyance to their capitals. That document is here: Official Statement of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the "Skripal Case" http://thesaker.is/official-statement-of-the-russian-ministry-of-foreign-affairs-on-the-skripal-case/ ..."
"... The document raises a number of questions about the case which the British appear to be avoiding answering and also points out that there is a procedure under the Convention For The Prohibition of Chemical Weapons" which Russia alleges the British are not following. ..."
"... Mercouris believes the intent of Britain was to get a UNSC Resolution blaming Russia (which Russia would veto) and then getting NATO to impose wide-ranging sanctions against Russia under Article 5 of the NATO Treaty and that this isn't going to happen. ..."
"... It's important to note that the language Theresa May has been using blames Russia for a "chemical attack on Britain" which is an act of war and can be used to invoke NATO Article 5. ..."
"... But it seems most of the parties decided to duck that serious step and left May hanging. Depending on what new details come out about the Skripal attack, I suspect the whole affair may end back-firing against Britain. ..."
"... The role of May & Johnson was so obvious and it defied the human dignity to such extend that others did not dare to participate in the provocation. ..."
Mar 22, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Richardstevenhack , 22 March 2018 at 05:15 PM

Movement on the Skripal case from Russia. They called together ambassadors from numerous nations to the Foreign Ministry and held a two-hour meeting to discuss the British allegations against Russia. The video of that is here:

Russian MFA summons all ambassadors to a meeting on Skripal case (MUST WATCH!!!)

http://thesaker.is/russian-mfa-summons-all-ambassadors-to-a-meeting-on-skripal-case-must-watch/

Although the headline says "Must watch", I wouldn't bother. I watched it and it was mostly a waste of time. There was one statement bringing up the point that all that is known about the alleged "Novichok" agent comes from one Russian defector to the US who is working for the US and what that means for the validity of any statement about those agents.

What matters is the referenced "aide memoire" which the Russian MFA produced for distribution to the ambassadors for conveyance to their capitals. That document is here: Official Statement of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the "Skripal Case" http://thesaker.is/official-statement-of-the-russian-ministry-of-foreign-affairs-on-the-skripal-case/

The document raises a number of questions about the case which the British appear to be avoiding answering and also points out that there is a procedure under the Convention For The Prohibition of Chemical Weapons" which Russia alleges the British are not following.

Alexander Mercouris at The Duran analyzes the EU response to the British allegations in a UNSC meeting which occurred on March 14th.

Britain's ultimatum to Russia BACKFIRES, NATO and EU allies reject demands for action on Skripal http://theduran.com/britain-struggles-win-allied-support-skripal/

Although the EU publicly claims (and repeated these claims in the Russian MFA meeting referenced above) solidarity with Britain, the UNSC meeting was considerably more muted in terms of ascribing the Skripal attack to Russia. Mercouris believes the intent of Britain was to get a UNSC Resolution blaming Russia (which Russia would veto) and then getting NATO to impose wide-ranging sanctions against Russia under Article 5 of the NATO Treaty and that this isn't going to happen.

It's important to note that the language Theresa May has been using blames Russia for a "chemical attack on Britain" which is an act of war and can be used to invoke NATO Article 5.

In other words the British referral to the UN Security Council had the purpose of preparing the ground for an emergency NATO summit at which Britain would invoke Article 5.

But it seems most of the parties decided to duck that serious step and left May hanging. Depending on what new details come out about the Skripal attack, I suspect the whole affair may end back-firing against Britain.

Anna -> Richardstevenhack ... , 22 March 2018 at 09:17 PM
It is hard to wrap one's mind around the stupidity of the Skripal affair, considering that the UK (or perhaps the Friends of Israel in the UK) decided to use the case of poisoning of a Russian citizen Julia Skripal (and her father) during her visit to the UK, as a ground for Article 5 -- before any evidence is collected and before a thorough investigation is conducted.

The role of May & Johnson was so obvious and it defied the human dignity to such extend that others did not dare to participate in the provocation.

[Mar 26, 2018] US expulsion of Russian diplomats is declaration of war by George Galloway

Notable quotes:
"... "vassal states," ..."
"... made a fairly desultory expulsion of a diplomat or two or three, but the United States' act is a kind of declaration of war, all the more surprising given that according to the deep state, and the liberal confluence in the United States, President Trump is Russia's man ..."
"... "precursor to a very sharp deterioration of relations" ..."
"... deep state opponents" ..."
"... "If it were me who was making the decision, I certainly wouldn't proceed on the assumption that being soft will in any way satiate the ravenous beasts that are baying for Russia's blood at this point in time," ..."
"... "As far as I can see there is no investigation, ..."
"... "The verdict was declared before the investigation began and I think there's no investigation because the results of any serious scientific analytical investigation would show that the allegations against Russia are baseless." ..."
"... "I don't believe that Russia is responsible for this act. And the good news is that most of the British public tend to agree," ..."
Mar 26, 2018 | www.rt.com

British politician, broadcaster, and writer George Galloway has slammed Donald Trump's decision to expel 60 Russian diplomats and close the Russian consulate in Seattle. Galloway regards it as tantamount to a "declaration of war." Galloway contrasted the US' actions with those of EU member states. Those EU countries who rushed to follow the lead of Britain and the US in response to the poisoning of former spy Sergei Skripal are simply acting as "vassal states," doing what they are told.

European states have " made a fairly desultory expulsion of a diplomat or two or three, but the United States' act is a kind of declaration of war, all the more surprising given that according to the deep state, and the liberal confluence in the United States, President Trump is Russia's man ," Galloway told RT.

The former British MP said the decision to leave just 40 Russian diplomats to do their jobs in the US was either a "precursor to a very sharp deterioration of relations" -- or alternatively a "charade " designed to make Trump's " deep state opponents" lay off him over not being tough enough on Russia.

Galloway said Russia should not assume that being soft in response to Trump's action will have any desirable effect.

"If it were me who was making the decision, I certainly wouldn't proceed on the assumption that being soft will in any way satiate the ravenous beasts that are baying for Russia's blood at this point in time," he said.

According to Galloway, the UK has not conducted a serious and unbiased investigation into the poisoning of Skripal and his daughter.

"As far as I can see there is no investigation, " he said. "The verdict was declared before the investigation began and I think there's no investigation because the results of any serious scientific analytical investigation would show that the allegations against Russia are baseless."

Galloway said there are still many questions which have been left unanswered in the Skripal case.

"I don't believe that Russia is responsible for this act. And the good news is that most of the British public tend to agree," he said.

[Mar 26, 2018] Trump Expels 60 Russian Diplomats as World Slides Towards War

So the Deep State is keeping Trump by the balls.
Notable quotes:
"... As The New York Times reports, ..."
"... Deep State 1 - 0 Trump. ..."
Mar 26, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Trump Expels 60 Russian Diplomats as World Slides Towards War Tyler Durden ( Zerohedge ) 9 hours ago | 4,602 314 President Trump has reportedly ordered the expulsion of 60 Russians from the United States on Monday, including 12 people identified as Russian intelligence officers who have been stationed at the United Nations in New York, in response to Russia's alleged poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain.

As The New York Times reports, the expulsion order, announced by administration officials, also closes the Russian consulate in Seattle.

The Russians and their families have seven days to leave the United States, according to officials.

The expulsions are the toughest action taken against the Kremlin by President Trump, who has been criticized for not being firm enough with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

In a call with reporters, senior White House officials said that the move was to root out Russians actively engaging in intelligence operations against the country, and to show that the United States would stand with NATO allies.

The officials said that the closure of the consulate in Seattle was ordered because of its proximity to a U.S. naval base.

The expulsion of 60 diplomats is the most sweeping since the Reagan administration ordered 55 diplomats out of the country in 1986.

As The Washington Post reports, a senior administration official, who was only authorized to discuss the actions on the condition of anonymity, commented:

"This was a reckless attempt by the government to murder a British citizens and his daughter on British soil with a nerve agent,"

"It cannot go unanswered."

Deep State 1 - 0 Trump.

"To the Russian government, we say, when you attack our friend you will face serious consequences," said a senior administration official.

"As we have continually stressed to Moscow, the door to dialogue is open." But, this official continued, Russia must "cease its recklessly aggressive behavior."

Last week EU leaders declared in a statement that it was "highly likely" there was "no plausible alternative explanation" other than Russia being to blame. Today, EU Council President Tusk announces that 14 EU nations will expel Russian diplomats...

[Mar 26, 2018] Heartlessness by Richard Sale

Notable quotes:
"... TL;DR – the entire post by James is one gigantic propaganda pastiche of myths and slander, that no serious historian would ever repeat with clean conscience – only propagandists with a clear and present agenda. ..."
"... It's impossible to understand Stalinism without reference to world economic developments during the interwar period (collapse of the balance-of-power in Europe, the demise of the liberal economic order, the agrarian depression which affected the terms of barter between town and countryside unfavorably leading to huge antagonism of the peasantry to the rule of the urban workers in Russia)(see Polanyi, 1944: 255-256 for details). ..."
Mar 26, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Lyttenburgh , 26 March 2018 at 02:26 PM

"What emerges is a horrifying character that began as a bank robber and ended as a mass executioner and the instigator of man- made famines that killed millions."

It is good to know that supposedly "accurate" historical documentary made in the West are completely useless propaganda drivels, because:

a) Stalin never robbed banks. So-called "Tiflis's' expropriation" of 26 June 1907 had been carried out by the group under Simon "Kamo" Ter-Petrosyan. Stalin was arrested in 1908 and back then the Czarist authorities did not accuse him of bank robbing – he was "political prisoner". There is absolutely NO evidence whatsoever that Stalin was a bandit.

b) Stalin was not a "mass executioner". The state wields the monopoly over violence.

c) Man-made nature of the so-called Holodomor is a myth, disproved many times over.

Good to know, that propaganda quality of the Western "blue screen" is effective enough to convince people of the "correct" narrative and switch off any critical thinking. Useful for the current times.

"There are no official reports about the height of Joseph Stalin because Stalin was sensitive about it; he went to great lengths to conceal his lack of stature from the Soviet people and the world because he stood only at 5 feet 4 or 5 feet 5"

Please, explain – how he "concealed" it? Was the state officials back in 1920-50 required to post their height somewhere for everyone to see?

"He was an un-attractive man with his pockmarked face, bad teeth, his limp, and his withered left arm yet his deepest ambition was to develop his country, weaken or kill rivals and have his image plastered on every public building."

How do YOU know what Stalin wanted ? That's a speculation. And as badmouthing his appearance – yeah, kudos to you! You did it!

"But from those things he learned little. He lacked refinement, elegance, social polish, and compassion."

Again, I have to ask – who's claiming this? Who do you know that he "learned little"? How do you know that "his selfish self-worship led his soul by the nose"? You are passing soundbites from that show for the facts

"But Stalin was a spiritual primitive. He lived in a society where having a conscience was seen as a vulnerability, not a strength."

First of all – define the term "a spiritual primitive". Next – what society are you talking about here? The Soviet Union?

"That's how Stalin's mind worked."

You keep saying this. How do you, James, know how Stalin's mind worked? Are you ESPer?

TL;DR – the entire post by James is one gigantic propaganda pastiche of myths and slander, that no serious historian would ever repeat with clean conscience – only propagandists with a clear and present agenda. A person who can repeat with a straight face a clear and many times disproven lie that:

"Of course, the day after Hitler invaded his country, June 22, 1941, Stalin broke down and for several days was so drunk on brandy and vodka that he was not able to function."

becomes guilty of lying himself. You, James, are no better than all those propagandists and no-brains that you were decrying in your past blogposts. Instead of thinking and researching, instead of trying to find the truth, you repeat lies and suppress any urge in others to see the reality as it is.

P.S. Oh, and one more thing:

"Communism reduced people to animals: they were merely food."

What about capitalism then? Or maybe you are projecting here?

Daniel A Lynch , 26 March 2018 at 03:18 PM
Agree with many of Harper's observations on the sociopathic personality, and on the importance of empathy, but then he loses me at "When President Reagan said that the Soviet state was an "evil empire" many objected, including me. But the more I learn, the more I endorse that judgment. Communism reduced people to animals."

But did communism had anything to do with it? Was Hitler a communist? Woodrow Wilson? Christopher Columbus? Churchill? Jefferson Davis? Was life wonderful in pre-Soviet Russia?

Today many Russians view Stalin positively. He industrialized the USSR, defeated the fascists, and made Russia a world power. While the West was mired in the Great Depression, Russia's economy hummed. We should acknowledge Stalin's mistakes, but we should also acknowledge that the poor and the working class may have been better off under Stalin than they had been before. Admittedly that may not be saying much.

Stefan , 26 March 2018 at 04:46 PM
The way I see it, thinking of Stalin as a heartless beast in order to understand the developments in the Soviet Union in the first half of the 20th century does two things for us:
  1. It provides a simple answer to the question: how could these horrific evil atrocities take place?
  2. It puts our mind at ease, thinking that if only people would be more moral or good, everything would be different.

The question why things developed as they did in Russia is not a trivial one, however it is also not a question that's beyond our understanding. In fact, plenty of serious answers have been provided over the years.

It's impossible to understand Stalinism without reference to world economic developments during the interwar period (collapse of the balance-of-power in Europe, the demise of the liberal economic order, the agrarian depression which affected the terms of barter between town and countryside unfavorably leading to huge antagonism of the peasantry to the rule of the urban workers in Russia)(see Polanyi, 1944: 255-256 for details).

If you want an answer that can explain the path towards the horrors of Stalinism and also fit into a tweet, here is one:

autarchy >> New Economic Policy >> crises and global depression >> Stalinism

It is still a bit longer than the usual - Stalin was a murderous lunatic thirsty for blood.

P.S. He was a murderer but definitely not a unattractive one. Google any picture of Stalin in his youth and you will be convinced :)

Walrus , 26 March 2018 at 05:00 PM
Stalin was certainly unattractive as a person, ruthless and cynical but not stupid. However rotten his methods (and they were rotten) I think you have to make allowances for the environment Stalin and the Bolsheviks faced in governing Russia.

Their driving need was to transform a huge backward country that had been largely populated by illiterate serfs - slaves less that Sixty years before the revolution that replaced an imperial government which itself was dissolute, corrupt and almost as brutal as Stalin. Desperate times called for desperate measures. There were no "democratic traditions' as we like to call them, brutality was the usual form of regulation in Russia and social institutions of government were not strong. Russian infrastructure was generations behind the West.

We could catalogue for hours the stupid inhuman brutality of the Bolshevik regime before WWII and the personal foibles of Stalin (his devotion to the crackpot agricultural theories of Lysenko - "vernalisation", etc. were responsible for starvation), we can endlessly examine the crimes of Beria and company, but we cannot obtain a full picture of Stalin without considering the challenges he faced.

catherine said in reply to Walrus... , 26 March 2018 at 06:18 PM
''but we cannot obtain a full picture of Stalin without considering the challenges he faced.''

Yes we can. Its in how he handled those challenges.

likbez , 26 March 2018 at 08:22 PM
This essay is a very primitive attempt to promote "cult of personality" myths.

The author does not understand the history and the role of personalities in history. Thus he can't properly evaluate key historical figures such as Stalin. His treatment of Stalin is simply petty.

Stalin was a monumental historic figure for several reasons but first of all as a representative of a new political force on the historical scene. I think that this was not workers -- that was partially a smoke screen -- but some kind of mafia-style organized gang of middle-class intellectuals hell-bent on acquiring state power.

Also, Stalin was the first to build a new theocratic state were Bolshevics ideology became a new state religion. This model proved to viable and later was replicated elsewhere. It currently exists not only in China and Cuba, but also in Islamic variations ("Political Islam" of Muslim Brotherhood, etc.)

Under Stalin, Bolshevism became an official religion and heretics were burned at stake. Like popes before him, Stalin and his followers felt that the killing (and sending to Gulag) of heretics was just.

Therefore, it is more proper to view Stalin was a representative of a historically new political force which demonstrated the possibility of acquiring state power by a small group of intellectuals powered by ideology (In case of Bolsheviks with some minimal financial and organizational help of hostile for this particular state foreign powers -- Germans military intelligence )

The same fit was later replicated by neoliberalism (aka "Trotskyism for the rich", which replaced the Party with the network of think tanks).

Neoliberals also were a small, tightly knit circle of intellectuals which came to power via stealth variant of coup d'état ("quite coup" as Johnson called it) displacing the New Deal capitalism.

And Bolsheviks as a political force made a profound impact on the course of human history and should be viewed as such. BTW the existence of the USSR was a hugely positive development for people outside the USSR.

For example, in the USA it helped to suppress cannibalistic instincts on the US financial elite, which returned to the scene in full glory after the USSR collapse after neoliberalism won in the USA and elsewhere.

Due to the existence of the USSR, two post-war decades were and probably will be forever considered as a golden age for US workers and the USA as a country.

[Mar 26, 2018] Neocons Are Back With a Big War Budget and Big War Plans by Ron Paul

What is interesting is that Trump not only folded, but seeking self-preservation he voluntarily appointed neocons to the top layer of his administration
Notable quotes:
"... This is why I often say: forget about needing a third political party – we need a second political party! Trump is admitting that to fuel the warfare state and enrich the military-industrial complex, it was necessary to dump endless tax dollars into the welfare state. ..."
"... But no one "forced" President Trump to sign the bill. His party controls both houses of Congress. ..."
"... Defense Secretary James Mattis said at the same press conference that, "As the President noted, today we received the largest military budget in history, reversing many years of decline and unpredictable funding." ..."
"... his statement is misleading. Where are these several years of decline? Did we somehow miss a massive reduction in military spending under President Obama? Did the last Administration close the thousands of military bases in more than 150 countries while we weren't looking? ..."
"... On militarism, the Obama Administration was just an extension of the Bush Administration, which was an extension of the militarism of the Clinton Administration. ..."
"... The military-industrial complex continues to generate record profits from fictitious enemies. The mainstream media continues to play the game, amplifying the war propaganda produced by the think tanks, which are funded by the big defense contractors. ..."
Mar 26, 2018 | www.unz.com

Ron Paul

On Friday, President Trump signed the omnibus spending bill for 2018. The $1.3 trillion bill was so monstrous that it would have made the biggest spender in the Obama Administration blush. The image of leading Congressional Democrats Pelosi and Schumer grinning and gloating over getting everything they wanted -- and then some -- will likely come back to haunt Republicans at the midterm elections. If so, they will deserve it.

Even President Trump admitted the bill was horrible. As he said in the signing ceremony, "there are a lot of things that we shouldn't have had in this bill, but we were, in a sense, forced -- if we want to build our military "

This is why I often say: forget about needing a third political party – we need a second political party! Trump is admitting that to fuel the warfare state and enrich the military-industrial complex, it was necessary to dump endless tax dollars into the welfare state.

But no one "forced" President Trump to sign the bill. His party controls both houses of Congress. He knows that no one in Washington cares about deficits so he was more than willing to spread some Fed-created money at home to get his massive war spending boost. And about the militarism funded by the bill? Defense Secretary James Mattis said at the same press conference that, "As the President noted, today we received the largest military budget in history, reversing many years of decline and unpredictable funding."

He's right and wrong at the same time. Yes it is another big increase in military spending. In fact the US continues to spend more than at least the next seven or so largest countries combined. But his statement is misleading. Where are these several years of decline? Did we somehow miss a massive reduction in military spending under President Obama? Did the last Administration close the thousands of military bases in more than 150 countries while we weren't looking?

Of course not.

On militarism, the Obama Administration was just an extension of the Bush Administration, which was an extension of the militarism of the Clinton Administration. And so on. The military-industrial complex continues to generate record profits from fictitious enemies. The mainstream media continues to play the game, amplifying the war propaganda produced by the think tanks, which are funded by the big defense contractors.

This isn't a conspiracy theory. This is conspiracy fact. Enemies must be created to keep Washington rich, even as the rest of the country suffers from the destruction of the dollar. That is why the neocons continue to do very well in this Administration.

While Trump and Mattis were celebrating big military spending increases, the president announced that John Bolton, one of the chief architects of the Iraq war debacle, would become his national security advisor. As former CIA analyst Paul Pillar has written, this is a man who, while at the State Department, demanded that intelligence analysts reach pre-determined conclusions about Iraq and WMDs. He cooked the books for war.

Bolton is on the record calling for war with Iran, North Korea, even Cuba! His return to a senior position in government is a return to the unconstitutional, immoral, and failed policies of pre-emptive war.

Make no mistake: the neocons are back and looking for another war. They've got the president's ear. Iran? North Korea? Russia? China? Who's next for the warmongers?

(Republished from The Ron Paul Institute by permission of author or representative)

[Mar 25, 2018] A truly historical month for the future of our planet by The Saker

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... (this last sentence in English in the original text – trans.) ..."
"... As to who will prevail, your guess is as good a mine. But the fact that today Trump replaced McMaster with a warmongering psychopath like John Bolton is a clear sign that the Neocons are in charge in the US and that the Axis of Kindness is about to get a heck of a lot "kinder". ..."
"... Both Saker and the commenter #1 put accent on the ideological struggle between Russia and the West, contrasting Russian (and) Chinese – we do not interfere with your system of beliefs or who rules you, let us cooperate and do business. This is contrasted against the Western – we are the Borg, you will be regime-changed to be assimilated, aka we are the Exceptional Owners of the World. This is truly the main ideological struggle of the 21. century, forget about left wing – right wing. ..."
"... I do not know how long the Russian initiative will last, but at the moment Russia is in a goldilocks situation: it probably has the best leadership in the world, ..."
"... 'Full Spectrum Dominance', as explicit in US military doctrine, and noted as such by Harold Pinter in his 2005 Nobel address, and embedded in the F. William Engdahl book 'Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order', was imo both pathological and impossible, but that didn't stop them from trying. ..."
"... Gen. Wesley Clark's rather famous post 9/11 surprise at hearing that 7 countries in five years were slated for – in effect – destruction, euphemistically called regime change is starting to seem like another era. 'Guess what I just heard down the hall. We're gonna go into 5 countries with our mercenaries, and military, and our amazing technology, and bomb them all to hell if we have to, and lie to the world about everything we're doing, and kill and wound and orphan millions of people, because ah, because ah, because ah, actually I'm not sure why, but that's what's on the program. It's sort of a tradition. We bombed the hell out of Korea, then we bombed the hell out of Vietnam and Laos and Cambodia, actually I lost count, so many, anyway fast forward to remnants of Yugoslavia, boy did we ever destroy that.!' ..."
"... Any similarity between MH17 and Skripal investigations, although both cooked up in the same kitchen, is completely coincidental, of course. ..."
Mar 23, 2018 | www.unz.com

March 2018 will go down in history as a truly historical month

March 1st , Vladimir Putin makes his historical address to the Russian Federal Assembly. March 4th , Sergei Skripal, a former UK spy, is allegedly poisoned in the UK . March 8th , British officials accuse Russia of using nerve gas to attempt to murder Sergei Skripal. March 12th , Theresa May officially blames Russia for the poisoning and gives Russia a 24-hour ultimatum to justify herself; the Russians ignore that ultimatum. The same day, the US representative at the UNSC threatens to attack Syria even without a UNSC authorization. March 13th , Chief of Russia's General Staff Valery Gerasimov warned that " in case there is a threat to the lives of our military, the Russian Armed Force will take retaliatory measures both over the missiles and carriers that will use them ". The same day Chief of the Russian Armed Forces' General Staff, Deputy Defense Minister, General of the Army Valery Gerasimov had a phone conversation with Marine Corps General Joseph Dunford, chairman of the United States' Joint Chiefs of Staff. March 15th , the UK blocked Russia's draft UN Security Council statement on Skripal poisoning case asking for an " urgent and civilized investigation " into the Skripal case. The US, UK, France, and Germany issue a statement backing the UK and blaming Russia . The UK Defence Minister tells Russia to " shut up and go away ". March 16th , Major General Igor Konashenkov calls the British Defense Minister an " uncouth shrew " and " intellectual impotent ". March 17th , Russian Generals warned that the US is preparing a chemical false flag attack in Syria March 18th , Putin overwhelmingly wins the Presidential election . The same day, General Votel, Commander of CENTCOM declares in a testimony to the Armed Services Committee that differences with Russia should be settled " through political and diplomatic channels ". When asked whether it would be correct to say that " with Russia and Iran's help, Assad has won the Civil War in Syria? " General Votel replied " I do not think that is too -- that is too strong of a statement. I think they have provided him the wherewithal to -- to be ascendant at this point ". March 19th , the EU's Foreign Affairs Council issues a statement fully backing the UK. March 21st The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs summons all ambassadors to a briefing on the Skripal case. The language used by the Russian representative at this briefing possibly is the bluntest used by any Russian (or even Soviet) official towards the West since WWII. The French, Swedish and US representative at the meeting all stood up to declare their "solidarity" with the UK. March 22nd , The Chief of the Russian Armed Forces' General Staff, Deputy Defense Minister, General of the Army Valery Gerasimov had another phone conversation with Marine Corps General Joseph Dunford, chairman of the United States' Joint Chiefs of Staff.

So what is really going on here? Surely nobody seriously believes that the Brits really think that the Russians had any motive to try to kill Skripal or, for that matter, if they had a motive, that they would do it in such a stupid manner? And what's the deal with Syria anyway? Is the US going to execute their false flag and bomb?

I think that at this point we should not get bogged down in the details of all this. There is a forest behind these trees. What matters most now, is that the most powerful factions of the AngloZionist Empire's ruling elites are making a concerted effort to create a unified anti-Russian coalition. In this regard it is quite telling that the US, France, and Germany issued a statement on March 15 th without even bothering to consult with their so-called "allies" in NATO or the EU. You can immediately tell "who is boss" in those crisis situations when the rest of the Euro-riffraff simply doesn't matter (poor East Europeans with their delusions about being appreciated or even respected by the West!). Furthermore, it is quite clear that in this case, the "Anglo" component of the AngloZionist Empire is far more involved than the Zionist one, at least insofar as the front of the stage is concerned ( behind the scenes the Neocons are seething at Trump for calling Putin to congratulate him and offer negotiations). I think that a number of crucial developments forced the US and the UK into trying to strong-arm the rest of the western nations to "circle the wagons" around the Empire:

The US humiliatingly failed in its attempts to frighten and force the DPRK into submission The AngloZionists have lost the civil war in Syria The UK and the rest of the NATO are becoming militarily irrelevant The Ukraine has crashed and is burning and a Ukronazi attack on the Donbass is most likely The political forces in Europe who opposed anti-Russian policies are on the ascent The Russians are winning many EU countries over by economic means including North Stream whereas sanctions are hurting the EU much more than Russia The anti-Putin campaign has miserably failed and Russia is fully united in her stance against the Empire

What this all means is very simple: the Empire needs to either fold or double down and folding is just not something the imperial elites are willing to consider yet. They are therefore using the tools which they perceive as most effective:

False flags : this is really a time-honored western tradition used by pretty much all the western powers. Since the general public is brainwashed and mostly can't even begin to imagine that "freedom loving liberal democracies" could use methods usually ascribed to evil, bloodthirsty dictatorial regimes, false flags are an ideal way to get the public opinion in the correct state of mind to approve of aggressive, hostile and even violent policies against a perceived threat or obstacle to hegemony.
Soft power : have you noticed how the Oscars or the Cannes festival always pick exactly the kind of "artists" which the Empire happens to politically promote? Well, this is true not only for the Oscars or the Cannes festival but for almost all of the cultural, social and political life in the West. This is especially true of so-called "human rights" and "peace" organizations which are simply political pit-bulls which can be sicked on any country in need of subversion and/or intervention. Russia has never developed that kind of political toolkit.
Verbal escalation : this tactic is extremely crude yet very effective. You begin by vociferously proclaiming some falsehood. The fact that you proclaimed it in such vociferous and hyperbolic matter achieves two immediate results: it sends all your friends and allies a clear message " you are either with us or against us ", that leaves no room for nuance or analysis, and it gives otherwise rather spineless politicians no way to back down, thus strengthening their "resolve".
Herding : there is safety in numbers. So when dealing with a potentially dangerous foe, like Russia, all the little guys flock together so as to appear bigger or, at least, harder to single out. Also, when everybody is responsible, nobody is. Thus herding is also politically expedient. Finally, it changed the inter-relational dynamic from one of friends or allies to one typically found among accomplices in a crime.
Direct threats : the Empire got away with making threats left and right for many decades, and this is a habit which is hard to break. The likes of Nikki Haley or Hillary Clinton probably sincerely believe that the US is quasi-omnipotent or, conversely, they might be terrified by the creeping suspicion that it might not. Threats are also an easy, if ineffective, substitute for diplomacy and negotiations, especially when your position is objectively wrong and the other side is simply a lot smarter than you.

The big problem is that none of these methods work against Russia or, let me correct that, don't work anymore (they sure appeared to work in the past). Russian public opinion is fully aware of all these methods (courtesy of a Russian media NOT controlled by AngloZionists) and Margarita Simonian beautifully summarized the feelings that all this elicits in the Russian population:

"all your injustice and cruelty, inquisitorial hypocrisy and lies you forced us to stop respecting you. You and your so-called "values." We don't want to live like you live, anymore. For fifty years, secretly and openly, we wanted to live like you, but not any longer. We have no more respect for you, and for those among us that you support, and for all those people who support you ( ). For that, you only have yourself to blame ( ) Our people are capable to forgive a lot. But we don't forgive arrogance, and no normal nation would. Your only remaining Empire would be wise to learn the history of its allies, all of them are former empires. To learn the ways they lost their empires. Only because of their arrogance. White man's burden, my ass!" (this last sentence in English in the original text – trans.)

The stark truth is that far from wanting to invade, appease or otherwise please the West, Russia has absolutely no need, or even interest, in it. None. For centuries Russian elites have been western-focused to some degree or other and none of them could even begin to imagine a West-less Russia. This is still true today, the Russian "elites" still want to live like (very rich) Brits or Germans and they still hate the common Russian people and Vladimir Putin. But those Russian elites have now been crushed by the magnitude of Putin's victory in the presidential elections. Normally, this should result in an even bigger exile of Russian "businessmen" to the UK, France or Israel, but the problem now is that the British are making noises about punishing them for, well, being Russians (even Russophobic, pro-western, "Russians"). As a result, these "poor" pro-western liberals can only whine on the social media and in the few pro-western media outlets left in Russia (no, not due to repression, but due to their political irrelevancy being backed, as they are, by something between 2% and 5% of the population).

But setting aside the wealthy "elites" for a moment, Russia as a country and as a nation has simply no use for the West and what it represents. Those who fantasize about Russia being interested in "Europe", "White identity" or "Western Christianity" are only kidding themselves. They hope that the current cultural and spiritual revival in Russia will somehow spill over to them and allow them to extricate themselves from the gutter in which they are currently prostrated. It won't. Just read again what Simonian said about the western "values" in the quote above. For most Russians "Europe" reeks of Napoleon, "White identity" of Hitler and "Western Christianity" of the creation of the Ukraine and the " Eastern Crusades ". No, Russia has no interest in revenge against any of that, she just has no respect or interest for what these concepts stand for. (Poland – is possibly the last country where all these things are taken seriously and fondly remembered). Still, the Russians remain willing to negotiate to establish a viable coexistence between the Western and Russian civilizational realms. Putin clearly said so in his speech

There is no need to create more threats to the world. Instead, let us sit down at the negotiating table and devise together a new and relevant system of international security and sustainable development for human civilization. We have been saying this all along. All these proposals are still valid. Russia is ready for this.

But if the AngloZionists are dead set on world domination by means of war, then Russia is ready for that too. Not a war of aggression, of course, not even against the tiny Baltic statelets, Putin made that clear too when he said "w e are not threatening anyone, not going to attack anyone or take away anything from anyone with the threat of weapons. We do not need anything . Just the opposite " (emphasis added). But if attacked, Russia is now ready to defend herself:

"And to those who in the past 15 years have tried to accelerate an arms race and seek unilateral advantage against Russia, have introduced restrictions and sanctions that are illegal from the standpoint of international law aiming to restrain our nation's development, including in the military area, I will say this: everything you have tried to prevent through such a policy has already happened. No one has managed to restrain Russia ( ) Any use of nuclear weapons against Russia or its allies, weapons of short, medium or any range at all, will be considered as a nuclear attack on this country. Retaliation will be immediate, with all the attendant consequences. There should be no doubt about this whatsoever."

Why is the nuclear issue so central? Because the Russians are fully aware of the fact that the AngloZionists cannot win a conventional war with Russia . Thus it is crucial for the Russians to convince the AngloZionists that they are neither militarily superior nor invulnerable (see here for a full analysis of these two myths). But once some kind of modus vivendi is achieved with the West, Russia will focus her efforts in different directions: much needed internal reforms and development, the work with China on the establishment of a single Eurasian zone of economic security, peace and prosperity, the restoration of peace in the Middle-East, the development of the Russian Far East and North – you name it. Russia has plenty of work which needs to be done, none of which involves the West in any capacity.

And that is, of course, what is so totally unacceptable to the West.

Hence this month's historical developments which have placed Russia and the West in a direct collision course. As I said above, the Empire can now either fold or double down. If it decides to fold, war will be averted and meaningful negotiations finally entered into. If it doubles down, something the Neocons always do, then this means war with Russia. This is a stark and very difficult choice (no, not for normal people, but for the psychopaths ruling the West). And there isn't much Russia could, or should, do at this point. As is the case every time a serious crisis takes place, the apparently united elites running the West will now break-up into separate factions and each one of these factions will pursue and promote its own, narrow, interests. There will be an intense, mostly behind the scenes, struggle between those who will want to double down or even trigger a war against Russia and those who will be horrified by that notion (not necessarily for profound moral reasons, just out of basic self-interest and a healthy instinct for self-preservation).

As to who will prevail, your guess is as good a mine. But the fact that today Trump replaced McMaster with a warmongering psychopath like John Bolton is a clear sign that the Neocons are in charge in the US and that the Axis of Kindness is about to get a heck of a lot "kinder".

Adrian E. , March 24, 2018 at 1:53 am GMT

Those who fantasize about Russia being interested in "Europe", "White identity" or "Western Christianity" are only kidding themselves. They hope that the current cultural and spiritual revival in Russia will somehow spill over to them and allow them to extricate themselves from the gutter in which they are currently prostrated. It won't. Just read again what Simonian said about the western "values" in the quote above. For most Russians "Europe" reeks of Napoleon, "White identity" of Hitler and "Western Christianity" of the creation of the Ukraine and the "Eastern Crusades". No, Russia has no interest in revenge against any of that, she just has no respect or interest for what these concepts stand for. (Poland – is possibly the last country where all these things are taken seriously and fondly remembered).

I think that is very important. I find it rather odd when some people from the alt-right project their ideals on Russia. Of course, many of these people reject the neoconservative agenda for legitimate reasons, and therefore, it is normal that they also reject Russophobia, and that should be welcomed by most people who do not support the neoconservative agenda. However, they should not think the widespread rejection of Western influence in Russia has much to do with their own ideology.

For most Russians, the difference between hypocritical Western liberals who want to dominate the world with their "values" (and military and economic means for spreading them) and white supremacists is hardly that big, both are a consequence of a similar kind of arrogance towards the rest of the world. Certainly, some white supremacists may under some circumstances be ready to accept Russians as fellow whites, but probably, the path back to regarding them as Asian subhumans is never too long.

Russians are mostly white, but Russia is a multinational and multiracial Eurasian country that is very far from being "racially pure", even as far as many ethnic Russians are concerned, and racism in the narrow sense has hardly ever had much support in Russia. Russia's main religion is Orthodox Christianity, but Islam and Buddhism are also domestic religions in Russia, and there has been an adversarial relationship between Western Christianity and Orthodox Christianity for centuries.

Ideologically, Western alt-right ideologues would be much more likely to find relatively widespread support for their ideas in Poland, the Baltic states, and among nationalists in Western Ukraine – mainly among the most Russophobic elements of European societies. Much of the daily hatred against "the Russians" in the Anglophone media is full of unambiguos bigotry, and even if some of the people believing in Western white identity are currently less extreme with respect to Russia than the liberal racist bigots who think that they are progressive because they hate Russians rather than Mexicans, this is rather a kind of liberals acting as racist supremacists than a genuine split between these two Western ideologies.

In Russia, the constant aggressive rhetoric from Western countries will hardly lead to Russians rejecting the liberal West while embracing nationalist Westerners concentrating on white identity, rather both versions of Western ideology are seen as similarly disgusting. It is doubtful whether in Soviet times, many people really believed in the official anti-imperialist Soviet ideology because the propaganda was too artificial. Now, no special propaganda efforts are needed, the aggressive, arrogant statement of Western politicians and journalists can simply be shown in the original.

Kiza , March 24, 2018 at 8:25 am GMT
I totally agree with Saker and mostly agree with commenter #1. The only big miss of the commenter #1 is that he lumps many different factions in the West into only two groups. The two factions that the commenter describes are as described – much less different than they themselves realise. But there are also a few factions which could be genuinely cooperative with Russia, they should not be discarded because they are also the natural allies in Russian defences against the aggressive West.

Both Saker and the commenter #1 put accent on the ideological struggle between Russia and the West, contrasting Russian (and) Chinese – we do not interfere with your system of beliefs or who rules you, let us cooperate and do business. This is contrasted against the Western – we are the Borg, you will be regime-changed to be assimilated, aka we are the Exceptional Owners of the World. This is truly the main ideological struggle of the 21. century, forget about left wing – right wing.

However, there is a very practical component in the Western rabid behavior, especially the British. The plentiful Russian land was not worth much in the past because it was predominantly permafrost and marshes. The British Empire of warm lower geographical latitudes was worth much more than the huge Russian landmass in colder higher latitudes. Even some Russians did not consider it of much value and this is how Alaska got sold for a pittance by a gambling Russian Tzar. But the contemporary reality is that the human capability to control the environment has advanced so much that the cold regions of the planet are not as much of a challenge that they used to be. On top, they have not been exploited much yet. This is why the Anglos now have an eye on the Russian land, especially Siberia.

It is commonly accepted that the center of human civilisation is moving from the Atlantic to the Pacific, but the shift of the center of gravity to the North is not widely appreciated. Of course, most people still prefer to live in warmer climate but there is more and more money to be made in colder climate. At the same time that the center of gravity is shifting Northwards, the human advancement in the warmer climate has broken the Britush Empire because most of the British colonies have largely caught up in development with the colonial power. This has left the Anglos with their obsolete principles of domination by the force of armaments and their attempts to double down in their area of advantage. In other words, the Anglo leaders do appear to position themselves for: either we maintain our rule or there will be no World to rule.

IMHO, the main reason for the fervent orgasmic hate displayed by the British parliament, successfully transferred onto most of the British population, is that the Anglos are in the process of losing their empire for the second time – first the British, now US. At the same time, the semi-Asiatic, dirty-Christian Russians (in their racist view) are undeservedly ascending, even after first the Russian Empire and then the Soviet Union dissolved, never mind that the Russians are now not even creating an empire of the obsolete Anglo kind then something totally new. The landless Anglo prols versus the landed Russian gentry. Those who are down on the wheel of fortune could not hate those now on top any more than they do.

Somewhere in there are also ever-expanding Zionist Jews, the cancer of humanity, who just want to own anything worth owning, but this is worth another long comment.

I do not know how long the Russian initiative will last, but at the moment Russia is in a goldilocks situation: it probably has the best leadership in the world, with fantastic ideas and unsurpassed advantages. Even the non-anthropological climate change appears to work in Russia's favour, opening up a new shorter Northern maritime route and slowly draining the marshes and exposing virgin fertile land. Both smart and lucky.

Kiza , March 24, 2018 at 8:50 am GMT
@Kiza

Sorry for the long post. What I have been trying to say is that the two biggest current ills of the world are the Anglo envy and the Zionist greed, whilst Russia and China have been dealt and have dealt to themselves a magnificent hand of cards.

Cold , March 24, 2018 at 12:22 pm GMT
Interesting read. Just one comment – if Clinton had "won," we would already be "at war" with Russia. Let's remember, even with the appointments through the revolving door (must get a bit dizzy for players) of the Trump administration, he is still the Commander in Chief. I don't see him going to war with Russia. Bolton is just as much "fireable" as the others.

Last thought, this saber rattling by the mouth organs of the Western criminal syndicate has the colour of desperation to it. Also – attempted misdirection. Good that they're overplaying their hand today since they'll have little room to escalate the rhetoric should indictments of the criminals of the Hussein administration be levied some time soon. Let's hope, anyway.

peterAUS , March 24, 2018 at 2:01 pm GMT
An .. interesting article. It appears that the author is really getting, fast, detached from reality. This in particular:

The AngloZionists have lost the civil war in Syria

and this even more.

The Ukraine has crashed and is burning and a Ukronazi attack on the Donbass is most likely

especially the former. This all is really starting to feel as "online therapy". A little echo chamber and groupthink simply helping the members to deal with the world around them.

El Dato , March 24, 2018 at 2:10 pm GMT
Briefing by Director of the Foreign Ministry Department for Non-Proliferation and Arms Control Vladimir Yermakov, Moscow, March 21, 2018

Question (representative of the US Embassy): It is important in this forum to demonstrate that we in the United States also stand in complete solidarity with our partners in the United Kingdom, in the European Union and in NATO. It's important, especially in this forum, since you have mentioned former Secretary of State Colin Powell and the courage that you suggest he demonstrated. It is very important that you, instead of demonstrating a similar type of courage, you attack, attack, attack my British colleague. In this forum in particular, instead of demonstrating the type of courage that we would hope to have seen in the 21st century, the Russian Federation continues its tried and true tactics of denying responsibility, distracting and disinforming. Again, we stand with our colleagues in the United Kingdom, and we will, as our colleagues in the United Kingdom, hold Russia accountable for its illegal actions.

Vladimir Yermakov: We are grateful to the respected representative of the US Embassy for his remarks. It would be interesting to know what American lawyers would make of them. You probably worked at the US State Department? Have we met before? I used to know everyone at the US State Department, and everyone there used to know me. That's water under the bridge In the past, nobody in the US State Department talked to me in this manner. You are probably on a mission from Washington. Well, everyone has a mission to accomplish.

Ow!

Beckow , March 24, 2018 at 3:46 pm GMT

@Kiza

shift of the center of gravity to the North

This has been an under-appreciated trend. North is richer, more liveable, healthier (no chance of Ebola), and has water. The climate changes and the massive increase in population are making southern areas slowly uninhabitable.

Western elites know this – they know that in 1-2 generations large parts of the Third World will collapse, Sub-Saharan Africa, but also partially India, Middle East, south-east Asia. The spill-over from these regions – that West has foolishly integrated with – will fatally damage most of the West.

Parts of the West are already suffering from the climate issues and uncontrolled migration. Inland Australia and Southwest US are becoming deserts. Large cities have been overrun by Third Worlders, and it is inevitable that more will come.

Russia's large geographic space is unique: very rich in resources, benefiting from climate changes, and thinly populated by a well educated, unique civilisation. This stands out like a sore thumb for the West. They have to ' incorporate ' Russia's resources, it is an economic imperative. West has been failing – mostly due to its own arrogance and stupidity. But all they know how to do is more of the same, get angry, scream and shout, try again and again with the same militant approach as before.

When that fails, they go into an outright hysteria: ' No Olympics for you!, and no fish and chips either, how dare your quote to us our own principles, you impertinent Russian savages!!! '. Eventually West might end up in a self-imposed cul-de-sac with the only option to go for the jugular and start an outright war. Then we will be all f ed, but at least the Western masters will not lose face.

Regnum Nostrum , March 24, 2018 at 4:27 pm GMT

The US humiliatingly failed in its attempts to frighten and force the DPRK into submission.

The offer of North Koreans to negotiate is a submission, a direct result of the US pressure.

The AngloZionists have lost the civil war in Syria.

The war is still going on. Assad barely controls half of Syria. As a matter of fact until recently he did not even control the whole of Damascus. The Turks are in Afrin, Americans east of the Euphrates River are building new bases.

The UK and the rest of the NATO are becoming militarily irrelevant.

Sure thing. They are so irrelevant that every time they make a move Putin has a major fit.

The Ukraine has crashed and is burning and a Ukronazi attack on the Donbass is most likely.

Agree about the possibility of an attack.

The political forces in Europe who opposed anti-Russian policies are on the ascent.

Any evidence?

The Russians are winning many EU countries over by economic means including North Stream whereas sanctions are hurting the EU much more than Russia.

A pipe dream.

The anti-Putin campaign has miserably failed and Russia is fully united in her stance against the Empire.

The anti Putin campaign continues, see your own paragraphs above. Most Russians seem to be behind Putin.

If it doubles down, something the Neocons always do, then this means war with Russia. This is a stark and very difficult choice (no, not for normal people, but for the psychopaths ruling the West).

I am sure that deciding to go to war is extremely difficult choice for the psychopaths whilst for the normal people it is a piece of cake. The entertainment value of this piece is priceless.

FB , March 24, 2018 at 5:30 pm GMT
@Regnum Nostrum

' The entertainment value of this piece is priceless '

Speaking of 'entertainment value' Any chance of seeing you take on Peter 'potatohead' Aus in a debate here ?

peterAUS , March 24, 2018 at 6:39 pm GMT
@Regnum Nostrum

Agree on all points.

Well, perhaps save that "priceless".
Just the usual Saker, only with one notch up. Increasingly delusional and ratcheting up his wishful thinking.

Fanbase and grupies here don't mind that. On the contrary, they need it, and increasingly so. Offsets, at least temporarily, the harsh realities around them.

Starts to feel almost as ..desperation.

Anatoly Karlin , Website March 24, 2018 at 8:00 pm GMT
@peterAUS

Correct on both points.

Assad of course hasn't won. While ISIS might be no more, and there have been real gains (Aleppo, Damascus suburbs), this is more than counterbalanced by Turkey establishing a real presence in northern Syria. Not clear how the Syrians can dislodge them, or the US from Rojava.

The Ukraine has crashed and is burning for the past four years now too bad The Saker is the only one noticing it (well, and Ishchenko, I suppose).

Whether the Ukraine will attack or not.

+: If Russia intervenes forcefully, half the participants announce a boycott. $14 billion or however much all the stadiums + kickbacks cost down the drain.
-: But then the Ukraine will be in for another humiliating defeat, and possibly the gay dwarves in the Kremlin finally find the balls to recognize the LDNR.
-: If Russia doesn't intervene, then the Ukraine has a basically good chance of conquering the LDNR.

Antiwar7 , March 24, 2018 at 9:17 pm GMT

I'm afraid the Bolton appointment means more that an immoral, horrible war with Iran became more probable, not so much Russia. Isn't that the main difference between McMaster and Bolton? Despite the obvious hair differences.
Robert Snefjella , March 24, 2018 at 9:17 pm GMT
Agree with the spirit of the title of this piece that the month of Mars, the war month, in 2018, feels like an historic watershed.

'Full Spectrum Dominance', as explicit in US military doctrine, and noted as such by Harold Pinter in his 2005 Nobel address, and embedded in the F. William Engdahl book 'Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order', was imo both pathological and impossible, but that didn't stop them from trying.

Putin's announcement to the planet that the Russians had developed a variety of weapons that were capable of demonstrating dominance over the US, does far more than end American full spectrum dominance ambitions and pretensions.

The thousand or so American military bases, and its navy around the planet, that have projected power, are henceforth providing many targets for precise strikes.

It also potentially gives many other countries the ability to purchase the means to be able to make American or NATO attacks on them far more difficult.

Gen. Wesley Clark's rather famous post 9/11 surprise at hearing that 7 countries in five years were slated for – in effect – destruction, euphemistically called regime change is starting to seem like another era. 'Guess what I just heard down the hall. We're gonna go into 5 countries with our mercenaries, and military, and our amazing technology, and bomb them all to hell if we have to, and lie to the world about everything we're doing, and kill and wound and orphan millions of people, because ah, because ah, because ah, actually I'm not sure why, but that's what's on the program. It's sort of a tradition. We bombed the hell out of Korea, then we bombed the hell out of Vietnam and Laos and Cambodia, actually I lost count, so many, anyway fast forward to remnants of Yugoslavia, boy did we ever destroy that.!'

Absolute power corrupting absolutely, Russia and China providing a counterbalance to the US attempt at absolute power has saved the Americans perhaps from being corrupted absolutely.

Andrei Martyanov , Website March 24, 2018 at 9:51 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Karlin, you do understand that you already turned into the cheap pathetic troll, right? With your zero "expertise" in any military issues (as well as most others related and not) your opinions on any Russia related military and geopolitical questions are worth as much as your, well, ignorance. I understand that you have complex of inferiority and are severely butt-hurt, and having a psychology of a loser-teenager you need to pretend that you somehow have something to say, but you don't. So, as I suggested in other threads–before you completely self-destruct and humiliate yourself to the point of becoming a meme for ignorance matched only by your unconstrained ambition (and you are getting there), try not to parade yourself as clown since pretty much your any geopolitical "opinion" is a cringe worthy experience for anyone who have good professional understanding of military issues. You don't and you have zero background for that, so , as I stated, when I have time I will gladly call them out. Note though, since you are an amateur in all that, even the way you state your (butt-hurt) ignorant opinions is such that rational and professional responses are not possible. It is akin to talking to hysterical girl who was un-liked on Facebook by some boy. So, just to illustrate how full of shit you are:

The Ukraine has crashed and is burning for the past four years now too bad The Saker is the only one noticing it (well, and Ishchenko, I suppose).

https://news.mail.ru/economics/32948771/?frommail=1

But then again, you have no faculties to even understand what is going on. Per Ishenko, LOL. Karlin, read Krylov's famous fable about Elephant and Pug, albeit you are not even qualified for a role of a pug.

Anatoly Karlin , Website March 24, 2018 at 10:46 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

Oh look, one can cherry pick positive news stories too even about that a company that is so tightly bound up with Russia.

But anyhow, about Ishchenko: How is the " winning of all of the Ukraine " coming along? And is Ukraine still " really falling apart before our eyes "? Indeed, what are the precise timeframes and conditions under which Ukraine either "falls apart" or "is all won"?

Kevin O'Keeffe , March 24, 2018 at 11:22 pm GMT

the fact that today Trump replaced McMaster with a warmongering psychopath like John Bolton is a clear sign that the Neocons are in charge in the US and that the Axis of Kindness is about to get a heck of a lot "kinder".

I don't care for John Bolton more than most reasonable people do, I suppose, but it's not clear he's any worse than McMaster. People are readily triggered by the name John Bolton , but has anything substantively changed?

Kiza , March 25, 2018 at 1:27 am GMT
@El Dato

This speech by a US dummy is a preview of what will come from OPCW "investigation", that is more of the same as what they concluded regarding Syrian use of chemical weapons. By some upside down magic privy only to the Exceptional People the countries which have declared, destroyed and have been verified to have destroyed them, keep using the chemical weapons and being constantly accused by those who still hold and produce chemical weapons. Those who have them do not use them, whilst those who do not have them use them. Iraq, Syria now Russia. The Skripal case is Iraq WMD 3.0.

Therefore, OPCW did not find any problem in that Britain did not follow the procedure clearly stated in the OPCW Statute, after Britain with Canada even declared that procedure optional. In reality, it is neither explicitly written nor implied that the procedure of sharing the samples with the accused is optional. But OPCW keeps silent.

Furthermore, the British are already using own courts to their advantage. Although Miss Skripal is a Russian citizen they convened a court proceeding about which no Russian representative was informed and straight out lied in court that the Russians never enquired about their citizen, contrary to the public announcement by the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The British Government appointed a lawyer for Miss Skripal. This court proceeding was a formality but it is a good sign of the things to come. More details here: http://johnhelmer.net/the-skripal-case-goes-to-court-for-the-first-time-new-uncertainties-for-the-british-and-russian-governments/#more-18920

My best guess is that OPCW will produce a report full of weasel words, which will then be blared from all Western MSM as proof of Russian and maybe even Putin's own doing (not sure how they would make that big jump over in logic, probably through the meme of secret intelligence that clown Johnson used already).

Any similarity between MH17 and Skripal investigations, although both cooked up in the same kitchen, is completely coincidental, of course.

Beefcake the Mighty , March 25, 2018 at 4:32 am GMT
@Adrian E.

Why do you suppose an alt-rightist must view Russia as an extension of what they wish to have in America? Do you have an example of someone who conflates Russian national interests with particular American concerns? Why is it not sufficient to recognize a common enemy and hope for mutual success? At any rate, Putin's multilateralist vision is inherently conservative (properly understood), and his coherence in absolute terms is admirable (never mind in comparison to revolting Western politicians).

pyrrhus , March 25, 2018 at 4:48 am GMT
@El Dato

"We in the United States" are well aware that the British false flag assassination claim is sheer nonsense, that the UK refuses to allow an investigation precisely because it is a pack of lies (probably ginned up in an attempt to improve May's approval rating), and that no "nerve gas" was used, and very likely nobody was killed.

So that's the problem with this ham handed attempt to stir up a pretext for war. Everyone with a brain knows that it's a lie .There will be no war with Russia, thank God .

[Mar 25, 2018] Litvinenko wasn't poisoned by Putin - He was likely smuggling the polonium that killed him by Ryan Dawson

Notable quotes:
"... No experienced mob boss like Berezovsky would be dumb enough to murder an underling in such a manner either. Therefore his death was an accident. It was mostly likely it was a botched smuggling operation . Why was he moving such a dangerous substance? Did he need fast cash? Were they planning to create a dirty bomb? Such a "smoky bomb" would turn the Polonium into powder and kill anyone who ingested it. ..."
"... Traces of Polonium were found on the planes that Litvinenko had been on. So I think we can deduce what happened. He was a mule . The questions remain, why did he have it?, Where did he get it? What was he going to do with it? Why was it in the offices of Berezovsky and Erinsys Ltd (Britain's Blackwater)? ..."
Apr 26, 2015 | www.sott.net

ANC Report, Sun, 26 Apr 2015 22:44 UTC
Berezovsky

Boris Berezovsky Save As we all know Alexander Litvinenko was poisoned by polonium, a rare radioactive substance. The main narrative blamed it all on Vladimir Putin of Russia. The rationale rested on little other than because Litvinenko was a Putin critic . This was the quick line in mass media, and it was on all the typical war propaganda channels.

There are many things wrong with the "Putin did it" story. For one, there is no motive , even with Litvinenko being a critic of Russia, he was no threat whatsoever to Putin. The man worked with Chechen terrorists and the Israeli-Russian oligarchs . But assuming that there was a sufficient motive to kill him, think about this: Why would Russia use a very rare, very expensive, and easily traceable radioactive substance to kill him instead of some cheap poison or just shooting him? Why risk smuggling radioactive material into the UK which is an act of war?

Yet that is exactly what the UK/US media would have you believe. They want to say that Putin had someone sneak into the UK with polonium and poison Litvinenko with it. It just isn't plausible. It's actually absurd.

Alexander Litvinenko who was formerly FSB fled to the UK to avoid court prosecution in Russia, worked for a shady Russian oligarch, Boris Berezovsky. Boris Berezovsky just so happens to be the Israeli-Russian oligarch who lived in London after fleeing the Russian judicial system for a multitude of crimes too long to list. He was on Interpol's most wanted list. Here is the grand prize. After the US and UK press branded Putin with the poisoning despite there being Zero evidence, (something the US is very well known for now) investigators were tracking down the traces of Polonium in the UK. They detected traces of Polonium at Berezovsky's office and residence! Now I do not know about you, but in my place of work, and certainly in my house, I do not have rare radioactive substances. Polonium is not something you just get at the market or pick up by accident walking through the park.

No experienced mob boss like Berezovsky would be dumb enough to murder an underling in such a manner either. Therefore his death was an accident. It was mostly likely it was a botched smuggling operation . Why was he moving such a dangerous substance? Did he need fast cash? Were they planning to create a dirty bomb? Such a "smoky bomb" would turn the Polonium into powder and kill anyone who ingested it.

Traces of Polonium were found on the planes that Litvinenko had been on. So I think we can deduce what happened. He was a mule . The questions remain, why did he have it?, Where did he get it? What was he going to do with it? Why was it in the offices of Berezovsky and Erinsys Ltd (Britain's Blackwater)?

The "Putin did it" smear case has never made sense. First of all, the amount of polonium 210 in play would have cost millions of dollars. That amount is too expensive to purchase and too large to go unnoticed if it were stolen. The only way to obtain such a quantity would be on a well organized black market that had a connection to a nuclear facility. It would certainly help organized crime if the nuclear powered supplier they received the Polonium from was not subjected to international inspections or part of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. Such a country, ( Foreign country A ) which denied they even built nuclear weapons for decades, would certainly also deny selling their Polonium byproduct as well.

Comment: Not necessarily . See:

Is it possible to hide that from the press? Yes. The media would ignore this for the same reason the media ignores them stealing nuclear secrets and building hundreds of nuclear weapons in Dimona, then throwing whistle blowers who took pictures of their warheads, in jail.

Litvinenko was in Israel, where he met Leonid Nevzlin the CEO of Yukos shortly before he died. If you wanted to buy/steal radioactive material that would be the place. What was he negotiating with Nevzlin? We learned Alexander had been an informant in a case that led to the arrest of nine Georgian and Russian Mobsters in Spain, including Alexander Gofstein a lawyer for Yukos who apparently was laundering money.

The downfall began when Georgian Mob Boss Zakhar Kalashov was arrested in May 2006. The scam was similar to what the old Five Families of New York had done, when guys like Meyer Lansky took profits from illegal gambling businesses and funneled them into buying up real estate in Florida. In the European case, the mob was taking illegal funds and buying up real estate in Spain as well as making investments into legitimate businesses .

Litivnenko's associates, Dmitry Kovtun and Andrei Lugovoi, who both had met with him the day of the poisoning, were also both hospitalized. They left traces of Polonium in Hamburg as they had taken the trip to Germany before meeting Litvinenko. It appears all three were involved in a smuggling operation, but for who?

Short answer: Russian Oligarch Boris Berezovsky's employee Alexander Litvinenko died from over exposure to Polonium in a botched smuggling operation. That is why traces of it were at Boris's house and on the planes Litvinenko was riding to and from Israel. The smear on Putin/Russia using a highly traceable 10 million dollar poison to kill a critic is about as plausible and rational as saying we have "British Intelligence" about Niger.... This transparent bogus lie was a quick and shamelessly sloppy explanation to cover up how and why this man in the UK had a radioactive poison in his body. Polonium only has a half life of 138 days.

Litvinenko had been in Israel to visit Yukos's CEO, just shortly before he died. And it's an open secret that Israel has nuclear weapons, the only place without nuclear safeguard or inspections. Traces of polonium were also on the British Airway planes that Litvinenko took to and from Israel. So they would have the means, location, and the timing fits, but let's just blame Putin, "The New Hitler" as Neocons have dubbed him?

Why the fuss about a conspiracy claiming that Putin put Litvinenko on a hitlist and poisoned him? Well as wacky as that story is, it was probably the best they could come up with on short notice. Boris knew once the police found out how Litvinenko died that there would be a lot of explaining to do. He also knew that if the investigation went forward that they could find more of this Polonium on his properties. So they just claimed the KGB was trying to kill them all.

Some History

This is not the first time that Berezovsky tried to pin a murder on someone else and claim that all the damning evidence pointing to him was a frame . There are the notorious cases (in Russia) of Ivan Litskevich and Vlad Listyev.

Ivan Listkevich was the general director of the Omsk oil refinery, easily the best refinery in Russia. Abramovich and Berezovsky planned to take over the refinery and make it part of Berezovsky's Sibnef (which it now is). Listkevich resisted. Ivan had outside investments from LUKoil (10% of the stock) and CS First Boston. So in no way was he threatened to sink. Omsk was in the best location, had the latest equipment, and was well positioned to continue to soar. They serviced the biggest oil producers in Russia. Naturally Ivan did not want to be swallowed by Sibnef. August 19, 1995 Ivan was found drowned in the Irtysh River. I doubt he went there to swim. Five days later Sibnef (Gazprom) took over . August 24th 1995, using his good buddy Yeltsin, Berezovsky got a Presidential Decree №872, to order a transfer of all the state's share in Omsk as well as 4 other companies to Sibnef. Then in 1996 Boris and Roman privatized Sibnef through a series of Loans-for-Shares' auctions which were a complete scam run through front companies and offshore banks. Yeltsin approved of it.

The case may leave doubts in the mind until one learns about the murder of Vlad Listyev. In 1994 Boris attacked one of his rivals over control of a media outlet. Part of the attack was broadcast all over TV and came to be known as "faces in the snow" as Boris's rival's bodyguard were forced at gun point to lie face down in the snow. Shortly after a 90mph high speed chase and attacking rival Gusinsky's MOST guards and pinning Gusinsky in his own building, Berezovsky would take control of ORT (channel 1) through an illegal non-public "auction" and gain a near media monopoly.

For details on that I recommend reading "God Father of the Kremlin" if you can still find it. It was written by the senior editor of Forbes in Russian who holds a Ph.D in Russian history, Paul Klebnikov. For the record Paul Klebnikov was killed after publishing his book on the Oligarchs , particularly on Boris, who is on the cover. He was shot four times in Moscow while leaving work and then died in the hospital after getting stuck on an elevator.

After the Gusinsky event, Boris had another problem. Vladislav Listyev. Listyev was probably the most popular talk show host in Russia and a TV producer. He was a business partner with Boris but the problem was he was not crooked. As general director of ORT he decided to fix a multi-million dollar leak in the company and indirect way of Boris paying people off in the Mob to do dirty work, as well as paying himself by spending money for ads in other companies owned where he also ran the advertising sales. He had an offer from Sergei Lisovsky to buy up the sector. Negotiations never went through and Vlad had a different idea.

On Feb 20th 1995 Vlad announced that he would break the monopoly of Boris and Sergei . He called for a moratorium on ORT advertising until they could work out ethical standards. As you can imagine that did not make Boris or the rest of the mob happy. Eight days later Boris personally met with "Nikolai", a mafia boss, and handed him a hundred thousand dollars in cash. This was witnessed by two police officers who were monitoring the Mob. Prior to that Boris's lacky Badri offered money to a different gangster but that man was arrested before he could do what was asked of him and he confessed this in jail. On March 1st the day after Berezovsky paid a second Mob Boss, Vlad Listyev was shot in the back at the entrance of his home .

Guilty as sin, with a confession against Badri as well as being personally witnessed by two police, offering another mob boss money, Boris was desperate. He was inches away from being arrested. Boris's TV network was cut out of government subsidies after the police raided it and it was subject to bankruptcy. Fellow media giant and friend Ruppert Murdoch promised to invest in the network and bail him out . How nice. And we all know where Murdoch stands. This relationship might also explain why Fox News and Sky News in the UK were so blatantly cheerleading the "Putin killed Litvinenko" conspiracy story.

But here is the real kicker. It is just as outrageous and far fetched as the Litvinenko poisoning. Boris concocted a story for Yeltsin which was recorded on video tape produced by Irina Lesnevskaya a producer at ORT and a friend of Yeltsin's wife. The tape claimed that it was all a big conspiracy against Berezovsky and that the real culprit (who had no motive other than to frame Boris [apparently able to hire a gun to kill Vlad but not Boris?]) was none other than bitter rival Gusinsky of Most Bank, whom Boris had already tried to kill once.

Yeltsin was paranoid of Gusinsky's political ambitions and Boris knew this. Boris also blamed X-KGB and said Vlad was killed by the MOST group, and not the mob he was witnessed meeting with a week after Vlad was going to break his monopoly. (Sounds like "Iraq moved the nonexistent WMDs to Syria just to make the US look bad." give me a break) Boris claimed to be set up because he was loyal to Yeltsin as was his new media outlet.

Yeltsin, ever a partner in cover ups, not to mention a drunk and a thief, got Boris out of trouble once again by firing the lead investigators in the case, which intimidated others to drop it. There was a huge public outcry. A TV personality had been killed. ORT created a new company called ORT advertising with a monopoly to sell ads on commission no less, and the boss-man chosen was none other than Sergei Lisovsky . Wow, how utterly shameless.

If you can speak Russian or if you can find an English copy of the Boris/Lesnevskaya tape transcript sent to Yeltsin, it's going to make you very angry. It is about as plausible as saying Putin risked an act of war with the UK to kill a critic who worked for both a criminal as well as terrorist.

Who Done It?

So we know what didn't happen. But there still remains a "who done it." The quickest way to get to the bottom of this is to see who is lying the most and loudest, because that is usually who has the most to hide .

Remember Anna Politkovskaya? She was killed on Putin's birthday and the alternative press and the 'mindlessly accepting any conspiracy' types who fell for it, tried to use that circumstantial "evidence" to blame the murder on Putin.

These are the same types that claim Russia bombed its own apartment buildings to start a war with Chechnya omitting the fact that the apartment bombing took place five months after the war has already started, and the "sources" trying to blame the FSB were none other than Boris's lacky Litvinenko and well known plagiarist David Satter, who wrote for the PNAC co-founders' Weekly Standard , which gave the world all the bogus lies about Iraq's WMD and connection to the September 11th attacks. Robert Kagan, the paper's cofounder with William Kristol, wrote an op-ed in the Washington Times calling "Speaking of Iraq" which pushes every erroneous prewar scare tactic there was. His wife Victoria Nuland is the same woman who was recorded on the phone saying "F" the EU and openly talking about who would be a good replacement Prime Minister in Ukraine. She chose Arseniy Yatseniuk, who she called "Yatz" and he did become the prime minister of Ukraine a month later after the coup. Everything out of this faction's mouth has been blindly anti-Russian.

There is a huge difference between conspiracy and kookpiracy. Getting away from the outlandish unsubstantiated claims about Anna's death, let's uncover something factual. Anna Politkovskaya was the journalist who had published three different articles on how SOMEONE was testing Polonium on Chechen children . Gee! Where have we seen THAT scenario before? Anna's articles were published in the Novaya Gazeta in 2006 and she was killed October of that same year.

The Washington Post then makes this clever claim. "Leonid Nevzlin, a former Yukos oil company shareholder and Russian exile currently living in Israel, told the Associated Press in late November that Litvinenko had given him a document related to a dossier on criminal charges made by Russian prosecutors against people connected to Yukos. Nevzlin, who is charged by Russian prosecutors with having organized killings, fraud and tax evasion, claimed Litvinenko's inquiries may have provided a motive for his poisoning"

Notice who else is in that Washington Post article (Scaramella) and who was planting the ideas that Putin had killed both Litvinenko and Anna. How crazy is that to use polonium to murder someone...Scaramella is a rotten one. After Anna's lawyer Stanislav Markelov was murdered in 2009 followed by the murder of one of her key informants in Chechnya, Natalia Estemirova the same year, there was a retrial in Anna's case which went to the Supreme Court. Chechen president Ramzan Kadyrov stirred up a public disgust when he said about Anna's informant Natalia Estemirova on Radio Liberty "She was a woman...who had never possessed any honor, dignity or conscience."

The prosecution cornered Dmitry Pavliutchenkov a former policeman who in turn confessed Lom-Ali Gaitukayev was who negotiated the contract killing and behind him he suspected Boris Berezovsky . Dmitry was sentenced to 11 years in jail. Five men were found guilty in her murder. Three were the Chechen brothers who had been acquitted in the first trial and they went to prison. Rustam Makhmudov and Lom-Ali Gaitukayev got life sentences in 2014. Berevsovsky had died the year before in March of 2013.

The most troubling thing here is not that mob did something illegal or that the Western press jumped the gun to do a anti-Russian witch hunt. All of that is pretty run of the mill. It's not even that Israel secretly has nukes and is involved with organized crime. Again, image my lack of shock. It's not even the multiple murders that are most troubling. The most troubling part of this story is what the ultimate purpose of that much Polonium was for and why it was in the UK. The potential for a dirty bomb is enormous. With the current climate of ISIS and disgruntled youth in Europe joining the mercenary forces to fight Israel's enemies in Syria and Lebanon, a dirty bomb in the UK is not an unimaginable scenario. Just having such a thing could also hold leverage over politicians there too. The source of the Polonium should have been traced and potential sources should also be subject to inspection.

  1. William Dunkerley on April 30, 2015 12:11 pm The news stream is replete with articles that falsify information in order to vilify Putin. The Arafat polonium poisoning is an example. But according to a March 17, 2015 AP report citing French experts, "Yasser Arafat was NOT poisoned by polonium. Good for AP for exposing that polonium nonsense. It's rare to find these stories debunked in the Western media. The long-running malicious narrative in Litvinenko saga is more the norm. The mainstream story is utterly false and without merit. I documented that in my book "The Phony Litvinenko Murder." Why do people believe all this specious rubbish? Largely it's a result of a phenomenon called "confirmation bias." I explain that process in detail in my book "Ukraine in the Crosshairs." The Ukrainian crisis is just one more example of how Putin's enemies have skillfully taken advantage of confirmation bias to snooker the masses.
    • Ryan Dawson on January 19, 2016 7:49 pm I also debunked the Arafat myth given that there is no way it would survive so long with such a short half life. Would you like your book to go in our library ? I'll read it then maybe we can talk about it.
  2. Mandatum Mandat on February 10, 2016 4:47 am What is your source for the claim that Litvinenko left a radioactive trail after his trip to Israel? Can't find any discusssion of this claim other than your own material.

[Mar 25, 2018] The West Is Going to War With Russia by Brad Cabana

Mar 25, 2018 | russia-insider.com

In a game of one-up-man-ship, UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has been blowing the proverbial bridges between Russia and the western world to pieces in the last several weeks with comments that have really been beyond the pale. He suggested that Russian President Putin was the person that gave the go ahead for the attempted assassination of a former Russian spy in England. He then absolutely blew that out of the water by claiming yesterday that holding the World Soccer Cup in Russia was akin to Hitler's 1936 Olympics. This last point I personally took huge exception to, because the fact is the 25 million or so Soviets that died actually fighting Hitler saved England fro German invasion - an invasion that England would have lost hands down. In truth, Johnson might just as well of accused modern day Israel of being a Nazi state. That's just how bizarre Johnson's attack on Russia was. And perhaps more importantly in the scheme of things, how incendiary the attack was.

What is becoming clear is that the US, and its western allies, are laying the groundwork for a massive war, perhaps a world war, with Eurasia and its allies in the Middle East. With the appointment of Bolton on the same day as Trump signed the first trade action against China (and he emphasized it was the first of many) the signs are very clear. The West is going to war with the East. The likely initial targets are Syria, and Iran. Any attack on Iran is a declaration of war on Russia. Iran after all is not just an important ally to Russia, but it sits right on the border with Russia. In other words, Russia would be pulled into such a war out of self-defence if for no other reason.

Bearing Russia's position in mind, think back to last week when Russia announced a number of new generation weapons it stated were untouchable by Western anti-missile capabilities. It is quite obvious that Russia is attempting to dissuade the West from its intended push against one of Russia's most strategic interests - Iran. It's also quite evident from Trump's gestures today that he is completely unmoved by Russia's message. That can only mean one thing - we are going to war. When I say we, I mean the West. As someone who has served, and the son of a World War II veteran I am disgusted by Western aggression toward Eurasia. Yes, I said Western aggression. Have a look around at all the conflicts going on. They're all going on around Russia's or China's backyard - not so much in the West...

Nobody knows for certain how this will play its deadly hand out. One thing is for certain, scrapping of the Iran Nuclear Agreement appears imminent. Also, a reigniting of the Saudi/Iran conflict is sure to follow. The West will need an easily understandable excuse to attack Iran, and that can only be one of three things really: an attack on Israel; coming to the aid of Saudi; or a North Korea style action against Iran having a nuclear weapon once the aforementioned agreement is unilaterally cancelled.

This won't be a picnic for the West though. Leave a direct conflict with Russia and China out of the equation for the moment. Consider that a Saudi/Iran conflict, or an Israeli/Iran conflict would have the affect of tripling oil prices over night. Then consider a massive sell off on the stock market. Factor in the US Federal Reserves increases in its over night lending rates. All these things, and quite a few economic problems not mentioned here, would plummet the Western economies into a cataclysmic spiral. The markets are very jittery as it is, sensing as they do that things have gone quite far off the tracks. Many people have said to me that such an economic collapse would cause Eurasia to fall as well, but I always answer that statement like this: "Remember in 2008 when the market collapsed? China sent 250 million people home to their villages, without a job, and that was that. There was no revolt, or any social turmoil. If that happened in the US or any Western economy, there would be civil insurrection almost over night. Therein lies the difference. While China would be hurt, it can sustain the blow. The Western world cannot. In other words, a war of economic attrition."

I don't know if there is anything the ordinary citizen can do to forestall this madness - as one American recently said to me: "all I can do is vote". But, I suggest if you like the world in one piece and you are concerned about the end of humanity, get out and say something. Be accountable to yourself, to humanity, and the world. Don't be a sheeple.

Source: Rock Solid Politics

Serg Derbst • 2 days ago ,

I have the same worries. The mainstream media here in Germany, which is entirely and 100% under CIA control, has been ramping up anti-Russia propaganda since weeks. I didn't think it would be possible after the Ukraine conflict but it is even worse now. The comments of this filthy lunatic Boris Johnson but also of his boss-bitch Theresa May have been way below any line of decency. It's even below the kind of rhetoric Hitler has used when he talked about other statesmen such as (this fat, ugly war-criminal and mass murderer) Winston Churchill.

But it's not "the West" that is going to war, it is the Anglo-American establishment. "West" is an artificial propaganda term that should not be used anyway, because all it denotes is the countries dominated by Anglo-America. Germany and France, the only countries powerful enough to stop Anglo-American madness, are usually dancing to the tune of Warshington and London, but I am not so sure if they will really go all the way here, especially with Iran. Also and despite all the propaganda, while German and French people may not trust Russia and see Putin as a "dictator", they also see the US regime (especially with the Trumpet in charge) as nothing but a dangerous, trigger-happy war machinery. There is no way you could sell a war against Iran to them, also not the rest of Europe including Britain. I even have doubts about whether the American public would swallow such a war.

Either way, it will be a disaster for the "West" - economically, politically, militarily. In fact, it will be the end of the "West" and of the Anglo-American empire including the Zionist colony. So in the end there might be a great result of yet another horror. What Russia really needs to do now is to give both Syria and Iran the full power of Russian air defence.

Scandinavia - Serg Derbst • 2 days ago ,

Craig Murray is on fire -

Evidence submitted by the British government in court today proves, beyond any doubt, that Boris Johnson has been point blank lying about the degree of certainty Porton Down scientists have about the Skripals being poisoned with a Russian "novichok" agent.

Yesterday in an interview with Deutsche Welle Boris Johnson claimed directly Porton Down had told him they positively identified the nerve agent as Russian:

*You argue that the source of this nerve agent, Novichok, is Russia. How did you manage to find it out so quickly? Does Britain possess samples of it?
Let me be clear with you When I look at the evidence, I mean the people from Porton Down, the laboratory

So they have the samples

They do. And they were absolutely categorical and I asked the guy myself, I said, "Are you sure?" And he said there's no doubt.*

I knew and had published from my own whistle blowers that this is a lie. Until now I could not prove it. But today I can absolutely prove it, due to the judgement at the High Court
case which gave permission for new blood samples to be taken from the Skripals for use by the OPCW. Justice Williams included in his judgement a summary of the evidence which tells us, directly for the first time, what Porton Down have actually said...

Read more here: https://www.craigmurray.org...

hiddeninplainsight Scandinavia - • a day ago ,

What a shameful disgrace is the UK government.

CyricRenner Serg Derbst • a day ago ,

Having spent some time in Germany, I have to agree with these comments. If you think the Propaganda is bad in the US and the UK, in Germany it is even worse. It is almost as if they are in competition to be the most servile and obedient to their masters. It is if history doesn't even exist. It is 1941 all over again. The difference being Germany has nothing to fight with and if it comes to war they will be absolutely pulverized to nuclear ash.

This is how stupid the media is to hype this Anti-Russian propaganda 24/7, 7 days a week. There is no real "alternative" news that I could find either. If there is a silver lining in all this though, is that many Germans don't take the media seriously at all anymore. When you overcook the pot, this is what can happen. Just like that fool Boris Johnson. He has now compared Putin to Hitler and the 1936 olympics. How stupid can this buffoon be? You think you can just carry on with business as usual once this stupid provocation with the poisoned spy blows over after saying something like that? He hasn't just insulted Putin, he has insulted all of Russia who sacrificed more than any other country to stop Hitler. I can't believe what low IQ clowns the UK is producing as politicians these days. It is really scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Nationalist Globalist Oligarch CyricRenner • a day ago ,

Does it really matter if the so called Germans take the media seriously?

They keep voting for Mama Merkel, that really tells me quite a bit about the people living in Germany and their political concerns.

[Mar 25, 2018] Cambridge Analytica Scandal Rockets to Watergate Proportions and Beyond by Adam Garrie

Highly recommended!
Mar 25, 2018 | www.eurasiafuture.com

Manipulating democracy -- brainwashing the public for a large fee

Cambridge Analytica, the data harvesting firm that worked for the Trump campaign, is in the midst of a scandal that should make everyone who cares about a clean political process demand major investigations of anyone who has procured the services of the company, major prosecutions of those who have violated laws across multiple nations and a wholesale revitalisation of electoral laws to prevent politicians from ever again procuring the services of unethical companies like Cambridge Analytica.

Days ago, whistleblower Christopher Wylie went public about his time working for Cambridge Analytica and specifically about how the firm illegally obtained the public and private data, including the private messages of 50 million Facebook users. He also exposed how Cambridge Analytica used this data to run highly scientific social manipulation campaigns in order to effectively brainwash the public in various countries to support a certain political candidate or faction.

Cambridge Analytica's dubious methods were used to meddle in the US election after the Trump campaign paid Cambridge Analytica substantial sums of money for their services. The firm also meddled in the last two Kenyan Presidential elections, elections in Nigeria, elections in Czech Republic, elections in Argentina, elections in India, the Brexit campaign, UK Premier Theresa May's recently election and now stands accused of working with the disgraced former Pakistani Premier Nawaz Sharif in an attempt to reverse his judicial ban on holding public office, while helping his PML-N party win the forthcoming general election.

Beyond the scandalous use of personal data from Facebook users and the illegal access to people's private messages, Cambridge Analytica has now been exposed as a company that, by the hidden-camera admission of its CEO Alexander Nix, engages in nefarious, illegal and outrageous activities across the globe.

The UK Broadcaster Channel 4 just released a video of Cambridge Analytica's CEO and Managing DIrector Mark Turnbull in a conversation with an undercover reporter posing as a Sri Lankan businessman interested in meddling in domestic elections. During the conversation Nix boasted of Cambridge Analytica's history of using entrapment, bribery and intimidation against the political opponents of its wealthy clients. Furthermore, Nix boasted about his firm's ability to procure Ukrainian prostitutes as a means to entrap adversaries while also procuring the services of "Israeli spies" as part of dirty smear operations.

The activities that Nix boasted of using in the past and then offered to a prospective client are illegal in virtually every country in the world. But for Nix and his world of ultra-rich clients, acting as though one is above the law is the rule rather than the exception. Thus far, Cambridge Analaytica has been able to escape justice throughout the world both for its election meddling, data harvesting, data theft and attempts to slander politicians through calculated bribery and entrapment schemes.

One person who refused to be tempted by Cambridge Analytica was Julian Assange. Alexander Nix personally wrote to Julian Assange asking for direct access to information possessed by Wikileaks and Assange refused. This is a clear example of journalistic ethics and personal integrity on the part of Assange. Justice must be done

Cambridge Analytica stands accused of doing everything and more that the Russian state was accused of doing in respect of meddling in the 2016 US Presidential election. While meetings and conversations that Trump campaign officials, including Steve Bannon had with Cambridge Analyatica big wigs were not recorded, any information as to what was said during these exchanges should be thoroughly investigated by law enforcement and eventually made public for the sake of restoring transparency to politics.

Just as the Hillary Clinton campaign openly conspired to deprive Bernie Sanders of the Democratic Party's nomination, so too did Donald Trump's campaign pay Cambridge Analytica to conspire against the American voters using a calculated psychological manipulation campaign that was made possible through the use of unethically obtained and stolen data.

While Facebook claims it was itself misled and consequently victimised by Cambridge Analytica and has subsequently banned the firm from its platform, many, including Edward Snowden have alleged that Facebook knew full well what Cambridge Analytica was doing with the data retrieved from its Facebook apps. Already, the markets have reacted to the news and the verdict is not favourble in terms of the public perception of Facebook as an ethical company. Facebook's share prices are down over 7% on the S&P 500. This represents the biggest tumble in the price of Facebook share prices since 2014. Moreover, the plunge has knocked Facebook out of the coveted big five companies atop the S&P 500. Furthermore, Alex Stamos, Facebook's security director has announced that he will soon leave the company.

The Trump myth and Russia myth exposed

Donald Trump has frequently boasted of his expert campaigning skills as being the reason he won an election that few thought he could have ever won. While Trump was a far more charismatic and exciting platform speaker than his rival Hillary Clinton, it seems that for the Trump campaign, Trump ultimately needed to rely on the expensive and nefarious services of Cambridge Analytica in order to manipulate the minds of American voters and ultimately trick them into voting for him. It is impossible to say whether Trump would have still won his election without Cambridge Analaytica's services, but the fact they were used, should immediately raise the issue of Trump's suitability for office.

Ultimately, the Trump campaign did conspire to meddle in the election, only it was not with Russia or Russians with whom the campaign conspired, it was with the British firm Cambridge Analytica. Thus one sees that both the narrative about Trump the electoral "genius" and the narrative about Trump the Kremlin puppet are both false. The entire time, the issue of Trump campaign election meddling was one between a group of American millionaires and billionaires and a sleaze infested British firm.

Worse than Watergate

In 1972, US President Richard Nixon conspired to cover-up a beak-in at the offices of his political opponents at the Watergate Complex. The scandal ultimately led to Nixon's resignation in 1974. What the Trump campaign did with Cambridge Analytica is far more scandalous than the Watergate break-in and cover-up. Where Nixon's cronies broke into offices to steal information from the Democratic party, Trump's paid cyber-thugs at Cambridge Analytica broke in to the private data of 50 million people, the vast majority of whom were US citizens.

Richard Nixon, like Donald Trump, was ultimately driven by a love of power throughout his life. Just as Trump considered running for President for decades, so too did Nixon try to run in 1960 and lost to John Fitzgerald Kennedy, while he also failed to become governor of California in 1962 election. By 1968 he finally got into the White House at the height of the Vietnam War. When time came for his re-election, Nixon's team weren't going to take any chances and hence the Watergate break-in was orchestrated to dig up dirt on Nixon's opponent. As it turned out Nixon won the 1972 by a comfortable margin, meaning that the Watergate break-in was probably largely in vain.

Likewise, Trump may well have won in 2016 even without Cambridge Analytica, but in his quest for power, Trump has resorted to dealing with a company whose practices have done far more damage to the American people than the Watergate break-in.

New laws are needed

While existing laws will likely be sufficient to bring the fiends at Cambridge Analytica to justice, while also determining the role that Trump campaign officials, up to and including Trump played in the scandal, new laws must be enshrined across the globe in order to put the likes of Cambridge Analytica out of business for good.

The following proposals must be debated widely and ideally implemented at the soonest possible date:

-- A total ban on all forms of data mining/harvesting for political purposes.

-- A total ban on the use of algorithms and artificial intelligence in any political campaign or for any political purpose.

-- A mandatory seizing of the assets of any company involved in data mining/harvesting for political purposes, after which point such a company would be forcibly shut down permanently.

-- A mandatory seizing of the assets of any company involved in the use of artificial intelligence or algorithms in the course of a public political campaign.

-- A total ban on the use of internet based platforms, including social media by political candidates and their direct associates for anything that could reasonably be classified as a misinformation and/or manipulation scheme.

-- A total ban on politicians using third party data firms or advertising firms during elections. All such advertising and analysis must be devised by advisers employed directly by or volunteering for an individual candidate or his or her party political organisation.

-- A total ban on any individual working for a political campaign, who derives at least half of his or her income from employment, ownership and/or shares in a company whose primary purpose is to deliver news and analysis.

-- A total ban on anyone paid by a political candidate to promote his or her election from an ownership or major share holding role in any company whose primary purpose is to deliver news and analysis until 2 years after the said election.

If all of these laws were implemented along with thorough campaign finance reform initiatives, only then can anything remotely resembling fair elections take place.

The elites eat their own

While many of the media outlets who have helped to publish the revelations of whistleblower Christopher Wylie continue to defame Russia without any evidence about Russian linkage to the 2016 US election (or any other western vote for that matter), these outlets are nevertheless exposing the true meddling scandal surrounding the Trump campaign which has the effect of destroying the Russia narrative.

In this sense, a divided elite are turning against themselves. While the billionaire property tycoon Donald Trump can hardly be described as anything but a privileged figure who moved in elite public circles for most of his life, his personal style, rhetoric and attitude towards fellow elites has served to alienate Trump from many. Thus, there is a desire on the part of the mainstream media to expose a scandal surrounding Trump in a manner that would be unthinkable in respect of exposing a cause less popular among western elites, for example the brutal treatment of Palestine by the Zionist regime.

In this sense, Trump's own unwillingness or lack of desire to endear himself to fellow elites and instead present himself as a 'man of the people', might be his penultimate undoing. His rich former friends are now his rich present day enemies and many ordinary voters will be completely aghast at his involvement with Cambridge Analytica, just as many Republicans who voted for Nixon, became converts to the anti-Nixon movement once the misdeeds and dishonesty of Richard Nixon were made public. Many might well leave the 'Trump train' and get on board the 'political ethics express'.

Conclusion

This scandal ultimately has nothing to do with one's opinion on Trump or his policies, let alone any of the other politicians who have hired Cambridge Analytica. The issue is that a company engaged in the most nefarious, dangerous, sleazy and wicked behaviour in the world, is profiting from their destruction of political institutions that ought to be based on open policy debates rather than public manipulation, brainwashing and artificial intelligence.

The issue is also one of privacy. 50 million people have been exploited by an unethical company and what's more is that the money from the Trump campaign helped to empower this unethical company. This is therefore as unfair to non-voters as it is to voters. Cambridge Analytica must be shut down and all companies like it must restrict the scope of their operations or else face the same consequence.

[Mar 25, 2018] Cambridge Analytica was always anti Russia. Involved in operations in most of the ex soviet countries to create a hatred of ethnic Russians and I think will work with non nationalist types who are very anti Russia.

Mar 25, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
Peter AU 1 , Mar 25, 2018 1:23:38 PM | 4
James 1

I ran onto something about that when researching SCL/Cambridge Analytica

The Mercer/Cambridge Analytica US wing of SCL put a lot of funding into the leave campaign which was undeclared. Like a political campaign, donations above a threshold have to be declared.

Threshold for declaring donations I think was around 3 to 7000 and CA put in over 300 000.

Peter AU 1 , Mar 25, 2018 2:31:01 PM | 10
james 6

I have been researching SCL the last few days now. It is starting to look as though, rather than being political mercenary's working for whoever pays, they seem to back nationalist leaning groups or individuals. They have a political or geo-political agenda but not sure what at the moment. Always anti Russia. Involved in operations in most of the ex soviet countries to create a hatred of ethnic Russians and I think will work with non nationalist types who are very anti Russia.

[Mar 25, 2018] Russian aide-memoire to clarify the state of affairs as regards the so-called 'Skripal case'

Notable quotes:
"... On 16 March, the Main Directorate for High-Priority Cases of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation initiated a criminal investigation into the attempted willful murder of Russian citizen Yulia Skripal committed by dangerous means in the territory of the United Kingdom. ..."
"... The Western countries' action on the fabricated 'Skripal case' contravenes the norms of international law and the general practice of inter-State relations, as well as the common sense itself. Naturally, we run a detailed record of all that, and when time comes, those guilty will inevitably be brought to justice. ..."
Mar 21, 2018 | www.voltairenet.org

Russian aide-memoire to clarify the state of affairs as regards the so-called 'Skripal case'

  1. On 12 March 2018, Prime Minister of Great Britain Theresa May, addressing the House of Commons, said it was "highly likely" that the Russian Federation was responsible for the poisoning of former GRU colonel, double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia Skripal on 4 March 2018 in Salisbury, with a nerve agent identified according to British classification as A-234.

    The United Kingdom has publicly raised a question about Russia's "concealing" and "using" part of its chemical arsenal, thus alleging that Russia has "violated" its obligations under the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (CWC) -- one of the most effective multilateral treaties in the disarmament and non-proliferation field, which was initiated, among others, by our country.

    Thus, the United Kingdom has come out against Russia as well as against the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) itself and the tremendous work that has been done within this organization during the last two decades, including with participation of the United Kingdom.

    Pursuant to the requirements of Article III of the CWC, the Russian Federation submitted a full and complete declaration of all its chemical weapons stockpiles. That data was thoroughly checked and verified by the inspection teams of the OPCW Technical Secretariat. The fact of the full elimination of Russia's chemical arsenal has been officially confirmed by the authorized international institution -- the OPCW.

  2. On 12 March 2018, given the gravity of the accusations brought against our country, the Russian Embassy in London sent a note verbale to the Foreign Office of Great Britain requesting access to the investigation materials, including samples of the chemical agent that British investigators were referring to, so that it could be tested by our experts in the framework of joint investigation.

    Thus, we proposed to act in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article IX of the CWC. It stipulates that States Parties to the Convention should first make every effort to clarify and resolve, through exchange of information and consultations among themselves, any matter which may cause doubt about compliance with the CWC. Under the provisions of that Article, Russia would be ready to respond to the United Kingdom's request within 10 days.

    Unfortunately, the British side rejected that option and, instead of following the existing norms of international law, chose to unscrupulously politicize the issue.

  3. British Prime Minister Theresa May suggested that a special Security Council meeting to discuss the matter be held on 14 March 2018. Suspecting that London would play dirty, Russia insisted on making the Security Council's meeting open.

    It is incomprehensible what the British side was trying to achieve by bringing the issue to the UNSC. This matter by no means falls within the mandate of the UNSC. It is quite obvious that all discussions are pointless until the OPCW gives its assessment of the Salisbury incident (it is important to know whether a nerve agent was actually used; if it was, how the likely origin of the chemicals was determined; what, and on what basis, actions were taken with regard to the victims, etc.).

  4. On 14 March 2018, British Prime Minister Theresa May, apparently having come to senses, finally sent a letter to Director-General of the Technical Secretariat of the OPCW Ahmet Üzümcü (circulated to all OPCW Executive Council Member States on 15 March 2018) inviting the OPCW Technical Secretariat "to independently verify the analysis" of the British investigation into the Salisbury incident.

    As indicated in the press release by the British Foreign Office of 18 March 2018, following the letter by Ms Theresa May, the UK's Permanent Representative to the OPCW invited experts of the OPCW Technical Secretariat to visit the United Kingdom to carry out an independent analysis of the findings of the British Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down in connection with the Salisbury incident. On 19 March 2018, OPCW experts arrived in the United Kingdom.

    Russia expects the OPCW to make an official detailed account of developments around the 'Skripal case'. We proceed from the understanding that the OPCW Technical Secretariat shall conduct a full-fledged independent investigation in accordance with all relevant provisions of the CWC.

  5. Russia has more and more questions both in legal and practical terms. And we intend to seek answers through the OPCW.

    Russia states that it has not used chemical weapons against Great Britain. We suppose that the attack on the Skripals with toxic chemicals shall be deemed a terrorist act. As Yulia Skripal, a Russian citizen, is among the victims to the incident, we propose cooperation with the British Side under Article IX of the CWC.

    We would like to ascertain the following issues.

    Where, how, and by whom were the samples collected from Sergei and Yulia Skripal? How was it all documented? Who can certify that the data is credible? Was the chain of custody up to all the OPCW requirements when evidence was collected?

    Which methods (spectral analysis and others) were used by the British side to identify, within such a remarkably short period of time, the type of the substance used ("Novichok" according to the western classification)? As far as we know, to do that, they must have had a standard sample of such agent at their disposal.

    And how do these hasty actions correlate with Scotland Yard's official statements that "the investigation is highly likely to take weeks or even months" to arrive at conclusions?

    What information and medical effects led to a hasty decision to administer antidotes to the aggrieved Skripals and the British policeman? Could that hastiness lead to grave complications and further deterioration of their health status?

    Which antidotes exactly were administered? What tests had been conducted to make the decision to use these drugs?

    How can the delayed action of the nerve agent be explained, given that it is a fast-acting substance by nature? The victims were allegedly poisoned in a pizzeria (in a car, at the airport, at home, according to other accounts). So what really happened? How come they were found in some unidentified time on a bench in the street?

    We need an explanation why it is Russia who was accused on the 'Skripal case' without any grounds whatsoever, while works to develop the agent codenamed "Novichok" in the West had been carried out by the United Kingdom, the USA, Sweden and the Czech Republic. There are more than 200 open sources publications in the NATO countries, highlighting the results that those countries achieved in the development of new toxic agents of this type.

  6. Even from purely humanitarian perspective London's action appears simply barbaric. On 4 March 2018 (as British authorities themselves claim) a nerve agent attack against Russian citizen Yulia Skripal was committed in the territory of the United Kingdom.

    Russian Federation has demanded exhaustive information on the course of investigation into the Salisbury incident involving a Russian citizen (the Russian Embassy in London sent the relevant note verbale on 12 March 2018).

    The United Kingdom is breaching elementary rules of inter-State relations and is still denying, without any explanation, Russian officials' consular access to Yulia Skripal envisaged by the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. For more than two weeks now, we have not been able to credibly ascertain what happened to our citizen and what condition she is actually in.

    On 16 March, the Main Directorate for High-Priority Cases of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation initiated a criminal investigation into the attempted willful murder of Russian citizen Yulia Skripal committed by dangerous means in the territory of the United Kingdom.

    The investigation will be conducted in accordance with the Russian legislation and the norms of international law. Highly qualified experts will contribute to the investigation.

    The investigators stand ready to work together with the competent authorities of the United Kingdom. We expect a cooperative approach of the British side.

  7. In the UN Security Council as well as in the OPCW and at other international fora, the Russian Federation has been a consistent and insistent proponent of thorough, comprehensive and professional investigation of all crimes involving toxic chemicals, and of bringing perpetrators to justice.

    We are ready to engage in full-scale and open cooperation with the United Kingdom in order to address any concerns whether in bilateral format or within the OPCW and other international instruments, working within the purview of international law.

    As a responsible member of the international community and a bona fide State Party to the CWC Russia will never speak the language of ultimatums or answer informal and word-of-mouth questions.

    The Western countries' action on the fabricated 'Skripal case' contravenes the norms of international law and the general practice of inter-State relations, as well as the common sense itself. Naturally, we run a detailed record of all that, and when time comes, those guilty will inevitably be brought to justice.

[Mar 25, 2018] Alexander Yakovenko introductory remarks at a press conference by Alexander Yakovenko

Looks like replay of Litvinenko polonium poisoning affair and MH17 tragedy. There was already a plan before the insident and it was activated immediately. Brits really refined the art of false flag poisoning became classics in the genre...
Subsequence actions of EU suggest existence of a very strong US pressure. So much for Trump administration desire of detente with Russia.
Notable quotes:
"... Therefore, the British Government has violated its obligations under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations by denying consular access for the Embassy to the Russian citizens. We continue to insist that the access and full information on the condition of our compatriots, whom nobody has seen since 4 March, should be provided. ..."
"... On 12 March, 8 days after the day of poisoning, I was summoned by Foreign Secretary Johnson, who put forward a 24-hour ultimatum to explain the Russian Government's position by the end of the next day. The question was put like following: either the incident in Salisbury was a direct act of the Russian Government against the UK or the Russian Government had lost control of a nerve agent that the Foreign Secretary identified as A-234, and allowed it to get into the hands of others. ..."
"... Next hour Prime Minister May updated the House of Commons about the incident in Salisbury using the same words as Secretary Johnson did at our meeting, except that she introduced the term "Novichok", a bizarre Russian name to use with regard to a chemical substance, in a clear attempt to additionally and quite artificially link the incident to Russia. ..."
"... On 14 March the Prime Minister gave another statement on the incident in Salisbury in the House of Commons, where she announced an expulsion of Russian diplomats and other hostile and provocative measures against Russia. She provided no proof of Russia's alleged involvement in the incident and made a conclusion that, as she put it, it was "highly likely" that Russia was responsible for it. Thus, the British Government again built its official position on pure assumptions. ..."
Mar 25, 2018 | www.voltairenet.org

Ladies and gentlemen,

The Number 1 rule in Britain is to start any statement with a joke. Unfortunately, it's not a time to joke. The issue I am going to raise is too serious.

On 5 March 2018 we heard media reports announcing that the day before two Russian citizens Sergei and Yulia Skripal were poisoned in Salisbury. Sergei Skripal is one who has dual citizenship. First of all I would like to wish all the victims, including Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, who also suffered from this incident, speedy recovery and well-being.

The Embassy has immediately requested the British authorities to share information about the incident and details of the ongoing investigation.

Unfortunately, 18 days have passed since the day of the incident and we have not received any official information from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office or police on the investigation thereof. The British authorities refused to provide samples of the chemical substance. The legitimate consular access to the Russian citizens under the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relation has not been granted.

The only response we received from the British authorities was a Note Verbale about medical condition of Yulia Skripal. It did not go further than the official public statements, according to which she was reportedly critically ill, but in a stable condition. The Foreign Office refused to share information on Sergei Skripal, citing his British citizenship.

Therefore, the British Government has violated its obligations under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations by denying consular access for the Embassy to the Russian citizens. We continue to insist that the access and full information on the condition of our compatriots, whom nobody has seen since 4 March, should be provided.

On 12 March, 8 days after the day of poisoning, I was summoned by Foreign Secretary Johnson, who put forward a 24-hour ultimatum to explain the Russian Government's position by the end of the next day. The question was put like following: either the incident in Salisbury was a direct act of the Russian Government against the UK or the Russian Government had lost control of a nerve agent that the Foreign Secretary identified as A-234, and allowed it to get into the hands of others.

Next hour Prime Minister May updated the House of Commons about the incident in Salisbury using the same words as Secretary Johnson did at our meeting, except that she introduced the term "Novichok", a bizarre Russian name to use with regard to a chemical substance, in a clear attempt to additionally and quite artificially link the incident to Russia.

Next day, on 13 March the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs gave a statement on the incident in Salisbury and strongly protested against evidence-free accusations and provocations by the British authorities. It was emphasized that Russia is not to be talked to in ultimatums, and that in any case we can only properly consider the matter after we receive samples of the chemical substance to which UK is referring to and after the UK complies with the Chemical Weapons Convention that stipulates cooperation between States Parties, for which Moscow is ready. Without that there is no sense in the British statements.

On 14 March the Prime Minister gave another statement on the incident in Salisbury in the House of Commons, where she announced an expulsion of Russian diplomats and other hostile and provocative measures against Russia. She provided no proof of Russia's alleged involvement in the incident and made a conclusion that, as she put it, it was "highly likely" that Russia was responsible for it. Thus, the British Government again built its official position on pure assumptions.

The Embassy again requested the British authorities to cooperate under the Chemical Weapons Convention on bilateral basis or through the OPCW Executive Council and share information and the samples of the toxic substance. Due to the pressure of the Russian side, the Prime Minister at last sent a letter to the Director-General of the OPCW Technical Secretariat on 14 March and requested assistance in verifying British analysis.

As I understand, the OPCW experts arrived to the UK this Monday. We do not know their mandate. But I hope they will follow all the necessary procedures and principles of the CWC, including ensuring a proper chain of custody of the samples, if there are any. They would also need to check how that was possible that the British authorities managed to designate the nerve agent used as so called "Novichok" and its origin so quickly. Could it mean that it is highly likely that the British authorities already had this nerve agent in their chemical laboratory in Porton Down, which is the largest secret military facility in the UK that has been dealing with chemical weapons? Is it a coincidence that this chemical weapons facility is only 8 miles away from the site of the incident? How did doctors decide what antidotes to administer to the victims? Russian experts were puzzled by how quickly the British authorities managed to designate the nerve agent allegedly used in Salisbury and how this correlates with Scotland Yard's official statements that "the investigation is highly likely to take weeks or even months" to arrive at conclusions.

We are sure that the results of the Technical Secretariat assistance mission should be reported to the OPCW Executive Council.

A few words about lack of cooperation from the British side.

Instead of imposing a 24-hour deadline the UK could and should have referred to paragraph 2 of Article IX of the Chemical Weapons Convention, which requires the State Parties to make every effort to clarify and resolve through exchange of information and consultations any matter which may cause doubt about compliance with the Convention. A State Party which receives a request from another State Party shall provide as soon as possible, but in any case not later than 10 days after the request, information sufficient to answer the doubt or concern. If they requested information from Russia on 12 March, they would have received it by 22 March.

The British side did not send a request to Russia and is not willing to talk to Russian representatives in the Hague, where the OPCW Technical Secretariat is located. Instead an anti-Russian campaign has been launched in the UK.

To make the story short, Britain has, without any evidence, blamed Russia of poisoning of three people and continues to refuse to cooperate. We cannot accept that.

There is another case, which worries us very much. From the British media, and again not from the British authorities, we have learned about the death of the Russian citizen Mr Nikolai Glushkov. The Embassy has also learned from the press that the police investigating Mr Glushkov's death assumes that he could have died from "compression on the neck", suggesting he was strangled.

In full accordance with the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, the Embassy immediately requested by a Note Verbale full information on the circumstances of the death of the Russian national and on the investigation, but has not received any meaningful response from the Foreign Office so far. Moreover, it seems that the British side is deliberately ignoring our requests and continues to avoid any contacts with the Embassy on this matter.

To summarize what have been said before a Q/A session, I would like to say that the burden of proof lies with the British authorities. By now no facts have been officially presented either to the OPCW, or to us, or to UK's partners, or to the public.

We can't take British words for granted.

The UK has a bad record of violating international law and misleading the international community, which includes invading Yugoslavia (78 days of bombardment), Iraq and Libya under false pretexts, and supporting the coup d'état in Ukraine. I would like to quote President Ronald Reagan, who frequently referred to the Russian proverb "trust but verify".

History shows that British statements must be verified.

We demand full transparency of the investigation and full cooperation with Russia and with the OPCW. Alexander Yakovenko

Alexander Yakovenko

Alexander Yakovenko Russian Federation ambassador to London (since 2011). This author's articles

Voltaire Network

Voltaire, international edition Focus
News in Brief
Controversies
Diplomatic Wire
Documentary

[Mar 25, 2018] Who Will Stop the US-Russia Arms Race naked capitalism

Notable quotes:
"... Look, it's bogus. It's fiction. It's B.S. It's disinformation. It's American propaganda. The reality is this: Russia has been protesting about the, once we left, Washington left the Antiballistic Missile Treaty, Russia has been protesting what we've been building. We told Russia, why are you worried? It has nothing to do with Russia. This is all about Iran and, quote, rogue states, unidentified. Russia said, OK, in that case let's build it together. We actually have better radar facilities than you have. We'll build it, we'll manage it together. We refused that systematically. ..."
"... Every attempt Russian made to join in the creation of a missile defense system was rejected by Washington. Everybody, unless, you know, you believe in the Easter Bunny, I guess, that this system as it was expanded, increasingly, and it branched out, was directed at Russia. I mean, maybe it would have worked against Iran, too, but that was going to be a bonus. This was about Russia. The Russians knew it. You and I knew it. Everybody knew it. Do you know what is an indestructible weapon system? ..."
"... One funded in all 50 states. All right. That's what this missile defense has been. They farmed out manufacturing of it everywhere from Paducah Kentucky to Israel. Everybody gets a piece of the action. Therefore you get no protest in Congress because it's constituency politics. And that's true of a lot of the weapons systems we make. They're indestructible when all 50 states get a piece of the action, and that's what you have with this missile defense stuff. ..."
"... One reason this situation is so dangerous, Aaron, so dangerous, is that in the '70s and '80s, and I participated at a junior or younger level, the debate over Cold War or detente in the United States, that the pro-detente people, the anti-Cold War people had lots of very senior allies many in Congress. Even in the State Department. Even among presidential aides. It was always a fair fight. ..."
"... There is no one today. Only the Schumers and the Pelosis. And they have become with this Russia gate stuff, claiming that Putin attacked America and it was like Pearl Harbor or 9/11. I mean I never call people names, but this is warmongering. That's exactly what it is. If you claim Russia attacked America, the assumption is we have to attack Russia. And we're talking about nuclear war potentially. So what kind of political leadership is, we have descended into a morass of degraded commentary on Russia that has never even when the Soviet Union existed, even during the worst days of the Cold War, we didn't have this kind of discourse. ..."
"... Warmongering or just politics as usual? That Washington is behaving is a reckless manner these days re Russia is disconcerting, but so is its bellicose behavior toward China, N. Korea, Syria . It is the age of the Moron in Charge. ..."
"... "we're really only making money", ..."
"... make a some money ..."
Mar 25, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Who Will Stop the US-Russia Arms Race? Posted on March 25, 2018 by Jerri-Lynn Scofield Jerri-Lynn here: This Real News network interview with Professor Stephen F. Cohen, professor emeritus at Princeton and NYU, about the insane arms race between the United States and Russia is terrifying. Cohen concludes by discussing how the state of debate over detente has deteriorated since the '70s and '80s, when "the pro-detente people, the anti-Cold War people had lots of very senior allies many in Congress. Even in the State Department. Even among presidential aides. It was always a fair fight."

Yet now:

There is no one today. Only the Schumers and the Pelosis. And they have become with this Russia gate stuff, claiming that Putin attacked America and it was like Pearl Harbor or 9/11. I mean I never call people names, but this is warmongering. That's exactly what it is. If you claim Russia attacked America, the assumption is we have to attack Russia. And we're talking about nuclear war potentially. So what kind of political leadership is, we have descended into a morass of degraded commentary on Russia that has never even when the Soviet Union existed, even during the worst days of the Cold War, we didn't have this kind of discourse.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/u3fongKv1dc

AARON MATE: It's the Real News. I'm Aaron Mate.

President Trump is drawing heat for congratulating Russian President Vladimir Putin on his re-election victory. During a phone call with Putin this week Trump reportedly ignored a written directive from his aides that instructed him, quote, do not congratulate. Speaking to MSNBC, Democratic Sen. Mark Warner echoed the outraged response from Republican Sen. John McCain.

MARK WARNER: I think John McCain put out a statement today, and his words were better than mine. He says, the leader of the free world doesn't call up and congratulate a dictator over a sham election. And clearly that's what happened today.

AARON MATE: News of the friendly phone call prompted former CIA Director John Brennan to suggest that the Russians could have compromising information on Donald Trump.

REPORTER: Why won't the president confront Vladimir Putin, why won't he read the cards and say the things that you say need to be said to Vladimir Putin? Do you believe he is somehow in debt to the president of Russia?

JOHN BRENNAN: I think he's afraid of the president of Russia.

REPORTER: Why?

JOHN BRENNAN: Well, I think one can speculate as to why. That the Russians may have something on him personally that they could always roll out and make his life more difficult.

REPORTER: Do you believe Russia has something on him?

JOHN BRENNAN: I believe that the Russians would would not, they would opt for things to do if they believed that it was in their interests. And the Russians, I think, have had long experience with Mr. Trump and they have things that they could expose.

REPORTER: Something personal, perhaps?

JOHN BRENNAN: Perhaps. Perhaps.

AARON MATE: In his defense, Trump said on Twitter that President Obama had also congratulated Putin during his last win in 2012. And like Obama, Trump claimed he wants to cooperate with Russia on several issues, including the arms race. This comes weeks after Putin gave a speech unveiling a new nuclear arsenal and blaming the U.S. for the arms race. He later spoke to NBC News.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: If you were to speak about arms race, then an arms race began at exactly the time and moment when the U.S. opted out of the Antiballistic Missile Treaty.

AARON MATE: Well, why does Russia blame the U.S. for the arms race? And in this current political moment, can their differences possibly be resolved. Well, to discuss this, I spoke recently to Professor Stephen F. Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies at New York University and Princeton. And I began by asking him what Putin is seeking in his relationship with the U.S.

STEPHEN COHEN: Well, let's begin by saying that there's hardly been a time when Putin did not call for good relations with the United States, even in the worst of times. And he continues to refer to American political leaders as 'my partners,' even in the worst of times. This, by the way, drives harder line, or harder line people in the Soviet security establishment up the wall. They say to him, why do you keep calling them your partner?

Putin is a guy who came to power with the hope and intention of a real, functional, constructive economic political relationship with the United States. And though he may have given up that hope, he still calls for it. The speech he gave that you're referring to, the equivalent, I guess, of the state of the Union speech on March 1, was exceedingly important.

The first two thirds of it was essentially his electoral program. It dealt with domestic issues, what he hopes to do for the Russian people. It was very similar to speeches made here during our elections. He talked about education, he talked about infrastructure, he talked about pensions. He talked about health care. No American would be surprised.

[But the latter third. Putin called it historic, and I think it is. And we can explain this simply. Ever since the America and the Soviet Union acquired the capacity to put nuclear warheads on ballistic missiles, cross the seas and strike the other country, we have been in a strategic agreement called mutual assured destruction. And all that meant that if Washington launched at Moscow, within minutes Moscow would launch at Washington, and both countries would be grievously affected, if not completely destroyed. And this doctrine, called MAD, may seem frightful, but it kept the nuclear peace until the idea came up that you could build an antiballistic missile weapon, missile defense. It started with Reagan.

To prevent that, I think signed in 1972, was a treaty, the antiballistic missile treaty, which meant that the sides were prohibited from deploying antiballistic missile systems in order to preserve this mutual assured destruction so that neither side would be tempted to launch a first strike. Each side, America and the Soviet Union, was given one exemption. Moscow put a missile defense system over, Russia did over Moscow. And I think we have our someplace in South Dakota for some reason, I'm not sure why. In 2002 President Bush left this treaty, nullified it unilaterally.

Ever since then we've been pushing missile defense installations toward Russia. I think there are 30 or 40. They range from, as I understand it, California to Alaska. But there's one operating in Romania, one to open in Poland. But here's the thing. we've figured out how to deploy them on ships. And so these anti-missile defense systems are sailing on ships in the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea, right on Russia's borders.

So what did Putin say? And it's really, if if half of what he claimed for these weapons is true, and I'm sure more than half is true, he said, we have developed several weapons that do not lie at the ballistic level. That is, high in the sky and descend. They fly much lower, much faster, and they can elude any any missile system that you Americans have spent trillions of dollars on. So therefore, we have restored mutual assured destruction. He's saying that you Americans, and it's true some Americans did this, tried to develop missile defense so that you could threaten us wit,h or perhaps launch, a first nuclear strike knowing that your missile defense would protect you from retaliation. He said that was a fiction from the beginning. But we now have these new weapons which make it absolutely impossible. And so he ends by saying, therefore, having restored the balance of sanity, let us sit down and have major nuclear weapons talks again.

But again, Aaron, I mean, if it's true, and I have no reason to think it's not true, though the stages of development of these weapons is a little unclear, it's true what Putin said about these four or five new weapons systems. We are now in a completely new era, because since the end of the Soviet Union the United States has tried to develop at least the capacity of a first strike capability at Russia using these missile defenses. That is over. It's not possible any longer. Trillions of dollars have been wasted.

By the way, I forget which administration, Bush or Obama, made missile defense a NATO project. It started out as an American project. But it officially gave it to NATO. Why? Because where NATO goes, the missile defense installations go, and NATO has expanded right to Russia's borders.

So this is an historic turning point, assuming what Putin said is largely true. Though you wouldn't know it. I guess you had on professor Theodore Postol of MIT. And I mean, Ted is excellent on this stuff but you don't get any of this in the mainstream media. Putin's speech was read as an act of threatened aggression against the United States. It was just the opposite.

AARON MATE: Right. And you know, I think what we often forget, too, is that as this missile system , defensive missile system, whatever it's called, was developed, especially under Bush number two, George W. Bush, it was billed to Russia for so long as being targeted towards Iran. Which seems like a pretty tough sell to accept when, when it's actually being positioned so close to Russia.

STEPHEN COHEN: Look, it's bogus. It's fiction. It's B.S. It's disinformation. It's American propaganda. The reality is this: Russia has been protesting about the, once we left, Washington left the Antiballistic Missile Treaty, Russia has been protesting what we've been building. We told Russia, why are you worried? It has nothing to do with Russia. This is all about Iran and, quote, rogue states, unidentified. Russia said, OK, in that case let's build it together. We actually have better radar facilities than you have. We'll build it, we'll manage it together. We refused that systematically.

Every attempt Russian made to join in the creation of a missile defense system was rejected by Washington. Everybody, unless, you know, you believe in the Easter Bunny, I guess, that this system as it was expanded, increasingly, and it branched out, was directed at Russia. I mean, maybe it would have worked against Iran, too, but that was going to be a bonus. This was about Russia. The Russians knew it. You and I knew it. Everybody knew it. Do you know what is an indestructible weapon system?

AARON MATE: No I don't.

STEPHEN COHEN: One funded in all 50 states. All right. That's what this missile defense has been. They farmed out manufacturing of it everywhere from Paducah Kentucky to Israel. Everybody gets a piece of the action. Therefore you get no protest in Congress because it's constituency politics. And that's true of a lot of the weapons systems we make. They're indestructible when all 50 states get a piece of the action, and that's what you have with this missile defense stuff.

AARON MATE: OK, so, speaking of Congress. If there is to be any push for Trump to engage with what Putin said seriously and try to restart some sort of arms control talks, including the New START treaty, which Trump has indicated little interest in advancing, you'd think that it would be Trump's opposition party who would be pushing him towards that.

Now, recently there were some Democratic senators to call for a new round of strategic arms talks with Russia. But I want to read to you a quote from the Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, where he is greeting the news of Mike Pompeo now being the secretary of state. And instead of pointing to Pompeo's open disdain for the Iran nuclear deal and his hawkishness on things including Russia, this is what Chuck Schumer said. He said: The instability of this administration and just about every area weakens America. If he's confirmed we hope that Mr. Pompeo will turn up we'll turn over a new leaf and will start toughening up our policies towards Russia and Putin, unquote.

So Professor Cohen, as we wrap, that is the top priority from the leader of the opposition party Chuck Schumer, for the new nominee to be secretary of state to be tougher towards Russia.

STEPHEN COHEN: Well, but it's not just Schumer. And Schumer is not to make this distinction as statesmen. He is a kind of local politician risen way above his pay grade when it comes to foreign affairs. It was outrageous what he said. But a lot of the Democratic leaders are saying this sort of thing.

I mean, let me make the point you made before. One reason this situation is so dangerous, Aaron, so dangerous, is that in the '70s and '80s, and I participated at a junior or younger level, the debate over Cold War or detente in the United States, that the pro-detente people, the anti-Cold War people had lots of very senior allies many in Congress. Even in the State Department. Even among presidential aides. It was always a fair fight.

There is no one today. Only the Schumers and the Pelosis. And they have become with this Russia gate stuff, claiming that Putin attacked America and it was like Pearl Harbor or 9/11. I mean I never call people names, but this is warmongering. That's exactly what it is. If you claim Russia attacked America, the assumption is we have to attack Russia. And we're talking about nuclear war potentially. So what kind of political leadership is, we have descended into a morass of degraded commentary on Russia that has never even when the Soviet Union existed, even during the worst days of the Cold War, we didn't have this kind of discourse.

AARON MATE: We have to leave it there. Professor Stephen F. Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies at New York University and Princeton University. Thank you.

STEPHEN COHEN: Pray a lot, Aaron.

AARON MATE: Will do. And thank you for joining us on the Real News.

Tomonthebeach , , March 25, 2018 at 3:35 am

Warmongering or just politics as usual? That Washington is behaving is a reckless manner these days re Russia is disconcerting, but so is its bellicose behavior toward China, N. Korea, Syria . It is the age of the Moron in Charge.

Pelosi and Schumer, are likely motivated by sticking as much McCarthy-tar to Trump as they can before the elections, because Mueller-goo is not yet available. I doubt that they would support preemptive attacks. In Trump's case WH recklessness appears to be adolescent bravado -- soon to be amplified by his new National Jingo Advisor. Preemptive attacks are Bolton's broken record (whyizit saber-rattlers are always cowardly draft dodgers?).

timbers , , March 25, 2018 at 8:17 am

That Washington is behaving is a reckless manner these days re Russia is disconcerting, but so is its bellicose behavior toward China, N. Korea, Syria . It is the age of the Moron in Charge.

If by the Age of Moron in Charge you refer to Obama as well as Trump, I agree with you. Yet sill, your moron in charge misses the point that it is primarily Democrats -- not Trump -- who've embraced and created the Russiagate nonsense that is probably the far greater danger.

But your moron in charge holds up perfectly with all the other nations, besides Russia.

Russia isn't Iraq. She can wipe the United States off the face of earth at will if she is forced to.

IMO you underestimate the level of danger the "politics as usual" is causing this time with the Democratic Tea Party Birtherists spreading so many lies about Russia it's impossible to keep track of, and it's affect is to create war with Russia.

In other words, the politics of usual you think this is not usual at all. Its UN-usually dangerous and irresponsible.

oh , , March 25, 2018 at 2:57 pm

The tar babies will soon have s**t on their face and after millions of $$$$ the Mueller-goo will fail to stick. Too bad we can't get Trumpie and his boys as well as the Dimrats to sink in the large tar pit.

jackiebass , , March 25, 2018 at 6:23 am

The answer is no-one. Our government and policy is controlled by the security, industrial , military complex. Exactly what Ike predicted before leaving office.

Jerri-Lynn Scofield Post author , , March 25, 2018 at 11:31 am

Yes, Ike did indeed deliver that notable speech. But he didn't shut down the Dulles brothers when he had the chance. Instead, he more or less gave them carte blanche. I recently read Stephen Kinzer's The Brothers -- and it reminded me just how odious they were, and how their malign influence continues to haunt US foreign policy.

Dirk77 , , March 25, 2018 at 7:39 am

I have often wondered about Aristotle's observation of democracy -> oligarchy -> tyranny and if it were really universal. But as time goes on I see myself wondering if a tyrant who was actually an adult would be better than the children who run this country, elected though they may be.

A possibly softer landing would be for the rest of the world to gang up on the USA and administer a beat down a la Sparta in the Peloponnesisn war. Perhaps if the US economy finally crashes and no one fears us anymore economically. Would that do it? I don't see the children having much of a spine.

JTMcPhee , , March 25, 2018 at 8:42 am

The children in this neighborhood all have caches of old-fashioned matches and lots of butane lighters and the gasoline cans from the garages in their single-family houses. And if the beat-down happens, handed out by folks in other neighborhoods, my bet is that these children are socio-psychopathic enough to burn down the other neighborhoods.

Earlier versions of the "Single Integrated Operational Plan" which like its successors and what's now OPLAN 8010-12 listed out the targeting options for the US imperial nuclear weapons, included some interesting possibilities. Maybe it was because the stockpile numbers of warheads was so large, at over 30,000 weapons, that the "most strategically important" target set was expected to be "taken out" (cue the nuclear winter scenario), leaving a lot of "unused" warheads for other purposes. So those target lists, from what I read, included the capitals and commercial centers of a whole lot of other supposedly "friendly" or at least "neutral" places. The notion being that if the Empire was to be destroyed, why should some upstart probably socialist-tending bunch of Wogs be left to survive and profit from picking over the remains of the Vast Global Capitalist Empire?

So my guess is that, given all the globalization-effectuated corruption and interlocking interests of the Elites, and the Empire's innovative and disruptive means and methods of "destabilizing" and "democratizing" places where "anti- full spectrum dominance global capitalist US" sentiments and motions might arise, getting the Peloponnesus Consensus together and functioning is just not going to happen. The pathogens and Neo-plasms have hijacked all the other organ systems, all the incentives are lined up (as with Cohen's rendering of that other "50-state strategy," and like In that scene in "Planet of the Apes" franchise, you'll have Charlotte Heston encountering the top of the Statue of Liberty sticking up from the beach and wailing, Oh my God I'm back. I'm home. All the time, it was We finally really did it. [falls to his knees screaming] YOU MANIACS! YOU BLEW IT UP! AH, DAMN YOU! GOD DAMN YOU ALL TO HELL!! [camera pans to reveal the half-destroyed Statue of Liberty sticking out of the sand] For the video version, looking here: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XvuM3DjvYf0

But never you worry, children, it's only a movie And Daddy has such a good job there at the Pantex plant https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantex_Plant And you know Reverend Billy Bob has it straight from God that we will all be raptured up to Heaven before the bombs detonate! And We Are Ready! https://www.raptureready.com/

Dirk77 , , March 25, 2018 at 2:04 pm

So you don't think the children can estimate odds very well? Hmm. Since change seems to occur now faster than in the past, I guess we are all going to find out in our lifetime.

Quentin , , March 25, 2018 at 9:00 am

Imagine being a North Korean, Russian, Iranian.. hearing the ravings of Washington about attacking your country, your house, your family, killing whoever gets in the way why? Mrs. Clinton knows all about it, ' and he died'. guffaw, girly giggle, guffaw; Mr. McCain, 'bomb, bomb Iran', to the tune of teenage, musical drivel from half a century ago; Mr. Obama 'Gee, I'm really good at killing', concluding with a knowing grin worthy of an Academy Award; and so forth. Only a rant can possibly relay the breadth and depth of US institutionalised violence at home and abroad.

timbers , , March 25, 2018 at 9:04 am

Watching the video truly is scary. Democrats like Pelosi and Schumer have truly lost their minds. Parapheasing Stephen Cohen: "We have never seen this kind of rhetoric even at the height of the Cold War with the Soviet Union."

Sometimes I fail to realize how insane Democrats (and of course Republicans) have become, because I don't watch TV and the corporate news shows regularly, and I've lost interest in the relentless fake news charges against Russia it just never stops and it's always wrong.

I do have Democratic friends who have called me names, insulted my intelligence, and implied bad social identity labels to me like "DO you believe the hallocaust even happened?" and talked down to me like I am mentally retarded, when I insist to them that money laundering and tax evasion by Americans in deals in Ukraine or elsewhere is not equivalent to showing evidence that Russia meddled in the election, who insist it's illegal to talk to Russians, that all Russians are spies and enemies of America. One Democrats told me Capone was convicted of mail fraud, and he was a gangster, so these people are guilty of election meddling.

My Republican friends a bit more nuanced regarding Russia. They usually don't like Putin, but seem indifferent or show little interest with the election meddling angle.

Bill Smith , , March 25, 2018 at 9:08 am

Funny, today the Russian newspaper at nvo.ng.ru has an article on the rise of the Chinese military and the need to keep up with them.

RenoDino , , March 25, 2018 at 9:15 am

The budget that Trump just signed doubles down on all the weapons systems that Russia just made obsolete with its recent announcement of new strategic delivery systems. General Mattis thanked the country for its sacrifice in making this huge military expenditure possible. (I about drove into a tree when I heard him say this. He is actually admitting that everyone and everything must now suffer because this is now the country's highest priority when, in fact, we are not at war yet.)

In exchange for crumbling roads, schools and bridges, a public healthcare crisis and massive economic inequality, you will be receiving half a trillion dollars of military gear that will be useless right out of the box.

Given the corrupt and archaic procurement methods used by this country, that has virtually no oversight, we can expect the defense gap between our current weapons systems and the Russians to be at least twenty years at current funding levels.

rkka , , March 25, 2018 at 9:37 am

I'll gently disagree with Prof. Cohen on one point.

Opposing the destroyers of Detente was never a fair fight.

Yes, the policy of Detente did have support at the highest levels of government and academia, but they were vastly outnumbered by the Paul Nitzes and the Richard Pipes'se, and the destroyers of Detente lied about & distorted Brezhnev's intentions every bit as much as their intellectual heirs now lie about & distort Putin's intentions.

And this is nothing new. A similar hysteria followed the victory in 1945. A perceptive observer at the time, a British Army officer who served on the British military mission to the USSR, minces no words.

"Even in Russia, the land of immensities, it means that one in every twelve Russians alive in 1941, one In twelve men, women, and children, has died a violent death, in order that the others might resume their lives with a swing and, if possible, a flourish. And most of those fifteen million were adults.

The survivors will not, of course, forget this. But we seem to have forgotten it. Because now, with this great country shattered, ravaged, and exhausted, with her people strained to the breaking-point, and with her adult manhood more than decimated-now, at this moment, there are many loud voices in the West crying out that another war is coming quickly and that this time the aggressor is Russia. And these voices, which cry out of a depth of imbecility, or ignorance, or unimaginativeness which is truly horrifying to contemplate, are widely believed."

Edward Crankshaw-Russia and the Russians, 1948, pgs 200-201

Imbecility, ignorance, unimaginitiveness. Of a depth which is truly horrifying to contemplate.

Hallmarks of the postwar US foreign policy elite, from the get-go.

Blue Pilgrim , , March 25, 2018 at 9:38 am

Cohen understands.

The arms race is over, and Russia has won, for decades to come, but for some carrying through and tying up some strings. Sadly, the plutocracy and politicians, especially the psychopaths, don't know this or are in denial.

The fictions (with the aid of the media) in the demonization of Russia and trying to maintain the empire may well push us into war and global destruction before climate destruction takes most of us out.
Since I wasn't here for the beginning of the 'Stupid Mankind play', maybe being here for the end is next best thing? The final curtain call could happen any time now if huge numbers of people don't wake up, end the absurd games, and stop it. Otherwise, this is not business or politics as usual, but very likely the last act.

Bill Smith , , March 25, 2018 at 10:31 am

What, exactly did the Russians win?

Rates , , March 25, 2018 at 12:11 pm

They have weapons now that will totally nullify an aircraft carrier group. Their weapons actually work as demonstrated in Syria, while America did all sorts of shitty expensive stuff that bombed like the F35.

Think about it this way. You have a common enemy, and you take turns to take the enemy on. If you are doing better than your rival, presumably your weapons/tactics are better no? That's what Russia demonstrated in Syria.

Americans continue to think that they have the best military in the world. It's as if Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq didn't happen. Americans better pray that they are not engaging Iran soon. Let's put it this way, if Iran is so easy to beat, why haven't the Israelis done it on their own?

Blue Pilgrim , , March 25, 2018 at 1:26 pm

What 'Rates' says, and also the new weapons Putin talked about in his speech, unstoppable hypersonic non-ballistic weapons, and M.A.D. fully in effect. Except Russia has somewhat better chance for surviving for a while, until the global radiation and nuclear winter takes out everyone who live through the initial onslaught.

The ABM stuff, what might have worked to a very limited extent, is now totally obsolete. US doing first strike is suicide. And even trying to catch up will not only take decades, but bankrupt the country entirely.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDGvrdqQZVY
Putin's annual address to Federal Assembly (FULL VIDEO)

(March 1, 2018) Military section begins about 1 hour 15 minutes.

http://en.special.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/56957

The Rev Kev , , March 25, 2018 at 10:11 am

You know the democrats should really re-consider their push for a war with Russia. Clinton supporters on the 2016 electoral map were scattered in small pockets around America which came to known as the Clinton Archipelago. With a few judicious nuclear strikes, the Russians could virtually wipe out the bulk majority of democrat voters for good leaving an all-Republican America left standing.

Lee , , March 25, 2018 at 1:05 pm

Now that would constitute election meddling.

Watt4Bob , , March 25, 2018 at 11:29 am

The sad fact is that America's rulers are not actually pushing war with Russia, they are just trying to make a lot of money by aligning themselves with the interests of those who profit from the arms race.

Our rulers long ago gave up even pretending to oppose wasteful military spending and simply rubber-stamp any spending requests no matter how obviously ill conceived, or even useless.

They probably feel deep in their hearts that since the whole point of their game is to enrich those who produce the weapons, and by extension, themselves, as opposed to preparing for war, that their behavior is not evil, dangerous warmongering, it's only making money, which everyone knows is the sacred right of every American, enshrined in our constitution

The problem is, that even though every thinking person on the rest of the planet understands that our rulers believe "we're really only making money", they also understand that that belief is a giant delusion, obscuring the fact that making all that money involves not only spending $trillions buying weapons from the folks who pay to get them elected, but killing millions of people in the mindless process of manufacturing enemies to justify the expense.

So now we've arrived at the point where our collective insanity, and bad behavior has convinced Russia and China to develop weapons systems to counter ours, but theirs are not simply money making schemes designed to enrich a small bunch of their richest people, their weapons are actually reliable and effective.

You may ask how I know that their weapons are reliable and effective, it is because their purpose is to defend their countries from the obviously greed-crazed and hysterical psychopaths who have purchased control of our country, and have perpetrated the myth that we are busy spreading peace and our superior democratic values around the world by spreading chaos, death and destruction.

We've become the existential threat to the planet, and most of people on earth understand that fact more clearly than we do, because we're so thoroughly marinated in the myth of America's unassailable virtues, and blind to the fact that hysterical greed is not a virtue.

Donald and Hillary and Nancy and Chuck are all just trying to make a some money , that's one way of looking at it.

marku52 , , March 25, 2018 at 3:46 pm

Russian and Chinese weapons *have* to work, because they have all the evidence in the world that the US is deranged enough to use its own.

Whoa Molly! , , March 25, 2018 at 12:26 pm

"funded in all 50 states. All right. That's what this missile defense has been."

Serious questions for NC commentariat:

-- Why has there been no serious movement for infrastructure spending instead of bloated, wasteful MIC spending? Seems like infrastructure is (could be) a 50 state spending.

-- Has any empire ever prioritised infrastructure spending over military expansionism and wars? Ever?

-- Would depression era WPA be an example? If so why did WPA cause such antipathy on right?

oh , , March 25, 2018 at 4:01 pm

The MIC with its bloated contracts have more lobbyists (bribers) than the construction companies that compete locally since the states have to pitch in a considerable amount for infrastructure projects. And the Congress critters can't use the fear card to promote infrastructure spending.

Whoa Molly! , , March 25, 2018 at 4:15 pm

Sounds like fear is the easiest and most consistent motivator for social and political change.

Once MIC spending begins, a load of people who are getting rich off the contracts are highly motivated to keep things going.

Thus the "New Red Scare", bloated MIC contracts, and endless war.

(I am trying to think clearly about this)

Huey Long , , March 25, 2018 at 4:16 pm

-- Why has there been no serious movement for infrastructure spending instead of bloated, wasteful MIC spending? Seems like infrastructure is (could be) a 50 state spending.

MIC spending is completely unaccountable. ( https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/12/08/569394885/pentagon-announces-first-ever-audit-of-the-department-of-defense ) Infrastructure spending is not.

-- Has any empire ever prioritised infrastructure spending over military expansionism and wars? Ever?

I can't recall any imperial state that has done so, although Rome and China did build some major infrastructure projects such as the Grand Canal and the Roman Aqueducts. Both are still in use today thousands of years later.

http://www.romanaqueducts.info/q&a/11stillinuse.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Canal_(China)#Modern_course

-- Would depression era WPA be an example? If so why did WPA cause such antipathy on right?

I'll quote Kalecki here and leave it at that:

We have considered the political reasons for the opposition to the policy of creating employment by government spending. But even if this opposition were overcome -- as it may well be under the pressure of the masses -- the maintenance of full employment would cause social and political changes which would give a new impetus to the opposition of the business leaders. Indeed, under a regime of permanent full employment, the 'sack' would cease to play its role as a 'disciplinary measure. The social position of the boss would be undermined, and the self-assurance and class-consciousness of the working class would grow. Strikes for wage increases and improvements in conditions of work would create political tension. It is true that profits would be higher under a regime of full employment than they are on the average under laissez-faire, and even the rise in wage rates resulting from the stronger bargaining power of the workers is less likely to reduce profits than to increase prices, and thus adversely affects only the rentier interests. But 'discipline in the factories' and 'political stability' are more appreciated than profits by business leaders. Their class instinct tells them that lasting full employment is unsound from their point of view, and that unemployment is an integral part of the 'normal' capitalist system.

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/08/kalecki-on-the-political-obstacles-to-achieving-full-employment.html

Anarcissie , , March 25, 2018 at 1:03 pm

To repeat myself from a few years ago, ''The Devil rages because his time is short,' indeed, but, 'Beware the lash of the dragon's tail as he dies.'

julia , , March 25, 2018 at 2:25 pm

I am canadian but was born in communist germany, lived " behind the iron curtain " for the first twenty years of my live. I still do not know, whom to thank for, that back than, we did not get " liberated" by the western world, or that they did not try for regime change
Now by default, I am supposedly on the other side of the new cold war. It is not my side either.
I absolutly do not want any war, no even a cold war, but this aggressive Neoliberal US and Nato politic is pulling the whole world down.
I am no fan of Putin, but he is not pushing for war.
I went in the 80' to soviet union and could still see what my people had done there
and no, the russians do not want another war.

[Mar 25, 2018] Neocon lobby and Iraq war

Mar 25, 2018 | www.unz.com

renfro , March 25, 2018 at 9:45 pm GMT

... US Senator Ernest Hollings was moved in May 2004 to acknowledge that the US invaded Iraq "to secure Israel," and "everybody" knows it.

...who played an important role in prodding the US into war: Richard Perle, chair of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board; Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary; and Charles Krauthammer, columnist and author.

Hollings referred to the cowardly reluctance of his Congressional colleagues to acknowledge this truth openly, saying that "nobody is willing to stand up and say what is going on ."

Due to "the pressures we get politically," he added, members of Congress uncritically support Israel and its policies.

Remarks by Ernest F. Hollings, May 20, 2004. Congressional Record -- Senate, May 20, 2004, pages S5921-S5925. Also ""Iraq Was Invaded to Secure Israel

[Mar 25, 2018] The Ukrainian pilot that, according to Russia, by accident shot down MH17, just committed suicide. I wonder if he was suicided

Notable quotes:
"... The Ukrainian pilot that, according to Russia, by accident shot down MH17, just committed suicide. I wonder if he was suicided. Sensational murders, or attempted murders, have quite different purposes. Blaming someone. ..."
"... Who believes that Arafat was not murdered, does anyone believe that the Diana accident was an accident, who believes the Hess and Kelly suicides ? Why was Palme murdered, who indeed thinks that Anna Lyndh was killed accidentally, that Barschel committed suicide, that Mölleman died accidentally ? And so on, and so forth. ..."
Mar 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

jilles dykstra , March 19, 2018 at 12:56 pm GMT

@Randal

There is one 'track record', Litvinov, killed by polonium. What secret service would be so dumb as to use this, pointing immediately to state murder ? Accidents, and suicides are quiet methods for keeping people silent for all times.

The Ukrainian pilot that, according to Russia, by accident shot down MH17, just committed suicide. I wonder if he was suicided. Sensational murders, or attempted murders, have quite different purposes. Blaming someone.

Who believes that Arafat was not murdered, does anyone believe that the Diana accident was an accident, who believes the Hess and Kelly suicides ? Why was Palme murdered, who indeed thinks that Anna Lyndh was killed accidentally, that Barschel committed suicide, that Mölleman died accidentally ? And so on, and so forth.

[Mar 25, 2018] Breaking: 'Silenced' Ukrainian Military Pilot Accused of Attack on Boeing MH17 Found Dead by Gordon Duff

"... VT has long asserted that two Ukrainian SU 25s or SU27s "radar spoofed" shot down MH 17. We did so on live Russia Today backed by experienced combat pilots and we presented evidence that an Israeli F15E AWAC aided, taking off from Azerbaijan, to vector in the shootdown. ..."
"... Now, years later, Russia speaks up after we believe media there was silenced by pro-Israeli traitors ..."
"... Voloshin's name came to be associated with independent investigations into the destruction of Flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine. In late 2014, a Ukrainian army aircraft mechanic told Russian media that the passenger airliner may have been downed by a Su-25 close air support aircraft flown by Voloshin. ..."
"... The Ukrainian side confirmed that the pilot was in the military at the time, but denied that he flew on the day the Malaysian airliner was brought down. ..."
"... Speaking to Sputnik about Voloshin's suspected suicide, Ukrainian politics expert Bogdan Bezpalko said that Kiev's version aside, "one cannot help but think that the other side may have eliminated him as a dangerous witness who could have lifted the veil of secrecy over the downing of MH17, which would subsequently strengthen Russia's position." ..."
"... In Bezpalko's view, Kiev and its Western power will continue to do everything they can to see that the truth about the tragedy of flight MH17 does not surface anytime soon. "It's possible that others who could shed light on this matter will be 'silenced' in one way or another. So I don't think we will learn the truth any time soon. ..."
"... I would like to recall, for example, that all matters related to the flight of Rudolf Hess to Britain [in 1941] remain classified to the British people for 100 years. And I think that the circumstances of the airliner will be made known only when the urgency of the matter disappears," the observer said. ..."
Notable quotes:
"... VT has long asserted that two Ukrainian SU 25s or SU27s "radar spoofed" shot down MH 17. We did so on live Russia Today backed by experienced combat pilots and we presented evidence that an Israeli F15E AWAC aided, taking off from Azerbaijan, to vector in the shootdown. ..."
"... Now, years later, Russia speaks up after we believe media there was silenced by pro-Israeli traitors ..."
"... Voloshin's name came to be associated with independent investigations into the destruction of Flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine. In late 2014, a Ukrainian army aircraft mechanic told Russian media that the passenger airliner may have been downed by a Su-25 close air support aircraft flown by Voloshin. ..."
"... The Ukrainian side confirmed that the pilot was in the military at the time, but denied that he flew on the day the Malaysian airliner was brought down. ..."
"... Speaking to Sputnik about Voloshin's suspected suicide, Ukrainian politics expert Bogdan Bezpalko said that Kiev's version aside, "one cannot help but think that the other side may have eliminated him as a dangerous witness who could have lifted the veil of secrecy over the downing of MH17, which would subsequently strengthen Russia's position." ..."
"... In Bezpalko's view, Kiev and its Western power will continue to do everything they can to see that the truth about the tragedy of flight MH17 does not surface anytime soon. "It's possible that others who could shed light on this matter will be 'silenced' in one way or another. So I don't think we will learn the truth any time soon. ..."
"... I would like to recall, for example, that all matters related to the flight of Rudolf Hess to Britain [in 1941] remain classified to the British people for 100 years. And I think that the circumstances of the airliner will be made known only when the urgency of the matter disappears," the observer said. ..."
www.theamericanconservative.com

[ Editor's note : VT has long asserted that two Ukrainian SU 25s or SU27s "radar spoofed" shot down MH 17. We did so on live Russia Today backed by experienced combat pilots and we presented evidence that an Israeli F15E AWAC aided, taking off from Azerbaijan, to vector in the shootdown.

Now, years later, Russia speaks up after we believe media there was silenced by pro-Israeli traitors Gordon Duff ]

*

The pilot's death, preliminarily ruled a suicide, has reopened claims about his possible role in the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over eastern Ukraine in the summer of 2014.

Vladislav Voloshin, the Ukrainian combat pilot which some Russian investigative journalists have accused of responsibility for the MH17 disaster, allegedly shot himself Sunday at his home.

According to a press release by police in the southern Ukrainian city of Mykolaiv, the 29-year-old pilot's wife heard the gunshot and called the emergency services. Voloshin succumbed to his wounds on route to hospital.

According to the police, the pilot was shot by a Makarov pistol, a standard issue military and police side arm in Ukraine. The weapon has been sent for examination. Police have opened a criminal investigation.

Inconvenient Facts: JIT Likely to Ignore New Russian MH17 Evidence

Relatives told police that Voloshin had been in a depressed state, and had voiced suicidal thoughts. Friends and family told local media that he was suffering from problems associated with the reconstruction of Mykolaiv's airport, where he was acting director.

Voloshin's name came to be associated with independent investigations into the destruction of Flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine. In late 2014, a Ukrainian army aircraft mechanic told Russian media that the passenger airliner may have been downed by a Su-25 close air support aircraft flown by Voloshin.

The Ukrainian side confirmed that the pilot was in the military at the time, but denied that he flew on the day the Malaysian airliner was brought down.

Speaking to Sputnik about Voloshin's suspected suicide, Ukrainian politics expert Bogdan Bezpalko said that Kiev's version aside, "one cannot help but think that the other side may have eliminated him as a dangerous witness who could have lifted the veil of secrecy over the downing of MH17, which would subsequently strengthen Russia's position."

According to the political scientist, "it's quite obvious that it was not in Russia's interest to shoot down this plane, and that all this was a provocation directed against our country."

In Bezpalko's view, Kiev and its Western power will continue to do everything they can to see that the truth about the tragedy of flight MH17 does not surface anytime soon. "It's possible that others who could shed light on this matter will be 'silenced' in one way or another. So I don't think we will learn the truth any time soon.

I would like to recall, for example, that all matters related to the flight of Rudolf Hess to Britain [in 1941] remain classified to the British people for 100 years. And I think that the circumstances of the airliner will be made known only when the urgency of the matter disappears," the observer said.

EXCLUSIVE: Kiev 'Turned Blind Eye to Lives of 298 People Aboard MH17'

On July 17, 2014, a Malasyia Airlines Boeing 777 flying from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur crashed outside the city of Donetsk, eastern Ukraine, killing all 298 people onboard.Kiev blamed the crash on the Donbass independence fighters, who countered by saying they did not have the means to bring down an aircraft flying at such a high altitude.

An inquiry by Dutch investigators concluded that the Boeing was shot down by a Buk missile system, which it alleged was delivered to the militia from Russia and then sent back. Moscow slammed the inquiry's bias, saying that the investigators' conclusions were based exclusively on information received from the Ukrainian side.

A separate investigation by Almaz-Antei, maker of the Buk system, concluded that the Boeing was shot down from territory controlled by the Ukrainian military.

[Mar 25, 2018] The former Ukrainian pilot Vladislav Voloshin, suspected of attacking Boeing 777 of Malaysia Airlines, committed suicide

He was 29...
Mar 19, 2018 | news.yandex.ru

The former Ukrainian pilot Vladislav Voloshin, suspected of attacking Boeing 777 of Malaysia Airlines, committed suicide. This was reported by the police of the Mykolayiv region. A retired military pilot killed himself at his home.

https://russian.rt.com/ussr/news/493702-ukraina-samoubiistvo-podozrevaemyi-mh17

https://www.vesti.ru/m/doc.html?id=2996849

[Mar 25, 2018] It Wasn't Russia (2) Veterans Today

Notable quotes:
"... I was amazed to learn this week that some websites are still pushing the discredited claim the Sukhoi-25 cannot reach FL330 (33'000 ft), the altitude MH17 was flying at when it was shot down. The issue is not whether a -25 can reach FL330 -- clearly it can, on combat power. The issue is why has the desperate lie that it could not been persisted in for so long? ..."
Mar 25, 2018 | www.veteranstoday.com

MH17

Western governments and media continue to lie about MH17. I have not yet seen a government report which attempts to grapple with the fact that the pro-Russian rebels blamed for the disaster lacked access to the arming codes for the Buk missile system in their possession, for example.

I was amazed to learn this week that some websites are still pushing the discredited claim the Sukhoi-25 cannot reach FL330 (33'000 ft), the altitude MH17 was flying at when it was shot down. The issue is not whether a -25 can reach FL330 -- clearly it can, on combat power. The issue is why has the desperate lie that it could not been persisted in for so long?

Service ceiling for the Su-25M, of which the Ukrainian Air Force has at least two examples, is 33,000 ft and higher with combat power. In any event the Ukrainians didn't need armor-plate to fire at an unarmed 777. As I have pointed out on these pages before the -25 has a heavy, titanium armor 'bath' designed to protect the pilot from ground fire. Remove that and you immediately buy yourself extra performance.

You won't find any of these points acknowledged on Wikipedia. The intellectual dishonesty of those pushing the 'Russian rebel' conspiracy theory is breath-taking.

[Mar 25, 2018] Germans media and voting for Mama Merkel

Notable quotes:
"... The mainstream media here in Germany, which is entirely and 100% under CIA control ..."
"... yes.... 100% right..... the servility of Germany with Merkel is disgusting and unbearable ..."
"... It's what one expects from Merkel and her NWO domesticated admin. EU gov'ts have been crying wolf for so long that few now believe a word coming from their media. ..."
Mar 25, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Serg Derbst • 2 days ago ,

I have the same worries. The mainstream media here in Germany, which is entirely and 100% under CIA control , has been ramping up anti-Russia propaganda since weeks. I didn't think it would be possible after the Ukraine conflict but it is even worse now. The comments of this filthy lunatic Boris Johnson but also of his boss-bitch Theresa May have been way below any line of decency. It's even below the kind of rhetoric Hitler has used when he talked about other statesmen such as (this fat, ugly war-criminal and mass murderer) Winston Churchill.

But it's not "the West" that is going to war, it is the Anglo-American establishment. "West" is an artificial propaganda term that should not be used anyway, because all it denotes is the countries dominated by Anglo-America. Germany and France, the only countries powerful enough to stop Anglo-American madness, are usually dancing to the tune of Warshington and London, but I am not so sure if they will really go all the way here, especially with Iran. Also and despite all the propaganda, while German and French people may not trust Russia and see Putin as a "dictator", they also see the US regime (especially with the Trumpet in charge) as nothing but a dangerous, trigger-happy war machinery. There is no way you could sell a war against Iran to them, also not the rest of Europe including Britain. I even have doubts about whether the American public would swallow such a war.

Either way, it will be a disaster for the "West" - economically, politically, militarily. In fact, it will be the end of the "West" and of the Anglo-American empire including the Zionist colony. So in the end there might be a great result of yet another horror. What Russia really needs to do now is to give both Syria and Iran the full power of Russian air defence.

CyricRenner Serg Derbst • a day ago ,

Having spent some time in Germany, I have to agree with these comments. If you think the Propaganda is bad in the US and the UK, in Germany it is even worse. It is almost as if they are in competition to be the most servile and obedient to their masters. It is if history doesn't even exist. It is 1941 all over again. The difference being Germany has nothing to fight with and if it comes to war they will be absolutely pulverized to nuclear ash.

This is how stupid the media is to hype this Anti-Russian propaganda 24/7, 7 days a week. There is no real "alternative" news that I could find either. If there is a silver lining in all this though, is that many Germans don't take the media seriously at all anymore. When you overcook the pot, this is what can happen. Just like that fool Boris Johnson. He has now compared Putin to Hitler and the 1936 olympics. How stupid can this buffoon be? You think you can just carry on with business as usual once this stupid provocation with the poisoned spy blows over after saying something like that? He hasn't just insulted Putin, he has insulted all of Russia who sacrificed more than any other country to stop Hitler. I can't believe what low IQ clowns the UK is producing as politicians these days. It is really scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Nationalist Globalist Oligarch CyricRenner • a day ago ,

Does it really matter if the so called Germans take the media seriously?

They keep voting for Mama Merkel, that really tells me quite a bit about the people living in Germany and their political concerns.

Peter Jennings Nationalist Globalist Oligarch • 19 hours ago ,

Has Germany ever had an election without US interference? I would imagine that securing power for anyone they choose in the EU has been a doddle for the US, even Hitler's daughter. That would be a sick joke typical of US neocons.

Nationalist Globalist Oligarch Peter Jennings • 16 hours ago ,

Has the USA ever had an election with out interference from its ruling class?

Seems to me the only people really being represented anywhere are the elite, the common citizen is just unimportant fodder to be led and manipulated.

Canosin CyricRenner • a day ago ,

yes.... 100% right..... the servility of Germany with Merkel is disgusting and unbearable .....

wilmers13 CyricRenner • 3 hours ago ,

As a former journalist in Germany I agree. All German news and current affairs are sanitized. People who object to too much power in the hands of the US on German soil or who are against the wars will be sidelined or blacklisted, depending on what their job is. "They" prepare for a new war, or they would not need a new billion $ military hospital near Ramstein. It said in one article that the German government could not prevent it and had to contribute, too. Pawns.

On the whole, though, what they prepare is NOT a war by the West, it is by the US for Full Spectrum Dominance. They rope in allies,sure, but I'd like to be optimistic. After the Iraq and ME experiences the populations (also here in Australia) are not enthusiastic. So maybe this time it will be US vs .... and they cannot hide behind a coalition.

The governments of Germany and Australia always kowtow of course. Ramstein and Pine Gap are crucial for the warmongers.

Serg Derbst CyricRenner • 5 hours ago ,

Thank you for recognizing this, but you're wrong about the German alternative scene. I think it is one of the strongest out there, it is just, well, German. Not so aggressive and more analytical. If you ask me, what the world needs is German Spirit, but this spirit has been oppressed (largely voluntarily, I admit) for the past 70 years or so, but it is still there.

And when I say German, I mean the real meaning of it, so the cultural heritage of the German language. Switzerland, Austria and others are definitely included. Do you speak German?

Play Hide
joe CyricRenner • 9 hours ago ,

The globalists need low IQ people to carry out the water for them but their days are numbered anyways...

Peter Jennings CyricRenner • 19 hours ago ,

It's what one expects from Merkel and her NWO domesticated admin. EU gov'ts have been crying wolf for so long that few now believe a word coming from their media. Most sit there and view it all as a form of entertainment. Maybe it's the reason why many people in the west are ambivalent.

[Mar 25, 2018] The US neocons demand to close the "Bear Gap" with Russia

Notable quotes:
"... Woah. What kind of bear is that? That's not on the approved play list. Nope, not a black bear, not a grizly bear, not even a teddy bear. What's that you say, all's fair in love and war? Well that means just one thing America. We have a ...... Bear Gap! Yes, a Bear Gap. ..."
"... I demand we take action to close the Bear Gap! and do it soon. We better look to our best and brightest, in the heart of the defense establishment, bowels of the think tanks the swamp. ..."
"... I suggest you try treating the neocons like bridesmaids at a wedding; because they all know they should be the one to marry the groom. ..."
Mar 24, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

So Coach Trump has brought in Bombing Bolton to strengthen the shooting line? He never did win a peace but he sure knows how to leave a nation in pieces. Well, as the saying goes, sometimes you eat the bear, and sometimes the bear eats you. I wonder what the opposing coach is going to do? Say "hold my vodka" and surprise the US? That'll get the right wingers laughing. Send in your best coach, go ahead, we dare ya.

What kind of bear is that?

Woah. What kind of bear is that? That's not on the approved play list. Nope, not a black bear, not a grizly bear, not even a teddy bear. What's that you say, all's fair in love and war? Well that means just one thing America. We have a ...... Bear Gap! Yes, a Bear Gap.

I demand we take action to close the Bear Gap! and do it soon. We better look to our best and brightest, in the heart of the defense establishment, bowels of the think tanks the swamp. I'm sure there's something right there in the 1,200 page omni-bulls*&$ spending bill you can use. Just say you read it in there somewhere - because nobody else read that damn thing before they voted for it either. What do you think they are, responsible leaders? So take the kind of action only you can do.

No, not that. This takes real strategy. I suggest you try treating the neocons like bridesmaids at a wedding; because they all know they should be the one to marry the groom. So give them just what they deserve:

Bridalcat

Yep, that ought to do it. We may still have a Bear Gap, but if there is one thing we have no shortage of in this age of soy-boys and cat ladies in waiting: it's cats. So toss them a bob. That'll keep'm busy for awhile.

[Mar 25, 2018] Litvinenko wasn't poisoned by Putin - He was likely smuggling the polonium that killed him -- Puppet Masters -- Sott.net

Notable quotes:
"... Weekly Standard ..."
"... Washington Times ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
Mar 25, 2018 | www.sott.net

Litvinenko wasn't poisoned by Putin - He was likely smuggling the polonium that killed him Ryan Dawson
ANC Report
Sun, 26 Apr 2015 22:44 UTC Berezovsky
Boris Berezovsky Save As we all know Alexander Litvinenko was poisoned by polonium, a rare radioactive substance. The main narrative blamed it all on Vladimir Putin of Russia. The rationale rested on little other than because Litvinenko was a Putin critic . This was the quick line in mass media, and it was on all the typical war propaganda channels.

There are many things wrong with the "Putin did it" story. For one, there is no motive , even with Litvinenko being a critic of Russia, he was no threat whatsoever to Putin. The man worked with Chechen terrorists and the Israeli-Russian oligarchs . But assuming that there was a sufficient motive to kill him, think about this: Why would Russia use a very rare, very expensive, and easily traceable radioactive substance to kill him instead of some cheap poison or just shooting him? Why risk smuggling radioactive material into the UK which is an act of war?

Yet that is exactly what the UK/US media would have you believe. They want to say that Putin had someone sneak into the UK with polonium and poison Litvinenko with it. It just isn't plausible. It's actually absurd.

Alexander Litvinenko who was formerly FSB fled to the UK to avoid court prosecution in Russia, worked for a shady Russian oligarch, Boris Berezovsky. Boris Berezovsky just so happens to be the Israeli-Russian oligarch who lived in London after fleeing the Russian judicial system for a multitude of crimes too long to list. He was on Interpol's most wanted list. Here is the grand prize. After the US and UK press branded Putin with the poisoning despite there being Zero evidence, (something the US is very well known for now) investigators were tracking down the traces of Polonium in the UK. They detected traces of Polonium at Berezovsky's office and residence! Now I do not know about you, but in my place of work, and certainly in my house, I do not have rare radioactive substances. Polonium is not something you just get at the market or pick up by accident walking through the park.

No experienced mob boss like Berezovsky would be dumb enough to murder an underling in such a manner either. Therefore his death was an accident. It was mostly likely it was a botched smuggling operation . Why was he moving such a dangerous substance? Did he need fast cash? Were they planning to create a dirty bomb? Such a "smoky bomb" would turn the Polonium into powder and kill anyone who ingested it.

Traces of Polonium were found on the planes that Litvinenko had been on. So I think we can deduce what happened. He was a mule . The questions remain, why did he have it?, Where did he get it? What was he going to do with it? Why was it in the offices of Berezovsky and Erinsys Ltd (Britain's Blackwater)?

The "Putin did it" smear case has never made sense. First of all, the amount of polonium 210 in play would have cost millions of dollars. That amount is too expensive to purchase and too large to go unnoticed if it were stolen. The only way to obtain such a quantity would be on a well organized black market that had a connection to a nuclear facility. It would certainly help organized crime if the nuclear powered supplier they received the Polonium from was not subjected to international inspections or part of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. Such a country, ( Foreign country A ) which denied they even built nuclear weapons for decades, would certainly also deny selling their Polonium byproduct as well.

Comment: Not necessarily . See:


Is it possible to hide that from the press? Yes. The media would ignore this for the same reason the media ignores them stealing nuclear secrets and building hundreds of nuclear weapons in Dimona, then throwing whistle blowers who took pictures of their warheads, in jail.

Litvinenko was in Israel, where he met Leonid Nevzlin the CEO of Yukos shortly before he died. If you wanted to buy/steal radioactive material that would be the place. What was he negotiating with Nevzlin? We learned Alexander had been an informant in a case that led to the arrest of nine Georgian and Russian Mobsters in Spain, including Alexander Gofstein a lawyer for Yukos who apparently was laundering money.

The downfall began when Georgian Mob Boss Zakhar Kalashov was arrested in May 2006. The scam was similar to what the old Five Families of New York had done, when guys like Meyer Lansky took profits from illegal gambling businesses and funneled them into buying up real estate in Florida. In the European case, the mob was taking illegal funds and buying up real estate in Spain as well as making investments into legitimate businesses .

Litivnenko's associates, Dmitry Kovtun and Andrei Lugovoi, who both had met with him the day of the poisoning, were also both hospitalized. They left traces of Polonium in Hamburg as they had taken the trip to Germany before meeting Litvinenko. It appears all three were involved in a smuggling operation, but for who?

Short answer: Russian Oligarch Boris Berezovsky's employee Alexander Litvinenko died from over exposure to Polonium in a botched smuggling operation. That is why traces of it were at Boris's house and on the planes Litvinenko was riding to and from Israel. The smear on Putin/Russia using a highly traceable 10 million dollar poison to kill a critic is about as plausible and rational as saying we have "British Intelligence" about Niger.... This transparent bogus lie was a quick and shamelessly sloppy explanation to cover up how and why this man in the UK had a radioactive poison in his body. Polonium only has a half life of 138 days.

Litvinenko had been in Israel to visit Yukos's CEO, just shortly before he died. And it's an open secret that Israel has nuclear weapons, the only place without nuclear safeguard or inspections. Traces of polonium were also on the British Airway planes that Litvinenko took to and from Israel. So they would have the means, location, and the timing fits, but let's just blame Putin, "The New Hitler" as Neocons have dubbed him?

Why the fuss about a conspiracy claiming that Putin put Litvinenko on a hitlist and poisoned him? Well as wacky as that story is, it was probably the best they could come up with on short notice. Boris knew once the police found out how Litvinenko died that there would be a lot of explaining to do. He also knew that if the investigation went forward that they could find more of this Polonium on his properties. So they just claimed the KGB was trying to kill them all.

Some History

This is not the first time that Berezovsky tried to pin a murder on someone else and claim that all the damning evidence pointing to him was a frame . There are the notorious cases (in Russia) of Ivan Litskevich and Vlad Listyev.

Ivan Listkevich was the general director of the Omsk oil refinery, easily the best refinery in Russia. Abramovich and Berezovsky planned to take over the refinery and make it part of Berezovsky's Sibnef (which it now is). Listkevich resisted. Ivan had outside investments from LUKoil (10% of the stock) and CS First Boston. So in no way was he threatened to sink. Omsk was in the best location, had the latest equipment, and was well positioned to continue to soar. They serviced the biggest oil producers in Russia. Naturally Ivan did not want to be swallowed by Sibnef. August 19, 1995 Ivan was found drowned in the Irtysh River. I doubt he went there to swim. Five days later Sibnef (Gazprom) took over . August 24th 1995, using his good buddy Yeltsin, Berezovsky got a Presidential Decree №872, to order a transfer of all the state's share in Omsk as well as 4 other companies to Sibnef. Then in 1996 Boris and Roman privatized Sibnef through a series of Loans-for-Shares' auctions which were a complete scam run through front companies and offshore banks. Yeltsin approved of it.

The case may leave doubts in the mind until one learns about the murder of Vlad Listyev. In 1994 Boris attacked one of his rivals over control of a media outlet. Part of the attack was broadcast all over TV and came to be known as "faces in the snow" as Boris's rival's bodyguard were forced at gun point to lie face down in the snow. Shortly after a 90mph high speed chase and attacking rival Gusinsky's MOST guards and pinning Gusinsky in his own building, Berezovsky would take control of ORT (channel 1) through an illegal non-public "auction" and gain a near media monopoly.

For details on that I recommend reading "God Father of the Kremlin" if you can still find it. It was written by the senior editor of Forbes in Russian who holds a Ph.D in Russian history, Paul Klebnikov. For the record Paul Klebnikov was killed after publishing his book on the Oligarchs , particularly on Boris, who is on the cover. He was shot four times in Moscow while leaving work and then died in the hospital after getting stuck on an elevator.

After the Gusinsky event, Boris had another problem. Vladislav Listyev. Listyev was probably the most popular talk show host in Russia and a TV producer. He was a business partner with Boris but the problem was he was not crooked. As general director of ORT he decided to fix a multi-million dollar leak in the company and indirect way of Boris paying people off in the Mob to do dirty work, as well as paying himself by spending money for ads in other companies owned where he also ran the advertising sales. He had an offer from Sergei Lisovsky to buy up the sector. Negotiations never went through and Vlad had a different idea.

On Feb 20th 1995 Vlad announced that he would break the monopoly of Boris and Sergei . He called for a moratorium on ORT advertising until they could work out ethical standards. As you can imagine that did not make Boris or the rest of the mob happy. Eight days later Boris personally met with "Nikolai", a mafia boss, and handed him a hundred thousand dollars in cash. This was witnessed by two police officers who were monitoring the Mob. Prior to that Boris's lacky Badri offered money to a different gangster but that man was arrested before he could do what was asked of him and he confessed this in jail. On March 1st the day after Berezovsky paid a second Mob Boss, Vlad Listyev was shot in the back at the entrance of his home .

Guilty as sin, with a confession against Badri as well as being personally witnessed by two police, offering another mob boss money, Boris was desperate. He was inches away from being arrested. Boris's TV network was cut out of government subsidies after the police raided it and it was subject to bankruptcy. Fellow media giant and friend Ruppert Murdoch promised to invest in the network and bail him out . How nice. And we all know where Murdoch stands. This relationship might also explain why Fox News and Sky News in the UK were so blatantly cheerleading the "Putin killed Litvinenko" conspiracy story.

But here is the real kicker. It is just as outrageous and far fetched as the Litvinenko poisoning. Boris concocted a story for Yeltsin which was recorded on video tape produced by Irina Lesnevskaya a producer at ORT and a friend of Yeltsin's wife. The tape claimed that it was all a big conspiracy against Berezovsky and that the real culprit (who had no motive other than to frame Boris [apparently able to hire a gun to kill Vlad but not Boris?]) was none other than bitter rival Gusinsky of Most Bank, whom Boris had already tried to kill once.

Yeltsin was paranoid of Gusinsky's political ambitions and Boris knew this. Boris also blamed X-KGB and said Vlad was killed by the MOST group, and not the mob he was witnessed meeting with a week after Vlad was going to break his monopoly. (Sounds like "Iraq moved the nonexistent WMDs to Syria just to make the US look bad." give me a break) Boris claimed to be set up because he was loyal to Yeltsin as was his new media outlet.

Yeltsin, ever a partner in cover ups, not to mention a drunk and a thief, got Boris out of trouble once again by firing the lead investigators in the case, which intimidated others to drop it. There was a huge public outcry. A TV personality had been killed. ORT created a new company called ORT advertising with a monopoly to sell ads on commission no less, and the boss-man chosen was none other than Sergei Lisovsky . Wow, how utterly shameless.

If you can speak Russian or if you can find an English copy of the Boris/Lesnevskaya tape transcript sent to Yeltsin, it's going to make you very angry. It is about as plausible as saying Putin risked an act of war with the UK to kill a critic who worked for both a criminal as well as terrorist.

Who Done It?

So we know what didn't happen. But there still remains a "who done it." The quickest way to get to the bottom of this is to see who is lying the most and loudest, because that is usually who has the most to hide .

Remember Anna Politkovskaya? She was killed on Putin's birthday and the alternative press and the 'mindlessly accepting any conspiracy' types who fell for it, tried to use that circumstantial "evidence" to blame the murder on Putin.

These are the same types that claim Russia bombed its own apartment buildings to start a war with Chechnya omitting the fact that the apartment bombing took place five months after the war has already started, and the "sources" trying to blame the FSB were none other than Boris's lacky Litvinenko and well known plagiarist David Satter, who wrote for the PNAC co-founders' Weekly Standard , which gave the world all the bogus lies about Iraq's WMD and connection to the September 11th attacks. Robert Kagan, the paper's cofounder with William Kristol, wrote an op-ed in the Washington Times calling "Speaking of Iraq" which pushes every erroneous prewar scare tactic there was. His wife Victoria Nuland is the same woman who was recorded on the phone saying "F" the EU and openly talking about who would be a good replacement Prime Minister in Ukraine. She chose Arseniy Yatseniuk, who she called "Yatz" and he did become the prime minister of Ukraine a month later after the coup. Everything out of this faction's mouth has been blindly anti-Russian.

There is a huge difference between conspiracy and kookpiracy. Getting away from the outlandish unsubstantiated claims about Anna's death, let's uncover something factual. Anna Politkovskaya was the journalist who had published three different articles on how SOMEONE was testing Polonium on Chechen children . Gee! Where have we seen THAT scenario before? Anna's articles were published in the Novaya Gazeta in 2006 and she was killed October of that same year.

The Washington Post then makes this clever claim. "Leonid Nevzlin, a former Yukos oil company shareholder and Russian exile currently living in Israel, told the Associated Press in late November that Litvinenko had given him a document related to a dossier on criminal charges made by Russian prosecutors against people connected to Yukos. Nevzlin, who is charged by Russian prosecutors with having organized killings, fraud and tax evasion, claimed Litvinenko's inquiries may have provided a motive for his poisoning"

Notice who else is in that Washington Post article (Scaramella) and who was planting the ideas that Putin had killed both Litvinenko and Anna. How crazy is that to use polonium to murder someone...Scaramella is a rotten one. After Anna's lawyer Stanislav Markelov was murdered in 2009 followed by the murder of one of her key informants in Chechnya, Natalia Estemirova the same year, there was a retrial in Anna's case which went to the Supreme Court. Chechen president Ramzan Kadyrov stirred up a public disgust when he said about Anna's informant Natalia Estemirova on Radio Liberty "She was a woman...who had never possessed any honor, dignity or conscience."

The prosecution cornered Dmitry Pavliutchenkov a former policeman who in turn confessed Lom-Ali Gaitukayev was who negotiated the contract killing and behind him he suspected Boris Berezovsky . Dmitry was sentenced to 11 years in jail. Five men were found guilty in her murder. Three were the Chechen brothers who had been acquitted in the first trial and they went to prison. Rustam Makhmudov and Lom-Ali Gaitukayev got life sentences in 2014. Berevsovsky had died the year before in March of 2013.

The most troubling thing here is not that mob did something illegal or that the Western press jumped the gun to do a anti-Russian witch hunt. All of that is pretty run of the mill. It's not even that Israel secretly has nukes and is involved with organized crime. Again, image my lack of shock. It's not even the multiple murders that are most troubling. The most troubling part of this story is what the ultimate purpose of that much Polonium was for and why it was in the UK. The potential for a dirty bomb is enormous. With the current climate of ISIS and disgruntled youth in Europe joining the mercenary forces to fight Israel's enemies in Syria and Lebanon, a dirty bomb in the UK is not an unimaginable scenario. Just having such a thing could also hold leverage over politicians there too. The source of the Polonium should have been traced and potential sources should also be subject to inspection.

  1. William Dunkerley on April 30, 2015 12:11 pm The news stream is replete with articles that falsify information in order to vilify Putin. The Arafat polonium poisoning is an example. But according to a March 17, 2015 AP report citing French experts, "Yasser Arafat was NOT poisoned by polonium. Good for AP for exposing that polonium nonsense. It's rare to find these stories debunked in the Western media. The long-running malicious narrative in Litvinenko saga is more the norm. The mainstream story is utterly false and without merit. I documented that in my book "The Phony Litvinenko Murder." Why do people believe all this specious rubbish? Largely it's a result of a phenomenon called "confirmation bias." I explain that process in detail in my book "Ukraine in the Crosshairs." The Ukrainian crisis is just one more example of how Putin's enemies have skillfully taken advantage of confirmation bias to snooker the masses.
    • Ryan Dawson on January 19, 2016 7:49 pm I also debunked the Arafat myth given that there is no way it would survive so long with such a short half life. Would you like your book to go in our library ? I'll read it then maybe we can talk about it.
  2. Mandatum Mandat on February 10, 2016 4:47 am What is your source for the claim that Litvinenko left a radioactive trail after his trip to Israel? Can't find any discusssion of this claim other than your own material.

[Mar 25, 2018] Trump Plans to Expel Russian Diplomats Over UK Poison Attack

Mar 25, 2018 | www.spartareport.com

President Donald Trump is preparing to expel dozens of Russian diplomats from the U.S. in response to the nerve-agent poisoning of a former Russian spy in the U.K., two people familiar with the matter said Saturday.

Trump agreed with the recommendation of advisers and the expulsions are likely to be announced on Monday, the people said, though they cautioned that Trump's decision may not be final. Trump is prepared to act but first wants to be sure European allies will take similar steps against Russia, aides said.

U.S. officials are working through the weekend to develop a coordinated response with the Europeans, one of the people said, after British Prime Minister Theresa May this week rallied support for a tough rebuke.

As early as Monday, a number of European nations also are expected to expel Russian officials, including Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and the Czech Republic. France and Germany backed May's call for tougher action, though their exact plans are less clear.

The U.S. considers the diplomats to be spies, carrying out intelligence activities under cover as embassy staff, one of the people said. Trump's action would follow a similar move by May, who ordered 23 Russians that she said were spies to leave Britain over the attack on the former Russian spy, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter.

The advisers reached recommendations for a U.S. response to the U.K. attack at a National Security Council meeting on Wednesday and honed the proposals on Friday. Trump discussed the issue Friday with U.S. Ambassador to Russia Jon Huntsman, Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan, FBI Director Chris Wray, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Defense Secretary James Mattis, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, outgoing National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster and others, two people said.

All of the people familiar with the discussions asked not to be identified.

Deputy White House Press Secretary Raj Shah told Bloomberg on Saturday, "The United States stands firmly with the United Kingdom in condemning Russia's outrageous action. The president is always considering options to hold Russia accountable in response to its malign activities. We have no announcements at this time."

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov declined to comment.

Russia Divisions More

Michael Moore Colluded With Russia Against Trump!

8:30 AM Feb 21, 2018 1,915

A battle within the White House over how to best address the provocations of Russian President Vladimir Putin has been intensifying. The internal divisions flared this week after Trump congratulated Putin on his recent re-election without first reviewing written guidance that he not do so, a person familiar with the matter said.

Trump has meanwhile reshaped his national security staff. On Thursday, he announced he would replace McMaster, who favored a tougher public posture toward Putin, with John Bolton, the former ambassador to the United Nations who has promoted military action against Iraq, Iran and North Korea. That move came just a week after the president fired Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who had also adopted a more confrontational stance toward Russia, and nominated Mike Pompeo, the CIA director, to replace him.

Congress has pressured Trump to get tougher on Putin and passed legislation in August giving lawmakers the power to block the president from lifting punitive U.S. measures imposed after Russia's incursion into Ukraine. Substantively, Washington's policy toward Russia has become tougher in recent months, though Trump's critics say he has dragged his feet in responding to Putin's provocations.

Relationship Priority

Trump has agreed to adopt increasingly tough policy stances on Russia. But the president places a priority on maintaining a personal relationship with the Russian president, won't publicly attack him, and doesn't see any benefit to the U.S. in confronting Putin in one-on-one encounters, one administration official said Thursday.

Trump defended his call with Putin on Twitter Wednesday, dismissing those who "wanted me to excoriate him."

"They are wrong!" Trump wrote. "Getting along with Russia (and others) is a good thing, not a bad thing."

May earlier this month condemned Russia for the nerve-agent attack that critically injured the former Russian spy and his daughter. A British police officer was also hospitalized. May said the 23 Russians she ordered to leave Britain were undeclared spies, and she has sought the cooperation of other countries in her campaign to punish Moscow.

Heather Nauert, a State Department spokeswoman, said on Friday night that "the United States is considering a range of options to respond to Russia's outrageous actions in the U.K., both to demonstrate our solidarity with our ally and to hold Russia accountable for its clear breach of international norms and agreements."

She added that the State Department "doesn't have any actions to announce today."

[Mar 25, 2018] The West's Guilty Until Proven Innocent Mantra Is Wrecking Lives International Relations Zero Hedge

Mar 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

... ... ...

In other words, neither men nor women have gained anything from this otherwise-well-intended campaign against sexual improprieties. However, this is not the first time the West has allowed raw emotions to knock the train of progress right off the tracks. History books are replete with examples of Western campaigns rising out of sheer mass hysteria. But at least in those wild times there was still some semblance of justice, complete with trials and investigations. Now compare that with our 'modern' times, when all it took for the United States to win approval for an illicit attack on Iraq was for Colin Powell to shake a vial of faux anthrax in front of the UN General Assembly.

With these historical hiccups in mind, it is possible to argue that the West has truly forgotten the lessons of history because they are certainly repeating them today.

By way of example, consider where the great bulk of US troops are encamped today – in and around the Middle East – and then ask yourself how they got there.

The answer is by hook and by crook, and not a little public manipulation and chicanery. That is because, in our insatiable desire to defend victims – the good guys, we are told – we are allowing ourselves to ignore crucial evidence while placing blind faith in what we are being told is the truth. Clearly that has not been the case to date.

From the accusations that Iraq was harboring weapons of mass destruction to launch against innocent people, to the current claims that the Syrian government of Bashar Assad is using chemical weapons against his own people, the West is gambling that claims based on zero evidence will always work to fulfill ulterior motives. So far, the ploy seems to be working with the gullible public, but sooner or later truth will catch up, indeed, as truth usually does.

Just this month, for example, an assassination attempt was made against Sergei Skripal – a former double agent who had moved to Salisbury, England following a spy-swap in 2010. Any guesses as to who the British authorities have ruled – without a trial, evidence or motivating factor – is the main culprit? Yes, Russia. Yet, even the usually loyal British press has started expressing reservations over the dubious claims.

This should come as no surprise since the UK, a member of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), has staunchly refused to provide samples of the alleged nerve agent to Russia for analysis. Why would it do that? Would anyone be surprised if this investigation goes the same way it did for all those Russian athletes who were, unjustly, banned from the Winter Olympic Games this year?

Or perhaps the same way it went following the 2016 US presidential elections, when Russia was accused of meddling on behalf of Donald Trump – zero evidence to back up the slanderous accusations , which are responsible for putting US-Russia relations into a free fall.

In conclusion, the unsightly spectacle of Western capitals backtracking on legal precedent – from domestic cases to international – makes it all the more clear why it is so anxious to win back the media mountaintops – it has no evidence whatsoever to support the reasons behind its increasingly illicit behavior. It is therefore incumbent upon them to own the narrative, as well as the justice system. How long this democratic charade can last is anybody's guess.

[Mar 25, 2018] Basically McMaster started clearing out the Israel Zios in the department ...including several who violate security rules on top secret info

Mar 24, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

catherine -> Barbara Ann ... , 24 March 2018 at 04:32 PM

Thanks for link. What they are talking about is the ZOA report on why McMaster should be fired
Here is the full..and very long report.

https://zoa.org/2017/08/10371905-zoa-nscs-mcmaster-reassign-him-to-area-not-dealing-with-israel-or-iran/

Basically McMaster started clearing out the Israel Zios in the department ...including several who violate security rules on top secret info. The report list person after person McMaster canned and the ZOA is furious all their inside boys were turned out.

Very cleverly the report is presented to Trump as McMaster firing all the 'Pro Trumpers" because McMasters is ''anti Trump''.

So the ZOA are now Trump Loyalist..lol...just pledge your loyalty to Trump and he'll follow you like a puppy.

I am beginning to wonder though if there is a small but growing number of upper rank military that are trying to weed out the bomb Iran Zionist.

[Mar 25, 2018] Neocons Panting for President 'Mad Dog' Mattis by Daniel McAdams

Notable quotes:
"... The Iranian regime, in my mind, is the single most enduring threat to stability and peace in the Middle East...For all the talk of ISIS and Al Qaida everywhere right now they're a very serious threat. But nothing is as serious in the long term enduring ramifications, in terms of stability and prosperity and some hope for a better future for the young people out there, than Iran. ..."
"... We know that vacuums left in the Middle East seem to be filled by either terrorists or by Iran or their surrogates or Russia In order to restore deterrence, we have to show capability, capacity and resolve. ..."
"... Using our special neocon-speak translator, we see that "capability, capacity and resolve" actually means "weapons, deployments, and wars." No wonder Kristol and company are touting this man as their savior. ..."
Apr 22, 2016 | www.ronpaulinstitute.org
The neocons have been in a panic this election season. One by one, their preferred choice for the Republican presidential nomination has been soundly rejected by the uncooperative American voting public. Sen. Lindsey Graham made a run for the nomination saying , "If you're tired of war, don't vote for me," and nobody did. Perhaps the idea of perpetual war to the very last US dollar is beginning to wear thin among Republican voters.

Though the two Republicans left standing, Sen. Ted Cruz and Donald Trump, have endorsed sending thousands of troops into the Middle East and even turning the sand into glass with a nuclear weapon, they are viewed as not reliably neoconservative enough for the Beltway bombardiers. William Kristol, absolutely forlorn over the American voter's rejection of the reliable Republican neocons in the race, has thrown his hat in with a very reliable Democrat neocon, Hillary Clinton. "I would rather see Hillary than Trump," said Kristol.

But such a move comes not without risk for the Kristol-ites. The neocons migrated from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party like a virus to a new host and one promising candidate does not a happy return necessarily make.

What to do? Again from Kristol: "We'll have to start a new party if it's Trump." And that's what they're doing. With the help of the compliant media, of course.

Thanks to Target Liberty for its diligence in "Mad Dog" spotting , we see the (former) house organ of the CIA, Time Magazine, joining the neocon cheering section behind the notion of a third party run by retired Major General James "Mad Dog" Mattis, former Commander of the US Central Command.

In an article with the fallacious title, Why Americans Want a Military General in the White House , Time wonders:

What is it about military leaders that has led so many voters to champion them for the Presidency? After all, it's not like the nation has emerged victorious from its recent wars. ... Retired Marine general James "Mad Dog" Mattis, who hung up his uniform three years ago, has fervent supporters who want him to run for President.
The very title of the article is a fraud. Who are these "Americans" who are clamoring for a General to become president? Neocons! What percentage to neocons make up of the US electorate? Re-read the first paragraph for an indication.

Why are the neocons panting like a dog in heat for "Mad Dog" Mattis? His speech today at the military-industrial complex funded Center for Strategic and International Studies tells the tale of the tape. What gets the Mad Dog all hot and bothered? War with Iran!

Barked the "Dog" today:

The Iranian regime, in my mind, is the single most enduring threat to stability and peace in the Middle East...For all the talk of ISIS and Al Qaida everywhere right now they're a very serious threat. But nothing is as serious in the long term enduring ramifications, in terms of stability and prosperity and some hope for a better future for the young people out there, than Iran.
And, in what must be music to the ears of all those inside the Beltway who have become rich robbing the rest of us to pay for their wars, Mattis spells out his foreign policy. In a word: War!
We know that vacuums left in the Middle East seem to be filled by either terrorists or by Iran or their surrogates or Russia In order to restore deterrence, we have to show capability, capacity and resolve.
Using our special neocon-speak translator, we see that "capability, capacity and resolve" actually means "weapons, deployments, and wars." No wonder Kristol and company are touting this man as their savior.

General George Washington was a reluctant political leader. He accepted the office of president only at the insistence of others. His preference after the battle was won was to hang up his guns and retire to hemp-growing and whiskey-distilling. In these days of increasingly political military officers , it seems the notion of civilian control of the military is, like the Constitution itself, just another anachronism.

Ladies and Gentlemen, we give you President Mattis:

  • The first time you blow someone away is not an insignificant event. That said, there are some a**holes in the world that just need to be shot.
    ( Business Insider )
  • I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you f*ck with me, I'll kill you all.
    ( San Diego Union Tribune )
  • Find the enemy that wants to end this experiment (in American democracy) and kill every one of them until they're so sick of the killing that they leave us and our freedoms intact.
    ( San Diego Union Tribune )
  • Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.
    ( San Diego Union Tribune )
  • You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them. Actually it's quite fun to fight them, you know. It's a hell of a hoot. It's fun to shoot some people. I'll be right up there with you. I like brawling.
    ( CNN )
  • I'm going to plead with you, do not cross us. Because if you do, the survivors will write about what we do here for 10,000 years.
    ( San Diego Union Tribune )
Woof woof!
Copyright © 2016 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.

Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

[Mar 24, 2018] Why the UK, the EU and the US Gang-Up on Russia by James Petras

Highly recommended!
For the greater part of a decade the US, the UK and the EU have been carrying out a campaign to undermine and overthrow the Russian government and in particular to oust President Putin. Fundamental issues are at stake including the real possibility of a nuclear war. "
Why do the Western regimes now feel Russia is a greater threat then in the past? Do they believe Russia is more vulnerable to Western threats or attacks? Why do the Western military leaders seek to undermine Russia's defenses? Do the US economic elites believe it is possible to provoke an economic crisis and the demise of President Putin's government? What is the strategic goal of Western policymakers? Why has the UK regime taken the lead in the anti-Russian crusade via the fake toxin accusations at this time?
Notable quotes:
"... For the greater part of a decade the US, the UK and the EU have been carrying out a campaign to undermine and overthrow the Russian government and in particular to oust President Putin. Fundamental issues are at stake including the real possibility of a nuclear war. ..."
"... First and foremost, during the 1990's the US degraded Russia, reducing it to a vassal state, and imposing itself as a unipolar state. ..."
"... Secondly, Western elites pillaged the Russian economy, seizing and laundering hundreds of billions of dollars. ..."
"... Thirdly, the US seized and took control of the Russian electoral process, and secured the fraudulent "election" of Yeltsin. ..."
"... With the collapse of the Yeltsin regime and the election of President Putin, Russia regained its sovereignty, its economy recovered, its armed forces and scientific institutes were rebuilt and strengthened. Poverty was sharply reduced and Western backed gangster capitalists were constrained, jailed or fled mostly to the UK and the US. ..."
"... As the entire US unipolar fantasy dissolved it provoked deep resentment, animosity and a systematic counter-attack. The US's costly and failed war on terror became a dress rehearsal for the economic and ideological war against the Kremlin ..Russia's historical recovery and defeat of Western rollback intensified the ideological and economic war. ..."
"... Russia is not a threat to the West: it is recovering its sovereignty in order to further a multi-polar world. President Putin is not an "aggressor" but he refuses to allow Russia to return to vassalage. ..."
"... The Western regimes recognize that Russia is a threat to their global dominance; they know that Russia is no threat to invade the EU, North America or their vassals. ..."
"... Western regimes believe they can topple Russia via economic warfare including sanctions. In fact Russia has become more self-reliant and has diversified its trading partners, especially China, and even includes Saudi Arabia and other Western allies. ..."
Mar 20, 2018 | unz.com
Originally from: www.globalresearch.ca Prof. James Petras Global Research, March 21, 2018 Region: Europe , Russia and FSU Theme: History , Intelligence , US NATO War Agenda

Introduction

For the greater part of a decade the US, the UK and the EU have been carrying out a campaign to undermine and overthrow the Russian government and in particular to oust President Putin. Fundamental issues are at stake including the real possibility of a nuclear war.

The most recent western propaganda campaign and one of the most virulent is the charge launched by the UK regime of Prime Minister Theresa May . The Brits have claimed that Russian secret agents conspired to poison a former Russian double-agent and his daughter in England , threatening the sovereignty and safety of the British people. No evidence has ever been presented. Instead the UK expelled Russian diplomats and demands harsher sanctions, to increase tensions. The UK and its US and EU patrons are moving toward a break in relations and a military build-up.

A number of fundamental questions arise regarding the origins and growing intensity of this anti-Russian animus.

Why do the Western regimes now feel Russia is a greater threat then in the past? Do they believe Russia is more vulnerable to Western threats or attacks? Why do the Western military leaders seek to undermine Russia's defenses? Do the US economic elites believe it is possible to provoke an economic crisis and the demise of President Putin's government? What is the strategic goal of Western policymakers? Why has the UK regime taken the lead in the anti-Russian crusade via the fake toxin accusations at this time?

This paper is directed at providing key elements to address these questions.

The Historical Context for Western Aggression

Several fundamental historical factors dating back to the 1990's account for the current surge in Western hostility to Russia.

First and foremost, during the 1990's the US degraded Russia, reducing it to a vassal state, and imposing itself as a unipolar state. Secondly, Western elites pillaged the Russian economy, seizing and laundering hundreds of billions of dollars. Wall Street and City of London banks and overseas tax havens were the main beneficiaries Thirdly, the US seized and took control of the Russian electoral process, and secured the fraudulent "election" of Yeltsin. Fourthly, the West degraded Russia's military and scientific institutions and advanced their armed forces to Russia's borders. Fifthly, the West insured that Russia was unable to support its allies and independent governments throughout Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America. Russia was unable to aid its allies in the Ukraine, Cuba, North Korea, Libya etc.

With the collapse of the Yeltsin regime and the election of President Putin, Russia regained its sovereignty, its economy recovered, its armed forces and scientific institutes were rebuilt and strengthened. Poverty was sharply reduced and Western backed gangster capitalists were constrained, jailed or fled mostly to the UK and the US.

Russia's historic recovery under President Putin and its gradual international influence shattered US pretense to rule over unipolar world. Russia's recovery and control of its economic resources lessened US dominance, especially of its oil and gas fields.

As Russia consolidated its sovereignty and advanced economically, socially, politically and militarily, the West increased its hostility in an effort to roll-back Russia to the Dark Ages of the 1990's. The US launched numerous coups and military intervention and fraudulent elections to surround and isolate Russia . The Ukraine, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen and Russian allies in Central Asia were targeted. NATO military bases proliferated.

Russia's economy was targeted : sanctions were directed at its imports and exports. President Putin was subject to a virulent Western media propaganda campaign. US NGO's funded opposition parties and politicians.

As the entire US unipolar fantasy dissolved it provoked deep resentment, animosity and a systematic counter-attack. The US's costly and failed war on terror became a dress rehearsal for the economic and ideological war against the Kremlin ..Russia's historical recovery and defeat of Western rollback intensified the ideological and economic war.

The UK poison plot was concocted to heighten economic tensions and prepare the western public for heightened military confrontations.

Russia is not a threat to the West: it is recovering its sovereignty in order to further a multi-polar world. President Putin is not an "aggressor" but he refuses to allow Russia to return to vassalage.

President Putin is immensely popular in Russia and hated by the US precisely because he is the opposition of Yeltsin -- he has created a flourishing economy; he resists sanctions and defends Russia's borders and allies.

Conclusion

In a summary response to the opening questions.

The Western regimes recognize that Russia is a threat to their global dominance; they know that Russia is no threat to invade the EU, North America or their vassals. Western regimes believe they can topple Russia via economic warfare including sanctions. In fact Russia has become more self-reliant and has diversified its trading partners, especially China, and even includes Saudi Arabia and other Western allies.

The Western propaganda campaign has failed to turn Russian voters against Putin. In the March 19, 2018 Presidential election voter participation increased to 67% . .Vladimir Putin secured a record 77% majority. President Putin is politically stronger than ever.

Russia's display of advanced nuclear and other advanced weaponry has had a major deterrent effect especially among US military leaders, making it clear that Russia is not vulnerable to attack.

The UK has attempted to unify and gain importance with the EU and the US via the launch of its anti-Russia toxic conspiracy. Prime Minister May has failed. Brexit will force the UK to break with the EU.

President Trump will not replace the EU as a substitute trading partner. While the EU and Washington may back the UK crusade against Russia they will pursue their own trade agenda; which do not include the UK.

In a word, the UK, the EU and the US are ganging-up on Russia, for diverse historic and contemporary reasons. The UK exploitation of the anti-Russian conspiracy is a temporary ploy to join the gang but will not change its inevitable global decline and the break-up of the UK.

Russia will remain a global power. It will continue under the leadership of President Putin. The Western powers will divide and bugger their neighbors -- and decide it is their better judgment to accept and work within a multi-polar world.

*

Prof. James Petras is a Research Associate of the CRG.

[Mar 24, 2018] Melania Trump refuses to be bullied by anyone

The main problem for Melania is Trump. Not so much attacks by the media.
Notable quotes:
"... "What can you say except I'm sorry?" [McDougal] told CNN's Anderson Cooper , apologizing for the alleged affair to Melania Trump. "I'm sorry. I wouldn't want it done to me." ..."
"... McDougal admitted that she knew Donald Trump was married during the alleged affair, saying she was reluctant to bring it up because "she felt guilty." ..."
"... She also said that Donald Trump offered to pay her after they had been intimate for the first time in 2006 and that it made her cry. ..."
"... "After we had been intimate, he tried to pay me, and I actually didn't know how to take that," McDougal said. "I've never been offered money like that. I looked at him and said, 'I'm not that type of girl." ..."
"... "And he said, 'Oh,' and he said, 'You're really special,'" McDougal said, adding: "It hurt me that he saw me in that light." ..."
"... According to McDougal, the relationship lasted for about 10 months. She says she broke it off in April 2007 because she felt guilty. She recalled traveling to meet Trump at his properties in New York, New Jersey and California and said she had sex with him "many dozens of times." ..."
"... McDougal had feelings for Trump, but the affair was "just tearing me apart," she said. "There was a real relationship there. There were real feelings," she added. "He would call me baby or he would call me beautiful Karen." ..."
"... quite simply efforts to publicly humiliate and shame of Melania, not to mention attacking the very essence of her marriage to her husband itself. ..."
"... Oh, wait. Isn't that also media bullying? ..."
"... I am well aware that people are skeptical of me discussing this topic. I have been criticized for my commitment to tackling this issue, and I know that will continue. But it will not stop me from doing what I know is right. I am here with one goal: helping children and our next generation." ..."
Mar 24, 2018 | theduran.com

Media sets double standards for itself as it tries to condemn the First Lady for standing up against bullying, all the while bullying her and her husband through infidelity allegations

... ... ...

In seemingly unrelated stories through the rest of the week attack pieces were printed by various women who claimed to have had extramarital affairs with the President during the time of his marriage to Melania. The headlines are anything from accusatory to salacious. Here are some examples:

The attack is the basest sort of hit possible, as these pieces highlight the accusation and "apology" offered by former Playmate model Karen McDougal. In the pieces this lady offers an apology to Melania for the affair with her husband, with the core of the story essentially as shown here (this is from the USA Today version):

"What can you say except I'm sorry?" [McDougal] told CNN's Anderson Cooper , apologizing for the alleged affair to Melania Trump. "I'm sorry. I wouldn't want it done to me."

McDougal admitted that she knew Donald Trump was married during the alleged affair, saying she was reluctant to bring it up because "she felt guilty."

She also said that Donald Trump offered to pay her after they had been intimate for the first time in 2006 and that it made her cry.

"After we had been intimate, he tried to pay me, and I actually didn't know how to take that," McDougal said. "I've never been offered money like that. I looked at him and said, 'I'm not that type of girl."

"And he said, 'Oh,' and he said, 'You're really special,'" McDougal said, adding: "It hurt me that he saw me in that light."

According to McDougal, the relationship lasted for about 10 months. She says she broke it off in April 2007 because she felt guilty. She recalled traveling to meet Trump at his properties in New York, New Jersey and California and said she had sex with him "many dozens of times."

McDougal had feelings for Trump, but the affair was "just tearing me apart," she said. "There was a real relationship there. There were real feelings," she added. "He would call me baby or he would call me beautiful Karen."

Okay, so here we have a great way to humiliate a devout Slovenian Roman Catholic, who is actually quite a traditional woman, even while she was a red-hot model, by making "apologies" that are not apologies at all, but quite simply efforts to publicly humiliate and shame of Melania, not to mention attacking the very essence of her marriage to her husband itself.

Oh, wait. Isn't that also media bullying?

It would seem so. And on Tuesday, Mrs. Trump wasn't having it. She fought back with her own gifts, those being her characteristic elegance, but with her amazing personal strength. But, praise aside, this is what the First Lady had to say:

I am well aware that people are skeptical of me discussing this topic. I have been criticized for my commitment to tackling this issue, and I know that will continue. But it will not stop me from doing what I know is right. I am here with one goal: helping children and our next generation."

[Mar 23, 2018] 'Trump lining up war cabinet' Bolton's elevation to NSC adviser fuels alarm

Notable quotes:
"... "With the appointments of Mike Pompeo and John Bolton, @realDonaldTrump is successfully lining up his war cabinet. Bolton played a key role in politicizing the intel that misled us into the Iraq War. We cannot let this extreme war hawk blunder us into another terrible conflict," ..."
"... "John Bolton supports proactively bombing Iran & striking North Korea with nuclear weapons first without provocation. Appointing him to be Nat Sec Advisor is a grave danger to the American people & a clear message from @realDonaldTrump that he is gearing up for military conflict," ..."
"... "If you're always wrong on security, you're the wrong person to be National Security Advisor," ..."
"... "drumbeats of war." ..."
"... "absolutely the wrong person to be national security advisor now," ..."
"... "John Bolton was part of the effort to mislead the US into the disastrous Iraq war and has supported military action against North Korea and Iran. He was too extreme to be confirmed as UN ambassador in 2005 and is absolutely the wrong person to be national security advisor now," ..."
"... "John Bolton is a dangerous radical. President Trump's decision to make Bolton his National Security Advisor is deeply disturbing," ..."
"... "John Bolton has spent his entire career pushing fringe conspiracy theories, espousing radical ideas about multilateralism, and undermining key alliances across the world." ..."
"... Like this story? Share it with a friend! ..."
Mar 23, 2018 | www.rt.com

Donald Trump's cabinet reshuffles have fueled concerns, not least after the latest appointment of hawkish John Bolton as national security adviser, just days after installing a former CIA chief as the new secretary of state. On Thursday afternoon Donald Trump decided to sack Gen. HR McMaster from his national security adviser post, replacing him with John Bolton. The former US envoy to the United Nations will assume office on April 9 – just days after Mike Pompeo is set to replace Rex Tillerson as the new secretary of state.

READ MORE: Trump replaces national security adviser McMaster with John Bolton

The newly formed doublet has caused shockwaves among the Democrats, who have alleged that Trump seems to be preparing for war. Democratic Senator from Massachusetts Ed Markey warned that Trump is creating a "war cabinet," warning of "grave danger" following Bolton's appointment.

John Bolton supports proactively bombing Iran and conducting a first strike on North Korea without provocation. Appointing him to be Nat Sec Advisor is a grave danger to the American people and a clear message from @realDonaldTrump that he is gearing up for military conflict.

-- Ed Markey (@SenMarkey) March 22, 2018

"With the appointments of Mike Pompeo and John Bolton, @realDonaldTrump is successfully lining up his war cabinet. Bolton played a key role in politicizing the intel that misled us into the Iraq War. We cannot let this extreme war hawk blunder us into another terrible conflict," he tweeted.

"John Bolton supports proactively bombing Iran & striking North Korea with nuclear weapons first without provocation. Appointing him to be Nat Sec Advisor is a grave danger to the American people & a clear message from @realDonaldTrump that he is gearing up for military conflict," Senator Markey added.

John Bolton:
Wanted war w Cuba, arguing wrongly that Cuba had WMD
Wanted war w Iraq, arguing – wrong again – that Iraq had WMD
Believes – wrongly – that Islamic law is taking over America

If you're always wrong on security, you're the wrong person to be National Security Advisor

-- Senator Jeff Merkley (@SenJeffMerkley) March 22, 2018

The choice of Bolton as the national security adviser has also been questioned by Senator Jeff Merkley from Oregon, who has pointed out many flaws with the new appointee's policies. "If you're always wrong on security, you're the wrong person to be National Security Advisor," Merkley tweeted.

This is dangerous news for the country and the world. John Bolton was easily one of the most extreme, pro-war members of the Bush Administration.

Imagine what havoc he could wreak whispering in Donald Trump's ear...I hear the drumbeats of war. https://t.co/A6ZIyORAM7

-- Rep. Barbara Lee (@RepBarbaraLee) March 22, 2018

Rep. Barbara Jean Lee of California's 13th congressional district was also disappointed by Trump's choice, claiming she is hearing the "drumbeats of war."

The President is surrounding himself with combative lawyers. He's replacing Tillerson and McMaster with Pompeo and Bolton.

It's almost like the President is preparing to go to war in the legal and foreign relations sense...

-- Bradley P. Moss (@BradMossEsq) March 22, 2018

Fears expressed by some Capitol Hill members and the public seem justified. The notoriously hawkish former United Nations ambassador was a chief architect of the George W. Bush administration's justification for the war in Iraq in 2003, that was based on false accusations that Baghdad possessed weapons of mass destruction.

This is one of the most dangerous developments I've seen in our foreign and nat'l security policy. Period. #Bolton #McMaster . https://t.co/aEl5aRn9fA

-- Steve Israel (@RepSteveIsrael) March 22, 2018

Trump's choice of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director Mike Pompeo as the new secretary of state also made many in Washington uneasy. Unlike his predecessor, Rex Tillerson, Pompeo seems better aligned with Trump's confrontational foreign policy, namely on the Iran nuclear deal, on North Korea, and on the shift of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Besides politicians, the American public also expressed concern about the feasibility of a looming armed conflict.

John Bolton was part of the effort to mislead the US into the disastrous Iraq war and has supported military action against North Korea and Iran. He was too extreme to be confirmed as UN ambassador in 2005 and is absolutely the wrong person to be national security advisor now.

-- Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) March 22, 2018

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders called Bolton "absolutely the wrong person to be national security advisor now," recalling how he deceived the public about the Iraq war.

"John Bolton was part of the effort to mislead the US into the disastrous Iraq war and has supported military action against North Korea and Iran. He was too extreme to be confirmed as UN ambassador in 2005 and is absolutely the wrong person to be national security advisor now," Sanders tweeted.

"John Bolton is a dangerous radical. President Trump's decision to make Bolton his National Security Advisor is deeply disturbing," Congressman Brendan F. Boyle (PA-13) said in a written statement. "John Bolton has spent his entire career pushing fringe conspiracy theories, espousing radical ideas about multilateralism, and undermining key alliances across the world."

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

[Mar 23, 2018] So on the 15th anniversary of the Iraq debacle, a neocon who cheered it on is rewarded with a national security post where he can cue up the attack on Iran that was always the ultimate prize for Israel's US stooges?

Mar 22, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Jim Haygood , , March 22, 2018 at 7:31 pm

So on the 15th anniversary of the Iraq debacle, a neocon who cheered it on is rewarded with a national security post where he can cue up the attack on Iran that was always the ultimate prize for Israel's US stooges?

Guess we'll be out marching again, just like last time. Bolton's walrus mustache is the 21st century version of Adolph H's toothbrush mustache. Down with the Persian Untermenschen! /sarc

Carolinian , , March 22, 2018 at 8:50 pm

Of course while working for Cheney Bolton was pretty confident about getting Dubya to start a war with Iran and that didn't happen. Here's a backgrounder that suggests that Bolton is tight with both Adelson and the Mossad so one way of looking at this has Russia fading as a target and Iran falling under the bulls eye. Trump's recent friendly phone call with Putin was contrary to instructions from his NSC and therefore presumably McMaster.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/why-a-john-bolton-appointment-is-scarier-than-you-think-mcmaster-trump/

Looked at optimistically it could be out of the frying pan and into a smaller frying pan (for us if not for Iran but that remains to be seen).

Of course looked at pessimistically it's terrible news but if the public and Congress are afraid of Trump gratuitously starting a new war then perhaps they should take away his power to do so. Seems the Constitution did have something to say about that.

barrisj , , March 22, 2018 at 10:21 pm

Tol'ja so these miserable wretches simply cannot die resurrection a promise any time a misfit administration takes power all that audition time on FoxNews paid off Trump stripping the cable channels of right-wing bloviators "best people for the jawb", don't you know.

[Mar 23, 2018] In a way Ukraine stepped on the same rake twice: once in 1991 and the second time in 2014. That's unforgivable

Looks like the rules of neoliberal game for Ukraine are as following: Ukraine should be ready for fight Russia till the last Ukrainian, serving as cannon fodder for EU geopolitical interests in Eurasia; (2) As a "debt slave" Ukraine should allow the transfer of ownership of all strategic assets and commodities to EU corporations for pennies on dollar independently of how Donbass situation is resolved; (3) Ukraine should buy EU products, no matter how poor they are and local production should be be iether eliminated ("Baltics style deindustrialization"), or outsourced to transnational corporations with Ukrainian as a cheap labor force (wage slaves).
Notable quotes:
"... And the Ukraine made a massive mistake. Their situation is completely different to Poland after USSR fell. ..."
Mar 22, 2018 | www.unz.com

likbez , March 23, 2018 at 3:20 am GMT

@polskijoe

And the Ukraine made a massive mistake. Their situation is completely different to Poland after USSR fell.

Very true. Poland was the first Eastern European country which adopted neoliberal model and thus served to a certain extent as "photo model" of neoliberalism for the rest of Eastern Europe and xUSSR space. So standard of living did not drop too low. The country was somewhat supported by EU and by the USA.

Ukraine was royally raped economically in 1991-2000. Probably as bad as Russia, may be even worse.

In 2014 Ukrainians were lured by unrealistic dream of getting Western European standard of living as a gift for breaking with Russia. As well as the resentment toward kleptocrat Yanukovich (which actually was pretty typical neoliberal politician; not much worse then Poroshenko )

Now they start to understand that the EU will devour the corpse to the bones and they are stuck at the Central African level poverty of $2 a day or so (on average), but this is too late.

A very typical story, a very typical outcome. Neoliberalism is a cancer. As Russian prime minister quipped about economic rape of Russia by local and Western neoliberals in 1991-2000: "We strived to get the best [economic] outcome, but it turned out like we got even worse then average. As always." ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Chernomyrdin )

So in a way they stepped on the same rake twice: once in 1991 and the second time in 2014. That's unforgivable.

[Mar 23, 2018] Megyn Kelly behaves like a rabid dog attacking Putin. Did not work well.

What is interesting that as there are 3.4K dislikes and only 1.2K likes. Looks like people start to decipher the NBC propaganda machine and neoliberal propaganda machine in general (NBC is not an outlier in this respect; this is run of mill neoliberal outlet)
Looks like Putin really has steel nerves. Megyn Kelly was really disgusting pushing her talking points like there is not tomorrow. Such a shill... . She also was organically able to listen. she has her prejudices can't shake them and actually does not want to shake them (may be this is connected with her job security ;-)
Notable quotes:
"... Confronting? The job of a real journalist is to ask questions, not to confront. Want to see the actual interview go watch Russian Insider is there in its totality. ..."
"... the moment i heard "American Democracy Under Attack" i stopped watching the video. ..."
"... Wtf NBC, this is ridiculously badly edited to fit an agenda. This is not journalism. ..."
"... It's not a debate if she keeps interrupting him, very disappointed in the way NBC took this golden opportunity to have a proper conversation with one of the super powers of the world and wasted it in "I tell you, you did this" and childish reaction from Megyn part. ..."
"... I am American and I am fully of aware how evil and deceptive this country is. I understand Putin is trying to do the right thing. But it seems as if almost 90-95% of people in this country still don't get it. ..."
"... How many governments in the world have been overthrown by the American CIA? How often does evil USA interfere in other states' elections? The USA government is pure evil. ..."
"... "American democracy, under attack".... by putting $46,000 worth of ads on Facebook, most of which were posted AFTER the election. Come on people, don't be foolish. ..."
"... "You believe that America meddled in your elections?" No Megyn Kelly, that's a historical fact, look up the "Harvard Boys" sponsored by USAID, look at the cover of the July 15, 1996 issue of Time Magazine entitled "Yanks to the Rescue", celebrating America's role in hijacking the Russian political system. ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | www.youtube.com

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1pPkAOZI50

rayochapin , 1 week ago

Confronting? The job of a real journalist is to ask questions, not to confront. Want to see the actual interview go watch Russian Insider is there in its totality.

Sa yan , 1 week ago

the moment i heard "American Democracy Under Attack" i stopped watching the video.

Rumata , 1 week ago

Mr. Putin, did you intervene in the US elections? No But did you intervene? No And when you intervened, did you intervene? No Have you intervened with the oligarchs? No Did you help them intervene? No And in the US say you intervened you did it? No But you did not interfere, huh? Yes Interfered? No

spasev , 1 week ago (edited)

Where is the full interview? I had to go to a Russian government TV channel so I can watch the full interview. And you label the Russian media as state propaganda. Shame on you.

Games4us , 1 week ago

FYI, this interview is 1,5 hour long in original. here it is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mhi_AyQAyw&t=977s

Mr. Ben , 1 week ago

"Cut and paste" the interview with an agenda of bashing Russia, using "some people say" or "some American experts say" as the sources without any solid proof and evidence is shameful.

namodicha , 1 week ago

Please, please, please, any US citizen who is watching this, go watch the full interview, just in order to get an idea of what your media is worth. Listen to the words, also pay attention to how it is filmed and presented.You really need to know how much you are bullshitted to.

Linera Y , 1 week ago (edited)

When he talked about principles, why didn't she believe? Please, know that there are many people in the world with principles, who are not necessarily running and dying for capitalist money, brands, silly talentless pointless half-naked pop-stars, yachts or florida-like beaches, etc. There are many people who are fine to live without all these but with principles and other values , which are not that bad even they don't run around money!

John A , 1 week ago

Her first and fatal mistake was underestimating his intelligence, thinking she could trip him up with her aggressive tone. Putin has forgotten more about politics than Kelly has yet to learn. It's easy to see why NBC hacked the interview to pieces - she was pathetic and out of her league, just another brainwashed, deluded American shill.

Johnny Bucknell , 1 week ago

Putin is my hero!! Love Putin from New Zealand, NBC is part of fake news!!

James Medina , 1 week ago

What a fake news BS story... Still desperately trying to find an excuse as to why Crooked Hillary lost.

Mark Hauser , 1 week ago

After listening to the whole interview. This short clip looks like fake news!!!! How the cut the phrase and questions, out of context. Looks pathetic

dimirsen , 1 week ago

why did you decide to create this Frankenstein interview consisting of small snippets? Will the next interview be in a format of a 10 sec coub?

somfplease , 1 week ago

I watched the FULL unedited version of this before hand. Holyshit the editing is dishonest.

Kyle Witcher , 1 week ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2MtKS1O8Ds THIS IS THE TRUE INTERVIEW, UNEDITED AND TRANSLATED Please share the TRUE interview. Megyn Kelly got destroyed.

Toye Adeniran , 1 week ago

Wtf NBC, this is ridiculously badly edited to fit an agenda. This is not journalism. I wasn't a fan of Russia before this, but you might be changing my mind by showing this edited crap. You're making things between the US and Russia worse not better by showing this edited crap.

Вован , 1 week ago

Wow, i am a Russian and i have to say you guys went too far with your propaganda. This is cut and edited beyond reason. Why you do this? Stop making our president look like the ultimate villain. Honestly, it was such a pleasure to listen to Vladimir Putin's reasonable approach. WTF NBC?

Zavier Brewer , 1 week ago

It's not a debate if she keeps interrupting him, very disappointed in the way NBC took this golden opportunity to have a proper conversation with one of the super powers of the world and wasted it in "I tell you, you did this" and childish reaction from Megyn part.

Che , 1 week ago

In America, Our political & Media Elite managed to collude Our foreign policy with Democracy promotion.We use Democracy promotion to achieved our foreign policy agenda.. In Libya we Used democracy promotion to achieve our foreign policy goal of getting ride of Gadhafi, following the fall of Gadhafi we abandon Libya on moved on to OUR NEXT TARGET, SYRIA.... IN SYRIA, we formed an alliance with non Democratic ARAB REGIMES to Overthrow A Circular government of ASSAD. when RUSSIA & IRAN INTERVEIN @ THE REQUEST OF THE SYRIAN GOVERNMENT, we have an issue with that.. OUR FOREIGN POLICY is INCONSISTENT AND UNDERMINES OUR NATIONAL INTEREST/Democracy. & Corporate Media is a SCAM... HAD WE HAD alternative NEWS SOURCE LIKE(social media) WE DO TODAY, WE WOULDN'T HAVE INVADED IRAQ ON FAKE EVIDENCE /INTELLIGENCE God Bless America

somtitious , 1 week ago

National Bias Corporation (NBC) I have watched the full interview and as usual, he flawed the beautiful but empty headed Kelly!

Joey Yared , 1 week ago

NBC is the reason why the US and Russia will never be allies. They seem to want war. Putin is probably laughing at the hysteria of the US media. Make no mistake, the MEDIA is getting in the way of peace with Russia. Putin is no saint, but keep in mind they have more nuclear weapons than us. Wouldn't hurt to mend the relationship...

Shantanu Nair , 1 week ago

This is American propaganda in its purest most undiluted form. The interpreter is putting words into Putin's mouth making him sound arrogant and brash. Its is Megyn Kelly who is the arrogant one just like the rest of the American mainstream media. I admire Putin for his patience, one must have the mental stability of a yogi to tolerate the half literate moronic deluge that radiates from Megyn's mouth. She was going too far, by interrupting Putin at every turn while Putin still has the decency to politely respond. If she is so democratic, I would advise her to pay a visit to her government's Saudi "allies.

Abe Jackson , 4 days ago

Putin is too smart for Megyn. Do you really think he's gonna tell you what you think when an American journalist asks you such questions? I don't like Putin either but he's got balls. I bet he knows English too but he knows that speaking a foreign language will put him at an disadvantage. Smart move by hiring an interpreter. By the way the US government throughout has done things far worse than rigging election.

DJKLY242 , 1 week ago (edited)

This isnt an interview more less the ' pressing' of 'false allegations & speculation'. Every response Putin gives is reasonable. Putin didnt have to agree with doing this. She sounds like a failed lawyer & wanna be politician. America is not Perfect, Russia is not perfect, I wish she would sit down with people in her own country & do the same but she doesnt. She acts as if she is asking these questions on behalf of Americans when really it is based on 'her' own views and for the sake of 'her' interview. This interview is flawed.

Big Money , 1 week ago

a new film about Putin, very interesting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RK2xmLVkDI

Pete Daltry , 1 week ago

Fake news

DazzaWebb , 1 week ago

America = The greatest threat to humanity since Nazi Germany.

Abz , 1 week ago

Don't spread lies NBC news. People should not believe this fake news! Glad to see there's more dislikes than likes, people are starting to know the truth.

Derek Robert , 1 week ago

NBC shilling for war as usual.

London England , 1 week ago (edited)

How disingenuous can NBC get? Actual quote from the interview: "Maybe, although they were Russian, they work for some American company. Maybe one of them worked with one of the candidates. I have no idea about this. These are not my problems" And in the headlines: "Putin on alleged US election interference: I don't care".

Henri Alanko , 1 week ago

It's been over a year and you've managed to find 13 Russian Twitter trolls. What a horrifying conspiracy. Worse than Pearl Harbor!

HeliOs AsclepiUs , 1 week ago

American Democracy is run by plutocrats Itching for war against Russia and China and Iran.. USA is a warmonger doing the bidding for Israel.. As if Russia had Trump elected.. What a joke.. American mainstream media is trying to manufacture consent from its people to go to war.. Watch and see..

VendPrekmurec , 1 week ago

A very russophobic primitive propaganda

zonkus culture , 1 week ago (edited)

United state have been interfering in African election forcing us to there evil democracy, killing Gaddafi for no reason. Look at what you guys did in Afghanistan, Iraq and other countries that don't want to do your evil democracy. After lying to the shameless United nations security council about Saddam's building of weapons of mass destruction, Who fight you about that?.

Love Animals-6 , 1 week ago

This is quite possibly the WORST interview ever conducted. This one is NOT a journalist. If you want to be a respectable broadcaster, fire this moron immediately. Horrendously non-factual, terribly edited - this interview is America in a nutshell. The world has awoken in this age and won't stand still.

Tony Stark , 1 week ago

This is the full 90 mins unedited version with English Subs, see the truth for yourselves. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mhi_AyQAyw

ImperialLion , 1 week ago

Remember that United States interferes in the affairs of other nations ALL THE TIME. The U.S. attempted to influence the elections of foreign countries as many as 81 times between 1946 and 2000. Since 2000, the U.S. has attempted to sway elections in Ukraine, Kenya, Lebanon, and Afghanistan.

Adam Koester , 1 week ago

I am American and I am fully of aware how evil and deceptive this country is. I understand Putin is trying to do the right thing. But it seems as if almost 90-95% of people in this country still don't get it. They actually are repulsed and angry by the idea that we could be the bad guys. It has turned my family and friends against me. I am all alone...

FahadMHassan , 1 week ago

Megyn Kelly? Pressure Putin? Should I cry or laugh! It's like watching Ahmedinajad destroying King! Even your questions has no concrete clue to any Russian government connection! None!!!!! Are you really a journalist? Guys seriously if you wanna do tv then do it right! You can't pressure Putin by saying they are Russians if you don't have any any any any clues on government connection! You should really consider your questions next time!

Patanjali Kumar.P , 1 week ago

Certain Americans are just pompous arrogant idiots and letting them represent America makes the world look at all Americans as that pompous person.

Korven Griffin , 1 week ago

What an absolute farce. Megan is nothing but a sassy mouthed fool. Funny as f##@

Janihoy Berhan , 1 week ago (edited)

There's no "Russian Connection". This is a lie. This whole "Russian interference in US elections" is a political sham invented by the corrupt American system infiltrated by Zionists and Anti-Christian lobbyists.

Bulat Nurmukhanov , 5 days ago

Poor work by the journalist. She is supposed to have a dialogue, she is supposed to listen to the interviewee. Instead, it was just a bunch of questions and it looked quite awkward.

Richard Mulder , 1 week ago

How many governments in the world have been overthrown by the American CIA? How often does evil USA interfere in other states' elections? The USA government is pure evil.

Richard Rider , 1 week ago

God, is President Putin PATIENT to put up with her...Why does he put up with her?

paul david , 1 week ago

"American democracy, under attack".... by putting $46,000 worth of ads on Facebook, most of which were posted AFTER the election. Come on people, don't be foolish.

Wavanova , 1 week ago

"You believe that America meddled in your elections?" No Megyn Kelly, that's a historical fact, look up the "Harvard Boys" sponsored by USAID, look at the cover of the July 15, 1996 issue of Time Magazine entitled "Yanks to the Rescue", celebrating America's role in hijacking the Russian political system.

[Mar 23, 2018] Inglorious end of career of neocon McMaster

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... President Trump congratulated Vladimir Putin to his reelection as president of the Russian Federation. It was a matter of simply courtesy to do so. The Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (aka the National Security Advisor), three star general McMaster, had advised him to not congratulate Putin. (McMaster now claims differently .) That was bad advice. But it became even worse when McMaster, or someone in his shop, promptly leaked this to the press. The usual Republican nutters like John McCain grumbled and Trump was furious. ..."
Mar 23, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

President Trump congratulated Vladimir Putin to his reelection as president of the Russian Federation. It was a matter of simply courtesy to do so. The Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (aka the National Security Advisor), three star general McMaster, had advised him to not congratulate Putin. (McMaster now claims differently .) That was bad advice. But it became even worse when McMaster, or someone in his shop, promptly leaked this to the press. The usual Republican nutters like John McCain grumbled and Trump was furious.

Trump decided to fire McMaster the very next day. He had it coming. Both the White House Chief of Staff Kelly as well as the Secretary of Defense Mattis wanted McMaster out. Unfortunately for them Trump chose a replacement that they did not want and will find difficult to live with.

[Mar 23, 2018] Putin and neoliberaism in Russia: What they told us about socialism was a pack of lies, but what they told us about capitalism turned out to be perfectly true

Notable quotes:
"... After the disastrous Yeltsin rule (which came on the heels of disastrous rule by Gorbachev) Putin and his team rescued Russia economically, politically, and militarily. ..."
"... As far as Western "democracies" are concerned, the author hit the nail on the head. Yet there are lots of problems in Russia that the author does not mention. I think current Russian take on Soviet propaganda summarizes everything nicely: "what they told us about socialism was a pack of lies, but what they told us about capitalism turned out to be perfectly true". ..."
Mar 23, 2018 | www.unz.com

Anon [147] • Disclaimer says: March 22, 2018 at 7:23 pm GMT • 500 Words

Anon from TN

The author is painting Putin as larger-than-life figure, which he isn't. He is a normal man, capable and intelligent, but he is not by any means that superhuman leader and savior. He looks much greater than he is because you subconsciously compare him with pathetic nonentities that the Western world sees as leaders now. In fact, the leadership of the US Empire and all its vassal countries visibly degenerated in the last decades. Just compare De Gaulle with sad excuses La Belle France had for presidents lately. Or compare Nixon (he might have been a nasty person, but he was a great President of the country) with various clintons, bushes, obamas, and trumps. Or compare Chancellor Kohl with that poor excuse for a chancellor that Germany has today. You get the drift.

Just like the Soviet Union was not defeated by the US, but actually collapsed due to internal problems, regime change rampage is over largely because the United States pushed their luck and overextended themselves, and not just thanks to Putin. Throughout history, all dominant empires lose their grip and eventually crumble (remember Roman or British), and now it's the turn of the US Empire. Fortunately or unfortunately, the next will be the Chinese Empire, not Russian.

After the disastrous Yeltsin rule (which came on the heels of disastrous rule by Gorbachev) Putin and his team rescued Russia economically, politically, and militarily.

However, the US played a huge role in increasing Putin's popularity inside Russia, more than his propaganda machine ever could. Before the US-sponsored coup in Ukraine in 2014, Putin's approval hovered at about 45%. Nazi takeover in Ukraine and his decisive move to take Crimea back (it was transferred to Ukraine from Russia by Khruschev in 1956, illegally even by vague Soviet law; Crimea tried to get away from Ukraine ever since the breakup of the USSR in 1991; polls by Gallup and German company GfK showed that 80%+ Crimean residents wanted to join Russia, rather than remain in the madhouse that Ukraine became after the coup) resulted in his approval soaring above 70%.

Ill-advised sanctions added even more. Now he did not need to rig elections, he got genuine 70%+ vote, a level of support Western politicians can't even dream of (e.g., Trump was elected by 26% of eligible voters; Merkel's party in Germany got even less).

As far as Western "democracies" are concerned, the author hit the nail on the head. Yet there are lots of problems in Russia that the author does not mention. I think current Russian take on Soviet propaganda summarizes everything nicely: "what they told us about socialism was a pack of lies, but what they told us about capitalism turned out to be perfectly true".

[Mar 23, 2018] Russia has several significant problems with growth of Muslim population and the fact that this is last term for Putin, which might signify the end of the period of political stability

Mar 23, 2018 | www.unz.com

likbez says: March 23, 2018 at 8:22 am GMT 900 Words

This is way too rosy account. Russia has several significant problems with growth of Muslim population and the fact that this is last term for Putin, which might signify the end of the period of political stability.

Also economic rape by local and Western neoliberals of Russia in 1991-2000 was so successful that the country still can't fully recover. Hundreds of billions were stolen and transferred to the West. The "problem of neoliberal oligarchs" as "fifth column" still remains and is a threat to the future of the country. Too much depends of Putin personally. In this sense China is in a better position.

Moreover, Putin was forced into new arm race (by the USA) and military spending now are high and that creates another set of problems including growing influence of internal military industrial complex. Add to this the cost of Syria war and related set of external and internal problems, such as almost complete absence of allies (neither China not Iraq are reliable allies; most post-Soviet republics, even Kazakhstan, are now hostile to Russia)

And Russia does not have too many degrees of freedom yet, as it still depends on the West for many technologies and complex machinery. West dominates high technology area. Add to this brain drain and export of capital from Russia.

Technological dependence means that really crippling sanction are always a possibility. Availability of some of those technologies in China makes this problem less acute than in the past, but still in no way Russia can pursue completely independent policy.

Add to this dependence on dollar and the fact that Russian national bank, which remain a neoliberal institution, controlled by neoliberal Nabibulina ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elvira_Nabiullina , who is close to Gref ) who like any "good" neoliberal keeps natural sovereign fund invested in US Treasuries. In this sense she is not that different from Kudrin.

And that means that those money can be confiscated anytime, like the USA did with Iran in the past. Also oligarchs money are now in danger due to clear desire of London to improve its financial standing at Russian oligarchs expense.

What is true is that neoliberalism as a political system entered deep crisis after 2008. In the USA political system became dysfunctional and there is some kind of "virtual" civil war between two factions of neoliberal oligarchy -- classic neoliberals and bastard neoliberals (aka economic nationalists). Add to this "strange" relations with Israel, which sometimes suggest that the tail wags the dog and I do not see why the USA can't experience something similar to processes that took place in Britain after the WWII.

But there is still no alternative social system on the horizon and return to "New deal capitalism" is impossible as the social alliance of management caste changed.

So Russia remains a neoliberal country which hates neoliberalism (in which by definition the power belongs to the financial oligarchy) and which tries to fight Western neoliberal imperialism in ofreign policy including attempts to make is a vassal and appropriate its natural resources (and Russia was a vassal of the West under Yeltsin) while remaining a neoliberal country and promoting neoliberalism externally. that's a recipe for a color revolution in the future, more successfully then 2012 "White" color revolution run by Moscow comprador class. Which in Moscow might well represent probably one third of the population (programmers, doctors, accountants, employees of foreign companies, part of "integrated with West" artistic cicles, writers, journalists, etc.). They were politically decimated by events in Ukraine and then by Russiagate hysteria in the USA. So "neoliberal compradors" class was not a player in the current elections. But that situation might eventually change and they can restore part of their political power.

So, in a way, Putin is some kind of Don Quixote which fight neoliberalism (and neoliberal globalization) externally, while allowing it to exist and even flourish internally (Medvedev, BTW looks like classic neoliberal, a Trojan horse in Putin's administration).

And internally neoliberalism naturally produces high level of corruption, which is amplified by "New Economic Policy" elements on the current Russia political regime (which allowed free operation of small and medium business, but tried to cut/decimate political power of large business -- a very difficult, if not impossible undertaking)

I think Professor Brovkin forgot the classic Lenin work "Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism". That's sad...

Moreover, former pro-Putin people who are now CEO of large government companies are not longer Pro-Putin people. Because their position influences their political orientation. In a sense, people like Gref and Sechin are dangerous strata of Putin-created "nova riches", who can betray him any moment, especially if their money will be under the treat of confiscation by the West.

It might well be that Putin was an anomaly and Russian will enter "Maidan" period or some other form of political crisis after Putin relinquishes his power.

BTW Ukrainians were successfully deceived by the West twice, so I do not see why Russians can't repeat this trick and step of the same rake again by electing some variation of Yeltsin who will promise them immediate bright future and jump in the standard of living (which for the last three year deteriorated due to low oil prices and a huge depreciation of ruble). For Ukrainians around 20 year was enough to forget all lessons.

My impression is that Russia might experience yet another serious of political cataclysm in the near future, when "Putinism" will disappear with Putin.

[Mar 23, 2018] Is there any forensic evidence provided in this document to serve as a legal basis for the invocation of Article 5? Nothing.

Notable quotes:
"... "Let me be clear with you" ..."
"... " When I look at the evidence, I mean" ..."
"... "the people from Porton Down, the laboratory So they have the samples They do." ..."
"... "And they were absolutely categorical" ..."
"... "and I asked the guy myself," ..."
"... "I said, "Are you sure?" And he said there's no doubt" ..."
Mar 23, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

J , March 22, 2018 at 22:36

On a related note, this article by Prof. Niels Harrit claims that a document declassified in 2008 was the basis for the ongoing war in Afghanstian, and that the document is as evidence free as the Novichok claims:

https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-mysterious-frank-taylor-report-the-911-document-that-launched-us-natos-war-on-terrorism-in-the-middle-east/5632874

Is there any forensic evidence provided in this document to serve as a legal basis for the invocation of Article 5? Nothing. There is absolutely no forensic evidence in support of the claim that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated from Afghanistan. Only a small part of the introductory text deals with 9/11, in the form of summary claims like the citation in Lord Robertson's press release. The main body of the text deals with the alleged actions of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban in the nineties.

On 4 October, NATO officially went to war based on a document that provided only 'talking points' and no evidence to support the key claim.

Sound familiar? Of course, I've no idea if he's right.

Je , March 23, 2018 at 00:01

The Taliban foreign minister at the time tried to warn the Americans of the attack they learned about it from a third party that is about as far removed from being behind the attack as it gets. Didn't help them did it the Americans were after vengeance and wanted to satisfy their bloodlust by bombing a country which didn't even have a single one of its citizens involved in the attack. Classic scapegoating.

https://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.bbc.co.uk%2F1%2Fhi%2Fworld%2Fsouth_asia%2F2242594.stm&date=2008-05-29

lysias , March 23, 2018 at 00:27

They had other reasons to want to attack Afghanistan . In fact, they warned the Taliban that they would if the Taliban did not permit the desired pipeline.

Je , March 23, 2018 at 00:41

There's an article on that here, written at the time (in 2001):

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/tangled_web/2001/12/pipe_dreams.html

Tom , March 22, 2018 at 22:37

What do you expect from Johnson? A grindingly stupid man who has never got a job on merit and is now desperately hoping the public don't see through his lies for the Americans. No wonder the government don't want to bring back grammar schools.

Herbie , March 22, 2018 at 22:45

The Ghouta connection:

http://www.unz.com/article/four-days-to-declare-a-cold-war/

CanSpeccy , March 22, 2018 at 22:45

Nice work.

The evidence so far supports Putin's claim that that allegations against Russia are "drivel."

Clark , March 22, 2018 at 22:57

New Viz character; Boris the Bullshitter. Textbook bullshitting:

-- "Let me be clear with you" (though what is to follow is as clear as mud,) " When I look at the evidence, I mean" (not me, actually, I mean) "the people from Porton Down, the laboratory So they have the samples They do." (believe me) "And they were absolutely categorical" (about what?) "and I asked the guy myself," (what did you ask him, Boris?) "I said, "Are you sure?" And he said there's no doubt" (no doubt of WHAT, Boris?)

What CAN you do with people like this?

m , March 22, 2018 at 23:02

It's obvious when Johnson is lying, it's whenever he opens his mouth.

Ross , March 22, 2018 at 23:18

Has PC Plod managed to make a public appearance yet, or is he still speaking through media surrogates?

Clark , March 22, 2018 at 23:26

Craig, I have to set you straight on this. Boris is as incapable of lying as he is of telling the truth. As strange as it may seem to rational minds, the concepts of truth and falsity simply do not exist in minds such as his. To him, everything is merely an opportunity for achieving his goals, or a threat to his credibility that needs to be bluffed over, and to those ends every statement he makes will be as vague as he can get away with under the circumstances.

J , March 23, 2018 at 00:36

Sounds about right.

[Mar 23, 2018] Hitler and the Poisoning of the British Public by Brian Cloughley

Notable quotes:
"... The British press and its political puppets are determined to convince the British public that there is a massive threat from Russia and even that the Kremlin influenced the disastrous referendum vote to quit the European Union, the Brexit debacle. The affair of the spy Skripal has provided much ammunition, and the newspapers have been effective in increasing the level of anti-Russian fervor and intensifying international tension. It's poison, Hitler and out-of-control government ministers that sell British newspapers. ..."
Mar 23, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org
... ... ...

The British government and media continue to proclaim that Russia was undeniably responsible for the incident, while ignoring the statement on March 20 by Ahmet Uzumcu, director general of the UN's Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, that "the OPCW has deployed experts to the UK and they will collect some samples." When asked about indications of the origin or type of substance alleged by the highest British authorities to be Russian, Mr Uzumcu said he "cannot project the outcome of such technical work," and that analysis will take "three weeks ahead at least."

Some of the media have attempted to provide objectivity. For example the BBC reported that Skripal "was jailed for 13 years by Russia in 2006. He was convicted of passing the identities of Russian intelligence agents working undercover in Europe to the UK's Secret Intelligence Service, MI6. In July 2010, he was one of four prisoners released by Moscow in exchange for 10 Russian spies arrested by the FBI as part of a swap. He was later flown to the UK." The man was a proven spy who had betrayed his own countrymen, and almost the only person to talk any sense about the matter was a former British Ambassador to Russia, Tony Brenton, who said that "the fact that [Skripal] blew a whole range of Russian agents, there may be personal animosities there. In most Russians' minds he would be categorized as a traitor. There are people there who would be delighted to see him dead."

But balance and objectivity do not sell newspapers, and neither do they provide headlines for politicians who are anxious to jump on publicity bandwagons. Enter the colorful British defense minister Gavin Williamson who announced that "Putin has made it quite clear that he has hostile intent towards this country. We've been seeing the build-up of his forces across the Eastern Front and in terms of what they're doing over many years now -- we have to wake up to that threat and we have to respond to it." Then on March 15 Williamson declared that Russia should "go away and shut up," which illustrated the maturity of the British government's approach to international affairs.

The level of official pronouncements was further lowered by yet another Johnson declaration that "By using a specific type of nerve agent known to be developed in Russia, it was a sign that no former Russian agent was immune and no-one could escape the long arm of Russian revenge," and on March 20 he dragged up the old faithful, Hitler, who is always a winner for attention in the UK. One pontificating politician proclaimed that "Putin is going to use it [the World Cup Competition] in the way Hitler used the 1936 Olympics" and Johnson hastened to chime in and say "I think that your characterization of what is going to happen in Moscow, the World Cup, in all the venues -- yes, I think the comparison with 1936 is certainly right. I think it's an emetic prospect, frankly, to think of Putin glorying in this sporting event."

Hitler and football are major players in Britain's propaganda war against Russia. Everyone reads about football, and mere mention of Hitler sends British hearts pounding in patriotic fervor. What these people don't realize is that insulting Russia by bringing in Hitler is a sure and certain way of uniting the Russian people in support of their government and fortifying their present understandable contempt for little Britain. The Russians had some twenty million civilians and over ten million members of the armed services killed in the war begun by Hitler when he invaded Russia in Operation Barbarossa on June 22, 1941. To in any fashion equate present-day Russia with Hitler's Germany is obscene, malevolent and preposterous to a degree that appears impossible for the British government and most of the media to understand.

The British press and its political puppets are determined to convince the British public that there is a massive threat from Russia and even that the Kremlin influenced the disastrous referendum vote to quit the European Union, the Brexit debacle. The affair of the spy Skripal has provided much ammunition, and the newspapers have been effective in increasing the level of anti-Russian fervor and intensifying international tension. It's poison, Hitler and out-of-control government ministers that sell British newspapers.

Brian Cloughley writes about foreign policy and military affairs. He lives in Voutenay sur Cure, France.

[Mar 23, 2018] A simple question: Where is Julia Skripal, a citizen of Russian Federation, who was taken by the UK secret services and whisked away to some undisclosed location?

Mar 23, 2018 | www.unz.com

annamaria , Next New Comment March 23, 2018 at 1:24 pm GMT

A simple question: Where is Julia Skripal, a citizen of Russain Federation, who was taken by the UK secret services and whisked away to some undisclosed location? There have been no photographs of either her father (British citizen) and Julia since the odd incident in a city of Salisbury that is a few miles away from the UK's main lab of chemical weaponry research.

"Porton Down is situated just northeast of the village of Porton near Salisbury, in Wiltshire, England. a site of the Ministry of Defence's Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl) – known for over 100 years as one of the UK's most secretive and controversial military research facilities , occupying 7,000 acres." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porton_Down

annamaria , Next New Comment March 23, 2018 at 2:05 pm GMT
Support the [ISIS] troops [in a war for Israel]! http://thesaker.is/syrian-war-report-march-22-2018-syrian-army-gets-control-of-harasta-militants-withdraw/
"Over 40 tonnes of toxic agents have been found in the areas liberated from militants Damascus has officially confirmed its readiness to assist in any investigation into a chemical attack in Syria. However, international organizations have refused to cooperate with the Syrian government, practically conniving with terrorist organizations in their illegal activity. The Syrian Foreign Ministry pointed out that more than 40 tonnes of chemical warfare agents have been discovered on the territories liberated from terrorist s the international community prefers turning a blind eye to the real facts in which chemical weapons are used in Syria against the government troops and civilians. .."

[Mar 23, 2018] A Very Useful Crime: Launching Information War against Putin and Russia by Alex Lantier

Notable quotes:
"... World Socialist Web Site ..."
"... London and NATO have neither produced physical evidence of Kremlin involvement, nor established a motive for a hypothetical Russian attack. Nor has London explained why, if the Kremlin wanted Skripal dead because he spied for Britain in the 1990s and early 2000s, it did not execute him after convicting him of spying in 2006, and instead sent him to Britain four years later in exchange for Russian spies jailed by London. ..."
"... Instead, a simplistic narrative accusing Moscow has emerged: If a crime appears to target countries or individuals hostile to the Russian government, NATO governments and media conclude within hours that it is self-evident that the Kremlin is responsible. ..."
"... And, after the US invaded and occupied Iraq, as it became clear that Iraq had no WMDs and was not responsible for the attacks, it emerged that the particular anthrax strain used in the attacks had in fact been created by Washington's own WMD program at Fort Detrick, Maryland. A US scientist, Steven Hatfill, was rumored to be responsible, investigated, and ultimately cleared. ..."
"... In the Skripal attack, it is unclear how Moscow would benefit. ..."
"... the Skripal attack hands Putin's enemies inside NATO an ideal diplomatic and political weapon to use against him. ..."
"... The benefits flow, rather, to sections of the British and European ruling class who are stoking war hysteria against Russia, and sections of the American ruling elite, particularly around the CIA and the Democratic Party, working with them to discredit Trump as a supposed agent of Russia. The Skripal attack allows these factions to place enormous pressure on rival sections of the European ruling class, notably in the French and German governments, who are calling for a European military policy independent from the United States and closer ties to Russia. ..."
"... Yesterday, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the United States has "full confidence" in the British assessment of the attack -- a statement he implicitly contradicted by then declaring that Russia was only "likely responsible." Despite firing Tillerson shortly after he made those statements, Trump echoed Tillerson's accusation of Russian complicity, declaring, "It sounds to me like it would be Russia, based on all the evidence they have." ..."
"... Porton Down is not a reliable source, however. It has a long record of illegal or covert testing of biological and chemical weapons on British citizens. These include the 1942 contamination with anthrax spores of Gruinard Island, which the British government was compelled to decontaminate in 1986; the unlawful death of Ronald Maddison in 1953 during trials of sarin gas on British servicemen; and the 1963-1975 spraying of biological weapons in Lyme Bay. The British government paid out 3 millions pounds to victims of such tests in 2008, without admitting liability. ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press

The World Socialist Web Site holds no brief for the kleptocratic business oligarchy that emerged in Russia from the Stalinist bureaucracy's restoration of capitalism in the Soviet Union in 1991. It cannot be ruled out that a faction of Russian intelligence, acting with or without the knowledge of President Vladimir Putin, may have poisoned Skripal.

But London and NATO have neither produced physical evidence of Kremlin involvement, nor established a motive for a hypothetical Russian attack. Nor has London explained why, if the Kremlin wanted Skripal dead because he spied for Britain in the 1990s and early 2000s, it did not execute him after convicting him of spying in 2006, and instead sent him to Britain four years later in exchange for Russian spies jailed by London.

Instead, a simplistic narrative accusing Moscow has emerged: If a crime appears to target countries or individuals hostile to the Russian government, NATO governments and media conclude within hours that it is self-evident that the Kremlin is responsible.

In fact, in international politics, the simple and obvious answer all but inevitably fails to reveal the complex web of political and economic interests that produce a given event or policy. Were the Skripal attack to be a Le Carré spy novel, the accusations so far would likely take up the first 10 pages of the book, after which the real story would unfold over the next 400 pages. The questions that must be posed in such cases are: what is the credibility of the accuser, and, above all, cui bono (who benefits from the crime)?

To those who say it is obvious that Russia poisoned Skripal, it is worth recalling the 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, in which a deadly strain of anthrax was mailed to many US officials in Washington, killing 5 people and infecting 17 more, shortly after the September 11 attacks. There again, media immediately blamed the attacks on obvious targets of US-UK war threats -- the Iraqi regime's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) program and its alleged ties to Al Qaeda. These all proved to be lies, serving Washington's foreign policy interests as it sought to go to war in Iraq.

And, after the US invaded and occupied Iraq, as it became clear that Iraq had no WMDs and was not responsible for the attacks, it emerged that the particular anthrax strain used in the attacks had in fact been created by Washington's own WMD program at Fort Detrick, Maryland. A US scientist, Steven Hatfill, was rumored to be responsible, investigated, and ultimately cleared.

It still remains unclear to this day which US officials were involved in carrying out the anthrax attacks. The FBI closed the investigation in 2010 after pinning the blame on another scientist, Bruce Edwards Ivins, who had committed suicide in 2008. However, the US National Academy of Sciences found in 2011 that the US government did not have sufficient scientific evidence to definitively assert that the anthrax used in the attacks came from Ivins.

In the Skripal attack, it is unclear how Moscow would benefit. The attack took place shortly before this weekend's elections in Russia, and as the NATO powers ramp up a confrontation with Russia over their failed war for regime change in Syria that has seen US forces attack and kill Russian military contractors in Syria in recent weeks. Rather, the Skripal attack hands Putin's enemies inside NATO an ideal diplomatic and political weapon to use against him.

The benefits flow, rather, to sections of the British and European ruling class who are stoking war hysteria against Russia, and sections of the American ruling elite, particularly around the CIA and the Democratic Party, working with them to discredit Trump as a supposed agent of Russia. The Skripal attack allows these factions to place enormous pressure on rival sections of the European ruling class, notably in the French and German governments, who are calling for a European military policy independent from the United States and closer ties to Russia.

Thus, on Monday, former French President François Hollande issued a sharp if barely veiled attack in Le Monde on his successor, Emmanuel Macron, who is working closely with Berlin. Asserting that current NATO policy allows Moscow and the Syrian government to "liquidate its opposition and massacre its own people," Hollande called for a confrontation with Moscow: "Russia has been rearming for several years, and if Russia is threatening, it must be threatened."

Yesterday, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the United States has "full confidence" in the British assessment of the attack -- a statement he implicitly contradicted by then declaring that Russia was only "likely responsible." Despite firing Tillerson shortly after he made those statements, Trump echoed Tillerson's accusation of Russian complicity, declaring, "It sounds to me like it would be Russia, based on all the evidence they have."

Under these conditions, and after the experience of the anthrax attacks, it must be said that factions of the British and American states themselves are prime suspects in the Skripal attack.

London has based its allegations against Russia entirely on the shifting analyses of its Porton Down biochemical warfare facility, located coincidentally only 10 miles from Salisbury. Initially, London alleged that Skripal had been exposed to fentanyl, a synthetic opioid more powerful than heroin. On March 7, however, British officials alleged that the poison was a nerve gas like sarin or VX, without explaining why Porton Down, a facility that has for decades specialized in producing nerve gases, failed to correctly identify one after it was used.

On Monday, May alleged that the nerve gas in question is in fact "novichok," a special chemical weapon initially produced by the Soviet government. However, London has refused Moscow's requests to actually provide it with samples of the substance used in the Salisbury attack for analysis, as required by the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). As of now, at least, the case against Russia is based on the say-so of the Porton Down facility.

Porton Down is not a reliable source, however. It has a long record of illegal or covert testing of biological and chemical weapons on British citizens. These include the 1942 contamination with anthrax spores of Gruinard Island, which the British government was compelled to decontaminate in 1986; the unlawful death of Ronald Maddison in 1953 during trials of sarin gas on British servicemen; and the 1963-1975 spraying of biological weapons in Lyme Bay. The British government paid out 3 millions pounds to victims of such tests in 2008, without admitting liability.

None of the allegations directed by such sources against Russia on the still-murky Skripal poisoning case have a shred of credibility. Only a full, objective international public inquiry, whose findings are published in real time as the inquiry progresses, can establish the truth of what took place. In the meantime, it is a critical measure of self-preservation for workers in America, Europe and around the world to oppose the ruling elite's stoking of war hysteria against Russia and the danger of an all-out confrontation between the world's main nuclear-armed powers.

Alex Lantier

[Mar 23, 2018] May has declared that there is no pausible alternate explanation for the Skirpal attack other than that Russia has done it. Given the recent elevation of Bolton and the EU acceptance of the May claims it is likely that we are entering a period similar to that of June 1914 when Europe commenced sleepwaling toward war.

Mar 23, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: Sushi | Mar 22, 2018 10:52:45 PM | 62

Sushi , Mar 22, 2018 10:52:45 PM | 62
May has declared that there is no pausible alternate explanation for the Skirpal attack other than that Russia has done it.

https://thesaker.is/a-curious-incident-part-iii/

Does provide a plausible alternatvie explanation. Given the recent elevation of Bolton and the EU acceptance of the May claims it is likely that we are entering a period similar to that of June 1914 when Europe commenced sleepwaling toward war.

If you find the above to be a credible explanation then please provide it to others so they may realize their government may not be acting in the best interest of the public.

[Mar 23, 2018] Boris Johnson A Categorical Liar by Craig Murray

The article is reposted at Craig Murray request, as his site was at the time under denial of service attack: "This website remains under a massive DOS attack which has persisted for more than 24 hours now, but so far the defences are holding. Some strange form of "ghost banning" is also affecting both my twitter and Facebook feeds. So please (a) Feel free to repost, republish, translate or spread this article anywhere and anyway you can. All copyright is waived.
Notable quotes:
"... The emphasis is mine. This sworn Court evidence direct from Porton Down is utterly incompatible with what Boris Johnson has been saying. The truth is that Porton Down have not even positively identified this as a "Novichok", as opposed to "a closely related agent". ..."
"... This constitutes irrefutable evidence that the government have been straight out lying – to Parliament, to the EU, to NATO, to the United Nations, and above all to the people – about their degree of certainty of the origin of the attack. It might well be an attack originating in Russia, but there are indeed other possibilities and investigation is needed. As the government has sought to whip up jingoistic hysteria in advance of forthcoming local elections, the scale of the lie has daily increased. ..."
"... It does not take a degree in chemistry to understand that something related to a class can be half of all poisons in the world. ..."
"... A closely related agent" has no precise scientific meaning. It could mean "in the same chemical class" as Novichok but of indeterminate chemical structure at this time; or it could mean having the same toxicological effect as novichok, but not necessarily in the same chemical class (although this could refer to mode of synthesis, rather than of structural type). ..."
"... In either case, what it means is that they do not know the precise molecular structure of the agent concerned – and iif they don't know that, they cannot sign it to Russia – or anyone else. ..."
"... The statement to the Court proves beyond any credible argument that the UK Government are simply lying, either to the court, or to the rest of us. ..."
"... 'This has been confirmed by specialists, our specialists. An Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons mission is in the UK now to independently confirm this analysis.' Or, to put it another way, the task of the OPCW is NOT to conduct an independent analysis, but to AGREE WITH 'our specialists'. ..."
"... What's a "related compound"? Could it be something as ordinary as sheep dip or weedkiller? Could they be described as "nerve agents", even if they're not usually thought of in that sense? ..."
"... If the Skripals really are in a Salisbury NHS hospital then It's safe to conclude that no nerve agent was involved at all. This is because of the comments of the consultant and the the fact that they're still alive ..."
"... Could it be argued that all nerve agents are "closely related" and then speculated that the wording of the testimony was arrived at in a way of compromise between the scientist(s) and the government? ..."
"... Also, do we know if the blood sample was taken from the police officer who (it would appear) made sudden recovery? Can him being discharged from hospital be seen as a way to avoid giving the blood sample? ..."
Mar 23, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

Evidence submitted by the British government in court today proves, beyond any doubt, that Boris Johnson has been point blank lying about the degree of certainty Porton Down scientists have about the Skripals being poisoned with a Russian "novichok" agent.

Yesterday in an interview with Deutsche Welle Boris Johnson claimed directly Porton Down had told him they positively identified the nerve agent as Russian:

You argue that the source of this nerve agent, Novichok, is Russia. How did you manage to find it out so quickly? Does Britain possess samples of it?

Let me be clear with you When I look at the evidence, I mean the people from Porton Down, the laboratory

So they have the samples

They do. And they were absolutely categorical and I asked the guy myself, I said, "Are you sure?" And he said there's no doubt.

I knew and had published from my own whistleblowers that this is a lie. Until now I could not prove it. But today I can absolutely prove it, due to the judgement at the High Court case which gave permission for new blood samples to be taken from the Skripals for use by the OPCW. Justice Williams included in his judgement a summary of the evidence which tells us, directly for the first time, what Porton Down have actually said:

The Evidence

16. The evidence in support of the application is contained within the applications themselves (in particular the Forms COP 3) and the witness statements.
17. I consider the following to be the relevant parts of the evidence. I shall identify the witnesses only by their role and shall summarise the essential elements of their evidence.
i) CC: Porton Down Chemical and Biological Analyst
Blood samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analysed and the findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound. The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent OR CLOSELY RELATED AGENT.

The emphasis is mine. This sworn Court evidence direct from Porton Down is utterly incompatible with what Boris Johnson has been saying. The truth is that Porton Down have not even positively identified this as a "Novichok", as opposed to "a closely related agent". Even if it were a "Novichok" that would not prove manufacture in Russia , and a "closely related agent" could be manufactured by literally scores of state and non-state actors.

This constitutes irrefutable evidence that the government have been straight out lying – to Parliament, to the EU, to NATO, to the United Nations, and above all to the people – about their degree of certainty of the origin of the attack. It might well be an attack originating in Russia, but there are indeed other possibilities and investigation is needed. As the government has sought to whip up jingoistic hysteria in advance of forthcoming local elections, the scale of the lie has daily increased.

On a sombre note, I am very much afraid the High Court evidence seems to indicate there is very little chance the Skripals will ever recover; one of the reasons the judge gave for his decision is that samples taken now will be better for analysis than samples taken post mortem.

Tom Smythe , March 23, 2018 at 00:49

"findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound. The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent OR CLOSELY RELATED AGENT."

Yes, they're not even saying it was a nerve agent, much less in the Novichok class of fluorophosphates, much less which among those hundred+ compounds. That fits with the Salisbury Hospital emergency room doctor's letter to The Times in which he states exactly 3 people have been treated there, all for poisoning, with none receiving antidotes for nerve gases. I wondered about that at the time, why not say Novichok-5 like in the fume hood accident at the Russian chemical warfare plant (which was treatable with atropine).

Here is the attending physician saying not only is the 41 bystander bit complete hooey but "no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury" though the 3 were "significantly poisoned". By what, if not a nerve agent, maybe norborene or strychnine? The latter "causes poisoning which results in muscular convulsions and eventually death through asphyxia."

March 16 2018
The Times

Sir, Further to your report ("Poison exposure leaves almost 40 needing treatment", Mar 14), may I clarify that no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury and there have only ever been three patients with significant poisoning. Several people have attended the emergency department concerned that they may have been exposed. None has had symptoms of poisoning and none has needed treatment. Any blood tests performed have shown no abnormality. No member of the public has been contaminated by the agent involved.

Stephen Davies

Consultant in emergency medicine, Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust

In a letter to The Times Dr Davies writes that no patients experienced symptoms other than the three with "significant poisoning". "Several people have attended the emergency department concerned that they may have been exposed," he adds. "None has had symptoms of poisoning and none has needed treatment. Any blood tests performed have shown no abnormality. No member of the public has been contaminated by the agent involved."

The Guardian, flip-flopping daily between uber-patriotic chest-thumping and skepticism, actually ran a well-researched article today

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/22/andrei-zheleznyakov-soviet-scientist-poisoned-novichok

Andrew Roth and Tom McCarthy Thu 22 Mar 2018 05.00 GMT

"Before former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia collapsed on a park bench in Salisbury on 4 March, the only other person confirmed to suffer the effects of novichok was a young Soviet chemical weapons scientist Circles appeared before my eyes: red and orange. A ringing in my ears, I caught my breath. And a sense of fear: like something was about to happen," Andrei Zheleznyakov told the now-defunct newspaper Novoye Vremya, describing the 1987 weapons lab incident that exposed him to a nerve agent that would eventually kill him. "I sat down on a chair and told the guys: 'It's got me.'"

N_ , March 23, 2018 at 02:14

"They got me" were also close to the last words of both Yasser Arafat and Hugo Chavez.

Tony M , March 23, 2018 at 01:06

Well, Nick Bailey is out and about – https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/poisoned-policeman-leaves-hospital-hg0ftjgk2

Harry Law , March 23, 2018 at 01:33

The Court evidence said @17.V ZZ: Treating Consultant.

a)Mr Skripal is heavily sedated following injury by a nerve agent.

b)Ms Skripal is heavily sedated following injury by a nerve agent.

This differs from the Porton Down evidence 17 i) CC: Porton Down Chemical and Biological Analyst
Blood samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analysed and the findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound. The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent OR CLOSELY RELATED AGENT.
Why isn't the Consultant more precise since he must have been given the exact Porton Down evidence in order to treat them.

james , March 23, 2018 at 01:34

amazing work craig thank you!

no wonder your website is under attack there are those opposed to letting the truth slip out.. they are some of them.. boris needs to be taken out to pasture

Steve , March 23, 2018 at 01:35

Keep up the good work Craig. Solidarity

N_ , March 23, 2018 at 02:02

Has Nick Bailey been asked to give the OPCW a new blood sample? Surely he should be asked. At least there is no consent issue, since he has recovered sufficiently to be discharged from hospital and he is fully able to give his consent or withhold it if he wishes. He probably has been asked, and there is no reason why taking a sample from him should have been mentioned in the judgment about taking samples from the Skripals, but I would still like to know.

N_ , March 23, 2018 at 02:12

I hope people do circulate this post by Craig as widely as they can. But note that it is not only Boris Johnson who has directly lied. Theresa May has also directly lied – and in her case, she has lied to the House of Commons. By parliamentary convention, a minister who has lied to the House should RESIGN, as John Profumo did in 1963.

If Jeremy Corbyn wishes to rise to the moment, he must at the earliest opportunity, which is to say TOMORROW, bring the matter of these lies to the House of Commons. He must directly accuse the prime minister of lying to the House and call on her to resign .

He should also call for Boris Johnson to come to the House and explain why he lied to Deutsche Welt.

N_ , March 23, 2018 at 02:20

And Corbyn should of course be supported by Vince Cable, Ian Blackford, and Liz Saville Roberts.

AAMVN , March 23, 2018 at 03:01

Boris Johnson a liar???? Whoever would have think that?

Pardon my sarcasm. This is important and irrefutable evidence that the UK Government are twisting the facts to suit an agenda that is not in the interests of the general populous, but aimed at retaining their tenuous grip on power. That has always been the Conservative policy – get into power and stay in power at any price. They don't have any answers to the problems the UK or wider world faces. They are not even looking for answers. Any solution would erode the privilege and security of their cronies and masters.

BTW – I don't have much less contempt for the other political parties. But the Conservatives are the most contemptible/despicable at the moment. Maybe we could start referring to the the robotic Ms May as the Contemptible Party Leader? Leader of the Contemptibles? Etc.

Kiza , March 23, 2018 at 00:08

i know that it is pointless, but let me explain something that should not need to be explained. If HMG really identified the nerve agent used in Skripal poisoning then its submission to court would have said: the nerve agent A-2617 was identified .

Instead, HMG submitted: the nerve agent of the class Novichok and then broadened it even beyond class to "or closely related agent".

It does not take a degree in chemistry to understand that something related to a class can be half of all poisons in the world.

Perhaps we will hear from Boris now that the secret intelligence that only he is privy to proves that Lucretia Borgia has been a secret Russian agent with a license to kill.

Harry Law , March 23, 2018 at 00:44

Just like the claims in Syria, it is 'Sarin' or a 'Sarin like substance', what a load of bollocks

A Biochemist writes , March 22, 2018 at 23:44

Fred,

" A closely related agent" has no precise scientific meaning. It could mean "in the same chemical class" as Novichok but of indeterminate chemical structure at this time; or it could mean having the same toxicological effect as novichok, but not necessarily in the same chemical class (although this could refer to mode of synthesis, rather than of structural type).

In either case, what it means is that they do not know the precise molecular structure of the agent concerned – and iif they don't know that, they cannot sign it to Russia – or anyone else.

But indeed, even if they did have a precise chemical structure, given that the synthetic processes have been published, even then they could not in any scientifically meaningful sense, ascribe its synthesis to Russia – or anyone else.

The statement to the Court proves beyond any credible argument that the UK Government are simply lying, either to the court, or to the rest of us.

Herbie , March 22, 2018 at 22:50

"I don't think anyone is disputing that it was 'produced in Russia' originally." That's disputed. By the OPCW. So, there was a program to attempt to develop these theoretical weapons in the Soviet Union (Uzbekistan) No evidence that the program was successful according to OPCW.

Robyn , March 22, 2018 at 23:56

'This has been confirmed by specialists, our specialists. An Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons mission is in the UK now to independently confirm this analysis.' Or, to put it another way, the task of the OPCW is NOT to conduct an independent analysis, but to AGREE WITH 'our specialists'.

Ex Pat , March 22, 2018 at 22:26

BORIS IS YELLOW

You've got them rattled Craig. Already the story is no longer screaming headlines, just faded mentions, even in the Daily Heil.

The nice part is that the British establishment may yet see blood running in the street. Theirs, if they loose control of the narrative!

Who can forget the rabbit-caught-in-the-headlights look of fear on Boris's face the morning after Brexit vote. – Boris booed and jeered as he leaves his house after Brexit, 24 June 2016 – Urban Picture UK – Youtube – – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1EtnpulrIg

"You were only supposed to blow the bloody doors off." Michael Caine – The Italian Job – – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_PX1cVuaVA

Just say "Up yours" to USUK Empire Neo-Con Nazi Nonce mass psychosis! – Biggus Dickus – – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGoRRoGQnb8#t=00m36s

– (Boris for it is he) – Youtube – – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kx_G2a2hL6U

(ER, Shome mishtake Shurely? Ed.) – Airplane – – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixljWVyPby0#t=01m06s

Paul Hunter , March 23, 2018 at 01:03

It is about right.

In the 90's young Boris used to write Eurosceptic articles for the Sunday Telegraph – really hard hitting pieces of writing, or so it seemed. Then along came Sir James Goldsmith's Referendum Party, a political organisation perfectly suited to Johnson's rhetoric you would have thought, except it wasn't: as soon as the new party appeared BoJo suddenly changed his tune – all of a sudden leaving the EU became a very bad idea with Goldsmith being described as a dangerous demagogue and readers were warned in no uncertain terms not to vote for him. It was as if Boris was taking orders from someone above.

He doesn't mean anything he says.

Harry Law , March 22, 2018 at 23:49

The Skripals are both in a coma in hospital after the nerve agent attack in Salisbury and therefore unable to give their consent to blood samples being taken or tested. A judge has given doctors permission to take blood samples from the former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, so that tests can be carried out by chemical weapons experts.

The judge, David Williams, who is based in the family division of the high court in London, announced his decision on Thursday after analysing the case at a private hearing earlier this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/22/salisbury-attack-medical-staff-contacted-police-when-antidotes-failed-to-work

How come Doctors had to wait so long? Doctors have been given the legal right to take blood samples from unconscious or incapacitated drivers without their consent. The change – under the provisions of the 2002 Police Reform Act – comes into effect on Tuesday. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2288574.stm

A spokesperson for the Home Office said the provision, which took effect Oct. 1, gives doctors "a power, but not a duty" to take the samples. The British Medical Association (BMA), which had urged the government to change the law, has issued guidelines for MDs. It says there should be "a clear separation between the 'CLINICAL' care the patient is receiving and any forensic procedures with which patients are asked to cooperate." Dr. Michael Wilks, chair of the BMA's Ethics Committee, says the association rarely supports taking samples without patients' consent, but in this case there is "a clear public interest" in having it done. He also pointed out that the law would help clear the names of some drivers. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC140489/
How much more of a public interest is it to save two peoples lives?

Barden Gridge , March 23, 2018 at 00:02

"Blood samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analyzed and the findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound. The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent OR CLOSELY RELATED AGENT."

What's a "related compound"? Could it be something as ordinary as sheep dip or weedkiller? Could they be described as "nerve agents", even if they're not usually thought of in that sense?

As for Johnson. I've watched his lies and obfuscation connected with the idiotic Garden Bridge project for the last two years. Some £46 million of public money was wasted on that because of him, never mind the disastrous Heatherwick new bus for London, the Dangleway, the Arcelor Mittal Orbit, the dodgy deal about West Ham getting the Olympic stadium. He has no conscience. He does not give a damn about anything other than Boris Johnson.

In a German TV disscussion programme last night, Anthony Glees was calling for a boycott of the World Cup in Russia and actually said:
"Boris Johnson would not have accused Putin if he didn't have any proof". ( Glees' is quoted in German here: https://twitter.com/maischberger/status/976580438222360576 ) He should try that line on a British audience, especially a London one.

Dave Lawton , March 23, 2018 at 00:23

Sheep dip yes is a nerve agent and people have died. There is even a brand called ASSASSIN Sheep Dip.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11561630/That-sheep-dip-poisoning-disaster-they-tried-to-keep-secret.html

Harry Law , March 23, 2018 at 00:05

The doctors could have taken the blood of the Skripals on 4th of March and helped to save their lives see my comment above. If they die, could this be manslaughter?

PreProle , March 23, 2018 at 00:06

The judgment at the high court also stated –

"c) The main consideration ought to be the beliefs and values that would be likely to influence the decision if Mr Skripal or Ms Skripal had capacity. An individual subjected to such an attack with personally catastrophic consequences would want to see it fully and properly investigated and that all appropriate steps to identify the perpetrators (individual and state) have been taken so that they can be held to account."

A 'full and proper investigation' into the Salisbury incident would HAVE to include the UK government's agreement to supply Russia with blood samples from Mr and Ms Skripal, in accordance with CWC procedures and with Russia's request in keeping with those procedures. As Russia alone hold the formulaic records by which to accurately measure the toxic type in the Skripals blood (should those toxins be Russian in origin), any investigation which excludes Russian participation can in no way be considered as "fully and properly" conducted. Furthermore, any effort to second-guess and thereby disregard whatever results a Russian participation may provide to an investigation can only be considered as an attempt against its 'full and proper' conclusion.

J , March 23, 2018 at 00:44

New cold War 2.0 with optional World War 3.0 extra's, all yours with only vague assurances. Deposit required. Buy now while stocks last.*

*Our products may differ from those described in the packaging, no refunds or returns.

MJ , March 23, 2018 at 00:16

If the Skripals really are in a Salisbury NHS hospital then It's safe to conclude that no nerve agent was involved at all. This is because of the comments of the consultant and the the fact that they're still alive

ohmygowd , March 23, 2018 at 00:27

Could it be argued that all nerve agents are "closely related" and then speculated that the wording of the testimony was arrived at in a way of compromise between the scientist(s) and the government?

https://chemm.nlm.nih.gov/nerveagents.htm

Also, do we know if the blood sample was taken from the police officer who (it would appear) made sudden recovery? Can him being discharged from hospital be seen as a way to avoid giving the blood sample?

[Mar 23, 2018] Interesting detail about illegal British war propaganda in breach of ICCPR Article 20. Of particular note is the report of Pompeo's role in the blame game for the failed Skripal provocation.

Notable quotes:
"... Ultimately, Britain is not a factor in foreign affairs. Having withdrawn from the EU, they've vanished up the USA's asshole. The US controls their Fisher-Price nuclear deterrent and their increasingly atavistic veto. ..."
"... The determining geopolitical factor is Russia's missile announcement. It re-established MAD, but that's not all. It also created a capability for proportional response to the entire range of US force that effectively counters all US use and threat of force. ..."
Mar 23, 2018 | www.unz.com

Red Dawn , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 9:53 pm GMT

Interesting detail about illegal British war propaganda in breach of ICCPR Article 20. Of particular note is the report of Pompeo's role in the blame game for the failed provocation.

Ultimately, Britain is not a factor in foreign affairs. Having withdrawn from the EU, they've vanished up the USA's asshole. The US controls their Fisher-Price nuclear deterrent and their increasingly atavistic veto.

The determining geopolitical factor is Russia's missile announcement. It re-established MAD, but that's not all. It also created a capability for proportional response to the entire range of US force that effectively counters all US use and threat of force. There's no more game of chicken. Russia can discipline the US with localized humiliation and global rout without recourse to mutual destruction.

The Russian program of coercion to peace is already taking effect:

https://www.merkley.senate.gov/news/press-releases/amid-heightened-tension-merkley-feinstein-sanders-and-markey-press-trump-administration-to-jumpstart-new-strategic-talks-with-russia

In these talks, Russia is in a position to impose not just nuclear disarmament but demilitarization. They've turned the clock back to the Eisenhower/Herter peace plan. That is a very good thing.

[Mar 23, 2018] The USA daily propaganda briefings on Skripal case

Mar 23, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: james | Mar 22, 2018 10:14:16 PM | 58

james , Mar 22, 2018 10:14:16 PM | 58
usa daily propaganda briefings...

https://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2018/03/279451.htm


"MS NAUERT: Yeah. Okay. So, as many of you know, Russia – yeah, I think it was yesterday – said that this could have come – the poisoning could have come from yet another country, which is ridiculous. I mean, we put out a statement about that, saying that is a joke that it could have come from another country. We've seen Russian claims like this before, when Russia claimed not to be responsible for its little green men in Ukraine, where Russia claimed to not be responsible for the downing of the Malaysian Air flight in 2014 over Ukraine. We've seen Russia continue to perpetuate the conflict in eastern Ukraine. They make a lot of claims. I think it's pretty clear we stand by the Brits, as do many other countries, that Russia's responsible for this."

[Mar 23, 2018] Unanticipated effect of expulsion of British diplomats from Russia

Mar 23, 2018 | vz.ru

Also on Thursday, the media reported that Moscow can reveal the identity of spies sent as part of 23 employees of the British Embassy in Russia after the announcement of persona non grata Russian diplomats in London.

Elena Vrach , 1 hour ago

Yes, there is a question the despite equal number of expelled diplomats, the level of damage is different and is higher for Britain. Because ironically, EVERYONE assumes that British authorities expelled Russian diplomats as a part of propaganda circus "Oh Oh Oh Novichok".

But on those who were expelled by Russia there is a stamp "MI6" because for Russia it does not make sense to resort to propaganda action -- they expelled those who really were harmful for their security trying to decimate British MI6 capabilities in their country -- and that means that all or most of expelled are iether undercover agents of MI6, or are closely connected with MI6.

Which means effectively the end of their career as MI6 undercover agents. Which is one of the unanticipated effects of this round of Skripal scandal...

It would be funny if WikiLeaks soon publish some list with their positions in MI6.

[Mar 23, 2018] The alleged Salisbury attack succeeded as propaganda but rush to judgement, childish government and diplomatic ranting makes it similar to Iraq WDM hoax

Mar 23, 2018 | www.unz.com

Randal , March 22, 2018 at 4:21 pm GMT

Britain:

My own country is looking particularly shabby at the moment, over a number of topical news stories:

The alleged Salisbury attack, and in particular the disgraceful and shameful British government response to it and the lockstep backing for it by the establishment media. Rush to judgement, childish government and diplomatic ranting, Iraq War-style manipulation of seemingly laughably inadequate evidence to "fit the facts around the policy", massive jingoistic propaganda effort.

Intelligence and security community involvement in the manipulative anti-Trump hysteria in the US.

Now, the related Cambridge Analytica/SCL Elections story and the comical performance in presumably giving time to cover up information on that company's servers with a convenient court delay in issuing a search warrant:

Cambridge Analytica: search of London HQ delayed by wait for warrant

The information commissioner will have to wait until at least Friday to enter the offices of Cambridge Analytica after a high court judge adjourned the hearing into her application for a warrant.

The commissioner, Elizabeth Denham, announced on Monday night that she planned to request an urgent warrant to enter the company's London offices, after it was revealed that it had been given information from 50m Facebook profiles without users' permission.

.

On Tuesday, crates were seen being removed from the central London office that Cambridge Analytica shares with other tenants. No one on the scene would comment on the origin of the crates, and the ICO said it was not involved in their removal.

The effectiveness of US sphere establishment media propaganda can be judged from the widespread belief that Russia was likely responsible for the alleged attack in Salisbury, when in reality the case against Russia is almost literally non-existent . One survey suggested as few as 26% even questioned the state approved and propaganda-imposed version (poll conducted 14th/15th March):

73% of people in the poll think that Russia is responsible for the poisoning, 21% are unsure, 5% don't think it was Russia. There is also broad public support for the government's reaction – 60% support the measures they've announced so far and 14% are opposed.

[Mar 23, 2018] Russiagate Comes to England by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... persona non grata ..."
"... May, who referred to a "Russian mafia state," has blamed Moscow for the attack even though she made plain in her first speech that the investigation was still underway. ..."
"... She did not consider that Vladimir Putin's government would have no good reason to carry out an assassination that surely would be attributed to it, particularly as it was on the verge of national elections and also, more important, because it will be hosting the World Cup later this year and will be highly sensitive to threats of boycott. ..."
"... when Theresa May says that the alleged agent used against the Skripals as being "of a type" associated with a reported Russian-developed chemical weapon called Novichok that was produced in the 1970s and 1980s, she is actually conceding that her own chemical weapons laboratories at Porton Down are, to a certain, extent, guessing at the provenance and characteristics of the actual agent that might or might not have been used in Salisbury. ..."
"... Reprinted with permission from Unz.co ..."
Mar 20, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

I don't know what happened in Salisbury England on March 4th, but it appears that the British government doesn't know either. Prime Minister Theresa May's speech before Parliament last Monday was essentially political, reflecting demands that she should "do something" in response to the mounting hysteria over the poisoning of former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia. After May's presentation there were demands from Parliamentarians for harsh measures against Russia, reminiscent of the calls for action emanating from the U.S. Congress over the allegations relating to what has been called Russiagate.

This demand to take action led to a second Parliamentary address by May on Wednesday in which she detailed the British response to the incident, which included cutting off all high-level contacts between Moscow and London and the " persona non grata " (PNG) expulsion of 23 "spies" and intelligence officers working out of the Russian Federation Embassy. The expulsions will no doubt produce a tit-for-tat PNG from Moscow, ironically crippling or even eliminating the MI-6 presence and considerably reducing Britain's own ability to understand what it going on in the Kremlin.

May, who referred to a "Russian mafia state," has blamed Moscow for the attack even though she made plain in her first speech that the investigation was still underway. In both her presentations, she addressed the issue of motive by citing her belief that the attempted assassination conforms with an established pattern of Russian behavior. She did not consider that Vladimir Putin's government would have no good reason to carry out an assassination that surely would be attributed to it, particularly as it was on the verge of national elections and also, more important, because it will be hosting the World Cup later this year and will be highly sensitive to threats of boycott. And it must be observed that Skripal posed no active threat to the Russian government. He has been living quietly in Britain for eight years, leading to wild tabloid press speculation that the Kremlin's motive must have been to warn potential traitors that there are always consequences, even years later and in a far-off land.

To provide additional buttressing of what is a questionable thesis, the case of the assassination of Alexander Litvinenko in London in 2006 has been repeatedly cited by the media on both sides of the Atlantic as evidence of Russian turpitude, but the backstory is not the same. Litvinenko was an FSB officer who fled to the United Kingdom to avoid prosecution in Russia. In Britain, he became a whistleblower and author, exposing numerous alleged Russian government misdeeds. Would the Kremlin have been motivated to kill him? He was seen as a traitor and a continuing threat through his books and speeches, so it is certainly possible. The story of Skripal was, however, completely different. He was a double agent working for Britain who was arrested and imprisoned in 2006. He was released and traveled to the UK after a 2010 spy swap was arranged by Washington and his daughter has been able to travel freely from Moscow to visit him. If the Russian government had wanted to kill him, they could have easily done so while he was in prison, or they could have punished him by taking steps against his daughter.

There are a number of problems with the accepted narrative as presented by May and the media. Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a nerve agent as "usually odorless organophosphate (such as sarin, tabun, or VX) that disrupts the transmission of nerve impulses by inhibiting cholinesterase and especially acetylcholinesterase and is used as a chemical weapon in gaseous or liquid form," while Wikipedia explains that it is "a class of organic chemicals that disrupt the mechanisms by which nerves transfer messages to organs." A little more research online reveals that most so-called nerve agents are chemically related. So when Theresa May says that the alleged agent used against the Skripals as being "of a type" associated with a reported Russian-developed chemical weapon called Novichok that was produced in the 1970s and 1980s, she is actually conceding that her own chemical weapons laboratories at Porton Down are, to a certain, extent, guessing at the provenance and characteristics of the actual agent that might or might not have been used in Salisbury.

Beyond that, a military strength nerve agent is, by definition, a highly concentrated and easily dispersed form of a chemical weapon. It is intended to kill or incapacitate hundreds or even thousands of soldiers. If it truly had been used in Salisbury, even in a small dose, it would have killed Skripal and his daughter as well as others nearby. First responders who showed up without protective clothing, clearly seen in the initial videos and photos taken near the site, would also be dead. After her first speech, May summoned the Russian Ambassador and demanded that he address the allegations, but Moscow reasonably enough demanded a sample of the alleged nerve agent for testing by relevant international bodies like the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons before it could even respond to the British accusations. It was a valid point even supported in Parliament questioning by opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, but May and her government decided to act anyway.

May's language also conveys uncertainty. She used "it appears" and also said it was "highly likely" that Moscow was behind the poisoning of Skripal but provided no actual evidence that that was the case, presumably only assuming that it had to be Russia. And her government has told the public that there is "little risk" remaining over the incident and that those who were possibly exposed merely have to wash themselves and their clothes, hardly likely if it were a military grade toxin, which gains it lethality from being persistent on and around a target. She made clear her lack of corroboration for her claim by offering an "either-or" analysis: either Russia's government did it or it had "lost control" of its nerve agent.

As noted above, May's argument is, to a certain extent, based on character assassination of Russians – she even offered up the alleged "annexation" of Crimea as corroboration of her view that Moscow is not inclined to play by the rules that others observe. It is a narrative that is based on the presumption that "this is the sort of thing the Russian government headed by Vladimir Putin does." The British media has responded enthusiastically, running stories about numerous assassinations and poisonings that ought to be attributed to Russia, while ignoring the fact that the world leaders in political assassinations are actually the United States and Israel.

There are a number of other considerations that the May government has ignored in its rush to expand the crisis. She mentioned that Russia might be somewhat exonerated if it has lost control of its chemical weapons, but did not fully explain what that might mean. It could be plausible to consider that states hostile to Russia like Ukraine and Georgia that were once part of the Soviet Union could have had , and might still retain, stocks of the Novichok nerve agent. That in turn suggests a false flag, with someone having an interest in promoting a crisis between Russia and Britain. If that someone were a country having a sophisticated arms industry possessing its own chemical weapons capability, like the United States or Israel, it would be quite easy to copy the characteristics of the Russian nerve agent, particularly as its formula has been known since it was published in 1992. The agent could then be used to create an incident that would inevitably be blamed on Moscow. Why would Israel and the United States want to do that? To put pressure on Russia to embarrass it and put it on the defensive so I would be forced eventually to abandon its support for President Bashar al-Assad in Syria. Removing al-Assad is the often-expressed agenda of the Israeli and American governments, both of which have pledged to take "independent action" in Syria no matter what the United Nations or any other international body says. The redoubtable Nikki Haley is already using the incident to fearmonger over Moscow's intentions at the U.N., warning that a Russian chemical attack on New York City could be coming.

And to throw out a really wild possibility, one might observe that no one in Britain had a stronger motive to generate a major confrontation with a well-defined enemy than Theresa May, who has been under fire by the media and pressured to resign by many in her own Conservative Party. Once upon a time suggesting that a democratically elected government might assassinate someone for political reasons would have been unthinkable, but the 2016 election in the United States has demonstrated that nothing is impossible, particularly if one is considering the possibility that a secret intelligence service might be collaborating with a government to help it stay in power. An incident in which no one was actually killed that can be used to spark an international crisis mandating "strong leadership" would be just the ticket.

Reprinted with permission from Unz.co

[Mar 23, 2018] Manipulative media monopoly Kremlin spokesman says US UK press has ruled world for decades by Simon Belcher

Notable quotes:
"... Media outlets based in the US and Britain have long enjoyed dominance in the global news market and have abused their position to manipulate audiences ..."
"... "People are naked against these media wars. They are victims of these media wars," ..."
"... "They are being driven into a certain way of emotions without even understanding that." ..."
"... "Anglo-Saxon media" ..."
"... "They are the most powerful, the most influential, and they have the widest possible reach globally," ..."
"... And, of course, this feeling of monopoly brings a will to manipulate this monopoly. ..."
"... You can use this monopoly as a tool of delivering your point of view, whether it's right or wrong, it doesn't matter, you can adjust it in accordance with the situation -- to simply manipulate the [minds] of people throughout the world." ..."
Mar 23, 2018 | www.rt.com

Media outlets based in the US and Britain have long enjoyed dominance in the global news market and have abused their position to manipulate audiences , a Kremlin spokesman told RT in an exclusive interview. Russia is currently being targeted by an unprecedented campaign in the West, aimed at undermining its resurgence, Dmitry Peskov told RT's Sophie Shevardnadze. The media are playing a major part in it, as they are selling an anti-Russian narrative to the people of Western nations. But what those outlets do is a disservice to their audiences, he argued.

"People are naked against these media wars. They are victims of these media wars," he said. "They are being driven into a certain way of emotions without even understanding that."

Peskov said that for decades "Anglo-Saxon media" enjoyed a virtual global monopoly on delivering news about economy and politics.

"They are the most powerful, the most influential, and they have the widest possible reach globally," he said. " And, of course, this feeling of monopoly brings a will to manipulate this monopoly.

You can use this monopoly as a tool of delivering your point of view, whether it's right or wrong, it doesn't matter, you can adjust it in accordance with the situation -- to simply manipulate the [minds] of people throughout the world."

He added that outlets like RT challenge this "huge machine" with alternative narratives and facts that don't fit into how the Western media wants the world to see things. A good example of this is coverage of events in Syria and Iraq, Peskov said.

Western media were all too eager to highlight civilian casualties of the operation in Aleppo, which they blame solely on Russian and Syrian forces, but failed to extend this kind of reporting to similar operations in Mosul and Raqqa, where the US-led coalition was in charge.

[Mar 23, 2018] 'Trump lining up war cabinet' Bolton's elevation to NSC adviser fuels alarm

Notable quotes:
"... "With the appointments of Mike Pompeo and John Bolton, @realDonaldTrump is successfully lining up his war cabinet. Bolton played a key role in politicizing the intel that misled us into the Iraq War. We cannot let this extreme war hawk blunder us into another terrible conflict," ..."
"... "John Bolton supports proactively bombing Iran & striking North Korea with nuclear weapons first without provocation. Appointing him to be Nat Sec Advisor is a grave danger to the American people & a clear message from @realDonaldTrump that he is gearing up for military conflict," ..."
"... "If you're always wrong on security, you're the wrong person to be National Security Advisor," ..."
"... "drumbeats of war." ..."
"... "absolutely the wrong person to be national security advisor now," ..."
"... "John Bolton was part of the effort to mislead the US into the disastrous Iraq war and has supported military action against North Korea and Iran. He was too extreme to be confirmed as UN ambassador in 2005 and is absolutely the wrong person to be national security advisor now," ..."
"... "John Bolton is a dangerous radical. President Trump's decision to make Bolton his National Security Advisor is deeply disturbing," ..."
"... "John Bolton has spent his entire career pushing fringe conspiracy theories, espousing radical ideas about multilateralism, and undermining key alliances across the world." ..."
"... Like this story? Share it with a friend! ..."
Mar 23, 2018 | www.rt.com

Donald Trump's cabinet reshuffles have fueled concerns, not least after the latest appointment of hawkish John Bolton as national security adviser, just days after installing a former CIA chief as the new secretary of state. On Thursday afternoon Donald Trump decided to sack Gen. HR McMaster from his national security adviser post, replacing him with John Bolton. The former US envoy to the United Nations will assume office on April 9 – just days after Mike Pompeo is set to replace Rex Tillerson as the new secretary of state.

READ MORE: Trump replaces national security adviser McMaster with John Bolton

The newly formed doublet has caused shockwaves among the Democrats, who have alleged that Trump seems to be preparing for war. Democratic Senator from Massachusetts Ed Markey warned that Trump is creating a "war cabinet," warning of "grave danger" following Bolton's appointment.

John Bolton supports proactively bombing Iran and conducting a first strike on North Korea without provocation. Appointing him to be Nat Sec Advisor is a grave danger to the American people and a clear message from @realDonaldTrump that he is gearing up for military conflict.

-- Ed Markey (@SenMarkey) March 22, 2018

"With the appointments of Mike Pompeo and John Bolton, @realDonaldTrump is successfully lining up his war cabinet. Bolton played a key role in politicizing the intel that misled us into the Iraq War. We cannot let this extreme war hawk blunder us into another terrible conflict," he tweeted.

"John Bolton supports proactively bombing Iran & striking North Korea with nuclear weapons first without provocation. Appointing him to be Nat Sec Advisor is a grave danger to the American people & a clear message from @realDonaldTrump that he is gearing up for military conflict," Senator Markey added.

John Bolton:
Wanted war w Cuba, arguing wrongly that Cuba had WMD
Wanted war w Iraq, arguing – wrong again – that Iraq had WMD
Believes – wrongly – that Islamic law is taking over America

If you're always wrong on security, you're the wrong person to be National Security Advisor

-- Senator Jeff Merkley (@SenJeffMerkley) March 22, 2018

The choice of Bolton as the national security adviser has also been questioned by Senator Jeff Merkley from Oregon, who has pointed out many flaws with the new appointee's policies. "If you're always wrong on security, you're the wrong person to be National Security Advisor," Merkley tweeted.

This is dangerous news for the country and the world. John Bolton was easily one of the most extreme, pro-war members of the Bush Administration.

Imagine what havoc he could wreak whispering in Donald Trump's ear...I hear the drumbeats of war. https://t.co/A6ZIyORAM7

-- Rep. Barbara Lee (@RepBarbaraLee) March 22, 2018

Rep. Barbara Jean Lee of California's 13th congressional district was also disappointed by Trump's choice, claiming she is hearing the "drumbeats of war."

The President is surrounding himself with combative lawyers. He's replacing Tillerson and McMaster with Pompeo and Bolton.

It's almost like the President is preparing to go to war in the legal and foreign relations sense...

-- Bradley P. Moss (@BradMossEsq) March 22, 2018

Fears expressed by some Capitol Hill members and the public seem justified. The notoriously hawkish former United Nations ambassador was a chief architect of the George W. Bush administration's justification for the war in Iraq in 2003, that was based on false accusations that Baghdad possessed weapons of mass destruction.

This is one of the most dangerous developments I've seen in our foreign and nat'l security policy. Period. #Bolton #McMaster . https://t.co/aEl5aRn9fA

-- Steve Israel (@RepSteveIsrael) March 22, 2018

Trump's choice of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director Mike Pompeo as the new secretary of state also made many in Washington uneasy. Unlike his predecessor, Rex Tillerson, Pompeo seems better aligned with Trump's confrontational foreign policy, namely on the Iran nuclear deal, on North Korea, and on the shift of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Besides politicians, the American public also expressed concern about the feasibility of a looming armed conflict.

John Bolton was part of the effort to mislead the US into the disastrous Iraq war and has supported military action against North Korea and Iran. He was too extreme to be confirmed as UN ambassador in 2005 and is absolutely the wrong person to be national security advisor now.

-- Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) March 22, 2018

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders called Bolton "absolutely the wrong person to be national security advisor now," recalling how he deceived the public about the Iraq war.

"John Bolton was part of the effort to mislead the US into the disastrous Iraq war and has supported military action against North Korea and Iran. He was too extreme to be confirmed as UN ambassador in 2005 and is absolutely the wrong person to be national security advisor now," Sanders tweeted.

"John Bolton is a dangerous radical. President Trump's decision to make Bolton his National Security Advisor is deeply disturbing," Congressman Brendan F. Boyle (PA-13) said in a written statement. "John Bolton has spent his entire career pushing fringe conspiracy theories, espousing radical ideas about multilateralism, and undermining key alliances across the world."

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

[Mar 23, 2018] So on the 15th anniversary of the Iraq debacle, a neocon who cheered it on is rewarded with a national security post where he can cue up the attack on Iran that was always the ultimate prize for Israel's US stooges?

Mar 22, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Jim Haygood , , March 22, 2018 at 7:31 pm

So on the 15th anniversary of the Iraq debacle, a neocon who cheered it on is rewarded with a national security post where he can cue up the attack on Iran that was always the ultimate prize for Israel's US stooges?

Guess we'll be out marching again, just like last time. Bolton's walrus mustache is the 21st century version of Adolph H's toothbrush mustache. Down with the Persian Untermenschen! /sarc

Carolinian , , March 22, 2018 at 8:50 pm

Of course while working for Cheney Bolton was pretty confident about getting Dubya to start a war with Iran and that didn't happen. Here's a backgrounder that suggests that Bolton is tight with both Adelson and the Mossad so one way of looking at this has Russia fading as a target and Iran falling under the bulls eye. Trump's recent friendly phone call with Putin was contrary to instructions from his NSC and therefore presumably McMaster.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/why-a-john-bolton-appointment-is-scarier-than-you-think-mcmaster-trump/

Looked at optimistically it could be out of the frying pan and into a smaller frying pan (for us if not for Iran but that remains to be seen).

Of course looked at pessimistically it's terrible news but if the public and Congress are afraid of Trump gratuitously starting a new war then perhaps they should take away his power to do so. Seems the Constitution did have something to say about that.

barrisj , , March 22, 2018 at 10:21 pm

Tol'ja so these miserable wretches simply cannot die resurrection a promise any time a misfit administration takes power all that audition time on FoxNews paid off Trump stripping the cable channels of right-wing bloviators "best people for the jawb", don't you know.

[Mar 23, 2018] Let's get over the McMaster ouster. The fact is that he was completely unqualified to be the National Security advisor. McMaster was uneducated in history and international politics.

Mar 23, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Don Bacon , Mar 22, 2018 9:20:29 PM | 45

Let's get over the McMaster ouster. The fact is that he was completely unqualified to be the National Security advisor. McMaster was uneducated in history and international politics. McMaster (1) was excellent as an army unit leader and (2) obtained a PhD with a thesis that claimed that the US lost in Vietnam because generals weren't listened to, which is complete BS.
Now we may not like Bolton, but at least he's qualified. Does the NSA have the authority to start a war? No. The simple fact is that in the most likely war scenarios, Korea and Iran, the US has bases, ships etc. within easy reach of prospective enemies. Forward basing, it's called. The Pentagon knows this very well. They hate it when bases are destroyed and ships are sunk.
Currently the US is crowing about an evacuation exercise in Korea -- with a hundred people, when there are tens of thousands of Americans in South Korea endangered by any war.
So let's cheer up.
Jackrabbit , Mar 22, 2018 9:45:06 PM | 49
Don Bacon

As I understand it, Mc Master's thesis was worse than 'generals weren't listened to", it was that Generals knew what it would take to win but were reluctant to press their case.

I think McMaster's view gets watered-down and sugar-coated into: "Generals should provide true info to civilian authority" when it seems to me that the message he conveys to Generals is simply this: be stubborn; insist on full and unconditional support of civilian authority for any military action. We see this attitude reflected in "The Powell Doctrine" and now Trump's hand's-off approach to the military.

I see this as civilian authority (the President) essentially handing the keys to the Generals once any military action is authorized.

Don Bacon , Mar 22, 2018 9:57:49 PM | 55
@jr 49
Vietnam, a US attempt at nation-building within a nation (stupid), was a lost cause to begin with and so what generals "knew" was irrelevant.
Harry Truman got it right.
A couple of President Harry Truman quotes: "It's the fellows who go to West Point and are trained to think they're gods in uniform that I plan to take apart". . ."I didn't fire him [General MacArthur] because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was, but that's not against the law for generals. If it was, half to three quarters of them would be in jail."

Now currently generals aren't any smarter, they are still dumb SOBs who rise up by sucking up, but at least they are smart enough to realize that forward basing dooms any offensive attacks against countries that have the capability to counter-attack against US bases and ships. That would be North Korea and Iran, for starters. Bolton's ascendance won't change that simple truth, so the sky isn't falling.

Grieved , Mar 22, 2018 10:18:19 PM | 60
@45 Don Bacon

Yes, agreed, let's please cheer up. We live in a age of miracles, when Russia and China see fit to ally, and preserve, or create, world stability.

Trump has always been surrounded by completely vile people, and none of this has stopped Russia from laying down the gauntlet. Bolton is as much a nothing, I suggest, as Boris Johnson across the ocean. Neither of them holds power. The west doesn't hold power any longer. It's been checkmated at every turn - by Russia militarily and China economically.

Power is the ability to force things to your will, and it's backed up by a gun or it fails in the end. Trump's button may be big but it's old and maybe rusted and the odds are good it doesn't even work very well, especially against next generation jamming and hypersonic speeds.

So the west can bluster and parade its theater all it wants, it means nothing as the caravans all move on into the future. And even the theater is getting found out in advance now, with chemical-weapon caches and plans rendered visible before they can act.

As for the bluster, it only works on domestic populations, who have no power and thus cannot affect reality, and whose governments have no power and thus cannot use a mandate to war even if given one by their populations, gulled by propaganda. It's a useless, circular mechanism whose paradigm has ended, is defunct.

I find it encouraging beyond words to watch the real power on the ground in this Eurasian Century, as the west declines. And I'll quote just one last time, because I love the potency of this equation: "Power. The one quality of the human condition that you can't fake."

[Mar 22, 2018] If it's correct, the Brits made a very nasty error that shows the true nature of their establishment.

Highly recommended!
Mar 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

karlof1 , March 22, 2018 at 12:06 am GMT

I find it rather interesting that none of the comments address the last part of Shamir's article. If it's correct, the Brits made a very nasty error that shows the true nature of their establishment.
Rick Merlotti , March 19, 2018 at 10:39 am

Perfidious Albion

A short statement of the reasons why the British are now staging the Skripal provocation can be found in a March 14 London Sunday Telegraph call to arms by Allister Heath, who rants:

"We need a new world order to take on totalitarian capitalists in Russia and China Such an alliance would dramatically shift the global balance of power, and allow the liberal democracies finally to fight back. It would endow the world with the sorts of robust institutions that are required to contain Russia and China Britain needs a new role in the world; building such a network would be our perfect mission."

Across the pond, as they say, a similar foundational statement was made by 68 former Obama Administration officials who have formed a group called National Security Action, aimed at securing Trump's impeachment and attacking Russia and China.

As visitors to the LaRouchePAC website know, Russia and China have embarked on a massive infrastructure building project in Eurasia, the center of all British geopolitical fantasies since the time of Halford MacKinder. Moreover, China's Belt and Road Initiative now encompasses more than 140 nations in the largest infrastructure-building project ever undertaken in human history. This project is a true economic engine for the future, while neo-liberal economies continue to see their productive potentials sucked dry by the massive mound of debt they have created since the 2008 financial collapse. This debt is now on a hair trigger for implosion. It is estimated by banking insiders that the City of London is sitting on a derivatives powderkeg of $700 trillion with over-the-counter derivatives accounting for another $570 trillion. The City of London will bear the major impact of the derivatives collapse.

In this strategic geometry, President Trump's support of peaceful collaboration with Russia during the campaign and his personal friendship with President Xi, marked him for the relentless coup against him waged by the British and their U.S. friends.

On top of that, President Putin delivered a mammoth strategic shock on March 1, showing new Russian weapons systems based on new physical principles which render present U.S. ABM systems and much of current U.S. war-fighting doctrine obsolete, together with the vaunted first strike capacity with which NATO has surrounded Russia. Not only is the West sitting on a new financial collapse; its vaunted military superiority has just been flanked.

More: https://larouchepac.com/20180318/perfidious-albion-fatally-wounded-british-beast-lashes-out

Anna , March 19, 2018 at 9:45 pm

Allister Heath pretends to be a pole-bearer for liberal democracies. And what exactly is so precious about Heath and his "liberal democracy" in the UK?

Is it the sudden expertise in chemical weaponry by Boris Johnson, who "knew" immediately that "Russians did it?" This Boris Johnson: "'I am a passionate Zionist,' declares Boris Johnson: http://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/boris-johnson-zionist/

Compare Boris pronouncements to the expert conclusion by a real expert in chemical weaponry:

"This so-called "nerve agent" [novichok] has never been placed on the OPCW list of banned chemical weapons because it has never existed. Its non-existence was confirmed by Dr. Robin Black, until recently he was a head of the detection laboratory at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Porton Down). He wrote in his review: " emphasizes that there is no independent confirmation of Mirzayanov's claims about the chemical properties of these compounds: Information on these compounds has been sparse in the public domain, mostly originating from a dissident Russian military chemist, Vil Mirzayanov. No independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published. (Black, 2016)"

"Just accept that everything the British government says is a lie" http://thesaker.is/the-british-spy-skripal-hoax/

[Mar 22, 2018] I think that in much of the world The World Cup is a bigger deal than the Olympics. That's why Brits want to undermine it with Skripal affair

Notable quotes:
"... I think that in much of the world The World Cup is a bigger deal than the Olympics. I knew some athletes here in Canada who had their athletic careers ended by our boycott of the 1980 Olympics (after years and years of hard work). I'm surprised western intelligence agencies have not done more to undermine Russia's world cup. They may yet. ..."
"... Outside of North America the World Cup is definitely a much bigger event than the Olympics. ..."
"... I just thought we would see the same nonsense we saw to undermine the Sochi Olympics, this just seems much more than just derogatory media coverage, or officials boycotting attending the event. I was interested to see Professor Richard Sakwa, his book on the Ukraine crisis is probably the best out there, interviewed on RT regarding this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcKQ-4Qqel0 ..."
Mar 22, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

JamesT , 21 March 2018 at 09:48 PM

LondonBob

I think that in much of the world The World Cup is a bigger deal than the Olympics. I knew some athletes here in Canada who had their athletic careers ended by our boycott of the 1980 Olympics (after years and years of hard work). I'm surprised western intelligence agencies have not done more to undermine Russia's world cup. They may yet.

LondonBob -> JamesT ... , 22 March 2018 at 04:24 AM
Outside of North America the World Cup is definitely a much bigger event than the Olympics. I already have my tickets for England v Panama in Nizhny Novgorod, as well as a second round match in Moscow.

I don't care much for the Olympics, although I do like the Winter Olympics. I just thought we would see the same nonsense we saw to undermine the Sochi Olympics, this just seems much more than just derogatory media coverage, or officials boycotting attending the event. I was interested to see Professor Richard Sakwa, his book on the Ukraine crisis is probably the best out there, interviewed on RT regarding this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcKQ-4Qqel0

[Mar 22, 2018] Either the British authorities are unable to protect from a terrorist attack on their territory or staged the attack themselves

Theresa May was definitly deciving british people about nerve gas attack
"either the British authorities are unable to protect from a terrorist attack on their territory or staged the attack themselves.
Notable quotes:
"... a Russian chem-tech said yesterday if the Russians had done it they would be dead. Even today they were poisoned in their homes is held to, after which they could drive to a pub and a meal (for which they waited 20 minutes) then out to a park bench . . . succumbing almost three hours later. ..."
"... I'm looking forward to an accurate timeline of what happened and when it happened. ..."
"... another gas pipeline inspired madness as NordStream 2 approaches implementation. This is supported by the voltairnet report (especially the sacking of Tillerson). The oil, coal, nuclear lobbies are desperate to profit from gas to EU and that is not going to happen from Russian gas pipelines. ..."
"... the UK is the homeland of Christopher Steele who assembled the Trump smut dossier. That was done with the connivance of MI6 and the UK conservative party in support of Hillary Clinton and against Trump. ie The UK not Russia set out to interfere in the USA elections and have been exposed. ..."
"... IMO, the Brits have made a massive mistake, a grave error, that they are now very much aware of -- their hoax has blown up in their faces, and there's no way out other than sweeping the entire affair down the memory hole or under the rug. And with the advent of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, the entire government's shifted to damage control. ..."
"... But there will be some that it doesn't fit easily with and the example of David Kelly will help as a salutary warning to anyone considering reflecting on the morals and ethics of a situation. ..."
"... Just so Mrs May and PHE are clear; A Dissipated, Weaponised Nerve Agent in the air and on surfaces in the Streets of Salisbury (or anywhere else) Is FUCKING DANGEROUS - BIG TIMEY ..."
"... Porton Down employees might get away with lying, Blair did get away with lying but it will be interesting how Mrs May is going to explain this one. ..."
"... Why do you call Wolfowitz, Bremmer and Rumsfeld clueless? Has it occurred to you they knew exactly what they were doing -- the destruction of Iraq -- and got away with it? ..."
"... I cannot understand why so many commenters assume that a toxic agent had anything to do with this obvious false flag charade. I wonder if Skripal or his daughter were actually sick at all, or merely doing a crisis acting job. ..."
"... Actually, there is zero evidence that anything happened at all. ..."
"... It's interesting to see how the Salisbury thing ties in with Brexit negotiations. Clearly the Tories are in disarray and probably pinning their hopes on a strongly worded anti Russian statement from the OPCW. They may be out of luck. ..."
Mar 22, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

ninel , Mar 21, 2018 7:50:18 PM | 78

Couple of recent pieces that point to an imminent attack from several sides Where's b on this?
Sid2 , Mar 21, 2018 7:53:20 PM | 79
@74: plus (sorry don't have link)

a Russian chem-tech said yesterday if the Russians had done it they would be dead. Even today they were poisoned in their homes is held to, after which they could drive to a pub and a meal (for which they waited 20 minutes) then out to a park bench . . . succumbing almost three hours later.

I'm looking forward to an accurate timeline of what happened and when it happened.

flamingo , Mar 21, 2018 8:16:19 PM | 80
Thank you b and all contributors. This is one great community to share ideas with. I am firmly of the belief that this venomous drivel by May and her UK parrots is:

1: another gas pipeline inspired madness as NordStream 2 approaches implementation. This is supported by the voltairnet report (especially the sacking of Tillerson). The oil, coal, nuclear lobbies are desperate to profit from gas to EU and that is not going to happen from Russian gas pipelines.

2: the UK is the homeland of Christopher Steele who assembled the Trump smut dossier. That was done with the connivance of MI6 and the UK conservative party in support of Hillary Clinton and against Trump. ie The UK not Russia set out to interfere in the USA elections and have been exposed.

More dust in the eyes is needed. So kill 2 birds with one stone as they say at Porton Down and voila, a poisoned traitor and daughter are found dying.

As the Afghanistan people discovered more than a century ago, you can't trust any British envoy.

The amusing part of this tale is how the UK suckered Nikki Haley, the US Ambassador to the UN. The shame and embarassment that Yankees must be feeling after they even had a war of independence from these lying, treacherous Tory fools. Trump needs to reassign Haley to the new embassy in the arctic circle.

karlof1 , Mar 21, 2018 8:20:52 PM | 81
Shamir's Unz Review article cited and linked by Don Bacon @13 which I relink here provides some explosive material at its conclusion that none of the Unz commentators addressed, which I found rather odd given its importance.

IMO, the Brits have made a massive mistake, a grave error, that they are now very much aware of -- their hoax has blown up in their faces, and there's no way out other than sweeping the entire affair down the memory hole or under the rug. And with the advent of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, the entire government's shifted to damage control.

Truth is always stranger than fiction!

Peter B , Mar 21, 2018 8:34:58 PM | 83
Got to say it would be a bit of a mind fuck for an honest scientist at Porton Down to be instructed to lie.

Of course the Developed Vetting Process kinda gets the right people in those positions where they actually believe not telling the truth is their duty when circumstances require it.

But there will be some that it doesn't fit easily with and the example of David Kelly will help as a salutary warning to anyone considering reflecting on the morals and ethics of a situation. But their job, when all is said and done, involves extending the science of humans' ability to kill other humans in more novel, ingenious and grotesque ways.

Once they come to terms with that they must accept what they are, and lying is a very minor blemish on what their souls have become.

But Doc Davies unabashed and vibrant (could also read naive and stupid) did speak out.

No retraction, no correction from the Doc himself, the NHS trust, Public Health England (PHE) or any other government authority says to me he told it as it was; nobody in Salisbury was poisoned by nerve agent (weaponised or otherwise)

Which ties in with Putin's observations - that stuff doesn't make you unwell, it kills you - and Mrs May' passing on of PHE advice; "as Public Health England has made clear, the risk to public health is low." whilst reassuring us in the same statement that; "It is now clear that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a military-grade nerve agent"

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-03-12/debates/722E1DF5-68E2-41A0-8F3C-23B6480B93BF/SalisburyIncident

Just so Mrs May and PHE are clear; A Dissipated, Weaponised Nerve Agent in the air and on surfaces in the Streets of Salisbury (or anywhere else) Is FUCKING DANGEROUS - BIG TIMEY

Porton Down employees might get away with lying, Blair did get away with lying but it will be interesting how Mrs May is going to explain this one.

Don Bacon , Mar 21, 2018 8:40:28 PM | 84
@Jen.

Porton Down is okay financially. They earned it! news report: Britain will invest 48 million pounds in a new chemical warfare defence centre at its Porton Down military research laboratory, Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson said on Thursday.

Madeira , Mar 21, 2018 8:54:06 PM | 85
@76 JohninMK

Yes, very interesting article on background/history of novichok and the various reasons for keeping it secret. Perhaps most important point to note is the following: "Probably all major laboratories that conduct research on poison gas, such as 'Porton Down' in England, Edgewood in the US and the Dutch TNO, have already synthesized novichoks a long time ago."

Castellio , Mar 21, 2018 9:16:30 PM | 86
sid2@68

Why do you call Wolfowitz, Bremmer and Rumsfeld clueless? Has it occurred to you they knew exactly what they were doing -- the destruction of Iraq -- and got away with it?

mike k , Mar 21, 2018 9:45:34 PM | 88
I cannot understand why so many commenters assume that a toxic agent had anything to do with this obvious false flag charade. I wonder if Skripal or his daughter were actually sick at all, or merely doing a crisis acting job.

Curious that they have been spirited away from anyone who might assess their condition. And the notoriously deadly nerve agent apparently did not do it's job on them. Because there was no nerve agent involved. Now after a long lapse of time some concocted nerve agent may be produced to back up the whole scam.

Meanwhile Scripal and daughter will be held away from prying eyes in "protective custody".

Don Bacon , Mar 21, 2018 10:01:33 PM | 89
Yulia Skripol facebook
PeacefulProsperity , Mar 21, 2018 10:24:08 PM | 90
Yes, Meyssan as always has the best intel about the real stuff behind the scenes. B's reporting has recently been also stellar. Thanks! UK has always been behind every US aggression, not the other way round. Besides read Myron Fagan...
blues , Mar 21, 2018 10:50:09 PM | 94
Actually, there is zero evidence that anything happened at all.
Don Bacon , Mar 21, 2018 11:15:12 PM | 95
The US and EU are wandering away from the UK script on Russia. Jean-Claude Juncker and Donald Trump have both undermined Theresa May's attempt at a united front against the Kremlin, as both men congratulated the president on his successful re-election. News report:

A message from European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker congratulating Vladimir Putin on his reelection as Russian president was called "shameful" and "nauseating" by British Conservatives.

Ashley Fox, a Tory MEP, said on Tuesday that it was remiss of Juncker not to have mentioned the poisoning of a Russian former spy and his daughter in Salisbury, southern England.

" To congratulate Vladimir Putin on his election victory without referring to the clear ballot-rigging that took place is bad enough. But his failure to mention Russia's responsibility for a military nerve agent attack on innocent people in my constituency is nauseating ,"

said Fox, according to the Guardian.

Dh , Mar 22, 2018 12:06:20 AM | 98
@97: It's interesting to see how the Salisbury thing ties in with Brexit negotiations. Clearly the Tories are in disarray and probably pinning their hopes on a strongly worded anti Russian statement from the OPCW. They may be out of luck.
jayc , Mar 22, 2018 1:12:16 AM | 100
Reuters describe OPCW inspectors beginning work "at the scene of the nerve agent attack." "The inspectors were seen arriving at the Mill pub in Salisbury." The Mill pub? https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-russia-toxin/chemical-weapons-inspectors-on-scene-of-uk-nerve-agent-attack-idUKKBN1GX1V4

[Mar 22, 2018] If Europe continues to buy Russian gas -- that will be bad news for US. The US, however, may yet succeed in sabotaging Nord Stream II and thus, in a long run, kill European industrial competitiveness thus opening European market for US products.

Mar 22, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

SmoothieX12 -> JPB ... 22 March 2018 at 09:02 AM

... ... ...

I am not a fan of LNG. If I was a Euro there is no way I would allow LNG in, whether from Sabetta in Russia or from Sabine Pass in the US.

Being fan or no fan of specific type of energy hardly factors into economic reality of Europe and coercing it into buying American LNG. If Europe continues to buy Russian gas -- that will be bad news for US. The US, however, may yet succeed in sabotaging Nord Stream II and thus, in a long run, kill European industrial competitiveness thus opening European market for US products. At least that is the plan. Here is a small taste of what is at stake.

http://www.unz.com/article/the-russo-chinese-alliance-revisited/

Since this article publication two major things happened:

1. China released White Paper on North Sea Route calling it a strategic interest of PRC;
2. Putin gave his March 1st speech.

[Mar 22, 2018] Russian gas supplies to Europe must be verboten, in US mind, or at least pushed back.

Mar 22, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

JPB , 21 March 2018 at 11:15 AM

Turkish press is reporting that 'TurkStream' , the pipeline to bring natural gas from Russia to Turkey, is now 80% complete and to be in operation by later this year. It is expected to deliver close to 16 billion cubic meters per year from Gazprom to Turkish gas distribution networks. A second phase scheduled for next year will reportedly deliver an equal amount to Greece and other points in southern Europe.

This is in addition to the existing 'BlueStream' pipeline from Russia to Turkey, operational since 2005, that also has a 16 billion cubic meter per year throughput.

Why the Western concern about NordStream pipeline but none about TurkStream? Are there no sanction problems for the Swiss company working with GazProm? Plus I wonder if this is one of the reasons why Russia has lately become paranoid regarding US Navy FON operations in the Black Sea?

SmoothieX12 -> JPB... , 21 March 2018 at 03:57 PM
Why the Western concern about NordStream pipeline but none about TurkStream? Are there no sanction problems for the Swiss company working with GazProm? Plus I wonder if this is one of the reasons why Russia has lately become paranoid regarding US Navy FON operations in the Black Sea?

The main concern has the name Sabetta--it is the port and a hub to a largest Liquid Natural Gas operation, which also happened to be (in relative terms) next to Europe's LNG ports. I usually don't do this but I apologize, here is a link to my blog's piece on that:

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/02/a-rather-gassy-business.html

LNG is precisely a commodity which is counted by US as a major component in possibly (and most likely not very probable) US re-industrialization. For that, the US has to sell her LNG to Europe. This implies removing Russian LNG from the EU market which dwarfs that of Turkey and some South European nations. Germany, France, UK, Holland among others are the prize here. Russian LNG must be verboten, in US mind, or at least pushed back. As per FON--it has nothing to do with FON but has everything to do with:

1. Flag demonstration--that is presence and Fleet In Being.
2. Signals collection from Sevastopol, Novorossyisk and, in general, all Russia's Southern Military District emitters.

[Mar 22, 2018] It is my opinion that China, Russia, Iran, and probably additional countries decided to make a move after the brazen 2003 invasion of Iraq by the U.S. and others, and the massive financial fraud partly exposed in the U.S. and Britain in 2008 and afterwards, which fraud was not stopped and the perpetrators were bailed out and none were prosecuted.

Notable quotes:
"... China, Russia, et. al. realized that the debt-saturated U.S. was propped up by the fact that the U.S. "dollar" was the reserve banking and trading currency of the entire world and that the "Petrodollar" was one of the main pillars of it, and that this system was the main source of U.S. influence and power around the world and allowed the U.S. and friends to impose financial sanctions on other countries. They also saw that the U.S. was not using gold or silver as a type of support or backup for the financial system. Therefore, they developed their own computer servers to route orders between banks and financial companies that will operate outside of the SWIFT system dominated by the U.S. It is now operational and is called CIPS (Cross-Border Interbank Payment System)-- ..."
Mar 22, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

robt willmann 21 March 2018 at 01:43 PM

John Minnerath,

In addition to the common desire of some (or many) human beings to exercise authority over other groups of people, I think Xi Jinping and his supporters want to complete the large and complex economic and financial projects they have started. It is not just the road and railroad and other infrastructure projects tied to the regional trading structure China has been working on, but a financial structure independent of the existing banking and financial system that was put together by the U.S. and Britain.

It is my opinion that China, Russia, Iran, and probably additional countries decided to make a move after the brazen 2003 invasion of Iraq by the U.S. and others, and the massive financial fraud partly exposed in the U.S. and Britain in 2008 and afterwards, which fraud was not stopped and the perpetrators were bailed out and none were prosecuted.

China, Russia, et. al. realized that the debt-saturated U.S. was propped up by the fact that the U.S. "dollar" was the reserve banking and trading currency of the entire world and that the "Petrodollar" was one of the main pillars of it, and that this system was the main source of U.S. influence and power around the world and allowed the U.S. and friends to impose financial sanctions on other countries. They also saw that the U.S. was not using gold or silver as a type of support or backup for the financial system. Therefore, they developed their own computer servers to route orders between banks and financial companies that will operate outside of the SWIFT system dominated by the U.S. It is now operational and is called CIPS (Cross-Border Interbank Payment System)--

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2015-10/08/content_22127404.htm

https://sputniknews.com/business/201603091036035210-vtb-bank-payment/

In addition, they are moving to break the Petrodollar. In the early 1970's, the U.S. made a non-treaty deal with Saudi Arabia that if they got the rest of OPEC to sell oil and gas to the whole world only in U.S. dollars and would plough some of the money back into U.S. government debt and into the stock market casino, the U.S. would protect the Saudi ruling family so it could run the entire country as its private business. This forced the whole world to get U.S. dollars in order to buy oil and gas, which further put the dollar in as banking reserves around the world, which further pushed the dollar into being used to settle much of the trade between countries.

However, now some contracts are being made to buy and sell oil and gas not in the U.S. dollar, but in other currencies, especially the Chinese renminbi (a/k/a yuan). Also, both China and Russia have been buying large amounts of gold for several years. To get around some of the U.S. sanctions prior to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), Iran sold oil and gas in exchange for gold. Since gold is not a government created and ordered "fiat" money, it cannot be choked off by the SWIFT system or controlled through numbers on computer hard drives in banks.

Russia also remembers what happened after the collapse of the Soviet Union when the U.S. financial "experts" [sic] went there to set up a "wonderful" market-based economy, but what happened of course was the creation of a system to loot Mother Russia and establish a new oligarchy tied in with the U.S., Britain, and Israel.

In the early 1990's when the Soviet Union pulled out of eastern Europe, the U.S. had a chance to help the world be a safer and more peaceful place. The methods of medical diagnosis and surgical technology developed in the U.S. could have been the basis of a new foreign policy that would have voluntarily opened doors across the world.

But it was not to be. The desire of some to be king of the world pushed the chance of improvement aside. Nevertheless, today even autocratic governments see that having financial and governmental options can be a beneficial thing.

And to our immediate south, a movement has been going on for a while in Mexico to establish a money based on silver, promoted by Hugo Salinas Price and others--

http://www.plata.com.mx/enUS/More/322?idioma=2

For obvious reasons, I am not optimistic about Mexico, the deterioration of which has been a sad thing to see. It needs a new and real revolution.

Xi's move is not a unilateral thing. He had to have the support of the ruling committees in China. Keep your eye on the financial structure, gold, and silver.

[Mar 22, 2018] I've been waiting to see what happens with the SDR (Special Drawing Right). The IMF (International Monetary Fund) added it to the SDR basket in October 2016 after a lot of foot dragging by the US.

Notable quotes:
"... I see the global monetary reset currently underway as the slowly moving, but unstoppable, glacier that is forcing all other events. ..."
Mar 22, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

EEngineer -> robt willmann... 21 March 2018 at 04:14 PM

I've been waiting to see what happens with the SDR (Special Drawing Right). The IMF (International Monetary Fund) added it to the SDR basket in October 2016 after a lot of foot dragging by the US. The AIIB (Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank) was setup largely as a Chinese alternative to the US dominated IMF and World Bank because they were not being given an appropriate "place at the table" in the IMF, which was founded as part of the Bretton Woods Agreement at the end of WWII.

I see the global monetary reset currently underway as the slowly moving, but unstoppable, glacier that is forcing all other events.

[Mar 22, 2018] 40 tons of chemical weapons left by militants found in Syria Russian MoD

Notable quotes:
"... "The Syrian Foreign Ministry pointed out that more than 40 tons of poisonous substances were found on the territories, liberated from terrorists," ..."
"... "preparing a provocation with the use of poisonous substances in order to blame the government forces of using chemical weapons against civilians." ..."
"... "has foiled the plans of the US-led coalition to strike key Syrian military targets in order to change the balance of power in favor of the so-called 'moderate opposition," ..."
"... "The shift in focus of the 87th session of the OPCW (Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) Executive Council from the Syrian chemical dossier to the unsubstantiated accusations against Russia over the chemical attack in Salisbury and the violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention only confirms the conclusion that the coalition's goals have been thwarted," ..."
Mar 22, 2018 | www.rt.com

Syrian medical staff take part in a training exercise to learn how to treat victims of chemical weapons attacks, in a course organized by the World Health Organisation (WHO) in Gaziantep, Turkey, July 20, 2017 © Murad Sezer / Reuters Chemical weapon production facilities have been discovered in the areas liberated from militants in Syria, the Russian Defense Ministry says. More than 40 tons of chemical weapons were abandoned by retreating militants in the war-ravaged country, the ministry said on Wednesday. "The Syrian Foreign Ministry pointed out that more than 40 tons of poisonous substances were found on the territories, liberated from terrorists," Igor Kirillov, the commander of Russia's Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Protection Forces, said on Wednesday. Read more Feb 16, 2005 - Baghdad, Iraq - An American soldier with the 1st Cavalry Division is treated after being shot in the volatile area of the Haifa Street neighborhood. © Robert King 15 years after Iraq War, same old MPs jump on chemical weapons claims in Skripal poisoning

The official was speaking at a press conference in Moscow concerning the poisoning of former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal. London and some of its Western allies blame the incident on Moscow, saying it has used a Russian-made nerve agent.

Kirillov said the West won't back off and is prepared to use any means necessary to discredit Russia. The official recalled the example of Syria's Khan Shaykhun.

The commander also criticized the international bodies for their refusal to work with Damascus in investigating the alleged chemical attacks in the country.

In late February, the Russian Reconciliation Center in Syria said it had obtained information that militants in the Damascus suburb of Eastern Ghouta had been "preparing a provocation with the use of poisonous substances in order to blame the government forces of using chemical weapons against civilians."

The release of this data "has foiled the plans of the US-led coalition to strike key Syrian military targets in order to change the balance of power in favor of the so-called 'moderate opposition," he said.

"The shift in focus of the 87th session of the OPCW (Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) Executive Council from the Syrian chemical dossier to the unsubstantiated accusations against Russia over the chemical attack in Salisbury and the violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention only confirms the conclusion that the coalition's goals have been thwarted," Kirillov noted.

The alleged chemical attack in Khan Shaykhun in the Idlib Governorate took place on April 4, 2017 in an area controlled by Al-Nusra Front terrorist group. Up to 100 civilians were said to have been killed by sarin gas, released in an airstrike by Syrian government forces. Washington immediately rushed to blame Damascus for the attack and fired 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at the Shayrat Airbase, claiming it was the very compound from which jets allegedly armed with the chemical took off.

READ MORE: Syria's Eastern Ghouta militants prepare chemical attack provocation, Russian MoD tipped off

Syria, which was confirmed to have destroyed its sarin stockpiles under a deal brokered between Russia and the US in 2013, has denied the American accusations. Russia also pointed out that thorough impartial investigation of the incident never took place, with OPCW experts refusing to visit Khan Shaykhun. It has argued that the attack could have been staged.

[Mar 22, 2018] Westerners held the carrots of a Western lifestyle, which the Russians could not match

Mar 22, 2018 | www.unz.com

Ivan , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 3:24 pm GMT

@Quartermaster

Of course it was a coup, though not a South American style with colonels in charge. It was brought about in the first instance by American meddling, with the obligatory tidal wave of cash in the cover of so called Orange Revolutions and aided by the neo-Nazi faction among the Ukrainians.

However fragile there was a constitutional order in the Ukraine, which held the Ukrainian and Russian speaking peoples of the Ukraine together. But the Westerners held the carrots of a Western lifestyle, which the Russians could not match. The bloodshed in that part of the world was instigated by the usual cabal of troublemakers. Putin was inclined to see the Ukrainians more as misguided Russians rather than anything else.

[Mar 22, 2018] On reasons for the made in a hurry Novichok story and the last surprisingly sane admissions by those in charge of CENTCOM

Notable quotes:
"... They mentioned although the Turkish officials have said they are ready to help evacuation of al-Nusra Front (Tahrir al-Sham Hay'at or the Levant Liberation Board) terrorists from Eastern Ghouta to take them to Idlib, this seems to be a cover as they really mean to rescue their special foreign forces that among the ranks of the Al-Qaeda-affiliatetd Al-Nusra in Syria. ..."
"... According to the sources, a sum of 960 foreign agents have so far been transferred to these specific regions after the terrorist groups allowed evacuation of civilians on March 15... ..."
"... It seems that there is a significant effort by the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Germany to provoke a military confrontation with Moscow. How else are we able to interpret threats from Macron to strike Damascus, together with his ominous advice to foreign journalists not to go to Damascus in the coming days and, for those already there, to leave the capital immediately? There has even been chatter within diplomatic circles that suggest that UN personnel are leaving Damascus.... ..."
"... Russian military representatives have reiterated that in the event of an attack, they will respond by hitting both the missiles launched as well as the ships from which the missiles were launched ..."
Mar 22, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Sarah B 22 March 2018 at 03:52 PM

On reasons for the made in a hurry Novichok story and the last surprisingly sane admissions by those in charge of CENTCOM:

http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13961229000496

"The sources said that after the army's expanding march in Eastern Ghouta and failure of the US-Israeli plot to conduct an effective offensive on Damascus, the US command center has rushed to to evacuate allied militants and agents operating for Israel, Jordan and NATO from the region.

They mentioned although the Turkish officials have said they are ready to help evacuation of al-Nusra Front (Tahrir al-Sham Hay'at or the Levant Liberation Board) terrorists from Eastern Ghouta to take them to Idlib, this seems to be a cover as they really mean to rescue their special foreign forces that among the ranks of the Al-Qaeda-affiliatetd Al-Nusra in Syria.

Therefore, the US has ordered Jeish al-Islam, Faylaq al-Rahman and other terrorist groups to allow evacuation of civilians from Eastern Ghouta to army-held regions in a bid to provide the ground for these foreign agents to also leave Ghouta in disguise and enable the Turkish intelligence service to send them to specified regions in al-Tanf and Northern Syria which are under the control of the US troops," they

.... According to the sources, a sum of 960 foreign agents have so far been transferred to these specific regions after the terrorist groups allowed evacuation of civilians on March 15... ."

Anna , 22 March 2018 at 09:17 AM
Are ziocons trumping the US non-zionized brass?- https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-21/if-us-plans-terrorist-false-flag-chemical-attack-justify-bombing-syria-russia-says

"According to reports, terrorists stationed in Al-Tanf received 20 tons of chlorine gas and detonators, disguised as cigarette packs, in order to attack in an area under the control of the terrorists that is densely inhabited by civilians. ...

It seems that there is a significant effort by the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Germany to provoke a military confrontation with Moscow. How else are we able to interpret threats from Macron to strike Damascus, together with his ominous advice to foreign journalists not to go to Damascus in the coming days and, for those already there, to leave the capital immediately? There has even been chatter within diplomatic circles that suggest that UN personnel are leaving Damascus....

Russian military representatives have reiterated that in the event of an attack, they will respond by hitting both the missiles launched as well as the ships from which the missiles were launched ."

--- As Zvika Haimovitch [head of the IDF's Aerial Defense Division] infromed us, the US troops will be "on the ground to be part of our deployment team to defend the State of Israel." http://www.infiniteunknown.net/2018/03/20/top-us-general-says-american-troops-should-be-ready-to-die-for-israel/

Casey -> Anna... , 22 March 2018 at 10:47 AM
Am I correct in assuming that the long-term US/UK/Israel plan is to use false-flag events blamed on P (spy poisonings, election tampering, MH17, Syria poison gas, etc.) to force R off the UNSC, then set up a Rus gov in exile (similar to the ploy used recently to steal Libyan cash), transfer the UNSC role to the exile Rus gov, and with all this to give the Rus elite sufficient political cover at home to "take out" an ever-popular P, by any means necessary?

Concurrently, a Syria false-flag gas attack is blamed on P, missiles launched on Syria to make sure Rus sinks a few Anglo warships and a few thousand expendable sailors are sunk, (as Ukraine warring restarts) then the open warfare, limited to the Med, with UK/US/Is certain they can outlast Rus, who will be stunned into surrender by the use of limited yield nukes?

Are the warmongers overplaying their hand? I keep seeing references to hair-on-fire hysteria of the elite doorkeepers being due to them seeing this trap in the Med as the last chance to take Rus out in a bid to try to save the NWO project.

[Mar 22, 2018] Does State Department have its own intel / black operations team in Syria? Thought it was a consumer not producer.

Mar 22, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Imagine -> james... 21 March 2018 at 02:33 PM

Because we all know the State Dept. is expert in hiring and directing jihadis to do dirty work. Thank heaven the CIA saved us!

...The whole thing smells like a dead fish.

The part about Porton Down getting creative with sarin samples' chain of custody has been alleged before, and I suppose State could have asked Britain to use its mercs to pull off an event.

However, since Sy Hersh points out embedded people were explicitly warned about the Apr '17 conventional attack ahead of time for their own safety (and the Syria plane cleared its mission with the Deconflict folks, and knew all along it was being tracked), the likelihood that a different group pulled the current sandbagging job must be considered.

So, fair question: Does State have its own intel / black operations team? Thought it was a consumer not producer.

[Mar 22, 2018] 21 March 2018 at 02:33 PM

Mar 22, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

...The whole thing smells like a dead fish.

The part about Porton Down getting creative with sarin samples' chain of custody has been alleged before, and I suppose State could have asked Britain to use its mercs to pull off an event.

However, since Sy Hersh points out embedded people were explicitly warned about the Apr '17 conventional attack ahead of time for their own safety (and the Syria plane cleared its mission with the Deconflict folks, and knew all along it was being tracked), the likelihood that a different group pulled the current sandbagging job must be considered.

So, fair question: Does State have its own intel / black operations team? Thought it was a consumer not producer.

[Mar 22, 2018] British attempts at gas lighting in Skripal affair

Mar 22, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

ex-PFC Chuck said in reply to james... , 21 March 2018 at 02:24 PM

@ 8
Yesterday Murray put up a post about the attempts at gas lighting thrown his way by the upholders of the Evil Putin Did It narrative, as well as trying to shame him for his past candor about his bipolar disorder.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/on-being-a-dissenting-voice-in-2018/comment-page-6/
VietnamVet , 21 March 2018 at 02:50 PM
Shepard
@14


"Russia did it" is a meme designed to scapegoat Russia to cover the Democrat's Asses for losing the 2016 election, and to enable continuation of the Forever Wars since the fall of Raqqa.


Facebook user data was fed into the analytics system that enabled Cambridge Analytica and the Trump campaign to effectively target voters at a minimal budget. They won Donald Trump the swing states and the election.

It wasn't the Russians, it was our own social media companies who sold user data to the Trump campaign which convinced liberals not to vote in swing states.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-21/it-wasnt-russia-it-was-obama-based-social-media-mining-beat-hillary

Peter Kim said in reply to b ... , 21 March 2018 at 05:33 PM
From what I learned about this Skripal affair and what we're expected to believe -- i.e., the official U.K. government version -- is ludicrous. Farcical. I'm talking Fargo and Burn After Reading kind of farcical. And is anyone a little alarmed that the same Monty Python-esque goofball is behind the attempted subversion of Trump's election in collusion with U.S. Deep State with a ludicrous 'Golden Showers' dossier was also the U.K.'s weapon to subvert FIFA and Russia in the World Cup and was an associate of Skripal.

POISONED RUSSIAN SPY LINKED TO TRUMP-RUSSIA DOSSIER AUTHOR CHRISTOPHER STEELE THROUGH SECURITY CONSULTANT
http://www.newsweek.com/russia-poison-spy-steele-dossier-836768

BBC (1/13/2017): Ex-MI6 man Steele hired for England World Cup bid
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-38607456


[Mar 22, 2018] The only suggestions that the Russians were responsible for the incident come from exactly the same kinds of people who told us about Iraq's WMD and the supposed Libyan humanitarian emergency

Notable quotes:
"... The UK has a long record of misdoings, he said, including the support of coup in Ukraine and the invasion of Iraq. "This is like talking to overweight alcoholics and drug users that have lost any sense of dignity." ..."
"... Their plan was to fabricate an attack against an ex-double agent in Salisbury and at the same time a chemical attack against the " moderate rebels " in the Ghouta. The conspirators' intention was to profit from the efforts of Syria to liberate the suburbs of its capital city and the disorganisation of Russia on the occasion of its Presidential election. Had these manipulations worked, the United Kingdom would have pushed the USA to bomb Damascus, including the Presidential palace, and demand that the United Nations General Assembly exclude Russia from the Security Council. ..."
"... However, the Syrian and Russian Intelligence Services got wind of what was being plotted. They realised that the US agents in the Ghouta who were preparing an attack against the Ghouta were not working for the Pentagon, but for another US agency. ..."
"... And there's the additional evidence that some kind of False Flag attempt fell apart at Eastern Ghouta + Trump's discovery that the Deep State was planning to take him by surprise (the immediate dismissal of Tillerson). ..."
Mar 22, 2018 | www.unz.com

annamaria , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 12:36 pm GMT

@polskijoe

The ongoing story of the lying scoundrels and war profiteers: https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-mysterious-frank-taylor-report-the-911-document-that-launched-us-natos-war-on-terrorism-in-the-middle-east/5632874
"On the morning of 12 September 2001, NATO's North Atlantic Council was summoned in Brussels. This was less than 24 hours after the events in USA.

Lord Robertson, Secretary General of NATO, wrote a draft resolution invoking Article 5 in the Washington treaty -- the famous 'musketeer clause' -- as a consequence of the terror attacks: "The Council agreed that if it is determined that this attack was directed from abroad against the United States, it shall be regarded as an action covered by Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, which states that an armed attack against one or more of the Allies in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all."

There was a reservation. Article 5 would not be formally activated before "it is determined that this attack was directed from abroad". Apparently, NATO had a suspect. But the forensic evidence was still pending, and hence also the formal invocation of Article 5.
Formally, this evidence was provided by Frank Taylor, a diplomat with the title of Ambassador from the US State Department . The first bombs fell in Kabul on 7 October 2001 [the slaughter of civilians by the US/NATO had begun].

Article 5 of the Washington Treaty emphasises the right to self-defense and reads: "Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, ." That is, military action is forbidden in the absence of an armed provocation , and the legality of the attack on Afghanistan depends exclusively on the evidence presented in Frank Taylor's report. But it was classified together with the minutes from the pertinent meetings.

We are still at war seventeen years later. Five countries have been destroyed, hundreds of thousands of people killed and millions displaced. Refugees are swarming the roads of Europe, trillions of dollars have been spent on weapons and mercenaries and our grandchildren have been shackled with endless debt."

-- Oded Yinon plan' fanatics, oilmen, banksters, MIC, "ambassadors," "lords," and "elected leaders of the free world " -- None of the war criminals has been punished. Guess, their children and grandchildren will be paying for the scoundrels' cowardice and lies.

annamaria , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 12:56 pm GMT
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-22/russian-ambassador-questions-uk-involvement-nerve-attack-blasts-johnsons-putin

"The Day, a news website that produces short articles about current affairs meant to be used as teaching aids in British schools , has offered students two alternatives to believe about Vladimir Putin: he is either Europe's "most dangerous leader since Hitler," or a puffed up figure attacking other nations out of weakness."

-- Was it a Friend of Israel that has concocted the definitions?

"Russian ambassador Alexander Yakovenko has held a press conference in London, denying the Kremlin was involved in the attempted murder of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia using military-grade nerve agent.

"Britain has without any evidence blamed Russia for poisoning three people and continues to refuse to cooperate," he said.

The UK authorities are violating Vienna Convention by not giving Russia access to Skripals, because Skripal has dual citizenship (the UK and Russia), Russian Ambassador to the UK Alexander Yakovenko said.

The Russian embassy has immediately requested details and materials of the case, the envoy stated.

While 10 days have passed, Moscow has received no response, while London has refused to pass samples of the poisonous substance allegedly used to attack Skripal.

Then Yakovenko turned a little darker, seemingly indicating concerns that this was nothing but a false-flag operation (via SputnikNews)
The envoy called for checking how could British experts find out the exact type of the nerve gas used to poison Skripal . [Good question!]

Commenting on the death of former top manager of Russian Aeroflot airline Nikolai Glushkov, the ambassador stated that "we cannot take Britain's words on trust."

Alexander Yakovenko said that Britain has provided no proof of Russia's alleged involvement in the nerve agent attack.
He suggested that the samples of the so-called Novichok nerve gas could have already been in possession of a laboratory, which is located just miles away from Salisbury .

"We have been refused consular access to our Russian citizen Yulia Skripal ," Russian Ambassador to the UK Alexander Yakovenko said.

The UK is ignoring requests on case of Russian businessman Glushkov who died in London, ambassador stated.

Russian experts puzzled how UK managed to determine type of nerve gas in Skripal case, in days, but not weeks or months.

The UK has a long record of misdoings, he said, including the support of coup in Ukraine and the invasion of Iraq. "This is like talking to overweight alcoholics and drug users that have lost any sense of dignity."

Boris Johnson [the self-proclaimed "passionate Zionist") compared Russia's hosting of this year's World Cup to the 1936 Olympics in Nazi Germany. Russians respond: "Nobody has the right to insult the Russian people, who defeated the Nazis."

But the Friends of Israel are new Nazis, see ziocons' collaboration with Ukrainian neo-Nazis. Boris Johnson needs to infrom himslef: https://richardedmondson.net/2014/04/27/christian-zionists-neo-nazis-jewish-banderas-a-ukrainian-mazel-tov/ "Christian Zionists, Neo-Nazis, & Jewish Banderas: A Ukrainian Mazel Tov?" "

annamaria , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 1:06 pm GMT
"The US special forces deliver 20 tons of chlorine gas to Al Qaeda terrorists in Syria order to execute a false flag for the purposes of blaming Damascus and Moscow."

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-21/if-us-plans-terrorist-false-flag-chemical-attack-justify-bombing-syria-russia-says

"It seems that there is a significant effort by the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Germany to provoke a military confrontation with Moscow. How else are we able to interpret threats from Macron to strike Damascus, together with his ominous advice to foreign journalists not to go to Damascus in the coming days and, for those already there, to leave the capital immediately? There has even been chatter within diplomatic circles that suggest that UN personnel are leaving Damascus.

This could be psychological warfare, or it could be a prelude to war. With the stakes so high, we cannot afford to ignore any detail, even if it may be disinformation. The American attack seems imminent, with mounting signs of movements of American and Russian warships in the Mediterranean in attack formation.

Russian military representatives have reiterated that in the event of an attack, they will respond by hitting both the missiles launched as well as the ships from which the missiles were launched. Things are getting pretty dicey, and the risk of a direct confrontation between the United States and the Russian Federation are rising with every passing hour. The transfer of numerous US aircraft from Incirlik, Turkey, to Al-Azrak, Jordan, is another indication of preparations for an attack, since the forces moved to Jordan are close to the Al-Tanf base. The proposed strategy could involve an assault on the city of Daraa, for the purposes of securing the borders between Syria and Jordan and Syria and Israel.

The warnings raised by Lavrov and Gerasimov appear unprecedented, given that they detail a plan already set in course, evidently approved at the highest levels and aimed at provoking and justifying an attack on Syria ; and attack that would encompass the Russian forces in Syria. "

-- Ziocons want their promised land by any means.

DESERT FOX , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 1:22 pm GMT
The Zionists control Britain and the U.S. and are planning to start WWIII using Syria and Iran as the precursor and nothing is going to stop this Zionist drive for a Zionist NWO no matter what the cost in lives or money, these satanic bastards are bound and determined to have a war with Russia and so it shall be done.

These satanic bastards have deep underground military bases that they think they can survive a nuclear war in and so they might, but what will be left, by the way these bases are known as DUMBs, and are connected by a tunnel system through out the U.S. and Britain, if anyone doubts this , do some research , it is true.

A Zionist nuclear war is on the horizon.

ploni almoni , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 1:50 pm GMT
@ANON

If you don't know, why don't you inform yourself?

Abdul Alhazred , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 2:00 pm GMT
@ANON

Mr. Meyssan wrote the first book, in 2002, to assert that 9/11 was a False Flag attack by what we now call the 'Deep State". 9/11 The Big Lie came out in English in 2003. I believe that Meyssan is living in exile from France in Syria. He was one of the first reporters to show that the attacks upon Assad and Syria were being run by foreign intelligence operatives and their terrorist minions like ISIS.

I am glad that Mr. Unz has run this very important article on the present intrigue.

cezanne , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 2:01 pm GMT
This excellent article is why I visit this site. Doing the work that the Jewstream media refuses to do. I knew "something was rotten in Denmark"! It is very, very good that the world has leaders such as our great President Trump and powerful (take no bull) Putin. As far as Merkel and May go the sooner the door hits them on the Ass the better.
Michael Kenny , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 2:36 pm GMT
Hilarious nonsense! Thierry Meyssan is a specialist in conspiracy theories and could be called a "9/11 negationist". One can assume that, in his eyes, the Salisbury attack, regardless of who might have carried it out, has not worked to Putin's advantage.
Beckow , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 2:36 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

Dutch voters behaved badly, so the toys are taken away. No more 'referanda' for you.

The disintegration will accelerate: more new faces, local parties, rebellion parties. And, of course, more clowns (hello Boris, now climb down from that tree).

Brussels is having urgent off-sites with think-tank geniuses how to stop it. So far they have come up with: more 'media control' (propaganda), more outreach, drastic new restrictions ('you like the old Europe? -- xenophobe!, no travel for you'), and a circular management refresh, Macronism .

One thing I doubt the globo-liberal EU obsessives will ever do is to actually listen to the 'misguided' people. It has been preliminary decided to simply label any resistance as ' Russian subversion '. That buys some time, but they have no long term solutions, or even coherent ideas. This will get more entertaining. Boris J-man might actually climb up that tree before this is over

Ilyana_Rozumova , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 2:55 pm GMT
There is structural Globalist government and all participants as Theresa May are only puppets. All western leaderships are only participants. So far only Trump is the one who is resisting.

The orders are coming from Rothschild. He ordered now that Russia must be destroyed or at least neutralized. I am convinced that Russia's government is fully aware of what is going on.

Just a while ago Russia commissioned three nuclear armed submarines. Not long time ago Putin ordered nuclear drill over all country. I would guess that Russia already a while ago is on war preparation mode. Looks like the west lost its mind.

Concerning economy Britain is in trouble. French were strongly opposing Britain to join EU. That was because England is the main competitor for French food exports. One thing from this will be good. Barb be qui season is coming and beef will be now cheep.

ANON [436] Disclaimer , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 3:41 pm GMT
@ploni almoni

Well I felt so unattracted by what I had read that I thought it would be helpful to see if any of the UR Commenters who can make sense would give an assessment.

ANON [436] Disclaimer , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 3:47 pm GMT
@Abdul Alhazred

Thank you for the information. It doesn't make him sound like a person who is well placed to make the claims to knowledge he has about what went on in England.

jilles dykstra , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 3:50 pm GMT
@Beckow

The main Brussels' battle cry is 'populism'. In my opinion, populism is simply opposing political mainstream. But this mainstream is disintegrating, Hollande abolished the French socialist party, Parti Socialiste.

In Germany Schulz, former EU top man, SPD member, the Socialist Party Germany, even had to step down as chairman in order to make SPD members agree with the SPD coalition with Merkel's CDU. Schulz obviously left his overpaid Brussels job in order to become chancellor.

But also Merkel policies are breaking down. Her minister of the Interior, police, border control, immigration, naturalisation, granting asylum, Seehofer, states that he will reinstate border controls, as the EU does nothing. Polls show that 76% of Germans agree with him.
What most Germans do not know is that oral instructions were given in Merkel's former chancellor period to customs and border police, not to stop any immigrant at the borders.

Merkel and Seehofer now disagree on Islam, Merkel 'the Islam belongs to Germany', Seehofer 'the Islam is in Germany'. But in how far the German people and culture can be saved in the long run one wonders. Demographic calsulations show that with present differences in birth rates in 30 to 40 years time 30 to 40% of the Germans will be Muslims. As Merkel said 'they're here already'. What Merkel's objectives are or were, she if often compared to the sfinx. In any case Mutti, mom, cannot last much longer.

E European countries reject Muslim immigrants. However, after the Muslim immigrants have been naturalised, under present EU rules, they can settle anywhere in the EU, so the eastern countries cannot keep them away. If they want to settle in hostile communities is the question.

annamaria , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 3:54 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

Please, read the informed American analysts before taking a stance of the innocent lady that doth protest too much.

jilles dykstra , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 3:55 pm GMT
@Ilyana_Rozumova

" Looks like the west lost its mind. " Rothschild, Bilderberg, is not the west, nor is AIPAC and AEI. However, former Shell CEO Van der Veer is chairman of a NATO strategic advisory committee.

Anonymous [436] Disclaimer , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 3:55 pm GMT
@annamaria

Does that all depend on the premise that the 9/11 attacks were not an Al Qaeda operation? Yes or No will do thank you.

Johnny Rico , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 6:39 pm GMT
@Wally

Now go back and read the article and then re-assess what A436 said, Wally.

It doesn't make him sound like a person who is well placed to make the claims to knowledge he has about what went on in England.

He's talking about whether Thierry Meyssan would really have access to the people and information that could confirm this story of conspiracy and its uncovering.

The British government and certain of its allies, including US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, have attempted to launch a Cold War against Russia.

Their plan was to fabricate an attack against an ex-double agent in Salisbury and at the same time a chemical attack against the " moderate rebels " in the Ghouta. The conspirators' intention was to profit from the efforts of Syria to liberate the suburbs of its capital city and the disorganisation of Russia on the occasion of its Presidential election. Had these manipulations worked, the United Kingdom would have pushed the USA to bomb Damascus, including the Presidential palace, and demand that the United Nations General Assembly exclude Russia from the Security Council.

However, the Syrian and Russian Intelligence Services got wind of what was being plotted. They realised that the US agents in the Ghouta who were preparing an attack against the Ghouta were not working for the Pentagon, but for another US agency.

In Damascus, the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, Fayçal Miqdad, set up an emergency Press conference for 10 March, in order to alert his fellow citizens. From its own side, Moscow had first of all tried to contact Washington via the diplomatic channels. But aware that the US ambassador, Jon Huntsman Jr, is the director of Caterpillar, the company which had supplied tunneling materials to the jihadists so that they could build their fortifications, Moscow decided to bypass the usual diplomatic channels.

No, you don't need to be IN England. But you do need to have at least a small record of qualifications and credibility to get readers to move past those first paragraphs which look like the script of a movie starring Jennifer Lawrence as an FSB triple-agent.

Miro23 , Next New Comment March 22, 2018 at 6:47 pm GMT
A comment from Randal on another thread that gets to the point:

The only suggestions that the Russians were responsible for the incident come from exactly the same kinds of people who told us about Iraq's WMD and the supposed Libyan humanitarian emergency. And yes, about supposed suicidal Syrian government uses of chemical weapons that are conveniently just big enough to provide their enemies with yet another big stick to beat them with, but not enough to give them any material advantage.

And there's the additional evidence that some kind of False Flag attempt fell apart at Eastern Ghouta + Trump's discovery that the Deep State was planning to take him by surprise (the immediate dismissal of Tillerson).

[Mar 22, 2018] Russian Ambassador Hints At False Flag The UK Has A Long Record Of Misdoings

Mar 22, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

by Tyler Durden Thu, 03/22/2018 - 08:41 50 SHARES

It appears the Russians are losing their patience with the proof-less accusations from The UK.

Russian ambassador Alexander Yakovenko has held press conference in London, denying the Kremlin was involved in the attempted murder of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia using military-grade nerve agent.

"Britain has without any evidence blamed Russia for poisoning three people and continues to refuse to cooperate," he said.

The UK authorities are violating Vienna Convention by not giving Russia access to Skripals, because Skripal has dual citizenship (the UK and Russia), Russian Ambassador to the UK Alexander Yakovenko said.

The Russian embassy has immediately requested details and materials of the case, the envoy stated.

While 10 days have passed, Moscow has received no response, while London has refused to pass samples of the poisonous substance allegedly used to attack Skripal.

Then Yakovenko turned a little darker, seemingly indicating concerns that this was nothing but a false-flag operation... (via SputnikNews )

The envoy called for checking how could British experts find out the exact type of the nerve gas used to poison Skripal.

Commenting on the death of former top manager of Russian Aeroflot airline Nikolai Glushkov, the ambassador stated that "we cannot take Britain's words on trust."

Alexander Yakovenko said that Britain has provided no proof of Russia's alleged involvement in the nerve agent attack.

He suggested that the samples of the so-called Novichok nerve gas could have already been in possession of a labaratory , which is located just miles away from Salisbury.

"We have been refused consular access to our Russian citizen Yulia Skripal," Russian Ambassador to the UK Alexander Yakovenko said.

The UK is ignoring requests on case of Russian businessman Glushkov who died in London, ambassador stated.

Russian experts puzzled how UK managed to determine type of nerve gas in Skripal case, in days, but not weeks or months.

The UK has a long record of misdoings, he said, including the support of coup in Ukraine and the invasion of Iraq.

UK Prime Minister May is set to warn at a summit in Brussels that Vladimir Putin's brazen flouting of international law represents a threat democracies across the continent.

And then the ambassador turned his attention to the shocking comments from UK foreign secretary Boris Johnson who compared the Russian World Cup to Hitler's 1939 Olympics...

Johnson recently raised the bar for the UK government's barrage of accusations against Moscow to a new level. The British foreign minister compared Russia's hosting of this year's World Cup to the 1936 Olympics in Nazi Germany.

"I think the comparison with 1936 is certainly right. It is an emetic prospect to think of Putin glorifying in this sporting event," he told a receptive Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/t1bLlotfGdM

Russia was furious:

"This statement is totally disgusting, it is not appropriate for any foreign minister," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.

"Undoubtedly, [this remark] is offensive and unacceptable."

Additionally, Mr Yakovenko condemned the comments today, saying:

"Nobody has the right to insult the Russian people, who defeated the Nazis.'"

But The UK's propaganda is not just for adults, they are indoctrinating the kids too...

In case pupils in the UK don't understand the headlines on Russia and its president, a special publication for kids explains how "toxic Putin" is poisoning the Wes t, without bothering to distinguish between fact and allegation.

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

The Day, a news website that produces short articles about current affairs meant to be used as teaching aids in British schools, has offered students two alternatives to believe about Vladimir Putin: he is either Europe's "most dangerous leader since Hitler," or a puffed up figure attacking other nations out of weakness.

[Mar 22, 2018] Russian MFA summons all ambassadors to a meeting on Skripal case (MUST WATCH!!!) The Vineyard of the Saker

Original at http://www.mid.ru/
Notable quotes:
"... We see that the British authorities are becoming increasingly nervous, which is logical. The clock is ticking. They have driven themselves into a corner. Ultimately, they will have to answer a growing number of questions, but they have no answers. ..."
"... The inference that they have made a mess of things but Russia is responsible anyway and must be held accountable is the wrong kind of logic. This logic may be good for a British or US movie, but it does not work in real life, especially in relations with Russia. ..."
"... It is becoming increasingly obvious that the attack on the Skripals in Salisbury is most likely a clumsy staged provocation. We must expose those who have orchestrated this attack and the reasons behind it. ..."
"... To be continued ..."
"... I have not watched the whole video. Will watch later. It appears, UK is defining the ground and terrain to fight, and Russia is obviously following. In that way, Russia is always on the defensive of what UK is dictating.. even if it is false which it is and that is the fight. ..."
"... Cut it short, Russia must realise that this is the new way to fight now. It cannot rely on facts and international laws and conventions alone as a defense.. Its not enough like the way it is doing now. It must quickly turn the situation around and determine the space to fight and how UK is to fight this of course without going to war. ..."
Mar 22, 2018 | thesaker.is

VIDEO: watch-v=dKyR0KZn2Xc

Ladies and gentlemen, colleagues, friends,

Good afternoon.

We are glad to see you at the Foreign Ministry on this cold wintry day that nevertheless carries a promise of spring.

We are grateful to you for responding so quickly to our invitation, which we issued only yesterday.

The situation is indeed unusual. There is an urgent need for a non-politicised and highly professional discussion of the Skripals' poisoning case. We have distributed a position paper. We ask you to bring it to the notice of your governments.

The language of this position paper, just as any other such paper, is dry legalese with technical details.

It would be wrong to invite you here just to say this. I propose that we hold an open discussion in this closed diplomatic group.

Let us look at hard facts, beginning with the humanitarian aspects of the case at hand.

On March 4, 2018, two people, one of them Russian citizen Yulia Skripal, were attacked in Salisbury, a flourishing city in the south of England.

Various versions of the circumstances of this tragedy have been voiced in the UK. They highlight the use of chemical agents, which the British call Novichok, for some reason. All of these versions do not stand up to any criticism.

In this situation, UK officials have laid the blame on Russia hastily, hysterically and without presenting any evidence, and demanded explanations from us.

I would like to repeat that it was a Russian citizen who has been attacked in the UK. Logic suggests two possible variants. Either the British authorities are unable to ensure protection against such terrorist attacks on their territory, or they were directly or indirectly involved in the preparation of this attack on a Russian citizen. There is no other alternative.

We are surprised, to put it mildly, that the British authorities had denied even consular access to the Russian citizen who has been attacked contrary to the elementary norms of civilised interstate relations. They are prevaricating, but at the same time they distribute video footage from the hospital where the Skripals are allegedly being treated. But this only raises more questions.

The British have refused to share the information obtained by their investigators and have not replied to the Russian requests regarding Yulia Skripal. We have no reliable information about what happened to this Russian citizen over the past two weeks and why this happened to her. This is hard to comprehend: these events are unfolding in the 21st century in a country that is considered civilised.

Naturally, demanding any explanations from Russia in this situation is simply absurd. Russia does not owe anything to anyone in this context, and it cannot be held accountable for the activities or inactivity of the British authorities in their national territory.

We see that the British authorities are becoming increasingly nervous, which is logical. The clock is ticking. They have driven themselves into a corner. Ultimately, they will have to answer a growing number of questions, but they have no answers.

The inference that they have made a mess of things but Russia is responsible anyway and must be held accountable is the wrong kind of logic. This logic may be good for a British or US movie, but it does not work in real life, especially in relations with Russia.

It is becoming increasingly obvious that the attack on the Skripals in Salisbury is most likely a clumsy staged provocation. We must expose those who have orchestrated this attack and the reasons behind it.

To be continued

amarynth on March 21, 2018 , · at 9:54 pm UTC

Doubling down by the Empire. Russia is hardening up fast but still displaying manners and offering goodwill! I'm afraid that is going nowhere excepting support is offered by the traditional friends of Russia as usual.

So far, no answer to the question: "And what is next?"

Things on the war front? Well, the Empire wants their war dammit! And how dare Russia deprive them of it!

I'm afraid tensions were only ratcheted up and the word de-escalation has been removed from all Empire Dictionaries. Oh Boy!

cdvision on March 21, 2018 , · at 10:08 pm UTC
I listened to all this. The idiot who represented the UK (actually not an idiot, she was just doing her job and no doubt in private would admit it was stupid) just parroted out May's previous words and never addressed any of the substantive questions raised; the EU and US speakers merely talked about solidarity with the UK.

Telling was the fact that the Russian main man referred to the US rep as someone he had never seen before, and was presumably from the State Dept.

None of the Russian requests for data or access to their citizens were dealt with.

The Russian side were well prepared, and the fact that they are pursuing this in this way indicates they have nothing to hide and are pissed off.

I'm increasingly convinced that Russia is playing for a bit more time. It truly does feel like a game of chess.

Cassandra on March 22, 2018 , · at 4:26 am UTC
"I'm increasingly convinced that Russia is playing for a bit more time."

But why? IMHO the only possible reason could be gaining sufficient time to clear the roaches from East Ghouta in Syria -- why? because it would eliminate one more of the possible false flag locations, and possibly provide more time to beef up the defenses in Syria.

I get the feeling that Russia is adopting a posture, a bit like a boxer puts up his dukes to guard against his opponents blows.

cdvision on March 22, 2018 , · at 5:44 am UTC
Cassandra: I'm thinking the waiting its more strategic than you suggest, bigger than East Ghouta. Maybe all the ducks are not yet in a row?
Lysander on March 22, 2018 , · at 12:07 am UTC
Kudos to the Venezuelan representative, who 1) stood up in Russia's defense against a backdrop of "solidarity" with the UK (I guess meaning whatever story they concoct we will pretend to believe) and 2) seems to be the only foreign diplomat in Moscow who bothered to learn Russian.
vot tak on March 22, 2018 , · at 12:36 am UTC
When FARA is not far enough: US lawmakers invent new ways to brand RT as propaganda

https://www.rt.com/usa/421958-fara-rt-new-legislation/

"Concerned that Americans may be watching "foreign propaganda" (or something different than what is offered on the mainstream media menu) Representatives Seth Moulton (D-MA) and Elise Stefanik (R-NY) introduced the Countering Foreign Propaganda Act.

In practice, it would force RT to do even more reporting to the US government than it currently does under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) and will also force it to broadcast every 30 minutes a message saying it is funded by, and is "under editorial control" of, a foreign government. Apparently, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will also be the arbiter of who is under editorial control and who is not, because the BBC and France 24 would not be forced to disclose the origins of their funding, according to Foreign Policy (FP) -- presumably, because their messaging is simply accidentally, sort of, in line with that of the British and French governments respectively.

RT's stance on a potential crackdown in the US was summarized by its editor-in-chief, Margarita Simonyan: "When the high from FARA is no longer hard enough, the representatives switch to even harder legislation."

The US branch of RT came into the focus of the American mainstream public after the election of Donald Trump as president. The channel starred in a controversial report by the Office of the Director for National Intelligence, which alleged that RT's coverage of American problems like fracking or the killings of black people by police amounted to infringing on US democratic institutions."

adam on March 22, 2018 , · at 1:08 am UTC
Headline story on RT: "Peskov says ex-spy has zero value; no need to poison him." Implication: "We only poison people of value."

If I were the spokesperson of Russia, I wouldn't even entertain the idea that Russia poisons people. If I were a pro Russian television network, I wouldn't treat this story as anything but Milli Vanilli.

Still think Margie "the true liberal" is your friend?

Tristan Dreykus on March 22, 2018 , · at 1:45 am UTC
I would like to make an observation regarding the name given by Briton and others of this lethal nerve agent, "Novichok". It seems to have appeared out of thin air, or the imaginations of some. As has been pointed out, here in the conference, this was a fictional name used in a TV show in Briton.

The point is this, "Novichok" is perhaps as to what the "Khorasan Group" was in the waning days of the Obama regime. Do you remember the "Aboslute Terror!.com"(tm) that was surrounding this fictional group of terrorists as trumpeted by Obama himself? Similarities are not inconsequential in that a nefarious political goal is the point of the obfuscation and lies.

What is that goal? I can't answer that question, but to speculate, I would guess that the oligarchs of the West have decided that the potential for nuclear annihilation is worth risking for unrestricted free market economic world domination in the short term.

Ilya G Poimandres on March 22, 2018 , · at 2:05 am UTC
Cause the translation is not very accurate (tough job!), here is the Russian only link if anyone is interested! :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awQK1WMZrVA

Bone on March 22, 2018 , · at 2:54 am UTC
I have not watched the whole video. Will watch later. It appears, UK is defining the ground and terrain to fight, and Russia is obviously following. In that way, Russia is always on the defensive of what UK is dictating.. even if it is false which it is and that is the fight.

In that way, no matter what facts are presented (which is what Russia is doing) Russia will always start from what they are accused of. Right there, UK is choosing what Russian reaction would be.

Cut it short, Russia must realise that this is the new way to fight now. It cannot rely on facts and international laws and conventions alone as a defense.. Its not enough like the way it is doing now. It must quickly turn the situation around and determine the space to fight and how UK is to fight this of course without going to war.

Cassandra on March 22, 2018 , · at 5:09 am UTC
A very good point, well made. I've learned myself that conforming to Marquis of Queensbury rules when engaged in a conflict with a street fighter can be somewhat counter-productive. You cannot counter lies and medacity with an appeal to truth. I wonder how these mouthpieces reading their government's lines can truly sleep at night.
Ann on March 22, 2018 , · at 3:04 am UTC
its heartbreaking watching this. It reminds me of the poaching of the great animals of Africa -- Russia does everything right and just -- and the shameful poachers use nothing honorable or decent in their wish to destroy. There has been nothing but dishonesty and untruth from Britain (and the west) in this whole affair -- no one even knows where or how the victims of this 'chemical attack' are -- and that there's only be two victims -- a chemical attack kills multiple people
GeorgeG on March 22, 2018 , · at 3:52 am UTC
I shall listen to the whole thing to get a better grasp of the context of certain speeches, remarks. TASS yesterday posted a report ( http://tass.com/politics/995445 ) that represents their own summary: "Russian Foreign Ministry suggests US could have orchestrated Skripal saga." While appreciating Russian humor, I dashed off a message to my German friends, as follows (translated):

Incredible! -- No I believe it. Watch the selected-emphasized sections below. The Russians have the knife in, and they are turning it, very slowly. Delicious!

 "It is likely that this could have been orchestrated from across the pond. [Note that Yermakov -- and he comes from the MoD, not the MFA -- throws May's "highly probable" back into her face, but he provides indirect evidence, which May did not do. Note also that it is indeed "likely". That has been my argument the whole time, except that I told you the Americans -- the Trump-Americans -- set a trap for May and she walked into it. Yermakov is saying the same thing: just watch and listen.]

 „It is no secret to anyone that the UK's closest partner is the only state officially keeping the largest arsenals of chemical weapons in the world." [How true, but ist he USA theUK's "closest partner" really? Actually, since the British launched their anti-Trump cvampaign -- with Christopher Steele / MI6 -- the two have been at war with one another. Yermakov seems to play innocent on that point, even naive, but if the Americans set the trap, then the British set themselves up by believing that what May did was wha their closest partner wanted them to do. And now May is in deep sh**.]

 Yermakov further,"is most likely a new grossly falsified and unlawful provocation." Against Russia, yes, of course, fa false flag, and illegal. But also against the UK? That is left ambiguous.?

 "It only has to be solved who stood behind this and which goals pursued." -- Yes, indeed, who was behind the false flag, and what were the aims? This hast o be solved, clarified. Yermakov poses these questions openly and round about, not limited to Russia. Do the British know who was behind the false flag, and what the aims were? Do they have any interest in finding out? Yermakov does not launch counter-accusations at the British.

 „Only one thing is clear that Russia has absolutely no complicity in this at least for one simple reason: such a scheme is simply inadmissible and it is disadvantageous for us by all parameters." Russia's innocence is clear, and, in fact, the British know that themselves. It would be insulting to claim the British believe their own propaganda. And,

 "At the same time, Great Britain has quite a different track record," the senior diplomat said, adding that former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair had openly admitted his lies about the situation around Iraq." Ah, yes, Blair lying about Irak WMD, but whether he was trapped into that lie or not, at least it is obvious he was doing it to justify actions that were not in the first place British actions, it was Bush's war.

 „"One only has to guess who and for what purpose is now trying to plunge Great Britain into a new dirty and again losing venture for London from the very outset against Russia *this time,*" -- "One" has to guess, and "one" can be Russian, some Russsian who guesses, or it can be a Brit. And "one" is going to "guess" about who is plunging Britain into a dirty and loosing venture against Russia. Wow! -- Let's unravel this. Russia has nothing to do with intelligence war-maneuvers of the Americans against England. If -- that thatg is "highly likely" -- the Americans set the trap, plunging Britain into a losing venture agaisn Russia, implied not to be in British interests, the Russians did not „collude" in setting the trap. Leave Russia out of the game. England is being dragged into something. Yermakov has "empathy" for the British in this dilemma. The British may well think that they were dragged into the Irak-WMD charade and the war, so who is dragging Britain into a losing game „this time"?]

 „"the British authorities are beginning to get ever more nervous" as "they have driven themselves into a deadlock" -- [Really a pity, right? That really hurts, you are invited / or dragged onto the gang-plank, thinking you are doing the right thing, and their your "closest partner" steps off the plank and you plunge into the depths. Sure you get nervous, sure you see you brought onto yourself, you are in a blind-alley. -- You can only do what Yermakov did if you have the upper-hand and you know it. Russia via Yermakov is not out for retaliation, Russia extends the open hand , Russia is merciful. Remember the scene in Schindler's list, where a Nazi camp-commander was about to shoot a little boy because there were still stains in the bathtub the boy was supposed to have cleaned? And Schindler tells the Nazi: real power ist to forgive, and the Nazi, who thinks he is powerful and wans power, lays down his rifle. How merciful the Russias are is ytilll to come. ]

 Moscow considers the Salisbury attack to be an act of terror against Russian citizens carried out on UK soil, he stressed. -- -- So Moscow wants access to the Skripals, Yulia in particular.

 Now comes the icing on the cake, the knife begins to turn. "The senior Russian diplomat called on the British to put their hatred against Russia aside for a moment, as well as their "island way of thinking." "I mean no offence, I think highly of the British diplomacy and this is the reason why I feel ashamed for you when I hear such things," Yermakov added, stressing that in the past, Russian diplomats had learned much from their British colleagues and British experts and now they were calling them for dialogue.. [Of course the British hate the Russians, but don't let that hate get in the way of properly assessing the British situation in this trap. If Russians are anything, they are professional and objective. Of course, Russian diplomats learned from British diplomas: they know double-dealing also, but Russians do it openly -- open double dealing, and that is what Yermakov was doing the whole time. Why would Russia do that? -- It's simple: "to split Europe." That is what the British accuse Russia of doing, but Russia is not doing it the way the British think, they are going to split Europe because the British have handed over the lever to do it, because the British are shaming themselves with their nonsense propaganda, and they know they are losing because it is so shameful. The British were tricked, Russia does not play tricks. The Russians win because they put truth on the table: if the British continue with their shameful behavior, they have no chance to play any leaves in Europe. They know it, that is why they are nervous, that is their own dead-end. Now, when Blair lied, dragging Britain into the Iraq war, it unleashed destruction, which does not bother the British as long as others are destroyed. But now they are on the receiving end, it is their own destruction which is at stake.

Ann on March 22, 2018 , · at 3:55 am UTC
wow -- the British diplomat in the audience has a brutal speech -- well written -- its so hard to defend oneself against untruth -- when its calculated -- at 53:55
Cassandra on March 22, 2018 , · at 4:19 am UTC
It is foolish to believe that explanation will bring to your side those who are implacably oriented against you because they take it as a sign of weakness.
Cassandra on March 22, 2018 , · at 4:28 am UTC
"A military grade, novichok, nerve agent developed by Russia". So they didn't make then ? 'Developing' isn't making, just in case your education didn't cover this rather unsubtle distinction. "Barrage of distortion and disinformation" Have you looked in the mirror of late ?? Pathetic.
Cassandra on March 22, 2018 , · at 5:10 am UTC
I think the UK representative went a bit off-script when she said "Russia produced" -- the official script is "Russian developed". I suspect that she may get a reprimand for that.
GeorgeG on March 22, 2018 , · at 9:21 am UTC
One the one hand I am amazed, on the other hand, not. Has anyone listened to the full session or read the TASS release? ( http://tass.com/politics/995445 ) If not, please do so, and show some of what the Russians call "respect," which means just listen carefully.

I do not wish to offend, as the Russian "senior diplomat" said, but I am ashamed to hear such baseless gossip as "It appears, UK is defining the ground and terrain to fight, and Russia is obviously following" or "You cannot counter lies and medacity with an appeal to truth" (cited examples being by no means exhasutive).

Do you realize, have you registered the *fact* that the Russians said "Russian Foreign Ministry suggests US could have orchestrated Skripal saga"?, which a load of backup to that suggesion.

[Mar 22, 2018] Four days to declare a Cold War by Thierry Meyssan

Notable quotes:
"... By doing do, the British government adopted the theories of Professor Amy Knight. On 22 January 2018, this US Sovietologist published a very strange book -- Orders to Kill -- the Putin régime and political murder . The author, who is " the " specialist on the ex-KGB, attempts to demonstrate that Vladimir Putin is a serial killer responsible for dozens of political assassinations, from the terrorist attacks in Moscow in 1999 to the attack on the Boston Marathon in 2013, by way of the execution of Alexandre Litvinenko in London in 2006 or that of Boris Nemtsov in Moscow in 2015. However, she admits herself that there is absolutely no proof of her accusations. ..."
"... The European Liberals then joined the fray. Ex-Prime Minister of Belgium Guy Verhofstadt, who presides their group in the European Parliament, called on the European Union to adopt sanctions against Russia. His counterpart at the head of their British party, Sir Vince Cable, proposed a European boycott of the World Football Cup. And already, Buckingham Palace announced that the royal family has canceled their trip to Russia. ..."
"... Responding to the Prime Minister, Blairist deputy Chris Leslie qualified Russia as a rogue state and demanded its suspension from the UN Security Council. Theresa May agreed to examine the question, but stressed that the outcome could only be decided by the General Assembly in order to avoid the Russian veto. ..."
"... During the public debate which followed, UK chargé d'affaire Jonathan Allen represented his country. He is an agent of MI6 who created the British War Propaganda Service and gives active support to the jihadists in Syria. He declared -- " Russia has already interfered in the affairs of other countries, Russia has already violated international law in Ukraine, Russia has comtempt for civilian life, as witnessed by the attack on a commercial aircraft over Ukraine by Russian mercenaries, Russia protects the use of chemical weapons by Assad ( ) The Russian state is responsible for this attempted murder ". The permanent representative for France, François Delattre, who, by virtue of a derogation by President Sarkozy, was trained at the US State Department, noted that his country had launched an initiative to end the impunity of those who use chemical weapons. He implied that the initiative, originally directed at Syria, could also be turned against Russia. ..."
"... Russian ambassador Vasily Nebenzya pointed out that the session had been convened at London's request, but that it is public at Moscow's request. He observed that the United Kingdom is violating international law by treating this subject at the Security Council while keeping the OPCW out of its enquiry. He noted that if London had been able to identify the " Novotchik ", it's because it has the formula and can therefore make its own. He noted Russia's desire to collaborate with the OPCW in the respect for international procedures. ..."
"... Throughout its long history, England has never hesitated to lie and betray its oath in order to defend its interests. This is how it earned its French nickname of " perfide Albion " (after the Latin name for England) ..."
"... local parties are the winners, winners also are national anti establishment parties, despite the demonizing of these populists, that represent the opinions of a significant portion of the population. ..."
"... As Belgium and Germany, governing our country becomes more and more difficult. The country seems to be more and more divided between those who trust the government, and those with deep distrust. ..."
Mar 22, 2018 | www.unz.com

The British government and certain of its allies, including US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, have attempted to launch a Cold War against Russia.

Their plan was to fabricate an attack against an ex-double agent in Salisbury and at the same time a chemical attack against the " moderate rebels " in the Ghouta. The conspirators' intention was to profit from the efforts of Syria to liberate the suburbs of its capital city and the disorganisation of Russia on the occasion of its Presidential election. Had these manipulations worked, the United Kingdom would have pushed the USA to bomb Damascus, including the Presidential palace, and demand that the United Nations General Assembly exclude Russia from the Security Council.

However, the Syrian and Russian Intelligence Services got wind of what was being plotted. They realised that the US agents in the Ghouta who were preparing an attack against the Ghouta were not working for the Pentagon, but for another US agency.

In Damascus, the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, Fayçal Miqdad, set up an emergency Press conference for 10 March, in order to alert his fellow citizens. From its own side, Moscow had first of all tried to contact Washington via the diplomatic channels. But aware that the US ambassador, Jon Huntsman Jr, is the director of Caterpillar, the company which had supplied tunneling materials to the jihadists so that they could build their fortifications, Moscow decided to bypass the usual diplomatic channels.

Here's how things played out:

12 March 2018

The Syrian army seized two chemical weapons laboratories, the first on 12 March in Aftris, and the second on the following day in Chifonya. Meanwhile, Russian diplomats pushed the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to get involved in the criminal investigation in Salisbury.

In the House of Commons, British Prime Minister Theresa May violently accused Russia of having ordered the attack in Salisbury. According to her, the ex-double agent Sergueï Skripal and his daughter were poisoned by a military nerve gas of a type " developed by Russia " under the name of " Novitchok ". Since the Kremlin considers Russian citizens who have defected as legitimate targets, it is therefore highly likely that they ordered the crime.

" Novitchok " is known by what has been revealed by two Soviet personalities, Lev Fyodorov and Vil Mirzayanov. The scientist Fyodorov published an article in the Russian weekly Top Secret (Совершенно секретно) in July 1992, warning about the extremely dangerous nature of this product, and warning against the use of old Soviet weaponry by the Western powers to destroy the environment in Russia and make it unlivable. In October 1992, he published a second article in the News of Moscow (Московские новости) with a counter-espionage executive, Mirzayanov, denouncing the corruption of certain generals and the traffic of " Novitchok " in which they were involved. However, they did not know to whom they may have sold the product. Mirzayanov was first of all arrested for high treason, then released. Fyodorov died in Russia last August, but Mirzayanov is living in exile in the United States, where he collaborates with the Department of Defense.

Russian ex-counter intelligence officer Vil Mirzayanov defected to the United States. Now 83 years old, he comments on the Skripal affair from Boston.

" Novitchok " was fabricated in a Soviet laboratory in Nurus, in what is now Uzbekistan. During the dissolution of the Soviet Union, it was destroyed by a US team of specialists. Uzbekistan and the United States, by necessity, have therefore possessed and studied samples of this substance. They are both capable of producing it.

British Minister for Foreign Affairs Boris Johnson summoned the Russian ambassador in London, Alexandre Iakovenko. He gave him an ultimatum of 36 hours to check if any " Novitchok " was missing from their stocks. The ambassador replied that none was missing, because Russia had destroyed all of the chemical weapons it had inherited from the Soviet Union, as witnessed by the OPCW, which had drawn up a certified report.

After a telephone discussion with Boris Johnson, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in turn condemned Russia for the attack in Salisbury.

Meanwhile, a debate was under way at the UN Security Council concerning the situation in the Ghouta. The permanent representative for the US, Nikki Haley, declared -- " About one year ago, after the sarin gas attack perpetrated in Khan Cheïkhoun by the Syrian régime, the United States warned the Council. We said that faced with the systematic inaction of the international community, states are sometimes obliged to act on their own. The Security Council did not react, and the United States bombed the air base from which al Assad had launched his chemical attack. We are reiterating the same warning today ".

The Russian Intelligence Services handed out documents from the US staff. They showed that the Pentagon was ready to bomb the Presidential palace and the Syrian Ministries, on the model of what it had done during the taking of Baghdad (3 to 12 April 2003).

Commenting the declaration by Nikki Haley, the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs, who had always called the attack in Khan Cheïkhoun a " Western manipulation ", revealed that the false information which had led the White House into error and triggered the bombing of the Al-Chaayrate air base, had in fact come from a British laboratory which had never revealed how it came to possess its samples.

13 March 2018

The Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs published a Press release condemning a possible US military intervention, and announcing that if Russian citizens were harmed in Damascus, Moscow would riposte proportionally, since the Russian President is constitutionally responsible for the security of his fellow citizens.

Bypassing the official diplomatic channels, Russian Chief of Staff General Valeri Guerassimov contacted his US counterpart General Joseph Dunford to inform him of his fear of a false flag chemical attack in Ghouta. Dunford took this information vey seriously, and alerted US Defense Secretary General Jim Mattis, who referred the matter to President Donald Trump. In view of the Russian insistence that this piece of foul play was being prepared without the knowledge of the Pentagon, the White House asked the Director of the CIA, Mike Pompeo, to identify those responsible for the conspiracy.

We do not know the result of this internal enquiry, but President Trump acquired the conviction that his Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, was implicated. The Secretary of State was immediately asked to interrupt his official journey in Africa and return to Washington.

Theresa May wrote to the General Secretary of the United Nations accusing Russia of having ordered the attack in Salisbury, and convened an emergency meeting of the Security Council. Without waiting, she expelled 23 Russian diplomats.

Published one month and a half before the attack in Salisbury, Amy Knight's book presents what was to become MI5's thesis. The author herself maintains that she has not the slightest proof of what she is claiming.

At the request of President of the House of Commons Interior Committee Yvette Cooper, British Secretary for the Interior Amber Rudd announced that MI5 (Military Interior Secret Services ) is going to re-open 14 enquiries into deaths which, according to US sources, were ordered by the Kremlin.

By doing do, the British government adopted the theories of Professor Amy Knight. On 22 January 2018, this US Sovietologist published a very strange book -- Orders to Kill -- the Putin régime and political murder . The author, who is " the " specialist on the ex-KGB, attempts to demonstrate that Vladimir Putin is a serial killer responsible for dozens of political assassinations, from the terrorist attacks in Moscow in 1999 to the attack on the Boston Marathon in 2013, by way of the execution of Alexandre Litvinenko in London in 2006 or that of Boris Nemtsov in Moscow in 2015. However, she admits herself that there is absolutely no proof of her accusations.

The European Liberals then joined the fray. Ex-Prime Minister of Belgium Guy Verhofstadt, who presides their group in the European Parliament, called on the European Union to adopt sanctions against Russia. His counterpart at the head of their British party, Sir Vince Cable, proposed a European boycott of the World Football Cup. And already, Buckingham Palace announced that the royal family has canceled their trip to Russia.

The UK communications regulator, Ofcom, announced that it might ban the channel Russia Today as a retaliatory measure, even though RT has on no occasion violated British law.

The Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs summoned the British ambassador in Moscow to inform him that reciprocal measures would soon be indicated in retaliation for the expulsion of Russian diplomats from London.

President Trump announced on Twitter that he had fired his Secretary of State, with whom he had not yet been in contact. He was replaced by Mike Pompeo, ex-Director of the CIA, who, the night before, had confirmed the authenticity of the Russian information transmitted by General Dunford. On his arrival in Washington, Tillerson obtained confirmation of his dismissal from White House General Secretary General John Kelly.

The ex-CEO of the largest multinational in the world, ExxonMobil, thought he was untouchable. But to his great surprise, Rex Tillerson was brutally dismissed by Donald Trump. The former believed he was serving the Anglo-Saxon world, while the latter considers him to be a traitor to his country.

Ex-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is a product of the Texan middle class. He and his family worked for the US Scouts, of whom he became the National President (2010-12). Culturally close to England, he did not hesitate, when he became President of the mega-multinational Exxon-Mobil (2006-16), not only to wage a politically correct campaign favouring the acceptance of young gays into the Scouts, but also to recruit mercenaries in British Guiana. He is said to be a member of the Pilgrims Society, the most prestigious of Anglo-US clubs, presided by Queen Elizabeth II, a number of whose members were part of the Obama administration.

During his functions as Secretary of State, the quality of his education provided a bond for Donald Trump, considered by US high society to be a buffoon. He was in disagreement with his President on three major subjects which allow us to define the ideology of the conspirators -

Like London and the US deep state, he thought it would be useful to diabolise Russia in order to consolidate the power of the Anglo-Saxons in the Western camp ;

Like London, he thought that in order to maintain Western colonialism in the Middle East, it was necessary to favour Iranian President Cheikh Rohani against the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Khamenei. He therefore supported the 5+1 agreement.

Like the US deep state, he considered that the swing of North Korea towards the United States should remain secret, and be used to justify a military deployment which would be directed in reality against the People's Repubic of China. He was therefore in favor of official talks with Pyongyang, but opposed to a meeting between the two heads of state.

14 March 2018

While Washington was still in shock, Theresa May spoke once again before the House of Commons to develop her accusation, while all around the world, British diplomats spoke to numerous inter-governmental organisations in order to broadcast the message. Responding to the Prime Minister, Blairist deputy Chris Leslie qualified Russia as a rogue state and demanded its suspension from the UN Security Council. Theresa May agreed to examine the question, but stressed that the outcome could only be decided by the General Assembly in order to avoid the Russian veto.

The North Atlantic Council (NATO) met in Brussels at the request of the United Kingdom. The 29 member states drew a link between the use of chemical weapons in Syria and the attack in Salisbury. They then decided that Russia was " probably " responsible for these two events.

In New York, the permanent representative of Russia, Vasily Nebenzya, proposed to the members of the Security Council that they adopt a declaration attesting to their common will to shed light on the attack in Salisbury and handing over the enquiry to the OPCW in the respect of international procedures. But the United Kingdom refused any text which did not contain the expression that Russia was " probably responsible " for the attack.

During the public debate which followed, UK chargé d'affaire Jonathan Allen represented his country. He is an agent of MI6 who created the British War Propaganda Service and gives active support to the jihadists in Syria. He declared -- " Russia has already interfered in the affairs of other countries, Russia has already violated international law in Ukraine, Russia has comtempt for civilian life, as witnessed by the attack on a commercial aircraft over Ukraine by Russian mercenaries, Russia protects the use of chemical weapons by Assad ( ) The Russian state is responsible for this attempted murder ". The permanent representative for France, François Delattre, who, by virtue of a derogation by President Sarkozy, was trained at the US State Department, noted that his country had launched an initiative to end the impunity of those who use chemical weapons. He implied that the initiative, originally directed at Syria, could also be turned against Russia.

Russian ambassador Vasily Nebenzya pointed out that the session had been convened at London's request, but that it is public at Moscow's request. He observed that the United Kingdom is violating international law by treating this subject at the Security Council while keeping the OPCW out of its enquiry. He noted that if London had been able to identify the " Novotchik ", it's because it has the formula and can therefore make its own. He noted Russia's desire to collaborate with the OPCW in the respect for international procedures.

15 March 2018

The United Kingdom published a common declaration which had been cosigned the night before by France and Germany, as well as Rex Tillerson, who at that moment was still US Secretary of State. The text reiterated British suspicions. It denounced the use of " a neurotoxic agent of military quality, and of a type developed by Russia ", and affirmed that it was " highly probable that Russia is responsible for the attack ".

The Washington Post published an op-ed piece by Boris Johnson, while the US Secretary of the Treasury, Steven Mnuchin, established new sanctions against Russia. These are not connected to the current affair, but to allegations of interference in US public life. The decree nonetheless mentions the attack in Salisbury as proof of the underhand methods of Russia.

Throughout its long history, England has never hesitated to lie and betray its oath in order to defend its interests. This is how it earned its French nickname of " perfide Albion " (after the Latin name for England)

British Secretary for Defence, the young Gavin Williamson, declared that after the expulsion of its diplomats, Russia should " shut up and go away " (sic). This is the first time since the end of the Second World War that a representative of a permanent member state of the Security Council has employed such a vocabulary in the face of another member of the Council. Sergueï Lavrov commented -- " He's a charming young man. He must want to ensure his place in History, by making shock declarations [...] Perhaps he lacks education ".

Conclusion

In the space of four days, the United Kingdom and its allies have laid the premises of a new division of the world, a Cold War.

However, Syria is not Iraq and the UNO is not the G8 (from which Russia has been excluded because of its adhesion to Crimea and its support of Syria). The United States are not going to destroy Damascus, and Russia will not be excluded from the Security Council. After having resigned from the European Union, then having refused to sign the Chinese declaration about the Silk Road, the United Kingdom thought to improve its stature by eliminating a competitor. By this piece of dirty work, it imagined that it would acquire a new dimension and become the " Global Britain " announced by Madame May. But it is destroying its own credibility.

polskijoe , March 21, 2018 at 2:33 pm GMT

Cold War 2.0 started
during the Bush years.
when NATO expanded and USA pulled out of Ballistic missile treaty.
Ronald Thomas West , Website March 21, 2018 at 3:46 pm GMT
Maybe the USA generals were simply happy to have excuse to make Tillerson go away

https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/03/pompeos-promotion-zio-christian-armageddonist-power-play/

because it's certainly nothing to do with the (non-existent) sanity at the Pentagon

anon [107] Disclaimer , March 21, 2018 at 11:07 pm GMT
Pompeo to correct the treachery of Tillerson?
Pricknick , March 22, 2018 at 4:44 am GMT
False Flag. Get used to it. Governments lie.
utu , March 22, 2018 at 5:00 am GMT
Meyssan is barking at a wrong tree. He should be more concerned with the guy who will replace Tillerson and not with Tillerson.
Carlton Meyer , Website March 22, 2018 at 5:51 am GMT

jilles dykstra , March 22, 2018 at 7:30 am GMT

Yesterday were the Dutch municipal elections. The losers were the governing parties at national level. Winners the local parties. Trust in 'elite' politicians is diminishing further.

We yesterday also had our last referendum, the referendum law no longer exists. As with all previous referenda, we voted against government policy, this time the law that gives secret services the legal right to spy on anyone.

As with all referenda, our vote will not have any effect, as when in 2005 we voted against the EU, and two years ago against the EU Ukraine association treaty.

Nevertheless, democracy functions. As I wrote, local parties are the winners, winners also are national anti establishment parties, despite the demonizing of these populists, that represent the opinions of a significant portion of the population.

As Belgium and Germany, governing our country becomes more and more difficult. The country seems to be more and more divided between those who trust the government, and those with deep distrust.

Realist , March 22, 2018 at 8:57 am GMT
@Pricknick

Two of the worst American false flags are responsible for the killing in North Korea and Vietnam. The killing of it's own people is not a moral dilemma for the Deep State.

Erebus , March 22, 2018 at 10:43 am GMT
Meyssan has often voiced the opinion that Trump & Putin have an understanding. We can't, and will probably never know the truth of this opinion, but when one watches their body language and behaviour together such as was openly displayed at the APEC summit in Vietnam, one sees that they are very comfortable with each other.

One of the things that the Kremlin understands is that the US, and specifically its foreign policy determinations, is rat's nest of various vested and/or rogue interests pulling in their various directions, and that by virtue of Washington's chaotic politics much of what seems to be foreign policy is executed without the knowledge, much less control of the President, or even the State & Defence Departments.

The reality is that both Russia and China want (for different reasons) a healthy USA to sit at a newly constituted round table of Great Powers. There are factions within the US that agree with them, and that the road to Global Hegemony is a dead end. Trump's election has opened a window of opportunity to allow the US to de-throttle, and even back away from that goal should those factions gain the upper hand. From what we see, they are making progress.

There's still a political battle royal ahead for them, but there's also factions within the US' allies whose fortunes will take a turn for the worse should they succeed. They will naturally ally with those in the US who's goal is Empire. As it is, with current developments in DC, and the Syrian gambit backfiring, said factions are panicking and it should surprise no-one to see ill-conceived and executed attempts to reverse their fortunes.

I think the Skripal case is a textbook example of just that kind of thing happening. A farcical caricature of a false flag operation gone awry, and no plausible narrative in sight.

That the once great UK is reduced to 3 blind mice standing in for Ministers of what are normally a nation's 3 most powerful ministries shows just how far from its moorings the West has drifted. One is almost embarrassed for them as they thrash around.

Saker posted a video on his site of a meeting called by the Kremlin of all ambassadors. It's astonishing, frankly.

Macon Richardson , March 22, 2018 at 10:53 am GMT
@utu

He can bark up Pompeo's tree when Pompeo becomes Secretary of State.

tyrone , March 22, 2018 at 11:45 am GMT
MAY-DAY, MAY-DAY don't write checks with insufficient funds on hand, May, America doesn't need the UK pimping a war with Russia, we can't pay for the ones with have now!
Seraphim , March 22, 2018 at 11:57 am GMT
@Erebus

Suggesting image: the ship Britannia cutting its moorings and drifting aimlessly, no longer ruling the waves.

[Mar 22, 2018] D j Vu with British Poison Allegations Against Russia by Wayne MADSEN

Mar 22, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

One thing about the neo-conservatives, who have thoroughly penetrated the Tory government of British Prime Minister Theresa May and, due to the reality television show savant nature of Donald Trump, are rapidly filling as many vacancies in the US administration as possible, is that they are consistent. Neocons, who make no secret of their desire for major military conflagrations, have dusted off an old playbook with regard to the nerve agent poisoning of Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury, England. The convoluted charges made by the British government bear all the hallmarks of the Polonium-210 radiation poisoning of ex-Russian intelligence agent Alexander Litvinenko, who died in London in 2006.

In June 2008, the British government conceded that the government of British Labor Prime Minister Tony Blair concocted and exaggerated claims about Russia's involvement in the Litvinenko poisoning in 2006. Apparently, the present government of Mrs. May believes rational people have no memories of what transpired in Britain twelve years ago.

The British intelligence services, which had their own relationship with Litvinenko, could no longer manage to suppress overwhelming evidence that the poisoning of Litvinenko was the result of a plot by anti-Vladimir Putin criminal syndicates based in Britain, Israel, Ukraine, and Poland to embarrass the Russian government.

Suspicions about the role of the exiled Russian-Israeli criminal syndicates in the poisoning of Litvinenko, including that which was headed by Litvinenko's friend, wanted Russo-Israeli oligarch Boris Berezovsky, re-surfaced after former Russian Prime Minister Yegor Gaidar became violently ill after eating breakfast at a conference he was attending in Dublin, Ireland. Ireland's banking secrecy laws has made it a favorite location for the Eurasian-Israeli Mafia.

Berezovsky's own suspicious death in March 2013 discovery of Berezovsky's body in his Ascot estate in England suggested that the anti-Russian crime syndicates, which work closely with hedge fund billionaire troublemaker George Soros and the Central Intelligence Agency, eliminated Berezovsky because he was about to reveal the nature of the syndicates to the Russian government. Most media reports coming out of Britain, at the time, claimed that Berezovsky died from natural causes. A few others suggested suicide or murder. Interestingly, Berezovsky had recently received medical treatment in Israel.

Berezovsky's expatriate friends in Britain and Israel included exiled oligarchs who were subjects of Russian arrest warrants. These included Russian-Israeli businessman Leonid Nevzlin, the former chief executive officer of Yukos Oil, who was the subject of a Russian arrest warrant for murder, embezzlement, and tax evasion. Nevzlin, a former head of the Russian Jewish Congress, resided in Tel Aviv under the protection of the Israeli government. Nevzlin's exiled Russian-Israeli comrades included Vladimir Dubov, a major Yukos shareholder, and wanted oligarch Vladimir Gusinsky. The wanted ex-Yukos officials, who are now allied with the expatriate former chief of Yukos and ex-convict, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, have also been linked to wealthy British businessman Jacob Rothschild.

Berezovsky ran from exile a major support network for Chechen terrorists. One of their leaders, Ahmed Zakayev, was a close associate of Berezovsky and Litvinenko.

Just like Litvinenko, Yulia Skripal had her own reported connections to Russian and Western intelligence services, suggesting that she, like Litvinenko, had embarked on a dangerous life as a double or triple agent. Yulia Skripal worked for the "information center" at the US embassy in Moscow and at the Holiday Inn in Southampton in England. Hotel jobs are a preferred "non-official cover" position for the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI-6). Until his arrest by Russian authorities, Sergei Skripal was a paid agent for MI-6. In 2010, he was given asylum in Britain after a major spy swap between the United States and Russia.

The nerve agent reportedly used on Skripal and his daughter was a "Novichok" ("Newcomer"), one of a series of binary agents allegedly developed in the Soviet Union during the Cold War. These nerve agents were also apparently stockpiled at the British biological and chemical warfare research facility at Porton Down, a mere eight miles from Salisbury, where the Skripals took ill.

But the existence of Novichok is, itself questionable. Claims about Novichok originally came from Vil Mirzayanov, a Soviet chemical weapons scientist who claimed to have invented Novichok at a facility in the Uzbek Soviet Socialist Republic. In 1994, Mirzayanov fled to the United States, where he came under the control of the CIA. In 2016, Dr. Robin Black, the chief of the Detection Laboratory in Porton Down, published an academic paper that questioned the veracity of Mirzayanov's Novichok claims.

The poisoning of the Skripals was followed shortly by the death in London of Berezovsky's longtime business colleague and friend Nikolai Glushkov. British police called Glushkov's death "suspicious," citing as the cause "compression to the neck." Berezovsky died as the result of a hanging, believed by police to be a "suicide." Radioactive traces of the Polonium-210 used to poison Litvinenko were traced to Berezovsky's office at 7 Down Street, in London's Mayfair district. In 2008, Badri Patarkatsishvili, Berezovsky's Georgian-Israeli business partner, collapsed and died at his home a mere 15 miles from Berezovsky's English estate. The death of the 52-year old was determined by authorities to be the result of a "heart attack."

Much more than circumstantial evidence suggests that Berezovsky, Glushkov, and Patarkatsishvili were murdered by exiled opponents of the Russian government, who also happen to be kingpins in the Eurasian-Israeli mafia that uses Britain as a major base of operations. Britain is favored by these criminal syndicates because of the close working relationship they have with British and American intelligence agencies, as well as with Soros, who maintains a residence in London.

Just as with the unfounded allegations about Russia made by British government officials in the wake of the Litvinenko death, current British officials found it difficult to keep their stories straight or factual. One such official was Foreign Secretary Boris London, the dim-witted former mayor of London who has been dubbed "the British Trump," a reference to the US president.

Johnson laughingly claimed that Russia directed "the use of a nerve agent on the streets of the UK, on the streets of Europe, for the first time since the Second World War." Just as with the Trump administration's wanton use of "fake news" and "alternate facts," Johnson was engaged in making up a "false history." There is no evidence that any chemical weapons, let alone nerve agents, were used by Germany against Britain during the Second World War. A British mustard gas attack on Adolf Hitler and his army unit near Ypres, France – an attack that landed Hitler in a military hospital with burnt lungs and partial blindness – convinced the German dictator not to use chemical weapons against Britain or the Soviet Union.

Although the Nazis maintained stockpiles of tabun and sarin nerve agents, Hitler forbid his generals from employing them in battle, except for the use of asphyxiating gas agents by SS chemical warfare troops in clearing caverns and catacombs in Sevastopol and Odessa of Soviet military personnel and civilians who had sought refuge from the invading German army. And, although the Nazis used hydrogen cyanide and carbon monoxide to murder millions of Jews, Roma, Soviet prisoners of war, and others in concentration camps throughout Europe, Johnson's statement about the use of nerve agents on British and European streets in World War II is ludicrous, as well as patently false. What is not false is that British generals dissuaded British Prime Minister Winston Churchill from using poison gas and anthrax on German population centers in World War II. Of course, Churchill was a great promoter of the use of poison gas, directing the use of debilitating lachrymatory gas ("tear gas") and deadlier mustard gas against rebels in Mesopotamia, present-day Iraq, in 1920.

In the world of British intelligence "make-believe" it is sometimes more revealing to discover the true nature of MI-6 operations from the movies. The screenwriters of the James Bond film, "Casino Royale," recognized the nature of the real life international mobsters who engage in such matters as assassinations of individuals for propaganda purposes. In the film, not only is a Montenegro-based Eurasian mob ring – Montenegro is one of the centers for the Eurasian-Israeli syndicates – featured as engaging in international terrorism in order to manipulate the stock market, but there is a reference by "M" (Judi Dench) that a similar mob ring engaged in stock "put" options before the 9/11 attacks, in order to make tons of money on the world markets. It appears that fictional spies know more about such intrigue, such as the murders of Litvinenko, Berezovsky, Patarkatsishvili, and Glushkov and the poisonings of the Skripals and Gaidar to bring about international crises, than do their real-life counterparts and intellectual dullards like Boris Johnson and Theresa May.

Tags: UK

[Mar 22, 2018] The first accusations were launched way too quickly after MH17 was hit

Mar 22, 2018 | thesaker.is

Peter from Oz on March 22, 2018 , · at 6:24 am UTC

The anger and righteous disgust by the chief RF MFA spokesman at around 1:45 from recall (I did just skip to snippets -- but got stopped there) is worth seeing. He talks of the Malaysian Boeing downed in Ukraine to the US rep in audience, pointing out US knows exactly what happened because of its satellites directly overhead, and says something I'd never heard -- repeated it a couple of times at least -- again in accusatory disgust -- that the first accusations Russia shot down the plane came BEFORE the plane was hit!
Auslander on March 22, 2018 , · at 7:29 am UTC
This is true, the plane was still flying when the first accusations were made. The fact that it hit the ground moments later belies the lies that Opolchensya and/or Russia did it. The plane was not hit by a missile, there are entry and exit aircraft cannon holes in the left cockpit outer skin. I have no doubts that the photos of that damning piece of evidence are long gone but not to worry, I'm sure someone has them.
Auslander

[Mar 22, 2018] Trump's National Security Chief Calls Russian Interference 'Incontrovertible'

Mar 22, 2018 | www.nytimes.com

MUNICH -- Just hours after the Justice Department indicted 13 Russians in what it charged was a broad conspiracy to alter the 2016 election, President Trump's national security adviser, Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster, accused Moscow of engaging in a campaign of "disinformation, subversion and espionage" that he said Washington would continue to expose.

The evidence of a Russian effort to interfere in the election "is now incontrovertible," General McMaster said at the Munich Security Conference, an annual meeting of European and American diplomats and security experts, including several senior Russian officials. On Friday, just hours before the indictment, the top White House official for cyberissues accused Russia of "the most destructive cyberattack in human history," against Ukraine last summer.

Taken together, the statements appeared to mark a major turn in the administration's willingness to directly confront the government of President Vladimir V. Putin. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and C.I.A. Director Mike Pompeo also attended the Munich conference, and while they did not speak publicly, in private meetings with others here they reiterated similar statements.

The comments highlighted a sharp division inside the administration about how to talk about the Russian covert efforts, with only Mr. Trump and a few of his close advisers holding back from acknowledging the Russian role or talking about a larger strategy to deter future attacks.

The indictment characterized the cyberattacks and social media fraud as part of a larger effort by Russia to undermine the United States. A senior administration official called the effort to confront Russia "a significant point of contention" within the administration.

After the indictment on Friday Mr. Trump declared in a Twitter post that "the results of the election were not impacted. The Trump campaign did nothing wrong -- no collusion!" He made no mention of Russia as a "revisionist power," the description used in his own National Security Strategy, or of the elaborate $1.2 million-a-month effort that the indictment indicated Russia's Internet Research Agency spent in an effort to discredit the election system and ultimately to support his candidacy.

Vice President Mike Pence, speaking this past week in Washington, misstated American intelligence conclusions about the election hacking, arguing "it is the universal conclusion of our intelligence communities that none of those efforts had any effect on the outcome of the 2016 election." The intelligence chiefs have said they have not, and cannot, reach such a conclusion.

Sergey V. Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, cited Mr. Pence's comments during the session here Saturday to make the case that Russia did nothing wrong. "So until we see the facts, everything else is just blabber," he said.

The man who served as the Russian ambassador to the United States during the period covered by the indictments, Sergey I. Kislyak, picked up on a favorite theme of Mr. Trump's: questioning the credibility of the F.B.I. and intelligence agency assessments.

"I have seen so many indictments and accusations against Russians," Mr. Kislyak said on Saturday afternoon. "I am not sure I can trust American law enforcement to be the most truthful source against Russians." He added, "The allegations being mounted against us are simply fantasies."

Mr. Kislyak, who has been caught up in the investigation because of meetings with Trump campaign officials during his time as ambassador, went on to cite a study, which he said he was keeping in his briefcase, that proved the "main source of computer attacks in the world is not Russia. It is the United States."

[Mar 22, 2018] The voice on MI6 suggests that May should be more aggressive toward Russia by Luke Harding

This supposedly MI6-connected presstitute promoted Steele dossier. Now he promotes the war with Russia.
His idea is confiscate cash from Russian oligarchs. He forgot that British have investments in Russian that can also be gone.
Notable quotes:
"... Expulsion of diplomats is a temporary setback but the PM might have done more ..."
"... There is one area where the Russian elite is vulnerable. It keeps its money in the west, with much of it laundered in London and via UK corporate entities and banks. Unlike in Soviet times when apparatchiks enjoyed superior Moscow apartments, Putin's friends are multibillionaires, with yachts, villas, planes and other international assets. ..."
"... May could have frozen the luxury properties of tycoons such as Alisher Usmanov or Igor Shuvalov, Russia's deputy prime minister, whose handsome London flat overlooks the Ministry of Defence. She didn't. Oligarchs, of course, are not officials. But they are useful intermediaries who enjoy their fortunes at Putin's pleasure. ..."
Mar 22, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Expulsion of diplomats is a temporary setback but the PM might have done more

... ... ...

There is one area where the Russian elite is vulnerable. It keeps its money in the west, with much of it laundered in London and via UK corporate entities and banks. Unlike in Soviet times when apparatchiks enjoyed superior Moscow apartments, Putin's friends are multibillionaires, with yachts, villas, planes and other international assets.

An entire class of British professionals service Russia's super-rich. They include lawyers, public relations executives, real estate firms, headmasters and accountants. It is this last group which sets up complex offshore-managed structures used for the purposes of money laundering. They went unmentioned by May.

And on the question of what to do about Russian cash, May was vague. The measures she suggested on Wednesday were aspirational. They included bringing to bear the capabilities of law enforcement against "serious criminals and corrupt elites". This happens already. But hard-pressed officers from the National Crime Agency admit prosecuting wealthy perpetrators is difficult and time-consuming.

May could have frozen the luxury properties of tycoons such as Alisher Usmanov or Igor Shuvalov, Russia's deputy prime minister, whose handsome London flat overlooks the Ministry of Defence. She didn't. Oligarchs, of course, are not officials. But they are useful intermediaries who enjoy their fortunes at Putin's pleasure.

[Mar 22, 2018] Well polished schemes: my impression is that I already saw very similar movie

Edited Yandex translation from Russian.
Notable quotes:
"... It looks like Political Hollywood thinks like this: if the scheme works, there is no need to change anything and it can be re-played with the same success, just different actors. That why this new "Russian poisoning scandal" looks to me like copy-cat of Litvinenko case with polonium replaced with equally mysterious and fascinating Novichok nerve gas. Which may or may not exist... ..."
Mar 22, 2018 | valery-pavlov.livejournal.com

"Former MI5 spy Sergei Skripal reported to the police about fears for his life the day before the poisoning". My impression is that I already watched quite similar movie.

I don't really like Hollywood scripts, and for some time I am quite indifferent to Oscar, and in General to the whole factory production.

Because when you buy a t-shirt or sneakers or fast food, quality standards matter to you. It is good to know that for example a t-shirt should be wearable at least for a year or so. When you watch a Hollywood movie with a similarly level of predictability which they try to present as a high quality, you feel like a very old man. In such movies you can guess all the Director's and scenario moves, the whole synopsis approximately 15 minutes into the movies. And it does no matter if this is a Hollywood Thriller, or a Western, or a detective, or a Comedy, or mystery. It iether causes cognitive dissonance or simply boredom.

I usually watch movies late in the evening. In recent years, about a third of these Hollywood moves affected me as a sleeping pill, I really fell asleep on the couch. And I usually watch only most popular, most successful Hollywood movies, often Oscar nominated, not some second rate crap.

But let's return to Skripal, those sacrificial lamps or pawns in some big game. Here we see the same scenario as with Litvinenko. A person used like a preservative long ago who managed to get to London by a lucky chance, and found himself under close watch of Berezovsky and MI5. They extracted from Litvinenko as much useful staff as they could leaving a disgruntled person with limited assets. But in this non-waste technology world they managed to find use even for a worn body of this "thrown like dirty napkins into waste basket" individual.

It looks like Political Hollywood thinks like this: if the scheme works, there is no need to change anything and it can be re-played with the same success, just different actors. That why this new "Russian poisoning scandal" looks to me like copy-cat of Litvinenko case with polonium replaced with equally mysterious and fascinating Novichok nerve gas. Which may or may not exist...

The same is true about our "collective Western partners" attempt to present this poisoning as a "casus belli". Well, this is a standard scheme to initiates the regime change in a certain country and start killing its inhabitants. "Use of chemical weapons". So boring. It was used so many time in Syria, Libya and elsewhere by our Western partners puppets, that it might also make me sleepy watching this nonsense on TV. As if it does not touch the lives of many thousands of people. With whom our "Western partners" play a very nasty "shooter" videogame with real victims. Including woman and children.

By the way, the case of Grigory Rodchenkov, I'd now would not worry about the KGB too much. I would worry a lot about Western intelligence agencies. Which might sooner or later, might decide to use his cadaver to make yet another false flag operation, yet another nasty anti-Russian move. However, this is a completely different story. And the carcass of Rodchenkov no longer belongs to him in any case. He sold his for some number of silver coins, along with his soul.

[Mar 22, 2018] Vladimir Putin: nonsense to think Russia would poison spy in UK

Highly recommended!
Mar 18, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

"As for the tragedy that you mentioned, I found out about it from the media. The first thing that entered my head was that if it had been a military-grade nerve agent, the people would have died on the spot," said Putin.

"Secondly, Russia does not have such [nerve] agents. We destroyed all our chemical weapons under the supervision of international organisations and we did it first, unlike some of our partners who promised to do it, but unfortunately did not keep their promises."

Despite the tensions, Putin said Moscow was ready to cooperate with London: "We are ready to cooperate, we said that straight away. We are ready to take part in the necessary investigations, but for that there needs be a desire from the other side and we don't see that yet. But we are not taking it off the agenda, joint efforts are possible."

"I think any sensible person would understand that it would be rubbish, drivel, nonsense, for Russia to embark on such an escapade on the eve of a presidential election."

[Mar 22, 2018] Britain was complicit in creating the world's greatest kleptocracy, Yeltsin regime

Surprisingly this Guardian presstitute has some sound thoughts ;-)
Theresa May was probably pushed by Big Uncle. It is inconceivable that she behaved so arrogantly and foolishly on her own, even taking into account that any confrontation with Russia might prolong the life of her cabinet.
All-in-all this false flag operation looks like the first step is some gambit designed by British intelligence services against Russia. With Scripals as sacrificed pawns. It is amazing how "false flag friendly" poisoning cases are. Uncomfortable evidence can always be hidden under that smoke screen of "state secrecy".
There might be strong desire to confiscate Russian oligarch money as one of the motives for the current May goverment hysteria. That's explains why members of parliament jumped so high on orders, and why the reaction was so bipartisan. Because the attempt to spoil the World Cup looks so petty, that it is smells with the USA, not British intelligence serves. After all British team is a favorite. But such attempts were numerous in the past, so you never know. Sochi was the most recent example.
Notable quotes:
"... Theresa May's language in the wake of events in Salisbury has been unhelpful, given our history of provoking Russia ..."
"... The prospect has certainly taken British minds off Brexit. It has exhilarated the press. It has given Theresa May an immense boost and helped the defence lobby in its campaign for more money. There is nothing democracy seems to enjoy so much as contemplating war, to unite it and raise its spirits. It is never unpopular -- beforehand. ..."
"... Ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, the west has revelled in the humiliation of Russia. Every act of the EU and Nato after 1989 was to the same destructive end. Russia's neighbours were welcomed into the EU. Nato extended its defensive border to the edge of the Russian Federation, despite then president Boris Yeltsin (and to an extent Germany) pleading with the west "not to play with fire". ..."
"... As Yeltsin plunged into his botched privatisations in the 1990s, London egged them on by opening its banks to handle Russia's stolen billions. Britain was complicit in creating the world's greatest kleptocracy, brazenly and for a quarter of a century. Even this week, the prime minister lacked the guts to face down the City of London and call a halt to Russian money laundering. ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Originally from: After the Skripal attack, talk of war only plays into Vladimir Putin's hands by Simon Jenkins

Theresa May's language in the wake of events in Salisbury has been unhelpful, given our history of provoking Russia

Do we really want war with Russia? Do we want to risk one, even a tiny one? The prospect has certainly taken British minds off Brexit. It has exhilarated the press. It has given Theresa May an immense boost and helped the defence lobby in its campaign for more money. There is nothing democracy seems to enjoy so much as contemplating war, to unite it and raise its spirits. It is never unpopular -- beforehand.

... ... ...

Parliament parroted the same nonsense. The Tories' Tom Tugendhat said the poisoning "if not an act of war, was certainly a warlike act". Labour's Chris Leslie and John Woodcock worked themselves into a lather over "our country under attack" and "the gravity of the threat Russia poses to this nation". In these bidding wars of exaggeration, words lose all meaning.

... ... ...

Ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, the west has revelled in the humiliation of Russia. Every act of the EU and Nato after 1989 was to the same destructive end. Russia's neighbours were welcomed into the EU. Nato extended its defensive border to the edge of the Russian Federation, despite then president Boris Yeltsin (and to an extent Germany) pleading with the west "not to play with fire".

As Yeltsin plunged into his botched privatisations in the 1990s, London egged them on by opening its banks to handle Russia's stolen billions. Britain was complicit in creating the world's greatest kleptocracy, brazenly and for a quarter of a century. Even this week, the prime minister lacked the guts to face down the City of London and call a halt to Russian money laundering.

All this is a grim echo of how the allies treated Germany after Versailles in 1919. They rubbed its nose in defeat, occupying its territory, destroying its dignity and stripping it of its flimsy wealth. Germany eventually found refuge in dictatorship.

... ... ...

Camus wrote that "plagues and wars take people equally by surprise". The idea that Skripal may be the Franz Ferdinand of the next European conflict may seem ludicrous. Yet the west's responses to post-Soviet Russia, however reasonable in the short term, have been disastrous in general. A war with Russia would be the west's fault.

• Simon Jenkins is a Guardian columnist

[Mar 22, 2018] Spy poisoning: police say investigation could last until summer by Andrew Roth

Notable quotes:
"... Senior Russian diplomatic and military officials have accused the UK of hiding and possibly planning to destroy evidence in the investigation into the Salisbury nerve agent attack. ..."
Mar 21, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Senior Russian diplomatic and military officials have accused the UK of hiding and possibly planning to destroy evidence in the investigation into the Salisbury nerve agent attack.

The comments came during a remarkable briefing at Moscow's foreign ministry given for all foreign ambassadors in Russia, to lay out the country's argument for why it is not responsible for the attack on former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, on 4 March.

Britain says they were poisoned with a nerve agent known as novichok and has blamed Russia for the attack, but Moscow has fiercely denied any involvement. The case has prompted the two countries to expel diplomats in a tit-for-tat dispute.

Speaking to a lecture hall of diplomats, Vladimir Yermakov, deputy head of the ministry's department for non-proliferation, suggested that the UK was "hiding facts" about the case that may later "disappear".

Laurie Bristow, the British ambassador to Russia, did not attend and the ambassadors of other major allies, including the US, Germany and France, also boycotted the briefing.

But one British diplomat did go. Emma Nottingham condemned the "disinformation" coming from the Russian government during the briefing, which was closed to the press but streamed live online.

"Russia has offered us so far no explanation of how this agent came to be used in the United Kingdom and no explanation as to why Russia has an undeclared chemical weapons programme in contravention of international law," Nottingham told the five-person panel.

"We are not obliged to give anything to Great Britain," Yermakov replied to Nottingham. "It is an attack on Russian citizens on the territory of Great Britain, so why don't we carry out a joint investigation?"

Yermakov also suggested that Russia may not accept the conclusions of an investigation by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons as fact.

"It is not possible to evaluate what happened in Salisbury within the framework of the convention and within the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons," he said in remarks translated by Interfax. "Deeper expert evaluations will be needed, and in any case we need to conduct our own investigations for Russia to be able to draw any conclusions."

The briefing lasted just under two hours.

[Mar 22, 2018] Romans saying tha applies to Britain "Iuppiter iratus ergo nefas" (Jupiter, you are angry, therefore you are wrong).

An interesting presentation by Andrey Vadjra (English subtitles)
Mar 22, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Andrey Vadjra. About the coma patients at the service of Her Majesty - YouTube

[Mar 22, 2018] Don't worry, folks. We don't have to take nobody's word for nuthin'. YouTube and Google Earth and "online investigations" from Eliot Higgins and Bellingcat (and you can "verify" too) have that all covered

Mar 22, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Abe , March 20, 2018 at 12:07 am

It's truly amazing what that plucky [CIA-based] Russian (and Ukrainian)-speaking "community" can provide:
-- chemical agents and nuclear materials (deliverable by aerial drone or up close and personal, of course),
-- rusty weapons parts and busted "barrel bombs" (I understand their "community" pioneered the IED concept),
-- even the occasional Russian missile or aircraft.

Sadly, they aren't able to provide the one thing that the U.S. "intelligence community" can never quite seem to find: satellite photos.

But don't worry, folks. We don't have to take nobody's word for nuthin'. YouTube and Google Earth and "online investigations" from Eliot Higgins and Bellingcat (and you can "verify" too) have that all covered.

Rest assured, that plucky Russian (and Ukrainian)-speaking "community" has something really, really "good". They've already used it a few times. That worked so well that their gonna use it again. Like real soon.

Abe , March 20, 2018 at 12:12 am

It's truly amazing what that plucky Russian (and Ukrainian)-speaking "community" can provide:
-- chemical agents and nuclear materials (deliverable by aerial drone or up close and personal, of course),
-- rusty weapons parts and busted "barrel bombs" (I understand their "community" pioneered the IED concept),
-- even the occasional Russian missile or aircraft.

Sadly, they aren't able to provide the one thing that the U.S. "intelligence community" can never quite seem to find: satellite photos.

But don't worry, folks. We don't have to take nobody's word for nuthin'. YouTube and Google Earth and "online investigations" from Eliot Higgins and Bellingcat (and you can "verify" too) have that all covered.

Rest assured, that plucky Russian (and Ukrainian)-speaking "community" has plenty of something. They're using it now and they're gonna keep on using it. Unless somebody finds some satellite photos.

[Mar 21, 2018] Who is judging the judges

Mar 21, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

one of our recommended browsers . Report

Aquinasotic , 30 Mar 2014 04:27

At present there is no way of disciplining a retired judge who trades on his former title of "Judge" and his rank of QC to give advice to lay people (without any up-to-date knowledge of law or professional indemnity insurance) and then speak on their behalf as a McKenzie Friend in Court.

I know of a case where this actually happened - a retired Chancery Circuit Judge intervened in a case involving a religious charity when he has no known connection to the faith in question. His intervention was distinctly unhelpful for the parties and impeded the proper administration of justice. But nothing could be done about his unprofessional and meddling behaviour.

Cynical007 -> JohntheLith , 26 Mar 2014 16:32
Journalists are not state officials, and do not have the power to imprison citizens. There is no right to be a judge (so state regulation of judges is legitimate) whereas there is a right to freedom of speech (so state regulation of journalism is not legitimate).
Cynical007 -> HybridMoments , 26 Mar 2014 16:31

The move to a system of locally elected (ie, accountable) judges is long overdue.

A tribunal consisting of elected politicians is not a real court.

profester , 26 Mar 2014 06:29
Judges are lawyers: a rapacious breed drawn predominantly from and representing the "highest" stratum of society. They are expert at presenting one-sided arguments, whatever the facts and evidence. They provide "blue chip justice" favouring that social segment that can afford to hire lawyers and so keep the legal sector in work. They know how to wear down complainants (often of limited means) with unjustified decisions that have to be appealed at every stage of proceedings. They are assisted by absurb laws which deem them virtually infallible in jurisdictions such as the Employment Tribunal, where it is, in practice, not an "error of law" to find something impossible to be true or to make a finding contrary to the weight of evidence, or without evidential basis (and invariably favouring the employer). Even when an indefatigable complainant succeeds in an appeal against a rotten judgement, they often find their case "remitted" for a rehearing before the same biased tribunal or another made up of the friends and colleagues of the first, and likewise of the employer. Many contributors here, and all employment lawyers, know this to be true, yet this unjust system persists. What criticisms of it there are focus on ultimately minor issues such as whether one should have to pay fees to lodge complaints, rather than the more important issue of its institutional racialism and the virtual impossibility of Black people being successful in complaints against members of the establishment within it.
pictish22 , 25 Mar 2014 21:59
You also need to remember that judges work within a system which is controlled by politics, press start complaining about high number of car thefts, car thieves suddenly start getting jailed while house breakers do not.

There are also other parts of the system for instance social work reports, often made about people who know the systems inside out, know exactly what to say and when to say it. Lawyers who are simply there to lie, on both sides of the case with full knowledge they are doing it. Police who are more concerned about getting results than actually justice. And finally the judges themselves who all appear to have totally different interpretations of the law, I have seen grown men break down when they find out they are getting 1 judge over another and that was just the lawyers.

newthought -> profester , 25 Mar 2014 20:03
Judicial lies are far from confined to racism-motivated instances. The whole system of "justice" is the biggest scam on the planet. That's why they don't allow recording of your own hearing.
newthought -> HybridMoments , 25 Mar 2014 19:56
The judiciary regularly get away with complete and utter cheap lies in their judgments. They are unaccountable as it only takes two more judges to refuse permission to challenge the lies and that's the end of the matter. In one of my cases I asked to audio-record (my own case). Both the judge and government barrister insisted I would not be alllowed to record. The reason for this refusal of recording is so that there is no record of the filthy lies judges deploy in the smaller civil court rooms where there are no reporters. One important subset of lies is about the limitation act. Supposedly fact means possibility, knowledge means suspicion, and was means might be - well that's what high court judges say these words mean, and the fact that loads of dictionaries say otherwise is of no power against them.
We need every litigant to have the right to record their own cases.
Ministryoftruth -> HybridMoments , 25 Mar 2014 19:51
Americans have elected judges. This has not stopped Judicial malfeasance there, it can actually create new forms of it.
Ursultana , 25 Mar 2014 18:34
And perhaps that needs review. After all, they are all members of same brotherhood or society, and all operate from under Londons Bar .So is no independence at all.
Violator -> HybridMoments , 25 Mar 2014 17:21

The move to a system of locally elected (ie, accountable) judges is long overdue.

Good grief! What an appalling idea.

JohntheLith -> Hywelliau , 25 Mar 2014 17:20
Ok, but... The Press "often" have more influence on Society than the Judiciary. Ergo, who needs to watched more?
arvindkc77 , 25 Mar 2014 16:45
My recent experience of JCIO is not entirely sanguine. I represented myself in a child custody case in Birmingham. The Cafcass favored my child to stay with me. The Circuit Judge presiding over the case, lied in his judgment three times in order to favor my ex. When I took the matter to the appeal in High Court, the Law Lord presiding practically said that because the Circuit Judge is experienced, he is entitled to lie. I was quite gobsmacked. JCIO were completely unmoved by my protestations. It is apparent that truth is diminished if you are a layman fighting the excesses of establishment.
whitecross , 25 Mar 2014 14:44
Corruption is the word and has been for some time.
Vizier , 25 Mar 2014 13:56
I have to say I think that most magistrates are firmly in the pockets of the police. So really most of them are corrupt.
Vizier -> theacademic , 25 Mar 2014 13:53
"When normal people face such baseless allegations, the case is struck out, or a responsible prosecutor stops it"

Or rather the ordinary person is found guilty and spends years in prison.

JaniceP , 25 Mar 2014 13:15
The internet is awash with people who have been unfairly treated by the Justice system. Court observers have commented on the familiarity between Judges and business men in employment tribunal cases, and the employee losing, and also losing an appeal. Has anybody ever tried to get an employment judge's notes from the case? Impossible. Ultimately when the judge says the notes are not to be released under any circumstances (why not if they have nothing to hide) and the Trbunal President when asked under a data protection request, tells you that the data controller, is, yes the original judge who won't release them under any circumstances, is it any wonder that people have no faith in the British Justice system, or should we rename it Old Boys Network system?
gogogob , 25 Mar 2014 12:54
It is reassuring to learn that judges get fair hearing. At least somebody does!
Gordon Bell , 25 Mar 2014 12:21
The corrupt protecting the corrupt!
I refer to the Porton Down cover-up that involved the killing of 39 Porton Down veterans who died as a result of being injected with a bacteria derived from salmonella - abortus equi - in an altered state. (source FOI) Upper Tribunal Judge Edward Jacobs (unlike Judge Brian Kennedy QC) who ordered details of the deaths to be made public) did purposely support the MoD by allowing them to keep secret ALL facts related to the killings. Judge Edward Jacobs also ignored a 3.72 million pounds fraudulent payment (stolen from public funds) awarded to Martyn Day Senior Partner with the London law firm Leigh Day & Co. It was Martyn Day who supposedly represented 39 family members of deceased veterans. In effect Jacobs by his very silence and by allowing crimes of this nature to be kept under wraps did himself become party to the crime.
ripteam , 25 Mar 2014 12:16
Was the judge who handed down six months to a student for stealing a water bottle ever investigated for serious misconduct?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/poll/2011/aug/12/riots-water-theft-punishment

theacademic -> Robthablob , 25 Mar 2014 11:56
yes, though that was a later comment.
Robthablob -> theacademic , 25 Mar 2014 11:44
"The comments in this section so far could hardly be more wrong" I don't know, I though Patrick Logicman was spot on with his "But then you couldn't tell them from janitors" remark above.
Hywelliau -> JohntheLith , 25 Mar 2014 11:30
Yes but in the midst of the usual press anarchy, a few wise words from Joshua are surely not out of order?

The predilection of cheap jack town magistrates describing themselves as Judges, takes some beating. The powers of local authorities to press their own non-criminal "charges" can be rather unpleasant, and quite happy to present fictitious evidence in abundance, backed up by such "judges".

ID7776906 -> profester , 25 Mar 2014 11:28
If you review most Laws in Britain,USA Canada,etc they were enacted worded and favored the very rich and property owners when passed. Judge`s hands are really tied to the laws of the land and it is the rich bias and regulations that keep the poor in their place that Judges are restricted by when looking to dispense justice [as far as the law allows].

Same applies to the Police they didn`t make the laws.The Justice system and the Police have been deliberately kept apart from society so they identify more with conservatism and the status quo and even identify with it as elitists.

theacademic -> Ozymandius , 25 Mar 2014 11:27
The difference is that the father needs to be suspended in case the allegations prove to be true, because something important is alleged. Here the allegations against the judges seem to be about nothing - nothing obviously wrong has happened even if the facts are true.
DigitalAsian , 25 Mar 2014 11:19
In my experience of the judiciary in criminal trials is that they do have a tendency to protect the Police and even on the odd occasion pervert the course of justice to protect them. You cannot assume that any judge will be impartial in any case or inquiry especially if police corruption is being investigated or has been alleged. In my view you trust a judge to be independent and impartial at your own risk.
Ozymandius , 25 Mar 2014 10:56
Suspending a judge from duty pending investigation is rather like a judge confining a separated father to a supervised contact centre while his ex's phony allegations are looked into. All rather unnecessary but what do you do?
profester , 25 Mar 2014 10:45
My experience of the judiciary convinces me that it functions principally to protect the establishment. This is perhaps seen most blatantly in the employment tribunal, where judges make virtually unchallengeable findings of "fact" that contradict incontrovertible evidence that they simply ignore in order to exculpate defendants in race and religous discrimination cases. Sometimes they collude with defendants to pervert the course of justice by accepting fabricated documents as genuine, despite the existence of the genuine documents showing their inauthenticity (which they do not mention as they are irreconcilable with the documents that they wish to represent as genuine). Sometimes, they make important findings based on key documents that they have never seen, which the claimant dispute ever existed and the defendants claim they have lost. At other times, the judges just simply lie about the evidence if that is required to discredit the complainant. Such phenomena are well-documented (e.g., http://www.irr.org.uk/news/culture-of-disbelief-why-race-discrimination-claims-fail-in-the-employment-tribunal/). However, maybe because sex, drugs and death are not involved - and it only affects Blacks, after all - no-one seems at all interested, no programmes get made about this or articles get written in the mainstream media even when prominent journalists have the evidence of its occurrence.
PatrickLogicman , 25 Mar 2014 10:21
It is a tradition in this country that, freedom of speech notwithstanding, judges do not respond to attacks on them in the media. This means that we often hear the attack, but not the defence. Let me illustrate this with an example from history which shows that judges can be right, even when non-lawyers think they are obviously wrong.

If the media and some members of Parliament had got their own way, Mr. Justice Grantham would have been sacked after instructing a jury in strong terms that a prison warder charged with manslaughter, against whom the evidence of guilt was overwhelming, was nevertheless not guilty. It transpired about two years later that the single prosecution witness had lied: the "victim" was dead before the warder entered the room. I understand that the warder was named Mitchell and, despite being acquitted, did not get his job back.

Had Mr. Justice Grantham been sacked he could not have investigated the Adolph Beck case, the true facts might never have come out and we might still not have a criminal appeals process.

"The credit for resolving this miscarriage of justice lay firstly with the 1904 trial judge, Mr Justice Grantham, who had lingering doubts about Beck's guilt and had delayed concluding the case despite apparently strong prosecution evidence and procedures. It was in this period of delay, before being sentenced, that the crucial arrest of the real offender took place."
Source - historybytheyard.co.uk

PatrickLogicman -> photonal , 25 Mar 2014 09:42
"The whole judicial system needs an overall."

Each? But then you couldn't tell a judge from a janitor. They tried that in China. It didn't work. Call me old-fashioned, but I rather like the wigs and gowns.

;-)

theacademic , 25 Mar 2014 09:38
The comments in this section so far could hardly be more wrong. Perhaps self-regulation does not work for most professions, but in the case of judges it seems to "over-work" and the desire to ensure that judges are seen as people of integrity seems to take over at times. On the basis of JR's article, there seems very clearly to be no substance in the allegations against either Fulford or Thornton. When normal people face such baseless allegations, the case is struck out, or a responsible prosecutor stops it. So the impression here is that the regulator is afraid to be thought to sweeping things under the carpet and so the process continues - and absurdity is piled onto absurdity when the judges are even suspended from work in the meantime.

Turenne and Shetreet's book, referred to in the text, notes instances when judges not only face complaints but actually receive criticism for doing things which others can do and might even be expected to do. For example, it seems that judges should plead guilty to minor traffic offences if they are guilty, and should not seek technical ways that might exist to defeat the charges (ie ways that are not based on the merits of the case). This may be a good idea, of course, but it further ridicules any notion that the regulator is soft.

worksforcommunityorg , 25 Mar 2014 09:23
I have for many decades thought that most judges are daft old fools, out of touch with reality. My opinion has been confirmed by many examples.

I'm not up enough with the law to be able to suggest a better alternative, those who know what they are talking about should do that. However, I was pleased to see the web site linked to in the article , which seems to be a small step in the right direction.

photonal , 25 Mar 2014 09:11
The whole judicial system needs an overall.

Justice and access to it should be a cornerstone of our society - except that in its current form, it is reduced to a cleverly disguised commodity - whereby the 'truth' / 'justice' can be purchased by paying for expensive lawyers.

anusplatt , 25 Mar 2014 08:41
This age old practice of letting "professionals" regulate themselves is thankfully in decline but not quickly enough. They didn't regulate themselves, they protected each other like brothers in crime. Lawyers, police, bankers, religious institutions, doctors banded together to give themselves maximum benefit. And the pompous indignation when Joe Public dared to question them. I have always felt that these groups pulled the wool over our eyes. I laugh at the term "professional" often they are far from it.
JohntheLith , 25 Mar 2014 08:01

Who is judging the judges?
We know a lot more about judicial complaints than we used to but it remains the case that judges themselves judge judges

I find it amusing that a journalist in a National Newspaper is writing an article about a group of self interested people being able to judge themselves.

Who handles complaints about newspapers? I'll give you a clue with a quote fro the Press Complaints Commission's website:

The Press Complaints Commission is currently in a phase of transition; and it will soon be replaced by a new structure of independent self-regulation for the newspaper and magazine industries.

Self-regulation. Sounds a bit like what the judges do.

I smell hypocrisy.

sonofblake , 25 Mar 2014 07:57
One of the key elements of the English judiciary is that it is NOT elected. The executive and legislature are the elected bits and thus the judiciary must defer to them in terms of law-making and keep to their own province of interpreting the law - true it can be a fuzzy line at times but it is a hugely important part of the functioning of the rule of law. Elected judges would be a disaster for many reasons.
HybridMoments , 25 Mar 2014 07:30
What the UK judiciary gets away with is utterly horrifying. That they palm it off as 'isolated cases' is bad enough, but hiding behind the pretence that people 'don't know the facts' is even worse.

The move to a system of locally elected (ie, accountable) judges is long overdue.

[Mar 21, 2018] Germany's Pivot From Russian Gas Will Be Costly

Pure propaganda. Comments are interesting, though
Notable quotes:
"... When I read: "As X becomes increasingly aggressive, even reckless geopolitically," frankly Russia was not the first country that came to mind. ..."
Mar 21, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
Yves here. I trust readers will be able to filter out the new Cold War assumptions in the piece to focus on the price of Germany's plans. Does anyone have an informed take on how significant the broader economic impact might be?

By Tim Daiss, an oil markets analyst, journalist and author working out of the Asia-Pacific region for 12 years who has covered oil, energy markets and geopolitics for Forbes, Platts, Interfax, NewsBase, Rigzone, and the UK-based Independent (newspaper) as well as providing energy markets analysis for subscription newsletters. Originally published at OilPrice

More problems are mounting for Russia's oil and gas sector. This time it's coming from Germany, which until recently usually gave Russia's energy sector more lead way than the U.S. or other allies.

But now it seems that German Chancellor Angela Merkel has also had enough. On Monday, Bloomberg reported that Merkel's government is seeking to build a liquefied natural gas (LNG) industry in Germany basically from scratch to reduce the nation's dependence on supplies arriving by pipeline from Russia and Norway.

Merkel backs "all initiatives supporting further diversification of gas supply -- whether from different regions or means of transporting gas," said German Economy and Energy Ministry spokeswoman Beate Baron.

The move comes as natural gas resources from the UK and the Netherlands are depleting, and Germany is forced to rely more on Russian gas. Merkel's newly formed coalition has a "coalition contract" that among other policies sets out energy agenda including LNG for the next four years, the Bloomberg reported added.

Germany, for its part, is Europe's largest gas consumer. In 2015, the country consumed 7.2 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) of natural gas, according to U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) data. According to the German energy research group, AG Energiebilanzen, imports account for about 90 percent of Germany's total natural gas supply, while most imports come from three countries: Russia (40 percent of total imports in 2015), Norway (21 percent) and the Netherlands (29 percent).

Moreover, German companies are participating in Russia's controversial Nord Stream 2 pipeline, an expansion of an existing route for gas to flow from Russia to Europe under the Baltic Sea. The U.S., Poland and others have recently condemned the pipeline as a threat to European security.

As Russia becomes increasingly aggressive, even reckless geopolitically, the security threat to not only the EU but to Germany is apparent, causing the country of some 83 million people to do an abrupt energy policy about face.

Germany's LNG pivot also comes as a geopolitical storm between the U.K. and Russia intensifies over an alleged Moscow-orchestrated nerve-agent attack on British soil against what the BBC called a double spy and his daughter.

British Prime Minister Theresa May retaliated last week by expelling Russian diplomats and seeking alternatives to Russian gas, including LNG produced at its new Arctic plant, the Yamal LNG export project. Addressing the UN Security Council last week, the U.K.'s deputy UN ambassador, Jonathan Allen, accused Russia of breaking its obligations under the Convention on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

The U.S. for its part also condemned the nerve agent attack. U.S. ambassador Nikki Haley said that Washington stood in "absolute solidarity" with Britain, citing the "special relationship" between the two countries and saying that Washington would "always be there" for the UK.

Germany's Abrupt LNG Pivot

However, until recently many in Germany accused the U.S., notably President Trump, of using U.S.-sourced LNG as a geopolitical weapon to challenge Russia's decades' old dominance of European gas markets -- an accusation that played perfectly into the hands of Russian energy companies and even Vladimir Putin.

When Trump singed fresh sanctions against Russia's energy sector in August, Uniper -- a German utility and one of Europe's largest energy firms -- said the new sanctions were an American economic move as much as a political one.

"The core reason (for the sanctions) is strategic economic interests, meaning the targeted dominance of the US in energy markets," Uniper CEO Klaus Schaefer told journalists shortly after Trump signed the sanctions bill. Uniper is one of five companies that have invested in Nord Stream 2.

Brigitte Zypries, Germany's economy minister, claimed last year that the sanctions violated international law and said that the EU should take action against the U.S. "Of course we don't want a trade war. But it is important the European Commission now looks into countermeasures," she said. "The Americans can't punish German companies because they have business interests in another country."

Cost Factors Could Impede Pivot

However, any Germany pivot to LNG away from Russian gas will come at a cost. Shipping LNG by one of several suppliers, including Qatar, the U.S. or Angola to name a few, is simply more expensive than Russian piped gas. While Russia already has an extensive pipeline network in place, LNG is more expensive when transportation, liquefaction and regasification costs are added.

Using a Henry Hub gas price of $2.85/MMBtu as a base, Russian energy giant Gazprom recently estimated that adding processing and transportation costs, the price in Europe would reach $6/MMBtu -- a steep markup.

Henry Hub gas prices are currently trading at $2.657/MMBtu. Over the last 52-week period U.S. gas has traded between $2.64/MMBtu and $3.82/MMBtu.

Russian gas sells for around $5/MMBtu in European markets. Moreover, Russian gas exporter Gazprom is also moving away from oil-indexation for gas prices to a European gas hub indexation, which will allow additional price savings and unfortunately for Germany -- an incentive to stick with Russian gas, even if it's geopolitically distasteful.

Meanwhile, Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak said yesterday that Russia is Europe's most flexibly and reliable source of energy that is needed.

Self Affine , , March 21, 2018 at 10:13 am

Its a long long way from a political announcement to an industrial reality. Also, the quote:

Merkel backs "all initiatives supporting further diversification of gas supply" is telling.

Germany does not want to be caught out in a Russia/US energy squeeze while its pursuing an alternative energy path. Nor does Merkel want to overtly pick sides.

Plus if you will note, given the momentum of current German/Russian energy initiatives, I rather doubt that this "announcement" will have a lot of traction in the near future.

The Oilprice site, although very informative is somewhat shrill from day to day (everything is a BIG DEAL).

PlutoniumKun , , March 21, 2018 at 11:22 am

Yes, its a telling quote -- it can basically be paraphrased as 'if someone is willing to pay for these facilities, we would be happy to hear that'. There are quite a few stalled projects for LNG terminals in Europe -- but they are expensive and even the promise of cheap US LNG won't unlock them so long as Russia can supply relatively cheap gas. If European governments want more LNG terminals for security reasons then they'll have to pay for them. Thats not likely to happen, there are far more pressing infrastructural needs.

third time lucky , , March 21, 2018 at 11:39 am

Nimby too. Locating an LNG terminal will be a neat trick to pull off in current fractured political environment.

Watt4Bob , , March 21, 2018 at 10:24 am

Where to begin?

Is anyone considering the possibility that the US's ability to deliver LNG may not exist for long enough to pay the cost of building the infrastructure necessary to use it?

Is anyone factoring in the damage to our environment, including our fresh water when calculating the cost of poking Russia in the eye?

At first glance, this whole play appears short-sighted, at least, probably foolish.

Of course the big oil companies have never gone unrewarded for their fealty to the whims of the MIC, even when any objective analysis finds massive foolishness.

Harry , , March 21, 2018 at 11:23 am

Dont worry, Novatek already delivered a shipment of LNG from the Yamal peninsular to the UK.

I would bet that Nord Stream will not eliminate the need to export across the Ukraine. Undersea pipelines dont have great capacity. But additional marginal pipeline capacity does reduce the bargaining power of the Ukraine. Im sure LNG capacity does the same.

Synoia , , March 21, 2018 at 12:05 pm

Undersea pipelines have as much capacity as the diameter of the pipe.

They have a big enemy.. Anchors.

Scott , , March 21, 2018 at 1:16 pm

And some of that LNG was later exported to Boston.

https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060076897

jsn , , March 21, 2018 at 12:24 pm

We're deep into our malinvestment phase where uneconomic industries are being sustained with monetary policy to prop up an unsustainable status quo.

The question is whether the left can coordinate collective action before the right can start WW3. It will be real events somewhere that cause real change: financialized capitalism with its own hand on the money spigot of fiat money is, with reference to itself, a perpetual motion machine.

It will either be a force of life, or thermodynamics that finally overthrow this machine. The stresses for dramatic external political events are building everywhere.

Watt4Bob , , March 21, 2018 at 2:11 pm

You see what I see.

Nathanael , , March 21, 2018 at 2:47 pm

You're correct about the malinvestment phase.

However, this is where market capitalism excels. As long as there is enough money in the hands of the average person (a major issue), the average person will install solar panels and batteries and heat pumps and buy an EV and say "to hell with you" to the oil, gas, and coal industries.

jsn , , March 21, 2018 at 3:16 pm

Less money is going to those average folks, but local EV is hopeful. Tons of money goes to supporting facking, which in the absence of QE and the spigot of free money for (mal)investors, would not be economical.

LNG ports to receive a fuel with what is approaching negative EROEI are pure mal-investment.

MMT was used to incentivize net positive public goods by Mariner Eccles making the US the richest nation in the world. We're now seeing the global financial cabal use the same tool to despoil real wealth, monetizing it along with trust wherever it can find either. It is an epic of short-termism that will ultimately destroy the money itself by liquidating the real productive social and economic constellations that support it.

Jeff , , March 21, 2018 at 10:37 am

I read the statement as that Germany is looking for a replacement of its Dutch and Norwegian gas sources. As Germany does not want to depend for 100% of its gas from Russia, they do need to look for alternatives.
It is just smart policy not to depend from a single source, for whatever purpose.

PlutoniumKun , , March 21, 2018 at 11:20 am

Dutch and Norwegian gas reserves are in long term decline , so its likely that Russian gas will become a higher proportion of supply in the medium to longer term.

Ignacio , , March 21, 2018 at 10:50 am

Two keys for natural gas markets:

i) the cost of transport is very high and there is a linear relationship between distance and transport costs

ii) both the client and the supplier would like stable long-term contracts to secure investments and supply.

There is always interdependence if you want durable supply.

Constructing some LNG facilities, besides the cost factors mentioned above won't reduce such interdependence by much given that Russia provides 40% of current consumption. Also, Russia migth seek providing NG to fast growing asian markets. I think that Germany is trying to diversify just because Norway, Netherlands, and its own production are declining. I also think that this means that fracking gas in Europe is not seen as an alternative.

I wouldn't say that Germany will "pivot" from russian gas, that is giving too much weigth to potential LNG supplies.

Ignacio , , March 21, 2018 at 10:58 am

I forgot to mention the second pipeline through the baltics. I think Merkel announcement didn't say anything about it. That is also telling

PlutoniumKun , , March 21, 2018 at 11:29 am

Another point is that if the issue is security, it would most likely be more cost effective to build up a buffer in underground storage facilities than building new LNG terminals.

The Rev Kev , , March 21, 2018 at 10:50 am

I could be that Germany is buckling under the pressure of attacks as the US is threatening to sanction European firms involved in the Russian/EU Nord Stream 2 project ( https://www.rt.com/business/421900-us-sanctions-nord-stream-companies/ ) which if true, would mean that the EU would have to ask the permission of Washington in dealings with any countries not to Washington's liking.
The Poles have already built a LNG gas delivery terminal so you would think that Germany would just pipe it in from there unless Germany wanted to build their own terminal so that they would not have to pay Poland any fees as Poland is one of the counties opposing Nord Stream 2.

Poland has already received at least one LNP shipment from the US but the price of the delivery is a state secret apparently.

The Russians could always turn around and sell their cheaper gas to China so no big loss to them. Thing is, it will take a decade to build a fleet of tankers to carry the gas that Germany needs annually as these ships would just be going back and forth like clockwork. Who pays for that? Germany would also need years just to build the LNP port facility to receive these shipments. I believe too that the US export terminal is in the Gulf so tough luck if a hurricane shut down that terminal at any time. Remember, this winter the Russians had to ship two tankers of gas to the US because of shortages so how reliable could a US supply be?

Add up the costs of building the port facility, a fleet of tankers and the infrastructure to deal with it all, then top up with the gas not only being more expensive than the Russian gas but also less reliable and the Germans will have to take a knife to their budget to pay for it all. Trump would have a fit if it was their defense budget so that means the social budget. Good luck with that. One last factor of which I have even less knowledge of is the US gas supply. I believe that it comes from shale deposits aka fracking but I know that these wells deplete rapidly so if true, would suggest that US gas as a supply source may be self limiting over time. I don't think that the economics work out here for Germany somehow.

Julia Versau , , March 21, 2018 at 10:51 am

When I read: "As X becomes increasingly aggressive, even reckless geopolitically," frankly Russia was not the first country that came to mind.

Ignacio , , March 21, 2018 at 11:02 am

I thought exactly the same. What is the author talking about?

kgw , , March 21, 2018 at 10:51 am

Pure propaganda likely written by the Christians-In-Action. Germany , kill itself? Not likely. Astronomical costs.

nervos belli , , March 21, 2018 at 10:52 am

It's not a pivot. The only important thing is North Stream 2: if the US or the transatlantic lobby manages to kill that, then there is a pivot. Otherwise, it's business as usual.

North sea gas is drying up, however we get 40-50% of our gas from there https://www.wingas.com/fileadmin/Wingas/content/05_Rohstoff_Erdgas/woher-bezieht-europa-erdgas-aufkommen_infografik.png

So unless one wants to be ~90% dependent on russian gas, there has to be some alternatives to keep the russians honest. Only realistic way is LNG. So Germany has to build the infrastructure for it to have a credible bargaining position. The marketshare of russian gas will increase over the next few years in any way.

Self Affine , , March 21, 2018 at 10:57 am

Also, I would like to add that the German Press isn't treating this like some sort of revelation.

As everywhere else, if a politician wants to get a little patriotic push on their side, they hold a speech touting "energy independence". Germany is no different in that regard and Merkel needs to appear a bit more nationalistic right now.

Current headlines are all about social issues like immigration, Facebook data breaches, internal politics, etc. No one is obsessing about LNG facilities or things like Brexit.

rd , , March 21, 2018 at 11:14 am

LNG ports on the Mediterranean also make sense as ships could traverse the Suez Canal or the the Atlantic to get there.

visitor , , March 21, 2018 at 3:08 pm

There are major offshore gas fields in the Mediterranean -- on the coast of Cyprus and all the way offshore from Syria to Egypt. Their exploitation is still largely pending resolution of local crises (Turkey vs EU re Cyprus, Israel vs Palestine and Lebanon, in Syria because of war). Once those fields come on line, the need for special-purpose ports to bring in LNG from afar to Europe no longer makes much economic sense.

Besides, Algeria continues to provide gas (and oil) to the EU.

Louis Fyne , , March 21, 2018 at 12:56 pm

nuclear fission. germany already buys a lot of french nuke electricity. might as well cut out the middleman.

not holding my breath. never going to happen though. as even bringing up nuclear fission is third rail of environmentalism

PlutoniumKun , , March 21, 2018 at 1:27 pm

Germany is a major shareholder in the EPR reactor, but isn't building any because its proven far too expensive, much more expensive than domestic renewables.

Its untrue to say that Germany buys a lot of French nuclear energy, imports from France are minor at a net of around 4 terawatt hours a year, similar to the amount of wind energy Germany buys from Denmark. Its dwarfed by the huge renewable sector in Germany which produces over 200 TWh per annum . Germany is actually a net exporter of energy to France in most summers as the inland nuclear plants often go off-line due to water shortages.

James McFadden , , March 21, 2018 at 12:58 pm

"Germany's LNG pivot also comes as a geopolitical storm between the U.K. and Russia intensifies over an alleged Moscow-orchestrated nerve-agent attack on British soil against what the BBC called a double spy and his daughter."

When one thinks about the geopolitical repercussions of this nerve gas attack on $$ for USA LNG, the control of energy supplies to the EU by the USA and its middle east puppets, the quickly identified fingerprint and emotionally charged finger pointing, a complex technical topic to which the general public has general knowledge and therefore must rely on "authorities", the high level of media attention for a relatively minor character, and the ongoing attempts to vilify and isolate Russia -- one has to wonder if this is just another CIA false flag event similar to Iraq WMDs and the Syrian chemical weapons attacks -- another false flag that will eventually fall apart after it has served its purpose. Examined in the light of past and ongoing CIA atrocities (Renditions and torture in Abu Ghraib and Gitmo, droning, MKULTRA, Operation Mongoose, Phoenix Program, Iran-Contra, numerous assassinations and coups -- just to name a few), it seems quite in line with what I would expect from this criminal organization. Not that we can really know the truth at this time, but those who dutifully believe the corporate media on this topic might want to open a skeptical eye. There are likely cover stories within cover stories -- much like cover stories one finds in the Wormwood documentary.

Tobin Paz , , March 21, 2018 at 2:24 pm

This news along with Trudeau's support for Kinder Morgan Canada's Trans Mountain oil/tar sands pipeline expansion should make it clear that the Paris Accords were a cruel joke on humanity. We will keep extracting every single last drop of recoverable oil until we run out of energy to continue or we nuke ourselves.

Nathanael , , March 21, 2018 at 2:45 pm

So, it's easy enough for Germany to pivot away from gas *if* they switch to heating with electricity. However, Merkel refuses to push this. Because Merkel.

[Mar 21, 2018] Linking Scripal poisoning with Litvinenko poisoning

Cue bono in both cases points to British government
"... The widow of poisoned former Russian security officer Aleksandr Litvinenko has denied he worked for the British intelligence service MI6, a claim made by Russian businessman Andrey Lugovoy in Moscow last week. ..."
"... The widow of former Russian FSB officer Aleksandr Litvinenko, who was murdered in London in 2006, admitted that her husband cooperated with the British intelligence services MI5 and MI6. ..."
"... The father of late Russian security officer Aleksandr Litvinenko says he pursued a smear campaign against the Russian government out of grief, but changed his mind after Aleksandr's widow revealed his son had been working for British intelligence. ..."
"... It was Berezovsky and Goldfarb. That's it. Goldfarb knows all about atomic energy. How do you think Aleksandr was first infected with Polonium-210? Why do you think this case has been dragging for so long? Why has there been no court case? Because they don't have anything, and if a real court case were to open, it will become apparent who was behind it!" the man said. ..."
"... Aleksandr Goldfarb is the head of Berezovsky's Civil Liberties' Fund. In the weeks prior and after Litvinenko's death he took the role of an unofficial spokesman for the man, putting the blame for the crime on the Kremlin ..."
"... For those keeping score, Boris Berezovsky was later found hanging from the ceiling of his Ascot mansion. ..."
"... There are many things wrong with the "Putin did it" story. For one, there is no motive , even with Litvinenko being a critic of Russia, he was no threat whatsoever to Putin. The man worked with Chechen terrorists and the Israeli-Russian oligarchs . But assuming that there was a sufficient motive to kill him, think about this: Why would Russia use a very rare, very expensive, and easily traceable radioactive substance to kill him instead of some cheap poison or just shooting him? Why risk smuggling radioactive material into the UK which is an act of war? ..."
"... No experienced mob boss like Berezovsky would be dumb enough to murder an underling in such a manner either. Therefore his death was an accident. It was mostly likely it was a botched smuggling operation . Why was he moving such a dangerous substance? Did he need fast cash? Were they planning to create a dirty bomb? Such a "smoky bomb" would turn the Polonium into powder and kill anyone who ingested it. ..."
"... Traces of Polonium were found on the planes that Litvinenko had been on. So I think we can deduce what happened. He was a mule . The questions remain, why did he have it?, Where did he get it? What was he going to do with it? Why was it in the offices of Berezovsky and Erinsys Ltd (Britain's Blackwater)? ..."
"... Litvinenko was in Israel, where he met Leonid Nevzlin the CEO of Yukos shortly before he died. If you wanted to buy/steal radioactive material that would be the place. What was he negotiating with Nevzlin? We learned Alexander had been an informant in a case that led to the arrest of nine Georgian and Russian Mobsters in Spain, including Alexander Gofstein a lawyer for Yukos who apparently was laundering money ..."
"... The British military Radiation and Chemical Warfare Center is just down the road, so they will have had experts on scene pretty rapidly. Latest local rumor is that it's fentanyl, or some derivative thereof. They had to decontaminate A&E and cancel hospital appointments. ..."
"... The local police and medical personnel are on the ball, I used to know a few. Link to local paper - they are quite good too http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/ ..."
"... Another false flag. MI5 poisons prominent russian 'baddies' so they can blame it on Russia. Makes Russian look bad, great for propaganda. ..."
"... Litvinenko said, "Mario Scaramella poised me," from his death bed. Enough said. This has gonnne on too long. WW# is enviable with a rapturous lying press living and believing in a James Bond geo political spy moves. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_Scaramella ..."
"... Polonium, mystery substance, blah, blah, blah! These James Bond spy thriller techniques smell more of MI6 or CIA than Russia. MI6 and CIA have always been drama queens. ..."
"... Why do drama queen things when you can Seth Rich or Michael Hastings this couple? ..."
"... These are the real professionals. What, if anything happened here is rank amateur- they should study how its done. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/BODIES.php#axzz58vFYg ..."
"... the us and uk intelligence services would not allow you to leave when they are finished with you as you become a liability in tough financial times.the UK killed the bastard like they killed litvinenko. ..."
Mar 05, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Shemp 4 Victory -> newmacroman Mon, 03/05/2018 - 18:47 Permalink

How many times is ZH going to dredge up the discredited fable about Putin ordering Litvinenko's murder?

First, nobody heard Litvinenko's "deathbed confession" except Alexander Goldfarb, who had a grudge against Putin and who worked with other shady Russian exiles in London like Boris Berezovsky.

Litvinenko's wife changed her story. The 2007 version:

The widow of poisoned former Russian security officer Aleksandr Litvinenko has denied he worked for the British intelligence service MI6, a claim made by Russian businessman Andrey Lugovoy in Moscow last week.

The 2011 version:

The widow of former Russian FSB officer Aleksandr Litvinenko, who was murdered in London in 2006, admitted that her husband cooperated with the British intelligence services MI5 and MI6.

From Litvinenko's father in 2012:

The father of late Russian security officer Aleksandr Litvinenko says he pursued a smear campaign against the Russian government out of grief, but changed his mind after Aleksandr's widow revealed his son had been working for British intelligence.

Litvinenko's father later told Scotland Yard who he thought was responsible:

" It was Berezovsky and Goldfarb. That's it. Goldfarb knows all about atomic energy. How do you think Aleksandr was first infected with Polonium-210? Why do you think this case has been dragging for so long? Why has there been no court case? Because they don't have anything, and if a real court case were to open, it will become apparent who was behind it!" the man said.

Boris Berezovsky is an exiled Russian tycoon, who was found guilty of embezzlement in Russia in an absentia trial. He is currently living in Britain, where he enjoys political asylum.

Berezovsky employed Litvinenko, who took part in numerous campaigns the billionaire waged against the Russian government.

Aleksandr Goldfarb is the head of Berezovsky's Civil Liberties' Fund. In the weeks prior and after Litvinenko's death he took the role of an unofficial spokesman for the man, putting the blame for the crime on the Kremlin .

Lots of loose ends and unanswered questions about Litvinenko point to British intelligence and the Russian/Israeli mafia. Which is why Putin must be blamed.

Oh, and by the way, the ricin-tipped umbrella was a Bulgarian way, not a Russian way.

Conscious Reviver -> Shemp 4 Victory Mon, 03/05/2018 - 19:59 Permalink

Thanks for the details, Shemp. For those keeping score, Boris Berezovsky was later found hanging from the ceiling of his Ascot mansion.

sparksmass -> Shemp 4 Victory Mon, 03/05/2018 - 20:32 Permalink

Berezovsky has been dead since 2013

veritas semper -> PrivetHedge Mon, 03/05/2018 - 18:36 Permalink

There are many things wrong with the "Putin did it" story. For one, there is no motive , even with Litvinenko being a critic of Russia, he was no threat whatsoever to Putin. The man worked with Chechen terrorists and the Israeli-Russian oligarchs . But assuming that there was a sufficient motive to kill him, think about this: Why would Russia use a very rare, very expensive, and easily traceable radioactive substance to kill him instead of some cheap poison or just shooting him? Why risk smuggling radioactive material into the UK which is an act of war?

The main thing it is that ANY radioactive substance is traceable to its point of origin.

There is one country which has not signed the nuclear non proliferation treaty and whose radioactive material can nto be traced ,you guessed it:IS>>>RA>>>EL

Alexander Litvinenko who was formerly FSB fled to the UK to avoid court prosecution in Russia, worked for a shady Russian oligarch, Boris Berezovsky. Boris Berezovsky just so happens to be the Israeli-Russian oligarch who lived in London after fleeing the Russian judicial system for a multitude of crimes too long to list. He was on Interpol's most wanted list. Here is the grand prize. After the US and UK press branded Putin with the poisoning despite there being Zero evidence, (something the US is very well known for now) investigators were tracking down the traces of Polonium in the UK. They detected traces of Polonium at Berezovsky's office and residence! Now I do not know about you, but in my place of work, and certainly in my house, I do not have rare radioactive substances. Polonium is not something you just get at the market or pick up by accident walking through the park.

No experienced mob boss like Berezovsky would be dumb enough to murder an underling in such a manner either. Therefore his death was an accident. It was mostly likely it was a botched smuggling operation . Why was he moving such a dangerous substance? Did he need fast cash? Were they planning to create a dirty bomb? Such a "smoky bomb" would turn the Polonium into powder and kill anyone who ingested it.

Traces of Polonium were found on the planes that Litvinenko had been on. So I think we can deduce what happened. He was a mule . The questions remain, why did he have it?, Where did he get it? What was he going to do with it? Why was it in the offices of Berezovsky and Erinsys Ltd (Britain's Blackwater)?

And here comes the best part:

Litvinenko was in Israel, where he met Leonid Nevzlin the CEO of Yukos shortly before he died. If you wanted to buy/steal radioactive material that would be the place. What was he negotiating with Nevzlin? We learned Alexander had been an informant in a case that led to the arrest of nine Georgian and Russian Mobsters in Spain, including Alexander Gofstein a lawyer for Yukos who apparently was laundering money .

You can read the whole story here . https://www.sott.net/article/310728-Litvinenko-wasnt-poisoned-by-Putin-

A good account here too. http://thesaker.is/the-litvinenko-inquiry-londons-absurd-show-trial/

Litvinenko's father said that Berezovsky killed his son.

newmacroman -> veritas semper Mon, 03/05/2018 - 18:49 Permalink

Wasn't Boris suicided by hanging in his London home?

veritas semper -> newmacroman Mon, 03/05/2018 - 19:10 Permalink

Yes. MI5

WillyGroper Mon, 03/05/2018 - 17:25 Permalink

" 33-year-old woman "

again...wink wink

BurningFuld -> WillyGroper Mon, 03/05/2018 - 17:28 Permalink

F E N T A N Y L

serotonindumptruck -> BurningFuld Mon, 03/05/2018 - 17:32 Permalink

Poison has historically been the preferred method of eliminating political opponents.

CRM114 Mon, 03/05/2018 - 17:28 Permalink

The British military Radiation and Chemical Warfare Center is just down the road, so they will have had experts on scene pretty rapidly. Latest local rumor is that it's fentanyl, or some derivative thereof. They had to decontaminate A&E and cancel hospital appointments.

The local police and medical personnel are on the ball, I used to know a few. Link to local paper - they are quite good too http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/

PrivetHedge -> CRM114 Mon, 03/05/2018 - 17:44 Permalink

How convenient. Perhaps they had experts on the scene before there was a problem?

CRM114 -> PrivetHedge Mon, 03/05/2018 - 18:01 Permalink

A No to that one. Not these days, anyway. Back in the Cold War though....

Cloud9.5 Mon, 03/05/2018 - 17:30 Permalink

This is tying up loose ends. Those people who brokered the uranium deal need to be sure their insurance policies are paid up.

PrivetHedge Mon, 03/05/2018 - 17:34 Permalink

Another false flag. MI5 poisons prominent russian 'baddies' so they can blame it on Russia. Makes Russian look bad, great for propaganda.

lurker since 2012 Mon, 03/05/2018 - 18:00 Permalink

Have NOT read. This is the oil, everything you heard and seen pure BS. Litvinenko said, "Mario Scaramella poised me," from his death bed. Enough said. This has gonnne on too long. WW# is enviable with a rapturous lying press living and believing in a James Bond geo political spy moves. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_Scaramella

ALLRIGHT,

I confess, I poisoned them (with a snickers bar) I am two sheets to the wind with my Make glorious Vodka for my successful job. Please inform Vlad it went well.

SHADEWELL -> lurker since 2012 Mon, 03/05/2018 - 18:13 Permalink

Laughable propaganda comrade ah yes Wikipedia a totally "reliable" source, in which anyone can "update" posts

And further - as if this hit man would ever implicate Putin fucking idiot. You are correct about this having gone on for too long. When will Putin be charged with that crime as well as the numerous other "suspicious deaths" Very similar to cuntlery body count. I wonder why that is? hmm

lurker since 2012 -> SHADEWELL Mon, 03/05/2018 - 18:31 Permalink

As everyone knows Langley write and update all Wiki information. So you use them as the Devils advocate. If they reveal this you can take it as a starting point. ( The 'Company wants to pin it on the Russian/Putin ) as they point out Scaramella wanted to be a CIA spy and had been refused, well o course he helped Whack/poisoned Litvinenko . Might get him his dream job he had been after ALL HIS LIFE. Polonium is easy to source as well as it is used extensive throughout South east Asia as a anti static xxxx on weaving machines involved in Clothing manufacturing.

Don't worry agent Shadewell got it all worked out. Look over their.

SHADEWELL -> lurker since 2012 Mon, 03/05/2018 - 19:31 Permalink

Or his final statement? Cemetery in North London . [32] On 25 November, an article attributed to Litvinenko was published by the Mail on Sunday Online entitled Why I believe Putin wanted me dead... [2] In his last statement he said about Putin:

this may be the time to say one or two things to the person responsible for my present condition. You may succeed in silencing me but that silence comes at a price. You have shown yourself to be as barbaric and ruthless as your most hostile critics have claimed. You have shown yourself to have no respect for life, liberty or any civilised value. You have shown yourself to be unworthy of your office, to be unworthy of the trust of civilised men and women. You may succeed in silencing one man but the howl of protest from around the world will reverberate, Mr Putin, in your ears for the rest of your life. May God forgive you for what you have done, not only to me but to beloved Russia and its people. [33]

Investigation

Koba the Dread Mon, 03/05/2018 - 18:49 Permalink

Polonium, mystery substance, blah, blah, blah! These James Bond spy thriller techniques smell more of MI6 or CIA than Russia. MI6 and CIA have always been drama queens.

Why do drama queen things when you can Seth Rich or Michael Hastings this couple?

thebriang Mon, 03/05/2018 - 18:51 Permalink

Another case of Clintonosis.

RedBaron616 Mon, 03/05/2018 - 18:53 Permalink

When you sell out your country by giving the names of lots of Russian spies, why would you be surprised to get what you probably deserve? After all, you are a turncoat, a traitor. You can rail at Putin all you want. You knew the risks in selling out your country. Hard to fault Putin for making an example of you for others to note.

mog Mon, 03/05/2018 - 19:06 Permalink

These are the real professionals. What, if anything happened here is rank amateur- they should study how its done. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/BODIES.php#axzz58vFYg

FGopher Mon, 03/05/2018 - 19:35 Permalink

I wonder if the First Responders who initially were dispatched to what would at first appear to be a drug overdose were also injured by whatever substance was used? The GRU used to tell their recruits: Walk through the door and leave by the chimney.

Davidduke2000 Mon, 03/05/2018 - 20:00 Permalink

the us and uk intelligence services would not allow you to leave when they are finished with you as you become a liability in tough financial times.the UK killed the bastard like they killed litvinenko.

the judge who was in charge of the investigations said"it's PROBABLY the Russians who killed him". I cannot believe a judge would say probably? where is the evidence asshole???

Davidduke2000 Mon, 03/05/2018 - 20:15 Permalink

The brits better not say the Russians did it, because they would have snatched Assange if they were looking for a fight.

[Mar 21, 2018] Arafat and Litvinenko: an Interesting Turn to a Mysterious Story

Highly recommended!
Highly recommended !
"... "Arafat and Litvinenko: an Interesting Turn to a Mysterious Story", http://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2013/11/13/arafat-and-litvinenko-an-interesting-turn-to-a-mysterious-story/ ..."
Notable quotes:
"... "Arafat and Litvinenko: an Interesting Turn to a Mysterious Story", http://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2013/11/13/arafat-and-litvinenko-an-interesting-turn-to-a-mysterious-story/ ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Andreas Schlüter | Mar 15, 2018 9:02:38 AM | 84

And a reminder:

"Arafat and Litvinenko: an Interesting Turn to a Mysterious Story", http://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2013/11/13/arafat-and-litvinenko-an-interesting-turn-to-a-mysterious-story/

[Mar 21, 2018] From Litvinenko to Skripal poisoning: the US intelligence agencies as rogue players.

Notable quotes:
"... "Berezovsky's expatriate friends in Britain and Israel included exiled oligarchs who were subjects of Russian arrest warrants. These included Russian-Israeli businessman Leonid Nevzlin, the former chief executive officer of Yukos Oil, who was the subject of a Russian arrest warrant for murder, embezzlement, and tax evasion. Nevzlin, a former head of the Russian Jewish Congress, resided in Tel Aviv under the protection of the Israeli government. Nevzlin's exiled Russian-Israeli comrades included Vladimir Dubov, a major Yukos shareholder, and wanted oligarch Vladimir Gusinsky. The wanted ex-Yukos officials, who are now allied with the expatriate former chief of Yukos and ex-convict, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, have also been linked to wealthy British businessman Jacob Rothschild. ..."
"... "Much more than circumstantial evidence suggests that Berezovsky, Glushkov, and Patarkatsishvili were murdered by exiled opponents of the Russian government, who also happen to be kingpins in the Eurasian-Israeli mafia that uses Britain as a major base of operations. Britain is favored by these criminal syndicates because of the close working relationship they have with British and American intelligence agencies, as well as with Soros, who maintains a residence in London." ..."
Mar 21, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Abe , March 20, 2018 at 3:24 pm

"One thing about the neo-conservatives, who have thoroughly penetrated the Tory government of British Prime Minister Theresa May and, due to the reality television show savant nature of Donald Trump, are rapidly filling as many vacancies in the US administration as possible, is that they are consistent. Neocons, who make no secret of their desire for major military conflagrations, have dusted off an old playbook with regard to the nerve agent poisoning of Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury, England. The convoluted charges made by the British government bear all the hallmarks of the Polonium-210 radiation poisoning of ex-Russian intelligence agent Alexander Litvinenko, who died in London in 2006.

"In June 2008, the British government conceded that the government of British Labor Prime Minister Tony Blair concocted and exaggerated claims about Russia's involvement in the Litvinenko poisoning in 2006. Apparently, the present government of Mrs. May believes rational people have no memories of what transpired in Britain twelve years ago.

"The British intelligence services, which had their own relationship with Litvinenko, could no longer manage to suppress overwhelming evidence that the poisoning of Litvinenko was the result of a plot by anti-Vladimir Putin criminal syndicates based in Britain, Israel, Ukraine, and Poland to embarrass the Russian government.

"Suspicions about the role of the exiled Russian-Israeli criminal syndicates in the poisoning of Litvinenko, including that which was headed by Litvinenko's friend, wanted Russo-Israeli oligarch Boris Berezovsky, re-surfaced after former Russian Prime Minister Yegor Gaidar became violently ill after eating breakfast at a conference he was attending in Dublin, Ireland. Ireland's banking secrecy laws has made it a favorite location for the Eurasian-Israeli Mafia.

"Berezovsky's own suspicious death in March 2013 discovery of Berezovsky's body in his Ascot estate in England suggested that the anti-Russian crime syndicates, which work closely with hedge fund billionaire troublemaker George Soros and the Central Intelligence Agency, eliminated Berezovsky because he was about to reveal the nature of the syndicates to the Russian government. Most media reports coming out of Britain, at the time, claimed that Berezovsky died from natural causes. A few others suggested suicide or murder. Interestingly, Berezovsky had recently received medical treatment in Israel.

"Berezovsky's expatriate friends in Britain and Israel included exiled oligarchs who were subjects of Russian arrest warrants. These included Russian-Israeli businessman Leonid Nevzlin, the former chief executive officer of Yukos Oil, who was the subject of a Russian arrest warrant for murder, embezzlement, and tax evasion. Nevzlin, a former head of the Russian Jewish Congress, resided in Tel Aviv under the protection of the Israeli government. Nevzlin's exiled Russian-Israeli comrades included Vladimir Dubov, a major Yukos shareholder, and wanted oligarch Vladimir Gusinsky. The wanted ex-Yukos officials, who are now allied with the expatriate former chief of Yukos and ex-convict, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, have also been linked to wealthy British businessman Jacob Rothschild.

"Berezovsky ran from exile a major support network for Chechen terrorists. One of their leaders, Ahmed Zakayev, was a close associate of Berezovsky and Litvinenko.

"Just like Litvinenko, Yulia Skripal had her own reported connections to Russian and Western intelligence services, suggesting that she, like Litvinenko, had embarked on a dangerous life as a double or triple agent. Yulia Skripal worked for the 'information center' at the US embassy in Moscow and at the Holiday Inn in Southampton in England. Hotel jobs are a preferred 'non-official cover' position for the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI-6). Until his arrest by Russian authorities, Sergei Skripal was a paid agent for MI-6. In 2010, he was given asylum in Britain after a major spy swap between the United States and Russia.

"The nerve agent reportedly used on Skripal and his daughter was a 'Novichok' ('Newcomer'), one of a series of binary agents allegedly developed in the Soviet Union during the Cold War. These nerve agents were also apparently stockpiled at the British biological and chemical warfare research facility at Porton Down, a mere eight miles from Salisbury, where the Skripals took ill.

"But the existence of Novichok is, itself questionable. Claims about Novichok originally came from Vil Mirzayanov, a Soviet chemical weapons scientist who claimed to have invented Novichok at a facility in the Uzbek Soviet Socialist Republic. In 1994, Mirzayanov fled to the United States, where he came under the control of the CIA. In 2016, Dr. Robin Black, the chief of the Detection Laboratory in Porton Down, published an academic paper that questioned the veracity of Mirzayanov's Novichok claims.

"The poisoning of the Skripals was followed shortly by the death in London of Berezovsky's longtime business colleague and friend Nikolai Glushkov. British police called Glushkov's death 'suspicious,' citing as the cause 'compression to the neck.' Berezovsky died as the result of a hanging, believed by police to be a 'suicide.' Radioactive traces of the Polonium-210 used to poison Litvinenko were traced to Berezovsky's office at 7 Down Street, in London's Mayfair district. In 2008, Badri Patarkatsishvili, Berezovsky's Georgian-Israeli business partner, collapsed and died at his home a mere 15 miles from Berezovsky's English estate. The death of the 52-year old was determined by authorities to be the result of a 'heart attack.'

"Much more than circumstantial evidence suggests that Berezovsky, Glushkov, and Patarkatsishvili were murdered by exiled opponents of the Russian government, who also happen to be kingpins in the Eurasian-Israeli mafia that uses Britain as a major base of operations. Britain is favored by these criminal syndicates because of the close working relationship they have with British and American intelligence agencies, as well as with Soros, who maintains a residence in London."

Déjà Vu with British Poison Allegations Against Russia By Wayne Madsen: https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/03/20/deja-vu-with-british-poison-allegations-against-russia.html

[Mar 21, 2018] An insane anti-Putin propaganda campaign in the West helped Russian people to learn their lesson: another Yeltsin or Gorbachev in Russia are now highly unlikely. In fact, the West will regret the day Putin is gone.

Mar 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

yurivku , Next New Comment March 21, 2018 at 12:53 pm GMT

@jilles dykstra

" As far as we all know now are quite hard times to Russia and to the world as a whole. "

Why do we have these hard times ?
Could it be globalisation, western greed, and western aggression ?

Well, probably it can be more clear for those who are attacking and humiliating Russia in all directions? The West-ZUS-UK

But I think it's just an agony of Empire seeing the world order is about to change. And yes it's "western greed" which have a "western aggression" as a consequence.

The "globalisation" actually IS that world order which the West trying to establish. Russia in all times in all its internal structure was a subject of annexation and submission. But we never agreed and never will do it, until alive. The West is too stupid to get that simple thing to know and leave us to live as we are about to.

[Mar 21, 2018] Considering the DNC machine rigged the Democratic primaries and derailed Bernie Sanders' run, and considering the entire Establishment came out in force to defeat Trump (e.g. Donna Brazile admitting she shared debate questions with Clinton campaign..... leaked audios, false accusations,....which are still ongoing.....), whatever shenanigans Putin campaign was involved in seem like the proverbial nothingburger

Mar 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

CalDre , Next New Comment March 21, 2018 at 4:56 pm GMT

@Avery

Aside from the obvious legalized bribery (Citizens United), the absolute control of the corrupt 2-party system, the oligarchic and utterly undemocratic mass media, etc., we also had the case in 2000 that a bunch of unelected dictators-for-life "decided" the US election, clearly unlawfully. Bush vs. Gore.

Yes, US is in no position to be lecturing anybody about "democracy". But US is not short on chutzpah in any political realm.

Anonymous Disclaimer , Next New Comment March 21, 2018 at 4:17 pm GMT
If elections resulted in real change, Yankees wouldn't have them. All theater for the zombies, aka the voting class. Only zombies would argue over the merits of the candidates. The US needs very little from its citizens. These includes obedience, widespread ignorance and the unquestioned belief they live in a Democracy because voting happens.

The best slaves are the ones that lack the intelligence to recognize their own slavery. The happiest slaves know that voting is a rigged sham but don't care because the right master leads them.

Anon Disclaimer , Next New Comment March 21, 2018 at 3:58 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

Anon from TN

Now, that I believe. Due to dismal school system (purely parochial, no national standards, local boards full of ignoramuses decide what kids are taught in school) too many Americans sincerely believe that the world consists of three roughly equal parts: Main street, out-of-town, and overseas. I guess the election results in the last few decades show this clearly.

jilles dykstra , Next New Comment March 21, 2018 at 3:36 pm GMT
@Twodees Partain

Alas, I stayed with USA friends, well educated middle class, where CNN was the only 'news' source.
Three other USA acquaintances I visited in their homes, cannot remember having seen a newspaper other than a local one about marriages and funerals.

The USA reminded me of the Peking court, that, when British warships were reported on the coast, responded with 'there had been so many pirates already'.

In the Badlands, in a very small café, I identified myself as Dutch, from Holland, Netherlands. When all this did not ring bell I mentioned Europe, the first time in my life. This was understood.

Anon Disclaimer , Next New Comment March 21, 2018 at 3:24 pm GMT
@RobinG

Anon from TN
Maybe I overestimate American citizens (I work at a top-rate University and communicate mostly with faculty and grad students), but I'd like to come to their defense. CNN (as well as FOX news, NYT, and other MSM) represent the views of the lower half of US citizens by IQ. As far as I can tell, blatant lies of Western propaganda achieved among the people with brains the same result as the Soviet propaganda: even if they state something truthful for a change, people would doubt that.

RobinG , Next New Comment March 21, 2018 at 3:07 pm GMT
@Twodees Partain

You're truly delusional if you think CNN does NOT represent average American thinking, at least a large paart of it. Last week I suffered through a luncheon of 5 mature adults extolling Rachel Maddow. Sickening.

[Mar 21, 2018] The coma patients at the service of Her Majesty

Notable quotes:
"... Well, the party lime is pretty different: "Treat Russia Like the Terrorist It Is. Whether the Skripal poisoning can be conclusively pinned on Moscow is beside the point." https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-03-09/u-k-spy-poisoning-treat-russia-like-the-terrorist-it-is ..."
"... The fact that neither Putin personally nor Russia benefits from the death of Skripal is obvious to any sane person. ..."
"... In addition, statements that gas called "Novichok could be made only in Russia is a known lie. This poison was created forty years ago in the USSR, so to have this gas can, at a minimum, all countries of the former Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. The inventor of the gas has fled to the US, and the chemical composition of the gas is known and now it can be manufactured it any relatively developed country. ..."
"... It would be possible not to poison Skripal by gas, but simply to strike on the head by the bust of Dzerzhinsky. It would be the same level of evidence, of the guilt of the FSB, the KGB successor of the successor of the VChK. ..."
"... Basically, we have a political elite who needs an enemy to distract their own people from what they are doing and oh, do they miss the Soviet Union. ..."
Mar 21, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Tiktaalik, , March 20, 2018 at 5:50 am

Well, the party lime is pretty different: "Treat Russia Like the Terrorist It Is. Whether the Skripal poisoning can be conclusively pinned on Moscow is beside the point." https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-03-09/u-k-spy-poisoning-treat-russia-like-the-terrorist-it-is
James from Durham ,, March 20, 2018 at 8:13 am
I'm a socialist. I don't understand how a conservative is getting this so right! There is a mad rush to judgment and anyone who wants to ask questions is getting accused of being unpatriotic.
rus_programmer ,, March 20, 2018 at 10:11 am
Quite a sensible article. The fact that neither Putin personally nor Russia benefits from the death of Skripal is obvious to any sane person.

In addition, statements that gas called "Novichok could be made only in Russia is a known lie. This poison was created forty years ago in the USSR, so to have this gas can, at a minimum, all countries of the former Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. The inventor of the gas has fled to the US, and the chemical composition of the gas is known and now it can be manufactured it any relatively developed country.

It would be possible not to poison Skripal by gas, but simply to strike on the head by the bust of Dzerzhinsky. It would be the same level of evidence, of the guilt of the FSB, the KGB successor of the successor of the VChK.

Serge ,, March 20, 2018 at 11:36 am
At the end of 1980s there was a project started by KGB supposed (1) to detect possible channels of security leakage, and (2) to begin spreading misinformation to potential adversaries. Different names were used to test different security leaks. The name "NOVICHOK" used to identify misinformation given to one of suspects, Vil Mirzayanov who was not chemist but rather a clerk. Very soon this security leakage was detected, and tons of other misinformation supplied to Mirzayanov, who was immediately secretly discharged from access to any real project. Mirzayanov was allowed to publish this fake info in NYT (around 1992-95?), and then to escape from Russia in 1995.

Since that time NATO has spent about $10 billions to develop protection tools against this fake "NOVICHOK"

P.S. The Russian word NOVICHOK stands for "a newbie"; from Russian grammar point of view, there is no chance such word to be assigned to any chemical weapon. It was assigned to Mirzayanov who was "a newbie" to this sort of projects at that time.

mark_be ,, March 20, 2018 at 12:43 pm
Cui bono: every murder of a Russian dissident/defector/oligarch/critical journalist, cannot possibly have happened on Putin's orders or with his tacit approval, because it reflects badly on Russia.

So, we have two possible explanations: some Western intelligence agency is murdering those people, probably without the knowledge of their own government (you'd have think that someone in elected office would have stopped such a programme by now); or the Russian Putin opposition is killing its own people, both in Russia and abroad. If the goal of such an operation is the destabilization of the Putin regime through Western sanctions, it is obviously not working.

You say cui bono, I say Occam's razor. Putin takes out those who might threaten him, raises his popularity, the sanctions are used to cover up his own disastrous economical policies, and in the end nothing changes.

b. ,, March 20, 2018 at 12:58 pm
We *knew* Iraq had no nukes, and we knew that the Bush administration lied, and we knew that "WMD" is the kind of BS we make up when there are no nukes.

Buchanan is not arguing in good faith. What Maine, Tonkin and WMD are about is *lies*, lies in service of criminal acts of aggression, lies to facilitate a premeditated violation of the Constitution as well as international law.

That is frankly a more important issue than the – justified and necessary – doubts regarding the attempted Skripal assassination and the motives behind it.

This is also true of an ongoing campaign employing drones – some controlled by CIA illegal combatants – and kill teams to implement collective punishment and ideological cleansing by means of sustained assassination – based on "signatures" provided by the likes of Google or Booz Allen. The US has no standing to judge the assassination attempts of others, just as our government can no longer meaningfully speak out on aggressive acts of war, collective punishment, and torture. A house divided cannot stand for anything.

Will Harrington ,, March 20, 2018 at 1:19 pm
Emil Bogdan

You say that the burden of proof is on the accused? That works in many parts of the world, but I hope that we here in the US have had a better standard of Justice. The burden of proof falls upon the accuser, in this case Britain. There is no ther standard that America should accept if we are to remain true to American principals. Not that I expect that our current oligarchy will care about principals.

SteveM ,, March 20, 2018 at 1:24 pm
"Cui bono?"

Exactly. Putin's long term strategy is an integrated Pan-Eurasian economic architecture in which Europe would be a major customer segment. That is why the EAEU was stood up by Russia and the BRI stood up by China. With supporting investment platforms like the AIIB to enable the initiatives.

Given that objective, why would Russia/Putin seek to totally wreck its relationship with Europe? More importantly what would be the motive and objectives for Russia to attack Poland and the Baltic Republics – the fear-monger threats du jour? When an overrun of Poland would create 30+ million subversive malcontents that Russia would have to govern, and when there are only minority ethnic Russian populations in the Baltics?

The driving force behind the illogical and incoherent demonization of Russia is the Washington War Party that froths up the political environment with the militarized fear-mongering. Because as Fran Macadam notes, there's Big Money in it. And the Neocon war-monger mouthpieces need some Big Enemies to keep themselves relevant, busy and living very large on the $200K – $600K salaries they collect at the bought off Think Pimp Tanks.

A crazed U.S. foreign policy that has been completely militarized is a train wreck waiting to happen. And us taxpayers will yet again be stuck with the bills to clean up the wreckage.

Will Harrington ,, March 20, 2018 at 1:25 pm
John S

Sovietologists? Now this, more than anything else, explains the reflexive anti-Russia hysteria. Who cares what historians dealing with the twentieth century Soviet Union think about current events? Historians provide useful insight, yes, but that does not mean they are conversant with current events. What you are doing is throwing in a fear laden buzzword. Basically, we have a political elite who needs an enemy to distract their own people from what they are doing and oh, do they miss the Soviet Union.

ScottA ,, March 20, 2018 at 1:53 pm
Our leaders are enthusiastic about being aggressive with the Russians, but the America Empire has a problem attracting enough volunteers to join the military.

For example, the Air Force has a shortage of 2,000 pilots and the Navy has a shortage of mechanics that they need to work on their on their aircraft.

Minnesota Mary ,, March 20, 2018 at 2:39 pm
The U.S. and Britain showed more respect to Joseph Stalin, the Butcher, than it has shown to Putin. The demonization of Putin in all the mainstream media outlets is the tip-off to me that Putin must be a pretty good guy doing some good things for Russia.

"If the world hates you know that it has hated me first. If the world loves you it is because you belong to the world." -- Jesus Christ

Tiktaalik ,, March 20, 2018 at 3:09 pm
>>Given the poison used it means one to two things -- either it was Russian secret services or the Russians have lost control over their poisons. Either one is a nasty thought.

Why? It was presumably created 40 years ago. Pretty much to time for information to spread around.
E.g., Kim's brother was presumably (again) poisoned by VX. Does it mean that it was MI-6? It's a British invention after all.

In any case, this story stinks, pardon for a word pun. A 'military grade agent' and no casualties. How could it be?

>>Why do it? To prove they can. To prove that no matter where you go they can get you -- that there is no safety.

Safety from what? This guy was non-entity, nobody knew him. More importantly, he has been already punished and pardoned, so double no sense.

>>I am sure Gary Kasparov is feeling a bit worried right now and Bill Browder is thinking of moving somewhere new.

Well, I'd suspect that Rodchenko and Khodorkovskiy are more evident sacrificial targets.

>>You ask Cui bono? Who do you think?

Western secret services, non?

EarlyBird ,, March 20, 2018 at 3:52 pm
Pat asks important questions. Unless we ever see the "evidence" to which Boris Johnson refers, or other direct evidence that this hit (and others) in Britain was directed by the Kremlin, it's worth continuing to ask them.

"Who benefits?" Indeed, it could be rogue Russian agents or Western agents attempting to further drive a wedge between the West and Russia.

But it could also be Putin signalling that the Russia which held onto traitorous spies between 2006 and 2010 is over.
It could be him simply trying to show that he can reach people inside the West, a pure flexing of muscle, a warning to future would-be traitors and Western governments. It could be to make America's allies nervous about Putin's relationship with his American puppet, Trumpolini. It could be just Putin sowing chaos and attempting to create discord among Western governments.

Skepticism about the latest pronouncements is valid, but Occam's Razor still applies. If it growls like a Russian bear and kills like a Russian bear

Light Horse Harry ,, March 20, 2018 at 3:58 pm
Who could be so phillistine as to suggest, on the eve of the World Cup, that Premier Andropov's KGB protege', Major Putin, would one day stoop to whacking a traitorous defector from the Party Line ?

The mind is repelled !

Now pass the polonium popcorn.

Tiktaalik ,, March 20, 2018 at 4:47 pm
>>Skepticism about the latest pronouncements is valid, but Occam's Razor still applies. If it growls like a Russian bear and kills like a Russian bear

Occam's Razor, my backside. Some guys from MI-5 tried to kill him like they killed David Kelly and Gareth Williams before. It's as credible as it gets, exactly the same amount of evidence.

Ken Zaretzke ,, March 20, 2018 at 5:00 pm
"But what is missing here is the Kremlin's motive for the crime."

Whereas rogue agents in the CIA or M16 would have a strong motive, by tarnishing the image of Russia and Putin.

sianka ,, March 20, 2018 at 5:28 pm
About the coma patients at the service of Her Majesty http://www.youtube.com/embed/g3CQ_4KEehw
Kuzmich Mar , , March 20, 2018 at 6:15 pm
Russia is guilty always. Russia is guilty in principle. If Russia is innocent, then it is guilty that she is innocent.

[Mar 21, 2018] The British Foreign Minister Boris Johnson now admits that Porton Down (illegally?) had 'Novichok' agents BEFORE the incident happened

Notable quotes:
"... So a non lethal dose of nerve agent, as would be possible with a handling error, a trace from an imperfect seal perhaps of a small sample, happens within a few miles of a facility, the only facility in Britain, that has quantities of that particular nerve agent on hand. If you can believe Boris Johnson. One victim is connected to the false flag 'chemical attacks' occurring in Syria. I wonder how good security really is at Porton Down? ..."
Mar 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

b , Mar 21, 2018 10:29:33 AM | 9

The British Foreign Minister Boris Johnson now admits that Porton Down (illegally?) had 'Novichok' agents BEFORE the incident happened.
Deutsche Welle: You argue that the source of this nerve agent, Novichok, is Russia. How did you manage to find it out so quickly? Does Britain possess samples of it?

BJ: Let me be clear with you When I look at the evidence, I mean the people from Porton Down, the laboratory

DW: So they have the samples

BJ: They do. And they were absolutely categorical and I asked the guy myself, I said, "Are you sure?" And he said there's no doubt.

No doubt = "of a type developed by Russia" NOT= "made by Russia"!

I updated the piece above with the BJ quotes.

TomGard , Mar 21, 2018 10:55:27 AM | 10
@ b | 9

Not illegally, as one Prof Alastair Hay pointed out yesterday http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43431537
He is right, I read it up in the CWC statutes.

Phillip O'Reilly , Mar 21, 2018 10:59:18 AM | 12
So a non lethal dose of nerve agent, as would be possible with a handling error, a trace from an imperfect seal perhaps of a small sample, happens within a few miles of a facility, the only facility in Britain, that has quantities of that particular nerve agent on hand. If you can believe Boris Johnson. One victim is connected to the false flag 'chemical attacks' occurring in Syria. I wonder how good security really is at Porton Down?
Anon , Mar 21, 2018 11:21:20 AM | 15
The moron speaks again: Timing of Salisbury attack is linked to Russian election -- Boris Johnson (WATCH LIVE@RT)
somebody , Mar 21, 2018 11:36:53 AM | 16
If the stuff is from Porton Down and they know it, that would explain the desperate disinformation going on.
the pessimist , Mar 21, 2018 12:51:36 PM | 29
Blocks for Boris has invoked Hitler w/regard to the world cup. The ugliness seems to have no limits. Perhaps this was the intended target.
the pessimist , Mar 21, 2018 12:53:00 PM | 30
Bloviator for Boris
james , Mar 21, 2018 12:54:01 PM | 31
@ the pessimist.. it shows one how low Britain has sunk on the world stage... from former empire to clear has been...

[Mar 21, 2018] It's strange that British police did not find balalaika on the scene. Replay of Iraq WDM hoax on a new level

First of all British did have the poison they detected. Otherwise they would be unable to detect "Novichok" (if there was such substance and this is not just a myth).
Notable quotes:
"... Pat asks, Cui bono? I would say rogue players in the deep state right here in the US along with their brethren in the military/industrial/intelligence complex. ..."
"... Of course, that makes me a conspiracy theorist. But I actually saw war as a young man based upon lies. By the way, in the lead-up to the illegal invasion of Iraq, I told people at work that this war would eventually rival the military blunder in Vietnam. The propaganda reminded me so much of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution. They all laughed at me and essentially said I was an old Vietnam veteran living in the past. They aren't laughing now. ..."
Mar 21, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

g e hoeflinger March 20, 2018 at 6:40 pm

"We went to war in Iraq in 2003 to disarm it of weapons of mass destruction we later discovered Saddam Hussein did not really have."

Which was known at the time, but was trumped up to give GWB and excuse foir a fast war at election time.

George Hoffman , , March 21, 2018 at 8:27 am
I served as a medical corpsman in Vietnam and ever since then I have been a card-carrying skeptic of my own country. But I saw the human face of a war based upon lies and propaganda that became the worst foreign policy debacle in our nation's history. If we would get into a shooting war over this affair, we would have to bring back the draft to prosecute this war against Russia. Then the proverbial "merde" would definitely hit the fan.

And when Kim Sung Un assassinated his half-brother in Malaysia, the VX nerve agent was used. The UK invented this agent in the 1950s at its government laboratory. But not one nation blamed Great Britain as the culprit.

Pat asks, Cui bono? I would say rogue players in the deep state right here in the US along with their brethren in the military/industrial/intelligence complex.

Of course, that makes me a conspiracy theorist. But I actually saw war as a young man based upon lies. By the way, in the lead-up to the illegal invasion of Iraq, I told people at work that this war would eventually rival the military blunder in Vietnam. The propaganda reminded me so much of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution. They all laughed at me and essentially said I was an old Vietnam veteran living in the past. They aren't laughing now.

[Mar 21, 2018] Russian Scientists Explain 'Novichok' - High Time For Britain To Come Clean on how good security really is at Porton Down?

Notable quotes:
"... Associated Press ..."
"... DW: You argue that the source of this nerve agent, Novichok, is Russia. How did you manage to find it out so quickly? Does Britain possess samples of it? ..."
"... DW: So they have the samples ..."
"... The "White Helmets" propaganda group in Syria was founded and is run by the former(?) British army intelligence officer James Le Mesurier with British and U.S. government money. His former(?) colleague de Bretton-Gordon is running the parallel Syria chemical weapon scam. Both profit from their government financed operations. ..."
"... Other British agents involved in the Skripal case are Pablo Miller who recruited Skripal for the MI6. He was a friend of Skripal, also lived in Salisbury and worked for Christopher Steele, the former(?) MI6 agent who produced the 'dirty dossier' about Donald Trump for the Clinton campaign. Both are involved with Russian mafia emigres in Britain like Boris Berezovski and the deceased Alexander Litvinenko who's father says that he was killed by an MI6 or CIA guy. ..."
"... How could the British government be sure of "Russian" involvement within a week and even expel Russian diplomats when the primary chemical experts on the issue will need three weeks for their first analyses and the British police predicts a several months long investigation? ..."
"... Moon of Alabama ..."
"... I doubt the MSM will let the public know that NoviChok was a term coined by a ex-soviet scientist, perhaps to sell a book, after he moved to the US. In general the western public will continue think the Russians researched and produced this deadly stuff called Novichok and were lying about doing so. Perception management. ..."
"... So a non lethal dose of nerve agent, as would be possible with a handling error, a trace from an imperfect seal perhaps of a small sample, happens within a few miles of a facility, the only facility in Britain, that has quantities of that particular nerve agent on hand. If you can believe Boris Johnson. One victim is connected to the false flag 'chemical attacks' occurring in Syria. I wonder how good security really is at Porton Down? ..."
"... "Novichok" is not the name of the CW, but the code name of a KGB disinformation operation -- per Andrey Lazarchuk here (at end of Shamir post) ..."
"... When Russia were asking for evidence and pushing for an OPCW investigation, this was just stalling according to the Brits. When the Uk gave their evidence to OPCW, they had no blood test results, no documented data of traces of poison or any other tests. ..."
"... Relying purely on propaganda to push it through, perhaps relying on bigger things happening in Syria to pull attention away and prevent any serious investigation taking place. ..."
"... Boris and May seem to be no more than extremely enthusiastic cannon fodder in this game, now having to see the narrative through on their own. ..."
"... A very strongly worded statement ..."
"... The "attack" on the Skripals is described as a "gross folly" by Russia and as a hoax by numerous writers and others like myself. The more the Outlaw US Empire and its vassals try to smear Russia, the more their credibility diminishes. Combined with the Cambridge Analytica revelations, the plan to demonize Russia has grossly failed as the real demons get revealed. ..."
"... "Bypassing the official diplomatic channels, Russian Chief of Staff General Valeri Guerassimov contacted his US counterpart General Joseph Dunford to inform him of his fear of a false flag chemical attack in Ghouta. Dunford took this information vey seriously, and alerted US Defense Secretary General Jim Mattis, who referred the matter to President Donald Trump. In view of the Russian insistence that this piece of foul play was being prepared without the knowledge of the Pentagon, the White House asked the Director of the CIA, Mike Pompeo, to identify those responsible for the conspiracy.".. ..."
"... "We do not know the result of this internal enquiry, but President Trump acquired the conviction that his Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, was implicated. The Secretary of State was immediately asked to interrupt his official journey in Africa and return to Washington.". ..."
"... Don Bacon @13 linked to a piece at UNZ Revue and the note by Andrey Lazarchuk at the bottom of the article which is interesting. According to that, Mirzayanov was Identified as a leak early on, and then used to transmit false information. It is noticeable that Mirzayanov Used a letter plus three digits for the designation code of the chemicals, whereas the scientist that actually worked on developing new compounds uses a letter plus four digits for the designation codes. ..."
"... The compounds Mirzayanov has in his book, A-232 and so forth, were most likely genuine compounds that had been discarded by the soviet scientists, given a new designation code and a name for the group and fed to Mirzayan. ..."
Mar 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Russian Scientists Explain 'Novichok' - High Time For Britain To Come Clean (Updated)

A week ago we asked if 'Novichok' poisons are real. The answer is now in: It is 'yes' and 'no'. Several Russian scientist now say that they once researched and developed lethal poisons but they assert that other countries can and have copied these. 'Novichok', they say, is a just western propaganda invention. They see the British accusations as a cynical plot against Russia. The people who push the 'Novichok' accusations have political and commercial interests.

The British Prime Minister Theresa May insinuated that the British-Russian double agent Sergej Skripal and his daughter Yulia, who collapsed on March 4 on a public bench in Salisbury, were affected by a 'Russian' nerve agent:

It is now clear that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia . It is part of a group of nerve agents known as Novichok .

Theresa May's claims are highly questionable.


Maria Zakharova, spokeswomen of the Russian Foreign Ministry: "'Novichok' has never been used in the USSR or in Russia as something related to the chemical weapon research" - bigger

A highly potent nerve agent would hurt anyone who comes in contact with it. But the BBC reported that a doctor who administered first aid to the collapsed Yulia Skripal for 30 minutes was not affected at all . Another doctor, Steven Davies who heads the emergence room of the Salisbury District Hospital, wrote in a letter the London Times :

"... no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury and there have only been ever been three patients with significant poisoning."

The name 'Novichok' comes from a book written by Vil Mirzanyanov, a 1990s immigrant to the U.S. from the former Soviet Union. It describe his work at Soviet chemical weapon laboratories and lists the chemical formulas of a new group of lethal substances.

AFP interviewed the author of the 'Novichok' book about the Salisbury incident:

Mirzayanov, speaking at his home in Princeton, New Jersey, said he is convinced Russia carried it out as a way of intimidating opponents of President Vladimir Putin.
...
The only other possibility, he said, would be that someone used the formulas in his book to make such a weapon .

"Russia did it", says Mirzanyanov, "OR SOMEONE WHO READ MY BOOK".


1 , 2

A 'Novichok' nerve agent plays a role in the current seasons of the British-American spy drama Strike Back which broadcasts on British TV. Theresa May might have watched this clip (vid) from the series. Is it a source of her allegations?

The Russian government rejects the British allegations and demands evidence which Britain has not provided. Russia joined the Chemical Weapon Convention in 1997. By 2017 it had destroyed all its chemical weapons and chemical weapon production facilities. Under the convention only very limited amounts of chemical weapon agents are allowed to be held in certified laboratories for defense research and testing purposes. The U.S. has such laboratories at Fort Detrick in Frederick, Maryland , the British lab is in Porton Down, a few miles from Salisbury. The Russian lab is in Shikhany in the southern Saratov Oblast. The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) audits these laboratories and their declared stocks "down to the milligram level".

The spokeswoman for the Russian Foreign Ministry and famous high heels folk dancer (vid) Maria Zakharova explains in a TV interview (vid, English subtitles) that 'Novichok' was not and is not the name of any Soviet or Russian program. The word was introduced in the "west" simply because it sounded Russian.

Western media claimed that Vil Miranzayanov is the developer of the 'Novichok' chemicals. It turns out that this is not the case. Interviews with two retired Russian chemists, both published only yesterday, tell the real story. The Russia news agency RIA Novostni talked with Professor Leonid Rink ( machine translation ):

Did you have anything to do with creating what the British authorities call the "Novice"?

- Yes. This was the basis of my doctoral dissertation.

At that time I worked in Shikhany, in the branch of GosNIIOKhT (State Research Institute of Organic Chemistry and Technology, during Soviet times was engaged in the development of chemical weapons), was a leading researcher and head of the laboratory.

Professor Rink says that:

The Associated Press summarizes other parts of the interview with Professor Rink:

Rink told Russia's state RIA Novosti news agency Tuesday that Britain and other western nations easily could have synthesized the nerve agent after chemical expert Vil Mirzayanov emigrated to the United States and revealed the formula.

Echoing Russian government statements, Rink says it wouldn't make sense for Moscow to poison Sergei Skripal, a military intelligence officer who spied for Britain, because he was a used asset "drained" by both Russia and Britain.

He claims Britain's use of the name Novichok for the nerve agent is intended to convince the public that Russia is to blame.

The English-Russian magazine The Bell interviews another Russian scientists involved in the issue:

The Bell was able to find and speak with Vladimir Uglev, one of the scientists who was involved in developing the nerve agent referred to as "Novichok". [...] Vladimir Uglev, formerly a scientist with Volsk branch of GOSNIIOKHT ("State Scientific-Research Institute for Organic Chemistry and Technology"), which developed and tested production of new lethal substances since 1972, spoke for the first time about his work as early as the 1990s. He left the institute in 1994 and is now retired.

– The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs insists that there was no research nor development of any substance called "Novichok", not in Russia, nor in the USSR. Is that true?

– In order to make it easier to understand the subject matter, I will not use the name "Novichok" which has is now commonly used by everyone to describe those four substances which were conditionally assigned to me to develop over a period of several years. Three of these substances are part of the "Foliant" program, which was led by Pyotr Kirpichev, a scientist with GOSNIIOKHT (State Scientific-Research Institute for Organic Chemistry and Technology). The first substance of a new class of organophosphorous chemical agents, I will call it "A-1972", was developed by Kirpichev in 1972. In 1976, I developed two substances: "B-1976" and "C-1976". The fourth substance, "D-1980", was developed by Kirpichev in the early 1980s. All of these substances fall under the group referred to as "Novichkov", but that name wasn't given to the substances by GOSNIIOKHT.

All four chemical agents are "FOS" or organophosphorous compounds which have a nerve paralyzing effect, but they differ in their precursors, how they were discovered and in their usage as agents of chemical warfare.

The four substances were developed by Pyotr Kirpichev and Vladimir Uglev. These substances were not readily usable by the military as they could not be safely transported and used in the field like binary chemical weapons can. Once synthesized they were extremely dangerous. Professor Leonid Rink, working later in a different group, tackled the problem but did not succeed. Uglev confirms that Vil Miranzayanov was not involved in the development at all. His group was responsible chemical analysis and for environmental control around the laboratory.


Vladimir Uglev, via The Bell - bigger

Vladimir Uglev, like Renk and Miranzayanov, notes that these agents "of a type developed by Russia" can now be produced by any sufficiently equipped laboratory, including private ones.

Uglev mentions a criminal use of one of the agents in the 1990s:

One of these substances was used to poison the banker, Ivan Kivelidi and his secretary in 1995. A cotton ball, soaked in this agent, was rubbed over the microphone in the handset of Kivelidi's telephone. That specific dose was developed by my group, where we produced all of the chemical agents, and each dose which we developed was given its own complete physical-chemical passport. It was therefore not difficult to determine who had prepared that dose and when it was developed. Naturally, the investigators also suspected me. I was questioned several times about this incident.

Journalist Mark Ames, who worked in Moscow at that time, remarks :

This muddles the narrative a bit -- "novichok" used in 1995 Moscow mafia poison hit on top mobster Ivan Kivelidi. So:
1) novichok [is] in mob hands too
2) used during reign of #1 Mobfather Boris Yeltsin, Washington's vassal

Uglev further notes that blood samples from the Salisbury victims, which Moscow demands but Britain has not handed over, can show what agent (if any) were involved and "where the specific dose was produced and by whom."

A new article in the New Scientists confirms the claims by the Russian scientists that the 'Novichok' agents which may have affected the Skripals may have been produced elsewhere:

Weapons experts have told New Scientist that a number of countries legally created small amounts of Novichok after it was revealed in 1992 and a production method was later published.

In 2016 Iranian scientists, in cooperation with the OPCW, published production and detection methods for such agents. It is likely that the various government labs secretly re-developed and produced these chemicals for their own purposes even prior to the Iranian publication.

[ UPDATE ] In an interview with Deutsche Welle British Foreign Minister Boris Johnson admits that Proton Down had (illegal?) 'Novichok' agents when the incident in Salisbury happened:

DW: You argue that the source of this nerve agent, Novichok, is Russia. How did you manage to find it out so quickly? Does Britain possess samples of it?

Boris Johnson: Let me be clear with you When I look at the evidence, I mean the people from Porton Down, the laboratory

DW: So they have the samples

Boris Johnson: They do. And they were absolutely categorical and I asked the guy myself, I said, "Are you sure?" And he said there's no doubt.

But Porton Down did not agree with the British government to claim that the supposed nerve agent was "made by Russia." It only agreed to the compromise formulation "of a type developed by Russia" i.e. it could have been made anywhere. [End Update]

The claims by the British government that a. the Skripals were affected by a nerve agent and that b. Russia was involved in the Skripal incident because it has some exclusive access to these agents seem both baseless. Unless there is significant further evidence the British incrimination of Russia looks like a cynical plot invented for political and/or commercial purposes.

As usual in the military-industrial complex the people who push such scares, are the ones who profit from them.

The British Morning Star points to one former British military intelligence officer, Colonel (rtd) Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, as a common protagonist in the Skripal case, in the claims of Syrian chemical weapon use and in commercial interests around chemical weapon defense:

Quoted daily by multiple media outlets on the Skripal case, de Bretton-Gordon has become a very public expert, relied upon for unbiased comment and analysis by the British and foreign media on chemical weapon threats from Salisbury to Syria.

He is a former assistant director of Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance Land Forces with the Ministry of Defence. Before that de Bretton-Gordon was commanding officer of Britain's Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) Regiment and Nato's Rapid Reaction CBRN Battalion.

While his CBRN background is often mentioned, his military intelligence links are rarely referred to publicly.

Long before the Salisbury event, de Bretton-Gordon was urging greater government expenditure on chemical protection counter-measures and equipment.
...
de Bretton-Gordon is managing director CBRN of Avon Protection Systems, based in Melksham, Wiltshire.
...
In 2017, the company made £50m from its US military contracts and a further £63.3m from other "protection and defence" revenue.

The former(?) army intelligence officer is also deeply involved in the "moderate rebels" chemical weapon scams in Syria:

On April 29 2014, the [Daily Telegraph] reported that it "obtained soil samples collected from sites of chemical attacks inside Syria by Dr Ahmad -- a medic whose real identity cannot be revealed for his own protection -- who had previously received training in sample collection by western chemical weapons experts.

"Mr de Bretton-Gordon, a British chemical weapons expert and director of Secure Bio, a private company, was one of the trainers."

And who carried out the tests? None other than de Bretton-Gordon himself.

The "White Helmets" propaganda group in Syria was founded and is run by the former(?) British army intelligence officer James Le Mesurier with British and U.S. government money. His former(?) colleague de Bretton-Gordon is running the parallel Syria chemical weapon scam. Both profit from their government financed operations.

Other British agents involved in the Skripal case are Pablo Miller who recruited Skripal for the MI6. He was a friend of Skripal, also lived in Salisbury and worked for Christopher Steele, the former(?) MI6 agent who produced the 'dirty dossier' about Donald Trump for the Clinton campaign. Both are involved with Russian mafia emigres in Britain like Boris Berezovski and the deceased Alexander Litvinenko who's father says that he was killed by an MI6 or CIA guy.

While the British government blamed the Russians just a week after the incident in Salisbury happened it now seems interested in delaying any further investigations. It took more than two weeks after the incident for the British government to invite the OPCW to help with the case. The head of the OPCW says it will take another three weeks for the organization to analyze the samples the British laboratory now handed over. The British police requires several months to find out what happened to the Skripals.

How could the British government be sure of "Russian" involvement within a week and even expel Russian diplomats when the primary chemical experts on the issue will need three weeks for their first analyses and the British police predicts a several months long investigation?

The Russian scientist and their government have explained their history and position in relation to 'Novichoks' and the Skripal incident. It is high time now for the British government, its scientists at Porton Down and its greedy mafia of former(?) British intelligence officer and their criminal Russian emigres to come clean about their own roles in it.

---

Previous Moon of Alabama reports on the Skripal case:

Posted by b on March 21, 2018 at 08:37 AM | Permalink

Comments

mischi , Mar 21, 2018 9:00:02 AM | 1

don't confuse them with facts!
ramparts , Mar 21, 2018 9:10:39 AM | 2
How could the British government be sure of "Russian" involvement within a week when the primary chemical experts on the issue will need three weeks for their first analyses and the police predicts a several months long investigation?

Because they're hard out lying -- their political lives depended on it.

Nice work, mate.

John Zelnicker , Mar 21, 2018 9:35:23 AM | 3
Thank you, b, for including the commercial possibilities when writing about the military/intelligence escapades perpetrated by the US and it's minions. Few others in the media ever look at these incidents from an economic point of view, yet we live in a world where Markets are worshiped as the Prime Mover.

Cui Bono? always seems to be a useful approach in determining motives and connections.

Jormaaja , Mar 21, 2018 9:37:55 AM | 4
And oops... here is Hamish de Bretton-Gordon prophesying on BBC in 16 February 2018:

"In the new "Cold War" with Russia, Nato must be prepared for chemical weapon usage. Though Russia and the US have destroyed their chemical stocks, they still maintain the capability to produce new ones, and there is speculation that research has been done on new super chemicals many times more potent than nerve agents like Sarin and VX.

All have seen how effective chemical weapons have been in Syria and Iraq, especially in fighting in built-up areas, and if there is conflict between East and West we must now assume that chemical weapons will be used.

This sadly being the case, quite apart from the very real threat of terrorist use, anywhere any time, Nato needs to re-invest in its chemical defence capabilities and be prepared to fight in this "dirty" environment - or we could quickly be rolled over by a concerted attack from the East.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-43074956

Christian Chuba , Mar 21, 2018 9:45:47 AM | 5
B, you are mean. You are denying Theresa May her Margaret Thatcher moment where she gets to stand up in Parliament and make a momentous speech about the United Kingdom standing tall on behalf of the world.

Why make a reference ... 'since WW2', even Hitler never used chemical weapons, wouldn't a reference to WW1 have been more appropriate? Oh yeah, by invoking WW2 you can make a rather obvious parallel between Putin and Hitler. Go for it Theresa May, hell always has room for more liars, especially self-righteous ones.

Peter AU 1 , Mar 21, 2018 9:56:09 AM | 6
Thanks b. I think UK was relying on full US support to push the Novichok scam through, which was not forthcoming. The brits will most likely end with some egg on their faces, but I doubt the MSM will let the public know that NoviChok was a term coined by a ex-soviet scientist, perhaps to sell a book, after he moved to the US. In general the western public will continue think the Russians researched and produced this deadly stuff called Novichok and were lying about doing so. Perception management.
John Gilberts , Mar 21, 2018 9:59:30 AM | 7
An excellent analysis as seems to be almost always the case here. As always, Canada plays devil's little helper. FM Chrystia Freeland proposed a motion condemning Russia which passed unanimously. As was the case when Canada bombed Libya. No proof necessary...

https://twitter.com/cafreeland/status/976099681838206979

Liberal MPs to Urge Trudeau to Push Magnitsky-Style Laws at G-7 Summit
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-liberal-mps-to-urge-trudeau-to-push-magnitsky-style-laws-at-g7-summit/

TomGard , Mar 21, 2018 10:09:06 AM | 8
Establishing that Porton Down probably lied about having analyzed traces of the fragmentation (!) products of the allegedly used poison raises other questions. Why did they choose such a thorny path? Why didn't they use ricin against the background of the poisoning of Georgi Markov by a secret service of a Warsaw Pact country? Why not botulinum? Both are by no means traceable to an origin and this enhances a suspicion against FSB or GRU based on the identity of the victims.

A manifest thesis, often brought about, those typical assassination weapons were dismissed because they are useless in a bigger follow-up incident. It is often assumed the use of "novichok" was meant either as precursor or threat with a false flag attack in Syria, but that is against logic. DoS annonced to hold Russia responsible for a weapons grade chemical attack in Syria months ago, also hinting at bringing it to the ICC. They could have used, or can use VX to mimic a "Russian" attack in Syria.

But with the EU it's different! Perpetrators in Porton Down and within the British Government had to assume, that they might have to go an "extra mile" in implicating Russia in a chemical attack on the European Continent to deny the EU the loophole of accounting it to "Sarin" and "ISIS".

The preliminary result: A lightning fast postponement of Brexit for 9 month to the end of 2019, to British conditions afaik. Brussels denied them to the UK fiercely even around 8 days before. It's not all about Russia - at least not directly.

b , Mar 21, 2018 10:29:33 AM | 9
The British Foreign Minister Boris Johnson now admits that Porton Down (illegally?) had 'Novichok' agents BEFORE the incident happened.
Deutsche Welle: You argue that the source of this nerve agent, Novichok, is Russia. How did you manage to find it out so quickly? Does Britain possess samples of it?

BJ: Let me be clear with you When I look at the evidence, I mean the people from Porton Down, the laboratory

DW: So they have the samples

BJ: They do. And they were absolutely categorical and I asked the guy myself, I said, "Are you sure?" And he said there's no doubt.

No doubt = "of a type developed by Russia" NOT= "made by Russia"!

I updated the piece above with the BJ quotes.

TomGard , Mar 21, 2018 10:55:27 AM | 10
@ b | 9

Not illegally, as one Prof Alastair Hay pointed out yesterday http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43431537 He is right, I read it up in the CWC statutes.

Phillip O'Reilly , Mar 21, 2018 10:59:18 AM | 12
So a non lethal dose of nerve agent, as would be possible with a handling error, a trace from an imperfect seal perhaps of a small sample, happens within a few miles of a facility, the only facility in Britain, that has quantities of that particular nerve agent on hand. If you can believe Boris Johnson. One victim is connected to the false flag 'chemical attacks' occurring in Syria. I wonder how good security really is at Porton Down?
Don Bacon , Mar 21, 2018 11:02:04 AM | 13
"Novichok" is not the name of the CW, but the code name of a KGB disinformation operation -- per Andrey Lazarchuk here (at end of Shamir post)
somebody , Mar 21, 2018 11:36:53 AM | 16
If the stuff is from Porton Down and they know it, that would explain the desperate disinformation going on.
psychohistorian , Mar 21, 2018 11:37:22 AM | 17
Great ongoing coverage of this trumped up situation.

I believe that this event was suppose to be another war igniting spark that is fizzling out. Maybe the approach is to overwhelm folks with a multitude of "could be" situations with Russian names until ignition and blast off. If they get ignition then they can bury all the fake scaffold leading to the spark.

I keep hoping for a flip by one of he slimeball insiders to tell the world how the puppeteers of our world keep the play of empire in motion. Then maybe some eyes will open.

Peter AU 1 , Mar 21, 2018 11:53:12 AM | 18
From b's link to the Boris the clown interview.

"I think, in the first instance, if I may respectfully say to the Kremlin detectives, we will trust to the technical experts of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. Let's see what their assessment is. That's the proper procedure that the UK has to follow under the Chemical Weapons Treaty. And, you know, I just have to say that I find the Russian position about what has happened to this Novichok increasingly bizarre."

When Russia were asking for evidence and pushing for an OPCW investigation, this was just stalling according to the Brits. When the Uk gave their evidence to OPCW, they had no blood test results, no documented data of traces of poison or any other tests.

Relying purely on propaganda to push it through, perhaps relying on bigger things happening in Syria to pull attention away and prevent any serious investigation taking place.

Boris and May seem to be no more than extremely enthusiastic cannon fodder in this game, now having to see the narrative through on their own.

turk 151 , Mar 21, 2018 11:56:33 AM | 20
Great insight on May's duplicity from voltairenet: http://www.voltairenet.org/article200232.html
karlof1 , Mar 21, 2018 11:59:45 AM | 21
"Vil Mirzayanov was head of the chromatographer group, chemists who deals with the separation and analysis of various mixtures of substances. He was responsible for environmental control and not a developer of any new substances."

This seems to impinge on Mirzayanov's credibility as he said he was one of the developers of the agent. Neil Clark muses about how the famous fictional detective Poirot would investigate this alleged crime.

A very strongly worded statement issued jointly by Russia's Foreign and Defense Ministries declares: "either the British authorities are unable to protect from a terrorist attack on their territory or staged the attack themselves... Russia owes nothing and can bear no responsibility for the actions or lack of actions on British soil."

The "attack" on the Skripals is described as a "gross folly" by Russia and as a hoax by numerous writers and others like myself. The more the Outlaw US Empire and its vassals try to smear Russia, the more their credibility diminishes. Combined with the Cambridge Analytica revelations, the plan to demonize Russia has grossly failed as the real demons get revealed.

Fecund Stench , Mar 21, 2018 12:20:35 PM | 23
Posted by: turk 151 | Mar 21, 2018 11:56:33 AM | 20

Thierry Meyssan's article blew me away:

"Bypassing the official diplomatic channels, Russian Chief of Staff General Valeri Guerassimov contacted his US counterpart General Joseph Dunford to inform him of his fear of a false flag chemical attack in Ghouta. Dunford took this information vey seriously, and alerted US Defense Secretary General Jim Mattis, who referred the matter to President Donald Trump. In view of the Russian insistence that this piece of foul play was being prepared without the knowledge of the Pentagon, the White House asked the Director of the CIA, Mike Pompeo, to identify those responsible for the conspiracy."..

"We do not know the result of this internal enquiry, but President Trump acquired the conviction that his Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, was implicated. The Secretary of State was immediately asked to interrupt his official journey in Africa and return to Washington.". .

"[Tillerson was replaced by Mike Pompeo, ex-Director of the CIA, who, the night before, had confirmed the authenticity of the Russian information transmitted by General Dunford."

Peter AU 1 , Mar 21, 2018 12:24:34 PM | 24
Don Bacon @13 linked to a piece at UNZ Revue and the note by Andrey Lazarchuk at the bottom of the article which is interesting.
According to that, Mirzayanov was Identified as a leak early on, and then used to transmit false information. It is noticeable that Mirzayanov Used a letter plus three digits for the designation code of the chemicals, whereas the scientist that actually worked on developing new compounds uses a letter plus four digits for the designation codes.

The compounds Mirzayanov has in his book, A-232 and so forth, were most likely genuine compounds that had been discarded by the soviet scientists, given a new designation code and a name for the group and fed to Mirzayan.

AriusArmenian , Mar 21, 2018 12:27:20 PM | 26
The UK will never come clean on their disinformation campaign. They are petty and stupid to think the UK is and can be kept somehow 'great'. They are actually the evidence of the decline of the UK.
Peter AU 1 , Mar 21, 2018 12:42:14 PM | 27
Further to my post @24. Have UK used some discarded soviet chemical compounds that has been used in a cold war disinformation operation to poison the Skripols and the policeman?

If this is the case, Russia would have the old soviet records of the disinformation operation ready to rock and roll. Maybe the Brits may have walked into a trap?

james , Mar 21, 2018 12:49:47 PM | 28
thanks b... great overview and especially the last half of your post where this kind of info never gets discussed.. pointing out that the messengers are also profiting from what they are saying is necessary and critical to be able to put the comments in perspective...
shills everyone of them - Colonel (rtd) Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, James Le Mesurier, and especially boris the idiot johnson..

my favourite question in the comments today so far..

"I wonder how good security really is at Porton Down?

Piotr Berman , Mar 21, 2018 12:54:26 PM | 32
According to the interview with Prof. Rink, a "military grade formulation" does not follow from the public data disclosed by Vadim Miranzayanov, because beside the main compound it is necessary to have "auxiliary ingredients", and Miranzayanov did not have access to the complete formulations, he had a technical role in the development of "main components". Therefore full chromatography of samples would disclose if the chemist working for the perpetrator(s) had a knowledge of the full formulation or not. There is also an explanation how word "novichok" was used, and indeed, it was used.
james , Mar 21, 2018 1:04:38 PM | 34
@23 Fecund Stench.. the folks over at emptywheel are very slow to figure that out... i guess the russian/trump hatefest must continue in at a number of blogs that used to be intelligent and insightful...
Cassandra , Mar 21, 2018 1:18:56 PM | 36
„In 2016 Iranian scientists, in cooperation with the OPCW, published production and detection methods for such agents. It is likely that the various government labs secretly re-developed and produced these chemicals for their own purposes even prior to the Iranian publication."

THERE IS NO SOLID EVIDENCE for this „Iranian Publication". (The visible source is Craig Murray.)

It appears that MoA, too has fallen for this probable canard, which was filtered thru and spread (unwittingly) by Craig Murray to make it appear „credible".

Ryan De Vooght-Johnson the stated „author" of this article is not a research-scientist but (was) the „commissioning editor" for a magazine called „Bioanalysis", published (among many others) by a company called Future Science Ltd. based in the north of London. (Part of the „Future Science Group")

BIOANALYSIS specialises in „Biomedicine" and „Drug R&D" (including analytical research about Doping) not exactly „nerve agents". (They do know about mass spectrometry, though)

Ryan De Vooght-Johnson apparently no longer works for the FSG, since a search for his name brought only results in the archives from 2013. As a „comissioning editor" he selected the articles which also included „sponsored" articles. So was he paid to publish this?

There is something very fishy about this article (what Iranian source?) and every time I open the website it starts to flash continually (is this just happening to me?) so it is impossible to read the whole thing. I managed to make a screenshot (from the top half) and zoomed in. (To me at least) this looks like a cut and paste job there are some strange dots above the headline)

I asked Press TV to comment (could they deny of verify the claim?) but received no answer so far.

Moreover THERE IS NO MENTION of this alleged „Iranian" breakthrough on the OPCW website and Murray's claim (expressed in the headline „Iranian chemists identify chemical warfare agents" clashes with this statement published by RT on March 16:

There is no record of the Novichok group of nerve agents having been declared by a state party to the Chemical Weapons Convention," the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) said in a press release on Friday.

The funny thing is, there is also no record of this „press-release" on the OPCW website. In fact, the search-term „Novichok" yields no result at all. This is all very strange, to say the least.

Seen in a geopolitical context, this „revelation" might have been planted with Craig Murray (who spread it to refute the claim that „Novichoks" must be „Russian") in order to smear Iran – by insinuating they are developing „chemical weapons" in violation of the CWC (now that JPCOA is being discarded by Trump, they need new political amunition ).

I have reached the conclusion that all this „novichok"-saga is a Red Herring. We ought so concentrate more on the WHY, not he HOW (as with „9/11").

A SHOCKING TALE OF THREE CITIES (Washington, Salisbury, Damascus)

In Salisbury, England two people are found „slumped", allegedly „poisoned" with an NA on a park-bench. HMG issues wild accusations against Russia. Days later the US Secretary of State is being fired. Meanwhile the SAA and their Russian allies are gaining more and more control over „rebel-held" Ghouta. Three different stories ? Not really.

Here is the article which connects the dots perfectly: (and it is much more important than the „Cambridge Analytics" stuff )

http://www.voltairenet.org/article200232.html (read also the article about the „rebels" in Ghouta)

Other Sources:
http://www.cfabs.org/7thWRIB-LongBeach2013.php
https://www.future-science.com/pb-assets/pdfs/2017-catalogue.pdf
https://www.rt.com/news/421512-opcw-no-member-states-novichok/

Cassandra , Mar 21, 2018 1:23:58 PM | 37
(I am sorry about the formatting ... I hate this HTML-stuff..) Anyway, the important link is this. Please do read it...

http://www.voltairenet.org/article200232.html

Peter AU 1 , Mar 21, 2018 1:26:51 PM | 38
Cassandra, your post is nearly unreadable the way it is, but I also looked into Ryan De Vooght-Johnson.
I found his bio. Lives in UK and writes for science journals.

TomGard came up with a separate document in one of the earlier novichok threads and it does look like Iran has worked with OPCW on these chemicals and has published its research.

Hmpf , Mar 21, 2018 1:33:02 PM | 40
@Cassandra

The information is correct. Published in 'Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry'. It's not been taken down (yet). Doing so now would be futile, anyways. Here's the link: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/rcm.7757

james , Mar 21, 2018 1:33:14 PM | 41
@37 cassandra.. i have read the article, but nowhere in the article do i see any refutation of the article that both b and criag murray linked to on iranian chemists identify russia chemical agents... what am i missing? thanks...

[Mar 21, 2018] Putin drew Macron attention to the lack of evidence behind accusations against Russia and reiterated its readiness to conduct joint investigation into the incident

Mar 21, 2018 | en.farsnews.com

"The sides also touched upon the incident in Salisbury," the Kremlin stressed, underlining that "The Russian side drew attention to the lack of evidence behind accusations against Russia and reiterated its readiness to conduct joint investigation into the incident", TASS reported.

"The two presidents discussed in detail issue of the Syrian settlement in the context of the implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2401 and the crisis in Ukraine in the light of the importance of the implementation of the Minsk agreements," the Kremlin stated.

The telephone conversation was initiated by the French Leader who called to congratulate Putin on his victory at Sunday's presidential polls in Russia, according to the Kremlin.

Macron spoke in favor of continuing joint work to promote comprehensive bilateral cooperation, including between civil societies within the Trianon Dialogue.

"It was agreed to continue to exchange views on the matters raised during the conversation at various levels," the press service added.

On March 4, Skripal and his daughter Yulia were exposed to a nerve agent in the city of Salisbury. They were found unconscious on a bench near a shopping center in Salisbury. Both are currently in the hospital in critical condition.

British Prime Minister Theresa May accused Russia of "an unlawful use of force" against her country. Subsequently, she announced that London would expel 23 Russian diplomats and would suspend high-level bilateral contacts.

Russia has vehemently denied its alleged involvement in the incident and said retaliatory measures would follow soon.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said on Saturday that 23 British diplomats had been declared personae non grata to be expelled from Russia in a week's period.

It also said the UK's consulate general in St. Petersburg would be closed and the British Council would stop its activities.

Apart from that, according to the Ministry, the Russian side reserved the right to take other measures "should further unfriendly steps are taken against Russia."

[Mar 21, 2018] If Putin was a happy accident, then Russia has a huge problem when he is gove -- which means in six years by Dmitry Orlov

Mar 21, 2018 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

... ... ...

And what does a vote for Putin actually mean, in terms of choice? Who picked him to begin with? Well, it turns out that Putin is a happy accident. Boris Yeltsin named him as his successor, and you could quite reasonably joke that Yeltsin was drunk at the time and didn't remember why he did that. But you could also surmise that Putin was picked for his renowned savvy in money-laundering and offshoring the ill-gotten gains of Russian oligarchs (his previous job back in St. Petersburg) and for his clever use of his KGB connections (from his job before that) to "settle questions." Remember, this was a time when the endlessly clever people who get paid to sit around and drink coffee over at the Pentagon imagined that "Russian mafia" was an emerging global threat. The oligarchs must have liked Putin, and Yeltsin, in keeping with his "leave no oligarch behind" program, did whatever they wanted him to do.

What they got instead was a pig in a poke. The oligarchs thought that they had recruited another faithful servant who, just like Yeltsin, would keep the state weak and facilitate their shameless plunder. Instead they got a steel-willed technocrat and a true Russian patriot who quickly manifested an awesome power to conjure up creative new ideologies. Instead of subservience, the oligarchs got his "doctrine of equidistance," according to which money≠power. (An oil baron by the name of Mikhail Khodorkovsky ran afoul of it, thinking that he could parlay his wealth into political power, and ended up cooling his heels in prison.) Instead of somebody who would look the other way while they ran roughshod over Russian society, they got his "dictatorship of the law," a significantly strengthened Russian state, and the once fearsome Russian mafia melted away like hoarfrost after sunrise. And the Russian oligarchy's plan to seamlessly meld into Western elite society using their expropriated wealth, leaving Russia behind as a withered husk, ran headlong into Putin's plan to reestablish "multipolarity" and to force other nations, even the United States, to treat Russia as an equal. This resulted in Western sanctions, which sent many oligarchs scurrying back to Russia and repatriating their funds under an amnesty program, lest they be frozen.

And so Putin, for Russia, is just a happy accident. Given that happy accidents are in general far less frequent than unhappy ones, a question arises: How can Russia reliably produce another Putin when the time comes? It is definitely a good thing that Russia has six years to answer this question, because this last presidential election, as well as all the previous ones, has conclusively demonstrated that Russian electoral politics are not the answer -- at least not yet. Let's look at Putin's "competition" (in quotes because, judging from the results, it was more of an exhibition).

The one who garnered the most votes was Pavel Grudinin, nominated by the Communists (although he wasn't a member) instead of their perennial presidential candidate and leader Gennady Zyuganov, who is getting rather long in the tooth. Grudinin failed to disclose his foreign bank accounts, or the fact that his son resides abroad, disqualifying him from holding the top secret clearance required of a Russian president. Nevertheless, he managed to get 15% or so of the vote.

Next in line was the nationalist perennial presidential candidate Vladimir Zhirinovsky, who is quite formidable, very entertaining, but also rather frightening because he is forever threatening to rain fire and brimstone on Russia's enemies both foreign and domestic. Nevertheless, he is definitely qualified to serve as president -- or to serve on your firing squad, because he is also a good shot, and you can be sure that he won't accidentally miss all of your vital organs and leave you writhing in pain while you bleed out slowly. You can regard him as Russia's presidential insurance, giving Russia's enemies an excellent reason to wish for Putin's good health, because Zhirinovsky is standing by, ready to make them say "ouch!" a lot.

And then we have a sort of winner, but not of the presidential sort: Xenia Sobchak. She is the daughter of Anatoly Sobchak, who was the first democratically elected mayor of St. Petersburg, co-author of Russia's constitution, and Putin's friend and mentor. She is a fully paid-up member of Russia's "golden youth" and pretty much does whatever she wants -- like run for president. Don't laugh, she got over 1% of the vote! She has dabbled in reality television, the fashion industry, this and that, is married to an actor, has a year-and-a-half-old son and is rumored to be pregnant.

She made me laugh because she lost Crimea even before she got her name on the ballot by declaring that she does not approve of Crimea being part of Russia. Recall that Crimea has been part of Russia since 1783, was "gifted" to the Ukraine by Nikita Khrushchev in 1954 in violation of the Soviet constitution, and then voted to rejoin Russia in 2014 after the Ukraine's government was overthrown in violation of the Ukrainian constitution: a rare instance of two constitutional violations canceling each other out.

Her slogan was "against all": she saw herself as a one-person alternative to the entire Russian political system. Neither she nor her supporters saw the obvious logical flaw with this platform: if she were truly "against all" then, to be consistent, she would have to campaign for people to vote against all -- including her. What she meant, of course, was "against all except me." Now that would have been a wonderful slogan, had she managed to explain what it was that made her so uniquely magic. Instead, she complained bitterly about everyone else. I believe that her presidential campaign was actually a clever merchandising operation. Maybe it had something to do with marketing eyeglass frames: she appeared to switch eyeglasses more often than most women change panties. There were some other kinds of "product placement" going on too.

Everybody else got less than 1%, but I will give them honorable mention anyway. There was the perennial liberal candidate Yavlinsky, who gave his rationale for running again this time (a hopeless cause given Russians' overwhelmingly unfavorable view of liberalism) as "I just really wanted to talk to some voters." Then, in no particular order (because I don't care) came the über-capitalist Titov, the über-Soviet Suraikin and the über-Russian Baburin. Titov ran on a pathetically hilarious slogan of "So, what about Titov?"

All of the candidates save Putin (who intelligently stayed above the fray) participated in several interminable rounds of "debates" whose format precluded all intelligent discussion. All candidates were given a few minutes to spout their programmatic gibberish while others tried to shout them down. At one point they ganged up on poor Xenia so hard that they made her cry. The only time they got to talk to Putin was after the election, when they were all invited to a sort of "thank you for playing" meeting at the Kremlin, and where they all appeared dignified, conciliatory and grateful.

This was all good, clean fun (except for making Xenia cry; that was mean) but it doesn't answer the essential question, which is: How can Russia find another Putin to elect president in six years? One of the most important reasons why the Soviet Union failed was the inability of its political elites to recruit and promote talent, causing it to degenerate into a dour, ossified, senile gerontocracy. This fact is currently very well understood in Russia, and a serious effort is underway to appoint young, promising governors and to put young people with leadership potential into positions of ministerial responsibility. Whether these efforts produce the intended result will become clear six years from now. A lot can happen in the intervening years -- both good and bad -- but at the moment the project to "make Russia great again" appears to be firing on all cylinders.

This article was originally published by " Club Orlov " -

shane · 4 hours ago

Orlov is a brilliant and patriotic Russian and is obviously pleased with the stability that Putin's reelection brings to his country in this time of crisis. However he is also strangely begrudging to President Putin here and in other articles I have read, casually throwing out a rather nasty and unsubstantiated slur that Putin during his early career in St Petersburg behaved as a low-life corrupt official, helping oligarchs off-shore their stolen riches. I would challenge Mr Orlov to produce not just hearsay but 'real' evidence of this. It seems to contradict the strongest features of Putin's character during his years as president, honesty and consistency. No one suggests that Putin must have a perfect record in all things, but such a serious accusation surely needs backup, or at least clarification as to what exactly Orlov means.
Pablo · 2 hours ago
As I only received this a couple of hours ago, I am pasting again my comments upon yesterday's Peter Koenigh's article:
Regret to have to say that all you people are squabbling over minor incidents, compared to the overall planned agenda. Craig Thomas is right, Paul Craig Roberts is right, Peter Koenigh is right, everybody who writes for ICH is right and Tom Feeley is a giant.
However, you are all missing the end goal of the universal plan. Defence industry, big pharma, oil industry, Monsanto, Bayer, Dupont, Nestlee, P&G, Goldman Sachs, Banks, the BIS, the Cheneys, Rockfellers, Bushes, Morgans, Rothchilds, Kissingers, Soros and Rumsfelds plus more, all belong to one single group that is known as the "establishment" that promotes globalisation. They have an agenda. It is not financial gluttony that drives them, but power. They already control the World's finances, and are aiming to soon also control the food chain and water supply. The purpose is simple logic. (Wish George Orwell were still alive). Their intent is to reduce the whole World's population to functioning "servants" with barely enough to survive upon, so that they be so encased within the efforts on their own survival in each one's little world, so that they be totally deprived of any stamina to check, object and criticize anything that the rulers of the "establishment" do or enact. The media belongs to them, and most of the reporters therein have already turned into the "servants" mentioned, evidently for their own survival. Hence the necessary brainwashing of the masses is secured. Any dissident that could endanger the agenda, has to be dealt with. One of those is Putin. (according to me, despite some of his misgivings, is the only leader in the Western World that deserves the position he holds). All the rest are plain buffoons. It is "we the people", "the brainwashed people" who have put them in office. However, there still may be some hope. Was Nostradamus right? What about China. A president for life? And what would be the consequences for the rest of us. Personal experience has taught me that the Chinese, as many too of the far Eastern peoples, know of little empathy within their culture. So what would be the future of the rest of us if they were to prevail globally? Should we not all embrace the Russians and Indians and hope for them to be our lifesaver buffer? Food for thought ladies and gentlemen !!!
Elliot · 1 hour ago
I hope the planet survives long enough to see who follows Putin as President of Russia.

[Mar 21, 2018] RT Chief, Margarita Simonyan: Why We Don't Respect the West Anymore

Notable quotes:
"... We don't want to live like you live, anymore. For fifty years, secretly and openly, we wanted to live like you, but not any longer. We have no more respect for you, and for those amongst us that you support, and for all those people who support you. That's how this 5% came to be. ..."
"... For that you only have yourself to blame. And also your Western politicians and analysts, newsmakers and scouts. Our people are capable to forgive a lot. But we don't forgive arrogance, and no normal nation would. Your only remaining Empire would be wise to learn history of its allies, all of them are former empires. To learn the ways they lost their empires. Only because of their arrogance. ..."
"... (in English in the original text -- trans. ..."
"... Neo-Liberalism is the worst because under this pseudo science they consider all things including the land, the air, the water, the human beings and the same life (all nature) as their rightful commodities. ..."
"... Unfortunately in this case Karl Rove is only making reference to what has been decided in political circles in Washington at that time. This habit of "defining new realities" is what all MSM and most Western politicians work after today. At any time at any case the MSM and the West system can change one reality perception to another without being held responsible for the factual truth. ..."
Mar 20, 2018 | russia-insider.com

And that's your fault, my Western friends. It was you who pushed us into "Russians never surrender" mode.

I've been telling you for a long time to find normal advisers on Russia. Sack all those parasites. With their short-sighted sanctions, heartless humiliation of our athletes (including athletes with disabilities ), with their "skripals" and ostentatious disregard of the most basic liberal values, like a presumption of innocence, that they manage to hypocritically combined with forcible imposition of ultra-liberal ideas in their own countries, their epileptic mass hysteria, causing in a healthy person a sigh of relief that he lives in Russia, and not in Hollywood, with their post-electoral mess in the United States, in Germany, and in the Brexit-zone;

with their attacks on RT, which they cannot forgive for taking advantage of the freedom of speech and showing to the world how to use it, and it turned out that the freedom of speech never was intended to be used for good, but was invented as an object of beauty, like some sort of crystal mop that shines from afar, but is not suitable to clean your stables, with all your injustice and cruelty, inquisitorial hypocrisy and lies you forced us to stop respecting you. You and your so called "values."

We don't want to live like you live, anymore. For fifty years, secretly and openly, we wanted to live like you, but not any longer. We have no more respect for you, and for those amongst us that you support, and for all those people who support you. That's how this 5% came to be.

For that you only have yourself to blame. And also your Western politicians and analysts, newsmakers and scouts. Our people are capable to forgive a lot. But we don't forgive arrogance, and no normal nation would. Your only remaining Empire would be wise to learn history of its allies, all of them are former empires. To learn the ways they lost their empires. Only because of their arrogance.

(in English in the original text -- trans. )

But the only Empire, you have left, ignores history, it doesn't teach it and refuses to learn it, meaning that it all will end the way it always does, in such cases.

In meantime, you've pushed us to rally around your enemy. Immediately, after you declared him an enemy, we united around him.

Before, he was just our President, who could be reelected. Now, he has become our Leader. We won't let you change this. And it was you, who created this situation.

It was you who imposed an opposition between patriotism and liberalism. Although, they shouldn't be mutually exclusive notions. This false dilemma, created by you, made us to chose patriotism.

Even though, many of us are really liberals, myself included.

Get cleaned up, now. You don't have much time left.

Muriel Kuri • 13 hours ago ,

I agree with you, Margarita, and I am American! I remember as a child, being taught about that horrid USSR - to be so feared, ready at any moment to bomb us into oblivion! I remember the Bay of Pigs in Cuba. - not knowing the full details, but being told that Kennedy saved us all from WWIII. As time went on, we'd watch humorous shows detailing the large percentage of Russians in USSR wanting to AND defecting to America. We were shown Russians lined up around city blocks to buy toilet paper, shoes (any size, any color would do). Russians naivety was always made fun of, casting the majority of you as either clowns or criminals capable of all heinous crimes. Then came the 90s. I watched Yeltsin tottering around drunk, watched in horror as the USSR collapsed, wondering what had happened to you. Then came Putin - this young man being handed the reins of your collapsed, ruined country. Suddenly it seemed, we saw more and more of him. I remember watching his face when he had to explain to the tearful, waiting parents and friends of the mariners from the Kursk. His remark that if he could go down there himself and rescue them he would! I knew then, that this was a man to be watched, because I admired him at that moment. Over the years, after one successful term after another, I saw Russia rising like a Phoenix from the ashes of the USSR. I saw the pride returning to the Russian faces, saw smiles returning to their faces, watched you regaining your honor, your sovereignty as we started losing ours. Watching and listening, in horror and fear as more and more of our rights were taken away after 9/11. Discovering that it was a false flag (one of many, it seems), that took the lives of ordinary Americans and used their deaths to start killing more people in Iraq, which had nothing to do with the attack. More time going by, more rights taken away here, yet for you, rising ever more to greater economy, more business friendly environments in Russia, more world trade with an increasing number of trading partners.

Then started the demonization again - not of USSR, but of Russia - same story, different name. Putin - guilty of all crimes of mankind, blamed for everything under the sun, capable and willing to kill people around the globe with impunity, using chemicals and all other nefarious things! I watched the crimes committed in Ukraine, which deposed the legally elected president, and that tried to kill him after a coup that put Nazis in his place. I watched Crimea hold it's referendum, saw the fireworks display afterwards with all the happy faces. Russia was demonized even more and sanctioned greatly for that. Now to 2017 - I prayed that Putin would run again - (he waited a long time before stating he would run.) I knew that Russia sorely needed him to remain at the reins, guiding Russia (and the world, it seems) around the icebergs of hate, crimes against humanity, local wars, demise of any empathetic feelings towards others as we are all dragged along to the next, last war. Putin has been the one who has prevented it from happening in several situations, where it could have been started. But the demonization continues - little wonder America has lost it's appeal to most of you!

The deep state has us in thrall - (no Kennedy here now to protect us). I pray daily that all of us will survive to realize our hopes - yours and ours, but feel on a deep level that this time it won't happen. It seems that some people here truly want a war - feel they could survive the strike and retaliate to ruin your country, but that ours would remain mainly untouched. They think their bunkers will protect them - their expansive underground cities built for the richest and 'best' of America, while the rest of us are collateral damage. I am not rich - have no real savings, so am definitely not one of those to be saved - like so others around me. I'm sure many of you are in the same position, have the same fears and dreams as I do. I offer all of you my best wishes for a happy, healthy, free and safe world. Maybe your Putin actually does have a rabbit in his hat, or that silver bullet - the magic needed to save us all! I truly hope so.

wdg Muriel Kuri • 5 hours ago ,

As a Canadian, thank you for your excellent summary of what I have concluded for some time. Sadly, the US is no longer a Constitutional Republic as established by the founders; it is not even a representative democracy. What the US has become is an Evil American Empire that is the greatest threat to peace and prosperity in the US and throughout the entire world. The good news is that a growing number of people in the US and the Western World realize this and are working very hard to return America to its founding ideals. The first stage in this process is the exposure of powerful members of the Deep State who have infiltrated and corrupted the essential institutions of government, freedom and justice.

TiredOfBsToo • 13 hours ago ,

I used to be liberal before liberalism became a symbol of stupidity, war mongering and affiliated with the Deep State and it's rush to rule the world by destroying every society whose people chose to live life as they saw fit. The translation mechanism for understanding US leadership is projection. If the mouthpieces ramble on about their values, the meaning is that they are stating the values of their opponent or target country. If they're accusing a country of terrorism, they're talking about their own support for terrorism for geopolitical gains. If they're accusing a country of using chemical weapons, they're really talking about their own use of chemical weapons to launch another war and destroy yet another country's society. So one can easily see the true meaning of these psychopaths rantings and rhetoric by merely using the simple mechanism of projection to determine the truth.

Maria Angelica Brunell Solar Gerry Hiles • 8 hours ago ,

Many times I am completely confused by the use that Americans make of traditional political or economic terms. "Socialism", for example, applied to Democrats? Calling "Liberals" those who like to defy society's traditional customs? "Marxism" is no longer a theory about the conflict of classes, or a dialectical understanding of society! Many political discussions are due to the different interpretations that people give to the same words. The US political science vocabulary is in chaos- along with many other US things!

tomo stojanovic Maria Angelica Brunell Solar • an hour ago ,

Americans are keen on Orwellian renaming

wdg Maria Angelica Brunell Solar • 5 hours ago ,

Seventy years ago, George Orwell wrote the prophetic essay, "Politics
and the English Language," in which he noted that politicians,
journalists and academics were increasingly using meaningless words and
euphemisms to make "lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and...
give an appearance of solidity to pure wind." Source: https://www.alternet.org/el...

Rafael Gerry Hiles • 6 hours ago ,

Totally agree. Fundamental or Philosophical Liberalism has to be with the human being and his liberties and rights.
Economic Liberalism has to be with the commodities trade and physical money, financial money, and their privileges put over the human beings, of course this is a euphemism because whom are really self conceded such privileges are the owners of those goods i.e. International Usurers.
Economic Liberalism morphed into the worst; into Neo-(Economic)-Liberalism (They call it only "liberalism" in order to confuse their enemies, all the people).
Neo-Liberalism is the worst because under this pseudo science they consider all things including the land, the air, the water, the human beings and the same life (all nature) as their rightful commodities.

Tommy Jensen TiredOfBsToo • 13 hours ago ,

Double speak, double thinking, defining realities, part of the same s..t.

TiredOfBsToo Tommy Jensen • 13 hours ago ,

You're absolutely correct! We've had the worst of the worst running and influencing those that run the country and this man was a psycho, but we have more, too many!

Gerry Hiles Tommy Jensen • 12 hours ago ,

And Dubya called him "Turd Blossom". Apt. Perhaps relating to mutual dehumanisation in Skull & Bones?

Peter Jennings Tommy Jensen • 5 hours ago ,

The arrogance of the man. I do hope he lives long enough to see the fruits of his labor whilst the economy collapses around him. I guess when that happens he and his other hapless miscreants will keep their heads down and rely on security to protect them from the karma hurtling towards them.

Nothing this man has done has benefited the American people.

Tommy Jensen Peter Jennings • 3 hours ago ,

Unfortunately in this case Karl Rove is only making reference to what has been decided in political circles in Washington at that time. This habit of "defining new realities" is what all MSM and most Western politicians work after today. At any time at any case the MSM and the West system can change one reality perception to another without being held responsible for the factual truth.

[Mar 21, 2018] The corporate media ignores the rise of oligarchy. The rest of us shouldn t by Bernie Sanders

Mar 21, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

The rapid rise of oligarchy and wealth and income inequality is the great moral, economic, and political issue of our time. Yet, it gets almost no coverage from the corporate media.

How often do network newscasts report on the 40 million Americans living in poverty, or that we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any major nation on earth? How often does the media discuss the reality that our society today is more unequal than at any time since the 1920s with the top 0.1% now owning almost as much wealth as the bottom 90%? How often have you heard the media report the stories of millions of people who today are working longer hours for lower wages than was the case some 40 years ago?

How often has ABC, CBS or NBC discussed the role that the Koch brothers and other billionaires play in creating a political system which allows the rich and the powerful to significantly control elections and the legislative process in Congress?

We need to ask the hard questions that the corporate media fails to ask

Sadly, the answer to these questions is: almost never. The corporate media has failed to let the American people fully understand the economic forces shaping their lives and causing many of them to work two or three jobs, while CEOs make hundreds of times more than they do. Instead, day after day, 24/7, we're inundated with the relentless dramas of the Trump White House, Stormy Daniels, and the latest piece of political gossip.

We urgently need to discuss the reality of today's economy and political system, and fight to create an economy that works for everyone and not just the one percent.

We need to ask the hard questions that the corporate media fails to ask: who owns America, and who has the political power? Why, in the richest country in the history of the world are so many Americans living in poverty? What are the forces that have caused the American middle class, once the envy of the world, to decline precipitously? What can we learn from countries that have succeeded in reducing income and wealth inequality, creating a strong and vibrant middle class, and providing basic human services to everyone?

We need to hear from struggling Americans whose stories are rarely told in newspapers or television. Unless we understand the reality of life in America for working families, we're never going to change that reality.

Until we understand that the rightwing Koch brothers are more politically powerful than the Republican National Committee, and that big banks, pharmaceutical companies, and multinational corporations are spending unlimited sums of money to rig the political process, we won't be able to overturn the disastrous US supreme court decision on Citizens United, move to the public funding of elections and end corporate greed.

Until we understand that the US federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour is a starvation wage and that people cannot make it on $9 or $10 an hour, we're not going to be able to pass a living wage of at least $15 an hour.

Until we understand that multinational corporations have been writing our trade and tax policies for the past 40 years to allow them to throw American workers out on the street and move to low-wage countries, we're not going to be able to enact fair laws ending the race to the bottom and making the wealthy and the powerful pay their fair share.

Until we understand that we live in a highly competitive global economy and that it is counterproductive that millions of our people cannot afford a higher education or leave school deeply in debt, we will not be able to make public colleges and universities tuition free.

Until we understand that we are the only major country on earth not to guarantee healthcare to all and that we spend far more per capita on healthcare than does any other country, we're not going to be able to pass a Medicare for all, single-payer program.

Until we understand that the US pays, by far, the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs because pharmaceutical companies can charge whatever price they want for life-saving medicine, we're not going to be able to lower the outrageous price of these drugs.

Until we understand that climate change is real, caused by humans, and causing devastating problems around the world, especially for poor people, we're not going to be able to transform our energy system away from fossil fuel and into sustainable forms of energy.

We need to raise political consciousness in America and help us move forward with a progressive agenda that meets the needs of our working families. It's up to us all to join the conversation -- it's just the beginning.

Bernie Sanders is hosting a town hall on Inequality in America: The Rise of Oligarchy and Collapse of the Middle Class on Monday 19 March at 7pm before a live audience in the auditorium of the US Capitol. It will be live-streamed by the Guardian

[Mar 21, 2018] Washington's Invasion of Iraq at Fifteen

Highly recommended!
Mar 21, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

March 20 marks a major anniversary. You'd be forgiven for not knowing it. Fifteen years after we invaded Iraq, few in the US are addressing our legacy there. But it's worth recalling we shattered that country.

We made it a terrorist hotspot, as expected. US and British intelligence, in the months preceding the invasion, expected Bush's planned assault would invigorate Al-Qaeda. The group " would see an opportunity to accelerate its operational tempo and increase terrorist attacks," particularly " in the US and UK ," assessments warned. Due course for the War on Terror.

Follow-up reports confirmed these predictions. "The Iraq conflict has become the 'cause celebre' for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement," Washington analysts explained in 2006.

Fawaz Gerges lists two groups this milieu produced: Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), "a creature of the 2003 US-led invasion," and ISIS, "an extension of AQI."

There were good reasons for anyone -- not just jihadists -- to resent US involvement. Consider sectarianism. "The most serious sectarian and ethnic tensions in Iraq's modern history followed the 2003 US-led occupation," Sami Ramadani affirmed . Nabil Al-Tikriti concurs , citing US policies that "led to a progressive, incessant increase in sectarian tensions." The Shia death squads " organized by U.S. operatives" were one such decision.

The extent to which these squads succeeded is, in part, what scholars debate when they tally the war deaths. Low estimates, like Iraq Body Count's, put civilians killed at just over 200,000. One research team determined some "half million deaths in Iraq could be attributable to the war." Physicians for Social Responsibility concluded "that the war has, directly or indirectly, killed around 1 million people in Iraq," plus 300,000 more in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Iraqis surviving the inferno confronted a range of nightmares. The UN " reported that over 4.4 million Iraqis were internally displaced, and an additional 264,100 were refugees abroad," for example. US forces dealt with Iraqi prisoners -- 70-90% of whom were " arrested by mistake " -- by "arranging naked detainees in a pile and then jumping on them;" "breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees;" and "forcing groups of male detainees to masturbate themselves," to list some of the ways we imparted , with the approval of top Bush administration officials, democratic principles.

Then there are the generations of future Iraqis in bomb-battered cities: Fallujah, Basra. In the former, "the reported increases in cancer and infant mortality are alarmingly high" -- perhaps " worse than Hiroshima " -- while "birth defects reached in 2010 unprecedented numbers." In the same vein, "a pattern of increase in congenital birth defects" plagues Basra, and "many suspect that pollution created by the bombardment of Iraqi cities has caused the current birth defect crisis in that country."

This bombardment began decades before 2003, it's crucial to clarify. We can recall UN Under-Secretary-General Martti Ahtisaari's mission to Baghdad after Operation Desert Storm. He and his team were familiar with the literature on the bombings, he wrote in March 1991, "fully conversant with media reports regarding the situation in Iraq," but realized upon arrival "that nothing that we had seen or read had quite prepared us for the particular form of devastation" -- "near-apocalyptic" -- "which has now befallen the country," condemning it "to a pre-industrial age" for the foreseeable future. This was the scale of ruin when the UN Security Council imposed sanctions. The measures were "at every turn shaped by the United States," whose "consistent policy " was "to inflict the most extreme economic damage possible on Iraq."

The policy was, in this respect, a ripping success. The UN estimated in 1995 that the sanctions had murdered over a half-million children -- " worth it ," Madeleine Albright said -- one factor prompting two successive UN Humanitarian Coordinators in Iraq to resign. Denis Halliday thought the sanctions "criminally flawed and genocidal;" Hans von Sponeck agreed , citing evidence of "conscious violation of human rights and humanitarian law on the part of governments represented in the Security Council, first and foremost those of the United States and the United Kingdom."

Eliminating hundreds of thousands of starving children was just the prequel to the occupation -- "the biggest cultural disaster since the descendants of Genghis Khan destroyed Baghdad in 1258," in one writer's judgment . But try to find more than a handful of commentators reflecting on any of these issues on this dark anniversary. Instead, silence shows the deep US capacity for forgetting.

Nick Alexandrov lives in Tulsa, Oklahoma. He can be reached at: [email protected]

[Mar 21, 2018] Russia to Theresa May: We ain't scared of you by Jonas E. Alexis

Mar 21, 2018 | www.veteranstoday.com

We've lost something in the political, intellectual, and legal culture. It used to be that if a person posits an extraordinary claim, then he is under the obligation to provide evidence for the claim. That's the way the Western world usually works. Keep that in mind as you read the following headline:

"Theresa May has given Vladimir Putin's administration until midnight on Tuesday to explain how a former spy was poisoned in Salisbury, otherwise she will conclude it was an 'unlawful use of force' by the Russian state against the UK." [1]

This is similar to the age-old tactic, "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" If you say yes, then you have just admitted that you are guilty of committing a crime. If you say no, then you are still guilty of committing a crime.

Theresa May's promiscuous accusation will never work in a sane world where the rules of evidence are respected and applied consistently. You simply cannot accuse someone of a crime and expect the same person to produce evidence that he is not guilty. It just doesn't add up. In fact, one needn't be a politician or even a lawyer to realize that May's position simply is crazy.

That seems to be one reason why Russia isn't taking May seriously at all. What May and New World Order agents need to do is simply this: produce rigorous evidence which shows that Russia is culpable. But there is something else here.

When May was asked in 2016 if she was prepared to authorize a nuclear strike on thousands upon thousands of men, women and children in the Middle East, she responded by saying:

" Yes! The whole point of deterrent is that our enemies need to know that we would be prepared to use it ."

In a rational world, this is inexplicable. Let's just do some thought experiment here. Let's suppose that Russia is guilty. Could it be that Russia was simply following May's prevailing vision? Could it be that Russia was actually universalizing May's ideology?

May is ready to use nuclear weapons on thousands of perceived enemies, but other countries cannot do the same! How in the world did they elect these people as leaders of the so-called free world? This is not even differential equations or mathematical physics. This is common sense which applies to every human being on the planet.

What we are seeing here is that New World Order agents like May are desperate because Russia has humiliated them in Syria. NWO agents are still perpetuating the chorus that Assad has to go. But Assad, Russia and Iran are still exposing war mongers in the region. How long did it take the United States to obliterate Iraq? Just a few months. Libya? Just a few months.

But Syria? Well, both Russia and Iran are saying enough is enough. May and other puppets of the Zionist regime obviously do not like that. Therefore, they are summoning implausible scenarios in order to keep the Zionist expedition in countries in the Middle East alive and well. But Russia isn't taking those people seriously at all. [2]

[Mar 21, 2018] Pat Buchanan Asks Did Putin Order The Salisbury Hit

Mar 21, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org,

Britain has yet to identify the assassin who tried to murder the double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, in Salisbury, England.

But Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson knows who ordered the hit.

"We think it overwhelmingly likely that it was (Russian President Vladimir Putin's) decision to direct the use of a nerve agent on the streets of the U.K."

"Unforgivable," says Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov of the charge, which also defies "common sense." On Sunday, Putin echoed Peskov: "It is just sheer nonsense, complete rubbish, to think that anyone in Russia could do anything like that in the run-up to the presidential election and the World Cup. It's simply unthinkable."

Putin repeated Russia's offer to assist in the investigation.

But Johnson is not backing down; he is doubling down.

"We gave the Russians every opportunity to come up with an alternative hypothesis and they haven't," said Johnson. "We actually have evidence that Russia has not only been investigating the delivery of nerve agents for the purposes of assassination but has also been creating and stockpiling Novichok," the poison used in Salisbury.

Why Russia is the prime suspect is understandable. Novichok was created by Russia's military decades ago, and Skripal, a former Russian intel officer, betrayed Russian spies to MI6.

But what is missing here is the Kremlin's motive for the crime.

Skripal was convicted of betraying Russian spies in 2006. He spent four years in prison and was exchanged in 2010 for Russian spies in the U.S. If Putin wanted Skripal dead as an example to all potential traitors, why didn't he execute him while he was in Kremlin custody?

Why wait until eight years after Skripal had been sent to England? And how would this murder on British soil advance any Russian interest?

Putin is no fool. A veteran intelligence agent, he knows that no rival intel agency such as the CIA or MI6 would trade spies with Russia if the Kremlin were to go about killing them after they have been traded.

"Cui bono?" runs the always relevant Ciceronian question. "Who benefits" from this criminal atrocity?

Certainly, in this case, not Russia, not the Kremlin, not Putin.

All have taken a ceaseless beating in world opinion and Western media since the Skripals were found comatose, near death, on that bench outside a mall in Salisbury.

Predictably, Britain's reaction has been rage, revulsion and retaliation. Twenty-three Russian diplomats, intelligence agents in their London embassy, have been expelled. The Brits have been treating Putin as a pariah and depicting Russia as outside the circle of civilized nations.

Russia is "ripping up the international rulebook," roared Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson. Asked how Moscow might respond to the expulsions, Williamson retorted: Russia should "go away and shut up."

Putin sympathizers, including Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn, have been silenced or savaged as appeasers for resisting the rush to judgment.

The Americans naturally came down on the side of their oldest ally, with President Donald Trump imposing new sanctions.

We are daily admonished that Putin tried to tip the 2016 election to Trump. But if so, why would Putin order a public assassination that would almost compel Trump to postpone his efforts at a rapprochement?

Who, then, are the beneficiaries of this atrocity?

Is it not the coalition -- principally in our own capital city -- that bears an endemic hostility to Russia and envisions America's future role as a continuance of its Cold War role of containing and corralling Russia until we can achieve regime change in Moscow?

What should Trump's posture be? Stand by our British ally but insist privately on a full investigation and convincing proof before taking any irreversible action.

Was this act really ordered by Putin and the Kremlin, who have not only denied it but condemned it?

Or was it the work of rogue agents who desired the consequences that they knew the murder of Skripal would produce -- a deeper and more permanent split between Russia and the West?

Only a moron could not have known what the political ramifications of such an atrocity as this would be on U.S.-British-Russian relations.

And before we act on Boris Johnson's verdict -- that Putin ordered it -- let us recall:

The Spanish, we learned, did not actually blow up the battleship Maine in Havana Harbor in 1898, which ignited the Spanish-American War.

The story of North Vietnamese gunboats attacking U.S. destroyers, which led to the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and 58,000 dead Americans in Vietnam, proved not to be entirely accurate.

We went to war in Iraq in 2003 to disarm it of weapons of mass destruction we later discovered Saddam Hussein did not really have.

Some 4,500 U.S. dead and tens of thousands of wounded paid for that rush to judgment. And some of those clamoring for war then are visible in the vanguard of those clamoring for confronting Russia.

Before we set off on Cold War II with Russia -- leading perhaps to the shooting war we avoided in Cold War I -- let's try to get this one right.

[Mar 21, 2018] Russiagate Comes to England by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... . Mirzoyanov as a source of leakage was identified immediately. In the 1990, he was removed from all real work, through he remained a conduit of disinformation. In 1992, he revealed himself voluntarily by publishing the well-known article. From that moment, the Novichok attracted media interests. In the 1995, NYT wrote about the "new Russian super-weapon". ..."
"... What actually happened in Salisbury is unclear; nor the behavior of the poisoned, nor the actions of the police, doctors, special services do not add up to the whole picture. More or less plausible is the poisoning with a synthetic neurotoxin, similar to the toxin of fugu fish. ..."
"... Brief summary: "Novichok" is not the name of the CW, but the code of the KGB operation carried out to identify the mole (the information leakage channel), as well as the supply of disinformation. ..."
Mar 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

Israel Shamir , Next New Comment March 20, 2018 at 6:24 am GMT

Another View of Salisbury Accident

This brief note by Andrey Lazarchuk has been published in the social networks. It is interesting, and it agrees with revealed facts. Whether it is true or not – remains to be seen. Here is his text in verbatim translation:

Do not ask for the source of the information, I will not give it up. Everything written below is very different from what you can find on the web.

1. Already in the early 1980s, the Soviet Army ceased to treat CW (Chemical Weapons) as a weapon that could be used in real war conditions: approximately in 1983-84 it was decided to cease CW supplies to the army, reduce operational reserves and take out CW from the troops to long-term storage warehouses and landfills for destruction. At the same time and until 1996, there were no new CW products supplied to the army, neither new instructions for use and protection.

2. Mirzoyanov, majoring in chemistry and analytics, never worked at theoretical developments or practical synthesis. All 1980s he worked in the administration (First Department).

3. In the second half of the 1980s, the KGB carried out a large-scale operation to dis-inform the enemy, which also had the side-line task of identifying information leakage channels. Twenty "fake" but very detailed projects were developed for "a new chemical super-weapon that is not detected by existing NATO detectors and from which there is no protection" (NOVA with indices, "Novichok" with indices, ASD and others). The Novichok passed through the hands of Mirzoyanov.

4. The factory-laboratory in Kantyubek in the late 70′s was re-profiled from the creation and testing of CW and BW for the production and testing of herbicides and defoliants – mainly for the needs of the cotton industry.

5. Mirzoyanov as a source of leakage was identified immediately. In the 1990, he was removed from all real work, through he remained a conduit of disinformation. In 1992, he revealed himself voluntarily by publishing the well-known article. From that moment, the Novichok attracted media interests. In the 1995, NYT wrote about the "new Russian super-weapon".

6. NATO had spent more than $ 10 billion on defence against this fake weapon.

7. What actually happened in Salisbury is unclear; nor the behavior of the poisoned, nor the actions of the police, doctors, special services do not add up to the whole picture. More or less plausible is the poisoning with a synthetic neurotoxin, similar to the toxin of fugu fish.

Brief summary: "Novichok" is not the name of the CW, but the code of the KGB operation carried out to identify the mole (the information leakage channel), as well as the supply of disinformation.

End of Lazarchuk's note.

[Mar 21, 2018] Let us posit some 3rd party, whose name some dare not mention?

Notable quotes:
"... It parallels 9/11, whereby contradictory evidence has been 'pushed.' The targets seem to be two, 1) the proles [as usual] and 2) Putin/Russia [danger, nukes!] ..."
"... But (1) makes no sense; as no Iraqi WMDs showed, a) the CCC [= covert criminal cabal] went ahead anyway, telling the proles: "Bite your bum!" The proles are powerless passengers, and voting is futile anyway since x = y. ..."
"... And (2) should have *no* effect at all; Putin was always going to be and has now been re-elected, and from Crimea, E.Ukr and especially Syria, Russia appears to have the rogue-regimes' measure. A proof = refugees now streaming out of Ghouta into [comparative] freedom, say. ..."
"... Let us posit some 3rd party, whose name some dare not mention? "Do what we say and nobody gets hurt" seems to have lost its oomph and 'smartest crims on the planet' looks definitely jaded. Confounded by inconvenient reality, perhaps? ..."
Mar 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

skrik , March 20, 2018 at 4:21 pm GMT

@Jake

So if the Mossad did it on British soil, you can bet your last penny that both the CIA and MI5/6 not only knew before hand but participated in the details

It's a publicity stunt; recall Bernays' "torches of freedom." It parallels 9/11, whereby contradictory evidence has been 'pushed.' The targets seem to be two, 1) the proles [as usual] and 2) Putin/Russia [danger, nukes!]

But (1) makes no sense; as no Iraqi WMDs showed, a) the CCC [= covert criminal cabal] went ahead anyway, telling the proles: "Bite your bum!" The proles are powerless passengers, and voting is futile anyway since x = y.

And (2) should have *no* effect at all; Putin was always going to be and has now been re-elected, and from Crimea, E.Ukr and especially Syria, Russia appears to have the rogue-regimes' measure. A proof = refugees now streaming out of Ghouta into [comparative] freedom, say.

So, given the apparently threadbare psyop, a) with what purpose, and b) cui bono? Especially (b), UK could end up with a very bad case of 'egg all over its face.'

Let us posit some 3rd party, whose name some dare not mention? "Do what we say and nobody gets hurt" seems to have lost its oomph and 'smartest crims on the planet' looks definitely jaded. Confounded by inconvenient reality, perhaps?

When it comes to choosing between a conspiracy and a stuff-up? Well, here we seem to have both. In spades. *OR* : We haven't seen the 'surprise' ending yet?

[Mar 21, 2018] There is absolutely nothing totally duplicitous, nothing evil, that British secret service (meaning both MI5 and MI6) will not do, and in fact has not done.

Mar 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

Jake , Next New Comment March 20, 2018 at 11:30 am GMT

There is absolutely nothing totally duplicitous, nothing evil, that British secret service (meaning both MI5 and MI6) will not do, and in fact has not done.

The British Empire operated as something at least akin to utterly amoral. It saw itself as beyond good and evil in any historic sense. As it was born of rebellion against Christendom, that not only makes sense but also was all but inevitable.

Anglo-Saxon Puritanism was a Judaizing heresy. Judaizing heresy will produce culture that is pro-Jewish specifically and more generally will reflect ways of doing and being and thinking, ways of defining morality, that are in step with the Talmud. And that may be summed as: amoral will to power based on faith that one's group is the superior race/nation that should rule the world by any means necessary.

The British Empire did not die in any sense. The British Empire's direct rule simply moved to DC and NYC. America is now the chief operating officer of the British Empire. WASP culture and its rather unique form of amoral imperialism still rules the world and intends to crush every opposition into dust – for the uplifting of poor brown and black brothers and sisters, and for freedom for all, and other selfless good works.

Who poisoned the hapless idiot Russian double agent and his daughter? In general, some part of the British secret service, which includes the CIA and the Mossad and the Saudi General Intelligence Presidency.

[Mar 21, 2018] There is certainly a reasonable list of suspects, most more credible than the Russian state. Perhaps one can also separate out the crime in to two parts, those who committed it, and those who have sought to exploit it.

Notable quotes:
"... May accusations implies that the British authorities have both a control sample (to determine if the quantities found would be lethal) and samples from a few different labs to confirm that the fingerprint was from lab A not lab B for example. How did they got those ? ..."
"... Also from scant information available suggests that the most plausible hypothesis is a false flag operation which probably proceeded in two steps (with the first step not necessary accomplished by those who run the second step; it can be two different groups). ..."
"... There is certainly a reasonable list of suspects, most more credible than the Russian state. Perhaps one can also separate out the crime in to two parts, those who committed it, and those who have sought to exploit it. ..."
Mar 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

likbez , Next New Comment March 20, 2018 at 9:57 am GMT

May and Johnson are probably examples of the level of the degeneration of British elite.

May accusations implies that the British authorities have both a control sample (to determine if the quantities found would be lethal) and samples from a few different labs to confirm that the fingerprint was from lab A not lab B for example. How did they got those ?

Also from scant information available suggests that the most plausible hypothesis is a false flag operation which probably proceeded in two steps (with the first step not necessary accomplished by those who run the second step; it can be two different groups).

First some poison like Fentanyl was mixed into food or drinks or taken by Skripals themselves either as masked as some other medication, or as a part of narcoaddict fix. Fentanyl is known for previous use in assassinations. It killed more than 21K people in the USA in 2016

http://www.newser.com/story/249960/fentanyl-claims-top-spot-for-us-overdose-deaths.html

https://www.everydayhealth.com/drugs/fentanyl

On the second stage, which occurred when Skripals were already hospitalized nerve agent was planted in several places, including home and the police investigator became the first victim. Poisoning of "opponent of the regime" provides ideal conditions for a false flag operation as the cloud of secrecy can be used to subvert the investigation and pursue the agenda with the complete impunity. The government can essentially decree the "truth" in such cases. It also provides tremendous propaganda effect.

And British are not shy from experimenting on humans with poison gases either. It took 50 years for Porton Down chemical research centre to come clean on poisoning a British soldier with Sarin telling him it was a flu test. Poor fella.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1476722/Porton-Down-unlawful-killing-verdict-opens-gates-to-claims.html

Only this sequence of events can explain what the doctor who treated the daughter for 30 min and first responders suffered no consequences.

Poisoning of the "opponent of the regime" is a known British tactics first demonstrated in full glory in Litvinenko case ("Arafat and Litvinenko: an Interesting Turn to a Mysterious Story", http://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2013/11/13/arafat-and-litvinenko-an-interesting-turn-to-a-mysterious-story/ .)

The first step can also be plot by some group connected with William Browder of Magnitsky death fame ( http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-25190975 ), Berezovsky associates or some other "Russian mafia in London" groups. The fact that Skripal has such an expensive car suggests that he was participating in some business dealings, probably as a part of some London-based exiles group. UK government is not know for extreme generosity toward such people as Skripal.

The question arise why the UK government went this path. It well might be the USA pressure (like in case of Iraq invasion) or internal considerations that such step will be beneficial to the May government survival. Or both.

My impression is that his is just a first (and somewhat clumsy executed) step in multi step gambit in which Scripals were just sacrificial lamps. Pawns is a bigger game.

The next steps might be related to Would Cup and/or confiscation of assets of Russian oligarchs in London to put pressure on Putin and possibly initiate with their hands a "regime change" in Russia.

Available timelines suggest that initial poisoning took around half an hour to incapacitate them, which is not typical for a nerve gas.

Here is timeline adapted from BBC ( http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43315636 )


CCTV footage shows them walking around 3:47 p.m. 16:15 GMT: emergency services received the first report of an incident ??:?? Police found the pair on a bench outside Zizzi in an "extremely serious condition"

If we assume that they were poisoned at Zizzi with fentanyl or something similar they survived for more then an hour, which is not atypical in cases of narcotics overdose. Moreover Scripal lost emotional control at the restaurant which also happens when a narcoaddict wants to take his fix and can't. That does not explain why the daughter was also affected, though.

Here is also another timeline from

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/03/no-patients-have-experienced-symptoms-of-nerve-agent-poisoning-in-salisbury.html#c6a00d8341c640e53ef01b8d2e3cc6c970c

@25 peter.. i found this sequence of events timing from somewhere else -- can't remember.. it
seems they visiting the pub before the restaurant

1255 EST depart residence on 10 min drive to cemetery

1305 EST arrive cemetery

1335 EST depart cemetery

1340 ARR Sainsbury parking lot

1345 EST arrive pub after 5 min walk to pub. EST 30 min in pub

1415 EST depart pub for 5 min walk to Zizzi

1420 ARR Zizzi pizza restaurant. Skirpal angry with loss of emotional control.

1535 DP Zizzi pizza restaurant

1547 CCTV walking on street toward park

1600 Found on park bench Comatose, frothing at mouth, contracted pupils, vacant stare,
convulsions, evidence of vomiting.

1615 Police and ambulance receive information from public. Response followed

CanSpeccy , Website Next New Comment March 20, 2018 at 5:14 pm GMT
@likbez

Only this sequence of events can explain what the doctor who treated the daughter for 30 min and first responders suffered no consequences.

The "Doctor" who, so the BBC reported, "asked not to be named" is surely a prime suspect. Not only was she the only person known to be in the vicinity of the Skripals closest to the time they were poisoned, but she was aksi the person best able to have planted nerve agent contamination where the Skripals were allegedly incapacitated.

As for the Skripals, who have disappeared from view and to whom the daughter has been denied contact by a Russian embassy representative, perhaps they are already settling into new identities, their old selves eventually to be declared dead, despite heroic efforts by, um, well we're not sure who, since no one subjected to a nerve agent was admitted as a patient by the local hospital.

LondonBob , Next New Comment March 20, 2018 at 10:01 am GMT
There is certainly a reasonable list of suspects, most more credible than the Russian state. Perhaps one can also separate out the crime in to two parts, those who committed it, and those who have sought to exploit it.

[Mar 21, 2018] The USA neocons might want to present (apparently by way of a series of reckless provocations) ultimatum to Russia and China: "either cede your sovereignty to the empire and start taking orders, or it's war" or something like that.

Mar 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

Harold Smith , Next New Comment March 21, 2018 at 2:15 am GMT

@tjm

The "hate for Trump" by the establishment, is a total canard.

Trump is OWNED by the same Zionist mafia filth that own May, which is the same Zionists that own the media in America and Britain.

As when Obama (also a Zionist puppet, mainly because Obama was a coward, unlike Trump who has been groomed to be a zionist puppet) was in office, he was provided a FAKE conflict with the "birthers". American politics are all about subterfuge, distraction, divide and conquer.

The so called "attacks on Trump", are simply meant to drive the right to support him, precisely the way the "attacks on Obama", drove the left to ignore Obama's neocon ways, and defend him.

England is run by the Zionists, Washington is run by the Zionists, Wall Street IS Zionist, as it the media and the entire entertainment industry, as well as the "social Media", Trump is from Jew York City, owes his fortune to Jewish Bankers, and yet, so many buy this ridiculous narrative of Trump, the anti establishment warrior, a meme that is ludicrous.

So, instead of discussing Trump's lies about border enforcement, his lies about leaving Syria, his lies about rebuilding infrastructure, he are distracted with lies about "sexual harassment", and "Russia Gate"...and sadly many buy right into it.

" [...] The so called "attacks on Trump", are simply meant to drive the right to support him, precisely the way the "attacks on Obama", drove the left to ignore Obama's neocon ways, and defend him. [...]"

Exactly. Orange Clown's whole campaign was a calculated "bait and switch" scam from the beginning, IMO.

I believe that Orange Clown is a "deep cover" or "sleeper" agent that's been groomed and "waiting in the wings" for his masters' beck and call. And the call came at the end of the Obama administration, with the agenda not only stalled but exposed like never before; with Russia and China rising; and the U.S. falling behind. As I see it, the political ascendancy of Orange Clown is a sign of his masters' increasing desperation.

I believe that Orange Clown's mission – as puppet president of last resort – is to present (apparently by way of a series of reckless provocations) ultimatum to Russia and China: "either cede your sovereignty to the empire and start taking orders, or it's war" or something like that.

And I believe the relocation of the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem was intended to show the world (in case there's any doubt) just who it is that's calling the shots here and running everything in the U.S. (IOW they're taking off the mask as they demand surrender).

Some people woke up when Orange Clown attacked the Syrian airbase with cruise missiles, but unfortunately it seems there are still many people who absolutely refuse to accept that Orange Clown is a fraud, no matter what he does (or fails to do). Paul Craig Roberts is an example of someone who should know better, but who continues to imply that Orange Clown is just a helpless "babe in the woods"; a nice guy in a bad situation.

[Mar 21, 2018] How much more evidence does the world need that the Western media is nothing but a collection of liars devoid of all integrity who serve as a Propaganda Ministry for undeclared government agendas? The Skripal Affair is the final nail in the coffin of the Western media by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

Notable quotes:
"... Washington's gratuitous raising of tensions with Russia that we have been witnessing for many years is so reckless and irresponsible that we need some relief from the depression of it all. Perhaps I am grasping at straws, but here are some hopeful developments. ..."
"... As important as Amb. Murray's factually uncontested findings are, the main point is that no laboratory has reported any finding that such a nerve agent was used on Skirpal and his daughter. We don't even know if any attack occurred on Skirpal. The corrupt British government has provided no evidence of any attack and no evidence of any nerve agent. ..."
"... What is the real reason for the British government's completely obvious blatant lies? What is the real reason for the complete failure of the media to investigate and report an alleged event? ..."
"... How much more evidence does the world need that the Western media is nothing but a collection of liars devoid of all integrity who serve as a Propaganda Ministry for undeclared government agendas? The Skripal Affair is the final nail in the coffin of the Western media. ..."
"... This article was originally published on Paul Craig Roberts Institute for Political Economy. ..."
"... Dr. Paul Craig Roberts is a frequent contributor to Global Research. ..."
Mar 20, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca
Originally from: Novichok and Russia-Gate: Finally, Some Good News By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts Global Research, March 20, 2018

Washington's gratuitous raising of tensions with Russia that we have been witnessing for many years is so reckless and irresponsible that we need some relief from the depression of it all. Perhaps I am grasping at straws, but here are some hopeful developments.

"I think we have ample facts revealed to us during this last year and a half that high-ranking people throughout government, not just the FBI, high-ranking people had a plot to not have Hillary Clinton, you know, indicted.

"I think it goes right to the top. And it involves that whole [Russiagate] strategy -- they were gonna win, nobody would have known any of this stuff, and they just unleashed the intelligence community. Look at the unmaskings. We haven't heard anything about that yet. Look at the way they violated the rights of all those American citizens."

Kallstrom goes on to name names .

It is possible that the firing of Deputy FBI Director McCabe has opened for public exposure the plot hatched by the CIA, FBI, Departments of Justice and State, Hillary Clinton, and the Democratic National Committee to cover up Hillary's felonies and to falsely accuse Donald Trump of conspiring with Russian President Putin to steal the US presidential election. If Trump doesn't chicken out, it is possible to put Brennan, Comey, McCabe, Hillary, and many others in prison for their egregious and bold assaut on American democracy and the rule of law. These prosecutions would break the power, of much of it, of the secret national security state, and, thereby, make it possible for Trump to return to his campaign promise to normalize relations with Russia. If these relations are not normalized, war will be the result. But at least now there is a chance.

Amb. Murray goes on to establish that there is no evidence that Russia ever developed such a nerve agent and that the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) found no such agent when it oversaw and verified Russia's destruction of Russian chemical weapons. Amb. Murray reports that the only known synthesis of what is being called "Novichok" occurred in 2016 by Iran in cooperation with the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in order to test whether formulas published in a book many years ago could actually produce such an agent.

Amb. Murray exposes the utterly corrupt presstitutes that comprise the Western media for never once asking the corrupt UK government about its hedge words, "of a type developed by Russia" and for their efforts to silence him with libel and slander.

As important as Amb. Murray's factually uncontested findings are, the main point is that no laboratory has reported any finding that such a nerve agent was used on Skirpal and his daughter. We don't even know if any attack occurred on Skirpal. The corrupt British government has provided no evidence of any attack and no evidence of any nerve agent.

What is the real reason for the British government's completely obvious blatant lies? What is the real reason for the complete failure of the media to investigate and report an alleged event?

How much more evidence does the world need that the Western media is nothing but a collection of liars devoid of all integrity who serve as a Propaganda Ministry for undeclared government agendas? The Skripal Affair is the final nail in the coffin of the Western media.

*

This article was originally published on Paul Craig Roberts Institute for Political Economy.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

[Mar 21, 2018] Blaming Russia for Skripal attack is similar to 'Jews poisoning our wells' in Middle Ages by Jim W. Dean

"The freaky British Government headed by a haggard Prime Minister is accusing President Putin personally of poisoning a former Russian spy and his daughter by nerve gas. This move on the part of British Intelligence is intended to portray President Putin as a criminal before the Presidential elections and to make a hodgepodge of allegations to divide the pro-Russian allies inside the European Union and implant hatred for Putin within the British community."
Notable quotes:
"... I had not known Craig Murray, the former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan was still on the planet. He was one of the bright lights of the sad War of Terror when he blew the story of the terror regime running Uzbekistan. ..."
"... It used the US war as a smokescreen to round up all of their political opponents as "terrorists", to torture and kill, and then fed phony confessions to US Intel that nobody seemed very interested in knowing they were bogus. Murray at the time said 10,000 were murdered. ..."
"... military grade ..."
"... no alternative conclusion other than that the Russian state was culpable for the attempted murder of Mr Skripal and his daughter. ..."
"... We did not need Murray's revelations, however valuable, to come to this conclusion ourselves. The day before Mrs May made her statement to the House of Commons, Neil Basu, the newly appointed assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police for counter-terrorism, who is in charge of the Skripal enquiry, told the press, in a formal statement, that the investigation was highly complex and that it would take a long time, probably "weeks." ..."
"... This enquiry, which broke the law under which it was conducted because Section 2 of the Enquiries Act of 2005 forbids such enquiries from ruling on criminal or civil liability, was in turn as convincing as the similar 2004 Hutton inquiry into the death of the scientist David Kelly. The Hutton report was widely ridiculed as an establishment stitch-up, which it was. ..."
"... The author of the Litvinenko report, a former judge acting on orders from Theresa May, concluded that President Putin ordered Litvinenko's assassination. Very similar arguments – that only the Russians could have done it because only they have these poisons – have now resurfaced about Skripal. ..."
"... Moreover, the same toxicologist, the late Professor John Henry of Imperial College, London, was the source of both the theory about Litvinenko's poisoning and also of the similar theory about Viktor Yushchenko, the Ukrainian politician who stood for president in 2004 and who developed acne during the campaign. ..."
"... John Laughland for RT. ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | www.veteranstoday.com

from Russia Today , Moscow

Craig Murray is still fighting the bastards

[ Editor's Note : RT is finally hitting its stride on the nerve agent poisoning, albeit it two days late. We were afraid this might be day number three, but its afternoon postings had some meat on their bones.

We are still mystified at VT how the Brits think anyone is going to believe their cock-and-bull story. On the contrary, we think they are pushing a hoax, based on their publicly making claims they admit not having evidence for.

They are not suffering from stupidity, but are over confident in their ability to bluff their way through it.

I had not known Craig Murray, the former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan was still on the planet. He was one of the bright lights of the sad War of Terror when he blew the story of the terror regime running Uzbekistan.

It used the US war as a smokescreen to round up all of their political opponents as "terrorists", to torture and kill, and then fed phony confessions to US Intel that nobody seemed very interested in knowing they were bogus. Murray at the time said 10,000 were murdered.

When Murray passed this gruesome information on to his diplomatic superiors, they were not interested. This current case is another example, as I had warned after 9-11, that if you don't nail them, they just come back at you later, having no fear of retribution from the public.

Litvinenko killed himself while smuggling a few million dollars of Polonium

VT's Ian Greenhalgh has a great story up, debunking the earlier Polonium poisoning of Russian defector Litvinenko and the usual British coverup done there.

Traces of Polonium on the plane seats Litvinenko had flown on proved he had been transporting it, obviously in a smuggling endeavor. Be sure to read Ian's piece.

As it was worth a few million dollars, VT can assure you the Russians don't have to spend that much to knock somebody off, even for a defector. Forgive me, but I have to say that is overkill.

Our revenge for putting us all through the Russian fear porn hoax is to organize call campaigns to British embassies everywhere, and let them know how ghastly we feel their behavior has been here. The phone number in DC is 202-588-6500.

The police commissioner says it is a complicated case that will take weeks for a preliminary report, and then British politicians are all pretending to have it figured out, but are keeping how they did that a secret. Gosh, might someone be lying to us? Jim W. Dean ]

Whitehall might regret the day for its playing us all for fools

– First published March 15, 2018 –

There is no proof of Russia's guilt in the Skripal poisoning. The case recalls previous allegations of poisoning which turned out to be either unproven or false, writes John Laughland. Congratulations to Craig Murray for getting there first. The colorful former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, turned anti-establishment dissident after he was sacked from the Foreign Office in 2004, has published on his blog some key texts by authoritative scientists which cast serious doubt on the British government's claims about what happened to the former double agent, Sergei Skripal, and why.

Murray – and his sources – have unearthed texts from 2016, 2013 and 1995 by, respectively, a scientist at Porton Down, the secret British military chemical weapons installations which is 20 minutes from Salisbury where Skripal was found last week; a scientist at the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the statutory body created by the 1997 Convention on Chemical Weapons but which London has ignored and bypassed in its spat with Moscow; and by the Russian defector scientist, Vil Mirzayanov, who is the sole source for the claim that the Soviet Union started to manufacture so-called novichok ("newbie") nerve agents in the 1980s, allegedly now used to poison Skripal.

Two of these texts, for which Murray does not provide links, are available online here and here . The first two show, long before anyone had heard of Sergei Skripal, that the existence of novichoks has not been confirmed.

Mirzayanov's 1995 paper says that they could be manufactured anywhere, for instance by any laboratory which can make fertilizer or pesticide, and that the factory where they were allegedly developed by the Soviet Union is in Uzbekistan, a country which has not been under Moscow's control since 1991 but where the Americans had a military base until 2005 .

In other words, even if it is true that Skripal was poisoned by this nerve agent, novichoks are not " military grade ". There is therefore no proof that they are manufactured in Russia and no grounds for claiming, as Theresa May did on March 14 in the House of Commons, that there is " no alternative conclusion other than that the Russian state was culpable for the attempted murder of Mr Skripal and his daughter. "

On the contrary, there are plenty of alternative conclusions available at this stage. The fact that these texts date from long before the Skripal affair only increases their credibility.

We did not need Murray's revelations, however valuable, to come to this conclusion ourselves. The day before Mrs May made her statement to the House of Commons, Neil Basu, the newly appointed assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police for counter-terrorism, who is in charge of the Skripal enquiry, told the press, in a formal statement, that the investigation was highly complex and that it would take a long time, probably "weeks."

Mrs. May's statement and that of Commissioner Basu cannot both be true: if the police investigation is still ongoing, there are no grounds even for making allegations, let alone for saying that guilt has been proved.

Mrs. May's proclaimed lack of doubt is hardly convincing, since it was she who, as home secretary, ordered the Litvinenko enquiry to be opened, seven years after Alexander Litvinenko's death, and then later instructed evidence given to it by the British intelligence services to be kept secret .

This enquiry, which broke the law under which it was conducted because Section 2 of the Enquiries Act of 2005 forbids such enquiries from ruling on criminal or civil liability, was in turn as convincing as the similar 2004 Hutton inquiry into the death of the scientist David Kelly. The Hutton report was widely ridiculed as an establishment stitch-up, which it was.

The author of the Litvinenko report, a former judge acting on orders from Theresa May, concluded that President Putin ordered Litvinenko's assassination. Very similar arguments – that only the Russians could have done it because only they have these poisons – have now resurfaced about Skripal.

Moreover, the same toxicologist, the late Professor John Henry of Imperial College, London, was the source of both the theory about Litvinenko's poisoning and also of the similar theory about Viktor Yushchenko, the Ukrainian politician who stood for president in 2004 and who developed acne during the campaign.

The theory that Yuschenko had been poisoned by his " pro-Russian " rival, Viktor Yanukovich, was widely accredited at the time, even though the clinic in Vienna, on whose premises the original claim of poisoning had been announced, formally denied, in a statement on its website, that it had authorized or approved the diagnosis.

In fact, as I learned by telephoning the medical director of the clinic which published the denial, he had received death threats for questioning Yushchenko's story. In five years as president of Ukraine, moreover, with the whole apparatus of the state at his disposal, Yushchenko was never able to find anyone responsible for what happened to him and the affair has now been closed for years.

The whole thing, to put it bluntly, was a load of rubbish. There are no known cases of fatal poisoning by dioxin in the history of medicine, and the Dutch toxicologist who claimed to have found dioxin in Yushchenko's blood – as I also found out when I rang him too – was in reality a food scientist who admitted to me that he had no way of knowing how it had got there.

He added that the dose was so small that it would hardly have killed a rat, let alone a human being. Yet this ridiculous theory was widely believed to be true, including by professors of medicine, and it served its purpose in getting Yushchenko elected.

So there is a history of such poisoning allegations going back a decade and a half. Such accusations tap into some very deep psychology indeed: Russia plays in these allegations the role attributed to Jews in the Middle Ages, who were regularly accused of poisoning wells or of bearing the plague.

Each of our modern witch-hunts feeds off the previous one and the theory snowballs over time. The unproved allegations of yesterday become the elements of proof for today. Those of us who cried foul back in 2004 may well be proved right about Sergei Skripal – but by that time everyone will have forgotten him and moved on to something else.

John Laughland for RT.

John Laughland is a historian and political scientist who has been Director of Studies at the Institute of Democracy and Cooperation in Paris since 2008. He is the author of several books, the most recent of which is 'A History of Political trials from Charles I to Charles Taylor'.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

[Mar 21, 2018] Why ever would May backtrack? The MSM are in full support, creating all the facts that justify her shrill denunciation of Vlad the Poisoner?

Notable quotes:
"... Why ever would she backtrack? The MSM are in full support, creating all the facts that justify her shrill denunciation of Vlad the Poisoner? ..."
"... Fellow was expendable. Daughter murdered for shock value. Judaized West not ethical not moral. ..."
Mar 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

CanSpeccy , Website March 20, 2018 at 5:27 pm GMT

@El Dato

The fun thing is that Premier May is now so hopelessly committed to this utter bollocks that backtracking will be political suicide.

Why ever would she backtrack? The MSM are in full support, creating all the facts that justify her shrill denunciation of Vlad the Poisoner?

bjondo , March 20, 2018 at 5:43 pm GMT
If they were poisoned?

Probably Brits. Maybe Benyammerin? Certainly US thug state aware. Most likely the 3 Axis of Evil members conspired. Fellow was expendable. Daughter murdered for shock value. Judaized West not ethical not moral.

Any way this event only helped Pres Putin. And 1500 international observers certify legit. US will need 1500 for NYC alone in 2020 to prevent Demos from stealing.

[Mar 21, 2018] Question Less! 'Liberal' witch-finders hunt for heretics in modern Britain by Neil Clark

RT Op-ed
Notable quotes:
"... no specific schooling for his role as witch-finder -- he just came with a passionate belief in the righteousness of his own actions. ..."
"... Keeping our press free is the best way to counter Kremlin propaganda ..."
"... both literally and metaphorically ..."
"... Russian aggression ..."
"... Russian state propaganda is no joke & it shouldn't be on London Underground ..."
"... n simple terms: he doesn't like the idea of a 'state-sponsored ' message which is not coming from his state, so wants to use the power of the state to make absolutely sure no one hears anything his state doesn't like. See? ..."
"... withdrawing licence from Putin's propaganda arm Russia Today ..."
"... f all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind, ..."
"... positive development. ..."
"... entirely justified ..."
Mar 20, 2018 | www.rt.com

Never mind that the presumption of innocence is a hallmark of a fair judicial system and indeed a civilized country. The Sun says it was Putin who did it, and so does John Woodcock MP, so that settles it. Trial by media and neocon propagandists has replaced due process.

Unlike in the 1970s, when Britain was truly a vibrant democracy, political debate is today vigorously policed with dissident voices hounded by obnoxious 'Witch-finder Generals' who clearly model themselves on the late Matthew Hopkins , a man who traveled East Anglia on horseback hunting for heretics. It was said of Hopkins that he had " no specific schooling for his role as witch-finder -- he just came with a passionate belief in the righteousness of his own actions. " With such an attitude he'd surely have a nice job working for the Rupert Murdoch media empire today.

Truly, what a state we're in. People -- believe it or not -- have been banned from membership of political parties on the basis on tweets or Facebook postings they made years ago. Employers are contacted too if the 'wrong' views are expressed on social media. Everyone it seems must conform and only express 'politically correct' opinions which the 21st Century witch-finders deem acceptable. That means no questioning of the official War Party narrative on foreign policy -- and joining in with the current Establishment-induced wave of Russophobia. Or else. Just look at the vile attacks made by 'Inside the Tent' state and corporate media journalists on Craig Murray, the former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, for his daring to challenge the official narrative on the Salisbury poisonings.

On Being a Dissenting Voice in 2018 - I just thought I might give you a little taste of what it means to your personal life to express dissent from the government line in the UK in 2018. Let me start with this combined effort from the UK's most popular https://t.co/UN886iUjEG

-- Craig Murray (@CraigMurrayOrg) March 20, 2018

There have been some chilling statements made in the past week, but arguably none more so than those made in a Sunday newspaper column by Ruth Davidson, the 'progressive' leader of the Scottish Conservatives. In an article entitled in its hard copy version " Keeping our press free is the best way to counter Kremlin propaganda ," Davidson claimed that Britain was being poisoned " both literally and metaphorically " by " Russian aggression ." In order to protect Britain's vigorous free media, we must "pull the plug" on RT.

I live less than 15 miles from where George Orwell is buried and I could swear I heard him turning in his grave on Sunday night. Repeat after me: To keep the press free we must close television stations To keep the press free we must close television stations. War is Peace. Slavery is Freedom!

'The clamour'?! It's only coming from you - The Times- who have run an obsessive & very nasty campaign to try and get @RT_com taken off air and second-rate NeoCon politicians desperate to curry favour with your owner Rupert Murdoch. https://t.co/TXmTla4lRW

-- Neil Clark (@NeilClark66) March 19, 2018

Davidson is one of a small but vociferous group of witch-finders who want RT taken off air. Lord Adonis is another. The unelected peer, whose only elected office was as a Lib Dem/SDP councilor in leafy North Oxford in the 1990s, was incensed when he saw RT's witty adverts on the London Underground last year. " Russian state propaganda is no joke & it shouldn't be on London Underground ," the baron tweeted . He then said he would be taking the matter up with 'the Commissioner.' As Simon Rite noted for RT: "I n simple terms: he doesn't like the idea of a 'state-sponsored ' message which is not coming from his state, so wants to use the power of the state to make absolutely sure no one hears anything his state doesn't like. See? "

On March 15, the pompous, censorious peer tweeted that he had written to UK media regulator Ofcom, requesting that they consider " withdrawing licence from Putin's propaganda arm Russia Today " -- which according to him is "not a news channel."

Perhaps we should move to a system whereby Lord Adonis designates what is or is not a " news channel "? We can't leave it to ordinary viewers in Sunderland or Southampton to decide, can we?

Rights activist Peter Tatchell in hot water over calls for Russian officials' children to be expelled from UK schools -- https://t.co/YCGcIMnwWh

-- Neil Clark (@NeilClark66) March 19, 2018

Then there are the recent comments of Peter Tatchell. The 'rights activist' is another 'liberal' who is currently advocating some pretty illiberal measures. On Sunday, on Twitter, he called for the 'seizure' of the UK assets of Putin-linked officials and their families and for their children to be expelled from British schools. Got that? Children expelled from school not because they are unruly or have been taking drugs, but because of who their mums and dads are. The parallels with Nazi Germany circa 1935 spring readily to mind.

A cursory look at how racial laws in 1930s Germany and Italy began is enough to show you where all this anti-Russian hysteria in the UK is heading: #Nuremberglaws #LeggiRazziali https://t.co/qKz4u3PnTX

-- Robin M Graziadei (@robinmonotti) March 19, 2018

The sad truth is that hatred of Russia and Russians has not only become an acceptable form of racism in the 'politically correct' Britain of 2018, it's almost de rigueur for anyone who wants to progress in politics and the media. What an indictment that is of the present system. The more we talk of 'tolerance,' the less 'tolerant' our public life has become.

The phenomenon of liberal totalitarianism -- and I don't think it's hyperbolic to call it that -- needs to be openly discussed, before it's too late. It's already too late for some. Entire countries such as Libya -- which not so long ago enjoyed the highest standard of living in the whole of Africa -- have been destroyed in order to 'save' their people from a leader the 'liberals' deem is beyond the pale. Whether the people want to be saved is neither here nor there. The Western 'liberal' always knows best. He's superior to everyone else. He has the right to decide who should lead countries thousands of miles away, which elections are 'free and fair' and which ones are fixed. Liberalism used to be an ideology which protected the individual and his rights. Now that it has merged with neo-conservatism, it oppresses the individual and reduces our rights. It seeks to ban, to bomb, to destroy. And all done in the name of 'moderation' and 'fighting extremism.'

Old-style liberalism took its cue from John Stuart Mill, the author of 'On Liberty,' who warned of the dangers of suppressing opinions we don't like. "I f all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind, " Mill famously wrote.

New-style liberalism by contrast takes its cue from neocon ideologues and obsessive Cold War warriors who want to clamp down on dissident voices.

An important turning point in the descent of liberalism into totalitarianism was the 'humanitarian' bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999 and in particular the targeting by NATO of Serbian TV. Sixteen workers were killed in a missile strike in the early hours of April 23, which also severely damaged a nearby Russian Orthodox Church. It was hailed by the truly demonic US envoy Richard Holbrooke as a " positive development. "

NATO justified the attack on the grounds that RTS was broadcasting anti-NATO 'propaganda.' British Prime Minister Tony Blair declared that bombing television stations was " entirely justified ."

It's worth remembering that even the Luftwaffe, at the height of the Blitz, didn't bomb the BBC having demanded that it hand the microphone to Joseph Goebbels.

The way we can strike back against this new liberal totalitarianism is to refuse to be cowed by it. We must not be afraid to express views which we genuinely hold, even if it does mean being targeted by witch-finders or NATO 'democracy bombs.' The more we speak our minds, the more it will encourage others to speak out too. Anti-free speech bullies who are destroying the Enlightenment values they claim to support, can only succeed if they ' gaslight ' us into submission and people decide to bite their tongues. That way -- the cowardly way -- leads to a thousand deaths, as Shakespeare put it; the valiant by contrast, taste death only once.

Question More, as the RT the motto says. And don't let those who want us to question less get away with it.

Read more:

Britain's presumption of guilt towards Russia invites conflict and chaos Anger of Adonis: British Lord joins political onslaught against RT's ads with Twitter rant

Follow Neil Clark on Twitter @NeilClark66

[Mar 21, 2018] "Novichok" is not the name of the CW, but the code of the KGB operation carried out to identify the mole (the information leakage channel), as well as the supply of disinformation by Israel Shamir

Notable quotes:
"... Mirzoyanov, majoring in chemistry and analytics, never worked at theoretical developments or practical synthesis. All 1980s he worked in the administration (First Department). ..."
"... Mirzoyanov as a source of leakage was identified immediately. In the 1990, he was removed from all real work, through he remained a conduit of disinformation. In 1992, he revealed himself voluntarily by publishing the well-known article. From that moment, the Novichok attracted media interests. In the 1995, NYT wrote about the "new Russian super-weapon". ..."
"... What actually happened in Salisbury is unclear; nor the behavior of the poisoned, nor the actions of the police, doctors, special services do not add up to the whole picture. More or less plausible is the poisoning with a synthetic neurotoxin, similar to the toxin of fugu fish ..."
"... Brief summary: "Novichok" is not the name of the CW, but the code of the KGB operation carried out to identify the mole (the information leakage channel), as well as the supply of disinformation. ..."
Mar 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

Postscript: Another View of Novichok

The Salisbury poisoning played an important role in the Russian elections. Practically all Russian publications expressed indignation and didn't propose any explanation. This brief note by Andrey Lazarchuk has been published in the social networks. It is interesting, and it agrees with revealed facts. Whether it is true or not – remains to be seen. Here is his text in verbatim translation:

Do not ask for the source of the information, I will not give it up. Everything written below is very different from what you can find on the web.

1. Already in the early 1980s, the Soviet Army ceased to treat CW (Chemical Weapons) as a weapon that could be used in real war conditions: approximately in 1983-84 it was decided to cease CW supplies to the army, reduce operational reserves and take out CW from the troops to long-term storage warehouses and landfills for destruction. At the same time and until 1996, there were no new CW products supplied to the army, neither new instructions for use and protection.

2. Mirzoyanov, majoring in chemistry and analytics, never worked at theoretical developments or practical synthesis. All 1980s he worked in the administration (First Department).

3. In the second half of the 1980s, the KGB carried out a large-scale operation to dis-inform the enemy, which also had the side-line task of identifying information leakage channels. Twenty "fake" but very detailed projects were developed for "a new chemical super-weapon that is not detected by existing NATO detectors and from which there is no protection" (NOVA with indices, "Novichok" with indices, ASD and others). The Novichok passed through the hands of Mirzoyanov.

4. The factory-laboratory in Kantyubek in the late 70′s was re-profiled from the creation and testing of CW and BW for the production and testing of herbicides and defoliants – mainly for the needs of the cotton industry.

5. Mirzoyanov as a source of leakage was identified immediately. In the 1990, he was removed from all real work, through he remained a conduit of disinformation. In 1992, he revealed himself voluntarily by publishing the well-known article. From that moment, the Novichok attracted media interests. In the 1995, NYT wrote about the "new Russian super-weapon".

6. NATO had spent more than $ 10 billion on defence against this fake weapon.

7. What actually happened in Salisbury is unclear; nor the behavior of the poisoned, nor the actions of the police, doctors, special services do not add up to the whole picture. More or less plausible is the poisoning with a synthetic neurotoxin, similar to the toxin of fugu fish .

Brief summary: "Novichok" is not the name of the CW, but the code of the KGB operation carried out to identify the mole (the information leakage channel), as well as the supply of disinformation.

Raves , March 21, 2018 at 3:31 am GMT

Of course, like most articles about Putin, no evidence is provided.

I'm sick of fake news. I'm sick of the constant barrage of claims with no evidence. I don't care who makes them. If you want people to pay any attention, provide evidence. Otherwise, I might as well waste my time watching CNN.

[Mar 21, 2018] Whataboutism Is A Nonsensical Propaganda Term Used To Defend The Failed Status Quo by Mike Krieger

Highly recommended!
The classic question " Who is judging the judges"
Western journalists, with a very small exception (real outliers), are experts at presenting one-sided arguments, whatever the facts and evidence. Look at Meagan Kelly interviews for the inspiration. They know how to wear down any dissident who does not buy into government talking points
Mar 20, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

If you spend any time on Twitter, you'll probably be familiar with the latest pathetic attempt to defend and insulate the U.S. status quo from criticism. It centers around the usage of an infantile and meaningless term, "whataboutism."

Let's begin with one particularly absurd accusation of "whataboutism" promoted by NPR last year:

When O'Reilly countered that "Putin is a killer," Trump responded, "There are a lot of killers. You got a lot of killers. What, you think our country is so innocent?"

This particular brand of changing the subject is called "whataboutism" -- a simple rhetorical tactic heavily used by the Soviet Union and, later, Russia. And its use in Russia helps illustrate how it could be such a useful tool now, in America. As Russian political experts told NPR, it's an attractive tactic for populists in particular, allowing them to be vague but appear straight-talking at the same time.

The idea behind whataboutism is simple: Party A accuses Party B of doing something bad. Party B responds by changing the subject and pointing out one of Party A's faults -- "Yeah? Well what about that bad thing you did?" (Hence the name.)

It's not exactly a complicated tactic -- any grade-schooler can master the "yeah-well-you-suck-too-so-there" defense. But it came to be associated with the USSR because of the Soviet Union's heavy reliance upon whataboutism throughout the Cold War and afterward, as Russia.

This is a really embarrassing take by NPR .

First, the author tries to associate a tactic that's been around since humans first wandered into caves -- deflecting attention away from yourself by pointing out the flaws in others -- into some uniquely nefarious Russian propaganda tool. Second, that's not even what Trump did in this example.

In his response to O'Reilly, Trump wasn't using "whataboutism" to deflect away from his own sins. Rather, he offered a rare moment of self-reflection about the true role played by the U.S. government around the world. This isn't "whataboutism," it's questioning the hypocrisy and abuse of power of one's own government. It's an attempt to take responsibility for stuff he might actually be able to change as President. It's the most ethical and honest response to that question in light of the amount of violence the U.S. government engages in abroad. If our leaders did this more often, we might stop repeatedly jumping from one insane and destructive war to the next.

Had O'Reilly's question been about the U.S. government's ongoing support of Saudi Arabia's war crimes in Yemen and Trump shifted the conversation to Russian atrocities, he could then be fairly accused of changing the subject to avoid accountability. In that case, you could condemn Trump for "whataboutism" because he intentionally deflected attention away from his own government's sins to the sins of another. This sort of thing is indeed very dangerous, especially when done by someone in a position of power.

But here's the thing. You don't need some catchy, infantile term like "whataboutism" to point out that someone in power's deflecting attention from their own transgressions. I agree wholeheartedly with Adam Johnson when he states:

He's absolutely right. One should never rely on the lazy use of a cutesy, catchy term like "whataboutism" as a retort to someone who points out a glaring contradiction. If you do, you're either a propagandist with no counterargument or a fool who mindlessly adopts the jingoistic cues of others. Responding to someone by saying "that's just whataboutism" isn't an argument, it's an assault on one's logical faculties. It's attempt to provide people with a way to shut down debate and conversation by simply blurting out a clever sounding fake-word. Here's an example of how I've seen it used on Twitter.

One U.S. citizen (likely a card carrying member of "the resistance") will regurgitate some standard intel agency line on Syria or Russia. Another U.S. citizen will then draw attention to the fact that their own government plays an active role in egregious war crimes in Yemen on behalf of the Saudis. This person will proceed to advocate for skepticism with regard to U.S. government and intelligence agency war promotion considering how badly the public was deceived in the run up to the Iraq war. For this offense, they'll be accused of "whataboutism."

The problem with this accusation is that this person isn't switching the subject to bring up another's transgression to deflect from scrutiny of his or her behavior. In contrast, the person is putting the conversation in its rightful place, which is to question the behavior of one's own country. When it comes to issues such as nation-state violence, the primary duty of a citizen is not to obsess all day about the violence perpetrated by foreign governments, but to hold one's own government accountable. This is as true for an American citizen in American as it is for a Russian citizen in Russia.

NPR explained how the Russian government used "whataboutism" to deflect away from it's own crimes, but Trump actually did the opposite in his interview with O'Reilly. He wasn't deflecting away from his own country's crimes, he was pointing out that they exist. That's precisely what you're supposed to do as a citizen.

The problem arises when governments deflect attention away from their own crimes for which they are actually responsible, by pointing out the crimes of a foreign government. This is indeed propaganda and an evasion of responsibility. Calling out your own government's hypocrisy in matters of state sanctioned murder abroad is the exact opposite sort of thing.

Noam Chomsky put it better than I ever could. Here's what he said in a 2003 interview :

QUESTION: When you talk about the role of intellectuals, you say that the first duty is to concentrate on your own country. Could you explain this assertion?

CHOMSKY: One of the most elementary moral truisms is that you are responsible for the anticipated consequences of your own actions. It is fine to talk about the crimes of Genghis Khan, but there isn't much that you can do about them. If Soviet intellectuals chose to devote their energies to crimes of the U.S., which they could do nothing about, that is their business. We honor those who recognized that the first duty is to concentrate on your own country. And it is interesting that no one ever asks for an explanation, because in the case of official enemies, truisms are indeed truisms. It is when truisms are applied to ourselves that they become contentious, or even outrageous. But they remain truisms. In fact, the truisms hold far more for us than they did for Soviet dissidents, for the simple reason that we are in free societies, do not face repression, and can have a substantial influence on government policy. So if we adopt truisms, that is where we will focus most of our energy and commitment. The explanation is even more obvious than in the case of official enemies.

Naturally, truisms are hated when applied to oneself. You can see it dramatically in the case of terrorism. In fact one of the reasons why I am considered "public enemy number one" among a large sector of intellectuals in the U.S. is that I mention that the U.S. is one of the major terrorist states in the world and this assertion, though plainly true, is unacceptable for many intellectuals, including left-liberal intellectuals, because if we faced such truths we could do something about the terrorist acts for which we are responsible, accepting elementary moral responsibilities instead of lauding ourselves for denouncing the crimes official enemies, about which we can often do very little.

Elementary honesty is often uncomfortable, in personal life as well, and there are people who make great efforts to evade it. For intellectuals, throughout history, it has often come close to being their vocation. Intellectuals are commonly integrated into dominant institutions. Their privilege and prestige derives from adapting to the interests of power concentrations, often taking a critical look but in very limited ways. For example, one may criticize the war in Vietnam as a "mistake" that began with "benign intentions". But it goes too far to say that the war is not "a mistake" but was "fundamentally wrong and immoral". the position of about 70 percent of the public by the late 1960s, persisting until today, but of only a margin of intellectuals. The same is true of terrorism. In acceptable discourse, as can easily be demonstrated, the term is used to refer to terrorist acts that THEY carry out against US, not those that WE carry out against THEM. That is probably close to a historical universal. And there are innumerable other examples.

For saying the above, Noam Chomsky would surely be labeled the godfather of "whataboutism" by Twitter's resistance army, but he's actually advocating the most ethical, logical and courageous path of citizenship. U.S. taxpayers aren't paying for Russia's military operations, but they are paying for the U.S. government's. The idea that U.S. citizens emphasizing U.S. violence are committing the thought-crime of "whataboutism" when it comes to foreign policy is absurd. Our primary responsibility as citizens is our own aggressive and violent foreign policy, not that of other countries.

Naturally, this isn't how neocon/neoliberal and intelligence agency imperialists want you to think. Proponents of the American empire need the public to ignore the atrocities of the U.S. government and its allies for obvious reasons, while constantly obsessing over the atrocities of the empire's official enemies. This is the only way to continue to exert force abroad without domestic pushback, and it's critical in order to keep the imperial gravy train going for those it benefits so significantly. How do you shut down vibrant foreign policy debate on social media that exposes imperial hypocrisy? Accuse people of "whataboutism."

That's what I see going on. I see the weaponization of a cutesy, catchy term on social media in order to prevent people from questioning their own government. It's completely logical and ethical for U.S. citizens to push back against those arguing for more regime change wars by pointing out the evils of our own foreign policy.

In fact, the unethical position is the one espoused by those who claim the U.S. can do no wrong, but when an adversary country does what we permit ourselves to do, they must be bombed into oblivion. These people know they have no argument, so they run around condemning those trying to hold their own government accountable of "whataboutism." It's a nonsensical term with no real meaning or purpose other than to defend imperial talking points.

Accusations of "whataboutism" amount to a cynical, sleazy attempt to stifle debate without actually engaging in argument. It's also the sort of desperate and childish propaganda tactic you'd expect during late-stage imperial decline.

* * *

If you liked this article and enjoy my work, consider becoming a monthly Patron , or visit our Support Page to show your appreciation for independent content creators.

[Mar 20, 2018] The plausibility of the doping charges disappeared when, at a time when Russian athletes were under extreme scrutiny in the Winter Olympics, they were accused of doping in the curling and bobsleigh events \

Mar 20, 2018 | www.unz.com
unseated , March 20, 2018 at 11:32 pm GMT
@Mark James

The plausibility of the doping charges disappeared when, at a time when Russian athletes were under extreme scrutiny in the Winter Olympics, they were accused of doping in the curling and bobsleigh events. At that point credibility of the charges flew out of the window.

[Mar 20, 2018] We read that Vladimir Putin's passport was found three days later at the Scripaal's poisoning scene.

Notable quotes:
"... Just like MH17, or the alleged (but fake) poison gas attacks in Syria, the policy has been to launch an initial barrage of accusations completely unsupported by the slightest shred of evidence – and then drop the matter abruptly, leaving the public with a strong impression of "Russian wickedness" although nothing has actually been proved. ..."
"... Skripal and daughter cheap, convenient, collateral damage for the warmongers. A person trained to handle organic nerve material introduces it into Skripal's car, they go for a morning drive and stop to have a pizza. After pizza, they begin to feel a little queasy. Go sit on a park bench. A passing citizen sees them, calls for medical assistance. Doctor says probably poisoned by toxic agent. Doctor knows it was not highly refined military grade. ..."
"... Car is lifted by straps so as not poison others and hauled to Potent Downs or whatever the Nerve Agent Factory is called. Now it can be doctored to fit the crime and I don't mean the Russians. How am I doing? Got a better tale? ..."
"... Now, I do understand that you – and most Brits – think that you are special. That there is one set of rules for you, and another for the ' others '. You have been conditioned by propaganda to assert this without any shame and to demonise Russia based on decades of half-witted stories (most taken out of context and exaggerated). Why would anyone take you seriously? ..."
"... People who walk around saying that they are exceptional, meaning they are 'Gods', or that they talk 'to God', are generally ignored or kept in an institution. Claiming that you are 'exceptional and special' is the same as claiming that you are divine – that's what it has meant historically. ..."
Mar 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

remo , Website Next New Comment March 20, 2018 at 8:36 am GMT

"Sir, Further to your report ("Poison exposure leaves almost 40 needing treatment", TIMES Mar 14)' may I clarify that no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury and there have only ever been three patients with significant poisoning. Several people have attended the emergency department concerned that they may have been exposed. None has had symptoms of poisoning and none has needed treatment. Any blood tests performed have shown no abnormality. No member of the public has been contaminated by the agent involved."
Stephen Davies. Consultant in emergency medicine, Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust.

Meanwhile, a doctor who was one of the first people at the scene has described how she found Ms Skripal..She said she treated her for almost 30 minutes, saying "there was no sign of any chemical agent on Ms Skripals face or body."

The woman, who asked not to be named, told the NNC she moved Ms Skripal into the recovery position and opened her airway, as others tended to her father.

she said she treated her for almost 30 minutes, saying there was no sign of any chemical agent on Ms Skripal's face or body.

The doctor said she had been worried she would be affected by the nerve agent, hut added that she "feels fine".

Some nerve agent. We read that Vladimir Putin's passport was found three days later at the scene.

Tom Welsh , Next New Comment March 20, 2018 at 8:53 am GMT
One wonders how the Skripals are right now. Have they recovered completely, or partially? Are they still deathly ill? Has one or both of them died?

In any case, why have there been no public announcements of these important facts? It is useless to cite privacy, when the government hastened to trumpet the case – and its own dubious conclusions – as publicly as possible.

Just like MH17, or the alleged (but fake) poison gas attacks in Syria, the policy has been to launch an initial barrage of accusations completely unsupported by the slightest shred of evidence – and then drop the matter abruptly, leaving the public with a strong impression of "Russian wickedness" although nothing has actually been proved.

Incidentally, I wonder where the Skripals are and why. Apparently the Russian government applied for consular access to Yulia (who is a Russian citizen) but this was bluntly refused – against all norms of international law and civilized behaviour.

Ger , Next New Comment March 20, 2018 at 6:17 pm GMT
Skripal and daughter cheap, convenient, collateral damage for the warmongers. A person trained to handle organic nerve material introduces it into Skripal's car, they go for a morning drive and stop to have a pizza. After pizza, they begin to feel a little queasy. Go sit on a park bench. A passing citizen sees them, calls for medical assistance. Doctor says probably poisoned by toxic agent. Doctor knows it was not highly refined military grade.

How does the doctor know this: He is just down the street from the British Nerve Agent Factory and has been trained to recognize and treat real exposures to potent nerve agents. A policeman ends up in same hospital as Skripal because he sees car parked overtime or illegally, opens door to check for ownership gets zapped by toxic agent. Car is lifted by straps so as not poison others and hauled to Potent Downs or whatever the Nerve Agent Factory is called. Now it can be doctored to fit the crime and I don't mean the Russians. How am I doing? Got a better tale?

Beckow , March 20, 2018 at 5:03 pm GMT

We understand we are not being taken seriously

Good, understanding that you are a joke is the first step on the road to possible recovery.

Try for once to imagine a reverse scenario: an Englishman dies under suspicious circumstances in a provincial town in Russia. (Or 3-4 of them over 15-20 years.) He was considered a 'traitor' by UK for whatever reason. Immediately Russia declares that it was an ' unacceptable attack on Russia's sovereignty, that Britain did it, and that it is 'highly likely' that Teresa May ordered it herself' . Russian government also says that they will not disclose any details, show no evidence and will not even allow basis diplomatic protocol for UK embassy. Why? For reasons of ' state security '. Wouldn't any rational outsider consider that a joke?

Now, I do understand that you – and most Brits – think that you are special. That there is one set of rules for you, and another for the ' others '. You have been conditioned by propaganda to assert this without any shame and to demonise Russia based on decades of half-witted stories (most taken out of context and exaggerated). Why would anyone take you seriously?

People who walk around saying that they are exceptional, meaning they are 'Gods', or that they talk 'to God', are generally ignored or kept in an institution. Claiming that you are 'exceptional and special' is the same as claiming that you are divine – that's what it has meant historically.

This 'joke' is not that funny any more. Grow up.

[Mar 20, 2018] Another timeline of Skripals poisoning

Where are those 30 min that a passeby doctor treated Skripla douther fall if they ere found at 16:00 and hospitalized at 16:15
Mar 20, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

james | Mar 19, 2018 5:32:05 PM | 27

@25 peter.. i found this sequence of events timing from somewhere else - can't remember.. it seems they visiting the pub before the restaurant...

  • 1255 EST depart residence on 10 min drive to cemetery
  • 1305 EST arrive cemetery
  • 1335 EST depart cemetery
  • 1340 ARR Sainsbury parking lot
  • 1345 EST arrive pub after 5 min walk to pub. EST 30 min in pub
  • 1415 EST depart pub for 5 min walk to Zizzi
  • 1420 ARR Zizzi pizza restaurant. Skirpal angry with loss of emotional control.
  • 1535 DP Zizzi pizza restaurant
  • 1547 CCTV walking on street toward park
  • 1600 Found on park bench Comatose, frothing at mouth, contracted pupils, vacant stare, convulsions, evidence of vomiting.
  • 1615 Police and ambulance receive information from public. Response followed

[Mar 20, 2018] Only a hopeless moron can stage a provocation without inventing a coherent set of plausible lies beforehand.

Notable quotes:
"... Not to mention that we are currently on version #5 (poisoned in the car, where apparently a British cop and more than 30 other people rode with him, if we are to believe previous statements). Only a hopeless moron can stage a provocation without inventing a coherent set of plausible lies beforehand. He did it, right in the middle of Britain in Salisbury, next to the British chemical weapons facility. Credo quia absurdum. ..."
"... Actually, having no definite story, and constantly updating the narrative with ridiculous red herrings, is probably the best way to go with a fake terror attack. With a different herring to pursue each day, the truth seeking citizen soon becomes exhausted and relapses back into the normal pattern of going to work and feeding a family, but with a reinforced sense of their own lack of power to either control, or even understand the world in which they live. ..."
"... This is the end time of democracy. We are now entering an age of psycho-totalitarianism. People do what the elite require because their brainwashed friends, neighbors, and children otherwise turn against them. They are demonized and humiliated as racists, anti-Semites, dog whistlers and all the rest of the bullshit lexicon of political correctness not for their actions but merely for their thoughts. ..."
Mar 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

CanSpeccy , Website March 20, 2018 at 5:44 pm GMT

@Anon

Anon from TN
Yes, this is the British version of Russiagate, no doubt: no evidence, numerous versions that contradict each other, lots of hot air and finger pointing. At the moment we do not know what Skripal was poisoned with or by whom, we can't even be sure that anyone was poisoned with anything. All we have is hot air, just like with Iraq WMD. From the same very "reliable" sources: British intelligence services and British PM. Neither ever lies, just ask Tony Blair. Not to mention that we are currently on version #5 (poisoned in the car, where apparently a British cop and more than 30 other people rode with him, if we are to believe previous statements). Only a hopeless moron can stage a provocation without inventing a coherent set of plausible lies beforehand. He did it, right in the middle of Britain in Salisbury, next to the British chemical weapons facility. Credo quia absurdum.

Actually, having no definite story, and constantly updating the narrative with ridiculous red herrings, is probably the best way to go with a fake terror attack. With a different herring to pursue each day, the truth seeking citizen soon becomes exhausted and relapses back into the normal pattern of going to work and feeding a family, but with a reinforced sense of their own lack of power to either control, or even understand the world in which they live.

This is the end time of democracy. We are now entering an age of psycho-totalitarianism. People do what the elite require because their brainwashed friends, neighbors, and children otherwise turn against them. They are demonized and humiliated as racists, anti-Semites, dog whistlers and all the rest of the bullshit lexicon of political correctness not for their actions but merely for their thoughts.

[Mar 20, 2018] This looks more and more like false flag operation by British intelligence againces: Queen May has no clothes on, but all the 'adults' in the mainstream press pretend to see a beautiful robe.

Notable quotes:
"... Please do not insult Britain because it does not need any other party (Ukraine, Georgia) to organize a false-flag such as this. Any reasonable person would understand that such mad rush to judgment and frantic lying by the British regime are closely related to the organizers of the poisoning. They could be one and only. ..."
"... I predicted at the start of the Skripal affair that will end up the same as the MH17 case: "truth established" without any good facts or based on secret facts, we move on. ..."
"... If somehow truth does surface, as with Iraqi WMD, then exactly the same strategy will be used by the British regime as by the US regime before: faulty intelligence and misleading (Porton Down) scientists. ..."
"... How many Porton Down scientists will be suicided a few weeks before daughters wedding, if the truth of the Russian WMD comes out, just as David Kelly regarding Iraqi WMD? ..."
"... Britain had a stronger motive to generate a major confrontation with a well-defined enemy than Theresa May, who has been under fire by the media and pressured to resign by many in her own Conservative Party. ..."
"... Really don't understand why Giraldi classifies this as "wild". Has he completely missed the numerous 'false flags' by UK initiated and financed 'White Helmets'? Every time UK/US intend to incite public outrage some 'chemical' incident was faked in Syria. ..."
"... The hate of the UK establishment for Trump is only rivaled by its hate for Russia, so MI5/6 playing May (who only a few weeks before Salisbury out of the blue ratcheted up her anti Russia rhetoric) like a fiddle was provided with what she needed. However looks like given the number of exotic deaths concentrated in the UK some MI5/6 idiot now made the mistake of more than he can fake. ..."
"... Quite astonishingly, given the lack of news coverage – At a London airport in public view, Prince Bandar apparently 'committed suicide' over a week ago, on 12 March 2018, when the UK refused entry to Bandar video said to be of Bandar jumping to his death, on YouTube ..."
"... So we have one of the best-known celebrity Saudi Arabian princes – who had threatened Russia – suddenly dead in a shocking and dramatic public 'suicide' at a London airport – yet this is 'not news' according to our overlords, tho Bandar's death and funeral prayers etc seem leading news across Muslim outlets ..."
"... Obviously we have a Western Permitted News Committee telling all major Western media outlets what is 'news', for our own good ..."
"... British media intel 'sources' have proposed different employ of the poison, from a 'hit squad' followed Yulia from Moscow, to the poison was planted in her luggage at Moscow, to the poison was introduced to Skripal's car via the ventilation system. ..."
"... When the 'backstop' lies differ so widely, it points to likelihood the British haven't a clue as to what actually happened, but the default position is 'the Russians did it' ..."
Mar 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

Kiza , Next New Comment March 20, 2018 at 5:31 am GMT

Dear Mr Giraldi,

Please do not insult Britain because it does not need any other party (Ukraine, Georgia) to organize a false-flag such as this. Any reasonable person would understand that such mad rush to judgment and frantic lying by the British regime are closely related to the organizers of the poisoning. They could be one and only.

I predicted at the start of the Skripal affair that will end up the same as the MH17 case: "truth established" without any good facts or based on secret facts, we move on.

If somehow truth does surface, as with Iraqi WMD, then exactly the same strategy will be used by the British regime as by the US regime before: faulty intelligence and misleading (Porton Down) scientists.

How many Porton Down scientists will be suicided a few weeks before daughters wedding, if the truth of the Russian WMD comes out, just as David Kelly regarding Iraqi WMD?

JR , Next New Comment March 20, 2018 at 7:33 am GMT
"And to throw out a really wild possibility, one might observe that no one in Britain had a stronger motive to generate a major confrontation with a well-defined enemy than Theresa May, who has been under fire by the media and pressured to resign by many in her own Conservative Party."

Really don't understand why Giraldi classifies this as "wild". Has he completely missed the numerous 'false flags' by UK initiated and financed 'White Helmets'? Every time UK/US intend to incite public outrage some 'chemical' incident was faked in Syria.

Look 'Rusiagate' Trump dossier has UK tail waggles US dog all over it. That Russiagate has been faltering increasingly over the last few months with recently the House Intelligence Committee declaring there is none. So some new impetus was required. Steele is too closely connected to MI5/6 to presume innocence on their behalf.

The hate of the UK establishment for Trump is only rivaled by its hate for Russia, so MI5/6 playing May (who only a few weeks before Salisbury out of the blue ratcheted up her anti Russia rhetoric) like a fiddle was provided with what she needed. However looks like given the number of exotic deaths concentrated in the UK some MI5/6 idiot now made the mistake of more than he can fake.

Brabantian , Website Next New Comment March 20, 2018 at 7:52 am GMT
On the topic of Russia-related deaths in Britain - Everyone knows Saudi Prince Bandar – 'Bandar Bush' thanks to his close public ties with the George Bush family – Bandar who reportedly threatened Putin with Saudi-sponsored terrorist attacks inside Russia Bandar has long been the perhaps best-known Saudi prince in the world

Quite astonishingly, given the lack of news coverage – At a London airport in public view, Prince Bandar apparently 'committed suicide' over a week ago, on 12 March 2018, when the UK refused entry to Bandar video said to be of Bandar jumping to his death, on YouTube

So we have one of the best-known celebrity Saudi Arabian princes – who had threatened Russia – suddenly dead in a shocking and dramatic public 'suicide' at a London airport – yet this is 'not news' according to our overlords, tho Bandar's death and funeral prayers etc seem leading news across Muslim outlets

Obviously we have a Western Permitted News Committee telling all major Western media outlets what is 'news', for our own good

Story by the UK's Aangirfan on her site: http://aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/prince-bandar-shock.html

Ronald Thomas West , Website Next New Comment March 20, 2018 at 8:28 am GMT
British media intel 'sources' have proposed different employ of the poison, from a 'hit squad' followed Yulia from Moscow, to the poison was planted in her luggage at Moscow, to the poison was introduced to Skripal's car via the ventilation system.

When the 'backstop' lies differ so widely, it points to likelihood the British haven't a clue as to what actually happened, but the default position is 'the Russians did it'

[Mar 20, 2018] Russiagate Comes to England, by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... After her first speech, May summoned the Russian Ambassador and demanded that he address the allegations, but Moscow reasonably enough demanded a sample of the alleged nerve agent for testing by relevant international bodies like the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons before it could even respond to the British accusations. It was a valid point even supported in Parliament questioning by opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, but May and her government decided to act anyway. ..."
"... That in turn suggests a false flag, with someone having an interest in promoting a crisis between Russia and Britain. If that someone were a country having a sophisticated arms industry possessing its own chemical weapons capability, like the United States or Israel, it would be quite easy to copy the characteristics of the Russian nerve agent, particularly as its formula has been known since it was published in 1992. The agent could then be used to create an incident that would inevitably be blamed on Moscow. Why would Israel and the United States want to do that? To put pressure on Russia to embarrass it and put it on the defensive so I would be forced eventually to abandon its support for President Bashar al-Assad in Syria. Removing al-Assad is the often-expressed agenda of the Israeli and American governments, both of which have pledged to take "independent action" in Syria no matter what the United Nations or any other international body says. The redoubtable Nikki Haley is already using the incident to fearmonger over Moscow's intentions at the U.N., warning that a Russian chemical attack on New York City could be coming. ..."
"... Once upon a time suggesting that a democratically elected government might assassinate someone for political reasons would have been unthinkable, but the 2016 election in the United States has demonstrated that nothing is impossible, particularly if one is considering the possibility that a secret intelligence service might be collaborating with a government to help it stay in power. An incident in which no one was actually killed that can be used to spark an international crisis mandating "strong leadership" would be just the ticket. ..."
Mar 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

There are a number of problems with the accepted narrative as presented by May and the media. Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a nerve agent as "usually odorless organophosphate (such as sarin, tabun, or VX) that disrupts the transmission of nerve impulses by inhibiting cholinesterase and especially acetylcholinesterase and is used as a chemical weapon in gaseous or liquid form," while Wikipedia explains that it is "a class of organic chemicals that disrupt the mechanisms by which nerves transfer messages to organs." A little more research online reveals that most so-called nerve agents are chemically related. So when Theresa May says that the alleged agent used against the Skripals as being "of a type" associated with a reported Russian-developed chemical weapon called Novichok that was produced in the 1970s and 1980s, she is actually conceding that her own chemical weapons laboratories at Porton Down are, to a certain, extent, guessing at the provenance and characteristics of the actual agent that might or might not have been used in Salisbury.

Beyond that, a military strength nerve agent is, by definition, a highly concentrated and easily dispersed form of a chemical weapon. It is intended to kill or incapacitate hundreds or even thousands of soldiers. If it truly had been used in Salisbury, even in a small dose, it would have killed Skripal and his daughter as well as others nearby. First responders who showed up without protective clothing, clearly seen in the initial videos and photos taken near the site, would also be dead. After her first speech, May summoned the Russian Ambassador and demanded that he address the allegations, but Moscow reasonably enough demanded a sample of the alleged nerve agent for testing by relevant international bodies like the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons before it could even respond to the British accusations. It was a valid point even supported in Parliament questioning by opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, but May and her government decided to act anyway.

May's language also conveys uncertainty. She used "it appears" and also said it was "highly likely" that Moscow was behind the poisoning of Skripal but provided no actual evidence that that was the case, presumably only assuming that it had to be Russia. And her government has told the public that there is "little risk" remaining over the incident and that those who were possibly exposed merely have to wash themselves and their clothes, hardly likely if it were a military grade toxin, which gains it lethality from being persistent on and around a target. She made clear her lack of corroboration for her claim by offering an "either-or" analysis: either Russia's government did it or it had "lost control" of its nerve agent.

As noted above, May's argument is, to a certain extent, based on character assassination of Russians – she even offered up the alleged "annexation" of Crimea as corroboration of her view that Moscow is not inclined to play by the rules that others observe. It is a narrative that is based on the presumption that "this is the sort of thing the Russian government headed by Vladimir Putin does." The British media has responded enthusiastically, running stories about numerous assassinations and poisonings that ought to be attributed to Russia, while ignoring the fact that the world leaders in political assassinations are actually the United States and Israel.

There are a number of other considerations that the May government has ignored in its rush to expand the crisis. She mentioned that Russia might be somewhat exonerated if it has lost control of its chemical weapons, but did not fully explain what that might mean. It could be plausible to consider that states hostile to Russia like Ukraine and Georgia that were once part of the Soviet Union could have had , and might still retain, stocks of the Novichok nerve agent. That in turn suggests a false flag, with someone having an interest in promoting a crisis between Russia and Britain. If that someone were a country having a sophisticated arms industry possessing its own chemical weapons capability, like the United States or Israel, it would be quite easy to copy the characteristics of the Russian nerve agent, particularly as its formula has been known since it was published in 1992. The agent could then be used to create an incident that would inevitably be blamed on Moscow. Why would Israel and the United States want to do that? To put pressure on Russia to embarrass it and put it on the defensive so I would be forced eventually to abandon its support for President Bashar al-Assad in Syria. Removing al-Assad is the often-expressed agenda of the Israeli and American governments, both of which have pledged to take "independent action" in Syria no matter what the United Nations or any other international body says. The redoubtable Nikki Haley is already using the incident to fearmonger over Moscow's intentions at the U.N., warning that a Russian chemical attack on New York City could be coming.

And to throw out a really wild possibility, one might observe that no one in Britain had a stronger motive to generate a major confrontation with a well-defined enemy than Theresa May, who has been under fire by the media and pressured to resign by many in her own Conservative Party. Once upon a time suggesting that a democratically elected government might assassinate someone for political reasons would have been unthinkable, but the 2016 election in the United States has demonstrated that nothing is impossible, particularly if one is considering the possibility that a secret intelligence service might be collaborating with a government to help it stay in power. An incident in which no one was actually killed that can be used to spark an international crisis mandating "strong leadership" would be just the ticket.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

[Mar 20, 2018] Putin was inviting the Russian people to picture traitors dying friendless and alone Men Without a Country in apartments strewn with empty vodka bottles but he never said that traitors should be killed. This was BBC fake.

Mar 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

Randal , March 19, 2018 at 1:11 pm GMT

Here's an interesting related piece that was linked to in Craig Murray's comments page. It deals with the quote by the UK government, in support of their accusation of Russia, of Putin's words in 2010, when he said: "Traitors will kick the bucket, believe me. Those other folks betrayed their friends, their brother in arms, whatever they got in exchange for it, those 30 pieces of silver they were given, they will choke on them." The context as stated by the UK government was "when we think about who benefits" [from the attack on the Skripals], and the clear intention was to try to create the impression that Putin had threatened to kill traitors, which is of course exactly how this quote was subsequently misrepresented.

There is of course a familiar "track record", or "pattern of behaviour" here, when one considers how Israel lobbies of various kinds intentionally misrepresented Iranian words about the Zionist regime "vanishing from the pages of history" as a threat to attack Israel.

The piece is long, and I've posted it below for reference because I do not know if the website in question will necessarily be around for long. Hopefully the moderators will put it under a [More] tag so it remains, but does not clog up the thread. There are embedded reference links in the text at the source.

https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/40900/did-putin-threaten-to-have-traitors-assassinated

No, on the occasion in question Putin did not say that traitors would be killed. The quote in your question comes from a March 5, 2018 broadcast of BBC Newsnight. It is a concatenation of three soundbites from a three-minute statement in which Putin says that Russia no longer kills traitors. The soundbites come from the last paragraph of his statement in which Putin paints a melodramatic picture of traitors as broken men living out their remaining days in abject misery leading to an early death.

The actual fate of enemies of the Russian state is beyond the scope of the question and this answer. Instead we will discuss the beliefs on this subject which Putin was attempting to instill. He was inviting the Russian people to picture traitors dying friendless and alone Men Without a Country in apartments strewn with empty vodka bottles.

The translation in the BBC broadcast alters the tone of Putin's statement and broadens the meaning of his words to the point that, when they are read in the style used by Western comedians portraying Putin, they seem to convey veiled threats of violence.

The Story Spreads

The next day (March 6th) the composite soundbite from the BBC broadcast appeared at the head of article on the website of The Sun, now shorn of all even the context provided in the BBC broadcast. The article describes the statement as a "threat to 'choke traitors'", thereby changing the BBC's poor translation into an unambiguously false one.

The day after that (March 7th) the Independent put up an article with its own version of the BBC video. The article incorrectly identifies it as a video which "re-emerged online" and describes Putin's words as "apparent death threats".

Also on March 7th the Telegraph described Putin's words unambiguously as a "death threat". This despite the fact that in 2010 they had reported on the very same statement and found exactly the opposite meaning in it. What is more, now Putin's words were not simply spoken close to the time of Sergei Skripal's release, they are now actually about him.

On March 7th on Good Morning Britain Piers Morgan asked Alexander Nekrassov (former Kremlin adviser) what Putin had meant by "kick the bucket". They each considered the other's interpretation of the phrase ridiculous. (Not surprising since Mr. Morgan was interpreting the Putin's words in the BBC's poor translation while Mr. Nekrassov was presumably interpreting Mr. Putin's actual words which, at least for this phrase, can be heard in the BBC broadcast.) Neither one of them seemed to know the context of the quote.

On March 12th the video was mentioned in an editorial in the New York Times. The editorial links to the March 7th article in the Independent and quotes the translation from the video. The editors seem to have obtained some information about the TV show during which the statement was made, but this is a bit garbled too. In particular their description of the question is incorrect and they make no mention of the overall import of Putin's answer.

Earlier Western Press Coverage of Putin's Statement

Putin's statement attracted some press coverage in the West at the time he made it. At the time the press had the full text of the statement and did not interpret it as a threat against traitors:

•Vladimir Putin: Russian secret services don't kill traitors (The Telegraph)

•Vladimir Putin says Russian secret service no longer kills traitors (Mirror)

•Putin: Russia's Secret Services Don't Kill Traitors (NBC News)

•Putin: We Don't Kill Traitors Anymore (CBS News)

Background of the Statement

Putin refers to the exposure and arrest of agents of the Illegals Program on June 27, 2010. The Illegals Program (which is the name given it by the US Department of Justice) planted Russian sleeper agents in the United States under cover as private citizens.

In July of 2010 the ten spies arrested in the United States were exchanged for three Russian nationals who had been convicted of high treason for espionage one of whom was Sergei Skripal. (This appears to be his only connection to the affair.) In August the deported Russian spies were "warmly greeted" by Vladimir Putin who "led them in singing patriotic songs".

After the program was exposed, the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service began an investigation in an attempt to determine whether the agents had been betrayed. Suspicion fell on one Colonel Aleksander Poteyev who was in charge of undercover spying in the US. He is thought to have fled Russia a few days before the arrest of the undercover agents. Where he is now is unclear, but the opinion in the Russian press is that he went to the US, that his children are also in the US, and that he may or may not have died in 2016.

The Statement

In the quote in question Putin is commenting on this affair. He is speaking during the program Direct Line: A Conversation with Vladimir Putin in December 2010. Direct Line is a marathon ask-me-anything-style show which he does once a year. The broadcast is on Youtube (the question is asked at about 3:12:15 and Putin concludes his answer at about 3:15:15) and there is a written transcript. Here is an English translation. The parts included in some form in the quote from your question are in bold:

M. Sittel: Vladimir Vladimirovich, I'm taking a question from the website, this time it is a personal one. It is clearly written by someone who loves memoirs. "When you spoke of the recent spy scandal, you noted: traitors do not live long. The leaders of many countries, as know from recollections, have signed orders for the the liquidation of the enemies of the homeland oversees. The French have done so, the Israelis. Have you, as the head of state, had occasion to make such a decision in the past?"

V.Putin: I do not think that the leaders of state signed such orders personally even in the past. That is the work of the special services. And during Soviet times, in Stalin's time, it is no secret, there were special subunits which carried out, including (these were military subunits, it was not all they did), which when necessary carried out such assignments: the liquidation of traitors. Such subunits were themselves liquidated long ago.

It is known that actual many, say the Israeli special services used such methods, yes, all things considered, as for today, far from all have given this up even now. The Russian special services do not use such means.

With regard to traitors, they will curl up on their own, I assure you. That's because Here we have this latest instance of betrayal in which they exposed a group of our illegals. And these are officers! Do you get it? Officers. A man betrayed his friends, his comrades in arms. These are people who laid their entire lives on the altar of patriotism. What is it like to learn a language at native level, leave behind one's relatives, not to be able to bury one's loved ones? Think about that for a minute! Someone has given his entire life to serve his homeland and now this brute comes along who betrays people like that. How is he going to live with that for the rest of his life? How will he look his children in the eye, the swine?! Whatever went on there, whatever 30 pieces of silver those people may have gotten, they will stick in their throat, I assure you. To spend your whole life trying to keep out of view, to be unable to talk with your loved ones, it means that someone who chooses such a fate will be regretting it a thousand times over.

So the quotation in the form you cite is garbled and has been interpreted in a manner which is at odds with the original context which is a specific denial that Russia assassinates traitors.

Notes on Translation

The word "загнуться" famously translated "kick the bucket" literally means "to curl up" or "to curl down". What it means here is open to interpretation. The translation "kick the bucket" can be found in Wiktionary as a possible translation of a very informal use of the word. @bashbino's assertion that such use refers to decline and death rather than sudden death is probably correct. I suspect it is an allusion to the way plants whither and die. In 2010 the phrase was translated "they will croak all by themselves" (The Telegraph, NBC News)

In translating "прятаться" as "trying to keep out of view" I am trying to leave the question of whether the traitor is hiding from assassins or simply from people he cannot look in the eye up to the reader's interpretation. This word can refer to social avoidance such as the behavior of a child who hides behind his mother's skirt.

The phrase "колом станут у них в горле" refers to difficulty swallowing due to revulsion, not difficulty breathing. To make this clear I have translated it "will stick in their throat".

Russian Press References

Articles on the Illegals affair:

•https://lenta.ru/articles/2011/06/28/poteev/

•https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/1536406

[Mar 20, 2018] The initial poisoning might be accidental but them was used by the UK Government to forge a chemical attack on British soil, probably surfing on the wave of the already mentioned popular spy show that is airing right now in Britain

The other hypothesis is that initial poisoning was done using fentanyl based mixture. Then it was molded into nerve gas attack to create the false flag and blame Russia. In other words nerve gar might be planted on the scene after Skripals were hospitalized.
Notable quotes:
"... The UK Government then, with the MI6, used the episode to forge a chemical attack on British soil, probably surfing on the wave of the already mentioned popular spy show that is airing right now in Britain. ..."
"... It is very likely a chemical attack never happened. It was probably a case of lack of sanitary fiscalization of the British services sector. But the UK has the means to forge the evidence, and give the OPCW (the OPCW is probably in the pockets of the West, but still, some formality may be necessary) "novichok" samples it already had in Porton Down (plausible deniability). ..."
"... Worst case scenario for the UK, however, some lower heads of the MI6 and the government will roll in order to preserve plausible deniability, so it was a low risk, low reward false flag operation by the British. ..."
Mar 20, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
VK , Mar 19, 2018 11:39:32 PM | 78
The doctor's letter is definite proof for me.

It was, most probably, a case of poor sanitary conditions in the restaurant/pub the Skripals visited, which resulted in a mass intoxication by food poisoning of circa 40 people -- the Skripals being two of them. Those people went to the nearest hospital, while the Skripals were intercepted by, probably, the MI6. It is very possible they are under captivity right now (assuming they are alive).

The UK Government then, with the MI6, used the episode to forge a chemical attack on British soil, probably surfing on the wave of the already mentioned popular spy show that is airing right now in Britain. This is a powerful semiotic weapon, because entertainment can, and is, used as a weapon of unconscious mass manipulation (manipulation of the collective imaginary). The British people -- already inclined to be anti-Russian, given the recent geopolitical events and its MSM propaganda warfare -- quickly (because it was mixed with the unconscious) connected the dots the Government wanted them to connect (false wisdom).

It is very likely a chemical attack never happened. It was probably a case of lack of sanitary fiscalization of the British services sector. But the UK has the means to forge the evidence, and give the OPCW (the OPCW is probably in the pockets of the West, but still, some formality may be necessary) "novichok" samples it already had in Porton Down (plausible deniability).

Russia was not affected: Putin was reelected with more votes (both in relative and absolute terms) than in the last election, and Pavel Grudinin (the candidate of the West) received just 12.xx% of the votes -- the worst result by the Communist Party since the fall of the USSR -- the UK will have to transmute this episode into a hot war if it wants to extract more fruits of this episode.

Worst case scenario for the UK, however, some lower heads of the MI6 and the government will roll in order to preserve plausible deniability, so it was a low risk, low reward false flag operation by the British.

[Mar 20, 2018] DID ISRAEL POISON SKRIPAL?

Notable quotes:
"... There are similarities the Skripal poisoning and the 1997 poisoning of Khaled Mashal in Jordan. The poison used may be the same fentanyl based mixture. ..."
"... The thing that really made me suspect Israel was the claim by Boris Johnson that Russia has a secret program that develops novichok type chemical weapons for assassinations ..."
"... I do not think the British found out about the alleged Russian program by themselves. They received the information, along with the disinformation from a foreign intelligence service. Most likely this was Israeli Mossad. Why would Mossad feed the British lies about a Russian assassination program, unless they wanted to pin their own assassinations on Russia. ..."
Mar 20, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
Petri Krohn , Mar 20, 2018 12:13:12 AM | 81
In the previous open thread I posted a long analysis of the alleged war preparation of a NATO land invasion of Syria, which I later published on The Duran . The thing that prompted me to write this was Boris Johnson's latest allegations about a Russian assassination program. In the end I left this speculation out of the published version.
U.S. War Plans: Kurdish Land Bridge to Israel?

The United States may be about to start a land invasion of Syria. The offensive would start from the U.S. base at the Al Tanf border crossing and extend through Abu Kemal to the American and Kurdish-held areas on the eastern bank of the Euphrates. The troops would be supplied through Jordan. It is possible that Britain would also take part in this operation.

The 2,400 man strong U.S. 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit arrived in Haifa in Israel on March 14, 2018 aboard the three US Navy ships of the Iwo Jima amphibious ready group. The Marines may be on their way to the Al Tanf base through Jordan. Another 200 U.S. troops are said to have arrived in Al Tanf the previous week. Unconfirmed rumors claim that an additional 2,300 British troops also arrived at the base along with Challenger tanks and Cobra and Black Hawk helicopters.

It now seems evident that to real reason for the poisoning of Sergei Skripal‎ was to drum up British support for a war against Syria and Russia. One must must thus ask who would most gains from such a war. If my analysis below is correct, then the answer would be Israel. Several things make Israel a likely suspect for the poisoning:

  1. Israel has a long history of assassinations abroad.
  2. Israel is not a OPCW member and has an active CW program.
  3. Mossad can perform hostile actions in Britain and still be counted as friendly. If they got caught in the act, they would simply be deported in secrecy.
  4. There are similarities the Skripal poisoning and the 1997 poisoning of Khaled Mashal in Jordan. The poison used may be the same fentanyl based mixture.
  5. Netanyahu is the current prime minister of Israel. He also ordered the 1997 assassination attempt on Mashal.

The thing that really made me suspect Israel was the claim by Boris Johnson that Russia has a secret program that develops novichok type chemical weapons for assassinations. It is most likely true that Russian laboratories have been working in novichoks, like all major weapons laboratories in the West. The part about assassinations is disinformation.

I do not think the British found out about the alleged Russian program by themselves. They received the information, along with the disinformation from a foreign intelligence service. Most likely this was Israeli Mossad. Why would Mossad feed the British lies about a Russian assassination program, unless they wanted to pin their own assassinations on Russia.

[Mar 20, 2018] BBC: A>mong senior ministers and officials, there's quiet satisfaction that the Russia crisis seems to be going according to plan. Maybe even better

So what was the plan then? To cease the assets Russian president's close associates - "the kind of people who have Putin on speed dial"? To raise the level of Russophobia in GB to cosmic level in an attempt to save May's government by splitting Labor Party on this monumental "national security" fake )"
While split of Labor Party (which like Democratic Party in the USA has it is own faction of warmonger of Hillary Clinton style) can help conservatives, the big fish they are trying to fry is probably Russia, not Corbyn/Labor party...
But they got more then they hoped for: probably some improvement of Brexit negotiating position and no doubt the military companies benefit from all this
In other words they managed to kill several birds with one stone ?
Mar 19, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Sid2 | Mar 19, 2018 5:46:27 PM | 29

The headline and intro of the BBC story are telling: Russian spy: UK government response going to plan so far

B's link to the BBC piece on how well it's all going indicates a smugness asking for take-down, in my view.

Among senior ministers and officials, there's quiet satisfaction that the Russia crisis seems to be going according to plan. Maybe even better.

According to one senior government source, "it's gone at least as well as we'd hoped".

I had to look at this phrasing hard to try to decipher the "it's" in how well it's all gone. "According to plan" is also peculiar, but I sense the smugness in the reporter here is oblivious to implications "the plan" was to add to the Russia hysteria and please the Americans.

The "it's" must mean the intent to blame the Russians, flakey and insubstantial as it is, and the sheep-like falling into line reported on (again smugly) in terms of items to tick off. This clumsy language suggests something sinister, not merely stupid, is happening.

I would like to hear more on the speculation Skripal was mixed up with Steele and the dossier. Have they been observed together recently? What suggests this connection in terms of recent activity?

[Mar 20, 2018] Can Ckripal case be a false flag operation by a circle of agents within British intelligence circles?

Notable quotes:
"... There is a tendency on the left to underestimate the fear that Corbyn inspires in The Establishment. They think that because he is a rather moderate Socialist in the old, and generally discredited, Social Democrat tradition he is no threat to the ruling class. In reality he is much more of a threat than someone that they can pin labels like extremist on. He showed as much in the last election when, despite blatant sabotage from the Party Staff, he came very close to victory. ..."
"... Operations like this one in Salisbury were mounted regularly in Northern Ireland and before that in the colonies. And these people don't work for their bosses, they work for themselves. They do as they please. They act withimpunity, the Old Boys network protects them. ..."
"... And they aren't very careful. They don't feel that they need to be-after all who wants to protect Putin or Corbyn? And they know that the neo-cons and Israel are with them. There is a good article in The Morning Star today https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/article/mask-military-industrial-complex ..."
"... It could very well be that they have unmasked the name, and rank, of the guy behind the plot to smear the two men that the Neocons fear and hate most: Putin and Corbyn. And, while doing so, to earn rewards from the oligarchs in London who are behind most of the killings being blamed on Russia. ..."
Mar 19, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

bevin | Mar 19, 2018 8:04:27 PM | 62

My guess is that this affair is the work of a circle of agents within British intelligence circles. And that it was aimed at embarrassing the Labor Party and stalling what has been looking like Corbyn's inexorable rise to power.

There is a tendency on the left to underestimate the fear that Corbyn inspires in The Establishment. They think that because he is a rather moderate Socialist in the old, and generally discredited, Social Democrat tradition he is no threat to the ruling class. In reality he is much more of a threat than someone that they can pin labels like extremist on. He showed as much in the last election when, despite blatant sabotage from the Party Staff, he came very close to victory.

One thing that everyone understands is that The Establishment and the governing Tories in particular, are in disarray. Nobody is in charge. Anyone who wants to take an initiative can do so without fear of May, Johnson or the alleged leadership.

And the Intelligence services in Britain, including many of the Armed Forces, are arrogant enough and well enough connected to the right wing.

Operations like this one in Salisbury were mounted regularly in Northern Ireland and before that in the colonies. And these people don't work for their bosses, they work for themselves. They do as they please. They act withimpunity, the Old Boys network protects them.

And they aren't very careful. They don't feel that they need to be-after all who wants to protect Putin or Corbyn? And they know that the neo-cons and Israel are with them. There is a good article in The Morning Star today https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/article/mask-military-industrial-complex

It could very well be that they have unmasked the name, and rank, of the guy behind the plot to smear the two men that the Neocons fear and hate most: Putin and Corbyn. And, while doing so, to earn rewards from the oligarchs in London who are behind most of the killings being blamed on Russia.

[Mar 20, 2018] It took 50 years for Porton Down chemical research centre to come clean on poisoning a British soldier with Sarin telling him it was a flu test. Poor fella.

Mar 20, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mike , Mar 19, 2018 6:57:20 PM | 51

This story has also been uncovered, took 50 years for Porton Down chemical research centre to come clean on poisoning a British soldier with Sarin telling him it was a flu test. Poor fella.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1476722/Porton-Down-unlawful-killing-verdict-opens-gates-to-claims.html

[Mar 20, 2018] The Ends Don't Justify The Means! by James Howard Kunstler

Mar 20, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by James Howard Kunstler via Kunstler.com,

Various readers, fans, blog commenters, Facebook trolls, and auditors twanged on me all last week about my continuing interest in the RussiaRussiaRussia hysteria, though there is no particular consensus of complaint among them -- except for a general "shut up, already" motif. For the record, I'm far more interested in the hysteria itself than the Russia-meddled-in the-election case, which I consider to be hardly any case at all beyond 13 Russian Facebook trolls.

The hysteria, on the other hand, ought to be a matter of grave concern, because it appears more and more to have been engineered by America's own intel community, its handmaidens in the Dept of Justice, and the twilight's last gleamings of the Obama White House, and now it has shoved this country in the direction of war at a time when civilian authority over the US military looks sketchy at best. This country faces manifold other problems that are certain to reduce the national standard of living and disrupt the operations of an excessively complex and dishonest economy, and the last thing America needs is a national war-dance over trumped-up grievances with Russia.

The RussiaRussiaRussia narrative has unspooled since Christmas and is blowing back badly through the FBI, now with the firing (for cause) of Deputy Director Andrew McCabe hours short of his official retirement (and inches from the golden ring of his pension). He was axed on the recommendation of his own colleagues in the FBI's Office of Professional Responsibility, and they may have been influenced by the as-yet-unreleased report of the FBI Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, due out shortly.

The record of misbehavior and "collusion" between the highest ranks of the FBI, the Democratic Party, the Clinton campaign, several top political law firms, and a shady cast of international blackmail-peddlars is a six-lane Beltway-scale evidence trail compared to the muddy mule track of Trump "collusion" with Russia.

It will be amazing if a big wad of criminal cases are not dealt out of it, even as The New York Times sticks its fingers in its ears and goes, "La-la-la-la-la ."

It now appears that Mr. McCabe's statements post-firing tend to incriminate his former boss, FBI Director James Comey -- who is about to embark, embarrassingly perhaps, on a tour for his self-exculpating book, A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership .

A great aura of sanctimony surrounds the FBI these days. Even the news pundits seem to have forgotten the long, twisted reign of J. Edgar Hoover (1924 – 1972), a dangerous rogue who excelled at political blackmail. And why, these days, would any sane American take pronouncements from the CIA and NSA at face value? What seems to have gone on in the RussiaRussiaRussia matter is that various parts of the executive branch in the last months under Mr. Obama gave each other tacit permission, wink-wink, to do anything necessary to stuff HRC into the White House and, failing that, to derail her opponent, the Golden Golem of Greatness.

The obvious lesson in all this huggermugger is that the ends don't justify the means.

I suspect there are basically two routes through this mess .

Personally, I'd rather see the US government clean house than blow up the world over an engineered hallucination. Tags Politics Semiconductors - NEC

Comments Vote up! 17 Vote down! 3

Brazen Heist Mon, 03/19/2018 - 16:43 Permalink

A nation run by donkeys and elephants.

Have donkeys and elephants ever copulated in nature? I'm guessing it wasn't a success story.

"Bi-partisan" in this case means double the anal pain.

[Mar 19, 2018] The vast majority of people have already had drummed into them the fact (sic) that novichok could only be produced in Russia, so this will of course be interpreted as conclusive proof that "Putin did it". The real push for dramatic measures (e.g., World Cup) will begin at that point.

Notable quotes:
"... The vast majority of people have already had drummed into them the fact (sic) that novichok could only be produced in Russia, so this will of course be interpreted as conclusive proof that "Putin did it". The real push for dramatic measures (e.g., World Cup) will begin at that point. ..."
Mar 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

for-the-record , March 19, 2018 at 7:54 pm GMT

It is reported that the OPCW is already carrying out tests on "samples taken from Salisbury". This will presumably take some time, but eventually (2 weeks?) there will be an announcement that it is indeed Novichok.

The vast majority of people have already had drummed into them the fact (sic) that novichok could only be produced in Russia, so this will of course be interpreted as conclusive proof that "Putin did it". The real push for dramatic measures (e.g., World Cup) will begin at that point.

[Mar 19, 2018] The release of toxic agent via the car ventilation system, suggested by some Western MSM, looks unlikely

Mar 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

Beckow , March 19, 2018 at 8:26 pm GMT

@reiner Tor

through Skripal's car's ventilation system

That opens up a few questions:

  • there had to be a physical person who did it and that means that person can be found – the beauty of the luggage story was that it could be written off as a clever remote attack
  • BMW has a good security system; this would require a risky break-in with a non-zero chance of getting caught
  • the release of the substance in a car cannot be controlled – it could happen in a crowded place, there could be an accident, Skripal could loan the car, etc

So I am skeptical, no 'intelligence' agency is this un-intelligent. Someone is releasing more scenarios (luggage, car, drinks, ) to confuse the narrative and let it linger in the media as in 'well, it was possible and if not that, maybe this was possible'. I don't know who that 'someone' is, but it is not Boris Johnson or Teresa May. They clearly know nothing.

[Mar 19, 2018] It might well be that Nordstream 2, the gas pipeline from Russia to Northern Europe is the target

Mar 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

CanSpeccy , Website Next New Comment March 19, 2018 at 8:50 pm GMT

@for-the-record

More likely that Nordstream 2, the gas pipeline from Russia to Northern Europe is the target.

Senators Push to Stop Russia's Nord Stream II Natural Gas Pipeline .

The Senators' argument is that dependence on Russian gas undermines European security.

Whereas to the Russians, it is obvious that the Americans wish to replace cheap Rusian piped gas with expensive liquefied American gas, which is a bi-product of fracking for oil and currently in surplus. Some frackers in Canada are even having to pay someone to take their gas.

Surprisingly, no one has yet pointed out that Russia could deliver Novichok to the whole of Europe via Nordstream 2.

[Mar 19, 2018] What happened to the BBC story of the first responder performing reanimation not getting particularly ill?

Mar 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

CanSpeccy , Website Next New Comment March 19, 2018 at 9:19 pm GMT

@El Dato

What happened to the BBC story of the first responder performing reanimation not getting particularly ill?

Ha! El Dato, you may just have cracked this case wide open. Don't you see?

Here's what the BBC reported :

Meanwhile, a doctor who was one of the first people at the scene has described how she found Ms Skripal slumped unconscious on a bench, vomiting and fitting. She had also lost control of her bodily functions.

The woman, who asked not to be named , told the BBC she moved Ms Skripal into the recovery position and opened her airway, as others tended to her father.

She said she treated her for almost 30 minutes, saying there was no sign of any chemical agent on Ms Skripal's face or body.

The doctor said she had been worried she would be affected by the nerve agent, but added that she "feels fine".

So that mystery woman, an alleged doctor, who asked not to be named, who was the first person to see the Skripals stricken, has disappeared. Obviously, she's the prime suspect. But the BBC and the British "intelligence services" are just too dumb to see it.

[Mar 19, 2018] Why the fact that Skripal was really upset by a long wait in the restaurant immediately before losing coinsience, and why the doctor who treated them for 30 minutes with no subsequent ill effects has disappeared down the memory hole

I would like to point out that at the moment we do not know not only what Skripal was poisoned with or by whom, we can't even be sure that anyone was poisoned with anything. All we have is hot air, just like with Iraq WMD. From the same very "reliable" sources: British intelligence services and British PM.
Notable quotes:
"... He said Mr Skripal appeared annoyed that their main course had taken 20 minutes to arrive – and appeared in a hurry to leave. ..."
"... 'They were only there for about 45 minutes. It was a quick lunch. He just wanted to get out of there. She was silent, perhaps embarrassed. ..."
Mar 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

for-the-record , Next New Comment March 19, 2018 at 10:53 pm GMT

@reiner Tor

I think the Skripals won't be able to talk at all. They are in a coma, and either they will stay there, or they will wake up with massive brain damage, unable to think much, let alone tell us what happened to them.

If they even know. For all we know they might have just as little idea why they were almost killed as the rest of us. If it was Russia killing a traitor - then it must have come out of the blue. If it was a false flag - ditto. So even if they woke up in full possession of their mental faculties, they might know nothing more than anyone else.

Apparently the murderer(s) struck them without any personal contacts. So they won't even know how they were poisoned. Just suddenly felt ill, and then lost consciousness. Or something similar.

For all we know they might have just as little idea why they were almost killed as the rest of us.

It would nonetheless be interesting to know why they (or at least he) was so upset in the restaurant immediately before, another story (along with the doctor who treated them for 30 minutes with no subsequent ill effects) that has disappeared down the memory hole.

How the 'poisoned' spy plot unfolded: Sergei Skripal and his daughter left Zizzi after arguing over a risotto before being found collapsed on a bench

The restaurant, in Castle Street, was busy when they arrived, but they declined the seats offered to them at the front, instead selecting ones at the back, close to the kitchen.

They began with a starter of garlic bread to share followed by two glasses of white wine. . .

But within minutes Mr Skripal had become angry, a witness said. 'I think he was swearing in Russian,' said the man, who did not want to be named.

'She was just sitting there quietly, and didn't really say anything. They were both smartly dressed, she was in a black coat.

'They were speaking to each other in Russian.'

He said Mr Skripal appeared annoyed that their main course had taken 20 minutes to arrive – and appeared in a hurry to leave.

He was going absolutely crazy, I didn't understand it and I couldn't understand him.

'They had not been seen for a little while by the front of house staff, but I think it was more than that. He just wanted his food and to go. He was just shouting and losing his temper. I would have asked him to leave. He just said "I want my food and my bill".

'The waiter took him the bill at the same time as the main course, which was unusual.

'I don't think they paid all of the bill. I think they were given a discount because he was so angry and agitated. He had to wait about 20 minutes for his main course.

'I think it was easier for the staff just to give him money to leave as he was so angry.

'They were sitting by themselves at the back of the restaurant but I think people were pleased when they left.

'They were only there for about 45 minutes. It was a quick lunch. He just wanted to get out of there. She was silent, perhaps embarrassed. '

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5470455/How-poisoned-spy-plot-unfolded-Salisbury.html

RobinG says:

March 20, 2018 at 12:21 am GMT
@for-the-record

This story reads like crap. Since when is 45min. is a quick lunch, when you haven't even gotten your entee?

[Mar 19, 2018] The Salisbury Chemist False Flags for Newbies by Dmitry Orlov

The script is really a replica of the one that previously worked out in the Litvinenko case over a decade ago
Notable quotes:
"... Giving the British story the benefit of the doubt, let's see what would compel Russia's secret services to go after Skripal. In Russia, he was convicted and sentenced for treason, then pardoned and released to the British in a prisoner exchange that included ten Russian spies who had worked in the US, including the rather memorable Anna Chapman [image, left]. It is a very important rule of the spy business that those released in a spy swap are never acted against; if this rule were violated, the resulting bad faith would make spy swaps impossible to negotiate. Thus, if the Russian authorities were to order the hit on Skripal, this would not just be immoral and illegal. That would be neither here nor there, since there are instances where raison d'état obviates the need for such scruples. Worse than that, such behavior would have been unprofessional. ..."
"... The attack on Skripal is by no means an isolated incident; there have been multiple suspicious murders of high-profile Russians within the UK for which no adequate explanation has been given. There is a consistent pattern: a strange murder; an instantaneous leap to "blame Russia"; and an attempt to exploit the incident politically. It would be beneficial to put this incident in context, but that would require a much longer article. ..."
"... Under direction from their colleagues in the US, and closely following a script previously worked out in the Litvinenko case over a decade ago, the British secret services, in close coordination with the British government and the press, poisoned Skripal and his daughter using a nerve agent obtained from Britain's military research base at Porton Down in order to obtain an excuse to compromise the World Cup games in Russia this summer and also to create a scandal immediately before the Russian presidential election. ..."
"... As far as Skripal himself well, that's just a really sad story: reputation ruined, life ruined, living in exile, wife dead from cancer, son dead from liver failure, and now this. All for the sake of serving as a warning unto others, which is: Don't trust the Anglos, for they are devious and without shame. ..."
Mar 19, 2018 | 21stcenturywire.com

Britain is in a media frenzy over the recent poisoning of the former Russian intelligence service colonel turned British spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury, England.

British PM Theresa May demanded that Russia explain itself, claiming that they were poisoned using a nerve agent called "Novichok" (Russian for "Newbie") that was a product of Soviet biological weapons research. It is no longer produced and the destruction of its stockpiles has been verified by international observers. However, its formula is in the public domain and it can be synthesized by any properly equipped chemical lab, such as Britain's own Porton Down, which, incidentally, is just an 18-minute drive from Salisbury.

May provided no evidence to back up her claims of Russian complicity in the attempted murder. Russia's Foreign Ministry has requested that Britain turn over all available evidence to back up its accusation of chemical weapons use (under the terms of the Chemical Weapons Convention Britain must do so within 10 days) but Britain has refused. Therefore, Russia's FM Sergei Lavrov has announced that Russia will not be responding to such baseless allegations.

An important key to spotting a false flag is that the "knowledge" of who is to blame becomes available before any evidence is in. For example, in the case of the shooting down of Malaysian Airlines MH-17 over Eastern Ukraine, everyone in the West was convinced that "pro-Russian separatists" were to blame even before the means could be established. To date, it isn't understood how they could have done it given the equipment they had at their disposal.

In this [Salisbury] case, Russia was accused almost immediately, while British FM Boris Johnson was quick to volunteer that Britain should not send its team to the World Cup in Russia this summer, disclosing the real reason behind the assassination attempt.

Is there anything new and different behind this latest provocation? Not really; it seems like a replay of the Litvinenko assassination back in November 2006. The choice of an exotic poison (Polonium 210), the lack of evidence (the British claimed that compelling circumstantial evidence exists but haven't provided any), and the instantaneous leap to "blame Russia" are all the same. The Russians offered to prosecute whoever is responsible if only the British would provide them with the evidence, but the British have failed to do so.

Giving the British story the benefit of the doubt, let's see what would compel Russia's secret services to go after Skripal. In Russia, he was convicted and sentenced for treason, then pardoned and released to the British in a prisoner exchange that included ten Russian spies who had worked in the US, including the rather memorable Anna Chapman [image, left]. It is a very important rule of the spy business that those released in a spy swap are never acted against; if this rule were violated, the resulting bad faith would make spy swaps impossible to negotiate. Thus, if the Russian authorities were to order the hit on Skripal, this would not just be immoral and illegal. That would be neither here nor there, since there are instances where raison d'état obviates the need for such scruples. Worse than that, such behavior would have been unprofessional.

Then there is the question of timing. Russia's presidential elections will take place in just a few days, on March 18. This is a particularly inopportune time to cause an international scandal. What possible urgency could there have been behind killing a pardoned former spy who no longer possessed any up-to-date intelligence, was living quietly in retirement, and at that moment was busy having lunch with his daughter? If the Russian government were involved in the poisoning, what possible reason could have been given for not waiting until after the election?

The attack on Skripal is by no means an isolated incident; there have been multiple suspicious murders of high-profile Russians within the UK for which no adequate explanation has been given. There is a consistent pattern: a strange murder; an instantaneous leap to "blame Russia"; and an attempt to exploit the incident politically. It would be beneficial to put this incident in context, but that would require a much longer article.

You would be justified in thinking that none of this makes much sense. Given the dearth of evidence, to make sense of this story we are forced to indulge in a bit of conspiracy theory. However, if a conspiracy theory is what it takes to produce the simplest, most elegant and most internally consistent explanation, then that in itself can be considered as circumstantial evidence for the existence of a conspiracy. My simple and consistent explanation, expressed in a single sentence, is as follows:

Under direction from their colleagues in the US, and closely following a script previously worked out in the Litvinenko case over a decade ago, the British secret services, in close coordination with the British government and the press, poisoned Skripal and his daughter using a nerve agent obtained from Britain's military research base at Porton Down in order to obtain an excuse to compromise the World Cup games in Russia this summer and also to create a scandal immediately before the Russian presidential election.

This is deplorable, of course, but there is a silver lining to this cloud as far as Russia is concerned: Britain (and, by association, the US) will now have a much harder time recruiting double agents from inside the Russian government, since their recruitment prospects will now know that they will remain vulnerable even if they escape, or are pardoned and exchanged. Clearly, the British consider them disposable and see it fit to kill them in exotic ways, then to exploit the incident for political purposes.

As far as Skripal himself well, that's just a really sad story: reputation ruined, life ruined, living in exile, wife dead from cancer, son dead from liver failure, and now this. All for the sake of serving as a warning unto others, which is: Don't trust the Anglos, for they are devious and without shame.

Writer Dmitry Orlov is an American author of ten books including, The Five Stages of Collapse . Learn more about his current projects and support his work at Patreon . This article was originally published at Club Orlov .

[Mar 19, 2018] The expensive BTW that Skripal was driving suggest that there he might be involved in some business ventures. Her Majesty s Government (HMG) is not known for generosity especially to Russian double agents (LOL) who actually brought very low value information to MI6, reflected by a relatively short prison sentence in Russia

Mar 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

Kiza , Next New Comment March 19, 2018 at 11:03 pm GMT

@Beckow

The perfect murder (attempted). No evidence at all...
To me it actually looks very imperfect. Something definitely happened, but the reaction and political management suggest chaos. The term 'murky' is very appropriate.

The way it has been set-up requires follow-ups: clarify the fate of Skripals, 'nerve agent' specifics, and the 'Russia-did-it' accusations. If it is not addressed it will be embarrassing. If there was a script, or conflicting scripts, it has gone beyond that. Both Russia and UK are in a bind, a mutually destructive embrace, one will have to let go.

My theory is that it has more to do with Skripals and less with geo-politics. Crimes tend to happen among people who know each other. And Julia just flew in the day before. If Skripals talk, it could get interesting (so they probably will not be allowed to talk).

In most scenarios it leaves a major boo-boo on Boris's face, but given his face we might not notice...

Kiza , Next New Comment March 19, 2018 at 11:16 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

You did not address my main point – there may have been no nerve agent involved at all, then some form of poison. It is true that A&E doctors are not fully qualified to diagnose nerve agent effects, but things become really suspicious when this is followed by the British own nerve agent production lab identifing the "nerve agent" but disallowing OPCW from doing its own checks.

If OPCW was the same as IOC, not following the procedures that the UK Government signed under would be unnecessary. The problem for the British is that they do not control OPCW as much as they control WADA and IOC. OPCW procedures are crystal clear and it is very hard to cheat.

[Mar 19, 2018] The whole story is probably a sham, a fake terror attack, a story concocted to befuddle the plebs and justify some new imperial aggression.

Notable quotes:
"... My impression is that the nerve agent was introduced to the scene after Skripals were hospitalized as a doctor attended the daughter for 30 min before the ambulance came. She did not develop any symptoms. So at this moment they lost conscience at the bench there was no nerve gas on the scene. It might well be something else. ..."
Mar 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

CanSpeccy , Website March 19, 2018 at 11:28 pm GMT

@reiner Tor

I think the Skripals won't be able to talk at all. They are in a coma

How do you know that?

Has there been any public report on the medical condition of the Skripals? I haven't been able to find one. If you know of such a report, will you please provide a link. In the meantime, one should keep in mind the statement of the Salisbury hospital consultant, Steohen Davies, that:

no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury

So either (1) the Skripal's were not exposed to Novichok or any other nerve agent, or (2) though exposed to a nerve agent, they were not treated at the hospital, which would be odd, though not impossible. Perhaps they were taken to the British chemical weapons lab at Porton Down, just seven miles from Salisbury, where, presumably, there are specialists in detoxification of those exposed to nerve agents.

But unless you adhere to (1) or (2), it would seem that you have to conclude that the Skripal's were not exposed to a nerve agent. In other words, that the whole story is probably a sham, a fake terror attack, a story concocted to befuddle the plebs and justify some new imperial aggression.

likbez , March 19, 2018 at 11:47 pm GMT
My impression is that the nerve agent was introduced to the scene after Skripals were hospitalized as a doctor attended the daughter for 30 min before the ambulance came. She did not develop any symptoms. So at this moment they lost conscience at the bench there was no nerve gas on the scene. It might well be something else.

IMHO this looks like an opening salvo in multi-step combination. Clumsy first step. It might well be designed to confiscate a part of Russian money in London banks and thus create the motive for Russian oligarchs to remove Putin. Kind of color revolution launched by disgruntled oligarchs.

That's probably why the UK government does not really care, if that is told to people true or not. Officials produce crazy statements and generally behave quite carelessly, as if they completely despise public and truth dos not matter for them one bit. The support of the USA is all that matter. Look for example at the most recent statement of Boris Johnson. But they needed the pretext for further actions, be it another witch hunt or something more serious and they succeeded.

Their actions look completely logical if the resulting hysteria is needed just for a few weeks to start the next round of sanctions against Russia. It might well be that the real goal is confiscation of "ill gotten" money of Russian oligarchs both to push them to act against Putin and to compensate for Brexit losses

[Mar 19, 2018] Sergei Skripal Casualty of The Psy War by Ian Greenhalgh

Notable quotes:
"... Does the idiot Johnson know what a "doctrine" is? Does he know how long they take to formulate and how long a time period they govern? Does he realise how hopeless the British government is looking, given that it took the view "a few months ago" that a foreign power was carrying out acts of war against Britain, but, don't worry, they're aware that they need to find themselves a new "doctrine", and they're on the job? ..."
"... As for "increasingly think", he's not supposed to be at a fucking debating society or at a high table somewhere. He's supposed to be the foreign minister. He's been asked in parliament whether Britain is at war or not. ..."
"... Boris Johnson is personally probably too off his head on cocaine to understand any of what's going on – he can talk the talk, or at least he can do the facial gestures, but he hasn't got a clue how to walk the walk – but consider what such guff says about the government as a whole. I mean not just the bunch of backhander-taking pricks in the cabinet, but both them and the permanent government of this country. ..."
"... Steering wheel? What's a steering wheel? Chop chop. Snort. ..."
Mar 19, 2018 | www.veteranstoday.com

One anonymous British blogger known only as '_N' wrote a rather prescient retort to the Boris bluster that I felt was worth quoting in full:

Does the idiot Johnson know what a "doctrine" is? Does he know how long they take to formulate and how long a time period they govern? Does he realise how hopeless the British government is looking, given that it took the view "a few months ago" that a foreign power was carrying out acts of war against Britain, but, don't worry, they're aware that they need to find themselves a new "doctrine", and they're on the job?

As for "increasingly think", he's not supposed to be at a fucking debating society or at a high table somewhere. He's supposed to be the foreign minister. He's been asked in parliament whether Britain is at war or not.

Boris Johnson is personally probably too off his head on cocaine to understand any of what's going on – he can talk the talk, or at least he can do the facial gestures, but he hasn't got a clue how to walk the walk – but consider what such guff says about the government as a whole. I mean not just the bunch of backhander-taking pricks in the cabinet, but both them and the permanent government of this country.

Steering wheel? What's a steering wheel? Chop chop. Snort. This does major damage to MI6.

MI6's main work is to collect intelligence from foreign sources. The higher up those sources are, the more they have to present themselves as who they really are: the British secret intelligence service. Above all an agent handler needs to win the trust of his potential asset.

That means that before the aset gets caught and tortured or jailed, the agency has to look after them. Any fears? Tell your handler. If the asset gets jailed, then oh DEAR, Sergei, how terrible – swap him out of jail when the opportunity arises. Oh, and don't ask him to pay for his own ticket from Vienna. That's what happened with Skripal.

They didn't swap him out because he would be able to help them much after his release, they swapped him out because both MI6 and the FSB must look good in the eyes of their potential and actual sources.

If an asset gets rubbed out on the street in Britain, or badly hurt in an attempt to rub them out, that does NOT look good for MI6, however many articles may appear in the British media saying "Putin" and "Russian spy" and "poison". That propaganda works fine for the sheeple, but it damages MI6's image in a market they care about much more – potential and actual foreign sources.

There is more than one market for the media narrative. The sheeple blame it on Putin, yes. But if you're a colonel in Islamabad, a civil servant in Ankara, or a businessman in Donetsk, and you're thinking of selling information to MI6, or you're already doing it, you want to know that they'll protect you if you get into deep shit.

You want to know that, even if they tricked or "coerced" you in the first place into working for them. That swapped out British asset might be you one day. You won't blame this attack on Putin, you'll blame it on Britain. So expect the line to be put out – not necessarily in the mainstream media – that Skripal was a dirty bastard who tried to get one over on his kind hosts.

The Russians Didn't Do It

Make no mistake, the poisoning of Sergei Skripal is part of an on-going and long-running psy war between Russia and the West, whoever carried out this attack had the intent of blackening Russia's image in the minds of the British people. However, do you think Russia's psywar guys give a toss about their image among the British and western sheeple or about "Russophobia" in those markets?

Fear and talk in the said markets about how Russian psywar guys are manipulating politics and media in the west (which they are) is GOOD for the Russian psywar effort, not BAD. Why? Because it implies to western populations that western rulers are WEAK, unable to control what goes on in western countries. That is really awful for morale. This is all in Psychological Warfare 101.

In short, the more bleating there is in Britain and the West about Russian manipulation of politics and media in those countries, the more the Russian psy war guys celebrate.

In psywar it's often very difficult to know the effect of what you've done. It's not like bombing a factory, when you can see the aftermath from your satellite. Often you don't find out what effect you've had, or you find out much later or in unexpected ways. If the other side is complaining to its sheeple about your terrible psywar capabilities and successes all the time, then you ARE finding out, and the news is that you're doing GREAT.

The psywar for WW3 has already begun. That's a normal thing with psywar: it begins before physical conflict and continues after it. I doubt a date has been set for the start of the physical-conflict stage but it won't be too far in the future.

Morale in Russia, unlike in the West, is very high. I mean morale in the sense that concerns war planners. Conversely, morale in Britain and the West, particularly among the military, is, quite frankly, abysmal.

The fact that Putin is not bleating like a crybaby about how foreign psywar agencies are undermining his country is closely related to how his government is perceived among the Russian sheeple, aka "morale". In my opinion, the west is far more likely to collapse than Russia.

Qui Bono

At the end of the day, the people who benefit from this crass and obvious attempt to ratchet up the tension between Russia and the West and to poison the minds of the British people against Russia is all too clear – it is the Zionist criminals who control Israel and the US.

Why is an even more obvious answer, they are pushing the world ever closer to World War 3 and poisoning a former Russian spy on the streets of Britain is their way of sowing in the minds of the British sheeple the notion that the Russians, and particularly Putin, are both belligerent and reckless enough to disregard international law and justice, to ignore British sovereignty and carry out a brutal murder on the streets of a quiet English town.

The message they wish to inculcate is one of fear and loathing of the big, bad Russian bear, a clear psy op to prepare the British sheeple for the upcoming war with Russia.

[Mar 19, 2018] Steele is a charlatan who knocked up a series of allegations that are either wildly improbable, or would need a high level source access he could not possibly get in today's Russia, or both

Notable quotes:
"... Craig Murray is an author, broadcaster and human rights activist. He was British Ambassador to Uzbekistan from August 2002 to October 2004 and Rector of the University of Dundee from 2007 to 2010. ..."
"... The idea that Russia is behind this attack is implausible, but that did not prevent the UK government from launching into an aggressively impertinent confrontation of Russia, and then using the Russian government's understandably annoyed response as supposed further evidence of supposed Russian guilt. ..."
"... After an initial scepticism the usual US sphere suspects (the US, France, Germany) lined up behind the British government's spurious feigned outrage, presumably having been reassured that the UK government would not seek to invoke NATO's Article 5). ..."
"... Am I wrong in thinking that there are thousands of Russians living in Germany, USA, Italy, Cyprus and so on but they are only poisoned in the UK? If I am mistaken on this then I apologies. ..."
"... If this letter is genuine then there has never been any nerve agent in Salisbury. ..."
Mar 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

Originally from: Russian to Judgement, by Craig Murray - The Unz Review

There is no doubt that Skripal was feeding secrets to MI6 at the time that Christopher Steele was an MI6 officer in Moscow, and at the the time that Pablo Miller, another member of Orbis Intelligence, was also an MI6 officer in Russia and directly recruiting agents. It is widely reported on the web and in US media that it was Miller who first recruited Skripal. My own ex-MI6 sources tell me that is not quite true as Skripal was "walk-in", but that Miller certainly was involved in running Skripal for a while. Sadly Pablo Miller's LinkedIn profile has recently been deleted, but it is again widely alleged on the web that it showed him as a consultant for Orbis Intelligence and a consultant to the FCO and – wait for it – with an address in Salisbury. If anyone can recover that Linkedin entry do get in touch, though British Government agencies will have been active in the internet scrubbing.

It was of course Christopher Steele and Orbis Intelligence who produced for the Clinton camp the sensationalist dossier on Trump links with Russia – including the story of Trump paying to be urinated on by Russian prostitutes – that is a key part of the "Russiagate" affair gripping the US political classes. The extraordinary thing about this is that the Orbis dossier is obvious nonsense which anybody with a professional background can completely demolish, as I did here . Steele's motive was, like Skripal's in selling his secrets, cash pure and simple. Steele is a charlatan who knocked up a series of allegations that are either wildly improbable, or would need a high level source access he could not possibly get in today's Russia, or both. He told the Democrats what they wish to hear and his audience – who had and still have no motivation to look at it critically – paid him highly for it.

I do not know for certain that Pablo Miller helped knock together the Steele dossier on Trump, but it seems very probable given he also served for MI6 in Russia and was working for Orbis. And it seems to me even more probable that Sergei Skripal contributed to the Orbis Intelligence dossier on Trump. Steele and Miller cannot go into Russia and run sources any more, and never would have had access as good as their dossier claims, even in their MI6 days. The dossier was knocked up for huge wodges of cash from whatever they could cobble together. Who better to lend a little corroborative verisimilitude in these circumstances than their old source Skripal?

Skripal was at hand in the UK, and allegedly even close to Miller in Salisbury. He could add in the proper acronym for a Russian committee here or the name of a Russian official there, to make it seem like Steele was providing hard intelligence. Indeed, Skripal's outdated knowledge might explain some of the dossier's more glaring errors.

But the problem with double agents like Skripal, who give intelligence for money, is that they can easily become triple agents and you never know when a better offer is going to come along. When Steele produced his dodgy dossier, he had no idea it would ever become so prominent and subject to so much scrutiny. Steele is fortunate in that the US Establishment is strongly motivated not to scrutinise his work closely as their one aim is to "get" Trump. But with the stakes very high, having a very loose cannon as one of the dossier's authors might be most inconvenient both for Orbis and for the Clinton camp.

If I was the police, I would look closely at Orbis Intelligence.

To return to Israel. Israel has the nerve agents. Israel has Mossad which is extremely skilled at foreign assassinations. Theresa May claimed Russian propensity to assassinate abroad as a specific reason to believe Russia did it. Well Mossad has an even greater propensity to assassinate abroad. And while I am struggling to see a Russian motive for damaging its own international reputation so grieviously, Israel has a clear motivation for damaging the Russian reputation so grieviously. Russian action in Syria has undermined the Israeli position in Syria and Lebanon in a fundamental way, and Israel has every motive for damaging Russia's international position by an attack aiming to leave the blame on Russia.

Both the Orbis and Israeli theories are speculations. But they are no more a speculation, and no more a conspiracy theory, than the idea that Vladimir Putin secretly sent agents to Salisbury to attack Skripal with a secret nerve agent. I can see absolutely no reason to believe that is a more valid speculation than the others at this point.

I am alarmed by the security, spying and armaments industries' frenetic efforts to stoke Russophobia and heat up the new cold war. I am especially alarmed at the stream of cold war warrior "experts" dominating the news cycles. I write as someone who believes that agents of the Russian state did assassinate Litvinenko, and that the Russian security services carried out at least some of the apartment bombings that provided the pretext for the brutal assault on Chechnya. I believe the Russian occupation of Crimea and parts of Georgia is illegal. On the other hand, in Syria Russia has saved the Middle East from domination by a new wave of US and Saudi sponsored extreme jihadists.

The naive view of the world as "goodies" and "baddies", with our own ruling class as the good guys, is for the birds. I witnessed personally in Uzbekistan the willingness of the UK and US security services to accept and validate intelligence they knew to be false in order to pursue their policy objectives. We should be extremely sceptical of their current anti-Russian narrative. There are many possible suspects in this attack.

Craig Murray is an author, broadcaster and human rights activist. He was British Ambassador to Uzbekistan from August 2002 to October 2004 and Rector of the University of Dundee from 2007 to 2010.

Seraphim , March 19, 2018 at 7:06 am GMT
The scam must be so obvious and damaging that even a 'believer' in the other obvious scams (Litvinenko) and the 'illegal' occupation of Crimea and 'parts of Georgia' must disassociate from it. I think that he might know more than simple conjectures about the role of the third party he alludes cautiously to, the party which has not only the motives to do it, but also the means and opportunities to operate freely under the radar which never sees it.
Alan Reid , March 19, 2018 at 7:07 am GMT
Here is one thing i noted about this meme In the American film 'The sum of all fears' the term novochok is used "novochok binary nerve agent" Now if you are going to lie, coat tailing on a BS yank movie is going to have advantages is it not? How many millions saw that movie? How many other movies are used to pre-imbed this type of predictive programming? More than a few is my guess . The instant i heard the 'novochok' claim i immediately recalled that movie and the terror it had gathered into it's celluloid.
jilles dykstra , March 19, 2018 at 8:29 am GMT
In my opinion there is not a shred of evidence that Russia did it, and there is no motive. The motive is the other way round, it fits in the climate of demonising Russia. Maybe the prelude to war, the last one, not a human being will survive.
Renoman , March 19, 2018 at 9:37 am GMT
Just the usual suspects telling the usual lies so they can start another war. It's what they do.
Randal , March 19, 2018 at 9:55 am GMT
Great to see this promoted at Unz. It's a vital story at the moment, which shines a very unflattering light on the UK government and should make anyone foolish enough to think the problems that were exposed over the manipulation of the country into the Iraq war in 2003 were particular to the government of Tony Blair or to that issue, think again. The truth is that the misrepresentation of intelligence, the blustering suppression of dissent by bombastic pseudo-patriotism, and the lockstep mainstream media support for it, are all endemic to the UK (and US, mutatis mutandis).

Murray stands at the opposite end of the political spectrum from me, and we would agree about very little outside of this kind of thing. But I salute his courage and persistence in standing up to the inevitable bullying and pressures that are brought to bear on people raising this kind of thing. Not as perniciously thuggish as the pressures placed upon race realist and English nationalist dissidents, but perhaps more menacing in some ways.

It is interesting to note that Murray – a longstanding UK dissident who has been making trouble for the authorities publicly since at least 2004, states (see Bothered by Midgies, linked above) that: " In 13 years of running my blog I have never been exposed to such a tirade of abuse as I have for refusing to accept without evidence that Russia is the only possible culprit for the Salisbury attack ". That partly reflects the shame he has brought upon the few members of our mainstream media (so called journalists working for the BBC, Sky, Guardian, Telegraph, Times, Independent (sic!), etc) still able to feel it, by doing their job when they had notably failed. It also reflects the importance of the work he is doing.

The idea that Russia is behind this attack is implausible, but that did not prevent the UK government from launching into an aggressively impertinent confrontation of Russia, and then using the Russian government's understandably annoyed response as supposed further evidence of supposed Russian guilt.

After an initial scepticism the usual US sphere suspects (the US, France, Germany) lined up behind the British government's spurious feigned outrage, presumably having been reassured that the UK government would not seek to invoke NATO's Article 5). The confrontation they have initiated will be far more costly to us all in the long run than the crime itself (grim though that has surely been for the individuals affected), and so it is vital for those few who can see through the blizzard of propaganda to continue to rip holes in the UK government's increasingly threadbare case.

Randal , March 19, 2018 at 10:25 am GMT
The UK government's case, such as it was, when it issued its disgraceful "ultimatum" to Russia was basically fourfold, as set out in this BBC piece:

Poisoned ex-spy: Why does UK think it was Russia?

  1. The substance they claim was used is of Russian origin.
  2. There is a motive for Russia to have carried out the attack – killing a traitor.
  3. There is supposedly a "track record" of Russia committing such crimes.
  4. There's no other hypothesis.

These points are all bunk, as set out below, and the information obtained by Murray has helped hugely in establishing that fact. But none of the refutations is remotely complicated or hard to spot, and any honest journalist should have been confronting the government with them from day one.

1 The substance they claim was used is of Russian origin.

As Murray has highlighted, the most the British government can say is that the substance they allege was used was "of a type developed by Russia", and in fact it could have been produced in any other country over the past ten years and was in fact produced in Iran in 2016 under OPCW supervision. So the fact that it was originally developed in Russia decades ago is evidence of nothing.

2 There is a motive for Russia to have carried out the attack – killing a traitor.

In fact Skipal was a spy who was unmasked by the Russians, tried, convicted and imprisoned. His offence was clearly not considered particularly serious, as treasons go, because he was only given 13 years in prison, and he was clearly considered no longer a threat because he was subsequently exchanged for some Russian spies.

3 There is supposedly a "track record" of Russia committing such crimes.

There is no track record of the Russians killing exchanged former spies. Indeed British intelligence effectively admitted that because they were quite happy for Skripal to live openly under his own name, with his address in the public domain and no protection given to him, unlike for instance organised crime witnesses who do actually face enemies with a track record of killing them.

4 There's no other hypothesis.

Of course there are plenty of other hypotheses with at least as much plausibility as the dubious case against Russia. Any of the governments seeking to promote and foment confrontation of Russia, over Ukraine or Syria, or just for internal political benefits, had a motive for committing this crime, and doing it in the method (a "wmd" attack on British soil) guaranteed to create the maximum hysteria and propaganda value. That brings the US, Israel, the Ukraine and the UK into the frame, all of whom would certainly have had the capability to manufacture the substance. Then there are issues around the shadowy criminal and political elements with whom Skripal was potentially involved, from Russian mafia to the US security state figures currently mixed up with British intelligence in the ongoing anti-Russian/anti-Trump nonsense.

In reality there is no shortage of alternative hypotheses. It's just that the BBC like the rest of the mainstream media failed to mention any of them. As usual, acting as stenographers for the powerful, rather than agents of truth.

The Alarmist , March 19, 2018 at 10:42 am GMT
Considering the Brits dragged us into two World Wars and a bunch of lesser but nevertheless costly messes, why the f *** do we listen to, much less believe, anything they say that points even in the general direction of conflict with Russia?

Does anyone in American leadership even fathom that the UK have a big chip on their shoulder for us knocking them off the top of the list of great empires and adding insult to injury by essentially forcing them to dismantle their empire, and then pushing them into a vassal state of the EU so we could better manage them as but one of many vassals?

skrik , March 19, 2018 at 11:11 am GMT
For what it's worth and if I may, a copy of a comment found on craigmurray.org.uk

" Arnie Saccnuson
March 19, 2018 at 09:37

Plot Twist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_Back:_Retribution
Word search Novichok and look at the dates it aired Our Rupert has such wonderful insight.
In case you missed it https://youtu.be/g9MBh1oM2Jo "

CF , March 19, 2018 at 11:55 am GMT
Am I wrong in thinking that there are thousands of Russians living in Germany, USA, Italy, Cyprus and so on but they are only poisoned in the UK? If I am mistaken on this then I apologies.
bliss_porsena , March 19, 2018 at 12:09 pm GMT
This is an Oligarch/Miller/Steele/Orbis carry on. All trails lead to HRC.
jilles dykstra , March 19, 2018 at 12:56 pm GMT
@Randal

There is one 'track record', Litvinov, killed by polonium. What secret service would be so dumb as to use this, pointing immediately to state murder ? Accidents, and suicides are quiet methods for keeping people silent for all times.

The Ukrainian pilot that, according to Russia, by accident shot down MH17, just committed suicide. I wonder if he was suicided.

Sensational murders, or attempted murders, have quite different purposes. Blaming someone.

Who believes that Arafat was not murdered, does anyone believe that the Diana accident was an accident, who believes the Hess and Kelly suicides ? Why was Palme murdered, who indeed thinks that Anna Lyndh was killed accidentally, that Barschel committed suicide, that Mölleman died accidentally ? And so on, and so forth.

Randal , March 19, 2018 at 1:16 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

There is one 'track record', Litvinov, killed by polonium.

Even if one chooses to believe the pretty dubious story concocted to blame that event on the Russian government, it doesn't represent any "track record" relevant to the Skripal case. Litvinenko was a former KGB/FSB thug who had found himself on the wrong side of a Kremlin power struggle and fled justice. He was not, like Skripal, a previously unmasked, tried, convicted, jailed and exchanged former spy.

Apples and oranges.

Kiza , March 19, 2018 at 1:21 pm GMT
Who says that there is no proof that Putin did it? Boris Johnson personally found a ripped off shirt next to the bench of Scripals and "Vlad WOS HIER" spray painted on the nearest wall.

Seriously, there was apparently an interesting letter from the Salisbury hospital to The Times:

Sir, Further to your report ("Poison exposure leaves almost 40 needing treatment", March 14), ****** may I clarify that no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury and there have only ever been three patients with significant poisoning . ****** Several people have attended the emergency department concerned that they may have been exposed. None has had symptoms of poisoning and none has needed treatment. Any blood tests performed have shown no abnormality. No member of the public has been contaminated by the agent involved.

Stephen Davies, Consultant in emergency medicine, Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust

If this letter is genuine then there has never been any nerve agent in Salisbury.

jilles dykstra , March 19, 2018 at 2:50 pm GMT
https://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/1806392/akkoord-eu-en-londen-over-overgangsperiode

And all of a sudden there is a GB EU agreement over a trade transition period. I wondered why May set up the poison gas murder show. I now wonder if this show was the price she was asked to pay, making GB the enemy of Russia, preventing GB trade with Russia. It reminds me of a new mafia member, asked to commit a crime, to show that he's real criminal.

[Mar 19, 2018] NBC's Clueless Boost for Putin by Ray McGovern

Notable quotes:
"... Reviewing the original Russian tape of the interviews, it became clear that the tête-à-tête showed a Putin looking patiently but supremely presidential to Russian viewers who could see the whole interviews, not just the selective selected excerpts aired by NBC and "interpreted" by Russophobe-de-jour Richard Haas. (A close adviser to Secretary of State Colin Powell, Haas was among those who told him it was a swell idea to invade Iraq. When the anticipated "cakewalk" turned rather bloody, with no WMD to be found, Haas quit in July 2003 and became President of the Council on Foreign Relations where he is now well into his 15th year.) ..."
"... For some reason best known to Kelly and NBC, Kelly tried repeatedly to make the case that the U.S. decision to scrap the ABM treaty was a result of the terrorist attacks of 9/11, when, she said, "the United States was reassessing its security posture." ..."
"... "Complete nonsense," was Putin's reply ("polniy chush" in Russian -- chush ringing with onomatopoeia and a polite rendering of "B.S."). Putin explained that "9/11 and the missile defense system are completely unrelated," adding that even "housewives" are able to understand that. He found occasion to use "polniy chush" (or simply "chush) several times during the interview. ..."
"... During the back-and-forth on chemical weapons, Putin not only called the accusations against Russia a lie, but saw fit to refer to Colin Powell's misbegotten speech at the UN just six weeks before the U.S./UK attack on Iraq: "It is a lie just as the vial with the white substance that allegedly proved that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, which the CIA gave to the Secretary of State." ..."
"... For good measure, Putin threw in "Why did you encourage the government coup in Ukraine?" ..."
Mar 19, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

As I watched NBC's special, " Confronting Putin ," Friday evening, I asked myself -- naively -- what possessed President Putin to subject himself again to what NBC calls a Megan Kelly "grilling," replete with supercilious questions and less-than-polite interruptions, just nine months after his first such "grilling." It then hit me that "grilling" is in the eye of the beholder.

Reviewing the original Russian tape of the interviews, it became clear that the tête-à-tête showed a Putin looking patiently but supremely presidential to Russian viewers who could see the whole interviews, not just the selective selected excerpts aired by NBC and "interpreted" by Russophobe-de-jour Richard Haas. (A close adviser to Secretary of State Colin Powell, Haas was among those who told him it was a swell idea to invade Iraq. When the anticipated "cakewalk" turned rather bloody, with no WMD to be found, Haas quit in July 2003 and became President of the Council on Foreign Relations where he is now well into his 15th year.)

Back to the Kelly-Putin pas de deux: At the March 1 interview the Russian President came out swinging. When Kelly asked the first time whether there is "a new arms race right now" after Putin's announcement of Russia's new strategic weapons, Putin reminded her that it was the U.S. that withdrew in 2002 from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972. He added that he had repeatedly warned the Bush/Cheney administration that Russia would be forced to respond to the dangerous upset of the strategic equilibrium.

For some reason best known to Kelly and NBC, Kelly tried repeatedly to make the case that the U.S. decision to scrap the ABM treaty was a result of the terrorist attacks of 9/11, when, she said, "the United States was reassessing its security posture."

"Complete nonsense," was Putin's reply ("polniy chush" in Russian -- chush ringing with onomatopoeia and a polite rendering of "B.S."). Putin explained that "9/11 and the missile defense system are completely unrelated," adding that even "housewives" are able to understand that. He found occasion to use "polniy chush" (or simply "chush) several times during the interview.

Russian "Interference"

It was no surprise that Kelly was armed with an array of questions about Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election, and at the start of the March 2 interview asked "can we have that discussion now?" Putin said, "I think we must discuss this issue if it keeps bothering you." And they were off on a feckless exchange with Putin replying calming to Kelly's hectoring.

After one interruption, Putin said, "You keep interrupting me; this is impolite." Kelly apologized, but dutifully went on to cover what seemed to be the remainder of her accusatory talking points. These included repeated insistence that Putin punish the click-bait farmers indicted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller for violating U.S. law.

No doubt fully briefed on the fact that Kelly sports a law degree, Putin asked, "Do you have people with legal training? We cannot even launch an investigation without cause. Give us at least an official inquiry with a statement of facts; send us an official paper."

Kelly: "Isn't it enough that U.S. intelligence agencies and now a Special Prosecutor (sic) with a criminal indictment -- is that not enough for you to look into it?" Putin: "Absolutely not. If you do not have legal training, I can assure you that an inquiry is required for this." Kelly: "I do." Putin: "Then you should understand that a corresponding official inquiry should be sent to the Prosecutor-General's Office of the Russian Federation."

The interview got testier toward the end, as Kelly tried to fit in all her questions, including the unsupported accusation that Syrian government forces are using chemical weapons and that Russia bears some responsibility for this.

During the back-and-forth on chemical weapons, Putin not only called the accusations against Russia a lie, but saw fit to refer to Colin Powell's misbegotten speech at the UN just six weeks before the U.S./UK attack on Iraq: "It is a lie just as the vial with the white substance that allegedly proved that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, which the CIA gave to the Secretary of State."

For good measure, Putin threw in "Why did you encourage the government coup in Ukraine?"

Once again for the record, President Putin finished on a familiar note: "Russia and the U.S. should sit down and talk in order to get things straight. I have the impression that this is what the current President wants, but he is prevented from it by some forces. We are ready to discuss any matter, be it missile-related issues, cyberspace, or counterterrorism efforts. But the U.S. must also be ready."

... ... ...

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Savior in inner-city Washington. During his 27-year career as a CIA analyst, he was Chief of the Soviet Foreign Policy Branch and later conducted the morning briefings of The President's Daily Brief to President Ronald Reagan's most senior national security advisers.

[Mar 19, 2018] 'It's nonsense' to think Russia tried to poison Skripals ahead of elections World Cup - Putin

Mar 19, 2018 | www.rt.com

Russian President Vladimir Putin has dismissed allegations that Russia was behind the early March poisoning of former double-agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury. It is "nonsense and absurd to claim that Russia would do anything like that before the elections and the World Cup," Putin said, touching on the subject for the fist time since the incident. He was responding to a reporter's question in his campaign headquarters, as early results of Sunday's presidential election indicated his landslide victory.

"Concerning this tragedy that you've mentioned, I learned about it from the media," Putin told reporters.

He dismissed the theory that it was a military-grade toxic agent that was used in the poisoning, because if that were the case "people, of course, would have died on the spot."

"It's an obvious fact, you should simply understand that," he said.

The Skripals, 66-year-old Sergei and 33-year-old Yulia, were found slumped on a bench in Salisbury on March 4. They remain in hospital, in critical but stable condition.

Moscow is open to working with London to investigate the poisoning, provided the UK is willing, which is not the case at the moment.

"We have not seen this so far, but we keep that on the agenda while planning our bilateral work," Putin said, adding that Russia is ready "to discuss any issues and overcome any difficulties" with London.

Moscow does not possess any chemical weapons stockpiles, Putin said.

"Russia doesn't have such means, and we have destroyed all our chemical weapons under the supervision of international observers," he stated, adding that Russia was the first to get rid of its arsenals while other countries "have promised [to do the same], but have not met their commitments yet, unfortunately."

Earlier, the Russian Foreign Ministry said that, contrary to UK Prime Minister Theresa May's claims that there could be "no alternative conclusion other than the Russian state was responsible," the toxin could have originated from the UK itself, Slovakia, the Czech Republic or Sweden.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova stated on Saturday that the project "is not the creation of Russia or the Soviet Union," pointing to the fact that several countries have been researching the substance since the 1990s, when many former Soviet scientists fled to the West.

On Sunday, British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson doubled down on his accusations that Russia was complicit in the incident, claiming that the UK has been collecting evidence "over the past 10 years" of Moscow devising deadly nerve agents for the purpose of assassination.

Moscow has requested samples of the alleged nerve agent to be provided to Russia through Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) channels, but the request has been repeatedly rebuked by the UK.

[Mar 19, 2018] Fancy killings and attempts thereof seem more indicative of the West tendencies towards drama including rogue parts of the CIA, MI6, etc.

Notable quotes:
"... CUI BONO ? Who Benefits? MIC, NeoCons, Zionists, Rothschilds banking cartel. ..."
"... Why the HELL would Russia, or anyone else, bother to use such a messy, traceable and complicated method to kill this guy? Especially when there are SO MANY WAYS it could have been done that wouldn't have garnered all the attention, and that would have left no traces? They could have sent someone to shove him in front of a train or something, or staged a 'botched robbery'. ..."
Mar 19, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Kafir Goyim -> DaiRR Sat, 03/17/2018 - 18:04 Perma link

You're not "just sayin'", you're just babbling. Just as Assad would never be stupid enough to use chemical weapons when he's already winning bigly, Russia would never be stupid enough to use chemical weapons on a has-been spy, when there's a hundred other ways to kill him. Anybody who insists on the chemical weapons narrative in either of these cases is pushing a narrative, not having a discussion. Why are you pushing this narrative, I wonder, my little 5 month old "Warrior for freedom."?

alexcojones -> Kafir Goyim Sat, 03/17/2018 - 19:23 Permalink

CUI BONO ? Who Benefits? MIC, NeoCons, Zionists, Rothschilds banking cartel.

And Russia disgraced and then banned from hosting World Cup.

It really is easy to see the Satanists game plan.

DownWithYogaPants -> pawn Sun, 03/18/2018 - 02:30 Permalink

I maintain that fancy killings and attempts thereof seem more indicative of the wests tendencies towards drama on the part of the CIA et al.

If you want to kill someone it seems a nailgun would be more reasonable.

Bemused Observer -> DownWithYogaPants Sun, 03/18/2018 - 11:56 Permalink

Seriously...I think these 'conspiracy theorists' have been watching too many Hollywood movies.

This is what I want to SCREAM every time I hear this shit...Why the HELL would Russia, or anyone else, bother to use such a messy, traceable and complicated method to kill this guy? Especially when there are SO MANY WAYS it could have been done that wouldn't have garnered all the attention, and that would have left no traces? They could have sent someone to shove him in front of a train or something, or staged a 'botched robbery'.

Reminds me of the stupid assassination methods the CIA wanted to use on Castro...poisoning his beard? Really? Well, aside from the fact that it is just too 'Wile E. Coyote' to be taken seriously, did anyone ask, if such an assassin could get close enough to poison his beard, why he wouldn't go with a more dependable method?

[Mar 19, 2018] There is no doubt that the UK acted as Washington's poodle

The problem with the recommended approach is the Russia is dependent on the West. It just can't break ties with the West.
Mar 19, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Well we know that. But the real point I want to make is that Russia always reacts to such nonsensical and outright false accusations; Russia always responds, rejects of course the accusations but usually with lengthy explanations, and with suggestions on how to come to the truth – as if the UK and the west would give a shit about the truth – why are they doing that? Why are you Russia, even responding?

That is foolish sign of weakness . As if Russia was still believing in the goodness of the west, as if it just needed to be awakened. What Russia is doing, every time, not just in this Skripal case, but in every senseless and ruthless attack, accusations about cyber hacking, invading Ukraine, annexing Crimea, and not to speak about the never-ending saga of Russia-Gate, Russian meddling and hacking into the 2016 US Presidential elections, favoring Trump over Hillary. Everybody with a half brain knows it's a load of crap. Even the FBI and CIA said that there was no evidence. So, why even respond? Why even trying to undo the lies, convince the liars that they, Russia, are not culpable?

Every time the west notices Russia's wanting to be a "good neighbor" – about which the west really couldn't care less, Russia makes herself more vulnerable, more prone to be accused and attacked and more slandered.

Why does Russia not just break away from the west? Instead of trying to 'belong' to the west? Accept that you are not wanted in the west, that the west only wants to plunder your resources, your vast landmass, they want to provoke you into a war where there are no winners, a war that may destroy entire Mother Earth, but they, the ZionAnglo handlers of Washington, dream that their elite will survive to eventually take over beautiful grand Russia. That's what they want. The Bashing is a means towards the end. The more people are with them, the easier it is to launch an atrocious war.

The Skripal case is typical. The intensity with which this UK lie-propaganda has been launched is exemplary. It has brought all of halfwit Europe – and there is a lot of them – under the spell of Russia hating. Nobody can believe that May Merkel, Macron are such blatant liars that is beyond what they have been brought up with. A lifelong of lies pushed down their throats, squeezed into their brains. Even if something tells them – this is not quite correct, the force of comfort, not leaving their comfort zone- not questioning their own lives – is so strong that they rather cry for War, War against Russia, War against the eternal enemy of mankind. – I sadly remember in my youth in neutral Switzerland, the enemy always, but always came from the East. He was hiding behind the "Iron Curtain".

The West is fabricating a new Iron Curtain. But while doing that, they don't realize they are putting a noose around their own neck. Russia doesn't need the west, but the west will soon be unable to survive without the East, the future is in the east – and Russia is an integral part of the East, of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), that encompasses half the world's population and controls a third of the world's economic output.

Mr. Putin, you don't need to respond to insults from the west, because that's what they are, abusive insults. The abject slander that Johnson boy threw at you is nothing but a miserable insult; you don't need to respond to this behavior. You draw your consequences.

Dear President Putin, Dear Mr. Lavrov, Let them! Let them holler. Let them rot in their insanity . – Respond to the UK no longer with words but with deeds, with drastic deeds. Close their embassy. Give all embassy staff a week to vacate your country, then you abolish and eviscerate the embassy the same way the US abolished your consulates in Washington and San Francisco – a bit more than a year ago. Surely you have not forgotten. Then you give all Brits generously a month to pack up and leave your beautiful country (it can be done – that's about what Washington is forcing its vassals around the globe to do with North Korean foreign laborers); block all trade with the UK (or with the entire West for that matter), block all western assets in Russia, because that's the first thing the western plunderers will do, blocking Russian assets abroad. Stealing is in their blood.

Mr. Putin, You don't need to respond to their lowly abusive attacks, slanders, lies. You and Russia are way above the level of this lowly western pack. Shut your relation to the west. You have China, the SCO, the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), Russia is part of the OBI – President Xi's One Belt Initiative – the multi-trillion development thrive, emanating from China, connecting continents – Asia, Africa, Europe, South America – with infrastructure, trade, creating hundreds of millions of decent jobs, developing and promoting science and culture and providing hundreds of millions of people with a decent life.

What would the west do, if suddenly they had no enemy, because the enemy has decided to ignore them and take a nap? China will join you.

Everything else, responding, justifying, explaining, denying the most flagrant lies, trying to make them believe in the truth is not only a frustrating waste of time, it's committing political suicide. You will never win. The west doesn't give a hoot about the truth – they have proven that for the last two thousand years or more. And in all that time, not an iota of conscience has entered the west's collective mind. The west cannot be trusted. Period.

Belrev -> NoDebt Sun, 03/18/2018 - 23:32 Permalink

Putin is all too happy to see West tirelessly attack and insult Russia as this kind of antagonism solidifiers Russian people unity and support for the Czar Vladimir. He does not need to lift a finger, just report the news from abroad. All economic and social problems are now secondary in Russia with this vicious anti-Russia campaign in the West and its weekly russophobic hysteria.

FoggyWorld -> Belrev Sun, 03/18/2018 - 23:39 Permalink

If you would listen to Putin who does give long interviews regularly you see that he understands that all of the money and energy being directed toward war is retarding the growth he and his people want to see in Russia.

That country has paid dues we can't get our minds around between the soviet overthrow of the government and WW2, never mind Stalin's years of the gulag. There is a free Russian movie with English titles on Youtube and it's called The Chekist. Strongly think it's worth your time to watch it.

PhilofOz -> FoggyWorld Mon, 03/19/2018 - 00:55 Permalink

The Checkist.... a great movie. It's time I watched it once more just to remind me of what the leftists around us in this day and age are capable of.

D.T.Barnum -> NoDebt Sun, 03/18/2018 - 23:33 Permalink

The governments of these "big player" countries put on kabuki theater, because behind closed doors and through back channels, they are working together to enslave the peoples. That's why Russia keeps responding.

...

Lore -> NoDebt Sun, 03/18/2018 - 23:51 Permalink

We're witnessing classic psychopathic warfare. Psychopaths play mind games. They make outrageous accusations and force you to spend thousands of hours spinning your wheels in an attempt to Prove A Negative.

I know because I worked for a psychopath who did it frequently, maintaining a culture of fear even among the executive board members. One nice fellow was so affected by the stress that he developed cancer and died. (The manipulative SOB didn't have the balls to attend the funeral. Too bad.)

Again, this is classic psychopathy. I was singled out at one point for something special, being accused in front of the Board of something "Too Horrible To Describe" (those exact words), but if I apologized for "it" then there would be an opportunity to make amends. Obviously, I had no idea, and got so rattled (I was a stupid kid) that I nearly burst into tears. A few minutes after I left, I heard them all laughing about it. People are not human beings to a psychopath, they're instruments to be manipulated.

The average American zombie may still be clueless to this, but Russian officials understand, surely. America and its vassals are a Pathocracy. The directives and messaging coming out of Washington and other corners are going to get a lot more zany, because psycohpaths are nothing if not imaginative when it comes to rationalization and avoidance of responsibility.

I'm convinced of 2 things: 1) Russia's strategy is to document everything like crazy for the purpose of providing a chronicle when SHTF (letting the psychopaths dig their own hole, in other words), and 2) When SHTF, it will not involve Russia directly at all. Things are going to get so loony that rational Americans will rise up. In other words, Revolution is inevitable as long as pscyhopaths are allowed to continued to grind everything that's good about the West into the dirt.

Psychopaths: Expect no sympathy when it all comes down. For all the terror and death that you have rained upon the rest of the world since WW2, you deserve everything coming to you.

Pi Bolar -> Lore Mon, 03/19/2018 - 01:22 Permalink

Psychopaths enjoy the thrill of lying and sowing discord amongst anyone they can bully, i.e. Staff in lower positions, (yes the chief burger flipper can be a psychopath to the junior burger flippers - it's not all about CEO's). They also bully anyone smaller, weaker or less fortunate than themselves. A lot of them do get locked up, but too many roam free.

ldd -> NoDebt Mon, 03/19/2018 - 00:12 Permalink

When you are taught what is right and what is wrong do you question it?

If we started saying this is that and that is this what would be the results?

A reign of steady and constant known vs a steady and constant unknown?

Why do our memories of the past not belong in the present?

Ikiru -> NoDebt Mon, 03/19/2018 - 00:19 Permalink

Agreed. I think the author is missing the point. In my opinion, the Russians are speaking to western people, not the corrupt leaders, when they expose the truth, and they're gaining credibility in the process. With the constant barrage of lies the West receives from the media and the imperialistic misdeeds constantly committed by the U.S. govt, Russia's best propaganda campaign is simply stating the truth.

grizfish Sun, 03/18/2018 - 23:25 Permalink

I'm expecting a false flag by the UK to disrupt delivery of LNG from Russia.

Headlines will read "Putin, with his new power has decided to cause millions to freeze to death in the UK."

FoggyWorld -> grizfish Sun, 03/18/2018 - 23:31 Permalink

Funny though as evil as Putin is painted out to be, he continued supplying Ukraine even when they weren't paying for their oil and gas.

But this endless made up stuff is bound to finally get to one of the more patient leaders on this planet.

[Mar 19, 2018] That it is just too Wile E. Coyote method of poinsoning

"I'm surprised they didn't happen to "find" the assassin's Russian passport lying on the ground next to the victims!"
Mar 19, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Bemused Observer -> DownWithYogaPants Sun, 03/18/2018 - 11:56 Permalink

Seriously...I think these 'conspiracy theorists' have been watching too many Hollywood movies.

This is what I want to SCREAM every time I hear this shit...Why the HELL would Russia, or anyone else, bother to use such a messy, traceable and complicated method to kill this guy? Especially when there are SO MANY WAYS it could have been done that wouldn't have garnered all the attention, and that would have left no traces? They could have sent someone to shove him in front of a train or something, or staged a 'botched robbery'.

Reminds me of the stupid assassination methods the CIA wanted to use on Castro...poisoning his beard? Really? Well, aside from the fact that it is just too 'Wile E. Coyote' to be taken seriously, did anyone ask, if such an assassin could get close enough to poison his beard, why he wouldn't go with a more dependable method?

Snaffew -> Bemused Observer Sun, 03/18/2018 - 16:43 Permalink

exactly why all the fingerprints of this assassination attempt point to the NSA/CIA. Which is more absurd...their methods or the gullible public?

An Shrubbery -> Bemused Observe r Mon, 03/19/2018 - 01:42 Permalink

+1 for "Wile E. Coyote method" lol

Snaffew -> pawn • Sun, 03/18/2018 - 16:41 Permalink

I blame the wildly dumbed down and complicit media here in the US and in our "allies" abroad. They spit out whatever the government feeds to them without a single ounce of effort to validate the stories they frantically preach to the ignorant public. Damn, I can't believe how many times people will be duped into trillion dollar wars and they still are die hard believers in the ethics and truthfulness of the US gov't. Morons---

dussasr -> Kafir Goyim • Sat, 03/17/2018 - 21:13 Permalink

It makes little sense that Russia would assassinate someone using a technique that would immediately implicate them. I'm surprised they didn't happen to "find" the assassin's Russian passport lying on the ground next to the victims! <

0

lakecity55 -> Kafir Goyim Sun, 03/18/2018 - 21:00 Permalink

The only "issue" the Atlanticists can bring up in the "Press" are CWs against the RF and Syria.

It's patently obvious the entire affair is a FF and made up out of a bolt of whole cloth.

The Atlanticists' claims are Pure Bullshit.

((They)) want Russia, and they will kill, lie, cheat and steal to get her back.

WE will pay the price unless they are stopped.

JohannSennefelder -> DaiRR Sun, 03/18/2018 - 07:41 Permalink

I disagree. If a government is going to terminate a spy they don't botch the job by letting him get to a hospital. In Putin's Russia they know how to terminate most efficiently. I may be wrong but this is a pretext for something more aggressive/dangerous.

I got a bad feeling about this situation...

philip88 -> JohannSennefelder Sun, 03/18/2018 - 10:33 Permalink

Me too...

Something big is coming..😱

Griffin -> JohannSennefelder Sun, 03/18/2018 - 13:36 Permalink

It is interesting that the incident took place only 12 km from Porton Down, a government run top secret facility that works on chemicals.

Maybe this was a accident, and the target was supposed to be something that would have had a more powerful impact.

It looks to me that its not entirely impossible that May may end up eating a big slice of humble pi.

lakecity55 -> Griffin Sun, 03/18/2018 - 21:02 Permalink

May is not going to like it when she comes out of her Bunker to find all of the UK a smoking nuclear wasteland.

"Shit! There's nobody left to boss around!!"

bh2 -> JohannSennefelder Sun, 03/18/2018 - 16:08 Permalink

Every war begins with a lie.

PeterLong -> DaiRR Sun, 03/18/2018 - 10:47 Permalink

And the proof that this attack ever happened is?

[Mar 19, 2018] Salisbury Hysteria Exposes the Chauvinism and Hypocrisy of British Elites

Notable quotes:
"... Everything they say is true of brexiters is actually far more true of them ..."
Mar 19, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Salisbury Hysteria Exposes the Chauvinism of British Elites Everything they say is true of brexiters is actually far more true of them

Crypto • 2 days ago ,

Nothing I have ever seen in my life is more ludicrous, more absurd and more unjust than this display in parliament.

1691 Crypto • 2 days ago ,

Remember the MH17 tragedy. It was worst. The whole western world was screaming Russia/Putin.

[Mar 19, 2018] Remember the MH17 tragedy. The whole western world was screaming Russia/Putin without any conclusive evidence

Notable quotes:
"... for a prime minister to gamble so much on 'highly likely' intelligence, is an insult to our intelligence. ..."
"... Another FALSE FLAG created by the western neocons to discredit Russia. This is so obvious. The sheeple need to wake up. ..."
Mar 18, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Crypto • 2 days ago ,

Nothing I have ever seen in my life is more ludicrous, more absurd and more unjust than this display in parliament.

1691 Crypto • 2 days ago ,

Remember the MH17 tragedy. It was worst. The whole western world was screaming Russia/Putin.

Peter Jennings Crypto • a day ago ,

I agree, and for a prime minister to gamble so much on 'highly likely' intelligence, is an insult to our intelligence.

The whole sorry lot in parliament are stuck in an 18th century mindset. The place has never so needed a new broom as it does right now.

tom , 2 days ago
"An editor at the Guardian says the poisoning was a 'brazen attack on a sovereign country' and 'cannot go unpunished'".

So presumably The Guardian will now be agitating for the trial and severe punishment of all those responsible for brazen and unprovoked attacks on Yugoslavia, Afghanistan. Iraq, Libya and Syria?

All of which did rather more than poisoning two or three people (so far, non-fatally). In Iraq alone the "coalition" is responsible for over 3 million civilian deaths. In Iraq and Libya the civil infrastructure was demolished and the head of state murdered.

And what does The Guardian have to say about that?

Mizan Thrope • 2 days ago

Another FALSE FLAG created by the western neocons to discredit Russia. This is so obvious. The sheeple need to wake up.

[Mar 18, 2018] The Illusion of War Without Casualties by Nicolas J.S. Davies

Notable quotes:
"... But low U.S. casualties do not mean that our current wars are less violent than previous wars. Our post-2001 wars have probably killed between 2 and 5 million people . The use of massive aerial and artillery bombardment has reduced cities like Fallujah, Ramadi, Sirte, Kobane, Mosul and Raqqa to rubble, and our wars have plunged entire societies into endless violence and chaos. ..."
"... But by bombing and firing from a distance with very powerful weapons, the U.S. has wreaked all this slaughter and destruction at an extraordinary low rate of U.S. casualties. The U.S.'s technological war-making has not reduced the violence and horror of war, but it has "externalized" it, at least temporarily. ..."
"... Even when the U.S. was losing 900-1,000 troops killed in action in Iraq and Afghanistan each year from 2004 to 2007, there was much more public debate and vocal opposition to war than there is now, but those were still historically very low casualty rates. ..."
"... Israeli and Saudi leaders openly threaten war on Iran, but expect the U.S. to fight Iran on their behalf. American politicians play along with this dangerous game, which could get thousands of their constituents killed. This would flip the traditional U.S. doctrine of proxy war on its head, effectively turning the U.S. military into a proxy force fighting for the ill-defined interests of Israel and Saudi Arabia ..."
"... In an article about the prospect of a U.S. war on Iran , U.S. Army Major Danny Sjursen dismissed American politicians' fears of Iran as "alarmism" and called his boss, Defense Secretary Mattis, "obsessed" with Iran. Sjursen believes that the "fiercely nationalistic" Iranians would mount a determined and effective resistance to foreign occupation, and concludes, "Make no mistake, U.S. military occupation of the Islamic Republic would make the occupation of Iraq, for once, actually look like the 'cakewalk' it was billed to be." ..."
"... Those who argue that war and preparation for it is not necessary to capitalism's existence or prosperity miss the point entirely: it simply has not functioned in any other way in the past and there is nothing in the present to warrant the assumption that the coming decades will be any different ..."
"... there are no easy solutions to the problems of irresponsible, deluded leaders and the classes they represent, or the hesitation of people to reverse the world's folly before they are themselves subjected to its grievous consequences. So much remains to be done – and it is late. ..."
"... America's deluded leaders know nothing of diplomacy beyond bullying and brinksmanship. As they brainwash themselves and the public with the illusion of war without casualties, they will keep killing, destroying and risking our future until we stop them – or until they stop us and everything else. ..."
"... The whole notion that American soldiers "fight to protect freedom here at home and abroad" is the biggest propaganda accomplishment in global history. ..."
"... This line of self delusional reasoning finds favor in the United States because it obviously provides moral and ethical support to otherwise brutal and imperialist ventures ..."
"... The War Party of Lincoln has been invading other peoples for the last 150 years. Lincoln was the first president of the Republican Party which represents big banks and big business ..."
"... The political parties are business gangsters, just like Al Capone. I don't think Al Capone killed women, children, and babies. ..."
"... I do not know about other people who comment on this websites. But we have social friends, many of them, unlike us, are in very financially lucrative professions. All their information comes from CNN, MSNBC. They have never read anything about American History or history of their own country. Many of them do not even know who Thomas Jefferson was. All their time is spent in making money and finding tax loopholes to avoid paying taxes. And many of them profess to be liberal democrats. This is your new America. ..."
"... Dave in all my years I have never heard, or experienced quite the confrontational attitudes that I see all around me being displayed so rudely and openly, as I see today. I blame a lot of this on our MSM's tabloid style of reporting. This is a media which leaves so much of the news to be disregarded, that it creates a very misinformed public. The 1st Amendment doesn't matter, as much as a particular persons opinions do. In someways I think certain Americans take pride in shutting down another American persons opinion from being known. Irritation only aggravates and brings on more irritation ..."
"... It's rather obvious that the US did away with the draft, and resorted to US bombings rather then boots on the ground to reduce US casualties in order to avoid blow back from the American people so they can fight their endless wars. ..."
"... We (and, plausibly, the world) have only one hope – the United States experiences financial destruction before we go much further. The United States has not experienced the horror of war on our own soil for 150 years – during the Civil War. I consider it quite unlikely that the American population will rise up to put a stop to the warmongers now. It will take one of two events to bring the American people to their senses. Either (a) we experience war here in CONUS or (b) our financial system collapses under the stress of massive government debt (currently $20+T and growing with the advent of our nice fat tax cuts) in much the same way that Sparta's did. ..."
Jan 09, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press

In the past 16 years, the U.S. has invaded, occupied and dropped 200,000 bombs and missiles on seven countries, but it has lost only 6,939 American troops killed and 50,000 wounded in these wars. To put this in the context of U.S. military history, 58,000 U.S. troops were killed in Vietnam, 54,000 in Korea, 405,000 in the Second World War and 116,000 in the First World War.

But low U.S. casualties do not mean that our current wars are less violent than previous wars. Our post-2001 wars have probably killed between 2 and 5 million people . The use of massive aerial and artillery bombardment has reduced cities like Fallujah, Ramadi, Sirte, Kobane, Mosul and Raqqa to rubble, and our wars have plunged entire societies into endless violence and chaos.

But by bombing and firing from a distance with very powerful weapons, the U.S. has wreaked all this slaughter and destruction at an extraordinary low rate of U.S. casualties. The U.S.'s technological war-making has not reduced the violence and horror of war, but it has "externalized" it, at least temporarily.

But do these low casualty rates represent a kind of "new normal" that the U.S. can replicate whenever it attacks or invades other countries? Can it keep waging war around the world and remain so uniquely immune from the horrors it unleashes on others?

Or are the low U.S. casualty rates in these wars against relatively weak military forces and lightly armed resistance fighters giving Americans a false picture of war, one that is enthusiastically embellished by Hollywood and the corporate media?

Even when the U.S. was losing 900-1,000 troops killed in action in Iraq and Afghanistan each year from 2004 to 2007, there was much more public debate and vocal opposition to war than there is now, but those were still historically very low casualty rates.

U.S. military leaders are more realistic than their civilian counterparts. General Dunford, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has told Congress that the U.S. plan for war on North Korea is for a ground invasion of Korea , effectively a Second Korean War. The Pentagon must have an estimate of the number of U.S. troops who are likely to be killed and wounded under its plan, and Americans should insist that it makes that estimate public before U.S. leaders decide to launch such a war.

The other country that the U.S., Israel and Saudi Arabia keep threatening to attack or invade is Iran. President Obama admitted from the outset that Iran was the ultimate strategic target of the CIA's proxy war in Syria.

Israeli and Saudi leaders openly threaten war on Iran, but expect the U.S. to fight Iran on their behalf. American politicians play along with this dangerous game, which could get thousands of their constituents killed. This would flip the traditional U.S. doctrine of proxy war on its head, effectively turning the U.S. military into a proxy force fighting for the ill-defined interests of Israel and Saudi Arabia .

Iran is nearly 4 times the size of Iraq, with more than double its population. It has a 500,000 strong military and its decades of independence and isolation from the West have forced it to develop its own weapons industry, supplemented by some advanced Russian and Chinese weapons.

In an article about the prospect of a U.S. war on Iran , U.S. Army Major Danny Sjursen dismissed American politicians' fears of Iran as "alarmism" and called his boss, Defense Secretary Mattis, "obsessed" with Iran. Sjursen believes that the "fiercely nationalistic" Iranians would mount a determined and effective resistance to foreign occupation, and concludes, "Make no mistake, U.S. military occupation of the Islamic Republic would make the occupation of Iraq, for once, actually look like the 'cakewalk' it was billed to be." Is This America's "Phony War"?

Invading North Korea or Iran could make the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan look in hindsight like the German invasions of Czechoslovakia and Poland must have looked to German troops on the Eastern front a few years later. Only 18,000 German troops were killed in the invasion of Czechoslovakia and 16,000 in the invasion of Poland. But the larger war that they led to killed 7 million Germans and wounded 7 million more.

After the deprivations of the First World War reduced Germany to a state of near starvation and drove the German Navy to mutiny, Adolf Hitler was determined, like America's leaders today, to maintain an illusion of peace and prosperity on the home front. The newly conquered people of the thousand-year Reich could suffer, but not Germans in the homeland.

Hitler succeeded in maintaining the standard of living in Germany at about its pre-war level for the first two years of the war, and even began cutting military spending in 1940 to boost the civilian economy. Germany only embraced a total war economy when its previously all-conquering forces hit a brick wall of resistance in the Soviet Union. Could Americans be living through a similar "phony war", one miscalculation away from a similar shock at the brutal reality of the wars we have unleashed on the world?

How would the American public react if far greater numbers of Americans were killed in Korea or Iran – or Venezuela? Or even in Syria if the U.S. and its allies follow through on their plan to illegally occupy Syria east of the Euphrates?

And where are our political leaders and jingoistic media leading us with their ever-escalating anti-Russian and anti-Chinese propaganda? How far will they take their nuclear brinksmanship ? Would American politicians even know before it was too late if they crossed a point of no return in their dismantling of Cold War nuclear treaties and escalating tensions with Russia and China?

Obama's doctrine of covert and proxy war was a response to the public reaction to what were in fact historically low U.S. casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq. But Obama waged war on the quiet, not war on the cheap . Under cover of his dovish image, he successfully minimized the public reaction to his escalation of the war in Afghanistan, his proxy wars in Libya, Syria, Ukraine and Yemen, his global expansion of special operations and drone strikes and a massive bombing campaign in Iraq and Syria.

How many Americans know that the bombing campaign Obama launched in Iraq and Syria in 2014 has been the heaviest U.S. bombing campaign anywhere in the world since Vietnam? Over 105,000 bombs and missiles , as well as indiscriminate U.S., French and Iraqi rockets and artillery , have blasted thousands of homes in Mosul, Raqqa, Fallujah, Ramadi and dozens of smaller towns and villages. As well as killing thousands of Islamic State fighters, they have probably killed at least 100,000 civilians , a systematic war crime that has passed almost without comment in the Western media.

" And It Is Late"

How will the American public react if Trump launches new wars against North Korea or Iran, and the U.S. casualty rate returns to a more historically "normal" level – maybe 10,000 Americans killed each year, as during the peak years of the American War in Vietnam, or even 100,000 per year, as in U.S. combat in the Second World War? Or what if one of our many wars finally escalates into a nuclear war, with a higher U.S. casualty rate than any previous war in our history?

In his classic 1994 book, Century of War , the late Gabriel Kolko presciently explained,

"Those who argue that war and preparation for it is not necessary to capitalism's existence or prosperity miss the point entirely: it simply has not functioned in any other way in the past and there is nothing in the present to warrant the assumption that the coming decades will be any different "

Kolko concluded,

"But there are no easy solutions to the problems of irresponsible, deluded leaders and the classes they represent, or the hesitation of people to reverse the world's folly before they are themselves subjected to its grievous consequences. So much remains to be done – and it is late."

America's deluded leaders know nothing of diplomacy beyond bullying and brinksmanship. As they brainwash themselves and the public with the illusion of war without casualties, they will keep killing, destroying and risking our future until we stop them – or until they stop us and everything else.

The critical question today is whether the American public can muster the political will to pull our country back from the brink of an even greater military disaster than the ones we have already unleashed on millions of our neighbors.

Drew Hunkins , March 9, 2018 at 2:30 pm

The whole notion that American soldiers "fight to protect freedom here at home and abroad" is the biggest propaganda accomplishment in global history.

This line of self delusional reasoning finds favor in the United States because it obviously provides moral and ethical support to otherwise brutal and imperialist ventures . These bromides about fighting to protect freedom and democracy assuage the American psyche. If American soldiers never fought for a noble cause, then the human carnage, death, bloodshed, destruction, genitals getting blown apart, people being disemboweled, children having limbs severed off, parents witnessing kids getting tortured, etc. would have all been a horror beyond human comprehension. It's absolutely essential that it all be put in some sort of justifiable apple-pie order, hence the self serving platitudes.

Since the end of WWII Washington militarists (and over the last 30 years their Zionist sidekicks) have committed crimes against humanity after crimes against humanity after crimes against humanity

geeyp , March 10, 2018 at 3:13 am

"America's deluded leaders know nothing of diplomacy", and they know nothing of real war.

stan , March 9, 2018 at 2:32 pm

War is an animal behavior to conquer territory, conquer resources, and conquer people. Anyone who thinks war is fought for ideas like freedom, democracy, or my personal favorite, freeing someone else's slaves, has been brainwashed by the cultural propaganda which begins in kindergarten. We were all brought up to believe war is fought for a noble purpose, for an idea. But war is to conquer the necessities of life.

And there is a difference between war against armies and plain murder of innocent civilians, women, children, and babies. The latter is just murder, not war. Our "wars" are just mass murder of civilians. The War Party of Lincoln has been invading other peoples for the last 150 years. Lincoln was the first president of the Republican Party which represents big banks and big business .

The political parties are business gangsters, just like Al Capone. I don't think Al Capone killed women, children, and babies.

Joe Tedesky , March 9, 2018 at 2:42 pm

We Americans need to go to the top of the mountain and dig deep into our moral conscience. I will say this that U.S. Army Major Danny Sjursen to me is a real American. His opinions are based on his reality of his serving in our military, and his questioning of this all the time any time war ideology is proper and patriotic.

I know I've been harping on this, but with Putin's revealing the Russian weapons achievements, which were all accomplished on a next to nothing budget got to be making American MIC heads spinning. This isn't good news for an industry who only knows how to profit, or is it good for the many congressional parasites who are excited to feed of them.

Peace!

john wilson , March 9, 2018 at 3:25 pm

Joe; Americans (and we British) don't have any conscience moral or otherwise. As far as war without casualties goes, I suggest the writer ask the people of Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and elsewhere if there is such a thing as war without casualties. As far as Putin's revelations about his new arms equipment go, I suggest the war industry is delighted about this as now they can claim they need more cash to catch up.

Joe Tedesky , March 9, 2018 at 4:33 pm

John on the subject of Americans with a conscience, we the ones with one are at this moment the citizens who are described as our being the un-American ones, or at least that's what we are being labeled now a days. I agree more emphasis should be put on the innocent lives where our two countries have inflicted this pain upon. In that you will find the incubator for terrorist, and this too our corrupt Deep State (both in the U.S. & U.K) is to them but merely some great job security.

On the subject of American's MIC budget increases, because of Putin's announcement of Russia's new and improved weaponry you make a strong point that Putin only helped to increase these out of sight MIC budgets, but on the other hand what a 'talking point' Putin also gave us advocates for defensive spending cuts if you think about it.

In any case the U.S. loss the status of it being the mightiest military, all because of it's military outrageous spending, and drastic social cuts be damned attitude so as America's quality of life has sunk to new all time low's. Now America is a country with no there, there to it, when it comes to actually having any hard assets. We now can yell back, 'hey why you spending so much, Putin doesn't need to' and see how the greedy elite like that. Joe

Dave P. , March 10, 2018 at 4:32 am

Joe,

You wrote: Americans with a conscience who are being described as un-American; yes that is how it is. If I even very softly try to explain to our social friends that it is not entirely true, and that there is no evidence of what is being said on TV networks about Russia/ Putin interfering in our 2016 election and destroying our democracy; they tell you in your face what you said, about being un-American.

I do not know about other people who comment on this websites. But we have social friends, many of them, unlike us, are in very financially lucrative professions. All their information comes from CNN, MSNBC. They have never read anything about American History or history of their own country. Many of them do not even know who Thomas Jefferson was. All their time is spent in making money and finding tax loopholes to avoid paying taxes. And many of them profess to be liberal democrats. This is your new America.

Most Americans, including immigrant citizens have been completely brain-washed. I have come to conclusion that there is no point in talking to them about these issues. How can you deprogramme these people now?

I do have cousins in Toronto, who understand what we are talking about. I visited Toronto last spring, they have RT channel there in Toronto, and they often watch it.

Joe Tedesky , March 10, 2018 at 10:38 am

Dave in all my years I have never heard, or experienced quite the confrontational attitudes that I see all around me being displayed so rudely and openly, as I see today. I blame a lot of this on our MSM's tabloid style of reporting. This is a media which leaves so much of the news to be disregarded, that it creates a very misinformed public. The 1st Amendment doesn't matter, as much as a particular persons opinions do. In someways I think certain Americans take pride in shutting down another American persons opinion from being known. Irritation only aggravates and brings on more irritation.

I never have a definite answer for you Dave, but like you we both need to struggle through this. I love my country, and I want to help add diverse opinion to make it better, but one person can only do what one person may do. We all need to stay calm and talk. Joe

Annie , March 9, 2018 at 3:25 pm

It's rather obvious that the US did away with the draft, and resorted to US bombings rather then boots on the ground to reduce US casualties in order to avoid blow back from the American people so they can fight their endless wars.

I personally find that the American people care little about the lives lost in Muslim and African countries, and one cousin in response to my mentioning these casualties said all countries engage in "sneaky and underhanded things." I've heard two people, one coming from a Jewish perspective on Muslims said every single Muslim should be killed, and I asked was she talking about children as well. Her answer was yes. Another who made the same statement was a former nun. Again I asked, children too? Her answer was yes. I really don't believe that Americans justify our wars in their own minds because they think we are trying to bring democracy and a better life to the countries we invade, even though it's the propaganda lie put forward, but they care little about the death and destruction of the "other." The Me generation more engaged with -self-fulfillment" than social responsibility has a very non-inclusive perspective on the world, as well as in their own country. Hollywood has certainly encouraged and pushed this self indulgent attitude as well.

Silly Me , March 10, 2018 at 6:03 am

It doesn't seem to make much difference what people believe, except that if they share it in public (as I am doing it here), they become easier to manipulate.

Those who have the power to make the decisions couldn't care less about Americans or, for that matter, anyone else.

Bob Van Noy , March 9, 2018 at 3:41 pm

"America's deluded leaders know nothing of diplomacy beyond bullying and brinksmanship."
Nicolas J.S. Davies

Thank you Mr. Davies for your excellent essay. It was the simple sentence above that really resonated for me, because it not only aptly describes the Neocon attitude but as you say, "America's" deluded leaders.

I originally thought this was a G.W. Bush phenomenon, but like a disease, it has spread to our entire government and Media. I can only hope that it will be possible to change America's mind.

At least we still have Consortiumnews! Thank you

nonsense factory , March 9, 2018 at 4:43 pm

If the United States had wanted a free and independent Vietnam then the 1956 elections would have been allowed to go forward, all French troops would have been ejected, and the U.S. would have been unconcerned about the election of a highly socialist government headed by Ho Chi Minh (who, lest we forget, liked to quote the Declaration of Independence as a basis for freeing Vietnam from French and Japanese colonialism).

Eisenhower, at least, honestly described U.S. aims in 'Indochina' in an Aug 4 1953 speech to the Governor's Conference:

"Let us take, though, for example, one simple problem in the foreign field. You have seen the war in Indochina described variously as an outgrowth of French colonialism and its French refusal to treat indigenous populations decently. You find it again described as a war between the communists and the other elements in southeast Asia. But you have a confused idea of where it is located–Laos, or Cambodia, or Siam, or any of the other countries that are involved. You don't know, really, why we are so concerned with the far-off southeast corner of Asia."

"If Indochina goes, several things happen right away. The Malayan peninsula, the last little bit of the end hanging on down there, would be scarcely defensible–and tin and tungsten that we so greatly value from that area would cease coming. . . So, when the United States votes $400 million to help that war, we are not voting for a giveaway program. We are voting for the cheapest way that we can to prevent the occurrence of something that would be of the most terrible significance for the United States of America -- our security, our power and ability to get certain things we need from the riches of the Indonesian territory, and from southeast Asia."

Honesty from a U.S. President! The U.S. was just going to run a colonial empire as the French and British had before, that was the post WW-II Washington consensus vision. However, they soon realized that such honesty was bad public relations.

So along came JFK (who ran against Nixon on a non-existent 'missile gap' with the Soviet Union), who preached the virtue of the humanitarian pro-democracy intervention in the name of freedom line that U.S. presidents have promoted ever since, be it Johnson or Nixon, Ford or Carter, Reagan and Bush or Clinton and Obama, it's the same PR line. And no, JFK was not going to pull out of Vietnam, he just thought the puppet regime he installed would be able to control the South Vietnamese and crush any resistance, as the puppet regime in South Korea had managed to do. Johnson did exactly what JFK would have done as the puppet regime in Saigon failed to maintain control.

So no, these wars have not been waged to free the suffering locals from oppressive governments, they have been waged to gain economic advantages and to promote imperial agendas. Of course, the Soviet Union had a similar agenda; the Central Asian Soviet states were little more than economic colonies that served Moscow's interests.

There were no good guys in the Cold War, just two different sets of greedy little bastards out to pillage the Third World by any means available, picking up where France and Britain and Germany and Belgium left off after Europe burned itself to the ground.

Zachary Smith , March 9, 2018 at 8:09 pm

The critical question today is whether the American public can muster the political will to pull our country back from the brink of an even greater military disaster than the ones we have already unleashed on millions of our neighbors.

In my opinion the author made this question relatively meaningless with another observation he wrote previously.

How many Americans know that the bombing campaign Obama launched in Iraq and Syria in 2014 has been the heaviest U.S. bombing campaign anywhere in the world since Vietnam?

Make that Point #1. They don't know. . The Corporate Media tells us only what it feels we need to know, and only their version is permitted. Why else would the PropOrNot scheme and others like it be pushed as much as they are?

Point #2 – In the event Americans ever learn, what are the chances they'll give a hoot? People can be "desensitized" – or manipulated into the belief the victims of the bombings deserved every bit of it. Once again, they must make their decisions based on what they believe to be the truth. "Russia Invaded Crimea." "Saddam will kill us all with his WMDs very soon." "Syria keeps using poison gas on its own people." "Israel is both God's Favorite People and the ONLY democracy in the mideast." "The ABM systems surrounding Russia are there to protect us from Iran and North Korea."

Only after looking at the first two Points can we address the third about American Political Will. But does that one mean a thing? Consider my case here in Indiana. Fake Democrat Joe Donnelly has NOBODY running against him in the upcoming primary. I'm going to have the "choice" between a character who votes Republican 95% of the time and a genuine Republican who wouldn't be much more reliable than that. My vote will be "counted" with an unverifiable electronic device which can be easily manipulated to report the results the highest bidder (or smartest technicians) want it to say. All of a sudden that Political Will business looks like a bad joke.

Americans have a declining standard of living. Declining incomes. Yet few of them understand what is happening, for we're constantly told everything is just great and we're Exceptional in every way imaginable. These days I'm seeing clerks at the check-out trying to sneak looks at their handheld devices between customers. Those types of people don't have a clue about US wars, and I'd venture to say a lot of body bags aren't going to trouble them much – if it's nobody they know.

Adolf Hitler was determined, like America's leaders today, to maintain an illusion of peace and prosperity on the home front.

And like Hitler, "America's leaders" are taking steps to keep the peasants happy. Happy with almost unlimited legal and illegal psycho-drugs. Happy with mostly adequate if crappy food. The obesity epidemic in the US population and US military is due to extremely high levels of cheap fat and sugar. Again, the peasants aren't informed about the real cost of this. (antibiotic resistance, everything laced with homones, and the (usually) sterilized shit and other dirt we eat.

Hitler solved the labor problem in Germany by importing slaves by the millions. Guess what the US elites are proposing?

What If You Could Get Your Own Immigrant? was promptly renamed Sponsor An Immigrant Yourself .

Make slavery legal again simply by calling it "sponsored immigration"!

h**ps://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/02/13/immigration-visas-economics-216968

But getting back to the central theme of the essay, that's something The Saker addressed last fall.

The End of the "Wars on the Cheap" for the United States

h**p://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-end-of-the-wars-on-the-cheap-for-the-united-states/

The Saker has another essay up today about the level of "denial" he predicts The Power Elites is going to display about the end of the Gravy Train. He says they're going to deny it, and keep on trucking with the useless weapons and the extremely profitable foreign murder rampages.

Newly revealed Russian weapons systems: political implications

I've no reason to quarrel with his assessment.

Zachary Smith , March 9, 2018 at 8:14 pm

https://thesaker.is/newly-revealed-russian-weapons-systems-political-implications/

Eddie , March 9, 2018 at 11:15 pm

Great article and comments -- these are the reason I long ago gave up reading MSM. The MSM doesn't even mention the stats that are in the article, they just omit KEY concepts and facts, because the MSM readers virtually demand it. I have to most of all agree with Annie's statement about lack of concern with.'the other' as being probably the major (though not ONLY) underlying cause of this indifference to the utterly HORRIBLE things the U.S. is doing to certain other countries. But let even ONE person (assuming it's a white, middle-class person of course) get killed in THIS country by a terrorist bomb, and the MSM and the general public can barely keep from having apoplexy and we are deluged with outraged commentary about the inhumanity of it all!! (Classic example was the bomb in Sterling Hall @ UW-Madison in 1970 that truly accidentally killed a person, and the attendent outrage, while at the SAME TIME we were dropping THOUSANDS of bombs per week (conservatively) in SE Asia with the very definite intention of killing LOTS of people.)

Skip Scott , March 10, 2018 at 9:50 am

The latte sippers have been lulled into sleep by our MSM, and will not wake until the mushroom clouds appear on the horizon. Maybe as homage to them our drone pilots should wear pink pussy hats.

Indrid Cold , March 10, 2018 at 11:04 am

Germany didn't invade Czechoslovakia. They supported the declaration of a separatist government of Slovakia in March 1939, whereupon the Czechoslovakian state imploded and the Germans walked in large unopposed aside from a minor company sized firefight. Other bits were occupied by Poland (a very aggressive and authoritarian state in those days) and Hungary A bit like Victoria Nuland's performance in Ukraine.

Jeff , March 10, 2018 at 12:06 pm

We (and, plausibly, the world) have only one hope – the United States experiences financial destruction before we go much further. The United States has not experienced the horror of war on our own soil for 150 years – during the Civil War. I consider it quite unlikely that the American population will rise up to put a stop to the warmongers now. It will take one of two events to bring the American people to their senses. Either (a) we experience war here in CONUS or (b) our financial system collapses under the stress of massive government debt (currently $20+T and growing with the advent of our nice fat tax cuts) in much the same way that Sparta's did.

But we'd better hope that it isn't (a) because the argument (that I first heard in the 60's) that we were no longer protected by the two oceans on either side is bullshit. No other country is going to be able to mount a conventional assault on the US. They aren't going to be able to do it over the oceans and the only other way is through either Canada or Mexico which is equally unlikely. The only other choice is nuclear. And that would suck to put it mildly. Aaaannnnd we'd better hope it isn't (b) either. The current system dates back to the '70s when OPEC jacked the price of oil up and the US didn't have the money to pay for our consumption (or just about anything else) since we blew all our money trying to bomb Vietnam back to the stone age. That cycle got us the petrodollar and special drawing rights and it also allowed a succession of Republican presidents to prove that the Republican party was the borrow and spend party, running up the national debt and getting the power to screw with the rest of the world through financial sanctions that rely on everybody needing US dollars which are only available from the US. The new Chinese oil futures exchange that is supposed to open this month will settle in gold backed Yuan. And China is the world's largest buyer of oil. We'd better hope that the world continues to need the US dollar because if they don't, a lot of countries aren't going to buy our debt, and if they don't buy our debt, the US dollar becomes less valuable and our standard of living starts to drop even faster than it already is. And that would really suck too. There is a third option where everybody drops on one knee and accepts American suzerainty. But I doubt that's likely.

Joe Tedesky , March 10, 2018 at 1:48 pm

I have been saying for a longtime of how the U.S. will sanction other nations into U.S. isolationism. Read this

https://www.activistpost.com/2017/09/venezuela-just-stopped-accepting-us-dollars-oil-countries-join-forces-kill-us-petrodollar.html

[Mar 18, 2018] It Wasn't Russia! by Michael Shrimpton

Notable quotes:
"... As an agency they would be even less ..."
Mar 17, 2018 | www.veteranstoday.com

... ... ...

The secretiveness of the May government is not helping. However it looks as though the police officer who was also incapacitated, Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, who thankfully is on the road to recovery (as are the Skripals), was not the officer who found them slumped on the bench. It seems that he was incapacitated after he went to the Skripal's home, also in Salisbury. Since he was a detective, not a beat officer, that would make sense.

... ... ...

Although they have been very free with their accusations against President Putin, who faces re-election, the May government have been less than forthcoming in backing up their offensive allegations with evidence. They have not even identified the variant of Novichok used to try and murder the Skripals and DS Bailey. (Under the doctrine of transferred malice the intelligence officers who carried out the attack, almost certainly from GO2, are criminally responsible for the attempt to murder the officer.)

Moreover the May government has not made a sample available to the Russian government, as they are obliged to under the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). They haven't even forwarded a sample to the highly competent Technical Secretariat of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, established under CWC Article VIII. The May government clearly has something to hide.

... ... ...

The Cui Bono principle

The 'who gains?' principle is a valuable intelligence analysis tool. President Putin had nothing whatsoever to gain by whacking Col Skripal. Although he was a convicted traitor he had been pardoned and exchanged in a spy swap. Moreover his daughter was living openly in Moscow. Col Skripal himself is reported to have had fairly recent contact with the Russian Embassy in Kensington Gardens.

Not even the old KGB ever went back on a spy swap. They would have regarded it as nekulturny . The SVR, Russia's external intelligence service, are highly professional. They're also very nice people. As an agency they would be even less likely than the KGB to go back on a spy-swap. No one would ever do a swap with them again.

... ... ...

[Mar 18, 2018] UK reluctance to file request to Russia under OPCW indicates their case is weak Lavrov

Mar 18, 2018 | www.rt.com

The UK's failure to send a request to Moscow over the Skripal case via Organization for Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) channels points to a lack of legal basis for a proper investigation, Russia's Foreign Minister said. "The fact, that they [UK officials] categorically rejects to file an official request and deliberately and arrogantly fan anti-Russian rhetoric in the public sphere bordering on hysteria, indicates that they clearly understand they have no formal pretext to go down a legal road," Lavrov said on Friday, referring to the British authorities' allegations that Russia, and, notably, President Vladimir Putin, were behind the plot to poison the former double agent and his daughter. Read more

'Highly likely' motto: West goes on offensive against Russia for Skripal poisoning

Instead, UK officials have tried to "move all this to the sphere of political rhetoric, to Russophobia in the hope that, as it was in many other cases, the West will align," Lavrov said.

The Russian top diplomat argued that British PM Theresa May's accusatory tirade in the Parliament, as well as the summoning of the Russian ambassador in the Foreign Office, cannot serve as a substitute for the formal proceedings envisaged in the Convention for Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

Claims made by British authorities to the contrary are "absolutely illiterate," Lavrov stressed, noting that the UK must file an official request in writing if it genuinely seeks to elicit the truth. For the moment being, Russia is still waiting for British authorities to submit such a request under the framework of the convention, he said.

The fact that the UK government is unwilling to question its own snap judgments should be a cause for concern in a society that prides itself as a democracy, Lavrov said. He was referring to the outrage that was sparked by Labor Party leader Jeremy Corbyn when he was heckled by the MP after he cautioned them against drawing instant conclusions in the case and asked for concrete evidence of Russia's culpability.

"So I think the right approach is to seek the evidence; to follow international treaties, particularly in relation to prohibited chemical weapons, because this was a chemical weapons attack, carried out on British soil," Corbyn's spokesman said following the debate, which led to him being ostracized by the media.

Read more
MPs retweet claim that Porton Down scientists can't identify nerve agent as Russian

On Thursday, Corbyn doubled down on his dissent, writing an op-ed for the Guardian that said: "To rush way ahead of the evidence being gathered by the police, in a fevered parliamentary atmosphere, serves neither justice nor our national security."

While UK Foreign Minister Boris Johnson said that the UK would allow the international OPCW experts in The Hague to review the British analysis of the sample, the UK refuses to enact the mechanism in the OPCW that calls for a thorough investigation, Lavrov said, adding that "if you appeal to this organization, you must comply with the provisions of the Convention that stipulate filing a request to us, because we are suspected of being a country of origin and even the country which had used this poisoning agent, and, providing us with samples of this agent, so we, together with OPCW experts, can analyze it."

However, "the British don't want to use any of this," he added, noting that when other countries express solidarity with the UK's stance, it looks like a "total sham and an insult to the common sense."

Meanwhile, Johnson claimed that London was "entirely in conformity with OPCW procedures" on Friday, alleging that the evidence of Russia's involvement in the incident is "overwhelming."

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

[Mar 18, 2018] Putin Furious After Britain Says He Ordered Attack by Jason Ditz

Looks like GB was pushed by the USA like Iraq WDM case. The Skripal case also closely resembles the USA Anthrax case.
Notable quotes:
"... Foreign Secretary says Putin 'overwhelmingly likely' personally ordered attack ..."
"... Russian officials, already increasingly mad about the allegations, issued a statement following Johnson's declaration calling it "shocking." They further labeled it " an unforgivable breach of diplomatic etiquette ." ..."
Mar 18, 2018 | news.antiwar.com

Foreign Secretary says Putin 'overwhelmingly likely' personally ordered attack

... ... ...

Russian officials, already increasingly mad about the allegations, issued a statement following Johnson's declaration calling it "shocking." They further labeled it " an unforgivable breach of diplomatic etiquette ."

British officials have invested heavily in portraying the poisoning as a Russian plot, and have stuck to that despite unwillingness to present evidence backing up that claim. Russian officials say they were willing to help in the investigation, but Britain clearly is uninterested in that.

[Mar 18, 2018] Globalists Or Nationalists Who Owns The Future by Patrick Buchanan

Mar 13, 2018 | Buchanan.org

Robert Bartley, the late editorial page editor of The Wall Street Journal, was a free trade zealot who for decades championed a five-word amendment to the Constitution: "There shall be open borders."

Bartley accepted what the erasure of America's borders and an endless influx or foreign peoples and goods would mean for his country.

Said Bartley, "I think the nation-state is finished."

His vision and ideology had a long pedigree.

This free trade, open borders cult first flowered in 18th-century Britain. The St. Paul of this post-Christian faith was Richard Cobden, who mesmerized elites with the grandeur of his vision and the power of his rhetoric.

In Free Trade Hall in Manchester, Jan. 15, 1846, the crowd was so immense the seats had to be removed. There, Cobden thundered:

"I look farther; I see in the Free Trade principle that which shall act on the moral world as the principle of gravitation in the universe -- drawing men together, thrusting aside the antagonisms of race, and creed, and language, and uniting us in the bonds of eternal peace."

Britain converted to this utopian faith and threw open her markets to the world. Across the Atlantic, however, another system, that would be known as the "American System," had been embraced.

The second bill signed by President Washington was the Tariff Act of 1789. Said the Founding Father of his country in his first address to Congress: "A free people should promote such manufactures as tend to make them independent on others for essential, particularly military supplies."

In his 1791 "Report on Manufactures," Alexander Hamilton wrote, "Every nation ought to endeavor to possess within itself all the essentials of national supply. These comprise the means of subsistence, habitat, clothing and defence."

This was wisdom born of experience.

At Yorktown, Americans had to rely on French muskets and ships to win their independence. They were determined to erect a system that would end our reliance on Europe for the necessities of our national life, and establish new bonds of mutual dependency -- among Americans.

Britain's folly became manifest in World War I, as a self-reliant America stayed out, while selling to an import-dependent England the food, supplies and arms she needed to survive but could not produce.

America's own first major steps toward free trade, open borders and globalism came with JFK's Trade Expansion Act and LBJ's Immigration Act of 1965.

By the end of the Cold War, however, a reaction had set in, and a great awakening begun. U.S. trade deficits in goods were surging into the hundreds of billions, and more than a million legal and illegal immigrants were flooding in yearly, visibly altering the character of the country.

Americans were coming to realize that free trade was gutting the nation's manufacturing base and open borders meant losing the country in which they grew up. And on this earth there is no greater loss.

The new resistance of Western man to the globalist agenda is now everywhere manifest.

We see it in Trump's hostility to NAFTA, his tariffs, his border wall.

We see it in England's declaration of independence from the EU in Brexit. We see it in the political triumphs of Polish, Hungarian and Czech nationalists, in anti-EU parties rising across Europe, in the secessionist movements in Scotland and Catalonia and Ukraine, and in the admiration for Russian nationalist Vladimir Putin.

Europeans have begun to see themselves as indigenous peoples whose Old Continent is mortally imperiled by the hundreds of millions of invaders wading across the Med and desperate come and occupy their homelands.

Who owns the future? Who will decide the fate of the West?

The problem of the internationalists is that the vision they have on offer -- a world of free trade, open borders and global government -- are constructs of the mind that do not engage the heart.

Men will fight for family, faith and country. But how many will lay down their lives for pluralism and diversity?

Who will fight and die for the Eurozone and EU?

On Aug. 4, 1914, the anti-militarist German Social Democrats, the oldest and greatest socialist party in Europe, voted the credits needed for the Kaiser to wage war on France and Russia. With the German army on the march, the German socialists were Germans first.

Patriotism trumps ideology.

In "Present at the Creation," Dean Acheson wrote of the postwar world and institutions born in the years he served FDR and Truman in the Department of State: The U.N., IMF, World Bank, Marshall Plan, and with the split between East and West, NATO.

We are present now at the end of all that.

And our transnational elites have a seemingly insoluble problem.

To rising millions in the West, the open borders and free trade globalism they cherish and champion is not a glorious future, but an existential threat to the sovereignty, independence and identity of the countries they love. And they will not go gentle into that good night.

[Mar 18, 2018] Of A Type Developed By Liars by Craig Murray

Notable quotes:
"... The Russians were allegedly researching, in the "Novichok" program a generation of nerve agents which could be produced from commercially available precursors such as insecticides and fertilizers. ..."
"... My FCO source, like me, remembers the extreme pressure put on FCO staff and other civil servants to sign off the dirty dossier on Iraqi WMD, some of which pressure I recount in my memoir Murder in Samarkand. She volunteered the comparison to what is happening now, particularly at Porton Down, with no prompting from me. ..."
"... Separately I have written to the media office at OPCW to ask them to confirm that there has never been any physical evidence of the existence of Russian Novichoks, and the program of inspection and destruction of Russian chemical weapons was completed last year. ..."
"... OPCW inspectors have had full access to all known Russian chemical weapons facilities for over a decade – including those identified by the "Novichok" alleged whistleblower Mirzayanov – and last year OPCW inspectors completed the destruction of the last of 40,000 tons of Russian chemical weapons ..."
"... Israel has extensive stocks ..."
Mar 17, 2018 | original.antiwar.com
I have now received confirmation from a well placed FCO source that Porton Down scientists are not able to identify the nerve gas as being of Russian manufacture, and have been resentful of the pressure being placed on them to do so. Porton Down would only sign up to the formulation "of a type developed by Russia" after a rather difficult meeting where this was agreed as a compromise formulation. The Russians were allegedly researching, in the "Novichok" program a generation of nerve agents which could be produced from commercially available precursors such as insecticides and fertilizers. This substance is a "novichok" in that sense. It is of that type. Just as I am typing on a laptop of a type developed by the United States, though this one was made in China.

To anybody with a Whitehall background this has been obvious for several days. The government has never said the nerve agent was made in Russia, or that it can only be made in Russia. The exact formulation "of a type developed by Russia" was used by Theresa May in parliament, used by the UK at the UN Security Council, used by Boris Johnson on the BBC yesterday and, most tellingly of all, "of a type developed by Russia" is the precise phrase used in the joint communiqué issued by the UK, USA, France and Germany on Thursday :

This use of a military-grade nerve agent, of a type developed by Russia, constitutes the first offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since the Second World War.

When the same extremely careful phrasing is never deviated from, you know it is the result of a very delicate Whitehall compromise. My FCO source, like me, remembers the extreme pressure put on FCO staff and other civil servants to sign off the dirty dossier on Iraqi WMD, some of which pressure I recount in my memoir Murder in Samarkand. She volunteered the comparison to what is happening now, particularly at Porton Down, with no prompting from me.

Separately I have written to the media office at OPCW to ask them to confirm that there has never been any physical evidence of the existence of Russian Novichoks, and the program of inspection and destruction of Russian chemical weapons was completed last year.

Did you know these interesting facts?

OPCW inspectors have had full access to all known Russian chemical weapons facilities for over a decade – including those identified by the "Novichok" alleged whistleblower Mirzayanov – and last year OPCW inspectors completed the destruction of the last of 40,000 tons of Russian chemical weapons

By contrast the program of destruction of US chemical weapons stocks still has five years to run

Israel has extensive stocks of chemical weapons but has always refused to declare any of them to the OPCW. Israel is not a state party to the Chemical Weapons Convention nor a member of the OPCW. Israel signed in 1993 but refused to ratify as this would mean inspection and destruction of its chemical weapons. Israel undoubtedly has as much technical capacity as any state to synthesize "Novichoks".

Until this week, the near universal belief among chemical weapons experts, and the official position of the OPCW, was that "Novichoks" were at most a theoretical research program which the Russians had never succeeded in actually synthesizing and manufacturing. That is why they are not on the OPCW list of banned chemical weapons.

Porton Down is still not certain it is the Russians who have apparently synthesized a "Novichok". Hence "Of a type developed by Russia". Note developed, not made, produced or manufactured.

It is very carefully worded propaganda. Of a type developed by liars.

UPDATE

This post prompted another old colleague to get in touch. On the bright side, the FCO have persuaded Boris he has to let the OPCW investigate a sample. But not just yet. The expectation is the inquiry committee will be chaired by a Chinese delegate. The Boris plan is to get the OPCW also to sign up to the "as developed by Russia" formula, and diplomacy to this end is being undertaken in Beijing right now.

I don't suppose there is any sign of the BBC doing any actual journalism on this?

Craig Murray is an author, broadcaster, human rights activist, and former diplomat. He was British Ambassador to Uzbekistan from August 2002 to October 2004 and Rector of the University of Dundee from 2007 to 2010. The article is reprinted with permission from his website .

[Mar 18, 2018] #Novichok Hysteria MI6 fake news agent Sergei Skripal's Salisbury nerve agent provocation

Very impressive YouTube video. They make analogy with US Anthrax case.
Mar 16, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Novichok nonsense? MI6 fake news agent Sergei Skripal & fireplace salesman Gavin Williamson

Former US Army Psychological Warfare officer Scott Bennett, Theresa May, Jeremy Corbyn, Martin Summers, Tony
Gosling

www.thisweek.org.uk
Fri 16 March 2018

The Russian Ambassador to the UK is giving an interview now to RT's Anastasia Churkina about the chemical-poisoning of a former Russian spy allegations being made by PM Theresa May and the British government against Russia and President Putin.

The Main Points:

It is obvious the charges by the UK against Russia about this "poisoning" incident are false, and expose a deeper strategy of deceit to obtain political objectives. the British government is refusing to answer any questions, provide any material, invite international scientific inspections, and have tried to emotionally hyperventilate this fake story into a nightmare reality. Why? The Globalist UK-EU-US-SOROS types are desperate to ignite a war in order to hide in its flames. The "psychological operation" seems to be attempting to achieve the following objectives:

  1. The political-career stabilization of the establishment Prime Minister Theresa May, who has been slipping into madness and oblivion since BREXIT;
  2. The demonization of Russia as an easy enemy that distracts the public away from the slow destruction of civil liberties and rights and freedoms by the rising police state;
  3. The cultivation and preparation of the public mind to be receptive to increased domination and control by the government;
  4. The expansion of the "chemical weapon" narrative as a potential threat against "New York", as claimed by US UN Rep Nikki Haley, as well as other UK-US-NATO members;
  5. The potential "suspension" of the BREXIT and European Union break-up using this incident as a "call to reverse course and re-integrate the European Union with Britain and France as a matter of "continental security against Russia";
  6. The manipulation of American President Donald Trump to buy in and partner in the lie, and participate in the political war as a pre-text for the military one brewing;
  7. Justify increased military movement of weapons into Ukraine, Syria, and Yemen to try and counter Russia-Iran's success in the Syrian war against Wahhabi-Saudi-Israeli terrorists pushing ISIS/AL NUSRA to try and destabilize Syrian President Bashar Assad;
  8. The blow back will be a separation of the thinking people from the mindless idiots in society, and an increase in social distrust and hostility towards the politicians and media and government institutions fomenting instability and the destruction of personal civil liberty through manufactured national hysteria. Essentially they've cried wolf far too many times to be given any respect by truthful citizens.
YourEyeColours 1 day ago (edited)
les havell 13 hours ago

[Mar 18, 2018] Russia Expels 23 British Diplomats In Retaliation

Mar 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Having warned it would retaliate proportionately, this morning Russia did just that when it expelled 23 British diplomats - the same number as the UK kicked out a few days earlier as punishment for Moscow's alleged poisoning of a former double agent. It also ordered the closure of the UK consulate in St Petersburg and the Moscow British Council, a cultural and educational organization.

Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned the British ambassador to Moscow and told him that the measures are "in response to the provocative actions of the British side and the unsubstantiated accusations" against Russia, the ministry said. Russia gave the British diplomats one week to leave. "If further actions of an unfriendly nature are taken against Russia, the Russian side reserves the right to take other retaliatory measures," the ministry said.

[Mar 18, 2018] Sean Hannity's time has come ... (irony)

Mar 18, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

turcopolier , 16 March 2018 at 07:44 PM

Laura

You like my comments on the Team of Sycophants? You have not seen what I will write about the Democrats. Pelosi? She is a self centered wretch enriched by her silicon valley admirers through no merit of her own who despises the people her father fought for. HC? I hope she is a drunk. I could like her better if she is. Her contempt for ordinary Americans who do not share her adolescent utopian revolutionary ideals is laughable. Perhaps Wellesley did that to her. My uncle endowed a chair there but I never liked him. pl

wisedupearly Ceo , 16 March 2018 at 08:05 PM
Trump seems unable to manage and keep a team of people of exceptional ability because he fears a cabal forming that will 'capture' him and steal his glory?

Hannity and Bolton are definitely his type of sycophants, distrusted by the establishment and desperate for power.

Matt , 16 March 2018 at 09:34 PM
Off-topic here....

Colonel Lang,

When will someone/something put a halt to this AIPAC/Israel/Neo-con march to war with Iran and possibly Russia?

I consider myself a Progressive who hates the establishment Democratic Party. The Russia hate is off the rails and dangerous. WTF is going on in this country? Have they lost their friggin minds?

Tyler said in reply to wisedupearly Ceo ... , 16 March 2018 at 09:37 PM
Cato,

Hmm yes. Trump has never displayed a habit of quickly shitcanning people if they don't live up to expectations throughout his life.

I'm sure your armchair pop-psychoanalysis through an MSNBC lens is totally on point.

turcopolier , 16 March 2018 at 09:58 PM
tyler

Your comment is obviously directed at me. pl

turcopolier , 16 March 2018 at 09:59 PM
james

Did I ask for your advice? Nevertheless, thanks. But a lot of the people here would not have recognized it as irony. pl

turcopolier , 16 March 2018 at 10:02 PM
ISL

My point. pl

Fred said in reply to Laura... , 16 March 2018 at 10:11 PM
Laura,

Hear! Hear! Even NPR agrees with.... Donald J. Trump:
"The claim Black and Hispanic unemployment are at or near record lows. The short answer Trump's numbers are right," ...... "Trump is right that African-American unemployment hit a record low in December. The unemployment rate for black Americans is currently 6.8 percent, the lowest level recorded since the government started keeping track in January 1972..... And he's also right that the Hispanic unemployment rate is down a point over the last year"

https://www.npr.org/2018/01/08/576552028/fact-check-trump-touts-low-unemployment-rates-for-african-americans-hispanics

outthere , 16 March 2018 at 10:22 PM
Larry Wilkerson writes:
"Avigdor Lieberman, Israel's defense minister, is scheduled to give the keynote address at the Jerusalem Post's conference in New York in April. The title of his address is published as "The Coming War With Iran." Any American citizen who believes this White House team will not involve the U.S. in Israel's war needs to check into a mental ward."
http://lobelog.com/the-most-important-hearings-of-the-young-century/
kooshy , 16 March 2018 at 10:23 PM
Colonel Lang I think our president wants and demands admirers and not advisers. With what I have experienced back here in Lotus Aters town, that self centred mentality fits with Beverly Hills star types, and Goldman Sachs fund managers
which the combination of this two personality brings to mind a CAA agent.
turcopolier , 16 March 2018 at 10:24 PM
outthere

Larry Wilkerson helped Powell sell out the US for favor at the WH. pl

catherine , 16 March 2018 at 10:55 PM

McCabe has been fired today....48 hrs before he was due to retire and be able to collect his 20 year pension....seems a little too vengeful to me.
Was there ever any real investigation into his alleged favoring of Hillary in the FBI investigation? I don't remember the details.
Leaky Ranger , 16 March 2018 at 11:08 PM
Former U.S. Army General Barry McCaffrey says, "Reluctantly I have concluded that President Trump is a serious threat to US national security. He is refusing to protect vital US interests from active Russian attacks. It is apparent that he is for some unknown reason under the sway of Mr Putin."
https://twitter.com/mccaffreyr3/status/974748724176941056
robt willmann , 16 March 2018 at 11:49 PM
And now, apparently on this Friday night, the Deputy Director of the FBI, Andrew McCabe, who is at this time perhaps not the official deputy director any more but who was on the payroll with accumulated vacation or sick leave or a similar such thing, was officially fired from the Bureau.

This is two days before he could retire with full benefits, as he turns 50 years of age on Sunday. Since he is most likely a civil service employee, even at his job as the number two person at the FBI, he would be covered by federal civil service law. I am not familiar with the federal process, but a civil service employee can usually contest the termination of employment, although it is in an "administrative proceeding", which has different rules than a lawsuit. The result of an administrative hearing can be appealed into a regular trial court in Texas, but with restrictions and limits on the rules of evidence and procedure that govern civil lawsuits. The federal rules regarding the appeal of an administrative ruling may be similar.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/sessions-fires-mccabe-he-can-retire-n856751

The battle lines with the "special counsel" Mueller are being more clearly drawn, as McCabe is quoted in the article as saying--

"This attack on my credibility is one part of a larger effort not just to slander me personally, but to taint the FBI, law enforcement, and intelligence professionals more generally. It is part of this Administration's ongoing war on the FBI and the efforts of the Special Counsel investigation, which continue to this day. Their persistence in this campaign only highlights the importance of the Special Counsel's work."

The situation creates the classic case of McCabe as a "disgruntled former employee". Everybody knows what that means....

turcopolier , 16 March 2018 at 11:50 PM
Leaky Ranger

He is NOT a former general mon petit connard. He is a retired general. pl

turcopolier , 16 March 2018 at 11:53 PM
Catherine

Let the investigation begin! Ecce homo. pl

outthere said in reply to turcopolier ... , 17 March 2018 at 12:21 AM
I remember well Powell's performance at the UN with CIA director literally backing him up. I knew he was lying, it was clear to anyone who bothered to read Knight Ridder.
Wilkerson's role was never clear to me, but I accept your evaluation.
mikee said in reply to robt willmann... , 17 March 2018 at 12:33 AM
The OIG found that McCabe made unauthorized disclosures to the new media then lied about while under oath. Flynn is probably getting drunk tonight.
J , 17 March 2018 at 04:59 AM
Colonel,

Regarding Mattis:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/men-left-die-gen-james-mattis-controversial-wartime/story?id=44018222

Barbara Ann , 17 March 2018 at 07:05 AM
If the Boss surrounds himself with sycophants, were are told what to expect:
Therefore a wise prince ought to hold a third course by choosing the wise men in his state, and giving to them only the liberty of speaking the truth to him, and then only of those things of which he inquires, and of none others; but he ought to question them upon everything, and listen to their opinions, and afterwards form his own conclusions. With these councillors, separately and collectively, he ought to carry himself in such a way that each of them should know that, the more freely he shall speak, the more he shall be preferred; outside of these, he should listen to no one, pursue the thing resolved on, and be steadfast in his resolutions. He who does otherwise is either overthrown by flatterers, or is so often changed by varying opinions that he falls into contempt.

http://etc.usf.edu/lit2go/217/the-prince/5603/chapter-23-how-flatterers-should-be-avoided/

r whitman , 17 March 2018 at 07:55 AM
Come on, all you people. This has been the most entertaining soap opera in Washington since Bill Clintons zipper trouble. There has not been any real damage to the country (and maybe a few benefits) and may not be in the future.

Pat, us Democrats are not bad people, we just have shitty leaders and no vision, but in that regard, the Republicans are catching up.

wisedupearly Ceo , 17 March 2018 at 07:57 AM
McCabe is brutally fired a day short of his 20 years, Sessions is humiliated on a daily basis, Tillerson was shafted everytime he went overseas trying to fix Trump's mistakes. Now, how many in the Trump administration and in government are going to 'work for the president' as opposed to 'working for themselves'.
Fear is not the tool of the effective manager.
turcopolier , 17 March 2018 at 08:06 AM
r. Whitman

Yes. Some of you are not bad people. Some Republicans are not bad people. pl

turcopolier , 17 March 2018 at 08:14 AM
j

Marineland is its own country. Army Special Forces have much the same mentality. Bing West is also a USMC fanatic. pl

Lars , 17 March 2018 at 08:33 AM
There may be plenty of irony, but that does not make it implausible. We have witnessed a progression of lamer and lamer ducks in this administration. Why not just use a video substitute and let Fox News take over White House operations?

The firing of McCabe shows how petty Trump is and his lack of a moral code. It is true that not all Republicans are bad. My wife, until recently, was one all her adult life.

I went to my monthly science lecture last evening, conducted by a neighbor, and he will rejoin the federal government this fall as a Senior Science Advisor.( He spent 30 years before retirement in that capacity) I would wish that more people as capable as he is would help run the country, regardless of the dumb people that get elected.

The good news about the dismal current condition is that standards may be raised in the future in an effort to make this just an educational interlude.

turcopolier , 17 March 2018 at 08:48 AM
outthere

Wilkerson told me (through a mutual friend) well be fore the UN debacle that he and Powell had the situation under control and that I should shut up. It was also Wilkerson who persuaded Powell not to take any intel analysts to CIA when they went to be briefed by Tenet and company. why did he do that? Hey! Why would such semi-divine beings as he and Powell need expert help? pl

Nancy K said in reply to turcopolier ... , 17 March 2018 at 09:03 AM
I agree it is time for Pelosi and Schumer to retire. The Democratic party needs new blood.
Barbara Ann -> Lars... , 17 March 2018 at 09:26 AM
Lars

"I would wish that more people as capable as he is would help run the country, regardless of the dumb people that get elected."

Niccolo would argue that wise advisers will not help. I tend to agree.

Babak Makkinejad -> kooshy... , 17 March 2018 at 09:43 AM
Rare indeed are leaders who surround themselves by those better and smarter than themselves; Yelstin was one such, Gorbachev was not.
SRW said in reply to turcopolier ... , 17 March 2018 at 09:50 AM
I am no big fan of Pelosi but she has been a very effective leader as this Atlantic article states. Just one example, she very effectively stopped Bush junior's Social Security privatization plan.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/04/the-nancy-pelosi-problem/554048/

A. Pols said in reply to catherine... , 17 March 2018 at 09:51 AM
Ah, but firing him days before his pension vested is beautiful. Too vengeful? I think not; it's exactly what he deserved. Why let a DB like that glean the rewards of double or even triple dipping?
J , 17 March 2018 at 09:52 AM
So Wilkerson had/has no conscience. WH Favors? How shallow can a person be? WH Favors? Blink, blink? Why Powell didn't slap the dog shit out of Wilkerson I'll never understand.

Back to Mattis, what was he waiting for (saying he needed more 'intel' for extraction of the wounded/dying?), a note sent through Fedex or UPS? To leave men to die in the field the way Mattis did. Arghhh.

I also have not seen anywhere where Mattis experienced combat except from a 'comfortable' position. That explains a lot why Mattis seems to be so gung ho on getting U.S. into another unnecessary war.

Leaky Ranger , 17 March 2018 at 10:00 AM
Former/Retired CIA Director John O. Brennan says, "When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history. You may scapegoat Andy McCabe, but you will not destroy America...America will triumph over you."
https://twitter.com/JohnBrennan/status/974978856997224448
Morongobill , 17 March 2018 at 10:05 AM
"Brutally fired?" More like he got his just deserts!
Jonst said in reply to wisedupearly Ceo ... , 17 March 2018 at 10:58 AM
Spare me the adjectives......he'fired. And if, significant if, he is guilty of what the published reports say is, if that is confirmed by an independent inspector general's report, and the text of that report matters here, then to hell with him he deserves to be fired.
TV said in reply to wisedupearly Ceo ... , 17 March 2018 at 10:58 AM
If Sessions had not (wrongly, it turns out) recused himself and cleaned out the DOJ (as expected) Trump would not have been riding him.
If Tillerson had followed Trump's direction on Iran, he probably would still be in his job.
As for McCabe, that's life in the fast lane.
He was too clever by half and got in over his head.
If anything, this whole McCabe/Strozk/Page and whoever else attempt at "plotting" shows the incompetence of these pinheads.
If Strozk was the FBI's top CI guy (texting like a teenage girl), no wonder the Chinese and Russians are running wild.
But to truly drain the swamp Trump has to get rid of hundreds, maybe thousands, more of the self-enriching parasite class.
TV said in reply to turcopolier ... , 17 March 2018 at 11:01 AM
Col.:
Guess that you and Wilkerson aren't exchanging Christmas cards.
Tosk59 said in reply to outthere... , 17 March 2018 at 11:06 AM
outthere,

For years Wilkerson spent great effort providing Colin Powell 'cover' on the allegations that he was in the loop on all the 'enhanced interrogation tactics' (torture), while Powell himself was quiet on the issue. And when CP was pushed he was vague e.g. stating that he didn't have "sufficient memory recall" about the meetings referenced; that he had participated in " many meetings on how to deal with detainees "; and that he was not "aware of anything that we discussed in any of those meetings that was not considered legal "

Of course it later came out that he was at the meetings, knew exactly what was going on, but said nothing. The bottom line? Wilkerson lied and lied...

http://www.ph2dot1.com/2011/02/great-quotes_21.html

DianaLC said in reply to turcopolier ... , 17 March 2018 at 11:09 AM
Well, if all the reports of her liquor bills for supplying the plane on tax-paid trips back and forth to California when she was speaker of the House are true, she IS a drunk. And on top of that I worry that all the Botox is now really affecting her brain.

She and Hillary really give being a woman something to cringe about. I, as a woman, would like her better if she joined the transgender movement so as to prove they aren't just voting as their husbands tell them to.

Flavius , 17 March 2018 at 11:41 AM
Brennan, Comey, Clapper; McCabe, Strzok, Page and others unknown politicized the Intelligence community through incompetence and malfeasance and left it a smoking wreck. They are delusional if they think that their contemptible bit of work has not been recognized for what it is by both active and retired members of that community.
It has almost nothing to do with Trump. John Brennan is an ass. In fact Trump's flailing around and leadership by tweet has only delayed the day of reckoning for the FBI with the CIA hiding in the tall grass and still unscathed. Lay that on Trump and Pompeo. Wray, a Trump appointment...wait, who is Wray and where is he?
I would call Trump's swamp draining efforts thus far a piss poor job and his FP efforts have been plagued by piss poor appointments and piss poor performance. He himself is more in the swamp than out of it and a Bolton appointment would put him in it over his ears.
Trump right now has one thing going for him: he's not Clinton; and that advantage is rapidly disappearing. He either stops behaving like a NY real estate lout with a pinky ring or he's going to blow himself and who knows what else to kingdom come.
Eric Newhill , 17 March 2018 at 11:53 AM
I despise the leftists that are attempting to take control of the country and, to the extent that the Democrat party has aligned with them (a large extent), I despise them too. Tucker Carlson is doing a fantastic job countering the left and I guess Hannity plays an important role in keeping anti-lefty outrage at the boiling point. We need people like him to keep morale high for the foot soldiers in the culture war. He isn't supposed to be a source of input for the generals.

That said, at a personal level, Hannity is, to me, an ignorant blow hard and he gives me a headache every time I listen to him for more than a minute or two. That is what politics in the USA has come down to; escalating rhetoric and counter rhetoric. If one side became more circumspect then the other side would drown them out with wild rants. So they all rant on with increasing fury. That is Hannity's role in all of this.

People here defending McCabe need to have their heads and moral compasses examined. I see how it goes. No one in DC can ever be punished for breaking the law because one of the parties will declare it to be politically motivated and 50% of the country (+/-) will buy into that narrative. I have seen several comments by former FBI stating that McCabe got what he deserved.

There are other ways to interpret the departure of McMaster (if it's real). The Boss and the section chief have some differences of opinion or style, but they aren't hostile to each other at a fundamental level. The section chief agrees to depart amicably and goes to work in a different area to which he carries and propagates the vision of the Boss. Post departure, the Boss and Chief maintain communications. I've seen this happen in private sector companies. I think this approach is unsettling to those with traditional views of how a bureaucratic career works.

Dr. Puck , 17 March 2018 at 12:05 PM
Thank you Colonel. Your most recent short hand about POTUS being a boss, and being so absolutely, mixes well with the previous and pithy, 'that the deal is everything, and there are no fouls in service to achieving that everything.'

It would be interesting to learn how that classic boss=god top down approach mixes with the military approach of the various 21st century generals who have come into the administration. There are a number of different and basic top down approaches in the private sector.

Isn't retired Army General 'Jerry' Boykins available?

Thomas , 17 March 2018 at 12:16 PM
"When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history. You may scapegoat Andy McCabe, but you will not destroy America...America will triumph over you."


My. my so Totsky of him.

If Evil Tzar Vladimir IV is selected again on Sunday, the Cruelly Clueless Crew better hope and pray he doesn't drop the Doomsday Dime or when "America" sees what they were a part of on July 17th 2014, well, "...America will triumph over you" will become a prophetic fulfillment.

Keep on talking.

J -> Leaky Ranger... , 17 March 2018 at 12:17 PM
Why are you quoting the words of a Traitor named John Brennan? He committed 'Sedition' against a duly elected/sworn in POTUS called Trump. Sedition is under the 'Treason' Statute which upon conviction is punishable by death, and there is no statute of time limitations. What Brennan did, he can be incarcerated for up until his dying day! Brennan hung himself with his own rope, and he's too narcissistic arrogant to realize it.

On another note it appears that the Trump dossier was created, financed, and orchestrated by MI6, which is (if I'm not mistaken) a U.K. 'Governmental Agency', which by defination the British Government actively conspired to overthrown a sitting U.S. President.

So.....do we now get to squash MI6 for the arrogant gnat they really are?

May owes Trump an formal official apology for MI6's actions of war.

J , 17 March 2018 at 12:31 PM
Colonel,

There are rumors that the double agent GRU Colonel Skripal was offering the Russian Government to turn states evidence against MI6 and provide the Russian Government with all the 'stuff' about the MI6 created Trump Dossier in return for his being able to return to Russia to see his daughter married.

All signs point to Skripal's poisoning was orchestrated and performed by the British Government (spelled MI6/MI5) to hide the fact that the Trump Dossier was created by the British Government (spelled MI6) to overthrow a sitting U.S. President.

The Russian Government had already convicted/incarcerated/realeased Skripal of Treason, they would have had nothing to gain by poisoning British MI6 Asset double agent GRU Colonel Skripal.

J , 17 March 2018 at 12:52 PM
Colonel,

My bad, not only does British PM May owe U.S. President Trump a formal apology for the British Government's (spelled MI6) attempted overthrow of a sitting U.S. President with their Trump Dossier, but also the Queen of England Queen Elizabeth herself and British King Apparent Prince William himself, as May acts as their formal agent. The sitting Queen/King of England rules England, not the PM as the PM are nothing more than their face persona agents.

Portis , 17 March 2018 at 01:18 PM
The fellow at Conservative Treehouse described the Mattis/Trump row (several days before it blew over) as a "Black Hat Hunting" exercise. Trump and Mattis put out the row story in a compartmentalized fashion in order to barium meal the leaker in the NSC. Sounds plausible.
Sid_finster said in reply to turcopolier ... , 17 March 2018 at 01:19 PM
Speaking only for myself, just because I despise mainstream Team D does not mean that I support Team R, and vice versa.
Babak Makkinejad , 17 March 2018 at 01:46 PM
All

In the meantime, weapons get more efficient

http://www.bbc.com/russian/features-43429973

catherine said in reply to A. Pols... , 17 March 2018 at 02:25 PM

''Ah, but firing him days before his pension vested is beautiful''

The timing is the point. If his firing was justifiable it should have been done much earlier.

''Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves.''

Trump is racking up a pile of enemies.

VietnamVet , 17 March 2018 at 03:30 PM
Colonel,

I really thought that Andrew McCabe would be allowed to retire and disappear into obscurity. Instead Jeff Session just took a shot at the FBI, Five Eyes intelligence community and the Media Mogul coup plotters. All Clinton, Bush and Obama appointees and supporters must go to the ground. The federal government will seize up. Anyone who thinks their future is at risk has a reason to assist invoking the 25th Amendment. The Trump Family will fight back. This is the start of an oligarch mob war fought by Deplorables against the ruling credentialed Consiglieres.

Meanwhile, even the NewsHour reports on the threat of a new Hezbollah-Israel conflict which will inevitably escalate into a shooting war with Iran and then draw in nuclear armed Russia.

The Gates of Hell are opening.

Charles said in reply to Barbara Ann ... , 17 March 2018 at 03:31 PM
Ah if only the USA were Florence in the 1400's.
While many have read and excoriated the Prince, few have studied the sources from whence that little handbook was drawn.
Enjoy:
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Discourses_on_Livy
In my own little library is one of his lesser works:'
https://www.amazon.com/Art-War-Niccolo-Machiavelli/dp/0226500403/ref=sr_1_12?ie=UTF8&qid=1521313961&sr=8-12&keywords=machiavelli+war
Given the evidence of his career, it is obvious that Pres. Trump is well versed in the art of manipulating sycophants. Rich men attract parasites like magnets attract iron filings. Since Pres. Trump was still rich when he won the presidency after 40+ years being a sycophant magnet, I think he is able to fluster them now as he has for decades. It is also obvious over his career that he picks good people for the job he wants done and when it is done he moves on to the next job and the next batch of appropriate people.
Granted this is not the norm for politicians, but it is for builders. You don't use the foundation or utilities contractor for the stucco work nor the stucco contractor for the interior decoration work. These things should be obvious but the talking heads insist on trying to put Pres. Trump into a politician pigeonhole. He doesn't because he isn't.
It is enjoyable that the talking heads still insist on taking his every word literally while simultaneously refusing to allow that he is a serious man with an excellent control of language and nuance when it serves him.
steve said in reply to Fred... , 17 March 2018 at 03:52 PM
Trump claimed that all those numbers, from the same sources, were fake when he was running for office.

Steve

Sleepybear51902 , 17 March 2018 at 04:07 PM
"Provocation will be used as pretext by #US & allies to launch strikes on military and govt infrastructures in #Syria, we are registering the signs of the preparations. Strike groups of the cruise missile carriers been formed in Mediterranean, Persian Gulf, Red Sea" - @mod_russia

https://twitter.com/Russ_Warrior/status/975013286667325440

Fred -> steve... , 17 March 2018 at 04:30 PM
steve,

You mean Black and Hispanic unemployment were great under Barack? Why oh why did those voters abandon the democratic candidate. I'm sure the Russians make African American's stay home on election day. Hilary 2020!

catherine said in reply to Charles ... , 17 March 2018 at 04:37 PM
''These things should be obvious but the talking heads insist on trying to put Pres. Trump into a politician pigeonhole''

Well he's sort of like a political pigeon playing chess...he struts onto the board, knocks over all the pieces, sh-ts on the board and declares himself the winner.

But the game continues.

Trump says Mueller better not cross his red line and get into his business.

So Mueller crosses Trump's red line:

2 days ago - WASHINGTON -- The special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, has subpoenaed the Trump Organization business records in recent weeks to turn over documents, including some related to Russia, according to two people briefed on the matter. The order is the first known instance of the special counsel demanding records ....

So yesterday Trump's attorney says :

''"I pray that Acting Attorney General Rosenstein will follow the brilliant and courageous example of the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility and Attorney General Jeff Sessions and bring an end to alleged Russia collusion investigation manufactured by McCabe's boss James Comey based upon a fraudulent and corrupt dossier,"

Next move?

BillWade said in reply to catherine... , 17 March 2018 at 04:42 PM
Catherine, it's possible they were giving McCabe, right up until the last minute, some time to make some statements that might mitigate his dilemna.
Laura said in reply to turcopolier ... , 17 March 2018 at 05:35 PM
I think we are all past the "there is no difference between the parties" rhetoric. There IS a difference...and the consistent damage across the board being done by the GOP. I have no doubt...and, as a historian, NO doubt...that the Democrats can screw up just as badly. They do, however, come from a very different place---and it has the virtue of being much more protective of the people and land of the USA.

I know we come from different life experiences, Pat, but our country is seriously at risk and it will be the differences between the parties that will count from here on out until that day when we can all start pulling in the same direction.

Laura said in reply to Fred... , 17 March 2018 at 05:38 PM
There is a certain amount of demographic inevitability going on here. All to the good for some of the marginalized Americans. I don't think Trump (or anyone) can really claim credit....although I do find Trump being factually correct about something, quite refreshing. Remember---"coincidence is not causation."
turcopolier , 17 March 2018 at 05:46 PM
laura

ah, yes the "end to white America syndrome" (ETWAS) actually, a desire for minorty majority is racist. pl

[Mar 18, 2018] Labour MPs who had decided Moscow was "unequivocally" to blame were "baying for blood"

Notable quotes:
"... Chris Williamson, the Labour MP for Derby North, said Labour MPs who had decided Moscow was "unequivocally" to blame were "baying for blood" and he suggested they face de-selection. ..."
Mar 18, 2018 | telegraph.co.uk

But a key ally of Jeremy Corbyn has suggested moderate Labour MPs who blame Russia for spy poisoning are "enemies" who should be deselected.

Chris Williamson, the Labour MP for Derby North, said Labour MPs who had decided Moscow was "unequivocally" to blame were "baying for blood" and he suggested they face de-selection.

And the Kremlin also ramped up its language, launching a withering response to Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson, who had suggested Russia should "go away and shut up".

Major-General Igor Konashenkov, a spokesman at Russia's defence ministry, accused Mr Williamson of engaging in "market wench talk", adding that it reflected his "intellectual impotency".

[Mar 18, 2018] In 1993 interview one of the Novichok scientists, Vladimir Uglev said that the compounds were successfully synthesised and tested, and would be easy for others to produce as long as they had the technology. He also makes some references to corruption and deceit in the Soviet military research system

Mar 18, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

Jiusito , March 17, 2018 at 22:24

I'm struggling to keep up!

Have you seen this, Craig? See pp18ff. http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a333126.pdf

Jiusito , March 17, 2018 at 22:33

Sorry, I should have said: it's an interview of one of the Novichok scientists, Vladimir Uglev, done in 1993. He says that the compounds were successfully synthesised and tested, and would be easy for others to produce as long as they had the technology. He also makes some references to corruption and deceit in the Soviet military research system.

Je , March 17, 2018 at 22:27

There's a whole load of literature on this. This one:

https://academic.oup.com/jat/article/39/2/96/763160

says "Organophosphate nerve agents (OPNAs) are some of the most widely used and proliferated chemical warfare agents. As evidenced by recent events in Syria, these compounds remain a serious military and terrorist threat to human health because of their toxicity and the ease with which they can be used, produced and stored.

The theoretical possibilities for nerve agents derived from the Schedule 1.A.1 and 1.A.3 core structures exceed 270000"

This article says "Russia's chemical weapons commander was a Mossad target"

https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-5172264,00.html

Russia's stockpile being destroyed is a red herring. This is tiny amounts of nerve agent that anyone who can purchase the commonly available ingredients can make – provided they have the technical knowhow – and that's a huge proviso. Russia invented these and could do it. The Israelis could do it too.

May is surely being sincere – there's no reason to think otherwise. We come back to who wants to kill this Russian "traitor" and b) the recently strangled person at the top of Russia's most wanted list. Russia having form for these things doesn't help their denials

Anonymous , March 17, 2018 at 22:30

The Iranian paper is very interesting. Thye ran some lab syntheses of Novichok compounds using two separate precursors (presumably the so-called 'safe binary agents') at low levels to minimise exposure. They say nothing about the effectiveness of combining the two compounds in the variable conditions of pressure, humidity and temperature in a non-lab environment.

One of the so-called 'safe' binary components they utilised is methylphosphonic difluoride. This is used in other binary cw weapons (eg M687 artillery shell) to produce sarin or soran. Rather than being safe in the common sense, it is described as reactive and corrosive (not surprising given it contains fluorine). It may cause burns, is rapidly absorbed through the skin and may cause symptoms of mild nerve agent exposure. It strikes me that rather than going through the rigamarole of relying on exposure untested uncontrolled binary agents, exposure to methylphosphonic difluoride may be sufficient. It is also a standard cw component so it could be produced almost anywhere with suitable lab facilities.

Anonymous , March 17, 2018 at 22:41

Further reading reveals more details. It is not simply a malter of combining to two 'safe' precursor copmpounds and bingo! – lots of nasty cw nerve agent. They are mixed together in the presence of a third chemical to produce an intermediate compound which is then converted to the desired nerve agent by the presence of 'alcohols'. This is certainly a long way from the Clown Car comedy description of how these things are supposed to work. This also suggests that whatever was used to poison the people, it was almost certainly not a nerve agent derived from novichok compounds released haphazardly in the house, restaurant, etc.

Dec , March 17, 2018 at 23:30

Craig, you must read the paper the article cites. Relevant quotes are:

"All the chemicals required for the microsynthesis of O-alkylN-[bis(dimethylamino)methylidene]-P-methylphosphonami-dates were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO,USA), Fluka (Neu-Ulm, Germany), and Merck (Darmstadt,Germany), and were used as received. Methylphosphonicdifluoride (Scheme 1, cpd 1) was synthesized by use of amethod described elsewhere.[18]Isopropanol-d6was preparedby reduction of acetone-d6by sodium borohydride."

Interpretation: trivial to obtain ingredients. Next we have the preparation itself. After some simple moves you can make with standard benchtop equipment we have the following line about safety:

"It should be noted that, due to the extreme toxicityof these materials, the separation and purification of CWC-related chemical are very difficult and thereforeshould be carried out only by a trained professional in an efficient fume cupboard equipped with an active charcoal filtration system."

So all you need is a slightly better than standard fume cupboard!

Not just another country, any fucking polytechnic can make this stuff in small quantities.

[Mar 18, 2018] On Not Being Refuted by Craig Murray

Notable quotes:
"... I am aware however of many provocations carried out by NATO close to and even within Russian borders. The U.K. seems to be teeming with Yeltsin-era plutocrats such as Bill Browder who have been sustaining a drumbeat of 'emnity' towards Putin and the Russians for the last five years at least and no doubt have been applying their ill-gotten largesse to U.K. politicians. ..."
"... FSB/GRU or whoever, they do have a track record. It just isn't _this_ track record. The MO has changed radically, from precise, targeted and fairly discreet, to a vast mess of colateral damage without even a fatality to show for it, despite the claim that they used the most lethal poison in the world. ..."
"... Still no apparent motive, no obvious benefit for mother Russia, and no clear identification of the agent, much less its source. ..."
"... Compared to this, evidence for Iraqi WMD was rock solid. But by all means, let's thunder away with outraged self-righteousness on the world stage. ..."
"... The Novichok agent is produced in other country's than in Soviet Union, they have at least acknowledged it. They Novichok agent today at Totalförsvarets forskningsinstituts, in Sweden! ..."
"... "Every time the west notices Russia's wanting to be a "good neighbor" – about which the west really couldn't care less, Russia makes herself more vulnerable, more prone to be accused and attacked and more slandered." ..."
"... Great reporting Craig and a devastating indictment of UK journalism. So why are May, Johnson and Williamson spouting misleading claims? ..."
"... I cannot believe the tories are daft enough to want war with Russia but I do think they want to divert the funds that could be used to mitigate austerity straight into our arms industry and dwindling military. Williamson has been on that track for the last few months. ..."
"... Of course Corbyn has had some success with voters and whipping up anti-Russia hysteria and using it to blacken Corbyn with the electorate is a handy bonus. "Standing up to Putin" is depicted as playing well for May in the media, another bonus. ..."
"... Will it fizzle out now the Russians have done their tit for tat expulsions? Is a chemical weapons false flag about to happen in Syria to justify more coalition bombing? Who knows? ..."
Mar 18, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

Canexpat , March 17, 2018 at 19:37

" a track record of emnity" Care to expand on this? I am unaware of any emnity towards the UK on the part of the Russian Federation in recent years.

I am aware however of many provocations carried out by NATO close to and even within Russian borders. The U.K. seems to be teeming with Yeltsin-era plutocrats such as Bill Browder who have been sustaining a drumbeat of 'emnity' towards Putin and the Russians for the last five years at least and no doubt have been applying their ill-gotten largesse to U.K. politicians.

Educate me. Perhaps I haven't been watching the right television.

BTW Did Israel have a motive to destabilise the U.S. when they attacked the U.S.S. Liberty?

Loftwork , March 17, 2018 at 20:33

FSB/GRU or whoever, they do have a track record. It just isn't _this_ track record. The MO has changed radically, from precise, targeted and fairly discreet, to a vast mess of colateral damage without even a fatality to show for it, despite the claim that they used the most lethal poison in the world.

Still no apparent motive, no obvious benefit for mother Russia, and no clear identification of the agent, much less its source.

Compared to this, evidence for Iraqi WMD was rock solid. But by all means, let's thunder away with outraged self-righteousness on the world stage. Good reviews and trebles all around, eh?

GK , March 17, 2018 at 19:23

The Novichok agent is produced in other country's than in Soviet Union, they have at least acknowledged it. They Novichok agent today at Totalförsvarets forskningsinstituts, in Sweden!

"Det är inte möjligt att Sverige är källan till nervgiftet Novitjok som användes mot den tidigare ryske dubbelagenten Sergej Skripal och hans dotter, säger kemvapenexperten Rikard Norlin till DN.

Anledningen är att nervgift endast finns på Totalförsvarets forskningsinstituts avdelning för CBRN-skydd i Umeå.

– Vi har bra koll på våra substanser och redovisar allt till OPCW, organisationen för förbud mot kemiska vapen, säger Norlin till tidningen."

http://omni.se/expert-nervgiftet-kan-inte-ha-kommit-fran-sverige/a/gPyqqa

Ben , March 17, 2018 at 19:32

"Every time the west notices Russia's wanting to be a "good neighbor" – about which the west really couldn't care less, Russia makes herself more vulnerable, more prone to be accused and attacked and more slandered."

*CHOKE!

http://thesaker.is/russias-reaction-to-the-insults-of-the-west-is-political-suicide/

Phil Espin , March 17, 2018 at 19:35

Great reporting Craig and a devastating indictment of UK journalism. So why are May, Johnson and Williamson spouting misleading claims?

I cannot believe the tories are daft enough to want war with Russia but I do think they want to divert the funds that could be used to mitigate austerity straight into our arms industry and dwindling military. Williamson has been on that track for the last few months.

£48 mill for Porton Down for agreeing to weasel words is just for starters. Cheap compared to £1 bill for the DUP. Of course Corbyn has had some success with voters and whipping up anti-Russia hysteria and using it to blacken Corbyn with the electorate is a handy bonus. "Standing up to Putin" is depicted as playing well for May in the media, another bonus.

Will it fizzle out now the Russians have done their tit for tat expulsions? Is a chemical weapons false flag about to happen in Syria to justify more coalition bombing? Who knows?

Once Putin's 1 March speech sinks in all we'll be left with by the Autumn is a clamour that Britain must spend more on defence. Or give up Brexit and join the EU military?

[Mar 18, 2018] Skripal case is very reminiscent of the MH17 campaign

Mar 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: the pessimist | Mar 16, 2018 2:03:28 PM | 21

Very reminiscent of the MH17 campaign that was used to bully the reluctant Europeans into imposing sanctions on Russia. Accusations were made and a narrative put forward immediately without presenting clear evidence or waiting for an investigation. Through repetition this narrative has become dogma in the West despite the fact that supporting evidence has still not been forthcoming. It seems that after 9-11 it became clear that quickly putting out a narrative, with the support of the press, and demonizing anyone with any public stature who questions the basic story could be successful, even when there were thousands of eye witnesses and many flaws in the official explanation. The facts, or what really happened no longer matter once the narrative has taken root.

My question is what kinds of threats are being used to keep potential dissenters in line now. French banks were punished over the mistrial deal and it was abandoned. Now the stakes seem to be higher and the risk of defections has increased, so what is the stick?

[Mar 18, 2018] UK's claims questioned: doubts voiced about source of Salisbury novichok by Ewen MacAskill

Notable quotes:
"... The former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, who visited the site at Nukus, said it had been dismantled with US help. He is among those advocating scepticism about the UK placing blame on Russia. ..."
"... In a blog post , he wrote: "The same people who assured you Saddam Hussein had WMDs now assure you Russian 'novichok' nerve agents are being wielded by Vladimir Putin to attack people on British soil." ..."
"... The UK government case rests not just on its argument that novichok was developed in Russia, but what it says is past form, a record of Russian state-sponsored assassination of former spies. ..."
"... Murray, in a phone interview, is undeterred, determined to challenge the government line, in spite of having been subjected to a level of abuse on social media he had not experienced before. ..."
"... "There is no evidence it was Russia. I am not ruling out that it could be Russia, though I don't see the motive. I want to see where the evidence lies," Murray said. "Anyone who expresses scepticism is seen as an enemy of the state." ..."
May 15, 2018 | www.theguardian.com
The question now is whether all of Russia's chemical weapons were destroyed and accounted for. Theresa May – having identified the nerve agent used in the Salisbury attack as novichok, developed in Russia – told the Commons on Wednesday that Russia had offered no explanation as to why it had "an undeclared chemical weapons programme in contravention of international law". Jeremy Corbyn introduced a sceptical note, questioning whether there was any evidence as to the location of its production.

The exchanges provoked a debate echoing the one that preceded the 2003 invasion of Iraq over whether UN weapons inspectors had overseen the destruction of all the weapons of mass destruction in the country or whether Saddam Hussein had retained secret hidden caches.

On social media, there were arguments that the novichok could have come from some part of the former Soviet Union other than Russia, such as Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan or Ukraine, or some non-state group, maybe criminals.

The years following the fall of the Berlin Wall were chaotic, with chemical weapons laboratories and storage sites across the Soviet Union abandoned by staff who were no longer being paid. Security was almost non-existent, leaving the sites at the mercy of criminal gangs or disenchanted staff looking to supplement their income.

"Could somebody have smuggled something out?" Amy Smithson, a US-based biological and chemical weapons expert, said to Reuters. "I certainly wouldn't rule that possibility out, especially a small amount and particularly in view of how lax the security was at Russian chemical facilities in the early 1990s."

It took almost a decade before order was restored, in part through stockpiles being transferred to Russia from other parts of the former Soviet Union and in part through help from US and other western experts.

Novichok was developed at a laboratory complex in Shikhany, in central Russia, according to a British weapons expert, Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, and a Russian chemist involved in the chemical weapons programme, Vil Mirzayanov, who later defected to the US. Mirzayanov said the novichok was tested at Nukus, in Uzbekistan.

The former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, who visited the site at Nukus, said it had been dismantled with US help. He is among those advocating scepticism about the UK placing blame on Russia.

In a blog post , he wrote: "The same people who assured you Saddam Hussein had WMDs now assure you Russian 'novichok' nerve agents are being wielded by Vladimir Putin to attack people on British soil."

A Russian lawyer, Boris Kuznetsov, told Reuters he was offering to pass to the British authorities a file he said might be relevant to the Salisbury case. It details an incident when poison hidden in a phone receiver killed a Russian banker and his secretary in 1995. The poison came from an employee at the state chemical facility who sold it through intermediaries – in an ampule placed in a presentation case – to help reduce his debts.

The UK government case rests not just on its argument that novichok was developed in Russia, but what it says is past form, a record of Russian state-sponsored assassination of former spies.

Murray, in a phone interview, is undeterred, determined to challenge the government line, in spite of having been subjected to a level of abuse on social media he had not experienced before.

"There is no evidence it was Russia. I am not ruling out that it could be Russia, though I don't see the motive. I want to see where the evidence lies," Murray said. "Anyone who expresses scepticism is seen as an enemy of the state."

[Mar 18, 2018] THE LITVINENKO 'RUSSIA DID IT' STORY WAS A LIE

Mar 18, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

Ex Pat , March 17, 2018 at 22:20

THE LITVINENKO 'RUSSIA DID IT' STORY WAS A LIE

In the nature of the internet, someone somewhere knows the truth but usually search engines and governments make sure you don't find it. Ever.

But occasionally the internet gods smile. If you are obsessed with electric bicycles, long time UK Pedelecs poster flecc knows all about Polonium 210 and why the Litvinenko 'Russia did it' story was a pack of lies. – Polonium 210 is _not_ just available in Russia. It is and was commercially available from the U.S.

– Fancy that department! Why the UK government 'Russia did it' Litvinenko story was a pack of lies, by flecc, today (17/3/18) at 1:48 PM post #28622 – Pedelecs UK –

– http://www.pedelecs.co.uk/forum/threads/brexit-for-once-some-facts.24369/page-1432#post-428232

How amusing that when someone tries that 'murder a Russian dissident and blame Russia' wheeze one time too often, the truth falls out of the cupboard in spades! Combine that with the lies about the apparent false flag Skripal attack –

– https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/on-not-being-refuted/comment-page-1/#comment-722843

No change there, then!

[Mar 18, 2018] The Dark Secrets of Porton Down: Inside controversial defence lab which developed VX nerve agent and used human 'guinea pigs'

Mar 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
likklemore , Mar 16, 2018 1:25:15 PM | 15
Thanks b for your continued heavy lifting. Btw, other serious journalists are now citing your diligence on this plot.

Yes, I 'm in on the dots to the Steele dossier "likely" that Skripal was very helpful and must be silenced; his daughter too since he may have confessed to his part.

Falling apart it is. How was The Mirror, (UK), allowed to publish this article?

Before it is pulled, take a read. Below are just snips.

The Dark Secrets of Porton Down: Inside controversial defence lab which developed VX nerve agent and used human 'guinea pigs'
More than 20,000 people have been tested on at the top secret lab which is concentrating on gas attack defences
LINK

It is one of Britain's most secretive sites, remaining shrouded in mystery for more than 100 years. [.]

The 7,000 acre site, near Salisbury, is one of the UK's most secretive and controversial military research facilities and the oldest chemical warfare research installations in the world.

Scientists from Porton were among the first to create biological weapons as well as one of the world's most lethal chemical weapons, but now its main purpose is to support the military and help combat terrorism.

Porton Down opened in 1916 as the War Department Experimental Station for testing chemical weapons during WW1.

Scientists at the lab researched and developed weapons agents used by the British military during the war such as chlorine, mustard gas and phosgene.[.]

The base was later named the Chemical Defence Experimental Establishment.
Chemical weapons were tested on site. Scientists built cannisters full of poison gas that could be released by a timer and they also filled shells with it and released them at targets.

But many of the shells failed to explode meaning the fields are still full of the active chemical agents.

Now Porton concentrates on devising defensive measures against gas attacks after its chemical and biological weapons programme was closed down in the 1950s.

On the government's website it says: "To help develop effective medical countermeasures and to test systems, we produce very small quantities of chemical and biological agents.

"They are stored securely and disposed of safely."[.]

Human experiments

Since 1916 more than 20,000 people have taken part in studies at the base.
Porton Down's experiments on humans have been widely criticised as it is alleged some human 'guinea pigs' were duped into taking part in tests.

Tests were carried out on servicemen to try and determine the effects of nerve agents on humans - with one recorded death due to a nerve gas experiment.
Leading Aircraftman Ronald Maddison died aged 20 in 1953 after taking part in sarin nerve agent toxicity tests.
.[.]

Viruses

Initial samples of the Ebola virus were sent to the Porton Down lab in 1976.
The lab now allegedly contains samples of some of the world's most aggressive diseases including Ebola, anthrax and the plague.[.]

Aerial release trials

Between 1953 and 1976 a number of aerial release trials were carried out to help the government understand how a biological attack might spread across the UK.

The government said: "Given the international situation at the time these trials were conducted in secret."

And added: "The information obtained from these trials has been and still is vital to the defence of the UK."

Two separate and independent reviews concluded the trials did not have any adverse health effects on the UK population.[.]

Aliens

There has been speculation over the years that alien bodies could be hidden at the sight.

But the government has said: "No aliens, either alive or dead have ever been taken to Porton Down or any other Defence Science and Technology Laboratory site."

[Mar 18, 2018] BBC New about Russian reaction

Mar 18, 2018 | www.bbc.com

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia was not worried by international expressions of support for the UK and challenged Britain to "provide some confirmation".

He said: "Sooner or later, the British will have to show some proof to those 'colleagues' who say they are with UK on this; sooner or later will have to stand up its accusations."

The Russian foreign ministry has called Mrs May's allegations "insane" and the Russian Embassy in Britain has described the order for diplomats to leave as "unacceptable, unjustified and short-sighted".

In response to the UK's sanctions, Russia's foreign ministry announced it would:

It said it was responding to "provocative actions" by Britain - and "unproven accusations" that the Russian state was behind the poisoning.

Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said the UK is "playing politics" and not taking into account an international pact on chemical weapons.

He said if the UK sends Moscow a formal request for an explanation under the Chemical Weapons Convention, Russia will respond within the set 10-day time limit.

Russia has also requested to be given a sample of the nerve agent used.

The Russian Ministry of Defence has called the UK's Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson a "vulgar old harpy" after he said Russia should "go away and shut up".

Major-General Igor Konashenkov said that "the extreme level of the intellectual impotence" of Mr Williamson confirmed London's accusations amounted to nothing.

"Long ago, Great Britain became the cosy nest not just for the world's turncoats, but also of all kinds of headquarters for producing fake scandals," he added.

Meanwhile, a suspect in the 2006 murder of former FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko has told Russian news agency Interfax that determining responsibility has to be done by "serious expert analysis".

Andrei Lugovoi, who is now a Russian MP, said: "Any chemist or physicist will tell you that in order to determine the involvement or non-involvement of a country, there must at least be some serious expert analyses carried out at a serious expert level.

"When such statements are made within a few days (of the incident), the only thing this shows is the irresponsibility of the person who makes them. It may also indicate that to find the truth is not the aim."

[Mar 18, 2018] Maria Zakharova blows apart poisoning hoax US should "be put under question"

Mar 18, 2018 | theduran.com

Questions arise: then, they should have samples, which they conceal, or it is a lie from start to finish."

"If the UK prime minister and other British experts give the formula, then it will be clear which countries have been developing these agents."

[Mar 18, 2018] Here's how WW2 startes: with a false flag operation by Nazy Germany against Poland

Mar 18, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk
N_ , March 16, 2018 at 01:50

History lesson time! Here's how WW2 started . I do not mean the background causes or the more proximal Soviet-German and British-Polish pacts. I mean the trigger .

The trigger was a number of false flag attacks carried out by German forces wearing Polish uniforms , collectively given the name "Operation Himmler". The best known incident occurred at Gleiwitz , just inside the German border, where "Polish" (but really German) forces attacked a German radio station on the night of 31 August 1939. The German forces murdered a German farmer, dressed him as a saboteur, and deposited his body at the scene as if he had been killed during the assault. This attack, along with alleged ethnic cleansing of German residents by the Polish authorities and a number of other false-flag attacks carried out by the German SS (in which the bodies of concentration camp prisoners were left behind), was used as "justification" for the German invasion of Poland the next morning.

The murdered German farmer had previously been known, or so it is said, for sympathising with Poles, and he was killed by injection with a chemical.

[Mar 18, 2018] No opportunity to pour more fuel on the fire of anti-Russia sentiments should be passed up. The British government seems up to the task.

Notable quotes:
"... "a robust dialogue with Russia on all the issues" ..."
"... And another question pops up. Why is the UK refusing to give Russia the samples of the deadly substanc e known as Novichok that it says was used to poison the former spy? Isn't it because the real poison was not Novichok but some other agent developed at Porton Down? Could be. You never know. This guess would at least explain the refusal. ..."
"... Nothing can be said for certain but it's only natural to look at what we know and make guesses. That's what analysts are for. Maybe this scenario wasn't what happened, but there is nothing to rule it out. ..."
"... After all, Mr. Skripal and his daughter got immediate emergency medical assistance. It arrived at once. Intelligence services? Who knows, but the victims were injected with an unknown substance almost immediately. Someone had known in advance that they'd need help. This is an undeniable fact. Another coincidence? Aren't there too many of them? ..."
"... Anyway, the work to determine exactly what substance poisoned Mr. Skripal and his daughter was done nowhere else but Porton Down. Wasn't it amazing how quickly they were able to say with absolute certainty that the nerve agent was Russian-produced Novichok? They are unbelievably talented people because normally that takes some time. ..."
"... The Russiagate scandal in the US appears to be dying down . The Skripal case, as well as the furor raised over the events in Eastern Ghouta, Syria, will breathe new life into the ongoing, well-orchestrated attacks on Moscow. ..."
Mar 18, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

Voices were heard calling for a detailed investigation before any final conclusions were reached. Labor Leader Jeremy Corbyn said the UK needed "a robust dialogue with Russia on all the issues" and warned against cutting off ties. He came under harsh criticism in Parliament, although the only thing Mr. Corbyn wanted was some evidence to go on before pointing the finger at Moscow. He just wondered why the government had not made a formal request for information in accordance with Article 9, clause 2 of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)? He got an emotional response, but nobody explained why the procedures described in the convention had not been invoked.

And what if Mr. Skripal pulls through and offers quite a different story? What if new witnesses appear whose testimony moves the investigation in a different direction?

The UK evidently does not want to go the whole nine yards to uncover the truth. It prefers to make accusations first and launch a halfhearted investigation second.

There is a very important fact that has been almost completely ignored by the British media. Where did the poisoning take place? Yes, we know, the name of that sleepy town is Salisbury. That's where Mr. Skripal lives. On March 16, Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson announced that the UK would spend 48 million pounds ($67 million) on a new chemical-warfare defense center. It will be built at Porton Down , a military research laboratory that has manufactured the nerve agents VX and sarin.

Where do you think that lab is located? Right, less than eight miles from Mr. Skipal's home in Salisbury. Vladimir Pasechnik , a senior Soviet expert on biological warfare, who defected to the UK in 1989, worked there. He died in 2001. Russia again? Not a chance. Where he lived was no secret and he had worked there quietly for so many years. It's the research he did at the Porton Down laboratory that was kept under lock and key. He quit the laboratory in 2000 to set up a business of his own. Since he was no longer working for the government, he was in a position to reveal awkward information. You never know about the people involved in hush-hush activities, and the timing of the events could be a coincidence. But it might not be.

The UK officially ceased all activities associated with nerve gas development in 1989 but scandalous stories about Porton Down have been leaked much more recently. The people who worked in the facility were dying under the most suspicious circumstances. In 2010, the Daily Mail published a very interesting report about these mysterious deaths -- all related to the development of nerve agents -- which was a fact that had been kept under wraps before. Porton Down featured prominently in all those stories. Wouldn't this be a good time to remember those in connection with Mr. Skripal's poisoning?

And another question pops up. Why is the UK refusing to give Russia the samples of the deadly substanc e known as Novichok that it says was used to poison the former spy? Isn't it because the real poison was not Novichok but some other agent developed at Porton Down? Could be. You never know. This guess would at least explain the refusal.

Nothing can be said for certain but it's only natural to look at what we know and make guesses. That's what analysts are for. Maybe this scenario wasn't what happened, but there is nothing to rule it out.

After all, Mr. Skripal and his daughter got immediate emergency medical assistance. It arrived at once. Intelligence services? Who knows, but the victims were injected with an unknown substance almost immediately. Someone had known in advance that they'd need help. This is an undeniable fact. Another coincidence? Aren't there too many of them?

Anyway, the work to determine exactly what substance poisoned Mr. Skripal and his daughter was done nowhere else but Porton Down. Wasn't it amazing how quickly they were able to say with absolute certainty that the nerve agent was Russian-produced Novichok? They are unbelievably talented people because normally that takes some time.

What next? The UK does not want to go it alone. It has raised the issue in the UN. It has approached NATO. The Skripal case will be added to the agenda at the March 22–23 EU summit and even the talks on Brexit.

The Russiagate scandal in the US appears to be dying down . The Skripal case, as well as the furor raised over the events in Eastern Ghouta, Syria, will breathe new life into the ongoing, well-orchestrated attacks on Moscow.

These days the divided West faces many challenges . Just look at the divisions threatening NATO and the EU. There is nothing better than an external enemy, even an imaginary one, to keep the West united and led by the US. That's where Russia comes in. We may never know who is to blame for the attempt on Mr. Skripal's life -- it's not important for those who are leading the anti-Russia campaign. No opportunity to pour more fuel on the fire of anti-Russia sentiments should be passed up. The British government seems up to the task.

[Mar 18, 2018] Theresa May is like the Queen of Hearts in Alice-in-Wonderland: "Verdict first, trial afterwards"

Mar 18, 2018 | dailymail.co.uk

jmNZ, Vienna, Austria, 38 minutes ago

Theresa May is like the Queen of Hearts in Alice-in-Wonderland: "Verdict first, trial afterwards" Indeed, she goes further: "Sentence first and no trial" - not even evidence!

[Mar 18, 2018] First Recorded Successful Novichok Synthesis was in 2016 - By Iran, in Cooperation with the OPCW by Craig Murray

Notable quotes:
"... the most encouraging thing is the reaction of readers of the Daily Mail , i was reading only this morning the hatchet job they did on RT, its not one the readers agreed with incidentally, at the time i read the article over 700 people had responded, the best rated where from those totally against the MSM narrative, the best thing our establishment could do is listen to the people, unfortunately they won't, encased in their bubble environment of Westminster ..."
"... resistance, or a form of inoculation to MSM propaganda is growing, the elite establishment are now on the back foot, question is how will they respond ban RT, or this blog ??? .i suspect the gloves will come off very soon ..."
"... Given the total lack of proper investigation, Craig is one of the few making any sense. I would expect an event like this, if treated normally as a crime, to take months of investigation before anyone could be accused. ..."
"... I see no reason why we have to jump to accusing Russia and I'm glad that Craig, rather than delving into conspiracy theory, is simply confirming that we can't know without a lot more investigation ..."
"... Pants down, she swiftly places a bucket over her head, and expels 23 of her own diplomats from Russia. Then accidentally falls into the embrace of her arch-Brexit enemies Germany and France. Side-splitting comedy. Never had such a good laugh at the expense of the hapless Tories. ..."
"... With Christopher Steele, Pablo Miller, Sergei Skripal in the UK script of the moment – the official deception is at a place of convergence. ..."
Mar 17, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

The line that novichoks can only be produced by Russia is now proven to be a complete lie. As I previously proved by referencing their publications, in 2013 the OPCW scientific advisory committee note the evidence was sparse that novichoks had ever been successfully produced, and in 2016 that was still the line being published by Porton Down in 2016. You can find the hard evidence of all that here .

I have now been sent the vital information that in late 2016, Iranian scientists set out to study whether novichoks really could be produced from commercially available ingredients. Iran succeeded in synthesising a number of novichoks. Iran did this in full cooperation with the OPCW and immediately reported the results to the OPCW so they could be added to the chemical weapons database.

mog, March 17, 2018 at 22:51

This case of unclear wording needs clearing up in a matter when little or no media attention seems to be on the victims, the hospital etc. :
The Times published a letter from Stephen Davies (Consultant in Emergency Medicine, Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust) on the 16th March.
'Sir, further to your report ('Poision Exposure Leaves Nearly 40 needing Treatment'), may I clarify that no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury and there have only ever been three patients with significant poisoning. Several people have attended the emergency department concerned that they may have been exposed. None has had symptoms of poisoning and none has needed treatment. Any blood tests performed have shown no abnormality. No member of the public has been contaminated by the agent involved.'
That first sentence .carefully worded or carelessly worded?

Jean , March 17, 2018 at 23:19

May claimed that the nerve agent was Novichok, developed in the USSR. In order to identify it, the UK experts had to have had a sample of it. Since neither the USSR, nor Russia, have ever been known to export it, we should assume that it was synthesized within the UK. The formula and the list of precursors are in the public domain, published by the scientist who developed Novichok, who has since moved to the US. Thus, British scientists working at Porton Down could have synthesized it themselves. In any case, it is not possible to determine in what country a given sample of the substance was synthesized, and the claim that it came from Russia is not provable.

It was claimed that the victims -- Mr. Skripal and his daugher -- were poisoned with Novichok while at a restaurant. Yet how could this have been done? The agent in question is so powerful that a liter of it released into the atmosphere over London would kill most of its population. Breaking a vial of it open over a plate of food would kill the murderer along with everyone inside the restaurant. Anything it touched would be stained yellow, and many of those in the vicinity would have complained of a very unusual, acrid smell. Those poisoned would be instantaneously paralyzed and dead within minutes, not strolling over to a park bench where they were found. The entire town would have been evacuated, and the restaurant would have to be encased in a concrete sarcophagus by workers in space suits and destroyed with high heat. None of this has happened.

In view of the above, it seems unlikely that any of what has been described in the UK media and by May's government has actually taken place. An alternative assumption, and one we should be ready to fully test, is that all of this is a work of fiction. No pictures of the two victims have been provided.

One of them -- Skripal's daughter -- is a citizen of the Russia

This was posted by RT there's more to the story just I have copied this part obviously to get the truth out there

alwaywrite, March 17, 2018 at 21:56

the most encouraging thing is the reaction of readers of the Daily Mail , i was reading only this morning the hatchet job they did on RT, its not one the readers agreed with incidentally, at the time i read the article over 700 people had responded, the best rated where from those totally against the MSM narrative, the best thing our establishment could do is listen to the people, unfortunately they won't, encased in their bubble environment of Westminster

resistance, or a form of inoculation to MSM propaganda is growing, the elite establishment are now on the back foot, question is how will they respond ban RT, or this blog ??? .i suspect the gloves will come off very soon

Elspeth Parris, March 17, 2018 at 21:11

No conspiracy theories here. Given the total lack of proper investigation, Craig is one of the few making any sense. I would expect an event like this, if treated normally as a crime, to take months of investigation before anyone could be accused.

I see no reason why we have to jump to accusing Russia and I'm glad that Craig, rather than delving into conspiracy theory, is simply confirming that we can't know without a lot more investigation

giyane , March 17, 2018 at 21:46

May must resign. She scripted the farce about Abu Qatada who was eventually deported to Jordan, a country which hosts joint Saudi – Israeli terrorist training camps which were used for training Daesh. The present farce about Salisbury stars the same cast of buffoon MPs from both sides of the House, ra-ra-ing against Russia while USUKIS who started the proxy war against Syria is hiding under the bed.

Pants down, she swiftly places a bucket over her head, and expels 23 of her own diplomats from Russia. Then accidentally falls into the embrace of her arch-Brexit enemies Germany and France. Side-splitting comedy. Never had such a good laugh at the expense of the hapless Tories.

Adrian , March 17, 2018 at 21:49

Here in North America we're witness to a campaign of propaganda that is of a DNA strand with the Salisbury story.

In late 2016 a private outfit named CrowdStrike fabricated word of an "Ukrainian artillery hack" by the GRU – this provided CrowdStrike and the US intell community the needed "high confidence" re Russia being responsible for a DNC "hack" – and this (amplified by recitation of CS agent Dmitri Alperovitch et al's false claims in the Washington Post etc.) preceded Obama's sanctions against Russia.

Cyber-security expert @jeffreycarr, among others, has debunked the GRU attribution by CrowdStrike: https://medium.com/@jeffreycarr/the-gru-ukraine-artillery-hack-that-may-never-have-happened-820960bbb02d but, as with the Christopher Steele "dossier", the false reports in the mainstream press created the narrative and, no doubt, helped construct the FBI illusion of things.

It appears now as if neither the Republicans nor the Democrats will really want to reveal all – and are moving to settle on "no collusion" but will avoid the "no hack" evidence as the latter would harm the ongoing military desire to stoke a war, cold or hot, with Russia.

With Christopher Steele, Pablo Miller, Sergei Skripal in the UK script of the moment – the official deception is at a place of convergence.

Thank you for helping dispel the smoke-and-mirrors.

[Mar 18, 2018] The Skripal anti-Russia hysteria effort is just another step in the US/CIA campaign to interfere with North Streat II

Notable quotes:
"... This is a European energy issue. From the start. The US either wants to be the middle-man or cut Russia off from it entirely. No other options have been tabled or would be acceptable to Washington. Remember the Trump quote "Why don't we just take their oil and gas?" ..."
"... Look at the opposition gaining speed against Nord Stream II. And also look, the UK and all of Europe may be in for some cold summers and winters now, it's a trend they cannot ignore as it gets colder for longer periods, this trend isn't relaxing with the stratosphere doing some flips and turns and sending "The Beast From The East" towards the once Great Britain. ..."
Mar 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

chet380 | Mar 17, 2018 4:14:40 PM | 6

The Skripal anti-Russia hysteria effort is just another step in the US/CIA campaign to interfere with the Russian hosting of the World Cup -- the next step will be to attempt to have the qualifying European countries boycott the event ... remember, to them, every Russian loss is an American win.

However, I will go on record to predict that the US will have its Ukrainian neo-Nazi vassals mount a major attack on the Donbass within week of the beginning of the World Cup tournament.

Gravatomic | Mar 17, 2018 4:28:35 PM | 12

@chet380 | Mar 17, 2018 4:14:40 PM | 6

I agree the World Cup is on the agenda, but this effort is multi-pronged, like Octi-putin, they will want to boycott it and you will see all sorts of FIFA related articles in the coming months, corruption and so on. It's all predictable.

This is a European energy issue. From the start. The US either wants to be the middle-man or cut Russia off from it entirely. No other options have been tabled or would be acceptable to Washington. Remember the Trump quote "Why don't we just take their oil and gas?"

Look at the opposition gaining speed against Nord Stream II. And also look, the UK and all of Europe may be in for some cold summers and winters now, it's a trend they cannot ignore as it gets colder for longer periods, this trend isn't relaxing with the stratosphere doing some flips and turns and sending "The Beast From The East" towards the once Great Britain.

[Mar 18, 2018] Demonization of Putin and Russia is in full swing

Notable quotes:
"... The general idea has been to isolate Russia and to make it so hard for anyone to defend Russia. This extends to the media. Whereas lots of articles on Russia and Syria were open to comments in the Guardian and lots of people write and disagree with the constant propaganda it is now rare to have these open to comment. Any questions is always dominated by anti Russia and anti SAG rhetoric. ..."
"... It is a constant psyop that is gathering momentum. I am sure the use of nerve agent is a not so subtle way of linking Russia with what is supposedly happening in Syria. ..."
"... But as we know that the supposed use of chemical weapons is a series of false flags then the same may apply here. ..."
"... So thanks to to the toxic tory blatant propaganda it's now an accepted fact in US Democrats minds that it was the Russians wot done it as they push for tougher sanctions against Russia. ..."
"... just remember it was the usa/uk under bush/blair that had all the info needed to attack iraq in 2003 so much for any lesson learned in any of that, or this at present the political class remain in the gutter serving the military-financial-energy complex of course these special interest groups would have it no other way as war=money what's a few dead people to get in the way of making a killing off the next war, or preparation for war? i heard porton down was given a few $ in the past day or two as well lets keep those chemists busy ..."
Mar 18, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

SA , March 16, 2018 at 07:20

I agree with you. But there is more, much more. There was an 8 part drama series on the. BBC called McMafia showing how criminality including arms and narcotics and so on, is closely linked to the Russian state. Then there was a series of very superficial BBC programmes, one on Putin as a new Tsar (sic) and the other on the elections with a spotlight on Navalny. Radio 4 is constantly almost daily talking about Russian aggression and of course there is the vilification of Russian athletes and the drugs.

The general idea has been to isolate Russia and to make it so hard for anyone to defend Russia. This extends to the media. Whereas lots of articles on Russia and Syria were open to comments in the Guardian and lots of people write and disagree with the constant propaganda it is now rare to have these open to comment. Any questions is always dominated by anti Russia and anti SAG rhetoric.

It is a constant psyop that is gathering momentum. I am sure the use of nerve agent is a not so subtle way of linking Russia with what is supposedly happening in Syria.

But as we know that the supposed use of chemical weapons is a series of false flags then the same may apply here.

Mochyn69 , March 16, 2018 at 02:44

"The sanctions today are a grievous disappointment, and fall far short of what is needed to respond to that attack on our democracy, let alone deter Russia's escalating aggression, which now includes a chemical weapons attack on the soil of our closest ally," Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee said in a statement.

So thanks to to the toxic tory blatant propaganda it's now an accepted fact in US Democrats minds that it was the Russians wot done it as they push for tougher sanctions against Russia.

There might just be an answer to the cui bono question somewhere in there. Just maybe, but I'm not rushing to judgement!

james , March 16, 2018 at 02:52

just remember it was the usa/uk under bush/blair that had all the info needed to attack iraq in 2003 so much for any lesson learned in any of that, or this at present the political class remain in the gutter serving the military-financial-energy complex of course these special interest groups would have it no other way as war=money what's a few dead people to get in the way of making a killing off the next war, or preparation for war? i heard porton down was given a few $ in the past day or two as well lets keep those chemists busy

[Mar 18, 2018] Mattis' Weak Case for Supporting the War on Yemen by Daniel Larison

Notable quotes:
"... "Mattis' Weak Case for Supporting the War on Yemen" ..."
Mar 18, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

The Secretary of Defense has written to Congressional leaders to express his opposition to S.J.Res. 54, the resolution that would end U.S. involvement in the war on Yemen:

In a letter sent to congressional leaders Wednesday and obtained by The Washington Post, Mattis wrote that restricting military support the United States is providing to the Saudi-led coalition "could increase civilian casualties, jeopardize cooperation with our partners on counterterrorism, and reduce our influence with the Saudis -- all of which would further exacerbate the situation and humanitarian crisis."

He urged Congress not to impose restrictions on the "noncombat," "limited U.S. military support" being provided to Saudi Arabia, which is "engaging in operations in its legitimate exercise of self-defense."

The Pentagon has been putting forward very weak legal arguments against S.J.Res. 54, and Mattis' statement of the policy arguments against the resolution are not any better. The Saudi-led coalition would have great difficulty continuing their war without U.S. military assistance. U.S. refueling allows coalition planes to carry out more attacks than they otherwise could, so it is extremely unlikely that ending it could possibly result in more civilian casualties than the bombing campaign causes now. Mattis is taking for granted that U.S. military assistance somehow makes coalition bombing more accurate and less likely to result in civilian casualties, but that is hard to credit when coalition forces routinely target civilian structures on purpose and when the military admits that it doesn't keep track of what happens after it refuels coalition planes.

Secretary Mattis says that cutting off support could jeopardize cooperation on counter-terrorism, but the flip side of this is that continuing to enable the Saudi-led war creates the conditions for Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and the local ISIS affiliate to flourish. The coalition's war has made AQAP stronger than it was before, and AQAP members have sometimes even fought alongside coalition forces on the ground. Instead of worrying about whether the U.S. is jeopardizing cooperation with these states, we should be asking whether that cooperation is worth very much in Yemen.

He claims that the Saudis and their allies are engaged in "a legitimate exercise of self-defense," and this is simply not true. The Saudis and their allies were not attacked and were not threatened with attack prior to their intervention. Saudi territory now comes under attack because the coalition has been bombing Yemen for years, but that doesn't make continuing the war self-defense. If an aggressor launches an attack against a neighboring country, it is the neighbor that is engaged in self-defense against the state(s) attacking them.

Mattis also warns that ending support for the Saudi-led coalition would have other undesirable consequences:

As Mattis put it in his letter to congressional leaders Wednesday, "withdrawing U.S. support would embolden Iran to increase its support to the Houthis, enabling further ballistic missile strikes on Saudi Arabia and threatening vital shipping lanes in the Red Sea, thereby raising the risk of a regional conflict."

These claims also don't hold water. Iranian support for the Houthis remains limited, but it has increased as a direct result of the war. The longer that the war goes on, the greater the incentive the Houthis and Iran will have to cooperate. The absurdity of this intervention is that it was dishonestly sold as a war against Iranian "expansionism" and yet it has done more to aid Iran than anything Iran's government could have done on its own. Missile strikes on Saudi Arabia wouldn't be happening if the Saudis and their allies weren't regularly bombing Yemeni cities. If the coalition halted its bombing, the missile strikes would almost certainly cease as well. Continuing the war is a guarantee that those attacks will continue, and U.S. military assistance ensures that the war will continue. Every reason Mattis gives here for continuing U.S. support for the war is actually a reason to end it.

Shipping lanes weren't threatened before the intervention and won't be threatened after it ends. Yemenis have every incentive to leave shipping lanes alone, since these are their country's lifeline. Meanwhile, the cruel coalition blockade is slowly starving millions of Yemenis to death by keeping out essential commercial goods from the main ports that serve the vast majority of the population. Mattis is warning about potential threats to shipping from Yemen while completely ignoring that the main cause of the humanitarian disaster is the interruption of commercial shipping into Yemen by the Saudi-led blockade. The regional conflict that Mattis warns about is already here. It is called the Saudi-led war on Yemen. If one wants to prevent the region from being destabilized further, one would want to put an end to that war as quickly as possible.

Mattis mentions that the U.S. role in the war is a "noncombat" and "limited" one, but for the purposes of the debate on Sanders-Lee resolution that is irrelevant. It doesn't matter that the military assistance the U.S. is providing doesn't put Americans in combat. That is not the only way that U.S. forces can be introduced into hostilities. According to the War Powers Resolution , the U.S. has introduced its armed forces into hostilities under these circumstances:

For purposes of this joint resolution, the term "introduction of United States Armed Forces" includes the assignment of member of such armed forces to command, coordinate, participate in the movement of, or accompany [bold mine-DL] the regular or irregular military forces of any foreign country or government when such military forces are engaged, or there exists an imminent threat that such forces will become engaged, in hostilities.

Any fair reading of this definition has to apply to the regular U.S. refueling of coalition planes that are engaged in an ongoing bombing campaign. The U.S. is obviously participating in the "movement" of coalition forces when it provides their planes with fuel. Indeed, our forces are making the movement of their forces possible through refueling. U.S. involvement in the war on Yemen clearly counts as introducing U.S. forces into hostilities under the WPR, and neither administration has sought or received authorization to do this. No president is permitted to do this unless there is "(1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces." There has obviously been no action from Congress that authorizes this, and there is certainly no emergency or attack that justifies it. U.S. involvement in the war on Yemen is illegal, and the Senate should pass S.J.Res. 54 to end it.

so it's blackmail March 15, 2018 at 11:00 am

"Mattis wrote that restricting military support the United States is providing to the Saudi-led coalition "could increase civilian casualties, jeopardize cooperation with our partners on counterterrorism, and reduce our influence with the Saudis -- all of which would further exacerbate the situation and humanitarian crisis.""

Wow. So MBS is blackmailing us. He's threatening to kill more civilians, to stop anti-terror cooperation, and to shut us out of other Saudi regional security decisions if we don't help him starve and wreck Yemen.

Maybe the situation is a little clearer, but how can anyone take Trump seriously after this embarrassing confession by Mattis?

We may assume that Trump has no self-respect, but doesn't he have any respect for his office? Is he really going to let this disgusting little torture freak jerk him around like this? When it implicates all Americans in Saudi war crimes?

SteveM , says: March 15, 2018 at 2:14 pm
Re: "Mattis' Weak Case for Supporting the War on Yemen"

Unfortunately, in this day of warped Military Exceptionalism as the civic religion, a 4-Star pedigree fronting weak arguments makes them essentially unassailable. No matter how immoral, idiotic or costly to the taxpayers.

Mad Dog Mattis got a free ride with his logically incoherent, hyper-belligerent pronouncements related to the National Security Strategy. Expect no different response to his perverse rationalizations of the Yemen catastrophe.

Generals and Admirals now pop off stupid and dangerous opinions right and left and are never challenged by an MSM that is bedazzled by anyone wearing stars on their shoulders.

Mattis' case for Yemen is not only weak, it's pathetic. Too bad the co-opted and seduced MSM will never suggest that to the public at large deluded by the omnipresent propaganda of the National Security State.

Nothing will change until the undeserved fawning adoration of the War Machine Elite is substantially attenuated.

Alex Ingrum , says: March 15, 2018 at 3:12 pm
The neocons will stop at nothing to bring down anyone they suspect of threatening Israel or U.S. military hegemony in the Middle East.

First, they lied about WMDs in Iraq and started a completely illegal war, killing millions and devastating that country for generations. That led directly to the creation of ISIS and the havoc it has wrought on both Iraq and Syria (and increasingly in other countries).

Then under Obama and Sec. Clinton, they allowed the military takeover of Egypt by the murderous and oppressive El-Sisi and launched an aggressive war of regime change in Libya, throwing both North African countries into turmoil.

Then they supported the brutal and savage ongoing Saudi war against Yemen to curb non-existent Iranian influence, followed by politically isolating Qatar for its supposed chumminess with Iran.

The neocons will do absolutely anything to bring down the Iranian regime, no matter how many foreign and American lives and destroyed to achieve that end.

b. , says: March 15, 2018 at 3:38 pm
The details of Mattis' letter of indulgence do not matter as much as the fact that he is willing to defend the indefensible. Even if his professed concerns were not only genuine, but actually reflected reality, he also has to know better than anybody else within the administration about the consequences of the US-backed Saudi/UAE invasion of Yemen.

Mattis has joined Graham and Albright in the "worth it" campaign to sustain and extend perfectly predictable atrocities.

If he wants to make the case that we cannot accept uncertainty with respect to an alleged Iranian aggression towards Saudi Arabia – and with even more unlikely acquiescence by the Houthi to let Iran use them the way the US uses the Kurds – or even assuming that Mattis wants to misrepresent possible Houthi blowback against Saudi Arabia as "Iranian" just for convenience – then it should be clear that he is claimng we can easily accept uncertainty with respect to Yemeni blowback against the US – blowback that he also uses to justify the US campaign inside Yemen, and that fueled Obama's pathological obsession with ideological cleansing in Yemen and other prospective "safe harbors".

Mattis is proving the validity of the actual Powell Doctrine – if you join it, you own it – both with respect to US co-belligerence in Yemen, and with respect to Mattis personally. He is also proving the observation that anybody who is willing to join an administration as criminal as that of Bush, Obama or Trump is unlikely to do any good – by their voluntary association they have irredeemably tainted themselves.

Uncle Billy , says: March 15, 2018 at 7:54 pm
We do not want to get in the middle of this Sunni vs. Shiite war. The Saudis want to destroy the Shiites in Yemen and we are fools at best and criminals at worst to help them. The people of Yemen are no threat to the US and for theAmerican Government to cooperate with the Saudis in the murderof Yemeni women and children is revolting.
Sisera , says: March 16, 2018 at 6:06 pm
Americans have heard for years that supporting "democracy" and popular uprisings throughout the Middle East are in our national interests, the basis being that oppressed people are more likely to resort to terrorism.

Yet in the cases of Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and now Yemen popular revolutions of Shias demanding equal rights are actually deemed a threat to our national security.

The neocons have gotten so deep in the Gulf/Israel v. Iran conflict that they're not even keeping to the ostensible reasons for interventionism.

[Mar 17, 2018] How the gas was administred in a place which was under surveillance and why passersby were not affected

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... You have obviously been at the crime scene, have witnessed the comatose bodies of the Skripals and after analyzing the Novitchok samples you meticulously collected, have reached the inescapable conclusion ..."
"... Nice sarcasm. Well deserved for those "Novichok hot heads", who claim that it is plausible that a military grade nerve gas was used. Actually initial reports were about a synthetic opioid, not any nerve gas ( https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ex-russian-agent-sergei-skripal-critical-condition-was-poisoned-by-fentanyl-1665286 ) ..."
"... I am amazed that people do not understand the level of absurdity of using nerve gas in such a case. It's really like ignorance has no boundaries. I understand that some people did not manage to graduate from a university or take a decent organic chemistry course, but still, this is simply amazing and very disturbing to read such posts. Especially here. ..."
Mar 17, 2018 | www.unz.com
likbez, March 17, 2018 at 7:08 am GMT
@ValmMond

You have obviously been at the crime scene, have witnessed the comatose bodies of the Skripals and after analyzing the Novitchok samples you meticulously collected, have reached the inescapable conclusion

Nice sarcasm. Well deserved for those "Novichok hot heads", who claim that it is plausible that a military grade nerve gas was used. Actually initial reports were about a synthetic opioid, not any nerve gas ( https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ex-russian-agent-sergei-skripal-critical-condition-was-poisoned-by-fentanyl-1665286 )

I am amazed that people do not understand the level of absurdity of using nerve gas in such a case. It's really like ignorance has no boundaries. I understand that some people did not manage to graduate from a university or take a decent organic chemistry course, but still, this is simply amazing and very disturbing to read such posts. Especially here.

If it was a nerve gas my question to "Novichok hot heads" here is who the assassin was?

You need either to place a can or some punctured packet under the bench (probably impossible) or spray the liquid on the victim from a short distance. The latter is a very dangerous exercise if you are not wearing a respirator and protection gear.

But still, it makes sense to do this inside (and kill many people) rather than outside. That was how Zarin was administered in Tokyo subway ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_subway_sarin_attack

Remember the place was under surveillance -- bad for any assassination. Also in lethal concentrations, the gas kills the victims in several minutes. But Skripals survived unattended for an hour or more and there was only one other seriously affected person -- a policeman, while doctor who treated Skriplal's daughter on the bench was unaffected.

I do not see any reasonable way to administer the gas in this environment without affecting many other people including any passerby, or the doctor who treated Skripal's daughter

[Mar 17, 2018] This is what a false flag operation is about: you need to carefully plant impurities that point to the desired target. Compare with Vault 7. Can it be a chemical Vault 7 available somewhere?

Notable quotes:
"... The anti Russia propaganda industry I believe was geared up to mobilize on an expected East Ghouta gas attack. OK the "industry" would not be privy to the details of such a false flag. But could it be they have gone off prematurely by assuming this Salisbury "event" was the intended pretext. ..."
"... Certainly there appears a degree of pre planned organization in the response to this false provocation ..."
"... I'm a major fan of Prime Minister May. What arouses my suspicions here is the refusal to this point of Her Majesty's government to submit samples of the poison to independent 3rd-party analysis. ..."
"... I've NEVER been antiwar, but DO oppose no-exit, no-win wars. The British public has a great deal of historical experience with such conflicts. Could this affair be the prelude to yet another? ..."
Mar 17, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

likbez , March 18, 2018 at 00:45

This is what a false flag operation is about: you need to carefully plant impurities that point to the desired target. Compare with Vault 7. Can it be a chemical Vault 7 available somewhere?

Peter Mo , March 17, 2018 at 13:52

The anti Russia propaganda industry I believe was geared up to mobilize on an expected East Ghouta gas attack. OK the "industry" would not be privy to the details of such a false flag. But could it be they have gone off prematurely by assuming this Salisbury "event" was the intended pretext.

Certainly there appears a degree of pre planned organization in the response to this false provocation

Ben Brink , March 17, 2018 at 14:20

My chemistry background is laughable (B in high school, D in college) and the only "legal" course I took was called Sociology of Law.

The Romans had the line "Cui bono?" The rough translation (10th grade Latin) is "Who benefits?"

Russia's President Vladimir Putin is an honor graduate of the KGB's foreign branch. It stands to reason he wouldn't hesitate to have an ex-spy assassinated if he thought it served the Russian interest. But in this case, what is that interest?

I'm a major fan of Prime Minister May. What arouses my suspicions here is the refusal to this point of Her Majesty's government to submit samples of the poison to independent 3rd-party analysis.

Due to nearsightedness, I never served in the U.S. Army; had I the common sense of a goat, I would have served in the Navy Supply Corps. I've NEVER been antiwar, but DO oppose no-exit, no-win wars. The British public has a great deal of historical experience with such conflicts. Could this affair be the prelude to yet another? Thank you all.

[Mar 17, 2018] How the gas was administred in a place which was under surveillance and why passersby were not affected

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... You have obviously been at the crime scene, have witnessed the comatose bodies of the Skripals and after analyzing the Novitchok samples you meticulously collected, have reached the inescapable conclusion ..."
"... Nice sarcasm. Well deserved for those "Novichok hot heads", who claim that it is plausible that a military grade nerve gas was used. Actually initial reports were about a synthetic opioid, not any nerve gas ( https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ex-russian-agent-sergei-skripal-critical-condition-was-poisoned-by-fentanyl-1665286 ) ..."
"... I am amazed that people do not understand the level of absurdity of using nerve gas in such a case. It's really like ignorance has no boundaries. I understand that some people did not manage to graduate from a university or take a decent organic chemistry course, but still, this is simply amazing and very disturbing to read such posts. Especially here. ..."
Mar 17, 2018 | www.unz.com
likbez, March 17, 2018 at 7:08 am GMT
@ValmMond

You have obviously been at the crime scene, have witnessed the comatose bodies of the Skripals and after analyzing the Novitchok samples you meticulously collected, have reached the inescapable conclusion

Nice sarcasm. Well deserved for those "Novichok hot heads", who claim that it is plausible that a military grade nerve gas was used. Actually initial reports were about a synthetic opioid, not any nerve gas ( https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ex-russian-agent-sergei-skripal-critical-condition-was-poisoned-by-fentanyl-1665286 )

I am amazed that people do not understand the level of absurdity of using nerve gas in such a case. It's really like ignorance has no boundaries. I understand that some people did not manage to graduate from a university or take a decent organic chemistry course, but still, this is simply amazing and very disturbing to read such posts. Especially here.

If it was a nerve gas my question to "Novichok hot heads" here is who the assassin was?

You need either to place a can or some punctured packet under the bench (probably impossible) or spray the liquid on the victim from a short distance. The latter is a very dangerous exercise if you are not wearing a respirator and protection gear.

But still, it makes sense to do this inside (and kill many people) rather than outside. That was how Zarin was administered in Tokyo subway ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_subway_sarin_attack

Remember the place was under surveillance -- bad for any assassination. Also in lethal concentrations, the gas kills the victims in several minutes. But Skripals survived unattended for an hour or more and there was only one other seriously affected person -- a policeman, while doctor who treated Skriplal's daughter on the bench was unaffected.

I do not see any reasonable way to administer the gas in this environment without affecting many other people including any passerby, or the doctor who treated Skripal's daughter

[Mar 17, 2018] Was any poisonous gas present in the Skripal bench area. Looks highly unlikely

Yes, it certainly looks like a provocation, the "false flag" operation. The Brits and the Banks needed the US and the EU to join the fight.
Notable quotes:
"... The most plausible goal of the whole "Operation Skripal" was poisoning UK-Russia relations and hopefully bringing the US and EU to impose new round of sanctions on Russia. In this sense it reminds Litvinenko case (which brought huge propaganda benefits to the UK and the hysteria lasted several months, if memory does not fail me). ..."
"... One thing I can't understand in "Operation Skripal" is how such an assassination (if we assume that this is an assassination) was accomplished. ..."
"... The gas (if it really exists, which is yet another question) supposedly is really deadly. If this was not gas but some substance infused with this agent (which would be extremely strange and risky method), you need to get it into the drinks, which means 100% chances of your detection. ..."
"... Moreover in case of the gas the difficulties look insurmountable -- to get it to the victim you need to mix components and shortly after spray it from a short distance, hoping the you mixed them correctly. The place where Skripals were found unconscious is a really bad place for such an exercise as there probably several cameras which record the events on the bench. ..."
"... So IMHO it looks like assassination without an assassin ..."
"... suggested traces of the opiate fentanyl -- a synthetic toxin many times stronger than heroin -- had been detected at the scene. ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | www.unz.com

likbez , March 16, 2018 at 3:48 am GMT

@Kiza

Kiza,

Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or fascist dictorship, or a parliament or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked (by a Russian sounding chemical weapon Novichok), and denounce the peace makers for lack of patriotism (https://www.craigmurray.org.uk - Craig Murray has been most viciously attacked for not accepting the official story without any evidence) and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

Hermann Göring

That's a perfectly applicable variation of the famous quote.

The most plausible goal of the whole "Operation Skripal" was poisoning UK-Russia relations and hopefully bringing the US and EU to impose new round of sanctions on Russia. In this sense it reminds Litvinenko case (which brought huge propaganda benefits to the UK and the hysteria lasted several months, if memory does not fail me).

BTW exiled Russian oligarchs like Khodorkovski ( https://www.voltairenet.org/article168007.html ) also could easily stage such a false flag operation using their interconnections with both Russia and Israel.

One thing I can't understand in "Operation Skripal" is how such an assassination (if we assume that this is an assassination) was accomplished.

The gas (if it really exists, which is yet another question) supposedly is really deadly. If this was not gas but some substance infused with this agent (which would be extremely strange and risky method), you need to get it into the drinks, which means 100% chances of your detection.

Moreover in case of the gas the difficulties look insurmountable -- to get it to the victim you need to mix components and shortly after spray it from a short distance, hoping the you mixed them correctly. The place where Skripals were found unconscious is a really bad place for such an exercise as there probably several cameras which record the events on the bench.

Unless it was the daughter who did this (in this case authorities have definitely all the necessary evidence of the crime committed) chances of an attacker to survive such an attack are slim, and changes not being recorded on one or more camera are virtually non existent.

If there was a human assassin, he/she risks to be immediately dead or severely injured as even in minimal concentrations such a gas reliably kills a person within two minutes or so. Antidote might help to survive, but how effective it is depends on the dose you can get.

If some robotic disperser was used, then it will be found as unlike in case of an explosive device the activation does no destroy it.

Also unclear why target the daughter, unless we are dealing with some botched amateur false flag operation in best traditions of ISIS Syria false flag operations.

Moreover, Skripals spent around an hour on a bench in a comatose state and were helped by a doctor who was not affected in any way. See timeline at

http://www.businessinsider.com/who-is-sergei-skripal-timeline-2018-3#march-3-240-pm-skripals-33-year-old-daughter-yulia-arrives-in-the-uk-via-london-heathrow-airport-relatives-said-she-was-visiting-from-moscow-17

But later a policeman was affected. Very strange.

So IMHO it looks like assassination without an assassin . There are some absurd statements that the poison was spiked in their drinks either in the pub or at the restaurant:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5742909/sergei-skripal-spy-russian-assassin-poison-hit-pub/

One possible scenario is that Skripal and his daughter were narcoaddicts and did it to themselves The initial reports (see, for example, https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5733372/ex-russian-spy-sergei-skripal-poisoned-salisbury-feared-life-cops/ ) suggested traces of the opiate fentanyl -- a synthetic toxin many times stronger than heroin -- had been detected at the scene.

Later their collapse was used to stage a false flag operation, when in fact there was no any gas involved, and at this point, a grandiose propaganda show with the decontamination of the area started.

[Mar 17, 2018] Governments Decree 'Truth' About Skripal - Dissenters Will Be Punished

Notable quotes:
"... Wall Street Journal ..."
"... The immense media scare and publicity of the Skripal case is likely centrally directed. Someone is pressing NATO countries as well as thoughtful politicians to get on the side of the aggressive anti-Russian campaign. The French government spokesperson first rejected the accusations Theresa May made against Russia. It demanded proof: ..."
"... " We don't do fantasy politics. Once the elements are proven, then the time will come for decisions to be made," Griveaux told a news conference shortly after May said she was expelling Russian diplomats and suspending bilateral talks. ..."
"... A day later and without further evidence coming into light France folded and joined others in accusing Russia because someone allegedly used a poison "of a type developed by Russia". ..."
"... What we are seeing here with the Skripal incident and the "Novichok" claims is a gigantic propaganda campaign comparable to the 2001 Anthrax scare in the U.S. and the whole "weapons of mass destruction" campaign that heralded the U.S./UK war on Iraq. ..."
"... Moon of Alabama ..."
"... thanks b.. you are covering all the bases here.... it is a clear frame up with serious ramifications...why the politicians of the west are so intent on this begs the question.. who are these politicians working for?? it clearly is not in the interest of its citizens... ..."
"... So what happened in the interim that caused the Russia hysteria? As I pointed out in the previous thread, on March 6 Browder began giving testimony to a UK Commons select committee where he stated it was a "Kremlin hit" and "I believe they want to kill me. They haven't figured out a way yet where they can kill me and get away with it." As The Times put it: "Since he said that, suspicions have deepened that the Russian state was behind the poisoning..." ..."
"... I guess everybody is aware of the potential rhyming of history with this "attempted" assassination. So good to refer to Saker's latest, I find that though he is not a native to the US, his observations concur with many of those I have made on my own in my adult life regarding life and the inhabitants and the cultural starus quo regarding life in America. ..."
"... It's not difficult to comprehend how an entire culture can be whipped up into an irrational unexamined frenzy. ..."
"... Perhaps Peter Lavell is right in his hypothesis that wars begin from a loss of prestige? Well, that and trade wars traditionally escalate? I wonder what will happen next, every day, things are getting worse to quote the Jamaican song. ..."
"... You are correct about the apparent connection between TV shows and what's happening. Same thing with 9/11. Remember when Condsleazy Rice said they never considered Airplanes used to fly into buildings... Then look at the TV show premier Lone Gunman? ..."
"... I read that Yulia, on the bench, was vomiting, had lost control of her bowels, and was conscious. It sounded to me like mushroom poisoning. (Not ricin, anthrax, sarin ) ..."
"... Very reminiscent of the MH17 campaign that was used to bully the reluctant Europeans into imposing sanctions on Russia. Accusations were made and a narrative put forward immediately without presenting clear evidence or waiting for an investigation. ..."
"... Through repetition this narrative has become dogma in the West despite the fact that supporting evidence has still not been forthcoming. It seems that after 9-11 it became clear that quickly putting out a narrative, with the support of the press, and demonizing anyone with any public stature who questions the basic story could be successful, even when there were thousands of eye witnesses and many flaws in the official explanation. The facts, or what really happened no longer matter once the narrative has taken root. ..."
"... Its disgusting to see how all the western media, states use this incident as a warmongering effort. These people are really sick in their heads. Also, note how propaganda works in the west, EVERY JOURNALIST, EVERY POLITICIAN toe with the propaganda line, isn't it amazing? Not only how it works but that there is NO DISSENT? Heinous! ..."
"... "If we want to prevent a unpredictable clash between nuclear armed powers, which could kill millions within just a few moments, we must all publicly voice our doubts and expose the false accusations made against Russia and other countries." Exactly. I strongly hope many more will do so. By now Boris 'the menace' Johnson accuses Putin personally. This man wants to go down history as the one who ignited the world. ..."
"... In December 2017, the BBC was given unprecedented access to Porton Down. They produced a 1 hour documentary on the place including details on animal and human experimentation. The video was available up to a few days ago. It has now been removed. Original BBC page - video not available: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07hx40t Video link at head of this page: [Edit: the page itself is now unavailable] http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/inside-porton-down-britains-controversial-12192830 It is still available here: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x65otqg ..."
"... The empire needs enemies to justify the hundreds of billions given to the MIC corporations. Enemies will continue to be manufactured. Screw the needs of the people. ..."
"... Browder!? Given that guy's history and background, the fact his name comes up in connection with this at all makes him #1 suspect, to my mind. He's a master at getting away with murder by dragging the red herrings of Putin and Russia across the trail. ..."
"... If we assume though that the Skripals poisoned themselves at home (accidentally or deliberately), then between the time they left home, had lunch (during which time they apparently had to wait 40 minutes for their meal), then went to a local pub for drinks and went to the shopping mall park bench, and the time they were found unconscious, with Julia Skripal vomiting, fitting and defecating, at least 90 - 120 minutes (up to 2 hours then) must have passed. They are now in Salisbury District Hospital in a critical condition. ..."
"... Compare and contrast his condition with the Skripals' condition. I think it is very likely that what contaminated the police officer is not the same thing that afflicts the Skripals. Could Bailey have been used to plant something at the Skripals' home and in doing so contaminated himself? ..."
"... Also we must ask why the Skripals have not been moved to a specialist hospital. ..."
"... The cui bono question's answer is those wanting at all/any costs to keep the Unipolar status of the Outlaw US Empire intact--an impossible task given the resources of the Multipolar Alliance. ..."
"... I see many parallels to 911's aftermath and the MH17 shootdown in this Big Lie promotion. Unfortunately, I don't see relations improving for quite a long time. ..."
"... So Glushkov was killed after the Salisbury incident same as Berezovsky (Glushov's partner) got killed after the Litvinenko case. ..."
"... Both the Litvinenko case or the Skripal case either completely incompetent or planned to cause a public crisis. ..."
"... Maybe the Skripals were poisoned for some unrelated reason. Or they simply overdosed on fentanyl. ..."
"... The event was piggybacked a few days later for promoting the War on Russia. Traces of some 'novichok' agent were left around Salisbury to be found by Porton Down experts. ..."
"... What if the "policeman" was actually the one who administered the poison and they just call him a policeman? ..."
"... The 'Skripal affair' is yet another chapter in a very long and inept but mesmerizing for many western geo-political 'soap opera', but without the soap. The constant theme: Russia is the enemy. And Russia really is the enemy, because it alone has effectively stood militarily up to the explicit adopted US geo-political doctrine of global military 'Full Spectrum Dominance'; also, Russia is an effective opposition to the implicit ambition of the insane western dominant-oligarchic-network of achieving global financial, political, and cultural 'full spectrum dominance'. ..."
"... Now there are numerous sub-stories – agendas – involved, but what they amount to are many threads in the playing out of what appears to be turning out to be an unsuccessful attempt at centralized global totalitarianism. Russia is out of western control. ..."
"... The completely unhinged 'Russia did it' outpouring of bs obsession of much of the American establishment and media in response to the Trump election glitch, again, is at core a recognition that Russia really is the enemy: the enemy of GMO food, the enemy of molesting children, the enemy of the western militaristic depravities, of western mass media's and politics' culture of deception. ..."
"... So I interpret the Skripal affair as a truly pathetic and desperate but thematic ploy that will over time rebound on the liars. The incident will underline the insane extent to which brazen stupid lies are relied upon by the western establishment. Notable is how immediately 'on cue' the foaming at the mouth indignation over Russia's 'terrible deed' has been in much British mass media and among British politicians. The hypocrisy is breathtaking. Was it Orwell who noted that the great English cultural failing was hypocrisy? ..."
"... This is an outstanding post. The best and most important article that I have read in the years that I've visited here. I don't know how you do it. I believe that the Skripals were attacked with a nerve poison; but not the highly toxic binary "newcomer" agent identified by the Prime Minister. This incident is serving two purposes; to silence a likely source for the Steele Dossier and as a False Flag to further scapegoat Russia. It is inconceivable that the Russian Federation did it. This is too dangerous and not in their national interests. ..."
"... Western democracies have been overthrown by corporate mafia families. The military, intelligence officers, and civil servants, who worked for the public good, have vanished. The hysteria is so great my only conclusion is that the decision has been made to go to war. Withdrawal from Syria is impossible. Last night, NewsHour reported "Syria's war keeps raging, amid threats of a new Hezbollah-Israel conflict". An American war with Iran is inevitable. It will draw in NATO and Russia. This will be five nuclear powers at war. The Apocalypse is inevitable. ..."
"... So what's the end game? Is the Predator Class preparing to start Hot War with Russia sometime real soon? Everyone knows that once the shooting starts things would rapidly escalate into a nuclear confrontation that can easily spin out of control? Are we seriously mobilizing down that path? This is shaping up to be worst disaster since the Cuban Crisis which the Deep State also instigated... JFK vowed to terminate the CIA- Deep State and was taken out by the Dulles- CIA Wet Works Division in retaliation. ..."
"... up to 38 people have reportedly been poisoned but their names have not been released and no photos of them have as yet been released. ..."
"... It's a pretty strange poison that has varying effects on different people. The doctor who gave first aid was unaffected as well. But the narrative has been inconsistent from one day to the next. This suggests that most of what we are reading, seeing or hearing on the news is being improvised on the fly. We need to reserve judgment on who is responsible until more details become available (if they ever do). ..."
"... In Orwells 1984 one cant help but question if the perpetual war between the 3 nations is real or not. The purpose of war is clear, that is to consume the excesses of industrial production, while keeping the populace in relative poverty to keep them controllable. The populace is then further controlled by fear of the enemy rival state and can be coerced into accepting their diminished lifestyle and supporting the ruling regime . The limited amount of human life that is expended in these unending conflicts turns this perpetual war into a twisted peace; "War is Peace." ..."
"... The West is using the Skripal poisoning to strip Russia of credibility when it defends Syria against false flag chemical weapons attacks staged by their Takfiri dupes to facilitate military attacks by the West on Syria. In effect they are saying is that Russia is such an egregious offender regarding the use of chemical weapons that they cannot be believed when they come to the defense of the Syrian government...in fact, they are inferring that Russia is more than likely complicit in these chemical weapon attacks. With obliging media houses and an unthinking general population its foolproof. ..."
"... We know too little to completely rule out the possibility mentioned early on of a possible joint suicide attempt (supported by the references to fentanyl patches, which seems an odd thing for first responders to have made up if there wasn't something going on). ..."
"... The rest is theater, with the beautiful part being to demand Russia prove it did not use "their" nerve agent, one which appears to have been mostly a theoretical exercise by the USSR that did not really pan out and was likely never actually produced, such that anything "found" could be that damned stuff. Prove this is NOT unicorn shit! ..."
"... He had reportedly made recent appearances at the Russian embassy, maybe just renewing passport and registration documents, but what if it was more? ..."
"... As to the hegemonic west, there will be no war. What we're seeing now IS the war. This is all they have to throw at Russia, and China and Iran, etc. This is how they fight, using all the power they can gather, and this is all they have. Putin on March 1 destroyed all possible military options for them, beyond spiteful attacks on the defenseless, and the suicide moves of proxies. ..."
Mar 17, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

The government decreed 'truth' about the Skripal case has many discrepancies. The connection of the case to Russia is much weaker than the propaganda claims. But doubt and dissent about it are not allowed to prevail .

The political response to the incident around the British-Russian double-agent Sergej Skripal and his daughter started slowly. On Sunday, the 4th of March, Skripal and his daughter were found unconscious on a public bench in Salisbury, England. The local police and emergency services took care of them.

Only on March 8 did the case start to make larger waves. The BBC reported :

Addressing the House of Commons, the home secretary [Rudd] said the attack was "attempted murder in the most cruel and public way".
...
She refused to speculate on whether the Russian state might have been involved in the attack, saying the police investigation should be based on "facts, not rumour" .

Besides Skripal and his daughter one police officer was affected:

A police officer, who was in intensive care, is now "stable and conscious", Wiltshire's chief constable said.

It is unclear where the officer is thought to have contacted the alleged poison. Some reports said it was at Skripal's house, others say that it was at the bench where the Skripal's collapsed.

But a doctor and others who administered first aid were not affected at all:

Meanwhile, a doctor who was one of the first people at the scene has described how she found Ms Skripal slumped unconscious on a bench, vomiting and fitting. She had also lost control of her bodily functions.

The woman, who asked not to be named, told the BBC she moved Ms Skripal into the recovery position and opened her airway, as others tended to her father.

She said she treated her for almost 30 minutes, saying there was no sign of any chemical agent on Ms Skripal's face or body.

The doctor said she had been worried she would be affected by the nerve agent, but added that she "feels fine".

This seems to exclude a highly toxic poison or a substance that is taken up through the skin. But how then was the police officer affected?

The Skripal's are said to be still alive. No details about the alleged poison were published and no medical bulletin about their current state.

After a slow start the British government is now making an immense show out of the case by involving the army and by sending out lots of people in obviously unnecessary high protection gear.


bigger

It also planted lots of rumors. On March 9 it was said that the poison likely came from inside Mr. Skripal's house. Three days ago claims were made that it was smeared on the door handle of Skripal's car, today it is supposed to have come out of the suitcase of Skripal's daughter. All these claims are based on leaks from anonymous official sources. It is likely that none of them is true.

Today, twelve days after the incident, it is still unknown what chemical substance the alleged poison exactly is and where and how it was administered.

Former British ambassador Craig Murray reports that the British chemical weapon laboratory at Porton Down, just 8 miles from where the incident happened, is unsure about what substance (if any) was actually involved:

I have now received confirmation from a well placed FCO source that Porton Down scientists are not able to identify the nerve gas as being of Russian manufacture , and have been resentful of the pressure being placed on them to do so. Porton Down would only sign up to the formulation "of a type developed by Russia" after a rather difficult meeting where this was agreed as a compromise formulation.

Blaming Russia for the use of a poison "of a type developed by Russia" (i.e. the Soviet Union) is like blaming Germany for all current Heroin addicts because the Deutsche Reich company Bayer developed the mass-production of Heroin as a sedative for coughs.

In her "45 minutes" speech on March 12 Theresa May used this wording:

It is now clear that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia. It is part of a group of nerve agents known as Novichok.

"Of a type developed by Russia" is now the standard formulation that the British government and its allies are using. This is supposed to refer to a zoo of chemical substances, the Novichoks, that back in the 1980s a Soviet laboratory in today's Uzbekistan may have researched as potential chemical weapons. There are serious doubts , including from a leading Porton Down scientist, that these Novichoks actually exist.

Someone in the British government propaganda apparatus probably watched the current seasons of the British-American spy drama Strike Back . Nina Byzantina points to the summaries of recent episodes:

Episode 50 ran in the U.K on November 21 2017 and in the U.S. on February 23 2018:

Meanwhile, General Lázsló shuts down Section 20, forcing Donovan to work in secret. She discovers that Zaryn is in fact Karim Markov, a Russian scientist who allegedly killed his colleagues with Novichok , a nerve agent they invented.

Episodes 51 ran in the U.K on November 28 2017 and in the U.S. on March 2 2018:

Section 20 track Berisovich's meth lab in Turov where Markov is making more Novichok and destroy it, though Berisovich escapes with Markov.

Episodes 52 ran in the U.K on January 31 2018 and in the U.S. on March 9 2018:

Section 20 track down Maya, a local Muslim woman Lowry radicalised, to a local airport. When she attempts to release the Novichok , Reynolds shoots her. The Novichok is fake however, as Berisovich does not want an attack committed in his country. ... By the time Section 20 arrives, Berisovich had already called in the FSB to extract Markov and confiscate the Novichok . Yuri resurfaces to kill McAllister and Wyatt. However they turn the tables and strangle him to death. They then manage to engage the FSB and contain the gas . But in the process Reynolds is exposed. Markov works on an antidote but is killed by the Russians before he can complete. McAllister improvises and saves Reynolds, before Novin blows up the lab. Lowry uses the remainder of the gas to kill Berisovich for trying to betray her.

Isn't it astonishing how life follows the course of last week's TV drama? Or did the TV drama follow a larger pre-written script? (Remember the X-Files pilot episode (vid) in March 2011 which predicted 9/11?) Who really gave the British government the idea to blame Russia and Novichoks for the incident that involved the Skripals? Were it the experts at Porton Down, some spy drama on current TV or a propaganda agency?

The Soviet chemist Vil Mirzanyanov, who now lives in the U.S., is the only person who claims that Novichocks were real chemical weapons. Neither Porton Down nor the OPCW have accepted that claim. In 2007 Mirzanyanov wrote a still available book about his work at the Soviet laboratory in Uzbekistan and published the chemical formulas of some alleged Novichok substances. But, as Mirzanyanov concedes , such Novichok substances, if these were involved at all, are by no means an exclusively Russian issue. Vil Mirzanyanov's much publicized book made sure of that. As today's Wall Street Journal explains :

That publicity led its chemical structure to be leaked, making it readily available for reproduction elsewhere , said Ralf Trapp, a France-based consultant on the control of chemical and biological weapons.

"The chemical formula has been publicized and we know from publications from then-Czechoslovakia that they had worked on similar agents for defense in the 1980s ," he said. " I'm sure other countries with developed programs would have as well. "
...
"The understanding at the time was that even though Russia was working on it and developing it, they didn't actually stockpile Novichok agents or precursors, " said Mr. Trapp.

The formulas are known and several other countries have worked on similar stuff. Anyone with a decent laboratory and some expert knowledge can make such poisons. This explains why the experts in Porton Down would not blame Russia and why the British government, eager to blame Russia, can only talk about "a type developed by Russia".

The WSJ piece also explains why it will be difficult to find out from where, when and how the alleged poisons came to Salisbury:

The components used to make Novichok are readily available, but their short lifespan and the risks involved in using it demand professional expertise, scientific and arms experts said.
...
Finding a trail of Novichok would be more difficult because it is carried in two parts that are combined to create a viscous liquid only shortly before use, said Mr. Trapp.

Mr. Trapp is a serious expert on the issue. He says that the Novichok agents are binary agents made from readily available substances and have a short live span. These characteristics will make it practically impossible to find a real culprit.

Russia, which the British government and now also its allies blame without presenting evidence, had no reason to attack the Skripal's. Mr. Skripal, the British double agent, was released from a Russian jail in a 2010 spy-swap. He has lived openly in Britain for eight years. If this was an act of Russian revenge why wait so long? Killing him would also endanger those Russian spies who came back to Russia in exchange for Skripal's freedom. It would impede any future exchange. There is no plausible reason for Russia to do such, especially not in current atmosphere.

There must be other reasons why Skripal was attacked, if he was, with some more recent motive than the one attributed to Russia.

Elijah Magnier, with decades of experience as war correspondent, tries to fit the incident into the larger picture of the U.S.-Russian proxy war in the Middle East:

The US and the International community tried to stop the battles of al-Ghouta to no avail. This prompted Washington to exercise its favourite hobby of imposing sanctions on Russia, without succeeding in stopping the Syrian army (fighting without its allies – except Russia) from recovering its control over Ghouta. The answer came immediately from Moscow by bombing Daraa and hitting al-Qaeda's area of influence in an indication as to where the future theatre of military operations is expected to be.

Again, events are moving very fast: the US response came quickly through its UK ally when Britain took advantage of the poisoning of the former Russian spy Sergey Skripal in London to accuse Moscow of being behind his assassination . The message here is clear: all means are legitimate for the control of the Middle East, specifically Syria.

I am not sure that this claim fits the timeline. The British already hinted at Russian culpability on March 8. Reuters reported the March 12 Deraa bombing at 1:16 PM . The British prime minister May raised her accusations against Russia only a few hours later. To prepare and negotiate her statement with Porton Down likely took longer than that.

The Skripal incident has its origin in something different, likely in his supposed involvement in the dirty Steele dossier which targeted Donald Trump. ( More interesting background to the Skripal-Steele connection can be found at UKColumn .) May's statement was not prompted by the Syrian-Russian bombing in Deraa governorate but is a part of the general anti-Russian campaign.

Magnier is right though to point out that a further escalation is quite possible:

The Syrian war is far from being a normal one. It is THE war between two superpowers and their allies, where US and Russian soldiers are directly involved on the ground in a war of domination and power. The lack of victory in the US eyes is worse than losing a battle. Even more, the victory of Russia and its allies on Syrian soil in any battle is therefore a direct blow to the heart of Washington and its allies .
...
The superpowers are on the verge of the abyss , so the danger of falling into a war of cosmic proposition is no longer confined to the imagination or merely a sensational part of unrealistic calculations.

The immense media scare and publicity of the Skripal case is likely centrally directed. Someone is pressing NATO countries as well as thoughtful politicians to get on the side of the aggressive anti-Russian campaign. The French government spokesperson first rejected the accusations Theresa May made against Russia. It demanded proof:

" We don't do fantasy politics. Once the elements are proven, then the time will come for decisions to be made," Griveaux told a news conference shortly after May said she was expelling Russian diplomats and suspending bilateral talks.

A day later and without further evidence coming into light France folded and joined others in accusing Russia because someone allegedly used a poison "of a type developed by Russia".

The British opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn warned of taking steps against Russia without first presenting evidence. He was immediately assaulted in a vicious propaganda campaign.


Even the hat of British opposition leader Corbyn was photoshopped by BBC Newsnight to make him look "Russian".
(If RT would do similar it would immediately lose its UK license.) - bigger

Corbyn folded and now even makes claims that May has never made:

Theresa May was right on Monday to identify two possibilities for the source of the attack in Salisbury, given that the nerve agent used has been identified as of original Russian manufacture.

Theresa May's careful wording "of a type developed by Russia" does not imply a specific agent nor Russian manufacturing. Corbyn fell into the trap.

What we are seeing here with the Skripal incident and the "Novichok" claims is a gigantic propaganda campaign comparable to the 2001 Anthrax scare in the U.S. and the whole "weapons of mass destruction" campaign that heralded the U.S./UK war on Iraq.

Provoking Russia further will not end well. Rattlesnakes are shy, but at some point they have no other way out than to bite.

If we want to prevent a unpredictable clash between nuclear armed powers, which could kill millions within just a few moments, we must all publicly voice our doubts and expose the false accusations made against Russia and other countries.

---

Previous Moon of Alabama pieces on the Skripal case:

Posted by b on March 16, 2018 at 12:26 PM | Permalink

Comments next page "

Steve , Mar 16, 2018 12:48:41 PM | 1

I doubt the masses of the West is capable of standing up to their government. They have been cowed. It is a pessimistic acknowledgement but I don't think anything short of hot war at home could wake up the average European or American any more. Heaven knows the kind of chemical that has been mixed with their food, but my observation is that most Westerners have become apathetic. And there is no leader to show them the way. Like Barack Obama, if Jeremy Corbyn becomes the Prime Minister of the UK he would be a disappointment. You have seen the sign of it.
Mike Maloney , Mar 16, 2018 1:03:10 PM | 5
The Skripal propaganda offensive is likely designed to soften up European and American voters for the long-sought bombing of Damascus. The French foreign ministry is making threats again today . The good news is that McMaster is rumored to be on his way out the door.
farm ecologist , Mar 16, 2018 1:08:17 PM | 6
"There must be other reasons why Skripal was killed"

If he had died, wouldn't that be announced loudly and repeatedly? Even if he was still seriously ill this long after the incident you'd think we would hear something about it. The silence is deafening, no?

james , Mar 16, 2018 1:09:58 PM | 7
thanks b.. you are covering all the bases here.... it is a clear frame up with serious ramifications...why the politicians of the west are so intent on this begs the question.. who are these politicians working for?? it clearly is not in the interest of its citizens...

that is a shame corbyn has also folded... using these terms ""of a type developed by Russia" is so flimsy as to generally not even require a response, but may as leader of the uk and other world leaders have been quick to cast blame on russia without providing any proof.. we are at the same place we were at with the war on iraq - which has been proven to be based on false premises... the big difference is russia is not iraq... i can't believe the leaders of the west are this stupid and subservient to the interests of moving towards ww3 here...

my own thought is this has been in the works all along.. frame russia... russia stopped the regime change game and for that they must be punished... the shit is going to hit the fan and we will be lucky to avert it... these bimbos for world leaders need to be removed, now as opposed to later - but there appears to be no one to replace them..

pantaraxia , Mar 16, 2018 1:11:48 PM | 8
On Sunday, the 4th of March, Skripal and his daughter were found unconscious on a public bench in Salisbury, England. ...
Only on March 8 did the case start to make larger waves.

So what happened in the interim that caused the Russia hysteria? As I pointed out in the previous thread, on March 6 Browder began giving testimony to a UK Commons select committee where he stated it was a "Kremlin hit" and "I believe they want to kill me. They haven't figured out a way yet where they can kill me and get away with it." As The Times put it: "Since he said that, suspicions have deepened that the Russian state was behind the poisoning..."

hopehely , Mar 16, 2018 1:12:04 PM | 9
They could suffer from botulism. That could explain neurotoxin poisoning symptoms (including paralysis) without doctors and nurses being affected. Still does not explain how that police officer got it. Hm.
Marshalldoc , Mar 16, 2018 1:21:31 PM | 11
Responding to 'Steve'; 'cowed' suggests 'beaten into submission' but my take (as a U.S. citizen & resident for nearly 70 years) is that 'buffaloed' is more apt. American's faith in the leaders & sources we've trusted (wrongly) to provide us the information needed to maintain a functional democracy have now been proven to be unworthy of that faith.

50% of registered voters couldn't even muster the interest in the '16 elections to bother to vote and that outcome was determined by a archaic body formed to insure the continued rule of white supremacist Christian male land owners (and, oh boy! Did they win big on that one!). The 'official media outlets' (NYT, WaPo, MSNBC, CNN, Faux[NOT]News, etc.) have all been shown to be highly partisan propaganda organs on a par with Soviet Russia's 'Pravda' (WaPo is commonly called 'Pravda on the Potomac') so we've also been entirely 'gaslighted' and the vast majority are adrift, not knowing what to believe or how to sort out reasonable 'alternative' news outlets (e.g.; ConsortiumNews, this site, RT, MPN, Telesur, etc. - IMO) from outlets spouting hysterical propaganda (e.g.; InfoWars, Media Matters - IMO). In the absence of trustworthy leaders or news sources I think the majority of my fellow citizens find themselves either too paralyzed with indecision to make decisive choices other than to abandon themselves to their 'Party of choice' and 'go with the flow'.

... Americans might begin seeing U.S. regime-change operations, among other disastrous foreign policy choices, in a different light. Had we ever suffered the direct consequences of war on our territory, we might be more empathetic with those upon whom we unleash our 'democracy promotion'. But, these things haven't happened so the vast majority of Americans are emotionally 'removed' from such empathy, or for some like the NeoCons' "better them than us" & "well, they deserve it". The American political system is entirely broken and dysfunctional. I see nothing hopeful in the future.

Geoff , Mar 16, 2018 1:22:05 PM | 12
I guess everybody is aware of the potential rhyming of history with this "attempted" assassination. So good to refer to Saker's latest, I find that though he is not a native to the US, his observations concur with many of those I have made on my own in my adult life regarding life and the inhabitants and the cultural starus quo regarding life in America.

Arguments that seem to ring true to nature are much more plausible to me than the "propaganda" emanating from the UK and it's allies, but many of my friends and relatives are impossible to speak to at this point, they seem to me so "off centered." It's not difficult to comprehend how an entire culture can be whipped up into an irrational unexamined frenzy.

I'd forgive it completely if I didn't think that it was partly due to the habitual making of poor choices, wherther coerced through societal pressure, or by personal convenience, mainly for short term gain, and over a long period of time. Perhaps Peter Lavell is right in his hypothesis that wars begin from a loss of prestige? Well, that and trade wars traditionally escalate? I wonder what will happen next, every day, things are getting worse to quote the Jamaican song.

mina , Mar 16, 2018 1:23:32 PM | 13
maybe west wants to say that chems are new normal because more evidence of ksa Syrian rebels involved with it everyday

daughter's symptoms are exactly same as nerve gas used on Yemeni demonstrators in sanaa back in 2011, check the vids

pantaraxia , Mar 16, 2018 1:24:18 PM | 14
Now a murder investigation has been launched into the death of Nikolai Glushkov. a close associate of Boris Berezovsky (purported to be his right hand man) who was found dead on Monday.

Police launch murder inquiry over death of Nikolai Glushkov
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/16/police-launch-inquiry-over-death-of-nikolai-glushkov

The Met police's counter-terrorism command, which has led the investigation from the outset, was retaining its lead role in the investigation "because of the associations Mr Glushkov is believed to have had", the force said.

"At this stage there is nothing to suggest any link to the attempted murders in Salisbury, nor any evidence that he was poisoned," the police said in a statement.

Nothing to see here folks.

likklemore , Mar 16, 2018 1:25:15 PM | 15
Thanks b for your continued heavy lifting. Btw, other serious journalists are now citing your diligence on this plot.

Yes, I 'm in on the dots to the Steele dossier "likely" that Skripal was very helpful and must be silenced; his daughter too since he may have confessed to his part.

Falling apart it is. How was The Mirror, (UK), allowed to publish this article?

Before it is pulled, take a read. Below are just snips.

The Dark Secrets of Porton Down: Inside controversial defence lab which developed VX nerve agent and used human 'guinea pigs'
More than 20,000 people have been tested on at the top secret lab which is concentrating on gas attack defences
LINK

It is one of Britain's most secretive sites, remaining shrouded in mystery for more than 100 years. [.]

The 7,000 acre site, near Salisbury, is one of the UK's most secretive and controversial military research facilities and the oldest chemical warfare research installations in the world.

Scientists from Porton were among the first to create biological weapons as well as one of the world's most lethal chemical weapons, but now its main purpose is to support the military and help combat terrorism.

Porton Down opened in 1916 as the War Department Experimental Station for testing chemical weapons during WW1.

Scientists at the lab researched and developed weapons agents used by the British military during the war such as chlorine, mustard gas and phosgene.[.]

The base was later named the Chemical Defence Experimental Establishment.

Chemical weapons were tested on site. Scientists built cannisters full of poison gas that could be released by a timer and they also filled shells with it and released them at targets.

But many of the shells failed to explode meaning the fields are still full of the active chemical agents.

Now Porton concentrates on devising defensive measures against gas attacks after its chemical and biological weapons programme was closed down in the 1950s.

On the government's website it says: "To help develop effective medical countermeasures and to test systems, we produce very small quantities of chemical and biological agents.

"They are stored securely and disposed of safely."[.]

Human experiments

Since 1916 more than 20,000 people have taken part in studies at the base. Porton Down's experiments on humans have been widely criticised as it is alleged some human 'guinea pigs' were duped into taking part in tests. Tests were carried out on servicemen to try and determine the effects of nerve agents on humans - with one recorded death due to a nerve gas experiment.
Leading Aircraftman Ronald Maddison died aged 20 in 1953 after taking part in sarin nerve agent toxicity tests. .[.]

Viruses

Initial samples of the Ebola virus were sent to the Porton Down lab in 1976. The lab now allegedly contains samples of some of the world's most aggressive diseases including Ebola, anthrax and the plague.[.]

Aerial release trials

Between 1953 and 1976 a number of aerial release trials were carried out to help the government understand how a biological attack might spread across the UK. The government said: "Given the international situation at the time these trials were conducted in secret." And added: "The information obtained from these trials has been and still is vital to the defence of the UK."

Two separate and independent reviews concluded the trials did not have any adverse health effects on the UK population.[.]

Aliens

There has been speculation over the years that alien bodies could be hidden at the sight. But the government has said: "No aliens, either alive or dead have ever been taken to Porton Down or any other Defence Science and Technology Laboratory site."

... ... ...

ken , Mar 16, 2018 1:27:07 PM | 16
Sorry but IMO no one is FALLING into a trap. These people know what they're doing. One gets tired of hearing how Trump has been trapped into provoking Russia. Paul Craig Roberts seems to believe it but after watching his actions I don't buy it at all. He never had any intentions of settling with Russia nor easing out of the empire wars.

You are correct about the apparent connection between TV shows and what's happening. Same thing with 9/11. Remember when Condsleazy Rice said they never considered Airplanes used to fly into buildings... Then look at the TV show premier Lone Gunman?

Everything in the West is scams and/or lies. Nothing the governments put out, whether economics or geopolitics are even close to accurate. The west is owned lock, stock and barrel by the central banks are fascism economically and very nearly Nazism politically. Their citizens are unskilled, uneducated, and have very little in the way of cognitive skills,,, all necessary for tyrants to exist in the open as they do today.

Very good analysis b. Too bad reading comprehension in the West is at a 3rd grade level.

Noirette , Mar 16, 2018 1:31:04 PM | 17
Without a good description of the toxin / poisonous substance / other agent, it is not possible to speculate. I read that Yulia, on the bench, was vomiting, had lost control of her bowels, and was conscious. It sounded to me like mushroom poisoning. (Not ricin, anthrax, sarin ) The only clue commensurate with 'nerve gas' or some other poison that could act rapidly through skin by touch / contact (touching the ill person, a contaminated surface, etc.) is that a policeman fell ill, but where is he, what are his symptoms, and how is he doing? Maybe that was just hype, etc. (see b, top post.) This is contradictory - as b points out - with the Doc not being affected in the least. (I'm not a toxicologist, this is just common sense.)

Point is, if I stated that some cooking, veggie identification mistake, or some attempted mayhem with mushrooms possibly as an insult miscalculated gone very wrong is what took place here, nobody could disprove or even seriously challenge my theory, for now. (Not saying that took place, only that there are no facts, no way of judging.)

The reaction of GB Gvmt., then the US, France, etc. is another matter altogether, in the present climate it is par for the course. A Russian ex-spy almost dying (if that is the case?) is obviously to be laid at the door of arch-devil Putin. This type of hysteria is actually a sign of weakness, of bewilderment, of not knowing where to turn, what to do, etc., and exploiting situations in the silliest ways. The UK at any rate has gone past a peak propaganda point, imhho.

Norumbega , Mar 16, 2018 1:40:44 PM | 18
I don't see a link for the account of the doctor who administered first aid. Great analysis. This is only something I noticed diving into the article a second time.
james , Mar 16, 2018 1:55:35 PM | 20
@18 norumbega... google is your friend.. here is a link to what you ask about...bbc below... http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43326734
the pessimist , Mar 16, 2018 2:03:28 PM | 21
Very reminiscent of the MH17 campaign that was used to bully the reluctant Europeans into imposing sanctions on Russia. Accusations were made and a narrative put forward immediately without presenting clear evidence or waiting for an investigation.

Through repetition this narrative has become dogma in the West despite the fact that supporting evidence has still not been forthcoming. It seems that after 9-11 it became clear that quickly putting out a narrative, with the support of the press, and demonizing anyone with any public stature who questions the basic story could be successful, even when there were thousands of eye witnesses and many flaws in the official explanation. The facts, or what really happened no longer matter once the narrative has taken root.

My question is what kinds of threats are being used to keep potential dissenters in line now. French banks were punished over the mistrial deal and it was abandoned. Now the stakes seem to be higher and the risk of defections has increased, so what is the stick?

jayc , Mar 16, 2018 2:05:53 PM | 22
Jonathan Freeland at The Guardian writes today that while due process and rules of evidence are a foundation of democracy, they do not apply in this case because Putin is diabolically evil. Freeland claims that since the responsibility for this "chemical weapons attack" is obvious, no delay should be permitted to suss out the silly details - because the evil Russians and their western enablers will use the time to "fog" the minds of the western peoples and seed doubt. He proposes immediate action to isolate the "murderous tyrant", through blacklists, freezing bank accounts, and unspecified action to counteract the intent to exploit "democratic and legal traditions as weaknesses." (i.e. - calls for more clarity play into Putin's hands).

The above is fascist twaddle, aimed at common citizens and also directly at Corbyn. Freeland should be called out as such, I believe The Guardian limited its comment section for a reason (other western media outlets have done the same over the past year). It seems whipping up this non-story was at least 50% directed at Corbyn and reflects domestic UK politics, but has taken a life of its own. The May government likely did not think out possible consequences of going code red, and if Craig Murray's sources are correct that the "findings" of the CW specialists are compromised intelligence produced under pressure, then some seismic backlash may yet await. Certainly Freeland felt the need to bring up the 2003 experiences, if only to argue its not the same. The abject mediocrity of the politicians and many of their supporters in the media is acute, and there's a real good chance they will impale themselves on their own swords.

CF , Mar 16, 2018 2:09:06 PM | 23
When progressive, social programs only have spineless, timid fools like Corbyn and Sanders to front them, it is no wonder why so many socialist states states have been founded by psychopaths like Lenin.
psychohistorian , Mar 16, 2018 2:10:52 PM | 24
Thank you for continuing to raise your voice about the ongoing myth making in our world. Are we ever going to discuss the Western social contract that has an elite cabal owning the global financial system and everything else forever and ever? That is where the power comes from that is fueling our sick world, IMO
Krollchem , Mar 16, 2018 2:13:43 PM | 25
Background on the tangled RUSI web: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_United_Services_Institute

Patron: Her Majesty Elizabeth II
President: HRH the Duke of Kent, Lt. Col. Rtd.
Chairman: The Rt Hon the Lord Hague of Richmond
Senior Vice President: General David Petraeus, US Army. Rtd .

More connections to the web can be found at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_think_tanks_in_the_United_Kingdom

Anon , Mar 16, 2018 2:36:54 PM | 27
Its disgusting to see how all the western media, states use this incident as a warmongering effort. These people are really sick in their heads. Also, note how propaganda works in the west, EVERY JOURNALIST, EVERY POLITICIAN toe with the propaganda line, isn't it amazing? Not only how it works but that there is NO DISSENT? Heinous!

'Skripal case helps divert attention from Brexit' – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53XCYOFBQ7Q

james , Mar 16, 2018 2:39:45 PM | 28
@22 jayc.. i wonder if freeland is any relation to our foreign minister here in canada - crystia freeland? she's also a real buffoon whenever the word russia leaves her lips...

i liked this quote from rt..

""Frankly speaking, in international practice we never encountered such behavior at the state level when very serious accusations are being brought up against a country – our country in this case – with such wording as 'apparently,' 'most likely' and so on," the press secretary said. Such an approach "contradicts not only international law, but common sense as a whole," he added. quote from Dmitry Peskov

paul , Mar 16, 2018 2:42:43 PM | 30
What sounds more and more like war fever is becoming quite frightening. But it's interesting to see that people are still sneering at those who point out that we appear to be on the verge of war, as they have been sneering for years. We've been at this precipice for a long time. The difference is that now we seem to be toeing the edge. In the end it is all theater though, bloody theater. The end goal is the same as ever, a global police state, an Orwellian world.
xor , Mar 16, 2018 2:43:34 PM | 31
Jeremy Corbyn: " Theresa May was right on Monday to identify two possibilities for the source of the attack in Salisbury, given that the nerve agent used has been identified as of original Russian manufacture. Either this was a crime authored by the Russian state; or that state has allowed these deadly toxins to slip out of the control it has an obligation to exercise. If the latter, a connection to Russian mafia-like groups that have been allowed to gain a toehold in Britain cannot be excluded.

On Wednesday the prime minister ruled out neither option. Which of these ultimately prove to be the case is a matter for police and security professionals to determine. Hopefully the next step will be the arrest of those responsible. "

I don't see any signs that the statement is manipulated or not of Corbyn's writing. What a disappointment he is! Instead of keeping his back straight, as b correctly pointed out, he completely folded into the anti-Russia frenzy. Without a shred of proof it's the Russian government be it directly or indirectly through Russian mafia. What about MI5/6 creating a desired political situation or as stated earlier by b, suicide or preventing a handover of some sort (remember to what lengths the USA went with Snowden, Miranda and Morales). Corbyn just proved to be a sellout just like any other politician in power.

Pnyx , Mar 16, 2018 2:55:59 PM | 32
"If we want to prevent a unpredictable clash between nuclear armed powers, which could kill millions within just a few moments, we must all publicly voice our doubts and expose the false accusations made against Russia and other countries." Exactly. I strongly hope many more will do so. By now Boris 'the menace' Johnson accuses Putin personally. This man wants to go down history as the one who ignited the world.
Anonymous , Mar 16, 2018 2:56:36 PM | 33
In December 2017, the BBC was given unprecedented access to Porton Down. They produced a 1 hour documentary on the place including details on animal and human experimentation. The video was available up to a few days ago. It has now been removed. Original BBC page - video not available: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07hx40t Video link at head of this page: [Edit: the page itself is now unavailable] http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/inside-porton-down-britains-controversial-12192830 It is still available here: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x65otqg
james , Mar 16, 2018 3:08:46 PM | 34
@31 xor... corbyn could have said a lot of things... what i find amazing is it has to be russia.. no consideration that another state player would consider such a thing - like ukraine which clearly has an axe to grind with russia, under their present us masters, or israel, which are unhappy with the changes that haven't worked out according to plan in syria... they are at the top of the list of possibilities... corbyn is showing himself to be another stooge (- not stoge ghosthip!) for the empire..
Perimetr , Mar 16, 2018 3:18:24 PM | 35
The UK government is manufacturing its nerve agent case for 'action' on Russia
Anon , Mar 16, 2018 3:21:33 PM | 36
paul

Indeed, note also that it is "of course" Russia's fault that we are on the verge of war, rather NOT the hysterical anti-russian stance past years no no move on, sigh.

b , Mar 16, 2018 3:21:46 PM | 37
@Bakerpete - I hear the the English team will boycott the World Cup after the group stage.

@farm ecologist - I have corrected that "killed" in my piece. It was wrong. Thanks for pointing it out.

@pantaraxia - I didn't know of that Browder connection. Sounds plausible.

@likklemore - , other serious journalists are now citing your diligence on this plot.
Who would that be? Also: Please don't quote news-sources at such length

@Noirette - yes, there are several other explanations for the Skripal's falling ill. The first local reports (link in my first piece) said that Fentanyl had been found at the bench. Other (unrelated) reports show that it is quite available in Salisbury.

@Norumbega - I don't see a link for the account of the doctor who administered first aid.
The doctor part is in the BBC piece linked some lines before that passage

ben , Mar 16, 2018 3:38:28 PM | 38
The "Russia did it" meme becomes more and more shrill and desperate every day. Trump's reticence is because he owes Russians mucho money, not because of any thing else. Business uber alles for him. Screw the working scum of the U$A and the globe.

The empire needs enemies to justify the hundreds of billions given to the MIC corporations. Enemies will continue to be manufactured. Screw the needs of the people.

Peter AU 1 , Mar 16, 2018 3:46:36 PM | 39
From Craig Murray's article and from a comment I found at anther site, it seems likely that Portland Down have established that the poison used (or at least detected on the sample tested) was an AChE inhibitor. Apparently other tests can be adapted to check for an AChE inhibitor. Nerve agents designed for CW are AChE inhibitors, but so are all the chemicals in this very long list at wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetylcholinesterase_inhibitor.
Piotr Berman , Mar 16, 2018 3:48:46 PM | 40
Barring such scenarios like announcing a discovery of nerve poison when some mild poison was added to food that Skripals ate just by state fiat, probably some "Novichok" matching published molecular structure was made, and as surmised by experts before, the stuff is not particularly lethal -- you should not add Roundup to your food either, but if you do, there is still some hope; using Novichok instead of soy souse may be similar.

If the molecules were indeed "Novichok" and not particularly lethal, it is very hard to fathom why Russians would resort to it. One can imagine a diabolic plot to discredit western governments by causing the latter to go ape, but really, isn't it enough to watch and comment what they do already?

One argument for Russian involvement is that while many intelligence agencies would be capable of doing it, only Russians would be sufficiently barbaric and brutal to go with something like that. Civilized countries would use different methods. Drones. A team of 48 assassins with poisonous injections, administered to the target in a quiet hotel room without disturbing the public (take that, drones!). And, in the name of Norway, they NEVER do it in bucolic suburbs.

laninya , Mar 16, 2018 3:59:39 PM | 41
@ pantaraxia (8)
@b (37)
"..on March 6 Browder began giving testimony to a UK Commons select committee where he stated it was a "Kremlin hit" and "I believe they want to kill me. They haven't figured out a way yet where they can kill me and get away with it."

Browder!? Given that guy's history and background, the fact his name comes up in connection with this at all makes him #1 suspect, to my mind. He's a master at getting away with murder by dragging the red herrings of Putin and Russia across the trail.

Peter AU 1 , Mar 16, 2018 4:00:11 PM | 42
40
As yet the UK has been unable to give OPCW the molecular structure or chemical makeup of the poison. UK representative gave a statement to OPCW including the UK 'evidence". This included neither designation code of a known substance nor chemical makeup of an unknown substance.
Bakerpete , Mar 16, 2018 4:02:37 PM | 43
Considering that this crap is not very solid for May I was wondering how far she would go to keep this from blowing back on her. Do the father and daughter die? If they are allowed to recover how will they be presented to the media? Then I had a really frightening thought; what if the police officer dies? Then all bets are off and no amount of real evidence will fix this.
Ant. , Mar 16, 2018 4:11:53 PM | 44
@the pessimist (21)

To me, this is more reminiscent of the justification of the Iraq invasion Version 2.

Saddam's Iraq was required to prove they did NOT have chemical weapons to lift crippling sanctions regimes, rather than western governments bearing the onus of proving Iraq DID have chemical weapons. As usual, the west made lots of grandiose accusations but little in the way of credible evidence.

Theresa May is doing the same thing, demanding the Russian Federation show cause why they shouldn't be regarded as being guilty as sin (although I don't understand why anyone would think Russian operatives would be so unprofessional as to use a nerve agent that could be linked to their home country rather than simply shoot him and make it look like a robbery gone wrong... like Seth Rich?).

It's the same trick / tactic. It's very difficult to prove a negative, if not downright impossible.

So much for innocent until proven guilty, a bedrock of jurisprudence pretty much the world over. Western governments don't seem to able to live up to their own self-declared principles.

Skeletor , Mar 16, 2018 4:14:58 PM | 45
The best article you've ever written. My goodness! Thank you Sir
Piotr Berman , Mar 16, 2018 4:15:37 PM | 46
Re Peter AU 1@42

I guess that this is the only strategy Her Majesty Government may have. Whatever the formula, OPCW would have to give the only possible opinion that it had to be produced by a secret lab that could be located in at least 50 different countries. UK and Russia had easier time locating Skripals than most, but they were not living in hiding, so any international reporter could track them (some passing command of Russian and English highly recommended, but not necessary).

Next, OPCW could actually test the substance, and in case of mediocre lethality (poor rats sacrificed in testing!), the case of distinct "Russian" brutality of the incident would be rather weak, and the suspicions could be directed at the civilized countries.

Jen , Mar 16, 2018 4:26:16 PM | 47
Hopehely @ 9:

I've also come to a similar conclusion as you have, that the Skripals were hit by food poisoning. It is known that they went to Zizzi's in Salisbury for a seafood risotto lunch. For those who don't live in the UK or have not visited there (both apply to me), the restaurant is part of the Zizzi restaurant franchise in the UK. I've been told by a UK-based commenter at The New Kremlin Stooge blog that the food (Italian cuisine) is vile.

Botulism might be possible - it doesn't cause unconsciousness but it does cause eyelids to droop so the victim appears to look unconscious - and ciguatera poisoning (symptoms include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and various neurological symptoms that can last for years) from eating fish is also a possibility. Shellfish poisoning is another possibility. Cooking does not remove or destroy the toxins.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciguatera
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paralytic_shellfish_poisoning

If we assume though that the Skripals poisoned themselves at home (accidentally or deliberately), then between the time they left home, had lunch (during which time they apparently had to wait 40 minutes for their meal), then went to a local pub for drinks and went to the shopping mall park bench, and the time they were found unconscious, with Julia Skripal vomiting, fitting and defecating, at least 90 - 120 minutes (up to 2 hours then) must have passed. They are now in Salisbury District Hospital in a critical condition.

Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey goes to their home after the Skripals are found, finds something and passes out almost straight away. He is also being treated in Salisbury District Hospital. His condition is serious but not critical. He apparently is able to talk although AFAIK no-one outside the police has been able to interview him.

Compare and contrast his condition with the Skripals' condition. I think it is very likely that what contaminated the police officer is not the same thing that afflicts the Skripals. Could Bailey have been used to plant something at the Skripals' home and in doing so contaminated himself?

Also we must ask why the Skripals have not been moved to a specialist hospital.

james , Mar 16, 2018 4:44:12 PM | 48
@bakerpete.. the sad part, aside from those possibilities - are the many innocent people who have died as a result of war, the war on iraq that blair and bush authored for one.. does Britain want a repeat of that here? looks like they are crazy enough, given their political leaders at this moment..
somebody , Mar 16, 2018 4:52:53 PM | 49
Corbyn is doing ok. Like everybody else he is using this incident for politics. In this case to attack Russian donations to the Conservative Party.
the pair , Mar 16, 2018 4:53:04 PM | 50
i have to say there are more salient and intelligent points made in this comment section than the entirety of US MSM. a low bar, but still noteworthy.

i immediately thought of the reptilian brit wanker who said "russia is at our doorstep fer realz! moar military welfare plz!" a week or so before this incident. in lieu of any actual threat, this litvinenko redux was thrown together. also the steele dossier. and syria.

there are so many moving parts to the anti-russia(/china) machine that it's difficult to pinpoint which cog is turning the hardest.

what stands out to me for the UK specifically (besides another disappointing case of corbyn lacking spine to match his heart) is that the same western media and politicians who over the past months have painted may as a "BrexitTard" (when she's actually just a typical neoliberaltard) and mocked her obvious lack of leadership qualities (or even basic intellect) are suddenly treating her as a pasty version of colin powell holding his little vial. ditto boris johnson who has been derided as "brit trump" but overnight has credibility because "the enemy of russia is my friend". i guess if they can rehab subhuman neocons like kristol and frum then anyone can get a "cold war makeover".

as for WWIII and such, i try to stay positive. there are still a lot of rich twats with money invested in various russian ventures and china would definitely join in on russia's side if nukes became a real possibility. alone, a stalemate in war with the west. together, start watching "the road" and adapting your favorite recipes for human meat since that's all we'll have to eat. plus you can always count on good old fashioned western cowardice should the draft be reinstated and rejected by the coddled masses.

karlof1 , Mar 16, 2018 5:05:41 PM | 51
Jen @47--

Excellent points! The cui bono question's answer is those wanting at all/any costs to keep the Unipolar status of the Outlaw US Empire intact--an impossible task given the resources of the Multipolar Alliance.

I see many parallels to 911's aftermath and the MH17 shootdown in this Big Lie promotion. Unfortunately, I don't see relations improving for quite a long time.

claudeS , Mar 16, 2018 5:07:10 PM | 52
We know that the western " advisers " in Aleppo were exfiltrated through buses with opaque windows when the city went back to the Syrian state. The Russians allowed this. Now they are so angry that they probably have refused the same thing to happen for the advisers still in Ghouta. Wouldn't this explain a lot of things?
Permafrost , Mar 16, 2018 5:09:32 PM | 53
Seeing the first photo, becomes very easy to know the origin of White Helmets: the seed never falls too far from the tree. Bunch of incompetent idiots! They do not even get a picture with a minimum of credibility? Are the English people so stupid as to swallow this shit?
Hoarsewhisperer , Mar 16, 2018 5:16:12 PM | 54
If we want to prevent a unpredictable clash between nuclear armed powers, which could kill millions within just a few moments, we must all publicly voice our doubts and expose the false accusations made against Russia and other countries.

With due respect, I beg to differ. If we must all publicly - do - anything let's choose something measurable with a permanent long-term benefit. Western Democracy has been infected with a cancer called Neoliberalism (= Privatise Everything). It can be treated, and cured, by demanding that our local MPs propose, endorse, and PASS Laws making it illegal for politicians to accept, and for anyone at all to offer, 'political donations'. Refusal to do so may safely be interpreted as a reliable indicator that he/she is representing the interests of an entity other than the people who voted for him/her and should step down so that The People can select a trustworthy replacement.

That's Step 1 towards disinfecting Democracy and until The People have gotten off their asses and tried it, I don't want to hear, and won't listen to, any more feeble-minded whingeing about 'bad' government.

somebody , Mar 16, 2018 5:17:15 PM | 55
The truth on the British Russian scene is coming out slowly. This here is the BBC
When Britain wanted to extradite ex-KGB agent Andrei Lugovoi over the death of Kremlin critic Alexander Litvinenko, the press noted that Mr Lugovoi had been linked to a supposed escape attempt for Glushkov in 2001.

So Glushkov was killed after the Salisbury incident same as Berezovsky (Glushov's partner) got killed after the Litvinenko case.

Both the Litvinenko case or the Skripal case either completely incompetent or planned to cause a public crisis.

Red Ryder , Mar 16, 2018 5:29:44 PM | 56
Syria is a war of direct conflict between Russia and the US. It also is a war of proxies used by both sides.

Russia seems to have taken revenge/payback for the PMC Wagner deaths dealt out by CENTCOM a month ago.

"All 7 U.S. Troops Aboard Helicopter Killed in Crash in Iraq."

Some reports have it at 9 dead. "The aircraft, a modified version of the Black Hawk helicopter, is also used by Special Operations pararescue specialists." https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/16/us/politics/seven-troops-killed-helicopter-crash-iraq.html

Coverup in full process. Ain't the first time in Syria nor will it be the last.

Syria requires a decisive victory by one side or the other. How much pain can the US take? We already know the Russians feel pain differently. They show it with their heroic acts of immolation rather than capture. For Russia, Syria is not an option. It is as necessary to be there as it is to have Crimea and the port for the Black Sea Fleet. Russia has returned to the ME, to the Mediterranean, to North Africa (Egypt-Libya).

The US refuses to accept Russia as a great power. When it finally takes notice of the body count from payback that is coming, from tactics that cannot win in Syria, from a strategy based on hegemony and Exceptionalist ideology, then the US will retreat. Syria will be decided by missiles (and missile defenses). That is why it is clear, Russia will prevail.

Petri Krohn , Mar 16, 2018 5:44:16 PM | 57
Here is a scenario:
  1. Maybe the Skripals were poisoned for some unrelated reason. Or they simply overdosed on fentanyl.
  2. The event was piggybacked a few days later for promoting the War on Russia. Traces of some 'novichok' agent were left around Salisbury to be found by Porton Down experts.

This may be a bit too complex to pass Occam's razor. But suppose there is an opportunistic infowar operation just waiting for the right trigger event to launch their false-flag spin.

karlof1 , Mar 16, 2018 5:57:23 PM | 58
Andrew Korybko's view of events is rather different:

"Rather, an unemotional reading of the international situation reveals that this conclusion [imminent end of world] is hyperbole, and that all previous indicators suggested that events would expectedly move in this direction. Instead of being "out of control", everything is actually "under control" -- the US and its allies are only doing what Russia had already predicted they would, and it's difficult to imagine that anyone in the Kremlin is surprised by the latest twists and turns in the New Cold War."

I've noted numerous comic strips reflecting on the issue of truth telling, one asking if it's okay to lie since the President and media lie all the time; the answer being no, it's never okay to lie--5 during this past week alone.

Pepe Escobar's been busy thus week with 3 articles published at atimes.com, 2 related to BRI, while this one examines why it's Putin's fault that he continues to win.

Fatima Manoubia , Mar 16, 2018 6:02:37 PM | 59
"We know that the western " advisers " in Aleppo were exfiltrated through buses with opaque windows when the city went back to the Syrian state. The Russians allowed this. Now they are so angry that they probably have refused the same thing to happen for the advisers still in Ghouta. Wouldn't this explain a lot of things?"

Posted by: claudeS | Mar 16, 2018 5:07:10 PM | 52

Most probably. Indeed, I think the Russians should retaliate by disclosing once for all the "real" role of the US and "its allies" in Syria, to the knowledge of all the US and, especially, European citizens who have suffered and have been submitted to martial law on account of the same terrorists they are supporting, trainning, arming and advising in Syria. This issue of falsely accusing Russia has gone too far.

BTW, that not only were "advisors" who fled from Alepo, but when the "Baba Amro caliphate" fell down to the SAA, some UK and French spies disguised as journalist of very renown media were caught and allowed to leave through a corridor straight to Lebanon in a truce...That was at the very beginning of the war....

Ant. , Mar 16, 2018 6:10:12 PM | 60
@Petri (57)

More correctly, William of Ockham's Razor, or even Aristotle's, the first documented exposition of the Law of Parsimony. No such person as Occam, an invention. See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

michael d , Mar 16, 2018 6:14:42 PM | 61
I don't think there was a slow response to the event. Rather the press seemed remarkably well prepped in what was just a temporary closure of an A&E for non-urgent customers. Plenty of TV and radio coverage on the same day. Lots more coverage the next day. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-43289194

True there was a drip drip feed of news, and direct references to Senior Sources waited for a few days. But it all seemed pretty well staged managed to me.

As well as Craig Murray's good comments on "of a type developed by Russia", I'd also add that I have yet to see any official with a name and a title actually say it was Novichok or even a nerve agent. May says her intelligence services say so. No one says it in their own name. Very like WMD.

Petri Krohn , Mar 16, 2018 6:36:22 PM | 62
IRAN DID IT! There is a publication online from November 2016 by Iranian scientists that describes the synthesis of Novichok agents. The paper includes precise synthesis instructions, including where to source the raw materials. The synthesized compounds may not be the exact ones most suitable for weaponization, but they resemble A-230 sited A-242 in the literature.
Hosseini, S. E., Saeidian, H., Amozadeh, A., Naseri, M. T., and Babri, M. (2016) Fragmentation pathways and structural characterization of organophosphorus compounds related to the Chemical Weapons Convention by electron ionization and electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom., 30: 2585–2593. doi: 10.1002/rcm.7757.

All the chemicals required for the microsynthesis of O-alkyl N-[bis(dimethylamino)methylidene]-P-methylphosphonamidates were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO, USA), Fluka (Neu-Ulm, Germany), and Merck (Darmstadt, Germany), and were used as received. Methylphosphonic difluoride (Scheme 1, cpd 1) was synthesized by use of a method described elsewhere.[18] Isopropanol-d6 was prepared by reduction of acetone-d6 by sodium borohydride.[19]

Unlike the other articles in the Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry journal this article is available for free with all diagrams.

Petri Krohn , Mar 16, 2018 7:02:44 PM | 65
...continued from 62 . Thanks to Charles Wood for finding the Iranian article on Novichok agents. More on the Iranian work here:
Iranian chemists identify Russian chemical warfare agents - Ryan De Vooght-Johnson, Spectroscopy now, Jan. 1, 2017

The Iranian researchers synthesised five 'Novichok' agents, along with four deuterated analogues. They were all O-alkyl N-[bis(dimethylamino)methylidene]-P-methylphosphonamidate compounds (i.e. molecules with the typical nerve agent phosphorus group coupled to N,N,N'N'-tetramethylguanidine). The O-alkyl group was varied, with the methoxy, ethoxy, isopropoxy, phenoxy, and 2,6-dimethylphenoxy derivatives being prepared. The syntheses were carried out on a micro-scale in order to minimize exposure.

Oscar Romero , Mar 16, 2018 7:06:43 PM | 67
What if the "policeman" was actually the one who administered the poison and they just call him a policeman?
Robert Snefjella , Mar 16, 2018 7:12:04 PM | 68
The 'Skripal affair' is yet another chapter in a very long and inept but mesmerizing for many western geo-political 'soap opera', but without the soap. The constant theme: Russia is the enemy. And Russia really is the enemy, because it alone has effectively stood militarily up to the explicit adopted US geo-political doctrine of global military 'Full Spectrum Dominance'; also, Russia is an effective opposition to the implicit ambition of the insane western dominant-oligarchic-network of achieving global financial, political, and cultural 'full spectrum dominance'.

Now there are numerous sub-stories – agendas – involved, but what they amount to are many threads in the playing out of what appears to be turning out to be an unsuccessful attempt at centralized global totalitarianism. Russia is out of western control.

The completely unhinged 'Russia did it' outpouring of bs obsession of much of the American establishment and media in response to the Trump election glitch, again, is at core a recognition that Russia really is the enemy: the enemy of GMO food, the enemy of molesting children, the enemy of the western militaristic depravities, of western mass media's and politics' culture of deception.

And with Russia out of control, China has had a chance to strengthen itself, and straighten its back, and many other countries are trending in that direction. The unipolar ambition is unraveling.

The US dollar as reserve currency, and the US domination of IMF and World Bank are at stake. And sensible populist policies pertaining to finance may begin to infiltrate the debt slavery system that currently dominates and hobbles so many countries.

So I interpret the Skripal affair as a truly pathetic and desperate but thematic ploy that will over time rebound on the liars. The incident will underline the insane extent to which brazen stupid lies are relied upon by the western establishment. Notable is how immediately 'on cue' the foaming at the mouth indignation over Russia's 'terrible deed' has been in much British mass media and among British politicians. The hypocrisy is breathtaking. Was it Orwell who noted that the great English cultural failing was hypocrisy?

All the above doesn't make the situation any less dangerous. Insanity and stupidity are not great qualities for influential people with nuclear weapons to have, or when facing those with nuclear weapons.

VietnamVet , Mar 16, 2018 7:18:15 PM | 69
b

This is an outstanding post. The best and most important article that I have read in the years that I've visited here. I don't know how you do it. I believe that the Skripals were attacked with a nerve poison; but not the highly toxic binary "newcomer" agent identified by the Prime Minister. This incident is serving two purposes; to silence a likely source for the Steele Dossier and as a False Flag to further scapegoat Russia. It is inconceivable that the Russian Federation did it. This is too dangerous and not in their national interests.

Western democracies have been overthrown by corporate mafia families. The military, intelligence officers, and civil servants, who worked for the public good, have vanished. The hysteria is so great my only conclusion is that the decision has been made to go to war. Withdrawal from Syria is impossible. Last night, NewsHour reported "Syria's war keeps raging, amid threats of a new Hezbollah-Israel conflict". An American war with Iran is inevitable. It will draw in NATO and Russia. This will be five nuclear powers at war. The Apocalypse is inevitable.

james , Mar 16, 2018 7:53:47 PM | 71
interesting post on this topic here with some interesting info, to which i am going to quote - from the comment section..

Paul Greenwood John Jones • 18 hours ago

Dr David Kelly worked at Porton Down, when he informed Andrew Gilligan about his reservations on WMD following inspections in Iraq he was "suicided"

John Jones Paul Greenwood • 17 hours ago

Yes, David Kelly worked physically at Porton Down as part of his job for DSTL at the time. There is a large wiki entry on the Hutton Enquiry and of the post mortum on Dr Kelly https://en.m.wikipedia.org/... Again, worth a read - I suspect a few people have a different interpretation than you on the scientists tragic death .

Paul Greenwood John Jones • 17 hours ago

I am sure they do as they do on Skripal's situation, whatever that might be. Do you know if he is alive/dead/ventilated or in hospital or inside Porton Down ?

John Jones Paul Greenwood • 16 hours ago

From BBC news I understand that both Skripal anf his daughter and the Police Sargeant. are in hospital in Salisbury, I think the PM.even spoke to the Police Sargeant.

I genuinely doubt that the Dstl site at Porton Down has either the hospital nor isolation facilities /protocols needed for a care situation.

Petri Krohn , Mar 16, 2018 7:55:14 PM | 72
Hopehely @9, Jen @47

Question: Did police sergeant Nick Bailey also eat the seafood risotto at the Zizzi restaurant? In fact, did all the 20 people alleged to have been affected have the same dish for lunch?

bevin , Mar 16, 2018 7:59:11 PM | 73
Those criticising Corbyn-for remarks quoted, without context in the media which hates him- are unconsciously succumbing to the Establishment's game which is to use this false flag to crush dissidents and, in particular (at a time when the internal campaign to clear out the Blairite apparatchiki sabotaging the Labour Party is at a climax, with the selection by the NEC of a new full time General Secretary due within a few days) the Labour Left.

The left has never been closer to power in its long history. The British ruling class live in fear of Corbyn declaring independence from the media, the punditocracy, the deep state and the City of London. They fear him because he promises to reform the tax system, renationalise the utilities, clean up the relationshop between Westminster and the kleptocracy, leave the EU and question the purpose of NATO.
These things may not impress anyone here but they make The Establishment in the UK tremble in fear. And their equivalents around Europe too dread the example of a revitalised welfare state, a reversal of Thatcherism and neo-liberalism and one of the main leaders of the Stop the War movement of 2003 coming to power.

If Corbyn uses the opportunity to point out that the crooked oligarchs who hate Putin are hand in glove with the City and the Tories, good luck to him. If he suggests that they may well be involved in assassinations in the UK, he could be right- what he has not claimed is that there is any evidence at all of Russian governmental involvement.

Let's look at the Big Picture: the only people in the US close to power who want war with Russia are the neo-cons. And most of them (Krystol, Boot, Frum etc) are just web cam whores selling warmongering language because it is easy work.). Nobody seriously believes that the full spectrum domination of the globe is anything more than an old pipedream, the last whiff of the Manifest Destiny gas which was almost empty when Frederic J. Turner was a lad.

There will be wars but only where there are no formidable enemies- the USA will fight anyone who doesn't have an air force or long range missiles.

The main enemy of the US ruling class and its equivalents throughout the west and in most of the world is the people -- it is them that they fear and hate. And for ages they have kept them waiting for justice, for their share of the wealth that they have created by claiming that war is coming, that the pocket money for kids, the pension funds, the budget for new hospitals must be spent on weapons, to keep the Yellow Peril or the Red Menace at bay.

It has been crystal clear since 1990 that there is no longer any justification for postponing the peace dividend, guaranteeing basic social and economic rights (eg the Four Freedoms from WW II), addressing the problems of the environment, evicting the exploiter from his place at every family's dinner table; putting an end to those living off the homeless and the unemployed, blackmailing the sick, enslaving the vulnerable.

And those-too many of whom are elderly baby boomers who have become fearful of change- unable to see what needs to be done- and that it needs doing sooner rather than later- that demographic is shrinking, along with newspaper readership, believers in the MSM and those who, with straight faces, can call a choice between Trump and Clinton (and their clones around the world) a political contest.

The bottom line is that, thanks to b and others like him or ready to share these posts, we all know that the Skrival story is bullshit from soup to nuts. We know who benefits from such lies and hysterical campaigns and it is not us, or the rest of the 99% of the world's population who matter..

What they/we want is a community in which we can live together in peace stop wasting our precious lives on the ideology, practice and organisation of war and murderous competition and the first tiny step in that direction involves replacing our evil rulers with people more in tune with our desires and more receptive to our wishes.

posa , Mar 16, 2018 8:05:33 PM | 74
So what's the end game? Is the Predator Class preparing to start Hot War with Russia sometime real soon? Everyone knows that once the shooting starts things would rapidly escalate into a nuclear confrontation that can easily spin out of control? Are we seriously mobilizing down that path? This is shaping up to be worst disaster since the Cuban Crisis which the Deep State also instigated... JFK vowed to terminate the CIA- Deep State and was taken out by the Dulles- CIA Wet Works Division in retaliation.
John Hawk , Mar 16, 2018 8:06:16 PM | 75
The ? was asked above about 'how do all the EU puppets all of a sudden agree with PM May et al?'. Well, maybe one should make a study of how blackmail works...just sayin'...!
harrylaw , Mar 16, 2018 8:28:18 PM | 77
The loss of the Middle East is in prospect for the US, now the UK, France and Germany are proposing to the other EU members, sanctions against Iran because of their missile defence program and 'meddling in the Middle East' an obvious sop to Donald Trump.Why are the UK population being propagandized so much, could this be the reason.....

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials.

Jen , Mar 16, 2018 8:46:51 PM | 78
Petri Krohn @ 72: Depending on who you read or listen to, up to 38 people have reportedly been poisoned but their names have not been released and no photos of them have as yet been released.

It's a pretty strange poison that has varying effects on different people. The doctor who gave first aid was unaffected as well. But the narrative has been inconsistent from one day to the next. This suggests that most of what we are reading, seeing or hearing on the news is being improvised on the fly. We need to reserve judgment on who is responsible until more details become available (if they ever do).

psychohistorian , Mar 16, 2018 8:54:48 PM | 79
@ harrylaw with the quote from Herman Goering

Thanks for that. It is quite obvious that strategy is being used again. Where are the countervailing forces today? Perhaps only you, I and the rest of the 99%

How to get the 99% to stand up and say NO! And as other have written, we need a replacement/upgrade strategy for our governmental leadership so they all work for us and not the 1%.

I derive some pleasure in seeing events seemingly bringing our cultural dysfunction to a crisis, manufactured or otherwise, because the period of social flux provides opportunity for human growth and evolution......will that potential be realized?

frances , Mar 16, 2018 8:57:26 PM | 80
Posted by: xor | Mar 16, 2018 2:43:34 PM | 31
re Corbyn selling out
Is he selling out or is he leaving options open while avoiding confrontation. He may recall what happened to Kelly.
Pft , Mar 16, 2018 9:05:48 PM | 82
In Orwells 1984 one cant help but question if the perpetual war between the 3 nations is real or not. The purpose of war is clear, that is to consume the excesses of industrial production, while keeping the populace in relative poverty to keep them controllable. The populace is then further controlled by fear of the enemy rival state and can be coerced into accepting their diminished lifestyle and supporting the ruling regime . The limited amount of human life that is expended in these unending conflicts turns this perpetual war into a twisted peace; "War is Peace."

I cant help but think China, Russia and the West are playing the same game with some additional actors in the Middle East taking sides in the pretend conflict. Eric Prince chosen by China to head security for its BRI. Russia leaving business unfinished in Syria. Madness. Putins public declarations of new weapon systems play right into US hands to get larger defense budgets in a time of larger deficits due to tax cuts. He knows as well as anyone the US knows of their capabilities.

On the other side the Trump-Kim silliness. Absurd Russia Gate in US that a 10 yo should be embarrassed to believe in , and this nonsense by May in the UK.

Its all theater IMO. No wonder there are no good movies out there as Hollywood writers are too busy scripting our reality and translating into Russian and Chinese

Don Bacon , Mar 16, 2018 9:07:08 PM | 83
news report
The White House sought to quash suggestions that President Trump is too soft on Moscow Thursday, ordering sanctions against Russians alleged to have participated in election meddling and joining allies to condemn the Kremlin for an attempted murder in Britain. The moves took many skeptical observers by surprise, given that the administration has long been accused of being too sympathetic to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Othello , Mar 16, 2018 9:12:55 PM | 84
The West is using the Skripal poisoning to strip Russia of credibility when it defends Syria against false flag chemical weapons attacks staged by their Takfiri dupes to facilitate military attacks by the West on Syria. In effect they are saying is that Russia is such an egregious offender regarding the use of chemical weapons that they cannot be believed when they come to the defense of the Syrian government...in fact, they are inferring that Russia is more than likely complicit in these chemical weapon attacks. With obliging media houses and an unthinking general population its foolproof.
J Swift , Mar 16, 2018 9:15:00 PM | 85
Terrific set of articles, b. Really, even the most cursory overview of actual, known facts, viewed in the known political webs and the known modus operandi of the Western intelligence (sic) services, there is truly no way it was a Russian "hit." Not sure what really happened, but sure it wasn't that.

Actually I'm curious about the factor that seemed to have changed--the daughter. Something about her appearance brought this to a head. Did she visit regularly, or was this a portentous meeting? And did she bring good news or bad? We know too little to completely rule out the possibility mentioned early on of a possible joint suicide attempt (supported by the references to fentanyl patches, which seems an odd thing for first responders to have made up if there wasn't something going on). I have seen two pictures of the daughter, and the recent one showed she had lost a lot of weight. That could be healthy, but what if she came to tell Pop that she had terminal cancer, or his request to be allowed to return to Russia was denied. He is friendless and unhappy in a strange country...suicide might not be ridiculous. And only after did it dawn on some MI6 smearmeister how timely it would be to say it was an assassination, performed in the only conceivable way that would immediately implicate Russia. The rest is theater, with the beautiful part being to demand Russia prove it did not use "their" nerve agent, one which appears to have been mostly a theoretical exercise by the USSR that did not really pan out and was likely never actually produced, such that anything "found" could be that damned stuff. Prove this is NOT unicorn shit!

Perhaps more likely, though, would be an alternative. He had reportedly made recent appearances at the Russian embassy, maybe just renewing passport and registration documents, but what if it was more? What if he had been approached with the proposition that since he was the "Russian source" in the Steele dossier, and Russia is tiring of the incessant Russiagate stuff and thought perhaps there was information he could provide which would further discredit Steele? Britain would no longer be safe, so best if he retuned to Russia and be reunited with his daughter. Daughter arrived either to finish sealing the deal, and/or to provide some cover with respect to the return visit to Russia. Western agencies are tipped off (no doubt they have many eyes on Steele an his associates), fear Dad might have talked too much to Daughter, so both are killed, at which point the above theater takes over.

Not enough information to know, of course, but it is curious why the poisoning now, and why him, and why with his daughter? It just seems her appearance on the scene might be tied in with the timing.

Don Bacon , Mar 16, 2018 9:24:15 PM | 88
The West is using the Skripal poisoning to strip Russia of credibility . . . it's foolproof.
Baloney. See my 81.
Peter AU 1 , Mar 16, 2018 10:22:16 PM | 93
Reading up on the AChE inhibitors, the grouping that CW nerve agents belong to, I find that thre is a huge amount of ongoing research into new chemical structures both for pesticides and medicine. The known CW nerve agents were stumbled upon during research for agricultural purposes, but when found too toxic, further developed as chemical weapons. It seems likely, going by Craig Murray's second article, that Portland Down has detected an organophosphorus chemical of some type - as yet, the chemical structure unknown. For a nerve agent or AChE inhibitor to be known as a chemical weapon, it has to have been manufactured for that purpose.

The three people poisoned by some form of organophosphorus AChE inhibitor, chemical structure as yet unknown. Non military as all three victims alive, but as organophosphorus AChE inhibitors are non reversible, will most likely never recover from whatever state they are in now. The facts seem to end with three people being poisoned by an unidentified organophosphorus AChE inhibitor. There would be many thousands of these left over/put aside from other research. The rest, military grade nerve agent, only Russia can produce it, Novichok, ect ect is all narrative.

farm ecologist , Mar 16, 2018 10:39:11 PM | 94
Peter AU #93

clarification Re., "as organophosphorus AChE inhibitors are non reversible, will most likely never recover from whatever state they are in now."

Not necessarily. Like other enzymes, AChE gradually turns over in the body. Thus, assuming the victim survives, the poison should be eliminated via the body's normal metabolic and excretory mechanisms, and the irreversibly inhibited AChE gradually replaced by newly synthesized molecules. To compare, ASA/aspirin is an irreversible inhibitor of an enzyme called cyclooxygenase, whereas ibuprofen inhibits the same enzyme, albeit in a reversible manner.

Kalen , Mar 16, 2018 10:41:42 PM | 95
The only way to deal with pure black propaganda as a series of cases under umbrella of Putin did it MH17 etc all., and Russia gate or rather Russia hate campaign and with all the coming soon more nonsense and vicious attack of wounded and dying political animals in the west trying to prove themselves useful relevant to global oligarchy before they have their asses kicked as ineffective tools for manipulation and confusion of enslaved masses is to ignore it as it is only a theatrical performance aimed to scare people into submission under fake threat of war.

Putin meek or no real response for the series of provocations since at least 2012 is telling the truth of reality of situation namely scared populations. Works for all sides and is beneficial for all trusted politicians who only lie when their lips are moving.

Putin was poling in high fifties to low sixties in 2012 recently polled in eighties and even in nineties when more viciously attacks on Russia was unleashed. What not to like, seen as defended of mother Russia under senseless accusations would rise polls even of hatred Yeltzin as Russian Byzantine politics dictates and what brought support for widely hated Stalin even after mass cleansing of the party and wiping out families deemed his enemies , Russians stood up for him as a symbol of the nation. Putin did not loose on any of that nonsense and in contrast consolidate his power while in the same time build consensus among supporting oligarchy, even Berezovsky change his mind about Putin along that lines.

Also a joke of sanctions against Russia brought no harm to Russia but only benefit as they shed dependence of the west but to Europe and helped to create chaos and let a bunch of puppets of Washington to take over roles of frontmen creating conditions of another bailout this time, since 2008 bailout of banks, multinationals, insurance companies, car companies, and hitech and energy companies now we witness bailout of MIC and war industry on all sides . You want to see nukes flying let May seize all assets of Russian oligarchy in UK but that will never happen, Putin meek attempt of doing so in Russia made him western target so he backed down as releasing Chodakovsky and others like double agents proved.

Do not be fooled, the only war that is coming is vicious war against ordinary people forced into slavery by united global oligarchy who are loosing their propaganda edge as more people wake up from torpor of national politics.

Grieved , Mar 16, 2018 11:32:31 PM | 98
Excellent journalism, b.

@68 Robert Snefjella -

I agree totally with your points. The Skripal affair is more than unraveling, it's rebounding with every wrong action it takes. In its overblown hysteria and vitriol, it is destroying, far more than enforcing, the power of mass lies in the UK - in my view.

@73 bevin -

Agreed that the UK is very alarmed by Corbyn, in the ways you state. I appreciate your summary, I hadn't seen any news about what he said yet. I confess I was falling into disappointment. Silly me.

And of course, it's always been the war of the rich against the poor, on a planet that produces abundance for all, but for the plunderers who become and remain rich by stealing from the poor. This is the only war there ever was, with greed at its root.

~~

As to the hegemonic west, there will be no war. What we're seeing now IS the war. This is all they have to throw at Russia, and China and Iran, etc. This is how they fight, using all the power they can gather, and this is all they have. Putin on March 1 destroyed all possible military options for them, beyond spiteful attacks on the defenseless, and the suicide moves of proxies.

What we are hearing in this latest opportunistic attack on Russia is the howl of insane rage, and the tantrums of willful children who are actually provoking to be slapped, just to return them to their senses.

I think Russia will be judicious with that slap, and execute it perfectly, with as much mercy as the situation allows. The US has been begging for it for a long time, and Russia has had plenty of time to plan multiple scenarios. Syria would be an excellent place for it to happen.

[Mar 17, 2018] Acceptable Bigotry and Scapegoating of Russia by Natylie Baldwin

Notable quotes:
"... Washington Post ..."
turcopolier.typepad.com

The first time I realized how low things would likely get was when Ruth Marcus, deputy editor of the Washington Post , sent out the following tweet in March of 2017, squealing with delight at the thought of a new Cold War with the world's other nuclear superpower: "So excited to be watching The Americans, throwback to a simpler time when everyone considered Russia the enemy. Even the president."

Not only did Marcus's comment imply that it was great for the U.S. to have an enemy, but it specifically implied that there was something particularly great about that enemy being Russia.

Since then, the public discourse has only gotten nastier. Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper – who notoriously perjured himself before Congress about warrantless spying on Americans – stated on Meet the Press last May that Russians were uniquely and "genetically" predisposed toward manipulative political activities. If Clapper or anyone else in the public eye had made such a statement about Muslims, Arabs, Iranians, Jews, Israelis, Chinese or just about any other group, there would have been some push-back about the prejudice that it reflected and how it didn't correspond with enlightened liberal values. But Clapper's comment passed with hardly a peep of protest.

More recently, John Sipher , a retired CIA station chief who reportedly spent years in Russia – although at what point in time is unclear – was interviewed in Jane Mayer's recent New Yorker piece trying to spin the Steele Dossier as somehow legitimate. On March 6, Sipher took to Twitter with the following comment : "How can one not be a Russophobe? Russia soft power is political warfare. Hard power is invading neighbors, hiding the death of civilians with chemical weapons and threatening with doomsday nuclear weapons. And they kill the opposition at home. Name something positive."

In fairness to Sipher, he did backpedal somewhat after being challenged; however, the fact that his unfiltered blabbering reveals such a deep antipathy toward Russians ("How can one not be a Russophobe?") and an initial assumption that he could get away with saying it publicly is troubling.

Glenn Greenwald re-tweeted with a comment asking if Russians would soon acceptably be referred to as "rats and roaches." Another person replied with: "Because they are rats and roaches. What's the problem?"

This is just a small sampling of the anti-Russian comments and attitudes that pass, largely unremarked upon, in our media landscape.

There are, of course, the larger institutional influencers of culture doing their part to push anti-Russian bigotry in this already contentious atmosphere. Red Sparrow , both the book and the movie , detail the escapades of a female Russian spy. The story propagates the continued fetishization of Russian women based on the stereotype that they're all hot and frisky. Furthermore, all those who work in Russian intelligence are evil and backwards rather than possibly being motivated by some kind of patriotism, while all the American intel agents are paragons of virtue and seem like they just stepped out of an ad for Nick at Nite's How to be Swell .

The recent Academy Awards continued their politically motivated trend of awarding Oscars for best documentary to films on topics that just happen to coalesce nicely with Washington's latest adversarial policy. Last year it was the White Helmets film to support the regime change meme in Syria. This year it's Icarus about the doping scandal in Russia.

[Mar 17, 2018] Could he possibly have been working for the Berezovsky organisation?

Notable quotes:
"... The haste in which the accusations and accompanying propaganda campaign were put in motion indicates a panicked decision made under pressure from the Puppet Masters of Washington. ..."
"... Likely the investigation will be a reprise of the MH17 case, where obstruction and obfuscation were used until the case passed out of the goldfish memory of the people. ..."
Mar 17, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk
N_ , March 16, 2018 at 03:32

1) The police have appealed for info on where Sergei Skripal's BMW was between 1pm and 1.40pm on 4 March, the day of the attack. Wasn't his car tracked? What's this about even if it wasn't?

2) According to her cousin , Yulia Skripal is engaged to a "high-ranking security official". Sounds like FSB. Was he her boyfriend when she was living in England for five years after he dad got swapped in 2010?

3) Who has Sergei Skripal worked for? The British and Russian governments both say that when he was in the GRU (Russian military intelligence) he was actually passing secrets to MI6. He pleaded guilty to that crime and was sentenced to jail for it. His family, however, deny that he was a traitor. Could he possibly have been working for the Berezovsky organisation?

james , March 16, 2018 at 03:44

perhaps he was helping pablo miller and christopher steele work on a dossier that became very central to the mueller investigation anything is possible and i wouldn't discount this either

Freddy , March 16, 2018 at 07:05

N_:"Could he possibly have been working for the Berezovsky organisation?"

More likely for the Orbis, together with Pablo Miller and and Christoper Steele.

But this one was a very close Berezovsky friend, and "Nikolai Glushkov, 68, the right-hand man of the deceased oligarch Boris Berezovsky, Mr Putin's one-time fiercest rival, was found dead at his London home on Monday."

Seems to be likely that those two (Skripal and Glushkov) were used by the Orbis to get information for the Steele's "Trump Dossier" through their old connections in Moscow.
Yulia Skripal was a go-between, a courier, because information of that kind was unlikely coming in and out via cell phones, it was delivered by a courier.
Now, as Steele is about to be brought to the US and to be questioned by various US Gov. organization, now is the time to do some cleaning. No information holders, no couriers, no witnesses – no problems whatsoever for the Orbis, for Christopher Steele, for Pablo Miller and others. No doubt there are plenty of cleaners working for the Orbis who can stage any kind of "poisoning".

Salford Lad , March 16, 2018 at 06:07

Teresa May and her Tory Govt have got themselves in a bind. They have made accusations against the Russian Govt, without proof or a credible motive shown. They have failed to go thru' the correct OPCW channels and have blocked a resolution at the UN for an investigation into the Skripal case.

It is inconceivable that the Lawyers around the Govt Civil Service could have allowed these accusations to be made on such spurious grounds.

The haste in which the accusations and accompanying propaganda campaign were put in motion indicates a panicked decision made under pressure from the Puppet Masters of Washington.

Indications are this is connected to Syria and a rapidly closing window of false flag/ chemical attack , to justify an invasion. That horse has now bolted and the cleaning of the Augean stables has arrived.

The OPCW will eventually investigate, but we must remember that many of our International bodies have been contaminated by Washingon infiltration.
OPCW did not cover itself in glory during the last several chemical attacks in Syria and the samples taken passes thru; several dubious channels before presentation to OPCW.

Likely the investigation will be a reprise of the MH17 case, where obstruction and obfuscation were used until the case passed out of the goldfish memory of the people.

No matter, the mud has been thrown at Russia and it will stick proof or no. It is the way of the world and the PTB know it.

Dennis Revell , March 16, 2018 at 07:14

:

Excellent again, Salford Lad.

– Tyldesley lad.

[Mar 17, 2018] Cue bono question and possible players

Mar 17, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

Stonky , March 16, 2018 at 02:53

Clyde Davis: " until I hear a more convincing explanation I'm sticking to my guns."

1. Russian dissident oligarchs: loads of money; baleful influence and financial tentacles extend into the very heart of the UK establishment; all sorts of dodgy connections in the former Soviet Union; zero scruples; hate Putin.
2. Ukraine: fascist regime; involved in a war with Russia already; just as likely to have access to old Soviet Novichok (if it exists) as Russia; just as capable of manufacturing it as Russia if it doesn't; zero scruples; hate Putin.
3. Turkey: angry because they're losing a proxy war with Russia in Syria; already have their own chemical weapons programme; perfectly capable of manufacturing this stuff; previous in targeted assassinations; zero scruples; hate Putin.
4. Saudi Arabia: angry because they're losing a proxy war with Russia in Syria; loads of money; baleful influence and financial tentacles extend into the very heart of the UK establishment; happy to export or facilitate terrorism anywhere in the world including their supposed 'allies'; zero scruples; hate Putin.
5. Anti-Trump forces in the US: Demented in their obsession with 'Trump-Russia' collusion; angry because they're losing a proxy war with Russia in Syria; already have access to Soviet Novichok (if it exists); perfectly capable of manufacturing it if it doesn't; previous in targeted assassinations; zero scruples; hate Putin.
6. Israel: angry because they're losing a proxy war with Russia in Syria; probably the best military/scientific capability in the world; certainly capable of manufacturing this stuff; previous in targeted assassinations; zero scruples when pursuing what they believe to be their own best interests; hate Putin.

Kiza , March 16, 2018 at 02:55

To me this is a repeat of the MH17 case study with its:

  1. Propaganda preparation – media full of shot down Uki military planes vs. media full of CW victims in Syria for which Russia is to blame,
  2. "Rush" to judgement whodunit – former Australian Prime Minister Abbot publicly pointed finger at the Russian rebels in Ukraine 7 hours after the shootdown vs. the UK Prime Minister blames Russia a day after her event,
  3. Soviet Union = Russia when convenient – the Soviet designed and made BUK becomes the exclusively Russian made BUK vs. the Soviet Designed CW becomes the exclusively Russian produced CW (with a touch of the good old British propaganda – maybe Russia lost control over it! => well, maybe US "lost control" over it when it was helping it's client Uzbekistan destroy it)
  4. Logic matters not – let us find a BUK coming all the way from Russia instead of looking at tens of such systems operated by the Uki troops, apparently four near the area where the shoot down happened vs. let us look at poison or a trained chemist coming all the way from Russia (how when one cannot get even a small bottle of drink on a plane?) whilst there is a British own source 12 km away,
  5. When questions arise and contrary items of evidence come out, just ignore and keep drumming "the proven facts" (the science is settled) from the blame package prepared in advance – an alternative, facts-supported explanation will never be accepted no matter what.

The post-modern West operates on evidence-free pure emotion-eliciting narratives ("Putin killed my baby") on the shoulders of MSM and troll farms. Any unauthorised explanation, such as Mr Murray's, is declared a conspiracy theory to be ridiculed.

Sergey , March 17, 2018 at 08:11

https://wikispooks.com/w/images/9/90/Report-mh17-crash-en.pdf Page 232

Above mean that Ukraine, Malaysia and Malaysia Airlines bore certain responsibilities with regards to the operations of flight MH17 based on national an international law.

Russia has very bad lawyers. The investigation is completed.

[Mar 17, 2018] BBC Timeline of the incident

They omitted the time when the doctor treated the daughter for 30 min or so.
Notable quotes:
"... Police said the pair went to The Mill pub before going to Zizzi restaurant at 14:20 GMT, staying until 15:35 GMT ..."
"... 16:15 GMT: emergency services received the first report of an incident ..."
Mar 17, 2018 | www.bbc.com

[Mar 17, 2018] Russian Spy Poisoning Story = Iraq WMD Scam 2.0

Mar 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

By Craig Murray, former British intelligence officer, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, and Rector (i.e. Chancellor) of the University of Dundee. Originally published at CraigMurray.org.uk .

As recently as 2016 Dr Robin Black, Head of the Detection Laboratory at the UK's only chemical weapons facility at Porton Down, a former colleague of Dr David Kelly, published in an extremely prestigious scientific journal that the evidence for the existence of Novichoks was scant and their composition unknown.

In recent years, there has been much speculation that a fourth generation of nerve agents, 'Novichoks' (newcomer), was developed in Russia, beginning in the 1970s as part of the 'Foliant' programme, with the aim of finding agents that would compromise defensive countermeasures. Information on these compounds has been sparse in the public domain, mostly originating from a dissident Russian military chemist, Vil Mirzayanov. No independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published. (Black, 2016)

Robin Black. (2016) Development, Historical Use and Properties of Chemical Warfare Agents. Royal Society of Chemistry

Yet now, the British Government is claiming to be able instantly to identify a substance which its only biological weapons research centre has never seen before and was unsure of its existence. Worse, it claims to be able not only to identify it, but to pinpoint its origin. Given Dr Black's publication, it is plain that claim cannot be true.

The world's international chemical weapons experts share Dr Black's opinion. The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) is a UN body based in the Hague. In 2013 this was the report of its Scientific Advisory Board, which included US, French, German and Russian government representatives and on which Dr Black was the UK representative:

[The SAB] emphasised that the definition of toxic chemicals in the Convention would cover all potential candidate chemicals that might be utilised as chemical weapons. Regarding new toxic chemicals not listed in the Annex on Chemicals but which may nevertheless pose a risk to the Convention, the SAB makes reference to "Novichoks". The name "Novichok" is used in a publication of a former Soviet scientist who reported investigating a new class of nerve agents suitable for use as binary chemical weapons. The SAB states that it has insufficient information to comment on the existence or properties of "Novichoks". (OPCW, 2013)

OPCW: Report of the Scientific Advisory Board on developments in science and technology for the Third Review Conference 27 March 2013

Indeed the OPCW was so sceptical of the viability of "novichoks" that it decided – with US and UK agreement – not to add them nor their alleged precursors to its banned list. In short, the scientific community broadly accepts Mirzayanov was working on "novichoks" but doubts he succeeded.

Given that the OPCW has taken the view the evidence for the existence of "Novichoks" is dubious, if the UK actually has a sample of one it is extremely important the UK presents that sample to the OPCW. Indeed the UK has a binding treaty obligation to present that sample to OPCW. Russa has – unreported by the corporate media – entered a demand at the OPCW that Britain submit a sample of the Salisbury material for international analysis.

Yet Britain refuses to submit it to the OPCW.

Why?

A second part of May's accusation is that "Novichoks" could only be made in certain military installations. But that is also demonstrably untrue. If they exist at all, Novichoks were allegedly designed to be able to be made at bench level in any commercial chemical facility – that was a major point of them. The only real evidence for the existence of Novichoks was the testimony of the ex-Soviet scientist Mizayanov. And this is what Mirzayanov actually wrote.

One should be mindful that the chemical components or precursors of A-232 or its binary version novichok-5 are ordinary organophosphates that can be made at commercial chemical companies that manufacture such products as fertilizers and pesticides.

[Mar 17, 2018] The real culprit might be one of the parties who are real beneficiaries of this propaganda surge, including criminal elements connected to the Russian exile "mafia" types, Ukraine, or some of the shadowy US and UK security state players

"At this stage, only gross ignorance or dishonesty can explain anyone seriously claiming there's a rational motive for the Russian government to have done this."
Notable quotes:
"... When Putin's cruising to an easy win and the only concern is whether the turnout is 60% or 70%, the claims he wants it for election purposes are pretty stupid, and become untenable when you consider the very real diplomatic, propaganda and soft power costs Russia will bear for this, and coming at a particularly bad time as well on several counts, with Syria on a knife edge in relation to (even more) open US military aggression, the NordStream II pipeline facing new attempts to block it, and the World Cup coming up. ..."
"... Frankly, if the idea of trying to murder someone in Britain, using a "wmd" in the most hysteria-inducing propaganda-favouring method possible, had been suggested to Putin by one of his security apparatchiks I suspect the man would have been guarding ice floes in the Arctic within a few hours. ..."
"... And that's not even considering that this individual (Skripal) wasn't a thuggish, troublemaking fugitive from Russian justice like Litvinenko, but rather a former spy who had already been unmasked, tried and imprisoned by the Russians (his offence was considered so serious he got a whole 13 years), and then exchanged after a few years inside. He was considered so endangered by British intelligence that they didn't even bother hiding his identity, and his address was in the public domain. ..."
"... At this stage, only gross ignorance or dishonesty can explain anyone seriously claiming there's a rational motive for the Russian government to have done this. ..."
"... And by the same exact token, there's no reason to get breathless about the idea that it could have been one of the parties who are real beneficiaries of this propaganda surge -- any of the countries currently engaged in confrontation of Russia in Syria and elsewhere, or that criminal elements connected to the Russian exile "mafia" types could have obtained it from a lab in, say, Ukraine, or that some of the shadowy US and UK security state contacts involved in the campaign to overturn the election of Trump might have used it as a twofer – to get rid of Skripal if he had information they wanted kept secret and set the pretext for the currently ongoing campaign against Russia. ..."
"... All a lot more plausible than the idea that the Russian government was stupid enough to do this to itself, gratuitously ..."
Mar 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

utu , March 17, 2018 at 2:37 am GMT

@CanSpeccy

Scenarios for operations are written by somebody. Possibly the same people who also write screenplays for TV and Hollywood. We know many writers who worked for intelligence services (Flemming, Greene, LeCarre.) In Six Days of Condor they wanted to keep the scenario secret and have it removed form popular circulation in a thriller books. But here is opposite situation. The operation is basically a psy-op so it is public where you want to convince people that something happened. I can see a point of injecting it as movie drama first so it will become more believable when it eventually happens. But still the simplest explanation of laziness and plagiarism can't be excluded.

Randal , March 17, 2018 at 2:40 am GMT
@Anon

Others have already explained why Purin and cronies might decide now was a good time to kill a traitor and be accused of it.

Nobody has yet credibly done so. When Putin's cruising to an easy win and the only concern is whether the turnout is 60% or 70%, the claims he wants it for election purposes are pretty stupid, and become untenable when you consider the very real diplomatic, propaganda and soft power costs Russia will bear for this, and coming at a particularly bad time as well on several counts, with Syria on a knife edge in relation to (even more) open US military aggression, the NordStream II pipeline facing new attempts to block it, and the World Cup coming up.

Frankly, if the idea of trying to murder someone in Britain, using a "wmd" in the most hysteria-inducing propaganda-favouring method possible, had been suggested to Putin by one of his security apparatchiks I suspect the man would have been guarding ice floes in the Arctic within a few hours.

And that's not even considering that this individual (Skripal) wasn't a thuggish, troublemaking fugitive from Russian justice like Litvinenko, but rather a former spy who had already been unmasked, tried and imprisoned by the Russians (his offence was considered so serious he got a whole 13 years), and then exchanged after a few years inside. He was considered so endangered by British intelligence that they didn't even bother hiding his identity, and his address was in the public domain.

At this stage, only gross ignorance or dishonesty can explain anyone seriously claiming there's a rational motive for the Russian government to have done this.

Randal , March 17, 2018 at 3:03 am GMT
@Mark James

Do I think Russia is involved with the Skripal hit? Of course. .Because of the poison involved, they (Rus/Putin) almost certainly did it.

That's the poison that Porton Down declined to claim they could identify as having come from Russia and were only prepared to say is "of a type developed by Russia"?

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/of-a-type-developed-by-liars/

The poison that the main source for (a former Soviet dissident living in the US) put the formulae for in his book published ten years ago, and who was quoted a few days ago as saying that either Russia did it, or someone else who'd read his book?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russians-says-chemist-uncovered-existence-novichok-075342077.html

Of course, exiled dissidents backing up the latest US propaganda campaign against their former home's government is hardly anything new – that was one of the main methods by which we were lied into the Iraq War. It's rather cutely naïve for one such to openly admit that anybody else with the resources (such as the UK, the US or Israel, for a start, and probably anybody else with access to state resources, such as Ukraine) could have manufactured the supposedly incriminating substance over the past ten years.

So the idea that the particular chemical allegedly used is in the slightest evidence of its origin is completely untenable. Nevertheless, that seems to be the only real piece of "evidence" relied upon for the convenient rush to judgement by the usual suspects.

I just happen to be reading "Rise and Kill First" – the secret history of Israel's targeted assassinations.

Roughly 700 pages of text and notes about one country's targeted killings so I'm really not in a 'how could this be' frame of mind with regard to Russia.

Absolutely. And by the same exact token, there's no reason to get breathless about the idea that it could have been one of the parties who are real beneficiaries of this propaganda surge -- any of the countries currently engaged in confrontation of Russia in Syria and elsewhere, or that criminal elements connected to the Russian exile "mafia" types could have obtained it from a lab in, say, Ukraine, or that some of the shadowy US and UK security state contacts involved in the campaign to overturn the election of Trump might have used it as a twofer – to get rid of Skripal if he had information they wanted kept secret and set the pretext for the currently ongoing campaign against Russia.

All a lot more plausible than the idea that the Russian government was stupid enough to do this to itself, gratuitously.

[Mar 17, 2018] Great Britain has long turned not only into a cozy nest for defectors from all over the world but also into a hub for all sorts of fake news-producing agencies: from the British "Syrian Observatory for Human Rights" to the created by a British intelligence officer pseudo-Syrian "White Helmets".

Notable quotes:
"... As to boorish words of the British Defense Minister regarding Russia, it seems that in the absence of the real results of the professional activity, rudeness is the only weapon remaining in the arsenal of the Her Majesty's Military. ..."
Mar 17, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Perimetr , Mar 16, 2018 11:34:37 PM | 99

Major General Igor Konashenkov of the Russia MoD replies to the British Defense Secretary's comment that "Russia should shut up and go away":

"The rhetoric of an uncouth shrew demonstrated by the Head of the British Ministry of Defense makes his utter intellectual impotence perfectly evident. All this confirms not only the nullity of all accusations towards Russia we have been hearing from London for the last several years but also that the "accusers" themselves are nonentities.

Great Britain has long turned not only into a cozy nest for defectors from all over the world but also into a hub for all sorts of fake news-producing agencies: from the British "Syrian Observatory for Human Rights" to the created by a British intelligence officer pseudo-Syrian "White Helmets".

As to boorish words of the British Defense Minister regarding Russia, it seems that in the absence of the real results of the professional activity, rudeness is the only weapon remaining in the arsenal of the Her Majesty's Military."

[Mar 17, 2018] Russian spy: Conspiracy theories and denial in Russia

Why Russian intelligence services should kill someone of no consequences in UK using some exotic, only in Russia made stuff, is beyond comprehension. Btw, it is not even sure if Novichok was used at all because UK refuses to provide samples and formula is known to many now.
The whole behavior of UK is of the guilty party and BBC coverage demonstrates that quite well. Most probably this is yet another false flag operation by CIA/MI6 job rogue elements hell-bent of Russophobia.
Mar 17, 2018 | www.bbc.com

At an urgent meeting of the United Nations security council on Wednesday, Russian ambassador to the UN Vasily Nebenzya implied the British government and allies including the United States could be responsible.

Mr Nebenzya said Mr Skripal was a "perfect victim which could justify any unthinkable lie," and asked if the attack was "something which benefits Russia on the eve of presidential elections and the world football championships?"

"I can think of a number of countries who would benefit from this incident and [from] blaming Russia," he said.

On state television and social media, Russian citizens and media commentators have espoused similar theories in starker terms. Conspiracy theories implicating the UK and its allies in the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal have been widely shared in order - adherents claim without evidence - to attack Russia.

'They love poison in the UK'

A news bulletin on state Rossiya 1 TV accused Britain of masterminding the attack on the Skripals.

In a bizarre and unsubstantiated claim, the Rossiya 1 report referenced the plot of Sky TV series Strike Back in its allegations.

"They started preparing the UK public for the so-called Russian aggression with the use of a nerve paralytic agent at the end of last year," a Rossiya 1 correspondent said.

"It is well known that the Strike Back series is funded and created with the direct involvement of the British special services," he added.

The television series is based on a book authored by former SAS soldier Chris Ryan published in 2007.

An interviewee on Rossiya 1 identified as a "former FSB [Federal Security Service] Major General" said "all this is a well-planned provocation," adding "they love poison in the UK".

'Remarkable coincidence'

On Telegram and VKontakte, a Russian-language social network, similar allegations have circulated among pro-Kremlin channels. Much speculation centred on videos of Mr Skripal's 2004 arrest that had been uploaded to YouTube in the days before the attack.

The timing of the uploads, little more than a week before the Skripals collapsed in Salisbury, led to accusations of British complicity. Posting in Russian, one Twitter user calling themselves 'Uruguayan Intelligence' claimed the YouTube channel Group M was "moderated from Britain", an assertion also made on Russian state TV.

It is unclear if there is any evidence for the claim - Rossiya 1 made it citing "some information" - but despite one news presenter's declaration the upload was "a remarkable coincidence," it is not immediately obvious what it is supposed to prove. In any case, reports on Telegram suggest the decision to post the videos - and other footage of "successful detentions" - was made as long ago as 2017 for a "website for veterans".

Could Ukraine be involved?

Former FSB chief Nikolai Kovalyov, a Russian MP, suggested on Tuesday Ukraine could be involved. Tensions between Russia and Ukraine have been high since Russia's annexation of the Crimea in 2014.

"Given that all this [nerve agent] was stored on the territory of the republics of the former Soviet Union," he said, "a Ukrainian trace cannot be ruled out".

"The beneficiaries are England, America and indirectly Ukraine, because it is interested in showing Russia as an aggressor state."

There is no evidence suggesting Ukraine's involvement.

'Rhetoric from a vulgar woman'

The worsening of tensions between Russia and the UK has also been reflected in the language used by Russian officials.

After the British Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson said Russia should "go away and shut up", Russia's Defence Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov described it as "the rhetoric of a vulgar woman from a bazaar".

"Perhaps he lacks education," suggested Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.

"This is trash... can you imagine who we are dealing with?" said Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova on Rossiya 1 TV on 14 March in reference to British government officials.

"These people have no idea about professionalism, diplomacy, international law, any international organisations. Second, they are simply liars. Real, fully-fledged liars."

Russia's ambassador to London, Alexander Yakovenko, told Rossiya 24 TV on Friday that Moscow had not received the answers it needed from Britain concerning the condition of Mr Skripal and his daughter and progress in the investigation.

"Unfortunately, the British often indulge in adopting such a colonial manner," he said.

[Mar 17, 2018] WWII between Russia and the West would be over in 1-2 days (if that), and is basically a suicide.

Mar 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

Beckow , March 15, 2018 at 3:30 pm GMT

@Phillip O'Reilly

bad faith and parochial bellicosity on the part of the all the major powers of the time

Some of it sounds familiar, but not all. I was pointing out that there are major differences between today and 1914, but it is extremely volatile and dangerous like then.

At least some in the West have made a decision to deal with Russia now before it gets stronger. Or to create a much better 'defensive' perimeter for the future. Ukraine, Baltics and probably Georgia, maybe Turkey have been lined up on Russia's border, with Nato bases and soldiers. There was the failed attempt to push Russia out of its key Navy base in Crimea. Syria war will go on to bleed and demoralise Russia, maybe in a few other places. Squeeze the economy by financial isolation. Use media demonisation to create pressure on the Westernised Russian elites.

Will that start a war like in 1914? That's where the differences come in. Russia cannot be today described as ' bellicose ', and neither can large parts of the West. Only some in the West are bellicose. Germany, Italy and to some extent France want to continue or even increase business with Russia.

There is also no such thing as a traditional war between Russia and the West – it would be over in 1-2 days (if that), basically a suicide. It could still happen, but we need more events before we get there.

[Mar 17, 2018] Kremlin Furious After Boris Johnson Accuses Putin Of Murder

Mar 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Earlier today we reported that the world got that much closer to a second Cold War after Russia said it would expel UK diplomats in retaliation to Theresa May's decision to kick out 23 Russians, while expanding its "blacklist" of US citizens in response to yesterday's Treasury sanctions. That's when things turned south fast because roughly at that time, the U.K.'s top diploma, Boris Johnson, directly accused Vladimir Putin, saying it was " overwhelmingly likely " that he personally ordered the nerve-agent attack on British soil.

In a dramatic escalation of a diplomatic crisis between the two countries, the Foreign Secretary said the U.K.'s problem was not with the Russian people but with the Russian leader.

"Our quarrel is with Putin's Kremlin and with his decision - and we think it overwhelmingly likely that it was his decision - to direct the use of a nerve agent on the streets of the U.K., on the streets of Europe, for the first time since World War II," Johnson said in London.

Predictably, the Kremlin was furious, said that blaming Putin personally for Skripal's poisoning is "shocking and unforgivable."

Speaking to Interfax, Putin's press secretary Dmitry Peskov said that "We have said on different levels and occasions that Russia has nothing to do with this story" and added that "any references to our president is nothing but shocking and unforgivable diplomatic misconduct."

Johnson's statement was a "diplomatic blunder" on the part of the UK foreign secretary, Peskov said, adding that the Kremlin remains "puzzled" by the conduct of the British authorities during the Skripal crisis.

The diplomatic tension increased further Friday afternoon when London's Metropolitan Police said it is treating as murder the death of Nikolai Glushkov, a close associate of Putin opponent Boris Berezovsky -- a one-time billionaire who was himself found hanging dead in 2013 in his house outside London.

The Kremlin's press secretary also expressed belief that "sooner or later the British side would have to present some kind of comprehensive evidence of Russia's involvement, at least, to their partners France, the US, Germany, who declared solidarity with London in this situation." Moscow earlier asked the UK to provide materials in the Skripal case, but received a negative answer.

Johnson's claims of Putin's personal involvement weren't the only example of over-the-top rhetoric by UK officials during the Skripal crisis. UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson said on Thursday that Russia "should go away and shut up" when asked about Moscow's possible response to British sanctions.

In response, Russia's Defence Ministry said Williamson was an "intellectual impotent" and Lavrov said he probably lacked education. "Well he's a nice man, I'm told, maybe he wants to claim a place in history by making some bold statements," Lavrov said. "Theresa May's main argument about Russia's guilt is 'Highly probable', while for him it's 'Russia should go and shut up'. Maybe he lacks education, I don't know."

serotonindumptruck -> kellys_eye Fri, 03/16/2018 - 20:36 Permalink

The False Flag nerve agent attack on Skripal and his daughter merely presents the opportunity to distract the British people from the Brexit imperative.

The British government/Parliament has no desire to separate from the EU, and they have nothing but contempt for the commoners, so they must call upon British intelligence services to fabricate a False Flag terrorist attack against two Russian ex-pats who represent absolutely no value to international espionage and attempt to kill them with poorly engineered chemical weapons.

Then the international community conveniently blames Russia.

What part did I leave out?

Labworks Fri, 03/16/2018 - 19:15 Permalink

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

-Goebbels.

That's Adolf Hitlah's man, Bori boy.

johnnyBoy Fri, 03/16/2018 - 19:22 Permalink

Seems the Deep State is getting desperate. Obama interferes in the Brexit vote..Johnson is interfering in the Russian vote. Bumper stickers back in the 60's.."What if they gave a war and nobody came?" Unfortunately, nukes negate that question. We are all invited and going to participate. Idiots are running the asylum. Duck and cover..ha!

Shemp 4 Victory -> Potato Farmer Fri, 03/16/2018 - 21:16 Permalink

Keep poking that bear geniuses.

During the latest debate between Russian presidential candidates, Zhirinovsky literally erupted about Theresa May's absurd nerve gas psychodrama. Seriously, I've never seen so much fire packed into a two-minute clip.

A couple of choice excerpts (but you really should watch):

"If they give us an ultimatum our Commander-in-Chief should deploy the Baltic Fleet to the shores of Britain. They might respond, but Khrushchev once told the UK: 'A couple of my missiles can eliminate your isles.' It shut them up for twenty years."

"Someone poisoned a filthy turncoat spy, and they blame entire Russia. They threaten to bomb our whole country of 150 million. A cyber-attack, a war - they're nuts. British Prime Minister Mey, May, or whatever, has gone mad. The lady who's never been to war. Like Thatcher, who'd never been to war, but started one over the Falkland Isles in Argentina. And, this one is starting a war in Europe."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsdXW7D50eA (2 min. 22sec. English subtitles)

ted41776 Fri, 03/16/2018 - 18:43 Permalink

definitely not murder though, and they totally hate us for our freedom

skbull44 -> serotonindumptruck Fri, 03/16/2018 - 19:21 Permalink

The Western criminal, er, I mean political class has officially jumped the shark...

Baron von Bud -> FoggyWorld Fri, 03/16/2018 - 19:26 Permalink

The Brits are genuinely good people. My wife much enjoyed herself there on a trip three years ago - except with being threatened with arrest for possessing some Walmart pepper spray. They are much dependent on a warfare economy. Caught between the EU and DC with economic pressure from China, they hooked their wagon to Washington and must play the phony "it was a Russian assassination" game. It's a matter of survival. They are experts at war and torment having run the world or been top dog for well over two centuries. America could help Britain by eliminating all neocons from our government. All this fuss over Hillary's crimes and Comey etc - small potatoes. We have to go after Bush Jr. and make him answer for 9/11. That's the core issue festering in our national soul. Few will talk about it. We need to pull Bush from his hidey-hole and get him on trial. Everything else will then resolve.

GoysRUs18 Fri, 03/16/2018 - 18:56 Permalink

Hey Vald. Time to take the kid gloves off and tell the world who the REAL murders are !!

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/9-11/Israel_did_it

When an event occurs that that fundamentally changes the dynamics of global geopolitics, there is one question above all others whose answer will most assuredly point to its perpetrators. That question is "Cui bono?" If those so indicted are in addition found to have had both motive and means then, as they say in the US, it's pretty much a "slam-dunk" .

And so it is with the events of 9/11 .

Discounting the Official Narrative as the absurdity it so clearly is, there are just two organisations on the entire planet with the expertise, assets, access and political protection necessary to have both executed 9/11 and effected its cover-up to date (ie the means). Both are Intelligence Agencies - the CIA and the Israeli Mossad whose motives were arguably the most compelling. Those motives dovetailed perfectly with the Neocon PNAC agenda, with it's explicitly stated need for "...a catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor" [1] in order to mobilise US public opinion for already planned wars, the effects of which would be to destroy Israel's enemies.

[Mar 17, 2018] Doctor> said she treated her for almost 30 minutes, saying there was no sign of any chemical agent on Ms Skripal s face or body.

Mar 17, 2018 | www.bbc.com

Meanwhile, a doctor who was one of the first people at the scene has described how she found Ms Skripal slumped unconscious on a bench, vomiting and fitting. She had also lost control of her bodily functions.

The woman, who asked not to be named, told the BBC she moved Ms Skripal into the recovery position and opened her airway, as others tended to her father.

She said she treated her for almost 30 minutes, saying there was no sign of any chemical agent on Ms Skripal's face or body.

The doctor said she had been worried she would be affected by the nerve agent, but added that she "feels fine".

[Mar 17, 2018] Was any poisonous gas present in the Skripal bench area. Looks highly unlikely

Yes, it certainly looks like a provocation, the "false flag" operation. The Brits and the Banks needed the US and the EU to join the fight.
Notable quotes:
"... The most plausible goal of the whole "Operation Skripal" was poisoning UK-Russia relations and hopefully bringing the US and EU to impose new round of sanctions on Russia. In this sense it reminds Litvinenko case (which brought huge propaganda benefits to the UK and the hysteria lasted several months, if memory does not fail me). ..."
"... One thing I can't understand in "Operation Skripal" is how such an assassination (if we assume that this is an assassination) was accomplished. ..."
"... The gas (if it really exists, which is yet another question) supposedly is really deadly. If this was not gas but some substance infused with this agent (which would be extremely strange and risky method), you need to get it into the drinks, which means 100% chances of your detection. ..."
"... Moreover in case of the gas the difficulties look insurmountable -- to get it to the victim you need to mix components and shortly after spray it from a short distance, hoping the you mixed them correctly. The place where Skripals were found unconscious is a really bad place for such an exercise as there probably several cameras which record the events on the bench. ..."
"... So IMHO it looks like assassination without an assassin ..."
"... suggested traces of the opiate fentanyl -- a synthetic toxin many times stronger than heroin -- had been detected at the scene. ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | www.unz.com

likbez , March 16, 2018 at 3:48 am GMT

@Kiza

Kiza,

Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or fascist dictorship, or a parliament or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked (by a Russian sounding chemical weapon Novichok), and denounce the peace makers for lack of patriotism (https://www.craigmurray.org.uk - Craig Murray has been most viciously attacked for not accepting the official story without any evidence) and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

Hermann Göring

That's a perfectly applicable variation of the famous quote.

The most plausible goal of the whole "Operation Skripal" was poisoning UK-Russia relations and hopefully bringing the US and EU to impose new round of sanctions on Russia. In this sense it reminds Litvinenko case (which brought huge propaganda benefits to the UK and the hysteria lasted several months, if memory does not fail me).

BTW exiled Russian oligarchs like Khodorkovski ( https://www.voltairenet.org/article168007.html ) also could easily stage such a false flag operation using their interconnections with both Russia and Israel.

One thing I can't understand in "Operation Skripal" is how such an assassination (if we assume that this is an assassination) was accomplished.

The gas (if it really exists, which is yet another question) supposedly is really deadly. If this was not gas but some substance infused with this agent (which would be extremely strange and risky method), you need to get it into the drinks, which means 100% chances of your detection.

Moreover in case of the gas the difficulties look insurmountable -- to get it to the victim you need to mix components and shortly after spray it from a short distance, hoping the you mixed them correctly. The place where Skripals were found unconscious is a really bad place for such an exercise as there probably several cameras which record the events on the bench.

Unless it was the daughter who did this (in this case authorities have definitely all the necessary evidence of the crime committed) chances of an attacker to survive such an attack are slim, and changes not being recorded on one or more camera are virtually non existent.

If there was a human assassin, he/she risks to be immediately dead or severely injured as even in minimal concentrations such a gas reliably kills a person within two minutes or so. Antidote might help to survive, but how effective it is depends on the dose you can get.

If some robotic disperser was used, then it will be found as unlike in case of an explosive device the activation does no destroy it.

Also unclear why target the daughter, unless we are dealing with some botched amateur false flag operation in best traditions of ISIS Syria false flag operations.

Moreover, Skripals spent around an hour on a bench in a comatose state and were helped by a doctor who was not affected in any way. See timeline at

http://www.businessinsider.com/who-is-sergei-skripal-timeline-2018-3#march-3-240-pm-skripals-33-year-old-daughter-yulia-arrives-in-the-uk-via-london-heathrow-airport-relatives-said-she-was-visiting-from-moscow-17

But later a policeman was affected. Very strange.

So IMHO it looks like assassination without an assassin . There are some absurd statements that the poison was spiked in their drinks either in the pub or at the restaurant:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5742909/sergei-skripal-spy-russian-assassin-poison-hit-pub/

One possible scenario is that Skripal and his daughter were narcoaddicts and did it to themselves The initial reports (see, for example, https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5733372/ex-russian-spy-sergei-skripal-poisoned-salisbury-feared-life-cops/ ) suggested traces of the opiate fentanyl -- a synthetic toxin many times stronger than heroin -- had been detected at the scene.

Later their collapse was used to stage a false flag operation, when in fact there was no any gas involved, and at this point, a grandiose propaganda show with the decontamination of the area started.

[Mar 17, 2018] This is yet another insult against Russian technical knowhow.

Mar 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

Fidelios Automata , March 16, 2018 at 4:00 am GMT

Even if the Russian government had ordered Skripal's kidding, no way would they be so sloppy as to spew toxins all over the place sickening innocent people. If the backward North Koreans can do a targeted chemical-based assassination, the Russians certainly can. This is yet another Anglo-Zionist insult against Russian technical knowhow.
Carlton Meyer , Website March 16, 2018 at 4:31 am GMT
We all know the KGB is smart and crafty and so is Putin. So for unknown reasons, they want to kill a retired Russian spy living openly in London. Do these brilliant people choose to:

1. Use a dangerous nerve agent that must be smuggled into England, is easily traceable to Russia, is dangerous to the assassin, and difficult to employ and ensure a kill?

Or:

2. Pay a desperate drug addict to club him on the head on the street and steal his wallet?

[Mar 17, 2018] So the chemist takes one of his arguments greatest weaknesses attempting to make it a strength. That the Russians wanted to be the chief suspects!

Notable quotes:
"... This diagrams this chemist put in his tweets are from the Wikipedia article on Novichoks. They are hardly definitive. And he never answers the question Craig poses about how can Porton down say the stuff they have is from Russia when they have no Russian control sample with which to compare it. ..."
"... Saying that all samples of the stuff have the same chemical formula just demolishes his own argument. Even Jeremy Corbyn says it's about the trace impurities, but even then a sample from the same, known source ( indeed, batch) would be needed. ..."
Mar 17, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

Singh March 16, 2018 at 15:52

So the chemist takes one of his arguments greatest weaknesses attempting to make it a strength. That the Russians wanted to be the chief suspects!

Well of course they did, which state wouldn't wish to be vilified on the world stage, to take an inevitable hit to its economy and international standing, who wouldn't enjoy the imposition of yet more sanctions, and finally who could say hand on heart they don't secretly want to have their assets frozen? Not a euphemism.

That a state assassins first priority would be to put as much distance between the state and the evidence should be patently obvious.

The Chemists suggestion that it would help to scare Russians at home is frankly ridiculous, after having inevitably thought about it for some time if this was the best he could offer, it does show the question around motive is the most tricky for the bullshitters. The other suggestion, wishing to scare poor old Blighty cos she's got no mates is equally if not more risible.

Istvan , March 16, 2018 at 16:53

If 'Porton Down' just showed the mass spectra obtained of the samples without any structural formulas that would count as a piece of evidence to many of us.

Philip Ward , March 16, 2018 at 17:12

This diagrams this chemist put in his tweets are from the Wikipedia article on Novichoks. They are hardly definitive. And he never answers the question Craig poses about how can Porton down say the stuff they have is from Russia when they have no Russian control sample with which to compare it.

Saying that all samples of the stuff have the same chemical formula just demolishes his own argument. Even Jeremy Corbyn says it's about the trace impurities, but even then a sample from the same, known source ( indeed, batch) would be needed.

[Mar 17, 2018] Perhaps Russia will instruct a challenge inspection of Porton Down?

Mar 17, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk
N_ , March 17, 2018 at 22:24

Perhaps Russia will instruct a challenge inspection of Porton Down? On my quick reading, an inspection would have to go ahead unless three-quarters of the OPCW council block it within 12 hours. (Possibly a "stop" is different from a "block" and only requires a majority?)

[Mar 17, 2018] Considering UK behavior towards Russia as a slap on face , Russia not only should but must demand immediate release of all information available to UK on this case and samples. It should be done in aggressive manner and backed by international law to which UK is a signer.

Mar 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

Sergey Krieger , March 16, 2018 at 9:04 am GMT

Considering UK behavior towards Russia as a slap on face , Russia not only should but must demand immediate release of all information available to UK on this case and samples. It should be done in aggressive manner and backed by international law to which UK is a signer. Someone must put the money where mouth is or shut up and go away .

[Mar 17, 2018] Operation Beluga The Plot to Demonise Putin by Ian Greenhalgh

Notable quotes:
"... In 2014, a highly credible source – a high ranking French security expert by the name of Paul Barril exposed the existence of a plot to demonise Putin and thus destabilise and weaken Russia; it is called Operation Beluga. ..."
"... Operation Beluga ..."
"... William Dunkerley is author of Ukraine in the Crosshairs. He is a media business analyst, principal of William Dunkerley Publishing Consultants, and a Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow. ..."
"... Najadi says the interview drew out the converse revelation that Litvinenko was actually killed by "an Italian who administered the deadly polonium 210." What's more, he astonishingly says, the operation was carried out under the auspices of the US and UK. ..."
"... The Phony Litvinenko Murder ..."
"... Litvinenko Murder Case Solved ..."
"... "According to Paul Barril, Litvinenko was himself working for the late Boris Berezovsky [a Russian fugitive oligarch that made London his home] who, according to Barril, was in turn working for and with the British intelligence service MI6. Barril said, 'Litvinenko has betrayed his employers, Berezovsky and the MI6, and has pocketed large sums of money, millions of US dollars, that were destined for agent provocateurs within the Berezovsky clan. The sole goal was to globally discredit Putin and the Russian Federation. This Western intelligence operation was directed from Washington DC and London. Its code name is Beluga.'" ..."
"... Najadi says, "These new revelations from Captain Paul Barril now open a new window to the truth about the motive for killing Alexander Litvinenko." ..."
"... Now the Litvinenko scandal takes on a new proportion. It's no longer just an incessantly long-running murder mystery. It just might be the telltale sign of an enormous geopolitical provocation that is wreaking havoc with world stability. ..."
Mar 17, 2018 | www.veteranstoday.com

You would have to have been in a coma or otherwise unconscious to not have heard the one about the two poisoned Russians on an English park bench and how those evil Russians did it, the news media has talked of little else in the past week.

Despite giving this story immense amounts of air time, the media have completely failed to apply even the most rudimentary standards of journalism, they have done a shockingly bad job of reporting on this case.

They have utterly failed to do their job and ask the relevant questions such as: Who was this Russian? Why was he poisoned? Who was he associated with? Who might want him dead? Who has he upset? etc; the sort of basic questions that should be asked right at the beginning, the moment the story broke.

Instead, all we have been given, in lieu of actual journalistic reporting, is a bunch of talking heads, many of them members of the UK government, all of them bleating about how reckless and downright murderous the Russians are to have brazenly attacked someone on English soil.

Where is the evidence? Where is the investigative reporting? The media has simply accepted whole and unquestioning the 'Russia did it' claim of Theresa May, obediently following the government's narrative, not once allowing a dissenting voice to be heard lest it asks even the simplest question or expresses even a glimmer of doubt.

What happened to that most proudly held tradition of English law – that one is innocent until proven guilty? Instead of applying that standard of English justice to Vladimir Putin, we have simply accepted he is guilty because Theresa May and Boris Johnson said so.

This is not the first time this has happened, a little over a decade ago, the death of Russian Alexander Litvinenko in London was also blamed on Putin. Litvinenko was not murdered on Putin's orders, there was never even a single shred of evidence to support that claim; furthermore, there was a mass of evidence to point to a completely different group of people.

However, the British government and media steadfastly ignored all the inconvenient facts and simply blamed Putin, exactly the same as they are today over Sergei Skripal and his daughter.

Litvinenko's death was most likely accidental, the result of mishandling of the Polonium-210 he was engaged in smuggling. Litvinenko was an ex-FSB officer who, like many of his former comrades, was now in the employ of the Khazarian mafia. He worked for Boris Berezevsky as a mule, transporting nuclear materials back and forth to Israel.

This is made obvious by the places that traces of Polonium-210 were found: on the British Airways planes that flew Litvinenko back and forth to Israel, in Boris Berezovsky's house, in the offices of businesses owned by Berezovsky

Were Berezovsky and his Khazarian mafia associates investigated, did the media look into the background to this story? Nope, they simply piled the blame on Putin, regardless of the complete lack of evidence, just as they have done this week in the Skripal case.

There have been a great deal of similar cases of 'blame Putin' in recent years, the Litvinenko and Skripal cases are simply the most well known. When so many accusations are aimed at one man and so little evidence is presented to support those accusations, one has to wonder if there is some kind of plot to demonise Putin.

Well, wonder no more for there is clear evidence that such a plot exists in the form of a long-running operation by the intelligence services of the West, primarily the US and Britain, but no doubt aided by the Mossad and others.

In 2014, a highly credible source – a high ranking French security expert by the name of Paul Barril exposed the existence of a plot to demonise Putin and thus destabilise and weaken Russia; it is called Operation Beluga.

This bombshell was reported by one reporter for one online publication and thus went unnoticed, certainly no-one in the mainstream media made any mention of it, lest their 'Putin did it' narrative was holed beneath the waterline and sunk with all hands by this bombshell.

You can read the article that exposed the existence of Operation Beluga below; precious little else is known about this operation, but VT is investigating and will report what we learn in the near future.

Operation Beluga: A US-UK Plot to Discredit Putin and Destabilize the Russian Federation
by William Dunkerley, 13th April 2014

William Dunkerley is author of Ukraine in the Crosshairs. He is a media business analyst, principal of William Dunkerley Publishing Consultants, and a Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow.

Renowned French security expert Paul Barril has let loose a bombshell: the existence of Operation Beluga, a covert Western intelligence scheme intended to undermine Russia and its leaders.

Is that what's behind much of the threatening rhetoric now going back and forth between the US and Russia?

Barril exposed Operation Beluga in a recent interview with Swiss businessman Pascal Najadi on the 2006 Alexander Litvinenko death case. Litvinenko was a reputed former spy who many believe was murdered with radioactive polonium on orders of Vladimir Putin.

Najadi says the interview drew out the converse revelation that Litvinenko was actually killed by "an Italian who administered the deadly polonium 210." What's more, he astonishingly says, the operation was carried out under the auspices of the US and UK.

In my books The Phony Litvinenko Murder and Litvinenko Murder Case Solved I've written about an Italian connection. But I can't confirm that Barril is talking about the same person.

Here's what Najadi told me:

"According to Paul Barril, Litvinenko was himself working for the late Boris Berezovsky [a Russian fugitive oligarch that made London his home] who, according to Barril, was in turn working for and with the British intelligence service MI6. Barril said, 'Litvinenko has betrayed his employers, Berezovsky and the MI6, and has pocketed large sums of money, millions of US dollars, that were destined for agent provocateurs within the Berezovsky clan. The sole goal was to globally discredit Putin and the Russian Federation. This Western intelligence operation was directed from Washington DC and London. Its code name is Beluga.'"

Barril's comments deserve serious consideration. A former officer of the French Gendarmerie Nationale, he's been dubbed "Supercop" in France. Barril is cofounder of the GIGN French antiterror group, and has also served in French presidential security. During his career he has led several private security companies, as well.

Najadi says, "These new revelations from Captain Paul Barril now open a new window to the truth about the motive for killing Alexander Litvinenko."

Litvinenko's death has been a hot topic for officials within British officialdom. A UK coroner's inquest failed to reach a verdict on the manner and cause of Litvinenko's death, even after the passage of almost ten years. Then a politically-motivated official inquiry was authorized by Prime Minister David Cameron. Its final report hypothesized that Putin was behind the death, but it failed to produce any credible evidence. (See "Six Reasons You Can't Take the Litvinenko Report Seriously")

Britain had accused two Russians of poisoning Litvinenko. But the UK prosecutor failed to make his case against them, claiming that he had only "grave suspicions" about who's to blame.

Then there was the aborted coroner's inquest, and finally a report was issued under suspicious circumstances by a discredited judge who lacked the basic qualifications for conducting an official inquiry. (See "Britain Allowed Unqualified Judge to Decide Litvinenko Case. Now Inquiry Report Must Be Recalled" and "Discredited Litvinenko 'Judge' Sends Parliament Untrustworthy Verdict.")

Now the Litvinenko scandal takes on a new proportion. It's no longer just an incessantly long-running murder mystery. It just might be the telltale sign of an enormous geopolitical provocation that is wreaking havoc with world stability.

In the run-up to the American presidential election many of the candidates have talked very tough on dealing with Russia's role in the world. I wonder how many of them have bought into the Beluga scheme.

Appendix:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/U14nGr0y2Z8?feature=oembed

Revisiting Litvinenko, What Really Happened?
by Ryan Dawson April 26, 2015

As we all know Alexander Litvinenko was poisoned by polonium, a rare radioactive substance. The main narrative blamed it all on Vladimir Putin of Russia. The rationale rested on little other than because Litvinenko was a Putin critic. This was the quick line in mass media, and it was on all the typical war propaganda channels.

There are many things wrong with the "Putin did it" story. For one, there is no motive, even with Litvinenko being a critic of Russia, he was no threat whatsoever to Putin. The man worked with Chechen terrorists and the Israeli-Russian oligarchs.

But assuming that there was a sufficient motive to kill him, think about this: Why would Russia use a very rare, very expensive, and easily traceable radioactive substance to kill him instead of some cheap poison or just shooting him? Why risk smuggling radioactive material into the UK which is an act of war?

Yet that is exactly what the UK/US media would have you believe. They want to say that Putin had someone sneak into the UK with polonium and poison Litvinenko with it. It just isn't plausible. It's actually absurd.

Alexander Litvinenko who was formerly FSB fled to the UK to avoid court prosecution in Russia, worked for a shady Russian oligarch, Boris Berezovsky. Boris Berezovsky just so happens to be the Israeli-Russian oligarch who lived in London after fleeing the Russian judicial system for a multitude of crimes too long to list. He was on Interpol's most wanted list. Here is the grand prize.

After the US and UK press branded Putin with the poisoning despite there being Zero evidence, (something the US is very well known for now) investigators were tracking down the traces of Polonium in the UK. They detected traces of Polonium at Berezovsky's office and residence!

Now I do not know about you, but in my place of work, and certainly in my house, I do not have rare radioactive substances. Polonium is not something you just get at the market or pick up by accident walking through the park.

No experienced mob boss like Berezovsky would be dumb enough to murder an underling in such a manner either. Therefore his death was an accident. It was mostly likely it was a botched smuggling operation. Why was he moving such a dangerous substance? Did he need fast cash? Were they planning to create a dirty bomb? Such a "smoky bomb" would turn the Polonium into powder and kill anyone who ingested it.

Traces of Polonium were found on the planes that Litvinenko had been on. So I think we can deduce what happened. He was a mule. The questions remain, why did he have it?, Where did he get it? What was he going to do with it? Why was it in the offices of Berezovsky and Erinsys Ltd (Britain's Blackwater)?

The "Putin did it" smear case has never made sense. First of all, the amount of polonium 210 in play would have cost millions of dollars. That amount is too expensive to purchase and too large to go unnoticed if it were stolen. The only way to obtain such a quantity would be on a well organized black market that had a connection to a nuclear facility. It would certainly help organized crime if the nuclear powered supplier they received the Polonium from was not subjected to international inspections or part of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. Such a country, (Foreign country A) which denied they even built nuclear weapons for decades, would certainly also deny selling their Polonium byproduct as well.

Is it possible to hide that from the press? Yes. The media would ignore this for the same reason the media ignores them stealing nuclear secrets and building hundreds of nuclear weapons in Dimona, then throwing whistle blowers who took pictures of their warheads, in jail.

Litvinenko was in Israel, where he met Leonid Nevzlin the CEO of Yukos shortly before he died. If you wanted to buy/steal radioactive material that would be the place. What was he negotiating with Nevzlin? We learned Alexander had been an informant in a case that led to the arrest of nine Georgina and Russian Mobsters in Spain, including Alexander Gofstein a lawyer for Yukos who apparently was laundering money.

The downfall began when Georgina Mob Boss Zakhar Kalashov was arrested in May 2006. The scam was similar to what the old Five Families of New York had done, when guys like Meyer Lansky took profits from illegal gambling businesses and funneled them into buying up real estate in Florida. In the European case, the mob was taking illegal funds and buying up real estate in Spain as well as making investments into legitimate businesses.

Litivnenko's associates, Dmitry Kovtun and Andrei Lugovoi, who both had met with him the day of the poisoning, were also both hospitalized. They left traces of Polonium in Hamburg as they had taken the trip to Germany before meeting Litvinenko. It appears all three were involved in a smuggling operation, but for who?

Short answer: Russian Oligarch Boris Berezovsky's employee Alexander Litvinenko died from over exposure to Polonium in a botched smuggling operation. That is why traces of it were at Boris's house and on the planes Litvinenko was riding to and from Israel. The smear on Putin/Russia using a highly traceable 10 million dollar poison to kill a critic is about as plausible and rational as saying we have "British Intelligence" about Niger . This transparent bogus lie was a quick and shamelessly sloppy explanation to cover up how and why this man in the UK had a radioactive poison in his body. Polonium only has a half life of 138 days.

Litvinenko had been in Israel to visit Yukos's CEO, just shortly before he died. And it's an open secret that Israel has nuclear weapons, the only place without nuclear safeguard or inspections. Traces of polonium were also on the British Airway planes that Litvinenko took to and from Israel. So if they would have the means, location, and the timing fits, but let's just blame, Putin "The New Hitler" as Neocons have dubbed him?

Why the fuss about a conspiracy claiming that Putin put Litvinenko on a hitlist and poisoned him? Well as wacky as that story is, it was probably the best they could come up with on short notice. Boris knew once the police found out how Litvinenko died that there would be a lot of explaining to do. He also knew that if the investigation went forward that they could find more of this Polonium on his properties. So they just claimed the KGB was trying to kill them all.

Some History

This is not the first time that Berezovsky tried to pin a murder on someone else and claim that all the damning evidence pointing to him was a frame. There are the notorious cases (in Russia) of Ivan Litskevich and Vlad Listyev.

Ivan Listkevich was the general director of the Omsk oil Refinery easily the best refinery in Russia. Abramovich and Berezovsky planned to take over the refinery and make it part of Berezovsky's Sibnef (which it now is). Listkevich resisted. Ivan had outside investments from LUKoil (10% of the stock) and CS First Boston.

So in no way was he threatened to sink. Omsk was in the best location, had the latest equipment, and was well positioned to continue to soar. They serviced the biggest oil producers in Russia. Naturally Ivan did not want to be swallowed by Sibnef.

August 19, 1995 Ivan was found drowned in the Irtysh River. I doubt he went there to swim. Five days later Sibnef (Gazprom) took over. August 24th 1995, using his good buddy Yeltsin, Berezovsky got a Presidential Decree №872, to order a transfer of all the state's share in Omsk as well as 4 other companies to Sibnef. Then in 1996 Boris and Roman privatized Sibnef through a series of Loans-for-Shares' auctions which were a complete scam run through front companies and offshore banks. Yeltsin approved of it.

The case may leave doubts in the mind until one learns about the murder of Vlad Listyev. In 1994 Boris attacked one of his rivals over control of a media outlet. Part of the attack was broadcast all over TV and came to be known as "faces in the snow" as Boris's rival's bodyguard were forced at gun point to lie face down in the snow.

Shortly after a 90mph high speed chase and attacking rival Gusinsky's MOST guards and pinning Gusinsky in his own building, Berezovsky would take control of ORT (channel 1) through an illegal non-public "auction" and gain a near media monopoly.

For details on that I recommend reading "God Father of the Kremlin" if you can still find it. It was written by the senior editor of Forbes in Russian who holds a Ph.D in Russian history Paul Klebnikov. For the record Paul Klebnikov was killed after publishing his book on the Oligarchs, particularly on Boris, who is on the cover. He was shot four times in Moscow while leaving work and then died in the hospital after getting stuck on an elevator.

After the Gusinsky event, Boris had another problem. Vladislav Listyev. Listyev was probably the most popular talk show host in Russia and a TV producer. He was a business partner with Boris but the problem was he was not crooked.

As general director of ORT he decided to fix a multi-million dollar leak in the company and indirect way of Boris paying people off in the Mob to do dirty work, as well as paying himself by spending money for ads in other companies owned where he also ran the advertising sales. He had an offer from Sergei Lisovsky to buy up the sector. Negotiations never went through and Vlad had a different idea.

On Feb 20th 1995 Vlad announced that he would break the monopoly of Boris and Sergei. He called for a moratorium on ORT advertising until they could work out ethical standards. As you can imagine that did not make Boris or the rest of the mob happy.

Eight days later Boris personally met with "Nikolai" a mafia boss, and handed him a hundred thousand dollars in cash. This was witnessed by two police officers who were monitoring the Mob. Prior to that Boris's lacky Badri offered money to a different gangster but that man was arrested before he could do what was asked of him and he confessed this in jail. On March 1st the day after Berezovsky paid a second Mob Boss, Vlad Listyev was shot in the back at the entrance of his home.

Guilty as sin, with a confession against Badri as well as being personally witnessed by two police, offering another mob boss money, Boris was desperate. He was inches away from being arrested. Boris's TV network was cut out of government subsidies after the police raided it and it was subject to bankruptcy.

Fellow Media giant and friend Ruppert Murdoch promised to invest in the network and bail him out. How nice. And we all know where Murdoch stands. This relationship might also explain why Fox News and Sky News in the UK were so blatantly cheerleading the "Putin killed Litvinenko" conspiracy story.

But here is the real kicker. It is just as outrageous and far fetched as the Litvinenko poisoning. Boris concocted a story for Yeltsin which was recorded on video tape produced by Irina Lesnevskaya a producer at ORT and a friend of Yeltsin's wife. The tape claimed that it was all a big conspiracy against Berezovsky and that the real culprit (who had no motive other than to frame Boris [apparently able to hire a gun to kill Vlad but not Boris?]) was none other than bitter rival Gusinsky of Most Bank who Boris had already tried to kill once.

Yeltsin was paranoid of Gusinsky's political ambitions and Boris knew this. Boris also blamed X-KGB and said Vlad was killed by the MOST group, and not the mob he was witnessed meeting with a week after Vlad was going to break his monopoly. (Sounds like "Iraq moved the nonexistent WMDs to Syria just to make the US look bad." give me a break) Boris claimed to be set up because he was loyal to Yeltsin as was his new media outlet.

Yeltsin ever a partner in cover ups, not to mention a drunk and a thief, got Boris out of trouble once again by firing the lead investigators in the case which intimidated others to drop it. There was a huge public outcry. A TV personality had been killed. ORT created a new company called ORT advertising with a monopoly to sell ads on commission no less, and the boss-man chosen was none other than Sergei Lisovsky. Wow how utterly shameless.

If you can speak Russian or if you can find an English copy of the Boris/Lesnevskaya tape transcript sent to Yeltsin, it's going to make you very angry. It is about as plausible as saying Putin risked an act of war with the UK to kill a critic who worked for both a criminal as well as terrorist.

Who Done It?

So we know what didn't happen. But there still remains a "who done it." The quickest way to get to the bottom of this is to see who is lying the most and loudest, because that is usually who has the most to hide.

Remember Anna Politkovskaya? She was killed on Putin's birthday and the alternative press and the 'mindlessly accepting any conspiracy' types who fell for it, tried to use that circumstantial "evidence" to blame the murder on Putin.

These are the same types that claim Russia bombed its own apartment buildings to start a war with Chechnya omitting the fact that the apartment bombing took place five months after the war has already started, and the "sources" trying to blame the FSB were none other than Boris's lacky Litvinenko and well known plagiarist David Satter, who wrote for the PNAC co-founders' Weekly Standard, which gave the world all the bogus lies about Iraq's WMD and connection to the September 11th attacks.

Robert Kagan, the paper's cofounder with William Kristol, wrote an op-ed in the Washington Times calling "Speaking of Iraq" which pushes every erroneous prewar scare tactic there was.

His wife Victoria Nuland is the same woman who was recorded on the phone saying "F" the EU and openly talking about who would be a good replacement Prime Minister in Ukraine. She chose Arseniy Yatseniuk, who she called "Yatz" and he did become the prime minister of Ukraine a month later after the coup. Everything out of this factions mouth has been blindly anti-Russian.

There is a huge difference between conspiracy and kookpiracy. Getting away from the outlandish unsubstantiated claims about Anna's death, let's uncover something factual. Anna Politkovskaya was the journalist who had published three different articles on how SOMEONE was testing Polonium on Chechen children. Gee! Where have we seen THAT scenario before? Anna's articles were published in the Novaya Gazeta in 2006 and she was killed October of that same year.

The Washington Post then makes this clever claim. "Leonid Nevzlin, a former Yukos oil company shareholder and Russian exile currently living in Israel, told the Associated Press in late November that Litvinenko had given him a document related to a dossier on criminal charges made by Russian prosecutors against people connected to Yukos. Nevzlin, who is charged by Russian prosecutors with having organized killings, fraud and tax evasion, claimed Litvinenko's inquiries may have provided a motive for his poisoning"

Notice who else is in that Washington Post article (Scaramella) and who was planting the ideas that Putin had killed both Litvinenko and Anna. How crazy is that to use polonium to murder someone Scaramella is a rotten one.

After Anna's lawyer Stanislav Markelov was murdered in 2009 followed by the murder of one of her key informants in Chechnya Natalia Estemirova the same year, there was a retrial in Anna's case which went to the Supreme Court.

Chechen president Ramzan Kadyrov stirred up a public disgust when he said about Anna's informant Natalia Estemirova on Radio Liberty "She was a woman who had never possessed any honor, dignity or conscience."

The prosecution cornered Dmitry Pavliutchenkov a former policeman who in turn confessed Lom-Ali Gaitukayev was who negotiated the contract killing and behind him he suspected Boris Berezovsky. Dmitry was sentenced to 11 years in jail. Five men were found guilty in her murder. Three were the Chechen brothers who had been acquitted in the first trial and they went to prison. Rustam Makhmudov and Lom-Ali Gaitukayev got life sentences in 2014. Berevsovsky had died the year before in March of 2013.

The most troubling thing here is not that mob did something illegal or that the Western press jumped the gun to do a anti-Russian witch hunt. All of that is pretty run of the mill. It's not even that Israel secretly has nukes and is involved with organized crime. Again, imagine my lack of shock.

It's not even the multiple murders that are most troubling. The most troubling part of this story is what the ultimate purpose of that much Polonium was for and why it was in the UK. The potential for a dirty bomb is enormous. With the current climate of ISIS and disgruntled youth in Europe joining the mercenary forces to fight Israel's enemies in Syria and Lebanon, a dirty bomb in the UK is not an unimaginable scenario.

Just having such a thing could also hold leverage over politicians there too. The source of the Polonium should have been traced and potential sources should also be subject to inspection.

[Mar 17, 2018] Aaron Mat on Year 1 of Russiagate and its consequences

Mar 17, 2018 | scotthorton.org

Aaron Maté of The Real News joins Scott to discuss two of his latest pieces for The Nation, " Hyping the Mueller Indictment " and " What We've Learned in Year 1 of Russiagate ." Maté explains why he thinks the Trump-Russia collusion case is much ado about nothing and how Trump's pre-election attempts to de-escalate tensions with Russia have been misconstrued as collusion. Scott and Maté then discuss how the centrist left, with the help of Facebook and corporate media, is using the Russiagate conspiracy to double down on the Hillary Clinton wing of the Democratic party.

[Mar 16, 2018] So what is being implied here, is that the British authorities have both: A control sample (to determine if the quantities found would be lethal) and samples from a few different labs to confirm that the fingerprint was from lab A not lab B for example. How did they have those?

Notable quotes:
"... For conclusive confirmation a coincidence of what is called 'retention times' would also be required against a standard. The retention time is the time it takes for the compound to 'show itself' at the end of the long thin tube inside the Gas Chromatograph. Different chemicals hold on to the tube with varying tenacities. and hence give various rates of elution. ..."
"... So what is being implied here, is that the authorities have both: A control sample (to determine if the quantities found would be lethal) and samples from a few different labs to confirm that the fingerprint was from lab A not lab B for example. ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

OK I'll bite. As a former industrial organic chemist, both synthetic organic, pilot plant, and QC (quality control), post-doc, this smells to me.

Regarding the synthesis, as I understand it, this class are binary agents, i.e. non-lethal till mixing, so the two 'halves' could be made without specialist kit. Even active nerve agents could be prepared using a just fume cupboard, and the right PPE. Nothing too special required other than non shaky hands. Could be made anywhere the precursors are available. We worked with HF, OsO4, Thallium etc in such environments.

Regarding the analysis. Typically small quantities are analysed (I used to install them) using GCMS. Gas Chromatography Mass spectrometry. This can detect down to femtogram levels.

OK.

So there exists databases of substances and their breakdown patterns under fragmentation, which can give possible matches to known compounds. This compound may have been on there. However, for an allegation of such seriousness, these would be 'indicative' rather than 'conclusive'. For conclusive confirmation a coincidence of what is called 'retention times' would also be required against a standard. The retention time is the time it takes for the compound to 'show itself' at the end of the long thin tube inside the Gas Chromatograph. Different chemicals hold on to the tube with varying tenacities. and hence give various rates of elution.

So a professional forensic scientist, I would hope, would do the following.

OK so a good forensic laboratory would have access to the following. A synthetically pure sample of known weight and impurity profile. Finger prints of samples from 'sources of concern'

So what is being implied here, is that the authorities have both: A control sample (to determine if the quantities found would be lethal) and samples from a few different labs to confirm that the fingerprint was from lab A not lab B for example.

(How) did they have those?

[Mar 16, 2018] At best this is circumstantial evidence leading to a wild assumption, and at worst it is conjecture much like that which has been the banner topic in the United States for 16 months concerning Russia and Donald Trump's election

Notable quotes:
"... Many trails point to the fact that Russia is responsible ..."
"... It certainly looks like the Russians were behind it. Something that should never ever happen and we're taking it very seriously as I think are many others. ..."
"... There is no alternative conclusion other than that the Russian state was culpable for the attempted murder of Mr. Skripal and his daughter." ..."
"... our quarrel is with Putin's Kremlin, and with his decision, and we think it overwhelmingly likely that it was his decision to direct the use of a nerve agent on the streets of the UK for the first time since the Second World War ..."
"... (That is assuming it was indeed Novichok, since Britain is being close-handed about sharing the data with Russian authorities.) ..."
"... All words, no facts. ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | theduran.com

Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov plainly stated that to refuse this assistance is a direct violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention which states that the country suspected of being the place of origin of a toxic agent is to be contacted first in the event of that agent's use.

One would wonder "why not?" At least one ought to.

But in the meantime, Russia is not taking this matter lying down. More, there is even a bit of humor.

The temperature of relations drops to -2 -3, but we are not afraid of cold weather. pic.twitter.com/mand9YyoaE

-- Russian Embassy, UK (@RussianEmbassy) March 14, 2018

Firstly, Moscow has opened its own investigation into the attempted murders of the Skripals on its own. In addition, they have also opened an investigation into the suspected murder of Nikolay Glushkov, a Russian businessman, which also happened in London.

And of course, when asked by a reporter from Reuters if Moscow would expel British diplomats, Foreign Minister Lavrov smiled and said, "We will, of course."

Even US President Donald Trump is seen by some news agencies to be "joining the dogpile" against Russia, though as it has been noted elsewhere here on The Duran , Mr. Trump's response suggests very tacit agreement, but in such a way as to leave plenty of opening, as the American president seems to have a cooler approach to this matter.

The primary allegation has this sort of structure:

But again these are allegations, and there is no conclusive evidence that verifies any of this aside from the point that Novichok was used. (That is assuming it was indeed Novichok, since Britain is being close-handed about sharing the data with Russian authorities.) At best this is circumstantial evidence leading to a wild assumption, and at worst it is conjecture much like that which has been the banner topic in the United States for 16 months concerning Russia and Donald Trump's election.

All words, no facts. Makes a person feel a bit like this man

[Mar 16, 2018] How do you know Skripal was murdered? Even the British haven't claimed that. In fact we don't even know that Skripal was injured. There have been no photos, no medical statements, we are just expected to believe all the fake news

Notable quotes:
"... How do you know Skripal was murdered? Even the British haven't claimed that. In fact we don't even know that Skripal was injured. There have been no photos, no medical statements, we are just expected to believe all the fake news. ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | www.unz.com

Don Bacon , March 16, 2018 at 2:36 pm GMT

@Daruma

"There are only three scenarios explaining the murder of Skripal "

How do you know Skripal was murdered? Even the British haven't claimed that. In fact we don't even know that Skripal was injured. There have been no photos, no medical statements, we are just expected to believe all the fake news.

But hey, highly likely has become overwhelmingly likely so why should we quibble.

[Mar 16, 2018] Corbyn Calls for Evidence in Escalating Poison Row

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... For requesting evidence of Russian culpability in the poisoning of former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter, UK Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn has been denounced by PM Theresa May and even members of his own party. ..."
"... he British government demanded that Russia offer an explanation, but then rejected a Russian request to share a sample of the nerve agent that was used in the poisoning. ..."
"... JEREMY CORBYN: Our response must be both decisive and proportionate, and based on clear evidence. If the government believes that it is still a possibility that Russia negligently lost control of a military grade nerve agent, what action is being taken through the OPCW with our allies? I welcome the fact the police are working with the OPCW, and has the prime minister taken the necessary steps under the Chemical Weapons Convention to make a formal request for evidence from the Russian government under Article 9.2? How has she responded to the Russian government's request for a sample of the agent used in the Salisbury attack to run its own tests? Has high resolution trace analysis been run on a sample of the nerve agent? And has that revealed any evidence as to the location of its production or the identity of its perpetrators? ..."
"... My first reaction having listened to the clip you played by Jeremy Corbyn is that's one very courageous man. It's not clear even his own Labour Party supports what he said. ..."
"... So, I kind of quarrel with your opening sentence that relations are as bad as they've been since the end of the Cold War. I say, no they're worse than they were during the Cold War. I jotted down just a few reasons. Let me just rattle them off and then we'll get to this, any other event you want to talk about. The reason this new Cold War is more dangerous is we already have three fronts that are fraught with hot war. That's where the NATO buildup in the North Baltic and the Black Sea, Ukraine, and Syria. Remember in Syria, it appears to be the case that American proxies have already killed Russian citizens. So, we don't know what's going to come next. ..."
"... Secondly, two of these fronts are directly on Russia's borders, not in Berlin as was the case during the preceding Cold War, right on Russia's borders in the Baltic region and in Ukraine. Thirdly, there has been such demonization of the Kremlin leader, Putin, unlike anything that was the case during the old Cold War with Kremlin communist leaders, and along with it a kind of a Russophobic attack on Russia itself the old Cold War was about communism. This one seems to be about Russia just in general. And then you get this lightning speed of news as with this nerve agent, with people weighing in without any authority or any knowledge, very very quickly, and it's spreading before anybody has a time has time to reflect, and think, an actual expert opinion come to the fore. ..."
"... Theresa May is, perhaps, among the weakest prime ministers in modern history. She's holding on for dear life. Jeremy Corbyn is an extraordinary figure. His party, his Labour Party, which is not very good on Russia related issues either, didn't approve of what he said. But he said the right thing. He said, "There's no evidence. While we search for evidence, we need to continue a robust dialogue with Russia." That's exactly right. ..."
"... And whether he'll prevail or not, I don't know, but it is interesting, isn't it, that unlike in the United States, the leader of the opposition, which is what Corbyn is, and potentially a prime minister, is setting himself against this reckless Cold War behavior on the part of the British government. All I can say is I wish we had such a person in American high politics. ..."
"... The latest in a continuing campaign of fear and violence, staged for a hapless public, designed to lend legitimacy to authoritarianism and fascism foisted upon our domestic population; brought to you by the same Fear Inc. that capitalized on the Charlie Hebdo massacre ..."
"... With such careless rush to judgement, circumventing due process, as has been demonstrated time and again by a class of corrupt and covetous warmongers posing as public officials and their equally corrupt mainstream propaganda machine, literally everything uttered by the likes of Teresa May and her cohort of psychopathic political charlatans must be viewed with incredulity. ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | therealnews.com

For requesting evidence of Russian culpability in the poisoning of former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter, UK Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn has been denounced by PM Theresa May and even members of his own party. We discuss the case with Stephen F. Cohen, Professor Emeritus of Russian Studies at New York University and Princeton

http://www.youtube.com/embed/jY9-c4M7UhA?rel=0&autoplay=0&showinfo=0

AARON MATÉ: It's The Real News. I'm Aaron Maté. Ties between Russia and the West are at their lowest point since The Cold War, and a new spat over a poisoning in Britain has sunk them even lower. The British government is blaming Russia for the poisoning of former Russian spy, Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in the British town of Salisbury.

The two remain in critical condition after ingesting what the British government says is a military-grade nerve agent made by Russia. The British government demanded that Russia offer an explanation, but then rejected a Russian request to share a sample of the nerve agent that was used in the poisoning. Speaking today in parliament, British Prime Minister Theresa May said Russia's response so far proves their culpability.

THERESA MAY: There is no alternative conclusion other than that the Russian state was culpable for the attempted murder of Mr. Skripal and his daughter. And for threatening the lives of other British citizens in Salisbury, including Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey. This represents an unlawful use of force by the Russian state against the United Kingdom. And as I set out on Monday, it has taken place against the backdrop of a well established pattern of Russian state aggression across Europe and beyond. It must therefore, be met with a full and robust response, beyond the actions we have already taken since the murder of Mr. Litvinenko and to counter this pattern of Russian aggression elsewhere.

AARON MATÉ: As part of the measures against Russia, May announced the expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats, the single biggest such expulsion in three decades. That drew a response from Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who pressed May to hand over evidence.

JEREMY CORBYN: Our response must be both decisive and proportionate, and based on clear evidence. If the government believes that it is still a possibility that Russia negligently lost control of a military grade nerve agent, what action is being taken through the OPCW with our allies? I welcome the fact the police are working with the OPCW, and has the prime minister taken the necessary steps under the Chemical Weapons Convention to make a formal request for evidence from the Russian government under Article 9.2? How has she responded to the Russian government's request for a sample of the agent used in the Salisbury attack to run its own tests? Has high resolution trace analysis been run on a sample of the nerve agent? And has that revealed any evidence as to the location of its production or the identity of its perpetrators?

AARON MATÉ: The dispute over the poisoning has gotten so serious, that there has been speculation of NATO invoking Article 5, which bounds member states to defend others in the event of an attack. So far, Downing Street has tamped down talk of Article 5, but Theresa May has been summoning support from key allies, including the US

Joining me is professor Stephen Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies at New York University and Princeton. Welcome, Professor Cohen.

You have been warning for a long time that we are in the midst of a new Cold War. What are your thoughts today as you see now tensions escalating between Britain and Russia, with now Britain ordering the expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats following the expulsions that have happened in the US to Russian diplomats as a result of the Russiagate controversy?

STEPHEN COHEN: My first reaction having listened to the clip you played by Jeremy Corbyn is that's one very courageous man. It's not clear even his own Labour Party supports what he said. In the essence of what he said is Theresa May has no evidence, and yet she's prepared to ratchet up already a bad relationship with Russia based on this. They haven't produced any evidence. Let's put it like that. This alarms me because, I've said this before on your broadcast, but it's almost never said in the mainstream and it's hard to get an American discussion of it, is that whether we call our relationship with Russia a new cold war or not, it certainly is. The point is it's so much more dangerous than the preceding Cold War. I could even argue that the situation today is in some ways more dangerous than the Cuban Missile Crisis.

So, I kind of quarrel with your opening sentence that relations are as bad as they've been since the end of the Cold War. I say, no they're worse than they were during the Cold War. I jotted down just a few reasons. Let me just rattle them off and then we'll get to this, any other event you want to talk about. The reason this new Cold War is more dangerous is we already have three fronts that are fraught with hot war. That's where the NATO buildup in the North Baltic and the Black Sea, Ukraine, and Syria. Remember in Syria, it appears to be the case that American proxies have already killed Russian citizens. So, we don't know what's going to come next.

Secondly, two of these fronts are directly on Russia's borders, not in Berlin as was the case during the preceding Cold War, right on Russia's borders in the Baltic region and in Ukraine. Thirdly, there has been such demonization of the Kremlin leader, Putin, unlike anything that was the case during the old Cold War with Kremlin communist leaders, and along with it a kind of a Russophobic attack on Russia itself the old Cold War was about communism. This one seems to be about Russia just in general. And then you get this lightning speed of news as with this nerve agent, with people weighing in without any authority or any knowledge, very very quickly, and it's spreading before anybody has a time has time to reflect, and think, an actual expert opinion come to the fore.

AARON MATÉ: One person who has been pillared in the media today is Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader who we heard from before. And I wanna play more of his speech of his comments today, to the British parliament.

JEREMY CORBYN: And while suspending planned high level contact, does the prime minister agree that it is essential to maintain a robust dialogue with Russia in the interest of our own and wider international security?

AARON MATÉ: That's Jeremy Corbyn speaking today, calling today for. "a robust dialogue with Russia." So, Professor Cohen, for saying that, Corbyn was widely mocked, including by members of his own party. I'm wondering if you can comment on that, the import of that, not just for this specific case, but overall, this attitude towards having dialogue, calling for dialogue with Russia being somehow worthy of scorn and contempt.

... ... ...

STEPHEN COHEN: But I've heard some of these people saying privately that we need this, but I don't hear them saying it publicly. Look, I did live in England and get educated there partly many, many years ago, and I followed British politics. So, I don't have great authority, but two things come to mind. Theresa May is, perhaps, among the weakest prime ministers in modern history. She's holding on for dear life. Jeremy Corbyn is an extraordinary figure. His party, his Labour Party, which is not very good on Russia related issues either, didn't approve of what he said. But he said the right thing. He said, "There's no evidence. While we search for evidence, we need to continue a robust dialogue with Russia." That's exactly right.

And whether he'll prevail or not, I don't know, but it is interesting, isn't it, that unlike in the United States, the leader of the opposition, which is what Corbyn is, and potentially a prime minister, is setting himself against this reckless Cold War behavior on the part of the British government. All I can say is I wish we had such a person in American high politics.

AARON MATÉ: Well, that's a good segue to the next part of our discussion where we're gonna talk more about the role right now of Russiagate in US politics. Professor Stephen F. Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies at Princeton University and New York University, thank you.

And thank you for joining us on The Real News.

Stephen F. Cohen is professor emeritus of Russian studies, history, and politics at New York University and Princeton University.

p.munkey • 2 hours ago ,

The latest in a continuing campaign of fear and violence, staged for a hapless public, designed to lend legitimacy to authoritarianism and fascism foisted upon our domestic population; brought to you by the same Fear Inc. that capitalized on the Charlie Hebdo massacre (See Youtube | StormCloudsGathering | 02m:43s " Charlie Hebdo Shootings - Censored Video " [ https://youtu.be/yJEvlKKm6og ])

With such careless rush to judgement, circumventing due process, as has been demonstrated time and again by a class of corrupt and covetous warmongers posing as public officials and their equally corrupt mainstream propaganda machine, literally everything uttered by the likes of Teresa May and her cohort of psychopathic political charlatans must be viewed with incredulity.

[Mar 16, 2018] Pressure of France to comply with GB position

Mar 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

b | Mar 15, 2018 10:27:46 AM | 88

https://twitter.com/Ch_Germann/status/974290574881771521
Christoph Germann @Ch_Germann now

  1. France says it wants firm proof of Russian involvement: "We don't do fantasy politics"
  2. Reuters publishes report
  3. Panic in NATOland
  4. Reuters updates report, no mention of "fantasy politics" or "definitive conclusions"
  5. May calls Macron
  6. France blames Russia

---

[Mar 16, 2018] NATO to display common front in Skripal case

Highly recommended!
France previously stated that they do not react to British "Fantasy politics". French president Emmanuel Macron wants more evidence Vladimir Putin was involved and his spokesman accused Britain of "fantasy politics" -- Theresa May accused of punishing Russia too SOON by France who demand more evidence .
Later Macron was forced to change the tune
Notable quotes:
"... Russian Envoy to the UN #Nebenzya: Curious fact. Although Russia stopped all its CW programmes in 1992, the UK & the US received specialists/defectors & documentation on these projects incl. so-called Novichok in mid-1990s, continued researching CW as evidenced by open sources ..."
"... .@RussiaUN: in 1992 Russia closed all Soviet chemical weapons programmes. Some of the scientists were flown to the West (incl UK) where they continued research. To identify a substance, formula and samples are needed – means UK has capacity to produce suspected nerve agent. ..."
"... Craig Murray's excellent essay's been heavily attacked, and he's written a stimulating and educational response that further bolsters the initial essay. Quite interesting the so-called journalists supporting May's propaganda. ..."
"... Oh dear, in sacred Europe!! How about the West using nerve agents on a grand scale against its enemy Iran in the Middle East (since the Second World War)? Twenty thousand Iranians were killed on the spot by nerve gas, according to reports, with thousands of people hospitalized. According to Iraqi documents, assistance in the development of chemical weapons was obtained from firms in many countries, including the United States, West Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and France. A report stated that Dutch, Australian, Italian, French and both West and East German companies were involved in the export of raw materials to Iraqi chemical weapons factories. ..."
"... This is the same sort of "highly likely" language that has worked so well with the false-flag attacks in Syria. It's obviously "highly likely" that there is no actual evidence. ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Don Bacon , Mar 15, 2018 11:17:24 AM | 90

In joint statement, world leaders agree Russia behind nerve agent attack on former spy
This is the joint statement of the whirled leaders:
We, the leaders of France, Germany, the United States and the United Kingdom, abhor the attack that took place against Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury, UK, on 4 March 2018. A British police officer who was also exposed in the attack remains seriously ill, and the lives of many innocent British citizens have been threatened. We express our sympathies to them all, and our admiration for the UK police and emergency services for their courageous response.

This use of a military-grade nerve agent, of a type developed by Russia, constitutes the first offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since the Second World War. It is an assault on UK sovereignty and any such use by a State party is a clear violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention and a breach of international law. It threatens the security of us all.

The United Kingdom briefed thoroughly its allies that it was highly likely that Russia was responsible for the attack. We share the UK assessment that there is no plausible alternative explanation, and note that Russia´s failure to address the legitimate request by the UK government further underlines its responsibility. We call on Russia to address all questions related to the attack in Salisbury. Russia should in particular provide full and complete disclosure of the Novichok programme to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).

Our concerns are also heightened against the background of a pattern of earlier irresponsible Russian behaviour. We call on Russia to live up to its responsibilities as a member of the UN Security Council to uphold international peace and security. . . here

b , Mar 15, 2018 11:35:19 AM | 92
Russian Embassy, UK @RussianEmbassy
Russian Envoy to the UN #Nebenzya: Russia destroyed all of its chemical weapons arsenals by 2017, a fact attested by @OPCW. No research, development or manufacturing of projects codenamed Novichok has ever been carried out in Russia, all CW programmes were stopped back in 1991-92

-

Russian Envoy to the UN #Nebenzya: Curious fact. Although Russia stopped all its CW programmes in 1992, the UK & the US received specialists/defectors & documentation on these projects incl. so-called Novichok in mid-1990s, continued researching CW as evidenced by open sources

-

later:

-

.@RussiaUN: in 1992 Russia closed all Soviet chemical weapons programmes. Some of the scientists were flown to the West (incl UK) where they continued research. To identify a substance, formula and samples are needed – means UK has capacity to produce suspected nerve agent.

source:
karlof1 , Mar 15, 2018 11:44:05 AM | 94
Craig Murray's excellent essay's been heavily attacked, and he's written a stimulating and educational response that further bolsters the initial essay. Quite interesting the so-called journalists supporting May's propaganda.
Don Bacon , Mar 15, 2018 11:51:02 AM | 96
from the Joint Statement:
. . . the first offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since the Second World War
Oh dear, in sacred Europe!! How about the West using nerve agents on a grand scale against its enemy Iran in the Middle East (since the Second World War)? Twenty thousand Iranians were killed on the spot by nerve gas, according to reports, with thousands of people hospitalized. According to Iraqi documents, assistance in the development of chemical weapons was obtained from firms in many countries, including the United States, West Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and France. A report stated that Dutch, Australian, Italian, French and both West and East German companies were involved in the export of raw materials to Iraqi chemical weapons factories.
Don Bacon , Mar 15, 2018 11:55:15 AM | 97
from the Joint Statement:
. . . it was highly likely that Russia was responsible for the attack
This is the same sort of "highly likely" language that has worked so well with the false-flag attacks in Syria. It's obviously "highly likely" that there is no actual evidence.

[Mar 16, 2018] Since it seems that Russia promise to defend its men and women in Damascus has effectively staved off a US attack and the western alliance decided to frame Russia for something

Notable quotes:
"... Since it seems that Russia's steadfast promise to defend its men and women in Damascus has effectively staved off a US attack, the western alliance did the next best thing to attacking Russia in Syria – it decided to frame Russia for something that happened on English soil. - Let's Talk About Motive in The Skripal Case: Let's Talk About Syria ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Grieved | Mar 15, 2018 3:46:39 PM | 124

Just read a very interesting supposition by Adam Garrie, which strikes a very true note:

Since it seems that Russia's steadfast promise to defend its men and women in Damascus has effectively staved off a US attack, the western alliance did the next best thing to attacking Russia in Syria – it decided to frame Russia for something that happened on English soil. - Let's Talk About Motive in The Skripal Case: Let's Talk About Syria

So, spite. Wounded ego.

And further demonstration of the west's pitiful lack of means to do anything much real in this world except kill people unprepared to fight back. What will it do as more and more prepare to fight back? Ask Kim. Ask Duterte, Maduro, Erdogan.

[Mar 16, 2018] There was a CCTV camera on the traffic light opposite the restaurant with the bench were Skriplas were found

Mar 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Peter VE | Mar 15, 2018 5:22:28 PM | 138

There's a CCTV camera on the traffic light opposite the restaurant (or was in Google St View June 2017) here . When will they release the video, or was the camera "not working"?

Wait, I found the footage! ;-)

[Mar 16, 2018] What Was the Mysterious WMD an Assassin Used on a Russian Spy The Answer Could Lead to Vladimir Putin by Spencer Ackerman

Notable quotes:
"... A former KGB officer told The Daily Beast that Western assumptions that these deadly concoctions must have been devised and authorized by the state showed a deep misunderstanding of Russia. ..."
"... Vassiliev, who became a KGB historian after retiring from the service, said the deaths of Skripal's wife, son and brother in recent years made this look more like a mafia revenge attack than a Kremlin-sanctioned mission. ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | www.thedailybeast.com

The Porton Down facility has been home to Britain's defense and technology research since reports emerged from First World War battlefields that the Germans had killed 140 British soldiers with chlorine gas in January 1915. Coincidentally, the highly secretive facility is located on the outskirts of Salisbury, just seven miles from where former Russian military intelligence colonel Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, were found on Sunday.

Samples were being analyzed within hours of the discovery after local police began to feel a physical reaction and officers raced to shut down the areas of contamination. Witnesses reported seeing the victims unconscious, with their eyes rolled back, and foaming at the mouth.

Skripal and his daughter were isolated immediately. About 24 hours after the attack, it was determined that they were suffering from some sort of nerve agent in their system. While Skripal has stabilized, his daughter remains in critical condition; both are being treated in the intensive care unit, along with a police officer who was called to investigate this mysterious illness.

Based on their symptoms and the contamination patterns, scientists who spoke to The Daily Beast are convinced this was a nerve agent attack and not radiation exposure, a cyanide attack, or a biological weapon.

"In these recent cases, the symptoms described like frothing at the mouth, vomiting, convulsions and coma -- that's more likely a nerve agent," said Timothy Erickson , chief of medical toxicology at Boston's Brigham and Women's Hospital and faculty at Harvard Medical School. Erickson published a paper last year in the journal Toxicology Communications about last the fatal February 2017 attack on Kim Jong Nam , the half-brother of North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, which used VX -- short for "Venomous agent X."

VX was invented by British biological warfare experts at Porton Down, the very same facility where tests are underway this week.

Sarin and VX -- dangerous neurochemicals that disrupt nerve-organ messaging and shut down basic bodily functions -- are the most popular of the agents, but others with similar properties do exist.

A senior intelligence source told the BBC that it is believed sarin and VX were not the agents used, posing the question: What was used instead and what can that tell us about the source?

Around World War II, Nazi scientists synthesized an entire "G-class" of nerve agents that not only included sarin, but also soman, cyclosarin, and tabun, variants that also debilitate the nervous system.

They were discovered accidentally while manufacturing pesticides , which can have similar effects on humans, but they remain extremely difficult to produce. Mark Bishop , a chemical weapons specialist in nonproliferation at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies in Monterey, California, said that producing them requires a technical capacity and scientific know-how that isn't possible in many places. "It's tricky," Bishop said. "It requires a pretty high level of expertise for producing chemicals."

Bishop said it was possible but highly unlikely that the Russians had developed a totally new nerve agent. "They're probably making an attempt [to create other nerve agents], but it's tough. There's no real incentive to create a new nerve agent -- they already work so well. The only motivation to create a new one would be if they wanted them to not be identified as chemicals or to fly under the radar."

One option that is unlikely but potentially alarming is that Russia has finally succeeded in its Soviet era mission to create a new class of nerve agents referred to as novichoks whose molecules were not detectable through modern lab testing methods. "They tried to keep it a secret, and there's pretty skimpy evidence that it was happening," Bishop cautioned. "But it's an interesting possibility that would point directly to the Russians."

No matter what substance was used, conclusively tracing the orders back to the Kremlin will prove difficult.

... ... ...

Judging by the rush to secure Skripal's home, the restaurant where he shared lunch with his daughter, the pub where they retired afterwards, and the hospital where they were treated, it seems there were fears that contaminated footprints were indeed being left along the way.

...The police officer, Nick Bailey, who was affected later at second-hand was so severely afflicted that he had to be treated in intensive care, although he is now conscious and talking.

The weapons experts at Porton Down will be examining every molecule and the patterns of the substance's distribution around Salisbury in the hope that they can find a specific chemical signature that will allow this agent to be traced back to its source.

... ... ...

A former KGB officer told The Daily Beast that Western assumptions that these deadly concoctions must have been devised and authorized by the state showed a deep misunderstanding of Russia.

"People actually underestimate the level of corruption in Russia -- any Russian will tell you that the corruption is so high that you can get anything, anything you want," said Alexander Vassiliev. "You want polonium? You get it -- just pay the money."

Vassiliev, who became a KGB historian after retiring from the service, said the deaths of Skripal's wife, son and brother in recent years made this look more like a mafia revenge attack than a Kremlin-sanctioned mission.

"I was a cadet in the KGB spy school exactly at the time when Putin was -- we had the same training, we had the same instructors, we had the same textbooks, so I always have an idea about how he is thinking," he said. "Intelligence services in civilized countries don't do revenge -- emotions shouldn't have a place in espionage -- it's not like two guys got drunk in Moscow, decided to go to Britain and kill a traitor, it doesn't work like that."

... ... ...

Some British newspaper reports have suggested, however, that he may have still been working either for MI6 -- his handlers when he was spying from Russia -- or freelancing for private intelligence companies including Orbis, which is run by Christopher Steele, who compiled the infamous Trump/Russia dossier.

"Of course, he was a traitor -- he committed high treason. In the Soviet Union he would have been executed, definitely," said Vassiliev. "But you only want to kill someone in espionage if you expect this guy to bring further damage to your country or your intelligence agency."

Where Vassiliev, the scientific community and the British authorities all agree, is on the brazenness of this attack, which could never have gone unnoticed.

Bishop, the weapons expert in California, said the failure to immediately kill the targets -- and incidental poisoning of 21 people -- suggested that this was a sloppy job. "Nerve agents are pretty potent, and you don't need a high concentration to kill someone," he said. "It's really surprising that they're still alive. Either it was not a potent nerve agent or it was not administered efficiently or it was impure and the proper concentration was not transferred."

Vassiliev agreed. "Generally it doesn't look like a special service operation because the whole thing was done in the daylight, as far as I understand. On the other hand you can never be sure about it because many things can go wrong, there could have been a mistake -- no secret agent is perfect."

[Mar 16, 2018] A monumental level of British Imperial Hypocrisy...

Notable quotes:
"... "A briefing paper by the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office stated: "We believe it better to maintain a dialogue with others if we want to influence their actions. Punitive measures such as unilateral sanctions would not be effective in changing Iraq's behaviour over chemical weapons, and would damage British interests to no avail." ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

time2wakeupnow | Mar 15, 2018 9:44:30 PM | 155

A Quick Chemical Weapons History of Western Imperial Hypocrisy...

The latest UNSC 'meeting' occurring yesterday - at the behest of the ever yapping US poodles 'across the pond', is available for viewing - (in it's a bit over an hour in it's entirety). I think that you might find find this video documentation of one of the most farcical UNSC sessions to take place probably since the now infamous Colin Powell high kabuki theater piece - when he comically held up for the council members - a vial of a "white power" substance that, I believe, turned out to be nothing more than a packet of "Saccharin" hastily appropriated from the UN's commissary earlier that morning for "demonstration purposes ONLY!". I think, He should have taken it a tad further and pretended to accidentally" drop the vial on the chamber floor - just to see how the other UNSC members listening to his CIA inspired ruse would have responded. I'm sure that everyone attending would've all had a great laugh together and then would have unanimously approved the west's request to bomb all thing Iraqi into oblivion.

What I think that you'll find of interest here, is not only the main parties (UK & the RF) presentations before the council, but also the presentations of the remaining 13 Security Council members - including, of course. Ms. Haley's saccharin & sanctimonious speech of the USA's eternal bond of solidarity with it's favorite, very well manicured pet poodle..eh.. ally: the UK. I especially found the Chinese predictably short, but carefully parsed statement, along with those from African and South American SC ambassadors.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=USYfRVqG2lk

Finally, bringing this whole mock-moral unipolar charade full circle, below is the historically damning Wikipedia page on the Halabja (but...he gassed his own people) massacre by Saddam Hussein on the evening of March the 16th, 1988 - nearly 2 months into George the First's term, and near the end of the western supported Iran/Iraq war. One of the very best pretzeled presentational pretenses came from none other that the now theatrically aggrieved sovereign "kingdom":

"A briefing paper by the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office stated: "We believe it better to maintain a dialogue with others if we want to influence their actions. Punitive measures such as unilateral sanctions would not be effective in changing Iraq's behaviour over chemical weapons, and would damage British interests to no avail."

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

[Mar 16, 2018] The UK still refuses to provide the required-by-law materials to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapon. The whole "communication" with Russians re Skripal case has exposed a stunning incompetence

Mar 16, 2018 | www.unz.com

annamaria , March 16, 2018 at 2:57 pm GMT

@Stan d Mute

The very first announcement made by Boris Johnson after the alleged terrorist act on the British soil was " British footballers will not attend the championship in Russia" -- before (BEFORE!) any investigation has been conducted.

The UK still refuses to provide the required-by-law materials to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapon.

The whole "communication" with Russian re Skripal case has exposed a stunning incompetence of the UK government across all departments, beginning with the incompetent Mrs. May and Mr. Johnson and down to the US Sec of Def Gavin Williamson (a Diaper-Boy with the expertise in fine china and ceramic countertops).

English subtitles: http://theduran.com/mariya-zakharova-lays-correct-way-deal-assassination/

https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/03/lavrov-uks-defense-chief-just-wants-to-be-remembered-in-history-for-his-bombastic-statements/

[Mar 16, 2018] Shadow of operation Gladio hangs over Skripal case

Notable quotes:
"... "Has high-resolution trace analysis been run on a sample of the nerve agent that revealed any evidence as to the location of its production or identity of its perpetrators? The government should work with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons." ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | www.unz.com

annamaria , March 16, 2018 at 1:33 pm GMT

@peterAUS

Such a strong expression of righteousness from peterAUS -- and careful omission, a la Quartermaster, of a simple fact articulated by Corbin:

"Has high-resolution trace analysis been run on a sample of the nerve agent that revealed any evidence as to the location of its production or identity of its perpetrators? The government should work with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons."

But the UK government refuses to provide samples to the OPCW. Why, peterAUS?

Is it too much to ask for the evidence? Or you want to compete with the soy-boy Gavin Williamson, the former seller of ceramic countertops? Perhaps you should watch the BBC documentary about Gladio before making your allegedly righteous rants re Saker. And please, spare us your ziocon' "defense" of Western society.

https://www.rt.com/uk/421273-russia-british-spy-sanctions/

[Mar 16, 2018] It is unlear if Novichok eve

Mar 16, 2018 | www.unz.com

Tick Tock , March 15, 2018 at 3:09 pm GMT

@Quartermaster

The Saker's most important theme in this article is that the whole Western so called Civilization is built largely on the capacity to LIE, (IE not tell the truth when one knows the truth). Lying is the most fundamentally destructive actions in any culture and in the West it is not only essential for success it is revered. I am so disgusted with the West that it is best for this charade and circus to come to an end, and it seems that the Lying Liars as Al Franken called them years ago have internalized there own Bull $hit and believe it absolutely. Yes, Johnny, you can put your hand on the red hot stove and nothing will happen. Go ahead, put it on there and see!!! Dumber than Dirt and God Damn F-n Proud of it too!! The new Western Motto!!

Arioch , March 15, 2018 at 3:58 pm GMT
The former Soviet scientist, Vil Mirzanyanov, who 'blew the whistle' and wrote about the 'Novichoks', now lives in a $1 million home in the United States. The AFP news agency just interviewed him about the recent incident:
Mirzayanov, speaking at his home in Princeton, New Jersey, said he is convinced Russia carried it out as a way of intimidating opponents of President Vladimir Putin.

"Only the Russians" developed this class of nerve agents, said the chemist. "They kept it and are still keeping it in secrecy."

The only other possibility, he said, would be that someone used the formulas in his book to make such a weapon.

"Russia did it", says Mirzanyanov, "OR SOMEONE WHO READ MY BOOK".

The book was published in 2008 and is available at Amazon as hardcover, paperback or for $8.16 as an electronic file. It includes a number of formulas which, Mirzanyanov says, could be used to produce those chemical agents.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/03/theresa-mays-novichok-claims-fall-apart.html

..But neither Porton Down nor the OPCW seem convinced that this is possible. They may believe that Mirzanyanov is just full of it.

The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has not recognized Novichoks as chemical weapons because it found scant evidence that they exist at all. The U.S. and the UK are both part of the organization and both agreed with this evaluation:

The name "Novichok" is used in a publication of a former Soviet scientist who reported investigating a new class of nerve agents suitable for use as binary chemical weapons. The OPCW's Scientific Advisory Board states that it has insufficient information to comment on the existence or properties of "Novichoks". (OPCW, 2013)

As recently as 2016 Dr Robin Black, Head of the Detection Laboratory at the UK's only chemical weapons facility at Porton Down , a former colleague of Dr David Kelly, published in an extremely prestigious scientific journal that the evidence for the existence of Novichoks was scant and their composition unknown.

In recent years, there has been much speculation that a fourth generation of nerve agents, 'Novichoks' (newcomer), was developed in Russia, beginning in the 1970s as part of the 'Foliant' programme, with the aim of finding agents that would compromise defensive countermeasures. Information on these compounds has been sparse in the public domain, mostly originating from a dissident Russian military chemist, Vil Mirzayanov. No independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published. Robin Black. (2016) Development, Historical Use and Properties of Chemical Warfare Agents. Royal Society of Chemistry

[Mar 16, 2018] Within weeks of the February Revolution, Lenin was called to meet with General Erich Ludendorff. The exact purpose of that meeting is unknown to history

Mar 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Daniel | Mar 15, 2018 2:02:26 AM | 74

chu che, debsisdead, et al. I recently learned more WW I/Russian Revolution related stuff, and it sounds like y'all might be piqued to reply.

It's 1917. General Erich Ludendorff had recently taken charge of the German military, and was planning to unleash the submarines to block Great Britain and the US shipping to Europe. Many Russian soldiers were already refusing to fight, the women-led socialists back home had largely shut down war production. The Czar had been "to the front" but came back to make a presence as the Czarina's response of ordering brutal crackdowns was not helping.

That was when the Revolutionaries secured the Czar's abduction, and the Duma began establishing a more or less socialist democratic republic.

Vladimir Lenin was in neutral Switzerland, sitting out the war, declaring no one could have predicted the February Revolution.

So, the new to me information took place prior to Russia's surrender.

1. Within weeks of the February Revolution, Lenin was called to meet with General Erich Ludendorff. The exact purpose of that meeting is unknown to history, but we do know what was happening at the time, and what happened immediately after.

Namely, Russia surrendered to the loser of WW I.

2. A German minister named Zimmerman sent a cable to the President of Mexico, encouraging Mexico to declare war on the US. Mind you, the US and Mexico had been having skirmishes for years already. In the cable, Zimmerman promised that once Germany won WW I, they would come to America, and help the Mexicans "reconquer" Texas, New Mexico and Arizona.

Great Britain had tapped the trans-oceanic cable and so intercepted that cable and leaked it to President Wilson. Or so it's recorded.

This really pissed off Wilson (or at least provided the ammo to convince Congress to vote for war against Germany).

3. Some of the Bolsheviks who did get into Petrograd/Saint Petersburg, Russia went through the Czar's paperwork and found documents related to the Sykes-Picot Agreement. That of course was the document dividing up the Ottoman Empire and Middle East/Central Asia between the Empires of Great Britain, France and Russia.

The Bolsheviks leaked these documents to The Guardian (coincidentally, the same paper that Glenn Greenwald would use to publish the Snowden leaks a century later, prior to founding The Intercept, and effectively stopping publishing the Snowden documents).

This really pissed off the Russian people, and especially the army conscripts.

General Ludendorff would go on to write books about - and become a popular speaker blaming - the socialists for Germany losing the war. One who took his arguments to heart had been in the German Infantry, and was something of a war hero, who insisted on returning to the fight even after being gassed and wounded. That guy wrote a book, too. "Mein" something or another. Wonder what ever became of that Adolph guy?

[Mar 16, 2018] Skripal murder also is about bankrupting Russia and trying to get European nations to turn the Russian gas tap off

Mar 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

FBaggins -> Bud Dry Fri, 03/16/2018 - 20:10 Permalink

It is about bankrupting Russia and also trying to get European nations to turn the Russian gas tap off, and so Europe will have to resort to buying gas through Western controlled natural gas resources, liquid gas shipments, and a proposed Qatar-Turkey pipeline through Syria. Once most Western people discover the actual history of our wars and what ruthless, unconscionable bastards our Western power brokers actually are, they will automatically want to support Russia.

FoggyWorld -> 7thGenMO Fri, 03/16/2018 - 19:02 Permalink

This is the May-Johnson excuse for not going through with Brexit. Now they will say they need their partner in the EU to protect them. Good luck with that one.

Savvy -> 7thGenMO Fri, 03/16/2018 - 19:52 Permalink

I wouldn't write NATO off just yet. Rothschild bought Naftogaz which has an office in Egypt. Igor Kolomoisky has some interesting ties also the temporary occupation of Crimea by Russia. And who is Genie Energy?

[Mar 16, 2018] And now that Berezovsky is dead who is more dodgy than his comrade-in-arms Bill Browder whose spectral image keeps flickering in the background of this whole Russiagate hysteria.

Notable quotes:
"... And now that Berezovsky is dead who is more dodgy than his comrade-in-arms Bill Browder whose spectral image keeps flickering in the background of this whole Russiagate hysteria. This is the same Bill Browder who has already succeeded in poisoning relations between Russia and the West with his successful lobbying for the Magnetsky Act. He succeeded despite strong objections from the Obama administration which, at that time, was attempting a reset in relations with Russia. In other words Browder had more of an impact in the shaping American foreign policy vis-a-vis Russia than Obama and his State Dept. ..."
"... Browder has been the driving force behind the implementation of the so-called Magnetsky Amendment into the Criminal Finances bill, which has been making its way through Parliament since December. It has been met with some resistance. ..."
"... In the American edition of Russiagate one also gets glimpses of Browder's machinations. In August in testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Glenn Simpson, a Fusion co-founder (Fusion had hired Christopher Steele), testified that Browder "was willing to, you know, hand stuff off to the DOJ anonymously in the beginning and cause them to launch a court case against somebody ," but that he wasn't interested "in speaking under oath about, you know, why he did that, his own activities in Russia." ..."
"... Which begs the question of whether Browder was covertly involved in the production and dissemination of the infamous Steele dossier. ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

pantaraxia | Mar 15, 2018 4:45:16 PM | 133

@38 Mina
Concluding statment from the article:

"Perhaps it is time to realise that if your country becomes a haven for dodgy people like Berezovsky then dodgy things are likely to happen."

And now that Berezovsky is dead who is more dodgy than his comrade-in-arms Bill Browder whose spectral image keeps flickering in the background of this whole Russiagate hysteria. This is the same Bill Browder who has already succeeded in poisoning relations between Russia and the West with his successful lobbying for the Magnetsky Act. He succeeded despite strong objections from the Obama administration which, at that time, was attempting a reset in relations with Russia. In other words Browder had more of an impact in the shaping American foreign policy vis-a-vis Russia than Obama and his State Dept.

In what turns out to be an onimous bit of foreshdowing, a November 2017 Vesti news report on Bill Browder concluded with "...( Browder) will speak in the British Parliament to convince lawmakers to increase sanctions against Russia". (h/t to integer from previous thread) And in an uncanny coincidence the Skripals are poisoned shortly before Browder began giving testimony to a UK Commons select committee where he stated it was a "Kremlin hit" and "I believe they want to kill me. They haven't figured out a way yet where they can kill me and get away with it." As The Times put it: "Since he said that, suspicions have deepened that the Russian state was behind the poisoning..."

Browder has been the driving force behind the implementation of the so-called Magnetsky Amendment into the Criminal Finances bill, which has been making its way through Parliament since December. It has been met with some resistance.

From the Financial Times:

MPs to vote on Magnitsky human rights amendment
https://www.ft.com/content/d1aabfd8-b890-11e6-961e-a1acd97f622d

"A "Magnitsky Amendment"...has been added to the Criminal Finances bill, which aims to clamp down on money-laundering and terror financing.

and
...the initiative could strain Britain's relations with Moscow,...at a time when prime minister Theresa May has said she is open to improving ties.

and
...successive British governments have resisted efforts by Mr Browder's campaign to persuade them to introduce legislation.


Now, as a consequence of the Skripal poisoning, not only are new sanctions imposed on Russia but according to The Telegraph:

"The attempted murder of a former Russian spy in Salisbury has given fresh impetus to plans to introduce a UK version of the so-called "Magnitsky Act"....Senior Conservatives campaigning for the move said ministers had agreed to implement "Magnitsky amendments" into the Sanctions Bill currently in the Commons."


So game, set and match. Coincidence???

In the American edition of Russiagate one also gets glimpses of Browder's machinations. In August in testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Glenn Simpson, a Fusion co-founder (Fusion had hired Christopher Steele), testified that Browder "was willing to, you know, hand stuff off to the DOJ anonymously in the beginning and cause them to launch a court case against somebody ," but that he wasn't interested "in speaking under oath about, you know, why he did that, his own activities in Russia."

Which begs the question of whether Browder was covertly involved in the production and dissemination of the infamous Steele dossier.

[Mar 16, 2018] Lenin would later say that he accepted the harsh terms against Russia when surrendering to Germany because he thought that the later treaty that ended the war for those still playing would be kinder to Russia. Ummm

Mar 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Daniel | Mar 15, 2018 6:19:17 PM | 145

Debs, thanks for providing yet another piece of the WW I/Russian Revolution puzzle for me. I did not know that Eugene commented on (and was apparently skeptical of) the "Zimmerman Cable."

Yes, it certainly looks to me like a provocation of the "false flag" sort. The supra-national banksters were heavily invested in Great Britain, and of course the Zionist Colonial Project also required the Brits to win. And the Brits and the Banks needed the US to join the fight.

Ironically, the Bolsheviks then leaking some of the Sykes/Picot documents actually slicked the way to fulfill that odious agreement and the creation of JSIL (Jewish State of Israel in the Levant), while simultaneously leading Russia to surrender to the eventual loser of the war.

Lenin would later say that he accepted the harsh terms against Russia when surrendering to Germany because he thought that the later treaty that ended the war for those still playing would be kinder to Russia. Ummm. Yeah, sure. Europe and the US were so friendly towards Socialist/Communist movements. ;-)

And thanks to b for letting us run OT on this.

[Mar 16, 2018] How the Iraq War Destabilized the Entire Middle East

Notable quotes:
"... The New York Times ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

How the Iraq War Destabilized the Entire Middle East by Mel Goodman

Photo by The U.S. Army | CC BY 2.0

As we approach the fifteenth anniversary of the unwarranted invasion of Iraq, which we are still paying for in so many ways, it is important to remember the misuse of intelligence that provided a false justification for war. It is particularly important to do so at this time because President Donald Trump has talked about a military option against North Korea or Iran (or Venezuela for that matter). Since there is no cause to justify such wars, it is quite likely that politicized intelligence would once again be used to provide a justification for audiences at home and abroad.

In 2002 and 2003, the White House, the Department of Defense, and the Central Intelligence Agency collaborated in an effort to describe the false likelihood of a nuclear weapons program that had to be stopped. In the words of Bush administration officials, the United States was not going to allow the "smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." On September 8, 2002, Vice President Cheney and national security adviser Condi Rice used that phrase on CNN and NBC's "Meet the Press," respectively, to argue that Saddam Hussein was "using his procurement system to acquire the equipment he needs to enrich uranium to build a nuclear weapon."

In October 2002, the CIA orchestrated a national intelligence estimate to argue falsely that Iraq was acquiring uranium from Niger for use in a nuclear weapon. Senior officials throughout the intelligence community knew that the so-called Niger report was a fabrication produced by members of the Italian military intelligence service, and several intelligence officials informed Congressional and White House officials that they doubted the reports of Iraqi purchases of uranium from Niger. Nevertheless, the national intelligence estimate spun a fictitious tale of a clear and present danger based on false reports of alleged stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons; nuclear weapons; unmanned aerial vehicles; and ties between Iraq and al Qaeda that were nonexistent.

In December 2002, President George W. Bush found the CIA's case for war inadequate and asked for "something that Joe Public would understand or gain a lot of confidence from." Bush turned to CIA director George Tenet and remarked, "I've been given all this intelligence about Iraq having WMD and this is the best we've got?" Instead of being truthful, Tenet replied, "Don't worry, it's a slam dunk!" Several days later, Alan Foley, the chief of the Weapons Intelligence, Proliferation and Arms Control Staff, told his analysts to prepare a briefing for the president. "If the president wants intelligence to support a decision to go to war," Foley said, "then it is up to the agency to provide it." In early January, CIA Deputy Director John McLaughlin gave the phony "slam dunk" briefing at the White House.

The Pentagon's Office of Special Plans distributed the unsubstantiated and flawed intelligence that not even the CIA would vouch for. The Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith supplied bogus intelligence to the White House on Iraqi WMD and links to terrorist organizations to make the case for war, and then "leaked" this intelligence to key journalists such as Judith Miller at The New York Times . Miller had a front page article in the Times on September 8, 2002, citing administration officials claiming that Saddam was seeking "specially designed" aluminum tubes to enrich uranium, the so-called "smoking gun." Several days later, President Bush inserted the Times' claim in his speech to the United Nations General Assembly.

The aluminum tube issue was central to Secretary of State Colin Powell's speech to the UN in February 2003, which was based on the phony CIA estimate from October 2002. As Powell's chief of staff, Lawrence Wilkerson wrote in The New York Times in February 2018, the secretary's "gravitas was a significant part of the Bush administration's two-year-long effort to get Americans on the war wagon. It was CIA Deputy Director McLaughlin who lied to Secretary of State Powell about the reliability of the intelligence in Powell's speech. McLaughlin was the central advocate for the phony intelligence on mobile biological laboratories that ended up in that speech.

President Bush would have gone to war with or without intelligence, and once again we are confronted by a president who might consider going to war with or without intelligence. Fifteen years ago, we had a CIA director from Capitol Hill who was loyal to the president and unwilling to tell truth to power. Once again, we have a CIA director, Gina Haspel, who is a White House loyalist and cannot be counted on to tell truth to power. She was one of the Agency's leading cheerleaders for torture and abuse, and sent the message that order the destruction of the torture tapes. And former CIA director Mike Pompeo, a neoconservative hardliner, is now secretary of state, who earned his new position by being a total loyalist who would never tell truth to power. Is there a voice for moderation left in the White House?

Bush's war destabilized the entire Middle East. Any Trump war could lead to the use of nuclear weapons that would destabilize the entire world.

[Mar 16, 2018] Are We Living Under a Military Coup ?

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... I'd define coup in this case as a potentially "illegal seizure of power" in the form of a slowly unfolding, unresolved constitutional crisis that sticks over time. ..."
"... The 1933 coup plot was funded by Wall Street money in hopes of subverting the power of Franklin Roosevelt, a leader deemed by many wealthy men of the time to be a traitor to his blue-blood class. ..."
"... The Plot to Seize the White House ..."
"... "War is a racket. It always has been," is how Butler's booklet War Is a Racket opens. "A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small 'inside' group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many." The little book ends this way: "Secretly each nation is studying and perfecting newer and ghastlier means of annihilating its foes wholesale. But victory will be determined by the skill and ingenuity of our scientists. If we put them to work making poison gas and more and more fiendish mechanical and explosive instruments of destruction, they will have no time for the constructive job of building a greater prosperity for all peoples." ..."
"... The Wall Street cabal's coup plot was based on the idea of insinuating a disciplined military man into a White House operation deemed irresponsible and out of control. The plan was to install Butler into a newly created cabinet-level position called the Secretary for General Affairs. Negative press would be arranged to inform the American people that the President of the United States was a cripple. The "man on a white horse" was there to save a problematic administration from itself -- all for the good of the country. ..."
"... Today's politics are very different; the similarity is in the troublesome situation of a sitting president deemed a national security problem. In FDR's case, it was weakness due to sympathy for the downtrodden; while in Trump's case, it's unprecedented governmental inexperience linked with a volatile narcissism contributing to chaos in the highest reaches of the government. ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

I'd define coup in this case as a potentially "illegal seizure of power" in the form of a slowly unfolding, unresolved constitutional crisis that sticks over time. Like the oft-cited frog being boiled to death in a pot of water rising in temperature very slowly. Center right Times columnist David Brooks had a column recently in which he compared Trump USA to Berlusconi Italy and how, once democracy has been sullied by a right-wing populist like Berlusconi (or Trump), getting democracy back within its previous (constitutional) lines is difficult to impossible.

Some like to call the 2000 election of George W. Bush a "coup" legitimized by a conservative Supreme Court. Whatever one calls the 2000 election, it did put a permanent stain on US democracy. I have no doubt in this age of "fake news" and sophisticated PR that an unresolved constitutional crisis cum coup in Washington D.C. would be spun by info wizards as a pro-American, patriotic event. All this, of course, has helped ratchet up political polarization to new heights.

Instead of seeing a military coup as restricted to melodramatic fiction like the film Seven Days In May, it might be instructive, beneficial and even patriotic to think of it as possible with at least one very real historical antecedent to consider.

The 1933 White House Plot

We don't hear much about the 1933 American "coup" -- here, put in quotes because it was always ambiguous and it was thwarted. The plot has effectively been deep-sixed into historical oblivion. Why might that be? Might it be because it amounted to just another example of the dirty little secret that hovers over everything in America: the power of money married to the power of violence? Just another day in the history of America. Maybe one has to be a left-leaning antiwar activist born under the sign of the National Security State to understand this. But, to me, the antiwar left is perennially at a loss in this equation: Not only is it oriented on peace versus war, but it's also unarmed in the sense of an NRA obsession with guns. Furthermore, the left tends to be crippled thanks to the Cold War that established left-leaning ideas as association with subversion and the enemy.

The 1933 coup plot was funded by Wall Street money in hopes of subverting the power of Franklin Roosevelt, a leader deemed by many wealthy men of the time to be a traitor to his blue-blood class. Had the whistle not been blown on the plot by a Marine general named Smedley Butler, it could have succeeded in politically crippling FDR and his New Deal government. Had it gone differently, it could have changed history. (The 1933 coup attempt is described by Jules Archer in a 1973 book titled The Plot to Seize the White House . Also, The History Channel produced a 41-minute documentary on the plot .)

As the depression set in, the nation watched the rise of fascism in Europe. FDR was opposed on the right by people like the popular hero Charles Lindbergh who cozied up with the Nazis. Much of this ugly, polarized political struggle has slipped from our popular history, in large part due to the unifying power of World War Two that helped end the depression and ended up consuming both sides of the right/left battle. The internal political struggles of the thirties shifted into a focus on military dominance. The US ended up top of the heap at the end of World War Two. It also ended up at odds with the other victor in the war, the Soviet Union. It was at this juncture that US leaders formulated The National Security Act of 1947, thus creating the National Security State we live under today.

MacArthur busting Bonus Marchers, Butler speaking to them and the Mussolini incident

Smedley Butler was raised a Hicksite Quaker in West Chester, Pennsylvania. One side of a major 19th century split, the Hicksites saw "the inner light" contained within each of us as the primary source of truth, while Orthodox Quakers were more like fundamentalist who saw The Bible as the primary source of truth. The young, idealistic Butler learned the US Marines was expanding and recruiting new officers. He lobbied his parents (his father was a US congressman) to let him join, and in 1898 at age sixteen, a fresh Second Lieutenant Butler was dropped off at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where he was first exposed to hostile fire. He went on to the Philippines. He fought in counter-insurgency wars in places like Nicaragua and Haiti. He undertook spy missions in Mexico. His career was unique. At one point, he took leave of the Marines and became police commissioner of Philadelphia, only to quit when he grasped the level of corruption in the city. He was awarded two Congressional Medals of Honor, and at the end of his career he was court martialed by Secretary of War Stimson for calling Benito Mussolini a bum in a speech. He, then, began speaking out in public, effectively undermining the charges. Today, amongst leftist, antiwar activists he's considered a hero thanks to a small book he wrote in 1935 called War Is a Racket. On the other hand, I mentioned him once to General Stanley McChrystal at a book signing and the respected Iraq "surge" leader cited him back at me as, in his mind, one of the great US military heroes. Both views paradoxically prevail. In 1939, he expressed opposition to war in Europe. But, then, he conveniently died in 1940. How he would have responded to the attack on Pearl Harbor remains an intriguing question.

Butler got involved in the 1933 coup when he was asked by the Wall Street cabal to be their "man on a white horse" to lead the plot. Due to his humility and his bravery, Butler was beloved by the common soldier -- even when he pushed them. In one story, a soldier has fallen out of a long march and General Butler, wearing no insignia of rank, gets the man back up and walking by carrying his pack. The plotters' modeled their efforts on the rising fascist states in Europe and the various colored-shirt thug organizations significantly made up of WWI veterans. Fatefully, Butler was a terrible choice; he supported FDR. Smelling a rat, he played along with the plotters' front-man, Gerald MacGuire, a fat, cigar-chomping stock broker paid to go to Europe and study the various colored-shirt groups. The idea was to install Butler as the commander of the American Legion, whose 500,000 members -- many disgruntled WWI vets -- had been used to smash union strikers with baseball bats. The Legion outnumbered the US military at the time. With the help of a reporter from the Philadelphia Record, Butler got the goods and went to the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), which held hearings and exposed the right-wing plot. (It's the very same HUAC that went on to notoriety as a prosecutor of the left.) Those named in the coup all denied they were plotting anything, and the story disappeared into obscurity. No charges were made.

Had the cabal, instead, set up General Douglas MacArthur as the "man on a white horse" -- who they had considered -- it might have turned out differently. MacArthur had an arrogant "fascist" character, but he was not loved by the common soldier. Butler and MacArthur had crossed paths in July 1932 during the Bonus March encampment in Washington DC. Butler was sympathetic and spoke to the encamped veterans seeking their promised bonus for WWI service. "They may be calling you tramps now, but in 1917 they didn't call you bums!" the cragey, diminutive general hollered at them. "You are the best-behaved group of men in the country today. I consider it an honor to be asked to speak to you." MacArthur, of course, led the troops who burned the Bonus Marchers out, killing one veteran and wounding 50.

"War is a racket. It always has been," is how Butler's booklet War Is a Racket opens. "A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small 'inside' group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many." The little book ends this way: "Secretly each nation is studying and perfecting newer and ghastlier means of annihilating its foes wholesale. But victory will be determined by the skill and ingenuity of our scientists. If we put them to work making poison gas and more and more fiendish mechanical and explosive instruments of destruction, they will have no time for the constructive job of building a greater prosperity for all peoples."

The Wall Street cabal's coup plot was based on the idea of insinuating a disciplined military man into a White House operation deemed irresponsible and out of control. The plan was to install Butler into a newly created cabinet-level position called the Secretary for General Affairs. Negative press would be arranged to inform the American people that the President of the United States was a cripple. The "man on a white horse" was there to save a problematic administration from itself -- all for the good of the country.

Today's politics are very different; the similarity is in the troublesome situation of a sitting president deemed a national security problem. In FDR's case, it was weakness due to sympathy for the downtrodden; while in Trump's case, it's unprecedented governmental inexperience linked with a volatile narcissism contributing to chaos in the highest reaches of the government. In both cases, the overarching issue is a very dangerous world and the need for experience and discipline. Is General Kelly today's "man on a white horse" insinuated into the White House to represent the interests of the National Security State?

There are no neat or absolute answers to these questions. We tend to associate the idea of a "coup" with coup d'etat in Third World nations. Our CIA and military have notoriously been up to their eyeballs in foreign coups; there's classics like Iran 1953 and Guatemala 1954. Venezuela 2002 and Honduras 2009 had the stink of US complicity, but they are more current and, thus, there was lots of plausible deniability and lots of fog. And fog and doubt only get worse in this internet age.

[Mar 16, 2018] H.R. McMaster Gives The Kremlin a Double Bird Salute

Notable quotes:
"... "We believe that Russia was responsible for this attack, and we call on the Russian government to answer all questions related to this incident, and to provide full information to the OPCW [Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons]. No nation -- Russia, China, or anybody else, any other nation -- should be using chemical weapons and nerve agents," McMaster said, following what critics have called a belated Wednesday statement casting blame on Moscow for the attack on Skripal. ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | www.thedailybeast.com

If H.R. McMaster is on his way out of the White House, he's going out with two middle fingers raised and pointed in the direction of the Kremlin.

"Russia is also complicit in [Syrian dictator Bashar] Assad's atrocities," McMaster, President Trump's national security adviser, said Thursday during an appearance at a discussion of the Syrian civil war held at the U.S. Holocaust memorial museum.

His voice raised, McMaster used harsher and more moralistic language than his boss does in characterizing Russia's geopolitical influence, and unequivocally blamed the Kremlin for "the abhorrent nerve agent attack" on a former double agent, Sergei Skripal , and proposed "serious political and economic consequences" for Russian aggression.

"We believe that Russia was responsible for this attack, and we call on the Russian government to answer all questions related to this incident, and to provide full information to the OPCW [Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons]. No nation -- Russia, China, or anybody else, any other nation -- should be using chemical weapons and nerve agents," McMaster said, following what critics have called a belated Wednesday statement casting blame on Moscow for the attack on Skripal.

McMaster's brief remarks, lasting under 20 minutes, came as the Army three-star general is the subject of furious speculation that Trump will soon fire him and install hardliner ex-ambassador John Bolton atop the National Security Council. His capstone achievement thus far has been a Russia-and-China-centric security strategy that has been conspicuously out of step with Trump's rhetoric and actions toward both countries.

"Russia has done nothing to encourage Assad to ensure delivery of humanitarian aid, to respect ceasefires and de-escalation agreements or to comply with U.N. Security Council Resolution 2254's call for a U.N.-monitored political process," McMaster said.

Those remarks suggested that Trump got suckered during his 2017 rounds of personal diplomacy with Vladimir Putin. In November, Trump and Putin issued a joint statement firmly pledging support for what is known as the 2254 Process -- though critics considered it a cover for Moscow to continue ensuring support for its client, Assad -- that "took note" of Assad's "recent commitment to the Geneva process and constitutional reform and elections as called for under UNSCR 2254."

And that followed July's acquiescence from Trump and just-ousted Secretary of State Rex Tillerson signing onto a Russia-driven process centered around achieving ceasefires that McMaster said Russia was not respecting.

[Mar 15, 2018] The UK will promptly expel 23 Russian diplomats without waiting for the end of the investigation

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The UK will promptly expel 23 Russian diplomats without waiting for the end of the investigation. Which means that from now on the investigation is highly politicized and tainted in a sense that it will be conducted by people who proved the existence of Iraq WMD in the past: ..."
"... This is one step further from the "self-indictment as a formal proof" used in Show Trials. Now it looks like "suspicion is the formal proof." ..."
"... Both cyberspace and poisoning with exotic chemical agents proved to be a perfect media for false flag operations designed to poison relations between nations and fuel war-style demonization. ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

likbez 14 March 2018 at 11:40 PM

The UK will promptly expel 23 Russian diplomats without waiting for the end of the investigation. Which means that from now on the investigation is highly politicized and tainted in a sense that it will be conducted by people who proved the existence of Iraq WMD in the past:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43402506

Moscow refused to meet Mrs May's midnight deadline to co-operate in the case, prompting Mrs May to announce a series of measures intended to send a "clear message" to Russia.

These include:

  • Expelling 23 diplomats
  • Increasing checks on private flights, customs and freight
  • Freezing Russian state assets where there is evidence they may be used to threaten the life or property of UK nationals or residents
  • Ministers and the Royal Family boycotting the Fifa World Cup in Russia later this year
  • Suspending all planned high-level bilateral contacts between the UK and Russia
  • Plans to consider new laws to increase defences against "hostile state activity"

Mrs May told MPs that Russia had provided "no explanation" as to how the nerve agent came to be used in the UK, describing Moscow's response as one of "sarcasm, contempt and defiance".

The use of a Russian-made nerve agent on UK soil amounted to the "unlawful use of force", she said.

So it looks more and more like a well planned multi-step propaganda operation, not an impromptu action on the part of GB. Kind of replica of Russian election influence witch hunt in the USA with the replacement of cyberspace and elections with chemical agents and poisoning.

So inconsistencies that were pointed in this thread (such as the mere fact that three people exposed are still alive) do not matter anymore.

The verdict now is in.

This is one step further from the "self-indictment as a formal proof" used in Show Trials. Now it looks like "suspicion is the formal proof."

Both cyberspace and poisoning with exotic chemical agents proved to be a perfect media for false flag operations designed to poison relations between nations and fuel war-style demonization.

Sad...

[Mar 15, 2018] The UK will promptly expel 23 Russian diplomats without waiting for the end of the investigation

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The UK will promptly expel 23 Russian diplomats without waiting for the end of the investigation. Which means that from now on the investigation is highly politicized and tainted in a sense that it will be conducted by people who proved the existence of Iraq WMD in the past: ..."
"... This is one step further from the "self-indictment as a formal proof" used in Show Trials. Now it looks like "suspicion is the formal proof." ..."
"... Both cyberspace and poisoning with exotic chemical agents proved to be a perfect media for false flag operations designed to poison relations between nations and fuel war-style demonization. ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

likbez 14 March 2018 at 11:40 PM

The UK will promptly expel 23 Russian diplomats without waiting for the end of the investigation. Which means that from now on the investigation is highly politicized and tainted in a sense that it will be conducted by people who proved the existence of Iraq WMD in the past:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43402506

Moscow refused to meet Mrs May's midnight deadline to co-operate in the case, prompting Mrs May to announce a series of measures intended to send a "clear message" to Russia.

These include:

  • Expelling 23 diplomats
  • Increasing checks on private flights, customs and freight
  • Freezing Russian state assets where there is evidence they may be used to threaten the life or property of UK nationals or residents
  • Ministers and the Royal Family boycotting the Fifa World Cup in Russia later this year
  • Suspending all planned high-level bilateral contacts between the UK and Russia
  • Plans to consider new laws to increase defences against "hostile state activity"

Mrs May told MPs that Russia had provided "no explanation" as to how the nerve agent came to be used in the UK, describing Moscow's response as one of "sarcasm, contempt and defiance".

The use of a Russian-made nerve agent on UK soil amounted to the "unlawful use of force", she said.

So it looks more and more like a well planned multi-step propaganda operation, not an impromptu action on the part of GB. Kind of replica of Russian election influence witch hunt in the USA with the replacement of cyberspace and elections with chemical agents and poisoning.

So inconsistencies that were pointed in this thread (such as the mere fact that three people exposed are still alive) do not matter anymore.

The verdict now is in.

This is one step further from the "self-indictment as a formal proof" used in Show Trials. Now it looks like "suspicion is the formal proof."

Both cyberspace and poisoning with exotic chemical agents proved to be a perfect media for false flag operations designed to poison relations between nations and fuel war-style demonization.

Sad...

[Mar 15, 2018] One strong indication that Skripal case is used for a preplanned propaganda campaign against Russia that specialists in the UK who know their stuff no longer get airtime while people like Luke Harding, who plainly don t, are all over the media

First Steele dossier. Now Skripals.. What's next ?
Notable quotes:
"... But even to an outsider, and even if we take it all at face value, that official account of the Wiltshire poisoning is nowhere near solid enough to justify the steps taken. "If you have a weak argument, shout louder" is sufficient therefore to explain the surprising volume of anti-Russian PR coming out of London just now. ..."
"... I think they're probably shouting loud enough to gain their point. A sufficient number of us in the UK public will accept that Wiltshire incident as further proof of Putin's malevolence. We will therefore accept further anti-Russian measures. ..."
"... For the Westminster bubble all our eggs are in the American neocon basket. One could say that the respective swamps are inextricably connected. What's in it for our politicians is nothing less than the maintenance of a comfortable and familiar status quo. There's therefore no choice but to be more Roman that Rome when it comes to pursuing neocon objectives. ..."
"... As ever therefore it all centres around Trump. Is he getting dragged along by his neocons? Or is he now one of them? ..."
"... Trump is not only up against his own establishment. He's up against the European establishment as well. Hence the hammering he's getting from our European press and politicians. Hence also the dossier scandal, which for my part I now see for certain as a joint attempt by the American/UK status quo supporters to weaken or unseat Trump. ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

English Outsider -> kooshy... 15 March 2018 at 08:52 AM

Kooshy - I should have checked down-thread before submitting my comment. Then I'd have seen that "London Bob" (87) had given a brief account of what is happening in Westminster.

"London Bob" explains something that puzzles some in the UK (and bothered me a lot over Syria). Why isn't Corbyn, the opposition leader in the House of Commons and now stronger than he was, coming out with all guns firing against the present anti-Russian hysteria? He'd have plenty of ammunition, that's for sure.

As that brief account explains, he's in no position to do so. He's leading a divided party. He has some support from within his party rank and file but not from many of his own colleagues in the House. We now see, incidentally, some of his colleagues making public statements that are only a hair's breadth away from disavowing Corbyn or his spokesmen.

In addition Corbyn is already suspected of being anti-patriotic and doesn't want to give his opponents a bigger stick to beat him with on that.

Therefore resistance to the current Russophobia from within the Westminster bubble is likely to be weak.

Also in this thread DH is casting a sceptical eye over the Wiltshire poisoning. It's an indication of how far down public discussion in the UK has gone that specialists in the UK who know their stuff no longer get airtime while people like Luke Harding, who plainly don't, are all over the media. This blanking out of the voice of reasoned criticism in the UK media is, I suspect, already proving counterproductive for the status quo. It merely reinforces that general public feeling, evident to some extent in the Brexit vote, that we do at least know we're being conned even if we don't always know how. I don't know how widespread that feeling is in this case.

But even to an outsider, and even if we take it all at face value, that official account of the Wiltshire poisoning is nowhere near solid enough to justify the steps taken. "If you have a weak argument, shout louder" is sufficient therefore to explain the surprising volume of anti-Russian PR coming out of London just now.

I think they're probably shouting loud enough to gain their point. A sufficient number of us in the UK public will accept that Wiltshire incident as further proof of Putin's malevolence. We will therefore accept further anti-Russian measures.

What's in it for us? As you perhaps indicate, bent money will be running like the devil away from London, which one would think can't be good news for the City or for the London property market. Hence the repeated calls for European and American solidarity; if the Russian expatriates can simply move their fortunes to other Western boltholes that's going to leave Westminster looking ineffectual.

I don't accept the argument I sometimes see put forward that we, and the East Europeans for that matter, are at present dragging the Americans along with us. However weak the American economy is or is said to be, there's no question but that ours is considerably more fragile. For the Westminster bubble all our eggs are in the American neocon basket. One could say that the respective swamps are inextricably connected. What's in it for our politicians is nothing less than the maintenance of a comfortable and familiar status quo. There's therefore no choice but to be more Roman that Rome when it comes to pursuing neocon objectives.

So when it comes to the various neocon establishments, the little dogs can kick up more racket but it's still the big dog running the show.

As ever therefore it all centres around Trump. Is he getting dragged along by his neocons? Or is he now one of them?

If the first, then it's accurate to see this as many of us here have seen it from the start. Trump is not only up against his own establishment. He's up against the European establishment as well. Hence the hammering he's getting from our European press and politicians. Hence also the dossier scandal, which for my part I now see for certain as a joint attempt by the American/UK status quo supporters to weaken or unseat Trump.

If the second then all is still not lost. Better to have the cronies falling out amongst themselves - and it's evident at least that that's happening - than have them as united as they were before Trump.

[Mar 15, 2018] Britain's Toxic Agenda for Russian Media by Finian Cunningham

Notable quotes:
"... This entire Russian hysteria reminds me of the old western movies where a crowd gathers outside the sheriff's office being manipulated into hysteria by rabblerousers shouting "Hang the Bastard". The rabble rousers are the media and government ministers and the crowd is the western public. No need for evidence evidence since everyone knows he is guilty! The west has descended into a pit of their own filth. ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

Relations between Britain and Russia have become so toxic now that anyone working with Russian news media is liable to be condemned as a stooge or traitor.

Senior Labour party member John McDonnell, the shadow finance minister, has conceded this week that fellow opposition politicians "may be banned from appearing on Russian news media" following the furore over allegations that Moscow carried out an assassination attempt in Britain last week.

Other reports have called on Britain's state media regulator, Ofcom, to cancel the broadcast license for Russian government-owned news outlet RT. That move is being touted as "appropriate retaliation" for Moscow's alleged involvement in the apparent poison attack on Sergei Skripal and his adult daughter.

Never Miss Another Story

Get Your FREE Daily Newsletter No Advertising - No Government Grants - This Is Independent Media

The pair have been hospitalized following an incident in their adopted home town of Salisbury on March 4, in which it appears they were exposed to a lethal nerve agent. Disgraced Russian agent Sergei Skripal had been living in the southern England town for the past eight years following his exile to Britain in 2010 as part of a spy exchange.

After much fevered speculation in British media, the Conservative Prime Minister Theresa May followed up this week by telling lawmakers in the House of Commons that "it was highly likely Russia was responsible".

The main incriminating factor cited is that the poisonous substance has been supposedly identified by British authorities as " novichok " -- a Soviet-made nerve agent, similar to VX and other weaponized organophosphate compounds.

Moscow has categorically denied any involvement in the apparent murder bid on the Skripals. Russia's Foreign Ministry has derided May's parliamentary address as "a circus show".

Let's back up a moment. May's claims of "highly likely" are eerily reminiscent of American and British "high confidence" about weapons of mass destruction allegedly in Iraq and Syria; or American and British "high confidence" about alleged Russian meddling in elections. It seems to be always a case of assertion-without-evidence which is either eventually disproven, as with WMDs in Iraq, or reliant on endless repetition by dutiful news media.

As for the British prime minister's supposed "smoking syringe" implicating Moscow because of an alleged Soviet military-grade nerve agent "novichok", that depends on the word of British military intelligence. How do we know novichok was actually used? It could have been any number of highly-toxic related organophosphate chemicals.

Even if novichok was deployed to injure the Skripals that is far from proof of any Russian connection. We can be sure Britain and other Western states have also developed their own stocks of novichok. How easy it would be to use the chemical as an apparent fingerprint framing the Kremlin, in the same way that the CIA and NSA can leave digital fingerprints framing enemies for seeming cyber-attacks.

The official British position implicating Russia over the Salisbury poisoning is tenuous, to say the least. But what is astounding is how the British are toxifying relations with Russia based on no objective evidence.

When Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn stood up in parliament this week to reply to Theresa May's speech, he was roundly vilified by Tory lawmakers and sections of the British media because he did not "condemn" Russia over the Salisbury incident.

This is the toxic war-like climate that has been engendered in Britain owing to relentless Russophobia whipped up by politicians and lynch-mob media mentality.

Russia is found "guilty" without any facts, based upon a ludicrous theory of revenge against a has-been spy who had been living undisturbed in England for eight years. We are expected to believe that Moscow would order his assassination with an identifiable Soviet-era chemical weapon on the eve of its own presidential elections.

What's much more plausible is that the British authorities staged the event as a propaganda stunt to frame and further demonize Russia. Theresa May probably hasn't a clue that she is being manipulated by her own secret services, as are other British politicians media.

May claims that the latest incident comes "against a backdrop of well-established Russian state aggression". One could far more reasonably argue "a backdrop of British and Western Russophobia".

There are many possible reasons for why British state forces would want to polarize international relations even more than they already are with Russia.

Notably, the poisoning incident has led to calls for greater military build-up by NATO forces on Russia's borders. That's an obvious win for the British military-industrial complex.

Another factor is that Britain seems to be using the latest debacle as a way to further damage European relations with Russia, demanding that Germany and France show "solidarity" by condemning Moscow. This could be related to European energy geopolitics in which London and Washington have a shared interest in sabotaging the soon-to-be-completed Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline from Russia to Europe.

But one other tangible outcome is the way that Russian news media are being targeted with even more venom. On the back of sensational claims that Russia "carried out a brazen attempt to murder innocent civilians on our soil", the climate is now conducive to censoring "Kremlin-backed news organizations" like RT and Sputnik.

As mentioned above, senior Labour figures like John McDonnell, who is normally strongly independent-minded, are obligingly calling for fellow members of their party to stop appearing on RT.

This Orwellian-like Russophobia is creating a situation in which anyone working with Russian news media is prone to be labeled traitorous. Former British politicians like George Galloway and Alex Salmond who have gone on to host programs for RT will, we can be sure, be subjected to intense pressure to quit.

A sign of how hysterical the Russophobia has become is a call this week in British media for Manchester United manager José Mourinho to renege on his recent deal with RT as a football pundit during this summer's World Cup tournament.

The same intimidatory atmosphere applies to all public figures and journalists who associate with Russian news media. It's a global witch-hunt orchestrated to silence dissenting views. Working with Russian news media is now tantamount to taking a poison pill.

Russian channels like RT and Sputnik have brought a refreshingly critical perspective to many international events.

When American, British and other European politicians decry "Russian meddling in elections" what they are really vexed about is the Russian news media performing a legitimate and laudable function of properly informing the public. Denigrating Russian media as "Kremlin-sponsored influence campaigns" is a desperate attempt by Western states to shut down critical voices.

The poisoning incident of Sergei Skripal and his daughter is conveniently having a broadside toxic impact on relations with Russia for any number of ulterior objectives for the British authorities.

One objective that seems to be clearly emerging is the way in which the Russophobia is being used to incriminate Russian news media and anyone who might associate with them. That's partly a reflection of how successful Russian news media have become in exposing Western governments' crimes.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of Information Clearing House.

Francis · 11 hours ago

Who has called for a public investigation with presentation of evidence? Who is against it and instead supports a witch-hunt hystetia?
B.F. · 11 hours ago
We have presidential elections in Russia on March 18, and this incident happens right before the elections. How convenient. And who gains by this ? Russia ? I think not. This false flag was instigated to vilify both Russia and Putin and give NATO an excuse to exist. The military industrial complexes in the US and Western Europe will, of course, be overjoyed, as now they expect more money. However, as far as I can see, many people are not buying this highly transparent piece of nonsense.
Arvy · 11 hours ago
Assumptions of guilt upon public accusation unless and until the accused undertakes the almost impossible task of proving the negative appears to be the prevalent trend amongst so-called "western democracies" everywhere.

I seem to recall US President Trump recently saying something about "take the gun first, go through due process second" and many others appear to agree with that approach ... although the designated 'villains' deserving that treatment may vary.

Know_the_truth 92p · 8 hours ago
"Theresa May probably hasn't got a clue she is being manipulated by her own intelligence services"

Yes she does, she fully knows what is going on and is on board with it. If these vile creatures succeed in bringing the unthinkable upon their citizens I sincerely hope there will be enough people left who know where the blame lies and who will hunt down these evil scum and deal with them adequately.

MathewNeville · 8 hours ago
Cost of UK Air and Drone Strikes in Iraq and Syria Reach £1.75 billion
http://truepublica.org.uk/united-kingdom/cost-of-...

Britain's secret assassinations programme and extended kill list--------------------------
http://truepublica.org.uk/united-kingdom/britains...
..............................................................................................................................................................

crosswinds · 6 hours ago
"Ratcheting up the Hysteria and Propaganda" for the "Final Battle" against all "evildoers." (i.e. "evildoers of the world unite....the Anglo-American democracies.)
barner davidl · 6 hours ago
As per an advise from Machiavelli : Never admit , deny-deny, lie and lie , till you die .
Dick · 5 hours ago
This entire Russian hysteria reminds me of the old western movies where a crowd gathers outside the sheriff's office being manipulated into hysteria by rabblerousers shouting "Hang the Bastard". The rabble rousers are the media and government ministers and the crowd is the western public. No need for evidence evidence since everyone knows he is guilty! The west has descended into a pit of their own filth.
Dave Welsh · 2 hours ago
Movie and book, I guess: "The Ox-Bow Incident". Did you see the movie?
2LTMorrisseau 97p · 4 hours ago
As to MOTIVE. i have also read that this Russian man and his daughter were caught up in AND HAD INTIMATE KNOWLEDGE that
British M16 actually CREATED THE INFAMOUS "RUSSIAN DOSSIER"....not Christopher Steele alone...........and since this information is a bombshell [UK Intel trying to unseat Trump] that this man and his daughter were knowledgable of AND THEY HAD REQUESTED PERMISSION TO REPATRIATE HOME TO RUSSIA.........."somebody" decided to OFF the two..... I wonder who that "somebody" might be?
Dennis Morrisseau
USArmy Officer [Vietnam era] ANTI-WAR

Lieutenant Morrisseau's Rebellion
FireCongress.org
LIBERTY UNION founder
Second Vermont Republic, VFM
POB 177, W. Pawlet, VT 05775
[email protected]
802 645 9727 9727

nick · 3 hours ago
poor rupert murdoch, his plans for billions of profit via Genie Energy from the resources of southern syria are being curtailed by russia. you have to feel for the guy, its only right that he uses his media empire to whine about it!
American · 2 hours ago
The Brits are making asses of themselves again, as usual - LOL!

Jose · 1 hour ago

We are witnessing a full court press by the US, Western Europe, Japan, Australia and Canada. The leaders of these nations and their obedient news outlets are going all out to confront Russia militarily, economically, politically and diplomatically. The hysteria stirred up by Western politicians and their subservient media seems to be driven by an agenda to isolate Russia from the rest of the world. The West is cynically using these unsubstantiated allegations to malign, discredit and demonize Russia so as to undermine its international standing. These repeated accusations seem like a page right out of NAZI Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels' "A lie told once remains a lie but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth ..If you repeat a lie often enough people will believe it." The assassination of this Russian double agent Sergei Skripal couldn't have come at a more opportune time for Prime Minister Theresa May whose popularity was sagging in the polls. The incident, irrespective of how disingenuous, provided her with a flag waving call to arms against the alien Russian 'aggressor." This all fits in quite neatly with other orchestrated allegations of Russian electoral interference, Russian trolls and hacking of DNC emails disseminating from US politicians and Intelligence Services.

This bellicose fear mongering taking place throughout the West is happening while NATO is literally on Russia's doorstep. How should Russia react to this mass hysteria? Their troops aren't on the borders of Western Europe, the US or Canada. Russia doesn't have 700 military bases in 70 countries throughout the world nor has it invaded other countries or conducted in regime change as has the US and NATO.

It therefore doesn't seem illogical, given the provocative rhetoric coming from the US, UK and Western Europe, that from a Russian perspective Russia is probably facing the greatest challenge from the West since Hitler's 1941 invasion "Operation Barbarossa." Of course the advent of nuclear weapons and intercontinental missiles in the last 72 years will hopefully be enough to reign in the crazies in Washington and London's 10 Downing Street.

itchyvet 78p · 41 minutes ago
It was not, an assassination, the guy and his daughter are still alive, therefore it was only an ATTEMPT at assassination.

[Mar 15, 2018] Hysterical panegyric on Observer.com reminds the Hate Week speech delivered by an Inner Party member in the movie version of George Orwell's 1984 !

Notable quotes:
"... It's sad that people even watch things such as BBC,CBC,NBC,ABC, CNN, etc. when every one of them parrots the same talking points, and they have repeatedly been outed as disinfo and pure propaganda outlets. ..."
"... Most interesting to me is that people can now see where their MP's stand WRT war - because this sure smells like the run-up to Libya. We already knew where the US would stand, same position for nearly a century. ..."
"... Only bankers benefit from war, and with the current global debt bomb, they are all in for declaration of "force majeure"- rest assured on that. ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

ashley albanese , Mar 15, 2018 4:18:50 PM | 129

Lying in bed listening to Australian government media propaganda . Endless parroting about the ' rules based order ' , ' the rising power of ( guess) and now Boris Johnson informing us that the world is insensed at Russian aggression . It is funny and absurd , sad and deadly !
SteveK9 , Mar 15, 2018 4:23:47 PM | 131
It's harder and harder to laugh at this nonsense. Just when you thought it could not get more ridiculous, something like this happens. I keep hearing that our masters are preparing us for war with Russia. All those people who keep saying 'war is coming', 'prepare for World War III', etc., you do realize that your life will be over, along with everyone you know, and ... human civilization?
Mister Roboto , Mar 15, 2018 5:58:41 PM | 143
When I read this hysterical panegyric on Observer.com (or at least as much of it as I could stomach), I couldn't help but think of the Hate Week speech delivered by an Inner Party member in the movie version of George Orwell's 1984 !
Oilman2 , Mar 15, 2018 7:03:54 PM | 150
It's sad that people even watch things such as BBC,CBC,NBC,ABC, CNN, etc. when every one of them parrots the same talking points, and they have repeatedly been outed as disinfo and pure propaganda outlets. The only "waking up" that I see anywhere is among those few that are neither progressive or conservative, and they are waking up to a nightmare. I am glad this is all talking - if fur truly starts flying, there isn't anywhere to hide from all this.

It's straight out of Bernays - just keep doubling down and throwing it up all over the media outlets. I get ashamed that critical thinking exists only in a few places like MOA. Yet even here, people seem to divide themselves right along the lines that all this claptrap designates at times.

All you need to sort this out is a simple exercise in "cui bono", same as ever - and Russia had nothing to gain, even in the intel arena.

Most interesting to me is that people can now see where their MP's stand WRT war - because this sure smells like the run-up to Libya. We already knew where the US would stand, same position for nearly a century.

Only bankers benefit from war, and with the current global debt bomb, they are all in for declaration of "force majeure"- rest assured on that.

[Mar 15, 2018] it is possible that Clinton mafia is a player in the Skripal story: 'BuzzFeed' and Christopher Steele face very serious lawsuits relating to the 'dossier'

This post suggest that one of the motivation fro the attack can be connected with imlications for GB of Steele dossier fiasco.
Notable quotes:
"... Ironically, while I think the notion that the Russian authorities would have organised this kind of attack now is peculiarly preposterous, I think there are a very large number of suspects -- including both state actors and some non-state. So, for example, Ukrainian oligarchs would very likely be in a position to organise such an operation. ..."
"... A possible element in the story is that both 'BuzzFeed' and Christopher Steele face very serious potential problems in lawsuits relating to the 'dossier.' Both have been sued by Aleksej Gubarev and XBT, while the former also has to face actions from the Alfa oligarchs, Michael Cohen, and Carter Page. ..."
"... The best way of avoiding a disaster for both 'BuzzFeed' and Steele -- which could have large knock-on implications -- may be to reinforce the already prevalent climate of hysteria, so that even the most preposterous claims in the dossier can be made to seem reasonable. ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

David Habakkuk -> Barbara Ann ... 15 March 2018 at 11:04 AM

Barbara Ann,

In reply to 139.

Ironically, while I think the notion that the Russian authorities would have organised this kind of attack now is peculiarly preposterous, I think there are a very large number of suspects -- including both state actors and some non-state. So, for example, Ukrainian oligarchs would very likely be in a position to organise such an operation.

Moreover, if they did, the British authorities would have very little option but to cover up for them.

One thing which is striking me forcibly is the way that the claims about a long history of assassinations of 'dissidents' in the UK in the 'investigation' by 'BuzzFeed' last June, of which the centrepiece was a long piece entitled 'From Russia With Blood' are now being recycled all over the place.

(See, for example, this from the 'Chicago Tribune -- http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-russian-dissidents-poisoned-20180306-story.html .)

A possible element in the story is that both 'BuzzFeed' and Christopher Steele face very serious potential problems in lawsuits relating to the 'dossier.' Both have been sued by Aleksej Gubarev and XBT, while the former also has to face actions from the Alfa oligarchs, Michael Cohen, and Carter Page.

The best way of avoiding a disaster for both 'BuzzFeed' and Steele -- which could have large knock-on implications -- may be to reinforce the already prevalent climate of hysteria, so that even the most preposterous claims in the dossier can be made to seem reasonable.

Sid Finster said in reply to turcopolier ... , 15 March 2018 at 11:05 AM
I think the problem goes well beyond the foreign policy establishment and most definitely includes the generals and a variety of other people and institutions in and out of government.

While BHO did restrain some of the aggression that we are now seeing, I suspect that the Deep State was confident that HRC or some Team R muppet (Jeb!) would win the next election, so all they had to do was bide their time.

Sid Finster said in reply to Barbara Ann ... , 15 March 2018 at 11:09 AM
Of course the "Russia poisons peoples we has the proof ZOMG!" coming out of May is pure theater and nothing more.

But why is she putting on this particular production right now?

[Mar 15, 2018] Rephazing Hermann G ring famous quote

Notable quotes:
"... Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | www.unz.com

Kiza , March 16, 2018 at 2:18 am GMT

Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or fascist dictatorship, or a parliament or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked (by a Russian sounding chemical weapon Novichok), and denounce the peace makers for lack of patriotism

( https://www.craigmurray.org.uk – Craig Murray has been most viciously attacked for not accepting the official story without any evidence) and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

[Mar 15, 2018] Russia is the Eastern Diamondback desperately trying to do all it can to avoid to have to strike. The West is the drunk idiot full of hubris, arrogance and a very mistaken sense of invulnerability saying " hold my beer and watch this! ".

Notable quotes:
"... Crotalus adamanteus ..."
"... hold my beer and watch this! ..."
"... hold my beer and watch this! ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | thesaker.is

Rattlesnakes have a terrible reputation. Here were I live, in Florida, we have the biggest rattlesnakes on the planet, the Eastern Diamondback ( Crotalus adamanteus ). They are huge and can reach well over 2m (6ft) in length and weigh up to 15kg (30lbs). The Eastern Diamondback's venom is not the most potent out there, but they can deliver *a lot* of it. So, yes, it is a formidable creature. But it is also a gentle creature and truly very shy one.

Eastern Diamonbacks are also a stunningly beautiful creatures. I confess that I absolutely love them.

For all their reputation for nastiness, Eastern Diamonbacks will never ever attack you if they can avoid it . I have seen a lot of these snakes on my hikes, I have manipulated them (with a hook), and I have seen my German Shepherd come nose to nose with one (literally) and that Eastern Diamondback did not strike. Why? Because these snakes will do everything they can to avoid having to bite you.

First and foremost, they hide. Really well. You can stand right next to a large Eastern Diamondback and never notice it. You can walk right by, and it won't move, or rattle its tail, and you will never know that it was there. Camouflage is their first line of defense.

Then, if discovered, they will rattle their tails. If needed, very loudly. You can easily hear the rattle from an Eastern Diamondback from 5m (15ft) away. More than enough distance to easily avoid it.

Furthermore, if given the chance, the Eastern Diamondback will retreat and hide.

Finally, when cornered a lot of them try what is called a "dry bite": they do bite you, but deliver no venom. Why? Because you are not prey, so what would be the point of envenomating you? The Eastern Diamondback does not want you dead, it wants you to let it live!

I was once told by a park ranger in Arizona that the profile of a typical rattlesnake bite victim is: white, male, with tattoos and the famous last words " hold my beer and watch this! ".

Why am I telling you all this?

Because that is exactly what I see happening before my horrified eyes.

Russia is the Eastern Diamondback desperately trying to do all it can to avoid to have to strike. The West is the drunk idiot full of hubris, arrogance and a very mistaken sense of invulnerability saying " hold my beer and watch this! ".

Keep in mind that in a confrontation with a drunken human the Eastern Diamondback is most unlikely to survive. And it knows that, and that is why it does everything it can to avoid such a confrontation in the first place. But if cornered or attacked the Diamondback will strike. Hard. Want to see what such a strike looks like?

[Mar 15, 2018] Having further researched Mike Pompeo s history it seems he is a war hawk

Mar 15, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

CitizenOne Reply

Well I said: "I hope that this is true but I cannot discount the other possibility that Trump has once again been fooled by the intelligence and the media into appointing a tool of the deep state to replace Tillerson. He was fooled in Syria and the World applauded or rather the World media applauded loudly. Hopefully he was not fooled by that contrived story. If that is the case then it is bad news for all of us and might lead to further hostilities against Russia."

Having further researched Mike Pompeo's history it seems he is a war hawk who will align to blame Russia for the attack on Sergei Skripal and his daughter. Further he has been a strong critic of the nuclear deal with Iran forged under Obama and has also been a strong republican supporter of every republican strategy for national defense including keeping Guantanamo Bay open indefinitely etc. This would support my doubts that the appointment of Secretary of State Pompeo would do much to ratchet down international tensions in the hot spots around the World where the US has chosen to portray our "enemies" as military targets to be conquered rather than other nations with their own sovereign rights to be dealt with through diplomacy.

The most alarming idea is to launch a war with Iran since they have negotiated a nuclear disarmament strategy with the Obama administration leaving them in a precarious situation of being vulnerable to a change in strategy by the US of negotiation towards a threat of armed force intervention coming from the US. Trump calls the Iran deal a terrible deal and so does Pompeo. How it is a terrible deal seems to be the same accusation that the US launched against Saddam Hussein in Iraq. It is only a terrible deal for Iran as it was for Iraq to believe that they could disarm under UN supervision in the hopes it would prevent an attack by the US.

I fear that the lessons of the potential new anti Iranian strategy to cancel out our deals with Iran will only convince the North Koreans that any pursuit of a peace with the USA will ultimately result in our reneging on the deal at the first arrival of our stated goals to get NK to disarm and will turn on them even if they comply with western demands that they must dismantle their nuclear arsenals.

The Iranian Nuclear deal is in peril with the appointment of Pompeo and the result will be that North Korea will see no advantage in cooperating with an adversary which on the one hand forges peace treaties and on the other hand revokes them by the politically shifting winds in Washington headed by a president who cannot see the forest from the trees and is easily influenced by people he "connects with" as though that is reason enough to surround himself with those people and appoint them to high positions.

The politically shifting instability in Washington with the firings of high officials alone would be reason enough for any foreign nation to doubt the credibility of any policy being put forth. Stability is what is essential to create the foundation for trust. Without an honest and consistent foreign policy it will be impossible to gain the trust of foreign leaders. As long as the administration is led by the nose by the media and acts in unpredictable ways there can be no shared basis for trust which is essential for peace.

What we have in Washington is the expansion of domestic political unrest and the contention of our national elections flaring over into blame of foreign influences and the externalization of blame for our current sociopolitical divide.

This is the fertile ground laced with the fertilizer for war or at the least a military buildup to war.

There is no greater threat than a World Superpower nation that shifts almost weekly on its policies and has open disputes with its appointed leaders which results in that nation repeatedly reshuffling the cards and changing its positions on foreign policy. I pray that the current leadership will come to grips with its own internal struggles and find a reasoned path towards maintaining the fragile peace that we all depend on.

[Mar 15, 2018] The central question is cue bono: Who benefits from the gassing of Sergei Skripal and his daughter?

Notable quotes:
"... There is no proof that the Russians were responsible and there is ample circumstantial evidence that there have been similar attempts many former governments to conduct false flag operations to create the appearance of enemy involvement in crimes boosted by the media in a rush to judgement where the home government would benefit from a story blaming the enemy state for deeds they were responsible for. Do you think we are not capable of the same crimes we routinely accuse other nations of? Do you believe every news story you hear and call every dissenting voice fake? ..."
"... The question of who benefits from the accusations that Russia was behind the gassing of Sergei Skripal and his daughter lies at the heart of the question of who really benefits from the news blitzes like the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter? ..."
"... Again, who benefits? Are the Russians benefiting from this assassination attempt? I think not. They are now corralled by the western press as having committed one more grievous crime. Why would they do this? Would their reasons be to empower the west to vilify them? Would they time their attack precisely at a time when the British were questioning their decision to exit the European Union was being called into question? How would their decision to unite against a Russian threat influence their decision? ..."
"... That's how you kill him if you want to frame the Russian state for the death. ..."
"... "Putindiditism" is definitely the new plague sweeping the West, infecting everyone, who was once able to think straight but is now incapable of critical thinking or even common sense. ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

CitizenOne

There is no bigger paid fake news than our commercial news corporations which will soon be able to propagandize us free of the Internet Neutrality rules which allow free discourse and debate thanks to the FCC ruling to end Net Neutrality which will end free speech for the tiny so called "fake news" sites like this. Fake only in the fact they counter the main stream propaganda. Admittedly you have found a hole in the story with some speculation being proposed by the author that connections to the Steele Report and the proximity of some supposed British nerve gas factory plays into the story. It is fake news as far as speculation that the British were involved since there is no proof of that either but how as that different from the fact free accusations that the Russians were responsible?

Personally I agree that the allegations that the British were behind it are unfounded but so are the allegations that Russia was behind it. It is a rush to find guilt on both sides unsupported by evidence and deserving its day in a court of law,

There is no proof that the Russians were responsible and there is ample circumstantial evidence that there have been similar attempts many former governments to conduct false flag operations to create the appearance of enemy involvement in crimes boosted by the media in a rush to judgement where the home government would benefit from a story blaming the enemy state for deeds they were responsible for. Do you think we are not capable of the same crimes we routinely accuse other nations of? Do you believe every news story you hear and call every dissenting voice fake?

The purpose of this site is to examine the all too real possibilities that our own governments are capable of perpetrating the same kinds of lies that our publicly announced "enemies" are accused as responsible for and to call into question their own motives for doing so.

The question of who benefits from the accusations that Russia was behind the gassing of Sergei Skripal and his daughter lies at the heart of the question of who really benefits from the news blitzes like the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter?

The article may be flawed with speculations but the underlying question remains "Who Benefits" Surely it is not the Russians who could have killed Sergei Skripal many years ago if they felt the need to kill him. They surely had ample means to do so being a world superpower and master at spying and controlling their assets.

It is the fault of our judgement and our ability to understand how international relations are controlled to not see how we can easily be fooled by a disinformation campaign aimed at aligning our nations around a guilty verdict based on false evidence.

Again, who benefits? Are the Russians benefiting from this assassination attempt? I think not. They are now corralled by the western press as having committed one more grievous crime. Why would they do this? Would their reasons be to empower the west to vilify them? Would they time their attack precisely at a time when the British were questioning their decision to exit the European Union was being called into question? How would their decision to unite against a Russian threat influence their decision?

Clearly there is more to this story than meets the eye and clearly there is much to be gained by creating a foreign enemy to rally the people.

So what is the risk? The risk is that by marginalizing the Russians and constantly keeping them out in the cold (war) the West will face an renewed existential threat and will only exacerbate tensions with a fully nuclear armed Russia.

This is great news for the arms manufacturers. They will reap giant profits as we descend into Cold War II.

So really you should be asking yourself who benefits and the only answer that is reasonable is the arms manufacturers and the military.

The agitation on the western side for blaming Russia for everything is economically motivated for profit.

That much is not speculation.

Realist , March 14, 2018 at 3:39 am

If the Russians wanted him dead he would have died of a tragic accident, due to mindless street violence, or of an armed robbery gone wrong years ago, not ritually assassinated on the public square using a military grade "weapon of mass destruction" made only at highly secured government facilities (like the shop down the street). That's how you kill him if you want to frame the Russian state for the death.

mrtmbrnmn , March 13, 2018 at 11:43 pm

"Putindiditism" is definitely the new plague sweeping the West, infecting everyone, who was once able to think straight but is now incapable of critical thinking or even common sense. Teresa May sounds as demented and desperate as our own Queen of You Owe Me during her failing campaign. "Highly likely" are Intelligence (duh) Community weasel words for "we're makin' this sh– up".

However, had the Sore Loser won, we might have been spared all these fairy tales and connivings and cut straight to Operation Barbarossa 2018. The true cold hearts' desire of all these berserkers and their fellow travelers barreling helter-skelter down the highway to hell and dragging the rest of us with them. What is to be done??

RUSSELL IACOBUCCI , March 13, 2018 at 11:50 pm

what webs we weave , when we attempt to deceive .

[Mar 15, 2018] It strikes me as odd that not only the Skripals but also Litvinenko who was murdered on British soil with polonium 210, another governmental action only weapon

Notable quotes:
"... The US undoubtedly hopes to get all of NATO to respond to an attack by Russia on the US in a country that the US is illegally occupying. I dunno. All the old colonial powers in Europe are pretty much US lapdogs. so it's hard to say what they'll do. ..."
"... Whether that message be a straightforward one by Russia that traitors always pay in the end, or a double-game, "false flag" one by the U.K. or U.S. to make it look like Russia, or some even more convoluted scenario – it's still more about communication than killing. ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Jeff , March 13, 2018 at 9:01 pm

I think it is much much worse than what you are suggesting. I think the governmental actor in question is either the US or the UK. Most likely the US with the UK as co-conspirator. It strikes me as odd that not only the Skripals but also Litvinenko who was murdered on British soil with polonium 210, another governmental action only weapon.

While on the one hand, these chemical/nuclear agents were known to be possessed by Russia, that doesn't mean that they weren't also possessed by us.

The US military would want samples of the nerve agent to work on possible antidotes and defenses. Polonium 210 is just an element. It can be made by anybody who has a research nuclear reactor.

The US is (unsuccessfully so far) attempting to isolate Russia as they prosecute their pursuit of ousting the elected government of Syria.

My take is that we are working up to attacking the government of Syria to protect "our" "moderate" rebel scum in Syria.

And we won't have any kind of UN resolution to misinterpret. I don't know how we're going to try to spin it but look for an attack in Ghouta sometime soon.

The US is trying to forestall a Russian response but the Russians have come out and said that an attack by the US would result in a Russian response.

The US undoubtedly hopes to get all of NATO to respond to an attack by Russia on the US in a country that the US is illegally occupying. I dunno. All the old colonial powers in Europe are pretty much US lapdogs. so it's hard to say what they'll do.

David G , March 13, 2018 at 2:20 pm

"The obfuscations of the British reinforce in [sic] the view that Skripal was dangerous to the anti-Trump forces and the authorities therefore sought to have them removed."

If it is true (and I don't take it as proved at this point) that an ultra-powerful, military nerve agent that nobody is supposed to even possess in 2018 was employed here, then whoever is responsible was trying to send a message, not just kill somebody unsuccessfully kill, for that matter, at least so far.

Whether that message be a straightforward one by Russia that traitors always pay in the end, or a double-game, "false flag" one by the U.K. or U.S. to make it look like Russia, or some even more convoluted scenario – it's still more about communication than killing. That's because anybody with the resources to get hold of this exotic toxin could easily have killed Skripal in a more mundane (and reliable) manner, if that was their primary goal.

Therefore, I disagree with James O'Neill's hypothesis that this was somebody trying to silence Skripal because of the Steele dossier: if that were the case, we'd have a dead victim and a conventional cause of death, albeit possibly made to look like an accident or suicide.

Linda Wood , March 13, 2018 at 6:54 pm

David G, your point here is really important.

If it is true that an ultra-powerful, military nerve agent that nobody is supposed to even possess in 2018 was employed here, then whoever is responsible was trying to send a message, not just kill somebody it's still more about communication than killing. That's because anybody with the resources to get hold of this exotic toxin could easily have killed Skripal in a more mundane (and reliable) manner, if that was their primary goal.

Not only does the use of such a toxin identify the killer as a government actor, whether Russian or U.S. or UK, it sends the message that whoever it is, they are dangerous, lawless, and willing to take the risk, knowing they have identified themselves as one of very few possible actors.

Just as the note in the anthrax attack stated, "WE HAVE THIS ANTHRAX", the question we have to ask in response is a kind of John le Carre quote: Who is speaking here?

alley cat , March 13, 2018 at 2:07 pm

There are infinite ways to eliminate someone without using a chemical that can be traced directly to you. The only operators who would use Novichok would be those trying to fan the flames of hysteria against Russia. The idea that Russians would deliberately incriminate themselves in this manner when they had nothing to gain by it doesn't even pass the straight-face test.

Israel Shamir posted an article on Unz Review that ties Putin's speech on March 1 with the growing threats by U.S. leaders to intervene militarily in Syria if the Syrian government "uses chemical weapons again." As if the Syrian government had any motive to use chemical weapons when it has all but won the war.

The Russians have contemptuously dismissed the absurd allegations against the Syrian government, and will do the same with respect to the allegations of Russian complicity in the assassination of Skripal.

But the military balance of power has shifted since Putin's latest speech. The Russian president has now drawn a line in the sand by giving U.S. leaders a clear warning that Russia has the capability to put a quick end to illegal U.S. meddling in Syria, and the will to do so.

Only complete, deluded, fools would doubt Putin's resolve. Thank God humanity is safe, since the people running the U.S. are all level-headed, intelligent, and reasonable.

[Mar 15, 2018] One of those former Soviet states, where it was stored, was Georgia

Mar 15, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

TWHM March 13, 2018 at 11:08 pm , March 13, 2018 at 11:08 pm

Well, jurgen, you don't have to look too hard to find the formula – all you need is an Amazon a/c and 30 bucks.

https://www.rt.com/news/421200-uk-novichok-agent-allegations/

As noted to the cohort this morn;

"The formula in a book you can buy on Amazon for 30 bucks, the stuff's not listed the OPCW's list of deadly nerve agents, to the stuff being stored in the former Soviet states, but Russia being the only one of those former Soviet states that destroyed their stockpiles of chemical & bio weapons – to the satisfaction of the OPCW, no less, 'Hallelujah' statements, and all.

(One of those former Soviet states, where it was stored, was Georgia. Reckon that all went away? https://journal-neo.org/2016/02/25/lugar-bio-weapons-laboratory-time-bomb-in-georgia-and-region/ . Like that? It's even named after the Yanqui Senator who opened it, FFS).

jurgen , March 13, 2018 at 4:52 pm

New York Times,
By JUDITH MILLER
MAY 25, 1999:

The United States and Uzbekistan have quietly negotiated and are expected to sign a bilateral agreement today to provide American aid in dismantling and decontaminating one of the former Soviet Union's largest chemical weapons testing facilities, according to Defense Department and Uzbek officials.

Earlier this year, the Pentagon informed Congress that it intends to spend up to $6 million under its Cooperative Threat Reduction program to demilitarize the so-called Chemical Research Institute, in Nukus, Uzbekistan. Soviet defectors and American officials say the Nukus plant was the major research and testing site for a new class of secret, highly lethal chemical weapons called "Novichok," which in Russian means "new guy."

Let us guess who got full access to the equipment, technical documentation and all those agents

[Mar 15, 2018] Where is Christopher Steele? Did he not have means and motive and oportunity

Mar 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

simeon | Mar 15, 2018 6:10:07 PM | 144

Where is Christopher Steele? did he not have means and motive and oportunity ?

Why has the russians not highlighted these connections after all the daughter is a russian citizen she has to be somewhere in hospital or kidnapped in a safe house.

Does not the russian embassy have a right to make sure this young lady is safe and happy to stay at her new porton down home.

And look what got announced today problem reaction solution new investments new buildings for the chemical weapons facilities at porton down what a concy dink 50 million for what testing dodgy sim samples .

[Mar 15, 2018] The UK and US had motive in order to keep advancing the Russia did it narrative to continue to manufacture consent for war on Russia It is perhaps telling that the media coverage is clearly designed to obscure rather than reveal

Notable quotes:
"... Clearly the brits were out to get Trump via Steele. That has been a long term objective as Trump is not an 'authorzed' agent for the deep, dependable State. ..."
"... Either the Russophobes are so deluded by their fear and hatred or they are intentional set on a course of action that could result in nuclear war. http://viewsandstories.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/russian-to-judgement.html ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

dikcheney , March 14, 2018 at 12:44 am

Clearly the brits were out to get Trump via Steele. That has been a long term objective as Trump is not an 'authorzed' agent for the deep, dependable State.

Skripal is too well informed and deeply dangerous to be alive now. I guess the unexpected survival issue can be sorted out soon enough. So there you go, fail in afghanistan, iran, iraq, syria, USA, where next for the Brits? fail in the EU. They certainly fail in the believeabilty challenge.

Nop , March 14, 2018 at 10:44 am

Frankly, this false flag is so blatantly gauche that I suspect it's something the Ukraine cooked up.

Steve Hayes , March 14, 2018 at 10:27 am

It is perhaps telling that the media coverage is clearly designed to obscure rather than reveal. The Russian to judgement in this has obvious parallels with the situation immediately prior to the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Either the Russophobes are so deluded by their fear and hatred or they are intentional set on a course of action that could result in nuclear war. http://viewsandstories.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/russian-to-judgement.html

[Mar 15, 2018] The point no Western MSM will even talk about: if this was supposed to be a hit then it was badly botched. The nerve agent didn t kill, the assassins didn t *confirm* the kill, the radius of the effect wasn t contained, and other people were contaminated.

Mar 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
Yeah, Right , Mar 15, 2018 7:03:02 PM | 149
Here's a thought: maybe the Soviet Union looked into the manufacture of these "novichoks" but decided that, nah, they don't work all that well in practice e.g. mixing the binary components in the field isn't an exact science, so the end result can range from Instant Death to Oh, Shit, Nobody Has Died And A Lot Of Innocents Are In Hospital.

Utterly unacceptable for any respectable KGB agent.

But some of the dudes who were working on those "novichoks" (dudes now out of work, remember) defected to the West with some diagrams and some tall tales of how stupendously clever they are and how astonishingly lethal their wares.

So places like Porton Down test the chemistry in the laboratory and, sure enough, under lab conditions the chemistry is astonishingly lethal.

They don't test it in the field because, well, why would they?

Fast forward to this week, and Someone has the Bright Idea to use some "novichoks" in a false-flag operation.

Why not? Everyone tells them that they are astonishingly lethal, and the lab tests back that up. What could go wrong?

So they do, and they find out what the Soviets found out decades ago.

Which is that this stuff is utter shit under field conditions: your target's don't die an instant death and innocent people who come to their aid get very, very sick.

Because that is the point that everyone in the MSM won't talk about: if this was supposed to be a hit then it was badly botched. The nerve agent didn't kill, the assassins didn't *confirm* the kill, the radius of the effect wasn't contained, and other people were contaminated.

Hardly the hallmarks of an agency that DEVELOPED this nerve agent, is it. But maybe the hallmark of no-hopers who didn't really understand what they were using.

[Mar 15, 2018] Britain s expulsion of Russian diplomats marks return to Cold War ejections

In the whole comment section there was only one commenter acidbot66 who questioned the windown of this false flag British operation. This particular commenter despite annoing use of ALL CAPS provides interesting line of arguments including the following: " British experts investigating the case are FROM THE VERY SAME AGENCY who advised Blair to go to WAR against Iraq on NON EXISTING Chemical weapons of mass destruction."
Four year of war propaganda took toll on US people if you assume that WaPo attract a special type of commenters ;-)
Mar 14, 2018 | www.washingtonpost.com

Prime Minister Theresa May announced Wednesday that her government will expel 23 Russian diplomats from Britain. It will be the biggest expulsion of Russian diplomats from the country since 1985 -- marking a return to the large-scale diplomatic ejections that took place during the Cold War.

...May's government lists 58 Russian diplomats in Britain, which means that almost 40 percent of them are being expelled.

county kerry 2 hours ago

Why poison , instead of a knife or gun ?

acidbot66

If Russians wanted to be known they would live a Putin's picture on the scene.

acidbot66

The British believes it is more Sensationalist and will catch more audience...

Philip Bond 2 hours ago

Everything old is new again... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhVaSWYcdyQ

acidbot66 2 hours ago

(Edited)
Decisions CANNOT be emotional. Hard evidence is required in ANY COURT of law. ANYONE MUST act according to international LAW not emotion or some sort of RUSSOPHOBIA so often affecting Americans and its European cronies.

NO ONE can be condemned based on CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE and that is in ANY CIVILIZED nation on this planet!

Although Russians may be involved HARD evidence MUST be presented BEFORE the judgment!

acidbot66 3 hours ago (Edited)

Nothing has been VERIFIED you IDIOT.
Nothing has been PROVEN as yet...
Not even VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE have been presented!

Evidences come before judgment, RIGHT?
Is this the way it works in Britain?

acidbot66, 15 minutes ago

No Proof. No Evidence.

That should be the national Motto of Russia.

Russia is as guilty as Sin and y0u know it BORIS. 3 hours ago "freedoms that democracy brings"

You mean like the "FREEDOMS" exposed by Edward Snowden?
Or the "FREEDOMS" for the military to MURDER innocents as disclosed by Julian Assange?

YOU ARE JOKING US ALL!

marph 3 hours ago

Theresa May's wonderful smoke screen would leave behind the toxic Brexit impact off the headlines. In a volatile world that we need alliances and not isolations.

Beside that, a hypocrite Conservative administration should in fact ban receiving donations from Russia.

As it was reported that since 2010, the Conservative party has received more than $5m donation from Russian oligarch and their linked businesses, what a bunch of hypocrite...

[Mar 15, 2018] The UK will promptly expel 23 Russian diplomats without waiting for the end of the investigation

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The UK will promptly expel 23 Russian diplomats without waiting for the end of the investigation. Which means that from now on the investigation is highly politicized and tainted in a sense that it will be conducted by people who proved the existence of Iraq WMD in the past: ..."
"... This is one step further from the "self-indictment as a formal proof" used in Show Trials. Now it looks like "suspicion is the formal proof." ..."
"... Both cyberspace and poisoning with exotic chemical agents proved to be a perfect media for false flag operations designed to poison relations between nations and fuel war-style demonization. ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

likbez 14 March 2018 at 11:40 PM

The UK will promptly expel 23 Russian diplomats without waiting for the end of the investigation. Which means that from now on the investigation is highly politicized and tainted in a sense that it will be conducted by people who proved the existence of Iraq WMD in the past:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43402506

Moscow refused to meet Mrs May's midnight deadline to co-operate in the case, prompting Mrs May to announce a series of measures intended to send a "clear message" to Russia.

These include:

  • Expelling 23 diplomats
  • Increasing checks on private flights, customs and freight
  • Freezing Russian state assets where there is evidence they may be used to threaten the life or property of UK nationals or residents
  • Ministers and the Royal Family boycotting the Fifa World Cup in Russia later this year
  • Suspending all planned high-level bilateral contacts between the UK and Russia
  • Plans to consider new laws to increase defences against "hostile state activity"

Mrs May told MPs that Russia had provided "no explanation" as to how the nerve agent came to be used in the UK, describing Moscow's response as one of "sarcasm, contempt and defiance".

The use of a Russian-made nerve agent on UK soil amounted to the "unlawful use of force", she said.

So it looks more and more like a well planned multi-step propaganda operation, not an impromptu action on the part of GB. Kind of replica of Russian election influence witch hunt in the USA with the replacement of cyberspace and elections with chemical agents and poisoning.

So inconsistencies that were pointed in this thread (such as the mere fact that three people exposed are still alive) do not matter anymore.

The verdict now is in.

This is one step further from the "self-indictment as a formal proof" used in Show Trials. Now it looks like "suspicion is the formal proof."

Both cyberspace and poisoning with exotic chemical agents proved to be a perfect media for false flag operations designed to poison relations between nations and fuel war-style demonization.

Sad...

[Mar 15, 2018] It is the British who need to maintain a strong diplomatic presence in Moscow to retain relevance

Notable quotes:
"... The Russians are sure to respond to the British expulsion of Russian diplomats from London by expelling a comparable number of British diplomats from Moscow. ..."
"... The reciprocal expulsions of diplomats will of course also make it more difficult for the British to maintain their intelligence operation in Moscow. ..."
"... Since this appears to be rather extensive, and seems to involve far more 'democracy promotion' activity (ie. meddling in Russian domestic politics) than anything the Russians do in Britain, the Russians will probably also be quietly pleased about it. ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | theduran.com

After days of hysteria and of mounting speculation, and after having stoked up by her statement on Monday expectations of stern action against Russia to stratospheric levels, Theresa May produced a package of 'sanctions' today which do no more than expose the weakness of Britain's hand.

This is how the BBC describes them

Note that none of these sanctions include any of the supposedly draconian steps which have been spoken about over the last few days.

Theresa May for example appeared to rule out a blanket visa ban and sweeping asset freezes on wealthy Russians coming to London. It is clear that ideas for a boycott by the England team of the World Cup in Russia and for the complete severing of diplomatic relations with Russia have been abandoned if they were ever considered.

Reports in the media have also confirmed that the idea of launching a cyber attack against Russia has been ruled out, since the British quietly acknowledge that Russia has immeasurably greater cyber resources with which to retaliate than Britain does.

As to whether or not Ofcom will now strip RT of its broadcasting licence, Maria Zakharova's threat to expel all British media outlets from Russia is having a chilling effect, with the British media apparently now quietly lobbying the British government against doing it.

By way of example, The Times of London , the newspaper which has been leading the British media's offensive against RT, now has this to say, tucked away at the bottom of a meandering editorial with the woolly and meaningless headline 'An Unstable World'

The Kremlin has threatened to expel British journalists from Moscow should London shut down the Russian propaganda channel RT. That would be ill advised. Britain stands for nothing if not free speech. Mrs May should stick to the evidence in the Skripal case, identifying the culprits and bringing maximum international force to bear to punish them personally.

It is interesting to see how the British media suddenly discovers free speech also applies to Russian media when its own interests are threatened.

It is still possible that Ofcom may follow up on its threats against RT, but that is now looking rather less likely.

As for the measures Theresa May announced today not only will they not affect Russia in the slightest, but they are actually counterproductive.

The Russians are sure to respond to the British expulsion of Russian diplomats from London by expelling a comparable number of British diplomats from Moscow.

Since Russia is by far the more powerful country, it is the British who need to maintain a strong diplomatic presence in Moscow to retain relevance. By contrast Russia, as a Great Power, has no need to maintain a strong diplomatic presence in Britain, which is nowadays a second or even third rank power.

The reciprocal expulsions which are now going to happen will not therefore affect Russia's position as a Great Power in the slightest. They will however further marginalise the British in international diplomacy.

The same is true of the British decision to sever bilateral contacts with Russia.

Apart from Boris Johnson's recent ill-starred to Moscow, there have in fact been barely any bilateral contacts between the Russian and British governments for years, even though it is again Britain as the weaker country which needs these contacts in order to retain relevance, not Russia.

As it happens I expect the Russians to greet the news that they are going to be spared further meetings with Boris Johnson with a quiet sigh of relief.

As for Boris Johnson himself, how he hopes to cut an important figure in international diplomacy when he is now prevented from visiting Moscow – the capital of one of the world's Great Powers – by his own government, completely escapes me. The reality is that no one takes him seriously anyway.

The reciprocal expulsions of diplomats will of course also make it more difficult for the British to maintain their intelligence operation in Moscow.

Since this appears to be rather extensive, and seems to involve far more 'democracy promotion' activity (ie. meddling in Russian domestic politics) than anything the Russians do in Britain, the Russians will probably also be quietly pleased about it.

[Mar 15, 2018] She and her bunch of Tory war criminals who have used Islamist terror in Libya Syria and Iraq have used highly emotive language today.

Mar 15, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

Reply ↓ giyane March 14, 2018 at 23:29

Adam
Exhilarating to see the establishment cage rattled.
Projection being the psychological flaw of choice for Tories, one could surmise you yourself might be trying to get lecture income, Craig is not touting for business here. In fact he is only surfacing on this blog when establishment lies reach the level of preposterous – dangerous .It was so completely obvious that Mrs May was lying today to parliament that Jeremy Corbyn refused to corroborate her lies. If she had said something reasonable, such as ' we are unable to identify the poison or attribute blame, then the leader of the opposition light have agreed with her suspicions. But she lied, like Blair over Iraqi wmd.

She and her bunch of Tory war criminals who have used Islamist terror in Libya Syria and Iraq have used highly emotive language today. Rather strange for a party that is propped up only by bribing the DUP. Even more strange to find you on the wrong side of history, the Mr Hyde side.

[Mar 15, 2018] The Novichok Story Is Indeed Another Iraqi WMD Scam

Mar 15, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

14 Mar, 2018 in Uncategorized by craig | View Comments

As recently as 2016 Dr Robin Black, Head of the Detection Laboratory at the UK's only chemical weapons facility at Porton Down, a former colleague of Dr David Kelly, published in an extremely prestigious scientific journal that the evidence for the existence of Novichoks was scant and their composition unknown.

In recent years, there has been much speculation that a fourth generation of nerve agents, 'Novichoks' (newcomer), was developed in Russia, beginning in the 1970s as part of the 'Foliant' programme, with the aim of finding agents that would compromise defensive countermeasures. Information on these compounds has been sparse in the public domain, mostly originating from a dissident Russian military chemist, Vil Mirzayanov. No independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published. (Black, 2016)

Robin Black. (2016) Development, Historical Use and Properties of Chemical Warfare Agents. Royal Society of Chemistry

Yet now, the British Government is claiming to be able instantly to identify a substance which its only biological weapons research centre has never seen before and was unsure of its existence. Worse, it claims to be able not only to identify it, but to pinpoint its origin. Given Dr Black's publication, it is plain that claim cannot be true.

The world's international chemical weapons experts share Dr Black's opinion. The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) is a UN body based in the Hague. In 2013 this was the report of its Scientific Advisory Board, which included US, French, German and Russian government representatives and on which Dr Black was the UK representative:

[The SAB] emphasised that the definition of toxic chemicals in the Convention would cover all potential candidate chemicals that might be utilised as chemical weapons. Regarding new toxic chemicals not listed in the Annex on Chemicals but which may nevertheless pose a risk to the Convention, the SAB makes reference to "Novichoks". The name "Novichok" is used in a publication of a former Soviet scientist who reported investigating a new class of nerve agents suitable for use as binary chemical weapons. The SAB states that it has insufficient information to comment on the existence or properties of "Novichoks". (OPCW, 2013)

OPCW: Report of the Scientific Advisory Board on developments in science and technology for the Third Review Conference 27 March 2013

Indeed the OPCW was so sceptical of the viability of "novichoks" that it decided – with US and UK agreement – not to add them nor their alleged precursors to its banned list. In short, the scientific community broadly accepts Mirzayanov was working on "novichoks" but doubts he succeeded.

[Mar 15, 2018] If your country becomes a haven for dodgy people, like Berezovsky, then dodgy things are likely to happen.

Notable quotes:
"... If your country becomes a haven for dodgy people, like Berezovsky, then dodgy things are likely to happen. ..."
"... In some ways on the political right the neocons are more dominant than they are in the US. The Murdoch empire controls a huge chunk of the right leaning media and pumps out the usual tropes, with the added hysteria of the tabloid press of this country. Sadly we saw the replacement of Emily Blunt's uncle Crispin as Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, a realist replaced by fellow Conservative but Zionist Tughendat. The neocons and the Blairites have the numbers in the Commons. ..."
"... On the left they have been traumatised by the election of Trump and the vote for Brexit. They have dutifully followed the Russia smokescreen of the Democrats in the US. ..."
"... Here, the 1914 analogy can be seen in the rapid insistence that friends and allies of Britain must also stand tall and denounce the Russians - evidence be damned - lest the alliance crumble. ..."
"... This will permit the "unlawfull chemical weapon attack" meme to grow just as Russiagate has done, with unproven allegations presented as settled fact, requiring "action" in response. ..."
"... Further, by this reaction, the British government has assured the investigation into whatever happened will be politicized, and that any information countering the government's charges will be suppressed so to prevent a loss of face. ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

LondonBob -> kooshy ... 14 March 2018 at 05:55 AM

What is going on here in Britain?

There are more unsavoury types who have fallen foul of the law and/or the Kremlin who then base themselves in London. If your country becomes a haven for dodgy people, like Berezovsky, then dodgy things are likely to happen.

In some ways on the political right the neocons are more dominant than they are in the US. The Murdoch empire controls a huge chunk of the right leaning media and pumps out the usual tropes, with the added hysteria of the tabloid press of this country. Sadly we saw the replacement of Emily Blunt's uncle Crispin as Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, a realist replaced by fellow Conservative but Zionist Tughendat. The neocons and the Blairites have the numbers in the Commons.

On the left they have been traumatised by the election of Trump and the vote for Brexit. They have dutifully followed the Russia smokescreen of the Democrats in the US. Crucially though Corbyn was elected leader of the Labour party and continues to poll well. Blairites, the press and the Israelis have launched an unrelenting campaign to unseat him and damage him electorally. This has not worked, Israel looks to have lost the political left. If you thought Trump was pro Russia, anti-interventionist and NATO skeptical then Corbyn is even mores so, with the added bonus of being fiercely critical of Israel.

Finally we have also seen continuing cuts to the defence budget, The military industrial complex has been eagerly jumping on the Russia bandwagon to try to stop this.

Add in the Saudi/Arab lobby and Syria and it is a perfect storm. The hysteria is because they are losing, not winning.

I'll add two articles on the Skripal affair that I like.

jjc , 14 March 2018 at 12:31 PM
May's British government is in a weak position domestically, with the fear and loathing of Corbyn motivating a certain hysteria since last years snap election. What has transpired this week appears direct from the Thatcher playbook. What is stunning is, for all the bluster, they have reached a verdict without a trial, without any evidence at all of an "attempted murder", without even being able to explain what happened. To then wrap their denunciations in the banner of standing tall for "our values" and sticking up for the "rules-based system" while trampling on the logic and procedure of the basic justice system - that's just crazy and rather thoughtless.

Here, the 1914 analogy can be seen in the rapid insistence that friends and allies of Britain must also stand tall and denounce the Russians - evidence be damned - lest the alliance crumble.

This will permit the "unlawfull chemical weapon attack" meme to grow just as Russiagate has done, with unproven allegations presented as settled fact, requiring "action" in response.

Further, by this reaction, the British government has assured the investigation into whatever happened will be politicized, and that any information countering the government's charges will be suppressed so to prevent a loss of face.

David Habakkuk -> LondonBob... , 14 March 2018 at 02:07 PM
LondonBob,

In response to comment 87.

Unfortunately, although the pieces by both Séamus Martin and Craig Murray to which you link are much better than most MSM coverage, among many problems with them is the rather basic one that both accept without question an unproven assumption that is fundamental to the whole British case against Russia over Skripal – that a class of lethal CW called 'Novichoks' actually exists.

A relevant post has just appeared on the site of a 'Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media' recently set up by a group of British academics. It is co-authored by Paul McKeigue, Professor of Statistical Genetics and Genetic Epidemiology at Edinburgh University, and Piers Robinson, Professor of Politics, Society and Political Journalism' at Sheffield University, and is entitled 'Doubts about "Novichoks".'

(See http://syriapropagandamedia.org/working-papers .)

In the Commons on 12 March, Theresa May claimed that 'world-leading experts at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down have established that Skripal was poisoned with one of a 'group of nerve agents known as Novichok,' developed by Russia.

Until recently the head of the detection laboratory at Porton Down was Dr Robin Black. As McKeigue and Robinson note, back in 2016 this 'world-leading expert' on chemical weapons – he really is that – published a chapter in a book on 'Chemical Warfare Toxicology' entitled 'Development, Historical Use and Properties of Chemical Warfare Agents.'

The link to this at the site of the Royal Society of Chemistry is at the end of the piece by McKeigue and Robinson – a free download if one registers. I would very strongly recommend the whole chapter to anyone seriously interested in getting to grips with issues to do with chemical weapons, as it provides an authoritative account accessible to those without a scientific background.

Of particular interest in relation to May's accusations against Russia is the fact that Black specifically states that the existence of the Russian programme to which she refers was unconfirmed as of his writing:

'In recent years, there has been much speculation that a fourth generation of nerve agents, 'Novichoks' (newcomer), was developed in Russia, beginning in the 1970s as part of the "Foliant" programme, with the aim of finding agents that would compromise defensive countermeasures. Information on these compounds has been sparse in the public domain, mostly originating from a dissident Russian military chemist, Vil Mirzayanov. No independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published.'

What he is suggesting is that in the course of the – OPCW-monitored – destruction of the Russian chemical weapons programme, no evidence emerged confirming the claims by Mirzayanov. For this to be consistent with the Prime Minister's claims, some pretty radical assumptions have to be introduced.

As McKeigue and Robinson also note, a similar scepticism was expressed in a March 2013 report by the Scientific Advisory Board on the OPCW – again, the link is in the 'Working Group' document:

'[The SAB] emphasised that the definition of toxic chemicals in the Convention would cover all potential candidate chemicals that might be utilised as chemical weapons. Regarding new toxic chemicals not listed in the Annex on Chemicals but which may nevertheless pose a risk to the Convention, the SAB makes reference to "Novichoks". The name "Novichok" is used in a publication of a former Soviet scientist who reported investigating a new class of nerve agents suitable for use as binary chemical weapons. The SAB states that it has insufficient information to comment on the existence or properties of "Novichoks".'

Of course, it is possible that, since Dr Black wrote, both Porton Down and the OPCW have received conclusive evidence vindicating the claims by Mirzayanov. It is even just remotely conceivable – very remotely conceivable – that all these people are part of a conspiracy to cover the devastating information revealed by Mirzayanov. But those who want to argue this owe us at least an attempt to provide a coherent account of how this might be so.

And then, it has to be born in mind that there is a long history of people in the West accepting, without critical examination, claims from 'dissidents' and 'defectors' from the former Soviet Union and now Russia.

In this connection, I would refer people to two reports from Judith Miller. One, from 1999 in the 'New York Times', is entitled 'U.S. and Uzbeks Agree on Chemical Arms Plant Cleanup'. It both accepts Mirzayanov's claim's at face value, and suggests American officials also did this.

(See http://www.nytimes.com/1999/05/25/world/us-and-uzbeks-agree-on-chemical-arms-plant-cleanup.html .)

Another, published yesterday in the 'City Journal' is entitled 'Chemical Weapons are Back, Thanks to Russia; The banned agents are increasingly being used for assassination and terror.'

(See https://www.city-journal.org/html/chemical-weapons-are-back-thanks-russia-15766.html .)

The 'City Journal' is an outlet with which I was unfamiliar. At first glance, and particular in the light of their publishing Judith Miller, it seems to me it might usefully be retitled 'Still useful idiots, after all these years, and proud of it', or 'Inside the bubble, and terrified of having it pricked.'

If this seems extreme, have a look at her article.

Compounding the confusion is the fact that various Russians quoted repudiating Theresa May's accusations have not denied that the 'Novichoks' programme existed. In general, these seem to me to be people who could not be expected to have a grasp of the detailed history of the Soviet chemical weapons programme, and this would not be the first time that such figures have opened their big mouths in response to questionable accusations and in so doing given these unmerited credibility.

(See https://www.rt.com/news/421200-uk-novichok-agent-allegations/ ; https://sputniknews.com/russia/201803131062469325-russia-nerve-agent/ .)

However, these are not matters which need to be prejudged. What we clearly need is clarification about the actual state of the evidence about 'Novichoks' from people who are well-informed, both on the Western and Russian sides. Maybe if some people in the Western MSM actually did some journalism, as it used to be understood, we might get it.

It would not be sufficient to establish Russian responsibility to establish that the programme to create 'Novichoks' actually existed, but it would seem rather close to a necessary condition. Until the problems raised by McKeigue and Robinson are cleared up, it really is premature to conduct any discussion of the Skripal poisoning on the basis of the assumption that it did.

Meanwhile, it is difficult to see what possible grounds there can be for the apparent reluctance of the British to supply the Russians with samples for testing.

An intriguing question is raised by the arguments made by McKeigue and Robinson. Clearly something was tested at Porton Down, and some kind of results produced. If in fact 'Novochoks' do not exist, what was it that was tested, and what were the results?

As with the test results from Porton Down and other laboratories on samples from incidents where CW have been used in Syria, one comes back to the urgent need to have the actual test results in the public domain, and the obvious implausibility of claims that 'sources and methods' considerations mean that this cannot be done.

Incidentally, Professor McKeigue is also the author of what I take to be a highly cogent demolition of the report of the UN/OPCW 'Joint Investigative Commission', issued last October, which blamed the Syrian government for the Khan Sheikhoun sarin atrocity, to which I have referred in earlier comments.

(See https://timhayward.wordpress.com/2017/12/22/khan-sheikhoun-chemical-attack-guest-blog-featuring-paul-mckeigues-reassessment/ .)

Among other things, his argument provides very strong reasons to suspect that intense pressure was put on people at the OPCW to collaborate in the cover-up of a 'false flag.' It thus becomes perfectly natural to ask whether similar pressure may have been put on people at Porton Down.

The fact that Theresa May simply assumed away the possibility of a 'false flag' would seem reason at least to a range of possibilities regarding her role – ranging from very great naivety to actual collusion in a cover-up of a 'false flag.'

If she wants to prove such suspicions are groundless, she should order the disclosure of the kind of information I have suggested needs to be made public – just as General Mattis should order the disclosure of the test results relevant to Syrian CW incidents which publicly available evidence indicates must be available to him.

In all these cases, what we most of all simply need are the charts showing the 'spectra' of the various compounds identified by the testing processes. It is difficult to see any cogent 'sources and methods' grounds for not disclosing these. Once they were disclosed, an informed discussion by people with relevant scientific competence would become possible.

Until they are disclosed, suspicion will be unavoidable that those who do not want to see them disclosed are afraid of what such informed discussion would reveal.

[Mar 15, 2018] The USA is on board, Niki Hailey says they will be using nerve agents in New York if we don't deal with the Russians.

Mar 15, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

luke8929 14 March 2018 at 05:28 PM

The USA is on board, Niki Hailey says they will be using nerve agents in New York if we don't deal with the Russians.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/foreign/nikki-haley-warns-russia-could-use-chemical-weapons-in-new-york

And of course a secret North Korean facility underground in Syria helping Assad make chemical weapons.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/u-s-monitoring-possible-north-korean-military-base-syria/

[Mar 15, 2018] Even if Novichok exists, it seems unlikely that it was used here. It more and more looks like Iraq WDM scam. That strengthes the hypothesis that this was a false flag operation, a replay on Litvinenko murder

Notable quotes:
"... But of course the investigation is a side show in this piece of orchestrated political theater - in much the same way as is Mueller's indictment of Russian trolls, who have no prospect of being brought to trial. God forbid they should actually catch the perpetrator. I'd put money on their being a state actor, just not that state. ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

irf520 said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 14 March 2018 at 04:34 PM

Even if Novichok exists, it seems unlikely that it was used here. Supposedly these things are 10x more toxic than VX, in which case anyone exposed to even the smallest quantity of it would be as dead as a doornail. Yet by some miracle no-one has actually been killed in this incident.
Barbara Ann -> David Habakkuk ... , 14 March 2018 at 05:10 PM
David Habakkuk

Thanks for the link to the 'Doubts about "Novichoks"' article, this is very encouraging. The second point made by the authors is that

"..any organic chemist with a modern lab would be able to synthesize bench scale quantities of such a compound."
Now Theresa May is not a scientist and may believe that a chemical compound can be 'Russian'. But you are right to speculate about pressure having been put on the boffins at Porton Down, as they will know better and seem to be choosing not to say so.

Given that the means in this crime now seems to be open to a far wider range of suspects, I would hope that the investigation would give at least some consideration to motive and opportunity. But of course the investigation is a side show in this piece of orchestrated political theater - in much the same way as is Mueller's indictment of Russian trolls, who have no prospect of being brought to trial. God forbid they should actually catch the perpetrator. I'd put money on their being a state actor, just not that state.

james said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 14 March 2018 at 06:41 PM
david - thanks for commenting on this.. i was hoping you would show up and comment!

craig murray has done another post today worth reading, as has b over at moa.. here are the links to them as it sounds like you haven't read them.

i will just say this.. as for dr. robin black - perhaps he is not at liberty to say that porton down followed the instructions in Mirzanjaov's book 'state secrets' - as b so aptly puts it ""Russia did it", says Mirzanjaov, "OR SOMEONE WHO READ MY BOOK"... either that, or he knows and is unwilling to state this openly.. i don't know, but what i really want to know is how does porton down verify it is this novichuk, without ever having been familiar with it? that part is hard to fathom... and, if it can be reproduced, how can the uk ascertain with such certainty that it was produced in russia? too many questions remain and the rush to a conclusion seems really shoddy on the part of the uk leadership...

thanks for the links and additional thoughts..

VietnamVet , 14 March 2018 at 07:20 PM
David Habakkuk and LondonBob

Thanks.

The hysteria that Russia did it is so total I completely missed that the victims are still alive. Like CP, I remember Basic Training, with nerve gas, if you didn't get the protective gear on; you died. This is very very strange. "Newcomer" nerve agents are binaries that are relative non-toxic but when mixed highly toxic; five times greater than VX. The policeman was exposed at the house. Yet the victims left home, drove into town, dined and collapsed on the park bench. I don't see how one mixes Russian military grade nerve agents without chemical protective gear and respirator and not die instantly. Perhaps someone mixed together an organophosphate compound in a clandestine laboratory that the victims were exposed to; but, that completely destroys the PM's narrative.

[Mar 15, 2018] Russian to Judgment Who Poisoned Sergei Skripal

Mar 15, 2018 | original.antiwar.com

by Justin Raimondo Posted on March 15, 2018 March 14, 2018 The latest example of alleged Russian perfidy – the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia – is yet another case of faith-based attribution. In accusing Russia of some heinous crime – in this instance, the murder of a former double agent working for MI6 – one needn't present any real evidence: it's only necessary to point the finger at the Kremlin. And of course we haven't had any real evidence proffered by the British government: Prime Minister Theresa May simply declared that Russia is the culprit and gave a midnight deadline for the Kremlin to explain how " its nerve weapon " – as NBC reported it – was used to attacked Skripal on British soil. She has since announced the expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats.

... ... ...

This is a replay of the Litvinenko affair , which was based on similarly dubious "evidence.": even the official British government report was ambiguous about Russia's alleged responsibility for poisoning the exiled anti-Putin propagandist. It says that Putin " probably approved" the murder.

Probably. No need for exactitude in these matters: after all, we're only talking about a country with enough nuclear weapons aimed at us – and the Brits – to wipe out the entire population of the planet. So "probably" is good enough.

Alexander Litvinenko was involved with all sorts of dubious characters , many of them linked to the Russian Mafia: any one of a number of these fine fellows could've killed him. As more of Skripal's story comes out, one suspects that the same will prove true in his case.

That won't stop the War Party from concocting yet another conspiracy theory pointing to the all-powerful Vladimir Putin as the source of all that's bad in the world.

Don't fall for it: instead, ask the question that's pinned to the top of my Twitter feed: Where's the evidence ?

[Mar 15, 2018] Another aspect of the British Operation Skripal provocation might be the Nord Stream gas pipeline from Russia to Germany

Notable quotes:
"... Another background to the British provocation might be the Nord Stream gas pipeline from Russia to Germany. Construction is to start now and once it is finished Ukraine can´t blackmail Europe anymore by holding up gas delivery. Poland, the Baltics, the US and of course Ukraine are violently opposed to Nord Stream 2. ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Tom 15 March 2018 at 06:51 AM

...The British noise about the alleged nerve gas agent is then nothing more but another attempt to force Washingtons´s hand to increase hostility towards Russia.

Interestingly enough today Germany´s defense minister who is a close confident of Merkel echoed the outrage about the alleged nerve gas attack but called for a "UN investigation". That is she didn´t endorse the British claim.

Another background to the British provocation might be the Nord Stream gas pipeline from Russia to Germany. Construction is to start now and once it is finished Ukraine can´t blackmail Europe anymore by holding up gas delivery. Poland, the Baltics, the US and of course Ukraine are violently opposed to Nord Stream 2.


[Mar 15, 2018] Visualizing How The World Views Vladimir Putin

Mar 15, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Earlier this week, British Prime Minister Theresa May announced in the House of Commons that Russia was "highly likely" to have been involved in the attempted murder of a former Russian spy and his daughter. The incident left Sergei Skripal, 66, and his daughter Yulia, 33, critically ill in hospital. As Statista's Niall McCarthy notes , The UK has now announced that it will expel 23 Russian diplomats after Russia failed to explain how a military-grade nerve agent was used in the attack in Salisbury.

Even though the Kremlin has vehemently denied any involvement, insiders have said that all signs point to Moscow and if that's true, it raises some troubling questions ahead of the country's presidential election on Sunday.

Some observers have suggested that rogue elements of the Russian government could be responsible for the attack while others are pointing their fingers firmly towards Vladimir Putin.

Even though there is no evidence that Putin gave the order to carry out a high-profile killing in public, the decision to use nerve agents that could be linked to Russia carries considerable risk. Some have claimed that Putin might have arranged the attack to engineer a confrontation with the west in order to improve turnout at the polls.

If the UK goes a step beyond expelling diplomats and imposes sanctions, Russia could find itself more isolated and that has proven deeply unpopular with the country's electorate .

Putin is expected to win Sunday's election easily and even if Russian media portrays the events in Salisbury as some kind of western conspiracy to rally voters, the president's image is still likely to worsen internationally .

The most recent polling into how Putin is viewed abroad was conducted in August 2017 by the Pew Research Center. Even before the events in Salisbury, Putin was very unpopular across the world.

You will find more infographics at Statista

In Poland where the relationship with Russia has never been easy, 89 percent of Pew's respondents said they have no confidence in Putin doing the right thing regarding world affairs.

In France, the share was also high at 80 percent.

In the United Kingdom and the United Stated, 76 and 74 percent of people have no faith in the Russian president doing the right thing on the world stage.

At the other end of the scale, Nigeria and India are more confident than not confident in Putin doing the right thing.

It seems the global propaganda machine has not been able to reach there quite yet.

DownWithYogaPants -> pier Wed, 03/14/2018 - 21:33 Permalink

If you don't have some appreciation of Putin's intellect and skill as a leader you're not paying attention. Additionally he's shown real composure and self control given the provocations he has been subject to.

If he has indeed tossed out the Rothschild bankers he is a hero of the ages. That is no light work.

eforce -> DownWithYogaPants Wed, 03/14/2018 - 21:36 Permalink

MSM propaganda still holds some power it seems.

Drater -> gatorengineer Wed, 03/14/2018 - 21:40 Permalink

Highly recommend reading Putin's NYT editorial from 2013...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-caution-from-r

rejected Wed, 03/14/2018 - 21:33 Permalink

When you say it like it is,,, when you don't BS everyone,,, and if you don't start a dozen wars in a dozen years no one has confidence in you?

The charts show the indoctrination levels, not confidence levels.

Russia and Mr. Putin have taken a lot of abuse that kept us and the world out of a major war,,, so far,,, and I sincerely thank them for that.

rwe2late Wed, 03/14/2018 - 21:36 Permalink

Even if the poll were accurate and unbiased,

it says next to nothing by way of relevant comparisons.

"Confident" about what?

How many had even heard of Putin or knew anything about him?

How confident are they in Trump or T. May or their own government?

How about confidence within the respective country?

Are Russians confident?

What about the most populous nation, China?

Iran? Syria?

Even if the poll were unbiased,

the selection of countries for the presentation is not.

Smi1ey Wed, 03/14/2018 - 21:36 Permalink

This is complete horseshit straight from the same people who give us WaPo and the New York Times. How does he not have Putin's popularity in Russia. Where is that?

Also, The author's view of the world is extremely skewed.

just the tip Wed, 03/14/2018 - 21:37 Permalink

this is nothing new. the propaganda is strong with this one.

https://247wallst.com/special-report/2015/04/21/countries-that-hate-ame

No country disapproves of America more than Russia, where 82% of survey respondents said they disapproved of U.S. leadership. This was also the worst rating from Russia in the history of the survey. While many Russians do not like America, residents of many other countries do not approve of Russia. The median disapproval rating of Russian leadership was greater than the median approval rating, the only country to claim this distinction. And while a majority of residents in 15 countries disapprove of the U.S., a majority of residents in 42 countries disapprove of Russia's leadership. Russia's disapproval rating of U.S. leadership worsened considerably from 2013, increasing 12 percentage points. Recently implemented U.S.-led Western sanctions on Russia have likely intensified Russians' disapproval. According to historical data from the Levada Center, Russia's independent public opinion tracker, negative attitudes towards the United States spiked during the invasion of Iraq and worsened again in 2008 after the Russia-Georgia conflict. More recently, the U.S. sided with Ukraine after Russia annexed Crimea in 2014.

Brazen Heist Wed, 03/14/2018 - 21:44 Permalink

Putin is the best Statesman of the 21st century.

The West doesn't make Statesmen anymore. It produces whores and pedophiles who sell to the highest bidders and don't have the capacity to think beyond their tenures.

Because Western governments are dominated by cucks and sellouts, they feel threatened by Putin's unwavering determination, backbone and geopolitical mastery, hence the concerted propaganda campaign to discredit him, which by the way is pretty fucking pathetic.

ISEEIT Wed, 03/14/2018 - 21:46 Permalink

Were YOU Russian... Likely that you would be one of the 70%+ who will vote for him.

Despite the massive (laughable) western efforts to interfere..collude...

Attempting to "undermine FAITH in their institutions"....lol

Pathetic..

[Mar 15, 2018] Western demonization of Putin

Mar 15, 2018 | www.unz.com

Mikhail , Website March 14, 2018 at 7:59 am GMT

This excerpt has a mainstreaming for the Western mainstream media elites dynamic:

" My point here is not to exonerate Putin or Russia for the many bad things that he (and we) has perpetrated. Plenty of people have died in Syria and Ukraine as the result of his decisions. Russia's history with its European neighbors to the West has been checkered at best, and I can more than understand the fear and apprehension with which peoples in the Baltic States, Poland and other countries view any sort of resurgence or posturing ."

****

Plenty more people might've died in Ukraine and Syria without Putin's action. Poland has had its own aggressive past with Russia – granted that Russia has had the overall upper hand. Besides Poland, some other parts of central/eastern Europe have been strategically used against Russia, over the course of history.

From elsewhere, here's another piece favoring Putin:

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/02/21/overhyping-us-russian-differences.html

Excerpt –

" Scott Shane's February 17 New York Times article 'Russia Isn't the Only One Meddling in Elections – We Do It, Too', distinguishes the US and Russian activity in question by claiming that American actions are done for a good cause unlike Russia – a thought shared by former CIA Director James Woolsey. Shane's piece notes the US role in influencing the 1996 Russian presidential election, without noting an otherwise glaring particular. Many generally believe that the US government intervention in that vote (whether you want to describe it as direct or indirect) tipped the balance in favor of Boris Yeltsin.

Yeltsin went on to appoint Vladimir Putin as his successor. If one accepts the US role as the deciding factor in the 1996 Russian presidential election, I wholeheartedly welcome that move which enabled Putin to become Russian president – something that very well might not have happened if Yeltsin didn't win in 1996."

Sergey Krieger , March 14, 2018 at 9:16 am GMT
"My point here is not to exonerate Putin or Russia for the many bad things that he (and we) has perpetrated. Plenty of people have died in Syria and Ukraine as the result of his decisions. Russia's history with its European neighbors to the West has been checkered at best, and I can more than understand the fear and apprehension with which peoples in the Baltic States, Poland and other countries view any sort of resurgence or posturing."

I see where it is all coming from. So, the only position Russia is allowed is doggy style butt up?
History like normal history not much different in this respect form majority. USA seems to have checkered history with practically the rest of the world and caused millions deaths by now and so what? So are other countries in Europe and Asia.
Russia is denied by the author legitimate right to defend her legitimate interests.
I basically sense same school of thought with minor variations as Anatoly Karlin's minus mammoths on Russian plain of course.

P.S: I expect rather lively discussion, lol.

Lars Jorgensen , Website March 14, 2018 at 10:18 am GMT
So, the best critical information that UNZ can provide is a Russian, who doesn't know and understand Russia today. This is not really promoting UNZ as an interesting site. – I am a Danish sociologist, who have collected some information that better explains, why most Russians think that Putin is the absolutely best choice today. http://homosociologicus.com/russia -- critical-information
jacques sheete , March 14, 2018 at 10:47 am GMT
@Sergey Krieger

So, the only position Russia is allowed is doggy style butt up?

Apparently. Amerika calls itself the leader of the free world, and if they can do it, (for G-wd's "Chosen), then so can the Russkies!

G-d Bless Putin!

jacques sheete , March 14, 2018 at 10:49 am GMT
Real Leader of the free World; a man among b̶o̶y̶s̶ punks.

[Mar 15, 2018] The end of Pax Americana, the period of controlling USA global influence, might be more close that previously thought

Notable quotes:
"... That Washington's principal focus currently is on attacking another country (Russia) which due to USA incompetence is punching far above its weight in world affairs. The latest anti-Russia attacks center on a sick Russian spook and some Facebook ads (new weak USA sanctions just announced) are two examples of USA weakness (together with its Europe puppets, also losers). ..."
"... It is the obvious finale of Pax Americana, the period of controlling USA global influence now coming slowly to an inglorious end due to USA incompetence. Coincidentally, the USA is faced with overwhelming problems domestically in many fields, including citizen disparity, health care, transportation, crime and unemployment. So let's celebrate the potential shift against a forced USA withdrawal on the world scene and a possible improvement in domestic policy. ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Don Bacon | Mar 15, 2018 12:40:31 PM | 105

That Washington's principal focus currently is on attacking another country (Russia) which due to USA incompetence is punching far above its weight in world affairs. The latest anti-Russia attacks center on a sick Russian spook and some Facebook ads (new weak USA sanctions just announced) are two examples of USA weakness (together with its Europe puppets, also losers).

It is the obvious finale of Pax Americana, the period of controlling USA global influence now coming slowly to an inglorious end due to USA incompetence. Coincidentally, the USA is faced with overwhelming problems domestically in many fields, including citizen disparity, health care, transportation, crime and unemployment. So let's celebrate the potential shift against a forced USA withdrawal on the world scene and a possible improvement in domestic policy.

It won't happen soon though, as the current incompetent president is advocating huge increases in wasteful military spending including the expansion of an army which has no productive purpose to exist at all.

[Mar 15, 2018] Pressure from Israel and the Lobby was not the only factor behind the decision to attack Iraq in March 2003, but it was critica

Mar 15, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Anna -> james... 14 March 2018 at 02:14 PM

"anything for israel..."
http://politicalhotwire.com/world-politics/57199-american-soldiers-dying-israel.html
"Pressure from Israel and the Lobby was not the only factor behind the decision to attack Iraq in March 2003, but it was critical. ... According to Philip Zelikow, a former member of the president's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, the executive director of the 9/11 Commission, and now a counsellor to Condoleezza Rice, the 'real threat' from Iraq was not a threat to the United States. The 'unstated threat' was the 'threat against Israel', Zelikow told an audience at the University of Virginia in September 2002. 'The American government,' he added, 'doesn't want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell.'

That was then Today with have this situation: http://silentcrownews.com/wordpress/?p=5814
"Washington and Israel have signed an agreement which would see the US come to assist Israel with missile defense in times of war according to Haimovitch [Israeli IDF Brig. Gen.] "I am sure once the order comes we will find here US troops on the ground to be part of our deployment and team to defend the state of Israel"

General Clark, the US Army: "We are ready to commit to the defense of Israel and anytime we get involved in a kinetic fight there is always the risk that there will be casualties "

https://whiskeytangotexas.com/2018/03/13/general-clark-u-s-ground-troops-are-now-prepared-to-die-for-the-jewish-state/

More: "Jerusalem - IDF, US Army Celebrate Inauguration Of First American Base In Israel" https://www.vosizneias.com/280626/2017/09/18/jerusalem-idf-us-army-celebrate-inauguration-of-first-american-base-in-israel/

[Mar 15, 2018] Mattis is as dangerous warmonger as McMaster

Notable quotes:
"... The problem is that this would have some semblance of solubility were it not for Israel. Israel desperately, repeat desperately, wants the U.S. to go to war in a very big way in the ME. That could tip the scales. ..."
"... I hope you are wrong, but Trump sees very clearly what "Wartime President" did for the cipher Bush. It's the only straw left for him to grasp at ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

FB Ali , 15 March 2018 at 12:00 AM

This post was about Mattis being the only "grown-up in the room".

I'm not sure that's something to be reassured about. Brian Cloughley is a seasoned military writer and analyst. A few years ago he wrote a piece on Mattis that was not very complimentary. If even half of it is right, we should all be worried.

The article is at: http://tinyurl.com/ycp8yta2

Bill Herschel , 15 March 2018 at 12:29 AM
Trump's mojo has evaporated. He has no coattails. He has negative coattails. So it is time for war.

The problem is that this would have some semblance of solubility were it not for Israel. Israel desperately, repeat desperately, wants the U.S. to go to war in a very big way in the ME. That could tip the scales.

I hope you are wrong, but Trump sees very clearly what "Wartime President" did for the cipher Bush. It's the only straw left for him to grasp at .

[Mar 14, 2018] Trump Votes For Rexit - Torture Queen Will Head CIA - (Updated)

Looks like Tillerson was yet another Big Lie junkie whose entire worldview is based on bullshit
Notable quotes:
"... Mattis sometimes calming influence over Trump on military issues will now become less effective. ..."
"... Haspel would be in jail if former president Barack Obama had not decided against prosecuting the CIA torture crimes. Torturing prisoners is a war crime. Obstruction of courts and destruction of evidence are likewise crimes. ..."
"... This is getting messy for the empire. Trump wants to attack Iran and be friends with Russia. The US neo-cons want to attack both Iran and Russia. UK and France want to be friends with Iran and attack Russia. ..."
"... The current anti Russia propaganda ["axis of evil" ] - Haley, Macron, May. Veto wielding members of the UNSC Russia, China vs US, France, UK...? ..."
"... I think the US, UK and Israel want to battle Russia in Syria. There will be more collateral damage done to Russians. ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

12:44 PM - 13 Mar 2018

Mike Pompeo, Director of the CIA, will become our new Secretary of State. He will do a fantastic job! Thank you to Rex Tillerson for his service! Gina Haspel will become the new Director of the CIA, and the first woman so chosen. Congratulations to all!

According to the anti Russian propagandists (vid) Tillerson got the job because Trump loves Russia and Tillerson was in good standing with Putin. The same people now claim that Tillerson was fired from his job because Trump loves Russia and Tillerson was not in good standing with Putin.

Neither is correct. The plan to oust Tillerson and elevate Pompeo to State has been rumored and written about for several month . The plan was "developed by John F. Kelly, the White House chief of staff". It had nothing to do with Russia.

Tillerson never got traction as Secretary of State. Congress disliked him for cutting down some State Department programs. Trump overruled him publicly several times.

There is some contradiction in the statements coming from the White House and the State Department. According to the Washington Post:

Trump last Friday asked Tillerson to step aside, and the embattled top diplomat cut short his trip to Africa on Monday to return to Washington.

Last Friday Tillerson suddenly fell ill while traveling in Africa and canceled several scheduled events.

... ... ...

Thus ends the 2018 insurrection at State.

With Tillerson leaving Secretary of Defense Mattis is losing an ally in the cabinet:

[I]t starts with me having breakfast every week with Secretary of State Tillerson. And we talk two, three times a day, sometimes. We settle all of our issues between he and I, and then we walk together into the White House meetings. That way, State and Defense are together.

Mattis sometimes calming influence over Trump on military issues will now become less effective.

CIA head Pompeo, the new Secretary of State, is a neoconservative with a racist anti-Muslim attitude and a special hate for Iran which he compared to ISIS . That he will now become Secretary of State is a bad sign for the nuclear agreement with Iran. The Europeans especially should take note of that and should stop to look for a compromise with Trump on the issue. The deal is now dead. There is no chance that a compromise will happen.

The new CIA director Gina Haspel is well known for actively directing and participating in the torture of prisoners at 'black sites':

Beyond all that, she played a vital role in the destruction of interrogation videotapes that showed the torture of detainees both at the black site she ran and other secret agency locations. The concealment of those interrogation tapes, which violated multiple court orders as well as the demands of the 9/11 commission and the advice of White House lawyers, was condemned as "obstruction" by commission chairs Lee Hamilton and Thomas Keane.

Haspel would be in jail if former president Barack Obama had not decided against prosecuting the CIA torture crimes. Torturing prisoners is a war crime. Obstruction of courts and destruction of evidence are likewise crimes.

Both, Pompeo and Haspel, will need to be confirmed by Congress. Both will receive a significant number of 'yes'-votes from the Democratic side of the aisle.

11:01 AM | Comments (41)

sejmon , Mar 13, 2018 12:16:49 PM | 6

I think last straw to fire him been TRex stance toward russians -give up Crimea and we cease sanction(WHAT A JOKE) same toward eastern republics of Ukraine LNR,DPR..good move VSGPDJT !!!!!!!!!!!!!

next Nicky H ?????

Peter AU 1 , Mar 13, 2018 1:15:53 PM | 15
This is getting messy for the empire. Trump wants to attack Iran and be friends with Russia. The US neo-cons want to attack both Iran and Russia. UK and France want to be friends with Iran and attack Russia.

The current anti Russia propaganda ["axis of evil" ] - Haley, Macron, May. Veto wielding members of the UNSC Russia, China vs US, France, UK...?

Red Ryder , Mar 13, 2018 1:31:53 PM | 16
Poor Syria. At least one more fierce year of war. But more likely, endless 2,3,4 more years of war. Israel and US are getting the rebels in Daraa (DEZ #4) primed to start up fighting again. I think the US, UK and Israel want to battle Russia in Syria. There will be more collateral damage done to Russians.
b , Mar 13, 2018 2:28:49 PM | 23
Tillerson just read a statement to the press:

(My notes)
Tillerson says:
- got call today, afternoon from president, also spoke to Kelly (implies that this was the firing)
- hopes for smooth transition
- Deputy Sec State Sullivan will be acting Sec State
- Tillerson job officially terminates March 31

to DoD and State:
- bound by office oath, support constitution, ...
- always stay by oath, (sounds crying)
to people in uniform:
- great relationship State DOD - thanks Mattis and Dunford, all soldiers
work review:
- DPRK pressure campaign was success
- Afghanistan commitment also
- Syria, Iraq - work remains
- nothing goes without allies, partner
- work to be done on China and "troubling behavior" of Russia
- predicts more isolation if Russia doesn't knee
- nothing on Iran

Didn't say thank you to Trump. Emphasized oath to constitution, not to president. Nothing on Iran, Saudis or Palestine.

This was a f*** you to the White House and its priorities. The endorsement by name of Mattis and Dunlap makes them targets.

b , Mar 13, 2018 2:41:53 PM | 27
A Professor for political science from the United Arab Emirates just posted this:
"History will record that a GCC country had a role in the sacking of the foreign minister of a great power, and this is only the beginning of more"

Interesting ...
https://twitter.com/hxhassan/status/973629082368921600

[Mar 14, 2018] We will probably never learn why President Trump turned on Rex Tillerson. If we ever do, it may be because Neocons are furious reality refuses to bend to their fantasies.

Notable quotes:
"... I agree with you all that replacing Rex Tillerson, who could not be brow-beaten all the time, with Mike Pompeo, "who agrees with me," further isolates the Trump Whitehouse and makes the world that more dangerous. ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

RC 13 March 2018 at 09:11 PM

I agree with you all that replacing Rex Tillerson, who could not be brow-beaten all the time, with Mike Pompeo, "who agrees with me," further isolates the Trump Whitehouse and makes the world that more dangerous.

But, am I alone in noting a tendency of President Trump to fire his staff without warning, at considerable distance, and to deny that anything he might have done was a reason for poor polling?

The first time we saw this was the dismissal of Corey Lewandowski, the man who was with Candidate Trump 24 / 7 for 18 months of Primaries. Corey arrives at his desk in Trump Tower at 6:00 am and is asked to join Trump Jr. He reaches Jr.'s office and is assigned a security guard to vacate his office. "What have I done?" he asks and Jr. does not reply. On 5th Avenue he calls Trump's personal number. The Donald says that "They are killing us." and hangs up. Corey is persuaded to meet Dana Bash of CNN and is extremely loyal to his former boss, while saying he has no idea about the firing. On leaving the studio, Trump calls him to say how proud he was of Corey. A nice gesture, but inadequate given Corey's personal sacrifice. (Let Trump Be Trump -- Lewandowski and Bossie 128 - 133.)

We will probably never learn why President Trump turned on Rex Tillerson. If we ever do, it may be because Neocons are furious reality refuses to bend to their fantasies.

[Mar 14, 2018] On this occasion the Russians are being accused without being presented with any evidence or ability to test the nerve agent [Lavrov has said this is required under the Chemical weapons convention]

Possibility that Skripal flipped again and was killed in such a way as to put all the blame on Russians should not be discarded. That actually explains why his daughter was hurt.
Mar 14, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

John Gilberts , Mar 13, 2018 7:29:08 AM | 96

14 1/2 Certainties About the Case of Sergei Skripal - by John Helmer

http://johnhelmer.net/fourteen-and-a-half-certainties-about-the-case-of-sergei-skripal/

"In cases like the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal, the only way to proceed is by identifying the evidence which proves with certainty, what happened; or failing that, proves with certainty what did not happen.

Perpetrators, co-conspirators, method, motive, intention - all come later, if they come at all..."

harrylaw | Mar 13, 2018 7:58:42 AM | 100

John Gilberts @96. One of the first and fundamental rules of natural justice is to hear both sides.

Audi alteram partem (or audiatur et altera pars) is a Latin phrase meaning "listen to the other side", or "let the other side be heard as well". It is the principle that no person should be judged without a fair hearing in which each party is given the opportunity to respond to the evidence against them.

On this occasion the Russians are being accused without being presented with any evidence or ability to test the nerve agent [Lavrov has said this is required under the Chemical weapons convention].

The same thing happened over the claim by the US/UK of the use of chemical weapons in Syria. Missiles were sent killing men, women and children before any investigation was initiated, all contrary to International law. The US/UK are rogue states, Putin must hit back hard to any further illegal actions against them or their allies in Syria.

Charles Michael , Mar 12, 2018 11:55:22 PM | 71
Very little attention has so far been directed to Skypal dautgher; her presence has surely added an emotional element but no part in the plot.
And then it just happen when she came to visit ?
- One first consideration: if it was a vendetta from Vlad why then to wait so many years and acting just when the daugther is meeting the father ?
- Second point any agent on Russian official (or not) disposal team would have been stricly prohibited to use anything more chemical than a lead pipe.
- remember this turn coat did it for money, supposedely collaborated on the Steele garbage can for money, so did the daughter bring somme message from Russia of the bribe and return home specy against informations on the Steele dossier ?

That would make a much more logical script, IMO.

simon , Mar 13, 2018 12:06:35 AM | 72

The possibility that British intelligence sent scores of its own agents to almost certain death in occupied Holland during the Second World War has been raised by the release of Foreign Office files kept secret for 60 years.

The disclosure that more than 50 Dutch agents working for the Special Operations Executive (SOE) may have been sacrificed as part of a complicated "double double agent" game played against the Germans is likely to provoke heated debate in the Netherlands.

The agents, trained in Britain to carry out sabotage, were parachuted straight into the arms of the waiting enemy, which had penetrated the entire SOE network in Holland. Almost all were subsequently executed in concentration camps.

in another case


All The King's Men" (Collins, 1988) homosexual Freemason, Deputy Head of MI-6, Sir Claude Dansey (1876-1947.)

Dansey deliberately placed a known german agent, Henri Dericourt, at the heart of the french ressistance Prosper organization. Dericourt, a French pilot, was responsible for organizing the nighttime shuttling of agents and materiel in and out of France.
in the wake of D-Day June 6, 1944, hundreds of acts of sabotage were committed by the French Resistance -- with one exception.

There were none in the north and north west where they mattered most.

There, the "Prosper" and related "Scientist" networks had been mopped by the Gestapo in 1943. Prosper's courageous young leader, Francis Anthony Suttill, 34, was languishing in a concentration camp.

He and scores of British agents were later executed, along with over 10,000 members of the French Resistance. One hundred and sixty plane loads of armaments –2600 containers -- including tons of sten guns and explosives, were seized by the Nazis. (193)

MI-6 placed their own man Nicolas Bodington in SOE to vouch for Dericourt and block all efforts by SOE (Special Operations Executive) to uncover the traitor. Bodington actually met with Baumelburg on a visit to Paris in 1943. They all had known each other before the war. It was Bodington who introduced Baumelburg to Dericourt.
nothing new
a gay mi6 mason gave up the top teams from other depts within the british government because of rivalry in this case the soe.
more tea vicar benign normalcy

somebody , Mar 13, 2018 12:53:24 AM | 73
Theresa May is in a bind.

The city of London (and the conservative party) is full of pro Putin Russian money same as Russian money hostile to Putin.

It is highly likely that the - very unprofessional, messy - attack was done by people trying to embarrass Putin before the election. That would be the Russian opposition - Chechen, Russian - whose center is in London plus the part of MI6 that would become obsolete with an end to the cold war.

So Russians are fighting it out in a city dependent on their (largely illegal) money especially under the conditions of Brexit - which may have been funded by both Russian factions to escape EU controls. It is not a good position to be in as the head of a party sponsored by Russians.

May sanctioning Russian "pro Putin" money in the city of London would endanger the city's business model - that money is safe there. It would also cut funds sponsoring the Conservative Party.

Yeah, Right , Mar 13, 2018 3:08:04 AM | 80
The moment that I read about this I assumed that the daughter had been sent to deliver a message (or, more likely, an offer) to Skripal to flip one more time, and unfortunately for both of them "Western" spooks got wind of it and decided that This Can Not Be Allowed To Happen.

Hence the hit, and also the need to stage the hit so that the very people who sent her could be blamed for the resulting mayhem.

Am I the only person who thinks this?

Peter AU 1 , Mar 13, 2018 3:23:24 AM | 81
80
The other angle is, he may already have flipped. Six years in jail and then pardoned. The Ukraine Joan of Ark, much touted in MSM, pardoned, no longer the Joan of Ark one back in Ukraine and talking of peace. Dropped off the MSM radar very quickly.
V. Arnold , Mar 13, 2018 5:03:37 AM | 83
All of these distractions must work as planned; there is a never ending drama; ramped up and down; played out ad infinitum.
The play behind the curtain is of course what is deemed important; but hard to focus with all the chatter.
War is coming to Syria; the U.S. is going to make a move (East Ghouta?) soon. They're boxed in and must find out just what Russia can/will do.
Damn stupid move if it's made.

Skripal is just a pawn; but damned effective, so far, it would seem. TM is far more stupid than she looks.

Yeah, Right , Mar 13, 2018 6:21:20 AM | 89
@84 Ah, yep, so you did. So it's not just me who is paranoid....

A general question for the readership here: in the history of Soviet/Russian "hits" on exiled dissidents (and let's not kid ourselves, there have been some) how many times have innocent bystanders become collateral damage?

I don't know the answer, which is why I'm asking: do the Russians have an MO of taking great care that no citizen of the host country is put in danger when an assassination attempt is made on an expat Russian?

Because that police officer first-responder is now fighting for his life, which does suggest that whoever did this was either so sloppy or so callous that they didn't seem to give any consideration to the possibility that innocent Brits would be put in danger.

Which strikes me as very in-Russian like but, then again, what do I know?

harrylaw , Mar 13, 2018 7:20:31 AM | 95
Lavrov as usual gives a logical response to the warmongering UK clowns. "Russia is not responsible," Sergei Lavrov said during a televised press conference with the Indonesian foreign minister in which he suggested that Moscow would not comply with a Tuesday deadline set by Theresa May to deliver an explanation or face retaliation.

Lavrov said Moscow's requests to see samples of the nerve agent have been turned down, which he called a violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention outlawing the production of chemical weapons.

"We have already made our statement on this case," he said. "Russia is ready to cooperate in accordance with the convention to ban chemical weapons if the United Kingdom will deign to fulfil its obligations according to the same convention."

In his remarks Lavrov said that under the convention, Russia would have ten days to reply to an official accusation by the United Kingdom for the use of a banned substance inside its borders. [The Guardian]

[Mar 14, 2018] Russia Slams Unprecedented, Hostile UK Action, Vows Retaliation

Notable quotes:
"... The Russian diplomats also claimed that "it's obvious that by opting for unilateral and non-transparent methods of investigating this incident, the British authorities have once again tried to unleash an indiscriminate anti-Russian campaign." ..."
"... Moscow said that it was "unacceptable and unworthy" for the UK leadership to further escalate tensions in relations with Russia "in pursuit of its own deplorable political aims." ..."
"... Russia had previously said that it's open to cooperation with the UK on the Skripal case if it's carried out in accordance with international law and Moscow is treated as an equal partner in the probe. Russia has also officially requested that the UK provide all the case files regarding the incident, but was turned down. ..."
"... If the Skripals had been shot with a Smith & Wesson found at the scene, that's all the evidence May needs to prove the United States are responsible? ..."
"... Firstly , he had done all the damage he could possible have done to Russian intelligence interests: there is no way he would have been 'traded' in a prisoner-swap otherwise ..."
"... Secondly : using a chemical agent that is so strongly associated with Russia? That would be such monumentally poor tradecraft that it beggars belief. It would be as stupid as the Mossad scrawling passages from the Talmud in the hotel room in which they killed al-Mabouh ..."
"... Thirdly , and most importantly: prisoner-swap individuals are the nearest thing there is to sacrosanct in the intelligence game. If Russia offed one of the people that it had swapped out , it would undermine the implied 'protected' status of people it had managed to swap back . ..."
"... As all y'all know, I am the last person to ascribe consistency or competence to state security and intelligence appratuses and their apparatchiki - but I would consider it massively unlikely that the Russians dunnit in such a hamfisted and stupidly detectable way. ..."
"... That would pretty much require the Pommie government to hurl accusations at someone, otherwise the whole " The UK produces significant quantities of biological weapons at Porton Down " narrative would clamber to the top of the problem sheet, and would have a new adjunct: " baddies can acquire deadly toxins - for a price - from corrupt individuals within the program ". ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Shortly after the Russian embassy in the UK reacted angrily to Britain's expulsion of 23 diplomats after Theresa May accused Russia of using a chemical weapon on UK soil, saying that it considers "this hostile action as totally unacceptable, unjustified and shortsighted" and adding that "all the responsibility for the deterioration of the Russia-UK relationship lies with the current political leadership of Britain", the Russian foreign ministry double down and warned that the UK's "hostile actions" against Russia under the pretext of the poisoning of ex-double agent Sergei Skripal are an "unprecedented provocation" which won't be left without a response.

The British move is "an unprecedentedly rude provocation, which undermines the foundations of a normal dialogue between our countries," the ministry said in a statement.

The ministry said that "the British government chose confrontation with Russia" instead of completing the investigation and using international formats "including those in the framework of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons."

The Russian diplomats also claimed that "it's obvious that by opting for unilateral and non-transparent methods of investigating this incident, the British authorities have once again tried to unleash an indiscriminate anti-Russian campaign."

Moscow said that it was "unacceptable and unworthy" for the UK leadership to further escalate tensions in relations with Russia "in pursuit of its own deplorable political aims."

"Needless to say, our response measures will not be long in coming," the Foreign Ministry concluded.

Russia had previously said that it's open to cooperation with the UK on the Skripal case if it's carried out in accordance with international law and Moscow is treated as an equal partner in the probe. Russia has also officially requested that the UK provide all the case files regarding the incident, but was turned down.

Below is the response from the Russia Foreign Ministry so far:

The March 14 statement made by British Prime Minister Theresa May in Parliament on measures to "punish" Russia, under the false pretext of its alleged involvement in the poisoning of Sergey Skripal and his daughter, constitutes an unprecedented, flagrant provocation that undermines the foundations of normal dialogue between our countries.

We believe it is absolutely unacceptable and unworthy of the British Government to seek to further seriously aggravate relations in pursuit of its unseemly political ends, having announced a whole series of hostile measures, including the expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats from the country.

Instead of completing its own investigation and using established international formats and instruments, including within the framework of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons – in which we were prepared to cooperate – the British Government opted for confrontation with Russia. Obviously, by investigating this incident in a unilateral, non-transparent way, the British Government is again seeking to launch a groundless anti-Russian campaign.

Needless to say, our response measures will not be long in coming

Separately, when the Russian embassy was asked about the unexpected death of Nikolay Glushkov who as we reported yesterday was an associated of billionaire anit-Putin oligarch Boris Berezovsky, it said: "Regretfully, the Embassy has received no information whatsoever regarding the circumstances of the death of Mr Glushkov. The investigation is not transparent, the British side appears not inclined to cooperate. This can only cause regret. Today the Embassy made an official request to provide all the information in possession of the British side regarding this Russian citizen whose death, as you said, appears mysterious."

"Overall, we are surprised with UK authorities' reluctance and unwillingness to provide us with full details of both the poisoning of Russians Sergei and Yulia Skripal and the death of Nikolay Glushkov."

We expect it is only a matter of time before Putin is personally blamed for Glushkov's death next.

BullyBearish -> skbull44 Wed, 03/14/2018 - 14:11 Permalink

GREAT BRITAIN...jeez, the same guys who tried to keep the entire chinese population addicted to opium...

Occident Mortal -> BullyBearish Wed, 03/14/2018 - 14:15 Permalink

Dear Russia,

Retaliate as hard as you like, we have all of your money.

Figured it out yet?

Dutti -> Smufty Wed, 03/14/2018 - 14:26 Permalink

A malevolent government full of cucks in the UK.

On the one hand they try to distract from their multiple failures and create or follow obvious false flag attacks against Russia, on the other hand they detain patriots like Lauren Southern, Martin Sellner etc. and also try to silence Tommy Robinson who are just voicing their opinion about the disastrous Multi-Kulti policies of western Europe:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/right-wing-canadian-activist-lauren-

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5490911/Martin-Sellner-Brittany

FoggyWorld -> TheRedScourge Wed, 03/14/2018 - 15:07 Permalink

Usually a Russian who stole his way into serious wealth and then quickly bolted and left the country to live high on the hog. Many reside in London and NYC and can't remember one getting poisoned in the US.

yomutti2 -> Dutti Wed, 03/14/2018 - 14:29 Permalink

Putin is such a fuck-up. Wasn't it obvious that this was going to happen? And no, Russian denials of responsibility carry no weight. Remember how they denied that the invading troops in Ukraine were really Russian? Yeah, that pretty much destroyed their credibility forever.

Brazen Heist -> yomutti2 Wed, 03/14/2018 - 14:35 Permalink

Yeah and WMDs in Iraq certainly "made" US credibility LOL. Do you think Putin would want to take out this double agent in the most extravagant way possible shortly before March 18th when he could have done it quietly while he was in Russia? Take your head out of your ass and think about cui bono? You're lapping up their stinking bullshit again.

This is MI5 handiwork, local chemical facility couple of miles from Salisbury. Its pretty pathetic.

The game is up. The fuckers were exposed for the head-chopper scum that they are in Syria for the whole world to see while they pretended to be white knight virtuosos of peace, and now the best they can do is blame Russia Russia Russia because Russia is the reason they failed to install Wahhabis in Syria!

Buckaroo Banzai -> solidtare Wed, 03/14/2018 - 15:06 Permalink

Indeed. It's hard to believe that Skripal wouldn't have a very good idea of who just tried to kill him. The fact that the British have put a muzzle on him tells you everything you need to know. The longer Skripal goes without saying anything while in British custody, the more certain you can be that when he does open his mouth, it'll be because they are forcing him to say something he doesn't want to say.

One thing you can say about Clown World®, at least it's entertaining to watch.

Nukerella -> Buckaroo Banzai Wed, 03/14/2018 - 15:23 Permalink

Ummm...let's see if they die in hospital, if they aren't already dead. The Russians have been denied a consular visit. And where is Christopher Steele?

Scar Bro -> Nukerella Wed, 03/14/2018 - 15:35 Permalink

Note that Jeremy Corbyn is the only one in Parliament who asked for proof to be provided before such action was taken.
Note also that Assange is a bit of a cunt saying that the Russian moves are already "gamed out". Jumping the gun aren't we Julian? WHERE IS THE FUCKING PROOF RUSSIA WAS EVEN INVOLVED??

CatInTheHat -> Nukerella Wed, 03/14/2018 - 16:18 Permalink

Skripal was an associate of Christopher Steele and Pablo Martin. Skripal is the one who fed the Russian side of the Trump dossier and was likely paid to do so. Israel Mossad also had the means with the chemicals and assassin's to pull it off. Zionist pissed because Russia helping Syria.

US/UK also have motive. Skripal could tell the truth about dossier. Was he on Mueller or Congressional list of inquiries?

fleur de lis -> CatInTheHat Wed, 03/14/2018 - 17:54 Permalink

So that means that Skirpal was nothing more than a loose end.

The DC Swamp does not like loose ends.

The dossier must have seemed like a fabulous idea at the time, but it is now a liability and anyone associated with it is a person of interest.

Christopher Steele is probably a loose end at this point too, but he thinks he's so important that nothing will happen to him.

And maybe nothing will, but who knows.

He's a loose end.

are we there yet -> solidtare Wed, 03/14/2018 - 17:36 Permalink

A public park bench is a difficult covert assassination spot. They had to loose consciousness so fast that they did not try to flee or draw attention, yet they are still barely alive. How was the nerve agent delivered? Plus, the assassin had to be sure there was no public surveillance or phone cams to incriminate him/her.

RedBaron616 -> yomutti2 Wed, 03/14/2018 - 15:18 Permalink

Notice that the Brits aren't handing over any information to Russia. Just an ultimatum. Is that diplomacy? They aren't handing anything over because it is all made up out of whole cloth. Russia isn't so stupid to kill a well-known Russian in such an exotic way when bullets work just as well. Do you think Russians would go to such an exotic murder method which would point to them? This is a false flag, which is why NOTHING has been submitted to Russia. Just a lot of hot air from May the Witch.

RedBaron616 -> yomutti2 Wed, 03/14/2018 - 15:21 Permalink

I remind you that the US SUPPORTED the VIOLENT OVERTHROW of a PROPERLY ELECTED GOVERNMENT in order to INSTALL their PRO-NATO, PRO-EURO, PUPPET GOVERNMENT. Russia saw where this was going and ensured access to the Naval Base they have had for over 200 YEARS. Seeing yet ANOTHER NATO move next to Russia and being thrown out of their only warm-water port, they acted to keep what is rightfully theirs. You, sir, are a complete dupe of the MSM.

Amun -> yomutti2 Wed, 03/14/2018 - 17:08 Permalink

"The Massacre

  • On Wednesday, September 15, the Israeli army surrounded the Palestinian refugee camp of Shatila and the adjacent neighborhood of Sabra in West Beirut. The next day, September 16, Israeli soldiers allowed about 150 Phalangist militiamen into Sabra and Shatila.
  • The Phalange, known for their brutality and a history of atrocities against Palestinian civilians, were bitter enemies of the PLO and its leftist and Muslim Lebanese allies during the preceding years of Lebanon's civil war. The enraged Phalangist militiamen believed, erroneously, that Phalange leader Gemayel had been assassinated by Palestinians. He was actually killed by a Syrian agent.
  • Over the next day and a half, the Phalangists committed unspeakable atrocities, raping, mutilating, and murdering as many as 3500 Palestinian and Lebanese civilians, most of them women, children, and the elderly. Sharon would later claim that he could have had no way of knowing that the Phalange would harm civilians, however when US diplomats demanded to know why Israel had broken the ceasefire and entered West Beirut, Israeli army Chief of Staff Rafael Eitan justified the move saying it was "to prevent a Phalangist frenzy of revenge." On September 15, the day before the massacre began, Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin told US envoy Morris Draper that the Israelis had to occupy West Beirut, "Otherwise, there could be pogroms."
  • Almost immediately after the killing started, Israeli soldiers surrounding Sabra and Shatila became aware that civilians were being murdered, but did nothing to stop it. Instead, Israeli forces fired flares into the night sky to illuminate the darkness for the Phalangists, allowed reinforcements to enter the area on the second day of the massacre, and provided bulldozers that were used to dispose of the bodies of many of the victims.
  • On the second day, Friday, September 17, an Israeli journalist in Lebanon called Defense Minister Sharon to inform him of reports that a massacre was taking place in Sabra and Shatila. The journalist, Ron Ben-Yishai, later recalled:

'I found [Sharon] at home sleeping. He woke up and I told him "Listen, there are stories about killings and massacres in the camps. A lot of our officers know about it and tell me about it, and if they know it, the whole world will know about it. You can still stop it." I didn't know that the massacre actually started 24 hours earlier. I thought it started only then and I said to him "Look, we still have time to stop it. Do something about it." He didn't react."'

  • On Friday afternoon, almost 24 hours after the killing began, Eitan met with Phalangist representatives. According to notestaken by an Israeli intelligence officer present: "[Eitan] expressed his positive impression received from the statement by the Phalangist forces and their behavior in the field," telling them to continue "mopping up the empty camps south of Fakahani until tomorrow at 5:00 a.m., at which time they must stop their action due to American pressure."
  • On Saturday, American Envoy Morris Draper, sent a furious message to Sharon stating: 'You must stop the massacres. They are obscene. I have an officer in the camp counting the bodies. You ought to be ashamed. The situation is rotten and terrible. They are killing children. You are in absolute control of the area, and therefore responsible for the area.'
  • The Phalangists finally left the area at around 8 o'clock Saturday morning, taking many of the surviving men with them for interrogation at a soccer stadium. The interrogations were carried out with Israeli intelligence agents, who handed many of the captives back to the Phalange. Some of the men returned to the Phalange were later found executed.
  • About an hour after the Phalangists departed Sabra and Shatila, the first journalists arrived on the scene and the first reports of what transpired began to reach the outside world.
Brazen Heist -> Smufty Wed, 03/14/2018 - 14:26 Permalink

Bullshit.....Western elites have become laughingstock of the world.

The constant drama and pandering to non-evidence-based emotional appeals is getting tiring.

It looks like Western governments are in dire need of the low-IQ crowd for their legitimacy with each new passing contrived scandal and conflict, meant to direct attention towards every single foreign bogeyman other than themselves.

rwe2late -> Smufty Wed, 03/14/2018 - 15:05 Permalink

Smufty

you need to educate yourself in order to conduct an intelligent discussion at ZH.

start here:

" The financial sector exploits an astonishing political privilege: the City of London is the only jurisdiction in the UK not fully subject to the authority of parliament. ...

The City is a semi off-shore state, a bit like the UK's crown dependencies and overseas territories, ...
Even the more orthodox financial institutions deploy a succession of scandalous practices: pension scams, endowment mortgage fraud, the payment protection insurance con, Libor rigging."

London is now the global money-laundering centre for the drug trade, says crime expert

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/london-is-now-the-global-mon

London: A giant washing machine for the filthy cash of a corrupt elite

https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/london-giant-washing-machine-filthy-cash-corr

Guardian Op-Ed – The City of London Has Turned Britain Into a "Civilized Mafia State"

https://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2015/09/09/guardian-op-ed-the-city-of-lon

Mr Twitch -> Smufty Wed, 03/14/2018 - 16:56 Permalink

You sound like Nikki Haley who now is saying this today; "Russia could use chemical weapons in New York"

Never go full retard like Nikki Haley.

Boubou -> Smufty Wed, 03/14/2018 - 17:11 Permalink

Putin's only crime is to be an obstacle to US full spectrum domination of the world. Only US is truly to be feared.

FBaggins -> Smufty Wed, 03/14/2018 - 18:27 Permalink

You think the on-going history of the wrongs of a society of international bankers, aristocrats and other powerful men and women running things in England is irrelevant?

May is a puppet of the oligarchic monsters which run her nation, the US and Israel. Putin is the only leader of a major power on the world stage with enough courage and integrity to oppose them. It is Russia under Putin which is defeating ISIS in Syria and not the false-flag nations of Britain, the US or Israel. If this evil cabal would simply stop supplying and paying the terrorists the war in Syria would abruptly end.

The bankster cabal first spread their control from England to the American colonies and after the 1776 American Revolution, which was essentially against them, they manipulated to regain complete financial control over US finances and assets until through their bankster agents in the US they succeeded by the end of the 19th century, administering the final coup de grâce in 1913 with the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act.

This same cabal is directly responsible for all the major wars of the 20 th century. In Britain, the US, and most Western nations, they control finances, the media, most politicians, the entertainment industry, and most research, historical education and publications. They control both the left and right political wings in British and American politics. They rule by causing endless division in the moderate majority of the citizenry and they constantly remain hidden from any real scrutiny or accountability. They purse monopolistic control of everything they touch. Like the monopolistic control of the diamond industry, they are now seeking complete control of the energy sector mainly through extreme sanctions and military conquest. The wars in the Middle East and aggression against Russia and other nations attempting to control their own oil and gas resources is the major link to complete global hegemony.

The purpose of their long regime-change operation and war against the Syrian government is to divide that nation both for additional territory for Israel, and for complete control of the vast Mid East oil and gas reserves together with a British-American controlled pipeline through Syria. There is no regard for the devastation they have caused to that nation or to the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of innocent people and the displacement of millions. They organized, trained, armed, supplied, deployed and payed both the so-called "moderate terrorists" and the radical Deash (ISIS, ISIL, & IS) terrorists.

They are the most evil, greedy, plundering counterfeit human beings on the face of the earth, and they do not have and cannot have the support of any truly God-fearing people anywhere even if they call themselves Christians, Jews, or Muslims.

History of the Rothschilds

http://majestic12research.blogspot.ca/2009/06/history-of-rothschilds.htm

Royalty & Bankers Collusion Against Scotland Since 1694

https://www.whatthepoliticiansdontsay.com/single-post/2017/05/30/Royalty-Bankers-Collusion-Against-Scotland-Since-1694

Rothschild and Freshfields founders linked to slavery

https://aaronrusso.wordpress.com/2009/07/02/rothschild-and-freshfields-founders-linked-to-slavery/

The History of Banking Control in the United States

https://www.michaeljournal.org/articles/social-credit/item/the-history-

Lincoln Financed the War by Taking On the British-Backed
New York Banks

http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2014/4125lincoln_greenbks.html

The Origins of the WWI

https://www.geopolitica.ru/en/article/secret-origins-first-world-war

rwe2late -> Looney Wed, 03/14/2018 - 15:09 Permalink

T. May reminds me of the lying war criminal T. Blair.

(In Britain, it appears, poodles and chihuahuas are political favorites)

FoggyWorld -> Singelguy Wed, 03/14/2018 - 15:16 Permalink

And P.S. We in Russia own Rosneft and BP has a 20% share. Guess what we may impound first.

nardami -> Occident Mortal Wed, 03/14/2018 - 15:05 Permalink

Notice how much England loves to take in dodgy Russian types...especially with suitcases full of dodgy cash?

kellys_eye -> flapdoodle Wed, 03/14/2018 - 16:26 Permalink

As much as I'd love for Putin to reveal details of all the false flag operations it will go unreported and classically refuted (without supporting evidence other than "it's the Russians, what did you expect them to say?").

The power of the establishment lies with the lies - and the MSM that propagate them.

Singelguy -> flapdoodle Wed, 03/14/2018 - 19:02 Permalink

Does anyone besides me get the impression that the deep state in the US is in cahoots with the deep state in the UK and that it was likely the CIA that poisoned that double agent just to stir up more shit with Russia?

land_of_the_few -> BullyBearish Wed, 03/14/2018 - 14:26 Permalink

And the Oscar for the least credible Russia-demonization attempt of the year goes to ....

Boubou -> land_of_the_few Wed, 03/14/2018 - 17:30 Permalink

Quite so. Like they would use a unique nerve agent with Russia written all over it.

Donnez moi a break.

Brazen Heist -> peopledontwanttruth Wed, 03/14/2018 - 14:17 Permalink

The UK-US elites are getting desperate. They know the game is up. Many people are no longer buying the stupid shit they're selling. These clowns don't have the ability to back down, they will go full retard. It's what empires do when ruled by degenerates and pedophiles coked up on hubris and lawlessness.

CatInTheHat -> Brazen Heist Wed, 03/14/2018 - 16:35 Permalink

Brazen, should have read National Security council Twitter. More folks know, than don't, that this is FF to manufacture consent for war on Russia cuz Russia and Syria moping up the terrorists enclaves in E.Ghouta. Only a few are deceived. But Corporate media want folks thinking that most believe.

They dont. House of cards falls when JUSA screams chemical attack in Syria (planned) and attacks Damascus with JUSA military hardware. And Russia retaliates....

Boubou -> Brazen Heist Wed, 03/14/2018 - 17:35 Permalink

From the viewpoint of the world and the future, UK does not exist.

Sine 1970 UK has not been independent. Its words and deeds follow the US like a shadow, a small shadow. It is for all intents occupied.

OutaTime43 -> asheylarry Wed, 03/14/2018 - 14:22 Permalink

Read..
Novichok is FIVE TIMES MORE POTENT than VX and yet nobody died. Rather curious eh? VX was used on Kim's half brother and he died within minutes. They are obviously lying.

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

Do you REALLY think this was actually used in this attack? Five times more potent than VX? Think

OutaTime43 Wed, 03/14/2018 - 14:19 Permalink

Novichok is FIVE TIMES MORE POTENT than VX and yet nobody died. Rather curious eh? VX was used on Kim's half brother and he died within minutes. They are obviously lying.

If Novichok was actually used, then dozens would have been killed in that area. Even the TARGET survived! Wake up rationalists!

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

OutaTime43 Wed, 03/14/2018 - 14:20 Permalink

Just like Hitler invaded Ukraine after the winter was over, the EU and UK attack Russia over this bs after winter is over otherwise the gas lines would be shut off. The earlier in the spring, the better. This timing is not an accident.

It also takes the focus off of the current FBI FISA abuses in the US. FBI deputy who was bribed by Clinton and the DNC to obstruct justice was fired today.

Albertarocks Wed, 03/14/2018 - 14:29 Permalink

The UK is so incredibly out of line here. Of course it's not really "the UK", it's the global banking class who is trying to instigate a war as a major distraction from what really ails planet earth. And that problem is a totally unpayable global debt, a situation that is going to end in world-wide economic catastrophe, a catastrophe cause by... you guessed it, the same global banking class who is screaming for an excuse for what's coming, and which they themselves caused. But of course I'll bet 97% of ZH readers already understand this fully. It's the rest of the world who are going to get absolutely blindsided that I worry most about.

Savvy -> Dorothea Binz Wed, 03/14/2018 - 15:53 Permalink

"Using a nerve agent known for it's connection to Russia"

Umm... It would only take an IQ of 60 to NOT sign your name on the body.
Or believe they would be so stupid.

quantum_wiggler -> Savvy Wed, 03/14/2018 - 16:23 Permalink

'But its the only "evidence" we've got'. Classic frame up. Pull someone over, drop some coke on them...they become a "Drug Dealer"...drop some Russian coke on them...and they become a Russian drug dealer. Simple confabulation which skews the objective nature of any investigation. There is also alot of word association at play here. Not in any order, but when we hear, "Nerve Agent", "Assassination", "Putin"...it imprints a certain degree of relativity...between these commonly used words so that they define their own, new meaning of those words...making them synonymous and therefore the sheeple will come to their "OWN" informed conclusions that Putin, in fact, did assassinate with a Russian nerve agent. Making it that much easier to steer public opinion as needed.

Joiningupthedots Wed, 03/14/2018 - 17:21 Permalink

NOVICHOKS?

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/03/theresa-mays-novichok-claims-fall-

MedTechEntrepreneur Wed, 03/14/2018 - 18:35 Permalink

If Deep State UK-US starts war with Russia....can we all agree that we dont accept that and they will need to be taken down? NO MORE WAR! NO WAR WITH RUSSIA!

Greed is King Wed, 03/14/2018 - 19:35 Permalink

The British Secret Service, once lauded as the best in the World is a pale imitation of comic outfits like the Keystone Cops, their false flags are pure theatre, one could be forgiven thinking that some thespian luvvie was directing operations; maybe the usual Secret Service recruitment grounds of Oxford and Cambridge are only teaching drama studies courses these days. A few of their LESS pathetic attempts of cloak and daggery of recent years;

  • Robin Cooke offends Blair, so Robin Cooke an experienced fell walker falls off a cliff to his death
  • Alexander Litvinenko is poisoned by Polonium, a completely unnecessary act seeing as he was already dying of cancer,
  • Gareth Williams a researcher at GCHQ fails to show for work for a week, but against all official protocols which require GCHQ for safety and security reasons to check WHY he failed to show, and check why he had not as required made his period check ins, GCHQ ignored his no show for a week; and when his apartment was eventually searched they found him dead locked up in a hold all bag.

At the inquest it was the official story that he had locked himself in the bag in some sort of bizarre sex game, to add credence to this it was stated that numerous womens dresses in his wardrobe. Under cross examination the Police admitted that the dresses were still in their original wrappers and had not been worn, and had been bought from Oxford street stores whose prices were way above what Gareth Williams could afford, it was also revealed by forensic experts that it was impossible for him to have locked himself into the hold all.

The Coroner recorded a verdict of death in suspicious circumstances and ordered the Police to reopen the case, they have not. What information had Gareth stumbled upon which proved fatal to his health.

galant Wed, 03/14/2018 - 19:46 Permalink

If the Skripals had been shot with a Smith & Wesson found at the scene, that's all the evidence May needs to prove the United States are responsible?

GeoffreyT Wed, 03/14/2018 - 19:50 Permalink

The UK government's claims are simply preposterous - the Russians are the last people who would off Skripal.

Firstly , he had done all the damage he could possible have done to Russian intelligence interests: there is no way he would have been 'traded' in a prisoner-swap otherwise;

Secondly : using a chemical agent that is so strongly associated with Russia? That would be such monumentally poor tradecraft that it beggars belief. It would be as stupid as the Mossad scrawling passages from the Talmud in the hotel room in which they killed al-Mabouh (who, truth be told, was probably offed by rivals - Mossad will work for anyone at a price, so long as the target is not a political ally of the Zionist Occupiers of Palestine).

Thirdly , and most importantly: prisoner-swap individuals are the nearest thing there is to sacrosanct in the intelligence game. If Russia offed one of the people that it had swapped out , it would undermine the implied 'protected' status of people it had managed to swap back . It would risk setting off a wave of reprisal killings of people who had been out of the game for decades - which would severely dry up the ability to recruit clandestine assets (part of the whole offer is promising the traitor that they would, if discovered, be included in a swap - these swaps happen all the time ... occasionally folks like Aldrich Ames discover that immediate swap is not always possible, but at least Ames is not dead).

As all y'all know, I am the last person to ascribe consistency or competence to state security and intelligence appratuses and their apparatchiki - but I would consider it massively unlikely that the Russians dunnit in such a hamfisted and stupidly detectable way.

It's far more likely that Skripal was a buyer's conduit, acquiring the chemical agent from a source inside Porton Down... and fucked up its handling.

That would pretty much require the Pommie government to hurl accusations at someone, otherwise the whole " The UK produces significant quantities of biological weapons at Porton Down " narrative would clamber to the top of the problem sheet, and would have a new adjunct: " baddies can acquire deadly toxins - for a price - from corrupt individuals within the program ".

That would add another headache to the beleaguered premiership of Theresa May.

[Mar 14, 2018] No British outlet will work in Russia if London shuts down RT

Notable quotes:
"... As colonel predicts a pre-war condition is forming on the two far ends of our outdated two ocean protection. ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Reply 13 March 2018 at 09:02 PM

I can't figure out what the hell is going on these days in UK, are they looking are they looking to exit the Europe only or the rather exit out of the world. What do they really want? Do they really think they can isolate Russia out of Europe?

Would that bring more security for UK? IMO, they must be crazy if they think American population will allow or come to protect them again, while the two-ocean security no longer is viable in era of ICBMs.

As colonel predicts a pre-war condition is forming on the two far ends of our outdated two ocean protection.

"No British outlet will work in Russia if London shuts down RT - Foreign Ministry"

https://www.rt.com/news/421190-british-outlet-rt-shut-zakharova/

[Mar 14, 2018] I m now even more convinced that the nerve agent attack in Sailsbury was staged

Notable quotes:
"... This is a time chosen to do most harm to Russia, with both the elections and the World Cup imminent. ..."
"... I really do not think that Putin gives a toss about the Skripals, and with the daughter living in Russia, Skripal was probably careful not to put her in danger. Which means it is even more unlikely to be Russia. We never do our own dirty work of course, that is what 'special relationships' are for. ..."
"... Listening to ex-CIA agent Philip Giraldi speak about the particular nerve agent used against Skirpal, it seem clear that not only would Skripal now be dead but quite a few other people in the nearby area would also be dead, such is the potency of the named agent. ..."
"... If we take into account the accusations against Russia of using chemical weapons in Syria, which again were suspect. Then we can plainly see that this latest event in England, can at the very least be seen in a similar light. ..."
"... This is what confuses me about the incident, how was it administered and how come they are not dead? Novichok agents are not widely known but I did find some information from https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/novichok-agent ..."
"... If Novichok was found in Zizzi then either the attempted murderers followed Skripal there or Skripal himself was carrying it. Unless the agent placed it in the targets food (very carefully), every other method I can think of had a large chance of killing members of the public and the agents themselves. ..."
"... As Skripal was outside when he become unconscious the most likely method is that someone walking past sprayed the powder in his face. Assuming of course it was Novichok. A slower acting agent would make things a lot easier and safer. ..."
"... Assuming of course that the whole thing wasn't faked. ..."
"... Excellent article. The UK media and Westminster are suffering from mass hysteria again just like, as you correctly state, they did with Saddam Hussain. It seems to be a case of guilty until proved innocent. ..."
"... The UK authorities actions in Salisbury seem either inept or suspicious. Shortly after finding Skripal and his daughter, and realising this was a nerve gas attack, I'd have expected an evacuation of the surrounding area, if not the whole town. Once they determined it was from the Novichok (spelling, Craig?) family, at least one of which is extremely powerful, it seems perhaps more likely the whole town should have been evacuated – rather than a recommendation to those in the bar and restaurant to wash their clothes etc. ..."
"... There would also be a manhunt underway to try and find the perpetrator(s). ..."
"... what is saddest about this incident is that the UK public have been infected by JamesBondism for generations, and spooks are very "sexed up" ..."
"... Major Alert ! Britain is undefended against Chemical Attack. Whether from False Flag, Terrorists, Russian or Israeli. The Threat Response demonstrated a complete shambolic readiness and zero contingency planning. ..."
"... Russia has humiliated the US, UK, Israel and Saudi Arabia in the middle east with its successful support of Syria. This could well be an attempt at retaliation. Qui buno ? Putin? Lest we forget, they do this kind of stuff, but are rarely caught. ..."
"... Here was a documented and utterly undeniable false flag, inside job, with Israel/US fingerprints all over it, does anybody remember how the media howled at the time, blaming Iraq, compounding the prevalent fear so soon after 9/11. Remember how silent they were when it turned out to be yet another one of their gigantic lies. ..."
"... Anthrax: The Forgotten False Flag and the Illegal Invasion of Iraq https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BP2G-cejYhI ..."
"... Another false flag lie that helped launch a war. The Incubator Babies Conspiracy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v94WsjWKQ3U ..."
"... I expect May knows full well it wasn't the Russians behind this poisoning attack. The whole pantomime is necessary so they can turn a blind eye to the real perpetrators, for which our government probably gets some favour in return. ..."
"... YES! It was [like] the White Helmets. Now it all makes sense. The discrepancies form a pattern called British state bullshite. ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk
Michael Dean March 13, 2018 at 12:24

The assassination of a Hamas commander in Dubai is confirmed as a Mossad operation, it will not be the first time that Israeli agents have used or tried to obtain foreign passports.

Forty-nine-year-old Mahmoud ¬al-Mabhouh was found dead in his room at the Al-Bustan Rotana hotel last month, and within days Hamas officials claimed he had been murdered as part of a secret operation by the Mossad, the Israeli foreign intelligence service.
Dubai police said yesterday they were looking for 11 suspects with regard to the killing, all carrying European passports – six from Britain, three from Ireland and one each from France and Germany. Dubai's police chief said the assassination was a foreign intelligence operation by Israel.

Michael Dean March 13, 2018 at 12:34

Two suspected agents were jailed for six months in 2004 in New Zealand for trying to falsely obtain a New Zealand passport. They were caught when an immigration official noticed a passport applicant was speaking with an American or Canadian accent.

Helen Clark, then prime minister of New Zealand, criticised Israel for behaving in a way "unacceptable internationally by any country". She said at the time: "The breach of New Zealand laws and sovereignty by agents of the Israeli government has seriously strained our relationship with Israel.

Michael Dean March 13, 2018 at 12:23

Agents from Mossad were caught with foreign passports, triggering diplomatic rows. In 1997, two using forged Canadian passports were arrested in Amman after trying to assassinate Khalid Meshal, a Hamas official by spraying poison into his ear!

The agents were quickly captured & their mission backfired spectacularly. Israel was forced to hand over an antidote that saved Meshal's life & had to release Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the Hamas spiritual leader, from prison, while also incurring the anger of key Arab ally Jordan. That operation was carried out while Binyamin Netanyahu was prime minister.

AndyM March 13, 2018 at 10:21

I was already assuming that Putin would have nothing to do with this. He has too much to lose, while others have too much to gain. Simply looking at Syria, where the intentions of the West, together with it's Gulf allies, have been thwarted, would be enough of a reason. This is a time chosen to do most harm to Russia, with both the elections and the World Cup imminent.

I thought that May would have shown more common sense, but seems to have been easily bullied into following the ideas of the American Press, or even the Russian haters in UK. That said, there was probably also a trigger; a reason to bump him off anyway, where that was combined with the intention to cause most harm to Russian interests, (If they have to do it, then they might as well achieve the most from it.) The question is 'Why did they have to do it and to whom was he a threat or nuisance? I really do not think that Putin gives a toss about the Skripals, and with the daughter living in Russia, Skripal was probably careful not to put her in danger. Which means it is even more unlikely to be Russia. We never do our own dirty work of course, that is what 'special relationships' are for.

Republicofscotland March 13, 2018 at 10:25

Stepping back for a moment, I'm now even more convinced that the nerve agent attack in Sailsbury was staged.

Listening to ex-CIA agent Philip Giraldi speak about the particular nerve agent used against Skirpal, it seem clear that not only would Skripal now be dead but quite a few other people in the nearby area would also be dead, such is the potency of the named agent.

So why has this whole event come about, is it an attempt to damage Putin's election chances? In my opinion Putin will still win comfortably though definitely not fairly.

Is it some sort of payback for the somewhat not proven fully attempts of Russian hacking in the US and Germany.

If we take into account the accusations against Russia of using chemical weapons in Syria, which again were suspect. Then we can plainly see that this latest event in England, can at the very least be seen in a similar light.

MightyDrunken March 13, 2018 at 14:12

This is what confuses me about the incident, how was it administered and how come they are not dead? Novichok agents are not widely known but I did find some information from https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/novichok-agent

Apparently these agents only require a few mg to kill, being more deadly than other nerve agents. Novichok is believed to be in powder form and starts to act in seconds, with death in minutes.

If Novichok was found in Zizzi then either the attempted murderers followed Skripal there or Skripal himself was carrying it. Unless the agent placed it in the targets food (very carefully), every other method I can think of had a large chance of killing members of the public and the agents themselves.

As Skripal was outside when he become unconscious the most likely method is that someone walking past sprayed the powder in his face. Assuming of course it was Novichok. A slower acting agent would make things a lot easier and safer.

LondonBob March 13, 2018 at 14:25

Link for the Giraldi interview?

Republicofscotland March 13, 2018 at 16:38

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVx5yjPY8NE

Ian Fantom March 13, 2018 at 10:46

Assuming of course that the whole thing wasn't faked.

Colliedogs March 13, 2018 at 10:49

Excellent article. The UK media and Westminster are suffering from mass hysteria again just like, as you correctly state, they did with Saddam Hussain. It seems to be a case of guilty until proved innocent.

GeorgeS March 13, 2018 at 10:54

The UK authorities actions in Salisbury seem either inept or suspicious. Shortly after finding Skripal and his daughter, and realising this was a nerve gas attack, I'd have expected an evacuation of the surrounding area, if not the whole town. Once they determined it was from the Novichok (spelling, Craig?) family, at least one of which is extremely powerful, it seems perhaps more likely the whole town should have been evacuated – rather than a recommendation to those in the bar and restaurant to wash their clothes etc.

As I understand it (from Googling), the Novichuk agents are binary and the formula for one of them may be in the public domain, namely a book by this insider – http://vilmirzayanov.blogspot.co.uk/2009/02/novichok-chemical-formulas-are-not.html
The book, which I have not bought or read, is at https://www.amazon.com/State-Secrets-Insiders-Chronicle-Chemical/dp/1432725661

MJ March 13, 2018 at 11:36

There would also be a manhunt underway to try and find the perpetrator(s).

David Marchesi March 13, 2018 at 10:55

what is saddest about this incident is that the UK public have been infected by JamesBondism for generations, and spooks are very "sexed up" . The John Hale book "The Whistleblower" points out that "secret agents"(at least the management -grade) are similar the world over, rather as "special forces" men are surely interchangeable merely of different nationalities.

So the public is receptive to a Hollywood-style scenario where truth is the first casualty. We start from the position that we are the good guys, together with our good friends, like the Yanks and the Israelis. And end at the same point. It's a win-win situation for the media moguls and sleazy politicians, whose combined honour is about the same as the amount of whatever required to kill "x" number of double/triple/quadruple agents. A wonderful weapon of mass distraction, stage management of the highest order. Grotesque.

PeteB March 13, 2018 at 11:38

Something that seems strange to me is that the OPCW verified on 27/9/17 that Russia had destroyed all of its chemical weapons https://www.opcw.org/news/article/opcw-director-general-commends-major-milestone-as-russia-completes-destruction-of-chemical-weapons-stockpile-under-opcw-verification/ A major propaganda boost for Russia, since the USA have still not destroyed all of theirs.

So to hold Putin responsible we have to believe that a) he successfully concealed CW stock from OPCW inspectors in order to achieve certification and then b) within 6 months of doing so, reveals that he has such material by ordering it to be used to assassinate a low-value target in a way and location that guarantees the material being identified, being impossible to conceal and causing much outraged publicity. Thus losing, or at least losing credibility for, Russian compliance with the Chemical Weapons Convention.

Tony_0pmoc March 13, 2018 at 11:55

Craig,

Brilliant article. I agree with all of that, except the bit about Crimea. The Russians were already legally there, hosting their Black Sea Fleet, where they had been since 1783. They didn't shoot anyone, and the population of Crimea voted overwhelmingly, to again become a part of Russia. If that hadn't have happened, Crimea's fate would be even worse than that of the Donbass, with very heavy casualties in Sevestapol, and quite probably a hot shooting war between Russians already stationed there, and American mercenaries if not their full army. The Americans obviously wanted to take Sevastpol from the Russians, and were defeated without a shot being fired. WWIII has so fare been avoided (I hope).

Otherwise, one of the best things you have ever written.

The Crimea referendum vote must have been because of the economy. Remove the Russian fleet from Sebastopol, and the Crimean economy would have been up the creek, with nothing to replace it from Kiev.

John A March 13, 2018 at 14:20

The US were fully determined to take over Sevastopol and the naval base. So much so they had drawn up plans and for putting contracts out to tender. They would certainly have kept the Crimean economy afloat.

Crimea was the main target for the US coup in Kiev. To deprive Russia of its Black Sea naval base.

graham wilson March 13, 2018 at 11:59

The first one to rule out is Russia. So blaming Russia is the game here. Could be Mossad, they would be favourites. The cold war goes on, Russia are an impediment to the West in the M/E, the key area for control of energy, the crucial big weapon as they see it. The US deep state do not trust Trump and try to smear his victory crying Russian involvement. Now they strike back and interfere in Russian elections! They won't like his art of the deal sit down with NK, he's off message to them. These things are all distractions for the mass of people. The BBC was primed ready to launch the Russia story on QT last Thursday, straight out the blocks no evidence required.

MJ March 13, 2018 at 12:12

"Could be Mossad, they would be favourites"

If it were Mossad I think the job would have been done properly. To me it's got a distinctively British, naff quality, from the botched assassination attempt right up to the bumbling police response.

"If it were Mossad I think the job would have been done properly."

Not at all. Mossad have botched lots of assassinations and false-flags, going back to the Lavon Affair in Cairo in 1954. In any case, the point here was not to kill the guy, but to put the blame on Putin.

Michael Dean March 13, 2018 at 12:19

The Crimean authorities have relied on the well-known Kosovo precedent, a precedent our Western partners created themselves, with their own hands, so to speak. In a situation absolutely similar to the Crimean one, they deemed Kosovo's secession from Serbia to be legitimate, arguing everywhere that no permission from the country's central authorities was required for the unilateral declaration of independence.

The UN's international court, based on Paragraph 2 of Article 1 of the UN Charter, agreed with that, and in its decision of 22 July 2010 noted the following, and I quote verbatim: No general prohibition may be inferred from the practice of the Security Council with regard to unilateral declarations of independence.

UN's Int. Court No prohibition may be inferred from the practice of the Security Council regarding unilateral declarations of independence

Colin Brown March 13, 2018 at 12:27

So today the BBC website is linking to http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/415742.stm – where Uzbekistan's inheritance of chemical weapons facilities was dismantled with US experts.
Many possibilities arise for continuation of that work by Russia's enemies .. any comment from Our Man in Uzbekistan, Craig?

P March 13, 2018 at 12:33

Major Alert ! Britain is undefended against Chemical Attack. Whether from False Flag, Terrorists, Russian or Israeli. The Threat Response demonstrated a complete shambolic readiness and zero contingency planning.

Forget about the threat from Russia, they can turn Britain (in totality) into a smouldering radioactive waste ground. The UK cannot countermeasure this threat, it cannot defend against it and it seems the only reprisal it can take is not to send our brave footballers to the World Cup.

Who are doing the most killings in the world? It's not the jihadies.

But thanks to HMG's response to the Salisbury incident the jihadies now know how to paralyse Britain.

Even a low grade co-ordinated Chemical Attack across multiple sites, pubs, restaurants, transport hubs, shopping centres, sports venues etc will crate chaos (terror)

They still don't know what the toxin was, they don't know where it came from, who delivered it, how it was administered or why. (the why is the most important of these, fat old blokes are easy to kill – this needed to be global news).

We do however know about the route the pair took, where they ate, drank. What flowers were put on a grave, a car recovered, a helicopter (don't mention the helicopter spreading a chemical weapon over Salisbury). The house, the red bag the brave Detective sgt first on the scene, before uniformed constables or ambulance and his visit to the victims home.

We know lots now but we still don't know what, who and why but we do know how to cripple Britain

Thank you HMG for making that known and making us less safe.

Sharp Ears March 13, 2018 at 12:34

Craig is correct about Mossad. There are many instances of assassination.

In 1992, an El Al Boeing 747 cargo plane crashed near Schipol airport and Avner Cohen reports that it had a shipment of DMMP, used in the manufacture of sarin nerve gas. From the Israeli government's public reaction to this tragedy, it seems that the policy of ambiguity and opacity that surround Israel's use and deployment of nuclear weapons, developed by Israel as a strategy to contain and threaten the Arab states without the danger of alienating US support, is also being followed in dealing with the problem of Israel's refusal to ratify the Chemical Weapons treaty and join the Biological Weapons Treaty.

fredi March 13, 2018 at 12:39

Russia has humiliated the US, UK, Israel and Saudi Arabia in the middle east with its successful support of Syria. This could well be an attempt at retaliation. Qui buno ? Putin? Lest we forget, they do this kind of stuff, but are rarely caught.

Here was a documented and utterly undeniable false flag, inside job, with Israel/US fingerprints all over it, does anybody remember how the media howled at the time, blaming Iraq, compounding the prevalent fear so soon after 9/11. Remember how silent they were when it turned out to be yet another one of their gigantic lies.

Anthrax: The Forgotten False Flag and the Illegal Invasion of Iraq https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BP2G-cejYhI

Another false flag lie that helped launch a war. The Incubator Babies Conspiracy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v94WsjWKQ3U

Tom March 13, 2018 at 12:46

An excellent piece. The Russian scare is almost certainly nothing more than a smokescreen so the real perpetrators can get away. We have seen this tactic in all the recent terrorist attacks, complete with the huge police search that inevitably turns up nothing except red herrings, and certainly not any ringleaders.

And leaving aside which state was behind this, why aren't there any clues about the would-be assassins?

I expect May knows full well it wasn't the Russians behind this poisoning attack. The whole pantomime is necessary so they can turn a blind eye to the real perpetrators, for which our government probably gets some favour in return.

Republicofscotland March 13, 2018 at 12:58

Well according to FT's correspondent in Moscow.

"Russia will not respond to Britain's request to explain its alleged role in the attempted murder of a former Russian spy in the UK until Moscow is allowed access to the case materials, foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said."

https://amp.ft.com/content/42417f04-26ac-11e8-b27e-cc62a39d57a0?__twitter_impression=true

Looks like Russia's Foreign Minister, has called May's bluff. But I'm pretty sure that the Tory government, see's the production of hard evidence and supplying said evidence to Russia as a non starter.

Its far more important to achieve a consensus from their allies, which it looks like they have, and move forward with implementing some sort of retribution, which ever form it takes.

Red Robbo March 13, 2018 at 13:07

Another interesting post by Craig. So basically lots of states could have used Novichok, including the UK at Porton Down, just a few miles from where the young woman was treated for vomiting by a doctor who wasn't wearing any protection.

Squeeth March 13, 2018 at 13:42

YES! It was [like] the White Helmets. Now it all makes sense. The discrepancies form a pattern called British state bullshite.

Philmo March 13, 2018 at 13:09

The Israeli hardliners certainly have more to gain in muddying waters, causing distractions from their Palestinian atrocities and in addition tweak the Russian noses for discouraging their participation, opposing Shia elements. The Israelis could, of course, depend on support from Tories and May/Patel in particular!

Republicofscotland March 13, 2018 at 13:14

Meanwhile the BBC are playing down Donald Trump's shock removal of Rex Tillerson, whose been replaced by Mike Pompeo, as Secretary of State.

Tillerson who was the US Secretary of State has been very vocal on the alleged nerve agent attack in Salisbury – Tillerson had no qualms about blaming Russia.

[Mar 14, 2018] Iraq is a country, in which, even the most pro-American Iraqis (outside of the Kurdish dominated region), will, at this very moment deciding that they have been screwed!

Notable quotes:
"... Iraq is a country, in which, even the most pro-American Iraqis (outside of the Kurdish dominated region), will, at this very moment (2017.09.28.17h03 NA EDT) be 100% deciding that they have been screwed! And not very nicely, at that. ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

One Tribe , September 28, 2017 at 9:13 pm GMT

@Ron Unz

First of all, thank you Andrei Martyanov for the very informative analysis/article. Also, thank you Ron Unz for this supporting addendum.

I am very much interested in further information concerning the U.S. military establishments seeming (increasingly alluded to) weak assessment/intelligence of Russian military capability, especially armaments.

Iraq is going to be a topic of (likely dramatically) increasing heat and attention (in the uncensored press which reports on the issues that are the most important to everyone alive, like this web site). The 'referendum' in the Kurdish dominated area of Iraq will make the 24 month long reverse polarization of Turkey (from NATO/US partner to Russian partner) look like an indecisive epic.

If anyone thought the 'war' in Iraq was going poorly for the Americans before, 'they ain't seen nothing yet'! Also, the passing the point of no return for Turkey; they've had enough lies and disingenuous promises from the Euroangangstas; their future association to the U.S. and (western) Europe will be exclusively from the Eurasian-centric multi-polar world perspective, under which they will prosper as well or better than they ever have before.

Iraq is a country, in which, even the most pro-American Iraqis (outside of the Kurdish dominated region), will, at this very moment (2017.09.28.17h03 NA EDT) be 100% deciding that they have been screwed! And not very nicely, at that.

With all of this Russiaphobia (let us not forget that this emanating as a deflection from the revelations a corrupt candidate who was cheating to win a party's nomination for the U.S. presidential candidate), it is highly politically incorrect to reference how far ahead V. Putin's geopolitical movement is compared to the west, especially the civil war crippled U.S.A..

One can see so much thoughtfulness and 'communication' in the completely unnecessary flight path, through Iraq of the bombers delivering their payloads.
In fact, it could be the most telling aspect of the entire operation!

Iraq is lost to the western empire.

Unfortunately, the response to on-ground western-empire supported aggression in the Kurdish-dominated region of Iraq, and likely in other Kurdish dominated middle eastern regions (outside of Iran), will like be decisive and therefore brutal (but, alas, understandable).

[Mar 14, 2018] I think the underlying assumption of your post - that a Novichok programme existed - is open to serious doubt

Notable quotes:
"... The British government is now demanding that Russia make a full disclosure of its Novichok programme by Tuesday evening. A Russian denial that such a programme existed will be taken as proof of guilt. ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

yoffa | Mar 12, 2018 9:04:40 PM | 59

b

I think the underlying assumption of your post - that a Novichok programme existed - is open to serious doubt.

The only source for the story of a Soviet/Russian programme to develop a new class of military nerve agents codenamed Novichoks is a defector in the 1990s named Vil Mirzayanov. He claimed that one of these compounds was 5 to 8 times more toxic than VX and that production of these compounds had continued after the Chemical Weapons Convention came into effect. He explained the many publications in the open literature by Soviet chemists on compounds with similar structures as a deception to provide cover for secret research on other more toxic compounds, and gave structures for these compounds.

A review of chemical warfare agents in 2016 ( http://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/chapter/bk9781849739696-00001/978-1-84973-969-6) by Robin Black, who had just retired as head of the detection lab at Porton Down, states that there is no independent confirmation of Mirzayanov's claims about the chemical properties of Novichok compounds.

The report of the OPCW's Scientific Advisory Board's meeting in April 2013 made a similar statement, and did not recommend adding these compounds or their precursors to the list of scheduled chemicals banned or restricted under the CWC. The members of the scientific advisory board included people who, like Black, were heads of western chemical defence labs. These labs would almost surely have undertaken experimental tests of Mirzayanov's claims about the toxicity of these compounds. So if members of the scientific advisory board who were in a position to know the results of these experiments did not recommend adding these compounds to the list of scheduled chemicals, we can reasonably infer that they were not found to be military grade nerve agents.

The British government is now demanding that Russia make a full disclosure of its Novichok programme by Tuesday evening. A Russian denial that such a programme existed will be taken as proof of guilt.

[Mar 14, 2018] FOURTEEN AND A HALF CERTAINTIES ABOUT THE CASE OF SERGEI SKRIPAL by John Helmer

If this really was a nerve gas there are multiple unexplainable details. For example, the doctor who fist treated both on the bench did not develop any symptoms. Another strange thing is that handing of the case violated standard protocols of dealing with military agents (which includes evacuation of the neighborhood). Another strange thing is why anybody on the scene is still alive? Why Skripals developed symptoms on the bench if nerve against was in this home. Who would be both instantly killed at home, if their home was contaminated with this substance.
So it might well be that Skripals suffered from something else. And nerve can well be introduced later as a part of false flag operation against Russia, which used (can well be accidental) collapse of both the Skripals (collapse, which can among other things be caused by narcotics).
Note that No.2 and No.3 suggest that two agents were used.
Notable quotes:
"... whereas there was a doctor who looked after the patients in the open, who hasn't been affected at all ..."
"... the poison cannot have been fast-acting for them at home ..."
"... the poison was faster-acting for Sgt Bailey because he developed symptoms almost immediately at the Skripal house ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | johnhelmer.net

At the moment, according to police and government releases and the British state media, the crime scene in Salisbury is being combed by at least 250 police officers; with another 180 military personnel specializing in chemical warfare. Dozens more electronic surveillance and cyber-warfare agents are also engaged. The crime scene locations include the Skripal house; the cemetery graves of Skripal's wife and son; the Mill public house where Skripal and his daughter had a drink; the Zizzi restaurant where they ate before collapsing; and the public areas where they walked between house, pub, restaurant, the Maltings shopping precinct, and park bench.

At least 240 pieces of evidence have reportedly been identified as such, not counting the Skripal house, and 200 witnesses interviewed, including Wiltshire Police Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey. He developed symptoms after being despatched to the Skripal house. That is, after the Skripals had been found and hospitalized.

According to Lord Ian Blair, a former Metropolitan Police Commissioner, "there are some indications that the police officer who was injured had been to the house, whereas there was a doctor who looked after the patients in the open, who hasn't been affected at all . So there maybe some clues floating around in here." Blair said this on the BBC.

His disclosure, also confirmed in several newspapers, provides the first certainty in the case: the Skripals came into contact with the poison for the first time inside their own home. They then went out to the pub and the restaurant.

Certainty No. 2 – the poison cannot have been fast-acting for them at home .

Certainty No. 3 – the poison was faster-acting for Sgt Bailey because he developed symptoms almost immediately at the Skripal house .

Follow the next eleven certainties.

Certainty No. 4. Prime Minister Theresa May has identified the poison as a "military grade nerve agent part of a group of nerve agents known as Novichok." Listen to May making her announcement in the House of Commons yesterday.

... .... ...

After they had left their home on Sunday afternoon, the Skripals spent more than an hour before developing symptoms. It is certain, therefore, that there were two sites of active poisoning. The Skripals must have carried the poison from their home through the streets to the mall, the pub, and the restaurant, before they were exposed. The large numbers of police, special service agents and soldiers have been deployed in order to trace the route the Skripals took, and all points at which they stopped, in order to identify, measure and map all concentrations, then dilute or destroy them for public safety.

Certainty no. 7. The British forces have inventoried all contents of the Skripal home, and verified all deliveries to the house, including mail and packages before last Sunday. They are certain to know if there are traces of the chemical components required for the Novichok combination, and whether these traces are in separate locations of the house. It is certain they have asked themselves how the nerve agent was active in the house to strike Sgt Bailey, but inactive for the Skripals until hours later.

Certainty No. 8. The British secret services and the Porton Down Defence Science and Technology Laboratory near Salisbury know what contact, if any, there has been recently between Skripal, his British secret service contacts and the Porton Down lab.

Certainty No. 9. The British Government agencies have informed Prime Minister May if samples of Novichok components, and of the active nerve agent itself, are in stock at Porton Down.

Certainty No. 10 The Prime Minister has not informed the House of Commons if Novichok is -- or was until Sunday evening -- in stock at Porton Down.

Certainty No. 11 . Although the British, American, and Russian secret services have the electronic capability to have been monitoring the Skripal house, Yulia Skripal on her travel from Moscow to Salisbury, and Sergei Skripal at home, in advance of the poisoning, they are unlikely to have been doing so on Sunday afternoon. British sources add that the security perimeter for the Porton Down establishment doesn't extend the nine kilometres (twelve by road) to Salisbury town.

However, it is certain, the sources acknowledge, that in retrospect the British and American services will have identified all unusual mobile telephone, other electronic signals and encrypted messaging around the Skripals on Sunday, including computer, internet and mobile telephone signals the Skripals sent and received before the Sunday events. Just as certainly, the Russian services will have the retrospective capacity to follow the communications of all their agents in the vicinity, if any there were. It is sure that if there had been a Russian operation targeting Skripal, an unusual volume of electronic evidence would now be visible to the British and Americans -- and the Russians would know it.

... ... ...

[Mar 14, 2018] The link between Christopher Steele and Sergei Skirpal is made in the UK Telegraph

Mar 14, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Julian | Mar 13, 2018 6:37:57 AM | 91

By the way - the link between Christopher Steele and Sergei Skirpal is made in the UK Telegraph.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/07/poisoned-russian-spy-sergei-skripal-close-consultant-linked/#comments

Read the comments - 90% bring up Hillary!

Anyone working for Hillary in anything dodgy has a history of ending up dead!

HA.

Anonymous , Mar 13, 2018 4:11:56 AM | 82
If Skripal was actually murdered, that would be an indication of the MAGNITUDE of the problem he posed to someone.

HENCE: almost certainly a clean-up operation by the Russiagate organizers in DC who are beginning to feel the heat.

It may be that there is now another DC faction who has decided that Brennan's Russiagate costume play has gone far enough and it's time for the adults to take over.

Ike , Mar 13, 2018 3:06:05 AM | 79
This was probably carried out by Mi6 for the Steel dossier reasons but also to bolster their shattered ego's after Putin's announcement re his nuclear weapons. More sanctions will just backfire as the last ones did and surely anything more than a symbolic response from NATO would only happen if they are complete idiots......oh wait a minute!

[Mar 14, 2018] Not only is Russia groundlessly and provocatively accused of the Salisbury incident, but apparently, plans are being developed in the UK to strike Russia with cyber weapons

Mar 14, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

"Today the Embassy sent a note to the Foreign Office reiterating that Russia is not involved in the Salisbury incident and outlining the above mentioned demands for joint investigation."

The embassy added: "UK Ambassador Laurence Bristow was summoned to Russia's ministry of foreign affairs, where first deputy FM Vladimir Titov strongly protested the evidence-free accusations by the UK authorities of Russia's alleged involvement in the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia.

"It was stated that the actions of the UK authorities are a clear provocation and that the Russian Federation was not involved in the incident that took place in Salisbury on March 4, 2018." * * *

Meanwhile, the Press Association reports that Russia has warned Britain to "consider the consequences" of mounting a retaliatory cyber strike after the Salisbury spy poisoning.

In a fresh sign of the escalating diplomatic tension sparked by the case, the Russian Embassy cautioned against "such a reckless move".

...

The Government has not publicly disclosed the options under consideration but reports on Tuesday suggested one possibility was a cyber counter-attack.

Responding to the speculation, the Russian Embassy in the UK said: "Statements by a number of MPs, 'Whitehall sources' and 'experts' regarding a possible 'deployment' of 'offensive cyber-capabilities' cause serious concern.

"Not only is Russia groundlessly and provocatively accused of the Salisbury incident, but apparently, plans are being developed in the UK to strike Russia with cyber weapons.

"Judging by the statements of the Prime Minister, such a decision can be taken at tomorrow's meeting of the National Security Council.

"We invite the British side to once again consider the consequences of such a reckless move."

Additionally, Zakharova stated that British Prime Minister Theresa May apparently has no actual facts concerning the poisoning of former Russian military intelligence Colonel Sergey Skripal and his daughter Yulia.

"No one knows anything, including Theresa May, who has no actual fact in her hands," Zakharova told the 60 Minutes program on the Rossiya-1 television channel.

Finally, following reports that Britain's media regulator Ofcom said Russian broadcaster RT could lose its UK licence if Theresa May's government determines that Moscow was behind the poisoning of a former Russian double agent in England this month, Russia's foreign ministry threatened retaliation:

"...not a single British media outlet with work in Russia if London shuts RT."

philipat -> The_Juggernaut Tue, 03/13/2018 - 13:35 Permalink

Agreed. Who the fuck does May think she is? Other than confirming that this is a false flag backed by a "rich uncle" with Russian sanctions and Nord Stream 2 front and centre?

skbull44 -> ???ö? Tue, 03/13/2018 - 13:37 Permalink

Iraqi WMDs all over again ... https://Olduvai.ca

pazmaker -> skbull44 Tue, 03/13/2018 - 13:43 Permalink

If this was Russia they would not still be alive.

EuroPox -> BaBaBouy Tue, 03/13/2018 - 13:47 Permalink

So, with no evidence at all, the utterly incompetent PM, Theresa May, demands action from Russia within 24 hours – which is completely different to the protocol set out in the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention, which has 165 signatories including the UK and Russia . WTF!!!!

How can anyone have allowed her to make such an embarrassing error? Whoever is advising her does not even know the terms of international agreements the UK has signed?

What on earth is going on? The PM is making a total laughing stock of the UK!

Freddie -> Beam Me Up Scotty Tue, 03/13/2018 - 16:32 Permalink

Mi6 aka 007 and James Bond. Mi6 = the Roth$schilds/Bank of England murder gang. Just like the CIA and all the Spec Ops.

Murdering innocent people for the bankers plus also the Clintons, Bushes and Obama who are ALL CIA lackeys.

  • British people = good
  • British Govt = Insanely evil and pretty Ko$her.
east of eden -> Freddie Tue, 03/13/2018 - 18:04 Permalink

Yes, and the elites in Britain have had their own people under their thumb since forever. Maybe, just maybe, we are going to start to the see the beginning of some grass root movements to slice and dice some of the old guard. Just enough so the rest of them take notice, or rather, are put on notice.

Shillinlikeavillan -> BennyBoy Tue, 03/13/2018 - 18:38 Permalink

This is why women in power is BAD fuckin news...

Dipshit may claimed that this "Novichok" nerve agent was used to kill thousands of people during her rant, when it is clear that it NEVER made it past the laboratory and was used in a small empty field test. And on top of that, Novichok hasn't been even seen by anyone since the late 80's, it's actual existence is highly questionable... hell, knowing how drugs are, the shit probably expired and broke down to something harmless after sitting around for 30+ years...

beemasters -> Shillinlikeavillan Tue, 03/13/2018 - 19:11 Permalink

Why would Russia poison Mr Skripal and his daughter in the UK with a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia???

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

Are there no common lethal poisons in England anymore???

MK ULTRA Alpha -> mkkby Tue, 03/13/2018 - 19:01 Permalink

The UK won't release a sample of the nerve gas to Russia?

Because there maybe an impurity in the nerve gas? And the nerve agent sample could tell Russia what production batch and the Russians would be able to track it. The UK is unwilling to allow this.

It was reported, the nerve gas target was still working for Russia, sending data to the Russian military. Proof of this would dispel the theory one of Russians defectors was killed by the Russians. It doesn't make sense, and the Russians wouldn't kill an asset.

One should look at who has the most to gain from stirring it up against Russia.

Would Russia kill a defector who was working for the Russians? No. Would Russia kill someone after Putin made the comment in the Megyn Kelly Putin interview, Putin saying if someone gives us poison, the poison would be given back, or another translation, If they give Russia poison, they will be consumed by their own poison.

The operative word is "poison". In the same interview Putin cites different nationalities could be responsible for the alleged Russian meddling in the US presidential election. The speculative Putin statement has been taking out of context by US media wanting to disrupt Russia, Putin statement it could have been Jews doing the manipulation of the US presidential election.

The nerve gas attack is the work of the Mossad. It is a warning to Putin.

A nerve gas attack in broad day light, at this time, wouldn't be a Russian tactic. The Russians are smarter and more capable than using a Russian nerve agent.

It was TOO DRAMATIC made for TV propaganda. Netanyahu was making the Iran war speech in NYC and then the Netahyahu and Trump stating the Iran war is on. Israel war hawk CIA director Pompeo wouldn't risk it during the Russia election manipulation probe. Too dangerous with limited reward. So no US gain.

Who gains? Israel and the plan to use the Americans as the beast of burden for a new round of wars for Israel. Putin must be warned, and be made a permanent enemy with no possible chance of a Russia US reset.

  1. Kelly Putin interview "poison" and "Jew" both taken out of context.
  2. double agent reporting to Russia is an asset for Russia
  3. the new US Israel relation with promises from Trump to attack Iran.

My analysis points at Israel Mossad.

[Mar 14, 2018] Russian UN anvoy> alleged the Salisbury attack was a false-flag attack, possibly by the UK itself, intended to harm Russia s reputation by Julian Borger

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... He alleged the Salisbury attack was a false-flag attack, possibly by the UK itself, intended to harm Russia's reputation. "Most probable source of this agent are the countries who have carried out research on these weapons, including Britain," Nebenzia said. ..."
"... The Russian ambassador sought to turn the tables on the UK, claiming that Theresa May's letter to the UN, outlining UK grounds for accusing Russia, was itself a "threat to a sovereign state". ..."
"... "The letter contains completely irresponsible statements which are even difficult for me to comment on using diplomatic vocabulary," the Russian envoy said. ..."
"... In her statement on behalf of the US, Haley said: "Let me make one thing clear from the very beginning: the United States stands in absolute solidarity with Great Britain. The United States believes that Russia is responsible for the attack on two people in the United Kingdom using a military-grade nerve agent," Haley said. ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

UK spy poisoning: Russia tells UN it did not make nerve agent used in attack

Russian envoy suggests Britain itself may have been behind the attack as UK allies support London's assertion

... ... ...

In his response, the Russian envoy to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, told the council: "No scientific research or development under the title novichok were carried out." He alleged the Salisbury attack was a false-flag attack, possibly by the UK itself, intended to harm Russia's reputation. "Most probable source of this agent are the countries who have carried out research on these weapons, including Britain," Nebenzia said.

The Russian ambassador sought to turn the tables on the UK, claiming that Theresa May's letter to the UN, outlining UK grounds for accusing Russia, was itself a "threat to a sovereign state".

"The letter contains completely irresponsible statements which are even difficult for me to comment on using diplomatic vocabulary," the Russian envoy said.

He later told reporters that the case belonged at the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in The Hague.

"We are ready to cooperate," he said.

Allen pointed out that the UK had already called in the OPCW to take part in the investigation. He described extensive evidence that novichok nerve agents had been developed by the Soviet Union and bequeathed to Russia.

In her statement on behalf of the US, Haley said: "Let me make one thing clear from the very beginning: the United States stands in absolute solidarity with Great Britain. The United States believes that Russia is responsible for the attack on two people in the United Kingdom using a military-grade nerve agent," Haley said.

... ... ...

The French ambassador, François Delattre, made a similar declaration backing the UK position, offering "the full support and complete solidarity of France for the UK".

... ... ..

[Mar 14, 2018] Hysterical hyperventilation of British authorities about Skripal incident suggests that it was pre-plnanned provocation, a false flag operation for fueling Russiphonia and Neo-McCarthyism

The event develop under scenario, which is very close to Litvinenko poisoning and MH17 investigation. Both now are suspected to be false flag operation to demonize Russia.
Mar 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

Randal , March 14, 2018 at 4:08 pm GMT

@Inquiring Mind

How about conducting a chemical WMD strike in the heart of U.K? How about Mr. Putin, O.J. Simpson style, saying "I didn't do it" while at the same time saying "the man deserves to die." How about poisoning a British police officer who did his duty to render aid along with about 20 other people? How about that even if the victims, your traitor along with innocent U.K. citizens survive the immediate effects, they can become permanently disabled and end up in a nursing home with people having to feed you and clean you up?

How about you admitting that you have not a shred of credible evidence for all your hysterical hyperventilation about this trivial incident?

How about you admitting that you cannot produce any remotely credible motivation for Russia doing this, when the costs to Russia of increased confrontation will massively outweigh any possible gains?

The only suggestions that the Russians were responsible for the incident come from exactly the same kinds of people who told us about Iraq's WMD and the supposed Libyan humanitarian emergency. And yes, about supposed suicidal Syrian government uses of chemical weapons that are conveniently just big enough to provide their enemies with yet another big stick to beat them with, but not enough to give them any material advantage.

Basically your idea is that the Syrians and Russians do these things just because they can, because in your opinion they are evil and stupid. And simultaneously, of course, so fiendishly cunning that they are threats to the world if not suppressed.

[Mar 14, 2018] UNSC holds urgent meeting over Salisbury attack

Highly recommended!
Mar 14, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

ninel , Mar 14, 2018 6:56:58 PM | 40

UNSC holds urgent meeting over Salisbury attack: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USYfRVqG2lk

At the 39 minutes and 25 seconds mark Russian UNSC member begins his speech

[Mar 14, 2018] President Donald Trump has assured Prime Minister Theresa May that the U.S. is "with the U.K. all the way" and said Russia must provide clear answers about the nerve-agent poisoning of a former spy

Notable quotes:
"... Lavrov told reporters on Tuesday Moscow's requests to see samples of the nerve agent have been turned down, which he called a violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention, which outlaws the production of chemical weapons. He insisted that Russia is "not to blame" for the poisoning. ..."
"... Lavrov said on Tuesday Moscow is willing to cooperate with the probe but suggested that London would be "better off" complying with its international obligations "before putting forward ultimatums." ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | www.truthdig.com

Britain says U.S. President Donald Trump has assured Prime Minister Theresa May that the U.S. is "with the U.K. all the way" and said Russia must provide clear answers about the nerve-agent poisoning of a former spy.

May's office says Trump and the British leader spoke by phone on Tuesday afternoon.

... ... ...

It says Trump "said the U.S. was with the U.K. all the way, agreeing that the Russian government must provide unambiguous answers as to how this nerve agent came to be used."

Russia says it will not meet a British deadline of midnight Tuesday to provide answers unless the U.K. shares samples of the nerve agent

___

6:00 p.m.

Russia's Foreign Ministry has sternly warned Britain against shutting the office of Russian state-funded RT television, saying it will lead to the closure of British media's bureaus in Moscow.

The ministry spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, said in televised remarks Tuesday that "not a single British media outlet will be able to work in our country if they close RT."

Zakharova's statement came in response to a warning by British media regulator Ofcom that RT could be stripped of its broadcasting license in the U.K. in the wake of the nerve agent attack on former spy Sergei Skripal.

Britain has given Russia until midnight Tuesday to explain how a Russian-made nerve agent came to be used in an English city, or face retaliatory measures.

___

5:15 p.m.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel says Russia must provide "quick answers to the legitimate questions posed by the British government" about the poisoning of an ex-spy and his daughter.

Merkel's office said the German leader spoke by phone on Tuesday with British Prime Minister Theresa May and condemned the nerve agent attack "in the sharpest manner."

The chancellor assured May that she took Britain's assessment about Russia's likely responsibility for the attack "extraordinarily seriously."

Merkel urged Russia to "comprehensively and immediately" reveal its chemical weapons program to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

___

4:30 p.m.

A lawyer says a Russian businessman who had associated with a prominent critic of the Kremlin who died in London in 2013 also has been found dead in the British capital.

Andrei Borovkov told Russian media outlets on Tuesday that his client, Nikolai Glushkov, has died, but said he was unaware of the time and circumstances.

Reports in British and Russian media say Glushkov, who was in his late 60s, was found dead at his home in southwest London.

London's Metropolitan Police force says officers are investigating the "unexplained" death of a man found at a house in the New Malden area late Monday. It did not identify him by name.

Glushkov was a friend of Boris Berezovsky, a Russian oligarch who died in London in 2013. An inquest failed to determine whether he had killed himself or died from foul play.

London police say counterterrorism detectives are leading the investigation "as a precaution because of associations that the man is believed to have had."

Police say there is no evidence to suggest a link to the March 4 poisoning of former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter.

___

3:50 p.m.

Britain's representative to the global chemical weapons watchdog says Russia has "failed for many years to declare chemical weapons development programs which date from the 1970s" and London has demanded that Moscow now "come clean."

Ambassador Peter Wilson told reporters Tuesday that London wants "Russia to declare these programs now."

British Prime Minister Theresa May said Monday that a military-grade nerve agent was used in the attack on former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his 33-year-old daughter Yulia, and that Russia was "highly likely" to blame.

Wilson also refuted a claim by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov that Britain would be breaching the treaty that outlaws chemical weapons if it refuses to share with Moscow samples of the nerve agent.

___

3:35 p.m.

Britain's media regulator says Kremlin-backed news channel RT could lose its license to broadcast in the U.K. in the wake of the nerve agent attack on former spy Sergei Skripal.

The channel has repeatedly been criticized by regulator Ofcom for breaching impartiality standards, and some British lawmakers have called for it to be shut down.

The regulator said Tuesday that it has a duty "to be satisfied that broadcast licensees remain fit and proper to hold their licenses."

Ofcom said it had written to ANO TV Novosti, which holds RT's U.K. broadcast licenses, saying that if Russia is found to be behind the attack, "we would consider this relevant to our ongoing duty to be satisfied that RT is fit and proper."

Britain has given Russia until midnight Tuesday to explain how a Russian-made nerve agent came to be used in an English city, or face retaliatory measures.

___

3:10 p.m.

Denmark's prime minister has said "the use of chemical weapons in a peaceful English town brings back memories of the Cold War."

Lars Loekke Rasmussen was commenting Tuesday on the poisoning of a former Russian spy and his daughter in southern England.

Loekke Rasmussen told Denmark's TV2 that his country would consult "with our allies what countermeasures it can lead to."

The Danish government leader also expressed "sympathy with the people affected and solidarity with Britain."

May told Britain's Parliament it is "highly likely" Russia was to blame for the March 4 attack. British police and intelligence reports say that Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia Skripals were poisoned by a military grade nerve agent produced in Russia.

___

2:50 p.m.

The Russian Foreign Ministry says it has handed the British ambassador a note of protest regarding the accusations leveled against Moscow over last week's poisoning of an ex-Russian spy.

Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia remain hospitalized in critical condition after being exposed to a military-grade nerve agent.

British Prime Minister Theresa May has vowed retaliatory measures if Russia offers no explanation for how the nerve agent developed in the Soviet Union came to poison the former spy and his daughter in a British city.

The Russian Foreign Ministry says it has summoned British Ambassador Laurie Bristow and handed him a protest note over the "baseless accusations" leveled against Russia. The ministry dismissed the reaction of British authorities to the attack as "provocative" and said it suspects the poisoning is "another unscrupulous attempt of the British authorities to discredit Russia."

___

2:30 p.m.

British police say the investigation into the chemical agent attack on a former Russian spy will last many weeks, and that they are not declaring a person of interest yet in the probe.

In a brief statement outside police headquarters, new counter-terror chief Neil Basu offered more details on the movements of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia before they were attacked in the English town of Salisbury on March 4. He appealed to the public to come forward if they saw the pair that day.

Basu says the public will see much police activity in and around the city over the coming days and that they should not be alarmed.

Basu also revealed for the first time that Skripal was a British citizen -- a fact that might color the government's response to the incident.

___

2:15 p.m.

Germany's foreign minister says Berlin is "very concerned" about the poisoning of the poisoning of a former Russian spy and his daughter in England and is voicing solidarity with Britain.

Sigmar Gabriel said in a statement that he spoke by phone Tuesday with British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson. He said that "we condemn this attack with a banned chemical weapon in the strongest terms."

Gabriel said that the perpetrators must be brought to justice and added: "If it is confirmed that Russia is behind this, that would be a very serious matter."

Gabriel is to be replaced as foreign minister by Heiko Maas, who is a member of the same party, when German Chancellor Angela Merkel's new government takes office on Wednesday.

___

1:45 p.m.

U.S. President Donald Trump has said "it sounds" like Russia was responsible for the poisoning of an ex-spy and his daughter in England.

Trump told reporters he will discuss the attack on Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in southern England with British Prime Minister Theresa May on Tuesday.

"It sounds to me that they believe it was Russia and I would certainly take that finding as fact," Trump said. He added the U.S. will condemn Russia if it agrees with Britain's findings.

His comments came after May told Parliament it is "highly likely" Russia was to blame for the attack.

British police and intelligence reports say that the Skripals were poisoned by a military grade nerve agent produced in Russia.

___

12:40 p.m.

British police have cordoned off a parking lot ticketing machine in the southwestern city of Salisbury as authorities retraced the steps of a former Russian spy and his daughter targeted in a chemical weapons attack.

The ticketing machine near a shopping center in Salisbury, 90 miles (145 kilometers) southwest of London, was covered by a tent similar to those at other sites where Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were seen during a March 4 excursion into the city.

A bench where the pair were found and markers for Skripal's son and wife in a nearby graveyard are also beneath tents.

Authorities say the pair were poisoned with a military-grade nerve agent and that Russia is "highly likely" to be behind it. Prime Minister Theresa May is demanding an explanation.

___

12:25 p.m.

The French Foreign Ministry says the nerve agent attack on former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Britain is "a totally unacceptable attack."

Without mentioning Russia, the ministry said in a statement that France repeatedly expressed "its refusal of impunity for those who use or develop toxic agents."

According to the statement, Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian spoke with his British counterpart, Boris Johnson, to express France's solidarity to "a top and strategic ally."

___

12:20 p.m.

A senior European Union official is calling for an EU-wide response to the poisoning of a former spy amid questions over whether Russia is to blame.

European Commission Vice President Frans Timmermans said Tuesday that "we cannot have nerve gas being used in our societies. This should be addressed by all of us."

He told EU lawmakers in Strasbourg, France, that "it is of the utmost importance that those who are responsible for what has happened see very clearly that there is European solidarity, unequivocal, unwavering and very strong."

Timmerman's appeal is a show of solidarity amid tense negotiations on Britain's departure from the EU next year.

Ex-spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a military-grade nerve agent in England last week and remain in critical condition.

___

Noon

British Home Secretary Amber Rudd says police and the domestic security service will look into a number of deaths in Britain that may be linked to Russia.

In a letter made public Tuesday, Rudd says the government takes seriously allegations that some 14 deaths may have some links to Russia.

"In the weeks to come, I will want to satisfy myself that the allegations are nothing more than that," Rudd said. "The police and MI5 agree and will assist in that endeavor."

BuzzFeed News reported in 2017 that some 14 deaths in Britain and the United States dating back to 2006 may have been linked to Russia. The cases include some prominent critics of Russian President Vladimir Putin including oligarch Boris Berezovsky and whistle-blower Alexander Perepilichny.

The list also includes former spy Alexander Litvinenko, killed by radioactive tea in 2006, a killing that British officials have linked to the Russian government.

___

11:50 a.m.

The British representative to the world's chemical weapons watchdog says it is highly likely that Russia is implicated in the nerve agent attack on a former spy and his daughter "by failure to control its own materials or by design."

Ambassador Peter Wilson told the Executive Council of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons on Tuesday that "I did not expect to have to brief this council on the first offensive use of a nerve agent of any sort on European territory since World War II."

British Prime Minister Theresa May said on Monday Russian ex-spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter had been poisoned with a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed in the Soviet Union.

Wilson has called the attack "not just a crime against the Skripals. It was an indiscriminate and reckless act against the U.K., which put the lives of innocent civilians at risk." His comments to the closed-door meeting were tweeted by his delegation.

___

11:30 a.m.

The chairwoman of the upper chamber of the Russian parliament says Britain is trying to influence this weekend's Russian presidential election by accusing Moscow of poisoning an ex-spy.

Sergei Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a military-grade nerve agent in an English city last week and are in the hospital in critical condition.

Valentina Matviyenko, who is the third most senior official in Russia, said on Tuesday the British prime minister's statement aims to "exert influence and pressure" on the March 18 vote.

British Prime Minister Theresa May said on Monday Russia is "highly likely" to be responsible for the attack.

___

11:20 a.m.

A former chief of Russia's main domestic intelligence agency says another post-Soviet nation could be the source of a rare nerve agent that Britain said was responsible for poisoning a Russian ex-spy in an English city last week.

British Prime Minister Theresa May said on Monday that Russian ex-spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter had been poisoned with Novichok, a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed in the Soviet Union near the end of the Cold War.

Nikolai Kovalyov, former chief of the FSB, told the Russian news agency on Tuesday that Novichok used to be stored in different parts of the Soviet Union, including Ukraine, which have since become independent nations, and that Ukraine or another post-Soviet nation could be the source of it.

Britain has asked the Russian ambassador in London to explain how the nerve agent turned up in the English city of Salisbury, leaving Skripal and his adult daughter in critical condition.

___

11:15 a.m.

Russian news agencies say the Foreign Ministry has summoned the British ambassador in Moscow over the poisoning of a Russian ex-spy.

The foreign ministry was quoted by Russian wires as saying that the ambassador must visit the ministry later on Tuesday.

Britain says a military-grade nerve agent developed by the Soviet Union was used in the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia. It has demanded a response from Moscow.

___

10:40 a.m.

The chief of the world's chemical weapons watchdog says that those responsible for the nerve agent attack on a former Russian spy and his daughter "must be held accountable."

In a speech Tuesday to the Executive Council of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, Director-General Ahmet Uzumcu said British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson called him Monday evening to inform him of the results of investigations into the attack on 66-year-old Sergei Skripal and his 33-year-old daughter Yulia.

British Prime Minister Theresa May told Parliament that Russia is "highly likely" to blame for poisoning Skripal and his daughter with a military-grade nerve agent.

Uzumcu says that, "It is extremely worrying that chemical agents are still being used to harm people. Those found responsible for this use must be held accountable for their actions."

Uzumcu's comments to the closed-door meeting were released by the OPCW.

___

10:30 a.m.

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov says Russia will only cooperate with Britain on the investigation into last week's poisoning of an ex-Russian spy if it receives samples of the nerve agent that is believed to have sickened the ex-spy and his daughter.

Lavrov told reporters on Tuesday Moscow's requests to see samples of the nerve agent have been turned down, which he called a violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention, which outlaws the production of chemical weapons. He insisted that Russia is "not to blame" for the poisoning.

British Prime Minister Theresa May said on Monday Russian ex-spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter had been poisoned with a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed in the Soviet Union. May said Russia has until the end of Tuesday to explain how the substance ended up in Britain.

Lavrov said on Tuesday Moscow is willing to cooperate with the probe but suggested that London would be "better off" complying with its international obligations "before putting forward ultimatums."

___

9:35 a.m.

Britain's government is considering how to deal with the poisoning of an ex-spy as it awaits a Russian government response to its claim that Russian was involved.

Officials said Tuesday Prime Minister Theresa May is reviewing a range of economic and diplomatic measures.

May has said it is "highly likely" Russia was involved in the nerve agent poisoning of 66-year-old Sergei Skripal and his 33-year-old daughter Yulia. Both remain in critical condition.

The prime minister says Russia has until the end of Tuesday to explain its actions in the case, which focuses on a former Russian military intelligence officer who was convicted of spying for Britain and then released in a spy swap.

Former foreign minister David Miliband has urged May to seek support from Europe and the United States.

[Mar 14, 2018] Over in GB, Theresa May lays down a 24 hr ultimatum: does this idiot know what an ultimatum is and what it means and where it leads? August 1914?

Mar 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Flavius Reply , 13 March 2018 at 08:10 PM

Trump is President today because in the Republican primaries he faced a fractured slate, many of whom, like Trump, had no business thinking they should be President; and in the election, he faced a corrupt government grifter without political talent whose only salient asset was that she was the wife of a former President, the one who destroyed the bully pulpet. Without the Clintons, there is no Trump.

Trump assumed office with no political friends, with some good ideas that resonated with old line Democrats and people who were tired of 16 years of a disastrous over militarized foreign policy and aimless failing or failed interventions; but unfortunately he had neither tactics, strategy, or personnel to carry those ideas forward; and as if these deficits weren't enough, through some combination of misfeasance and malfeasance, the outgoing Administration, the Intelligence swamp, and the Democratic Party extremists combined to cripple him with a hastily concocted crisis in our relations with Russia. Finally, Trump did not help himself by surrounding himself with Generals and family members, something he had not signaled he would be doing during the campaign.

Trump tapped Tillerson for State precisely because it was reasonable at the time to believe that Tillerson could be instrumental in restoring correct relations with Russia. Alas, it was not to be: neither Trump nor Tillerson were up to steering out of the maelstrom. Still, Trump did not serve himself well by the chickenshit way he got rid of Tillerson.

So how are things now lining up: Trump; Mattis; Pompeo; a career bureaucrat from an undistinguished time frame (to say the least) at CIA: and the perfectly awful, hopelessly unqualified, ranting fool, Nikki Haley.

Over in GB, Theresa May lays down a 24 hr ultimatum: does this idiot know what an ultimatum is and what it means and where it leads? Is there a .300 hitter in the bunch?

JohnsonR said in reply to Pacifica_Advocate... , 13 March 2018 at 08:08 PM
The UK and Israeli elites undoubtedly count among the second order "influencers" that I mentioned, but in the end the US can't use them as excuses. They are only allowed to "influence" the US so strongly because it suits so many powerful people in the US for them to do so, and the "influence" certainly goes both ways, in Britain's case at any rate.

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me". Israel has been manipulating US policy and culture for decades, and Britain has been doing so for a century and more. However, it's a bit absurd to pretend that the scope and scale of British "influence" has even approached that of Israel and its lobbies, certainly in recent decades. British "influence" is nowadays mostly just being useful for particular factions within US politics and government.

[Mar 14, 2018] MoA - Theresa May's 'Novichok' Claims Fall Further Apart

Notable quotes:
"... In recent years, there has been much speculation that a fourth generation of nerve agents, 'Novichoks' (newcomer), was developed in Russia, beginning in the 1970s as part of the 'Foliant' programme, with the aim of finding agents that would compromise defensive countermeasures. Information on these compounds has been sparse in the public domain, mostly originating from a dissident Russian military chemist, Vil Mirzayanov. No independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published. (Black, 2016) ..."
"... Additionally the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has not recognized Novichoks as chemical weapons because it found scant evidence that they exist at all. ..."
"... [The SAB] emphasised that the definition of toxic chemicals in the Convention would cover all potential candidate chemicals that might be utilised as chemical weapons. Regarding new toxic chemicals not listed in the Annex on Chemicals but which may nevertheless pose a risk to the Convention, the SAB makes reference to "Novichoks". The name "Novichok" is used in a publication of a former Soviet scientist who reported investigating a new class of nerve agents suitable for use as binary chemical weapons. The SAB states that it has insufficient information to comment on the existence or properties of "Novichoks". (OPCW, 2013) ..."
"... Theresa's May claims that the Skripals were poisoned with 'Novichok' agents is highly questionable. Her claim that only Russia could be responsible for this is obviously bollocks. ..."
"... But most disturbing about the case are not the false claims Theresa May makes. She is in deep political trouble over the Brexit negotiations and other issues and needs any political diversion that she can get. Blaming Russia for something is en vogue and might help her for a while. ..."
"... No, the most troubling issue is the behavior of the media who fail to point out that May's claims are bluster and that there is no evidence at all that supports her claims. The only paper that is somewhat skeptical is the Irish Times ..."
"... The British opposition leader Corbyn was right today when he demanded that she produces evidence for her claims. A few more pushes and her house of cards will surely come down. ..."
"... it seems to me Russia bashing is really en vogue and nobody important comes out to call May - and Boris - miserable liars. We are lingering at the border of a mayor war. ..."
"... remembering what was written by Arthur Conan Doyle: "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact". ..."
"... I have little faith that the truth will change matters since it will be suppressed by the anti-Russian media and the political class. It's very depressing--although not surprising--that we find ourselves in this state. ..."
"... Its amazing how easily propaganda works in the west, this is nothing but a psy-operation. ..."
"... Surely the British must have CCTV footage of the perpetrator. Why is does not one seem to be interested in who the person is? Why are there no descriptions from staff and patrons? ..."
"... If they have not been able to identify the perpetrator, why have they not published photos and tried to identify this person. If the perpetrator is still at large in the UK, are they not a threat to other people? Why are the British not trying to find this person? ..."
"... Corbyn is being savaged in the corporate press for questioning May's proof. There's even a hint of yet another leadership challenge within in Labour. If the Blairites are able to claim Corbyn's scalp based on this, one has to truly marvel at the miracle powers of propaganda. ..."
"... Information-, propaganda- and proxy war against Russia had begun in 2012 at least ..."
"... WWIII has already started and we are just witnessing the latest battle/scrimmage. ..."
"... Worthwhile to add the rush to judgement into the "claims fall apart" mix? As the Russians pointed out at OPCW meeting, there's a longstanding agreed procedure to investigating claims of chemical weapons use. ..."
"... Since I read about the "sanctions" I am quite sure, this isn't about Russia at all. It is about blackmailing the EU. Additional stopping North Stream 2. ..."
"... After 6 years of attacks on Putin the only shocking is that we see weak and meek response of Russians for another provocation. Did they not know for sure that a series of provocations were and are coming? ..."
"... This Global McCarthysm is nothing but the expression of panic among political puppets of oligarchic ruling elite that their embellishments are no longer effective in fooling and dividing of population into self destructive herds and that they themselves will be disposed of when their no longer effective lies will be replaced by war and violence within societies all over the world. ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Theresa May's 'Novichok' Claims Fall Further Apart

The British government claims that 'Novichok' poisons, developed 30 years ago in the Soviet Union, affected a British double agent. Such substances may not exits at all.

The 'whistleblower' for the 'Novichok' program and poisons published some chemical formulas that should enable any decent laboratory to reproduce them. But neither the existence of the claimed program nor the existence of the alleged substances were ever accepted by the scientific community.

The highly constructed drama around the alleged poisoning of a British double agent Skripal and his daughter has thus turned into a surreal play. The British government has so far given no evidence that the Skripal's were poisoned at all, or were poisoned by someone else. No detailed medical bulletin was published. The British accusations against Russia lets one assume that a suicide attempt has been excluded. Why?

There is no independent evaluation of the alleged poison. The British government claims that its own chemical weapon laboratory at Porton Down, only a few miles from where the incident happened, has identified the poison as one of the 'Novichok' chemicals.

But in 2016 a leading chemist at Porton Down published a piece in a scientific journal that denied that such chemicals exist. (Tim Hayword and Craig Murray both point this out ):

As recently as 2016 Dr Robin Black, Head of the Detection Laboratory at the UK's only chemical weapons facility at Porton Down, a former colleague of Dr David Kelly, published in an extremely prestigious scientific journal that the evidence for the existence of Novichoks was scant and their composition unknown.

In recent years, there has been much speculation that a fourth generation of nerve agents, 'Novichoks' (newcomer), was developed in Russia, beginning in the 1970s as part of the 'Foliant' programme, with the aim of finding agents that would compromise defensive countermeasures. Information on these compounds has been sparse in the public domain, mostly originating from a dissident Russian military chemist, Vil Mirzayanov. No independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published. (Black, 2016)

Robin Black. (2016) Development, Historical Use and Properties of Chemical Warfare Agents. Royal Society of Chemistry

Additionally the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has not recognized Novichoks as chemical weapons because it found scant evidence that they exist at all. The U.S. and the UK are both part of the organization and both agreed with this evaluation:

The OPCW's Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) appeared to doubt the existence of "Novichoks", and did not advise that the compounds described by Mirzayanov, or their precursors, should be designated as Scheduled Chemicals that should be controlled under the Chemical Weapons Convention:

[The SAB] emphasised that the definition of toxic chemicals in the Convention would cover all potential candidate chemicals that might be utilised as chemical weapons. Regarding new toxic chemicals not listed in the Annex on Chemicals but which may nevertheless pose a risk to the Convention, the SAB makes reference to "Novichoks". The name "Novichok" is used in a publication of a former Soviet scientist who reported investigating a new class of nerve agents suitable for use as binary chemical weapons. The SAB states that it has insufficient information to comment on the existence or properties of "Novichoks". (OPCW, 2013)

The former Soviet scientist, Vil Mirzanjaov, who 'blew the whistle' and wrote about the 'Novichoks', now lives in a $1 million home in the United States. The AFP news agency just interviewed him:

Mirzayanov, speaking at his home in Princeton, New Jersey, said he is convinced Russia carried it out as a way of intimidating opponents of President Vladimir Putin.

"Only the Russians" developed this class of nerve agents, said the chemist. "They kept it and are still keeping it in secrecy."

The only other possibility, he said, would be that someone used the formulas in his book to make such a weapon.

"Russia did it", says Mirzanjaov, "OR SOMEONE WHO READ MY BOOK".


1 , 2

The book was published in 2008 and is available as hardcover, paperback or for $8.16 as an electronic file. It includes a number of formulas which, Mirzanjaov says, could be used to produce those chemical agents. But neither Porton Down nor the OPCW seem convinced that this is possible. They may believe that Mirzanjaov is just full of it.

One customer reviewing Mirzanjaov's book remarked :

[Needs] an editor to throttle back his epic "i'm an epic awesome martyr" stuff and stick to the science.

Another reviewer wrote :

State secrets is by far the most long winded and painfully slow novel on chemical weapons written by a disgruntled defected scientist from Russia I have ever read! If you want to hear an employ with delusions of grandeur moan about every person he ever worked with then this is the book for you, otherwise don't waste your sweet time. Seriously! Nothing happens except Vil somethingkov helps make things that kill people for 30 years, gets a (sort of) conscience, defects, and constantly whinges about.....everything.

Vil Mirzanjaov promoted his book in a 2009 video . Shortly after he published his book he blogged an explanation why he included formulas in it:

While I was writing my book "State Secrets: An Insider's Chronicle of the Russian Chemical Weapons Program", some people from Washington persistently advised me not to include the formulas of the chemical agents of the Novichok series in my book.
...
I asked why it would be a bad idea to publish this information, since it would be for the safety of all people. Then the governments would work to have those chemical agents and their precursors included into the Control List. They responded, "Terrorists could use them for their criminal actions." This kind of reasoning is used all the time now to scare people and prevent any discussion. We are already used to ignoring a lot of real problems thanks to that.

Mirzanjaov further points out that only experienced personal in well equipped laboratories would be able to use his formulas. State actors have such laboratories, like the British Porton Down, but terrorists do not have such capabilities.

Mirzanjaov urged to included the substances he described into the OPCW list of controlled material. But the OPCW, as seen above, rejected that. Neither its scientific board nor the head of a Porton Down laboratory were convinced that these substances or the Soviet program Mirzanjaov described existed at all.

The Soviet chemical weapon laboratory in which Mirzanjaov had worked was in Uzbekistan, not in Russia as Theresa May falsely claims. The laboratory was dismantled with the active help of the United States .

Theresa's May claims that the Skripals were poisoned with 'Novichok' agents is highly questionable. Her claim that only Russia could be responsible for this is obviously bollocks.

The existence of the substances as described by Vil Mirzanjaov is in serious doubt. But if he is right then any state or company with a decent laboratory and competent personal can produce these substances from the formulas and descriptions he provides in his book. That is at least what Mirzanjaov himself says.

But most disturbing about the case are not the false claims Theresa May makes. She is in deep political trouble over the Brexit negotiations and other issues and needs any political diversion that she can get. Blaming Russia for something is en vogue and might help her for a while.

No, the most troubling issue is the behavior of the media who fail to point out that May's claims are bluster and that there is no evidence at all that supports her claims. The only paper that is somewhat skeptical is the Irish Times which finds it highly unlikely that the Russian government is behind the poisoning.

May demanded and got a NATO meeting on the case. But the statement NATO issued afterwards was extremely weak. It only offered support in conducting the British investigation and it asked Russia to respond to the British questions. Neither did it support the claims May made, nor did it take any measures against Russia. A French spokesperson said "We don't do fantasy politics" and demanded ' definite conclusions ' on the case before deciding anything. No support was given to May by the Trump administration.

The story May wants to tell has way too much holes to be sustainable. The involvement of the British double agent Skripal in the fake Steele dossier about Trump is likely the real story behind the incident. No international support is coming for May. The British opposition leader Corbyn was right today when he demanded that she produces evidence for her claims. A few more pushes and her house of cards will surely come down.

Posted by b on March 14, 2018 at 03:17 PM | Permalink

Fatima Manoubia , Mar 14, 2018 3:31:12 PM | 1

Interesting that a Senate Democrat of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Robert Menendez, brings in the case of the murder of Kim Jong Un´s brother, Kim Jong-Nama, since, for the same token, on the arbitrarious asignation of guilt against Russia for having fabricated Novichok in the past decades, the poisonous substance which finished Kim Jong-Un´s brother was the nerve agent VX, as well fabricated by the UK in the past, and probably also today, as was stated by Annie Machon in the last Crosstalk by Peter Lavelle about this case.
Thus, the same requests made to the Russian governement, we assume, could well be directed to Theresa May´s government.

What this pantomime is about, is that those West countries implicated in the Syrian nightmare, seeing their terrorists proxies being definitely defeated and so their goals sent to waste, at the hands of the SAA and their allies, amongst whom they are the RF, do not know already what to invent next to try to paint Russia as the agressor when it is getting increasingly clear, even in the public light, out of the so called "alt-media", that that label fits better with them.
They, simply, are in panicking that Mr. Putin gets elected once more time and the paradigm shift is definitely completed....

For desperation, they even do not bother to appoint people who carry a warrant for abuse of human rights in Europe...Although this increasingly resembles a western titled "The City Without Law"....

Another question would be, why none of the affected by the alleged poisoning have been yet accesed by any relative or official of its country ( as could be the case of Yulia Skripal ) since they did not died after all..... You go to see whether this is real or is simply a new "Manequin Challenge" like those performed by the "White Helmets", a renowned, even at Oscars level, broadcasting enterprise created by another MI6 "ex-spy", James LeMesurier....This increasingly seem to be the next profit niche of London...Theater!...But of the worst kind...

Not to mention that there are some declaration by a female doctor, who arrived at the event location at the first moments, and who was not affected in any way by any poison, on the contrary to the alleged poisoned policeman placed some meters away...

Also, it is said that the Skripals went out of the restaurant where they were eating quite airated, arguing...

Enough data to take months of inquiries even for the very sharp Sherlock Holmes...Even "Murder in the Orient Express" took, well, a whole travel in the orient Express of the lasting of those of past decades, to be solved by Agatha Christie....That Theresa May and the Democrats/Republicans in the USA, have already the case solved speaks volumes of cui bono ....and who could be interested in solving the case asap without any evidence and a proper investigation to their benefit...

SmoothieX12 , Mar 14, 2018 3:40:07 PM | 2
Note to spies: if ever becoming a Russian spy and then deciding to switch sides--DO NOT go to London. No UK, period. Mexico or Argentina increasingly look attractive. LOL.
ben , Mar 14, 2018 3:43:33 PM | 3
Be interesting to see if any of this info b is reporting, makes it's way into the corporate media. Thanks b...

If it does, I'll be shocked...

Pnyx , Mar 14, 2018 3:43:47 PM | 4
Interesting. I hope you're right with your confidence. Although it seems to me Russia bashing is really en vogue and nobody important comes out to call May - and Boris - miserable liars. We are lingering at the border of a mayor war.
jfc , Mar 14, 2018 3:43:59 PM | 5
It will give her enough leverage to survive this term.
karlof1 , Mar 14, 2018 3:56:37 PM | 6
Great work b!

Where's Jim Jones when you need him to serve up some of his koolaid to the numerous politicos and propagandists pushing the Russiagate Big Lie, for they surely deserve several pitchers full each.

Given the degree of effort Pompeo's used in pushing Russiagate, I can't wait for his first meeting with Lavrov or Putin.

The sooner Corbyn is able to become British PM, the better for all excepting the corrupt.

Il Discobolo , Mar 14, 2018 3:59:14 PM | 7
In the MEF Territorial Office in Salisbury, England, the Inspector Watson summarizes to Commissioner Golphar the known facts:

"- a man was found unconscious in a park;
- he turns out to be a former Russian spy who worked for Britain in the '90s, arrested but freed by the Russians themselves 8 years ago. from the analysis it turns out to have been contaminated with a substance created in the former Soviet Union decades ago ... that has hit also other people nearby"

The Inspector halts to speak for a while, then asks loudly: "Who could have been to do all that?"

"Elementary, my dear Watson", the Commissioner immediately responds with a flash of cunning in his eyes: "It was Russia, of course!"

But immediately afterwards he becomes pensive and among himself says in a low voice: "... or not?", remembering what was written by Arthur Conan Doyle: "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact".

In the homeland of Sherlock Holmes, does anyone remember that sentence?

WorldBLee , Mar 14, 2018 4:01:00 PM | 8
In the House of Commons and the UK press, May's ploy sure is working. Now she is a "War Prime Minister" who may be able to hang onto power -- and even gain more powers through legislation. Let's not forget that in the US, Bush 2 was failing miserably until 9/11 -- then his rating zoomed up and America happily went to war behind him, or at least its hapless soldiers did. Even if the UK's far -- fetched narrative is shown to be completely inaccurate, I have little faith that the truth will change matters since it will be suppressed by the anti-Russian media and the political class. It's very depressing--although not surprising--that we find ourselves in this state.

I imagine the Tories are chortling right now with little thought that they are bringing a world war closer through their reckless actions.

Anonymous , Mar 14, 2018 4:10:06 PM | 9
Just how deadly is this nunchuck agent?

i) Absolutely deadly - you need total body protection with positive pressure suit and self-contained rebreather.
ii) Just your average toxic industrial chemical - tyvek suit, boots, gloves and gasmask.
iii) Meh - come across worse on a Friday night outside a curry house.
iv) All of the above at the same time.

Anonymous , Mar 14, 2018 4:12:12 PM | 10
Its amazing how easily propaganda works in the west, this is nothing but a psy-operation. Anyway, there seems to be a one effort to kick Russia out of UNSC by the brittish as a "response".
Blessed Economist , Mar 14, 2018 4:12:15 PM | 11
May trying to be Maggie. Haha. I have never read spy novels, so there are a few things about this incident that I don't understand.

• If the Skripals were hit with a military grade toxin, why are they not dead?

• If they were being taken out by the FSB, MI6, CIA, or even Mossad, surely they would have done the job properly?

• Even if Skripal contributed dodgy info to Steel dossier, why would that justify silencing him?

• Why would anyone do a hit in a pizza care in mid-afternoon, when the perpetrator would be obvious to staff and patrons? Would not an ex-spy be on the alert for an attack in such a place.

• Surely the British must have CCTV footage of the perpetrator. Why is does not one seem to be interested in who the person is? Why are there no descriptions from staff and patrons?

• If the British have identified the person from CCTV footage, why are they not slamming the Russians with their identity, rather than making vague claims about the source of the toxin.

•If they have not been able to identify the perpetrator, why have they not published photos and tried to identify this person. If the perpetrator is still at large in the UK, are they not a threat to other people? Why are the British not trying to find this person?

There is a different possibility that no one seems to have raised: Skripal is old and ill. His son died recently. He is stuck in dreary England, separated from his friends and family. He has become depressed. His daughter came to visit because she was concerned about his mental health. He decided to commit suicide and put his daughter's shame to an end. As an ex-spy, he had a suicide pill. He used it to kill himself and his daughter. He failed to complete the task.

Shakesvshav , Mar 14, 2018 4:13:53 PM | 12
A canter through the various deaths on British soil: https://off-guardian.org/2018/03/13/fatal-quad-who-is-assassinating-former-mi6-assets-on-british-soil/
Mike Maloney , Mar 14, 2018 4:17:32 PM | 13
Corbyn is being savaged in the corporate press for questioning May's proof. There's even a hint of yet another leadership challenge within in Labour. If the Blairites are able to claim Corbyn's scalp based on this, one has to truly marvel at the miracle powers of propaganda.
TomGard , Mar 14, 2018 4:23:18 PM | 14
The statement of OPCW 2013 means nothing at all. The Scientific Advisory Board "included US, French, German and Russian government representatives and on which Dr Black was the UK representative" (Murray). Information-, propaganda- and proxy war against Russia had begun in 2012 at least. So in the SAB they had a stalemate. Russia couldn't say anything without incriminating itself, the Germans normally know nothing and the representatives of US, French and UK could well have had motives to be quiet about things they knew or had.
Tobin Paz , Mar 14, 2018 4:23:59 PM | 15
Intersting article from Nafeez Ahmed. Aside from touching on Skripal:

The UK government is manufacturing its nerve agent case for 'action' on Russia

Two years ago, the Independent reported on new historical research which found that during the Cold War, the British government "used the general public as unwitting biological and chemical warfare guinea pigs on a much greater scale than previously thought."

...

Less well-known, though, is the fact that members of the British armed forces "were experimented on with Sarin, the deadly nerve gas, as late as 1983 at the Government's defence research centre at Porton Down," according to Ministry of Defence documents obtained by The Telegraph. Operation Antler, as the police investigation into the experiments was called, found that the nerve agent trials had gone on as late as 1989.

james , Mar 14, 2018 4:24:02 PM | 16
thanks b.. this story is a load of bs with nothing substantive to back it up.. and of course the scribes for the empire are only too willing to not ask questions! i look forward to the time when sanity returns to international affairs.. at this point, russia seems like the only stand up player on the scene...

i love the info you found in mirzanjaov.. "Russia did it", says Mirzanjaov, "OR SOMEONE WHO READ MY BOOK". - brilliant!! i guess that pays for the house and all else... you are a good stooge mirzanjaov!

james , Mar 14, 2018 4:51:46 PM | 20
we haven't gotten to that point yet ghost ship, lol... here is cluborlov's comment on this..
John Gilberts , Mar 14, 2018 4:52:43 PM | 21
Canada's Banderite FM Chrystia Freeland. Russia is guilty as charged of course. This came out before TMay even rose to deliver her version: Statement By Foreign Affairs on Chemical Attack in UK
https://www.canada.ca/en/global-affairs/news/2018/03/statement-by-minister-of-foreign-affairs-on-chemical-weapon-attack-in-united-kingdom.html

and Response by the Russian Embassy: https://twitter.com/RussianEmbassyC/status/973981938649190400

psychohistorian , Mar 14, 2018 4:54:11 PM | 22
# b who wrote:
"
No, the most troubling issue is the behavior of the media who fail to point out that May's claims are bluster and that there is no evidence at all that supports her claims.
"

We read your blog because those media organizations are controlled by the same elite that have their fist up May's ass.

The City of London was around before the US Fed, as was the British empire. I read recently that London has the most millionaires of any city in the world.

The God of Mammon religion is my name for the global private financial system (BIS, SWIFT, IMF, World Bank, etc) and all the national private Central Banks and the money systems within all Western nations. That "sacred" construct of our social contract is under attack and what you see is their response so far.

WWIII has already started and we are just witnessing the latest battle/scrimmage. When/if there is another Bretton Woods meeting of the geopolitical elite to decide where the financial control will/should be going forward, then we will see if the centuries old cabal of families that have ruled our world will give up that power or reset the human experiment with nukes.

Jackrabbit , Mar 14, 2018 5:00:25 PM | 23
b

Worthwhile to add the rush to judgement into the "claims fall apart" mix? As the Russians pointed out at OPCW meeting, there's a longstanding agreed procedure to investigating claims of chemical weapons use.

TomGard , Mar 14, 2018 5:02:13 PM | 24
@James - 16

(Following up the other thread) Since I read about the "sanctions" I am quite sure, this isn't about Russia at all. It is about blackmailing the EU. Additional stopping North Stream 2.

Stopping North Stream might well be a zero-sum game for Russia. It can't fail sustaining the world price of gas and this might compensate Russia for disadvantages of Asian markets

Taffyboy , Mar 14, 2018 5:08:59 PM | 26
Here you go B. nice support article.

http://johnhelmer.org/?p=17619

Fatima Manoubia , Mar 14, 2018 5:14:27 PM | 28
@Posted by: Blessed Economist | Mar 14, 2018 4:12:15 PM | 11

Some good questions there, but better than the CCTV footage would be hearing the MI6 person in charge of supervising every movement by Skripal, since, as claimed by Annie Machon at the same Crosstalk program I pointed out at my previous comment, every double agent has its own agent behind it, as a protection protocol ( and also for securing he is not a triple...I guess )...

telescope , Mar 14, 2018 5:15:51 PM | 29
EU is basically telling Theresa May to go and screw herself. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-russia-eu/eu-to-back-may-on-russia-with-words-but-limited-action-idUSKCN1GQ1FB
Anonymous , Mar 14, 2018 5:41:34 PM | 32
Telecope

Nah, EU is of course as hysterical against Russia as UK is, but what can they do? Why should they do anything is another question. Its like these people are looking for war all because a Russian spy is hurt. Are they insane?

Daniel , Mar 14, 2018 6:05:04 PM | 33
Floating around the Twittersphere:

The Official Enemy always does *exactly* the wrong thing:

- Saddam Hussein hid WMD even as war loomed
- Gaddafi ordered a massacre certain to bring 'intervention'
- Assad launched a gas attack exactly as inspectors entered Damascus
- And now Putin...

I haven't yet seen the Russian Ambassador yet, but the UN Security Council's special meeting over this had been universally condemning Russia/Putin. Naturally, this was especially full-throated from Trump's UN Embarrasor, Nimrata "Nikki" Randhawa "Haley."

What would be required to have Russia removed from the UNSC?

Anonymous , Mar 14, 2018 6:10:48 PM | 34
AT the UN, the US provides evidence supporting the UK's claim that 'Putin done it' in the Skirpal case.

By one of those amazing coincidences, the western media has rediscovered the MH17 incident, and the infamous Spanish air traffic controller Carlos. He has been interviewed by Radio Liberty and a group of Romanian investigative journalists. He claims he received $48,000 USD from 'Russian sources' for his part in the incident.

https://z5h64q92x9.net/proxy_u/ru-en.en/https/diana-mihailova.livejournal.com/1744880.html

What an amazing story! /sarc

james , Mar 14, 2018 6:21:33 PM | 35
221 john gilberts.. thanks.. nice to know the loser freeland is being given a large platform to her anti russia rhetoric under the canuck flag too.. geez, but sometimes i wish canada wasn't so stupid and dishonest catering to the usa and etc, but alas.. as a canuck i am very disappointed that she is anywhere near a position of power.. working with soros has it's merits..

@24 tomgard.. i think blackmailing the eu is a smaller part of it..i could be wrong.. isolating russia seems like the main meal.. russia is viewed as a threat by the usa/uk and probably a few other players that will go unnamed..

@33 daniel question.. i am sure china would go along with it, lol - NOT... in fact - they would be next... too bad the un security council actually represents a few level headed players - the uk/usa not being one of them!

karlof1 , Mar 14, 2018 6:22:11 PM | 36
Garrie comments and provides video of UNSC session.
Mina , Mar 14, 2018 6:36:14 PM | 37
Uae got rex's head and mbs got 23 russian diplomats?
Mina , Mar 14, 2018 6:39:00 PM | 38
Seamus Martin conclusion on Russian billionaires apply just as well to Gulfies in London
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/unlikely-that-vladimir-putin-behind-skripal-poisoning-1.3425736
Clueless Joe , Mar 14, 2018 6:42:58 PM | 39
Fucking Theresa May should stick to do her job, as in protecting British citizens and ensuring their safety. Like, for instance, in Telford, where more than thousand kids have been gang-raped for decades, and authorities kept shut about it - a case that the usually very loud Me-Too crowd is being suspiciously quiet about as well. But no, it's so much easier just to make shit up and bash Russia like the Brits have been doing since Crimean War.
ninel , Mar 14, 2018 6:56:58 PM | 40
UNSC holds urgent meeting over Salisbury attack

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USYfRVqG2lk

At the 39 minutes and 25 seconds mark Russian UNSC member begins his speech

karlof1 , Mar 14, 2018 7:07:12 PM | 41
In case some haven't, Craig Murray's essay b linked to and I relink here is quite the blockbuster, or rather Maybuster. Russia's UNSC rep only needed to announce Craig's conclusion to destroy the credibility of UK, US, France, and any other nation stupid enough to back May's crazy assertions. As Garrie proposes , May certainly rivals Blair for worst UK PM ever.
LXV , Mar 14, 2018 7:12:04 PM | 42
Posted by: Anonymous | Mar 14, 2018 4:10:06 PM | 9

LOL, nice catch! Facts...? Who needs stinkin facts in a post-truth world ?

Ian , Mar 14, 2018 7:33:57 PM | 43
Daniel @33:

After looking at this for the second time, it appears there is a possible way. It appears a precedent was set via UN General Assembly Resolution, UN Res. 1668 & 2758, where support from 2/3 of the membership is needed. Although the resolutions addressed specifically to the China/Taiwan question, it could be used against Russia. However, it requires an alternate capital with support from a significant population.

Another obstacle I see is from pro-UN supporters, who wouldn't tolerate Russia, or any other nation, being excluded from the UN. By allowing any member to leave the UN would be repeating the mistakes from it's predecessor, League of Nations. Yes, there's been cases where nations stopped it's participation, but the UN didn't consider them gone; just absent. The UN concept was never meant to be some governing body. Unfortunately, there's considerable efforts to make it one.

In the end, the possibility of excluding Russia from either the UNSC and or UN is ZERO.

Kalen , Mar 14, 2018 7:38:21 PM | 44
After 6 years of attacks on Putin the only shocking is that we see weak and meek response of Russians for another provocation. Did they not know for sure that a series of provocations were and are coming?

Will the wait another 6 months to expel British MI6 spies masquerading as diplomats this time because of coming Easter and children of those agents of war and death may suffer spoiled holidays.

It is clear now that this timid response is due to Russian oligarchs, Putin supporters, vital interests in the west are being challenged or even threatened.

Did they not know that in medical schools of psychiatry they warn new doctors not to succumb to mental patient's delusions by trying to reason with him or her, trying to explain reality since it only aggravates psychosis and leads to violence.

This Global McCarthysm is nothing but the expression of panic among political puppets of oligarchic ruling elite that their embellishments are no longer effective in fooling and dividing of population into self destructive herds and that they themselves will be disposed of when their no longer effective lies will be replaced by war and violence within societies all over the world.

bevin , Mar 14, 2018 8:09:49 PM | 45
The Soviet Union boycotted UNSC meetings some time around the Korean War -- that is how the imperialist forces got to call themselves UN forces, because USSR didn't veto the resolutions in question.

Where the idea came from that Russia could be removed from the SC I have no idea, it is a nonsense reflecting the propaganda overhang that the US and its satellites can do anything that they want. They can't. And their power is declining daily.

This idiocy from the UK is a direct measurement of the actual impotence of the UK government which has nothing left to do but to scare up the elderly (most people under 50 either don't follow the MSM or know them to be lying) the only demographic that will support them in an election. The story is aimed at embarrassing Corbyn, who they hate and fear, by calling up the Blairites to disassociate themselves from Labour.

It has worked: the usual treacherous MPs, the remains of those who pushed for war in Iraq and called for war in Libya and Syria, have come out in support of May and the MI6. This makes it much more likely that they will not be running for Labour again. Which is good news.

The bad news is that so long as b and the handful of bloggers like him continue to shoot down these propaganda balloons when they are still only a few dozen feet in the air, the Political caste and the Ruling Class will attempt to silence them.

[Mar 14, 2018] If Putin is so diabolical and his information operations so elegant and effective he should execute one that breaks the chain of zionist influence on the US polity. That would prevent Armageddon and the world would be thankful.

Mar 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

14 March 2018 at 04:12 AM

What is US interest in the Middle East? I don't see any. We've got plenty of oil. And the Canadians will happily sell us more.

The millenia old conflicts there are really no business of ours. The possibility that we'll go to war with Russia and risk our own population to further Israeli perceptions shows how far down the rabbit hole we've gone. The zionists "own" our political, media, governmental establishments lock stock and barrel for this possibility to exist.

If Putin is so diabolical and his information operations so elegant and effective he should execute one that breaks the chain of zionist influence on the US polity. That would prevent Armageddon and the world would be thankful.

Honestly I have no idea what the firing of Tillerson and his replacement by Pompeo means. Maybe it's because Tillerson called Trump a moron and Pompeo is an ass licker. Hillary, Rubio, etc al wanted a no-fly-zone over Syria. That would have brought instant conflict with Russia. If Nikki Haley's threats come to pass we'll get there.

Trump is attempting to change many past arrangements. One being trade where the US has bled for decades running massive trade deficits. How the GOP does in the mid-terms will influence his position on many issues.

[Mar 14, 2018] Jefferson Morley on the CIA and Mossad Tradeoffs in the Formation of the US-Israel Strategic Relationship

Highly recommended!
Angleton was a founding father of the deep state.
Notable quotes:
"... Angleton embodied and shaped the CIA's operational ethos and its internal procedures, especially in the realm of counterintelligence. His theories of Soviet penetration dominated the thinking of Western intelligence agencies, and their legacy can even be seen in the counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign and allegations of collusion with Russia. I want to emphasize that I only use the term deep state as a colloquial shorthand term for the array of US national security agencies that operate under the shroud of official secrecy. ..."
"... Angleton, I'm going to put to you, was a founding father of what we call the deep state. ..."
"... With the passage of the National Security Act in July 1947, Angleton went to work at the CIA. The CIA came into existence and Angleton became the chief of the foreign intelligence staff with responsibility for intelligence collection operations worldwide. ..."
"... Angleton became the CIA's exclusive liaison with the Mossad in 1951. ..."
"... He was introduced to Amos Manor, chief of counterespionage for Israel's domestic security service known as Shabak or Shin Bet. ..."
"... "I didn't know exactly what to do, but I had the idea of giving them material we had gathered a year earlier about the efforts of the Eastern Bloc to use Israel to bypass an American trade embargo. We edited the material and informed them that they should never ask us to identify our sources." From such arrangements, the CIA-Mossad relationship began to grow. Manor would be friends with Angleton for the rest of his life. ..."
"... Asher Ben-Natan, Angleton's source dating back to the OSS days, was playing a key procurement role in the secret Israeli program to obtain nuclear weapons. Teddy Kollek, one of Angleton's closest contacts and friends in Washington, later became the mayor of Jerusalem. Angleton's Israeli friends in short were really the architects, some of the architects of the Zionist state. ..."
"... As I came to learn his story from talking to CIA veterans and Israelis and reading a lot, a couple of things stood out to me. First of all, the Israeli recruitment of Angleton was extremely astute. In the early 1950s, Angleton was a rising star at this new agency, the CIA, but he was not a senior figure and not even particularly powerful. The Israelis recognized the latent qualities that would make him powerful. ..."
"... In 1954 Angleton became the chief of the CIA's counterintelligence staff, the first one. In 1956 Amos Manor passed him a copy of Nikita Khrushchev's secret speech to the Soviet Communist Party in which he criticized the cult of personality around the deceased dictator, Joseph Stalin. This intelligence coup made Angleton a legend within the CIA and the power within the agency as well, and it was very much made possible by the Israelis. ..."
"... Angleton's formative and sometimes decisive influence on US policy towards Israel can be seen in many areas – from the impotence of US nuclear nonproliferation policy in the region, to Israel's triumph in the 1967 Six-Day War, to the feeble US response to the attack on the Liberty, to the intelligence failure represented by the Yom Kippur War of 1973. ..."
"... The question, which was put to me by Grant but is right on point, was why didn't the CIA help the FBI investigate the diversion of US weapons-grade material from the United States to Israel in the 1960s and 1970s? The short answer is because Jim Angleton didn't want to. Angleton played a key role in enabling Israel to obtain nuclear weapons, and he did so in a subtle way that characteristically left few fingerprints. He was not a man to investigate himself. Many of these details are now known thanks to Grant Smith, Roger Mattson, John Hadden, Jr. and others. ..."
"... the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation, otherwise known as NUMEC, started processing highly-enriched uranium in the United States in 1959. NUMEC had been created by David Lowenthal, a Zionist financier who financed the postwar boatlift from Europe to Palestine that was romanticized in the book and movie Exodus. He hired Zalman Shapiro, a brilliant young metallurgist to run the company. ..."
"... By October 1965, the AEC estimated that 178 kilograms of highly-enriched uranium had gone missing from the NUMEC facility, by March 1968, that figure was 267 kilograms. ..."
"... John Hadden was the CIA station chief in Israel from 1964 to 1967. He worked very closely with Angleton throughout this period. He would later concur with the near unanimous assessment of CIA's nuclear scientist that Israel had indeed stolen fissile material from NUMEC and used it to build their nuclear arsenal. ..."
"... With the fissile material diverted from NUMEC, Israel was able to construct its first nuclear weapon by 1967 and become a full-blown nuclear power by 1970 – the first and still the only nuclear power in the Middle East. Angleton, it is fair to say, thought collaboration with Israel was more important than US nonproliferation policy. ..."
"... When Angleton left government service 20 years later, Israel held twice as much territory as it had in 1948. The CIA and Mossad collaborated on a daily basis and the governments of the United States and Israel were strategic allies knit together by expansive intelligence sharing, multibillion-dollar arms contracts and coordinated diplomacy. ..."
"... Angleton's influence on U.S.-Israeli relations between 1951 and 1974 exceeded that of any Secretary of State with the possible exception of Henry Kissinger. His influence was largely unseen by Congress, the press, other democratic institutions, and much of the CIA itself. He was empowered by his own ingenuity and the clandestine arrangements rationalized by doctrines of national security and counterintelligence. The arc of his career breathes life into the concept of the deep state. ..."
"... Angleton, more than any other American, enabled the Americans to gain and hold this strategic high ground in the Middle East. He was, as his friend Meir Amit said, the biggest Zionist of the lot ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | www.antiwar.com
Angleton embodied and shaped the CIA's operational ethos and its internal procedures, especially in the realm of counterintelligence. His theories of Soviet penetration dominated the thinking of Western intelligence agencies, and their legacy can even be seen in the counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign and allegations of collusion with Russia. I want to emphasize that I only use the term deep state as a colloquial shorthand term for the array of US national security agencies that operate under the shroud of official secrecy.

Let's not forget there are a dozen, at least a dozen such agencies based here in Washington. The CIA with its $15 billion a year budget is the largest. The NSA with a budget of about $10 billion is the second largest. The Defense Intelligence Agency is about $4 billion. Then along with some other obscure but still very large agencies like the NGIA. Never heard of the NGIA? I didn't think so. The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency is a $4.9 billion a year agency. Collectively, these agencies spend probably $50 billion to $60 billion a year, which make them a very small but powerful potent sector in the American scheme of power.

Want to know how the NGIA spent your $4.9 billion? Good luck. Want to see a line item budget of CIA activities in Africa last year? Move along. It's true that Congress nominally has oversight powers over these agencies. Our elected officials do have their security clearances that we don't have, so they can go in and look at selected operations. But the intelligence oversight system is very weak as even its defenders will admit. The intelligence committees polarized and politicized can't even agree on what kind of secret activities they're supposed to monitor. The FISA court system is supposed to protect Americans from surveillance by their government, but it largely functions as a rubberstamp of the secret agencies. A secret government is the norm in America in 2018 which is why the discourse of the deep state has such currency today.

Angleton, I'm going to put to you, was a founding father of what we call the deep state. So who was he? Born in December 1917, James Angleton grew up as the oldest son of James Hugh Angleton, a brash self-made American businessman who moved to Milan, Italy during the Depression and made a fortune during the time Benito Mussolini selling cash registers. Angleton attended private school in England. He went to Yale College, and then to Harvard Law school. He was a precocious good-looking young man with sophisticated manners and a literary frame of mind.

As an undergraduate, he befriended his fellow expatriate – Ezra Pound – in Italy. Pound was the modernist poet in the mad tribune of Mussolini's fascism. In their correspondence, which I found at Yale, Angleton sometimes ape the anti-Semitic rhetoric of Ezra Pound. For example, criticizing the Jewish book merchants who he thought overcharged for Pound's books.

In 1943, Angleton was recruited into the Office of Strategic Services, America's first foreign intelligence service stationed in Rome during and after World War II. He excelled at secret intelligence work. I tell a story in The Ghost of how he rescued a leading Nazi and a leading Italian fascist from postwar justice. Among other tasks, he reported on the flow of Jews escaping from Germany and heading for Palestine. The revelations of the Holocaust transformed his disdain for Jews into something of sympathy. He began to develop sources among the leaders of the Jewish and Zionist organizations – including Teddy Kollek who was a British intelligence agent, and a German operative named Arthur Pier who later became known as Asher Ben-Natan.

With the passage of the National Security Act in July 1947, Angleton went to work at the CIA. The CIA came into existence and Angleton became the chief of the foreign intelligence staff with responsibility for intelligence collection operations worldwide. In those days, the CIA was right here in the heart of Washington. It's hard for people to believe now, but the CIA was located in a series of temporary buildings located along the reflecting pool next to the Lincoln Memorial. The tempos, as they were called by CIA people, were drafty in the winter, hot in the summer, and devoid of charm year-round. But this is where Angleton worked, at what was known as the Office of Special Operations.

Angleton, while sympathetic to Jewish suffering, was still very wary of Israel when he started his career at the CIA. Before the 1948 war, the Jewish army had been largely armed by Czech arms manufacturers and communist Czechoslovakia. The Soviet Union was the first country to recognize the state of Israel in 1948. Angleton initially feared that the Soviets would use Israel as a platform for injecting spies into the West. The Israelis, for their part, were looking to cultivate American friends. Stalin's anti-Semitic purges in 1948 showed that his allegiance to the Jewish state was superficial at best.

In 1950 a man named Reuven Shiloah, the founder of Israel's first intelligence organization, came to Washington. He visited the CIA and he came away very impressed with how it was organized. He went back to Israel and in April 1951, he created out of a very fractious collection of security forces what was known as the Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks – inevitably known as Mossad, Hebrew for institute.

In 1951 Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion came to the United States and brought Shiloah with him. Ben-Gurion met privately with President Truman, and Angleton arrange for Ben-Gurion to also have lunch with his friend Allen Dulles who would shortly become the director of the CIA. The purpose of this meeting, Efrain Halevy, a retired director of the Mossad and a longtime friend of Angleton's told me in an interview in Tel Aviv, the purpose was in Halevy's words to clarify in no uncertain terms that notwithstanding what had happened between Israel and United States 1948 and notwithstanding that Russia had been a key factor in Israel's survival, Israel considered itself part of the Western world and would maintain the relationship with the United States in this spirit.

Shiloah stayed on in Washington to work out the arrangements with Angleton. Shiloah, according to his biographer, soon developed a special relationship – quote/unquote – and Angleton became the CIA's exclusive liaison with the Mossad in 1951. Angleton return the favor by traveling to Israel often. He was introduced to Amos Manor, chief of counterespionage for Israel's domestic security service known as Shabak or Shin Bet.

Manor headed up Operation Balsam which was the Israeli's conduit to the Americans. "They told me I had to collect information about the Soviet bloc and transmit it to them," Manor recalled about the Americans. "I didn't know exactly what to do, but I had the idea of giving them material we had gathered a year earlier about the efforts of the Eastern Bloc to use Israel to bypass an American trade embargo. We edited the material and informed them that they should never ask us to identify our sources." From such arrangements, the CIA-Mossad relationship began to grow. Manor would be friends with Angleton for the rest of his life.

In 1963 a man named Isser Harel was succeeded as the chief of Mossad by a military intelligence officer named Meir Amit. Amit found Angleton to be a little eccentric, but he noted that his – quote – identification with Israel was a great asset for Israel. Asher Ben-Natan, Angleton's source dating back to the OSS days, was playing a key procurement role in the secret Israeli program to obtain nuclear weapons. Teddy Kollek, one of Angleton's closest contacts and friends in Washington, later became the mayor of Jerusalem. Angleton's Israeli friends in short were really the architects, some of the architects of the Zionist state.

As I came to learn his story from talking to CIA veterans and Israelis and reading a lot, a couple of things stood out to me. First of all, the Israeli recruitment of Angleton was extremely astute. In the early 1950s, Angleton was a rising star at this new agency, the CIA, but he was not a senior figure and not even particularly powerful. The Israelis recognized the latent qualities that would make him powerful.

Second, Angleton's creative intellect and his operational audacity inspired deep feelings of loyalty among the Israelis. While Angleton's counterintelligence vision would become very controversial within and bitterly divisive within the CIA, he was widely admired in Israel as a stalwart friend. He still is to this day.

In 1954 Angleton became the chief of the CIA's counterintelligence staff, the first one. In 1956 Amos Manor passed him a copy of Nikita Khrushchev's secret speech to the Soviet Communist Party in which he criticized the cult of personality around the deceased dictator, Joseph Stalin. This intelligence coup made Angleton a legend within the CIA and the power within the agency as well, and it was very much made possible by the Israelis.

Angleton's formative and sometimes decisive influence on US policy towards Israel can be seen in many areas – from the impotence of US nuclear nonproliferation policy in the region, to Israel's triumph in the 1967 Six-Day War, to the feeble US response to the attack on the Liberty, to the intelligence failure represented by the Yom Kippur War of 1973. I tell a lot of the story in The Ghost, but the story of Angleton in Israel is really so large and so profound that it probably deserves its own book. I could certainly not do justice to it in the 18 minutes that I have, so I'm going to confine myself to one narrow question about the tradeoffs that became implicit in this arrangement between the CIA and the Mossad and its implications for us.

The question, which was put to me by Grant but is right on point, was why didn't the CIA help the FBI investigate the diversion of US weapons-grade material from the United States to Israel in the 1960s and 1970s? The short answer is because Jim Angleton didn't want to. Angleton played a key role in enabling Israel to obtain nuclear weapons, and he did so in a subtle way that characteristically left few fingerprints. He was not a man to investigate himself. Many of these details are now known thanks to Grant Smith, Roger Mattson, John Hadden, Jr. and others.

I want to just give you a sense of how this transpired. So the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation, otherwise known as NUMEC, started processing highly-enriched uranium in the United States in 1959. NUMEC had been created by David Lowenthal, a Zionist financier who financed the postwar boatlift from Europe to Palestine that was romanticized in the book and movie Exodus. He hired Zalman Shapiro, a brilliant young metallurgist to run the company.

At that time, the US government owned all of supplies of nuclear fuel which private companies, like NUMEC, were allowed to use but ultimately had to return to the government. Within a few years the Atomic Energy Commission noticed worrisome signs that the Apollo Plant – NUMEC had a plant in Apollo, Pennsylvania – that the plant's security and accounting were very deficient. Unexplained losses of nuclear material did happen at other companies, but NUMEC's losses were proportionately much larger. By October 1965, the AEC estimated that 178 kilograms of highly-enriched uranium had gone missing from the NUMEC facility, by March 1968, that figure was 267 kilograms.

John Hadden was the CIA station chief in Israel from 1964 to 1967. He worked very closely with Angleton throughout this period. He would later concur with the near unanimous assessment of CIA's nuclear scientist that Israel had indeed stolen fissile material from NUMEC and used it to build their nuclear arsenal. This story is now very well documented. In the spring of 1965, a technician working at the night shift at NUMEC went out on a loading dock for a breath of fresh air and saw an unusual sight. Zalman Shapiro was pacing on the dock while a foreman and truck driver loaded cylindrical storage containers, known as stovepipes, onto a flatbed truck.

The technician saw a clipboard saying that the material was destined for Israel. It was highly unusual to see Dr. Shapiro in the manufacturing section of the Apollo nuclear facility, the technician said. It was unusual to see Dr. Shapiro there at night, and it was very unusual to see Dr. Shapiro so nervous. The next day NUMEC's personnel manager visited the technician and threatened to fire him if he did not keep his mouth shut, that's a quote, concerning what he had seen. It would be 15 years before the employee told the story to the FBI.

What did Angleton know about NUMEC? Well, he knew that the AEC and the FBI were investigating starting in 1965. As the Israel desk officer of the CIA, he talked about the NUMEC case with liaison agent Sam Papich who was monitoring the investigation for the FBI. He also spoke about it with his colleague John Hadden.

On the crime scene particulars, Hadden defended his former boss. "Any suggestion that Angleton had help the Israelis with the NUMEC operation was totally without foundation," he told journalists Andrew and Leslie Cockburn. But Hadden didn't deny that Angleton had helped the Israeli nuclear program. Why would somebody whose whole life was dedicated to fighting communism have any interest in preventing a very anti-Communist nation for getting the means to defend itself, Hadden asked. The fact they stole it from us didn't worry him in the least, he went on. I suspect that in his inmost heart he would have given it to them if they had asked. Hadden knew better than to investigate any further. I never sent anything to Angleton on this – the nuclear program – because I knew he wasn't interested, Hadden later told his son, and I knew he'd try to stop it if I did.

With the fissile material diverted from NUMEC, Israel was able to construct its first nuclear weapon by 1967 and become a full-blown nuclear power by 1970 – the first and still the only nuclear power in the Middle East. Angleton, it is fair to say, thought collaboration with Israel was more important than US nonproliferation policy. He believed that the results proved his point. When he started as chief of the counterintelligence staff in 1954, the state of Israel and its leaders were regarded warily in Washington – especially at the State Department. When Angleton left government service 20 years later, Israel held twice as much territory as it had in 1948. The CIA and Mossad collaborated on a daily basis and the governments of the United States and Israel were strategic allies knit together by expansive intelligence sharing, multibillion-dollar arms contracts and coordinated diplomacy.

Angleton's influence on U.S.-Israeli relations between 1951 and 1974 exceeded that of any Secretary of State with the possible exception of Henry Kissinger. His influence was largely unseen by Congress, the press, other democratic institutions, and much of the CIA itself. He was empowered by his own ingenuity and the clandestine arrangements rationalized by doctrines of national security and counterintelligence. The arc of his career breathes life into the concept of the deep state.

I thought of this story when I visited one of the memorials to Angleton in Israel in 2016. The memorial is located on a winding road outside the city of Mevaseret Zion, which is now really a suburb of Jerusalem. Historically, control of this high ground has been seen as key to the control of Jerusalem and of Palestine itself. A nearby ruins of a castle built by 12th-century Christian crusaders for exactly that purpose stands in mute testimony to the importance of its strategic location.

The Angleton memorial consists of a pedestal of stones topped with a black plaque. To James Angleton, a friend it says. This plaque was dedicated in 1987, a few months after Angleton died, and it has been maintained by his Israeli friends ever since. It's still in perfect condition. The location is no accident. In the course of his extraordinary career, Angleton, more than any other American, enabled the Americans to gain and hold this strategic high ground in the Middle East. He was, as his friend Meir Amit said, the biggest Zionist of the lot . Thank you.

[Mar 14, 2018] Japan was ready to surrender before the US dropped two A bombs

Mar 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

for-the-record , March 13, 2018 at 3:26 pm GMT

@jilles dykstra

Until recently I considered these nonsense, after reading a nearly hour to hour description on how the emperor could end the war, I had to change my view.

Have you read Racing the Enemy: Stalin, Truman, and the Surrender of Japan by Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, a Japanese-American historian who was apparently the first to make significant use of documents from all 3 countries (Russia, Japan, USA). His basic conclusion is that:

Rather, what decisively changed the views of the Japanese ruling elite was the Soviet entry into the war. It catapulted the Japanese government into taking immediate action. For the first time, it forced the government squarely to confront the issue of whether it should accept the Potsdam terms. In the tortuous discussions from August 9 through August 14, the peace party, motivated by a profound sense of betrayal, fear of Soviet influence on occupation policy, and above all by a desperate desire to preserve the imperial house, finally staged a conspiracy to impose the "emperor's sacred decision" and accept the Potsdam terms, believing that under the circumstances surrendering to the United States would best assure the preservation of the imperial house and save the emperor.

The quote above is from an article of his replying to some of his critics.

https://apjjf.org/-tsuyoshi-hasegawa/2501/article.html

jilles dykstra , March 13, 2018 at 4:15 pm GMT
@for-the-record

I read
Japan's Decision to Surrender
Robert J. C. Butow
A day to day description of what went on in the critical days, sometimes by the hour, or by minute.

I cannot completely accept the above quote.
What was at the time the ruling elite ?

Since the mid or early thirties the military ruled Japan.
The fanatical military were prepared to wage war on the Japanese mainland, accepting 20 million deaths.

The Okinawa ratio US Japanese deaths was, from memory, 7000 to 150000.
If one accepts this ratio continuing the war with an invasion on the mainland this would have cost over 900.000 USA deaths.

Therefore the concept of unconditional surrender was left, as had been the case in Italy.

And about imposing, the emperor played an active role in ending the war, risking his own life.
Even after the recording had been made of the emperor announcing, in not too explicit terms, the surrender, by radio, the very first time Japanese heard his voice, fanatics tried to get hold of the recording.
As I stated, the two atomic bombs, plus the annihilation of the Kwantung army, made it possible.

[Mar 14, 2018] Neocons are like clogged arteries you know they will be a problem but failing to comprehend the danger, that heart attack can occur most unexpectedly, killing the host

Notable quotes:
"... The bloodthirsty neocons are dangerous fools. At least the Japanese Imperial Forces wore uniforms and flew their flag when attacking, even if a sneak attack. Neocons are silent killers of their host. ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

Sarah Toga , September 28, 2017 at 8:00 pm GMT

Our military record is not so great. Russia, on the other hand, has held its lands for a millennia. The only war we (the USA) have truly won since the War of 1812 was the Pacific Theater of WWII. Everything else was done by others (WWII European Theater was mostly Russian work), or a miserable stand-off (Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan) or a totally unnecessary fiasco (War Between The States, WWI, Iraq ) such that "winning" was no benefit to the "victor".

You might say the Mexican War gave us some good territory but the Mexicans are winning their Reconquista invasions while we sleep and dilly dally.

The bloodthirsty neocons are dangerous fools. At least the Japanese Imperial Forces wore uniforms and flew their flag when attacking, even if a sneak attack. Neocons are silent killers of their host.

Neocons are like clogged arteries -- you know they will be a problem but failing to comprehend the danger, that heart attack can occur most unexpectedly, killing the host.

You know you need to clean the crud out of those clogged arteries but you just don't do what is needed to clean out and become safe.

[Mar 14, 2018] Trump Votes For Rexit - Torture Queen Will Head CIA - (Updated)

Looks like Tillerson was yet another Big Lie junkie whose entire worldview is based on bullshit
Notable quotes:
"... Mattis sometimes calming influence over Trump on military issues will now become less effective. ..."
"... Haspel would be in jail if former president Barack Obama had not decided against prosecuting the CIA torture crimes. Torturing prisoners is a war crime. Obstruction of courts and destruction of evidence are likewise crimes. ..."
"... This is getting messy for the empire. Trump wants to attack Iran and be friends with Russia. The US neo-cons want to attack both Iran and Russia. UK and France want to be friends with Iran and attack Russia. ..."
"... The current anti Russia propaganda ["axis of evil" ] - Haley, Macron, May. Veto wielding members of the UNSC Russia, China vs US, France, UK...? ..."
"... I think the US, UK and Israel want to battle Russia in Syria. There will be more collateral damage done to Russians. ..."
Mar 14, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

12:44 PM - 13 Mar 2018

Mike Pompeo, Director of the CIA, will become our new Secretary of State. He will do a fantastic job! Thank you to Rex Tillerson for his service! Gina Haspel will become the new Director of the CIA, and the first woman so chosen. Congratulations to all!

According to the anti Russian propagandists (vid) Tillerson got the job because Trump loves Russia and Tillerson was in good standing with Putin. The same people now claim that Tillerson was fired from his job because Trump loves Russia and Tillerson was not in good standing with Putin.

Neither is correct. The plan to oust Tillerson and elevate Pompeo to State has been rumored and written about for several month . The plan was "developed by John F. Kelly, the White House chief of staff". It had nothing to do with Russia.

Tillerson never got traction as Secretary of State. Congress disliked him for cutting down some State Department programs. Trump overruled him publicly several times.

There is some contradiction in the statements coming from the White House and the State Department. According to the Washington Post:

Trump last Friday asked Tillerson to step aside, and the embattled top diplomat cut short his trip to Africa on Monday to return to Washington.

Last Friday Tillerson suddenly fell ill while traveling in Africa and canceled several scheduled events.

... ... ...

Thus ends the 2018 insurrection at State.

With Tillerson leaving Secretary of Defense Mattis is losing an ally in the cabinet:

[I]t starts with me having breakfast every week with Secretary of State Tillerson. And we talk two, three times a day, sometimes. We settle all of our issues between he and I, and then we walk together into the White House meetings. That way, State and Defense are together.

Mattis sometimes calming influence over Trump on military issues will now become less effective.

CIA head Pompeo, the new Secretary of State, is a neoconservative with a racist anti-Muslim attitude and a special hate for Iran which he compared to ISIS . That he will now become Secretary of State is a bad sign for the nuclear agreement with Iran. The Europeans especially should take note of that and should stop to look for a compromise with Trump on the issue. The deal is now dead. There is no chance that a compromise will happen.

The new CIA director Gina Haspel is well known for actively directing and participating in the torture of prisoners at 'black sites':

Beyond all that, she played a vital role in the destruction of interrogation videotapes that showed the torture of detainees both at the black site she ran and other secret agency locations. The concealment of those interrogation tapes, which violated multiple court orders as well as the demands of the 9/11 commission and the advice of White House lawyers, was condemned as "obstruction" by commission chairs Lee Hamilton and Thomas Keane.

Haspel would be in jail if former president Barack Obama had not decided against prosecuting the CIA torture crimes. Torturing prisoners is a war crime. Obstruction of courts and destruction of evidence are likewise crimes.

Both, Pompeo and Haspel, will need to be confirmed by Congress. Both will receive a significant number of 'yes'-votes from the Democratic side of the aisle.

11:01 AM | Comments (41)

sejmon , Mar 13, 2018 12:16:49 PM | 6

I think last straw to fire him been TRex stance toward russians -give up Crimea and we cease sanction(WHAT A JOKE) same toward eastern republics of Ukraine LNR,DPR..good move VSGPDJT !!!!!!!!!!!!!

next Nicky H ?????

Peter AU 1 , Mar 13, 2018 1:15:53 PM | 15
This is getting messy for the empire. Trump wants to attack Iran and be friends with Russia. The US neo-cons want to attack both Iran and Russia. UK and France want to be friends with Iran and attack Russia.

The current anti Russia propaganda ["axis of evil" ] - Haley, Macron, May. Veto wielding members of the UNSC Russia, China vs US, France, UK...?

Red Ryder , Mar 13, 2018 1:31:53 PM | 16
Poor Syria. At least one more fierce year of war. But more likely, endless 2,3,4 more years of war. Israel and US are getting the rebels in Daraa (DEZ #4) primed to start up fighting again. I think the US, UK and Israel want to battle Russia in Syria. There will be more collateral damage done to Russians.
b , Mar 13, 2018 2:28:49 PM | 23
Tillerson just read a statement to the press:

(My notes)
Tillerson says:
- got call today, afternoon from president, also spoke to Kelly (implies that this was the firing)
- hopes for smooth transition
- Deputy Sec State Sullivan will be acting Sec State
- Tillerson job officially terminates March 31

to DoD and State:
- bound by office oath, support constitution, ...
- always stay by oath, (sounds crying)
to people in uniform:
- great relationship State DOD - thanks Mattis and Dunford, all soldiers
work review:
- DPRK pressure campaign was success
- Afghanistan commitment also
- Syria, Iraq - work remains
- nothing goes without allies, partner
- work to be done on China and "troubling behavior" of Russia
- predicts more isolation if Russia doesn't knee
- nothing on Iran

Didn't say thank you to Trump. Emphasized oath to constitution, not to president. Nothing on Iran, Saudis or Palestine.

This was a f*** you to the White House and its priorities. The endorsement by name of Mattis and Dunlap makes them targets.

b , Mar 13, 2018 2:41:53 PM | 27
A Professor for political science from the United Arab Emirates just posted this:
"History will record that a GCC country had a role in the sacking of the foreign minister of a great power, and this is only the beginning of more"

Interesting ...
https://twitter.com/hxhassan/status/973629082368921600

[Mar 13, 2018] The transition of Pompeo from CIA to the State Department is a logical step as both are intelligence agencies serving global neoliberal empire, not the USA as a country

Looks like another Cold War warrior...
Notable quotes:
"... He has cultivated ties with Charles and David Koch, the billionaire industrialists who are patrons of conservative causes. They invested in Thayer Aerospace, a company Pompeo started with friends from West Point in 1998. He turned to Koch Industries, the Wichita-based conglomerate which has holdings in oil and other sectors, to help bankroll his 2010 congressional race. Pompeo was criticized by liberals for hiring a Koch Industries lawyer as his chief of staff and for introducing legislation that would benefit Koch interests. ..."
"... Pompeo has hawkish views on a range of policy issues, including torture, surveillance and the National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden. ..."
Mar 13, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Pompeo graduated from both the United States Military Academy at West Point and Harvard and served three terms as a representative for Kansas's fourth district. As a member of the House select committee on intelligence, he was an aggressive critic of US foreign policy under the Obama administration, particularly regarding the nuclear deal with Iran.

... ... ...

He has cultivated ties with Charles and David Koch, the billionaire industrialists who are patrons of conservative causes. They invested in Thayer Aerospace, a company Pompeo started with friends from West Point in 1998. He turned to Koch Industries, the Wichita-based conglomerate which has holdings in oil and other sectors, to help bankroll his 2010 congressional race. Pompeo was criticized by liberals for hiring a Koch Industries lawyer as his chief of staff and for introducing legislation that would benefit Koch interests.

Pompeo has hawkish views on a range of policy issues, including torture, surveillance and the National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden.

... ... ...

He has, however, diverged from Trump on Russia. In his confirmation hearing, he appeared to share with CIA staff an adversarial view of Russia and Vladimir Putin.

The Senate approved his nomination 66-32. The Democratic minority leader, Chuck Schumer, who voted to confirm Pompeo, said in a statement on Tuesday: "If he's confirmed [as secretary of state] we hope that Mr Pompeo will turn over a new leaf and will start toughening up our policies towards Russia and Putin."

... ... ...

[Mar 13, 2018] Russians have also been accusing the British of ignoring the Chemical Weapons Convention, which they say stipulates joint investigations of incidents like the Skripal attack.

Mar 13, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 | Mar 13, 2018 4:00:26 PM | 34

Mercouris at The Duran provides more info related to additional threats and their counters. Just one example:

"Meanwhile the Russians have also been accusing the British of ignoring the Chemical Weapons Convention, which they say stipulates joint investigations of incidents like the Skripal attack."

Certainly not least, it's suggested that May didn't listen to what Putin had to say on 1 March.

March Madness, and I don't mean basketball. Western nations lack diplomats and sane leaders not led by Big Lies. I read the Doomsday Clock to declare 11:59:45!

[Mar 13, 2018] I worked on Pathogen security and storage in UZ (as well as GE, KZ others) and they ain't secure take my word for it.

Mar 13, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

Durak March 13, 2018 at 19:14

Craig

I worked on Pathogen security and storage in UZ (as well as GE, KZ others) and they ain't secure take my word for it.

Wanna steal something nasty? Just bribe the staff at the Georgia NCDC in Tbilisi (for example) . Would love to have stayed in UZ but they closed Juliano's . No reason to extend contract there!

A few thou will do it.

Job done.

[Mar 13, 2018] Russian to Judgement - Craig Murray

The speed with which British authorities blades Putin strongly suggests false flag operation: "I am alarmed by the security, spying and armaments industries' frenetic efforts to stoke Russophobia and heat up the new cold war. I am especially alarmed at the stream of cold war warrior "experts" dominating the news cycles."
Notable quotes:
"... From Putin's point of view, to assassinate Skripal now seems to have very little motivation. If the Russians have waited eight years to do this, they could have waited until after their World Cup. The Russians have never killed a swapped spy before. ..."
"... Just as diplomats, British and otherwise, are the most ardent upholders of the principle of diplomatic immunity, so security service personnel everywhere are the least likely to wish to destroy a system which can be a key aspect of their own personal security; quite literally spy swaps are their "Get Out of Jail Free" card. You don't undermine that system – probably terminally – without very good reason. ..."
"... It is worth noting that the "wicked" Russians gave Skripal a far lighter jail sentence than an American equivalent would have received. If a member of US Military Intelligence had sold, for cash to the Russians, the names of hundreds of US agents and officers operating abroad, the Americans would at the very least jail the person for life, and I strongly suspect would execute them. Skripal just received a jail sentence of 18 years, which is hard to square with the narrative of implacable vindictiveness against him. If the Russians had wanted to make an example, that was the time. ..."
"... Sadly Pablo Miller's LinkedIn profile has recently been deleted, but it is again widely alleged on the web that it showed him as a consultant for Orbis Intelligence and a consultant to the FCO and – wait for it – with an address in Salisbury. If anyone can recover than Linkedin entry do get in touch, though British Government agencies will have been active in the internet scrubbing. ..."
"... It was of course Christopher Steele and Orbis Intelligence who produced for the Clinton camp the sensationalist dossier on Trump links with Russia – including the story of Trump paying to be urinated on by Russian prostitutes – that is a key part of the "Russiagate" affair gripping the US political classes. The extraordinary thing about this is that the Orbis dossier is obvious nonsense which anybody with a professional background can completely demolish, as I did here . ..."
"... If I was the police, I would look closely at Orbis Intelligence. ..."
"... To return to Israel. Israel has the nerve agents. Israel has Mossad which is extremely skilled at foreign assassinations. Theresa May claimed Russian propensity to assassinate abroad as a specific reason to believe Russia did it. Well Mossad has an even greater propensity to assassinate abroad. And while I am struggling to see a Russian motive for damaging its own international reputation so grieviously, Israel has a clear motivation for damaging the Russian reputation so grieviously. Russian action in Syria has undermined the Israeli position in Syria and Lebanon in a fundamental way, and Israel has every motive for damaging Russia's international position by an attack aiming to leave the blame on Russia. ..."
"... Both the Orbis and Israeli theories are speculations. But they are no more a speculation, and no more a conspiracy theory, than the idea that Vladimir Putin secretly sent agents to Salisbury to attack Skriapin with a secret nerve agent. I can see absolutely no reason to believe that is a more valid speculation than the others at this point. ..."
"... I am alarmed by the security, spying and armaments industries' frenetic efforts to stoke Russophobia and heat up the new cold war. I am especially alarmed at the stream of cold war warrior "experts" dominating the news cycles. ..."
Mar 13, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

The "novochok" group of nerve agents – a very loose term simply for a collection of new nerve agents the Soviet Union were developing fifty years ago – will almost certainly have been analysed and reproduced by Porton Down. That is entirely what Porton Down is there for. It used to make chemical and biological weapons as weapons, and today it still does make them in small quantities in order to research defences and antidotes. After the fall of the Soviet Union Russian chemists made a lot of information available on these nerve agents. And one country which has always manufactured very similar persistent nerve agents is Israel. This Foreign Policy magazine (a very establishment US publication) article on Israel 's chemical and biological weapon capability is very interesting indeed. I will return to Israel later in this article.

Incidentally, novachok is not a specific substance but a class of new nerve agents. Sources agree they were designed to be persistent, and of an order of magnitude stronger than sarin or VX. That is rather hard to square with the fact that thankfully nobody has died and those possibly in contact just have to wash their clothes.

From Putin's point of view, to assassinate Skripal now seems to have very little motivation. If the Russians have waited eight years to do this, they could have waited until after their World Cup. The Russians have never killed a swapped spy before.

Just as diplomats, British and otherwise, are the most ardent upholders of the principle of diplomatic immunity, so security service personnel everywhere are the least likely to wish to destroy a system which can be a key aspect of their own personal security; quite literally spy swaps are their "Get Out of Jail Free" card. You don't undermine that system – probably terminally – without very good reason.

It is worth noting that the "wicked" Russians gave Skripal a far lighter jail sentence than an American equivalent would have received. If a member of US Military Intelligence had sold, for cash to the Russians, the names of hundreds of US agents and officers operating abroad, the Americans would at the very least jail the person for life, and I strongly suspect would execute them. Skripal just received a jail sentence of 18 years, which is hard to square with the narrative of implacable vindictiveness against him. If the Russians had wanted to make an example, that was the time.

It is much more probable that the reason for this assassination attempt refers to something recent or current, than to spying twenty years ago. Were I the British police, I would inquire very closely into Orbis Intelligence.

There is no doubt that Skripal was feeding secrets to MI6 at the time that Christopher Steele was an MI6 officer in Moscow, and at the the time that Pablo Miller, another member of Orbis Intelligence, was also an MI6 officer in Russia and directly recruiting agents. It is widely reported on the web and in US media that it was Miller who first recruited Skripal. My own ex-MI6 sources tell me that is not quite true as Skripal was "walk-in", but that Miller certainly was involved in running Skripal for a while. Sadly Pablo Miller's LinkedIn profile has recently been deleted, but it is again widely alleged on the web that it showed him as a consultant for Orbis Intelligence and a consultant to the FCO and – wait for it – with an address in Salisbury. If anyone can recover than Linkedin entry do get in touch, though British Government agencies will have been active in the internet scrubbing.

It was of course Christopher Steele and Orbis Intelligence who produced for the Clinton camp the sensationalist dossier on Trump links with Russia – including the story of Trump paying to be urinated on by Russian prostitutes – that is a key part of the "Russiagate" affair gripping the US political classes. The extraordinary thing about this is that the Orbis dossier is obvious nonsense which anybody with a professional background can completely demolish, as I did here . Steele's motive was, like Skriapin's in selling his secrets, cash pure and simple. Steele is a charlatan who knocked up a series of allegations that are either wildly improbable, or would need a high level source access he could not possibly get in today's Russia, or both. He told the Democrats what they wish to hear and his audience – who had and still have no motivation to look at it critically – paid him highly for it.

I do not know for certain that Pablo Miller helped knock together the Steele dossier on Trump, but it seems very probable given he also served for MI6 in Russia and was working for Orbis. And it seems to me even more probable that Sergei Skripal contributed to the Orbis Intelligence dossier on Trump. Steele and Miller cannot go into Russia and run sources any more, and never would have had access as good as their dossier claims, even in their MI6 days. The dossier was knocked up for huge wodges of cash from whatever they could cobble together. Who better to lend a little corroborative verisimilitude in these circumstances than their old source Skripal?

Skripal was at hand in the UK, and allegedly even close to Miller in Salisbury. He could add in the proper acronym for a Russian committee here or the name of a Russian official there, to make it seem like Steele was providing hard intelligence. Indeed, Skripal's outdated knowledge might explain some of the dossier's more glaring errors.

But the problem with double agents like Skripal, who give intelligence for money, is that they can easily become triple agents and you never know when a better offer is going to come along. When Steele produced his dodgy dossier, he had no idea it would ever become so prominent and subject to so much scrutiny. Steele is fortunate in that the US Establishment is strongly motivated not to scrutinise his work closely as their one aim is to "get" Trump. But with the stakes very high, having a very loose cannon as one of the dossier's authors might be most inconvenient both for Orbis and for the Clinton camp.

If I was the police, I would look closely at Orbis Intelligence.

To return to Israel. Israel has the nerve agents. Israel has Mossad which is extremely skilled at foreign assassinations. Theresa May claimed Russian propensity to assassinate abroad as a specific reason to believe Russia did it. Well Mossad has an even greater propensity to assassinate abroad. And while I am struggling to see a Russian motive for damaging its own international reputation so grieviously, Israel has a clear motivation for damaging the Russian reputation so grieviously. Russian action in Syria has undermined the Israeli position in Syria and Lebanon in a fundamental way, and Israel has every motive for damaging Russia's international position by an attack aiming to leave the blame on Russia.

Both the Orbis and Israeli theories are speculations. But they are no more a speculation, and no more a conspiracy theory, than the idea that Vladimir Putin secretly sent agents to Salisbury to attack Skriapin with a secret nerve agent. I can see absolutely no reason to believe that is a more valid speculation than the others at this point.

I am alarmed by the security, spying and armaments industries' frenetic efforts to stoke Russophobia and heat up the new cold war. I am especially alarmed at the stream of cold war warrior "experts" dominating the news cycles. I write as someone who believes that agents of the Russian state did assassinate Litvinenko, and that the Russian security services carried out at least some of the apartment bombings that provided the pretext for the brutal assault on Chechnya. I believe the Russian occupation of Crimea and parts of Georgia is illegal. On the other hand, in Syria Russia has saved the Middle East from domination by a new wave of US and Saudi sponsored extreme jihadists.

The naive view of the world as "goodies" and "baddies", with our own ruling class as the good guys, is for the birds. I witnessed personally in Uzbekistan the willingness of the UK and US security services to accept and validate intelligence they knew to be false in order to pursue their policy objectives. We should be extremely sceptical of their current anti-Russian narrative. There are many possible suspects in this attack.

[Mar 13, 2018] 'Say something' May 'under incredible pressure' from colleagues to blame Russia in ex-spy poisoning -- RT UK News

Notable quotes:
"... "seem to have forgotten about that very quickly and, rather than being cautious, there's a drive to blame Russia immediately." ..."
"... "outright accusatory statements" made mid-way though the investigation are "part of the anti-Russia hype that continues in the West." ..."
"... "We need to see the evidence. And the people of both Russia and the United States, and the world, are savvy enough to see the evidence and be able to make their own judgement. We haven't seen that evidence," ..."
"... "Why would Russia leave a signature like that, it's similar to some of the hacking that has been going on leaving Cyrillic [script] in the hacking codes. If this all was orchestrated by the Russian government, why would they be leaving such a trail?" ..."
"... "defies logic and common sense." ..."
"... "what will happen will be sanctions, some diplomatic expulsions." ..."
"... One possible response floated by MPs was a boycott of the World Cup in Russia by the England national football team. While the topic was not raised personally by May, if it turns out to be the case, such a decision will go down in history as, arguably, the most unpopular one ever taken by an incumbent PM, "apart from Brexit delay," ..."
Mar 13, 2018 | www.rt.com

... ... ... 'A history of politicized intel'

It's hard to believe that the investigation that is being conducted by the UK authorities is impartial, what with the surrounding media frenzy and the vast record of highly politicized intelligence coming from the authorities, Dr Tara McCormack, lecturer in International Politics at the University of Leicester, told RT.

Read more 'Russia as close to a rogue state as any': Wildest MP claims from Skripal session in UK parliament

McCormack noted that the media and the lawmakers are reluctant to reflect on these mistakes. They "seem to have forgotten about that very quickly and, rather than being cautious, there's a drive to blame Russia immediately."

Former Pentagon official Michael Maloof echoed the point, saying that the "outright accusatory statements" made mid-way though the investigation are "part of the anti-Russia hype that continues in the West." Bringing up how the UK government sided with the US in the false claim that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, he said it's hard to take any such assertions at face value.

"We need to see the evidence. And the people of both Russia and the United States, and the world, are savvy enough to see the evidence and be able to make their own judgement. We haven't seen that evidence," Maloof said.

Timed to Russia's election

The timing of the attack, on the verge of Russia's presidential election and its circumstances, notably the use of a Soviet nerve agent, begs the question: "Why would Russia leave a signature like that, it's similar to some of the hacking that has been going on leaving Cyrillic [script] in the hacking codes. If this all was orchestrated by the Russian government, why would they be leaving such a trail?" Maloof asked, pointing out that it "defies logic and common sense."

With MPs calling Russia names and touting a host of potential sanctions, NATO retaliation and a ban on RT broadcasting, it's still up to the UK government to decide what measures to take, Dr McCormack noted. Asserting that she doesn't believe May will back down from her initial allegations against Russia, she theorized that "what will happen will be sanctions, some diplomatic expulsions."

One possible response floated by MPs was a boycott of the World Cup in Russia by the England national football team. While the topic was not raised personally by May, if it turns out to be the case, such a decision will go down in history as, arguably, the most unpopular one ever taken by an incumbent PM, "apart from Brexit delay," Jon Gaunt said.

[Mar 13, 2018] Theresa May Makes A 45 Minutes Claim

Why would Putin be interested in a has-been spy he could have killed long ago? On the other hand, might certain people connected with the Trump dossier be keen to silence sources, now that Sessions is investigating the FISA warrants and at the same time, implicate Russia?
Notable quotes:
"... as usual - the west under the leadership of the usa /uk - need no proof... assertions and innuendo is all that is needed! ..."
"... Interesting they allowed the possibility that the gas, if made in Russia, could have been stolen. Is that because they thought the sheeple might actually wonder about the anthrax released after 9/11, which came from a US facility, and which nobody ever accused the government of unleashing? ..."
"... In testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee (on 3 November, 2017), it was stated that Daniel Jones (a member of Fusion GPS), had described Fusion as a "shadow media organization helping the government," and was funded by a "group of Silicon Valley billionaires and George Soros." ..."
"... Steele has refused to comment about which projects he involved Miller but given Miller's Russian contacts, it is not credible that the Trump dossier was not one of them – in which case it is also not credible that Skripal was also not involved. ..."
"... Why would Putin be interested in a has-been spy he could have killed long ago? On the other hand, might certain people connected with the Trump dossier be keen to silence sources, now that Sessions is investigating the FISA warrants and at the same time, implicate Russia? ..."
"... Edit: The PM has said that the nerve agent was 'Novichok' which is 5 to 8 times more potent than VX... and the authorities waited 5 days to send the army in and over a week to tell people to wash their clothes and other items? ..."
Mar 13, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
Theresa May claimed ( saved tweet ) in Parliament that:

May went on to claim that:

Cont. reading: Theresa May Makes A "45 Minutes" Claim

james , Mar 12, 2018 3:48:25 PM | 1

thanks b...

as usual - the west under the leadership of the usa /uk - need no proof... assertions and innuendo is all that is needed!

i swear they are gearing up for something with russia, whether it be war in syria, thanks that freak haleys words from earlier today, or this, or something... it is non stop..

simon , Mar 12, 2018 4:30:09 PM | 7
What is this "known" Russian never agent? Who else manufactures it? Does UK (or could it as a "special project")? Particularly, in the lab right down the street?

Interesting they allowed the possibility that the gas, if made in Russia, could have been stolen. Is that because they thought the sheeple might actually wonder about the anthrax released after 9/11, which came from a US facility, and which nobody ever accused the government of unleashing?

EDIT: Apparently May is alleging the chemical involved is a novichok, which was supposedly produced by the USSR from the 1970s to the 1990s. Assuming all this is true, I found the following interesting excerpt from Wikipedia in terms of who may have access to the chemical (aside from the Russian state and/or ((Russian)) mafia):

One of the key manufacturing sites was the Soviet State Scientific Research Institute for Organic Chemistry and Technology (GosNIIOKhT) in Nukus, Uzbekistan. ... Since its independence in 1991, Uzbekistan has been working with the government of the United States to dismantle and decontaminate the sites where the Novichok agents and other chemical weapons were tested and developed.

Funny, didn't see anything in May's speech about that.

In reply to Fucking fascist UK with by Perimetr
Vote up!

paul , Mar 12, 2018 4:33:31 PM | 8
In 1995, Sergey Skripal was recruited by an MI6 undercover agent, Pablo Miller, who at the time was posing as Antonio Alvarez de Hidalgo and working at the British Embassy in Tallinn, Estonia.

Pablo Miller was exposed in the early 2000s, after multiple Russians were arrested for spying and fingered Miller as their recruiter. One of Miller's other recruits was Alexander Litvinenko. [Note: Polonium was also used to murder Arafat – the source is said to have been Israel's Dimona reactor.]

Miller and Skripal met frequently: Skripal (whose codename was "Forthwith") passed the entire Russian military intelligence telephone handbook to Miller, containing details of more than 300 of his colleagues in Russian intelligence. In 2006 Skripal was jailed.

After the spy swap in 2010, Skripal decided to resettle in Salisbury, where Pablo Miller also lived. In 2015 Miller retired and received an OBE for services to Her Majesty's Government. No doubt Miller was Skripal's minder and was probably the reason Skripal had gone to Salisbury.

According to his LinkedIn entry (deleted a few days ago), Miller worked as a consultant for Christopher Steele – Miller is the consultant whose name was withheld by the Telegraph. Steele's Orbis Business Intelligence was hired by Fusion GPS in 2016 to research Trump.

In testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee (on 3 November, 2017), it was stated that Daniel Jones (a member of Fusion GPS), had described Fusion as a "shadow media organization helping the government," and was funded by a "group of Silicon Valley billionaires and George Soros."

Between 26 November, 2017 and 10 January, 2018 George Soros (who is a prolific tweeter) was silent. Not a single tweet. Why, where was he?

Steele has refused to comment about which projects he involved Miller but given Miller's Russian contacts, it is not credible that the Trump dossier was not one of them – in which case it is also not credible that Skripal was also not involved.

Join the dots.... cui bono? Why would Putin be interested in a has-been spy he could have killed long ago? On the other hand, might certain people connected with the Trump dossier be keen to silence sources, now that Sessions is investigating the FISA warrants and at the same time, implicate Russia?

Edit: The PM has said that the nerve agent was 'Novichok' which is 5 to 8 times more potent than VX... and the authorities waited 5 days to send the army in and over a week to tell people to wash their clothes and other items?

In reply to May: Umm, our investigations by Shitonya Serfs

[Mar 13, 2018] May Charges Russia in Ex-Spy's Poisoning, Warns of U.K. Reprisal

Mar 13, 2018 | www.bloomberg.com

"Either this was a direct act by the Russian State against our country, or the Russian government lost control of this potentially catastrophically damaging nerve agent and allowed it to get into the hands of others," May told lawmakers in London on Monday.

Russia wasted little time in dismissing May's assessment. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova called her statement a " circus act ." The onus is on the U.K. to act decisively this time given criticism it responded weakly to the 2006 murder of Russian ex-spy Alexander Litvinenko.

[Mar 13, 2018] Poisoning of Russian Ex-Spy "Is Almost Beyond Comprehension," Tillerson Says by GARDINER HARRIS

Friends in need...
Notable quotes:
"... Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson on Monday called the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain "an egregious act" and added, "It appears that it clearly came from Russia." ..."
"... The statement, made in an interview with reporters at the end of a five-nation tour of Africa, was the clearest statement yet from the Trump administration, after several days of equivocation in which American officials declined to explicitly blame Russia for the March 4 attack. ..."
Mar 12, 2018 | www.nytimes.com

Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson on Monday called the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain "an egregious act" and added, "It appears that it clearly came from Russia."

The statement, made in an interview with reporters at the end of a five-nation tour of Africa, was the clearest statement yet from the Trump administration, after several days of equivocation in which American officials declined to explicitly blame Russia for the March 4 attack.

"I've become extremely concerned about Russia," Mr. Tillerson said in the interview. "We spent most of last year investing a lot into attempts to work together, to solve problems, to address differences. And quite frankly, after a year, we didn't get very far. Instead what we've seen is a pivot on their part to be more aggressive."

He added: "And this is very, very concerning to me and others, that there seems to be a certain unleashing of activity that we don't fully understand what the objective behind that is. And if in fact this attack in the U.K. is the work of the Russian government, this is a pretty serious action."

[Mar 13, 2018] The transition of Pompeo from CIA to the State Department is a logical step as both are intelligence agencies serving global neoliberal empire, not the USA as a country

Looks like another Cold War warrior...
Notable quotes:
"... He has cultivated ties with Charles and David Koch, the billionaire industrialists who are patrons of conservative causes. They invested in Thayer Aerospace, a company Pompeo started with friends from West Point in 1998. He turned to Koch Industries, the Wichita-based conglomerate which has holdings in oil and other sectors, to help bankroll his 2010 congressional race. Pompeo was criticized by liberals for hiring a Koch Industries lawyer as his chief of staff and for introducing legislation that would benefit Koch interests. ..."
"... Pompeo has hawkish views on a range of policy issues, including torture, surveillance and the National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden. ..."
Mar 13, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

Pompeo graduated from both the United States Military Academy at West Point and Harvard and served three terms as a representative for Kansas's fourth district. As a member of the House select committee on intelligence, he was an aggressive critic of US foreign policy under the Obama administration, particularly regarding the nuclear deal with Iran.

... ... ...

He has cultivated ties with Charles and David Koch, the billionaire industrialists who are patrons of conservative causes. They invested in Thayer Aerospace, a company Pompeo started with friends from West Point in 1998. He turned to Koch Industries, the Wichita-based conglomerate which has holdings in oil and other sectors, to help bankroll his 2010 congressional race. Pompeo was criticized by liberals for hiring a Koch Industries lawyer as his chief of staff and for introducing legislation that would benefit Koch interests.

Pompeo has hawkish views on a range of policy issues, including torture, surveillance and the National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden.

... ... ...

He has, however, diverged from Trump on Russia. In his confirmation hearing, he appeared to share with CIA staff an adversarial view of Russia and Vladimir Putin.

The Senate approved his nomination 66-32. The Democratic minority leader, Chuck Schumer, who voted to confirm Pompeo, said in a statement on Tuesday: "If he's confirmed [as secretary of state] we hope that Mr Pompeo will turn over a new leaf and will start toughening up our policies towards Russia and Putin."

... ... ...

[Mar 13, 2018] China replaced the USA in russianenergy market

Mar 13, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

likklemore | Mar 13, 2018 7:48:34 PM | 69

@ Ian 64.

Sanctions on Russia are being ignored. China is investing its US Trillions. Under US imposed sanctions, ExxonMobil withdrew and China said "Thank You" and took the partnership.

Chinese state-controlled Huarong Asset Management has bought a 36.2 percent stake in the unit of CEFC China Energy through which CEFC is acquiring a $9.1 billion stake in Russian oil giant Rosneft.

According to CEFC filings seen by Reuters, Huarong has bought the stake in CEFC in two tranches, one in December and one in February. Huarong is controlled by China's Ministry of Finance.

In September, CEFC Energy announced plans to acquire 14.16 percent of Rosneft shares from Glencore and the Qatar Investment Authority (QIA).

"The final structure of Rosneft's shareholders has been formed," Rosneft CEO Igor Sechin told Rossiya 24 television.

As part of a long-term agreement, Rosneft and CEFC Energy inked a deal on crude oil deliveries in 2017. According to the agreement, the Russian oil major will supply CEFC with 60.8 million tons of oil annually until 2023.

The agreement covers the development of exploration and production projects in Siberia. The two companies plan to cooperate in refining, petrochemicals and crude trading.

https://www.rt.com/business/421021-china-cefc-rosneft-purchase/

Betcha Rex is so so sorry he went to D.C.

[Mar 13, 2018] The current ruling junta in the US absolutely does not have the interests of the American people or the nation at large in mind

Mar 13, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

SlapHappy | Mar 13, 2018 1:46:05 PM | 18

As if it needs saying, the current ruling junta in the US absolutely does not have the interests of the American people or the nation at large in mind, they're answering to a different set of masters at this point.

Until we can purge the fifth column that's infested the halls of power in this country and obviously in the UK and much of Europe - at least the EU - we'll continue to fight wars for Zionism and all that will be left of the US and Russia when this is over will be bombed-out nuclear wastelands, which is exactly what the Zionists want to have happen.

They did it to Germany and Russia in WWII, and they're going to do it to the US, Russia, and possibly China in WWIII, which is spooling up as we dissect the latest maniacal machinations of the war cabal.

[Mar 13, 2018] Russia's Stand-Off Capability The 800 Pound Gorilla in Syria by Andrei Martyanov

Notable quotes:
"... You miss the more immediate goal of the Anglozionist Empire, namely the prevention of the Shia Crescent becoming a stable and calm area, protected and strengthened by well-trained, battle-hardened, united forces, including of course the SAA, Iran, the Iraqi militias, and Hezzbollah. ..."
"... For although as you mentioned the Zionist narcissistic great evil and its Yinon Plan to destabilize the entire Middle East / North Africa has long been a goal, we see once again that reality presents them having bitten off more than they could chew ..."
"... They doubled down, as psychopathic narcissists are prone to do, in Syria, and the resulting action by a stronger and more aggressive Russia has shone the light on the folly of their ways ..."
"... But to do so we must recognise that we are moving to the realms of wider politics rather than its subset, war. At the level we are talking about, the decisions are always political rather than military, even when they are taken by military men in an overtly military regime. ..."
"... The context is what is discussed by Martyanov above – the US regime, presumably listening to some of the less wise amongst its senior military men and the less honestly motivated amongst its influential political and media figures, decides to try to defeat and destroy the Russian forces in Syria whilst counting on what they believe is the US's general escalation superiority to constrain Russian responses and keep the open conflict contained to the region. ..."
"... After the initial probably devastating US attack on Russian forces in Syria, involving the overloading and suppression by various means including direct SEAD attacks of the limited air defences in theatre, the Russians respond with large standoff attacks that effectively destroy US bases and/or carriers used in the attack or in the vicinity. ..."
"... Given the likely involvement of the forces and bases of regional allies (though who really knows how enthusiastic Turkey would really be, these days), it seems likely the attack on Russian forces in Syria could still be prosecuted to completion with their effective destruction, and meaningful Russia reinforcements interdicted successfully, but that would now seem rather a sideshow. ..."
"... In Pearl Harbor the Japanese executed a "Bush Doctrine" preventive attack on US military forces intended to forestall what they probably correctly saw as an existential threat from a rival. ..."
"... The real lesson of all this, of course, is that the US regime would have to be profoundly stupid or desperate to risk attacking Russian forces in Syria. Sadly that's not as reassuring as it ought to be. ..."
"... If Russia can stabilize the region on the helm of a coalition of Iran-Iraq-semiTurkey (bc. you never know what the turk will do) it would achieve a massive win in the trade war against the petrodollar (Meanwhile China is making moves in Africa to secure the pipelines) ..."
"... Rather than a direct attack on Russian forces, it is more probable that the US will resort to sneaky backstabbings, with deniability potential. Direct attacks on the Syrian army could escalate, on the other hand. ..."
"... As per neocons–these are exact people who set foreign policies in D.C. Their military incompetence is appalling (which is expected from people with their backgrounds) and as such they are extremely dangerous. ..."
"... For people who think that the history of Peloponnesian War (in their big honcho Kagan's version) has any relevance to the age of GPS/GLONASS and Combat Informational Control Systems with Stand-off weapons–these people should be looked at very seriously by psychiatrist. ..."
"... The neocons are a problem. I think they've largely been kept in check by calmer heads in the military, which has to do the fighting and occasional dying in the fights the neocons want to pick, which in my opinion is why the neocons have gone about achieving their aims using the Company and its assets. ..."
"... The Zionist neocons who control the U.S. are used to invading and destroying small countries with no regard for international law and killing millions of civilians including men , women and children, this is what the Zionist neocons do or rather this is what they make the American military do. ..."
"... The Zionist warmongers are going to destroy America and in case of war with Russia both nations will be destroyed and fools like col. ralph peters are typical of the toy officer contingent that is harbored in the military, and who are puppets of Israel. ..."
"... My top of the envelope estimate is that Russia spends its military budget about five times more efficiently than US, and about three times more efficiently than the EU/NATO allies of US. China is very similar, possibly even slightly more efficient than Russia. BTW, this efficiency is only partly due to lower labor costs, but this is a discussion which I had with Andrei before. ..."
"... Who suffers? People who end up being boots on the ground. People who pay taxes. People who want a strong, but noble and inspiring, America. People who want to live and let others live. ..."
"... In case you haven't noticed the author isn't talking about Russia dictating the defense of Iran but about Iran objectively being in the same boat as far as Western aggression is concerned. The animosity towards Iran in the USA is just as great as towards Russia – the difference is Russia is capable of defending itself, vodka bottle in hand, which is not at all certain about Iran. ..."
"... The bloodthirsty neocons are dangerous fools. At least the Japanese Imperial Forces wore uniforms and flew their flag when attacking, even if a sneak attack. Neocons are silent killers of their host. ..."
Mar 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

Frankie P , September 28, 2017 at 8:49 am GMT

@peterAUS

You miss the more immediate goal of the Anglozionist Empire, namely the prevention of the Shia Crescent becoming a stable and calm area, protected and strengthened by well-trained, battle-hardened, united forces, including of course the SAA, Iran, the Iraqi militias, and Hezzbollah.

For although as you mentioned the Zionist narcissistic great evil and its Yinon Plan to destabilize the entire Middle East / North Africa has long been a goal, we see once again that reality presents them having bitten off more than they could chew, and actions like the Iraq War, a neocon feast of overconfidence and bluster, ended up strengthening the true resistance, the true danger to their regional hegemonic plans.

They doubled down, as psychopathic narcissists are prone to do, in Syria, and the resulting action by a stronger and more aggressive Russia has shone the light on the folly of their ways.

The resistance has now become The Resistance, and with America's continuing belligerence pushing Russia and China ever closer, we will soon be calling it THE RESISTANCE.

Frankie P

Randal , September 28, 2017 at 9:41 am GMT

So, what do you think, what could be the next steps in that play?

OK let's look at it a bit closer. But to do so we must recognise that we are moving to the realms of wider politics rather than its subset, war. At the level we are talking about, the decisions are always political rather than military, even when they are taken by military men in an overtly military regime.

The context is what is discussed by Martyanov above – the US regime, presumably listening to some of the less wise amongst its senior military men and the less honestly motivated amongst its influential political and media figures, decides to try to defeat and destroy the Russian forces in Syria whilst counting on what they believe is the US's general escalation superiority to constrain Russian responses and keep the open conflict contained to the region.

After the initial probably devastating US attack on Russian forces in Syria, involving the overloading and suppression by various means including direct SEAD attacks of the limited air defences in theatre, the Russians respond with large standoff attacks that effectively destroy US bases and/or carriers used in the attack or in the vicinity.

They would not have enough to keep all US and allied ships and bases from which attacks could be launched in Syria out of action, but they could presumably render several substantial bases unusable for significant periods and sink a number of ships including carriers, which would have to operate from more distant locations, rendering operations more costly and less effective.

What does the US do next? Militarily it has to retaliate, but it can choose how far to escalate in doing so. The problem is that substantive retaliation presumably requires attacks on Russian bases inside Russia, which involves very high risks of uncontrolled escalation to a strategic nuclear exchange. Do they do that? If they launch limited attacks inside Russia (eg an attack on a base used to launch the strategic bombers, say), Russia has the strategic capability to carry out direct tit for tat responses.

Given the likely involvement of the forces and bases of regional allies (though who really knows how enthusiastic Turkey would really be, these days), it seems likely the attack on Russian forces in Syria could still be prosecuted to completion with their effective destruction, and meaningful Russia reinforcements interdicted successfully, but that would now seem rather a sideshow.

And meanwhile Iraqi and Iranian involvement would be likely, and not to the advantage of the US's interests on the ground. Russian ships in the region and perhaps elsewhere could (certainly would in the case of ships in theatre) be engaged in full scale air/sea battles likely resulting in their fairly prompt destruction, but not without significant ongoing losses to US naval forces.

While all this is going on, what is the political response that will drive the long term outcome? Imo that depends on the political context – is this Pearl Harbor or the Beirut bombings for the US regime? In Pearl Harbor the Japanese executed a "Bush Doctrine" preventive attack on US military forces intended to forestall what they probably correctly saw as an existential threat from a rival.

The result was that although they did considerable military damage all they ultimately achieved was to provide the political context in which the US regime could do what it had not previously been capable of doing, namely to wage a total war to defeat and occupy its Pacific rival. In Beirut the US was interfering in a Lebanese conflict under the transparently false pretext of "peacekeeping", and their enemies struck back at them by carrying out a large suicide bombing attack on their military base in theatre. The result was not the creation of a political motivation for invasion and occupation, but rather the discrediting of the intervention policy and the withdrawal of US military forces from Lebanon.

In the context under discussion, would the loss of US bases and/or carriers, with massive loss of life and arguably even greater loss of prestige (and, it should be remembered, substantial loss of actual military intervention capability in theatre, even if that could be rebuilt and replaced over time), result in an American political determination to engage in a long, massive military confrontation to defeat Russia strategically (a WW2 Japan-style open war of invasion and occupation is ruled out by the modern nuclear peace), and would the US have the necessary global support in waging such a campaign to give it any chance of succeeding?

Or would it result in a backlash, both domestic and international, against the US regime itself for attacking Russian forces in Syria and essentially provoking the Russian response?

Much depends on propaganda – does the US regime and its various collaborating elites still have sufficient control of the global and domestic media environment to impose the necessary narrative of a dastardly Russian act of aggression (yes, incredibly enough that is how they try to would portray it – the Americans have demonstrated over the years a shocking degree of hypocrisy when it comes to viewing themselves as the victims in cases of retaliation against them for the actions of their own government and military)? But much also would depend upon the particular circumstances in which the initial American attacks took place and how they were justified (supposed chemical attacks, WMD, responses to provocations, etc).

In the end, all the dithering in Washington over the past six years about how far to go in Syria has been in large part about who gets the blame if things go wrong.

So would the result be some kind of strategic defeat for Russia (as for Japan in WW2), or political turmoil in the US resulting in a loss of stomach for further interference (as in Lebanon)? If the former, then you have to explain how such a defeat is realistically going to occur given the reality of the strategic nuclear deterrent Russia has against any massive military attack, and its very significant defensive conventional capabilities, as well as the reality that even if the US's European and Pacific satellites might be willing to go along in such a venture (questionable in some cases, depending on the context), China and most of Asia, and much of Africa and South America, certainly would not, and these areas weigh much more heavily in the global economic balance than they did a few decades ago.

The real lesson of all this, of course, is that the US regime would have to be profoundly stupid or desperate to risk attacking Russian forces in Syria. Sadly that's not as reassuring as it ought to be.

bb. , September 28, 2017 at 12:03 pm GMT
@peterAUS

Russia can not make that chaos go away. Or if it can, well .fine. I just don't see it.

TBH i don't realistically see it either, but if you think about it, it's kind of a win win situation for them anyways. My thinking goes like this (correct me pls if I am off)

If Russia can stabilize the region on the helm of a coalition of Iran-Iraq-semiTurkey (bc. you never know what the turk will do) it would achieve a massive win in the trade war against the petrodollar (Meanwhile China is making moves in Africa to secure the pipelines)

If Russia fails to stabilize the region, it would mean rising oil prices, which again, is free money for them in the medium term.

Captain Nemo , September 28, 2017 at 12:29 pm GMT
Rather than a direct attack on Russian forces, it is more probable that the US will resort to sneaky backstabbings, with deniability potential. Direct attacks on the Syrian army could escalate, on the other hand.
Andrei Martyanov , Website September 28, 2017 at 12:48 pm GMT
@The Alarmist

but I doubt anyone who is anyone, except for a few of the dumbest neocons, takes anything he says seriously.

Here is the problem, Peters is not alone, in fact, a lot of his hysteria is echoed by such people as former SACEUR Phil Breedlove, today it is Dunford etc.

Another matter, because those are still uniformed (or were recently) it is really bad idea to behave as psychopaths as Peters but all of them read from the same script, just the method of delivery differs, slightly at that.

As per neocons–these are exact people who set foreign policies in D.C. Their military incompetence is appalling (which is expected from people with their backgrounds) and as such they are extremely dangerous. So I would dispute this thesis of yours. Militarily all neocons are dumb. For people who think that the history of Peloponnesian War (in their big honcho Kagan's version) has any relevance to the age of GPS/GLONASS and Combat Informational Control Systems with Stand-off weapons–these people should be looked at very seriously by psychiatrist.

for the Rah-Rah crowd

So, we agree–it is 99% of American military, political and, so called, intellectual elite, right?

Randal , September 28, 2017 at 12:57 pm GMT
@Ron Unz

At the time, such a high-tech attack on ISIS positions seemed rather cost-ineffective to me, but presumably a major purpose was to dissuade America (and Israel) from considering any future attack on what was a rather small and isolated Russian expeditionary force.

Clearly it made no sense in a tactical military sense to use cruise missiles when straightforward air attack was available, and the use of the Kalibrs in October 2015 was certainly motivated as a demonstration of capability. To what degree it was a warning to potential enemies (the US regime, Israel and the Gulf states, obviously, but also remember at the time still Turkey, though that brief hostility seems to have been managed out of existence, helped by the US turning to the Kurds as their proxies in Syria, since then), as opposed to a marketing pitch ( the Russians have been selling export versions of these missiles for many years ) is open to question – probably both.

The issue is not so much the possession of cruise missiles – the Soviets had nuclear armed Tomahawk equivalents back in the 1980s, and it's always been assumed that those (the air and sea launched ones, anyway) were repurposed as conventionally armed missiles. It's having them, along with deployable launchers, in numbers and proving that they work reliably that was the issue. There's an understandable post-Soviet tendency in the US sphere to discount Russian capabilities in terms of high tech weapons. And in order to use cruise missiles in the way Martyanov describes here – basically as a base-denial weapon against a peer rival – you need plenty of them. To hit a US base and render it unusable with conventionally armed weapons, you have to hit it accurately and you have to hit it multiple times, evading or overloading the defences and counter-measures. To take out a carrier, you have to locate the target first, and then beat the counter-measures to hit it at least once and preferably several times, though one hit could be a mission kill. And in the case of the land base, you have to be able to do it again a few days later, and keep hitting it.

So the Russians, with their repeated uses of cruise missiles and the introduction of more modern and potentially significantly more capable missiles that Martyanov refers to, have been building a credible case that the US can no longer count on escalation superiority in Syria to protect them.

Sergey Krieger , September 28, 2017 at 1:58 pm GMT
Now I see how shooting from Iranian airspace increases salvo. missiles with shorter range can be used which could not have been used from Russian airspace. Now the logic behind longer range missiles is also clear to avoid being dependent on allies too. Those are not reliable. One can only say in retrospective that were it not for what happened in 90s soviet/ Russian stand off capabilities would be absolutely crushing strong long time ago. Now, combined with EW capabilities, air defences and fast moving hard hitting land forces all this United by computerized control it must be something.
The Alarmist , September 28, 2017 at 2:06 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

There are reasons why Breedlove was pushed out. I've been out of the "war" for a couple decades, so my confidence that there are saner heads where it counts might be misplaced.

I wouldn't say 99%, but the number is non-trivial, and that is alarming. Peters is aimed at the folks who buy the medicines and other crap hawked on Fox. It helps sell his fiction to people who used to read Tom Clancy but now have to take a step down. If he were taken seriously, he'd be doing more appearances on the Sunday shows.

Stoltenberg's militancy is distressing, but I again hope his masters have him on a short leash, meaning he will bark but he won't bite.

The neocons are a problem. I think they've largely been kept in check by calmer heads in the military, which has to do the fighting and occasional dying in the fights the neocons want to pick, which in my opinion is why the neocons have gone about achieving their aims using the Company and its assets.

DoD has undoubtedly seen and assessed the standoff capability of the Russians, which is why their involvement has been somewhat muted, but yeah, there are some rabid types down the chain who are itching to try their toys on the only real adversaries we have in the world, and given the independence we often give field commanders, they can get us in trouble.

Thorfinnsson , September 28, 2017 at 2:10 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

Pardon the pun, but converting anti-ship missiles into land attack missiles doesn't sound like rocket science.

Even if the Soviet Union didn't have advanced land-attack cruise missiles in the 80s, it should still have been obvious to anyone that their anti-ship missiles could be developed into land attack missiles.

We're really just talking about a different guidance package, and depending on the sensors involved that can be as simple as a software change. GLONASS began to enter service in 1982, and the first test of a satellite guided bomb was conducted in 1993. Any idiot should've been able to put two and two together here, and at least some Western writers have been warning about increasingly sophisticated Russian weapons for more than a decade.

Whether or not anti-ship missiles make surface warships obsolete I do not know. My hunch is certainly yes (and the future obsolescence of surface warships was predicted already before the war), but this is one of those things we won't truly know until we see it done.

For that matter I'm not sure that hypersonic missiles are game changers for naval warfare presumably one could simply saturate any naval task force with cheaper subsonic missiles and overwhelm defenses. If none of the of the ships in the task force have low frequency radars, stealth aircraft could drop laser guided bombs right down the blind stack directly on top of warships. A 2,000 pound high explosive bomb would sink more or less any warship afloat today. The Australian theorist Carlo Kopp proposed this for the F-22 as part of his pet cause to get his country to acquire F-22s.

It has long struck me as idiotic that modern surface warships are largely unarmored, and I also find it curious how few CIWS Western warships have compared to Russian ones.

DESERT FOX , September 28, 2017 at 2:12 pm GMT
The Zionist neocons who control the U.S. are used to invading and destroying small countries with no regard for international law and killing millions of civilians including men , women and children, this is what the Zionist neocons do or rather this is what they make the American military do.

America is run by a Zionist crime cabal that operates much as Hitler and the Nazis did with no regard for life or limb, ie a rogue nation that creates terror groups such as ISIS and AL CIADA that it uses to wreck countries and pretends to fight this self created terror.

The Zionist warmongers are going to destroy America and in case of war with Russia both nations will be destroyed and fools like col. ralph peters are typical of the toy officer contingent that is harbored in the military, and who are puppets of Israel.

The real GORILLA is the Zionists and Israel who have driven American foreign policy for decades and who are going to destroy America as just as a parasite destroys its host so shall Zionist Israel destroy America.

GOD BLESS RUSSIA AND SYRIA

Kiza , September 28, 2017 at 2:20 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

The existence of advanced military technology in Russia (or, really, anywhere outside of America) does appear to surprise American civilian leaders however, few of whom have any military expertise these days.

Two separate illusions are to blame for not understanding the foreign, or particularly Russian military capability:

1) the US population in general has been brainwashed that US is the technologically the most advanced country in the World; this may be true in many areas but it is far from being true in all areas, and

2) the US population and its leaders believe that military superiority, especially the one based on technology, is proportional to the budget, which is totally non-sensual; it may be true within US, although the mergers of the MIC companies have reduced the competition to only a few, but it definitely does not apply even to the comparison with the efficiency of spending military funds even by Western allies of US, let alone to Russia and China.

My top of the envelope estimate is that Russia spends its military budget about five times more efficiently than US, and about three times more efficiently than the EU/NATO allies of US. China is very similar, possibly even slightly more efficient than Russia. BTW, this efficiency is only partly due to lower labor costs, but this is a discussion which I had with Andrei before.

SimplePseudonymicHandle , September 28, 2017 at 3:23 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

And hopefully will not be done in the future–let's keep our fingers crossed.

An admirable sentiment, or outcome of rational, moral principle. Maybe the wisest statement in this whole OP + comment thread. If grown-ups are in charge in Russia, China and then U.S., then it is the case for all three that:

1. Their foreign and military policies are intended to advance, sometimes forcefully, their national interests
2. Their military, forceful, national interest is defined as being sufficiently powerful to deter one another from the use of force specifically with the intention of preventing an outcome from ever happening where one or the other is in open conflict
3. Because, open conflict with one or another is an outcome that's wholly incompatible with #1

Sooooooo many words people toss about finding n-more ways to peal the onion of US/Russia/China power, but really just two things that matter:

1. The US is always paying too much for its military, regardless of what it gets for what it paid
2. The most worrisome thing on the world stage is a US leader or person in the US decision-making chain of command, losing his cool , and acting rashly, out of irrational fear that US dominance is threatened or the infantile possession of a belief that US dominance means dominance over near-peer partnersaries

In any case – if the US blanketed Russian military positions in Syria:

A. Definite outcome – somewhere on the planet Russia would face-savingly even the score by sinking (or otherwise destroying) a carrier yes they are difficult to sink but a Syria debacle would create a will for a partnersary with ways
B. Unclear outcome – whether it would stop there

Because of B, this must never happen. Let's hope to God our leaders understand that.

Ram , September 28, 2017 at 4:08 pm GMT
Russia in effect has far more valuable very vulnerable targets in the area than the US does.
utu , September 28, 2017 at 5:27 pm GMT
It all comes down to the nuclear deterrence which mask the actual level of imbalance in conventional weapons between Russia and the US. Neither Russia nor the US may demonstrate conventional weapons advantage in an actual exchange to prevent the opponent from being forced to resorting to the use of nuclear weapons. Thus the Saving Face Exit Option (SFEO) will be always left by the stronger one for the weaker one. This means that we will not find out about the actual conventional strike and counter strike capabilities. It will be left to speculations, phantasies, disinformation and propaganda.
Avery , September 28, 2017 at 6:03 pm GMT
@Anon

{ but that's only because Russia has not been seriously opposed.}

Who would seriously oppose Russia? How?

I think it was either [TheSaker] or [Karlin] who noted that both NATO and/or Israel can bring to bear assets at least 10X what Russia has in Syria. But obviously something gives NATO/US and/or Israel 2nd thoughts. I have no idea what it is, but the reason there is no interference with Russia is not because NATO/US/Israel are charitably disposed towards Russia. Clearly they are concerned (or worried) about something.

The pending defeat of the Reptiles in Syria is a BIG deal. It throws of giant monkey wrench in the PINAC plan to redraw the Middle East for Eretz Yisrael. Short of directly attacking Russia – with unpredictable consequences – they tried pretty much everything:.

Despite all that, SAA+Russia+Iran+Hezbollah are relentlessly grinding down the cannibalistic invaders. Israel-firsters and anti-American slime who have invested the State dept, Pentagon, and CIA are apoplectic.

But clearly they don't know what to do. Otherwise, they would have done it already.

Carroll Price , September 28, 2017 at 6:17 pm GMT
@Frankie P

They doubled down, as psychopathic narcissists are prone to do, in Syria, and the resulting action by a stronger and more aggressive Russia has shone the light on the folly of their ways. The resistance has now become The Resistance

Indeed. Relatively unknown (at the time) Hezbollah, who in 2006 put a royal shellacking on Israel, has not only survived, but emerged many magnitudes stronger and more confident than anyone could have ever imagined.

yeah , September 28, 2017 at 6:21 pm GMT
@Anon

There were boots a plenty on the ground in Vietnam – and how did that one end? In case you missed Vietnam, Iraq has had plenty of boots on the ground as well; this one hasn't still officially ended but has not been going well, not well at all. And Afghanistan. And Korea in the fifties.

As to Russia not having been seriously opposed in Syria: well, short of all-out war with Russia what else could have been done? If we try to understand the real game being played, we would be very concerned. From a Machiavellian perspective, the US strategy has been succeeding brilliantly. Boots on the ground did not succeed in Vietnam, but the Machiavellian plan certainly did. Allow me to elaborate a little below.

Let us stop this knee-jerk, rah-rah rooting for the home team and try to think coolly. The first thing that comes to mind is that there isn't really any home team. This whole ball-game is not about wining once and for all, it is about keeping these crises going – all the time, everywhere. Russia is also learning how to play this game: after all, it, too, has to put on a game for its citizens lest they start getting all sorts of wrong ideas. So the powers that be collude, and keep these fires smouldering so that they can continue to collect protection fees from their respective citizens and client states.

Who suffers? People who end up being boots on the ground. People who pay taxes. People who want a strong, but noble and inspiring, America. People who want to live and let others live.

Carroll Price , September 28, 2017 at 7:02 pm GMT
@The Alarmist

During congressional hearings in the 1970s, Admiral Hyman Rickover considered aircraft carriers as being obsolete targets. It's more than obvious to any reader of this forum why they continue being produced.

Carroll Price , September 28, 2017 at 7:11 pm GMT
@peterAUS

Just wondering; Have either of you military geniuses ever consider enrolling in the US War College?

EugeneGur , September 28, 2017 at 7:21 pm GMT
@survey-of-disinfo

the uproar in Iran regarding the decision to let Russian planes use an Iranian airbase

There is always somebody in any country who'd create an uproar whether it is in the interests of the country or not.

In case you haven't noticed the author isn't talking about Russia dictating the defense of Iran but about Iran objectively being in the same boat as far as Western aggression is concerned. The animosity towards Iran in the USA is just as great as towards Russia – the difference is Russia is capable of defending itself, vodka bottle in hand, which is not at all certain about Iran.

It is not in Iran's interest to have Russia use Iran as a forward base. Dream on, and quit hitting that vodka bottle.

By using the Iranian airspace, Russia isn't using Iran as a forward base but, on the contrary, signaling that Iran isn't alone – this is to your advantage, buddy, in case you haven't figured that out yet.

If you guys want to dwell on the past insults, real or perceived, go right ahead, but remember – this is a loosing proposition unless, of course, you possess a time machine.

If you think Iran'd be better off allied with the US – who is stopping you?

Sarah Toga , September 28, 2017 at 8:00 pm GMT
Our military record is not so great. Russia, on the other hand, has held its lands for a millennia. The only war we (the USA) have truly won since the War of 1812 was the Pacific Theater of WWII. Everything else was done by others (WWII European Theater was mostly Russian work), or a miserable stand-off (Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan) or a totally unnecessary fiasco (War Between The States, WWI, Iraq ) such that "winning" was no benefit to the "victor".

You might say the Mexican War gave us some good territory but the Mexicans are winning their Reconquista invasions while we sleep and dilly dally.

The bloodthirsty neocons are dangerous fools. At least the Japanese Imperial Forces wore uniforms and flew their flag when attacking, even if a sneak attack. Neocons are silent killers of their host.

Neocons are like clogged arteries – you know they will be a problem but failing to comprehend the danger, that heart attack can occur most unexpectedly, killing the host.

You know you need to clean the crud out of those clogged arteries but you just don't do what is needed to clean out and become safe.

John Gruskos , September 28, 2017 at 8:39 pm GMT
Even if Russia were militarily the weakest nation on earth, a US attack on the Russians would still be a colossal mistake.

No American national interests or civilizational interests are advanced by attacking Russia.

On the contrary, American lives and wealth would be wasted, and America's reputation tarnished, in a war which would benefit America's real enemies, Sunni jihadists such as Al-Qaeda and ISIS, while diminishing American export opportunities, providing a pretext for the ongoing migrant invasion of Europe, and ethnically cleansing Middle Eastern Christians.

[Mar 13, 2018] The CIA Democrats: Part one by Patrick Martin

Brennanization of the Democratic Party
Notable quotes:
"... If the Democrats capture a majority in the House of Representatives on November 6, as widely predicted, candidates drawn from the military-intelligence apparatus will comprise as many as half of the new Democratic members of Congress. They will hold the balance of power in the lower chamber of Congress. ..."
"... Both push and pull are at work here. Democratic Party leaders are actively recruiting candidates with a military or intelligence background for competitive seats where there is the best chance of ousting an incumbent Republican or filling a vacancy, frequently clearing the field for a favored "star" recruit. ..."
"... The Democratic leaders are promoting CIA agents and Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans. At the same time, such people are choosing the Democratic Party as their preferred political vehicle. ..."
Mar 07, 2018 | www.wsws.org

Introduction

An extraordinary number of former intelligence and military operatives from the CIA, Pentagon, National Security Council and State Department are seeking nomination as Democratic candidates for Congress in the 2018 midterm elections. The potential influx of military-intelligence personnel into the legislature has no precedent in US political history.

If the Democrats capture a majority in the House of Representatives on November 6, as widely predicted, candidates drawn from the military-intelligence apparatus will comprise as many as half of the new Democratic members of Congress. They will hold the balance of power in the lower chamber of Congress.

Both push and pull are at work here. Democratic Party leaders are actively recruiting candidates with a military or intelligence background for competitive seats where there is the best chance of ousting an incumbent Republican or filling a vacancy, frequently clearing the field for a favored "star" recruit.

A case in point is Elissa Slotkin, a former CIA operative with three tours in Iraq, who worked as Iraq director for the National Security Council in the Obama White House and as a top aide to John Negroponte, the first director of national intelligence. After her deep involvement in US war crimes in Iraq, Slotkin moved to the Pentagon, where, as a principal deputy assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs, her areas of responsibility included drone warfare, "homeland defense" and cyber warfare.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) has designated Slotkin as one of its top candidates, part of the so-called "Red to Blue" program targeting the most vulnerable Republican-held seats -- in this case, the Eighth Congressional District of Michigan, which includes Lansing and Brighton. The House seat for the district is now held by two-term Republican Representative Mike Bishop.

The Democratic leaders are promoting CIA agents and Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans. At the same time, such people are choosing the Democratic Party as their preferred political vehicle. There are far more former spies and soldiers seeking the nomination of the Democratic Party than of the Republican Party. There are so many that there is a subset of Democratic primary campaigns that, with a nod to Mad magazine, one might call "spy vs. spy."

[Mar 12, 2018] New Huge Anti-Russian Provocation ahead of Russian election by Robert Stevens

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The pair were found unconscious and slumped on a bench near the Maltings shopping centre. Police stated that two became ill at around 13.30 p.m. Police arrived on the scene at around 16.15 p.m., after being alerted by a concerned member of the public. ..."
"... Financial Times, ..."
"... Daily Mirror's ..."
"... If the Putin regime were indeed set on killing Skripal and his daughter, some explanation needs to be made as to motive. Skripal's daughter lived and worked in Russia and made regular trips back and forth. ..."
"... At least one other person released from jail in Russia would appear to have been a much more likely target of the Putin regime than Skripal, if indeed its intention was to prevent anti-Russian activities. Igor Sutyagin developed into a prominent anti-Putin figure in the UK, becoming a fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) defence and intelligence think-tank. ..."
"... RUSI is central to the formulation of British imperialism's anti-Russian policy. Even the Guardian's ..."
"... Under conditions in which the NATO powers, including Britain, are seeking to utilise any pretext to justify their ongoing encirclement of Russia's border, Putin authorizing the murder of two people on the streets of the UK would be a propaganda gift to his opponents. ..."
"... The response of the government and media to these events must be placed in the context of the concerted drive by London to demonize Russia. Only last week the Times ..."
"... This followed a January speech given at RUSI by General Sir Nick Carter, the Chief of the General Staff of the British Armed Forces, in which he declared that the UK had to actively prepare for war with Russia and other geo-political rivals. ..."
"... Moon of Alabama has cited a London Daily Telegraph article stating that Sergei Skripal was close to a security consultant (fingered in MoA comments as Pablo Miller) who has worked for Christopher Steele. This security consultant apparently recruited Skripal in Estonia in 1995 and also lives in Salisbury (which as some have noted is some 13 km from Porton Down, site of a UK Ministry of Defence military research lab). ..."
"... If MoA's speculations have any substance, I should think Boris Berezovsky's suicide in 2013 merits closer attention. ..."
"... The UK and M16 is probably behind this murder as a step in helping the USA pile up fake evidence about alleged Russian crimes to justify the USA in its plan to go to war against Russia. ..."
"... These characters and entities (CIA or MI-6), are capable of unthinkable evil, such us disposing of those people just to be able to blame Russia-Putin once more. No holds barred. ..."
"... Cui Bono indeed. There is absolutely no reason the "Putin regime" as you insist on calling the Russian government, or Putin personally would gratuitously kill some completely irrelevant long-retired and already pardoned double agent who had long ago given British Intelligence every scrap of information he knew while knowing the only possible outcome would be a huge propaganda campaign against Russia and Putin personally just two weeks before the Presidential election. ..."
"... On the other hand, for MI6, the CIA, and the creatures behind them, it makes perfect sense to have their now useless former spy perform one last unwitting "service" for the Western Oligarchy by providing yet another pretext for ramping up their campaign of anti-Russian hysteria. As a fringe benefit, they don't have to pay his pension anymore. ..."
www.moonofalabama.org

Nobody of us can really know what happened in London with the Russian ex-double agent they tried to kill.
But Russians would be foolish to let the agent leave from Russia to try to assassinate him many years afterwards, at the eve of their Presidential Election.

DK Anti-Russia campaign follows alleged poisoning of former UK/Russian double agent and daughter

The British government and mass media have mounted a hysterical anti-Russian campaign centered on the still unexplained circumstances surrounding the hospitalisation of former British double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, after they were found unconscious on a bench in Salisbury on Sunday.

Initial reports Monday stated that Skripal, aged 66, may have ingested fentanyl, a synthetic opioid many times stronger than heroin, which can be fatal in small doses.

On Tuesday, the other person hospitalized was identified as Skripal's 33-year-old daughter, Yulia, who was also said to be in a critical condition.

Skripal is a former colonel in Russia's GRU, the military intelligence service. He spent four years in jail in Russia after being found guilty in 2006 of passing secrets to MI6, the UK's foreign intelligence service. He was sentenced to 13 years in prison.

Skripal served four years before being released in 2010, when he was pardoned by Russia as part of a well-publicized 10-person spy swap between the US, the UK and Russia. He moved to the UK where he has lived for the past seven years.

The pair were found unconscious and slumped on a bench near the Maltings shopping centre. Police stated that two became ill at around 13.30 p.m. Police arrived on the scene at around 16.15 p.m., after being alerted by a concerned member of the public. It was announced Wednesday that a police officer is also in critical condition after attending the incident. The Skripals visited a nearby restaurant, Zizzi's, which was cordoned off, as well as a local pub, The Bishop's Mill.

By Tuesday, despite nothing of substance being reported by the police, the government and media had effectively declared the incident an act of terrorism, with the finger pointing at Russia's Putin government. References to an opioid being involved were dropped, with media reports saying the government's secret chemical lab at Porton Down was as yet unable to identify the substance. Wiltshire police announced that London's Metropolitan Police counter-terrorist unit would be taking over the investigation.

In parliament, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson spoke about the "disturbing incident in Salisbury" and stated, "Although I am not now pointing fingers, because we cannot point fingers, I say to governments around the world that no attempt to take innocent life on UK soil will go either unsanctioned or unpunished," He then referred to Russia as a "malign and destructive force" and warned that if Moscow were found to be involved, the government would "take whatever measures we deem necessary to protect the lives of the people in this country, our values and our freedoms."

In another pointed reference to Russia, he stated that the case had "echoes of the death of Alexander Litvinenko in 2006" -- the former officer in Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB, the successor to the KGB), who died on November 23, 2006 after having been granted asylum in Britain in 2000. The UK, backed by the US have long claimed that the Putin regime ordered the killing despite no evidence being presented in an official British inquiry in 2016 -- other than the presence of the radioactive substance polonium.

Johnson threatened that England could consider boycotting the soccer World Cup in Russia this summer.

Every newspaper, apart from the Financial Times, led with hysterical anti-Russian headlines . The Sun blared, "Red Spy in UK Poison Terror," with an accompanying story referring to "fear over a Kremlin backed hit " The Daily Mirror's headline was " 'Assassins' on British street".

In an article in the Spectator , columnist Ed West posed the question, "Will Britain stand up to Russia?"

By the evening, despite Newsnight anchor Kirsty Wark introducing the story by saying, "so far we know nothing about what happened to them, if they were poisoned and if they were, by whom," the BBC's flagship news programme was dedicated to a narrative that Russia was responsible and that Skripal and his daughter were likely victims of an attack by Russia intelligence operatives.

The media have reported the deaths of Skripal's wife, his son and his older brother as mysterious events requiring investigation. His wife died of cancer in 2012 in Britain.

The following day the Daily Telegraph asserted that "Putin swore death on poisoned Russian spy." The Times went with "MI5 believes Russians tried to kill former spy."

On Wednesday morning, the government convened its COBRA committee, which meets during periods of national emergencies. On Wednesday evening, Met Police Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley announced that Skripal and his daughter were subjected to an attack by a "nerve agent," with it being classified as a case of "attempted murder."

No information released by the authorities can be taken at face value. All reports attest that Skripal was supposedly politically inactive. He evidently did nothing to hide his identity, buying a house for £260,000 in his real name and applying to join a railway social club. He regularly bought lottery scratch cards and purchased food from a local Polish food store.

If the Putin regime were indeed set on killing Skripal and his daughter, some explanation needs to be made as to motive. Skripal's daughter lived and worked in Russia and made regular trips back and forth.

At least one other person released from jail in Russia would appear to have been a much more likely target of the Putin regime than Skripal, if indeed its intention was to prevent anti-Russian activities. Igor Sutyagin developed into a prominent anti-Putin figure in the UK, becoming a fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) defence and intelligence think-tank.

RUSI is central to the formulation of British imperialism's anti-Russian policy. Even the Guardian's main advocate against the Putin regime, columnist Luke Harding, was forced to acknowledge that Sutyagin "gave lectures on Vladimir Putin's darkening state, and kept a high public profile. Skripal, by contrast, eschewed London. He settled with Liudmilla [his wife] in the comparative quiet of Wiltshire. "

Asking the question who would benefit from the deaths of Skripal and his daughter, there would appear to be no obvious reason why the Putin government would authorize such an act. Putin is currently campaigning in the last stretch of the 2018 presidential election, which takes place on March 18. He is expected to be re-elected.

Under conditions in which the NATO powers, including Britain, are seeking to utilise any pretext to justify their ongoing encirclement of Russia's border, Putin authorizing the murder of two people on the streets of the UK would be a propaganda gift to his opponents.

The response of the government and media to these events must be placed in the context of the concerted drive by London to demonize Russia. Only last week the Times devoted its front page, an op-ed piece and an editorial to bellicose calls by senior military figures, including second in command of the armed forces, Sir Gordon Messenger, for an increase in military spending, naming Russia as the power that must be confronted.

This followed a January speech given at RUSI by General Sir Nick Carter, the Chief of the General Staff of the British Armed Forces, in which he declared that the UK had to actively prepare for war with Russia and other geo-political rivals.

Jennifer Hor • 4 days ago

Moon of Alabama has cited a London Daily Telegraph article stating that Sergei Skripal was close to a security consultant (fingered in MoA comments as Pablo Miller) who has worked for Christopher Steele. This security consultant apparently recruited Skripal in Estonia in 1995 and also lives in Salisbury (which as some have noted is some 13 km from Porton Down, site of a UK Ministry of Defence military research lab).

http://www.moonofalabama.or...

If MoA's speculations have any substance, I should think Boris Berezovsky's suicide in 2013 merits closer attention.

Kelli Hernandez • 4 days ago
When will people realize, here in America, that everything Russia is meant to manufacture consent for a world war against Russia? Why are our people so stupid?
Terry Lawrence Kelli Hernandez • 4 days ago
Not stupid, but victims of the best miseducation system in the world, sowing endless disinformation while pretending to educate.
Raycomeau • 4 days ago
The UK and M16 is probably behind this murder as a step in helping the USA pile up fake evidence about alleged Russian crimes to justify the USA in its plan to go to war against Russia.
Carolyn Zaremba Raycomeau • 4 days ago
Wouldn't surprise me at all.
Balázs Jávorszky • 4 days ago
A good article at last, apart from constant references to the "Putin regime".
Terry Lawrence -> Balázs Jávorszky • 4 days ago
Exactly.
Dave Tate • 4 days ago
Is it possible that instead of Putin or the Russian government being responsible for Skripal death more shadowy figures from his past decided to seek revenge from some past action? After all these people move in murky unpleasant circles and the past can catch up with one eventually.
Deplorable -> Dave Tate • 4 days ago
These characters and entities (CIA or MI-6), are capable of unthinkable evil, such us disposing of those people just to be able to blame Russia-Putin once more. No holds barred.
Terry Lawrence -> Dave Tate • 4 days ago
MI-6
jo • 5 days ago
Makes me laugh (kind of bitterly though) how the media's labelled the recent bout of cold weather insistently and repeatedly as "the beast from the East" blaming Russia for it! All of a piece with planting anti Russian seeds in the pleb's mind.
Terry Lawrence • 5 days ago
Cui Bono indeed. There is absolutely no reason the "Putin regime" as you insist on calling the Russian government, or Putin personally would gratuitously kill some completely irrelevant long-retired and already pardoned double agent who had long ago given British Intelligence every scrap of information he knew while knowing the only possible outcome would be a huge propaganda campaign against Russia and Putin personally just two weeks before the Presidential election.

On the other hand, for MI6, the CIA, and the creatures behind them, it makes perfect sense to have their now useless former spy perform one last unwitting "service" for the Western Oligarchy by providing yet another pretext for ramping up their campaign of anti-Russian hysteria. As a fringe benefit, they don't have to pay his pension anymore.

Incidentally, according to Canadian TV "news", his daughter lives in Moscow and was just visiting him in Britain. So apparently the FSB had no particular interest in killing her as they could easily have arranged a low profile "car accident" or something similar in Moscow at any convenient time. Whenever some high profile murder is promptly attributed to "Putin", "the Putin Regime" or "the Russians" and a huge obviously pre-arranged propaganda campaign swings into full throated shrieking, usually shortly before some important international event being held in Russia like the World Cup Soccer matches or the Presidential Election, always ask: Cui Bono.

Carolyn Zaremba -> Terry Lawrence • 4 days ago
Always.
Deplorable -> Terry Lawrence • 4 days ago
Putin has levels of approval ratings, unknown to the leaders of any country in the world. The only ones worrying about his reelection, are the despicable enemies of Russia, parroting US media anti Putin campaign.

By the way, how come that the indispensable country, home to 327 million people, can not even field a team in the Football World Cup in Russia this summer.

Even little Uruguay with a population of 3 million, is going to be there. Everybody who is somebody in the civilized world, is going to be in Russia for the cup, but the US.

Terry Lawrence -> Deplorable • 4 days ago
In the US, where everything is named for the opposite of what it actually is, the name "Football" is reserved for a game where you carry an object which is not shaped like a ball with your hands instead of kicking a round, ball shaped object with your foot.

Kind of like the "Forest Protection Act" removes logging protecting from National Forests and the "Clean Air Act" removes anti-pollution regulations from big polluters like coal fired power stations.

Here in Canada the "Seal Protection Act" makes it illegal to protect seals, among other "named the opposite of what they actually do" laws.

George Orwell nailed it in "1984". "War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength".

jo Terry Lawrence • 5 days ago
Yeah why not the Trump regime? Obama regime? When I'm reading these articles I always mentally replace "administration" with "regime".

[Mar 12, 2018] Remember when that building fire killed scores of people, they called for calm and patience until the full investigation is done, not to jump to any conclusions and all that jazz, song dance. Where is now the famous British attitude "Keep calm and carry on"?

Notable quotes:
"... As far as one can tell from what the British have revealed about this attempted killing is that the agent is an organophosphate triester acety choline (ach) inhibitor. ..."
"... This is a class of chemicals that include hundreds if not thousands of different compounds. As a matter of fact most of these compounds can be synthesized in very simple labs if there is an individual that has the knowledge. It would be possible to put together such a lab in a single family house with a natural gas, electric hook ups and a good kitchen sink along with a few thousand dollars to purchase the right flasks, pumps and temperature controllers. ..."
"... The suggestion by May that Russia is one of the only countries in the world capable of making this stuff is totally laughable. In the last 80 years the organophosphate neurotoxins have been used by and produced by dozens of countries as insecticides. ..."
"... At this point there close to zero evidence that the agent used to intoxicate the Skripils was something uniquely available to Russia. ..."
"... When in trouble at home, create trouble abroad. ..."
Mar 12, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

ToivoS , Mar 12, 2018 4:36:57 PM | 9

What is totally insane about all of these allegations against Russia is that so far they have not identified the nerve agent that was used against Skrpil and his daughter. As far as one can tell from what the British have revealed about this attempted killing is that the agent is an organophosphate triester acety choline (ach) inhibitor.

This is a class of chemicals that include hundreds if not thousands of different compounds. As a matter of fact most of these compounds can be synthesized in very simple labs if there is an individual that has the knowledge. It would be possible to put together such a lab in a single family house with a natural gas, electric hook ups and a good kitchen sink along with a few thousand dollars to purchase the right flasks, pumps and temperature controllers.

The suggestion by May that Russia is one of the only countries in the world capable of making this stuff is totally laughable. In the last 80 years the organophosphate neurotoxins have been used by and produced by dozens of countries as insecticides. These chemicals were discovered by German chemists in the 1920s.

The difference between an insecticide and a chemical warfare agent is no more than a simple side chain about the phosphate core.

At this point there close to zero evidence that the agent used to intoxicate the Skripils was something uniquely available to Russia.

et Al , Mar 12, 2018 5:28:14 PM | 21

Well, I place my completely subjective assessment on Mossad wot dun it.

Motive?

Russia is in 'its backyard' and screwing up its plans (destroying IS/ISIL/ISIS/DAESH/Whatever), or at least limiting its options.

Means?

Lots of Israeli Russians to pick from for the job, probably previously unactivated ones for this special one off. As 'b' has pointed out already, this agent is not 'magic' or unknown to the West.

Opportunity?

Upcoming 2018 Football World Cup in Russia, Presidential elections. Timed for maximum impact to give allies (CIA probably and by extension MI6/whatever) a sliver of opportunity to try and push for collective action to limit or control Russia in the ME and elsewhere.

It all rather smacks of desperation though, which is why I think of Nut&Yahoo who was yet again 'interviewed' last week by the cops. When in trouble at home, create trouble abroad. It's also a pretty dumb move (considering the close relations between Russia & Israel) which I hope will back fire and probably won't work out as planned (as everything else planned by the West hasn't). If Russia fingers Nut&Yahoo for this, then they will call the shots, i.e. he'll have to fall on his sword and Russian troops will retake the Golan. Actually I expect the latter to happen regardless. No one else can do it without being bombed.

Anyways, that's my massive speculation for what it is worth. Not a lot!

WorldBLee , Mar 12, 2018 5:35:59 PM | 23
If the UK has any doubt, I'm sure there are '17 intelligence agencies' in the US who will back them up all the way! And they're so good, they don't even need to see any evidence to know for sure!
karlof1 , Mar 12, 2018 5:42:50 PM | 24
May's using the trusted-old projection propaganda ploy for her constituents. I await the CCTV footage showing the pair being gassed on that public park bench only 8 miles away from a very sensitive military installation. Seems the only people sniffing the bait are from 5-Eyes, English-speaking nations, as proven by how the media's playing along. The UK's drowning as it continues its slide into irrelevancy after its brief affair as #1 planetary hegemon.

Meanwhile, Mercouris and Escobar provide the underlying reasons why UK/US are so frantic.

hopehely , Mar 12, 2018 5:49:15 PM | 26
Remember when that building fire killed scores of people, they called for calm and patience until the full investigation is done, not to jump to any conclusions and all that jazz, song & dance. Where is now the famous British attitude "Keep calm and carry on"?
Peter AU 1 , Mar 12, 2018 5:49:22 PM | 27
The UK poisoned spy is just part of an intensive US/UK/France propaganda effort. US and France on Syria and UK on Russia. Haley in the UN saying US will act on its own unless UNSC demand imediate no conditions 30 day ceasefire in Ghouta, Macron fiddling with his CW red line and now May/UK ramping up the propaganda on Russia.
Ghouta must have been very important to these pricks.
JohninMK , Mar 12, 2018 6:15:01 PM | 35
Wonderful thing the Internet. I have just found this 1993 document that contains a long interview with one of the 'inventors' of Novochuk. It is amazing stuff, as is the rest of the document.

It is part of the 'what can we do to turn Soviet tanks into plowshares' plan back then with interviews with key players. Found in a JPRS report available through DTIC.

I can't cut and past as its a huge pdf that also takes a bit of time to load. Check out pages 18/19/20.

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a333126.pdf

Huge thanks to Twitter users Private Joker and Veli-Pekka Kivimäki
‏

Mina , Mar 12, 2018 6:15:49 PM | 36
Since the ghouta scheduled false Flag was debunked in advance thy had to come with another chemical big one?

[Mar 12, 2018] It appears Mr Skripal for some reason has a nerve gas stored in his house with enough concentration to take out a policeman who inspected the premises

Mar 12, 2018 | off-guardian.org

Thomas Peterson says March 9, 2018

From what's emerging now, it seems there simply were no assassins wandering round Salisbury.

Instead, it appears Mr Skripal for some reason has a house full of nerve gas, or enough of it at least to take out himself, his daughter and a policeman who inspected the premises.

[Mar 12, 2018] Putin s Stated Plan A High-Tech Russian Doll

Notable quotes:
"... The New York Times ..."
"... Nineteen Eight-Four ..."
"... Putin's goal is now neither to recreate the USSR, nor to become part of the West. Rather, the ambition is to build an economic and technological "West" inside Russia, ..."
www.moonofalabama.org

Scary Putin, Bogeyman to the World, has been on full display in US newspapers this month, most conspicuously on the front page of The New York Times , in a misleading photograph suitable for the cover of a new edition of Nineteen Eight-Four . " Putin Says He Has 'Invincible' Nuclear Missile ," was the headline. The hypersonic zig-zag cruise missiles and torpedoes of which he boasted might be a bluff for now, the Times noted. Fully operational, however, such weapons would "travel low, stealthily, far and fast – too fast for defenders to react."

... ... ...

What wasn't on display last week was an analytic account of what else Putin said in what was, after all, his state of the nation address , three weeks before the election in which he is seeking a fourth presidential term. For that I turned to Alexander Baunov of the Carnegie Moscow Center. I get my Russia news from Johnson's Russia List -- 191 items last week, of which I read perhaps twenty-five -- and from Jonathan Haslam's blog, Through Russian Eyes . Haslam is Kennan professor at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton.

Bloomberg's Andrey Biryukov and Evgenia Pismennaya set the stage for Putin's hour-long speech. Simon Shuster conveyed its atmospherics in Time , and Mary Dejevsky, of London's Independent , its production values . But it was Baunov who made sense of it, in A Hi-Tech Russian Doll: Putin's Fourth-Term Reboot , on the Carnegie.ru website.

Putin's goal is now neither to recreate the USSR, nor to become part of the West. Rather, the ambition is to build an economic and technological "West" inside Russia, while continuing an aggressive posture towards the West on the outside .

... ... ...

The problems of the Russian economy, interesting though they may be, are for the most part orthogonal to those of the US, which at the moment have to do with the prospect of trade wars with its allies.

... ... ...

[Mar 12, 2018] Putin humiliates NWO agent Megyn Kelly

Notable quotes:
"... Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin's War on America and the Election of Donald Trump ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin's War on America and the Election of Donald Trump ..."
"... America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order ..."
"... Jewish Review of Books ..."
"... Mainstreaming Torture: Ethical Approaches in the Post-9/11 United States ..."
"... The CIA as Organized Crime: How Illegal Operations Corrupt America and the World ..."
"... The Phoenix Program: America's Use of Terror in Vietnam ..."
"... They try to provoke him by shooting down aircraft, demonizing, sanctions and all forms of schoolboy antics. Regardless, he remains on course, an outstanding strategist. I don"t think he felt provoked in the interview, rather he just had difficulty suffering such a hollow woman. ..."
"... I don't know is she stupid or no, but she had the task – to provoke my President. This is why she acted like a questioning robot. Ignored the answers and simple logic, she wanted him to make a mistake and express what they wanted from him on emotions. Several times he was really angry about her persistent curiosity about Russian hand in US elections. She took the role of prosecutor. But this interview plan was transparent for Putin. ..."
"... Ms. Kellys' antics gave Mr. Putin some face time in the USA MSM. He looks and acts like a leader. I'm sure the benefits outweighed the nonsense. ..."
Mar 12, 2018 | www.veteranstoday.com

Similarly, the reason I reject the New World Order ideology is because it is metaphysically incoherent. Its finest proponents have never bothered to address its incoherence either. Double standards, contradictions, illogical leaps, inconsistency, are obvious signs that a system is internally incoherent and failing. These issues are never discussed in Michael Isikoff's recent book, Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin's War on America and the Election of Donald Trump . [1]

New World Order agent Megyn Kelly has recently interviewed Vladimir Putin again, but she didn't flesh out anything new at all. She asked the same old questions about hacking as if the United States should never be placed in the same position. Russia has to admit that it "hacked" the election, the argument goes, but the United States should never be challenged on the same issue. It is totally irrelevant.

I wish I could persuade Kelly and other New World Order agents to concentrate on the fundamental issues and stop flip-flopping. Here is what Kelly needs to focus on: even if we grant the ridiculous idea that Russia "hacked" the election, so what? The United States has been doing this since the beginning of time! This is again coming from the New York Times :

"Bags of cash delivered to a Rome hotel for favored Italian candidates. Scandalous stories leaked to foreign newspapers to swing an election in Nicaragua. Millions of pamphlets, posters and stickers printed to defeat an incumbent in Serbia.

"The long arm of Vladimir Putin? No, just a small sample of the United States' history of intervention in foreign elections.

"Most Americans are understandably shocked by what they view as an unprecedented attack on our political system. But intelligence veterans, and scholars who have studied covert operations, have a different, and quite revealing, view.

"'If you ask an intelligence officer, did the Russians break the rules or do something bizarre, the answer is no, not at all,' said Steven L. Hall, who retired in 2015 after 30 years at the C.I.A., where he was the chief of Russian operations. The United States 'absolutely' has carried out such election influence operations historically, he said, 'and I hope we keep doing it.'

"Loch K. Johnson, the dean of American intelligence scholars, who began his career in the 1970s investigating the C.I.A. as a staff member of the Senate's Church Committee, says Russia's 2016 operation was simply the cyber-age version of standard United States practice for decades, whenever American officials were worried about a foreign vote.

"'We've been doing this kind of thing since the C.I.A. was created in 1947,' said Mr. Johnson, now at the University of Georgia. 'We've used posters, pamphlets, mailers, banners -- you name it. We've planted false information in foreign newspapers. We've used what the British call 'King George's cavalry': suitcases of cash.'" [2]

Russia should not hack the election, but who gave the United States the license to hack virtually every election around the globe? Isn't that a blatant double standard? Shouldn't Kelly have wrestled with this issue before she even presented it to Putin? If Putin and the Russians have to go to jail for hacking the election, when will we start jailing virtually every single US official for screwing up the Middle East and much of the world? This is the New York Times again:

"The United States' departure from democratic ideals sometimes went much further. The C.I.A. helped overthrow elected leaders in Iran and Guatemala in the 1950s and backed violent coups in several other countries in the 1960s. It plotted assassinations and supported brutal anti-Communist governments in Latin America, Africa and Asia." [3]

As former military intelligence officer Robert David Steele has pointed out, "Americans rigged, bribed, stole, killed, raped, and poisoned and you want to blame the Russians?" The United States, Steele argues, has meddled in at least 26 countries since World War II. But the ingenious Megyn Kelly hasn't even bothered to ask for a thorough investigation.

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

Furthermore, what did Russia release before the election that the average American shouldn't have known? These questions have never been answered by New World Order agents like Kelly, Michael Isikoff, and David Corn. Why?

Simple: these people do not want to use reason and common sense. They have deliberately abandoned the moral and political order and have embraced an essentially Talmudic ideology. They cannot see that New World Order agents in the United States are deliberately melting in the heat of their own contradictions. Don't believe me? This is coming from Bloomberg (thanks to my dear friend and colleague Mark Dankof for sending this article to me):

"Billionaire investor Peter Thiel got a fresh victory in Washington. His data-mining startup, Palantir Technologies Inc., won a much-contested contract to provide software to the U.S. Army.

"Palantir will work with Raytheon Co. to replace the troubled Distributed Common Ground System now in effect. They beat out seven other proposals for a decade-long, $876 million contract, according to the U.S. Defense Department. Terms of the partnership between Palantir and Raytheon weren't disclosed, and the companies didn't immediately respond to requests for comment.

"Thiel, the co-founder and chairman of Palantir, approved the company's move in 2016 to sue the Army over what it called an unfair bidding process. A judge found in Palantir's favor and ordered the Army to revamp the way it solicits bids for the Distributed Common Ground System. The U.S. Government Accountability Office determined that the Army's current system was over-budget and underperforming.

"Since the election of President Donald Trump, Thiel has gained significant influence in Washington. He was the most prominent supporter of Trump from Silicon Valley and contributed money to the campaign. Thiel helped fill positions in the Trump administration with former staff, including Trae Stephens, a onetime Palantir employee. Although he recently told the New York Times that Trump's presidency had 'fallen short' in some ways, Thiel said he has no regrets about supporting him.

"In addition to the Army deal, Palantir has been making inroads elsewhere in the U.S. government. After the company made a similar legal challenge to the U.S. Navy, officials agreed to revamp its technology procurement process last year." [4]

Why doesn't Megyn Kelly sit down with Palantir and tell him that he has no right to get involved in such a covert activity? Why doesn't Kelly -- who used to show her skin for metrosexual magazines such as GQ -- discuss these issues with Palantir at a coffee shop somewhere? Who is that woman really fooling this time?

Obviously she is not fooling Putin, who usually says of Kelly's assertions: " This is complete nonsense. " Listen to this sophomoric question that Kelly asked Putin: "Do you like the fact that you were in the KGB? Do you like people to know that?" Again, Kelly finds it repulsive that Putin was in the KGB, but Kelly doesn't even find it repugnant that Irving Kristol, the father of the Neoconservative movement, was a proud Trotskyite.

Kristol proudly admitted that the "honor I most prized was the fact that I was a member in good standing of the [Trotskyist] Young People's Socialist League (Fourth International)." [5] Kristol was not just a former Trotskyist, but a former neo-Marxist and neo-socialist. [6]

The interview between Putin and Kelly is telling:

Megyn Kelly : I will give you one piece of evidence. Andrei Krutskikh is an advisor to the Kremlin when it comes to cyber issues. In his speech to an information security forum in February 2016, he reportedly said, quote, "I am warning you. We are on the verge of having something in the information arena which will allow us to talk to the Americans as equals." What do you think he meant? Because it certainly sounds like a threat right before an election hack.

Vladimir Putin : Sometimes I think you are joking.

Megyn Kelly : No, I am deadly serious.

Vladimir Putin : A man says something about how he sees our contacts and our work with our foreign partners, the US in this case, in a certain area. I have no idea what he said. Ask him what he meant. Do you think I control everything?

Megyn Kelly : He is an advisor to the Kremlin on cyber.

Vladimir Putin : So what? There are 2,000 people working in the administration; do you think I control everyone? Peskov is sitting in front of me, he is my press secretary and he sometimes says things that I see on television and think, what is he talking about? Who told him to say this?

Megyn Kelly : I think when it comes to our two countries you know exactly what is going on. And this is Russia's problem now. It is. The heads of the US intelligence agencies just testified to Congress that Russia, Russia poses the greatest threat in the world to the American security, greater than ISIS. You cannot get the sanctions lifted. The relationship between our two countries is nearly non-existent right now. Did not this interference, whether you knew or you did not know about it, backfire against Russia?

Did you follow Kelly's logic in the last statement? The US intelligence agencies declared that Russia poses the greatest threat in the world to the American security, and Kelly didn't even challenge that premise. She swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. The US intelligence agencies are the alpha and omega, the beginning and the end, and whatever they posit must axiomatically be true.

We have numerous cases where US intelligence agencies deliberately lied to the American people for perpetuating diabolical activities. [7] But Megyn Kelly isn't interested in things like that because they would ruin her ideological foundations. Now we're talking:

Megyn Kelly : Okay, so let me ask you: you have stated explicitly you believe that America interfered in Russian elections, right?

Vladimir Putin : The US does this all the time.

Megyn Kelly : But Russia did not interfere in America's election?

Vladimir Putin : No, and there are no plans in Russia to do so. It is impossible. It is impossible for us.

Megyn Kelly : Why not? Why wouldn't you?

Megyn Kelly was trained as a lawyer, and she just couldn't realize that her questions violate the basic cannons of logic. I once had a discussion with a lawyer back in 2011 during which he made an extraordinary statement. My simple question was: "Where is the evidence for that?" His response? "Where is the evidence that it is not the case?"

I was astounded because I thought I was talking to a lawyer. The dude made a statement and wanted me to present evidence for it! At that point, I realized that the conversation was over.

Let us conclude by saying that it is just crazy for Kelly to take the US intelligence agencies at face value when they declared that "Russia poses the greatest threat in the world to the American security, greater than ISIS." It sounds like that the agencies got that idea right out George Soros' mouth. Soros, as we recalled, wrote an article back in 2016 entitled, "Putin is a bigger threat to Europe's existence than Isis." Soros incoherently declared then:

"The leaders of the US and the EU are making a grievous error in thinking that president Vladimir Putin's Russia is a potential ally in the fight against Islamic State. The evidence contradicts them. Putin's aim is to foster the EU's disintegration, and the best way to do so is to flood Europe with Syrian refugees." [8]

No one with an ounce of common sense should take this crazy assertion seriously. Soros, as I have argued elsewhere, is a New World Order agent and has been in the business for years.

What we are seeing again and again is that the New World Order is actually collapsing because it cannot produce a coherent system. We were told ad nauseam that Putin is reestablishing the Soviet Union. (Keep in mind that the Soviet Union was essentially Jewish.) Now we are being told that Putin is essentially anti-Semitic because he simply said that

"Maybe they [the so-called hackers] are not even Russians but Ukrainians, Tatars or Jews, but with Russian citizenship, which should also be checked; maybe they have dual citizenship of a green card; maybe the U.S. paid them for this. How can you know that? I do not know either." [9]

Putin said that the hackers could be either Russians, Tartars, or even Jews. But the fact that he mentioned Jews axiomatically makes him an anti-Semite. Mentioning Russians does not necessarily make him anti-Russian, but mentioning Jews is an unpardonable sin for which there is no redemption. Where did they dig these people?

https://www.youtube.com/embed/X6275tfuSzM?feature=oembed

  1. joetv March 11, 2018 at 2:19 pm Putin mentioned other suspects. As in any investigation the most likely suspect can be found using logic to determine who benefited from the crime. An honest, reasonable investigator would have ruled out Russia early, as there was nothing to be gained. The motive offered; the end of sanctions, just a canard. It turns out the big winner is Israel. Surprise! That is where the spot light should shine. Log in to leave a comment
  2. Chris Paul March 11, 2018 at 1:55 pm Come on Jonas, stop guilding the lily. You quote some dude who says that the USA has interfered in 26 countries since WW2. That is a Limite Hang Out. I wish to posit the hypothesis that the USA has interfered with EVERY COUNTRY ON THE PLANET since WW2. Using the Scientific Method we need to gather evidence, both hard and cicumstantial, from every corner of the Planet. I would suggest Crowd Funding multiple PhD students from all over and then some to very carefully centrally co-ordinate that gathered information. Gradually that Hypothesis could be transformed into a Theory that the USA pursued a Unipower Policy of Full Spectrum Dominance over the whole Planet.Further, as that one would only take a few years with all the Publicly Available
    read more ... Log in to leave a comment
    • M.O.A.Bitches March 11, 2018 at 6:53 pm I think you just described Argentina . . . since 1891.
      Not only does the U.S. interfere with every country under the sun, so did the old money farts from the daze of yore . . . It grew from there. GMO zio-seed money.
      Argentina has been a hot mess of "revolutionary death and destruction chaos" with Marxist brainwash hammer since, oh I reckon 1891 when Moritz (Zvi) von Hirsch dreamed a little colonization dream for Argentina.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Colonization_Association
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_de_Hirsch
      The Jewish Colonization
      read more ...
    • M.O.A.Bitches March 11, 2018 at 7:01 pm The Jewish Colonization Association (JCA or ICA, Yiddish ייִק"אַ) was created on September 11, 1891, by Baron Maurice de Hirsch. Its aim was to facilitate the mass emigration of Jews from Russia and other Eastern European countries, by settling them in agricultural colonies on lands purchased by the committee, particularly in North America (Canada and the United States), and South America (Argentina and Brazil).
      -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
      Argentina and Brazil . . .
      That is classic!
      The Zionists are a bunch of delusional Masonic magick worshiping secret coders. Sept. 11 1891 . . . and 110 years later . . . NYC is hit.
      Evil bastards is right.
    • Eduardo March 11, 2018 at 7:13 pm These are facts that US has interfered with any Nation on Earth since WW2. Though let us remember that the hammer and anvil of international jewry has already goy crowd funded our days reality and at the same time woven a sticky net of deceit and defense around the globe and themselves reinforced by corrupted politics, religious henchmen and greedy fools. An evil organism in itself, separated from humane humanity but controlling and steering it by their own will and desire. A change can only occur if conscientiousness sets in that every Nation is affected and NO Nationality spared. Only when Nations unite in sovereignty, independence and a CLEAR conscience a change will happen. The "cleansing" must start at every home. A circle must be drawn,
      read more ...
    • Eduardo March 11, 2018 at 7:30 pm Brasil is exactly the same MOAB. Corruption is not a South American virtue as it is recognized all over the world. It was infected and seeded by international Jewry a century ago. President Temer of Brasil is just one of many "heads of state" that legalizes international jewry's rule officially. We all know by now who is behind corruption though it wont be South Americans unless they are double citizens and attend synagogues.
      Colombia is another Jewish enclave run bu the same Jewry. A proper revolution will be needed but this time without creating a safe heaven for Zionists. A proper detention center run by independent goyim seems more appropriate.
  3. Sandra Villarreal March 11, 2018 at 1:08 pm As a well informed American citizen, it was so embarrassing watching Megan Kelly, once again, bring her brainwashed propaganda back to the table with Putin for all the world to see. I think she actually believes her own lies. But thank goodness Putin's able to handle her like a champ. Log in to leave a comment
    • Chris Paul March 11, 2018 at 2:04 pm Putin cleverly plays her. Her stupidity is not as apparent to Pavlovian Trained USA Citizens, but embarrases the USA in the eyes of the rest of the world. The Parasite Cult is gutting the USA under Pump and Dump Drumpf and exposing the level of understanding of the USA Public is part of that process. As they used to say in the TV Industry and probably still do: "pitch it to the lowest common denominator, never overestimate the taste of the viewing public".
  4. US-First March 11, 2018 at 12:03 pm Part 1

    Why President Putin even bothers to give Kelly the time of day is beyond me. She is merely an NWO media sycophant who, if she found one minuscule notion (emphasis on the minus) that somehow Putin was hedging or evasive this would be sufficient to assume guilt on what? – a totally contrived media and face-saving facade by the Democrats agreeable to the Republicans because for once they could unite and attack alleged and delusional Russian interference in the 2016 election. Kelly has gone from being a clown in the Russia-gate circus to doing a high-wire act at 26 feet. She might as well be at 26,000 ft. craving oxygen to give life to a non-existent story in rare air. This may well account for her suffering the Third Man syndrome –
    read more ... Log in to leave a comment

    • US-First March 11, 2018 at 12:09 pm Part 2
      Kelly did manage to evoke one comment that now has the Jewish-run media tripping over themselves that Putin is an anti-Semite. He stated during the interview on alleged Russian interference:

      "Maybe they are not even Russians but Ukrainians, Tatars or Jews but with Russian citizenship, which should also be checked; maybe they have dual citizenship of a green card; maybe the U.S. paid them for this " he said.

      The Tatar – Khazar connection is a double whammy by those espousing the view that Khazars formed the foundational core of modern Ashkenazim – (Koestler 1976 pp. 134-150). It is quite astounding the number of these same modern-day Ashkenazis are close acquaintances of one Donald Trump and were crucial in getting him
      read more ...

  5. Log in to leave a comment
  6. Khalid Talaat March 11, 2018 at 10:25 am The one thing you must admire about Putin is his laser like focus on his goal. He is a master of himself. They try to provoke him by shooting down aircraft, demonizing, sanctions and all forms of schoolboy antics. Regardless, he remains on course, an outstanding strategist. I don"t think he felt provoked in the interview, rather he just had difficulty suffering such a hollow woman. Log in to leave a comment
  7. Andrew_Bukanov(Russia) March 11, 2018 at 5:00 am I have watched the interview yesterday. I don't know is she stupid or no, but she had the task – to provoke my President. This is why she acted like a questioning robot. Ignored the answers and simple logic, she wanted him to make a mistake and express what they wanted from him on emotions. Several times he was really angry about her persistent curiosity about Russian hand in US elections. She took the role of prosecutor. But this interview plan was transparent for Putin. Log in to leave a comment

[Mar 12, 2018] Can't stand Megyn Kelly anymore: she has access to a world leader and spend most of her time trying to prove that Russians posting to Facebook is the single most important event in the world today

Notable quotes:
"... She has access to a world leader and acts as if Russians posting to Facebook is the single most important event in the world today; narcissism. Speaking of narcissism, did Kelly flick her hair or strut because she knows that she is undoubtedly the most beautiful woman to have ever lived? ..."
"... I hope, 20yrs from now, that Oliver Stone's interview will be remembered. It's possible to to learn about someone by actually listening to them rather than shutting them down. Scientists are still studying this phenomenon. ..."
"... Formerly T-Bear , Mar 12, 2018 12:57:09 PM | 28 ..."
"... @ 13 V. Arnold | Mar 12, 2018 2:35:25 AM @ 25 Jackrabbit | Mar 12, 2018 11:46:08 AM ..."
"... Reading Gilbert Doctorow's book Does the United States Have A Future? Collected (Nonconformist Essays on Russian-American Relations, 2015-17) , ISBN 13: 9781976038371 He mentions another interview V. Putin had with Meagan Kelly in his essay dated 8 June 2017. The essay states RT ran a full, unedited version that is compared to a youtube reference: ..."
"... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxqGoXNI_gw ..."
"... put on air for American audiences (4 minutes into program).[sorry, transcribing by hand, trusting sufficient information for others to followup]. Apparently the interview was held on sidelines of the St. Petersburg 'International Economic Forum' of 2017. Note was made by Doctorow of the shambles presented to the American viewers. ..."
Mar 12, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Christian Chuba | Mar 12, 2018 11:33:13 AM | 22

"the full interview with putin and megan kelly.. emptywheel has also written a piece on it going over the minutiae.. i swear these folks can't see the forest for the trees.." - James

Can't stand Megyn Kelly anymore.

She has access to a world leader and acts as if Russians posting to Facebook is the single most important event in the world today; narcissism. Speaking of narcissism, did Kelly flick her hair or strut because she knows that she is undoubtedly the most beautiful woman to have ever lived?

I hope, 20yrs from now, that Oliver Stone's interview will be remembered. It's possible to to learn about someone by actually listening to them rather than shutting them down. Scientists are still studying this phenomenon.

Formerly T-Bear , Mar 12, 2018 12:57:09 PM | 28
@ 13 V. Arnold | Mar 12, 2018 2:35:25 AM
@ 25 Jackrabbit | Mar 12, 2018 11:46:08 AM

Reading Gilbert Doctorow's book Does the United States Have A Future? Collected (Nonconformist Essays on Russian-American Relations, 2015-17) , ISBN 13: 9781976038371 He mentions another interview V. Putin had with Meagan Kelly in his essay dated 8 June 2017. The essay states RT ran a full, unedited version that is compared to a youtube reference:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxqGoXNI_gw

put on air for American audiences (4 minutes into program).[sorry, transcribing by hand, trusting sufficient information for others to followup]. Apparently the interview was held on sidelines of the St. Petersburg 'International Economic Forum' of 2017. Note was made by Doctorow of the shambles presented to the American viewers.

... ... ...

[Mar 12, 2018] Russophobia as a projection of antisemitism

Notable quotes:
"... It's rather scary. The Guardian screaming for a crusade aimed at toppling the Russian system and replacing it with something else, something closer to 'our values.' The moralizing is shocking and grotesque. I really wish the ground would just open up and swallow the Guardian whole. We'd be far better off with out it. ..."
Mar 12, 2018 | off-guardian.org

"Poor little Britain", with half the population, a much smaller territory, and being part of the largest military alliance in the world, spends only 10 billions less than Russia in "defense".

If the same tone would have been used in the BBC and guardian articles against another nation, for example Israel, it would rightly be treated as anti-Semitic and even considered as hate crime by the Police.

The stink of hypocrisy from the Guardian and almost all the English press has made me absolutely convinced that the public are being softened up for a direct conflict against Russia. My guess is that it will kick off within the next year. I think that Putin has mis-calculated because NATO know that the Russians don't yet have the capability that they boasted of recently, it's largely still in development, so NATO needs to move now before they are further constrained. The lunacy of such a move is lost in their desperation to go to war.

Several weeks ago I predicted that there would be some false-flag event that would lead to a boycott of the World Cup in Russia, there's no way that the neocons can allow Russia to be portrayed positively.

Francis Lee says March 10, 2018

I suppose by now we should be used to the nauseating, self-righteous bluster dished out on a daily basis by the Anglo-Zionist media. The two minutes hate by the flabby 'left' liberals who now have apparently joined forces with the demented US neo-cons in openly baying for a war against Russia. How, exactly did these people expect Russia to react to the abrogation of the ABM agreement, marching NATO right up to Russia's doorstep, staging coups in the Ukraine and Georgia, having the US sixth fleet swanning around in the Black Sea? Of course, Russia reacted as any other self-respecting state would react to such blatant provocations. And this includes the US during the Cuba crisis and its self-proclaimed right to intervene in its sphere of influence – Latin America – and for that matter anywhere else on the planet. And it does so A L'outrance.

But I was foregetting, the Anglo-Zionist axis has a divine mission mandated by the deity to reconfigure the world and bring democracy and freedom to those "Lesser breeds without the Law" (Kipling). Of course, this updated version of 'taking up the white man's burden' by the 'exceptional people' may involve mass murder, mayhem, destruction and chaos, unfortunately necessary in the short(ish) run. But these benighted peoples should realise it is for their own good, and if this means starving to death 500,000 Iraqi children through sanctions, well, it was 'worth it' according to the lovely Madeline Albright. This is the language and methodology of a totalitarian imperialism. As someone has remarked the Anglo-zionist empire is not on the wrong side of history, it is the wrong side of history.

The arrogance, ignorance and crass venality of these people is manifest to the point of parody.

Jen says March 10, 2018
I agree with Mark Rice-Oxley that Russian oligarchs should pull their money out of Britain and return it to Russia to invest in businesses there. That would be the ethical thing for them to do, to fulfill their proper tax obligations and stop using Britain as a tax haven.

I hear that Russia has had another bumper wheat harvest and is now poised to take over from Australia as the major wheat exporter to Egypt and Indonesia, the world's biggest buyers of wheat. So if Russian oligarchs are wondering where to put their money in, wheat production, research into improving wheat yields and the conditions wheat is grown in are just a few areas they can invest in.

Be careful what you wish for, Mr Rice-Oxley – your wish might come true bigger than you realise!

Jen says March 11, 2018
On top of what I said yesterday, if Russian oligarchs do pull all their money out of Britain, the British economy would crash, it being highly dependent on the services sector (constituting 80% of Britain's GDP in 2016 according to Wikipedia) and the financial services industry in particular. So if all those Russian billions swirling through Britain's financial system are "dodgy", that's because the system itself encouraged those inflows.

Who's really "dodgy", Mr Rice-Oxley?

David C. Lee (@worldblee) says March 10, 2018
"Poor little Britain" which actually spends on par with Russia in terms of its military budget, despite the fact that a) it's a much smaller country to defend and is surrounded by water, and b) it's part of NATO with the US as its staunch defender so it really doesn't need a standalone military anyway.
Emily Durron says March 9, 2018
The Guardian are scum. Lying, deceiving, warmongering, hating scum.

I would love to parachute them all into East Ghouta.

bevin says March 9, 2018
Their world is falling apart- in Korea and the Middle East the Empire is on the verge of eviction. All the certitudes of yesteryear are dissolving. Even the Turks, who, famously, held the line in Korea when the PLA attacked and the US Eighth Army fled south, are now on the other side. The same Turks who hosted US nuclear armed strategic missiles so openly that the USSR sent missiles of its own to Cuba.

As to the UK, the economy is contracting and the economic infrastructure is cracking up- living standards are plummeting and the only recourse of those responsible for the mess-the officers on the bridge- is propaganda. Like the Empire the British Establishment has been living on the fruits of its own propaganda for so long that, when it is exposed as merely empty bullying, there is nothing left but to resort to more lies in the hope that they will obscure raw and looming reality.

In The Guardian newsroom the water is three feet deep and rising inexorably, the ship is sinking and all hands are required to bail or the screens will go black. There is no time to wait for developments, for investigations to be completed, for evidence- every ounce of strength must be thrown into the defiance of nature, the shocking nakedness of reality.

There is something very significant about the way that simultaneous attacks of impotent russophobic dementia are eating away the brains of the rulers on both sides of the Atlantic.

The game, which has been going the same way for about 500 years, is up. The maritime empire is becoming marginal and the force that it has used, throughout these centuries, no longer overwhelms. The cruisers and carriers no longer work except to intimidate those not worth frightening.

There is only one thing left for the Empire and its hundreds of thousands of apparatchiki-from cops to pundits, from Professors to jailers- either they adjust to a new dispensation because the Times are Changing or they blow themselves and the whole planet up.

Thomas Prentice says March 9, 2018
Cleary the Guardian was swallowed up by England's fascist regime controlled by the City of London when it surrendered its hard drives to the regime for examination and/or destruction in the wake of the Snowden revelations.

The Guardian ownerships also sold their souls -- although the Guardian had already been in decline before they nabbed Glenn Greenwald. When he left, the Guardian lost ALL presumptive credibility.

Now The Guardian is just an organ of regime propaganda like the BBC (thank GOd for OffGuardian) and here is the island nation AGAIN asserting its dominance over the whole world, but this time on behalf of his brawnier brother, the EUSE, aka Exceptional US Empire.

One wonders how much longer the Russians will put up with this now that it is CLEAR that -- for the first time ever -- the Russians have complete military and nuclear superiority over "The West."

I'll bet Putin won't invade Ukraine, Germany, France, Brussels and England from the North and from the sea in the wintertime.

The Big Problem Is That Americans are afraid -- frightened -- but they are NOT afraid or frightened of a particular thing -- it is a generic fright. So they are no longer afraid of nuclear war. Trotsky said America was the strongest nation but also the most terrified' and nothing has changed except military and nuclear superiority along with economic clout has shifted to Russia and China. Were Americans afraid of nuclear war -- or say, of an invasion from Saskatchewan or Tamaulipas -- there might be hope.

But somewhere along the time beginning with Clinton, Americans didn't worry their pretty little heads about nuclear war or American wars on everybody anywhere any longer so long as it didn't disturb their creature comforts and shopping and lattes by coming to the homeland. The Nuclear Freeze movement was, after all, a direct response to Reagan's "evil empire" military buildup in the 1980s and then voila he and Gorbachev negotiated away a whole class of nuclear weapons and Old Bush promised Nato wouldn't expand. Hope. Then that sneaky little bastard Clinton started expanding Nato on behalf of the Pentagon / CKIA / NSA / military /congressional industrial complex.

None of this suggests tht it will end pretty.

MichaelK, March 9, 2018

The whole piece is an emotionally charged rant, bordering on hysteria, based on a transparent tissue of lies, distortions and absolutely stunning hypocrisy; and this coming from the 'liberal' 'left of centre' Guardian!

It's rather scary. The Guardian screaming for a crusade aimed at toppling the Russian system and replacing it with something else, something closer to 'our values.' The moralizing is shocking and grotesque. I really wish the ground would just open up and swallow the Guardian whole. We'd be far better off with out it.

[Mar 12, 2018] MILITARY grade? Well then, Mrs. Prime Minister... that's pretty God damn serious then. Because everyone knows the Russian CONSUMER-grade nerve agents are crap

The PM has said that the nerve agent was 'Novichok' which is 5 to 8 times more potent than VX... and the authorities waited 5 days to send the army in and over a week to tell people to wash their clothes and other items?
Mar 12, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

PavewayIV | Mar 12, 2018 4:41:58 PM | 10

"Sergej Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a military grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia.

MILITARY grade? Well then, Mrs. Prime Minister... that's pretty God damn serious then. Because everyone knows the Russian CONSUMER -grade nerve agents are crap. I think they sell them on Amazon (Free shipping with Amazon Prime).

TJ , Mar 12, 2018 4:55:27 PM | 11
Like I said in a previous thread Novichok was part of the plot of the recent "Strike Back: Retribution" TV series on Sky TV, Rupert Murdoch's 21st Century Fox owns a 39.14% controlling stake in Sky PLC. So a TV series by a billionaire supporter of Teresa May just happens to make a fictional TV series around a nerve agent and Bad Russians(TM) and is put on TV just before Teresa May accuses Bad Russians(TM) of using said nerve agent. This is not a coincidence.

[Mar 11, 2018] Craig Murray smelt a rat and made his suspicions clear, publicly. like Litvinenko case this case will probably remains unresolved and milked mesilessly for anti-russian propaganda purposes, if history is any guide

Notable quotes:
"... As for murray's theory, i think you're both right. while i doubt the primary reason was to gin up more russophobia (they usually just make stuff up out of thin air and it usually works) it is a pleasant side effect for the brit officials who have recently been groveling for more war profiteering under the pretense of "russia on our doorstep". ..."
"... They seem to have the same mentality rahm emanuel had when he said (regarding the 2008 collapse that decimated giant swathes of the US economy) "never let a good crisis go to waste". ..."
"... The whole affair gets curiouser and curiouser. Now there's a report that the Skripals were poisoned at HOME. And then succumbed later, elsewhere? And what about the other 21 people reportedly affected and treated? Huh?? ..."
"... I believe Craig Murray. Anyone who remembers the 9/11 Anthrax scare that threatened US decision makers? ..."
"... The BBC has reported that a "source familiar with the investigation" said the nerve agent was "likely to be rarer than sarin or VX". This suggests that the ground is being prepared for announcing a result that will implicate Russia. ..."
"... Kaszeta's comments are relevant because he works closely with Bellingcat and it appears from his output that since 2013 he has been used to channel information originating from western intelligence services about alleged chemical attacks, based on his status as an independent expert with his company Strongpoint Security. The accounts filed for this company show that its turnover was not enough to provide Kaszeta with a living, raising obvious questions about who or what was paying him. ..."
"... There we go Britain to raise Sergei Skripal poisoning case with Nato allies ..."
"... Similar case in California, Were they addicts? http://abc7.com/2-dead-in-possible-fentanyl-exposure-in-fontana-home/3197127/ ..."
Mar 11, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Christopher Black , Mar 9, 2018 12:22:35 PM | 55

My take on this incident.

https://journal-neo.org/2018/03/09/the-skripal-incident-another-anti-russian-provocation/

the pair , Mar 9, 2018 2:14:50 PM | 56
as mentioned above, the UK is saturated with CCTV cameras. in all the MSM screeching i have yet to hear about any footage being examined.

As for murray's theory, i think you're both right. while i doubt the primary reason was to gin up more russophobia (they usually just make stuff up out of thin air and it usually works) it is a pleasant side effect for the brit officials who have recently been groveling for more war profiteering under the pretense of "russia on our doorstep".

They seem to have the same mentality rahm emanuel had when he said (regarding the 2008 collapse that decimated giant swathes of the US economy) "never let a good crisis go to waste". maybe an even better analogy would be churchill praying for a german attack to justify his bloodlust as seen in dresden and other firebombing targets.

jason , Mar 9, 2018 3:40:04 PM | 57
the fact that putin has elections and the media came out with the story that this move would ensure after the elections that other spies won't have any doubts.....are prepared statements. if your spies were in syria from rus and from us. i think most people know who would have the heavier conscience. and in fact it is reminding their own what they are worth to them .... genius. actually.

before cctv were widespread among civil infrastructure, the opponents against the idea realized that people can just erase the time stamp and put on different ones and have actors act it out and placed onto television as proof. but we see they usually go for the afp reported from cnn report from 50 agencies unnamed unsourced deparment heads, circular fun.

i am not so much interested in the videos from nearby stores and streets, as if one really were to investigate, looking through weeks of tapes is not difficult. i am more interested in Britain next move.

i think it would be easier to britain to just mute this guy permanently if he were to wake up with ideas that it wasn't putin its a big problem for all the milking they are doing on it.

a. he makes it out of the hospital and comes out and becomes anti putin fanatic and makes it believable.
b. he makes it out of the hospital and goes back to normal life.
c. he makes it out of the hospital and is immediately gunned/poisoned by "russians".
d. he doesn't make it out of the hospital and goes back to normal life anyways.
e. he doesn't make it out of the hospital......but his daughter does.
f. he doesn't make it out of the hospital and is in coma indefinitely.
g. he is dropped from the news altogether due to security censorship.

Emily Dickinson , Mar 9, 2018 5:56:52 PM | 58
The whole affair gets curiouser and curiouser. Now there's a report that the Skripals were poisoned at HOME. And then succumbed later, elsewhere? And what about the other 21 people reportedly affected and treated? Huh??

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/09/russian-spy-may-have-poisoned-home-police-believe/

luke8929 , Mar 9, 2018 11:54:55 PM | 61
The police sgt. that became ill wasn't at the initial scene, he later searched the home of the two victims. So someone is making the assumption that they may have been poisoned at their home since that is where the police officer who later became ill was assigned.
francesca , Mar 10, 2018 12:49:40 AM | 62
There is a possible scenario that he was in possession of a nerve agent, and accidentally poisoned himself and his daughter
Porton Down is only 8 miles down the road
somebody , Mar 10, 2018 5:45:04 AM | 63
I believe Craig Murray. Anyone who remembers the 9/11 Anthrax scare that threatened US decision makers?
somebody , Mar 10, 2018 5:58:51 AM | 64
And yes, a MI6 agent is connected to Litvinenko, Skripal and Christopher Steele .
Hoarsewhisperer , Mar 10, 2018 9:58:06 AM | 65
I believe Craig Murray.
...
Posted by: somebody | Mar 10, 2018 5:45:04 AM | 63

Craig Murray smelt a rat and made his suspicions clear, publicly. Whether Murray's speculation is better or worse than anyone else's is unresolved and could remain that way, if History is any guide.

We seem no closer to discovering the ID of the instigators of the sordid and spectacularly public murder of Kim Jong-nam.

yoffa , Mar 10, 2018 10:29:38 AM | 66
The BBC has reported that a "source familiar with the investigation" said the nerve agent was "likely to be rarer than sarin or VX". This suggests that the ground is being prepared for announcing a result that will implicate Russia.

Kaszeta on bellingcat.com brings up the story of "novichoks" a class of organophosphate compounds allegedly developed as military nerve agents in the USSR. Russian chemists published papers in the open literature on these compounds from the 1960s to the 1980s. The story that they were developed for military use and given the name "novichok" comes from a defector in the 1990s, Vil Mirzayanov. An authoritative review by Robin Black notes that there is no independent evidence supporting Mirzayanov's claims about the properties of these compounds.

Kaszeta's comments are relevant because he works closely with Bellingcat and it appears from his output that since 2013 he has been used to channel information originating from western intelligence services about alleged chemical attacks, based on his status as an independent expert with his company Strongpoint Security. The accounts filed for this company show that its turnover was not enough to provide Kaszeta with a living, raising obvious questions about who or what was paying him.

Petra , Mar 10, 2018 10:45:44 AM | 67
65, Hw... Murray has a lot more insider information than he lets on, often couching it as speculation, probably partly to protect sources. He can be admirably or foolishly blunt at times ("z' is b'sh!")but with delicate issues, he often alludes at things insteda of saying outright. He has retained deep connections with many (at least partially like-minded) people at the FCO, the diplomatic corps and (indeed) MS5 and 6.
Fatima Manoubia , Mar 10, 2018 11:10:53 AM | 69
Attention to the thread of comments starting with commenter "Abben" in this article by RI:

https://russia-insider.com/en/putin-recites-love-poem-all-women-internatl-womens-day-march-8-video/ri22732#comment-3793737255

TJ , Mar 10, 2018 11:32:45 AM | 70
@66 yoffa

"Novichok" was just used in the plot of the latest Strike Back TV series, from the Wikipedia article-"She discovers that Zaryn is in fact Karim Markov, a Russian scientist who allegedly killed his colleagues with Novichok, a nerve agent they invented"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_Back:_Retribution

Hoarsewhisperer , Mar 10, 2018 12:53:16 PM | 73
65, Hw... Murray has a lot more insider information than he lets on.
...
Posted by: Petra | Mar 10, 2018 10:45:44 AM | 67

His Former British Ambassador status bolsters his street cred. OTOH one imagines that he is acutely aware of the line dividing whistle-blowing from treason.

On the other, other hand, b is a quite diligent and competent sleuth too, and has more than a passing interest in military/defense intrigue and intel.

somebody , Mar 10, 2018 3:37:56 PM | 74
#65

There we go Britain to raise Sergei Skripal poisoning case with Nato allies

Kalen , Mar 10, 2018 3:40:12 PM | 75
Similar case in California, Were they addicts? http://abc7.com/2-dead-in-possible-fentanyl-exposure-in-fontana-home/3197127/

[Mar 11, 2018] Cleary the Guardian was swallowed up by government when it surrendered its hard drives to the regime for examination and/or destruction in the wake of the Snowden revelations

Guardian is just an organ of regime propaganda like the BBC...
Notable quotes:
"... Now The Guardian is just an organ of regime propaganda like the BBC (thank God for OffGuardian) and here is the island nation AGAIN asserting its dominance over the whole world, but this time on behalf of his brawnier brother, the EUSE, aka Exceptional US Empire. ..."
"... But somewhere along the time beginning with Clinton, Americans didn't worry their pretty little heads about nuclear war or American wars on everybody anywhere any longer so long as it didn't disturb their creature comforts and shopping and lattes by coming to the homeland. ..."
"... The Nuclear Freeze movement was, after all, a direct response to Reagan's "evil empire" military buildup in the 1980s and then voila he and Gorbachev negotiated away a whole class of nuclear weapons and Old Bush promised Nato wouldn't expand. Hope. Then that sneaky little bastard Clinton started expanding Nato on behalf of the Pentagon / CKIA / NSA / military /congressional industrial complex. ..."
Mar 11, 2018 | off-guardian.org

Thomas Prentice says March 9, 2018

Cleary the Guardian was swallowed up by England's fascist regime controlled by the City of London when it surrendered its hard drives to the regime for examination and/or destruction in the wake of the Snowden revelations.

The Guardian ownerships also sold their souls -- although the Guardian had already been in decline before they nabbed Glenn Greenwald. When he left, the Guardian lost ALL presumptive credibility.

Now The Guardian is just an organ of regime propaganda like the BBC (thank God for OffGuardian) and here is the island nation AGAIN asserting its dominance over the whole world, but this time on behalf of his brawnier brother, the EUSE, aka Exceptional US Empire.

One wonders how much longer the Russians will put up with this now that it is CLEAR that -- for the first time ever -- the Russians have complete military and nuclear superiority over "The West."

I'll bet Putin won't invade Ukraine, Germany, France, Brussels and England from the North and from the sea in the wintertime.

The Big Problem Is That Americans are afraid -- frightened -- but they are NOT afraid or frightened of a particular thing -- it is a generic fright. So they are no longer afraid of nuclear war. Trotsky said America was the strongest nation but also the most terrified' and nothing has changed except military and nuclear superiority along with economic clout has shifted to Russia and China. Were Americans afraid of nuclear war -- or say, of an invasion from Saskatchewan or Tamaulipas -- there might be hope.

But somewhere along the time beginning with Clinton, Americans didn't worry their pretty little heads about nuclear war or American wars on everybody anywhere any longer so long as it didn't disturb their creature comforts and shopping and lattes by coming to the homeland.

The Nuclear Freeze movement was, after all, a direct response to Reagan's "evil empire" military buildup in the 1980s and then voila he and Gorbachev negotiated away a whole class of nuclear weapons and Old Bush promised Nato wouldn't expand. Hope. Then that sneaky little bastard Clinton started expanding Nato on behalf of the Pentagon / CKIA / NSA / military /congressional industrial complex.

None of this suggests that it will end pretty.

[Mar 11, 2018] We've attempted to screw him and his country with such malice and intensity that he must see us as existential threat.

Mar 11, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Bill Herschel 10 March 2018 at 04:13 PM

Slightly off topic...

I would be really interested in SST conducting a gedanken experiment with its correspondents that would choose/ create answers to a variant of the Evangelical question, "WWJD?", namely What Would Putin Do?

I'm interested in this, because I think the entire question, "Did Russia influence the Presidential election?" completely misses the point and ultimately is irrelevant in itself. The relevant question is "Why would Russia influence the election?"

Certainly, without the slightest question, Russia would have a motive to influence the election if it owned Donald Trump. But it's pointless to engage in a round robin about whether or not that is true. On the other hand, if Russia/Putin *did* own Donald Trump, what would Donald Trump do? What would Putin have him do? Obviously, you have to make some assumptions about what Putin wants for the U.S., but the recent historical record indicates to me that what Putin wants for the U.S. is for it to degenerate into anarchy and obscurity. We've attempted to screw him and his country with such malice and intensity that he must see us as existential threat.

Now, to be of any use, there should be an entire list of Trump's actions... 20, 30... with the question, "Is this what Putin would have ordered him to do and why?"

Personally, I have trouble finding a single thing Trump has done that could not have been ordered from Moscow. Moving the embassy to Jerusalem, meeting Kim, erecting tariffs, etc. All exactly what Putin/Russia would want him to do. Domestically, supporting the most divisive candidates he can find (Alabama, Arizona...) etc. What is interesting is that if Putin does *not* own him, if Trump spent his time in Moscow reading the great books, it is amazing that he could be acting in a way that fully supports Putin.

So there can be no confusion, I am a Russophile. An excellent case can be made that Russia won WWII. That by itself is enough to support the country. But it goes on and on. Up to and including Russia's support for Syrian sovereignty against Saudi terrorists.

[Mar 11, 2018] I have the audacity to hope that the dismantling of the American Empire will proceed as copacetically as the dismantling of the Soviet Empire did

Mar 11, 2018 | cluborlov.blogspot.ch

I have the audacity to hope that the dismantling of the American Empire will proceed as copacetically as the dismantling of the Soviet Empire did. (This is not to say that it won't be humiliating or impoverishing, or that it won't be accompanied by a huge increase in morbidity and mortality.)

One of my greatest fears over the past decade was that Russia wouldn't take the US and NATO seriously enough and just try to wait them out. After all, what is there to really to fear from a nation that has over a 100 trillion dollars in unfunded entitlements, that's full of opioid addicts, with 100 million working-age people permanently out of work, with decrepit infrastructure and poisoned national politics?

And as far as NATO, there is, of course, Germany, which is busy rewriting "Deutschland, Deutschland, über alles" to be gender-neutral. What are they supposed to do next? March on Moscow under a rainbow banner and hope that the Russians die laughing? Oh, and there's also NATO's largest Eurasian asset, Turkey, which is currently busy slaughtering America's Kurdish assets in Northern Syria.

But simply waiting them out would have been a gamble, because in its death throes the American Empire could have lashed out in unpredictable ways.

I am glad that Russia chose not to gamble with its national security. Now that the US has been safely checkmated using the new Russian weapons systems, I feel that the world is in a much better place. If you like peace, then it seems like your best option is to also like nukes -- the best ones possible, ones against which no deterrent exists, and wielded by peaceful, law-abiding nations that have no evil designs on the rest of the planet.

[Mar 11, 2018] Washington s Century-long War on Russia by Mike Whitney

Highly recommended!
The crisis of neoliberalism is at the core of current anti-Russian campaign.
Notable quotes:
"... So, as long as Russia remained open to the West's political maneuvering and wholesale thievery, every thing was hunky-dory. But as soon as Vladimir Putin got his bearings (during his second term as President) and started reassembling the broken state, then western elites became very concerned and denounced Putin as an "autocrat" and a "KGB thug." ..."
"... As the Western countries' elites were implementing a policy of political and economic containment of Russia, old threats were growing and new ones were emerging in the world, and the efforts to do away with them have failed. I think that the main reason for that is that the model of "West-centric" globalization, which developed following the dismantling of the bipolar architecture and was aimed at ensuring the prosperity of one-seventh of the world's population at the expense of the rest, proved ineffective. It is becoming more and more obvious that a narrow group of "chosen ones" is unable to ensure the sustainable growth of the global economy on their own and solve such major challenges as poverty, climate change, shortage of food and other vital resources . ..."
"... The American people need to look beyond the propaganda and try to grasp what's really going on. Russia is not Washington's enemy, it's a friend that's trying to nudge the US in adirection that will increase its opportunities for peace and prosperity in the future. Lavrov is simply pointing out that a multipolar world is inevitable as economic power becomes more widespread. This emerging reality means the US will have to modify its behavior, cooperate with other sovereign nations, comply with international law, and seek a peaceful settlement to disputes. It means greater parity between the states, fairer representation in global decision-making, and a narrower gap between the world's winners and losers. ..."
"... Admit it: The imperial model has failed. It's time to move on. ..."
www.nakedcapitalism.com

The United States has launched a three-pronged offensive on Russia. First, it's attacking Russia's economy via sanctions and oil-price manipulation. Second, it's increasing the threats to Russia's national security by arming and training militant proxies in Syria and Ukraine, and by encircling Russia with NATO forces and missile systems. And, third, it's conducting a massive disinformation campaign aimed at convincing the public that Russia is a 'meddling aggressor' that wants to destroy the foundation of American democracy. (Elections)

In response to Washington's hostility, Moscow has made every effort to extend the olive branch. Russia does not want to fight the world's biggest superpower any more than it wants to get bogged down in a bloody and protracted conflict in Syria. What Russia wants is normal, peaceful relations based on respect for each others interests and for international law. What Russia will not tolerate, however, is another Iraq-type scenario where the sovereign rights of a strategically-located state are shunted off so the US can arbitrarily topple the government, decimate the society and plunge the region deeper into chaos. Russia won't allow that, which is why it has put its Airforce at risk in Syria, to defend the foundational principle of state sovereignty upon which the entire edifice of global security rests.

The majority of Americans believe that Russia is the perpetrator of hostilities against the United States, mainly because the media and the political class have faithfully disseminated the spurious claims that Russia meddled in the 2016 elections. But the allegations are ridiculous and without merit. Russia-gate is merely the propaganda component of Washington's Full Spectrum Dominance theory, that is, disinformation is being used to make it appear as though the US is the victim when, in fact, it is the perpetrator of hostilities against Russia. Simply put, the media has turned reality on its head. Washington wants to inflict as much pain as possible on Russia because Russia has frustrated its plan to control critical resources and pipeline corridors in Central Asia and the Middle East. The Trump administration's new National Defense Strategy is quite clear on this point. Russia's opposition to Washington's destabilizing interventions has earned it the top spot on the Pentagon's "emerging rivals" list. Moscow is now Public Enemy#1.

Washington's war on Russia has a long history dating back at least 100 years to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. Despite the fact that the US was engaged in a war with Germany at the time (WW1), Washington and its allies sent 150,000 men from 15 nations to intervene on behalf of the "Whites" hoping to staunch the spread of communism into Europe. In the words of British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, the goal was "to strangle the Bolshevik baby in its crib."

According to Vasilis Vourkoutiotis from the University of Ottawa:

" the Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War.. was a failed attempt to eradicate Bolshevism while it was still weak .As early as February 1918 Britain supported intervention in the civil war on behalf of the Whites, and in March it landed troops in Murmansk. They were soon joined by forces from France, Italy, Japan, the United States, and ten other nations. Eventually, more than 150,000 Allied soldiers served in Russia

The scale of the war between the Russian Reds and Whites, however, was such that the Allies soon realized they would have little, if any, direct impact on the course of the Civil War unless they were prepared to intervene on a far grander scale. By the end of April 1919 the French had withdrawn their soldiers .British and American troops saw some action in November 1918 on the Northern Front but this campaign was of limited significance in the outcome of the Civil War. The last British and American soldiers were withdrawn in 1920. The main Allied contributions to the White cause thereafter were supplies and money, mostly from Britain .

The chief purpose of Allied intervention in Soviet Russia was to help the Whites defeat the Reds and destroy Bolshevism." (Allied Intervention in the Russian Revolution", portalus.ru)

The reason we bring up this relatively unknown bit of history is because it helps to put current events into perspective. First, it helps readers to see that Washington has been sticking its nose in Russia's business more than a century. Second, it shows that– while Washington's war on Russia has ebbed and flowed depending on the political situation in Moscow– it has never completely ended. The US has always treated Russia with suspicion, contempt and brutality. During the Cold War, when Russia's global activities put a damper on Washington's depredations around the world, relations remained stretched to the breaking point. But after the Soviet Union collapsed in December, 1991, relations gradually thawed, mainly because the buffoonish Boris Yeltsin opened the country up to a democratization program that allowed the state's most valuable strategic assets to be transferred to voracious oligarchs for pennies on the dollar. The plundering of Russia pleased Washington which is why it sent a number of prominent US economists to Moscow to assist in the transition from communism to a free-market system. These neoliberal miscreants subjected the Russian economy to "shock therapy" which required the auctioning off of state-owned resources and industries even while hyperinflation continued to rage and the minuscule life savings of ordinary working people were wiped out almost over night. The upshot of this Washington-approved looting-spree was a dramatic uptick in extreme poverty which intensified the immiseration of tens of millions of people. Economist Joseph Stiglitz followed events closely in Russia at the time and summed it up like this:

"In Russia, the people were told that capitalism was going to bring new, unprecedented prosperity. In fact, it brought unprecedented poverty, indicated not only by a fall in living standards, not only by falling GDP, but by decreasing life spans and enormous other social indicators showing a deterioration in the quality of life ..

(Due to) the tight monetary policies that were pursued firms didn't have the money to even pay their employees . they didn't have enough money to pay their pensioners, to pay their workers .Then, with the government not having enough revenue, other aspects of life started to deteriorate. They didn't have enough money for hospitals, schools. Russia used to have one of the good school systems in the world; the technical level of education was very high. (But they no longer had) enough money for that. So it just began to affect people in every dimension of their lives .

The number of people in poverty in Russia, for instance, increased from 2 percent to somewhere between 40 and 50 percent, with more than one out of two children living in families below poverty. The market economy was a worse enemy for most of these people than the Communists had said it would be. It brought Gucci bags, Mercedes, the fruits of capitalism to a few .But you had a shrinking (economy). The GDP in Russia fell by 40 percent. In some (parts) of the former Soviet Union, the GDP, the national income, fell by over 70 percent. And with that smaller pie it was more and more unequally divided, so a few people got bigger and bigger slices, and the majority of people wound up with less and less and less . (PBS interview with Joseph Stiglitz, Commanding Heights)

So, as long as Russia remained open to the West's political maneuvering and wholesale thievery, every thing was hunky-dory. But as soon as Vladimir Putin got his bearings (during his second term as President) and started reassembling the broken state, then western elites became very concerned and denounced Putin as an "autocrat" and a "KGB thug." At the same time, Washington continued its maniacal push eastward using its military catspaw, NATO, to achieve its geopolitical ambitions to control vital resources and industries in the most populous and prosperous region of the coming century, Eurasia. After promising Russian President Gorbachev that NATO would never "expand one inch to the east", the US-led military alliance added 13 new countries to its membership, all of them straddling Russia's western flank, all of them located, like Hitler, on Russia's doorstep, all of them posing an existential threat to Russia's survival. NATO forces now routinely conduct provocative military drills just miles from the Russian border while state-of-the-art missile systems surround Russia on all sides. (Imagine Russia conducting similar drills in the Gulf of Mexico or on the Canadian border. How would Washington respond?)

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov gave an excellent summary of post Cold War history at a gathering of the Korber Foundation in Berlin in 2017. Brainwashed Americans who foolishly blame Russia for meddling in the 2016 elections, should pay attention to what he said.

LAVROV– "Ever since the fall of the Berlin Wall we have shown our cards, trying to do our best to assert the values of equal partnership in international affairs .Back in the early 1990s, we withdrew our troops from Eastern and Central Europe and the Baltic states and dramatically downsized our military capacity near our western borders

When the cold war era came to an end, Russia was hoping that this would become our common victory – the victory of both the former Communist bloc countries and the West. The dreams of ushering in shared peace and cooperation seemed near to fruition. However, the United States and its allies decided to declare themselves the sole winners, refusing to work together to create the architecture of equal and indivisible security. They made their choice in favor of shifting the dividing lines to our borders – through expanding NATO and then through the implementation of the EU's Eastern Partnership program

As the Western countries' elites were implementing a policy of political and economic containment of Russia, old threats were growing and new ones were emerging in the world, and the efforts to do away with them have failed. I think that the main reason for that is that the model of "West-centric" globalization, which developed following the dismantling of the bipolar architecture and was aimed at ensuring the prosperity of one-seventh of the world's population at the expense of the rest, proved ineffective. It is becoming more and more obvious that a narrow group of "chosen ones" is unable to ensure the sustainable growth of the global economy on their own and solve such major challenges as poverty, climate change, shortage of food and other vital resources .

The latest events are clear evidence that the persistent attempts to form a unipolar world order have failed .The new centers of economic growth and concomitant political influence are assuming responsibility for the state of affairs in their regions. Let me reiterate that the emergence of multipolar world order is a fact and a reality. Seeking to hold back this process and keep the unfairly gained privileged positions is going to lead nowhere. We see increasing examples of nations raising their voice in defense of their right to decide their own destiny ." (Sergey Lavrov, Russian Foreign Minister)

The American people need to look beyond the propaganda and try to grasp what's really going on. Russia is not Washington's enemy, it's a friend that's trying to nudge the US in adirection that will increase its opportunities for peace and prosperity in the future. Lavrov is simply pointing out that a multipolar world is inevitable as economic power becomes more widespread. This emerging reality means the US will have to modify its behavior, cooperate with other sovereign nations, comply with international law, and seek a peaceful settlement to disputes. It means greater parity between the states, fairer representation in global decision-making, and a narrower gap between the world's winners and losers.

Who doesn't want this? Who doesn't want to see an end of the bloody US-led invasions, the countless drone assassinations, the vast destruction of ancient civilizations, and the senseless slaughter of innocent men, women and children? Who doesn't want to see Washington's wings clipped so the bloodletting stops and the millions of refugees and internally displaced can return to their homes?

Lavrov offers a vision of the future that all peace-loving people should welcome with open arms.

Admit it: The imperial model has failed. It's time to move on.

[Mar 11, 2018] Reality Check: The Guardian Restarts Push for Regime Change in Russia by Kit

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... This,,,"Russia appears lost, a global menace, a moral vacuum, a far greater threat than it ever was during the cold war." Should be changed to "The Guardian appears lost, a global menace, a moral vacuum, a far greater threat than it ever was during the cold war." ..."
"... The Guardian has consistently propagandised for regime changes inspired by Washington NeoCons, those of Libya, Syria, Ukraine and is ramping up their propaganda machine toward North Korea, Venezuela and now Russia itself having promoted destabilisation on its borders in Ukraine. ..."
"... On top of what I said yesterday, if Russian oligarchs do pull all their money out of Britain, the British economy would crash, it being highly dependent on the services sector (constituting 80% of Britain's GDP in 2016 according to Wikipedia) and the financial services industry in particular. So if all those Russian billions swirling through Britain's financial system are "dodgy", that's because the system itself encouraged those inflows. ..."
"... "Poor little Britain" which actually spends on par with Russia in terms of its military budget, despite the fact that a) it's a much smaller country to defend and is surrounded by water, and b) it's part of NATO with the US as its staunch defender so it really doesn't need a standalone military anyway. ..."
"... From what's emerging now, it seems there simply were no assassins wandering round Salisbury. Instead, it appears Mr Skripal for some reason has a house full of nerve gas, or enough of it at least to take out himself, his daughter and a policeman who inspected the premises. ..."
"... There is one key element that proves that the Russians didn't do it: The Russians aren't so clumsy as to poison over a dozen other people at the same time. ..."
"... The whole piece is an emotionally charged rant, bordering on hysteria, based on a transparent tissue of lies, distortions and absolutely stunning hypocrisy; and this coming from the 'liberal' 'left of centre' Guardian! ..."
Mar 11, 2018 | off-guardian.org

Mark Rice-Oxley, Guardian columnist and the first in line to fight in WWIII.

The alleged poisoning of ex-MI6 agent Sergei Skripal has caused the Russophobic MSM to go into overdrive. Nowhere is the desperation with which the Skripal case has been seized more obvious than the Guardian. Luke Harding is spluttering incoherently about a weapons lab that might not even exist anymore . Simon Jenkins gamely takes up his position as the only rational person left at the Guardian, before being heckled in the comments and dismissed as a contrarian by Michael White on twitter. More and more the media are becoming a home for dangerous, aggressive, confrontational rhetoric that has no place in sensible, adult newspapers.

For example, Mark Rice-Oxley's column in today's Guardian:

Oh, Russia! Even before we point fingers over poison and speculate about secret agents and spy swaps and pub food in Salisbury, one thing has become clear: Russia appears lost, a global menace, a moral vacuum, a far greater threat than it ever was during the cold war.

Read this. It's from a respected "unbiased", liberal news outlet. It is the worst, most partisan political language I have ever heard, more heated and emotionally charged than even the most fraught moments of the Cold War. It is dangerous to the whole planet, and has no place in our media.

If everything he said in the following article were true, if he had nothing but noble intentions and right on his side, this would still be needlessly polarizing and war-like language.

To make it worse, everything he proceeds to say is a complete lie.

Usually we would entitle these pieces "fact checks", but this goes beyond that. This? This is a reality check.

Its agents pop over for murder and shopping

FALSE: There's no proof any of this ever happened. There has been no trial in the Litvinenko case. The "public inquiry" was a farce, with no cross-examination of witnesses, evidence given in secret and anonymous witnesses. All of which contravene British law regarding a fair trial.

even while its crooks use Britain as a 24/7 laundromat for their ill-gotten billions, stolen from compatriots.

TRUE sort of: Russian billionaires do come to London, Paris, and Switzerland to launder their (stolen) money. Rice-Oxley is too busy with his 2 minutes of hate to interrogate this issue. The reason oligarchs launder their money here is that WE let them. Oligarchs have been fleeing Russia for over a decade. Why? Because, in Russia, Putin's government has jailed billionaires for tax evasion and embezzling, stripped them of illegally acquired assets and demanded they pay their taxes. That's why you have wanted criminals like Sergei Pugachev doing interviews with Luke Harding, complaining he's down to his "last 270 million" .

When was the last time a British billionaire was prosecuted for financial crimes? Mega-Corporations owe literally billions in tax , and our government lets them get away with it.

Its digital natives use their skills not for solving Russia's own considerable internal problems but to subvert the prosperous adversaries that it secretly envies.

FALSE: Russiagate is a farce, anyone with an open-mind can see that . The reference to Russians envying the west is childish and insulting. The 13, just thirteen, Russians who were indicted by Mueller have no connection to the Russian government, a nd allegedly campaigned for many candidates , and both for and against Trump. They are a PR firm, nothing more.

It bought a World Cup,

FALSE: The World Cup bids are voted on, and after years and years of investigation the US/UK teams have found so little evidence of corruption in the Russia bid that they simply stopped talking about it. If the FBI had found even the slightest hint of financial malpractice, would we ever have stopped hearing about it?

invaded two neighbours

False: A European Union investigation found that Georgia was to blame for the start of the (very brief, very humiliating) Russo-Georgian war . It lasted a week. That a week-long conflict started by the other side is evidence of "global threat" in a world where Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya have happened is beyond hypocritical it is delusional.

Regarding the second "neighbour": Ukraine. Ukraine and Russia are not at war. Ukraine has claimed to have been "invaded" by Russia many times but has never declared war. Why? Because they rely on Russian gas to live, and because they know that if Russia were to ever REALLY invade, the war would last only just a big longer than the Georgian one. The "anti-terrorist operation" in Ukraine was started by the coup government in 2014. Since that time over 10,000 people have died. The vast majority killed by the governments mercenaries and far-right militias many of whom espouse outright fascism .

bombed children to save a butcher in the Middle East.

MISLEADING: The statement is trying to paint Russia/Assad as deliberately targeting children, which is clearly untrue. Russia is operating in Syria in full compliance with international law. Unlike literally everybody else bar Iran. When Russia entered the conflict, at the invitation of the legitimate Syrian government, Jihadists were winning the war. ISIS had huge swathes of territory, al-Qaeda affiliates had strongholds in all of Syria's major cities. Syria was on the brink of collapse. Rice-Oxley is unclear whether or not he thinks this is a good thing.

Today, ISIS is obliterated, Aleppo is free and the war is almost over. Apparently Syria becoming another Libya is preferable to a secular government winning a war against terrorists and US-backed mercenaries.

And now it wants to start a new nuclear arms race.

FALSE: America started the arms race when they pulled out of the anti-ballistic missile treaty. Putin warned at the time it was a dangerous move . America then moved their AEGIS "defense shield" into Eastern Europe . Giving them the possibility of first-strike without retaliation. This is an untennable position for any country. Putin warned, at the time, that Russia would have to respond. They have responded. Mr Rice-Oxley should take this up with Bush and Cheney if he has a problem with it.

And before the whataboutists say, "America does some of that stuff too", that may be true, but just because the US is occasionally awful it doesn't mean that Russia isn't.

MISLEADING: America doesn't do "some of that stuff". No, America aren't "occasionally awful". They do ALL of that stuff, and have been the biggest destructive force on the planet for over 70 years. Since Putin came to power America has carried out aggressive military operations against Pakistan, Libya, Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon and Syria. They have sanctioned and threatened and carried out coups against North Korea, Ukraine, Iran, Honduras, Venezuela and Cuba. All that time, the US has also claimed the right to extradite and torture foreign nationals with impunity. The war crimes of American forces and agencies are beyond measure and count.

We are so used to American crimes we just don't see them anymore. Imagine Putin, at one his epic four-hour Q&A sessions, off-handedly admitting to torturing people in illegal prison camps . Would we ever hear the end of it?

Even if you cede the utterly false claim that Russia has "invaded two neighbours", the scale of destruction just does not compare.

Invert the scale of destruction and casualties of Georgia and Iraq. Imagine Putin's government had killed 500,000 people in Georgia alone, whilst routinely condemning the US for a week-long war in Iraq that killed less than 600 people. Imagine Russia kidnapped foreign nationals and tortured them, whilst lambasting America's human rights record.

The double-think employed here is literally insane.

Note to Rice-Oxley and his peers, pointing out your near-delusional hypocrisy is not "whataboutism". It's a standard rhetorical appeal to fairness. If you believe the world shouldn't be fair, fine, but don't expect other people not to point out your double standards.

As for poor little Britain, it seems to take this brazen bullying like a whipping boy in the playground who has wet himself. Boycott the World Cup? That'll teach them!

FALSE: Rice-Oxley is trying to paint a picture of false weakness in order to promote calls for action. Britain has been anything but cooperative with Russia. British forces operate illegally in Syria , they arm and train rebels. They refused to let Russian authorities see the evidence in the Litvinenko case, and refused to let Russian lawyers cross-examine witnesses. Britain's attitude to Russia has been needlessly, provocatively antagonistic for years.

Russians have complained that the portrayal of their nation in dramas such as McMafia is cartoonish and unhelpful, a lazy smear casting an entire nation as a ludicrous two-dimensional pantomime villain with a pocketful of poisonous potions .Of course, the vast majority of Russians are indeed misrepresented by such portrayals, because they are largely innocent in these antics.

TRUE: Russians do complain about this, which is entirely justifiable. The western representation of Russians is ignorant and racist almost without exception. It is an effort, just like Rice-Oxley's column, to demonize an entire people and whip up hatred of Russia so that people will support US-UK warmongering.

Most ordinary Russians are in fact also victims of the power system in their country, which requires ideas such as individual comfort, aspiration, dignity, prosperity and hope to be subjugated to the wanton reflexes of the state

FALSE: Putin's government has decreased poverty by over 66% in 17 years . They have increased life-expectancy, decreased crime, and increased public health. Pensions, social security and infrastructure have all been rebuilt. These are not controversial or debated claims. The Guardian published them itself just a few years ago. That is hardly a state where hope and aspiration are put aside.

Why is Russian power like this: cynical, destructive, zero-sum, determined to bring everything down to a base level where everyone thinks the worst of each other and behaves accordingly?

MISLEADING FALLACY: This is simply projection. There is no logical basis for this statement. He is simply employing the old rhetorical trick of asking WHY something exists, as a way of establishing its existence. This allows the (dishonest) author to sell his own agenda as if it solves a riddle. Before you can explain something, you need to establish an explanandum something which requires explaining. This is the basic logical process that our dear author is attempting to circumvent. We don't NEED to explain why Russian power is like this, because he hasn't yet established that it is .

I think there are two reasons. The most powerful political idea in Russia is restoration. A decade of humiliation – economic, social and geopolitical – that followed its rebirth in 1991 became the defining narrative of the new nation.

MISLEADING LANGUAGE: Describing the absolute destruction caused by the fall of the USSR as "rebirth" is an absurd joke. People sold their medals, furniture and keepsakes for food, people froze to death in the streets.

At times, even the continued existence of the Russian Federation appeared under threat.

TRUE: This is true. Russia was in danger of Balkanisation. The possibility of dozens of anarchic microstates, many with access to nuclear weapons, was very real. Most rational people would consider this a bad thing. The achievement of Putin's government in pulling Russia back from the brink should be applauded. Especially when compared with our Western governments who can barely even maintain the functional social security states created by their predecessors. Compare the NHS now with the NHS in 2000, compare Russia's health service now to 17 years ago. Who do you think is really in trouble?

The second reason is that the parlous internal state of Russia – absurdist justice, a threadbare social safety net, a pyramid society in which a very few get very rich and the rest languish – creates moral ambivalence.

PROJECTION: he actually makes this statement without even a hint of irony. The Tory government has killed people by slashing their benefits, and homeless people froze to death during the recent blizzards. The overall trend of British social structure has been down, for decades. Poverty is increasing all the time , food banks are opening and people are increasingly desperate. We are trending down. 20%, one in five British people, now live in poverty .

In that same time, as stated above, Russia's poverty has gone down and down. 13% of Russians live in poverty, almost half the UK rate. In 2014, before we sanctioned Russia, it was only 10%. Even the briefest research would show this. Columnists like Rice-Oxley go out of their way to avoid inconvenient facts.

What is to be done? I wouldn't respond with empty threats, Boris Johnson. No one cares.

Here we come to the centre of the shrubbery maze, up until now the column was just build up. Establishing a "problem" so he can pitch us a "solution".

There are only two weaknesses in this bully's defences. The first is his money. Britain needs to do something about the dodgy Russian billions swilling through its financial system. Make it really hard for Kremlin-connected money to buy football clubs or businesses or establish dodgy limited partnerships; stop oligarchs from raising capital on the London stock exchange. Don't bother with sanctions. Just say: "No thanks, we don't want your business."

FALSE: This shows not even the most basic understanding of the way money works. Money being made in Russia and spent in London is bad fo Russia. Sending billionaires back to Russia would inject money INTO the Russian economy. Either Rice-Oxley is actually a moron, or he is being deliberately dishonest.

What he REALLY means is that we should put pressure on the oligarchs, not to the hurt the Russian economy, but in the hopes the oligarchs will turn on Putin and remove him by undemocratic means.

He is pushing for backdoor regime change. And if you think I'm reading too much into this, then here

The second is public opinion. The imminent presidential election is a foregone conclusion, but the mood in Russia can turn suddenly, as we saw in 1991, 1993 and 2011-2012.

Notice how quickly he dismisses the democratic will of the Russian people. Poor, stupid, "envious" Russians aren't equipped to make their own decisions. We need to step in. "Public opinion" turning means a colour revolution. It means US backed regime change in a nuclear armed super-power. Backed by the cyberwarriors paid to spread Western propaganda online.

Maybe it's time to try some new digital hearts-and-minds operation. In the internet age, Russians have already shown how public opinion can be manipulated. Perhaps our own secret digital marvels can embark on the kind of information counter-offensive to win over the many millions of Russians who share our values. Perhaps they already are.

The hypocrisy is mind-blowing, when I read this paragraph I was dumb-founded. Speechless. For months we've been hearing about how terrible Russia is for allegedly interfering in the American election. Damaging democracy with reporting true news out of context and some well placed memes.

Our response? Our defense of our "values"? Use the armies of online propagandists our governments employ – their existence was reported in the Guardian – in order to undermine, or undo the democratic will of the Russian people. Rice-Oxley is positing this with a straight face.

Russia is such a destabilising threat to "our democratic values", such a moral vacuum, that we must use subterfuge to undermine their elections and remove their popular head of state.

Rice-Oxley wants to push and prod and provoke and antagonise a nuclear armed power that, at worst, is guilty of nothing but playing our game by our rules and winning. He wants to build a case for war with Russia, and he's doing it on bedrock of cynical lies.

It's all incredibly dangerous. Hopefully they'll realise that before it's too late. For all our sakes.

vexarb says March 11, 2018

Meanwhile, back in the real world, Putin's 10 year plan for the future of Russia. Putin is a builder, like Peter the Great. He is a seeker after excellence, like Catherine the Great. If his 10 year plan can achieve the half of what he set out in his recent speech, the name Putin will go down in history with the same sobriquet.

The most important part of Putin's March 1st speech:

https://thesaker.is/the-most-important-part-of-putins-march-1st-speech/

And on the village level, because that's where most of the real work of the world is done, a snippet BTL from Auslander who lives in the Crimea: "the first implications of anti corruption efforts are obvious in our little village. We'll see how it pans out but everyone can, and should, assist in this task. The proof will be in the pudding when The West starts screaming about certain kind, gentle and innocent 'businessmen' who end up counting trees [in Siberia?] for a decade or three."

Jay Q says March 10, 2018
Take a look at this wretched piece in the Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/10/sergei-skripal-case-proved-charge-putin-attempted-murder

I wonder how much longer the general readership over there will cotton on to the pro-war and propaganda agenda of the Guardian and leave it en masse? It's as dishonest as The Sun.

M. says March 10, 2018
"Poor little Britain", with half the population, a much smaller territory ,and being part of the largest military alliance in the world, spends only 10 billions less than Russia in "defense". One of those "defense" strategies included in the budget, one that all those commentators vilifying Russia conveniently ignore, is to blow up weddings, funerals and entire villages with missiles fired from drones. No trial, no public kill list, no record of people killed, no accountability. That is sanctioned, extra-judicial murder of suspects and everyone around them. And these progressive commentators, eager to spread prosperity by any mean, seem to be ok with it.

Update: as I was writing this I noticed that The Guardian has a piece by (of all people!), Simon Jenkins, which, yes, takes for granted that the assassination attempt was carried out by the Russians, but asks if there is a moral difference between that and killing suspects with drone strikes. For that, he has been labeled an useful idiot and "an apologist for attempted mass murder on British soil". Highly amusing if you ask me, but also a terrifying example of how straying if only a little bit from the official line ("yes, the Russians tried to kill this guy, they are the worst, but maybe we should have a look at ourselves and our (kind of) inappropriate tendency to murder everyone we want") has to be punished. There are no ifs or buts while at the two minutes of hate. Now even the pieces that are there to give a semblance of balance have to be torn apart by those liberal, prosperity loving persons that can´t seem to be able to condemn the murder of children at will. Now it is time to express hatred towards Goldstein, I mean, of course, Putin and everything Russia.

Greg Bacon says March 10, 2018
This,,,"Russia appears lost, a global menace, a moral vacuum, a far greater threat than it ever was during the cold war." Should be changed to "The Guardian appears lost, a global menace, a moral vacuum, a far greater threat than it ever was during the cold war."

All suffering from PTDS AKA Putin-Trump Derangement Syndrome.

stevehayes13 says March 10, 2018
The Russophobes over at the Guardian (and the rest of the corporate media) would be well advised to review the trial of Julius Streicher at the Nuremberg Tribunal.
Sheila Coombes says March 10, 2018
The Guardian has consistently propagandised for regime changes inspired by Washington NeoCons, those of Libya, Syria, Ukraine and is ramping up their propaganda machine toward North Korea, Venezuela and now Russia itself having promoted destabilisation on its borders in Ukraine.

I find it the ultimate paradox that a publication purporting to be 'liberal' acts so enthusiastically for deadly regime changes from this once Trotskyist but now extreme Right Wing group. There is nothing 'liberal', 'humanitarian', or moral about promotion of deadly regime changes that have destroyed previously peaceful nations and murdered hundreds of thousands in the process. Guardian for the geopolitical goals of the self-declared 'exceptional' Empire, the new 'master race' that of the US.

Big B says March 10, 2018
One final observation on the Skripal case (for now): this stuff is so toxic. We don't know what the stuff is: nevertheless, we know it is so toxic, can only be made by a state, and needs careful expert handling. We know this because every paper and TV channel has by now emphasised that this stuff is so toxic, etc. If we missed the "nerve agents and what they do to you" coverage: we can ascertain for ourselves from the men in the hazmat suits, the this stuff must be so toxic. The Army have now been deployed: on hand after completing the largest CW exercise ever held, 'Toxic Dagger'; they are now employing their specialist skills to carry out "Sensitive Site Operations" because this stuff is you get it by now. In another piece of pure theater: police in hazmat suits were examining the grave of Alexander and Liudmila Skripal because even after a year or more buried underground, you can't be too careful, because this stuff is A woman from the office next to Zizzi was taken ill (maybe she had the risotto con pesce) because even after a week, and next door, traces of this stuff can still be

11 (or 16) people were hospitalised from the effects of 'this stuff': the first attending officer, Nick Bailey, is only just out of ICU and lucky to be alive. The Skripal's are not so lucky: and on "palliative care" according to H de Bretton-Gordon. Yet the eye-witness calling himself 'Jamie Paine' was close enough to get coughed on; and the unnamed passing doctor and nurse that attended the Skripals at the scene, clearing their airways, are all fine (despite being hospitalised). Yet PC Bailey nearly died? Funny that?

When first you practice to deceive: someone in the propaganda department must have noticed this glaring inconsistency. Enter, stage right, former Met Chief Ian (now Lord) Blair (guess who was leading the Met when Litvinenko was poisoned?): to clarify that PC Bailey was contaminated when he was the first officer to enter the Skripal's home – not attend them in Salisbury. This allowed the Torygraph and Fox to speculate that Yulia brought a contaminated present for her father (which she kept in a drawer for a week, because this stuff is so toxic?). The Torygraph's previous spin: that Skripal was poisoned for his contributions to the Pissgate dossier were torpedoed by Orbis (Steele's company). Speaking on Radio 4: after pushing the Buzzfeed "14 other deaths" dodgy dossier; Blair said "So there maybe some clues floating around in here." Yes, clues that you are lying? This is pure theater: only it is more Morecambe and Wise than Shakespeare.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/09/russian-spy-may-have-poisoned-home-police-believe/

DomesticExtremist says March 10, 2018
Theatre indeed.

Check out the report from C4News (mute the sound).

Two guys plodding around in fluorescent breather suits, another couple with gas masks, but behind them firemen in normal uniform and no gas masks and the reporter 20 feet in front, in civvies wih no protective gear at all.

Virulent nerve agent threat? Theatre, and not very convincing at that.

BigB says March 10, 2018
Another day, another story: now the BBC, Torygraph (contradicting its own article above), Wiltshire Police, and Nick Bailey himself all confirmed that he became ill after attending the Skripals. So now we know they are lying: the house story concocted by Blair was a complete fabrication. The "nerve agent" appears to be only selectively toxic!
http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/journalnewsindex/16078868.Police_officer_in_hospital_over_nerve_agent_attack_releases_first_statement/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/08/russian-spy-poisoning-police-officer-struck-rare-nerve-agent/
flaxgirl says March 10, 2018
It just seems like the so very patronizing nonsense you'd see in a right-wing publication.
Edwige says March 10, 2018
Or the tune you'd hear played on the "mighty wurlitzer".
BigB says March 10, 2018
Flaxgirl: a bit OT, but not too much as this event does not seem to have too much basis in reality: on the question of fabrication the UK Home Office held an event this week – Security and Policing 2018 – where the "Live Demo Area" was sponsored by Crisis Cast. I though you might interested? Are they providing critical incident training: or the critical incidents themselves is a legitimate question after the events in Salisbury?

https://www.securityandpolicing.co.uk/security-policing-live/demo/

As featured on UK Column News (from 22:52.)
https://www.ukcolumn.org/ukcolumn-news/uk-column-news-6th-march-2018

Francis Lee says March 10, 2018
I suppose by now we should be used to the nauseating, self-righteous bluster dished out on a daily basis by the Anglo-Zionist media. The two minutes hate by the flabby 'left' liberals who now have apparently joined forces with the demented US neo-cons in openly baying for a war against Russia. How, exactly did these people expect Russia to react to the abrogation of the ABM agreement, marching NATO right up to Russia's doorstep, staging coups in the Ukraine and Georgia, having the US sixth fleet swanning around in the Black Sea? Of course, Russia reacted as any other self-respecting state would react to such blatant provocations. And this includes the US during the Cuba crisis and its self-proclaimed right to intervene in its sphere of influence – Latin America – and for that matter anywhere else on the planet. And it does so A L'outrance.

But I was foregetting, the Anglo-Zionist axis has a divine mission mandated by the deity to reconfigure the world and bring democracy and freedom to those "Lesser breeds without the Law" (Kipling). Of course, this updated version of 'taking up the white man's burden' by the 'exceptional people' may involve mass murder, mayhem, destruction and chaos, unfortunately necessary in the short(ish) run. But these benighted peoples should realise it is for their own good, and if this means starving to death 500,000 Iraqi children through sanctions, well, it was 'worth it' according to the lovely Madeline Albright. This is the language and methodology of a totalitarian imperialism. As someone has remarked the Anglo-zionist empire is not on the wrong side of history, it is the wrong side of history.

The arrogance, ignorance and crass venality of these people is manifest to the point of parody.

Jen says March 10, 2018
I agree with Mark Rice-Oxley that Russian oligarchs should pull their money out of Britain and return it to Russia to invest in businesses there. That would be the ethical thing for them to do, to fulfill their proper tax obligations and stop using Britain as a tax haven.

I hear that Russia has had another bumper wheat harvest and is now poised to take over from Australia as the major wheat exporter to Egypt and Indonesia, the world's biggest buyers of wheat. So if Russian oligarchs are wondering where to put their money in, wheat production, research into improving wheat yields and the conditions wheat is grown in are just a few areas they can invest in.

Be careful what you wish for, Mr Rice-Oxley – your wish might come true bigger than you realise!

Jen says March 11, 2018
On top of what I said yesterday, if Russian oligarchs do pull all their money out of Britain, the British economy would crash, it being highly dependent on the services sector (constituting 80% of Britain's GDP in 2016 according to Wikipedia) and the financial services industry in particular. So if all those Russian billions swirling through Britain's financial system are "dodgy", that's because the system itself encouraged those inflows.

Who's really "dodgy", Mr Rice-Oxley?

David C. Lee (@worldblee) says March 10, 2018
"Poor little Britain" which actually spends on par with Russia in terms of its military budget, despite the fact that a) it's a much smaller country to defend and is surrounded by water, and b) it's part of NATO with the US as its staunch defender so it really doesn't need a standalone military anyway.
Emily Durron says March 9, 2018
The Guardian are scum. Lying, deceiving, warmongering, hating scum. I would love to parachute them all into East Ghouta.
Fair dinkum says March 9, 2018
"It's them, over there, they are evil. We must stop them. They are coming for us, they will take our children and steal our i phones !!! Arrgh!!!" "I'll have another strong short black thanks"
bevin says March 9, 2018
Their world is falling apart- in Korea and the Middle East the Empire is on the verge of eviction. All the certitudes of yesteryear are dissolving. Even the Turks, who, famously, held the line in Korea when the PLA attacked and the US Eighth Army fled south, are now on the other side. The same Turks who hosted US nuclear armed strategic missiles so openly that the USSR sent missiles of its own to Cuba.
As to the UK, the economy is contracting and the economic infrastructure is cracking up- living standards are plummeting and the only recourse of those responsible for the mess-the officers on the bridge- is propaganda. Like the Empire the British Establishment has been living on the fruits of its own propaganda for so long that, when it is exposed as merely empty bullying, there is nothing left but to resort to more lies in the hope that they will obscure raw and looming reality.

In The Guardian newsroom the water is three feet deep and rising inexorably, the ship is sinking and all hands are required to bail or the screens will go black. There is no time to wait for developments, for investigations to be completed, for evidence- every ounce of strength must be thrown into the defiance of nature, the shocking nakedness of reality.

There is something very significant about the way that simultaneous attacks of impotent russophobic dementia are eating away the brains of the rulers on both sides of the Atlantic.

The game, which has been going the same way for about 500 years, is up. The maritime empire is becoming marginal and the force that it has used, throughout these centuries, no longer overwhelms. The cruisers and carriers no longer work except to intimidate those not worth frightening.

There is only one thing left for the Empire and its hundreds of thousands of apparatchiki-from cops to pundits, from Professors to jailers- either they adjust to a new dispensation because the Times are Changing or they blow themselves and the whole planet up.

Thomas Peterson says March 9, 2018
From what's emerging now, it seems there simply were no assassins wandering round Salisbury. Instead, it appears Mr Skripal for some reason has a house full of nerve gas, or enough of it at least to take out himself, his daughter and a policeman who inspected the premises.
Thomas Prentice says March 9, 2018
Cleary the Guardian was swallowed up by England's fascist regime controlled by the City of London when it surrendered its hard drives to the regime for examination and/or destruction in the wake of the Snowden revelations.

The Guardian ownerships also sold their souls -- although the Guardian had already been in decline before they nabbed Glenn Greenwald. When he left, the Guardian lost ALL presumptive credibility.

Now The Guardian is just an organ of regime propaganda like the BBC (thank GOd for OffGuardian) and here is the island nation AGAIN asserting its dominance over the whole world, but this time on behalf of his brawnier brother, the EUSE, aka Exceptional US Empire.

One wonders how much longer the Russians will put up with this now that it is CLEAR that -- for the first time ever -- the Russians have complete military and nuclear superiority over "The West."

I'll bet Putin won't invade Ukraine, Germany, France, Brussels and England from the North and from the sea in the wintertime.

The Big Problem Is YThat Americans are afraid -- frightened -- but they are NOT afraid or frightened of a particular tbhing -- it is a generic fright. So they are no longer afraid of nuclear war. Trotsky said A'meria was the strongest nation but also the most terrified' and nothing has changed except military and nuclear superiority along with economic clout has shifted to Russia and China. Were Americans afraid of nuclear war -- or say, of an invasion from Saskatchewan or Tamaulipas -- there might be hope.

But somewhere along the time beginning with Clinton, Americans didn't worry their pretty little heads about nuclear war or American wars on everybody anywhere any longer so long as it didn't disturb their creature comforts and shopping and lattes by coming to the homeland. The Nuclear Freeze movement was, after all, a direct response to Reagan's "evil empire" military buildup in the 1980s and then voila he and Gorbachev negotiated away a whole class of nuclear weapoms and Old Bush promised NAto wouldn;t expand. Hope. Then that sneaky little bastard Clinton started expanding Nato on behalf of the Pentagon / CKIA / NSA / miklitary /congressional industyrial complex.

None of this suggests tht it will end pretty.

vierotchka says March 9, 2018

Maybe it's time to try some new digital hearts-and-minds operation. In the internet age, Russians have already shown how public opinion can be manipulated. Perhaps our own secret digital marvels can embark on the kind of information counter-offensive to win over the many millions of Russians who share our values. Perhaps they already are.

He really is taking Russians for idiots and fools!

vierotchka says March 9, 2018
There is one key element that proves that the Russians didn't do it: The Russians aren't so clumsy as to poison over a dozen other people at the same time.
MichaelK says March 9, 2018
The whole piece is an emotionally charged rant, bordering on hysteria, based on a transparent tissue of lies, distortions and absolutely stunning hypocrisy; and this coming from the 'liberal' 'left of centre' Guardian!

It's rather scary. The Guardian screaming for a crusade aimed at toppling the Russian system and replacing it with something else, something closer to 'our values.' The moralizing is shocking and grotesque. I really wish the ground would just open up and swallow the Guardian whole. We'd be far better off with out it.

[Mar 11, 2018] One final observation on the Skripal case (for now): this stuff is toxic anti-Russian propaganda .

Mar 11, 2018 | off-guardian.org

Big B says March 10, 2018

One final observation on the Skripal case (for now): this stuff is so toxic. We don't know what the stuff is: nevertheless, we know it is so toxic, can only be made by a state, and needs careful expert handling. We know this because every paper and TV channel has by now emphasised that this stuff is so toxic, etc. If we missed the "nerve agents and what they do to you" coverage: we can ascertain for ourselves from the men in the hazmat suits, the this stuff must be so toxic. The Army have now been deployed: on hand after completing the largest CW exercise ever held, 'Toxic Dagger'; they are now employing their specialist skills to carry out "Sensitive Site Operations" because this stuff is you get it by now. In another piece of pure theater: police in hazmat suits were examining the grave of Alexander and Liudmila Skripal because even after a year or more buried underground, you can't be too careful, because this stuff is A woman from the office next to Zizzi was taken ill (maybe she had the risotto con pesce) because even after a week, and next door, traces of this stuff can still be

11 (or 16) people were hospitalised from the effects of 'this stuff': the first attending officer, Nick Bailey, is only just out of ICU and lucky to be alive. The Skripal's are not so lucky: and on "palliative care" according to H de Bretton-Gordon. Yet the eye-witness calling himself 'Jamie Paine' was close enough to get coughed on; and the unnamed passing doctor and nurse that attended the Skripals at the scene, clearing their airways, are all fine (despite being hospitalised). Yet PC Bailey nearly died? Funny that?

When first you practice to deceive: someone in the propaganda department must have noticed this glaring inconsistency. Enter, stage right, former Met Chief Ian (now Lord) Blair (guess who was leading the Met when Litvinenko was poisoned?): to clarify that PC Bailey was contaminated when he was the first officer to enter the Skripal's home -- not attend them in Salisbury. This allowed the Torygraph and Fox to speculate that Yulia brought a contaminated present for her father (which she kept in a drawer for a week, because this stuff is so toxic?). The Torygraph's previous spin: that Skripal was poisoned for his contributions to the Pissgate dossier were torpedoed by Orbis (Steele's company). Speaking on Radio 4: after pushing the Buzzfeed "14 other deaths" dodgy dossier; Blair said "So there maybe some clues floating around in here." Yes, clues that you are lying? This is pure theater: only it is more Morecambe and Wise than Shakespeare.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/09/russian-spy-may-have-poisoned-home-police-believe/

DomesticExtremist says March 10, 2018
Theatre indeed.

Check out the report from C4News (mute the sound).

Two guys plodding around in fluorescent breather suits, another couple with gas masks, but behind them firemen in normal uniform and no gas masks and the reporter 20 feet in front, in civvies with no protective gear at all .

Virulent nerve agent threat? Theatre, and not very convincing at that.

BigB says March 10, 2018
Another day, another story: now the BBC, Torygraph (contradicting its own article above), Wiltshire Police, and Nick Bailey himself all confirmed that he became ill after attending the Skripals. So now we know they are lying: the house story concocted by Blair was a complete fabrication. The "nerve agent" appears to be only selectively toxic!
http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/journalnewsindex/16078868.Police_officer_in_hospital_over_nerve_agent_attack_releases_first_statement/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/08/russian-spy-poisoning-police-officer-struck-rare-nerve-agent/

[Mar 11, 2018] The Elephant In The Room by Craig Murray

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... while totally failing to mention the fact that incident took place only eight miles from the largest stock of nerve agent in western Europe. ..."
"... The adviser said the use of nerve agent suggested a state operation ..."
"... It certainly does. But the elephant in the room is – which state? ..."
Mar 11, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

Nerve agents including Sarin and VX are manufactured by the British Government in Porton Down, just 8 miles from where Sergei Skripal was attacked. The official British government story is that these nerve agents are only manufactured "To help develop effective medical countermeasures and to test systems".

The UK media universally accepted that the production of polonium by Russia was conclusive evidence that Vladimir Putin was personally responsible for the murder of Alexander Litvinenko. In the case of Skripal, po-faced articles like this hilarious one in the Guardian speculate about where the nerve agent could possibly have come from – while totally failing to mention the fact that incident took place only eight miles from the largest stock of nerve agent in western Europe.

The investigation comprises multiple strands. Among them is whether there is any more of the nerve agent in the UK, and where it came from.

Chemical weapons experts said it was almost impossible to make nerve agents without training. "This needs expertise and a special place to make it or you will kill yourself. It's only a small amount, but you don't make this in your kitchen," one said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a former commanding officer at the UK's chemical, biological and nuclear regiment, said: "This is pretty significant. Nerve agents such as sarin and VX need to be made in a laboratory. It is not an insufficient task. Not even the so-called Islamic State could do it."

Falling over themselves in the rush to ramp up the Russophobia, the Guardian quotes

"One former senior Foreign Office adviser suggested the Kremlin was taking advantage of the UK's lack of allies in the US and EU. He said the British government was in a "weaker position" than in 2006 when two Kremlin assassins poisoned the former FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko with a radioactive cup of tea.

The adviser said the use of nerve agent suggested a state operation "

It certainly does. But the elephant in the room is – which state?

[Mar 11, 2018] The Skripal Incident -- Another Anti-Russian Provocation

Mar 11, 2018 | journal-neo.org

The British government is talking war with Russia over a mysterious incident that is claimed to have taken place on Sunday March 4, just a few kilometres from the secrecy shrouded British biological and chemical warfare research and development facility at Porton Down in Wiltshire. I say claimed since we have very little information confirming what exactly took place outside of government statements and we have seen no photographs of the alleged victims in their hospital beds to convince us that the alleged victims did fall ill and are being treated. However, let us assume that the incident as described did take place.

The mystery consists in the fact that the victims, former Russian colonel of military intelligence, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter, were not under any known threat from Russia. Skripal was charged and convicted in Russia in 2006 of being an asset of the British Secret Intelligence Service, MI6, and handing over secret information to the British. He was jailed, but in a spy swap in 2010 was pardoned and allowed to leave Russia for Vienna, then Britain, where he has been living ever since. Why he was pardoned is difficult to determine, unless it was necessary legally to effect the swap with the British. In any even the Russians had washed their hands of him but it seems the British had other uses for him, as their expendable man for a provocation against Russia.

The facts as the British government states them are that Skripal and his daughter, visiting from Russia, met for lunch in Salisbury, the town outside of which Porton Down is located. The purpose of the daughter's visit is not known. According to ever changing media accounts witnesses in a restaurant reported that Skripal appeared to be agitated and angry and left in that state with his daughter following. Agitated and angry about what we do not know.

Half an hour later it is said that the two of them were found slumped over on a public bench. Some early media accounts state that it was thought they had taken too much fentanyl and were vomiting and that their illness may have been self-induced. But very quickly the British government claimed that they had been poisoned by some chemical or nerve agent and immediately cast the blame on Russia though the investigation had just begun. The incident was immediately taken out of the hands of the local police and handed over to the Counter-Terrorism Police, formerly known as Special Branch, though the government refused to call it a terrorist incident. A meeting of the British government high-level emergency committee, Cobra, was called. Why this was done for what appears to be an assault or attempted murder or a self-induced accident is a good question. But the answer lies in the immediate propaganda campaign mounted in the British press against Russia.

On Thursday the 8th of March the British government claimed that they had identified a "nerve agent" as the substance used. Yet the BBC quotes on the same day a woman physician who attended at the scene saying that she found Mrs. Skripal slumped unconscious on a bench vomiting and fitting. She had lost control of her bodily functions. The physician, who asked not to be named, told the BBC she moved the daughter into the recovery position and opened her airways as others tended to her father. The doctor stated that the she treated her for almost 30 minutes, saying there was no sign of any chemical agent on her face or body and that though she had been worried she would be affected by a nerve agent so far she "feels fine."

Yet, the British media published on Thursday a photograph of a police officer who they say attended the scene and who they claim was made ill and placed in intensive care but is now stable and recovering. The two stories do not add up, as it would seem the doctor was in closer physical contact with the two victims than the police officer yet the doctor has suffered no symptoms at all.

The Guardian quoted Andrei Lugovoi, another former Russian agent, accused of Litvinenko's murder by the British as stating that Skripal had been pardoned in Russia so no one from there is after him. " "I don't rule out that this is another provocation by British. Whatever happens on British territory, they start yelling: 'He was killed, he was hung, he was poisoned!' and that Russia is to blame for everything. This is to their advantage." Igor Sutyagin, yet another Russian traitor flown to Russia in 2010 in an exchange of spies-also said, "I don't think that Mr. Skripal would be targeted, because he was pardoned."

To add to the mystery the British government refuses to name the alleged nerve agent. To create more drama the British Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, stated that it was not Sarin or VX but something "very rare." I think we can expect that they will choose the right dramatic moment to name something and state that only Russian labs can make it. That is their modus operandi. They certainly do not want to state that VX was involved since VX was developed in 1952 at Porton Down near the sight of the incident; for that would lead to necessary investigations into security at that facility and whether personnel there were involved. However, despite the fact that Porton Down is in the business of manufacturing chemical warfare agents including nerve agents and that logic would dictate that the Porton Down authorities would be barred from being investigators into a case in which they could be involved the British government immediately assigned Porton Down to identify the substance that might have been used.

That the Russians may be correct that this incident is another NATO arranged provocation must be seriously considered. Despite the fact there is no evidence whatsoever that Russia had anything to do with this incident, the British government was quick to label Russia as the villain of the piece and the mass media dutifully acted in lock step and put out the word. Boris Johnson called Russia a "malign and disruptive force' and made threats about pulling the UK out of the World Cup to be held in Russia this year. The attempts by the NATO alliance to throw Russia out of the Olympics on trumped up doping charges were largely successful and now we see another attempt to disrupt a sports event that is important to world football fans and to Russia. Johnson added that Britain would act "robustly' of Moscow is found to be involved.

The Russian embassy in London stated the allegations of Russian involvement are untrue and that the "script of yet another anti-Russian campaign has already been written." It seems so and the script has some pages to run yet. One has to wonder what the role of the British intelligence services is in this for the BBC also reports that Skripal still kept the company of British intelligence agents. So one has to ask, for what reason? What was his continuing role as an asset of MI6? What was their role on that day?

But that line of inquiry will not be followed. All the British media are linking this incident to the case of Alexander Litvinenko, another Russian who was supposedly poisoned with radioactive tea. Evidence that cronies of his were involved were ignored in favour the line that Russia was behind it though no evidence has ever been put forward to support that claim. They are also making the claim that this "very rare" substance must be from a state military stockpile, so the statements to come from the British government can be predicted.

This incident has echoes of the case of Georgi Markov, the Bulgarian dissident killed in London in 1978 by a ricin pellet injected into his leg by means of an umbrella it was said, though it was no doubt done with an air pistol. That murder was quickly blamed on the KGB and Bulgarian government agents but there is evidence that in fact the murder was arranged by MI6 as was the murder of media magnate Robert Maxwell in 1991, who had documents relating to the Markov murder in his possession, according sources such as Richard Cottrell in his book Gladio and accounts by former British intelligence agent Gordon Logan.

The Skripal incident also brings to mind the death of Dr. David Kelly in 2003 whose mysterious death in woods near his home, was officially attributed to "suicide." He is thought by many to have been assassinated by the British secret services and CIA to keep him from revealing secrets about the war in Iraq. He worked at Porton Down as head of microbiology.

He in turn is connected to other scientists at Porton Down who have died under questionable circumstances, for instance, Dr. Richard Holmes, whose body was found in the same woods as Dr. Kelly, in 2012, two days after going for a walk, and one month after resigning from Porton Down, and to Vladimir Pasechnik's death in November 2001, another Russian defector, who allegedly died of a stroke. His death was not announced until a month later and by British intelligence. Dr. Kelly had been involved in his debriefing when he left Russia.

Sir Edward Leigh, a member of the Parliamentary Defence Committee, in the British Parliament stated, "the circumstantial evidence against Russia is very strong. Who else would have the motive and the means?" The answer to that of course is that the British government has the motive and the means. What would Russia benefit from harming a has-been like Skripal and causing all this fuss? None. What benefit does Britain have and NATO? The answer again is provided by Sir Richard who went on to state "The only way to preserve peace is through strength," carefully echoing Trump's foreign policy. He continued, "and if Russia is behind this, this is a brazen act of war, of humiliating our country and defence is the first duty and spending 2% of the budget on defence is not enough." There is the motive right there. To justify an increase on defence spending and to hit Russia yet again with propaganda warfare to justify NATO's continuing aggression against Russia.

Russia has volunteered to cooperate in the "investigation" but to what end? The script is already written, the drama will unfold, the consequences will flow and they will lead not to peace and cooperation but to more hostility and war.

Christopher Black is an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto. He is known for a number of high-profile war crimes cases and recently published his novel " Beneath the Clouds . He writes essays on international law, politics and world events, especially for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook."

[Mar 11, 2018] It is highly probably that Steele and Skripal knew each other

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Russophobia is extremely profitable to the armaments, security and spying industries and Russophobia reinforces intellectually challenged voters in their Tory loyalty. Ramping Russophobia is the most convincing motive for the Skripal attack. ..."
"... Steele was an MI6 undercover agent in Moscow around the time when Skripal was recruited and handed over Russian secrets to the MI6. He also ran the MI6 Russia desk so anything about Skripal will have passed through him. It is very likely that they personally knew each other. Pablo Miller, who worked for Steele's private company, lived in the same town as Skripal and they seems to have been friends since Miller had recruited him. Miller or someone else attempted to cover up the connection to Steele by editing his LinkedIn entry. ..."
"... Unfortunately it is likely that the British government, and its U.S. cousin, will come up with some "blame Russia" story for the gullible people and leave it at that. That story will involve some "brazen and reckless" Russian plot and an "outrageous" attempt by Putin himself to publicly kill a friend of Britain with some with highly dangerous weapon of mass destruction. This will then be used to throw up new tensions, to put more sanctions on Russia and to sell more weapons. ..."
"... Ms Rudd told MPs it was an "outrageous crime", adding that the government would "act without hesitation as the facts become clearer". ..."
"... One day the pendulum will swing back hard and merciless at these criminal warmongers and war profiteers. Disgusting how low what goes for 'homo sapiens' can sink. ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

... ... ...

It was not Russian vengeance for Skripal's earlier spying. He had been in Russian jails for four years and lived openly in Salisbury for eight. There was plenty of time to off him. Russia certainly does not need any more anti-Russian propaganda in "western" media. If a Russian service would want to kill someone it would do so without making such noise.

The former British ambassador Craig Murray suspects a different motive and culprit:

Craig Murray @CraigMurrayOrg - 10:21 AM - 8 Mar 2018
Russophobia is extremely profitable to the armaments, security and spying industries and Russophobia reinforces intellectually challenged voters in their Tory loyalty. Ramping Russophobia is the most convincing motive for the Skripal attack.

Ambassador Murray also points out that Salisbury, where the incident took place, is just 8 miles away from Porton Down, a chemical weapon test site run by the British government. As the BBC noted in a report about the place:

... chemical agents such as VX and mustard gas are still manufactured on site ...

I believe that Craig Murray is wrong. Russophobia can be stoked without attempting to publicly kill a retired spy and his daughter.

More likely motives can be found in the tight connection to another important affair. The British Telegraph reports today :

A security consultant who has worked for the company that compiled the controversial dossier on Donald Trump was close to the Russian double agent poisoned last weekend, it has been claimed.

The consultant, who The Telegraph is declining to identify, lived close to Col Skripal and is understood to have known him for some time.
...
The Telegraph understands that Col Skripal moved to Salisbury in 2010 in a spy swap and became close to a security consultant employed by Christopher Steele , who compiled the Trump dossier.

The British security consultant, according to a LinkedIn social network account that was removed from the internet in the past few days , is also based in Salisbury.

On the same LinkedIn account, the man listed consultancy work with Orbis Business Intelligence, according to reports.

Meduza named the man the Telegraph declines to identify as:

Pablo Miller, who at the time was posing as Antonio Alvarez de Hidalgo and working in Britain's embassy in Tallinn. Russia's Federal Security Service says Miller was actually an undercover MI6 agent tasked with recruiting Russians.

Orbis is Christopher Steele's company which was paid by the Clinton campaign to make up or find 'dirt' about Trump. Sergei Skripal was an agent Steele himself was likely involved with :

Steele had spent more than twenty years in M.I.6, most of it focussing on Russia. For three years, in the nineties , he spied in Moscow under diplomatic cover. Between 2006 and 2009, he ran the service's Russia desk, at its headquarters, in London. He was fluent in Russian, and widely considered to be an expert on the country.

Steele was an MI6 undercover agent in Moscow around the time when Skripal was recruited and handed over Russian secrets to the MI6. He also ran the MI6 Russia desk so anything about Skripal will have passed through him. It is very likely that they personally knew each other. Pablo Miller, who worked for Steele's private company, lived in the same town as Skripal and they seems to have been friends since Miller had recruited him. Miller or someone else attempted to cover up the connection to Steele by editing his LinkedIn entry.

Here are some question:

If there is a connection between the dossier and Skripal, which seems very likely to me, then there are a number of people and organizations with potential motives to kill him. Lots of shady folks and officials on both sides of the Atlantic were involved in creating and running the anti-Trump/anti-Russia campaign. There are several investigations and some very dirty laundry might one day come to light. Removing Skripal while putting the blame on Russia looks like a convenient way to get rid of a potential witness.

Update: Steele's company issued a weak denial of Skripal's involvement in the dossier:

Sources close to Orbis, the business intelligence firm run by former MI6 agent Christopher Steele, who was behind a dossier of compromising allegations against Donald Trump, said Mr Skripal did not contribute to the file. But they could not say whether Mr Skripal was involved in different investigations into the US President for other interested parties.

The most curious point in the affair though is the visit of the daughter. She had just come from Moscow to visit her lonely father when both were poisoned in a rather sensational way. There must be some reason why she was involved in this.

or

The above questions are all highly speculative. But the connection between Steele and Skripal is way too deep to be irrelevant here. It certainly deserves more digging.

Unfortunately it is likely that the British government, and its U.S. cousin, will come up with some "blame Russia" story for the gullible people and leave it at that. That story will involve some "brazen and reckless" Russian plot and an "outrageous" attempt by Putin himself to publicly kill a friend of Britain with some with highly dangerous weapon of mass destruction. This will then be used to throw up new tensions, to put more sanctions on Russia and to sell more weapons.

That official story though is unlikely to be the true one.

---
h/t to commenter yoffa for providing the Meduza link.

Posted by b on March 8, 2018 at 04:04 PM | Permalink

yoffa , Mar 8, 2018 4:35:34 PM | 2

The Orbis consultant / analyst living in Salisbury is identified as Pablo Miller.
He had recruited Skripal in 1995 ( https://meduza.io/en/feature/2018/03/06/a-hundred-grand-and-hundreds-of-betrayed-agents).
notheonly1 , Mar 8, 2018 4:40:39 PM | 3
Ms Rudd told MPs it was an "outrageous crime", adding that the government would "act without hesitation as the facts become clearer".

Yeah, right. Like the illegal invasion of a sovereign foreign country based on the lies by the same 'government', with a million+ casualties among the middle eastern population. That kind of outrageous crime , correct?

One day the pendulum will swing back hard and merciless at these criminal warmongers and war profiteers. Disgusting how low what goes for 'homo sapiens' can sink.

[Mar 11, 2018] Ramping Russophobia is the most convincing motive for the Skripal attack

Highly recommended!
The key question is "Why now", after so many years ? This guy was exchanged by Russians. It he was such a threat to Russia they would keep him in jail. this is an interesting question. And it looks like in current circumstances cuo bono test firmly points to British as it can poison World cup in Russia. Intelligence services recently extended the activities of sabotage of sport events and teams of adversaries so there is nothing new to it. In a way this somewhat similar line of attack to previous attempts to undermine international sporting events in Russia. British Foreign Office quick reaction suggests exactly that.
Notable quotes:
"... Russia spent millions it really couldn't afford on the World Cup the worlds eyes are on Russia. Putin needs this kind of attention on him his leadership, election and his money like a hole in the head. Gov will up defence spending who wins..Putin or IMC. ..."
"... You clearly identify Russian motive and willingness to kill an ex-spy along with others who are, or may prove too troublesome. Fair enough. Just be sure that western intel agencies would have no qualms doing the same ..."
Mar 11, 2018 | twitter.com

Craig Murray ‏ Verified account @ CraigMurrayOrg Mar 8

Russophobia is extremely profitable to the armamaments, security and spying industries and Russophobia reinforces intellectually challenged voters in their Tory loyalty. Ramping Russophobia is the most convincing motive for the Skripal attack.

37 replies 285 retweets 378 likes

ᎠᎩլꂅᏒ ϮuᏒᎠᕱՈ ‏ @ dylerturdan Mar 9 Replying to @ CraigMurrayOrg

Russia spent millions it really couldn't afford on the World Cup the worlds eyes are on Russia. Putin needs this kind of attention on him his leadership, election and his money like a hole in the head. Gov will up defence spending who wins..Putin or IMC.

Broty Burgermeister ‏ @ anseachdamhtonn Mar 8 Replying to @ CraigMurrayOrg

When I run this poisoning event though the cui bono test, it makes more sense if western intel elements did it

Paul Mansfield ‏ @ azardsphere Mar 8 Replying to @ muschifuss998 @ Jb83080064 @ CraigMurrayOrg

You clearly identify Russian motive and willingness to kill an ex-spy along with others who are, or may prove too troublesome. Fair enough. Just be sure that western intel agencies would have no qualms doing the same

1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes

[Mar 11, 2018] Theresa May To Blame Russia For Nerve Gas Attack; Full Spectrum Of Sanctions To Follow

Introduction of new sanctions and confiscating some Russian property were probably the idea behind this, most probably, false flag operation.
Notable quotes:
"... In a late-breaking report, the Sun confirmed that May is preparing to name Russia as the perpetrator of the attack on Sergei Skripal, a spy who was turned over to the UK in 2010 as part of a swap with Russia, after receiving confirmation from her intelligence chiefs. ..."
"... Of course, by blaming Russia for the attack, May be inadvertently doing Putin a favor. With Russian elections set for next weekend, blaming Russia after such a short investigation could bolster Putin's claims that Western powers are actively conspiring against him. Some have speculated that Russia could've planned the attack for exactly this purpose, while others have pointed out that it bears some hallmarks of a false flag attack intended to frame Russia. ..."
"... Former British Ambassador to Russia Sir Tony Brenton said yesterday: "The more Putin can point to Western hostility and aggression, the more he rallies the Russian people around him". ..."
"... So, once again, a Western power is blaming Russia for an attack, citing an obscure piece of Russian law which declares that foreign assassinations must be approved by the Russian president. ..."
"... MI6 false flag attack? How much do you want to bet? ..."
"... Note that the UK military has been trying to hype the Russian threat for the last several weeks to get more money to expand the UK war machine. ..."
Mar 11, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Barely a week after UK Home Secretary Amber Rudd warned the country not to "jump to conclusions" about who was behind a nerve gas attack on a former Russian double-agent, it appears Prime Minister Theresa May is about to do just that...

In a late-breaking report, the Sun confirmed that May is preparing to name Russia as the perpetrator of the attack on Sergei Skripal, a spy who was turned over to the UK in 2010 as part of a swap with Russia, after receiving confirmation from her intelligence chiefs.

An intelligence assessment explaining the findings is reportedly being delivered overnight, and will be on May's desk in the morning. The attack, which occurred at a shopping center in a quiet suburban area, led to the hospitalization of 21 people, and left Skripal, his daughter Yulia and a local officer who responded to the scene in critical - but stable - condition.

The "tell" - as it were - was the presence of certain chemicals which are believed to have been developed in a Russian laboratory. The announcement is expected to take place at 11 am during a meeting of May's National Security Council. A formal charge against Moscow could be unveiled before the House of Commons could as early as this afternoon. May might even go as far as blaming Russian President Vladimir Putin personally for ordering the hit.

In their report to Mrs May, The Sun has learned that MI5 and MI6 chiefs will cite the very rare substance used on ex-spy Sergei Skripal and daughter Yulia as key evidence of the Kremlin's involvement.

It is believed to have been developed in the SVR Russian foreign spy service's notorious Yasenevo laboratory.

Mrs May will then summon an emergency meeting of her National Security Council at 11 am to decide on the scale of Britain's retaliation.

The result of the finding could be more economic sanctions against Russia (which is still facing sanctions tied to the annexation of Crimea).

However, UK ministers are still undecided on exactly how and when to retaliate.

A "full spectrum" package of expulsions and economic sanctions has been drawn up, along with a plea for international support for them.

Of course, by blaming Russia for the attack, May be inadvertently doing Putin a favor. With Russian elections set for next weekend, blaming Russia after such a short investigation could bolster Putin's claims that Western powers are actively conspiring against him. Some have speculated that Russia could've planned the attack for exactly this purpose, while others have pointed out that it bears some hallmarks of a false flag attack intended to frame Russia.

Given the recent criticism that May is being "soft" on Russia, the timing of the announcement also bears some hallmarks of a purely political decision meant to strengthen May's hand.

But it is feared that a strong reaction ahead of Russia's presidential elections next Sunday may play into Putin's hands.

It is suspected that the Russian ruler sanctioned the brazen nerve agent attack simply to goad Britain into a reaction that he can strike back against and look like a strongman standing up to the West to voters.

Former British Ambassador to Russia Sir Tony Brenton said yesterday: "The more Putin can point to Western hostility and aggression, the more he rallies the Russian people around him".

Sir Tony added: "Russia is number one on a list of suspects that doesn't include a number two".

In a hint of action to come, the Chancellor said: "If there were to be an involvement of a foreign state, then obviously that would be very serious indeed and the government would respond appropriately.

Philip Hammond also told BBC1's Andrew Marr Show that Britain will not be humiliated by the attack, that breaks every rule in the international book.

He added: "The vast resources that have been deployed and the high level assets that we have been able to use show that nobody is laughing at us.

"This is a very serious investigation. Let's see where it leads us."

Mrs May came under mounting pressure last night from campaigners and her own MPs to hit back at Russia.

So, once again, a Western power is blaming Russia for an attack, citing an obscure piece of Russian law which declares that foreign assassinations must be approved by the Russian president. That, and some chemical markers that purport to trace back to a Russian lab. Whether or not May decides to pursue sanctions, one thing is clear: Putin's words from an address he made to Parliament earlier this month - where he unveiled a new nuclear weapon capable of bypassing NATO missile defenses - are resonating more and more.

Looney -> ???ö? Sun, 03/11/2018 - 19:47 Permalink

Theresa May is a frozen cunt, but Boris Johnson is, well Before running his mouth and threatening to boycott the World Cup 2018 in Russia, he should've checked the FIFA's rules.

According to the Telegraph , A boycott would risk breaching FIFA's tournament regulations, which dictate that "all participating member associations undertake to play all of their matches until eliminated from the FIFA World Cup".

Article 6 of those regulations states that any association that withdraws could face sanctions, "including the expulsion of the association concerned from subsequent FIFA competitions" [that would be the World Cup 2022 in Qatar].

The Brits don't seem to mind being spied on by the GCHQ, they don't care about the CCTV cameras everywhere, but if you take away their soccer/football, they WILL pick up pitchforks and torches and they WILL fuck you up.

That's why Boris is backpedaling, "We will not send the UK government's representatives".

Hey, Boris, I have a deal for you – let Julian Assange go and you can keep your BritBob ! ;-)

Looney

Shemp 4 Victory -> Looney Sun, 03/11/2018 - 19:55 Permalink

In their report to Mrs May, The Sun has learned that MI5 and MI6 chiefs will cite the very rare substance used on ex-spy Sergei Skripal and daughter Yulia as key evidence of the Kremlin's involvement.

Everyone knows that MI5/MI6 were responsible for this, which is why they have no choice other than blaming the Russians.

Theresa May knows who did it. She also knows what will happen to her if she deviates from the official script given to her by MI5/MI6.

Slippery Slope -> Shemp 4 Victory Sun, 03/11/2018 - 19:56 Permalink

It makes no sense for Russia to kill a has-been spy 5 years after they exchanged him for their own spies.

Especially right before the elections and World Cup.

philipat -> Slippery Slope Sun, 03/11/2018 - 20:07 Permalink

This makes absolutely no sense and has all the hallmarks of a CIA/MI6 false flag to keep the pressure on Russia in a Europe (particularly Germany) leaning back towards opening trade with Russia.

It is also interesting that NONE of the UK media have disclosed the fact that Christopher Steele was a close associate. Might it be assumed that much of Steele's "information" came from here? If so, and if disclosed, it might be "inconvenient" for this person to be questioned? But inconvenient for whom? Therein lies the answer.

EuroPox -> doctor10 Sun, 03/11/2018 - 21:16 Permalink

In 1995, Sergey Skripal was recruited by an MI6 undercover agent, Pablo Miller, who at the time was posing as Antonio Alvarez de Hidalgo and working at the British embassy in Tallinn, Estonia.

Pablo Miller was exposed in the early 2000s, after multiple Russians were arrested for spying and fingered Miller as their recruiter. One of his recruits was Alexander Litvinenko.

Miller and Skripal met frequently: Skripal (whose codename was "Forthwith") passed the entire Russian military intelligence telephone handbook to Miller, containing details of more than 300 of his colleagues in Russian intelligence. In 2006 Skripal was jailed.

After the spy swap in 2010, Skripal decided to resettle in Salisbury, where Pablo Miller also lived. In 2015 Miller retired and received an OBE for services to Her Majesty's Government. No doubt Miller was Skripal's minder and was probably the reason Skripal had gone to Salisbury.

According to his LinkedIn entry (deleted a few days ago), Miller worked as a consultant for Christopher Steele – Miller is the consultant whose name was withheld by the Telegraph. Steele's Orbis Business Intelligence was hired by Fusion GPS in 2016 to research Trump.

In testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee (on 3 November, 2017), it was stated that Daniel Jones (a member of Fusion GPS), had described Fusion as a "shadow media organization helping the government," and was funded by a "group of Silicon Valley billionaires and George Soros."

Between 26 November, 2017 and 10 January, 2018 George Soros (who is a prolific tweeter) was silent. Not a single tweet. Why, where was he?

Steele has refused to comment about which projects involved Miller but given Miller's Russian contacts, it is not credible that the Trump dossier was not one of them – in which case it is also not credible that Skripal was also not involved.

Join the dots....

Baron von Bud -> Looney Sun, 03/11/2018 - 19:59 Permalink

They sure do have a Russia bug up their butts. What's the real story? We'll never know. But this sounds like the bogus Syrian gas attacks. Oh, well. Russia will be incentivized to build up it's own industries and not be reliant in any way on the West. Probably best for everybody in the long run.

veritas semper -> Baron von Bud Sun, 03/11/2018 - 21:08 Permalink

The Perfidious Albion had always suffered from an acute case of Russophobia.

And this has become lethal for Britain since Pueeh-tin is in power.

LOL.

TeethVillage88s -> ???ö? Sun, 03/11/2018 - 21:14 Permalink

UK Must plead for War on Russia, it has too many problems at home which threaten the Regime.
A) Planned Inflation, Big City Living, Rents, Cost of Living, Debts, Pounds Expanded in new Finance/FIREs, just like dying empire
B) Dis-Unity, Polarization, Social Media, Alternative News, Fake News, People know of Lies from Govt not Monarchy
C) Type Three Crisis, No Deflation, No Growth, Output Gap continues after 10 years... GINI Income Inequality is well known

Lea -> Ignatius Sun, 03/11/2018 - 20:05 Permalink

They have teams working 24/7 on making shit up, namely the MI6 and the US alphabet soup agencies, plus a whole array of PR firms. That being said, money sure buys you serious propaganda firepower, but not brains.

Why would Putin kill a spook who had been in jail in Russia, that he had swapped years ago and who lived in Britain with no further connection to Russian intelligence? If he had wanted the dude dead, why wait so long? Why not kill quietly when he was in jail in Russia?

On the other hand, Litvinenko had been an MI6 agent, and so is Skripal. It would seem that being an MI6 agent is not very good for your health, especially when you are more use to them dead than alive.

Son of Captain Nemo Sun, 03/11/2018 - 19:50 Permalink

Theresa.

I hate to ask you honey... But did the U.K. have anything to do with the 22 foreign service officers of the Russian Federation that included Vitaly Churkin ( https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-un-churkin/russias-u-n-envoy- ) mysteriously dying or murdered like the Russian media magnet in a Washington D.C. hotel room ( https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-01-28/fbi-releases-docs-claiming-rt ) over the last 6 years???...

Let alone the bombing of flight 9268 ( http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-34687990 ) after you knew all of your assets inside Ukraine during the siege by the "DPR" in the Donbass airport incident left you "gutted" in May 2014... And Russian special forces kicking the ever loving shit out of your SAS in Syria which has meant total defeat for the Anglo-Zionist operation(s)?...

Take your time answering sweetie!... And above all else... PLEASE be "THOUGHTFUL"!!!

Shemp 4 Victory -> Son of Captain Nemo Sun, 03/11/2018 - 20:07 Permalink

Theresa May also knows who was responsible for the killing of Litvinenko. She's certainly taking her time answering that one.

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/07/31/theresa-may-raises-an-

Shemp 4 Victory -> CRM114 Sun, 03/11/2018 - 19:57 Permalink

It's also a war crime, under the Chemical Weapons Convention

Conveniently, MI6 are above such laws.

Conscious Reviver -> Shemp 4 Victory Sun, 03/11/2018 - 20:48 Permalink

After the over and over again false flag chemical attacks in Syria, which have so far failed to spark a wider war, MI6 decides to try their luck with the domestic variety.

Shemp 4 Victory -> lolmao500 Sun, 03/11/2018 - 20:02 Permalink

lolmao500 shilling for MI6 using chemicals weapons on UK soil against UK citizens, which is an act of treason.

CARONTE-RAPTOR Sun, 03/11/2018 - 20:37 Permalink

The little, stinking English house of horror, ...... is horrified? Smells like a false flag?

Promethus Sun, 03/11/2018 - 20:45 Permalink

And the Russians probably killed Seth Rich too.

Promethus Sun, 03/11/2018 - 20:47 Permalink

Blame the Russians. Never saw that coming.

45North1 Sun, 03/11/2018 - 20:49 Permalink

May wanted to ensure that the heating season was close enough to being over before taking an economic swing at Russia....

smacker Sun, 03/11/2018 - 20:51 Permalink

By blaming the Russians so aggressively for this attack, Theresa May is really admitting that it was a job carried out by MI6 and probably the CIA.

Pure deflection of blame.

PhiPhi Sun, 03/11/2018 - 21:05 Permalink

I hope she has more evidence than ' the chemicals are know to be used by the Russians '. The Islamic terrorist attacks and policy of importing immigrants hailing from the very nations that spawn the terrorists is becoming deeply unpopular, enter the Russian bogeyman. TPTB need to mobilize a new external threat to keep the peasants compliant to outrageous revocation of rights, freedoms and true equalities. For example a perceived imminent threat from Russia would provide extenuating circumstances to sell a non-Brexit Brexit deal that essentially in all but name thwarts the referendum.

I just don't see how offing some historic traitor on foreign soil in such a public and exotic way is of any benefit to Russia.

Herdee Sun, 03/11/2018 - 21:05 Permalink

MI6 false flag attack? How much do you want to bet?

WTFUD Sun, 03/11/2018 - 21:12 Permalink

As the Russia dun it meme/narrative Special Neocon Investigation dies a slow death across the Atlantic, its vassal tag-team/ugly twin, in the City of London, pick up the mantle/batton in order to prolong the mind-fuck.

The sinister publishing group, News Corp ( Permanent Member of 5 Eyes Security Council ) via its sister WSJ rag, The Sun, are once again CHOSEN as the Official Conduit Flag-Bearers by the Ministry of Truthy Leaks.

AriusArmenian Sun, 03/11/2018 - 21:26 Permalink

This is not a false flag when the supposed gas attack occurred about eight miles from where there is a UK government facility that experiments with such agents?

Note that the UK military has been trying to hype the Russian threat for the last several weeks to get more money to expand the UK war machine.

UK, go suck on a string.

[Mar 11, 2018] Kremlin Publishes Full Megan Kelly Putin Interview - NBC Cut the Best Parts

Notable quotes:
"... Listen to me. Not long ago President Trump said something absolutely correct. He said that if Russia's goal was to sow chaos, it has succeeded. But it is not the result of Russian interference, but your political system, the internal struggle, the disorder and division. ..."
Mar 11, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Megyn Kelly: Creating chaos. That is the goal.

Vladimir Putin: Listen to me. Not long ago President Trump said something absolutely correct. He said that if Russia's goal was to sow chaos, it has succeeded. But it is not the result of Russian interference, but your political system, the internal struggle, the disorder and division.

Russia has nothing to do with it whatsoever. Get your own affairs in order first. And the way the question is framed, as I mentioned – that you can interfere anywhere because you bring democracy, but we cannot – is what causes conflicts. You have to show your partners respect, and they will respect you.

[Mar 11, 2018] Bringing a sense of reality to a deeply delusional Empire by The Saker

Looks like neocons represent a trap in which the US society got and out of which there is not easy end. That trap which can be fatal.
Notable quotes:
"... American power elites, the majority of whom have never served a day in uniform nor ever attended serious military academic institutions and whose expertise on serious military-technological and geopolitical issues is limited to a couple of seminars on nuclear weapons and, in the best case scenario, the efforts of the Congressional Research Service are simply not qualified to grasp the complexity, the nature, and application of military force. They simply have no reference points ..."
"... In the " Empire of Illusions ," facts simply don't matter at all. In fact, I predict that the now self-evidently useless ABM program will proceed as if nothing had happened. ..."
"... The zombified US general public won't be told what is going on, those who will understand will be marginalized and powerless to make any changes, as for the corrupt parasites who have been making millions and billions from this total waste of taxpayer money, they have way too much at stake to throw in the towel ..."
"... In fact, since the US is now run by Neocons, we can very easily predict what they will do. They will do what Neocons always do: double down. So, after it has become public knowledge that the entire US ABM deployment is useless and outdated, expect a further injection in cash into it by "patriotic" "Congresspersons" (my attempt at being politically correct!), surrounded by flags who will explain to the lobotomized public that they are "taking a firm stance" against "the Russian dictator" and that the proud US of A shall not cave in to the "Russian nuclear blackmail". These colors don't run! United we stand! Etc. etc. etc. ..."
Mar 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

Bringing a sense of reality to a deeply delusional Empire

The leaders of the Empire, along with their brainwashed ideological drones , live in a world completely detached from reality. This is why Martyanov writes that the US " still continues to reside in her bubble which insulates her from any outside voices of reason and peace " and that Putin's speech aimed at " coercing America's elites into, if not peace, at least into some form of sanity, given that they are currently completely detached from the geopolitical, military and economic realities of a newly emerging world ". Martyanov explains that:

American power elites, the majority of whom have never served a day in uniform nor ever attended serious military academic institutions and whose expertise on serious military-technological and geopolitical issues is limited to a couple of seminars on nuclear weapons and, in the best case scenario, the efforts of the Congressional Research Service are simply not qualified to grasp the complexity, the nature, and application of military force. They simply have no reference points. Yet, being a product of the American pop-military culture, also known as military porn and propaganda, these people -- this collection of lawyers, political "scientists", sociologists and journalists who dominate the American strategic kitchen which cooks non-stop delusional geopolitical and military doctrines, can understand one thing for sure, and that is when their poor dears get a bulls-eye on their backs or foreheads.

The fact that in the real world these elites have had a bulls-eye on their backs for decades doesn't change the fact that they also managed to convince themselves that they could remove that bulls-eye by means of withdrawing from the ABM treaty and by surrounding Russia with anti-missile launchers. The fact that some (many? most?) US politicians realized, at least in the back of their minds, that their ABM systems would never truly protect the US from a Russian counter-strike did not really matter because there were some uniquely American psychological factors which made the notion of an ABM system irresistibly attractive:

1) An ABM system promised the US impunity : impunity is, along with military superiority, one of the great American myths (as discussed here ). From Reagan with this "weapons which kill weapons" to the current crisis in Korea, Americans have always strived for impunity for their actions abroad: let all countries drown in an ocean of fire, murder and mayhem as long as our "homeland" remains the untouchable sacrosanct citadel. Since WWII Americans have killed many millions of people abroad, but when 9/11 came (nevermind that it was obviously a false flag) the country went into something like clinical shock from the loss of about 3'000 innocent civilians. Soviet, and then later, Russian nuclear weapons promised to deliver many tens of millions of deaths if the USSR/Russia was attacked and that is why spinning the fairy tale about an ABM "shield" was so appealing even if it was technologically speaking either a pipe-dream (Reagan's "Star Wars") or an extremely limited system capable of stopping maybe a few missiles at most (the current ABM system in Europe). Again, facts don't matter at all, at least not in American politics or in the US collective psyche.

2) An ABM system promised a huge financial bonanza for the fantastically corrupt US Military-Industrial Complex for which millions of Americans work and which made many of them fantastically rich. Frankly, I suspect that many (most?) folks involved in the ABM programs fully realized that this was a waste of time, but as long as they were getting their bank accounts filled with money, they simply did not care: hey, they pay me – I will take it!

3) The US military culture never had much of an emphasis on personal courage or self-sacrifice (for obvious reasons). The various variations of the ABM fairy tale make it possible for Americans to believe that the next war would be mostly fought by pressing buttons and relying on computers. And if real bombs start falling, let them fall somewhere else, preferably on some remote brown people who, well, ain't quite as precious to God and humanity as us, the White "indispensable nation".

Add to this a quasi-religious belief (a dogma, really) in the myth of American technological superiority and you understand that the Russian leaders began to realize that their US counterparts were gradually forgetting that they did have a bulls-eye painted on their backs. So what Putin did is simply paint a few more, different ones, just to make sure that US leaders come back to reality.

The goal of Putin's speech was also to prove both Obama ("the Russian economy is in tatters") and McCain ("Russia is a gas station masquerading as a country") wrong. The Russian message to the US ruling elites was simple: no, not only are we not lagging behind you technologically, in many ways we are decades ahead of you, in spite of sanctions, your attempts to isolate us, the dramatic drop in energy prices or your attempts at limiting our access to world markets (the successful development of this new generation of weapons systems is a clear indicator of the real state of fundamental research in Russia in such spheres are advanced alloys, nanotechnology, super-computing, etc.).

To the warmongers at the Pentagon, the message was equally clear and tough: we spend less than 10% of what you can spend on global aggression; we will match your quantitative advantage with our qualitative superiority. Simply put, you fight with dollars, we will fight with brains. US propagandists, who love to speak about how Russia always uses huge numbers of unskilled soldiers and dumb but brutal weapons now have to deal with a paradigm which they are completely unfamiliar with: a Russian soldier is much better trained, much better equipped, much better commanded and their morale and willpower is almost infinitely higher than one of the typical US serviceman. For a military culture used to mantrically repeat that everything about it is "the best in the world" or even "the best in history" this kind of new reality will come as a very painful shock and most will respond to it by going into deep denial. To those who believed in the (historically completely false) narrative about the US and Reagan bankrupting the USSR by means of a successful arms race, it must feel very strange to have sort of "traded places" with the bad old USSR and being in the situation of having to face military-spending induced bankruptcy.

Nothing will change in the Empire of Illusions (at least for the foreseeable future)

Speaking of bankruptcy. The recent revelations have confirmed what the Russians have been warning about for years: all the immense sums of money spent by the US in ABM defenses have been completely wasted. Russia did find and deploy an asymmetrical response which makes the entire US ABM program completely useless and obsolete. Furthermore, as Martyanov also points out, the current force structure of the US surface fleet has also been made basically obsolete and useless, at least against Russia (but you can be sure that China is following close behind). Potentially, this state of affairs should have immense, tectonic repercussions: immense amounts US taxpayer money has been completely wasted, the US nuclear and naval strategies have been completely misguided, intelligence has failed (either on the acquisition or the analytical level), US politicians have made disastrous decisions and this is all a total "cluster-bleep" which should trigger God knows how many investigations, resignations, and numerous sanctions, administrative or even criminal ones. But, of course, absolutely nothing of this, nothing at all, will happen. Not a single head will roll

In the " Empire of Illusions ," facts simply don't matter at all. In fact, I predict that the now self-evidently useless ABM program will proceed as if nothing had happened. And, in a way, that is true.

The zombified US general public won't be told what is going on, those who will understand will be marginalized and powerless to make any changes, as for the corrupt parasites who have been making millions and billions from this total waste of taxpayer money, they have way too much at stake to throw in the towel.

In fact, since the US is now run by Neocons, we can very easily predict what they will do. They will do what Neocons always do: double down. So, after it has become public knowledge that the entire US ABM deployment is useless and outdated, expect a further injection in cash into it by "patriotic" "Congresspersons" (my attempt at being politically correct!), surrounded by flags who will explain to the lobotomized public that they are "taking a firm stance" against "the Russian dictator" and that the proud US of A shall not cave in to the "Russian nuclear blackmail". These colors don't run! United we stand! Etc. etc. etc.

[Mar 11, 2018] THE HYSTERICAL LEFT LIES ABOUT WIKILEAKS AND ME Roger Stone Stone Cold Truth by Roger Stone

Notable quotes:
"... The drooling left-wing talking heads insist endlessly that Julian Assange, the publisher of WikiLeaks, is a Russian agent and WikiLeaks is a Russian front. Therefore, they reason that obtaining and passing such documents to Trump would be a treasonous crime. ..."
Mar 09, 2018 | stonecoldtruth.com
I AM UNDER ATTACK In the 40 years that I have spent in American Politics, I have never seen a more hysterical lynch mob than the one at MSNBC , and other "Trump Hating" fake news sites. If you read the Washington Post, Salon or Vice , they would have you believe that I am on the verge of being indicted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller for obtaining copies of the allegedly hacked DNC emails acquired and published by Julian Assange, and passing them to Donald Trump and his campaign.

The drooling left-wing talking heads insist endlessly that Julian Assange, the publisher of WikiLeaks, is a Russian agent and WikiLeaks is a Russian front. Therefore, they reason that obtaining and passing such documents to Trump would be a treasonous crime.

There is only one little problem with this conspiracy theory. I never received anything from Wikileaks, or the Russians, or anyone else. I never sent Donald Trump anything. In fact, I never discussed the Wikileaks disclosures or allegedly hacked DNC emails with Donald Trump before during or after the election.

I testified for four hours before the House Intelligence Committee months ago, debunking this left-wing conspiracy theory. Unfortunately, although members of the Committee disparaged me in public session, I was only allowed to respond behind closed doors. Suggestions by the grumbling Democratic minority and amplified by Politico that my testimony was less than honest are completely and categorically false.

Last week someone on the staff of the House of Intelligence Committee leaked a carefully doctored and truncated screenshot of the direct message exchange I had with WikiLeaks. This material was long ago supplied to the House Intelligence Committee and even in its heavily edited form, proves yet again that I had no coordination or collaboration with WikiLeaks.

[Mar 11, 2018] Russia Narrative Is Cynical Manipulation by Oleg Deripaska

Notable quotes:
"... In the comedy movie " Wag the Dog ," a fictitious U.S. president is on the cusp of losing an election over a real scandal. So a political spin doctor and Hollywood producer hired by his campaign instead distract the public by manufacturing "the appearance of a war" with Albania. The spin doctor explains: "It's not a war, it's a pageant. We need a theme, a song -- some visuals." The producer ascribes Albania a false motive against the United States: "They want to destroy our way of life!" The story line keeps changing to explain away emerging, inconvenient realities. ..."
"... The ever-changing "Russia narrative" in American politics is today's "Wag the Dog" scenario. Technology and the disintegration of evidence-based journalism permit a surprisingly small number of individuals to destroy bilateral or multilateral relations. Their motivation in shifting from an inconvenient reality into their desired reality is power and military-industrial commercial interests. ..."
"... Ignore Donald Trump and increase your defense budget to 2 percent, because the generals who are 'operationalizing policy' remain in charge ..."
"... When you owe the world $18 trillion, the only way to get them to "pay 2 percent for defense" is to manufacture a boogeyman. Russian novelist and pacifist Leo Tolstoy observed: "There is no war which was not hatched by the governments, the governments alone, independent of the interests of the people." ..."
"... they simply follow the "Wag the Dog" playbook: We don't need it to prove to be true. We need it to distract them. ..."
"... President Theodore Roosevelt once cautioned ..."
"... The distractions no longer can mask these "unholy alliances." The wife of a central architect of the Department of Justice's "Russia narrative" secretly worked for the dossier-peddling Fusion GPS. Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson attempted -- according to his own congressional admissions -- to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election ..."
"... Yet on March 16, 2017, Daniel Jones -- himself a team member of Fusion GPS, self-described former FBI agent and, as we now know from the media, an ex-Feinstein staffer -- met with my lawyer, Adam Waldman, and described Fusion as a "shadow media organization helping the government," funded by a "group of Silicon Valley billionaires and George Soros." My lawyer testified these facts to the Senate Intelligence Committee on Nov. 3. Mr. Soros is, not coincidentally, also the funder of two "ethics watchdog" NGOs (Democracy 21 and CREW) attacking Rep. Nunes' committee memo. ..."
"... A former Obama State Department official, Nuland, has been recently outed as another shadow player, reviewing and disseminating Fusion's dossier, and reportedly, hundreds of other dossiers over a period of years. "Deep State-proud loyalists" apparently was a Freudian slip, not a joke. ..."
Mar 11, 2018 | dailycaller.com

In the comedy movie " Wag the Dog ," a fictitious U.S. president is on the cusp of losing an election over a real scandal. So a political spin doctor and Hollywood producer hired by his campaign instead distract the public by manufacturing "the appearance of a war" with Albania. The spin doctor explains: "It's not a war, it's a pageant. We need a theme, a song -- some visuals." The producer ascribes Albania a false motive against the United States: "They want to destroy our way of life!" The story line keeps changing to explain away emerging, inconvenient realities.

The ever-changing "Russia narrative" in American politics is today's "Wag the Dog" scenario. Technology and the disintegration of evidence-based journalism permit a surprisingly small number of individuals to destroy bilateral or multilateral relations. Their motivation in shifting from an inconvenient reality into their desired reality is power and military-industrial commercial interests.

When I attended the Munich Security Conference in February, the extraordinary, coordinated message of a panel of U.S. senators was summarized by moderator Victoria Nuland, former assistant secretary of state under President Barack Obama, as: "Deep State-proud loyalists giv[ing] broad reassurance about continuity." One of the panelists, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), said: "What the Breitbart crowd would call the 'Deep State' is what many of us would call 'knowledgeable professionals.'" The panel's uniform message was essentially: Ignore Donald Trump and increase your defense budget to 2 percent, because the generals who are 'operationalizing policy' remain in charge .

When you owe the world $18 trillion, the only way to get them to "pay 2 percent for defense" is to manufacture a boogeyman. Russian novelist and pacifist Leo Tolstoy observed: "There is no war which was not hatched by the governments, the governments alone, independent of the interests of the people."

What has been inelegantly termed the "Deep State" is really this: shadow power exercised by a small number of individuals from media, business, government and the intelligence community, foisting provocative and cynically false manipulations on the public. Out of these manipulations, an agenda of these architects' own design is born.

Unfortunately, I am personally familiar with this group. Before they moved to their current, bigger ambitions of reversing the U.S. presidential election results, they scurrilously attacked me and others from the shadows for two decades. The various story lines and roles they have created for me don't survive close scrutiny and are internally inconsistent, yet they simply follow the "Wag the Dog" playbook: We don't need it to prove to be true. We need it to distract them.

President Theodore Roosevelt once cautioned : "Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics, is the first task."

The distractions no longer can mask these "unholy alliances." The wife of a central architect of the Department of Justice's "Russia narrative" secretly worked for the dossier-peddling Fusion GPS. Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson attempted -- according to his own congressional admissions -- to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election and its aftermath, to attack Russia and to "embarrass" me and cause trouble for the company I founded.

This inconvenient disclosure necessitated a new story line. Former Democratic National Committee chairwoman and CNN commentator Donna Brazile attacked the memo prepared by House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) on television as "the weaponization of classified information." It is ironic that someone who once ran the organization that allegedly rigged the primary nomination process and who was fired from CNN for allegedly rigging a presidential debate is now producing "Russian-rigging" stories.

World War II hero and former U.S. Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) once observed , in a different context: "There exists a shadowy government with its own fundraising mechanism." Wagging the dog costs money. So, who is the "funding mechanism" of this "shadowy government?"

Fusion GPS's Simpson, in a New York Times op-ed describing his own Judiciary Committee testimony, claimed a neoconservative website "and the Clinton campaign" were "the Republican and Democratic funders of our Trump research." The Judiciary Committee's Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) then unilaterally released, over the objection of committee chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Simpson's testimony to "set the record straight." Fusion GPS "commended Senator Feinstein for her courage."

Yet on March 16, 2017, Daniel Jones -- himself a team member of Fusion GPS, self-described former FBI agent and, as we now know from the media, an ex-Feinstein staffer -- met with my lawyer, Adam Waldman, and described Fusion as a "shadow media organization helping the government," funded by a "group of Silicon Valley billionaires and George Soros." My lawyer testified these facts to the Senate Intelligence Committee on Nov. 3. Mr. Soros is, not coincidentally, also the funder of two "ethics watchdog" NGOs (Democracy 21 and CREW) attacking Rep. Nunes' committee memo.

A former Obama State Department official, Nuland, has been recently outed as another shadow player, reviewing and disseminating Fusion's dossier, and reportedly, hundreds of other dossiers over a period of years. "Deep State-proud loyalists" apparently was a Freudian slip, not a joke.

Invented narratives -- not "of the people, by the people, for the people," but rather just from a couple of people, cloaked in the very same hypocritical rhetoric of "freedom" and "democracy" that those are actively undermining -- impede internationally shared efforts on the world's most pressing, real issues, like global health, climate change and the future of energy. My own "Mother Russia" has many problems and challenges, and my country is still in transition from the Soviet regime -- a transition some clearly wish us to remain in indefinitely.

But we need to stop this old movie.

Oleg Deripaska is the founder of UC Rusal, the world's leading producer of aluminum using clean, renewable hydropower.

[Mar 11, 2018] Russiagate is being used for a host of multipurpose items. Including the suppression of any disagreement with the Mainstream Media, and any dissent with the official line.

Mar 11, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

J, 10 March 2018 at 03:32 PM

Colonel,

Russiagate is being used for a host of multipurpose items. Including the suppression of any disagreement with the Mainstream Media, and any dissent with the official line.

http://therealnews.com/t2/story:21276:Will-Rqussiagate-Help-the-Israel-Lobby-Censor-Al-Jazeera%3F

[Mar 11, 2018] RI has published to complete transcript of the Putin interviews by Megyn Kelly

Mar 11, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

outthere 10 March 2018 at 03:49 PM

Off topic, but perhaps well worth it
RI has published to complete transcript of the Putin interviews by Megyn Kelly. Worthy full read. Putin covers so much ground, far more than you ever saw/heard from NBC which drastically edited the interviews for USA consumption. Kelly repeatedly interrupts and attempts "gotcha", and reveals herself as arrogant stupid american.
here's a taste - but you really have to read it all for yourself
re USA ditching the ABM treaty, Kelly says the reason was 911
quote
> Megyn Kelly: Again, it was in the wake of 9/11, just to make it clear. 9/11 happened on September 11, 2001, and the United States was reassessing its security posture in the world for good reason, wouldn't you admit?
>
> Vladimir Putin: No, not for good reason.This is complete nonsense. Because the missile defence system protects from the kind of ballistic missiles that no terrorists have in their arsenal. This is an explanation for the housewives watching your programme. But if these housewives can hear what I am saying, if you show it to them and they hear me, they will understand that 9/11 and the missile defence system are completely unrelated. To defend themselves from terrorist attacks, the major powers must join their efforts against the terrorists rather than create threats for each other.

re: interference in USA elections by Yevgeny Prigozhin
quote
> To claim otherwise makes no sense. Will anyone believe that Russia, a country located thousands of kilometres away, could use two or three Russians, as you have said, and whom I do not know, to meddle in the elections and influence their outcome? Don't you think that it sounds ridiculous?
>
> Megyn Kelly: Now you are talking about causation. But I am still on whether you did it. And it is not true that you do not know the individuals who were accused of conducting this. One of your good friends is actually accused of helping conduct this. His name is Yevgeny Prigozhin. Do you know him?
>
> Vladimir Putin: I know this man, but he is not a friend of mine. This is just twisting the facts. There is such a businessman; he works in the restaurant business or something. But he is not a state official; we have nothing to do with him.
>
> Megyn Kelly: After you heard about him being indicted, did you pick up the phone and call him?
>
> Vladimir Putin: Certainly not.I have plenty of other things to worry about.
>
> Megyn Kelly: He is your friend. He has been indicted.
>
> Vladimir Putin: Did you hear what I just said? He is not my friend. I know him, but he is not a friend of mine. Was I not clear? There are many people like that. There are 146 million people in Russia. That is less than in the US, but it is still a lot.
>
> Megyn Kelly: He is a prominent businessman.
>
> Vladimir Putin: A prominent businessman? So what? There are many prominent people in Russia. He is not a state official, he does not work for the government; he is an individual, a businessman.
>
> Megyn Kelly: Some people say his real job is to do your dirty work.
>
> Vladimir Putin: Who are those people? And what dirty work? I do not do any dirty work. Everything I do is in plain view. This is your prerogative; some people in your country enjoy doing dirty work. You think we do the same. That is not true.
>
> Megyn Kelly: It is a) the fact that you know him, you admit that. He is a prominent Russian businessman. And he is specifically accused of running this operation; b) this is the same man who has been accused of sending Russian mercenaries into Syria and they attacked a compound held by American back militia. This guy gets around.
>
> Vladimir Putin: You know, this man could have a wide range of interests, including, for example, an interest in the Syrian fuel and energy complex. But we do not support him in any way. We do not get in his way but we do not support him either. It is his own personal initiative.
>
> Megyn Kelly: That is my question to you. That is my question to you. Why, why would you interfere in our election time and time again? And why would not you, for that matter? Let me put it to you that way. You have spent a day, every time I have seen you, in St Petersburg, in Moscow and now here in Kaliningrad, telling me that America has interfered in Russia's electoral process and that Russia has a robust cyber warfare arsenal. And yet you want us to believe that you did not deploy it. Do you understand how implausible that seems, sir?
>
> Vladimir Putin: That does not seem implausible to me at all, because we do not have such a goal, to interfere. We do not see what we have to gain by interfering. There is no such goal. Let us suppose this was our goal. Why, just for the sake of it? What is the goal?
>
> Megyn Kelly: Creating chaos. That is the goal.
>
> Vladimir Putin: Listen to me. Not long ago President Trump said something absolutely correct. He said that if Russia's goal was to sow chaos, it has succeeded. But it is not the result of Russian interference, but your political system, the internal struggle, the disorder and division. Russia has nothing to do with it whatsoever. Get your own affairs in order first. And the way the question is framed, as I mentioned – that you can interfere anywhere because you bring democracy, but we cannot – is what causes conflicts. You have to show your partners respect, and they will respect you.

re usa sanctions
quote
>
>
> Megyn Kelly: One of the questions that our audiences have is how do we walk this back? How do we get to the place where these two great nations are less adversaries and something closer to allies, which we clearly are not right now. Do you agree we are not?
>
> Vladimir Putin: Unfortunately, we are not. But we were not the ones who made the US our adversary. It was the US, the US Congress, who called Russia its adversary. Why did you do that? Did Russia impose sanctions on the United States? No, it was the US that imposed sanctions on us.
>
> Megyn Kelly: You know why.
>
> Vladimir Putin: No, I do not. Can I ask you a different question? Why did you encourage the government coup in Ukraine? Why did you do that? The US directly acknowledged spending billions of dollars to this end. This was openly acknowledged by US officials. Why do they support government coups and armed fighting in other countries? Why has the US deployed missile systems along our borders?
>
> Listen, Russia and the US should sit down and talk it over in order to get things straight. I have the impression that this is what the current President wants, but he is prevented from doing it by some forces. But we are ready to discuss any matter, be it missile-related issues, cyberspace or counterterrorism efforts. We are ready to do it any moment. But the US should also be ready. The time will come when the political elite in the US will be pushed by public opinion to move in this direction. We will be ready the instant our partners are ready.

much more here, including chemical attacks in syria:
https://russia-insider.com/en/kremlin-publishes-full-megan-kelly-putin-interview-nbc-cut-best-parts-video-transcript/ri22747

[Mar 11, 2018] Moscow to Leave the ECHR Pursuing a 'Russia First' Policy

Mar 11, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

Peter KORZUN | 04.03.2018 | WORLD / Europe Moscow to Leave the ECHR: Pursuing a 'Russia First' Policy

Russia is leaving the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and the Russian media reported on March 1 that ending its cooperation with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) wa s yet an other option under consideration . The idea is in the air. The withdrawal may be imminent.

The Russian Federation (Russian Federation) joined the Council of Europe (CE) in 1996 and ratified the ECHR in 1998. The ECHR established the European Court of Human Rights in 1959. These mechanisms to protect human rights are binding on all 47 CE member states.

After Crimea became part of Russia in 2014, Russia's voting rights in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) were suspended. Moscow responded in 2017 by reducing its payments to that organization by one-third, a decision that will not be reversed until its delegation has its voting rights back. Russia is one of the largest donors to the CE with an annual membership fee amounting to €33 million ($37.5 million), or about 7% of the Council's overall budget.

In 2016, the PACE was not invited to monitor Russia's parliamentary elections. Obviously this was a sign of a deteriorating relationship. In late 2017, the RF warned it could withdraw from the PACE altogether if its right to vote was not restored. More than 20 ECHR judges have been elected without Russia's input. Why should the RF respect their rulings? Top CE officials are also elected without Moscow's vote. Why should it trust them? Is it legitimate to hold such elections without Russia? Certainly not. Then why should the RF comply with rules that were established without its input or with court verdicts that are obviously politicized? And why should it pay? Would anyone buy a movie ticket knowing in advance that he would never see the film? So many questions! And the answers are all "no."

In 2015 the RF adopted a law asserting its right to ignore rulings from the ECHR if those conflict with Russian law. It's an open secret that the RF is deeply disappointed with the institutions of the CE: the PACE and the ECHR. The PACE's anti-Russian tilt is obvious. Anyone who observes the organization's activities will remember how Pedro Agramunt, the president of the Parliamentary Assembly, was stripped of his powers and forced to resign last year. This happened after he joined Russian lawmakers on a trip to Syria, which included a meeting with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The CE has openly interfered in the RF's internal affairs by insisting on the right of Aleksei Navalny, an opposition politician, to take part in the 2018 presidential election. Navalny is not allowed to run because anyone with a criminal conviction is barred from seeking elected office in Russia.

In 2017, the Court ruled that the ban on "gay propaganda" is illegal, because it breaches Article 10 of the ECHR, which protects the right to freedom of expression and information. Ridiculous, isn't it? Does this mean that Russia has no right to protect its children from pride marches, promiscuous propaganda, and indecent behavior? If that's not flagrant meddling into internal affairs, then what is?

The institutions of the CE could and should be reformed to guarantee that everyone is equal and the organization is not biased. No PACE member should be denied voting rights and no resolutions should be adopted with only a minority of votes. Finger pointing should be abandoned. That is not what the PACE was created for. Its mission is to serve as a platform for exchanging views and ideas.

And the Court should stop being used as a tool of the CE for propaganda and political purposes. The Court should provide its independent opinion, but without any further binding rulings. National law should prevail.

Russia refuses to contribute to this organization in which it has no voice and rightly so. Remember " No taxation without representation "? No doubt Americans are sympathetic toward Russia's stance.

If the RF pulls out from the ECHR and the ECHR, it will also terminate its membership in the CE. The Council represents approximately 820 million people. The population of the RF, a country rich in resources, with a huge military and economy, exceeds 144 million. Without Russia the CE would no longer qualify as a truly pan-European institution. The RF is large enough that the idea of European discourse without Moscow is meaningless.

As a member of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), Moscow does not need the podium of the PACE to make its views known. But will the CE enjoy the same clout without Russia? The RF can easily do without the Council, but the organization's clout will diminish. It's time for CE leaders to reconsider their organization's mission.

Tags: European Court of Human Rights

[Mar 10, 2018] Meier might have discovered that his subject had been, as it were, 'top supporting actor' in the first fumbling attempt by Christopher Steele et al to produce a plausible-sounding scenario as to the background to Litvinenko s death.

Highly recommended!
There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time.
It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this
Notable quotes:
"... There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this. ..."
"... Important support for these strategies was provided by the 'StratCom' network centred around the late Boris Berezovsky, which clearly collaborated closely with MI6. As was apparent from the witness list at Sir Robert Owen's Inquiry into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, which produced a report based essentially on a recycling of claims made by the network's members, key players were on your side of the Atlantic – notably Alex Goldfarb, Yuri Shvets, and Yuri Felshtinsky. ..."
"... it seems to me the usa and uk have been tied at the hip for a very long time... when it comes to foreign affairs policy and wars - the one will always vouch for the other without hesitation... it tells me the relationship is really deep.. ..."
"... I and my friends consider it a given that most, if not all, anglo-zionist moves in the ME are to "provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area. " It is an open secret that the izzies are the reason why a few Russians, some Turks, lots of Kurds and countless Arabs are dying in the Syrian battlefields. Another open secret: the takfiris and kurds have been, and are, supported by the West. That the "masters of the universe™" have been conceiving and doubling down on such disastrous policies give lie to their much-vaunted "intelligence". ..."
"... It is the very FACT of Trump even getting elected at ALL which outrages and terrifies them so much. They are used to seeing themselves as successful manipulators and engineers of every major event. They were engineering the whole electoral battlespace to get Clinton elected. The mere fact of Trump's victory in the teeth of their Electoral Engineering for Clinton is an act of defiance which they will not tolerate. ..."
"... And if they fail to bring Trump down at all, they will stand revealed as being defeatable. And this is their big fear. That if people see they have defeated the Borg once on keeping Trump in the teeth of Borg's efforts, that people might try to defeat and smash down the Borg on another issue. And then another. And then another after that. ..."
"... Because it is not possible to do on fundamental level yet, especially with US foreign policy establishment and so called consensus being built almost entirely, in ideological and, most importantly, cadres senses, on the ultimate exceptionalist agenda in which Russia is the ultimate obstacle and enemy. Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. ..."
"... They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress West's posture; say 2040 ..."
"... In 1977 Zbigniew Brzezinski, as President Carter's National Security Adviser, forms the Nationalities Working Group (NWG) dedicated to the idea of weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions. ..."
"... State Department official Henry Precht will later recall that Brzezinski had the idea "that Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets." [Scott, 2007, pp. 67] In November 1978, President Carter appointed George Ball head of a special White House Iran task force under Brzezinski. Ball recommends the US should drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the radical Islamist opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini. This idea is based on ideas from British Islamic expert Dr. Bernard Lewis, who advocates the balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. The chaos would spread in what he also calls an "arc of crisis" and ultimately destabilize the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union ..."
"... About relation Steele-MI6, well, you never leave your IS. Or to put it in another way, you are never out of the scope of your past IS ..."
"... No, three years at tops and could be much sooner if dimes starting dropping by exposed people that don't want to take the fall for their superiors whom they always detested. One possible thing to get the process started sooner is if the recent Russian Intelligence delegation to DC that Smoothie mentions on another thread gave the current administration, as a diplomatic courtesy of course, the audio recordings of Madame Sectary Nuland's infamous mental meltdown at Kaliningrad. No telling what beans were spilled in her moment of panic, but I am willing to bet key names were dropped. Either way the time is coming. ..."
"... Especially, once American policy-makers who saw and experienced war (Ike, George Marshall's generation) departed things started to roll down hill with Reagan bringing on board a whole collection of neocons. ..."
"... Unawareness is always dangerous, a complete blackout in relations between two nuclear powers is more than dangerous--it is completely reckless. Again, the way CW 1.0 is perceived in the current US "elites" it becomes extremely tempting to repeat it. Electing Hillary was another step in unleashing CW 2.0 by people who have no understanding of what they were doing. ..."
"... Obama started crushing US-Russian relations before any campaigns were launched and before Trump was even seriously considered a GOP nominee, let alone a real contender. New confrontation hinged on HRC being elected. In fact, she was one of the major driving forces behind a serious of geopolitical anti-Russian moves. Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in HRC campaign long before any Steele's Dossier. This was a program. ..."
"... IMO, the bigger problem for American not shying away from wars, or being silent about them , is when your home, your mom and dad' home, the town you grew up in, are immune and away from the war. ..."
"... The security and safety of the two oceans, encourages or at least, in an all volunteer military makes it a secondary problem for regular people, to worry about. ..."
"... A particular interesting feature of those on the British side – in which we now know Christopher Steele must have played a leading role – were the bizarre gyrations those responsible were going through trying to explain away the extraordinary fact that when he had broken the story of his poisoning, Litvinenko had pointed the finger of suspicion at his Italian associate Mario Scaramella. ..."
"... Of course later reports in the Steele Dossier go hand in hand with a larger public relations campaign. Creating reality? Irony alert: as informer/source I would by then know what the other side wants to hear. ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Steele, Shvets, Levinson, Litvinenko and the 'Billion Dollar Don.'

In the light of the suggestion in the Nunes memo that Steele was 'a longtime FBI source' it seems worth sketching out some background, which may also make it easier to see some possible reasons why he 'was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.'

There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this.

This agenda has involved hopes for 'régime change' in Russia, whether as the result of an oligarchic coup, a popular revolt, or some combination of both. Also central have been hopes for a further 'rollback' of Russia influence in the post-Soviet space, both in areas now independent, such as Ukraine, and also ones still part of the Russian Federation, notably Chechnya.

And, crucially, it involved exploiting the retreat of Russian power from the Middle East for 'régime change' projects which it was hoped would provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area.

Important support for these strategies was provided by the 'StratCom' network centred around the late Boris Berezovsky, which clearly collaborated closely with MI6. As was apparent from the witness list at Sir Robert Owen's Inquiry into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, which produced a report based essentially on a recycling of claims made by the network's members, key players were on your side of the Atlantic – notably Alex Goldfarb, Yuri Shvets, and Yuri Felshtinsky.

The question of what links these had, or did not have, with elements in U.S. intelligence agencies is thus a critical one.

In making some sense of it, the fact that one key figure we know to have been involved in this network was missing at the Inquiry – the former FBI agent Robert Levinson, who disappeared on the Iranian island of Kish in March 2007 – is important.

Unfortunately, I only recently came across a book on Levinson published in 2016 by the 'New York Times' journalist Barry Meier, which is now hopefully winging its way across the Atlantic. From the accounts of the book I have seen, such as one by Jeff Stein in 'Newsweek', it seems likely that its author did not look at any of the evidence presented at Owen's Inquiry.

(See http://www.newsweek.com/2016/05/20/what-really-happened-robert-levinson-cia-iran-454803.html .)

Had he done so, Meier might have discovered that his subject had been, as it were, 'top supporting actor' in the first fumbling attempt by Christopher Steele et al to produce a plausible-sounding scenario as to the background to Litvinenko's death. A Radio 4 programme on 16 December 2006, presented by the veteran BBC presenter Tom Mangold, had been wholly devoted to an account by Shvets, backed up by Levinson. Both of these were, like Litvinenko, supposed to be impartial 'due diligence' operatives.

The notion that any of them might have connections with Western intelligence agencies was not considered. The – publicly available – evidence of the involvement of Shvets, whose surname means 'cobbler' or 'shoemaker' in Ukrainian, in the processing of the tapes of conversations involving the former Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma supposedly recorded by Major Melnychenko, which had played a crucial role in the 2004-5 'Orange Revolution' was not mentioned.

Still less was it mentioned that claims that the – very dangerous – late Soviet Kolchuga system, which made it possible the kind of identification of incoming aircraft which radar had traditionally done, without sending out signals which made the destruction of the facilities doing it possible, had been sold by Kuchma to Iraq had proven spurious.

What Shvets had done had been to take – genuine – audio in which Kuchma had discussed a possible sale, and edit it to suggest a sale had been completed.

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

As a former television current affairs producer, I can talk to you of the marvels which London audio editors can produce, very happily. Unfortunately, the days when not all BBC and 'Guardian' journalists were corrupt stenographers for corrupt and incompetent spooks, as Mangold and his like have been for Steele and Levinson, are long gone.

All this has become particularly relevant now, given that Simpson has placed the notorious Jewish Ukrainian mobster Semyon Mogilevich and the 'Solntsevskaya Bratva' mafia group centre stage in his accounts not simply of Trump and Manafort, but also of William Browder. For most of the 'Nineties, Levinson had been a, if not the, lead FBI investigator on Mogilevich.

(On this, see the 1999 BBC 'Panorama' programme 'The Billion Dollar Don', also presented by Tom Mangold, which has extensive interviews both with Mogilevich and Levinson at

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/events/panorama/transcripts/transcript_06_12_99.txt )

In the months leading up to Levinson's disappearance, a key priority for the advocates of the strategy I have described was to prevent it being totally derailed by the patently catastrophic outcome of the Iraqi adventure.

Compounding the problem was the fact that this had created the 'Shia Crescent', which in turn exacerbated the potential 'existential threat' to Israel posed by the steadily increasing range, accuracy and numbers of missiles available to Hizbullah in hardened positions north of the Litani.

These, obviously, provided both a 'deterrent' for that organisation and Iran, and also a radical threat to the whole notion that somehow Israel could ever be a 'safe haven' for Jews, against the supposedly ineradicable disposition of the 'goyim' sooner or later to, as it were, revert to type. The dreadful thought that Israel might not be necessary had to be resisted at all costs.

What followed from the disaster unleashed by the – Anglo-American – 'own goal' in toppling Saddam was, ironically, a need on the part of key players to 'double down.' Above all, it was necessary for many of those involved to counter suggestions from the Russian side that going around smashing up 'régimes' that one might not like sometimes blew up in one's face.

Even more threatening were suggestions from the Russian side that it was foolish to think one could use jihadists without risking 'blowback', and that there might be an overwhelming common interest in combating Islamic extremism.

Another priority was to counter the pushback in the American 'intelligence community' and military, which was to produce the drastic downgrading of the threat posed by the Iranian nuclear programme in the November 2007 NIE and then the resignation of Admiral William Fallon as head of 'Centcom' the following March.

So in 2005 Shvets came to London. He and his audio editors had another 'bite at the cherry' of the Melnychenko tapes, so that material that did in fact establish that both the SBU and FSB had collaborated with Mogilevich could be employed to make it seem that Putin had a close personal relationship with the mobster.

All kinds of supposedly respectable American and British academics, like Professors Karen Dawisha and Robert Service, have fallen for this, hook, line and sinker. It gives a new meaning to the term 'useful idiot.'

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

In a letter sent in December that year by Litvinenko to the 'Mitrokhin Commission', for which his Italian associate Mario Scaramella was a consultant, this was used in an attempt to demonstrate that Mogilevich, while acting as an agent for the FSB and under Putin's personal 'krysha', had attempted to supply a 'mini atomic bomb' – aka 'suitcase nuke' – to Al Qaeda. Shortly after the letter was sent Scaramella departed on a trip to Washington, where he appears to have got access to Aldrich Ames.

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

At precisely this time, as Meier explains, Levinson was in the process of being recruited by a lady called Anne Jablonski who then worked as a CIA analyst. It appears that she was furious at the failure of the operational side at the Agency to produce evidence which would have established that Iran did indeed have an ongoing nuclear programme, and she may well have hoped would implicate Russia in supplying materials.

There are grounds to suspect that one of the things that Berezovsky and Shvets were doing was fabricating such 'evidence.' Whether Levinson was involved in such attempts, or genuinely looking for evidence he was convinced must be there, I cannot say. It appears that he fell for a rather elementary entrapment operation – which could well have been organised with the collaboration of Russian intelligence. (People do get fed up with being framed, particular if 'régime change' is the goal.)

It also seems likely that, quite possibly in a different but related entrapment operation, related to propaganda wars in which claims and counter claims about a polonium-beryllium 'initiator' as the crucial missing part which might make a 'suitcase nuke' functional, Litvinenko accidentally ingested fatal quantities of polonium. A good deal of evidence suggests that this may have been at Berezovsky's offices on the night before he was supposedly assassinated.

It was, obviously, important for Steele et al to ensure that nobody looked at the 'StratCom' wars about 'suitcase nukes.' Here, a figure who has played a key role in such wars in relation to Syria plays an interesting minor one in the story.

Some time following the destruction of the case for an immediate war by the November 2007 NIE, a chemical weapons specialist called Dan Kaszeta, who had worked in the White House for twelve years, moved to London.

In 2011, in addition to founding a consultancy called 'Strongpoint Security', he began a writing career with articles in 'CBRNe World.' Later, he would become the conduit through which the notorious 'hexamine hypothesis', supposedly clinching proof that the Syrian government was responsible for the sarin incidents at Khan Sheikhoun, Ghouta, Saraqeb, and Khan Al-Asal, was disseminated.

Having been forced by the threat of a case being opened against them under human rights law into resuming the inquest into Litvinenko's death, in August 2012 the British authorities appointed Sir Robert Owen to conduct it. (There are many honest judges in Britain, but obviously, if one sets out to find someone who will 'cover up' for the incompetence and corruption of people like Steele, as Lord Hutton did before him, you can find them.)

That same month, a piece appeared in 'CBRNe World' with the the strapline: 'Dan Kaszeta looks into the ultimate press story: Suitcase nukes', and the main title 'Carry on or checked bags?' Among the grounds he gives for playing down the scare:

'Some components rely on materials with shelf life. Tritium, for example, is used in many nuclear weapon designs and has a twelve year half-life. Polonium, used in neutron initiators in some earlier types of weapon designs, has a very short halflife. US documents state that every nuclear weapon has "limited life components" that require periodic replacement (do an internet search for nuclear limited life components and you can read for weeks).'

(For this and other articles by Kaszeta, as also his bio, see http://strongpointsecurity.co.uk ')

What Kaszeta has actually described are the reasons why polonium is a perfect 'StratCom' instrument. In terms of scientific plausibility, in fact there were no 'suitcase nukes', and in any case 'initiators' using polonium had been abandoned very early on, in favour of ones which lasted longer.

For 'StratCom' scenarios, as experience with the 'hexamine hypothesis' has proved, scientific plausibility can be irrelevant.

What polonium provides is a means of suggesting that Al Qaeda have in fact got hold of a nuclear device which they could easily smuggle into, say, Rome or New York, or indeed Moscow, but there is a crucial missing component which the FSB is trying to provide to them. By the same token, of course, that missing component could be depicted as one that Berezovsky and Litvinenko are conspiring to suppl to the Chechen insurgents.

In addition, the sole known source of global supply is the Avangard plant at Sarov in Russia, so the substance is naturally suited for 'StratCom' directed against that country, which its intelligence services would – rather naturally – try to make 'boomerang.'

According to Glenn Simpson, Christopher Steele is a 'boy scout.' This seems to me quite wrong – but, even if it were true, would you want to unleash a 'boy scout' into these kinds of intrigue?

As it is not clear why Kaszeta introduced his – accurate but irrelevant – point about polonium into an article which was concerned with scientific plausibility, one is left with an interesting question as to whether he cut his teeth on 'StratCom' attempting to ensure that nobody seriously interested in CBRN science followed an obvious lead.

In relation to the question of whether current FBI personnel had been involved in the kind of 'StratCom' exercises, I have been describing, a critical issue is the involvement of Shvets and Levinson in the Alexander Khonanykhine affair back in the 'Nineties, and the latter's use of claims about the Solntsevskaya to prevent the key figure's extradition. But that is a matter for another day.

A corollary of all this is that we cannot – yet at least – be absolutely confident that the account in the Nunes memo, according to which Steele was suspended and then dismissed as an FBI source for what the organisation is reported to define as 'the most serious of violations' – the unauthorised disclosure of a relationship with the organisation – is necessarily wholly accurate.

Who did and did not authorise which disclosures to the media, up to and including the extraordinary decision to have the full dossier, including claims about Aleksej Gubarev and the Alfa oligarchs, in flagrant disregard of the obvious risks of defamation suits, and who may be trying to pass the buck to others, remains I think less than totally clear.

Posted at 03:42 PM in As The Borg Turns , Habakkuk , Russia , Russiagate | Permalink

james , 03 February 2018 at 04:33 PM

thanks david... fascinating overview and conjecture..

it seems to me the usa and uk have been tied at the hip for a very long time... when it comes to foreign affairs policy and wars - the one will always vouch for the other without hesitation... it tells me the relationship is really deep..

JohnB , 03 February 2018 at 05:17 PM
David,

Thank you very. As ever you have illuminated a few more things for me. Kaszeta's involvement is interesting. He is someone I am in the middle of researching in relation to Higgins and Bellingcat.

turcopolier , 03 February 2018 at 06:02 PM
james

It is the closest of all international intelligence relationships. It started in WW2. Before that the Brits were though of as a potential enemy. pl

Babak Makkinejad -> turcopolier ... , 03 February 2018 at 06:10 PM
I think the English are using you, they are unsentimental empirical people that only do these that benefit the Number One.
The chief beneficiary of the Coup in Iran was England and not US.
catherine , 03 February 2018 at 06:22 PM
That Newsweek piece about Levinson is very superficial to me.

Re: Levinson

# Who suggested to who 'first' the Iran caper...Anne Jablonski to Levinson or Levinson to Jablonski? It was reported earlier by Meier that in December 2005, when Levinson was pitching Jablonski on projects he might take on when his CIA contract was approved he sent her a lengthy memo about Dawud's potential as an informant.

# Ira Silverman, the Iran hating NBC guy, pitched a Iraq caper to Levinson with Dawud Salahuddin, as his Iran contact and Levinson went to Jablonski with it.

# And what was with Boris Birshstein, a Russian organized crime figure who had fled to Israel and Oleg Deripaska, the "aluminum czar" of Russia whose organized crime contacts have kept him from entering the United States jumping in to help find Levinson? The FBI allowed Deripaska in for two visits in 2009 in exchange for his alleged help in locating Levinson but obviously nothing came of it.

I think there were more little agents/agendas in this than Levinson and Jablonski and US CIA.

Ishmael Zechariah , 03 February 2018 at 06:54 PM
DH,

As usual a wonderful analysis. I admire your insight, integrity and courage. I wish you could write more on why the Borg is so much against Trump, even though they have Kushner, Adelson and Co. running interference for them.

I and my friends consider it a given that most, if not all, anglo-zionist moves in the ME are to "provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area. " It is an open secret that the izzies are the reason why a few Russians, some Turks, lots of Kurds and countless Arabs are dying in the Syrian battlefields. Another open secret: the takfiris and kurds have been, and are, supported by the West. That the "masters of the universe™" have been conceiving and doubling down on such disastrous policies give lie to their much-vaunted "intelligence".

Be safe.

Ishmael Zechariah

Rd , 03 February 2018 at 07:31 PM
Babak Makkinejad said in reply to turcopolier...

The chief beneficiary of the Coup in Iran was England and not US.
..and US is the one who has been paying for it since 1979!!!

kooshy said in reply to Ishmael Zechariah... , 03 February 2018 at 08:21 PM
IZ
My guess is, that he is unpredictable, instantaneous and therefore can't be consistent and reliable, useful idiot needs to be predictable.
kooshy , 03 February 2018 at 08:43 PM
"There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. "

David as usual fascinating work connecting the dots. One question that comes to my mind is about the above point you are making. Is it your understanding or believe that these IC individuals on both side of Atlantic, are pursuing/forcing their (on behalf of the Borg) foreign policy agenda outside of their respected seating governments? If not, why is it that incoming administration cannot stop them? So far I can't see any strategic changes on US foreign policy toward ME or Russia, at tactical level yes but not fundamentally.

different clue , 03 February 2018 at 08:49 PM
Ishmael Zechariah,

( reply to comment 6),

I am not David Habakkuk, obviously. But I will venture a little opinion anyway. It is not enough that the Borgists get their policy preferences. If it were, then Kushner, Adelson and Co. running interference would be enough for them.

It is the very FACT of Trump even getting elected at ALL which outrages and terrifies them so much. They are used to seeing themselves as successful manipulators and engineers of every major event. They were engineering the whole electoral battlespace to get Clinton elected. The mere fact of Trump's victory in the teeth of their Electoral Engineering for Clinton is an act of defiance which they will not tolerate.

And if they fail to bring Trump down at all, they will stand revealed as being defeatable. And this is their big fear. That if people see they have defeated the Borg once on keeping Trump in the teeth of Borg's efforts, that people might try to defeat and smash down the Borg on another issue. And then another. And then another after that.

So that is why the Borg cares so much. They view the Trump election as an insurgency, and they view themselves as waging a counterinsurgency, which they dare not lose.

Jack , 03 February 2018 at 08:54 PM
David,

Thanks for your analysis. I always enjoy and learn from your posts. I wish you would post more often.

In my non-expert opinion, the Borg and the media were all in for Hillary. They were convinced that she was gonna win. To curry favor with the Empress who would be certainly crowned after the election they were eager and convinced that their lawlessness would become a badge for promotion and plum positions in her administration. In their conceit, they believed they could kill two birds with one stroke. They could vilify Putin and create the mass hysteria to checkmate him, while at the same time disparage and frame Trump as The Manchurian Candidate to seal their certain electoral victory.

Unfortunately for them voters in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin didn't buy their sales pitch despite the overwhelming media barrage from all corners. Even news publications who have only endorsed Republican candidates for President for over a century endorsed her.

Trump's election win caused panic among the political establishment, the media and the Deep State. They were already all-in. Their only choice was to double down and get Trump impeached. Now their conspiracy is beginning to unravel. They are doing everything possible to forestall their Armageddon. Of course they have many allies. This battle is gonna be interesting to watch. Trump is clearly getting many Congressional Republicans on side as his base of Deplorables remains solidly behind him. That is what's befuddling the Borg pundits.

SmoothieX12 -> kooshy... , 03 February 2018 at 09:51 PM
So far I can't see any strategic changes on US foreign policy toward ME or Russia, at tactical level yes but not fundamentally.

Because it is not possible to do on fundamental level yet, especially with US foreign policy establishment and so called consensus being built almost entirely, in ideological and, most importantly, cadres senses, on the ultimate exceptionalist agenda in which Russia is the ultimate obstacle and enemy. Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. This swamp (Borg, deep state, etc.) still thinks that it can use Cold War 1.0 Playbook and address very real and dangerous American economic issues. They are wrong, since most of them didn't read the playbook correctly to start with.

Babak Makkinejad -> SmoothieX12 ... , 03 February 2018 at 10:10 PM
They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress West's posture; say 2040.
kooshy said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 03 February 2018 at 10:24 PM
You are right CWII is very much desired and on agenda, but i am not sure of setup, the setup/board has been changed tremendously and IMO benefits the Asian side of Bosphorus, for one thing technology is no longer exclusive, and financial burden is heavier on atlantic side.
catherine said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 12:21 AM
''Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. ''

The locust keep trying and trying, destruction is their life's work.

'1977-1981: Nationalities Working Group Advocates Using Militant Islam Against Soviet Union'

In 1977 Zbigniew Brzezinski, as President Carter's National Security Adviser, forms the Nationalities Working Group (NWG) dedicated to the idea of weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions. The Islamic populations are regarded as prime targets. Richard Pipes, the father of Daniel Pipes, takes over the leadership of the NWG in 1981. Pipes predicts that with the right encouragement Soviet Muslims will "explode into genocidal fury" against Moscow. According to Richard Cottam, a former CIA official who advised the Carter administration at the time, after the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1978, Brzezinski favored a "de facto alliance with the forces of Islamic resurgence, and with the Republic of Iran." [Dreyfuss, 2005, pp. 241, 251 - 256]

'November 1978-February 1979: Some US Officials Want to Support Radical Muslims to Contain Soviet Union'

State Department official Henry Precht will later recall that Brzezinski had the idea "that Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets." [Scott, 2007, pp. 67] In November 1978, President Carter appointed George Ball head of a special White House Iran task force under Brzezinski. Ball recommends the US should drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the radical Islamist opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini. This idea is based on ideas from British Islamic expert Dr. Bernard Lewis, who advocates the balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. The chaos would spread in what he also calls an "arc of crisis" and ultimately destabilize the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union

aleksandar , 04 February 2018 at 04:41 AM
David,

About relation Steele-MI6, well, you never leave your IS. Or to put it in another way, you are never out of the scope of your past IS.

Fred said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 04 February 2018 at 08:40 AM
Babak,

"they got US to bail them out during WWII" And how would things have worked out had we not done so?

Fred , 04 February 2018 at 08:46 AM
David,

"There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time."

Yes, that is what appears to be just what is coming to light. I wonder just what position Trey Gowdy is going to have since he won't be running for re-election. The rage from the left is palpable. I'm sure the next outraged guy on the left will know how to shoot straighter than the ones who shot up Congressman Scalise or the concert goers at Mandalay Bay.

Anna said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 08:48 AM
"They are wrong, since most of them didn't read the playbook correctly to start with."
-- If they have read the important books at all... The ongoing scandal has been revealing a stunning incompetence of the "deciders." Too often they look comical, ridiculous, undignified. This is dangerous, considering their power.
turcopolier , 04 February 2018 at 08:54 AM
Anna

The powerful are often remarkably ignorant. pl

Babak Makkinejad -> Fred... , 04 February 2018 at 10:08 AM
England preferred NAZI Germany to USSR, this is well known. As to what would have happened, the outcome of the war, in my opinion, did not depend on US participation in the European Theatre. All of Europe would have become USSR satellite or joined USSR.
jonst said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 04 February 2018 at 11:53 AM
"unsentimental empirical people"? Absolutely disagree with you. Now the Iranians, they strike me as a singularity unsentimental people. Just general impressions, mind you.
Kooshy said in reply to catherine... , 04 February 2018 at 12:06 PM
Yes, US was the first country to proudly deliver Manpads to be used by "rebels" (Mojahadin later Taleban) against USSR in Afghanistan back in 80s. And, as per the architect of support for the rebels (Zbigniew Brzezinski) very proud of it with no regret. With that in mind, I don't see how western politicians, the western governments and their related proxy war planers, will be regretting, even sadden, once god forbid we see passenger planes with loved ones are shot down taking off or landing at various western airports and other places around the word. Just like how superficialy with crocodile tears in their eyes they acted in aftermath of the terrorist events in various western cities in this past 16 years. Gods knows what will happens to us if the opposite side start to supply his own proxies with lethal anti air weapons. "Proudly", I don't think anybody in west cares or will regret of such an escalation.
Phodges said in reply to turcopolier ... , 04 February 2018 at 12:23 PM
Sir

It seems we are being defeated by Cicero's enemy within. Zion is achieving what no one could hope to achieve by force of arms.

David Habakkuk -> catherine... , 04 February 2018 at 01:17 PM
catherine,

In response to comment 5.

I think it likely that what Meier produces is only a 'limited hangout', and am hoping that when the book arrives it will contain more pointers.

It is important to be clear that one is often dealing with people playing very complicated double games.

An interesting document is the 'Petition for Writ of Habeus Corpus' made on behalf of Khodorkovsky's close associate Alexander Konanykhin back in 1997,when the Immigration and Naturalization Service were – apparently at least – cooperating with Russian attempts to get hold of him. An extract:

'During the immigration hearing FBI SA Robert Levinson, an INS witness, confirmed that in 1992 Petitioner was kidnapped and afterwards pursued by assassins of the Solntsevskaya organized criminal group. This organized criminal group is reportedly the largest and the most influential organized criminal group in Russia, and operates internationally.'

(See http://defiancethebook.com/legal/habeas/petition.htm .)

Note the similarities between the 'StratCom' that Khonanykin and his associates were producing in the 'Nineties, and that which Simpson and his associates have been producing two decades later.

Another useful example is provided by a 2004 item in the 'New American Magazine', reproduced on Konanykhin's website:

'One of those who testified on behalf of Konanykhine was KGB defector Yuri Shvets, who declared: "I have a firsthand knowledge on similar operations conducted by the KGB." Konanykhine had brought trouble on himself, Shvets continued, when he "started bringing charges against people who were involved with him in setting up and running commercial enterprises. They were KGB people secretly smuggling from Russia hundreds of millions of dollars . This is [a] serious case, and I know that KGB ... desperately wants to win this case, and everybody who won't step to their side would face problems."'

(See http://konanykhin.com/news/the-konanykhine-case.html .)

So – 'first hand knowledge', from a Ukrainian nationalist – look at what the Chalupas have been doing, it seems not much has changed.

For a rather different perspective on what Konanykhin had actually been up to, from someone in whose honesty – if not always judgement – I have complete confidence, see the testimony of Karon von Gerhke-Thompson to the House Committee on Banking and Financial Services hearings on Russian Money Laundering. In this, she described how she had been approached by him in 1993:

'"Konanykhine alleged that Menatep Bank controlled $1.7bn [Ł1bn] in assets and investment portfolios of Russia's most prominent political and social elite," she recalled. She said he wanted to move the bank's assets off shore and asked her to help buy foreign passports for its "very, very special clients".

'In her testimony to the committee Ms Von Gerhke-Thompson said she informed the CIA of the deal, and the agency told her that it believed Mr Konanykhine and Mr Khodorkovsky "were engaged in an elaborate money laundering scheme to launder billions of dollars stolen by members of the KGB and high-level government officials".

(For a 'Guardian report, see https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/sep/23/julianborger ; for the actual testimony, see http://archives-financialservices.house.gov/banking/92299ger.pdf .)

Coming back to Steele's 'StratCom', in July 2008, an item appeared on the 'Newnight' programme of the BBC – which some of us think should by then have been rechristened the 'Berezovsky Broadcasting Corporation' – in which the introduction by the presenter, Jeremy Paxman, read as follows:

'Good evening. The New Russian President, Dmitri Medvedev, was all smiles and warm words when he met Gordon Brown today. He said he was keen to resolve all outstanding difficulties between the two countries. Yada yada yada. Gordon Brown smiled, but he must know what Newsnight can now reveal: that MI5 believes the Russian state was involved in the murder of Alexander Litvinenko by radioactive poisoning. They also believe that without their intervention another London-based Russian, Boris Berezovsky, would have been murdered. Our diplomatic editor, Mark Urban, has this exclusive report.'

(For the transcript presented in evidence to Owen's Inquiry, see http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/ ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/ )

When Urban repeated the claims on his blog, there was a positive eruption from someone using the name 'timelythoughts', about the activities of someone she referred to as 'Berezovsky's disinformation specialist' – when I came across this later, it was immediately clear to me that she was Karon von Gerhke, and he was Shvets.

(For the first part of the exchanges of comments, the second apparently having become unavailable, see http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2008/07/litvinenko_killing_had_state_i.html )

She then described a visit by Scaramella to Washington, details of which had already been unearthed by my Italian collaborator, David Loepp. Her claim to have e-mails from Shvets, from the time immediately prior to Litvinenko's death, directly contradicting the testimony he had given, fitted with other evidence I had already unearthed.

Later, we exchanged e-mails over a quite protracted period, and a large amount of material that came into my possession as a result was submitted by me to the Inquest team, with some of it being used in posts on the 'European Tribune' site.

What I never used publicly, because I could only partially corroborate it from the material she provided, was an extraordinary claim about Shvets:

'He was responsible for bringing in a Kremlin initiative that was walked Vice President Cheney's office on a US government quid pro quo with the Kremlin FSB SVR involving the arrest of Mikhail Khodorkovsky – a cease and desist on allegations of a politically motivated arrest of Khodorkovsky, violations of rules of law and calls from Russia's expulsion from the G 8 in exchange for favorable posturing of U.S. oil companies on Gazprom's Shtokman project and intelligence on weapon sales during the Yeltsin era to Iraq, Iran and Syria, all documented in reports I submitted to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and MI6.

'Berezovsky's DS could not be on both sides on that isle. His Kremlin FSB SVR sources had been vetted by the CIA and by the National Security Council. They proved to be as represented. As we would later learn, however, he was on Berezovsky's payroll at same time. The FSB SVR general he was coordinating the Kremlin initiative through was S. R. Subbotin, the same FSB SVR general who was investigating Berezovsky's money laundering operations in Switzerland during the same timeframe. His FSB SVR sources surrounding Putin were higher than any Lugovoy could have ever hoped to affiliate with.

'R. James Woolsey (former CIA DCI), Marshall Miller (former law partner of the late CIA DCI William Colby), who I coordinated the Kremlin initiative through that Berezovsky's DS had brought in were shocked to learn that he was affiliated with Berezovsky and Litvinenko. He was in Berezovsky's inner circle and engaged in vetting Russian business with Litvinenko. He operated Berezovsky's Ukraine website, editing and dubbing the now infamous Kuchma tapes throughout the lead up to the elections in the Ukraine. Berezovsky contributed $41 million to Viktor Yushchenko's campaign, which he used in an attempt to force Yushchenko to reunite with Julia Tymoschenko. It failed but would succeed later after Berezovsky orchestrated a public relations initiative through Alan Goldfarb in the U.S. on behalf of Tymoschenko.'

Having got to know Karon von Gerhke quite well, and also been able to corroborate a great deal of what she told me about many things, and discussed these matters with her, it is absolutely clear to me that she was neither fabricating nor fantasising. What later became apparent, both to her and to me, was that in the 'double game' that Shvets was playing, he had succeeded in fooling her as to the side for which he was working.

It seems likely however that the reason Shvets could do what he did was that quite precisely that many high-up people in the Kremlin and elsewhere were playing a 'double game.' In this, Karon von Gerhke's propensity for indiscretion – of which I, like others, was both beneficiary and victim – could be useful.

An exercise in 'positioning', which could be used to disguise the fact that Shvets was indeed 'Berezovsky's disinformation specialist', could be used to make it appear that 'intelligence on weapon sales during the Yeltsin era to Iraq, Iran and Syria' was actually credible.

This could have been used to try to rescue Cheney, Bush and their associates from the mess they had got into as a result of the failure of the invasion to provide any evidence whatsoever supporting the case which had been made for it. It could also have been used to provide the kind of materials justifying military action against Iran for which Levinson and Jablonski were looking, and for similar action against Syria.

Among reasons for bringing this up now is that we need to make sense of the paradox that Simpson – clearly in collusion with Steele – was using Mogilevich and the 'Solnsetskaya Bratva' both against Manafort and Trump and against Browder.

There are various possible explanations for this. I do not want to succumb to my instinctive prejudice that this may have been another piece of 'positioning', similar to what I think was being done with Shvets, but the hypothesis needs to be considered.

A more general point is that people in Washington and London need to 'wise up' to the kind of world with which they are dealing. This could be done quite enjoyably: reading some of Dashiell Hammett's fictions of the United States in the Prohibition era, or indeed buying DVDs of some of the classics of 'film noir', like 'Out of the Past' (in its British release, 'Build My Gallows High') might be a start.

Very much of the coverage of affairs in the post-Soviet space since 1991 has read rather as though a Dashiell Hammett story had been rewritten by someone specialising in sentimental children's, or romantic, fiction (although, come to think of it, that is really what Brigid O'Shaughnessy does in 'The Maltese Falcon.')

The testimony of Glenn Simpson seems a case in point. The sickly sentimentality of these people does, rather often, make one feel as though one wanted to throw up.

Thomas , 04 February 2018 at 01:24 PM
"They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress West's posture; say 2040.}

No, three years at tops and could be much sooner if dimes starting dropping by exposed people that don't want to take the fall for their superiors whom they always detested. One possible thing to get the process started sooner is if the recent Russian Intelligence delegation to DC that Smoothie mentions on another thread gave the current administration, as a diplomatic courtesy of course, the audio recordings of Madame Sectary Nuland's infamous mental meltdown at Kaliningrad. No telling what beans were spilled in her moment of panic, but I am willing to bet key names were dropped. Either way the time is coming.

SmoothieX12 -> Anna... , 04 February 2018 at 01:39 PM
- If they have read the important books at all... The ongoing scandal has been revealing a stunning incompetence of the "deciders." Too often they look comical, ridiculous, undignified. This is dangerous, considering their power.

My coming book is precisely about that. Especially, once American policy-makers who saw and experienced war (Ike, George Marshall's generation) departed things started to roll down hill with Reagan bringing on board a whole collection of neocons.

Unawareness is always dangerous, a complete blackout in relations between two nuclear powers is more than dangerous--it is completely reckless. Again, the way CW 1.0 is perceived in the current US "elites" it becomes extremely tempting to repeat it. Electing Hillary was another step in unleashing CW 2.0 by people who have no understanding of what they were doing.

Obama started crushing US-Russian relations before any campaigns were launched and before Trump was even seriously considered a GOP nominee, let alone a real contender. New confrontation hinged on HRC being elected. In fact, she was one of the major driving forces behind a serious of geopolitical anti-Russian moves. Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in HRC campaign long before any Steele's Dossier. This was a program.

james said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 04 February 2018 at 03:01 PM
there seems to be no shortage of money for these blatant propaganda exercises..
Babak Makkinejad -> SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 04:14 PM
I think the failure of Deciders is nothing new - Fath Ali Shah attacking Russia, or the abject failure of the Deciders in 1914. Europe is still not where she was in 1890.
begob , 04 February 2018 at 05:20 PM
I read the post and responses early on, so forgive me if this point has been addressed in the meantime. If the memo information on non-disclosure of material evidence to the warrant issuing court is accurate, as soon as that information came to the attention of the authorities (clearly some time ago) there was a duty on them (including the judge(s) who issued the warrants) to have the matter brought back before the court toot sweet. If that had happened it would surely be in the public domain, so on the assumption the prosecutors and maybe even the judge didn't see the need to review the matter, even purely on a contempt/ethics basis, the memo information only seems convincing if the FISA system is a total sham. I really doubt that.
kooshy said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 06:20 PM
IMO, the bigger problem for American not shying away from wars, or being silent about them , is when your home, your mom and dad' home, the town you grew up in, are immune and away from the war.

The security and safety of the two oceans, encourages or at least, in an all volunteer military makes it a secondary problem for regular people, to worry about. As I remember that wasn't the case at the end of VN war when i first landed here. At that time even though the war was on the other side of the planet and away from homeland, still people, especially young ones in colleges were paying more attention to the cost of war.

spy killer , 04 February 2018 at 06:55 PM
Diana West has uncovered some interesting "Red Threads" (6 part article at dianawest-dot-net) on all the Fusion GPS folks. Seems ole Russian speaking Nellie Ohr got herself a ham radio license recently. Wonder why she would suddenly need one of those? They are all Marxists with potential connections back to Russia.
English Outsider -> Fatima Manoubia... , 05 February 2018 at 07:23 AM
Been there. I am also a latecomer to SST. You have to read the back numbers. How? My IT expertise dates from the dawn of the internet and was lamentable then but I find Wayback sometimes allows easier searches than the SST search engine. A straight search on google also allows searches with more than one term. This link -

https://twitter.com/pat_lang

- gets you to a chronological list and for recent material is sometimes quicker than fiddling around with search engines. "Categories" on the RH side is useful but then you don't get some very informative comments that cross-refer.

If those sadly elementary procedures fail resort to the nearest infant. There's a blur of fingers on the keyboard and what you want then usually appears. Never ask them how they did it. They get so fed up when you ask them to explain it again.

"Who is David Habakkuk?" That's a quantum computer sited, from internal evidence you pick up from time to time, somewhere in the Greater London area. Cross references like you wouldn't believe and over several fields, so maybe he's two quantum computers.

The "Borg"?. Try Wittgenstein. Likely a prog but you can't be choosy these days. Early on in "Philosophical Investigations" (hope I get this right) he discusses the problem of how you can view as an entity something that has ill-defined or overlapping boundaries. The "Borg" is that "you know it when you see it" sort of thing. A great merit of this site is that the owner and many of the contributors know it from inside.

In general you may regard your new found site as a microcosm of the great battle that is raging in the West. It's a battle between the (probably apocryphal but adequately stated) Roveian view of reality that regards truth as an adjunct to or as a by-product of ideology and Realpolitik and the objective view of reality as something that is damned difficult to get at, and sometimes impossible, but that has a truth in it somewhere that is independent of the views and convictions of the observer. It's a battle that's never going to be won but unless it tilts back closer to common sense it can certainly be lost and the West with it.

jonst said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 05 February 2018 at 08:11 AM
Clearly the Labor Party in the UK preferred the USSR to Nazi Germany. (cepting that short interlude where the Soviets signed the Agreement with Hitler, and the Left Organized Leadership all across Europe, for the most part, lined up with Hitler). But for the most part, Labor was Left.
Elements (the ones that won out in the end) of the Conservative Party loathed both Hitler and Stalin. An element of the Conservative Party was sympathetic, but only up to a certain point, with the Nazis. This ended in 1939, sept.

So I don't think it fair, or accurate, to say 'England prefered the Nazis....and even if it not those things, it certainly not "well known", except to the people who have used the false premise to butter their wounds from supporting Stalin in his Pact with Hitler. Or are inclined to bash the British in general.

Babak Makkinejad -> jonst... , 05 February 2018 at 08:29 AM
All right, perhaps I should have said "The English Government". Google "Litvinov", you may discover how the English Government pushed Stalin to make a deal with Hitler to buy USSR time.
Sid Finster said in reply to Jack... , 05 February 2018 at 10:26 AM
Witness the infamous State Department protest memo calling for more war on Syria.

The State Department employees that signed that memo were sure that HRC would win and that their diligent work in pushing the Deep State agenda would sure be rewarded.

Since entering office, Trump appears to have taken the line that if he gives the Deep State everything it demands, he will be allowed to remain in office, even if he is not allowed to remain in power.

Sid Finster said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 05 February 2018 at 10:31 AM
Explain Marshall Miller's role in this, please. He is someone I know quite well. I also know one of the Chalupas.
begob said in reply to jonst... , 05 February 2018 at 10:56 AM
jonst That's broadly accurate, but specifically Attlee brought the motion of no confidence in Chamberlain, which the conservative appeasers won but which led to Churchill's opportunity. Attlee was essential in cabinet to Churchill's resistance after the retreat of the BEF.
turcopolier , 05 February 2018 at 11:18 AM
FM
What are you doing here? You said you dislike the military. Are you really in the Spanish Basque country? Bilbao maybe? break - David Habakkuk is a private scholar of the Litvinenko murder and Soviet/Russian politics and intelligence affairs. His surname comes from Wales where in the 18th (?) Century the ancestral village were all "chapel" and changed their surnames to Old Testament names. His father was master of one of the Cambridge colleges and David is himself a graduate of Cambridge. pl
Babak Makkinejad -> Fatima Manoubia... , 05 February 2018 at 11:19 AM
Yes, I am Iranian. All "Babak"s are Iranians - except some obscure ones that are Rus - Babakov.
Anna , 05 February 2018 at 02:07 PM
The hard, blinding truth: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/02/05/will-conspiracy-trump-american-democracy-go-unpunished/
"In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousand fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations." – Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Thomas said in reply to turcopolier ... , 05 February 2018 at 02:08 PM
Colonel,

This troll showed up recently at b's place doing the same accusations. There is group that is running sacred and pulling out all the stops in "info ops" side of the spectrum. The damn fools don't or, most probably, won't get thru their thick heads and even thicker hearts that it is a failed strategy that turns bystanders into their opponents.

Richardstevenhack , 05 February 2018 at 02:36 PM
Here for your edification is the definitive analysis of the GOP memo by Alexander Mercouris over at The Duran.

And it is a masterpriece - and quite long, possibly his longest analysis of anything so far. He buries the counterarguments being passed around by the Democratic opposition and the anti-Trump media.

Mercouris writes on legal affairs alongside his foreign policy stuff and he writes with a lawyer's precision. And in this article he points out that the GOP memo is writter as a legal document - probably by Trey Gowdy - with additional political insertions by Nunes. So it should properly be referred to as the "GOP memo" or the "Gowdy memo", not the Nunes memo."

Why this is important is that the GOP memo is basically written as a defense lawyer would in contesting a case -- this case being the FISA warrant application. Which means its orientation is proving failure to disclose relevant and material information to the FISA court and in some cases rising to the point of contempt of court.

Seriously, read this! The whole thing!

Rampant abuse and possible contempt of Court: what you need to know about the GOP memo
http://theduran.com/rampant-abuse-contempt-court-analysis-gop-memorandum/

blue peacock , 05 February 2018 at 03:25 PM
Sen Grassley releases memo heavily redacted by DOJ/FBI.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-05/grassley-graham-blast-fbi-censoring-memo-calling-criminal-probe-trump-dossier

"Seeking transparency and cooperation should not be this challenging," Grassley said in a statement after posting a heavily redacted version of the criminal referral that he and GOP Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina sent to the Justice Department last month. " The government should not be blotting out information that it admits isn't secret. "

I suppose DOJ/FBI believe that by obstructing, stalling and obfuscating they can buy time and that the Republicans in Congress will get tired of the games and go home. This seems like a pretty straightforward memo, highlighting the discrepancy between Steele's court filings and the FBI's version of Steele's discussions with them. Grassley is pointing out that either Steele or the FBI is lying.

What is interesting is the difference in process and ability between the House & Senate. The House can release their memos on its own, even if not declassified by the Executive, whereas the Senate requires the Executive to declassify it's memos that are based on classified documents.

turcopolier , 05 February 2018 at 04:38 PM
FM

We have not had a self declared communist on SST before although LeaNder in her youth may have come close to that exalted status. You might want to read the wiki on me and the CV I have posted on the blog to avoid tedious accusations of this or that. I am thought by some to have some knowledge of the ME so please do not try to lecture me about how much you love the Arabs. I speak their language and have lived with them for a long time. There are people who write to SST who are pro-Trump and some who are anti-Trump. I seek a mixture of views so long as personal insult and invective are eschewed. Personally, I do not belong to a political party and would describe myself as an original intent, strict constructionist.

Trump is the constitutionally and legally elected president of the United States. Your descriptors with regard to him are, in my opinion, only plausible if seen from the point of view of various kinds of leftist including Marxist-Leninists like you. You sound very smug and self-satisfied but we will see if you can have an open mind at all. pl

Kooshy said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 05 February 2018 at 04:46 PM
Found him, Ali Babacan XVPM, XFM and M of finance. Yes god forbid, if he is a decendent of Ardisher Babakan and another claimant to Iranian throne, which CIA and Soros can jump on.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Babacan MBA from Northeestern
blue peacock , 05 February 2018 at 04:55 PM
...would describe myself as an original intent, strict constructionist.

Aye. Aye. Sir!

+1

That is why some of us believe the Patriot Act and FISA are both unpatriotic and unconstitutional. SCOTUS disagrees with the few of us.

Babak Makkinejad -> Fatima Manoubia... , 05 February 2018 at 05:03 PM
I do not believe Trump is a misogynists - he stated publicly that he likes beautiful women. I also do not think he is a racist. I think he is the first US leader in many decades who has been willing to publicly talk about US problems. For most other US politicians - they largely live in "the best of all possible worlds".
English Outsider , 05 February 2018 at 06:31 PM
Colonel - sincere apologies if my comment above disrupted the discussion on a fascinating article.

David Habakkuk - I should say that "Quantum Computer" referred solely to the ability to gather and collate great amounts of material. It's an ability I admire. On Steele, you are among other things setting out something that is unfamiliar to me though not to most others here, I imagine, and that is the milieu in which he is or was working as a UK Intelligence operative. That you have also done in previous articles; it doesn't seem to be a particularly savoury milieu. As far as Steele's US activities are concerned, from you I'm not getting the picture of a lone operative, all ties with MI6 neatly severed, working solo in the States on some chance assignment in 2016. I'm getting the picture of someone still very much in the swim and selected because of that.

The only problem with that second picture is the dossier, or the 30% or so of it - what Comey, I think it was, described as "salacious and unverified". Surely that's got to be amateur night. Not something that a practised professional working with other professionals would put his hand to. Does that not support the picture of an ex-operative who's gone off the rails and is fumbling around unsupervised?

The Steele affair touched a nerve. One is always I suppose aware that IC professionals are getting up to all sorts and it doesn't seem improbable that "all sorts" includes political stuff and smear campaigns. But it's not heaps of corpses in Syria or farm boys being sent to certain death in the Ukraine. And even within the UK Intelligence Community and their contractors or whatever they're called, compared with what our IC people have done in the ME or compared with what one fears Hamish de Bretton Gordon might have got himself involved in, Christopher Steele's just a choirboy. Nevertheless there's something deeply repellent about what he did. Whatever your view of Trump there he was, newly elected, obviously wanting to make a go of it, and already faced with difficulties. Then some chancer throws "Golden Showers" in his face and makes his position, not maybe for the insiders but for the general public, that bit more untenable.

So from a UK perspective the question of whether Steele was acting in concert with others in the UK becomes important. If he was truly working solo then that from a UK point of view is regrettable but one of those things. In that case MI6 would just have to tighten up its controls on what ex-operatives get up to, put out the appropriate disclaimers, and that's the end of it as far as the UK is concerned. But if Golden Showers and the rest of it was a "Welcome Mr President" from UK IC professionals as a group then those professionals should be hung drawn and quartered together with whoever set them on.

I've read your article several times now and apart from the fact that much of what you pull together isn't material I'm up on, it doesn't seem to me that you're definitely coming to one conclusion or the other. There are many more facts to come out so perhaps this question is premature, but do you think Steele was acting in concert with others in the UK or was he, at least as far as the UK is concerned, working solo?

kooshy , 05 February 2018 at 07:49 PM
Most Iranian females Named Fatima/ Fatimah after prophet' daughter, call themselves Fati, and if they are of aristocrat type, they are called Bibi Fati Khanam, which is honorable lady Fati and if they are westernized they become Fay or Fifi.
turcopolier , 05 February 2018 at 07:59 PM
EO

Much of your commentary seems directed to David Habakkuk and PT rather than I. I don't think the FBI would have started to pay him until he left UK service. pl

English Outsider , 06 February 2018 at 05:10 AM
Colonel - Further apologies - I should have submitted comment 79 as two items.

Yes, the question about Steele was in response to DH's article. The UK side of the affair is I suppose only a small part of the question you and your Committee are examining but it's a dubious part however one looks at it. Although it's early days yet I was hoping DH, with his encyclopaedic knowledge of the UK intelligence scene, might feel able to cast more light on that UK side.

English Outsider -> Cortes... , 06 February 2018 at 05:53 AM
Cortes - " ... where, exactly, do you expect the great public to look beyond the initial scabrously defamatory storytelling about the "golden showers"? "

I don't think one can expect the public, at least in the UK, to look very far beyond the initial scandal. The investigations and enquiries presently under way in the US are complex and are taking place in a different system. This member of the UK public wouldn't be able to give you a coherent account of those enquiries and I doubt many of my fellows could.

So we have to take on trust, most of us, what we're told. As far as I can tell the underlying theme from the BBC and the media is generally that Trump is subverting the American Justice system in order to ensure his own misdemeanours aren't investigated.

Some of us take that as gospel. Others of us assume that the politicians and the media are untrustworthy and ignore them. I doubt many of us go into much more detail than that. Therefore the original story will stick in our minds.

But for some in the UK there are questions in there as well. How come the UK got mixed up in all this? How much did the UK get mixed up in it?

David Habakkuk -> Sid Finster... , 06 February 2018 at 06:19 AM
Sid Finster,

In response to comment 53.

When I belatedly started looking at the Litvinenko mystery, as a result of a strange email provoked by comments of mine on SST which arrived in my inbox in March 2007 from someone who turned out to be a key protagonist, it was rather obvious that improvised and chaotic 'StratCom' operations had been put into place on both the Russian and British sides to cover up what had happened.

A particular interesting feature of those on the British side – in which we now know Christopher Steele must have played a leading role – were the bizarre gyrations those responsible were going through trying to explain away the extraordinary fact that when he had broken the story of his poisoning, Litvinenko had pointed the finger of suspicion at his Italian associate Mario Scaramella.

When I started delving, I came across some very interesting pieces on Scaramella and related matters posted on the 'European Tribune' website by a Rome-based blogger using the name 'de Gondi' in the period after the story broke.

His actual name is David Loepp, by profession he is an artisan jeweller specialising in ancient and traditional goldsmith techniques, and I already knew and respected his work from his contributions to the transnational internet investigation into the Niger uranium forgeries – an earlier MI6 clusterf**ck.

So in May 2008 I posted a longish piece on that site, setting out the problems with the evidence about the Litvinenko case as I saw them, in the hope of reactivating his interest. This paid off in spades, when he linked to, and translated a key extract from, the request from Italian prosecutors to use wiretaps of conversations with Senator Paolo Guzzanti in connection with their prosecution of Scaramella for 'aggravated calumny.'

The request, which up to not so long ago was freely available on the website of the Italian Senate, was denied, but the extensive summaries of the transcripts provided a lot of material.

(This initial post by me, and later posts by me on that site, are at http://www.eurotrib.com/user/uid:1857/diary. Three posts David Loepp and I produced jointly in December 2012, which have a lot on Scaramella and Shvets, are on his page there, at http://www.eurotrib.com/user/de%20Gondi/diary .)

The extract from the wiretap request which David Loepp posted, which like Litvinenko's letter containing the claims he and Yuri Shvets had concocted about Putin using Mogilevich to attempt to supply Al Qaeda with a 'mini nuclear bomb' is dated 1 December 2005, contains key pointers to the conspiracy. It concludes:

'A passage on Simon Moghilevic and an agreement between the camorra to search for nuclear weapons lost during the Cold War to be consigned to Bin Laden, a revelation made by the Israeli. According to Scaramella the circle closes: camorra, Moghilevic- Russian mafia- services- nuclear bombs in Naples.'

Subsequent conversations make clear that Scaramella left on 6 December 2005 for Washington, on a trip where he was to meet Shvets. The summary of a report on this to Guzzanti reads:

'12) conversation that took place on number [omissis] on December 18, 2005, at 9:41:51 n. 1426, containing explicit references to the authenticity of the declarations of Alexander Litvinenko acquired by Scaramella, to the trustworthiness of the affirmations made by Scaramella in his reports to the commission and to the meetings Scaramella had with Talik after having denounced them [presumably Talik and his alleged accomplices]. (They can talk with HEIMS thanks to the help of MILLER. SHVEZ says that he had been a companion of CARLOS at the academy; SHVEZ has already made declarations and is willing to continue collaboration. Guzzanti warns that a document in Russian arrived in commission in which the name of SCARAMELLA appears several times, these [sic] say that directives to the contrary had been given to Litvinenko. Scaramella says that he went to the meeting with TALIK in the company of two treasury [police] and a cop, Talik spoke of a person from the Ukrainian GRU who would be willing to talk and a strange Chechen ring in Naples. Assassination attempt against the pope, CASAROLI was a Soviet agent.)'

The summary of a later conversation also refers to 'MILLER':

'conversation that took place on number [omissis] on January 13, 2006, at 11:22:11 n. 2287, containing references to Scaramella's sources in relation to facts referred in the Commission, the means by which they were obtained by Scaramella from declarations made abroad, the role of Litvinenko, also on the occasion of declarations made by third parties and the credibility of the news and theses given by Scaramella to the commission (Scaramella reads a text in English on the relation between the KGB and PRODI. Guzzanti asks if its credibility can be confirmed and if the taped declarations can be backed up; Scaramella answers that there were two testimonies, Lou Palumbo and Alexander (Litvinenko), and that the registration made in London at the beginning of the assignment [Scaramella's?] had been authenticated by a certain BAKER of the FBI. As he translates the text from English, Scaramella notes that the person testifying does not say he knows Prodi but only that he thinks that Prodi ...; all those who worked for the person testifying in Scandinavia said that Prodi was "theirs." The affair in Rimini, Bielli is preparing the battle in Rimini. Meetings with MILLER for the three things that are needed. Polemic about Pollari over the pressure exerted on Gordievski.)'

In the exchanges on my May 2008 post, I mentioned and linked to some extraordinary comments on a crucial article by Edward Jay Epstein, in which Karon von Gerhke claimed that his sceptical account fitted with what her contacts in the British investigation had told her. When that July I came across her equally extraordinary claims in response to the BBC's Mark Urban piece of stenography – which Steele may also have had a hand in organising – I found she was referring to precisely that visit to Washington by Scaramella which had been described in the wiretap request.

As you can perhaps imagine, the fact that 'Miller' had featured in the conversations with Guzzanti both as a key contact, who could introduce Scaramella to Aldrich Ames (which is who 'Heims' clearly is), and with whom there had been meetings about 'the three things that are needed' made me inclined to take seriously what Karon von Gerhke said about his role.

In December 2008, I put up another post on 'European Tribune', putting together the material from David Loepp and that from Karon von Gerhke – but not discussing the references to 'Miller.' As I had hoped, this led to her getting in touch.

Among the material with which she supplied me, which I in turn supplied to the Solicitor to the Inquest, were covers of faxes to John Rizzo, then Acting General Counsel of the CIA. From a fax dated 23 October 2005.

'John: See attached email to Chuck Patrizia. Berezovsky alleges he is in possession of a copy of a classified file given to the CIA by Russia's FSB, which he further alleges the CIA disseminated to British, French, Italian and Israeli intelligence agencies implicating him in business associations with the Mafia and to ties with terrorist organizations. Yuri Shvets was authorised/directed by Berezovsky to raise the issue with Bud McFarlane scheduled for Thursday. McFarlane is unaware the issue will be raised with him.'

From a fax dated 7 November 2005:

'John: I am attaching an email exchange between Yuri Shvets and me re: 1) article he published on his Ukraine website on alleged sale of nuclear choke to Iran, which I reproached him on as having been planted by Berezovsky and 2 the alleged FSB/CIA document file that Berezovsky obtained from Scaramella, which Yuri acknowledges in his e-mail to me. Like extracting wisdom teeth to get him to put anything on paper, especially in an e-mail! [NAME REDACTED BY ME – DH] is the source McFarlane referred Yuri to re: Berezovsky's visa issue. She proposed meeting Berezovsky in London. Alleged it would take a year to clear up USG issues and even then could not guarantee him a visa. She too has access to USG intelligence on Berezovsky. Open book.'

From a fax dated 5 December 2005:

'John. From Mario Scaramella to Yuri Shvets to my ears, the DOJ has authorised Mario Scaramella to interview Aldrich Ames with regard to members of the Italian Intelligence Service agent recruited by Ames for the KGB. Scaramella, as you may recall, is who gave Boris Berezovsky's aide, a former FSB Colonel [LITVINENKO – DH], that alleged document number to the FSB file that the CIA disseminated on Berezovsky – a file that Bud McFarlane's "Madam Visa" [NAME REDACTED BY ME – DH] is alleged is totting off to London for a meeting with Berezovsky, who has agreed to retain her re: his visa issue. Quid pro quo's with Berezovsky and Scaramella on the CIA agent currently facing kidnapping charges for the rendition of the Muslim cleric? Scott Armstrong has a most telling file on Scaramella. Not a single redeeming quality.'

In the course of very extensive exchanges with Karon von Gerhke subsequently, we had some rather acute disagreements. It was unfortunate that her filing was a shambles – a crucial hard disk failed without a backup, and the 'hard copies' appeared to be in a chaotic state.

However, the only occasion when I can recall having reason to believe that was deliberately lying to me was when David Loepp unearthed a cache of documentation including the full Italian text of the letter from Litvinenko containing the 'StratCom' designed to suggest that Putin had attempted to supply a 'mini nuclear bomb' to Al Qaeda. Having been asked to keep this between ourselves for the time being, Karon insisted on immediately sending it to her contacts in Counter Terrorism Command, and then produced bogus justifications.

Time and again, moreover, I found that I could confirm statements that she made – see for example the two posts I put up on the legal battles following the death in February 2008 of Berezovsky's long-term partner Arkadi 'Badri' Patarkatsishvili in June and July 2009, which were based on careful corroboration of what she told me.

(I should also say that I acquired the greatest respect for her courage.)

And while Owen and his team suppressed all the evidence from her, and almost all of that from David Loepp, which I had I provided to them, the dossier about Berezovsky is described in a statement made by Litvinenko in Tel Aviv in April 2006, presented in evidence in the Inquiry.

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

Other evidence, moreover, strongly inclines me to believe that there were overtures for a 'quid pro quo', purporting to come from Putin, but that this was a ruse orchestrated by Berezovsky.

Part of the purpose of this would almost certainly have been to supply probably bogus 'evidence' about arms sales in the Yeltsin years to Iraq, Iran and Syria. Moreover, I think there was an article on the second 'Fifth Element' site run by Shvets about the supposed sale of a nuclear 'choke' – whatever that is – to Iran.

The likelihood of the involvement of elements in the FBI in these shenanigans seems to quite high, given what has already emerged about the activities of Levinson. Also relevant may be the fact that the 'declaration' which was part of the attempt to frame Romano Prodi was authenticated, in London, by 'a certain BAKER of the FBI.')

Babak Makkinejad -> David Habakkuk ... , 06 February 2018 at 09:40 AM
Thank you David Habakkuk. Truly sordid and deplorable. WWIII to be initiated on basis of lies.
Jack , 06 February 2018 at 12:06 PM
David

You may already know this but Steele was a no show in a UK court for a deposition on the libel suit.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/05/christopher-steele-is-no-show-in-london-court-in-civil-case-over-dossier.amp.html

Babak Makkinejad -> David Habakkuk ... , 06 February 2018 at 01:18 PM
I know something of spectroscopy.

The critical issue here is the provenance of the samples and not the sophistication of the techniques used in the analysis itself or its instrumentation.

The paragraph that you have quoted:

"To figure out signatures based on various synthetic routes and conditions, Chipuk says that the synthetic chemists on his team will make the same chemical threat agent as many as 2,000 times in an ..." reeks of intellectual intimidation - trying to brow-beat any skeptic by the size of one's instrument - as it were."

And then there is a little matter of confidence level in any of the analysis - such things are normally based on prior statistics - which did not and could not exist in this situation.

LeaNder , 07 February 2018 at 09:16 AM
David, it's no doubt interesting to watch how attention on Victor Ivanov in another deficient inquiry on the British Isles, was managed in that inquiry. If I may, since he pops up again in the Steele dossier. You take what's available? Is that all there is to know?

I know its hard to communicate basics if you are deeply into matters. Usually people prefer to opt out. It's getting way too complicated for them to follow. You made me understand this experience. But isn't this (fake) intelligence continuity "via" Yuri Svets what connects your, no harm meant I do understand your obsession with the case, with what we deal with now in the Steele Dossier? Again, one of the most central figures is Ivanov.

Of course later reports in the Steele Dossier go hand in hand with a larger public relations campaign. Creating reality? Irony alert: as informer/source I would by then know what the other side wants to hear.

By the way, babbling mode, I found your Tom Mangold transcription. It felt it wasn't there on the link you gave. I used the date, and other search terms. Maybe I am wrong. Haven't looked at what the judge ruled out of the collection. Yes, cozy session/setting.

According to Google search there are no other links then your articles here:
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613093555/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/files/2015/04/HMG000513wb.pdf ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/files/2015/04/HMG000513wb.pdf">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613093555/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/files/2015/04/HMG000513wb.pdf

**********

JAN RICHARD BĆRUG
The Collapsing Wall. Hybrid Journalism.
A Comparative Study of Newspapers and
Magazines in Eight Countries in Europe

Available online. Haven't read it yet, but journalism as hidden public relations transfer belt would be one of my minor obsessions. ...

Babak Makkinejad -> turcopolier ... , 07 February 2018 at 11:23 AM
I wonder too; their command of the English idiom is very au currant - noticed "opt in/opt out" reference? Too American.

They clearly are not native speakers of German.

LeaNder said in reply to kooshy... , 07 February 2018 at 12:30 PM
why California, Kooshy #18? California among other things left this verbal trace, since I once upon time thought a luggage storage in SF might be free/available now: this is my home, lady.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kish_Island#Economy

Tourists from many -- but not all -- foreign nations wishing to enter Kish Free Zone from legal ports are not required to obtain any visa prior to travel. For those travelers, upon-arrival travel permits are stamped valid for 14 days by Kish officials.

Who are the not all? Can we assume Britain is not one of those?

The German link is different. How about the Iranian?

or isn't this the Kish we are talking about?

LeaNder said in reply to LeaNder... , 07 February 2018 at 01:14 PM
correcting myself #94:

another Ivanov. I struggled with names (...) in Russian crime novels, admittedly. But that's long ago from times Russian crime and Russian money flows and rogues getting hold of its nuclear material surfaced more often in Europe. 90s

I see Sergei seems to share my interest in the literary genre:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Ivanov#Personal

[Mar 10, 2018] There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this. ..."
"... Important support for these strategies was provided by the 'StratCom' network centred around the late Boris Berezovsky, which clearly collaborated closely with MI6. As was apparent from the witness list at Sir Robert Owen's Inquiry into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, which produced a report based essentially on a recycling of claims made by the network's members, key players were on your side of the Atlantic – notably Alex Goldfarb, Yuri Shvets, and Yuri Felshtinsky. ..."
"... it seems to me the usa and uk have been tied at the hip for a very long time... when it comes to foreign affairs policy and wars - the one will always vouch for the other without hesitation... it tells me the relationship is really deep.. ..."
"... I and my friends consider it a given that most, if not all, anglo-zionist moves in the ME are to "provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area. " It is an open secret that the izzies are the reason why a few Russians, some Turks, lots of Kurds and countless Arabs are dying in the Syrian battlefields. Another open secret: the takfiris and kurds have been, and are, supported by the West. That the "masters of the universe™" have been conceiving and doubling down on such disastrous policies give lie to their much-vaunted "intelligence". ..."
"... It is the very FACT of Trump even getting elected at ALL which outrages and terrifies them so much. They are used to seeing themselves as successful manipulators and engineers of every major event. They were engineering the whole electoral battlespace to get Clinton elected. The mere fact of Trump's victory in the teeth of their Electoral Engineering for Clinton is an act of defiance which they will not tolerate. ..."
"... And if they fail to bring Trump down at all, they will stand revealed as being defeatable. And this is their big fear. That if people see they have defeated the Borg once on keeping Trump in the teeth of Borg's efforts, that people might try to defeat and smash down the Borg on another issue. And then another. And then another after that. ..."
"... Because it is not possible to do on fundamental level yet, especially with US foreign policy establishment and so called consensus being built almost entirely, in ideological and, most importantly, cadres senses, on the ultimate exceptionalist agenda in which Russia is the ultimate obstacle and enemy. Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. ..."
"... They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress West's posture; say 2040 ..."
"... In 1977 Zbigniew Brzezinski, as President Carter's National Security Adviser, forms the Nationalities Working Group (NWG) dedicated to the idea of weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions. ..."
"... State Department official Henry Precht will later recall that Brzezinski had the idea "that Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets." [Scott, 2007, pp. 67] In November 1978, President Carter appointed George Ball head of a special White House Iran task force under Brzezinski. Ball recommends the US should drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the radical Islamist opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini. This idea is based on ideas from British Islamic expert Dr. Bernard Lewis, who advocates the balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. The chaos would spread in what he also calls an "arc of crisis" and ultimately destabilize the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union ..."
"... About relation Steele-MI6, well, you never leave your IS. Or to put it in another way, you are never out of the scope of your past IS ..."
"... No, three years at tops and could be much sooner if dimes starting dropping by exposed people that don't want to take the fall for their superiors whom they always detested. One possible thing to get the process started sooner is if the recent Russian Intelligence delegation to DC that Smoothie mentions on another thread gave the current administration, as a diplomatic courtesy of course, the audio recordings of Madame Sectary Nuland's infamous mental meltdown at Kaliningrad. No telling what beans were spilled in her moment of panic, but I am willing to bet key names were dropped. Either way the time is coming. ..."
"... Especially, once American policy-makers who saw and experienced war (Ike, George Marshall's generation) departed things started to roll down hill with Reagan bringing on board a whole collection of neocons. ..."
"... Unawareness is always dangerous, a complete blackout in relations between two nuclear powers is more than dangerous--it is completely reckless. Again, the way CW 1.0 is perceived in the current US "elites" it becomes extremely tempting to repeat it. Electing Hillary was another step in unleashing CW 2.0 by people who have no understanding of what they were doing. ..."
"... Obama started crushing US-Russian relations before any campaigns were launched and before Trump was even seriously considered a GOP nominee, let alone a real contender. New confrontation hinged on HRC being elected. In fact, she was one of the major driving forces behind a serious of geopolitical anti-Russian moves. Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in HRC campaign long before any Steele's Dossier. This was a program. ..."
"... IMO, the bigger problem for American not shying away from wars, or being silent about them , is when your home, your mom and dad' home, the town you grew up in, are immune and away from the war. ..."
"... The security and safety of the two oceans, encourages or at least, in an all volunteer military makes it a secondary problem for regular people, to worry about. ..."
"... A particular interesting feature of those on the British side – in which we now know Christopher Steele must have played a leading role – were the bizarre gyrations those responsible were going through trying to explain away the extraordinary fact that when he had broken the story of his poisoning, Litvinenko had pointed the finger of suspicion at his Italian associate Mario Scaramella. ..."
"... Of course later reports in the Steele Dossier go hand in hand with a larger public relations campaign. Creating reality? Irony alert: as informer/source I would by then know what the other side wants to hear. ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Steele, Shvets, Levinson, Litvinenko and the 'Billion Dollar Don.'

In the light of the suggestion in the Nunes memo that Steele was 'a longtime FBI source' it seems worth sketching out some background, which may also make it easier to see some possible reasons why he 'was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.'

There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this.

This agenda has involved hopes for 'régime change' in Russia, whether as the result of an oligarchic coup, a popular revolt, or some combination of both. Also central have been hopes for a further 'rollback' of Russia influence in the post-Soviet space, both in areas now independent, such as Ukraine, and also ones still part of the Russian Federation, notably Chechnya.

And, crucially, it involved exploiting the retreat of Russian power from the Middle East for 'régime change' projects which it was hoped would provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area.

Important support for these strategies was provided by the 'StratCom' network centred around the late Boris Berezovsky, which clearly collaborated closely with MI6. As was apparent from the witness list at Sir Robert Owen's Inquiry into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, which produced a report based essentially on a recycling of claims made by the network's members, key players were on your side of the Atlantic – notably Alex Goldfarb, Yuri Shvets, and Yuri Felshtinsky.

The question of what links these had, or did not have, with elements in U.S. intelligence agencies is thus a critical one.

In making some sense of it, the fact that one key figure we know to have been involved in this network was missing at the Inquiry – the former FBI agent Robert Levinson, who disappeared on the Iranian island of Kish in March 2007 – is important.

Unfortunately, I only recently came across a book on Levinson published in 2016 by the 'New York Times' journalist Barry Meier, which is now hopefully winging its way across the Atlantic. From the accounts of the book I have seen, such as one by Jeff Stein in 'Newsweek', it seems likely that its author did not look at any of the evidence presented at Owen's Inquiry.

(See http://www.newsweek.com/2016/05/20/what-really-happened-robert-levinson-cia-iran-454803.html .)

Had he done so, Meier might have discovered that his subject had been, as it were, 'top supporting actor' in the first fumbling attempt by Christopher Steele et al to produce a plausible-sounding scenario as to the background to Litvinenko's death. A Radio 4 programme on 16 December 2006, presented by the veteran BBC presenter Tom Mangold, had been wholly devoted to an account by Shvets, backed up by Levinson. Both of these were, like Litvinenko, supposed to be impartial 'due diligence' operatives.

The notion that any of them might have connections with Western intelligence agencies was not considered. The – publicly available – evidence of the involvement of Shvets, whose surname means 'cobbler' or 'shoemaker' in Ukrainian, in the processing of the tapes of conversations involving the former Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma supposedly recorded by Major Melnychenko, which had played a crucial role in the 2004-5 'Orange Revolution' was not mentioned.

Still less was it mentioned that claims that the – very dangerous – late Soviet Kolchuga system, which made it possible the kind of identification of incoming aircraft which radar had traditionally done, without sending out signals which made the destruction of the facilities doing it possible, had been sold by Kuchma to Iraq had proven spurious.

What Shvets had done had been to take – genuine – audio in which Kuchma had discussed a possible sale, and edit it to suggest a sale had been completed.

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

As a former television current affairs producer, I can talk to you of the marvels which London audio editors can produce, very happily. Unfortunately, the days when not all BBC and 'Guardian' journalists were corrupt stenographers for corrupt and incompetent spooks, as Mangold and his like have been for Steele and Levinson, are long gone.

All this has become particularly relevant now, given that Simpson has placed the notorious Jewish Ukrainian mobster Semyon Mogilevich and the 'Solntsevskaya Bratva' mafia group centre stage in his accounts not simply of Trump and Manafort, but also of William Browder. For most of the 'Nineties, Levinson had been a, if not the, lead FBI investigator on Mogilevich.

(On this, see the 1999 BBC 'Panorama' programme 'The Billion Dollar Don', also presented by Tom Mangold, which has extensive interviews both with Mogilevich and Levinson at

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/events/panorama/transcripts/transcript_06_12_99.txt )

In the months leading up to Levinson's disappearance, a key priority for the advocates of the strategy I have described was to prevent it being totally derailed by the patently catastrophic outcome of the Iraqi adventure.

Compounding the problem was the fact that this had created the 'Shia Crescent', which in turn exacerbated the potential 'existential threat' to Israel posed by the steadily increasing range, accuracy and numbers of missiles available to Hizbullah in hardened positions north of the Litani.

These, obviously, provided both a 'deterrent' for that organisation and Iran, and also a radical threat to the whole notion that somehow Israel could ever be a 'safe haven' for Jews, against the supposedly ineradicable disposition of the 'goyim' sooner or later to, as it were, revert to type. The dreadful thought that Israel might not be necessary had to be resisted at all costs.

What followed from the disaster unleashed by the – Anglo-American – 'own goal' in toppling Saddam was, ironically, a need on the part of key players to 'double down.' Above all, it was necessary for many of those involved to counter suggestions from the Russian side that going around smashing up 'régimes' that one might not like sometimes blew up in one's face.

Even more threatening were suggestions from the Russian side that it was foolish to think one could use jihadists without risking 'blowback', and that there might be an overwhelming common interest in combating Islamic extremism.

Another priority was to counter the pushback in the American 'intelligence community' and military, which was to produce the drastic downgrading of the threat posed by the Iranian nuclear programme in the November 2007 NIE and then the resignation of Admiral William Fallon as head of 'Centcom' the following March.

So in 2005 Shvets came to London. He and his audio editors had another 'bite at the cherry' of the Melnychenko tapes, so that material that did in fact establish that both the SBU and FSB had collaborated with Mogilevich could be employed to make it seem that Putin had a close personal relationship with the mobster.

All kinds of supposedly respectable American and British academics, like Professors Karen Dawisha and Robert Service, have fallen for this, hook, line and sinker. It gives a new meaning to the term 'useful idiot.'

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

In a letter sent in December that year by Litvinenko to the 'Mitrokhin Commission', for which his Italian associate Mario Scaramella was a consultant, this was used in an attempt to demonstrate that Mogilevich, while acting as an agent for the FSB and under Putin's personal 'krysha', had attempted to supply a 'mini atomic bomb' – aka 'suitcase nuke' – to Al Qaeda. Shortly after the letter was sent Scaramella departed on a trip to Washington, where he appears to have got access to Aldrich Ames.

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

At precisely this time, as Meier explains, Levinson was in the process of being recruited by a lady called Anne Jablonski who then worked as a CIA analyst. It appears that she was furious at the failure of the operational side at the Agency to produce evidence which would have established that Iran did indeed have an ongoing nuclear programme, and she may well have hoped would implicate Russia in supplying materials.

There are grounds to suspect that one of the things that Berezovsky and Shvets were doing was fabricating such 'evidence.' Whether Levinson was involved in such attempts, or genuinely looking for evidence he was convinced must be there, I cannot say. It appears that he fell for a rather elementary entrapment operation – which could well have been organised with the collaboration of Russian intelligence. (People do get fed up with being framed, particular if 'régime change' is the goal.)

It also seems likely that, quite possibly in a different but related entrapment operation, related to propaganda wars in which claims and counter claims about a polonium-beryllium 'initiator' as the crucial missing part which might make a 'suitcase nuke' functional, Litvinenko accidentally ingested fatal quantities of polonium. A good deal of evidence suggests that this may have been at Berezovsky's offices on the night before he was supposedly assassinated.

It was, obviously, important for Steele et al to ensure that nobody looked at the 'StratCom' wars about 'suitcase nukes.' Here, a figure who has played a key role in such wars in relation to Syria plays an interesting minor one in the story.

Some time following the destruction of the case for an immediate war by the November 2007 NIE, a chemical weapons specialist called Dan Kaszeta, who had worked in the White House for twelve years, moved to London.

In 2011, in addition to founding a consultancy called 'Strongpoint Security', he began a writing career with articles in 'CBRNe World.' Later, he would become the conduit through which the notorious 'hexamine hypothesis', supposedly clinching proof that the Syrian government was responsible for the sarin incidents at Khan Sheikhoun, Ghouta, Saraqeb, and Khan Al-Asal, was disseminated.

Having been forced by the threat of a case being opened against them under human rights law into resuming the inquest into Litvinenko's death, in August 2012 the British authorities appointed Sir Robert Owen to conduct it. (There are many honest judges in Britain, but obviously, if one sets out to find someone who will 'cover up' for the incompetence and corruption of people like Steele, as Lord Hutton did before him, you can find them.)

That same month, a piece appeared in 'CBRNe World' with the the strapline: 'Dan Kaszeta looks into the ultimate press story: Suitcase nukes', and the main title 'Carry on or checked bags?' Among the grounds he gives for playing down the scare:

'Some components rely on materials with shelf life. Tritium, for example, is used in many nuclear weapon designs and has a twelve year half-life. Polonium, used in neutron initiators in some earlier types of weapon designs, has a very short halflife. US documents state that every nuclear weapon has "limited life components" that require periodic replacement (do an internet search for nuclear limited life components and you can read for weeks).'

(For this and other articles by Kaszeta, as also his bio, see http://strongpointsecurity.co.uk ')

What Kaszeta has actually described are the reasons why polonium is a perfect 'StratCom' instrument. In terms of scientific plausibility, in fact there were no 'suitcase nukes', and in any case 'initiators' using polonium had been abandoned very early on, in favour of ones which lasted longer.

For 'StratCom' scenarios, as experience with the 'hexamine hypothesis' has proved, scientific plausibility can be irrelevant.

What polonium provides is a means of suggesting that Al Qaeda have in fact got hold of a nuclear device which they could easily smuggle into, say, Rome or New York, or indeed Moscow, but there is a crucial missing component which the FSB is trying to provide to them. By the same token, of course, that missing component could be depicted as one that Berezovsky and Litvinenko are conspiring to suppl to the Chechen insurgents.

In addition, the sole known source of global supply is the Avangard plant at Sarov in Russia, so the substance is naturally suited for 'StratCom' directed against that country, which its intelligence services would – rather naturally – try to make 'boomerang.'

According to Glenn Simpson, Christopher Steele is a 'boy scout.' This seems to me quite wrong – but, even if it were true, would you want to unleash a 'boy scout' into these kinds of intrigue?

As it is not clear why Kaszeta introduced his – accurate but irrelevant – point about polonium into an article which was concerned with scientific plausibility, one is left with an interesting question as to whether he cut his teeth on 'StratCom' attempting to ensure that nobody seriously interested in CBRN science followed an obvious lead.

In relation to the question of whether current FBI personnel had been involved in the kind of 'StratCom' exercises, I have been describing, a critical issue is the involvement of Shvets and Levinson in the Alexander Khonanykhine affair back in the 'Nineties, and the latter's use of claims about the Solntsevskaya to prevent the key figure's extradition. But that is a matter for another day.

A corollary of all this is that we cannot – yet at least – be absolutely confident that the account in the Nunes memo, according to which Steele was suspended and then dismissed as an FBI source for what the organisation is reported to define as 'the most serious of violations' – the unauthorised disclosure of a relationship with the organisation – is necessarily wholly accurate.

Who did and did not authorise which disclosures to the media, up to and including the extraordinary decision to have the full dossier, including claims about Aleksej Gubarev and the Alfa oligarchs, in flagrant disregard of the obvious risks of defamation suits, and who may be trying to pass the buck to others, remains I think less than totally clear.

Posted at 03:42 PM in As The Borg Turns , Habakkuk , Russia , Russiagate | Permalink

james , 03 February 2018 at 04:33 PM

thanks david... fascinating overview and conjecture..

it seems to me the usa and uk have been tied at the hip for a very long time... when it comes to foreign affairs policy and wars - the one will always vouch for the other without hesitation... it tells me the relationship is really deep..

JohnB , 03 February 2018 at 05:17 PM
David,

Thank you very. As ever you have illuminated a few more things for me. Kaszeta's involvement is interesting. He is someone I am in the middle of researching in relation to Higgins and Bellingcat.

turcopolier , 03 February 2018 at 06:02 PM
james

It is the closest of all international intelligence relationships. It started in WW2. Before that the Brits were though of as a potential enemy. pl

Babak Makkinejad -> turcopolier ... , 03 February 2018 at 06:10 PM
I think the English are using you, they are unsentimental empirical people that only do these that benefit the Number One.
The chief beneficiary of the Coup in Iran was England and not US.
catherine , 03 February 2018 at 06:22 PM
That Newsweek piece about Levinson is very superficial to me.

Re: Levinson

# Who suggested to who 'first' the Iran caper...Anne Jablonski to Levinson or Levinson to Jablonski? It was reported earlier by Meier that in December 2005, when Levinson was pitching Jablonski on projects he might take on when his CIA contract was approved he sent her a lengthy memo about Dawud's potential as an informant.

# Ira Silverman, the Iran hating NBC guy, pitched a Iraq caper to Levinson with Dawud Salahuddin, as his Iran contact and Levinson went to Jablonski with it.

# And what was with Boris Birshstein, a Russian organized crime figure who had fled to Israel and Oleg Deripaska, the "aluminum czar" of Russia whose organized crime contacts have kept him from entering the United States jumping in to help find Levinson? The FBI allowed Deripaska in for two visits in 2009 in exchange for his alleged help in locating Levinson but obviously nothing came of it.

I think there were more little agents/agendas in this than Levinson and Jablonski and US CIA.

Ishmael Zechariah , 03 February 2018 at 06:54 PM
DH,

As usual a wonderful analysis. I admire your insight, integrity and courage. I wish you could write more on why the Borg is so much against Trump, even though they have Kushner, Adelson and Co. running interference for them.

I and my friends consider it a given that most, if not all, anglo-zionist moves in the ME are to "provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area. " It is an open secret that the izzies are the reason why a few Russians, some Turks, lots of Kurds and countless Arabs are dying in the Syrian battlefields. Another open secret: the takfiris and kurds have been, and are, supported by the West. That the "masters of the universe™" have been conceiving and doubling down on such disastrous policies give lie to their much-vaunted "intelligence".

Be safe.

Ishmael Zechariah

Rd , 03 February 2018 at 07:31 PM
Babak Makkinejad said in reply to turcopolier...

The chief beneficiary of the Coup in Iran was England and not US.
..and US is the one who has been paying for it since 1979!!!

kooshy said in reply to Ishmael Zechariah... , 03 February 2018 at 08:21 PM
IZ
My guess is, that he is unpredictable, instantaneous and therefore can't be consistent and reliable, useful idiot needs to be predictable.
kooshy , 03 February 2018 at 08:43 PM
"There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. "

David as usual fascinating work connecting the dots. One question that comes to my mind is about the above point you are making. Is it your understanding or believe that these IC individuals on both side of Atlantic, are pursuing/forcing their (on behalf of the Borg) foreign policy agenda outside of their respected seating governments? If not, why is it that incoming administration cannot stop them? So far I can't see any strategic changes on US foreign policy toward ME or Russia, at tactical level yes but not fundamentally.

different clue , 03 February 2018 at 08:49 PM
Ishmael Zechariah,

( reply to comment 6),

I am not David Habakkuk, obviously. But I will venture a little opinion anyway. It is not enough that the Borgists get their policy preferences. If it were, then Kushner, Adelson and Co. running interference would be enough for them.

It is the very FACT of Trump even getting elected at ALL which outrages and terrifies them so much. They are used to seeing themselves as successful manipulators and engineers of every major event. They were engineering the whole electoral battlespace to get Clinton elected. The mere fact of Trump's victory in the teeth of their Electoral Engineering for Clinton is an act of defiance which they will not tolerate.

And if they fail to bring Trump down at all, they will stand revealed as being defeatable. And this is their big fear. That if people see they have defeated the Borg once on keeping Trump in the teeth of Borg's efforts, that people might try to defeat and smash down the Borg on another issue. And then another. And then another after that.

So that is why the Borg cares so much. They view the Trump election as an insurgency, and they view themselves as waging a counterinsurgency, which they dare not lose.

Jack , 03 February 2018 at 08:54 PM
David,

Thanks for your analysis. I always enjoy and learn from your posts. I wish you would post more often.

In my non-expert opinion, the Borg and the media were all in for Hillary. They were convinced that she was gonna win. To curry favor with the Empress who would be certainly crowned after the election they were eager and convinced that their lawlessness would become a badge for promotion and plum positions in her administration. In their conceit, they believed they could kill two birds with one stroke. They could vilify Putin and create the mass hysteria to checkmate him, while at the same time disparage and frame Trump as The Manchurian Candidate to seal their certain electoral victory.

Unfortunately for them voters in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin didn't buy their sales pitch despite the overwhelming media barrage from all corners. Even news publications who have only endorsed Republican candidates for President for over a century endorsed her.

Trump's election win caused panic among the political establishment, the media and the Deep State. They were already all-in. Their only choice was to double down and get Trump impeached. Now their conspiracy is beginning to unravel. They are doing everything possible to forestall their Armageddon. Of course they have many allies. This battle is gonna be interesting to watch. Trump is clearly getting many Congressional Republicans on side as his base of Deplorables remains solidly behind him. That is what's befuddling the Borg pundits.

SmoothieX12 -> kooshy... , 03 February 2018 at 09:51 PM
So far I can't see any strategic changes on US foreign policy toward ME or Russia, at tactical level yes but not fundamentally.

Because it is not possible to do on fundamental level yet, especially with US foreign policy establishment and so called consensus being built almost entirely, in ideological and, most importantly, cadres senses, on the ultimate exceptionalist agenda in which Russia is the ultimate obstacle and enemy. Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. This swamp (Borg, deep state, etc.) still thinks that it can use Cold War 1.0 Playbook and address very real and dangerous American economic issues. They are wrong, since most of them didn't read the playbook correctly to start with.

Babak Makkinejad -> SmoothieX12 ... , 03 February 2018 at 10:10 PM
They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress West's posture; say 2040.
kooshy said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 03 February 2018 at 10:24 PM
You are right CWII is very much desired and on agenda, but i am not sure of setup, the setup/board has been changed tremendously and IMO benefits the Asian side of Bosphorus, for one thing technology is no longer exclusive, and financial burden is heavier on atlantic side.
catherine said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 12:21 AM
''Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. ''

The locust keep trying and trying, destruction is their life's work.

'1977-1981: Nationalities Working Group Advocates Using Militant Islam Against Soviet Union'

In 1977 Zbigniew Brzezinski, as President Carter's National Security Adviser, forms the Nationalities Working Group (NWG) dedicated to the idea of weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions. The Islamic populations are regarded as prime targets. Richard Pipes, the father of Daniel Pipes, takes over the leadership of the NWG in 1981. Pipes predicts that with the right encouragement Soviet Muslims will "explode into genocidal fury" against Moscow. According to Richard Cottam, a former CIA official who advised the Carter administration at the time, after the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1978, Brzezinski favored a "de facto alliance with the forces of Islamic resurgence, and with the Republic of Iran." [Dreyfuss, 2005, pp. 241, 251 - 256]

'November 1978-February 1979: Some US Officials Want to Support Radical Muslims to Contain Soviet Union'

State Department official Henry Precht will later recall that Brzezinski had the idea "that Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets." [Scott, 2007, pp. 67] In November 1978, President Carter appointed George Ball head of a special White House Iran task force under Brzezinski. Ball recommends the US should drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the radical Islamist opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini. This idea is based on ideas from British Islamic expert Dr. Bernard Lewis, who advocates the balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. The chaos would spread in what he also calls an "arc of crisis" and ultimately destabilize the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union

aleksandar , 04 February 2018 at 04:41 AM
David,

About relation Steele-MI6, well, you never leave your IS. Or to put it in another way, you are never out of the scope of your past IS.

Fred said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 04 February 2018 at 08:40 AM
Babak,

"they got US to bail them out during WWII" And how would things have worked out had we not done so?

Fred , 04 February 2018 at 08:46 AM
David,

"There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time."

Yes, that is what appears to be just what is coming to light. I wonder just what position Trey Gowdy is going to have since he won't be running for re-election. The rage from the left is palpable. I'm sure the next outraged guy on the left will know how to shoot straighter than the ones who shot up Congressman Scalise or the concert goers at Mandalay Bay.

Anna said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 08:48 AM
"They are wrong, since most of them didn't read the playbook correctly to start with."
-- If they have read the important books at all... The ongoing scandal has been revealing a stunning incompetence of the "deciders." Too often they look comical, ridiculous, undignified. This is dangerous, considering their power.
turcopolier , 04 February 2018 at 08:54 AM
Anna

The powerful are often remarkably ignorant. pl

Babak Makkinejad -> Fred... , 04 February 2018 at 10:08 AM
England preferred NAZI Germany to USSR, this is well known. As to what would have happened, the outcome of the war, in my opinion, did not depend on US participation in the European Theatre. All of Europe would have become USSR satellite or joined USSR.
jonst said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 04 February 2018 at 11:53 AM
"unsentimental empirical people"? Absolutely disagree with you. Now the Iranians, they strike me as a singularity unsentimental people. Just general impressions, mind you.
Kooshy said in reply to catherine... , 04 February 2018 at 12:06 PM
Yes, US was the first country to proudly deliver Manpads to be used by "rebels" (Mojahadin later Taleban) against USSR in Afghanistan back in 80s. And, as per the architect of support for the rebels (Zbigniew Brzezinski) very proud of it with no regret. With that in mind, I don't see how western politicians, the western governments and their related proxy war planers, will be regretting, even sadden, once god forbid we see passenger planes with loved ones are shot down taking off or landing at various western airports and other places around the word. Just like how superficialy with crocodile tears in their eyes they acted in aftermath of the terrorist events in various western cities in this past 16 years. Gods knows what will happens to us if the opposite side start to supply his own proxies with lethal anti air weapons. "Proudly", I don't think anybody in west cares or will regret of such an escalation.
Phodges said in reply to turcopolier ... , 04 February 2018 at 12:23 PM
Sir

It seems we are being defeated by Cicero's enemy within. Zion is achieving what no one could hope to achieve by force of arms.

David Habakkuk -> catherine... , 04 February 2018 at 01:17 PM
catherine,

In response to comment 5.

I think it likely that what Meier produces is only a 'limited hangout', and am hoping that when the book arrives it will contain more pointers.

It is important to be clear that one is often dealing with people playing very complicated double games.

An interesting document is the 'Petition for Writ of Habeus Corpus' made on behalf of Khodorkovsky's close associate Alexander Konanykhin back in 1997,when the Immigration and Naturalization Service were – apparently at least – cooperating with Russian attempts to get hold of him. An extract:

'During the immigration hearing FBI SA Robert Levinson, an INS witness, confirmed that in 1992 Petitioner was kidnapped and afterwards pursued by assassins of the Solntsevskaya organized criminal group. This organized criminal group is reportedly the largest and the most influential organized criminal group in Russia, and operates internationally.'

(See http://defiancethebook.com/legal/habeas/petition.htm .)

Note the similarities between the 'StratCom' that Khonanykin and his associates were producing in the 'Nineties, and that which Simpson and his associates have been producing two decades later.

Another useful example is provided by a 2004 item in the 'New American Magazine', reproduced on Konanykhin's website:

'One of those who testified on behalf of Konanykhine was KGB defector Yuri Shvets, who declared: "I have a firsthand knowledge on similar operations conducted by the KGB." Konanykhine had brought trouble on himself, Shvets continued, when he "started bringing charges against people who were involved with him in setting up and running commercial enterprises. They were KGB people secretly smuggling from Russia hundreds of millions of dollars . This is [a] serious case, and I know that KGB ... desperately wants to win this case, and everybody who won't step to their side would face problems."'

(See http://konanykhin.com/news/the-konanykhine-case.html .)

So – 'first hand knowledge', from a Ukrainian nationalist – look at what the Chalupas have been doing, it seems not much has changed.

For a rather different perspective on what Konanykhin had actually been up to, from someone in whose honesty – if not always judgement – I have complete confidence, see the testimony of Karon von Gerhke-Thompson to the House Committee on Banking and Financial Services hearings on Russian Money Laundering. In this, she described how she had been approached by him in 1993:

'"Konanykhine alleged that Menatep Bank controlled $1.7bn [Ł1bn] in assets and investment portfolios of Russia's most prominent political and social elite," she recalled. She said he wanted to move the bank's assets off shore and asked her to help buy foreign passports for its "very, very special clients".

'In her testimony to the committee Ms Von Gerhke-Thompson said she informed the CIA of the deal, and the agency told her that it believed Mr Konanykhine and Mr Khodorkovsky "were engaged in an elaborate money laundering scheme to launder billions of dollars stolen by members of the KGB and high-level government officials".

(For a 'Guardian report, see https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/sep/23/julianborger ; for the actual testimony, see http://archives-financialservices.house.gov/banking/92299ger.pdf .)

Coming back to Steele's 'StratCom', in July 2008, an item appeared on the 'Newnight' programme of the BBC – which some of us think should by then have been rechristened the 'Berezovsky Broadcasting Corporation' – in which the introduction by the presenter, Jeremy Paxman, read as follows:

'Good evening. The New Russian President, Dmitri Medvedev, was all smiles and warm words when he met Gordon Brown today. He said he was keen to resolve all outstanding difficulties between the two countries. Yada yada yada. Gordon Brown smiled, but he must know what Newsnight can now reveal: that MI5 believes the Russian state was involved in the murder of Alexander Litvinenko by radioactive poisoning. They also believe that without their intervention another London-based Russian, Boris Berezovsky, would have been murdered. Our diplomatic editor, Mark Urban, has this exclusive report.'

(For the transcript presented in evidence to Owen's Inquiry, see http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/ ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/ )

When Urban repeated the claims on his blog, there was a positive eruption from someone using the name 'timelythoughts', about the activities of someone she referred to as 'Berezovsky's disinformation specialist' – when I came across this later, it was immediately clear to me that she was Karon von Gerhke, and he was Shvets.

(For the first part of the exchanges of comments, the second apparently having become unavailable, see http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2008/07/litvinenko_killing_had_state_i.html )

She then described a visit by Scaramella to Washington, details of which had already been unearthed by my Italian collaborator, David Loepp. Her claim to have e-mails from Shvets, from the time immediately prior to Litvinenko's death, directly contradicting the testimony he had given, fitted with other evidence I had already unearthed.

Later, we exchanged e-mails over a quite protracted period, and a large amount of material that came into my possession as a result was submitted by me to the Inquest team, with some of it being used in posts on the 'European Tribune' site.

What I never used publicly, because I could only partially corroborate it from the material she provided, was an extraordinary claim about Shvets:

'He was responsible for bringing in a Kremlin initiative that was walked Vice President Cheney's office on a US government quid pro quo with the Kremlin FSB SVR involving the arrest of Mikhail Khodorkovsky – a cease and desist on allegations of a politically motivated arrest of Khodorkovsky, violations of rules of law and calls from Russia's expulsion from the G 8 in exchange for favorable posturing of U.S. oil companies on Gazprom's Shtokman project and intelligence on weapon sales during the Yeltsin era to Iraq, Iran and Syria, all documented in reports I submitted to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and MI6.

'Berezovsky's DS could not be on both sides on that isle. His Kremlin FSB SVR sources had been vetted by the CIA and by the National Security Council. They proved to be as represented. As we would later learn, however, he was on Berezovsky's payroll at same time. The FSB SVR general he was coordinating the Kremlin initiative through was S. R. Subbotin, the same FSB SVR general who was investigating Berezovsky's money laundering operations in Switzerland during the same timeframe. His FSB SVR sources surrounding Putin were higher than any Lugovoy could have ever hoped to affiliate with.

'R. James Woolsey (former CIA DCI), Marshall Miller (former law partner of the late CIA DCI William Colby), who I coordinated the Kremlin initiative through that Berezovsky's DS had brought in were shocked to learn that he was affiliated with Berezovsky and Litvinenko. He was in Berezovsky's inner circle and engaged in vetting Russian business with Litvinenko. He operated Berezovsky's Ukraine website, editing and dubbing the now infamous Kuchma tapes throughout the lead up to the elections in the Ukraine. Berezovsky contributed $41 million to Viktor Yushchenko's campaign, which he used in an attempt to force Yushchenko to reunite with Julia Tymoschenko. It failed but would succeed later after Berezovsky orchestrated a public relations initiative through Alan Goldfarb in the U.S. on behalf of Tymoschenko.'

Having got to know Karon von Gerhke quite well, and also been able to corroborate a great deal of what she told me about many things, and discussed these matters with her, it is absolutely clear to me that she was neither fabricating nor fantasising. What later became apparent, both to her and to me, was that in the 'double game' that Shvets was playing, he had succeeded in fooling her as to the side for which he was working.

It seems likely however that the reason Shvets could do what he did was that quite precisely that many high-up people in the Kremlin and elsewhere were playing a 'double game.' In this, Karon von Gerhke's propensity for indiscretion – of which I, like others, was both beneficiary and victim – could be useful.

An exercise in 'positioning', which could be used to disguise the fact that Shvets was indeed 'Berezovsky's disinformation specialist', could be used to make it appear that 'intelligence on weapon sales during the Yeltsin era to Iraq, Iran and Syria' was actually credible.

This could have been used to try to rescue Cheney, Bush and their associates from the mess they had got into as a result of the failure of the invasion to provide any evidence whatsoever supporting the case which had been made for it. It could also have been used to provide the kind of materials justifying military action against Iran for which Levinson and Jablonski were looking, and for similar action against Syria.

Among reasons for bringing this up now is that we need to make sense of the paradox that Simpson – clearly in collusion with Steele – was using Mogilevich and the 'Solnsetskaya Bratva' both against Manafort and Trump and against Browder.

There are various possible explanations for this. I do not want to succumb to my instinctive prejudice that this may have been another piece of 'positioning', similar to what I think was being done with Shvets, but the hypothesis needs to be considered.

A more general point is that people in Washington and London need to 'wise up' to the kind of world with which they are dealing. This could be done quite enjoyably: reading some of Dashiell Hammett's fictions of the United States in the Prohibition era, or indeed buying DVDs of some of the classics of 'film noir', like 'Out of the Past' (in its British release, 'Build My Gallows High') might be a start.

Very much of the coverage of affairs in the post-Soviet space since 1991 has read rather as though a Dashiell Hammett story had been rewritten by someone specialising in sentimental children's, or romantic, fiction (although, come to think of it, that is really what Brigid O'Shaughnessy does in 'The Maltese Falcon.')

The testimony of Glenn Simpson seems a case in point. The sickly sentimentality of these people does, rather often, make one feel as though one wanted to throw up.

Thomas , 04 February 2018 at 01:24 PM
"They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress West's posture; say 2040.}

No, three years at tops and could be much sooner if dimes starting dropping by exposed people that don't want to take the fall for their superiors whom they always detested. One possible thing to get the process started sooner is if the recent Russian Intelligence delegation to DC that Smoothie mentions on another thread gave the current administration, as a diplomatic courtesy of course, the audio recordings of Madame Sectary Nuland's infamous mental meltdown at Kaliningrad. No telling what beans were spilled in her moment of panic, but I am willing to bet key names were dropped. Either way the time is coming.

SmoothieX12 -> Anna... , 04 February 2018 at 01:39 PM
- If they have read the important books at all... The ongoing scandal has been revealing a stunning incompetence of the "deciders." Too often they look comical, ridiculous, undignified. This is dangerous, considering their power.

My coming book is precisely about that. Especially, once American policy-makers who saw and experienced war (Ike, George Marshall's generation) departed things started to roll down hill with Reagan bringing on board a whole collection of neocons.

Unawareness is always dangerous, a complete blackout in relations between two nuclear powers is more than dangerous--it is completely reckless. Again, the way CW 1.0 is perceived in the current US "elites" it becomes extremely tempting to repeat it. Electing Hillary was another step in unleashing CW 2.0 by people who have no understanding of what they were doing.

Obama started crushing US-Russian relations before any campaigns were launched and before Trump was even seriously considered a GOP nominee, let alone a real contender. New confrontation hinged on HRC being elected. In fact, she was one of the major driving forces behind a serious of geopolitical anti-Russian moves. Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in HRC campaign long before any Steele's Dossier. This was a program.

james said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 04 February 2018 at 03:01 PM
there seems to be no shortage of money for these blatant propaganda exercises..
Babak Makkinejad -> SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 04:14 PM
I think the failure of Deciders is nothing new - Fath Ali Shah attacking Russia, or the abject failure of the Deciders in 1914. Europe is still not where she was in 1890.
begob , 04 February 2018 at 05:20 PM
I read the post and responses early on, so forgive me if this point has been addressed in the meantime. If the memo information on non-disclosure of material evidence to the warrant issuing court is accurate, as soon as that information came to the attention of the authorities (clearly some time ago) there was a duty on them (including the judge(s) who issued the warrants) to have the matter brought back before the court toot sweet. If that had happened it would surely be in the public domain, so on the assumption the prosecutors and maybe even the judge didn't see the need to review the matter, even purely on a contempt/ethics basis, the memo information only seems convincing if the FISA system is a total sham. I really doubt that.
kooshy said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 06:20 PM
IMO, the bigger problem for American not shying away from wars, or being silent about them , is when your home, your mom and dad' home, the town you grew up in, are immune and away from the war.

The security and safety of the two oceans, encourages or at least, in an all volunteer military makes it a secondary problem for regular people, to worry about. As I remember that wasn't the case at the end of VN war when i first landed here. At that time even though the war was on the other side of the planet and away from homeland, still people, especially young ones in colleges were paying more attention to the cost of war.

spy killer , 04 February 2018 at 06:55 PM
Diana West has uncovered some interesting "Red Threads" (6 part article at dianawest-dot-net) on all the Fusion GPS folks. Seems ole Russian speaking Nellie Ohr got herself a ham radio license recently. Wonder why she would suddenly need one of those? They are all Marxists with potential connections back to Russia.
English Outsider -> Fatima Manoubia... , 05 February 2018 at 07:23 AM
Been there. I am also a latecomer to SST. You have to read the back numbers. How? My IT expertise dates from the dawn of the internet and was lamentable then but I find Wayback sometimes allows easier searches than the SST search engine. A straight search on google also allows searches with more than one term. This link -

https://twitter.com/pat_lang

- gets you to a chronological list and for recent material is sometimes quicker than fiddling around with search engines. "Categories" on the RH side is useful but then you don't get some very informative comments that cross-refer.

If those sadly elementary procedures fail resort to the nearest infant. There's a blur of fingers on the keyboard and what you want then usually appears. Never ask them how they did it. They get so fed up when you ask them to explain it again.

"Who is David Habakkuk?" That's a quantum computer sited, from internal evidence you pick up from time to time, somewhere in the Greater London area. Cross references like you wouldn't believe and over several fields, so maybe he's two quantum computers.

The "Borg"?. Try Wittgenstein. Likely a prog but you can't be choosy these days. Early on in "Philosophical Investigations" (hope I get this right) he discusses the problem of how you can view as an entity something that has ill-defined or overlapping boundaries. The "Borg" is that "you know it when you see it" sort of thing. A great merit of this site is that the owner and many of the contributors know it from inside.

In general you may regard your new found site as a microcosm of the great battle that is raging in the West. It's a battle between the (probably apocryphal but adequately stated) Roveian view of reality that regards truth as an adjunct to or as a by-product of ideology and Realpolitik and the objective view of reality as something that is damned difficult to get at, and sometimes impossible, but that has a truth in it somewhere that is independent of the views and convictions of the observer. It's a battle that's never going to be won but unless it tilts back closer to common sense it can certainly be lost and the West with it.

jonst said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 05 February 2018 at 08:11 AM
Clearly the Labor Party in the UK preferred the USSR to Nazi Germany. (cepting that short interlude where the Soviets signed the Agreement with Hitler, and the Left Organized Leadership all across Europe, for the most part, lined up with Hitler). But for the most part, Labor was Left.
Elements (the ones that won out in the end) of the Conservative Party loathed both Hitler and Stalin. An element of the Conservative Party was sympathetic, but only up to a certain point, with the Nazis. This ended in 1939, sept.

So I don't think it fair, or accurate, to say 'England prefered the Nazis....and even if it not those things, it certainly not "well known", except to the people who have used the false premise to butter their wounds from supporting Stalin in his Pact with Hitler. Or are inclined to bash the British in general.

Babak Makkinejad -> jonst... , 05 February 2018 at 08:29 AM
All right, perhaps I should have said "The English Government". Google "Litvinov", you may discover how the English Government pushed Stalin to make a deal with Hitler to buy USSR time.
Sid Finster said in reply to Jack... , 05 February 2018 at 10:26 AM
Witness the infamous State Department protest memo calling for more war on Syria.

The State Department employees that signed that memo were sure that HRC would win and that their diligent work in pushing the Deep State agenda would sure be rewarded.

Since entering office, Trump appears to have taken the line that if he gives the Deep State everything it demands, he will be allowed to remain in office, even if he is not allowed to remain in power.

Sid Finster said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 05 February 2018 at 10:31 AM
Explain Marshall Miller's role in this, please. He is someone I know quite well. I also know one of the Chalupas.
begob said in reply to jonst... , 05 February 2018 at 10:56 AM
jonst That's broadly accurate, but specifically Attlee brought the motion of no confidence in Chamberlain, which the conservative appeasers won but which led to Churchill's opportunity. Attlee was essential in cabinet to Churchill's resistance after the retreat of the BEF.
turcopolier , 05 February 2018 at 11:18 AM
FM
What are you doing here? You said you dislike the military. Are you really in the Spanish Basque country? Bilbao maybe? break - David Habakkuk is a private scholar of the Litvinenko murder and Soviet/Russian politics and intelligence affairs. His surname comes from Wales where in the 18th (?) Century the ancestral village were all "chapel" and changed their surnames to Old Testament names. His father was master of one of the Cambridge colleges and David is himself a graduate of Cambridge. pl
Babak Makkinejad -> Fatima Manoubia... , 05 February 2018 at 11:19 AM
Yes, I am Iranian. All "Babak"s are Iranians - except some obscure ones that are Rus - Babakov.
Anna , 05 February 2018 at 02:07 PM
The hard, blinding truth: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/02/05/will-conspiracy-trump-american-democracy-go-unpunished/
"In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousand fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations." – Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Thomas said in reply to turcopolier ... , 05 February 2018 at 02:08 PM
Colonel,

This troll showed up recently at b's place doing the same accusations. There is group that is running sacred and pulling out all the stops in "info ops" side of the spectrum. The damn fools don't or, most probably, won't get thru their thick heads and even thicker hearts that it is a failed strategy that turns bystanders into their opponents.

Richardstevenhack , 05 February 2018 at 02:36 PM
Here for your edification is the definitive analysis of the GOP memo by Alexander Mercouris over at The Duran.

And it is a masterpriece - and quite long, possibly his longest analysis of anything so far. He buries the counterarguments being passed around by the Democratic opposition and the anti-Trump media.

Mercouris writes on legal affairs alongside his foreign policy stuff and he writes with a lawyer's precision. And in this article he points out that the GOP memo is writter as a legal document - probably by Trey Gowdy - with additional political insertions by Nunes. So it should properly be referred to as the "GOP memo" or the "Gowdy memo", not the Nunes memo."

Why this is important is that the GOP memo is basically written as a defense lawyer would in contesting a case -- this case being the FISA warrant application. Which means its orientation is proving failure to disclose relevant and material information to the FISA court and in some cases rising to the point of contempt of court.

Seriously, read this! The whole thing!

Rampant abuse and possible contempt of Court: what you need to know about the GOP memo
http://theduran.com/rampant-abuse-contempt-court-analysis-gop-memorandum/

blue peacock , 05 February 2018 at 03:25 PM
Sen Grassley releases memo heavily redacted by DOJ/FBI.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-05/grassley-graham-blast-fbi-censoring-memo-calling-criminal-probe-trump-dossier

"Seeking transparency and cooperation should not be this challenging," Grassley said in a statement after posting a heavily redacted version of the criminal referral that he and GOP Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina sent to the Justice Department last month. " The government should not be blotting out information that it admits isn't secret. "

I suppose DOJ/FBI believe that by obstructing, stalling and obfuscating they can buy time and that the Republicans in Congress will get tired of the games and go home. This seems like a pretty straightforward memo, highlighting the discrepancy between Steele's court filings and the FBI's version of Steele's discussions with them. Grassley is pointing out that either Steele or the FBI is lying.

What is interesting is the difference in process and ability between the House & Senate. The House can release their memos on its own, even if not declassified by the Executive, whereas the Senate requires the Executive to declassify it's memos that are based on classified documents.

turcopolier , 05 February 2018 at 04:38 PM
FM

We have not had a self declared communist on SST before although LeaNder in her youth may have come close to that exalted status. You might want to read the wiki on me and the CV I have posted on the blog to avoid tedious accusations of this or that. I am thought by some to have some knowledge of the ME so please do not try to lecture me about how much you love the Arabs. I speak their language and have lived with them for a long time. There are people who write to SST who are pro-Trump and some who are anti-Trump. I seek a mixture of views so long as personal insult and invective are eschewed. Personally, I do not belong to a political party and would describe myself as an original intent, strict constructionist.

Trump is the constitutionally and legally elected president of the United States. Your descriptors with regard to him are, in my opinion, only plausible if seen from the point of view of various kinds of leftist including Marxist-Leninists like you. You sound very smug and self-satisfied but we will see if you can have an open mind at all. pl

Kooshy said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 05 February 2018 at 04:46 PM
Found him, Ali Babacan XVPM, XFM and M of finance. Yes god forbid, if he is a decendent of Ardisher Babakan and another claimant to Iranian throne, which CIA and Soros can jump on.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Babacan MBA from Northeestern
blue peacock , 05 February 2018 at 04:55 PM
...would describe myself as an original intent, strict constructionist.

Aye. Aye. Sir!

+1

That is why some of us believe the Patriot Act and FISA are both unpatriotic and unconstitutional. SCOTUS disagrees with the few of us.

Babak Makkinejad -> Fatima Manoubia... , 05 February 2018 at 05:03 PM
I do not believe Trump is a misogynists - he stated publicly that he likes beautiful women. I also do not think he is a racist. I think he is the first US leader in many decades who has been willing to publicly talk about US problems. For most other US politicians - they largely live in "the best of all possible worlds".
English Outsider , 05 February 2018 at 06:31 PM
Colonel - sincere apologies if my comment above disrupted the discussion on a fascinating article.

David Habakkuk - I should say that "Quantum Computer" referred solely to the ability to gather and collate great amounts of material. It's an ability I admire. On Steele, you are among other things setting out something that is unfamiliar to me though not to most others here, I imagine, and that is the milieu in which he is or was working as a UK Intelligence operative. That you have also done in previous articles; it doesn't seem to be a particularly savoury milieu. As far as Steele's US activities are concerned, from you I'm not getting the picture of a lone operative, all ties with MI6 neatly severed, working solo in the States on some chance assignment in 2016. I'm getting the picture of someone still very much in the swim and selected because of that.

The only problem with that second picture is the dossier, or the 30% or so of it - what Comey, I think it was, described as "salacious and unverified". Surely that's got to be amateur night. Not something that a practised professional working with other professionals would put his hand to. Does that not support the picture of an ex-operative who's gone off the rails and is fumbling around unsupervised?

The Steele affair touched a nerve. One is always I suppose aware that IC professionals are getting up to all sorts and it doesn't seem improbable that "all sorts" includes political stuff and smear campaigns. But it's not heaps of corpses in Syria or farm boys being sent to certain death in the Ukraine. And even within the UK Intelligence Community and their contractors or whatever they're called, compared with what our IC people have done in the ME or compared with what one fears Hamish de Bretton Gordon might have got himself involved in, Christopher Steele's just a choirboy. Nevertheless there's something deeply repellent about what he did. Whatever your view of Trump there he was, newly elected, obviously wanting to make a go of it, and already faced with difficulties. Then some chancer throws "Golden Showers" in his face and makes his position, not maybe for the insiders but for the general public, that bit more untenable.

So from a UK perspective the question of whether Steele was acting in concert with others in the UK becomes important. If he was truly working solo then that from a UK point of view is regrettable but one of those things. In that case MI6 would just have to tighten up its controls on what ex-operatives get up to, put out the appropriate disclaimers, and that's the end of it as far as the UK is concerned. But if Golden Showers and the rest of it was a "Welcome Mr President" from UK IC professionals as a group then those professionals should be hung drawn and quartered together with whoever set them on.

I've read your article several times now and apart from the fact that much of what you pull together isn't material I'm up on, it doesn't seem to me that you're definitely coming to one conclusion or the other. There are many more facts to come out so perhaps this question is premature, but do you think Steele was acting in concert with others in the UK or was he, at least as far as the UK is concerned, working solo?

kooshy , 05 February 2018 at 07:49 PM
Most Iranian females Named Fatima/ Fatimah after prophet' daughter, call themselves Fati, and if they are of aristocrat type, they are called Bibi Fati Khanam, which is honorable lady Fati and if they are westernized they become Fay or Fifi.
turcopolier , 05 February 2018 at 07:59 PM
EO

Much of your commentary seems directed to David Habakkuk and PT rather than I. I don't think the FBI would have started to pay him until he left UK service. pl

English Outsider , 06 February 2018 at 05:10 AM
Colonel - Further apologies - I should have submitted comment 79 as two items.

Yes, the question about Steele was in response to DH's article. The UK side of the affair is I suppose only a small part of the question you and your Committee are examining but it's a dubious part however one looks at it. Although it's early days yet I was hoping DH, with his encyclopaedic knowledge of the UK intelligence scene, might feel able to cast more light on that UK side.

English Outsider -> Cortes... , 06 February 2018 at 05:53 AM
Cortes - " ... where, exactly, do you expect the great public to look beyond the initial scabrously defamatory storytelling about the "golden showers"? "

I don't think one can expect the public, at least in the UK, to look very far beyond the initial scandal. The investigations and enquiries presently under way in the US are complex and are taking place in a different system. This member of the UK public wouldn't be able to give you a coherent account of those enquiries and I doubt many of my fellows could.

So we have to take on trust, most of us, what we're told. As far as I can tell the underlying theme from the BBC and the media is generally that Trump is subverting the American Justice system in order to ensure his own misdemeanours aren't investigated.

Some of us take that as gospel. Others of us assume that the politicians and the media are untrustworthy and ignore them. I doubt many of us go into much more detail than that. Therefore the original story will stick in our minds.

But for some in the UK there are questions in there as well. How come the UK got mixed up in all this? How much did the UK get mixed up in it?

David Habakkuk -> Sid Finster... , 06 February 2018 at 06:19 AM
Sid Finster,

In response to comment 53.

When I belatedly started looking at the Litvinenko mystery, as a result of a strange email provoked by comments of mine on SST which arrived in my inbox in March 2007 from someone who turned out to be a key protagonist, it was rather obvious that improvised and chaotic 'StratCom' operations had been put into place on both the Russian and British sides to cover up what had happened.

A particular interesting feature of those on the British side – in which we now know Christopher Steele must have played a leading role – were the bizarre gyrations those responsible were going through trying to explain away the extraordinary fact that when he had broken the story of his poisoning, Litvinenko had pointed the finger of suspicion at his Italian associate Mario Scaramella.

When I started delving, I came across some very interesting pieces on Scaramella and related matters posted on the 'European Tribune' website by a Rome-based blogger using the name 'de Gondi' in the period after the story broke.

His actual name is David Loepp, by profession he is an artisan jeweller specialising in ancient and traditional goldsmith techniques, and I already knew and respected his work from his contributions to the transnational internet investigation into the Niger uranium forgeries – an earlier MI6 clusterf**ck.

So in May 2008 I posted a longish piece on that site, setting out the problems with the evidence about the Litvinenko case as I saw them, in the hope of reactivating his interest. This paid off in spades, when he linked to, and translated a key extract from, the request from Italian prosecutors to use wiretaps of conversations with Senator Paolo Guzzanti in connection with their prosecution of Scaramella for 'aggravated calumny.'

The request, which up to not so long ago was freely available on the website of the Italian Senate, was denied, but the extensive summaries of the transcripts provided a lot of material.

(This initial post by me, and later posts by me on that site, are at http://www.eurotrib.com/user/uid:1857/diary. Three posts David Loepp and I produced jointly in December 2012, which have a lot on Scaramella and Shvets, are on his page there, at http://www.eurotrib.com/user/de%20Gondi/diary .)

The extract from the wiretap request which David Loepp posted, which like Litvinenko's letter containing the claims he and Yuri Shvets had concocted about Putin using Mogilevich to attempt to supply Al Qaeda with a 'mini nuclear bomb' is dated 1 December 2005, contains key pointers to the conspiracy. It concludes:

'A passage on Simon Moghilevic and an agreement between the camorra to search for nuclear weapons lost during the Cold War to be consigned to Bin Laden, a revelation made by the Israeli. According to Scaramella the circle closes: camorra, Moghilevic- Russian mafia- services- nuclear bombs in Naples.'

Subsequent conversations make clear that Scaramella left on 6 December 2005 for Washington, on a trip where he was to meet Shvets. The summary of a report on this to Guzzanti reads:

'12) conversation that took place on number [omissis] on December 18, 2005, at 9:41:51 n. 1426, containing explicit references to the authenticity of the declarations of Alexander Litvinenko acquired by Scaramella, to the trustworthiness of the affirmations made by Scaramella in his reports to the commission and to the meetings Scaramella had with Talik after having denounced them [presumably Talik and his alleged accomplices]. (They can talk with HEIMS thanks to the help of MILLER. SHVEZ says that he had been a companion of CARLOS at the academy; SHVEZ has already made declarations and is willing to continue collaboration. Guzzanti warns that a document in Russian arrived in commission in which the name of SCARAMELLA appears several times, these [sic] say that directives to the contrary had been given to Litvinenko. Scaramella says that he went to the meeting with TALIK in the company of two treasury [police] and a cop, Talik spoke of a person from the Ukrainian GRU who would be willing to talk and a strange Chechen ring in Naples. Assassination attempt against the pope, CASAROLI was a Soviet agent.)'

The summary of a later conversation also refers to 'MILLER':

'conversation that took place on number [omissis] on January 13, 2006, at 11:22:11 n. 2287, containing references to Scaramella's sources in relation to facts referred in the Commission, the means by which they were obtained by Scaramella from declarations made abroad, the role of Litvinenko, also on the occasion of declarations made by third parties and the credibility of the news and theses given by Scaramella to the commission (Scaramella reads a text in English on the relation between the KGB and PRODI. Guzzanti asks if its credibility can be confirmed and if the taped declarations can be backed up; Scaramella answers that there were two testimonies, Lou Palumbo and Alexander (Litvinenko), and that the registration made in London at the beginning of the assignment [Scaramella's?] had been authenticated by a certain BAKER of the FBI. As he translates the text from English, Scaramella notes that the person testifying does not say he knows Prodi but only that he thinks that Prodi ...; all those who worked for the person testifying in Scandinavia said that Prodi was "theirs." The affair in Rimini, Bielli is preparing the battle in Rimini. Meetings with MILLER for the three things that are needed. Polemic about Pollari over the pressure exerted on Gordievski.)'

In the exchanges on my May 2008 post, I mentioned and linked to some extraordinary comments on a crucial article by Edward Jay Epstein, in which Karon von Gerhke claimed that his sceptical account fitted with what her contacts in the British investigation had told her. When that July I came across her equally extraordinary claims in response to the BBC's Mark Urban piece of stenography – which Steele may also have had a hand in organising – I found she was referring to precisely that visit to Washington by Scaramella which had been described in the wiretap request.

As you can perhaps imagine, the fact that 'Miller' had featured in the conversations with Guzzanti both as a key contact, who could introduce Scaramella to Aldrich Ames (which is who 'Heims' clearly is), and with whom there had been meetings about 'the three things that are needed' made me inclined to take seriously what Karon von Gerhke said about his role.

In December 2008, I put up another post on 'European Tribune', putting together the material from David Loepp and that from Karon von Gerhke – but not discussing the references to 'Miller.' As I had hoped, this led to her getting in touch.

Among the material with which she supplied me, which I in turn supplied to the Solicitor to the Inquest, were covers of faxes to John Rizzo, then Acting General Counsel of the CIA. From a fax dated 23 October 2005.

'John: See attached email to Chuck Patrizia. Berezovsky alleges he is in possession of a copy of a classified file given to the CIA by Russia's FSB, which he further alleges the CIA disseminated to British, French, Italian and Israeli intelligence agencies implicating him in business associations with the Mafia and to ties with terrorist organizations. Yuri Shvets was authorised/directed by Berezovsky to raise the issue with Bud McFarlane scheduled for Thursday. McFarlane is unaware the issue will be raised with him.'

From a fax dated 7 November 2005:

'John: I am attaching an email exchange between Yuri Shvets and me re: 1) article he published on his Ukraine website on alleged sale of nuclear choke to Iran, which I reproached him on as having been planted by Berezovsky and 2 the alleged FSB/CIA document file that Berezovsky obtained from Scaramella, which Yuri acknowledges in his e-mail to me. Like extracting wisdom teeth to get him to put anything on paper, especially in an e-mail! [NAME REDACTED BY ME – DH] is the source McFarlane referred Yuri to re: Berezovsky's visa issue. She proposed meeting Berezovsky in London. Alleged it would take a year to clear up USG issues and even then could not guarantee him a visa. She too has access to USG intelligence on Berezovsky. Open book.'

From a fax dated 5 December 2005:

'John. From Mario Scaramella to Yuri Shvets to my ears, the DOJ has authorised Mario Scaramella to interview Aldrich Ames with regard to members of the Italian Intelligence Service agent recruited by Ames for the KGB. Scaramella, as you may recall, is who gave Boris Berezovsky's aide, a former FSB Colonel [LITVINENKO – DH], that alleged document number to the FSB file that the CIA disseminated on Berezovsky – a file that Bud McFarlane's "Madam Visa" [NAME REDACTED BY ME – DH] is alleged is totting off to London for a meeting with Berezovsky, who has agreed to retain her re: his visa issue. Quid pro quo's with Berezovsky and Scaramella on the CIA agent currently facing kidnapping charges for the rendition of the Muslim cleric? Scott Armstrong has a most telling file on Scaramella. Not a single redeeming quality.'

In the course of very extensive exchanges with Karon von Gerhke subsequently, we had some rather acute disagreements. It was unfortunate that her filing was a shambles – a crucial hard disk failed without a backup, and the 'hard copies' appeared to be in a chaotic state.

However, the only occasion when I can recall having reason to believe that was deliberately lying to me was when David Loepp unearthed a cache of documentation including the full Italian text of the letter from Litvinenko containing the 'StratCom' designed to suggest that Putin had attempted to supply a 'mini nuclear bomb' to Al Qaeda. Having been asked to keep this between ourselves for the time being, Karon insisted on immediately sending it to her contacts in Counter Terrorism Command, and then produced bogus justifications.

Time and again, moreover, I found that I could confirm statements that she made – see for example the two posts I put up on the legal battles following the death in February 2008 of Berezovsky's long-term partner Arkadi 'Badri' Patarkatsishvili in June and July 2009, which were based on careful corroboration of what she told me.

(I should also say that I acquired the greatest respect for her courage.)

And while Owen and his team suppressed all the evidence from her, and almost all of that from David Loepp, which I had I provided to them, the dossier about Berezovsky is described in a statement made by Litvinenko in Tel Aviv in April 2006, presented in evidence in the Inquiry.

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

Other evidence, moreover, strongly inclines me to believe that there were overtures for a 'quid pro quo', purporting to come from Putin, but that this was a ruse orchestrated by Berezovsky.

Part of the purpose of this would almost certainly have been to supply probably bogus 'evidence' about arms sales in the Yeltsin years to Iraq, Iran and Syria. Moreover, I think there was an article on the second 'Fifth Element' site run by Shvets about the supposed sale of a nuclear 'choke' – whatever that is – to Iran.

The likelihood of the involvement of elements in the FBI in these shenanigans seems to quite high, given what has already emerged about the activities of Levinson. Also relevant may be the fact that the 'declaration' which was part of the attempt to frame Romano Prodi was authenticated, in London, by 'a certain BAKER of the FBI.')

Babak Makkinejad -> David Habakkuk ... , 06 February 2018 at 09:40 AM
Thank you David Habakkuk. Truly sordid and deplorable. WWIII to be initiated on basis of lies.
Jack , 06 February 2018 at 12:06 PM
David

You may already know this but Steele was a no show in a UK court for a deposition on the libel suit.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/05/christopher-steele-is-no-show-in-london-court-in-civil-case-over-dossier.amp.html

Babak Makkinejad -> David Habakkuk ... , 06 February 2018 at 01:18 PM
I know something of spectroscopy.

The critical issue here is the provenance of the samples and not the sophistication of the techniques used in the analysis itself or its instrumentation.

The paragraph that you have quoted:

"To figure out signatures based on various synthetic routes and conditions, Chipuk says that the synthetic chemists on his team will make the same chemical threat agent as many as 2,000 times in an ..." reeks of intellectual intimidation - trying to brow-beat any skeptic by the size of one's instrument - as it were."

And then there is a little matter of confidence level in any of the analysis - such things are normally based on prior statistics - which did not and could not exist in this situation.

LeaNder , 07 February 2018 at 09:16 AM
David, it's no doubt interesting to watch how attention on Victor Ivanov in another deficient inquiry on the British Isles, was managed in that inquiry. If I may, since he pops up again in the Steele dossier. You take what's available? Is that all there is to know?

I know its hard to communicate basics if you are deeply into matters. Usually people prefer to opt out. It's getting way too complicated for them to follow. You made me understand this experience. But isn't this (fake) intelligence continuity "via" Yuri Svets what connects your, no harm meant I do understand your obsession with the case, with what we deal with now in the Steele Dossier? Again, one of the most central figures is Ivanov.

Of course later reports in the Steele Dossier go hand in hand with a larger public relations campaign. Creating reality? Irony alert: as informer/source I would by then know what the other side wants to hear.

By the way, babbling mode, I found your Tom Mangold transcription. It felt it wasn't there on the link you gave. I used the date, and other search terms. Maybe I am wrong. Haven't looked at what the judge ruled out of the collection. Yes, cozy session/setting.

According to Google search there are no other links then your articles here:
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613093555/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/files/2015/04/HMG000513wb.pdf ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/files/2015/04/HMG000513wb.pdf">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613093555/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/files/2015/04/HMG000513wb.pdf

**********

JAN RICHARD BĆRUG
The Collapsing Wall. Hybrid Journalism.
A Comparative Study of Newspapers and
Magazines in Eight Countries in Europe

Available online. Haven't read it yet, but journalism as hidden public relations transfer belt would be one of my minor obsessions. ...

Babak Makkinejad -> turcopolier ... , 07 February 2018 at 11:23 AM
I wonder too; their command of the English idiom is very au currant - noticed "opt in/opt out" reference? Too American.

They clearly are not native speakers of German.

LeaNder said in reply to kooshy... , 07 February 2018 at 12:30 PM
why California, Kooshy #18? California among other things left this verbal trace, since I once upon time thought a luggage storage in SF might be free/available now: this is my home, lady.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kish_Island#Economy

Tourists from many -- but not all -- foreign nations wishing to enter Kish Free Zone from legal ports are not required to obtain any visa prior to travel. For those travelers, upon-arrival travel permits are stamped valid for 14 days by Kish officials.

Who are the not all? Can we assume Britain is not one of those?

The German link is different. How about the Iranian?

or isn't this the Kish we are talking about?

LeaNder said in reply to LeaNder... , 07 February 2018 at 01:14 PM
correcting myself #94:

another Ivanov. I struggled with names (...) in Russian crime novels, admittedly. But that's long ago from times Russian crime and Russian money flows and rogues getting hold of its nuclear material surfaced more often in Europe. 90s

I see Sergei seems to share my interest in the literary genre:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Ivanov#Personal

[Mar 10, 2018] Meier might have discovered that his subject had been, as it were, 'top supporting actor' in the first fumbling attempt by Christopher Steele et al to produce a plausible-sounding scenario as to the background to Litvinenko s death.

Highly recommended!
There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time.
It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this
Notable quotes:
"... There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this. ..."
"... Important support for these strategies was provided by the 'StratCom' network centred around the late Boris Berezovsky, which clearly collaborated closely with MI6. As was apparent from the witness list at Sir Robert Owen's Inquiry into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, which produced a report based essentially on a recycling of claims made by the network's members, key players were on your side of the Atlantic – notably Alex Goldfarb, Yuri Shvets, and Yuri Felshtinsky. ..."
"... it seems to me the usa and uk have been tied at the hip for a very long time... when it comes to foreign affairs policy and wars - the one will always vouch for the other without hesitation... it tells me the relationship is really deep.. ..."
"... I and my friends consider it a given that most, if not all, anglo-zionist moves in the ME are to "provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area. " It is an open secret that the izzies are the reason why a few Russians, some Turks, lots of Kurds and countless Arabs are dying in the Syrian battlefields. Another open secret: the takfiris and kurds have been, and are, supported by the West. That the "masters of the universe™" have been conceiving and doubling down on such disastrous policies give lie to their much-vaunted "intelligence". ..."
"... It is the very FACT of Trump even getting elected at ALL which outrages and terrifies them so much. They are used to seeing themselves as successful manipulators and engineers of every major event. They were engineering the whole electoral battlespace to get Clinton elected. The mere fact of Trump's victory in the teeth of their Electoral Engineering for Clinton is an act of defiance which they will not tolerate. ..."
"... And if they fail to bring Trump down at all, they will stand revealed as being defeatable. And this is their big fear. That if people see they have defeated the Borg once on keeping Trump in the teeth of Borg's efforts, that people might try to defeat and smash down the Borg on another issue. And then another. And then another after that. ..."
"... Because it is not possible to do on fundamental level yet, especially with US foreign policy establishment and so called consensus being built almost entirely, in ideological and, most importantly, cadres senses, on the ultimate exceptionalist agenda in which Russia is the ultimate obstacle and enemy. Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. ..."
"... They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress West's posture; say 2040 ..."
"... In 1977 Zbigniew Brzezinski, as President Carter's National Security Adviser, forms the Nationalities Working Group (NWG) dedicated to the idea of weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions. ..."
"... State Department official Henry Precht will later recall that Brzezinski had the idea "that Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets." [Scott, 2007, pp. 67] In November 1978, President Carter appointed George Ball head of a special White House Iran task force under Brzezinski. Ball recommends the US should drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the radical Islamist opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini. This idea is based on ideas from British Islamic expert Dr. Bernard Lewis, who advocates the balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. The chaos would spread in what he also calls an "arc of crisis" and ultimately destabilize the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union ..."
"... About relation Steele-MI6, well, you never leave your IS. Or to put it in another way, you are never out of the scope of your past IS ..."
"... No, three years at tops and could be much sooner if dimes starting dropping by exposed people that don't want to take the fall for their superiors whom they always detested. One possible thing to get the process started sooner is if the recent Russian Intelligence delegation to DC that Smoothie mentions on another thread gave the current administration, as a diplomatic courtesy of course, the audio recordings of Madame Sectary Nuland's infamous mental meltdown at Kaliningrad. No telling what beans were spilled in her moment of panic, but I am willing to bet key names were dropped. Either way the time is coming. ..."
"... Especially, once American policy-makers who saw and experienced war (Ike, George Marshall's generation) departed things started to roll down hill with Reagan bringing on board a whole collection of neocons. ..."
"... Unawareness is always dangerous, a complete blackout in relations between two nuclear powers is more than dangerous--it is completely reckless. Again, the way CW 1.0 is perceived in the current US "elites" it becomes extremely tempting to repeat it. Electing Hillary was another step in unleashing CW 2.0 by people who have no understanding of what they were doing. ..."
"... Obama started crushing US-Russian relations before any campaigns were launched and before Trump was even seriously considered a GOP nominee, let alone a real contender. New confrontation hinged on HRC being elected. In fact, she was one of the major driving forces behind a serious of geopolitical anti-Russian moves. Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in HRC campaign long before any Steele's Dossier. This was a program. ..."
"... IMO, the bigger problem for American not shying away from wars, or being silent about them , is when your home, your mom and dad' home, the town you grew up in, are immune and away from the war. ..."
"... The security and safety of the two oceans, encourages or at least, in an all volunteer military makes it a secondary problem for regular people, to worry about. ..."
"... A particular interesting feature of those on the British side – in which we now know Christopher Steele must have played a leading role – were the bizarre gyrations those responsible were going through trying to explain away the extraordinary fact that when he had broken the story of his poisoning, Litvinenko had pointed the finger of suspicion at his Italian associate Mario Scaramella. ..."
"... Of course later reports in the Steele Dossier go hand in hand with a larger public relations campaign. Creating reality? Irony alert: as informer/source I would by then know what the other side wants to hear. ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Steele, Shvets, Levinson, Litvinenko and the 'Billion Dollar Don.'

In the light of the suggestion in the Nunes memo that Steele was 'a longtime FBI source' it seems worth sketching out some background, which may also make it easier to see some possible reasons why he 'was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.'

There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this.

This agenda has involved hopes for 'régime change' in Russia, whether as the result of an oligarchic coup, a popular revolt, or some combination of both. Also central have been hopes for a further 'rollback' of Russia influence in the post-Soviet space, both in areas now independent, such as Ukraine, and also ones still part of the Russian Federation, notably Chechnya.

And, crucially, it involved exploiting the retreat of Russian power from the Middle East for 'régime change' projects which it was hoped would provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area.

Important support for these strategies was provided by the 'StratCom' network centred around the late Boris Berezovsky, which clearly collaborated closely with MI6. As was apparent from the witness list at Sir Robert Owen's Inquiry into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, which produced a report based essentially on a recycling of claims made by the network's members, key players were on your side of the Atlantic – notably Alex Goldfarb, Yuri Shvets, and Yuri Felshtinsky.

The question of what links these had, or did not have, with elements in U.S. intelligence agencies is thus a critical one.

In making some sense of it, the fact that one key figure we know to have been involved in this network was missing at the Inquiry – the former FBI agent Robert Levinson, who disappeared on the Iranian island of Kish in March 2007 – is important.

Unfortunately, I only recently came across a book on Levinson published in 2016 by the 'New York Times' journalist Barry Meier, which is now hopefully winging its way across the Atlantic. From the accounts of the book I have seen, such as one by Jeff Stein in 'Newsweek', it seems likely that its author did not look at any of the evidence presented at Owen's Inquiry.

(See http://www.newsweek.com/2016/05/20/what-really-happened-robert-levinson-cia-iran-454803.html .)

Had he done so, Meier might have discovered that his subject had been, as it were, 'top supporting actor' in the first fumbling attempt by Christopher Steele et al to produce a plausible-sounding scenario as to the background to Litvinenko's death. A Radio 4 programme on 16 December 2006, presented by the veteran BBC presenter Tom Mangold, had been wholly devoted to an account by Shvets, backed up by Levinson. Both of these were, like Litvinenko, supposed to be impartial 'due diligence' operatives.

The notion that any of them might have connections with Western intelligence agencies was not considered. The – publicly available – evidence of the involvement of Shvets, whose surname means 'cobbler' or 'shoemaker' in Ukrainian, in the processing of the tapes of conversations involving the former Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma supposedly recorded by Major Melnychenko, which had played a crucial role in the 2004-5 'Orange Revolution' was not mentioned.

Still less was it mentioned that claims that the – very dangerous – late Soviet Kolchuga system, which made it possible the kind of identification of incoming aircraft which radar had traditionally done, without sending out signals which made the destruction of the facilities doing it possible, had been sold by Kuchma to Iraq had proven spurious.

What Shvets had done had been to take – genuine – audio in which Kuchma had discussed a possible sale, and edit it to suggest a sale had been completed.

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

As a former television current affairs producer, I can talk to you of the marvels which London audio editors can produce, very happily. Unfortunately, the days when not all BBC and 'Guardian' journalists were corrupt stenographers for corrupt and incompetent spooks, as Mangold and his like have been for Steele and Levinson, are long gone.

All this has become particularly relevant now, given that Simpson has placed the notorious Jewish Ukrainian mobster Semyon Mogilevich and the 'Solntsevskaya Bratva' mafia group centre stage in his accounts not simply of Trump and Manafort, but also of William Browder. For most of the 'Nineties, Levinson had been a, if not the, lead FBI investigator on Mogilevich.

(On this, see the 1999 BBC 'Panorama' programme 'The Billion Dollar Don', also presented by Tom Mangold, which has extensive interviews both with Mogilevich and Levinson at

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/events/panorama/transcripts/transcript_06_12_99.txt )

In the months leading up to Levinson's disappearance, a key priority for the advocates of the strategy I have described was to prevent it being totally derailed by the patently catastrophic outcome of the Iraqi adventure.

Compounding the problem was the fact that this had created the 'Shia Crescent', which in turn exacerbated the potential 'existential threat' to Israel posed by the steadily increasing range, accuracy and numbers of missiles available to Hizbullah in hardened positions north of the Litani.

These, obviously, provided both a 'deterrent' for that organisation and Iran, and also a radical threat to the whole notion that somehow Israel could ever be a 'safe haven' for Jews, against the supposedly ineradicable disposition of the 'goyim' sooner or later to, as it were, revert to type. The dreadful thought that Israel might not be necessary had to be resisted at all costs.

What followed from the disaster unleashed by the – Anglo-American – 'own goal' in toppling Saddam was, ironically, a need on the part of key players to 'double down.' Above all, it was necessary for many of those involved to counter suggestions from the Russian side that going around smashing up 'régimes' that one might not like sometimes blew up in one's face.

Even more threatening were suggestions from the Russian side that it was foolish to think one could use jihadists without risking 'blowback', and that there might be an overwhelming common interest in combating Islamic extremism.

Another priority was to counter the pushback in the American 'intelligence community' and military, which was to produce the drastic downgrading of the threat posed by the Iranian nuclear programme in the November 2007 NIE and then the resignation of Admiral William Fallon as head of 'Centcom' the following March.

So in 2005 Shvets came to London. He and his audio editors had another 'bite at the cherry' of the Melnychenko tapes, so that material that did in fact establish that both the SBU and FSB had collaborated with Mogilevich could be employed to make it seem that Putin had a close personal relationship with the mobster.

All kinds of supposedly respectable American and British academics, like Professors Karen Dawisha and Robert Service, have fallen for this, hook, line and sinker. It gives a new meaning to the term 'useful idiot.'

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

In a letter sent in December that year by Litvinenko to the 'Mitrokhin Commission', for which his Italian associate Mario Scaramella was a consultant, this was used in an attempt to demonstrate that Mogilevich, while acting as an agent for the FSB and under Putin's personal 'krysha', had attempted to supply a 'mini atomic bomb' – aka 'suitcase nuke' – to Al Qaeda. Shortly after the letter was sent Scaramella departed on a trip to Washington, where he appears to have got access to Aldrich Ames.

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

At precisely this time, as Meier explains, Levinson was in the process of being recruited by a lady called Anne Jablonski who then worked as a CIA analyst. It appears that she was furious at the failure of the operational side at the Agency to produce evidence which would have established that Iran did indeed have an ongoing nuclear programme, and she may well have hoped would implicate Russia in supplying materials.

There are grounds to suspect that one of the things that Berezovsky and Shvets were doing was fabricating such 'evidence.' Whether Levinson was involved in such attempts, or genuinely looking for evidence he was convinced must be there, I cannot say. It appears that he fell for a rather elementary entrapment operation – which could well have been organised with the collaboration of Russian intelligence. (People do get fed up with being framed, particular if 'régime change' is the goal.)

It also seems likely that, quite possibly in a different but related entrapment operation, related to propaganda wars in which claims and counter claims about a polonium-beryllium 'initiator' as the crucial missing part which might make a 'suitcase nuke' functional, Litvinenko accidentally ingested fatal quantities of polonium. A good deal of evidence suggests that this may have been at Berezovsky's offices on the night before he was supposedly assassinated.

It was, obviously, important for Steele et al to ensure that nobody looked at the 'StratCom' wars about 'suitcase nukes.' Here, a figure who has played a key role in such wars in relation to Syria plays an interesting minor one in the story.

Some time following the destruction of the case for an immediate war by the November 2007 NIE, a chemical weapons specialist called Dan Kaszeta, who had worked in the White House for twelve years, moved to London.

In 2011, in addition to founding a consultancy called 'Strongpoint Security', he began a writing career with articles in 'CBRNe World.' Later, he would become the conduit through which the notorious 'hexamine hypothesis', supposedly clinching proof that the Syrian government was responsible for the sarin incidents at Khan Sheikhoun, Ghouta, Saraqeb, and Khan Al-Asal, was disseminated.

Having been forced by the threat of a case being opened against them under human rights law into resuming the inquest into Litvinenko's death, in August 2012 the British authorities appointed Sir Robert Owen to conduct it. (There are many honest judges in Britain, but obviously, if one sets out to find someone who will 'cover up' for the incompetence and corruption of people like Steele, as Lord Hutton did before him, you can find them.)

That same month, a piece appeared in 'CBRNe World' with the the strapline: 'Dan Kaszeta looks into the ultimate press story: Suitcase nukes', and the main title 'Carry on or checked bags?' Among the grounds he gives for playing down the scare:

'Some components rely on materials with shelf life. Tritium, for example, is used in many nuclear weapon designs and has a twelve year half-life. Polonium, used in neutron initiators in some earlier types of weapon designs, has a very short halflife. US documents state that every nuclear weapon has "limited life components" that require periodic replacement (do an internet search for nuclear limited life components and you can read for weeks).'

(For this and other articles by Kaszeta, as also his bio, see http://strongpointsecurity.co.uk ')

What Kaszeta has actually described are the reasons why polonium is a perfect 'StratCom' instrument. In terms of scientific plausibility, in fact there were no 'suitcase nukes', and in any case 'initiators' using polonium had been abandoned very early on, in favour of ones which lasted longer.

For 'StratCom' scenarios, as experience with the 'hexamine hypothesis' has proved, scientific plausibility can be irrelevant.

What polonium provides is a means of suggesting that Al Qaeda have in fact got hold of a nuclear device which they could easily smuggle into, say, Rome or New York, or indeed Moscow, but there is a crucial missing component which the FSB is trying to provide to them. By the same token, of course, that missing component could be depicted as one that Berezovsky and Litvinenko are conspiring to suppl to the Chechen insurgents.

In addition, the sole known source of global supply is the Avangard plant at Sarov in Russia, so the substance is naturally suited for 'StratCom' directed against that country, which its intelligence services would – rather naturally – try to make 'boomerang.'

According to Glenn Simpson, Christopher Steele is a 'boy scout.' This seems to me quite wrong – but, even if it were true, would you want to unleash a 'boy scout' into these kinds of intrigue?

As it is not clear why Kaszeta introduced his – accurate but irrelevant – point about polonium into an article which was concerned with scientific plausibility, one is left with an interesting question as to whether he cut his teeth on 'StratCom' attempting to ensure that nobody seriously interested in CBRN science followed an obvious lead.

In relation to the question of whether current FBI personnel had been involved in the kind of 'StratCom' exercises, I have been describing, a critical issue is the involvement of Shvets and Levinson in the Alexander Khonanykhine affair back in the 'Nineties, and the latter's use of claims about the Solntsevskaya to prevent the key figure's extradition. But that is a matter for another day.

A corollary of all this is that we cannot – yet at least – be absolutely confident that the account in the Nunes memo, according to which Steele was suspended and then dismissed as an FBI source for what the organisation is reported to define as 'the most serious of violations' – the unauthorised disclosure of a relationship with the organisation – is necessarily wholly accurate.

Who did and did not authorise which disclosures to the media, up to and including the extraordinary decision to have the full dossier, including claims about Aleksej Gubarev and the Alfa oligarchs, in flagrant disregard of the obvious risks of defamation suits, and who may be trying to pass the buck to others, remains I think less than totally clear.

Posted at 03:42 PM in As The Borg Turns , Habakkuk , Russia , Russiagate | Permalink

james , 03 February 2018 at 04:33 PM

thanks david... fascinating overview and conjecture..

it seems to me the usa and uk have been tied at the hip for a very long time... when it comes to foreign affairs policy and wars - the one will always vouch for the other without hesitation... it tells me the relationship is really deep..

JohnB , 03 February 2018 at 05:17 PM
David,

Thank you very. As ever you have illuminated a few more things for me. Kaszeta's involvement is interesting. He is someone I am in the middle of researching in relation to Higgins and Bellingcat.

turcopolier , 03 February 2018 at 06:02 PM
james

It is the closest of all international intelligence relationships. It started in WW2. Before that the Brits were though of as a potential enemy. pl

Babak Makkinejad -> turcopolier ... , 03 February 2018 at 06:10 PM
I think the English are using you, they are unsentimental empirical people that only do these that benefit the Number One.
The chief beneficiary of the Coup in Iran was England and not US.
catherine , 03 February 2018 at 06:22 PM
That Newsweek piece about Levinson is very superficial to me.

Re: Levinson

# Who suggested to who 'first' the Iran caper...Anne Jablonski to Levinson or Levinson to Jablonski? It was reported earlier by Meier that in December 2005, when Levinson was pitching Jablonski on projects he might take on when his CIA contract was approved he sent her a lengthy memo about Dawud's potential as an informant.

# Ira Silverman, the Iran hating NBC guy, pitched a Iraq caper to Levinson with Dawud Salahuddin, as his Iran contact and Levinson went to Jablonski with it.

# And what was with Boris Birshstein, a Russian organized crime figure who had fled to Israel and Oleg Deripaska, the "aluminum czar" of Russia whose organized crime contacts have kept him from entering the United States jumping in to help find Levinson? The FBI allowed Deripaska in for two visits in 2009 in exchange for his alleged help in locating Levinson but obviously nothing came of it.

I think there were more little agents/agendas in this than Levinson and Jablonski and US CIA.

Ishmael Zechariah , 03 February 2018 at 06:54 PM
DH,

As usual a wonderful analysis. I admire your insight, integrity and courage. I wish you could write more on why the Borg is so much against Trump, even though they have Kushner, Adelson and Co. running interference for them.

I and my friends consider it a given that most, if not all, anglo-zionist moves in the ME are to "provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area. " It is an open secret that the izzies are the reason why a few Russians, some Turks, lots of Kurds and countless Arabs are dying in the Syrian battlefields. Another open secret: the takfiris and kurds have been, and are, supported by the West. That the "masters of the universe™" have been conceiving and doubling down on such disastrous policies give lie to their much-vaunted "intelligence".

Be safe.

Ishmael Zechariah

Rd , 03 February 2018 at 07:31 PM
Babak Makkinejad said in reply to turcopolier...

The chief beneficiary of the Coup in Iran was England and not US.
..and US is the one who has been paying for it since 1979!!!

kooshy said in reply to Ishmael Zechariah... , 03 February 2018 at 08:21 PM
IZ
My guess is, that he is unpredictable, instantaneous and therefore can't be consistent and reliable, useful idiot needs to be predictable.
kooshy , 03 February 2018 at 08:43 PM
"There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. "

David as usual fascinating work connecting the dots. One question that comes to my mind is about the above point you are making. Is it your understanding or believe that these IC individuals on both side of Atlantic, are pursuing/forcing their (on behalf of the Borg) foreign policy agenda outside of their respected seating governments? If not, why is it that incoming administration cannot stop them? So far I can't see any strategic changes on US foreign policy toward ME or Russia, at tactical level yes but not fundamentally.

different clue , 03 February 2018 at 08:49 PM
Ishmael Zechariah,

( reply to comment 6),

I am not David Habakkuk, obviously. But I will venture a little opinion anyway. It is not enough that the Borgists get their policy preferences. If it were, then Kushner, Adelson and Co. running interference would be enough for them.

It is the very FACT of Trump even getting elected at ALL which outrages and terrifies them so much. They are used to seeing themselves as successful manipulators and engineers of every major event. They were engineering the whole electoral battlespace to get Clinton elected. The mere fact of Trump's victory in the teeth of their Electoral Engineering for Clinton is an act of defiance which they will not tolerate.

And if they fail to bring Trump down at all, they will stand revealed as being defeatable. And this is their big fear. That if people see they have defeated the Borg once on keeping Trump in the teeth of Borg's efforts, that people might try to defeat and smash down the Borg on another issue. And then another. And then another after that.

So that is why the Borg cares so much. They view the Trump election as an insurgency, and they view themselves as waging a counterinsurgency, which they dare not lose.

Jack , 03 February 2018 at 08:54 PM
David,

Thanks for your analysis. I always enjoy and learn from your posts. I wish you would post more often.

In my non-expert opinion, the Borg and the media were all in for Hillary. They were convinced that she was gonna win. To curry favor with the Empress who would be certainly crowned after the election they were eager and convinced that their lawlessness would become a badge for promotion and plum positions in her administration. In their conceit, they believed they could kill two birds with one stroke. They could vilify Putin and create the mass hysteria to checkmate him, while at the same time disparage and frame Trump as The Manchurian Candidate to seal their certain electoral victory.

Unfortunately for them voters in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin didn't buy their sales pitch despite the overwhelming media barrage from all corners. Even news publications who have only endorsed Republican candidates for President for over a century endorsed her.

Trump's election win caused panic among the political establishment, the media and the Deep State. They were already all-in. Their only choice was to double down and get Trump impeached. Now their conspiracy is beginning to unravel. They are doing everything possible to forestall their Armageddon. Of course they have many allies. This battle is gonna be interesting to watch. Trump is clearly getting many Congressional Republicans on side as his base of Deplorables remains solidly behind him. That is what's befuddling the Borg pundits.

SmoothieX12 -> kooshy... , 03 February 2018 at 09:51 PM
So far I can't see any strategic changes on US foreign policy toward ME or Russia, at tactical level yes but not fundamentally.

Because it is not possible to do on fundamental level yet, especially with US foreign policy establishment and so called consensus being built almost entirely, in ideological and, most importantly, cadres senses, on the ultimate exceptionalist agenda in which Russia is the ultimate obstacle and enemy. Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. This swamp (Borg, deep state, etc.) still thinks that it can use Cold War 1.0 Playbook and address very real and dangerous American economic issues. They are wrong, since most of them didn't read the playbook correctly to start with.

Babak Makkinejad -> SmoothieX12 ... , 03 February 2018 at 10:10 PM
They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress West's posture; say 2040.
kooshy said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 03 February 2018 at 10:24 PM
You are right CWII is very much desired and on agenda, but i am not sure of setup, the setup/board has been changed tremendously and IMO benefits the Asian side of Bosphorus, for one thing technology is no longer exclusive, and financial burden is heavier on atlantic side.
catherine said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 12:21 AM
''Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. ''

The locust keep trying and trying, destruction is their life's work.

'1977-1981: Nationalities Working Group Advocates Using Militant Islam Against Soviet Union'

In 1977 Zbigniew Brzezinski, as President Carter's National Security Adviser, forms the Nationalities Working Group (NWG) dedicated to the idea of weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions. The Islamic populations are regarded as prime targets. Richard Pipes, the father of Daniel Pipes, takes over the leadership of the NWG in 1981. Pipes predicts that with the right encouragement Soviet Muslims will "explode into genocidal fury" against Moscow. According to Richard Cottam, a former CIA official who advised the Carter administration at the time, after the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1978, Brzezinski favored a "de facto alliance with the forces of Islamic resurgence, and with the Republic of Iran." [Dreyfuss, 2005, pp. 241, 251 - 256]

'November 1978-February 1979: Some US Officials Want to Support Radical Muslims to Contain Soviet Union'

State Department official Henry Precht will later recall that Brzezinski had the idea "that Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets." [Scott, 2007, pp. 67] In November 1978, President Carter appointed George Ball head of a special White House Iran task force under Brzezinski. Ball recommends the US should drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the radical Islamist opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini. This idea is based on ideas from British Islamic expert Dr. Bernard Lewis, who advocates the balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. The chaos would spread in what he also calls an "arc of crisis" and ultimately destabilize the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union

aleksandar , 04 February 2018 at 04:41 AM
David,

About relation Steele-MI6, well, you never leave your IS. Or to put it in another way, you are never out of the scope of your past IS.

Fred said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 04 February 2018 at 08:40 AM
Babak,

"they got US to bail them out during WWII" And how would things have worked out had we not done so?

Fred , 04 February 2018 at 08:46 AM
David,

"There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time."

Yes, that is what appears to be just what is coming to light. I wonder just what position Trey Gowdy is going to have since he won't be running for re-election. The rage from the left is palpable. I'm sure the next outraged guy on the left will know how to shoot straighter than the ones who shot up Congressman Scalise or the concert goers at Mandalay Bay.

Anna said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 08:48 AM
"They are wrong, since most of them didn't read the playbook correctly to start with."
-- If they have read the important books at all... The ongoing scandal has been revealing a stunning incompetence of the "deciders." Too often they look comical, ridiculous, undignified. This is dangerous, considering their power.
turcopolier , 04 February 2018 at 08:54 AM
Anna

The powerful are often remarkably ignorant. pl

Babak Makkinejad -> Fred... , 04 February 2018 at 10:08 AM
England preferred NAZI Germany to USSR, this is well known. As to what would have happened, the outcome of the war, in my opinion, did not depend on US participation in the European Theatre. All of Europe would have become USSR satellite or joined USSR.
jonst said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 04 February 2018 at 11:53 AM
"unsentimental empirical people"? Absolutely disagree with you. Now the Iranians, they strike me as a singularity unsentimental people. Just general impressions, mind you.
Kooshy said in reply to catherine... , 04 February 2018 at 12:06 PM
Yes, US was the first country to proudly deliver Manpads to be used by "rebels" (Mojahadin later Taleban) against USSR in Afghanistan back in 80s. And, as per the architect of support for the rebels (Zbigniew Brzezinski) very proud of it with no regret. With that in mind, I don't see how western politicians, the western governments and their related proxy war planers, will be regretting, even sadden, once god forbid we see passenger planes with loved ones are shot down taking off or landing at various western airports and other places around the word. Just like how superficialy with crocodile tears in their eyes they acted in aftermath of the terrorist events in various western cities in this past 16 years. Gods knows what will happens to us if the opposite side start to supply his own proxies with lethal anti air weapons. "Proudly", I don't think anybody in west cares or will regret of such an escalation.
Phodges said in reply to turcopolier ... , 04 February 2018 at 12:23 PM
Sir

It seems we are being defeated by Cicero's enemy within. Zion is achieving what no one could hope to achieve by force of arms.

David Habakkuk -> catherine... , 04 February 2018 at 01:17 PM
catherine,

In response to comment 5.

I think it likely that what Meier produces is only a 'limited hangout', and am hoping that when the book arrives it will contain more pointers.

It is important to be clear that one is often dealing with people playing very complicated double games.

An interesting document is the 'Petition for Writ of Habeus Corpus' made on behalf of Khodorkovsky's close associate Alexander Konanykhin back in 1997,when the Immigration and Naturalization Service were – apparently at least – cooperating with Russian attempts to get hold of him. An extract:

'During the immigration hearing FBI SA Robert Levinson, an INS witness, confirmed that in 1992 Petitioner was kidnapped and afterwards pursued by assassins of the Solntsevskaya organized criminal group. This organized criminal group is reportedly the largest and the most influential organized criminal group in Russia, and operates internationally.'

(See http://defiancethebook.com/legal/habeas/petition.htm .)

Note the similarities between the 'StratCom' that Khonanykin and his associates were producing in the 'Nineties, and that which Simpson and his associates have been producing two decades later.

Another useful example is provided by a 2004 item in the 'New American Magazine', reproduced on Konanykhin's website:

'One of those who testified on behalf of Konanykhine was KGB defector Yuri Shvets, who declared: "I have a firsthand knowledge on similar operations conducted by the KGB." Konanykhine had brought trouble on himself, Shvets continued, when he "started bringing charges against people who were involved with him in setting up and running commercial enterprises. They were KGB people secretly smuggling from Russia hundreds of millions of dollars . This is [a] serious case, and I know that KGB ... desperately wants to win this case, and everybody who won't step to their side would face problems."'

(See http://konanykhin.com/news/the-konanykhine-case.html .)

So – 'first hand knowledge', from a Ukrainian nationalist – look at what the Chalupas have been doing, it seems not much has changed.

For a rather different perspective on what Konanykhin had actually been up to, from someone in whose honesty – if not always judgement – I have complete confidence, see the testimony of Karon von Gerhke-Thompson to the House Committee on Banking and Financial Services hearings on Russian Money Laundering. In this, she described how she had been approached by him in 1993:

'"Konanykhine alleged that Menatep Bank controlled $1.7bn [Ł1bn] in assets and investment portfolios of Russia's most prominent political and social elite," she recalled. She said he wanted to move the bank's assets off shore and asked her to help buy foreign passports for its "very, very special clients".

'In her testimony to the committee Ms Von Gerhke-Thompson said she informed the CIA of the deal, and the agency told her that it believed Mr Konanykhine and Mr Khodorkovsky "were engaged in an elaborate money laundering scheme to launder billions of dollars stolen by members of the KGB and high-level government officials".

(For a 'Guardian report, see https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/sep/23/julianborger ; for the actual testimony, see http://archives-financialservices.house.gov/banking/92299ger.pdf .)

Coming back to Steele's 'StratCom', in July 2008, an item appeared on the 'Newnight' programme of the BBC – which some of us think should by then have been rechristened the 'Berezovsky Broadcasting Corporation' – in which the introduction by the presenter, Jeremy Paxman, read as follows:

'Good evening. The New Russian President, Dmitri Medvedev, was all smiles and warm words when he met Gordon Brown today. He said he was keen to resolve all outstanding difficulties between the two countries. Yada yada yada. Gordon Brown smiled, but he must know what Newsnight can now reveal: that MI5 believes the Russian state was involved in the murder of Alexander Litvinenko by radioactive poisoning. They also believe that without their intervention another London-based Russian, Boris Berezovsky, would have been murdered. Our diplomatic editor, Mark Urban, has this exclusive report.'

(For the transcript presented in evidence to Owen's Inquiry, see http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/ ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/ )

When Urban repeated the claims on his blog, there was a positive eruption from someone using the name 'timelythoughts', about the activities of someone she referred to as 'Berezovsky's disinformation specialist' – when I came across this later, it was immediately clear to me that she was Karon von Gerhke, and he was Shvets.

(For the first part of the exchanges of comments, the second apparently having become unavailable, see http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2008/07/litvinenko_killing_had_state_i.html )

She then described a visit by Scaramella to Washington, details of which had already been unearthed by my Italian collaborator, David Loepp. Her claim to have e-mails from Shvets, from the time immediately prior to Litvinenko's death, directly contradicting the testimony he had given, fitted with other evidence I had already unearthed.

Later, we exchanged e-mails over a quite protracted period, and a large amount of material that came into my possession as a result was submitted by me to the Inquest team, with some of it being used in posts on the 'European Tribune' site.

What I never used publicly, because I could only partially corroborate it from the material she provided, was an extraordinary claim about Shvets:

'He was responsible for bringing in a Kremlin initiative that was walked Vice President Cheney's office on a US government quid pro quo with the Kremlin FSB SVR involving the arrest of Mikhail Khodorkovsky – a cease and desist on allegations of a politically motivated arrest of Khodorkovsky, violations of rules of law and calls from Russia's expulsion from the G 8 in exchange for favorable posturing of U.S. oil companies on Gazprom's Shtokman project and intelligence on weapon sales during the Yeltsin era to Iraq, Iran and Syria, all documented in reports I submitted to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and MI6.

'Berezovsky's DS could not be on both sides on that isle. His Kremlin FSB SVR sources had been vetted by the CIA and by the National Security Council. They proved to be as represented. As we would later learn, however, he was on Berezovsky's payroll at same time. The FSB SVR general he was coordinating the Kremlin initiative through was S. R. Subbotin, the same FSB SVR general who was investigating Berezovsky's money laundering operations in Switzerland during the same timeframe. His FSB SVR sources surrounding Putin were higher than any Lugovoy could have ever hoped to affiliate with.

'R. James Woolsey (former CIA DCI), Marshall Miller (former law partner of the late CIA DCI William Colby), who I coordinated the Kremlin initiative through that Berezovsky's DS had brought in were shocked to learn that he was affiliated with Berezovsky and Litvinenko. He was in Berezovsky's inner circle and engaged in vetting Russian business with Litvinenko. He operated Berezovsky's Ukraine website, editing and dubbing the now infamous Kuchma tapes throughout the lead up to the elections in the Ukraine. Berezovsky contributed $41 million to Viktor Yushchenko's campaign, which he used in an attempt to force Yushchenko to reunite with Julia Tymoschenko. It failed but would succeed later after Berezovsky orchestrated a public relations initiative through Alan Goldfarb in the U.S. on behalf of Tymoschenko.'

Having got to know Karon von Gerhke quite well, and also been able to corroborate a great deal of what she told me about many things, and discussed these matters with her, it is absolutely clear to me that she was neither fabricating nor fantasising. What later became apparent, both to her and to me, was that in the 'double game' that Shvets was playing, he had succeeded in fooling her as to the side for which he was working.

It seems likely however that the reason Shvets could do what he did was that quite precisely that many high-up people in the Kremlin and elsewhere were playing a 'double game.' In this, Karon von Gerhke's propensity for indiscretion – of which I, like others, was both beneficiary and victim – could be useful.

An exercise in 'positioning', which could be used to disguise the fact that Shvets was indeed 'Berezovsky's disinformation specialist', could be used to make it appear that 'intelligence on weapon sales during the Yeltsin era to Iraq, Iran and Syria' was actually credible.

This could have been used to try to rescue Cheney, Bush and their associates from the mess they had got into as a result of the failure of the invasion to provide any evidence whatsoever supporting the case which had been made for it. It could also have been used to provide the kind of materials justifying military action against Iran for which Levinson and Jablonski were looking, and for similar action against Syria.

Among reasons for bringing this up now is that we need to make sense of the paradox that Simpson – clearly in collusion with Steele – was using Mogilevich and the 'Solnsetskaya Bratva' both against Manafort and Trump and against Browder.

There are various possible explanations for this. I do not want to succumb to my instinctive prejudice that this may have been another piece of 'positioning', similar to what I think was being done with Shvets, but the hypothesis needs to be considered.

A more general point is that people in Washington and London need to 'wise up' to the kind of world with which they are dealing. This could be done quite enjoyably: reading some of Dashiell Hammett's fictions of the United States in the Prohibition era, or indeed buying DVDs of some of the classics of 'film noir', like 'Out of the Past' (in its British release, 'Build My Gallows High') might be a start.

Very much of the coverage of affairs in the post-Soviet space since 1991 has read rather as though a Dashiell Hammett story had been rewritten by someone specialising in sentimental children's, or romantic, fiction (although, come to think of it, that is really what Brigid O'Shaughnessy does in 'The Maltese Falcon.')

The testimony of Glenn Simpson seems a case in point. The sickly sentimentality of these people does, rather often, make one feel as though one wanted to throw up.

Thomas , 04 February 2018 at 01:24 PM
"They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress West's posture; say 2040.}

No, three years at tops and could be much sooner if dimes starting dropping by exposed people that don't want to take the fall for their superiors whom they always detested. One possible thing to get the process started sooner is if the recent Russian Intelligence delegation to DC that Smoothie mentions on another thread gave the current administration, as a diplomatic courtesy of course, the audio recordings of Madame Sectary Nuland's infamous mental meltdown at Kaliningrad. No telling what beans were spilled in her moment of panic, but I am willing to bet key names were dropped. Either way the time is coming.

SmoothieX12 -> Anna... , 04 February 2018 at 01:39 PM
- If they have read the important books at all... The ongoing scandal has been revealing a stunning incompetence of the "deciders." Too often they look comical, ridiculous, undignified. This is dangerous, considering their power.

My coming book is precisely about that. Especially, once American policy-makers who saw and experienced war (Ike, George Marshall's generation) departed things started to roll down hill with Reagan bringing on board a whole collection of neocons.

Unawareness is always dangerous, a complete blackout in relations between two nuclear powers is more than dangerous--it is completely reckless. Again, the way CW 1.0 is perceived in the current US "elites" it becomes extremely tempting to repeat it. Electing Hillary was another step in unleashing CW 2.0 by people who have no understanding of what they were doing.

Obama started crushing US-Russian relations before any campaigns were launched and before Trump was even seriously considered a GOP nominee, let alone a real contender. New confrontation hinged on HRC being elected. In fact, she was one of the major driving forces behind a serious of geopolitical anti-Russian moves. Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in HRC campaign long before any Steele's Dossier. This was a program.

james said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 04 February 2018 at 03:01 PM
there seems to be no shortage of money for these blatant propaganda exercises..
Babak Makkinejad -> SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 04:14 PM
I think the failure of Deciders is nothing new - Fath Ali Shah attacking Russia, or the abject failure of the Deciders in 1914. Europe is still not where she was in 1890.
begob , 04 February 2018 at 05:20 PM
I read the post and responses early on, so forgive me if this point has been addressed in the meantime. If the memo information on non-disclosure of material evidence to the warrant issuing court is accurate, as soon as that information came to the attention of the authorities (clearly some time ago) there was a duty on them (including the judge(s) who issued the warrants) to have the matter brought back before the court toot sweet. If that had happened it would surely be in the public domain, so on the assumption the prosecutors and maybe even the judge didn't see the need to review the matter, even purely on a contempt/ethics basis, the memo information only seems convincing if the FISA system is a total sham. I really doubt that.
kooshy said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 06:20 PM
IMO, the bigger problem for American not shying away from wars, or being silent about them , is when your home, your mom and dad' home, the town you grew up in, are immune and away from the war.

The security and safety of the two oceans, encourages or at least, in an all volunteer military makes it a secondary problem for regular people, to worry about. As I remember that wasn't the case at the end of VN war when i first landed here. At that time even though the war was on the other side of the planet and away from homeland, still people, especially young ones in colleges were paying more attention to the cost of war.

spy killer , 04 February 2018 at 06:55 PM
Diana West has uncovered some interesting "Red Threads" (6 part article at dianawest-dot-net) on all the Fusion GPS folks. Seems ole Russian speaking Nellie Ohr got herself a ham radio license recently. Wonder why she would suddenly need one of those? They are all Marxists with potential connections back to Russia.
English Outsider -> Fatima Manoubia... , 05 February 2018 at 07:23 AM
Been there. I am also a latecomer to SST. You have to read the back numbers. How? My IT expertise dates from the dawn of the internet and was lamentable then but I find Wayback sometimes allows easier searches than the SST search engine. A straight search on google also allows searches with more than one term. This link -

https://twitter.com/pat_lang

- gets you to a chronological list and for recent material is sometimes quicker than fiddling around with search engines. "Categories" on the RH side is useful but then you don't get some very informative comments that cross-refer.

If those sadly elementary procedures fail resort to the nearest infant. There's a blur of fingers on the keyboard and what you want then usually appears. Never ask them how they did it. They get so fed up when you ask them to explain it again.

"Who is David Habakkuk?" That's a quantum computer sited, from internal evidence you pick up from time to time, somewhere in the Greater London area. Cross references like you wouldn't believe and over several fields, so maybe he's two quantum computers.

The "Borg"?. Try Wittgenstein. Likely a prog but you can't be choosy these days. Early on in "Philosophical Investigations" (hope I get this right) he discusses the problem of how you can view as an entity something that has ill-defined or overlapping boundaries. The "Borg" is that "you know it when you see it" sort of thing. A great merit of this site is that the owner and many of the contributors know it from inside.

In general you may regard your new found site as a microcosm of the great battle that is raging in the West. It's a battle between the (probably apocryphal but adequately stated) Roveian view of reality that regards truth as an adjunct to or as a by-product of ideology and Realpolitik and the objective view of reality as something that is damned difficult to get at, and sometimes impossible, but that has a truth in it somewhere that is independent of the views and convictions of the observer. It's a battle that's never going to be won but unless it tilts back closer to common sense it can certainly be lost and the West with it.

jonst said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 05 February 2018 at 08:11 AM
Clearly the Labor Party in the UK preferred the USSR to Nazi Germany. (cepting that short interlude where the Soviets signed the Agreement with Hitler, and the Left Organized Leadership all across Europe, for the most part, lined up with Hitler). But for the most part, Labor was Left.
Elements (the ones that won out in the end) of the Conservative Party loathed both Hitler and Stalin. An element of the Conservative Party was sympathetic, but only up to a certain point, with the Nazis. This ended in 1939, sept.

So I don't think it fair, or accurate, to say 'England prefered the Nazis....and even if it not those things, it certainly not "well known", except to the people who have used the false premise to butter their wounds from supporting Stalin in his Pact with Hitler. Or are inclined to bash the British in general.

Babak Makkinejad -> jonst... , 05 February 2018 at 08:29 AM
All right, perhaps I should have said "The English Government". Google "Litvinov", you may discover how the English Government pushed Stalin to make a deal with Hitler to buy USSR time.
Sid Finster said in reply to Jack... , 05 February 2018 at 10:26 AM
Witness the infamous State Department protest memo calling for more war on Syria.

The State Department employees that signed that memo were sure that HRC would win and that their diligent work in pushing the Deep State agenda would sure be rewarded.

Since entering office, Trump appears to have taken the line that if he gives the Deep State everything it demands, he will be allowed to remain in office, even if he is not allowed to remain in power.

Sid Finster said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 05 February 2018 at 10:31 AM
Explain Marshall Miller's role in this, please. He is someone I know quite well. I also know one of the Chalupas.
begob said in reply to jonst... , 05 February 2018 at 10:56 AM
jonst That's broadly accurate, but specifically Attlee brought the motion of no confidence in Chamberlain, which the conservative appeasers won but which led to Churchill's opportunity. Attlee was essential in cabinet to Churchill's resistance after the retreat of the BEF.
turcopolier , 05 February 2018 at 11:18 AM
FM
What are you doing here? You said you dislike the military. Are you really in the Spanish Basque country? Bilbao maybe? break - David Habakkuk is a private scholar of the Litvinenko murder and Soviet/Russian politics and intelligence affairs. His surname comes from Wales where in the 18th (?) Century the ancestral village were all "chapel" and changed their surnames to Old Testament names. His father was master of one of the Cambridge colleges and David is himself a graduate of Cambridge. pl
Babak Makkinejad -> Fatima Manoubia... , 05 February 2018 at 11:19 AM
Yes, I am Iranian. All "Babak"s are Iranians - except some obscure ones that are Rus - Babakov.
Anna , 05 February 2018 at 02:07 PM
The hard, blinding truth: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/02/05/will-conspiracy-trump-american-democracy-go-unpunished/
"In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousand fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations." – Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Thomas said in reply to turcopolier ... , 05 February 2018 at 02:08 PM
Colonel,

This troll showed up recently at b's place doing the same accusations. There is group that is running sacred and pulling out all the stops in "info ops" side of the spectrum. The damn fools don't or, most probably, won't get thru their thick heads and even thicker hearts that it is a failed strategy that turns bystanders into their opponents.

Richardstevenhack , 05 February 2018 at 02:36 PM
Here for your edification is the definitive analysis of the GOP memo by Alexander Mercouris over at The Duran.

And it is a masterpriece - and quite long, possibly his longest analysis of anything so far. He buries the counterarguments being passed around by the Democratic opposition and the anti-Trump media.

Mercouris writes on legal affairs alongside his foreign policy stuff and he writes with a lawyer's precision. And in this article he points out that the GOP memo is writter as a legal document - probably by Trey Gowdy - with additional political insertions by Nunes. So it should properly be referred to as the "GOP memo" or the "Gowdy memo", not the Nunes memo."

Why this is important is that the GOP memo is basically written as a defense lawyer would in contesting a case -- this case being the FISA warrant application. Which means its orientation is proving failure to disclose relevant and material information to the FISA court and in some cases rising to the point of contempt of court.

Seriously, read this! The whole thing!

Rampant abuse and possible contempt of Court: what you need to know about the GOP memo
http://theduran.com/rampant-abuse-contempt-court-analysis-gop-memorandum/

blue peacock , 05 February 2018 at 03:25 PM
Sen Grassley releases memo heavily redacted by DOJ/FBI.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-05/grassley-graham-blast-fbi-censoring-memo-calling-criminal-probe-trump-dossier

"Seeking transparency and cooperation should not be this challenging," Grassley said in a statement after posting a heavily redacted version of the criminal referral that he and GOP Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina sent to the Justice Department last month. " The government should not be blotting out information that it admits isn't secret. "

I suppose DOJ/FBI believe that by obstructing, stalling and obfuscating they can buy time and that the Republicans in Congress will get tired of the games and go home. This seems like a pretty straightforward memo, highlighting the discrepancy between Steele's court filings and the FBI's version of Steele's discussions with them. Grassley is pointing out that either Steele or the FBI is lying.

What is interesting is the difference in process and ability between the House & Senate. The House can release their memos on its own, even if not declassified by the Executive, whereas the Senate requires the Executive to declassify it's memos that are based on classified documents.

turcopolier , 05 February 2018 at 04:38 PM
FM

We have not had a self declared communist on SST before although LeaNder in her youth may have come close to that exalted status. You might want to read the wiki on me and the CV I have posted on the blog to avoid tedious accusations of this or that. I am thought by some to have some knowledge of the ME so please do not try to lecture me about how much you love the Arabs. I speak their language and have lived with them for a long time. There are people who write to SST who are pro-Trump and some who are anti-Trump. I seek a mixture of views so long as personal insult and invective are eschewed. Personally, I do not belong to a political party and would describe myself as an original intent, strict constructionist.

Trump is the constitutionally and legally elected president of the United States. Your descriptors with regard to him are, in my opinion, only plausible if seen from the point of view of various kinds of leftist including Marxist-Leninists like you. You sound very smug and self-satisfied but we will see if you can have an open mind at all. pl

Kooshy said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 05 February 2018 at 04:46 PM
Found him, Ali Babacan XVPM, XFM and M of finance. Yes god forbid, if he is a decendent of Ardisher Babakan and another claimant to Iranian throne, which CIA and Soros can jump on.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Babacan MBA from Northeestern
blue peacock , 05 February 2018 at 04:55 PM
...would describe myself as an original intent, strict constructionist.

Aye. Aye. Sir!

+1

That is why some of us believe the Patriot Act and FISA are both unpatriotic and unconstitutional. SCOTUS disagrees with the few of us.

Babak Makkinejad -> Fatima Manoubia... , 05 February 2018 at 05:03 PM
I do not believe Trump is a misogynists - he stated publicly that he likes beautiful women. I also do not think he is a racist. I think he is the first US leader in many decades who has been willing to publicly talk about US problems. For most other US politicians - they largely live in "the best of all possible worlds".
English Outsider , 05 February 2018 at 06:31 PM
Colonel - sincere apologies if my comment above disrupted the discussion on a fascinating article.

David Habakkuk - I should say that "Quantum Computer" referred solely to the ability to gather and collate great amounts of material. It's an ability I admire. On Steele, you are among other things setting out something that is unfamiliar to me though not to most others here, I imagine, and that is the milieu in which he is or was working as a UK Intelligence operative. That you have also done in previous articles; it doesn't seem to be a particularly savoury milieu. As far as Steele's US activities are concerned, from you I'm not getting the picture of a lone operative, all ties with MI6 neatly severed, working solo in the States on some chance assignment in 2016. I'm getting the picture of someone still very much in the swim and selected because of that.

The only problem with that second picture is the dossier, or the 30% or so of it - what Comey, I think it was, described as "salacious and unverified". Surely that's got to be amateur night. Not something that a practised professional working with other professionals would put his hand to. Does that not support the picture of an ex-operative who's gone off the rails and is fumbling around unsupervised?

The Steele affair touched a nerve. One is always I suppose aware that IC professionals are getting up to all sorts and it doesn't seem improbable that "all sorts" includes political stuff and smear campaigns. But it's not heaps of corpses in Syria or farm boys being sent to certain death in the Ukraine. And even within the UK Intelligence Community and their contractors or whatever they're called, compared with what our IC people have done in the ME or compared with what one fears Hamish de Bretton Gordon might have got himself involved in, Christopher Steele's just a choirboy. Nevertheless there's something deeply repellent about what he did. Whatever your view of Trump there he was, newly elected, obviously wanting to make a go of it, and already faced with difficulties. Then some chancer throws "Golden Showers" in his face and makes his position, not maybe for the insiders but for the general public, that bit more untenable.

So from a UK perspective the question of whether Steele was acting in concert with others in the UK becomes important. If he was truly working solo then that from a UK point of view is regrettable but one of those things. In that case MI6 would just have to tighten up its controls on what ex-operatives get up to, put out the appropriate disclaimers, and that's the end of it as far as the UK is concerned. But if Golden Showers and the rest of it was a "Welcome Mr President" from UK IC professionals as a group then those professionals should be hung drawn and quartered together with whoever set them on.

I've read your article several times now and apart from the fact that much of what you pull together isn't material I'm up on, it doesn't seem to me that you're definitely coming to one conclusion or the other. There are many more facts to come out so perhaps this question is premature, but do you think Steele was acting in concert with others in the UK or was he, at least as far as the UK is concerned, working solo?

kooshy , 05 February 2018 at 07:49 PM
Most Iranian females Named Fatima/ Fatimah after prophet' daughter, call themselves Fati, and if they are of aristocrat type, they are called Bibi Fati Khanam, which is honorable lady Fati and if they are westernized they become Fay or Fifi.
turcopolier , 05 February 2018 at 07:59 PM
EO

Much of your commentary seems directed to David Habakkuk and PT rather than I. I don't think the FBI would have started to pay him until he left UK service. pl

English Outsider , 06 February 2018 at 05:10 AM
Colonel - Further apologies - I should have submitted comment 79 as two items.

Yes, the question about Steele was in response to DH's article. The UK side of the affair is I suppose only a small part of the question you and your Committee are examining but it's a dubious part however one looks at it. Although it's early days yet I was hoping DH, with his encyclopaedic knowledge of the UK intelligence scene, might feel able to cast more light on that UK side.

English Outsider -> Cortes... , 06 February 2018 at 05:53 AM
Cortes - " ... where, exactly, do you expect the great public to look beyond the initial scabrously defamatory storytelling about the "golden showers"? "

I don't think one can expect the public, at least in the UK, to look very far beyond the initial scandal. The investigations and enquiries presently under way in the US are complex and are taking place in a different system. This member of the UK public wouldn't be able to give you a coherent account of those enquiries and I doubt many of my fellows could.

So we have to take on trust, most of us, what we're told. As far as I can tell the underlying theme from the BBC and the media is generally that Trump is subverting the American Justice system in order to ensure his own misdemeanours aren't investigated.

Some of us take that as gospel. Others of us assume that the politicians and the media are untrustworthy and ignore them. I doubt many of us go into much more detail than that. Therefore the original story will stick in our minds.

But for some in the UK there are questions in there as well. How come the UK got mixed up in all this? How much did the UK get mixed up in it?

David Habakkuk -> Sid Finster... , 06 February 2018 at 06:19 AM
Sid Finster,

In response to comment 53.

When I belatedly started looking at the Litvinenko mystery, as a result of a strange email provoked by comments of mine on SST which arrived in my inbox in March 2007 from someone who turned out to be a key protagonist, it was rather obvious that improvised and chaotic 'StratCom' operations had been put into place on both the Russian and British sides to cover up what had happened.

A particular interesting feature of those on the British side – in which we now know Christopher Steele must have played a leading role – were the bizarre gyrations those responsible were going through trying to explain away the extraordinary fact that when he had broken the story of his poisoning, Litvinenko had pointed the finger of suspicion at his Italian associate Mario Scaramella.

When I started delving, I came across some very interesting pieces on Scaramella and related matters posted on the 'European Tribune' website by a Rome-based blogger using the name 'de Gondi' in the period after the story broke.

His actual name is David Loepp, by profession he is an artisan jeweller specialising in ancient and traditional goldsmith techniques, and I already knew and respected his work from his contributions to the transnational internet investigation into the Niger uranium forgeries – an earlier MI6 clusterf**ck.

So in May 2008 I posted a longish piece on that site, setting out the problems with the evidence about the Litvinenko case as I saw them, in the hope of reactivating his interest. This paid off in spades, when he linked to, and translated a key extract from, the request from Italian prosecutors to use wiretaps of conversations with Senator Paolo Guzzanti in connection with their prosecution of Scaramella for 'aggravated calumny.'

The request, which up to not so long ago was freely available on the website of the Italian Senate, was denied, but the extensive summaries of the transcripts provided a lot of material.

(This initial post by me, and later posts by me on that site, are at http://www.eurotrib.com/user/uid:1857/diary. Three posts David Loepp and I produced jointly in December 2012, which have a lot on Scaramella and Shvets, are on his page there, at http://www.eurotrib.com/user/de%20Gondi/diary .)

The extract from the wiretap request which David Loepp posted, which like Litvinenko's letter containing the claims he and Yuri Shvets had concocted about Putin using Mogilevich to attempt to supply Al Qaeda with a 'mini nuclear bomb' is dated 1 December 2005, contains key pointers to the conspiracy. It concludes:

'A passage on Simon Moghilevic and an agreement between the camorra to search for nuclear weapons lost during the Cold War to be consigned to Bin Laden, a revelation made by the Israeli. According to Scaramella the circle closes: camorra, Moghilevic- Russian mafia- services- nuclear bombs in Naples.'

Subsequent conversations make clear that Scaramella left on 6 December 2005 for Washington, on a trip where he was to meet Shvets. The summary of a report on this to Guzzanti reads:

'12) conversation that took place on number [omissis] on December 18, 2005, at 9:41:51 n. 1426, containing explicit references to the authenticity of the declarations of Alexander Litvinenko acquired by Scaramella, to the trustworthiness of the affirmations made by Scaramella in his reports to the commission and to the meetings Scaramella had with Talik after having denounced them [presumably Talik and his alleged accomplices]. (They can talk with HEIMS thanks to the help of MILLER. SHVEZ says that he had been a companion of CARLOS at the academy; SHVEZ has already made declarations and is willing to continue collaboration. Guzzanti warns that a document in Russian arrived in commission in which the name of SCARAMELLA appears several times, these [sic] say that directives to the contrary had been given to Litvinenko. Scaramella says that he went to the meeting with TALIK in the company of two treasury [police] and a cop, Talik spoke of a person from the Ukrainian GRU who would be willing to talk and a strange Chechen ring in Naples. Assassination attempt against the pope, CASAROLI was a Soviet agent.)'

The summary of a later conversation also refers to 'MILLER':

'conversation that took place on number [omissis] on January 13, 2006, at 11:22:11 n. 2287, containing references to Scaramella's sources in relation to facts referred in the Commission, the means by which they were obtained by Scaramella from declarations made abroad, the role of Litvinenko, also on the occasion of declarations made by third parties and the credibility of the news and theses given by Scaramella to the commission (Scaramella reads a text in English on the relation between the KGB and PRODI. Guzzanti asks if its credibility can be confirmed and if the taped declarations can be backed up; Scaramella answers that there were two testimonies, Lou Palumbo and Alexander (Litvinenko), and that the registration made in London at the beginning of the assignment [Scaramella's?] had been authenticated by a certain BAKER of the FBI. As he translates the text from English, Scaramella notes that the person testifying does not say he knows Prodi but only that he thinks that Prodi ...; all those who worked for the person testifying in Scandinavia said that Prodi was "theirs." The affair in Rimini, Bielli is preparing the battle in Rimini. Meetings with MILLER for the three things that are needed. Polemic about Pollari over the pressure exerted on Gordievski.)'

In the exchanges on my May 2008 post, I mentioned and linked to some extraordinary comments on a crucial article by Edward Jay Epstein, in which Karon von Gerhke claimed that his sceptical account fitted with what her contacts in the British investigation had told her. When that July I came across her equally extraordinary claims in response to the BBC's Mark Urban piece of stenography – which Steele may also have had a hand in organising – I found she was referring to precisely that visit to Washington by Scaramella which had been described in the wiretap request.

As you can perhaps imagine, the fact that 'Miller' had featured in the conversations with Guzzanti both as a key contact, who could introduce Scaramella to Aldrich Ames (which is who 'Heims' clearly is), and with whom there had been meetings about 'the three things that are needed' made me inclined to take seriously what Karon von Gerhke said about his role.

In December 2008, I put up another post on 'European Tribune', putting together the material from David Loepp and that from Karon von Gerhke – but not discussing the references to 'Miller.' As I had hoped, this led to her getting in touch.

Among the material with which she supplied me, which I in turn supplied to the Solicitor to the Inquest, were covers of faxes to John Rizzo, then Acting General Counsel of the CIA. From a fax dated 23 October 2005.

'John: See attached email to Chuck Patrizia. Berezovsky alleges he is in possession of a copy of a classified file given to the CIA by Russia's FSB, which he further alleges the CIA disseminated to British, French, Italian and Israeli intelligence agencies implicating him in business associations with the Mafia and to ties with terrorist organizations. Yuri Shvets was authorised/directed by Berezovsky to raise the issue with Bud McFarlane scheduled for Thursday. McFarlane is unaware the issue will be raised with him.'

From a fax dated 7 November 2005:

'John: I am attaching an email exchange between Yuri Shvets and me re: 1) article he published on his Ukraine website on alleged sale of nuclear choke to Iran, which I reproached him on as having been planted by Berezovsky and 2 the alleged FSB/CIA document file that Berezovsky obtained from Scaramella, which Yuri acknowledges in his e-mail to me. Like extracting wisdom teeth to get him to put anything on paper, especially in an e-mail! [NAME REDACTED BY ME – DH] is the source McFarlane referred Yuri to re: Berezovsky's visa issue. She proposed meeting Berezovsky in London. Alleged it would take a year to clear up USG issues and even then could not guarantee him a visa. She too has access to USG intelligence on Berezovsky. Open book.'

From a fax dated 5 December 2005:

'John. From Mario Scaramella to Yuri Shvets to my ears, the DOJ has authorised Mario Scaramella to interview Aldrich Ames with regard to members of the Italian Intelligence Service agent recruited by Ames for the KGB. Scaramella, as you may recall, is who gave Boris Berezovsky's aide, a former FSB Colonel [LITVINENKO – DH], that alleged document number to the FSB file that the CIA disseminated on Berezovsky – a file that Bud McFarlane's "Madam Visa" [NAME REDACTED BY ME – DH] is alleged is totting off to London for a meeting with Berezovsky, who has agreed to retain her re: his visa issue. Quid pro quo's with Berezovsky and Scaramella on the CIA agent currently facing kidnapping charges for the rendition of the Muslim cleric? Scott Armstrong has a most telling file on Scaramella. Not a single redeeming quality.'

In the course of very extensive exchanges with Karon von Gerhke subsequently, we had some rather acute disagreements. It was unfortunate that her filing was a shambles – a crucial hard disk failed without a backup, and the 'hard copies' appeared to be in a chaotic state.

However, the only occasion when I can recall having reason to believe that was deliberately lying to me was when David Loepp unearthed a cache of documentation including the full Italian text of the letter from Litvinenko containing the 'StratCom' designed to suggest that Putin had attempted to supply a 'mini nuclear bomb' to Al Qaeda. Having been asked to keep this between ourselves for the time being, Karon insisted on immediately sending it to her contacts in Counter Terrorism Command, and then produced bogus justifications.

Time and again, moreover, I found that I could confirm statements that she made – see for example the two posts I put up on the legal battles following the death in February 2008 of Berezovsky's long-term partner Arkadi 'Badri' Patarkatsishvili in June and July 2009, which were based on careful corroboration of what she told me.

(I should also say that I acquired the greatest respect for her courage.)

And while Owen and his team suppressed all the evidence from her, and almost all of that from David Loepp, which I had I provided to them, the dossier about Berezovsky is described in a statement made by Litvinenko in Tel Aviv in April 2006, presented in evidence in the Inquiry.

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

Other evidence, moreover, strongly inclines me to believe that there were overtures for a 'quid pro quo', purporting to come from Putin, but that this was a ruse orchestrated by Berezovsky.

Part of the purpose of this would almost certainly have been to supply probably bogus 'evidence' about arms sales in the Yeltsin years to Iraq, Iran and Syria. Moreover, I think there was an article on the second 'Fifth Element' site run by Shvets about the supposed sale of a nuclear 'choke' – whatever that is – to Iran.

The likelihood of the involvement of elements in the FBI in these shenanigans seems to quite high, given what has already emerged about the activities of Levinson. Also relevant may be the fact that the 'declaration' which was part of the attempt to frame Romano Prodi was authenticated, in London, by 'a certain BAKER of the FBI.')

Babak Makkinejad -> David Habakkuk ... , 06 February 2018 at 09:40 AM
Thank you David Habakkuk. Truly sordid and deplorable. WWIII to be initiated on basis of lies.
Jack , 06 February 2018 at 12:06 PM
David

You may already know this but Steele was a no show in a UK court for a deposition on the libel suit.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/05/christopher-steele-is-no-show-in-london-court-in-civil-case-over-dossier.amp.html

Babak Makkinejad -> David Habakkuk ... , 06 February 2018 at 01:18 PM
I know something of spectroscopy.

The critical issue here is the provenance of the samples and not the sophistication of the techniques used in the analysis itself or its instrumentation.

The paragraph that you have quoted:

"To figure out signatures based on various synthetic routes and conditions, Chipuk says that the synthetic chemists on his team will make the same chemical threat agent as many as 2,000 times in an ..." reeks of intellectual intimidation - trying to brow-beat any skeptic by the size of one's instrument - as it were."

And then there is a little matter of confidence level in any of the analysis - such things are normally based on prior statistics - which did not and could not exist in this situation.

LeaNder , 07 February 2018 at 09:16 AM
David, it's no doubt interesting to watch how attention on Victor Ivanov in another deficient inquiry on the British Isles, was managed in that inquiry. If I may, since he pops up again in the Steele dossier. You take what's available? Is that all there is to know?

I know its hard to communicate basics if you are deeply into matters. Usually people prefer to opt out. It's getting way too complicated for them to follow. You made me understand this experience. But isn't this (fake) intelligence continuity "via" Yuri Svets what connects your, no harm meant I do understand your obsession with the case, with what we deal with now in the Steele Dossier? Again, one of the most central figures is Ivanov.

Of course later reports in the Steele Dossier go hand in hand with a larger public relations campaign. Creating reality? Irony alert: as informer/source I would by then know what the other side wants to hear.

By the way, babbling mode, I found your Tom Mangold transcription. It felt it wasn't there on the link you gave. I used the date, and other search terms. Maybe I am wrong. Haven't looked at what the judge ruled out of the collection. Yes, cozy session/setting.

According to Google search there are no other links then your articles here:
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613093555/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/files/2015/04/HMG000513wb.pdf ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/files/2015/04/HMG000513wb.pdf">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613093555/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/files/2015/04/HMG000513wb.pdf

**********

JAN RICHARD BĆRUG
The Collapsing Wall. Hybrid Journalism.
A Comparative Study of Newspapers and
Magazines in Eight Countries in Europe

Available online. Haven't read it yet, but journalism as hidden public relations transfer belt would be one of my minor obsessions. ...

Babak Makkinejad -> turcopolier ... , 07 February 2018 at 11:23 AM
I wonder too; their command of the English idiom is very au currant - noticed "opt in/opt out" reference? Too American.

They clearly are not native speakers of German.

LeaNder said in reply to kooshy... , 07 February 2018 at 12:30 PM
why California, Kooshy #18? California among other things left this verbal trace, since I once upon time thought a luggage storage in SF might be free/available now: this is my home, lady.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kish_Island#Economy

Tourists from many -- but not all -- foreign nations wishing to enter Kish Free Zone from legal ports are not required to obtain any visa prior to travel. For those travelers, upon-arrival travel permits are stamped valid for 14 days by Kish officials.

Who are the not all? Can we assume Britain is not one of those?

The German link is different. How about the Iranian?

or isn't this the Kish we are talking about?

LeaNder said in reply to LeaNder... , 07 February 2018 at 01:14 PM
correcting myself #94:

another Ivanov. I struggled with names (...) in Russian crime novels, admittedly. But that's long ago from times Russian crime and Russian money flows and rogues getting hold of its nuclear material surfaced more often in Europe. 90s

I see Sergei seems to share my interest in the literary genre:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Ivanov#Personal

[Mar 10, 2018] There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this. ..."
"... Important support for these strategies was provided by the 'StratCom' network centred around the late Boris Berezovsky, which clearly collaborated closely with MI6. As was apparent from the witness list at Sir Robert Owen's Inquiry into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, which produced a report based essentially on a recycling of claims made by the network's members, key players were on your side of the Atlantic – notably Alex Goldfarb, Yuri Shvets, and Yuri Felshtinsky. ..."
"... it seems to me the usa and uk have been tied at the hip for a very long time... when it comes to foreign affairs policy and wars - the one will always vouch for the other without hesitation... it tells me the relationship is really deep.. ..."
"... I and my friends consider it a given that most, if not all, anglo-zionist moves in the ME are to "provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area. " It is an open secret that the izzies are the reason why a few Russians, some Turks, lots of Kurds and countless Arabs are dying in the Syrian battlefields. Another open secret: the takfiris and kurds have been, and are, supported by the West. That the "masters of the universe™" have been conceiving and doubling down on such disastrous policies give lie to their much-vaunted "intelligence". ..."
"... It is the very FACT of Trump even getting elected at ALL which outrages and terrifies them so much. They are used to seeing themselves as successful manipulators and engineers of every major event. They were engineering the whole electoral battlespace to get Clinton elected. The mere fact of Trump's victory in the teeth of their Electoral Engineering for Clinton is an act of defiance which they will not tolerate. ..."
"... And if they fail to bring Trump down at all, they will stand revealed as being defeatable. And this is their big fear. That if people see they have defeated the Borg once on keeping Trump in the teeth of Borg's efforts, that people might try to defeat and smash down the Borg on another issue. And then another. And then another after that. ..."
"... Because it is not possible to do on fundamental level yet, especially with US foreign policy establishment and so called consensus being built almost entirely, in ideological and, most importantly, cadres senses, on the ultimate exceptionalist agenda in which Russia is the ultimate obstacle and enemy. Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. ..."
"... They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress West's posture; say 2040 ..."
"... In 1977 Zbigniew Brzezinski, as President Carter's National Security Adviser, forms the Nationalities Working Group (NWG) dedicated to the idea of weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions. ..."
"... State Department official Henry Precht will later recall that Brzezinski had the idea "that Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets." [Scott, 2007, pp. 67] In November 1978, President Carter appointed George Ball head of a special White House Iran task force under Brzezinski. Ball recommends the US should drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the radical Islamist opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini. This idea is based on ideas from British Islamic expert Dr. Bernard Lewis, who advocates the balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. The chaos would spread in what he also calls an "arc of crisis" and ultimately destabilize the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union ..."
"... About relation Steele-MI6, well, you never leave your IS. Or to put it in another way, you are never out of the scope of your past IS ..."
"... No, three years at tops and could be much sooner if dimes starting dropping by exposed people that don't want to take the fall for their superiors whom they always detested. One possible thing to get the process started sooner is if the recent Russian Intelligence delegation to DC that Smoothie mentions on another thread gave the current administration, as a diplomatic courtesy of course, the audio recordings of Madame Sectary Nuland's infamous mental meltdown at Kaliningrad. No telling what beans were spilled in her moment of panic, but I am willing to bet key names were dropped. Either way the time is coming. ..."
"... Especially, once American policy-makers who saw and experienced war (Ike, George Marshall's generation) departed things started to roll down hill with Reagan bringing on board a whole collection of neocons. ..."
"... Unawareness is always dangerous, a complete blackout in relations between two nuclear powers is more than dangerous--it is completely reckless. Again, the way CW 1.0 is perceived in the current US "elites" it becomes extremely tempting to repeat it. Electing Hillary was another step in unleashing CW 2.0 by people who have no understanding of what they were doing. ..."
"... Obama started crushing US-Russian relations before any campaigns were launched and before Trump was even seriously considered a GOP nominee, let alone a real contender. New confrontation hinged on HRC being elected. In fact, she was one of the major driving forces behind a serious of geopolitical anti-Russian moves. Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in HRC campaign long before any Steele's Dossier. This was a program. ..."
"... IMO, the bigger problem for American not shying away from wars, or being silent about them , is when your home, your mom and dad' home, the town you grew up in, are immune and away from the war. ..."
"... The security and safety of the two oceans, encourages or at least, in an all volunteer military makes it a secondary problem for regular people, to worry about. ..."
"... A particular interesting feature of those on the British side – in which we now know Christopher Steele must have played a leading role – were the bizarre gyrations those responsible were going through trying to explain away the extraordinary fact that when he had broken the story of his poisoning, Litvinenko had pointed the finger of suspicion at his Italian associate Mario Scaramella. ..."
"... Of course later reports in the Steele Dossier go hand in hand with a larger public relations campaign. Creating reality? Irony alert: as informer/source I would by then know what the other side wants to hear. ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Steele, Shvets, Levinson, Litvinenko and the 'Billion Dollar Don.'

In the light of the suggestion in the Nunes memo that Steele was 'a longtime FBI source' it seems worth sketching out some background, which may also make it easier to see some possible reasons why he 'was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.'

There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this.

This agenda has involved hopes for 'régime change' in Russia, whether as the result of an oligarchic coup, a popular revolt, or some combination of both. Also central have been hopes for a further 'rollback' of Russia influence in the post-Soviet space, both in areas now independent, such as Ukraine, and also ones still part of the Russian Federation, notably Chechnya.

And, crucially, it involved exploiting the retreat of Russian power from the Middle East for 'régime change' projects which it was hoped would provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area.

Important support for these strategies was provided by the 'StratCom' network centred around the late Boris Berezovsky, which clearly collaborated closely with MI6. As was apparent from the witness list at Sir Robert Owen's Inquiry into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, which produced a report based essentially on a recycling of claims made by the network's members, key players were on your side of the Atlantic – notably Alex Goldfarb, Yuri Shvets, and Yuri Felshtinsky.

The question of what links these had, or did not have, with elements in U.S. intelligence agencies is thus a critical one.

In making some sense of it, the fact that one key figure we know to have been involved in this network was missing at the Inquiry – the former FBI agent Robert Levinson, who disappeared on the Iranian island of Kish in March 2007 – is important.

Unfortunately, I only recently came across a book on Levinson published in 2016 by the 'New York Times' journalist Barry Meier, which is now hopefully winging its way across the Atlantic. From the accounts of the book I have seen, such as one by Jeff Stein in 'Newsweek', it seems likely that its author did not look at any of the evidence presented at Owen's Inquiry.

(See http://www.newsweek.com/2016/05/20/what-really-happened-robert-levinson-cia-iran-454803.html .)

Had he done so, Meier might have discovered that his subject had been, as it were, 'top supporting actor' in the first fumbling attempt by Christopher Steele et al to produce a plausible-sounding scenario as to the background to Litvinenko's death. A Radio 4 programme on 16 December 2006, presented by the veteran BBC presenter Tom Mangold, had been wholly devoted to an account by Shvets, backed up by Levinson. Both of these were, like Litvinenko, supposed to be impartial 'due diligence' operatives.

The notion that any of them might have connections with Western intelligence agencies was not considered. The – publicly available – evidence of the involvement of Shvets, whose surname means 'cobbler' or 'shoemaker' in Ukrainian, in the processing of the tapes of conversations involving the former Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma supposedly recorded by Major Melnychenko, which had played a crucial role in the 2004-5 'Orange Revolution' was not mentioned.

Still less was it mentioned that claims that the – very dangerous – late Soviet Kolchuga system, which made it possible the kind of identification of incoming aircraft which radar had traditionally done, without sending out signals which made the destruction of the facilities doing it possible, had been sold by Kuchma to Iraq had proven spurious.

What Shvets had done had been to take – genuine – audio in which Kuchma had discussed a possible sale, and edit it to suggest a sale had been completed.

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

As a former television current affairs producer, I can talk to you of the marvels which London audio editors can produce, very happily. Unfortunately, the days when not all BBC and 'Guardian' journalists were corrupt stenographers for corrupt and incompetent spooks, as Mangold and his like have been for Steele and Levinson, are long gone.

All this has become particularly relevant now, given that Simpson has placed the notorious Jewish Ukrainian mobster Semyon Mogilevich and the 'Solntsevskaya Bratva' mafia group centre stage in his accounts not simply of Trump and Manafort, but also of William Browder. For most of the 'Nineties, Levinson had been a, if not the, lead FBI investigator on Mogilevich.

(On this, see the 1999 BBC 'Panorama' programme 'The Billion Dollar Don', also presented by Tom Mangold, which has extensive interviews both with Mogilevich and Levinson at

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/events/panorama/transcripts/transcript_06_12_99.txt )

In the months leading up to Levinson's disappearance, a key priority for the advocates of the strategy I have described was to prevent it being totally derailed by the patently catastrophic outcome of the Iraqi adventure.

Compounding the problem was the fact that this had created the 'Shia Crescent', which in turn exacerbated the potential 'existential threat' to Israel posed by the steadily increasing range, accuracy and numbers of missiles available to Hizbullah in hardened positions north of the Litani.

These, obviously, provided both a 'deterrent' for that organisation and Iran, and also a radical threat to the whole notion that somehow Israel could ever be a 'safe haven' for Jews, against the supposedly ineradicable disposition of the 'goyim' sooner or later to, as it were, revert to type. The dreadful thought that Israel might not be necessary had to be resisted at all costs.

What followed from the disaster unleashed by the – Anglo-American – 'own goal' in toppling Saddam was, ironically, a need on the part of key players to 'double down.' Above all, it was necessary for many of those involved to counter suggestions from the Russian side that going around smashing up 'régimes' that one might not like sometimes blew up in one's face.

Even more threatening were suggestions from the Russian side that it was foolish to think one could use jihadists without risking 'blowback', and that there might be an overwhelming common interest in combating Islamic extremism.

Another priority was to counter the pushback in the American 'intelligence community' and military, which was to produce the drastic downgrading of the threat posed by the Iranian nuclear programme in the November 2007 NIE and then the resignation of Admiral William Fallon as head of 'Centcom' the following March.

So in 2005 Shvets came to London. He and his audio editors had another 'bite at the cherry' of the Melnychenko tapes, so that material that did in fact establish that both the SBU and FSB had collaborated with Mogilevich could be employed to make it seem that Putin had a close personal relationship with the mobster.

All kinds of supposedly respectable American and British academics, like Professors Karen Dawisha and Robert Service, have fallen for this, hook, line and sinker. It gives a new meaning to the term 'useful idiot.'

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

In a letter sent in December that year by Litvinenko to the 'Mitrokhin Commission', for which his Italian associate Mario Scaramella was a consultant, this was used in an attempt to demonstrate that Mogilevich, while acting as an agent for the FSB and under Putin's personal 'krysha', had attempted to supply a 'mini atomic bomb' – aka 'suitcase nuke' – to Al Qaeda. Shortly after the letter was sent Scaramella departed on a trip to Washington, where he appears to have got access to Aldrich Ames.

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

At precisely this time, as Meier explains, Levinson was in the process of being recruited by a lady called Anne Jablonski who then worked as a CIA analyst. It appears that she was furious at the failure of the operational side at the Agency to produce evidence which would have established that Iran did indeed have an ongoing nuclear programme, and she may well have hoped would implicate Russia in supplying materials.

There are grounds to suspect that one of the things that Berezovsky and Shvets were doing was fabricating such 'evidence.' Whether Levinson was involved in such attempts, or genuinely looking for evidence he was convinced must be there, I cannot say. It appears that he fell for a rather elementary entrapment operation – which could well have been organised with the collaboration of Russian intelligence. (People do get fed up with being framed, particular if 'régime change' is the goal.)

It also seems likely that, quite possibly in a different but related entrapment operation, related to propaganda wars in which claims and counter claims about a polonium-beryllium 'initiator' as the crucial missing part which might make a 'suitcase nuke' functional, Litvinenko accidentally ingested fatal quantities of polonium. A good deal of evidence suggests that this may have been at Berezovsky's offices on the night before he was supposedly assassinated.

It was, obviously, important for Steele et al to ensure that nobody looked at the 'StratCom' wars about 'suitcase nukes.' Here, a figure who has played a key role in such wars in relation to Syria plays an interesting minor one in the story.

Some time following the destruction of the case for an immediate war by the November 2007 NIE, a chemical weapons specialist called Dan Kaszeta, who had worked in the White House for twelve years, moved to London.

In 2011, in addition to founding a consultancy called 'Strongpoint Security', he began a writing career with articles in 'CBRNe World.' Later, he would become the conduit through which the notorious 'hexamine hypothesis', supposedly clinching proof that the Syrian government was responsible for the sarin incidents at Khan Sheikhoun, Ghouta, Saraqeb, and Khan Al-Asal, was disseminated.

Having been forced by the threat of a case being opened against them under human rights law into resuming the inquest into Litvinenko's death, in August 2012 the British authorities appointed Sir Robert Owen to conduct it. (There are many honest judges in Britain, but obviously, if one sets out to find someone who will 'cover up' for the incompetence and corruption of people like Steele, as Lord Hutton did before him, you can find them.)

That same month, a piece appeared in 'CBRNe World' with the the strapline: 'Dan Kaszeta looks into the ultimate press story: Suitcase nukes', and the main title 'Carry on or checked bags?' Among the grounds he gives for playing down the scare:

'Some components rely on materials with shelf life. Tritium, for example, is used in many nuclear weapon designs and has a twelve year half-life. Polonium, used in neutron initiators in some earlier types of weapon designs, has a very short halflife. US documents state that every nuclear weapon has "limited life components" that require periodic replacement (do an internet search for nuclear limited life components and you can read for weeks).'

(For this and other articles by Kaszeta, as also his bio, see http://strongpointsecurity.co.uk ')

What Kaszeta has actually described are the reasons why polonium is a perfect 'StratCom' instrument. In terms of scientific plausibility, in fact there were no 'suitcase nukes', and in any case 'initiators' using polonium had been abandoned very early on, in favour of ones which lasted longer.

For 'StratCom' scenarios, as experience with the 'hexamine hypothesis' has proved, scientific plausibility can be irrelevant.

What polonium provides is a means of suggesting that Al Qaeda have in fact got hold of a nuclear device which they could easily smuggle into, say, Rome or New York, or indeed Moscow, but there is a crucial missing component which the FSB is trying to provide to them. By the same token, of course, that missing component could be depicted as one that Berezovsky and Litvinenko are conspiring to suppl to the Chechen insurgents.

In addition, the sole known source of global supply is the Avangard plant at Sarov in Russia, so the substance is naturally suited for 'StratCom' directed against that country, which its intelligence services would – rather naturally – try to make 'boomerang.'

According to Glenn Simpson, Christopher Steele is a 'boy scout.' This seems to me quite wrong – but, even if it were true, would you want to unleash a 'boy scout' into these kinds of intrigue?

As it is not clear why Kaszeta introduced his – accurate but irrelevant – point about polonium into an article which was concerned with scientific plausibility, one is left with an interesting question as to whether he cut his teeth on 'StratCom' attempting to ensure that nobody seriously interested in CBRN science followed an obvious lead.

In relation to the question of whether current FBI personnel had been involved in the kind of 'StratCom' exercises, I have been describing, a critical issue is the involvement of Shvets and Levinson in the Alexander Khonanykhine affair back in the 'Nineties, and the latter's use of claims about the Solntsevskaya to prevent the key figure's extradition. But that is a matter for another day.

A corollary of all this is that we cannot – yet at least – be absolutely confident that the account in the Nunes memo, according to which Steele was suspended and then dismissed as an FBI source for what the organisation is reported to define as 'the most serious of violations' – the unauthorised disclosure of a relationship with the organisation – is necessarily wholly accurate.

Who did and did not authorise which disclosures to the media, up to and including the extraordinary decision to have the full dossier, including claims about Aleksej Gubarev and the Alfa oligarchs, in flagrant disregard of the obvious risks of defamation suits, and who may be trying to pass the buck to others, remains I think less than totally clear.

Posted at 03:42 PM in As The Borg Turns , Habakkuk , Russia , Russiagate | Permalink

james , 03 February 2018 at 04:33 PM

thanks david... fascinating overview and conjecture..

it seems to me the usa and uk have been tied at the hip for a very long time... when it comes to foreign affairs policy and wars - the one will always vouch for the other without hesitation... it tells me the relationship is really deep..

JohnB , 03 February 2018 at 05:17 PM
David,

Thank you very. As ever you have illuminated a few more things for me. Kaszeta's involvement is interesting. He is someone I am in the middle of researching in relation to Higgins and Bellingcat.

turcopolier , 03 February 2018 at 06:02 PM
james

It is the closest of all international intelligence relationships. It started in WW2. Before that the Brits were though of as a potential enemy. pl

Babak Makkinejad -> turcopolier ... , 03 February 2018 at 06:10 PM
I think the English are using you, they are unsentimental empirical people that only do these that benefit the Number One.
The chief beneficiary of the Coup in Iran was England and not US.
catherine , 03 February 2018 at 06:22 PM
That Newsweek piece about Levinson is very superficial to me.

Re: Levinson

# Who suggested to who 'first' the Iran caper...Anne Jablonski to Levinson or Levinson to Jablonski? It was reported earlier by Meier that in December 2005, when Levinson was pitching Jablonski on projects he might take on when his CIA contract was approved he sent her a lengthy memo about Dawud's potential as an informant.

# Ira Silverman, the Iran hating NBC guy, pitched a Iraq caper to Levinson with Dawud Salahuddin, as his Iran contact and Levinson went to Jablonski with it.

# And what was with Boris Birshstein, a Russian organized crime figure who had fled to Israel and Oleg Deripaska, the "aluminum czar" of Russia whose organized crime contacts have kept him from entering the United States jumping in to help find Levinson? The FBI allowed Deripaska in for two visits in 2009 in exchange for his alleged help in locating Levinson but obviously nothing came of it.

I think there were more little agents/agendas in this than Levinson and Jablonski and US CIA.

Ishmael Zechariah , 03 February 2018 at 06:54 PM
DH,

As usual a wonderful analysis. I admire your insight, integrity and courage. I wish you could write more on why the Borg is so much against Trump, even though they have Kushner, Adelson and Co. running interference for them.

I and my friends consider it a given that most, if not all, anglo-zionist moves in the ME are to "provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area. " It is an open secret that the izzies are the reason why a few Russians, some Turks, lots of Kurds and countless Arabs are dying in the Syrian battlefields. Another open secret: the takfiris and kurds have been, and are, supported by the West. That the "masters of the universe™" have been conceiving and doubling down on such disastrous policies give lie to their much-vaunted "intelligence".

Be safe.

Ishmael Zechariah

Rd , 03 February 2018 at 07:31 PM
Babak Makkinejad said in reply to turcopolier...

The chief beneficiary of the Coup in Iran was England and not US.
..and US is the one who has been paying for it since 1979!!!

kooshy said in reply to Ishmael Zechariah... , 03 February 2018 at 08:21 PM
IZ
My guess is, that he is unpredictable, instantaneous and therefore can't be consistent and reliable, useful idiot needs to be predictable.
kooshy , 03 February 2018 at 08:43 PM
"There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. "

David as usual fascinating work connecting the dots. One question that comes to my mind is about the above point you are making. Is it your understanding or believe that these IC individuals on both side of Atlantic, are pursuing/forcing their (on behalf of the Borg) foreign policy agenda outside of their respected seating governments? If not, why is it that incoming administration cannot stop them? So far I can't see any strategic changes on US foreign policy toward ME or Russia, at tactical level yes but not fundamentally.

different clue , 03 February 2018 at 08:49 PM
Ishmael Zechariah,

( reply to comment 6),

I am not David Habakkuk, obviously. But I will venture a little opinion anyway. It is not enough that the Borgists get their policy preferences. If it were, then Kushner, Adelson and Co. running interference would be enough for them.

It is the very FACT of Trump even getting elected at ALL which outrages and terrifies them so much. They are used to seeing themselves as successful manipulators and engineers of every major event. They were engineering the whole electoral battlespace to get Clinton elected. The mere fact of Trump's victory in the teeth of their Electoral Engineering for Clinton is an act of defiance which they will not tolerate.

And if they fail to bring Trump down at all, they will stand revealed as being defeatable. And this is their big fear. That if people see they have defeated the Borg once on keeping Trump in the teeth of Borg's efforts, that people might try to defeat and smash down the Borg on another issue. And then another. And then another after that.

So that is why the Borg cares so much. They view the Trump election as an insurgency, and they view themselves as waging a counterinsurgency, which they dare not lose.

Jack , 03 February 2018 at 08:54 PM
David,

Thanks for your analysis. I always enjoy and learn from your posts. I wish you would post more often.

In my non-expert opinion, the Borg and the media were all in for Hillary. They were convinced that she was gonna win. To curry favor with the Empress who would be certainly crowned after the election they were eager and convinced that their lawlessness would become a badge for promotion and plum positions in her administration. In their conceit, they believed they could kill two birds with one stroke. They could vilify Putin and create the mass hysteria to checkmate him, while at the same time disparage and frame Trump as The Manchurian Candidate to seal their certain electoral victory.

Unfortunately for them voters in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin didn't buy their sales pitch despite the overwhelming media barrage from all corners. Even news publications who have only endorsed Republican candidates for President for over a century endorsed her.

Trump's election win caused panic among the political establishment, the media and the Deep State. They were already all-in. Their only choice was to double down and get Trump impeached. Now their conspiracy is beginning to unravel. They are doing everything possible to forestall their Armageddon. Of course they have many allies. This battle is gonna be interesting to watch. Trump is clearly getting many Congressional Republicans on side as his base of Deplorables remains solidly behind him. That is what's befuddling the Borg pundits.

SmoothieX12 -> kooshy... , 03 February 2018 at 09:51 PM
So far I can't see any strategic changes on US foreign policy toward ME or Russia, at tactical level yes but not fundamentally.

Because it is not possible to do on fundamental level yet, especially with US foreign policy establishment and so called consensus being built almost entirely, in ideological and, most importantly, cadres senses, on the ultimate exceptionalist agenda in which Russia is the ultimate obstacle and enemy. Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. This swamp (Borg, deep state, etc.) still thinks that it can use Cold War 1.0 Playbook and address very real and dangerous American economic issues. They are wrong, since most of them didn't read the playbook correctly to start with.

Babak Makkinejad -> SmoothieX12 ... , 03 February 2018 at 10:10 PM
They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress West's posture; say 2040.
kooshy said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 03 February 2018 at 10:24 PM
You are right CWII is very much desired and on agenda, but i am not sure of setup, the setup/board has been changed tremendously and IMO benefits the Asian side of Bosphorus, for one thing technology is no longer exclusive, and financial burden is heavier on atlantic side.
catherine said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 12:21 AM
''Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. ''

The locust keep trying and trying, destruction is their life's work.

'1977-1981: Nationalities Working Group Advocates Using Militant Islam Against Soviet Union'

In 1977 Zbigniew Brzezinski, as President Carter's National Security Adviser, forms the Nationalities Working Group (NWG) dedicated to the idea of weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions. The Islamic populations are regarded as prime targets. Richard Pipes, the father of Daniel Pipes, takes over the leadership of the NWG in 1981. Pipes predicts that with the right encouragement Soviet Muslims will "explode into genocidal fury" against Moscow. According to Richard Cottam, a former CIA official who advised the Carter administration at the time, after the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1978, Brzezinski favored a "de facto alliance with the forces of Islamic resurgence, and with the Republic of Iran." [Dreyfuss, 2005, pp. 241, 251 - 256]

'November 1978-February 1979: Some US Officials Want to Support Radical Muslims to Contain Soviet Union'

State Department official Henry Precht will later recall that Brzezinski had the idea "that Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets." [Scott, 2007, pp. 67] In November 1978, President Carter appointed George Ball head of a special White House Iran task force under Brzezinski. Ball recommends the US should drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the radical Islamist opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini. This idea is based on ideas from British Islamic expert Dr. Bernard Lewis, who advocates the balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. The chaos would spread in what he also calls an "arc of crisis" and ultimately destabilize the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union

aleksandar , 04 February 2018 at 04:41 AM
David,

About relation Steele-MI6, well, you never leave your IS. Or to put it in another way, you are never out of the scope of your past IS.

Fred said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 04 February 2018 at 08:40 AM
Babak,

"they got US to bail them out during WWII" And how would things have worked out had we not done so?

Fred , 04 February 2018 at 08:46 AM
David,

"There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time."

Yes, that is what appears to be just what is coming to light. I wonder just what position Trey Gowdy is going to have since he won't be running for re-election. The rage from the left is palpable. I'm sure the next outraged guy on the left will know how to shoot straighter than the ones who shot up Congressman Scalise or the concert goers at Mandalay Bay.

Anna said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 08:48 AM
"They are wrong, since most of them didn't read the playbook correctly to start with."
-- If they have read the important books at all... The ongoing scandal has been revealing a stunning incompetence of the "deciders." Too often they look comical, ridiculous, undignified. This is dangerous, considering their power.
turcopolier , 04 February 2018 at 08:54 AM
Anna

The powerful are often remarkably ignorant. pl

Babak Makkinejad -> Fred... , 04 February 2018 at 10:08 AM
England preferred NAZI Germany to USSR, this is well known. As to what would have happened, the outcome of the war, in my opinion, did not depend on US participation in the European Theatre. All of Europe would have become USSR satellite or joined USSR.
jonst said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 04 February 2018 at 11:53 AM
"unsentimental empirical people"? Absolutely disagree with you. Now the Iranians, they strike me as a singularity unsentimental people. Just general impressions, mind you.
Kooshy said in reply to catherine... , 04 February 2018 at 12:06 PM
Yes, US was the first country to proudly deliver Manpads to be used by "rebels" (Mojahadin later Taleban) against USSR in Afghanistan back in 80s. And, as per the architect of support for the rebels (Zbigniew Brzezinski) very proud of it with no regret. With that in mind, I don't see how western politicians, the western governments and their related proxy war planers, will be regretting, even sadden, once god forbid we see passenger planes with loved ones are shot down taking off or landing at various western airports and other places around the word. Just like how superficialy with crocodile tears in their eyes they acted in aftermath of the terrorist events in various western cities in this past 16 years. Gods knows what will happens to us if the opposite side start to supply his own proxies with lethal anti air weapons. "Proudly", I don't think anybody in west cares or will regret of such an escalation.
Phodges said in reply to turcopolier ... , 04 February 2018 at 12:23 PM
Sir

It seems we are being defeated by Cicero's enemy within. Zion is achieving what no one could hope to achieve by force of arms.

David Habakkuk -> catherine... , 04 February 2018 at 01:17 PM
catherine,

In response to comment 5.

I think it likely that what Meier produces is only a 'limited hangout', and am hoping that when the book arrives it will contain more pointers.

It is important to be clear that one is often dealing with people playing very complicated double games.

An interesting document is the 'Petition for Writ of Habeus Corpus' made on behalf of Khodorkovsky's close associate Alexander Konanykhin back in 1997,when the Immigration and Naturalization Service were – apparently at least – cooperating with Russian attempts to get hold of him. An extract:

'During the immigration hearing FBI SA Robert Levinson, an INS witness, confirmed that in 1992 Petitioner was kidnapped and afterwards pursued by assassins of the Solntsevskaya organized criminal group. This organized criminal group is reportedly the largest and the most influential organized criminal group in Russia, and operates internationally.'

(See http://defiancethebook.com/legal/habeas/petition.htm .)

Note the similarities between the 'StratCom' that Khonanykin and his associates were producing in the 'Nineties, and that which Simpson and his associates have been producing two decades later.

Another useful example is provided by a 2004 item in the 'New American Magazine', reproduced on Konanykhin's website:

'One of those who testified on behalf of Konanykhine was KGB defector Yuri Shvets, who declared: "I have a firsthand knowledge on similar operations conducted by the KGB." Konanykhine had brought trouble on himself, Shvets continued, when he "started bringing charges against people who were involved with him in setting up and running commercial enterprises. They were KGB people secretly smuggling from Russia hundreds of millions of dollars . This is [a] serious case, and I know that KGB ... desperately wants to win this case, and everybody who won't step to their side would face problems."'

(See http://konanykhin.com/news/the-konanykhine-case.html .)

So – 'first hand knowledge', from a Ukrainian nationalist – look at what the Chalupas have been doing, it seems not much has changed.

For a rather different perspective on what Konanykhin had actually been up to, from someone in whose honesty – if not always judgement – I have complete confidence, see the testimony of Karon von Gerhke-Thompson to the House Committee on Banking and Financial Services hearings on Russian Money Laundering. In this, she described how she had been approached by him in 1993:

'"Konanykhine alleged that Menatep Bank controlled $1.7bn [Ł1bn] in assets and investment portfolios of Russia's most prominent political and social elite," she recalled. She said he wanted to move the bank's assets off shore and asked her to help buy foreign passports for its "very, very special clients".

'In her testimony to the committee Ms Von Gerhke-Thompson said she informed the CIA of the deal, and the agency told her that it believed Mr Konanykhine and Mr Khodorkovsky "were engaged in an elaborate money laundering scheme to launder billions of dollars stolen by members of the KGB and high-level government officials".

(For a 'Guardian report, see https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/sep/23/julianborger ; for the actual testimony, see http://archives-financialservices.house.gov/banking/92299ger.pdf .)

Coming back to Steele's 'StratCom', in July 2008, an item appeared on the 'Newnight' programme of the BBC – which some of us think should by then have been rechristened the 'Berezovsky Broadcasting Corporation' – in which the introduction by the presenter, Jeremy Paxman, read as follows:

'Good evening. The New Russian President, Dmitri Medvedev, was all smiles and warm words when he met Gordon Brown today. He said he was keen to resolve all outstanding difficulties between the two countries. Yada yada yada. Gordon Brown smiled, but he must know what Newsnight can now reveal: that MI5 believes the Russian state was involved in the murder of Alexander Litvinenko by radioactive poisoning. They also believe that without their intervention another London-based Russian, Boris Berezovsky, would have been murdered. Our diplomatic editor, Mark Urban, has this exclusive report.'

(For the transcript presented in evidence to Owen's Inquiry, see http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/ ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/ )

When Urban repeated the claims on his blog, there was a positive eruption from someone using the name 'timelythoughts', about the activities of someone she referred to as 'Berezovsky's disinformation specialist' – when I came across this later, it was immediately clear to me that she was Karon von Gerhke, and he was Shvets.

(For the first part of the exchanges of comments, the second apparently having become unavailable, see http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2008/07/litvinenko_killing_had_state_i.html )

She then described a visit by Scaramella to Washington, details of which had already been unearthed by my Italian collaborator, David Loepp. Her claim to have e-mails from Shvets, from the time immediately prior to Litvinenko's death, directly contradicting the testimony he had given, fitted with other evidence I had already unearthed.

Later, we exchanged e-mails over a quite protracted period, and a large amount of material that came into my possession as a result was submitted by me to the Inquest team, with some of it being used in posts on the 'European Tribune' site.

What I never used publicly, because I could only partially corroborate it from the material she provided, was an extraordinary claim about Shvets:

'He was responsible for bringing in a Kremlin initiative that was walked Vice President Cheney's office on a US government quid pro quo with the Kremlin FSB SVR involving the arrest of Mikhail Khodorkovsky – a cease and desist on allegations of a politically motivated arrest of Khodorkovsky, violations of rules of law and calls from Russia's expulsion from the G 8 in exchange for favorable posturing of U.S. oil companies on Gazprom's Shtokman project and intelligence on weapon sales during the Yeltsin era to Iraq, Iran and Syria, all documented in reports I submitted to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and MI6.

'Berezovsky's DS could not be on both sides on that isle. His Kremlin FSB SVR sources had been vetted by the CIA and by the National Security Council. They proved to be as represented. As we would later learn, however, he was on Berezovsky's payroll at same time. The FSB SVR general he was coordinating the Kremlin initiative through was S. R. Subbotin, the same FSB SVR general who was investigating Berezovsky's money laundering operations in Switzerland during the same timeframe. His FSB SVR sources surrounding Putin were higher than any Lugovoy could have ever hoped to affiliate with.

'R. James Woolsey (former CIA DCI), Marshall Miller (former law partner of the late CIA DCI William Colby), who I coordinated the Kremlin initiative through that Berezovsky's DS had brought in were shocked to learn that he was affiliated with Berezovsky and Litvinenko. He was in Berezovsky's inner circle and engaged in vetting Russian business with Litvinenko. He operated Berezovsky's Ukraine website, editing and dubbing the now infamous Kuchma tapes throughout the lead up to the elections in the Ukraine. Berezovsky contributed $41 million to Viktor Yushchenko's campaign, which he used in an attempt to force Yushchenko to reunite with Julia Tymoschenko. It failed but would succeed later after Berezovsky orchestrated a public relations initiative through Alan Goldfarb in the U.S. on behalf of Tymoschenko.'

Having got to know Karon von Gerhke quite well, and also been able to corroborate a great deal of what she told me about many things, and discussed these matters with her, it is absolutely clear to me that she was neither fabricating nor fantasising. What later became apparent, both to her and to me, was that in the 'double game' that Shvets was playing, he had succeeded in fooling her as to the side for which he was working.

It seems likely however that the reason Shvets could do what he did was that quite precisely that many high-up people in the Kremlin and elsewhere were playing a 'double game.' In this, Karon von Gerhke's propensity for indiscretion – of which I, like others, was both beneficiary and victim – could be useful.

An exercise in 'positioning', which could be used to disguise the fact that Shvets was indeed 'Berezovsky's disinformation specialist', could be used to make it appear that 'intelligence on weapon sales during the Yeltsin era to Iraq, Iran and Syria' was actually credible.

This could have been used to try to rescue Cheney, Bush and their associates from the mess they had got into as a result of the failure of the invasion to provide any evidence whatsoever supporting the case which had been made for it. It could also have been used to provide the kind of materials justifying military action against Iran for which Levinson and Jablonski were looking, and for similar action against Syria.

Among reasons for bringing this up now is that we need to make sense of the paradox that Simpson – clearly in collusion with Steele – was using Mogilevich and the 'Solnsetskaya Bratva' both against Manafort and Trump and against Browder.

There are various possible explanations for this. I do not want to succumb to my instinctive prejudice that this may have been another piece of 'positioning', similar to what I think was being done with Shvets, but the hypothesis needs to be considered.

A more general point is that people in Washington and London need to 'wise up' to the kind of world with which they are dealing. This could be done quite enjoyably: reading some of Dashiell Hammett's fictions of the United States in the Prohibition era, or indeed buying DVDs of some of the classics of 'film noir', like 'Out of the Past' (in its British release, 'Build My Gallows High') might be a start.

Very much of the coverage of affairs in the post-Soviet space since 1991 has read rather as though a Dashiell Hammett story had been rewritten by someone specialising in sentimental children's, or romantic, fiction (although, come to think of it, that is really what Brigid O'Shaughnessy does in 'The Maltese Falcon.')

The testimony of Glenn Simpson seems a case in point. The sickly sentimentality of these people does, rather often, make one feel as though one wanted to throw up.

Thomas , 04 February 2018 at 01:24 PM
"They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress West's posture; say 2040.}

No, three years at tops and could be much sooner if dimes starting dropping by exposed people that don't want to take the fall for their superiors whom they always detested. One possible thing to get the process started sooner is if the recent Russian Intelligence delegation to DC that Smoothie mentions on another thread gave the current administration, as a diplomatic courtesy of course, the audio recordings of Madame Sectary Nuland's infamous mental meltdown at Kaliningrad. No telling what beans were spilled in her moment of panic, but I am willing to bet key names were dropped. Either way the time is coming.

SmoothieX12 -> Anna... , 04 February 2018 at 01:39 PM
- If they have read the important books at all... The ongoing scandal has been revealing a stunning incompetence of the "deciders." Too often they look comical, ridiculous, undignified. This is dangerous, considering their power.

My coming book is precisely about that. Especially, once American policy-makers who saw and experienced war (Ike, George Marshall's generation) departed things started to roll down hill with Reagan bringing on board a whole collection of neocons.

Unawareness is always dangerous, a complete blackout in relations between two nuclear powers is more than dangerous--it is completely reckless. Again, the way CW 1.0 is perceived in the current US "elites" it becomes extremely tempting to repeat it. Electing Hillary was another step in unleashing CW 2.0 by people who have no understanding of what they were doing.

Obama started crushing US-Russian relations before any campaigns were launched and before Trump was even seriously considered a GOP nominee, let alone a real contender. New confrontation hinged on HRC being elected. In fact, she was one of the major driving forces behind a serious of geopolitical anti-Russian moves. Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in HRC campaign long before any Steele's Dossier. This was a program.

james said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 04 February 2018 at 03:01 PM
there seems to be no shortage of money for these blatant propaganda exercises..
Babak Makkinejad -> SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 04:14 PM
I think the failure of Deciders is nothing new - Fath Ali Shah attacking Russia, or the abject failure of the Deciders in 1914. Europe is still not where she was in 1890.
begob , 04 February 2018 at 05:20 PM
I read the post and responses early on, so forgive me if this point has been addressed in the meantime. If the memo information on non-disclosure of material evidence to the warrant issuing court is accurate, as soon as that information came to the attention of the authorities (clearly some time ago) there was a duty on them (including the judge(s) who issued the warrants) to have the matter brought back before the court toot sweet. If that had happened it would surely be in the public domain, so on the assumption the prosecutors and maybe even the judge didn't see the need to review the matter, even purely on a contempt/ethics basis, the memo information only seems convincing if the FISA system is a total sham. I really doubt that.
kooshy said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 06:20 PM
IMO, the bigger problem for American not shying away from wars, or being silent about them , is when your home, your mom and dad' home, the town you grew up in, are immune and away from the war.

The security and safety of the two oceans, encourages or at least, in an all volunteer military makes it a secondary problem for regular people, to worry about. As I remember that wasn't the case at the end of VN war when i first landed here. At that time even though the war was on the other side of the planet and away from homeland, still people, especially young ones in colleges were paying more attention to the cost of war.

spy killer , 04 February 2018 at 06:55 PM
Diana West has uncovered some interesting "Red Threads" (6 part article at dianawest-dot-net) on all the Fusion GPS folks. Seems ole Russian speaking Nellie Ohr got herself a ham radio license recently. Wonder why she would suddenly need one of those? They are all Marxists with potential connections back to Russia.
English Outsider -> Fatima Manoubia... , 05 February 2018 at 07:23 AM
Been there. I am also a latecomer to SST. You have to read the back numbers. How? My IT expertise dates from the dawn of the internet and was lamentable then but I find Wayback sometimes allows easier searches than the SST search engine. A straight search on google also allows searches with more than one term. This link -

https://twitter.com/pat_lang

- gets you to a chronological list and for recent material is sometimes quicker than fiddling around with search engines. "Categories" on the RH side is useful but then you don't get some very informative comments that cross-refer.

If those sadly elementary procedures fail resort to the nearest infant. There's a blur of fingers on the keyboard and what you want then usually appears. Never ask them how they did it. They get so fed up when you ask them to explain it again.

"Who is David Habakkuk?" That's a quantum computer sited, from internal evidence you pick up from time to time, somewhere in the Greater London area. Cross references like you wouldn't believe and over several fields, so maybe he's two quantum computers.

The "Borg"?. Try Wittgenstein. Likely a prog but you can't be choosy these days. Early on in "Philosophical Investigations" (hope I get this right) he discusses the problem of how you can view as an entity something that has ill-defined or overlapping boundaries. The "Borg" is that "you know it when you see it" sort of thing. A great merit of this site is that the owner and many of the contributors know it from inside.

In general you may regard your new found site as a microcosm of the great battle that is raging in the West. It's a battle between the (probably apocryphal but adequately stated) Roveian view of reality that regards truth as an adjunct to or as a by-product of ideology and Realpolitik and the objective view of reality as something that is damned difficult to get at, and sometimes impossible, but that has a truth in it somewhere that is independent of the views and convictions of the observer. It's a battle that's never going to be won but unless it tilts back closer to common sense it can certainly be lost and the West with it.

jonst said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 05 February 2018 at 08:11 AM
Clearly the Labor Party in the UK preferred the USSR to Nazi Germany. (cepting that short interlude where the Soviets signed the Agreement with Hitler, and the Left Organized Leadership all across Europe, for the most part, lined up with Hitler). But for the most part, Labor was Left.
Elements (the ones that won out in the end) of the Conservative Party loathed both Hitler and Stalin. An element of the Conservative Party was sympathetic, but only up to a certain point, with the Nazis. This ended in 1939, sept.

So I don't think it fair, or accurate, to say 'England prefered the Nazis....and even if it not those things, it certainly not "well known", except to the people who have used the false premise to butter their wounds from supporting Stalin in his Pact with Hitler. Or are inclined to bash the British in general.

Babak Makkinejad -> jonst... , 05 February 2018 at 08:29 AM
All right, perhaps I should have said "The English Government". Google "Litvinov", you may discover how the English Government pushed Stalin to make a deal with Hitler to buy USSR time.
Sid Finster said in reply to Jack... , 05 February 2018 at 10:26 AM
Witness the infamous State Department protest memo calling for more war on Syria.

The State Department employees that signed that memo were sure that HRC would win and that their diligent work in pushing the Deep State agenda would sure be rewarded.

Since entering office, Trump appears to have taken the line that if he gives the Deep State everything it demands, he will be allowed to remain in office, even if he is not allowed to remain in power.

Sid Finster said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 05 February 2018 at 10:31 AM
Explain Marshall Miller's role in this, please. He is someone I know quite well. I also know one of the Chalupas.
begob said in reply to jonst... , 05 February 2018 at 10:56 AM
jonst That's broadly accurate, but specifically Attlee brought the motion of no confidence in Chamberlain, which the conservative appeasers won but which led to Churchill's opportunity. Attlee was essential in cabinet to Churchill's resistance after the retreat of the BEF.
turcopolier , 05 February 2018 at 11:18 AM
FM
What are you doing here? You said you dislike the military. Are you really in the Spanish Basque country? Bilbao maybe? break - David Habakkuk is a private scholar of the Litvinenko murder and Soviet/Russian politics and intelligence affairs. His surname comes from Wales where in the 18th (?) Century the ancestral village were all "chapel" and changed their surnames to Old Testament names. His father was master of one of the Cambridge colleges and David is himself a graduate of Cambridge. pl
Babak Makkinejad -> Fatima Manoubia... , 05 February 2018 at 11:19 AM
Yes, I am Iranian. All "Babak"s are Iranians - except some obscure ones that are Rus - Babakov.
Anna , 05 February 2018 at 02:07 PM
The hard, blinding truth: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/02/05/will-conspiracy-trump-american-democracy-go-unpunished/
"In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousand fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations." – Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Thomas said in reply to turcopolier ... , 05 February 2018 at 02:08 PM
Colonel,

This troll showed up recently at b's place doing the same accusations. There is group that is running sacred and pulling out all the stops in "info ops" side of the spectrum. The damn fools don't or, most probably, won't get thru their thick heads and even thicker hearts that it is a failed strategy that turns bystanders into their opponents.

Richardstevenhack , 05 February 2018 at 02:36 PM
Here for your edification is the definitive analysis of the GOP memo by Alexander Mercouris over at The Duran.

And it is a masterpriece - and quite long, possibly his longest analysis of anything so far. He buries the counterarguments being passed around by the Democratic opposition and the anti-Trump media.

Mercouris writes on legal affairs alongside his foreign policy stuff and he writes with a lawyer's precision. And in this article he points out that the GOP memo is writter as a legal document - probably by Trey Gowdy - with additional political insertions by Nunes. So it should properly be referred to as the "GOP memo" or the "Gowdy memo", not the Nunes memo."

Why this is important is that the GOP memo is basically written as a defense lawyer would in contesting a case -- this case being the FISA warrant application. Which means its orientation is proving failure to disclose relevant and material information to the FISA court and in some cases rising to the point of contempt of court.

Seriously, read this! The whole thing!

Rampant abuse and possible contempt of Court: what you need to know about the GOP memo
http://theduran.com/rampant-abuse-contempt-court-analysis-gop-memorandum/

blue peacock , 05 February 2018 at 03:25 PM
Sen Grassley releases memo heavily redacted by DOJ/FBI.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-05/grassley-graham-blast-fbi-censoring-memo-calling-criminal-probe-trump-dossier

"Seeking transparency and cooperation should not be this challenging," Grassley said in a statement after posting a heavily redacted version of the criminal referral that he and GOP Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina sent to the Justice Department last month. " The government should not be blotting out information that it admits isn't secret. "

I suppose DOJ/FBI believe that by obstructing, stalling and obfuscating they can buy time and that the Republicans in Congress will get tired of the games and go home. This seems like a pretty straightforward memo, highlighting the discrepancy between Steele's court filings and the FBI's version of Steele's discussions with them. Grassley is pointing out that either Steele or the FBI is lying.

What is interesting is the difference in process and ability between the House & Senate. The House can release their memos on its own, even if not declassified by the Executive, whereas the Senate requires the Executive to declassify it's memos that are based on classified documents.

turcopolier , 05 February 2018 at 04:38 PM
FM

We have not had a self declared communist on SST before although LeaNder in her youth may have come close to that exalted status. You might want to read the wiki on me and the CV I have posted on the blog to avoid tedious accusations of this or that. I am thought by some to have some knowledge of the ME so please do not try to lecture me about how much you love the Arabs. I speak their language and have lived with them for a long time. There are people who write to SST who are pro-Trump and some who are anti-Trump. I seek a mixture of views so long as personal insult and invective are eschewed. Personally, I do not belong to a political party and would describe myself as an original intent, strict constructionist.

Trump is the constitutionally and legally elected president of the United States. Your descriptors with regard to him are, in my opinion, only plausible if seen from the point of view of various kinds of leftist including Marxist-Leninists like you. You sound very smug and self-satisfied but we will see if you can have an open mind at all. pl

Kooshy said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 05 February 2018 at 04:46 PM
Found him, Ali Babacan XVPM, XFM and M of finance. Yes god forbid, if he is a decendent of Ardisher Babakan and another claimant to Iranian throne, which CIA and Soros can jump on.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Babacan MBA from Northeestern
blue peacock , 05 February 2018 at 04:55 PM
...would describe myself as an original intent, strict constructionist.

Aye. Aye. Sir!

+1

That is why some of us believe the Patriot Act and FISA are both unpatriotic and unconstitutional. SCOTUS disagrees with the few of us.

Babak Makkinejad -> Fatima Manoubia... , 05 February 2018 at 05:03 PM
I do not believe Trump is a misogynists - he stated publicly that he likes beautiful women. I also do not think he is a racist. I think he is the first US leader in many decades who has been willing to publicly talk about US problems. For most other US politicians - they largely live in "the best of all possible worlds".
English Outsider , 05 February 2018 at 06:31 PM
Colonel - sincere apologies if my comment above disrupted the discussion on a fascinating article.

David Habakkuk - I should say that "Quantum Computer" referred solely to the ability to gather and collate great amounts of material. It's an ability I admire. On Steele, you are among other things setting out something that is unfamiliar to me though not to most others here, I imagine, and that is the milieu in which he is or was working as a UK Intelligence operative. That you have also done in previous articles; it doesn't seem to be a particularly savoury milieu. As far as Steele's US activities are concerned, from you I'm not getting the picture of a lone operative, all ties with MI6 neatly severed, working solo in the States on some chance assignment in 2016. I'm getting the picture of someone still very much in the swim and selected because of that.

The only problem with that second picture is the dossier, or the 30% or so of it - what Comey, I think it was, described as "salacious and unverified". Surely that's got to be amateur night. Not something that a practised professional working with other professionals would put his hand to. Does that not support the picture of an ex-operative who's gone off the rails and is fumbling around unsupervised?

The Steele affair touched a nerve. One is always I suppose aware that IC professionals are getting up to all sorts and it doesn't seem improbable that "all sorts" includes political stuff and smear campaigns. But it's not heaps of corpses in Syria or farm boys being sent to certain death in the Ukraine. And even within the UK Intelligence Community and their contractors or whatever they're called, compared with what our IC people have done in the ME or compared with what one fears Hamish de Bretton Gordon might have got himself involved in, Christopher Steele's just a choirboy. Nevertheless there's something deeply repellent about what he did. Whatever your view of Trump there he was, newly elected, obviously wanting to make a go of it, and already faced with difficulties. Then some chancer throws "Golden Showers" in his face and makes his position, not maybe for the insiders but for the general public, that bit more untenable.

So from a UK perspective the question of whether Steele was acting in concert with others in the UK becomes important. If he was truly working solo then that from a UK point of view is regrettable but one of those things. In that case MI6 would just have to tighten up its controls on what ex-operatives get up to, put out the appropriate disclaimers, and that's the end of it as far as the UK is concerned. But if Golden Showers and the rest of it was a "Welcome Mr President" from UK IC professionals as a group then those professionals should be hung drawn and quartered together with whoever set them on.

I've read your article several times now and apart from the fact that much of what you pull together isn't material I'm up on, it doesn't seem to me that you're definitely coming to one conclusion or the other. There are many more facts to come out so perhaps this question is premature, but do you think Steele was acting in concert with others in the UK or was he, at least as far as the UK is concerned, working solo?

kooshy , 05 February 2018 at 07:49 PM
Most Iranian females Named Fatima/ Fatimah after prophet' daughter, call themselves Fati, and if they are of aristocrat type, they are called Bibi Fati Khanam, which is honorable lady Fati and if they are westernized they become Fay or Fifi.
turcopolier , 05 February 2018 at 07:59 PM
EO

Much of your commentary seems directed to David Habakkuk and PT rather than I. I don't think the FBI would have started to pay him until he left UK service. pl

English Outsider , 06 February 2018 at 05:10 AM
Colonel - Further apologies - I should have submitted comment 79 as two items.

Yes, the question about Steele was in response to DH's article. The UK side of the affair is I suppose only a small part of the question you and your Committee are examining but it's a dubious part however one looks at it. Although it's early days yet I was hoping DH, with his encyclopaedic knowledge of the UK intelligence scene, might feel able to cast more light on that UK side.

English Outsider -> Cortes... , 06 February 2018 at 05:53 AM
Cortes - " ... where, exactly, do you expect the great public to look beyond the initial scabrously defamatory storytelling about the "golden showers"? "

I don't think one can expect the public, at least in the UK, to look very far beyond the initial scandal. The investigations and enquiries presently under way in the US are complex and are taking place in a different system. This member of the UK public wouldn't be able to give you a coherent account of those enquiries and I doubt many of my fellows could.

So we have to take on trust, most of us, what we're told. As far as I can tell the underlying theme from the BBC and the media is generally that Trump is subverting the American Justice system in order to ensure his own misdemeanours aren't investigated.

Some of us take that as gospel. Others of us assume that the politicians and the media are untrustworthy and ignore them. I doubt many of us go into much more detail than that. Therefore the original story will stick in our minds.

But for some in the UK there are questions in there as well. How come the UK got mixed up in all this? How much did the UK get mixed up in it?

David Habakkuk -> Sid Finster... , 06 February 2018 at 06:19 AM
Sid Finster,

In response to comment 53.

When I belatedly started looking at the Litvinenko mystery, as a result of a strange email provoked by comments of mine on SST which arrived in my inbox in March 2007 from someone who turned out to be a key protagonist, it was rather obvious that improvised and chaotic 'StratCom' operations had been put into place on both the Russian and British sides to cover up what had happened.

A particular interesting feature of those on the British side – in which we now know Christopher Steele must have played a leading role – were the bizarre gyrations those responsible were going through trying to explain away the extraordinary fact that when he had broken the story of his poisoning, Litvinenko had pointed the finger of suspicion at his Italian associate Mario Scaramella.

When I started delving, I came across some very interesting pieces on Scaramella and related matters posted on the 'European Tribune' website by a Rome-based blogger using the name 'de Gondi' in the period after the story broke.

His actual name is David Loepp, by profession he is an artisan jeweller specialising in ancient and traditional goldsmith techniques, and I already knew and respected his work from his contributions to the transnational internet investigation into the Niger uranium forgeries – an earlier MI6 clusterf**ck.

So in May 2008 I posted a longish piece on that site, setting out the problems with the evidence about the Litvinenko case as I saw them, in the hope of reactivating his interest. This paid off in spades, when he linked to, and translated a key extract from, the request from Italian prosecutors to use wiretaps of conversations with Senator Paolo Guzzanti in connection with their prosecution of Scaramella for 'aggravated calumny.'

The request, which up to not so long ago was freely available on the website of the Italian Senate, was denied, but the extensive summaries of the transcripts provided a lot of material.

(This initial post by me, and later posts by me on that site, are at http://www.eurotrib.com/user/uid:1857/diary. Three posts David Loepp and I produced jointly in December 2012, which have a lot on Scaramella and Shvets, are on his page there, at http://www.eurotrib.com/user/de%20Gondi/diary .)

The extract from the wiretap request which David Loepp posted, which like Litvinenko's letter containing the claims he and Yuri Shvets had concocted about Putin using Mogilevich to attempt to supply Al Qaeda with a 'mini nuclear bomb' is dated 1 December 2005, contains key pointers to the conspiracy. It concludes:

'A passage on Simon Moghilevic and an agreement between the camorra to search for nuclear weapons lost during the Cold War to be consigned to Bin Laden, a revelation made by the Israeli. According to Scaramella the circle closes: camorra, Moghilevic- Russian mafia- services- nuclear bombs in Naples.'

Subsequent conversations make clear that Scaramella left on 6 December 2005 for Washington, on a trip where he was to meet Shvets. The summary of a report on this to Guzzanti reads:

'12) conversation that took place on number [omissis] on December 18, 2005, at 9:41:51 n. 1426, containing explicit references to the authenticity of the declarations of Alexander Litvinenko acquired by Scaramella, to the trustworthiness of the affirmations made by Scaramella in his reports to the commission and to the meetings Scaramella had with Talik after having denounced them [presumably Talik and his alleged accomplices]. (They can talk with HEIMS thanks to the help of MILLER. SHVEZ says that he had been a companion of CARLOS at the academy; SHVEZ has already made declarations and is willing to continue collaboration. Guzzanti warns that a document in Russian arrived in commission in which the name of SCARAMELLA appears several times, these [sic] say that directives to the contrary had been given to Litvinenko. Scaramella says that he went to the meeting with TALIK in the company of two treasury [police] and a cop, Talik spoke of a person from the Ukrainian GRU who would be willing to talk and a strange Chechen ring in Naples. Assassination attempt against the pope, CASAROLI was a Soviet agent.)'

The summary of a later conversation also refers to 'MILLER':

'conversation that took place on number [omissis] on January 13, 2006, at 11:22:11 n. 2287, containing references to Scaramella's sources in relation to facts referred in the Commission, the means by which they were obtained by Scaramella from declarations made abroad, the role of Litvinenko, also on the occasion of declarations made by third parties and the credibility of the news and theses given by Scaramella to the commission (Scaramella reads a text in English on the relation between the KGB and PRODI. Guzzanti asks if its credibility can be confirmed and if the taped declarations can be backed up; Scaramella answers that there were two testimonies, Lou Palumbo and Alexander (Litvinenko), and that the registration made in London at the beginning of the assignment [Scaramella's?] had been authenticated by a certain BAKER of the FBI. As he translates the text from English, Scaramella notes that the person testifying does not say he knows Prodi but only that he thinks that Prodi ...; all those who worked for the person testifying in Scandinavia said that Prodi was "theirs." The affair in Rimini, Bielli is preparing the battle in Rimini. Meetings with MILLER for the three things that are needed. Polemic about Pollari over the pressure exerted on Gordievski.)'

In the exchanges on my May 2008 post, I mentioned and linked to some extraordinary comments on a crucial article by Edward Jay Epstein, in which Karon von Gerhke claimed that his sceptical account fitted with what her contacts in the British investigation had told her. When that July I came across her equally extraordinary claims in response to the BBC's Mark Urban piece of stenography – which Steele may also have had a hand in organising – I found she was referring to precisely that visit to Washington by Scaramella which had been described in the wiretap request.

As you can perhaps imagine, the fact that 'Miller' had featured in the conversations with Guzzanti both as a key contact, who could introduce Scaramella to Aldrich Ames (which is who 'Heims' clearly is), and with whom there had been meetings about 'the three things that are needed' made me inclined to take seriously what Karon von Gerhke said about his role.

In December 2008, I put up another post on 'European Tribune', putting together the material from David Loepp and that from Karon von Gerhke – but not discussing the references to 'Miller.' As I had hoped, this led to her getting in touch.

Among the material with which she supplied me, which I in turn supplied to the Solicitor to the Inquest, were covers of faxes to John Rizzo, then Acting General Counsel of the CIA. From a fax dated 23 October 2005.

'John: See attached email to Chuck Patrizia. Berezovsky alleges he is in possession of a copy of a classified file given to the CIA by Russia's FSB, which he further alleges the CIA disseminated to British, French, Italian and Israeli intelligence agencies implicating him in business associations with the Mafia and to ties with terrorist organizations. Yuri Shvets was authorised/directed by Berezovsky to raise the issue with Bud McFarlane scheduled for Thursday. McFarlane is unaware the issue will be raised with him.'

From a fax dated 7 November 2005:

'John: I am attaching an email exchange between Yuri Shvets and me re: 1) article he published on his Ukraine website on alleged sale of nuclear choke to Iran, which I reproached him on as having been planted by Berezovsky and 2 the alleged FSB/CIA document file that Berezovsky obtained from Scaramella, which Yuri acknowledges in his e-mail to me. Like extracting wisdom teeth to get him to put anything on paper, especially in an e-mail! [NAME REDACTED BY ME – DH] is the source McFarlane referred Yuri to re: Berezovsky's visa issue. She proposed meeting Berezovsky in London. Alleged it would take a year to clear up USG issues and even then could not guarantee him a visa. She too has access to USG intelligence on Berezovsky. Open book.'

From a fax dated 5 December 2005:

'John. From Mario Scaramella to Yuri Shvets to my ears, the DOJ has authorised Mario Scaramella to interview Aldrich Ames with regard to members of the Italian Intelligence Service agent recruited by Ames for the KGB. Scaramella, as you may recall, is who gave Boris Berezovsky's aide, a former FSB Colonel [LITVINENKO – DH], that alleged document number to the FSB file that the CIA disseminated on Berezovsky – a file that Bud McFarlane's "Madam Visa" [NAME REDACTED BY ME – DH] is alleged is totting off to London for a meeting with Berezovsky, who has agreed to retain her re: his visa issue. Quid pro quo's with Berezovsky and Scaramella on the CIA agent currently facing kidnapping charges for the rendition of the Muslim cleric? Scott Armstrong has a most telling file on Scaramella. Not a single redeeming quality.'

In the course of very extensive exchanges with Karon von Gerhke subsequently, we had some rather acute disagreements. It was unfortunate that her filing was a shambles – a crucial hard disk failed without a backup, and the 'hard copies' appeared to be in a chaotic state.

However, the only occasion when I can recall having reason to believe that was deliberately lying to me was when David Loepp unearthed a cache of documentation including the full Italian text of the letter from Litvinenko containing the 'StratCom' designed to suggest that Putin had attempted to supply a 'mini nuclear bomb' to Al Qaeda. Having been asked to keep this between ourselves for the time being, Karon insisted on immediately sending it to her contacts in Counter Terrorism Command, and then produced bogus justifications.

Time and again, moreover, I found that I could confirm statements that she made – see for example the two posts I put up on the legal battles following the death in February 2008 of Berezovsky's long-term partner Arkadi 'Badri' Patarkatsishvili in June and July 2009, which were based on careful corroboration of what she told me.

(I should also say that I acquired the greatest respect for her courage.)

And while Owen and his team suppressed all the evidence from her, and almost all of that from David Loepp, which I had I provided to them, the dossier about Berezovsky is described in a statement made by Litvinenko in Tel Aviv in April 2006, presented in evidence in the Inquiry.

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

Other evidence, moreover, strongly inclines me to believe that there were overtures for a 'quid pro quo', purporting to come from Putin, but that this was a ruse orchestrated by Berezovsky.

Part of the purpose of this would almost certainly have been to supply probably bogus 'evidence' about arms sales in the Yeltsin years to Iraq, Iran and Syria. Moreover, I think there was an article on the second 'Fifth Element' site run by Shvets about the supposed sale of a nuclear 'choke' – whatever that is – to Iran.

The likelihood of the involvement of elements in the FBI in these shenanigans seems to quite high, given what has already emerged about the activities of Levinson. Also relevant may be the fact that the 'declaration' which was part of the attempt to frame Romano Prodi was authenticated, in London, by 'a certain BAKER of the FBI.')

Babak Makkinejad -> David Habakkuk ... , 06 February 2018 at 09:40 AM
Thank you David Habakkuk. Truly sordid and deplorable. WWIII to be initiated on basis of lies.
Jack , 06 February 2018 at 12:06 PM
David

You may already know this but Steele was a no show in a UK court for a deposition on the libel suit.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/05/christopher-steele-is-no-show-in-london-court-in-civil-case-over-dossier.amp.html

Babak Makkinejad -> David Habakkuk ... , 06 February 2018 at 01:18 PM
I know something of spectroscopy.

The critical issue here is the provenance of the samples and not the sophistication of the techniques used in the analysis itself or its instrumentation.

The paragraph that you have quoted:

"To figure out signatures based on various synthetic routes and conditions, Chipuk says that the synthetic chemists on his team will make the same chemical threat agent as many as 2,000 times in an ..." reeks of intellectual intimidation - trying to brow-beat any skeptic by the size of one's instrument - as it were."

And then there is a little matter of confidence level in any of the analysis - such things are normally based on prior statistics - which did not and could not exist in this situation.

LeaNder , 07 February 2018 at 09:16 AM
David, it's no doubt interesting to watch how attention on Victor Ivanov in another deficient inquiry on the British Isles, was managed in that inquiry. If I may, since he pops up again in the Steele dossier. You take what's available? Is that all there is to know?

I know its hard to communicate basics if you are deeply into matters. Usually people prefer to opt out. It's getting way too complicated for them to follow. You made me understand this experience. But isn't this (fake) intelligence continuity "via" Yuri Svets what connects your, no harm meant I do understand your obsession with the case, with what we deal with now in the Steele Dossier? Again, one of the most central figures is Ivanov.

Of course later reports in the Steele Dossier go hand in hand with a larger public relations campaign. Creating reality? Irony alert: as informer/source I would by then know what the other side wants to hear.

By the way, babbling mode, I found your Tom Mangold transcription. It felt it wasn't there on the link you gave. I used the date, and other search terms. Maybe I am wrong. Haven't looked at what the judge ruled out of the collection. Yes, cozy session/setting.

According to Google search there are no other links then your articles here:
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613093555/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/files/2015/04/HMG000513wb.pdf ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/files/2015/04/HMG000513wb.pdf">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613093555/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/files/2015/04/HMG000513wb.pdf

**********

JAN RICHARD BĆRUG
The Collapsing Wall. Hybrid Journalism.
A Comparative Study of Newspapers and
Magazines in Eight Countries in Europe

Available online. Haven't read it yet, but journalism as hidden public relations transfer belt would be one of my minor obsessions. ...

Babak Makkinejad -> turcopolier ... , 07 February 2018 at 11:23 AM
I wonder too; their command of the English idiom is very au currant - noticed "opt in/opt out" reference? Too American.

They clearly are not native speakers of German.

LeaNder said in reply to kooshy... , 07 February 2018 at 12:30 PM
why California, Kooshy #18? California among other things left this verbal trace, since I once upon time thought a luggage storage in SF might be free/available now: this is my home, lady.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kish_Island#Economy

Tourists from many -- but not all -- foreign nations wishing to enter Kish Free Zone from legal ports are not required to obtain any visa prior to travel. For those travelers, upon-arrival travel permits are stamped valid for 14 days by Kish officials.

Who are the not all? Can we assume Britain is not one of those?

The German link is different. How about the Iranian?

or isn't this the Kish we are talking about?

LeaNder said in reply to LeaNder... , 07 February 2018 at 01:14 PM
correcting myself #94:

another Ivanov. I struggled with names (...) in Russian crime novels, admittedly. But that's long ago from times Russian crime and Russian money flows and rogues getting hold of its nuclear material surfaced more often in Europe. 90s

I see Sergei seems to share my interest in the literary genre:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Ivanov#Personal

[Mar 10, 2018] The difference between opposition of Likudniks and ethnically based anti-semitism

Those are two different phenomena. Most of the opposition is directed against warmongering Likudniks, neocons and financial oligarchy (signicant part of which is ethnically Jewish, like Germany in 30th), while often incorrectly using ethnic terminology. So in many case you need to substitution Jew with a Neocon or Likudnik to make sense of the sentiments expressed.
Mar 10, 2018 | www.unz.com

Colleen Pater , March 9, 2018 at 12:33 am GMT

@Reactionary Utopian

"How much anti-Jewish hostility is there today in America? A lot? A little? Is it negligible? Potentially explosive? It is hard to tell because disliking Jews is often a firing offense, and a controlled press makes discussion impossible.

A clue can perhaps be found in the comments sections of political websites where, protected by anonymity, commenters are often bitterly anti-Jewish. But then, these comments may, or may not, be the work of a few cranks."

This is a question that has moving parts. There might be a lot of hostility today and was very little a few decades ago because what was once thought behavior we could afford or was perhaps thought a temporary reaction to WW2 now seems much more insidious.

Or any of a dozen similar relationships. I have always noticed Jewish behavior being a New Yorker, but had until very recently been rather indulgent about it.

... ... ...

[Mar 10, 2018] The US is not capable of entering into any legal agreement under which it can be trusted to abide by the terms for more than 5 minutes

Mar 10, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: BM | Mar 9, 2018 11:43:07 AM | 51

O/t

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/03/08/president-trumps-stunningly-effective-north-korea-policy-leaves-professional-diplomatic-corps-gobsmacked/

Supposedly according to a statement by South Korean National Security Adviser Chung Eui-yong, Kim Jong-un is 'ready' to negotiate away with the US his nuclear deterrance and has asked to meet Trump. The allegations in the above report cannot be true, they would be suicidal. Kim Jong-un is far too intelligent for that. I think more likely the report is seriously distorted by Chung Eui-yong as a means of stupid and naive manipulation - if so that would be a sinister development.

The US is not capable of entering into any legal agreement under which it can be trusted to abide by the terms for more than 5 minutes - that has been proved multiple times over in the recent years. Qadhafy also negotiated away his nuclear programme with legal agreements and where did he end up? And that was before the more recent TOTAL renunciation of adherence to international law by the US which is no longer even covered by a fig leaf!

Kim has claimed (reasonably) before that IF North Korea's security COULD be adequately guaranteed he would be ready to give up his nuclear weapons. That does NOT mean it is POSSIBLE to achieve any such guarantee - who could ever make any such guarantee and how could it be enforced, and what would the interests of the enforcers be? It seems impossible to me. Certainly any bilateral agreement between the US and Kim has no relevance whatsoever to with Kim's offer - it would be like signing his own death warrant.

What makes the report especially implausible by many orders of magnitude is the pitiful allegation in the statement:

"I told President Trump that in our meeting North Korean leader Kim Jong-un said he is committed to denuclearization. Kim pledged that North Korea will refrain from any further nuclear or missile tests; he understands that the routine joint military exercises between the Republic of Korea and the United States must continue. And he expressed his eagerness to meet President Trump as soon as possible."

...

"Along with President Trump we are optimistic about continuing a diplomatic process to test the possibility of a peaceful resolution. The Republic of Korea, The United States and our partners stand together in insisting that we not repeat the mistakes of the past; and that the pressure will continue until North Korea matches it's words with concrete actions. Thank You."

In other words, according to (what I presume is a US puppet and beneficiary of the warmongering) Chung Eui-yong, Kim Jong-un bows down to the supreme military superiority of the US and humbly begs for promises that are not worth writing on toilet paper. Anybody who believes that is a moron. Chung Eui-yong is obviously deliberately distorting Kim's position, as an attempt to sabotage the peace negotiations, the treacherous monster. I can well understand that Kim Jong-un would be horrified by Chung Eui-yong's statement which would massively increase distrust and undermine the tremendous recent diplomatic advances between North and South Korea, but hopefully Kim will navigate around it. Chung Eui-yong must be fired immediately.

I cannot see how North Korea's security could possibly be guaranteed without its nuclear weapons, unless the US gives up all its weapons, navy and worldwide bases. If any such possibility exists it would certainly be dependent on guarantees from many parties including (most crucially) Russia and China, but also the SCO, EU, NATO and the US. The Iran agreement already had multiple guarantors but even that is threatening to unravel, and the US is threatening to tear it up. How could Kim trust that he will not end up sodomised with a bayonet like Qadhafy? The real problem is how can any agreement be enforced if the US tears it up?

Probably any solution if it exists must include arming North Korea with the latest Russian non-nuclear defence equipment with guarantees to upgrade them, combined with defence agreements, investments in the economy, and certainly with multi-year transition arrangements before nuclear weapons are actually removed.

Forget about signing a piece of toilet paper with the US - it is meaningless unless North Korea has POTENT means to enforce US compliance with any such agreement. Such enforcement cannot rely on legal channels because the US is a rogue state with no respect for the law.

"he understands that the routine joint military exercises between the Republic of Korea and the United States must continue" - bad joke, bad taste.

[Mar 10, 2018] Why We re Underestimating American Collapse

discussion.theguardian.com
Why We're Underestimating American Collapse The Strange New Pathologies of the World's First Rich Failed State

You might say, having read some of my recent essays, "Umair! Don't worry! Everything will be fine! It's not that bad!" I would look at you politely, and then say gently, "To tell you the truth, I don't think we're taking collapse nearly seriously enough."

Why? When we take a hard look at US collapse, we see a number of social pathologies on the rise. Not just any kind. Not even troubling, worrying, and dangerous ones. But strange and bizarre ones. Unique ones. Singular and gruesomely weird ones I've never really seen before, and outside of a dystopia written by Dickens and Orwell, nor have you, and neither has history. They suggest that whatever "numbers" we use to represent decline  --  shrinking real incomes, inequality, and so on -- we are in fact grossly underestimating what pundits call the "human toll", but which sensible human beings like you and I should simply think of as the overwhelming despair, rage, and anxiety of living in a collapsing society.

Let me give you just five examples of what I'll call the social pathologies of collapse  --  strange, weird, and gruesome new diseases, not just ones we don't usually see in healthy societies, but ones that we have never really seen before in any modern society.

America has had 11 school shootings in the last 23 days. That's one every other day, more or less. That statistic is alarming enough  --  but it is just a number. Perspective asks us for comparison. So let me put that another way. America has had 11 school shootings in the last 23 days, which is more than anywhere else in the world, even Afghanistan or Iraq. In fact, the phenomenon of regular school shootings appears to be a unique feature of American collapse  --  it just doesn't happen in any other country  --  and that is what I mean by "social pathologies of collapse": a new, bizarre, terrible disease striking society.

Why are American kids killing each other? Why doesn't their society care enough to intervene? Well, probably because those kids have given up on life  --  and their elders have given up on them. Or maybe you're right  --  and it's not that simple. Still, what do the kids who aren't killing each other do? Well, a lot of them are busy killing themselves.

So there is of course also an "opioid epidemic". We use that phrase too casually, but it much more troubling than it appears on first glance. Here is what is really curious about it. In many countries in the world  --  most of Asia and Africa  --  one can buy all the opioids one wants from any local pharmacy, without a prescription. You might suppose then that opioid abuse as a mass epidemic would be a global phenomenon. Yet we don't see opioid epidemics anywhere but America  --  especially not ones so vicious and widespread they shrink life expectancy. So the "opioid epidemic"  --  mass self-medication with the hardest of hard drugs  --  is again a social pathology of collapse: unique to American life. It is not quite captured in the numbers, but only through comparison  --  and when we see it in global perspective, we get a sense of just how singularly troubled American life really is.

Why would people abuse opioids en masse unlike anywhere else in the world? They must be living genuinely traumatic and desperate lives, in which there is little healthcare, so they have to self-medicate the terror away. But what is so desperate about them? Well, consider another example: the "nomadic retirees". They live in their cars. They go from place to place, season after season, chasing whatever low-wage work they can find  --  spring, an Amazon warehouse, Christmas, Walmart.

Now, you might say  --  "well, poor people have always chased seasonal work!" But that is not really the point: absolute powerlessness and complete indignity is. In no other country I can see do retirees who should have been able to save up enough to live on now living in their cars in order to find work just to go on eating before they die  --  not even in desperately poor ones, where at least families live together, share resources, and care for one another. This is another pathology of collapse that is unique to America  --  utter powerlessness to live with dignity. Numbers don't capture it  --  but comparisons paint a bleak picture.

How did America's elderly end up cheated of dignity? After all, even desperately poor countries have "informal social support systems"  --  otherwise known as families and communities. But in America, there is the catastrophic collapse of social bonds. Extreme capitalism has blown apart American society so totally that people cannot even care for one another as much as they do in places like Pakistan and Nigeria. Social bonds, relationships themselves, have become unaffordable luxuries, more so than even in poor countries: this is yet another social pathology unique to American collapse.

Yet those once poor countries are making great strides. Costa Ricans now have higher life expectancy than Americans  --  because they have public healthcare. American life expectancy is falling, unlike nearly anywhere else in the world, save the UK  --  because it doesn't.

And that is my last pathology: it is one of the soul, not one of the limbs, like the others above. American appear to be quite happy simply watching one another die, in all the ways above. They just don't appear to be too disturbed, moved, or even affected by the four pathologies above: their kids killing each other, their social bonds collapsing, being powerless to live with dignity,or having to numb the pain of it all away.

If these pathologies happened in any other rich country  --  even in most poor ones  --  people would be aghast, shocked, and stunned, and certainly moved to make them not happen. But in America, they are, well, not even resigned. They are indifferent, mostly.

So my last pathology is a predatory society. A predatory society doesn't just mean oligarchs ripping people off financially. In a truer way, it means people nodding and smiling and going about their everyday business as their neighbours, friends, and colleagues die early deaths in shallow graves. The predator in American society isn't just its super-rich  --  but an invisible and insatiable force: the normalization of what in the rest of the world would be seen as shameful, historic, generational moral failures, if not crimes, becoming mere mundane everyday affairs not to be too worried by or troubled about.

Perhaps that sounds strong to you. Is it?

Now that I've given you a few examples  --  there are many more  --  of the social pathologies of collapse, let me share with you the three points that they raise for me.

These social pathologies are something like strange and gruesome new strains of disease infecting the body social. America has always been a pioneer  --  only today, it is host not just to problems not just rarely seen in healthy societies  --  it is pioneering novel social pathologies have never been seen in the modern world outside present-day America, period. What does that tell us?

American collapse is much more severe than we suppose it is. We are underestimating its magnitude, not overestimating it. American intellectuals, media, and thought doesn't put any of its problems in global or historical perspective  --  but when they are seen that way, America's problems are revealed to be not just the everyday nuisances of a declining nation, but something more like a body suddenly attacked by unimagined diseases.

Seen accurately. American collapse is a catastrophe of human possibility without modern parallel . And because the mess that America has made of itself, then, is so especially unique, so singular, so perversely special  --  the treatment will have to be novel, too. The uniqueness of these social pathologies tell us that American collapse is not like a reversion to any mean, or the downswing of a trend. It is something outside the norm. Something beyond the data. Past the statistics. It is like the meteor that hit the dinosaurs: an outlier beyond outliers, an event at the extreme of the extremes. That is why our narratives, frames, and theories cannot really capture it  --  much less explain it. We need a whole new language  --  and a new way of seeing  --  to even begin to make sense of it.

But that is America's task, not the world's. The world's task is this. Should the world follow the American model  --  extreme capitalism, no public investment, cruelty as a way of life, the perversion of everyday virtue  --  then these new social pathologies will follow, too. They are new diseases of the body social that have emerged from the diet of junk food  --  junk media, junk science, junk culture, junk punditry, junk economics, people treating one another and their society like junk  --  that America has fed upon for too long.

Umair
January 2018

[Mar 10, 2018] Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in Obama policy and HRC campaign long before any Steele s Dossier. This was a program ofunleashing cold War II

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Especially, once American policy-makers who saw and experienced war (Ike, George Marshall's generation) departed things started to roll down hill with Reagan bringing on board a whole collection of neocons. ..."
"... Unawareness is always dangerous, a complete blackout in relations between two nuclear powers is more than dangerous--it is completely reckless. Again, the way CW 1.0 is perceived in the current US "elites" it becomes extremely tempting to repeat it. Electing Hillary was another step in unleashing CW 2.0 by people who have no understanding of what they were doing. ..."
"... Obama started crushing US-Russian relations before any campaigns were launched and before Trump was even seriously considered a GOP nominee, let alone a real contender. New confrontation hinged on HRC being elected. In fact, she was one of the major driving forces behind a serious of geopolitical anti-Russian moves. Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in HRC campaign long before any Steele's Dossier. This was a program. ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

As chickenhawks related those who experienced war in the USA elite that slide to neocon dominance became inevitable.

SmoothieX12 -> Anna... , 04 February 2018 at 01:39 PM

- If they have read the important books at all... The ongoing scandal has been revealing a stunning incompetence of the "deciders." Too often they look comical, ridiculous, undignified. This is dangerous, considering their power.

My coming book is precisely about that. Especially, once American policy-makers who saw and experienced war (Ike, George Marshall's generation) departed things started to roll down hill with Reagan bringing on board a whole collection of neocons.

Unawareness is always dangerous, a complete blackout in relations between two nuclear powers is more than dangerous--it is completely reckless. Again, the way CW 1.0 is perceived in the current US "elites" it becomes extremely tempting to repeat it. Electing Hillary was another step in unleashing CW 2.0 by people who have no understanding of what they were doing.

Obama started crushing US-Russian relations before any campaigns were launched and before Trump was even seriously considered a GOP nominee, let alone a real contender. New confrontation hinged on HRC being elected. In fact, she was one of the major driving forces behind a serious of geopolitical anti-Russian moves. Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in HRC campaign long before any Steele's Dossier. This was a program.

kooshy said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 04:10 PM
John McCain is a war veteran and a policy maker, who has seen war closer than Marshal or Ike still he will shy away from any war even with nuclear Russia.
Joe100 said in reply to kooshy... , 04 February 2018 at 04:40 PM
While McCain is a war veteran, his career was not in any way distinguished - rather he pretty clearly was given "hall pass" after "hall pass" given his father and grandfather. It also seems pretty clear his time as a POW has probably significantly influenced his view of the world.

"The Nightingale's Song" has an excellent treatment of his Naval Academy and service time, along with and in contrast to Ollie North, Jim Webb, admiral Poindexter and Bud MacFarlane. Not a pretty picture..

SmoothieX12 -> kooshy... , 04 February 2018 at 05:00 PM
John McCain is a war veteran and a policy maker, who has seen war closer than Marshal or Ike still he will shy away from any war even with nuclear Russia.

Seeing generations of your close and remote relatives killed and your property destroyed as a result of war is usually a very sobering collective experience. McCain, apart from being a rather exceptional warmonger, doesn't know what it is, despite experiencing some serious trials while being a POW. Ike saw, for starters, concentration camps and, unlike, McCain was mostly on the ground. This is a crucial distinction.

kooshy , 04 February 2018 at 05:15 PM
"It also seems pretty clear his time as a POW has probably significantly influenced his view of the world."
I agree, and, that was the point I tried to make, not all veterans are necessary qualified MINDS for deciding future of the coming generations. I have the same suspicion for General Kelly, having lost a son in Afghanistan and having power to influence the war in Afghanistan, I think is this situation, like judges, one has to recuse him/herself to be part of planers.

[Mar 10, 2018] The Russia witch hunt is caused by the economic failures of neoliberalism and growing distruct toward neoliberal elite in the UK and US. No noticeable advance in living standards since 1985 make middle class disillusioned and angry. The neilineral elite badly needs a spcapegoat and Russia fits the bill

Notable quotes:
"... Obvious failure everywhere the supposed electorate look. Of course they want an alternative. ..."
"... You have a good point, but I often think that, a the machinery of surveillance and repression becomes so well oiled and refined, the ruling oligarchs will soon stop even paying lip service to 'American workers', or the "American middle class" and go full authoritarian. ..."
"... The Clintonoid project seems set on taking it to the late 16th century. Probably with a return of chattel slavery. I recall during the George II administration someone in congress advocating for he return of debtor's prisons during the 'debat' over ending access to bankruptcy ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Harry, 09 March 2018 at 08:02 PM

I'm increasingly coming tip the conclusion that the Russia stuff is caused by the economic failures of the ruling classes in the UK and US. No noticeable advance in living standards since 1985.

An American oligarch is now a trillionaire and doesn't pay tax.

Obvious failure everywhere the supposed electorate look. Of course they want an alternative. Its lucky the Russians chose now to become aggressive cos otherwise the Dem party leaders would be fired for incompetence.

Generalfeldmarschall von Hindenburg -> Harry... 10 March 2018 at 06:25 PM

You have a good point, but I often think that, a the machinery of surveillance and repression becomes so well oiled and refined, the ruling oligarchs will soon stop even paying lip service to 'American workers', or the "American middle class" and go full authoritarian.

Karl Rove's dream to return the economy to the late 19th Century standard.

The Clintonoid project seems set on taking it to the late 16th century. Probably with a return of chattel slavery. I recall during the George II administration someone in congress advocating for he return of debtor's prisons during the 'debat' over ending access to bankruptcy

likbez -< Generalfeldmarschall von Hindenburg...
Late Sheldon Wolin (who died Oct. 21, 2015) claimed that the current US political system should be called "inverted totalitarism". He stressed that the democracy and the republican form of government are incompatible with
  1. Powerful national intelligence agencies, which inevitably tend to escape civilian control and convert the state into national security state
  2. MIC which enforces the imperial foreign policy which is associated with such terms as "super power" and global neoliberal Empire. This was noted much earlier by President Eisenhower in his farewell address to the nation.
  3. High level of concentration of media ownership. In the USA six corporations control the lion share of MSM.
  4. Neoliberalism as a social system, with its inescapable tendency to replace representative democracy with "one dollar, one vote" regime and institualized corruption of politicians (via "revolving door" mechanism, mechanism of financing the election campaign, and the power of lobbyists on Capital Hill )

As he wrote ( http://www.activatingdemocracy.com/resources/get-inspired/sheldon-wolin/inverted-totalitarianism-by-sheldon-wolin/ ):

"Empire" and "superpower" accurately symbolize the projection of American power abroad, but for that reason they obscure the internal consequences. Consider how odd it would sound if we were to refer to "the Constitution of the American Empire" or "superpower democracy." The reason they ring false is that "constitution" signifies limitations on power, while "democracy" commonly refers to the active involvement of citizens with their government and the responsiveness of government to its citizens.

For their part, "empire" and "superpower" stand for the surpassing of limits and the dwarfing of the citizenry. The increasing power of the state and the declining power of institutions intended to control it has been in the making for some time. The [two] party system is a notorious example.

...Representative institutions no longer represent voters. Instead, they have been short-circuited, steadily corrupted by an institutionalized system of bribery that renders them responsive to powerful interest groups whose constituencies are the major corporations and wealthiest Americans. The courts, in turn, when they are not increasingly handmaidens of corporate power, are consistently deferential to the claims of national security.

Elections have become heavily subsidized non-events that typically attract at best merely half of an electorate whose information about foreign and domestic politics is filtered through corporate-dominated media.

Citizens are manipulated into a nervous state by the media's reports of rampant crime and terrorist networks, by thinly veiled threats... and by their own fears about unemployment.

What is crucially important here is not only the expansion of governmental power but the inevitable discrediting of constitutional limitations and institutional processes that discourages the citizenry and leaves them politically apathetic.

...At the same time, it is corporate power, as the representative of the dynamic of capitalism and of the ever-expanding power made available by the integration of science and technology with the structure of capitalism, that produces the totalizing drive
.. a pervasive atmosphere of fear abetted by a corporate economy of ruthless downsizing, withdrawal or reduction of pension and health benefits; a corporate political system that relentlessly threatens to privatize Social Security and the modest health benefits available, especially to the poor.

With such instrumentalities for promoting uncertainty and dependence, it is almost overkill for inverted totalitarianism to employ a system of criminal justice [to suppress dissent, like in classic totalitarism. ]

[Mar 10, 2018] 'It's propaganda,' Lavrov BLASTS Britain's claims of Russian involvement in Skripal poisoning

Notable quotes:
"... We haven't heard a single fact, we only watch TV coverage, where your colleagues speak fervently with serious faces that if it is Russia, the response will be that Russia will remember forever. It's not serious, it's propaganda at its finest and pressing hysteria " ..."
"... "I want to remind people that Litvinenko's death was also attributed to Russia, but hasn't been investigated, because court proceedings, which were called 'public,' were in fact closed. They were carried out in a very strange way, and numerous facts, which emerged throughout investigation, haven't come into the public domain. ..."
"... "We offered our assistance and cooperation; however, British justice decided that they are above this, and it was enough just to come out with a verdict which is not inclusive," ..."
"... "swept under the carpet." ..."
"... "propaganda channels," ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | theduran.com

Russophobia called to account as Russian Foreign Minister offers Moscow's help, confronting the British for uncooperative attitude towards Moscow

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated that his government is willing to cooperate with an ongoing British investigation into the poisoning of former Russian spy Sergey Skripal and his daughter, Yulia. However, Lavrov blasted the allegations that this was an act committed by the will of the Russian government, calling these 'hysteria' and 'propaganda.'

We haven't heard a single fact, we only watch TV coverage, where your colleagues speak fervently with serious faces that if it is Russia, the response will be that Russia will remember forever. It's not serious, it's propaganda at its finest and pressing hysteria "

Click here for the best news on Russia >>

RT.com notes in their newspiece that Skripal died, but this appears to be a mistake . What is true is that Sergey's wife and son died in 2012 and 2017. At the time of this report, both Sergei and Yulia are in the hospital in critical condition. In fact, there have been 21 people in total who have received medical treatment as the result of the poisoning, which made many of them also seriously ill.

The nature of the agent used in this poisoning is not specifically known publicly, but the British police did state that this was a 'nerve gas' that was used. They have also stated that this was a targeted assassination attempt.

The present climate of Russophobia and hysteria concerning 'all things Russia' has increased the ease at which hysterical accusations abound in this situation. Lavrov called all this to account in addressing the parallels attempted between this attack on the Skripals and the death of Alexander Litvinenko in 2006, which was determined to have been caused by radiation poisoning from polonium-210. The foreign minister had this to say:

"I want to remind people that Litvinenko's death was also attributed to Russia, but hasn't been investigated, because court proceedings, which were called 'public,' were in fact closed. They were carried out in a very strange way, and numerous facts, which emerged throughout investigation, haven't come into the public domain.

"We offered our assistance and cooperation; however, British justice decided that they are above this, and it was enough just to come out with a verdict which is not inclusive," Lavrov added, saying that many facts linked to the tragedy have been "swept under the carpet."

Those interested in the matter should turn to countries they wish to find answers from, not to "propaganda channels," Lavrov added.

[Mar 10, 2018] From Yeltsin to Putin: Chubais, Liberal Pathology, and Harvard's Criminal Record

Highly recommended!
Mar 10, 2018 | www.rusjournal.org

From Yeltsin to Putin: Chubais, Liberal Pathology, and Harvard's Criminal Record

Matthew Raphael Johnson

Johnstown, PAWhen the USSR collapsed in 1990-1991, Gorbachev was incapable of handling thesituation. Boris Yeltsin came to power both bureaucratically and popularly. He was named theChief of the Presidium, but in June of 1991, he was elected in a popular election where heearned 57% of the popular vote.

With a small army of American advisers, Yeltsin began selling off Soviet era assets.The problem was that the process had nothing to do with markets. Privatization of assets wentto a handful of well-connected politicians and bureaucrats who came to control the economyas a whole.1 They had amassed a huge number of shares by 1995, and hence, the post-Sovietoligarchy was born. The fact is that the work of 70 years of Soviet labor went to the pocketsof two or three dozen people.2

The rising oligarchs could easily manipulate the court system and tax police, sincethere was no real law governing private enterprise. Russia was led to the brink of anarchy. By1998, according to a paper by Sergei Guriev and Andrei Rachinsky, the oligarchs comprisedabout 700 individuals that completely controlled Russia's economic assets.3

The Western Elites and the Ivy League as a Criminal Syndicate

In NS Leonov's book (only in Russian), The Way of the Cross: Russia from 1991-2000, he states, as the first "reform" of Yeltsin's government :

Government "reforms" that began Gaidar's privatization scam was the seizure of the savings of the people. These were taken by force, though not directly. Inflation and economic collapse made the transfer of funds easy. State control was removed from prices and the "free market" would ensure the enrichment of corruption. This was the level of cynicism the new democracy had reached, while simultaneously preaching the sanctity of private property. What did not melt away in the deliberate fleecing of the people was taken by other means. An estimate of the total taken thisway is about 300 billion rubles, and it had the proper effect: without money, rebellion was difficult. They cried out in frustration.4

Nothing was done according to democratic norms, which is odd since democracy was the buzzword that made these economic decisions seem political. At almost no time in the history of the USSR did one man, Chubais and his allies, have such total and irresponsible control over the Russian economy. When the voucher program was introduced in 1992, massive inflation resulted. Soon, each 10,000 ruble voucher was worth very little. It was rendered null regardless, since the state refused to consider the vouchers as legal tender.

1 Hoffman, D. The Oligarchs: Wealth And Power In The New Russia. Public Affairs Books, 2011 (cf esp ch12).

2 Kotz, D.M. Russia's Financial Crisis: The Failure of Neoliberalism? Z Magazine, (1998), 28-32

3 Guriev, S. and Andrei Rachinsky. The Role of Oligarchs in Russian Capitalism. Journal of EconomicPerspectives, 19(1), (2005), 131-150 http://pages.nes.ru/sguriev/papers/GurievRachinsky.pdf

4 Leonov, NS. The Way of the Cross: Russia from 1991-2000. Moscow: Russia House, 2002 (All citations aremy translations from the Russian.

Making the entire scam even more blatant, Chubais inserted a rider to the law stating that the value of the voucher would only exist until late 1993. In 1992, Yeltsin's popularity went from 50% in January to 30% in August, and from there to single digits.

By July of 1992, Chubais was hated. This led Yeltsin to limit the power of parliament, increase his executive power and totally dominate the regions. This was done with western backing and was a far greater centralization of power than Putin was later to be condemned for. He had already banned the Communist Party, helping to break his main opposition and prevent their imminent reelection in Parliament. The fraud of democracy was clearly open.

Soon Chubais and his crew stated that there was no benchmark value for any sold property. The institution in charge of this, the Russian Federal Property Fund and related agencies, therefore, began from arbitrary benchmarks. Ultimately, major firms were being sold for 1-5% of their value. Worse, some of these were defense plants, bought up by shallcompanies operates by the CIA – this was Hay's job. Therefore, scientific advances of the USSR were now entirely in American hands.

In 1992, Yeltsin did fairly well in a referendum, receiving about 50% approval, but at this date, privatization had just begun. Elections a bit later were to belie this vote. Yeltsin himself clearly had no confidence in this referendum. Having no confidence in that vote, Yeltsin then, again with western backing, banned all opposition protests in Moscow. Then, making matters worse, he signed order 1400 in September of 1993 which stripped the Congress of People's Deputies of all power. For the upcoming elections, Yeltsin passed a law saying that only 25% of voters needed to show for it to be valid. This was a means of making sure that opposition boycotts could not win. Yeltsin soon after banned the main opposition newspaper.

Russia's privatization scam was created, directed and imposed by Harvard University and carried out by two "professors" whose incompetence is rivaled only by their lack of accountability. Anatoly Chubais, probably the most hated man in Russia, was an old friend of Harvard "economist" Andrei Shleifer, who was also working with Harvard don Jonathan Hay (who according to the FSB, is CIA). Chubais, functioning as a Russian dictator since Yeltsin was not functional at the time, put the privatization scheme into Harvard's hands. Apparently having no workable knowledge of Russian life, the Harvard elite, believing themselves infallible, quickly proved their theories not only false, but directly responsible for ruining thelives of millions.5

1994-1995 was the period of the solidification of the oligarchic clans, their connection with the United States, and the complete collapse of the state. Oligarchic clans, created by Chubais, filled the vacuum with private armies, political machines and newspapers. In the US, conservative and liberal alike called this the "free market" and democracy. Vladimir Zhirinovsky, of Jewish origin and endlessly changing political positions, became the government's ace in the hole: whenever the US questioned the increasingly obvious destruction of Russia, Yeltsin would trot this clown out to make some typically outrageous statement. In 1995, it was clear that Zhirinovsky both "loved Hitler" and was "proud" of Russia's victory in the Great Patriotic War. Clearly in the pocket of Yeltsin, Zhirinovsky a)kept US aid money coming into his efforts, b) siphoned off serious criticism, c) easily associated nationalist views with this kind of rhetorical nonsense.

Chubais continued to hang onto power. Not being a Russian citizen (and yet having all that power), he clearly equated the oligarchic clans as "democracy." In Davos, 1996, he met with the heads of all the clans including Guzinsky, Berezovsky, Khodorkovsky, Friedman, Potanin and many others, and formed a political movement designed to keep nationalist and communists out of power.

5 McClintick, D. How Harvard Lost Russia. Institutional Investor, 2006. http://www.institutionalinvestor.com/Article/1020662/How-Harvard-lost-Russia.html?ArticleId=1020662&single=true#.UY7blLWG2So

This move shows that Chubais backed the oligarchs, did not consider them "unintended consequences" and sought their assistance to stay in power: All in the name of democracy.

Yeltsin, now at 3% (with the same margin of error) began to implement populist measures, but now was isolated. Winning a strangely high 33% of the vote in the 1996 elections, it can only be attributed to a) electoral fraud, or b) the fact that Gen. Alexander Lebed had been talked into entering a sort of coalition with Yeltsin. If they won, then Lebed's rival Pavel Grachev, would be history. Yeltsin won the second round with just over 50%, as the oligarchs and Chubais personally spend a small fortune bribing artists, journalists, writers and, making an even worse mockery of democracy, busing thousands of urban youth into Moscow to ensure their support.

Harvard's Sinister Role

Harvard University spent quite a bit of its money to restructure Russia. The US government sued some of them, specifically, Andrei Shleifer, for breach of contract. Many economists from Harvard worked for the State Department so as to be able to control Russia for the better. The fraud of the Russian economy was in part blamed on these advisers, whowere forced to pay more than $31 million to the US government for "conspiracy to defraud."

Harvard had authored the plan that Gorbachev had requested to turn Russia into a capitalist state. This was the plan that was enacted. The Harvard Institute for International Development in Russia was the group created at Harvard and sponsored by the US government. This is what was sued over. The US government argued that the reform program was a failure, and the planners, living in America, knew it was a failure and continued to defend it – with taxpayer money. Even worse, as it turns out, Shleifer was rigging some of the auctions himself, investing his own money in firms that he knew would turn a profit, even if overseas.

The US Justice Department in 2000 sued, among others, Shleifer and Hay for defrauding the US government. The Justice Department stated:

The United States alleges that Defendants' actions undercut the fundamental purpose of the United States' program in Russia -- the creation of trust and confidence in the emerging Russian financial markets and the promotion of openness, transparency, the rule of law, and fair play in the development of theRussian economy and laws.6

Since they were using $40 million in taxpayer money, the cold-blooded desolation of Russia implicated the US. The civil lawsuit argued, to simplify, that Harvard's economists, especially Shleifer (and his wife), was investing taxpayer money in Russian companies about which they were giving financial advice. Harvard admitted guilt in the form of a $25 million settlement. How much of this assisted their victims in Russia is not known.7

In response to the suit, lawyers for Shleifer and his co-conspirator, Jonathan Hay, sneered to the press: "We are confident that, as the civil case unfolds, the court will confirm that the Harvard program significantly fostered Russian reform and that the government received its money's worth." As it turns out, even their lawyers did not believe this, since their defense rested, not on the denial that conflict of interest existed, but that they were never bound by such ethical rules.8

6 "United States of America, Plaintiff v. the President and Fellows of Harvard College, Andrei Shleifer, Jonathan Hay, Nancy Zimmerman, and Elizabeth Hebert, Defendants" (2000)

7 His crimes and the full nature of the lawsuit and evidence can be found here: Wedel, J. Who Taught CronyCapitalism to Russia? How Harvard and the 'U.S. Government's Aid Agency became part of the RussianProblem. The Wall Street Journal Europe, March 19, 2001

In 2005, a federal judge found Shleifer guilty of professional fraud. The disgraced "professor" paid the US government $2 million, and his wife, operating yet another scam, settled out of court for $1.5 million. Harvard paid about $10 million in legal fees to defend their role in the starvation of Russia.9

For all that, Shleifer remains a celebrated professor at Harvard and the toast of academia worldwide. His academic stock has not suffered in theleast from this. Just as puzzling, Harvard suffered no diminution in prestige. This is especially puzzling in that ivy league scandals erupt seemingly on a daily basis. This Teflon world exists partly due to the protection of former Harvard President, World Bank economist and Treasury Secretary, Lawrence Summers, also a pivotal figure in the Russian fiasco.10

Summers is partly to blame for the American sub-prime mortgage disaster since hewas pivotal in removing many of the regulatory barriers that forbade predatory lendingpractices. Therefore, the execrable Summers is the co-author of not one but two national meltdowns. Summers, after being forced to resign from Harvard based on an unrelated set of sins,11 was quickly rehired as a "professor" by the government. Then, Summers became a leading figure in Obama's economic brain trust, was soon after appointed as part of the "oversight"panel for the UN's economic programs and became a member of the Group of 30, a highlyelite and secretive organization created by the Rockefeller family.

Like Summers and Shleifer, Chubais was also handsomely rewarded for his direct role in the Russian cataclysm. He was soon placed on the board of JP Morgan, and, to no one's surprise, was granted a seat on the ultra-elite Council on Foreign Relations, another powerful conclave within the Rockefeller cult.12

Summer's career, his almost comic legacy of failure and ignorance, and the criminal impoverishment of Russia (not to mention the 2007 US meltdown) wholly destroy the "elitestatus" of places like Harvard.13 This set of scandals, largely unknown to a bewildered and exhausted American public, shows the profound and pervasive putrescence of academia, especially in the Ivy leagues. It brought into question academic tenure, unearned salaries, and the famed academic insulation from consequences arising from their theories. The Harvard civil suit and all it entails demonstrates the incompetence of those paid to implement policy and their ability to get their hands on taxpayer money. It shows a reprehensible and reckless disregard for the welfare of others that is rewarded with academic posts, social prestige, ostentatious wealth and immense power.

It might be worth mentioning that the behavior patters of Chubais conforms almost perfectly to the Triarchic diagnostic model of psychopathy as developed by Skeem, et al in 2011. First, it is typified by a pathological arrogance. The victim has full confidence that he is above the law, or that the law only applies to others. Second, the victim shows an impulsive and anti-social temper that focuses only on short term gratification based on the lowest motives. Because of these two symptoms, the victim either does not perceive or does not have any restraints on his destructive behavior. Finally, and most significantly, the victim feels no remorse for the consequences of his actions. Other criteria related to these includeparasitic behavior, superficial charm, grandiosity, ingenious criminal ideas, and assertive narcissism.14 Yeltsin, quoted in Leonov's book, called Chubais "an absolute Bolshevik by temperament and mentality." The basic consensus about Chubais' behavior is that he cared little for construction, and only for destruction.

8 Seward, Z. Harvard To Pay $26.5 Million in HIID Settlement. Crimson, July 20059 The guilty verdict and settlement issues are summarized in the Crimson article above.

10 Finucane, M "Feds Sue Harvard over Russia Advisers." ABD News; also see Wedel, Janine R. The HarvardBoys Do Russia. The Nation, 2008; and "Larry Summers, Robert Rubin: Will The Harvard Shadow EliteBankrupt The University And The Country?" The Huffington Post, Jan 2010: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harry-r-lewis/larry-summers-robert-rubi_b_419224.html

11 These had something to do with comments about intellectual differences between men and women. That this contrived controversy erupted just as Harvard was paying off the federal government is no coincidence.

12 Levy, Ari. Summers Joins Andreessen Horowitz as a Part-Time Adviser to Entrepreneurs. Bloomberg, June2011 and Greenwald, Glenn. Larry Summers, Tim Geithner and Wall Street's ownership of government.Salon, 2009

13 As far as ivy league fraud and incompetence go, this is just one scandal out of hundreds.

The political lesson of this is unfortunate: the diagnostic criteria for criminal psychopathy are precisely the qualities required for success in big business and government. Even the best intentioned politician or businessman must display some combination of thesevices in order to successfully compete in these fields. What passes as virtue in libera lcapitalism is actually an undisguised form of mental illness.

Leonov speaks in more detail about his pathology:

Evil lurks in Chubais' colorless eyes. He arrogantly uses his supporters in public. Assertiveness and phony composure is his cynical way. Yeltsin was seen by him as merely manageable. Yeltsin was easy to manipulate due to his unpopularity. He did not have the intellectual wherewithal to fight back. He was compliant and signed anything on cue. He saw the Duma as mere formalism that can be bypassed. In reality, he just relied on Presidential decrees.

Of course, all of this in the name of democracy. Rather than deal with the fallout for the sins of others, Yeltsin did one excellent thing for Russia – appointed Vladimir Putin astemporary president on new year's eve, 1999. As was proper, Putin guaranteed Yeltsin immunity from prosecution, which meant he could no longer be used as a scapegoat. Putin, to make a long story very short, brought Russia from a GDP that was 98th in the world to 2014,where it is 8th. For the period 1991-1997, the transfer of wealth from Russia to the oligarchs was roughly $1.75 trillion. This was not "lost" to Russia, since wealth is not "lost." It merely changed hands. Under Chubais and Harvard, the economic contracted by almost 90%.

For all that, Yeltsin's party received 15% of the vote. With instructions from the US, Yeltsin, after this humiliation, created the idea of a "consensus document." The point is to create the illusion of agreement. Several western NGOs designed a position paper which supported "free market" reforms. Representatives of the new rich in Russia signed this document, which was then trumpeted as proof of social cohesion around Yeltsin.

Bernard Black et al, writing in 2009, described the devastation of this shock treatment for Russia and Ukraine in 1994:Russia's mass privatization. . . permitted insiders (managers and controlling shareholders) to engage in extensive "self" or "inside" dealing. . . which the government did nothing to control. Later privatization "auctions" were a massive giveaway of Russia's most important companies at bargain prices to a handful of well-connected "kleptocrats". . . Medium-term prospects are grim; the Russian ruble has plunged; the Russian government has defaulted on both its dollar denominated and ruble-denominated debt; most banks are bankrupt; corruption is rampant; tax revenues have collapsed; capital flight is pervasive; and the government (whomever the Prime Minister happens to be at the moment) seems clueless about what to do next.15

14 Skeem, JL, Polaschek, DLL, Patrick, CJ, and S Lilienfeld. Psychopathic Personality: Bridging the GapBetween Scientific Evidence and Public Policy. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 12 (3): 95–1622011

15 Black, et al, 1

This scheme represents one of the most luridly thoroughgoing, colossal and overwhelming failures in economic history. The role of the US government, international financial agencies and elite academia in this monumental disaster is well known. During the well publicized destruction and starvation of Russia, the British journal Euromoney named Chubais the "Worlds Greatest Finance Minister," as yet another means of displaying theelite's lack of accountability. In the Financial Times of 2004, A. Ostrovsky states "Chubais makes no excuses and feels no remorse over the most controversial privatization of all - the 'loans-for-shares' deal, in which he handed control of Russia's largest and most valuable assets to the group of tycoons [sic] in return for loans and support in the 1996 election for the then ailing Yeltsin."16

Once this became plain, the architects of the plan backed off, blaming everyone else for the issues. He writes in Foreign Affairs that the "Russian people" must vote for "democracy" in the 2000 elections. At the time, his own popularity was running about 2-3%. Hence, he did not mean "democracy" in the normal sense of the word. The real change was between 1994-1996. Here, the oligarchs were openly ruling with Yeltsin, who was often drunk and would disappear for weeks on end. It didn't matter. The oligarchs bought up most of the banks, then issued licenses to trade internationally that only they could have. As the government got desperate, the oligarchs stepped in and loaned Moscow the money to continue to function. Russian was not a "government" in any sense of the word. About 700 major families controlled almost the entire Russian economy and hence, the state as well.

The Results of the Scam

Government revenues went down by over 50% in this same time. Wages went down by about 75% by 1998. In 1992, the inflation rate was almost 1000%. Light industry, that is, the consumer sector, lost about 90% of its capital, the hardest hit sector of all. Machinery of all kinds fell by about 75%, meaning that 75% of the machines useful in the Russian economy had been liquidated (or were just not used) by 1998. The only thing that kept Russiaafloat was the black market.17

The state could no longer enforce its laws, and hence, men started not showing up for the draft. Republic after republics declared independence, to be immediately recognized by the US. So, what can we conclude here? Very few deny that Yeltsin was a failure, but a failure of the worst kind. This kind of economic destruction has never been seen before outside of warfare. Government revenues and expenditures collapsed, hence, an already bad infrastructure was made far worse. Believe it or not, from 1992-1999, the Russian government collected about $6 billion all told. Hence, the state did not function.

Interest rates were high, about 300% in 1994, so credit was available only to the very rich, who controlled the (now private) central bank in the first place. Nearly everyoligarchical bank was connected with organized crime. In fact, there is no substantial difference between the oligarchs and organized crime.18

Under the oligarchs, tax collection collapsed. Industrial production went down by 25% in just a few years. By 1997, Russia had defaulted on its debts. Between 1991 and 1998,Russian GDP fell by almost 40%. Life expectancy went down from 68 to 56 years. Russians became impoverished. Money was so scarce that, by 1996, most trade was done through barter. Importantly, these oligarchs became a state within a state. Tax collection had collapsed, and the new Russia was completely broke. With the Asian meltdown in 1998, interest rates for Russian borrowing went to 300%. 19

16 Arkady Ostrovsky, Father to the Oligarchs. Financial Times, 2004.

17 Graham, Thomas. From Oligarchy to Oligarchy: The Structure of Russia's Ruling Elite. Demokratizatsiya7(3), (1997) 325-340

18 ibid

Yeltsin's popularity by 1998 went to about zero. Since then, pro-western (that is, pro freemarket) parties have polled no more than 5-7% of the vote combined. Yeltsin resigned the Presidency in 1999 and appointed Vladimir Putin as president.

A man of immense mental and physical strength, he sought to discipline the oligarchs, rebuild Russia and create a modern economy. As soon as Putin took office, he went after the media monopoly of Vladimir Guzinsky. Soon, numerous oil firms and banks were investigated for tax fraud. Some oligarchs fled the country, others like Mikhail Khordokovsky, ended up in prison. Attempting to split the oligarchs, playing one fraction against another, Putin's popularity soared, and Russian economic growth recovered.20 Since the meltdown in 1998, the Russian economy has gone from $1 trillion to $2.5 trillion by 2011. Growth rates remain high, and Russia enjoys both a trade and budget surplus. In the first eight years of Putin's presidency, the Russian GDP increased by over 75%.

Near the end of 1993, about 18-20 billion rubles had fled the country. As 1994 dawned, the population was impoverished. Malnutrition was becoming a problem, and alcoholism was increasing, as was suicide and all manner of social pathology. By 1994, thedeputy interior minister, Vladimir Kozlov, stated that about 40% of the economy is nowcriminalized. Leonov writes,

V. Polevanov [deputy prime minister at the time] notes that the total nominal valueof the voucher fund (about $1.5 trillion rubles) was 20 times less than the cost fixed assets industry, fired up for auction. One Moscow, where privatization was notcarried out on the residual and by market value, gained 20% of the enterprises 1.8 trillion rubles, while income from the rest of Russia in the first two years of privatization amounted to only $1 trillion rubles.

The above argument is abstract. In this section, a case study will be analyzed in detail to show how these forces come to be, how they operate, and how they attempt to insulate themselves from its consequences. Traumatic economic events do not occur due to abstract or impersonal forces. People, very powerful people, create the conditions that destroy entire economies. Economic self-interest is the engine of these irrational policies. Economics depicts social actors and institutions as calculating machines with no identity or purpose. The result is that economics is always treated in the passive voice, which is a fundamental mystification.

The Second Half of the 1990s

Showing Chubais complete rejection of supporting Russian interests, Leonov writes,

Soon, it became clear that Chubais committed his sins only because he was controlled by others. The real owners of Russia. In 1998, Russia was continuing to disaster, that is, total bankruptcy. At this point, even after the default, American investors finally got the message and moved their cash out of Russian securities. This strengthened the effect of the default. As he became CEO of RAO (etc), he sold to foreigners a 32% chunk of Russian energy concerns, which violated all Russian laws. This meant, of course, that foreigners now could block Russian energy policy.

Chubais and his Harvard friends did not believe in their own rhetoric. Their had quickly moved into the most luxurious apartments and appointed to themselves very high salaries. Nothing about their world was based on the market principles they hypocriticallyadvocated. While advocating the rule of law, the oligarchical firms allied with Chubais werenot paying taxes; but it just so happens that the criminal code recently passed did not considerthis a crime. In 1997, there was no question that Chubais was evading taxes as well.

19 Ibid, cf esp 330-332

20 Sakwa, R. Putin and the Oligarchs. New Political Economy, 13(2) (2008): 185-191

Admitting his guilt, he paid about 500 million rubles, which was just a small amount of what he owed. His power did not diminish, but it remains a fact that no dictator in Russian history had the power that Chubais had. In the name of market reform and the rule of law,Chubais was receiving millions from shall companies for non existent services. Alexander Lebed remained the sole source of opposition to Chubais once Yeltsin sought treatment for heart illness. Chubais, realizing the general's recent spike in popularity for negotiating successfully with Chechen rebels, invented a slew of charges that the general conspired with these same militants. Chubais had become so powerful that he was no longer required to be creative. Lebed was dismissed from his post, proving that Chubais was, in fact, a dictator.21

In the name of the rule of law, Chubais made mafia gangster Boris Berezovsky "deputy director of the security council." Potanin, another underworld billionaire, was named "Deputy Prime Minister." Chubais was rubbing Russia's face in his power, typical of thepsychotic. Soon, all major television channels were in the hands of two mafia dons, Berezovsky and Guzinsky.

Leonov writes:

By 1996, all the financial power was concentrated in the hands of a small group of businessmen almost exclusively Jewish. It consisted of Boris Berezovsky, Vladimir Gusinsky, Alexander Smolensky, Pyotr Aven, Boris Chait, and Vitaly Malkin. Major bankers also included gentiles Potanin and Vinogradov, the only two.

Since the state had collapsed, these oligarchs acted as the state treasury and profited from it. Billions continued to be looted and wound up in banks in Israel, Britain and the US. Yet, elections were coming up. An ailing Yeltsin dismissed Chernomyrdin's "government," which included Chubais. Boris Berezovsky began, in his words, to rally all the "democraticand reformist forces in Russia" to prevent his own possible dispossession.

Typical of the psychotic, these men knew no limits. They began issuing high yield junk bonds, eventually promising to pay out, in some cases, 180%. Foreigners were buying these bonds to the point where almost 30% of all marketable securities of the Russian "state"were owned by outsiders. It was another scam, and the bankers refused to pay anypercentage, and even more, demanded the return of Chubais to government. Chubais quicklyflew to Washington, warning of a communist-nationalist resurgence. $6 billion was quickly given, which was never seen again.

Forming a shadow government, Russia's bankers dictated terms to Yeltsin. In their generosity, they agreed to not demand immediate debt payment from the Russian taxpayer. Yet, to punish Yeltsin, this oligarchy declared that it will reduce the sale of foreign currency. Putting downward pressure on the ruble, the oligarchs got their revenge for the tepid rebellion of Yeltsin. This is what drove the junk bonds as high as 180%; the ruble was suddenly worth nothing. In fear, Yeltsin put the banker's friend, Chernomyrdin, back in power in late summer, 1998.22

21 Ostrovsky, Arkady. Father to the Oligarchs. Financial Times, 2004

22 Russian Federation: Selected Issues 2012 International Monetary Fund IMF Country Report No. 12/218http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2012/cr12218.pdf and Oliker, O, and T. Paley. Assessing Russia's

As typical of capitalist democracies, the political clique took the fall for the private sector. Yeltsin was blamed for the disaster, though his power was nil. That winter, Russia froze with millions unable to buy fuel. The perfect man was chosen for the prime ministership, Yevgeny Primakov, with no apparent beliefs of any kind. Quickly, Primakov demanded the return of Chubais and others who caused the mess, in order to repair it.

The default that August destroyed any bank not immediately under the oligarchs. GDPfell by 200-300 billion rubles. Industry was devastated. In one month, September of 1998, the average Russian income fell by over 30%. The Federation Council, too late, officially declared Chubais and crew as "negligent and incompetent." At the same time, the banking oligarchy was speculating in currency markets, making a profit estimated at the time of 5.5billion rubles in 1997.

Bill Clinton at the time cared only about the possibility of the Lebed coup. Primakov, however, began to strengthen the state as the only possibly solution to the total dissolution of Russia as a political entity. Soon, the dependable Zhirnovsky was again trotted out, with the occasional spray painted swastika to re-direct attention and create the "extremist" threat. More political groups, heretofore unknown, showed up in Moscow with strange uniforms and rallies. Gaidar was quick to link them with the communists, creating a convenient, single group for the masses to visualize.

In the midst of the meltdown, the system took advantage of the perfectly timed murder of Galina Starovoitova, a westernizing politician. 15,000 members of the opposition were rounded up and the "democratic forces" demanded emergency powers. The westenizers even created their own "nationalist" political group, "Fatherland" in order to siphon off opposition activists. In a display showing excellent acting, Yeltsin, in December of 1998, disbanded the group as a "threat" to "democracy." Of course, western Russia experts breathed a sigh of relief that "fascism" was not coming to Russia.

Solzhenitsyn refused to be a part of the charade, refusing to accept the Medal of St. Andrei from Yeltsin. A long time nationalist, Solzhenitsyn realized that in giving this award, Yeltsin was currying favor. Another misdirection was the attempted impeachment of Yeltsin in 1998, as if he was in charge of the disaster he only vaguely understood. Like the Clinton impeachment, it was an absurdity, deliberately designed to protect those with actual power (that is, the private sector) who created the disaster. The Commission decided that Yeltsin had "exceeded his power" as president, as if this is the reason why Muscovites just froze the previous winter. Using political figures to cover for the banking cartel is as old as the Medicis in Florence. Then, in another mockery of Russia, Yeltsin was blamed 100% for the disaster ofthe previous decade.23

Given all this, you are now ready to understand Putin. He came to power as Premier under Yeltsin when the latter resigned in 1999. Yeltsin's popularity rating was between 3-5%. All aid from the IMF was stolen and funneled into the hands of the oligarchs. Oil and gas firms had their profits pocketed in the same way, tax free. As Yeltsin retired, he gave many of his friends immunity from prosecution.

Putin as the Restorer of Sanity

Putin's leadership restored confidence in the currency, the state and the law. Oligarchystill exists in Russia (as elsewhere), but the monopoly position they used to wield is no more.Russian oil firms have come under the control, though not the ownership, of the state, sinceoligarchs were planning on selling assets to Exxon-Mobil, which led to the "KhordokovskyDecline. The Rand Corporation, 2002http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/2007/MR1442.pdf23 Guriev, S. and Andrei Rachinsky (2005). The Role of Oligarchs in Russian Capitalism. Journal of EconomicPerspectives, 19(1), (2005) 131-150 http://pages.nes.ru/sguriev/papers/GurievRachinsky.pdfaffair." Mikhail Khordokovshy was an oligarch who controlled YUKOS, one of Russia's mostpowerful oil firms. In the interest of national security, Putin placed Khordokovsky under arrest. He was indeed guilty of tax evasion, but his plans to see Russian strategic assets to Americans was too much for Putin to stomach. The more oligarchs Putin put in jail, the more popular he becomes.

Putin's policy has been to tread softly, taking on only the most powerful and obnoxious of the oligarchs. He has made strategic alliances with some in order to intimidate others While Russia has been rebuilt and the state became powerful, the oligarchs still have fight left in them, and Putin acts cautiously. Putin's basic approach has been to guide investment and control the flow of investment funds so they benefit Russia, not the oligarchy. The state does not own the economy, but it does oversee it. The oligarchy gave Putin no other choice.

The oligarchs financed all of Yeltsin's election campaigns and public image in Russia at the time. The point was to keep Yeltsin in power long enough so that the oligarchs could get their cash out of the country. They knew that eventually, a popular government would punish them. Putin, to a great extent, was this punishment.

Putin created an entirely new Russian government, when local districts under his control. Needless to say, the regional governments had been bought, and Putin could have no dealings with them. Some of them even had their own foreign policy! All those sent to govern the regions were from the security services or the army. This was no accident. Putin restructured the Upper House (the Federation Council) so as to permit his government to have a say in who gets appointed to it. 24

Putin insisted that local law must be consistent with federal law. This is because local leaders were creating their own countries, and this could not stand. Putin then permitted oligarchs and their puppets to be tried as violators of the constitution. Let me give you one example. In 2003, the oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky had taken over the Russian oil giant Yukos. Now, Putin got intelligence that Khodorkovsky was planning on entering intobusiness with Exxon-Mobil, permitting their penetration into the Russian market. Realizing this was a security threat (which it was, since it would mean that Exxon would control much of Russia's oil), he had Khodorkovsky arrested. Is list of crimes was well known, but the stategot him on taxes, which was a no-brainier. Putin was immediately attacked or "authoritarianism" by the press in the west.

So why does the west heap abuse on this man?

He reformed the tax code, putting in place a 13% flat tax on all income and investments. About half of regional prosecutors were removed from their positions due toe xtreme corruption. All Russians knew that already. He quickly ended the war in Chechnya, making sure a Chechen, pro-Russian government was put in charge.

He brought together the top 13 oligarchical families to a conference he organized. He told them that their rule was over. He forced them to pay millions in back taxes to the state, and to create several important charitable funds with their stolen money.

He was going to use the state to pressure their media into being more objective, pro-Russian and pro-state. Since the oligarchs controlled the press, it made sense that this had to be fought. To call this "assaulting press freedom" is absurd.

He realized that the political opposition in Russia was created by the oligarchy. Hence, there was no actual party development. Few parties had an agenda (except the communists, who did well), and these were mostly personal vehicles for their founders.

Putin also shifted investment away from oil and towards higher end items. This was needed to diversify the economy. The judiciary is independent. Today, about 70% of people who sue the state for various reasons win. Putin also introduced the jury.25

24 Sakwa, R. Putin and the Oligarchs. New Political Economy, 13(2), (2008), 185-191

It's tough to argue with Putin's success:

Labor productivity grew 49 percent 1995-2005, ranging from a 23 percent improvement in retailing to a 73 percent rise in construction. Total factor productivity grew by 5.8 percent per year, and the World Bank estimates that only one third of that increase came from increased capacity utilization. Firm turnover (i.e. the exit of inefficient firms and the entry of new ones) accounts for half the total improvement. Stock market capitalization rose to 44 percent of GDP by 2005, while the RTS index went from 300 in 2000 to 2,360 in December 2007.

In September 2006 the market capitalization of the 200 biggest firms was $833 billion (one third of which was Gazprom). The percent of the population living in poverty fell from 38 percent in 19998 to 9.5 percent in 2004, and the share of family budgets spent on food fell from 73% in 1992to 54% in 2004.

The only macroeconomic indicator that gives cause for concern is inflation, which dropped from 20 percent in 2000 to 9 percent in2006, before creeping back up to 11-12 percent level.26

Now, "market capitalization" and other such elite measures are not the whole story. They can exist with an economy failing in other respects. However, before wealth can b eredistributed, it has to exist. Accumulating what can then be redistributed are what these numbers are telling us. Given all this, however, it should come as no surprise that those who are condemning Putin today backed the privatization deals 20 years ago.

W. Thompson, writing in the Guardian in the Summer of 2003, states:

Fiscal consolidation has probably contributed more than any other single factor to restoring the authority and legitimacy of the formerly bankrupt state. Exceptionally favorable economic circumstances account for much of this improvement, but so also do better expenditure management, the reform of tax legislation and more efficient administration. The state's rule-making capacity has also grown markedly.

Unlike Yeltsin, Putin has a compliant parliament and presides over a government that, for all its internal divisions, is not riven by the factional conflicts that marked the 1990s. The result has been a flood of new legislation, much of it directly concerned with state reconstruction.27

Thompson speaks the truth. "Exceptionally favorable economic circumstances "can not cause national success. They do not in Ukraine, much of Africa or Detroit. They must be identified and utilized with substantial skill. Circumstances, of themselves, tell us nothing. The "compliant parliament" exists because of Putin's popularity, though Thomas seems to suggest that such legislative cooperation is required in times of emergency. Worried about bureaucratic corruption, Putin passed several laws limiting the discretionary power of federal agencies. Reform has reduced corruption, endemic at onepoint. Business is much easier to accomplish. Putin's reelection numbers roughly mirror his popularity in the country, and his opposition, backed by the US, has no agenda whatsoever.

25 Lavelle, P Putin's "Authoritarianism" vs. the "Commentariat". Commentary, 2004ahttp://www.futurebrief.com/peterlavelle004.asp and Lavelle, P Russia's Economic Future. Commentary,2004 http://www.futurebrief.com/peterlavelle.asp

26 Rutland, P. Putin's Economic Record. Wesleyan University, CT, 2008

27 Thompson, W. Putin's Success. The Guardian; June 2003 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/jun/08/russia.theworldtodayessays

They simply want more Yeltsinism.

As of January 1 of this 2013, Russia's anti-bribery legislation is the toughest in the world. In Russia, about 92% of American businesses think that Russian investment is a good thing, and that Russia is a decent place to do business. The IMF has stated that part of Putin's success is is utilization of capital that was left idle. Utilization of the country's resources has increased from about 50% in 2000 to over 76% today. But in order to do this, he needed to destroy the power of the oligarchs at the regional level.

Conclusion

The simple fact is that Putin's authoritarianism was forced upon him. He did use a heavy hand, but not nearly as heavy as Yeltsin. He realized that it was either a strong hand or chaos. As the state has been rebuilt, so have oversight bodies empowered to check it'sbehavior. Putin launched a bunch of commissions to look into corruption in different areas o the country, knowing full well that his popularity is based on that, plus economic growth.Putin needed to increase the potential of the state before the state itself could grow. Hence,the reformation of all police agencies gave them a direct line to the Kremlin, but, by 2002,crime was still rife. Now, all that has changed.

It makes sense to call Putin a reaction to Yeltsin, chaos and oligarchy. His policies make no sense without the background. Things appear differently when contrasted with the free-fall collapse of the Yeltsin years.

Putin then did two things: first, to build up the rudiments of a new state, one that can permit business to thrive and destroy oligarchy. He needed a new law code, more centralized structures and an end to regional independence. Second, he was to create a new macroeconomic structure, with strong fiscal and oversight measures. Russia now runs a trade and budget deficit. He then stabilized the currency.

Once economic growth took off, he tried to get as much money out of foreign banks as possible. He first backed big business (for the sake of growth), then shifted more recently to backing smaller business. He then engaged in education and pension reform. He turned Russia to the east, allying with China to cooperate in their tremendous economic growth.

It is easy to forget that all that Putin is "blamed" for was suggested by western elites for Yeltsin. Liberal democracy in the eastern bloc has, without exception, merely been a cover for the most cynical sort of exploitation. In the name of "democracy" the eastern bloc melted into the bank accounts of both foreign and local elites. Warlords developed with private armies that, in the 1990s, were the subject of some journalistic treatment. A Russia in collapse is far more dangerous for the west than anything Putin has dreamed about.

Rationally, the enforced, rehearsed and studied contempt of Putin can only exist because the west had other plans for Russia, as a hinterland for cheap, educated labor and resources. Western collapse is assured precisely because Russia is not prostrate and under the thumb of Exxon-Mobil. Putin will have the last laugh, which, when the smoke clears, is the only real cause of the west's irrational hatred.

... ... ...

[Mar 10, 2018] The military industrial complex needs an enemy to keep Western Europe in line. The Russians serve this role as Boogeyman

Notable quotes:
"... For the West, the demonization of Vladimir Putin is not a policy; it is an alibi for the absence of one. ..."
"... Ultimately the US government's anti-Russian animus does not matter. US government propaganda intensifies in lockstep with Washington's impotence and discredit. These beltway tantrums are a good sign. ..."
"... But in fact, comprehensive and exhaustive evidence shows that the US is more repressive than Russia. ..."
"... Russia is no longer a communist totalitarian state. In the intervening 30 years since the collapse of the Soviet empire, the yankee imperium itself has completed its morph into a quasi-fascist empire begun over the cold war decades. It is, therefore, imperative that Mr. Buchanan's wise counsel be followed if we are to survive. ..."
"... Few Americans understand the extent of the anti-Russian propaganda and the massive profiteering by military contractors that results. Watch this recent Jimmy Dore clip to learn more. Most are shocked to learn the USA spends twelve times more. Our increase this year alone is much greater than Russian entire military budget! ..."
"... The antipathy to Russia comes from the US Deep State, not Trump or the American people. Anti-Russian hysteria is derived entirely from America's Jewish press and Deep State with their "Russian hacking" and "influencing elections" stories – as if the Israel lobby doesn't influence US elections?? ..."
"... Neocons, Izzy firsters, and globalist banksters, mostly. Then there are the stooges like the McCainiacs and the Hillaryhyenas Then we have stupid, gullible people who believe their rot, essentially the rot believed by preceding generations including the brain dead, unquestioning, "greatest" generation of pseudo tough guy servile suck ups. ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | www.unz.com

33 Comments to "Time to Get Over the Russophobia"

RobinG , March 9, 2018 at 5:59 am GMT

"And Russians today enjoy freedoms of speech, assembly, religion, travel, politics, and the press that the generations before 1989 never knew."

And these are freedoms that Americans, since 2001, are enjoying less and less. To add insult to injury, it's not only our gov't., but our neighbors who seek to curtail Freedom of Speech. One is likely to be ostracized for not succumbing to the Russiagate hysteria.

This excellent interview discusses motives for this propaganda.

Will Russiagate Help the Israel Lobby Censor Al Jazeera?

Anon Disclaimer , March 9, 2018 at 6:40 am GMT
'Russophobia' is not OUR problem.

Most Americans would have no 'Russophobia' if not for the crazy media. After all, most Americans, Demmy or Repuby, are wholly oblivious to world affairs. They only care about pop culture.

So, why did Russia become a big deal?

Not because of the people. It was because of the media and deep state. Who runs them? Jewish globalists. Why do Jews hate Russia? It's historic.

So, the real problem is Jewish Supremacism. 'Russophobia' is just a symptom of it.

Jewish globalists HATE anything that stands in the way of their total domination.

Russia clearly isn't anti-Jewish. Jews are 0.2% of the population but make up 20% of the richest people there. So, why do Jews hate Russia? They haven't been allowed to gain total power as in the US. And Jews fear that the Russian example might inspire other white nations. And only total mastery and domination will please Jewish globalists who are in supremacist mode.

That's what this is about. All this hysteria about Russia hacking blah blah is just Jewish globalists trying to discredit Russia in the eyes of goyim.

Now, given the Jewish globalist mindset, why would they abandon anti-Russian hysteria? It's not about Russia. It's about them. They will do ANYTHING to serve their own interests.

Anon Disclaimer , March 9, 2018 at 8:46 am GMT
Unfortunately, we will not get over it for the following reasons:

1. The military industrial complex needs an enemy to keep Western Europe in line. The Russians serve this role as Boogeyman.

2. The LA-NYC-DC media axis has a strong hatred of Russians because they are White and opposed to gays; never mind the fact that the public at large could care less. The axis controls the megaphone, so Russiophobia it is.

3. Russiophobia is the means by which these Deep State traitors and axis allies are attempting to overthrow our elected president. Not a single day has gone by that I haven't seen some BS Russia gate crap from these late night propaganda shows or the controlled media. Russiophobia is literally the only thing they have going because their immigration and trade policies are unpopular.

4. Money. Lots of cash to be made in weapon sales from a new Cold War. Since the Chinese are Chinese, a Cold War with them would be 'racist' but since Russia is white

5. The Israel lobby has their sights set on Iran and Russia stands in the way. Thus, the lobby fiercely opposes Putin.

PiltdownMan , March 9, 2018 at 9:53 am GMT

For the West, the demonization of Vladimir Putin is not a policy; it is an alibi for the absence of one.

Putin should come to realize that, whatever his grievances, a policy of military impositions would produce another Cold War. For its part, the United States needs to avoid treating Russia as an aberrant to be patiently taught rules of conduct established by Washington. Putin is a serious strategist -- on the premises of Russian history. Understanding U.S. values and psychology are not his strong suits. Nor has understanding Russian history and psychology been a strong point of U.S. policymakers.

Leaders of all sides should return to examining outcomes, not compete in posturing.

-- Henry Kissinger, in 2014

reiner Tor , March 9, 2018 at 11:45 am GMT

But what Russian leader, save Yeltsin, has not been an autocrat?

How was Yeltsin not an autocrat? He illegally dissolved the parliament by military force killing hundreds, illegally ousted his own vice president who was elected on the same ticket as himself, had a new constitution accepted by a plebiscite with massive fraud, then had himself re-elected with massive fraud, while some 100% of the media and 90+% of the press were under his or his allies' control. He then handpicked a successor who was elected in 2000 with near total control of the media (and massive fraud, though probably it was only needed to avoid a second round).

If that's not an autocrat, then what is? How could Yeltsin be any less of an autocrat than Putin?

Renoman , March 9, 2018 at 12:16 pm GMT
Where is the threat? What have they done? Yes they have good weapons and thank God they do or the crazy Israeli led US Generals would surely have nuked someone by now.
The economy? About the same as Italy, big whoop.
Resource rich, peaceful, mind their own business sort of folks not being led around by Gays goofs and assholes like the USA, why not do business with em? They are not the BOOGIE MAN!
I'm sure trump would have been over there cutting deals a year ago if it weren't for the Hillary crazies. What a bunch of looser's they are, they make me sick.
restless94110 , March 9, 2018 at 2:42 pm GMT
@Anon

Very good collection of Buchanan's erros and omissions, but you missed one:

Neither Putin nor Franklin Roosevelt were autocrats. They were (or are about to be) elected by their people 4 times. They were and are very popular leaders.

The Constitutional Amendment limiting a President to 2 terms should have never been passed and should be repealed (or if not, then add all of Congress to that 2 term limit nonsense).

The only reason for a 2-term limit was hatred of Roosevelt by idiots like Buchanan, and the so-called "tradition" of Presidents only staying or lasting for 2 terms.

Both reasons are obvious poppycock. Buchanan and his ilk never complain about the 10 terms of many Senators and House members. Yet a beloved and popular President is somehow an autocrat?

What a moronic smear. Mirriam-Webster's definition of autocrat is: a person (such as a monarch) ruling with unlimited authority; one who has undisputed influence or power.

FDR like Putin did not have unlimited power, neither did(do) either have undispouted power or influence.

You are dead wrong about both Presidents, Pat. Shame on you, you know that you know better.

Charta 17 , March 9, 2018 at 2:56 pm GMT
Ultimately the US government's anti-Russian animus does not matter. US government propaganda intensifies in lockstep with Washington's impotence and discredit. These beltway tantrums are a good sign.

When this article says 'us,' I don't think it conflates the US police state and the American people. Many Americans suffer from induced Russophobia. They feel they have to qualify any opinion with a general complaint about Russian oppression.

But in fact, comprehensive and exhaustive evidence shows that the US is more repressive than Russia.

You can compare them for yourself, point-by-point, in terms of all the legal duties of the state.

The Russian government has put itself on a self-improvement treadmill of ongoing independent review by all the nations that commit themselves to human rights. The US government evades independent review and undermines your rights with bureaucratic red tape and bad faith.

Russians get a better deal than you do. What happens when we all realize it? We'll do to the USA what we did to the USSR. We'll knock it over, rip it apart, replace it with a country based on rights and rule of law. That's the underlying panic of the bureaucrats at Langley. Their real enemy is rights and rule of law.

David , March 9, 2018 at 2:57 pm GMT
@reiner Tor

I don't know what Buchanan meant, but maybe it was that Yeltsin was a western stooge.

Achmed E. Newman , Website March 9, 2018 at 4:26 pm GMT
@anonymous

I agree, and Mr. Buchanan comes off sounding naive in quite a few of his columns. He knows what's going on in the world. He also knows American politics, but only in terms of who is on this committee, who will vote yea on that bill there, whether there is a precedent for this, etc. and lots of history on all this. What he does not seem to understand is that it is not 1965 or even 1990, as far as the way things get actually run in this country.

There are no civil agreements "across the aisle" that will be held to, no precedent from a court decision from 1995 that will, of course, be upheld by rule-of-law judges, and that sort of thing. It is anarcho-tyranny at this point, from top to bottom .

Achmed E. Newman , Website March 9, 2018 at 4:38 pm GMT
@restless94110

Neither Putin nor Franklin Roosevelt were autocrats. They were (or are about to be) elected by their people 4 times. They were and are very popular leaders.

I don't know Russian politics that well, but I imagine Putin would be very popular. As far as relations with American is concerned he's a great guy to have there, and things would be lots better between our countries without the American Deep State .

... ... ...

TomSchmidt , March 9, 2018 at 4:56 pm GMT
True, Vladimir Putin is an autocrat seeking a fourth term, like FDR.

That, my friends, is how one does propaganda.

Anon Disclaimer , March 9, 2018 at 6:41 pm GMT
@Anon

Buchanan needs to address the Jewish Power directly. WE are not behind anti-Russianism. If Jews were call a halt to anti-Russianism, everyone else would follow suit since most of the goys inside the Beltway are shabbos cucks.

Inque Yutani , March 9, 2018 at 6:46 pm GMT
Does he not understand the concept if the Narrative? They KNOW it's bullshît. It's just a tool to use on the marching morons.
exiled off mainstreet , March 9, 2018 at 6:56 pm GMT
Russia is no longer a communist totalitarian state. In the intervening 30 years since the collapse of the Soviet empire, the yankee imperium itself has completed its morph into a quasi-fascist empire begun over the cold war decades. It is, therefore, imperative that Mr. Buchanan's wise counsel be followed if we are to survive.
Jonathan Tokeley , March 9, 2018 at 8:31 pm GMT
@anonymous

There WAS a referendum in the Crimea -- I have a copy of it before me, as I write, provided by my wife, a Ukrainian -- and it asks whether you (the voter), wish to retain the Constitution of '56, by which the Crimea was ceded by Khruschev to Ukraine, as a gift, or whether you (the voter) wish to return to Russian hegemony?

The vote for the latter was 97%.

All the talk of "annexation" was nonsense. There were no troops involved, no movement of military, and the Russian Federation Base, which contractually was allowed to host 10,000 troops, was not involved.

It was a perfectly peaceful SECESSION from Ukraine

Please don't talk nonsense

Carlton Meyer , Website March 9, 2018 at 8:35 pm GMT
Few Americans understand the extent of the anti-Russian propaganda and the massive profiteering by military contractors that results. Watch this recent Jimmy Dore clip to learn more. Most are shocked to learn the USA spends twelve times more. Our increase this year alone is much greater than Russian entire military budget!
Anon Disclaimer , March 10, 2018 at 12:11 am GMT
"Pat, you need to get over the Putinist propaganda. There was no coup in Ukraine."

Literally the next sentence: "The people rose up because they refused to be betrayed into Russian hands by Yanukovich." These State Department paid trolls really need to get some better training. State Dept Gets $40 Million to Fund Troll Farm:

https://news.antiwar.com/2018/02/26/state-dept-gets-40-million-to-fund-troll-farm/

U.S. Repeals Propaganda Ban, Spreads Government-Made News to Americans

https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/14/u-s-repeals-propaganda-ban-spreads-government-made-news-to-americans/

Noah Way , March 10, 2018 at 12:36 am GMT
Syria was never about "Assad putting down peaceful protests". It is about pipelines – both existing Russian and potential new ones from Qatar that need a route (a la Trans Afghanistan Pipeline), geopolitical dominance, regional destabilization (for Israel and the MIC), and revenge for Putin derailing the imminent US invasion of Syria by brokering a deal for Assad to eliminate chemical weapons.
Twodees Partain , March 10, 2018 at 2:18 am GMT
"What is the matter with us?"

It isn't us, Pat, at least not ordinary people like you and me who have no input into policy decisions. It's the neocons, zionists, and the lunatics in government who are pushing this Russophobia. They have a goal in mind and it looks as though they are afraid to reveal what it is.

Whatever that goal is, it's not likely to be good for either the US or Russia.

Twodees Partain , March 10, 2018 at 2:25 am GMT
@Jonathan Tokeley

Jonathon, he was quoting Pat Buchanan, not talking nonsense himself. I'm sure he agrees with what you said about the referendum.

Now if you'd ask Pat to stop talking nonsense, that would be like asking a fish not to shit in the water.

MarkinLA , March 10, 2018 at 3:04 am GMT
@Quartermaster

Russia wasn't going to lose the Sevastopol base, but when Crimea is returned to its rightful owners, they will lose it, as they deserve.

Are you planning to take it back for them?

polskijoe , March 10, 2018 at 5:25 am GMT
Good article.

But if the US goes after China, Russia will probably side with China. The US did backstab Russia a couple times.

Miro23 , March 10, 2018 at 8:57 am GMT

Yet, what is also clear is that Putin hoped and believed that, with the election of Trump, Russia might be able to restore respectful if not friendly relations with the United States.

Clearly, Putin wanted that, as did Trump.

That's what it looked like, and Trump clearly said that he wanted better relations with Russia.

The antipathy to Russia comes from the US Deep State, not Trump or the American people. Anti-Russian hysteria is derived entirely from America's Jewish press and Deep State with their "Russian hacking" and "influencing elections" stories – as if the Israel lobby doesn't influence US elections??

USA as a country, has been hopelessly captured by Zionist Jews who have their own agenda directed against Russia (and the US public).

jacques sheete , March 10, 2018 at 1:27 pm GMT

Again, what is the matter with this generation?

Neocons, Izzy firsters, and globalist banksters, mostly. Then there are the stooges like the McCainiacs and the Hillaryhyenas Then we have stupid, gullible people who believe their rot, essentially the rot believed by preceding generations including the brain dead, unquestioning, "greatest" generation of pseudo tough guy servile suck ups.

Boycott 'em, mock 'em, and play the victim card just like the imaginary heroes and bureaucrat messiahs typically do.

for-the-record , March 10, 2018 at 2:03 pm GMT
@Jonathan Tokeley

whi ch contractually was allowed to host 10,000 troops, was not involved.

Actually, it was 25,000, I believe.

KenH , March 10, 2018 at 3:29 pm GMT

Bibi Netanyahu has met many times with Putin,

That's because Bibi is playing good cop while he outsources the role of bad cop to the Jewish diaspora in the West and specifically AIPAC. This is in keeping with the age old Jewish strategy of betting on both horses so only a certain segment of Jewry gets blamed and reaps the consequences.

Putin has to know this and the power American Jews and their goy auxiliaries have over U.S. foreign policy.

[Mar 10, 2018] In 1977 Zbigniew Brzezinski, as President Carter's National Security Adviser, forms the Nationalities Working Group (NWG) dedicated to the idea of weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions.

Notable quotes:
"... In 1977 Zbigniew Brzezinski, as President Carter's National Security Adviser, forms the Nationalities Working Group (NWG) dedicated to the idea of weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions. ..."
"... State Department official Henry Precht will later recall that Brzezinski had the idea "that Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets." [Scott, 2007, pp. 67] In November 1978, President Carter appointed George Ball head of a special White House Iran task force under Brzezinski. Ball recommends the US should drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the radical Islamist opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini. This idea is based on ideas from British Islamic expert Dr. Bernard Lewis, who advocates the balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. The chaos would spread in what he also calls an "arc of crisis" and ultimately destabilize the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

catherine -> SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 12:21 AM

''Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. ''

The locust keep trying and trying, destruction is their life's work.

'1977-1981: Nationalities Working Group Advocates Using Militant Islam Against Soviet Union'

In 1977 Zbigniew Brzezinski, as President Carter's National Security Adviser, forms the Nationalities Working Group (NWG) dedicated to the idea of weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions. The Islamic populations are regarded as prime targets. Richard Pipes, the father of Daniel Pipes, takes over the leadership of the NWG in 1981. Pipes predicts that with the right encouragement Soviet Muslims will "explode into genocidal fury" against Moscow. According to Richard Cottam, a former CIA official who advised the Carter administration at the time, after the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1978, Brzezinski favored a "de facto alliance with the forces of Islamic resurgence, and with the Republic of Iran." [Dreyfuss, 2005, pp. 241, 251 - 256]

'November 1978-February 1979: Some US Officials Want to Support Radical Muslims to Contain Soviet Union'

State Department official Henry Precht will later recall that Brzezinski had the idea "that Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets." [Scott, 2007, pp. 67] In November 1978, President Carter appointed George Ball head of a special White House Iran task force under Brzezinski. Ball recommends the US should drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the radical Islamist opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini. This idea is based on ideas from British Islamic expert Dr. Bernard Lewis, who advocates the balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. The chaos would spread in what he also calls an "arc of crisis" and ultimately destabilize the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union

Kooshy -> catherine... , 04 February 2018 at 12:06 PM
Yes, US was the first country to proudly deliver Manpads to be used by "rebels" (Mojahadin later Taleban) against USSR in Afghanistan back in 80s. And, as per the architect of support for the rebels (Zbigniew Brzezinski) very proud of it with no regret. With that in mind, I don't see how western politicians, the western governments and their related proxy war planers, will be regretting, even sadden, once god forbid we see passenger planes with loved ones are shot down taking off or landing at various western airports and other places around the word. Just like how superficialy with crocodile tears in their eyes they acted in aftermath of the terrorist events in various western cities in this past 16 years. Gods knows what will happens to us if the opposite side start to supply his own proxies with lethal anti air weapons. "Proudly", I don't think anybody in west cares or will regret of such an escalation.

[Mar 10, 2018] Soros role in Fusion GPS? "Follow the money."

Soros might well be a front company for an intelligence agency.
Notable quotes:
"... a former FBI investigator, Feinstein staffer and now a Fusion GPS operative ..."
"... This is quite plausible. Silicon Valley billionaires are definitely "investing" in their PC propaganda agenda. The Seattle billionaire and now the world's wealthiest man owns the neocon rag published from our nation's capital. He's also got lucrative contracts from our IC. Alexa is quite happy to listen into all your private conversations at home. ..."
"... "This funding is critical to ensuring that we continue an aggressive response to malign influence and disinformation and that we can leverage deeper partnerships with our allies, Silicon Valley, and other partners in this fight," said Steve Goldstein, undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs." ..."
"... I have often wondered if Soros is not a front company for an intelligence agency. ..."
"... i think it was the open Russia foundation that was funded by Soros, but i see former owner of yukos - Mikhail Khodorkovsky has his name attached to it... ..."
"... It seems the Magnitsky Act is a critical juncture in all the developments towards singling out russia for everything.. ..."
"... i don't know soros or khodorkovskys connection to bill browder in all of this, but would be curious to know. it seems they are all operating to bring down russia, in some way, shape or form.. ..."
"... My understanding is that Mr. Soros has funded, participated and closely associated himself with US' IC community, for various regime change and copes mostly Eastern Europe in past decades. We know that US IC community has the agenda ( a hard on) for discrediting and removing legally elected president of US from his office. We know US Democratic Party has paid and hired members of foreign intelligence for connecting presidential campaign of DT to Russians, for a possible killing of 2 birds with one shot. We know the cheassy silicon billionaires, are no other than the same old Move on Organization which to the bone are clintonian DLC, or the latter day Obamachies. We know Mr. Soros an Easter European migrant like Zbig is totally and fiercely anti anti Russian. ..."
"... When all facts put to gather, sounds like all these elements, entities, and personalities share a common motif and goal, which centers on anti Trump and anti Puttin Russia. When put together, makes a villain's marriage in haven. ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

"In a Daily Caller op-ed calling the Russian meddling narrative a " false public manipulation ," Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska claims that Daniel Jones - a former FBI investigator, Feinstein staffer and now a Fusion GPS operative - told the Russian Oligarch's lawyer in March, 2017 that Fusion GPS was funded by " a group of Silicon Valley billionaires and George Soros. "" Zerohedge

------------

Now, this is something different. I have no idea what the relative truthiness of this may be, but... pl

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-09/russian-billionaire-claims-fusion-gps-funded-soros

Posted at 12:33 PM in Russiagate | Permalink

Jack , 09 March 2018 at 01:58 PM

Sir

This is quite plausible. Silicon Valley billionaires are definitely "investing" in their PC propaganda agenda. The Seattle billionaire and now the world's wealthiest man owns the neocon rag published from our nation's capital. He's also got lucrative contracts from our IC. Alexa is quite happy to listen into all your private conversations at home.

JW , 09 March 2018 at 02:39 PM
I appreciate your use of the phrase ' relative truthiness', and I suggest this latest truthiness is just part of the movie, and a great movie it is.

Still, it's about time Soros showed up and he's in good company too, along with this week's poisoned Russian spy and a paid prostitute with a Trump story to tell. Next ?

We're probably due for a Clinton/Russia-related Julian Assange document dump, some Russian intel officer arrests in DC and....a new Steele-equivalent originator offering a more respectable document since after all any evidence is good evidence. Anything to keep the show going and the audience enthralled !

As for Soros himself, I suggest that there are plenty of Soros's with plenty of attached money trails, but George has the watch. All he is missing is the white cat on his lap.

Peter AU , 09 March 2018 at 03:04 PM
Silicon Valley. A mention of them in this Politico article
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/26/state-defense-russia-propaganda-426626

"This funding is critical to ensuring that we continue an aggressive response to malign influence and disinformation and that we can leverage deeper partnerships with our allies, Silicon Valley, and other partners in this fight," said Steve Goldstein, undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs."

The entry at wikipedia on Fredric Terman, Stanford university and silicon valley is interesting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Terman

Soros? All NGO's that apear in MSM articles, I look up their funding. Most funding traces back to State Dep NED and Soros, along with other older money 'philanthropist' type foundations.

I have often wondered if Soros is not a front company for an intelligence agency.

james , 09 March 2018 at 04:02 PM
oleg deripaska is a colorful Russian oligarch...

i think it was the open Russia foundation that was funded by Soros, but i see former owner of yukos - Mikhail Khodorkovsky has his name attached to it...

It seems the Magnitsky Act is a critical juncture in all the developments towards singling out russia for everything..

i don't know soros or khodorkovskys connection to bill browder in all of this, but would be curious to know. it seems they are all operating to bring down russia, in some way, shape or form..

Kooshy , 09 March 2018 at 05:04 PM
My understanding is that Mr. Soros has funded, participated and closely associated himself with US' IC community, for various regime change and copes mostly Eastern Europe in past decades. We know that US IC community has the agenda ( a hard on) for discrediting and removing legally elected president of US from his office. We know US Democratic Party has paid and hired members of foreign intelligence for connecting presidential campaign of DT to Russians, for a possible killing of 2 birds with one shot. We know the cheassy silicon billionaires, are no other than the same old Move on Organization which to the bone are clintonian DLC, or the latter day Obamachies. We know Mr. Soros an Easter European migrant like Zbig is totally and fiercely anti anti Russian.

When all facts put to gather, sounds like all these elements, entities, and personalities share a common motif and goal, which centers on anti Trump and anti Puttin Russia. When put together, makes a villain's marriage in haven.

Fred , 09 March 2018 at 05:23 PM
Interesting that a former staffer from Senator Feinstein is implicated in the mess. How many others are there who have been doing the same thing? I wonder if Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultt's IT staffer Mr. Arwan was accessing any relevant information while he was on her payroll and for whom?

[Mar 10, 2018] There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this. ..."
"... Important support for these strategies was provided by the 'StratCom' network centred around the late Boris Berezovsky, which clearly collaborated closely with MI6. As was apparent from the witness list at Sir Robert Owen's Inquiry into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, which produced a report based essentially on a recycling of claims made by the network's members, key players were on your side of the Atlantic – notably Alex Goldfarb, Yuri Shvets, and Yuri Felshtinsky. ..."
"... it seems to me the usa and uk have been tied at the hip for a very long time... when it comes to foreign affairs policy and wars - the one will always vouch for the other without hesitation... it tells me the relationship is really deep.. ..."
"... I and my friends consider it a given that most, if not all, anglo-zionist moves in the ME are to "provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area. " It is an open secret that the izzies are the reason why a few Russians, some Turks, lots of Kurds and countless Arabs are dying in the Syrian battlefields. Another open secret: the takfiris and kurds have been, and are, supported by the West. That the "masters of the universe™" have been conceiving and doubling down on such disastrous policies give lie to their much-vaunted "intelligence". ..."
"... It is the very FACT of Trump even getting elected at ALL which outrages and terrifies them so much. They are used to seeing themselves as successful manipulators and engineers of every major event. They were engineering the whole electoral battlespace to get Clinton elected. The mere fact of Trump's victory in the teeth of their Electoral Engineering for Clinton is an act of defiance which they will not tolerate. ..."
"... And if they fail to bring Trump down at all, they will stand revealed as being defeatable. And this is their big fear. That if people see they have defeated the Borg once on keeping Trump in the teeth of Borg's efforts, that people might try to defeat and smash down the Borg on another issue. And then another. And then another after that. ..."
"... Because it is not possible to do on fundamental level yet, especially with US foreign policy establishment and so called consensus being built almost entirely, in ideological and, most importantly, cadres senses, on the ultimate exceptionalist agenda in which Russia is the ultimate obstacle and enemy. Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. ..."
"... They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress West's posture; say 2040 ..."
"... In 1977 Zbigniew Brzezinski, as President Carter's National Security Adviser, forms the Nationalities Working Group (NWG) dedicated to the idea of weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions. ..."
"... State Department official Henry Precht will later recall that Brzezinski had the idea "that Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets." [Scott, 2007, pp. 67] In November 1978, President Carter appointed George Ball head of a special White House Iran task force under Brzezinski. Ball recommends the US should drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the radical Islamist opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini. This idea is based on ideas from British Islamic expert Dr. Bernard Lewis, who advocates the balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. The chaos would spread in what he also calls an "arc of crisis" and ultimately destabilize the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union ..."
"... About relation Steele-MI6, well, you never leave your IS. Or to put it in another way, you are never out of the scope of your past IS ..."
"... No, three years at tops and could be much sooner if dimes starting dropping by exposed people that don't want to take the fall for their superiors whom they always detested. One possible thing to get the process started sooner is if the recent Russian Intelligence delegation to DC that Smoothie mentions on another thread gave the current administration, as a diplomatic courtesy of course, the audio recordings of Madame Sectary Nuland's infamous mental meltdown at Kaliningrad. No telling what beans were spilled in her moment of panic, but I am willing to bet key names were dropped. Either way the time is coming. ..."
"... Especially, once American policy-makers who saw and experienced war (Ike, George Marshall's generation) departed things started to roll down hill with Reagan bringing on board a whole collection of neocons. ..."
"... Unawareness is always dangerous, a complete blackout in relations between two nuclear powers is more than dangerous--it is completely reckless. Again, the way CW 1.0 is perceived in the current US "elites" it becomes extremely tempting to repeat it. Electing Hillary was another step in unleashing CW 2.0 by people who have no understanding of what they were doing. ..."
"... Obama started crushing US-Russian relations before any campaigns were launched and before Trump was even seriously considered a GOP nominee, let alone a real contender. New confrontation hinged on HRC being elected. In fact, she was one of the major driving forces behind a serious of geopolitical anti-Russian moves. Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in HRC campaign long before any Steele's Dossier. This was a program. ..."
"... IMO, the bigger problem for American not shying away from wars, or being silent about them , is when your home, your mom and dad' home, the town you grew up in, are immune and away from the war. ..."
"... The security and safety of the two oceans, encourages or at least, in an all volunteer military makes it a secondary problem for regular people, to worry about. ..."
"... A particular interesting feature of those on the British side – in which we now know Christopher Steele must have played a leading role – were the bizarre gyrations those responsible were going through trying to explain away the extraordinary fact that when he had broken the story of his poisoning, Litvinenko had pointed the finger of suspicion at his Italian associate Mario Scaramella. ..."
"... Of course later reports in the Steele Dossier go hand in hand with a larger public relations campaign. Creating reality? Irony alert: as informer/source I would by then know what the other side wants to hear. ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Steele, Shvets, Levinson, Litvinenko and the 'Billion Dollar Don.'

In the light of the suggestion in the Nunes memo that Steele was 'a longtime FBI source' it seems worth sketching out some background, which may also make it easier to see some possible reasons why he 'was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.'

There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this.

This agenda has involved hopes for 'régime change' in Russia, whether as the result of an oligarchic coup, a popular revolt, or some combination of both. Also central have been hopes for a further 'rollback' of Russia influence in the post-Soviet space, both in areas now independent, such as Ukraine, and also ones still part of the Russian Federation, notably Chechnya.

And, crucially, it involved exploiting the retreat of Russian power from the Middle East for 'régime change' projects which it was hoped would provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area.

Important support for these strategies was provided by the 'StratCom' network centred around the late Boris Berezovsky, which clearly collaborated closely with MI6. As was apparent from the witness list at Sir Robert Owen's Inquiry into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, which produced a report based essentially on a recycling of claims made by the network's members, key players were on your side of the Atlantic – notably Alex Goldfarb, Yuri Shvets, and Yuri Felshtinsky.

The question of what links these had, or did not have, with elements in U.S. intelligence agencies is thus a critical one.

In making some sense of it, the fact that one key figure we know to have been involved in this network was missing at the Inquiry – the former FBI agent Robert Levinson, who disappeared on the Iranian island of Kish in March 2007 – is important.

Unfortunately, I only recently came across a book on Levinson published in 2016 by the 'New York Times' journalist Barry Meier, which is now hopefully winging its way across the Atlantic. From the accounts of the book I have seen, such as one by Jeff Stein in 'Newsweek', it seems likely that its author did not look at any of the evidence presented at Owen's Inquiry.

(See http://www.newsweek.com/2016/05/20/what-really-happened-robert-levinson-cia-iran-454803.html .)

Had he done so, Meier might have discovered that his subject had been, as it were, 'top supporting actor' in the first fumbling attempt by Christopher Steele et al to produce a plausible-sounding scenario as to the background to Litvinenko's death. A Radio 4 programme on 16 December 2006, presented by the veteran BBC presenter Tom Mangold, had been wholly devoted to an account by Shvets, backed up by Levinson. Both of these were, like Litvinenko, supposed to be impartial 'due diligence' operatives.

The notion that any of them might have connections with Western intelligence agencies was not considered. The – publicly available – evidence of the involvement of Shvets, whose surname means 'cobbler' or 'shoemaker' in Ukrainian, in the processing of the tapes of conversations involving the former Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma supposedly recorded by Major Melnychenko, which had played a crucial role in the 2004-5 'Orange Revolution' was not mentioned.

Still less was it mentioned that claims that the – very dangerous – late Soviet Kolchuga system, which made it possible the kind of identification of incoming aircraft which radar had traditionally done, without sending out signals which made the destruction of the facilities doing it possible, had been sold by Kuchma to Iraq had proven spurious.

What Shvets had done had been to take – genuine – audio in which Kuchma had discussed a possible sale, and edit it to suggest a sale had been completed.

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

As a former television current affairs producer, I can talk to you of the marvels which London audio editors can produce, very happily. Unfortunately, the days when not all BBC and 'Guardian' journalists were corrupt stenographers for corrupt and incompetent spooks, as Mangold and his like have been for Steele and Levinson, are long gone.

All this has become particularly relevant now, given that Simpson has placed the notorious Jewish Ukrainian mobster Semyon Mogilevich and the 'Solntsevskaya Bratva' mafia group centre stage in his accounts not simply of Trump and Manafort, but also of William Browder. For most of the 'Nineties, Levinson had been a, if not the, lead FBI investigator on Mogilevich.

(On this, see the 1999 BBC 'Panorama' programme 'The Billion Dollar Don', also presented by Tom Mangold, which has extensive interviews both with Mogilevich and Levinson at

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/events/panorama/transcripts/transcript_06_12_99.txt )

In the months leading up to Levinson's disappearance, a key priority for the advocates of the strategy I have described was to prevent it being totally derailed by the patently catastrophic outcome of the Iraqi adventure.

Compounding the problem was the fact that this had created the 'Shia Crescent', which in turn exacerbated the potential 'existential threat' to Israel posed by the steadily increasing range, accuracy and numbers of missiles available to Hizbullah in hardened positions north of the Litani.

These, obviously, provided both a 'deterrent' for that organisation and Iran, and also a radical threat to the whole notion that somehow Israel could ever be a 'safe haven' for Jews, against the supposedly ineradicable disposition of the 'goyim' sooner or later to, as it were, revert to type. The dreadful thought that Israel might not be necessary had to be resisted at all costs.

What followed from the disaster unleashed by the – Anglo-American – 'own goal' in toppling Saddam was, ironically, a need on the part of key players to 'double down.' Above all, it was necessary for many of those involved to counter suggestions from the Russian side that going around smashing up 'régimes' that one might not like sometimes blew up in one's face.

Even more threatening were suggestions from the Russian side that it was foolish to think one could use jihadists without risking 'blowback', and that there might be an overwhelming common interest in combating Islamic extremism.

Another priority was to counter the pushback in the American 'intelligence community' and military, which was to produce the drastic downgrading of the threat posed by the Iranian nuclear programme in the November 2007 NIE and then the resignation of Admiral William Fallon as head of 'Centcom' the following March.

So in 2005 Shvets came to London. He and his audio editors had another 'bite at the cherry' of the Melnychenko tapes, so that material that did in fact establish that both the SBU and FSB had collaborated with Mogilevich could be employed to make it seem that Putin had a close personal relationship with the mobster.

All kinds of supposedly respectable American and British academics, like Professors Karen Dawisha and Robert Service, have fallen for this, hook, line and sinker. It gives a new meaning to the term 'useful idiot.'

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

In a letter sent in December that year by Litvinenko to the 'Mitrokhin Commission', for which his Italian associate Mario Scaramella was a consultant, this was used in an attempt to demonstrate that Mogilevich, while acting as an agent for the FSB and under Putin's personal 'krysha', had attempted to supply a 'mini atomic bomb' – aka 'suitcase nuke' – to Al Qaeda. Shortly after the letter was sent Scaramella departed on a trip to Washington, where he appears to have got access to Aldrich Ames.

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

At precisely this time, as Meier explains, Levinson was in the process of being recruited by a lady called Anne Jablonski who then worked as a CIA analyst. It appears that she was furious at the failure of the operational side at the Agency to produce evidence which would have established that Iran did indeed have an ongoing nuclear programme, and she may well have hoped would implicate Russia in supplying materials.

There are grounds to suspect that one of the things that Berezovsky and Shvets were doing was fabricating such 'evidence.' Whether Levinson was involved in such attempts, or genuinely looking for evidence he was convinced must be there, I cannot say. It appears that he fell for a rather elementary entrapment operation – which could well have been organised with the collaboration of Russian intelligence. (People do get fed up with being framed, particular if 'régime change' is the goal.)

It also seems likely that, quite possibly in a different but related entrapment operation, related to propaganda wars in which claims and counter claims about a polonium-beryllium 'initiator' as the crucial missing part which might make a 'suitcase nuke' functional, Litvinenko accidentally ingested fatal quantities of polonium. A good deal of evidence suggests that this may have been at Berezovsky's offices on the night before he was supposedly assassinated.

It was, obviously, important for Steele et al to ensure that nobody looked at the 'StratCom' wars about 'suitcase nukes.' Here, a figure who has played a key role in such wars in relation to Syria plays an interesting minor one in the story.

Some time following the destruction of the case for an immediate war by the November 2007 NIE, a chemical weapons specialist called Dan Kaszeta, who had worked in the White House for twelve years, moved to London.

In 2011, in addition to founding a consultancy called 'Strongpoint Security', he began a writing career with articles in 'CBRNe World.' Later, he would become the conduit through which the notorious 'hexamine hypothesis', supposedly clinching proof that the Syrian government was responsible for the sarin incidents at Khan Sheikhoun, Ghouta, Saraqeb, and Khan Al-Asal, was disseminated.

Having been forced by the threat of a case being opened against them under human rights law into resuming the inquest into Litvinenko's death, in August 2012 the British authorities appointed Sir Robert Owen to conduct it. (There are many honest judges in Britain, but obviously, if one sets out to find someone who will 'cover up' for the incompetence and corruption of people like Steele, as Lord Hutton did before him, you can find them.)

That same month, a piece appeared in 'CBRNe World' with the the strapline: 'Dan Kaszeta looks into the ultimate press story: Suitcase nukes', and the main title 'Carry on or checked bags?' Among the grounds he gives for playing down the scare:

'Some components rely on materials with shelf life. Tritium, for example, is used in many nuclear weapon designs and has a twelve year half-life. Polonium, used in neutron initiators in some earlier types of weapon designs, has a very short halflife. US documents state that every nuclear weapon has "limited life components" that require periodic replacement (do an internet search for nuclear limited life components and you can read for weeks).'

(For this and other articles by Kaszeta, as also his bio, see http://strongpointsecurity.co.uk ')

What Kaszeta has actually described are the reasons why polonium is a perfect 'StratCom' instrument. In terms of scientific plausibility, in fact there were no 'suitcase nukes', and in any case 'initiators' using polonium had been abandoned very early on, in favour of ones which lasted longer.

For 'StratCom' scenarios, as experience with the 'hexamine hypothesis' has proved, scientific plausibility can be irrelevant.

What polonium provides is a means of suggesting that Al Qaeda have in fact got hold of a nuclear device which they could easily smuggle into, say, Rome or New York, or indeed Moscow, but there is a crucial missing component which the FSB is trying to provide to them. By the same token, of course, that missing component could be depicted as one that Berezovsky and Litvinenko are conspiring to suppl to the Chechen insurgents.

In addition, the sole known source of global supply is the Avangard plant at Sarov in Russia, so the substance is naturally suited for 'StratCom' directed against that country, which its intelligence services would – rather naturally – try to make 'boomerang.'

According to Glenn Simpson, Christopher Steele is a 'boy scout.' This seems to me quite wrong – but, even if it were true, would you want to unleash a 'boy scout' into these kinds of intrigue?

As it is not clear why Kaszeta introduced his – accurate but irrelevant – point about polonium into an article which was concerned with scientific plausibility, one is left with an interesting question as to whether he cut his teeth on 'StratCom' attempting to ensure that nobody seriously interested in CBRN science followed an obvious lead.

In relation to the question of whether current FBI personnel had been involved in the kind of 'StratCom' exercises, I have been describing, a critical issue is the involvement of Shvets and Levinson in the Alexander Khonanykhine affair back in the 'Nineties, and the latter's use of claims about the Solntsevskaya to prevent the key figure's extradition. But that is a matter for another day.

A corollary of all this is that we cannot – yet at least – be absolutely confident that the account in the Nunes memo, according to which Steele was suspended and then dismissed as an FBI source for what the organisation is reported to define as 'the most serious of violations' – the unauthorised disclosure of a relationship with the organisation – is necessarily wholly accurate.

Who did and did not authorise which disclosures to the media, up to and including the extraordinary decision to have the full dossier, including claims about Aleksej Gubarev and the Alfa oligarchs, in flagrant disregard of the obvious risks of defamation suits, and who may be trying to pass the buck to others, remains I think less than totally clear.

Posted at 03:42 PM in As The Borg Turns , Habakkuk , Russia , Russiagate | Permalink

james , 03 February 2018 at 04:33 PM

thanks david... fascinating overview and conjecture..

it seems to me the usa and uk have been tied at the hip for a very long time... when it comes to foreign affairs policy and wars - the one will always vouch for the other without hesitation... it tells me the relationship is really deep..

JohnB , 03 February 2018 at 05:17 PM
David,

Thank you very. As ever you have illuminated a few more things for me. Kaszeta's involvement is interesting. He is someone I am in the middle of researching in relation to Higgins and Bellingcat.

turcopolier , 03 February 2018 at 06:02 PM
james

It is the closest of all international intelligence relationships. It started in WW2. Before that the Brits were though of as a potential enemy. pl

Babak Makkinejad -> turcopolier ... , 03 February 2018 at 06:10 PM
I think the English are using you, they are unsentimental empirical people that only do these that benefit the Number One.
The chief beneficiary of the Coup in Iran was England and not US.
catherine , 03 February 2018 at 06:22 PM
That Newsweek piece about Levinson is very superficial to me.

Re: Levinson

# Who suggested to who 'first' the Iran caper...Anne Jablonski to Levinson or Levinson to Jablonski? It was reported earlier by Meier that in December 2005, when Levinson was pitching Jablonski on projects he might take on when his CIA contract was approved he sent her a lengthy memo about Dawud's potential as an informant.

# Ira Silverman, the Iran hating NBC guy, pitched a Iraq caper to Levinson with Dawud Salahuddin, as his Iran contact and Levinson went to Jablonski with it.

# And what was with Boris Birshstein, a Russian organized crime figure who had fled to Israel and Oleg Deripaska, the "aluminum czar" of Russia whose organized crime contacts have kept him from entering the United States jumping in to help find Levinson? The FBI allowed Deripaska in for two visits in 2009 in exchange for his alleged help in locating Levinson but obviously nothing came of it.

I think there were more little agents/agendas in this than Levinson and Jablonski and US CIA.

Ishmael Zechariah , 03 February 2018 at 06:54 PM
DH,

As usual a wonderful analysis. I admire your insight, integrity and courage. I wish you could write more on why the Borg is so much against Trump, even though they have Kushner, Adelson and Co. running interference for them.

I and my friends consider it a given that most, if not all, anglo-zionist moves in the ME are to "provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area. " It is an open secret that the izzies are the reason why a few Russians, some Turks, lots of Kurds and countless Arabs are dying in the Syrian battlefields. Another open secret: the takfiris and kurds have been, and are, supported by the West. That the "masters of the universe™" have been conceiving and doubling down on such disastrous policies give lie to their much-vaunted "intelligence".

Be safe.

Ishmael Zechariah

Rd , 03 February 2018 at 07:31 PM
Babak Makkinejad said in reply to turcopolier...

The chief beneficiary of the Coup in Iran was England and not US.
..and US is the one who has been paying for it since 1979!!!

kooshy said in reply to Ishmael Zechariah... , 03 February 2018 at 08:21 PM
IZ
My guess is, that he is unpredictable, instantaneous and therefore can't be consistent and reliable, useful idiot needs to be predictable.
kooshy , 03 February 2018 at 08:43 PM
"There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. "

David as usual fascinating work connecting the dots. One question that comes to my mind is about the above point you are making. Is it your understanding or believe that these IC individuals on both side of Atlantic, are pursuing/forcing their (on behalf of the Borg) foreign policy agenda outside of their respected seating governments? If not, why is it that incoming administration cannot stop them? So far I can't see any strategic changes on US foreign policy toward ME or Russia, at tactical level yes but not fundamentally.

different clue , 03 February 2018 at 08:49 PM
Ishmael Zechariah,

( reply to comment 6),

I am not David Habakkuk, obviously. But I will venture a little opinion anyway. It is not enough that the Borgists get their policy preferences. If it were, then Kushner, Adelson and Co. running interference would be enough for them.

It is the very FACT of Trump even getting elected at ALL which outrages and terrifies them so much. They are used to seeing themselves as successful manipulators and engineers of every major event. They were engineering the whole electoral battlespace to get Clinton elected. The mere fact of Trump's victory in the teeth of their Electoral Engineering for Clinton is an act of defiance which they will not tolerate.

And if they fail to bring Trump down at all, they will stand revealed as being defeatable. And this is their big fear. That if people see they have defeated the Borg once on keeping Trump in the teeth of Borg's efforts, that people might try to defeat and smash down the Borg on another issue. And then another. And then another after that.

So that is why the Borg cares so much. They view the Trump election as an insurgency, and they view themselves as waging a counterinsurgency, which they dare not lose.

Jack , 03 February 2018 at 08:54 PM
David,

Thanks for your analysis. I always enjoy and learn from your posts. I wish you would post more often.

In my non-expert opinion, the Borg and the media were all in for Hillary. They were convinced that she was gonna win. To curry favor with the Empress who would be certainly crowned after the election they were eager and convinced that their lawlessness would become a badge for promotion and plum positions in her administration. In their conceit, they believed they could kill two birds with one stroke. They could vilify Putin and create the mass hysteria to checkmate him, while at the same time disparage and frame Trump as The Manchurian Candidate to seal their certain electoral victory.

Unfortunately for them voters in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin didn't buy their sales pitch despite the overwhelming media barrage from all corners. Even news publications who have only endorsed Republican candidates for President for over a century endorsed her.

Trump's election win caused panic among the political establishment, the media and the Deep State. They were already all-in. Their only choice was to double down and get Trump impeached. Now their conspiracy is beginning to unravel. They are doing everything possible to forestall their Armageddon. Of course they have many allies. This battle is gonna be interesting to watch. Trump is clearly getting many Congressional Republicans on side as his base of Deplorables remains solidly behind him. That is what's befuddling the Borg pundits.

SmoothieX12 -> kooshy... , 03 February 2018 at 09:51 PM
So far I can't see any strategic changes on US foreign policy toward ME or Russia, at tactical level yes but not fundamentally.

Because it is not possible to do on fundamental level yet, especially with US foreign policy establishment and so called consensus being built almost entirely, in ideological and, most importantly, cadres senses, on the ultimate exceptionalist agenda in which Russia is the ultimate obstacle and enemy. Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. This swamp (Borg, deep state, etc.) still thinks that it can use Cold War 1.0 Playbook and address very real and dangerous American economic issues. They are wrong, since most of them didn't read the playbook correctly to start with.

Babak Makkinejad -> SmoothieX12 ... , 03 February 2018 at 10:10 PM
They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress West's posture; say 2040.
kooshy said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 03 February 2018 at 10:24 PM
You are right CWII is very much desired and on agenda, but i am not sure of setup, the setup/board has been changed tremendously and IMO benefits the Asian side of Bosphorus, for one thing technology is no longer exclusive, and financial burden is heavier on atlantic side.
catherine said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 12:21 AM
''Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. ''

The locust keep trying and trying, destruction is their life's work.

'1977-1981: Nationalities Working Group Advocates Using Militant Islam Against Soviet Union'

In 1977 Zbigniew Brzezinski, as President Carter's National Security Adviser, forms the Nationalities Working Group (NWG) dedicated to the idea of weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions. The Islamic populations are regarded as prime targets. Richard Pipes, the father of Daniel Pipes, takes over the leadership of the NWG in 1981. Pipes predicts that with the right encouragement Soviet Muslims will "explode into genocidal fury" against Moscow. According to Richard Cottam, a former CIA official who advised the Carter administration at the time, after the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1978, Brzezinski favored a "de facto alliance with the forces of Islamic resurgence, and with the Republic of Iran." [Dreyfuss, 2005, pp. 241, 251 - 256]

'November 1978-February 1979: Some US Officials Want to Support Radical Muslims to Contain Soviet Union'

State Department official Henry Precht will later recall that Brzezinski had the idea "that Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets." [Scott, 2007, pp. 67] In November 1978, President Carter appointed George Ball head of a special White House Iran task force under Brzezinski. Ball recommends the US should drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the radical Islamist opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini. This idea is based on ideas from British Islamic expert Dr. Bernard Lewis, who advocates the balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. The chaos would spread in what he also calls an "arc of crisis" and ultimately destabilize the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union

aleksandar , 04 February 2018 at 04:41 AM
David,

About relation Steele-MI6, well, you never leave your IS. Or to put it in another way, you are never out of the scope of your past IS.

Fred said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 04 February 2018 at 08:40 AM
Babak,

"they got US to bail them out during WWII" And how would things have worked out had we not done so?

Fred , 04 February 2018 at 08:46 AM
David,

"There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time."

Yes, that is what appears to be just what is coming to light. I wonder just what position Trey Gowdy is going to have since he won't be running for re-election. The rage from the left is palpable. I'm sure the next outraged guy on the left will know how to shoot straighter than the ones who shot up Congressman Scalise or the concert goers at Mandalay Bay.

Anna said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 08:48 AM
"They are wrong, since most of them didn't read the playbook correctly to start with."
-- If they have read the important books at all... The ongoing scandal has been revealing a stunning incompetence of the "deciders." Too often they look comical, ridiculous, undignified. This is dangerous, considering their power.
turcopolier , 04 February 2018 at 08:54 AM
Anna

The powerful are often remarkably ignorant. pl

Babak Makkinejad -> Fred... , 04 February 2018 at 10:08 AM
England preferred NAZI Germany to USSR, this is well known. As to what would have happened, the outcome of the war, in my opinion, did not depend on US participation in the European Theatre. All of Europe would have become USSR satellite or joined USSR.
jonst said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 04 February 2018 at 11:53 AM
"unsentimental empirical people"? Absolutely disagree with you. Now the Iranians, they strike me as a singularity unsentimental people. Just general impressions, mind you.
Kooshy said in reply to catherine... , 04 February 2018 at 12:06 PM
Yes, US was the first country to proudly deliver Manpads to be used by "rebels" (Mojahadin later Taleban) against USSR in Afghanistan back in 80s. And, as per the architect of support for the rebels (Zbigniew Brzezinski) very proud of it with no regret. With that in mind, I don't see how western politicians, the western governments and their related proxy war planers, will be regretting, even sadden, once god forbid we see passenger planes with loved ones are shot down taking off or landing at various western airports and other places around the word. Just like how superficialy with crocodile tears in their eyes they acted in aftermath of the terrorist events in various western cities in this past 16 years. Gods knows what will happens to us if the opposite side start to supply his own proxies with lethal anti air weapons. "Proudly", I don't think anybody in west cares or will regret of such an escalation.
Phodges said in reply to turcopolier ... , 04 February 2018 at 12:23 PM
Sir

It seems we are being defeated by Cicero's enemy within. Zion is achieving what no one could hope to achieve by force of arms.

David Habakkuk -> catherine... , 04 February 2018 at 01:17 PM
catherine,

In response to comment 5.

I think it likely that what Meier produces is only a 'limited hangout', and am hoping that when the book arrives it will contain more pointers.

It is important to be clear that one is often dealing with people playing very complicated double games.

An interesting document is the 'Petition for Writ of Habeus Corpus' made on behalf of Khodorkovsky's close associate Alexander Konanykhin back in 1997,when the Immigration and Naturalization Service were – apparently at least – cooperating with Russian attempts to get hold of him. An extract:

'During the immigration hearing FBI SA Robert Levinson, an INS witness, confirmed that in 1992 Petitioner was kidnapped and afterwards pursued by assassins of the Solntsevskaya organized criminal group. This organized criminal group is reportedly the largest and the most influential organized criminal group in Russia, and operates internationally.'

(See http://defiancethebook.com/legal/habeas/petition.htm .)

Note the similarities between the 'StratCom' that Khonanykin and his associates were producing in the 'Nineties, and that which Simpson and his associates have been producing two decades later.

Another useful example is provided by a 2004 item in the 'New American Magazine', reproduced on Konanykhin's website:

'One of those who testified on behalf of Konanykhine was KGB defector Yuri Shvets, who declared: "I have a firsthand knowledge on similar operations conducted by the KGB." Konanykhine had brought trouble on himself, Shvets continued, when he "started bringing charges against people who were involved with him in setting up and running commercial enterprises. They were KGB people secretly smuggling from Russia hundreds of millions of dollars . This is [a] serious case, and I know that KGB ... desperately wants to win this case, and everybody who won't step to their side would face problems."'

(See http://konanykhin.com/news/the-konanykhine-case.html .)

So – 'first hand knowledge', from a Ukrainian nationalist – look at what the Chalupas have been doing, it seems not much has changed.

For a rather different perspective on what Konanykhin had actually been up to, from someone in whose honesty – if not always judgement – I have complete confidence, see the testimony of Karon von Gerhke-Thompson to the House Committee on Banking and Financial Services hearings on Russian Money Laundering. In this, she described how she had been approached by him in 1993:

'"Konanykhine alleged that Menatep Bank controlled $1.7bn [Ł1bn] in assets and investment portfolios of Russia's most prominent political and social elite," she recalled. She said he wanted to move the bank's assets off shore and asked her to help buy foreign passports for its "very, very special clients".

'In her testimony to the committee Ms Von Gerhke-Thompson said she informed the CIA of the deal, and the agency told her that it believed Mr Konanykhine and Mr Khodorkovsky "were engaged in an elaborate money laundering scheme to launder billions of dollars stolen by members of the KGB and high-level government officials".

(For a 'Guardian report, see https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/sep/23/julianborger ; for the actual testimony, see http://archives-financialservices.house.gov/banking/92299ger.pdf .)

Coming back to Steele's 'StratCom', in July 2008, an item appeared on the 'Newnight' programme of the BBC – which some of us think should by then have been rechristened the 'Berezovsky Broadcasting Corporation' – in which the introduction by the presenter, Jeremy Paxman, read as follows:

'Good evening. The New Russian President, Dmitri Medvedev, was all smiles and warm words when he met Gordon Brown today. He said he was keen to resolve all outstanding difficulties between the two countries. Yada yada yada. Gordon Brown smiled, but he must know what Newsnight can now reveal: that MI5 believes the Russian state was involved in the murder of Alexander Litvinenko by radioactive poisoning. They also believe that without their intervention another London-based Russian, Boris Berezovsky, would have been murdered. Our diplomatic editor, Mark Urban, has this exclusive report.'

(For the transcript presented in evidence to Owen's Inquiry, see http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/ ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/ )

When Urban repeated the claims on his blog, there was a positive eruption from someone using the name 'timelythoughts', about the activities of someone she referred to as 'Berezovsky's disinformation specialist' – when I came across this later, it was immediately clear to me that she was Karon von Gerhke, and he was Shvets.

(For the first part of the exchanges of comments, the second apparently having become unavailable, see http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2008/07/litvinenko_killing_had_state_i.html )

She then described a visit by Scaramella to Washington, details of which had already been unearthed by my Italian collaborator, David Loepp. Her claim to have e-mails from Shvets, from the time immediately prior to Litvinenko's death, directly contradicting the testimony he had given, fitted with other evidence I had already unearthed.

Later, we exchanged e-mails over a quite protracted period, and a large amount of material that came into my possession as a result was submitted by me to the Inquest team, with some of it being used in posts on the 'European Tribune' site.

What I never used publicly, because I could only partially corroborate it from the material she provided, was an extraordinary claim about Shvets:

'He was responsible for bringing in a Kremlin initiative that was walked Vice President Cheney's office on a US government quid pro quo with the Kremlin FSB SVR involving the arrest of Mikhail Khodorkovsky – a cease and desist on allegations of a politically motivated arrest of Khodorkovsky, violations of rules of law and calls from Russia's expulsion from the G 8 in exchange for favorable posturing of U.S. oil companies on Gazprom's Shtokman project and intelligence on weapon sales during the Yeltsin era to Iraq, Iran and Syria, all documented in reports I submitted to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and MI6.

'Berezovsky's DS could not be on both sides on that isle. His Kremlin FSB SVR sources had been vetted by the CIA and by the National Security Council. They proved to be as represented. As we would later learn, however, he was on Berezovsky's payroll at same time. The FSB SVR general he was coordinating the Kremlin initiative through was S. R. Subbotin, the same FSB SVR general who was investigating Berezovsky's money laundering operations in Switzerland during the same timeframe. His FSB SVR sources surrounding Putin were higher than any Lugovoy could have ever hoped to affiliate with.

'R. James Woolsey (former CIA DCI), Marshall Miller (former law partner of the late CIA DCI William Colby), who I coordinated the Kremlin initiative through that Berezovsky's DS had brought in were shocked to learn that he was affiliated with Berezovsky and Litvinenko. He was in Berezovsky's inner circle and engaged in vetting Russian business with Litvinenko. He operated Berezovsky's Ukraine website, editing and dubbing the now infamous Kuchma tapes throughout the lead up to the elections in the Ukraine. Berezovsky contributed $41 million to Viktor Yushchenko's campaign, which he used in an attempt to force Yushchenko to reunite with Julia Tymoschenko. It failed but would succeed later after Berezovsky orchestrated a public relations initiative through Alan Goldfarb in the U.S. on behalf of Tymoschenko.'

Having got to know Karon von Gerhke quite well, and also been able to corroborate a great deal of what she told me about many things, and discussed these matters with her, it is absolutely clear to me that she was neither fabricating nor fantasising. What later became apparent, both to her and to me, was that in the 'double game' that Shvets was playing, he had succeeded in fooling her as to the side for which he was working.

It seems likely however that the reason Shvets could do what he did was that quite precisely that many high-up people in the Kremlin and elsewhere were playing a 'double game.' In this, Karon von Gerhke's propensity for indiscretion – of which I, like others, was both beneficiary and victim – could be useful.

An exercise in 'positioning', which could be used to disguise the fact that Shvets was indeed 'Berezovsky's disinformation specialist', could be used to make it appear that 'intelligence on weapon sales during the Yeltsin era to Iraq, Iran and Syria' was actually credible.

This could have been used to try to rescue Cheney, Bush and their associates from the mess they had got into as a result of the failure of the invasion to provide any evidence whatsoever supporting the case which had been made for it. It could also have been used to provide the kind of materials justifying military action against Iran for which Levinson and Jablonski were looking, and for similar action against Syria.

Among reasons for bringing this up now is that we need to make sense of the paradox that Simpson – clearly in collusion with Steele – was using Mogilevich and the 'Solnsetskaya Bratva' both against Manafort and Trump and against Browder.

There are various possible explanations for this. I do not want to succumb to my instinctive prejudice that this may have been another piece of 'positioning', similar to what I think was being done with Shvets, but the hypothesis needs to be considered.

A more general point is that people in Washington and London need to 'wise up' to the kind of world with which they are dealing. This could be done quite enjoyably: reading some of Dashiell Hammett's fictions of the United States in the Prohibition era, or indeed buying DVDs of some of the classics of 'film noir', like 'Out of the Past' (in its British release, 'Build My Gallows High') might be a start.

Very much of the coverage of affairs in the post-Soviet space since 1991 has read rather as though a Dashiell Hammett story had been rewritten by someone specialising in sentimental children's, or romantic, fiction (although, come to think of it, that is really what Brigid O'Shaughnessy does in 'The Maltese Falcon.')

The testimony of Glenn Simpson seems a case in point. The sickly sentimentality of these people does, rather often, make one feel as though one wanted to throw up.

Thomas , 04 February 2018 at 01:24 PM
"They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress West's posture; say 2040.}

No, three years at tops and could be much sooner if dimes starting dropping by exposed people that don't want to take the fall for their superiors whom they always detested. One possible thing to get the process started sooner is if the recent Russian Intelligence delegation to DC that Smoothie mentions on another thread gave the current administration, as a diplomatic courtesy of course, the audio recordings of Madame Sectary Nuland's infamous mental meltdown at Kaliningrad. No telling what beans were spilled in her moment of panic, but I am willing to bet key names were dropped. Either way the time is coming.

SmoothieX12 -> Anna... , 04 February 2018 at 01:39 PM
- If they have read the important books at all... The ongoing scandal has been revealing a stunning incompetence of the "deciders." Too often they look comical, ridiculous, undignified. This is dangerous, considering their power.

My coming book is precisely about that. Especially, once American policy-makers who saw and experienced war (Ike, George Marshall's generation) departed things started to roll down hill with Reagan bringing on board a whole collection of neocons.

Unawareness is always dangerous, a complete blackout in relations between two nuclear powers is more than dangerous--it is completely reckless. Again, the way CW 1.0 is perceived in the current US "elites" it becomes extremely tempting to repeat it. Electing Hillary was another step in unleashing CW 2.0 by people who have no understanding of what they were doing.

Obama started crushing US-Russian relations before any campaigns were launched and before Trump was even seriously considered a GOP nominee, let alone a real contender. New confrontation hinged on HRC being elected. In fact, she was one of the major driving forces behind a serious of geopolitical anti-Russian moves. Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in HRC campaign long before any Steele's Dossier. This was a program.

james said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 04 February 2018 at 03:01 PM
there seems to be no shortage of money for these blatant propaganda exercises..
Babak Makkinejad -> SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 04:14 PM
I think the failure of Deciders is nothing new - Fath Ali Shah attacking Russia, or the abject failure of the Deciders in 1914. Europe is still not where she was in 1890.
begob , 04 February 2018 at 05:20 PM
I read the post and responses early on, so forgive me if this point has been addressed in the meantime. If the memo information on non-disclosure of material evidence to the warrant issuing court is accurate, as soon as that information came to the attention of the authorities (clearly some time ago) there was a duty on them (including the judge(s) who issued the warrants) to have the matter brought back before the court toot sweet. If that had happened it would surely be in the public domain, so on the assumption the prosecutors and maybe even the judge didn't see the need to review the matter, even purely on a contempt/ethics basis, the memo information only seems convincing if the FISA system is a total sham. I really doubt that.
kooshy said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 06:20 PM
IMO, the bigger problem for American not shying away from wars, or being silent about them , is when your home, your mom and dad' home, the town you grew up in, are immune and away from the war.

The security and safety of the two oceans, encourages or at least, in an all volunteer military makes it a secondary problem for regular people, to worry about. As I remember that wasn't the case at the end of VN war when i first landed here. At that time even though the war was on the other side of the planet and away from homeland, still people, especially young ones in colleges were paying more attention to the cost of war.

spy killer , 04 February 2018 at 06:55 PM
Diana West has uncovered some interesting "Red Threads" (6 part article at dianawest-dot-net) on all the Fusion GPS folks. Seems ole Russian speaking Nellie Ohr got herself a ham radio license recently. Wonder why she would suddenly need one of those? They are all Marxists with potential connections back to Russia.
English Outsider -> Fatima Manoubia... , 05 February 2018 at 07:23 AM
Been there. I am also a latecomer to SST. You have to read the back numbers. How? My IT expertise dates from the dawn of the internet and was lamentable then but I find Wayback sometimes allows easier searches than the SST search engine. A straight search on google also allows searches with more than one term. This link -

https://twitter.com/pat_lang

- gets you to a chronological list and for recent material is sometimes quicker than fiddling around with search engines. "Categories" on the RH side is useful but then you don't get some very informative comments that cross-refer.

If those sadly elementary procedures fail resort to the nearest infant. There's a blur of fingers on the keyboard and what you want then usually appears. Never ask them how they did it. They get so fed up when you ask them to explain it again.

"Who is David Habakkuk?" That's a quantum computer sited, from internal evidence you pick up from time to time, somewhere in the Greater London area. Cross references like you wouldn't believe and over several fields, so maybe he's two quantum computers.

The "Borg"?. Try Wittgenstein. Likely a prog but you can't be choosy these days. Early on in "Philosophical Investigations" (hope I get this right) he discusses the problem of how you can view as an entity something that has ill-defined or overlapping boundaries. The "Borg" is that "you know it when you see it" sort of thing. A great merit of this site is that the owner and many of the contributors know it from inside.

In general you may regard your new found site as a microcosm of the great battle that is raging in the West. It's a battle between the (probably apocryphal but adequately stated) Roveian view of reality that regards truth as an adjunct to or as a by-product of ideology and Realpolitik and the objective view of reality as something that is damned difficult to get at, and sometimes impossible, but that has a truth in it somewhere that is independent of the views and convictions of the observer. It's a battle that's never going to be won but unless it tilts back closer to common sense it can certainly be lost and the West with it.

jonst said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 05 February 2018 at 08:11 AM
Clearly the Labor Party in the UK preferred the USSR to Nazi Germany. (cepting that short interlude where the Soviets signed the Agreement with Hitler, and the Left Organized Leadership all across Europe, for the most part, lined up with Hitler). But for the most part, Labor was Left.
Elements (the ones that won out in the end) of the Conservative Party loathed both Hitler and Stalin. An element of the Conservative Party was sympathetic, but only up to a certain point, with the Nazis. This ended in 1939, sept.

So I don't think it fair, or accurate, to say 'England prefered the Nazis....and even if it not those things, it certainly not "well known", except to the people who have used the false premise to butter their wounds from supporting Stalin in his Pact with Hitler. Or are inclined to bash the British in general.

Babak Makkinejad -> jonst... , 05 February 2018 at 08:29 AM
All right, perhaps I should have said "The English Government". Google "Litvinov", you may discover how the English Government pushed Stalin to make a deal with Hitler to buy USSR time.
Sid Finster said in reply to Jack... , 05 February 2018 at 10:26 AM
Witness the infamous State Department protest memo calling for more war on Syria.

The State Department employees that signed that memo were sure that HRC would win and that their diligent work in pushing the Deep State agenda would sure be rewarded.

Since entering office, Trump appears to have taken the line that if he gives the Deep State everything it demands, he will be allowed to remain in office, even if he is not allowed to remain in power.

Sid Finster said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 05 February 2018 at 10:31 AM
Explain Marshall Miller's role in this, please. He is someone I know quite well. I also know one of the Chalupas.
begob said in reply to jonst... , 05 February 2018 at 10:56 AM
jonst That's broadly accurate, but specifically Attlee brought the motion of no confidence in Chamberlain, which the conservative appeasers won but which led to Churchill's opportunity. Attlee was essential in cabinet to Churchill's resistance after the retreat of the BEF.
turcopolier , 05 February 2018 at 11:18 AM
FM
What are you doing here? You said you dislike the military. Are you really in the Spanish Basque country? Bilbao maybe? break - David Habakkuk is a private scholar of the Litvinenko murder and Soviet/Russian politics and intelligence affairs. His surname comes from Wales where in the 18th (?) Century the ancestral village were all "chapel" and changed their surnames to Old Testament names. His father was master of one of the Cambridge colleges and David is himself a graduate of Cambridge. pl
Babak Makkinejad -> Fatima Manoubia... , 05 February 2018 at 11:19 AM
Yes, I am Iranian. All "Babak"s are Iranians - except some obscure ones that are Rus - Babakov.
Anna , 05 February 2018 at 02:07 PM
The hard, blinding truth: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/02/05/will-conspiracy-trump-american-democracy-go-unpunished/
"In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousand fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations." – Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Thomas said in reply to turcopolier ... , 05 February 2018 at 02:08 PM
Colonel,

This troll showed up recently at b's place doing the same accusations. There is group that is running sacred and pulling out all the stops in "info ops" side of the spectrum. The damn fools don't or, most probably, won't get thru their thick heads and even thicker hearts that it is a failed strategy that turns bystanders into their opponents.

Richardstevenhack , 05 February 2018 at 02:36 PM
Here for your edification is the definitive analysis of the GOP memo by Alexander Mercouris over at The Duran.

And it is a masterpriece - and quite long, possibly his longest analysis of anything so far. He buries the counterarguments being passed around by the Democratic opposition and the anti-Trump media.

Mercouris writes on legal affairs alongside his foreign policy stuff and he writes with a lawyer's precision. And in this article he points out that the GOP memo is writter as a legal document - probably by Trey Gowdy - with additional political insertions by Nunes. So it should properly be referred to as the "GOP memo" or the "Gowdy memo", not the Nunes memo."

Why this is important is that the GOP memo is basically written as a defense lawyer would in contesting a case -- this case being the FISA warrant application. Which means its orientation is proving failure to disclose relevant and material information to the FISA court and in some cases rising to the point of contempt of court.

Seriously, read this! The whole thing!

Rampant abuse and possible contempt of Court: what you need to know about the GOP memo
http://theduran.com/rampant-abuse-contempt-court-analysis-gop-memorandum/

blue peacock , 05 February 2018 at 03:25 PM
Sen Grassley releases memo heavily redacted by DOJ/FBI.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-05/grassley-graham-blast-fbi-censoring-memo-calling-criminal-probe-trump-dossier

"Seeking transparency and cooperation should not be this challenging," Grassley said in a statement after posting a heavily redacted version of the criminal referral that he and GOP Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina sent to the Justice Department last month. " The government should not be blotting out information that it admits isn't secret. "

I suppose DOJ/FBI believe that by obstructing, stalling and obfuscating they can buy time and that the Republicans in Congress will get tired of the games and go home. This seems like a pretty straightforward memo, highlighting the discrepancy between Steele's court filings and the FBI's version of Steele's discussions with them. Grassley is pointing out that either Steele or the FBI is lying.

What is interesting is the difference in process and ability between the House & Senate. The House can release their memos on its own, even if not declassified by the Executive, whereas the Senate requires the Executive to declassify it's memos that are based on classified documents.

turcopolier , 05 February 2018 at 04:38 PM
FM

We have not had a self declared communist on SST before although LeaNder in her youth may have come close to that exalted status. You might want to read the wiki on me and the CV I have posted on the blog to avoid tedious accusations of this or that. I am thought by some to have some knowledge of the ME so please do not try to lecture me about how much you love the Arabs. I speak their language and have lived with them for a long time. There are people who write to SST who are pro-Trump and some who are anti-Trump. I seek a mixture of views so long as personal insult and invective are eschewed. Personally, I do not belong to a political party and would describe myself as an original intent, strict constructionist.

Trump is the constitutionally and legally elected president of the United States. Your descriptors with regard to him are, in my opinion, only plausible if seen from the point of view of various kinds of leftist including Marxist-Leninists like you. You sound very smug and self-satisfied but we will see if you can have an open mind at all. pl

Kooshy said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 05 February 2018 at 04:46 PM
Found him, Ali Babacan XVPM, XFM and M of finance. Yes god forbid, if he is a decendent of Ardisher Babakan and another claimant to Iranian throne, which CIA and Soros can jump on.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Babacan MBA from Northeestern
blue peacock , 05 February 2018 at 04:55 PM
...would describe myself as an original intent, strict constructionist.

Aye. Aye. Sir!

+1

That is why some of us believe the Patriot Act and FISA are both unpatriotic and unconstitutional. SCOTUS disagrees with the few of us.

Babak Makkinejad -> Fatima Manoubia... , 05 February 2018 at 05:03 PM
I do not believe Trump is a misogynists - he stated publicly that he likes beautiful women. I also do not think he is a racist. I think he is the first US leader in many decades who has been willing to publicly talk about US problems. For most other US politicians - they largely live in "the best of all possible worlds".
English Outsider , 05 February 2018 at 06:31 PM
Colonel - sincere apologies if my comment above disrupted the discussion on a fascinating article.

David Habakkuk - I should say that "Quantum Computer" referred solely to the ability to gather and collate great amounts of material. It's an ability I admire. On Steele, you are among other things setting out something that is unfamiliar to me though not to most others here, I imagine, and that is the milieu in which he is or was working as a UK Intelligence operative. That you have also done in previous articles; it doesn't seem to be a particularly savoury milieu. As far as Steele's US activities are concerned, from you I'm not getting the picture of a lone operative, all ties with MI6 neatly severed, working solo in the States on some chance assignment in 2016. I'm getting the picture of someone still very much in the swim and selected because of that.

The only problem with that second picture is the dossier, or the 30% or so of it - what Comey, I think it was, described as "salacious and unverified". Surely that's got to be amateur night. Not something that a practised professional working with other professionals would put his hand to. Does that not support the picture of an ex-operative who's gone off the rails and is fumbling around unsupervised?

The Steele affair touched a nerve. One is always I suppose aware that IC professionals are getting up to all sorts and it doesn't seem improbable that "all sorts" includes political stuff and smear campaigns. But it's not heaps of corpses in Syria or farm boys being sent to certain death in the Ukraine. And even within the UK Intelligence Community and their contractors or whatever they're called, compared with what our IC people have done in the ME or compared with what one fears Hamish de Bretton Gordon might have got himself involved in, Christopher Steele's just a choirboy. Nevertheless there's something deeply repellent about what he did. Whatever your view of Trump there he was, newly elected, obviously wanting to make a go of it, and already faced with difficulties. Then some chancer throws "Golden Showers" in his face and makes his position, not maybe for the insiders but for the general public, that bit more untenable.

So from a UK perspective the question of whether Steele was acting in concert with others in the UK becomes important. If he was truly working solo then that from a UK point of view is regrettable but one of those things. In that case MI6 would just have to tighten up its controls on what ex-operatives get up to, put out the appropriate disclaimers, and that's the end of it as far as the UK is concerned. But if Golden Showers and the rest of it was a "Welcome Mr President" from UK IC professionals as a group then those professionals should be hung drawn and quartered together with whoever set them on.

I've read your article several times now and apart from the fact that much of what you pull together isn't material I'm up on, it doesn't seem to me that you're definitely coming to one conclusion or the other. There are many more facts to come out so perhaps this question is premature, but do you think Steele was acting in concert with others in the UK or was he, at least as far as the UK is concerned, working solo?

kooshy , 05 February 2018 at 07:49 PM
Most Iranian females Named Fatima/ Fatimah after prophet' daughter, call themselves Fati, and if they are of aristocrat type, they are called Bibi Fati Khanam, which is honorable lady Fati and if they are westernized they become Fay or Fifi.
turcopolier , 05 February 2018 at 07:59 PM
EO

Much of your commentary seems directed to David Habakkuk and PT rather than I. I don't think the FBI would have started to pay him until he left UK service. pl

English Outsider , 06 February 2018 at 05:10 AM
Colonel - Further apologies - I should have submitted comment 79 as two items.

Yes, the question about Steele was in response to DH's article. The UK side of the affair is I suppose only a small part of the question you and your Committee are examining but it's a dubious part however one looks at it. Although it's early days yet I was hoping DH, with his encyclopaedic knowledge of the UK intelligence scene, might feel able to cast more light on that UK side.

English Outsider -> Cortes... , 06 February 2018 at 05:53 AM
Cortes - " ... where, exactly, do you expect the great public to look beyond the initial scabrously defamatory storytelling about the "golden showers"? "

I don't think one can expect the public, at least in the UK, to look very far beyond the initial scandal. The investigations and enquiries presently under way in the US are complex and are taking place in a different system. This member of the UK public wouldn't be able to give you a coherent account of those enquiries and I doubt many of my fellows could.

So we have to take on trust, most of us, what we're told. As far as I can tell the underlying theme from the BBC and the media is generally that Trump is subverting the American Justice system in order to ensure his own misdemeanours aren't investigated.

Some of us take that as gospel. Others of us assume that the politicians and the media are untrustworthy and ignore them. I doubt many of us go into much more detail than that. Therefore the original story will stick in our minds.

But for some in the UK there are questions in there as well. How come the UK got mixed up in all this? How much did the UK get mixed up in it?

David Habakkuk -> Sid Finster... , 06 February 2018 at 06:19 AM
Sid Finster,

In response to comment 53.

When I belatedly started looking at the Litvinenko mystery, as a result of a strange email provoked by comments of mine on SST which arrived in my inbox in March 2007 from someone who turned out to be a key protagonist, it was rather obvious that improvised and chaotic 'StratCom' operations had been put into place on both the Russian and British sides to cover up what had happened.

A particular interesting feature of those on the British side – in which we now know Christopher Steele must have played a leading role – were the bizarre gyrations those responsible were going through trying to explain away the extraordinary fact that when he had broken the story of his poisoning, Litvinenko had pointed the finger of suspicion at his Italian associate Mario Scaramella.

When I started delving, I came across some very interesting pieces on Scaramella and related matters posted on the 'European Tribune' website by a Rome-based blogger using the name 'de Gondi' in the period after the story broke.

His actual name is David Loepp, by profession he is an artisan jeweller specialising in ancient and traditional goldsmith techniques, and I already knew and respected his work from his contributions to the transnational internet investigation into the Niger uranium forgeries – an earlier MI6 clusterf**ck.

So in May 2008 I posted a longish piece on that site, setting out the problems with the evidence about the Litvinenko case as I saw them, in the hope of reactivating his interest. This paid off in spades, when he linked to, and translated a key extract from, the request from Italian prosecutors to use wiretaps of conversations with Senator Paolo Guzzanti in connection with their prosecution of Scaramella for 'aggravated calumny.'

The request, which up to not so long ago was freely available on the website of the Italian Senate, was denied, but the extensive summaries of the transcripts provided a lot of material.

(This initial post by me, and later posts by me on that site, are at http://www.eurotrib.com/user/uid:1857/diary. Three posts David Loepp and I produced jointly in December 2012, which have a lot on Scaramella and Shvets, are on his page there, at http://www.eurotrib.com/user/de%20Gondi/diary .)

The extract from the wiretap request which David Loepp posted, which like Litvinenko's letter containing the claims he and Yuri Shvets had concocted about Putin using Mogilevich to attempt to supply Al Qaeda with a 'mini nuclear bomb' is dated 1 December 2005, contains key pointers to the conspiracy. It concludes:

'A passage on Simon Moghilevic and an agreement between the camorra to search for nuclear weapons lost during the Cold War to be consigned to Bin Laden, a revelation made by the Israeli. According to Scaramella the circle closes: camorra, Moghilevic- Russian mafia- services- nuclear bombs in Naples.'

Subsequent conversations make clear that Scaramella left on 6 December 2005 for Washington, on a trip where he was to meet Shvets. The summary of a report on this to Guzzanti reads:

'12) conversation that took place on number [omissis] on December 18, 2005, at 9:41:51 n. 1426, containing explicit references to the authenticity of the declarations of Alexander Litvinenko acquired by Scaramella, to the trustworthiness of the affirmations made by Scaramella in his reports to the commission and to the meetings Scaramella had with Talik after having denounced them [presumably Talik and his alleged accomplices]. (They can talk with HEIMS thanks to the help of MILLER. SHVEZ says that he had been a companion of CARLOS at the academy; SHVEZ has already made declarations and is willing to continue collaboration. Guzzanti warns that a document in Russian arrived in commission in which the name of SCARAMELLA appears several times, these [sic] say that directives to the contrary had been given to Litvinenko. Scaramella says that he went to the meeting with TALIK in the company of two treasury [police] and a cop, Talik spoke of a person from the Ukrainian GRU who would be willing to talk and a strange Chechen ring in Naples. Assassination attempt against the pope, CASAROLI was a Soviet agent.)'

The summary of a later conversation also refers to 'MILLER':

'conversation that took place on number [omissis] on January 13, 2006, at 11:22:11 n. 2287, containing references to Scaramella's sources in relation to facts referred in the Commission, the means by which they were obtained by Scaramella from declarations made abroad, the role of Litvinenko, also on the occasion of declarations made by third parties and the credibility of the news and theses given by Scaramella to the commission (Scaramella reads a text in English on the relation between the KGB and PRODI. Guzzanti asks if its credibility can be confirmed and if the taped declarations can be backed up; Scaramella answers that there were two testimonies, Lou Palumbo and Alexander (Litvinenko), and that the registration made in London at the beginning of the assignment [Scaramella's?] had been authenticated by a certain BAKER of the FBI. As he translates the text from English, Scaramella notes that the person testifying does not say he knows Prodi but only that he thinks that Prodi ...; all those who worked for the person testifying in Scandinavia said that Prodi was "theirs." The affair in Rimini, Bielli is preparing the battle in Rimini. Meetings with MILLER for the three things that are needed. Polemic about Pollari over the pressure exerted on Gordievski.)'

In the exchanges on my May 2008 post, I mentioned and linked to some extraordinary comments on a crucial article by Edward Jay Epstein, in which Karon von Gerhke claimed that his sceptical account fitted with what her contacts in the British investigation had told her. When that July I came across her equally extraordinary claims in response to the BBC's Mark Urban piece of stenography – which Steele may also have had a hand in organising – I found she was referring to precisely that visit to Washington by Scaramella which had been described in the wiretap request.

As you can perhaps imagine, the fact that 'Miller' had featured in the conversations with Guzzanti both as a key contact, who could introduce Scaramella to Aldrich Ames (which is who 'Heims' clearly is), and with whom there had been meetings about 'the three things that are needed' made me inclined to take seriously what Karon von Gerhke said about his role.

In December 2008, I put up another post on 'European Tribune', putting together the material from David Loepp and that from Karon von Gerhke – but not discussing the references to 'Miller.' As I had hoped, this led to her getting in touch.

Among the material with which she supplied me, which I in turn supplied to the Solicitor to the Inquest, were covers of faxes to John Rizzo, then Acting General Counsel of the CIA. From a fax dated 23 October 2005.

'John: See attached email to Chuck Patrizia. Berezovsky alleges he is in possession of a copy of a classified file given to the CIA by Russia's FSB, which he further alleges the CIA disseminated to British, French, Italian and Israeli intelligence agencies implicating him in business associations with the Mafia and to ties with terrorist organizations. Yuri Shvets was authorised/directed by Berezovsky to raise the issue with Bud McFarlane scheduled for Thursday. McFarlane is unaware the issue will be raised with him.'

From a fax dated 7 November 2005:

'John: I am attaching an email exchange between Yuri Shvets and me re: 1) article he published on his Ukraine website on alleged sale of nuclear choke to Iran, which I reproached him on as having been planted by Berezovsky and 2 the alleged FSB/CIA document file that Berezovsky obtained from Scaramella, which Yuri acknowledges in his e-mail to me. Like extracting wisdom teeth to get him to put anything on paper, especially in an e-mail! [NAME REDACTED BY ME – DH] is the source McFarlane referred Yuri to re: Berezovsky's visa issue. She proposed meeting Berezovsky in London. Alleged it would take a year to clear up USG issues and even then could not guarantee him a visa. She too has access to USG intelligence on Berezovsky. Open book.'

From a fax dated 5 December 2005:

'John. From Mario Scaramella to Yuri Shvets to my ears, the DOJ has authorised Mario Scaramella to interview Aldrich Ames with regard to members of the Italian Intelligence Service agent recruited by Ames for the KGB. Scaramella, as you may recall, is who gave Boris Berezovsky's aide, a former FSB Colonel [LITVINENKO – DH], that alleged document number to the FSB file that the CIA disseminated on Berezovsky – a file that Bud McFarlane's "Madam Visa" [NAME REDACTED BY ME – DH] is alleged is totting off to London for a meeting with Berezovsky, who has agreed to retain her re: his visa issue. Quid pro quo's with Berezovsky and Scaramella on the CIA agent currently facing kidnapping charges for the rendition of the Muslim cleric? Scott Armstrong has a most telling file on Scaramella. Not a single redeeming quality.'

In the course of very extensive exchanges with Karon von Gerhke subsequently, we had some rather acute disagreements. It was unfortunate that her filing was a shambles – a crucial hard disk failed without a backup, and the 'hard copies' appeared to be in a chaotic state.

However, the only occasion when I can recall having reason to believe that was deliberately lying to me was when David Loepp unearthed a cache of documentation including the full Italian text of the letter from Litvinenko containing the 'StratCom' designed to suggest that Putin had attempted to supply a 'mini nuclear bomb' to Al Qaeda. Having been asked to keep this between ourselves for the time being, Karon insisted on immediately sending it to her contacts in Counter Terrorism Command, and then produced bogus justifications.

Time and again, moreover, I found that I could confirm statements that she made – see for example the two posts I put up on the legal battles following the death in February 2008 of Berezovsky's long-term partner Arkadi 'Badri' Patarkatsishvili in June and July 2009, which were based on careful corroboration of what she told me.

(I should also say that I acquired the greatest respect for her courage.)

And while Owen and his team suppressed all the evidence from her, and almost all of that from David Loepp, which I had I provided to them, the dossier about Berezovsky is described in a statement made by Litvinenko in Tel Aviv in April 2006, presented in evidence in the Inquiry.

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

Other evidence, moreover, strongly inclines me to believe that there were overtures for a 'quid pro quo', purporting to come from Putin, but that this was a ruse orchestrated by Berezovsky.

Part of the purpose of this would almost certainly have been to supply probably bogus 'evidence' about arms sales in the Yeltsin years to Iraq, Iran and Syria. Moreover, I think there was an article on the second 'Fifth Element' site run by Shvets about the supposed sale of a nuclear 'choke' – whatever that is – to Iran.

The likelihood of the involvement of elements in the FBI in these shenanigans seems to quite high, given what has already emerged about the activities of Levinson. Also relevant may be the fact that the 'declaration' which was part of the attempt to frame Romano Prodi was authenticated, in London, by 'a certain BAKER of the FBI.')

Babak Makkinejad -> David Habakkuk ... , 06 February 2018 at 09:40 AM
Thank you David Habakkuk. Truly sordid and deplorable. WWIII to be initiated on basis of lies.
Jack , 06 February 2018 at 12:06 PM
David

You may already know this but Steele was a no show in a UK court for a deposition on the libel suit.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/05/christopher-steele-is-no-show-in-london-court-in-civil-case-over-dossier.amp.html

Babak Makkinejad -> David Habakkuk ... , 06 February 2018 at 01:18 PM
I know something of spectroscopy.

The critical issue here is the provenance of the samples and not the sophistication of the techniques used in the analysis itself or its instrumentation.

The paragraph that you have quoted:

"To figure out signatures based on various synthetic routes and conditions, Chipuk says that the synthetic chemists on his team will make the same chemical threat agent as many as 2,000 times in an ..." reeks of intellectual intimidation - trying to brow-beat any skeptic by the size of one's instrument - as it were."

And then there is a little matter of confidence level in any of the analysis - such things are normally based on prior statistics - which did not and could not exist in this situation.

LeaNder , 07 February 2018 at 09:16 AM
David, it's no doubt interesting to watch how attention on Victor Ivanov in another deficient inquiry on the British Isles, was managed in that inquiry. If I may, since he pops up again in the Steele dossier. You take what's available? Is that all there is to know?

I know its hard to communicate basics if you are deeply into matters. Usually people prefer to opt out. It's getting way too complicated for them to follow. You made me understand this experience. But isn't this (fake) intelligence continuity "via" Yuri Svets what connects your, no harm meant I do understand your obsession with the case, with what we deal with now in the Steele Dossier? Again, one of the most central figures is Ivanov.

Of course later reports in the Steele Dossier go hand in hand with a larger public relations campaign. Creating reality? Irony alert: as informer/source I would by then know what the other side wants to hear.

By the way, babbling mode, I found your Tom Mangold transcription. It felt it wasn't there on the link you gave. I used the date, and other search terms. Maybe I am wrong. Haven't looked at what the judge ruled out of the collection. Yes, cozy session/setting.

According to Google search there are no other links then your articles here:
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613093555/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/files/2015/04/HMG000513wb.pdf ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/files/2015/04/HMG000513wb.pdf">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613093555/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/files/2015/04/HMG000513wb.pdf

**********

JAN RICHARD BĆRUG
The Collapsing Wall. Hybrid Journalism.
A Comparative Study of Newspapers and
Magazines in Eight Countries in Europe

Available online. Haven't read it yet, but journalism as hidden public relations transfer belt would be one of my minor obsessions. ...

Babak Makkinejad -> turcopolier ... , 07 February 2018 at 11:23 AM
I wonder too; their command of the English idiom is very au currant - noticed "opt in/opt out" reference? Too American.

They clearly are not native speakers of German.

LeaNder said in reply to kooshy... , 07 February 2018 at 12:30 PM
why California, Kooshy #18? California among other things left this verbal trace, since I once upon time thought a luggage storage in SF might be free/available now: this is my home, lady.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kish_Island#Economy

Tourists from many -- but not all -- foreign nations wishing to enter Kish Free Zone from legal ports are not required to obtain any visa prior to travel. For those travelers, upon-arrival travel permits are stamped valid for 14 days by Kish officials.

Who are the not all? Can we assume Britain is not one of those?

The German link is different. How about the Iranian?

or isn't this the Kish we are talking about?

LeaNder said in reply to LeaNder... , 07 February 2018 at 01:14 PM
correcting myself #94:

another Ivanov. I struggled with names (...) in Russian crime novels, admittedly. But that's long ago from times Russian crime and Russian money flows and rogues getting hold of its nuclear material surfaced more often in Europe. 90s

I see Sergei seems to share my interest in the literary genre:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Ivanov#Personal

[Mar 10, 2018] Us neocons and Jewish question

Mar 10, 2018 | www.unz.com

First of all many Neo-con are no Jewish (such prominent neo-con as Dick Cheney for example)

Also warmongering pays well and attracts specific type of people, some of which may be Jews.

Return of Shawn , March 8, 2018 at 3:21 pm GMT

@Anonymous

More of the past? Nope. It is just a question of how many goyim will be nuked.

It's all very simple. Fundamentally, Jews have been disliked because, as part of their Jewish identity, those with power pursue, often successfully, their perceived interests which often conflict with the perceived interests of another group(s).

[Mar 10, 2018] It's Time to Get Over Our Russophobia

Notable quotes:
"... Russia is acting again as a great power. And she sees us as having slapped away her hand, extended in friendship in the 1990s, only to humiliate her by planting NATO on her front porch. ..."
"... Yet what is also clear is that Putin hoped and believed that, with the election of Trump, Russia might be able to restore respectful if not friendly relations with the United States. Clearly, Putin wanted that, as did Trump. Yet with the Beltway in hysteria over hacking of the DNC and John Podesta emails, and the Russophobia raging in Washington, we appear to be paralyzed when it comes to engaging with Russia. ..."
"... The U.S. political system, said Putin this week, "has been eating itself up." Is his depiction that wide of the mark? What is the matter with us? ..."
"... Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, ..."
"... . To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at www.creators.com. ..."
"... " If Russia wanted friendly relations with the US why meddle in our elections?" ..."
"... "However, Europeans are not irrational, but perfectly logical in being wary of Russia." ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

That's pretty naive article. The Russophobia is used to cement fracturing neoliberal society and create the commonenemy, more important the neoliberal elite which looted the country for the last 40 years or so.

Russia is just a very convenient target which allow to reuse Cold War stereotypes and play to the crowd instincts.

Another problem that Russa refuses to the be a Washington vassal (the status it enjoyed under drunk Yeltsin) and neoliberal empire accept only vassal not eaul partners in thier ranks.

Unless there is a late surge for Communist Party candidate Pavel Grudinin, who is running in second place with 7 percent, Vladimir Putin will be re-elected president of Russia for another six years on March 18.

Once he is, we must decide whether to continue on course into a second Cold War, or to engage Russia, as every president sought to do in Cold War I.

For our present conflict, Vladimir Putin is not alone at fault. His actions have often been reactions to America's unilateral moves.

After the Soviet Union collapsed, we brought all of the Warsaw Pact members and three former republics of the USSR into our military alliance, NATO, to corral Russia. How friendly was that?

Putin responded with his military buildup in the Baltic.

George W. Bush abrogated the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty that Richard Nixon had negotiated. Putin responded with a buildup of the offensive missiles he put on display last week. The U.S. helped to instigate the Maidan Square coup that dumped over the elected pro-Russian government in Ukraine. To prevent the loss of his Sevastopol naval base on the Black Sea, Putin countered by annexing the Crimean Peninsula.

After peaceful protests in Syria were put down by Bashar al-Assad, we sent arms to Syrian rebels to overthrow the Damascus regime. Seeing his last naval base in the Med, Tartus, imperiled, Putin came to Assad's aid and helped him win the civil war.

The Boris Yeltsin years are over.

Russia is acting again as a great power. And she sees us as having slapped away her hand, extended in friendship in the 1990s, only to humiliate her by planting NATO on her front porch.

Yet what is also clear is that Putin hoped and believed that, with the election of Trump, Russia might be able to restore respectful if not friendly relations with the United States. Clearly, Putin wanted that, as did Trump. Yet with the Beltway in hysteria over hacking of the DNC and John Podesta emails, and the Russophobia raging in Washington, we appear to be paralyzed when it comes to engaging with Russia.

The U.S. political system, said Putin this week, "has been eating itself up." Is his depiction that wide of the mark? What is the matter with us?

... ... ...

Japan negotiates with Putin's Russia over the southern Kuril Islands lost at the end of World War II. Bibi Netanyahu has met many times with Putin, though he is an ally of Assad, whom Bibi would like to see ousted, and has a naval and air base not far from Israel's border.

We Americans have far bigger fish to fry with Russia than Bibi. Strategic arms control. De-escalation in the Baltic, Ukraine, and the Black Sea. Ending the war in Syria. North Korea. Space. Afghanistan. The Arctic. The war on terror. Yet all we seem to hear from our elites is endless whining that Putin has not been sanctioned enough for desecrating "our democracy."

Get over it.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever . To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at www.creators.com.

Chris in Appalachia March 8, 2018 at 10:33 pm

Good article, Pat, although it will probably send commenter Michael Kenny into apoplexy. Yes, we have all heard the official lines about why we should beware of Putin. Like so many official spins (Saddam's WMDs, etc.) it is probably an intentional distraction from the actual truth.
The Other Eric , says: March 8, 2018 at 11:13 pm
This was actually a sane article. What have you done with the real Buchanan?
spite , says: March 9, 2018 at 12:46 am
It's the same nonsense in other places of the world, North Korea agitates against America, Israel against Iran, Iran against Israel, China against Japan, etc. What all of these have in common is that it is easier to point out the distant foreigner as the cause of so many problems instead of looking inward and asking what REALLY is causing problems.

And with absolute certainty all the liberal comments here will say that this is false and that Russia is to blame for all the problems.

Ken T , says: March 9, 2018 at 1:00 am
Russia is neither America's "best friend" nor our "implacable enemy". What it is is a very powerful competitor, with its own agenda and its own interests. Sometimes those interests will align with ours, sometimes they will clash. Certainly it is a good thing for our relationship with them to be on as amicable terms as possible, in order to facilitate our mutual benefit wherever possible.

But for you to insist that their direct meddling in our electoral process is a non-issue that should be ignored, is to declare that the United States is not a sovereign state, that we have no right to determine our own form of government. That we in fact exist as a puppet of Russia. You may think that is an acceptable position to take. I do not.

Mai La Dreapta , says: March 9, 2018 at 2:15 am
So this article is a basically a softball way of pitching the reactionary motto "America Is A Communist Country". Why did the elites favor engagement with the Soviet premiers? Because they liked communism. Why are they enraged by Putin, who is in every significant way less oppressive than his predecessors? Because he's not a communist.
William Dalton , says: March 9, 2018 at 4:07 am
What on Earth is Trump doing meeting with Kim before he meets with Putin?
Adam , says: March 9, 2018 at 5:31 am
While I agree with you that the expansion of NATO did a lot of damage to the relationship with Russia I have to say that you seem remarkably sanguine about a foreign power influencing the American election so much that the clear favorite ended up losing.

I wonder how easily you would have been able to 'get over it' if Russia had leaked letters from the Republicans which lead to Carter beating Reagan in 1980 or Gore beating Bush in 2000? I'm no fan of Clinton and am glad she lost but I am a fan of Democracy and a foreign power undermining it is tantamount to an act of war. Are you really so partisan that you would rather your side win than the country have a reliable democracy?

Thaomas , says: March 9, 2018 at 7:56 am
If Russia had no military designs on the new NATO members, why was their membership considered an affront? If Russia had no economic designs on Ukraine, why was it's joining the EU considered a treat? If Russia wanted friendly relations with the US why meddle in our elections?
Mal Profit , says: March 9, 2018 at 7:58 am
All true.
HenionJD , says: March 9, 2018 at 8:53 am
Is Russia the great bogey-man of yesteryear? Perhaps not. Do they have legitimate issues and grievances? Possibly. Can we perhaps reach an accommodation with them? Maybe. Is Trump doing anything to curtail their mucking about in our political process? Nope. There's the rub.
MikeCLT , says: March 9, 2018 at 8:57 am
As usual Mr. Buchanan is correct.
pfed , says: March 9, 2018 at 9:16 am
Patrick Buchanan is an apologist for Kremlin kleptocrats who not only foment trouble abroad, but oppress their own people to stay in power.

The U.S. did not instigate the Maidan protest, unless you think that upwards of a million ordinary people in Kyiv and millions more across Ukraine protested for dignity and the rule of law in the dead of winter for nearly four months, then perhaps Mr. Buchanan has a point. He does not.

Again, I quote verbatim from comments I made last month to pieces by Robert Merry and Mr. Buchanan: "The Ukrainian president wasn't toppled; he fled,doubting the loyalty of his own security forces and despite an agreement with the opposition to stay in power pending a new election within 10 months."

Wezz , says: March 9, 2018 at 10:12 am
I lean liberal and it's not that much much about what Russia is up to but If Meuller actually came out with solid evidence that Trump himself and his people, did collude with Russia to influence the 2016 election will his followers even care at this point?

I really wonder how Americas next generation is going to behave now that Trump and his cronies have done so much to damage to any ideas of truth, integrity, honesty, decency, the common good I could go on.

And something like 70% of Republicans think Trump is a good role model for children according to a January Quinnipiac poll.

collin , says: March 9, 2018 at 10:19 am
These are all reasonable points but:

If you want to stop Russiaphobia, then Putin and Trump need to come clean about the 2016 activity. Period. Trump will not be impeached. End the Russian trolling for alt-right causes or otherwise Democrats will attack hard.

Otherwise, the Manafort trial starting in July is going to be the biggest trial since OJ and every night cable news will analyze every detail of Manafort working with Russian government and money laundering for the Russians. (And there will be plenty of details of expensive area rugs!)

And if there are any connections of Manafort or witness Gates to the Russian trolls it will not be pretty. (Or Roger Stone to the hacked DNC e-mails.)

Michael Kenny , says: March 9, 2018 at 10:42 am
The usual double-talk: "Vladimir Putin will be re-elected president of Russia", i.e. the Russian Federation, a sovereign state which has existed only since 1991, but then, "we must decide whether to continue on course into a second Cold War, or to engage Russia, as every president sought to do in Cold War I, "Russia" here meaning the now defunct "Soviet Union". Mr Buchanan is locked in his cold war mindset and is simply unable to get his mind around the idea that the Russian Federation isn't the Soviet Union, nor is it even the sole successor state to the Soviet Union. It is merely one of 15 former Soviet republics and if Mr Buchanan believes the US should "engage" with the former Soviet Union, shouldn't it also engage with, Ukraine, Georgia, the Baltic Republics etc.? Engaging only with the Russian Federation implies taking sides with Putin against the other 14 former Soviet republics, which, of course, contradicts Mr Buchanan's much proclaimed belief in "non-intervention"! It's perfectly true to say that US wrongdoing created Putin, not least the US neocon attempt to use him as a useful idiot to destroy the EU, but how does US wrongdoing give Putin the right to violate Ukrainians' rights? This is in fact the standard pro-Putin nonsense argument: A violates B's rights. C is to be allowed to punish A by also violating B's rights! If the US is at fault, it must put right its wrongdoing by getting Putin out of Ukraine. One way or the other. Any other course of action is just one more step towards the collapse of the US.
Annab , says: March 9, 2018 at 11:55 am
All that I know to be the truth is that Russia seems to support the truth more than we Americans! We have lost our soul. If we cannot recuperate our "soul", we need to die the death of all failed empires!
ukm1 , says: March 9, 2018 at 12:10 pm
During an event in October, 2017, the President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir V. Putin blamed the collapse of the U.S.S.R. on Soviet Union trusting the West "too much," describing the move as "our biggest mistake!"

"You interpreted our trust as weakness, and you exploited that," said the Russian president, adding:

"Unfortunately, our Western partners, having divided the U.S.S.R.'s geopolitical legacy, were certain of their own incontestable righteousness having declared themselves the victors of the 'Cold War'."

"They started to openly interfere in the sovereign affairs of countries and to export democracy in the same way as in their time the Soviet leadership tried to export the Socialist revolution to the whole world."

SteveM , says: March 9, 2018 at 12:38 pm
Re: Thaomas, " If Russia wanted friendly relations with the US why meddle in our elections?"

The jilted Left has mutated a huge bogus "Russian meddling" junk narrative into a self-licking ice cream cone of political insanity.

The late, great journalist Robert Parry (RIP) had been tracking the Russia meddling story assiduously before he died unexpectedly in January. Parry's Consortium News is one of the few remaining sites of genuine journalistic integrity. It has no affection for Donald Trump, only the Truth. It swings a 2X4 in every direction. Read the final assessment of the Russia Meddling ruse by Parry published last December:

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/12/11/russia-gates-litany-of-corrections/

And then tell us how Parry had it wrong. Americans, including Thaomas are being played for chumps by the corrupted MSM and crony Political Hacks. Reject the Big Lie and the Crony Tools that sustain it.

P.S. Save consortiumnews to your browser favorites and visit it occasionally to wash off the slime of MSM Fake News propaganda.

Aleks , says: March 9, 2018 at 12:49 pm
The truth is this. Russia is the irreplaceable adversary of the United States because they are the one significant nation on this planet whose peoples do not fit neatly into our post modern western concepts of race and ethnicity. Slavic people have and never will be understood in the United States. They will always be the backwards, unelightened, barbaric, undemocratic people. The one whom both Churchill and Hitler stated were inferior to both the Anglo and Germanic peoples.

That is the truth.

EarlyBird , says: March 9, 2018 at 12:49 pm
Pat, are you kidding?

While your critique of America's unnecessary post-Cold War antagonism is correct, it is hardly relevant to 2018.

"Putin hoped and believed that, with the election of Trump, Russia might be able to restore respectful if not friendly relations with the United States." >? What?!

Putin has and continues to attempt to meddle in and create chaos in our elections. He clearly "has something" on Trump personally. He's using Trump as an agent of disruption within the United States to get vengeance on the US for its post-Cold War activities.

It may very well make sense to attempt to reach out to the Russians, but this is hardly the president or the time to do that.

Delia Ruhe , says: March 9, 2018 at 12:49 pm
Pat Buchanan is far from my favourite American (ex)politician, but this article is a model of pure reason. Indeed, it ranks up there with the best ones on the current topic of Washington's childish and dangerous Russophobia.

It really is high time that the Democrats and their fellow travellers, the neocons, gave up on their poorly designed anti-Russia, anti-Putin propaganda narrative. Ever more Americans are not buying it, Washington's vassal states have never bought it (although, as obedient vassals the leaders of those states don't dare say so), and the rest of the world is simply enjoying the clownish performance of American victimization and injured innocence.

Thanks, Pat Buchanan

Cynthia McLean , says: March 9, 2018 at 1:00 pm
Good article.
What snowflakes we are -- has our house of Democracy always been built on the sands of hypocrisy and hubris? The recent demonization of Russia, it seems to me, is a gift to the War Machine which always needs an enemy to justify $billions in weaponry. I am much more concerned about John Bolton calling shots from the White House, than I am about Putin, or even Kim Jungun.
b. , says: March 9, 2018 at 1:19 pm
"Putin hoped and believed that, with the election of Trump, Russia might be able to restore respectful if not friendly relations with the United States. Clearly, Putin wanted that, as did Trump. [..] What is the matter with us?"

Let us not pretend to be naive, and let us give credit where credit is due. Whereas the Republican Party's principled stance against the political opponents focused on "stained dress" and "birth certificate", the Clinton/Obama leadership of the *other* war mongering party managed to strike a strategic alliance with the neocons and the "national insecurity" apparat, and, together with the "Real GOP", has prevented Trump from changing US foreign policy for the better as effectively as the business wings of the "Biparty" have co-opted Trump into Reagonomics 2.0 – now as farce.

There is a reason why the GOP refused to focus on the Benghazi CIA pipeline channeling Libyan arsenals to Syrian islamists.

The authors recap makes rather clear that the US elites, since before the end of WW2, committed themselves to the dismantling of the Soviet Union and the subordination of its parts. US policy towards Russia is not driven by negligence or incompetence, and we should not ever forget that US talk of "winneable" nuclear war, decapitation strikes and "regime change" goes far back – to Eisenhower, in fact, who denied that nuclear weapons were different from other means of "mass destruction" in war. The continuity of US aggressive posture – and posturing – is exemplified by the career of Keith Payne, with GWB and now Trump, and his sponsors – like Rumsfeld – with Reagan, Bush and Bush – posturing that culminated in Able Archer, which led Thatcher to concern herself with containing and rolling back US nuclear blackmail.

The Biparty and other camp followers of the war profiteering classes and the global oligarchy are not concerned with "defending" The People, much less our "allies", as South Korea is learning at cost – the Endsieg over Russia and, eventually, China, is their multi-generational project. If you wonder whether the 2016 election was rigged or fixed in any way, you have to go back to the primaries that were supposed to only offer us a choice between two warmongers intent to outdo each other.

In Clinton, the establishment succeeded in promoting another Judas goat in the mold of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, for the Democratic Party. The Republican leadership failed in this task, but it turns out that Trump is not merely a flawed champion of the discontent, a hollow man, but the perfect Judas goat of our time – he even believed himself.

Anybody voting for "pocket change" in 2018 will lead us to another goat rodeo in 2020. Meanwhile, we are heading for a repeat of Able Archer and another change to "win" ourselves a profitable nuclear war at "a level compatible with national survival and recovery."

Donald , says: March 9, 2018 at 1:33 pm
It is a sad state of affairs when Pat Buchanan writes a column that makes more sense than most of what appears in the mainstream liberal press.
DanJ , says: March 9, 2018 at 1:45 pm
A phobia is an irrational fear, not based on reason. The term "Russophobia" is used to proactively belittle and discredit arguments critical of Russia.

However, Europeans are not irrational, but perfectly logical in being wary of Russia. The Soviet Union occupied and violently oppressed Eastern Europe for 50 years, while building the capability to wage massive nuclear war on Western Europe on short notice.

It is now perfectly sensible for former Warsaw Pact allies or Soviet republics to seek maximum integration with any and all institutions of the West, such as NATO and the EU. It is also their right to do so as sovereign nations. Russia has no legitimate "sphere of interest" beyond her own borders.

And NATO in its current form is but a shadow of the Cold War alliance in Europe. US troop levels there are at 1/5 of Cold War numbers. NATO does not have an offensive posture in Europe, hardly even a good defensive one. It does not threaten Russia in any way, even if you might think otherwise from the incessant complaining by Putin and some of his American fellow travellers.

SteveM , says: March 9, 2018 at 2:47 pm
Re: DanJ, "However, Europeans are not irrational, but perfectly logical in being wary of Russia."

Talk is cheap. The actual level of European fear of Russia is implied by the level of military spending by the Europeans to defend themselves against that supposed threat. Those military spending levels are almost universally below the relatively modest GDP targets, especially compared to the out of control U.S. "defense" spending.

The perverse irony is that the low levels of military spending by Europe would indicate masochistic irrationality if the Russian threat were genuine.

Agree NATO does not militarily threaten Russia. The Russian objection is to the Global Cop Gorilla that consciously throws wrenches in the normalization of Russian/European relationships by militarizing every element of foreign policy. Simply because the U.S. Security State apparatus needs an existential enemy to justify its TRILLION dollar War Machine.

The Europeans currently accept U.S. hegemony because it doesn't cost them anything.

The U.S. war-monger led foreign policy model is completely bankrupt. The Crony Elite Hacks in Washington just haven't realized it yet. Because as parasites, they make too much money from it. They will feed on the carcass until it collapses.

Josep , says: March 9, 2018 at 3:23 pm
@ Aleks
"They will always be the backwards, unelightened, barbaric, undemocratic people. The one whom both Churchill and Hitler stated were inferior to both the Anglo and Germanic peoples."

If what you wrote isn't racist, then I dunno what to say.

Lenny , says: March 9, 2018 at 3:24 pm
Pat writes:
Yet all we seem to hear from our elites is endless whining that Putin has not been sanctioned enough for desecrating "our democracy."

Get over it.

Nyet comrade Buchananovich. If Democracy means so little to you, move to Russia

Ken Zaretzke , says: March 9, 2018 at 3:30 pm
Something else to keep in mind is this: In the 1960s, Russia detonated an H-bomb that was–I forget the exact ratio–about 10,000 times as powerful as the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. And now we're worried about a country–North Korea–that a half century later detonated a bomb five times as powerful as the one that obliterated Hiroshima.

How crazy is it to demonize Putin when, if push came to shove, they could annihilate the U.S.? Yes, we could annihilate them, even if they launched a first strike with strategic (as opposed to tactical) nuclear weapons. But it's no offense to the country that produced the incomparable Tolstoy to say that against the ruin of Moscow and St. Petersburg would be measured the ruin of New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, Boston, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., San Diego, and Denver. Russia can destroy far more human capital in America than we can destroy in Russia. Advantage, Russia.

The moral of this story: It's unwise to poke the bear–much less to poke the bear in the eye, as we have been doing since the presidency of Bill Clinton, who started NATO's misguided project of encircling Russia.

Tiktaalik , says: March 9, 2018 at 3:30 pm
Guys, if you trully believe that 13 superheroes with 100 K$ can overcome +1Bn$ plethora of PACs|SuperPACS|and all other whatnots you should quit watching all these fine Marvel movies about superheroes.

And, btw, leaving aside total lack of proofs, how did this DNC hack played out? Was it some dirty invented lies about Whight Knigtess? Or was it blatant truth? ) I'm really amused how lemmings started to sing 'DNC hacks!DNC hacks!' being completely oblivious to the content of this leaked emails. You don't care that you're being, hmm, 'abused' by your ruling class all the time, don't you?
Finally, do you care that US meddled (and this fact is 1000% proven) in internal politics in quite a number of different countries, Russia included?

Aleks , says: March 9, 2018 at 3:42 pm
@Josep

"If what you wrote isn't racist, then I dunno what to say."

I fail to see the racism in what I wrote since they were both well-known beliefs (and quotes) held by both Churchill and Hitler. But I'm sure you knew that.

cdugga , says: March 9, 2018 at 3:42 pm
I will follow Buchanan's reasoning to its logical conclusion and say that, well, the guy, and maybe his daughter to, were spies and deserved the classic kgb response. What putin does, we deserve. It is getting hard to swallow so much putin and kgb love here at TAC. Like, most americans are not suffering from russophobia nearly as much as so many are enamored by authoritarianism and the murderous kgb agent putin. The don himself admires putin for the head oligarch the don wishes he himself could be. Putin is head of an organized crime syndicate masquerading as a great state. Social conservatives have even crowned putin an advocate for western christian civilization. Russians gladly kiss his hand. It may not pay them anything, but the consequences of not kissing his hand have been demonstrated. You know, something right wingers admire. The don is doing the same thing here. Like, if we could see his tax returns, we could readily anticipate his policy actions. Hey, and get rich too.
I will be surprised though, if US steel does much more than become the middle man in marking up steel they import and stamp USA on to. I do not know, but expect a large part of the imported steel the US buys, is bought from middlemen companies that buy chinese steel and stamp it canadian. Canada does produce allot of aluminum. Most of china sits on a 15k foot plateau of minerals. The rest of the world will buy from their glut. We might really not want to depend on chinese steel if we are planning to war. Europe is beholding to putin to stay warm in the winter, so it will be interesting to see how they respond to the collateral damage from assassinations carried out in their own countries. Like, I wonder if their punditry will claim they probably deserve it. Churchill has been gone for quite a while after all. Russophobia? Is that where people show illegitimate concern when putin proclaims to have shiny new nukes that we have no defense against. Yepper, we deserve that too. Once you put the victims mantle on, it is hard to be anything but a victim, and much easier to excuse yourself anything while projecting your fear onto, well, defenseless snowflakes are an easy target. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russian-ex-spy-sergei-skripal-his-daughter-poisoned-nerve-agent-n854516
vato_loco_frisco , says: March 9, 2018 at 4:09 pm
The Democratics are obsessed with Putin and the Russians, blaming them for the most ignominious shellacking in modern electoral history, and yet refuse to do the necessary groundwork to win the presidency in 2020. They've placed all their cards on the collusion narrative, hoping for the best. BTW, good article, Pat.
Someone in the crowd , says: March 9, 2018 at 4:38 pm
I think cdugga expresses best the mentality that defines the present moment: 'If Russia is accused of something, it means that they are guilty.' Can't imagine how that assumption could ever be abused, can you?

One of your better articles, Pat, was glad to see it. Let's hope a few more of our leaders start thinking along these same lines and decide it might be just as well not to nuke the planet out of pique over some bleeping facebook ads.

Tiktaalik , says: March 9, 2018 at 4:41 pm
2 cdugga
>> I will follow Buchanan's reasoning to its logical conclusion and say that, well, the guy, and maybe his daughter to, were spies and deserved the classic kgb response.

Could you please provide some proofs that they were poisoned by some Russian secret service? Why on Earth would these aforementioned services like to kill the guy? He's 100% non-entity.
On the other hand, it's a very convenient target if someone wants to frame FSB or GRU, so I'll bet on British MI-###. Tough luck for this guy, you're fired in this way in this business.

Josep , says: March 9, 2018 at 4:42 pm
@ Aleks
I'm aware that Hitler and Churchill believed those. I apologize for taking your comment out of context and calling out racism where none was intended. I feel kinda silly now.
ScottA , says: March 9, 2018 at 5:29 pm
Great article Pat!
Kurt Gayle , says: March 9, 2018 at 8:32 pm
Thanks for another important essay, Pat.

But what I most want to thank you for is your role in President Trump's announcement of tariffs on steel and aluminum.

That announcement had your name written all over it, Pat.

[Mar 10, 2018] Dr. Strangelove already back, McCarthy coming! by Ali Watkins

Notable quotes:
"... It would also require the FBI to investigate all requests by U.S.-based Russian diplomats to travel 50 miles outside his or her official post to ensure those diplomats have properly notified the U.S. Government of their travel plans. No Russian diplomats could travel outside of that 50 mile perimeter unless all of their colleagues have followed travel rules in the three months prior. The FBI would also be required to notify Congress that the Russians have followed the rules before the travel is cleared by the State Department. The purpose is to ensure the Russians are following proper protocol in their travel. ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press

Dr. Strangelove already back, McCarthy coming! 02/07/2016 Senate Committee Looks To Revive Cold-War Era Body To Catch Russian Spies

By Ali Watkins

A new intelligence bill also proposes tightening how Russian diplomats can travel.

Congress is pushing the White House to revive a Cold War-era committee to crack down on Russian spies, underscoring just how uneasy Washington is about its adversaries in Moscow.

In its 2017 Intelligence Authorization Bill, the Senate Intelligence Committee is asking the White House to reinstate a presidentially-appointed group to unmask Russian spies and uncover Russian-sponsored assassinations. The group, which would include personnel from the State Department, intelligence community and several other executive offices, would meet monthly. Along with spies and covert killings, the committee would also investigate the funding of front groups -- or cover organizations for Russian operations -- "covert broadcasting, media manipulation" and secret funding.

A similar interagency body called the "Active Measures Working Group" existed during the Cold War, but it hasn't been active in decades. This new group would be modeled after its Cold War predecessor, one U.S. intelligence official said on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive bill.

The intelligence bill passed through the Senate committee in May, and now must be passed by the full Senate.

It would also require the FBI to investigate all requests by U.S.-based Russian diplomats to travel 50 miles outside his or her official post to ensure those diplomats have properly notified the U.S. Government of their travel plans. No Russian diplomats could travel outside of that 50 mile perimeter unless all of their colleagues have followed travel rules in the three months prior. The FBI would also be required to notify Congress that the Russians have followed the rules before the travel is cleared by the State Department. The purpose is to ensure the Russians are following proper protocol in their travel.

[Mar 10, 2018] The Future of the Jews by Fred Reed

What some refer to as "Middle Eastern" characteristics probably more correctly can be called the "rug merchant mentality."
Notable quotes:
"... Diversity often disappears through assimilation. Today people named O'Toole and Libertini may be proud of their ancestry, but they think of themselves as American, not as Irish and Italian. So do others. Thus hostility to them, once intense, has vanished. ..."
"... Jews do not assimilate. Yes, they speak the same language, wear the same clothes, and peck at smartphones like everyone else. Yet they think of themselves as Jews. So, therefore, does everyone else. While there is no legal or moral reason why they should not so think of themselves, there are consequences: Human nature is what it is, regardless of whether we think it should be. ..."
"... Worse -- and this has caused millions of deaths -- Jews are often successful. It doesn't matter whether the success arises from superior intelligence, greater drive, collusion, or the will of Yahweh. It happens. Thus the pattern repeated over and over and over down the ages. Jews prosper, become rich, gain power sometimes abused, and become arrogant. If Christians did this -- Bill Gates, or the Robber Barons of the Gilded Age -- they would be resented as individuals perhaps, not as an ethnicity. But Jews are Them. The surrounding population feels colonized -- by Them, by Space Aliens, by internal foreigners -- and deeply resents it. ..."
"... Power and wealth are not necessary to engender slaughter. Mere difference, specifically not being Christian, has often been enough. History is littered with examples, of which Jews are well aware. When the First Crusade took Jerusalem in 1099, the Christian armies immediately burned the synagogue with the Jews inside. Why? The Jews had no part in the war, which was between Muslims and Christians. ..."
"... A Jewish friend once expressed the attitude as sometimes being, "Look what they have done to us. We can do anything we want to them." ..."
"... "It appears that gypsies are born only to be thieves. They are born as thieves, raised among thieves, study to be thieves, and finally end by being common thieves." Cervantes died in 1616, which makes the story over 400 years old. Yet this description of gypsies is their reputation today, very much supported by police files.They haven't assimilated, and they haven't changed. Jews of course have never been associated with burglary or picking pockets, but the passage makes clear that peoples can maintain characteristics over centuries ..."
"... Jews with remarkable consistency have been described for centuries as smart, greedy, combative, clannish, "pushy," exploitative, and arrogant. This is how I hear them described in Mexico, where I live. (I think of these as Middle Eastern traits, but never mind.) Then there is chutzpah. which in practice seems to mean "brashly walking over other people." It can leave others feeling bulldozed, defeated, used. This bruising of the ego, of self-respect, arouses a hostility all out of proportion to actual damage done. It is, or so I think, a major cause of dislike for Jews. Such descriptions are dismissed today as stereotypes. A stereotype is just the aggregate observation of many people over time. ..."
"... In sum, Jews seem alien, smarter than others and far more aggressive than Christians, whom they seem to trample. Christians feel that they cannot compete, that they are outsmarted at every turn, or at least pushed around, and made victims. This bruising of the ego sets off irrational, serious hostility. It is the attitude of blacks toward whites, for the same reasons ..."
"... Finally there is Israel, the albatross around the Jewish neck, making it impossible for Jews quietly to be more or less normal Americans. To Jews Israel is of immense and understandable importance, but this enthusiasm brings up charges of dual loyalty or, often, loyalty exclusively to Israel. The truth of this doesn't matter. It looks true, which is enough. Does Rachel the Jewish dentist in Peoria back Israel? To what extent? What does she think of Israeli behavior? We don't know. We know that Jewish lobbies like AIPAC and the Neocons back Israel one hundred percent. And they control American Mid-Eastern policy. This is much noted on the Web. ..."
"... America is not really stable. Political animosity runs high, racial hostility is great and growing, standards of living fall, offshoring and automation leave the young with nowhere for their lives to go. Wealth goes rapidly from the many to the few and what was the working class falls into drugs and anomie. The wars never end. Infrastructure ages and falls behind that of more advanced nations. Anger grows. As the pie shrinks, someone will have to get less pie. ..."
Mar 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

It is strange: Jews have been disliked everywhere and in all times. The dislike appears in odd places. I was astonished to find that my Nepalese trekking guides were intensely hostile to Jews. They said that Jews (actually Israelis in most cases I think, but the Nepalese do not seem to make the distinction) were loud, demanding, and always trying to force down the guides' fees. Historically the hostility has often been powerful and, not infrequently, murderous. Jews have been expelled from country after country, excluded from polite society, subjected to quotas,and required to live in certain regions. Why?

How much anti-Jewish hostility is there today in America? A lot? A little? Is it negligible? Potentially explosive? It is hard to tell because disliking Jews is often a firing offense, and a controlled press makes discussion impossible. A clue can perhaps be found in the comments sections of political websites where, protected by anonymity, commenters are often bitterly anti-Jewish. But then, these comments may, or may not, be the work of a few cranks.

Today there appear news stories about growing hostility on campuses, that Jews are fleeing Paris because of increased or more openly expressed dislike, or that the German Right, never fond of Jews, gains strength.

Since the dislike has existed for at least two thousand years, there must be some enduring reason or reasons. What?

One I think is the Space Alien Effect. It is human nature to dislike people different from oneself. This fact runs against today's cult of diversity, which accounts for the disastrous reality of American life, but a glance around the world reveals that diversity causes most of the planet's troubles: Sunni and Shia, Jew and Muslim, Tutsi and Hutu, black, white and brown in America, Tamil and Sinhalese; Turks and Kurds; Turks and Armenians; Thais and Muslims, Germans and Jews. Protestants and Catholics in Ireland, on and on for a very long list of religious, ethnic, and racial differences. Diversity is nobody's strength.

Diversity often disappears through assimilation. Today people named O'Toole and Libertini may be proud of their ancestry, but they think of themselves as American, not as Irish and Italian. So do others. Thus hostility to them, once intense, has vanished.

Jews do not assimilate. Yes, they speak the same language, wear the same clothes, and peck at smartphones like everyone else. Yet they think of themselves as Jews. So, therefore, does everyone else. While there is no legal or moral reason why they should not so think of themselves, there are consequences: Human nature is what it is, regardless of whether we think it should be.

Specifically, Jews are always Them. We are Us. We are aware that Feinstein is Jewish as we are not aware that O'Malley is Irish -- because he isn't. Difference alone doesn't cause antagonism. but makes it much more likely.

Worse -- and this has caused millions of deaths -- Jews are often successful. It doesn't matter whether the success arises from superior intelligence, greater drive, collusion, or the will of Yahweh. It happens. Thus the pattern repeated over and over and over down the ages. Jews prosper, become rich, gain power sometimes abused, and become arrogant. If Christians did this -- Bill Gates, or the Robber Barons of the Gilded Age -- they would be resented as individuals perhaps, not as an ethnicity. But Jews are Them. The surrounding population feels colonized -- by Them, by Space Aliens, by internal foreigners -- and deeply resents it. As noted, the reaction may take the form of ostracism, enforced quotas, confinement to the Pale of Settlement, expulsion from the country, ghastly pogroms, or Auschwitz.

Hitler's complaints against the Jews were along usual lines, that Jews controlled German culture, finance, academia, and the media. These are also things said in America today today on the internet against Jews . Whether these criticisms are true, fair, justified, or make sense does not matter. What matters is that people feel, or can easily be made to feel, controlled, by Them. Making a list of powerful Jews is sufficient and, with the internet, easy.

The dislike is profoundly visceral, not rational, tapping into deep wells of instinct that make little sense -- which doesn't matter. This can be seen in the wild disproportion between offense given and reaction. How do you get rationally in Germany from growlings in beer halls, "There are too damn many Jews in everything," to "We should kill all the Jews"?

Them, not Us. It makes little obvious sense to say that Jews are not Americans. Bob Dylan isn't an American? Lauren Bacall? Yet this is clearly how anti-Jewish commenters on the web see it. Them, not Us. It is a matter of limbic tribalism, which does not map well onto legal principles.

The hostility is often to Jews more as a metaphysical category than as actual people. Many who loathe Jews have little contact with them. Ask, "What have Jews actually done to you? Hacked your bank account? Gypped you out of your house? Shot your dog?" and the answer will likely be, "Nothing." Rachel Cohen, the dentist next door in Peoria, is not easily envisioned as trying to destroy America, impose communism, or wreck the currency. Thus, "some of my best friends but ." While the Jews one actually knows probably are not bad people, or at most annoying, The Jews collectively are a sort of ominous barely visible miasma. (For the record, no American Jew has ever harmed me, and many have helped me in what I humorously call "my career." Coupla girlfriends, too.)

Importantly, Jewish presence is seen as Jewish conspiracy. Four Jews on the Supreme Court? From two percent of the population? My God, they must be up to something . A conspiracy, doubtless. But a conspiracy to do what? A candidate theory, correct as it happens, is that Jews as a people do anything and everything they can to advance the fortunes of Israel. But on the Supreme Court how? Other suggestions are a desire to destroy the white race (including themselves?), to bring America down (why?), to wreck the international monetary system (why?), or to impose a Zionist world empire. Most of these make between little and no sense, which doesn't matter. Jews don't actually have to sacrifice Christian children to die for it. They just have to be thought to do so.

It is interesting that these usually nonexistent Jewish conspiracies get enduring attention while other, demonstrably real, conspiracies do not arouse similar ire. For example, the Koch brothers, who are not Jewish, have funded and led a massive and disguised campaign to subvert American politics for the benefit of big business. The arms industry bribes, suborns, and finagles to get the government to buy hugely expensive weapons. The FBI was recently caught trying to prevent the election of Donald Trump. The Clintons are crooked as kite string in a ceiling fan. So why do Jewish conspiracies, sometimes real but, more usually, imagined, get attention on the web?

The Space Alien Effect. Jews are Them. We are Us. Both know it.

The importance of this tribalism should not be underestimated. I once walked down Main Street in Farmville, Virginia, a small town in the Southside, with a friend. He said -- I forget how the subject came up -- with some bitterness, "The Jews own everything on Main Street. Just like they do everywhere." He pointed to Rose's, a perfectly ordinary department store. It did nothing wrong or even interesting. But it was Jewish. That was enough.

Them, not Us. The Presbyterian owners of a store actually engaged in gouging would have been resented as individuals, not as a tribe. The Jews.

Power and wealth are not necessary to engender slaughter. Mere difference, specifically not being Christian, has often been enough. History is littered with examples, of which Jews are well aware. When the First Crusade took Jerusalem in 1099, the Christian armies immediately burned the synagogue with the Jews inside. Why? The Jews had no part in the war, which was between Muslims and Christians.

This explains why Jews do not like Christianity, though the antipathy typically is (wisely) disguised as a principled adherence to the invented constitutional doctrine of separation of church and state. Note that while Americans think of the Holocaust as something the Germans did (I do) to Jews it can look like just another attack by a Christian country (Poland, Russia, England, the Baltics, and so on.) A Jewish friend once expressed the attitude as sometimes being, "Look what they have done to us. We can do anything we want to them."

Here we encounter the unfortunate human tendency to blame entire groups for what a few members did. For example, the Jews killed Christ. "(Gosh, Rachel, you don't look old enough.") Or whites enslaved blacks. Actually, no one in the United States has been a slave, or owned one, for a century and a half. Most of liberal politics would wither to nothing if we accepted that people cannot be guilty of things they did not do.

It is not necessarily wise to be seen as trying to eliminate a majority religion.

Note that a people, though living always among others, can maintain characteristic over long periods. Recently I was reading Las Novelas Ejemplares of Cervantes, specifically La Gitnailla , which means very approximately The Little Gypsy Girl. It begins,

"Parece que los gitanos y gitanas solamente nacieron en el mundo para ser ladrones: nacen de padres ladrones, críanse con ladrones, estudian para ladrones y, finalmente, salen con ser ladrones corrientes."

"It appears that gypsies are born only to be thieves. They are born as thieves, raised among thieves, study to be thieves, and finally end by being common thieves." Cervantes died in 1616, which makes the story over 400 years old. Yet this description of gypsies is their reputation today, very much supported by police files.They haven't assimilated, and they haven't changed. Jews of course have never been associated with burglary or picking pockets, but the passage makes clear that peoples can maintain characteristics over centuries .

Jews with remarkable consistency have been described for centuries as smart, greedy, combative, clannish, "pushy," exploitative, and arrogant. This is how I hear them described in Mexico, where I live. (I think of these as Middle Eastern traits, but never mind.) Then there is chutzpah. which in practice seems to mean "brashly walking over other people." It can leave others feeling bulldozed, defeated, used. This bruising of the ego, of self-respect, arouses a hostility all out of proportion to actual damage done. It is, or so I think, a major cause of dislike for Jews. Such descriptions are dismissed today as stereotypes. A stereotype is just the aggregate observation of many people over time.

Of course the evidence does not always support a particular explanation for avisible effect. A Jewish friend says, "We're no more greedy than anyone else. We're just good businessmen so we make money." Those with money are usually described as greedy. I don't think I have ever met a greedy Jew, though I have met many who were very careful with money. It doesn't matter whether you really are greedy only that people think you are.

Chutzpah: When I was seven we lived in Arlington, Virginia, next to the Furmans, recently someone said, of Hell's Kitchen, which I didn't know what was. The Furmans were by no means bad people. One day Mrs. Furman came over and gave my mother a hard time because my little brother, five was playing with a kid across the street instead of little Andrew Furman. Mom had done nothing to influence my brother's choice of friends. She, a quietly genteel woman from the Southside of Virginia, was horrified by the aggressiveness. She told me of this decades later, so it clearly made a bad impression. Thereafter, Them were not our kind of people. Small things can produce lifelong dislike.

In sum, Jews seem alien, smarter than others and far more aggressive than Christians, whom they seem to trample. Christians feel that they cannot compete, that they are outsmarted at every turn, or at least pushed around, and made victims. This bruising of the ego sets off irrational, serious hostility. It is the attitude of blacks toward whites, for the same reasons .

Finally there is Israel, the albatross around the Jewish neck, making it impossible for Jews quietly to be more or less normal Americans. To Jews Israel is of immense and understandable importance, but this enthusiasm brings up charges of dual loyalty or, often, loyalty exclusively to Israel. The truth of this doesn't matter. It looks true, which is enough. Does Rachel the Jewish dentist in Peoria back Israel? To what extent? What does she think of Israeli behavior? We don't know. We know that Jewish lobbies like AIPAC and the Neocons back Israel one hundred percent. And they control American Mid-Eastern policy. This is much noted on the Web.

Jewish backing for Israel requires emotional contortions since Israel is everything liberals, to include Jews, profess to hate, being racist -- just now it is expelling blacks -- religiously exclusive, an apartheid state, militaristic, and brutal in its treatment of Arabs. This I suspect bothers some Jews, but assuredly is a grave PR problem for the country. But then, as a small coastal enclave in a part of the world intensely hostile to it, a sort of second Crusader Kingdom, it is hard to see what choices it has. If it becomes democratic or allows extensive intermarriage, for example, it will quickly cease to be a Jewish state, and there is no way to rule nicely over a sea of people who want to kill you.

Is there a possibility of active anti-semitism in America? Yes. Why is America immune to a dislike that has influenced all of history?

Yet at the moment, no. No overt expression will soon occur, and perhaps never will. But the classic preliminary conditions exist and grow. The appearance of Jewish power is strong. Four of nine justices of the Supreme Court, a majority of Ivy presidents, CEOs of television networks. Zuckerberg of Facebook, Sergei Brin co-founder of Google. the New York Times , Time-Warner, Disney, much of Hollywood, huge parts of retail, most of the big publishing houses in New York. Anyone who has worked in Washington knows that Jewish control of Congress and the media is near absolute. The list could go on for pages. Things like this create a propagandist's paradise.. If America's tight control over expression ever slipped, a would-be Adolf with Google searches could come up with a shocking list.

A rational person might ask, "So what?" Do the Supreme Court's Jewish justices make Jewish decisions -- whatever that might mean? Or do they vote like any four NPR listeners chosen at random? Did Mark Zuckerberg do anything underhanded? Or was he a very bright Jewish kid who had an idea and the strength of character to push it into existence? Does Schultz of Starbucks do something evil, or does he, like, you know, sell reasonably good coffee at a reasonable price?

It doesn't matter. They are there, so they must be conspiring. And their influence is becoming more obvious, as with Trump's subservience (as seen by much of the world) to Israel in planning to move the embassy.

People who think they are defending Jews will point to Jewish contributions to nearly everything -- science, music, math, technology, literature, charity, medicine, support for symphonies. These contributions are real and immense. With respect to anti-Jewish politics, they are also irrelevant or worse. Since the hostility to Jews rests largely on their excessive presence (again, in the eyes of the anti-Jewish) pointing to their intellectual contributions just increases the dislike. It emphasizes both the Jewish presence and apparent superiority.

Happy, prosperous societies seldom form lynch mobs. When things break down, when hope wanes, expectations fall, and near-desperation sets in, explosions come. Today the United States quite arguably heads into a Weimar-like future of chaos and social violence. This may sound crazy but is it? Nobody thought such a highly civilized country as Germany capable of Treblinka.

America is not really stable. Political animosity runs high, racial hostility is great and growing, standards of living fall, offshoring and automation leave the young with nowhere for their lives to go. Wealth goes rapidly from the many to the few and what was the working class falls into drugs and anomie. The wars never end. Infrastructure ages and falls behind that of more advanced nations. Anger grows. As the pie shrinks, someone will have to get less pie.

It is hard to see how this can continue forever. My guess is that the fighting -- "unrest" is the polite term -- will break out first between white and black. Whites are quiescent now, but see their lives worsening and their world deteriorating. The kneelers in the NFL, the rioters

Stealth , March 4, 2018 at 11:31 pm GMT

Fred, you know we love most of your columns, but this one is deeply flawed:

Specifically, Jews are always Them. We are Us.

That's it, huh? Then why did you go on to write the following?

Anyone who has worked in Washington knows that Jewish control of Congress and the media is near absolute.

That doesn't sound like being hated for the offense of simply being different; that sounds like something that would piss people off.

They said that Jews (actually Israelis in most cases I think, but the Nepalese do not seem to make the distinction) were loud, demanding, and always trying to force down the guides' fees.

Implicit in this is that the Nepalese don't dislike most other foreign visitors as much as they do the Israelis. And what had the Israelis done, other than just what the Nepalese guides said? Failed to assimilate into the culture of Nepal while on vacation there? I think your're kind of undermining your central thesis with this one.

Anonymous Disclaimer , March 4, 2018 at 11:33 pm GMT
@fnn

There is a simpler explanation. For obvious reasons, Israelis are terribly fond of third-worlders.

lavoisier , Website March 4, 2018 at 11:37 pm GMT
Animus goes much deeper than simple resentment at Jewish success.

It is because of the destruction of our once stable society and the implosion of Western European nations under cultural currents unleased by the Jews that is the source of that animus.

Speak honestly Fred and stop the tangential and mealy mouthed explanations for the animus.

Stealth , March 4, 2018 at 11:54 pm GMT
For someone who thinks antisemitism is irrational, Fred, you sure do seem to provide a lot of rational sounding reason for disliking the Jews.

Note: I haven't encountered any Jews who were pushy or hostile with me. I've known Jews from work, school and the community, and they don't seem any more likely to be aggressive, in the interpersonal sense, than anyone else. I think this tendency has been exaggerated – a lot. When I was in my early twenties my blond shiksa cousin had a couple of Jewish friends she would take with her when she visited. Trust me, the only aggressive and mean one in the bunch was my cousin. The two Jewish girls were good company, and my friends and I were always happy to socialize with them. The one Jewish kid in my class would never have been described as aggressive by anyone.

KenH , March 5, 2018 at 2:48 am GMT

This explains why Jews do not like Christianity,

That was in 1099. I could give a F who did what to whom that long ago. But with Jews their motto is "never forgive, never forget". Even when they've lived better in white Christian nations than in any other they still work to undermine the white Christians they live among. That their historical grudges have an endless shelf life is reason to hate them and bar them from living in our nations.

Importantly, Jewish presence is seen as Jewish conspiracy. Four Jews on the Supreme Court?

Right. When Jews are overrepresented in any field it's because they're so darn smart. It whites are overrepresented in their own friggin countries then Jews lecture us about unearned white privilege. This is why I and a growing number of whites hate them. And it just so happens that all four Jews represent the totalitarian left wing of the court who consistently vote against white American interests. Another reason they're hated.

I won't waste too much time since Fred's writing philo-semitic propaganda and taking pot shots at anyone who doesn't think they're as groovy as he does. This is just one of Freddy's partisan diatribes similar to how he lionizes and promotes Mexicans and Mexico.

Anyone who examines the historical record and the history of the Jews in the diaspora with an open mind will become anti-semitic.

Bay Area Guy , March 5, 2018 at 2:55 am GMT
As Fred hinted, Jews prize their ethnic identity much more than most whites. For example, while Italian and Greek Americans may pay homage to their respective identities, they don't wear them on their sleeves. They certainly wouldn't describe an Italian marrying a Greek as "intermarriage," a few potential exceptions notwithstanding.

Of course, Jews bragging about their success doesn't help either. Chinese and other Asian Americans – while not wielding the political and cultural clout of Jews – are also very economically successful; but they at least have the wisdom to keep quiet about it, as evidenced by their strident rejection of the "model minority" stereotype. Successful minorities worldwide such as Bohras in India also manage to quietly enjoy their success; and that's saying something, given that India is an openly – and often violently – majoritarian country.

Ultimately, I think that Jews' chutzpah engenders a lot of ill will. Of all affluent and accomplished minorities, they're certainly the most flamboyant and pushy.

turtle , March 5, 2018 at 2:55 am GMT

When a state is composed of a homogeneous population, the natural inertia of such a population will hold the Stage together and maintain its existence through astonishingly long periods of misgovernment and maladministration.
But the situation is utterly different in a country where the population is not homogeneous .Should the ruling hand show signs of weakness in such a State the result will be to awaken the individualistic instincts which are slumbering in the ethnological groups.

nsa
March 5, 2018 at 3:09 am GMT @Stealth

Fred the apologist clearly states the jooies exercise "near absolute control" of Wash DC i.e. the goy 98% of the US population has essentially been disenfranchised. That's not a reason to hate on the vile conniving jooies?

turtle
March 5, 2018 at 3:27 am GMT 100 Words Stereotypes come from somewhere.
I have a friend who is prejudiced against Chinese people, based on his dealings with Chinese in the computer industry. His perception (right or wrong, but it is the perception which matters) is that they were "sneaky," "underhanded," they "stuck together against the round eyes."
Yet, as a school teacher, this same fellow readily bragged up the achievements of his numerous Oriental students. Which tells me that, on a personal level, prejudice can be overcome. As the saying went, back in the days of hippies vs. rednecks, "Bar stool to bar stool, things can be pretty cozy."
My friend is a devout evangelical Christian. Whenever I see the "fish" symbol, I tend to run the other way. But, I make an exception in his case, because I know him to be, and respect him as, a good man.
Carroll Price , March 5, 2018 at 3:31 am GMT

It is hard to tell because disliking Jews is often a firing offense, and a controlled press makes discussion impossible.

Why?? Therein lies the answer as to why Jews are resented and disliked.

turtle , March 5, 2018 at 5:09 am GMT

Hitler's complaints against the Jews were along usual lines, that Jews controlled German culture, finance, academia, and the media.

Not exactly.
In his own words:

There were few Jews in Linz.
As I thought they were persecuted on account of their Faith my aversion to hearing remarks against them grew almost into a feeling of abhorrence.
Then I came to Vienna.
In the Jew I still saw only a man who was of a different religion, and therefore, on grounds of human tolerance, I was against the idea that he should be attacked because he had a different faith.
Once, when passing through the inner City [Vienna], I suddenly encountered a phenomenon in a long caftan and wearing black side-locks. My first thought was: Is this a Jew? They certainly did not have this appearance in Linz.
Cleanliness, whether moral or of another kind, had its own peculiar meaning for these people.
What soon gave me cause for very serious consideration were the activities of the Jews in certain branches of life .Was there any shady undertaking, any form of foulness, especially in cultural life, in which at least one Jew did not participate?
The fact that nine-tenths of all the smutty literature, artistic tripe and theatrical banalities, had to be charged to the account of people who formed scarcely one percent of the nation – that fact could not be gainsaid.

In summary, Hitler states that his antipathy towards Jews, as a group, was based on his experiences in the "big city" (Vienna), and his *perception* that the Jews he encountered there were mostly immoral and corrupt, unlike those he had known in his (smaller) home town.

Corvinus , March 5, 2018 at 5:14 am GMT
@Anonymous

"It is just a question of how many goyim will be nuked."

Not that many, if you are honest.

"People don't like Jews because Jews don't practice the Golden Rule of treating others as they would like to be treated themselves."

Some people, absolutely.

And, of course Fred is not completely accurate when he said that "Jews do not assimilate".

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/are-us-jews-assimilating-out-of-existence

"David Goldman–Sadly, American Jews stand out as a horrible example of demographic failure. In the United States, secular and loosely affiliated American Jews, that is, the vast majority, have the lowest fertility rate of any identifiable segment of the American population. As I wrote in my book How Civilizations Die (and Why Islam is Dying, Too):

Nowhere is the fertility gap between religious and non-religious more extreme than among American Jews. As a group, American Jews show the lowest fertility of any ethnic group in the country. That is a matter of great anguish for Jewish community leaders. According to sociologist Steven Cohen, "We are now in the midst of a non-Orthodox Jewish population meltdown. Among Jews in their 50s, for every 100 Orthodox adults, we have 192 Orthodox children. And for the non-Orthodox, for every 100 adults, we have merely 55 such children."

Half of the non-Orthodox children, moreover, marry non-Jews, and very few children of mixed marriages will remain Jewish. As Reform Rabbi Lance J Sussman wrote in 2010, "With the exception of a number of Orthodox communities and a few other bright spots in or just off the mainstream of Jewish religious life, American Judaism is in precipitous decline the Reform movement has probably contracted by a full third in the last ten years!"

turtle , March 5, 2018 at 5:45 am GMT
As I understand it, Zionism got its main initial impetus from this book:

http://www.mideastweb.org/jewishstate.pdf

which in turn was inspired, if that is the word, by the trial of Captain Alfred Dreyfus of the French Army, in which Capt Dreyfus was unjustly convicted of espionage.
From the preface:

In 1902, he [Herzl] published a utopian novel about the Jewish state, Altneuad (oldnew
land) a vision complete with monorails and modern industry. , Altneuad
envisioned a multipluralistic Democracy in which Arabs and Jews had equal
rights.

Doesn't seem to have worked out that way.
The central premise of Zionism seems to be that Jews cannot expect equable treatment in a majority Gentile society. Ironically, the infamous case which inspired it also disproves this hypothesis.
To wit:
In the long run, justice was done in the case of Capt. Dreyfus.
He was very publicly restored to rank, with a promotion, in the French Army, and served honorably in what was then known as the Great War, which was all he ever wanted to do in the first place.

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

On 12 July 1906, Dreyfus was officially exonerated by a military commission. The day after his exoneration, he was readmitted into the army with a promotion to the rank of major (Chef d'Escadron). A week later, he was made Knight of the Legion of Honour,[6] and subsequently assigned to command an artillery unit at Vincennes.

Of course, there are (particularly) Jews who will say, "But he had years of his life stolen from him." This is, of course, true, but in the long run it is nothing more, nor less, than another miscarriage of justice, which in the case was, fortunately for its victim, eventually corrected. It is, in that sense, not unique. It did result in an an outcome more favorable than some both before and since.

RobinG , March 5, 2018 at 5:45 am GMT
@SolontoCroesus

WWIII ???
"The country that will have made it possible is Israel." Col. Larry Wilkerson

Is the US Ramping Up Its Military Presence in Syria and Planning to Attack Iran for Israel?

Ace , March 5, 2018 at 6:00 am GMT
@lavoisier

It isn't just cultural currents unleashed; it's deliberate destruction planned by institutional Jewry. Barbara Specter's married to the chief rabbi of Sweden and says Europe's "too monolithic," meaning "too white." She says Jews will be resented for their leading role in making Europe multicultural, i.e., non-white majority. Right you are, Barbara.

1,200+ rabbis in the U.S. came out for unchecked immigration of "refugees" and Adelson, Saban, Gelbaum, the ADL, the AJC, the HIAS, and BB are all for open borders. And the utter destruction of white America.

Jews played a huge role in Bolshevism, in putsches in Hungary, Austria, and Germany, and in Holodomor. "Jew" and "communist" were practically synonymous in 1930s America and Israel ran Pollard, one of the most destructive spies ever known in America. Jews have also done their utmost to push the most destructive aspects of the civil rights disaster.

Israel went to war against the U.S. with its deliberate attack on the USS Liberty with machine gunning of our sailors trying to make it into the lifeboats. It's protestations of "mistake" were transparent lies.

AIPAC ensures that billions from the treasury are squandered every year on an enemy nation that tries to involve us in fighting their wars for local hegemony. Is greater Israel also one of our projects?

Finally, institutional Jewry does everything in its power to distort National Socialism as "right-wing" to deflect attention from the leftist essence of totalitarian destruction, torture, theft, and murder and the disproportionate Jewish role in extreme leftist movements. The Jewish obsession with "The" Holocaust is the ultimate "holocaust denial." And woe betide he who cares to point that out. "The" Holocaust pales in comparison to the communist ones? Hater!!

What is not to loathe in organized Jewry?

I know of decent, patriotic Jews but I know of few Jews who dare to speak out against what I have mentioned. I would be attacked for "anti-Semitism" long before such voices are heard.

Fred us always a great read and a personal hero of mine. However, he missed the target here with his discussion of a bland "otherness." Reading excerpts from the Talmud and quotes from the great Rabbi Schneerson reveals that there is indeed some virulent Jewish hatred of the goyim out there. Bland otherness is not what I'm picking up.

RealAmericanValuesCirca1776Not1965 , March 9, 2018 at 6:18 pm GMT

Hitler's complaints against the Jews were along usual lines

You disingenuously fail to note that it is the consistency of these particular accusations throughout history that makes them 'usual'. Jews are always persecuted for the same list of crimes . because they're always up to the same list of crimes. How many times have they been expelled from the gentile nations that were effectively isolated in time and by geography. Are you saying that gentile civilization has quietly conspired to sew a false narrative of Jews, across national borders, and throughout it's entire, and diversely recorded history? Because that's the official Jewish narrative, as wild and absurd as it is. Of course, you'll have to fight tooth and nail just to get one of them to be honest enough to admit that they've been routinely expelled from a great many nations that had formerly welcomed them. And even then, you'll almost never get one honest enough to admit any wrongdoing on the part of the Jews in any such instances of expulsion. Jews can only be victims or heroes, after all. Never villains. Just ask the Democrats, or the Republicans. Or the Media. Or the ADL, or the SPLC, or your college professor etc etc etc.

Them, not Us. It makes little obvious sense to say that Jews are not Americans.

Tell that to the Jews. They're the one's who don't practice what they preach. More than anything, it's that double standard, along with the mass censorship of all criticism and dissent via a deafening chorus of cries of 'antisemitism' that foster the most hostility towards Jews as a collective. Even your dentist Isn't likely to reproach Jews for their wrongdoings, or call for the Orwellian 'strength' of diversity to flood Israel, the way they would in America. You make no mention of the widespread 'ethno-nationalism for me, but not for thee' views held by Jews with regards to Israel and the West.

Four Jews on the Supreme Court? From two percent of the population? My God, they must be up to something. A conspiracy, doubtless.

Don't stop there. Not unless you're TRYING to be dishonest. You've pointed out a single piece in a very long pattern of such events and then attempted to misrepresent the rest of the argument by omitting all the other pieces of evidence that come together to show a cohesive Jewish conspiracy that is rooted in verifiable facts. Tell everyone how much of our government, media, academia, finance etc is overwhelmingly dominated by this 2%.

Then compare the results of such an analysis with Hitler's complaints against the Jews. And then look at the collective leftward political lean of all these Jewish dominated positions of power and influence in America/The West. The Marxists in our colleges, the academics dictating our historical narrative and how we record it in history books, the bankers, the globalist billionaires and media moguls and Hollywood big wigs etc etc etc.

What they all lobby for, advocate for and push, is all the same things they won't tolerate at all in Israel. And for exactly all the same reasons that they decry whites as racists and bigots for bringing up.

Jews with remarkable consistency have been described for centuries as smart, greedy, combative, clannish, "pushy," exploitative, and arrogant. This is how I hear them described in Mexico, where I live.

At some point, Fred, hopefully you figure out how to tell the difference between a coincidence and pattern of events. I'm not holding my breath though.

Svigor , March 4, 2018 at 10:45 pm GMT

I was astonished to find that my Nepalese trekking guides were intensely hostile to Jews. They said that Jews (actually Israelis in most cases I think, but the Nepalese do not seem to make the distinction) were loud, demanding, and always trying to force down the guides' fees. Historically the hostility has often been powerful and, not infrequently, murderous. Jews have been expelled from country after country, excluded from polite society, subjected to quotas,and required to live in certain regions. Why?

LOL.

No, see, this is just brainwashing by the Great Global Antisemitic Conspiracy. They read some virulent antisemitism online first. Then, primed for antisemitism, they saw bad behavior from Jews where it didn't exist.

How much anti-Jewish hostility is there today in America? A lot? A little? Is it negligible? Potentially explosive? It is hard to tell because disliking Jews is often a firing offense, and a controlled press makes discussion impossible.

Yeah, no recipe for animus there.

Countersemitism is probably less common than the countersemites think, and more common than the philosemites think.

Jewish success isn't the problem. Jews are very fond of this answer, because it strokes their ethnic egos, and feeds their dindu nuffin culture (nobody, I mean NOBODY, does dindu culture like the Jews), but it's silly. Whites are rich tourists; did your Nepalese friends say they didn't like whites? Or do you suppose they bitch to their Jewish clients about whites? I suppose it's possible.

Countersemitism thrives despite an extremely hostile environment (it's firing, ruination, and unpersoning stateside; prison time in Europe) because there are much better reasons for it than envy. No serious person takes up countersemitism trivially; the cost is too high. There are far easier ways to work out one's psychological needs, if that's the only motive. No, countersemitism is driven by altruism.

Finally there is Israel, the albatross around the Jewish neck, making it impossible for Jews quietly to be more or less normal Americans.

Jews make it impossible. All they have to do is what whites would do; turn on Israel the way whites turned on South Africa. All they have to do is be consistent in their leftism, and subject themselves to the same rules that they enforce on others. You just glide past this and start yakking about Israel; what they do is their business, what the Jewish diaspora does is our business.

Whites and Jews really are different.

Jewish behavioral profile: "we should be the last people to have to live by the rules we push on everyone else."
White behavioral profile: "we can't push rules on everyone else that we aren't already living by ourselves."

A rational person might ask, "So what?" Do the Supreme Court's Jewish justices make Jewish decisions–whatever that might mean? Or do they vote like any four NPR listeners chosen at random? Did Mark Zuckerberg do anything underhanded? Or was he a very bright Jewish kid who had an idea and the strength of character to push it into existence? Does Schultz of Starbucks do something evil, or does he, like, you know, sell reasonably good coffee at a reasonable price?

It doesn't matter. They are there, so they must be conspiring. And their influence is becoming more obvious, as with Trump's subservience (as seen by much of the world) to Israel in planning to move the embassy.

A rational person might point to the Jews and their leftism, support for "diversity" and such. Jews say "we need black faces here, brown faces," etc., but then we're not supposed to turn around and say, "fine, we need white gentile faces in here"? Sauce, gander. Jews see removal of Jews as antisemitism, so we should see removal of white gentile faces as anti-white racism. Let Jews and all the rest advocate for their own representation, and we whites will advocate for ours.

That's the rational response.

People who think they are defending Jews will point to Jewish contributions to nearly everything–science, music, math, technology, literature, charity, medicine, support for symphonies. These contributions are real and immense. With respect to anti-Jewish politics, they are also irrelevant or worse. Since the hostility to Jews rests largely on their excessive presence (again, in the eyes of the anti-Jewish) pointing to their intellectual contributions just increases the dislike. It emphasizes both the Jewish presence and apparent superiority.

Nah. Jews follow whites around, the same way blacks do. Jews need whites, to live in white countries, the same way blacks do. Jews chimp out at the thought of being excluded from white communities or countries, the same way blacks do. That burning need is not the hallmark of superiority. Whites, on the other hand, don't need either group. They certainly don't need to follow either around, or go ape at the idea of being excluded from their communities or countries.

This explains a lot of the chip on the Jewish shoulder. Jews have a love-hate, superiority-inferiority complex going with whites, big time.

America is not really stable.

Owed mostly to diversity, which in turn is owed largely to the Jews, and their tireless efforts from 1924 to 1965 to pry open our borders.

John Gruskos , March 9, 2018 at 7:07 pm GMT
@Svigor

Svigor,

Your idealism and altruism are wasted on Fred Reed.

He isn't arguing in good faith.

He is just writing lies, which he knows full well to be lies, to provoke the anger of his audience, for his own amusement. I believe they call it "trolling".

The only way antisemitism will ever go away is if more members of the Jewish elite follow the lead of Ron Unz and Stephen Miller and make a good faith effort to use their influence for the benefit of the host community. (If you made a list of the 100,000 most influential Jews in America, would there be anyone on that list other than Unz and Miller who is favorably disposed towards old-stock Americans?)

Trolls like Fred Reed, on the other hand, will reliably increase antisemitism every time they get access to a keyboard. They will be perceived as toadies of the hostile Jewish elite, and unfortunately all Jews will receive a share of the animus stirred up by the all too numerous likes of Fred Reed.

[Mar 09, 2018] When we look at how the MSM are spinning Skripal story, Craig Murray's theory about using the incident to ramp up Russophobia is the most plausible hypothesis

Notable quotes:
"... Russophobia is extremely profitable to the armaments, security and spying industries and Russophobia reinforces intellectually challenged voters in their Tory loyalty. Ramping Russophobia is the most convincing motive for the Skripal attack. ..."
Mar 09, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

The former British ambassador Craig Murray suspects a different motive and culprit:

Craig Murray @CraigMurrayOrg - 10:21 AM - 8 Mar 2018
Russophobia is extremely profitable to the armaments, security and spying industries and Russophobia reinforces intellectually challenged voters in their Tory loyalty. Ramping Russophobia is the most convincing motive for the Skripal attack.

Dee Drake | Mar 9, 2018 4:58:36 AM | 44

When we look at how the corporate media is spinning this story, it seems to me that Craig Murray's theory about using the incident to ramp up Russophobia has its merits.

[Mar 09, 2018] Gladio still running

Mar 09, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mark | Mar 8, 2018 10:36:17 PM | 39

Remember Operation Gladio.

[Mar 09, 2018] New Huge Anti-Russian Provocation ahead of Russian election by Robert Stevens

Notable quotes:
"... Nobody of us can really know what happened in London with the Russian ex-double agent they tried to kill. But Russians would be foolish to let the agent leave from Russia to try to assassinate him many years afterwards, at the eve of their Presidential Election. DK ..."
"... By Robert Stevens ..."
"... Financial Times, ..."
"... Under conditions in which the NATO powers, including Britain, are seeking to utilise any pretext to justify their ongoing encirclement of Russia's border, Putin authorising the murder of two people on the streets of the UK would be a propaganda gift to his opponents. ..."
Sep 03, 2018 | Defend Democracy Press
Originally from: www.wsws.org

Nobody of us can really know what happened in London with the Russian ex-double agent they tried to kill. But Russians would be foolish to let the agent leave from Russia to try to assassinate him many years afterwards, at the eve of their Presidential Election.
DK Anti-Russia campaign follows alleged poisoning of former UK/Russian double agent and daughter

By Robert Stevens
8 March 2018

The British government and mass media have mounted a hysterical anti-Russian campaign centred on the still unexplained circumstances surrounding the hospitalisation of former British double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, after they were found unconscious on a bench in Salisbury on Sunday.

Initial reports Monday stated that Skripal, aged 66, may have ingested fentanyl, a synthetic opioid many times stronger than heroin, which can be fatal in small doses.

On Tuesday, the other person hospitalised was identified as Skripal's 33-year-old daughter, Yulia, who was also said to be in a critical condition.

Skripal is a former colonel in Russia's GRU, the military intelligence service. He spent four years in jail in Russia after being found guilty in 2006 of passing secrets to MI6, the UK's foreign intelligence service. He was sentenced to 13 years in prison.

Skripal served four years before being released in 2010, when he was pardoned by Russia as part of a well-publicized 10-person spy swap between the US, the UK and Russia. He moved to the UK where he has lived for the past seven years.

The pair were found unconscious and slumped on a bench near the Maltings shopping centre. Police stated that two became ill at around 13.30 p.m. Police arrived on the scene at around 16.15 p.m., after being alerted by a concerned member of the public. It was announced Wednesday that a police officer is also in critical condition after attending the incident. The Skripals visited a nearby restaurant, Zizzi's, which was cordoned off, as well as a local pub, The Bishop's Mill.

By Tuesday, despite nothing of substance being reported by the police, the government and media had effectively declared the incident an act of terrorism, with the finger pointing at Russia's Putin government. References to an opioid being involved were dropped, with media reports saying the government's secret chemical lab at Porton Down was as yet unable to identify the substance. Wiltshire police announced that London's Metropolitan Police counter-terrorist unit would be taking over the investigation. In parliament, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson spoke about the "disturbing incident in Salisbury" and stated, "Although I am not now pointing fingers, because we cannot point fingers, I say to governments around the world that no attempt to take innocent life on UK soil will go either unsanctioned or unpunished," He then referred to Russia as a "malign and destructive force" and warned that if Moscow were found to be involved, the government would "take whatever measures we deem necessary to protect the lives of the people in this country, our values and our freedoms."

In another pointed reference to Russia, he stated that the case had "echoes of the death of Alexander Litvinenko in 2006" -- the former officer in Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB, the successor to the KGB), who died on November 23, 2006 after having been granted asylum in Britain in 2000. The UK, backed by the US have long claimed that the Putin regime ordered the killing despite no evidence being presented in an official British inquiry in 2016 -- other than the presence of the radioactive substance polonium.

Johnson threatened that England could consider boycotting the soccer World Cup in Russia this summer.

Every newspaper, apart from the Financial Times, led with hysterical anti-Russian headlines . The Sun blared, "Red Spy in UK Poison Terror," with an accompanying story referring to "fear over a Kremlin backed hit " The Daily Mirror's headline was " 'Assassins' on British street".

In an article in the Spectator , columnist Ed West posed the question, "Will Britain stand up to Russia?" By the evening, despite Newsnight anchor Kirsty Wark introducing the story by saying, "so far we know nothing about what happened to them, if they were poisoned and if they were, by whom," the BBC's flagship news programme was dedicated to a narrative that Russia was responsible and that Skripal and his daughter were likely victims of an attack by Russia intelligence operatives.

The media have reported the deaths of Skripal's wife, his son and his older brother as mysterious events requiring investigation. His wife died of cancer in 2012 in Britain.

The following day the Daily Telegraph asserted that "Putin swore death on poisoned Russian spy." The Times went with "MI5 believes Russians tried to kill former spy."

On Wednesday morning, the government convened its COBRA committee, which meets during periods of national emergencies. On Wednesday evening, Met Police Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley announced that Skripal and his daughter were subjected to an attack by a "nerve agent," with it being classified as a case of "attempted murder."

No information released by the authorities can be taken at face value. All reports attest that Skripal was supposedly politically inactive. He evidently did nothing to hide his identity, buying a house for £260,000 in his real name and applying to join a railway social club. He regularly bought lottery scratch cards and purchased food from a local Polish food store.

If the Putin regime were indeed set on killing Skripal and his daughter, some explanation needs to be made as to motive. Skripal's daughter lived and worked in Russia and made regular trips back and forth.

At least one other person released from jail in Russia would appear to have been a much more likely target of the Putin regime than Skripal, if indeed its intention was to prevent anti-Russian activities. Igor Sutyagin developed into a prominent anti-Putin figure in the UK, becoming a fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) defence and intelligence think-tank.

RUSI is central to the formulation of British imperialism's anti-Russian policy. Even the Guardian's main advocate against the Putin regime, columnist Luke Harding, was forced to acknowledge that Sutyagin "gave lectures on Vladimir Putin's darkening state, and kept a high public profile. Skripal, by contrast, eschewed London. He settled with Liudmilla [his wife] in the comparative quiet of Wiltshire." Asking the question who would benefit from the deaths of Skripal and his daughter, there would appear to be no obvious reason why the Putin government would authorize such an act. Putin is currently campaigning in the last stretch of the 2018 presidential election, which takes place on March 18. He is expected to be re-elected.

Under conditions in which the NATO powers, including Britain, are seeking to utilise any pretext to justify their ongoing encirclement of Russia's border, Putin authorising the murder of two people on the streets of the UK would be a propaganda gift to his opponents.

The response of the government and media to these events must be placed in the context of the concerted drive by London to demonize Russia. Only last week the Times devoted its front page, an op-ed piece and an editorial to bellicose calls by senior military figures, including second in command of the armed forces, Sir Gordon Messenger, for an increase in military spending, naming Russia as the power that must be confronted.

This followed a January speech given at RUSI by General Sir Nick Carter, the Chief of the General Staff of the British Armed Forces, in which he declared that the UK had to actively prepare for war with Russia and other geo-political rivals:

... ... ...

[Mar 09, 2018] A conflict in North Korea, John, would be probably the worst kind of fighting in most people's lifetimes

Mar 09, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Don Bacon | Mar 9, 2018 10:24:50 PM | 39

Dickerson: "What keeps you awake at night?"
Mattis: "Nothing, I keep other people awake at night."
and. . .
MATTIS: A conflict in North Korea, John, would be probably the worst kind of fighting in most people's lifetimes.
Why do I say this? The North Korean regime has hundreds of artillery cannons and rocket launchers within range of one of the most densely populated cities on earth, which is the capital of South Korea.

We are working with the international community to deal with this issue. This regime is a threat to the region, to Japan, to South Korea, and in the event of war, they would bring danger to China and to Russia as well.

But the bottom line is, it would be a catastrophic war if this turns into combat, if we are not able to resolve this situation through diplomatic means. here

Don Bacon , Mar 9, 2018 10:56:44 PM | 41

We shouldn't expect that any meeting and talks would actually solve anything, because the DPRK and US positions are basically irreconcilable. DPRK wants the US out of Korea, US wants DPRK to denuke (disarm).

The DPRK strategy, probably, is to spawn endless meetings for a long time. The Vietnam peace talks serve as a model, first with the parties discussing the shape of the table, etc. I look for DPRK to play this game.

It's a basic east vs. west gambit, where the east has the patience to endure years whereas the west expects quick results.

[Mar 09, 2018] Ukraine begins seizure of Russian energy giant Gazprom's assets, citing Stockholm court decision -- RT Business News

Notable quotes:
"... "Under the current circumstances, the Ukrainian cabinet initiates action aimed at recovering [a] penalty from Gazprom," ..."
"... "very politically motivated." ..."
Mar 09, 2018 | www.rt.com

The Ukrainian authorities have started the seizure of assets belonging to the Russian gas giant Gazprom, citing its alleged non-compliance with the decision of the Stockholm arbitration court. "Under the current circumstances, the Ukrainian cabinet initiates action aimed at recovering [a] penalty from Gazprom," the Ukrainian government's press service said in a statement published on its official website. It also claimed that the move was conducted in compliance with the decision of the Stockholm court and involves collecting a fine from the Russian company over its alleged violation of Ukrainian anti-monopoly legislation. Read more FILE PHOTO: A man prepares firewood at the village © Konstantin Chernichkin Ukraine is overpaying for European gas & wants Russia to foot the bill

The Swedish arbitration body initially ruled on the three-year dispute between Gazprom and the Ukrainian energy company, Naftogaz, back in December 2017. The policy of the court prevents it from even acknowledging that it's mediating a case, which makes it impossible to obtain its own account of the final ruling. Both energy companies, which have opposing takes on the outcome, initially claimed victory in the case.

In late February, the same court ordered Gazprom to compensate Naftogaz $4.6 billion for what the latter sees as lost profit from the transit of Russian gas to Europe.

The legal battle between the two energy companies in the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce had rumbled on since June 2014. Gazprom's claims related to fines for insufficient withdrawal and use of gas by the Ukrainian side, in accordance with a 'take-or-pay' rule. The Russian gas giant also demanded payment of a debt for gas delivered to Ukraine between May and June 2014.

Naftogaz pushed for a retroactive change in the price of gas, the reimbursement of overpayments and the repeal of a ban on reselling Russian gas. The court eventually satisfied some of the Ukrainian company's demands, in particular by setting a minimum amount of gas that Naftogaz must buy from Gazprom annually (from 2018) at a volume that was 10 times lower than in the original contract. At the same time, it also obliged Gazprom to pay for the transit of the Russian gas through the Ukrainian territory between 2009 and 2017 even though the gas was not, in fact, transited over that period.

The Head of Gazprom, Alexei Miller, then called the court's decision "asymmetric" and "very politically motivated." The court justified its decision by referring to a difficult economic situation in Ukraine.

[Mar 09, 2018] A Stalinist Purge In America by Paul Craig Roberts

There is huge difference: Stalinist were convinced that communism is a bright future of mankind and were determine (with the religious zeal_ to eliminate allthe resistance to tits coming.
Neoliberalism is clearly experience both ideological (since 2008) and now social crisis in the USA. So here the purges are designed to prolong the like of decaying regime which lost its legitimacy in the eyes of population. As such is is not similar to the Stalin Doctors' plot - Wikipedia -- the purge of Jewish doctors at the end of this reign.
Notable quotes:
"... Militarily, since World War II Washington has relied on its armed predominance to dictate to the world. But now the President of Russia has announced possession of what are from the US perspective super weapons that do not, as some claim, give Russia parity with the US, but give Russia immense military superiority over the US, indeed over the entire Western alliance. ..."
Mar 07, 2018 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

This year could turn out to be a defining year for the United States. It is clear that the US military/security complex and the Democratic Party aided by their media vassals intend to purge Donald Trump from the presidency. One of the open conspirators declared the other day that we have to get rid of Trump now before he wins re-election in a landslide.

It is now a known fact that Russiagate is a conspiracy of the military/security complex, Obama regime, Democratic National Committee, and presstitute media to destroy President Trump. However, the presstitutes never present this fact to the American public. Nevertheless, a majority of Americans do not believe the Democrats and the presstitutes that Trump conspired with Putin to steal the election.

One question before us is: Will Mueller and the Democrats succeed in purging Donald Trump, as Joseph Stalin succeed in purging Lenin's Bolsheviks, including Nikolai Bukharin, who Lenin called "the golden boy of the revolution," or will the Democratic Party and the presstitutes discredit themselves such that the country moves far to the right.

Stalin didn't need facts and could frame-up people at will as he had absolute power. In the US the presstitute media, like Stalin, does not concern itself with facts, but the presstitutes do not have absolute power. Indeed, few people trust the presstitutes, and even fewer trust Mueller.

Many are puzzled that President Trump has not moved against his enemies as they have no evidence for their charges. Indeed, Mueller's indictments have nothing whatsoever to do with the Russiagate accusations. Why are not Mueller, Comey, Rosenstein, and all the rest indicted for their clear and obvious crimes?

America's future turns on the answer to this question. Is it because the Trump regime is letting the presstitutes and the Democrats destroy their credibility, or is it because Trump is weak, confused, and doesn't know how to use the powers of his office to slay those who intend to slay him?

If it is the former, then America will move far to the right. If it is the latter, America will have had its own Stalinist purge, and the purge is likely to follow the Stalin model and to extend down to those who voted for Trump.

The failure of the integrity of the liberal/progressive/left has left the US facing two unpalatable outcomes. One is a right-wing government empowered by the left's self-defeat. The other is the rise of the Identity Politics state in which oppression will be based on gender, race, and beliefs.

This is not the only issue that could be resolved in 2018. There are others, and the other two major ones are the economic situation and the military situation.

For a decade the central banks of the West and Japan have printed money far in excess of the increase in real goods and services. This money printing has not caused massive inflation of consumer prices. Instead it has caused inflation in financial instruments and real estate.

The high Dow Jones average is the product of this money printing. Can the central banks stop printing money and allow interest rates to rise, thus collapsing equity prices and pension funds? What would be the consequences?

Militarily, since World War II Washington has relied on its armed predominance to dictate to the world. But now the President of Russia has announced possession of what are from the US perspective super weapons that do not, as some claim, give Russia parity with the US, but give Russia immense military superiority over the US, indeed over the entire Western alliance.

[Mar 08, 2018] Every crook in Russia who feels the long hand of the law about to nab him runs off to the West and claims asylum. This says much more about the West than about Russia

Notable quotes:
"... Actually an interesting metamorphose happen right at the border crossing. A crook instantly became the staunch defender of western democracy and its (aka neoliberal) values against Russian backwardness, paranoia and kleptocratic state headed by evil Putin who personally torture innocent girls from Pussy Riot wearing his old KGB uniform ..."
"... BTW I would object about the term "Stubborn Deniers of Reality" applied to Western Journalism. I think a more proper definition is "Creators of artificial reality". Masters of illusion, so to speak. And that's would be a proper classification of Bachelor and Masters degree in journalism instead of "Bachelor of arts", etc. used today. And truth be told this esoteric art reached the level of perfection and sophistication in comparison with which all those circus magicians are just children. ..."
Mar 08, 2018 | marknesop.wordpress.com

kievite , June 1, 2013 at 8:48 am

Actually an interesting metamorphose happen right at the border crossing. A crook instantly became the staunch defender of western democracy and its (aka neoliberal) values against Russian backwardness, paranoia and kleptocratic state headed by evil Putin who personally torture innocent girls from Pussy Riot wearing his old KGB uniform :-)

I would call this sudden attraction to democratic values at the border crossing a "crooks survival instinct" in action. Crooks are always crooks.

BTW I would object about the term "Stubborn Deniers of Reality" applied to Western Journalism. I think a more proper definition is "Creators of artificial reality". Masters of illusion, so to speak. And that's would be a proper classification of Bachelor and Masters degree in journalism instead of "Bachelor of arts", etc. used today. And truth be told this esoteric art reached the level of perfection and sophistication in comparison with which all those circus magicians are just children.

BTW who would explain to me the meaning of the term of BS in English. Is this about deception, or an attempt to cover own incompetence (posturing as an expert in subject about which the BS artist has no clue) or about pure propaganda or about meaningless drivel designed to hide the real motives ?

Reply kirill ,

[Mar 08, 2018] Personally I would suggest that there are people within the US establishment that know very well that Putin was/is not bluffing

Mar 04, 2018 | off-guardian.org

summitflyer,

Personally I would suggest that there are people within the US establishment that know very well that Putin was/is not bluffing.The theatrics from the likes of Mark Galeotti and coterie are just that ,buffoons and clowns that speak to a crowd cheering on anyone that would re-enforce the false narrative of the bad Russians in order to feel good about themselves and keep thumping their chests . This will not last forever .Sanity will visit this planet again .

Arrby, March 6, 2018

I don't think that Putin was bluffing. But I came across a Consortium News article that had me wondering about the impression Putin made and whether he was okay with misleading us just a bit, not by doing it himself, but by omission and by allowing us to have ideas that don't exactly conform to reality:
https://consortiumnews.com/2018/03/03/why-putins-latest-weapons-claims-should-scare-us/
Schlüter, March 4, 2018
I´d like to recommend this again:

„Geo-Politics: The Core of Crisis and Chaos and the Nightmares of the US Power Elite" https://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2016/08/01/geo-politics-the-core-of-crisis-and-chaos-the-nightmares-of-the-us-power-elite/
Sunday regards

[Mar 08, 2018] Cue bono question in Scripal case?

Highly recommended!
This case looks more and more like Litvinenko II -- another false flag designed to implicate Russia a fuel anti-russian hysteria. British MI6 are masters in such provocations.
Along with sabotaging Moscow soccer tournament this also can also be an attempt to distract from MI6 role is creation of Steele dossier too.
Notable quotes:
"... Having worked for Russia's Military Intelligence Directorate (GRU) since the Soviet era, Sergey Skripal was recruited in 1995 by the British agent Pablo Miller, who at the time was posing as Antonio Alvarez de Hidalgo and working in Britain's embassy in Tallinn. Russia's Federal Security Service says Miller was actually an undercover MI6 agent tasked with recruiting Russians. ..."
"... The first reports about Miller's work in Russia emerged in the early 2000s, after multiple Russians arrested for spying fingered Miller as their recruiter. For example, former tax police Major Vyacheslav Zharko says it was Miller who recruited him. He says it was Boris Berezovsky and former Federal Security Service (FSB) agent Alexander Litvinenko who introduced him to British intelligence agents. Zharko surrendered himself to Russian officials when he learned about the British authorities' suspicions that another former FSB officer, Andrey Lugovoi, had poisoned Litvinenko with polonium. ..."
"... Litvinenko also worked for MI6 ..."
"... Skripal, however, never turned himself in. For nine years, according to the FSB, he collaborated actively with British intelligence, transmitting information about Russian agents. ..."
"... Who/what paid Skripal a $472,000 house and a pension? That is way more than the reported $100,000 he earlier got. What did he do to earn the higher pay? ..."
"... Seems Skripal was a British spy at the end. If he required killing, it would have happened long ago as b asserts. Clearly, he knew something dangerously compromising to make himself a target. ..."
"... If b is too moral to consider killing injuring unrelated, innocent people for propaganda as it was 9/11 whoever did it, he must wake up. These days, days of phony YT,FB Twitter reality, the only value is propaganda value nothing else, anybody will be thrown under the bus if this fits aims of ruling elite even some oligarchs who are rich only because their submit to rape of ruling elite as high paid prostitute while the rest are raped for free ..."
"... If fact they will supress details of that crime just to obfuscate obvious perpetrators in a cloud of conspiracy theories in fact mining people's brains busy them up like little ants like Bitcoin miners waste electricity and computer power for delusional quest of riches ..."
"... Sources close to Orbis, the business intelligence firm run by former MI6 agent Christopher Steele, who was behind a dossier of compromising allegations against Donald Trump, said Mr Skripal did not contribute to the file. But they could not say whether Mr Skripal was involved in different investigations into the US President for other interested parties. ..."
"... It's interesting how quickly the denial from steele comes out... Is skripal dead yet, or still alive? i wonder if he comes back, what he says? i guess we will never know either way... ..."
"... Media management and playing the old "backs to the wall boys & girls, its the blitz all over again" is what the 'counter-terror' mob do. ..."
"... The initial cops played the whole thing really low key, it seemed as though they wanted to get to the bottom of whatever happened, but their replacements 'counter-terror' appear to devote more time and energy to seducing credulous journos than they do trying to find out what actually did occur. ..."
"... Over in the states there have been reports about carfentanil poisoning responders to overdoses because of trace amounts. It is reported as 100 x as powerful as fentanyl. So maybe a chemical cousin is a possible consideration. ..."
"... B's suggestion that Skripal might be longing to return to and die in Russia, and that he was offering a "gift" to Moscow via his daughter (or maybe even a letter apologising for his treachery and begging for forgiveness, Berezovsky-style) is a stroke of genius. Makes me think that Boris Berezovsky's death merits more attention and cannot be brushed off as a suicide. ..."
"... On a park bench, they were discovered. I'll bet my best fishing lure that location's covered by a CCTV whose footage will provide all the answers--unless we aren't to be shown, due to national security or some such. ..."
"... Meanwhile The Guardian is spewing its usual bilge : Russian spy attack inquiry widens after medics treat 21 people ..."
"... The longer Skripal and his daughter stay alive, the more propaganda can be rung out of his death. Be worth watching to see how many sanctions and laws the UK can push through before he finally snuffs it. ..."
Mar 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Spy Poisons Spy And The Anti-Trump Campaign

On Sunday a former British-Russian double agent and his daughter were seriously injured in a mysterious incident in Salisbury, England. The British government says that both were hurt due to "exposure to a nerve agent". Speculative media reports talk of Sarin and VX, two deadly nerve-agents used in military chemical weapons. Anonymous officials strongly hint that 'Russia did it'.

New reports though point to a deep connection between the case and the anti-Trump/anti-Russia propaganda drive run by the Obama administration and the Hillary Clinton election campaign.

Sergei Skripal once was a colonel in a Russian military intelligence service. In the early 1990s he was recruited by the MI6 agent Pablo Miller. He continued to spy for the Brits after his 1999 retirement. The Russian FSB claims that the British MI6 paid him $100,000 for his service. At that time a Russian officer would only make a few hundred bucks per month. Skripal was finally uncovered in 2004 and two years later convicted for spying for Britain. He was sentenced to 18 years and in 2010 he and other agents ware exchanged in a large spy swap between the United States and Russia. Skripal was granted refuge in Britain and has since lived openly under his own name in Salisbury. His wife and his son died over the last years of natural causes. The only near relative he has left is his daughter who continued to live in Russia.

Last week his daughter flew to Britain and met him in Salisbury. On Sunday they went to a pub and a restaurant. At some point they were poisoned or poisoned themselves. They collapsed on a public bench. They are now in intensive care. A policeman one the scene was also seriously effected.

Authorities have declined to name the substance to which the pair is suspected to have been exposed, but :

Local media had on Monday reported the substance found at the scene to be similar to fentanyl: a lethally strong opioid available even on Salisbury's soporific streets.

The British government is hinting at Russian involvement :

Whorin Piece , Mar 8, 2018 4:30:36 PM | 1

Seth Rich.

Awesome, thank you b,

I think this event is a ramp to offing Knesia Sobchak prior to or just after the national poll. She is a pawn of the West. She has been directed to consolidate the disparate liberal opposition campaigns by the use of primaries...which would just happen to result in her primacy. The idea is to have her win enough vote it can be alleged that she has embarrassed Putin...and then they six her using VX. Her father was close go Putin during Putin's early years in St Pete. The BBC has been running chaff out the foot saying Putin killed his mentor Anatoly Sobchak. Knesia has been moved into position. She will be offed to harm Putin's reputation but also to place e a complex wound in him. The West are monsters

yoffa , Mar 8, 2018 4:35:34 PM | 2
The Orbis consultant / analyst living in Salisbury is identified as Pablo Miller. He had recruited Skripal in 1995 ( https://meduza.io/en/feature/2018/03/06/a-hundred-grand-and-hundreds-of-betrayed-agents).
notheonly1 , Mar 8, 2018 4:40:39 PM | 3
Ms Rudd told MPs it was an "outrageous crime", adding that the government would "act without hesitation as the facts become clearer".

Yeah, right.

Like the illegal invasion of a sovereign foreign country based on the lies by the same 'government', with a million+ casualties among the middle eastern population.

That kind of outrageous crime , correct?

One day the pendulum will swing back hard and merciless at these criminal warmongers and war profiteers. Disgusting how low what goes for 'homo sapiens' can sink.

Christian Chuba , Mar 8, 2018 4:43:02 PM | 4
I was wondering if Grigory Rodchenkov was in danger of meeting the same fate by some of the more unsavory elements of U.S. Intelligence Agencies. He would become a poster boy for Russian assassinations on U.S. soil.

One thing about Rodchenkov, if the doping was not state sponsored, what motive would have have for doing it on his own, is there enough money in the Olympics that individual athletes would bribe him or would it make him look better if his athletes did better? I don't buy that it was state sponsored, or at least there is no evidence to that affect.

Oyyo , Mar 8, 2018 4:51:46 PM | 6
21 people were affected.

https://news.sky.com/story/live-poisoned-salisbury-cop-talking-and-engaging-11280674

xLemming , Mar 8, 2018 5:05:53 PM | 7
Sadly @3 we may have to wait for Judgement Day for that to happen. But if it comes about sooner, and in our lifetime, it will be a day of rejoicing!
b , Mar 8, 2018 5:07:11 PM | 8
@yoffa @2 - thank you. Your link does not work, here is a good one: A hundred grand and hundreds of betrayed agents What was former GRU Colonel Sergey Skripal's treason against Russia?
Having worked for Russia's Military Intelligence Directorate (GRU) since the Soviet era, Sergey Skripal was recruited in 1995 by the British agent Pablo Miller, who at the time was posing as Antonio Alvarez de Hidalgo and working in Britain's embassy in Tallinn. Russia's Federal Security Service says Miller was actually an undercover MI6 agent tasked with recruiting Russians.

The first reports about Miller's work in Russia emerged in the early 2000s, after multiple Russians arrested for spying fingered Miller as their recruiter. For example, former tax police Major Vyacheslav Zharko says it was Miller who recruited him. He says it was Boris Berezovsky and former Federal Security Service (FSB) agent Alexander Litvinenko who introduced him to British intelligence agents. Zharko surrendered himself to Russian officials when he learned about the British authorities' suspicions that another former FSB officer, Andrey Lugovoi, had poisoned Litvinenko with polonium.

Litvinenko also worked for MI6 ..
Skripal, however, never turned himself in. For nine years, according to the FSB, he collaborated actively with British intelligence, transmitting information about Russian agents.

Nikolai Luzan, who calls himself a colonel and a veteran of Russia's security agencies, wrote a detailed book about how the British recruited Sergey Skripal. Luzan says his book, "A Devil's Counterintelligence Dozen," is an "artistic-documentary production."

If we assume that Luzan's account is generally accurate, then Skripal was recruited during a long-term assignment in Malta and Spain, where he "got greedy."
...

Further on:
Skripal led a quiet life in Salisbury, where he reportedly bought an average house for 340,000 British pounds (about $472,000). His neighbors describe him as an ordinary, reasonably friendly pensioner. When he moved to the area, he even invited the whole street over for a housewarming party.

It's unclear why Skripal decided to resettle specifically in Salisbury, but LinkedIn indicates that Pablo Miller -- the MI6 agent who recruited him -- lives in the same town. In 2015, the year he retired, Miller received the Order of the British Empire for services to Her Majesty's Government.

Skripal's wife, Lyudmila, lived with him in Salisbury until her death a few years ago. His son died from liver failure in 2017 in St. Petersburg.

It must be Pablo Miller who worked with Steele ...

Who/what paid Skripal a $472,000 house and a pension? That is way more than the reported $100,000 he earlier got. What did he do to earn the higher pay?

karlof1 , Mar 8, 2018 5:12:03 PM | 9
Seems Skripal was a British spy at the end. If he required killing, it would have happened long ago as b asserts. Clearly, he knew something dangerously compromising to make himself a target. The UK's fairly well covered by CCTV; I'd be very interested in what those in Salisbury observed. The incident has La Carre written all over it.
Kalen , Mar 8, 2018 5:21:30 PM | 10
If someone like MI6 for FSB wanted him dead they would be instantly in a car accident of robbery attempt, they whoever they are, wanted this to thing to prolong in time to feed the press Russia gate and wanted people like b to follow the trap since most of the info here can be found just after few clicks, will be picked up by rational people.

If b is too moral to consider killing injuring unrelated, innocent people for propaganda as it was 9/11 whoever did it, he must wake up. These days, days of phony YT,FB Twitter reality, the only value is propaganda value nothing else, anybody will be thrown under the bus if this fits aims of ruling elite even some oligarchs who are rich only because their submit to rape of ruling elite as high paid prostitute while the rest are raped for free .

If fact they will supress details of that crime just to obfuscate obvious perpetrators in a cloud of conspiracy theories in fact mining people's brains busy them up like little ants like Bitcoin miners waste electricity and computer power for delusional quest of riches .

In the society of control ruling elite controls everything it needs to control and hence is responsible for this. Case closed.

b , Mar 8, 2018 5:39:21 PM | 12
The Independent: Sergei Skripal: Former double agent may have been poisoned with nerve agent over 'freelance' spying, sources say
The Russian double agent poisoned in Salisbury may have become a target after using his contacts in the intelligence community to work for private security firms, investigators believe.

Sergei Skripal could have come to the attention of certain people in Russia by attempting to "freelance" for companies run by former MI5, MI6 and GCHQ spies, security sources say.
...
Sources close to Orbis, the business intelligence firm run by former MI6 agent Christopher Steele, who was behind a dossier of compromising allegations against Donald Trump, said Mr Skripal did not contribute to the file. But they could not say whether Mr Skripal was involved in different investigations into the US President for other interested parties.

A very believable denial by Steele. Not.
james , Mar 8, 2018 5:56:08 PM | 13
It's interesting how quickly the denial from steele comes out... Is skripal dead yet, or still alive? i wonder if he comes back, what he says? i guess we will never know either way...
Debsisdead , Mar 8, 2018 6:02:23 PM | 14
For me it was particularly suss when the Leceister Police who are the coppers on the ground in Salisbury were heavied by Scotland Yuk ( or 'the met' as englander papers call that gang of proven torturers & murderers) to turn the Skripsky investigation over to the 'counter-terror squad' - the mob of thugs whose skillful manipulation of england's media combined with evidence falsification made their indicted murder of Brazilian electrician Jean Charles de Menezes seem like an heroic act by playing the old honest whitefella card - "all those brownfellas look the same, who can tell the difference?" . No copper, not the killers or the idiot in charge suffered any disciplinary actiion, much less a criminal one. IIRC the policeperson in charge who claimed to be 'in the bathroom' at the time of de Menzeses murder, one Cressida Dick, is now chief commissioner, the boss of Scotland Yuk.

The local coppers know the area and will have a rapport with witnesses that a mob of arseholes in sharp suits backed by balaclava wearing armed heavies is unlikely to enjoy, so why grab the gig especially since it is certain to remain unsolved?

Well partly that, to make sure it remains unsolved, but also because counter-terror plays the press release regurgitators who are englander 'journos' like a fine old violin. Questions about fentanyl being a nerve agent get tricky? Spin the chooks a yarn about evil a-rabs you have met.

Uncoy , Mar 8, 2018 6:21:20 PM | 15
Kalen is right. Such a flamboyant killing is not how modern intelligence agencies dispose of problems. Unless they want to draw attention to their work.

Maybe there's a bunch of people around the Christopher Steele dossier thinking of talking. What better way to shut them up than to knock off a Steele source.

Peter , Mar 8, 2018 6:33:27 PM | 16
Very good work, B. Thanks for your website, best on the web.
sadness , Mar 8, 2018 6:41:55 PM | 17
It could always be a simple & rather human explanation - The daughter was struggling for cash at home, dad was old but refused to die & had a stash of cash from his past, she knocked him off to get an earlier inheritance but being an amateur at this she did herself in too, which would be poetic justice...?
sadness , Mar 8, 2018 6:49:11 PM | 18
....oh i forgot to add....or it was a sad suicide pact between them when all else was lost & over
ToivoS , Mar 8, 2018 7:08:41 PM | 19
It is highly unlikely that fentanyl was the toxin that poisoned Skribal and his daughter. That hypothesis should be excluded at this point.

The main reason for this is that the patrol man who discovered them also came down with similar symptoms. Fentanyl is extremely toxic when injected intravenously. But not to any one coming into contact with them, touching them or even performing mouth to mouth resusication.

There are numerous acetyl choline inhibitors (e.g. sarin, vx, and many other similar compounds that have never been approved for chemical warfare) that can cause symptoms if someone comes into contact with an intoxicated patient especially one has be exposed externally.

Also the Portland Down lab has identified an ACE inhibitor (of course, that is part of the British military and they could very easily be lying.)

In any case, this looks like a nerve toxin poison, fentanyl is not in that class.

Fatima Manoubia , Mar 8, 2018 7:08:44 PM | 20
Fentanyl patchs are used to control intense chronic pain...If he resigned from GRU because of health issues, as the "Meduzas" affirm, it might be related to this chronic pain and so he could well be a patient using this drug for pain control.....

Thus, fentanyl is not a nerve agent, but an anesthesic in any case....All could well be a performance...to blame the Russians and contribute to scare the population about them previous to some machination to be mounted at......Do not forget that that factory of mannequin challenges broadcasts, the White Helmets, is also a British "enterprise", creation of "former" MI6 LeMesurier....

Debsisdead , Mar 8, 2018 7:40:41 PM | 21
Yesterday when questions about fentanyl were raised, the sick policeman was identified, up until that point all that had been said was that the bill first on the scene were admitted to be checked out by medics. Today the close to death's door copper is in fine fettle once again. I leave it up to others to decide whether he was crook (sick - an Oz term) or the imported police were crooks (lying).

Media management and playing the old "backs to the wall boys & girls, its the blitz all over again" is what the 'counter-terror' mob do. If they were really opposed to scaring the bejeezuz outta englanders which is what their name implies they would A) be better at preventing actions which they hadn't cranked up themselves for entrapment and B) not imagine it was on the up and up to terrify the burghers of Salisbury with yarns about possible 'nerve agent' on the loose that were placing the town's population at risk.

The initial cops played the whole thing really low key, it seemed as though they wanted to get to the bottom of whatever happened, but their replacements 'counter-terror' appear to devote more time and energy to seducing credulous journos than they do trying to find out what actually did occur. The form of this gang of sleek deceitful killers means that just because they claim this local woodentop was poisoned, it doesn't mean that is what actually befell him.

Duck1 , Mar 8, 2018 7:49:18 PM | 22
Over in the states there have been reports about carfentanil poisoning responders to overdoses because of trace amounts. It is reported as 100 x as powerful as fentanyl. So maybe a chemical cousin is a possible consideration.
Jen , Mar 8, 2018 7:54:30 PM | 23
It seems that MI6 was keeping Sergei Skripal on a tight leash by having him live in Salisbury close to Pablo Miller who must be the old fellow's minder as well as recruiter. One way of keeping Skripal on this leash must be to supply him with an addictive painkiller, for whatever pain he is suffering (physical, perhaps psychological?), and fentanyl fits the bill.

Fentanyl also fits the bill for a poisoning agent that also affected the police officer who attended the Skripals. The fentanyl epidemic is apparently forcing emergency and first-response personnel to re-evaluate procedures in handling patients so that they themselves are not affected by sniffing fentanyl accidentally.

B's suggestion that Skripal might be longing to return to and die in Russia, and that he was offering a "gift" to Moscow via his daughter (or maybe even a letter apologising for his treachery and begging for forgiveness, Berezovsky-style) is a stroke of genius. Makes me think that Boris Berezovsky's death merits more attention and cannot be brushed off as a suicide.

karlof1 , Mar 8, 2018 7:59:42 PM | 24
sadness @17 & 18--

Nobody died. Only 3 remain in hospital and are not endangered.

On a park bench, they were discovered. I'll bet my best fishing lure that location's covered by a CCTV whose footage will provide all the answers--unless we aren't to be shown, due to national security or some such.

Briar Patch , Mar 8, 2018 8:05:32 PM | 25
The question raised by the link offered by Oyyo at 6 (at least 21 affected by the "neurotoxin"), the comments offered by Debisdead at 21, and the note from Craig Murry about the nearby chemical site: Was this an attack targeting Skripal at all, or some other kind of "misadventure"? There are so many opportunities to use this kind of incident, by entities capable of spinning it this way and that, that it doesn't give to us individuals reading the news much hope of ever learning the truth.
Ghost Ship , Mar 8, 2018 8:16:50 PM | 26
>>>>> ToivoS | Mar 8, 2018 7:08:41 PM | 19

Fentanyl can enter the body through the skin :

A police officer in East Liverpool, Ohio, collapsed and was rushed to the hospital after he brushed fentanyl residue off his uniform, allowing the drug to enter his system through his hands. The officer had apparently encountered the opioid earlier in the day while making a drug bust.
Fenatanyl acts on the nervous system so could be described as a "nerve agent", particularly by a British politician or civil servant.
WorldBLee , Mar 8, 2018 8:49:38 PM | 30
I love it when the UK media call it a "professional hit job." No, it's not. In a professional hit job the person ends up dead.
Ghost Ship , Mar 8, 2018 9:02:37 PM | 31
Meanwhile The Guardian is spewing its usual bilge: Russian spy attack inquiry widens after medics treat 21 people

Statement from Wiltshire Police :

In addition to the three inpatients**** who are currently receiving treatment in relation to the incident, in line with Public Health England guidance, which asked anyone who was in the area and is concerned because they feel unwell to come forward, the Trust has seen and assessed a number of people who did not need treatment.

**** - These are Sgt Nick Bailey & the two original victims.

Peter AU 1 , Mar 8, 2018 9:04:33 PM | 32
The longer Skripal and his daughter stay alive, the more propaganda can be rung out of his death. Be worth watching to see how many sanctions and laws the UK can push through before he finally snuffs it.

[Mar 08, 2018] In recent years, there has been ample evidence that US policy-makers and, equally important, mainstream media commentators do not bother to read what Putin says, or at least not more than snatches from click-bait wire-service reports.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Still worse, Putin and "Putin's Russia" have been so demonized that it is hard to imagine any leading American political figures or editorial commentators responding positively to what is plainly his hope for a new beginning in US-Russian relations. If nothing else, strategic parity always also meant political parity -- recognizing that Soviet Russia, like the United States, had legitimate national interests abroad. The years of American vilifying Putin and Russia are essentially an assertion that neither has any such legitimacy. ..."
Mar 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

outthere , 08 March 2018 at 11:01 AM

Stephen F. Cohen:

Does Putin really believe Washington will "listen now"? He may still have some "illusions," but we should have none. In recent years, there has been ample evidence that US policy-makers and, equally important, mainstream media commentators do not bother to read what Putin says, or at least not more than snatches from click-bait wire-service reports.

Still worse, Putin and "Putin's Russia" have been so demonized that it is hard to imagine any leading American political figures or editorial commentators responding positively to what is plainly his hope for a new beginning in US-Russian relations. If nothing else, strategic parity always also meant political parity -- recognizing that Soviet Russia, like the United States, had legitimate national interests abroad. The years of American vilifying Putin and Russia are essentially an assertion that neither has any such legitimacy.

And making matters worse, there are the still unproven allegations of "Russiagate" collusion. Even if President Trump understands, or is made to understand, the new -- possibly historic -- overture represented by Putin's speech, would the "Kremlin puppet" allegations made daily against him permit him to seize this opportunity? Indeed, do the promoters of "Russiagate" care?

more here:

https://www.thenation.com/article/how-washington-provoked-and-perhaps-lost-a-new-nuclear-arms-race/

[Mar 08, 2018] So the net effect of Flynn indictment is that Mueller's office is conducting our Russian foreign policy. Authority without either responsibility or expertise is not a desirable thing when it comes to forging correct relations with a nuclear power.

Notable quotes:
"... So the net effect is that Mueller's office is conducting our Russian foreign policy. Authority without either responsibility or expertise is not a desirable thing when it comes to forging correct relations with a nuclear power. ..."
Mar 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Flavius -> LeaNder... , 08 March 2018 at 01:54 PM

It will be interesting to see why the interviewing FBI Agents to whom Flynn has admitted to the Mueller Op telling a lie, or lies, did not avail Flynn the opportunity of the 'lie circumstantial."

From what I think I know about the case, the answers to the questions put to Flynn were already known to the Agents from wire overhears; and their substance did not constitute a crime in any case.

Why would not the Agents interviewing Flynn have said "If you're telling me this, we have reason to think that you're mistaken?"

If I'm correct in my understanding, in my opinion, the Agents conducted themselves in a very chickenshit fashion and I would suspect an Agenda was in play.


Making a more general observation regarding the Mueller Op, it seems to me that not the least reprehensible effect of its existence is that de facto it has usurped the authority of the White House and the State Department to conduct Foreign Policy vis a vis Russia.

For example, I doubt very much whether Mueller cleared his ridiculous indictment relating to the Russian troll farm, a requirement that at one time would have been SOP for any FBI Office or USAtty Office bringing an indictment of this kind. And even if Mueller did, what would, what could the WH or State response have been given the mishapen political climate and the track record of outrageous leaking that so far have gone on without consequence to the leaker.

So the net effect is that Mueller's office is conducting our Russian foreign policy. Authority without either responsibility or expertise is not a desirable thing when it comes to forging correct relations with a nuclear power.

[Mar 08, 2018] Kleptocracy the most typical form of corruption under neoliberalism, where the government exists to increase the personal wealth and political power of its officials and the financial oligarchy at the expense of the wider population, now even without pretense of honest service

Notable quotes:
"... he Dems disgust me with their neo-McCarthyism and the Repubs disgust me because of the way they are playing out their hand right now as well. Games within corrupt games, and yet normal behavior especially in waning empires (or other types of polities, including powerful int'l corporations). ..."
"... Chapter 14 of Guns, Germs and Steel is titled "From Egalitarianism to Kleptocracy" and it used to be available online but my old link is dead and I couldn't find a new one. But a basic definition should suffice: "Kleptocracy, alternatively cleptocracy or kleptarchy, is a form of political and government corruption where the government exists to increase the personal wealth and political power of its officials and the ruling class at the expense of the wider population, often without pretense of honest service." I have no idea how one turns this around and I doubt it's even possible. ..."
"... The Real Reason Establishment Frauds Hate Trump and Obsess About Russia https://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2018/02/20/the-real-reason-establishment-frauds-hate-trump-and-obsess-about-russia/ ..."
"... Blaming Russia for all the nation's problems serves several key purposes for various defenders of the status quo. For discredited neocons and neoliberals who never met a failed war based on lies they didn't support, it provides an opportunity to rehabilitate their torched reputations by masquerading as fierce patriots against the latest existential enemy. Similarly, for those who lived in denial about who Obama really was for eight years, latching on to the Russia narrative allows them to reassure themselves that everything really was fine before Trump and Russia came along and ruined the party. ..."
Mar 01, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Valissa -> jsn... , 01 March 2018 at 07:44 PM

jsn @16 & 40, in complete agreement with you. Great comments! T he Dems disgust me with their neo-McCarthyism and the Repubs disgust me because of the way they are playing out their hand right now as well. Games within corrupt games, and yet normal behavior especially in waning empires (or other types of polities, including powerful int'l corporations).

Chapter 14 of Guns, Germs and Steel is titled "From Egalitarianism to Kleptocracy" and it used to be available online but my old link is dead and I couldn't find a new one. But a basic definition should suffice: "Kleptocracy, alternatively cleptocracy or kleptarchy, is a form of political and government corruption where the government exists to increase the personal wealth and political power of its officials and the ruling class at the expense of the wider population, often without pretense of honest service." I have no idea how one turns this around and I doubt it's even possible.

Back when I used to subscribe to STRATFOR, founder George Friedman always made a point of evaluating the elites of whatever country he was analyzing and how they operated amongst themselves and relative to the people and how effective they were or were not in governing a country. But he never did that for the US. I would have paid extra for that report! But of course he could not stay in business if he did such a thing as those people are his clients.

I think Mike Krieger over at Liberty Blitzkrieg nails it from another perspective with this post:

The Real Reason Establishment Frauds Hate Trump and Obsess About Russia https://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2018/02/20/the-real-reason-establishment-frauds-hate-trump-and-obsess-about-russia/

Blaming Russia for all the nation's problems serves several key purposes for various defenders of the status quo. For discredited neocons and neoliberals who never met a failed war based on lies they didn't support, it provides an opportunity to rehabilitate their torched reputations by masquerading as fierce patriots against the latest existential enemy. Similarly, for those who lived in denial about who Obama really was for eight years, latching on to the Russia narrative allows them to reassure themselves that everything really was fine before Trump and Russia came along and ruined the party.

By throwing every problem in Putin's lap, the entrenched bipartisan status quo can tell themselves (and everybody else) that it wasn't really them and their policies that voters rejected in 2016, rather, the American public was tricked by cunning, nefarious Russians. Ridiculous for sure, but never underestimate the instinctive human desire to deny accountability for one's own failures. It's always easier to blame than to accept responsibility.

That said, there's a much bigger game afoot beyond the motivations of individuals looking to save face. The main reason much of the highest echelons of American power are united against Trump has nothing to do with his actual policies. Instead, they're terrified that -- unlike Obama -- he's a really bad salesman for empire. This sort of Presidential instability threatens the continuance of their well oiled and exceedingly corrupt gravy train. Hillary Clinton was a sure thing, Donald Trump remains an unpredictable wildcard.

... Obama said all the right things while methodically doing the bidding of oligarchy. He captured the imagination of millions, if not billions, around the world with his soaring rhetoric, yet rarely skipped a beat when it came to the advancement of imperial policies. He made bailing out Wall Street, droning civilians and cracking down on journalists seem progressive. He said one thing, did another, and people ate it up. This is an extraordinarily valuable quality when it comes to a vicious and unelected deep state that wants to keep a corrupt empire together.

Trump has the exact opposite effect. Sure, he also frequently says one thing and then does another, but he doesn't provide the same feel good quality to empire that Obama did. He's simply not the warm and fuzzy salesman for oligarchy and empire Obama was, thus his inability to sugarcoat state-sanctioned murder forces a lot of people to confront the uncomfortable hypocrisies in our society that many would prefer not to admit.

------------

I can't stand Kushner's smirky face and got a good chuckle from this prince's fall as I am not a fan of his passion for Israel. But I don't think he's a stupid idiot either. He's probably very smart in business, but he seems to have no feel for politics. Trump is much better at it than Kushner. Of course they are going after Kushner as a way to attack and disadvantage Trump. Politics is a form of warfare after all.

My take is that Trump survives but mostly contained by the Borg

[Mar 08, 2018] And Now For The Good News by Justin Raimondo

Notable quotes:
"... The neocons are nothing if not survivors: they've managed to escape being totally shunned despite their disastrous leadership of the Iraq war, and they're now enjoying a new vogue in "liberal" and even leftist circles on account of their pioneering efforts on behalf of the NeverTrump movement. ..."
"... yet in this era of "America First" nationalism and the explicit anti-globalism of some in the higher reaches of the Trump administration, this time they may well be facing a humiliating defeat. ..."
Mar 08, 2018 | original.antiwar.com

The neocons are nothing if not survivors: they've managed to escape being totally shunned despite their disastrous leadership of the Iraq war, and they're now enjoying a new vogue in "liberal" and even leftist circles on account of their pioneering efforts on behalf of the NeverTrump movement.

This attack on their longtime stronghold in government is bound to call out the Furies, and yet in this era of "America First" nationalism and the explicit anti-globalism of some in the higher reaches of the Trump administration, this time they may well be facing a humiliating defeat. The NED is a rich source of grants and other government goodies: for the neocons to lose this is hitting them where they live.

Yes, the good news is breaking out all over! Enjoy it while it lasts

[Mar 08, 2018] No. Russians Did Not Hack The FCC Comments.

Notable quotes:
"... Washington Post ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... [email protected] ..."
"... Pew Research Center ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... #Russiagate, from the start, was framed as an indictment not just of one potentially traitorous Trump, but all alternative politics in general. The story has evolved to seem less like a single focused investigation and more like the broad institutional response to a spate of shocking election results, targeting the beliefs of discontented Americans across the political spectrum. ..."
"... it might be more scary then insane actually given how many are being suckered into this stupidity.. ..."
"... The US is under a psychotic mind massage that requires daily doses of Russophobic "medicine". ..."
"... All they have is their own crippled view of reality. But it is very dangerous. Projecting their own fears and hatreds often self-triggers into violence when schizoidal patients act out. ..."
"... The silver lining here though is that it is not working. Take the case of Matteo Renzi in Sunday's general election in Italy. He had tried to copy his neoliberal colleagues in other countries and allege victimization at the hands of Russian hackers and bots, but he eventually threw in the towel because the absurdity of his claims were roundly dismissed by the public. His Democratic Party polled under 20% and he announced his resignation the other day. The neoliberals can keep peddling their Russophobia but it doesn't work at the polls. ..."
"... "This Russiagate nonsense has do be debunked at each and every corner to prevent its further abuse against dissent on everything else." To me it looks like a Sisyphos work. Where I look I am confronted with cheating Russians, faking Russians, murdering Russians, they are just evil, evil, evil. I honestly doubt you can do anything against this avalanche of genuine demonizing. It's disgusting but apparently the ruling circles want to go to war. And even you won't stop them. ..."
"... The morons who peddle this "Russia did it" nonsense fully realize it isn't true, but it distracts the masses, so the bought and paid for idiots who now own the U$A, can dismantle any Govt. interference to their plan for global market share capture. ..."
"... Taibbi is right and that makes 'progressive' embrace of the Russiagate hoaxes that much more sinister. It is fundamentally pro-war, pro-establishment and pro-censorship ..."
"... "...but I rather doubt "the ruling circles" want a hot war with Russia/China and their allies as that will destroy their Casino-economy faster than most anything else..." ..."
"... Let's hope you're right. Brit General Sir Gordon Messenger views the "next big fight," most likely against nuclear-armed Russia, as winnable. (Times 18.03.01) And he isn't the only confident warmonger. ..."
"... Really folks, what the hell do people expect the rest of the globe to do, as the U$A's corporate empire continues to surround and attempt to strangle other nations? If other nations of the globe didn't push back, I for one, wouldn't respect them. Other nations of the world have the legitimate right to push back, and should. ..."
Mar 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

A member of the Federal Communications Commission, Jessica Rosenworcel, wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post .


bigger

It is unlikely that the headline was chosen by the author of the op-ed. The editors of the Washington Post opinion page wrote it. I also doubt that she would have chosen a picture of the FCC head to decorate her piece.

For the record: The headline is false.

The op-ed is about a request for comments the Federal Communications Commission issued last year in preparation of its net-neutrality decision. Anyone, and anything, could comment multiple times. Various lobbying firms, political action groups and hacks abused the public comment system to send copy-paste comments via single-use email accounts or even without giving any email address.

But this had and has nothing to with Russia or Russians.

Here are the top graphs of the the WaPo op-ed with the "Russia-did-it" headline:

What do Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), deceased actress Patty Duke, a 13-year-old from upstate New York and a 96-year-old veteran from Southern California have in common?

They appear to have filed comments in the net neutrality record at the Federal Communications Commission. That ought to mean they went online, submitted their names and addresses, and typed out their thoughts about Internet regulatory policy. But appearances can be deceiving. In fact, each of these individuals -- along with 2 million others -- had their identities stolen and used to file fake comments.

These fake comments were not the only unnerving thing in the FCC net neutrality record. In the course of its deliberations on the future of Internet openness, the agency logged about half a million comments sent from Russian email addresses . It received nearly 8 million comments from email domains associated with FakeMailGenerator.com with almost identical wording.

I have emphasized the only words in the whole op-ed that are related to Russia. They are wrong. The author of that op-ed does not understand the FCC public comment system. Public comments are made by filling out a form on the FCC website leaving ones comment, some address data and an email address. Public comments are not "send" by email. Thus the FCC did not log any comments "sent from Russian email". It logged comments made in a web form where the human (or program) making the comment provided a Russian email address as a means of contact. (It is obviously not expertise on communication issues that qualifies Mrs. Rosenworcel for her position as FCC commissioner.)

At least 12-13 million of the 21.7 million comments to the FCC were fake. 8 million email addresses entered in the form the FCC had set up were generated with www.fakemailgenerator.com , half a million were entered with *.ru Internet domains.

FakeMailGenerator can use foreign domains for generating throw-away email addresses. In the screenshot below it generated an Hungarian one for me.


bigger

If I would comment at the FCC and enter [email protected] into the FCC form I would be counted as Hungarian. I would not have "sent" that comment from an Hungarian email address. Nor did the entering of the comment make me Hungarian. Neither do *.ru email domains mean that the people (ab-)using them have anything to do with Russia.

The Pew Research Center analyzed the 21.7 million comments the FCC received:

Fully 57% of comments used temporary or duplicate email addresses, and seven popular comments accounted for 38% of all submissions

The FCC and other agencies are required by law to accept public comments. But, as the op-ed says, it is utterly useless to request such public comments on the Internet without having some authentication system in place. The FCC did have some email address verification system in place. But it did not use it. As the Pew Center writes:

[T]he Center's analysis shows that the FCC site does not appear to have utilized this email verification process on a consistent basis. According to this analysis of the data from the FCC, only 3% of the comments definitively went through this validation process . In the vast majority of cases, it is unclear whether any attempt was made to validate the email address provided.

As a result, in many cases commenters were able to use generic or bogus email addresses and still have their comments accepted by the FCC and posted online.

It is obvious that the FCC had no interest at all in receiving legitimate public comments. But the FCC at least did not blame Russia. The Washington Post editors do that when they chose a headline that has no factual basis in the piece below it. They abuse the op-ed which has the presumed authority of an FCC commissioner to reinforce their anti-Russian campaign.

C. J. Hopkins notes that such a cult of authority is systematically used to make the lunatic claims of Russiagate believable.

Matt Taibbi writes that the aim of the Russiagate campaign was and is to target all dissent :

If you don't think that the endgame to all of this lunacy is a world where every America-critical movement from Black Lives Matter to Our Revolution to the Green Party is ultimately swept up in the collusion narrative along with Donald Trump and his alt-right minions, you haven't been paying attention.

That's because #Russiagate, from the start, was framed as an indictment not just of one potentially traitorous Trump, but all alternative politics in general. The story has evolved to seem less like a single focused investigation and more like the broad institutional response to a spate of shocking election results, targeting the beliefs of discontented Americans across the political spectrum.

Some commenters here lament about my posts about the Steele and or Russiagate issues. "It's enough already." But the issue is, as Taibbi points out, much bigger. This Russiagate nonsense has do be debunked at each and every corner to prevent its further abuse against dissent on everything else.

Posted by b on March 7, 2018 at 04:17 PM | Permalink

Comments

Castellio , Mar 7, 2018 4:40:37 PM | 1

"This Russiagate nonsense has do be debunked at each and every corner to prevent its further abuse against dissent on everything else."

Exactly right, b, exactly right.

james , Mar 7, 2018 4:58:26 PM | 4
thanks b.. this Russiagate thing is insane... i like the counter punch article you linked to and appreciate your breaking these fcc thing apart... it might be more scary then insane actually given how many are being suckered into this stupidity..
james , Mar 7, 2018 4:59:47 PM | 5
Craig Murray has a good article up today on the poisoning in the uk of the ex russian dude...
karlof1 , Mar 7, 2018 5:04:28 PM | 6
b: "This Russiagate nonsense has do be debunked at each and every corner to prevent its further abuse against dissent on everything else."

Concur 100% Truth must be used in the constant battle against Big Lie Nation and its perverse billionaire Deep State. Bezos should be wary he now wears a bullseye on his back none of his billions can remove. I see Taibbi has finally gotten part of his head out of his ass and is finally beginning to recognize Russiagate to be the Big Lie that it is, although he hasn't yet extracted his mouth so he can tell the world it's all a Big Lie--bet Deep State affiliated Rolling Stone would fire him if he did so. That's why we're treated to his poorly written article that's almost two years too late.

Red Ryder , Mar 7, 2018 5:51:55 PM | 9
b, glad to have your expert mind cutting through the maze of crapola. The US is under a psychotic mind massage that requires daily doses of Russophobic "medicine".

All they have is their own crippled view of reality. But it is very dangerous. Projecting their own fears and hatreds often self-triggers into violence when schizoidal patients act out. We see this in America with school and concert shootings. With Russia as its enemy, the Exceptional Nation is taunting a great power with more nukes than the US has. Every stupid American statement, thus, must be challenged. We can't be silent or laugh. It's too serious.

Jackrabbit , Mar 7, 2018 5:58:13 PM | 10
Yes, criminalizing dissent. Those who view this as partisan politics misunderstand the nature of politics today.
Mike Maloney , Mar 7, 2018 6:24:14 PM | 12
The silver lining here though is that it is not working. Take the case of Matteo Renzi in Sunday's general election in Italy. He had tried to copy his neoliberal colleagues in other countries and allege victimization at the hands of Russian hackers and bots, but he eventually threw in the towel because the absurdity of his claims were roundly dismissed by the public. His Democratic Party polled under 20% and he announced his resignation the other day. The neoliberals can keep peddling their Russophobia but it doesn't work at the polls.
Debsisdead , Mar 7, 2018 6:27:49 PM | 14
Sorry to go off topic but the Syrian Arab Army has just marched thru East Gouta town of Al-Hammouriyah to the joy of locals who are demanding that the arseholes of Faylaq al-Rahman and Jaysh al-Islam take the next stage outta Beit Sawa.
There is a vid from Al Masdar News here and another here if you want to use facebook links as the vids are mounted on FB. Both vids show support for the SAA by the population of East Gouta.
Pnyx , Mar 7, 2018 7:04:56 PM | 15
"This Russiagate nonsense has do be debunked at each and every corner to prevent its further abuse against dissent on everything else." To me it looks like a Sisyphos work. Where I look I am confronted with cheating Russians, faking Russians, murdering Russians, they are just evil, evil, evil. I honestly doubt you can do anything against this avalanche of genuine demonizing. It's disgusting but apparently the ruling circles want to go to war. And even you won't stop them.
michaelj72 , Mar 7, 2018 7:56:03 PM | 17
"It is obvious that the FCC had no interest at all in receiving legitimate public comments. ..." hahaha. too true, B!! quite simply, democracy and capitalism can no longer co-habitate under the same roof
ben , Mar 7, 2018 8:36:00 PM | 19
The morons who peddle this "Russia did it" nonsense fully realize it isn't true, but it distracts the masses, so the bought and paid for idiots who now own the U$A, can dismantle any Govt. interference to their plan for global market share capture.
ben , Mar 7, 2018 8:55:20 PM | 20
A reminder as to who the evil MF's are: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/450078556481803620/?autologin=true
paul , Mar 7, 2018 9:48:04 PM | 21
Taibbi is right and that makes 'progressive' embrace of the Russiagate hoaxes that much more sinister. It is fundamentally pro-war, pro-establishment and pro-censorship and thus not progressive -- depending on how we define progress of course...
Pnyx , Mar 7, 2018 10:01:37 PM | 22
karlof1 16

"...but I rather doubt "the ruling circles" want a hot war with Russia/China and their allies as that will destroy their Casino-economy faster than most anything else..."

Let's hope you're right. Brit General Sir Gordon Messenger views the "next big fight," most likely against nuclear-armed Russia, as winnable. (Times 18.03.01) And he isn't the only confident warmonger.

Don Bacon , Mar 7, 2018 10:37:47 PM | 23
Yes, we (patriotic) dissenters are "swept up in the collusion narrative" when we are labeled "Russians." This has happened to me. When I comment a lot on military sites about the ridiculous waste of money they are, I occasionally get the Russian treatment. "You're a Russian." Once it was hilarious when the "Russian" label on me was deemed authentic by one genius blogger. He said I must be Russian because I had used the word "kilometers." That proved my Russian-ness to him. . . .Currently Trump is denigrated for being a Russia-lover, but calling him a Russian is not likely (but possible).
ben , Mar 7, 2018 11:53:38 PM | 24
Really folks, what the hell do people expect the rest of the globe to do, as the U$A's corporate empire continues to surround and attempt to strangle other nations? If other nations of the globe didn't push back, I for one, wouldn't respect them. Other nations of the world have the legitimate right to push back, and should.

[Mar 08, 2018] One of their aims is to prevent countries of Africa, Latin America, Near and Middle East and Southern Asia from choosing their trade partners freely and from making use of their resources and industrialize

Mar 08, 2018 | wipokuli.wordpress.com

The US Power Elite ... would be rightfully called the „Deep State" of the USA ( http://tinyurl.com/ho2nz87 ).

And this Deep State has become more and more ruthless over the time. They have brought nightmares over the Southern Hemisphere by installing brutal dictatorships ( http://tinyurl.com/kkpvcf7 ) in their interest and waging bloody colonial wars, in the last one and a half decades especially with their „War on Terror" ( http://tinyurl.com/nrxxej5 ).

One of their aims is to prevent countries of Africa, Latin America, Near and Middle East and Southern Asia from choosing their trade partners freely and from making use of their resources and industrialize, since that would mean a division of resources and allowing them their part of „consuming ecologic Earth capacity".

[Mar 07, 2018] Troubles for US empire are just starting

Mar 07, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Deep Snorkeler -> y3maxx Wed, 03/07/2018 - 12:45 Permalink

Tsar Putin Addresses America

1. you are a country that cannot keep its genders straight

2. always bent on futile crusades in foreign lands

3. normality eludes you

4. your political-economy is hallucinatory

5. you are in a constant state of distorted perception.

You cannot know what is real. It doesn't exist.

It never existed.

BennyBoy -> zerotohero Wed, 03/07/2018 - 13:20 Permalink

Komrade Putin speak truth.

Consuelo -> BennyBoy Wed, 03/07/2018 - 13:49 Permalink

And he speaks it with an ease and decorum that only a confident but measured individual is capable of - quite frankly, in many ways like President Trump. The problem here is, daring to speak truth and calling a spade a spade has been made to look like one is speaking like a mad man.

veritas semper -> Consuelo Wed, 03/07/2018 - 14:08 Permalink

I would like to see The Donald or any other Western Leader having a Q& A televised address, for > 4 hrs,answering without a teleprompter all types of questions,mostly from unfriendly foreign journalists ,without babbling and wiping the floor with idiots like Charlie Rose and comp.

I do not think so.

Fireman -> Snaffew Wed, 03/07/2018 - 14:38 Permalink

If USSA gets too loopy with its ongoing financial collapse as the toilet paper Saudi Mercan dollah gets flushed, don't worry Mr. Bear will rip the entire carcass apart and devour it whole like it did NAZI Germany. Count on it. Russians don't boast and never run off at the mouth like USSANS. Russians never threaten but when it's time to strike they ride hard and hammer fast and furious. Ask the Germans the exceptionals the last time round!.

researchfix -> Fireman Wed, 03/07/2018 - 14:45 Permalink

"Ask the Germans the exceptionals the last time round!."

100 points, beautiful said.

putaipan -> Cry Baby Moe Wed, 03/07/2018 - 13:49 Permalink

speaking of tigers and bears ....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRbMMpTJUVo

Fireman -> Cry Baby Moe Wed, 03/07/2018 - 14:32 Permalink

You come across as a whack nutjob Bolshevik punk. No cure is possible. Go ahead and jump

Ckierst1 -> Cry Baby Moe Wed, 03/07/2018 - 15:08 Permalink

Yeah, those Russkies need to dismantle all those military bases that surround our happy, peaceful little chunk of North America and stop knocking over all our neighbors to install hostile puppet regimes on our doorstep.

FBaggins -> Shitonya Serfs Wed, 03/07/2018 - 15:13 Permalink

Add Ottawa Canada to the list.

The Western cabal will not use tactical nukes nukes, and for a land war in Eastern Europe they are far from being ready, nor would they likely win it. But Russia has no such ambitions unless there is a continuation of confrontation against Syria and Iran in the ME further isolating, fragmenting, and economically harming Russia and its allies.

The big concern right now for Putin is not the use of nukes or even the constant provocations in Syria attempting to escalate that war. Rather, it is the upcoming Russian election which the West, led by the US deep state, is clearly interfering in and intends to rig with the billions being spent. The US intends to justify its interference based on the unrelenting, deep-state-generated fake news and political propaganda that the Russians interfered in the 2016 US Presidential election, and with the soft-sell mantra being currently spread through the alleged alternate media that "all major powers these days interfere with foreign elections".

Rico -> LawsofPhysics Wed, 03/07/2018 - 12:46 Permalink

... and one fiat to rule them all...

My repost from earlier:

The Norks are the fake enemy to keep to keep MIC pumped. The western fiat faction needs to eat Russia for its survival. The gold kings (Putin and Xi) know that the West is dying, and like a starving man, it wants to prolong the inevitable by consuming Russia first, then it will be China's turn. The gold kings know they are on the menu, they know the West is bleeding out and that if they can block the West from doing something stupid (like a first strike nuclear attack on Russia using the stealth drones from the bases in Ukraine and Afghanistan that have already been established for this purpose) then time will take care of the collapse of the West for them...

But understand, without Russia's resources, the West is dead sooner rather than later. So will a starving man attack his innocent neighbor to steal his food and thus prolong his own death? This is the only question that matters and I think we know what the psychos will do. This is why I found Putin's speech the other day to be so revealing, true or not, he is creating doubt as to the winnable nature of our first strike nuclear plans for Russia...pouring sand into the West's vaseline, so to speak...

Will it be enough? Will the West die gracefully or do we take everyone else with us?

LightTrumpsDark -> Rico Wed, 03/07/2018 - 15:05 Permalink

Absolutely agree Rico. Since Nixon took the world off the gold standard in 1971, the West has had to transform from a real economy making things into a financial services economy. Problem is that 90% have become slaves to the Private banking cartel supported by the Central banks in each country. The politicians, media conglomerates, big business, intelligence agencies, and the MIC are all in bed together. They know that they have collectively ruined the world's eco system, ruined the worlds monetary system, and that after the world financial crisis mapped out for the rest of this year, they will usher in a limited world war. Limited to depopulating small parts of the west, large parts of the 3rd world (freeing up resources) and large parts of China, India and the middle east. The system has been built on lies and deceit, and those in power are desperate to keep their crimes and money laundering hidden. They would rather destroy the world with nuclear weapons than lose control of the system. The stupid neocons built up China hoping for it to transform into a market economy. Now China is turning against them, and aligning with Russia, and setting up a gold based monetary system (no gold of any decent quantity or quality in Fort Knox by the way). On another level the nuclear rhetoric may just be fear based theater for the masses, and after the financial storm hits the puppet masters will usher in a one world currency and one world totalitarian government. After all, Trump did praise Xi Jinping on being appointed for life.

Peacefulwarrior -> nmewn Wed, 03/07/2018 - 12:42 Permalink

Sociopathic politicians and their Attorneys are not good for business or ethics. Looks like we will revisit the same cyclical Zenith of Ill Repute we have throughout known history, eventually reset and then start the game again...

nmewn -> Peacefulwarrior Wed, 03/07/2018 - 12:47 Permalink

It would be an interesting comparison, the sociopathy.

Gowdy or Shitz?

DiFi or Grassley?

And on and on ;-)

Dilluminati -> nmewn Wed, 03/07/2018 - 13:01 Permalink

this all has it roots in the Crimean thing.. and the following:

Turning his attention to a particularly sensitive topic, Putin said he was dismayed by what he described as the U.S. role in the ouster of Ukraine's Russia-friendly president in February 2014 amid massive protests.

Putin charged that the U.S. had asked Russia to help persuade then-President Viktor Yanukovych not to use force against protesters and then "rudely and blatantly" cheated Russia, sponsoring what he called a "coup." Russia responded by rushing through a referendum in Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula, whose result was an overwhelming majority voting to join Russia.

"Few expected us to act so quickly and so resolutely, not to say daringly," Putin said.

He described the Western sanctions over Crimea and the insurgency in eastern Ukraine as part of "illegitimate and unfair" efforts to contain Russia, adding that "we will win in the long run." He added that "those who serve us with poison will eventually swallow it and poison themselves."

Responding to a question about Russia's growing global leverage, Putin responded: "If we play strongly with weak cards, it means the others are just poor players, they aren't as strong as it seemed, they must be lacking something."

What i wish Russia would say is: Yes we used what internet and information persuasion we could when we invaded/intervened in Crimea.

And then say: There will be no tampering with elections though we of course have foreign policy objectives.

And finally : That the arguments in your neighbor's house belong inside the house and please don't drag them out onto the lawn.

The whole issue boils back to the debate and wtf to do in respect to arming Ukraine, and that time Russia was in newsgroups and targeting information along with the Buk debacle. It happened, it was for real, no bullshit. Even some of the NFL websites had the content and the posting comes from supposedly far right or far left however the hallmark is always an identity politics message , trolling for the lowest common denominator. Some of the work was sooo damn bad it was almost comical but mostly it was drivel and off-topic, misdirecting any meaningful discussion, that was most often used when crowdsourcing the Buk and proof of deployed green men.. the posts were just disruptive in nature and designed to make the posting environment as fucked up as possible. Trump said some things somewhat favorable to the Russians in the debates and that was when McCains knickers went into flames and Lindsey Graham got worked up.

There was this thing called the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, which effectively said: heh Ukraine give up your nukes and we'll make sure that that doesn't come back to bite your ass.. and at that time Obama was like.. we'll send blankets and rations.. and Germany and France were like.. well here is the photo

https://cdn3.img.sputniknews.com/images/101854/34/1018543424.jpg

This photo ^ tells more of the issue than anything else.....

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

Now fast forward to the elections.. Some of the facebook ads were back material and if you follow that timeline were in fact the basis of the Ukraine campaign, similar to Rendon group.. etc.. now the difference is that the topics changed and there is no controlled narrative like in the good old days when you'd find a baby in an incubator and that was the story.. or a C130 broadcasting something flying in circles was the message.. so the stuff that surrounded the activity morphed as the larger US based internet discussed the rather "phenomenon" of the elections...

Now if or how, or perhaps there was collusion or more succinctly a quid-pro-quo between Putin and Trump? I don't know.. however the broader incrimination is what is being made. My hunch without all the facts is that the crowd that I call hollywood for ugly people suddenly found the rules changed, couldn't deliver a pinch hit on Brexit, couldn't control the narrative for Hillary, and that they are still floundering around on the issues. They feel cheated as they didn't get their way.

Did Russia troll and perform information campaigns? yes they did.. have I seen a stolen election? Nope.. Hillary really lost that on her own and though she sees the analytics on the email as the issue it was actually when she was too fucking cute and said: "Like with a cloth?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Rha6Wamfp0

you can watch and remember.. the analytics topics email, but it was her fucking dishonesty and her mannerism that sunk her, no matter what she says or does, you can't rollback that verdict

I think some people are taking this way too fucking far, and if Americans violated laws.. well fucking charge em

But if meddling in other peoples elections or having an opinion is illegal then we need to completely redo our foreign policy with some middle east nations.. serious the fuck up..

the truth in a picture

https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/belarus-president-alexander-lukash

Librarian -> Dilluminati Wed, 03/07/2018 - 15:09 Permalink

>The whole issue boils back to the debate and wtf to do in respect to arming Ukraine

Respectfully, I don't think that's the real debate here. IMHO that ship sailed long ago. Figuratively, it sank to the bottom of the ocean. Everyone involved is now in the process of sorting out their insurance claims.

It's similar to someone parking an expensive motorcycle in his backyard, with the gate unlocked and the keys in the ignition. It's been more than a year since the bike was jacked. But the property owner is still foaming at the mouth and ranting about setting up tripwire perimeter machine guns and setting up minefields in his flower beds.

It's gone and it isn't coming back. Fighting this battle with the Donetsk rebels even down to the last Western Ukrainian isn't going to do much except to produce a few million childless Ukrainian women. The last census in Ukraine was such a shock that portions of it that will likely never be released.

Baron von Bud Wed, 03/07/2018 - 12:25 Permalink

If our government wasn't bought off by defense contractors and bankers then fair compromise would be possible. Put the people first and money second. That's how Putin stays in power. Learn and change.

Boubou -> Baron von Bud Wed, 03/07/2018 - 12:41 Permalink

I can tell you this as someone who left USA 50 years ago;

The USA reputation right now for bullying and warmongering is so extreme that most people in the world feel admiration and affection for anyone who tries to stand up for his country's independence from US full spectrum domination. Putin benefits from that, plus many find him charismatic and humorous.

I don't think he is delusional enough to believe that Russia can really survive a US attack or carve out a rival empire, in fact I don't think he is delusional at all.

Radical Marijuana -> exartizo Wed, 03/07/2018 - 13:07 Permalink

Putin has a practically impossible task, which is to provide rational deterrence to the Anglo-American (Zionist) Finance Empire, which is dominated by increasingly psychotic psychopaths.

The doctrine of MAD Mutual Assured Destruction was the only policy that could be proposed and promoted in order to attempt to cope with weapons of mass destruction becoming trillions of times more powerful than ever before in human history. However, that threat of force from atomic weapons, etc., was the continuation of the historical trends of the combined money/murder systems based upon the public powers of governments being used to enforce frauds by private banks, and the big corporations that grew up around those big banks.

The MAD Mutual Assured Destruction threats continued to back up the MAD Money As Debt systems. The international bankers, behind the globalized dominance of the Anglo-American (Zionist) Finance Empire became the best organized gangsters, the banksters, who effectively captured control over all NATO governments, and especially recaptured control over the government of the USA for more than a Century.

The social successfulness based upon being able to enforce frauds has been enabled by about exponentially advancing technologies to become about exponentially more fraudulent. That is the context inside of which the combination of MAD Money As Debt, backed by MAD Mutual Assured Destruction, is automatically becoming MADDER & MADDER. Indeed, that overall MAD situation has already become too MAD to be completely comprehended anymore by anyone!

The underlying issues were that Globalized Neolithic Civilization was based on Civilization being effectively controlled by applying the methods of organized crime on larger and larger scales, until those became globalized privatization of public powers, in order that money based on measurement backed by murder could spin out of human control, because the collective MADNESS became runaway criminal insanities.

All over the world, it is painfully obvious that various societies integrated into Globalized Neolithic Civilization are manifesting various forms of runaway social psychoses, due to Civilization becoming based on the excessively successful applications of the methods of organized crime, which have reached the point of the MAD Mutual Assured Destruction seeming to fail to rationally deter the dominate gangsters, the banksters, from attempting to consolidate their globalized control over their MAD Money As Debt systems, which thereby effectively consolidate control over the world's natural resources.

Putin has a practically impossible political problem, which is to provide rational material deterrence against the globalized ruling classes, whose previous privatization of the planet has allowed them to indulge in runaway psychotic attitudes towards themselves, as well as everyone and everything else.

Any attempt to wage overt warfare against Russia would result in the destruction of Globalized Neolithic Civilization. For all practical purposes, that kind of criminal insanity would mean that Civilization had committed collective suicide.

The history of the previous social successfulness of the Anglo-American (Zionist) Finance Empire has reinforced the ruling classes of their organizations to become too criminally insane to recover from the degree to which that has become so, while, at the same time, most of those who have been more and more ruled over by those increasingly psychotic psychopaths have gradually adapted, for generation after generation, to living inside those systems by becoming increasingly incompetent political idiots.

Putin keeps on warning both the rulers, as well as those ruled over, in NATO countries, not to be so criminally insane. However, as Putin points out, those warnings are more and more falling upon deaf ears. Putin is stuck inside the problematic predicament of attempting to maintain the precarious balancing of MAD Mutual Assured Destruction, despite that doing so allows the MAD Money As Debt problems to continue to get about exponentially worse.

Theoretically, since it was the series of intellectual scientific revolutions and profound paradigm shifts in mathematical physics that enabled the development of globalized electronic monkey money frauds, backed by the threat of force from apes with atomic weapons, it "should" be imperative for series of intellectual scientific revolutions and profound paradigm shifts to be applied to the public perception of the combined money/murder systems.

Theoretically, after weapons become trillions of times more powerful, then militarism "should" be radically transformed. Since militarism is the ideology of the murder system, while the murder system has been radically transformed by about exponentially advancing technologies, based on profound paradigm shifts in physics, therefore, militarism "should" go through series of profound paradigm shifts in the perception of the death control systems that back up the debt control systems. However, the only things which are actually happening are the ways in which the collective runaway MADNESS is getting MADDER & MADDER!

exartizo -> Radical Marijuana Wed, 03/07/2018 - 16:17 Permalink

Well written, fascinating, but too verbose my friend.

Here it is in a nutshell for you:

The MAD Money Banksters are losing control of the MAD Bombs and vice versa so that the understanding of which is "wagging the proverbial dog's tail", the dog or the tail, "The Money or The Bombs" is blurring into a surreal landscape of money and power the end of which is MAD in every sense.

Let's please do try to remember to be succinct, my friend.

But your paragraphs are sexy.

Cheers

veritas semper -> exartizo Wed, 03/07/2018 - 14:21 Permalink

Do not expect that once taking advantage of Russia's weakness, you will receive dividends forever. Russian has always come for their money. And when they come - do not rely on an agreement signed by you, you are supposed to justify. They are not worth the paper it is written. Therefore, with the Russian is to play fair, or do not play.

Otto von Bismarck

one of the greatest politicians of all times .

Blankone Wed, 03/07/2018 - 12:38 Permalink

More hot air from Putin without any actions.
Putin is getting bullied in Syria now. Even Russia says the US has 20 military bases IN Syria. From RT just today:

"That's after it was revealed the Pentagon plans to spend around $300 million to train and equip a 60,000-strong army in Syria. "

Yesterday RT had a story that ZH is avoiding. That a Russian transport crashed in Syria killing over 30 troops. Which was especially interesting for this reason:

A russian transport plane just crashed in Syria killing all the troops on board.
Some group of people really like their numbers to send messages.

The model number of the Russian airliner that recently crashed was AN 148 = 13
The call number of the Iranian airliner that recently crashed is EP-ATS. MSN 391 = 13

This russian transport drops on landing due to "technical issues" on March 6 = 3/6 = 3 - 6's = 666

All 3 planes just dropped suddenly. This plane lost control on approach to where it could not attempt to glide in. Someone's having fun with Russia and Iran. (Let's not forget how the Russian military choir suddenly dropped out of the sky, on Christmas I believe.)

Yesterday we also found out Putin's claims about a hypersonic nuke was BS and he used photo's of a slightly modified run of the mill missile. Add to that the BS story of a super hypersonic nuke torpedo. And the totally BS story about the new super fighter jet.

What is consistent is increased noise from Putin without any action to confront NATO.

Boogity -> Blankone Wed, 03/07/2018 - 13:36 Permalink

Yawn... The USA has hundreds of military bases all over the world and a military budget larger than the next 12 countries combined yet it still keeps getting its sorry azzz whipped in Third World shitholes all over the planet.

In fact, with the notable exception of Ronny Raygun's daring invasion of mighty Grenada in 1984, the USA hasn't won a war since WW2. The only thing that's happened is that its "Empire" is now 20 trillion bucks in debt and rapidly collapsing after just a few decades of existence.

In the grand sweep of human history, where many Empires have lasted a millennia or longer, the USA's pretend Empire will be barely a blip on the radar screen.

Blankone -> Boogity Wed, 03/07/2018 - 14:01 Permalink

You do not understand their goals.
How many times has Russia/Soviet Union fallen during the time of the US existence?
A decade is 10 yrs, the US has existed more than 2 or 3 decades.
The US is on the path to ruin in many ways. But Russia is no powerhouse and may well crumble from within yet again. And if Russia fails yet again TPTB will dice it up and haul away the resources this time. And then there will be no Russia, even it the US crumbles later.

Right now Putin is so desperate he tries to change history and make Stalin a hero for the Russian people to rally around. Do they not know who Stalin was or maybe Putin honors him due to the religious purges he enforced. Putin pushed into law new legislation making it a serious crime to deny the holohoax. hmmm Are they going to do it Again?

veritas semper -> Blankone Wed, 03/07/2018 - 14:45 Permalink

He strikes me as very calm ,collected,intelligent .

He took Russia from a total disaster done by chosen gang during the Yeltsin years and elevated it to a superpower in 16 years.

Russians have been through Hell and back. During the Color Revolution which was Bolshevism and during the shock therapy applied to them by the Haaavard jooo gang working in synchrony with the Russian chosen. They have seen the wanders of Bolshevism and of American so called capitalism.

And they chose neither.

They chose Mr. Putin ,not because he is a Communist ,or a zionist , red or white ,they chose him because he is RUSSIAN.

Russia has learned from past mistakes. The future is on Russia's side. Not so for US . US has not learned anything . When it makes a mistake ,it doubles,triples down.

Remember ,even if you lose a battle ,wining the war is more important. And this is precisely what Russia is doing.

I really don't understand,do you want a hot war ,that will annihilate the world? You do not seem stupid . Which leaves only one other explanation

veritas semper -> Blankone Wed, 03/07/2018 - 14:29 Permalink

See above quote . From somebody much ,much smarter then you and me.

And he is going to do it . While avoiding,from his part a WWWIII. Maybe you are eager for one?

Everything in due time. All pieces on the GO table are in place.

And ,remember time is on Russia's side ,not on American one. JUSA is going down .

In 3 years ,Russia had thousands of transports in Syria. this was probably ans accident. And even if it wasn't ,see Bismarck's quote above.

Son of Captain Nemo Wed, 03/07/2018 - 13:04 Permalink

God Damn but I wish he were my President and "Russia" was the United States!...

The only thing that needs to be said with the gloves clearly off for good with Uncle Shlomo is... When does Putin announce his formal dislocation and departure from the UN after terrorism on his borders and in his Country courtesy of the "Union" since 1992?...

Calling home his diplomatic corps in the U.S. and sending Amerikansy packing from Russia... Either he speaks the embarrassing truth that the West needs to hear with an announcement to the UN that it's the worst farce that mankind has ever conceived... and that he will work with the SCO/BRICS members to build a new "Home" for the rule of law that it deserves?... Or he continues to acquiesce to unconvicted mass murderers through "diplomatic channels" that no longer exist that only wear camo and that he knows he will inevitably never win over anyway!

ENOUGH is "ENOUGH"!!!

P.S.

Vlad FYI... Make my suntan "extra crispy"... And scatter me over a very large part of Washington D.C. where I reside!

Like all Americans THAT HAVE CHOSEN TO BE COLLECTIVE PSYCHOPATHS since this ( http://www.ae911truth.org/ )... We're fucking cowards that will take the easiest and worst way out when we LOSE!!!

CatInTheHat Wed, 03/07/2018 - 13:14 Permalink

The US is so utterly obvious in it's WARMONGERING, particularly toward Putin and Russia. People in other countries think we are the biggest dumbasses and we are.

The other day, RT had an article about the election in Italy and within the article was a tweet from Samantha power blaming Russia for the election outcome. The blowback from Italians reading that Tweet was outstanding. They know Russiagate is bullshit and the blowback on Americans who buy into this highly propagandized subject we're mercilessly ridiculed.

We should be talking diplomacy, but the US doesn't make money or try to even hide the fact that they want WAR. Our population has been so depleted of critical thinking skills and so deeply complacent, they will sit and watch Maddow continue her assault upon Russia, with American idiots parked in front or their computer or TV sets, as the nuke from Russia heads this way while Maddow beelines it to a bunker.

Americans have descended so far into madness, a reset is required to bring them to a reality that shows them who their ZIONIST masters really are. Maddow being one of the most dangerous among the propagandist serving the see eye aye,EFF BEE EYE, EAT.AL.

Putin appears SANE compared to the insane psychopaths running the country. I mean has anyone bothered to read up about Putin? The documentary of his interview? Anyone read up on RUSSIAN culture or it's people?? I have been and it's really interesting.

What Democrats are doing is INCITEMENT to genocide which is a war crime under international law. They dehumanize, demonizes millions of people and their leader. Think about it, what if this were in reverse? If Putin and his parliament were accusing the US of meddling in their elections and then spend two years threatening to murder our entire population??

Jesus H. Christ THINK PEOPLE.

Pliskin -> Vaablane Wed, 03/07/2018 - 14:54 Permalink

WOW! The level of american't butt-hurt on this post is through the roof!!

veritas semper -> Pliskin Wed, 03/07/2018 - 15:16 Permalink

Yes. Sooo funny.

After Mr. Putin speech ,where he tipped the balance of power on Russia's side ,we are witnessing ,in all its glory , the 5 stages of American grief.

-first stage was denial : Putin lied,Russians are drunk and incapable ,those were fake missiles

-then the angry response : the weapons sent to Ukraine , extending of sanctions for another year by the Donald ,continuing vilification of Russia/Putin ; hey ,the Donald 's State Department Troll Farm received a 40 Mil injection recently.

-then will be the bargaining stage : US will try to offer something ,like let's say the used and discarded Porkoshenko in return for transforming Sarmat into scrap metal

-then it's depression time after Russia says they can shove their offer up their assesky

-will we reach a cold acceptance or a very hot nuclear acceptance ?

Stay

abgary1 Wed, 03/07/2018 - 14:41 Permalink

Career politicians and bureaucrats are the problem.

-Recall legislation for politicians to remove the worst of the worst.

-Term limits of 2 for politicians at any one level of government and contract limits of 8 years for bureaucrats at any one level of government. If the legislators know they will spend the majority of their working careers in the private sector they won't be passing laws that strictly benefit the public sector.

-Balanced budget laws that require referendums to repeal.

Grass root party members need to demand change.

Let it Go Wed, 03/07/2018 - 14:50 Permalink

It is not hard to understand Russia's concern a mishap might occur. When it comes to our nuclear arsenal, not only is America ready to launch but we are also about to spend a great deal of money to increase that ability. What the world would look like following a nuclear war has been the subject of much speculation.

A great number of variables feed into such scenarios but we should be troubled that today it seems many people consider nuclear weapons as an acceptable tool or option for us to use in our defense if we are attacked. More on the size of our arsenal and the plans to spend a huge amount to upgrade the delivery system in the article below.

http://Nuclear Weapons-We Are Ready To Launch.html

Anon2017 Wed, 03/07/2018 - 14:53 Permalink

1. It appears to me that Putin has a better grasp of American politics than millions of Americans of all colors and religions, who I think would even fail the basic civics test given to legal immigrants who apply for US citizenship.

2. Victoria Nuland, who was Secretary of State Clinton's point person on Ukraine, helped stir up the 2014 Ukrainian Revolution which ended up in the ouster of its Russia-friendly President. Did anyone in a senior position in NATO really expect Russia to sit idly by while Ukraine developed ever closer ties to NATO and possibly oust the Russians from their only warm water military base at Sevastopol?

[Mar 07, 2018] The Philosopher's Stone A REPLY TO EWAN

Mar 07, 2018 | robertpaulwolff.blogspot.com
Ewan said...
LFC
John Kerry agreed the terms of a ceasefire. President Obama gave it his imprimatur. The Secretary of Defence said he didn't think the US should comply (publicly defied his commander-in-chief!). The USAF then accidentally bombed Syrian troops. Oops.

(We can get into the bombing of the relief convoy if you wish, and the Western media's practice of broadcasting as fact without verification jihadi propaganda. The reporting of the siege of Aleppo has been one of the very lowest points in our media's lamentable career. Compare and contrast Mosul. It appears to be a principle with us that our enemies can always be trusted to act against their own interests at precisely the moment when it will cause them maximum damage and justify us in doing whatever it is we wanted to do all along. For example, Syria use chemical weapons thus crossing the US "red line" the jihadis want it to cross, precisely when it has invited in the UN chemical weapons inspectors... D'oh!)

Russia and Iran are acting within the law in coming to the aid of an ally at that ally's request. The US and its allies are acting contrary to the law in funding, arming, training etc. jihadists, mostly not even Syrians, to overthrow the Syrian government. What may very well have started as a civil war, soon morphed into a proxy war by the Saudis, Turkey, the US, UK and France to overthrow a government they do not like. Such interference is what treaties they have all signed deem illegal. If we are to believe Messrs. Annan and Ibrahimi of the UN, a negotiated settlement in 2012 was thwarted by the jihadis at the behest of the US and the Saudis. The killing of civilians could have ceased long since but for that. We have encouraged the prolongation of the killing of civilians. Given the record of both the Saudis and the US, it is in any event not for us to be lecturing anyone, even the Ba'athists in Syria. We are in the process of driving 19m Yemenis to starvation. We killed what the UN estimated to be half a million Iraqi children in the 1990s (no-one bothered to count the adults). The US Secretary of State called it a "price worth paying". We have killed more than a million civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen since 2001. And we aren't finished.

"Not grown-up" is maybe not most apt to describe those who complain righteously that their enemies kill thousands as a pretext to kill hundreds of thousands themselves.

And maybe you do not like the term applied to US policy on Syria. Fair enough - but that policy is surely not coherent. The US has signed agreements with Russia it has failed to honour. It has condemned Russia for doing legally in Syria what it is itself doing illegally. It has proclaimed its determination to defeat Islamism - by allying itself with the main source and sponsor of Islamism. It insists on identifying as its chief enemies the only forces on the ground able to fight the jihadis effectively. It has allied itself with those its allies are fighting. It has even been reduced to pretending that a change of name has rendered al qaeda a "moderate rebel force" worthy of US tax dollars. I could go on!

You may think it unhelpful to characterise US behaviour as "not grown-up". Fair enough. It still scares the bejeesus out of the rest of us to no good purpose. Or are you able to tell me what purpose has been served by turning Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia into a chaos of death and destruction with no end in sight and at the expense of several trillion dollars?

US foreign policy for at least a hundred years has been about making the world safe for "free enterprise". Quite how does the current chaos further that policy?

Ewan said...
LFC
I have gone on too long.

A few points:

"If the U.S. is bent on overthrowing Assad, it has an odd way of demonstrating that." This is startling. The US makes no bones about it.

I'm also surprised you don't see the difficulty in us deciding who is legitimate and who illegitimate. If we were indeed the good guys, maybe... but, as it is, it is really not on for us to label Assad worse than the Saudis, or Saddam a good guy when we support him but the new Hitler when he disobeys us. The Russian insistence on the rule of law seems to me the best of a bad job. I can't think of any other way to curb them all even slightly.

On al qaeda in Syria, there are specialists who try to detail the various jihadi groups and affiliations. Al Nusra, ahrar al-Sham etc are all inter-related and all subsidiaries and rebrandings and divisions and factions of the same jihadis. As indeed is ISIS/Daesh. They are all the spawn of the US/Saudi cunning plan to use Islamists against secular Arab states. Brzezinski was actually proud of it!

Mosul: I meant the whole shebang. You refer to one incident we happen to have heard of. Aleppo was "genocide!!!!!"; Mosul - mainly silence.

I hold no brief for any thug or princeling or prime minister in the Middle East. I do think the stream of drivel about Russia needs stopping. It is dangerous to us all.

I won't drone on any longer.

[Mar 07, 2018] John Helmer suggests there are signs that Putin has now moved decisively in favour of the forces which have produced the weaponry of which he spoke and against those who side with the oligarchs and favour accommodation, on almost any terms, with the USA

Mar 07, 2018 | off-guardian.org

Reply

bevin says March 6, 2018

The real significance of Putin's speech has been missed. As John Helmer suggests there are signs that Putin has now moved decisively in favour of the forces which have produced the weaponry of which he spoke and against those who side with the oligarchs and favour accommodation, on almost any terms, with the USA.

Something that has mystified unthinking westerners is the possibility that, while spending relatively small amounts an industrial sector which is notoriously run down has managed to come up with an arsenal which matches and may very well exceed that of the US with its massive defense budgets. In a society obsessed with the silly notion that privatisation and free enterprise produce innovation and cut costs the performance of Russia's, largely state owned, arms industry seems counter intuitive. When added to the conventional wisdom that the Soviet Union failed because it was bureaucratised and inefficient Russia's advantage is inexplicable .

In reality none of this should be surprising. The US Defense procurement system is designed basically to funnel money from the taxpayers to the MIC. And the Military Industrial Complex, as its name suggests, has many often conflicting aims in developing and producing weapons. Of the various interest groups in the MIC only the tiny, though loud, ideological wing of neo-conservatives has any interest in war with Russia. As to the rest, the politicians, the corporations, the military war is the least of their desires: the politicians want jobs for constituents and deep wells of graft in which those trillions can be re-cycled into campaign funds, think tanks, pensions, bribes and favours. The corporations want orders with guaranteed and fat profits. They also want monopolies and help in garnering the super profits that come from foreign orders. Places like Israel and Saudi are the icing on an already rich and fruity cake. The military want other things, of which wars against their peers in Russia and China are not a part.

Add together the realities of the Defense procurement system and the inefficiencies of monopoly capitalism and the wonder is not that the Russian state produces better results but that the US forces have any 'materiel' at all. And often enough they do not: the F35 is but one example of the many projects into which untold riches have been sunk without any perceptible advantage. The US fleets are full of ships that serve no real purpose except to consume fuel and bang into one another. The army is so bad that most of the work is actually carried out by Special Forces (now 70,000 strong) while the logistical load is borne by contractors and mercenary bands.

But the reality of Russia's position, as anyone who has followed modern history will know, is that bureaucratic and sclerotic as the Soviet system was it was still vastly more efficient than the chaotic and suicidal capitalist system. From Sputnik down, even despite the co-ordinated wrecking of the Soviet economy, until today the Russian system of developing, producing and employing arms has proved to be superior to the US system.

For this there are many reasons but the single most important is that, in the USA Defense procurement is a scam whereas in Russia, as Putin made plain, it is a matter of national survival. And so it has been since 1918- a century of making sure that a world full of enemies could be fought off.
Those western commentators who sneered that Putin was boasting and exaggerating when he warned potential aggressors to think twice, have gone through the lessons of that century without learning a thing.

What has happened in Russia, since the 1990s, is that the sirens of westernisation, which Russians have been listening to since Tsar Paul's time, have been discredited again. The future in Russia lies not with the Fifth Column of westerners, with their Wall St/City of London banking practices and their longing for acceptance by high finance but with those looking east where the sun rises, east and south where three out of every four members of humanity live.

Theo says March 5, 2018
Putin is an experienced strategist.He plans long ahead and is not at all a warmonger.On his campaign trail Trump recognized this and wanted to ease tensions with Russia.But he failed.I never understood the Russia bashing.The Russians love Putin for what he did for his country.And that's what counts.

[Mar 07, 2018] Putin is the representative of the faction who wants to integrate with the western elites on equal terms, while compradorswork by taking percentages from the loot of Russia by their western handlers and being welcome in the parties of the western institutions

Mar 07, 2018 | www.unz.com

kemerd , Next New Comment March 6, 2018 at 10:50 pm GMT

Actually, we don't have to wait too long to see if the Russians will fold. Putin, as I argued before, is the representative of the faction who wants to integrate with the western elites but on equal terms and there are compradors who considers taking percentages from the loot of Russia by their western handlers and being welcome in the parties of the western institutions is good enough and the least risky path.

I am with Peter that the likelihood of the second faction winning is higher. Only because the first faction cannot eliminate the second without hurting its own interests. In fact, Putin's speech was mostly about how he will be trying to balance those factions and divide pork between them (hint. the state should withdraw from the economy, encourage private enterprises, etc.): such a policy of balancing can be sustained only so far; real sovereignty can only be asserted with elites who sees its future of its own making on its own soil.

Billionaires have a tendency to relocate if they smell danger.

Because of this and unfortunately for Russia, the first faction would easily fold if they feel the second starts to gain the upper hand and their personal fortunes are at stake. Therefore, if the person after Putin continues his policy of balancing oligarchs, the power will eventually be handed again over to Yeltsin types.

In this respect, getting rid of all billionaires is the only way of asserting sovereignty as the remaining people including small scale business class will have to and would see their future in their own country.

peterAUS , Next New Comment March 6, 2018 at 11:28 pm GMT
@kemerd

Actually .

I am with Peter that the likelihood of the second faction winning is higher.

that's not exactly what I've been saying and what concerns me. That's the easy, nice option. There is only one, very little snag there. TRUST.

How can Putin and his team trust the "opposition" that, should they step down, they won't be dragged at some court? How anyone with brains can trust that? I wouldn't. Not after Milosevic, Saddam and especially Qaddafi.

Let's cut to the chase here. Have you people seen the Colonel's murder? Then, have you seen the reaction of The Bitch on hearing that?

Now .there is more. The "best and brightest" of US, and Anglo-Saxon world were all for The Bitch. Think about that for a second. So ..is it realistically to expect Putin and his team, mostly Russian siloviki, to, effectively, surrender to the victor's justice of those people?

I can't. I can very well envisage: "I am going down .well you are too." And, realistically, we all do deserve that. Now, I am an relic from the Cold War. So, maybe I get all this wrong. But, then, Putin is coming from the same world. Maybe he, with age, got "civilized" enough not to do that. Mellowed a bit. Maybe he hasn't.

Now back to "my dick is bigger" high-tech weapon discussion.

[Mar 07, 2018] The Khazakstan government has passed legislation requiring the use of Latin script instead of the traditional Cyrillic script.

Mar 07, 2018 | off-guardian.org

Yonatan says March 4, 2018

The North American Terrorist Organisation is currently trying hard to pry Khazakstan from the Russian sphere. The Khazakstan government has passed legislation requiring the use of Latin script instead of the traditional Cyrillic script. For the ordinary people that must be as galling as the UK government requiring the the use of French as written text. Khazakstan is also where Russia does a lot of its long range missile tests and is the landing zone for the capsules that return from the International Space Station.

Loss of Khazakstasn would be a major coup for the Terrorists. However, most of its northern land border lies with Russia, so there would be immediate economic payback should this happen.

However, most leaders (e.g. Erdogan and the Su-22 incident) seem to be unable to see further than short term massive boosts to their offshore bank accounts.

[Mar 07, 2018] How Russiagate helps the Israel lobby

Notable quotes:
"... The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs ..."
"... The Washington Report's ..."
Mar 07, 2018 | electronicintifada.net

Ever since Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 US presidential election , the Democratic Party establishment has held tightly to the belief that her shock defeat was not the result of her and their shortcomings, but rather due to a nefarious Russian plot to "hack" the election in "collusion" with the winner.

Instead of examining why Donald Trump was able to connect with voters in economically distressed parts of the country in a way that Democrats failed to do, adherents of the Russiagate narrative hoped that investigations would quickly find a smoking gun, leading to Trump's impeachment and undoing an election result they consider aberrant and unjust.

On Friday, I spoke at a conference in Washington, DC, titled The Israel Lobby and American Policy , sponsored by The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs and IRmep , a group that researches the lobby's influence.

As I note in my talk, a handful of journalists – especially Max Blumenthal and Aaron Maté of The Real News – have consistently debunked the wild, exaggerated and sometimes fabricated claims of Russian interference made by members of the self-styled but woefully ineffectual "Resistance" to Trump.

Watch the video above.

True, over the course of the last year, special counsel Robert Mueller has made a number of indictments, but none of those cases – including the recent indictment of 13 Russians linked to a St. Petersburg troll farm – substantiates the heavily hyped claim that Russia helped Trump win the White House.

Perhaps the most high-profile indictment of someone in Trump's inner circle, the president's first national security adviser Michael Flynn , actually shows that rather than colluding with Russia, senior members of Trump's team were really working with Israel to advance its agenda.

And while no one has pinpointed evidence of Trump auctioning off his foreign policy to any Russian oligarchs, he has definitely tailored his policy toward Israel to the demands of casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson , his biggest campaign donor .

Adelson's immediate priority was securing US recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital and moving the American embassy there – and Trump duly obliged .

New censorship helps Israel

In my talk I consider how the Russiagate narrative is actually helping Israel and its lobby in particular ways.

I point out that the Russiagate hysteria being adopted by many liberals is legitimizing censorship that helps Israel clamp down on free speech and a free press.

Last year, the Russian-funded network RT was forced to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

As Maté has noted, free speech advocates and journalists were largely silent about it , perhaps thinking this tool of government control over the media would never be used against them.

But now, Israel's supporters in Congress – including Senator Ted Cruz – are demanding that Al Jazeera be investigated by the Department of Justice and forced to register as an agent of Qatar. They are explicitly citing the US government crackdown on RT as their precedent.

Al Jazeera's transgression is that it produced an undercover documentary on the workings of the Israel lobby in the US.

Qatar has come under intense pressure from that lobby to make sure the documentary is never aired. Five months after the network's head of investigations Clayton Swisher announced it would be released "very soon," the film has yet to be broadcast.

On Monday, The Electronic Intifada exclusively published details of what is in the film.

According to a source who has seen it, the film identifies a number of lobby groups as working with Israel to spy on American citizens using sophisticated data gathering techniques. It is also said to cast light on covert efforts to smear and intimidate Americans seen as too critical of Israel.

True, FARA is being used only against foreign networks, but the point is that these outlets – whatever their flaws – are providing space for discussion and dissent that docile US mainstream media keep closed.

It's simply impossible to imagine CNN, ABC – or for that matter the BBC – showing true independence and taking on the power of the Israel lobby.

While organizers diligently informed media about the Washington conference, the only outlets that invited me on to talk about the Israel lobby were the The Real News and RT. I know that other speakers were shut out of mainstream media as well.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/v7EvTIplv5I?feature=oembed

And besides, there are other forms of high-tech censorship that are being used to stifle or stigmatize dissent in domestic media: Partly as an outgrowth of Russiagate, Silicon Valley giants Google and Facebook have succumbed to political pressure to effectively throttle the exposure of independent outlets in the name of fighting extremism, "fake news" and alleged foreign interference.

The perverse effect has been to reassert state and elite control over media and erode the freedom that those of us shut out of mainstream outlets rely on. Nothing could suit Israel and its lobby better.

Stark warning

The conference in Washington featured many interesting presentations that can be seen at The Washington Report's YouTube channel .

Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, who served as chief of staff to Colin Powell when he was secretary of state in the run-up to the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, issued a stark warning that the US ramping up its military presence in Syria may be a prelude to launching a war on Iran on behalf of Israel.

Wilkerson said that Israel and its ally Saudi Arabia are encouraging the US to fight a regime-change war against Tehran that they would be incapable of mounting on their own.

"We've already done Iraq, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan," Wilkerson said, "so we'd just be seen as continuing the trend."

He warned that an Israeli confrontation and war with Lebanon – perhaps on the pretext of disputed gas fields in the Mediterranean – could provide the pretext.

In an ominous parallel, he likened the current situation to 1914, the eve of World War I – any spark could generate a broad regional or even global conflagration.

Wilkerson singled out the role of the neoconservative think tank Foundation for Defense of Democracies as leading the campaign for war on behalf of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his defense minister Avigdor Lieberman.

Notably, the source who spoke to The Electronic Intifada about Al Jazeera's suppressed Israel lobby film said that the documentary reveals that the same think tank may be acting as an agent for Israel in its covert efforts to undermine support for Palestinian rights in the US.

In spite of Wilkerson's worrying thesis, it must be said that, however powerful, the Israel lobby cannot alone force the US to undertake foreign military conquests. For one thing, US elites have never needed encouragement from anyone to wage devastating wars around the world.

When the US establishment sees a critical interest at stake, it pursues it regardless of what the lobby may want. That is why the US signed the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement despite all of Israel's efforts to sabotage it. Of course whether that deal survives the Trump administration remains to be seen .

In his keynote address , Haaretz journalist Gideon Levy stated that Israel's military rule over Palestinians "is today one of the most brutal, cruel tyrannies on Earth."

He asserted that the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement for Palestinian rights is a "legitimate tool" and the "only game in town" to force Israel to end this injustice.

[Mar 07, 2018] The disproportionate ongoing emphasis on the fake story that Russia meddled in the US election serves to stir up suspicions and fears regarding Russia in the generally brain-numbed population

Notable quotes:
"... The deep state (the oligarchs, MIC, and intelligence community, which controls the media and most politicians) whether or not it actually helped Trump by harming Hillary is immaterial. The election is over and there was never any real resolve in the deep state to impeach Trump or to jail Hillary and their never will be. The reason should be obvious. ..."
"... The only thing consistent in the Russian collusion and election rigging nonsense is the groundless and unrelenting vilification of Russia, blaming Putin for everything. Just as we see grandiose deep state theatrics for the US to obtain access to strategic rare-earth resources in North Korea, we see the similar deep state orchestrated theatrics falsely alleging that Russians rigged or interfered in the US Presidential election. Russia's Putin is the main obstacle to the Western bankster-corporate cabal obtaining resource and geopolitical hegemony over the entire planet. That is the main fact. It is the main reason to subject that nation to constant vilification, sanctions, and military aggression and provocation. ..."
"... The deep state cabal will likely spend tens, if not hundreds, of billions of US dollars interfering in the Russian election. Presently they are most likely bribing, blackmailing, and intimidating thousands of people to swing and rig the election to ensure Putin does not win. "You did it to us." Will be their justification when Putin complains. ..."
Mar 07, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

teolawki -> Joe Davola Wed, 03/07/2018 - 11:19 Permalink

Well of course there are. We've been told repeatedly that the Obama administration was on the job and focused like a laser on Russia collusion and meddling.

Unfortunately, the hard drive all that was stored on crashed and it was all lost.

FBaggins -> Joe Davola Wed, 03/07/2018 - 11:45 Permalink

If we really want the truth then we have to stop relying on what people say just because we like them, or we think they are on our side, and instead we have to examine the interests of the various sources. Only then we can make better decisions. At this stage of the game the deep state can no longer blame with any credibility Russian hacking as the source of the alleged leak. The know it came directly from the DNC. However, the deep state has a priority (a very strong interest) to keep the heat on Russia.

The deep state (the oligarchs, MIC, and intelligence community, which controls the media and most politicians) whether or not it actually helped Trump by harming Hillary is immaterial. The election is over and there was never any real resolve in the deep state to impeach Trump or to jail Hillary and their never will be. The reason should be obvious.

The only thing consistent in the Russian collusion and election rigging nonsense is the groundless and unrelenting vilification of Russia, blaming Putin for everything. Just as we see grandiose deep state theatrics for the US to obtain access to strategic rare-earth resources in North Korea, we see the similar deep state orchestrated theatrics falsely alleging that Russians rigged or interfered in the US Presidential election. Russia's Putin is the main obstacle to the Western bankster-corporate cabal obtaining resource and geopolitical hegemony over the entire planet. That is the main fact. It is the main reason to subject that nation to constant vilification, sanctions, and military aggression and provocation.

The disproportionate ongoing emphasis on the fake story that Russia meddled in the US election, not only serves to stir up suspicions and fears regarding Russia in the generally brain-numbed population, but mainly at this stage, and by the sheer fact that the deep state has carried this rouse so far down the field, the only rational conclusion one can make is that the deep state is going to interfere in the Russian elections in a very major way to ensure that Putin and his cronies - those wicked oil and gas nationalizers, those heinous enemies of the Rothschild banksters and their plans for an expanded US Fed to the auspices of their proposed One World Bank; those upstart renegades who support nations which choose to trade oil without US petrodollars; those evil monsters who oppose globalism and defend their own nation's sovereignty and other nations like Syria which call for help.

The deep state cabal will likely spend tens, if not hundreds, of billions of US dollars interfering in the Russian election. Presently they are most likely bribing, blackmailing, and intimidating thousands of people to swing and rig the election to ensure Putin does not win. "You did it to us." Will be their justification when Putin complains.

Good luck Vlad and F the deep state.

[Mar 07, 2018] The thing with "neocons" is that they're pathological liars and narcissists.

Mar 07, 2018 | www.unz.com

Harold Smith , March 7, 2018 at 6:25 pm GMT

The thing with "neocons" is that they're pathological liars and narcissists. And the first victims of their dishonesty are themselves. In fact even describing them as "liars" who've deceived themselves is being generous. To put it another way, they've created a false reality for themselves. Actual facts and reasoned arguments, especially any kind of moral reasoning, bounce off such creatures like bullets bounce off Superman.

[Mar 07, 2018] Neo-McCarthyism in the USA leads to growing distrust toward neoliberals and compradors in Russia

Mar 07, 2018 | www.unz.com

likbez , March 7, 2018 at 5:03 am GMT

@peterAUS

Peter,

that's not exactly what I've been saying and what concerns me. That's the easy, nice option. There is only one, very little snag there. TRUST.

That's an astute observation, but it cuts both ways. You also need to take into account the level of Neo-McCarthyism in the USA and resulting growing distrust toward neoliberals and compradors in Russia. Despite efforts of Putin personally and Putin administration (Lavrov, Medvedev) to suppression growing anti-Americanism, soon Russian people might start throwing eggs at neoliberals/comparadors rallies. Look at the travails of the elite prostitute who is the most neoliberal and pro-Western candidate for Presidents in the current race:

https://sputniknews.com/russia-elections-2018-news/201803041062213741-sobchak-zhirinovsky-water/

Add to that a distinct desire by the "Collective West" to expropriate Russian oligarchs holdings during the next six years of Putin rule (which they now probably understand, or at least start to understand after the most recent "blacklist"). That creates some links with the motherland even for the most cosmopolitan Russian bankers

pogohere , Website March 7, 2018 at 5:07 am GMT
@NoseytheDuke

$21 trillion of unauthorized spending by US govt discovered by economics professor
Published time: 16 Dec, 2017
[MORE]

The US government may have misspent $21 trillion, a professor at Michigan State University has found. Papers supporting the study briefly went missing just as an audit was announced.

Two departments of the US federal government may have spent as much as $21 trillion on things they can't account for between 1998 and 2015. At least that's what Mark Skidmore, a Professor of Economics at MSU specializing in public finance, and his team have found.

They came up with the figure after digging the websites of departments of Defense (DoD) and Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as well as repots of the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) over summer.

The research was triggered by Skidmore hearing Catherine Austin Fitts, a former Assistant Secretary in the HUD in the first Bush administration, saying the Inspector General found $6.5 trillion worth of military spending that the DoD couldn't account for. She was referring to a July 2016 report by the OIG, but Skidmore thought she must be mistaking billion for trillion. Based on his previous experience with public finances, he thought the figure was too big even for an organization as large as the US military.

"Sometimes you have an adjustment just because you don't have adequate transactions so an auditor would just recede. Usually it's just a small portion of authorized spending, maybe one percent at most. So for the Army one percent would be $1.2 billion of transactions that you just can't account for," he explained in an interview with USAWatchdog.com earlier this month.

After discovering that the figure was accurate, he and Fitts collaborated with a pair of graduate students to comb through thousands of reports of the OIG dating back to 1998, when new rules of public accountability for the federal government were set and all the way to 2015, the time of the latest reports available at the time. The research was only for the DoD and the HUD.

"This is incomplete, but we have found $21 trillion in adjustments over that period. The biggest chunk is for the Army. We were able to find 13 of the 17 years and we found about $11.5 trillion just for the Army," Skidmore said.

https://www.rt.com/usa/413411-trillions-dollars-missing-research/

josealamia , March 7, 2018 at 5:43 am GMT
@Regnum Nostrum

I think Americans might be able to get along just fine without the USA?
If the USA wants to threaten or mute those who offer an opinion?

As stupid as Americans are said to be,
they do feel the pains of fake news, loss of freedom of speech,
spying, corporate dominance, and corrupt in purpose leadership?

Erebus , March 7, 2018 at 6:06 am GMT
@peterAUS

Another possibility is that even the best technology can't compensate for human factor.
From the crew being overworked, untrained to being on drugs. Or vodka. Pick the one more likely.

Perhaps you've seen the article linked below.
Some excerpts from the summation follow:

"Russia appears to have won at least a partial victory in Syria, and done so with impressive efficiency, flexibility, and coordination between military and political action."

" Russia's "lean" strategy, adaptable tactics, and coordination of military and diplomatic initiatives offer important lessons for the conduct of any military intervention in as complex and volatile an environment as the Middle East."

" Washington should pay close attention to the Russian intervention and how Moscow achieved its objectives in Syria."

Leaving the requisite downplaying of what happened in Syria ("partial victory"?, really?) aside, the authors seem a little envious, frankly.

Your points are of course valid, but the Russians seem to have answered those calls and a few others besides, at least in the Syrian theatre. One can expect a similar or better performance in any conflict involving Russian soil, especially as only the creme de la creme of missile crews would be assigned to game changing weaponry.

Putin's announcement represents a massive FAIL on the part of a $1T's worth of intelligence agencies, military think tanks, political analysts and military planners who collectively didn't see it coming . They're all now in either panic, the foundation of America's geo-political goals utterly undermined, or in denial.
Denial is winning, so their next big FAIL is already underway. Heads aren't rolling. The Pentagon thinks it can save the day by doubling down and demanding more of the useless crap they've got now. We can expect the CIA et al will roll out even more failing propaganda and politically destabilizing activity to continue trying their hand at regime change. Even the Afghans are on to them, so good luck with that.

The US simply must internalize the strategic significance of these developments, and change everything about their postures and behaviours in the world. There's little sign of that happening, Mad Dogs can't learn new tricks, so we're sailing into very treacherous waters indeed.

http://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/Military-Review/English-Edition-Archives/March-April-2018/Rojansky-Victory-for-Russia/

David Archibald , March 7, 2018 at 7:46 am GMT
The Deep State, also known as the Swamp, holds Trump in contempt because he put Deep State people into so many positions. The Secretary of the Air Force is a Lockheed agent – she took in $600k from Lockheed while she was a politician. Mattis is in favour of trannies in the military – 50% suicide rate and $100k a pop. Tillerson was in favour of the Paris climate treaty, so was Mattis. There are signs that reality is sinking in though – putting Trophy systems on M1 tanks for example. The increase in the bomb production rate is a sign that it is not business as usual. A much larger warstock is necessary for the coming conflict with China. Nobody in the system has the guts to end the F-35. Mattis, for all his bravado, is just a political creature.

One thing that struck me about Putin's speech on the new missile systems is that he understood the technical detail of how the things worked to the extent of having a genuine personal interest in knowing such stuff. Corruption and the Russian mafia are still Russia's biggest problem but I see that Russian wheat production is finally increasing near 20 years after the fall of communism.

SteveRogers42 , March 7, 2018 at 9:54 am GMT
Mr. Martyanov -- Does the ECM/EMP capability that the USS Donald Cook allegedly ran into in the Black Sea enter into these deliberations at all?
TT , March 7, 2018 at 10:54 am GMT
@pogohere

These was reported some time ago. Pentagon needs another 911 to remove all evidents that they did after 5+Trillions unknown usage was discovered.

Tip of iceberg how many trillions US is printing from air for its lavish unproductive lives & endless wars over last many decades unreported. The world having their foreign reserves tied by IMF to 5 currencies, is picking up the tabs of US, EU, Japan & UK free currency printing QE to artificially prop up their collapsing economy based on stupid theory of growth by borrowing.

These countries run on deficit(except jp with high export & artificial low ex-ch rate), high debts, high salary, high property price, overspending with budget deficit, and financial banking scams to prop up high Nominal GDP.

When music stop, someone will miss the seat.

China & Russia know, they stored up time proven gold reserve, & Petrol Yuan started. When China replaced Petrol $ with yuan, slash its 3T US treasury reserve, the music stop.

TT , March 7, 2018 at 11:05 am GMT
@David Archibald

I see that Russian wheat production is finally increasing near 20 years after the fall of communism.

Food commodity price is controlled by big oligarchs. West has big subsidy to artificially lowered their cost/ export price in name of food security, to the tune that all subsidies are enough to feed all hungries on earth. But its aim to destroy developing countries agri sector. Latin America was hit badly in past that agri no longer sustainable, when land bcom barren, capitalist swoop in to buy land dirt cheap.

China & Russia aren't stupid to let West control their food chain, but they imported these subsidized food without ruin own agri ability, esp for animal feeds. When sanction started, Putin simply activated its standby agri program. When trade war start, China will do the same, already its probing US sorghum subsidy.

TT , March 7, 2018 at 12:02 pm GMT
@likbez

Looks like in order to make such a statement Putin should have intelligence information about a real threat of attack from the USA, or some large scale provocation in Syria or Ukraine. Only in this case his statement makes some sense. As a open warning: do not do it.

Look at the keyword, allies. Putin emphasized, if Russia or its allies are attacked .. so its Syria potential hyper escalation, Ukraine brewing collision with new lethal weapons, to some lesser extent, Iran & Venezuela with Russia high investment.

12. China has less than 300 nuclear weapons and still is regarded as a formidable nuclear power, probably spending 20 times less money in this area.

China might have to do something similar to Putin later just to ensure US won't took the wrong calculated risk to do something stupid. However China style is always keep secretive of its killer weapon that worry US most. Its said in every Wargaming, whenever Red team losing to Blue, they launch China Murderer Mace(Trump card), then everything end in Red favour.

In another topic, some said China has est 400 nukes, with only 20~40 that can reach US which might tempted US to believe it could survive an exchange. So a large upgrade is necessary. Anyone got better idea?

In last year during South China Seas confrontation, China actually sent out all its navy to conduct live exercise till eve of fake Hague court judgement, with nuclear subs in high profile despatched to US Guam & Indian ocean bases(where their nuclear bombers station). Two strike groups that with its Adm Harry threaten war start tonight, were reportedly hiding in East Philippine Seas to get out of H6k bomber missiles(aircraft carrier killer) range.

WH panick of real war escalation, Obama sent its top general to China, with NSA advisor Rice also visited Xi to resolve. This shows US isn't ready for a military clash with nuke China, with much lesser warheads than Russia.

TT , March 7, 2018 at 12:32 pm GMT
@Carlton Meyer

The new $14 billion USS Ford aircraft carrier has a launch system that cannot be fixed because it never worked. It remains an experimental system that after 20 years of development is not ready for use, and may never be. Replacing it with a proven steam system will cost over $5 billion.

EMALS works! Carrier Ford completes first flight operations
By: Mark D. Faram   July 29, 2017

https://www.defensenews.com/news/2017/07/29/emals-works-carrier-ford-completes-first-flight-operations/

China took a short time to develop, and a much better medium power EMALS running on non nuclear powered a/c.

China claims breakthrough in electromagnetic launch system for aircraft carrier
By: Mike Yeo   November 9, 2017

https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2017/11/09/tech-breakthrough-chinas-next-carrier-could-feature-electromagnetic-launch-system/

Construction of the third carrier is expected to start next year and will use electromagnetic launch rather than steam-powered catapults. The carrier is expected to have 80,000 ton displacement which would put it in the super carrier class.

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/11/china-starting-construction-of-superaircarrier-with-electromagnetic-launch-but-using-older-heavier-fighter-jets.html/amp

China was confident about its EMALS technology now that it was able to produce its own insulated-gate bipolar transistor (IGBT) chips, a key component of the high-efficiency electric energy conversion systems used in variable-speed drives, trains, electric and hybrid electric vehicles, power grids and renewable energy plants.

Andrei Martyanov , Website March 7, 2018 at 1:51 pm GMT
@pogohere

Kissinger, Metternich, and Realism

All things described like "realism", "order" and references to Napoleon is all contrived pseudo-academic bunk. In the end another "great" strategic minds such as neocons wrote (Kagan's cabal) what is touted as the "best" history pf Peloponnese Wars. And look where this "academic brilliance" based on those ideas brought the United States and the world to. American elites of the 20th and 21st Century, with some minor exceptions, have no grasp of the nature of the military force (power) and how it applies. None and this can not be fixed. It is also a tragedy for many, including the US itself.

Andrei Martyanov , Website March 7, 2018 at 2:00 pm GMT
@SteveRogers42

Mr. Martyanov -- Does the ECM/EMP capability that the USS Donald Cook allegedly ran into in the Black Sea enter into these deliberations at all?

No. Russia does have the best EW capabilities in the world–the fact admitted even by US military's top brass, but USS Donald Cook's alleged "shutting down" of her radar by SU-24 never happened. It is all, hm, as strange as it sounds, Russian amateurs' and fanboys' propaganda. SU-24 is not capable to "shut down" anything on a ship with energy capacity of Arleigh Burke-class DDG. Two different weight categories. Most likely SU-24 simply put out what is known as pomehi (interference) which may have created multiple targets picture–this is possible. It is still very unpleasant and unnerving situation but nothing as dramatic as what became now a consistent and false meme.

Dragon , March 7, 2018 at 3:53 pm GMT
@yurivku

and I'm just guessing, but for the same reasons successful anti-laser techniques could be devised once that becomes a reality (even in clear day conditions)

Y.L. , March 7, 2018 at 4:53 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

Andrei, I don't know if you're still reading comments on this thread, but ZeroHedge posted confirming what you wrote, yet somehow analysts are still dismissive. Still to quote you "butt hurt."

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-06/putins-hypersonic-rocket-revealed-be-modified-iskander-ballistic-missile

Quote: "From a national security perspective, Putin's claims of hypersonic weapons should not be underestimated but should be analyzed in an attempt to parse fact from fiction.

"The team of analysts at The Drive precisely did that, and made several conclusions: In particular, one of the weapons Putin mentioned in his speech was an air-launched hypersonic anti-ship missile launched from a Mikoyan MiG-31 Foxhound. Upon closer examination, the Drive team found the hypersonic weapon closely resembles the Iskander short-range ballistic missile."

End quotation.

I wonder if Putin will deploy the laser system to Syria, now that America is making threats.

"A potential decision by Washington to take new military actions against Damascus would mark the second US strike on Syria in less than a year."

https://sputniknews.com/us/201803071062309965-us-considering-attack-syria/

5371 , March 7, 2018 at 4:59 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

The elder Kagan's Peloponnesian war history is actually instructive from a neocon point of view. He identifies with the Athenian side, and with the most belligerent Athenian politicians, so completely that he shows not the least understanding of why the other side, or neutrals, or less aggressive Athenian politicians acted as they did. So although he uses a respectable scholarly apparatus, he has no conception of how history should be written.

Y.L. , March 7, 2018 at 5:19 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

Thanks for the reply but my point primarily is that the A.Z. (to quote The Saker) Empire is doubling down. Its attitude is still "what're you gonna do about it" and the recent news indicates they're pushing in Syria.

A nuclear strike from Russia that kills 99% of the population doesn't bother them in the slightest. Or they think Putin is bluffing.

My concern is about the plane crash in Syria: why were so many pilots (allegedly) on board and thus so vulnerable. Not that it's necessarily true that the "Deep State" caused this.

https://sputniknews.com/world/201803071062295024-russia-syria-an-26-crash/

The self-confessed military analysts "Q" with millions of followers states, incidentally, that CIA caused the recent jetliner crash to kill Rosatom executives and scientists. I don't trust him. He says Snowden now is in China; was CIA all along and was deliberately sent to Russia for mischief making.

https://qanonposts.com/

Finally, if you have any idea about my hypothesis discussed with F.B. above whether the glider manipulates plasma using electric fields and a small on-board nuclear reactor or just uses an undiscovered and unknown to America composite. But from what F.B. wrote we have no how idea how it would work, hence the skepticism by the fake experts.

I hope you can comment since you're the expert and can separate truth from the bullshit.

Putin's character makes me think he doesn't bluff. Western politicians are such liars they don't believe Putin tells the truth.

Quaint , March 7, 2018 at 5:31 pm GMT
@Russia is the best

I don't think they are "shell shocked", that implies they understand what happened.

peterAUS , March 7, 2018 at 5:36 pm GMT
@Erebus

Your points are of course valid, but the Russians seem to have answered those calls and a few others besides, at least in the Syrian theatre. One can expect a similar or better performance in any conflict involving Russian soil,

Agree.
Keywords "Syria" and "similar".

How about:
A new flareup in Novorossya->in, say, 3 months of "engagement" that part of Ukraine starts looking as parts of Syria now.
An ethnic unrest in one of remote regions->reaction by the Kremlin->that part of RF starts looking as parts of Syria now.

So, based on that, this

.the foundation of America's geo-political goals utterly undermined, or in denial.

and

They're all now in either panic, the foundation of America's geo-political goals utterly undermined, or in denial

sounds .wrong?

Perhaps those advising Kremlin are in denial?

So, related to

We can expect the CIA et al will roll out even more failing propaganda and politically destabilizing activity to continue trying their hand at regime change.

how about:
We can expect the Kremlin et al will roll out even more failing propaganda and internal politically destabilizing activity to continue trying their hand against The Empire.

Just a thought.

peterAUS , March 7, 2018 at 5:41 pm GMT
@Y.L.

Or they think Putin is bluffing.

They do.

My concern is about the plane crash in Syria: why were so many pilots (allegedly) on board and thus so vulnerable.

Systemic failure. Somewhere between acquiring spare parts, through maintenance and general processes and procedures to, last, but not least .vodka.
More to come in coming months.

Andrei Martyanov , Website March 7, 2018 at 5:49 pm GMT
@5371

So although he uses a respectable scholarly apparatus, he has no conception of how history should be written.

True, but to add insult to injury neocons generally do not know actual military history–one is bound to fail to know it when they are in the business of erasing causalities, rather than finding them. That is why they suck as strategists, have a very vague understanding of operational and tactical issues and, of course, none of them understands serious military-technological problems. Just to reiterate my point–they have no idea what warfare is.

Andrei Martyanov , Website March 7, 2018 at 5:52 pm GMT
@Y.L.

The team of analysts at The Drive precisely did that

Each time I hear (read) about some "team of analysts" and Russia in the same sentence I am getting a sour taste in my mouth.

I wonder if Putin will deploy the laser system to Syria, now that America is making threats.

No. Why?

Avery , March 7, 2018 at 6:09 pm GMT
@5371

{ ., he has no conception of how history should be written.}

I think he does, so do his ilk.

They mind-bend history to fit their narrative, to confuse the multitudes into seeing the world through their Neocon lens. Part and parcel of the full spectrum disinformation/propaganda/brainwashing campaign. History (books & movies), "news", analysis, commercials, nothing is off the table.

pogohere , Website March 7, 2018 at 6:20 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

"All things described like "realism", "order" and references to Napoleon is all contrived pseudo-academic bunk. "

Russia intends to relate to its adversaries from a position of strength. That is consistent with what Kissinger believes. Putin still meets with him on occasion. See http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/world/europe/henry-kissinger-to-meet-with-vladimir-putin-in-russia.html , https://www.rt.com/news/331194-putin-meets-friend-kissinger/ and https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-kissinger-russia-putin-232925 . That was why I posted that excerpt from Kaplan's review.

No need to discuss Kaplan et al nor his work. I am aware of who he is.

Y.L. , March 7, 2018 at 6:23 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

I am assuming the laser is state-of-the-art anti-missile defense: better chance of shooting down Patriot missiles and making a point if another attack comes and prove the system exists and he's not a liar. A real field test.

I am saddened, incidentally, by the death of so many brave Russian personnel in the plane crash, which I notice you didn't remark upon. If it was an accident, I am sure the callous Americans are saying, "See, they kill themselves, we don't have to bother trying" unless there was duplicity involved and not just a gross failure due to negligence, etc.

I assume also that there is no evidence CIA (or Mossad) did target Rosatom executives in the jet liner crash or Russia would not want that to get out, clear act of war.

Of course, sadly, American Deep State is at war with Russia. They just use duplicity and proxies and it's too bad since we could have been friends and not enemies. So many voted for Trump hoping for the best.

American Deep State won't change (neocons) until they get a bloody nose. Not sure when or if that will ever happen.

Harold Smith , March 7, 2018 at 6:25 pm GMT
The thing with "neocons" is that they're pathological liars and narcissists. And the first victims of their dishonesty are themselves. In fact even describing them as "liars" who've deceived themselves is being generous. To put it another way, they've created a false reality for themselves. Actual facts and reasoned arguments, especially any kind of moral reasoning, bounce off such creatures like bullets bounce off Superman.
kemerd , March 7, 2018 at 6:25 pm GMT
@peterAUS

My contention is that the factions are not so clear cut and most people that matters can switch sides. That is why I think, the compradors will eventually win if a sweeping cleaning is not done as such a setup is open to external manipulation for tipping the balance on one side.

Currently, the wind is blowing from the side of patriots so many people that are influential position themselves on this side. But as said before, a patriot billionaire is an oxymoron and they would switch sides when they feel themselves or their wealth are threatened. That is why the military-security bureaucracy that spearheads the Russian nationalist faction will eventually have to make a choice if they want to sustain their power: either clean them up or try to juggle a a difficult balancing act while also not completely alienating western elites. In my view, this cannot be done. But, since the difference among them is not day and night for many an reverse transition of power in a similar manner like the smooth transition from Yeltsin to Putin is most likely.

[Mar 07, 2018] Russia this and Russia that. It's a circus. It's a spectacle. Nothing more. US has one party: the war party. US has one establishment that wants MOAR.

Notable quotes:
"... How is Trump different from Hillary? Here's how: Trump is MUCH better at playing the crowd. He is a MUCH better faux populist and distractor. Please take note: The left hates Trump for being a playboy and colluding with Russia!! Real issues like inequality and militarism are back page material. ..."
"... It's all political games now. One side promises too much, the other side corrects that, then goes overboard themselves. This back and forth APPEARS to rock the boat but no one of any importance ever falls out. Only the occasional wildcard - like Assange and Putin - give the establishment pause. ..."
Mar 07, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Russia this and Russia that. It's a circus. It's a spectacle. Nothing more. US has one party: the war party. US has one establishment that wants MOAR.

Why did Al Gore choose not to fight for the Presidency? Why did "liberal lion" Ted Kennedy throw his support to Obama, the sneaky warmongering neoliberal? Why did Sanders not walk away from the Democratic Party when it became clear that they conspired with the Hillary campaign?

How is Trump different from Hillary? Here's how: Trump is MUCH better at playing the crowd. He is a MUCH better faux populist and distractor. Please take note: The left hates Trump for being a playboy and colluding with Russia!! Real issues like inequality and militarism are back page material.

It's all political games now. One side promises too much, the other side corrects that, then goes overboard themselves. This back and forth APPEARS to rock the boat but no one of any importance ever falls out. Only the occasional wildcard - like Assange and Putin - give the establishment pause.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Mar 6, 2018 9:50:13 PM | 57

[Mar 07, 2018] Russiagate also serves as a massive distraction from many vile things being done such as a war against Yemen, illegal US occupation of Syria; ongoing war in Ukraine

Notable quotes:
"... Frankly; I'm so bloody fed up with this whole narrative; I don't care if it's true or not! What difference does it make? Russia, Russia, Russia; bloody hell; get over it! It's a massive distraction from many other vile things being done; war against Yemen; illegal US occupation of Syria; ongoing war in Ukraine; massive violations of the US constitution within the borders of the continental US; militarized police violence against US citizens; the list goes on ad infinitum... ..."
"... I'm shocked! Mayer has a stellar reputation, but this piece is riddled with errors and misinformation. Are they all sellouts in the MSM???? ..."
"... The term "presstitute" which is used for attacking pro-establishment media shills comes to mind. Formerly respectable outlets such as the New Yorker and their writer, Jane Mayer, have gone over into war crimes by in effect fomenting a new cold war based on falsehoods, similar to what the postwar less corrupt yankee imperium considered war crimes in the four power Nuremberg trial which convicted the editor of Der Stuermer, a Nazi sheet, on that basis. ..."
"... The reason why this whole Russiagate seems to go beyond the usual partisan tit-for-tat when it comes to the executive branch (Kenneth Star v. Clinton, Birthers v. Hussein-Obama, liberal-educated dems v. A fundamentalist-protestant dumbass W. Bush), is the absolute certainty which the MSM, the dems, and neocons spew their Russophobic spittle onto anyone that happens to be listening; meanwhile dragging Trump through the mud. The usual partisan coverage of prior executive branches were more evenhanded by news outlets (it resembled news). The current atmosphere resembles pure propaganda and smacks of utter desperation and globalist panic. ..."
"... The New Yorker refused to allow Sy Hersh to publish "The Red Line and the Rat Line", about the covert US effort to transfer weapons from Libya to Syrian jihadist groups, so he had to go to the London Review of Books. At that point it became clear the New Yorker had gone over into partisan pro-government propaganda publishing. ..."
"... These days the corporate media will often start a story with a lie. They think it's funny or something ..."
"... Mayer is no Judith Miller, but if it's not "selling out", she may be suffering from a case of incipient Judith Miller Syndrome. ..."
"... This New Yorker disinfomation piece is most likely not exclusively Ms Mayer's doing alone. David Remnick (NYer Publisher & Ms. Mayers boss) is a full fledged participant in the MSM'S ongoing 'Russian Collusion' narrative. ..."
"... Remnick is a full fledged supporter of our oligarchical, neocon establishment that's hell bent on establishing a US/Israel centered global hegemony since the break-up of the Soviet Union. ..."
"... So, we have yet another fraud promoting the initial fraud as Big Lie Nation manufactures and exports its #1 commodity. Those of us knowing Russiagate's yet another Big Lie ought to be shocked by the further digging of this massive excavation that can no longer be called a deep hole but aren't because the desperation's become all too predictable. The exceptional witch is melting live in living color! ..."
"... The Slate is another publication that wants to go to war with Russia, 'Why are we letting the Russians get away with it' ... https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/03/why-is-america-letting-russia-get-away-with-meddling-in-our-democracy.html What does Fred Kaplan want to do? Oh nothing crazy, just cyber espionage on the order of Stuxnet, or at least outing Putin's secret foreign bank accounts (or pilfering them). ..."
Mar 07, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

V. Arnold , Mar 6, 2018 7:46:39 AM | 7

Frankly; I'm so bloody fed up with this whole narrative; I don't care if it's true or not! What difference does it make? Russia, Russia, Russia; bloody hell; get over it! It's a massive distraction from many other vile things being done; war against Yemen; illegal US occupation of Syria; ongoing war in Ukraine; massive violations of the US constitution within the borders of the continental US; militarized police violence against US citizens; the list goes on ad infinitum...

Ya'all just seem immune and apathetic...

Hoarsewhisperer , Mar 6, 2018 8:37:39 AM | 10
Will The Swamp's vassals ever stop behaving like spiteful 10-year-olds?
Don Bacon , Mar 6, 2018 9:02:32 AM | 12
CNN had another lengthy special report on alleged Trump-Russia collusion over the weekend. Remember CNN was the lead-dog on the dossier with its release of the dossier fake news on Jan 10, 2017, just ten days before the Trump inauguration. But also remember what a CNN producer said last summer about Trump-Russia collusion: " Could be bullshit. I mean, it's mostly bullshit right now. Like, we don't have any big giant proof ."
Jay Connor , Mar 6, 2018 9:17:24 AM | 15
And twice Ms Mayer repeats the lie about "all US intelligence agencies concluding that Russia interfered in the US election". Her phrasing: "that major U.S. intelligence agencies had unanimously endorsed this view'" then: "It [the report] contained the agencies' unanimous conclusion that, during the Presidential campaign, Putin had directed a cyber campaign aimed at getting Trump elected."

These are obvious references to the January 6th 2017 "report" that was full of unsupported assertions and distraction. Ms Mayer doesn't appear to be familiar with reasons to avoid citing that report.

The New York Times has had to retract the "17 agencies lie"--did so at the end of June 2017. Ms Mayer doesn't appear to have noticed, or worse thought she could get away with changing the phrasing of the lie slightly to "major intelligence agencies".

I too seemed to remember that Yahoo news had published on the Steele report in advance of others in the press. Obviously the New Yorker staff didn't.

All very embarrassing for the New Yorker and Ms Mayer, will now of course be used to question the validity of other Jane Mayer reporting.

lg , Mar 6, 2018 10:00:07 AM | 16
@Luther - LOL too mild, howling more like it, creating my very own river deltas...
plantman , Mar 6, 2018 10:24:34 AM | 17
I'm shocked! Mayer has a stellar reputation, but this piece is riddled with errors and misinformation. Are they all sellouts in the MSM????
exiled off mainstreet , Mar 6, 2018 11:04:37 AM | 18
The term "presstitute" which is used for attacking pro-establishment media shills comes to mind. Formerly respectable outlets such as the New Yorker and their writer, Jane Mayer, have gone over into war crimes by in effect fomenting a new cold war based on falsehoods, similar to what the postwar less corrupt yankee imperium considered war crimes in the four power Nuremberg trial which convicted the editor of Der Stuermer, a Nazi sheet, on that basis.
LXV , Mar 6, 2018 11:19:24 AM | 19
Ah, so the elitist award-winning (((culprit))) of global warming propaganda and niece of "dark money" oligarch henchmen such as Emanuel Lehman and Allan Nevins has written a eulogy for the creatures of the Imperial Swamp?

Color me not-so-surprised!

WorldBLee , Mar 6, 2018 11:37:36 AM | 20
As a former, longtime New Yorker reader I can attest that the New Yorker's supposed fact checking is basically non-existent. They do check rigorously for spelling and grammar to fit the writing style of the magazine, but incorrect facts have riddled articles for decades. They do publish a few letters each issue and occasionally allow criticisms through but for the most part as long as the narrative fits what "the right sort of people believe" there seems to be no standard for actually, you know, basing statements on reality.
Mike Maloney , Mar 6, 2018 12:21:30 PM | 23
My guess is that the Democratic Party, so addled at the top, splits by 2020. All it has for the voters, which it repetitiously blares from its many organs -- CNN, MSNBC, NYT, New Yorker -- is Russophobia. For instance, I ran into a guy last night who regularly watches MSNBC and he said the network has not once mentioned the statewide teachers strike underway in West Virginia. How's that for "leaning forward"?
NemesisCalling , Mar 6, 2018 12:24:24 PM | 24
The reason why this whole Russiagate seems to go beyond the usual partisan tit-for-tat when it comes to the executive branch (Kenneth Star v. Clinton, Birthers v. Hussein-Obama, liberal-educated dems v. A fundamentalist-protestant dumbass W. Bush), is the absolute certainty which the MSM, the dems, and neocons spew their Russophobic spittle onto anyone that happens to be listening; meanwhile dragging Trump through the mud. The usual partisan coverage of prior executive branches were more evenhanded by news outlets (it resembled news). The current atmosphere resembles pure propaganda and smacks of utter desperation and globalist panic.

It makes the whole situation seem like Trump really is anti-establishment. That is where the hope came from which won him the election and it continues on in his fanbase.

@24 nemesiscalling.. ditto your comment as well.. thanks..

nonsense factory , Mar 6, 2018 1:38:23 PM | 27
The New Yorker refused to allow Sy Hersh to publish "The Red Line and the Rat Line", about the covert US effort to transfer weapons from Libya to Syrian jihadist groups, so he had to go to the London Review of Books. At that point it became clear the New Yorker had gone over into partisan pro-government propaganda publishing.

It's also curious how the article doesn't really touch on Wall Street and the fossil fuel industry in the United States; that sector also donates heavily to Democrats, which is likely why. There could be some issues there related to sanctions-dodging by ExxonMobil but digging into that doesn't serve the political agenda, so. . . . Still nothing credible on the evidence side as far as iI can tell.

Anon , Mar 6, 2018 2:13:11 PM | 28
These days the corporate media will often start a story with a lie. They think it's funny or something .
Ort , Mar 6, 2018 2:27:55 PM | 30
@ plantman | 17

Mayer has a stellar reputation, but this piece is riddled with errors and misinformation. Are they all sellouts in the MSM????
____________________________________

Some well-regarded Amerikan investigative journalists seem deeply ambivalent when reporting on US government, military, and intelligence (spook agencies) affairs.

They can be appropriately skeptical and critical some of the time-- admirable "watchdogs" or "gadflies" in the best muckraking tradition. Their critical stories are even a form of "speaking truth to power", and their reputation and popularity is deserved.

OTOH, at other times they seem to display a core uncritical regard, respect, and even admiration for these institutions and their personnel. I've seen interviews with Mayer following some exposé in which she comes across as being either deliberately naïve, or reluctant to follow her own findings to an unacceptably radical logical conclusion.

As in this article, Mayer is far more trusting and credulous of official sources than her experience of their habitual mendacity dictates.

Sorry that I can't provide precise examples off the top of my head, but I think this is an occupational hazard of journalists who spend their careers working (too) closely with government insiders. Seymour Hersh and Jeremy Scahill come to mind.

In a nutshell, I think they're trying to be disinterested, dispassionate journalists who report without fear or favor though the heavens fall, etc. But my pop-psychology guess is that they also develop an affinity with their sources that occasionally trips them up, and/or renders them vulnerable to manipulation by their vaunted insider connections.

Or maybe it's comparable to the undercover drug enforcement agent who ends up getting addicted and engaging in criminal activity after becoming too immersed in the life they're supposed to be policing.

Mayer is no Judith Miller, but if it's not "selling out", she may be suffering from a case of incipient Judith Miller Syndrome.

Anonymous , Mar 6, 2018 2:50:57 PM | 32
An autotranslated article about a pending(?) cw false flag in Syria with the usual cast of cute children, fake wounds and the White "False Flags 'R US" Helmets. If they do pull something off it may be worth keeping an eye open for these actors.

Fakebook and LiveJournal have already pulled the original articles this item was based on.

https://z5h64q92x9.net/proxy_u/ru-en.en/https/colonelcassad.livejournal.com/4032567.html

Anon , Mar 6, 2018 2:52:44 PM | 33
Maybe he could bomb Syria to get the focus elsewhere? Sigh, this man is a moron that is led by neocons. Trump considered new military action against Syrian govt.: Report http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2018/03/06/554582/Trump-considered-new-military-action-against-Syrian-govt
time2wakeupnow , Mar 6, 2018 3:16:03 PM | 34
This New Yorker disinfomation piece is most likely not exclusively Ms Mayer's doing alone. David Remnick (NYer Publisher & Ms. Mayers boss) is a full fledged participant in the MSM'S ongoing 'Russian Collusion' narrative.

Remember, even the great Sy Hersh had to go to the independent European press to publish his 'controversial' article that methodically debunked the deep states fairy tale narrative of events on what exactly went down in the infamous OBL Abottabad compound raid in 2011.

Hersh, up until then, exclusively published most of his investigative "bombshell" articles in the New Yorker. Remnick is a full fledged supporter of our oligarchical, neocon establishment that's hell bent on establishing a US/Israel centered global hegemony since the break-up of the Soviet Union.

karlof1 , Mar 6, 2018 3:28:29 PM | 38
So, we have yet another fraud promoting the initial fraud as Big Lie Nation manufactures and exports its #1 commodity. Those of us knowing Russiagate's yet another Big Lie ought to be shocked by the further digging of this massive excavation that can no longer be called a deep hole but aren't because the desperation's become all too predictable. The exceptional witch is melting live in living color!
sejmon , Mar 6, 2018 3:29:20 PM | 39
V.ARNOLD #7 ..You forget very important stuff....since 11/9/16 Dems they still wage war against legally elected president PDJT...those whores did try everything..and nothing is working......
Christian Chuba , Mar 6, 2018 3:42:26 PM | 42
The Slate is another publication that wants to go to war with Russia, 'Why are we letting the Russians get away with it' ... https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/03/why-is-america-letting-russia-get-away-with-meddling-in-our-democracy.html What does Fred Kaplan want to do? Oh nothing crazy, just cyber espionage on the order of Stuxnet, or at least outing Putin's secret foreign bank accounts (or pilfering them).

BTW I do not believe that Putin has billions socked away offshore. If he did then Obama would have revealed it on his way out the door and even if Obama didn't the CIA / FBI / Treasury would have leaked it. Instead what they did was claim he had billions without providing any proof.

Pft , Mar 6, 2018 4:19:25 PM | 44
Some Faraday bags allow you to reveive calls if placed in the front pouch and block all signals at back pouch, while still offering complete EMP protection front or back
time2wakeupnow , Mar 6, 2018 4:42:45 PM | 45
If you are able to receive a call on your cellphone - in a Faraday bag, or not, you are still completely vulnerable to hacking and/or tracking. No "back of the bag EMP protection" claim is gonna be able to block invasive signals - unless the pouch, or bag, or whatever it's stored in is COMPLETELY impenetrable - period!
Daniel Bruno , Mar 6, 2018 5:12:29 PM | 46
You can make your own Faraday bag with rolls of aluminum or tin foil spun around a crayon box.

Anyway, cell phones are unavoidable tracking devices and can not be immunized from surveillance and hacking http://hpub.org/article-64217/ so anybody with secrets would avoid using one unless your name is Her Haughtiness Hillary Clinton and you keep an unencrypted email server in your personal bathroom or, your name is Podesta and your google account password is "password."

End to end encryption is available but requires cooperation on both ends.

bevin , Mar 6, 2018 5:25:38 PM | 47
I seem to recall that Steele was involved in the Magnitsky and Litvinenko cases and that he has long made a living out of defending oligarchs against the Russian government's attempts to collect taxes from them.
It is sad that Steele is polluting the air of Farnham an ancient town with a long history which includes being the birthplace of some of the greatest English writers.
Tobin Paz , Mar 6, 2018 5:31:45 PM | 48
You gotta be kidding:

Australian Diplomat Whose Tip Launched Russia Probe Has $25 Million Tie To Clintons

The Australian diplomat whose 2016 tip resulted in the FBI's Trump-Russia counterintelligence investigation had previously arranged one of the largest donations to Clinton charities, documents reveal.
...
Downer tipped off Australian authorities after a conversation with Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos at a London bar, in which Papadopoulos reportedly said the Russians had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton. After Australian authorities alerted the FBI, a counterintelligence probe was launched according to reports
alcemartello , Mar 6, 2018 6:47:47 PM | 53
Greta work
It only proves that western journalist have become stenographers and propagandist for pax-americana/anglo-zionist.
15000 word readers digest entry on the so called fourth estate. It only shows how desperate they are in trying to keep the perception of the Russians ate my lunch. Seeing that the Russian Federation just recently revealed that their invincibility as a Military force is questionable Nato must be rethinking their first strike capacity.
Post Scriptum: It is sad to see not one nation in the west speaking of peace and detente but of aggression and conquest. It smells like 1913 all over again especially since the Trump regime has now opened up the can of worms TRADE WARS. If any individual with a semblance of grey matter can critically analyse these moves one could see WAR on the horizon .
Firts currency wars then trade wars and docius in fundem Firing wars. How sad the weste has become.
Debsisdead , Mar 6, 2018 7:08:51 PM | 54
Posted by: Tobin Paz | Mar 6, 2018 5:31:45 PM | 48

Alexander Downer has never been a diplomat, he was always a particularly sleazy politician - may even have been leader of the opposition as head of Oz's conservative & misnamed Liberal Party. The guy is the worst of the worst, a small time suburban solicitor (lawyer who doesn't go to court), whose play was posing as a mock englander gentleman but never quite pulling it off.
Anything Downer gets his sticky fingers into has two common features 1) It benefits A.Downer and 2) It is a lie.

Jen , Mar 6, 2018 7:16:54 PM | 55
Tobin Paz @ 48, Debsisdead @ 54: I thought Alexander Downer had been sent overseas to play at being ambassador or diplomat so as to limit the amount the damage he could cause just by his very existence. Instead he hoovers up money faster than a pig can sniff out truffles.
Debsisdead , Mar 6, 2018 6:43:42 PM | 52
I'm sorta enjoying it all it's so over the top I doubt anyone apart from the usual dingbats & drongos, takes it seriously.

Just as the Steele dossier with its outrageous fictions led the way, the englanders are outdoing themselves sledging Russia and Russians.

Even the seemingly innocuous 'weatherman' has been getting in on the act, England has been even colder than usual and before the freeze over actually began the incessant weather reports which dominate englander 'news' was warning of a cold wind from Siberia that was in evil Russian fashion about to "freeze the balls off Her Majesty's brass monkey".

The cooler air a direct result of western europe's (including england) two century long penchant for burning shit up which had raised the temperature of the Arctic seas to the point where even in the middle of winter the North Pole waters no longer freeze. Warm seas=warmer air which rises and cooler air comes in to fill the gap blah, blah but that didn't stop the weather reports, which by the time england was frozen the cause had been casually abbreviated into "the beast from the east". Cold are you englanders? Don't forget to blame Russia and Russians while you salute Stephenson's Rocket (the instigator) and you wait for a train which will never come thanks to Thatcherism/neoliberalism/can't pick Johnnie Foreigner's pocket any more, better pick Johnnie Neighbours.

But blaming the weather on Russia is so last week, this week it is all about some treasonous former KGB colonel and his daughter who prolly offed themselves in the most public way possible since their lives turned to shit . Natch the englander media being what it is, the traitor was executed at the behest of the man himself Vladimir Putin. Except of course the timing is inexplicable as Prez Putin is about to have an election - sorry 'election' (elections in Russia have to have single quotes around em because the winner is not supported by any englander newspaper and must therefore be a put up job cos englander fishwraps never get it wrong). The old cui bene is relevant since this death happened at a bad time for Russia one is left asking if the traitor didn't top himself who else would want it right now, certainly not Russia's leadership.

I can still remember 50 years later exactly how gobsmacked I was the first time I read a serious englander newspaper and discovered that these otherwise seemingly intelligent journos actually believed all this Cold War horseshit that we used to laugh at in the South. Yeah amerika sure they believe anything they are told to, but the englanders subscribe to this nonsense - how can that be? I was young and naive and didn't realise that the most truthful parts of englander media are in the boxes around the edges of the articles. The real commercials are the news stories. In england in the 1970's all the foreign correspondents had two jobs, there was the newspaper gig which paid well but felt sleazy and the other gig with the SIS aka MI6 which was a good way to rub shoulders with the elite plus it covered the kids' public school fees.

Nothing about englander media can be believed, for a long time the audience was entirely captive so the earn was guaranteed with more money if you could tell a really big lie. Big enough to generate headlines and start a fleet street feeding frenzy. Those days are gone the journos know no other way to work so the stories are getting more tawdry and less believable by the day.

This is the poisonous atmosphere the Steele dossier came out of. There is certain to be a few doubles in the generation of this yarn That is the double giggers englander journo by day wannabe 'secret' agent by night. Steele wasn't allowed into Russia so who else is he gonna call?

Don Bacon , Mar 6, 2018 8:07:26 PM | 56
It's becoming more amusing. From Stars and Stripes--
WASHINGTON, Mar 6 -- Senators grilled the top intel chief Tuesday, pushing for details of a U.S. plan to stave off attempts of Russian meddling and cyberattacks .

In a tense congressional hearing examining worldwide threats, the lawmakers expressed frustration that the U.S., hampered by President Donald Trump, hasn't done enough to address past and future Russian cyberattacks.

Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee that while counterintelligence work is underway, the details of those operations are classified.

"The American people deserve to know whether or not the president directed his top intelligence officials to effectively counter this continuing act of war on our country ," Sen. Richard Blumethal, D-Conn., said in a sharp exchange with Coats.

The comments come a week after a hearing before the same committee when U.S. Cyber Command Chief Adm. Mike Rogers said that Russia has paid little for its interference in the 2016 elections , and that he hasn't been authorized by Trump to combat future attempts.

There are growing concerns that Russia will target this year's elections and that the U.S. hasn't done enough to counter that effort.
"We're taking steps, but we're probably not doing enough ," Rogers told the committee last week. . . here

President Putin must be enjoying this. I know I am.

[Mar 06, 2018] The Empire shall go for the Russia's internal problems and try to capitalize on that. Ukraine was taken down using that approach. Oh, wait, not only Ukraine but all those who didn't tow the line.

Notable quotes:
"... Politically the situation we see in Ukraine is that the ordinary people don't really care about the politics they are genuinely concerned about bread and butter it is quite sad actually that the US is treating the Ukraine as a pawn and a quite cheap one at that in its game with Russia ..."
Mar 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

likbez , March 6, 2018 at 4:00 am GMT

Some weak points of the article:

1. There is some mystery in this Putin "bragging" about new formidable weapons. This is not his style. Why now? Why do it when sanctions are in place and can be easily be tightened as the result? Looks like in order to make such a statement Putin should have intelligence information about a real threat of attack from the USA, or some large scale provocation in Syria or Ukraine. Only in this case his statement makes some sense. As a open warning: do not do it. Otherwise this is just an open invitation for the new, more destructive and expensive stage in nuclear arms race. The scenario that Russia should try to avoid.

2. Also the rule is: if your adversary is making a mistake, you should not try to stop him. If missile defense systems and aircraft carriers are useless why not to allow the USA to put another 100 billion dollars into it ? Something does not compute here. BTW both remain perfectly viable as the first strike weapons (you never know what those tubes contain and they can hold cruise missiles as well). The fact that they will perish is just part of the cost of the whole operation.

3. Russia has way too many problems, both economic and political. So each dollar put into military technology is stolen from the civilian sector and makes sanctions more effective. So succumbing to the arm race is like self-sanctions.

4. After 2012 it is clear that the way the USA will try to undermine Russia is most probably via political interference during the next election, in which there will be a power vacuum as Putin finishes his last term, and there is no Putin II. The problem of the leader succession is a well-known Achilles' spot of Russia. In 2012 the "collective West" achieved pretty significant success in staging color revolution in Russia using pro-West (aka Zapadniki) and comprador sector in Moscow as the fifth column. The political situation in Moscow will always favor pro-European forces, as this city has a huge concentration of employees of foreign companies, professionals and entrepreneurs who depend on the West and earn money from the West (compradors) . Efforts to put in power a classic neoliberal like Macron in France will be multiplied for elections in 2024. I do not see, why they can't be more successful then in 2012.

5. While weakened by the recent McCarthyism campaign in the USA, Russian comprador sector and neoliberals are still a very powerful political force and control a significant part of media and oligarch money. Russian constitution was written by the USA. And scars from the economic rape of Russia in 90th still did not fully heal. In other words, pro-Western forces in Russia are powerful enough to serve as a base to stage another color revolution. Probably along with crashing oil prices before the elections again, or some other nasty trick. In this case you do not need any missiles. As long as Russia is a neoliberal country Putin and his policies remain a political anomaly. And Putin himself a maverick. There will be no another Putin, but there can well be another Gorbachov, or, worse, Yeltsin. The same is true for China, but at least China has political control of the Communist Party and state ownership of the financial sector. The latter is not true for Russia and is a huge political risk. While neoliberalism entered the stage of decline there is no viable alternatives on the horizon.

6. Loss of Ukraine was/is a huge geopolitical defeat of Putin (and Russia as a country) which can't be compensated any bragging about new weapon systems. It was and still is a geopolitical knockdown.

7. Hopes about "some sensible conversation on the new world order may start between key geopolitical players" are naïve. The US elite is hell-bent on world superiority as this is a pre-condition of the existence of the dollar as the primary world currency. This situation will not probably change until the end of cheap oil, which might take another twenty years or more.

8. If time is working against the USA, why not to sit quiet and try not to anger aging hegemon as China supposedly does (having also advantage of host of "offshored" manufacturing from the USA and having the USA as debtor).

9. The level of brain drain from Russia actually is a huge limiting factor, which makes a claim about cruising missile with a nuclear reactor as a part of propulsion engine highly suspect.

10. The network of intelligence agencies around Russia (which now include Estonia and Ukraine) probably represents much more serious threat then the "first strike" capability of the USA, if such thing can ever exist.

11. "Collective West" can easily tighten sanction expanding them on more technological sectors, thus damaging Russia economic growth. So bragging about new weapons is bad diplomacy when the opponent is much stronger economically and politically.

12. China has less than 300 nuclear weapons and still is regarded as a formidable nuclear power, probably spending 20 times less money in this area.

13. The claim that "The Kinzhal effectively removes any non-suicidal surface force thousands of miles away from Russia's shores and renders its capabilities irrelevant" is highly questionable. The idea of the first strike includes the elimination of the possibility of launching most (or all) Kinzhal missiles carriers, as a necessary part required for the success of the operation. Any losses of forward deployed units are acceptable in such a huge game.

peterAUS , March 6, 2018 at 4:26 am GMT
@iffen

Just a pre-empt, tiring if you say you don't understand Ukraine, etc. then twenty comments; dem Jews.

No rain, too much rain, dem Jews.

Well, you did utter the trigger word.

Guess your family believes religiously in the eternal victimhood and in the right of Jewish people to demand special treatment from "others"– "because of Holocaust." -- This is over. After the fraternization of the Kagans' clan (via Nuland-Kagan) with neo-Nazi in Ukraine and after Israeli's support for ISIS, Jewish pretenses on superior morality (and similar fantastic inventions) have become unrealistic.

Yahweh, help us.

peterAUS , March 6, 2018 at 4:43 am GMT
@likbez

Putin should have intelligence information about a real threat of attack from the USA, or some large scale provocation in Syria or Ukraine.

I'd go for Ukraine.

Something does not compute here.

Well, "if we can't have it it's not good." Sour grapes.

Russia has way too many problems, both economic and political. So each dollar put into military technology is stolen from the civilian sector and makes sanctions more effective. So succumbing to the arm race is like self-sanctions.

Agree.

In other words, pro-Western forces in Russia are powerful enough to serve as a base to stage another color revolution. In this case you do not need any missiles.

...While neoliberalism entered the stage of decline there is no viable alternatives on the horizon.

Agree.

Loss of Ukraine was/is a huge geopolitical defeat of Putin (and Russia as a country) which can't be compensated any bragging about new weapon systems. It was and still is a geopolitical knockdown.

Agree. But, perhaps that's not true. In any case, the resident "Team Russia" will now explain that. As victory, of course.

Hopes about "some sensible conversation on the new world order may start between key geopolitical players" are naïve. The US elite is hell-bent on world superiority as this is a pre-condition of the existence of the dollar as the primary world currency.

Agree.

If time is working against the US, why not to sit quiet and try not to anger aging hegemon as China supposedly does (having also advantage of host of "offshored" manufacturing from the USA and having the USA as debtor).

and

The level of brain drain from Russia actually is a huge limiting factor, which makes a claim about cruising missile with a nuclear reactor as a part of propulsion engine highly suspect.

and

"Collective West" can easily tighten sanction expanding them on more technological sectors, thus damaging Russia economic growth. So bragging about new weapons is bad diplomacy when the opponent is much stronger economically and politically.

"Team Russia" coming up. You are about to see the light. Somehow.

peterAUS , Next New Comment March 6, 2018 at 5:48 pm GMT
@Sergey Krieger

Putin and those around him would better do concentrate on internal issues or eventually issues will concentrate on them.

Agree.

This obsession with high tech is actually puzzling. Not only that, but, overall, which "military" is better. "Whose father/older brother is stronger" kid talk.

The Empire shall go for the Russia's internal problems and try to capitalize on that. Ukraine was taken down using that approach. Oh, wait, not only Ukraine but all those who didn't tow the line. Thinking that, somehow, a conventional war, only, will settle the issue is not only delusional but stupid. Why would The Empire do that? No reason whatsoever.

It will try to do exactly what's been doing since '91. Internal dissent.

So, while Russian elites will keep building high tech weaponry (remember USSR), The Empire will keep working on getting all those "unhappy" with Putin regime onboard and using them for weakening the regime.

If the regime in Moscow can't, or doesn't want to see it, well, it doesn't deserve that position. True, weapons industry is good for making money and stashing most of it offshore. Not sharing that wealth, though, with general population is not that smart, just, they simply can't help it. That's the way of the world there. Czars and serfs.

The problem is, of course, they can't step down even if they wanted to. Nobody wants kangaroo courts and hanging. Or public murder broadcast live on Internet. Conundrum.

FB , March 6, 2018 at 2:06 pm GMT
@likbez

You make some interesting observations and your comment is thought-provoking

However I think the intent of the article was to explore some of the technical issues of what we saw on March 1 not so much the political dimension and certainly your approach is to try to get an overall wide angle picture that gets every possible Russia issue into the frame

which by necessity means you give up some resolution or granularity if you will compared to a more tightly focused article

You start with an initial premise of why announce these weapons now and question the wisdom the simple answer may be technical related these weapons may be already mature technically and now is the time to show them ?

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar

A couple more points you mention sanctions quite a bit but we have seen that Russia is able to carry on just fine sanctions or not

The key indicator there is that sanctions are having a much bigger blowback on the US itself i.e. the US is losing Europe

Germany has been quite vocal about US going a step too far in trying to dictate energy policy which is key to German industrial export economy and besides they may finally be finding their sea legs after years of subservience to an increasingly unhinged country that is heading for the cliff

The Germans are going to get Nordstream 2 because they want it. It is actually more important to Germany than to Russia Russia has been supplying energy to Europe for many decades going back to Soviet times but is just now starting to feed the biggest energy consumer in the world China

Other, smaller EU countries notably Italy have become quite vocal about Russia sanctions hurting them we saw just now an election in Italy where the ruling claque were turfed

So it seems that the days of US dictating the politics to its European vassals may be over the kind of friction they are making with sanctions and their increasing hysteria is only hastening this process of vassals breaking off

The other issue is Ukraine you bring to this the the typical US perspective of 'losing' a country this again goes back to the vassal game

The US gained all of Eastern Europe after the collapse of the Soviet Union but did Russia lose anything sensible people will say the lost they burden of empire long after it had ceased being profitable as with the British previously

Ukraine is historically something of an artificial country the original Kievan Rus [Rurivik dynasty] was the original Russia it fell apart after the Mongol invasions but the Russian and Ukrainian language and people are mostly indistinguishable other than the Galician Catholic minority

For several hundred years the peoples of the Ukraine [ie even then it was more than a single national people] were under rule by the Poles and Lithuania while the new Russian empire based in Moscow gained strength and eventually took over 300 years ago

There are and have always been Ukrainian nationalists that do not like Russia but they are in the minority the best way to think of Ukraine is similar to Scotland even the Irish are more distant from the English than Ukrainians from Russians

Politically the situation we see in Ukraine is that the ordinary people don't really care about the politics they are genuinely concerned about bread and butter it is quite sad actually that the US is treating the Ukraine as a pawn and a quite cheap one at that in its game with Russia

I don't believe the Russians look at the situation that way there is real fraternity among many Russians and Ukrainians that goes to a fundamental level again similar to Scotland where the country is divided on the issue of the English

So unless the EU and US are prepared to do a full Marshall plan to drag Ukraine into a reasonable living standard then this 'win' will turn out to be something of a chimera

Heck the polls even in eastern Europe are trending against the post Cold War direction with about half the people now questioning if the new boss is really better than the old boss

And finally if you are going to do a wide angle shot like this then get the crazy cousin into the picture also ie the US and its failing Ponzi economy that is bound to collapse just on the principles of mathematics

China and Russia are working to bury the source of all US strength the petrodollar this is literally kryptonite the US is quite simply toast once the petrodollar sinks

China is the world's biggest economy and biggest energy buyer Russia is the world's biggest energy seller other nations too that are not so strong and have felt the body blows of US economic warfare such as Iran, Venezuela and other will gladly join in

It's starting to feel like US has used up all its chips and all its markers

The entire developing world wants real prosperity not economic colonialism and corporate plunder

These are some large and powerful currents that have to be taken into account if one is going to take a wide angle shot of geopolitics

AP , Next New Comment March 6, 2018 at 6:53 pm GMT
@FB

Ukraine is historically something of an artificial country the original Kievan Rus [Rurivik dynasty] was the original Russia it fell apart after the Mongol invasions

Relationship of Kievan Rus to modern Russia and Ukraine is somewhat analogous to the relationship of Charlemagne's Frankish Empire to modern France or Germany. Although both Germany and France would have to be in the same linguistic family for the analogy to be more accurate.

For several hundred years the peoples of the Ukraine [ie even then it was more than a single national people] were under rule by the Poles and Lithuania

Correct. This meant not only political separation but largescale settlement (about 10% of the population were Polish settlers – these were absorbed by the natives, so most Ukrainians have some Polish roots), centuries of schooling, etc. And this was enough to lead to a different culture, language, identity.

eventually took over 300 years ago

The eastern half of Ukraine was linked to Moscow in the 1650s (so indeed about 300 years), but the western half in the 1770s (so 200 years) and Galicia not until 1939.

but the Russian and Ukrainian language and people are mostly indistinguishable

Incorrect. Ukrainian is about as close to Russian as it is to Polish (Ukrainian grammar and pronunciation is closer to Russian, but Ukrainian vocabulary actually has more words in common with Polish than with Russian). The Scandinavian languages are closer to each other Russian is to Ukrainian. The catch is that in everyday life about half of Ukrainians, and most urban Ukrainians other than people in Lviv, use Russian rather than Ukrainian. Kiev is a Russian-speaking city (and Dublin an English-speaking one).

the best way to think of Ukraine is similar to Scotland

Anatol Lieven correctly observed that Ukraine's relationship to Russia is somewhere between that of Scotland and that of Ireland, to England. Viewing it as Scotland is too positive, as Ireland too negative. Given that Scotland itself nearly separated, it is natural to see Ukraine as separate.

[Mar 06, 2018] How the U.S. Establishment Lies Through Its Teeth, for War Against Russia by Eric Zuesse

Mar 06, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

The "Russian officials were accusing the United States," while there was supposedly actual "Russian behavior, including interventions in Ukraine and Syria, military posturing and harassment in Europe, and interference in Western elections ," which pretexts the Establishment is now debating with itself whether that will be sufficient to 'justify' an American and NATO invasion, as response. This holier-than-thou and upside-down presumption, of Russian-government guilt and American-government innocence, is reeking throughout that pompous article; but what's even worse is that the reality is exactly the opposite of the story-line that's portrayed in it. The actual reality is: Ever since 24 February 1990, the U.S. and its NATO allies have been pursuing secretly a continuation of the Cold War after the termination in 1991 of the Soviet Union, and of its communism, and of its counter-NATO military alliance, the Warsaw Pact; and the U.S. plan has been to swallow up, first the former Warsaw Pact nations, and then the former nations (such as Ukraine itself) that were inside the Soviet Union itself, and then, any other foreign allies that Russia might still have (such as Syria); and, then, finally, to invade and conquer Russia itself. And, instead of helping those countries, the U.S. Government has been destroying them.

The 'news'media lie about Ukraine , they lie about Syria , they lie about Crimea , and they lie about the entire historical background . America's 'news'media are basically stenographers for the lies by the regime .

Neoconservative, holier-than-thou, lying is so widespread in America's 'news'media, there's practically nothing else than such deceptions about Russia, that's "Fit to Print" (or broadcast) in today's United States, and this is true in the media of both Parties, not merely the Republican media, or the Democratic media . This neoconservative consensus -- the bipartisan ceaseless warmongering -- is driven by the military-industrial complex (MIC) profiteers, whose companies' main market is the American and allied governments (so that in order to increase their sales, more and costlier weapons must be purchased by those governments). It's the MIC-sick current style of capitalism: capitalism that's of, by, and for, the billionaires: a fascism that's merely called 'democracy' . (By contrast, one area of commerce that Russia refused to privatize was its weapons-manufacturers -- there aren't any stockholders who pay politicians to increase the 'defense' budget: instead, the Government itself is in control over that.)

America's billionaires, and their many agents, are giving hypocrisy a bad name.

[Mar 06, 2018] A former CIA officer called John Sipher, calling a rival organisation 'the best intelligence professionals in the world'

Mar 06, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Jen , Mar 6, 2018 4:15:56 PM | 43

This part of the New Yorker article could be sheer comedy gold:

'... Regardless of what others might think, it's clear that Steele believed that his dossier was filled with important intelligence. Otherwise, he would never have subjected it, his firm, and his reputation to the harsh scrutiny of the F.B.I. "I'm impressed that he was willing to share it with the F.B.I.," [former CIA spook John Sipher] said. "That gives him real credibility to me, the notion that he'd give it to the best intelligence professionals in the world."...'

FBI, best intelligence professionals in the world? Didn't the FBI along with the CIA miss most indications of a looming terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in the months leading up to September 11, 2001?

A former CIA officer called John Sipher, calling a rival organisation 'the best intelligence professionals in the world'?

[Mar 06, 2018] A Parody on New Yorker reporting of Steele dossier saga

Mar 06, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Luther , Mar 6, 2018 8:52:41 AM | 11

"...looked much like the other businessmen heading home, except for the fact that he kept his phones in a Faraday bag -- a pouch, of military-tested double-grade fabric, designed to block signal detection..."

A practical man, Steele also kept a giant roll of telephone line attached to his belt. Unrolling it as he proceeded down the high street, he glanced upwards.

A Pteranodon, perched upon the slate roof was watching him closely. A bead of sweat appeared on his temple, just showing underneath the rim of his bowler hat, trickling down the side of his face, the leaving a streak that resembled a long forgotten river delta.

A chimmney sweet was approaching him on his right, whistling a jaunty tune, his bag of extendable brushes jingling and clanking, just like Steele's nerves. Obviously a Russian operative, the sweep was whistling an excerpt from Tchaikovsky's Sleeping Beauty, an ominous warning...

[Mar 06, 2018] Is Russia still moving toward neoliberalism

Notable quotes:
"... I would say generally not. If you look at neoliberalism as promoting privatization, removal of regulations and removal of social services, Russia seems to be moving in opposite directions with trying to break up the power of the oligarchs, keeping controls over rampant capitalism and interested in raising pensions. ..."
"... Both Russia and China seem to realize the power of the state more as a restriction to rampant capitalism to protect society. ..."
Mar 06, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

financial matters | Mar 5, 2018 12:57:39 PM | 65

@ james 62

I would say generally not. If you look at neoliberalism as promoting privatization, removal of regulations and removal of social services, Russia seems to be moving in opposite directions with trying to break up the power of the oligarchs, keeping controls over rampant capitalism and interested in raising pensions.

Both Russia and China seem to realize the power of the state more as a restriction to rampant capitalism to protect society. Neoliberal countries such as the US use the government to empower capitalism at the expense of society such as bailing out banks while cutting back on medicare and social security and also promoting student indebtedness.

[Mar 06, 2018] The U.S. Returns to 'Great Power Competition,' With a Dangerous New Edge

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... It was President Bill Clinton who moved NATO eastwards, abrogating a 1991 agreement with the Russians not to recruit former members of the Warsaw Pact that is at the root of current tensions with Moscow. And, while the U.S. and NATO point to Russia's annexation of the Crimea as a sign of a "revanchist" Moscow, it was NATO that set the precedent of altering borders when it dismembered Serbia to create Kosovo after the 1999 Yugoslav war. ..."
"... And it was President Barack Obama who further chilled relations with the Russians by tacitly backing the 2014 coup in the Ukraine, and whose "Asia pivot" has led to tensions between Washington and Beijing. ..."
"... In speaking at Johns Hopkins, Defense Secretary James Mattis warned , "If you challenge us, it will be your longest and worst day" -- a remark aimed directly at Russia. ..."
"... NATO ally Britain went even further. Chief of the United Kingdom General Staff, Nick Carter, told the Defense and Security Forum that "our generation has become used to wars of choice since the end of the Cold War," but "we may not have a choice about conflict with Russia." He added , "The parallels with 1914 are stark." ..."
"... Certainly the verbiage about Russia and China is alarming. Russia is routinely described as "aggressive," "revisionist," and "expansionist." In a recent attack on China, U.S. Defense Secretary Rex Tillerson described China's trade with Latin America as " imperial ," an ironic choice of words given Washington's more overtly imperial history in the region. ..."
"... While Moscow is certainly capable of destroying the world with its nuclear weapons, Russia today bears little resemblance to 1914 Russia -- or, for that matter, the Soviet Union. ..."
"... The U.S. and its NATO allies currently spend more than 12 times what Russia does on its armaments, and even that vastly underestimates Washington's actual military outlay. A great deal of U.S. spending is not counted as "military," including nuclear weapons, currently being modernized to the tune of $1.5 trillion. ..."
"... The balance between China and the U.S. is more even, but the U.S. still outspends China almost three to one. Fact in Washington's major regional allies -- Japan, Australia, and South Korea -- and that figure is almost four to one. In nuclear weapons, the ratio is vastly greater: 26 to 1 in favor of the U.S. Add NATO and the ratios are 28 to 1. ..."
"... Meanwhile, China has two military goals: to secure its sea-borne energy supplies by building up its navy, and to establish a buffer zone in the East and South China seas to keep potential enemies at arm's length. To that end it has constructed smaller, more agile ships, and missiles capable of keeping U.S. aircraft carriers out of range, a strategy called "area denial." It has also modernized its military, cutting back on land-based forces and investing in air and sea assets. However, it spends less of its GDP on its military than does the U.S.: 1.9 percent as opposed to 3.3 percent as of 2016. ..."
"... But China has been invaded several times, starting with the Opium Wars of 1839 and 1856, when Britain forced the Chinese to lift their ban on importing the drug. Japan invaded in 1895 and 1937. If the Chinese are touchy about their coastline, one can hardly blame them. ..."
"... Is this a new Cold War, when the U.S. attempted to surround and isolate the Soviet Union? There are parallels, but the Cold War was an ideological battle between two systems, socialism and capitalism. The fight today is over market access and economic domination. When Secretary of State Rex Tillerson warned Latin America about China and Russia, it wasn't about "Communist subversion," but trade. ..."
"... For one, the big arms manufacturers -- Lockheed Martian, Boeing, Raytheon, BAE Systems, Northrop Grumman, and General Dynamics -- have lots of cash to hand out come election time. "Great power competition" will be expensive, with lots of big-ticket items: aircraft carriers, submarines, surface ships, and an expanded air force. ..."
"... And many of the Democrats are ahead of the curve when it comes to demonizing the Russians. The Russian bug-a-boo has allowed the party to shift the blame for Hillary Clinton's loss to Moscow's manipulation of the election, thus avoiding having to examine its own lackluster campaign and unimaginative political program. ..."
"... Piling onto Moscow may have consequences as well. Andrei Kostin, head of one of Russia's largest banks, VTB, told the Financial Times that adding more sanctions against Russia " would be like declaring war ." ..."
Mar 06, 2018 | fpif.org

The U.S. has never taken its eyes off its big competitors.

It was President Bill Clinton who moved NATO eastwards, abrogating a 1991 agreement with the Russians not to recruit former members of the Warsaw Pact that is at the root of current tensions with Moscow. And, while the U.S. and NATO point to Russia's annexation of the Crimea as a sign of a "revanchist" Moscow, it was NATO that set the precedent of altering borders when it dismembered Serbia to create Kosovo after the 1999 Yugoslav war.

It was President George W. Bush who designated China a "strategic competitor," and who tried to lure India into an anti-Chinese alliance by allowing New Delhi to violate the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Letting India purchase uranium on the international market -- it was barred from doing so by refusing to sign the NPT -- helped ignite the dangerous nuclear arms race with Pakistan in South Asia.

And it was President Barack Obama who further chilled relations with the Russians by tacitly backing the 2014 coup in the Ukraine, and whose "Asia pivot" has led to tensions between Washington and Beijing.

So is jettisoning "terrorism" as the enemy in favor of "great powers" just old wine, new bottle? Not quite. For one thing the new emphasis has a decidedly more dangerous edge to it.

1914 vs. Today

In speaking at Johns Hopkins, Defense Secretary James Mattis warned , "If you challenge us, it will be your longest and worst day" -- a remark aimed directly at Russia.

NATO ally Britain went even further. Chief of the United Kingdom General Staff, Nick Carter, told the Defense and Security Forum that "our generation has become used to wars of choice since the end of the Cold War," but "we may not have a choice about conflict with Russia." He added , "The parallels with 1914 are stark."

Certainly the verbiage about Russia and China is alarming. Russia is routinely described as "aggressive," "revisionist," and "expansionist." In a recent attack on China, U.S. Defense Secretary Rex Tillerson described China's trade with Latin America as " imperial ," an ironic choice of words given Washington's more overtly imperial history in the region.

But there are differences between now and the run up to the First World War. In 1914, there were several powerful and evenly matched empires at odds. That is not the case today.

While Moscow is certainly capable of destroying the world with its nuclear weapons, Russia today bears little resemblance to 1914 Russia -- or, for that matter, the Soviet Union.

The U.S. and its NATO allies currently spend more than 12 times what Russia does on its armaments, and even that vastly underestimates Washington's actual military outlay. A great deal of U.S. spending is not counted as "military," including nuclear weapons, currently being modernized to the tune of $1.5 trillion.

The balance between China and the U.S. is more even, but the U.S. still outspends China almost three to one. Fact in Washington's major regional allies -- Japan, Australia, and South Korea -- and that figure is almost four to one. In nuclear weapons, the ratio is vastly greater: 26 to 1 in favor of the U.S. Add NATO and the ratios are 28 to 1.

This isn't to say that the military forces of Russia and China are irrelevant. Russia's intervention in the Syrian civil war helped turn the tide against the anti-Assad coalition put together by the United States. But its economy is smaller than Italy's, and its "aggression" is arguably a response to NATO establishing a presence on Moscow's doorstep.

Meanwhile, China has two military goals: to secure its sea-borne energy supplies by building up its navy, and to establish a buffer zone in the East and South China seas to keep potential enemies at arm's length. To that end it has constructed smaller, more agile ships, and missiles capable of keeping U.S. aircraft carriers out of range, a strategy called "area denial." It has also modernized its military, cutting back on land-based forces and investing in air and sea assets. However, it spends less of its GDP on its military than does the U.S.: 1.9 percent as opposed to 3.3 percent as of 2016.

Beijing has been heavy-handed in establishing "area denial," alienating many of its neighbors -- Malaysia, Vietnam, the Philippines, and Taiwan -- by claiming most of the South China Sea and building bases in the Paracel and Spratly islands.

But China has been invaded several times, starting with the Opium Wars of 1839 and 1856, when Britain forced the Chinese to lift their ban on importing the drug. Japan invaded in 1895 and 1937. If the Chinese are touchy about their coastline, one can hardly blame them.

China is, however, the United States' major competitor and the second largest economy in the world. It has replaced the U.S. as Latin America's largest trading partner and successfully outflanked Washington's attempts to throttle its economic influence. When the U.S. asked its key allies to boycott China's new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, with the exception of Japan , they ignored Washington.

However, commercial success is hardly "imperial."

Is this a new Cold War, when the U.S. attempted to surround and isolate the Soviet Union? There are parallels, but the Cold War was an ideological battle between two systems, socialism and capitalism. The fight today is over market access and economic domination. When Secretary of State Rex Tillerson warned Latin America about China and Russia, it wasn't about "Communist subversion," but trade.

Behind the Shift

There are other players behind this shift.

For one, the big arms manufacturers -- Lockheed Martian, Boeing, Raytheon, BAE Systems, Northrop Grumman, and General Dynamics -- have lots of cash to hand out come election time. "Great power competition" will be expensive, with lots of big-ticket items: aircraft carriers, submarines, surface ships, and an expanded air force.

This is not to say that the U.S. has altered its foreign policy focus because of arms company lobbies, but they do have a seat at the table. And given that those companies have spread their operations to all 50 states, local political representatives and governors have a stake in keeping -- and expanding -- those often high paying jobs.

Nor are the Republicans going to get much opposition on increased defense spending from the Democrats, many of whom are as hawkish as their colleagues across the aisle. That's true even though higher defense spending -- coupled with the recent tax cut bill -- will rule out funding many of the programs the Democrats hold dear. Of course, for the Republicans that dilemma is a major side benefit: cut taxes, increase defense spending, then dismantle social services, Social Security, and Medicare in order to service the deficit.

And many of the Democrats are ahead of the curve when it comes to demonizing the Russians. The Russian bug-a-boo has allowed the party to shift the blame for Hillary Clinton's loss to Moscow's manipulation of the election, thus avoiding having to examine its own lackluster campaign and unimaginative political program.

There are other actors pushing this new emphasis as well, including the Bush administration's neoconservatives who launched the Iraq War. Their new target is Iran, even though inflating Iran to the level of a "great power" is laughable. Iran's military budget is $12.3 billion. Saudi Arabia alone spends $63.7 billion on defense, slightly less than Russia, which has five times the population and eight times the land area. In a clash between Iran and the U.S. and its local allies, the disparity in military strength would be closer to 60 to 1 .

However, in terms of disasters, even Iraq would pale before a war with Iran.

The most dangerous place in the world right now is the Korean Peninsula, where the Trump administration appears to be casting around for some kind of military demonstration that will not ignite a nuclear war. But how would China react to an attack that might put hostile troops on its southern border?

Piling onto Moscow may have consequences as well. Andrei Kostin, head of one of Russia's largest banks, VTB, told the Financial Times that adding more sanctions against Russia " would be like declaring war ."

The problem with designating "great powers" as your adversaries is that they might just take your word for it and respond accordingly. Foreign Policy In Focus columnist Conn Hallinan can be read at dispatchesfromtheedgeblog.wordpress.com and middleempireseries.wordpress.com .

[Mar 06, 2018] The current anti-Russian sentiment in the West as hysterical. But this hysteria is concentrated at the top level of media elite and neocons. Behind it is no deep sense of unity or national resolve. In fact we see the reverse - most Western countries are deeply divided within themselves due to the crisis of neolineralism.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Therefore, if we must see this in terms of conflict, we see a dramatically less powerful and dramatically poorer but essentially unified Russia facing up to a threat from a West that is far superior militarily and economically but that is divided in itself and slipping further into decline. ..."
"... This does of course lead to the unstable world you say we are faced with. Dangerously unstable. But I do not believe you are admitting to yourself that it is an instability we in the West are causing. ..."
Mar 06, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

English Outsider -> Lars, 04 March 2018 at 07:43 AM

Lars,

I don't understand the last three paragraphs of your comment so I may be missing your central point. However, I believe this sentence taken in isolation could do with qualifying:-

"No doubt there is a lot of noise, but the reality is that economically Russia is a basket case and the US is rapidly joining them."

The picture one gets of Russia is of a country slowly digging itself out of the disintegrative corruption of the 90's. Putin's recent remarks indicate how slowly.

President Carter's characterisation of the US as now being an oligarchy shows the US slowly going the other way. Even including Germany that is the general picture in the West.

Some recent remarks and examples from DH show the Russian people, or rather a substantial number of them, soberly and consciously preparing to address the threat from the West. Unless it's all Russian PR there is a sense of national unity there, at least for many, and that is reflected by the Russian leadership.

I'm afraid our host is correct when he characterises the current anti-Russian sentiment in the West as hysterical. That, however, is I believe largely top down. It is a product of PR from the media and from the Western politicians. Behind it is no deep sense of unity or national resolve. In fact we see the reverse - most Western countries are deeply divided within themselves.

The Russians seem also to have escaped the demoralising effects of the more far out social trends in the US and other Western countries.

Therefore, if we must see this in terms of conflict, we see a dramatically less powerful and dramatically poorer but essentially unified Russia facing up to a threat from a West that is far superior militarily and economically but that is divided in itself and slipping further into decline.

This does of course lead to the unstable world you say we are faced with. Dangerously unstable. But I do not believe you are admitting to yourself that it is an instability we in the West are causing.

[Mar 04, 2018] Ukraine Freezes After Russia Halts Gas Deliveries

Notable quotes:
"... Bullshit. The Ukrainians have been on a pay before delivery tariff from Russia for years. They have chosen war over trade. They currently prefer to spend what income they get that survives oligarch looting on trying to kill the East Ukrainians (currenly 6.9% of GDP). ..."
Mar 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Sat, 03/03/2018 - 21:13 Last week, Russia's state-run gas giant and quasi-monopolist when it comes to European natgas supplies, Gazprom, announced it would not restart shipments of natural gas to Ukraine's Naftogaz starting March 1 after the two sides failed to reach an agreement, Gazprom deputy chairman, Alexander Medvedev, told journalists.

Russian gas deliveries to Ukraine were supposed to restart on Thursday following a foreign court ruling aimed at ending years of disputes between Kiev and Moscow, including two halts to Russian gas supplies to Europe through Ukraine. But Gazprom unexpectedly refused to resume deliveries, returning the prepayment for supplies made by Kiev, claiming amendments to a contract had not been completed.

The decision came as the sides reportedly failed to extend a supplemental agreement to the current gas contract, RT reported.

"So far, the supplemental agreement to the operating contract with Naftogaz has not been approved, and that is a compulsory condition for launching the shipments," Medvedev said. "So, we have to recover the amount paid by the company in full. And it is obvious that the shipments in March won't start."

In response, Ukraine's state monopoly said that Gazprom had failed to deliver prepaid gas. Naftogaz is reportedly planning to claim damages for supply failure from the Russian energy major.

And while the long-running dispute may, but likely won't, be resolved in court, Ukraine has suddenly found itself without heat and on Friday urged schools to close and factories to cut production, while residents shivered as the country strained to save on gas supplies.

The decision coincided with freezing temperatures all over Ukraine, and the government called on Friday for measures to reduce consumption.

" Starting today, we recommended ... to stop the work of kindergartens, schools and universities ," Ukraine energy minister Igor Nasalyk told lawmakers , while urging Ukrainian companies to adjust their operations to save gas, while power companies were ordered to switch to fuel oil where possible.

Nasalyk said these savings measures would be in effect until Tuesday, when temperatures are expected to rise.

* * *

Meanwhile, on Friday, Gazprom director Alexei Miller said that the company would immediately turn to the Stockholm arbitration court to break its contract with the Ukrainian operator Naftogaz, Russian news agencies reported. A ruling by the same court last year was meant to halt disputes over gas prices and shipments, which had often been a proxy for political disputes between Moscow and Kiev. The court set a price and ordered Kiev to resume purchases it had cancelled following the breakout in "proxy" violence between the two nations in 2014.

Also on Friday, Naftogaz said that Gazprom had not only refused to resume deliveries meant for it, but lowered the pressure in gas pipelines by 20 percent and minimized sales to other customers. In a statement, Naftogaz said that Gazprom was trying to portray Ukraine in a negative light and suggest that it was willing either to let its own population freeze or make it out to be "an unreliable transit company that takes the gas away" from European countries.

In response, Reuters reported today that Gazprom said there had so far been no impact on supplies through its pipelines to Europe, despite the sharp escalation in tensions with the key transit nation.

Russia's Energy Minister Alexander Novak told European Commission Vice President Maros Sefcofic in a phone conversation that gas transit would not be at risk until Gazprom and Naftogaz fully terminated their agreement.

"Minister Novak assured that the gas transit from Russia to Europe is under no threat. The transit remains as reliable as in the past," the ministry said.

* * *

Kiev and Moscow have a history of clashing over prices and obligations under contracts for the delivery of Russian gas to Ukraine as well as transit to Europe. The standoff in the winter of 2006 triggered supply disruptions, with Russia accusing Ukraine of stealing gas intended for the European market.

The gas giants are currently involved in a long-standing litigation over the terms of the current delivery contract. Ukraine's lawyers are struggling for annulment of the so-called take-or-pay provision that obliges Kiev to purchase a minimum annual quantity of gas. Earlier this week, Naftogaz claimed it had won a $2.56 billion victory in another round of its legal battle with Gazprom.

philipat -> stizazz Sat, 03/03/2018 - 19:06 Permalink

Karma can be a bitch Ukraine. Still, I'm sure your friends in Washington will immediately provide you with an endless supply of free LNG? Call Vicky.

Incidentally, to the author, your map is incorrect (i'm sure that was just an error like Goolag's deletion of Themtube sites). Crimea is no longer a part of Ukraine after 95%+ of its population excercised their right to self-determination after the Maidan coup.

Joe Trader -> IH8OBAMA Sun, 03/04/2018 - 01:43 Permalink

I'm the resident Joe of ZH.

Ukraine's already connected to Poland's LNG port. And by the way, days at sea for a ship with Qatari LNG is the same as a saudi tanker hauling oil to the U.S.

COSMOS -> Joe Trader Sun, 03/04/2018 - 02:09 Permalink

Ukraine is in a total meltdown, forget about Venezuela which at least has energy stores. Ukraine has to import most of its energy. Donbass has all the coal. Putin is a genius, he is starving Ukraine of energy. There will be mass unrest in the country. Expect a government friendly to Russia to come back into play. The only thing that can prevent this is if Europe and the USA are willing to pay for Ukraine's energy needs.

Where otherwise will Ukraine get the hard currency. Well for a while it will get it by selling off its farmland and its women. In ww2 you could buy a woman with a package of pantyhose, an MRE, or a pack of cigarettes. Now you will be able to buy them again the same way and with a lump of coal.

Right now the streets of Kiev are policed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNy8XVuBSDE

Joe Trader -> COSMOS Sun, 03/04/2018 - 04:16 Permalink

It's western countries' loss for not granting asylum to all those hot Ukrainian women

land_of_the_few -> Joe Trader Sun, 03/04/2018 - 06:14 Permalink

They already have visa-free travel to the EU and are leaving en masse as fast as they can to the EU and Russia.

Many are perfectly normal working age women, with normal qualifications, they are not all poledancers as you seem to think.

Most do language courses and marry EU citizens so they don't have to go back.

HowdyDoody -> Joe Trader Sun, 03/04/2018 - 07:47 Permalink

"Ukraine Freezes After Russia Halts Gas Deliveries"

Bullshit. The Ukrainians have been on a pay before delivery tariff from Russia for years. They have chosen war over trade. They currently prefer to spend what income they get that survives oligarch looting on trying to kill the East Ukrainians (currenly 6.9% of GDP).

On March 1, Ukraine closed all schools, colleges and universities to conserve energy. Following a Stockholm arbitration court decision on March 1, Gazprom has started the process of cancelling the contracts for supply of gas to and through Ukraine. They are at liberty to purchase it at market rates ($600 per 100 cubic metersversus the subsidised $300 from Russia) from the Europeans.

researchfix -> HowdyDoody Sun, 03/04/2018 - 09:04 Permalink

Price doesn´t matter. Important is not to pay the invoices. That´s chapter 1 of UKie business.

Does anybody believe there will be payment to Europe for gas? Of course the EU will lie about that, and sweep it under the rug.

Justin Case -> pluto the dog Sat, 03/03/2018 - 23:12 Permalink

Joe Biden's son, Hunter, was hired by a Ukraine company, Burisma Holdings Limited, promoting energy independence from Moscow. So hows it goin Hunter?? Too busy fooling around with his late brother's widow. No time for Ukraine. Murica can help fund some gas, if they can throw away a couple billion for the coup, c'mon Guys, Porky is yoar Bro.

COSMOS -> Justin Case Sun, 03/04/2018 - 02:17 Permalink

Most likely he was fooling around with her before his brother died. Some of his nieces and nephews may be his kids. The Bidens are a microcosm of the perverse behavior in DC.

land_of_the_few -> Justin Case Sun, 03/04/2018 - 06:19 Permalink

"Kathleen Biden accused estranged husband Hunter of reckless spending on 'drugs, prostitutes, and an $80,000 diamond' in divorce docs - days before his affair with widowed sister-in-law Hallie was revealed"

" Kathleen claims Hunter spends money on 'drugs, alcohol, prostitutes, strip clubs and gifts for women with whom he had sexual relations' in her new motion "

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4276134/Kathleen-Biden-divorce-

swmnguy -> uhland62 Sat, 03/03/2018 - 19:38 Permalink

I live in Minneapolis. The weather here isn't too different from much of Ukraine. For early March we're having a very warm day, nearly 50 F. But next week we get back to more seasonal highs around freezing, with maybe 6" of slushy snow on Monday.

I really like it when my heat works. I do have a wood-burning fireplace but if I have to use it for heat we've got a lot of problems all at once. Ukraine is a great example of what always happens when Nazis get in charge. Everything goes to hell in a handbasket, quickly.

HenryHall -> litemine Sun, 03/04/2018 - 12:26 Permalink

>> Ukraine may have to declare war.

They already did declare war on Russia. Their problem was that Russia did not believe they were serious, thought they were joking.

BlindMonkey -> robertocarlos Sat, 03/03/2018 - 20:41 Permalink

The fools just might do that to keep the riots out of the government buildings in Kiev. Russia doesn't want the basket case either so who knows what the war would look like. Kiev is totally screwed either way this goes.

keep the basta -> BlindMonkey Sat, 03/03/2018 - 22:46 Permalink

No Russia knows that any dealings with Kiev or ukr companies are disastrous. Russia acts very carefully within the law. Hence immediate return of first gas payement since 2014, so not legally bound. Hence Gasprom requiring a signed contract under mutually agreed conditions which they did not get.

Already Ukraine is say there is a 20 percent drop off in pressure on transit gas thru. ukr. Russia says not, it is gas pressure as usual.

Looks like Ukraine is stealing 20percent of transit gas immediately.

[Mar 04, 2018] The picture one gets of Russia is of a country slowly digging itself out of the disintegrative corruption of the 90's. Putin's recent remarks indicate how slowly

Mar 04, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

English Outsider -> Lars... , 04 March 2018 at 07:43 AM

Lars - I don't understand the last three paragraphs of your comment so I may be missing your central point. However, I believe this sentence taken in isolation could do with qualifying:-

"No doubt there is a lot of noise, but the reality is that economically Russia is a basket case and the US is rapidly joining them."

The picture one gets of Russia is of a country slowly digging itself out of the disintegrative corruption of the 90's. Putin's recent remarks indicate how slowly.

President Carter's characterisation of the US as now being an oligarchy shows the US slowly going the other way. Even including Germany that is the general picture in the West.

Some recent remarks and examples from DH show the Russian people, or rather a substantial number of them, soberly and consciously preparing to address the threat from the West. Unless it's all Russian PR there is a sense of national unity there, at least for many, and that is reflected by the Russian leadership.

I'm afraid our host is correct when he characterises the current anti-Russian sentiment in the West as hysterical. That, however, is I believe largely top down. It is a product of PR from the media and from the Western politicians. Behind it is no deep sense of unity or national resolve. In fact we see the reverse - most Western countries are deeply divided within themselves.

The Russians seem also to have escaped the demoralising effects of the more far out social trends in the US and other Western countries.

Therefore, if we must see this in terms of conflict, we see a dramatically less powerful and dramatically poorer but essentially unified Russia facing up to a threat from a West that is far superior militarily and economically but that is divided in itself and slipping further into decline.

This does of course lead to the unstable world you say we are faced with. Dangerously unstable. But I do not believe you are admitting to yourself that it is an instability we in the West are causing.

Babak Makkinejad said in reply to English Outsider ... , 04 March 2018 at 07:43 AM
I think the term "basket case" in connection to economic conditions of a country, was used in regards to Bangladesh. Russia was never an economic power in comparison to the Western Diocleteans but she was involved and influential in European politics for centuries.

[Mar 04, 2018] Is Russia a basket case economy?

Mar 04, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

stefan 04 March 2018 at 04:43 PM

Russia a basket case economy?
I am a European expat living in Moscow. My cousin, who works for Mercedes at their HQ in Germany, came last month to visit me. After a few days in Moscow he told me: "Shit, there are more Mercs here, than in Stuttgart at HQ, where every mid level employee gets one as company benefit".

The "state" is rich, controls almost all mineral resources, biggest banks, airlines and many companies which do profits (e.g. Sberbank did 17 billion USD last year). Plus, here international corporates pay full tax, instead of 0% elsewhere, otherwise they are thrown out. Salaried taxes are 13%.

Medium,small business and many salaried people is all black economy, so unaccounted in GDP. At the end Russia adds 10 billion each month to the state's coffers, debts are about 17% of GDP, despite lots of infrastructure works (metro, roads, Crimea Bridge, ...)

As for the armaments, science, hi tech stuff, here a PhD's employee costs you 15/20 k, where in US/Europe at least 100 k. And imagine here there special Maths based schools from age of 6. And Russian parents get crazy to get their kids in these schools. At my kids "super smart" expat school most of the local Russians do extra maths lessons at home, because british/american maths curriculum is crap they say.

So consider rich state, cheap wages for abundant and extremely strong science PhDs.

[Mar 04, 2018] It was the USA which unleashed the civil war in Ukraine pushing Provisional government for military solution of unrest in Donbass

Notable quotes:
"... "The US regime foisted nazi rule on Ukraine, and backs the ethnic-cleansing program there to kill or else cause to flee from Ukraine into Russia the residents in Ukraine's far-eastern Donbass region, in which over 90% of the people had voted for the democratically elected Ukrainian President that the US regime overthrew and replaced by fascists and nazis, in February 2014. Obama needed to get rid of those intensely anti-nazi voters, because otherwise the regime that he installed wouldn't have lasted beyond the first post-coup election. That's the purpose of ethnic cleansing - to get rid of unwanted voters." ..."
Mar 04, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Anna, March 2018 at 11:27 PM

Alternative media is trying to bring the MSM owners to senses (which is highly improbable): https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-03/zuesse-americas-news-media-foment-hate

"... there is actually nothing at all in Russia which even begins to approach the outright nazi displays and rallies that are routine in today's Ukraine, and some of which Ukrainian marches are publicly displaying symbols from Hitler's regime -- in fact, it's all outright illegal in Russia, which had lost (by far) more of its citizens to Germany's Nazis (13,950,000, or 12.7% of its population) than did any other country (except Belarus -- another state within the Soviet Union -- which lost 25.3% of its population). ...

-- On the civil war in Ukraine:

"The US regime foisted nazi rule on Ukraine, and backs the ethnic-cleansing program there to kill or else cause to flee from Ukraine into Russia the residents in Ukraine's far-eastern Donbass region, in which over 90% of the people had voted for the democratically elected Ukrainian President that the US regime overthrew and replaced by fascists and nazis, in February 2014. Obama needed to get rid of those intensely anti-nazi voters, because otherwise the regime that he installed wouldn't have lasted beyond the first post-coup election. That's the purpose of ethnic cleansing - to get rid of unwanted voters."

-- Rather a convincing explanation. One wonders, where are the veterans' organizations and the senior-level brass and how come that the US has exposed itself as a protector of the self-proclaimed (not hypothetical) nazis? Where are the activists from the Holocaust biz?

[Mar 04, 2018] Generals who now are running the USA foreign policy represents a great danger. These men seem incapable of rising above the Russophobia that grew in the atmosphere of the Cold War. They yearn for world hegemony for the US and to see Russia and to a lesser extent China and Iran as obstacles to that dominion for the "city on a hill

Highly recommended!
McMaster is a danger tot he USA and the world as a whole. Trump disingaged from forign policy and now generals are running it.
Notable quotes:
"... I stopped listening to McMaster at one point. Quite early really. I wish there was a transcript around. But on first sight there isn't. But yes, 'revisionist' surfaced. ..."
"... Senator Lindsey Graham wants to attack North Korea. China promises to defend North Korea if attacked by the USA. If nuclear weapons are used by anyone; destroying Seoul, Pyongyang, Kyoto, Tokyo or Guam, the war will explode. China has 65 hardened ICBMs that can survive a first attack and destroy every major American city. Russia cannot sit out a world war blowing up directly South of Siberia. ..."
"... Simply put, Washington DC has become unhinged. The military is free to do whatever it wants. The western economic system is in slow-motion collapse. There is too much debt. Either the people will force the oligarchs to write down the debt and end the wars; or, fighting over the remains, the corrupt elite will kill off mankind. ..."
"... He has given the quartet too much leeway and they for some naïve reason are far too willing to listen to the Israelis always whispering in their ears. GC Marshall was right when he warned Truman against a future dominated by the existence of Israel. pl ..."
Mar 04, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Karel Whitman , 04 March 2018 at 10:02 AM

I have been reflecting about Reagan too in recent contributions here. Not least since Trump seemed to try to emulate the GOP's greatest hero.

From the original Strategic Statement, casting Russia and China as 'rivals and competitors', the subsequent Defense Posture Statement elevated the latter from mere rivals, to 'revisionist powers'

I stopped listening to McMaster at one point. Quite early really. I wish there was a transcript around. But on first sight there isn't. But yes, 'revisionist' surfaced. As curiously enough this did: "rogue regimes (ME north East Asia) are developing the most destructive weapons on earth."

Maybe I listen to him now. Relevant parts start at 1:45.

https://www.securityconference.de/en/media-library/munich-security-conference-2018/video/statement-by-herbert-raymond-mcmaster/

******
That said, what I still have huge troubles seemingly is to wrap my head around is the huge applause Trump got on SST, while it left me more then a little irritated, when delivering his foreign policy speech in April 2016. That was before Russia-Gate made news.

kooshy -> FB Ali ... , 04 March 2018 at 10:09 AM
"These US generals have shown themselves to be shallow-minded believers in a doctrine of US invincibility and universal dominance that is no longer applicable to the world we live in."

General Ali, if I remember correctly you reside in Canada, those who are brought up in and under US system, majority think of their country in this way, it's part of the mentality that the system educates and trains it's constituency, to think they are exceptional, invincible and above all others. From what I have learned, this is not unique to just these four generals, this is how even the regular police thinks regardless of state or community they serve. This is how every child has been thought early on.

Babak Makkinejad -> kooshy... , 04 March 2018 at 01:08 PM
I think you are right, once I told an American that the United States will not survive a nuclear war with Russia; he seemed to have been offended.
VietnamVet , 04 March 2018 at 03:57 PM
All

This week NBC News described the White House as "unglued". The owner of Comcast that owns NBC, Brian L. Roberts (Barrack Obama's friend), and the five other media moguls want Donald Trump gone. All that has stopped them so far are four Generals. This is highly unstable. The USA has already killed Russians in Syria. Turkey is heading towards attacking American troops in Manbij. U.S. trainers are in the trenches with Ukraine troops in the Donbass. Anyone who is against this madness is labeled as a Russian collaborator.

Senator Lindsey Graham wants to attack North Korea. China promises to defend North Korea if attacked by the USA. If nuclear weapons are used by anyone; destroying Seoul, Pyongyang, Kyoto, Tokyo or Guam, the war will explode. China has 65 hardened ICBMs that can survive a first attack and destroy every major American city. Russia cannot sit out a world war blowing up directly South of Siberia.

Simply put, Washington DC has become unhinged. The military is free to do whatever it wants. The western economic system is in slow-motion collapse. There is too much debt. Either the people will force the oligarchs to write down the debt and end the wars; or, fighting over the remains, the corrupt elite will kill off mankind.

If somehow, the use of nuclear weapons is avoided; at best, South Korea, the heart of the Asian Economy, will be destroyed. The drumbeats for war with North Korea, Iran and/or Russia is crazy.

turcopolier , 04 March 2018 at 04:06 PM
Alastair Crooke

I agree that the "Four of Hearts" among the generals now running US foreign policy are a great danger. These men seem incapable of rising above the Russophobia that grew in the atmosphere of the Cold War. They yearn for world hegemony for the US and to see Russia and to a lesser extent China and Iran as obstacles to that dominion for the "city on a hill."

Trump is as yet indifferent to such matters and is in pursuit of his mercantilist view of economics. He has given the quartet too much leeway and they for some naïve reason are far too willing to listen to the Israelis always whispering in their ears. GC Marshall was right when he warned Truman against a future dominated by the existence of Israel. pl

kooshy said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 04 March 2018 at 04:06 PM
The first time i really understood and encounter this mentality, was in American government class back in 74 or 75, I even believed in it for a while.

[Mar 04, 2018] Zuesse America's News Media Foment Hate by Eric Zuesse

Mar 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

Mimicking the movie 1984, in its two-minute section " Two Minutes of Hate ,"...

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

...the US-installed Ukrainian regime on Russia's doorstep, will soon be debating a bill to make hate of Russia obligatory to be inculcated into all Ukrainian children.

The Hill , on 9 November 2017, had the extraordinary courage to publish an opinion-piece that condemned the mainstream news-media's charges that reports of widespread "neo-Nazi formations in Ukraine" are nothing but "Russian propaganda." An editor who would accept a submission like that at such media as the Washington Post, New York Times, New Yorker, The Atlantic , or just about any other in America, would probably be fired or else re-assigned, so as to prevent a repeat.

It's the way to achieve mass-indoctrination, which the Ministry of Truth specializes in. Thus, among the reader-comments to that bold article, the top-listed one under "sort by best" (in other words, the most popular) was the anti -Russian "Have you counted how many neo-Nazis are in the Russian army as well?"

[Mar 04, 2018] Minister of Security and Justice signs MH17 treaty with Ukraine

Jul 07, 2018 | www.government.nl

Minister of Security and Justice Stef Blok and his Ukrainian counterpart Pavlo Petrenko today signed a bilateral treaty on international legal cooperation in relation to the downing of flight MH17. The treaty provides that those suspected of downing flight MH17 can be prosecuted in the Netherlands in respect of all 298 victims. This means that all next of kin will have the same rights in the Dutch criminal proceedings.

Minister of Security and Justice Stef Blok and his Ukrainian counterpart Pavlo Petrenko sign the treaty.

The countries whose prosecution authorities are cooperating in the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) – Australia, Belgium, Malaysia, Ukraine and the Netherlands – this week jointly decided that the prosecution and trial of the suspects would take place in the Netherlands, in a process rooted in close and ongoing international cooperation and support. The JIT's criminal investigation is still underway. A decision on prosecution will be taken by the Dutch Public Prosecution Service in due course.

The bilateral treaty with Ukraine eliminates any doubts that the prosecution could take place in the Netherlands in respect of all the victims, not only those who were Dutch nationals. The victims of the MH17 disaster included people from 17 different countries.

The treaty also makes it possible for any Ukrainian defendants to be examined by video link. Provision has also been made for the transfer of enforcement of any prison sentences that may be imposed. This is important since the Ukrainian constitution prohibits the country from extraditing its own nationals.

'The signing of this treaty is an important step towards establishing the truth, trying those responsible and achieving justice for the next of kin,' Mr Blok said. 'We are grateful to Ukraine for cooperating effectively with us, including in the agreement of this treaty.'

The MH17 treaty and its implementing legislation will be submitted to the House of Representatives for consideration as soon as possible.

[Mar 04, 2018] Propaganda war still continues on who shot MT17 question. Now it is clear that goverment and intelligence serveses are subservert to the USA and we probably will never know the truth, like was the case with the JFK assasination

Notable quotes:
"... Of course Kiev junta shot down MH17, otherwise US would provide satellite images and other details obtained by high tech devices. But so far nothing has been published. Speaks volumes, no? ..."
"... Well, nobody really knows, what we do know is that Ukraine was the one directing where the MH17 should fly, and Ukraine had just one day earlier been bombing the rebels from airplanes in just that area, and Ukraine was responsibly for what happens inside its airspace, and that Ukraine benefited hugely from the destruction of the MH17. ..."
Mar 04, 2018 | nationalinterest.org

Agarbeau • a day ago ,

Russia has a nasty habit of downing aircraft even commercial airliners.

Vic -> Agarbeau • a day ago ,

Hrm? Seems Russia is one of the few countries that does not have a habit of shooting down civilian airliners.

"Siberia Airlines Flight 1812[1] was a commercial flight shot down by the Ukrainian Air Force over the Black Sea on 4 October 2001, en route from Tel Aviv, Israel to Novosibirsk," https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

"Iran Air Flight 655 was a scheduled Iran Air passenger flight from Tehran to Dubai. On 3 July 1988, the aircraft operating on this route was shot down by the United States Navy guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes under the command of William C. Rogers III, killing all 290 people on "board.https:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_...

focusser -> Vic • a day ago ,

MH17, and Korean Airlines 007. Just two planes Russia shot down.

Vic -> focusser • a day ago ,

MH17 was likely shot down by Ukraine in an successfully attempt to internationalize the conflict. Airliner 007 was shot down by Soviets.

Melotte 22 -> Vic • 20 hours ago ,

Of course Kiev junta shot down MH17, otherwise US would provide satellite images and other details obtained by high tech devices. But so far nothing has been published. Speaks volumes, no?

Vic -> Melotte 22 • 11 hours ago ,

Yes, that is a good point, USA had satellites passing over Ukraine when it happened, USA saw and recorded everything, Russia said this and demand that USA release the images, and USA itself admitted they had satellites over Ukraine during the event . However USA refused to reveal the satellite images. Which would have proven or disproven everything.

disqus_t8zg0f4HzM Vic • a day ago ,

That is lie

Vic disqus_t8zg0f4HzM • a day ago ,

Well, nobody really knows, what we do know is that Ukraine was the one directing where the MH17 should fly, and Ukraine had just one day earlier been bombing the rebels from airplanes in just that area, and Ukraine was responsibly for what happens inside its airspace, and that Ukraine benefited hugely from the destruction of the MH17.

olu -> Vic • a day ago ,

So Soviet doesn't mean Russian?

Vic -> olu • a day ago ,

Of course not. Different country, different government, different ideology. However anti-Russians often mix up Russia with Soviet when they want to say something negative, and pro-Russian often mix up Russia with Soviet when they want to say something positive.

An Anti-Russian would say "Russia exterminate millions in GULAG" and a pro-Russian would say "Russia won world war 2" neither is true of course. Most of the people exterminated in GULAG were Russians and while Russia was the largest country in the USSR and did the most to fight Nazism, USSR also consisted of many other ethnic groups that was critical to the success of USSR.

[Mar 04, 2018] NBC's Megyn Kelly gets demolished by Vladimir Putin in latest one-on-one interview (Video)

Mar 04, 2018 | theduran.com

NBC's Megyn Kelly is once again sitting down with Russian President Vladimir Putin to disseminate Deep State propaganda to her Today Show base, and maybe give it another go at trying to outsmart Russia's President.

As expected, Kelly looks lie a complete fool when confronting Putin, as she peddles the tiresome and stupid narrative of ''Russian bots" and ''Facebook Ads", only to be schooled by Putin on how the real world of diplomacy and international law works.

[Mar 04, 2018] Putin interview to Megan Kelly

Mar 04, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Joe Tedesky , March 3, 2018 at 1:13 pm

Here is Megyn Kelly's interview with Putin.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-03/putin-says-russia-cant-react-mueller-indictment-without-official-request

incontinent reader , March 3, 2018 at 3:30 pm

Joe- I think the interview reposted by Zero Hedge in its 3/3/18 edition is the interview broadcast by NBC on June, 4 2017. That broadcast was of an edited version of the full interview, and, as such, egregiously misrepresented some of what Putin actually said. The unedited version can be accessed at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_WPk6Rxx00&t=7s .

I'm not certain the new one – i.e. dated 3/1 or 3/2/18- has been broadcast or posted yet, apart from two short excerpts- both of which left this viewer more certain than ever that Kelly was and is arrogant, crude, misinformed- and a peddler of misinformation. See, for example: https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/video/exclusive-putin-addresses-2016-election-meddling-1175502915757 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TN8GpOSX3gg

[Mar 04, 2018] Russian Foreign Ministry slams US State Department spokesperson

Mar 04, 2018 | www.fort-russ.com

Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova blasted the United States on Friday saying that the Russian Foreign Ministry will allocate special seats for American journalists at press briefings if the US continues to infringe on the rights of Russian reporters.

The aggressive response came as US State Department Spokesperson Heather Nauert rudely and condescendingly rejected questions from a Russian reporter at a press briefing on Thursday.

"You're from Russian TV too? OK! Enough said then, I'll move on," Nauert interrupted.

Nauert's outburst even received condemnation from some American journalists who also wanted the spokesperson to clarify her remarks about Putin's speech.

"This behavior is unacceptable! If the State Department once again dares to label our journalists who are present at press briefings 'journalists from Russia' and stop communicating with them because of that, we will carry out what we promised," Zakharova said.

"We will arrange special seats for the so-called journalists from the US at the Foreign Ministry's press center so that your journalists could feel this time what it is all about," she said.

"Earlier, literally several decades ago, people with different skin color were not allowed to ride on the same bus in the United States. It is necessary to overcome that instead of returning to the flawed practice of the early 19th century, dividing journalists into countries and nationalities. You have no right to deny them access to information due to their nationality," Zakharova stressed.

She then also went onto thank "those American reporters who defended their Russian counterparts' right to access information and be treated equally."

[Mar 04, 2018] Bill Maher The US Media Manufactures More Fake News Than Russia Ever Could

Notable quotes:
"... Maher released a helpful summary of "rules for identifying fake news" - which everybody who posts on social media about the campaign-era predations of shadowy Russian trolls ..."
"... In his monologue "explainer" on how to spot fake news, Maher admits that Trump voters have good reasons to be suspicious of the mainstream media and its tendency toward hyperbole and exaggeration that often leads CNN, the Huffington Post, Slate and their peers to manufacture controversies out of thing air. ..."
"... "I used to think something was news if a journalist reported it. But really I live in a world where its news if Mariah Carey's tit flops out because Twitter will respond and then a journalist reports on the controversy. If a boob flops in the forest and nothing is heard about it doesn't make a sound. But if three jackasses tweet about it, it's news." ..."
"... This is not an outlier, this is a constant and prominent part of today's journalism. Creating some bullshit non-issue that a few trolls will go apeshit over, then reporting on those tweets like all of America's talking about nothing else ..."
"... No wonder fake news resonates so much with Trump fans - because so much of it is fake! Just nonsense made to keep you perpetually offended with an endless stream of controversy that aren't controversial. And outrages that aren't outrageous. ..."
"... Because places like the Huffington Post and Buzzfeed and Salon - they make their money based on how many clicks they get. Yes, the people who see themselves as morally superior are actually ignoring their sacred job of informing citizens of what's important and instead creating divisions to pursue their own selfish ends. Wait isn't that what Russia was doing to us? Yes it is . ..."
"... And no, it's not easy: in fact, as the media's current business model shows, clickbait works, which is why it is easier to just blame someone else for creating it and "sowing discord", when the real culprit is America's endless superficial, scandal-seeking obsession, always eager to to click on the next catchy, if idiotic news story, and then cover up its guilt by blaming, why who else, Russia. ..."
Mar 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Every once in a while, Bill Maher reminds us that he's the only liberal pundit on TV who will call "the tolerant" left on its BS. In his latest weekly show, Maher released a helpful summary of "rules for identifying fake news" - which everybody who posts on social media about the campaign-era predations of shadowy Russian trolls and the mechanics of "internalized misogyny" would do well to watch: "Fake News" isn't some made-up phenomenon concocted by pro-Trump bloggers. It's a very real and disturbing trend that goes much further in tearing at the social fabric of American society than $100,000 of spending on Facebook ads ever could.

In his monologue "explainer" on how to spot fake news, Maher admits that Trump voters have good reasons to be suspicious of the mainstream media and its tendency toward hyperbole and exaggeration that often leads CNN, the Huffington Post, Slate and their peers to manufacture controversies out of thing air. Or, as he puts it, just because a few people on Twitter with no followers and no real-life influence are angry, doesn't mean the rest of America feels that way...

"Since so much of what passes for today's journalism is anything but...how about some rules for identifying actual news.

"If anybody is demanding an apology... unless they have hostages, that's not news.

"And when the offended group are identified as the internet, twitter or people - it's nobody. I guarantee when you click on the story the internet is three losers with a combined twitter following of their mom."

"I used to think something was news if a journalist reported it. But really I live in a world where its news if Mariah Carey's tit flops out because Twitter will respond and then a journalist reports on the controversy. If a boob flops in the forest and nothing is heard about it doesn't make a sound. But if three jackasses tweet about it, it's news."

Maher gives several examples of what passes as news, including the "controversy surrounding Jennifer Lawrence's performance in the movie "Red Sparrow". The mainstream press reported that a shot of Lawrence with a group of men was unforgivably sexist...because Lawrence wasn't wearing a coat (while the men in the shot were).

Maher threw up all over the "story" which just happened to be reported in dozens of "serious" media outlets, despite having zero social import or even any grounding in reality.

Here's the headline from Elle online and a hundred other sites: 'Jennifer Lawrence's latest red sparrow protocol has twitter calling out gender inequality. See because the men are wearing coats but she's not. And even though that was her choice, somebody with 11 followers didn't like it so the the story was reported in the New York Times, the Washington Post, the New York Post, Fox News..."

" Now all these esteemed news organizations aren't saying they think it's a big deal because they're serious journalists. They'd rather be writing about Syria or the oceans dying but oh the humanity, Jennifer Lawrence didn't have a coat. Wrap her up, wrap her up!"

Such "clickbait" stories like this aren't rare, in fact as Maher admits they have become the norm, to an extent that most consumers of news hardly recognize how ridiculous they sound.

"This is not an outlier, this is a constant and prominent part of today's journalism. Creating some bullshit non-issue that a few trolls will go apeshit over, then reporting on those tweets like all of America's talking about nothing else."

Justin Timberlake used a protection of Prince for his Superbowl halftime show and people are furious...nope nobody cared.

People are really mad that Sean White dragged the American flag after he won the gold...nope not even a little you fucking liars.""Weight Watchers is targeting teens and twitter is outraged. No it isn't, it's the same three people. And it's not hard to find three people who are mad at anything. I could say good morning and three people on twitter would object: 'Good in your privileged world, Bill Maher'."

Yet considering the mainstream media's obsession with these types of stories, it is no surprise that a sizable chunk of the US population has lost its faith in the validity and and motivations of news organizations like CNN. What is surprising is that people like Maher are finally admitting what is really going on...

"No wonder fake news resonates so much with Trump fans - because so much of it is fake! Just nonsense made to keep you perpetually offended with an endless stream of controversy that aren't controversial. And outrages that aren't outrageous.

And what is really going on is that as Maher admits, what the US media is doing is no different than the alleged "discord-sowing" misinformation campaign that Mueller recently accused 13 Russians and 3 Russian companies of perpetrating on the US population?

"Because places like the Huffington Post and Buzzfeed and Salon - they make their money based on how many clicks they get. Yes, the people who see themselves as morally superior are actually ignoring their sacred job of informing citizens of what's important and instead creating divisions to pursue their own selfish ends. Wait isn't that what Russia was doing to us? Yes it is .

And we need to stop both of them from using us as the cocks in their cock fights. And so I saw to the people who were unable to go on after seeing Kendal Jenner tweet the wrong colored emoji A bit of advice: If you didn't like what Kendal did with a brown fist...then don't watch her sister's sex tape."

So, next time you're reading about the epidemic of teenagers eating Tide Pods, or rushing to be the first to know all about the latest Kardashian clickbait du jour, don't: not only will it stop rewarding hollow headlines designed for clicks, it will force the US media to once again focus on news that truly matters. The real news.

And no, it's not easy: in fact, as the media's current business model shows, clickbait works, which is why it is easier to just blame someone else for creating it and "sowing discord", when the real culprit is America's endless superficial, scandal-seeking obsession, always eager to to click on the next catchy, if idiotic news story, and then cover up its guilt by blaming, why who else, Russia.

[Mar 04, 2018] Will the War Clouds Pass Us By, Or Will the Storm Break by Alastair Crooke

Notable quotes:
"... Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act ..."
"... "This has happened as the Russia-gate claims have fallen to pieces All across the media spectrum, from the big name corporate stenographers like The New York Times, CNN, National Public Radio, The Washington Post to The Atlantic and Nation magazines and other "leftist" publications such as Mother Jones and Who What Why, the Russia and Putin bashing has become hysterical in tone, joined as it is with an anti-Trump obsession "Russia Sees Midterm Elections as a Chance to Sow Fresh Discord ( NY Times , 2/13), "Russia Strongman [Putin] haspulled off one of the greatest acts of political sabotage in modern history" ( The Atlantic , Jan. /Feb. 2018), "Mueller's Latest Indictment Shows Trump Has Helped Putin Cover Up a Crime" ( Mother Jones , 2/16/18), "A Russian Sightseeing Tour For Realists" ( whowhatwhy.com , 2/7/18), etc." ..."
"... a war of choice ..."
"... generational enemy. ..."
"... the primordial threat ..."
"... status quo ante ..."
"... or its allies ..."
Mar 04, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

The compulsive hatred of President Putin in élite western circles has surpassed anything witnessed during the Cold War. Western states have been hyping political hostility in almost every sphere: In Syria, in Ukraine, across the Middle East, in Eurasia, and now, this hatred has leached into the Security Council, leaving it irretrievably polarised -- and paralysed. This hostility has percolated too, across to all Russia's allies, contaminating them. It potends – almost inevitably – further sanctions on Russia (and its friends) under the catch-all Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act . But the real question is: Does this collective hysteria portend war ?

Ed Curtis reminds us of the almost parabolic escalation of antagonism in recent weeks:

"This has happened as the Russia-gate claims have fallen to pieces All across the media spectrum, from the big name corporate stenographers like The New York Times, CNN, National Public Radio, The Washington Post to The Atlantic and Nation magazines and other "leftist" publications such as Mother Jones and Who What Why, the Russia and Putin bashing has become hysterical in tone, joined as it is with an anti-Trump obsession "Russia Sees Midterm Elections as a Chance to Sow Fresh Discord ( NY Times , 2/13), "Russia Strongman [Putin] haspulled off one of the greatest acts of political sabotage in modern history" ( The Atlantic , Jan. /Feb. 2018), "Mueller's Latest Indictment Shows Trump Has Helped Putin Cover Up a Crime" ( Mother Jones , 2/16/18), "A Russian Sightseeing Tour For Realists" ( whowhatwhy.com , 2/7/18), etc."

By casting Russia's interference in the US presidential election as "an attack on American democracy" and thus "an act of war", the 'Covert American State' is saying – implicitly - that just as the act of war at Pearl Harbour brought a retaliatory war upon Japan, so, pari passu , Russia's effort to subvert America require similar retribution.

Across the Middle East – but especially in Syria – there is ample dry tinder for a conflagration, with incipient or existing conflicts between Turkey and the Kurds; between the Turkish Army and the Syrian Army; between Turkish forces and American forces in Manbij; between Syrian forces and American forces; between American forces and the USAF, and Russian servicemen and Russia's aerospace forces; between American forces and Iranian forces, and last but not least, between Israel and Syria.

This is one heck of a pile of combustible material. Plainly any incident amidst such compressed volatility may escalate dangerously. But this is not the point. The point is: Does all this Russia hysteria imply that the US is contemplating a war of choice against Russia, or in support of a re-set of the Middle East landscape to Israel's and Saudi Arabia's benefit ? Will the US deliberately provoke Russia – by killing Russian servicemen, for example – in order to find pretext for a 'bloody nose' military action launched against Russia itself – for responding to the American provocation?

Inadvertent war is a distinct possibility, of course: Both Israel and Saudi Arabia are experiencing domestic leadership crises. Israel may overreach, and America may overreach, too, in its desire to support Israel. Indeed the constant portrayal of the US President as Putin's puppet is pursued, of course, to taunt Trump into proving the opposite - by authorizing some or other action against Russia – albeit against his better instincts.

At the Munich Security Conference, PM Netanyahu said :

"For some time I've been warning about this development [Iran's alleged plan to complete a Shi'i crescent] I've made clear in word and deed that Israel has red lines it will enforce. Israel will continue to prevent Iran from establishing a permanent military presence in Syria We will act without hesitation to defend ourselves. And we will act, if necessary, not just against Iran's proxies that are attacking us, but against Iran itself."

And, at the same conference, US National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster warned Saturday against increased Iranian efforts to support its proxies in the Middle East, saying the "time is now" to act against Tehran.

But what did McMaster mean by "time is now to act" ? Is he encouraging Israel to attack Hizbullah or Iranian-linked forces in Syria? This, almost certainly, would lead to a three or four front war for Israel; yet there are good grounds for believing that the Israeli security establishment does not want to risk a three front war. Possibly, McMaster was thinking more of full-spectrum hybrid, or COIN war, but not conventional war, especially since Israel cannot, any longer (after the shoot down of its F16), be sure of its air dominance , without which, it cannot expect, or hope, to prevail.

As senior Israeli officials complain about the gap between US rhetoric and action, General Josef Votel, the commander of Centcom , stated explicitly, by way of confirmation of the differing view, at a hearing in Congress on 28 February that, "countering Iran is not one of the coalition missions in Syria".

So – back to the Russia hysteria. I do not believe that Syria is a practical locus for a war of choice either for the United States or Russia. Both are circumscribed by the realities of Syria. American forces there are not numerous: they are isolated, and dependent on allies – the Kurds – who are a minority in that part of Syria, who are divided, and who are disliked by the Arab population. And Russian forces mostly consist of no more than 37 aircraft, and small numbers of Russian advisers and Russian supply lines are extended and vulnerable (in the Bosphorous).

No, the US aim in Syria is limited to denying any political success to either Presidents Putin or Assad. It is pure schadenfreude. The American occupation of north-east Syria is primarily about spitting in the face of Iran – i.e. the pursuit of a COIN war against an American, generational enemy.

And at the same time, at the macro, geo-strategic level, America has precisely been trying to 'disarm' Russia's nuclear defences, and seize the advantage, by withdrawing from the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty, and by deliberately surrounding Russia on its borders with anti-ballistic missiles (the ABM treaty provided for only one site on its territory - for each party - that would be protected from missile attack). The US strategy effectively left Russia naked, in the nuclear sense. And that clearly was the intent. "With the build-up of the global US ABM missile system, the New START Treaty (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) is devaluated, and the strategic balance [was] broken", Russian President Vladimir Putin said in his State of the Nation Address yesterday.

But then, as 'the quartet of generals' (effectively, General Petraeus is a part of the WH trinity of generals), having usurped America's foreign policy out from the prerogative of the President and into their control, so US defence policy has metamorphosed beyond 'Cold War', to something far more aggressive - and dangerous: a precursor to 'hot war'.

From the original Strategic Statement, casting Russia and China as 'rivals and competitors', the subsequent Defense Posture Statement elevated the latter from mere rivals, to 'revisionist powers', which is to say, dubbed them as seditionists committed to overturning the global order by military force (the definition of revisionist power). The Statement placed great power competition above terrorism, as the primordial threat facing America, and implied that this 'revisionist' threat to the American-led global order needed to be met. American generals complained that their erstwhile, unchallenged global dominance of the skies, and of terrain, was being eroded by Russia acting as 'arsonist' [of stability] whilst presenting itself as the "fire-fighter" [in Syria]. America's air dominance must be reasserted, General Votel implied .

But in a startling upending of the strategic balance and missile encirclement, that America has been seeking to impose on Russia, President Putin announced yesterday that:

"Those who for the past 15 years have been fueling the arms race, seeking advantages over Russia, imposing restrictions and sanctions, which are illegal from the standpoint of international law, in order to hinder our country's development, particularly in the defence field, must hear this: all that you have been trying to prevent by this policy has happened. Attempts to restrain Russia have failed."

The Russian President announced a series of new weapons (including new nuclear-powered missiles invulnerable to any missile defence, hypersonic weapons, and underwater drones, inter alia ), that remarkably return the situation to the status quo ante – one of mutually assured destruction (MAD), were NATO to contemplate attacking Russia.

President Putin said that he had repeatedly warned Washington not to deploy ABM missiles around Russia – "Nobody listened to us: [But] Listen now!", he said:

"Our nuclear doctrine says Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons only in response to a nuclear attack or an attack with other weapons of mass destruction against her or her allies, or a conventional attack against us that threatens the very existence of the state."

"It is my duty to state this: Any use of nuclear weapons against Russia or its allies , be it small-scale, medium-scale or any other scale, will be treated as a nuclear attack on our country. The response will be instant - and with all the relevant consequences" (emphasis added).

President Putin underlined that he was not threatening America, nor did Russia have revanchist ambitions. It was rather Russia simply using the only language that Washington understands.

Putin's speech, accompanied by visuals of the new Russian weaponry, explains at least something of what has been going on in DC: America's recent seizure by a madness for spending. The Pentagon must have got (some) wind of Russia's advances – hence the huge increase in the budget for Defence planned for this year, and another 9% next year, and an unbudgeted commitment to fund a new nuclear submarine fleet, a replacement for the Minuteman missile system, and the development of new nuclear (tactical) weapons (costs unspecified).

The expense will be prodigious for the US government. But Russia already has stolen the lead, and did this with government debt, as a percentage of nominal GDP, standing at only 12.6%, whereas America debt's already is at 105% of GDP (before the weapons upgrade has begun). President Reagan is credited with busting the USSR economically by forcing it into an arms race, but now it is the US that is vulnerable to its mountain of debt – should the US try to reverse Putin's Spring 'surprise', and (if it can), restore its global conventional and nuclear primacy.

So, America has a choice: either to re-set the relationship with Russia (i.e. pursue détente), or, risk running a US borrowing requirement that busts the credibility of the dollar. The US, culturally, is accustomed to acting militarily 'where, when and how' it decides so to do. It will probably be culturally unable to abstain from this well-practiced habit. Therefore, a weak dollar and rising debt servicing costs seems inevitable: thus, the rôles seem set for a reversal from the Reagan era. Then it was Russia that overreached, trying to catch up with the US. Now, it may be the vice versa .

The hysteric anti-Russian rhetoric will continue – so deeply embedded is it as an 'article of faith' - but it seems likely that America will need to reconsider before further provoking Russia in Syria. If America is now unwilling to 'bloody Russia's nose' over some escalation in Syria, then its isolated and vulnerable military outposts in eastern Syria will loose much of their point, or begin to take casualties, or both.

The question now must be how Russia's exercise in speaking 'truth to power' will play on America's policy towards North Korea. The US 'generals' will not like President Putin's message, but there is probably little that they can do about it. But North Korea is different. Just as Britain, at its moment of weakness, in the wake of WW2, wanted the world to know that it remained strong (though the signs of its weakened state were evident to all), it sought to demonstrate its continued power through the disastrous Suez Campaign. Let us hope North Korea does not become America's 'Suez moment'.

Peter AU , 03 March 2018 at 05:40 PM

It seems Russia was able to develop all these weapons, right up to the testing phase, in total secrecy. Testing, impossible to conceal, would have been undertaken over the last two years or so, which fits the time frame for US looking at upgrading their weapons. US ABM defense, a big part of US military future, what twenty years in the making for US? is now null and void.
Christian Chuba , 03 March 2018 at 06:12 PM
If I know my country our reaction will be, 'we beat them in space race, we beat them in the 80's arms race, and dog gone it, we will beat them again'.

We have no interest in examining how we got here or who triggered it. All we see is that a gauntlet has been thrown down. We will go into even more massive deficit spending to whip them again and won't think about it again until we are eating out of garbage cans.

I'm angry at the professional Cold Warriors but even more angry at the MSM. Just today, I heard a Russian expert (aka hater) on FOX intone that Russia never had anything to worry about with our ABM systems because it can't a massive first strike. I naively expected the lady host to ask, 'but maybe they are worried that it would be able to stop a retaliatory strike after we send them to hades'. Needless to say, I was disappointed. Instead, Eboni Williams (mentioning her name to show that I'm not hallucinating, any of them would have reacted the same way), her eyes opened wide, 'we must improve our defenses to stop them'.

There you go, the FOX host, not only didn't see through the guests straw man argument but took it as a given that the U.S. should be able to nuke Russia out of existence with no consequences for us. The entire premise of the START treaty was to preserve MAD with a smaller nuke force to reduce accidents. Mr. Naive again, why should I expect the host to know that or the expert to inform her that MAD is the expected norm.

catherine , 03 March 2018 at 06:16 PM

''The point is, ladies and gentleman, that war, for lack of a better word, is good. War is right, war works. War clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. War, in all of its forms; war for life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind.''

So say the fellows who qualify to sit it out in well stocked gov bunkers and watch it on TV.

Lars , 03 March 2018 at 06:16 PM
When you qualify any anti-Russian sentiment as "hysteric", you lose a lot of credibility. No doubt there is a lot of noise, but the reality is that economically Russia is a basket case and the US is rapidly joining them.

For the next decade, we are faced with an unstable world and that will cause a lot of damage. However, it is unlikely that it will result in the massive land wars of the past. The biggest potential adversary to both the US and Russia is China. The battle field will be the communications platforms. The good new is that they will remain fragmented and technology will more than likely make it even more so, which will thankfully and eventually localize information, as global solutions are increasingly rejected.

As with these pages, there are a lot of conspiracies published right now, but as they are increasingly dispatched, a standard will be developed. Some will agree with it and others will not and will thus migrate elsewhere. This will be repeated all over the Internet.

I was an early user of the Internet and it quickly became a rather awful place where people were exchanging views. It soon became evident that was not sustainable and things changed. Like in a pond, the scum will rise, until encountering sunlight, when it is transformed and sinks to the bottom, never to be seen again, unless you dig very deep. But the cream will assemble at the top.

likbez , 04 March 2018 at 12:54 AM
The compulsive hatred of President Putin in élite western circles has surpassed anything witnessed during the Cold War. Western states have been hyping political hostility in almost every sphere: In Syria, in Ukraine, across the Middle East, in Eurasia, and now, this hatred has leached into the Security Council, leaving it irretrievably polarised -- and paralysed. This hostility has percolated too, across to all Russia's allies, contaminating them. It potends – almost inevitably – further sanctions on Russia (and its friends) under the catch-all Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act. But the real question is: Does this collective hysteria portend war?
Not necessary. With MAD temporary restored on a new level the benefits of the first strike against Russia (if such plans existed) are null and void. Moreover spending on the current generation of missile defense systems should be partially written off, as their efficiency is now highly questionable (but they can be repurposed into offensive weapons carrying cruise missiles and such)

But the new neo-McCarthyism campaign, which is now in full force in the USA, serves a different purpose than the preparation to the WWIII, and reached such scale and intensity for a quite different reason.

Neoliberalism, which was the social system that the USA adopted in 1970th and spread around the globe entered a deep crisis. And Russia is a very convenient scapegoat, which allows to avoid the most difficult question: what to do next as neoliberalism entered the phase of decline (also Russia as a scapegoat allows just to reuse Cold War stereotypes firmly engraved in minds of the considerable part of the US population.)

The collapse of neoliberal ideology in 2008. and the collapse of support by the US population of neoliberal elite in 2016, threatens the USA role in the world and thus the existence of global neoliberal empire. And, in a more distant perspective (a decade, or two), the status of dollar as a global reserve currency.

And nobody knows what to do with this situation, how to approach it.

First it looked to me that the election of Trump was a sign that a more forward looking part of the US elite was trying to organize a soft landing: declare victory for neoliberalism and slowly retreat from the large part of the expenses for maintaining the global neoliberal empire. Partially off-loading those costs on EU, Japan, Australia, etc.

In this case enormous resources spent on MIC and empire per se can be redirected internally to placate restive population, and the deepening of the internal crisis in governance and the loss of confidence of population in the ruling elite, which demonstrated itself is such a dramatic manner in Hillary loss in 2016, can be probably be averted.

I was wrong. Multinationals fully and tightly control the US neoliberal elite (and are an important part of it) and they will never allow this. Also a large part of neoliberal elite is hell bent on world domination, and, like French aristocracy, "forgot nothing, and learned nothing" after 2016 elections.

With the alarming level of degeneration of the elite clearly visible in both Trump Administration and Congress. But the process itself started long ago (people say that Nixon was the last "real" president ;-). To say nothing about top intelligence agencies honchos.

In any case, it is clear that the US neoliberal elite still is hell-bent on world domination and is resistant to any change of the status quo . And I also noticed that, like in Rome, there is now an influential caste of "imperial servants", also hell-bent on maintaining the status quo.

Which includes not only Pentagon, and State Department which have a lot of staff living abroad for years. But also major intelligence agencies, closely connected with their counterparts (note role of UK-USA connections in Steele dossier) and as such fully "globalized/neoliberalized", at least ideologically. As well as the majority of the US Senate and House

That blocks any possibility of change in the US foreign policy and budget priorities. It looks like MIC needs to be fed at all costs. And the power of the "deep state" is such that it took them just three months to emasculate Trump, and put him in line with previous policies.

I would like to remind that Trumpism (or "economic nationalism" as it sometimes it is called) initially was pretty attractive proposition which included the following elements (most of which are anathema to classic neoliberalism):

  1. Rejection of neoliberal globalization;
  2. Rejection of unrestricted immigration;
  3. Fight against suppression of wages by multinationals via cheap imported labor;
  4. Fight against the elimination of meaningful, well-paying jobs via outsourcing and offshoring of manufacturing;
  5. Rejection of wars for enlargement and sustaining of neoliberal empire, especially NATO role as global policemen and wars for Washington client Israel in the Middle East;
  6. Détente with Russia;
  7. More pragmatic relations with Israel and suppression of Israeli agents of influence;
  8. Revision of offshoring of manufacturing and relations with China and India, as well as addressing the problem of trade deficit;
  9. Rejection of total surveillance on all citizens;
  10. The cut of military expenses to one third or less of the current level and concentrating on revival on national infrastructure, education, and science.
  11. Abandonment of maintenance of the "sole superpower" status and global neoliberal empire for more practical and less costly "semi-isolationist" foreign policy;
  12. Closing of unnecessary foreign military bases and cutting aid to the current clients.

The truth is that the moment, when the USA could change direction to the regime of "splendid isolation", or whatever such move can be called, was lost.

Moreover, despite Trump capitulation, the color revolution against him continued because he is not accepted as a legitimate POTUS by neoliberal elite, and, especially, by neocons. Which further weakens the state. That's another reason why neo-McCarthyism hysteria is still in full swing: it helps to compensate for the damage caused by slash-and-burn political infighting (which is a kind of soft civil war, if you wish)

The problem with witch hunt against Russia is that can speed up the alliance of China and Russia, on most beneficial for China terms. If and when China-Russia alliance materialize, the containment of China would be even more difficult and costly, the threat to dollar more pronounced and all bets are off for the US led global neoliberal empire as "Silk road" project will eat it in Europe and Asia chunk by chunk.

Neo-McCarthyism in this respect might be not such an absurd policy (and it does provide internal benefits in the form of consolidation of society against the fake external enemy -- a classic trick described by Hermann Göring in his famous quote https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/33505-why-of-course-the-people-don-t-want-war-why-should ) as Putin is not eternal and this will be his last term in office. With clear signs of possible political crisis in Russia due to the weakness of the mechanisms for smooth transition of the power to a new leader, or even the selection of the new one.

The danger is that instead of desirable new pro-European president (or at least a person who is inclined to cooperate with the West, but only on equal terms, like Putin) the next Russian president can be a fierce nationalist.

[Mar 04, 2018] Highlights From Putin's Megyn Kelly Interview Hacked Elections, Nukes And A New Cold War

Mar 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

NBC's Megyn Kelly has tried to establish herself as the US media's preeminent "Putin whisperer" since confronting the Russian president last year over allegations he sanctioned interference by hacking groups in the 2016 US presidential election. In a formal interview with the Russian president, Kelly asked the Russian leader about the latest development in the ongoing controversy, Mueller's indictment of 13 Russians and 3 Russian entities for election meddling.

Ignoring that the indictment stated that the alleged activities of the trolls at the Internet Research Agency had no impact on the outcome of the election, Kelly insisted on pressing the Russian president about why Russia hadn't acted to prosecute the men - including Yevgeniy Prigozhin, a wealthy Russian businessman.

Putin pointed out that no formal requests had been made by the US government, and no effort to share the incriminating information had been made.

"I have to see first what they've done. Give us a document, give us an official request" Putin said in the NBC interview adding that "We can not respond to that if they do not violate Russian laws."

Kelly responded by listing some of the allegations, before Putin insisted that they shouldn't be presented to him personally - but to Russia's general prosecutor.

"This has to go through official channels, not through the press, or yelling and hollering in the United States Congress," Putin said.

The broadcast aired a day after Putin grabbed headlines in Western media by revealing that Russia had recently finished testing a range of nuclear weapons that were capable of evading US anti-ballistic missile batteries, showing animated footage and digital representations of the missiles' capabilities striking Florida which prompted an uproar at the US State Department .

Meanwhile, even though Russia has repeatedly criticized the US and NATO for installing anti-ballistic missile shields in Eastern Europe that Russia says more closely resemble offensive missile batteries, Putin pushed back against questions about whether the US and Russia were entering a new Cold War. The Russian leader said anybody spreading these accusations are more concerned with propaganda than accurate representations of the relationships between the two countries.

"My point of view is that the individuals that have said that a new Cold War has started are not analysts. They do propaganda."

Repeating a claim that has been made by many Russian officials, Putin said the arms race between the US and Russia began when George W Bush withdrew from the anti-ballistic missile treaty in 2002.

"If you were to speak about an arms race, then an arms race began exactly at the time and moment the U.S. opted out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty," he said.

When asked, Putin refused to answer direct questions about the missile tests, saying only that "every single weapons system that I have discussed today easily surpasses and avoids a missile defense system."

Watch the full interview below:

https://www.nbcnews.com/widget/video-embed/960120387521

Politics War Conflict

Brazen Heist -> NiggaPleeze Sat, 03/03/2018 - 11:07 Permalink

Whatever interview is shown of Putin on any lamestream outlet, you can bet your bottom dollar that they will twist it to fit their narratives that Putin is bad, and the Swamp is good. In fact, it don't matter that the US pulls out of treaties and acts unilaterally.......laws and treaties are optional to the evil empire. Non-agreement capable comes to mind.

TahoeBilly2012 -> Brazen Heist Sat, 03/03/2018 - 12:10 Permalink

Better a few Ruski internet geeks "hack" ur election, than Hillary and Merkel hack your regime out of power, like Gaddafi learned.

virgule -> TahoeBilly2012 Sat, 03/03/2018 - 12:13 Permalink

The Pentagon in uproar? You mean despite all the spying, eavesdropping, electronic surveillance, satellites, etc...they had no idea?

LOL. Might as well cut those defense budgets by 90% then!

[Mar 03, 2018] Shocking EU Reforms Ukraine's public debt doubles in 4 years, while personal incomes halve

Mar 03, 2018 | www.fort-russ.com

The Ukrainian economy is in a catastrophic state after four years of "euro-reforms," said ​​Viktor Medvedchuk, head of the public movement "Ukrainian Choice – People's Right." "At the end of 2013. Ukraine's state and publicly guaranteed debt was 40% of GDP, and by the end of 2017 it had more than doubled, exceeding 80% of GDP. In 2013, Ukraine's GDP per capita was more than $ 4,075, and in 2016 decreased to $ 2221.

The average monthly salary in 2017 as a whole for the country was $ 267 (in 2013 it exceeded $ 408), pensions are also 2.3 times lower than before the euro reform. Today, it is slightly more than $ 48, while in 2013 it was almost $ 112, " Medvedchuk said.

[Mar 03, 2018] Ukrainian special forces indispensible for NATO's war against Russia

Mar 03, 2018 | www.fort-russ.com

Ukrainian special forces can be "indispensable" for NATO in the event of a war with Russia. This is stated by military expert First Rank Captain Konstantin Sivkov in the "Military Industrial Courier "

"Special forces can be transferred to the Russian Federation both under the guise of civilian passengers and by military aircraft, either by land or from the sea. They can be introduced to consolidate success , which can establish reliable control over the strategic nuclear arsenal of our country, "- writes Sivkov.

This, in the author's opinion, explains the build-up of NATO special operations and rapid deployment units in the areas bordering Russia.

Sivkov notes the special role of the Ukrainian military, in the conflict. "Particularly valuable in these conditions for NATO are the soldiers of the Ukrainian special forces who are ethnically and culturally related to the Russian population, speaking the same language, they will be indispensable in the conduct of special actions with preliminary secretive deployment," the expert said

[Mar 02, 2018] >US Approves Sale of Anti-Tank Missiles to Ukraine by Jason Ditz

Mar 02, 2018 | news.antiwar.com

$47 million sale targeted at neighboring Russia

Posted on March 1, 2018 Categories News Tags Pentagon , Russia , Ukraine

With Ukrainian officials continuing to talk up their hostility with neighboring Russia, the Pentagon announced on Thursday that approval has been granted for the sale of Javelin anti-tank systems to Ukraine.

The sale, estimated at a $47 million deal for Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, would involve 37 Javelin Command Launch Units and 210 missiles . The Poroshenko government says it will be used to "protect Ukrainian soldiers."

Russia is protesting the sale, however, arguing that the sale of the missiles would encourage Ukraine to resume the use of force against Eastern Ukraine's ethnic Russian rebels, with the idea that they would deploy the missiles against any rebel tanks, and also against any Russian tanks that might join the fight.

Pentagon officials downplayed the issue, saying they don't believe the Javelin missiles will materially change the military balance of power in the region. Despite obvious offensive uses for such missiles, the US is trying to spin this as another "defensive" sale to Ukraine.

[Mar 02, 2018] Review 'Breaking Point' Finds Fake News and Real Violence in Ukraine

So Europeans, both Russians and Ukrainians are dying again for the USA geopolitical goals.
Mar 02, 2018 | www.nytimes.com

The first line of the Ukrainian national anthem is "Ukraine has not yet died," one interviewee says in "Breaking Point," a fierce documentary about that country and its recent clashes with Russia. For a land often perched on the edge of ruin, she says, mere survival is something to celebrate.

Directed by Mark Jonathan Harris and Oles Sanin, the film starts with a rundown of a history that has repeated itself for centuries -- invaders have long prized Ukraine for its resources and geography, and modern times are no exception.

... ... ...

The filmmakers supply terrifying footage: At civilian rallies, we see nightstick beatings and bloody riots. During military battles, bullets whiz by and explosions shake the cameras. Nerve-racking scenes follow Ukraine's extraordinarily bold volunteer soldiers.

[Mar 02, 2018] There is will be no invasion of Russia only intimidation of the elites to submit to US political and economic dictates.

Mar 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

/p

What he did not mention is more important namely not what Russia did do with no violation of existing treaties but what they did anticipating expiration of treaties or in violation of existing treaties especially regarding space nuke.

In Fact China, Russia and US all work on space nuclear as well as so called guided hypersonic gravity systems what are man made meteorites , tungsten rods to hit the targets with cosmic speeds.

All additionally with anti satellite systems as well as massive electronic warfare including hacking of airplanes,drones, cruise missiles as well as ICBMs whose latest countermeasures made them, like guided, non ballistic trajectories nuclear heads practically non defeatable .

In fact Putin's speech actually more campaign speech countering the political right on subject of weakness and western appeasement, covered what was well know before, and was a counter point to military strategy of all sides rejecting use of nukes as way to achieve any tactical or strategic advantage.

Nukes are madness serve nobody but threatening human race with anihilation so they submit to their respective rulers who will never used them against one another but only in desperation face global revolution.


Facts are following:

Hitler and Napoleon learned that it is impossible to conquer Russia size of continent of militarily impossible weather with now a network of underground fortifications, tunnels that cannot be nuked.

There is no conquering Russia with measly million soldiers west could at best deploy for their sure deaths. Hence no western strategist plan for that and so the idea of Russia responding to conventional attack with nuke was a propaganda aim to end the conversation about that absurd, no sides really considers, but is used to spread fear.

US may attack Russia with nukes but no strategic goal would be achieved by that while retaliation would have been devastating.

Even conventional attack on Russia is absurd. Poland 50k 5k offensive capability, All Baltic states 10k, Slovakia 5k, Hungary 9k facing what?

Russian allies: Donbas rebels 40k war hardened rebel soldiers would be hard to beat; Belarus 250k highly trained soldiers, fully integrated Air, Space, Ground and electronic warfare with all newest Russian toys, while entire army of 2 millions. Russia 3-5 million military can call at least 10 millions will maintain air and space superiority over their territory , digged in while invaders are exposed.

There is will be no invasion of Russia only intimidation of the elites to submit to US political and economic dictates. Also there is no conquering China as well. Not possible.

The only nuke war can occur when global elite will be losing grip on power and going down in flames in socialist revolution and only to take entire humanity with them to hell.

Posted by: Kalen | Mar 1, 2018 11:30:58 PM | 55

[Mar 02, 2018] The best time to attack Russia

Mar 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

V. Arnold | Mar 2, 2018 12:01:34 AM | 57

The best time to attack Russia, enjoy:

This past September, in one of his regular interviews with the newspaper Parlamentní Listy, retired Czech Major General Hynek Blaško commented on the possibility of a conflict between Russia and NATO with a following anecdote:

"I have seen a popular joke on the Internet about Obama and his generals in the Pentagon debating on the best timing to attack Russia. They couldn't come to any agreement, so they decided to ask their allies.

The French said: " We do not know, but certainly not in the winter. This will end badly. "

The Germans responded: "We do not know, either, but definitely not in a summer. We have already tried."

Someone in Obama's war room had a brilliant idea to ask China, on the basis that China is developing and always has new ideas.

The Chinese answered: "The best time for this is right now. Russia is building the Power of Siberia pipeline, the North Stream Pipeline, Vostochny Cosmodrome Spaceport, the MegaProject bridge to Crimea; also Russian is upgrading the Trans-Siberian railroad with a new railway bridge across Lena River and the Amur-Yakutsk Mainline. Russia is also building new sports facilities for the World Cup and athletics, and has in development over 150 production projects in the Arctic Well, now they really need as many POWs as possible!"

[Mar 02, 2018] It was only after the mid-70s, when the USSR begun to stagnate (it never had a recession), that the military spending theorists begun to sprout

Notable quotes:
"... So, albeit the USSR registered up to 17% of GDP spending on the "military" (as some sources claim) -- you have to take it with a grain of salt. ..."
"... Another problem with this "too much military" theory is the logic behind it. During the 50s and 60s, the USSR was also spending a lot on the military, but it didn't stop it growing 15%-10% yoy ..."
"... It was only after the mid-70s, when the USSR begun to stagnate (it never had a recession), that the military spending theorists begun to sprout. The question is the same about the ill fate of the welfare state in Western Europe in the end of the 70s: which came first, the egg or the chicken. Putting it in another way: was it the Soviet was spending that caused its long stagnation or was it its long stagnation that made its military spending look big? ..."
Mar 02, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

VK , Mar 1, 2018 8:47:38 PM | 43

The war hawks in my beloved country are the Soviet Politburo clamoring for a larger army, navy, air force to be equipped with the most expensive weaponry. Back in the 80's the Soviet Union had an army of 5M, they it is less than 1M and is purely defensive. We on the other hand have built up our Defense Budget to epic levels and have consultant after consultant telling us that it is at an all time low.

- Posted by: Christian Chuba | Mar 1, 2018 4:14:46 PM | 20

The USSR had deeper problems than that.

It's not that the Soviet expenditure with the military was a problem. On the opposite: the Soviet were very familiar with the concept of dual industry, them being the masters of WWII. Many industries in the USSR that were officially military were actually civilian: the most colorful example being the airplane industry, which could produce either civilian or military aircraft. Another example: the USSR was the biggest agriculture tractor producer in the world at one point. These tractors were produced in the same industrial plants as the one used to produce battle tanks. So, albeit the USSR registered up to 17% of GDP spending on the "military" (as some sources claim) -- you have to take it with a grain of salt.

Another problem with this "too much military" theory is the logic behind it. During the 50s and 60s, the USSR was also spending a lot on the military, but it didn't stop it growing 15%-10% yoy .

It was only after the mid-70s, when the USSR begun to stagnate (it never had a recession), that the military spending theorists begun to sprout. The question is the same about the ill fate of the welfare state in Western Europe in the end of the 70s: which came first, the egg or the chicken. Putting it in another way: was it the Soviet was spending that caused its long stagnation or was it its long stagnation that made its military spending look big?

[Mar 02, 2018] You don't hear foreign leaders, e.g., Vladimir Putin, constantly referring to the other countries in the world as "competitors", "rivals", "adversaries", "enemies", etc., depending the degree of their subservience/loyalty.

Mar 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

p

Harold Smith , Next New Comment March 2, 2018 at 4:20 pm GMT

@The Alarmist

You don't hear foreign leaders, e.g., Vladimir Putin, constantly referring to the other countries in the world as "competitors", "rivals", "adversaries", "enemies", etc., depending the degree of their subservience/loyalty. And as far as I know Chinese rulers don't do it either. Apparently Vladimir Putin really does try to treat other countries as "partners" (and that may explain his demonstrated reluctance to use any kind of "force").

Putin's all about cooperation; respect for international law; respect for each nation's sovereignty; diplomacy; etc. whereas the jewish-supremacist-controlled-demon-possessed-puppet-rulers-of-the-corrupt-neo-Bolshevik-"West" are all about lawlessness, unaccountability, deceit, war, terrorism, complete disregard for the rights/sovereignty of other countries, etc., etc., etc.

Can you imagine if a private person in society acted like the jew-supremacist-controlled U.S. government? Seriously try. Imagine you live on a street where one neighbor, "Sam" is always causing trouble. You have to be either "with him" (and complicit in his treachery against the whole neighborhood) or you're his "enemy", and you'll be dealt with accordingly. And you try to get along with your neighbors, but "Sam" gets up every morning with the thought "how can I screw them over today?"

One day one of Sam's neighbor's kids set up a lemonade stand. The kids had fun and made a little money. Sam was incensed; the neighbor's kids became "rivals" to his kids. Sam reasoned that if he didn't take action, these industrious neighbor kids would one day take over the whole neighborhood.(Sam's kids could've done the same thing but because of Sam's influence, they felt it was "beneath" them). So one day Sam ran over the lemonade stand with his car, trashing it, and he told the cops it
was an "accident."

Sam is always fighting with someone over something; he's burnt down peoples' houses; he's robbed people; he's killed people; he's raped some of the women in the neighborhood; and he's never held accountable. He's a pervert, a liar, a murderer, a crook, an arsonist, etc. And Sam always seems to get away with his crimes because he owns the cops and the judge.

Society wouldn't put up with a scumbag like this for very long, would it? At some point, somebody who's had enough is going to shoot Sam. And this is exactly the situation with the U.S. "government" today.

What is China (or Russia or Panama or Bangladesh or wherever)? It's a country full of people who have the same God-given natural right to exist that anyone else has, including U.S. rulers. Until U.S. rulers accept this (which they apparently never will) there will never be peace on this planet (unless somebody forcefully puts Sam in his place).

So what's my main point? I disagree with labeling other countries according to their willingness to take orders from the "beast". I disagree with the notion that the U.S. "government" can sit in judgment of the governments of other countries which have done nothing to the U.S. China is not a "rival"; Russia is not a "rival"; Country X is not a rival; and there is almost no problem on this earth that reasonable people cannot solve by way of diplomacy, if everyone involved is acts in good faith and accepts the natural rights of other people in far away places.

[Mar 02, 2018] The tales about putin super wealth in neoliberal MSM is just plain war propaganda, attempt to demonize him

Mar 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

/b

TKK , Next New Comment March 2, 2018 at 3:37 am GMT

Putin a modest man? His net worth is an estimated 200 billion$-illegally vacuumed from government assets. It is believed he is the richest man in the world. Quite impressive considering he was a low level KGB drone stationed in Berlin.

Any journalist or bureaucratic agency that questions his staggering wealth disappears, is the victim of a "street" crime or is subject to campaigns of threats and gaslighting (Objects moved in their home while they are away, men following them on the street).

Has the author ever been to Russia? Perhaps that might be the first step in writing an article that is based in reality. Even in Moscow, access to basic antibiotics are a roll of the dice. If you pay enough, you may get them that day. If you not have enough money or the proper connections you may have to meet wait two weeks to get a simple dose of anti virals.

Any procedure that involves the slightest specialization must be scheduled months in advance, unless you are a member of the elite.

The American intellect is so flabby that it must paint people as heroes or devils. There can be no colorable issues. Putin is a man who is going to butter his own bread. He is a skilled politician and a deft criminal, and presenting a strong patriotism to Russia benefits him on all fronts.

Most large nations mettle in others elections. The western media is so deceptive,repulsive and deranged in their hatred of Trump that this is the only issue they believe they can hang their hat on to impeach Trump. If the evidence cannot be found they will invent.

But to paint Putin as a benevolent hero is so out of touch with the facts as to be either childish or insane.

FB , Next New Comment March 2, 2018 at 4:48 am GMT
@TKK

My my what a remarkable tale

Do you have the slightest shred of evidence for even a tiny fraction of that gas eruption ?

I've spent a lot of time in Russia and you obviously have NOT

None of what you say is even remotely approaching reality of life in Russia which is quite civilized in fact much more so than the US

Basic antibiotics ?

What do you think Russia is Ethiopia ?

You're plain nutcase or troll

Jesse James , Next New Comment March 2, 2018 at 4:57 am GMT
@TKK

"Putin a modest man? His net worth is an estimated 200 billion$-illegally vacuumed from government assets. It is believed he is the richest man in the world. Quite impressive considering he was a low level KGB drone stationed in Berlin".

Comical unsubstantiated neocon fiction from US gov't outlets of CNN-MSNBC. Why would Putin stay in office with that kind of bank account? You are a neo-liberal myrmidon.

EugeneGur , March 2, 2018 at 4:20 pm GMT
@TKK

His net worth is an estimated 200 billion$-illegally vacuumed from government assets.

It's been "estimated" at $20 billion, $40 billion, and then $200 billion. The key word is "estimated". Where do you think a man could hide that amount of money, even $20 billion, so no one is able to find it? Why would Putin even need the money, ever, and would be able to use it? Putin is a smart man and he knows full well that the time when the Count of Monte-Cristo could emerge from a cave with an immense fortune nobody questions the origin of are gone. Putin knows he'd never be able to live in the West and enjoy his money, even if he wanted to. But as long as he stays in Russia he'll enjoy the status of the ex-President and everything that comes with it. This is from the practical standpoint.

Also, Putin doesn't seem to be the type. We've been observing him for close to 20 years, and during this time he has acquired the quality of a leader of truly historical proportions. I don't think he is particularly interested in personal enrichment.

Don't believe everything you read in the West about Russia or Putin – most of it is BS.

Even in Moscow, access to basic antibiotics are a roll of the dice.

Come on, man, are you for real? You can buy a truckload of antibiotics in any pharmacy in any town in Russia. Recently, they started to introduce that stupid "prescription only" rule but plenty is still available. Yes, some procedures do involve some waiting time but so is the case in the United States or anywhere.

Russia is not heaven on earth. It has plenty of problems. It's climbing out of a very deep hole economically and socially. But there is no need to invent stupidities.

[Mar 02, 2018] Neocon schumer plays identity politics

Mar 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

renfro , March 2, 2018 at 2:59 am GMT

Don't worry about republicans ..democrats are ruining themselves all alone .every time the deplorables see something like this they will double down on anything but a Dem.
Regardless of one's view on blacks or whites this is a major Stupid for a politician.

Chuck Schumer votes against South Carolina federal judge nominee because he's white

https://www.postandcourier.com/politics/chuck-schumer-votes-against-s-c-judicial-nominee-because-he/article_8b9f1890-1d6b-11e8-8533-0f7cc33319a9.html

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer rejected President Donald Trump's nominee for a long-vacant South Carolina federal judgeship not because of his qualifications but because of his race.
The decision drew the quick ire of South Carolina's two U.S. senators and U.S. Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-Spartanburg, a former federal prosecutor.

Schumer, a New York Democrat, said in a Senate floor speech Wednesday he would not support Greenville attorney Marvin Quattlebaum for a vacancy on the U.S. District Court in South Carolina

Voting for Quattlebaum, he said, would result in having a white man replace two African-American nominees from the state put forth by former President Barack Obama.

Schumer said he would not be a part of the Trump administration's pattern of nominating white men.

"The nomination of Marvin Quattlebaum speaks to the overall lack of diversity in President Trump's selections for the federal judiciary," Schumer said.

"It's long past time that the judiciary starts looking a lot more like the America it represents," he continued. "Having a diversity of views and experience on the federal bench is necessary for the equal administration of justice."

South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, the Senate's sole black Republican, pushed back on Schumer's rationale and urged other Senate Democrats to instead address diversity issues by starting with their offices.

"Perhaps Senate Democrats should be more worried about the lack of diversity on their own staffs than attacking an extremely well-qualified judicial nominee from the great state of South Carolina," Scott tweeted Thursday morning.

[Mar 02, 2018] The War Against Alternative Information by Rick Sterling

Notable quotes:
"... The U.S. establishment is not content simply to have domination over the media narratives on critical foreign policy issues, such as Syria, Ukraine and Russia. It wants total domination. Thus we now have the " Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act " that President Obama signed into law on Dec. 23 as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2017 , setting aside $160 million to combat any "propaganda" that challenges Official Washington's version of reality. ..."
"... The new law is remarkable for a number of reasons, not the least because it merges a new McCarthyism about purported dissemination of Russian "propaganda" on the Internet with a new Orwellianism by creating a kind of Ministry of Truth – or Global Engagement Center – to protect the American people from "foreign propaganda and disinformation." ..."
"... Justifying this new bureaucracy, the bill's sponsors argued that the existing agencies for " strategic communications " and " public diplomacy " were not enough, that the information threat required "a whole-of-government approach leveraging all elements of national power." ..."
"... The law also is rife with irony since the U.S. government and related agencies are among the world's biggest purveyors of propaganda and disinformation – or what you might call evidence-free claims, such as the recent accusations of Russia hacking into Democratic emails to "influence" the U.S. election. ..."
"... Of course, there is a long history of U.S. disinformation and propaganda. Former CIA agents Philip Agee and John Stockwell documented how it was done decades ago, secretly planting "black propaganda" and covertly funding media outlets to influence events around the world, with much of the fake news blowing back into the American media. ..."
"... In more recent decades, the U.S. government has adopted an Internet-era version of that formula with an emphasis on having the State Department or the U.S.-funded National Endowment for Democracy supply, train and pay "activists" and "citizen journalists" to create and distribute propaganda and false stories via "social media" and via contacts with the mainstream media. The U.S. government's strategy also seeks to undermine and discredit journalists who challenge this orthodoxy. The new legislation escalates this information war by tossing another $160 million into the pot. ..."
Mar 02, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

By Rick Sterling ( first published Jan. 1, 2017 )

The U.S. establishment is not content simply to have domination over the media narratives on critical foreign policy issues, such as Syria, Ukraine and Russia. It wants total domination. Thus we now have the " Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act " that President Obama signed into law on Dec. 23 as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2017 , setting aside $160 million to combat any "propaganda" that challenges Official Washington's version of reality.

The new law mandates the U.S. Secretary of State to collaborate with the Secretary of Defense, Director of National Intelligence and other federal agencies to create a Global Engagement Center "to lead, synchronize, and coordinate efforts of the Federal Government to recognize, understand, expose, and counter foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation efforts aimed at undermining United States national security interests." The law directs the Center to be formed in 180 days and to share expertise among agencies and to "coordinate with allied nations."

The legislation was initiated in March 2016, as the demonization of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russia was already underway and was enacted amid the allegations of "Russian hacking" around the U.S. presidential election and the mainstream media's furor over supposedly "fake news." Defeated Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton voiced strong support for the bill: "It's imperative that leaders in both the private sector and the public sector step up to protect our democracy, and innocent lives."

The new law is remarkable for a number of reasons, not the least because it merges a new McCarthyism about purported dissemination of Russian "propaganda" on the Internet with a new Orwellianism by creating a kind of Ministry of Truth – or Global Engagement Center – to protect the American people from "foreign propaganda and disinformation."

As part of the effort to detect and defeat these unwanted narratives, the law authorizes the Center to: "Facilitate the use of a wide range of technologies and techniques by sharing expertise among Federal departments and agencies, seeking expertise from external sources, and implementing best practices." (This section is an apparent reference to proposals that Google, Facebook and other technology companies find ways to block or brand certain Internet sites as purveyors of "Russian propaganda" or "fake news." )

Justifying this new bureaucracy, the bill's sponsors argued that the existing agencies for " strategic communications " and " public diplomacy " were not enough, that the information threat required "a whole-of-government approach leveraging all elements of national power."

The law also is rife with irony since the U.S. government and related agencies are among the world's biggest purveyors of propaganda and disinformation – or what you might call evidence-free claims, such as the recent accusations of Russia hacking into Democratic emails to "influence" the U.S. election.

Despite these accusations -- leaked by the Obama administration and embraced as true by the mainstream U.S. news media -- there is little or no public evidence to support the charges. There is also a contradictory analysis by veteran U.S. intelligence professionals as well as statements by Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and an associate, former British Ambassador Craig Murray , that the Russians were not the source of the leaks. Yet, the mainstream U.S. media has virtually ignored this counter-evidence, appearing eager to collaborate with the new "Global Engagement Center" even before it is officially formed.

Of course, there is a long history of U.S. disinformation and propaganda. Former CIA agents Philip Agee and John Stockwell documented how it was done decades ago, secretly planting "black propaganda" and covertly funding media outlets to influence events around the world, with much of the fake news blowing back into the American media.

In more recent decades, the U.S. government has adopted an Internet-era version of that formula with an emphasis on having the State Department or the U.S.-funded National Endowment for Democracy supply, train and pay "activists" and "citizen journalists" to create and distribute propaganda and false stories via "social media" and via contacts with the mainstream media. The U.S. government's strategy also seeks to undermine and discredit journalists who challenge this orthodoxy. The new legislation escalates this information war by tossing another $160 million into the pot.

Propaganda and Disinformation on Syria

Syria is a good case study in the modern application of information warfare. In her memoir Hard Choices , former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wrote that the U.S. provided "support for (Syrian) civilian opposition groups, including satellite-linked computers, telephones, cameras, and training for more than a thousand activists, students and independent journalists."

Indeed, a huge amount of money has gone to "activists" and "civil society" groups in Syria and other countries that have been targeted for "regime change." A lot of the money also goes to parent organizations that are based in the United States and Europe, so these efforts do not only support on-the-ground efforts to undermine the targeted countries, but perhaps even more importantly, the money influences and manipulates public opinion in the West.

In North America, representatives from the Syrian "Local Coordination Committees" (LCC) were frequent guests on popular media programs such as "DemocracyNow." The message was clear: there is a "revolution" in Syria against a "brutal regime" personified in Bashar al-Assad. It was not mentioned that the "Local Coordination Committees" have been primarily funded by the West, specifically the Office for Syrian Opposition Support, which was founded by the U.S. State Department and the U.K. Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

More recently, news and analysis about Syria has been conveyed through the filter of the White Helmets, also known as Syrian Civil Defense. In the Western news media, the White Helmets are described as neutral, non-partisan, civilian volunteers courageously carrying out rescue work in the war zone. In fact, the group is none of the above. It was initiated by the U.S. and U.K. using a British military contractor and Brooklyn-based marketing company.

While they may have performed some genuine rescue operations, the White Helmets are primarily a media organization with a political goal: to promote NATO intervention in Syria. (The manipulation of public opinion using the White Helmets and promoted by the New York Times and Avaaz petition for a "No Fly Zone" in Syria is documented here. )

The White Helmets hoax continues to be widely believed and receives uncritical promotion though it has increasingly been exposed at alternative media outlets as the creation of a "shady PR firm ." During critical times in the conflict in Aleppo, White Helmet individuals have been used as the source for important news stories despite a track record of deception.

Recent Propaganda: Blatant Lies?

As the armed groups in east Aleppo recently lost ground and then collapsed, Western governments and allied media went into a frenzy of accusations against Syria and Russia based on reports from sources connected with the armed opposition. CNN host Wolf Blitzer described Aleppo as "falling" in a "slaughter of these women and children" while CNN host Jake Tapper referred to "genocide by another name."

The Daily Beast published the claims of the Aleppo Siege Media Center under the title "Doomsday is held in Aleppo" and amid accusations that the Syrian army was executing civilians, burning them alive and "20 women committed suicide in order not to be raped." These sensational claims were widely broadcast without verification. However, this "news" on CNN and throughout Western media came from highly biased sources and many of the claims – lacking anything approaching independent corroboration – could be accurately described as propaganda and disinformation.

Ironically, some of the supposedly "Russian propaganda" sites, such as RT, have provided first-hand on-the-ground reporting from the war zones with verifiable information that contradicts the Western narrative and thus has received almost no attention in the U.S. news media. For instance, some of these non-Western outlets have shown videos of popular celebrations over the "liberation of Aleppo."

There has been further corroboration of these realities from peace activists, such as Jan Oberg of Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research who published a photo essay of his eyewitness observations in Aleppo including the happiness of civilians from east Aleppo reaching the government-controlled areas of west Aleppo, finally freed from areas that had been controlled by Al Qaeda's Syrian affiliate and its jihadist allies in Ahrar al-Sham.

Dr. Nabil Antaki, a medical doctor from Aleppo, described the liberation of Aleppo in an interview titled "Aleppo is Celebrating, Free from Terrorists, the Western Media Misinformed." The first Christmas celebrations in Aleppo in four years are shown here, replete with marching band members in Santa Claus outfits. Journalist Vanessa Beeley has published testimonies of civilians from east Aleppo. The happiness of civilians at their liberation is clear.

Whether or not you wish to accept these depictions of the reality in Aleppo, at a minimum, they reflect another side of the story that you have been denied while being persistently force-fed the version favored by the U.S. State Department. The goal of the new Global Engagement Center to counter "foreign propaganda" is to ensure that you never get to hear this alternative narrative to the Western propaganda line.

Even much earlier, contrary to the Western mythology of rebel "liberated zones," there was strong evidence that the armed groups were never popular in Aleppo. American journalist James Foley described the situation in 2012 like this :

"Aleppo, a city of about 3 million people, was once the financial heart of Syria. As it continues to deteriorate, many civilians here are losing patience with the increasingly violent and unrecognizable opposition -- one that is hampered by infighting and a lack of structure, and deeply infiltrated by both foreign fighters and terrorist groups. The rebels in Aleppo are predominantly from the countryside, further alienating them from the urban crowd that once lived here peacefully, in relative economic comfort and with little interference from the authoritarian government of President Bashar al-Assad."

On Nov. 22, 2012, Foley was kidnapped in northwestern Syria and held by Islamic State terrorists before his beheading in August 2014.

The Overall Narrative on Syria

Analysis of the Syrian conflict boils down to two competing narratives. One narrative is that the conflict is a fight for freedom and democracy against a brutal regime, a storyline promoted in the West and the Gulf states, which have been fueling the conflict from the start . This narrative is also favored by some self-styled "anti-imperialists" who want a "Syrian revolution."

The other narrative is that the conflict is essentially a war of aggression against a sovereign state, with the aggressors including NATO countries, Gulf monarchies, Israel and Jordan. Domination of the Western media by these powerful interests is so thorough that one almost never gets access to this second narrative, which is essentially banned from not only the mainstream but also much of the liberal and progressive media.

For example, listeners and viewers of the generally progressive TV and radio program "DemocracyNow" have rarely if ever heard the second narrative described in any detail. Instead, the program frequently broadcasts the statements of Hillary Clinton, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power and others associated with the U.S. position. Rarely do you hear the viewpoint of the Syrian Ambassador to the United Nations, the Syrian Foreign Minister or analysts inside Syria and around the world who have written about and follow events there closely.

"DemocracyNow" also has done repeated interviews with proponents of the "Syrian revolution" while ignoring analysts who call the conflict a war of aggression sponsored by the West and the Gulf monarchies. This blackout of the second narrative continues despite the fact that many prominent international figures see it as such. For example, the former Foreign Minister of Nicaragua and former President of the UN General Assembly, Father Miguel D'Escoto, has said, "What the U.S. government is doing in Syria is tantamount to a war of aggression, which, according to the Nuremberg Tribunal, is the worst possible crime a State can commit against another State."

In many areas of politics, "DemocracyNow" is excellent and challenges mainstream media. However in this area, coverage of the Syrian conflict, the broadcast is biased, one-sided and echoes the news and analysis of mainstream Western corporate media, showing the extent of control over foreign policy news that already exists in the United States and Europe.

Suppressing and Censoring Challenges

Despite the widespread censorship of alternative analyses on Syria and other foreign hotspots that already exists in the West, the U.S. government's new "Global Engagement Center" will seek to ensure that the censorship is even more complete with its goal to "counter foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation." We can expect even more aggressive and better-financed assaults on the few voices daring to challenge the West's "group thinks" – smear campaigns that are already quite extensive.

In an article titled "Controlling the Narrative on Syria" , Louis Allday describes the criticisms and attacks on journalists Rania Khalek and Max Blumenthal for straying from the "approved" Western narrative on Syria. Some of the bullying and abuse has come from precisely those people, such as Robin Yassin-Kassab, who have been frequent guests in liberal Western media.

Reporters who have returned from Syria with accounts that challenge the propaganda themes that have permeated the Western media also have come under attack. For instance, Canadian journalist Eva Bartlett recently returned to North America after being in Syria and Aleppo, conveying a very different image and critical of the West's biased media coverage. Bartlett appeared at a United Nations press conference and then did numerous interviews across the country during a speaking tour. During the course of her talks and presentation, Bartlett criticized the White Helmets and questioned whether it was true that Al Quds Hospital in opposition-held East Aleppo was attacked and destroyed as claimed.

Bartlett's recounting of this information made her a target of Snopes, which has been a mostly useful website exposing urban legends and false rumors but has come under criticism itself for some internal challenges and has been inconsistent in its investigations. In one report entitled " White Helmet Hearsay," Snopes' writer Bethania Palmer says claims the White Helmets are "linked to terrorists" is "unproven," but she overlooks numerous videos , photos, and other reports showing White Helmet members celebrating a Nusra/Al Qaeda battle victory, picking up the bodies of civilians executed by a Nusra executioner, and having a member who alternatively appears as a rebel/terrorist fighter with a weapon and later wearing a White Helmet uniform. The "fact check" barely scrapes the surface of public evidence.

The same writer did another shallow "investigation" titled "victim blaming" regarding Bartlett's critique of White Helmet videos and what happened at the Al Quds Hospital in Aleppo. Bartlett suggests that some White Helmet videos may be fabricated and may feature the same child at different times, i.e., photographs that appear to show the same girl being rescued by White Helmet workers at different places and times. While it is uncertain whether this is the same girl, the similarity is clear.

The Snopes writer goes on to criticize Bartlett for her comments about the reported bombing of Al Quds Hospital in east Aleppo in April 2016. A statement at the website of Doctors Without Borders says the building was "destroyed and reduced to rubble," but this was clearly false since photos show the building with unclear damage. Five months later, the September 2016 report by Doctors Without Borders says the top two floors of the building were destroyed and the ground floor Emergency Room damaged yet they re-opened in two weeks.

The many inconsistencies and contradictions in the statements of Doctors Without Borders resulted in an open letter to them. In their last report, Doctors Without Borders (known by its French initials, MSF) acknowledges that "MSF staff did not directly witness the attack and has not visited Al Quds Hospital since 2014."

Bartlett referenced satellite images taken before and after the reported attack on the hospital. The images do not show severe damage and it is unclear whether or not there is any damage to the roof, the basis for Bartlett's statement. In the past week, independent journalists have visited the scene of Al Quds Hospital and report that that the top floors of the building are still there and damage is unclear.

The Snopes' investigation criticizing Bartlett was superficial and ignored the broader issues of accuracy and integrity in the Western media's depiction of the Syrian conflict. Instead the article appeared to be an effort to discredit the eyewitness observations and analysis of a journalist who dared challenge the mainstream narrative.

U.S. propaganda and disinformation on Syria has been extremely effective in misleading much of the American population. Thus, most Americans are unaware how many billions of taxpayer dollars have been spent on yet another "regime change" project. The propaganda campaign – having learned from the successful demonizations of Iraq's Saddam Hussein, Libya's Muammar Gaddafi and other targeted leaders – has been so masterful regarding Syria that many liberal and progressive news outlets were pulled in. It has been left to RT and some Internet outlets to challenge the U.S. government and the mainstream media.

But the U.S. government's near total control of the message doesn't appear to be enough. Apparently even a few voices of dissent are a few voices too many.

The enactment of HR5181, "Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation," suggests that the ruling powers seek to escalate suppression of news and analyses that run counter to the official narrative. Backed by a new infusion of $160 million, the plan is to further squelch skeptical voices with operation for "countering" and "refuting" what the U.S. government deems to be propaganda and disinformation.

As part of the $160 million package, funds can be used to hire or reward "civil society groups, media content providers, nongovernmental organizations, federally funded research and development centers, private companies, or academic institutions."

Among the tasks that these private entities can be hired to perform is to identify and investigate both print and online sources of news that are deemed to be distributing "disinformation, misinformation, and propaganda directed at the United States and its allies and partners."

In other words, we are about to see an escalation of the information war.

Rick Sterling is an independent investigative journalist. He lives in the San Francisco Bay Area and can be reached at [email protected]

Joe Tedesky , February 28, 2018 at 4:08 pm

If Russia-Gate hadn't been about providing a distraction from Hillary's blasted emails, it would have been something else to create this need to combat 'fake news', because for my whole life of 68 years most of everything our government and media has told us is a lie, so now truthful reporting will be censored. Now all alternative news is being attacked by the very establishment of people who have been lying to us for so long, as their constant lies have made necessary a market for honest news. Rather the corporate owned media tell the truth, they instead rally behind a patriotically draped 'news ban', as this is the MSM's fix for all that's fake, or to tell the truth their fake news hammer to squash all that's honest. We are in the bottom of the ninth whereas our police state nation is about to lose it's free press god help us, god help the world.

BobH , February 28, 2018 at 4:19 pm

" their constant lies have made necessary a market for honest news." yes, Joe, perhaps that's the only good thing that has come out of their monopoly of MSM.

Joe Tedesky , February 28, 2018 at 5:02 pm

Yes being able to find truthful journalism is a commodity these days, but how long before we lose that, is the question?

Joe Tedesky , February 28, 2018 at 4:54 pm

Lt. Col. Daniel L Davis says it's time to quit going to war with the AUMF. After you read this let's see how much media attention the good Lt. Col. gets.

http://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/376067-abuse-of-the-2001-aumf-weakens-our-national-security

Joe Tedesky , February 28, 2018 at 5:10 pm

More on journalism going down the drain.

https://www.sott.net/article/378500-The-Hired-Jumping-Jacks-of-the-Press-and-Their-Corporate-and-Deep-State-Overlords

Joe Tedesky , February 28, 2018 at 5:33 pm

Here's another link, this one took 100 years in the making.

https://www.sott.net/article/378594-Prolonging-The-Agony-Macgregor-and-Docherty-Publish-Volume-Two-of-Hidden-History-of-WW1

godenich , February 28, 2018 at 7:58 pm

Here's an interesting view[1] and a classic on patriotic peer pressure for war[2]. There must have been ample profit for stakeholders in the Vickers maxim gun production during the Boer Wars and WW1[3,4].

[1] The Truth About World War I: The Hidden History | Youtube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQ8Sj9FFmRc
[2] The Four Feathers | AEW Mason
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/18883
https://librivox.org/the-four-feathers-by-a-e-w-mason-2/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aG1kHdnMSRU
[3] Merchants of Death | H. C. Engelbrecht | Internet Archives | 1934
https://archive.org/details/MerchantsOfDeath-AStudyOfTheInternationalArmamentIndustry
[4] Zaharoff High Priest Of War | Guiles Davenport | Internet Archives | 1934
https://archive.org/details/zaharoffhighprie011222mbp

Joe Tedesky , February 28, 2018 at 10:06 pm

Thank you very much. I watched the first video and got the book, I also am going to enjoy 'the Four Feathers' movie since it is one of my favorites.

Here something where moonofalabama is suggesting of how the NYT is back to their old tricks like before the Iraq WMD invasion, where now the NYT is claiming N Korea is selling nuclear weapons parts to Syria.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/02/new-york-times-time-warps-back-to-2002-makes-new-bogus-wmd-claims.html#more

John W , March 1, 2018 at 12:04 pm

Checked out all of your links. I have downloaded, and saved as favorites. I have some reading to do. I'll watch the youtube links that you have provided first. Thanks godenrich.

John W , March 1, 2018 at 11:19 am

Keep those links coming Joe Tedesky. People need actual reality, not reality derived by the criminally insane.

Bruce , March 1, 2018 at 5:57 am

Excellent comment. To paraphrase Orwell .telling the truth has become a revolutionary act.

Joe Tedesky , March 1, 2018 at 5:51 pm

Orwell was so right, that sometimes I swear we in this century should be looking to see if he is amongst us .a true time traveler. Joe

John W , March 1, 2018 at 11:13 am

I concur Joe Tedesky. The shit is indeed hitting the fan. Destroying the very thing that gives them live(Earth) is complete insanity. But, psychopaths want control, and I believe that these humanoids in control do not want anything to grow, live, prosper, or be, unless they say so. Unless they have ultimate control over it(trees, grass, flowers, birds, animals, humans, bacteria, planets, suns, etc). This geoengineering and other agendas that they are doing, is killing off everything. This I believe is where their GMO's comes in. Kill all off, then replace it with that they have created to live in the environment they have created. Nothing or no one has a child or offspring unless they deem it ok, give their acceptance for it to be. Entirely psychopathic, or an extremely primitive beastial mind. But, no one says that what we call psychopathic is anywhere near sane. A bit off the tracks, but it does coincide with controlling narratives or 'truths' for their agendas.

Nancy , March 1, 2018 at 1:07 pm

In a crazy way, it makes sense!

Joe Tedesky , March 1, 2018 at 5:50 pm

John W if more people were to investigate the harmful effects of GMO food products, and they were to take what they found seriously, why this alone would be a good reason to stand up and say to our corporate masters, 'enough is enough'.

Glad you enjoyed the links, because I was fearful that I had over done it with all those posted links get this I had even more, but thought I was going overboard with what I had already posted. So thanks for the approval John W. Joe

BobH , February 28, 2018 at 4:15 pm

"the State Department or the U.S.-funded National Endowment for Democracy supply, train and pay "activists" and "citizen journalists" to create and distribute propaganda and false stories via "social media" and via contacts with the mainstream media." and yet they hyperventilate about "Russian trolls". How many of these pseudo patriotic agencies have been financed with our taxes?

mark , March 1, 2018 at 5:22 pm

They paid just one British PR company, Bell Pottinger, $540 million to produce fake material about Iraq and Syria and get it on to the Internet. This firm is run by a British Lord, Lord Bell. He and his firm have a very shady record. They were hired by corrupt South African politicians to divert attention from corruption scandals by fomenting hatred towards the white minority there.

mike k , February 28, 2018 at 4:17 pm

Mind control is an essential feature of the project to enslave the world. If you think there is no such project, you may already be a victim of it. Realizing that this is happening is essential for defending against it. Those who are waging this war against your freedom will do everything in their power to make you unaware of being brainwashed.

For a person to awaken to being brainwashed requires humility, openness, honesty, courage, and the right kind of help from those already awakening.

mike k , February 28, 2018 at 5:43 pm

And if you lack the qualities mentioned, welcome to zombiehood!

ranney , February 28, 2018 at 4:20 pm

Last Sunday 60 minutes had a segment on the White Helmets so full of lies I wanted to barf. I hope everyone who reads this comments section will write 60 minutes and tell them that lying to the public is a big no-no and that White Helmets is an ISIS organization that gasses their own people and leaves "evidence" to prove Assad did it.

Lois Gagnon , February 28, 2018 at 6:46 pm

Once in a while I go on the networks' Facebook pages and link an article that contradicts what they just reported. Sometimes the next night they will add what the critics of US policy are saying. They go out of their way to minimize that content, but it's good to let them know there are people paying attention to the reality on the ground. It also exposes those commenting on the FB page to alternative information.

It may not make a big difference, but even putting a dent in the official propaganda is better then nothing.

Realist , March 1, 2018 at 3:48 am

I make it a point not to watch 60 Minutes any more, because I have a low tolerance for deceit. However, I am aware of the false narratives they have been propagating on this country's foreign policy for a long time. Other media outlets that have taken on that role with zest these days include the History Channel, with a scathing systematic slander of "Public Enemy Number One," President Vladimir Putin, and the National Geographic Channel. Like PBS and NPR, both try to pass themselves off as dispensers of a refined intellectual approach to news. Frankly, there is more thoughtful analysis given to the purchases of backyard junk made by Mike Wolfe and Frank Fritz on the History Channel's "American Pickers."

john wilson , March 1, 2018 at 5:23 am

60 minutes is part of the MSM deep state mouth piece. You don't seriously think they will take the slightest bit of notice of letters complaining about their shyty programme do you? We need to support and donate to genuine alternative media, news and comment like the late Mr Parry's great site. Further, good, informative articles and alternative news clips should be printed out and left on public transport for others to read. If each of us only printed out 10 copies of informative alternative news and left them on public transport for others to read, then we might get at least a bit of the alternative (no, not alternative but truth news) out there.

Nancy , March 1, 2018 at 1:10 pm

That's a great idea.

Virginia , March 1, 2018 at 2:51 pm

I second that idea.

Dan Good , February 28, 2018 at 7:04 pm

It is quite amazing to see that America is creating a class of American dissidents. Growing up in the 50's and 60's it was hard to understand how the USSR could treat its writers as outcasts. But it is about to happen now in the US of A.

Virginia , February 28, 2018 at 7:34 pm

Thank you, Mr. Stirling.

Jessika , February 28, 2018 at 11:56 pm

Sobering recap in reprint of this Rick Sterling article, to realize that things continue as bad or worse since this was published. There is a very well written opinion piece on Sputnik by Finian Cunningham, "American Collapse -- The Spectacle of Our Time". The US power structure, rather than address US internal societal rot, he says, doubles down on its rogue nation behavior and militarism. The US is now as bad as Nazi Germany was and ought to receive a "Judgement at Nuremberg" condemnation, is my opinion, but read Finian's piece at Sputnik, very good.

geeyp , March 1, 2018 at 12:24 am

Particularly good choice to reprint as many have awoken since then to the last president's sedition and cutting of the last thin thread of what was left of US democracy. And, he didn't even have to pay for it. He allotted for it, and you paid for it.

robjira , March 1, 2018 at 1:12 am

It was the one sided reporting on Syria that was the last straw for me regarding DN, of which I had been a financial supporter. Cracks in the veneer appeared (for me, at any rate) as far back as the release of the Collateral Murder video (I distinctly recall Amy Goodman relentlessly badgering Julian Assange to confirm it was [Bradley] Chelsea Manning who provided the material to Wikileaks, while Assange with obvious discomfort repeatedly told Goodman Wikileaks did not reveal the identities of sources), and continued with her ignorant and insulting treatment of a member of Iraq Veterans Against The War who acknowledged during a segment on the CM video, that he had friends among the squad of ground troops who arrived after the massacre (he didn't want to reveal their names, and Goodman tore into him questioning his enthusiasm for transparency, displaying stunning ignorance of the bonds formed by soldiers serving together in combat). My misgivings deepened with the enthusiastic support for the vilification of Putin as a monolithic representation of all that is brutally and nefariously, "Russian." This coincided with DN's somewhat murky reporting on the Ukrainian crisis, but it was Syria and the coverage of the 2016 election that did it for me as far as DN is concerned.
Thank the stars for Consortium News. RIP Robert Parry.

Gary , March 1, 2018 at 3:45 am

robjira – thanks for the observations on Democracy Now. It has really been quite amazing to watch Amy and company continue to shill for amoral neocon war mongering while continuing to promote themselves as some sort of challenge to power. I'm really not sure how that crew sleeps at night given the amount of civilian blood on their hands from their reporting both Libya and Syria. Glad to see Aaron Mate left and now is able to do important ethical journalism over at RealNews. Meanwhile a senior reporter Shane Bauer at "Mother Jones" openly calls for censorship by the web platform "Medium" of those posting views that challenge the official government narrative on Syria. And "Counterpunch" seems to have stopped publishing the work of Andre Vitchek, as its editorial selection of articles becomes more and more milk-toast "McResistance" by the week. As the ranks of "alternative media" willing to actually stand up and oppose U.S. imperialism continues to shrink, those (like Consortiumnews) that have maintained their integrity become that much more important.

Nancy , March 1, 2018 at 1:21 pm

The times we are living in are separating the real truth-seekers from the phonies. This is a good thing, as Democracy Now, Counterpunch, etc. are exposing themselves as part of the problem, not the solution. The truth is hard to face but as the saying goes–will set us free –someday.

BobH , March 1, 2018 at 2:35 pm

The good news is that there are other independent sources that keep popping up. They may have occasional links to MSM(when relevant) but the bias is toward uncovering corruption and international hypocrisy. One such website I recently discovered was Defend Democracy Press with an emphasis on European news.

http://www.defenddemocracy.press/a-fourth-nato-reich-over-europe-preparing-to-fight-iran-and-russia/

Virginia , March 1, 2018 at 2:47 pm

Robjira, Gary, Nancy -- I observed the same thing with DN and Amy Goodman. I recall a piece here at CN that show DN not to be the independent news source it used to be, some huge contribution was mentioned. DN is compromised now.

Maybe you saw Amy interview Glenn Greenwald who early on debunked Russia hacking the DNC. He made a good case but she, as did MSM's reporters, stopped using the word "alleged" hacking almost right away.

Two good articles not to miss on RT today: one on White Helmets, the other on Putin's speech.

mark , March 1, 2018 at 5:15 pm

Not really all that amazing.
DemocracyNow is funded by Soros.
Just follow the money.
It's the same story with a lot of these "radical", "alternative" sites.

Realist , March 1, 2018 at 3:37 am

Wonderful, this gives me another chance to say it: Thanks, Obama! NOT!!!

KiwiAntz , March 1, 2018 at 4:39 am

What a godsend Consortiumnews & other alternative news outlets like RT & Sputnik are which provide real news rather than the Fakestream American & Western Media? I can't even watch or read Western Media now, I just cringe in disgust at the endless, baseless & 24 hr propagandist lies & bull crap, it makes me sick to my stomach! Consortiumnews has really opened my eyes to the real situation behind World events? As a thinking person, I reached a sort of "Road to Damascus moment" & that's when one comes to the realisation that everything our Leaders & Countries have told us are blatant lies & brainwashing lies at that? Some Americans, especially those who read alternative news & refuse to be brainwashed by their Govt, are slowly coming to this realisation, that their Country has become a evil, murderous, Fascist, Oligarchy state & when that happens the scales really come off the eyes (just like the Apostle Paul) & you really start to understand the serious threat to every human being on Earth, that this evil, scumbag, American deepstate elite class are, with their demented agenda, seeking to manipulate, deceive & enslave the World with their murderous, money making schemes. Using Nazi style, fake media propaganda as demonstrated in this article, that Joseph Goebels would have rejoiced in, they fail to recognise that just as Hitler's fascist Empire fell, it is the fate of this current false US Empire as well, to collapse under its own imperialistic weight? Americans need a "storming the Bastille" revolution like the French Revolution, where they round up this elite class & dispense justice by gullotine? It worked out fine for the French & it could work for American citizens, fed up with this bunch of crooks? That's the only way to get rid of these satanic nutcases? The Writings on the Wall, the rot has set in, & hopefully we will be around to see the American empire collapse, it's going to happen & the sooner the better before it's drags us into WW3?

john wilson , March 1, 2018 at 5:31 am

Hey there KiwAntz, there is another great site out there called 'information clearing house info' and it has great articles by people like John Pilger and others. Just type in the usual www, etc and you will find it.

Crimean , March 1, 2018 at 6:21 am

Well of course the USG has to quiet the Alternative News army – how else can one have successful False Flags or assisted ones , when you have someone – spilling the beans. And there is a big one coming folks – you can bet on it – but they have to silence the Truth News – first. The Deep State , MIC, Corporations, Bankers, Wall Street, and many many USG employees along with State and Muni Govs. are going to throw all their chips into the pot on this Global poker game – they're all in – Look out World !

backwardsevolution , March 1, 2018 at 6:32 am

The Southern Poverty Law Center has been hired by Google to police the content of YouTube for hate speech. IOW, one hate group gets to stifle their opposition.

anastasia , March 1, 2018 at 8:10 am

Is this why I have noticed that google and youtube are taking down comments, youtube channels, etc of alternative media; why I also noticed that new bogus websites are going up purporting to be "alternative" websites (but who clearly are not) that are putting up false information and are very threatening, etc. Is google, Amazon, etc. doing this in accordance with this new law? What is our President doing about it? What about Congress? Eventually will they close down Trump's Twitter account and claim that they are only complying with the National Defense Authorization Act for 2017? This is very disturbing.

backwardsevolution , March 1, 2018 at 8:45 am

anastasia – yes, it is disturbing. I think Congress is putting pressure on Google (who owns YouTube), Facebook and Twitter to censor. Of course, some say that these outfits are merely an arm of the U.S. government. Who knows what's really happening.

The upshot is that freedom of speech is being strangled right in front of our eyes. I hope everyone will stop using Google, Facebook and Twitter. Boycott them.

backwardsevolution , March 1, 2018 at 8:47 am

As Paul Craig Roberts said:

"Who asked Google to transform itself from search engine to gatekeeper? Is there a conspiracy here against the First Amendment? What are Google's qualifications for determining what is fake news and extremist views? Is what are we witnessing here the elite's use of a private company to control explanations in behalf of the One Percent?

How does a private company get to overrule the First Amendment of the US Constitution? [ ]

Why do people use Google, Youtube, Facebook, and Twitter when the companies are in a conspiracy against freedom of the press? Is the answer that Americans would rather be entertained than to be free?"

E. Leete , March 1, 2018 at 11:03 am

I remember Paul Craig Roberts saying that the neoliberal economic agenda is getting enough pushback that it will have to use nuclear weapons to succeed, and make no mistake the neoliberal economic agenda means. to. succeed.

I can't fathom why the 99% underpaid are not campaigning united for an end to allowing overpay. When will humans snap awake and stop shoveling world wealth to a fraction few in exchange for tyranny? Tyranny is where overfortunes are – money is power – power to influence power to control power to make human history be what they say it will be – !! – the government is bought by people with overfortunes who are writing the laws and putting themselves above the laws they write – because they can – the gigarich are behind all the disinformation, the waste of wealth, the chaos, violence, corruption, the psychopathological militarism we cannot afford – divide and conquer – distractions instead of focus on the root cause – people endlessly discuss myriad CONsequences of allowing overpayoverpower but won't go near the one idea that would reverse the colossal destruction of everyone's everything. Getting good government and an unbiased press requires turning to justice and obeying her. Peace, safety, prosperity, a bright future? Spread world wealth as evenly as world work is spread and outlaw once and for all time any human being's being able to keep an overfortune. The madness is not going to stop until we resolve ourselves to end the stealing – legal thefts are too numerous to count right now and the gigarich obviously have the power to keep inventing new ones even if you can manage to shut one legal theft down now and then – see the biggest picture, humanity – or perish by your own lack of seeing. Endlessly attacking the consquences of allowing overpayoverpower is getting you nowhere but deeper in the hole.

BobH , March 1, 2018 at 11:33 am

"Who asked Google to transform itself from search engine to gatekeeper?" exactly, it's the loose end of a long rope that tends to choke dissent on the internet at best, it induces paranoia one never knows whether that "glitche" is intended to censor or is merely a technical aberration

jools , March 1, 2018 at 12:22 pm

Just wait until Net Neutrality "officially" kicks in, when the Stasi will go full throttle in interrupting many of the progressive channels esp. on UTube. On a side note, I was wondering, does Consortiumnews have a podcast? Again, thanks for enlightening us all w/your hard hitting journalism for I fear that much darker days awaits this nation.

Liam , March 1, 2018 at 12:27 pm

Excellent article Rick Sterling and Consortium News. For those wanting to learn more about the White Helmets (FSA terrorists) this link includes hundreds of pics from their own Facebook accounts proving that they are indeed terrorists posing as rescuers of little kids.

Huge Cache of White Helmets Exposed Links All In One Massive Volume For Sharing and Red Pilling – Over 400 Images in 22 Files

https://steemit.com/news/@clarityofsignal/huge-cache-of-white-helmets-exposed-links-all-in-one-massive-volume-for-sharing-and-red-pilling-over-400-images-in-22-files

Liam , March 1, 2018 at 12:32 pm

Also worth noting: A huge purge of You Tube alternative information channels took place in the wake of the Parkland shooting event. Looks like the school shooting has been used not just as a gun grab, but also to assert control via purging of a large number of popular You Tube channels that were critical of the children's acting skills. It would be great to see Consortium News cover this attack on free speech, and also the Google/You Tube connections to the Deep State and why they should be looked at as a government entity and not simply as a corporate entity that has the right to ban and censor people. They have almost complete control of information.

Massive list of channels removed from YouTube #The1984IsREAL

https://steemit.com/politics/@theouterlight/massive-list-of-channels-removed-from-youtube-the1984isreal

backwardsevolution , March 1, 2018 at 7:08 pm

Liam – great post! People need to open their eyes. I too hope that more and more articles are written on this very topic. I know Tucker Carlson at Fox tries to bring this to people's attention on a weekly basis. You don't know what you've got 'til it's gone. We had better smarten up quickly.

backwardsevolution , March 1, 2018 at 7:13 pm

Good article here:

https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=233057

me under the circumstances , March 1, 2018 at 3:10 pm

Vanessa Beeley and Eva Bartlett are targeted by the "pure white never mistaken good guys" ie the Fawning Corporate Media, as Ray McGovern calls them, as fake news providers, indicating to fair observers that they are actually the reporters on the scene in many parts of the globe who record what is really happening and how it affects the people involved.

Even when evidence is staring people in the face, many refuse to change their stereotyped images of who is to blame.

Lucifer Christ , March 1, 2018 at 3:49 pm

The problem with this propaganda is that the US government is calling its own ticked off citizens trolls.

The American people should not be paying for propaganda against their own interests.

This money is being spent by the Deep State to destroy the American people.

The American people are aware of the evil that lives in Washington, DC and how people in Washington, DC within the Deep State care nothing about them or their families. No matter of money will change that fact!

People's actions say much. Over time the American people have learned that the Deep State and the majority of politicians in DC are all about their own agenda and padding their own pockets – not serving Americans.

Washington DC is evil. Everybody knows!

mark , March 1, 2018 at 5:02 pm

DemocracyNow is just controlled opposition.
It is constantly shilling for regime change and "humanitarian bombing".
It gets its funding from Soros.
It is just another faux Left outfit like the Guardian.

backwardsevolution , March 1, 2018 at 10:22 pm

From Paul Craig Roberts again:

"The Trump presidency is the perfect timing for the oligarchs to take over control of all information. The liberal/progressive/left hate Trump so much that they are willing to ignore the proven fact that Russiagate was a FBI/Obama/Hillary conspiracy against Trump in order to use the false accusation as a weapon against Trump.

Gun control advocates and Identity Politics are willing to turn a blind eye to the unanswered questions about school shootings and terrorist bombings in order to get more gun control and police power to suppress "white supremacists." Partisan in their approach, they do not consider that the same power will be used against them.

As far as I can tell, the vast majority of young Americans have no idea what is at stake. Most will never realize that their reality consists of controlled explanations. They will never know the truth about anything."

The Lefties are playing right into their trap. Like I said, useful idiots.

Drew Hunkins , March 2, 2018 at 12:55 am

There were two points in very recent history when the Putin vilification operations really began to ramp up in the West:

1.) The anti Putin propaganda campaign escalated in 2006 when Kemp & Edwards published their CFR paper in which they made the absurd charge that Putin was "rolling back democracy" in Russia. What a sick joke. They made no such breathless accusations during the rape and pillage of Russia during the 1990s when j. Sachs and his Harvard boyz provided the intellectual muscle for the massive exploitation and plunder. No, it was only when Putin put a halt to a lot of the looting and capital flight that the Western liberal intellectual class became alarmed and proceeded to assail and decry the Putin "regime" ( it is almost always deemed a regime, rarely is it referred to as the Putin "administration.")

2.) Then the anti Putin propaganda campaign began to escalate even more so in 2013 when Putin pulled off one of the finest diplomatic moves of the last 30 years: he talked Obama down from bombing Damascus to remove Assad. This made Putin enemy number one in the eyes of the Zio-Saudi-Washington militarist Terror Network. They wanted ever so desperately to topple Assad and turn Syria into a wasteland and miserable failed state. They were apoplectic.

From here on out the Rachelle Maddows & Masha Gessens were off and running, fomenting Russophobia and putting the world on the brink of thermo nuclear Armageddon.

Gerry , March 2, 2018 at 2:45 am

I wrote a small comment thanking Rick (whom I know) and even that comment was not published.
I cannot find a moderation policy, but perhaps non-US citizens are not allowed on this site? I cannot find any way of contacting anybody either.Probably because I said a few more things that were upsetting the status quo here.
Well, so much for the most censored site I have ever seen: nice website but operated by controlling journalists, so better stick to non-US sites as this is really ridiculous. You publish whatever somebody says (Abe) who exposes anybody who dares to disagree with his idea about those of us who do not agree with Zionism, but no rebuttal allowed. Nobody will see this comment probably, so censor that as well and you are right up there with all the other Americans who pretend they have a broader view and yet censor anybody who says something slightly critical. Goodbye and good luck with the effect of this site on the media while your part of the same policies in the end if it does not suit you.

Loretta , March 2, 2018 at 5:11 am

What about Israel's foreign propaganda and meddling in elections?

[Mar 02, 2018] Why Russia: one day, we woke up and realised the Chicoms held enough of our debt to destroy us, while the Russians don't, so we keep kicking at the old bogeyman.

Mar 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

p

The Alarmist , Next New Comment March 2, 2018 at 11:56 am GMT

Biggest blunder in our lifetimes was not inviting Russia to join NATO, but I guess after years of anti-Russian propaganda the Neocons figured China would never be quite the bogeyman that we had built the Sovs into, big enough to keep the defense-dollars gravy-train flowing while we re-jiggered the mission to find another bogey man. Then, one day, we woke up and realised the Chicoms held enough of our debt to destroy us, while the Russians don't, so we keep kicking at the old bogeyman.

[Mar 02, 2018] McMaster may be on his way out

Notable quotes:
"... According to MSNBC, H.R.McMaster may be on his way out , orchestrated by CoS Kelly and Sec Def. Mattis ..."
Mar 02, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

The Beaver , 01 March 2018 at 05:21 PM

According to MSNBC, H.R.McMaster may be on his way out , orchestrated by CoS Kelly and Sec Def. Mattis

[Mar 01, 2018] Russia is at war. Sanction is essentially a declaration of war

Notable quotes:
"... Russia has no more bleak a likely future than the massively indebted, corrupt, racially violent, culturally and linguistically balkanizing, opioid-suiciding, bridge-collapsing, high-tax, antifamily, morally perverse, and homosexualized USA. ..."
"... A piece of that restoration would be ending the belligerence, dishonesty, sanctions, and threatening troop movements that the us gov is perpetrating against Russia. Oh, and stop killing Russian and Syrian personnel who are fighting Islamists. And stop supporting ISIS and other Islamists, and intentionally letting them escape. Just for starters, WarMaster. ..."
Mar 01, 2018 | www.unz.com

Jason Liu , February 23, 2018 at 3:35 pm GMT

First, and this is crucial, Russia is at war. Let me repeat this: Russia is at war with the AngloZionist Empire. The fact that this war is roughly 80% informational, 15% economic and 5% kinetic does not make it less real or less dangerous, if only because these ratios can very rapidly change.

So is China, except we're not as aware of it. Especially the information warfare part.

I think Putin should just kick democracy to the curb and make sure his opponents never have a chance to even deny him a majority. The west already regards Russia as an "non-democratic authoritarian state" anyway, it wouldn't make a difference in terms of perception.

Andrei Martyanov , Website February 23, 2018 at 3:57 pm GMT
@Jason Liu

So is China,

Yes and no. It is much more complex with China than with Russia. US-Chinese relations have a peculiar dynamics, although at some pint of time things may get really dicey, no doubt about it.

RadicalCenter , February 23, 2018 at 4:17 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

Russia has no more bleak a likely future than the massively indebted, corrupt, racially violent, culturally and linguistically balkanizing, opioid-suiciding, bridge-collapsing, high-tax, antifamily, morally perverse, and homosexualized USA.

I'm praying for both of our countries to turn it around, each according to its own culture, traditions, and core people's wishes (I.e. I want a less centralized system than Russia has, and than WE have for that matter, and generally more individual liberty than most Russians would want. America and Russia can develop on different paths and still be effective partners, increasing trade and military cooperation to destroy Islamists, crush piracy on the sea, deter and contain China to Asia, etc.)

A piece of that restoration would be ending the belligerence, dishonesty, sanctions, and threatening troop movements that the us gov is perpetrating against Russia. Oh, and stop killing Russian and Syrian personnel who are fighting Islamists. And stop supporting ISIS and other Islamists, and intentionally letting them escape. Just for starters, WarMaster.

[Mar 01, 2018] Did the CIA Plant Drugs on Russian Athletes at the Olympics

Notable quotes:
"... This is a video created by the New Yorker magazine which desperately pushes the idea that the Russians are dopers. The New Yorker has been a hotbed of pushing a heavy Russophobia through its favorite columnist Masha Gessen. ..."
"... Russian curling team Alexander Krushelnitsky and Anastasia Bryzgalova ..."
"... more than any other athletes ..."
"... is a substance where there is a parent compound which is a common headache migraine treatment available particularly in China and Japan and if that is found then it is not considered an ADRV. And if there is a very low level, as there was in this case, that is a possibility. ..."
"... Russian bobsledder Nadezhda Sergeeva. ..."
Mar 01, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Did the CIA Plant Drugs on Russian Athletes at the Olympics? Something stinks Rick Sterling Feb 27, 2018 | 2,899 122 MORE: Politics

There is something very fishy about the Anti Doping Rule Violations (ADRVs) pinned on the Russian curler and Russian bobsledder during the final week of the Peyongchang Winter Olympics.

It makes no logical sense that an athlete would do a one-time consumption of a chemical that is of no value in circumstances where it is almost certain to be detected with huge negative consequences.

me title=

This is a video created by the New Yorker magazine which desperately pushes the idea that the Russians are dopers. The New Yorker has been a hotbed of pushing a heavy Russophobia through its favorite columnist Masha Gessen.

That is precisely the situation. The Russian Mixed Curling bronze medal winner, Alexander Krushelnitsky, had to give up his medal, plus that of his partner wife, because traces of meldonium were found in his urine sample. He had previously tested clean. Meldonium is a medication which helps keep the heart healthy by increasing blood flow. That would be of no benefit in a sport like curling which requires accuracy, strategy and focus but is not taxing physically. The "sweeping" to help guide the rock down the ice lasts only 20 seconds or less. International curlers were astounded at the news and bemused at the idea of performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) for curling. The skip of the Danish curling team said "I think most people will laugh and ask, 'what could you possibly need doping for?"

Krushelnitsky strongly denies taking banned drugs. "I am categorically opposed to doping . never, at any time that I have been involved in sport, have I ever used prohibited substances".

Russian curling team Alexander Krushelnitsky and Anastasia Bryzgalova

Similar curious circumstances apply in the second ADRV . Russian bobsledder Nadezhda Sergeeva had numerous negative (clean) tests before she was tested positive for banned trimetazidine. Bobsledding is another sport which requires physical and mental skill but not physical endurance.

In the February 25 IOC meeting to close the Peyongchang Winter Games, the head of the IOC Implementation Group, Nicole Hoevertz, said the Russian athletes had been tested " more than any other athletes ". She and her group were convinced that the 168 member Russian athletic team was clean. At about 82:00 in the video, she says the two Russian doping violations were "so peculiar." She introduced the IOC Medical and Scientific Director, Dr. Richard Bludgett, to provide more detail. He suggested that meldonium would not be of benefit in curling. He then went further and suggested the ADRV regarding trimetazidine may be in error. He said trimetazidine " is a substance where there is a parent compound which is a common headache migraine treatment available particularly in China and Japan and if that is found then it is not considered an ADRV. And if there is a very low level, as there was in this case, that is a possibility. "

Sergeeva denies ever taking banned drugs and even went on social media with a T-shirt declaring her commitment to clean spor t.

Russian bobsledder Nadezhda Sergeeva.

In summary, it seems highly unlikely that two different Russian athletes would intentionally take medications that have no benefit but which are almost guaranteed to be detected resulting in huge harm to them and their team.

Who Benefits?

Another possibility is that meldonium or trimetazidine powder was surreptitiously put in the food of the athletes. This one time consumption would cause a positive test.

In fact there are forces on the international scene who are pleased that Russia has been battling defamation and charges of "state sponsored doping" for the past two years. They want the current denigration and punishments of Russia to continue, perhaps influencing Russia's upcoming national election and undermining Russia's hosting of the Football World Cup this summer.

One such group is the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The CIA has a long history of big and small criminal deeds. Presumably it would not be difficult for them to infiltrate Olympic facilities or bribe a corrupt individual to put traces of meldonium or another powder in someone's food or drink.

Those who quickly dismiss this possibility probably also thought that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction in 2002. That was a false claim supported by evidence fabricated by the CIA.

It is well documented the CIA carries out murders, coups and major sabotage. The CIA has documented some of their methods in "The Official CIA Manual of Trickery and Deception" . They don't just carry out assassinations and coups. In the book "In Search of Enemies", former CIA officer J ohn Stockwell documented how the CIA created a false story about Cuban soldiers raping Angolan women to defame Cuba.

Corrupt police forces sometimes plant evidence on a suspect they wish to convict. It would be essentially the same thing to get a Russian athlete to ingest spiked food or beverage.

The CIA has motive and expressed intent:

* In contrast with Russian leaders who call the US a "partner", US officials increasingly call Russia an "adversary". The latest US National Security Strategy explicitly says they intend to respond to Russia as an adversary: " The United States will respond to the growing political, economic and military competitions we face around the world. China and Russia challenge American power, influence, and interests, attempting to erode American security and prosperity."

* Despite the lack of clear evidence , there is widespread belief that Russia "meddled" in the US election. The anti-Russia sentiment has been fanned into the exaggerated claim that the unproven Russian action was "an act of war, an act of hybrid warfare".

* Neoconservatives forces openly talk about "punishing" Russia. The former Deputy Director of the CIA, Michael Morrell, said "We need to make the Russians pay a price" . He confirmed on public television that means killing Russians (and Iranians) in Syria. This is the 33 year veteran CIA leader who publicly campaigned for Hillary Clinton.

Did the CIA plant the doping evidence? We don't know for certain but it should not be dismissed out of hand. The CIA has the means, opportunity and above all the motive to falsely implicate Russians in new doping cases with the goal of preventing Russia from getting beyond the international sporting sanctions and punishments. They have done vastly more deceitful, manipulative, and outrageous things than this.

Media Bias

Unfortunately, western media will not investigate this possibility. Western media cannot even accurately report on events like the IOC meeting yesterday. The fact that the head of the IOC Implementation Group warmly praised the Russian participation at the Peyongchang Olympics is not mentioned in western media. The fact that Dr. Bludgett raised questions about the accuracy of the ADRVs against Russia is not mentioned in reports from NY Times , the UK Guardian or I nside the Games . Instead, the writer at Inside the Games once again exaggerated the voice of critics of Russia as he downplayed the voices of international athletes who want to put the doping scandal behind and move forward.

Western media have reported deceptively that the Russian athletes have "admitted" to the violations. In fact, both Russian athletes strongly deny taking banned drugs.

Western media bias is also shown in the focus on alleged Russian doping and minimization or ignoring of other possible violations. For example the story about the Norwegian cross-country ski team and their use of banned asthmatic medications. They get around the restrictions by having their doctor claim that most of their athletes are asthmatic. This situation is a result of the inconsistent rules and regulations. A Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) can be given to any athlete designated by a doctor and in secrecy. They are not required to publicly disclose this, giving incentive to corruption and misuse.

Richard McLaren's Bias

The World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) has also been biased. Over one year ago, their investigator Richard McLaren claimed "over one thousand Russian athletes benefited" from the alleged Russian conspiracy to cheat the ant-doping system. McLaren said the proof would be provided to the various sport federations. In September 2017 it was revealed that charges had been filed against 96 athletes. Of these, WADA cleared 95 athletes of wrongdoing; only one athlete was proven to be in violation. More recently, the Court of Arbitration in Sport completely overturned the bans on 28 Russian athletes. In summary, it appears that McLaren's accusation about "over one thousand athletes benefiting" was a huge exaggeration or fabrication.

Where Do Things Go From Here?

The IOC Executive Board has indicated they intend to lift the suspension of the Russian Olympic Committee if no more "anti doping rule violations" are found in the last batch of athlete samples from the Peyongchang Olympics. The results are expected in a few days.

Another ADRV may appear. If so, that will greatly complicate the effort to reintegrate Russian athletics. Even if the final tests are all clean, those who oppose Russia will continue trying to delay or prevent the full integration of Russia within the world sporting Community.

The former Moscow Laboratory Director Grigory Rodchenkov is the primary weapon in the campaign accusing Russia of "state sponsored doping". "Icarus" is a movie about him which has received huge funding and promotion. It is nominated for an an Oscar Academy award. This will serve the campaign well.

The Russian have been accused of trying to murder Rodchenkov. But if he suddenly dies one day, it is more likely to be by the CIA. At this point, Rodchenkov has done all the damage he can to Russian sports. The only thing he could possibly do is to recant or fall apart. His handlers have prevented him from appearing before the various committees looking into the accusations. At this point, Rodchenkov could be more valuable dead than alive. His death would be a powerful weapon to disrupt the normalization of relations with Russia.

[Mar 01, 2018] Putin The Man Who Stopped Washington s Regime Change Rampage by Mike Whitney

What Washington really haptes about Putin is that he has refused to comply with their diktats and has openly rejected their model of a "unipolar" world order.
Notable quotes:
"... The attacks on Putin began sometime in 2006 during Putin's second term when it became apparent that Russia was going to resist the looting and exploitation the US requires of its vassal states. ..."
"... That's right, Russia was thrown under the bus because they wanted to control their own oil and their own destiny. ..."
"... John Edwards and Jack Kemp were appointed to lead a CFR task force which concocted the absurd pretext that that Putin was "rolling back democracy" in Russia. ..."
"... What Washington really despises about Putin is that he has refused to comply with their diktats and has openly rejected their model of a "unipolar" world order. ..."
"... Despite Russia's efforts to assist the US in its War On Terror, Washington has continued to regard Putin as an emerging rival that would eventually have to be confronted. The conflict in Ukraine added more gas to the fire by pitting the two superpowers against each other in a hot war that remains unresolved to this day. ..."
"... But Syria was the straw that broke the camel's back. Russia's intervention in the Syrian War in September 2015 proved to be the turning point in the 7 year-long conflagration. By rolling back the CIA-trained militants, Putin bloodied Washington's nose and forced the Pentagon to adopt a backup plan that relied heavily on Kurdish proxies east of the Euphrates. ..."
"... The Syria humiliation precipitated the Russia-gate Information Operation (IO) which is the propaganda component of the current war on Russia. The scandal has been an effective way to poison public perceptions and to make it look like the perpetrator of aggression is really the victim. ..."
"... Putin clearly blames the United States for the rise of ISIS and the surge in global terrorism. He also condemns Washington's strategy to use terrorist organizations to achieve its own narrow strategic objectives. (regime change) More important, he uses his platform at the United Nations to explain why he has deployed the Russian Air-force to bases in Syria where it will it will be used to conduct a war against Washington's jihadist proxies on the ground. ..."
"... The only place where people have a negative view of Putin is in the United States (14 percent) and EU (28 percent), the two locations where he is relentlessly savaged by the media and excoriated by the political class. ..."
"... The problem is that the propaganda power structure behind the yankee imperium is probably too powerful for rationality to triumph, so we are in for serious trouble. ..."
"... After having spent 36 years in the West and having seen Westerners vote for the likes of Blair, Sarkozy or Macron, I have a very low opinion of Western intelligence, and Western moral relativism and indifference with regards to the crimes their elected leaders committed abroad. ..."
"... China is a rival but an odd kind of rival. Let's not forget that the US, over the last 30 whatever years has enthusiastically facilitated China's rise. China has become the world's factory because the US and other countries Co's want CHEAP labour. ..."
"... American liberals support lifting living standards and ending poverty? You mean, the same American liberals who support 'free' trade and importing unlimited amounts of scab labor? You must have us confused with some other country, Mike. ..."
"... not like he had a choice. dc was about to have it's hands on his throat and he finally reacted. That was ukraine. syria was him trying to protect another one of his naval bases. the bear simply reacted to attempts at cutting off it's legs. ..."
"... Putin inherited a broken Russia in 2000. A Russia on the verge of collapse due to misrule of drunkard Yeltsin and body blows administered by US/NATO. A broken down military; economy in shambles; demographic collapse. During his presidency US/EU/NATO engineered a collapse of oil prices and assaults on ruble: what exactly was Putin supposed to non-passively do to counter the collapse of world oil prices, for example? ..."
"... Putin was wise enough and cautious enough not to go head-to-head with US/NATO until his military and economy were in good enough shape to do and make a difference, as in Syria for example. It would have been very bad for Russia to act prematurely and get bled dry, which warmongering US Neocons were hoping for. ..."
"... Obviously Putin knows the strengths and weaknesses of Russia better than any of us here. He is butting heads with the combined military industrial might of US+EU: that block has a lot of human resources, wealth, worldwide financial and political influence. Also Putin has to – has to – improve the living standards of citizens of RF, so he cannot afford to get into an expensive arms race with the West. Putin is doing very well with what he has, as far as human and military-industrial resources Russia has. ..."
"... When asked by a Germany-based academic where Russia had most seriously gone wrong in the past decade and a half, Putin said he had too readily laid his trust in the West, which he then accused of having abused its relationship with Moscow to further its own interests." ..."
"... America is in a very ugly spot and getting worse everyday. Living here I can sense it. Americans are going crazy. Pathetic how they are trying and build hate for Russia/Putin mainly because America got triple fucked across the ME and especially in Syria. Very sad. ..."
"... America's greatest historical truth: in foreign policy the USA just cannot learn from experience. We keep making the same mistakes. Stupid, idiotic, nation building b/s. ..."
"... In my opinion, the USA, until now, could afford to conduct foreign policy for internal reasons ..."
"... The reason why the US empire will follow the British empire into the graveyard is because they are based on the same model – trying to prevent others from becoming equal to them instead of trying to get better than the competitors. ..."
"... GB was preoccupied with preventing Germany from surpassing them – and guess what? They succeeded. And where is the British empire now? ..."
"... US is on a similar path of self-destruction. First they made China an economic superpower and now they want to contain them militarily. Good luck with that. ..."
"... The money that the US spent on military misadventures – they could have bribed with far lesser amount of money the various "dictatorships" that they were so democratically inclined to topple – and would have achieved better results. Instead of using those money to make US better – for their citizens, they are trying to prevent the world from catching up with them – British style. ..."
Feb 28, 2018 | www.unz.com

"It is essential to provide conditions for creative labor and economic growth at a pace that would put an end to the division of the world into permanent winners and permanent losers. The rules of the game should give the developing economies at least a chance to catch up with those we know as developed economies. We should work to level out the pace of economic development, and brace up backward countries and regions so as to make the fruit of economic growth and technological progress accessible to all. Particularly, this would help to put an end to poverty, one of the worst contemporary problems." Vladimir Putin, President Russian Federation, Meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club

Putin wants to end poverty? Putin wants to stimulate economic growth in developing countries? Putin wants to change the system that divides the world into "permanent winners and losers"? But, how can that be, after all, Putin is bad, Putin is a "KGB thug", Putin is the "new Hitler"?

American liberals would be surprised to know that Putin actually supports many of the same social issues that they support. For example, the Russian President is not only committed to lifting living standards and ending poverty, he's also a big believer in universal healthcare which is free under the current Russian Constitution. Naturally, the Russian system has its shortcomings, but there has been significant progress under Putin who has dramatically increased the budget, improved treatment and widened accessibility. Putin believes that healthcare should be a universal human right. Here's what he said at the annual meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club:

"Another priority is global healthcare . All people in the world, not only the elite, should have the right to healthy, long and full lives. This is a noble goal. In short, we should build the foundation for the future world today by investing in all priority areas of human development." (Vladimir Putin, President Russian Federation, Meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club)

How many "liberal" politicians in the US would support a recommendation like Putin's? Not very many. The Democrats are much more partial to market-based reforms like Obamacare that guarantee an ever-increasing slice of the pie goes to the giant HMOs and the voracious pharmaceutical companies. The Dems no longer make any attempt to promote universal healthcare as a basic human right. They've simply thrown in the towel and moved on to other issues.

Many Americans would find Putin's views on climate change equally surprising. Here's another clip from the Valdai speech:

"Ladies and gentlemen, one more issue that shall affect the future of the entire humankind is climate change. I suggest that we take a broader look at the issue .What we need is an essentially different approach, one that would involve introducing new, groundbreaking, nature-like technologies that would not damage the environment, but rather work in harmony with it, enabling us to restore the balance between the biosphere and technology upset by human activities.

It is indeed a challenge of global proportions. And I am confident that humanity does have the necessary intellectual capacity to respond to it. We need to join our efforts, primarily engaging countries that possess strong research and development capabilities, and have made significant advances in fundamental research. We propose convening a special forum under the auspices of the UN to comprehensively address issues related to the depletion of natural resources, habitat destruction, and climate change. Russia is willing to co-sponsor such a forum .." Valdai)

Most people would never suspect that Putin supports a global effort to address climate change. And, how would they know, after all, bits of information like that– that help to soften Putin's image and make him seem like a rational human being– are scrubbed from the media's coverage in order to cast him in the worst possible light. The media doesn't want people to know that Putin is a reflective and modest man who has worked tirelessly to make Russia and the world a better place. No, they want them to believe that he's is a scheming tyrannical despot who's obsessive hatred for America poses a very real threat to US national security. But it's not true.

Putin is not the ghoulish caricature the media makes him out to be nor does he hate America, that's just more propaganda from the corporate echo-chamber. The truth is Putin has been good for Russia, good for regional stability, and good for global security. He pulled the Russian Federation back from the brink of annihilation in 2000, and has had the country moving in a positive direction ever since. His impact on the Russian economy has been particularly impressive. According to Wikipedia:

"Between 2000 and 2012 Russia's energy exports fueled a rapid growth in living standards, with real disposable income rising by 160%. In dollar-denominated terms this amounted to a more than sevenfold increase in disposable incomes since 2000. In the same period, unemployment and poverty more than halved and Russians' self-assessed life satisfaction also rose significantly."

Inequality is a problem in Russia just like it is in the US, but the vast majority of working people have benefited greatly from Putin's reforms and a system of distribution that –judging by steady uptick in disposable incomes – is significantly superior to that in the United States where wages have flatlined for over 2 decades and where virtually all of the nation's wealth trickles upward to the parasitic 1 percent.

Since Putin took office in 2000, workers have seen across-the-board increase in wages, benefits, healthcare and pensions. Poverty and unemployment have been reduced by more than half while foreign investment has experienced steady growth. Onerous IMF loans have been repaid in full, capital flight has all-but ceased, hundreds in billions in reserves have been accumulated, personal and corporate taxes have been slashed, and technology has experienced an unprecedented renaissance. The notorious Russian oligarchs still have a stranglehold on many privately-owned industries, but their grip has begun to loosen and the "kleptocracy has begun to fade."

Things are far from perfect, but the Russian economy has flourished under Putin and, generally speaking, the people are appreciative. This helps to explain why Putin's public approval ratings are typically in the stratosphere. (70 to 80 percent) Simply put: Putin the most popular Russian president of all time. And his popularity is not limited to Russia either, in fact, he typically ranks at the top of most global leadership polls such as the recent Gallup International End of Year Survey (EoY) where Putin came in third (43 percent positive rating) behind Germany's Angela Merkel (49 percent) and French President Emmanuel Macron. (45 percent) According to Gallup: "Putin has gone from one in three (33 percent) viewing him favourably to 43 percent, a significant increase over two years."

The only place where people have a negative view of Putin is in the United States (14 percent) and EU (28 percent), the two locations where he is relentlessly savaged by the media and excoriated by the political class. This should come as no surprise to Americans who know that the chances of stumbling across an article that treats Putin with even minimal objectivity is about as likely as finding a copper coin at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean. The consensus view of the western media is that Putin is a maniacal autocrat who kills journalists and political opponents (no proof), who meddles in US elections to "sow discord" and destroy our precious democracy (no proof), and who is conducting a secret and sinister cyberwar against the United States. (no proof). It's a pathetic litany of libels and fabrications, but its impact on the brainwashed American people has been quite impressive as Gallup's results indicate. Bottom line: Propaganda works.

The attacks on Putin began sometime in 2006 during Putin's second term when it became apparent that Russia was going to resist the looting and exploitation the US requires of its vassal states. This is when the powerful Council on Foreign Relations funded a report titled "Russia's Wrong Direction" that suggested that Russia's increasingly independent foreign policy and insistence that it control its own vast oil and natural gas resources meant that "the very idea of a 'strategic partnership' no longer seems realistic." That's right, Russia was thrown under the bus because they wanted to control their own oil and their own destiny.

John Edwards and Jack Kemp were appointed to lead a CFR task force which concocted the absurd pretext that that Putin was "rolling back democracy" in Russia. They claimed that the government had become increasingly authoritarian and that the society was growing less "open and pluralistic". Kemp and Edwards provided the ideological foundation upon which the entire public relations campaign against Putin has been built. Twelve years later, the same charges are still being leveled at Putin along with the additional allegations that he meddled in the 2016 presidential elections.

Needless to say, none of the nation's newspapers, magazines or broadcast media ever publish anything that deviates even slightly from the prevailing, propagandistic narrative about Putin. One can only assume that the MSM's views on Putin are either universally accepted by all 325 million Americans or that the so-called "free press" is a wretched farce that conceals an authoritarian corporate machine that censors all opinions that don't promote their own malign political agenda.

What Washington really despises about Putin is that he has refused to comply with their diktats and has openly rejected their model of a "unipolar" world order. As he said at the annual Security Conference at Munich in 2007:

"The unipolar world refers to a world in which there is one master, one sovereign; one center of authority, one center of force, one center of decision-making. At the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within."

Despite Russia's efforts to assist the US in its War On Terror, Washington has continued to regard Putin as an emerging rival that would eventually have to be confronted. The conflict in Ukraine added more gas to the fire by pitting the two superpowers against each other in a hot war that remains unresolved to this day.

But Syria was the straw that broke the camel's back. Russia's intervention in the Syrian War in September 2015 proved to be the turning point in the 7 year-long conflagration. By rolling back the CIA-trained militants, Putin bloodied Washington's nose and forced the Pentagon to adopt a backup plan that relied heavily on Kurdish proxies east of the Euphrates. At present, US Special Forces and their allies are clinging to a strip of arid wasteland in the Syrian outback hoping that the Pentagon brass can settle on a forward-operating strategy that reverses their fortunes or brings the war to a swift end.

The Syria humiliation precipitated the Russia-gate Information Operation (IO) which is the propaganda component of the current war on Russia. The scandal has been an effective way to poison public perceptions and to make it look like the perpetrator of aggression is really the victim. More important, failure in Syria has led to a reevaluation of how Washington conducts its wars abroad. The War on Terror pretext has been jettisoned for a more direct approach laid out in the Trump administration's National Defense Strategy. The focus going forward will be on "Great Power Competition", that is, the US is subordinating its covert proxy operations to more flagrant displays of military force particularly in regards to the "growing threat from revisionist powers", Russia and China. In short, the gloves are coming off and Washington is ramping up for a land war.

Putin has become an obstacle to Washington's imperial ambitions which is why he's has been elevated to Public Enemy Number 1. It has nothing to do with the fictitious meddling in the 2016 elections or the nonsensical "rolling back democracy" in Russia. It's all about power. In the United States the group with the tightest grip on power is the foreign policy establishment. These are the towering mandarins who dictate the policy, tailor the politics to fit their strategic vision, and dispatch their lackeys in the media to shape the narrative. These are the people who decided that Putin must be demonized to pave the way for more foreign interventions, more regime change wars, more bloody aggression against sovereign states.

Putin has repeatedly warned Washington that Russia would not stand by while the US destroyed one country after the other in its lust for global domination. He reiterated his claim that Washington's "uncontained hyper-use of force" was creating "new centers of tension", exacerbating regional conflicts, undermining international relations, and "plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts." He has pointed out how the US routinely displayed its contempt for international law and "overstepped its national borders in every way." As a result of Washington's aggressive behavior, public confidence in international law and global security has steadily eroded and "No one feels safe. I want to emphasize this," Putin thundered in Munich. "No one feels safe."

On September 28, 2015 Putin finally threw down the gauntlet in a speech he delivered at the 70th session of the UN General Assembly in New York. After reiterating his commitment to international law, the UN, and state sovereignty, he provided a brief but disturbing account of recent events in the Middle East, all of which have gotten significantly worse due to Washington's use of force. Here's Putin:

"Just look at the situation in the Middle East and Northern Africa Instead of bringing about reforms, aggressive intervention destroyed government institutions and the local way of life. Instead of democracy and progress, there is now violence, poverty, social disasters and total disregard for human rights, including even the right to life

The power vacuum in some countries in the Middle East and Northern Africa obviously resulted in the emergence of areas of anarchy, which were quickly filled with extremists and terrorists. The so-called Islamic State has tens of thousands of militants fighting for it, including former Iraqi soldiers who were left on the street after the 2003 invasion. Many recruits come from Libya whose statehood was destroyed as a result of a gross violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1973 ."

US interventions have decimated Iraq, Libya, Syria and beyond. Over a million people have been killed while tens of millions have been forced to flee their homes and their countries. The refugee spillover has added to social tensions across the EU where anti-immigrant sentiment has precipitated the explosive growth in right wing groups and political organizations. From Northern Africa, across the Middle East, and into Central Asia, global security has steadily deteriorated under Washington's ruthless stewardship. Here's more from Putin:

"The Islamic State itself did not come out of nowhere. It was initially developed as a weapon against undesirable secular regimes. Having established control over parts of Syria and Iraq, Islamic State now aggressively expands into other regions .It is irresponsible to manipulate extremist groups and use them to achieve your political goals, hoping that later you'll find a way to get rid of them or somehow eliminate them ."

Putin clearly blames the United States for the rise of ISIS and the surge in global terrorism. He also condemns Washington's strategy to use terrorist organizations to achieve its own narrow strategic objectives. (regime change) More important, he uses his platform at the United Nations to explain why he has deployed the Russian Air-force to bases in Syria where it will it will be used to conduct a war against Washington's jihadist proxies on the ground.

Putin: "We can no longer tolerate the current state of affairs in the world."

Less than 48 hours after these words were uttered, Russian warplanes began pounding militant targets in Syria.

Putin again: "Dear colleagues, relying on international law, we must join efforts to address the problems that all of us are facing, and create a genuinely broad international coalition against terrorism .Russia is confident of the United Nations' enormous potential, which should help us avoid a new confrontation and embrace a strategy of cooperation. Hand in hand with other nations, we will consistently work to strengthen the UN's central, coordinating role. I am convinced that by working together, we will make the world stable and safe, and provide an enabling environment for the development of all nations and peoples."

So, here's the question: Is Putin "evil" for opposing Washington's regime change wars, for stopping the spread of terrorism, and for rejecting the idea that one unipolar world power should rule the world? Is that why he's evil, because he won't click his heels and do as he's told by the global hegemon?

We should all be so evil.

Renoman , February 28, 2018 at 10:32 am GMT

Leader of the free World.
Robert Magill , February 28, 2018 at 11:00 am GMT
The dumbest thing about the US focus on Russia and Putin is that it leaves China, our actual rival, free to continue its march to overwhelming mastery of the entire Eastern Hemisphere. Without firing a shot or wasting a bullet China has moved into a position of influence the US has dreamed of for a century.

The next war, if it comes, will be over something like Cobalt. The future lies in big and plentiful electric batteries and China and Russia between them control almost 50% of the known supply of Cobalt, while the US has none. Stand by and wait, folks.

https://robertmagill.wordpress.com/2015/01/11/mr-bernays-to-dr-goebbels-to-s-h-i-t-3/

macilrae , February 28, 2018 at 2:11 pm GMT

The only place where people have a negative view of Putin is in the United States (14 percent) and EU (28 percent), the two locations where he is relentlessly savaged by the media and excoriated by the political class.

I would be staggered is only 14 percent of Americans had a negative view of Putin – almost everybody I have spoken to has completely swallowed the media line. In Europe UK in particular has been brainwashed against him – southern Europe far less so. The 28 percent is more realistic.

Harold Smith , February 28, 2018 at 2:41 pm GMT
@Robert Magill

Is China trying to trash our constitution? Is China invading other countries, killing people with missiles and bombs all over the world, staging "color revolutions" and subverting legitimate governments in the "West"? Is China patrolling the Gulf of Mexico and putting missiles in Mexico and Canada? China hasn't done anything bad to me or to anyone I know, so please explain how China is "our" "rival"?

exiled off mainstreet , February 28, 2018 at 3:37 pm GMT
This is a great article. The problem is that the propaganda power structure behind the yankee imperium is probably too powerful for rationality to triumph, so we are in for serious trouble.
Tailgunner Joes talking liver , February 28, 2018 at 3:50 pm GMT
Magisterial article.

There's a simple reason why Putin is talking sense. He's doing nothing more than stating customary international law. Those economic quotes have been set out in a series of UN resolutions including A/RES/41/128 on the right to development. This is the acquis of the civilized world. No country in the world opposes it – except the USA. The US votes alone against it every time it comes up, even though customary international law is US federal and state common law under the Supreme Court decision, The Paquete Habana.

Mr. Whitney has accepted the official framing that it's all about Putin. That clever decision makes his article more provocative. Calm appraisal of the current official foreign devil is inherently inflammatory. However, this has nothing to do with Putin. Rigid legalist that he is, his hands are tied. Russia has ratified the ICESCR.

Russia has ratified the ICESCR. The USA has not. Here are some of the rights Russians have that you do not:

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CESCR.aspx

OHCHR has a convenient compilation showing how each government meets its legal obligations and commitments. The synoptic heatmap below shows the US deep down in the shithole with Wahhabi headchoppers and neocolonial African presidents-for-life.

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

The exhaustively documented fact here is, the Russian state meets world standards. The US government does not. The Russian government respects, protects, and fulfils human rights. The US government fights tooth and nail to keep them out of your reach, and negates your incomplete half-assed constitutional rights with statist red tape. Russians get a better deal than you do. Merely by reciting the law as he does, Putin would win a fair election here with Roosevelt-scale majorities, again and again. That's why he drives the US government up the wall.

Beckow , February 28, 2018 at 4:23 pm GMT
Where is it the propaganda campaign going? We have seen this before as preparation for a war or a regime change. In Russia both are unlikely to succeed. That leaves an ever increasing propaganda bombast in the West, people brainwashed to the point where outright racism against anything 'Russian' will become widespread. Then what? Move movies with white Russian villains, as if that is what threatens West the most?

Russia can neither be isolated, nor 'collapsed' economically, nor ignored. It is too resource rich and powerful. Russia could possibly be checked in a second tier conflict (Syria?), but that would be of minimal consequence. Ukraine could be escalated, but there Russia has an enormous local logistics advantage, it would be a disaster for Kiev. And Russia is on friendly terms with China, its only potential military threat on land.

Propaganda by itself does nothing, it is only means to an end. West is in no position to go beyond propaganda, so we might experience a bizarre example of a mindless propaganda that goes on and on. As with all propaganda the main target is the domestic population – in other words it is the common people in the West who are being propagandised and in effect made more stupid, less capable of making rational decisions.

Even a slight u-turn is at this point unthinkable, almost all elites have too visibly engaged in the evil-Russia talk, how could they let go of it? We are stuck, we might get saved by an unrelated 'big event' somewhere else. If not, this could just be fatal, after all this belligerent talk we could perish because somebody dared to call Clinton a satan on Facebook. And they didn't use their real name – the horror .

dearieme , February 28, 2018 at 5:08 pm GMT
My own view is that Putin is probably as trustworthy and honest as any other ex-KGB man. On the other hand he does come across as intelligent, cautious, and calm. Especially when compared to the crook Hillary or the oaf Trump.
Si1ver1ock , February 28, 2018 at 5:34 pm GMT
@Tailgunner Joes talking liver

Great comment. I tried to follow the links but got an error:

The connection has timed out

The server at http://www.ohchr.org is taking too long to respond.

The site could be temporarily unavailable or too busy. Try again in a few moments.
If you are unable to load any pages, check your computer's network connection.
If your computer or network is protected by a firewall or proxy, make sure that Firefox is permitted to access the Web.

This is starting to bother me. Stuff is disappearing from the web. Look at the link below to an Al Jazeera documentary which has disappeared from YouTube and the web.

Attempting to play the video gives a message:

This video is unavailable.

https://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/peopleandpower/2010/03/201031761541794128.html

Si1ver1ock , February 28, 2018 at 5:38 pm GMT
Nowadays being Pro Truth now makes you Anti American.

Sad.

and

Edie P , February 28, 2018 at 8:36 pm GMT
Si1ver1ock, interesting problems you're having. I had no problem with the links, but then the magic of Tor means I'm reaching them from the Netherlands. State censorship is harder when you can access suppressed URLs from a couple dozen different countries.

( https://www.torproject.org/download/download-easy.html.en )

anonymous Disclaimer , February 28, 2018 at 11:50 pm GMT
@Robert Magill

Please do respond, and in good faith, to the reply of commenter Harold Smith. I share his apparent concern that you may be conflating the interests of the American people with the imperial ambitions of their Uncle Sam.

Robert Magill , March 1, 2018 at 1:19 am GMT
@Harold Smith

Harold Smith,

I feel we have a problem with the term 'rival' here. All the negatives you describe represent a rivalry that I in no way imply in my statements. Rivalry can be strictly limited to trade and business and not in the war-making processes you are citing. I tried to point out that we as a nation miss the mark in constantly demonizing Russia, who is certainly no rival in trade and business, while China certainly is.
Our zealous attacking of rivals has a long history and is not easily abandoned. However, I am afraid our national focus in this unproductive way will cause us as a people to not be aware of where our serious competition is actually coming from and be able to deal with it in a timely fashion.

Robert Magill , March 1, 2018 at 1:20 am GMT
@anonymous

See my reply to Harold Smith.

Harold Smith , March 1, 2018 at 2:52 am GMT
@Robert Magill

"I feel we have a problem with the term 'rival' here. All the negatives you describe represent a rivalry that I in no way imply in my statements. Rivalry can be strictly limited to trade and business and not in the war-making processes you are citing."

In your original comment you said:

"The dumbest thing about the US focus on Russia and Putin is that it leaves China, our actual rival, free to continue its march to overwhelming mastery of the entire Eastern Hemisphere. Without firing a shot or wasting a bullet China has moved into a position of influence the US has dreamed of for a century."

Since a big part of the U.S. "focus" on Russia is military encirclement, confrontation by proxy, the threat of direct conflict even nuclear war, etc., this statement clearly suggests a "military solution" to "contain" an economically "rising" China, IMO. (After all, when the only tool the U.S. "government" has is a hammer, everything looks like a nail).

But so what if China has some kind of "mastery" of the Eastern hemisphere? To the extent that's true, at least they didn't do it by way of lawless imperial treachery.

The U.S. is losing influence all over the world because it's making itself hated; it's imposing itself everywhere and squandering everything of value on the hopeless pursuit of world domination and control.

"I tried to point out that we as a nation miss the mark in constantly demonizing Russia, who is certainly no rival in trade and business, while China certainly is."

The thing is "we" don't demonize Russia "as a nation"; rather, it's done by the Satanic ruling class that hates Russia – not for any rational reason, but for the same reason that Cain hated Abel: because "evil" hates a "good" example.

"Our zealous attacking of rivals has a long history and is not easily abandoned."

Unless you're going change the definition of "rival" again, I should point out that the U.S. "government" doesn't generally attack "rivals" but deems any country that asserts its sovereign independence and refuses to take orders an "enemy", subject to economic, political and military attack.

"However, I am afraid our national focus in this unproductive way will cause us as a people to not be aware of where our serious competition is actually coming from and be able to deal with it in a timely fashion."

You seem to be conflating "us as a people" with the U.S. "government" which has by now lost even the pretense of moral and constitutional legitimacy, and thus has nothing remotely to do with what's in the best interests of "us as a people".

Ilyana_Rozumova , March 1, 2018 at 5:34 am GMT
@Harold Smith

Here is the explanation. China is economic rival to US. That is not only inconvenient, rival, it is the most efficient and most dangerous rival, because who is wining the economic competition is pushing out the opponent from world markets.

LarryS , March 1, 2018 at 5:51 am GMT
@Harold Smith

Somebody wants white Christians to kill each other. Again.

Vojkan , March 1, 2018 at 6:52 am GMT
That people in the West believe the lies that TPTB concoct for their consumption, I can conceive, though only after a convoluted intellectual effort, for given all the now exposed deceit, one is left in wonder as to why the masses still believe proven liars.

After having spent 36 years in the West and having seen Westerners vote for the likes of Blair, Sarkozy or Macron, I have a very low opinion of Western intelligence, and Western moral relativism and indifference with regards to the crimes their elected leaders committed abroad.

Still, I can't figure out if TPTB believe their own narrative. It takes a very peculiar mindset to be able to live in permanent lies. Contrary to truth which can exist per se and is therefore essentially cost-free, lies demand permanent maintenance and have high maintenance cost.
So, TPTB of the West are either delusional in thinking they can maintain their lies ad vitam aeternam, or they are mythomaniacs. Either way, just think what happens when lies cannot be maintained any more and the liars don't want to relinquish power.

Bear in mind that lying being effectively irrational, they cannot be considered as rational actors. Prepare your shelters folks.

Ludwig Watzal , Website March 1, 2018 at 8:02 am GMT
Very seldom, I've read such a realistic article on President Putin and his policy. I've been following not only his administration but also that of the US Empire, and I'm always flabbergasted about the US elites demonization of this leader. He belongs to the few leaders who got their act together compared to the political exorcists in Washington. The real thugs and psychopaths are the members of the American political elite and their cheerleaders in the fawning US mainstream media. Following their analysis, I often think they stem from lunatics who are coming from outer space.
animalogic , March 1, 2018 at 9:05 am GMT
@Robert Magill

Yes, China is a rival but an odd kind of rival. Let's not forget that the US, over the last 30 whatever years has enthusiastically facilitated China's rise. China has become the world's factory because the US and other countries Co's want CHEAP labour.
So -- Dr Frankenstein is now scared of his own monster. Oh the irony !

Truthmatters , March 1, 2018 at 9:41 am GMT
In the last two weeks a virtual book burning has begun on YouTube. Scores of independent truth seeking channels have been deleted. Some were pretty amateur and sensationalist, many were good, top notch investigative fact checking in nature. Many had large numbers of subscribers, a few had 100,000s subscribers.

Common denominator seemed to question official mainstream media narrative on mass shootings, 9/11, war on terror, human sex trafficking, Clinton Foundation corruption, and even UFO coverups. One channel was a woman skilled at body language commenting on videos of people like John Podesta being interviewed as to whether he was lying.

None of these channels advocated violence, quite the contrary. Most couched opinion alongside probable facts by asking deductive and inductive questions. The YouTube virtual book burning appears to have gathered pace in last week.

So much for free speech in the fake but very slickly fake Western democracies. Where the geopolitical narrative is uniformly uniform.

Seamus Padraig , March 1, 2018 at 9:43 am GMT

American liberals would be surprised to know that Putin actually supports many of the same social issues that they support. For example, the Russian President is not only committed to lifting living standards and ending poverty, he's also a big believer in universal healthcare which is free under the current Russian Constitution.

American liberals support lifting living standards and ending poverty? You mean, the same American liberals who support 'free' trade and importing unlimited amounts of scab labor? You must have us confused with some other country, Mike.

"I suggest that we take a broader look at the issue .What we need is an essentially different approach, one that would involve introducing new, groundbreaking, nature-like technologies that would not damage the environment, but rather work in harmony with it "

I note that he says nothing about 'cap and trade,' or any other Western bankster-scam. I have nothing against renewable energy–whether or not global warming is real.

PiltdownMan , March 1, 2018 at 11:01 am GMT
For the West, the demonization of Vladimir Putin is not a policy; it is an alibi for the absence of one. -- Henry Kissinger in 2014.
Swan Knight , Website March 1, 2018 at 11:18 am GMT
Vladimir Putin is the World's greatest leader since Robert E Lee
Astuteobservor II , March 1, 2018 at 12:50 pm GMT
not like he had a choice. dc was about to have it's hands on his throat and he finally reacted. That was ukraine. syria was him trying to protect another one of his naval bases. the bear simply reacted to attempts at cutting off it's legs.

that is actually very, very passive.

Robert Magill , March 1, 2018 at 1:49 pm GMT
@ animalogic

"China has become the world's factory because the US and other countries Co's want CHEAP labour. "

We all know the drill here. China makes stuff cheap so that WalMart can undercut competitors and grow rich. Therefore, alas, what can be done? Except that WalMart has over four hundred stores IN CHINA and plans to build forty more! So what's our excuse now for not being able to compete?

Avery , March 1, 2018 at 2:18 pm GMT
@Harold Smith

{Russia had not been so passive over the years,}

Putin inherited a broken Russia in 2000. A Russia on the verge of collapse due to misrule of drunkard Yeltsin and body blows administered by US/NATO. A broken down military; economy in shambles; demographic collapse. During his presidency US/EU/NATO engineered a collapse of oil prices and assaults on ruble: what exactly was Putin supposed to non-passively do to counter the collapse of world oil prices, for example?

Putin was wise enough and cautious enough not to go head-to-head with US/NATO until his military and economy were in good enough shape to do and make a difference, as in Syria for example. It would have been very bad for Russia to act prematurely and get bled dry, which warmongering US Neocons were hoping for.

Obviously Putin knows the strengths and weaknesses of Russia better than any of us here. He is butting heads with the combined military industrial might of US+EU: that block has a lot of human resources, wealth, worldwide financial and political influence. Also Putin has to – has to – improve the living standards of citizens of RF, so he cannot afford to get into an expensive arms race with the West. Putin is doing very well with what he has, as far as human and military-industrial resources Russia has.

TailgunnerJoes Talking Liver , March 1, 2018 at 2:33 pm GMT
Alden, sounds like you stopped with the maps and didn't read any of the underlying documents because of the preconceptions you wear on your sleeve: "idealistic pie in the sky by and by UN treaties impossible to effect." Those preconceptions happen to coincide with the residual message of one persistent strand of US statist propaganda.

Have you ever read, in any US institution or medium, criticism as comprehensive and incisive as this?

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/LACRegion/Pages/USIndex.aspx

IGs can't do this. Courts can't begin to do this. Congress wouldn't dare do this. Media would never do it if they could. The recommendations are legally binding and the US government knows it. Each review is videoed. You haven't lived until you've seen State and Justice bureaucrats crawling and sniveling and tying themselves in logical knots, making fools of themselves in the most public forum in the world. You get to watch the US regime bleeding influence and standing and 'soft power.' It's public disgrace in front of the 96% of the world outside the US iron curtain. You may not want to watch impartial legal experts make a laughingstock of the USG, but everybody else in the world watches with amusement, so you might as well know.

Treaty body review has driven more reforms than Congress ever did. You know perfectly well how bad your government sucks, what a useless parasite it is. The treaty bodies and charter bodies give you more say than either state-controlled political party. Face it, human rights review is all you got. When your government sucks, you go over its head to the world.

Harold Smith , March 1, 2018 at 4:11 pm GMT
@Avery

"During a policy talk at the Valdai Discussion Club, the Russian leader spoke on a number of issues, especially criticizing U.S. foreign policy moves across the globe and lauding Russia's increasingly relevant role as a world power. When asked by a Germany-based academic where Russia had most seriously gone wrong in the past decade and a half, Putin said he had too readily laid his trust in the West, which he then accused of having abused its relationship with Moscow to further its own interests."

http://www.newsweek.com/russia-putin-reveal-biggiest-mistake-trusting-west-688998

Well maybe you can make Vladimir Putin feel better about this. You can tell him that blindly trusting the corrupt "West" (in the face of shamelessly obvious provocations) was actually not a mistake at all, since Russia couldn't have done a single thing about it anyway, right?

EugeneGur , March 1, 2018 at 4:40 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

Putin has drubbed Russia's economy.

This is a ridiculous statement. When Putin came aboard, there was no Russian economy to speak of. Now it's grown strong enough to withstand the events in Ukraine, sanctions and what not and even derive benefits from these challenges. I am not saying everything's coming up roses but it could hardly be expected considering the deep hole Russia dug itself into in the 1990s.

the entire region is upset with Putin's behavior as they have seen Putin's behavior in Crimea and the Donbas.

The entire region, it you mean our Eastern European neighbors, can like it or lump it. They, Poland in particular, participated very willingly and actively in the coup in Ukraine. Crimea and Donbass are direct, and perfectly predictable, consequences of that coup. If they forgot the law of physics that every action has a reaction, this is just as good a reminder as any.

the thing is, because of the recent study by J. Leroy Hulsey, Putin could still do it, but I predict that he unfortunately will do nothing of the kind.

EugeneGur , March 1, 2018 at 4:57 pm GMT
@Harold Smith

blindly trusting the corrupt "West" (in the face of shamelessly obvious provocations) was actually not a mistake at all, since Russia couldn't have done a single thing about it anyway, right?

Actually, it could've done a lot. Right at the beginning, Russia could've refused to trust in the word of the West's leaders about the NATO expansion and demand guarantees. A formal treaty plus a couple of remaining military bases, say, in Poland and East Germany, would've sufficed. This likely would've saved Yugoslavia as well.

Russia could've refrained from stopping the development of many weapon system and from destroying others. It could've also kept its own industry (civil aviation comes to mind) instead of relying on cooperation with the West. It could've refrained from allowing the US troops to use the Russia territory to move supplies to Afghanistan. Even recently it did occur to someone exceedingly smart to order aircraft carriers in France – speaking about trust! I do hope they learned their lesson, finally.

jilles dykstra , March 1, 2018 at 5:43 pm GMT
@Avery

In my opinion Putin is the man who saves us from a worldwide USA yoke

windwaves , March 1, 2018 at 6:07 pm GMT
Great Article.

America is in a very ugly spot and getting worse everyday. Living here I can sense it. Americans are going crazy. Pathetic how they are trying and build hate for Russia/Putin mainly because America got triple fucked across the ME and especially in Syria. Very sad.

America's greatest historical truth: in foreign policy the USA just cannot learn from experience. We keep making the same mistakes. Stupid, idiotic, nation building b/s. Come on dudes !

This is just a phase, we will turn it around and make America great again ( as opposed to israel which was never great anyway). It is just a question of how long it will take.

It will start the day when we'll tell that terrorist, shit-hole country called israel to go the hell, fight your own wars, pay for your own wars.

When Ukies attack , March 1, 2018 at 6:25 pm GMT
@EugeneGur

GDP per capita tripled on Putin's watch. That's one reason why he has public approval numbers that US politicians couldn't dream of.

jilles dykstra , March 1, 2018 at 6:58 pm GMT
@windwaves

In my opinion, the USA, until now, could afford to conduct foreign policy for internal reasons. Because of this the Sept 11 shock, while in reality it meant very little, as USA citizens working in the Netherlands soon afterwards said 'we have 30.000 traffic deaths each year'.

edNels , March 1, 2018 at 7:46 pm GMT
@Harold Smith

Good comeback there that was one of the best ones in a while!

I'm sorry, but no we're not. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but we here in the "West" are living under a Satanic judeo-communist dictatorship, bent on world domination and control at any cost.

The difference between corporate state, and totalitarian state like old Soviet system is getting blurier all the time. Like planned economies of command systems, now they just create money for the cronies, who might as well be commies, and they don't give a care about what's true or honest, they lie and that's, like you mentioned, (Satanic), the truth isn't in 'em.

FB , March 1, 2018 at 8:01 pm GMT
@Seamus Padraig

' I note that he says nothing about 'cap and trade,' or any other Western bankster-scam. I have nothing against renewable energy–whether or not global warming is real '

Good comment however the environment is about more than just 'global warming' which may or may not be man-caused there is no scientific certainty but certainly what looks like a concerted push by certain quarters

But there is also habitat loss the toxins introduced through pollution industrial farming and the problems it causes with erosion, bad food etc

Putin's comments and Mike's citation of them reflect a thoughtful and realistic approach to at least start looking at these problems

Anon Disclaimer , March 1, 2018 at 8:15 pm GMT
Anon from TN
The author is painting Putin as larger-than-life figure, which he isn't. Just like the Soviet Union was not defeated by the US, but actually collapsed due to internal problems, regime change rampage is over largely because the United States pushed their luck and overextended themselves, and not just thanks to Putin. Throughout history, all dominant empires lose their grip and eventually crumble (remember Roman or British), and now it's the turn of the US Empire. Fortunately or unfortunately, the next will be the Chinese Empire, not Russian. (PS. Muslims missed the train. Again)
The Alarmist , March 1, 2018 at 10:57 pm GMT
@Harold Smith

It's not like he used the term 'enemy,' which too many unfortunately resort to in these discussions. During Cold War 1.0, a lot of us referred to the Sovs as the 'Adversary' because it was a less loaded term than enemy, though many equate the two. Are the Chinese rivals? Sure. Are they adversaries? You bet, especially when we keep stepping into their back yard. Are they enemies? The will be if we keep stepping into their back yard and telling them how to behave with their next door neighbours. All of this applies to Russia as well.

Cyrano , March 1, 2018 at 11:15 pm GMT
The reason why the US empire will follow the British empire into the graveyard is because they are based on the same model – trying to prevent others from becoming equal to them instead of trying to get better than the competitors.

GB was preoccupied with preventing Germany from surpassing them – and guess what? They succeeded. And where is the British empire now?

From an empire on which the sun never sets, pretty soon they'll be a country where the sun never rises – thanks to their stupid immigration policies and preoccupations with Russia (still!), like they (the British) are still even a factor in the global power games.

US is on a similar path of self-destruction. First they made China an economic superpower and now they want to contain them militarily. Good luck with that.

The money that the US spent on military misadventures – they could have bribed with far lesser amount of money the various "dictatorships" that they were so democratically inclined to topple – and would have achieved better results. Instead of using those money to make US better – for their citizens, they are trying to prevent the world from catching up with them – British style.

If anything the British military record was at least better than US's, at least they used to win wars – they pretty much went down undefeated – but they did went down and US military doesn't have the same success rate and even if they did, they will not accomplish holding the world back – same as Britain didn't.

renfro , March 1, 2018 at 11:26 pm GMT

American liberals would be surprised to know that Putin actually supports many of the same social issues that they support. For example, the Russian President is not only committed to lifting living standards and ending poverty, he's also a big believer in universal healthcare which is free under the current Russian Constitution

I do not see anything 'liberal' in Putin's ideas, certainly not as in the liberal agendas in the US.

I see him advocating Balance . creating a better order for the needs of populations and interactions between nations . therefore preserving nations, people and earth. Balance is not rocket science .nature is the ultimate example of balance, when it is tampered with all species eventually suffer.

Florin , March 2, 2018 at 12:06 am GMT
The neocons were/are Zionist in essence and mainly Jewish in thought leadership – this is inarguable. Also inarguable, though I am not aware of very many well-written essays on the topic, is that under Yeltsin, brought to power in no small part by US meddling, there was a fire sale of Russian assets – something arranged very largely by Jewish economists and Jewish bureaucrats. And the new 'oligarchs?' Why 6 of 7 of the most enriches were Jews in a nation <3% Jewish.

Ukraine was largely a coup by Nuland, Pyatt, Feltman ato help Jewish oligarchs in Ukraine who suddenly found themselves in the very top of the new govt. Jewish names pop up inordinately as to authors and editors of unhinged Russophobic articles. At what point do we say that the mideast wars are driven by Jews, so, disproportionately (maybe even mainly as to the media) is the aggression and disinfo on Russia.

The Jewish Problem is to be taken seriously. We need to find a way to discuss it, rescued from Zionists and bona fide Judeophobes. Our lives may well depend on it.

[Mar 01, 2018] The Eternal Lure of Nationalism by Pat Buchanan

Notable quotes:
"... Western elites may deplore the return of nationalism. But they had best not dismiss it, for assertions of national and tribal identity appear to be what the future is going to be all about. ..."
"... In Hungary and Poland, ethnonationalism, the belief that nation-states are created and best suited to protect and defend a separate and unique people, with its separate and unique history and culture, is already ascendant. ..."
"... Globalists may see the U.N., EU, NAFTA, TPP as stepping stones to a "universal nation" of all races, tribes, cultures and creeds. But growing numbers in every country, on every continent, reject this vision. And they are seeking to restore what their parents and grand-parents had, a nation-state that is all their own. ..."
"... Looking back over this 21st century, the transnational elite that envisions the endless erosion of national sovereignty, and the coming of a new world order of open borders, free trade and global custody of mankind's destiny, has triggered a counter-revolution. Does anyone think Angela Merkel looks like the future? ..."
"... Indeed, now that George W. Bush's crusade for democracy has ended up like Peter the Hermit's Children's Crusade, what is the vision, what is the historic goal our elites offer to inspire and enlist our people? ..."
"... The US has always been ruled or parasitized by corrupt, murderous psychopaths with the results we have to live with today. All corny rhetoric aside, it has never been a force for peace, justice, or freedom. Why would anyone desire it to remain what she has been? ..."
"... There is a rebellious coolness in tearing down the PC edifice similar to the fun that could be had attacking Christianity and its holy cows back in the 20th century. The age of Blair, Merkel, Obama and Juncker is drawing to a close. ..."
"... Nationalists supporting such people – any supposedly nationalist movement rooted on the political left – will simply be betrayed, as were the Greeks who voted for SYRIZA, the leftist supposedly "anti-establishment" party that carried its leaders into office and power and then transformed itself into a "respectable" party of the "centre left", and ensured that the boat was not rocked in any ways that might really upset the EU/globalist elites. ..."
"... The war is between globalism and nationalism, the stakes are whether we continue on the path to one world corporatist government and culture – a place where there are no borders, there is no "outside", and no escape from the crushing dogmas of political correctness, or step off before it's too late. And the only true nationalism is the nationalism of the right. That will be true until parties of the old left – devoted to supporting indigenous workers and not to pushing social radicalism – reappear, if they ever do. ..."
apple.slashdot.org

In a surprise overtime victory in the finals of the Olympic men's hockey tournament, the Russians defeated Germany, 4-3. But the Russians were not permitted to have their national anthem played or flag raised, due to a past doping scandal. So, the team ignored the prohibition and sang out the Russian national anthem over the sounds of the Olympic anthem. One recalls the scene in "Casablanca," where French patrons of Rick's saloon stood and loudly sang the "La Marseillaise" to drown out the "Die Wacht am Rhein" being sung by a table of German officers.

When the combined North-South Korean Olympic team entered the stadium, Vice President Mike Pence remained seated and silent. But tens of thousands of Koreans stood and cheered the unified team. America may provide a defensive shield for the South, but Koreans on both sides of the DMZ see themselves as one people. And, no fool, Kim Jong Un is exploiting the deep tribal ties he knows are there.

Watching the Russians defiantly belt out their anthem, one recalls also the 1968 summer Olympics in Mexico City where sprinters Tommie Smith and John Carlos stood on the podium, black gloved fists thrust skyward in a Black Power salute, asserting their separate racial identity

Western elites may deplore the return of nationalism. But they had best not dismiss it, for assertions of national and tribal identity appear to be what the future is going to be all about.

Some attendees at the CPAC conclave this past week were appalled that Britain's Nigel Farage and France's Marion Le Pen were present.

But Farage was the man most responsible for Brexit, the historic British decision to leave the EU. Le Pen is perhaps the most popular figure in a National Front party that won 35 percent of the vote in the runoff election won by President Emmanuel Macron.

And the most unifying stand of the NF appears to be "Let France be France!" The French people do not want their country invaded by unassimilable millions of migrants from Africa and the Islamic world. They want France to remain what she has been. Is this wrong? Is preservation of a country, the national family one grew up in, not conservative? In Hungary and Poland, ethnonationalism, the belief that nation-states are created and best suited to protect and defend a separate and unique people, with its separate and unique history and culture, is already ascendant.

Globalists may see the U.N., EU, NAFTA, TPP as stepping stones to a "universal nation" of all races, tribes, cultures and creeds. But growing numbers in every country, on every continent, reject this vision. And they are seeking to restore what their parents and grand-parents had, a nation-state that is all their own.

Nationalists like Farage, who seek to pull their countries out of socialist superstates like the EU, and peoples seeking to secede and set up new nations like Scotland, Catalonia, Corsica and Veneto today, and Quebec yesterday, are no more anti-conservative than the American patriots of Lexington and Concord who also wanted a country of their own.

Why are European peoples who wish to halt mass migration from across the Med, to preserve who and what they are, decried as racists? Did not the peoples of African and Middle Eastern countries, half a century ago, expel the European settlers who helped to build those countries? The Rhodesia of Spitfire pilot Ian Smith was a jewel of a nation of 250,000 whites and several million blacks that produced trade surpluses even when boycotted and sanctioned by a hating world. When Smith was forced to yield power, "Comrade Bob" Mugabe took over and began the looting of white Rhodesians, and led his Shona tribesmen in a slaughter of the Matabele of rival Joshua Nkomo.

Eighty-five percent of the white folks who lived in Rhodesia, prior to "majority rule," are gone from Zimbabwe. More than half of the white folks who made South Africa the most advanced and prosperous country on the continent are gone. Are these countries better places than they were? For whom?

Looking back over this 21st century, the transnational elite that envisions the endless erosion of national sovereignty, and the coming of a new world order of open borders, free trade and global custody of mankind's destiny, has triggered a counter-revolution. Does anyone think Angela Merkel looks like the future?

Consider the largest countries on earth. In China, ethnonationalism, not the ruling Communist Party, unites and inspires 1.4 billion people to displace the Americans as the first power on earth. Nationalism sustains Vladimir Putin. Nationalism and its unique identity as a Hindu nation unites and powers India. Here, today, it is "America First" nationalism.

Indeed, now that George W. Bush's crusade for democracy has ended up like Peter the Hermit's Children's Crusade, what is the vision, what is the historic goal our elites offer to inspire and enlist our people?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, "Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever."

Anon Disclaimer , February 27, 2018 at 11:17 am GMT

It's far more complicated. Scotland and Catalonia wanted to secede because they found their nations TOO CONSERVATIVE. Catalonia wanted to be independent to take in MORE immigrants. Scotland wanted independence to take in MORE immigrants and push diversity and leftism even more.

At this point, I think France is too far gone. By some estimates, 70% of all births in Paris are to Africans and Muslims. And French women got serious junglois fever, and many new black babies are popping out of white wombs.

Also, Korean nationalism is myth. Koreans are toadies of any great power. 80% of Koreans want to move to US or Canada and forever abandon their identity. Even though the current 'leftist' regime in SK is for better relations with NK, it is also for massive immigration and replacement of Koreans with foreigners. And 80% of Korean youth support Diversity since their US-trained teachers taught them so.

I'm not sure what Buchanan means by including Rhodesia. Is he saying nationalism was justified in expelling whites? Or is he saying imperialism is better because whites ran a better nation?

... ... ...

WorkingClass , February 27, 2018 at 12:24 pm GMT

what is the vision, what is the historic goal our elites offer to inspire and enlist our people?

The globalists envision the earth as a plantation with oligarchs (stateless corporate monopolists) as planters, former national governments as overseers and the people of earth as niggers.

jacques sheete , February 27, 2018 at 12:33 pm GMT

They want France to remain what she has been. Is this wrong?

Insofar as France has been a colonial power, the answer is, "yes." Insofar as France has been a puppet of Israel, the answer is also, "yes."It's really sad when an historian of PB's caliber seems to be either clueless or worse about what France has been. As far as the US being what she has been, the answer is also, "yes." Why would anyone want the US to support an entity like the bloody USSR as it has done in the past? Why would anyone want to US to be a morally and fiscally bankrupt nation ruled by monsters and controlled by Zio-gangsters, as she has been, and is?

The US has always been ruled or parasitized by corrupt, murderous psychopaths with the results we have to live with today. All corny rhetoric aside, it has never been a force for peace, justice, or freedom. Why would anyone desire it to remain what she has been?

Anonym , February 27, 2018 at 1:00 pm GMT
Pretty much this, Pat. The future of white people rebounds inexorably towards ethnonationalism. Yes, there will be a boiling off into so much mystery meat of immigrants and whites who are attracted to that or end up with it, but a lot of those areas are Balkanized. Every white child that is born will have more genetic and/or cultural attraction to their own by default.

The baby boomers who have ascended the heights of the institutions can't take it with them. Their time is over. The time for those adults who have been able to make a realistic assessment of the world, now it's not a whitopia any more, has come. They are emboldened by the s *** posting of the internet, the audacity of Trump. There is a rebellious coolness in tearing down the PC edifice similar to the fun that could be had attacking Christianity and its holy cows back in the 20th century. The age of Blair, Merkel, Obama and Juncker is drawing to a close. The era of Xi and Putin has already been here a while, and now we have Trump and will have a cascade of similar leaders in the West in due course I believe.

Randal , February 27, 2018 at 1:30 pm GMT

peoples seeking to secede and set up new nations like Scotland, Catalonia, Corsica and Veneto today, and Quebec yesterday, are no more anti-conservative than the American patriots of Lexington and Concord who also wanted a country of their own.

Well, yes and no. On the one hand, these people are in fact inherently anti-conservative in the most fundamental sense – they are radicals, seeking to overturn the existing order. On the other hand, where they are merely local elites seeking to formalise their own power and shrug off remote overseers, and don't seek radical social change otherwise, then they are also conservative. That's why the American Secession was not a revolution, merely a transfer of power from remote to local elites.

Things are complicated further by supposed "nationalist" movements that are run by leftists – as in the case of Scotland or Catalonia. These are people who merely want to transfer control from the established state to a more distant superstate, the EU, and who are firmly committed to all the dogmas of leftism – internationalism, antiracism, open borders, social radicalism, and who are just as much dupes for globalist corporatism as any establishment pseudo-conservative.

Nationalists supporting such people – any supposedly nationalist movement rooted on the political left – will simply be betrayed, as were the Greeks who voted for SYRIZA, the leftist supposedly "anti-establishment" party that carried its leaders into office and power and then transformed itself into a "respectable" party of the "centre left", and ensured that the boat was not rocked in any ways that might really upset the EU/globalist elites.

The war is between globalism and nationalism, the stakes are whether we continue on the path to one world corporatist government and culture – a place where there are no borders, there is no "outside", and no escape from the crushing dogmas of political correctness, or step off before it's too late. And the only true nationalism is the nationalism of the right. That will be true until parties of the old left – devoted to supporting indigenous workers and not to pushing social radicalism – reappear, if they ever do.

Randal , February 27, 2018 at 1:35 pm GMT
@Anon

It's far more complicated. Scotland and Catalonia wanted to secede because they found their nations TOO CONSERVATIVE. Catalonia wanted to be independent to take in MORE immigrants. Scotland wanted independence to take in MORE immigrants and push diversity and leftism even more.

And they did not want independence, they wanted to transfer their subordination to a slightly more remote, more globalist supranational organisation, namely the developing superstate that is the EU.

KenH , February 27, 2018 at 1:47 pm GMT
@Anon

And 80% of Korean youth support Diversity since their US-trained teachers taught them so.

Considering growing numbers of S. Koreans want U.S. forces out of their nation and their highly restrictive immigration policy where's the evidence that they're becoming diversity loving social justice warriors?

Mr. Hack , February 27, 2018 at 2:05 pm GMT

Globalists may see the U.N., EU, NAFTA, TPP as stepping stones to a "universal nation" of all races, tribes, cultures and creeds. But growing numbers in every country, on every continent, reject this vision. And they are seeking to restore what their parents and grand-parents had, a nation-state that is all their own.'

Right on Pat! So why your hypocritical stance towards Ukraine and its quest to separate itself from Russian imperial interests? Your inconsistencies are appalling!

Citizen of a Silly Country , February 27, 2018 at 2:16 pm GMT

The Eternal Lure of Nationalism

No, it's the eternal lure of family. As Sailer has noted, races/ethnicities are just extended families. Only sociopaths don't care more for their family than strangers. Even with the most overarching propaganda – schools, media, government, etc. – in history pushing whites to forget this, we are slowly coming out of our slumber. Will we ever fully wake up and, if so, in time? Who knows.

But I do know that our current society won't last. Much like what's going on in Africa, this system – based on the falsehood of racial equality – will slowly (then quickly) fall apart. Of course, the timeframe that I use is historic, not the timeframe that we use in our own lives. A hundred years is a nothing if you look over the past 5,000 years when human civilization began.

Does anyone really believe that the current Cult of Equality system in W. Europe and the U.S. will still be around in 100 years, much less 200 years? No chance. Could it still be hanging on by a thread in 50 or 60 years – long after I'm dead? Quite possibly.

However, we're already seeing some cracks in the system after 50 years and things seem to be accelerating. What happens when Muslims start demanding Sharia law in parts of Paris or London? What happens when whites are no longer welcome in the Dem Party as we're beginning to see at the top level? What happens when government debt reaches a level where the gov can't borrow as much and must start cutting welfare spending? What happens when an increasingly black and brown Congress (and state houses) starts to demand much higher taxes on whites (and Asians) to support blacks and browns?

Wanting to be ruled by your own people is natural – and good. Whites have been on top for 500 years and have forgotten what it's like to have to fight for our place in the sun. As we start to get ruled by others year after year, that tribal instinct will grow. Will it grow fast enough that we survive? Again, who knows. I hope so.

If not, well, natural selection is a bitch, isn't it.

Tulip , February 27, 2018 at 2:57 pm GMT
[W]hat is the historic goal our elites offer to inspire and enlist our people?

I'm sure Max Boot has some ready ideas.

WorkingClass , February 27, 2018 at 2:59 pm GMT
@jacques sheete

Should we give up these evil nation states for an evil global feudalism?

I can understand a desire for more options. The anarchists have the best of it in my opinion when it comes to political ideology. But there is the real problem of security and survival for anarchists in a non anarchist world.

From the point of view of globalists, nationalism is already a de-centralization of political power. I favor decentralization even if it will not take me all the way to a Jeffersonian agrarian utopia.

Who said "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good"?

Rurik , February 27, 2018 at 4:23 pm GMT

French people do not want their country invaded by unassimilable millions of migrants from Africa and the Islamic world.

They want France to remain what she has been. Is this wrong?

I guess six million wasn't enough for Pat Buchanan

anyone with a kippah's worth of brains know that if France is allowed to remain French, then the gas chambers and soap factories are only a matter of time.

let's let ((Nicolas Sarkozy)) explain it to you all

Nazis:

must be forced to mix, if they don't do so willingly, because if not, then you can just sit back and count the days until geysers of blood start shooting out of the ground again.

we've all seen this kind of 'will to power' before, when people like the French (and Poles and Hungarians) think they can threaten others with their anti-Semitism by refusing to mix and blend their vile and evil white Nazi features and culture away.

Never again!

Citizen of a Silly Country , February 27, 2018 at 5:09 pm GMT
@Rurik

Totally agree. If gentile whites aren't breed out of existence, it's just a matter of time before we see gas chambers in Ohio or Lincolnshire.

Throughout Jewish history, non-Jewish whites inexplicably have shown an insanely irrational dislike of Jews. Since it emerges over and over, across time and regions, it must be some form of mental sickness inherent in gentile whites. There's no other explanation. The only commonalty is gentile whites.

No matter where Jews go, within a century or two, the local goys start to hate them to the point that Jews are often ejected from the area, sometimes attacked. Everywhere, every time. Jews, who just want to fit in and become a part of the community – no, to improve the community – are singled out for no reason again and again.

Well, this must end. Even with their own homeland surrounded by a fence and protected by nuclear weapons, Jews will never be safe until gentile whites are no longer a race. What is the loss of the European peoples and their culture compared to the need to protect the Jewish people from the inevitable Holocaust II: Revenge of the Goys.

Thankfully, the new breed – a mix of African, European, Mesitzo and whatever else – will be more enlightened.

Randal , February 27, 2018 at 5:38 pm GMT
Here's an interesting example of modern nations trying to deal with the consequences of globalism in the context of the ruling political correctness dogmas:

Denmark plans double punishment for ghetto crime

Imagine trying that in the US! How's that for some disparate impact, eh Obama?

He denied that harsher penalties in one area could simply drive criminals into other areas.

This seems a bit of a stretch really. I mean, it's still got to be a good thing to harass ghetto thugs and petty criminal oafs on the turf they think is theirs, but there needs to be preparation for the inevitable spillover into more respectable areas. Unless you take the view that ghetto dweller crime spilling over more is a price worth paying because it will help to "wake up" the wealthy leftist classes who vote for more immigration and evade the costs.

Rurik , February 27, 2018 at 6:17 pm GMT
@Citizen of a Silly Country

it's just a matter of time before we see gas chambers in Ohio or Lincolnshire.

we already saw it in Charlottesville!

the SS was goose stepping towards Sobibór redux, chanting Nazi propaganda about how 'Jews will not replace us"

have you ever heard anything so vile?!

Of course Jews will replace you! because white people are congenitally EVIL!

They don't know their place, because jehovah put them here to SERVE the Jews!!! Yet they stubbornly refuse!

and appoint a Nazi goyim to the Supreme Court!!!

and a CIS at that!

I'm sure glad you too can see what we're up against as these neo-Nazis in France try to assert their inner Himmler, and avoid the Great Kosher Blending.

Thankfully, the new breed – a mix of African, European, Mesitzo and whatever else – will be more enlightened.

not unattractive, but more to the point, unconnected to any ethnic or cultural heritage.

the perfect obedient slave race

a doubleplus good improvement over the Nazis (all white people/anti-Semites)

Never Again!

silviosilver , February 27, 2018 at 6:20 pm GMT
@Anon

Scotland wanted independence to take in MORE immigrants and push diversity and leftism even more.

Scottish elites – in the form of the Scottish National Party – wanted that. But did Scottish voters? Or were they just voting for Scottish independence rather than for the policies of the SNP? Hard to tell.

I'm not sure what Buchanan means by including Rhodesia. Is he saying nationalism was justified in expelling whites? Or is he saying imperialism is better because whites ran a better nation?

I think he's saying that white Rhodesians were the nation, and that they would have been justified in expelling the blacks if the blacks weren't happy with their lot – rather than allowing the blacks to destroy 'their' country. This is a very old school WN viewpoint that, even among WNs, you don't hear much of anymore, but Buchanan likes to make ambiguous and plausibly deniable statements like this. I mean, it's very easy for him to backtrack and claim that he simply meant one of the options you outlined, but probably what he really believes is the version I put forward.

Rhodesia's a bit much, imo; there were just too few whites. You need to have Israeli-settler-like fanaticism to support whites' keeping control of all that territory. I could have supported the South Africans sending the blacks to their own 'homelands' and then cutting off contact with them. That would have been a better long term solution than the segregation they tried to implement. You need a much larger majority – like the South has/had – to pull segregation off. Although, even then, apartheid could have last much longer than it did, if it wasn't for pressure from other white countries.

Maple Curtain , February 27, 2018 at 6:49 pm GMT
The Jews stole America on your watch Buchanan. You had your chance. You're yesterday's news. Still can't name the Jew. Out to pasture.
Carroll Price , February 27, 2018 at 10:05 pm GMT
Nice article Pat, but as long as Jews control the US, it will continue serving as a doormat known as diversity.
expeedee , February 28, 2018 at 12:39 am GMT
@Citizen of a Silly Country

Very profound. Couldn't agree more. Great post.

KenH , February 28, 2018 at 12:51 am GMT
It's not just nationalism that's rising but racial nationalism or what some like to refer to as ethno-nationalism. No doubt those Russian hockey players were all ethnically Russian and their celebration was as much one of blood as of nation which in saner times are indivisible.

black gloved fists thrust skyward in a Black Power salute, asserting their separate racial identity

And it's long past due that whites in America and throughout the Western world start to assert their separate racial identity and act accordingly. We are the only race of people that doesn't act in its own racial interests and if that doesn't change we won't last this century.

Raceless civil nationalism is a dead end for white people and it doesn't resonate with anyone but brainless and brainwashed whites. Religion will always play second fiddle to race and ethnicity and it always will.

Militant multiculturalism, the de facto secular religion of the West, must be overthrown by any means necessary along with its many mullahs in government, universities and the media.

Corvinus , February 28, 2018 at 4:43 am GMT
@Citizen of a Silly Country

"No, it's the eternal lure of family. As Sailer has noted, races/ethnicities are just extended families."

No, races and ethnicities do NOT fit that description. It's an appeal to authority.

"But I do know that our current society won't last."

No, you are only speculating here. No one knows for certain.

"What happens when Muslims start demanding Sharia law in parts of Paris or London? What happens when whites are no longer welcome in the Dem Party as we're beginning to see at the top level? What happens when government debt reaches a level where the gov can't borrow as much and must start cutting welfare spending? What happens when an increasingly black and brown Congress (and state houses) starts to demand much higher taxes on whites (and Asians) to support blacks and browns?"

Chicken Little.

"Wanting to be ruled by your own people is natural – and good."

Our people are Americans.

"Whites have been on top for 500 years and have forgotten what it's like to have to fight for our place
in the sun."

The human race is more important than whites or blacks or Asians.

Corvinus , February 28, 2018 at 4:45 am GMT
@KenH

"Raceless civil nationalism is a dead end for white people and it doesn't resonate with anyone but brainless and brainwashed whites."

White people make their own decisions regarding race and culture. What you are suggesting here is fascism.

"Religion will always play second fiddle to race and ethnicity and it always will."

In reality, religion trumps race and ethnicity. A white Christian and a black Christian are equal in the eyes of the Lord.

Corvinus , February 28, 2018 at 4:49 am GMT
@Rurik

"Of course Jews will replace you! because white people are congenitally EVIL!"

Most white people do not believe in the Jewish conspiracy. You are an outlier.

"not unattractive, but more to the point, unconnected to any ethnic or cultural heritage."

That would be Fake News. The mixing of races and ethnicities is part of our humanity. Besides, there are clear scientific benefits.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3146070/Mixed-race-relationships-making-taller-smarter-Children-born-genetically-diverse-parents-intelligent-ancestors.html

Twodees Partain , February 28, 2018 at 10:52 am GMT
@Citizen of a Silly Country

"Thankfully, the new breed – a mix of African, European, Mesitzo and whatever else – will be more enlightened."

Of course, though the new breed won't be allowed in Israel.

Quartermaster , February 28, 2018 at 1:22 pm GMT
@anonymous

Smith was a native of Rhodesia. The RAF trained pilots in Rhodesia.

Talha , February 28, 2018 at 4:09 pm GMT
@Anon

And French women got serious junglois fever, and many new black babies are popping out of white wombs.

Is this right? Anyone have stats? Is anyone keeping count?

Even though Black African nationalism did expel European powers, can nationalism survive in black Africa without whites?

Good point – no doubt the current borders have a lot to do with how lines were drawn by the retreating European powers.

Without whites and their organization skills, black African tends to fracture into tribes, and warring tribes do no make a nation

Possibly, but they did have the capability to organize into fairly large empires (depending on which part of Africa you are talking about. The capability to form an empire over a vast multi-ethnic, multi-religious landscape is certainly a stepping stone for the ability to form a modern nation-state (not that that is the goal).

If things do fracture down and tribal alliances become preeminent, then expect the very large ethno-linguistic groups (like the Fulani and Hausa that number in the tens of millions) to form something that lies across many of the current borders.

Peace.

Talha , February 28, 2018 at 4:37 pm GMT
@KenH

Religion will always play second fiddle to race and ethnicity and it always will.

That seems to be ahistorical when put in those absolute terms. Consider that Catholics and Protestants joined others apart from their own ethno-linguistic background to slaughter (what they considered) heretics of their own ethnicity. The current mess in the Middle East is also quite a bit related to religious fault-lines. Sunni and Shiah of various backgrounds are ganging up on each other.

To take another example of a recent breakdown of civil law and slaughter (the Rwandan genocide). It was split; being Christian didn't seem to matter to transcend ethnic fault lines, but being Muslim did:
"Roman Catholicism has been the dominant faith in Rwanda for more than a century. But many people, disgusted by the role that some priests and nuns played in the killing frenzy, have shunned organized religion altogether, and many more have turned to Islam.
'People died in my old church, and the pastor helped the killers," said Yakobo Djuma Nzeyimana, 21, who became a Muslim in 1996. 'I couldn't go back and pray there. I had to find something else.'"

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/07/world/since-94-horror-rwandans-turn-toward-islam.html

As an imam from Rwanda explains, the Muslim Hutus and Tutsis have made their ethnic identity a lesser priority:
"First, you have to remember that Muslims represent one of the only -- perhaps the only -- truly integrated community in Rwanda. What do I mean by this? I mean that most mothers of Muslims are Tutsis, and most fathers of Muslims are Hutus -- let's say something like 80 percent on each side. And while many Muslims share the appearance of Tutsis, we are really a mixed community. We are a community built by intermarriage."

https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/interviews/a-discussion-with-sheikh-saleh-habimana-head-mufti-of-the-islamic-community-of-rwanda

So I understand this attitude in places like Europe, but that's because they don't really take religion as seriously as they used to, which means that other priorities bubble up. If you observe other places in the world, ethnicity plays second fiddle.

Peace.

Note: By the way, sometimes people being scared of you can be quite helpful (from the above article):
"You see, for many years Hutus had been taught to fear Muslims. They were scared of our mosques, so we could hide Tutsis there without fear of Hutus entering. Hutus had been taught that our mosques were houses of the devil. They were taught that the devil lived in Muslim homes, too. It went even further. It was also believed by many Hutus that if you shook the hand of a Muslim something bad would happen to you, maybe get sick, because Muslims were dirty people. So for all these reasons, Hutu militias were afraid of Muslims and left us alone for the most part. "

LOOOL!

Rurik , February 28, 2018 at 6:07 pm GMT
@Corvinus

You are an outlier.

my name is Legion, for we are many

https://www.activistpost.com/2018/02/wyoming-house-votes-overwhelmingly-remove-taxation-gold-silver.html

RadicalCenter , February 28, 2018 at 11:35 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

I don't recall Pat ever saying that any Ukrianian oblasts that want to remain in Ukraine, should instead be forced to secede and join Russia.

The people of Crimea solidly wanted to be part of Russia (again).

That is true to a much lesser extent in parts of the Donbass region, apparently, but not true of any of the other oblasts.

Would you let the people of the oblasts including Donetsk and Lugansk secede from Ukraine if they voted to do so?

KenH , March 1, 2018 at 3:38 am GMT
@Talha

Please provide an example of Catholics and Protestants joining ethnic others to slaughter heretics of their own race/etnicity so I can better respond.

The current mess in the Middle East is also quite a bit related to religious fault-lines. Sunni and Shiah of various backgrounds are ganging up on each other.

Without a doubt but what Muslims won't admit is that there are also ethnic fault lines between Kurd, Arab, Turk and Persian. Turks, Kurds and Arabs are mostly Sunni yet Sunni Islam has not united them or fostered goodwill and they are savagely fighting each other. The enmity between Arab Muslim and Turkish Muslim goes back almost 1000 years.

To take another example of a recent breakdown of civil law and slaughter (the Rwandan genocide). It was split; being Christian didn't seem to matter to transcend ethnic fault lines, but being Muslim did:

Partly proves my point that the Catholic faith of Hutu and Tutsi didn't avert the inter-ethnic bloodshed nor was Catholic dogma sufficient to prevent the bloodletting. I don't think I was aware that some turned to Islam which is arguably a much more militant, uncompromising and violent faith than Christianity or Catholicism. So any future conflicts involving that particular group are likely to be religious in nature.

So I understand this attitude in places like Europe, but that's because they don't really take religion as seriously as they used to, which means that other priorities bubble up. If you observe other places in the world, ethnicity plays second fiddle.

Be careful with that claim, because again it appears Hutu and Tutsi took Catholicism far more seriously than Europeans do but it did not transcend the ethnic hatred and tensions that existed.

Iran takes religion seriously but it, too, is affected by ethnic tensions such that the CIA was inflaming ethnic minorities against the majority Persians in 2006 in an attempt to weaken the central government. Racial and ethnic diversity isn't such a strength after all since a foreign government could easily foment racial unrest in America with it's 40% no-white population.

Afghanistan takes the Islamic religion very seriously (home of the Taliban) but Sunni Uzbeks and Tajiks loathe the Sunni Pashtuns and vice versa while the Pashtuns loathe the Shiite Hazeras. Islam has not melded the various ethnic groups into one polity nor has it fostered mutual affection between them.

In America it's been long known that Sunday Christian worship is a very racially segregated affair and Christianity and Catholicism has not melded its three dominant racial groups (white, black, Latino) into a cohesive group.

Europeans took religion far more seriously during the WWI and WWII era (but less seriously than previous centuries) but that didn't stop the mind boggling fratricide during the two world wars which may yet lead to the demise of Western Europe and the U.K. Ideology, nationality and ethnicity had greater pull and won the day.

While there's certainly outliers and exceptions I believe that the evidence shows that, generally speaking, ethno-nationalism trumps religion in most cases because it's a force of nature that people must come to terms with instead of deny.

KenH , March 1, 2018 at 4:19 am GMT
@Talha

So I understand this attitude in places like Europe, but that's because they don't really take religion as seriously as they used to, which means that other priorities bubble up.

And don't forget that Europeans took religion so seriously in the 17th century that it nearly wiped out 50% of Germany's population during the Thirty Years War. I doubt ethnic conflict would have been any more bloody and brutal. Your Tamerlane took it so seriously that he's responsible for murdering 17 million people.

Note: By the way, sometimes people being scared of you can be quite helpful (from the above article):

Not unlike a KKK member wearing a white sheet in the 19th century since blacks thought the mask wearer(s) were ghosts and would flee in terror and fear. They incurred the slur "spook" since they were so easily spooked by the sight of a white men wearing white sheets.

Anonymous Disclaimer , March 1, 2018 at 7:59 am GMT
@Anonym

White people will be bred out and chased down. Within the next generation they will become functionally enslaved (we're halfway there already). Our Overlords have seen to this by shifting our nation's demographics in a decisive and irreversible way. Everything– everything –is being redefined such that if white people do it, it's a crime, and if nonwhite people or chosenites do it, it's a mitzvah . Your predictions? They are delusional–I say enjoy them!

Anonymous Disclaimer , March 1, 2018 at 8:01 am GMT
@Rurik

You may think you're being clever, but haven't you just copypasted one of Jack D's posts?

Anonymous Disclaimer , March 1, 2018 at 8:05 am GMT
@Maple Curtain

They stole America once they had grabbed the reins of the mass media, and that happened before Patrick came along. Since then it's just been consolidation. PJB is one of the most courageous voices of our time and he's paid a very high price professionally. Neither of these is true of his critics, yourself included.

Anonymous Disclaimer , March 1, 2018 at 8:08 am GMT
@Corvinus

You keep forgetting to begin your silly screeds with the salutation:
"Dear Fellow White People "

Mr. Hack , March 1, 2018 at 12:52 pm GMT
@RadicalCenter

Referendums, at the point of a Russian gun, as was done in Crimea aren't truly an accurate meaure of anything.
Would you feel that a referendum today, after somewhere in the vicinity of 3million people have left the Donbas, would likewise settle anything?

Ilyana_Rozumova , March 1, 2018 at 1:47 pm GMT
OoooooH that challenge again. Multiculturalism is not working, Zionist Globalists need a new trick.
Rabbis are huddling.
Citizen of a Silly Country , March 1, 2018 at 2:32 pm GMT
@Anonymous

I'd bet on the bred out before I'd bet on the functionally enslaved. It's hard to enslave a population that's smarter and better-organized than your people. At the moment, whites are enslaving themselves. That's very different than being enslaved.

Gentile whites can free themselves at any moment – if we choose to. Will we? Good question. I don't care if whites drop to 10% or 20% of the population; if that small minority found its racial/ethnic cohension and decided to push back as a group, it'd be functionally independent and free in a very short period of time.

Whites are not blacks or mestizos. We are not being enslaved. (Jews are clever and certainly a major driving force behind much of what's going on, but they aren't omnipotent.) We have agency. A glitch in our DNA makes many whites ill suited for the current environment, ironically, an environment we created. This means that one of three things will happen. All whites will be absorbed by other groups better suited for this environment. Whites with the attributes to survive in this environment – the tribal whites – survive and prosper while other whites fade away. The environment changes.

The future is not linear. You can't just extrapolate today's trends a hundred years out. Europe was 99%+ white a hundred years ago. Now, 10% to 15% of births are to non-whites with immigration continuing. North America was 100% native Indians 600 years ago. Now, they are only a couple of percentage points of the population.

Things change. Momentum changes. I already hear whites laughing in public about being call a racist. Granted, they laugh because they believe that they are "color blind" and thus not racist, rather than being proud of being white. But let's take this one step at a time. Indeed, my own child – truly unprompted – mentioned to me that she should be as proud of European ancestry and a black should be of their African ancestry.

Things change.

Corvinus , March 1, 2018 at 4:20 pm GMT
@Anonymous

Actually, it is addressed as "My dear humans".

Corvinus , March 1, 2018 at 4:29 pm GMT
@Citizen of a Silly Country

"At the moment, whites are enslaving themselves."

That is patently false. Whites are free to make their own decisions, and are only "enslaved" as individuals if their choices box them in, and they choose not get themselves out of their predicament.

"I don't care if whites drop to 10% or 20% of the population; if that small minority found its racial/ethnic cohension and decided to push back as a group, it'd be functionally independent and free in a very short period of time."

No, because that group would be enslaving the 80-90% of other white people. You neglect to consider that European whites themselves tend to lack cohesiveness due to their political or religious differences. You assume this minority group will be able to set aside their problems for the benefit of their "race". Perhaps, but perhaps not.

"A glitch in our DNA makes many whites ill suited for the current environment, ironically, an environment we created."

A false premise on your part.

"Indeed, my own child – truly unprompted – mentioned to me that she should be as proud of European ancestry and a black should be of their African ancestry."

Yet she was programmed to make this remark, maybe without realizing it. No different than an SJW who have their own kids and indoctrinate them. You and them are one in the same in this regard.

Talha , March 1, 2018 at 5:36 pm GMT
@KenH

Please provide an example of Catholics and Protestants joining ethnic others to slaughter heretics of their own race/etnicity so I can better respond.

Not race, but certainly ethnicity. The slaughter in Germany that you described was (if I recall my history correctly) due to the Thirty Years War where various powers from outside what is now Germany were called in on one side or another; from as far as Sweden, Spain, even Scotland. Some states even sided with the Ottomans (though I think they did not put soldiers out in the field).

I don't really have a problem with your greater point that ethnicity/tribal identity is often at odds and in tension with religious identity and often wins out. I simply don't see how one can make an absolutist claim that ethnicity always wins out since there are many historical exceptions to the rule.

For instance you pointed to the tension among the various ethnic groups in Afghanistan. This is true, but religion also can help them transcend that divide, something that the Taliban have been pushing successfully as of late:
"Ethnic Minorities Are Fueling the Taliban's Expansion in Afghanistan: The Taliban is gaining dangerous leverage by recruiting Tajiks, Turkmen, and Uzbeks."

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/06/15/ethnic-minorities-are-fueling-the-talibans-expansion-in-afghanistan/

Of Islam and race, Arnold Toynbee (the very capable British historian) wrote:
"The extinction of race consciousness as between Muslims is one of the outstanding moral achievements of Islam, and in the contemporary world there is, as it happens, a crying need for the propagation of this Islamic virtue; for, although the record of history would seem on the whole to show that race consciousness has been the exception and not the rule in the constant interbreeding of the human species, it is a fatality of the present situation that this consciousness is felt-and felt strongly-by the very peoples which, in the competition of the last four centuries between several Western powers, have won-at least for the moment-the lion's share of the inheritance of the Earth."

Though Toynbee was being hyperbolic, it is a phenomenon that is quite real and caused someone like Malcolm X (ra) to completely re-evaluate his assumptions about White people after having gone to Hajj, writing:
"During the past eleven days here in the Muslim world, I have eaten from the same plate, drunk from the same glass, and slept on the same rug – while praying to the same God – with fellow Muslims, whose eyes were the bluest of blue, whose hair was the blondest of blond, and whose skin was the whitest of white. And in the words and in the deeds of the white Muslims, I felt the same sincerity that I felt among the black African Muslims of Nigeria, Sudan and Ghana."

You are right about ethnic/tribal affiliation being part of the core of the human animal. It is, like sexuality and lust, embedded deep in the recesses of human consciousness. Just like a pack of wolves or a troop of chimpanzees will tear apart another group in competition for resources, we too have that innate animal instinct in us. But like sexuality, avarice or a whole host of human traits – the whole point of religion is to help us to; a) transcend them and b) point them to a useful purpose or keep them under control.

We will never see ethnic identity or attraction to it completely wiped out (thank God), that is part of the beauty of the human project:
"O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you nations and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most pious of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted." (49:13)

However, religion is supposed to helps us to overcome the pathologies and extremes that can arise from it, same as from unchecked sexuality or other natural human tendencies. Of course, religion can be used to underwrite other pathologies as well. Well, the world is never perfect, eh? It'll be interesting to see which way this goes.

I think people will start to be more ethnocentric and identity-conscious for a while (Whites will jump in on this as Blacks and other minorities already do), but I simply don't know how long that will last since that really doesn't provide much in the way of long term transcendental purpose and seems really to be a temporary reaction to the way things have gone to the other extreme for the last few decades.

I guess we'll see.

Peace.

Talha , March 1, 2018 at 5:50 pm GMT
@Corvinus

Hey Corvinus,

Yet she was programmed to make this remark, maybe without realizing it.

Not sure about this. It comes naturally to people and there is a side of it that is wrong (which takes it to extreme pride and arrogance) and a side which is natural and healthy.

On twitter, I follow an African American Muslim scholar, Dr. (Shaykh) Abdullah Ali, who once wrote – in criticism of some of the SJW Muslim activists that like to call everyone racist:

Can a White Man Be Proud of His People?

Another area of concern related to Muslim activists is the push for cultural Marxist egalitarianism. It is not that one should be opposed to equal opportunity for all members of society. It is just that Islam promotes meritocracy rather than "sameness" and "equal representation" for the sake of equal "representation." According to this cultural paradigm, it is "good" to celebrate and take pride in what is unique about one's own culture. This seems the case, at least, for any person who is not "white." White people, on the other hand, due to their historical domination of others are forbidden from publicly expressing pride about European civilizational contributions lest they be declared a racist or white supremacist. This concern is shared by nativists like Richard Spencer. But Spencer, however, regurgitates the pseudoscientific racist assumptions of the 19th century French aristocrat Arthur De Gobineau who pioneered the Aryan master race theory. Those blinkered notions aside, what legitimate wrong could be claimed about a white man or woman feeling pride about the achievements of their ancestors if it does not result in cultural domination?

The question he ends with is a pertinent one; what is wrong with that, especially if everyone else is able to publicly do it and not be shamed. Why should we assume this is a sign of indoctrination and not something very natural and healthy. My kids are mixed heritage; I definitely want them to know and love their European side as much as their roots from the Indian subcontinent.

Peace.

Rurik , March 1, 2018 at 5:52 pm GMT
@Anonymous

what are you talking about?

and who is Jack D?

I just did a search of Jack D and it's some fudge-packer

RadicalCenter , March 1, 2018 at 6:43 pm GMT
@Mr. Hack

Are you truly claiming that most people in Crimea didn't want to rejoin Russia?

Talha , March 1, 2018 at 6:59 pm GMT
@RadicalCenter

Original Crimean War – as interpreted through Tom & Jerry:

Citizen of a Silly Country , March 1, 2018 at 7:03 pm GMT
@Anonymous

Corny's not a bad guy. He has schtick – sort of a cross between "We're all God's children" and libertarianism – and he sticks to it. Whether he believes it or not, who knows.

But he is disingenuous.

There was a point in my career when I dealt a lot with lawyers from other companies about reasonably complex issues. After awhile, I could tell when a lawyer was doing their best to make things clearer to see if we could reach a deal and when a lawyer was trying to make things murky in hopes of cheating you out on something. Naturally, the DB lawyers would always argue that our side just wasn't smart enough to understand their brillant proposition.

It was just annoying. Everyone knew what was going on. I suppose that the DB lawyers felt that they needed to try, but it just ended up making everything take a lot longer than necessary.

Corny most definitely falls in the DB lawyer camp. He deliberately obfuscates. If you tell him that an orange is the color orange, he'll say that you can't prove that because there are different shades of orange and thus the color orange doesn't exist. It's tedious and pointless.

It's a shame. I'd love to have someone who believes in multi-everything to discuss these issues with. I've changed my mind on a number of things over the years so maybe they could show me where I'm wrong. That'd be a fascinating dialogue.

Sadly, that's Corny is not that guy. He's either a true believer or a very diligent (maybe paid?) troll. Either way, not of much use.

MarkinLA , March 1, 2018 at 9:42 pm GMT
@Anonymous

There were opportunities to take it back but they weren't taken and Pat was there then. The reason it isn't written about much is because Pat would have to come to terms with who the real Nixon and Reagan were and Pat will never allow such thoughts into his head, let alone his writing.

Arvind , Website March 1, 2018 at 11:38 pm GMT
Thanks for the comment on India! I'm trying to explore how the rise of nationalism fits into Indian identity in my blog. Long time fan.

redpillindian.blogspot.com

[Mar 01, 2018] Russia's economic recovery, thus overall improvement of such metrics as life expectancy, was done on a radically non-neo-liberal economic agenda.

Notable quotes:
"... Nor, obviously, you understand that Russia's economic recovery, thus overall improvement of such metrics as life expectancy, was done on a radically non-neo-liberal economic agenda. In fact, in the last ten years revitalizing of Russia's industry (from extraction to machine-building) was done precisely with the most active participation of the State be it re-nationalization of some major manufacturers or creation of gigantic conglomerates such as Rostec. ..."
"... This is just the small part of State's (I deliberately omit here the term "government") radically non-neo-liberal policies which actually saved Russia. You can BS some foreigner about 1990s, but not me. ..."
Mar 01, 2018 | www.unz.com

Andrei Martyanov , Website February 23, 2018 at 3:27 pm GMT

@Felix Keverich

Government's "neoliberal" policies made this possible: they actually encouraged Russians to lead more healthy lifestyles.

Pardon me, but you have no clue what are you talking about–a feature very typical for pretentious Russian "liberals" and, generally, office plankton. You definitely have very vague idea about Russia and Russians.

Nor, obviously, you understand that Russia's economic recovery, thus overall improvement of such metrics as life expectancy, was done on a radically non-neo-liberal economic agenda. In fact, in the last ten years revitalizing of Russia's industry (from extraction to machine-building) was done precisely with the most active participation of the State be it re-nationalization of some major manufacturers or creation of gigantic conglomerates such as Rostec.

This is just the small part of State's (I deliberately omit here the term "government") radically non-neo-liberal policies which actually saved Russia. You can BS some foreigner about 1990s, but not me.

[Mar 01, 2018] MoA - New York Times Time Warps Back To 2002 - New Bogus WMD Claims Made

Notable quotes:
"... Did they bring Judith Miller back to write this latest Langley Gazette war-mongering op? ..."
Mar 01, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

New York Times, September 8 2002
U.S. Says Hussein Intensifies Quest For A-Bomb Parts

Iraq has stepped up its quest for nuclear weapons and has embarked on a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb, Bush administration officials said today.

In the last 14 months, Iraq has sought to buy thousands of specially designed aluminum tubes, which American officials believe were intended as components of centrifuges to enrich uranium. American officials said several efforts to arrange the shipment of the aluminum tubes were blocked or intercepted but declined to say, citing the sensitivity of the intelligence, where they came from or how they were stopped.

The infamous aluminum tubes Iraq sought to buy from Italy were for short range rockets, not for uranium enrichment centrifuges as the Bush administration claimed. That was a fact well known to several U.S. agencies like the Energy and State Departments. But the claim, first propagandized by the NY Times, was repeated by then President Bush in a speech to the UN and became a main basis for the war on Iraq. The Knight-Ridder (now McClatchy) Washington Bureau, but not the NY Times, reported about the many doubts experts had about such Weapon of Mass Destruction claims.

New York Times, February 27 2018
U.N. Links North Korea to Syria's Chemical Weapons Program

North Korea has been shipping supplies to the Syrian government that could be used in the production of chemical weapons, United Nations experts contend.
...
The supplies from North Korea include acid-resistant tiles, valves and thermometers, according to a report by United Nations investigators .
...
The possible chemical weapons components were part of at least 40 previously unreported shipments by North Korea to Syria between 2012 and 2017 of prohibited ballistic missile parts and materials that could be used for both military and civilian purposes , according to the report, which has not been publicly released but which was reviewed by The New York Times.

The valves, thermometers and acid resistance tiles Syria may have sought to acquire could be used for medical facilities, the production of candy or for dozens of other civilian purposes. They could be used to produce something for the military with chemical weapons probably being the most unlikely.

But like the discredited aluminum tube story, the current NYT piece, written by its UN reporter Michael Schwirtz, obfuscates the doubts about WMD connections of the issue. It makes false claims and is full of war-mongering assertions by hawkish figures. It is a scare story constructed to vilify various opponents to U.S. hegemony on meager factual grounds.

The reporter does not understand the issue he writes about. The "possible chemical weapons components" are not such. Chemical weapons obviously do not contain valves, thermometers or acid resistance tiles. To increase the "be afraid" effect of his piece the author mentions an alleged 2007 accident "in which several Syrian technicians, along with North Korean and Iranian advisers, were killed in the explosion of a warhead filled with sarin gas and the extremely toxic nerve agent VX." No weapon designer ever thought of "a warhead" that was filled with both - Sarin and VX. That would be lunacy and reports thereof are obviously bogus.

The "United Nations investigators" are a bunch of spooks selected by individual Security Council members who collect claims of North Korean breaches of sanctions. The group was set up in 2006 under the UN Security Council resolution 1718 as a "Committee of the Security Council consisting of all the members of the Council". The Committee is not part of the UN bureaucracy and they are not "UN experts" or "UN investigators". The reports of the committee list various claims made by single UN member countries without judging their veracity.

The Associated Press report on the issue makes this clear :

[The report] said, a visit by a technical delegation from North Korea in August 2016 "involved the transfer to Syria of special resistance valves and thermometers known for use in chemical weapons programmes".

That information came from another member state , which also reported that North Korean technicians "continue to operate at chemical weapons and missile facilities at Barzeh, Adra and Hama", the report said.

The valve and thermometer point in the Committee report are based on the claims of one country alone. But the NY Times lists those claims as "the [UN] report says" giving them a false aura of neutrality. That one country also claims that Syria still has chemical weapons facility. In 2013 the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) verified (pdf) that all Syrian production facilities for chemical weapons and under control of the government were rendered unusable or destroyed. The OPCW can request to inspect additional facilities it deems suspicious. It has not done so. The AP, but not the New York Times, notes that the Syrian government officially denied that any North Korean technicians are working there.

The New York Times discredited itself over its support for the false Bush administration claims about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. It later issued a lame mea culpa and fired one reporter while the responsible editors and managers stayed on.

The paper has obviously not changed. It is again creating false pretexts for wars by publishing unobjective, one sided and intended-to-scare pieces about alleged weapons of mass destruction.

Posted by b on February 28, 2018 at 08:36 AM | Permalink

Comments

librul , Feb 28, 2018 9:16:44 AM | 1

Great b,

One small issue. You conclude with, "It is again creating false pretexts for wars..."

Obviously the word "again" should be "still".
"It is still creating false pretexts for wars..."

The NYT did not take a decade long hiatus in it's relationship with the CIA, etal.

JC , Feb 28, 2018 9:17:04 AM | 2
Did they bring Judith Miller back to write this latest Langley Gazette war-mongering op?
Don Bacon , Feb 28, 2018 9:26:02 AM | 3
It's amazing that these diplomats could get copies of key documents.
NYTimes -- The report, which is more than 200 pages long, includes copies of contracts between North Korean and Syrian companies as well as bills of lading indicating the types of materials shipped. Much information was provided by unidentified United Nations member states.
But hey, why release the details when the US propaganda public diplomacy mill is working.
The UN declined to comment on the report, which was written by a panel of eight experts tasked with checking North Korea's compliance with sanctions. It may never be publicly released, but a spokesperson stressed that the "overarching message is that all member states have a duty and responsibility to abide by the sanctions that are in place."
Tannenhouser , Feb 28, 2018 9:27:46 AM | 4
"The valves, thermometers and acid resistance tiles Syria may have sought to acquire could be used for medical facilities, the production of candy or for dozens of other civilian purposes. They could be used to produce something for the military with chemical weapons probably being the most unlikely"

Funny how their is no mention of the simple fact that most 'western' homes have numerous devices which could be identified as 'suspect' if TPTB needed an excuse. Where I'm from there is a big push for households to obtain pressure cookers, as 'a roast from frozen in two hours' fit's a hyper active stressful cancer causing lifestyle and eating out is becoming prohibitively expensive even for those of us on the west side of town.

How many households have old cell phones? Got a pool/hot tub? Bromine/chlorine anyone? Like to garden, oops might be some NPK fertilizers around. Like to hunt? Gunpowder, I wont even go into the over the counter kinetic explosives that are the target shooter rage ATM. Got kids' then you probably have electronic kits and RC vehicles, likely in doubles.

Western society bows to authority regardless how illegitimate it shows itself to be. How else can you explain a belief that fires at the top of three buildings caused them to free fall into their own footprints against the laws of gravity taught in grade school and still practiced and verified daily in universities and regular life.

librul , Feb 28, 2018 9:32:16 AM | 5
@3

You quoted: "Much information was provided by unidentified United Nations member states" The NYT has given everyone on this planet permission to identify themselves as from a UN member state. This post came to you courtesy of a UN Member state.

Yul , Feb 28, 2018 9:45:50 AM | 6
All these lies based and hidden under the auspices of a UN Panel of Experts which consists of 8 members: P5 + Japan , South Korea and South Africa , sitting on their a---s @ Turtle Bay. Did they visit Syria or North Korea or any port to check on those shipments ?

http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/2017/377

Nikki Haley orgasmic (sorry for unladylike language) thirst for Muslim/Arab blood is growing.

LXV , Feb 28, 2018 9:46:51 AM | 7
Thanks b!

For obvious reasons, I stopped reading at "...the current NYT piece, written by its UN reporter (((Michael Schwirtz))) ..."

Don Bacon , Feb 28, 2018 9:55:32 AM | 8
This "report" coincides with US charges on chemical use in Ghouta.
Diplomatic sources have said the chemical weapons watchdog, the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, opened an investigation into attacks in eastern Ghouta to determine whether banned munitions were used. U.S. disarmament ambassador Robert Wood said on Wednesday that Russia has violated its duty to guarantee the destruction of Syria's chemical weapons stockpile and prevent the Assad government from using poison gas. . . here
"Russia has..." -- In a larger sense this is part of an updated US diplomatic offensive against Russia. From recent testimony of General Votel, CENTCOM Commander:
>On the diplomatic front, Moscow is playing the role of arsonist and firefighter–fueling the conflict in Syria between the Syrian Regime, YPG, and Turkey, then claiming to serve as an arbiter to resolve the dispute. Moscow continues to advocate for alternate diplomatic initiatives to Western-led political negotiations in Syria and Afghan-led peace processes in Afghanistan, attempting to thwart the UN's role and limit the advance of American influence.

> Russia is also trying to cultivate multi-dimensional ties to Iran. Though historic rivals, Moscow and Tehran share interests across the region, including an overarching desire to sideline, if not expel, the U.S. from the region.

> Russia also maintains significant influence in Central Asia,where the countries of the former-Soviet Union rely on Russia to varying degrees for their economic and security needs. This is problematic as Russia's efforts could limit U.S. engagement options and provide Moscow additional levers of influence, particularly as NATO forces deployed in Afghanistan are dependent on Central Asian partners for logistical support. . . here

Don Bacon , Feb 28, 2018 10:21:13 AM | 9
Meanwhile, the sanctions on North Korea shipping are a joke. More than 50 ships and shipping companies were cited by the Treasury Department for evading existing U.S. and international sanctions. While most of those named were based in North Korea, companies and ships from China, Singapore, Taiwan, Panama, Tanzania, the Marshall Islands and the Comoros were also included.
Bloomberg reports on the "name game":
The Jin Teng, sanctioned by the U.S. in March 2016, became the Shen Da 8 and then the Hang Yu 1 last November, according to Kharon, a Los Angeles-based firm that identifies sanctions risks for banks and companies. The Jin Tai 7, also sanctioned by the U.S. in March 2016, changed its name to Sheng Da 6 two months later and then to Bothwin 7 last November, Kharon said. That was before a new round of UN sanctions was agreed on in December. Both ships remain on the U.S.'s sanctions list despite the name changes.The Bothwin 7 visited the port of Lianyungang, China, in January, the same month that the Hang Yu 1 stopped at the Port of Ningbo-Zhoushan, also in China. Both ships, once part of a fleet owned by Ocean Maritime Management Co., based in Pyongyang and sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury Department and the UN, changed their names to evade detection, according to Kharon, whose researchers drill down into company releases as well as court and corporate filings to establish links between front companies and sanctioned entities.

"Sanctions against North Korea are largely symbolic gestures of disapproval that do not demonstrate any capability to change the political behavior of the Kims," said Robert Huish, an associate professor at Dalhousie University in Halifax, Canada, who has been monitoring the country's shipping traffic. . . here

Don Bacon , Feb 28, 2018 10:58:29 AM | 10
And we have the recent striking news that the Pentagon doesn't believe Syria used Sarin last year.
Secretary of Defense James Mattis made it very clear recently that "aid groups and others" had provided the U.S. with evidence that was insufficient to conclude that President Bashar Assad had recently used the chemical weapon Sarin against Syrian civilians . In other words, the Pentagon does not believe what has been presented to it as evidence, chiefly because of the dubious provenance of the providers. . . here

Remember that almost a year ago a UN commission concluded that the Syrian government was responsible for a widely discussed incident in Khan Sheikhoun. An alleged gas attack by air happened in April in an al-Qaeda controlled area in Syria. It was used by the White House to justify its bombing of a Syrian airbase.
Christian Chuba , Feb 28, 2018 11:24:04 AM | 11
The Guardian link has one of the most comical requests that the U.N. tends to make on the accused in the vein of 'prove you are not a witch' ...
"The UN experts added that they had not yet received a reply with documents supporting this claim and a list of all North Koreans who had travelled to Syria."

Syria, 'there were no Korean technicians, military, or official visits'.
U.N. - 'Prove it, give us a list of the Koreans'
The Syrians should give the U.N. an empty list.

They did this to Syria before when they were accused of a WMD bombing of civilians. The Syrians said that they didn't have any military flights that day, 'give us a list of flights, what, no list? GUILTY!'

AriusArmenian , Feb 28, 2018 11:58:57 AM | 12
Same old, same old.
Warmongering US morons marching to war.
They always lie us into their wars.
WorldBLee , Feb 28, 2018 12:04:33 PM | 13
Never underestimate the ability of the NYT or WaPo to fabricate incredible lies in conjunction with the US security state.
james , Feb 28, 2018 12:40:54 PM | 14
thanks b... i think what you are doing here, if i could be so bold, is that you are tearing apart of merits of this reporter michael schwirtz's talking points... this is very important to do, as no one is doing it! in looking at what the dolt has written for the nyt the past few months, it becomes very clear the agenda is to carry water for the neo con crowd, facts be dammed... this is his job... he does need to be taken to the woodshed and given a beating! and why is it these ambiguous types are always given clearance in such papers as the nyt, wapo or wsj? it would be hard not to conclude the folks who own these papers are very intent on doing the same - carrying water for the military and financial industry in a move towards war, or a desire for war..

your story is not going to get the coverage the nyt story gets... how do we change that?

@don bacon - reading the usa daily press propaganda briefings is always informative... why it was just yesterday that the quote you gave from today, was served up yesterday thanks heather nauert.. this from yesterday "MS NAUERT: Russia signed on to this. That's first of all. Russia signed on to this as an entity that agreed to this UN Security Council resolution. Let me remind you also that Russia had agreed to help, years ago, Syria with getting rid of its chemical weapons. Russia has failed to do that. I want to point that out as well." who needs facts, when you can lie, make shit up and etc. etc.?? https://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2018/02/278913.htm

@1 librel.. i agree with you - change the word, again to still... the nyt is 'still' shilling for the war machine...

ritzl , Feb 28, 2018 12:47:21 PM | 15
Is it some surprise that US sanctioned countries trade with other US sanctioned countries (for benign, commercial reasons)? It apparently is to some.

(Warning: sweeping statement alert...) This GLOBAL US sanctions regime only hastens the formation of a non-US/alternative commercial trade collective, the end of the dollar as "world trade currency," and the subsequent end of the US ability to fund global war (as US T-Bill interest rates jack up - currently at ZERO - correspondingly, US sovereign debt becomes unsupportable by the economy, and the end of economic life as we in the US know it). Perpetual war, as a function of the end of empire, do have that effect.

psychohistorian , Feb 28, 2018 12:59:03 PM | 16
I just stumbled across a Feb 26, Vanity Fair article written by Joe Pompeo about disagreements at the NYT

"THE NEWSROOM FEELS EMBARRASSED": BACKFIRES AND EXPLOSIONS AT THE NEW YORK TIMES AS A POSSIBLE FUTURE CHIEF RE-INVENTS THE PAPER'S OPINION PAGES

alaric , Feb 28, 2018 1:02:08 PM | 17
The Syrian attempt to end militants in Ghouta has elicited an incredibly strong, and for me, unexpected response. Why are the NATO/zionist/neocon crowd going crazy over a small plot of land that was obviously going to be recaptured? Are they concerned that the inability of the jihadists to shell Damascus will be too beneficial to Assad? Is this just an attempt by Bibi to save his skin? Maybe the jihadist backers have finally come to realize that this little game is coming to a close?
james , Feb 28, 2018 1:20:12 PM | 18
@17 alaric - "Reading media reports of the fighting in east Ghouta over the last few days has triggered an eery sense of déjà vu.

It is like taking a time machine back to the autumn of 2016 and listening to all the arguments over the fighting in Aleppo all over again." the article is here

Scotch Bingeington , Feb 28, 2018 1:21:36 PM | 19
Thanks b and also Yul | 6 for shedding light on that matter.

Those "UN experts" are being cited on German state media again and again, with some new report on this or that, establishing Syria as guilty party. But whenever that happens and I go on the UN's website to find s.th. on said report, like a press statement, just anything official, there's nothing to be found. So clearly they're misusing the official 'UN' tag, and no-one's stopping them.

As for the latest expert ruse, it's eye-opening to have a look at the people from the document which Yul posted. On the face of it, it might look like a pretty diverse crew, ppl from all regions of the world with names no-one has ever heard of, so why not trust them?

It gets bad when you take a closer look. The French boy (born '84) is from law and has dealt with nothing but law so far, yet poses as an expert on "missile issues and other technologies". Would you believe it?

This just goes on, the Britisher ("air transport") has a background in political science (or "science" rather).

Rounding things off, there's this American lady with her no doubt common English name Stephanie Kleine-Ahlbrandt. If you're confused as to her actual nationality you can at least be sure that she's a deep-state outgrowth. Council on Foreign Relations, Council of Europe, council here, council there. Political science by training too, probably's never done a day's work in her life. But quite the expert on "finance and economics", I hear.

PS: Those tiles, I remember we had tables clad with those in the chemistry labs, back in high school. So maybe they were justmeant for one of the schools they're rebuilding in Aleppo, another thought.

Have a nice day, everybody!

Ninel , Feb 28, 2018 1:24:48 PM | 20
These reports (allegations) are part of a psychological war waged by the US and its allies on Syria et al. There may be a military attack in the works, maybe not, but one thibg's for sure -- serious allegations like these serve to keep the Syrians and their allies on their tippy toes, and intended to make them think twice before they make moves contrary to US interests. So yes the reports are for domestic consumption but also part of a warning to foreign foes.
Yul , Feb 28, 2018 1:34:18 PM | 21
@ 19 Scotch
Don't forget who has got the permanent post for the USG of Political Affairs at the UN . A US citizen- currently Jeffrey Feltman who is leaving soon to be replaced by another ilk - a woman this time around. Ban Ki-Moon couldn't sneeze w/o the approval of Jeffrey. Looks like Antonio is in the same boat - guess that's how and why he got elected - another US puppet as UNSG.
jayc , Feb 28, 2018 2:11:38 PM | 22
The NYT piece so obviously contradicts itself internally to boil down to a leaked document without official imprimatur, containing unverified information from unnamed UN member states, information which may or may not appear sinister, should it ever be confirmed, depending on one's point of view. That's very thin gruel, and yet the story has been amplified by other outlets and presented to the public as representing some sort of established fact. Yes, that is exactly the Iraqi WMD propaganda playbook.

Jonathan Cook on the "authoritarian courtiers" who write, amplify, and excuse such nonsense:
https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/02/28/the-authoritarians-who-silence-syria-questions/

OJS , Feb 28, 2018 2:19:43 PM | 23

https://sg.news.yahoo.com/syrias-ghouta-rescuers-keep-finding-bodies-164128495.html


How about fake news from AFP?

In Syria's Ghouta, rescuers keep finding bodies

.... Abdulmonam Eassa AFP News February 28, 2018
Syrian civil defence volunteers pray over the body of a victim who died in a building collapse following reported regime bombardment in Haza, in the besieged Eastern Ghouta region on February 26, 2018 More In Syria's rebel-held Eastern Ghouta enclave, the bombs have stopped falling from the sky but the dead are still being raised from the rubble.

In the town of Hazeh, volunteers from the Syrian Civil Defence known as the "White Helmets" pull one body from the basement of a collapsed home. And minutes later, a second one.

"It's carnage down there," says Ali Bakr, a young man looking on with other residents. "People hide underground to shelter from the strikes but even that doesn't guarantee you're safe."

Syrian regime forces, backed by Russia's military, intensified their bombardment of Eastern Ghouta on February 18, carrying out one of the bloodiest assaults of the country's seven-year war.

More than 600 civilians have been killed in 10 days of air strikes, barrel bombs dropped from helicopters and rocket fire on the area, which is controlled by Islamist and jihadist groups....

Cassandra , Feb 28, 2018 2:57:31 PM | 24
The „churnalists" live up to their real name. They did the same stunt in 2017 – even more brazenly rehashing what the press agency „said" (in turn relying on what anonymous „officials" and reports „said"):

The „sources":

1 a „confidential" (read: secret) report by ANONYMOUS authors (called: „independent experts" in manipulative press jargon):

„The report by a panel of independent U.N. experts, which was submitted to the U.N. Security Council earlier this month and seen by Reuters on Monday, gave no details on WHEN or WHERE the interdictions occurred or WHAT the shipments contained".
(Give me a break )

2 the allegations of 3 UNIDENTIFIED „(UN) member states": 2 „interdicted shipments " and 1 „HAD REASONS TO BELIEVE" :

(REUTERS) " Two MEMBER STATES interdicted shipments destined for Syria. Another Member state informed the panel that it HAD REASONS TO BELIEVE that the goods were part of a KOMID contract with Syria," according to the report.
„KOMID is the Korea Mining Development Trading Corporation. It was blacklisted by the Security Council in 2009 and DESCRIBED AS Pyongyang's key arms dealer and exporter of equipment related to ballistic missiles and conventional weapons. In March 2016 the council also blacklisted two KOMID representatives in Syria."
The consignees were Syrian entities DESIGNATED by the European Union and the United States as front companies for Syria's Scientific Studies and Research Centre (SSRC), a Syrian entity identified by the Panel as cooperating with KOMID in previous prohibited item transfers," the U.N. experts wrote. SSRC has overseen the country's chemical weapons program since the 1970s."

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-syria-un/north-korea-shipments-to-syria-chemical-arms-agency-intercepted-u-n-report-idUSKCN1B12G2 (this piece was dutifully distributed by the „mass producers of ignorance"

An excellent commentary / critique of this „journalism for imbeciles" can be found here:

https://www.mintpressnews.com/un-asserts-link-north-korea-syria-chemical-weapons-program/231262/

The latest „reporting" is using the same methods: secret sources, innuendo, conjecture, confirmation bias, framing, etc.
The report is UNPUBLISHED, the authors („experts on what?) are NOT KNOWN but the insinuation is that it contains „new evidence" for criminal activities between the DPRK and Syria (criminal only because of the unwarranted sanctions)

So the „multiplicators" write about what Reuters says is in the report (as if it were true) although no journalist has tried to verify the claims but when the Syrian government refutes the allegations they dutifully point out that

„The UN panel said Syrian officials had not responded to a request for documents that would support this assertion "

http://www.dw.com/en/north-korea-is-supplying-chemical-weapons-to-syria-un-experts/a-42764642

Cassandra , Feb 28, 2018 3:07:26 PM | 25
Meanwhile .. the real axis of evil has been doing its dirty work unhindered

http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/war-gains-bulgarian-arms-add-fuel-to-middle-east-conflicts-12-16-2015
http://21stcenturywire.com/2018/01/21/wmd-america-inside-pentagons-global-bioweapons-industry/ .

Some information on the UN„experts" (DPRK-sanctions panel)

https://www.un.org/sc/suborg/en/sanctions/1718/panel_experts/appointment-experts

BENOIT CAMGUILHEM (F) – missile issues
a French university lecturer in public / administrative law - an expert on missiles?

HUGH GRIFFITHS (UK) - air transport
leads the panel this guy is a dangerous fraud ... infiltrating SIPRI and earlier involved in the black "human rights" propaganda about Serbia and Kosovo (director of field mission, medecins du monde (1999-2001)- as "authentic" as the White Helmets...)

https://www.sipri.org/about/bios/hugh-griffiths

(„he worked for governments" (!) and the „Institute for War & Peace":

„Institute for War & Peace Reporting (or IWPR for short) is an international media development charity, established in 1991. It runs major programmes in Afghanistan, the Caucasus, Central Asia, Iran, Iraq, the Philippines, Southeastern Europe, Syria, Uganda and Southern Africa. (nice choice of countries !)

"IWPR builds democracy at the frontlines of conflict and change through the power of professional journalism. IWPR programs provide intensive hands-on training, extensive reporting and publishing, and ambitious initiatives to build the capacity of local media ." (haven't we heard this crap before ?)

„Also we are managing a special reporting project on war crimes tribunals" . „managing" indeed:

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Institute_for_War_and_Peace_Reporting

Edward Herman's great analysis about the Milosevic trial (Marlise Simons: A Study in Total Propaganda Service) contains this reference:

Marlise Simons, "Prosecutors SAY Documents Link Milosevic to Genocide," New York Times, June 20, 2003

„Simons swallowed the Office of the Prosecutor's bait, its revelation of a document that "MAY PROVE TO BE crucial evidence in support of their case that the former Yugoslav president is guilty of genocide." (First published on the webpage of the highly-compromised Institute for War & Peace Reporting..)" Sound familiar?

The Simonses of this world have multiplied like cancer cells and as Herman remarked:

„Framing and sourcing are closely linked, as the use of a particular source allows that source to define the issues and to fix the frames of reference, presumably those acceptable to or preferred by the journalist"

By the way, the IWPR (their "democracy-loving" directors) seem to be very unpopular in Iraq .. I wonder why:

http://www.iraq-businessnews.com/2015/05/05/iwpr-iraq-director-killed-in-baghdad/
http://www.iraq-businessnews.com/2015/10/20/iwpr-director-found-dead/

The newly-appointed Iraq Director for the Institute for War and Peace Reporting (IWPR) has been found dead in suspicious circumstances at an Istanbul airport. („hanged herself with shoelaces") The ex-BBC journalist had been returning from a memorial service in London for the former IWPR Iraq director, Ammar Al Shahbander, who was killed in a car bomb attack in Baghdad in May.

Daniel , Feb 28, 2018 3:18:00 PM | 26
I hate to admit it, but clearly the AZ Empire is not "finished" with Syria yet. The division of this ancient society with the storied Euphrates River serving as one border (as "Promised" in Genesis 15:18) is enforced by thousands of US troops, artillery pieces, warplanes and at least a dozen US military bases. That gives about 1/3 of Syria's land and 1/2 of its oil to the proposed Kurdistan (with Kurdish people making up 6% of Syria's population).

I sincerely hope that Syria's allies, Russia and Iran, are themselves sincere in their commitment to preserve Syria's sovereignty and the integrity of its borders.

Another story came out of this devastated land and people.

Syria conflict: Women 'sexually exploited in return for aid'

It's been going on since "revolution" began. The first UN report on it was 3 years ago, but nothing has been done. And of course, it is the Sharia Councils we pay for that set the terms for trading food for women and girls (and no doubt boys).

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-43206297

Tobin Paz , Feb 28, 2018 3:29:10 PM | 27
Things are not looking good:

Lindsey Graham Warns Iran Is Testing Trump and Israel Is Preparing for War

Senator Lindsey Graham said Iran is testing President Donald Trump and warned Israel was preparing to start a war in southern Lebanon over an Iranian-backed Hezbollah rocket factory.
Castellio , Feb 28, 2018 3:31:16 PM | 28
James @14

You write: "the folks who own these papers are very intent on doing the same - carrying water for the military and financial industry in a move towards war, or a desire for war.. "

Have you considered that the owners of the media also own large parts of the military industrial complex, as well as controlling interest in the financial institutions?

The media is not a separate fourth estate seeking objectivity, it is a useful tool to create popular support for policies that go against the interest of the majority. They are not separate.

Perhaps that was your point.

karlof1 , Feb 28, 2018 4:07:00 PM | 29
Castellio @28--

Excellent points! I shun most "traditional" media of all types as most are corrupted in some manner, with some more than others. I'm reminded of the closed door meeting FDR had with the major media CEOs just prior to 7 Dec and the resulting lock-step they all displayed afterwards--a lock-step continuing as we breathe.

james , Feb 28, 2018 4:07:13 PM | 30
@28 castellio.. thanks for articulating that.. i didn't say that, but it does beg the question who owns the media and i do believe it is as you say..
test , Feb 28, 2018 4:21:58 PM | 31
Max Blumenthal slams Democracy Now & guest for supporting 'neocon project of regime change in Syria'
https://www.sott.net/article/378447-Max-Blumenthal-slams-Democracy-Now-guest-slammed-for-supporting-neocon-project-of-regime-change-in-Syria
Jeffrey Kaye , Feb 28, 2018 4:47:54 PM | 32
This is a black propaganda two-fer, casting aspersions upon both Syria and North Korea. Let us now forget it was the U.S. that enabled sales of chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein. It was the U.S. that most likely used Sarin gas during the Vietnam War. And it was the U.S. that amnestied the worst biological warfare criminals from Japan's Unit 731 complex and then used their expertise to conduct a large-scale experimental campaign of germ warfare against both China and North Korea during the Korean War. Regarding the latter, readers are referred to https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/the-long-suppressed-korean-war-report-on-u-s-use-of-biological-weapons-released-at-last-20d83f5cee54
karlof1 , Feb 28, 2018 5:08:09 PM | 33
NY Times now spreading All Propaganda report that Russia hacked German database extensively & for very long period of time.
Quentin , Feb 28, 2018 5:20:06 PM | 34
Jeffrey Kaye @ 32 - the link doesn't work - no information at Medium Search nor in Google search - could you help?
Kalen , Feb 28, 2018 5:25:45 PM | 35
Here are white helmeted angels in Syria.
It is true. They live.
https://pp.userapi.com/c834404/v834404425/cda58/8COyhYqrb8I.jpg
Jen , Feb 28, 2018 5:36:07 PM | 36
Castellio @ 28, James and Karlof1: In the case of Rupert Murdoch, who through News Corporation owns newspapers, journals, magazines, TV and online news channels, at least one major film studio (20th Century Fox), publishing company HarperCollins Publishers and other media outlets, the link between the media and the military industrial complex is between the two hemispheres of his brain. Murdoch is on the Board of Directors of Genie Energy (along with ex-US President of Vice Dick Cheney) which owns a company that has a licence (granted by an Israeli court) to explore and drill for oil and natural gas in Syria's Golan Heights.

How much more incestuous can the media be with the military industrial complex?

Wait while I hunt out the connection between The Guardian newspaper's management and investment bank NM Rothschild & Sons Ltd ...

https://www.theguardian.com/the-scott-trust/2015/jul/26/the-scott-trust-board

wendy davis , Feb 28, 2018 5:36:33 PM | 37
@ quentin 34

see if this works at his medium site (though they look the same):

https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/the-long-suppressed-korean-war-report-on-u-s-use-of-biological-weapons-released-at-last-20d83f5cee54

on his twitter thing: https://twitter.com/Anony_Mia/status/968892377065754625

ted01 , Feb 28, 2018 5:59:10 PM | 38
Quentin @ 34

delete the formatting characters that appear at the end of the url in your web browser. If you hover over the link you can see them.

Debsisdead , Feb 28, 2018 6:39:35 PM | 39
What is up here? Apart from the horror of the NYT story, why are so many commenters in this thread too damn lazy to use the html tags provided. It is 2018 and I find it impossible to accept that so many are still incapable of posting to a blog.
The only reason I can deduce is that far too many still sit at ancient desktops and don't comprehend the disaster their laziness causes for those who use tablets & phones.
Daniel , Feb 28, 2018 6:42:15 PM | 40
A new movie "Revolution Man" directed by Syrian director Najdat Aznour. Deals with rebel propaganda ie. #WhiteHelmets fakery, child soldiers & the role of western media in demonizing the government.

Check out the trailer at their F**kBook site:

https://www.facebook.com/Revolution-Man-Movie-فيلم-رجل-الثورة-993146510832449

Daniel , Feb 28, 2018 6:46:04 PM | 41
For Debs and b:

A new movie "Revolution Man" directed by Syrian director Najdat Aznour. Deals with rebel propaganda ,#WhiteHelmets fakery, child soldiers & the role of western media in demonizing the government

Check out the trailer at their F**kBook site:

karlof1 , Feb 28, 2018 6:50:33 PM | 42
Jen @36--

Such incestuousness was uncovered during the Merchants of Death Congressional hearings during the 1930s and helped enact the Neutrality Acts. Prominent US Historians Charles and Mary Beard were decrying the evils of media consolidation soon after WW1, a message that only increased in volume as time moved forward. Imagine what we might have if anti-trust legislation were enforced as rigorously as Taft(!) did 100+ years ago.

[Mar 01, 2018] Russiagate and the Neo McCarthyite War on Alternative Media and Political Dissent Global Research by Jonathan Sigrist

Notable quotes:
"... It has been a long year ever since January 20 th of last year. Not only because of the ever-ensuing embarrassments of the Commander in Chief with such frequency it can be difficult to follow, but also – and I would say especially – because of the incessant daily media focus on the so called "Russiagate" scandal, a conspiracy which seeks to prove a collusion between the Putin and the Trump administration in order to successfully steal the 2016 presidential election win away from Democrat nominee Hillary Clinton. ..."
Feb 28, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

It has been a long year ever since January 20 th of last year. Not only because of the ever-ensuing embarrassments of the Commander in Chief with such frequency it can be difficult to follow, but also – and I would say especially – because of the incessant daily media focus on the so called "Russiagate" scandal, a conspiracy which seeks to prove a collusion between the Putin and the Trump administration in order to successfully steal the 2016 presidential election win away from Democrat nominee Hillary Clinton.

The United States and the Russian Federation have a long history of mutual hostility – famously dividing the East and West into a bipolar world during the Cold War – and the vision of Russia is among many Americans still that of the Soviet bad guys . The Cold War was not a pleasant time for many obvious reasons, but in the minds of the American left, the McCarthy era is one that still sticks, and its apparent return is something that seems to concern only a minority on the left – including myself. Now for the unacquainted, McCarthyism can be described as " the vociferous campaign against alleged communists in the US government and other institutions carried out under Senator Joseph McCarthy in the period 1950–4. Many of the accused were blacklisted or lost their jobs, though most did not in fact belong to the Communist Party " ( source ). It was a clever way used by the US government to frame and condemn all the big left leaning civil rights and social justice movements that were happening during the Cold War era. Professors, academics, independent media platforms, politicians or activists with left leaning messages were being labelled as Soviet agents by the US government, discrediting them completely of any legitimacy in the eyes of the American people through the widespread Red Scare . What has been happening in the last year can be seen as a mirror of the same mentality, except that " Soviet spy " has today been replaced by labels such as " Kremlin agent " or " Russian bot ".

It isn't news that what is often referred to as the " American Left" of the Democratic party is in reality nothing more than a neo-liberal party slightly more to the center/left than the GOP. So in this article, when I am referring to the terminology "American Left" , and the one subject to the revamped McCarthyism, I am in fact talking about the often anti-establishment, anti-imperialistic and even sometimes anti-capitalistic left – the one that threatens the current neo-liberal status quo. So as I elaborate my case, I just want to make it clear that I am referring to the latter.

One of the greater, larger left-wing media presence on US ground is undoubtedly RT America (RT short for Russia Today). Hosting many US critical segments such as Redacted Tonight by Lee Camp, On Contact with Chis Hedges and Breaking The Set with Abby Martin, RT America comes out as a prominent side-narrative to the mainstream medias such as MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CNN, NPR and so forth. Yet last year, RT America has had to register itself as a "foreign agent" , on the basis of a very weak report by the Director of National Intelligence . Reasons for this decision as stated in the report claims to be that RT regularly covers surveillance, civil liberties, protest movements, the environmental impacts of fracking and Wall Street greed. Other more establishment friendly foreign news media on US soil such as BBC America have not had to register as a foreign agent. So far, only RT. Facebook (known for working closely with the US government) has even gone as far as marking RT articles shared on its platform as spam The Intercept

did find out recently as well that Facebook does censor certain of its pages on behalf of governments , so more of the same behaviour is expected to be seen more in the future.

Where the delegitimization of leftist media really strikes is in the realm of "fake news"-stamping and propaganda-flagging. The Washington Post backed the website project PropOrNot.com which frames in a sort of 'blacklist' news medias that they believe are Russian Propaganda, with usually no evidence to back up their claims. Many independent news outlets are to be found on their list, and none of the major media conglomerates (unless they're Russian, of course). In the same vein, Facebook has decided to team up with established media outlets such as AP and ABC News to find out and decide what is or is not "Fake News" .

Apparently, Americans are believed to be too unwise to figure it out for themselves, and if alternate narratives and opinions are being held, it must be because they have fallen victim of fake news. BBC has even gone as far as taking the teaching role in spotting "fake news" . The concept seems to be that social media platforms and mainstream media outlets are to tell the population what is real and what is a lie. The same outlets that pushed the war in Iraq, Syria, Libya, as well as the current Russiagate narrative. Media outlets that are ramping up on US intelligence spokesmen for their news segments, despite the fact that they are historically known to lie and deceive the American people . These same people are to tell us what is the truth. It is my belief that one of the only way such a development has become possible lies in the fact that the Democratic party and its voters have a newfound love for the FBI, NSA and CIA, thanks to the Russiagate conspiracy.

During the last year, James Comey and Robert Mueller have incessantly been praised by the media as American heroes and patriots saving the American people from the Kremlin puppets that Trump and his administration are accused to be (with very little evidence so far). It would seem that in this day and age, the Democrats would rather side with the deep state than with reason. Through programs such as COINTELPRO

and Operation Mockingbird , the FBI and CIA have spent decades and millions of dollars deceiving and crushing any movement that dared to challenge the two-party system. For " the resistance " movement to embrace US intelligence agencies and the lies they propagate is an extremely reckless and dangerous move, and by doing so they are not only consciously trying their best to harm the current administration, but unconsciously harming the many media outlets, journalists, activists and politicians who hold a different view on the world than the Washington narrative, and who are now all being flagged as Kremlin agents pushing Russian propaganda.

During the last year we have been told not only that Trump's campaign colluded with the Kremlin, but also that Bernie Sanders, Green Party leader Jill Stein and even that UK's Jeremy Corbyn did. So have we been told about whistleblowers Julian Assange , Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning , and many of RT America's journalists who have their shows and articles published on RT America for the sole reason that RT is one of the only outlets allowing their differing viewpoints on American politics. Many Russiagate sceptics on Twitter have r eceived messages directly from Twitter informing them that they might have fallen victim to Russian propaganda because they had retweeted or were following certain accounts they deemed to be associated with the Kremlin. From my own personal experience, I cannot count how many times I have seen Russiagate sceptics being called-out by liberals for being Kremlin agents or Russian bot accounts – all because of the many, many Russia-Kremlin-Trump stories that have been promulgated over the last year. It has paralyzed a large portion of the centre-left to not even move an inch more towards the left, and has condemned those who have.

There is a paranoia happening in the US political establishment, remarkably similar to the one experienced during the Cold War era. It doesn't matter whether the Russia-Collusion story is true or not (let's not forget the United States has itself meddled in countless foreign elections ever since the end of WWII , even in Russia in 1996 ), it matters more what this ongoing investigation and grotesque media-hype is doing to the American public – and by extension to the rest of the world. The US-Russia relation is worse today than at the high point of the Cold War , all thanks to this constant Putin bashing and the fact that NATO is slowly encircling the Russia in Eastern Europe, Northern Europe, the Arctic, the Middle-East and Asia. Despite the West promising not to expand NATO an inch Eastwards as part of the German reunification deal, such promises have not been kept. But of course, most of the general population is fine this politically unwise expansion of NATO, " because you know, Russians are bad " (satire).

If there is a threat to national and global security today, and a threat to free speech and independent media, it is not coming from Putin or the Kremlin – but rather from the United States. And until the American left gathers itself and stops listening to the warmongering pundits and establishment journalists parroting the Washington narrative, we have nothing but a bleak future in front of us with regards to the relation between thte two old nemesis nuclear superpowers.

*

Jonathan Sigrist is a student at the University of Tromsř in Northern Norway, currently studying the geopolitical, environmental, cultural and economic relations between the Arctic nations (The US, Canada, Russia, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark/Greenland and Iceland), as well as the future of the Arctic's role in global politics. He has lived in Denmark, Sweden, Finland and France, and is a fervent observer and critic of US foreign policy.

[Feb 28, 2018] Barring black swan events, the Ukraine is meta-stable and can muddle along indefinitely

Feb 28, 2018 | www.unz.com

p

Pavlo , February 28, 2018 at 4:34 am GMT

the government makes a show of it.

there has been dramatic improvement in number of soldiers, usability of equipment

That is the show.

The Ukrainian army's battlefield performance after February 2015 has not improved, nor will the odds ever again be as favourable as they were in Mid-2014. Kiev has assembled an army suitable for skirmishing and the occasional terrorist attack, nothing more strenuous. Building an army capable of winning the war would entail discipline and sacrifice, and the effort would be for nothing since the RF forces would move in and crush Kiev's army if it were ever on the point of victory.

Kiev is content with the status quo – it's far from ideal for them but it's not so bad as to justify the risks involved in a new offensive (this will never happen). Barring black swan events, the Ukraine is meta-stable and can muddle along indefinitely, so long as Moscow does not pull its finger out of its backside and resolve the situation properly.

likbez , February 28, 2018 at 10:52 am GMT
@Pavlo

Kiev is content with the status quo – it's far from ideal for them but it's not so bad as to justify the risks involved in a new offensive (this will never happen). Barring black swan events, the Ukraine is meta-stable and can muddle along indefinitely, so long as Moscow does not pull its finger out of its backside and resolve the situation properly.

Two consideration:

1. Ukraine decides very little. Government was outsourced to Washington, DC. If creation of tension with Russia is necessary, they will launch offensive.
2. Nationalist movements, especially far-right, have their own often destructive dynamics and can do things that are illogical and/or highly harmful for the country. They also are ready to fight and die for their ideas. In this sense Poroshenko is a hostage of Galician far right "revolutionaries. "

[Feb 28, 2018] Russia threatens our ability to dominate - US general to Congress

Notable quotes:
"... "the only geographic combatant command executing active combat operations," ..."
"... "An increase in Russian surface-to-air missile systems in the region threatens our access and ability to dominate the airspace," ..."
"... "The principle reason we are in Syria is to defeat ISIS, and that remains our sole and single task," ..."
"... "Sunni populations remain vulnerable to identity-based recruitment" ..."
"... "impressionable youth in this tumultuous region, seeking community and justice, are highly susceptible to extremists' teachings." ..."
Feb 28, 2018 | www.rt.com

h6> Feb 28, 2018 briefed the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) on Tuesday on the efforts against Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) and the wars in Syria, Afghanistan, and Yemen. All of which fall under the purview of CENTCOM, "the only geographic combatant command executing active combat operations," Votel pointed out.

The US has partitioned the globe into six combatant commands. Under this arrangement, CENTCOM's area of responsibility extends from the Libyan border with Egypt to Pakistan's border with India, and from Kazakhstan's border with Russia to Sudan.

US geographical combatant commands / Wikipedia

From Votel's 45-page prepared testimony , it was apparent that the US regards Iran as the biggest challenge in the region, followed by Russian and Chinese efforts to chip away at Washington's hegemony.

"An increase in Russian surface-to-air missile systems in the region threatens our access and ability to dominate the airspace," Votel complained at one point, discussing Syria.

Unlike the US forces present in that country, Russian forces are in Syria at the invitation of the government in Damascus. Votel argued that the legal basis for the presence of US troops was the "collective self-defense of Iraq" from IS.

"The principle reason we are in Syria is to defeat ISIS, and that remains our sole and single task," Votel told the lawmakers, echoing last week's remarks by President Donald Trump.

Declaring the IS largely defeated, Votel cautioned that "Sunni populations remain vulnerable to identity-based recruitment" into terrorist groups, adding that "impressionable youth in this tumultuous region, seeking community and justice, are highly susceptible to extremists' teachings."

[Feb 28, 2018] Types of commenters about Russia in the Web

Feb 28, 2018 | www.unz.com

p

yurivku , Next New Comment February 28, 2018 at 7:45 am GMT

@peterAUS

Firstly I decided not to answer for I know you as not Rusophile and probably your questions are just some kind of trolling. Also as I understood you are from Croatia which of course add more colors to the picture. But you've touched interesting point.

Don't you think it's rather personal question?

Yes I do. Do you? If yes why do you ask?

My take: does not matter who is on top there. The core system will always be the same.
That's why there is still a brain drain, or middle class drain, from Russia. And it will continue.

That's absolutely true for ZUS. For Russia it's absolutely wrong. Just compare Gorbachev-Yeltsin-Putin.
Can you see the difference? I can.
And compare Bush -Clinton-Obama -Trump.
Can you see the difference? I can't.
And for drain – that's true. It's because I say the system must be changed.

the most fervent advocates of Russia are people who do NOT live there.

Why didn't you count me? I'm Russian, living in Russia, love Russia (but not blindly), well, not adore Putin, but neither hate him.

As for your statement – it makes sense and should be thought over. Why "most fervent advocates of Russia are people who do NOT live there" ?
I think that here there are three types of Russians (more exactly Russian speaking current and former Russian citizens) are present here:

1. Gessen type. Represented here by Felix. They hate Russia heartily, each moment they try to prove how bad was their life in Russia and how good it is in the West. In Mashas case she's allowed for LGBT activities. For Felix probably it's a happiness to have abortion prohibited and transgendering allowed. Most of them not actually Russians. Here is a good insight:

https://russia-insider.com/en/never-ever-listen-what-american-jews-have-say-about-russia/ri22480

They are absolute amoral, but blaming Russians for that. They have not idea of God (any kind) and they hate Russian Othodox Church. They hardly read any Russian classic literature so they are thinking that Russian have no moral and no feelings except greed. It's hard to judge them – the idea of Christian morality is alien for them.

2. Сosmopolitans. Those can be Russians and not Russians, they have an idea that motherland there where they are prosperous. Don't think we can see many of those here. Just probably some who are on their way to the West, but not yet left Russia. Others are just not interested to spare time in writing BS.

3. I call them US-ass kissers or liberasts. They can switch to type 1 in the future, but currently they are in Russia. They are preaching western values among dark Russian masses and dream of reincarnation of liberal paradise in Russia, but after understanding it's not possible got crying how amoral Russians are and prepare to leave.

I did not count 4th type because it's tiny:
4. Just curious Russians (like me), living in Russia who've got to idea to understand how that stupid West lives. Why it's not afraid of being melted in Africa/Asia/etc immigrants flow, why it has no compassion to those it kills all over the world, why it's going to degrade stimulating exotic perversions at last why it provokes us, is it pretend to Darwin award?

Probably there are some more.
But why no Russians proud of Russia, living in Russia are here? I think just because they not only live in Russia, but speak also Russian and are interesting in Russian problems. The same reason why in Russian talking places no Westerners who advertise western way of life. Just Ukies who as always pour a sh#t (not a bull, but just plain S) on Russia. Well, it's the only toy they have now.

The sheer .weirdness? of that boggles the mind.
No wonder it's hard to take them seriously.

Please take care of your brain. Don't overexert.

yurivku , Next New Comment February 28, 2018 at 8:32 am GMT
@Jonathan Revusky

Great. Agree.

As for Karlin – IMHO he's a product of US education. And in ZUS tradition is not be sorry for such a little thing as couple millions or so being killed.
Madeleine Albright is a good example – Jewish child being saved by Serbs from Nazy she said that hundreds of thouthands killed in Iraq – "This is a very hard choice, but we think the price is worth it."

She paid Serbs also in full scale for her being saved.
US citizens here feel no sorry about all the Dresden , Japan, Iraq, Serbia, Vietnam, Syria stories.
Why Karlin should?

yurivku , Next New Comment February 28, 2018 at 8:59 am GMT
@yurivku

Sorry! I've forgotten type well represented here
5. People who due to force majeure circumstances left Russia, but still feel a connection to it. And it's main reason for them to be here and create blogs as Andrei and Saker do.
Most of them will never return. For me it's a pity, but understandable. Moreover, if they returned there is a great possibility for them to get unhappy because they got used for western problems and not adapted for ours.
Actually I was suprised to see people like them and glad that not all former Russians lost for Russian world. But their children unfortunately are lost.

[Feb 27, 2018] Syria vs Ukraine

Looks like Poroshenko is playing with fire. the longer Donetsk and Lugansk republics exists as a separate political entities the more difficult and costly will be to bring them back. Each year matters in this respect. After, say, ten year probably no compromise could ever emerge, unless Russia is weakened and /or dissolved into smaller statelets (the permanent problem for Russia is change of leadership, so 2024 will be a very important year, as Putin does not have any realistic successor who can continue his policies. So iether Russian "economic nationalists" (to borrow Bannon's term) or Pro-European faction will come to power. In both cases foreign policies change. Or the US economy crash again and military budget will be drastically cut, leaving no money for foreign military adventure and the protection of neoliberal empire. Direct attach might elicit Russian response and as such is highly risky (especially in view of Russia being pissed by the USA all the time now and might want to make Ukraine, as a US client, a boy for beating) , but periodic skirmishes just run this territory into wasteland that Syria regions now are. They also drive population out.
Notable quotes:
"... IMO the emerging partition is likely to last a long time. Syria is only 80 years old as a state and a prolonged de facto partition as opposed to wartime occupation can easily become more or less perm ..."
"... If the Kurds of Afrin throw themselves on the mercy of the Syrian government in Damascus then Kurdish autonomy is squashed in that enclave. And, when it is all said and done, isn't that what Erdogan really wants? ..."
Feb 27, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

turcopolier , 25 February 2018 at 11:06 PM

TTG et al

You don't understand what I mean. IMO the emerging partition is likely to last a long time. Syria is only 80 years old as a state and a prolonged de facto partition as opposed to wartime occupation can easily become more or less permanent as was the case with Turkey's acquisition of Hatay. pl

Yeah, Right said in reply to turcopolier ... , 26 February 2018 at 12:30 AM
I certainly don't dispute that Turkey is invading Afrin. And I agree with you that if things continue to stand as they are now then that invasion will continue until all of Afrin has been overrun.

But to simply extrapolate from what has happened into the future suggests that circumstances won't change or - if they do - that Erdogan will continue on like some wind-up automaton.

If the Kurds of Afrin throw themselves on the mercy of the Syrian government in Damascus then Kurdish autonomy is squashed in that enclave. And, when it is all said and done, isn't that what Erdogan really wants?

If the Kurds are too stupid or too proud to play that card then, yeah, sure, you and I both agree that they will be ground into the dirt.

But if they do supplicate to Assad then the situation changes.

You (I assume) believe that in that circumstance Erdogan will continue to grind on with this invasion regardless.

I believe he will beat his chest and then go home.

One of us will be wrong, and one of us will be right.

[Feb 27, 2018] "The US goal is to destroy Russia": ten quotes by Valentin Falin

RIP. Valentin Falin 3 April 1926 – 22 February 2018
Feb 24, 2018 | www.newsilkstrategies.com
​"The US goal is to destroy Russia": ten quotes by Valentin Falin

Comments Our translation of an article from RIA Novosti along with our own commentary.

Let's start with Falin's comment about countering the US' threat to nuke Russia. His comment was drastic, calling for planting nukes in the oceans off the US coasts and detonating them in the event Russia were attacked, and most Westerners will be shocked. Except for those few who know that the US had a plan to annihilate Russia, including millions of innocents, according to declassified information from the SAC (Strategic Air Command), as described by the National Interest :

The U.S. government has finally declassified the 1950s Strategic Air Command target list, which would have dispatched American bombers and missiles on nuclear strikes across the Communist world.

"SAC listed over 1200 cities in the Soviet bloc, from East Germany to China, also with priorities established," according to the National Security Archive , the non-governmental organization which requested the declassified information.

"The US goal is to destroy Russia": ten quotes by Valentin Falin

Subject: Valentin Falin has died (12)

2-23-2018

MOSCOW, February 23 (Itar-Tass) - RIA Novosti. Former Soviet ambassador to West Germany and chairman of the board of the Novosti Press Agency (APN), the predecessor of the Russia Today agency, Valentin Falin, died at the age of 92.

On the incompatibility of the USSR and the USA: "The Americans decided in 1946 that the very existence of the USSR was incompatible with US security: Communist or non-communist was not the question." The benefit is very simple: resources. Today Ukraine is part of that plan.

"Besides resources, Russia without Ukraine becomes more vulnerable, Brezhnev Brzezinski (an American political scientist, editor-in-chief) said in this regard."

On the relationship between sanctions and the arms race: "Sanctions and the creation of a belt of military bases along the border with Russia - all this is just a continuation of the West's old policy, only the methods have changed." After the creation of the USSR's thermonuclear weapons, and hence the elimination of the United States' monopoly in this area, the arms race has become a form of warfare, and now the imposition of new aspects to this race pursues a very specific goal, ie, to cause the Russian economy to collapse, and the United States will hardly abandon this idea."

On the American bombing of Japan: "Bombs were dropped on Japan in the hope that they would show the Soviet Union that there is now one master in the world."

On the global significance of the Yalta Conference: "Yalta was the best chance that has been granted to mankind throughout its written history, at least since Christ's birth, when we could eliminate war altogether, as recorded in the UN Charter, from human life. The chance was frittered away; the responsibility for this lies primarily with Washington. "

On the way of saving the Soviet Union: To save the USSR, we should have acted very simply. This, however, is an extreme position, but, incidentally, it was one held by Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov. We should have created an unlimited amount of 100-megaton bombs, placed them along the American Atlantic and Pacific coasts at the bottom of the oceans, and if the Americans had attacked us, detonated all these bombs; there would have been nothing left of the United States.

About Evgeni Primakov: "The greatest merit of Yevgeny Maksimovich, which will be his monument, is to have saved the country from default after the financial collapse, when in fact the Russian Federation was on the verge of disintegrating not only from a political collapse but also from an economic collapse."

On Russia's actions during the armed conflict in South Ossetia (2008): "If we had not reacted as our leadership did, we would have opened the floodgates for new provocations against Russia and against its vital interests, in order to squeeze us, and build all the aggressive positions along our periphery. "

About responsibility for the future: "Shortly after the collapse of the USSR I wrote: "The primary concern of everyone who assumes responsibility for the future of the country must be the consolidation of society. Gorchakovsky's "Russia, concentrate!" is as relevant as ever. Concentrate thoughts, energy and effort on creation and rebirth, on reconciling oneself with oneself. Otherwise, Russia will not wake up."

About Trump's policy: "In order to understand the meaning of Trump's decisions, their common vector and prospects, it is necessary to go beyond the discussion of details and look at the situation in the US and the world as a whole, since what happened last November (2016) In that country, was not just a mere changing of the guard but the beginning of a change in the global matrix."

About the main threats to humanity: "When people ask about what is most threatening to humanity and all of life on Earth today, they usually mention nuclear, chemical and bacteriological weapons, but forget about one more truly terrible weapons of mass destruction, aimed primarily at the human brain. This is information, propaganda and agitation."

What we remember about Valentin Falin

A graduate of Moscow State Institute of International Relatins (MGIMO), he dedicated many years to the diplomatic service: he worked as an analysts in the information committee of the USSR Ministry of Foreign Affairs, prepared the texts of Nikita Khrushchev's speeches on German issues, and led a group of advisers to foreign minister Andrei Gromyko. In 1971-1978, he was the USSR ambassador to the FRG (West Germany).

From 1978 to 1982, Falin was the first deputy chief of the international information department of the Central Committee of the CPSU, later entered journalism, was an observer for Izvestia, and also served as one of the leaders of the APN, the predecessor of MIA Russia Today.

Valentin Falin's field of scientific interest was history. He wrote the book "The History of Foreign Policy of the USSR" (in 1969, member of the group of authors awarded the USSR State Prize), Political Memoirs (1993, Germany, 1999, Russia), Second Front (1995, Germany, 2000, Russia); "Conflicts in the Kremlin" (1997, Germany, 1999, Russia). Doctor of Historical Sciences and laureate of the State Prize of the USSR (1982).

For his achievements he was awarded the Order of the October Revolution, three Orders of the Red Banner of Labor, Friendship of Peoples, and won the gratitude of the Russian President (2010).

[Feb 27, 2018] China will force the US to change its mind about Bashing Russia by Andranik Migranyan

Notable quotes:
"... This is why Washington has adopted a strategy of bashing Russia. The US wants to break our country and withdraw it from the game, deprive it of sovereignty and subjectivity in world politics, as was the case in the 1990s, so that at the hour of the decisive clash, Russia was not an independent player capable of making decisions based on its interests. ..."
"... Thus, the minimum and maximum goals of the US are pursued: the first is to neutralize Russia, and since today it reliably covers China's rear, create threats for China from the Russian direction. ..."
"... The second is to establish a power in Moscow that would act together with Washington against China in a decisive battle. In recent years, we have seen elements of the implementation of this strategy. These are sanctions in Ukraine, attempts at financial and economic strangulation, involvement in mediated wars and a new arms race in order to provoke a split in elite Russian circles, and between the masses and the leader -- in order to ruin Putin's power and establish a puppet regime in Russia. ..."
Feb 19, 2018 | www.newsilkstrategies.com

Andranik Migranyan for RIA Novosti

The US is no longer a superpower: Washington's nuclear strategy tells us this.

By now, the United States has already adopted a deterrence strategy with respect to Beijing and methodically pursues a policy of encircling the PRC with the help of its partners and allies. China has with almost all its neighbours conflicts and problems that the US traditionally skilfully uses to create an anti-China coalition. Countries that can form its core include Japan, India, Vietnam, the Philippines and Australia. Over time, other states may join them.

... And now - the most important thing. Against the backdrop of a possible battle between the two giants in the foreseeable future, Russia's role and significance are incredibly increasing. Obviously, having huge nuclear-missile potential, vast spaces and immense resources, Russia can, with its participation on the side of one of the giants in the battle, decide the fate of the confrontation.

I personally get the impression that Washington strategists understand this perfectly. However, they do not believe that by improving relations with Moscow, they can make it a reliable ally in the case of a head-on confrontation with China. And because the future destiny of the United States is at stake, facing an impending existential challenge, any miscalculation can prove fatal.

This is why Washington has adopted a strategy of bashing Russia. The US wants to break our country and withdraw it from the game, deprive it of sovereignty and subjectivity in world politics, as was the case in the 1990s, so that at the hour of the decisive clash, Russia was not an independent player capable of making decisions based on its interests.

Thus, the minimum and maximum goals of the US are pursued: the first is to neutralize Russia, and since today it reliably covers China's rear, create threats for China from the Russian direction.

The second is to establish a power in Moscow that would act together with Washington against China in a decisive battle. In recent years, we have seen elements of the implementation of this strategy. These are sanctions in Ukraine, attempts at financial and economic strangulation, involvement in mediated wars and a new arms race in order to provoke a split in elite Russian circles, and between the masses and the leader -- in order to ruin Putin's power and establish a puppet regime in Russia.

Will the Americans succeed in implementing their strategy? This is highly doubtful, despite the enormous resources that the collective West, led by the United States, can mobilize. First, the Western world and the States are not experiencing the best of times. America has overextended itself over almost the past two decades in a series of endless wars and external adventures. Secondly, Russia cannot be broken by applying crude, direct pressure on it. If it breaks down, as we know from our history, it is only because of internal conflicts and confrontations. So, in the medium term, external pressure can only consolidate Russian society and power.

Third. The history of the White House's pressure on North Korea suggests that this huge country cannot cope even with this small state, which has taken a firm stand.

Fourth. The solidarity of Western countries with the United States also has its limits. They are unlikely to become willing hostages to the confrontation of the US vs Russia, and then the US vs China.

And lastly, I like to hope that in Beijing they understand (or very soon will realize) that the main target of the States is not Russia. Thus, the Kremlin is now resisting the White House both for itself and, as we used to say in the USSR, for the other guy.

And it seems to me that if in this confrontation China more vigorously defends Russia, then it is likely that the US will understand the hopelessness of the strategy of bashing Russia and change the paradigm of its policy. Otherwise, they themselves are at risk of being broken because of the exorbitant imperial overstrain.

No wonder Patrick Buchanan, one of the most astute patriarchs of American politics and analysts of US foreign and domestic policy, published a few years ago a book with the very characteristic title "Suicide of a superpower: will the US survive until 2025?"

RIA Novosti https://ria.ru/analytics/20180219/1514877102.html

[Feb 27, 2018] Neoliberalism goes into counter-offence and Russians under each bed is just tip of the iceberg

Interesting observation: "This is what happens when you have 'Five Eyes' but no brains!"
Notable quotes:
"... The entire U.S. MSM is a F'ing troll farm, disinformation, Orwellian world on steroids. The U.S. public is fed a constant never ending stream of complete Bull sh**, self serving crap. ..."
"... It's surprising to see the NYT admit the US does it, too. The alt media has been all over this including Corbett's recent video with the Woolsey interview with Fox News where he laughs it off and then says it was for a good cause. ..."
"... I've been writing to my favorite websites telling them that the Russians could not possibly compete with the U.S. when it came to manipulation of twitter/facebook etc. Where is the comparative analysis? How could the Russians possibly compete with US Internet-manipulation, US-election-funding? Look at the most basic numbers, US population compared to Russian population... ..."
"... The whole Russiagate thing has been proven to be nothing but a cover for the Democratic Party's real manipulation of the last election to cut out the only progressive in the race (Sanders) and get the worst possible opponent (Trump) for the elite's favorite candidate (Clinton). The stupid little people of middle America just didn't follow orders like their ever so sophisticated compatriots on the east and west coasts and now the 0.01% have to cover their tracks. Mueller's indictment of 13 interns in some sadsack little St Petersburg troll farm would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic (well actually it is pretty funny). ..."
"... It's McCarthyism on steroids, and as usual, the real targets are progressives and the "real left" fighting for workers. We are allowed to have all the social justice we want, but don't you dare discuss economic justice that threatens the bank accounts of the 0.01%, or watch any of that evil alternative news that provides a different perspective from our govt/corporate approved sources. ..."
Feb 27, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

pantaraxia | Feb 26, 2018 6:42:36 PM | 21

It went much further than that . Google actually tweaked its algorithms to alter search recommendations in favor of the Clinton campaign. A comparative analysis of search engines Google, Bing and Yahoo showed that Google differed significantly from the other two in producing search recommendations relevant to Clinton.

Google Manipulates Search Results To Favor Hillary Clinton - Jimmy Dore
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MICXf6viakc

But , but, but...Russia!!!

Nothing to see her folks. Carry on.

che , Feb 26, 2018 6:47:53 PM | 22

The entire U.S. MSM is a F'ing troll farm, disinformation, Orwellian world on steroids. The U.S. public is fed a constant never ending stream of complete Bull sh**, self serving crap.

How to stop it is the only question, to stop the impunity with which these criminals like Bush and Trump and Obama and Mattis et.al. lie with their pants on fire and .....they all suck .01% dick.

Fec , Feb 26, 2018 8:19:04 PM | 23
@8 Nonsense Factory

Ahmed Nafeez exposed The Rendon Group and the Pentagon's Highlands Forum a few years ago.

And then there's today's nonsense.

Are You a Russian Troll?

John Gilberts , Feb 27, 2018 8:21:44 PM | 86
It's surprising to see the NYT admit the US does it, too. The alt media has been all over this including Corbett's recent video with the Woolsey interview with Fox News where he laughs it off and then says it was for a good cause.

Posted by: Curtis | Feb 26, 2018 8:44:21 PM | 24

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

Finally, I do not believe my eyes. I've been writing to my favorite websites telling them that the Russians could not possibly compete with the U.S. when it came to manipulation of twitter/facebook etc. Where is the comparative analysis? How could the Russians possibly compete with US Internet-manipulation, US-election-funding? Look at the most basic numbers, US population compared to Russian population...

... ... ...

John Gilberts | Feb 27, 2018 1:00:46 PM | 59

CBC: NATO Researcher Warns of Russian Interference inn 2019 Canadian Elections
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nato-researcher-russia-interference-election-1.4553572

"Russia is attracted to Canada because destabilizing it will 'undermine the cohesion' of the broader NATO alliance. Moreover it could serve to undermine Canadian policy in Europe..."

More money for CSIS, CSE, 'Five Eyes' etc. Maybe we'll build a Trudeau troll-farm too.

Sad Canuck | Feb 27, 2018 3:31:01 PM | 67

@59 John Gilberts,

Gee gosh golly a NATO researcher thinks Russia is threatening Canada and the CBC acts as a megaphone for this BS.

The whole Russiagate thing has been proven to be nothing but a cover for the Democratic Party's real manipulation of the last election to cut out the only progressive in the race (Sanders) and get the worst possible opponent (Trump) for the elite's favorite candidate (Clinton). The stupid little people of middle America just didn't follow orders like their ever so sophisticated compatriots on the east and west coasts and now the 0.01% have to cover their tracks. Mueller's indictment of 13 interns in some sadsack little St Petersburg troll farm would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic (well actually it is pretty funny).

Who exactly is Putin going to support in a Canadian election? The liberals and conservatives are both reliable lapdogs of Washington and even the NDP (No Difference Party) is infected with Russophobia and Whitehelmetphilia. Between supporting an overtly fascist regime in Kiev, contributing to every "bombing brown people to save them" campaign concocted by Washington, and leading a NATO battle group in Latvia some 250 miles from Moscow, it's pretty hard to make a case that Canada is a passive little angel looking for world peace anymore.

Very sad what the neo-liberal imposter Trudeau is doing to Canada. The guy is Harper with ridiculous socks and a bit of identity politics thrown in to fool whatever passes as center-left in Canada these days. What a change and almost nobody makes a fuss or cares. Of course the Canadian media attacks anyone suggesting better relations with Russia and Canada might be worth trying. It's McCarthyism on steroids, and as usual, the real targets are progressives and the "real left" fighting for workers. We are allowed to have all the social justice we want, but don't you dare discuss economic justice that threatens the bank accounts of the 0.01%, or watch any of that evil alternative news that provides a different perspective from our govt/corporate approved sources.

Very sad for my home and native land .......

9308305K | Feb 27, 2018 1:32:40 PM | 62

Pertinent quote regarding propaganda:

"When people ask about what is most threatening to humanity and all of life on Earth today, they usually mention nuclear, chemical and bacteriological weapons, but forget about one more truly terrible weapons of mass destruction, aimed primarily at the human brain. This is information, propaganda and agitation."

Valentin Falin, who recently died aged 92.

More on what he thought (some of it quite extreme) here:

http://www.newsilkstrategies.com/news–analysis/the-us-goal-is-to-destroy-russia-ten-quotes-by-valentin-falin

Anon | Feb 27, 2018 3:46:29 PM | 69

John Gilberts | Sad Canuck

ITs the classical propaganda campaign, Nato+western media, another standard psyop stunt earlier by the same "troll":

Russia is trying to cause unrest in Germany to topple Merkel, senior NATO expert says

https://www.dailysabah.com/europe/2016/03/06/russia-trying-to-create-unrest-in-germany-to-topple-merkel-senior-nato-expert-says

John Gilberts | Feb 27, 2018 8:21:44 PM | 86

"Huge Cash Infusion"? Hardly...

Liberals Pitch $500 Million Cyber Security Plan

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2018/02/27/liberals-pitch-500-million-cyber-security-plan.html

"Canada's electronic spy agency takes a central role in new cyber security strategy, will see budget boosts."

This is what happens when you have 'Five Eyes' but no brains!

[Feb 26, 2018] State Department Troll Farm Receives Huge Cash Infusion

Notable quotes:
"... "This funding is critical to ensuring that we continue an aggressive response to malign influence and disinformation and that we can leverage deeper partnerships with our allies, Silicon Valley, and other partners in this fight," said Under Secretary Goldstein. "It is not merely a defensive posture that we should take, we also need to be on the offensive. ..."
"... Israel is long known for such information operations in which its paid trolls not only comment on issues on social media but actively manipulate Wikipedia entries. Such astroturfing has since become a common tool in commercial marketing campaigns. ..."
"... With regard to the larger issue, it seems that the US is getting more and more like its allies Ukraine (drives out any press concerned with printing the truth, relies on a bombastic and entirely false narrative to try and convince its hapless citizens that all is great and everything is Russia's fault) and Israel (an early leader in manipulating online info as b states). ..."
"... If it sounds like a PR monkey banging away on a regurgitated theme, it probably is. For example, the endless repetition in US media about "Syrian chemical weapons attacks" with no on-the-ground supporting evidence is typical of a Rendon Group disinformation campaign; so then they hire a hundred trolls to post outraged comments about 'Syrian chemical weapons use' in comment sections and on twitter; then they hire some State Department intern to write a book about the horrors of the Assad regime, and at the end they collect their $10 million paycheck. ..."
"... The hypocrisy of the U$A continues to be staggering.. If the collective IQ's of the general public approached double digits, the disinformation and propaganda afoot, couldn't gain much traction. As comedian Richard Pryor once said, " Who you gonna' believe, the propagandists, or your lying eyes." ..."
"... money for propaganda... that was back in 1984 - we have progressed from Orwell's version of reality to a new one where reality is what you make of it... meanwhile there will be more dead people that the sponsors of these troll farms, could care less about... although they will frame it - 180% of that... ..."
Feb 26, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

The U.S. State Department will increase its online trolling capabilities and up its support for meddling in other countries. The Hill reports :

The State Department is launching a $40 million initiative to crack down on foreign propaganda and disinformation amid widespread concerns about future Russian efforts to interfere in elections.

The department announced Monday that it signed a deal with the Pentagon to transfer $40 million from the Defense Department's coffers to bolster the Global Engagement Center, an office set up at State during the Obama years to expose and counter foreign propaganda and disinformation.

The professed reason for the new funding is the alleged but unproven "Russian meddling" in the U.S. election campaign. U.S. Special Counsel Mueller indicted 13 Russians for what is claimed to be interference but which is likely mere commercial activity.

The announcement by the State Department explains that this new money will not only be used for measures against foreign trolling but to actively meddle in countries abroad:

Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Steve Goldstein said the transfer of funds announced today reiterates the United States' commitment to the fight.

"This funding is critical to ensuring that we continue an aggressive response to malign influence and disinformation and that we can leverage deeper partnerships with our allies, Silicon Valley, and other partners in this fight," said Under Secretary Goldstein. "It is not merely a defensive posture that we should take, we also need to be on the offensive. "

The mentioning of Silicon Valley is of interest. The big Silicon Valley companies Google, Facebook and Twitter were heavily involved in the U.S. election campaign. The companies embedded people within the campaigns to advise them how to reach a maximum trolling effect:

While the companies call it standard practice to work hand-in-hand with high-spending advertisers like political campaigns, the new research details how the staffers assigned to the 2016 candidates frequently acted more like political operatives, doing things like suggesting methods to target difficult-to-reach voters online, helping to tee up responses to likely lines of attack during debates, and scanning candidate calendars to recommend ad pushes around upcoming speeches.

In May 2016 the Hillary Clinton campaign even set up her own troll farm :

Hillary Clinton's well-heeled backers have opened a new frontier in digital campaigning, one that seems to have been inspired by some of the Internet's worst instincts. Correct the Record, a super PAC coordinating with Clinton's campaign, is spending some $1 million to find and confront social media users who post unflattering messages about the Democratic front-runner.

In effect, the effort aims to spend a large sum of money to increase the amount of trolling that already exists online.

Clinton is quite experienced in such issues. In 2009, during protests in Iran, then Secretary of State Clinton pushed Twitter to defer maintenance of its system to "help" the protesters. In 2010 USAid, under the State Department set up a Twitter-like service to meddle in Cuba.

The foreign policy advisor of Hillery Clinton's campaign, Laura Rosenberger, initiated and runs the Hamilton68 project which falsely explains any mentioning of issues disliked by its neo-conservative backers as the result of nefarious "Russian meddling".

The State Department can build on that and other experience.

Since at least 2011 the U.S. military is manipulating social media via sock puppets and trolls:

A Californian corporation has been awarded a contract with United States Central Command (Centcom), which oversees US armed operations in the Middle East and Central Asia, to develop what is described as an "online persona management service" that will allow one US serviceman or woman to control up to 10 separate identities based all over the world.
...
The Centcom contract stipulates that each fake online persona must have a convincing background, history and supporting details, and that up to 50 US-based controllers should be able to operate false identities from their workstations "without fear of being discovered by sophisticated adversaries".

It was then wisely predicted that other countries would follow up:

The discovery that the US military is developing false online personalities – known to users of social media as "sock puppets" – could also encourage other governments, private companies and non-government organisations to do the same.

Israel is long known for such information operations in which its paid trolls not only comment on issues on social media but actively manipulate Wikipedia entries. Such astroturfing has since become a common tool in commercial marketing campaigns.

With the new money the State Department will expand its Global Engagement Center (GEC) which is running "public diplomacy", aka propaganda, abroad:

The Fund will be a key part of the GEC's partnerships with local civil society organizations, NGOs, media providers, and content creators to counter propaganda and disinformation. The Fund will also drive the use of innovative messaging and data science techniques.

Separately, the GEC will initiate a series of pilot projects developed with the Department of Defense that are designed to counter propaganda and disinformation. Those projects will be supported by Department of Defense funding.

This money will be in addition to the large funds the CIA traditionally spends on manipulating foreign media:

"We've been doing this kind of thing since the C.I.A. was created in 1947," said Mr. Johnson, now at the University of Georgia. "We've used posters, pamphlets, mailers, banners -- you name it. We've planted false information in foreign newspapers. We've used what the British call 'King George's cavalry': suitcases of cash."
...
C.I.A. officials told Mr. Johnson in the late 1980s that "insertions" of information into foreign news media, mostly accurate but sometimes false, were running at 70 to 80 a day.

Part of the new State Department money will be used to provide grants. If online trolling or sock puppetry is your thing, you may want to apply now.

Posted by b on February 26, 2018 at 02:02 PM | Permalink

Comments

nhs , Feb 26, 2018 2:34:39 PM | 1

The US propaganda machine has just confirmed what establishment's worst nightmare would be
Peter AU 1 , Feb 26, 2018 2:40:29 PM | 2
"to find and confront social media users who post unflattering messages about the Democratic front-runner"

I call these social media watchers rather than trolls. Rather than simply trying to disrupt any and all social media threads they don't like, social media watchers look for comments or comment threads that are disparaging or damaging to their employer.

WorldBLee , Feb 26, 2018 2:49:32 PM | 3
#2 @Peter AU 1 - I would say the language "to find and CONFRONT" sounds pretty much like troll behavior.

With regard to the larger issue, it seems that the US is getting more and more like its allies Ukraine (drives out any press concerned with printing the truth, relies on a bombastic and entirely false narrative to try and convince its hapless citizens that all is great and everything is Russia's fault) and Israel (an early leader in manipulating online info as b states).

Don Bacon , Feb 26, 2018 2:51:50 PM | 4
That $40 million will probably be pissed away on a couple sweetheart contracts to Tillerson friends and nobody will see a difference. US State Department propaganda programs, labeled as "public diplomacy" and other monikers, have been around for a long time but haven't been executed very well.

From the State Dept. historian office, 2013: . .(excerpt):

Public Diplomacy Is Still in Its Adolescent Stage in the State Department , etc.

. . . The process of convergence has been evolutionary. Secretary Powell grasped the power of the information revolution, reallocated positions and resources from traditional diplomatic posting to new areas and recognized the power of satellite television to move publics and constrain governments even in authoritarian regimes. Secretary Rice forwarded this reconceptualization under the rubric of "Transformational Diplomacy," which sought to help people transform their own lives and the relationship between state and society. Secretary Clinton continued the theme under the concept of "Smart Power." "Person-to-person diplomacy in today's work is as important as what we do in official meetings in national capitals across the globe," Clinton said in 2010.The work done by PD officials in Arab Spring countries beginning in 2011 was as much about capacity-building as advocating U.S. policies or directly trying to explain American culture. . . here

notlurking , Feb 26, 2018 2:55:14 PM | 5
I am retired and can use some extra change....just kidding!!!....
nonsense factory , Feb 26, 2018 3:18:15 PM | 6
Prior efforts were targeted more at traditional news outlets, this is just an expansion into social media along the lines of previous work, example A being the Rendon Group in Iraq, etc. https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Rendon_Group

If it sounds like a PR monkey banging away on a regurgitated theme, it probably is. For example, the endless repetition in US media about "Syrian chemical weapons attacks" with no on-the-ground supporting evidence is typical of a Rendon Group disinformation campaign; so then they hire a hundred trolls to post outraged comments about 'Syrian chemical weapons use' in comment sections and on twitter; then they hire some State Department intern to write a book about the horrors of the Assad regime, and at the end they collect their $10 million paycheck.

Tediousness, defined.

Peter AU 1 , Feb 26, 2018 3:19:30 PM | 7
WorldBLee 2

Media watchers target specific comments or comment threads, in the case stated by b, those disparaging or damaging to Clinton.

What I term trolls target blogs or social media accounts that are considered targets, no matter the content of a particular article or comment thread. Social media media watchers are a little more specialized than trolls and look for specific content.

nonsense factory , Feb 26, 2018 3:23:52 PM | 8
P.S. it's funny that you can find out what these clowns are up to by looking for job listings and salary reports:

The Rendon Group Social Media Specialist Salary | Glassdoor

Average [monthly] salaries for The Rendon Group Social Media Specialist: $2,520. The Rendon Group salary trends based on salaries posted anonymously by The Rendon Group employees.

Talk about a soul-destroying job. Right up there with Wikipedia page editor.

Peter AU 1 , Feb 26, 2018 3:27:48 PM | 9
nonsense factory 8. Money looks good. Plenty of people that dont give a shit about their soul will take it up.
la Cariatide , Feb 26, 2018 3:40:19 PM | 11
http://www.voltairenet.org/article194715.html
NemesisCalling , Feb 26, 2018 4:08:38 PM | 12
@7 peter

I see what you are alluding to, but the only problem with it is that, irrespective of the differing definitions, at heart, these infiltrators are a disrupting force on the message boards, whether paid to be or not. Their medium is disruption and obfuscation. I tried to wade into the neoliberal viper's den at slate.com un the past to post "alt-right" stuff and was quickly attacked by multiple avatars.

In essence, one troll disrupts because he has a need for recognition, and the latter disrupts for money. Both are netgain for the troll and loss for the rest of us.

ben , Feb 26, 2018 4:09:30 PM | 13
The hypocrisy of the U$A continues to be staggering.. If the collective IQ's of the general public approached double digits, the disinformation and propaganda afoot, couldn't gain much traction. As comedian Richard Pryor once said, " Who you gonna' believe, the propagandists, or your lying eyes."

Turn off your I phones, and think a little.

james , Feb 26, 2018 4:19:32 PM | 14
thanks b... troll farms looks like a good name for it... farming for the empire.. they could call it that too.. russia as trend setter, lol.. i don't think so!

speaking of troll farms, i see max Blumenthal came out with some 'about time' comments on the sad kettle of fish called 'democracy now'... here is his tweet - "If @democracynow is going to push the neocon project of regime change in Syria so relentlessly and without debate, it should drop the high minded literary NPR aesthetic and just host Nikki Haley for a friendly one-on-one #EstablishmentNow https://twitter.com/democracynow/status/967123918237655041
7:07 AM - Feb 25, 2018 "

money for propaganda... that was back in 1984 - we have progressed from Orwell's version of reality to a new one where reality is what you make of it... meanwhile there will be more dead people that the sponsors of these troll farms, could care less about... although they will frame it - 180% of that...

NemesisCalling , Feb 26, 2018 4:19:33 PM | 15
The silver lining here is that the state dept. is in a sense admitting that there is nothing "in the pipe" relating to outright censorship whether through nefarious agreements between ISP providers and the IC via the repeal of net neutrality.

$40 mil is a lot for liberal college graduates however.

Jen , Feb 26, 2018 4:20:59 PM | 16
Nonsense Factory @ 8, Peter AU 1 @ 9: There are plenty of communities in rural Australia who'd be glad to have troll farms paying that sort of money (even as Australian dollars - 1 Australian dollar being worth about US$0.76 at this time of posting) a month. Real farmers could do trolling on the side during slow seasons of the year and make some money.
karlof1 , Feb 26, 2018 4:26:45 PM | 17
What we need are some Mole Trolls, or maybe that's Troll Moles--double agents if you will that work for 6-12 months recording 100% of all they do then reveal it all in an expose.
Ian , Feb 26, 2018 5:21:58 PM | 18
Getting ready for mid-terms. It's going to be interesting to see if the Democrats get wiped off the map. They should be able to hire quite a few people for $40 million. Don't be surprised if they deploy AI in the first wave, then follow up with a real person.

ben @13:

Turn off your I phones, and think a little.

ROFL After wandering aimlessly in the mall with Her Majesty over the weekend, I'm not sure if that's even possible now.

Piotr Berman , Feb 26, 2018 5:23:20 PM | 19
Hillary Clinton sat on a wall,
Hillary Clinton had a great fall;
All the DNC stooges and all her trolls
Couldn't put her campaign again on the roll.

[department of lame rhymes]

Piotr Berman , Feb 26, 2018 5:29:18 PM | 20
I am retired and can use some extra change....just kidding!!!....

Posted by: notlurking | Feb 26, 2018 2:55:14 PM | 5

Foolish human, who needs the likes of you! Regards, Chief Bot

pantaraxia , Feb 26, 2018 6:42:36 PM | 21
"The big Silicon Valley companies Google, Facebook and Twitter were heavily involved in the U.S. election campaign. The companies embedded people within the campaigns to advise them how to reach a maximum trolling effect:"

It went much further than that . Google actually tweaked its algorithms to alter search recommendations in favor of the Clinton campaign. A comparative analysis of search engines Google, Bing and Yahoo showed that Google differed significantly from the other two in producing search recommendations relevant to Clinton.

Google Manipulates Search Results To Favor Hillary Clinton - Jimmy Dore
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MICXf6viakc

But , but, but...Russia!!!

Nothing to see her folks. Carry on.

che , Feb 26, 2018 6:47:53 PM | 22
The entire U.S. MSM is a F'ing troll farm, disinformation, Orwellian world on steroids. The U.S. public is fed a constant never ending stream of complete Bull sh**, self serving crap. How to stop it is the only question, to stop the impunity with which these criminals like Bush and Trump and Obama and Mattis et.al. lie with their pants on fire and .....they all suck .01% dick.
Fec , Feb 26, 2018 8:19:04 PM | 23
@8 Nonsense Factory

Ahmed Nafeez exposed The Rendon Group and the Pentagon's Highlands Forum a few years ago.

And then there's today's nonsense.

Are You a Russian Troll?

Curtis , Feb 26, 2018 8:44:21 PM | 24
It's surprising to see the NYT admit the US does it, too. The alt media has been all over this including Corbett's recent video with the Woolsey interview with Fox News where he laughs it off and then says it was for a good cause.
Curtis , Feb 26, 2018 8:47:09 PM | 25
Hillary's Troll Farm = Lipstick on a pig.
Fec , Feb 26, 2018 8:51:55 PM | 26
From Nafeez Ahmed :
Two days before 9/11, Condoleeza Rice received the draft of a formal National Security Presidential Directive that Bush was expected to sign immediately. The directive contained a comprehensive plan to launch a global war on al-Qaeda , including an "imminent" invasion of Afghanistan to topple the Taliban. The directive was approved by the highest levels of the White House and officials of the National Security Council, including of course Rice and Rumsfeld. The same NSC officials were simultaneously running the Dhabol Working Group to secure the Indian power plant deal for Enron's Trans-Afghan pipeline project. The next day, one day before 9/11, the Bush administration formally agreed on the plan to attack the Taliban.
Fec , Feb 26, 2018 9:01:10 PM | 27
From Nafeez Ahmed :

The Highlands Forum has thus played a leading role in defining the Pentagon's entire conceptualization of the 'war on terror.' Irving Wladawsky-Berger, a retired IMB vice president who co-chaired the President's Information Technology Advisory Committee from 1997 to 2001, described his experience of one 2007 Forum meeting in telling terms:

"Then there is the War on Terror, which DoD has started to refer to as the Long War, a term that I first heard at the Forum. It seems very appropriate to describe the overall conflict in which we now find ourselves. This is a truly global conflict the conflicts we are now in have much more of the feel of a battle of civilizations or cultures trying to destroy our very way of life and impose their own."
Debsisdead , Feb 26, 2018 9:01:42 PM | 28
Posted by: Fec | Feb 26, 2018 8:19:04 PM | 23

Yeah well since the writer of the 'quiz' exposes themself as bein a troll of the worst sort there is nothing to be said. I'm currently attempting to ingest only those newstories where the publisher provides space for feedback from readers since if a story is truthful it should be able to withstand challenge. yeah riight cos that means there's bugger all out there anymore. The biggest 'win' populism has had this far is in driving all feedback off all sites with a readership of more than a few hundred. Many of those that do allow feedback only permit humans with credentialed facebook or google accounts to indulge and the comments are only visible to similarly logged in types. That tells us a lot about the lack of faith the corporate media actually have in the nonsense they publish.

Of course 'trolls' are the ones held to be the guilty for causing this but if you actually watch what happens in a feedback column such as the rare occasions when the graun still permits CIF comments it isn't the deliberately offensive arseholes spouting the usual cliches who get deleted, it is those who put forward a considered argument which details why the original writer has reached a faulty conclusion.

We all know this yet it seems as though none of us are prepared to confront it properly as the censorship it is.
IMO media outlets which continually lie or at least distort the truth to advance a particular agenda need to be called to account.
Massed pickets outside newsrooms would be a good way cos as much as media hate us loudmouths who won't swallow their bromides, they like their competition even less. A decently organised picket of NYT, WaPo or the Graun would be news in every other spineless, propagandising & slug-featured media entity.

Lozion , Feb 26, 2018 9:09:10 PM | 29
Cant wait to see the big new shiny gold GEC logo, AMC & GMC anyone? ;)
Fec , Feb 26, 2018 9:17:57 PM | 30
@ 28 Debsisdead

Said troll was published in Richmond and God only knows who else picked it up. I refuted it in the comments as best I could, also excerpting MOA. Regardless:

From Ahmed Nafeez :

Among Rendon's activities was the creation of Ahmed Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress (INC) on behalf of the CIA, a group of Iraqi exiles tasked with disseminating propaganda, including much of the false intelligence about WMD . That process had begun concertedly under the administration of George H W. Bush, then rumbled along under Clinton with little fanfare, before escalating after 9/11 under George W. Bush. Rendon thus played a large role in the manufacture of inaccurate and false news stories relating to Iraq under lucrative CIA and Pentagon contracts  --  and he did so in the period running up to the 2003 invasion as an advisor to Bush's National Security Council: the same NSC, of course, that planned the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, achieved with input from Enron executives who were simultaneously engaging the Pentagon Highlands Forum.

https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/why-google-made-the-nsa-2a80584c9c1
Fec , Feb 26, 2018 9:26:22 PM | 31
From Ahmed Nafeez :
Mass surveillance and data-mining also now has a distinctive operational purpose in assisting with the lethal execution of special operations, selecting targets for the CIA's drone strike kill lists via dubious algorithms, for instance, along with providing geospatial and other information for combatant commanders on land, air and sea, among many other functions. A single social media post on Twitter or Facebook is enough to trigger being placed on secret terrorism watch-lists solely due to a vaguely defined hunch or suspicion; and can potentially even land a suspect on a kill list.
Fec , Feb 26, 2018 9:40:37 PM | 32
From Ahmed Nafeez :
In 2011, the Forum hosted two DARPA-funded scientists, Antonio and Hanna Damasio, who are principal investigators in the 'Neurobiology of Narrative Framing' project at the University of Southern California. Evoking Zalman's emphasis on the need for Pentagon psychological operations to deploy "empathetic influence," the new DARPA-backed project aims to investigate how narratives often appeal "to strong, sacred values in order to evoke an emotional response," but in different ways across different cultures

This goes a long way toward explaining what is occurring in Hollywood and Nashville.

[Feb 26, 2018] Democrat Memo Lays Egg by Publius Tacitus

Highly recommended!
Carter Page FISA warrant does much, much more than surveille Page himself -- it permits surveillance of most of the Trump campaign.
Notable quotes:
"... The whole Memo discussion above concerns the FBI's data manipulations to cast Carter Page as a spy worthy of an Article 1 warrant by the FISC. As I explained above, once Admiral Rogers closed the FBI's access to the NSA mega-file, the Bureau developed several work-arounds to explain how the FBI had data from the mega-file that they were mining through our Ambassador to the UN. ..."
"... Fusion GPS immediately hired the wife of FBI manager Bruce Ohr, Nellie, and Christopher Steele. Bruce handed material to Nellie, Nellie to Christopher. He repackaged the material claiming it was provided by very personal "Russian contacts" and the FBI then handed that laundered Steele material to the FISC. ..."
"... This laundering operation was exposed with a mistake concerning Trump's lawyer Michael Cohen. Michael Cohen was actually attending a family celebration and a ball game here in the US when he supposedly met Steele's "Russian contacts" in Prague. Steele's contacts, who exist only in his mind, dutifully confirmed that the meeting took place in Prague. ..."
"... Bill Binney, on Jimmy Dore show, said that FISA warrant enabled "two hop" surveillance. If so, then Carter Page FISA warrant does much, much more than surveille Page himself -- it permits surveillance of most of the Trump campaign. ..."
"... My "dog that didn't bark" question about Carter Page - if Carter Page was such a known danger, why didn't the FBI warn the Trump Campaign against letting him become involved in the campaign? ..."
"... The dog that didn't bark - if the Schiff Memo were so powerful, such a slam dunk, every MSM outlet in the western world would be trumpeting it to the skies and talking about nothing but. They seem to be barely able to acknowledge the existence of the Memo. ..."
"... As it happens, I think the suggestion that Steele's role may have been, in very substantial measure, to give the impression that material from other source was the product of a high-quality 'humint' investigation merits being taken extremely seriously. ..."
"... Schiff's defence sounded so, pardon the pun, shifty and did nothing to really counter the main point Nunes made when he released his memo. ..."
"... Schiff's memo was basically a vendetta against persons. Page and Papadopolis (sp?) are obviously the unpopular kids in the minds of the "mean girl" Democrats because they had links to Trump, the real threat to the popular girl Democrats. ..."
"... Funnily enough the question raised in your excerpt is exactly what I've been thinking since reading a post by TTG about Carter Page being an important FBI informant and state witness to the prosecution of Russian espionage. ..."
"... If the FBI believed Page had become a Russian spy it would have been easy due to their prior relationship with him to interview him and if he lied, to prosecute him for the process crime of perjury. That is such a slam dunk that the fact they didn't do that makes it seem there's something fishy there. ..."
"... And they never verified Steele's allegation that Page met with Sechin and Divyekin which would have been easy to do and now it seems was pure fabrication. Instead the FBI and DOJ lied and misrepresented to FISC to get a surveillance warrant on Page. This seems rather fishy. I speculate they did that to gain incidental collection on members of the Trump campaign. ..."
"... I note that Page hasn't been charged by the DOJ for any crime. ..."
"... Instead of working hard to protect national security, the FBI/CIA/DOJ' senior-idiots (accustomed to comfort and hefty checks) have been politicking and meddling in the electoral process. Meanwhile, the foreign nationals were left free to surf congressional computers – for years! (See Awan affair) and the "natives" like Clinton et al have been making a lot of money by getting huge bribes from Russians and Saudis (see Uranium One, involving Mueller for all other people). ..."
"... Carter Page during his period of cooperation with the FBI, almost certainly was handled by Agents assigned to a field office. I wonder what they had to say, assuming they even knew, about HQ opening a CI case targeting their former cooperating witness for FISA coverage. It will be very interesting to see who handled Steele. Strzok? ..."
"... What was the compelling evidence and who furnished it to turn a US Naval Academy graduate, and presumably a Naval Officer with a readily accessible track record in service, into the targeted subject of an espionage investigation. Did he even have any current access to classified information? This is not looking good. ..."
"... Carter Page is indeed a puzzlement. I don't see any account of him being an FBI informant, but he was a witness in the investigation and trial of the three SVR officers who tried to recruit him in 2013. ..."
"... Obama claimed something to the effect that, it turns out I am pretty good at killing people. This was in reference to the drone program and assume I don't need to footnote. Perhaps he got the notion that his administration was pretty good at intelligence. ..."
Feb 26, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

After reading the memo championed by Democrat Adam Schiff , which was promised to rebut the memo produced by the Republican majority on the House Intel Committee, I was reminded of a Peggy Lee song-- Is That All There Is?

Devin Nunes and his team have saved me the effort of pointing out the problems with the Schiff rebuttal. I am presenting that in full. Here is the bottomline--we now know that Christopher Steele was not a "one-time Charlie." He had a longstanding covert relationship as an FBI intelligence asset. The Democrat memo does nothing to dispute that fact.

It also is clear that DOJ and FBI personnel engaged in unprofessional (and possibly illegal) conduct with respect to making representations to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). Three key points on this front--1: The so-called Steele dossier was proffered as evidence to the FISC without fully disclosing that Steele was a covert asset being paid for his work and that Democrat political operatives were also paying him; 2: Senior DOJ officials, particularly Bruce Our, were totally comprised yet continued to be involved in the process; and 3: The Democrats insist that Carter Page is a bad guy and deserves to be investigated. Yet, no charges have been filed against him and the allegations leveled in the Steele dossier were dismissed by former FBI Director Comey as "salacious and unverified."

Anyway, here are the main points from the Democrat memo and the Republican response.

Publius Tacitus -> steve... , 25 February 2018 at 03:12 PM

Steve,

Page was a campaign nobody. Never had a meeting with Trump. Never briefed Trump. That's what is one of the bizarre aspects of this.

james , 25 February 2018 at 08:53 PM
from page 2 of the pdf - https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/hpsci_redacted_minority_memo.pdf

"George Papadopoulos revealed [redacted] that individuals linked to Russia, who took interest in Papadopoulos as a Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, informed him in late April 2016 that Russia [two lines redacted]. Papadopoulos's disclosure, moreover, occurred against the backdrop of Russia's aggressive covert campaign to influence our elections, which the FBI was already monitoring. We would later learn in Papadopoulos's plea that the information the Russians could assist by anonymously releasing were thousands of Hillary Clinton emails."

my problem with this is wikileaks released the e mails via a search-able archive on march 16th 2016...

i still don't see how anything papadopolous said is relevant time wise.. what am i missing here, other then the obvious fact papadopolous looks like a lousy liar.. apparently he got this from Joseph Mifsud who as it turns out was 'director of the London Academy of Diplomacy' and etc - according to the nyt here - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/31/world/europe/russia-us-election-joseph-mifsud.html

and from the nyt article "Mr. Papadopoulos has pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I. about his conversations with the "professor." Mr. Mifsud is referred to in the papers only as "the professor," based in London, but a Senate aide familiar with emails involving Mr. Mifsud -- lawmakers in both the Senate and the House are investigating Russia's role in the election -- confirmed that he was the person cited."

the whole thing of russia influencing the usa election seems built on via a number of sketchy characters at best..

at any rate - this is what emptywheel thinks is relevant in an otherwise irrelevant memo from schiff... i don't get how it is!

RC said in reply to Fred ... , 25 February 2018 at 09:50 PM
Fred,

The whole Memo discussion above concerns the FBI's data manipulations to cast Carter Page as a spy worthy of an Article 1 warrant by the FISC. As I explained above, once Admiral Rogers closed the FBI's access to the NSA mega-file, the Bureau developed several work-arounds to explain how the FBI had data from the mega-file that they were mining through our Ambassador to the UN.

Fusion GPS immediately hired the wife of FBI manager Bruce Ohr, Nellie, and Christopher Steele. Bruce handed material to Nellie, Nellie to Christopher. He repackaged the material claiming it was provided by very personal "Russian contacts" and the FBI then handed that laundered Steele material to the FISC.

This laundering operation was exposed with a mistake concerning Trump's lawyer Michael Cohen. Michael Cohen was actually attending a family celebration and a ball game here in the US when he supposedly met Steele's "Russian contacts" in Prague. Steele's contacts, who exist only in his mind, dutifully confirmed that the meeting took place in Prague.

I wish I might be a sock-puppet, but too many of my condo neighbors know otherwise. My favorite hobby in retirement is writing films for children, in which white hats succeed and black hats don't.

Steve McIntyre , 25 February 2018 at 10:25 PM
Bill Binney, on Jimmy Dore show, said that FISA warrant enabled "two hop" surveillance. If so, then Carter Page FISA warrant does much, much more than surveille Page himself -- it permits surveillance of most of the Trump campaign.
Tel said in reply to Boronx... , 25 February 2018 at 10:40 PM
"The entire case against the FBI rests on the idea that they cannot seek a warrant using biased evidence."
The FBI can use any evidence that is convincing to a judge.

Ahhhh, but they cannot legally tell lies to the judge during that process.

RC , 25 February 2018 at 11:19 PM
Hi Fred,

In some ways, being a sock-puppet and napping, in a bureau drawer (?), between soliloquies would be rather peaceful. Alas, too many of my condo neighbors know me to be otherwise !

Do check out sites such as The Conservative Treehouse and you will discover that Admiral Rogers' closing the NSA mega-file to the FBI led to Nellie Ohr's & Christopher Steele's information laundering operation. Other sites yet will introduce you to FISC Chief Judge Rosemary Collyer's 99-page rebuke of the FBI for their defalcations.

At a minimum, you won't be surprised when a plethora of FBI / DOJ / State Department employees are found guilty and sent to prison.

Enrico Malatesta , 26 February 2018 at 12:06 AM
My "dog that didn't bark" question about Carter Page - if Carter Page was such a known danger, why didn't the FBI warn the Trump Campaign against letting him become involved in the campaign?
blue peacock , 26 February 2018 at 03:53 AM
A cogent critique of the Schiff memo and how it doesn't aid the Democrats.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/schiff-memo-russia-investigation-harms-democrats-more-than-helps-them/

The memo does note that "the FBI also interviewed Page multiple times about his Russian intelligence contacts." Apparently, these interviews stretch back to 2013. The memo also lets slip that there was at least one more interview with Page in March 2016, before the counterintelligence investigation began. We must assume that Page was a truthful informant since his information was used in a prosecution against Russian spies and Page himself has never been accused of lying to the FBI .

So . . . here's the question: When Steele brought the FBI his unverified allegations that Page had met with Sechin and Divyekin, why didn't the FBI call Page in for an interview rather than subject him to FISA surveillance? Lest you wonder, this is not an instance of me second-guessing the Bureau with an investigative plan I think would have been better. It is a requirement of FISA law.

When the FBI and DOJ apply for a FISA warrant, they must convince the court that surveillance -- a highly intrusive tactic by which the government monitors all of an American citizen's electronic communications -- is necessary because the foreign-intelligence information the government seeks "cannot reasonably be obtained by normal investigative techniques." (See FISA, Section 1804(a)(6)(C) of Title 50, U.S. Code.) Normal investigative techniques include interviewing the subject. There are, of course, situations in which such alternative investigative techniques will inevitably fail -- a mafia don or a jihadist is not likely to sit down with FBI agents and tell them everything he knows. But Carter Page was not only likely to do so, he had a documented history of providing information to the FBI .

There's a reason why Nunes, Goodlatte and Grassley are focused on the Clinton commissioned Fusion GPS dossier, Christopher Steele and the FISA Title 1 warrant on Carter Page. It is the simplest path to the conspiracy at the Obama administration.

jonst said in reply to Boronx... , 26 February 2018 at 09:35 AM
My, street sense, and experience as a lawyer tells me that -- "tips, confessions.." from informants is true Steve. But the bar for going after a drug dealer, or fence, or kiddie porn type, is supposed -- one assumes -- to be a hell of a lot lower than going after the nominee for President of a major political party.
Green Zone Café , 26 February 2018 at 11:11 AM
Welcome to the criminal defense world. Everyday, hundreds of warrants based on the statements of criminals, paid informers, bitter ex-girlfriends, lying cops, and even non-existent "confidential informants" are issued. With all but the most blatant provably false affidavits, questionable searches are upheld by judges.

At this point I'm just waiting for Mueller's final indictments and the report. The facts will be there, or they won't.

If they are, try arguing a Motion to Suppress Evidence in the impeachment trial. That'll get you far . . .

Sid Finster , 26 February 2018 at 11:14 AM
The dog that didn't bark - if the Schiff Memo were so powerful, such a slam dunk, every MSM outlet in the western world would be trumpeting it to the skies and talking about nothing but. They seem to be barely able to acknowledge the existence of the Memo.
David Habakkuk -> RC... , 26 February 2018 at 11:28 AM
RC,

It really does help if, when you make claims, you link to the source so that others can evaluate them. In the case of the claims you are making, the source is clearly a post two days ago by 'sundance' on the 'Conservative Treehouse' site entitled 'Tying All The Loose Threads Together – DOJ, FBI, DoS, White House: "Operation Latitude" '

(See https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/02/24/tying-all-the-loose-threads-together-doj-fbi-dos-white-house-operation-latitude/ .)

As it happens, I think the suggestion that Steele's role may have been, in very substantial measure, to give the impression that material from other source was the product of a high-quality 'humint' investigation merits being taken extremely seriously.

However, to repeat claims by 'sundance', while not taking the – rather minimal – amount of trouble required to provide the link which allows others to evaluate them, simply puts people's backs up and makes them less likely to take what you are suggesting seriously.

DianaLC , 26 February 2018 at 01:55 PM
PT,

In the words of Emily Dickinson, I'm nobody. So., I come here to test my reaction when I read what the Democrats wrote -- though it was hard to get any continuity while reading because of all the big black lines--I was completely underwhelmed. I hate it when someone claims that what he/she is going to say will be something that will change my entire Weltanschauung and it turns out to be a nothing burger, in today's parance.

So thank you for confirming my opinion of the memo and thanks to others who have commented and who have way more experience and knowledge about how our Swam works (or doesn't work?).

My first reaction before I even tried to read the memo was correct. My first instinct was to judge on the basis of personality, which I know is not often logical. I felt that nothing put out under Schiff's authority could change my mind about the point Nunes made when he put out his mamo. Schiff's defence sounded so, pardon the pun, shifty and did nothing to really counter the main point Nunes made when he released his memo.

Schiff's memo was basically a vendetta against persons. Page and Papadopolis (sp?) are obviously the unpopular kids in the minds of the "mean girl" Democrats because they had links to Trump, the real threat to the popular girl Democrats. All we have to do is hear their names and we should automatically decide that if we want to be popular, we should malign them also so as to malign Trump and gain our entrance into the popular group in the cafeteria.

Jack said in reply to blue peacock... , 26 February 2018 at 02:00 PM
blue peacock,

Thanks for that link.

Funnily enough the question raised in your excerpt is exactly what I've been thinking since reading a post by TTG about Carter Page being an important FBI informant and state witness to the prosecution of Russian espionage.

If the FBI believed Page had become a Russian spy it would have been easy due to their prior relationship with him to interview him and if he lied, to prosecute him for the process crime of perjury. That is such a slam dunk that the fact they didn't do that makes it seem there's something fishy there.

And they never verified Steele's allegation that Page met with Sechin and Divyekin which would have been easy to do and now it seems was pure fabrication. Instead the FBI and DOJ lied and misrepresented to FISC to get a surveillance warrant on Page. This seems rather fishy. I speculate they did that to gain incidental collection on members of the Trump campaign.

I note that Page hasn't been charged by the DOJ for any crime. I agree with you that the investigation of the "conspiracy" is moving along well despite the roadblocks by the DOJ. Goodlatte who has seen the FISA application has now requested all the DOJ testimony from FISC. In a recent interview Rep. Ratcliffe who has also seen the FISA application made an interesting point that since in a FISC proceeding the accused has no ability to challenge the prosecution's claims, the prosecution has an affirmative obligation under FISA to present all the evidence, which the DOJ did not do but instead knowingly mislead the court.

It looks like we're heading towards another special counsel to investigate law enforcement and the IC regarding both the Trump and Clinton counter-intelligence investigations as well as the IC and media propaganda efforts to build hysteria around the meme of collusion of the Trump campaign with the Russian government. That investigation could lead all the way into the Obama White House.

Anna said in reply to Leaky Ranger... , 26 February 2018 at 02:56 PM
Your answer deserves F.

See post No 14: "...the FBI also interviewed Page multiple times about his Russian intelligence contacts." Apparently, these interviews stretch back to 2013. The memo also lets slip that there was at least one more interview with Page in March 2016, before the counterintelligence investigation began. We must assume that Page was a truthful informant since his information was used in a prosecution against Russian spies and Page himself has never been accused of lying to the FBI."

The case is not closed – it is closing on the high-placed violators of the US Constitution --as well as on their lack of professionalism, sheer incompetence and promiscuous opportunism

Instead of working hard to protect national security, the FBI/CIA/DOJ' senior-idiots (accustomed to comfort and hefty checks) have been politicking and meddling in the electoral process. Meanwhile, the foreign nationals were left free to surf congressional computers – for years! (See Awan affair) and the "natives" like Clinton et al have been making a lot of money by getting huge bribes from Russians and Saudis (see Uranium One, involving Mueller for all other people).

There is another big Q: To what extend both the FBI and the CIA have been infiltrated by Israel-firsters that are loyal to Zion, and how extensive is the damage inflicted by the "duals" on the US.

RC said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 26 February 2018 at 03:30 PM
Thank you David -- will do so in the future.
outthere , 26 February 2018 at 04:30 PM
Some commentators here seem not to know this simple fact: prosecutors in USA have enormous power. They can make mountains of molehills. And their most powerful weapon is the law of conspiracy. Here is an explanation by an experienced attorney:
https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/02/26/thirteen-russians-a-defense-lawyer-decodes-the-mueller-indictments/
Flavius , 26 February 2018 at 05:32 PM
Most unusual, I would say, for an Agent in an upper management position in FBI HQ to open a counter intelligence case and then for all intents and purposes assign it to himself. Cases are normally worked and directly supervised in field offices.

Carter Page during his period of cooperation with the FBI, almost certainly was handled by Agents assigned to a field office. I wonder what they had to say, assuming they even knew, about HQ opening a CI case targeting their former cooperating witness for FISA coverage. It will be very interesting to see who handled Steele. Strzok?

What was the compelling evidence and who furnished it to turn a US Naval Academy graduate, and presumably a Naval Officer with a readily accessible track record in service, into the targeted subject of an espionage investigation. Did he even have any current access to classified information? This is not looking good.

The Twisted Genius -> Jack... , 26 February 2018 at 07:29 PM
Jack,

Carter Page is indeed a puzzlement. I don't see any account of him being an FBI informant, but he was a witness in the investigation and trial of the three SVR officers who tried to recruit him in 2013.

If he was an informant, the FBI would not have had to obtain a FISA warrant to surveil him in 2014. That also raises doubts about how cooperative he was during that investigation and the 2015 Russian spy trial.

Obviously he didn't obstruct the investigation or prosecution or he would have been charged for that long ago. I get the impression he is a lot more wily than most people give him credit for.

Duck1 , 26 February 2018 at 08:37 PM
Obama claimed something to the effect that, it turns out I am pretty good at killing people. This was in reference to the drone program and assume I don't need to footnote. Perhaps he got the notion that his administration was pretty good at intelligence.

[Feb 26, 2018] Et Tu, Bernie by Justin Raimondo

Looks like neoliberals decided to equate widespread anti-neoliberalism and anti-globalization sentiment with pro-Russian propaganda. A very clever and very dirty trick.
What is funny is that Steele dossier and FBI Mayberry Machiavellians machinations actually deprived Sanders a chance to represent Democratic Party. nt that he wanted this badly, he folded eve without major pressure (many be under behind the scenes intimidation due to business dealing of his wife)
Notable quotes:
"... Instead of standing up to the crazies – by which I mean the Democratic party Establishment – and saying that the whole Russia-phobic campaign is based on nothing but hot air and fantasy, he's kowtowing to the very people who are trying to smear him as a Russian agent. Here he is signing on to the Clintonite canon of faith that poor Hillary " had to run against the Russian government " as well as Trump. ..."
"... This is laughable: there's no evidence for this other than Mueller's comical "indictment," which shows that something called the "Internet Research Agency," run by an out-of-work chef, spent a grand total of $100,000 – mostly after the election – on Facebook ads that were both anti-Clinton and anti-Trump. Michael Moore attended one "Russian-sponsored" event – a rally of thousands targeting Trump Tower, and, by the way, the only successful "Russian" event (the pro-Trump events were flops). ..."
"... Not only is Bernie buying into Russia-gate, now that the case for it is collapsing – nearly two years later and there's still no evidence of "collusion" – but he's calling for a full-fledged witch-hunt: ..."
"... Sanders' followers have taken up the hate-on-Russia battle cry with alacrity, with material by the fraudulent fanatic Luke Harding all over the web site of the Democratic Socialists of America. And being the left edge of the Democratic party, DSA will be supporting the very Democratic officeholders and officials who are shouting the loudest about Russia. ..."
"... Oh, he's got money-laundering charges on Paul Manafort and associates, but that has nothing to do with the Trump campaign: it all happened years before Trump ran. He's got Carter Page pleading guilty to lying to the FBI – but it's not clear what this means, exactly, since he's not been charged with a crime after all this time. ..."
"... So no matter what you may think of Trump and his policies, the real question is: will the Deep State and their allies in the media succeed in their bid for power? Will they oust a sitting President and institute a new era in our politics, one in which the political class can exercise its veto over the democratic will of the people? ..."
"... A SPECIAL NOTE : Yes, our matching funds have arrived: a group of donors has gotten together and pledged $30,000 – but there's a catch. We have to match that amount in smaller donations. So now it's up to you. We need your support so we can get back to doing our job – exposing the lies of the War Party. But we can't do it without your tax-deductible donations. ..."
Feb 26, 2018 | original.antiwar.com

Sanders signs on to Russia-gate conspiracy theory

One by one, the plaster gods fall, cracked and crumbled on the ground: the latest is Bernie Sanders, the Great Pinko Hope of the (very few) remaining Democrats with a modicum of sense who reject the "Russia! Russia! Russia!" paranoia of Rep. Adam Schiff and what I call the party's California Crazies. The official Democratic leadership seems to have no real commitment to anything other than fealty to a few well-known oligarchs, who provide the party with needed cash, a burning hatred of Russia – an issue no ordinary voter outside of the Sunshine State loony bin and Washington, D.C. cares about – and exotic issues of interest only to the upper class virtue-signalers who are now their main constituency (e.g., where will trans people go to the bathroom?). Overlaying this potpourri of nothingness, the glue holding it all together, is pure unadulterated hatred: of President Trump, of Trump voters, of Middle America in general, and, of course, fear and loathing of Russia and all things Russian.

And now the one supposedly bright spot in this pit of abysmal darkness has flickered out, with Bernie Sanders, the Ron Paul of the Reds, jumping on the Russia-did-it bandwagon and cowering in the wake of Robert Mueller's laughable "indictment," in which the special prosecutor avers that $100,000 in Facebook ads were designed to throw the election to Trump – and to help Bernie!

Oh no, says Bernie, from his place of exile in the wilds of Vermont, where the Russians did not take over the electrical grid: It wasn't me!

Instead of standing up to the crazies – by which I mean the Democratic party Establishment – and saying that the whole Russia-phobic campaign is based on nothing but hot air and fantasy, he's kowtowing to the very people who are trying to smear him as a Russian agent. Here he is signing on to the Clintonite canon of faith that poor Hillary " had to run against the Russian government " as well as Trump.

This is laughable: there's no evidence for this other than Mueller's comical "indictment," which shows that something called the "Internet Research Agency," run by an out-of-work chef, spent a grand total of $100,000 – mostly after the election – on Facebook ads that were both anti-Clinton and anti-Trump. Michael Moore attended one "Russian-sponsored" event – a rally of thousands targeting Trump Tower, and, by the way, the only successful "Russian" event (the pro-Trump events were flops).

Not only is Bernie buying into Russia-gate, now that the case for it is collapsing – nearly two years later and there's still no evidence of "collusion" – but he's calling for a full-fledged witch-hunt:

"The key issues now are: 1) How we prevent the unwitting manipulation of our electoral and political system by foreign governments. 2) Exposing who was actively consorting with the Russian government's attack on our democracy."

This is the real goal of anti-Trump groups like the " Alliance for Securing Democracy " and their "Hamilton dashboard," which purports to track "pro-Russian" sentiment online: it's the explicit intention of #TheResistance to censor the media with the cooperation of the tech oligarchs like Google, Twitter, and Facebook. It's back to the 1950s, folks, only this time the Thought Police are "liberals," and "socialists" like Bernie and the Bernie Bros.

Sanders' followers have taken up the hate-on-Russia battle cry with alacrity, with material by the fraudulent fanatic Luke Harding all over the web site of the Democratic Socialists of America. And being the left edge of the Democratic party, DSA will be supporting the very Democratic officeholders and officials who are shouting the loudest about Russia.

Coming soon: a congressional "investigation" into "pro-Russian" Americans using the "Hamilton dashboard" and the Southern Poverty Law Center as templates. Remember the House UnAmerican Activities Committee? Well, it's coming back. That's always been in the cards, and now those cards are about to be dealt.

I'll tell you one thing: I would have colluded with the Klingon Empire to prevent Hillary and her band of authoritarian statists and warmongering nutcases from taking the White House. If only the Russians had intervened, they'd have been doing this country – and the world – a great service. Alas, there's not one lick of solid evidence – forensic, documentary, witness testimony – that shows this. Which is what the Mueller investigation is all about: the Democrats are claiming there was interference, and Mueller is out to find corroboration. Except it's been over a year and he's come up with nothing.

Oh, he's got money-laundering charges on Paul Manafort and associates, but that has nothing to do with the Trump campaign: it all happened years before Trump ran. He's got Carter Page pleading guilty to lying to the FBI – but it's not clear what this means, exactly, since he's not been charged with a crime after all this time.

The Deep State's bid for power has hit several roadblocks recently, but it could yet succeed. First, Mueller could indict the President for "obstruction of justice" – a charge derived not from any real criminal activity, but from the investigation itself. I think this is the most probable outcome of all this.

Barring that, however, there is one road they could and probably would go down, given the intensity of their hatred for this President and their overweening power lust. Having gone this far in an attempt to overthrow a sitting President, they can't just stop halfway to their goal. They have to go all the way, or else suffer the consequences – public exposure, and possible criminal charges. In short, if they fail to get Trump on some semi-legal basis, I think they'd welcome his assassination.

The Deep State cannot allow the Trump administration to stand for a number of reasons, the chief one being that the coup is already in progress and there's no stopping it now. The President's enemies are legion, they are powerful, and they are abroad as well as here on American shores. They cannot allow his brand of "America First" nationalism to succeed, or seem to succeed: it conflicts too violently with their globalist vision of a borderless America-centric empire ruled by a coalition of oligarchs, technocrats, and Deep State operatives who've been shaping world events from the shadows for generations.

So no matter what you may think of Trump and his policies, the real question is: will the Deep State and their allies in the media succeed in their bid for power? Will they oust a sitting President and institute a new era in our politics, one in which the political class can exercise its veto over the democratic will of the people?

That's the issue at hand and that's why I spend so much time writing about Trump and his enemies' efforts to destroy him. Because if the Deep State succeeds, the America we knew and loved will be no more. Something else will take its place – and believe me, it won't be pretty.

A SPECIAL NOTE : Yes, our matching funds have arrived: a group of donors has gotten together and pledged $30,000 – but there's a catch. We have to match that amount in smaller donations. So now it's up to you. We need your support so we can get back to doing our job – exposing the lies of the War Party. But we can't do it without your tax-deductible donations.

If we all get together and make that final push we can make our goal. Every donation counts, no matter the amount. This is how we'll finally win the battle for peace: by uniting, despite superficial differences, to support the institutions that are in the front lines of the struggle for a rational foreign policy. And leading the charge is Antiwar.com.

Please make your tax-deductible contribution today.

NOTES IN THE MARGIN

You can check out my Twitter feed by going here . But please note that my tweets are sometimes deliberately provocative, often made in jest, and largely consist of me thinking out loud.

I've written a couple of books, which you might want to peruse. Here is the link for buying the second edition of my 1993 book, Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement , with an Introduction by Prof. George W. Carey , a Foreword by Patrick J. Buchanan, and critical essays by Scott Richert and David Gordon ( ISI Books , 2008).

You can buy An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard (Prometheus Books, 2000), my biography of the great libertarian thinker, here .

[Feb 26, 2018] Why one war when we can heve two! by Eric Margolis

Highly recommended!
This is mainly about the defense of neoliberal empire which is challenge by Russia who does not wants to be Washington vassal and China who is rising economic power that challenge the US world dominance and status quo of dollar as the main reserve currency. There are also some oil related consideration as weakening and dismembering Russia while capturing its oil and gar resources can postpone the day of becoming for the USA and Western Europe.
Notable quotes:
"... `We will continue to prosecute the campaign against terrorists, but great-power competition – not terrorism – is now the primary focus of US national security.' Henceforth Russia and China will be America's main enemies, with Iran and North Korea thrown in for good measure. ..."
"... At the same time, the US is fast running out of Muslim targets to bomb, now that the bogeyman ISIS has vanished into thin air and US air attacks in Syria are being minimized for fear of clashing with Russia. Iran still remains on the US potential hit list. ..."
"... Which brings us back to General 'Mad Dog' Mattis. He is quite right that so-called terrorists (that's anyone who actively opposes the Lex Americana) pose no real life or death threat to the US mainland. ..."
"... Of course, this supposes the US is ready for war. In truth, neither the US and NATO nor Russia are in any way prepared to fight a real war on land, sea and air. Military forces on both sides have been so run down and depleted by little wars and budget cuts that there are serious shortages of war stocks and aging equipment. ..."
"... Key NATO member Germany is in a shambles. Its feminized military, run by a nice but incompetent lady defense minister, could not fight its way out of a paper bag. France is not much better off. The US armed forces and Britain are critically short of spares, munitions, transport, and armor. Russia's once mighty Red Army is short of everything. Both east and west are simply unready for a real war. ..."
"... As if there is any reason for one. There is not. Those jackanapes in the US Congress and media trying to inflate online mischief by 20-something Russian hackers into a second Pearl Harbor are crying 'fire' in a crowded theater. ..."
"... A final respectful note to Gen. Mattis (my dad was a marine): A good general does not pick a fight with two, far–away major powers at once. The trick is to turn them against one another. Declaring a future war against China and Russia is a crazy idea. Only draft-dodgers and generals who lost the Vietnam War could come up with it. ..."
Feb 24, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press

`We will continue to prosecute the campaign against terrorists, but great-power competition – not terrorism – is now the primary focus of US national security.' Henceforth Russia and China will be America's main enemies, with Iran and North Korea thrown in for good measure.

So declared US Secretary of Defense, James Mattis, last week in a statement of profound importance for the world.

For the past seventeen years, the US military has been laying waste to the Muslim world in the faux `war on terrorism.' Afghanistan, Iraq, much of Syria, Somalia, Pakistan – all have been heavily bombed. US B-52's and B-1 heavy bombers have tried to pound those resisting American 'guidance' into submission.

In Afghanistan, America's longest war, President Donald Trump ordered a doubling of bombing against Taliban forces battling US occupation. Now, the US is running very low on bombs, guided munitions and even air-to-air missiles for some reason. Stores of munitions are being rushed from the US Pacific command to the Mideast.

At the same time, the US is fast running out of Muslim targets to bomb, now that the bogeyman ISIS has vanished into thin air and US air attacks in Syria are being minimized for fear of clashing with Russia. Iran still remains on the US potential hit list.

Which brings us back to General 'Mad Dog' Mattis. He is quite right that so-called terrorists (that's anyone who actively opposes the Lex Americana) pose no real life or death threat to the US mainland.

But if so, how then to maintain the $1 trillion US military budget? Well, of course, trot out those good old 'Reds Under Our Beds.' Actually, the Pentagon has been planning a new war with China for the past three years, a mainly air and naval conflict to dominate China's coasts and seas. The Pentagon is loading up on new aircraft, missiles, satellites and naval craft for the next Pacific War, and trying to enlist India as an ally against China.

But what then about Russia? Not so easy. The likely theater for a US-Russia clash is on the Baltic coast, Ukraine, the Black Sea or Syria. In this case, the US would be confronted by the same problem that afflicted France in the fall of 1939.

Few people know that it was France that first attacked Germany, not the other way around. Responding to the German invasion of Poland, France and Britain declared war on Germany. French divisions began to invade Germany's Rhineland. But after a few skirmishes the French high command, under the inept Gen. Maurice Gamelin, didn't know what to do next. Germany was large, and the defensive-minded French did not anticipate occupying its entire country.

After a brief demonstration, the French Army withdrew behind the Maginot Line. Hitler did not counter-attack in hope he could forge a peace treaty with London and Paris. Winston Churchill and his fellow imperialists furiously sought to push Britain into war with Germany. But months of inactivity went by, known as the 'Sitzkrieg' or ' drôle de guerre' until Germany acted decisively.

This would also be America's problem in a war against Russia. How deep into Russia to attack (assuming no use of nuclear weapons)? How to protect ever lengthening supply lines? Napoleon and Hitler faced the same challenges and failed.

Of course, this supposes the US is ready for war. In truth, neither the US and NATO nor Russia are in any way prepared to fight a real war on land, sea and air. Military forces on both sides have been so run down and depleted by little wars and budget cuts that there are serious shortages of war stocks and aging equipment.

Key NATO member Germany is in a shambles. Its feminized military, run by a nice but incompetent lady defense minister, could not fight its way out of a paper bag. France is not much better off. The US armed forces and Britain are critically short of spares, munitions, transport, and armor. Russia's once mighty Red Army is short of everything. Both east and west are simply unready for a real war.

As if there is any reason for one. There is not. Those jackanapes in the US Congress and media trying to inflate online mischief by 20-something Russian hackers into a second Pearl Harbor are crying 'fire' in a crowded theater.

A final respectful note to Gen. Mattis (my dad was a marine): A good general does not pick a fight with two, far–away major powers at once. The trick is to turn them against one another. Declaring a future war against China and Russia is a crazy idea. Only draft-dodgers and generals who lost the Vietnam War could come up with it.

[Feb 25, 2018] Kettle called pot blac: McFaul calls for branding RT foreign agent over involvement in the USA Presidential elections

www.moonofalabama.org

Paulo | Dec 11, 2016 9:24:53 AM | 130

Jesus Christ, US turning to a dictatorship with its info war and censorship. Ex-US envoy to Russia calls for branding RT 'foreign agent' over 'involvement' in elections

https://www.rt.com/news/369937-mcfaul-russia-involvement-us/

[Feb 25, 2018] I were in the US or EU leadership, I'd make sure that Ukraine is not my friend, simply for the sake of self-preservation.

Neither EU nor the USA want to be Ukrainian friends. They want Ukrainian market and resources. That's it.
Feb 25, 2018 | www.unz.com

Anon Disclaimer , February 26, 2018 at 12:20 am GMT

Anon from TN

Somehow in numerous statements in this thread, mostly boiling down to "mine is more Russian than yours", the key issues were missed. I am not even talking about obvious trolls trying to denigrate Putin's foreign policy feats. He achieved a lot more with a relatively weak hand than the US with a much stronger one, both in Syria and in Ukraine.

Admittedly, Ukraine does not count: only Americans, who have no history and don't know the history of other countries, could have stepped into that particular pile of s Ukraine brings ruin to anyone it supports. At the beginning of the eighteens century Ukrainian Hetman Mazepa betrayed Russia and joined the Swedes. Peter the Great decimated Swedes in the battle near Poltava. That was the end of Sweden as a great European power. Western Ukrainians fought for Austro-Hungarian Empire in WWI. Where is that Empire now? Then "independent" Ukraine supported Germans. Well, they lost WWI. Then Ukrainians served Hitler in WWII. USSR smeared Nazi Germany over he wall. Then Ukrainians were "holier then thou" supporters of the Soviet Union. Where is it now? So, if I were in the US or EU leadership, I'd make sure that Ukraine is not my friend, simply for the sake of self-preservation.

Syria is a totally different story. The Empire, on behalf of Israel and Saudis, tried to break it up into a bunch of powerless Bantustans. The plan seemed to be close to bearing fruit until Putin threw a wrench into the works. With ridiculously small ground and air force he turned the tide of the war. The Empire was frustrated. Hence the hysterics.

Anyway, IMHO Putin's Russia has two major weaknesses. One is the profusion of oligarchs who stole their riches from the state and hid the loot offshore. He does not seem inclined to tackle them, likely honoring the deal he made in 2000. "Protected" appear to include even such notorious figures as Chubais (if you ask Russians, ~90% would say that oligarchs should be stripped of their wealth, tried, and imprisoned; but as many or more would say that Chubais should be publicly hanged). The other weakness is that it remains a one-man show, i.e., the absence of credible state institutions and an obvious successor. The rest is chaff.

Jake , February 26, 2018 at 12:50 am GMT
"what we see is that western democracies are run by gangs of oligarchs and bureaucrats who have almost nothing in common with the people they are supposed to represent."

ABSOLUTELY TRUE!

Robert Dunn , Website February 26, 2018 at 1:06 am GMT
I'm like so totally sure the CIA will not be interfering with their election.
Kiza , February 26, 2018 at 1:36 am GMT
@utu

Just for a moment I will take you seriously, although you sometimes write truly silly stuff, and respond.

Yes, the AngloZionist would prefer to turn and absorb the Russian and Chinese elite, but only as low subordinates. This is what they have been doing in other conquered countries – generating a mix of the new and compliant part of the old elite with a greater proportion of the new elite. The Russian neo-Liberals are ready and waiting for the job, looking down on their compatriots as cattle (the same word as goyim, what an amazing coincidence!?). Read what this Felix writes about the Russians. This gang turned Russia into killing fields in 1917 and will gladly do it again given half a chance by their foreign masters.

The masters are underwriting the full-time writing of puppets such as Karlin. Karlin is the Russian Elliot Higgins , interpreting data without a faintest idea of solid data analysis, a paid full-time hack drawing the right conclusions for the empire. Perhaps he sees himself as a minister in the Russian puppet government after the successful regime change.

Therefore, this group of regular trolls (about 10 nicks) on all Saker's writings are aiming to be that future new Russian servant elite when Russia would be absorbed. They are truly the last thing that Russian people need.

As I said above, I have seen it all before, it is deja vu all over again (Yogi Bear).

[Feb 25, 2018] Poland vs Ukraine

Actually life in Ukraine was not that bad in 2010-2014. Hopefully "After-Maydan" deterioration might be temporary, although without new markets for Ukrainian industrial goods recovery is almost impossible. Also the level of foreign debt is now much higher, so they dig a deeper hole for themselves to climb out. Other probable scenario is bankruptcy. See also Bill Black Once a Poster Child for Austerity, Latvia Becomes a Hotbed of Corruption naked capitalism
Feb 25, 2018 | www.unz.com

Dmitry , Next New Comment February 25, 2018 at 7:15 pm GMT

@Felix Keverich

Poland's level of GDP per capita is 6 times bigger than Ukraine's. They started out around the same level in 1991 and were supposed to follow the same playbook. To the extent that their paths diverged can be explained by Ukrainian corruption and incompetence.

Poland received hundreds of billions of dollars in EU subsidies and transfers. Not a fair comparison. Even still today they are receiving this transfer of wealth from net contributor countries in the EU (there's another good reason EU became unpopular in net contributor countries like the UK and the Netherlands):

https://msp.gov.pl/en/polish-economy/economic-news/4015,Poland-to-get-nearly-EUR-106-bln-from-2014-2020-EU-budget-pool-expected-impact-o.html

Felix Keverich , Next New Comment February 25, 2018 at 8:16 pm GMT
@Dmitry

Energy subsidies from Russia to the Ukraine are estimated at hundreds of billions of dollars since 1991. The Ukraine has been well subsidized since independence. What they have been desperately lacking is governance.

[Feb 25, 2018] Is Putin a neoliberal?

Feb 25, 2018 | www.unz.com

likbez: February 26, 2018 at 1:36 am GMT

I doubt that Putin can be viewed as "pure" neoliberal. He might have some neoliberal leanings, but in his policies he deviates enough to view him as a dangerous revisionist. Even more so than Trump during recent elections with his rejection of globalization, offshoring of industries to countries with cheap labor, protection (and creation) of "good jobs" in the USA, etc (he was quickly emasculated -- approximately three-four months after elections ;-)

Neoliberalism as a social system implies neoliberal globalization. For any country other then the USA that means the acceptance of the dominant role of the USA in world economics and the global role of dollar as the dominant convertible currency. In other words is you need to accept preeminent role of the USA in world economic and financial system and institutions much like members of Communist International accepted preeminent role of the USSR.

That's why GB, Western Europe and Japan are often viewed as US vassals. They might have strong objections to the USA policies and they have certain degrees of freedom, but on key, fundamental issues they need to behave.

I think Putin strays from neoliberal doctrine on both of those issues. He definitely does not want Russia to be vassal of the USA. And he jailed Khodorkovski and exiled a couple of other oligarchs who wanted political power in Russia, which is a direct affront to the neoliberal system. I think Putin tries to play MIC, energy complex and other similar forces vs pro-European "globalist" faction of neoliberal oligarchs as two countervailing forces. This is a tough balancing act that requires immense political skills.

In this sense he is a statist, not so much a neoliberal. What is true is that Putin considers socialism to be not viable social system and accepts capitalism as the necessary evil. But within the bound of capitalism he advocates strong role of state in controlling greed of capitalists, exactly like in the New Deal. Under neoliberalism large corporations and financial oligarchy controls the state. Some elements of Putin polices can probably be viewed as "cultural nationalism" (ethnic nationalism is not a viable political platform in Russia, for obvious reasons). Or using Bannon term "economic nationalism".

Also neoliberalism hates welfare state and any New Deal style protections for workers. So neoliberals typically try to dismantle such social protection net. Neoliberalism also tries to enforce the law of jungles for workers (aka "labor market" with atomized powerless individuals instead of trade unions, using "free movement of labor" to suppress wages, etc).

On both issues Putin position is different. My impression is that on many such issues his position is closer to the New Deal vision of capitalism than to neoliberalism. So I consider viewing Putin as a pure neoliberal wrong.

[Feb 25, 2018] Putin is neo-liberal, a representative of Russian national oligarchy which wants to integrate with the western ruling classes but on equal terms

Notable quotes:
"... My view is that Putin is representative of Russian national oligarchy which DOES want to integrate with the western ruling classes but on equal terms. It is, BTW, why I think Putin's responses to American aggression is muted, or that he still does not get rid of 5th columnists: he really does not want to alienate them totally and waits for a faction in western elite to take over that would recognize Russian oligarchy as equals. ..."
"... In my view, this is never going to happen: as Saker frequently points out, because of the cultural tendencies of the west, they have never considered Russia as equal partners and will never do. In fact, the only reason they could not suck the blood of Russia to the bone and let the country slip from their fingers is their total disregard for the interests of Russian elites which do want their country and themselves be regarded as equals to their western partners. ..."
"... However, this is their main weakness: they cannot beat imperialists on their own game. ..."
"... I would venture a suggestion that, although with quite different complexities, the same would apply to China and its elite. The AngloZionist elite would never accept the Russian or the Chinese elite as equals and this is the main reason that a global alliance of the powerful against the powerless will never happen, despite being predicted by so many authors. ..."
"... In essence, what Saker and you are saying is that Putin has done fantastic things for Russia but he is a man of the past who has reached his personal limits and Russia is in a need of a new leader to take her to the next stage. But there is no such on the horizon – that is the key issue of the forthcoming Russian election. ..."
"... My view is that Putin is representative of Russian national oligarchy which DOES want to integrate with the western ruling classes but on equal terms. ..."
"... This how I also see it. For this reason I was always skeptical of those who put hopes in Putin's Russia as a genuine opponent of the Zio-Amercian Empire. Putin actions and in-actions should be understood as playing for time and gaining some leverage for a better position at the negotiating table. They want to sit at the sam table with the Empire while the Empire still sees them as dish to be consumed at this table. ..."
Feb 25, 2018 | www.unz.com

kemerd , February 25, 2018 at 9:52 am GMT

I agree with Saker in that Putin is neo-liberal but disagree on the part that Putin believes in social democracy. My view is that Putin is representative of Russian national oligarchy which DOES want to integrate with the western ruling classes but on equal terms. It is, BTW, why I think Putin's responses to American aggression is muted, or that he still does not get rid of 5th columnists: he really does not want to alienate them totally and waits for a faction in western elite to take over that would recognize Russian oligarchy as equals.

In my view, this is never going to happen: as Saker frequently points out, because of the cultural tendencies of the west, they have never considered Russia as equal partners and will never do. In fact, the only reason they could not suck the blood of Russia to the bone and let the country slip from their fingers is their total disregard for the interests of Russian elites which do want their country and themselves be regarded as equals to their western partners.

However, this is their main weakness: they cannot beat imperialists on their own game. The correct course of action is to fully reject them: i.e. withdrawal from IMF, World Bank, and other financial institutions, placing controls on the transfer of capital, nationalizing strategic industries, etc. Obviously, these are actions which will reduce the power of the oligarchy in Russia and thus impossible to implement by Putin (unless an open conflict with the west forces him to do so to put the economy in complete war footing).

Incidentally, Russian communist party offers exactly that. So, unlike Saker I take them seriously not because I don't believe in what Saker writes about them but because such transformation has its own life and real leadership would eventually emerge from such dynamics. And, such leaders could not care less what the westerners think and write about them, unlike Putin

Kiza , February 25, 2018 at 5:51 pm GMT
@kemerd

Absolutely great insight, I agree with Saker but even more with you.

I would venture a suggestion that, although with quite different complexities, the same would apply to China and its elite. The AngloZionist elite would never accept the Russian or the Chinese elite as equals and this is the main reason that a global alliance of the powerful against the powerless will never happen, despite being predicted by so many authors.

I would speculate that one of the main reasons is the Jewish view of others as goyim or cattle – would you consider a leading bull of a heard as equal to yourself? It is a barrier. The Anglo elite is only less blunt about this, but not much different.

It is funnily ironic how one cultural feature of the current rulers of the World is going to generate a bipolar World and a clash of two empires.

In essence, what Saker and you are saying is that Putin has done fantastic things for Russia but he is a man of the past who has reached his personal limits and Russia is in a need of a new leader to take her to the next stage. But there is no such on the horizon – that is the key issue of the forthcoming Russian election.

utu , Next New Comment February 25, 2018 at 6:54 pm GMT
@kemerd

My view is that Putin is representative of Russian national oligarchy which DOES want to integrate with the western ruling classes but on equal terms.

This how I also see it. For this reason I was always skeptical of those who put hopes in Putin's Russia as a genuine opponent of the Zio-Amercian Empire. Putin actions and in-actions should be understood as playing for time and gaining some leverage for a better position at the negotiating table. They want to sit at the sam table with the Empire while the Empire still sees them as dish to be consumed at this table.

[Feb 25, 2018] Russian Presidential Elections boring, useless and necessary by The Saker

This is a weak article (it is almost impossible to judge Russin political situation while being outside of Russia without any contacts with common people and politicans but it contains some interesting albeit polemic statements.
I think that Putin see that currently there is no viable alternative to neoliberalism. And try to navigate this minefield trying to preserve independence as best as he cam.
The US empire wants to crush Russian independence both as an open affront to neoliberal globalization and also as a move to encircle China. that's why they staged While revolution of 2011-2012 in Russia, relying on strong neoliberal fifth column within Russia with ambassador McFaul coordinating all the efforts.
Also it would be stupid openly oppose the USA, which is far more powerful empire (which only now started its decline). And Chinese will betray Russians easily as they did in the past (actually rise of chine was in part a direct result of grooming it as an anti-Russian force by the West). The same true about Iranians with thier teocratic state. Or Turkey. So Russian has no reliable allies. China still is trying to play the Russia card to its advantage trying to get something from the USA in return and that's a great danger.
Saker misunderstands and exaggerate the role of corruption. Corruption is a immanent feature of neoliberalism and probably any other social system known to mankind. It just take different forms in different societies. For example "revolving door" mechanism is the most common form of corruption in the USA. In Russia it takes more primitive (or should I say ancient) forms.
It is also impossible to replace neoliberal block in Russia and the alternative is only military-industrial complex, which is no better and might be worse. Saker does not underneath that nature abhor vacuum, including vacuum of power. The great strength of Putin is his ability to maneuver staying as arbiter of those two political blocks. But real political power in Russia belongs to two blocks: neoliberals and MIC (or, more broadly, the "deep state"). Similar to the the situation in the USA. Unfortunately.
The great challenge and danger for Russia is that what can happen "after Putin". This will be his last term in office. And during previous term he experiences humiliating defeat in Ukraine. Which might probably partially can be attributed that all his attention was concentrated on Sochi Olympics, not on the dynamics of the Ukrainian coup d'état. Or may be he understood that coming to power of Ukrainian nationalists is inevitable, as the country has no viable force capable to defeat them and alternative ideology. The other significant blow was the US crushing of oil prices in 2014 (supported by Saudi regime) which along with sanctions let to deterioration of Russian standard of living and depreciation of currently 100% or so (in comparison Ukrainian currency depreciated 300%)
He definitely is unable to produce a viable successor who can continue his politics of balancing between those two forces. That is typical in history of Russian society, but that makes Russian society much less stable. Disastrous successor with low political skills and understanding of the situation like new Gorbachov is a real danger.
Notable quotes:
"... the fact remains that most of Putin's energy was directed at fighting the war against the Empire and the 5 th column inside Russia. Most of the country is still in dire need of reform. ..."
"... What matters is that most Russian people clearly would want a number of things which Putin is not willing or able to deliver including a much harsher crackdown on corruption, much more vigorous social policies (social or "socialist" in the Russian sense of the word, meaning socially-oriented and not driven by capitalist ideology) and a much more equitable distribution of wealth. ..."
"... Whatever may be the case, I don't think that anybody will deny that most Russian people would be happy if the entire "economic block" of the Medvedev regime would be fired (or jailed or, even better, summarily executed by a firing squad) and replaced by much more "left/socialist/communist" leaning economists. The fact that the Russian Communists completely fail to provide such an alternative is great for Putin's reelection but very bad for Russia. ..."
Feb 25, 2018 | www.unz.com

... ... ...

First, and this is crucial, Russia is at war. Let me repeat this: Russia is at war with the AngloZionist Empire. The fact that this war is roughly 80% informational, 15% economic and 5% kinetic does not make it less real or less dangerous, if only because these ratios can very rapidly change. Furthermore, Putin is a brilliant man placed at the top of an extremely bad system which almost cost Russia her very existence. As a result, Putin put his efforts in mostly two directions: protect Russia against the western aggression and struggle against the pro-western 5 th columnists inside Russia (oligarchs, Zionists, "liberals", russophobes, etc.) including inside the Kremlin (the Atlantic Integrationists à la Medvedev or the IMF/WTO/Washington Consensus types à la Nabiulina & Kudrin & Chubais, etc.). Of course, Putin did try to fight corruption, mismanagement, fraud, etc., but the two spheres where he hit the hardest were defense and aerospace. He also created the ONF (The All-Russia People's Front) to try to "reach" deeper inside the Russian society and economy, and this also worked. But the fact remains that most of Putin's energy was directed at fighting the war against the Empire and the 5 th column inside Russia. Most of the country is still in dire need of reform.

Second, and to my personal great regret, Putin is a neo-liberal. A real anti-liberal would never have kept people like Kudrin (who, by the way, was fired by Medvedev, not Putin), or Nabiulina and all the rest of them. Alas, Putin failed to kick this entire gang were it belongs: in jail . He got some of them (Serdiukov, Uliukaev) but most of them are still here (notice that neither Nabuilina nor Chubais ever made it to the US sanctions list?). I am no mind reader but my best guess is that Putin sincerely believes in what we could loosely called "regulated capitalism" or "social democracy" and that the kind of ideas presented by, say, Sergei Glaziev, really frighten him as a possible return to the kind of disaster-economics the Soviet Union had in the 1980s. I think that he is wrong, but that doesn't matter. What matters is that most Russian people clearly would want a number of things which Putin is not willing or able to deliver including a much harsher crackdown on corruption, much more vigorous social policies (social or "socialist" in the Russian sense of the word, meaning socially-oriented and not driven by capitalist ideology) and a much more equitable distribution of wealth.

By all accounts, and in diametrical opposition to what nonsense spewed by the AngloZionist propaganda, Putin is not at all a nostalgic of the Soviet era. In fact, he seems to have somewhat of a phobia of anything which could remind somebody of Soviet-era policies even when these policies were clearly superior to what we see today in Russia (say in education, health, fundamental science, social programs, etc.). Whatever may be the case, I don't think that anybody will deny that most Russian people would be happy if the entire "economic block" of the Medvedev regime would be fired (or jailed or, even better, summarily executed by a firing squad) and replaced by much more "left/socialist/communist" leaning economists. The fact that the Russian Communists completely fail to provide such an alternative is great for Putin's reelection but very bad for Russia.

Third, Russia today is ruled by one man: Putin. Great guy, I totally support him! But one man ruling a country is a very bad thing not only because sooner or later this man will leave the scene and leave no credible successor, but also because a President should not be dealing with the pavement of the road in small cities in the Urals or get involved in the geographical distribution of maternity wards in Siberia. Yet this is exactly what is going on. The Russians have even an expression for that "Putin rules in a manual regime" meaning that he has to do everything by himself. This is sheer folly and this is obviously unsustainable. Oh sure, there are very sharp and good people around Putin, but none of them can match his unique combination of charm, charisma, intelligence, courage, patience, and determination: as soon as Putin leaves, for whatever reason, this entire system will come tumbling down precisely because it is not a real system but a "one man show". And this is exactly what the Atlantic Integrationists are obviously waiting for to strike again.

So if Putin is so bad, why do I support him? Simply because at this point in time there is no alternative. And it's not really that Putin is "bad" – but rather that he is a human being, not a miracle worker with a magic wand in his hands who can reform Russia simply by waving it and saying "abracadabra". Especially not while Russia is at war with an Empire which threatens her very existence!

In the West, the AngloZionist are clearly backing Grudinin (see here here here here here here and even the always hyperpoliticallycorrect Wikipedia loves him !). The reasons for that are really simple: not only would the AngloZionist prefer *anybody*, including Count Dracula, over Putin, but if even if a purely nominal pseudo-Communist like Grudinin came to power the entire western "elites" could finally all loudly proclaim that: " Aha! Here is the proof; here is a wave of revanchist Communism in Russia and that is like the USSR 2.0 – welcome to the next Cold War!! ". In reality, the Russian Communist Party, chock-full of very real capitalists, (see machine translated article here ) who Communist only in name, but its members still like red flags and pictures of Lenin and that 's good enough to scare those who already want to be scared (westerners). In the meantime, while the Russian state-media is bashing Grudinin, "somebody" is clearly actively promoting him in the Russian social media. Any guesses who that "somebody" might be?

As always, Russia's "western geostrategic partners" are misreading Russia and wasting their breath (and money!). Here are the latest polls : Putin 71.5%, Zhirinovsky 5.5%, Grudinin 7.3% and the rest don't matter. You don't want to believe them? Fine. But when the difference is by a full order of magnitude your doubts won't make much of a difference. Besides, you really don't want the figures of being any different, trust me, because if the jester or the fake comes to power, then the crisis which will hit Russia and the rest of our planet will really be immense and very dangerous: we already have one clown in charge of a nuclear superpower, we most definitely can't afford a second one.

The sad reality is that these elections will change nothing and they are not only boring (no real, credible, opposition) but also useless. A grand waste of time and money. And yet, they are also necessary.

They are necessary because in the "Empire of Illusions", to borrow Chris Hedges' excellent expression, everybody simply has to play by the AngloZionist rules: elections are an absolute "must" even if they are self-evidently farcical. So the Russians will get their "secular liturgy" (which is what elections really are), the right guy will stay in power, which is good, even if his staying in power has nothing to do with the formal trappings democracy. Yes, Putin does have the support of the overwhelming majority of the Russian people, even those who do not trust polls or election results agree on this, and that popular support is by far his most important power base (and the main reason why Putin-haters either stay quiet or become politically irrelevant). But the reality of that support is neither expressed by, nor conveyed through, Presidential elections. Putin does have the nation behind him, but not because some electoral farce says so. If by some magic trick, say, some court would strip Putin of all his legal powers, he still would have a much higher moral and, therefore, practical authority than any other person in Russia. Alexander Solzhenitsyn once said that all regimes can be positioned on a continuum ranging from regimes whose authority is based on their power to those whose power is based on their authority. Putin's real power is not based on any Presidential election, nor is the based on the Russian Constitution, it is based on his moral authority with the Russian people. This is not something which can be expressed in percentages or numbers of cast bulletins, but it is no less real.

So the Empire's goal is simple: not to replace Putin, at least not yet, but to prevent Putin from obtaining a clear majority in the first round. The plan is simple: if Putin gets a majority – denounce Russia as a non-democratic authoritarian state. If Putin by some miracle fails to get that majority, prove to the world that he is nowhere as popular as most people say he is and hope that all the anti-Putin forces combined will turn to Grudinin or Zhirinovsky (either one will do). If Grudinin goes into a 2 nd round that will prove that Russia is a country with a strong nostalgia for the Soviet era (expect a myriad of references so Stalin in the Ziomedia), if it is Zhirinovksy, announce to the world that rabid Russian nationalists are about to invade the Baltics or nuke Turkey. When Putin eventually wins, declare that the election was stolen and explain to the zombified audience that Evil Vlad is nothing but the ideological sum total of commies and nationalists combined into one big "Russian Threat".

Sounds stupid? Yes, of course. Because it is. But that's the plan anyway.

Felix Keverich , February 23, 2018 at 2:16 pm GMT

For one thing, many Russians are deeply opposed to the neo-liberal policies of the Medvedev government and even though Putin talks a very social talk, the sad reality is that he also is clearly a proponent of western-style economics.

The only alternative to western-style economics is Venezuela style economic malaise. Teachers and doctors in Venezuela are offering sexual services in exchange for food. This is what non-western economic models deliver. That's "Bolivarian socialism". You want this for Russia?

not good enough for a nation and culture which has always been strongly social and collectivistic, which instinctively feels that capitalism and individualism are morally repugnant, and practically unsustainable, and which views the accumulation of capital as something profoundly immoral.

You speak like someone who never lived in post-communist Russia. The Russians CRAVE money, and do not hesitate to flaunt their wealth in front of their less well-off contrymen. The pavements in central Moscow are littered with expensive German cars. Russian Orthodox priests are particulary fond of German cars along with their traditional penchant for gold jewelry. Their morals allow them to buy this stuff.

he [Putin] seems to have somewhat of a phobia of anything which could remind somebody of Soviet-era policies even when these policies were clearly superior to what we see today in Russia (say in education, health, fundamental science, social programs, etc.).

Life expectancy in Soviet Russia piqued at 69 in 1964 and has been in a slow *decline* for the remainder of communist rule right until that system collapsed. After a crash during the 1990s, life expectancy began to recover during Putin's rule. It reached 73 years in 2017 and still rising. Government's "neoliberal" policies made this possible: they actually encouraged Russians to lead more healthy lifestyles.

Whatever may be the case, I don't think that anybody will deny that most Russian people would be happy if the entire "economic block" of the Medvedev regime would be fired (or jailed or, even better, summarily executed by a firing squad) and replaced by much more "left/socialist/communist" leaning economists.

And this is why economic policy cannot not be decided by popular opinion. A typical Russian is ignorant about economics and government finance. A typical Russian doesn't want responsibility for these decisions anyway. He would rather let someone else (some authority figure) make these choices for him. This is why real democracy cannot work in Russia.

Putin should not be idealized. He is a typical post-Soviet crook, who was still wise enough to pursue orthodox economic policies to prolong the longevity of his regime. This is what Putin does: he is preserving his regime. He isn't fighting any war – I have no idea where Saker got this from.

[Feb 25, 2018] The neoliberal "methodology" for "showing economic success" is propaganda masquerading as "science". So they sell Latvia as a poster child of austerity, true neoliberal market miracle. In reality it is a hot bed of curruption and deindustrialization

Latvia now is a typical neoliberal debt slave and flourishing sex trafficking market. Not that different from other Baltic states, Ukraine, Moldavia and generally all xUSSR space.
Feb 25, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

YankeeFrank , February 25, 2018 at 7:38 am

Bill mentions the brain drain from Latvia, but I seem to recall a quite massive general emigration from the country during austerity, which also helped to "reduce unemployment" as well. The neoliberal "methodology" for "showing economic success" is moral and economic bankruptcy masquerading as "science". And wow. So we have Latvia to thank for the coming nuclear holocaust as well. A true neoliberal market miracle.

Lambert's two principles of neoliberalism are once again brought to mind:

#1 Because markets.

#2 Go die.

Skip Intro , February 25, 2018 at 11:03 am

All those 'excess' workers who left were helping keep wages low in the EU
In the sense that Latvia's future productivity is sacrificed for short-term benefits on the books, it starts to look like another asset-stripping scheme, and the costs are borne by workers in the EU.

The Rev Kev , February 25, 2018 at 8:40 am

This is not the first time that Latvia has appeared on NC ( https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/01/latvias-economic-disaster-as-a-neoliberal-success-story-a-model-for-europe-and-the-us.html ) and probably won't be the last. What is it about neoliberalism that that seems to have corruption as part of its DNA?

Latvia already has one of the highest levels of poverty and income inequality in the EU and its population has dropped by about a fifth in the past 18 years which is a bit of a record considering that there was no war, that is, unless you count the neoliberal war on people. Some moved to the capital Riga but most bailed out of the country altogether and are not coming back. You can find whole blocks of empty buildings in some towns.
But don't worry. The Latvians are on the case. The head of the Latvian Central Bank detained for extortion and the Latvian Ministry of Defense both blame, you guessed it, Russia!

Lambert's two principles of neoliberalism may have to be updated. He already has
#1 Because markets.
#2 Go die.

He may have to modify the second one to say
#2 Go die or get the hell outta Dodge.

DJG , February 25, 2018 at 9:11 am

Now I may be prejudiced because the Gs came from deepest darkest Lithuania–and we're talking out in the endless woods in a village along a lake.

When people talk about population decline in Latvia, you are talking about part of the corruption. The native Latvians wanted a way of getting rid of the Russian population, many of whom are considered immigrants. So dropping 20 percent of the population means throwing out the Russians. When your "population policy " is based on something like that, you can image what the country's economic policies are like.

In contrast–although Lithuania, too, has lost some 10 – 15 percent of its population since restored independence–the Lithuanians came to terms, imperfect terms, with their smaller Polish and Russian minorities. Nevertheless, the Lithuanians didn't go whole-hog free-market fundamentalism. And when a recent president was found to be corrupt, they impeached him and threw him out.

So you have different models for how to survive as a Baltic State. Latvia has made a mess of its "model."

edmondo , February 25, 2018 at 10:53 am

"Now of course that's still in a land where they had really severely repressed wages for the working class and for middle class, and continued to tolerate a fair degree of unemployment and underemployment for folks, as well. So, yeah it works really well for the oligarchs. And they do employ people. The unemployment rate drops, but the country invariably becomes extremely corrupt."

Was he still talking about Latvia or did he switch over to the USA?

Altandmain , February 25, 2018 at 12:15 pm

There is a strong correlation between inequality and corruption.

Furthermore, in the medium term there is a causal relationship:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1331677X.2016.1169701

This would suggest that inflicting austerity on a population, which worsens inequality, will set the precedent for corruption in the future.

Massinissa , February 25, 2018 at 12:27 pm

Half a decade ago when Latvia was considered a success story for neoliberal austerity, one animator made this great satire video making fun of how farcical it was to consider it such.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IRUBJ8qraY

Eustache De Saint Pierre , February 25, 2018 at 12:42 pm

Latvia also being part of that running sore which involves according to the US state department's last global estimate, about 800,000 to a million victims per annum of people trafficking. Of which around 80% are female, with a not stated amount being children, used for both labour & sexual purposes.

I suppose that it comes as little surprise that the 2 main flows of these commodities is from East to West & South to North.

[Feb 25, 2018] Looks like FBI or CIA has an insider in Internet Research Agency Agata Burdonova, who has recently moved with her husband to the United States. She run translator project and is missing from Mueller indictment

Notable quotes:
"... The Russian independent TV Rain, also known as Dozhd, found (Russian, machine translation ) that one management person of the IRA was missing in the Mueller indictment. That women, Agata Burdonova, has recently moved with her husband to the United States. She had run the "translator" department of the IRA that created English language social marketing campaigns. She has now applied for a U.S. Social Security number. ..."
"... On June 15, 2017, Dmitry Fyodorov says he received an employment offer from Facebook. On August 8, 2017 Fyodorov marries Burdonova. Employer (presumably, Facebook) sponsors both of their visas -- prob. H1B. ..."
"... On December 7 2017 both moved to Bellevue, Washington. Two month later Mueller indicts the alleged IRA owner and management, but not Burdonova. This smells of a deal made by some US agency to get insight into the IRA. In return, an opportunity to move to the US was offered. ..."
Feb 25, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Feb 19 - Internet Marketing - Why Is This Smelly Fish Priceless?

Automated Twitter accounts, or trolls, repeated a tweet about a MoA piece on Muller's indictment of "Russian trolls" . Funny but not really important. There is interesting news though related to the original Muller indictment. Mueller accused with little evidence 13 persons involved in the private Russian Internet Research Agency (IRA) of meddling with the U.S. election campaign.

The Russian independent TV Rain, also known as Dozhd, found (Russian, machine translation ) that one management person of the IRA was missing in the Mueller indictment. That women, Agata Burdonova, has recently moved with her husband to the United States. She had run the "translator" department of the IRA that created English language social marketing campaigns. She has now applied for a U.S. Social Security number.

According to a follow up :

On June 15, 2017, Dmitry Fyodorov says he received an employment offer from Facebook. On August 8, 2017 Fyodorov marries Burdonova. Employer (presumably, Facebook) sponsors both of their visas -- prob. H1B.

On December 7 2017 both moved to Bellevue, Washington. Two month later Mueller indicts the alleged IRA owner and management, but not Burdonova. This smells of a deal made by some US agency to get insight into the IRA. In return, an opportunity to move to the US was offered.

Feb 20 - "Russian bots" - How An Anti-Russian Lobby Creates Fake News

On the farce of the "Hamilton 68" dashboard and how the media fall for it.

[Feb 25, 2018] Why Republican Elites are Threatened

This is almost two year old discussion. Still relevant...
Notable quotes:
"... Republicans have fooled people into thinking budget deficits can be reduced substantially by eliminating waste and fraud in government, cutting foreign aid, or that it is the fault of lazy, undeserving "others" who sponge off of government programs. ... ..."
"... I am very happy that the Republican con is starting to come to light. Members of the working class who support Trump are beginning to see that the elites in the Republican Party do not have their best interests at heart. I am not pleased at all, however, that people are still being led to believe that there are simple answers to budget problems that do not require raising taxes, or, alternatively, reducing their hard-earned benefits from programs such as Social Security or Medicare. ... ..."
"... And the next GOP President will immediately give away those hard earned surpluses generated by President Clinton or Sanders to their plutocratic donors - just as W did. ..."
"... The collapse and subsequent economic rape of the USSR region in 1991-1998 was a huge stimulus for the US economy. Something like 300 millions of new customers overnight for many products and huge expansion of the dollar zone, which partially compensates for the loss of EU to euro. ..."
"... Actually, Bill Clinton put a solid fundament for subsequent deterioration relations with Russia. His semi-successful attempt to colonize Russia (under Yeltsin Russia was a semi-colony and definitely a vassal state of the USA) backfired. ..."
"... Now the teeth of dragon planted by Slick Bill (of Kosovo war fame) are visible in full glory. Russian elite no longer trusts the US elite and feels threatened. ..."
"... Series of female sociopath (or borderline personalities) in the role of Secretaries of State did not help either. The last one, "We came, we saw, he died" Hillary and her protégé Victoria Nuland (which actually was a close associate of Dick Cheney http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2005/11/president_cheney.html ) are actually replay of unforgettable Madeleine Albright with her famous a 60 Minutes segment in which Lesley Stahl asked her "We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?" and Albright replied "we think the price is worth it."[ ..."
"... "Republicans have fooled people into thinking budget deficits can be reduced substantially by eliminating waste and fraud in government, cutting foreign aid, or that it is the fault of lazy, undeserving "others" who sponge off of government programs. ..." ..."
"... I think you have identified the potential roots of a movement. The unwrapping and critical analysis of the demagoguery that has defined the lives of the baby boom generation. The quote below from Dan Baum's Harper's article, Legalize It All", seems particularly poignant: ..."
"... Much Republican elites would love to raise sales taxes, payroll taxes, or any tax that the "little people" pay. This would allow them to cut taxes for rich people even more. This is their game. Take from the poor and give to the rich. DOOH NIBOR economics! ..."
"... Excellent piece, but I would point out that the GOP would likely sacrifice their own mothers for upper class tax cuts. ..."
"... Rachel Maddow pointed out last night that the GOP *leadership* is vehemently opposed to Trump, because he threatens their authority, but the rank-and-file seem to be pretty happy with him. ..."
"... The idea seems to be that Trump, if elected, will obviously 'reconstitute' the GOP, re-making it totally, casting out old people, bringing in New Blood. ..."
"... This would be 'yuuugely' more cataclysmic than what happened between Teddy Roosevelt and the anti-progressives of the GOP back in 1912. ..."
"... [I am very happy that the Republican con is starting to come to light. Members of the working class who support Trump are beginning to see that the elites in the Republican Party do not have their best interests at heart.] ..."
Mar 22, 2016 | economistsview.typepad.com
New Column:
Why Republican Elites are Threatened, by Mark Thoma : ... Donald Trump's tax plan will result in a fall in revenue of 9.5 trillion dollars over the next ten years, yet somehow he will fulfill his promise to protect Social Security and Medicare and balance the budget? When push comes to shove (or worse – this is Trump after all), who do you think he will protect, social insurance programs the working class relies upon for economic security or his own and his party's wealthy interests? Ted Cruz has proposed an 8.6 trillion dollar tax cut. How, exactly, will that be financed without large cuts to social insurance programs or huge increases in the budget deficit?

Republicans have fooled people into thinking budget deficits can be reduced substantially by eliminating waste and fraud in government, cutting foreign aid, or that it is the fault of lazy, undeserving "others" who sponge off of government programs. ...

I am very happy that the Republican con is starting to come to light. Members of the working class who support Trump are beginning to see that the elites in the Republican Party do not have their best interests at heart. I am not pleased at all, however, that people are still being led to believe that there are simple answers to budget problems that do not require raising taxes, or, alternatively, reducing their hard-earned benefits from programs such as Social Security or Medicare. ...

Posted by Mark Thoma on Tuesday, March 22, 2016 at 05:24 AM in Economics , Politics , Social Insurance | Permalink Comments (41)

New Deal democrat -> pgl...
And the next GOP President will immediately give away those hard earned surpluses generated by President Clinton or Sanders to their plutocratic donors - just as W did.

Hence my support for a *countercyclical* Balanced Budget Amendment.

Peter K. -> New Deal democrat...
My point was that Sanders or Clinton would be getting the surprise surpluses as W. did.

My hope is that Clinton would do the right thing, but I wouldn't bet money on it. I could see her do tax cuts for corporations and finance. Summers recently had a piece arguing for tax cuts as incentives for private investment.

sanjait -> Peter K....
If we consider that there is probably some pent up business investment demand that could drive above average productivity growth for a few years ... then it plausibly is possible for the country to achieve late 90s style growth.
likbez -> Peter K....

The collapse and subsequent economic rape of the USSR region in 1991-1998 was a huge stimulus for the US economy. Something like 300 millions of new customers overnight for many products and huge expansion of the dollar zone, which partially compensates for the loss of EU to euro.

Even if we count just the cash absorbed by the region, it will be a major economic stimulus. All-it-all it was Bernanke size if we add buying assets for pennies on the dollar.

Actually, Bill Clinton put a solid fundament for subsequent deterioration relations with Russia. His semi-successful attempt to colonize Russia (under Yeltsin Russia was a semi-colony and definitely a vassal state of the USA) backfired.

Now the teeth of dragon planted by Slick Bill (of Kosovo war fame) are visible in full glory. Russian elite no longer trusts the US elite and feels threatened.

Series of female sociopath (or borderline personalities) in the role of Secretaries of State did not help either. The last one, "We came, we saw, he died" Hillary and her protégé Victoria Nuland (which actually was a close associate of Dick Cheney http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2005/11/president_cheney.html ) are actually replay of unforgettable Madeleine Albright with her famous a 60 Minutes segment in which Lesley Stahl asked her "We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?" and Albright replied "we think the price is worth it."[

pgl :
All well said! The notion that Paul Ryan, Ted Cruz, and Donald Trump lie a lot is as established as the fact that the earth is not flat.
Jerry Brown -> pgl...
True that!
Paul Mathis :
"[T]here are simple answers to budget problems that do not require raising taxes, or, alternatively, reducing their hard-earned benefits from programs such as Social Security or Medicare."

As every legitimate economist knows, stimulus spending to increase the GDP growth rate would raise tax revenues without raising tax rates. This phenomenon is well-known to Keynesians and has been demonstrated many times.

Thanks to the disinformation campaign run by Republicans, however, stimulus spending has been taken off the table of economic choices except in China where minimum GDP growth is 6.5%. China is "killing us" economically because we are stupid.

Jerry Brown -> Paul Mathis...
Instead, the Trumps and Cruzes and Ryans believe in giant tax cuts for the very wealthy. This might provide a weak stimulus for the economy, but it is a very poor way to go about it. More likely in my mind is that it would lead to increased pressure to cut government spending on things that actually do help the economy.
Paul Mathis -> Jerry Brown...
Tax cuts for the wealthy do not increase demand. Trickle down is a false economic doctrine that exacerbates inequality and therefore reduces demand. Keynes established this principle decades ago but his wisdom has been ignored.
pgl -> Paul Mathis...
You'll love this bit of honesty from right wing Joe Scarborough:

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2016/03/08/joe-scarborough-admits-that-trickle-down-economics-is-a-total-republican-lie-video/

But the 1981 tax cuts did increase shopping on Rodeo Drive.

mulp -> pgl...
Job losses began the month Reagan signed the tax cuts. Job creation began the month Reagan hiked taxes to pay workers to fix the roads and bridges. Reagan and his job killing tax cuts caused the recession, not the Fed and monetary policy. Monetary policy was steady from 1980 to 1983.

Reagan's tax cuts struck fear into would be lenders. How much debt was the government going to need if it intentionally cuts it's incomes? On the other hand, if the government stops spending, that's millions of workers who will be forced to stop spending.

For Nixon, the Fed monetized the smaller deficits from repealling the war tax surcharge that balanced the budget in 1969. Just as the Fed monetized all government debt once FDR and his bankers took over, especially Eccles at the Fed.

But Volcker was not going to monetize the debt caused by Reagan's adoption of intentional deficit spending.

But even Reagan eventually understood what FDR did: gdp growth requires workers getting paid more, and government can take the money from people who have it but won't spend it paying workers, but tax and spend, and create jobs.

If only economists today understood it, and called for tax and spend to create jobs to grow gdp.

anne :
Really nice essay.
Mr. Bill :
"Republicans have fooled people into thinking budget deficits can be reduced substantially by eliminating waste and fraud in government, cutting foreign aid, or that it is the fault of lazy, undeserving "others" who sponge off of government programs. ..."

I think you have identified the potential roots of a movement. The unwrapping and critical analysis of the demagoguery that has defined the lives of the baby boom generation. The quote below from Dan Baum's Harper's article, Legalize It All", seems particularly poignant:

"At the time, I was writing a book about the politics of drug prohibition. I started to ask Ehrlichman a series of earnest, wonky questions that he impatiently waved away. "You want to know what this was really all about?" he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. "The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."

BobZ :
I'm pretty sure that the Trumpists would be thrilled to raise taxes...on someone else. It's only the elites that are interested in lowering taxes on the rich. Trump's followers don't care.

I'm also pretty sure that Trump will turn on the donor class rather than reduce anything for his own base - but I could be wrong.

pgl -> BobZ ...
Much Republican elites would love to raise sales taxes, payroll taxes, or any tax that the "little people" pay. This would allow them to cut taxes for rich people even more. This is their game. Take from the poor and give to the rich. DOOH NIBOR economics!
pgl -> BobZ ...
Krugman for almost 12 years ago:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/01/opinion/dooh-nibor-economics.html?_r=0

JohnH :
All this liberal hand wringing about Trump's tax plan. Yet when Bernie introduces a major tax plan, it doesn't get noticed!!! Not a single 'attaboy' from these supposedly liberal economists.

"With the most progressive tax policy of any candidate, Sanders would dramatically increase taxes for the very wealthy and high-income earners (as well as moderate increases for the middle- and upper-middle classes) in order to pay for key planks of his social agenda including tuition-free public college, a Medicare for All healthcare program, massive infrastructure spending, and paid family leave for all workers."
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/03/21/tax-plan-sanders-beats-both-clinton-and-trump-double-digits


"Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders proposes significant increases in federal income, payroll, business, and estate taxes, and new excise taxes on financial transactions and carbon. New revenues would pay for universal health care, education, family leave, rebuilding the nation's infrastructure, and more. TPC estimates the tax proposals would raise $15.3 trillion over the next decade. All income groups would pay some additional tax, but most would come from high-income households, particularly those with the very highest income. His proposals would raise taxes on work, saving, and investment, in some cases to rates well beyond recent historical experience in the US."
http://taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/2000639-an-analysis-of-senator-bernie-sanderss-tax-proposals.pdf

As I've said many times, most 'liberal' economists simply to not want increased taxes to be put on the table as a viable alternative for funding stimulus. Else, why would they go silent when a major candidate makes such an economically significant proposal? Why is it that they are eager to promote ever more debt but refuse to support more taxes?

pgl -> JohnH...
You are pushing this which is fine. But

"Yet when Bernie introduces a major tax plan, it doesn't get noticed!!"

I noticed this a long time ago. And I applauded Bernie's proposal. I guess I have to resign as a "liberal economist".

JohnH -> pgl...
Now pgl claims to have supported Bernie's tax plan...when all he said did was to acknowledge that I cited a credible source!
http://ctj.org/ctjreports/2016/02/bernie_sanders_health_care_tax_plan_would_raise_13_trillion_yet_increase_after-tax_incomes_for_all_i.php#.VvFotY-cHcs

Question is, why are all those 'liberal' economists running from Bernie's progressive tax plan like the plague?

pgl -> JohnH...
I have supported tax increases on the rich many times. Pay attention. Also - read the latest column from Mark Thoma which is what this thread is supposed to be about. I guess Mark must not be a liberal economists either. DUH!
Eric377 -> JohnH...
Because they can always run back to something like it if a Democrat is elected, but not so if Trump or Cruz are and they have convinced themselves that supporting Sanders is a big risk of getting a Republican. And they are right about that.
JohnH -> Eric377...
LOL!!! Democrats will NOT endorse support anything like Bernie's tax pan EVER! Just like 'liberal" economists will never endorse it either...in fact, they have every opportunity to endorse it now but refuse to even talk about it, apparently hoping it will just go away.
mulp -> JohnH...
But the real benefit of high tax rates on people with lots of money is they will work really hard to not pay taxes by investing in new capital assets even if the bean counters think building more assets will only slash returns on capital.

The result is no increase in tax revenue, but lots of jobs created if the tax dodges are designed to create jobs.

The best example is a carbon tax. The correct carbon tax schedule of increases will raise virtually no tax revenue, but will result in trillions of dollars in labor costs building productive capital, which will ironically make the rich far wealthier.

But if millions of people are employed for a lifetime and the burning of fossil fuels ends, only Bernie will be angry that those responsible end up worth hundreds of billions, or maybe become trillionaires. Their businesses will not be profitable, just like Amazon, Tesla, SpaceX are worth tens of billions but are unprofitable.

pgl :
GOP elite Peter Schiff babbling even worse lies than our excellent host has documented:

http://realcrash2016.com/peter-schiff-social-security-could-implode-in-2016/?code=466832/&utm_source=taboola&utm_medium=referral

pgl -> pgl...
Schiff is saying Soc. Sec. will go bankrupt this year. He also predicted hyperinflation and gold at $5000 an ounce:

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/2013/02/13/gold-at-5000-and-beyond-peter-schiff-sticks-to-his-call/

Benedict@Large -> pgl...
Every year Schiff predicts a recession. Once every 6-8 years, he's right. Schiff then claims he's predicted every recession for the last three dozen years. Everyone is amazed. "How does he do it?" the crowd gasps.

Why does anyone even mention Schiff? He's a grifter with an angle to part rich people from their money. Nothing more.

pgl :
From the day job - filed under fun with Microsoft Excel. Math nerds will get this right away. I'm reading a report from some expert witness that claims some loan guarantee is worth only 22 basis points when my client has charged 55 basis points. Think of x = 1.005 and take the natural log. Yes, the right answer is 50 basis points. This clown uses Excel and types in log(x).

OK - I hate Microsoft Excel as it took me a while. But the log function assumes base 10. The correct syntax is ln(x).

Somehow I think the right wing elite will start doing similar things in their Soc. Sec. analyzes.

William -> pgl...
Somehow, I think the right wing elite don't know the difference between a basis point and a percentage point, let alone between a base 10 or a base e logarithm.
pgl -> William...
I know Stephen Moore certainly does not know the difference!
DrDick :
Excellent piece, but I would point out that the GOP would likely sacrifice their own mothers for upper class tax cuts.
pgl :
Politics down under (New Zealand). The Green Party is campaigning on transfer pricing enforcement in order to make the multinationals pay their fair share of taxes:

https://www.greens.org.nz/news/press-release/govt-warned-multinational-tax-rort-2013

We need more of this in the US!

Fred C. Dobbs :
Rachel Maddow pointed out last night that the GOP *leadership* is vehemently opposed to Trump, because he threatens their authority, but the rank-and-file seem to be pretty happy with him.
pgl -> Fred C. Dobbs...
I was tired and fell asleep by 9PM missing Rachel's show. Thanks for filling me in. She's awesome!
Fred C. Dobbs -> pgl...
The idea seems to be that Trump, if elected, will obviously 'reconstitute' the GOP, re-making it totally, casting out old people, bringing in New Blood.

This would be 'yuuugely' more cataclysmic than what happened between Teddy Roosevelt and the anti-progressives of the GOP back in 1912.

eudaimonia :
[I am very happy that the Republican con is starting to come to light. Members of the working class who support Trump are beginning to see that the elites in the Republican Party do not have their best interests at heart.]

I disagree here. I don't see Trump as exposing the Republican economic agenda to be a fraud. Instead, Trump is exposing that the main driver in conservatism is not policy, but racism.

The Republican base is not "waking up" per say, but Trump rather erased away the policy veneer and has shown the heart of the conservative base.

For decades, the RW economic and social agenda was based off of racism and bigotry - fictional Cadillac mothers, how blacks just vote Democrat since they are lazy, increased voting restrictions for a non-problem, Willie Horton, opposing the CRA in the name of "freedom" and states' rights, etc.

The argument now has simply shifted away from slashing taxes on white rich males since it creates an underclass of dependent minorities, to blaming Mexicans, immigrants, Muslims, etc.

If you look at the heart of Trump supporters, they are high school dropouts who have also dropped out of the labor force since they were dependent on the old economy, live in mobile houses and have not moved around much, with a history of voting for segregationists.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/13/upshot/the-geography-of-Trump_vs_deep_state.html?_r=0

As their economy breaks down around them, like it has in various parts of the country, we are seeing the same social ills emerge - suicide, drug use, depression, rise of divorce, etc.

What Trump has shown them is that it is not their fault. It is not the fault of policy. It is not the fault of globalization. It is not the fault of technological change. It is the fault of the Mexicans, immigrants, Muslims, etc.

The core of conservatism is still there: racism, and Trump has simply shown this. Conservatism is not about policy, but an emotional reactionary ideology based on fear and ignorance that looks for minorities to be scapegoats.

pgl :
US Supreme Court splits 4-4 in Hawkins v. Community Bank of Raymore:

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-03-22/u-s-supreme-court-splits-4-4-for-first-time-since-scalia-death?cmpid=yhoo.headline

Appeals Court had ruled in favor of the bank so the bank prevails. OK - we know Scalia would have voted in favor of the bank but now the standard is how would have Garland ruled. The Senate needs to act on his nomination.

sanjait :
Maybe the simplest way to dissect it is to note that the GOP has been running multiple overlapping cons. They tell the base that tax cuts will improve their lives, and then passes tax cuts that go mostly to the rich.

They tell the base that regulations are killing jobs, and then block or remove any government protection or program that makes the country livable so some industrialist can avoid having to deal with externalities. They tell the base that "those people" are taking their stuff, and then shred the safety net that helps almost everyone except the rich.

What Trump has done is expose how these cons don't really fit together logically, but he hasn't really gone strongly against any of them. He's been on both sides of the first two, and tripled down on the third.

[Feb 24, 2018] How to Solve the Ukraine Crisis Peacekeepers

An interesting discussion with two polar views on the situation. There is no good guys in the story anyway. Nether the USA, or Russia, or Ukrainian nationalists, or separatists qualify. Truth probably lies somewhere in between. The debate itself reminds the current political debate in the USA between neoliberals/globalists and "economic nationalists"/isolationalists : the two sides do not hear other and their positions are irreconcilable. Each has its own set of grievances. Its own version of history. And its own vision of the desirable future.
Independence by itself meant huge stimulus to Western Ukrainian nationalists (who historically lived a long time under Hapsburg empire). So their political ascendance were given and Maydan was just the culmination point of a long process (actually encouraged by EU members such as Germany, Poland , Baltic republics and Sweden)
The USA clearly tried to secure it geopolitical interests via forcefully turning Ukraine to the West. Despite the fact that it was not completely ready for such a move yet; although were slowly moving in this direction since independence. Germany (and EU in general) played the same fatal role of "accelerator" as well. They wanted new markets for their goods and also have geopolitical interests in weakening Russia (which did happened; Ukraine was the biggest strategic defeat of Putin). The Nazi Lebensraum was, after all, about Ukraine.
But the process of "separation" from Russia was pretty much under way since independence and proceeded at a brisk pace under Yanukovich too, who actually supported Ukrainian nationalists during his term (especially Svoboda, hoping to create something like the USA two party systems: nationalists vs Party of Regions). And it was Yanukovich government which prepared and intended to sign the association agreement with the EU. Then Yanukovich hesitated to sign it and at this point was doomed as pro-Western forces has already their own dynamics and financial support from abroad. With the financial. organizational and political support support of the USA and EU were able to depose him. Large (for Ukraine political scene) amount of money was injected, protesters bused from Western Ukraine, and eventually yet another color revolution (the first was so called Orange revolution which brought to power Yushchenko government) took care of Yanukovich regime. The problem is that this "alternative" political course and a new vision of Ukrainian future proved to be a minefield. Also the association agreement with EU was very unfair to Ukrainian economic interests and essentially downgraded the status of Ukraine to the status of neo-colony openly promoting deindustrialization like in Baltic Republics.
Some unrealistic dreams about benefits of Ukraine association with EU were pretty widespread and become a political factor in the success of the Maydan. nobody understood that by trying to balance between Russia and the West Yanukovich postponed the day of reckoning and kept economics expanding. Everybody hated corrupt Yanukovich although some members of his cabinet were pretty competent technocrats. Nobody calculated losses from the separation of economic ties with Russia and having a hostile Russia as a neighbor. Hopes that EU will open its market for Ukrainian agricultural goods and to Ukrainian gastarbeiters proved to be exaggerated. To say nothing about the danger (or even mere possibility) of civil war as the result of Maydan. All those dreams about improving the standard of living via association with EU were buried after the Maydan very soon. The currency dropped around 300% after 2014 from 8.5 to 27 grivna per dollar. Markets in Russia are almost completely lost.
Ukrainian nationalists decided that the success of Maydan gave them carte blanche on neo-colonization of Eastern Ukraine as well as the suppression of Russian language and culture. They miscalculated. This policy was similar to "Polinization of Western Ukraine" by Poles and it faced growing resistance. Lugansk and Donetsk republic are direct results of this resistance (not without Russia help). In other words this policy backfired, and now those regions represent a Gordian knot for both the USA, EU, Russia and Ukraine. For Poroshenko government to agree on federalization (which Minsk accords presuppose) means to lose face politically (Why to organize Maydan in such cases, if the net result is a huge drop of the standard of living, loss of Crimea, and federalization of Ukraine?), and they prefer military solution to the problem. The USA under Trump administration are only happy to sell weapons to them (as well as coal to replace lost coal from Donetsk region). And nuclear fuel to electrical stations inread of Russia. Meanwhile economics is not improving and that also represents a political threat to Poroshenko, making push for the military solution more probable.
Notable quotes:
"... Any agreement, however -- at least as far as the U.S. State Department is concerned -- would require that Russia must make the first move to ease tensions. ..."
"... Secretary Tillerson has made it abundantly clear that Russia must take the first steps to de-escalate violence and resolve this conflict by fully implementing the Minsk Accords." ..."
"... Dave Majumdar is the defense editor for ..."
"... . You can follow him on Twitter: ..."
"... This country is screwed, alas. Peacekeepers will not change much, but they could help stop shellings and thus help regular people who suffer the most. ..."
"... Strelkov came into Donbass on April 12, 2014 and the acting president Turchinov announced ATO (Anti terrorist operation) on April 7. The people of Donbass protested peacefully for months and no one wanted to talk with them. They sent tanks and jets instead. ..."
"... "And yes, his self-promotion as the "governor of Donetsk" was both illegal and unpopular with the locals." ..."
"... Indeed, that is why there is a civil war in Ukraine. "Red Cross officially declares Ukraine civil war" https://www.thelocal.ch/201... ..."
Feb 23, 2018 | nationalinterest.org

Any agreement, however -- at least as far as the U.S. State Department is concerned -- would require that Russia must make the first move to ease tensions. However, it is unclear is Secretary of State Rex Tillerson or anyone in his department truly speaks for the Trump Administration.

"It's important to be clear about U.S. policy towards the conflict: Crimea is Ukraine. The Donbas is Ukraine. We will never accept trading one region of Ukraine for another. We will never make a deal about Ukraine without Ukraine," John J. Sullivan, deputy secretary of state, said during a speech in at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' Diplomatic Academy in Kiev on Feb. 21 . "To advance these fundamental goals, Secretary Tillerson appointed Ambassador Kurt Volker as Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations in July of last year. And his mandate is to break the deadlock with Russia over Ukraine. Secretary Tillerson has made it abundantly clear that Russia must take the first steps to de-escalate violence and resolve this conflict by fully implementing the Minsk Accords."

Time will tell if any progress will be made in solving the Donbas situation.

Dave Majumdar is the defense editor for The National Interest . You can follow him on Twitter: @davemajumdar .

Joe Stevens , February 22, 2018 2:20 AM

If that's the case, then America needs to pull it's own illegal occupation forces out of eastern Syria ASAP too! Eastern Syria is Syria. Eastern Syria is NOT part of Kurdistan! What a bunch of hypocrites.

Vic , February 22, 2018 7:11 AM

"One potential approach -- which as been proposed by U.S. special representative to Ukraine Kurt Volker -- is where peacekeepers would be deployed in phases while Ukraine implements some of the measures it agreed to under the Minsk agreements."

-That could work, here is the Minsk 2 agreement for those that don't know, https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

It stipulates that Ukraine should complete a number of things, and by the end of it Donbass will be returned to Ukraine. If you add phased peacekeepers to this it could work, the peacekeepers would start between Donbass and Ukraine, and then move into Donbass and get more control the more of the Minsk 2 agreement Ukraine completed.

The peacekeepers could not be NATO or Russian troops for each side to agree obviously

VadimKharichkov , February 22, 2018 5:08 AM

Europe and the US have nothing of value to offer to Ukraine because there's little to exchange it for. There is no economy and too few natural resources to fight for. Thus, Ukraine will remain a suitcase without a handle despite wet dreams of its ultra-nationalists (should be represented in the troll section of this thread).

It will remain useless as an economical ally to Russia in the upcoming years because Ukraine is divided within itself.

The only thing it will be good for, is to serve as an example for everybody on how foolish it is to overthrow democratically elected governments for the sake of fairy tales.

The conflict there will be frozen for decades, as it was frozen in Moldova and Georgia. Without Russian and European investments, there will be no economical development in Ukraine.

This country is screwed, alas. Peacekeepers will not change much, but they could help stop shellings and thus help regular people who suffer the most.

Jorge Martinho VadimKharichkov , February 22, 2018 6:13 AM

Vadim, if Ukraine is not important, why do you spend so much of your precious time writing about it? Why does Russia keep financing the war in Donbass if its so uninteresting to invest in Ukraine? Why did Russia steal Ukrainian gas in the Azov Sea? Or why does it steal ukrainian coal in Donbass? Where did the machinery from the Donbass factories go, Vadim?

Vic Jorge Martinho , February 22, 2018 7:02 AM

"Or why does it steal ukrainian coal in Donbass?"

-The coal belongs to the people of Donbass, not Ukraine, and Ukraine itself banned buying gas from these territories in hope that it will cause more misery to the civilians living there, just like Ukraine stole their pensions and their social welfare in hope for causing maximal suffering.

Jorge Martinho Vic , February 22, 2018 9:09 AM

The Donbass is internationally recognized as part of Ukraine. Second Ukraine is not obliged to pay for the Russian occupation of its territory. The occupation force is responsible for everything that happens inside that territory, even the payment or not of pensions.

Vic Jorge Martinho , February 22, 2018 10:06 AM

That is a pure lie, the conflict between Donbass and Ukraine is a civil war. Russia is not occupying those territories. And Donbass will return to Ukraine if they can follow thru on the Minsk 2 agreement like they agreed to, but never will of course, because the hyper-corrupt Ukrainian government need the legitimacy and distraction that war brings both domestically to avoid coup and internationally as an excuse.

"Red Cross officially declares Ukraine civil war" https://www.thelocal.ch/201...

Alex Robeson Vic , February 22, 2018 1:56 PM

Strelkov, referring to the war he helped start in Donbas: "In the beginning, nobody there wanted to fight."

Pro-Russian agitators like Pavel Gubarev tried to illegally take over government buildings in E Ukraine, and also tried to organize protests, but they had little support from the local population. The local population was cynical about Kiev, but they certainly weren't interested in starting a civil war. That is why Strelkov and other Russians had to start the war.

Vic Alex Robeson , February 22, 2018 2:48 PM

"but they certainly weren't interested in starting a civil war. That is why Strelkov and other Russians had to start the war."

-Nobody wanted a war of course, that is one reason why the Kiev government became so dependent on volunteer n4zists, they were the only one that was eager and willing to kill their brothers at the whims of the unconstitutional coup regime. The average Ukrainian soldiers didn't want to fight and a lot of the Donbass fighters came from defected Ukrainian soldiers.

Alex Robeson Vic , February 22, 2018 5:55 PM

Again, all I have to do is point to Strelkov: "In the beginning, nobody there wanted to fight."

"I dream of a Russia in its natural borders," he says. "At least those of 1939." He claims to have been the one who convinced Putin to intervene militarily in Ukraine, at a time, he says, when the Kremlin was still debating the proper approach to the country."

"I was the one who pulled the trigger for war," Strelkov boasts."

http://www.spiegel.de/inter...

Vic Alex Robeson , February 23, 2018 4:17 AM

Doesn't matter at all what some commanders "boasts" , the war was started when the unconstitutional and unelected government of Ukraine sent its army to crush the rebels.

brylcream Alex Robeson , February 23, 2018 3:20 AM

Strelkov came into Donbass on April 12, 2014 and the acting president Turchinov announced ATO (Anti terrorist operation) on April 7.
The people of Donbass protested peacefully for months and no one wanted to talk with them. They sent tanks and jets instead.

"and also tried to organize protests, but they had little support from the local population. "

This is a blatant lie.

Alex Robeson brylcream , February 23, 2018 7:18 AM

Strelkov took Slavyansk on April 12 - that's not when he arrived. As for the ATO, yes, it was announced on April 7, after armed separatists stormed regional government buildings in Donetsk, Lugansk and Kharkov, raised Russian flags, and said they would hold an independence referendum. What would Russia do if Karelia was taken over by pro-Finnish separatists? And keep in mind, when the ATO was announced, Turchynov promised amnesty for separatists who laid down arms.

No, the "people" of Donbass did not protest peacefully (Gubarev and others were not representative of the people of Donbass). Gubarev and others repeatedly tried to seize buildings and declare self-rule/independence. But polls during that time clearly showed that people did not want independence, even if they were unhappy about Yanukovych being ousted from the presidency. Public opinion did not really shift towards independence until after the fire of Odessa and Mariupol, when Donbass regions were under separatist control and influenced by Russian propaganda.

Vic Alex Robeson , February 22, 2018 2:46 PM

"Strelkov, referring to the war he helped start in Donbas: "In the beginning, nobody there wanted to fight.""

-The civil war was started when the unelected and unconstitutional coup government sent the army to kill the rebels in Donbass for just wanting their language rights protected.

"Pro-Russian agitators like Pavel Gubarev tried to illegally take over government buildings in E Ukraine,"

-Pavel is a Ukrainian, and it is pretty far fetched to call it illegal to resist to an illegal unconstitutional coup government.

Alex Robeson Vic , February 22, 2018 2:58 PM

I have not seen any proof that there was a coordinated coup to remove Yanukovych. On Feb 21st, Western powers got what they wanted when Yanukovych agreed to form a coalition government with Yatsenyuk, Klitschko, and Tyahnybok (OK, maybe Tyahnbok wasn't they're first choice) and have early elections. Yanukovych fled because the security forces abandoned him. They most likely abandoned him because the Feb 21st agreement called for investigation into violence on the Maidan, and they thought they would be blamed for everything.

I never said Gubarev wasn't Ukrainian. But he was clearly a pro-Russian agitator. And yes, his self-promotion as the "governor of Donetsk" was both illegal and unpopular with the locals.

brylcream Alex Robeson , February 23, 2018 3:35 AM

Yanukovich was in Donetsk when they broke their constitution in the Rada, when they didn't have enough votes to impeach him.

"And yes, his self-promotion as the "governor of Donetsk" was both illegal and unpopular with the locals."

Really?
https://www.youtube.com/wat...

Alex Robeson brylcream , February 23, 2018 7:50 AM

He was in Kharkiv, but not on an official visit. He was fleeing. And sorry, but protests attended by a few thousand people do not mean that Gubarev had widespread support.

Vic Alex Robeson , February 22, 2018 3:14 PM

""governor of Donetsk" was both illegal and unpopular with the locals."

-It is worth to point out that there was no democratic support for the coup in Kiev however. Which I guess is why there was a coup in the first place.

Alex Robeson Vic , February 22, 2018 4:20 PM

You still haven't offered any proof for your claim of a coup in Kiev.

brylcream Alex Robeson , February 23, 2018 3:37 AM

Check the Ukrainian constitution, Article 111. There is described how a president could be impeached.

Alex Robeson brylcream , February 23, 2018 7:33 AM

That's not a coup. It's an unconstitutional removal of a president who abandoned his post. What were they supposed to do - live with a power vacuum?

Vic Alex Robeson , February 22, 2018 3:09 PM

"And yes, his self-promotion as the "governor of Donetsk" was both illegal and unpopular with the locals."

-Hardly illegal, quite the opposite, more like it was a duty to resist an unconstitutional coup government. And while I have not found a opinion poll on rebel controlled areas, the closes I found suggest that the rebels has a very high support among the Donbass population.

"An opinion poll that was taken on the day of the referendum and the day before by a correspondent of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, the Washington Post, and five other media outlets found that of those people who intended to vote, 94.8% would vote for independence. The poll did not claim to have scientific precision, but was carried out to get a basis from which to judge the outcome of the referendum, given that independent observers were not present to monitor it. Even with those who said they would not vote counted in, a 65.6% majority supported separation from Ukraine"
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/...

Alex Robeson Vic , February 22, 2018 5:52 PM

You should probably try reading the actual article, instead of quoting Wikipedia. The journalists polled 186 people, and of those 110 supported independence. That's a tiny and insignificant sample size. People voting for independence had been going through a war started by pro-Russian separatists, they were under the martial law of pro-Russian separatists, and their only news was Russian propaganda telling them that Kiev was all Nazis who wanted to exterminate Russia. Also, as you no doubt saw while reading Wikipedia, polls taken before Strelkov and the others started the war showed that the locals were not supportive of independence.

Vic Alex Robeson , February 23, 2018 4:22 AM

" them that Kiev was all Nazis who wanted to exterminate Russia"

-Pretty close to the truth actually, Kiev certainly did and are doing everything they can do exterminate the local civilians in Donbas, but stealing their pensions, cutting of social pay, hindering and stoping food, medicine and water.

Actually I mentioned that in my comment, there are no opinion polls but the closes we get is the opinion polls from Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, the Washington Post, which shows a massive support for the rebels. Which is no surprise as we are talking about an illegal unconstitutional pro-nazi government seizing power.

"tthe locals were not supportive of independence.

-The support for rebels are as all sources show quite high, of course nobody wanted the war, but that was forced on them by the unelected coup government. If Ukraine had just language right of the Donbass people there would have been no war.

Alex Robeson Vic , February 23, 2018 8:14 AM

No, Kiev was not filled with Nazis. Russia engaged in fearmongering to get Crimeans to vote for independence. And what happened? The Ukrainian Army in Crimea resisted all provocations to start a war. Kiev thought that the international community would come to its aid. Remember the presidential and parliamentary elections of 2014? Svoboda and Right Sector barely had any public support at all. The lie that Kiev was filled with Nazis was just that - a lie.

Again, your Frankfurter Allgemeine poll was less than 200 people who happened to be willing to talk to Western journalists. Only 110 of them said they wanted independence, and this was after living under martial law and Russian propaganda for months. There were plenty of actual scientific polls conducted in April before the "referendum" which showed that there was no support for secession - at most, people wanted decentralisation.

Vic Alex Robeson , February 22, 2018 3:05 PM

Well, depends on what you mean with proof I suppose, is an American marxist oligarchs admitting they spent millions to training demonstrators to subvert Ukrainian democracy proof?
Is the fact that 100% of NATO controlled media support the Ukrainian opposition proof?
Is that fact that USA leaders went down to Ukraine and gave out cookies to the undemocratic opposition and held speeches encouraging them to overthrow their government proof?
Is leaked phone calls from USA telling Ukraine which leaders should be installed(which later were installed) proof?
Is Obama openly admitting they handled the "transition of power" in Ukraine proof?
Is the fact that the fascist and ultra-nationalist groups used used to overthrow the democratic government of Ukraine(OUN) known CIA assets proof? I mean, basically, it was the most blatant coup in world history. But if you literally want the USA government to totally in details describe and admit to every detail you will just have to wait a few years or decades until it is released in a FOI report like the fact that USA created ISIS.

Alex Robeson Vic , February 22, 2018 4:38 PM

- I'm assuming you mean the $5 billion the US invested over 20+ years? Russia invested $40 billion in the same time frame - 8x as much as the US (see Sergey Glazyev's March 24, 2014 interview with National Review). Financial investments in democratic institutions are not proof of a coup, but nice try.

- NATO controlled media? There's no such thing.

- Why is it such a big deal with Nuland giving out cookies?

- John McCain didn't encourage them to "overthrow their government". When did he say that? He said "We are here to support your just cause, the sovereign right of Ukraine to determine its own destiny freely and independently. And the destiny you seek lies in Europe."

- Did you know that government officials from European countries and the EU also encouraged the protesters?

- Nuland and the US were clearly operating to keep the opposition united, and yes, they pushed their interests by encouraging Yatsenyuk to take the lead. But Yatsenyuk, Klitschko, and Tyahnybok were already established as opposition politicians in general, and had been accepted by the Maidan protesters before the US arrived on the scene. And besides, the Feb 21st agreement was what the US wanted - it would have placed those three figures in a coalition government with Yanukovych, followed by early elections. All of that considered, the fact that they emerged as leaders after Yanukovych left is really not surprising.

- Obama admitted what everyone knew - the US had entered into the crisis on the side of the EU to push Yanukovych to listen to the protesters. Russia, of course, was pushing Yanukovych to crack down. I remember when RT and Sputnik tried to twist it to mean Obama was claiming the US was behind a coup - it was the most blatant spin/propaganda I've ever seen. Go back and watch Obama's interview with Fareed Zakaria.

- You'll have to provide at least an ounce of proof that ultranationalist, far-right, or neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine are "CIA assets". Otherwise you're just another baseless conspiracy theorist.

- Yes, the US and USSR (Russia) have engaged in regime changes in the past. There's zero proof though, that there was a coup in Ukraine.

Vic Alex Robeson , February 23, 2018 4:27 AM

lol, yes, that is what is called a coup. Not only a coup but the most blatant coup in history I would say, I can only imagine if Russia funded trained and funded demonstrators Mexico, Russian leaders went to Mexico handing out cookies and giving support to the demonstrators, and ordering the opposition which leaders should be installed after the coup and so forth,and then afterwards openly admitting it did it.Hilarious. But I guess you are paid troll, and even when FYI releases information where USA planned the entire thing in detail, like it has with its creation of ISIS and al-qaeda you will deny it still.

Here is the head of Stratfor by the way, the "Shadow CIA" saying the exact same thing, xD

"Head of Stratfor, 'Private CIA,' Says Overthrow of Yanukovych Was 'The Most Blatant Coup in History'"
http://www.washingtonsblog....

Alex Robeson Vic , February 23, 2018 9:01 AM

Watch the video of Obama's interview ( https://www.youtube.com/wat... - he clearly states "Yanukovych then fleeing after we had brokered a deal to transition power in Ukraine." In other words, he openly admits to helping form the February 21st "Agreement on settlement of political crisis in Ukraine". Obviously he's not talking about the Rada removing Yanukovych from office.

Nuland's conversation backs this up. It shows the Obama administration was helping Yatsenyuk, Klitschko, and Tyahnybok stay united. Yanukovych was individually offering them posts in his government. The US was pushing them to resist those offers. This culminated in the February 21st agreement, where the US and EU got additional concessions from Yanukovych - a coalition government with those three leaders, early elections, and investigations of the violence on Maidan.

As for the head of Stratfor, George Friedman went on to write an article in which he said that his quote was completely taken out of context ( http://www.businessinsider.... .

You think handing out cookies means people are funding coups. I'll have to remember that when giving cookies to my children.

Jorge Martinho Vic , February 22, 2018 2:34 PM

Civil wars dont involve foreign powers invading another country...

Duendao Jorge Martinho , February 22, 2018 7:21 PM

So what is doing the US in syria?

Vic Jorge Martinho , February 22, 2018 2:43 PM

Indeed, that is why there is a civil war in Ukraine. "Red Cross officially declares Ukraine civil war" https://www.thelocal.ch/201...

Vic Jorge Martinho , February 22, 2018 7:01 AM

Russia does not steal anything, the Crimean people voted to join Russia and that is their democratic right.

"With two studies out of the way, both Western-based, it seems without question that the vast majority of Crimeans do not feel they were duped into voting for annexation, and that life with Russia will be better for them and their families than life with Ukraine. A year ago this week, 83% of Crimeans went to the polling stations and almost 97% expressed support for reunification with their former Soviet parent."
https://www.forbes.com/site...

Alex Robeson Vic , February 22, 2018 1:48 PM

Crimea was a coup, initiated on February 27, 2014 when armed/masked militants (Spetsnaz?) stormed the Crimean parliamentary building, raised the Russian flag over the building, and barricaded themselves inside. During this occupation, an emergency parliamentary session was called. It is unknown how many MPs participated - a number have said they were not there, even though they were claimed to have been there. But in that emergency session, the Crimean PM (Anatolii Mohyliov) was illegally removed and replaced with an unpopular pro-Russian MP (Sergey Aksyonov). Aksyonov immediately called for the independence referendum. Just to emphasize, all of this happened while the parliamentary building was under armed occupation from unknown pro-Russian forces (most likely Spetsnaz), and against the will of the current Crimean and Ukrainian governments. Interestingly, just the day before (February 26), the Crimean government had told pro-Russian and pro-Ukrainian protesters outside the building that there would be no effort to seek independence from Ukraine.

It was, without doubt, a coup.

Vic Alex Robeson , February 23, 2018 4:28 AM

Derp, there is quite literally a source right above you debunking your lies and linking to several USA and Germany opinion polls verifying that the result of the referendum was reflective of the democratic will of the Crimean people.

Alex Robeson Vic , February 23, 2018 9:03 AM

I didn't dispute the poll. What I said is that before the referendum Russia instigated a coup, suppressed protests, and created a sense of fear in Crimea that drove people to think Kiev was filled with Nazis. Of course they voted to join Russia after that.

BlackRoseML Alex Robeson , February 23, 2018 1:27 PM

Isn't that what happened throughout Ukraine when "protestors" (more accurately thugs) took over the Regional Administration buildings and occupied them? Well, before the coup in Kiev, numerous government buildings in other regions were occupied.

You said that it was a big propaganda exercise to portray being pro-Ukraine as being pro-Nazi. Then why was the Euromaidan far right? Why were the most prominent activists and leaders of the "revolution" associated with Svodoba and Right Sector? Why were there thugs destroying monuments to Lenin? Why were many activists extolling Stepan Bandera and Roman Shukhevych?

The people on the Maidan behaved like far-right lunatics and brigands. No wonder why there it isn't difficult to conceive of them as Nazis.

If I were a woman in Crimea, I would be grateful that I am not living under the jackboot of the Maidan thugs.

[Feb 24, 2018] As Washington's efforts to recapture and return Russia to vassalage have failed it has resorted to a growing series of provocations and conflicts

Notable quotes:
"... Nevertheless, the US retains its political clients in the Baltic , the Balkans and Eastern and Central European regimes. However, these clients are unruly and often eager to confront a nuclear-armed Russia, confident that the US-NATO will intervene, in spite of the probability of being vaporized in a nuclear Armageddon. ..."
"... Despite President Trump's campaign promises to 'pull-back', the US has re-entered Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria in a big way. The Trump shift from global containment and realism to 'rollback and aggression' against Russia and China has failed to secure a positive response from past and present allies. ..."
"... China has increased economic ties with the EU. Russia and the EU share strategic gas and oil trade ties. Domestically, the US military budget deepens the fiscal deficit and drastically threatens social spending. This creates a scenario of increasing US isolation with its futile aggression against a dynamic and changing world. ..."
Feb 24, 2018 | www.unz.com

Russia has reduced and challenged the US pursuit of a uni-polar global empire following the recovery of its sovereignty and economic growth after the disaster of the 1990's. With the ascent of President Putin, the US-EU empire lost their biggest and most lucrative client and source of naked pillage.

Nevertheless, the US retains its political clients in the Baltic , the Balkans and Eastern and Central European regimes. However, these clients are unruly and often eager to confront a nuclear-armed Russia, confident that the US-NATO will intervene, in spite of the probability of being vaporized in a nuclear Armageddon.

Washington's efforts to recapture and return Russia to vassalage have failed. Out of frustration Washington has resorted to a growing series of failed provocations and conflicts between the US and the EU, within the US between Trump and the Democrats; and among the warlords controlling the Trump cabinet.

Germany has continued lucrative trade ties with Russia, despite US sanctions, underscoring the decline of US power to dictate policy to the European Union. The Democratic Party and the ultra-militaristic Clinton faction remains pathologically nostalgic for a return to the 1990's Golden Age of Pillage (before Putin). Clinton's faction is fixated on the politics of revanchism . As a result, they vigorously fought against candidate Donald Trump's campaign promises to pursue a new realistic understanding with Russia. The Russia-Gate Investigation is not merely a domestic electoral squabble led by hysterical 'liberals.' What is a stake is nothing less than a profound conflict over the remaking of the US global map. Trump recognized and accepted the re-emergence of Russia as a global power to be 'contained', while the Democrats campaigned to roll-back reality, overthrow Putin and return to the robber baron orgies of the Clinton years. As a result of this ongoing strategic conflict, Washington is unable to develop a coherent global strategy, which in turn has further weakened US influence in the EU in Europe and elsewhere.

Nevertheless, the intense Democratic onslaught against Trump's initial foreign policy pronouncements regarding Russia succeeded in destroying his 'pivot to realism' and facilitated the rise of a fanatical militaristic faction within his cabinet, which have intensified the anti-Russia policies of the Clintonite Democrats. In less than a year, all of Trump's realist advisers and cabinet members have been purged and replaced by militarists. Their hard core confrontational anti-Russia policy has become the platform for launching a global military strategy based on vast increases in military spending, demands that the EU nations increase their military budgets, and open opposition to an EU-centered military alliance, such as the one recently proposed by French President Emmanuel Macron.

Despite President Trump's campaign promises to 'pull-back', the US has re-entered Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria in a big way. The Trump shift from global containment and realism to 'rollback and aggression' against Russia and China has failed to secure a positive response from past and present allies.

China has increased economic ties with the EU. Russia and the EU share strategic gas and oil trade ties. Domestically, the US military budget deepens the fiscal deficit and drastically threatens social spending. This creates a scenario of increasing US isolation with its futile aggression against a dynamic and changing world.

[Feb 24, 2018] Chuck Schumer War Hawk or Progressive

He is a neoliberal and neocon...
Notable quotes:
"... He basically is a Senator for Israel. He totally supports the Israeli foreign policy viewpoint, which is a very hawkish, if you were a Republican you would call him a neocon. ..."
"... Schumer criticized the Obama administration for abstaining on this very basic resolution, which every other country voted for. So the US was still a pariah, because the US didn't vote for it, it just abstained on it. But to Schumer that was not enough, he wanted it to be completely vetoed, because anything that Israel does is sacrosanct, and anyone who criticizes it, in Schumer's eyes, is not someone he wants to ally with politically, so he'd rather affectively ally with Trump. ..."
"... The most recent showing of that allegiance was last month, when Schumer supported Trump's decision to launch an air strike on an Air Force base in Syria, something Israel also strongly supported. ..."
"... The criticism of the Democratic Party is it is the Wall Street and war party. That is Chuck Schumer, and so for him to have this kind of pretend progressive image, it's just so obviously fraudulent. ..."
"... Chuck Schumer has replaced Joe Lieberman as the Senator representing Israeli interests in the Senate. US interests are usually secondary to his machinations ..."
"... Great development and exposure of this hillary-look-alike. Love the phrase 'pretend progressive,' as it describes Schumer to a T. Great piece. ..."
"... Schumer and Clinton must be understood in relation to Israel. Israel to both of them are sacrosant. Israel can do no wrong. Both these two war hawks for Israel takes their orders from Netanyahu. He is like a vice president for Israel in the United States. ..."
"... Schumer (sic) is a scum bucket who ought to be trounced out of the Senate, through the revolving door to his sinecure on Wall Street. Schumer's ultimately loyalties are to his corporate benefactors on Wall Street. Which too is his constituency. ..."
"... Schumer is a puppet for the deep state and the deep state may have some "dirt" on him in order to keep him in line...and his famous quote about the security state: "they have 6 ways to Sunday to get back at you" or something to this effect...makes me wonder what he knows? ..."
"... Israel is the driving force behind disruption of the middle east...the more the middle east is neutralized, the better for Israel...Chuck is one of their best foot soldiers ..."
"... Generals gathered in their masses, just like witches at black masses. Evil minds that plot destruction, sorcerer of death's construction. In the fields the bodies burning, as the war machine keeps turning. Death and hatred to mankind, poisoning their brainwashed minds...Oh lord yeah! ..."
"... Politicians hide themselves away They only started the war Why should they go out to fight? They leave that role to the poor ..."
"... Time will tell on their power minds Making war just for fun Treating people just like pawns in chess Wait `till their judgement day comes, yeah! ♪ ..."
Feb 24, 2018 | therealnews.com

... ... ...

Thomas Hedges: In the 2007 book he published, Positively American, in the midst of his campaign against the war, Schumer admitted that his opposition that year and the year before, was as much about ending a failed policy as it was about getting votes. In reality Schumer had been one of the war's most ardent supporters, beyond his public display against the war carefully timed for the 2006 Congressional elections, Schumer in fact pitted much of the blame on Iraqis themselves, arguing that Sunis, Shiites and Kurds seemed more interested in starting a civil war in Iraq than in receiving help from the Americans and constructing any democratic central government.

He even said, that in a similar future situation, he might vote again to authorize the use of force against a country like Iraq. "Today," he wrote in his book, "I still believe that when our country is under attack the chief executive deserves a degree of latitude, if God forbid, we were attacked again, I could well vote to give it to a future President, Democrat or Republican." And when a Real News correspondent pressed Schumer in 2007 on US reparations to the Iraqi people, this is what he had to say.

Sam Husseini: Do we owe something to the Iraqi people other than just getting out? Do we owe them reparations for having brought about this war?

Chuck Schumer: I don't believe that.

Ben Norton: It's hard to find a Democrat that's more gung-ho about war than Chuck Schumer. Not only did he support the Iraq war, and fearmonger about weapons of mass destruction, he tepidly criticized the Bush administration for how it carried out the war.

Thomas Hedges: In fact, tepid criticism seems to be Schumer at his most radical. In general, he is someone who supports hard-line policy decisions, atoning for mistakes only years down the line, and usually because it's politically expedient to do so, as in an election is about to take place.

Chuck Schumer: If you don't give up and you keep fighting and you're right, you win!

Thomas Hedges: In his early days, Schumer wasn't as focused on foreign policy, in the years before 911 would shift America's attention to the Middle East, Congressman Schumer, along with the new Democrats like Bill Clinton among others, would exploit the crime scare of the 1990's in order to gain more votes and more power. During those years, Schumer supported the Omnibus Crime Bill of 1994, which spiked the prison population. And in 1995 he sponsored the Omnibus Counterterrorism Act, which became the foundation from which the Patriot Act six years later, was built.

Ben Norton: When it comes to the war on terror he was a very enthusiastic supporter and remains so. He voted for the Patriot Act, and again this is a supposed Democratic leader, who voted for the Bush administration to take away Americans civil liberties.

Thomas Hedges: In the years straddling 911, he supported many of the same policies Republicans supported. From his tough on crime approach to supporting war in the Middle East, to defending the surveillance of Muslim groups in New York after 911. Schumer and the GOP had very few differences, in fact despite shedding tears at a press conference earlier this year after the Muslim ban that Trump implemented, Schumer himself had proposed something eerily similar.

Ben Norton: In November of 2015, not that long ago, less than two years ago, Schumer also said that the US government should consider a so called pause on the re-settlement of Syrian refugees. He also, in one of the most egregious yet under reported aspects of Schumer, previously said that torture should be considered in some places, and he said that, "Oh well if you oppose torture, you say this now, but you need to put yourself in the shoes of people in these particular situations etc." So he really left torture on the table.

Before Trump was President, he had actually donated money to Schumer, that of course, represents something, this is not a progressive Democrat. Schumer actually represents the segment, the influential powerful segment of the Democratic Party, that has helped pave the way for Donald Trump to carry out many of the policies he's already implementing.

Thomas Hedges: But for voters who have paid attention to Schumer for a long time, the Senator's policy choices are anything but surprising.

Kevin Zeese: He basically is a Senator for Israel. He totally supports the Israeli foreign policy viewpoint, which is a very hawkish, if you were a Republican you would call him a neocon.

Ariel Gold: He has come out in strong opposition to the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions movement and was very supportive of New York Governor Cuomo's order to ban BDS in New York state, and Schumer made a direct statement in support of that.

Thomas Hedges: Schumer's staunch support for Israel has prompted him for example, to criticize the Obama administration, when in 2016, the United States abstained from a UN Security Council resolution re-affirming something the Council had almost unanimously upheld since 1979. Namely, that Israel's settlement building projects on Palestinian land violated international law.

Ben Norton: Schumer criticized the Obama administration for abstaining on this very basic resolution, which every other country voted for. So the US was still a pariah, because the US didn't vote for it, it just abstained on it. But to Schumer that was not enough, he wanted it to be completely vetoed, because anything that Israel does is sacrosanct, and anyone who criticizes it, in Schumer's eyes, is not someone he wants to ally with politically, so he'd rather affectively ally with Trump.

Thomas Hedges: The most recent showing of that allegiance was last month, when Schumer supported Trump's decision to launch an air strike on an Air Force base in Syria, something Israel also strongly supported.

Chuck Schumer: On Syria, I salute the professionalism and skill of our armed forces, who took action last night. The people of Syria have suffered untold horrors and violence at the hands of Bashar al-Assad and his supporters in Tehran and in Putin's Russia, making sure that Assad knows when he commits such despicable atrocities he will pay a price, is the right thing to do.

Thomas Hedges: But perhaps Schumer's greatest show of allegiance to Israel, was his decision to oppose the Iran nuclear deal, without which experts have warned, would put the United States and Iran on a collision course.

Ben Norton: Under President Obama, Schumer was one of the most prominent Democrats to oppose the Iran nuclear deal, and he was of course fearmongering about Iran, which to him is the devil incarnate, and he actually made factually false statements about the nuclear agreement, and claimed that it would allow Iran in 10 years to produce nuclear weapons etc.

Thomas Hedges: Leading up to his decision, Schumer reassured Zionists that he was consulting the most credentialed men in Washington, including Henry Kissinger, an opponent of the deal, and the man who orchestrated the violent coup in Chile that toppled its democratically elected leader, as well as the architect of the very bloody Vietnam war.

Chuck Schumer: I spent some time with Dr. Kissinger, I'm spending time with excellence.

Ariel Gold: So it threatened to pull us into another war, and we're back in that threat again with Trump winning the election we hear a lot about undoing the Iran nuclear deal, and it's one of the things that Israel has been saying they would like to see come out of the Trump administration.

Thomas Hedges: Schumer's willingness to oppose the deal early on, which created an opening for other undecided Democrats to do the same, is a strong display of support for Israel.

News Anchor: Schumer's support here really would have been key for the White House, but coming out overnight against this deal saying in a statement quote, "I will vote to disapprove the agreement, not because I believe war is a viable or desirable option, not to challenge the path of dis-plomacy it is because, I believe Iran will not change."

Thomas Hedges: It also put him in yet the same camp as current President Donald Trump in terms of pursuing a Middle East policy that is in line with Washington's most hawkish advocates. In the end, Schumer's a friend of the neo conservative foreign policy agenda. While he may cry over Trump's Muslim ban and purport to have the same inclinations as America's most progressive members of the Senate, he's fundamentally in agreement with the United States forceful efforts abroad.

Kevin Zeese: The criticism of the Democratic Party is it is the Wall Street and war party. That is Chuck Schumer, and so for him to have this kind of pretend progressive image, it's just so obviously fraudulent.

Thomas Hedges: As the United States nears yet another arms deal with Middle East ally Saudi Arabia, this time for a hundred billion dollars, and coupled with its four billion dollar annual aid to Israel, we can expect Schumer not only to support an even more militarized Middle East, but to continue to rail against countries like Iran that pose a threat to US and Israel's hegemony in the region.

0040 • 3 days ago ,

Chuck Schumer has replaced Joe Lieberman as the Senator representing Israeli interests in the Senate. US interests are usually secondary to his machinations

raquel • 9 months ago ,

Great development and exposure of this hillary-look-alike. Love the phrase 'pretend progressive,' as it describes Schumer to a T. Great piece.

kofi123 • 9 months ago ,

Schumer and Clinton must be understood in relation to Israel. Israel to both of them are sacrosant. Israel can do no wrong. Both these two war hawks for Israel takes their orders from Netanyahu. He is like a vice president for Israel in the United States.

potshot Stretch • 9 months ago ,

Said Nietzsche.

"I only take up causes in which I know I'll find no allies. And often I wait for a cause to become successful before attacking it."

Schumer (sic) is a scum bucket who ought to be trounced out of the Senate, through the revolving door to his sinecure on Wall Street. Schumer's ultimately loyalties are to his corporate benefactors on Wall Street. Which too is his constituency. Anything in the way of progressiveness that you suggest will be only, like Obama's eloquent blackness, to run cover for favors for the war party. Which at this late date ought also be christened the "hastening to collective extinction" party.

Seer • 9 months ago ,

Schumer is a puppet for the deep state and the deep state may have some "dirt" on him in order to keep him in line...and his famous quote about the security state: "they have 6 ways to Sunday to get back at you" or something to this effect...makes me wonder what he knows?

Jsharp • 9 months ago ,

Israel is the driving force behind disruption of the middle east...the more the middle east is neutralized, the better for Israel...Chuck is one of their best foot soldiers

sisterlauren Jsharp • 9 months ago ,

I think we can call him an Israel firster.

v. jabotinsky • 9 months ago ,

Schumer is a Zionist. He's said he sees himself as the protector of Israel.

p.munkey • 9 months ago ,

Of the likes of Chuck Schumer, the bard sang:

♪ Generals gathered in their masses,
just like witches at black masses.
Evil minds that plot destruction,
sorcerer of death's construction.
In the fields the bodies burning,
as the war machine keeps turning.
Death and hatred to mankind,
poisoning their brainwashed minds...Oh lord yeah!

Politicians hide themselves away
They only started the war
Why should they go out to fight?
They leave that role to the poor

Time will tell on their power minds
Making war just for fun
Treating people just like pawns in chess
Wait `till their judgement day comes, yeah! ♪

[Feb 24, 2018] The Mueller Indictments The Day the Music Died by Daniel Lazare

The size of funds that Democrats and Republicans operated were in billions. And , IRA staffers purchased just $100,000 worth of Facebook ads, 56% of which ran after Election Day. So only $44K was spent during election campaign.
There author is wrong about color revolution against Trump. It is progressing.
One interesting side effect will be ruthless suppression of the US influence in Russian elections. Bismark famously remarked that "the Russians are slow to saddle up, but ride fast." Here media dogs also are off leash and there will be innocent victims, blamed in treason and other nefarious activities just to voicing dissent. Russiagate discredited neoliberal fifth column in Russia, making them all "enemies of the people".
Notable quotes:
"... After nine months of labor, Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller thus brought forth a mouse. Even if all the charges are true – something we'll probably never know since it's unlikely that any of the accused will be brought to trial -- the indictment tells us virtually nothing that's new. ..."
"... Yes, they persuaded someone in Florida to dress up as Hillary Clinton in a prison uniform and stand inside a cage mounted on a flatbed truck. And, yes, they also got another "real U.S. person," as the indictment terms it, to stand in front of the White House with a sign saying, "Happy 55th Birthday Dear Boss," a tribute, apparently, to IRA founder Yevgeniy Prigozhin, the convicted robber turned caterer whose birthday was three days away. Instead of a super-sophisticated spying operation, the indictment depicts a bumbling freelance operation that is still giving Putin heartburn months after the fact. ..."
"... Not that this has stopped the media from whipping itself into a frenzy. "Russia is at war with our democracy," screamed a headline in the Washington Post. "Trump is ignoring the worst attack on America since 9/11," blared another. " Russia is engaged in a virtual war against the United States through 21st-century tools of disinformation and propaganda," declared the New York Times, while Daily Beast columnist Jonathan Alter tweeted that the IRA's activities amounted to nothing less than a "tech Pearl Harbor." ..."
"... This makes the Dems seem crass, unscrupulous, and none too democratic. But then Mudde gave the knife a twist. The real trouble with the strategy, he said, is that it isn't working: ..."
"... No collusion means no impeachment and hence no anti-Trump "color revolution" of the sort that was so effective in Georgia or the Ukraine. Moreover, while 53 percent of Americans believe that investigating Russiagate should be a top or at least an important priority according to a recent poll , figures for a half-dozen other issues ranging from Medicare and Social Security reform to tax policy, healthcare, infrastructure, and immigration are actually a good deal higher – 67 percent, 72 percent, or even more. ..."
"... " the Russia-Trump collusion story might be the talk of the town in Washington, but this is not the case in much of the rest of the country." Out in flyover country, rather, Americans can't figure out why the political elite is more concerned with a nonexistent scandal than with things that really count, i.e. de-industrialization, infrastructure decay, the opioid epidemic, and school shootings. As society disintegrates, the only thing Democrats have accomplished with all their blathering about Russkis under the bed is to demonstrate just how cut off from the real world they are. ..."
"... But Russiagate is not just about regime change, but other things as well. One is repression. Where once Democrats would have laughed off Russian trolls and the like, they're now obsessed with making a mountain out of a molehill in order to enforce mainstream opinion and marginalize ideas and opinions suspected of being un-American and hence pro-Russian. If the RT (Russia Today) news network is now suspect -- the Times described it not long ago as "the slickly produced heart of a broad, often covert disinformation campaign designed to sow doubt about democratic institutions and destabilize the West" – then why not the BBC or Agence France-Presse? How long until foreign books are banned or foreign musicians? ..."
"... "I'm actually surprised I haven't been indicted," tweets Bloomberg columnist Leonid Bershidsky. "I'm Russian, I was in the U.S. in 2016 and I published columns critical of both Clinton and Trump w/o registering as a foreign agent." When the Times complains that Facebook "still sees itself as the bank that got robbed, rather than the architect who designed a bank with no safes, and no alarms or locks on the doors, and then acted surprised when burglars struck," then it's clear that the goal is to force Facebook to rein in its activities or stand by and watch as others do so instead. ..."
"... But Russiagate is about something else as well: war. As National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster warns that the "time is now" to act against Iran, the New York Times slams Trump for not imposing sanctions on Moscow, and a spooky "Nuclear Posture Review" suggests that the US might someday respond to a cyber attack with atomic weapons, it's plain that Washington is itching for a showdown that will somehow undo the mistakes of the previous administration. The more Trump drags his feet, the more Democrats conclude that a war drive is the best way to bring him to his knees. ..."
"... Thus, low-grade political interference is elevated into a casus belli while Vladimir Putin is portrayed as a supernatural villain straight out of Harry Potter. But where does it stop? Libya has been set back decades, Syria, the subject of yet another US regime-change effort, has been all but destroyed, while Yemen – which America helps Saudi Arabia bomb virtually around the clock – is now a disaster area with some 9,000 people killed, 50,000 injured, a million-plus cholera cases, and more than half of all hospitals and clinics destroyed. ..."
"... The more Democrats pound the war drums, the more death and destruction will ensue. The process is well underway in Syria, the victim of Israeli bombings and a US-Turkish invasion, and it will undoubtedly spread as Dems turn up the heat. If the pathetic pseudo-scandal known as Russiagate really is collapsing under its own weight, then it's not a moment too soon. ..."
"... The Frozen Republic: How the Constitution Is Paralyzing Democracy ..."
"... A minor quibble was how at the end the author kept referring to how the "U.S" or "Washington" were the forces for the regime changes or flat-out destruction of nations Israel wants destroyed. The crappy little pesthole has been the barely-concealed mastermind of all the "Wars For Israel" which have turned the US of A into a bankrupt laughingstock. ..."
"... As ludicrous as Russiagate became, it was no joke, and became a real amplifier of the threat of nuclear war, and the relentlessly increasing militarization of America. Without the enthusiastic help of the corporate media, the whole phony narrative would never have got off the ground. Of course the criminals we call the intelligence community did all they could to give it legs, as well. We can only pray that it fades away now, and is not replaced with something else like a shooting war. But that hope is fading now on several fronts ..."
"... That was NOT to remove Trump, which was always a long shot and would only produce Pence and angry motivated Trump voters in the next election. ..."
"... The Trump derangement syndrome had a calculated purpose to keep donors giving after they were outraged by the waste of their donations. They'd been acting like a donor-strike was in progress. This cured that. ..."
"... This fed off the Stages of Grief reactions of those who'd so confidently expected a Hillary win. That helped do it, but was not the real motive. Those who initiated and shaped it were more directed, and aimed at the money. That is why the more likely things to blame, like Comey, were set aside in favor of the easy target of a foreign enemy which was familiar from recent Cold War. ..."
"... Having only as reference my own personal take on our news media the infamous MSM, is that these journalistic bandits are only in the game of twisting the news for the ratings, and to promote their own opportunistic careers. The corporate owned media has replaced responsible reporting with salaisuus promotions of often tragic events in a way that tends to in my eyes be a mere exploitation of these tragedies, as we viewers become glued to our TV screens. ..."
Feb 24, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Fads and scandals often follow a set trajectory. They grow big, bigger, and then, finally, too big, at which point they topple over and collapse under the weight of their own internal contradictions. This was the fate of the "Me too" campaign, which started out as an exposé of serial abuser Harvey Weinstein but then went too far when Babe.net published a story about one woman's bad date with comedian Aziz Ansari. Suddenly, it became clear that different types of behavior were being lumped together in a dangerous way, and a once-explosive movement began to fizzle.

So, too, with Russiagate. After dominating the news for more than a year, the scandal may have at last reached a tipping point with last week's indictment of thirteen Russian individuals and three Russian corporations on charges of illegal interference in the 2016 presidential campaign. But the indictment landed with a decided thud for three reasons:

It failed to connect the Internet Research Agency (IRA), the alleged St. Petersburg troll factory accused of political meddling, with Vladimir Putin, the all-purpose evil-doer who the corporate media say is out to destroy American democracy. It similarly failed to establish a connection with the Trump campaign and indeed went out of its way to describe contacts with the Russians as "unwitting." It described the meddling itself as even more inept and amateurish than many had suspected.

After nine months of labor, Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller thus brought forth a mouse. Even if all the charges are true – something we'll probably never know since it's unlikely that any of the accused will be brought to trial -- the indictment tells us virtually nothing that's new.

Yes, IRA staffers purchased $100,000 worth of Facebook ads, 56 percent of which ran after Election Day. Yes, they persuaded someone in Florida to dress up as Hillary Clinton in a prison uniform and stand inside a cage mounted on a flatbed truck. And, yes, they also got another "real U.S. person," as the indictment terms it, to stand in front of the White House with a sign saying, "Happy 55th Birthday Dear Boss," a tribute, apparently, to IRA founder Yevgeniy Prigozhin, the convicted robber turned caterer whose birthday was three days away. Instead of a super-sophisticated spying operation, the indictment depicts a bumbling freelance operation that is still giving Putin heartburn months after the fact.

Not that this has stopped the media from whipping itself into a frenzy. "Russia is at war with our democracy," screamed a headline in the Washington Post. "Trump is ignoring the worst attack on America since 9/11," blared another. " Russia is engaged in a virtual war against the United States through 21st-century tools of disinformation and propaganda," declared the New York Times, while Daily Beast columnist Jonathan Alter tweeted that the IRA's activities amounted to nothing less than a "tech Pearl Harbor."

All of which merely demonstrates, in proper backhanded fashion, how grievously Mueller has fallen short. Proof that the scandal had at last overstayed its welcome came five days later when the Guardian, a website that had previously flogged Russiagate even more vigorously than the Post, the Times, or CNN, published a news analysis by Cas Mudde, an associate professor at the University of Georgia, admitting that it was all a farce – and a particularly self-defeating one at that.

Mudde's article made short work of hollow pieties about a neutral and objective investigation. Rather than an effort to get at the truth, Russiagate was a thinly-veiled effort at regime change. "[I]n the end," he wrote, "the only question everyone really seems to care about is whether Donald Trump was involved – and can therefore be impeached for treason.

With last week's indictment, the article went on, "Democratic party leaders once again reassured their followers that this was the next logical step in the inevitable downfall of Trump." The more Democrats play the Russiagate card, in other words, the nearer they will come to their goal of riding the Orange-Haired One out of town on a rail.

This makes the Dems seem crass, unscrupulous, and none too democratic. But then Mudde gave the knife a twist. The real trouble with the strategy, he said, is that it isn't working:

"While there is no doubt that the Trump camp was, and still is, filled with amoral and fraudulent people, and was very happy to take the Russians help during the elections, even encouraging it on the campaign, I do not think Mueller will be able to find conclusive evidence that Donald Trump himself colluded with Putin's Russia to win the elections. And that is the only thing that will lead to his impeachment as the Republican party is not risking political suicide for anything less."

Other Objectives of "Russiagate"

No collusion means no impeachment and hence no anti-Trump "color revolution" of the sort that was so effective in Georgia or the Ukraine. Moreover, while 53 percent of Americans believe that investigating Russiagate should be a top or at least an important priority according to a recent poll , figures for a half-dozen other issues ranging from Medicare and Social Security reform to tax policy, healthcare, infrastructure, and immigration are actually a good deal higher – 67 percent, 72 percent, or even more.

Summed up Mudde: " the Russia-Trump collusion story might be the talk of the town in Washington, but this is not the case in much of the rest of the country." Out in flyover country, rather, Americans can't figure out why the political elite is more concerned with a nonexistent scandal than with things that really count, i.e. de-industrialization, infrastructure decay, the opioid epidemic, and school shootings. As society disintegrates, the only thing Democrats have accomplished with all their blathering about Russkis under the bed is to demonstrate just how cut off from the real world they are.

But Russiagate is not just about regime change, but other things as well. One is repression. Where once Democrats would have laughed off Russian trolls and the like, they're now obsessed with making a mountain out of a molehill in order to enforce mainstream opinion and marginalize ideas and opinions suspected of being un-American and hence pro-Russian. If the RT (Russia Today) news network is now suspect -- the Times described it not long ago as "the slickly produced heart of a broad, often covert disinformation campaign designed to sow doubt about democratic institutions and destabilize the West" – then why not the BBC or Agence France-Presse? How long until foreign books are banned or foreign musicians?

"I'm actually surprised I haven't been indicted," tweets Bloomberg columnist Leonid Bershidsky. "I'm Russian, I was in the U.S. in 2016 and I published columns critical of both Clinton and Trump w/o registering as a foreign agent." When the Times complains that Facebook "still sees itself as the bank that got robbed, rather than the architect who designed a bank with no safes, and no alarms or locks on the doors, and then acted surprised when burglars struck," then it's clear that the goal is to force Facebook to rein in its activities or stand by and watch as others do so instead.

Add to this the classic moral panic promoted by #MeToo – to believe charges of sexual harassment and assault without first demanding evidence "is to disbelieve, and deny due process to, the accused," notes Judith Levine in the Boston Review – and it's clear that a powerful wave of cultural conservatism is crashing down on the United States, much of it originating in a classic neoliberal-Hillaryite milieu. Formerly the liberal alternative, the Democratic Party is now passing the Republicans on the right.

But Russiagate is about something else as well: war. As National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster warns that the "time is now" to act against Iran, the New York Times slams Trump for not imposing sanctions on Moscow, and a spooky "Nuclear Posture Review" suggests that the US might someday respond to a cyber attack with atomic weapons, it's plain that Washington is itching for a showdown that will somehow undo the mistakes of the previous administration. The more Trump drags his feet, the more Democrats conclude that a war drive is the best way to bring him to his knees.

Thus, low-grade political interference is elevated into a casus belli while Vladimir Putin is portrayed as a supernatural villain straight out of Harry Potter. But where does it stop? Libya has been set back decades, Syria, the subject of yet another US regime-change effort, has been all but destroyed, while Yemen – which America helps Saudi Arabia bomb virtually around the clock – is now a disaster area with some 9,000 people killed, 50,000 injured, a million-plus cholera cases, and more than half of all hospitals and clinics destroyed.

The more Democrats pound the war drums, the more death and destruction will ensue. The process is well underway in Syria, the victim of Israeli bombings and a US-Turkish invasion, and it will undoubtedly spread as Dems turn up the heat. If the pathetic pseudo-scandal known as Russiagate really is collapsing under its own weight, then it's not a moment too soon.

Daniel Lazare is the author of several books including The Frozen Republic: How the Constitution Is Paralyzing Democracy (Harcourt Brace).

Zachary Smith , February 24, 2018 at 1:25 pm

First thing I checked before reading this was to check for instances of misuse of the term "liberal". When I found none at all, the piece suddenly looked very promising. And it was a fine essay!

A minor quibble was how at the end the author kept referring to how the "U.S" or "Washington" were the forces for the regime changes or flat-out destruction of nations Israel wants destroyed. The crappy little pesthole has been the barely-concealed mastermind of all the "Wars For Israel" which have turned the US of A into a bankrupt laughingstock.

With that small objection on record, I will declare this was great.

BobH , February 24, 2018 at 2:05 pm

Zachary, I wouldn't get too hung up on words like "liberal" which have been used and abused to become almost meaningless but yes, "the Democratic Party is now passing the Republicans on the right." Somehow I think they believe they can pick up enough "moderate" Republicans in the midterms to make up for the "angry white males"(& intellectuals) they lost in the last election the same losing strategy.

mike k , February 24, 2018 at 1:41 pm

As ludicrous as Russiagate became, it was no joke, and became a real amplifier of the threat of nuclear war, and the relentlessly increasing militarization of America. Without the enthusiastic help of the corporate media, the whole phony narrative would never have got off the ground. Of course the criminals we call the intelligence community did all they could to give it legs, as well. We can only pray that it fades away now, and is not replaced with something else like a shooting war. But that hope is fading now on several fronts

Mark Thomason , February 24, 2018 at 1:41 pm

From its first moment, this was a Team Hillary exercise, decided on by her in the days right after the election and promoted through her media contracts that had been an extension of her campaign.

Why? At first they seemed to imagine it possible to reverse the election outcome.

Then it shifted to Trump hate. Why?

That was NOT to remove Trump, which was always a long shot and would only produce Pence and angry motivated Trump voters in the next election.

The Trump derangement syndrome had a calculated purpose to keep donors giving after they were outraged by the waste of their donations. They'd been acting like a donor-strike was in progress. This cured that.

This fed off the Stages of Grief reactions of those who'd so confidently expected a Hillary win. That helped do it, but was not the real motive. Those who initiated and shaped it were more directed, and aimed at the money. That is why the more likely things to blame, like Comey, were set aside in favor of the easy target of a foreign enemy which was familiar from recent Cold War.

It was completely cynical, guided by the same greed that had produced the candidacy of Hillary and run it the whole time, doing fund raising in friendly places instead of campaigning in swing states.

JDQ , February 24, 2018 at 2:00 pm

..please do read this. It gives Liberals more a bashing than Conservatives

Joe Tedesky , February 24, 2018 at 2:40 pm

Having only as reference my own personal take on our news media the infamous MSM, is that these journalistic bandits are only in the game of twisting the news for the ratings, and to promote their own opportunistic careers. The corporate owned media has replaced responsible reporting with salaisuus promotions of often tragic events in a way that tends to in my eyes be a mere exploitation of these tragedies, as we viewers become glued to our TV screens.

This is the way the MSM sell too many needless pharmaceutical products, and their drugs are products, to insurance ad's and somehow make commercial space for the MIC defense contractors. This is how the MSM makes real money, as they forfeited our learning of anything worthwhile, as to pave the way for more exploitation of our country's struggles with everything and anything, but all forfeited simply to make the MSM more money.

It goes without saying that we the American public aren't necessarily as fooled, and tricked, as our masters would like to believe we are. So to explain away the Empire's failings certain forces from within our nation's Beltway are hard at work trying to blame all of their misgivings on another, and that another is Vladimir Putin and his American engineered misunderstood Russians. For this reason our MSM hardly ever put the real Putin on our television screens. No never, these American media producers always when describing Putin, use a prop, or a slimy squinty eyed shirtless Russian stereotype instead. For our MSM ever to air a speech of Putin, or do as Oliver Stone did, is beyond question, so don't wait up kids to see ever steady Vladimir on our American TV sets because it just isn't going to happen.

So now our MSM is exploiting the Florida mass shooting, and it is with their slants and predisposed opinions where I lose faith in anything our media does. Even as terrible as this Florida school shooting was, our MSM must politicize and adhere left right slants to this story as in their daff journalistic heads this is what they must do. Like I said this is my opinion taken from my own experiences, so take my comment for what it is, and not from any references I happened upon.

[Feb 23, 2018] Russia loses the E. Ukraine as a buffer.

Feb 23, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Les | Dec 31, 2016 12:09:53 PM | 4

Kissinger reportedly working on a deal with Russia: Crimea for East Ukraine.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/henry-kissinger-russia-trump-crimea-advises-latest-ukraine-a7497646.html

[Feb 23, 2018] The Knives Are Out for Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster

So one year ago McMaster was under attack and survived. Note that this was the time of appointment of the Special Prosecutor which changed the dynamics, probably preserving his scalp. This time might be different.
Notable quotes:
"... Washington Post ..."
May 09, 2017 | foreignpolicy.com

The Afghanistan strategy McMaster is pushing, with the support of Defense Secretary James Mattis, would send roughly 3,000-5,000 U.S. and NATO troops to Afghanistan, according to a separate source familiar with the internal deliberations. These troops would be sent to help bulk up the Afghan National Security Forces, which, after years of U.S. assistance, are still struggling against the Taliban, al Qaeda, and a small Islamic State presence in the country.

According to the Washington Post , the new strategy "would authorize the Pentagon, not the White House, to set troop numbers in Afghanistan and give the military far broader authority to use airstrikes to target Taliban militants." The hope is that by increasing pressure on the Taliban, it will force them to the negotiating table with more favorable terms for Kabul and Washington. Sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan follows a decision made last year by then-President Barack Obama, who announced in July that 8,400 U.S. troops would remain in Afghanistan through January 2017 because of the "precarious" security situation there, undoing his previous plan to draw down to 5,500 by the time he left office.

The Post reported that "those opposed to the plan have begun to refer derisively to the strategy as 'McMaster's War,'" and this particular criticism is repeated in a handful of negative stories about McMaster that have already cropped up this week. For those plugged into the dicey world of Trump administration power plays, this slur has the hallmarks of a hit job by Bannon's team. (It's worth noting that the same people who oppose McMaster are no fans of Mattis's moderating influence on the president, but he's seen as politically untouchable for now.)

[Feb 23, 2018] Marion Maréchal Le Pen's Dynamic Speech The American Conservative

Notable quotes:
"... The Benedict Option ..."
Feb 23, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Marion Maréchal Le Pen's Dynamic Speech By Rod Dreher • February 22, 2018, 7:04 PM

http://www.youtube.com/embed/gn80bxXr8eQ?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

Marion Maréchal-Le Pen, the right-wing French politician, delivered a solid speech to CPAC today. It's embedded above. It was not the usual American conservative boilerplate. For example, check out this passage:

To open oneself to the outside, you must have a solid core. To welcome, you have to remain, and to share, you must have something to offer. Without nation, and without family, the limits of the common good, natural law, and collective morality disappears, as the reign of egoism continues.

Today, even children have now become merchandise. We hear now in the public debate, we have the right to order a child from a catalog, we have the right to rent a woman's womb, we have the right to deprive a child of a mother or father. No you don't! A child is not a "right". Is this the freedom that we want? No. We don't want this atomized world of individuals without gender, without fathers, without mothers, and without nation.

She went on to condemn euthanasia, gender theory, and transhumanism. Le Pen said that the fight cannot be political alone, but must take place in culture, in media, and in the education system. She ended like this:

I finish with a Mahler quote I like very much, a quote which sums up conservatism in modernity: 'Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire."

I like that quote very much too:

"Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire." -- Gustav Mahler. #BenedictOption

-- Rod Dreher (@roddreher) September 23, 2017

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Michael Brendan Dougherty picked out the most unusual thing about her speech : how it inadvertently revealed how very, very Protestant most American conservatism is. Check out his short reaction piece for the details. That is what occurred to me as well, especially having just returned from a week in France. Even though The Benedict Option was written for an American readership, I find it so much easier to discuss it with French and Italian Catholics, for reasons that I have not been able to figure out. Hearing Le Pen in an American context really brought that out. Even American Catholics are a lot more Protestant in how they think politically than they realize.

I don't say this as a put-down; it's what you would expect from people raised in an overwhelmingly Protestant nation, one built on Protestant, classic-liberal principles. But there it is. My friend Fred Gion, a Catholic and political conservative in Paris, told me over a decade ago that the arguments in my book Crunchy Cons, which was being attacked by many US conservatives for being crypto-liberal, made perfect sense to European conservatives.

Continental conservatives in the Le Pen mold are more traditionalist, focusing on natural law, religion, and culture. Conservative US Protestants share a lot of the views of European conservatives, but there seems to be among conservatives from Catholic cultures a deeper sense of order unifying these principles. There also tends to be much more skepticism of the free market and individualism.

Readers who have thought more about this than I have: tell me why this is. Which principles define conservative politics in Britain and America as more Protestant than conservative politics on the continent? Let's talk about this -- but anybody, Protestant or Catholic, who wants to sneer at the other, keep it to yourself.

I agree with this from Dougherty as well:

And I have a warning for those who would warm to [Le Pen's speech] uncritically. As my career grants me friendships with other conservatives across Europe, I notice the tendency in them and in myself to idealize or project hopes onto the conservatives in other nations. My Irish and English friends tend to be far more positive about Trump than I am. And I have been far more positive about some of their would-be champions than they can be. Unfamiliarity breeds fantasy.

This is true. I was asked quite a bit about Trump while I was in France. It was interesting to me that most of my interlocutors regarded him ideally, in contrast to Emmanuel Macron, whom they detested. I could tell that folks didn't really understand why I was so cool on Trump. I bet that things would be exactly reversed in the matter of Marion Maréchal-Le Pen (but not her secular nationalist aunt Marine, whom I find unappealing!).

Siarlys Jenkins February 23, 2018 at 11:30 am

The main reason why nothing ever gets done in the Beltway is because the two-party system has strangled everything. It is an archaic system which cries out for reform.

Hear! Hear! Three or four parties doing some honest horse trading would serve us much better.

'Look, you know we're never going to agree to X, but, none of us alone have sufficient strength to form a government, so, we could give you Y if you'll go along with Z, and pretty much all of us agree on Q.'

Hector_St_Clare , says: February 23, 2018 at 12:34 pm
Any way there are a lot reasons that Trump is still unpopular in a nation with ~4% unemployment.

The European country with the lowest unemployment rate is the Czech Republic (also with good economic growth and tied for the second-lowest Gini index in the world), and they're also the most ethnocentric and, in a value neutral sense, the most opposed to ethnic diversity. Denmark and Switzerland among others have also seen major reactions against ethnic diversification, in spite of being model high performing social democracies. I don't know what they think about Trump per se in the Czech Republic or Denmark, I doubt they care for him at all, but I do think it's a mistake to reduce all concerns about ethnicity and identity to economics. (As noted, it's also a major mistake to elide all anti-liberal, ethnic-tribalist politicians together. Trump is not Marine Le Pen, much to his discredit, and he's a cut below most other major cultural-reactionary leaders in Europe as well, both in terms of ideology and personal character).

David Nash , says: February 23, 2018 at 12:41 pm
Interesting that also published on February 22 was Cardinal Chaput's speech on faith, state, and society.

http://archphila.org/archbishop-chaputs-address-at-villanova-university-things-to-come-faith-state-and-society-in-a-new-world/

I think that speech and your article have some commonality. What do you think?

Anne , says: February 23, 2018 at 2:22 pm
Yes, as a commenter above noted, I have to wonder where you found these pro-Trump Frenchmen? That alone gives me pause about their supposedly Catholic ways. I get that there can be cultural differences that make the grass look greener on the other hill. But they are seeing green where even their fellow countrymen see an orange-colored blight. Worry.
Robert B Lewis , says: February 23, 2018 at 2:24 pm
I think the difference between American Protestant "conservatives" and European Catholic conservatives is rather simple: the latter are steeped in the "Tory" benevolent paternalism of the social justice encyclicals of the modern papacy, which, though not overtly socialistic, are extraordinarily concerned with the social responsibilities of the "owners" and the rights and dignities of the "laborers." Those encyclicals totally and completely reject unregulated free-market capitalism, albeit favoring entrepreneurship. The model of capitalism they seem to embrace is called "distributism."
Janek , says: February 23, 2018 at 2:35 pm
Sorry RD, they are not for sale. You have them or you don't ;).
JonF , says: February 23, 2018 at 2:51 pm
Re: Le Pen may be Catholic, but she is also divorced from her husband of two years, with whom she has a daughter.

Is she remarried? It isn't divorce per se that is the issue, but rather remarriage afterward.

Geoff , says: February 23, 2018 at 2:58 pm
New ideas, good or bad, achieve escape velocity more easily where traditions are weak. Just as ideas can be good or bad, traditions can be stultifying or sustaining. Protestant culture developed in rebellion against an established culture and any time the dust begins to settle it can be stirred up again by rebels referring to founding principles (inner light, congregationalism, every man his own priest, etc.)

My preference is for protestantism as a personal mode of existence but I feel that a successful society will probably have a strong, stiffening admixture of catholicism.

I'm not really religious and I'm trying to abstract protestantism and catholicism a bit from their formal identities. I think that is okay if understood in the same spirit that Rod says that the United States is a protestant culture and that this influences even American Catholics. I use upper and lower case letters to differentiate confessing members of religions from general tendencies and mental dispositions.

Walter Bagheot once said that a reason the British political experience had been happier and more successful than the French was that the British were more stupid. From the essay:

"In fact, what we opprobriously call 'stupidity,' though not an enlivening quality in common society, is nature's favorite resource for preserving steadiness of conduct and consistency of opinion; it enforces concentration: people who learn slowly, learn only what they must. The best security for people's doing their duty is, that they should not know anything else to do; the best security for fixedness of opinion is, that people should be incapable of comprehending what is to be said on the other side."

Bagheot doesn't just mention the French and the English, he also compares Greece to Rome. And in Bagheot's formulation the inquisitive and experimental virtues are given to the Catholic French and steadiness assigned to Protestant Great Britain Possibly a reason to look for a deeper more accurate division than protestant and catholic.

Logical Meme , says: February 23, 2018 at 3:21 pm
Within the same TAC site, it's interesting how Bill Wirtz had a polar opposite reaction to La Pen's CPAC speech. Wirtz's obsession with Jean-Marie Le Pen's Holocaust quote (which must be contextualized ) notwithstanding, there is a profound struggle for the soul of the conservative movement taking place, both here in the States and across Europe.
James C. , says: February 23, 2018 at 5:26 pm
DRK, Marine LePen is the divorced-and-cohabiting one. (as for her religious beliefs, she claims to be a believer, but doesn't go into detail and doesn't appear to be a regular churchgoer. She did have all her kids baptised).

Marion Marechal Le Pen is the practicing Catholic one.

James C. , says: February 23, 2018 at 5:30 pm
Yes, Marion was civilly divorced last year. She lives with her mother now.
Mark VA , says: February 23, 2018 at 7:56 pm
Why is the "Benedict Option" easier to discuss with the French and Italian Catholics, even though it was written mainly for the American readership? This is what I, a Traditionalist Catholic, think:

(a) Protestantism covers a wide spectrum of beliefs, so a less "cohesive" and more "grainy" response is to be expected (Fragmentation);

(b) Benedict Option may sound like "salvation by works" – if we only work hard and form these communities ourselves, we'll survive and be "saved" in the end. And anyway, weren't those monasteries dens of vice? (Anathema);

(c) A belief that God blesses the faithful us, but others bring evil upon themselves because they have abandoned God, or follow idolatrous religions (Exceptionalism);

(d) Benedict Option, if it's to be done right, requires a comprehensive and rigorous study of the past. However, such studies often bring on uncomfortable questions which can challenge "settled facts" (Amnesia);

To be fair, many Catholics share in some of the above. Part (c) can be heard among a few of my fellow Catholic Traditionalists, and (d) can be found within the Vatican II faction. I think part (c) is particularly tricky – the Book of Job comes to mind.

Les Govment , says: February 23, 2018 at 8:08 pm
I've formerly posted at TAC as "A Libertarian Guy"

I watched Marion Maréchal-Le Pen's speech at CPAC last night. It was like a thunderbolt out of a clear blue sky when she got to the part where she spoke against surrogate mothering and the nonsensical fluid-gender stuff. I had no idea there were any political people in Europe with that kind of common sense and morals.

I too, liked the quote, : 'Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire."

-- Les Govment https://tinyurl.com/ycrwtcng

[Feb 23, 2018] NSA Genius Debunks Russiagate Once For All

Highly recommended!
Interesting information Guccifer II. He falsified the evidence.
Follow the money. Along with a smoke screen for Hillary political fiasco, Russiagate is a swindle to get more money for intelligence agencies and MIC. For about 15 companies who run the US foreign policy.
Notable quotes:
"... The CIA and NSA, and other intelligence agencies all work on behalf of these corporate entities. There main objective is to keep us all uninformed and dumber than a bag of hammers, so they can extort all the wealth from our great nation ..."
"... If this video won't stop the brainless McCarthyist regressives from knowing the truth about Russiagate, nothing will. And I mean absolutely nothing. Except maybe if they come here to Brighton Beach, Brooklyn, NYC. We got lots of Russian immigrants here and they are just normal people ..."
"... Russiagate is an excuse to spend more on the military. Wow- surprising, yet somehow not surprising. American Empire is the biggest destabilizing force in the world ..."
"... Guccifer 2.0 is the United States government. Either the CIA, FBI, NSA or DHS. I'd say it was the CIA with the NSA being a close second ..."
Feb 23, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Art Dehls , 2 months ago

Also, when did Russian hackers become so stupid? Since when has the GRU being unable to get even the basics like the up to date email list for the Clinton campaign, started using two-year-old obsolete malware instead of 0-day exploits, completely forgetting that VPN's exist and how to spoof an IP address, and on and on and on. These aren't the guys who cloned Nasdaq!

SeaRose , 2 months ago

Wish I could give this 1000.

Thank you jimmy so much for doing this interview and thank you Bill Binney for so clearly explaining the technical and structural reasons why Russiagate is both false and ceaselessly pushed. Amazing interview!

David Schnell , 2 months ago

My experience working on the Mississippi democratic party executive committee, the Hinds county Executive committee, and working for the state employees union here in Mississippi has educated me on the fact that democratic reps and republican reps work together to pass legislation to benefit the corporate class i.e. business. All you who have replied to my comment make sense, but we must remember that there is no difference between the Democratic and Republician parties, they all work for their corporate masters.

The CIA and NSA, and other intelligence agencies all work on behalf of these corporate entities. There main objective is to keep us all uninformed and dumber than a bag of hammers, so they can extort all the wealth from our great nation. In other words they our commiting treason upon the American people and our constitution and all should be through in prison for the rest of their lives and all ill-gotten wealth given back to the people of these great nation by rebuilding the infrastructure of America, investing in the education of our people to secure a prosperous future, and provide healthcare for all Americans. We can ensure this happens in two ways, pass the 28th amendment and pass FDR's 2nd bill of rights(worker's bill of rights). This will ensure that corporations will never take control of our country again.

hamdoggius , 2 months ago

Can we please now move onto whom the person was that stole the data from the DNC? Can I take a stab in the dark (or maybe two shots to the back of the head?) and guess his name was Seth Rich?

James Williamson , 2 months ago

The fraudulent "war on terror" is a big money-making scam. I've been saying this for the past three years.

P , 2 months ago

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." Goethe (requote for google... best line)

Atze Peng Bar , 2 months ago

I know I commented this already in the last segment, but this guy is absolutely awesome. Everything he says is substantial, non-speculative and supported by facts. You're becoming a proper journalist Jimmy. More of people like this please. I got my credit card again. I will donate shortly. Keep up.

Laura Cortez , 2 months ago (edited)

Russia didn't hack USA democracy .. AIPAC did long time ago and you didn't even know it.

Tommy O Donovan , 2 months ago

This is earth shaking news. World class Jimmy....I never thought you had it in you.

tesscot , 2 months ago

As long as they keep lying about Russia they can continue the sanctions against Russia. Russia is holding it's own even with the sanctions but originally under Putin Russia had paid off all it's debt to the IMF (World Bank). Now their debt is increasing, partly because of the sanctions and partly because of helping Syria and preparing for the US to cause a great war. Russia is a threat to the IMF (World Bank). Russia and China want trade outside of the Petrol Dollar. When Russia was debt free from the IMF (World Bank) it was completely independent of them. Russia did not have to take orders from the international bankers. That is why they lie about Russia.

Amateur Professional , 2 months ago

If this video won't stop the brainless McCarthyist regressives from knowing the truth about Russiagate, nothing will. And I mean absolutely nothing. Except maybe if they come here to Brighton Beach, Brooklyn, NYC. We got lots of Russian immigrants here and they are just normal people.

stephen0793 , 2 months ago (edited)

Russiagate is an excuse to spend more on the military. Wow- surprising, yet somehow not surprising. American Empire is the biggest destabilizing force in the world

branden burks , 2 months ago

Guccifer 2.0 is the United States government. Either the CIA, FBI, NSA or DHS. I'd say it was the CIA with the NSA being a close second.

branden burks , 2 months ago

A war on terror is a war on ourselves since the United States are the largest terrorists in the world and fund and arm terrorists around the world.

jennings mills , 2 months ago

So you would need a Internet speed of 392 mbps from Russia to Washington. yeah there was no hack. R.I.P Seth Rich,

Matt Erbst , 2 months ago

As I tried to tell you the previous time you had referenced the "conclusions" of the CIA groups, this data nonsense he is handwaving about is all quite feasible, by using a nearby national server, and much skepticism is deserved! Also he doesn't seem to know what he is talking about, from all of the paraphrasing.

I am also quite reminded of the psychological incorporation into personal behaviors by habit of the standards and policies of the industry or professional standards, which for the US Intelligence community includes an explicit policy of disinformation and dishonesty.

How the hell would the NSA's "man in the middle" logging servers see that the transfer occurs to a local USB2 drive (he assumes this is the case because 40 megabytes per second is approximately the rate of the USB2 protocol of 400 megabits per second... Very few USB flash drives were manufactured with solid state storage chips fast enough to reach that full transfer rate before the widespread adoption of USB3, or the modern USB3.1. Essentially, your chosen headline title is a false clickbait, because as of today there is insufficient evidence to draw ANY conclusion

earthie48 Johnson , 2 months ago

Just as they smeared Joe Wilson & his wife, and other great Courageous Americans that came out AGAINST the invasion of Iraq! Until we start DEMANDING those LIARS leave their seats in Washington, put on the Military Gear, and GO to the Countries they want to invade! I am past FED UP with them sacrificing our Troops, they return home to be MISTREATED, and kicked to the curb! Americans, wake up and DEMAND that they GO!

[Feb 22, 2018] Bill Binney explodes the rile of 17 agances security assessment memo in launching the Russia witch-hunt

Highly recommended!
A very interesting interview. It is almost one year old.
When intelligence agencies use the phase "with high confidence" means that they do not have evidence. This is one of the biggest lie intelligence agencies resort to. They are all professional liars and should be treated as such.
If DNC email offloading was done over Internet (which means it was a hack not an internal leak) NSA should have the direct evidence. They do not. So this is a progpaganda move by Brennan and Clapper to unleash MSM witch hunt, which is a key part of the color revolution against Trump.
Another question is who downloaded this information to Wikileaks. Here NSA also should have evidence. And again they do not.
They have already to direct attention from the main issues. Oversight of intelligence agencies is joke. They can lie with impunity.
BTW NSA has all Hillary emails, including deleted.
Mar 4, 2017 | www.youtube.com

He also exposes the NSA penchant for "swindles", such as preventing the plugging of holes in software around the world, to preserve their spying access.

John, 10 months ago

It's almost comical to hear that they lie to each other. No wonder why these retards in the mid-east and every other third world country gets the better of us.

Nancy M, 10 months ago

The Clinton campaign to divert attention to Russia instead of her myriad of crimes that were revealed during the election must be stopped and the alt media needs to start talking about her and Obama's crimes again and demand justice...control the dialogue

[Feb 22, 2018] Ray McGovern's First Day as CIA Director

Notable quotes:
"... The low-calorie Jan. 6 ICA was clumsily cobbled together: "We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence used the Guccifer 2.0 persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks." ..."
"... Binney and other highly experienced NSA alumni, as well as other members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), drawing on their intimate familiarity with how the technical systems and hacking work, have been saying for a year and a half that this CIA/FBI/NSA conclusion is a red herring , so to speak. Last summer, the results of forensic investigation enabled VIPs to apply the principles of physics and the known capacity of the internet to confirm that conclusion. ..."
"... Oddly, the FBI chose not to do forensics on the so-called "Russian hack" of the Democratic National Committee computers and, by all appearances, neither did the drafters of the ICA. ..."
"... What troubles me greatly is that the NYT and other mainstream print and TV media seem to be bloated with the thin gruel-cum-Kool Aid they have been slurping at our CIA trough for a year and a half; and then treating the meager fare consumed as some sort of holy sacrament. That goes in spades for media handling of the celebrated ICA of Jan. 6, 2017 cobbled together by those "handpicked" analysts from CIA, FBI, and NSA. It is, in all candor, an embarrassment to the profession of intelligence analysis and yet, for political reasons, it has attained the status of Holy Writ. ..."
"... And Democrats like Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, were kicking the ball hard down the streets of Washington. On Jan. 25, 2017, I had a chance to confront Schiff personally about the lack of evidence -- something that even Obama had acknowledged just before slipping out the door. I think our two-minute conversation speaks volumes. ..."
"... Now I absolutely look forward to dealing with Adam Schiff from my new position as CIA director. I will ask him to show me the evidence of "Russian hacking" that he said he could not show me on Jan. 25, 2017 – on the chance his evidence includes more than reports from the New York Times ..."
"... Intelligence analysts put great weight, of course, on sources. The authors of the lede, banner-headlined NYT article of Jan. 7, 2017 were Michael D. Shear and David E. Sanger; Sanger has had a particularly checkered career, while always landing on his feet. Despite his record of parroting CIA handouts (or perhaps partly because of it), Sanger is now the NYT's chief Washington correspondent. ..."
"... More instructive still, in May 2005, when firsthand documentary evidence from the now-famous "Downing Street Memorandum" showed that President George W. Bush had decided by early summer 2002 to attack Iraq, the NYT ignored it for six weeks until David Sanger rose to the occasion with a tortured report claiming just the opposite. The title given his article of June 13 2005 was "Prewar British Memo Says War Decision Wasn't Made." ..."
"... Against this peculiar reporting record, I was not inclined to take at face value the Jan. 7, 2017 report he co-authored with Michael D. Shear – "Putin Led a Complex Cyberattack Scheme to Aid Trump, Report Finds." ..."
"... Nor am I inclined to take seriously former National Intelligence Director James Clapper's stated views on the proclivity of Russians to be, well, just really bad people – like it's in their genes. I plan to avail myself of the opportunity to discover whether intelligence analysts who labored under his "aegis" were infected by his quaint view of the Russians. ..."
"... I shall ask any of the "handpicked" analysts who specialize in analysis of Russia (and, hopefully, there are at least a few): Do you share Clapper's view, as he explained it to NBC's Meet the Press on May 30, 2017, that Russians are "typically, almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor, whatever"? I truly do not know what to expect by way of reply. ..."
"... In sum, my priority for Day One is to hear both sides of the story regarding "Russian hacking" with all cards on the table. All cards. That means no questions are out of order, including what, if any, role the "Steele dossier" may have played in the preparation of the Jan. 6, 2017 assessment. ..."
Feb 22, 2018 | www.antiwar.com

Now that I have been nominated again – this time by author Paul Craig Roberts – to be CIA director, I am preparing to hit the ground running.

Last time my name was offered in nomination for the position – by The Nation publisher Katrina vanden Heuvel – I did not hold my breath waiting for a call from the White House. Her nomination came in the afterglow of my fortuitous, four-minute debate with then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, when I confronted him on his lies about the attack on Iraq , on May 4, 2006 on national TV. Since it was abundantly clear that Rumsfeld and I would not get along, I felt confident I had royally disqualified myself.

This time around, on the off-chance I do get the nod, I have taken the time to prepare the agenda for my first few days as CIA director. Here's how Day One looks so far:

Get former National Security Agency Technical Director William Binney back to CIA to join me and the "handpicked" CIA analysts who, with other "handpicked" analysts (as described by former National Intelligence Director James Clapper on May 8, 2017) from the FBI and NSA, prepared the so-called Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) of Jan. 6, 2017. That evidence-impoverished assessment argued the case that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered his minions "to help President-elect Trump's election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton."

When my predecessor, CIA Director Mike Pompeo invited Binney to his office on Oct. 24, 2017 to discuss cyber-attacks, he told Pompeo that he had been fed a pack of lies on "Russian hacking" and that he could prove it. Why Pompeo left that hanging is puzzling, but I believe this is the kind of low-hanging fruit we should pick pronto.

The low-calorie Jan. 6 ICA was clumsily cobbled together: "We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence used the Guccifer 2.0 persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks."

Binney and other highly experienced NSA alumni, as well as other members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), drawing on their intimate familiarity with how the technical systems and hacking work, have been saying for a year and a half that this CIA/FBI/NSA conclusion is a red herring , so to speak. Last summer, the results of forensic investigation enabled VIPs to apply the principles of physics and the known capacity of the internet to confirm that conclusion.

Oddly, the FBI chose not to do forensics on the so-called "Russian hack" of the Democratic National Committee computers and, by all appearances, neither did the drafters of the ICA.

Again, Binney says that the main conclusions he and his VIPs colleagues reached are based largely on principles of physics – simple ones like fluid dynamics. I want to hear what that's all about, how that applies to the "Russian hack," and hear what my own CIA analysts have to say about that.

I will have Binney's clearances updated to remove any unnecessary barriers to a no-holds-barred discussion at a highly classified level. After which I shall have a transcript prepared, sanitized to protect sources and methods, and promptly released to the media.

Like Sisyphus Up the Media Mountain

At that point things are bound to get very interesting. Far too few people realize that they get a very warped view on such issues from the New York Times . And, no doubt, it would take some time, for the Times and other outlets to get used to some candor from the CIA, instead of the far more common tendentious leaks. In any event, we will try to speak truth to the media – as well as to power.

I happen to share the view of the handful of my predecessor directors who believed we have an important secondary obligation to do what we possibly can to inform/educate the public as well as the rest of the government – especially on such volatile and contentious issues like "Russian hacking."

What troubles me greatly is that the NYT and other mainstream print and TV media seem to be bloated with the thin gruel-cum-Kool Aid they have been slurping at our CIA trough for a year and a half; and then treating the meager fare consumed as some sort of holy sacrament. That goes in spades for media handling of the celebrated ICA of Jan. 6, 2017 cobbled together by those "handpicked" analysts from CIA, FBI, and NSA. It is, in all candor, an embarrassment to the profession of intelligence analysis and yet, for political reasons, it has attained the status of Holy Writ.

The Paper of (Dubious) Record

I recall the banner headline spanning the top of the entire front page of the NYT on Jan. 7, 2017: "Putin Led Scheme to Aid Trump, Report Says;" and the electronic version headed "Putin Led a Complex Cyberattack Scheme to Aid Trump, Report Finds." I said to myself sarcastically, "Well there you go! That's exactly what Mrs. Clinton – not to mention the NY Times, the Washington Post and The Establishment – have been saying for many months."

Buried in that same edition of the Times was a short paragraph by Scott Shane: "What is missing from the public report is what many Americans most eagerly anticipated: hard evidence to back up the agencies' claims that the Russian government engineered the election attack. That is a significant omission."

Omission? No hard evidence? No problem. The publication of the Jan. 6, 2017 assessment got the ball rolling. And Democrats like Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, were kicking the ball hard down the streets of Washington. On Jan. 25, 2017, I had a chance to confront Schiff personally about the lack of evidence -- something that even Obama had acknowledged just before slipping out the door. I think our two-minute conversation speaks volumes.

Now I absolutely look forward to dealing with Adam Schiff from my new position as CIA director. I will ask him to show me the evidence of "Russian hacking" that he said he could not show me on Jan. 25, 2017 – on the chance his evidence includes more than reports from the New York Times .

Sources

Intelligence analysts put great weight, of course, on sources. The authors of the lede, banner-headlined NYT article of Jan. 7, 2017 were Michael D. Shear and David E. Sanger; Sanger has had a particularly checkered career, while always landing on his feet. Despite his record of parroting CIA handouts (or perhaps partly because of it), Sanger is now the NYT's chief Washington correspondent.

Those whose memories go back more than 15 years may recall his promoting weapons of mass destruction in Iraq as flat fact. In a July 29, 2002 article co-written with Them Shanker, for example, Iraq's (nonexistent) "weapons of mass destruction" appear no fewer than seven times as flat fact.

More instructive still, in May 2005, when firsthand documentary evidence from the now-famous "Downing Street Memorandum" showed that President George W. Bush had decided by early summer 2002 to attack Iraq, the NYT ignored it for six weeks until David Sanger rose to the occasion with a tortured report claiming just the opposite. The title given his article of June 13 2005 was "Prewar British Memo Says War Decision Wasn't Made."

Against this peculiar reporting record, I was not inclined to take at face value the Jan. 7, 2017 report he co-authored with Michael D. Shear – "Putin Led a Complex Cyberattack Scheme to Aid Trump, Report Finds."

Nor am I inclined to take seriously former National Intelligence Director James Clapper's stated views on the proclivity of Russians to be, well, just really bad people – like it's in their genes. I plan to avail myself of the opportunity to discover whether intelligence analysts who labored under his "aegis" were infected by his quaint view of the Russians.

I shall ask any of the "handpicked" analysts who specialize in analysis of Russia (and, hopefully, there are at least a few): Do you share Clapper's view, as he explained it to NBC's Meet the Press on May 30, 2017, that Russians are "typically, almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor, whatever"? I truly do not know what to expect by way of reply.

End of Day One

In sum, my priority for Day One is to hear both sides of the story regarding "Russian hacking" with all cards on the table. All cards. That means no questions are out of order, including what, if any, role the "Steele dossier" may have played in the preparation of the Jan. 6, 2017 assessment.

I may decide to seek some independent, disinterested technical input, as well. But it should not take me very long to figure out which of the two interpretations of alleged "Russian hacking" is more straight-up fact-based and unbiased. That done, in the following days I shall brief both the Chair, Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) and ranking member Schiff of the House Intelligence Committee, as well as the Chair and ranking member of its counterpart in the Senate. I will then personally brief the NYT's David Sanger and follow closely what he and his masters decide to do with the facts I present.

On the chance that the Times and other media might decide to play it straight, and that the "straight" diverges from the prevailing, Clapperesque narrative of Russian perfidy, the various mainstream outlets will face a formidable problem of their own making. Mark Twain put it this way: "It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them they have been fooled."

And that will probably be enough for Day One.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. He was an Army Infantry/Intelligence officer and CIA analyst for a total of 30 years and now servers on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS). Reprinted with permission from Consortium News .

[Feb 22, 2018] The US-UK Deep State Empire Strikes Back 'It's Russia! Russia! Russia!'

Notable quotes:
"... For weeks the unfolding story in Washington has been how a cabal of conspirators in the heart of the American federal law enforcement and intelligence apparat ..."
"... Are you reading this commentary? ..."
"... To the extent that Russiagate was less about Trump than ensuring that enmity with Russia will be permanent and will continue to deepen , this latest Mueller indictment is a smashing success already. ..."
Feb 22, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

There's no defense like a good offense.

For weeks the unfolding story in Washington has been how a cabal of conspirators in the heart of the American federal law enforcement and intelligence apparat colluded to ensure the election of Hillary Clinton and, when that failed, to undermine the nascent presidency of Donald Trump. Agencies tainted by this corruption include not only the FBI and the Department of Justice (DOJ) but the Obama White House, the State Department, the NSA, and the CIA, plus their British sister organizations MI6 and GCHQ , possibly along with the British Foreign Office (with the involvement of former British ambassador to Russia Andrew Wood ) and even Number 10 Downing Street.

Those implicated form a regular rogue's gallery of the Deep State: Peter Strzok (formerly Chief of the FBI's Counterespionage Section, then Deputy Assistant Director of the Counterintelligence Division; busy bee Strzok is implicated not only in exonerating Hillary from her email server crimes but initiating the Russiagate investigation in the first place, securing a FISA warrant using the dodgy "Steele Dossier," and nailing erstwhile National Security Adviser General Mike Flynn on a bogus charge of "lying to the FBI "); Lisa Page (Strzok's paramour and a DOJ lawyer formerly assigned to the all-star Democrat lineup on the Robert Mueller Russigate inquisition); former FBI Director James Comey, former Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, and – let's not forget – current Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, himself implicated by having signed at least one of the dubious FISA warrant requests . Finally, there's reason to believe that former CIA Director John O. Brennan may have been the mastermind behind the whole operation .

Not to be overlooked is the possible implication of a pack of former Democratic administration officials, including former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, former National Security Adviser Susan Rice , and President Barack Obama himself, who according to text communications between Strzok and Page "wants to know everything we're doing." Also involved is the DNC, the Clinton campaign, and Clinton operatives Sidney Blumenthal and Cody Shearer – rendering the ignorance of Hillary herself totally implausible.

On the British side we have "former" (suuure . . . ) MI6 spook Christopher Steele, diplomat Wood, former GCHQ chief Robert Hannigan (who resigned a year ago under mysterious circumstances ), and whoever they answered to in the Prime Minister's office.

The growing sense of panic was palpable. Oh my – this is a curtain that just cannot be allowed to be pulled back!

What to do, what to do . . .

Ah, here's the ticket – come out swinging against the main enemy. That's not even Donald Trump. It's Russia and Vladimir Putin. Russia! Russia! Russia!

Hence the unveiling of an indictment against 13 Russian citizens and three companies for alleged meddling in U.S. elections and various ancillary crimes.

For the sake of discussion, let's assume all the allegations in the indictment are true, however unlikely that is to be the case. (While that would be the American legal rule for a complaint in a civil case, this is a criminal indictment, where there is supposedly a presumption of innocence. Rosenstein even mentioned that in his press conference, pretending not to notice that that presumption doesn't apply to Russian Untermenschen – certainly not to Olympic athletes and really not to Russians at all, who are presumed guilty on "genetic" grounds .)

Based on the public announcement of the indictment by Rosenstein – who is effectively the Attorney General in place of the pro forma holder of that office, Jeff Sessions (R-Recused) – and on an initial examination of the indictment, and we can already draw a few conclusions:

The Mueller indictment against the Russians is a well-timed effort to distract Americans' attention from the real collusion rotting the core of our public life by shifting attention to a foreign enemy. Many of the people behind it are the very officials who are themselves complicit in the rot. But the sad fact is that it will probably work.

[Feb 22, 2018] McMaster, Kelly On Their Way Out Zero Hedge

Feb 22, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

In January, McMaster quashed rumors of his departure, telling reporters "I have a job and it is my intention to go as long and hard as I can in service of the President of the nation," adding that it was "a tremendous honor to do this job every day."

Trump's first National Security Advisor, Michael Flynn, resigned shortly after taking office amid a controversy over whether he lied to Vice President Mike Pence about his contacts with Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak.

On Thursday, the Pentagon directed all inquiries about McMaster to the White House. "General McMaster works for President Trump. Any decision with regards to staff, the White House will make those determinations," said chief spokesperson Dana White. Meanwhile, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters on Tuesday that Trump "still has confidence in General McMaster."

A Source within the White House, leaking to CNN, reports that Trump can't stand McMaster's demeanor during briefings - and that the President considers his National Security Advisor to be "gruff and condescending."

He prefers the briefing style of someone like CIA Director Mike Pompeo or Defense Secretary James Mattis, who patiently answer his questions, regardless of the premise. McMaster, meanwhile, is the person who delivers the news that Trump doesn't want to hear on a daily basis, according to the senior Republican source.

The issue is not political but mostly stylistic, as McMaster and Mattis tend to discuss information before it is presented to the President, the same source added. - CNN

Kelly and McMaster both declined to comment, however Reuters' sources were quick to add that "tensions could blow over, at least for now, as have previous episodes of discord between the president and other top officials who have fallen out of favor."

4

LetThemEatRand Thu, 02/22/2018 - 20:18 Permalink

So much for the "military is behind Trump" meme. Kudos to Trump for telling this guy where he can shove it after repeating Deep State propaganda.

Sir Edge -> LetThemEatRand Thu, 02/22/2018 - 20:18 Permalink

Finally... 'Dereliction Of Duty' comes home to roost...


Edgey...

J S Bach -> Sir Edge Thu, 02/22/2018 - 20:21 Permalink

McSinister is the essence of Goldfinger in the old James Bond fiction. One couldn't envision a more stereotypical "worm-tonguesque" villain in charge of our armed forces and acting presidential "advisor".

GUS100CORRINA -> Normalcy Bias Thu, 02/22/2018 - 20:57 Permalink

McMaster Finally Out? Pentagon Paving Way For Return To Military: Report

My response: Looks like the POTUS is prepping for the Return of General Flynn.

McMaster has some very suspicious associations and has been referenced in Q-ANON posts. He was an "OBOZO" plant.

Also, it appears that "OBOZO's" LEGAL problems are growing by the day.

"OBOZO" maybe the first POTUS in US history to be charged with TREASON. Also, KERRY is in a DEEP PILE OF SHIT as well. He directed the US State Department to provide 9 million dollars to her charity. This is ladies and gentlemen of ZH is BULLSHIT!!!!!!

CORRUPTION and CRIME as far as the EYE can see for the last four POTUS office holders. It make me ashamed of my nation at times.

May GOD bless, guide and protect President TRUMP and the TRUMP administration as they "DRAIN THE SWAMP".

Chupacabra-322 -> Luc X. Ifer Thu, 02/22/2018 - 21:21 Permalink

Flynn blew the whistle on Pure Evil War Criminal Treasonous Seditious Psychopath Obama, the CIA & State Dept. arming, funding & training terror organizations.

The Criminal Deep State has had it for him ever since.

gatorengineer -> J S Bach Thu, 02/22/2018 - 20:52 Permalink

Member of the council on foreign relations... Nough said? Trump sure likes Obama stooges for some reason

directaction -> gatorengineer Thu, 02/22/2018 - 20:54 Permalink

Trump is refusing to start new wars.

That's annoying the deep state rats inside the military.

I sure wish Trump would stop all of Obama's wars, too.

gatorengineer -> directaction Thu, 02/22/2018 - 20:58 Permalink

Boy you sure get a different news feed than I do.... Mine says we have heavy ground presence in Syria (didnt under Obowel), are on the verge of war with the NORKs after the Olympics, and our CIA has been stirring the shit pot in Iran....

Does your news coverage come before of after the episodes of My little pony?

The only difference between Trump and Hillary is Hillary has better hair. Follow what Trump actually does and not what he Tweets, HUGE difference. WE ARENT WINNING.

loveyajimbo -> LetThemEatRand Thu, 02/22/2018 - 20:30 Permalink

McMaster is a Deep State maggot... but who on Trump's team is not??? Too many MIC Generals all begging for moar war for profit...

Sessions is the biggest maggot... he has overseen the total breakdown of the rule of law in America and should be tarred and feathered.

Navymugsy -> LetThemEatRand Thu, 02/22/2018 - 20:40 Permalink

The military is an arm of the deep state. Congratulations West Point, Annapolis, etc.

squilmi -> LetThemEatRand Thu, 02/22/2018 - 20:51 Permalink

McMaster was NEVER with Trump. The military in general is.

New_Meat -> nmewn Thu, 02/22/2018 - 20:31 Permalink

SecDef knows him (from in the sandbox) and might want/need him to fill a CinC slot. The pussified O crowd cut off the balls of many of the flag ranks and they need to be purged (Regan did that and brought in/up Starry and Papa Bear and Vuono and Art C-ski and the other knuckle draggers).

POTUS might be getting his foreign policy situation sorted out. McMaster hasn't ever been a smooth team player within the Army structure--that would also endear him to Jim, but not suit him to a staff/advisor role.

We can always blame it on Global Climate Change and the Rooskies--cover all the bases.

lurker since 2012 Thu, 02/22/2018 - 20:26 Permalink

Fuck yea put him in Nork country. Fat boy and Monster McMaster can face off in the octagon.

Previous post regarding McMaster...

lurker since 2012 Tue, 02/20/2018 - 17:27 Permalink

Monster McMaster opening greeting to the Munich security conference, "I know OUR good friend John McCain can't be here, as unfortunately he can't, but he brings you good wishes"....Then he proceeded to outline Russian Election bullshit. Cyber bot farm meddling invading Georgia BLA BLA BLA. This is why war is plausible, McMaster is Military SWAMP.

Brazen Heist Thu, 02/22/2018 - 20:37 Permalink

Oh boy, some oversized ego tripping....the sheer hubris of it all....fuckers cannot see or admit to the gross amount of meddling they have done to the world, and yet react like little bitches when allegations are merely cooked up.

I cannot believe that this is the lowly state of American political discourse in 2018 AD.

Just another Rome, only with a much bigger budget for bullshit and weaponry.

Dickguzinya Thu, 02/22/2018 - 20:50 Permalink

Fire him. Forget the fourth star. He is undeserving. Another scumbag trying to upend President Trump's agenda/objectives. The scumbag conveniently doesn't mention that the Russian Hacking didn't have an impact on the election. This untrustworthy piece of shit never should have been brought into the fold. And don't even think about allowing him back into the military. Fuck off you turncoat.

Green2Delta Thu, 02/22/2018 - 21:06 Permalink

This guy was the commanding officer of 3rd ACR while I was in. Only time I saw him in Iraq was when he flew down to tell us how sorry he was, or something like that, after we lost 1/3 of our platoon. The rest of the time he was in northern Iraq where it was safe. While those of us unlucky enough to be in 3rd Squadron were stuck down on the south side of Baghdad. If you read his bio they make it out like he personally did all kinds of Rambo shit. I guess that's they way it is for officers. Those guys will slit your throat for the next shiny thing to stick on their uniform.

Even back then my buddy SSG Judy, just talked to him an hour ago, told me McMaster was being groomed for bigger roles. He definitely nailed that one.

NoWayJose Thu, 02/22/2018 - 22:35 Permalink

These two and Mad Dog keep whispering "Evil Russia" at Trump and demanding US troops keep poking a stick at the bear - meanwhile Trump knows there is no collusion. How does that square up?

[Feb 21, 2018] "NATO expansion was a provocative policy destined to elicit a strong Russian response "

Feb 21, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

b. February 20, 2018 at 12:29 pm

"NATO expansion was a provocative policy destined to elicit a strong Russian response "

You spellcheck failed you – it should read "policy designed to elicit".

It is not clear from the article whether the "blunder" was "influence ops" involving Russians – with or w/o the Russian government, or whether the blunder is the "fake" hysteria peddled by the establishment apparat and the Clinton Democrats?

If you have no proof of an "act of war", to quote the latest mouth-breathing from one of our selected representatives, and you have no
effective means to retaliate, and if you have good reason to believe that the act in question might well have been blowback from your own earlier transgressions, it would be advisable to shut it up and suck it up.

The "Russia!" politicking in this nation is not just a crime or a blunder, it is idiotic, incompetent and reckless bipartisan malpractice.

Worse, the people who willingly beat this drum as their version of a "stained" vote or a substitute or augmentation for another unaccountable and self-destructive "special" investigation are actively – and possibly knowingly – undermining not just Trump, or the legitimacy of the current administration, or the trust in the election process, they are eroding the confidence in the robustness of democratic institutions and the concept of democracy itself.

Worse yet, these people are the same that have been pushing for "money can't buy me votes" Supreme Court decisions, highly optimized gerrymandering, voter purges, violations of the voting rights act, voter discrimination, systematic disenfranchisement, "rigged" primaries and campaigns, and a uniquely revealing and detestable 2001 decision by the Rehnquist court.

This is the picture of US democracy in action as painted by these people: elections will be decided because of drivel paid for by Russian or American oligarchs and their unprincipled, mercenary retainers, deployed by trolling farms, e-mail spam "down the lists", unsolicited phone calls, and corporate media by means of editorial and outright bought advertising. Voters are incapable of applying common sense, keeping a skeptical attitude and insisting on verification, and they will ignore the evidence in their own lives and vote in accordance to the "nudge" that is backed by the most money and the best voter tracking operation with the most data and the most expensive analysts providing "analytics".

It gives a new meaning to "follow the money."

Now that caricature of The People might or might not contain more truth than we are comfortable with, but the conclusion assuredly is that to the extent this claim is "true", we have bigger problems than a few dozen Russians spending a few dozen million dollars. If this is true, then our problem is that there are entire industries in the US making profit from delivering services to actively undermine and erode the US Constitution and the institutions and processes of our democracy, that many of those people have already been elected as – in their belief – the result of the services this industry delivers, and that as a nation, we have completely failed in inoculating ourselves against this process of "treason for profit".

You do democracy with the voters you have, not the voters you wish for. If our institutions, if We The People ourselves, are not resilient against concentrations of wealth and power, inside or outside the country, foreign or domestic, then we need to fortify ourselves and our institutions, and we need to reduce and dissolve any such concentration of wealth and power within our borders before we can even begin to worry about any such "influences" from abroad. If our democracy is being wrecked, it ain't by Putin.

The absolute worst about this is that our national elections, just with like the congressional-military-industrial "complex", or the government-bailed financial industry, or the student loan financed education industry, or government-mandated health insurance, most of the perpetrators involved do not even care about the election outcome or the process – it is just another American Con to extract millions of fees and profits in exchange for channeling billions of dollars of campaign financing into "information ops" and other services provided by what is, essentially, little more than an entertainment industry delivering advertising. For the congressional-election industrial machine, democracy is just another "must have" feature of modern society ripe for profitable public-private "partnership" to convert ever more tax revenue and money seeking influence into the profitable businesses of selling voting machines, securing voting machines, auditing voting machines

The best democracy money can buy to make money – putting the profit into the Cargo Cult. If we ever try public funding for political candidates, it will be as if Obama and Sunstein designed another funnel for profit extraction.

We "are sick and tired of hearing about your damn" Russians!

[Feb 20, 2018] Russia's Election Meddling Worse Than a Crime; a Blunder by Robert W. Merry

Feb 20, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Ukraine is crucial in this Russian sense of territorial imperative. It's a tragically split country, with part tilting toward the West and part facing eastward toward Russia. That makes for a delicate political and geopolitical situation, but for centuries that delicate political and geopolitical situation has been overseen by Russia. Now the West wants to end that. Upending a duly elected (though corrupt) Ukrainian president was part of the plan. Getting Ukraine into NATO is the endgame.

Note that the Ukrainian revolution occurred in 2014, which just happened to be the year, according to the U.S. indictments, that Russia initiated its grand program to influence America's 2016 elections. Kennan was right: Russia inevitably would react badly to the NATO encirclement policy, and then America's anti-Russian cadres would cite that as evidence that the encirclement was necessary all along. That's precisely what's happening now.

Which brings us to the fifth and final fundamental reality surrounding the revelation of Russia's grand effort to influence the U.S. election. It was an incredible blunder. Given all that's happened in U.S.-Russian relations this century, there probably wasn't much prospect that those relations could ever be normalized, much less made cordial. But that is now utterly impossible.

Donald Trump campaigned on a platform of seeking better relations with Russia. After getting elected he repeatedly asserted in his first news conference that it would be "positive," "good," or "great" if "we could get along with Russia." Unlike most of America's elites, he vowed to seek Moscow's cooperation on global issues, accepted some U.S. share of blame for the two countries' sour relations, and acknowledged "the right of all nations to put their interests first."

This suggested a possible dramatic turn in U.S.-Russian relations -- an end to the encirclement push, curtailment of the hostile rhetoric, a pullback on economic sanctions, and serious efforts to work with Russia on such nettlesome matters as Syria and Ukraine. That was largely put on hold with the narrative of Russian meddling in the U.S. election and vague allegations of campaign "collusion" with Russia on behalf of Trump's presidential ambitions.

It doesn't appear likely that investigators will turn up any evidence of collusion that rises to any kind of criminality. But it doesn't matter now, in terms of U.S.-Russian relations, because these indictments will cement the anti-Russian sentiment of Americans for the foreseeable future. No overtures of the kind envisioned by Trump will be possible for any president for a long time. It won't matter that every nation does it or that America in particular has done it or that the West's aggressive encirclement contributed to the Russian actions. The U.S.-Russian hostility is set. Where it leads is impossible to predict, but it won't be good. It could be tragic.

Robert W. Merry, longtime Washington, D.C., journalist and publishing executive, is editor of The American Conservative . His latest book, President McKinley: Architect of the American Century , was released in September.

[Feb 20, 2018] How Russophobia wrecked normalization between US Russia -- RT Op-ed

Notable quotes:
"... gesture to the Kremlin that would enable the nascent Trump administration to see its desire for friendly relations with Russia would be reciprocated ..."
"... fit a pattern within the Trump administration of sidling up to Russia. Taken in sum, the pattern raises questions about whether Trump and his team are willing to pay Russia back for the Kremlin's role in the [presidential] election ..."
Feb 20, 2018 | www.rt.com

The baleful effect of this anti-Russian paranoia was illustrated in an article published last week by the Daily Beast. It was reported that a member of Trump's National Security Council proposed early in the new presidency last year that the US should scale back its military forces in the Baltic countries.

Russia has long complained that the buildup of US-led NATO forces on its European borders is a provocative threat to its national security.

The idea of repositioning US troops from the Baltic was pitched as a " gesture to the Kremlin that would enable the nascent Trump administration to see its desire for friendly relations with Russia would be reciprocated ."

READ MORE: Senate probe expanded to anyone 'of Russian descent or nationality' – email

Apparently, the proposal was quickly rebuffed out of concern about how it would fuel US media claims of Trump being a Russian puppet.

Another idea that was similarly rejected was the lifting of US sanctions on Russia's economy.

The Daily Beast goes on to make the pejorative editorial comment that the floated proposals " fit a pattern within the Trump administration of sidling up to Russia. Taken in sum, the pattern raises questions about whether Trump and his team are willing to pay Russia back for the Kremlin's role in the [presidential] election ."

Note how the article asserts as fact the dubious speculation about Russia interfering in US politics.

Reportedly the proposals for trying to restore relations with Russia have since dried up within Trump's National Security Council.

Indeed, the NSC official named as the originator of the ideas – Kevin Harrington – is understood to have led the team that produced the hawkish National Security Strategy published at the end of last year.

Thus, from reasonable proposals to engage with Russia floated at the start of Trump's first year in office, within 12 months the administration has absorbed and adopted the Russophobia narrative.

Anti-Russian group think espoused by US elites has become institutionalized, against the stated views of the president and the American electorate. Where's the democracy in that?

[Feb 20, 2018] Lavrov Russia ready for partnerships based on mutual respect

This attempt to offer West the "olive branch" is useless. The US neoliberal elite is trying to save itself from people anger and extent the coming to the end period of global dominance and Russia is a convenient scapegoat.
Notable quotes:
"... Commenting on the Moscow-Brussels ties, Lavrov said that the European Union has failed to find a golden mean in relations with Russia in the last decades, treating the country in 1990s as an "aprentice" that should be taught in accordance with western standards and values. Now, the other irrational myth about the so-called "Russian threat" is being exploited, Lavrov went on to note, with the western states accusing Moscow of meddling in every controversial event, including Brexit and the Catalan referendum on independence. ..."
"... Russia is open to an equal, mutually respectful partnership that will be based on the balance of interests with the EU in order to find effective solutions to the challenges of a present day. We are ready to build relations with the US and other countries basing on the same principles ..."
"... We believe that his idea of cooperation between the European Union, Russia, the United States and China to support the creation of the security architecture in the Middle East is very appreciated, and the same is true for the Gulf ..."
Feb 20, 2018 | theduran.com
Sputnik News reports:

Commenting on the Moscow-Brussels ties, Lavrov said that the European Union has failed to find a golden mean in relations with Russia in the last decades, treating the country in 1990s as an "aprentice" that should be taught in accordance with western standards and values. Now, the other irrational myth about the so-called "Russian threat" is being exploited, Lavrov went on to note, with the western states accusing Moscow of meddling in every controversial event, including Brexit and the Catalan referendum on independence.

Mr. Lavrov went further, though, to state that:

Russia is open to an equal, mutually respectful partnership that will be based on the balance of interests with the EU in order to find effective solutions to the challenges of a present day. We are ready to build relations with the US and other countries basing on the same principles

He also expressed hope that the EU remains unified and continues to serve the basic interests of each of its member states. He noted especially that he hoped that the EU countries would be autonomous in international affairs. He made a point that he believed that the EU member states should define for themselves how to develop their own economies and to satisfy their resource requirements, most particularly that of energy, a veiled reference to the pressure exerted on some EU nations by the Americans to buy American energy rather than the more easily available and cheaper Russian energy resources.

He went on to the discussion of Middle Eastern policy:

We believe that his idea of cooperation between the European Union, Russia, the United States and China to support the creation of the security architecture in the Middle East is very appreciated, and the same is true for the Gulf

Russia has been honest, but always rather tactful, pointing out that the Middle Eastern troubles especially dating from 2011 were caused or exacerbated by the foreign policy whims of the United States. Russia's collegial approach to solving these matters stands in contrast to the single-minded determination of the USA to exert its will in Middle Eastern affairs, as in much of the rest of the world.

[Feb 20, 2018] For the life of me I cannot figure why Americans want a war/conflict with Russia

Highly recommended!
This post summaries several "alternative" views that many suspect, but can't express as clearly as here.
Feb 20, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Palloy | Feb 20, 2018 8:52:02 PM | 34

@4 "For the life of me I cannot figure why Americans want a war/conflict with Russia."

Ever since US Crude Oil peaked its production in 1970, the US has known that at some point the oil majors would have their profitability damaged, "assets" downgraded, and borrowing capacity destroyed. At this point their shares would become worthless and they would become bankrupt. The contagion from this would spread to transport businesses, plastics manufacture, herbicides and pesticide production and a total collapse of Industrial Civilisation.

In anticipation of increasing Crude Oil imports, Nixon stopped the convertibility of Dollars into Gold, thus making the Dollar entirely fiat, allowing them to print as much of the currency as they needed.

They also began a system of obscuring oil production data, involving the DoE's EIA and the OECD's IEA, by inventing an ever-increasing category of Undiscovered Oilfields in their predictions, and combining Crude Oil and Condensate (from gas fields) into one category (C+C) as if they were the same thing. As well the support of the ethanol-from-corn industry began, even though it was uneconomic. The Global Warming problem had to be debunked, despite its sound scientific basis. Energy-intensive manufacturing work was off-shored to cheap labour+energy countries, and Just-in-Time delivery systems were honed.

In 2004 the price of Crude Oil rose from $28 /barrel up to $143 /b in mid-2008. This demonstrated that there is a limit to how much business can pay for oil (around $100 /b). Fracking became marginally economic at these prices, but the frackers never made a profit as over-production meant prices fell to about $60 /b. The Government encourages this destructive industry despite the fact it doesn't make any money, because the alternative is the end of Industrial Civilisation.

Eventually though, there must come a time when there is not enough oil to power all the cars and trucks, bulldozers, farm tractors, airplanes and ships, as well as manufacture all the wind turbines and solar panels and electric vehicles, as well as the upgraded transmission grid. At that point, the game will be up, and it will be time for WW3. So we need to line up some really big enemies, and develop lots of reasons to hate them.

Thus you see the demonisation of Russia, China, Iran and Venezuela for reasons that don't make sense from a normal perspective.

[Feb 20, 2018] Hillary Clinton If I m President, We Will Attack Iran We Would be Able to Totally Obliterate Them. Global Research - Cent

Notable quotes:
"... Among Global Research's most popular articles in 2016. ..."
"... Hillary is Dangerous. She Means What She says? Or Does She? (M. C. GR. Editor) ..."
"... On July 3, 2015, presidential aspirant Hillary Clinton addressed a hand-picked audience at a Dartmouth College campaign event. She lied calling Iran an "existential threat to Israel I hope we are able to get a deal next week that puts a lid on (its) nuclear weapons program." ..."
"... Stephen Lendman ..."
"... lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected]. ..."
"... His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." ..."
"... http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html ..."
Feb 20, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

Hillary Clinton: "If I'm President, We Will Attack Iran We Would be Able to Totally Obliterate Them." By Stephen Lendman Global Research, February 19, 2018 Global Research 5 July 2015 Region: Middle East & North Africa , USA Theme: Militarization and WMD , US NATO War Agenda In-depth Report: IRAN: THE NEXT WAR?

Among Global Research's most popular articles in 2016.

Hillary is Dangerous. She Means What She says? Or Does She? (M. C. GR. Editor)

* * *

On July 3, 2015, presidential aspirant Hillary Clinton addressed a hand-picked audience at a Dartmouth College campaign event. She lied calling Iran an "existential threat to Israel I hope we are able to get a deal next week that puts a lid on (its) nuclear weapons program."

Even if we do get such a deal, we will still have major problems from Iran. They are the world's chief sponsor of terrorism.

They use proxies like Hezbollah to sow discord and create insurgencies to destabilize governments. They are taking more and more control of a number of nations in the region and they pose an existential threat to Israel.

We have to turn our attention to working with our partners to try to reign in and prevent this continuing Iranian aggressiveness.

Fact: US and Israeli intelligence both say Iran's nuclear program has no military component. No evidence whatever suggests Tehran wants one. Plenty indicates otherwise.

As a 2008 presidential aspirant, she addressed AIPAC's annual convention saying:

The United States stands with Israel now and forever. We have shared interests .shared ideals .common values. I have a bedrock commitment to Israel's security.

(O)ur two nations are fighting a shared threat" against Islamic extremism. I strongly support Israel's right to self-defense (and) believe America should aid in that defense.

I am committed to making sure that Israel maintains a military edge to meet increasing threats. I am deeply concerned about the growing threat in Gaza (and) Hamas' campaign of terror.

No such campaign exists. The only threats Israel faces are ones it invents.

Clinton repeated tired old lies saying Hamas' charter "calls for the destruction of Israel. Iran threatens to destroy Israel."

"I support calling the Iranian Revolutionary Guard what it is: a terrorist organization. It is imperative that we get both tough and smart about dealing with Iran before it is too late."

She backs "massive retaliation" if Iran attacks Israel, saying at the time:

" I want the Iranians to know that if I'm president, we will attack Iran. In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."

She endorses using cluster bombs, toxic agents and nuclear weapons in US war theaters. She calls them deterrents that "keep the peace." She was one of only six Democrat senators opposed to blocking deployment of untested missile defense systems – first-strike weapons entirely for offense.

*

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected].

His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

[Feb 20, 2018] Russophobia is a futile bid to conceal US, European demise by Finian Cunningham

Highly recommended!
This is an old method to unite the nation against external enemy. Carnage (with so much oil and gas) needs to be destroyed. And it's working only partially with the major divisions between Trump and Hillary supporters remaining open and unaffected by Russiagate witch hunt.
Notable quotes:
"... It is an age-old statecraft technique to seek unity within a state by depicting an external enemy or threat. Russia is the bête noire again, as it was during the Cold War years as part of the Soviet Union. ..."
"... Russophobia -- "blame it all on Russia" -- is a short-term, futile ploy to stave off the day of reckoning when furious and informed Western citizens will demand democratic restitution for their legitimate grievances. ..."
"... The dominant "official" narrative, from the US to Europe, is that "malicious" Russia is "sowing division;""eroding democratic institutions;" and "undermining public trust" in systems of governance, credibility of established political parties, and the news media. ..."
"... A particularly instructive presentation of this trope was given in a recent commentary by Texan Republican Representative Will Hurd. In his piece headlined, "Russia is our adversary" , he claims: "Russia is eroding our democracy by exploiting the nation's divisions. To save it, Americans need to begin working together." ..."
"... He contends: "When the public loses trust in the media, the Russians are winning. When the press is hyper-critical of Congress the Russians are winning. When Congress and the general public disagree the Russians are winning. When there is friction between Congress and the executive branch [the president] resulting in further erosion of trust in our democratic institutions, the Russians are winning." ..."
"... The endless, criminal wars that the US and its European NATO allies have been waging across the planet over the past two decades is one cogent reason why the public has lost faith in grandiose official claims about respecting democracy and international law. ..."
"... The US and European media have shown reprehensible dereliction of duty to inform the public accurately about their governments' warmongering intrigues. Take the example of Syria. When does the average Western citizen ever read in the corporate Western media about how the US and its NATO allies have covertly ransacked that country through weaponizing terrorist proxies? ..."
"... The destabilizing impact on societies from oppressive economic conditions is a far more plausible cause for grievance than outlandish claims made by the political class about alleged "Russian interference". ..."
"... Finian Cunningham (born 1963) has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. Originally from Belfast, Northern Ireland, he is a Master's graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. For over 20 years he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organizations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent. Now a freelance journalist based in East Africa, his columns appear on RT, Sputnik, Strategic Culture Foundation and Press TV. ..."
Feb 20, 2018 | www.rt.com

Russophobia - "blame it all on Russia" - is a short-term, futile ploy to stave off the day of reckoning when furious and informed Western citizens will demand democratic restitution for their legitimate grievances

It is an age-old statecraft technique to seek unity within a state by depicting an external enemy or threat. Russia is the bête noire again, as it was during the Cold War years as part of the Soviet Union.

But the truth is Western states are challenged by internal problems. Ironically, by denying their own internal democratic challenges, Western authorities are only hastening their institutional demise.

Russophobia -- "blame it all on Russia" -- is a short-term, futile ploy to stave off the day of reckoning when furious and informed Western citizens will demand democratic restitution for their legitimate grievances.

The dominant "official" narrative, from the US to Europe, is that "malicious" Russia is "sowing division;""eroding democratic institutions;" and "undermining public trust" in systems of governance, credibility of established political parties, and the news media.

This narrative has shifted up a gear since the election of Donald Trump to the White House in 2016, with accusations that the Kremlin somehow ran "influence operations" to help get him into office. This outlandish yarn defies common sense. It is also running out of thread to keep spinning.

Paradoxically, even though President Trump has rightly rebuffed such dubious claims of "Russiagate" interference as "fake news", he has at other times undermined himself by subscribing to the notion that Moscow is projecting a campaign of "subversion against the US and its European allies." See for example the National Security Strategy he signed off in December.

Pathetically, it's become indoctrinated belief among the Western political class that "devious Russians" are out to "collapse" Western democracies by "weaponizing disinformation" and spreading "fake news" through Russia-based news outlets like RT and Sputnik.

Totalitarian-like, there seems no room for intelligent dissent among political or media figures.

British Prime Minister Theresa May has chimed in to accuse Moscow of "sowing division;" Dutch state intelligence claim Russia destabilized the US presidential election; the European Union commissioner for security, Sir Julian King, casually lampoons Russian news media as "Kremlin-orchestrated disinformation" to destabilize the 28-nation bloc; CIA chief Mike Pompeo recently warned that Russia is stepping up its efforts to tarnish the Congressional mid-term elections later this year.

On and on goes the narrative that Western states are essentially victims of a nefarious Russian assault to bring about collapse.

A particularly instructive presentation of this trope was given in a recent commentary by Texan Republican Representative Will Hurd. In his piece headlined, "Russia is our adversary" , he claims: "Russia is eroding our democracy by exploiting the nation's divisions. To save it, Americans need to begin working together."

Congressman Hurd asserts: "Russia has one simple goal: to erode trust in our democratic institutions It has weaponized disinformation to achieve this goal for decades in Eastern and Central Europe; in 2016, Western Europe and America were aggressively targeted as well."

Lamentably, all these claims above are made with scant, or no, verifiable evidence. It is simply a Big Lie technique of relentless repetition transforming itself into "fact" .

It's instructive to follow Congressman Hurd's thought-process a bit further.

He contends: "When the public loses trust in the media, the Russians are winning. When the press is hyper-critical of Congress the Russians are winning. When Congress and the general public disagree the Russians are winning. When there is friction between Congress and the executive branch [the president] resulting in further erosion of trust in our democratic institutions, the Russians are winning."

As a putative solution, Representative Hurd calls for "a national counter-disinformation strategy" against Russian "influence operations" , adding, "Americans must stop contributing to a corrosive political environment".

The latter is a chilling advocacy of uniformity tantamount to a police state whereby any dissent or criticism is a "thought-crime."

It is, however, such anti-democratic and paranoid thinking by Western politicians -- aided and abetted by dutiful media -- that is killing democracy from within, not some supposed foreign enemy.

There is evidently a foreboding sense of demise in authority and legitimacy among Western states, even if the real cause for the demise is ignored or denied. Systems of governance, politicians of all stripes, and institutions like the established media and intelligence services are increasingly held in contempt and distrust by the public.

Whose fault is that loss of political and moral authority? Western governments and institutions need to take a look in the mirror.

The endless, criminal wars that the US and its European NATO allies have been waging across the planet over the past two decades is one cogent reason why the public has lost faith in grandiose official claims about respecting democracy and international law.

The US and European media have shown reprehensible dereliction of duty to inform the public accurately about their governments' warmongering intrigues. Take the example of Syria. When does the average Western citizen ever read in the corporate Western media about how the US and its NATO allies have covertly ransacked that country through weaponizing terrorist proxies?

How then can properly informed citizens be expected to have respect for such criminal government policies and the complicit news media covering up for their crimes?

Western public disaffection with governments, politicians and media surely stems also from the grotesque gulf in social inequality and poverty among citizens from slavish adherence to economic policies that enrich the wealthy while consigning the vast majority to unrelenting austerity.

The destabilizing impact on societies from oppressive economic conditions is a far more plausible cause for grievance than outlandish claims made by the political class about alleged "Russian interference".

Yet the Western media indulge this fantastical "Russiagate" escapism instead of campaigning on real social problems facing ordinary citizens. No wonder such media are then viewed with disdain and distrust. Adding insult to injury, these media want the public to believe Russia is the enemy?

Instead of acknowledging and addressing real threats to citizens: economic insecurity, eroding education and health services, lost career opportunities for future generations, the looming dangers of ecological adversity, wars prompted by Western governments trashing international and diplomacy, and so on -- the Western public is insultingly plied with corny tales of Russia's "malign influence" and "assault on democracy."

Just think of the disproportionate amount of media attention and public resources wasted on the Russiagate scandal over the past year. And now gradually emerging is the real scandal that the American FBI probably colluded with the Obama administration to corrupt the democratic process against Trump.

Again, is there any wonder the public has sheer contempt and distrust for "authorities" that have been lying through their teeth and playing them for fools?

The collapsing state of Western democracies has got nothing to do with Russia. The Russophobia of blaming Russia for the demise of Western institutions is an attempt at scapegoating for the very real problems facing governments and institutions like the news media. Those problems are inherent and wholly owned by these governments owing to chronic anti-democratic functioning, as well as systematic violation of international law in their pursuit of criminal wars and other subterfuges for regime-change objectives.

Finian Cunningham (born 1963) has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. Originally from Belfast, Northern Ireland, he is a Master's graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. For over 20 years he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organizations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent. Now a freelance journalist based in East Africa, his columns appear on RT, Sputnik, Strategic Culture Foundation and Press TV.

[Feb 19, 2018] Europe and Russia

A very interesting issue
Feb 19, 2018 | www.voltairenet.org

Current Concerns", n°32, December 31st, 2017

Partners | Zurich (Switzerland) | 3 January 2018

[Feb 19, 2018] Western Chauvinism Against Russia Gone Berserk by Michael Averko

Olympics became completely corrupt sport where gladiators ruin their health for wealthy watchers.
Notable quotes:
"... Even if these irregularities occurred (something that remains unclear on account of the claim not being fully presented in the open), one then practically wonders whether it was with the knowledge of any or all of the effected Russian athletes and if their actual test results were indeed positive? Meantime, the prior and post 2014 Winter Olympic Olympic drug tests of a good number of these athletes reveal innocence. ..."
"... Tygart (along with Canadian sports legal politico Dick Pound and some other pious blowhards) have favored a collective ban on all Russian athletes. ..."
"... A February 2 RT article , provides a healthy offset to the overall biased Western mass media reporting on the subject of Russian sports doping. The former details numerous reasons for not believing much of the negative allegations against Russian Olympians. ..."
"... In actuality, a good number of them train outside Russia, with non-Russian coaches. Touching on this last point, The Washington Post's Sally Jenkins had an August 10, 2016 article , that showed how Russian swimmer Yulia Efimova, had taken performance enhancing drugs on her own, while training in the US, as opposed to some Russian state-sponsored method. ..."
"... Moments before the 2018 Pyeongchang Winter Olympic opening ceremony, CAS came out with another decision on Russian athletes, which contradicts its February 1 ruling. Bigotry has been given a boost over the idea of judging people as individuals. To quote The New York Times' Juliet Macur: " The whistle-blowers are holding their breath. The Russians and clean athletes are, too ." ..."
"... Substitute 'Russians' for some other group in such a negatively applied way and see the selective outrage. No NYT journo would write a bigoted comparison that differentiates between law abiding citizens and African-Americans, followed by a utilization of crime statistics as 'proof' for such a presented contrast ..."
Feb 09, 2018 | www.eurasiareview.com

For you non-sports minded Russia watchers, the ethically flawed antics of the IOC (International Olympic Committee), WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) and Western mass media at large, highlight a predominating anti-Russian bias that have a definite bigoted aspect. Having personally penned the title of this essay, let me say that the February 1 CAS (Court of Arbitration for Sport) decision favoring Russian athletes, is proof positive that not everyone in the West is motivated (subconsciously or otherwise) by anti-Russian sentiment.

Upon announcing its decision to ban Russia from the 2018 Pyeongchang Winter Olympics (with some Russian athletes competing under the Olympic flag and "Olympic Athlete from Russia" designation), the IOC indicated that the WADA propped McLaren report's claim of a Russian state-sponsored Olympic and Paralympic doping campaign hasn't been proven. Yet, this fact hasn't stopped the BBC and New York Times from falsely stating that the IOC decision is based on a primary Russian government culpability. Without definitively making the case in the open, the IOC said that there were testing irregularities at the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics, that favored some Russian athletes.

The February 1 CAS decision took into consideration that a good number of the IOC banned Russian athletes have been extensively tested inside and outside of Russia over a lengthy period of time, without ever being found guilty of a drug infraction. In addition, the CAS (on the known facts) reasonably concluded that the claimed 2014 Sochi Winter Olympic testing irregularities haven't been firmly concluded. Even if these irregularities occurred (something that remains unclear on account of the claim not being fully presented in the open), one then practically wonders whether it was with the knowledge of any or all of the effected Russian athletes and if their actual test results were indeed positive? Meantime, the prior and post 2014 Winter Olympic Olympic drug tests of a good number of these athletes reveal innocence.

In reply to these particulars, I've heard some Western chauvinist spin, saying that the CAS cleared Russians athletes aren't necessarily innocent, on account that they still could've cheated without getting caught. That very same logic applies to non-Russian athletes who might very well have succeeded in finding a way around the process.

The CAS found 11 Russian Olympians to have been previously found guilty of a drug infraction, that warranted a ban from Pyeongchang, as opposed to the hypocritically flawed IOC decision to implement a lifetime ban against them. The hypocrisy concerns the number of non-Russian athletes found guilty of doping, who didn't receive lifetime bans.

On the matter of gross anti-Russian hypocrisy, note famed US Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps' 2009 admission of smoking pot. Phelps wasn't banned from Olympic competition for that action. On the other hand, the IOC feels that it's appropriate to ban the Russian 1500 meter speed skating world record holder Denis Yuskov from the upcoming Winter Olympics, for a prior marijuana smoking episode in 2008. The unfairness of that move has been noted by some earnest folks in the West. Another of several repugnant anti-Russian IOC acts, concerns the banning of Russian short track speed skater Viktor Ahn.

As I've previously noted, Richard McLaren's claim that 1000 Russian athletes benefitted from a Russian government involved illicit regimen of cheating, would likely mean that ALL of the Russian athletes in question, would be shown beyond a reasonable doubt to have taken such a course. This hasn't been proven at all, with a note that the combined Russian Summer and Winter Olympic and Paralympic participating athletes is (if I'm not mistaken) under 1000.

On the US based National Public Radio, I heard the WADA connected American legal sports politico Travis Tygart (in rather self serving fashion) suggest his objectivity, by noting how he went after the legendary American cyclist Lance Armstrong. This is sheer BS, as Tygart never advocated banning all American cyclists and-or all US athletes from major competition. In comparison, Tygart (along with Canadian sports legal politico Dick Pound and some other pious blowhards) have favored a collective ban on all Russian athletes.

The likes of Tygart have a committed track record of extreme bias against Russia. In contrast, the IOC President Thomas Bach, comes across as a wishy washy sort, not fit to serve his position. It's a high point of chutzpah for Bach to second guess the CAS ruling on Russia, by saying that the CAS needs to be revamped. Bach and his fellow IOC cronies have belittled the CAS decision, with the announcement that none of the cleared Russian athletes will be invited to the upcoming Winter Olympics. Russian Federation Council Speaker Valentina Matviyenko befittingly said that the IOC and WADA are in need of restructuring.

At the 2016 Rio Summer Olympics, Bach took the position that the individual sports federations should decide on whether to restrict Russian partition. With rare exception, most of these IOC affiliated sports bodies decided (based on facts) that Russia shouldn't be penalized at that Olympiad. This time around, Bach has leaned towards the "pressure", as constantly rehashed by leading Western mass media outlets "to do something" against Russia.

A February 2 RT article , provides a healthy offset to the overall biased Western mass media reporting on the subject of Russian sports doping. The former details numerous reasons for not believing much of the negative allegations against Russian Olympians. Among the particulars, is the faulty notion that Russian athletes live and train under the same state manipulated structure.

In actuality, a good number of them train outside Russia, with non-Russian coaches. Touching on this last point, The Washington Post's Sally Jenkins had an August 10, 2016 article , that showed how Russian swimmer Yulia Efimova, had taken performance enhancing drugs on her own, while training in the US, as opposed to some Russian state-sponsored method. (On the subject of Russian sports doping, Jenkins' aforementioned piece is an exception to the generally biased trend in Western mass media.)

It's matter of established record that Italy has the most Olympic sports dopers, despite having a smaller number of competing athletes when compared to Russia. Per capita, India, Turkey and Iran have higher rates of such doping infractions than Russia, with South Africa and Belgium having about the same percentage of positive doping as Russia. The December 24, 2017 Worlds Apart show , suggests that a disproportionate number of Western athletes have been given exemptions for drugs having a performance enhancing capability. (That RT show had earlier featured Dick Pound , which I followed up on .)

Moments before the 2018 Pyeongchang Winter Olympic opening ceremony, CAS came out with another decision on Russian athletes, which contradicts its February 1 ruling. Bigotry has been given a boost over the idea of judging people as individuals. To quote The New York Times' Juliet Macur: " The whistle-blowers are holding their breath. The Russians and clean athletes are, too ."

As I noted : " Substitute 'Russians' for some other group in such a negatively applied way and see the selective outrage. No NYT journo would write a bigoted comparison that differentiates between law abiding citizens and African-Americans, followed by a utilization of crime statistics as 'proof' for such a presented contrast ."

Along with numerous other Western mass media journalists, some of Macur's other commentary have a noticeable anti-Russian bias. I wonder if she learned that slant from her father , who she wrote about?

*Michael Averko is a New York based independent foreign policy analyst and media critic. A closely related version of this article was initially placed at the Strategic Culture Foundation's website on February 8.

[Feb 19, 2018] Nunes FBI and DOJ Perps Could Be Put on Trial by Ray McGovern

Highly recommended!
Nunes chances to bring perpetrators to justice are close to zero. The Deep State controls the Washington, DC and can withstand sporadic attacks.
It is an extremly courageous of Devin Nunes to give this interview.
Notable quotes:
"... Throwing down the gauntlet on alleged abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) by the Department of Justice and the FBI, House Intelligence Committee Chair Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) stated that there could be legal consequences for officials who may have misled the FISA court. "If they need to be put on trial, we will put them on trial," he said. "The reason Congress exists is to oversee these agencies that we created." ..."
"... Nunes took this highly unusual, no-holds-barred stance during an interview with Emmy-award winning investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson , which aired on Sunday. ..."
"... He unapologetically averred that, yes, a criminal trial might well be the outcome. "DOJ and FBI are not above the law," he stated emphatically. "If they are committing abuse before a secret court getting warrants on American citizens, you're darn right that we're going to put them on trial." ..."
"... The stakes are very high. Current and former senior officials -- and not only from DOJ and FBI, but from other agencies like the CIA and NSA, whom documents and testimony show were involved in providing faulty information to justify a FISA warrant to monitor former Trump campaign official Carter Page -- may suddenly find themselves in considerable legal jeopardy. Like, felony territory. ..."
"... On the other hand, the presumptive perps have not run into a chairman like Nunes in four decades, since Congressmen Lucien Nedzi (D-Mich.), Otis Pike (D-NY), and Sen. Frank Church (D-Idaho) ran tough, explosive hearings on the abuses of a previous generation deep state, including massive domestic spying revealed by quintessential investigative reporter Seymour Hersh in December 1974. (Actually, this is largely why the congressional intelligence oversight committees were later established, and why the FISA law was passed in 1978.) ..."
"... At this point, one is tempted to say plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose ..."
"... One glaring sign of the media's unwillingness to displease corporate masters and Official Washington is the harsh reality that Hersh's most recent explosive investigations, using his large array of government sources to explore front-burner issues, have not been able to find a home in any English-speaking newspaper or journal. ..."
"... On this point, Nunes said, "In the last administration they were unmasking hundreds, and hundreds, and hundreds of Americans' names. They were unmasking for what I would say, for lack of a better definition, were for political purposes." ..."
"... It is real courageous of Devin Nunes to give this interview. It is not only the accountability to law that is at stake in U.S., but the Whole World is imperiled with what happens in Washington. But as many have written before in comments about this complete moral collapse of the Entire West, I am afraid, it is all going to be swept under the rug. We have to just keep the fingers crossed. ..."
"... I have never seen such media bias against a sitting president in my lifetime, not even against Richard Nixon when they at least practiced decorum and feigned objectivity even if they were secretly cheering on his demise. I will reiterate here that I do not champion the man but rather due process under our constitution, which has been made a travesty from the moment of Clinton's loss at the polls. ..."
"... I completely agree with you Realist. I am not Trump's fan or supporter of his agenda, in fact, in many things quite the opposite of it. However, he raised some very valid points about the the domestic economy and other issues, and about the need to stop interventions in foreign countries, and getting along Russia, and the need to rebuild country's manufacturing system again. He was duly elected by the people, and he should have been given the support to pursue what he promised. But it did not happen. ..."
"... Although it's being done for the wrong reasons, I am nevertheless looking forward to seeing our out-of-control intelligence agencies being put in their place. If I were president and my party controlled both houses of Congress, you'd better believe I'd be looking to dismantle the national surveillance state and reduce the military budget to a "mere" $250 billion annually. ..."
"... The post 9-11 wars of aggression, massive surveillance, torture and other war crimes were sold to the American public as only to be inflicted on foreigners, i.e. "we fight them over there so we don't fight them here." But the blowback has now turned America's schools, malls, workplaces, concerts and churches into war zones and little by little, the disinformation ops, "regime change" know-how and other accoutrements of perpetual war (the fool's errand of gaining full spectrum dominance over the rest of the world) have been turned inward on the American people, including powerful American officials themselves. So it would seem to be a good thing that some politicians like Nunes have finally seen the light exactly as Frank Church did -- only when they themselves began to reap the negative consequences of what they thought would only negatively impact other, lesser people. ..."
"... But there is more to it, as some have pointed out in comments above, there are some intra-party quarrels going on in Washington to take the upper hand. Regarding foreign policy, National Security State and surveillance, and other such issues, both parties are joined at the hip. ..."
"... It is instructive to read the comments on any NYT article on this subject. The comments are clearly written by intelligent, well-educated individuals – who parrot the Deep State's anti-Russian propaganda as if they were the dumbest of the "Better dead than Red!" 50s McCarthyites. ..."
"... The new McCarthyites are actually stupider and more authoritarian than their sad fore-bearers, because they could pierce the Deep States lies with 30 minutes of online research, but they prefer tribalism and ignorance, instead. ..."
"... Trump started going head to head with the intel folks, but has backed down a lot now. Let's hope Nunes et al hang in there and keep the pressure on these despicable criminals who hide behind governmental powers. ..."
"... Somehow I don't think Nunes or his committee is capable of reigning in Frankenstein. His "constitutuents"" are not likely to allow it and although the monster was pieced together from many body parts its instincts for self-preservation are formidable. Nevertheless, I would applaud anyone who makes the effort. ..."
"... Note that after saying the Russians are indicted for interfering in the election, and spending 5 minutes on this, at the 5 minute 20 second mark Rosenstein says there is no evidence that the Russians had any affect [sic] on the election! So what we have is the Deputy Attorney General of the United States announcing an indictment for which he says there is no evidence! ..."
"... In the world of cypher espionage I have no knowledge, but if Russia does hang out in it well then I'm sure the U.S. is already there to do what it must to defend it's cypher security. So that's a wash, but this insane Russia-Gate distraction was originally a way to deflect attention from Hillary & Debbie's putting the screws to Socialist Sanders . then Russia-Gate became a MSM driven coup to oust Trump from his Electoral won presidential office. ..."
"... Impossible to get the whole Gorgon's head, anyway, in such a corrupt system as we have ..."
"... Ray, do you think Trump has made a deal: he'll allow escalations against Russia, and in return the Deep State will leave him alone? If so, does that portend that this will fizzle out? ..."
"... While the shiny ball, smoke and mirrors psychological operation known as "Russiagate" has begun running on fumes before the gas tank finally runs dry, the major revelation of the Clinton WikiLeaks emails describing Saudi/Qatari financing of ISIS drops further down the memory hole. There's nothing like success ..."
Feb 19, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

House Intelligence Committee Chair Devin Nunes has stated that "DOJ and FBI are not above the law," and could face legal consequences for alleged abuses of the FISA court, reports Ray McGovern.

Throwing down the gauntlet on alleged abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) by the Department of Justice and the FBI, House Intelligence Committee Chair Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) stated that there could be legal consequences for officials who may have misled the FISA court. "If they need to be put on trial, we will put them on trial," he said. "The reason Congress exists is to oversee these agencies that we created."

Nunes took this highly unusual, no-holds-barred stance during an interview with Emmy-award winning investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson , which aired on Sunday.

Attkisson said she had invited both Nunes and House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) but that only Nunes agreed. She asked him about Schiff's charge that Nunes' goal was "to put the FBI and DOJ on trial." What followed was very atypical bluntness -- candor normally considered quite unacceptable in polite circles of the Washington Establishment.

Rather than play the diplomat and disavow what Schiff contended was Nunes' goal, Nunes said, in effect, let the chips fall where they may. He unapologetically averred that, yes, a criminal trial might well be the outcome. "DOJ and FBI are not above the law," he stated emphatically. "If they are committing abuse before a secret court getting warrants on American citizens, you're darn right that we're going to put them on trial."

Die Is Cast

The stakes are very high. Current and former senior officials -- and not only from DOJ and FBI, but from other agencies like the CIA and NSA, whom documents and testimony show were involved in providing faulty information to justify a FISA warrant to monitor former Trump campaign official Carter Page -- may suddenly find themselves in considerable legal jeopardy. Like, felony territory.

This was not supposed to happen. Mrs. Clinton was a shoo-in, remember? Back when the FISA surveillance warrant of Page was obtained, just weeks before the November 2016 election, there seemed to be no need to hide tracks, because, even if these extracurricular activities were discovered, the perps would have looked forward to award certificates rather than legal problems under a Trump presidency.

Thus, the knives will be coming out. Mostly because the mainstream media will make a major effort -- together with Schiff-mates in the Democratic Party -- to marginalize Nunes, those who find themselves in jeopardy can be expected to push back strongly.

If past is precedent, they will be confident that, with their powerful allies within the FBI/DOJ/CIA "Deep State" they will be able to counter Nunes and show him and the other congressional investigation committee chairs, where the power lies. The conventional wisdom is that Nunes and the others have bit off far more than they can chew. And the odds do not favor folks, including oversight committee chairs, who buck the system.

Staying Power

On the other hand, the presumptive perps have not run into a chairman like Nunes in four decades, since Congressmen Lucien Nedzi (D-Mich.), Otis Pike (D-NY), and Sen. Frank Church (D-Idaho) ran tough, explosive hearings on the abuses of a previous generation deep state, including massive domestic spying revealed by quintessential investigative reporter Seymour Hersh in December 1974. (Actually, this is largely why the congressional intelligence oversight committees were later established, and why the FISA law was passed in 1978.)

At this point, one is tempted to say plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose -- or the more things change, the more they stay the same -- but that would be only half correct in this context. Yes, scoundrels will always take liberties with the law to spy on others. But the huge difference today is that mainstream media have no room for those who uncover government crimes and abuse. And this will be a major impediment to efforts by Nunes and other committee chairs to inform the public.

One glaring sign of the media's unwillingness to displease corporate masters and Official Washington is the harsh reality that Hersh's most recent explosive investigations, using his large array of government sources to explore front-burner issues, have not been able to find a home in any English-speaking newspaper or journal. In a sense, this provides what might be called a "confidence-building" factor, giving some assurance to deep-state perps that they will be able to ride this out, and that congressional committee chairs will once again learn to know their (subservient) place.

Much will depend on whether top DOJ and FBI officials can bring themselves to reverse course and give priority to the oath they took to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. This should not be too much to hope for, but it will require uncommon courage in facing up honestly to the major misdeeds appear to have occurred -- and letting the chips fall where they may. Besides, it would be the right thing to do.

Nunes is projecting calm confidence that once he and Trey Gowdey (R-Tenn.), chair of the House Oversight Committee, release documentary evidence showing what their investigations have turned up, it will be hard for DOJ and FBI officials to dissimulate.

In Other News

In the interview with Attkisson, Nunes covered a number of other significant issues:

The committee is closing down its investigation into possible collusion between Moscow and the Trump campaign; no evidence of collusion was found. The apparently widespread practice of "unmasking" the identities of Americans under surveillance. On this point, Nunes said, "In the last administration they were unmasking hundreds, and hundreds, and hundreds of Americans' names. They were unmasking for what I would say, for lack of a better definition, were for political purposes." Asked about Schiff's criticism that Nunes behaved improperly on what he called the "midnight run to the White House," Nunes responded that the stories were untrue. "Well, most of the time I ignore political nonsense in this town," he said. "What I will say is that all of those stories were totally fake from the beginning."

Not since Watergate has there been so high a degree of political tension here in Washington but the stakes for our Republic are even higher this time. Assuming abuse of FISA court procedures is documented and those responsible for playing fast and loose with the required justification for legal warrants are not held to account, the division of powers enshrined in the Constitution will be in peril.

A denouement of some kind can be expected in the coming months. Stay tuned.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Savior in inner-city Washington. He was a CIA analyst for 27 years and is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

Skip Scott , February 19, 2018 at 9:38 am

Thanks Ray for another great article. One can only hope that Nunes is successful. However, like you say, the MSM is now complicit with the "Deep State", so the fight for justice becomes much harder. One also has to remember Schumer's "six ways from Sunday" applies equally to the congress as it does to the president. I hardly ever watch TV news, but recently I've been subjected to it, and I've seen a deluge of fluff pieces on our so-called Intelligence Agencies. I would love to see Trump give a speech (instead of a tweet) directly to the American people letting them know what rascals like Brennan, Clapper, et al have been up to.

Bob Van Noy , February 19, 2018 at 12:51 pm

This may be the best broadcast tv journalism in many years, read Sharyl Attkisson's story, "Stonewalled" (I will link the commentary page to that book for thorough readers). And thank you Nat, Ray McGovern & CN

https://www.amazon.com/Stonewalled-Obstruction-Intimidation-Harassment-Washington/dp/0062322850/ref=sr_1_1/140-4375232-2286101?ie=UTF8&qid=1519058613&sr=8-1&keywords=stonewalled#customerReviews

Dave P. , February 19, 2018 at 2:29 pm

An excellent and very timely article by Ray McGovern. Lawlessness, greed, complete subservience to Wall Street Finance and other Powers, insanity, and utter inhumanity prevails in present day Ruling Establishment in Washington. Obama, "the hope and change" Con Artist for whose election, being democrats we worked so hard in 2008 turned to be the biggest perpetrator of this lawlessness and responsible for fanning the flames still further in starting a new Cold War.

It is real courageous of Devin Nunes to give this interview. It is not only the accountability to law that is at stake in U.S., but the Whole World is imperiled with what happens in Washington. But as many have written before in comments about this complete moral collapse of the Entire West, I am afraid, it is all going to be swept under the rug. We have to just keep the fingers crossed.

Howard Dean just said yesterday that Nunes and people like him belong in jail. Now can you believe it, how low these so called liberal democrats have come to? Looking at the pictures of Adam Schiff, Howard Dean, and others in their company, I literally feel sick in the stomach. And one asks the essential question: "did not their parents teach them any honesty or moral principles in young age?".

Abbybwood , February 19, 2018 at 3:54 pm

But what he said is very confusing. First he says that Congress has no way to prosecute the DOJ/FBI for wrong doing then at the end he says Congress will need to prosecute the DOJ/FBI if necessary. Either Congress has the ability to prosecute the DOJ/FBI and issue indictments and set up Grand Juries or they don't.

Somebody needs to find out, Constitutionally, what the solution is when the DOJ/FBI at the highest levels become the criminals. WHO has the power to indict/convict these individuals??

Sam F , February 19, 2018 at 10:36 pm

A special prosecutor (Mueller's position) is appointed by the Pres or AG.

Annie , February 19, 2018 at 3:20 pm

From what I've heard expressed by a few FBI people, you don't come before a court, but a judge, one person, and they are known to rubber stamp almost everything. So they should be investigated too.

Realist , February 19, 2018 at 5:02 pm

I have never seen such media bias against a sitting president in my lifetime, not even against Richard Nixon when they at least practiced decorum and feigned objectivity even if they were secretly cheering on his demise. I will reiterate here that I do not champion the man but rather due process under our constitution, which has been made a travesty from the moment of Clinton's loss at the polls.

Dave P. , February 19, 2018 at 7:56 pm

I completely agree with you Realist. I am not Trump's fan or supporter of his agenda, in fact, in many things quite the opposite of it. However, he raised some very valid points about the the domestic economy and other issues, and about the need to stop interventions in foreign countries, and getting along Russia, and the need to rebuild country's manufacturing system again. He was duly elected by the people, and he should have been given the support to pursue what he promised. But it did not happen. We would not know now what he actually wanted to accomplish.

Sam F , February 19, 2018 at 10:41 pm

Yes, neither party nor the mass media shows concern for the Constitution or for the people. As the propaganda agency, the mass media are primarily responsible. The zionist/WallSt/MIC oligarchy have consolidated control over mass media, secret agencies, and elections, but not without factions.

Michael , February 19, 2018 at 10:00 am

Although it's being done for the wrong reasons, I am nevertheless looking forward to seeing our out-of-control intelligence agencies being put in their place. If I were president and my party controlled both houses of Congress, you'd better believe I'd be looking to dismantle the national surveillance state and reduce the military budget to a "mere" $250 billion annually.

Joe Tedesky , February 19, 2018 at 11:09 am

Michael I hear ya. Yes, there is a civil war of sorts going on in DC, and yes it would be a wonderful thing to rid our bureaucracy of all the slim that is in it, but taking Jiminy Cricket's good advice to heart would be so much more fruitful to if you and I would only sing;

'When you wish upon a star
Makes no difference who you are
Anything your heart desires will come to you"

Now that song will be stuck in my head all day .got any Journey? Joe

Coleen Rowley , February 19, 2018 at 3:27 pm

It's true that people generally do not care when bad practices, policies or violence is inflicted on others and not on themselves. Of course that's stupid because it's just a matter of time before "blowback" occurs (as the CIA euphemistically labeled how doing unto others eventually boomerangs back on perpetrators). Going back to the Church Committee and how that bit of accountability finally happened, it only got off the ground when Frank Church and other Senators found THEMSELVES in the crosshairs of FBI Cointelpro; CIA's "CHAOS" and NSA's "Minaret" surveillance. http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/09/25/secret-cold-war-documents-reveal-nsa-spied-on-senators/ (To this day, only 7 of the 1000 or so Americans targeted by the NSA during the Vietnam War have been discovered but their identities are telling.)

The post 9-11 wars of aggression, massive surveillance, torture and other war crimes were sold to the American public as only to be inflicted on foreigners, i.e. "we fight them over there so we don't fight them here." But the blowback has now turned America's schools, malls, workplaces, concerts and churches into war zones and little by little, the disinformation ops, "regime change" know-how and other accoutrements of perpetual war (the fool's errand of gaining full spectrum dominance over the rest of the world) have been turned inward on the American people, including powerful American officials themselves. So it would seem to be a good thing that some politicians like Nunes have finally seen the light exactly as Frank Church did -- only when they themselves began to reap the negative consequences of what they thought would only negatively impact other, lesser people.

BobS , February 19, 2018 at 4:50 pm

" the blowback has now turned America's schools, malls, workplaces, concerts and churches into war zones"

"blowback" is doing a lot of work in that sentence, if you're referring specifically to "post 9-11 wars of aggression, massive surveillance, torture and other war crimes". Whenever the incidents have had a political agenda attached, it's more often than not been of the domestic right-wing variety. And of course, all of them have been facilitated by easy civilian access to hardware that was originally developed by the military (ours and the Soviets) to efficiently kill/incapacitate large numbers of enemy fighters.

Gregory Herr , February 19, 2018 at 7:30 pm

BobS fails to understand that blowback encapsulates more than "revenge". "Forever war" and all Colleen mentions that goes with it has had societal impact because violence is glorified as a "solution" and feelings of suspicion and antagonism become part of the dark undertow.

Sam F , February 19, 2018 at 10:54 pm

Well said, Colleen. Let us hope that Nunes is not merely acting the part. I wonder whether the greatest secrets of domestic spying are now so compartmentalized and controlled that only those most dependent upon their agency could blow the whistle.

Annie , February 19, 2018 at 4:23 pm

This is not to be compared to spying on citizens, which is unacceptable, but they tried to undermine a presidency, whether you like Trump or not, and at the same time it allowed them to push their cold war agenda. I remember Clinton's campaign manager coming out right after the e-mail dump that said the Russians did it. And didn't Obama send a lot of those Russian ambassadors packing? They should be investigated, as should the FISA court itself. Perhaps if Trump didn't have this charge of colluding with Russia he might have been able to be more diplomatic on that score. Now, they made sure he would never be getting along with Russia. What they have now is a bunch of Russians acting on their own that allegedly interfered in our elections and created political discord, which is absurd, since the democrats are mainly responsible for this nonsense, as is the FBI and DOJ. I was a democrat, but no more.

Dave P. , February 19, 2018 at 4:52 pm

Annie, you are right on that. However, Coleen Rowely has also made some very good observations in her comments. But there is more to it, as some have pointed out in comments above, there are some intra-party quarrels going on in Washington to take the upper hand. Regarding foreign policy, National Security State and surveillance, and other such issues, both parties are joined at the hip.

Gregory Herr , February 19, 2018 at 7:42 pm

I wouldn't completely discount the idea that Nunes' sense of responsibility has been activated by being a close witness to what is blatant wrongdoing. But then my cynicism is still tempered by the belief that sometimes people are compelled to do what's right just because it's what's right. Silly me.

Virginia , February 19, 2018 at 10:34 am

Me, too, Michael, to " dismantle the national surveillance state and reduce the military budget to a 'mere' $250 billion annually."

Thanks to Ray McGovern for another good article with link to interview. Good to hear they will finally be closing the Mueller investigation (Nunes was straightforward about that, no there there) and will likely be investigating the FBI and DOJ.

Applause goes to David Nunes. Keep up the good work.

Abbybwood , February 19, 2018 at 4:03 pm

But I see where Trump asked for nearly one TRILLION dollars for the military and got it.

Pandas4peace , February 19, 2018 at 10:24 am

Where can we get access to Seymour Hersh's "recent explosive investigations" even if they are written in German?

Cherrycoke , February 19, 2018 at 11:57 am

https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article165905578/Trump-s-Red-Line.html

There is more at the bottom of the page.

Ray McGovern , February 19, 2018 at 12:11 pm

Try this link: http://raymcgovern.com/?s=hersh+welt or simply search on consortiumnews.com webpage.

ray

mike k , February 19, 2018 at 2:54 pm

"On June 25th 2017 the German newspaper, Welt, published the latest piece by Seymour Hersh, countering the "mainstream" narrative around the April 4th 2017 Khan Sheikhoun chemical attack in Syria."

Ray McGovern , February 19, 2018 at 9:35 pm

Ranney,

Please have a look at this: https://consortiumnews.com/2017/06/25/intel-behind-trumps-syria-attack-questioned/

Consortiumnews.com publishes and comments on everything Pulitzer Prize winning Sy Hersh does. The problem is that he is BANNED from English-language pubs -- simply banned and even kept off erstwhile "liberal" TV and radio programs. Amy Goodman, for example, has ALWAYS had Sy on when he had a new story until this one. She would not touch it; these days prefers to go with the "White Helmets" of this world. O Tempora, O Mores. Sad.

So, in sum, the problem is a very basic one. Sy does not publish until he has nailed down every significant detail and, since he is so well plugged in with many longtime, trusted sources to sift through, that takes a while for a bit story -- as all of them are. And when he is ready to publish, he hears folks whisper "Leper" as he gets close to an editorial office. It really IS that bad. We owe the op-ed editor at die Welt our thanks.

Btw: The Consortiumnews.com main page has a SEARCH button that I find very handy. Try to search on Seymour Hersh. Same goes for easily searchable raymcgovern.com, my website.

Ray

David Otness , February 19, 2018 at 5:37 pm

The London Review of Books has been publishing Hersh's work. That's one source.

Ray McGovern , February 19, 2018 at 9:51 pm

David,

Not for his latest of last June. See explanation of LRB cave in at: https://consortiumnews.com/2017/06/25/intel-behind-trumps-syria-attack-questioned/

The ostracizing of Sy Hersh is a major -- if highly depressing -- story in and of itself. But he is irrepressible. I do not think he is going to silently steal away any time soon.

Ray McGovern

Kim Dixon , February 19, 2018 at 10:32 am

Can anyone imagine the Neocon WashPo, or the NYT (or CBS, or CNN, or ) committing actual journalism, as this story progresses?

That, and the DNC's commitment to the DNC to the Russia Did It!™ canard, will ensure that real revelations go nowhere.

It is instructive to read the comments on any NYT article on this subject. The comments are clearly written by intelligent, well-educated individuals – who parrot the Deep State's anti-Russian propaganda as if they were the dumbest of the "Better dead than Red!" 50s McCarthyites.

The new McCarthyites are actually stupider and more authoritarian than their sad fore-bearers, because they could pierce the Deep States lies with 30 minutes of online research, but they prefer tribalism and ignorance, instead.

Lois Gagnon , February 19, 2018 at 1:01 pm

You got that right! I live in the 5 college area in Massachusetts. Plenty of those types around here playing activists. They fit your description. I can't stand to be in the same room with any of them. They may as well be from Mars.

Nancy , February 19, 2018 at 2:47 pm

I agree. The average working person has more common sense than the so-called intelligent, educated class. I suspect their views reflect the fact that they are very comfortable, financially, with the status quo, and don't want any real change.

mike k , February 19, 2018 at 10:35 am

Trump started going head to head with the intel folks, but has backed down a lot now. Let's hope Nunes et al hang in there and keep the pressure on these despicable criminals who hide behind governmental powers. When you allow people to do whatever they want in secret with no oversight, you can expect them to abuse their power. The basic question all this leads to is "who is running this country and making crucial decisions about war and peace, or fascism and democracy"?

BobH , February 19, 2018 at 10:52 am

Somehow I don't think Nunes or his committee is capable of reigning in Frankenstein. His "constitutuents"" are not likely to allow it and although the monster was pieced together from many body parts its instincts for self-preservation are formidable. Nevertheless, I would applaud anyone who makes the effort.

BobH , February 19, 2018 at 6:43 pm

Here's where Mueller's investigation didn't go https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-2_Bc_7Pos

Bob Van Noy , February 19, 2018 at 7:11 pm

Thanks BobH, that's an excellent rant, thanks for passing it along.

Joe Tedesky , February 19, 2018 at 10:58 am

The only way any trail that Nunes could even begin to make magically appear to happen before our weary eyes will happen only, and I say only, will appear because it will be good for tv ratings. Enforcing Constitutional law, I mean who does that anymore? Why today in our nation's capital we have congressional people asking the opposite of what Ben Franklin warned us good citizens about as the swamp critters are saying, 'Constitution how can we lose it'. You know this Ray that these crooks and crookettes in DC think that the U.S. Constitution is so passé and so anciently colonial that they hear Jefferson saying, 'ignore this stupid document, I was drunk with Adams and Franklin when I wrote it. It was all a big mistake.' Or something like that, but Constitutional law we don't need no stink'n Constitutional law, now get back to your part time work. (Whip cracking sound)

Hey Ray this whole fiasco does what is most important in this new American century, this fiasco is entertaining and the ratings are going through the roof so with that what more could a red blooded good American ask for now pass the tv remote.

Joe Tedesky , February 19, 2018 at 11:29 am

Paul Craig Roberts may have nailed this thing: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/02/18/cbs-contradicts-muellers-report/

blimbax , February 19, 2018 at 9:21 pm

Paul Craig Roberts wrote,

Note that after saying the Russians are indicted for interfering in the election, and spending 5 minutes on this, at the 5 minute 20 second mark Rosenstein says there is no evidence that the Russians had any affect [sic] on the election! So what we have is the Deputy Attorney General of the United States announcing an indictment for which he says there is no evidence!

If we take Roberts' statement at face value, he may have inadvertenly mischaracterized Rosenstein's statement. According to Roberts, Rosenstein said there is no evidence of an effect on the election, but it does not follow from that that Rosenstein is saying that there is no evidence of interference. There may have been "interference" that had no impact. And, of course, there is the question, just what is meant by "interference" in this context?

I share the frustration many commenters have about the entire "Russiagate" narrative, but I think it is important to be careful in how we evaluate these statements. It may all be a "nothinburger," but it is important to describe things carefully and correctly. Otherwise, one ends up inadvertently setting up a straw man for someone else to knock down.

Joe Tedesky , February 19, 2018 at 10:25 pm

I share the stress you do blimblax that you and all who stay on this Russia-Gate pay-ops suffer, but the way this crooked nail investigation has been going, mostly distorted by the press coverage, your argument about the interpretation of Rosenstein's words to the general public will be like splitting hairs with bald people . they just won't get it, and why, because I'm not sure the vast amount of Americans get it now. They got turned off along time ago back when the FBI didn't produce Trump performing his much heard about Steele Dossier acclaimed Water Sports in his Moscow Obama's Presidential Suite sick, yes, but it's the truth. No pictures, no believe you.

Personally I have never doubted any Russian influence in the way of statements, or essays, but this contribution of opinion is to be expected from any well thinking country, or nation if you'd rather of the world. Plus the Russians spending wasn't even close to any real fraction of what both U.S. Presidential candidate spend on their campaigns, get real.

In the world of cypher espionage I have no knowledge, but if Russia does hang out in it well then I'm sure the U.S. is already there to do what it must to defend it's cypher security. So that's a wash, but this insane Russia-Gate distraction was originally a way to deflect attention from Hillary & Debbie's putting the screws to Socialist Sanders . then Russia-Gate became a MSM driven coup to oust Trump from his Electoral won presidential office.

We could argue to how Trump,should be questioned, or even brought up on impeachment charges, but not for this particular Russia interference into our so well guarded American democracy. In fact we Americans don't need any Russian help at bringing our American democracy down, because we Americans already did that with the Patriot Act as among a few many other things. Joe

Joe Tedesky , February 19, 2018 at 11:59 am

Here is a rant by Charles Hugh Smith: http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.com/2018/02/russian-meddling-gagging-on-irony.html

SocraticGadfly , February 19, 2018 at 1:35 pm

Neither Dems nor GOP truly care about the First Amendment. Ray won't write about that. I have, re the Mueller indictments: http://socraticgadfly.blogspot.com/2018/02/internet-research-agency-butt-hurt.html

Joe Tedesky , February 19, 2018 at 2:14 pm

That was a terrific read, and so is this: http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/02/mueller-indictement-the-russian-influence-is-a-commercial-marketing-scheme.html#more

Enjoy. Joe

Bill , February 19, 2018 at 11:48 am

Somehow many Democrats are convinced that the FBI/DOJ did nothing wrong with regards to the FISA warrants. And they're still convinced that Trump colluded with Putin. Nothing will change their minds, it's hopeless.

Lois Gagnon , February 19, 2018 at 4:17 pm

It is indeed surreal to watch people who classify themselves as the left undermining the left by supporting the very agencies whose sole purpose from their inception is to destroy the left.

As David William Pear put it at OpEd News, "I don't think even Orwell has a scene like this: anti-authoritarian dissidents endorse more authoritarian means to weed out authoritarians resulting in authoritarians having more control to weed out dissidents."

I have a headache.

Jessika , February 19, 2018 at 11:55 am

The Deep State is very, very deep, and we're "Knee Deep in the Big Muddy" (Pete Seeger). Anybody knows the US Deep State was thoroughly entrenched by Reagan's time. It's overdue not to let this deep state corruption harden to concrete. I support neither party until there is a course correction, and Nunes makes valid points in support of a correction. Thanks, Ray.

BobS , February 19, 2018 at 11:58 am

Thin skinned too, eh Ray?
You're right, of course- Russia analysts at the CIA did stellar work in the 1980s.

Joe Tedesky , February 19, 2018 at 12:01 pm

No BobS it's you with your thickhead that doesn't get it. Keep it up BobS, because eventually you are going to say something funny. Take care. Joe

SocraticGadfly , February 19, 2018 at 1:34 pm

Ray continues to engage in two-siderism. He ignores digging into legit critiques of Mueller, as I have. http://socraticgadfly.blogspot.com/2018/02/internet-research-agency-butt-hurt.html

Charles Misfeldt , February 19, 2018 at 11:58 am

Will Nunes or any conservative go after the thousands of illegal acts perpetrated by conservatives??? NO! Nunes, along with every conservative traitor in America (republican or democrat) needs to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. The conservative agenda is not moral or constitutional.

BobS , February 19, 2018 at 1:09 pm

Considering their disregard for law as well as their worship of authoritarianism (exercised against the proper targets, of course), I'd say it's more than "self-enrichment" that drives conservatives, both ancient and modern.

Deniz , February 19, 2018 at 1:58 pm

Perhaps that is an issue, but I am unclear precisely what is wrong in Nunes position that he is relying on Gowdy, an undeniably sharp, precise, prosecutor, to review the examined material. Watching both Nunes and Gowdy in sessions, I would have probably, and gladly, made the same decision. It also make sense politically that they cover for each other, one person is expendable and takes the heat – Nunes, while the other – Gowdy, an upward star of the party, who probably ran the whole investigation anyway, keeps his hands clean.

BobS , February 19, 2018 at 2:09 pm

The always partisan "upward star" Trey 'BENGHAZI!!!' Gowdy announced his retirement from congress last month due to his being "sick of hyper-partisanship". And let me show you this bridge I'm selling

Deniz , February 19, 2018 at 2:32 pm

In fact, I would greatly enjoy a discussion on weapons transfers from Libya to Erdogan to Al – Qaeda via Clinton. This is actually one of my favorite topics. So have it.

Deniz , February 19, 2018 at 5:34 pm

So what is your argument, that we should be loyal to our crime family and not theirs?

Or do you think Hillary, "We came, we saw, he died" or Mueller, of nothing to see here on 9/11 notoriety are the sort of people we should be defending.

Jessika , February 19, 2018 at 12:07 pm

Impossible to get the whole Gorgon's head, anyway, in such a corrupt system as we have. Why else are we in such a mess? Both GOP and Democrats have not served the people, so we should therefore give up trying to address any abuse?

Antiwar7 , February 19, 2018 at 12:35 pm

Ray, do you think Trump has made a deal: he'll allow escalations against Russia, and in return the Deep State will leave him alone? If so, does that portend that this will fizzle out?

Gregory Herr , February 19, 2018 at 8:14 pm

So you are privy to the briefings in question. Just because Reagan bloated the military budget doesn't mean he was being fed false intelligence by McGovern.

On the other hand, it is well publicized that Cheney twisted arms at Langley and Tenet obliged and Rummy worked the Iraq angle as well. We also had the Downing Street Memo and the Powell fiasco and Valerie Plame. Ray was right to be indignant.

Jerry Alatalo , February 19, 2018 at 3:50 pm

While the shiny ball, smoke and mirrors psychological operation known as "Russiagate" has begun running on fumes before the gas tank finally runs dry, the major revelation of the Clinton WikiLeaks emails describing Saudi/Qatari financing of ISIS drops further down the memory hole. There's nothing like success

Drew Hunkins , February 19, 2018 at 3:59 pm

Good point Mr. Alatalo. The Saudi-Zio Terror Network gets away with murder, literally and figuratively and of course the Saudi-Zio Terror Network NEVER, EVER interferes in ANY elections in the United States, no never.

(sarcasm)

Paul E. Merrell, J.D. , February 19, 2018 at 5:59 pm

Related news: Kim Dotcom: "Let Me Assure You, The DNC Hack Wasn't Even A Hack", https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-18/kim-dotcom-let-me-assure-you-dnc-hack-wasnt-even-hack (Kim Dot Com claims personal knowledge on who took the DNC emails (Seth Rich) and his lawyers wrote to Mueller twice, offering his testimony, but never heard back from Mueller).

Bob Van Noy , February 19, 2018 at 7:18 pm

Thank you Paul E. Merrell, J.D. I have been convinced from the beginning of all of this that this was the line to Wikileaks. Now if we could only get a real investigation into Seth's murder.

Stop Bush and Clinton , February 19, 2018 at 7:34 pm

"We found that they broke a vast number of laws, did surveillance of a competitor with a warrant based on fake evidence, all adding up to treason worse than Watergate. But we think that no reasonable prosecutor would file charges .." -- The FBI

[Feb 19, 2018] The Russiagate Intelligence Wars What We Do and Don't Know

Highly recommended!
Mueller was the person responsible for investigation of 911. That fact alone tells you all as for what we can expect.
Notable quotes:
"... NO actual physical proof has been presented to the public to substantiate claims that Russia hacked the DNC ..."
"... There is NO proof (only allegations) of collusion between Trump's campaign and the Kremlin ..."
"... Social media efforts by Russian trolls to influence the election were minimal in the extreme, laughably amateurish and completely ineffective ..."
"... Glenn Greenwald has spent the past year documenting in detail the large volume of fake anti-Russian "news" generated by the MSM (see GG at The Intercept) ..."
"... There is NO connection between the Russian government and the 13 private citizens recently indicted for their pathetic and ineffectual activity as part of a troll farm ..."
"... Thanks to the paranoid, xenophobic, Russia-bashing nationalistic propaganda that is being promoted by our military-industrial-intelligence-media complex, the U.S. now believes it is acceptable to launch a first strike nuclear attack in retaliation for breeches of cyber security ..."
"... Trump won't be impeached over Russiagate for the simple reason that Russiagate is nothing but a psyops perpetrated against the American people by the national-security bureaucracy (and their corporate media propagandists) for the purposes of reigniting a second Cold War and maintaining U.S. global hegemony. ..."
"... Thanks to the hysterical McCarthyism now rampant among Democrats - and that is being used to great effect by Washington's bipartisan neocon warmongers - we may just end up in a nuclear war. The good news: it will be a short war and the Democrats will never have to accept responsibility for Clinton's loss. ..."
"... How about that Clinton got the CIA to partner with neo-Nazis in Ukraine to stage a coup, kick out Putin's friend, and install a billionaire capitalist as President? - something the media never mentions. ..."
"... Ultimately, I see the Russia story as getting its legs from the efforts of the dominant Hillary wing of the Democratic party, backed by big media, to continue to assert that Hillary really won the presidency in 2016, and that their wing should continue to have control of the party. ..."
"... That an immensely dangerous war fever is being whipped up in the process is of no importance to them. And, by no means incidentally, they are ignoring all of the real atrocities being committed by the Trump administration against the American people and the earth's environment. ..."
"... It has been thus since the creep moved into the White House. Dreyfuss, perky Rachel Maddow, Colbert, Maher, and many others have been the true "useful idiots". ..."
"... This same media never gave Sanders any media exposure during the primary. ..."
"... I would add that the election manipulations which the Clinton forces engaged in to defeat Sanders during the Democratic primaries dwarfs, by orders of magnitude, anything alleged against the Russians by even the most hawkish backers of the Russia probe. ..."
"... tweet by Peter Van Buren, former US foreign intelligence officer "Just did a quick read of the '13 Russian' indictment. Missing are a) any connections between the 13 and the Russian government and/or Trump campaign; b) any discussion of the impact (if any) their social media efforts had. It describes them buying Facebook ads, but nothing about if it affected votes; c) no connection shown between any of this and DNC, Wikileaks, hacking of emails; d) no discussion of motive; e) assumption that anything anti-Clinton was defacto pro-Bernie and/or pro-Trump. And all indicted persons are Russians, and outside the U.S., so highly unlikely this is going anywhere further legally. ..."
"... BTW, today the media put up that scumbag Podesta as a spokesperson for the Democrats. ..."
"... Seems that the end justifies the means. No matter what is the truth. In the mean-time, they're actually harming the opposition to Trump. I suppose nobody asked Podesta why the DNC never offered their computers for FBI forensics. ..."
"... The MSM never asks the hard questions anymore. It seems all pre-scripted and sanitized for corporate media. ..."
"... It's been a year since Mueller went to work and what's he got? A couple of Republican political operatives being political operatives. Their crime was not reporting to the USG that they were working for Ukraine. Now we're down to social media posts. You're probably one of those people who say, I saw it on the internet so it must be true. If the government is going to be upset about crap they see on social media from foreign parties, they need to start by telling said social media that they can't solicit advertising from foreign entities with political overtones as facebook did of RT. ..."
"... So we are going to limit global free speech by spending $Trillions more on building a nuclear arsenal - total madness - driven by [un] Democratic whining. ..."
"... Apparently, it comes down to trolls who planted various "fake news" stories. Stipulate to all of that; the worst of it. How does THAT begin to stack–up against the murderous coup that the USA OPENLY fomented in the Ukraine a couple of years earlier by bankrolling dozens of Non-governmental organizations whose sole purpose was "regime change"? ..."
"... Maybe come back to me about all of this when the FBI can convincingly prove that the Russian government armed and funded a Neo–nazi para–military group that assaulted and burned–down the North Carolina State House. ..."
"... You mean like Clinton and the CIA did in Ukraine, for economic domination over Russia, don't you? ..."
"... Tell me, as soon as you can, when having skepticism on the Russia/Election Meddling story is finally permitted. I heard tell, we've lately dropped the "Treason" narration. Now the spin du jour is that Trump & Co were all duped by them clever Ruskies. Whatever floats your boat. ..."
"... Stephen Cohen's take on Russiagate makes a lot of sense, to me. I've followed Russia/soviet/US relations very closely since Gorbachev. Open your eyes, Mattis has labeled Russia our mortal enemy, we just upped defense spending to an obscene level that shall keep our schools, hospitals, social services, and infrastructure in their bad state. ..."
Feb 19, 2018 | www.thenation.com

Cara Marianna says: February 19, 2018 at 4:36 pm

Here's what we know:

  1. NO actual physical proof has been presented to the public to substantiate claims that Russia hacked the DNC
  2. There is NO proof (only allegations) of collusion between Trump's campaign and the Kremlin
  3. Social media efforts by Russian trolls to influence the election were minimal in the extreme, laughably amateurish and completely ineffective
  4. Glenn Greenwald has spent the past year documenting in detail the large volume of fake anti-Russian "news" generated by the MSM (see GG at The Intercept)
  5. There is NO connection between the Russian government and the 13 private citizens recently indicted for their pathetic and ineffectual activity as part of a troll farm
  6. Thanks to the paranoid, xenophobic, Russia-bashing nationalistic propaganda that is being promoted by our military-industrial-intelligence-media complex, the U.S. now believes it is acceptable to launch a first strike nuclear attack in retaliation for breeches of cyber security

Read number six again and think about it. The U.S. is ready and willing to launch a preemptive nuclear attack against any nation it accuses of undermining our cyber security - no proof necessary. The Democratic establishment, which has spent the past year engaging in baseless Kremlin-baiting (and very little else), is directly responsible for this insanity.

Trump won't be impeached over Russiagate for the simple reason that Russiagate is nothing but a psyops perpetrated against the American people by the national-security bureaucracy (and their corporate media propagandists) for the purposes of reigniting a second Cold War and maintaining U.S. global hegemony.

Thanks to the hysterical McCarthyism now rampant among Democrats - and that is being used to great effect by Washington's bipartisan neocon warmongers - we may just end up in a nuclear war. The good news: it will be a short war and the Democrats will never have to accept responsibility for Clinton's loss.

Fred Caruso says: February 18, 2018 at 9:30 pm

Who gives a shit really?

How about that Clinton got the CIA to partner with neo-Nazis in Ukraine to stage a coup, kick out Putin's friend, and install a billionaire capitalist as President? - something the media never mentions.

Caleb Melamed says: February 18, 2018 at 9:12 am

As I open the online edition of The Nation this morning, there are two lead stories. One of them tells how Trump is planning to evict 5 million poor people from public housing. A very important story.

The second story by Bob Dreyfuss is probably the 10,000th one I've seen about the Russia probe. The public housing story is obviously much more important and substantial, yet the Democrats have been focusing almost exclusively on the flimsy Russia probe. Not even the pressing need to regulate assault rifles has really grabbed their full attention, even in the wake of the latest dreadful Florida high school massacre. In perusing the news stories this Sunday morning, the Russia probe continues to hold first place in coverage by a big margin.

Ultimately, I see the Russia story as getting its legs from the efforts of the dominant Hillary wing of the Democratic party, backed by big media, to continue to assert that Hillary really won the presidency in 2016, and that their wing should continue to have control of the party.

That an immensely dangerous war fever is being whipped up in the process is of no importance to them. And, by no means incidentally, they are ignoring all of the real atrocities being committed by the Trump administration against the American people and the earth's environment.

Clark M Shanahan says: February 18, 2018 at 9:52 am

Amen, Caleb
It has been thus since the creep moved into the White House. Dreyfuss, perky Rachel Maddow, Colbert, Maher, and many others have been the true "useful idiots".

Fred Caruso says: February 18, 2018 at 9:33 pm

This same media never gave Sanders any media exposure during the primary.

Caleb Melamed says: February 18, 2018 at 9:42 am

I would add that the election manipulations which the Clinton forces engaged in to defeat Sanders during the Democratic primaries dwarfs, by orders of magnitude, anything alleged against the Russians by even the most hawkish backers of the Russia probe.

Clark M Shanahan says: February 18, 2018 at 8:24 am

FYI
tweet by Peter Van Buren, former US foreign intelligence officer "Just did a quick read of the '13 Russian' indictment. Missing are a) any connections between the 13 and the Russian government and/or Trump campaign; b) any discussion of the impact (if any) their social media efforts had. It describes them buying Facebook ads, but nothing about if it affected votes; c) no connection shown between any of this and DNC, Wikileaks, hacking of emails; d) no discussion of motive; e) assumption that anything anti-Clinton was defacto pro-Bernie and/or pro-Trump. And all indicted persons are Russians, and outside the U.S., so highly unlikely this is going anywhere further legally.

Fred Caruso says: February 18, 2018 at 9:37 pm

There is nothing illegal or unethical about any individual of government supporting one candidate over another. BTW, today the media put up that scumbag Podesta as a spokesperson for the Democrats.

Clark M Shanahan says: February 19, 2018 at 9:02 am

Seems that the end justifies the means. No matter what is the truth. In the mean-time, they're actually harming the opposition to Trump. I suppose nobody asked Podesta why the DNC never offered their computers for FBI forensics.

Fred Caruso says: February 19, 2018 at 12:31 pm

The MSM never asks the hard questions anymore. It seems all pre-scripted and sanitized for corporate media.

Richard Phelps says: February 18, 2018 at 2:52 am

There is one issue that no media is talking about regarding the "memos". Trump is clearly a "person of interest", if not a suspect in some parts of the investigation. Given Trump's entanglement how is it not an absolute conflict of interest for Trump being the person who decides what memos get to be public and what redactions must be made.

Imagine a judge being a suspect in a crime or a major stockholder in a corporate civil suit. S/he would never be allowed to make any rulings on what evidence the jury gets to see or anything about the case. Some non-interested 3rd party needs to make those decisions.

Fred Caruso says: February 18, 2018 at 9:38 pm

Quit feeding this beast.

Jeffrey Harrison says: February 16, 2018 at 8:15 pm

The other interesting and fun fact not mentioned anywhere. Three Names won by 3 million votes. Crafty Ruskis.

Carla Skidmore says: February 16, 2018 at 7:33 pm

This investigation by Mueller is just beginning. In other words, and to use the vernacular, "We "ain't seen nothing," yet."

Fred Caruso says: February 18, 2018 at 9:40 pm

You are right. This is nothing but bullshit and it may be just the beginning. The Democrats have an endless supply of donkey-shit.

Jeffrey Harrison says: February 16, 2018 at 6:08 pm

It's interesting that the Russians set this all up to boost Trump and disparage Three Names before Trump even announced he was running. The basic set up for this was going on in 2014 whereas Trump announced in 2015.

Carla Skidmore says: February 16, 2018 at 7:29 pm

No, not really. Trump was making gestures of interest in the presidency in 2012

Clark M Shanahan says: February 18, 2018 at 10:28 am

Since when have you been so trusting of our FBI & CIA, Carla? From what we've experienced together from the Gulf of Tonkin onward, I'm a wee-tad taken aback. Please read the ex-foreign intelligence officer's twitter posting that I posted above.

Jeffrey Harrison says: February 16, 2018 at 8:30 pm

Pfui. He also made noises about running in the 2012 election. People don't set up organizations to do stuff just on the off chance that some politician or wannabe is going to run. These guys ain't got nothin'. It's been a year since Mueller went to work and what's he got? A couple of Republican political operatives being political operatives. Their crime was not reporting to the USG that they were working for Ukraine. Now we're down to social media posts. You're probably one of those people who say, I saw it on the internet so it must be true. If the government is going to be upset about crap they see on social media from foreign parties, they need to start by telling said social media that they can't solicit advertising from foreign entities with political overtones as facebook did of RT.

Fred Caruso says: February 19, 2018 at 3:35 pm

So we are going to limit global free speech by spending $Trillions more on building a nuclear arsenal - total madness - driven by [un] Democratic whining.

Francis Louis Szot says: February 16, 2018 at 6:05 pm

Apparently, it comes down to trolls who planted various "fake news" stories. Stipulate to all of that; the worst of it. How does THAT begin to stack–up against the murderous coup that the USA OPENLY fomented in the Ukraine a couple of years earlier by bankrolling dozens of Non-governmental organizations whose sole purpose was "regime change"?

Maybe come back to me about all of this when the FBI can convincingly prove that the Russian government armed and funded a Neo–nazi para–military group that assaulted and burned–down the North Carolina State House.

Fred Caruso says: February 19, 2018 at 3:37 pm

You mean like Clinton and the CIA did in Ukraine, for economic domination over Russia, don't you?

Clark M Shanahan says: February 16, 2018 at 3:44 pm

I'm hoping the hush-money passed on to two of Trump's romantic caprices, during the election, gets traction.

Tell me, as soon as you can, when having skepticism on the Russia/Election Meddling story is finally permitted. I heard tell, we've lately dropped the "Treason" narration. Now the spin du jour is that Trump & Co were all duped by them clever Ruskies. Whatever floats your boat.

Clark M Shanahan says: February 17, 2018 at 10:13 am

Yes David, I'm still a skeptic. In fact, I think this move to indict 13 suspects, that have a snowball in Hell's chance of ever being tried, is simply a dog and pony show to placate the public. Debrief yourself, read Binney's report and listen to Stephen F Cohen's latest, here on the Nation.

Clark M Shanahan says: February 17, 2018 at 5:25 pm

Stephen Cohen's take on Russiagate makes a lot of sense, to me. I've followed Russia/soviet/US relations very closely since Gorbachev. Open your eyes, Mattis has labeled Russia our mortal enemy, we just upped defense spending to an obscene level that shall keep our schools, hospitals, social services, and infrastructure in their bad state.

As if Hill, who stole the primaries actually ran a competent campaign.

[Feb 19, 2018] Poland opposes Nord Stream 2 - plans to build own pipeline - Fort Russ

Feb 19, 2018 | www.fort-russ.com

The Polish leadership intends to implement a project of its own with the Baltic Pipe gas pipeline - in face of the "Nord Stream - 2". This is reported by the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung .

The Polish party "Law and Justice" decided to revive the Baltic Pipe project and connect to the Norwegian gas network. According to press releases, at the end of last year the Polish state oil and gas company PGNiG reserved the capacity of the gas pipeline for 15 years, at a cost of two billion dollars. It is assumed that the Polish project with an annual capacity of 10 billion cubic meters per year will begin to function in 2022, but the final decision on this project will be taken later in 2018.

Poland actively opposes the construction of the Russian "Nord Stream - 2". Earlier, the Polish Prime Minister called on the US leadership to extend American sanctions for the implementation of this project. In addition, he said that European companies involved in the construction of the gas pipeline should be fined.

Germany has rebuffed such statements, stating that the project guarantees energy security for Europe.

Nord Stream -2 is a project worth 9.5 billion euros, which involves the construction of two lines of pipeline across the Baltic Sea from the coast of Russia to Germany. The total capacity will be 55 billion cubic meters of gas per year.

[Feb 19, 2018] With the almost non stop Russian bashing in the US one has to wonder if something else is at play here. Like priming the US psych to cheer on an inevitable war with Russia.

More like attempt to unite the nation which crumbles die to crisis of neoliberalism and decimation of neoliberal ideology. And resore even on false pretext trust for neoliberal ruling elite that is sitting in Congress and major government institutions.
As well as swipe Hillary political fiasco under the rug and prevent loss of power by Clinton wing of Democratic Party.
Feb 19, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

not dead vet Fri, 02/16/2018 - 23:43 Permalink

With the almost non stop Russian bashing in the US one has to wonder if something else is at play here. Like priming the US psych to cheer on an inevitable war with Russia. If one digs into the revelations it's obvious they are bunk, unless your reading Wapo, New York Times, Time, and other neocon mouthpieces which are full of fiction not facts, but America is a soundbite nation. We stop reading after the headline and the way stories are structured that do have some truth in them never get read.

No matter what the US has done to crash the Russian economy Putin has strengthened it and is working hard to make it impervious to outside forces.

Unlike the US where the government and the CEO's can't destroy it fast enough while filling their wallets. The more successful Putin is, especially on foreign policy, the more desperate and dangerous the neocons will become. Remember they have nice luxurious bunkers to wait out the inevitable while you die a slow death.

[Feb 19, 2018] America Is Descending Into a Dangerous Psychosis by James Howard Kunstler

Notable quotes:
"... The author is a prominent American social critic, blogger, and podcaster , and we carry his articles regularly on RI . His writing on Russia-gate has been highly entertaining. ..."
"... He is one of the better-known thinkers The New Yorker has dubbed 'The Dystopians' in an excellent 2009 profile , along with the brilliant Dmitry Orlov, another regular contributor to RI (archive) . These theorists believe that modern society is headed for a jarring and painful crack-up. ..."
"... You can find his popular fiction and novels on this subject, here . To get a sense of how entertaining he is, watch this 2004 TED talk about the cruel misery of American urban design - it is one of the most-viewed on TED. ..."
"... If you like his work, please consider supporting him on Patreon . ..."
"... Why Does Trump Ignore Top Officials' Warnings on Russia? , ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... Sport's Illustrated ..."
"... Actually the Times's editorial seems to have CIA / NSA fingerprints all over it, or at least Deep State paw prints. By stating that the Russians are already "meddling" in 2018 elections that haven't happened yet, aren't our own security agencies setting up the public to lose faith in the electoral process and fight over election results? Oh, by the way, the Times ..."
"... The longer this fantasy about Russia continues from the Left side of the political transect, the deeper the nation sinks into a dangerous collective psychosis. After all this time, the only known instances of American political figures "colluding" with Russians involve the shenanigans between the DNC, the Hillary Clinton campaign, and US intel services including the FBI and CIA, in paying for the "Steele Dossier" and the activities of the Fusion GPS company that claimed Russia hacked Hillary's and John Podesta's email. ..."
"... There is now a ton of evidence about all this monkey business, and no sign (yet) that Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller may be taking a good hard look at it, not to mention the professional misconduct of a half dozen senior FBI, NSA, and CIA officials, especially former CIA chief John Brennan, who has now morphed into a CNN "analyst," taking an active role in what amounts to a psy-ops campaign to shove the public toward war. ..."
"... We are already choking this polity to death by endlessly litigating the past, insuring that the country doesn't have the time or the fortitude to deal with much more important quandaries of the present -- especially a financial system that is speeding into the most colossal train wreck in history. That will de-rail Mr. Trump soon enough, and then all the rest of us will have enough to do to keep our lives together or to refashion them in some that will work in a very different economy. ..."
Feb 19, 2018 | russia-insider.com
The author is a prominent American social critic, blogger, and podcaster , and we carry his articles regularly on RI . His writing on Russia-gate has been highly entertaining.

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

You can find his popular fiction and novels on this subject, here . To get a sense of how entertaining he is, watch this 2004 TED talk about the cruel misery of American urban design - it is one of the most-viewed on TED.

If you like his work, please consider supporting him on Patreon .

Forget about sharks. In their Valentine's Day editorial: Why Does Trump Ignore Top Officials' Warnings on Russia? , The New York Times jumped several blue whales (all the ones left on earth), a cruise ship, a subtropical archipelago, a giant vortex of plastic bottles, and the Sport's Illustrated swimsuit shoot. The lede said:

The phalanx of intelligence chiefs who testified on Capitol Hill delivered a chilling message: Not only did Russia interfere in the 2016 election, it is already meddling in the 2018 election by using a digital strategy to exacerbate the country's political and social divisions.

Hmmm . After almost two years of relentless public paranoia about Russia and US elections, don't you suppose these Ruskie gremlins would find some other way to make mischief in our world -- maybe meddle in the NHL playoffs, or hack WalMart's bookkeeping department, or covertly switch out the real Dwayne Johnson with a robot? I kind of completely and absolutely doubt that they'll bother with our elections.

Actually the Times's editorial seems to have CIA / NSA fingerprints all over it, or at least Deep State paw prints. By stating that the Russians are already "meddling" in 2018 elections that haven't happened yet, aren't our own security agencies setting up the public to lose faith in the electoral process and fight over election results? Oh, by the way, the Times presented no evidence whatsoever that this alleged "meddling" is taking place. They just assert it, as if it were already adjudicated.

But then they take it another step, making the case that because Mr. Trump does not go along with the Russian Meddling story, he is obstructing efforts to prevent Russian interference in the elections that haven't happened yet, and is therefore by implication guilty of treason. A fine piece of casuistry.

The longer this fantasy about Russia continues from the Left side of the political transect, the deeper the nation sinks into a dangerous collective psychosis. After all this time, the only known instances of American political figures "colluding" with Russians involve the shenanigans between the DNC, the Hillary Clinton campaign, and US intel services including the FBI and CIA, in paying for the "Steele Dossier" and the activities of the Fusion GPS company that claimed Russia hacked Hillary's and John Podesta's email.

There is now a ton of evidence about all this monkey business, and no sign (yet) that Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller may be taking a good hard look at it, not to mention the professional misconduct of a half dozen senior FBI, NSA, and CIA officials, especially former CIA chief John Brennan, who has now morphed into a CNN "analyst," taking an active role in what amounts to a psy-ops campaign to shove the public toward war.

The "resistance" may think it is getting some mileage out of this interminable narrative, but its arrant inconsistencies only undermine faith in all our political institutions, and that is really playing with fire.

We are already choking this polity to death by endlessly litigating the past, insuring that the country doesn't have the time or the fortitude to deal with much more important quandaries of the present -- especially a financial system that is speeding into the most colossal train wreck in history. That will de-rail Mr. Trump soon enough, and then all the rest of us will have enough to do to keep our lives together or to refashion them in some that will work in a very different economy.

... ... ...

[Feb 19, 2018] Russian Meddling Was a Drop in an Ocean of American-made Discord by AMANDA TAUB and MAX FISHER

Highly recommended!
Very weak analysis The authors completely missed the point. Susceptibility to rumors (now called "fake new" which more correctly should be called "improvised news") and high level of distrust to "official MSM" (of which popularity of alternative news site is only tip of the iceberg) is a sign of the crisis and tearing down of the the social fabric that hold the so social groups together. This first of all demonstrated with the de-legitimization of the neoliberal elite.
As such attempt to patch this discord and unite the US society of fake premises of Russiagate and anti-Russian hysteria look very problematic. The effect might be quite opposite as the story with Steele dossier, which really undermined credibility of Justice Department and destroyed the credibility o FBI can teach us.
In this case claims that "The claim that, for example, Mrs. Clinton's victory might aid Satan " are just s a sign of rejection of neoliberalism by voters. Nothing more nothing less.
Notable quotes:
"... It has infected the American political system, weakening the body politic and leaving it vulnerable to manipulation. Russian misinformation seems to have exacerbated the symptoms, but laced throughout the indictment are reminders that the underlying disease, arguably far more damaging, is all American-made. ..."
"... A recent study found that the people most likely to consume fake news were already hyperpartisan and close followers of politics, and that false stories were only a small fraction of their media consumption. ..."
Feb 18, 2018 | www.nytimes.com

That these efforts might have actually made a difference, or at least were intended to, highlights a force that was already destabilizing American democracy far more than any Russian-made fake news post: partisan polarization.

"Partisanship can even alter memory, implicit evaluation, and even perceptual judgment," the political scientists Jay J. Van Bavel and Andrea Pereira wrote in a recent paper . "The human attraction to fake and untrustworthy news" -- a danger cited by political scientists far more frequently than orchestrated meddling -- "poses a serious problem for healthy democratic functioning."

It has infected the American political system, weakening the body politic and leaving it vulnerable to manipulation. Russian misinformation seems to have exacerbated the symptoms, but laced throughout the indictment are reminders that the underlying disease, arguably far more damaging, is all American-made.

... ... ...

A recent study found that the people most likely to consume fake news were already hyperpartisan and close followers of politics, and that false stories were only a small fraction of their media consumption.

Americans, it said, sought out stories that reflected their already-formed partisan view of reality. This suggests that these Russians efforts are indicators -- not drivers -- of how widely Americans had polarized.

That distinction matters for how the indictment is read: Though Americans have seen it as highlighting a foreign threat, it also illustrates the perhaps graver threats from within.

An Especially Toxic Form of Partisanship

... ... ...

"Compromise is the core of democracy," she said. "It's the only way we can govern." But, she said, "when you make people feel threatened, nobody compromises with evil."

The claim that, for example, Mrs. Clinton's victory might aid Satan is in many ways just a faint echo of the partisan anger and fear already dominating American politics.

Those emotions undermine a key norm that all sides are served by honoring democratic processes; instead, they justify, or even seem to mandate, extreme steps against the other side.

Advertisement Continue reading the main story

In taking this approach, the Russians were merely riding a trend that has been building for decades. Since the 1980s , surveys have found that Republicans and Democrats' feelings toward the opposing party have been growing more and more negative. Voters are animated more by distrust of the other side than support for their own.

This highlights a problem that Lilliana Mason, a University of Maryland political scientist, said had left American democracy dangerously vulnerable. But it's a problem driven primarily by American politicians and media outlets, which have far louder megaphones than any Russian-made Facebook posts.

"Compromise is the core of democracy," she said. "It's the only way we can govern." But, she said, "when you make people feel threatened, nobody compromises with evil."

The claim that, for example, Mrs. Clinton's victory might aid Satan is in many ways just a faint echo of the partisan anger and fear already dominating American politics.

Those emotions undermine a key norm that all sides are served by honoring democratic processes; instead, they justify, or even seem to mandate, extreme steps against the other side.

[Feb 18, 2018] And, what about all the foreign nationals who post here in this forum on this blog? I daresay most offer opinions not complementary of the US government and its political menagerie.

"I swear that Russiagate is nothing more than trying to cover up the blatant corruption of the DNC, Hillary Clinton, the FBI, CIA and The Department of Justice. Keep everybody busy with Russiagate and don't allow the corruption (with the help of the press) to see the light of day. Otherwise, people in high places would be going to jail.
Notable quotes:
"... As many commentators have pointed out, we are a country of completely brain washed people now. Schiff, Schumer, Sanders . . . they are all cut from the same cloth. There is not one politician left in the country who will challenge the The Ruling Power Structure's narrative. Even in Russia, there are lot of opposition leadership voices who are making noises against the System they disagree with. ..."
"... They can't make "hacking" stick 'cause it's false. They can't make "Trump is a Putin puppet" stick 'cause it's false. So now the whole damn dumb show–regurgitated by either shameless war profiteers or straight-faced useful idiots–comes down to so-called Russian social media trolls exercising the same "speech" that we are supposedly so proud to call "free" in this country. ..."
"... The Thought Police use surveillance and psychological monitoring to find and eliminate members of society who challenge the party's authority and ideology. ..."
"... Anyone who has questioned the intelligence agencies narrative that Russians and Trump colluded to win the election are viewed with suspicion as potential enemies of the state. ..."
"... What is the end goal? The end goal is to prop up a long in the tooth multi-decade cold war with Russia to justify massive military spending. Do you want to know the answer to your question of whether or not the US defense industry and our intelligence agencies are trying to spark a war with Russia? ..."
"... The answer is yes they are. As crazy as that sounds, the hungry defense industry with its insatiable appetite for more weapons has decided to go for the ultimate win the lottery strategy and foment war with Russia. It had been happening under Obama and now it is happening under Trump. They are trying to box him into a corner where he will feel enough pressure to go against Russia. Perhaps they can goad him into attacking Russia which is what I believe they want to do. Our national media plays along and is in bed with the intelligence agencies as much as ever just like they spouted the lies of Chalabi in Iraq War II falsely believing his claims that Saddam Hussein had nuclear and chemical and biological weapons. ..."
"... "Yet still they want more as Caitlin Johnstone pointed out. What they want now to do is to do the same thing they have been doing under Obama and enlist Trump on the grandest military adventure of all. War with Russia." ..."
"... The Russiagate affair has been going on for almost a year and I would think Mueller is under a lot of pressure to find something to stick. This indictment may be it. ..."
"... Once again, Russia's reputation will be taken down a few notches and made to suffer another humiliation. And the US will move on to the next allegation, "UK and US blame Russia for the malicious NotPetya cyberattack" (headline on BBC). ..."
Feb 18, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

"Realist , February 17, 2018 at 3:27 pm

Essentially, all Mueller did yesterday was to indict a bunch of private Russian citizens for expressing their opinions about the candidates in the last presidential election via public media (mainly Facedbook and Twitter), and the individual Russians contacted by the press about it did not deny doing so. Mueller made no links to the Russian government, Putin, the FSB or even their alleged puppet Donald Trump. Just private individuals being persecuted for expressing an opinion on American politics in public because they are foreigners. Doesn't matter whether the opinions were true, false, complementary or disparaging because they were subjective just like anyone else's opinions (you know, opinions are like a-holes, everybody's got one).

So, if that move by Mueller is allowed to stand and serve as a precedent in American jurisprudence, doesn't that mean that journalists from foreign lands, like Caitlin herself, are at risk of being indicated at any moment by the US Justice Department if they express opinions that the insiders in the Deep State do not like? And, what about all the foreign nationals who post here in this forum on this blog? I daresay most offer opinions not complementary of the US government and its political menagerie. And, to be honest, many do so in order to either change minds or solidify shared beliefs with others, including great swirling drifts of snowflake Americans.

This free exchange of thoughts is now to be verboten because someone other than Uncle Sam may have an influence or even change the mind of a precious American citizen? This is madness. That the most educated and articulate amongst us do not see this, but rather participate in the feeding frenzy upon the carcass of what is left of our liberal democracy is absolutely stupifying. As I have been saying for some time now, someone or some force must be imposing a form of mass hypnosis upon the population and only a few of us (including most here) seem to be immune to its effects. Maybe something we consume acts as an antidote. Perhaps your Italian grandma's muffalettas or calzones, Joe? Or my mother's German rouladen?

Dave P. , February 17, 2018 at 5:01 pm

Realist –

"As I have been saying for some time now, someone or some force must be imposing a form of mass hypnosis upon the population and only a few of us (including most here) seem to be immune to its effects."

You are dead right on that. My wife was yelling and screaming last night that why I was not watching this "Russia trolls" show with her on CNN, MSNBC, and PBS; to learn how the Russians have destroyed our beautiful democracy. She had seen the World too, mostly for fun and experiences; she taught English in Malaysia – British colony until 1957 – as a peace Corps volunteer during 1960's. There you have it. As many commentators have pointed out, we are a country of completely brain washed people now. Schiff, Schumer, Sanders . . . they are all cut from the same cloth. There is not one politician left in the country who will challenge the The Ruling Power Structure's narrative. Even in Russia, there are lot of opposition leadership voices who are making noises against the System they disagree with.

Gregory Herr , February 17, 2018 at 6:21 pm

They can't make "hacking" stick 'cause it's false. They can't make "Trump is a Putin puppet" stick 'cause it's false. So now the whole damn dumb show–regurgitated by either shameless war profiteers or straight-faced useful idiots–comes down to so-called Russian social media trolls exercising the same "speech" that we are supposedly so proud to call "free" in this country. They not only take us for moronic fools, but they can't even see that that they are insulting us further by insinuating that our voting decisions are completely unsophisticated and easily swayed to the point that 13 Russians could have an impact amidst a sea of election season campaign "propaganda" from both major parties and an array of special interest influence peddling. Like the Clinton campaign didn't hire Facebook trolls!
Bye Bye First Amendment no one in the halls of power takes it seriously enough to defend it unless you're spouting groupthink right Bernie?

Zachary Smith , February 17, 2018 at 8:00 pm

Essentially, all Mueller did yesterday was to indict a bunch of private Russian citizens for expressing their opinions about the candidates in the last presidential election via public media (mainly Facedbook and Twitter), and the individual Russians contacted by the press about it did not deny doing so.

I'll echo Drew Hunkins in calling this a brilliant condensation of the issue. What worries me is what the morons-in-charge might have in mind as a follow-up to this lunacy.

CitizenOne , February 18, 2018 at 2:31 am

Perhaps we are entering into the Orwellian dawn of Thought Crimes which are any feelings or thinking a Citizen has which are counter to the State Propaganda put out by the Ministry of Truth. The Thought Police (thinkpol in Newspeak) are the secret police of the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. It is their job to uncover and punish thoughtcrime. The Thought Police use surveillance and psychological monitoring to find and eliminate members of society who challenge the party's authority and ideology.

Anyone who has questioned the intelligence agencies narrative that Russians and Trump colluded to win the election are viewed with suspicion as potential enemies of the state.

It would appear to be allegations of thought crime because 15 foreign nationals posted things on social media. We have been under the perception that social media is a free forum for discourse but now, like China, we are seeing the formation of a witch hunt for foreign devils who have infiltrated the social mediascape and are on trial for the results of a national election.

We are literally burning some innocent teenager for the calamity we are convinced was not of our own making. We need to find a witch to brew some witchcraft to explain how our current situation has arisen.

Not sure if anyone alive today believes the Salem Witch Trials served justice and created a restoration of civil harmony. I'm fairly sure that everyone looks at those dark days as a travesty of justice.

Yes we are living in a time of universal deceit and the act of telling the truth has become a revolutionary act just as Orwell portrayed in his novel.

Thought crimes are fairly scary and they imply that our government is willing to indict the thoughts of whoever it deems to be an enemy of the state and bring the thinkers of thought crime as defined by the state as anyone who questions the official fake narrative of Russia Gate to "justice".

What is the end goal? The end goal is to prop up a long in the tooth multi-decade cold war with Russia to justify massive military spending. Do you want to know the answer to your question of whether or not the US defense industry and our intelligence agencies are trying to spark a war with Russia?

The answer is yes they are. As crazy as that sounds, the hungry defense industry with its insatiable appetite for more weapons has decided to go for the ultimate win the lottery strategy and foment war with Russia. It had been happening under Obama and now it is happening under Trump. They are trying to box him into a corner where he will feel enough pressure to go against Russia. Perhaps they can goad him into attacking Russia which is what I believe they want to do. Our national media plays along and is in bed with the intelligence agencies as much as ever just like they spouted the lies of Chalabi in Iraq War II falsely believing his claims that Saddam Hussein had nuclear and chemical and biological weapons.

Even the analysis on North Korea which opines that NK will use all weapons first as a first strike in a scenario the USA has called the "Use it or Lose it" fell short and was proved a false scenario or that there were really no actual WMDs in Iraq as the UN claimed.

Either way, the likely outcomes of a WMD armed Iraqi leader facing imminent demise which would cause him to use all available weapons at his disposal did not happen. There are only two conclusions to the outcome. Saddam did not have these weapons or the likely scenario of "Use it or Lose it" is all wrong.

Either way the premise of the war was shown to be false.

Unfortunately in the aftermath of that war there was no US counterpart to the British Chilcot Report and the US went on to engage in regime change in other nations like Ukraine, Syria, Libya and elsewhere.

There is no sense to it other than to destabilize nations, foment violence and create international tensions which have the effect of causing our elected leaders to pony up more money for defense to combat the new enemies we just created.

Yet still they want more as Caitlin Johnstone pointed out. What they want now to do is to do the same thing they have been doing under Obama and enlist Trump on the grandest military adventure of all. War with Russia.

I agree with her assessment that this is crazy. This is the most irresponsible thing yet but it has been enabled by a fake news press just as it was enabled by the fake news media all the times before.

I agree with you Joe that a form of mass hypnosis has gripped our democrat officials and a large segment of our population. We have been handed a leader they don't like and they are ready and able to make hay with the election outcome to persuade us by force to support more military adventures.

Dave P. , February 18, 2018 at 3:53 am

Citizen One –

"Yet still they want more as Caitlin Johnstone pointed out. What they want now to do is to do the same thing they have been doing under Obama and enlist Trump on the grandest military adventure of all. War with Russia."

I agree with her assessment that this is crazy. This is the most irresponsible thing yet but it has been enabled by a fake news press just as it was enabled by the fake news media all the times before."

Yes. This scenario is getting more and more likely. All steps point to that direction.

Skeptigal , February 17, 2018 at 11:10 pm

Unfortunately I'm not as confident. Here is the complete indictment at http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43091945 . There are three counts (with almost 70 allegations): 1. Conspiracy to Defraud the United States 2. Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud And Bank Fraud and 3. Aggravated Identity Theft. It ends with a forfeiture allegation seeking property, real or personal from the defendants.

The Russiagate affair has been going on for almost a year and I would think Mueller is under a lot of pressure to find something to stick. This indictment may be it. Mueller will be the hero; Trump may be saved as the interference started in 2014, before his campaign began; the Hillary emails and Nunes memo will be cast aside; and the USA can say to the world "see I told you so."

Once again, Russia's reputation will be taken down a few notches and made to suffer another humiliation. And the US will move on to the next allegation, "UK and US blame Russia for the malicious NotPetya cyberattack" (headline on BBC).

Martin - Swedish citizen , February 18, 2018 at 1:15 am

If the allegations are true, they need to be put in perspective:
– what might be the rational behind? Eg tit-for-tat for Western meddling, arms race,
– do other nations engage in similar projects? What are the scale of those?

Starting in 2014 could it have been triggered by the Kiev coup and Nuland's was it five billion?

[Feb 18, 2018] This dangerous escalation of tensions with Russia is extremely lucrative for the war profiteers, the retired generals intelligence members who prostitute themselves as media pundits, the members of Congress who get $$$ from the war profiteers, and the corporate media which thrives on links to the war profiteers as well as on war reporting

Highly recommended!
Feb 18, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

REDPILLED

This dangerous escalation of tensions with Russia is extremely lucrative for the war profiteers, the retired generals & intelligence members who prostitute themselves as media pundits, the members of Congress who get $$$ from the war profiteers, and the corporate media which thrives on links to the war profiteers as well as on war reporting.

That's why we must all be kept fearful, so we don't demand that annual trillion dollar military "defense" budgets be slashed and that money instead be spent on social safety net programs and infrastructure.

That's also why tensions with not only Russia, but Iran, Syria, North Korea, and China must be maintained, and our endless wars and global empire of military bases continued.

As long as war and militarism are such profitable rackets, it doesn't matter that all life on earth is threatened. That is the essence of capitalism in a nutshell: profits are more important than life itself.

Joe Tedesky , February 17, 2018 at 12:55 pm

You got that right, and the sooner the American public wise up to all these lies the better. If you want this maddening insanity to stop, well then my fellow Americans quit buying into their lies. Just go ahead and board the damn plane, oh BTW one of the reasons NFL attendance is down is well think of the new security rules put in place plus who knows the rules of football anymore (our football is even tainted with screwiness). Sorry for the rant, but we Americans got to start calling our officials out on this stuff. It's that plain and simple. Nice post REDPILLED. Joe

Virginia , February 17, 2018 at 1:06 pm

REDPILLED,

I'm just imagining how it must feel, if you're Putin, to be able to rein in your emotions, to not react no matter how much baited, and to stay above the fray while warmongers, like dogs, are barking at your feet. That degree of self-composure, resting on a strong necessity to try to prevent WWIII and nuclear annihilation, well, I'm afraid not many of us will ever know or feel that exactly, but we can imagine! To do this with grace and dignity, insult after insult! There are lessons to be learned here.

Joe Tedesky , February 17, 2018 at 1:10 pm

Virginia we Americans better hope patient Putin stays in power. Joe

irina , February 17, 2018 at 3:19 pm

Exactly. I can't imagine who the Creatures of the Deep think would be a
good successor to Putin, but I do think they should be very careful of
what they wish for. Case in point, the Ukraine. What exactly happened
to "Our Man Yats" anyway ? He seems to have (been ?) disappeared. . .

Joe Tedesky , February 17, 2018 at 3:30 pm

There is a bit of a warring nature still left in this old fighter cat, and during these imaginary moments of destruction I struggle with I see Russian T72 tanks driving down Maiden Square looking for old Yats and his friends. Not to worry though, I seriously don't want anyone, anywhere, to have to suffer even one minute of war, but on a bad day, well need I say more? Joe

ranney , February 17, 2018 at 5:45 pm

I agree Virginia. I am so depressed by Mueller's actions my head swims. I had hoped that Mueller was actually an honest investigator who believed in the rule of law as everyone said. Now I can't imagine what game he is playing. Now it seems like all hope has vanished that anything even vaguely resembling the truth will come out.. Mueller"s indictments of these poor people seals the deal: Russia is the evil bugbear that must be destroyed and all right thinking patriots will agree to that when we launch nuclear war.
I keep feeling like we're all in a Kafka exercise or a Harold Pinter play where motives and truths are hidden behind an impenatrable wall. Even the new Consortium article by McGovern and Binney seems to hint at much more than they are telling, leaving me to wish they'd just come out and say what they are worried about given their knowledge and expertise. Instead I'm left with the sense that there is a coded message in there that I have missed.

So yes, I too worry about how patient Putin can be when we have already in so many ways performed a dozen or more acts of war on Russia in the past year and he has not reacted violently.

p.s. Once again Caitlin has provided great links. Click on one of the first about the government telling us lies. It'll get you a great 4 minute cartoon based on Chomskys book Manufacturing Consent. It's about propaganda. You'll like it.

Virginia , February 17, 2018 at 8:50 pm

Ranney -- One thing that has lifted my spirit somewhat, I heard a real thinker say that the Deep State (DS) is losing ground now because its anointed candidate HRC was defeated in 2016. So 2016 marks a positive time of turning and healing. Putin and Xi seem to both be working for the good of the world. Wonderful if Donald Trump could drain the swamp and get on board. Either way, those two Leaders together can lead us out of this morass.

There's a state of thought that remains composed no matter what the valley of the shadow of death. The more I learn -- and sometimes what I learn is vastly darker than I could ever conceive -- the deeper grows my joy. It's been a puzzle to me that I could read something truly devastating here on CN and walk away with more joy than I had before reading it (and believe me, it's not because of the evil news). It's partly because I'm grateful that my eyes have been opened. There is absolutely nothing I can do without being well informed about it. I feel I'm learning all this for a reason; a very real big good reason. Don't you? There's a state of thought that refuses to be fearful no matter what. Adopt that one, Ranney.

Just look at those Olympiads doing the impossible! They start with, "I can."

Dave P. , February 18, 2018 at 4:07 am

Virginia,

Yes. Regarding the barking dogs, I read some where this Putin's answer to a question a few days ago on that list of 200 sanctioned Russians put out by U.S. Treasury Department. Putin said: Let the barking dogs bark, but the caravan goes on.

[Feb 17, 2018] Russia condemned and defined as the enemy of America with laughably little evidence (effing Facebook posts being about the extent of it) .... not a word about JEWISH MONEY controlling the entire political system in the USA. When Netanyahu gets 29 standing ovations from Congress should that not have triggered an FBI Investigation

Taking oil price to 30th or 40th is a strategic goal of the USA in relation to Russia. Listen at 3:30.
Notable quotes:
"... Appeasing interview with a shockingly cheap incompetent former CIA head Woolsey. If this man seriously represents the intellectual level of the CIA, then the USA will implode even faster than in ten years. ..."
"... You are exactly right. U$ politicians are uninformed, stupid, detached from reality, selfish and they think like schoolyard kids do. ..."
"... They are the product of the US society as a whole. ..."
"... Craig Murray nailed this issue stone dead for all time a few years ago, when he wrote:"[neo]liberal interventionism, the theory that bombing brown people is good for them". ..."
"... In the former The Ukraine, the Jewish Quisling oligarch dictator, Poroshenko, has been appointing foreigners to positions of power (SackOfShvilli is but one). He supported this by stating: "Ukrainians are too corrupt to rule themselves." When will we in America hear such a statement from our leaders to justify the appointment of Jews and paid Judaeophiles to all positions of power? ..."
"... I'm just waiting for Yevgeny Prigozhin to hold a press conference in Russia to claim that Hillary Clinton paid him to run the Internet Research Agency to besmirch her opponent- watch the fireworks :) It's all a hall of mirrors. ..."
"... The Internet Research Agency couldn't have possibly been more ineffective, which points to it's main purpose being to besmirch Trump (more more likely it was just an unimportant hobby of Prigozhin). ..."
"... Sure the United States has, they have been doing it since 1953 with the overthrow of Iran, to as recently as 2012 Russian Election, 2014 Ukraine Election, the UK referendum on 23 June 2016 on Brexit and currently trying to overthrow it this year. These are just a few and there is a very long list of other countries also. The United States in now in Russia and Hungry today meddling it their elections. Got to get the right people in office so they will cow-tow to the United States. ..."
"... What an admission! trump doesn't want more drilling for oil to Americans to use. It is for export and for foreign interference ..."
"... and if the price of oil would go down to 30/40$ that would make a unhappy input and so would be the saudis and you fracking industry would go down the toilet and thy will drag the banks with them. What a moron. And US oil companies would like that alot too ..."
Feb 17, 2018 | theduran.com

Gano1 , February 17, 2018 10:31 AM

The USA has lost all morality, they are so hypocritical it is risible.

Patricia Dolan , February 17, 2018 10:25 AM

What Russian expansionism??? Look at the US expansionism..........get a grip!

Ann Johns Patricia Dolan , February 17, 2018 2:51 PM

Another tiresome, butthurt yank/wank? Between the new One Belt, One Road Chinese initiative, the Russians taking control of ME oil production and the fact that america has NO answers to help it's declining empire, it would seem to the non-partisan observer that america is well and truly f***ed. You must be talking about their debt expansionism, $20 TRILLION and rising by the second.

Vera Gottlieb Patricia Dolan , February 17, 2018 2:29 PM

US expansionism...really? Where? 😜

Mario8282 Vera Gottlieb , February 17, 2018 2:58 PM

Syria? Libya? Yemen? Africa, Afgh...

Vera Gottlieb Mario8282 , February 17, 2018 3:00 PM

And you left out Latin America...

Mario8282 Vera Gottlieb , February 17, 2018 3:05 PM

This is why I left with the dots... The list would end up with America itself (an endless spree of false flags and deception schemes).

Patricia Dolan Mario8282 , February 17, 2018 6:11 PM

Thank you Mario......let's not forget Ukraine, Kosovo, Bosnia, the entirety of eastern Europe, the entirety of northern Africa, Rwanda, the Congo, Venezuela, Chili, Guatemala, Panama, Jeeeeeeeze etc......

Patricia Dolan Vera Gottlieb , February 17, 2018 6:07 PM

get a grip......and turn your TV off!

Terry Ross Patricia Dolan , February 17, 2018 6:08 PM

'twas sarcasm Patricia.

Patricia Dolan Terry Ross , February 17, 2018 6:18 PM

I guess the WINKS need to be LARGER!!!! LOL

ThereisaGod , February 17, 2018 10:05 AM

Russia condemned and defined as the enemy of America with laughably little evidence (effing Facebook posts being about the extent of it) .... not a word about JEWISH MONEY controlling the entire political system in the USA. When Netanyahu gets 29 standing ovations from Congress should that not have triggered an FBI "Investigation"? Nah ... nothing happening there. It is breathtaking that THIS is the Alice-In-Wonderland world we inhabit.

Ton Jacobs, Human Guardians , February 17, 2018 10:02 AM

Appeasing interview with a shockingly cheap incompetent former CIA head Woolsey. If this man seriously represents the intellectual level of the CIA, then the USA will implode even faster than in ten years.

christianblood Ton Jacobs, Human Guardians , February 17, 2018 12:32 PM

(...If this man seriously represents the intellectual level of the CIA, then the USA will implode even faster than in ten years...)

You are exactly right. U$ politicians are uninformed, stupid, detached from reality, selfish and they think like schoolyard kids do.

Jesse Marioneaux christianblood , February 17, 2018 12:43 PM

They are the product of the US society as a whole.

christianblood Jesse Marioneaux , February 17, 2018 12:57 PM

They indeed are! U$A! U$A! U$A!

tom , February 17, 2018 11:14 AM

Craig Murray nailed this issue stone dead for all time a few years ago, when he wrote:"[neo]liberal interventionism, the theory that bombing brown people is good for them".

journey80 , February 17, 2018 12:37 PM

Yeah, that's hilarious. Join the murdering creep in a giggle, Laura, that's cute. Here's a global criminal who should have been hung years ago for crimes against humanity. No one in their right mind would treat this creep with anything but contempt and horror, let alone find him funny.

Franz Kafka , February 17, 2018 12:17 PM

In the former The Ukraine, the Jewish Quisling oligarch dictator, Poroshenko, has been appointing foreigners to positions of power (SackOfShvilli is but one). He supported this by stating: "Ukrainians are too corrupt to rule themselves." When will we in America hear such a statement from our leaders to justify the appointment of Jews and paid Judaeophiles to all positions of power?

journey80 Franz Kafka , February 17, 2018 12:34 PM

We don't need to hear it, we're living it.

Franz Kafka journey80 , February 17, 2018 3:33 PM

My profound and sincere condolences. You are getting the 'Democracy Treatment' by the West. I hope some of you survive to tell the tale and take revenge.

Franz Kafka , February 17, 2018 12:09 PM

Are those ears or bat-wings? WOW! Yet another Jewe, pretending not be be. I guess he would say that the USA murdered all the Indians and enslaved Africans 'for their own good' as well.
Talmudo-Satanism is the pernicious underlying ideology of the people who have taken over, not just the USA, but, lets face it, the entire West.

Vera Gottlieb , February 17, 2018 2:28 PM

What a bunch of ingrates we are...not appreciating all that the CIA is doing for us. We must thank them instead of complaining.

Trauma2000 , February 17, 2018 5:30 PM

Lets not forget that the U.$.A. meddled in Australia's election of the Whitlam Government. (And several governments there after as soon as they realised they could get away with it an nothing would happen to them). The United States are a bunch of sick puppies; really sick puppies the way they have treated Australia.

So much for being allies. With allies like the United States you don't need enemies (Unless the U.$. doctors them up for you to force you to pay them more money for weapons and protection).

And it makes me sick that so many 'naive' people around the world keep falling for the SH*T that comes out of their mouths.

When dealing with the United States there are a few rules to follow. (Apologies to the innocent Americans out there but 'they' allow their government to do some unspeakable horrors to the world.)

And that goes for the entire planet no matter who the United States is speaking to.

End of story.

Shue Trauma2000 , February 17, 2018 5:51 PM

Worst part is the our Gov can't think ahead, if they keep antagonising China on behalf of the Seppo's China will eventually pull their mineral imports and our economy will crash overnight.

HappyCynic , February 17, 2018 4:31 PM

Yes, nobody doubts that the US interferes with elections in other countries - we're the good guys, so this is ok :)

I'm just waiting for Yevgeny Prigozhin to hold a press conference in Russia to claim that Hillary Clinton paid him to run the Internet Research Agency to besmirch her opponent- watch the fireworks :) It's all a hall of mirrors.

The Internet Research Agency couldn't have possibly been more ineffective, which points to it's main purpose being to besmirch Trump (more more likely it was just an unimportant hobby of Prigozhin).

John R Balch Jr , February 17, 2018 6:31 PM

Sure the United States has, they have been doing it since 1953 with the overthrow of Iran, to as recently as 2012 Russian Election, 2014 Ukraine Election, the UK referendum on 23 June 2016 on Brexit and currently trying to overthrow it this year. These are just a few and there is a very long list of other countries also. The United States in now in Russia and Hungry today meddling it their elections. Got to get the right people in office so they will cow-tow to the United States.

Graeme Pedersen , February 17, 2018 6:11 PM

I believe john Key was sent from the U$A (Merrill Lynch) to ruin our economy in New Zealand as well.

janbn , February 17, 2018 5:37 PM

What an admission! trump doesn't want more drilling for oil to Americans to use. It is for export and for foreign interference.

Aidi Deduction , February 17, 2018 4:51 PM

Frederick the Great concluded that to allow governments to be dominated by the majority would be disastrous: "A democracy, to survive, must be, like other governments a minority persuading a majority to let itself be led by a minority."

General Kreeg , February 17, 2018 4:13 PM

Russian Trolls are all of a sudden the Russian Gov't.

fredd , February 17, 2018 3:18 PM

and if the price of oil would go down to 30/40$ that would make a unhappy input and so would be the saudis and you fracking industry would go down the toilet and thy will drag the banks with them. What a moron. And US oil companies would like that alot too

Mario8282 , February 17, 2018 2:56 PM

...and the US bombed half of the world's countries for their own good too. US made Libya a slave market for humanity's good as well. Oboomer even got the Nobel Peace Prize for it.

K Walker , February 17, 2018 2:55 PM

I would be greatly relieved if the USA government merely tweeted instead of invading and indulging in regime change.

Kevin S , February 17, 2018 12:55 PM

Talk about the pinnacle of hypocrisy!

[Feb 17, 2018] Shocking New Evidence: Maidan snipers confess they were under orders from Coup leaders to shoot police AND protesters by Matfey Shaheen

Notable quotes:
"... "We were told to ensure order so that there were no drunks, to maintain discipline and identify rabble-rousers sent in by the authorities," the officer recounted. ..."
Feb 17, 2018 | theduran.com
Snipers Koba Nergadze and Alexander Revazishvili, who now fear for their lives, are even ready to confirm their stunning account below in a Ukrainian court.

A protestor points a gun during clashes with riot police in the centre of Kiev on January 22, 2014.

It was the shot unheard around the world – everyone knows the Ukraine Crisis began after the 2014 Maidan Coup, but few in the West know Russia didn't invade Ukraine, fewer still know of the mysterious snipers who rained down death from above those fateful days in Kiev.

The corporate media was quick to follow standard stenographers union protocol in line with modern western journalistic standards – so they of course immediately blamed Russia without any evidence. They claim Russian trained snipers were supporting the Ukrainian president by firing on protesters.

Those who actually in Kiev, and not only Russian media, but independent foreign media report a key fact: yes, the snipers fired on protesters, but also on security forces. Snipers were attacking both sides, adding fuel to the raging fires of bloody revolution that laid Kiev – the Mother of Russian Cities – again to ruin.

Now, thanks to Sputnik , we have finally identified the snipers, they were Georgian, and their accounts will shock you:

It is necessary to create chaos on the Maidan, using weapons against any targets, protesters and police – no difference" Said one of the ringleaders

According to Sputnik, snipers Koba Nergadze and Alexander Revazishvili, who now fear for their lives, are even ready to confirm their stunning account below in a Ukrainian court :

Sputnik has obtained copies of an official testimony that they gave to lawyers Alexander Goroshinsky and Stefan Reshko and also copies of air tickets confirming the arrival of Nergadze and Revazishvili to Kiev during the Maidan events .

To get really understand how we got here, we must go back to the beginning of sniper fire on Maidan, which is where the Sputnik report begins:

On February 20, 2014, unknown snipers shot at people gathered on Kiev's central Maidan square killing 49 protesters and four police officers. Local opposition leaders, as well as US and EU representatives, were quick to point a finger at the "regime of Viktor Yanukovych ." Still, an official investigation failed to produce any results with the culprits still at large.

A Sputnik correspondent has met with the purported snipers, all of them from Georgia. They insist that they were taking orders from Maidan leaders. Moreover, they had direct orders to fire at police officers AND protesters in order to enrage the crowd and provoke a political crisis.

from left to right: General Tristan Tsitelashvili, Alexander Revazishvili and Koba Nergadze

According to Sputnik, General Tristan Tsitelashvili , erstwhile commander of the Georgian Army's elite Avaza unit, was the first to expose the fact it was Georgian snipers were firing onto Maidan Square. The General lead troops during the August 2008 hostilities in Abkhazia, until he became a personal enemy of Mikhail Saakashvili, who tried to blame him for his own failures.

Saakashvili trying to eat his tie? Seriously, we couldn't make this up if we tried

Saakashvili is the infamous and stupendously incompetent Georgian president, turned Ukrainian opposition leader who just got deported to Poland by equally unpopular Ukrainian President Poroshenko. He's lucky he wasn't deported to Georgia, as he isn't exactly welcome in his home country either .

While many people have reasonable complaints against the former Georgian President, General Tsitelashvili's issue is far more personal. His home was raided by Saakashvili's forces who arrested the General, and critically injured his little son. Since 2008, the two had been sworn enemies, but Tsitelashvili can hardly be considered a friend of Russia, considering he fought for Georgia. This makes his incredible account all the more credible. Sputnik's report continues with a quote from the General:

I knew already in 2014 about people from Georgia who were present on Maidan square with specific orders to shoot. Some of them served under my command in the Georgian army. Some are still in Ukraine, fighting, others returned to Georgia. They took their time to speak out because they were afraid to. They are still afraid because they can simply be eliminated as unwanted witnesses!

One of those snipers who "knew too much" was Koba Nergadze, a carrier Georgian special forces operator. Sputnik spoke with him as well:

"We were fighting smugglers. The region was divided into zones controlled by Georgian and Ossetian businessmen. Conflicts occasionally flared up, including real firefights with the Ossetian military. Our brigade suffered 11 or 12 people killed, I can't say for sure. Overall, the Georgian army lost 45 people," Nergadze said.

After his 2006 departure from the regular army after, he joined the Georgen DEFMIN's Security Service, with the help of a peculiar friend.

This friend was Mamuka Mamulashvili, the commander of the "Georgian Legion" fighting in eastern Ukraine on Kiev's side. Once again, as with General Tsitelashvili, these aren't exactly Russia's friends, which makes their claims against Kiev all the more unbiased and believable .

"I first met him while in the army, at the birthday party of my friend Bezho," Koba added. "Officially, we also dealt with the protection of the rallies held in Tbilisi, to make sure that there would be no clashes between supporters and opponents of Saakashvili. In fact, we were tasked with suppressing opposition rallies and keeping an eye on the opposition," he admitted.

If necessary, by order of commanders, our service officers beat up opposition leaders. As a rule, we did this while wearing masks. People called us 'Sonderkommando.' Service members were usually tight-lipped about where they worked and what they did.

Sputnik further explains that:

The agents were divided into "tens." Nergadze was one of the foremen. Other foremen he knew are Georgy Saralidze, Merab Kikabidze and David Makiashvili. In his interview with Sputnik, Koba mentioned some of the "tariffs." He said that they were paid $1,000 for beating up an opposition MP.

In December 2013, Mamulashvili invited the "foremen" to a meeting and ordered them "to immediately go to Ukraine to help the protesters." Nergadze's group was allocated $10,000 with an additional $50,000 promised them upon their return.

They used other people's passports to reach their destination. Nergadze had a passport issued in the name of Georgy Karusanidze (born in 1977).

In Kiev, the group was accommodated on Ushinsky Street and each day, as if to work, they went to Maidan.

"We were told to ensure order so that there were no drunks, to maintain discipline and identify rabble-rousers sent in by the authorities," the officer recounted.

Nergazde celebrated New Year at Hotel Ukraina, which was already controlled by protesters.

The hotel Ukraiina provides the perfect vantage point for a Sniper, overlooking Maidan square. If a sniper were to fire from the hotel, into the violently rioting crowd, targeting both sides in the middle of the pandemonium, the fighting would quickly escalate, and the mass panic would help conceal the sniper's identity, position, and very existence.

The Hotel Ukraine is the large building on the top left

The report continues:

Alexander Revazishvili is another former Georgian military man, who arrived in Kiev in the midst of unrest. After serving in the Georgian army, he was an active member of "Free Zone" – an organization of Saakashvili's supporters. In his own words, he "infiltrated the oppositionists' ranks, inciting fights and engaging in other provocations." The organization was led by Koba Khabazi, who introduced Revazishvili to Mamulashvili. He took a great deal of interest in the ex-officer's military specialization as a sniper.

In mid-February, Revazishvili, Khabazi and four other representatives of the Free Zone arrived in Kiev on a UIA flight. They were accommodated at Vozduhoflotskaya Street before being moved to the city conservatory, which was already controlled by the opposition.

"The following day Mamulashvili brought us to Maidan and placed us in a tent set up on the square. Khabazi told us that our task was to provoke the protesters to attack. Our group, along with the protesters, attacked Berkut with stones and Molotov cocktails. Some people were bringing rocks; some were lining up Molotov cocktails, while others assaulted Berkut and the police. Revazishvili said.
https://youtu.be/T7k0MjODEQY

"Sergei Pashinsky Was Bringing the Arms"

Protesters fighting with police during Maidan, unaware snipers were targeting both sides

"On February 14 or 15, the group commanders – me, Kikabidze, Makiashvili, Saralidze, I do not remember the names of the others – were gathered in a suite on the third floor of Hotel Ukraina.

Among those present were Parubiy (Andrey Parubiy, right-wing Ukrainian politician, the "commandant of the Maidan" during the period of unrest in Kiev; since 2016 – Speaker of the Verkhovna Rada), and Pashinsky (Sergei Pashinsky, a notorious Ukrainian politician and businessman, a People's Deputy of Ukraine. – Ed.). 'We need to help our fraternal people, and soon we will have an assignment.' He gave no further clarification. By that time I had already seen hunting rifles and pistols, carried by the protesters," "Nergadze said.

Also taking part in the meeting was a certain Christopher Brian, who was presented as a former American soldier.
In the evening of February 19, Sergey Pashinsky and several unfamiliar guys with big bags returned to the hotel.

They took out SCS carbines, 7.62mm Kalashnikov assault rifles, an SVD rifle and a foreign-made carbine. Pashinsky explained to us that the weapons would be needed "for self-defense," but when I asked him from whom we were going to defend ourselves, he did not answer and left the room. Sputnik reports.

The next part of their story really proves what the goal of the snipers was to do. Apparently Mamulashvili mentioned some a "special task" to the snipers.

" It is necessary to create chaos on the Maidan, using weapons against any targets, protesters and police – no difference ." said Mamulashvili

He said that the money for the "business trip" would be paid once the "assignment" had been completed.

The account continues that:

Someone asked Mamulashvili in Georgian: "Where's Misha?" He answered: "With Porokh." Then they left. Sometime later, Pashinsky and several other men brought in a bag with weapons, mostly SCS carbines. Pashinsky himself was holding a Kalashnikov rifle with an open butt.

Among those present was Vladimir Parasyuk, the leader of one of the Maidan "hundreds," who subsequently commanded the 4th Company of the Dnepr Battalion and later became a People's Deputy of Ukraine.

Revazishvili went on to say:

Pashinsky asked me to help choose shooting positions. He said that Berkut [police commandos] could storm the Conservatory during the night and break up the protesters. At night, about 4 or 5 am, I heard gunshots.

I thought they were coming from the October Palace. Pashinsky jumped up, grabbed the walkie-talkie, and started yelling to cease fire, that it was not the right time. The shooting immediately stopped.

At about 7.30 am (maybe later) Pashinsky ordered everyone to get ready and open fire, taking two or three shots and immediately change position. The shooting continued for about 10-15 minutes. After that, we were ordered to drop weapons and leave the building.

Then he returned to Maidan. He heard that people were enraged; some believed that it was the Berkut shooting. Others, on the contrary, thought that it was the protesters who had fired the shots.

"I realized that this might end badly, that I was in a real fix, that people could tear me up right here if they only knew the truth. I went out to take a walk on Maidan. They I decided that it was time to fly out. I took a taxi to the airport," Revazishvili concluded.

Sputnik's report finishes with the words of

Early in the morning on February 20, at about 8, I heard the sound of gunshots coming from the conservatory; 3 or 4 minutes later, Mamulashvili's group opened fire from windows on the third floor of Hotel Ukraina. They were shooting in pairs. After each shot, they moved to another room and fired again. When it was all over, they told us to get out. That same day Bezho and I flew to Tbilisi.

The stunning report ends as follows:

The ex-officer of the Georgian army was never paid the money he was promised. Today, he fears revenge from his former "colleagues."

Koba Nergadze and Alexander Revazishvili are ready to confirm their words in a Ukrainian court. Sputnik has obtained copies of an official testimony that they gave to lawyers Alexander Goroshinsky and Stefan Reshko, who represent the interests of former members of the Berkut police commando unit. Sputnik also has copies of air tickets confirming the arrival of Nergadze and Revazishvili to Kiev during the Maidan events.

Those who follow alternative media are well aware of the existence of the snipers and the real story of Maidan, however now we finally may know who they are, and what they did. Moreover, seeing as Sputnik announced that in addition to their legal accounts, they can prove they were in Kiev during the Maidan coup. We are one step closer to learning more about how the Coup began, but are we any closer to an end to the war uncertain. This may have incredible implications in coming days, and if anything new arises, we will be sure to keep you informed.

[Feb 17, 2018] Former CIA Chief Admits US Meddling In Foreign Elections For Their Own Good

Notable quotes:
"... How about Brazil, Argentina, and South Africa? Fuck Allen Dulles, Mike Pompeo, and everybody in-between! ..."
"... BTW, Victoria Noodles will be very disappointed Ukraine didn't make the list after all of her hard work. ..."
"... Victoria "F*ck the EU" Nuland and the CIA were all over the Ukrainian "coup", but of course no mention of that on "Fair and Balanced". Laura Ingram is a typical Fox News Zio-Nazi bitch, hiding behind a cross, who apparently believes her own BS, and along others like Hannity have blood on their hands. ..."
"... You can always spot a psychopathic liar by their predisposition to smile or laugh at questions that are not humorous. Laura Ingraham is a neocon mouth-peice for the establishment. ..."
Feb 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Former CIA chief James Woolsey appeared on Fox News to push the narrative of how dastardly 'dem Russkies' are in their meddling with the sacred soul of America's democracy.

Woolsey did his patriotic deep-state-duty and proclaimed the evils of "expansionist Russia" and dropped 'facts' like "Russia has a larger cyber-army than its standing army," before he moved on to China and its existential threats.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/SpWai3kZ-gM

But then, beginning at around 4:30 , the real debacle of the conversation begins as Ingraham asks Woolsey,

"Have we ever tried to meddle in other countries' elections?"

Hes responds, surprisingly frankly...

"Oh probably... but it was for the good of the system..."

To which Ingraham follows up...

"We don't do that now though? We don't mess around in other people's elections?"

Prompting this extraordinary sentence from a former CIA chief...

"Well...hhhmmm, numm numm numm numm... only for a very good cause...in the interests of democracy"

So just to clarify - yes, the CIA chief admitted that Democracy-spreading 'Murica meddled in the Democratic elections of other nations "in the interests of democracy."

In case you wondered which ones he was referring to, here's a brief selection since 1948...

2016: UK (verbal intervention against Brexit)
2014: Afghanistan (effectively re-writing Afghan constitution)
2014: UK (verbal intervention against Scottish independence)
2011: Libya (providing support to overthrow Colonel Gaddafi)
2009: Honduras (ousting President Zelaya)
2006: Palestine (providing support to oust Prime Minister Haniyeh)
2005: Syria (providing support against President al-Assad)
2003: Iran (providing support against President Khatami)-
2003: Iraq (ousting of President Hussein)
2002: Venezuela (providing support to attempt an overthrow of President Chavez)
1999: Yugoslavia (removing Yugoslav forces from Kosovo)
1994: Iraq (attempted overthrow of President Hussein)
1991: Haiti (ousting President Aristide)
1991: Kuwait (removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait)
1989: Panama (ousting General Noriega)
1983: Grenada (ousting General Austin's Marxist forces)
1982: Nicaragua (providing support
1971: Chile (ousting President Allende)
1967: Indonesia (ousting President Sukarno)
1964: Brazil (ousting President Goulart)
1964: Chile (providing support against Salvador Allende)
1961: Congo (assassination of leader Lumumba)
1958: Lebanon (providing support to Christian political parties)
1954: Guatemala (ousting President Arbenz)
1953: Iran (ousting Prime Minister Mossadegh)
1953: Philippines (providing support to the President Magsaysay campaign)
1948: Italy (providing support to the Christian Democrats campaign)

(h/t @Yogi_Chan)

gellero Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:18 Permalink

What?? No Ukrania ???

Stan522 -> gellero Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:23 Permalink

obama sent in operatives into Israel to mess with Bibi....... They missed that one too....

skbull44 -> Stan522 Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:25 Permalink

It's always for the children...

https://olduvai.ca

TBT or not TBT -> skbull44 Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:29 Permalink

Yeah, a little bit for the children, but primarily it's for the stockholders and upper management, with some serious trickle down to their children.

Looney -> TBT or not TBT Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:32 Permalink

How about Brazil, Argentina, and South Africa? Fuck Allen Dulles, Mike Pompeo, and everybody in-between!

Looney

Mango327 -> manofthenorth Sat, 02/17/2018 - 17:01 Permalink

This Russia bullshit has gotta stop. For the love of God, it's been like two and a a half years now. If Vladimir Putin was as twice as evil as we're told, he still wouldn't be half as evil as the Clintons are on any given Thursday.

MUELLER IS A JOKE, ABOLISH the F.B.I.

https://youtu.be/wC_Ro80LlhE

SoilMyselfRotten -> skbull44 Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:47 Permalink

Democracy? Annnnnnnd it's gone! No wonder the rest of the world thinks we've collectively lost our minds. BTW, Victoria Noodles will be very disappointed Ukraine didn't make the list after all of her hard work.

marysimmons -> SoilMyselfRotten Sat, 02/17/2018 - 17:16 Permalink

Victoria "F*ck the EU" Nuland and the CIA were all over the Ukrainian "coup", but of course no mention of that on "Fair and Balanced". Laura Ingram is a typical Fox News Zio-Nazi bitch, hiding behind a cross, who apparently believes her own BS, and along others like Hannity have blood on their hands.

The whole purpose of the Mueller indictment was to give the mainstream outlets something to report so idiot Americans will believe the crap put out about Russia since the Winter Olympics in Sochi and set the tone to justify a military conflict with Russia that won't end well for anyone, IMO

veritas semper -> marysimmons Sat, 02/17/2018 - 17:40 Permalink

And Victoria Nuland Kagan is now Senior Adviser in the Donald's Department of Defense. See, kids, how the swamp is drained?

New_Meat -> marysimmons Sat, 02/17/2018 - 17:46 Permalink

mary, just a touch catty tonight, don't cha' think?

Zio-Nazi? How dat work?

Whole purpose of the Mueller indictments is to give the folks a show to prove that their money hasn't been wasted on a Trump collusion charge for collusion that started in 2014 when Trump was prolly out schlongin' some playmate or other..

TheSilentMajority -> Looney Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:47 Permalink

They didu sumtin.

Deep Snorkeler -> skbull44 Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:38 Permalink

America plays political-economic pranks on the rest of the world for the good of the system. It's worked out well.

Dumpster Elite -> Stan522 Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:28 Permalink

I kinda wondered why they missed that one, too. I've seen that list on here before. I guess messing with Israel's elections doesn't fit the ZH narrative?

Justin Case -> Stan522 Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:36 Permalink

That anchor sounds like she would be a good candidate for a gender change, meat stick and tea bag.

Vilfredo Pareto -> Stan522 Sat, 02/17/2018 - 17:00 Permalink

They missed post war Greece too, Albania, and a ton of others.

Bastiat -> Vilfredo Pareto Sat, 02/17/2018 - 17:18 Permalink

. . . and Australia: watch The Falcon and the Snowman, if you haven't.

TheSilentMajority -> gellero Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:51 Permalink

Rothschilds at it again?

keep the basta -> gellero Sat, 02/17/2018 - 17:53 Permalink

No Australia? Whitlam dismissal 11/11/1975 even wiki lists it

dirty fingernails Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:20 Permalink

The US is working hard to make banana republics look respectable

TBT or not TBT -> dirty fingernails Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:31 Permalink

We're The Most Interesting Banana Republic In The World.

Justin Case -> dirty fingernails Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:45 Permalink

to make banana republics look respectable

Not like a shit hole?

Bay Area Guy Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:20 Permalink

I generally can't stand Laura, but that was a spot on question. America is the quintessential "do as I say and not as I do" government.

chunga -> Bay Area Guy Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:33 Permalink

Among the many things sorely lacking in uncle sam is simple humility.

rwe2late Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:29 Permalink

Woolsey is an evil man. I doubt if he really believes. that the murders and tortures he presided over were for "their own good".

Ms No -> rwe2late Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:55 Permalink

No way he believes it. One thing about people who lack human empathy is that they would NEVER fall for the same tricks that the empathy having population does. They will always see the angle. It's what their brain is devoted to. All the capacity that we use to be reflective, emotional or caring all goes to angling for advantage with them. He knows exactly why people are tortured and couldn't give a shit less. You are either shark or mutilated gold fish as far as he is concerned.

New_Meat -> rwe2late Sat, 02/17/2018 - 17:51 Permalink

Woolsey is an evil man, for a certainty. But, au contraire, I bet he does believe it is for their own good. Whoever "they" are that he's doin' shit to. Like the Jesuits in Andalusia, purging the non-believers.

- Ned

dizzyfingers Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:29 Permalink

This repeats our own terrible history: Tom Landess on "The Dark Side of Abraham Lincoln," and the week in review at the Abbeville Institute.

serotonindumptruck Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:31 Permalink

You can always spot a psychopathic liar by their predisposition to smile or laugh at questions that are not humorous. Laura Ingraham is a neocon mouth-peice for the establishment.

Dumpster Elite Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:32 Permalink

It really would be a new dawn for this country if the entire Deep State were outed, and publicly executed. I know that sounds like tinfoil hat talk, but hey, I'm sure the NSA is all over me right about now. Too bad they can't seem to find serial killers that say they're going to shoot up a school online. Too busy trying to shut up those that don't like the Deep State.

Ms No Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:50 Permalink

They have always done this and every single other accusation that they have levied against other "tyrants". The crazy train continues to pick up speed.

OT: Wales may have had a fracking quake. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fM4Wcqe6s_s

This is pretty funny. "Footage" of quake. Fracking quakes usually are not that big but it did drop masonry off of buildings. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEI4cSd4B38

Paracelsus Sat, 02/17/2018 - 16:52 Permalink

Ummm, Fidel Castro, Cuba, 1962 ? Leading up to Dallas? Which led to LBJ and ramp up of Indochina. If you look closely you will see that there was a huge little war going on in Laos, lots of bombing of the Ho Chi Minh trail from fighter bombers based in Thailand.

Also, Australia. The 1972 Whitlam dismissal was a bloodless coup d'état. Whitlam recognized North Vietnam which pissed off a bunch of people in Langley. The pilots were on strike and they couldn't fly parts and crew into Alice Springs (Pine Gap Satellite facility). The Aussies have long memories and it will be a cold day in hell before they trust the Yanks like before. This is a country with a strong sense of injustice. The Aussies still talk about the "bodyline" cricket scandal with the Brits, and that happened in the 1930's....

[Feb 17, 2018] Iran is already being attacked from West and East in the North

Feb 17, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Posted by: ninel | Feb 11, 2018 3:59:15 PM

Here is an interesting article that points to the new American strategy with respect to Iran and central Asia. Iran is already being attacked from West and East in the North. And central Asia is next. This might force Iran to pull back some forces from Syria and Iraq.

No end to the wars.

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/02/06/us-isis-nexus-afghanistan-becomes-hot-topic.html

[Feb 17, 2018] Neo-McCarthyite Hysteria at US Senate Intelligence Committee Hearing Global Research - Centre for Research on Globalization

Notable quotes:
"... The concern of the American ruling class is not Russian or Chinese "subversion," but the growth of social opposition within the United States. The narrative of "Russian meddling" has been used to justify a systematic campaign to censor the Internet and suppress free speech. ..."
"... World Socialist Web Site ..."
Feb 17, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

The concern of the American ruling class is not Russian or Chinese "subversion," but the growth of social opposition within the United States. The narrative of "Russian meddling" has been used to justify a systematic campaign to censor the Internet and suppress free speech.

Senator Mark Warner

The performance of Senator Mark Warner , the ranking Democrat on the committee, was particularly obscene. Warner, whose net worth is estimated at $257 million, appeared to be doing his best impersonation of Senator Joe McCarthy . He declared that foreign subversion works together with, and is largely indistinguishable from, "threats to our institutions from right here at home."

Alluding to the publication of the so-called Nunes memo, which documented the fraudulent character of the Democratic-led investigation of White House "collusion" with Russia, Warner noted,

"There have been some, aided and abetted by Russian Internet bots and trolls, who have attacked the basic integrity of the FBI and the Justice Department."

Responding to questioning from Warner, FBI Director Christopher Wray praised the US intelligence agencies' greater "engagement" and "partnership" with the private sector, concluding,

"We can't fully police social media, so we have to work with them so that they can police themselves."

Wray was referring to the sweeping measures taken by social media companies, working directly with the US intelligence agencies, to implement a regime of censorship, including through the hiring of tens of thousands of "content reviewers," many with intelligence backgrounds, to flag, report and delete content.

The assault on democratic rights is increasingly connected to preparations for a major war, which will further exacerbate social tensions within the United States. Coats prefaced his remarks by declaring that "the risk of inter-state conflict, including among great powers, is higher than at any time since the end of the Cold War."

As the hearing was taking place, multiple news outlets were reporting that potentially hundreds of Russian military contractors had been killed in a recent US air strike in Syria. This came just weeks after the publication of the Pentagon's National Defense Strategy, which declared,

"Inter-state strategic competition, not terrorism, is now the primary concern in US national security."

However, the implications of this great-power conflict are not simply external to the US "homeland." The document argues that "the homeland is no longer a sanctuary," and that "America is a target," for "political and information subversion" on the part of "revisionist powers" such as Russia and China.

Since "America's military has no preordained right to victory on the battlefield," the only way the US can prevail in this conflict is through the "seamless integration of multiple elements of national power," including "information, economics, finance, intelligence, law enforcement and military."

In other words, America's supremacy in the new world of great-power conflict requires the subordination of every aspect of life to the requirements of war. In this totalitarian nightmare, already far advanced, the police, the military and the intelligence agencies unite with media and technology companies to form a single seamless unit, whose combined power is marshaled to manipulate public opinion and suppress political dissent.

The dictatorial character of the measures being prepared was underscored by an exchange between Wray and Republican Senator Marco Rubio , who asked whether Chinese students were serving as spies for Beijing.

"What is the counterintelligence risk posed to US national security from Chinese students, particularly those in advanced programs in the sciences and mathematics?" asked Rubio.

Wray responded that

"the use of nontraditional collectors, especially in the academic setting, whether it's professors, scientists, students, we see in almost every field office that the FBI has around the country, not just in major cities, small ones as well, basically every discipline."

This campaign, with racist overtones, recalls the official rationale -- defense of "national security" -- used to justify the internment of some 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry during the Second World War.

In its open letter calling for a coalition of socialist, antiwar and progressive websites against Internet censorship, the World Socialist Web Site noted that

"the ruling class has identified the Internet as a mortal threat to its monopolization of information and its ability to promote propaganda to wage war and legitimize the obscene concentration of wealth and extreme social inequality."

It is this mortal threat -- and fear of the growth of class conflict -- that motivate the lies and hypocrisy on display at the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing.

The original source of this article is World Socialist Web Site Copyright © Andre Damon , World Socialist Web Site , 2018

[Feb 17, 2018] News Watch A Reading on Collective Angst naked capitalism

Notable quotes:
"... or like viewing old photos of the Robber Barons. The msm has stopped trying to convince middle class readers it's 'on their side', imo. A few have gone full plutocrat friendly. Anything that rocks the plutocrats boats must be caused by 'russians, russians, russians', or outside agitators, or foreigners of one kind or another – not 'real' Americans. ..."
"... Exactly the kind of things the robber barons and their press said 100+ years ago about working class workers striking for better wages and working conditions. ..."
"... I agree in the regard to the seeming reduction in analytical quantity and quality. I think you're right with it being caused by reductions in newsroom staff, but I think the type of journalists we have has also changed drastically. ..."
"... In this real world context, this guy wants to promote an unnecessary new cold war to get Democrats elected. Truly disgusting and insane. ..."
"... Not only disgusting and insane, but politically stupid. Any Democrat politician who thinks that promoting Unhinged Russia Hysteria is a winning political strategy is guilty of political malpractice. ..."
"... seems to be what she and they are pushing(unhinged Russia hysteria ) as a winning political strategy. ..."
"... That's what people are going to remember when they go to the voting booth in 2018 (if they even bother) – while the Democrats where whining about Putin and Russia and doing nothing productive whatsoever to improve people's lives, Trump gave everybody more $$$. ..."
"... The "official" narratives from much of the MSM are increasingly removed from any reality experienced by the majority. For example, the latest is a report from Hamilton that much of the social media activity concerning the Florida school shooting is now infested and promoted by Russian bots "to sow division". How more absurd could it be? ..."
"... I have it on good authority that the whole rebranding of the KKK first as the CCC than as the NRA was a long-term Soviet Russian plot to cause an epidemic of mass shootings that would undermine not only US 'Democracy', but the entire capitalist juggernaut! ..."
"... Following up on something Lambert wrote once, it seems that pundits who are incapable of using the term "working class" without somehow attaching the word "white" to it are -- besides not really being on the left -- also more likely than others to push the "Russia ate my Election" nonsense. ..."
"... I think what the horrid warmongering article in Useless News misses is that the flyover states, which supply the troops for the wars, are getting war weary (and why not). Trump capitalized on this in the election, and there was a positive correlation at IIRC the county level between war casualities and troop support. ..."
"... An anti-war candidate who could make the case in the flyover states might really make an impact. ..."
"... I wholeheartedly agree about how a significant factor is that the mainstream media insists on viewing everything through ridiculously contrived "lenses" (Trump, "Russia-gate", Brexit, harassment) and, intentionally I would claim, deliberately obscuring the real problems (wealth distribution, neoliberalism, collapse of the social contract). ..."
"... whatever other news there is seems weirdly predictable and is based around personalities, rather than communities and systems. ..."
"... Animals become agitated in advance of earthquakes. It may be that the reason for angst does not lie in the past, but in the future. In general, so many of the stories are predictable self-parodies, from the Democrats relentless pursuit of the mythical 'moderate insurgents' in republican suburbs, and their comical screeching about Putin, to the drumbeat stories attacking Trump for Obama policies, to the contortions of the neocon policy apparatus trying to justify occupation and regime change in Syria, without mentioning those goals ..."
"... For me, this is key. When I cast my eye upon the news I'm greeted with unrelenting bleakness. Trump's cruel and terrible health plan was big news for months, then his terrible tax cut plan, now his terrible budget. Foreign affairs are equally bleak: the Democrats are busy stirring up a second Cold War. There's no end in sight to the trillions of dollars our nation spends every year on waste and destructive mayhem. Sociopathic corporations and octogenarian billionaires own this country. It's difficult to see anything positive on the horizon. ..."
"... There are two Americas. The news is mostly for and from the one that protects the rentier or elite class. They send their children to private schools. The second one has children who go to public schools who get shot and killed by gunmen that the school and law authorities have been warned about and then decide it's not worth their attention. ..."
"... I think we have reached America's breaking point. Shitty jobs, shitty pay, shitty hours, no hope of affordable housing anywhere, no advancement, massive amounts debt, no easy access to medical care, uneven safety nets, denigration, lack of mutual respect, a lifetime of working with little hope of a safe retirement it's just not pretty out here. ..."
"... I think we are still in a Wile E. Coyote moment where he has gone off the cliff but gravity has not taken hold yet (cartoons don't understand parabolic arcs, similar to central banks and politicians). One of the purposes of financial crises like 2008 is to reset the playing field. The inequality and inefficiency of the Roaring 20s got reset in the 1930s where many people who had paper wealth, but large debt, collapsed and regulation followed that survived for 60 years in preventing similar scenarios. The 2009-2016 period missed that window of opportunity as the focus became preserving the people who had destabilized the system. That meant the damage was one-sided to the bottom 90%. The top 10% are largely disconnected, deliberately, from what is going on with the bottom 90% and as a result are baffled about the swelling unrest in the country. That unrest is still largely unfocused and just burps out random things right now like the Tea Party, Trump, Sanders etc. ..."
"... The only good news to come out of the Florida shooting is that the young people are beginning to realize that they are cannon fodder (literally) in the cynical political battles waged by their elders. ..."
"... I've done my stint in living through the chaotic end to the 1970's and endured the major social upheavals in Thatcher's show-no-mercy early 1980's. Those were bad times. But this is worse in a lot of ways, if only for the crushing atmosphere of a powerless proletariat. ..."
"... The Dem commitment to Russiagate has become their WMD story, it has to be stuck with lest its proponents admit their lying ..."
"... The Russo-Resistance strategy has had the effect of exacerbating divisions in the potential opposition to neoliberalism. Not a bug. ..."
"... Compare and contrast with Putin and Xi, who are personally untouched by corruption taint, and whom their population actually believes has their nations' long-term interests at heart ..."
"... The general consensus was that we simply cannot go on as we are. ..."
"... I think you've hit the nail on the head. Whether it's skyrocketing measures of income inequality, health insurance premiums rising faster than wages, college tuition rates and student loan balances rising faster than wages, mindlessly skyrocketing stock markets and asset bubbles fueled by stupid central bank policies, or whatever other unsustainable woe you choose to pick, these things cannot go on forever ..."
"... And we're incredibly divided. Most of the MSM has been sucked into personality conflicts and the us-vs-them mindset. They actively feed it now. You're expected to pick a team and learn to hate the other guys. ..."
"... I too suspect that "tweaking round the edges" will prove totally inadequate, but I have no desire for revolution. I've seen too many of them start off well but then go off the rails in horrible, terrifying directions. Revolutions can be terribly sloppy affairs, with real people getting hurt in the process. And they usually don't end where we really want them to. ..."
"... Just yesterday I was asked, "Aren't you a liberal Democrat?" I answered, "No, I hate both parties equally." That set them back on their laurels. They expected me to say "Yes." ..."
"... The general consensus was that we simply cannot go on as we are ..."
"... Waiting for Godot ..."
"... A seemingly endless loop of outrage that yields nothing, except the feeling of powerlessness -- that all that is important in life is out of our hands, and in the hands of those who look at us and see nothing but another source of revenue. ..."
"... I rather think that our "feeling of powerlessness" is the goal aimed for by the msm. And identity politics serves a divide and conquer function. (But you can buy T-shirts! so it's all good. /s) ..."
"... I hope to draw some response to the second part of my complaint, which is that in the dog-eat-dog world of a society ordered solely by markets, we are reduced: First, from being to citizens to consumers, then from being consumers to being marks, rubes, suckers. The "news" (such as it is) isn't reported to us, it's sold to us. ..."
"... Corporate media has been pumping out Trump Derangement Syndrome stories for 18+ months. [if you're cynical] not only because the media genuinely dislike trump, but to drive clickbait and subscription sign-ups ..."
"... From my reading of history, when countries have been in the grip of anxiety it is often a relief when a feared thing happens – such as when Japan bombed Pearl Harbour it was widely reported that the response of the public, including anti-war activists, was great relief. ..."
"... I've read that much the same feeling descended over much of Europe at the start of WWI. While the same situation doesn't quite apply in the US, I do fear that there is a craving for some sort of decision, a decisive act. ..."
"... I think Trump understands more than he reveals. I think we are looking at the tempered effects of MSM froth by all the good, sensible internet bloggers and commenters which serve to neutralize the nonsense. What I see is angst failure – nobody bought this farcical onslaught of propaganda. Everyone questioned it. Something happens to the "news" when opposite views and facts collide – it gets emulsified like vinegar and oil into much less drastic possibilities. ..."
"... Interesting reminds me of how some torturers have learned that the fear of the pain can be worse than the pain itself in terms of emotional distress and breaking down ego-barriers to cooperation/submission. When the fear is worse than the feared experience, the feared experience itself is a relief. ..."
"... ur–Angst? ..."
"... Our Jerri-Lynn, who mainly lives overseas, was briefly in the US last month and dropped by our NYC meetup. She commented to me that she was very eager to leave because she could sense how high the general tension level was. ..."
"... Few people I know feel secure; a lot of it is about the basic stuff, health care and jobs. ..."
"... True, but can they address those concerns? The Occupy movement was such an effort, but the police seem to have stifled it. Then Sen. Sanders appeared on the scene with his Presidential campaign and that too was suppressed. If people are in fact not engaged it probably indicates an absence of what is important and meaningful for them in the larger society ..."
"... The LAT had truly turned into a piece of garbage the past years, they'd get scooped on stories in their own backyard, the writing was what you'd expect from a newspaper emanating from a city of 48,424, and it would be a given that new reporter hires should go at least a page into google when investigating. ..."
"... We've been watching a German TV series called Babylon Berlin, which is set in Wiemar Germany, 1929, just before the crash. It's fascinating to compare those times to our own, there are many parallels. The show is extremely well done. https://newrepublic.com/article/147053/babylon-berlin-sees-weimar-republic ..."
"... ah, yes. this has been on my mind lately. More the best lacking all conviction and the worst full of passionate intensity than the rough beast part He's already ensconced in Washington and doesn't seem to be able to do much of anything [brain glancing off the specter of all those judges]. ..."
"... post the nation state ..."
"... When war comes it will not be fought by "post-nation states." ..."
"... These are middle aged and middle class professionals about to be thrown on the scrap heap. ..."
"... Colonel Smithers, I observed something similar during the Sanders campaign's peak here in Tucson. That would be during late 2015 and early 2016. Let's just say that people weren't flocking to Bernie because their lives were going well. ..."
"... If the subtext to the MSM's Trump coverage is, "He's a racist authoritarian so he must be stopped at all costs," then you'd think they'd cover police brutality every day. If they're so concerned about racism and authoritarianism. Instead, we're seeing the FBI, CIA, etc., cast in the role of 'oppressed minorities standing up to The System, Maaan!' ..."
"... Plus, as a fan of paranoia, I can say. . . I've never seen a more unsatisfying, overly-abstract conspiracy in my life. It's not that they are rehabilitating CIA goons, but they're doing so specifically in order to obsess over memos, and reports about memos, and memos about reports about leaks about other memos. ..."
"... It's like an episode of The Office if everyone in the office had nukes. ..."
"... that attitude is nearly universal, across all layers of society ..."
"... I am in my late 50s, and for most of my life there was an air of seriousness and competence about national leaders. Even when they were doing something you didn't like, you could generally assume they were adequate to the situation, or at least had access to people who were. E.g., the moronic Reagan at least supposedly had a coterie of serious people in his administration who could keep the train on the tracks. ..."
"... Now we seem to be at a point where the people in charge are unapologetic about their greed, their lack of ability or even interest in their jobs and consitiuents, their lack of intellect and integrity, and the absence of any pretense of doing anything useful for the population or the society ..."
"... I guess what I'm saying is, as one surveys the landscape, there is a marked loss of hope coupled with a tearing urgency that something needs to be done. It's a terrible, very volatile and dangerous condition. ..."
Feb 17, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
Jim Haygood , February 16, 2018 at 7:42 am

' orthodox MSM outlets like the New York Times and the WaPo seem to be presenting us with stale fare right now '

Such as this [paywalled] bombshell from the WaPo: 'With McCain's retreat, some turn to Romney to carry his torch.'

Riveting. Like reviewing old photos of the Soviet Politburo to see who got airbrushed out. To paraphrase the WaPo's slogan, 'Democracy dies in decadence. '

flora , February 16, 2018 at 10:31 am

or like viewing old photos of the Robber Barons. The msm has stopped trying to convince middle class readers it's 'on their side', imo. A few have gone full plutocrat friendly. Anything that rocks the plutocrats boats must be caused by 'russians, russians, russians', or outside agitators, or foreigners of one kind or another – not 'real' Americans.

Exactly the kind of things the robber barons and their press said 100+ years ago about working class workers striking for better wages and working conditions.

Alex V , February 16, 2018 at 10:25 am

I agree in the regard to the seeming reduction in analytical quantity and quality. I think you're right with it being caused by reductions in newsroom staff, but I think the type of journalists we have has also changed drastically.

Most of the younger generation that is being brought in has gone directly to journalism school, but has no other experience in the real world. I think many of the older guard had other careers, expertise or experience before they started writing.

So much of what passes for "analysis" nowadays reveals very shallow knowledge of the subject being covered by the writer. This is often most apparent in tech or science articles. I would say some overlap to "management" culture – managers are interchangeable, no matter the industry, since they are experts on managing. Same thing with journalism – if you can write something, you can write about anything .

XXYY , February 16, 2018 at 2:59 pm

For one thing, the, MSM has become heavily dependent on election coverage in the last decade or so, both (I assume) in revenue from political advertising, and in fountains of easy-to-write daily horse race articles about the state of the election.

I think 2017, a post-election year, kind of got a free pass because of the election of Trump, who was either going to make everything great (again!) or blow everything up, and the media was able to sustain an electoral-style energy and reader involvement well beyond the 2016 elections.

Now that (a) Trump has turned out to be an incompetent and ineffectual idiot who does nothing but watch TV, (b) we are seeing the tired old GOP program of screwing the population instead of anything new, and ( c) the Dems have done absolutely nothing for 13 months beyond foam at the mouth about Trump, perhaps the energy of the 2016 election is finally wearing off.

In other words, this is a pre-2018 election lull.

Emorej a Hong Kong , February 16, 2018 at 6:44 am

How much does this weigh?

The article ( https://www.usnews.com/opinion/thomas-jefferson-street/articles/2018-02-13/democrats-should-use-patriotism-to-appeal-to-white-working-class-voters ) linked in yesterday's Water Cooler, seemed to be a major step forward in articulating and advocating a strategy of the Democratic establishment making anti-Russia hysteria (and resulting surveillance and military spending and probably adventures), as a core campaigning plank, the new normal, completely independent of any impeachment or even re-election defeat of Trump.

This strategy was already starting to become implicit, as the Mueller-related "wolf"-crying drags on (and counter-investigations of Clintons are brandished as a M.A.D. deterrent), and as we read that Trump's tax cuts are playing well among likely swing voters both in Congress and in the low-middle income electorate, while it gets ever-closer to "too late" (to be credible before the 2018 midterms) for the Democratic establishment to show any new seriousness about the issues raised and pursued by Bernie Sanders, and by the many local candidates being sabotaged (of necessity more openly than in the past) by the donor-addicted Democratic establishment.

Dwight , February 16, 2018 at 7:48 am

In the real world, we have growing social needs with an aging population that will require Social Security and Medicare. This guy is basically saying to ignore that, which will likely result in a mass die-off of the middle-aged and elderly like that which occurred in 1990s Russia when social programs were gutted under neoliberal shock-therapy "advisors" to the puppet Yeltsin.

Meanwhile, climate change advances requiring massive investment in adaptation, and mitigation if Democrat concerns about climate change are to be taken at face value. (I believe we are 30 years too late, but should do what we can. Democrats claim to be concerned about climate change with their posturing around the Paris Agreement – how does this new cold war lower emissions?)

Nuclear waste from nuclear power and weapons needs to be secured before climate change kicks in, but instead we are spending trillions on new weapons that will create new radioactive waste. The new arms race with Russia and China will be incredibly expensive and dangerous, taking money from real societal and economic needs. Arms spending by the US will result in arms spending in Russia and China, multiplying the problem on a global scale. Unsecured nuclear waste in Russia and China, like unsecured nuclear waste in the US, affects the entire globe.

In this real world context, this guy wants to promote an unnecessary new cold war to get Democrats elected. Truly disgusting and insane.

Big River Bandido , February 16, 2018 at 11:18 am

In this real world context, this guy wants to promote an unnecessary new cold war to get Democrats elected. Truly disgusting and insane.

Not only disgusting and insane, but politically stupid. Any Democrat politician who thinks that promoting Unhinged Russia Hysteria is a winning political strategy is guilty of political malpractice.

petal , February 16, 2018 at 12:22 pm

On that note, I'll try harder to go to that Sen. Jeanne Shaheen talk on Tuesday, as that seems to be what she and they are pushing(unhinged Russia hysteria ) as a winning political strategy.

lyman alpha blob , February 16, 2018 at 1:54 pm

It really is politically stupid.

I got paid today and since the Republican tax cut, my take home pay is larger. Not a dollar or two larger, but enough that it's very easy to notice.

That's what people are going to remember when they go to the voting booth in 2018 (if they even bother) – while the Democrats where whining about Putin and Russia and doing nothing productive whatsoever to improve people's lives, Trump gave everybody more $$$.

DHG , February 16, 2018 at 7:42 pm

Not everything is about money and its not going to affect the majority of people who will be going to the polls, we are already set in our objections of the POTUS and unless he becomes Presidential quickly none of us are changing our minds. This brought to you by a swing voting independent. I will not vote for a republican in 2018 sans what I said.

sleepy , February 16, 2018 at 8:05 am

. . . articulating and advocating a strategy of the Democratic establishment making anti-Russia hysteria (and resulting surveillance and military spending and probably adventures), as a core campaigning plank, the new normal, completely independent of any impeachment or even re-election defeat of Trump.

The "official" narratives from much of the MSM are increasingly removed from any reality experienced by the majority. For example, the latest is a report from Hamilton that much of the social media activity concerning the Florida school shooting is now infested and promoted by Russian bots "to sow division". How more absurd could it be?

I think that sort of disconnect produces both a numbness and an anxiety and a belief that we are governed and led by institutions completely clueless and out of control. Therefore, people just hunker down in disbelief.

taunger , February 16, 2018 at 8:41 am

this. this seems important. coupled with the fact that enough of the news consumers today are wholly cynical regarding any ability of the hoi poloi to make change.

Skip Intro , February 16, 2018 at 10:03 am

I have it on good authority that the whole rebranding of the KKK first as the CCC than as the NRA was a long-term Soviet Russian plot to cause an epidemic of mass shootings that would undermine not only US 'Democracy', but the entire capitalist juggernaut!

Fiery Hunt , February 16, 2018 at 11:05 am

Key phrase here "out of control".

I've definitely been noticing a fairly obvious breakdown in people's ability to be on top of even basic things. We're all fried. I've got really reliable clients suddenly bouncing payments, unable to track projects I've also had first hand encounters with both the law/court system and the medical industry/health care system and the IT processes are byzantine and hugely ineffective.

I think Lambert used the phrase "boom exhaustion ". I think it's apt. We're spinning so hard and nothings getting better or easier.

" the center can't hold.
Things fall apart."

I suggest we expect serious gyrations.

Andrew Watts , February 16, 2018 at 10:42 am

That story is a classic example of a dominant minority resorting to archaism to address the present crisis they face. It won't work either. The US government had an extraordinarily high amount of social trust and support heading into the external crisis that was the Cold War. They eventually frittered it away into the present and the expectation that events will turn out the same is why the creative minority of our past is now a dominant minority in the present. I've said it before, but I'll say it again, for the sake of clarity. We live in a target rich environment for people who've studied Toynbee.

will_f , February 16, 2018 at 12:53 pm

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/thomas-jefferson-street/articles/2018-02-13/democrats-should-use-patriotism-to-appeal-to-white-working-class-voters

Following up on something Lambert wrote once, it seems that pundits who are incapable of using the term "working class" without somehow attaching the word "white" to it are -- besides not really being on the left -- also more likely than others to push the "Russia ate my Election" nonsense.

Lambert Strether , February 16, 2018 at 4:50 pm

I think what the horrid warmongering article in Useless News misses is that the flyover states, which supply the troops for the wars, are getting war weary (and why not). Trump capitalized on this in the election, and there was a positive correlation at IIRC the county level between war casualities and troop support.

An anti-war candidate who could make the case in the flyover states might really make an impact. And the only candidate I can see doing that is Sanders, and I'm not sure Sanders has the inclination, or even the stones, to do it. That F-35 base in Vermont rankles. Is that really the kind of bacon to bring home?

windsock , February 16, 2018 at 7:14 am

A couple of thoughts:

1) Do you think this might be an age-related experience? The elders among us may have a feeling of deja-vu, been here, seen that there's not much new in the world, just the same scenes endlessly repeated with new actors, or an incremental worsening of situations that have already been in decline for years. How long can endless war be news? Or endless corruption? Or endless neo-liberalism etc?

2) Here in the UK, I personally am sick to death with everything being seen through the prism of Brexit. Yes it is an existential crisis for our politics and our way of life but no-one is addressing the ways in which it will improve/demolish our daily lives – food being an obvious one. Yes it is referred to but not in such terms as ordinary people can identify with. It's all about abstracts – treaties/reciprocal arrangements/customs and tariffs/values and volumes of exports/imports etc. And in the meantime, we get stories about how Europeans leaving us will damage our NHS and crop picking without addressing the underlying causes of WHY we need imported labour and why the NHS is still deteriorating despite having those immigrants.

3) Following on from 2, whatever other news there is seems weirdly predictable and is based around personalities, rather than communities and systems. Whatever source one chooses to read, this predictability leads one to end up agreeing with Mandy Rice-Davies "Well, he would say that, wouldn't he?", no matter who the subject is.

4) Now we are leaping on the Russiabus but it is largely met with a huge yawn, unless you like to foam at the mouth at ConservativeHome.

Clive , February 16, 2018 at 7:44 am

I wholeheartedly agree about how a significant factor is that the mainstream media insists on viewing everything through ridiculously contrived "lenses" (Trump, "Russia-gate", Brexit, harassment) and, intentionally I would claim, deliberately obscuring the real problems (wealth distribution, neoliberalism, collapse of the social contract).

Fiery Hunt , February 16, 2018 at 11:09 am

Yep.
And that discord is showing signs of sowing collapse.

sleepy , February 16, 2018 at 9:45 am

Here in the UK, I personally am sick to death with everything being seen through the prism of Brexit.

I read the following article from today's Links fully expecting it to be about Brexit and the political fallout from a possible hard border. Instead, the pivotal issue in the split between Sinn Fein and the DUP apparently revolves around efforts to secure offical status for the Irish language in the North. While that issue too may well be a distraction, it had nothing to do with Brexit, and I was surprised.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/02/could-direct-rule-solve-northern-irelands-political-crisis/

MoBee , February 16, 2018 at 10:30 am

whatever other news there is seems weirdly predictable and is based around personalities, rather than communities and systems.

This really hit home for me. Thank you!

Skip Intro , February 16, 2018 at 7:17 am

Animals become agitated in advance of earthquakes. It may be that the reason for angst does not lie in the past, but in the future. In general, so many of the stories are predictable self-parodies, from the Democrats relentless pursuit of the mythical 'moderate insurgents' in republican suburbs, and their comical screeching about Putin, to the drumbeat stories attacking Trump for Obama policies, to the contortions of the neocon policy apparatus trying to justify occupation and regime change in Syria, without mentioning those goals

" The centre does not hold, mere anarchy is loosed upon the world ".

Lee Robertson , February 16, 2018 at 7:22 am

It's the mind numbing parade of horrors.

Brooklin Bridge , February 16, 2018 at 10:55 am

Yes! I've never seen anything like this by any measure. It's the scope and magnitude and number and inter-relatedness and intractability of all the issues at once. Population, climate change, economic disaster systems as in Capitalism going nuts, exploding Military Industrial Complex and perpetual wars , 2 Bat -- - Crazy and utterly corrupt political parties playing nuclear Russian Roulette, Baghdad Bob like main stream media, transformation from a democracy into a police state, open and protected killing of blacks for being black (the fact that isn't exaggerated is mind-numbing), technological tsunamis being co-opted and twisted into iron fisted dystopias by all of the above.

The mind simply can't keep up with it – particularly the reality of it (as in the Democrats going stark raving mad with Russia-Gate – never mind just being corrupt and hypocritical to the core) and the body or something inside sends out a sort of anesthetic to help the mind deal with the increasing perception of the trauma.

I do "get" the analogy of calm before the storm and perhaps that is indeed what we are going through right now but to me it feels like we are simultaneously in the middle of the disaster and constantly waking up to just how horrific it really is.

John , February 16, 2018 at 10:57 am

"Slowed down by a sense of hopelessness in all his decisions and movements, he suffered from bitter sadness, and his incapacity solidified into a pain that often sat like a nosebleed behind his forehead the moment he tried to make up his mind to do something." -- Robert Musil, The Man Without Qualities

False Solace , February 16, 2018 at 4:39 pm

For me, this is key. When I cast my eye upon the news I'm greeted with unrelenting bleakness. Trump's cruel and terrible health plan was big news for months, then his terrible tax cut plan, now his terrible budget. Foreign affairs are equally bleak: the Democrats are busy stirring up a second Cold War. There's no end in sight to the trillions of dollars our nation spends every year on waste and destructive mayhem. Sociopathic corporations and octogenarian billionaires own this country. It's difficult to see anything positive on the horizon.

It could also come down to low Vitamin D and an unusually cold (thanks to climate change) winter.

Lambert Strether , February 16, 2018 at 4:52 pm

> the Democrats are busy stirring up a second Cold War

That's hardly fair; they're stirring up a second Civil War at home, because that's what an impeachment would amount to.

sd , February 16, 2018 at 7:24 am

There are two Americas. The news is mostly for and from the one that protects the rentier or elite class. They send their children to private schools. The second one has children who go to public schools who get shot and killed by gunmen that the school and law authorities have been warned about and then decide it's not worth their attention.

I think we have reached America's breaking point. Shitty jobs, shitty pay, shitty hours, no hope of affordable housing anywhere, no advancement, massive amounts debt, no easy access to medical care, uneven safety nets, denigration, lack of mutual respect, a lifetime of working with little hope of a safe retirement it's just not pretty out here.

rd , February 16, 2018 at 11:38 am

I agree with this. For example this article yesterday caught my attention: http://www.businessinsider.com/san-francisco-housing-crisis-home-sale-2018-2?r=UK&IR=T

Where I live, they post the real estate sales in the newspaper and there are many weeks where not a single house sold for over $500k. But in SF, it is news that something sold for $500k because nothing is ever that cheap.

So you have many areas of the country (not accidental they voted for Trump) where $500k is a fabulously high price for a house because the economies are in a rut but the places where all the people carrying huge student debt loads are supposed to go to work to be part of the future are completely unaffordable for all but a few.

I think we are still in a Wile E. Coyote moment where he has gone off the cliff but gravity has not taken hold yet (cartoons don't understand parabolic arcs, similar to central banks and politicians). One of the purposes of financial crises like 2008 is to reset the playing field. The inequality and inefficiency of the Roaring 20s got reset in the 1930s where many people who had paper wealth, but large debt, collapsed and regulation followed that survived for 60 years in preventing similar scenarios. The 2009-2016 period missed that window of opportunity as the focus became preserving the people who had destabilized the system. That meant the damage was one-sided to the bottom 90%. The top 10% are largely disconnected, deliberately, from what is going on with the bottom 90% and as a result are baffled about the swelling unrest in the country. That unrest is still largely unfocused and just burps out random things right now like the Tea Party, Trump, Sanders etc.

The only good news to come out of the Florida shooting is that the young people are beginning to realize that they are cannon fodder (literally) in the cynical political battles waged by their elders. We may start to see more passion for change occurring. https://www.thecut.com/2018/02/florida-school-shooting-survivors-share-powerful-messages.html Hopefully the 70 years old politicians will move out of the way and allow a new generation with new ideas to start to emerge. However, it will take a lot to displace the current political inertia from funding allowed for the wealthy 70 year olds by Citizens United.

Clive , February 16, 2018 at 7:25 am

Strangely enough, I've been thinking the exact same things, obviously from a U.K. framed perspective. I've not commented on this on posts nor have I discussed this with either Jerri-Lynn, Lambert, Yves, Richard Smith or any of the regular crowd here. I just passed it off to myself as my usual neurotic preoccupations.

I can't really put it into words properly. Which can be one of the reasons why I've not put my thoughts down in writing. Musing on this earlier this week, the best way I could come up with capturing the vibe was to quote from E M Forster who (describing an English country house, the people in it and as a metaphor for the country as a whole at the time) as "being not yet actually in decline, but in the torpor which precedes it". That fit both the mood that I sense and the cause of the pervasive anxiety.

It also, he says, opening a can of worms which he'll probably regret, but here goes, covers and explains several conversations I've had with fellow Brexit voters. The U.K. government is screwing things up royally with regards to the implementation of Brexit. The national division is just as bad as ever. And we're alienating the neighbors who we really need to keep in with for the sake of the long term. We may yet end up as being something akin to Mordor-on-Sea. But, among the friends and relatives I've had these discussions with, none of us could, if we were being honest, really say we cared that much. The nihilism was slightly shocking. What was the reason for that?

The general consensus was that we simply cannot go on as we are. Something -- anything -- is better than years and years, decades and decades of more of the same. A shake up is long overdue and we're way past the point that tweaking round the edges is going to be good enough.

I'm still slightly stunned to have stumbled across this unsettling zeitgeist.

I've done my stint in living through the chaotic end to the 1970's and endured the major social upheavals in Thatcher's show-no-mercy early 1980's. Those were bad times. But this is worse in a lot of ways, if only for the crushing atmosphere of a powerless proletariat.

I do think there are some safety valves. And at least in the past decade we've come to recognise in our shared culture the harms done by things like inequality and how corrupt our governments and corporations really are. And we've channels of common communication (like Naked Capitalism, amongst a few others) which didn't exist a decade or so ago. I'm just not sure they're enough.

windsock , February 16, 2018 at 7:55 am

Mordor-Sea ha! Mordor has better weather.

Completely agree with "none of us could, if we were being honest, really say we cared that much". My friends and I are in the same boat. I'm not sure it's nihilism sometimes I think this is the point of our news coverage – to grind us down with boring mediocrity until we accept whatever settlement suddenly becomes acceptable to TPTB. But then maybe THAT is nihilistic too.

hemeantwell , February 16, 2018 at 8:55 am

Important question! Let me serve up a goulash of inertial fear and loathing:

1. Attacks on Trump have failed to wing him legally. Passage of the corporatophilic tax bill is going to produce a short term stimulus that many of us suspect will undermine the reversal of fortune the policy-thin Dems hoped to pull off. So in part we're stuck with watching a dreary theme in political economy play out in as margin estimates drift downward.

2. The Dem commitment to Russiagate has become their WMD story, it has to be stuck with lest its proponents admit their lying. Down on the ground, I was flummoxed to get a forwarded MoveOn email from a friend encouraging me to participate in flash demonstration at the capitol if Mueller is fired. I was moved to explain that this worried me since it likely hinged on Russophobia. A coolness ensued. This is happening broadly. The Russo-Resistance strategy has had the effect of exacerbating divisions in the potential opposition to neoliberalism. Not a bug.

3. The Syrian conflict has entered yet another crucial phase. I expect the Israelis to kick over the table, and the Trump administration doesn't have the necessary resolution to stop them with guaranteed threats. Militaristic cretins might be given a chance to run with the ball. And then there's North Korea. Breath holding here.

4. Personally, I have very little gut-level understanding of the cadences of crisis politics. Given the seriousness of the issues and the obviousness of the targets, I'd expect Sanders or someone else to be sounding the trumpets. Instead, it seems to be more a matter of setting out rebuttals, worrying about exhausting or boring the audience. I realize that we're not in an "in the streets" phase, but are supposed to be building organizations, finding candidates, etc. But the methodical, deliberate pace of that effort starts to seem inadequate to the moment.

5. And then there's climate warming, which so easily gives rise to that deck chairs feeling. Hard to suppress it at times.

I hate to concede much to the importance of national leadership, but in the absence, as yet, of a broad, thoroughly anti-neoliberal social democratic organization that provides a "culture of solidarity," (as Rick Fantasia described it in his fine book) we need it. And so we're left with moods and presentiments, while trying to deflate fake leader trial balloons -- another Kennedy? Cory Booker?

chwee , February 16, 2018 at 9:42 am

I would argue that there's a basic need for most human beings to feel like part of something greater, that they're working towards something more meaningful than ever more crass consumerism, ala Kennedy's "Ask not what your country can do for you .."

So when push comes to shove, a credible national leader who is able to cajole everyone to start pulling together in the same direction can make a serious go at solving or at least addressing / amerliorating some of our pressing issues. I don't think there's anyone in the US political circles right now that fits the bill ..

Compare and contrast with Putin and Xi, who are personally untouched by corruption taint, and whom their population actually believes has their nations' long-term interests at heart

I'd say national leadership will make all the difference when push comes to shove. Been telling that to US friends for a couple of years, fwiw.

Grumpy Engineer , February 16, 2018 at 8:56 am

" The general consensus was that we simply cannot go on as we are. "

I think you've hit the nail on the head. Whether it's skyrocketing measures of income inequality, health insurance premiums rising faster than wages, college tuition rates and student loan balances rising faster than wages, mindlessly skyrocketing stock markets and asset bubbles fueled by stupid central bank policies, or whatever other unsustainable woe you choose to pick, these things cannot go on forever . Indeed, you can almost feel the "major social upheaval" lurking around the corner.

And we're incredibly divided. Most of the MSM has been sucked into personality conflicts and the us-vs-them mindset. They actively feed it now. You're expected to pick a team and learn to hate the other guys.

I too suspect that "tweaking round the edges" will prove totally inadequate, but I have no desire for revolution. I've seen too many of them start off well but then go off the rails in horrible, terrifying directions. Revolutions can be terribly sloppy affairs, with real people getting hurt in the process. And they usually don't end where we really want them to.

So where does this leave us? Unsettled and full of angst, to say the least, with no good solutions in sight.

perpetualWAR , February 16, 2018 at 9:38 am

Just yesterday I was asked, "Aren't you a liberal Democrat?" I answered, "No, I hate both parties equally." That set them back on their laurels. They expected me to say "Yes."

Lambert Strether , February 16, 2018 at 5:00 pm

> The general consensus was that we simply cannot go on as we are

Waiting for Godot :

ESTRAGON: I can't go on like this.

VLADIMIR: That's what you think.

(Bleakness mitigated by my view that Waiting for Godot is best read, and performed, in the tradition of slapstick comedy.)

bassmule , February 16, 2018 at 7:26 am

A seemingly endless loop of outrage that yields nothing, except the feeling of powerlessness -- that all that is important in life is out of our hands, and in the hands of those who look at us and see nothing but another source of revenue.

timotheus , February 16, 2018 at 7:48 am

Yes, I agree with the "endless loop of outrage" weariness that has set in, the best example being the (ho-hum) shooting of a dozen high school students that in a normal society would prompt mobilization for change and quick marginalization of any leader who said, Let's do nothing! When murder becomes routine, an overall numbness is unavoidable. I had a visitor from Mexico with me recently who asked why I was watching a documentary about serial killer John Wayne Gacey (as someone who hitchhiked nearby around that time, I take a personal interest) and remarked, "In Mexico serial killers are not news."

flora , February 16, 2018 at 10:51 am

"A seemingly endless loop of outrage that yields nothing, except the feeling of powerlessness–"

I rather think that our "feeling of powerlessness" is the goal aimed for by the msm. And identity politics serves a divide and conquer function. (But you can buy T-shirts! so it's all good. /s)

bassmule , February 16, 2018 at 11:39 am

I hope to draw some response to the second part of my complaint, which is that in the dog-eat-dog world of a society ordered solely by markets, we are reduced: First, from being to citizens to consumers, then from being consumers to being marks, rubes, suckers. The "news" (such as it is) isn't reported to us, it's sold to us.

flora , February 16, 2018 at 7:18 pm

Facebook's emotional contagion experiment comes to mind.

Louis Fyne , February 16, 2018 at 7:30 am

Corporate media has been pumping out Trump Derangement Syndrome stories for 18+ months. [if you're cynical] not only because the media genuinely dislike trump, but to drive clickbait and subscription sign-ups

but just as 'likes' juice the happy-chemical parts of your brain, Trump-related outrage stories juice the angry-chemical parts of your brain.

After 18 months of being triggered by the news media [sometimes by Trump, sometimes by DNC pundits, sometimes by real life], your brain basically says -- 'so what? i'm not angry any more.'

qed the overton Window has been moved.

PlutoniumKun , February 16, 2018 at 7:40 am

I was idly wondering yesterday where the current hysteria surrounding Trump will lead everyone. There have been hysterical political situations before, but they have tended to be 'single issue' ones – I can't recall any time when so many people on the main political parties have been so singlemindedly determined to whip up anger. When its a 'single issue' or generated by one side it can run out of steam or diffuse but when its multiple issues I think its liable to either result in an explosion, or, conversely, lead to a sort of nervous exhaustion. Looking at it from the outside, I would really fear what could happen in the US if there was a major economic reversal. A sense of a rising tide can ease over a lot of worries, but if things go into reverse, it can curdle into real anger. In historical situations it can help if the anger has a particular focus, but a huge problem in the US seems to me to be that there is no focus – its all so diffuse – anger at Trump, at inequality, at feminists, at equality, at Russia, at Iran, at pretty much everyone.

From my reading of history, when countries have been in the grip of anxiety it is often a relief when a feared thing happens – such as when Japan bombed Pearl Harbour it was widely reported that the response of the public, including anti-war activists, was great relief. A feeling that at least a course had been set, a key decision made, even if it was a potentially disastrous one.

I've read that much the same feeling descended over much of Europe at the start of WWI. While the same situation doesn't quite apply in the US, I do fear that there is a craving for some sort of decision, a decisive act. While I think Trump is by nature someone who prefers to stir the pot rather than take decisive action, he is also very sensitive to the darker drives of the public feeling. I do fear that he might feel inclined to do something really stupid, and there is nobody sensible around him to stop it happening.

susan the other , February 16, 2018 at 12:25 pm

I think Trump understands more than he reveals. I think we are looking at the tempered effects of MSM froth by all the good, sensible internet bloggers and commenters which serve to neutralize the nonsense. What I see is angst failure – nobody bought this farcical onslaught of propaganda. Everyone questioned it. Something happens to the "news" when opposite views and facts collide – it gets emulsified like vinegar and oil into much less drastic possibilities.

On the one hand – on the other hand. The internet was able to neutralize the MSM because the MSM does only superficial "reporting". There seems to be a state of angst withdrawal, lots of confusion, and no direction. As if "time goes on like nothing is important." And lately a very interesting thing has happened – there is almost no hysteria about "the debt. I have the vague feeling that there are some few people who are actually in control of their senses and the sea change is approaching critical mass. Things will change for the better not only because everyone is fed up but probably more because our dear leaders, including the banksters, are clueless and they don't know how to make capitalism work using the old rules. It's gonna be interesting. Thank you NC.

W , February 16, 2018 at 3:38 pm

Interesting reminds me of how some torturers have learned that the fear of the pain can be worse than the pain itself in terms of emotional distress and breaking down ego-barriers to cooperation/submission. When the fear is worse than the feared experience, the feared experience itself is a relief.

johnf , February 16, 2018 at 7:42 am

I am definitely sensing more Angst in Germany (the ur–Angst? ), but at the moment, that is probably going off topic.

Kevin , February 16, 2018 at 7:44 am

Our Jerri-Lynn, who mainly lives overseas, was briefly in the US last month and dropped by our NYC meetup. She commented to me that she was very eager to leave because she could sense how high the general tension level was.

I can assure you, what she feels is very, very real. My wife and I travel at least once a year back to Canada , where my wife is from – the difference in tension is palpable. I feel so loose and calm when I am there.

windsock , February 16, 2018 at 7:50 am

I feel the same when I leave UK and head to Italy or Portugal.

Lambert Strether , February 16, 2018 at 5:04 pm

> I feel so loose and calm when I am [in Canada]

I felt the very same thing when I lived there for a couple years in the late 90s. I think it's the lack of the imperial burden.

Norello , February 16, 2018 at 7:46 am

"Do you sense, as Lambert and I do, that the news tide has receded?"

My primary news source is the print edition of the Wall Street Journal and I've noted to myself a similar observation recently. The first time I saw the gymnist doctor sex abuse story featured prominetly on the first page I thought it odd. When the story was featured promintely on the front page multiple times after that it felt bizzare. My reaction was wondering how can this possibly be that important compared to everything else happening in the world.

"If so, to resort to Warren Buffett's image, who do you think it has exposed as swimming naked?"

My interpetation has been the news media has been exposed as swimming naked. They are unable or unwilling to spend the money required to deliver professional reporting. Since election season they have depended on reporting on Trump's controversies to fill their pages. That is cheap and easy to do. Without that they have to spend time, money and talent to report on other complex matters.

The quaility and quantity of the print edition of the WSJ has been a noticeable decline the last few years. Little things like a front page lead in to what was supposed to be on page B1 was instead on B4. I've been reading the WSJ for probably twenty years now and never seen that happen before.

Twice during the presidential election they had what looked like at first a normal section of the newspaper but was actually a "paid advertisement" from China and Japan. It was blatant propaganda from their governments. It was shocking that the WSJ would take money to print foreign government's propaganda on election matters. There have been many other observations like that which have lead me to the conclusion news reporting capabilities have been gutted more than most people realize.

Anonymous2 , February 16, 2018 at 4:18 pm

Taken over not so long ago by one R Murdoch? He has damaged every paper he has touched IMO.

Edward , February 16, 2018 at 7:52 am

Maybe this painting depicting ennui captures the current mood: http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/sickert-ennui-n03846

Perhaps this is what happens when you are surrounded by nonsensical rubbish by press and government. But I have felt this way for years.

ChiGal in Carolina , February 16, 2018 at 9:17 am

They might be without purpose but they appear secure. Few people I know feel secure; a lot of it is about the basic stuff, health care and jobs.

Edward , February 16, 2018 at 10:02 am

True, but can they address those concerns? The Occupy movement was such an effort, but the police seem to have stifled it. Then Sen. Sanders appeared on the scene with his Presidential campaign and that too was suppressed. If people are in fact not engaged it probably indicates an absence of what is important and meaningful for them in the larger society.

Eustache De Saint Pierre , February 16, 2018 at 7:57 am

I have had the same or at a least similar feeling of late, but for the most part considered it as me reflecting my own circumstances on the world, as well as worrying items of news particularly from Syria. A bit like an increasing tightness of breath, within the increasingly stale & pressurized air of an expanding balloon.

Wukchumni , February 16, 2018 at 7:58 am

It has been a rather dull time for news, and i'm not really feeling any angst, other than when I went to a neighbor's dinner party surrounded by reign of error supporters that seemed to be doubling down on their choice in an assertive manner, with absolutely no prompting from me.

I found that disturbing, the group-sink mentality, a blackjack equivalent of doubling down on a 16, with the dealer showing a face card, why?

The LA Times got sold this week, which came with the SD Union Tribune as 2 for 1 deal for $500 million.

The LAT had truly turned into a piece of garbage the past years, they'd get scooped on stories in their own backyard, the writing was what you'd expect from a newspaper emanating from a city of 48,424, and it would be a given that new reporter hires should go at least a page into google when investigating.

Why would somebody pay half a billion for something that's broken down and even if you fixed it, where is the upside?

Sam Adams , February 16, 2018 at 7:59 am

My take is we are in the period just before WW1 and the last garden parties. Everything seems warm, slightly off. The skirts are hobbling, the hats large and the military medals shiny on gold braid. The politicians are making noise, but we all know that for all the strum and bother, they will come to a resolution.

Did you hear the Austrian heir and his wife were shot? Try the sandwiches .

JacobiteInTraining , February 16, 2018 at 10:36 am

Ummm, those sandwiches are simply MARVELOUS I *must* get your recipe.

My neighbors sons both joined the Uhlan Regiment, and we are organizing a party for them before they go to the academy. They look sooooo precious in their uniforms, I want to be sure we have the best in food and drink for their send off party!

And yes, those dang Serbians. Such troublemakers. Rest assured they will be dealt with swiftly and severely.

Lord Koos , February 16, 2018 at 2:19 pm

We've been watching a German TV series called Babylon Berlin, which is set in Wiemar Germany, 1929, just before the crash. It's fascinating to compare those times to our own, there are many parallels. The show is extremely well done. https://newrepublic.com/article/147053/babylon-berlin-sees-weimar-republic

Carolinian , February 16, 2018 at 7:59 am

There's an Ingmar Bergman film from the 1960s called Winter Light where one of the characters finds out the Red Chinese have acquired the bomb and kills himself. Surely it's the news media who are creating the current wave of high anxiety and even tragedies like school shootings seem to be egged on by the media since most shooters are copycats.

Which is why some of us have taken to getting our news from sites like this one. A sanity filter is needed. A sense of perspective may also be useful as in world historical terms there have been much worse periods than this. Time does heal wounds, perhaps even elites who have lost their marbles.

ChiGal in Carolina , February 16, 2018 at 9:29 am

ah, yes. this has been on my mind lately. More the best lacking all conviction and the worst full of passionate intensity than the rough beast part He's already ensconced in Washington and doesn't seem to be able to do much of anything [brain glancing off the specter of all those judges].

GERMO , February 16, 2018 at 9:46 am

This is an astute post by NC and lots of great comments -- little to add but I'll see your Yeats and raise you one Gramsci:

"The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear."

Bittercup , February 16, 2018 at 11:24 am

Well as long as we're talking poetry, I think Auden's September 1, 1939 might be even more relevant today than it was back when it was written. So much so that I can't decide which part of it to excerpt (and it's a bit too long to just quote the whole thing!).

Actually, no, I do know -- here is the last stanza of the poem, which just happens to describe exactly the kind of thing that NC -- at its best -- can provide in opposition to the "waves of anger and fear [ ] obsessing our private lives."

Defenceless under the night
Our world in stupor lies;
Yet, dotted everywhere,
Ironic points of light
Flash out wherever the Just
Exchange their messages:
May I, composed like them
Of Eros and of dust,
Beleaguered by the same
Negation and despair,
Show an affirming flame.

Katherine Calkin , February 16, 2018 at 10:15 pm

How about Sartre: Hell is other people.

Jay Jay , February 16, 2018 at 8:16 am

The DOJ Inspector General report will be out in March. After one look at a draft of the report, Randall Wray fired McCabe. And remember, the DOJIG has all of the Strzok e-mails, including the ones the FBI "inadvertently destroyed." Hopes–and fears–are high that this report will expose all of the Russiagate corruption in complete detail. If so, even mainstream media stars won't have a place to hide. They went all in too long ago and pushed the story way too hard.

So to answer Yves's questions: yes, there is deep fear that a receding tide is about to reveal a lot of naked swimmers and that yes, it will be a tsunami.

nv , February 16, 2018 at 8:16 am

Professor Kendall Thomas, director of the Center for the Study of Law and Culture at Columbia Law School, spoke at Goethe House New York recently. He designated Trump a 'post-president,' saying that the mythological status of the US presidency has been exploded (my word). An audience member asked if we were also post the nation state; Kendall replied that the questioner had answered his own question.

Perhaps here we have the source, or one major source, of the generalized angst? (No video, or no video yet, however, see https://www.goethe.de/ins/us/en/sta/ney/ver.cfm ? fuseaction=events.detail&event_id=21154521)

paul , February 16, 2018 at 12:48 pm

Now that is news I can use!

I suppose it might have been private eye, a very changed publication from my first introduction, suggested that the offspring of the firm were far more interested in discotheques and tax free beaches than than the fealty of the field mice in their property.

A little disinterested resignation might go a long way.

However

paul , February 16, 2018 at 1:21 pm

NCO smithers, sorry to hijack your thread; But if I'm going to do it within the headline post: Iraq war protests: The one in edinburgh was glorious, people flowing in from the mound, the west est end and leith street, blocking the roads, g galloway and t sheridan doing what they do best.

I retired and watched the news on the bbc and that is why I have hardly looked at since then.

What your have gifted me is contributions is that nothing is rational as family business, and extra-family is hopeless romance.

I'll jog along (to use the contemporary parlance),

The only weak point is the family.

Loneprotester , February 16, 2018 at 12:04 pm

When war comes it will not be fought by "post-nation states."

Great thread. Keep it going.

Weltschmerz , February 16, 2018 at 8:26 am

1) gaslighting with news that doesn't matter
2) feeeling of an echo chamber and the same ol same ol
3) unclear ways of taking action and identifying those persons who can fix the mess that those persons impmementing neoliberalism and warmongering have created

Colonel Smithers , February 16, 2018 at 8:58 am

Thank you.

I don't have much contact with the 1% now, having changed jobs in mid-2016, but agree with you and get that sense from friends / former colleagues who do.

I work in the City of London. To use the euphemism en vogue at my employer, many people will be "rolling off the platform", ours, over the spring. It's the same at my former employer and another firm I know well. These are middle aged and middle class professionals about to be thrown on the scrap heap.

One can observe Thatcherites becoming Corbynites.

Arizona Slim , February 16, 2018 at 11:40 am

Colonel Smithers, I observed something similar during the Sanders campaign's peak here in Tucson. That would be during late 2015 and early 2016. Let's just say that people weren't flocking to Bernie because their lives were going well.

Lambert Strether , February 16, 2018 at 5:10 pm

> "rolling off the platform"

What's the metaphor here?

ChiGal in Carolina , February 16, 2018 at 6:23 pm

Just to clarify, these are Bernie folks I'm talking about, with no love of corporate Dems/Hillary, but I fear they don't realize how very real the threat is that the energy of the base will be coopted by the leadership.

Norb , February 16, 2018 at 9:20 am

The news tide has receded because by blurring the line between news/information and entertainment, for most people, it looses all relevance in conducting daily life. People are tuned out and apathetic. Those watching the MSM closely are either entirely satisfied with society as is, brainwashed, social voyeurs titilated by the access to human suffering in ever expanding forms, or for professional interest. The weird atmosphere is that people realize how precarious their social positions have become, but are offered no outlet to relieve the growing anxiety. There is no leadership attempting to address these grievances, and when movements do surface, the same set of characters jump to the forefront and successfully diffuse the energy building for something different.
There is no accountability.

The MSM is ubiquitous in its constant drone of irrelevance. Just as the constant flashing of advertising becomes harder and harder to see, it just stops carrying any useful information regardless of what is being said or shown.

My sense for years has been the thought, "what will it take to break the malaise". Society has gone from the Deep Water Horizon disaster, Fukushima meltdown, endless small wars, and growing ecological disasters. Not to mention growing economic inequality with no end in sight. The response is indifference and obfuscation.

Democracy requires civic action, but without proper leadership, Democracy is impossible. Democracy requires institutions that citizens can participate in, and the current crop of leaders undermines that participation at every turn.

So what is left is that everyone conducts their lives on autopilot- until forced to act otherwise. It is a weird atmosphere where the general consensus is one of quiet despair, but easier to pretend that all is well.

Pat , February 16, 2018 at 9:25 am

I will note that years after I stopped biting my nails I have started again. And this time it is worse. I never endangered the quick, but am now so anxious And I have eliminated most traditional sources of news from my life.

I am powerless. A seismic event that should have caused at least a small path change has not. Instead the road is even more closed to alteration, the real news is the same or worse. And the bread and circuses is not considered necessary because nothing really changed. The shootings, the growing early deaths of the populace, and so on are normal. I do not know if the slow boil of the frogs/populace will only end with their total collapse and that we have merely turned up the heat to speed things up. Or if another seismic event that is more violent and revolutionary is going to happen as the restricted road is overrun by those supposed to die quickly and quietly. A Russian and French Revolution level up rising where our current system is bludgeoned to death.

I try to ignore that sense, that prediction. But as my admission makes clear I cannot. We are cursed to live in interesting times.

Dean , February 16, 2018 at 10:02 am

The firehose of information (shit?) being sprayed at me during my waking hours by the industrial-information complex was chipping away at my soul one clickbait headline at a time, one junk email at a time, one advertisement at a time. So I made a choice and l 'opted out' as best I could. I have only 3 news bookmarks (NC on of them). I dropped all social media in the summer of '16. I've been cable free for nearly two years.

My overall mood has improved greatly over this time. I am not feeling the angst but I see the effect the 24×7 bombardment is having on people close to me.

I am beginning to wonder if this constant bombardment is someone's grand design to wear us down, divide us, and keep us in a permanent state of fear and paralysis.

Loneprotester , February 16, 2018 at 12:37 pm

Brilliant! I felt a similar Lightness of Being after giving up Facebook a few months ago. But this has been undermined by recently taking up Twitter. Twitter is like having a stranger run up to you every few minutes shouting the same piece of nonsense in your face. Then someone else shouts the exact opposite. And so on and so on.

Lambert Strether , February 16, 2018 at 5:24 pm

Twitter demands extremely careful curation, and then it's incredibly valuable. Rather like life.

Kokuanani , February 16, 2018 at 1:06 pm

I share your sense of "bombardment," and for me it's an on-going fight with my husband who wants to watch MSNBC, CNN, etc. We have a very small house, so it's almost impossible for me to get away from the audio, and it's winter, so going outside to escape is more challenging.

I find the yelling of Rachel Maddow et al. actually like a physical assault on my senses. I say to my husband, "you know things in the world are crap. Do you need to have that fact repeated to you again and again? And don't you feel that this assault wears you down and makes you less able to take positive action? That's its effect on me."

[I wear my noise-cancelling earphones a lot.]

Eclair , February 16, 2018 at 1:37 pm

Gosh, Kokuanani, I am in much the same situation. My recently-retired husband turns the TV on first thing in the morning and almost never shuts it down until bedtime. We have downsized to a small condo, which fortunately has a small second bedroom/sitting room, so I can escape for a time.

He watches CNN and the local news stations a lot and, as I stroll through the living room or work in the adjacent kitchen, I am assaulted with the tension-laden voices of the news anchors, pushing the latest disaster. I was almost grateful for the school shooting, since it did make a change from the incessant prattling about l'affaire Porter.

What I find most horrifying are the daytime TV shows that feature white male authority figures telling hapless people who have supposedly screwed up their lives and relationships, exactly where they have gone wrong and what they need to do to straighten themselves out. The audience, or should it be the 'mob,' acts as a chorus, egging on the participants.

I now realize how insulated from the 'real world' I have been for decades.

It is interesting that you feel the verbal yelling as as an almost physical assault. I feel the same about constant background noise; it hurts. My spouse, on the other hand, seems to need the stimulation of the verbal stream. (Might have something to do with his dyslexia).

RMO , February 16, 2018 at 3:36 pm

I frequently like to have the television on – often as background while I do other things. I do have cable (as part of an integrated telephone/internet/television package) and when I have broadcast television playing, as opposed to DVD's etc., I find I gravitate to old comedy reruns. I've rewatched the entirety of the Mary Tyler Moore show multiple times this winter along with many other 50's through early 80's television. The only breakthrough from the hurricane of angst whirling through the U.S. media has been the commercials. The ads are often made up of 50% promotion of a new pharmaceutical or medical product and 50% an invitation to join a class action suit against the makers of a slightly older pharmaceutical or medical product. It's an odd juxtaposition.

Lambert Strether , February 16, 2018 at 5:26 pm

I visit friends who watch CNN all the time fairly regularly (and as readers know, I don't have a TV at all, so it's quite an experience for me).

Whatever's going on at CNN, it's clearly not news in any sense that I understand. It's demented, crazy-making.

John , February 16, 2018 at 10:07 am

The wheels keep turning in place with no movement forward, backward, or in a circle. Case in point: Yet one more mass shooting in a school. Yet one more disturbed, angry, and/or obsessed personal with a semi-automatic weapon. Shock, horror, thoughts, prayers; we need 'sensible' gun controls; it's not the time to talk about guns, etc., etc. Same script every time and it fades away until the next time. Does no one notice?

What can I add to what has already been said? I am sick to death of slippery empty words and sly tactics and thievery. I want to say to hell with it all, but I cannot not care.

Craig H. , February 16, 2018 at 10:11 am

The reason most news is dull is that most of it is fake. I was watching an old interview that Kerry Cassidy did with Jim Marrs the other day and he was riveting. A lot of people classify Marrs as a conspiracy nut but he described himself as a journalist. One of the most memorable things he said (this is not an exact quote) is that he still tried to do journalism, but we really don't have journals any more. They are more like advertising circulars and the stories are almost all government or corporate public relations pieces. There are plenty of stories to write. The pieces you guys run on Uber and Calpers are rare and not dull. It is obvious when a competent journalist has taken the time to do research and investigate and double-check things and think about what they are doing.

The manipulated dope the government releases on the latest shooting is not news. It is propaganda. It isn't worth reading.

schultzzz , February 16, 2018 at 2:08 pm

my 2 cents: the FOX NEWS-ification of the MSM is now complete, and that's why it's weird.

If the subtext to the MSM's Trump coverage is, "He's a racist authoritarian so he must be stopped at all costs," then you'd think they'd cover police brutality every day. If they're so concerned about racism and authoritarianism. Instead, we're seeing the FBI, CIA, etc., cast in the role of 'oppressed minorities standing up to The System, Maaan!'

Plus, as a fan of paranoia, I can say. . . I've never seen a more unsatisfying, overly-abstract conspiracy in my life. It's not that they are rehabilitating CIA goons, but they're doing so specifically in order to obsess over memos, and reports about memos, and memos about reports about leaks about other memos.

It's like an episode of The Office if everyone in the office had nukes. Sheesh, give me P2 and the Vatican Bank any day.

TLDR: It's weird because of the sudden growth of the disconnect between [the very real anxieties we news consumers feel in our daily lives] . . . . and the news reports which attempt to leverage those anxieties into outrage at [whatever media elites are mad at that day].

EGrise , February 16, 2018 at 2:13 pm

A question I'm pondering lately that may be related: suppose a general pulled a Julius Caesar, crossed the Rubicon/Potomac and seized control of the US government. What would the response be?

Sixty years ago, there would have been staunch support for the civilian government, politicians of both parties would have rallied their supporters to defend our democratic heritage, and I believe ordinary citizens would have actively opposed the military government in a number of ways up to and including taking up arms.

Today? I just can't see it. I don't know if anyone would really give a [family_blog] beyond some outrage on Facebook or Twitter. The nihilism and ennui are palpable.

Mark Blyth tells the story of speaking to a room full of fund managers and other monied types, and he asked them if they would have trusted the politicians they supported twenty or thirty years prior to manage one of their accounts, to general assent. But when he asked if they would trust any of the politicians they currently support to do the same, they all laughed out loud. In the US, that attitude is nearly universal, across all layers of society .

Could you see yourself risking your life to go fight for our democracy under the banner of Chuck Schumer? The DNC? Any of the ghouls in the GOP? I can't. And I think that's meaningful.

schultzzz , February 16, 2018 at 2:22 pm

If I didn't know any better, I'd say the MSM is getting revenge on us. They got the 2016 election wrong, were exposed as out-of-touch, and rightly ridiculed. Lacking credibility and unwilling to do stories that would upset their owners (i.e. stories ABOUT average American problems), the only tool left in their 'keep people reading us' toolkit is. . .'aaaaah read this or the country dies!!!!'

And what do you know, the 'anxiety' tool just also happens to inflict a lot of psychic punishment on the same news consumers that ridiculed them. So that's a two-fer!

Rosario , February 16, 2018 at 2:44 pm

I'm having trouble articulating the pile of words in my head to describe my thinking on current news media. I'll just say that I've suspected an "establishment agenda" in most news for years and Trump has mostly confirmed that suspicion. I'm sure it has, to some extent, always been that way with the press (we can't escape our culture), but the stakes of milquetoast (or outright nefarious) new media seem bigger now than ever (US empire collapse, climate change, ballooning global inequality). I'm only 31 so let me know if I'm off base thinking the sky is falling.

I think the hosts are right that the news seems to be drying up as of late, but I think that is more a feature than a bug. There is plenty to discuss and dissect. They are just not the kinds of things that capitalist media wants to even acknowledge much less cover.

I don't know if there are any Aussies in this thread, but I'll include a link to a comedian from Australia who has excellent and usually funny commentary on Australian politics. He posts a great deal on Youtube and has a pretty excellent take down of Vice News. BTW the ever edgy Vice has a 5% stake owned by Rupert Murdoch's 21st Century Fox and his boy James is/was a board member, figure that one out. The comedian says more pointedly what I was trying to say above to a particular example of the problem, and I think the critique of Vice News is within the topic of the thread. As a heads up, you may need to see his initial video to get any context. I recommend both.

XXYY , February 16, 2018 at 3:36 pm

I think one thing that is new recently is that the people supposedly driving the bus are *obviously* incompetent and in over their heads.

I am in my late 50s, and for most of my life there was an air of seriousness and competence about national leaders. Even when they were doing something you didn't like, you could generally assume they were adequate to the situation, or at least had access to people who were. E.g., the moronic Reagan at least supposedly had a coterie of serious people in his administration who could keep the train on the tracks. Various government departments were staffed by people who had a lifetime of experience in their affairs, and there was thus a deep bench of skill and experience the national leaders could rely on when needed. Government seemed serious and purposeful for the most part, and the nation seemed in reasonably good hands.

It's impossible to say how much of this sensibility was real and how much carefully maintained illusion; my guess is a lot of what was going on was the latter, but at least leaders and the media realized seriousness was an important front to maintain.

Now we seem to be at a point where the people in charge are unapologetic about their greed, their lack of ability or even interest in their jobs and consitiuents, their lack of intellect and integrity, and the absence of any pretense of doing anything useful for the population or the society. Important national institutions (e.g. the State Department! The CDC!) are being left to languish or being actively dismantled. Who will fill the void? No one cares. The media, meanwhile, not only fails to lament these things but actually seems to have some glee about the situation and delights in spotlighting incompetence and even criminality in the leadership

(I write from the US, obviously; however, the same seems to be true, perhaps even more so, in the UK, from what I read.)

As a result, a deadly sense of futility sets in. At best, we can head off the bigger disasters. Nothing is likely to actually improve. The will and leadership to face our many impending disasters (climate change, nuclear war, inequality, racism, financial collapse, infrastructure collapse) seems utterly absent.

I guess what I'm saying is, as one surveys the landscape, there is a marked loss of hope coupled with a tearing urgency that something needs to be done. It's a terrible, very volatile and dangerous condition.

jrs , February 16, 2018 at 7:40 pm

a sensible emotional response to Trump perhaps. Obama was bad in many ways, but Trump is something harder to make sense of than mere bad: he's absurd.

Jim , February 16, 2018 at 6:55 pm

The Crack-Up F.Scott Fitzgerald (1936)

"Before I go on with this short history, let me make a general observation -- the test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function. One should, for example, be able to see that things are hopeless and yet be determined to make them otherwise."

Do we still have that will and can we find a way?

[Feb 16, 2018] A Dangerous Turn in U.S. Foreign Policy

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... It was President Bill Clinton who moved NATO eastwards, abrogating a 1991 agreement with the Russians not to recruit former members of the Warsaw Pact that is at the root of current tensions with Moscow. And, while the U.S. and NATO point to Russia's annexation of the Crimea as a sign of a "revanchist" Moscow, it was NATO that set the precedent of altering borders when it dismembered Serbia to create Kosovo after the 1999 Yugoslav war. ..."
"... And it was President Barack Obama who further chilled relations with the Russians by backing the 2014 coup in the Ukraine, and whose "Asia pivot" has led to tensions between Washington and Beijing. ..."
"... Certainly the verbiage about Russia and China is alarming. Russia is routinely described as "aggressive," "revisionist," and "expansionist." In a recent attack on China, US Defense Secretary Rex Tillerson described China's trade with Latin America as "imperial. ..."
"... Russia's intervention in the Syrian civil war helped turn the tide against the anti-Assad coalition put together by the US. But its economy is smaller than Italy's, and its "aggression" is largely a response to NATO establishing a presence on Moscow's doorstep. ..."
"... China is, however, the US's major competitor and the second largest economy in the world. It has replaced the US as Latin America's largest trading partner and successfully outflanked Washington's attempts to throttle its economic influence. When the US asked its key allies to boycott China's new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, with the exception of Japan, they ignored Washington ..."
"... Is this a new Cold War, when the U.S. attempted to surround and isolate the Soviet Union? There are parallels, but the Cold War was an ideological battle between two systems, socialism and capitalism. The fight today is over market access and economic domination. When Secretary of State Rex Tillerson warned Latin America about China and Russia, it wasn't about "Communist subversion," but trade. ..."
"... For one, the big arms manufacturers -- Lockheed Martian, Boeing, Raytheon, BAE Systems, Northrop Grumman, and General Dynamics -- have lots of cash to hand out come election time. "Great power competition" will be expensive, with lots of big-ticket items: aircraft carriers, submarines, surface ships, and an expanded air force. ..."
"... This is not to say that the U.S. has altered its foreign policy focus because of arms company lobbies, but they do have a seat at the table. And given that those companies have spread their operations to all 50 states, local political representatives and governors have a stake in keeping -- and expanding -- those high paying jobs. ..."
"... Piling onto Moscow may have consequences as well. Andrei Kostin, head of one of Russia's largest banks, VTB, told the Financial Times ..."
"... Conn Hallinan can be read at dispatchesfromtheedgeblog.wordpress.com ..."
Feb 16, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

The Trump administration's new National Defense Strategy is being touted as a sea change in U.S. foreign policy, a shift from the "war on terrorism" to "great power competition," a line that would not be out of place in the years leading up to World War I. But is the shift really a major course change, or a re-statement of policies followed by the last four administrations?

The U.S. has never taken its eyes off its big competitors.

It was President Bill Clinton who moved NATO eastwards, abrogating a 1991 agreement with the Russians not to recruit former members of the Warsaw Pact that is at the root of current tensions with Moscow. And, while the U.S. and NATO point to Russia's annexation of the Crimea as a sign of a "revanchist" Moscow, it was NATO that set the precedent of altering borders when it dismembered Serbia to create Kosovo after the 1999 Yugoslav war.

It was President George W. Bush who designated China a "strategic competitor," and who tried to lure India into an anti-Chinese alliance by allowing New Delhi to violate the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Letting India purchase uranium on the international market -- it was barred from doing so by refusing to sign the NPT -- helped ignite the dangerous nuclear arms race with Pakistan in South Asia.

And it was President Barack Obama who further chilled relations with the Russians by backing the 2014 coup in the Ukraine, and whose "Asia pivot" has led to tensions between Washington and Beijing.

So is jettisoning "terrorism" as the enemy in favor of "great powers" just old wine, new bottle? Not quite. For one thing the new emphasis has a decidedly more dangerous edge to it.

In speaking at Johns Hopkins, Defense Secretary James Mattis warned, "If you challenge us, it will be your longest and worst day," a remark aimed directly at Russia. NATO ally Britain went even further. Chief of the United Kingdom General Staff, Nick Carter, told the Defense and Security Forum that "our generation has become use to wars of choice since the end of the Cold War," but "we may not have a choice about conflict with Russia," adding "The parallels with 1914 are stark."

Certainly the verbiage about Russia and China is alarming. Russia is routinely described as "aggressive," "revisionist," and "expansionist." In a recent attack on China, US Defense Secretary Rex Tillerson described China's trade with Latin America as "imperial. "

But in 1914 there were several powerful and evenly matched empires at odds. That is not the case today.

While Moscow is certainly capable of destroying the world with its nuclear weapons, Russia today bears little resemblance to 1914 Russia, or, for that matter, the Soviet Union.

The U.S. and its allies currently spend more than 12 times what Russia does on its armaments–$840 billion to $69 billion -- and that figure vastly underestimates Washington's actual military outlay. A great deal of U.S. spending is not counted as "military," including nuclear weapons, currently being modernized to the tune of $1.5 trillion.

The balance between China and the U.S. is more even, but the U.S. outspends China almost three to one. Include Washington's allies, Japan, Australia and South Korea, and that figure is almost four to one. In nuclear weapons, the ratio is vastly greater: 26 to 1 in favor of the U.S. Add NATO and the ratios are 28 to 1.

This is not to say that the military forces of Russia and China are irrelevant.

Russia's intervention in the Syrian civil war helped turn the tide against the anti-Assad coalition put together by the US. But its economy is smaller than Italy's, and its "aggression" is largely a response to NATO establishing a presence on Moscow's doorstep.

China has two military goals: to secure its sea-borne energy supplies by building up its navy and to establish a buffer zone in the East and South China seas to keep potential enemies at arm's length. To that end it has constructed smaller, more agile ships, and missiles capable of keeping U.S. aircraft carriers out of range, a strategy called "area denial." It has also modernized its military, cutting back on land-based forces and investing in air and sea assets. However, it spends less of its GDP on its military than does the US: 1.9 percent as opposed to 3.8 percent.

Beijing has been rather heavy-handed in establishing "area denial," aliening many of its neighbors -- Malaysia, Vietnam, the Philippines, and Taiwan -- by claiming most of the South China Sea and building bases in the Paracel and Spratly islands.

But China has been invaded several times, starting with the Opium Wars of 1839 and 1856, when Britain forced the Chinese to lift their ban on importing the drug. Japan invaded in 1895 and 1937. If the Chinese are touchy about their coastline, one can hardly blame them.

China is, however, the US's major competitor and the second largest economy in the world. It has replaced the US as Latin America's largest trading partner and successfully outflanked Washington's attempts to throttle its economic influence. When the US asked its key allies to boycott China's new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, with the exception of Japan, they ignored Washington .

However, commercial success is hardly "imperial."

Is this a new Cold War, when the U.S. attempted to surround and isolate the Soviet Union? There are parallels, but the Cold War was an ideological battle between two systems, socialism and capitalism. The fight today is over market access and economic domination. When Secretary of State Rex Tillerson warned Latin America about China and Russia, it wasn't about "Communist subversion," but trade.

There are other players behind this shift.

For one, the big arms manufacturers -- Lockheed Martian, Boeing, Raytheon, BAE Systems, Northrop Grumman, and General Dynamics -- have lots of cash to hand out come election time. "Great power competition" will be expensive, with lots of big-ticket items: aircraft carriers, submarines, surface ships, and an expanded air force.

This is not to say that the U.S. has altered its foreign policy focus because of arms company lobbies, but they do have a seat at the table. And given that those companies have spread their operations to all 50 states, local political representatives and governors have a stake in keeping -- and expanding -- those high paying jobs.

Nor are the Republicans going to get much opposition on increased defense spending from the Democrats, many of whom are as hawkish as their colleagues across the aisle. Higher defense spending -- coupled with the recent tax cut bill -- will rule out funding many of the programs the Democrats hold dear. Of course, for the Republicans that dilemma is a major side benefit: cut taxes, increase defense spending, then dismantle social services, Social Security and Medicare in order to service the deficit.

And many of the Democrats are ahead of the curve when it comes to demonizing the Russians. The Russian bug-a-boo has allowed the Party to shift the blame for Hillary Clinton's loss to Moscow's manipulation of the election, thus avoiding having to examine its own lackluster campaign and unimaginative political program.

There are other actors pushing this new emphasis as well, including the Bush administration's neo-conservatives who launched the Iraq War. Their new target is Iran, even though inflating Iran to the level of a "great power" is laughable. Iran's military budget is $12.3 billion. Saudi Arabia alone spends $63.7 billion on defense, slightly less than Russia, which has five times the population and eight times the land area. In a clash between Iran and the US and its local allies, the disparity in military strength would be a little more than 66 to 1.

However, in terms of disasters, even Iraq would pale before a war with Iran.

The most dangerous place in the world right now is the Korean Peninsula, where the Trump administration appears to be casting around for some kind of military demonstration that will not ignite a nuclear war. But how would China react to an attack that might put hostile troops on its southern border?

Piling onto Moscow may have consequences as well. Andrei Kostin, head of one of Russia's largest banks, VTB, told the Financial Times that adding more sanctions against Russia "would be like declaring war."

The problem with designating "great powers" as your adversaries is that they might just take your word for it and respond accordingly. Join the debate on Facebook More articles by: Conn Hallinan

Conn Hallinan can be read at dispatchesfromtheedgeblog.wordpress.com

[Feb 16, 2018] We Need to Abolish the Olympic Games

Notable quotes:
"... David Macaray is a playwright and author. His newest book is How To Win Friends and Avoid Sacred Cows . He can be reached at [email protected] ..."
Feb 16, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

February 14, 2018 We Need to Abolish the Olympic Games

by David Macaray

by At the risk of sounding mawkishly sentimental, there was a time -- decades ago, when this world was vastly larger, more mysterious, more inscrutable -- when the Olympic Games genuinely mattered. A time when one could make the argument that the Olympics actually "benefitted mankind."

Take the Summer Games of 1960, for example, which were held in Rome. It was in Rome where American and European track stars first got to meet athletes from countries that they barely knew existed, much less had competed against. Indeed, it was in Rome where the African runners -- those extraordinary athletes who eventually came to dominate the distance events -- first made their presence known on the world stage.

In 1960, Kenya, Ethiopia, Somalia, et al, were remote and exotic locales. In fact, they were so remote (this was before the Peace Corps was established) that, farfetched as it sounds, it was unlikely an American would ever meet face to face with any of their citizens unless he did so as an athlete at the Olympic Games.

It was a different age, a different milieu. Not only was there was no TV coverage of the 1960 Olympics, the only aspect of those Games that the American media deemed worth reporting was the comparative medal count of the USA and its arch-enemy the USSR.

But so much has changed since 1960, it's close to impossible to quantify. Not only is the "magic" gone from the Games, even the novelty is gone. Because today's world is an infinitely smaller place, who really cares?

To say we have become more cosmopolitan is a profound understatement. "Hey, I met a Kenyan." An athlete telling someone that he got to shake hands with a Kenyan doesn't even move the needle on the Human Interest meter. That's because our mailman is a Kenyan. Or our neighbor. Or our buddy at the health club.

Somalis now post photos of themselves and their families on Facebook. The men are wearing Dockers and polo shirts. There are two excellent Ethiopian restaurants in the city of Santa Monica. Also, let's not forget that mega-corporations now own the whole shebang. They own it outright. NBC reportedly paid $1 billion for the rights to broadcast the 2018 Winter Olympics. And of course, absurd as it seems, professional athletes are now allowed to compete.

Why any American (even those of the flag-waving, USA-chanting variety) would get their jollies seeing a team composed of NBA stars beat a struggling team from, say, Honduras by 81 points is a mystery. Charles Barkley said that during an out-of-bounds call, an opposing player actually handed him a scrap of paper and a pen, and requested his autograph. The game was a mismatch, but it was still in progress! WTF?

Basically, the Olympic Games have outgrown themselves, and by doing so, they've relinquished whatever modest "contribution" they once made to the Family of Man. They've gone from a noble and worthwhile experiment to a bloated, self-aggrandizing, and over produced spectacle, having congealed into a caricature of their former self.

And speaking as a life-long track & field fan, the final nail in the coffin has been the proliferation of PEDs (performance enhancing drugs). Other than perhaps bicycling, nowhere in the sports world do you find athletes more juiced up with drugs than today's world-class runners, jumpers and throwers.

Because the "drug detectives" (those overworked and understaffed technicians assigned the daunting task of flagging drug users) are five years behind the "drug innovators" (those creative and highly motivated geniuses who are coming up with space-age performance enhancers that aren't yet even on the list of illegal substances), the sport will always be suspect.

So let's end the charade and abolish the Olympics. We don't need a billion-dollar extravaganza to satisfy our needs. Track fans can catch all the action they want by attending high school and college meets. I've done it myself. Gymnastics fans can do the same. As for aficionados of synchronized swimming, well .good riddance. Join the debate on Facebook More articles by: David Macaray

David Macaray is a playwright and author. His newest book is How To Win Friends and Avoid Sacred Cows . He can be reached at [email protected]

[Feb 16, 2018] The big news is the Russian offer to the Saudi authorities to invest directly in the upcoming Aramco initial public offering

Feb 16, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Mild-ly -Facetious , February 16, 2018 at 5:42 pm

F Y I :> Putin prefers Aramco to Trump's sword dance

Hardly 10 months after honoring the visiting US president, the Saudis are open to a Russian-Chinese consortium investing in the upcoming Aramco IPO

By M.K. BHADRAKUMAR
FEBRUARY 16, 2018

[extract]

In the slideshow that is Middle Eastern politics, the series of still images seldom add up to make an enduring narrative. And the probability is high that when an indelible image appears, it might go unnoticed -- such as Russia and Saudi Arabia wrapping up huge energy deals on Wednesday underscoring a new narrative in regional and international security.

The ebb and flow of events in Syria -- Turkey's campaign in Afrin and its threat to administer an "Ottoman slap" to the United States, and the shooting down of an Israeli F-16 jet -- hogged the attention. But something of far greater importance was unfolding in Riyadh, as Saudi and Russian officials met to seal major deals marking a historic challenge to the US dominance in the Persian Gulf region.

The big news is the Russian offer to the Saudi authorities to invest directly in the upcoming Aramco initial public offering -- and the Saudis acknowledging the offer. Even bigger news, surely, is that Moscow is putting together a Russian-Chinese consortium of joint investment funds plus several major Russian banks to be part of the Aramco IPO.

Chinese state oil companies were interested in becoming cornerstone investors in the IPO, but the participation of a Russia-China joint investment fund takes matters to an entirely different realm. Clearly, the Chinese side is willing to hand over tens of billions of dollars.

Yet the Aramco IPO was a prime motive for US President Donald Trump to choose Saudi Arabia for his first foreign trip. The Saudi hosts extended the ultimate honor to Trump -- a ceremonial sword dance outside the Murabba Palace in Riyadh. Hardly 10 months later, they are open to a Russian-Chinese consortium investing in the Aramco IPO.

Riyadh plans to sell 5% of Saudi Aramco in what is billed as the largest IPO in world history. In the Saudi estimation, Aramco is worth US$2 trillion; a 5% stake sale could fetch as much as $100 billion. The IPO is a crucial segment of Vision 2030, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman's ambitious plan to diversify the kingdom's economy.

MORE : http://www.atimes.com/article/putin-prefers-aramco-trumps-sword-dance/

[Feb 16, 2018] The Pathetic Inadequacy of the Trump Opposition The American Conservative by Paul Brian

Notable quotes:
"... Dancing With The Stars ..."
"... The Washington Post. ..."
"... Paul Brian is a freelance journalist. He has reported for BBC, Reuters, and Foreign Policy, and contributed to the Week, The Federalist, and others. He covered the fledgling U.S. alt-right at a 2014 conference in Hungary as well as the 2015 New Hampshire primary, and also made a documentary about his time living in the Republic of Georgia in 2012. You can follow him on Twitter @paulrbrian or visit his website www.paulrbrian.com . ..."
Feb 16, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

The hawks and internationalists who set our house on fire don't now deserve the contract to rebuild it.

While it may have significant popular support, much of the anti-Trump "Resistance" suffers from a severe weakness of message. Part of the problem is with who the Resistance's leading messengers are: discredited neoconservative poltroons like former president George W. Bush, unwatchable alleged celebrities like Chelsea Handler, and establishment Republicans who routinely slash and burn the middle class like Senator Jeff Flake. Furthermore, what exactly is the Resistance's overriding message? Invariably their sermonizing revolves around vague bromides about "tolerance," diversity, unrestricted free trade, and multilateralism. They routinely push a supposed former status quo that was in fact anything but a status quo. The leaders of the Resistance have in their arsenal nothing but buzzwords and a desire to feel self-satisfied and turn back to imagined pre-Trump normality. A president like Donald Trump is only possible in a country with opposition voices of such subterranean caliber.

Remember when Trump steamrolled a crowded field of Republicans in one of the greatest electoral upsets in American history? Surely many of us also recall the troupes of smug celebrities and Bushes and Obamas who lined up to take potshots at Trump over his unacceptably cruel utterances that upset their noble moral sensibilities? How did that work out for them? They lost. The more that opposition to Trump in office takes the same form as opposition to him on the campaign trail, the more hypocritical and counterproductive it becomes. Further, the resistance to Trump's policies is coming just at the moment when principled opposition most needs to up its game and help turn back the hands of the Doomsday Clock. It's social conservatives who are also opposed to war and exploitation of the working class who have the best moral bona fides to effectively oppose Trump, which is why morally phrased attacks on Trump from the corporate and socially liberal wings of the left, as well as the free market and interventionist conservative establishment, have failed and will continue to fail. Any real alternative is going to have to come from regular folks with hearts and morals who aren't stained by decades of failure and hypocrisy.

A majority of Democrats now have favorable views of George W. Bush, and that's no coincidence. Like the supposedly reasonable anti-Trump voices on their side, Bush pops up like a dutiful marionette to condemn white supremacy and "nativism," and to reminisce about the good old days when he was in charge. Bush also lectures about how Russia is ruining everything by meddling in elections and destabilizing the world. But how convincing is it really to hear about multilateralism and respect for human rights from Bush, who launched an unnecessary war on Iraq that killed hundreds of thousands of civilians and left thousands of American servicemen and women dead and wounded? How convincing is it when former secretary of state Madeleine Albright, who famously remarked that an estimated half a million Iraqis dead from our 1990s sanctions was "worth it," haughtily claims that she's "offended" by Trump's travel ban ? "Offended" -- is that so, Madame Secretary? I have a feeling millions of Muslims in the Middle East may have also been "offended" when people like you helped inflame their region and turned it into an endless back-and-forth firestorm of conflict between U.S.-backed dictators and brutal jihadists, with everyone else caught in between.

Maybe instead of being offended that not everyone can come to America, people like Albright, Kerry, and Bush shouldn't have contributed to the conditions that wrecked those people's homes in the first place? Maybe the U.S. government should think more closely about providing military aid to 73 percent of the world's dictatorships? Sorry, do excuse the crazy talk. Clearly all the ruthless maneuvering by the U.S. and NATO is just being done out of a selfless desire to spread democratic values by raining down LGBT-friendly munitions on beleaguered populations worldwide. Another congressman just gave a speech about brave democratic principles so we can all relax.

Generally, U.S. leaders like to team up with dictators before turning on them when they become inconvenient or start to upset full-spectrum dominance. Nobody have should been surprised to see John Kerry fraternizing in a friendly manner with Syrian butcher Bashar al-Assad and then moralistically threatening him with war several years later, or Donald Rumsfeld grinning with Saddam Hussein as they cooperated militarily before Rumsfeld did an about-face on the naďve dictator based on false premises after 9/11. Here's former president Barack Obama shaking Moammar Gaddafi's hand in 2009 . I wonder what became of Mr. Gaddafi?

It's beyond parody to hear someone like Bush sternly opine that there's "pretty clear evidence" Russia meddled in the 2016 election. Even if that were deeply significant in the way some argue, Bush should be the last person anyone is hearing from about it. It's all good, though: remember when Bush laughed about how there hadn't been weapons of mass destruction in Iraq at the White House Correspondents Dinner in 2004? It's all just a joke; don't you get it? (Maybe Saddam Hussein had already used all the chemical weapons the U.S. helped him get during the 1980s on Iran in the Iran-Iraq War, which killed over one million people by the time the coalition of the willing came knocking in 2003). That's the kind of thing people like Bush like to indirectly joke about in the company of self-satisfied press ghouls at celebratory dinners. However, when the mean man Mr. Trump pals around with Russian baddie Vladimir Putin, mistreats women, or spews out unkind rhetoric about "shitholes," it's far from a joke: it's time to get out your two-eared pink hat and hit the streets chanting in righteous outrage.

To be fair, Trump is worthy of opposition. An ignorant, reactive egotist who needs to have his unfounded suppositions and inaccuracies constantly validated by a sycophantic staff of people who'd be rejected even for a reality show version of the White House, he really is an unstable excuse for a leader and an inveterate misogynist and all the other things. Trump isn't exactly Bible Belt material despite his stamp of approval from Jerry Falwell Jr. and crew; in fact he hasn't even succeeded in getting rid of the Johnson Amendment and allowing churches to get more involved in politics, one of his few concrete promises to Christian conservatives. He's also a big red button of a disaster in almost every other area as commander-in-chief.

Trump's first military action as president reportedly killed numerous innocent women and children (some unnamed U.S. officials claim some of the women were militants) as well as a Navy SEAL. Helicopter gunships strafed a Yemeni village for over an hour in what Trump called a "highly successful" operation against al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). A senior military official felt differently, saying that "almost everything went wrong." The raid even killed eight-year-old American girl Nawar al-Awlaki, daughter of previously killed extremist leader Anwar al-Awlaki, whose other innocent child, 16-year-old Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, was also droned while eating outdoors at a restaurant in 2010 (with several friends and his 17-year-old cousin). The Obama administration dismissed Abdulrahman's death at the time as no big deal .

The list goes on with the Trump administration, a hollow outfit of Goldman Sachs operatives and detached industry and financier billionaires helping out their hedge fund friends and throwing a small table scrap to the peasants every now and then. As deformed babies are born in Flint, Michigan , Ivanka grandstands about paid parental leave . Meanwhile, Trump and Co. work to expand the war in Afghanistan and Syria. It's a sad state of affairs.

So who are the right voices to oppose the mango man-child and his cadre of doddering dullards? Not degenerate celebrities, dirty politicians of the past, or special interest groups that try to fit everyone into a narrow electoral box so mainline Democrats can pass their own version of corporate welfare and run wars with more sensitive rhetoric and politically correct messaging. Instead, the effective dissidents of the future will be people of various beliefs, but especially the pro-family and faith-driven, who are just as opposed to what came before Trump as they are to him. The future of a meaningful political alternative to the underlying liberalism, materialism, and me-first individualism on the left and right will revolve around traditionalists and pro-family conservative individuals who define their own destinies instead of letting themselves be engineered into destinies manufactured by multinational corporations and boardroom gremlins with diversity outreach strategies. It's possible, for example, to be socially conservative, pro-worker, pro-environment, and anti-war. In fact, that is the norm in most countries that exist outside the false political paradigm pushed in America.

If enough suburbanite centrists who take a break from Dancing With The Stars are convinced that Trump is bad because George W. Bush and Madeleine Albright say so, it shows that these people have learned absolutely nothing from Trump or the process that led to him. These kind of resistors are the people nodding their heads emphatically as they read Eliot Cohen talk about why he and his friends can't stomach the evil stench of Trump or Robert Kagan whine about fascism in The Washington Post. Here's a warning to good people who may not have been following politics closely prior to Trump: don't get taken in by these charlatans. Don't listen to those who burned your town down as they pitch you the contract to rebuild it. You can oppose both the leaders of the "Resistance" and Trump. In fact, it is your moral duty to do so. This is the End of the End of History As We Know It, but there isn't going to be an REM song or Will Smith punching an alien in the face to help everyone through it.

Here's a thought for those finding themselves enthusiastic about the Resistance and horrified by Trump: maybe, just maybe , the water was already starting to boil before you cried out in pain and alarm.

Paul Brian is a freelance journalist. He has reported for BBC, Reuters, and Foreign Policy, and contributed to the Week, The Federalist, and others. He covered the fledgling U.S. alt-right at a 2014 conference in Hungary as well as the 2015 New Hampshire primary, and also made a documentary about his time living in the Republic of Georgia in 2012. You can follow him on Twitter @paulrbrian or visit his website www.paulrbrian.com .

Fran Macadam February 16, 2018 at 1:14 pm

Trump is definitely a castor oil antidote. But if not him, then them.
Frank , says: February 16, 2018 at 1:19 pm
Now this is TAC material!
Kent , says: February 16, 2018 at 1:48 pm
"The future of a meaningful political alternative to the underlying liberalism, materialism, and me-first individualism on the left and right will revolve around traditionalists and pro-family conservative individuals who define their own destinies instead of letting themselves be engineered into destinies manufactured by multinational corporations and boardroom gremlins with diversity outreach strategies."

They will have to lose their faith in "Free Market God" first. I don't believe that will happen.

Aaron Paolozzi , says: February 16, 2018 at 2:56 pm
I enjoyed the heat. The comments made are on point, and this is pretty much what my standard response to reactionary trump dissidents are. Trump is terrible, but so is what came before him, he is just easier to dislike.

Keep it coming.

One Guy , says: February 16, 2018 at 3:16 pm
Even with inadequate opposition, Trump has managed to be the most unpopular president after one year, ever. I'm guessing this speaks to his unique talent of messing things up.
RVA , says: February 16, 2018 at 4:11 pm
Wow! Paul! Babylon burning. Preach it, brother! Takes me back to my teenage years, Ramparts 1968, as another corrupt infrastructure caught fire and burned down. TAC is amazing, the only place to find this in true form.

Either we are history remembering fossils soon gone, or the next financial crash – now inevitable with passage of tax reform (redo of 2001- the rich got their money out, now full speed off the cliff), will bring down this whole mass of absolute corruption. What do you think will happen when Trump is faced with a true crisis? They're selling off the floorboards. What can remain standing?

And elsewhere in the world, who, in their right mind, would help us? Good riddance to truly dangerous pathology. The world would truly become safer with the USA decommissioned, and then restored, through honest travail, to humility, and humanity.

You are right. Be with small town, front porch, family and neighborhood goodness, and dodge the crashing embers.

The Flying Burrito Brothers: 'On the thirty-first floor a gold plated door
Won't keep out the Lord's burning rain '

God Bless.

Donald , says: February 16, 2018 at 5:50 pm
I agree with Frank. This was great.

The depressing thing to me is how hard it is to get people to see this. You have people who still think Trump is doing a great job and on the other side people who admire the warmongering Resistance and think Hillary's vast experience in foreign policy was one of her strengths, rather than one of the main reasons to be disgusted by her. Between the two categories I think you have the majority of American voters.

[Feb 16, 2018] The Deep Staters care first and foremost about themselves.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Putin is evil, Putin kills, Putin steals, bla bla bla!!! Putin is only guilty for not being America's vassal. The Russia bashing in MSM will cease by miracle if it becomes America's client state. Putin and Russia are presumed guilty of everything bad that happens in the world. ..."
"... No evidence is needed, high confidence is enough!! It is almost funny that a country like USA which has a long records of meedling and intervention in others countries internal affairs worlwide, now is losing reason about alleged russia meedling. ..."
Feb 16, 2018 | nationalinterest.org

andrewp111 Guest , February 13, 2018 7:21 AM

For a very simple reason. The Deep Staters care first and foremost about themselves. They wanted Hillary to win, badly, but were not willing to risk too much for her. James Comey in particular cares about James Comey. Remember, this is a guy who views himself as a historical Religious Figure. He wanted to be able to serve out a full 10 year term. He wanted to please his Democratic masters enough to avoid being fired by either Obama or Clinton, but not too much to gain excessive ire from Congress. He was afraid that a Republican Congress under a future Clinton Administration would go after him tooth and nail if he "concealed" new evidence against Clinton prior to the election - especially since he promised the Congress that he would inform them of new developments. And Comey probably feared the worst as to what was in Wiener's email archive. When they finally went through that archive, and failed to find much that was new, he must have breathed a sigh of relief - only to see the wrong person win the election.

Tracy Crawford , February 13, 2018 8:21 PM

The political system in the US is a near complete failure. On one hand the massive levels of corruption legalized in Citizen's United give influence over political decisions to wealthy elites previously unseen outside of the deeply corrupted and criminal Russian oligarchy. On the other hand and synergistic with the previous point, the least informed and most easily influenced of people have votes equal in weight to highly informed, well-educated, expert and professional practitioners.

Rights guaranteed by a difficult-to-alter constitution combined with easily managed and easily created social media content based on opaque sources of emotionally charged, unverified and unverifiable information have gained control over public opinion (making alteration of our constitution even more difficult.)

And look at the fourth (Reagan, Bush, Bush, Trump) wave of Republican explosion of national debt under the banner of "fiscal responsibility."

It is astounding how "A" can be so successfully marketed as "B."

I am afraid that once control of public opinion has been so successfully attained in our form of democracy/legalized-corruption that there is no way to recover.

It is a sad state of affairs. I'd love to hear solutions.

Kurt Gayle , February 13, 2018 2:03 PM

An excellent description of the recent activities of the Deep State, Mr. Merry.

Thank you.

The trolls will now come after you full-bore.

WillDippel , February 12, 2018 9:08 PM

As shown in this article, Washington is completely ignoring the one issue of its own making that could create global chaos:

https://viableopposition.bl...

Washington's anti-Russia program is simply a distraction from its real problems.

Anti-Empire , February 14, 2018 12:48 PM

Great piece by Merry. Not new, but worthy of repetition when presented clearly like this.
It does not matter what you call it, Deep State or something else. What Merry says about the threat it poses to what remnants of democracy we have is true.
I prefer to call it the Imperial State since its highest priority is the US Empire, with domestic well-being simply an afterthought or of no cosequence at all.

Jamie , February 14, 2018 12:12 PM

"Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you,"

- Cryin' Chuck Schumer

Steve JimmyD , February 14, 2018 1:29 PM

There is only ONE country that consistently "messes" in the politics of nearly every other country on the planet and that is not Russia.

It is the USA Deep State. I challenge you to research the evidence, "hidden in plain sight", of these examples:

1) US money that flowed into France and Italy elections after WW2;

2) overthrow of Greece elected pres in 1974 by US-friendly generals;

3) overthrow of Salvadore Allende in Chile 1973;

4) overthrow of Iran Mossadegh in 1953;

5) overthrow of neutral govt in Indonesia in early '60s;

6) the massive money that flowed into Russia in 1996 to get Yeltsin re-elected;

7) the money and attention US put into overthrowing legally elected govt in Ukraine in 2014.

That is just a VERY short list.

NO OTHER COUNTRY ON EARTH HAS MAINTAINED THIS FRANTIC PACE OF MASSIVE INTERVENTIONS/MEDDLING/BRIBING/OVERTHROWING/BOMBING/INVADING/DEATH-SQUADing FOREIGN POLITICAL SYSTEMS FOR 70 YEARS LIKE YOUR "GOOD OLE USA", powered by it's un-elected Deep State.

kelly bako JimmyD , February 13, 2018 7:27 PM

Putin is evil, Putin kills, Putin steals, bla bla bla!!! Putin is only guilty for not being America's vassal. The Russia bashing in MSM will cease by miracle if it becomes America's client state. Putin and Russia are presumed guilty of everything bad that happens in the world.

No evidence is needed, high confidence is enough!! It is almost funny that a country like USA which has a long records of meedling and intervention in others countries internal affairs worlwide, now is losing reason about alleged russia meedling.

A troll, from Saint Petersburg.

Tracy Crawford kelly bako , February 13, 2018 10:50 PM

You're right, Kelly, about some of your points. Evil: check. Kill: check. Steal: check. Co-opting the largest per capita criminal network in the world: check.

kelly bako Tracy Crawford , February 14, 2018 2:01 AM

He forced Americans to vote trump to undermine your democracy : check

[Feb 16, 2018] The indictment includes charges not yet proven in a court of law, yet prominent Americans are treating the indictment as fact

Notable quotes:
"... People read these accusational headlines, probably just the headlines, and it acts as a virus and penetrates the membrane of the collective subconscious, without even a moments thought to question the assertion. In time, the virus breaks down the will of the rational consumer to weigh evidence fairly, though it is also aided by further bombardment of fake news, which increases the rate of infection. ..."
Feb 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
stonebird , Feb 16, 2018 3:49:41 PM | 39
francis @37

One of the best bits about the indictment is the mention ;"arranging for a Real US person to stand in front of the White House in the district of Colombia with a sign that read; "Happy 55th birthday dear boss" (May 29, in 2016)" America must have trembled. (or maybe they were shaking with laughter?).

NemesisCalling , Feb 16, 2018 4:14:31 PM | 40
People read these accusational headlines, probably just the headlines, and it acts as a virus and penetrates the membrane of the collective subconscious, without even a moments thought to question the assertion. In time, the virus breaks down the will of the rational consumer to weigh evidence fairly, though it is also aided by further bombardment of fake news, which increases the rate of infection.

The virus then blossoms into a fairly beautiful and uniform flower with clean, geometric edges and universal appeal which catches the gaze of others and so is able to double the rate of infection from this secondary source.

This flower, the Ruskiesdidittous, is the result of haphazard propogation, though its ability to survive and thrive is notable due to a carrier population already enfeebled by a diet of Dr. Pepper and a lack of discernible vegetables.

I tremble for my countrymen.

Don Bacon | Feb 16, 2018 4:25:01 PM | 41

...adding to the remarks in #40...

The indictment includes charges not yet proven in a court of law, yet prominent Americans are treating the indictment as fact. from CNN:

>House Speaker Paul Ryan called the Russians' alleged actions "a conspiracy to subvert the process, and take aim at democracy itself." "We have known that Russians meddled in the election, but these indictments detail the extent of the subterfuge," Ryan said in a statement.

>Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement that given the indictments, Trump should "immediately" implement the Russia sanctions that Congress passed last summer to punish Moscow for its election meddling. "The administration needs to be far more vigilant in protecting the 2018 elections, and alert the American public any time the Russians attempt to interfere," Schumer said.

>House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said in a statement that the indictments "make absolutely clear" that Russians tried to influence the presidential election to support Trump's campaign and continue to try to interfere with our elections. "We are on the eve of the 2018 midterm elections," the statement added. "There is no time to waste to defend the integrity of our elections and our democracy."

>Robby Mook, Clinton's former campaign manager, tweeted: "The intelligence community has repeatedly told us Russia meddled. Now criminal indictments from DOJ. We were attacked by a foreign adversary. Will our Congress and President stand strong and take action? Or let it happen again?"

karlof1 | Feb 16, 2018 5:04:57 PM | 42

My rebuttal of Pelosi's statement @41--

There has never been any "integrity" in US elections, nor is there such a thing as "democracy" within the USA.

IMO, Congresscritters have never before looked and acted so damn stupid -- clearly they are merely mutts being led by a leash and told to bray at a moon called Russia.

The Outlaw US Empire totally lacks integrity and clearly isn't a democracy; it is merely another of history's failed empires destroyed by its own hubris; it really needs to gouge its eyes out and wander in the forest until it dies.

[Feb 15, 2018] More Sanctions Please IOC Crusade on Russia Has Reinvigorated Its Fans, Athletes and Patriotism

When Western intelligence agencies ventured into sport like MI6 did with football federation, sports ands and dirty political games start. Not the professional sport is not corrupt to the core. It is. But it is universally corrupt, with the USA probably the most dirty country.
Feb 15, 2018 | russia-insider.com

[Feb 15, 2018] Mattis is probably mentally ill. He'll gleefully kill millions more. I really can not see what Tillerson and Mattis have to offer Turkey other than threats.

Feb 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mattis is probably mentally ill. He'll gleefully kill millions more.

The terrorists are mentally ill. They would kill millions if they could.

Implacable.

Thus, the reason for the rise of Russia and the influence and respect for Putin. Russians will kill terrorists but embrace Islamic people who want peaceful cooperation.

Peace is a long way off. The Hegemon abhors Peace and has the means and ideology to create chaos, death and destruction anywhere on the globe.

The American economic system depends on MIC expenditures, debt, waste, corruption, and fiscal abuse.

Nothing much will change until multi-polar economic forces come into dominance and coerce the American changes. Those are a long way off, also, though a few of those forces are coming into view.

Posted by: Red Ryder | Feb 12, 2018 12:21:31 PM | 2

ConfusedPundit , Feb 12, 2018 1:33:01 PM | 4

Mattis is coming to Turkey soon.

Pentagon statement today: 550 million dolar, 2018 budget, for PKK.
(Meaning: You can defeat terrorism, but you can't you beat our purse!)

There is a massive propaganda campaing targeting Turkey in the past 2-3 days. It's coming from international sources. BBC, AFP etc.

This is the main theme

"Turks, beware of Russia, Syria and Iran! They are your enemy. Israel is your friend! The USA is a superpower, obey!"

I believe nobody, no muslim targets America or ordinary American people for that mater! So any incident should be received as provocation.
Those who pull the strings in the USA, behind the doors, maybe under risk though.

IMHO

jsn , Feb 12, 2018 1:55:10 PM | 7
Mattis/Pentagon just doing business development for the MIC
nonsense factory , Feb 12, 2018 11:39:44 PM | 32
@colin 3, Yes, I used to try to update the wikipedia page on the TAPI pipeline and while some things remained on the site, most of it was edited away. Anything to do with Exxon, Chevron, US military actions along the pipeline route, Hillary Clinton's cheerleading for the project during the Obama era, actions taken by the US State Department in summer 2001 (pre 9-11) aimed at pressuring the Taliban into signing off on the deal (in exchange for handing over bin Laden, etc.) all gone. Not worth the bother; you're up against PR firms with full-time staff devoted to sanitizing everything.

@4 CP, the corporate media PR stream, it's something I can't even watch anymore (I follow it with Google News search just to see what the headlines are, but it's basically predictable content so that's enough). Here and there across the web there are some honest discussions though:
https://thewire.in/219467/russia-turkey-iran-triangle-economic-interests-paramount/

I really can't see what Tillerson and Mattis have to offer Turkey other than threats.

xaderp , Feb 13, 2018 3:47:05 AM | 35
I think you are reading Mattis's comments wrong.

The moment the USA pulls its troops out of the middle east, a bomb will go off at Times Square .

john , Feb 13, 2018 6:07:37 AM | 43
Yeah, Right says:

"If America Wasn't America, The United States Would Be Bombing It".
Damn, that's funny

yeah, i just read the article , and while the title is indeed humorous, the content is decidedly not. but it's a good synopsis of the unprecedented amount of death and destruction wrought on this undeserving planet by the US of Argh.

ConfusedPundit , Feb 13, 2018 12:12:09 PM | 49
What's this man talking about? US led NATO has been terrorising another member, Turkey.
By means of 3 Proxies: PKK, ISIS, Gulenists.

It's a misconception that the Turks and Americans want a war.
However, both Americans and Turks do want a war against the Neocons!

Perhaps it's time for a false flag nuke at Times Sq or Taksim Sq or Tiananmen Sq or Trafalgar Sq.

Eric Neoconman the chief provocator.

Turkey Is Out of Control.Time for the U.S. to Say So

Partisan , Feb 14, 2018 5:57:41 AM | 72
The West and in particular Amerikkans constantly use the Circular Argument in its public relation and propaganda statements. That kind of attitude works with an allies, nominal or otherwise, in the cases where sovereignty/national interest is threatened that kind of deception is treated just like that, deception.
Unfortunately Tayyip has been used as client state for long time, from Libya to Syria where he experienced sudden awakening.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/02/erdogan-slams-support-kurdish-ypg-fighters-180214070010174.html


The US has reiterated that it has no plans to withdraw its forces from Manbij.

Paul Funk, the commander of US forces in Syria and Iraq, made a recent visit to Manbij and said that the US and its partners in Syria would hit back if attacked.

"You hit us, we will respond aggressively. We will defend ourselves," Funk said.

Erdogan took aim at that, saying: "It is obvious that those, who say they will 'give a sharp response' if they were hit, have not been hit by the Ottoman slap."

He, he, he....that would be something to see.

[Feb 15, 2018] The US Has Just The structure of Russian neoliberal fifth column

Notable quotes:
"... Atlantic Integrationists ..."
"... Eurasian Sovereignists ..."
"... What can we do? ..."
"... very approximate translation ..."
"... if your enemy slaps you in your face, you have to immediately slap him back lest you look weak ..."
"... if your enemy slaps you in the face you step back and plan how to bring him down in the long run because what matters is not the short-lived posturing, which can be even dangerous and counter-productive, but playing the long run and winning ..."
"... good luck to the Americans trying get anything major done on the planet without our support ..."
"... the Russian spy chief behind 2016 election hacking campaign ..."
"... you need us a heck of a lot more than we need you because you need to work with us or else you won't get anything done, we are still willing to work with you, but if you go crazy then your global interests will suffer much more than our ours; for all your hot air, you have been working with us all along and if you go overboard with the nonsense we will first reveal the extend of our collaboration and, if that is not enough to cool you down, we will terminate it ..."
"... what is the Russian share of the gross world product, how many aircraft carriers does Russia have and what is the Russian weight in international financial institutions? And how is your vodka-soaked Ruble doing anyway, buddy?! ..."
"... when is the last time you got anything successfully done, you dumb pompous ass ..."
Feb 15, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Two things are noteworthy: first, this list completely ignores one of the most important realities of Russian politics: that the real, dangerous, opposition to Putin is not from the people (who support him at anywhere between 60% to 80%+) or from the Russian media (which, while often critical, does not represent a real threat to him) or even the Duma (whose opposition parties are critical of the Kremlin, but who are very careful about criticizing Putin himself lest they lose support from the people) . For years now I have been explaining that the real opposition to Putin is a) inside the ruling elites, including the Presidential Administration and the Government and b) big money: banks, oligarchs, etc.

I call this (informal) opposition the " Atlantic Integrationists " because what these pro-western globalists want is for the AngloZionist Empire to accept Russia as an equal partner and to have Russia fully integrate the US-controlled international financial and security structures: WTO, NATO, EU, G7/8, etc. Very roughly speaking you could them of them as the "Medvedev people" (but you could also say that the Ministers in charge of the Russian economy all fall into this category, as do almost all the heads of Russian banks).

Eurasian Sovereignists ". These are the folks who see the future of Russia in the South, East and even North, who want to pull Russia out of the AngloZionist international financial and security structures and who want a truly sovereign Russia to contribute to a new truly multi-polar world in collaboration with countries like China or the other BRICS countries. Very roughly you could call these people the "Putin people" (but you could also say that figures such as Ivanov, Rogozin, Shoigu and a few others are key personalities).

This is important because the this list of (potentially sanctioned) people makes absolutely no distinctions between these two groups. Check out this article on RT entitled " Major Russian bank will no longer service defense industry over US sanctions fears ". It quotes the Alfa Bank CEO Mikhail Fridman whose net worth is estimated at $16.2 billion by Forbes, as saying that the magazine that Alfa-Bank was cutting ties with the Russia's defense industry, adding, " What can we do? ". Now look at the list, Appendix II, entry #23. Do you see who is there? Yup, the very same Mikhail Fridman!

Now let me add this: in the current political climate in Russia, to have bank accounts in the West is considered shameful and unpatriotic and that is something which even most dishonest and hypocritical Eurasian Sovereignists can hardly afford for political reasons (that does not mean that some don't try, they do, but at a great political risk). In contrast, among Atlantic Integrationists, whose power and influence does not depend on public opinion, having assets abroad is much less dangerous and, therefore, much more common.

Now that the the US Treasury has released this "list of marked individuals" (and their families, relatives or associated corporate entities) for potential, unspecified, future sanction, who do you think will freak out most, the Eurasian Sovereignists or the Atlantic Integrationists? Then look a step further and forget about the US for a second: Russia is trying hard to work with the Europeans in many join projects. What do you think the creation of such a list will have on joint ventures between EU and Russian businessmen? I predict two things:

  1. It will place a great deal of pressure on EU corporations not to do business when the Russians and, therefore, it will further place the EU and the US on a collision course.
  2. It will hurt the Atlantic Integrationists were it hurts them the most: in their financial interests.

Frankly, if I was paid to think long and hard about how to come up with the dumbest and most self-defeating foreign policy decision for the USA I could never do better than what the Trump Administration and Congress have just done. This is, by the way, something which all Russian analysts agree with. What they don't agree with are the reasons for that seemingly completely and terminally stupid move. Here are the various schools of thought in Russia on that account:

Group One: "the slap in the face of Russia":

They believe that the sole intention was to insult and humiliate Russia by basically declaring that all the top Russian people are gangsters. According to them, there ain't much the US can do to Russia other than to continue a petty war of insults and harassment (like the expulsion of Russian diplomats and the seizure of Russian consular buildings in the USA).

Group Two: "it's all internal US politics":

That groups says that this has nothing to do with Russia at all. According to them, the US economy is doing well under Trump, the Democrats have nothing to use against him so all they do is continue to hammer the "Russian threat" fairytale to which Trump responds with deliberately ineffective and totally symbolic actions which make it look like he is anti-Russian when in reality he is quietly sabotaging the Democrats' attempts at truly worsening relations with Russia and preventing the Democrats from playing the "Russian threat" card against Trump.

Group Three: "Трамп Наш" (Тrump is ours):

Some even go as far as saying that this list is most damaging to the people opposed to Putin and that it gives him a pretext to fire them all after the Presidential elections in Russia. Far from considering Trump a bumbling idiot, this group sees him as a consummate politician who is actually creating the circumstances to really hurt his (real) enemies and help his (real) friends.

Group Four: "Наших бьют!" (Our people are under attack!):

This is the group which doesn't care at all why the US is doing this or that, no matter how clumsy. All they care about is that this is yet another attack on "our people" (meaning Russian individuals or corporate entities) and that means that Russians should "circle the wagons" and come to the rescue of those thus attacked. This group most vociferously demands retaliatory steps from the Kremlin. They are a vocal minority.

Group Five: "Филькина Грамота" (Botched document produced by clueless idiots [ very approximate translation !]) This is the group which basically says that it is all much more simple and no complex explanations are needed: the Trump Administration and Congress is composed of clueless idiots who have no idea what the hell they are doing and who just like to produce some policy decisions just to look like they still matter in world where they really don't. Putin himself seems to be in this last group as he officially called this latest US document " complete stupidity ".

Frankly, in my experience the decision making process in the USA is almost never the result of a efforts of single actor. In fact, US political decisions are the "sum vector" of the effect of many different vectors acting together to produce a sum vector which sometimes looks nonsensical but which is still the logical result from the joint effect of all the vectors which determined it. In other words, all the explanations above could be right, albeit to various degrees. This being said, I strongly favor the last one as, like Putin, I have come to the conclusion that the Empire is run by stupid, ignorant ideologues who live in a world totally detached from reality.

What is absolutely certain is that this latest move by the USA is, again, a dream come true for Putin and his supporters, especially right before the elections.

First and foremost, this is clearly an attack on "our guy" and even on "all of us" and this triggers a very strong reaction of support from the people. Furthermore, it separates all Russians into basically two camps: first, Putin supporters and, second, those who are so totally sold out to the USA (like Ksenia Sobchak) that they would even hand back Crimea just in order to be friends with the West. The first group must roughly include, oh, let's say 95%-98% of the population, the 2nd one about 2%-5%.

Second, it is now clear that every Russian oligarch (along with his family members and colleagues) has a big bullseye painted on his back and that he now should hurry to place his assets in the only location were the Empire cannot seize them: inside Russia.

To sum it all up: the latest move is a true blessing for Putin and Russia in both economic and political terms and the only ones really hurt by all this are the Atlantic Sovereignists (who are really going through some very bad times anyway).

The paradox: US sanctions – a blessing in disguise?

Let's think about what the USA has been doing over the past couple of years. Officially, the USA has been trying to "isolate" Russia. But isolate from exactly what? From Peru? Or maybe from cultural exchanges with Morocco? Hardly. When the USA says that it wants to isolate Russia it means cut Russia off the western markets (trade), the western financial system (credit) and the western political elites (fora).

These sanctions were supposed to hurt Russia precisely because Russia was, at least in part, dependent on trade with the EU, credits from western financial institution and her participation in G8 (now G7) type of events.

Putin predicted that it would take 2 years for Russia to recover from these sanctions (and the concomitant drop in energy prices) and he was right: Russia not only created new trade ties, but also finally began investing in her internal market, she found credits elsewhere (China) and in terms of fora, it really turned out that the G7 without Russia was more or less like the Council of Europe or, for that matter, the UN Security Council: useless. Instead, world leaders began booking flight and visiting Moscow.

Now the latest US sanctions are putting an immense amount of pressure on Russian oligarchs to bring their money back home. It sure looks to me that US sanctions made it possible for Putin to do something he might never have been able to do without them: to seriously begin reforming Russia (which badly needed such reforms). Remember, Eurasian Sovereignists are just that – sovereignists; whereas Atlantic Integrationists are just that – integrationists. By "cutting off Russia from the West" – whose agenda did the USA really hurt, the integrationists or the sovereignists? Could it be that Putin owes his immense popularity, and Russia her success, at least in part to US sanctions?

The fundamental theory of deterrence hold that "deterrence is in the eye of the beholder". In other words, I cannot assume that what would deter me would also deter you. In order to deter you I need to understand what your goals and values are. I submit that when the US elites decided to sanction Russia (putatively to deter her from further resisting the Empire) they made a fundamentally wrong assumption: that Russia was ruled by Atlantic Integrationist types who would be horrified and deterred.

Instead, these sanctions ended being a blessing for the Eurasian Sovereignists who used these sanctions to paralyze the Atlantic Sovereignists, to push through much needed reforms and basically eliminate the pro-Western opposition. In so many ways Russia is still a mess and a struggling country, but thanks to US sanctions none of that will have any impact at all on the next Presidential elections in Russia and the Eurasian Sovereignists are more powerful than ever before. Thank you, Uncle Shmuel!

Possible Russian reactions:

Whatever the reasons for all this nonsense, this does beg some kind of reaction from Russia and I think that judging by all the similar situation in the recent past, the Russian reaction is fairly easy to predict.

First, there will be no grandiose gesture or loud hyperbolic statements out of the Kremlin. Putin jokingly deplored that his own name was no on the list, Peskov said that this was a hostile act, a few Russian Duma members canceled planned trip to the USA and Russian commentators expressed various degrees of dismay and disgust. But, all in all, this is very, very little.

As usual, this will be completely misunderstood in the West where the culture is roughly " if your enemy slaps you in your face, you have to immediately slap him back lest you look weak ". In most of Asia (and the Middle-East, by the way), the norm is totally different: " if your enemy slaps you in the face you step back and plan how to bring him down in the long run because what matters is not the short-lived posturing, which can be even dangerous and counter-productive, but playing the long run and winning ".

You could say that in the West the attention span and long-term planning is counted in days or weeks, while in Asia and the Middle-East it is counted in years and decades. So while there might not be anything particularly photogenic or quote-worthy coming out of the Kremlin, a few Russians did drop hints of what the Russian policy will be: " good luck to the Americans trying get anything major done on the planet without our support ".

And just to make that point clear to those who can connect the dots, the Russian ambassador to the U.S., Anatoly Antonov, speaking on the Russian TV channel Rossiya One, declared that the Director of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR), Sergei Naryshkin, recently traveled to the USA and met with some high level US personalities (including, according to US sources , CIA Director Mike Pompeo).

As Newsweek wrote , Naryshkin would be " the Russian spy chief behind 2016 election hacking campaign " which various nutcases even called an act of war. He is on the very top of all these sanctions list, but there he is, traveling inside the USA and meeting with top US officials.

Why did Antonov leak this? Simply to show that for all the huffing and puffing and hyperbolic grandstanding from the USA, the reality is that the USA and Russia are still very much working together because they really cannot afford not doing so (as I write these words I got a link to a WaPo article now saying that Alexander Bortnikov, the head of the Federal Security Service (FSB) and even Colonel-General Korobov, the head of the Main Directorate of the General Stuff (GU GSh), the military intelligence service (ex-GRU) also took part in this trip to the USA.)

So that is the real Russian message to the USA: you need us a heck of a lot more than we need you because you need to work with us or else you won't get anything done, we are still willing to work with you, but if you go crazy then your global interests will suffer much more than our ours; for all your hot air, you have been working with us all along and if you go overboard with the nonsense we will first reveal the extend of our collaboration and, if that is not enough to cool you down, we will terminate it .

There is no doubt in my mind that for most inhabitants of the AngloZionist Empire the notion of the almighty USA needing the struggling (and economically comparatively small) Russia more than Russia needs the USA is laughable. These folks would say something like that: " what is the Russian share of the gross world product, how many aircraft carriers does Russia have and what is the Russian weight in international financial institutions? And how is your vodka-soaked Ruble doing anyway, buddy?! "

The Russians wouldn't reply much of anything, most would just smile in contempt and think something along the lines of " when is the last time you got anything successfully done, you dumb pompous ass ". That's fundamentally fine since this message is really not destined to ideological drones but to those in power in the USA who are aware of the real scorecard of Uncle Sam and who realize that right now it is the Empire, not Russia, which is almost completely paralyzed, and isolated (oh irony!) on all levels.

Conclusion one: the Empire's main export is hot air

Many of my friends and readers send me various articles with all sorts of quotes by US officials and I have a really hard time explaining to them that they should stop listening to this endless bombastic verbiage. Not only because the vast majority of officials making these statements are both stupid and ignorant, but because the main export of the AngloZionist Empire nowadays is hot air.

We saw that recently with the grand statements about Kurdistan or, for that matter, the plans "A", "B", "C" and "D" about Syria: all delivered with the same final gravitas. This is counter-intuitive, I will admit that.

After all, when the President of the nuclear superpower, a three star general or any other senior official takes the floor to make an official statement, we automatically tend to assume that what they say matters, especially if they are surrounded by flags and many exited reporters. But it really doesn't. Especially not when the "other guy" (the Russians and the Chinese) come from a culture which frowns upon loudmouthed histrionics: "make my day, punk" is just not an (Eur-)Asian way of delivering threats.

I don't mean to suggest that we should ignore the Empire, most definitely not, but we should look at what the Empire actually does and more or less ignore it's constantly running narcissistic commentary. When the Empire promises to do something right, it usually lies. When it promises to do something wrong, these are usually empty threats. So what's the point of paying so much attention to these promises?

Conclusion two: learning optimism and caution from history

If we look at world history we can always see the same phenomenon taking place: when things to well, the elites are united, but as soon as things go south, the elites turn on each other. The reason for this is quite simple: elites are never as united as they pretend to be.

In reality Empires, and any big country, really, are run by a coalition of elites who all benefit from the established order. They can hate each other, sometimes even kill each other (SA vs SS, Trotskyists vs Stalinists, etc.), but they will work together just like crime families do in the mob. But when a real, profound, crisis becomes undeniably apparent, these ruling elites typically turn on each other and when that happens, nobody is really in charge until, eventually, the entire system comes tumbling down or a new main ruler/group emerges.

Right now the AngloZionists elites are locked into a huge struggle which is likely to last for the foreseeable future. However, we need to be aware that such a situation can also be used be a previously less visible party to make a move and seize power. That is exactly how Putin came to power, pushed by the Russian security services even while Eltsin was still the nominal head of state.

This also fully applies to the Ukraine which is also run by a group of people whose main current contribution to the world scene is hot air. But that could change very, very fast. This is why while I recommend more or less ignoring the hot air coming out of the top US (or Ukie) officials, I would keep an attentive eye on the level right below them, especially the US (or Ukie) military.

Finally, we should never confuse the inability to get anything done with the inability to make things worse: the latter does not flow from the former. Nazi Germany was basically defeated in Stalingrad (Feb 1943) but that did not prevent it from murdering millions more people for another two and a half years before two Soviet soldiers placed the Soviet flag on top of the Reichstag. We are still far away from such a "Reichstag flag" moment, but we sure are witnessing the AngloZionist "Stalingrad" taking place before our eyes.

[Feb 15, 2018] Russia In the Crosshairs by Paul Craig Roberts

that would be nice if the state capable to put the USA in place exists. But such state does not exist and we need to be content with this fact. The period of wnjoying "sole superpower" status which started in 1991 with the dissolution of the USSR will not end probably until we run out of cheap oil. Russia currently is way too weak to confront the USA and NATO allies in Syria. So she needs to suffer, while trying to preserve gains of Assad government.
I think Russia realizes that Washington is not a rational government with which diplomacy can be practiced, peace pursued, and agreements reached.
As the author stated earlier : " With the public in its pocket, the military/security complex will increase its reckless provocations of Russia until we are all dead."
Notable quotes:
"... Eric Zuesse notes that only Syria and Russia complain about Washington's illegal occupation of Syrian territory, an occupation that has no UN authorization and is a complete and total violation of international law, and Israel's continual attacks on Syria. ..."
"... Zuesse also notes that Washington and its UK puppet block all UN action against Washington's illegality. http://rinf.com/alt-news/editorials/u-s-not-globally-condemned-military-occupation-syria/ ..."
"... But the question is, when will Russia learn, if ever, that facts and law make no difference whatsoever to Washington? Washington's interest is in its hegemony over the world and in Israel's hegemony in the Middle East. ..."
"... Lendman makes the point that "As long as Russia maintains the myth of partnership with Washington instead of giving Washington a taste of its own medicine . . . conflict will likely continue escalating." https://www.globalresearch.ca/russia-blasts-us-attack-on-syrian-and-allied-forces/5628740 ..."
"... Either Russia is unsure of its power or Putin is prevented from using Russia's power by the treasonous Atlanticist Integrationists who constitute Washington's Fifth Column inside the Russian government and economy. It is a mystery why Putin tolerates a small handful of traitors who have minimal public support while the West and Israel become daily more aggressive against Russian national interests. ..."
"... Putin sensibly avoids escalating a situation, but one gets the impression that there are constraints on Putin's ability to stand up to Washington. The Saker identifies the problem as the pro-Washington "Atlanticist Integrationists" who for personal career reasons, personal business reasons, and because they are supported by Washington-financed NGOs and media inside Russia, have sold out Russian sovereignty to globalism. ..."
"... This entire conflict, primed to grow in intensity, could have been stopped by Putin acknowledging the same overwhelming majority vote as occured in Crimea and reincorporating the provinces in Russia. The nazi government of Ukraine even with Washington and EU's support is not so completely insane that it would attack Russia and expect to continue to exist. ..."
Feb 15, 2018 | www.unz.com

Defending the latest round of US/Israeli aggression against Syria, US State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert struck a Hitlerian note when she blamed Syria and Iran for an act of overt Israeli aggression, saying "The United States . . . strongly supports Israel's sovereign right to defend itself," and when she lied that "Iran's malign activities" and "calculated escalation of threat and its ambition to project its power and dominance places all people in the region at risk." https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201802111061547754-state-department-syria-israel-escalation/

Adolf Hitler covered his "projection of power and dominance" and his invasion of Poland with the same blatant lies that Washington and Israel use to cover their aggressions. Hitler claimed that Polish forces had crossed the frontier and attacked Germany. That is the excuse used by Israel and its puppets in the White House and Pentagon that blames Iran for Israel's attack on Syria. When Washington and Israel are shameless in their lies, why does Russia think they are "partners" with whom agreements can be reached?

Eric Zuesse notes that only Syria and Russia complain about Washington's illegal occupation of Syrian territory, an occupation that has no UN authorization and is a complete and total violation of international law, and Israel's continual attacks on Syria. Washington's continuing support for war against the legitimate government of Syria and support for Israeli and terrorist attacks on Syrian and Russian forces are undermining Russia's efforts to bring peace to the region. Zuesse also notes that Washington and its UK puppet block all UN action against Washington's illegality. http://rinf.com/alt-news/editorials/u-s-not-globally-condemned-military-occupation-syria/

Zuesse is correct. But is the continuation of Washington's campaign against Syria and Russia largely the fault of Russia? Stephen Lendman makes a case that it is Russia's fault. https://www.globalresearch.ca/russia-blasts-us-attack-on-syrian-and-allied-forces/5628740

Why? It appears to be the case that the Russian government is so anxious for Western approval that it ends its successful military campaigns before the job is finished. It was Putin himself who declared "victory" in Syria and withdrew some of the Russian military before clearing all of Syria of foreign and jihadist occupation, thus leaving in place US beachheads for renewing the conflict.

It couldn't have taken more than two more weeks for Russia and Syria to liberate all of Syria from the US backed jihadists, but apparently Russia was afraid to annoy Washington that much and to risk contact with US personnel, even though Russia is in Syria legally under international law and the US is present illegally.

Again trusting to international law, the UN, and "our Western partners," Russia quit prematurely. As Lendman says, the complaints by Zakharova, Lavrov, Russian Defense Ministry spokesmen, and Putin himself are based in absolute fact. But the question is, when will Russia learn, if ever, that facts and law make no difference whatsoever to Washington? Washington's interest is in its hegemony over the world and in Israel's hegemony in the Middle East.

Lendman makes the point that "As long as Russia maintains the myth of partnership with Washington instead of giving Washington a taste of its own medicine . . . conflict will likely continue escalating." https://www.globalresearch.ca/russia-blasts-us-attack-on-syrian-and-allied-forces/5628740

Lendman might be correct judging by the reported heavy Israeli attacks on Syria on February 10 after Syrian air defences damaged Israel's image of invincibility by shooting down one of Israel's US-supplied war planes that was attacking Syria and reports that the conflict might be escalating and involving Iran. RT reports that the Kremlin is worried that the de-escalation zones are threatened and that Putin got on the telephone with Netanyahu urging restraint.

All of my life US presidents have been urging restraint on Israel to no effect whatsoever. Putin's urges will have no more effect, unless Putin takes the card from Lendman's playbook and tells the war criminal Netanyahu who heads the illegal Israeli state, which is based on land stolen at bayonet point from Palestinians, that any more of this and Russia will take Israel out. Lendman thinks that no other way of talking to the crazed zionist state, or to Washington, will have any effect, and history seems to be on Lendman's side. http://stephenlendman.org/2018/02/syrian-air-defense-downs-israeli-f-16/ and http://stephenlendman.org/2018/02/israel-escalates-aggression-syria/

Either Russia is unsure of its power or Putin is prevented from using Russia's power by the treasonous Atlanticist Integrationists who constitute Washington's Fifth Column inside the Russian government and economy. It is a mystery why Putin tolerates a small handful of traitors who have minimal public support while the West and Israel become daily more aggressive against Russian national interests.

Putin sensibly avoids escalating a situation, but one gets the impression that there are constraints on Putin's ability to stand up to Washington. The Saker identifies the problem as the pro-Washington "Atlanticist Integrationists" who for personal career reasons, personal business reasons, and because they are supported by Washington-financed NGOs and media inside Russia, have sold out Russian sovereignty to globalism. Putin, apparently, is unwilling or unable to move aside those who serve as Washington's check on Russian nationalism, which prevents any real Russian victory. If the "Atlanticist Integrationists" inside Putin's government are able to block more decisive responses, the question arises: how powerful, really, is Putin? Did Putin win Syria only to lose it to Washington and the Israelis? How can we imagine Putin, the head of a powerful state, on the telephone pleading with an Israeli war criminal who heads a tiny state? We know that Israel owns Washington, but does Israel own Russia also?

How many times did Putin announce victory in Syria, pull out, and then have to go back after Washington's forces had recuperated? Why does Putin refuse the reincorporation of the breakaway Russian provinces in Ukraine? He allowed Crimea back in because of the Russian naval base, but he has refused the Russian provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk. Consequently, the Russian people in these provinces continue to be subject to attack, and Washington has now armed its Ukrainian nazi state with weapons to reconquer the breakaway republics.

This entire conflict, primed to grow in intensity, could have been stopped by Putin acknowledging the same overwhelming majority vote as occured in Crimea and reincorporating the provinces in Russia. The nazi government of Ukraine even with Washington and EU's support is not so completely insane that it would attack Russia and expect to continue to exist.

Putin can entirely end the Ukrainian conflict by accepting the former Russian provinces back into Russia. We can understand that Putin might be thinking long term, as were the Soviet leaders who put Russian populations into Ukraine, to balance the Ukrainian state with Russian populations so that the West cannot completely turn Ukraine, a historic part of Russia herself, into a completely hostile state against which more military forces must be directed. Clearly Putin is a long term strategic thinker, but Russia's fate and that of the rest of us will be decided in the short run.

We can also understand that Putin, by continuing to stress international law, is trying to bring Europe to the realization that Washington operates outside of and above law. Putin is wasting his time. For decades European leaders have been on Washington's payroll. They don't give a hoot about anything other than their bank balances.

The neoconservatives who rule in Washington believe that Putin's removal will restore Washington's hegemony over the world. They regard China as a country that will accept American leadership in exchange for riches. This is most likely a mistaken view of the Chinese government, but it serves to concentrate the attack on Russia, within whose government Washington has allies.

Can the Russian government successfully withstand Washington without Putin dispensing with the Atlanticist Integrationists?

I understand that the views expressed here might be wrong. Zuesse perhaps is wrong. Lendman is perhaps wrong. The Saker is perhaps wrong. And perhaps I am mistaken in my reading of them. No one should underestimate Putin. Nevertheless, Russia should be aware that she is perceived by neoconservative policymakers as a weak state lacking in courage that Washington, and even tiny Israel, can push around, as Washington has done since the collapse of the Soviet Union and as Israel is doing now in Syria. There is never any cost to Washington of blackening Russia's eyes and Russia's reputation. Russia's passivity is inviting nuclear war or Russian surrender.

Whether or not Russia wants to acknowledge it, Russia is in a fight for her life. There is evidence that top Russian leaders are unaware of this. Sergei Chemezov says that Russia is willing to sell Russia's S-400 anti-aircraft system to Washington so Washington can learn how to defeat it and catch up with Russian military technology. Unless Chemezov is making a joke, there is a problem in his perception of reality. http://www.fort-russ.com/2018/02/head-of-rostech-us-may-buy-russias-s.html

Putin damaged himself with people who have a moral conscience when he met with the criminal-in-chief of the Israeli state and treated Netanyahu as if he were not a war criminal who belonged on the scaffold but a world leader worthy of Russia's recognition. This act of folly deflated Putin's reputation as a leader who stood for moral outcomes and not merely for self-interested, negotiated outcomes.

The world needs a leader. The hopes were on Putin.

The America-worshipping Russian Atlanticist Ingegrationists must have many screws loose to want to be part of degenerate Western civilization:

https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2018/02/08/sarah-silverman-i-want-to-eat-an-aborted-fetus/

https://www.infowars.com/journalist-calls-for-profs-to-drown-conservative-students/

https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_commentary/little_barbies_sex_trafficking_of_young_girls_is_americas_dirty_little?utm_source=The+Rutherford+Institute&utm_campaign=8f8957d1fe-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_02_05&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d7ffde3304-8f8957d1fe-42135461

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/nation-now/2018/02/08/boys-silent-victims-sex-trafficking/1073799001/

[Feb 15, 2018] How The Deep State Stopped Better Relations With Russia by Robert W. Merry

Feb 14, 2018 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

Note: this article is part of a symposium included in the March/April 2018 issue of the National Interest .

OF COURSE there's a Deep State. Why wouldn't there be? Even a cursory understanding of human nature tells us that power corrupts, as Lord Acton put it; that, when power is concentrated and entrenched, it will be abused; that, when it is concentrated and entrenched in secrecy, it will be abused in secret. That's the Deep State.

James Burnham saw it coming. The American philosopher and political theorist (1905–87), first a Trotskyist, then a leading conservative intellectual, wrote in 1941 that the great political development of the age was not the battle between communism and capitalism. Rather, it was the rise of a new "managerial" class gaining dominance in business, finance, organized labor and government. This gathering managerial revolution, as he called it, would be resisted, but it would be impervious to adversarial counteractions. As the managerial elites gained more and more power, exercised often in subtle and stealthy ways, they would exercise that power to embed themselves further into the folds of American society and to protect themselves from those who might want to bust them up.

Nowhere is this managerial elite more entrenched, more powerful and more shrouded in secrecy than in what Dwight Eisenhower called the military-industrial complex, augmented by intelligence and law-enforcement agencies. That's where America's relentless drive for global hegemony meshes with defense manufacturers only too willing to provide the tools of dominance.

Now we have not only a standing army, with hundreds of thousands of troops at the ready, as in Cold War days. We have also permanent wars, nine of them in progress at the moment and not one with what could even remotely be called proper congressional approval. That's how power gets entrenched, how the managerial revolution gains ever greater force and how the Deep State endures.

Few in the general public know what really happened with regard to the allegations of Trump campaign "collusion" with Russia, or how the investigation into those troubling allegations emerged. But we know enough to know we have seen the Deep State in action.

We know that U.S. agencies released an "Intelligence Community Assessment" saying that Russia and President Putin were behind the release of embarrassing Democratic emails in a plot to help Trump win the presidency. But we also know that it wasn't really a National Intelligence Assessment (a term of art denoting a particular process of expansive intelligence analysis) but rather the work of a controlled task force. As Scott Ritter, the former Marine intelligence officer and arms-control official, put it , "This deliberate misrepresentation of the organizational bona fides of the Russia NIA casts a shadow over the viability of the analysis used to underpin the assessments and judgments contained within." Besides, the document was long on assertion and short on evidence. Even the New York Times initially derided the report as lacking any "hard evidence" and amounting "essentially . . . to 'trust us.'"

[Feb 15, 2018] Russophobia a Futile Bid to Conceal US, European Decline by Finian Cunningham

Feb 14, 2018 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

It is an age-old statecraft technique to seek unity within a state by depicting an external enemy or threat. Russia is the bête noire again, as it was during the Cold War years as part of the Soviet Union. But the truth is Western states are challenged by internal problems.

Ironically, by denying their own internal democratic challenges, Western authorities are only hastening their institutional demise.

Russophobia -- "blame it all on Russia" -- is a short-term, futile ploy to stave off the day of reckoning when furious and informed Western citizens will demand democratic restitution for their legitimate grievances.

The dominant "official" narrative, from the US to Europe, is that "malicious" Russia is "sowing division;""eroding democratic institutions;" and "undermining public trust" in systems of governance, credibility of established political parties, and the news media.

This narrative has shifted up a gear since the election of Donald Trump to the White House in 2016, with accusations that the Kremlin somehow ran "influence operations" to help get him into office. This outlandish yarn defies common sense. It is also running out of thread to keep spinning.

Paradoxically, even though President Trump has rightly rebuffed such dubious claims of "Russiagate" interference as "fake news" , he has at other times undermined himself by subscribing to the notion that Moscow is projecting a campaign of "subversion against the US and its European allies." See for example the National Security Strategy he signed off in December.

Pathetically, it's become indoctrinated belief among the Western political class that "devious Russians" are out to "collapse" Western democracies by "weaponizing disinformation" and spreading "fake news" through Russia-based news outlets like RT and Sputnik.

Totalitarian-like, there seems no room for intelligent dissent among political or media figures.

British Prime Minister Theresa May has chimed in to accuse Moscow of "sowing division;" Dutch state intelligence claim Russia destabilized the US presidential election; the European Union commissioner for security, Sir Julian King, casually lampoons Russian news media as "Kremlin-orchestrated disinformation" to destabilize the 28-nation bloc; CIA chief Mike Pompeo recently warned that Russia is stepping up its efforts to tarnish the Congressional mid-term elections later this year.

On and on goes the narrative that Western states are essentially victims of a nefarious Russian assault to bring about collapse.

A particularly instructive presentation of this trope was given in a recent commentary by Texan Republican Representative Will Hurd. In his piece headlined, "Russia is our adversary" , he claims: "Russia is eroding our democracy by exploiting the nation's divisions. To save it, Americans need to begin working together."

Congressman Hurd asserts: "Russia has one simple goal: to erode trust in our democratic institutions. It has weaponized disinformation to achieve this goal for decades in Eastern and Central Europe; in 2016, Western Europe and America were aggressively targeted as well."

Lamentably, all these claims above are made with scant, or no, verifiable evidence. It is simply a Big Lie technique of relentless repetition transforming itself into "fact" .

It's instructive to follow Congressman Hurd's thought-process a bit further.

He contends: "When the public loses trust in the media, the Russians are winning. When the press is hyper-critical of Congress the Russians are winning. When Congress and the general public disagree the Russians are winning. When there is friction between Congress and the executive branch [the president] resulting in further erosion of trust in our democratic institutions, the Russians are winning."

As a putative solution, Representative Hurd calls for "a national counter-disinformation strategy" against Russian "influence operations" , adding, "Americans must stop contributing to a corrosive political environment".

The latter is a chilling advocacy of uniformity tantamount to a police state whereby any dissent or criticism is a "thought-crime."

It is, however, such anti-democratic and paranoid thinking by Western politicians -- aided and abetted by dutiful media -- that is killing democracy from within, not some supposed foreign enemy.

There is evidently a foreboding sense of demise in authority and legitimacy among Western states, even if the real cause for the demise is ignored or denied. Systems of governance, politicians of all stripes, and institutions like the established media and intelligence services are increasingly held in contempt and distrust by the public.

Whose fault is that loss of political and moral authority? Western governments and institutions need to take a look in the mirror.

The endless, criminal wars that the US and its European NATO allies have been waging across the planet over the past two decades is one cogent reason why the public has lost faith in grandiose official claims about respecting democracy and international law.

The US and European media have shown reprehensible dereliction of duty to inform the public accurately about their governments' warmongering intrigues. Take the example of Syria. When does the average Western citizen ever read in the corporate Western media about how the US and its NATO allies have covertly ransacked that country through weaponizing terrorist proxies?

How then can properly informed citizens be expected to have respect for such criminal government policies and the complicit news media covering up for their crimes?

Western public disaffection with governments, politicians and media surely stems also from the grotesque gulf in social inequality and poverty among citizens from slavish adherence to economic policies that enrich the wealthy while consigning the vast majority to unrelenting austerity.

The destabilizing impact on societies from oppressive economic conditions is a far more plausible cause for grievance than outlandish claims made by the political class about alleged "Russian interference".

Yet the Western media indulge this fantastical "Russiagate" escapism instead of campaigning on real social problems facing ordinary citizens. No wonder such media are then viewed with disdain and distrust. Adding insult to injury, these media want the public to believe Russia is the enemy?

Instead of acknowledging and addressing real threats to citizens: economic insecurity, eroding education and health services, lost career opportunities for future generations, the looming dangers of ecological adversity, wars prompted by Western governments trashing international and diplomacy, and so on -- the Western public is insultingly plied with corny tales of Russia's "malign influence" and "assault on democracy."

Just think of the disproportionate amount of media attention and public resources wasted on the Russiagate scandal over the past year. And now gradually emerging is the real scandal that the American FBI probably colluded with the Obama administration to corrupt the democratic process against Trump.

Again, is there any wonder the public has sheer contempt and distrust for "authorities" that have been lying through their teeth and playing them for fools?

The collapsing state of Western democracies has got nothing to do with Russia. The Russophobia of blaming Russia for the demise of Western institutions is an attempt at scapegoating for the very real problems facing governments and institutions like the news media. Those problems are inherent and wholly owned by these governments owing to chronic anti-democratic functioning, as well as systematic violation of international law in their pursuit of criminal wars and other subterfuges for regime-change objectives.

Finian Cunningham has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. He is a Master's graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. He is also a musician and songwriter. For nearly 20 years, he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organisations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent.

This article was originally published by " RT "

Cathi · 4 hours ago

Anyone who believes MSM is totally indoctrinated since it has been proven over and over that they won't tell the truth of the matter. The only REAL thing this country supplies or produces is war. Most other industries have been outsourced and given subsidies to so, thus taking American jobs from our lives. And now they want to take Social Security and Medicare to PAY for our military buildup????
Jim P · 3 hours ago
This nation needs a complete chage. All Congress and Dual citizens must be removed!
vicenr · 4 hours ago
It is without a doubt true that the political class and their oligharchic owners are falling and falling fast. They need a war to sustain their enrichment and attempted control of the world. They have run out of potential victims , while on the home front the naive Amrikan is starting to reject their nonsense. They can't really afford to take on China as they could easily dump their US treasuries and sink the financing arrangements for a war. They would like to stop the OBOR ; but how? Ah Russia. Smaller population but lethal in central Europe and perhaps beyond. Good geographic position for cutting OBOR. After all why would anyone be allowed to put in such a mega project and not let the US oligharchic class control it?
Woopy · 3 hours ago
A big part of the problem with Washington DC is that they are ruled by the Rothschild oligarchs and function first and foremost for Rothschild interests such as Israel and other Rothschild programs. Washington is not focused on the states it was designed to serve. Rothschild's and other oligarchs, fascists and the like control Washington crippling them. Countries like China, Russia are making their own destinies while Washington languishes and dissolves under a Rothschild fascist flag.
the_chump · 3 hours ago
"Intel chief: Federal debt poses 'dire threat' to national security"

The above was the title to an article in The Hill, yesterday. The comment was attributed to Dan Coates, DNI in testimony to Congress. To me, since elected officials CREATE the federal debt, what the DNI is REALLY saying is that the elected officials are a dire threat to national security. Their spending and fake borrowing from the Federal Reserve is the threat-not Syria, Yemen, or other countries that have not attacked the US. The elected officials, both Democrat and Republicans are on the way to destroying the US. Not Russia, China, ISIS, or international terrorism.

Eric · 2 hours ago
I recently read a horrifying commentary by John Whitehead on the burgeoning sex trade in this country where young girls are abducted and sold for sexual favors to deviants in every major city in the US. Many of these girls are as young a three and four years old, and the average age of these victims is 13! Thousands of missing children end up as sex slaves and are forced to be with as many as 40 men a night.

This great evil has become extremely lucrative, and numerous monsters, both men, and women are reaping billions of dollars from the unspeakable crime of destroying children's lives, not only physically, but mentally and spiritually as well.

The West has reached a new level of rottenness. Moral decay is actively gnawing at the very fabric of our society. The Cabal and its rampant criminality in Washington is a reflection of this terrible decline we are witnessing around us.

The hypocritical cry and hue from our government officials about the terrible human rights abuses in other countries as they seek to deflect the attention away from their own criminality and murderous abuses at home and abroad is indeed sickening.

Ray Joseph Cormier 84p · 1 hour ago
UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold was killed in a suspicious plane crash in 1961. He dared speak Truth to the Power. His quote from over 60 years ago is so relevant to what is going on Today. It has spread like never before to affect the judgments of the Politicians, the news media, and the Public.

-The Assembly has witnessed over the last weeks how historical truth is established; once an allegation has been repeated a few times, it is no longer an allegation, it is an established fact, even if no evidence has been brought out in order to support it.

American propaganda is scapegoating Russia to absolve Americans of responsibility for creating their own political divisions.

Observing from CanaDa, this anti-Russia/Putin Propaganda is confirming this Vision of the Future published 41 years ago.

On September 13, 1976, the major daily THE KANSAS CITY TIMES published this Vision of the FUTURE: "He came to town for the Republican National Convention and will stay until the election in November TO DO GOD'S BIDDING: To tell the world, from Kansas City, this country has been found wanting and its days are numbered [...] He gestured toward a gleaming church dome. "The gold dome is the symbol of Babylon," he said." [...] He wanted to bring to the Public's attention an "idea being put out subtly and deceptively" by the government that we have to get prepared for a war with Russia.

It's taken over 40 years, but that 1976 FUTURE is NOW with the Revelation of the details GENERALLY unfolding in the spirit of the letter. The World is finally waking up to see Trump just may hasten "its days are numbered" part of the 1976 Public record.

Ray Joseph Cormier 84p · 1 hour ago
The KANSAS CITY TIMES did a follow up report on ALL SOULS DAY, November 2, 1976. When the TV movie 'THE DAY AFTER' Kansas City was incinerated in a Nuclear Holocaust appeared in 1983, most likely, I was the only Human on Earth, including the newspaper reporters, to note at the END, the movie pauses at the very same picture frame THE KANSAS CITY TIMES chose for the ALL SOULS DAY record 7 years earlier.

Any way you look at it, that HISTORICAL FACT is a confirming SIGN for our Generations, the World has arrived at this point of Decision, of an "idea being put out subtly and deceptively" by the government that we have to get prepared for a war with Russia."
Multitudes! Multitudes in the Valley of Decision. The Day of the LORD IS NEAR in the Valley of Decision.

Not many will recognize, "this country has been found wanting and its days are numbered" as the 1st two parts, of the 3 part 'Writing on the Wall" from Daniel 5 and the Captivity of Babylon some 2600 years ago. The whole world saw The Writing on the Wall for the 1st TIME at the same TIME, with the Global Financial Meltdown-Economic Pearl Harbour in September of 2008, even if the world does not recognize it as such.

The 3rd part of the Writing on the Wall tells of the decline of Babylon, the 1st Biblical model of the Nation that reaches Imperial Military-Economic Superpower Status, and the rise of Persia

Ancient Babylon is now Iraq, and ancient Persia is now Iran.

The US is the latest, greatest of all the Nations reaching Imperial Military-Economic Superpower Status in the 2600 year old Biblical Babylonian superstructure.

The TAIL struck the HEAD, causing the unravelling of the Earthly Babylonian superstructure and infrastructure, ushering in the Law of the Jungle to the Middle East and this World.

The Iranian Revolution happened in 1979, 2-1/2 years after the record in the 1976 KANSAS CITY TIMES Timeline.

All the chaos in the Middle East since then, including the carnage in Syria, is the consequence of the vain attempt to reverse that God ordained, repeat of History, as a SIGN for our Generations.
http://ray032.com/2013/09/01/signs-of-the-times/

refirex · 55 minutes ago
https://warsclerotic.com/2017/01/07/cartoons-and-...
Take Placid · 43 minutes ago
Bulldoze them Georgia Guidestones.
Erase that Denver Airport Artwork.
Send Lady Liberty back to France.
Neandertals, behaving badly.
Stars and Stripes gilded cheap pennant should be changed to Skull n Bones.
Guest99 · 5 minutes ago
What the U.S. political and Deep State accused of Russia today is exactly what they themselves have done to much of the world. Entire Wikipedia is not big enough to write about the dirty tricks of the CIA and NSA.

Russia of course has no need to do what was accused. But they are surely laughing at being accused. Indeed, keep the accusation coming. The more the accusations, the longer they last, the more sure Russia know the corrupt terror empires of the west are going down.

Without firing a single shot. Now isn't that funny? Just ask the Chinese!

[Feb 15, 2018] Dutch FM Admits Lying About Putin - Russia

Feb 15, 2018 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

February 14, 2018 " Information Clearing House " - Every empire needs a scary external threat, led by a singular menacing villain, to justify its massive military expenditures, consolidation of authoritarian powers, and endless wars. For the five decades after the end of World War II, Moscow played this role perfectly. But the fall of Soviet Union meant, at least for a while, that the Kremlin could no longer sustain sufficient fear levels. After some brief, largely unsuccessful auditions for possible replacements -- Asian actors like China and a splurging Japan were considered -- the post-9/11 era elevated a cast of Muslim understudies to the starring role: Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, ISIS and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and "jihadism" generally kept fear alive.

The lack of any 9/11-type catastrophic attack on U.S. (or any Western) soil for the past 17 years, along with the killing of a pitifully aged, ailing bin Laden and the erosion of ISIS, has severely compromised their ongoing viability as major bad guys. So now -- just as a film studio revitalizes a once-successful super-villain franchise for a new generation of moviegoers -- we're back to the Russians occupying center stage.

That Barack Obama spent eight years (including up through his final year-end news conference) mocking the notion that Russia posed a serious threat to the U.S. given their size and capabilities, and that he even tried repeatedly to accommodate and partner with Russian President Vladimir Putin, is of no concern: In the internet age, "2016" is regarded as ancient history, drowned out by an endless array of new threats pinned by a united media on the Russkie Plague. Moreover, human nature craves a belief in an existential foreign threat because it confers a sense of purpose and cause, strengthens tribal unity and identity, permits scapegoating, shifts blame for maladies from internal to external causes, and (like religion) offers a simplifying theory for understanding a complex world.

One of the prime accusations sustaining this script is that the Kremlin is drowning the West in "fake news" and other forms of propaganda. One can debate its impact and magnitude, but disinformation campaigns are something the U.S., Russia, and countless other nations have done to one another for centuries, and there is convincing evidence that Russia does this sort of thing now. But evidence of one threat does not mean that all claimed threats are real, nor does it mean that that tactic is exclusively wielded by one side.

Over the past year, there have been numerous claims made by Western intelligence agencies, mindlessly accepted as true in the Western press, that have turned out to be baseless, if not deliberate scams. Just today, it was revealed that Dutch Foreign Minister Halbe Zijlstra lied when he claimed he was at a meeting with Putin, in which the Russian president "said he considered Belarus, Ukraine and the Baltic states as part of a 'Greater Russia.'"

"Fake news" is certainly something to worry about when it emanates from foreign adversaries, but it is at least as concerning and threatening, if not more so, when emanating from one's own governments and media. And there are countless, highly significant examples beyond today's of such propaganda that emanates from within.

... ... ...

If there's any lesson that should unite everyone in the West, it's that the greatest skepticism is required when it comes to government and media claims about the nature of foreign threats. If we're going to rejuvenate a Cold War, or submit to greater military spending and government powers in the name of stopping alleged Russian aggression, we should at least ensure that the information on which those campaigns succeed are grounded in fact. Even a casual review of the propaganda spewing forth from Western power centers over the last year leaves little doubt that the exact opposite is happening.

This article was originally published by " The Intercept "

Zeesso 101p · 4 hours ago

Russia accusations are a false flag!!-No evidence-Zero NADA!!
Rather than Russia how about Mossad false flags??!
More likely .............and the silence is deafening.......... at theZionist owned MSMs in the USA!!!!
Dollars to Doughnuts-Israel is the perpetrator
Invictus · 2 hours ago
I suppose I am too naive to understand the
hysteria and indignation that claims of Russia
Interference in the 2016 american electoral process garners.
The US openly calls for regime change in Syria. Hung Saddam
Hussein after a show trial. Arranged Muammar Gaddafi's sodomization
and assassination.
Do americans not realize that in levelling the accusation that Putin-Russia
successfully subverted the US electoral process that you are conceding that Russia has the power to subjugate (bring under domination or control, especially by conquest.) the US electoral process, its government, institutions and public perception.
If americans are going to continue to make this outlandish claim for which no evidence has yet to be produced then Putin's Russia must be recognized as the world hegemon and the indispensable- Exceptional nation. What does that do to the narrative of the "shining city set upon a hill".
The US is blinded by its own conceit.
fudmier · 1 hour ago
Frankly, what I have seen in the past 20 years, the people in San Francisco might be better off under Russian federation management than it has been under the selected, elected, salaried, privileged 527 USA neo clowns who manage Americans in America. At least the Russians might not give USA money to foreigners, prevent Americans from drilling their own gas and oil, tax Americans so the USA can give the tax revenues to the corporations, and send American jobs and educational knowledge to far away places; as the NEO CLOWN management has done.

My personal experience with Russia people with whom I have worked is they are just exactly like Americans, quite a bit better educated, may be a little more honest.. so the question becomes under which managing government would 340,000,000 Americans be better off: the Russian Federation or the 527 neocon-selected, media-elected, salaried, privileged USA neo clowns? Actually, i think both governments are in need of being better arranged to respond to the needs and intentions of their people instead of using those they govern to satisfy the Oligarchs.

beanhead001 102p · 1 hour ago
"9/11-type catastrophic attack on U.S." a self-inflicted "catastrophic attack". Perhaps the USI should quit murdering people at home and abroad... maybe that way some semblence of symathy could be mustered up.
Oh and the "shooter" in Florida.. notuce it's not a "terrorist"? So this kid was a "shooter". Pfft. Call it what it is. He was and is a terrorist. Treat him as one would treat the invented funded and propped up "terrorists" abroad. Send the kid to 'Gitmo' (how i loathe that americanized word)

[Feb 14, 2018] I hope the Russians are aware of the utter ruthlessness of certain western countries, the US in particular.

Feb 14, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

harrylaw , Feb 14, 2018 6:34:07 AM | 74

I hope the Russians are aware of the utter ruthlessness of certain western countries, the US in particular. They are so determined to have regime change in Syria that they will lie and cheat to achieve that end, probably culminating in direct military attacks on Syrian forces west of the Euphrates on some phoney pretext or another.

Because Putin is aware of US aims it is beyond foolish to withdraw Russian forces as they have done in the past, in the vain hope that the US will reciprocate, the US do not behave like that, they see any withdrawal as a sign of weakness and exploit it. Make no mistake the US are in this for keeps, anyone who thinks otherwise will be killed just like those Russian contractors last week and the hundreds of Syrian troops killed because they posed a "so called threat" to deconfliction zones.

If the West can supply hundred's of billions worth of arms to the most repressive nations on earth [Saudi Arabia and Co, then surely the Russians should supply s400 anti aircraft missiles to the Syrians who are under threat of a military assault from the West in the event of a successful false flag chemical weapons attack by the Wests proxies[which they are working on now] If not, why not?

[Feb 14, 2018] Mattis is probably mentally ill. He'll gleefully kill millions more.

Feb 14, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mattis is probably mentally ill. He'll gleefully kill millions more.

The terrorists are mentally ill. They would kill millions if they could.

Implacable.

Thus, the reason for the rise of Russia and the influence and respect for Putin. Russians will kill terrorists but embrace Islamic people who want peaceful cooperation.

Peace is a long way off. The Hegemon abhors Peace and has the means and ideology to create chaos, death and destruction anywhere on the globe.

The American economic system depends on MIC expenditures, debt, waste, corruption, and fiscal abuse.

Nothing much will change until multi-polar economic forces come into dominance and coerce the American changes. Those are a long way off, also, though a few of those forces are coming into view.

Posted by: Red Ryder | Feb 12, 2018 12:21:31 PM | 2

[Feb 14, 2018] UKRAINE'S NADRA YUZIVSKA AND SHELL ENTERED INTO SHALE GAS PRODUCTION PSA

Jan 24, 2013 | oilmarket-magazine.com

A production sharing agreement (PSA) between Royal Dutch Shell and Ukraine's Nadra Yuzivska for the development of Yuzivske shale gas deposits located in Ukraine's Kharkiv and Donetsk regions was signed in Davos on 24 January 2013 through the mediation of Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych and Netherlands prime minister Mark Rutte. The agreement was inked by Ukraine's energy and coal industry minister Eduard Stavitsky and Royal Dutch Shell CEO Peter Voser.

Prior to the signing ceremony Yanukovych told journalists that Ukraine would benefit from the agreement since it would allow attracting investments, which Ukraine could use to increase the domestic natural gas production thus creating jobs, raising the level of the country's economy as well as increasing the budget revenues and providing funds for social needs.

On 23 January Ukraine's cabinet of ministers approved a draft PSA between Shell Exploration and Production Ukraine Investments B.V. and Nadra Yuzivska for Yuzivske shale gas field (7,886m2 acreage) development.

Yuzivske field prognostic resources are estimated at 2-4trln m3 of gas, which can be a viable alternative for costly natural gas volumes Ukraine imports form Russia. In the meanwhile US Energy Information Agency (EIA) estimates Ukraine's shale gas potential at 1.2trln m3 in this way making the country's shale gas reserves the 4th largest in Europe after Poland, France and Norway. Totally consuming some 60bn m3 of natural gas annually, Ukraine has to import 40bn m3 of natural gas from Russia priced $430 per 1,000 m3 based on the terms of agreements inked in 2009.

Ukraine's prime minister Mykola Azarov stated earlier that Yuzivske field commercial development over the span of a decade could give Ukraine an additional 8-10bn m3 of gas annually.

As Eduard Stavitsky put it in Davos, Ukraine could possibly meet its domestic natural gas demand in full in about 5 years of shale gas production cooperation with Shell. "According to Shell's optimistic scenario about 20bn m3 of gas could be extracted annually; according to the pessimistic one, at the very least 7-8bn m3. If the top forecasts were fulfilled, we would tackle the gas shortfall problem in Ukraine or might even go into surplus", Stavitsky was quoted as saying. He stated earlier that Shell saw investments under the deal of at least $10bn under the most likely scenario and possibly as much as $50bn.

OILMARKET Info
In May 2012 Shell was chosen the successful bidder for 7,800km2 Yuzivske acreage (Kharkiv and Donetsk regions, Ukraine) development with projected reserves estimated at 4.054trln m3 of gas of various categories. The project calls for raising at least $20mn (UAH1.6bn) in investments for the geological study phase, and $3.75bn (UAH30bn) for the industrial production phase. The agreement envisages stage-by-stage exploration, development and hydrocarbons production. Both companies (Shell and Nadro Yuzivske) will hold a 50% participation stake, with Shell chosen the project operator responsible for carrying out works under the terms of agreement.

According to Shell press service, the mentioned PSA was signed for 50 years period. The initial geological study phase at Yuzivske field implies 2D and 3D seismics as well as 15 well drilling, which is expected to enable effective exploration and assessments of hydrocarbon deposits potential especially that of natural gas trapped in compacted sandstone. Yuzivske field development will be implemented in line with the highest international HSE standards. In this way Shell is to carry out comprehensive possible environmental, social and public health impact assessment of the project prior to launch.

[Feb 14, 2018] Recused Judge in Flynn Prosecution Served on FISA Court

Highly recommended!
Feb 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

Clyde, February 14, 2018 at 11:20 am GMT

@Ozymandias

"It's worth noting that intentionally deceiving a federal judge is a felony."
It's also worth noting that sometimes the judge is in on it.

For the Trump Admin surveillance warrants the FISA judge was probably Contreras. So goes the rumor. He was probably in on it or halfway in on it. All the major players in DC know each other and trade favors.

And Gen Mike Flynn is in the process of getting his case dismissed. The only thing left to determine is how much the Federales will have to reimburse him for his lawyers fees, which are a million plus.

FISA Judge Rudolph Contreras EXPOSED – twitter.com

Rudolph Contreras was the FISA Judge who issued a warrant to spy on Carter Page because of a Yahoo News article and a Phony Probably have already. He needs to go

Recused Judge in Flynn Prosecution Served on FISA Court

https://www.infowars.com/recused-judge-in-flynn-prosecution-served&#8230 ;

Did Judge Contreras OK electronic surveillance of Recused Judge in Flynn Prosecution Served on FISA Court Did Judge Contreras OK electronic surveillance of

Federal FISA Judge Recuses Himself From Michael Flynn Case

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/12/07/federal-fisa-judge&#8230 ;

Blows the whole FISA Court to hell in a hand basket and Judge Contreras is getting the hell out of dodge. This a helluva mess for the FISA Court and it's victims. Rule 5. Authority of the Judges. (b) Referring Matters to Other Judges.

[Feb 14, 2018] MH17 now also comes into a different light, why Russia must be blamed for the catastrophe, and why we still dot not know who did it

Notable quotes:
"... MH17 still has not been solved, in my opinion it never will. The strategy seems to be to continue vague accusations against Russia, though nobody ever explained Russia's interest in destroying a western passenger plane. ..."
"... As Jimmy Carter once said, 'it is unimportant who fires the first shot in a war, the origins of war always go years back'. In the case of Russia, we now know, at least to 2006. ..."
Feb 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

jilles dykstra , February 14, 2018 at 8:02 am GMT

Our Dutch minister of Foreign Affairs, Halbe Zijlstra, just a few months in office, had to admit that he in 2006 lied about being in Putin's country house, where he heard Putin say that White Russia, the Baltic States and Khazakstan 'would be nice to have'. Zijlstra yesterday resigned.

43 out of 150 gave a vote of non confidence against prime minister Rutte, whoa had to admit that he knew about the lie since several weeks.

Zijlstra's excuse as that he wanted to protect someone else, who was there, and heard Putin say these things. This someone else, it was revealed, had been Van der Veer, now former Shell CEO, and now member of the NATO strategic commission.

Alas Van der Veer denied have heard the words, and having told Zijlstra, though 'Putin had made a statement more or less like what Zijlstra lied about'.
Dutch comments are that Shell has considerable interests in Russia.

We now wonder how Zijlstra's lie surfaced after twelve years. He was scheduled to meet Lavrov a few days from now.

My, and many in my country, conclude that there is deliberate Russia, or Putin, bashing. Many already knew this, but never before was it so clear that an important politician with us had to resign.

MH17 still has not been solved, in my opinion it never will. The strategy seems to be to continue vague accusations against Russia, though nobody ever explained Russia's interest in destroying a western passenger plane.

As Jimmy Carter once said, 'it is unimportant who fires the first shot in a war, the origins of war always go years back'. In the case of Russia, we now know, at least to 2006.

jilles dykstra , February 14, 2018 at 4:54 pm GMT

https://www.theautomaticearth.com/2018/02/the-lies-and-the-narrative/

Wrong is that Zijlstra in 2006 worked for Shell, he just was a member of the representatives for the town of Utrecht.Pandora's box went open in yesterday evening Jinek talkshow, Rutte concluded gas deals for E Ukraine for Shell.

MH17 now also comes into a different light, why Russia must be blamed for the catastrophe, and why we still dot not know who did it.

http://oilmarket-magazine.com/eng/shownews.phtml?id=221

[Feb 14, 2018] A Russian Trump by Israel Shamir

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... However, Gru is not a run-of-the-mill communist candidate. A successful manager of an agricultural holding called Lenin Sovkhoz ..."
"... The producers, both industrialists and agriculturalists, want more protectionist measures and cheaper credits, they want to boost the buying power of ordinary Russians, that is increase salaries and pensions. Their fortunes lie with the fortunes of the ordinary Russian workers. They are dissatisfied with President Putin, and even more with his government led by Mr Medvedev ..."
"... Putin has been a good president, and a popular one, but he has his limitations. He still feels obliged to keep the Deal he made with the late President Yeltsin; he still keeps fighting the Soviet memory, he is surrounded by his buddies who roll in cash; he does not support local production except for the weapons industry. While he was good for a long while, there is a feeling that the country is ripe for a changing of the guard. ..."
"... Grudinin's suggestions are anathema to the neo-liberal Kremlin. Putin keeps the doors of Russia wide open for immigration, to the detriment of native workers. If the immigration flow has decreased it is mostly the result of Rouble's depreciation. ..."
"... The Russians paid heavily for their cutting edge achievement, while the European peoples became the main beneficiaries of the October Revolution. They've got all the Russians fought for, for free. Their leaders were afraid their workers would go over to the Communists; and thus the welfare state came into being. ..."
"... Eventually, both branches of the Left forgot their history. The Western Left forgot their victories were due to the Red Army's might, and they proudly preached the new-fangled theories of Euro-Communism. The Russians, always eager to learn a new trick, fell for it, and dismantled the socialist state, sincerely expecting they would live as good as Swedes. The end was gruesome: the Russians were plunged into long years of depopulation and de-industrialisation, while the flagship of the Western left, the huge Euro-Communist parties of France and Italy disappeared. Swedish socialism has almost perished. ..."
"... The cause of socialism was defeated in 1991, no doubt, but it is not the first defeat. In November 1941, when the German troops reached the outskirts of Moscow, it also appeared socialism had been defeated. However, in 1945 socialism rebounded. Since 1991, the winner, Capital, claims its victory is irrevocable and irreversible. It is, they say, the end of history. ..."
"... But victories and defeats can be reversed. The Soviets did not know that. They believed that "the victory of socialism is inevitable because it is progressive." Perhaps in the long run it is inevitable, but it can happen in a thousand years, and meanwhile a nuclear war or biological experiments can exterminate the human race. ..."
"... The most basic ideals of French Republic – democracy, liberty, equality – were defeated by Napoleon, by the Bourbons, by Orleans, but they rebounded. ..."
"... Nothing is inevitable. The Soviet Bolsheviks believed in inevitability – and lost; while their adversaries just fought hard, not giving an inch – and won. Their attitude should be emulated. The people of the West are ready for the real-Left turn. Recent successes of Jeremy Corbyn in England, of Bernie Sanders in the US, of Jean-Luc Mélenchon in France prove it. They are soft, but hard ones will come, too. ..."
"... This is not the beginning of the end of the cruel man-eating neo-liberalism and its Menshevik allies, but this is the end of the beginning in the universal battle for socialism, as Churchill said of the British victory over the Germans at El Alamein. The light at the end of the tunnel is already visible. And then the Russian Communists will again become the beacon for the workers of the world. ..."
Feb 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

Do you remember the terrible onslaught of the mainstream media on presidential candidate Donald Trump in 2016? Dozens of revelations about his fake hair, pussy grabbing, tax avoidance and what not; dozens of public polls proving that the nation wanted Hillary and hated Trump, opinion pieces convincing you that only racist white trash could think of voting for him. They even printed that Time weekly (or was it Newsweek ?) cover with a Madam President ! greeting. And then came the day of counting.

This development comes to my mind as I follow the incessant attacks in the Russian media and social networks on presidential candidate Paul N. Grudinin (usually nicknamed Gru). Russian state-owned TV is supposed, by its charter, to play a neutral role in the election campaign. They did it for a week after his name was entered into the race. In that week's time, Gru's rating skyrocketed and almost reached that of President Putin. This was an unexpected turn of events for the Kremlin, whose political witch-doctors expected Gru to make a modest showing and to improve the doubtful legitimacy of the forthcoming elections.

When they recognised the magnitude of their mistake, they gave a command to their obedient TV channels, and Gru became the target of their daily attacks. Out of eight candidates, Gru is the only one who gets negative coverage. About him, they speak bad or nothing, just like about Trump in the US in his time.

A veteran candidate, the old Nationalist Zhirinovsky gets plenty of time on the TV, for he has only one message, Down with Gru . His wild attacks on Gru are broadcasted in every election campaign program every evening on the TV.

There is a spoiler, a tiny 'Russian Communists' Trotskyite party, whose only purpose in life is to steal votes from the mainstream Communist Party (KPRF). It is a virtual party that disappears after elections to come back to life before new elections. Some innocent souls in the Russian hinterland vote for them being convinced that this is the Communist Party. They are violently anti-Gru, and post like mad in Facebook their denunciations of the not-quite-communist Gru.

However, Gru is not a run-of-the-mill communist candidate. A successful manager of an agricultural holding called Lenin Sovkhoz , he is a good example of Russian industrialists otherwise called 'Red directors', that is managers of Soviet factories and enterprises who adjusted to the new system. They are producers of goods for local consumption, and their interests do not coincide with those of the Putin (or Yeltsin) oligarchs. Those oligarchs made their fortunes by importing consumer goods and exporting raw materials; they are the base of Putin's power.

The producers, both industrialists and agriculturalists, want more protectionist measures and cheaper credits, they want to boost the buying power of ordinary Russians, that is increase salaries and pensions. Their fortunes lie with the fortunes of the ordinary Russian workers. They are dissatisfied with President Putin, and even more with his government led by Mr Medvedev.

Gru became the candidate for a plethora of political organisations from the Left and from the Right; he is supported by Russian Nationalists , though his main alliance is with the KPRF (the mainstream Russian Communist Party). He is a combination of Sanders and Trump, for workers, against immigration, for protective trade barriers and low-cost credits for small producers. A self-made-man of the upper-middle class, not a billionaire, but definitely a wealthy man, he does not scare middle-class Russians who would be afraid to support a real red-in-tooth-and-claw Communist.

Though the official prediction grouop, the Russian Public Opinion Research Center, VTSIOM (ВЦИОМ) claims 70% of electorate will vote for Putin and only 7% for Grudinin, the feeling on the ground is very different. There are a few sites allowing people to express their preference by "voting"; a biggish site of this sort is http://president-rf.ru/ where out of 180,000 voters 60% preferred Gru, and only 30% voted for President Putin. On other sites, Gru gets anything from 30 to 80 per cent of the vote.

It is difficult to predict the result, and it is still over a month until election day, but VTSIOM's assessment appears too low to justify the ferocious campaign against Gru. If he were about to get 6-7%, the top wheeler-dealer, the presidential administration, would not bother and would not activate its troll factories and fake social network accounts to stop Grudinin. It seems that man has a chance to win the battle, that is if the elections are reasonably fair.

Putin has been a good president, and a popular one, but he has his limitations. He still feels obliged to keep the Deal he made with the late President Yeltsin; he still keeps fighting the Soviet memory, he is surrounded by his buddies who roll in cash; he does not support local production except for the weapons industry. While he was good for a long while, there is a feeling that the country is ripe for a changing of the guard.

A teacher in the preparatory school may be wonderful, but sooner or later, the child should move on, to new teachers. Gru is the first man who has excited the Russians since 1996, and he is likely to make a strong bid.

The Russian Left is Different.

Grudinin has the support of the left and of the right; of workers and of managers; of communists and of nationalists. How could this happen? The main reason is that the Russian Left is quite different from the European Left. The Russians are Bolsheviks. The Western Left is predominantly Menshevik.

Historically, the Russian Social Democrats were divided into Bolsheviks, the Majorites, and Mensheviks, the Minorites. The actual argument that divided the Social Democrats into these majority and minority groups is of little importance now and of even less relevance. Nowadays, the Majorites are the Left for the Majority, while Minorites are the Left for Minorities.

The Russian Left is the force for the majority, for the workers, for the natives. The Western Left is for gender, ethnic, religious minorities. If you'd ask a Western worker about the Left, he will probably tell you: the Left is not for us, they care only for gays and migrants who take our jobs.

Mensheviks are (and were) better for Jews, as Jews are the ultimate minority. Bolsheviks accepted Jews as individuals and equals, not as a separate and preferred minority group. Bolsheviks fought against the Bund, the Jewish Social Democrats, while the Mensheviks joined with the Bund.

Stalin observed (and Trotsky quoted that in his book on Stalin):

"the majority of the Menshevik group were Jews. On the other hand, the overwhelming majority of the Bolshevik group were ethnic Russians. In this connection a Bolshevik observed in jest that the Mensheviks constituted a Jewish group while the Bolsheviks constituted a true-Russian group and, therefore, it wouldn't be a bad idea for us Bolsheviks to organise a pogrom in the Party".

While being comradely to Jewish comrades, Stalin effectively de-Jewified the Russian Communist Party by bringing in many ethnic Russian workers and peasants. He treated the Jews as just one of the tribes populating Eurasia, not as the Chosen Ones. This is the sin of Stalin in Jewish eyes, and that is why they condemn him now.

The Jewish influence in the Western Left has survived all these years and even outlived the massive Jewish involvement with the Left. After 1968, the Jews en masse departed to new pastures, but their influence lingered, entrenching the Jewish-friendly Menshevik tendency. They adapted the Western Left to fit their preferences and made it suitable for cohabitation with the elites. Along the way, they had lost their working class support, but they were more interested in keeping with the rulers.

The Jewish-run Mensheviks fit perfectly into the oligarchy. They believe that Anna and Susan Wojicki, the former wife of Sergei ("Google") Brin and her sister, are unhappy discriminated women, unlike welders and auto mechanics, who are white men, the patriarchal lords of the world.

The Bolsheviks struggle for women's equality is exemplified in free kindergartens, and the Mensheviks, in reserved places for women in the directorships of large companies.

Mensheviks are concerned about the rights of transgender people to a urinal of their preference. The Bolsheviks are concerned about the right of workers to work, to a decent wage, to their share of natural resources. You can easily understand what sort of Left is preferred in the eyes of mainstream media and their billionaire owners.

Migrants provide another cause of distinction. The Western working class achieved much during the years of the Cold War, when the Western ruling class had to compete with the Communists for workers' loyalty. Now the rulers are eager to void these achievements – and the easiest way is through population replacement by the massive importation of migrants and refugees. For this purpose, Capital is waging wars in the Middle East and fanning strife in Africa, and they facilitate the refugees' flight to Europe and America.

The Mensheviks, that is the Western Left, support migrants against the indigenous population, in the name of their anti-racism and internationalism. However, for all practical reasons they do the work for their masters, because migrants are easier to manipulate, they help to lower salaries, to undermine the workers' organisations, and to destroy natural solidarity.

The Bolsheviks are against the causes of mass migration, against the use of migrants and refugees to the detriment of the indigenous population. This is the position of the Russian Communists, whose anti-migration rhetoric is so outspoken that even Trumpists would find it too brusque.

Mr Grudinin has a history of anti-immigration demands behind him. He calls for enforcing a visa regime with the Central Asian republics of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kirgizstan, as now their working migrants do not need a Russian visa. He insists that every working migrant should be given the same salary as a native Russian worker, the idea being that in such conditions there will be less demand for migrants' labour. Perhaps it makes sense to hire inexperienced dirt-cheap Tajik migrants, but if for the same price you can hire a qualified Russian worker, you will probably employ the latter.

Grudinin's suggestions are anathema to the neo-liberal Kremlin. Putin keeps the doors of Russia wide open for immigration, to the detriment of native workers. If the immigration flow has decreased it is mostly the result of Rouble's depreciation.

In the West, these ideas of limiting migration belong fully to the realm of the Right, or even the Alt-Right. They are described as "populist", meaning they are popular but disapproved by the ruling elites. The Western Left has been manipulated into an unpopular position, while the popular ('populist') ideas have been transferred to the Right.

In Russia, the Russian Communists did not follow the path of the Mensheviks. They made all sorts of compromises, but they always stayed for the workers. They do not fight for gays, migrants and upper-class feminists. They make allies with the producers and against the rentiers and bankers.

Perhaps the Russian Communists will show the way to their Western comrades as they did a hundred years ago. These two branches of the world Left movement have had a checkered history. In the 19 th century, the new-born Russian revolutionary movement was keen to learn from the West; the Russian Narodniks went on a pilgrimage to visit Marx in London seeking his advice. The Western revolutionaries of that time (including Marx) were as distrustful of Russians as Robert Mueller or John McCain. They thought Russia was so backward and so reactionary that a Russian progressive Left was an impossibility.

And then something unexpected had happened. When the guns of the First World War struck, only the Russian Left, led by Vladimir Lenin, did not lose their heads, but led their country to the victory of socialist revolution. After 1917, for many years the Russian Left was the guiding star for the world Left.

The Russians paid heavily for their cutting edge achievement, while the European peoples became the main beneficiaries of the October Revolution. They've got all the Russians fought for, for free. Their leaders were afraid their workers would go over to the Communists; and thus the welfare state came into being.

Eventually, both branches of the Left forgot their history. The Western Left forgot their victories were due to the Red Army's might, and they proudly preached the new-fangled theories of Euro-Communism. The Russians, always eager to learn a new trick, fell for it, and dismantled the socialist state, sincerely expecting they would live as good as Swedes. The end was gruesome: the Russians were plunged into long years of depopulation and de-industrialisation, while the flagship of the Western left, the huge Euro-Communist parties of France and Italy disappeared. Swedish socialism has almost perished.

Over the years, the Western Left virtually disappeared, and its place was taken by the pseudo-left, who appropriated the name of the historical Left parties. Capital raised in its secret labs this poisonous pseudo-Left, with one supreme goal in mind – to make the very name of communism obnoxious and repelling.

For the Bolsheviks, the Good Ones were workers, they were the salt of the earth. Everyone could join this class by identifying with workers. The Menshevik pseudo-left has offered a shortcut to join the Good Ones: Identity Politics. You are Good if you are discriminated against. If you are black, you suffer discrimination, even if you are an Obama. If you are a woman, you suffer discrimination. If you like BDSM, you are discriminated against. If you are a migrant, you are discriminated against. If you are a Jew, a Soros or a Rothschild, you are still suffer discrimination, for just half a century ago your grandfather was not allowed to join a country club.

For Bolsheviks, discrimination is not the most urgent problem. They are surely against discrimination; but it takes a backseat after the really important question: labour/capital relationship. When the working people win, discrimination will vanish, they say. By keeping the eye on this most important bottom line, the Bolsheviks are the greatest natural enemies of the 1%.

The cause of socialism was defeated in 1991, no doubt, but it is not the first defeat. In November 1941, when the German troops reached the outskirts of Moscow, it also appeared socialism had been defeated. However, in 1945 socialism rebounded. Since 1991, the winner, Capital, claims its victory is irrevocable and irreversible. It is, they say, the end of history.

But victories and defeats can be reversed. The Soviets did not know that. They believed that "the victory of socialism is inevitable because it is progressive." Perhaps in the long run it is inevitable, but it can happen in a thousand years, and meanwhile a nuclear war or biological experiments can exterminate the human race.

The most basic ideals of French Republic – democracy, liberty, equality – were defeated by Napoleon, by the Bourbons, by Orleans, but they rebounded.

Nothing is inevitable. The Soviet Bolsheviks believed in inevitability – and lost; while their adversaries just fought hard, not giving an inch – and won. Their attitude should be emulated. The people of the West are ready for the real-Left turn. Recent successes of Jeremy Corbyn in England, of Bernie Sanders in the US, of Jean-Luc Mélenchon in France prove it. They are soft, but hard ones will come, too.

This is not the beginning of the end of the cruel man-eating neo-liberalism and its Menshevik allies, but this is the end of the beginning in the universal battle for socialism, as Churchill said of the British victory over the Germans at El Alamein. The light at the end of the tunnel is already visible. And then the Russian Communists will again become the beacon for the workers of the world.

Gru's success can change a lot of things. His worldview has many points in common with Donald Trump. In a month' time, we shall know how far this Russian Trump has succeeded in advancing.

Israel Shamir can be reached at [email protected] This article was first published at The Unz Review .

[Feb 12, 2018] The Age of Lunacy: The Doomsday Machine

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The world had a great opportunity in March of 1953 to reverse course rather than this insane military spending that was beginning. On March 5th, 1953, Stalin died. The Soviet leaders reached out to the United States. They offered the Americans an olive branch. They talked about changing the direction of our relations. They talked about, basically, ending the Cold War. We could've ended the Cold War as early as March 5, 1953, taken a different route. Eisenhower and the others in his administration debate what to do, how to respond. Churchill, who was now re-elected and back in office in England, begged the United States to hold a summit with the Soviet leaders and move toward peace, rather than belligerence and hostility. Eisenhower doesn't say anything publicly in response for six weeks. Then he makes a speech. It's a visionary speech. It's the kind of vision that Eisenhower represented at his best, and he says there ..."
"... PRESIDENT EISENHOWER: Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. This is, I repeat, the best way of life to be found on the road the world has been taking. This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron. ..."
"... two days later, John Foster Dulles, Secretary of State, makes a speech reversing the whole thing. Instead of an olive branch, he gives the Soviets a middle finger and he accuses the Soviet Union of trying to overthrow every Democratic government in the world. The exact wrong message. ..."
"... Did Eisenhower speak for it or did Dulles speak for it? Was Eisenhower the militarist or was Dulles the militarist? In many ways, the '50s was a very, very dangerous time. And there were so many harebrained schemes that were going on. ..."
"... The great independent journalist I.F. Stone mentioned that the word for lunar, for moon, in Latin is Luna. And he said, we should have a new department in the cabinet and call it the Department of Lunacy because of the crazy ideas that were being promulgated at the time. ..."
"... Well, the Cuban Missile Crisis is very important because now we're going through the Korean Missile Crisis, and if Trump has his way, we'll also go through the Iranian Missile Crisis. And the last time we were this close to nuclear war was during the Cuban Missile Crisis. What happens there is that Khrushchev, in order to try to accomplish two things, or three things, really. ..."
"... And so, we were planning, we had the plans in place to overthrow the Cuban government, number one. Number two, Khrushchev wanted a credible deterrent. The Americans learned, Kennedy says, "Let's find out what the reality of the Missile Gap is." And he has McNamara do the study. We find out that there is a Missile Gap. By October of '61, we find out that there is a Missile Gap, and it's in our favor. The United States is ahead between 10 to 1 and 100 to 1 over the Soviet Union in every important category. ..."
"... He said, "We would've definitely destroyed Cuba and probably wiped out the Soviet Union as well." So, that's how close we came at this time. Which is again, as Robert Gates, another hawk, warns, "The United States should not invade Syria," he said. "Or should not bomb Syria because haven't we learned anything from Iraq and Afghanistan and Libya, that whenever these things happen, you never know what the consequences are going to be. It's always the unintended consequences that are going to get you." ..."
"... It takes two to tango. The idea that the US is solely to blame for the continuation of the Cold War, or that the US is solely to blame for a revival is Soviet/Russian propaganda. Great powers are aggressive, and rarely circumspect. ..."
"... And given Churchill's anathema toward Communism in general, and the Soviet Union in particular, and given that he was the architect of the Cold War from the West I find the idea of him being a peacenik to be bizarre. ..."
"... They do not appreciate that there are different manifestations of both economic models. (Neoliberalism is eating us alive.) They do not appreciate that communism was probably the salvation of both post-war Russia and China. They conflate socialism with communism, view high taxes as communistic, and ignore that the countries with the highest standard of living are quite socialist. ..."
"... Ike was so right about the Military-Industrial complex, and yet we have only enabled it to grow to the point that it dominates every political decision – every law – every regulation in ways that ensure weapons are expended so more can take their place; and more weapons need to be developed because the boogeyman out there (pick a regime) probably, maybe, could be building an even nastier weapon. Make no mistake, Sputnik was viewed as evidence that the Russians already had better weapons and that they would take over "outer space" and we would thus be at their mercy. Back in the 60s the US did worry that communism was working better than capitalism, and that fear enabled a lot of foreign policy (gunboat diplomacy). ..."
"... Capitalism has fatal flaws, but we should all thank Communism died the way it did. ..."
"... not like capitalism didn't murder a few proletarians if murder is the standard, both are condemned ..."
"... the vast bulk of provocations and exacerbations in that now-reprised Cold War were a pas de deluxe, not mostly driven by our own insane US leaders, like the ones discussed in small detail in the post. Conveniently ignoring the whole escalation process of the Exceptional Empire doing the "policies" of the Dulleses and their clan, the craziness of stuff like the John Birchers and the McCarthy thing, and the madness of MAD (which I believe was a notion coined by that nest of vipers called RAND, that "we have to be understood to be insane enough to commit suicide, to kill the whole planet, for the 'deterrent effect' of Massive Retaliation (forget that the US policy and military structure very seriously intended a first strike on the Evil Soviets for quite a long time, and are now building "small nukes" for 'battlespace use' as if there are no knock-on consequences.) ..."
"... Russia suffered 20 million dead in WW II, pretty much won that war against fascism, and the leaders there get dang little decrepit for being (so far) so much more the "grownups in the room" in the Great Game Of RISK! ™ that our idiot rulers are playing. Go look up how many times, however, beyond that vast set of slapstick plays that led to the "Cuban Missile Crisis", the human part of the world skated up, by combinations of accident and error, to getting its death wish. And the main impetus for the nuclear "standoff" has been the US and the "policies" forwarded by "our" insane rulers and militarists. ..."
"... Guys, I generally treasure the NC comments section, and I am not singling anyone out, but some of the rhetoric here is starting to remind me of ZeroHedge doomp&rn. Let's please recover some perspective. ..."
"... Every year of human history since the expulsion from Eden will let us cherry pick overwhelming evidence that the lunatics were running the asylum. Or that every generation of our forebears gleefully built our civilization atop heaps of skulls of [insert oppressed groups here]. ..."
"... Such faith we have in ourselves, and such little evidence other than maybe a couple of world wars and long histories of the loonies playing stupid with whole populations, that we don't need to worry about the concentrated efforts of the sociopathic lunatics to rise to positions of great power and do stupid stuff. ..."
"... "It's the kind of vision that Eisenhower represented at his best, and he says there" Was he subsequently co-opted, or BSing? ..."
"... But that doesn't help the millions who would die on the peninsula. Further, whats known as a Nuclear Famine could still occur, which would be pretty damn devastating for civilization, even if mankind itself manages to survive. ..."
"... Science is about doubt and skepticism. That's what the scientific process is. Doubt a nuclear winter: Ok, I'll bite. We have examples – Large Volcanic eruptions, and we have the year without a summer sometime in the 1830s I believe – that is in recorded History. The we searched to archeological record for more evidence, and found large die-offs following a layer of volcanic dust. Again and again, I believe. Quoting scientists who "doubt nuclear winter" requires more examination: ..."
"... Humanity might survive as a species but not as an idea. Am about halfway through the Ellsberg book and, yes, it does make Dr. Strangelove look like a documentary. Current thinking does not seem much changed. ..."
"... Something missing from the sequence of events here is that the main reason that the Kremlin put nuclear missiles in Cuba was the fact that more than 100 Jupiter intermediate-range ballistic nuclear missiles were deployed in Italy and Turkey in 1961 by the US, thus cutting down any reaction time by Moscow to minutes in case of a US attack. ..."
"... The main – unacknowledged – part of the climb down from the Cuba missile crisis was that as Russia pulled its nuclear missiles out of Cuba, the US would do the same in Europe. It cooled things down again until Reagan was electe ..."
"... I had forgotten that the 50s had just as many crazies as present times – the Dulles brothers, Curtis LeMay, Edward Teller, J. Edgar Hoover – really scary people and probably founding members of the deep state. ..."
"... The Jupiter missile agreement was a secret at the time. Kennedy wanted to minimize the appearance of a quid-pro-quo. The subsequent presence of Pershings and Tomahawks in Europe (but not Turkey) was a reaction to the mobile IRBMs deployed by the Soviet Union. Which they still have. France and Britain have their own independent deterrents. Which is just as well, since the Pershings and Tomahawks were traded away as part of START/SALT. ..."
"... The more recent escalation of NATO into E Europe, the Baltics and the Ukraine are a definite violation of the spirit of the Cuban Missile Crisis agreement, and are pure aggression against a Russia that was seen as too weak to do anything about it until they did do something about it in 2014. ..."
"... An aggressive NATO is something I view with horror. One does not poke the bear. But Kissinger (the German) and Berzhinski (the Pole) are fanatically anti-Russian. They made up for the passing of Churchill. ..."
"... LeMay had suggested that we should perhaps wipe out the Soviet Union before they had the chance to catch up to us in nukes. It was an era ruled by fear of nuclear war–a fear that was unleashed by the use of the bomb in Japan. Truman and Byrnes (the latter in a meeting in his hometown–my hometown) rejected calls by some of the Los Alamos scientists to share the nuclear secrets with the Russians and forestall this arms race or so they hoped. ..."
"... This isn't accurate. Stalin tried repeatedly and even towards the end, desperately, to sign a treaty with the Britain and France. They rebuffed him because [he was a] Commie. He signed up with Hitler only after those efforts had clearly failed. It was a self-preservation move. It probably did buy him less time than he thought. But let's not kid ourselves: Hitler's first move otherwise would have been to the East. What were later the Allies would have been delighted to see him take over the USSR. This was why British aristos were so keen on Hitler, that he was seen as an answer to Communism and therefore "our kind of man". ..."
"... General LeMay was responsible for the death of a fifth (some say a third) of the North Korean population by saturation bombing with napalm, was he not? A third? Isn't that one in three? ..."
"... Additional books that shed light on both leaving the new deal behind and the Cuban missile crisis are (1) "The Devil's Chessboard" by Talbot and (2) "JFK and The Unspeakable" by Douglass. The first is mostly about Allen Dulles but has interesting chapters on McCarthy, Eisenhower, Nixon, etc. It is reasonably well foot-noted. The second is about the assassination and has loads of detail about the missile crisis and its power players. It is meticulously foot-noted. ..."
Feb 11, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Posted on February 11, 2018 by Jerri-Lynn Scofield

Jerri-Lynn here: Lest anyone be deluded into thinking that the current lunacy of Trump foreign policy is unprededented and ahistoric, part eight of an excellent Real News Network series on Undoing the New Deal reminds us this simply isn't so.

That series more generally discuses who helped unravel the New Deal and why. That was no accident, either. In this installment, historian Peter Kuznick says Eisenhower called for decreased militarization, then Dulles reversed the policy; the Soviets tried to end the cold war after the death of Stalin; crazy schemes involving nuclear weapons and the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba put the world of the eve of destruction.

Three things I've seen recently made me think readers might appreciate this interview. First, I recently finished reading Stephen Kinzer's The Brothers , about the baleful consequences of the control over US foreign policy by Dulles brothers– John Foster and Alan. These continue to reverberate to today. Well worth your time.

Over the hols, I watched Dr. Strangelove again. And I wondered, and this not for the first time: why has the world managed to survive to this day? Seems to me just matter of time before something spirals out of control– and then, that's a wrap.

Queued up on my beside table is Daniel Ellsberg's The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner . Haven't cracked the spine of that yet, so I'll eschew further commentary, except to say that I understand Ellsberg's provides vivid detail about just how close we've already come to annihilation.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/3ejpFDjks9M

PAUL JAY: Welcome to The Real News Network, I'm Paul Jay. We're continuing our series of discussions on the Undoing of the New deal, and we're joined again by Professor Peter Kuznick, who joins us from Washington. Peter is a Professor of History, and Director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University. Thanks for joining us again Peter.

PETER KUZNICK: My pleasure, Paul.

PAUL JAY: So, before we move on to Kennedy, and then we're going to get to Johnson, you wanted to make a comment about Eisenhower, who made a couple of great sounding speeches about reducing military expenditure but I'm not sure how much that actually ever got implemented. But talk about this speech in, I guess, it's 1953, is it?

PETER KUZNICK: Yes. The world had a great opportunity in March of 1953 to reverse course rather than this insane military spending that was beginning. On March 5th, 1953, Stalin died. The Soviet leaders reached out to the United States. They offered the Americans an olive branch. They talked about changing the direction of our relations. They talked about, basically, ending the Cold War. We could've ended the Cold War as early as March 5, 1953, taken a different route. Eisenhower and the others in his administration debate what to do, how to respond. Churchill, who was now re-elected and back in office in England, begged the United States to hold a summit with the Soviet leaders and move toward peace, rather than belligerence and hostility. Eisenhower doesn't say anything publicly in response for six weeks. Then he makes a speech. It's a visionary speech. It's the kind of vision that Eisenhower represented at his best, and he says there

PRESIDENT EISENHOWER: Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. This is, I repeat, the best way of life to be found on the road the world has been taking. This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.

PETER KUZNICK: This is not a way of life at all. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.� What a great speech and the Soviets were thrilled. They republished this. They reprinted it. They broadcast it over and over, and then two days later, John Foster Dulles, Secretary of State, makes a speech reversing the whole thing. Instead of an olive branch, he gives the Soviets a middle finger and he accuses the Soviet Union of trying to overthrow every Democratic government in the world. The exact wrong message.

And so, it's sort of like Trump, where Tillerson says something sane and then Trump will undermine it two days later when it comes to North Korea. The same thing happened in 1953 with Eisenhower and Dulles. We're really much more on the same page, but if you look at the third world response, you've got the Bandung Conference in Indonesia in 1955, and the third world leaders are all saying, "We have to be independent. We have to be neutral." They say, "It is insane to spend all these dollars and all these rubles on the military when we need money for development."

PAUL JAY: So, what went on with Eisenhower, making that kind of speech? He's not known for any big increase in social spending domestically. He helps build, as you said, the military industrial complex, especially the nuclear side of it. So, what was that speech about, and then how does he allow Dulles to contradict him two days later?

PETER KUZNICK: That's one of the mysteries. That's why writing books on the debate, what was going on in that administration. Did Eisenhower speak for it or did Dulles speak for it? Was Eisenhower the militarist or was Dulles the militarist? In many ways, the '50s was a very, very dangerous time. And there were so many harebrained schemes that were going on.

We talked a little bit about Sputnik but one of the proposals after that was to blast a hydrogen bomb on the surface of the moon to show the world that we really are the strongest. And they talked about putting missile bases on the moon, and then the idea was to have the Soviets respond by putting their own missile bases on the moon. We could put ours on distant planets, so that we could then hit the Soviet bases on the moon. The great independent journalist I.F. Stone mentioned that the word for lunar, for moon, in Latin is Luna. And he said, we should have a new department in the cabinet and call it the Department of Lunacy because of the crazy ideas that were being promulgated at the time.

This comes across, really, with the nuclear policies. So, when McGeorge Bundy asks Dan Ellsberg in 1961 to find out from the Joint Chiefs what would be, how many people would die as a result of America's nuclear launch in the event of a war with the Soviet Union, the Pentagon comes back with the idea that between 600 and 650 million people would die from America's weapons alone in our first PSYOP. And that doesn't even account for nuclear winter, which would have killed us all, or the numbers who would be killed by the Soviet weapons. That includes at least 100 million of our own allies in Western Europe.

We are talking about a period the lunacy and insanity was captured best by Stanley Kubrick in Dr. Strangelove in 1964. That policy was so close to what was actually occurring at the time. Did Eisenhower speak for this? When Eisenhower wanted to, one of his visions was for planetary excavation using hydrogen bombs. People should study the lunacy of Project Plowshare.

PAUL JAY: They used to have tourism to go look at nuclear tests outside of Las Vegas and people would sit just a few miles away with sunglasses on.

PETER KUZNICK: And we sent American soldiers into the blast area, knowing that they were going to be irradiated. Yeah, the irrationality in these times. People are going to look back at the Trump administration and if we're here later, maybe they'll laugh at us. If we survive this period, they'll laugh. They'll look back and say, "Look at the craziness of this period." Well, if you look at the history of the '50s and early '60s, you see a lot of that same kind of craziness in terms of the policies that were actually implemented at the time, and the ones, for example, one of the ideas was to melt the polar ice caps using hydrogen bombs. We wanted to increase polar melting. We wanted to increase the temperature on the planet by exploding nuclear bombs.

PAUL JAY: And this was to do, to what end?

PETER KUZNICK: For what end? I'm not sure. I mean, one-

PAUL JAY: Well, they may get their way, the way things are heading right now. They may get that.

PETER KUZNICK: And one of the things from Trump's National Security speech was to not talk about, or to say that global warming is not a National Security concern as Obama and others had believed it was. But they wanted to actually redirect hurricanes by setting off hydrogen bombs in the atmosphere in the path of the hurricane, so they could redirect hurricanes. They wanted to build new harbors by setting off hydrogen bombs. They wanted to have a new canal across the, instead of the Panama canal, with hydrogen bombs and reroute rivers in the United States.

I mean, crazy, crazy ideas that was considered American policy. And actually, it was the Soviets who saved us because Eisenhower wanted to begin to do these programs, but the Soviets would not allow, would not give the United States the right to do that because there was a temporary test ban in the late 1950s. And Eisenhower would have had to abrogate that in order to begin these projects.

PAUL JAY: Okay. Let's catch up. So, we had just, the last part dealt with some of Kennedy. We get into the 1960s. Kennedy is as preoccupied with the Cold War, the beginning of the Vietnam War, Cuba, the Missile Crisis. And we had left off right at the moment of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Give us a really quick recap because I think on this issue of militarization and former policy, we kind of have to do a whole nother series that focuses more on that. We're trying to get more into this issue of the New Deal and what happened to domestic social reforms in the context of this massive military expenditure. But talk a bit about that moment of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

PETER KUZNICK: Well, the Cuban Missile Crisis is very important because now we're going through the Korean Missile Crisis, and if Trump has his way, we'll also go through the Iranian Missile Crisis. And the last time we were this close to nuclear war was during the Cuban Missile Crisis. What happens there is that Khrushchev, in order to try to accomplish two things, or three things, really.

One is to, he knows the United States is planning an invasion of Cuba. The United States had been carrying out war games, massive war games, 40,000 people participating in these war games. Like now, we're carrying out war games off the Korean coast. And the war game that was planned for October of '62 was called Operation Ortsac. Anybody who doesn't get it? Certainly the Soviets did. Ortsac is Castro spelled backwards.

And so, we were planning, we had the plans in place to overthrow the Cuban government, number one. Number two, Khrushchev wanted a credible deterrent. The Americans learned, Kennedy says, "Let's find out what the reality of the Missile Gap is." And he has McNamara do the study. We find out that there is a Missile Gap. By October of '61, we find out that there is a Missile Gap, and it's in our favor. The United States is ahead between 10 to 1 and 100 to 1 over the Soviet Union in every important category.

Still, the pressure was to increase America's missiles and so, the Strategic Air Command in the Air Force wanted to increase our missiles by 3,000. McNamara figures that the least number he can get away with is to increase our intercontinental ballistic missiles by 1,000 even though we're ahead 10 to 1 already at that point. The Kremlin interpreted that, and said, "Why is the US increasing its missiles when it's so far ahead of us?" They said, "Obviously, the United States is preparing for a first strike against the Soviet Union." That was the Kremlin interpretation. It needed a credible deterrent.

They knew that, initially they thought, "Well, the fact that we can take out Berlin will be a credible enough deterrent. The Americans will never attack." Then they realized that that wouldn't be a sufficient deterrent to some of the hawks in the American military, the Curtis LeMays, who had a lot of influence at the time. Or before that, the Lemnitzers. And so, they decide, "Well, we've got to put missiles in Cuba, which is a more credible deterrent."

And the third is that Khrushchev wanted to appease his hawks. Khrushchev's strategy was to build up Soviet consumer economy. He said, "The Soviet people want washing machines. They want cars. They want houses. That's what we need." And so, he wanted to decrease defense spending and one of the cheap ways to do that was to put the missiles in Cuba. So, they do that foolishly. It's a crazy policy because they don't announce it. It's very much like the movie Strangelove, where Khrushchev was planning to announce that the missiles were in Cuba on the anniversary of the Soviet Revolution. That was coming up in a couple-

PAUL JAY: You mean Dr. Strangelove, meaning what's the point of a doomsday machine if you don't tell people you've got it?

PETER KUZNICK: As Strangelove says, "Well what's the point of the doomsday machine if you don't announce that you have it?" And then, the Americans didn't, the Soviets didn't announce that they had the, if they had announced that the missiles were there, then the United States could not have invaded Cuba the way the military wanted. They could not have bombed Cuba. It would've been an effective deterrent, especially if they announced that also, that the missiles were there, that the warheads were there and that they also had put 100 battlefield nuclear weapons inside Cuba.

That would have meant that there was no possibility of the United States invading and that the deterrent would've actually worked. But they didn't announce it. And so, the United States plans for an invasion and we got very close to doing so. But again, the intelligence was abysmal. We knew where 33 of the 42 missiles were. We didn't find the other missiles. We didn't know that the battlefield nuclear weapons were there. We didn't know that the missiles were ready to be armed.

And so, the United States was operating blind. We thought that there were 10,000 armed Soviets in Cuba. Turns out, there were 42,000 armed Soviets. We thought that there were 100,000 armed Cubans. Turns out, there were 270,000 armed Cubans. Based on the initial intelligence, McNamara said, "If we had invaded, we figured we'd suffer 18,000 casualties, 4,500 dead." When he later finds out how many troops there actually were there, he says, "Well, that would've been 25,000 Americans dead." When he finds out that there were 100 battlefield nuclear weapons as well, he doesn't find that out until 30 years later, and then he turns white, and he says, "Well that would've meant we would've lost 100,000 American Troops." Twice as many, almost, as we lost in Vietnam.

He said, "We would've definitely destroyed Cuba and probably wiped out the Soviet Union as well." So, that's how close we came at this time. Which is again, as Robert Gates, another hawk, warns, "The United States should not invade Syria," he said. "Or should not bomb Syria because haven't we learned anything from Iraq and Afghanistan and Libya, that whenever these things happen, you never know what the consequences are going to be. It's always the unintended consequences that are going to get you."

Which we learned in Cuba. We learned in Iraq and Afghanistan or we should've learned from Iraq and Afghanistan. Obviously, Trump hasn't learned it and we had better learn before we do something crazy now in Korea.

PAUL JAY: All right, thanks, Peter. And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.

Disturbed Voter , February 11, 2018 at 5:28 am

It takes two to tango. The idea that the US is solely to blame for the continuation of the Cold War, or that the US is solely to blame for a revival is Soviet/Russian propaganda. Great powers are aggressive, and rarely circumspect. The existence of nuclear weapons, was what prevented either the US or the Soviet Union/Russia from attacking each other. Otherwise the sport of kings would have continued as usual.

And given Churchill's anathema toward Communism in general, and the Soviet Union in particular, and given that he was the architect of the Cold War from the West I find the idea of him being a peacenik to be bizarre.

Chris , February 11, 2018 at 9:49 am

It's always that word, "communism", isn't it? As long as that word is used, everything is justifiable. If you look at it closely, it would seem that the Russians have discovered that communism is every bit as susceptible to corruption as capitalism. Communism has been, in fact, MORE discredited than capitalism (for now.) With Russia on the other side of the planet, what would be the harm in letting whatever failed ideologies they have fail like Kansas failed? As Jesus might say, "Ah Ye of little faith."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2017/06/07/the-great-kansas-tax-cut-experiment-crashes-and-burns/

Tomonthebeach , February 11, 2018 at 1:03 pm

The vast majority of Americans today have no idea what communism is. Most cannot even thing about communism in terms of it being just another economic system different from capitalism. (No, it is slavery!) They do not appreciate that there are different manifestations of both economic models. (Neoliberalism is eating us alive.) They do not appreciate that communism was probably the salvation of both post-war Russia and China. They conflate socialism with communism, view high taxes as communistic, and ignore that the countries with the highest standard of living are quite socialist.

In many cases, Americans vote against their own interests just because some pol labels a new social program as communist so he can give his new bill and edge.

Ike was so right about the Military-Industrial complex, and yet we have only enabled it to grow to the point that it dominates every political decision – every law – every regulation in ways that ensure weapons are expended so more can take their place; and more weapons need to be developed because the boogeyman out there (pick a regime) probably, maybe, could be building an even nastier weapon. Make no mistake, Sputnik was viewed as evidence that the Russians already had better weapons and that they would take over "outer space" and we would thus be at their mercy. Back in the 60s the US did worry that communism was working better than capitalism, and that fear enabled a lot of foreign policy (gunboat diplomacy).

Trump is anything if he is not politically and strategically a dim wit. Thus he probably buys into the communist boogeyman scenario common in our culture. He is likely attracted to the economic stimulus that more guns and less butter offer in the short run. Our problems seems to hinge on leaders who limit their action to the short run, and the long run (ensuring survival of the human species?), well, they never get around to that.

Moocao , February 11, 2018 at 8:09 pm

I would not be so loving over the "communistic ideals". My great grandparents were murdered for the fact that one was a postal office manager, another was a sock factory owner. Believe what you want, but communism is far from just an economic theory.

Communism, once you force the politics into the economic theory, is this: equality of all men, regardless of abilities, and damn if you started off well because everything will be taken from you. Your life is not your own, your family is not your own, your work is not your own: it belongs to the state.

Capitalism has fatal flaws, but we should all thank Communism died the way it did.

Duck1 , February 11, 2018 at 11:10 pm

not like capitalism didn't murder a few proletarians if murder is the standard, both are condemned

JTMcPhee , February 11, 2018 at 9:55 am

Yaas, it's just Putin friendly propaganda, that's all. Let us persuade ourselves that the vast bulk of provocations and exacerbations in that now-reprised Cold War were a pas de deluxe, not mostly driven by our own insane US leaders, like the ones discussed in small detail in the post. Conveniently ignoring the whole escalation process of the Exceptional Empire doing the "policies" of the Dulleses and their clan, the craziness of stuff like the John Birchers and the McCarthy thing, and the madness of MAD (which I believe was a notion coined by that nest of vipers called RAND, that "we have to be understood to be insane enough to commit suicide, to kill the whole planet, for the 'deterrent effect' of Massive Retaliation (forget that the US policy and military structure very seriously intended a first strike on the Evil Soviets for quite a long time, and are now building "small nukes" for 'battlespace use' as if there are no knock-on consequences.)

How does one break the cycle of ever-increasing vulnerability and eventual destruction, that includes the extraction and combustion and all the other decimations of a livable planet? how to do that when the Imperial Rulers are insane, by any sensible definition of insanity? And the Russians sure seem to be wiser and more restrained (barring some provocation that trips one of their own Doomsday Devices that they have instituted to try to counter the ridiculous insane provocations and adventures of the Empire?

Maybe revert to "Duck and cover?" Or that Civil Defense posture by one of the Reaganauts, one T.K. Jones, who wanted Congress to appropriate $252 million (1980 dollars) for Civil Defense, mostly for SHOVELS: in the firmly held belief that "we can fight and win a nuclear war with the Soviet Union:"

Three times Mr. Jones – or someone speaking in his name – agreed to testify. Three times he failed to appear. The Pentagon finally sent a pinch-hitter, Assistant Secretary of Defense Richard Perle. But the Senate wants Mr. Jones. It wants an authoritative explanation of his plan to spend $252 million on civil defense. Evidently, most of that money will go for shovels.

For this is how the alleged Mr. Jones describes the alleged civil defense strategy: "Dig a hole, cover it with a couple of doors and then throw three feet of dirt on top. It's the dirt that does it."

Mr. Jones seems to believe that the United States could recover fully, in two to four years, from an all-out nuclear attack. As he was quoted in The Los Angeles Times: "Everybody's going to make it if there are enough shovels to go around."

Dig on, Senator Pressler. We're all curious.

Russia suffered 20 million dead in WW II, pretty much won that war against fascism, and the leaders there get dang little decrepit for being (so far) so much more the "grownups in the room" in the Great Game Of RISK! ™ that our idiot rulers are playing. Go look up how many times, however, beyond that vast set of slapstick plays that led to the "Cuban Missile Crisis", the human part of the world skated up, by combinations of accident and error, to getting its death wish. And the main impetus for the nuclear "standoff" has been the US and the "policies" forwarded by "our" insane rulers and militarists.

"Tu Quoque" is an especially weak and inapposite and insupportable argument in this context.

Chris , February 11, 2018 at 10:28 am

SPOT ON! IF Robby Mook and the gang can stir up a Russian frenzy from hell based on nothing more than sour grapes, and IF what we know about the deep state is only the tip of the iceberg, and IF the media is largely under the control of the 'Gov, THEN a logical human must at least be open to the possibility that there is also such a thing as American propaganda, must (s)he not?

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2018/01/08/hillarys-campaign-manager-the-russia-investigation-is-not-a-winning-strategy-n2429189

Summer , February 11, 2018 at 12:30 pm

Indeed, WWII was never a war against fascism, just particular fascists that ventured off the establishment reservation.

rd , February 11, 2018 at 2:51 pm

Yes. Nobody invaded Argentina when Juan Peron et al took over. Hitler and Mussolini could have died as dictators decades later if they had simply kept their armies home.

ObjectiveFunction , February 11, 2018 at 11:20 am

Guys, I generally treasure the NC comments section, and I am not singling anyone out, but some of the rhetoric here is starting to remind me of ZeroHedge doomp&rn. Let's please recover some perspective.

Every year of human history since the expulsion from Eden will let us cherry pick overwhelming evidence that the lunatics were running the asylum. Or that every generation of our forebears gleefully built our civilization atop heaps of skulls of [insert oppressed groups here].

Yet during the Cold War, there were plenty of prominent people calling out the McCarthys and Lemays of the world as loons (and behind the Curtain, even Stalin was removed from key posts before his death). Guess what, sane generally wins out over the mad king. The arc of history indeed bends toward justice, though never without sacrifice and diligent truthseeking. The ones to worry about are the snake oil merchants, who pee on our shoes and tell us it's raining.
g.

Here endeth my catechism.

JTMcPhee , February 11, 2018 at 12:19 pm

Keep whistling past the graveyard: http://nuclearfiles.org/menu/key-issues/nuclear-weapons/issues/accidents/20-mishaps-maybe-caused-nuclear-war.htm

Such faith we have in ourselves, and such little evidence other than maybe a couple of world wars and long histories of the loonies playing stupid with whole populations, that we don't need to worry about the concentrated efforts of the sociopathic lunatics to rise to positions of great power and do stupid stuff.

Summer , February 11, 2018 at 12:48 pm

Yes, this is what the world gets when technological advancement is combined with a socio-economic system that rewards sociopathic tendencies. A system advanced by propaganda (disguised as entertainment and education) backed up with the barrell of a gun and cameras everywhere.

bob , February 11, 2018 at 12:59 pm

"The arc of history indeed bends toward justice"

You're going to need some proof for that wild, completely baseless claim.

oaf , February 11, 2018 at 6:57 am

"It's the kind of vision that Eisenhower represented at his best, and he says there" Was he subsequently co-opted, or BSing?

Don Midwest , February 11, 2018 at 6:58 am

This article is not scary enough. Find out that in 1983 there was almost a nuclear war. Both sides have a first strike strategy and a Russian general thought that actions of Reagan were getting ready for the first strike and he was going to strike first. And during the Cuban missile crisis, Russian subs had nuclear weapons on them and we dropped low level depth charges on them and we didn't know that they were armed.

This is a very long interview of Daniel Ellsberg in Seattle on Jan 9, 2018.

Daniel Ellsberg with Daniel Bessner:
The Doomsday Machine

Now that everyone, except many in the USA, knows that when the USA changes a government that the country is ruined, this may have forced North and South Korea to get together.

Ellsberg says that any nukes used in the Korean Peninsula would result in at least 1 million dead and while 60 million in WWII were killed during the course of the war, with nukes that many cold be killed in a week. And then, nuclear winter would finish off the rest of us.

I am scared.

Massinissa , February 11, 2018 at 10:13 am

To be fair, there are now doubts among scientists that Nuclear Winter as classically described would even be a thing.

But that doesn't help the millions who would die on the peninsula. Further, whats known as a Nuclear Famine could still occur, which would be pretty damn devastating for civilization, even if mankind itself manages to survive.

JTMcPhee , February 11, 2018 at 1:15 pm

Some scientists doubt global warming too. Got support for your assertion? https://www.popsci.com/article/science/computer-models-show-what-exactly-would-happen-earth-after-nuclear-war

Synoia , February 11, 2018 at 2:21 pm

Science is about doubt and skepticism. That's what the scientific process is. Doubt a nuclear winter: Ok, I'll bite. We have examples – Large Volcanic eruptions, and we have the year without a summer sometime in the 1830s I believe – that is in recorded History. The we searched to archeological record for more evidence, and found large die-offs following a layer of volcanic dust. Again and again, I believe. Quoting scientists who "doubt nuclear winter" requires more examination:

List them, together with their credentials and "donor$."

Donald , February 11, 2018 at 3:07 pm

You can google nuclear winter early enough. And yes, there are scientists who are skeptical for various reasons. The only group that has written a paper on it in recent years is composed of some of the same scientists who originally proposed it and they think it is real.

Reasons for skepticism include doubt about the amount of smoke that would be produced. And the volcano and asteroid comparisons are imperfect because the details are different. People used to talk about volcanic dust, and now it is mostly sulfuric acid droplets. With asteroids the initial thought was the KT boundary layer represented trillions of tons of submicron size dust and then Melosh proposed ejects blasted around the world heated the upper atmosphere and ignited global fires and created soot and then his grad student Tamara Goldin wrote her dissertation saying the heat might not be quite enough to do that and then people suggested it was ( I won't go into why) and others suggested the bolide hit sulfur layers .

The point is that there is not a consensus about the detailed atmospheric effects of either large asteroid impacts or of super volcanoes like Toba and yet we do have some evidence because these things happened. We don't have an example to study in tge geologic record where hundreds of cities were hit simultaneously with nuclear weapons.

I could go on, but I don't want to give the impression I have a strong opinion either way, because I don't. But I think the case for global warming is overwhelming because vastly more people are working on it and it is happening in front of us. It is not just computer models.

Sy Krass , February 11, 2018 at 5:18 pm

Forget possible nuclear winter, the economic effects alone would be worth 10 Lehman brothers (2008 meltdowns). And then the knock on effects would cause other knock on effects like other wars. Even without a nuclear winter, civilization would probably collapse within 18 months anyway.

JBird , February 11, 2018 at 5:32 pm

All this, while true, only change the details not the results. The Chicxulub impact almost certainly exterminated the majority of then living species, and the Toba Supervolcano probably almost caused our extinction. That suggest throwing massive amounts of anything into the atmosphere is not good.

As a student I would like to know the details, but in practice, it's like arguing whether a snow storm or a blizzard killed someone. Humanity as a species would probably survive a nuclear war okay, but many(most?) individuals as well as our planetary civilization would be just as dead. The numbers dying would be slightly different is all.

rfdawn , February 11, 2018 at 6:53 pm

Humanity might survive as a species but not as an idea. Am about halfway through the Ellsberg book and, yes, it does make Dr. Strangelove look like a documentary. Current thinking does not seem much changed.

Jer Bear , February 11, 2018 at 7:07 am

Trump, like everyone before him, will do what Kissinger advises him to do.

The Rev Kev , February 11, 2018 at 8:11 am

Something missing from the sequence of events here is that the main reason that the Kremlin put nuclear missiles in Cuba was the fact that more than 100 Jupiter intermediate-range ballistic nuclear missiles were deployed in Italy and Turkey in 1961 by the US, thus cutting down any reaction time by Moscow to minutes in case of a US attack.

The main – unacknowledged – part of the climb down from the Cuba missile crisis was that as Russia pulled its nuclear missiles out of Cuba, the US would do the same in Europe. It cooled things down again until Reagan was elected.

I had forgotten that the 50s had just as many crazies as present times – the Dulles brothers, Curtis LeMay, Edward Teller, J. Edgar Hoover – really scary people and probably founding members of the deep state.

Jerri-Lynn Scofield Post author , February 11, 2018 at 8:26 am

Excellent point about the missiles deployed in Turkey and Italy– and one I might have mentioned if I had remembered it, absent your prod.

Disturbed Voter , February 11, 2018 at 9:02 am

The Jupiter missile agreement was a secret at the time. Kennedy wanted to minimize the appearance of a quid-pro-quo. The subsequent presence of Pershings and Tomahawks in Europe (but not Turkey) was a reaction to the mobile IRBMs deployed by the Soviet Union. Which they still have. France and Britain have their own independent deterrents. Which is just as well, since the Pershings and Tomahawks were traded away as part of START/SALT.

The more recent escalation of NATO into E Europe, the Baltics and the Ukraine are a definite violation of the spirit of the Cuban Missile Crisis agreement, and are pure aggression against a Russia that was seen as too weak to do anything about it until they did do something about it in 2014.

An aggressive NATO is something I view with horror. One does not poke the bear. But Kissinger (the German) and Berzhinski (the Pole) are fanatically anti-Russian. They made up for the passing of Churchill.

The Rev Kev , February 11, 2018 at 5:55 pm

Just recently Russia deployed more nuclear-capable Iskander missiles to the Kaliningrad enclave between Poland and Lithuania. Maybe something to do with all those special forces NATO keeps stationing on the Russian border?

JTMcPhee , February 11, 2018 at 9:14 pm

And all the a -- -oles who Command and Rule, and most of the commentariat and punditry, all treat these affairs as if they are playing some Brobdingnagian Game of Risk ™, where as with Monopoly (which was originally intended to teach a very different lesson) the object of the game is all about TAKING OVER THE WHOLE WORLD, WAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA an idiotic froth on top of an ever more dangerous brew of exponentially increasing,and largely ignored, mutual if often asymmetric, deadly vulnerability.

Stupid effing humans and their vast stupid monkey tricks

Carolinian , February 11, 2018 at 9:14 am

LeMay had suggested that we should perhaps wipe out the Soviet Union before they had the chance to catch up to us in nukes. It was an era ruled by fear of nuclear war–a fear that was unleashed by the use of the bomb in Japan. Truman and Byrnes (the latter in a meeting in his hometown–my hometown) rejected calls by some of the Los Alamos scientists to share the nuclear secrets with the Russians and forestall this arms race or so they hoped.

So no the crazy didn't start with Trump and Trump had even advocated we make nice with the Russians until the Dems, their remnants at State and Defense and the press forced him to change course (on threat of impeachment). The elites who have gained more or less permanent power over the direction of this country are a threat to us all.

Anyhow, thanks for the above post. Those who forget history ..

polecat , February 11, 2018 at 11:51 am

Let's not forget the little country that could with it's aggregated threat of 300+ undeclared
They're 'in-the-mix' too !

Disturbed Voter , February 11, 2018 at 12:02 pm

In so far as the US has moved away from the JFK view of nuclear deterrence to the LeMay view of nuclear first strike we are dead.

David , February 11, 2018 at 11:07 am

Different world. The first generation of nuclear weapons had yields (around 20-30Kt) that were comprehensible in terms of conventional bombing, which of course would have required many more aircraft but was also much more efficient per tonne of explosives. For the formative years after 1945, therefore, people thought of nuclear weapons as weapons in the classic sense and, at that time, nobody really knew that much about the effects of radiation and fallout. This all changed with the advent of the hydrogen bomb, but even then it took a long time for the likely catastrophic effects of the use of such weapons in large numbers to sink in. Nuclear technology, and both delivery and guidance systems, evolved far more quickly than rationales for their use could be found. Indeed, you can say that the Cold War was a period when nuclear powers found themselves acquiring weapons with technologies that couldn't actually be used, but couldn't be un-invented either. Enormous intellectual effort went into trying to provide post-hoc rationales for having these weapons, some of it very ingenious, most of it wasted.

Don't forget the role of paranoia either. NSC-68, the report that formalized US strategy during the Cold War, reads today like the ravings of a group of lunatics, seeing, almost literally, Reds under the beds. And if Stalin was dead, the Soviet leadership had just gone through a war which had cost them almost 30 million dead, and any, literally any, sacrifice was worth it to make sure that they prevented another war, or at least won it quickly.

rd , February 11, 2018 at 11:56 am

Dr. Strangelove has moved from the archive boxes of historical artifacts to being a "must see" movie again.

Baby Gerald , February 11, 2018 at 2:12 pm

It never left the 'must see' list. Its just moved higher up the rankings in recent months, what with all this 'collaboration' conspiracy drivel.

From wikipedia :

US military casualties in WW2: 407,300
US civilian casualties in WW2: 12,100

USSR military casualties in WW2: estimated by various sources [see the footnotes] between 8,668,000 to 11,400,000.
USSR civilian casualties in WW2: 10,000,000 [plus another 6-7 million deaths from famine, a line in the table that is completely blank for the US]

Simply put, for every American that died, somewhere between a thousand to two thousand of their Russian counterparts were killed. And somehow people in the US were convinced and worried that Russia wanted to start yet another war when they still hadn't finished burying the dead from the last one.

rd , February 11, 2018 at 3:06 pm

1. Stalin made his pact with the devil that gave Hitler free rein to invade Poland and France. Hitler then invaded Russia from Poland as the jumping off point. Stalin miscalculated big-time.

2. Invaded countries always have many more civilian countries than un-invaded ones.

3. Germany started WW II only 20 years after the end of WW I that also slaughtered 2 million German soldiers. Past losses generally does not appear to impact the decision-making of dictators regarding new wars. So it would have been irrational for the West to think that the USSR had no intent to expand its borders. That was the blunder that France and Britain made in 1938-39. However, the paranoia did get extreme in the Cold War.

Yves Smith , February 11, 2018 at 6:03 pm

This isn't accurate. Stalin tried repeatedly and even towards the end, desperately, to sign a treaty with the Britain and France. They rebuffed him because [he was a] Commie. He signed up with Hitler only after those efforts had clearly failed. It was a self-preservation move. It probably did buy him less time than he thought. But let's not kid ourselves: Hitler's first move otherwise would have been to the East. What were later the Allies would have been delighted to see him take over the USSR. This was why British aristos were so keen on Hitler, that he was seen as an answer to Communism and therefore "our kind of man".

JBird , February 11, 2018 at 8:34 pm

The Poles have been the Germans and Russians chewtoy ever since it was completely partitioned. All the countries immediately around Russia have been horribly abused by Russia. Putin is doing his country no favors by reminding everyone of that. He can cow them into submission, but like the American government is finding, just because they are doesn't mean they cannot cause trouble. Heck, the current Great Game could be said to have started with the Soviet-Afghanistan War.

Going into the war every country was unprepared and unwilling to fight and had difficulty choices. The German military itself was not prepared. It was Hitler's choice to start when and where and by 1938 everyone knew it. Hitler was surprised that France and Great Britain honored their guarantee to Poland.

As evil as Stalin's regime was, and his invasion of Poland was just as bad as Hitler's at first, I don't think most people really understood just how evil the Nazis were and what they were planning on doing for Germany's living space. It was worse than anything that Stalin did and between the Ukrainian famine, the Great Purges, the takeover of the Baltic States, the invasion of Finland, etc he did serious evil.

Harold , February 11, 2018 at 3:17 pm

General LeMay was responsible for the death of a fifth (some say a third) of the North Korean population by saturation bombing with napalm, was he not? A third? Isn't that one in three?

xformbykr , February 11, 2018 at 12:34 pm

Additional books that shed light on both leaving the new deal behind and the Cuban missile crisis are (1) "The Devil's Chessboard" by Talbot and (2) "JFK and The Unspeakable" by Douglass. The first is mostly about Allen Dulles but has interesting chapters on McCarthy, Eisenhower, Nixon, etc. It is reasonably well foot-noted. The second is about the assassination and has loads of detail about the missile crisis and its power players. It is meticulously foot-noted.

JTMcPhee , February 11, 2018 at 1:09 pm

For those with a shred of remaining optimism who want to be rid of it, might I suggest a book titled "With Enough Shovels" by Robert Scheer. https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/robert-scheer-4/with-enough-shovels-reagan-bush-and-nuclear-war/

I was going to post the text of the short review, but all I got at the moment is this blankety iPhone and its limits with cut and paste.

Not many read books anyway these days, and what sufficient moiety of them will form the groundswell that tips over the Juggernaut we are all pushing and pulling and riding toward the cliff?

I read this stuff mostly to sense which hand holds the knife and not to go down asking "What happened? What did it all mean?"

John k , February 11, 2018 at 1:13 pm

Trump has been bellicose re NK and Iran, but I see him as resisting the Syrian adventure, while cia plus military hawks pushing forward.
Dems today are real hawks, itching to confront Russia in both Syria and Ukraine the latter another place trump may be resisting hawks, the area has been quiet since the election, I.e. since dems were in charge.
It's an odd thought that in some theaters trump may be the sane one

JTMcPhee , February 11, 2018 at 1:55 pm

Yaas, nothing is happening in Ukraine, all is quiet on the Eastern Front of NATO: http://ukraine.csis.org/ Nuland has gone on to other conquests, and all that. The CIA and War Department have lost interest in that Conflict Zone. Nothing is happening. You are getting sleepy. Sleepy.

Yaas, nothing is happening. https://www.reuters.com/places/ukraine All is well. Safely rest. God is nigh.

marku52 , February 11, 2018 at 3:12 pm

Yeah, the title of this post would lead one to believe that their is something uniquely horrible about Trump's foreign policy. From anything I can detect, her bellicose statement about a no-fly zone in Syria and her abject destruction of Libya, HRC's FP would have been even worse.

If she had been elected, we might already be in a ground war with the Russians in Syria. The only hopeful sign is that while Trump spends his day watching TeeVee, State, DOD, and CIA are all working at cross purposes and getting in each other's way.

Foreign policy? We have a foreign policy? If anybody finds it, will they please explain it to me?

William Beyer , February 11, 2018 at 1:20 pm

I almost never comment, although I rely on NC for most of my news and blood pressure control. You are a treasure.

May I recommend another book – "All Honorable Men" – by James Stewart Martin. Published in 1950 and shortly thereafter all bookstore copies were hoovered-up and burned by the CIA. It might have been referenced in one of the RNN segments, but I haven't slogged through all of them yet.

You can get a hardback at Amazon for a mere $298. An i-book is cheaper.

After reading "The Brothers," and "The Devil's Chessboard," I considered starting a non-profit using GPS technology – Piss-on-their-Graves.org.

J.Fever , February 11, 2018 at 2:43 pm

Forbidden bookshelf series $11.49 Barnes & Noble

JBird , February 11, 2018 at 2:47 pm

The Forbidden Bookshelf series by Open Media is fantastic. Sadly for dinosaurs like me, it is mostly ebooks, but they do the occasional hard copy reprints, and since much in the series would be out of print without Open Media, even the ebooks are great to have.

And it is interesting to see how many bothersome books just go away even without any "censorship" even with the First Amendment being the one right courts have consistently, and strongly, enforced.

JTMcPhee , February 11, 2018 at 9:17 pm

Especially the right of corporate persons to one dollar, one vote speech..,

JBird , February 11, 2018 at 9:43 pm

I will take what I can get, even if as a college student, I don't have much "Free Speech."

:-)

shinola , February 11, 2018 at 4:07 pm

This article reminded me of an interesting/disturbing thing I saw on tv last night – a local news show had a bit on what to do in case of nuclear attack!

Boomers & older probably remember the drill: go to the basement or innermost room of the house, have 72 hours of food & water stashed & don't go outside for at least 3 days, etc. (yeah, that's the ticket).
Thought I was having a flashback to the 60's

Of course the best advice I ever heard on the subject was "Squat down, put your head between your knees & kiss your sweet [rear end] goodbye."

JBird , February 11, 2018 at 5:45 pm

Well, as I recall they were trying to give us the illusion of control so that we would not go all nihilistic or into a drunken fatalistic stupor. I don't know if telling people, like little JBird, that the bombs might start dropping anytime in which case you're just f@@@@d would have done any good.

The Rev Kev , February 11, 2018 at 6:04 pm

Maybe they could digitally colourise and re-issue this old film again, you know, as a public service-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_1jkLxhh20

Of course, it took a long time till we learned that a nuclear attack would be more like this-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VG2aJyIFrA

Oregoncharles , February 11, 2018 at 4:41 pm

One interpretation of the Cold War, that I found revealing, was that the two "opposing" militaries colluded to magnify the threat so as to pump up their respective budgets. So both were essentially conning their own governments – and putting the whole world at risk in the process.

Of course, another big factor, equally obvious at the time, was (and is) that world "leaders," elected or not, can't resist the temptation to play chess with live pieces. They don't seem to care that people wind up dead, or that occasionally they put the whole world in danger.

Waking Up , February 11, 2018 at 5:05 pm

FYI: The first link to the Real News Network ends up at outlook.live.

Jerri-Lynn Scofield Post author , February 11, 2018 at 11:45 pm

Fixed it. Thanks.

rkka , February 11, 2018 at 5:13 pm

It's SIOP, not PSYOP. SIOP stands for Single Integrated Operating Plan, which was what the first nuclear war plan was called. PSYOPS are Psychological Operations.

VietnamVet , February 11, 2018 at 7:17 pm

Having served in the first Cold War, it simply is beyond my comprehension that the Democrats restarted it all over again. Even weirder are the neo-con proponents of a First Strike. If the USA wins, at least one or two major cities (if not all) will be destroyed. New Zealand becomes the sequel to "On the Beach". We are in the same position as Germany in the 1930s except we know that the world war will destroy us. Tell me, how in the hell, did a few thousand U.S. soldiers and contractors ended up in the middle of Eastern Syria surrounded by Russians, the Syrian Arab Army and Shiite militias at risk of attack by Turkey?

JBird , February 11, 2018 at 7:59 pm

Tell me, how in the hell, did a few thousand U.S. soldiers and contractors ended up in the middle of Eastern Syria surrounded by Russians, the Syrian Arab Army and Shiite militias at risk of attack by Turkey?

Why they are needed to fight the evil-doers of course! Anything to protect our Freedom and the American Way. Now, ifyou keep asking these inconvenient questions, then "they" might start asking if you support the terrorists.

It's like when my half blind aged mother, and her possibly weaponized cane, is scrutinized as a possible al-Qaeda terrorist with a super hidden weapon, and I ask why it's 9/11 and the very bad people might hurt us.

Max4241 , February 11, 2018 at 8:10 pm

Nuclear winter. How quaint. Soot and dust. Rapid cooling. Crop failures. Starvation. Billions -perhaps- dead.

But life, certainly, will find a way!

Not in my world. All-out thermonuclear war means 250 nuclear reactors melt down simultaneously and several hundred thousand tons of loosely stored nuclear waste becomes aerosoled.

The resulting radiation blast burns the atmosphere off and the earth becomes a dead planet.

We can never look the thing straight in the eye. Take North Korea. We have been told, repeatedly, endlessly, that they have 20,000 artillery pieces trained on Seoul!

Again, how quaint. How SCARY! What we should be reading about, are the priority targets, the game changers:

http://res.heraldm.com/content/image/2012/03/23/20120323001281_0.jpg

Light those five softies up and you can say good-bye to South Korea forever.

Bobby Gladd , February 11, 2018 at 8:19 pm

"People should study the lunacy of Project Plowshare."
__

Yeah. In 1992 my wife was serving as the QA Mgr for the Nevada Test Site (NTS) nuke remediation project contractor. In 1993 a successful FOIA filing unearthed the Alaskan "Project Chariot." One of the brilliant Project Plowshare ideas was the potential utility of nuke detonations to carve out deep water harbors (they now deny it), so they took a bunch of irradiated soil from NTS and and spread it around on the tundra 130 miles N of the Arctic circle on the coast of the Chukchi Sea to "study potential environmental impacts."

The nuke "dredging" idea went nowhere, so they just plowed the irradiated crap under the surface, where it remained secret until the FOIA revelation decades later. DOE told my wife's company "go clean this shit up" (Eskimo tribes were freaking after finding out), so off goes my wife and her crew to spend the summer and fall living in tents guarded by armed polar bear guards (they had to first plow out a dirt & gravel runway, and flew everyone and all supplies in on STOL aircraft). They dug the test bed area all up (near Cape Thompson), assayed samples in an onsite radlab, put some 30 tons of "contaminated" Arctic soil in large sealed containers, barged it all down to Seattle, loaded it on trucks and drove it all back down to be buried at NTS.

Your tax dollars.

She looked so cute with her clipboard, and her orange vest, steel toed boots and hardhat.

JTMcPhee, February 11, 2018 at 9:26 pm

Did she get stuck dealing with any of the impossibly intractable problems at the Hanford Reservation? Anyone who doubts the massive stupidity of humans, read this: http://www.oregonlive.com/travel/index.ssf/2008/06/a_tour_of_the_hanford_reveals.html

Disaster tourism. "Buffy, can we do Fukushima next?"

The Rev Kev, February 11, 2018 at 9:50 pm

As a teenager I read in a newspaper a proposal to use nuclear blasts to form a canal that would bring the sea to the middle of Australia and form an inland sea from which water could be drawn. We already had nuclear weapon being tested here ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_tests_in_Australia ) so there was no appetite for ideas like this.

[Feb 12, 2018] Too many sport disciplines, too much cheating, too much money and too many politics involved in the Olympic

Highly recommended!
Feb 12, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Sportsmen became modern day graduators, who rid their health for entetaiment of crowd of rich spectactators.

I am no longer fond of Olympic games. There are too many sport disciplines, too much cheating, too much money and too many politics involved in the Olympics. The Norwegian team was rumored to have brought some 6,000 doses of asthma medicine for its athletes. That rumor is likely false, but it makes a good point. Such drugs are exempted by the anti-doping agency if some doctor simply certifies that an athlete needs them.

That such drugs are performance enhancing is then just a 'side effect'.

At least 15 U.S. athletes in the Rio Olympics took such 'medicine'. Russian athletes though, who never used these exemptions, were banned or restricted for alleged doping on quite murky grounds.

cbrown , Feb 11, 2018 2:17:20 PM | 4

The asthmatic drugs is to conceal the enhancement drug traces in the system. They're not really the enhancers by itself.
chet380 , Feb 11, 2018 2:17:56 PM | 5
It has been depressing to watch the Americans corrupt the Olympic Movement by taking control of WADA, the doping testing body, based on the allegations of Rodchenko, the CIA stooge 'under American protection in California' and thereby influence key members of the IOC who engineered the banning of the entire Russian athletic teams in Rio and N. Korea, even though hundreds of those athletes had competed for years and provided clean drug tests on all occasions.

When a number of Russian athletes successfully appealed their bans to the CAS appeal body and were reinstated, Thomas Bach, the IOC president, vociferously "regretted" the CAS decision and threatened the continued existence of the CAS -- in the next days, the CAS declined the appeals of a further 47 clean Russian athletes without any coherent reasons for their judgment.

With the Americans striving to disrupt Russian participation in major international sporting events (remember as well the very successful Sochi Olympics and the Kiev coup), watch for some American-sponsored disruption of the Russian hosting of the football World Cup.

John Merryman , Feb 11, 2018 2:37:16 PM | 7
Cbrown,
Https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronchodilator
Formerly T-Bear , Feb 11, 2018 3:49:57 PM | 12
IOC President Thomas Bach has tacitly admitted the IOC or WADA have neither the integrity, competence nor will to oversee and administer a fair, equitable drug surveillance in the current Olympics. Like all 'Wars on Drugs', the IOC and WADA are fraudulent affronts to their victims. When Thomas Bach speaks of urgent need for reorganisation of institution, he should start with IOC and WADA. He and his ilk needs return all compensation he receives since the Sochi Games and be band from all sport events and organisations for life. There IS no Olympic Game without the Russian Flag and a Russian Team. Don't buy into what is on offer now - it is not Olympic when some are excluded. Exclusion was not the original Olympics, it disqualifies this as being Olympics.

Gave to the book from above encomium. Thanks, factual information for all of MENA is difficult to find - we will see.

Red Ryder , Feb 11, 2018 4:15:48 PM | 15
Norways 6000 asthma drugs dosage list:
Norwegian government-owned broadcasting corporation NRK published ( https://www.nrk.no/sport/olympiatoppen-har-sendt-over-6000-doser-astmamedisin-til-ol-1.13880280)
the list of drugs taken to PyeongChang by the Norwegian team doctor.

It includes 1,800 doses of Symbicort, 1,200 doses of Atrovent, 1,200 doses of Alvesco, 360 doses of Ventolin and 1,200 doses of Airomir – which amounts to 10 times more asthma drugs than Finland has brought to South Korea.

https://www.rt.com/sport/418122-norway-pyeongchang-2018-asthma-drugs-stash/

The Scandinavians were the orginators of blood doping back in the day.

This asthma thing is a joke. Steroids and amphetamines packaged in inhalers, with a doctor's note.

The rat who set up the Russian team doping scandal appears to have undergone plastic surgery or is using a double.

The Canadians and WADA are totally corrupt, destroying Russians premier teams in Summer and Winter Olympics with this phony doping scandal.

The IOC has always been a corrupt organization that is constitutionally built and lives on bribery. The US owns them.

che , Feb 11, 2018 4:30:47 PM | 16
I came to that conclusion about the Olympics long ago. It is unseemly and obscene that the U.S. parades around its $$ pampered and ego addled athletes pompously dominating the medals and all that with their superior $$ and etc. It long ago ceased to be any sort of fair sport or cultural exchange aimed at improving international relations, it has become just an extension of all the political propaganda. And the U.S. BrainDead that it is, embarrassing itself and humiliating its citizens with the brazenly crude and undiplomatic behavior of its government. Sochi in 2010 was a prime example of that.
nonsense factory , Feb 11, 2018 4:39:10 PM | 19
The Olympics have been a fairly politicized event for many decades now; I think exhibit A is Carter and Brezezinski's secret op to destabilize Afghanistan in 1979, followed by the US boycott of the Summer 1980 Olympics:

Brzezinki: ". . .it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention."

The same thing is going on now with all the doping allegations, Pence's political posturing in Seoul (really, to the people calling for Trump to be impeached - Pence is much worse!) which is really about blocking peaceful resolution of the Korean problem - because then, how would the economic-centric 'pivot to Asia' be accomplished? Let alone NBC, subdivision of Comcast, is controlling the video feed, and charging admission - can't we just get some volunteers with cameras to upload the action to Youtube, it'd probably be just as good quality.

That's why I like mountaineering - people can use oxygen or not, they can take drugs or not, it really doesn't matter, the mountains have the final say. People have more respect for oxygen-free ascents of big Himalayan mountains, but there's no authoritarian control (well, you have to pay for passes to the local governments, but that's fair enough).

NemesisCalling , Feb 11, 2018 4:45:51 PM | 20
The american coverage of the opening ceremonies fixated on the seating arrangement of Kim's sister behind Pence. She had an ironic smirk on for a lot of it. Pence was his thin-lipped Rethuglican self, half-smiling with no teeth throughout. No charm, all business.

Agree with T-Bear @12. These are not games of peace. I think we would be enjoying athletes a lot more without the politics and hybrid wars hanging over the whole spectacle. I will say congratulations to Korea for honoring the spirit of the games by coming together, at least for a few moments. Don't let Uncle Sambo and Co. play spoiler to your fun. Breathe easy and see how it feels.

Jen , Feb 11, 2018 5:04:12 PM | 21
Recently The Atlantic published an article on how the Olympic Games came to be associated with excess in terms of spending and spectacle.

Michael Weinreb, "How the Olympics Got Disneyfied"
https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/02/how-the-olympics-got-disneyfied/552659/

MoA regulars may need to have headache tablets, medication for nausea and a bed to lie down on at the ready

[Feb 12, 2018] Ike's Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex Is Alive and Very Well by William J. Astore

Highly recommended!
160 billion plus 160 billion are pretty serious money. money that were stolen from ordinary Americans.
PRESIDENT EISENHOWER: Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. This is, I repeat, the best way of life to be found on the road the world has been taking. This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron. (cited from The Age of Lunacy The Doomsday Machine naked capitalism )
Notable quotes:
"... The military talks about needing all these scores of billions to "rebuild." And, sure, there are ships that need to be refitted, planes in need of repairs, equipment that needs to be restocked, and veterans who need to be cared for. But a massive increase in military and war spending, perhaps as high as $320 billion over two years, is a recipe for excessive waste and even more disastrous military adventurism. ..."
"... Perhaps you've heard of the expression, "Spending money like drunken sailors on shore leave." Our military has been drunk with money since 9/11. Is it really wise to give those "sailors" an enormous boost in the loose change they're carrying, trusting them to spend it wisely? ..."
Feb 12, 2018 | www.antiwar.com

The new Congressional budget boosts military spending in a big way . Last night's PBS News report documented how military spending is projected to increase by $160 billion over two years, but that doesn't include "overseas contingency funding" for wars, which is another $160 billion over two years. Meanwhile, spending for the opioid crisis, which is killing roughly 60,000 Americans a year (more Americans than were killed in the Vietnam War), is set at a paltry $6 billion ($25 billion was requested).

One thing is certain: Ike was right about the undue influence of the military-industrial-Congressional complex.

The military talks about needing all these scores of billions to "rebuild." And, sure, there are ships that need to be refitted, planes in need of repairs, equipment that needs to be restocked, and veterans who need to be cared for. But a massive increase in military and war spending, perhaps as high as $320 billion over two years, is a recipe for excessive waste and even more disastrous military adventurism.

Even if you're a supporter of big military budgets, this massive boost in military spending is bad news. Why? It doesn't force the military to think . To set priorities. To define limits. To be creative.

Perhaps you've heard of the expression, "Spending money like drunken sailors on shore leave." Our military has been drunk with money since 9/11. Is it really wise to give those "sailors" an enormous boost in the loose change they're carrying, trusting them to spend it wisely?

William J. Astore is a retired lieutenant colonel (USAF). He taught history for fifteen years at military and civilian schools and blogs at Bracing Views . He can be reached at [email protected] . Reprinted from Bracing Views with the author's permission.

[Feb 11, 2018] What We've Learned in Year 1 of Russiagate

Notable quotes:
"... The New York Times ..."
"... The new weapons for Ukraine coincides with an increase in US troop deployments in the Baltic region on Russia's border, prompting Russia to accuse the United States of violating the 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act, and position nuclear-capable ballistic missiles in response. ..."
Feb 11, 2018 | www.thenation.com

One consequence of the Trump-Russia fixation is the overshadowing of the far-right agenda that Trump and his Republican allies are carrying out, including, inexorably, policies that undermine the narrative of Trump-Russian collusion. But as that narrative is also used as a cudgel against Trump's presidency, it is worth asking if some of those policies are now even a direct result.

In December, Trump authorized the sale of new weapons to Ukraine for its fight against Russian-backed separatists. President Obama had rejected the arms shipments, "fearing that it would only escalate the bloodshed," as The New York Times noted in 2015. Trump had also opposed such a move during the campaign, but was swayed by lobbying from advisers and congressional neoconservatives . "Overall," observed Andrew Weiss , a Russia expert with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, "I see this discussion [on Trump-Russia] as fitting within a broader effort by people within the national security bureaucracy to box Trump in on Ukraine."

The new weapons for Ukraine coincides with an increase in US troop deployments in the Baltic region on Russia's border, prompting Russia to accuse the United States of violating the 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act, and position nuclear-capable ballistic missiles in response.

[Feb 11, 2018] http://theduran.com/american-hysteria-over-russia-will-lead-to-nuclear-war/

Notable quotes:
"... Russia is not the Soviet Union and the Cold War is long over. However, despite our best efforts to sustain a positive relationship, Russia now perceives the United States and NATO as its principal opponent and impediment to realizing its destabilizing geopolitical goals in Eurasia. (Emphasis mine) ..."
"... becoming great ..."
"... Russia has significantly increased the capabilities of its non-nuclear forces to project power into regions adjacent to Russia and, as previously discussed, has violated multiple treaty obligations and other important commitments. Most concerning are Russia's national security policies, strategy, and doctrine that include an emphasis on the threat of limited nuclear escalation, and its continuing development and fielding of increasingly diverse and expanding nuclear capabilities. Moscow threatens and exercises limited nuclear first use, suggesting a mistaken expectation that coercive nuclear threats or limited first use could paralyze the United States and NATO and thereby end a conflict on terms favorable to Russia. Some in the United States refer to this as Russia's "escalate to de-escalate" doctrine. "De-escalation" in this sense follows from Moscow's mistaken assumption of Western capitulation on terms favorable to Moscow. ..."
"... Effective U.S. deterrence of Russian nuclear attack and non-nuclear strategic attack now requires ensuring that the Russian leadership does not miscalculate regarding the consequences of limited nuclear first use, either regionally or against the United States itself. Russia must instead understand that nuclear first-use, however limited, will fail to achieve its objectives, fundamentally alter the nature of a conflict, and trigger incalculable and intolerable costs for Moscow. Our strategy will ensure Russia understands that any use of nuclear weapons, however limited, is unacceptable. ..."
"... The U.S. deterrent tailored to Russia, therefore, will be capable of holding at risk, under all conditions, what Russia's leadership most values. It will pose insurmountable difficulties to any Russian strategy of aggression against the United States, its allies, or partners and ensure the credible prospect of unacceptably dire costs to the Russian leadership if it were to choose aggression. ..."
Feb 11, 2018 | theduran.com

Russian television broadcast a dire sounding piece on February 5th that probably was rather disquieting to most Russians, and also a source of significant dismay to their hopes for a rapprochement in relations following the election of Donald Trump to the Presidency of the United States. The news agency "Vesti" explained that the US is preparing itself for nuclear war with Russia.

The US Department of Defense published its 2018 Nuclear Posture Review. This consists of at least two documents that are public domain that detail the assessment the DoD made about nuclear threats from around the world. The language about Russia is curious, for like Russia, the US repeatedly maintains that there is no desire for anything but good relations.

However, this is unfortunately either a blind claim or a willfully blind claim for the sake of propaganda. Based on the insanity of the US government's reaction or posture about Russia overall, with the military fears, the sanctions and the most recent incidents of the release of the "Kremlin list" of government heads and successful businessmen and women, and the close flyby of a Russian fighter jet to an American surveillance aircraft , the ever-present "RussiaGate" investigations ; and the lack of visible insanity on the Russians' side, it seems likely that the American version of what is causing the 'need' to resolidify 'defenses' is lacking in factual evidence and cannot be taken as conclusive or trustworthy.

Not that there is any precedent for this outrageous statement and if you believe that

The problem begins with a false premise:

Russia is not the Soviet Union and the Cold War is long over. However, despite our best efforts to sustain a positive relationship, Russia now perceives the United States and NATO as its principal opponent and impediment to realizing its destabilizing geopolitical goals in Eurasia. (Emphasis mine)

This is an extremely bold assertion, though for some of the people who influence the stance of US foreign and military policy, this is how they see it. However, it is also rather skillful sophistry that is achieved by a combination of American desire for hegemony and also, unfortunately, by a certain level of vagueness on both sides.

The Russian component of this vagueness largely seems to rest on the matter of Ukraine. Ukraine itself is rightly understood as the motherland of all the Rus' ("all the Russias") from history that runs back over a thousand years. It was Kiev that was the great capital of the early Russian governorate, which slowly expanded to become the Russian Empire.

However, there is also a complicated and deeply tragic history regarding the Ukraine, notably during the Soviet era, when millions of Ukrainians perished in what some in that country now regard as an intentional genocide , perpetrated deliberately against them by the Soviets in Moscow, hence, "Russia."

This issue itself is complex and warrants, even begs, further exposition, but it is beyond the scope of this article. Some understanding may be gained by reading this piece , which gives an interesting survey of the history of Ukraine. (Be aware though that it still comes from a publication with Western perspective.)

The main point is that Ukraine's own nationalistic wish is spawned from factors including a national memory that points at Moscow as the source of their problems. The fact that the Russian Federation is not Communist does not deter this point of view, because although the Russian nation is no longer a dictatorship, it still does not always conduct its foreign and national affairs transparently, and the desire for a real sense of self-determination is magnified by the allure of the glittering, wealthy West. The Western powers, most notably the USA, know this and have been teasing the Ukrainians with it.

Some of them, in Kiev and the western areas of the country (not all of which were Soviet territories at one point) have long had ties more to Europe than to Russia, and the inclusion of their territories in the Soviet Union was a source of further bitterness. For many people in Ukraine, their history is of living in a battlefield of foreign powers.

They are understandably almost instinctively upset about any power's designs on their territory, but it is also easy to manipulate this characteristic, and the United States has led the current struggle for Ukraine yet again. The allure of Western European life seems to be what drew so many to the Euromaidan struggle in 2014, but the present day economy under the pro-Western government also appears to be in a shambles.

At any rate, the historical memory of extremely authoritarian and cruel Soviet rule in the region, plus the present day "vagueness" that seems to exist with regards to Russian foreign affairs, helps the West to cast Russia as an authoritarian nation, led by a "secret Communist", Vladimir Putin, "who used to be a KGB agent."

When one gives this information to many Americans, the conclusion they draw is clear.

Share
The Pentagon, the central hub of US military operations.

Now to be sure, Vladimir Putin has been extremely open and candid about his nation and his own assertions of a strong Russian nation are absolutely proper for Russia, as they are for any nation. Nationalism is held extremely strongly in the United States, and again, history plays a part. The recent history of what amounts to world dominance, militarily, scientifically, academically, and culturally, gives a sense to Americans that it is their country which is the guardian of all that is good.

But what are they guarding? That greatness has shown many signs of slipping into decadence, such as happened in the waning days of the Roman Empire, where people lost their vision of becoming great , and have been self-indulgent in their perceived independence, not only of other nations and cultures, but of any power, including the Highest Power. We have seen it become legal to call homosexual unions "marriage" and depravity, drug use, and tremendous unproductive navel-gazing have become more and more prevalent in a nation that, a mere 45 years ago, really stood as a defender of Christian freedom.

It is not possible that a nation living in delusion about itself can have a clear view of those nations outside itself. And Russia has moved in the opposite direction as has the West. The struggle exists, for Russia under Communism suffered great damage to the institutions of family, marriage and Church, but the move of the Federation now is to rebuild these core values. All this while for a time, America seemed to be engaged in self-destruction by attacking these same core values.

Now, America's military is in an extremely dangerous place. The amount of sheer power the military has is greater than any in the world. Although Russia and China also have incredibly capable military forces, the Chinese are untested in battle thus far, and the Russians are just beginning to show their own incredible capabilities. But the United States has been at war almost continuously since at least as early as 2001, and this projection of power does create experience.

This Nuclear Posture Review shows us the face of a country who is deluded, hysterical, as the Russian media calls it, and they are right. Despite the issues with Russia and Ukraine or Syria, Russia's political will does not remotely resemble the notion that Russia is in an expansionist stage and that it wants to take over the former Soviet republics and then expand into the West. Russia does want to chart her own course, and as a great power, and one with a long history and long memory of suffering, she wants to try to protect her own people from more suffering.

The American posture points the finger at Russia for being a threat, and then implies that Russia is a threat in very well-crafted language. And this makes the assessment even more dangerous:

Russia has significantly increased the capabilities of its non-nuclear forces to project power into regions adjacent to Russia and, as previously discussed, has violated multiple treaty obligations and other important commitments. Most concerning are Russia's national security policies, strategy, and doctrine that include an emphasis on the threat of limited nuclear escalation, and its continuing development and fielding of increasingly diverse and expanding nuclear capabilities. Moscow threatens and exercises limited nuclear first use, suggesting a mistaken expectation that coercive nuclear threats or limited first use could paralyze the United States and NATO and thereby end a conflict on terms favorable to Russia. Some in the United States refer to this as Russia's "escalate to de-escalate" doctrine. "De-escalation" in this sense follows from Moscow's mistaken assumption of Western capitulation on terms favorable to Moscow.

Effective U.S. deterrence of Russian nuclear attack and non-nuclear strategic attack now requires ensuring that the Russian leadership does not miscalculate regarding the consequences of limited nuclear first use, either regionally or against the United States itself. Russia must instead understand that nuclear first-use, however limited, will fail to achieve its objectives, fundamentally alter the nature of a conflict, and trigger incalculable and intolerable costs for Moscow. Our strategy will ensure Russia understands that any use of nuclear weapons, however limited, is unacceptable.

The U.S. deterrent tailored to Russia, therefore, will be capable of holding at risk, under all conditions, what Russia's leadership most values. It will pose insurmountable difficulties to any Russian strategy of aggression against the United States, its allies, or partners and ensure the credible prospect of unacceptably dire costs to the Russian leadership if it were to choose aggression.

This is an amazing construction and assertion, and it is extremely dangerous for a nation with simultaneously massive power and a deluded worldview to hold. It is also very difficult to get people who have such a suspicious point of view to back away from that suspicion. There is a great deal of bondage such belief and fear exerts on those who hold it.

That being said, this situation helps explain what many in the alternative media do – to counter media and political bias and to report on events in a light that is hopefully objective and true. The Vesti newspiece was in its own way as alarmist as the American document it reported is. The real way through this is obviously through increased understanding of the truth in all matters – historical, ideological, and in our case here, geopolitical.

The American side has taken several nasty jabs at the Russians recently, in this document and last week's "Kremlin list", but there is also hope that the disintegrating "Russiagate" investigation will come to the true conclusions about this matter, and so free the hands of those in America who understand that Russia is anything but an enemy or adversary.

[Feb 11, 2018] Western sanctions have been a net benefit to Russia over the last three years keeping capital in the country and giving the agricultural, food processing and light manufacturing industries some room to breathe and develop free from Western competition.

Feb 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

Peter Akuleyev , February 9, 2018 at 11:24 am GMT

Cohen is a Communist and reflexive hater of the United States in the Noam Chomsky mold. He is either naive or a fool if he believes half of what he is saying.

Russia never had a decent shot at democracy. The collapse of the Soviet Union was arranged by the Nomenklatura for their own benefit as a massive asset grab. The fight between Yeltsin and the Russian Parliament was basically a fight between two factions, and the Yeltsin/KGB faction beat the CPSU/Red Manager faction. Putin is very much a product of and continuation of the Yeltsin/KGB team (notice, for example, the role that Chubais continues to play in government policy), but the current team realizes how hated Yeltsin is and are smart enough to create plausible distance for public consumption.

For the most part the Putin years have been a failure, and these last two decades will be seen as squandered. Very little economic growth, continuing deterioration of the education and health systems, increasing dependence on China and massive transfers of wealth abroad. Those are Putin's primary achievements.

On the plus side, Western sanctions have been a net benefit to Russia over the last three years – keeping capital in the country and giving the agricultural, food processing and light manufacturing industries some room to breathe and develop free from Western competition.

[Feb 11, 2018] Too many sport disciplines, too much cheating, too much money and too many politics involved in the Olympic

Feb 11, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Sportsmen became modern day graduators, who rid their health for entetaiment of crowd of rich spectactators.

I am no longer fond of Olympic games. There are too many sport disciplines, too much cheating, too much money and too many politics involved in the Olympics. The Norwegian team was rumored to have brought some 6,000 doses of asthma medicine for its athletes. That rumor is likely false, but it makes a good point. Such drugs are exempted by the anti-doping agency if some doctor simply certifies that an athlete needs them.

That such drugs are performance enhancing is then just a 'side effect'.

At least 15 U.S. athletes in the Rio Olympics took such 'medicine'. Russian athletes though, who never used these exemptions, were banned or restricted for alleged doping on quite murky grounds.

[Feb 11, 2018] How Russiagate fiasco destroys Kremlin moderates, accelerating danger for a hot war

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The pro-Hillary warmongering media, the ones that pushed for war in Iraq and elsewhere, through big lies and false evidence, are the vanguard of this ugly machine that supports the most terrible Trump administration bills, yet, this machine can't stop accusing him for 'colluding' with Russia that 'interfered' in the 2016 US election. Of course, no evidence presented for such an accusation and no one really can explain what that 'interference' means. ..."
"... They're accusing the President of the United States of being a Russian agent, this has never happened in American history. However much you may loathe Trump, this is a whole new realm of defamation. For a number of years, there's been a steady degradation of American political culture and discourse, generally. There was a time when I hoped or thought that it would be the Democratic Party that would push against that degradation ..."
"... Now, however, though I'm kind of only nominally, a Democrat, it's the Democratic Party that's degrading our political culture and our discourse. So, this is MSNBC, which purports to be not only the network of the Democratic Party, but the network of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, is now actually because this guy was a semi-anchor was asking the question to an American senator, " Do you think that Representative Nunes, because he wants the memo released, has been compromised by the Kremlin? " ..."
"... And by the way, if people will say, " Well, it's a weak capitulation of McCarthyism, " I say no, it's much more than that because McCarthy was obsessed with Communist. That was a much narrower concept than being obsessed with anybody who might be under Russian influence of any kind. The so-called affinity for Russia. Well, I have a profound affinity for Russian culture and for Russian history. I study it all the time. This is something new. And so, when you accuse a Republican or any Congressman of being a Kremlin agent, this has become a commonplace. We are degraded. ..."
"... We are building up our military presence there, so the Russians are counter-building up, though within their territory. That means the chances of hot war are now much greater than they were before. ..."
"... Every time Trump has tried with Putin to reach a cooperative arrangement, for example, on fighting terrorism in Syria, which is a necessary purpose, literally, the New York Times and the others call him treasonous. Whereas, in the old days, the old Cold War, we had a robust discussion. There is none here. We have no alert system that's warning the American people and its representatives how dangerous this is. And as we mentioned before, it's not only Nunes, it's a lot of people who are being called Kremlin agents because they want to digress from the basic narrative. ..."
"... Meanwhile, people in Moscow who formed their political establishment, who surround Putin and the Kremlin, I mean, the big brains who are formed policy tankers, and who have always tended to be kind of pro-American, and very moderate, have simply come to the conclusion that war is coming. ..."
"... The Democrats couldn't had downgrade their party further. This disgusting spectacle would make FDR totally ashamed of what this party has become. Not only they are voting for every pro-plutocracy GOP bill under Trump administration, but they have become champions in bringing back a much worse and unpredictable Cold War that is dangerously escalating tension with Russia. ..."
Feb 06, 2018 | failedevolution.blogspot.gr

How Russiagate fiasco destroys Kremlin moderates, accelerating danger for a hot war with Russia globinfo freexchange

Corporate Democrats can't stop pushing for war through the Russiagate fiasco.

The party has been completely taken over by the neocon/neoliberal establishment and has nothing to do with the Left. The pro-Hillary warmongering media, the ones that pushed for war in Iraq and elsewhere, through big lies and false evidence, are the vanguard of this ugly machine that supports the most terrible Trump administration bills, yet, this machine can't stop accusing him for 'colluding' with Russia that 'interfered' in the 2016 US election. Of course, no evidence presented for such an accusation and no one really can explain what that 'interference' means.

But things are probably much worse, because this completely absurd persistence on Russiagate fiasco that feeds an evident anti-Russian hysteria, destroys all the influence of the Kremlin moderates who struggle to keep open channels between Russia and the United States.

Stephen Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian studies, history, and politics at NY University and Princeton University, explained to Aaron Maté and the Real News the terrible consequences:

They're accusing the President of the United States of being a Russian agent, this has never happened in American history. However much you may loathe Trump, this is a whole new realm of defamation. For a number of years, there's been a steady degradation of American political culture and discourse, generally. There was a time when I hoped or thought that it would be the Democratic Party that would push against that degradation.

Now, however, though I'm kind of only nominally, a Democrat, it's the Democratic Party that's degrading our political culture and our discourse. So, this is MSNBC, which purports to be not only the network of the Democratic Party, but the network of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, is now actually because this guy was a semi-anchor was asking the question to an American senator, " Do you think that Representative Nunes, because he wants the memo released, has been compromised by the Kremlin? "

I think all of us need to focus on what's happened in this country when in the very mainstream, at the highest, most influential levels of the political establishment, this kind of discourse is no longer considered an exception. It is the norm. We hear it daily from MSNBC and CNN, from the New York Times and the Washington Post, that people who doubt the narrative of what's loosely called Russiagate are somehow acting on behalf of or under the spell of the Kremlin, that we aren't Americans any longer. And by the way, if people will say, " Well, it's a weak capitulation of McCarthyism, " I say no, it's much more than that because McCarthy was obsessed with Communist. That was a much narrower concept than being obsessed with anybody who might be under Russian influence of any kind. The so-called affinity for Russia. Well, I have a profound affinity for Russian culture and for Russian history. I study it all the time. This is something new. And so, when you accuse a Republican or any Congressman of being a Kremlin agent, this has become a commonplace. We are degraded.

The new Cold War is unfolding not far away from Russia, like the last in Berlin, but on Russia's borders in the Baltic and in Ukraine. We are building up our military presence there, so the Russians are counter-building up, though within their territory. That means the chances of hot war are now much greater than they were before. Meanwhile, not only do we not have a discussion of these real dangers in the United States but anyone who wants to incite a discussion, including the President of the United States, is called treasonous. Every time Trump has tried with Putin to reach a cooperative arrangement, for example, on fighting terrorism in Syria, which is a necessary purpose, literally, the New York Times and the others call him treasonous. Whereas, in the old days, the old Cold War, we had a robust discussion. There is none here. We have no alert system that's warning the American people and its representatives how dangerous this is. And as we mentioned before, it's not only Nunes, it's a lot of people who are being called Kremlin agents because they want to digress from the basic narrative.

Meanwhile, people in Moscow who formed their political establishment, who surround Putin and the Kremlin, I mean, the big brains who are formed policy tankers, and who have always tended to be kind of pro-American, and very moderate, have simply come to the conclusion that war is coming. They can't think of a single thing to tell the Kremlin to offset hawkish views in the Kremlin. Every day, there's something new. And these were the people in Moscow who are daytime peacekeeping interlockers. They have been destroyed by Russiagate. Their influence as Russia is zilch. And the McCarthyites in Russia, they have various terms, now called the pro-American lobby in Russia 'fifth columnists'. This is the damage that's been done. There's never been anything like this in my lifetime.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/CpVBA4OIfb8

The Democrats couldn't had downgrade their party further. This disgusting spectacle would make FDR totally ashamed of what this party has become. Not only they are voting for every pro-plutocracy GOP bill under Trump administration, but they have become champions in bringing back a much worse and unpredictable Cold War that is dangerously escalating tension with Russia.

And, unfortunately, even the most progressives of the Democrats are adopting the Russiagate bogus, like Bernie Sanders, because they know that if they don't obey to the narratives, the DNC establishment will crush them politically in no time.

[Feb 11, 2018] Cohen has basically been trying to show that Putin is a normal leader, ready to cooperate with the US and defend his country's national interests. His posture has been defensive

Notable quotes:
"... However, the Ukraine conflict has completely messed up that dream project. My most important objection to Saker is that Putin does not know what to do about Ukraine and does not have a policy on Ukraine. He puts up with what no Russian leader would put up with. Americans are arming Ukrainian neo-Nazies for a war with Russia. And Putin does nothing. Americans openly arm terrorists on Syria who shoot a Russian airplane and Russia does nothing. Basically Putin's policy of turning enemies into partners and partners into friends and friends into allies has partially succeeded in Syria but failed in Ukraine. Is he going to wait until US missiles are established in Ukraine? Is he going to accept de facto NATO membership of Ukraine. Where is the red line beyond which he would not go? ..."
Feb 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

Vlad, February 9, 2018 at 11:12 am GMT

Saker did a great job of explaining Cohen's position on Putin that had been misunderstood in mainstream Western media. Cohen has basically been trying to show that Putin is a normal leader, ready to cooperate with the US and defend his country's national interests. His posture has been defensive. Cohen is trying to reason with the liberals and New York Jews. He is trying to convince them that the mainstream media is lying. Fine.

But that does not explain what Putin's agenda is. Saker goes further. He does explain most of Putin's past and present. But still there is room for disagreement. Saker argues that Putin knew all along the wicked intentions of the US and openly revealed that knowledge after the Ukraine take over by the US. Here I disagree. When Bush came to Russia Putin greeted him with genuine enthusiasm. Putin then did hope that Russia and US could turn the page and begin a new relationship. That did not happen. Expansion of NATO happened instead. And that is when Putin began to reconsider. My difference with Saker is that I believe that Putin still does not know what his policy to the US should be. He still hopes that Trump will live up to his pre-election promise. Putin is still beholden to the moment of 2003 when Russia Germany France and Italy were together in opposition to US Iraq war. He still craves for the days when the German Chancellor and Italian leader were his personal friends. He hoped then and still hopes today to draw Europe to Russia and undermine NATO from within.

However, the Ukraine conflict has completely messed up that dream project. My most important objection to Saker is that Putin does not know what to do about Ukraine and does not have a policy on Ukraine. He puts up with what no Russian leader would put up with. Americans are arming Ukrainian neo-Nazies for a war with Russia. And Putin does nothing. Americans openly arm terrorists on Syria who shoot a Russian airplane and Russia does nothing. Basically Putin's policy of turning enemies into partners and partners into friends and friends into allies has partially succeeded in Syria but failed in Ukraine. Is he going to wait until US missiles are established in Ukraine? Is he going to accept de facto NATO membership of Ukraine. Where is the red line beyond which he would not go?

Sergey Krieger , February 10, 2018 at 9:31 pm GMT
@yurivku

I believe it is all divide and rule strategy by western elites. Gender, race. It is far easier to control and fleece when steeple is distracted and confused, unity, moral and ethics are destroyed. With Soviet union in place as other choice and pole it would have never happened even in the West. And frankly, were ussr still in place the West would have been completely bankrupt by now. Our resources bought them 20 years. Why do you think so much hatred towards Russia? Imagine your favorite meal refusing to get eaten but actually fighting back successfully.

yurivku , February 10, 2018 at 9:36 pm GMT
@Sergey Krieger

Sergey, I 've asked just after u said about bright expectations. Sorry. Actually for me every one who consider our country as Motherland is precious and should be kept and helped.
See trolls are under attack, dont know which .. but ill refresh my english and continue to spread the simple words of reason

yurivku , February 10, 2018 at 9:49 pm GMT
@AP

AFAIR u are from khohols ? Just fly down, I wont speak with a shithole representatives

yurivku , February 10, 2018 at 9:57 pm GMT
@Sergey Krieger

Sergey, if u'll come to Russia, just cal me my email is yurivku then l dot ru, try to write. Ill be happy to help if I can

yurivku , February 10, 2018 at 10:10 pm GMT
@Sergey Krieger

Sergey, I dont give my explanations and underderstandings when I just fix the presence of jews here and there. Of cource I have an explanation, but I keep it for now. But as always they are here.

Sergey Krieger , February 10, 2018 at 10:11 pm GMT
@yurivku

Future looked bright in 1985 when I finished school. Misunderstanding.

AP , February 11, 2018 at 12:56 am GMT
@yurivku

Try to write in better English.

Anon • Disclaimer , February 11, 2018 at 12:58 am GMT
@AP

Yea, truth hurts. Losers are particularly vulnerable. My condolences.

AP , February 11, 2018 at 4:33 am GMT
@Anon

So in your world Kadyrov came to Kiev in 2014? Very funny.

Beefcake the Mighty , February 11, 2018 at 5:47 am GMT
@Vlad

Putin's main flaw, like Hitler's, is underestimating the hostility his opponents have towards him and Russia. However, he does know that Russia is not yet ready for a major war and is rightfully proceeding carefully. He has countered NATO's attempt to close off Russia's access to the Black Sea. He has been effectively a savior in helping Syria stave off Zio-American terror and halted, at least for now, their continued destabilization of the ME. I would say thus far he has played his cards reasonably well.

[Feb 11, 2018] What is clear that the west has resumed the Cold War, under a pretext, this time, with a not negligible chance of turning it into a hot war, the war that will end all wars, the end of humanity

Feb 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

jilles dykstra , February 11, 2018 at 8:18 am GMT

A weird country, the USA.
Until 1933 the USA did not recognise diplomatically the USSR. FDR did. Conspiracy theorists, I'm one of them, suppose that already in 1933 FDR was planning his war.

During the thirties the USSR show trials were denied by USA ambassadors in Moscow, Davies the first, a nephew of Morgenthau. USA top brass who met the Russians during WWII were very cynical about them, Patton one of them, he died by an accident, of which many suppose it was murder.

1948 was the turning point, Stalin blocked Berlin. All of a sudden Uncle Joe became a monster, THE threat to the USA McCarthy saw communists anywhere.

Then the long Cold War, an effort by the west to let the USSR fall apart through the burden of defence spending.

1990 success, not just because of defence spending, but because a centrally directed economy without the profit motive is unable to produce the consumer goods the consumer wants.
In 1990 I was so naive to think that NATO would be dissolved, it was not.

What western policy towards the non communist Russia was after 1990, I never fully understood. What is clear that the west has resumed the Cold War, under a pretext, this time, with a not negligible chance of turning it into a hot war, the war that will end all wars, the end of humanity.

[Feb 11, 2018] Professor Stephen F. Cohen Rethinking Putin. For what it is worth, this is the best article on Putin, the USSR/Russia and the KGB I have ever read by The Saker

Feb 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

Chris Bridges , February 11, 2018 at 1:55 pm GMT

I am a retired CIA ops officer. For what it is worth, this is the best article on Putin, the USSR/Russia and the KGB I have ever read. Russiphobe idiots, take note.
Michael Kenny , February 11, 2018 at 2:30 pm GMT
Putin certainly changed sides about the time he returned to the presidency in 2012. Prior to that he had been slowly steering Russia back to its normal place as a European great power and, thereby, drawing closer to the EU. Suddenly, he became a US neocon stooge and allowed himself to be used as a "useful idiot" in their campaign to destroy the EU.

That blunder led him to paint himself into the corner he is now in in Ukraine and that blunder, in turn, led him to wade into the Syrian civil war, thereby painting himself into another corner. What emerges is a man with little or no political savvy who simply lurches from blunder to blunder, with each blunder an attempt to overcome the consequences of the previous blunder. Professor Cohen also repeats a classic neocon propaganda line, namely, that Russians do not see themselves as Europeans.

As far as I can tell, that propaganda line was invented by Daniel Pipes and was intended, one supposes, to drive a wedge between Russia and the rest of Europe, in particular the EU. I can find no evidence (to borrow a phrase!) that Russians regard themselves, or have ever regarded themselves, as anything but European and Professor Cohen provides no evidence in support of his claim, although he is quite happy to dismiss criticisms of Putin by arguing that there is no evidence to support them.

The classic technique of the pro-Putin camp: when it favours Putin, no evidence is required; when it doesn't suit him, proof, almost to courtroom standards, has to be provided. Professor Cohen has once again lived up to his reputation as a pro-Putin propagandist and his remarks will be judged accordingly.

I was amused by the author's claim that Putin "wants a new, multi-polar, international order of sovereign countries". He could usefully prove his bona fides in that regard by respecting Ukrainian sovereignty and ceasing to finance anti-EU political parties (the latest, apparently, being the Lega Nord in Italy), thereby violating the sovereignty of the countries in which they operate. Indeed, if he hadn't started violating the sovereignty of other European countries, there wouldn't be a dispute with him in the first place! That does tend to support the author's view that Putin has been double-dealing from the start, which, in its turn, completely demolishes Professor Cohen's "nice but misunderstood Mr Putin" thesis.

Anon Disclaimer , February 11, 2018 at 4:37 pm GMT
@AP

Anon from TN
He didn't even need to fly there personally: he scared pathetic nonentities calling themselves Ukrainian leaders long-range. The truth is, first Ukraine denied OSCE mission access to these journalists, broke all the rules so badly that even Human Rights Watch said that Ukraine dangerously interferes with press freedom. But all this bluster evaporated when Kadyrov entered negotiations. Within 4 days both journalists were released unconditionally and flown to Moscow. Typical Ukraine: it "suffered a glorious victory" then, not for the first and not for the last time.
As is widely known, Ukraine is the only country in the world that shot down two civilian aircraft and not a single military one. However hard the Empire and its lackeys try to convince the gullible that Malayan Boeing in 2014 was shot down by Russia or Russia-backed Donbass freedom fighters, international airlines made their conclusions: all fly over Russia, but they fly around Ukraine, avoiding Ukrainian airspace like they avoid North Korean.

Aedib , February 11, 2018 at 4:48 pm GMT
@Michael Kenny

in that regard by respecting Ukrainian sovereignty

You fail to understand what self-determination (i.e. Crimean referendum) means.

Anon Disclaimer , February 11, 2018 at 7:28 pm GMT
@Aedib

Anon from TN
As far as Crimean population is concerned, it tried to get out of Ukraine since the dissolution of the USSR in 1991. Crimeans say that finally in 2014 Russia did not betray them. Polls by Gallup and Pew Research Center in 2014, as well as by German company GfK later, showed that more than 80% of Crimean residents want to be part of Russia, not Ukraine.
Not to mention that today the expression "Ukrainian sovereignty" makes as much sense as "the virginity of an old prostitute".

[Feb 11, 2018] In Afghanistan's Unwinnable War, What's the Best Loss to Hope For

Feb 11, 2018 | www.nytimes.com

After 16 years of war in Afghanistan, experts have stopped asking what victory looks like and are beginning to consider the spectrum of possible defeats.

All options involve acknowledging the war as failed, American aims as largely unachievable and Afghanistan's future as only partly salvageable. Their advocates see glimmers of hope barely worth the stomach-turning trade-offs and slim odds of success.

"I don't think there is any serious analyst of the situation in Afghanistan who believes that the war is winnable," Laurel Miller, a political scientist at the RAND Corporation, said in a podcast last summer, after leaving her State Department stint as acting special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

This may be why, even after thousands have died and over $100 billion has been spent, even after the past two weeks of shocking bloodshed in Kabul , few expect the United States to try anything other than the status quo.

It is a strategy, as Ms. Miller described it, to "prevent the defeat of the Afghan government and prevent military victory by the Taliban" for as long as possible.

Though far from the most promising option, it is the least humiliating. But sooner or later, the United States and Afghanistan will find themselves facing one of Afghanistan's endgames -- whether by choice or not.

[Feb 10, 2018] American Think Tanks Are Hired Purveyors of Fake News by Paul Craig Roberts

Notable quotes:
"... think tanks are essentially lobby groups for their donors. The policy analyses and reform schemes that they produce are tailored to support the material interests of donors. None of the studies are reliable as objective evidence. They are special pleading. ..."
"... Think tanks, such as the American Enterprise Institute, Brookings Institution, and the Atlantic Council, speak for those who fund them. Increasingly, they speak for the military/security complex, American hegemony, corporate interests, and Israel ..."
"... Bryan MacDonald lists those who support the anti-Russian think tanks such as the Atlantic Council, the Center for European Policy Analysis, German Marshall Fund of the US, and Institute for Study of War. The "experts" are mouthpieces funded by the US military security complex. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/48755.htm US government agencies use taxpayer dollars to deceive taxpayers. ..."
Feb 10, 2018 | www.unz.com

A couple of decades or more ago when I was still in Washington, otherwise known as the snake pit, I was contacted by a well-financed group that offered me, a Business Week and Scripps Howard News Service columnist with access as a former editor also to the Wall Street Journal, substantial payments to promote agendas that the lobbyists paying the bills wanted promoted.

To the detriment of my net worth, but to the preservation of my reputation, I declined. Shortly thereafter a conservative columnist, a black man if memory serves, was outed for writing newspaper columns for pay for a lobby group.

I often wondered if he was set up in order to get rid of him and whether the enticement I received was intended to shut me down, or whether journalists had become "have pen will travel"? (Have Gun -- Will Travel was a highly successful TV Series 1957-1963).

Having read Bryan MacDonald's article on Information Clearing House, "Anti-Russia Think Tanks in US: Who Funds them?," I see that think tanks are essentially lobby groups for their donors. The policy analyses and reform schemes that they produce are tailored to support the material interests of donors. None of the studies are reliable as objective evidence. They are special pleading.

Think tanks, such as the American Enterprise Institute, Brookings Institution, and the Atlantic Council, speak for those who fund them. Increasingly, they speak for the military/security complex, American hegemony, corporate interests, and Israel.

Bryan MacDonald lists those who support the anti-Russian think tanks such as the Atlantic Council, the Center for European Policy Analysis, German Marshall Fund of the US, and Institute for Study of War. The "experts" are mouthpieces funded by the US military security complex. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/48755.htm US government agencies use taxpayer dollars to deceive taxpayers.

In other words insouciant Americans pay taxes in order to be brainwashed. And they tolerate this.

[Feb 10, 2018] Canons of color revolution in action: hundreds of thousands have pledged to take to the streets if Special Counsel Robert Mueller is removed, reflecting misplaced priorities and some fundamental misunderstandings

Notable quotes:
"... What has happened in America is eerily similar to the color revolutions in targeted countries which leads me to believe the organizers of such revolutions looked at the biggest prize of all and said "Why not.'. ..."
"... Herman.I think you are right. These things are being cooked up–orchestrated to serve the current power block. The mainstream propaganda media plays a big part in that. And sadly, Americans cannot wake up fast enough ..."
"... I am familiar with the tactics of Move-On, and although they would deny it, represent the democratic party. They actually called me up asking for money to create mayhem at Trump's rallies during his run for the presidency. I told them I wouldn't give them a nickel since not only did I see it as undemocratic and contentious, but psychologically idiotic. Idiotic in the sense that the people who supported Trump perceived themselves as victims of a corrupt system who cared little about their needs, and turning Trump's rallies into mayhem would portray him as a victim as well, which would cause his supporters to more fully identify with him, and more committed to getting him elected. ..."
"... This is Jimmy Dore's take on the left falling for Russia-gate and aligning itself with the FBI. As he says, they are reacting to Trump with their lizard brain which makes them easy prey for being led to their own political slaughter. ..."
"... Does anybody ever talk about the failures of capitalism anymore or just about people and politics? ..."
"... Yes, but clearly he doesn't, and therefore he won't. He will drag out his neocon-sponsored witch-hunt as long as possible in order to do the maximum damage possible to all those who don't toe the neocon line. The very existence of Mueller's unholy inquisition constantly forces the president ever-further to the right in an effort to appease his neocon tormentors. That is, further away from détente with Russia and closer to nuclear Armageddon. ..."
"... The neocons' goal is to kill two birds, U.S. democracy and Russia, with one stone -- the Mueller "investigation." ..."
"... yes i agree that Mueller will be exposed (before congress ?) but not in the mainstream media. ..."
"... This article does point to no doubt one of our nation's most evasive, and spookiest courts, which is FISA. Yet, on tv hardly is this subject ever brought up, while instead reissuing every 90 days for permission to monitor Carter Page gets talked about to no end. So far hardly has there been, to when at least I've viewed the anchors and pundits, do they ever discuss the unconstitutionally, or break down of our democratic values, that this FISA court represents. ..."
"... Meanwhile so far what has Robert Mueller come up with? Well, we know that Manafort may be guilty of money laundering with his dealings with foreign officials, which is an easy obstacle splinter to uncover due part and parcel to his trade. We do know that the young up and coming politico operative George Papadopoulos would do well to learn a lesson from his past barroom experience of possibility talking to much to strangers, and skip the bar talk. In many ways it's hard to see to what exactly Lt General Michael Flynn is guilty of. Maybe Flynn as the newly appointed National Security Advisor is guilty of discussing the sanctions imposed onto Russia, or was he guilty of representing Bibi Netanyahu? Probably the former is prosecutable, but of course never the latter for protecting dear sweet Israel in America no matter what is the right thing to do. Protecting Israel may in some people's eyes even seem quite patriotic, as far as that goes, but talking to Russian diplomats, nay, never. ..."
"... Great point Mr. Tedesky. This creepy police-state court is rarely criticized at all in our free [sic] press and establishment media. ..."
"... Population in the country was very poorly informed any how. And now, they, The Ruling Establishment which includes Media, have completely messed the people up – making them compliant and confused. ..."
"... As a foreigner, looking from the outside, it seems Mueller will not find anything on Russia. He already found something on Israel, but he doesn't pursue that. If Americans rally, then it seems you should rally to make an objective and fair inquiry, to nail Israel for what they seem to have done. ..."
"... Many years ago in my early 20s I read 'Guns of August' that described support for the coming WWI. What was so striking about that period was how the public in every relevant European was hell bent on war. Among the major players -- Germany, France, UK, Russia and Austro-hungary -- their populations were demonstrating in the streets and assemblies for war. How was it possible for all of those people to eagerly lust for war that within a few years led to the destruction of the German, Russian and Austrian empires, the deaths of millions of their citizens and multidecade impoverishment for the survivors. The costs of the war resulted in the effective bankruptcy of the UK and French colonial empires as well as millions of dead and traumatized survivors. ..."
"... I never was able to see how so many people then could be so incredibly foolish. In the last two years I have gained some insight. Many of my respected, but now previous, political associates have just gone totally nuts over Russiagate. There was some kind of psychic break in their minds when Hillary lost and they are now little more than raging primates trapped in a cognitive dissonance loop. Not just that, but these are people who are on the verge of supporting war against Russia. ..."
"... Maybe wishful thinking on my part. The Grassley-Graham referral regarding Steele's potential violation of Title 18 Section 1001, lying to the FBI, may or may not be prosecutable depending upon where the "lies" took place and the likely lack of extra-territorial jurisdiction if they occurred in Rome. But even if no criminal violation could be prosecuted, I would think the IG should still investigate the matter for potential administrative discipline. ..."
"... That Russia "meddled in the US election" is totally without foundation and you know it. Any such attempt by them would be pointless, ineffective and detrimental if ever found out. If we had really found out any such thing, we'd all know about it rather than being fed bullshit based upon absolutely no real evidence. America would not be subjected to a year and a half of shenanigans by a thoroughly-biased politically-motivated special prosecutor given a hunting license by a frustrated deep state, a bitter political opposition and a raucous media in the service of both. ..."
"... Give the Clinton right wing credit for achieving what the Republicans had long hoped, but failed, to do. First, they split apart the Dem voting base in the 1990s, middle class vs. poor, and the Obama years served to confirm that this split is permanent. Then they apparently plagiarized old Joe McCarthy's playbook, launching their anti-Russian crusade, splitting apart those who are not on the right wing. Divide, subdivide, conquer. ..."
"... I believe the public is getting played on Mueller. Little hints keep dropping about Trump firing him. Then the media and the left goes into a frenzy, demanding Saint Mueller stay. Mueller has literally become the symbol of hope for the left. ..."
"... Imagine Mueller now coming out and clearing Trump completely while exposing what his real investigative objective was: revealing the deep state. Remember NBC and CNN mentioning Mueller began investigating the Podestas? Then they dropped that story as fast as possible. ..."
"... The thing about liberals is, they'll only accept one result in the Mueller probe. If Trump removes him, he's hiding something. And if Mueller exposes Dem corruption instead of Rep corruption, they'll say its fixed. They want the process to play out, but they'll only accept one result, that of Trump/Russia collusion. They are blinded by their own hate. ..."
"... One of the supreme ironies of our age is how the McCarthyesque focus on Russian interference in our electoral process has completely obscured the domestic politicization of our own institutions of government, that is the damage our now rabid placement of political party party above the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of the American population. ..."
"... Our slow descent into the present National Chaos might well've been birthed under McCarthy antics as cloak&cover for Operation Paperclip. One could rightly label his actions "political theater" or straight subversion. -- Whatever, US actual history is a Disappearing Act with imperious propensity. We, as a nation, have always been imperious and domineering, just as were our British forefathers. ..."
"... Is it a diversion? From what? It is obvious that Israel & Trump are on a roll. Bombing Syria on the skirtings of Iran – "oh joy of joys, one step closer," – to doomsday. Elsewhere i have recommended the Palestinian people exit Palestine ASAP. Foolhardy Israel is only the size of a postage stamp, 4 time the size of Hiroshima. when nerves fray hey! ..."
"... I was actually hoping that with Trump taking over the reigns of the war machine that the left would once again mobilize and oppose our wars and the spying state that walks all over our civil liberties. Trump certainly gives them enough legitimate areas of concern that they have plenty to go on. Sadly this really does show the power of the press to manipulate public opinion and the left-wing media loves Russia Gate. ..."
"... For myself personally, I see the threat of a confrontation with Russia as the #1 concern. We have now entered into a new cold war with all the massive spending, proxy wars and yet again the very real chance of it leading to a hot war that could be the end of all of us. Sadly the "left" in this country has once again fallen for the endless propaganda, their hatred of Trump is only part of this issue. ..."
"... With or without the Mueller investigation the Russia hatred will go on. Mueller could exonerate Trump tomorrow and the anti-Russian propaganda will continue. ..."
"... Yes, the Dem's are wasting valuable time chasing after these Russian hackers who weren't there. ..."
"... The so called liberals tried to redefined the left away from working class to LBGT, Black Lives Matter, abortion rights, etc and , in the process, dug their own graves. ..."
"... I maintain that having only two political parties is the crux of the problem, and clearly both are corporate. People don't get how they are being played. A quote attributed to Mark Twain I just read: "It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they are being fooled." ..."
"... Nuts' indeed. Before raising the temperature over the Russiagate, first. Shave off the Pentagon budget! ..."
Feb 09, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Originally from: 'This is Nuts' Liberals Launch 'Largest Mobilization in History' in Defense of Russiagate Probe – Consortiumnews By Coleen Rowley and Nat Parry

Exclusive: Hundreds of thousands have pledged to take to the streets if Special Counsel Robert Mueller is removed, reflecting misplaced priorities and some fundamental misunderstandings, report Coleen Rowley and Nat Parry.

... ... ...

Social psychologists have long talked about how emotional manipulation can work effectively to snooker a large percentage of the population, to get them, at least temporarily, to believe the exact opposite of the facts. These techniques are known in the intelligence community as "perception management," and have been refined since the 1980s "to keep the American people compliant and confused," as the late Robert Parry has reported . We saw this in action last decade, when after months of disinformation, about 70% of Americans came to falsely believe that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11 when the truth was the opposite – Saddam was actually an enemy of the Al Qaeda perpetrators.

Such emotional manipulation is the likely explanation for the fact that so many people are now gearing up to defend someone like Mueller, while largely ignoring other important topics of far greater consequence. With no demonstrations being organized to stop a possible war with North Korea – or an escalation in Syria – hundreds of thousands of Americans are apparently all too eager to go to the mat in defense of an investigation into the president's possible "collusion" with Russia in its alleged meddling in election 2016.

Setting aside for the moment the merits of the Russiagate narrative, who really is this Robert Mueller that amnesiac liberals clamor to hold up as the champion of the people and defender of democracy? Co-author Coleen Rowley, who as an FBI whistleblower exposed numerous internal problems at the FBI in the early 2000s, didn't have to be privy to his inner circle to recall just a few of his actions after 9/11 that so shocked the public conscience as to repeatedly generate moral disapproval even on the part of mainstream media. Rowley was only able to scratch the surface in listing some of the more widely reported wrongdoing that should still shock liberal consciences.

Although Mueller and his "joined at the hip" cohort James Comey are now hailed for their impeccable character by much of Washington, the truth is, as top law enforcement officials of the George W. Bush administration (Mueller as FBI Director and Comey as Deputy Attorney General), both presided over post-9/11 cover-ups and secret abuses of the Constitution, enabled Bush-Cheney fabrications used to launch wrongful wars, and exhibited stunning levels of incompetence.

Ironically, recent declassifications of House Intelligence Committee's and Senate Judiciary Committee Leaders letters ( here and here ) reveal strong parallels between the way the public so quickly forgot Mueller's spotty track record with the way the FBI and (the Obama administration's) Department of Justice rushed, during the summer of 2016, to put a former fellow spy, Christopher Steele up on a pedestal. Steele was declared to be a "reliable source" without apparently vetting or corroborating any of the "opposition research" allegations that he had been hired (and paid $160,000) to quickly produce for the DNC and Hillary Clinton's campaign.

There are typically at least two major prongs of establishing the "reliability" of any given source in an affidavit, the first – and the one mostly pointed to – being the source's track record for having furnished accurate and reliable information in the past. Even if it is conceded that Steele would have initially satisfied this part of the test for determining probable cause, based on his having reportedly furnished some important information to FBI agents investigating the FIFA soccer fraud years before, his track record for truthfulness would go right up in smoke only a month or so later, when it was discovered that he had lied to the FBI about his having previously leaked the investigation to the media. (Moreover, this lie had led the FBI to mislead the FISA court in its first application to surveil Carter Page.)

The second main factor in establishing the reliability of any source's information would be even more key in this case. It's the basis of the particular informant's knowledge, i.e. was the informant an eye witness or merely reporting double-triple hearsay or just regurgitating the "word on the street?"

If the actual basis of the information is uncertain, the next step for law enforcement would normally be to seek facts that either corroborate or refute the source's information. It's been reported that FBI agents did inquire into the basis for Steele's allegations, but it is not known what Steele told the FBI – other than indications that his info came from secondary sources making it, at best, second- or third-hand. What if anything did the FBI do to establish the reliability of the indirect sources that Steele claimed to be getting his info from? Before vouching for his credibility, did the FBI even consider polygraphing Steele after he (falsely) denied having leaked his info since the FBI was aware of significant similarities of a news article to the info he had supplied them?

Obviously, more questions than answers exist at the present time. But even if the FBI was duped by Steele – whether as the result of their naivete in trusting a fellow former spy, their own sloppiness or recklessness, or political bias – it should be hoped by everyone that the Department of Justice Inspector General can get to the bottom of how the FISA court was ultimately misled.

As they prepare for the "largest mobilization in history" in defense of Mueller and his probe into Russiagate, liberals have tried to sweep all this under the rug as a "nothing burger." Yet, how can liberals, who in the past have pointed to so many abusive past practices by the FBI, ignore the reality that these sorts of abuses of the FISA process more than likely take place on a daily basis – with the FISA court earning a well-deserved reputation as little more than a rubberstamp?

Other, more run-of-the-mill FISA applications – if they were to be scrutinized as thoroughly as the Carter Page one – would reveal similar sloppiness and lack of factual verification of source information used to secure surveillance orders, especially after FISA surveillances skyrocketed after 9/11 in the "war on terror." Rather than dismissing the Nunes Memo as a nothing burger, liberals might be better served by taking a closer look at this FISA process which could easily be turned against them instead of Trump.

It must be recognized that FBI agents who go before the secret FISA court and who are virtually assured that whatever they present will be kept secret in perpetuity, have very little reason to be careful in verifying what they present as factual. FISA court judges are responsible for knowing the law but have no way of ascertaining the "facts" presented to them.

Unlike a criminal surveillance authorized by a federal district court, no FBI affidavit justifying the surveillance will ever end up under the microscope of defense attorneys and defendants to be pored over to ensure every asserted detail was correct and if not, to challenge any incorrect factual assertions in pre-trial motions to suppress evidence.

It is therefore shocking to watch how this political manipulation seems to make people who claim to care about the rule of law now want to bury this case of surveillance targeting Carter Page based on the ostensibly specious Steele dossier. This is the one case unique in coming to light among tens of thousands of FISA surveillances cloaked forever in secrecy, given that the FISA system lacks the checks on abusive authority that inherently exist in the criminal justice process, and so the Page case is instructive to learn how the sausage really gets made.

Neither the liberal adulation of Mueller nor the unquestioned credibility accorded Steele by the FBI seem warranted by the facts. It is fair for Americans to ask whether Mueller's investigation would have ever happened if not for his FBI successor James Comey having signed off on the investigation triggered by the Steele dossier, which was paid for by the Clinton campaign to dig up dirt on her opponent.

In any event, please spare us the solicitations of these political NGOs' "national mobilization" to protect Mueller. There are at least a million attorneys in this country who do not suffer from the significant conflicts of interest that Robert Mueller has with key witnesses like his close, long-term colleague James Comey and other public officials involved in the investigation.

And, at the end of the day, there are far more important issues to be concerned about than the "integrity" of the Mueller investigation – one being the need to fix FISA court abuses and restoring constitutional rights.

Coleen Rowley, a retired FBI special agent and division legal counsel whose May 2002 memo to then-FBI Director Robert Mueller exposed some of the FBI's pre-9/11 failures, was named one of TIME magazine's "Persons of the Year" in 2002.

Nat Parry is co-author of Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush .

Herman , February 9, 2018 at 9:44 am

What has happened in America is eerily similar to the color revolutions in targeted countries which leads me to believe the organizers of such revolutions looked at the biggest prize of all and said "Why not.'.

Tower of Babel , February 9, 2018 at 11:04 am

Herman.I think you are right. These things are being cooked up–orchestrated to serve the current power block. The mainstream propaganda media plays a big part in that. And sadly, Americans cannot wake up fast enough

Annie , February 9, 2018 at 10:40 am

I'm not all that familiar with the group Avaaz, but I am familiar with the tactics of Move-On, and although they would deny it, represent the democratic party. They actually called me up asking for money to create mayhem at Trump's rallies during his run for the presidency. I told them I wouldn't give them a nickel since not only did I see it as undemocratic and contentious, but psychologically idiotic. Idiotic in the sense that the people who supported Trump perceived themselves as victims of a corrupt system who cared little about their needs, and turning Trump's rallies into mayhem would portray him as a victim as well, which would cause his supporters to more fully identify with him, and more committed to getting him elected.

I discontinued my support for Move-on as a result of these kind of antics. Those I know who were viciously anti-Trump lost total perspective during his presidential run, and all supported Clinton whose policies they knew little about. They were hooked into mainstream media, and none investigated alternative news sources even though they are computer literate and could have done so. All were hooked into Russia-gate from the beginning, and have never waivered in their position. I think we have to begin to look at these people not as liberals, or progressives, but for the most part they are democrats who see their party as representing liberal causes. None I know who would support this march participated in any anti-war movement, and were basically silent on Obama's militarism, which informs me these so called liberals when it comes to war their position is more dependent on who's doing the killing.

Joe Tedesky , February 9, 2018 at 1:27 pm

Annie I found this statement of yours a very interesting perspective 'and turning Trump's rallies into mayhem would portray him as a victim as well'. All this noise coming from the left is never analyzed from the perspective of what would the average Trump supporter think. Yet, you did this. Pretty good analytical take on these attacks against Trump.

I thought when Trump honored the 'Natve-American code breakers' that by his doing this function while standing underneath a picture of Andrew 'Trail of Tears' Jackson was very telling. Although seen properly by many who may have a good sense of history, I thought that this was purposely done, and done to insight the Trump supporters who's racist attitude were served quite well with Trump's staging of this honorable affair.

The Left (which isn't really Left) is wandering around trying to bring down Trump, while at the same time the American Left ignores what a Trump supporter may think. Both groups of American citizenry would do well to quit with all of this name calling, and derisive contempt for each other, and they should begin with a dialog which could eventually bring them together, in order to create a more perfect union.

Then that's where you come in Annie, as to reassure they keep their eye on the ball, and to what is most important to remember, and that is because we are all together in this big crazy thing called America. We Americans should bridge our difference into making the U.S. a better nation for all to live in, and relieve the world from fears of American bombs falling on their heads.

Good take on the anti-Trump movement Annie. Joe

Jim Meeks , February 9, 2018 at 7:34 pm

https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-propaganda-war-against-syria-led-by-avaaz-and-the-white-helmets/5479307

Coleen Rowley , February 9, 2018 at 10:12 pm

More background on Avaaz (and its hypocrisy) at: https://consortiumnews.com/2016/04/14/duping-progressives-into-wars/

Lois Gagnon , February 9, 2018 at 11:02 pm

This is Jimmy Dore's take on the left falling for Russia-gate and aligning itself with the FBI. As he says, they are reacting to Trump with their lizard brain which makes them easy prey for being led to their own political slaughter. He does become more foul mouthed towards the end. I understand his increasing frustration with this insanity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYAvvAQopmQ

Nancy , February 9, 2018 at 1:46 pm

"Hoisted by his own petard of hubris"–great line. We can only hope.

weilunion , February 9, 2018 at 5:47 pm

Does anybody ever talk about the failures of capitalism anymore or just about people and politics?

floyd gardner , February 9, 2018 at 10:38 pm

Your point is NEVER off-subject. Soros may fund one branch of the Capitalist Party and Singer the other; but they both and all the rest of their ilk, belong to the same Brotherhood.

alley cat , February 9, 2018 at 4:28 pm

"I'm not a politician; cannot gauge whether it a good or bad idea that Mueller, Rosenstein, et al. be fired for cause "

Ray, thanks for not being like most politicians (and journalists) who carefully test which way the political winds are blowing to decide whether something is a good or bad idea. You do what you think is right, based on considerations more important than your career (gasp!).

"In my view, if Mueller had an ounce of integrity, he would resign "

Yes, but clearly he doesn't, and therefore he won't. He will drag out his neocon-sponsored witch-hunt as long as possible in order to do the maximum damage possible to all those who don't toe the neocon line. The very existence of Mueller's unholy inquisition constantly forces the president ever-further to the right in an effort to appease his neocon tormentors. That is, further away from détente with Russia and closer to nuclear Armageddon.

The neocons' goal is to kill two birds, U.S. democracy and Russia, with one stone -- the Mueller "investigation."

Mueller and his co-conspirators, with all their lies and smears, have been subverting our democracy long enough. Fire him already and oppose Trump democratically instead.

Zachary Smith , February 9, 2018 at 6:56 pm

Nice summary. I can't really think of anything to say to improve on that title remark of "This is Nuts.

Virginia , February 9, 2018 at 7:12 pm

Ray, Mueller should resign (" if Mueller had an ounce of integrity, he would resign -- if only because of the incredibly partisan way in which he staffed his investigation") because there is no there there. Just close the investigation and let Americans get on with our lives.

GEOFF TEAGUE , February 9, 2018 at 9:12 pm

yes i agree that Mueller will be exposed (before congress ?) but not in the mainstream media. as long as that dog has a bone he will run with it. where's a dog catcher when you need one??

CitizenOne , February 10, 2018 at 12:13 pm

Thanks Ray,

Way to little truth out there and a whole bunch of characters involved in some modern day Shakespearean tragedy.

So Tex , February 9, 2018 at 10:48 am

These organizers are arms of or provocateurs for the failing and flailing Democratic Party.. They have staked their very lives on the Russia-gate nonsense and removing or just crippling Trump.. It's all very sad since they could be embracing the current political climate and reforming the once great Democratic Party. The unfortunate reality is that many people, including good hearted people, are falling for it.

Tower of Babel , February 9, 2018 at 11:00 am

"It is telling that the liberal establishment is mobilizing on this particular issue."

"Social psychologists have long talked about how emotional manipulation can work effectively to snooker a large percentage of the population, to get them, at least temporarily, to believe the exact opposite of the facts."

Ain't that the truth. Most Americans want to believe anything that authority tells them to believe. They are not worthy of the great democracy they inherited. Thank you Colleen. You are the opposite. We need to see you more often.

Joe Tedesky , February 9, 2018 at 11:25 am

This article does point to no doubt one of our nation's most evasive, and spookiest courts, which is FISA. Yet, on tv hardly is this subject ever brought up, while instead reissuing every 90 days for permission to monitor Carter Page gets talked about to no end. So far hardly has there been, to when at least I've viewed the anchors and pundits, do they ever discuss the unconstitutionally, or break down of our democratic values, that this FISA court represents.

Meanwhile so far what has Robert Mueller come up with? Well, we know that Manafort may be guilty of money laundering with his dealings with foreign officials, which is an easy obstacle splinter to uncover due part and parcel to his trade. We do know that the young up and coming politico operative George Papadopoulos would do well to learn a lesson from his past barroom experience of possibility talking to much to strangers, and skip the bar talk. In many ways it's hard to see to what exactly Lt General Michael Flynn is guilty of. Maybe Flynn as the newly appointed National Security Advisor is guilty of discussing the sanctions imposed onto Russia, or was he guilty of representing Bibi Netanyahu? Probably the former is prosecutable, but of course never the latter for protecting dear sweet Israel in America no matter what is the right thing to do. Protecting Israel may in some people's eyes even seem quite patriotic, as far as that goes, but talking to Russian diplomats, nay, never.

What this Russia-gate investigation has rot among so many other things, is that it has taken the weakening Left and showed it for what it is. It was one thing when the Clinton's moved the Democrates over into the Wall Street column, but now with this organized Left push to support the Mueller Investigation the Left has been moved into the police state category whether these poorly misguided liberals even realize this fact. This would be akin to Albert Einstein marching behind a Nazi flag, or his standing next to Joseph Goebbels to help usher in the sheep to slaughter under the guise of democracy, and everything that's right.

Wake up America.

Drew Hunkins , February 9, 2018 at 11:46 am

"This article does point to no doubt one of our nation's most evasive, and spookiest courts, which is FISA. Yet, on tv hardly is this subject ever brought up"

Great point Mr. Tedesky. This creepy police-state court is rarely criticized at all in our free [sic] press and establishment media.

Joe Tedesky , February 9, 2018 at 1:34 pm

Thank you Mr Hunkins, I've read many a comment post of yours, and hardly do I ever disagree with you. To bad there are not more of us voices for sanity, but with that there go I. Joe

Joe Tedesky , February 10, 2018 at 12:46 am

I just saw this on the Duran. Duran reporter Jim Jatras details some very interesting angles of the likes you don't very often hear in regard to Russia-Gate. Be notified Mr Jatras has a typo where he says Mac Blumenthal he really means the father of Max who is Sidney.

Jatras also points to the same circumstance where many Russians assumed Hillary would be our next president, so the attraction to sabotage Hillary's campaign seemed to a fruitless proposition. I remember our own beloved Robert Parry making the same observation.

http://theduran.com/steele-dossier-full-russian-dirt-or-british/

exiled off mainstreet , February 10, 2018 at 3:35 am

The last sentence sums it up. Any former member of the left who supports this (they became former once they supported this obviously flawed fascistic phony investigation the implications of which threaten the rule of law and the stability and sustainability of life itself) has gone zombie and can be compared to Einstein backing Goebbels.

Joe Tedesky , February 10, 2018 at 8:01 pm

I'm still having a hard time accepting this pseudo Left swing to the National Security State/Deep State. Nothing in life should surprise me by now, but seeing what calls itself the Left in the U.S. go the way of the CIA/FBI/NSA is hard to swallow.

The Democrates are soon going to regret spending all of this valuable time wasted on this Russia-Gate craziness, and then what will they blame? Of course they will blame Trump, and still invoke Putin's name, because that's what sells tv ratings. In the end the Democrates may wake up to the realization that they blamed Trump,for all the wrong things that should have mattered. This distraction for their bend obsession with all things Russian, is what will have sunk their boat in 2018, and unless the Dem's wise up this unneeded shadow will hover over them even into 2020. Joe

Drew Hunkins , February 9, 2018 at 11:42 am

The most disconcerting and heartbreaking thing I've witnessed in my 30 plus years of studying the politico-economic scene is the manner in which otherwise decent liberals have fallen for (or of course have been more than willing propagandists for) the hoax Russia-gate narrative. Sure, with the Schiffs (D-Israel), Schumers (D-Israel) and others in the corporate DNC, it's all to be expected, and no semi-intelligent CN fan would consider them to be otherwise decent liberals. But to see good domestic populist liberals sell this dangerous snake-oil has been illuminating and dismaying. For crying out loud -- on this particular issue Sean Hannity is better than Rachel Maddow!

It demonstrates more than any other issue the lock that Official Washington and its military driven empire builders along with the blood soaked mass media have on virtually our entire political spectrum and social discourse.

The recent Nuclear Posture Review just comes out -- putting the world closer to complete annihilation and total Armageddon -- and there isn't much of a hue and cry from the smart and most important people in our media-industrial complex. Frightening.

D.H. Fabian , February 9, 2018 at 11:49 am

An additional layer of disappointment is the fascist ideology seen in the liberal anti-Israel campaign. We really don't all agree that a "fair partitioning" in the Mideast would be: 100% for the Arabs, 0% for the Jews. For those who don't know, Israel is a tiny country (roughly the size of New Jersey). It's the sole Jewish nation, surrounded by vast, oil-rich Arab countries. Jews are, indeed, indigenous to that bit of land. Those called "Palestinians" are Arabs who are recruited to work toward the destruction of Israel, establishing a 100% "pure" Moslem Mideast.

Drew Hunkins , February 9, 2018 at 1:07 pm

"An additional layer of disappointment is the fascist ideology seen in the liberal anti-Israel campaign."

Set up a strawman much?

What you describe is a very, very marginal phenomenon in the Palestinian justice movement, marginal enough to be totally insignificant. It's interesting that you bring this disinformation into CN. The Zionist power configuration in America can be relentless, no doubt. Hasbara is ubiquitous.

Israel's a criminal state and international pariah bent on wiping out any independent pro Palestinian nation-state in the Middle East and subverting and destabilizing any independent pro Palestinian head of state. Bloodthirsty Tel Aviv militarists mow the grass in Gaza by killing and maiming roughly 2,000 women and children every 6 or 7 years. And no, it's not a "fascist ideology" to point any of this out.

Read Gilad Atzmon, Norman Finkelstein, James Petras, Mearsheimer and Walt and a few others I'm forgetting at the moment for the real dope.

Joe Tedesky , February 9, 2018 at 1:38 pm

I think D.H. just ran a Zionist commercial on 'the Consortium'. Should we run a pro-Palestinian commercial, just to be 'fair and balanced'?

Zachary Smith , February 9, 2018 at 6:53 pm

I've noticed the dishonest Zionist was trying to act like a "normal" person a few times recently. Probably the thought was that this would gain "credibility" for BS like this "Zionist Commercial" you speak of.

Joe Tedesky , February 9, 2018 at 7:12 pm

Zachary it's interesting to listen to a Zionist using the same talking points that would describe the horrible plight of the downtrodden Palestinian, and do it so easily without any conscious effort to hide the truth, of what's really going on. Joe

Lois Gagnon , February 9, 2018 at 11:22 pm

I've seen this troll on other progressive sites using the same exact wording.

Anon , February 9, 2018 at 1:35 pm

Troll alert: please do not reply to DHF comments. This is an attempt to derail the discussion and debase the participants, a extreme zionist attack, on a site known for more cautious and fair commenters.

Joe Tedesky , February 9, 2018 at 1:42 pm

Maybe we should aim our conversation to this maddening frustration over all things Russian, to better describe America's relationship to the Zionist Bibi Netanyahu. Do you hear me, Robert Mueller? Can you Mr Mueller lean heavily onto Flynn's Israeli heavy lifting, and why Flynn was serving the needs of the Israeli's?

Martin - Swedish citizen , February 9, 2018 at 6:21 pm

Yes, this comment is so out of touch that it must be a troll looking to discredit this site.

A previous comment making the same statement was it seems removed. Israel must be a very sensitive issue in the US.

Drew Hunkins , February 9, 2018 at 8:20 pm

It is beyond belief how sensitive it is. You have no idea. However, now it actually isn't as subversive and contentious as it was just 15 to 20 years ago. So there has been a small amount of progress, long way to go though.

floyd gardner , February 9, 2018 at 10:57 pm

There's an elephant in the room; and it's stomping on everyone's feet. But anyone who mentions it is an anti-elephant.

louis coulson , February 9, 2018 at 5:34 pm

Hey Fabian I have some refugees here so I'm taking your land for them. Pack your trash and move on.

nonsense factory , February 10, 2018 at 10:54 am

The solution is simple: Allow all Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza to vote in Israeli national parliamentary elections. Only then could Israel call itself a 'true democracy'. This I believe results in about a 50-50 split in the electorate on religious / ethnic lines so you could even get a Muslim leader of Israel, or at least a balanced parliament.

This of course raises the issue of the military and executive and judicial structure of Israel; land ownership and immigration policy would have to be changed so that any citizen could own land, and non-Jews would be allowed to emigrate back to the region (i.e. the Palestinian diaspora would have the same rights as the Jewish diaspora).

An even more tricky issue would be the Israeli nuclear weapons program; the first step there is for the state of Israel to publicly admit its existence and allow for IAEA inspections of the program.

Bob Van Noy , February 9, 2018 at 12:17 pm

Many thanks Coleen Rowley and Nat Parry. Drew Hunkins, I think your comment about "otherwise decent liberals" is prescient but I'll bet that we could have a long, extended discussion on The illiberalness of this generation of democrats (please note the small d).
I would argue that with the inception of the Clinton/Blair "Third Way" that the Democratic Party separated itself from its historic roots. In fact I think the very label of liberal opposition here used is disingenuous.

These people The Clintons and their Neoliberal constituents have never represented the Democratic Party in act or deed. The Neocons switching sides prior to the last election cycle underscored their illiberal attitude. In fact classic party alignment has little to do with this issue of criminal behavior, it is just the vehicle of divisiveness being utilized in this instance

Drew Hunkins , February 9, 2018 at 1:09 pm

Points well taken Mr. Van Noy.

Most of the Dem Party has been a complete dumpster fire since corporate Clinton, "New Democrats!" and DLC completely took over the entire infrastructure.

Nancy , February 9, 2018 at 1:51 pm

Sadly, those decent liberals you speak of also fell for the Clinton/Obama hoax. They are a big part of the problem -- phonies.

Gregory Herr , February 10, 2018 at 1:45 am

A big part of the problem for sure. Support for the Democrats on the basis of "liberal causes" is blind, phony. or both. We have suffered soaring housing and health care costs. Investment in Social Security has been marginalized at the same time war costs are put "off the books" and deemed a "necessity" of National Security. Public schools are now "standardized", but standards are lacking and the quality of "higher"education has taken a hit too while leaving graduates in piles of debt. The safety of our drinking water is suspect and other environmental concerns take a back seat as well while "fracking" and "drill baby drill" get passes. Civil liberties are under assault and the war drums beat on. So where are the liberal Democrats? Taking "contributions", hiding under rocks, or snickering through 3-martini lunches with their Republican cohorts but they certainly haven't been "liberals" for a long time now. Bill Clinton and Obama were nothing of the sort.
Next time a Democrat calls him/her self a "liberal", they ought to have to express a true idea of just what that's suppose to mean. And then explain what happened the last quarter-century and what in the hell their current "resistance" is really about. Don't worry there won't be any straight answers forthcoming, and likely nary a hint of embarrassment either. They are shameless traitors or fools

Bob Van Noy , February 10, 2018 at 10:07 am

Nicely done Gregory Herr. The democratic party talks a good game but manages to Never Deliver the goods. The party hierarchy (DNC) doesn't deserve support
Simply vote for a candidate that delivers. And, never donate to the party

D.H. Fabian , February 9, 2018 at 11:44 am

We saw how powerfully the Clinton "New Democrat Party" gained "influence" over the media marketed to middle class liberals, from MSNBC to online publications, pulling them well to the right. The Democrats' anti-Russian crusade does, indeed, mimic Bush's lies about "Iraq's stockpiles of WMD." What is truly "nuts" is that so much of the liberal media promote the right wing agenda while wearing their "bold progressive" lapel buttons.

Loretta , February 9, 2018 at 12:05 pm

Thank you for this piece!!

j. D. D. , February 9, 2018 at 12:16 pm

The spectacle of the Democratic Part and even the Black Caucus rallying to support the FBI is truly a wonder to behold. Have they forgotten the FBI's past in blackmailing presidents and political leaders including JFK, Robert Kennedy and Matin Luther King? Have they forgotten its Operation Frugmenschen, which means "ape man" in German to target Balck politicians and activists, or the threatening dirty tricks letter sent to MLK urging him to commit suicide? Are they prepared to see through an illegal coup against an elected president who dared suggest a positive relaitonship with Russia and China, ensuring that no future president will dare "step out of line" lest the secret files be pulled to create a cripling scandal?. Apparently not, as the Demcratic Party we knew appears quite dead, perhaps lethally shot on Nov 22, 1963 and finally buried in 2016 with the nomination of a craven Wall Street puppet and warmonger.

SeaClearly , February 9, 2018 at 12:17 pm

Thank you, Nat and Coleen, for this article -- as well as continuing and furthering Consortium News' reputation as one of the few remaining independent outlets that can be considered trustworthy. In this age, where even Common Dreams has lost its credibility (and posts by Caitlin Johnstone have to be taken/guarded with grains of salt) it is still a refreshing rarity.

In overall relation, the following Review is shared as representative:

Robert Shetterly's "Americans Who Tell The Truth.org" continually express, show, and Speak Truth to Power. During our times of First Draft Coalition[s], where we are subjected to 98% (?) Controlled Narratives, a predominance critically desires to hear/see those sides which are purposely and collusively repressed, banned and/or censored. In these exponentially-escalating periods of secret laws based on secret memos, secret courts acting with secret evidence (which will not be revealed to the accused), absolute torture to the point of insanity (and death) as a means of interrogation until one gives predetermined answers (truthful or not), worldwide surveillance on every inhabitant (without probable cause) that can be (and is) used as a means to instill fear, to threaten, tarnish, oppress, and silence even peaceful dissenters of basic causes while (resultantly) turning back history 500 years, we need those with (the ability of) absolute courage to Stand Up Now (more than ever).

Evolution: from Total Information Awareness (which started long before 9/11) to Total Information (and Population) Control (as a goal in the present).

Steve , February 9, 2018 at 12:19 pm

FAKE NEWS has been used to snooker the Aemnrician people and as it is gobbled up and digested and spit back with investigation or corroboration it turns decent folks into FAKE PEOPLE. Mueller is no choir boy and the mess in Washington is not going away sometime soon. As for damaging democracy, the 2 party system has taken care of that very nicely but channeling anger into something positive just wont' be allowed to happen as the media are controlled by huge moneyed interests.

Janet Zampieri , February 9, 2018 at 12:29 pm

The liberals are reacting this way because of the constant lies they are fed by the mainstream media. The corporate and CIA control of the media must be exposed and put to an end.

Bruce Dickson , February 9, 2018 at 12:36 pm

Being a mere paycheque away from disaster, most Americans cannot afford to take to any streets. The Powers That Be know and exploit this, having orchestrated their captives' dire straits, all along.

So, whence shall cometh these threatening troops from Camps AVAAZ and MoveOn? By process of elimination, from the minority well-enough-heeled and the Soros-paid.

FISA's Footsoldiers. Mueller's Mobs. Comey's Creatures. Hillary's Hordes.

Slavery is Freedom! War is Peace! 1984 was a cookbook; we've been reading Orwell all wrong.

johnnieandroidseed , February 9, 2018 at 9:03 pm

My chuckle for the day was "1984 was a cookbook." Reminded me of the Twilight Zone episode "To Serve Man" which should be the motto of capitalists everywhere.

floyd gardner , February 9, 2018 at 11:17 pm

"We serve the workers" [to our Distinguished Diners.]

Joe Tedesky , February 10, 2018 at 12:17 am

As the episodes star character Michael Chambers is taken away by the Kanamits for meal time on their far away planet, Chambers looks at the audience and says, "How about you? You still on Earth, or on the ship with me? Really doesn't make very much difference, because sooner or later, all of us will be on the menu all of us."

Yikes how true. Great comment johnnieandroidseed. Joe

Gregory Herr , February 10, 2018 at 5:36 am

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=De4u1Zz7Yt4

Joe Tedesky , February 10, 2018 at 2:20 pm

That was so cool. Thanks Gregory. Joe

Bryan Hemming , February 9, 2018 at 12:40 pm

Though my instincts tell me there are many more people who are willing to sign a petition than to actually get out on the street, I might be proved wrong in this particular instance.

After signing a couple of petitions for this or that, in the forlorn hope they might bring about change, I began to realize they were mainly designed to make me feel good about myself; that I was doing something very important to make the world a better place.

Even worse, I saw I was being treated as nothing more than another fish in the net. My signature had hardly enough time to reach its destination before my inbox was deluged with requests to sign more petitions, each of which invited me to donate towards the great effort it takes to think up a petition and put it on the internet. For some unexplained reason, the process seemed to require highly-remunerated executives, and an awful lot more money than all the real work needed to run something as work-intensive as Consortium News.

After signing two, I'd already given up the idea of signing more petitions by the time I was urged to sign one for a no-fly zone over Syria to save hundreds of thousand of lives. With anti-Russian propaganda being heavily pushed by the corporate media at the time, it was obvious people who had no idea what a no-fly zone entailed were being manipulated.

We live at a time where, for most people, touchy-feely means engaging with the world through a screen. No man is an island being far from the state of affairs, all men have become islands. Far from bringing us together, the internet is being increasingly used to keep most of us farther and farther away from each other, and the information we need to form opinions based on facts.

Which leads me to ponder how on earth we arrived at a point where of hundreds of thousands of people are preparing to come out on the streets to demonstrate their support of an organization, which just happens to be one of several intelligence agencies, trying to remove their right to come out on the streets to demonstrate? I hope I'm not the only one who finds it perversely ironic and extremely disturbing.

Bruce Dickson , February 9, 2018 at 1:16 pm

Do those intending to demonstrate on the FBI's behalf even realize that one of that agency's most resource-intensive and mission-critical tasks is to record, identify and profile demonstrators?

"I am marching for my right to be surveilled. Democracy means Dossiers for All! FISA = Freedom. I'm guided by the beauty of my shackles. Liberty is Liability. Truth is Treason."

And Insanity is Virtue. Well played, overlords: you have set the stage well – but for the hubris you can't shake off. Lofty as you are, you don't float above the law of unintended consequences. Or that of gravity, either.

Gregory Herr , February 10, 2018 at 6:16 am

Love your comments, The bigger they are, the harder they fall.

Martin - Swedish citizen , February 9, 2018 at 2:21 pm

My experience with AVAAZ is similar. They petition for many good causes and seem to achieve quite a lot, but then there appear a slice of the petitions that are political and naive, like the no fly zone. Inherent problems in their brand of activism. They should probably reconsider their scope of issues.

Coleen Rowley , February 9, 2018 at 10:43 pm

Some more background information on Avaaz at: https://consortiumnews.com/2016/04/14/duping-progressives-into-wars/

Martin - Swedish citizen , February 10, 2018 at 1:34 am

Thank you!

Fenn , February 10, 2018 at 9:32 am

Yes, thank you for the link. I had forgot about that. It's very important that we understand NGO's roles & who they are working for.

Lethal Weapon: NGO Soft Power

"Along with military invasions and missionaries, NGOs help crack countries open like ripe nuts, paving the way for intensifying waves of exploitation and extraction" " ~ Stephanie McMillan

""The NGO 'soft power complex' is now one of the most destructive global forces. It is employed as an interface between civilians of a target nation, with government, economic or military structures of the colonialist force intent on harnessing any given nation's resources or undermining its geopolitical influence. The Democratization process, or the path to regime change is facilitated by these undercover government or corporate proxy employees who, once embedded into a society, set about producing the propaganda that will justify intervention, either economically, politically or militarily. NGO propaganda will often employ slick social media marketing which is underpinned by advance applied behavioural psychology and advanced NLP-based 'social enterprise' sales pitches.

A recent piece by researcher Eva Bartlett entitled, "Human Rights Front Groups [Humanitarian Interventionalists] Warring on Syria", provides a detailed insight into how this new breed of weaponized politics is being deployed right now in the Middle East.

The perception of a 'non profit' complex who purport to be "working for the betterment and improvement of humanity" can be a difficult nut to crack, but it must be done. In the west. charities, not-for-profits and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) are seen as "do gooders" and so they rarely fall under public scrutiny. Western governments know the general public has an inherent faith in their perceived integrity and this provides an ideal cover for western government and intelligence agencies to operate through their NGO and aid organisations."

-Vanessa Beeley,
https://www.globalresearch.ca/syrias-white /5485128

welshTerrier2 , February 9, 2018 at 1:24 pm

Why all the criticism of MoveOn?

I think it's great that they are calling for massive rallies against the rape of our democracy by the one percent. It's great to see them rallying hundreds of thousands of us to protest the state of endless war. It's nice to see them putting all that muscle into the streets to oppose US foot-dragging on climate change.

Oh wait, I must have misread the article.

On a serious note, we need to see these FISA abuses only as the tools of tyranny. Far more important is who is wielding them and why.

Judy Majors , February 9, 2018 at 1:41 pm

Thank you Ms. Rowley and Mr. Parry for reporting honestly. If certain factions can set-up a POTUS, what can they do to "we the people"? Mr. Parry, your father would be proud of you!

mike k , February 9, 2018 at 1:48 pm

"Liberals?" Just another name for war mongering liars these days. "Conservatives?" Just another brand of liars and thieves. People who put stock in, and vote on the basis of these baseless tags are the real suckers that enable our whole doomed evil empire. If you vote for anyone who uses either of those labels, you are a fool, and a dangerous one at that. Come to think of it, if you vote at all you are an idiot endorsing a corrupt process.

Drew Hunkins , February 9, 2018 at 1:52 pm

Off topic.

What looks to be an outstanding brand new film is coming out soon. It's entitled, "The Young Karl Marx." This movie looks like a must-see.

The following link is to the two minute trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVTDoZLssg8

(If the link doesn't open, merely punch into the YouTube search engine ""The Young Karl Marx" trailer".)

Martin - Swedish citizen , February 9, 2018 at 2:24 pm

Thanks!

lindaj , February 9, 2018 at 11:42 pm

Looks good!

Gary , February 9, 2018 at 1:56 pm

Unfortunately for those very many invested in the Russiagate nonsense, the cold reality is that doubling down on crazy doesn't somehow magically produce sanity. We're watching the Western power structure fracture before our eyes as their propaganda operations have become not simply unbelievable, but now have entered into the world of the totally outlandish and absurd. The notion that "reality" requires some kind of rational connection to observable events in the physical world seems to have totally lost any meaning in this current climate of reality meltdown. Quite amazing to witness actually.

Eddie , February 10, 2018 at 12:49 pm

"doubling down on crazy doesn't somehow magically produce sanity."–Great phrasing!

alley cat , February 9, 2018 at 2:23 pm

The undead hands of those two zombie neocons, HRC and John Brennan, reach out from the boneyard of U.S. politics to drag democracy down with them.

The neocons' ultimate target is Russia, together with anyone who dares to utter the truth about Russia. They are drunk with power and will stop at nothing, not even nuclear war, to eliminate any rival for global domination. They are so reckless and arrogant that they think a nuclear war is winnable.

Megalomania much?

Goebbels boasted that he could play the German public like a keyboard. The neofascist neocons are using the same tactics with the so-called U.S. left, which, measured by international political metrics, corresponds to the traditional imperialist right. American so-called liberals are allowing themselves to be played, like the German public was played by the Nazis before WWII. They are attacking Trump from the reactionary right, not from the left. In their feckless hysteria, they can't even tell the difference.

Fascist tactics bring fascist results. There are multitudinous grounds to oppose Trump democratically. Impeaching him based on ginned-up, right-wing, smears would tear this country apart at the seams.

lindaj , February 9, 2018 at 11:46 pm

"American so-called liberals are allowing themselves to be played, like the German public was played by the Nazis before WWII. They are attacking Trump from the reactionary right, not from the left. In their feckless hysteria, they can't even tell the difference."

I'm afraid you are right.

Democrats are not "the left." Have they ever really been? That's why you said "so-called left" I realize. It makes me laugh when mainstream media calls it such.

Richard Hicks , February 9, 2018 at 2:36 pm

The story says: "Considering all of the threats to democracy posed by unconstitutional overreach, unfair elections, corruption, and voter suppression – not to mention environmental challenges, economic inequality, an out-of-control U.S. foreign policy, numerous foreign conflicts that the U.S. is engaged in, and the ever-present threat of nuclear war – it is telling that the liberal establishment is mobilizing on this particular issue."
Yes, it is "telling that the liberal establishment is mobilizing on this particular issue". Except it's not just this issue. Remember that Al Capone was convicted of crimes other than the crime he was arrested for. It seems that on an almost daily basis evidence is discovered that the President is/was involved in crimes other than Conspiracy and/or Obstruction of Justice. As new evidence is uncovered, it may lead the Mueller investigation in another direction, and apparently, it has. If that is the case, Mueller is doing his job. The job that The People hired him to do. If Trump were to fire Mueller, it could very well be because of newly discovered criminal activity that Trump is, or was involved in, and Trump is nervous about. Our Nation is a Nation of laws, and no one, even the President is above the law. This President has a long-standing proven reputation, of difficulty with the Truth. Based on that alone, if Mueller is fired by Trump, people would be justified taking to the streets, in protest.

mike k , February 9, 2018 at 3:45 pm

A riot to back up the putch against Trump? Not likely, but a disaster if performed. Is this how some dream of a new US government? It will take something much deeper and wiser to accomplish that. Again not likely, but if one has to dream, why not something truly positive?

mike k , February 9, 2018 at 4:06 pm

"Putin's life work is spying"? You seem to have a rather shallow estimate of someone who stands against those in the US determined to turn our planet into an ashy corpse.

Daniel C. Maguire , February 9, 2018 at 2:49 pm

Best not to lose sight of this fact: there is no liberal cause, especially the incipient climate disaster, that is not negatively affected by Trump and the legal coup-d etat achieved by the Republicans. Anyone working to stymie that,whether sinless or simon pure deserves support. Also, re Russia, Garry Kasparov the Chess Master says it would be naive to think that Putin whose life work is spying would not use his current sophisticated apparatus to work his will on any issue or election of interest.

mike k , February 9, 2018 at 4:00 pm

"legal coup d'etat?" That's a new one on me, on the other hand the whole loony scene in Washington is illegal – so what the hey! Still, removing a sitting President on the basis of phony charges against him for colluding with Russia would really kick over the chess board and empower the crazies to do their worst. Or is there anybody still out there who believes the Russiagate nonsense has a shred of truth in it? I hope not, but I am afraid I am in danger of overestimating my fellow citizens .

mike k , February 9, 2018 at 4:02 pm

As for Gary Kasparov, he should rest on his fading laurels as a chess master, and stay out of politics. If he had his way Russians would raise Yeltsin from the grave, and turn their country back over to the international capitalists.

Mark Thomason , February 9, 2018 at 2:52 pm

Russia-gate has nothing to do with the real Russia.

It is entirely a Team Hillary attack on Trump. It is an attempt to deny the election. It is rage at losing, looking for excuses to express itself. If not Russia it would be Comey, or many other things. It has been most convenient to use Putin at the pinata, but that is a matter of internal US politics, not Putin at all.

irina , February 9, 2018 at 4:17 pm

And luckily for us, Putin not only groks that dynamic but has been brave enough
to say so in public.

What's with all the new-name trolls here today ?

Mr Boompi , February 9, 2018 at 3:02 pm

I hate the term derangement syndrome but some people surely do have Trump derangement syndrome. It's beaten into them every day on TV and certain internet sites. I believe they want Trump removed using any means possible, including illegal means. Their derangement syndrome includes the mistaken belief attempting to enforce the law regarding Clinton emails and the frauds perpetrated on the FISA court are nothing more than an attempt to obstruct justice for Trump. Even though there is no evidence Trump has done anything wrong. It's a shame actually.

Alan , February 9, 2018 at 3:06 pm

Let's take a step or two back and try to see the current state of chaos in a broader perspective. People are angry. The Trump administration is without question aberrant. Where is true leadership today? Certainly not with Trump or his administration. The real issue isn't specifically "Russiagate", but what lies beneath.

We have been mislead, lied to, manipulated by virtually every administration to greater and lesser degrees. Of relevance here is that both Nixon and Reagan manipulated the American people through their backchannel negotiations with foreign powers prior to inauguration.

While this Consortiumnews article can shine some light on potential abuses which takes place through the FISA court we must recognize that we form an imperfect union. This particular article seems to be like arguing for changes to the fire codes while Rome burns!

Any mobilization of the "liberal establishment" is far more about the egregious threats to our democracy than whatever "Russiagate" means. An imperfect Mueller seems to represent our best way forward to finding the hidden truths behind all of Trump's malfeasance. Let the people be heard!

mike k , February 9, 2018 at 4:10 pm

The people have been heard! They voted for Trump

WheresOurTeddy , February 9, 2018 at 3:16 pm

Damn the people in this country are easy to manipulate. Pathetic.

If the activists of the last generation could see the sellout pieces of garbage that call themselves democrats today, they'd roll over in their unmarked graves they were dumped into by the same alphabet agencies of oppression the stooges are standing up for.

Late stage empire in decline.

mike k , February 9, 2018 at 4:11 pm

Amen.

Maxim , February 9, 2018 at 3:29 pm

They don't want Trump, they want Russia. That's why Trump was "elected". So they could use Trump to get to Russia. In 2020 Clinton will finally get elected and everyone will be begging for WWW3 against the Russian Threat. Another false Pearl Harbor is coming. Syria, N.Korea, Iran or Ukraine are all potential flash points. We're sheep being led to slaughter.

Far , February 9, 2018 at 3:58 pm

In one ponit you are wrong. The orange clown is uninhibited in starting a war. Read just the new disclosure that pentagon had been resisting requests from the White House to provide military options for Iran. In his first speach in the UN Trump has threatened to destroy North Korea totally. This crazy man doesn't deserve to be the president of the US!

mike k , February 9, 2018 at 4:14 pm

Mostly correct, but the Deep State emphatically did NOT want Trump elected. Too unpredictable. The DS thought Hillary had a lock on the election. Just goes to show that the DS is not as smart as they like to think they are.

Realist , February 10, 2018 at 4:47 am

For sure, Mike, the DS pulled out all the stops to help Hillary both before and after the election to no avail. They are still doing it. The most influential insiders in America couldn't alter the results of the election, yet they would have you believe that Putin merely snaps his fingers, "meddles in our democracy" and has his way. Yet most people cannot see the absurdity of that claim because the corporate media, which is part of the real conspiracy orchestrated by the DS, spews nothing but propaganda full bore 24/7 changing apparent reality right in front of your own lying eyes.

Now the History Channel is coming out with an extra special demonisation of Putin extravaganza!!! Be sure to watch if you wanna stay free! These people could rehabilitate Hitler if it suited their purposes. The American people are putty in their hands. There is no opposition but those few of us who fail to be hypnotized by the svengalis that represent the interests of the string puller elites on the boob tube and internets, who and which they totally own and control. There are so few of us who can still see the truth, I suspect they could house us all in a single detention camp if it comes to that.

Gregory Herr , February 10, 2018 at 6:49 am

I couldn't suppress a derisive laugh reading an above comment about Putin's ability "to work his will on any issue or election of interest." Yep, those snapping fingers are rife with ability not to mention speculation about Putin's desires. What a mad genius he must be!

Snookered and bamboozled, the show must go on.

Far , February 9, 2018 at 3:45 pm

I would support any measure that tends to an impeachment of a crazy, impulsive and retarded president. This president is a misfortune for the US and for the world. One can criticise the actions to support the current investigations in the Russiagate. But if it helps to get rid of a mentally ill clown then why not!

mike k , February 9, 2018 at 4:18 pm

Good reasoning, but it fails to consider what's next? Believe it or not, there will probably be a lot worse in store for us than President Donald Trump. Things just tend to get worse and worse in a collapsing empire ..

Far , February 9, 2018 at 4:39 pm

What's next is a good question. I hope that Clinton leave finally the political world. She was one of the main reasons that many of voters elected the bad option instead of the worst option. Collapsing of the system can not be an option. But Trump is well under way to shake the political system and polarize the civil society more than ever before

Realist , February 10, 2018 at 4:59 am

That's what Susan Sarandon foresaw as the "good" outcome of a Trump victory–the collapse of the system would be advanced. However, how do we benefit from that opportunity for change when the only announced candidates for Trump's job are the same ilk (Clinton, Biden, Kerry) or their even shallower accolytes (Booker, Harris ) that caused all the damage in the first place? All those idiots are still about fooling and fleecing the American public and warring upon the rest of the world–friends and foes alike. They offer no peace, no prosperity, and no future whatsoever, only a bleak struggle for existence in a nuclear winter by the few survivors of their promised handiwork. You nailed it, Mike, things will only get worse because our leaders (from both of these two abominable parties) insist upon it.

irina , February 9, 2018 at 4:22 pm

"Why not ?" Because such 'measures' only serve to destroy what little remains of our
democracy. Here's a thought experiment for you : would you support similar 'measures'
if they 'tended to an impeachment' of crazy, impulsive, mentally ill Hillary had she been
elected ? (As co-president with Bill, who she promised to 'put in charge' of the economy).

Because "We came, we saw, he Died" Hillary is arguably even farther off the rails than
The Donald. And probably more dangerous for many reasons, not the least of which is
that so many people look at her and see someone 'sane'.

Far , February 9, 2018 at 5:06 pm

Crooked Hillary was never be an option. And Trump is definitive not fit for the oval office. Trump will bury the democracy finally. Damages to the reputation of the US in the world community is immense. With Trump there is no chance to make a real change. Quit in contrary the US will face serious social, economic and security challenges without a glimmer of hope to change the things. My father said that a great ship could be sunk. And if it sinks it will be just slower than a little one. Trump is not an option anymore to steer the ship.

louis coulson , February 9, 2018 at 5:19 pm

Have a look at the less than vigorous investigations run by Mueller into BCCI (Bush crime family "intelligence" op) pre 911. Mueller can run coverups or smear campaigns. Wonder what his corporate offshore bank accounts look like

lindaj , February 9, 2018 at 11:50 pm

bank accounts. good question.

weilunion , February 9, 2018 at 5:35 pm

"Social psychologists have long talked about how emotional manipulation can work effectively to snooker a large percentage of the population, to get them, at least temporarily, to believe the exact opposite of the facts. These techniques are known in the intelligence community as "perception management," and have been refined since the 1980s "to keep the American people compliant and confused," as the late Robert Parry has reported. We saw this in action last decade, when after months of disinformation, about 70% of Americans came to falsely believe that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11 when the truth was the opposite – Saddam was actually an enemy of the Al Qaeda perpetrators."

Cognitive dissonance, lack of critical thinking, reliance on authority, in this case a former head of a criminal organization called the FBI.

People have no class consciousness. They have no idea who their enemies ar or how to organize.

This is the sad case of liberalism melting like warm butter while the fascists congeal.

Joe Tedesky , February 9, 2018 at 7:27 pm

Nicely put.

Dave P. , February 10, 2018 at 2:51 am

"Social psychologists have long talked about how emotional manipulation can work effectively to snooker a large percentage of the population, to get them, at least temporarily, to believe the exact opposite of the facts. . ."

Yes. On any bar counter, just start some conversation with the person sitting to you. With all this bizarre drama – Russia-Gate, Iran, memos, dossier . . . going on TV, and in Washington being enacted knowingly by the the Powers who rule – both, so called Liberals and Conservatives – one can see how this emotional manipulation has worked to snooker just about most of the population. I just had the experience today during lunch at a bar counter. In our conversation, the person sitting next to me was ready to nuke Iran, N. Korea, and go after Russia; and go after Hillary too.

Population in the country was very poorly informed any how. And now, they, The Ruling Establishment which includes Media, have completely messed the people up – making them compliant and confused.

Does any body have idea how they are going to bring an end to this completely concocted bizarre drama?

Joe Tedesky , February 10, 2018 at 8:21 pm

Dave the same stupid asses you speak of will still be the same stupid asses long after these foreign affairs take any turn for the better. The dumb butts are easy to control. It's like you point and say bad, and these morons growl, as their faces contort in macho anger. Although, if one day the U.S. should make friends with Iran, N Korea, or Russia, these silly little stupid puppies will just go back to work. If you tell them it will be exciting to play the Russians at hockey, well this might get them going a little bit again, but not to worry because it's just hockey. Oh, easy on the beer, and make sure the refreshment stands have plenty of nachos and tip. The jackasses like to eat and drink a lot, what can I say? Joe

Jessika , February 9, 2018 at 5:56 pm

Both MoveOn and Avaaz get major funding from George Soros.

Martin - Swedish citizen , February 9, 2018 at 6:30 pm

As a foreigner, looking from the outside, it seems Mueller will not find anything on Russia. He already found something on Israel, but he doesn't pursue that. If Americans rally, then it seems you should rally to make an objective and fair inquiry, to nail Israel for what they seem to have done.

Joe Tedesky , February 9, 2018 at 7:28 pm

Now your talking. Good idea.

ToivoS , February 9, 2018 at 7:11 pm

"This is nuts" is a great headline for our current problem.

Many years ago in my early 20s I read 'Guns of August' that described support for the coming WWI. What was so striking about that period was how the public in every relevant European was hell bent on war. Among the major players -- Germany, France, UK, Russia and Austro-hungary -- their populations were demonstrating in the streets and assemblies for war. How was it possible for all of those people to eagerly lust for war that within a few years led to the destruction of the German, Russian and Austrian empires, the deaths of millions of their citizens and multidecade impoverishment for the survivors. The costs of the war resulted in the effective bankruptcy of the UK and French colonial empires as well as millions of dead and traumatized survivors.

I never was able to see how so many people then could be so incredibly foolish. In the last two years I have gained some insight. Many of my respected, but now previous, political associates have just gone totally nuts over Russiagate. There was some kind of psychic break in their minds when Hillary lost and they are now little more than raging primates trapped in a cognitive dissonance loop. Not just that, but these are people who are on the verge of supporting war against Russia.

Reading other comments here it seems my experience has been shared by others.

Joe Tedesky , February 9, 2018 at 7:49 pm

Yes ToivoS, many of us here have been watching our family, friends, and fellow citizens lose their minds in mass over the election of Donald J Trump. It's with his Electoral College win that I noticed the psychic break in many a citizens mind. So now here we are, where this psychic break has moved good thinking people to the side of the field where the Deep State, or National Security State if you will, has replaced critical thinking people by turning them into 'useful idiots', if that is enough of a suitable label to pin on these stray pseudo liberals.

These misguided liberal thinkers ought to move out of the way, drop this Russia-Gate travesty, and allow the real Left to emerge so as justice maybe served upon the Trump Administration. And if these limousine liberal hacks don't wish to travel a different avenue, as to confront what the Trump team does, then for the love of mike please dear almost liberals quit getting so cozy with the National Security State. This kind of stuff gives reason to believe that 'Nightmare on Elm Street' was a documentary, as Freddy Krueger is a nice guy in real life. Now I'm afraid to go to sleep .take care ToivoS. Joe

Zachary Smith , February 9, 2018 at 11:35 pm

Regarding Guns of August , it's a book I won't be reading. Anything by Barbara Tuchman connected with WW1 is automatically suspect with me. I've kept many of her other history books, but will maintain a distinct level of skepticism while reading them. That's necessary because she was a fanatical Zionist, and lying about Israel-related issues is just something that type does.

Lois Gagnon , February 10, 2018 at 12:32 am

The term psychic break I think is dead accurate. It made me think of Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine" in that people who are traumatized by natural or man made disasters are taken advantage of by powerful interests intent on imposing policies that are against the public interest.

People who are in a state of shock are not equipped to make rational decisions. Trump's surprise (at least to Clinton voters) win left Democratic Party voters in shock leaving them vulnerable to the Establishment's agenda of increasing tensions with Russia. Enter Russia-gate which serves many purposes at once. As we have seen, it worked like a charm. Those falling for the psy-op have left all reason behind. They are singularly focused. It is virtually impossible to introduce evidence that contradicts the narrative. It's as frustrating as talking to a religious fanatic.

Pandas4peace , February 10, 2018 at 11:48 am

In an ironic twist, Naomi Klein today has completely lost her mind due to Trump Derangement Syndyome.

Larco Marco , February 10, 2018 at 3:34 am

The Ottoman Empire was also destroyed, with the UK subsequently claiming Palestine as a piece of their own empire.

Sam , February 9, 2018 at 8:26 pm

"[I]t should be hoped by everyone that the Department of Justice Inspector General can get to the bottom of how the FISA court was ultimately misled."

Is the IG even looking at this? The current investigation by the IG, the one due to report soon, is looking at the investigation into Clinton's email server. I'm not aware of an IG investigation on this matter. It would certainly be a good idea – assuming that the IG is not compromised, which is a big assumption.

Coleen Rowley , February 9, 2018 at 11:20 pm

Maybe wishful thinking on my part. The Grassley-Graham referral regarding Steele's potential violation of Title 18 Section 1001, lying to the FBI, may or may not be prosecutable depending upon where the "lies" took place and the likely lack of extra-territorial jurisdiction if they occurred in Rome. But even if no criminal violation could be prosecuted, I would think the IG should still investigate the matter for potential administrative discipline.

GEOFF TEAGUE , February 9, 2018 at 9:05 pm

the so called liberals need god on their side so they can tear down the constitution (at least what is left of it) and then put trump's head on a pike. the most fearful thing in this country is watching ignorance in action.

Pandas4peace , February 10, 2018 at 11:45 am

Yes! Stop and think about the consequences of a COUP of a legitimately ELECTED U.S. President by the Deep State and his political opponents. It's a dangerous game and a slippery slope. It's frightening to imagine where this could go.

ThomasGilroy , February 9, 2018 at 9:13 pm

To a liberal, the worst possible scenario was the election of Trump – especially because they are "liberals". That cannot be difficult to see. They rightly see that Russian inference in the election could have made a significant difference in the swing states.

Whether that is true or not, is irrelevant. There cannot be closure without the investigation going forward. That Russia meddled in the US election is certainly without question. Whether Trump colluded or not still needs to be answered.

Finally, future election need to be safeguarded against foreign powers attempting to influence our system of democracy. Russia had a lot to gain potentially helping to elect Trump. Trump had a lot to gain by colluding. We need to find out the truth.

Zachary Smith , February 10, 2018 at 1:00 am

"swing states" – do you suppose that Hillary taking several of them for granted had anything to do with "influencing" the election?

That Russia meddled in the US election is certainly without question.

Without Question! This sounds very much like a religious belief to me. Something like this 1950 declaration by the pope at the time:

By the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.

Change a few words in that, and we'd have the Tragedy of Saint Hillary.

Finally, future election need to be safeguarded against foreign powers attempting to influence our system of democracy. Russia had a lot to gain potentially helping to elect Trump.

And how do you suggest this "safeguarding" happen? Shut down the internet? Imprison anyone who says a favorable word about Russia?

ThomasGilroy , February 10, 2018 at 3:48 pm

Zachary

HRC was the second worse candidate in US history – just behind Trump. She is definitely the one most responsible for her loss in the election. None the less, very few votes separated a significant amount of electoral votes so the Russian influence could have made a difference. If you view all of the evidence beginning when US intelligence first identified Russian-related hackers in 2015, followed by Crowdstrike in 2016 (and at least five other cybersecurity firms which confirmed Crowdstrike's conclusions) , social media and the obvious reasons that Putin favored Trump over the anti-Russia candidacy of HRC (motive), then it becomes much more logical that Russia meddled. Assange served the Russian government as well (mostly with the aid of the Russian government-funded RT). He clearly looked to undermine the HRC candidacy despite his denials (lies).

The Daily Beast does a nice job with the time line in the current Mueller investigation (Trump-Russia Isn't About the Cover-Up. It's About the Crime. http://thebea.st/2slKBBE?source=twitter&via=desktop via @thedailybeast) and Marcie Wheeler (at Empty Wheel) also does a good job presenting evidence of Russian perfidy. Mueller probably knows a lot more than he is sharing so it's just a matter of time before the evidence becomes much more difficult to ignore.

Realist , February 10, 2018 at 5:23 am

That Russia "meddled in the US election" is totally without foundation and you know it. Any such attempt by them would be pointless, ineffective and detrimental if ever found out. If we had really found out any such thing, we'd all know about it rather than being fed bullshit based upon absolutely no real evidence. America would not be subjected to a year and a half of shenanigans by a thoroughly-biased politically-motivated special prosecutor given a hunting license by a frustrated deep state, a bitter political opposition and a raucous media in the service of both.

What's the point in dragging out the process if the object is justice and the removal of a putative pretender to the presidency? The aforementioned insurrectionists cannot pull off their desired miracle because the evidence doesn't exist and it doesn't exist because the purported crime was never committed.

Both the Democrats and the Republicans undoubtedly each cheated to win the election in their own ways, but not in any way involving the Russians who have just served as unwitting targets by our own domestic villains. Russia has gained NOTHING by seeing Trump in office. During the election Putin would not even play favorites, stating the obvious: that he could not predict the future and that he would have to deal with whomever was elected. Your scenarios are all delusions, Gilroy.

Dave P. , February 10, 2018 at 3:36 pm

Realist – Excellent summation of this whole false, delusionary, bizarre concocted drama being enacted on the American people, and on people beyond in the World.

Paul Easton , February 9, 2018 at 9:29 pm

The article mentions "perception management" and I think it is well to generalize. Ever since 9/11 the permanent government has kept the population in line by playing on their fears, in Trump's case fear of fascism. (And quite possibly the events of 9/11 were planned and executed for this very purpose.) As it turned out the perception management was all too effective and by now most of the population is freaking out, in one way or another, and our society is disintegrating. Personally I am cheering it on. Goodbye USA Thank God!

Charles Leone , February 9, 2018 at 9:46 pm

Liberals getting behind the most racist government agency in a pathetic display of supporting the "enemy of my enemy" Donald Trump gives further proof they are as unprincipled as any of history's other "national socialists".

Zachary Smith , February 10, 2018 at 1:02 am

What the hell is this endless repetition of the word "Liberals"? Try "Corporate Democrats" and you'd be a LOT closer to reality.

Realist , February 10, 2018 at 5:31 am

To be sure. The other biggest mischaracterisation is to call the ring leaders of this witch hunt "the left" or "leftists." The genuine left (what little still exists of it) are the few who rail against this nonsense, largely on this or similar sites (e.g., ICH).

Dave P. , February 10, 2018 at 3:40 pm

I completely agree, Zachary. The true democratic party adherents – which includes lot of us – should have split from the Corporate Democrats long ago during Clinton presidency.

Bandrui , February 9, 2018 at 10:27 pm

We live in a hall of mirrors. This is yet another example of how easily most Americans are manipulated, dumbest populace on the planet apparently. I see no hope for us at all.

D.H. Fabian , February 10, 2018 at 12:36 am

Give the Clinton right wing credit for achieving what the Republicans had long hoped, but failed, to do. First, they split apart the Dem voting base in the 1990s, middle class vs. poor, and the Obama years served to confirm that this split is permanent. Then they apparently plagiarized old Joe McCarthy's playbook, launching their anti-Russian crusade, splitting apart those who are not on the right wing. Divide, subdivide, conquer.

RandyLee , February 10, 2018 at 9:55 am

so the democrats are going for mob rule now? and they have willing accomplices in liberals who have no idea why they hate Trump, they just know they are supposed to hate Trump. well I say take to the streets then! give it your best shot! cry and scream and threaten your little butts off. when you have no real idea why you are doing something, it won't take long before you realize how stupid you are and will stop listening to those who encourage you from the sidelines to attack american principles but aren't actually on the streets with you. its ok for you to take that bullet but they sure as hell won't be taking one for the cause.

Martin S , February 10, 2018 at 10:19 am

The nefarious results of the Left propaganda: CRUSH THE TRUTH AND THE SHEEP WILL SWALLOW

William Thrash , February 10, 2018 at 10:55 am

I believe the public is getting played on Mueller. Little hints keep dropping about Trump firing him. Then the media and the left goes into a frenzy, demanding Saint Mueller stay. Mueller has literally become the symbol of hope for the left.

Imagine Mueller now coming out and clearing Trump completely while exposing what his real investigative objective was: revealing the deep state. Remember NBC and CNN mentioning Mueller began investigating the Podestas? Then they dropped that story as fast as possible.

I think we're witnessing the absolute genius of the deep state getting taken down. My hunch is that Mueller is part of the team and the media is getting outsmarted.

Joe Tedesky , February 10, 2018 at 1:11 pm

One can only wonder to where all of this may go. Read this .

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-08/fbi-informant-testifies-moscow-routed-millions-clinton-foundation-russian-uranium

robert , February 10, 2018 at 11:24 am

The thing about liberals is, they'll only accept one result in the Mueller probe. If Trump removes him, he's hiding something. And if Mueller exposes Dem corruption instead of Rep corruption, they'll say its fixed. They want the process to play out, but they'll only accept one result, that of Trump/Russia collusion. They are blinded by their own hate.

Joe Tedesky , February 10, 2018 at 8:27 pm

Remember when the Dem's hated Comey? Boy, those were the days, weren't they?

Pandas4peace , February 10, 2018 at 11:35 am

Robert Mueller is leading an open-ended investigation that can cover any potential crime uncovered during the course of the investigation. He has unlimited resources, no deadlines, and no oversight. He can't be fired, except by the President. He reports to noone. His targets have no idea what their crimes may be. His team is stacked with partisan hacks. He uses heavy-handed tactics intended to break his adversaries, even if they haven't been charged with a crime. He refuses to consider contrary evidence or to examine the DNC computers. He won't interview witnesses. The Constitutional and human rights abuses are alarming.

Douglas Mailly , February 10, 2018 at 11:43 am

Great article, but too bad about the polygraph reference, it just perpetuates the myth that they are useful

https://antipolygraph.org

Howard Mettee , February 10, 2018 at 12:11 pm

One of the supreme ironies of our age is how the McCarthyesque focus on Russian interference in our electoral process has completely obscured the domestic politicization of our own institutions of government, that is the damage our now rabid placement of political party party above the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of the American population.

Corporations have taken over our legislatures under the guise of "free speech", and the country's foreign policy is controlled by a military-industrial-security complex that sees perpetual war as the answer to domestic economic well being and American world hegemony.

While Russians have no doubt used the internet to sow dissent here via "perception management", as we no doubt have done there and elsewhere around the globe, what we Americans as masters of Madison Avenue techniques have done to ourselves pales in comparison. Can we come to grips with this and then get on to building a more cooperative world? It's a cause worth fighting for.

Mild -ly - Facetious , February 10, 2018 at 5:17 pm

Well said, Howard Mettee.

Our slow descent into the present National Chaos might well've been birthed under McCarthy antics as cloak&cover for Operation Paperclip. One could rightly label his actions "political theater" or straight subversion. -- Whatever, US actual history is a Disappearing Act with imperious propensity. We, as a nation, have always been imperious and domineering, just as were our British forefathers.

The present personification of our historical arrogance is this trenchantly self-approving / self-adoring Trump; (Mala Mens Malus Animus), whose wanton path of destruction is largely more perverse than any of his predecessors. His path of DECONSTRUCTION is the portent of a free-radical DISORGANIZATION of the world structure as we've known it. ( Poe aptly depicted this in his short story, "The Descent Into The Maelstrom")

The foreboding actions from Mr. Trump foreshadow Perilous Times predicted first in First Timothy 6: 9-10, Trump as forerunner and Second Timothy 3: 1-5 -- either and both apt descriptions of Donald Trump.

– – – – – – "mala mens malus animus"

R Davis , February 10, 2018 at 2:21 pm

Is it a diversion? From what? It is obvious that Israel & Trump are on a roll. Bombing Syria on the skirtings of Iran – "oh joy of joys, one step closer," – to doomsday. Elsewhere i have recommended the Palestinian people exit Palestine ASAP. Foolhardy Israel is only the size of a postage stamp, 4 time the size of Hiroshima. when nerves fray hey!

Brad Smith , February 10, 2018 at 2:22 pm

I was actually hoping that with Trump taking over the reigns of the war machine that the left would once again mobilize and oppose our wars and the spying state that walks all over our civil liberties. Trump certainly gives them enough legitimate areas of concern that they have plenty to go on. Sadly this really does show the power of the press to manipulate public opinion and the left-wing media loves Russia Gate.

For myself personally, I see the threat of a confrontation with Russia as the #1 concern. We have now entered into a new cold war with all the massive spending, proxy wars and yet again the very real chance of it leading to a hot war that could be the end of all of us. Sadly the "left" in this country has once again fallen for the endless propaganda, their hatred of Trump is only part of this issue.

With or without the Mueller investigation the Russia hatred will go on. Mueller could exonerate Trump tomorrow and the anti-Russian propaganda will continue. It was already ramping up well before our elections and much of it was targeted at the left then as well. Remember Pussy Riot? Remember the stories about how homophobic Russians are? The left has been primed to hate Putin for a long time by this propaganda and they fell for it well before Trump ran for office. Think about it this way, before we had the American "Deplorables" we had "Russians". They were shown as nothing but drunken, wife beating, homophobic, Religious, white, gun nuts, etc. etc. etc. This Extreme form of stereotyping was meant to invoke hatred by the left and it worked.

Joe Tedesky , February 10, 2018 at 8:33 pm

Brad you got it right. Yes, the Dem's are wasting valuable time chasing after these Russian hackers who weren't there. Brad you also got it right, that these so called liberals are blinded by their hatred of Trump, and in my estimation these kool-aid liberals are passing up any golden opportunity they may have to go after Trump for what they should be going after him for. Talk about misdirected, the Dem's aren't even close. Joe

Erelis , February 10, 2018 at 3:24 pm

Well, there was middle last year a nationally organized "March for Truth" which called for investigation of Trump and any Russian ties. The march by newspaper reports got "hundreds" in Chicago and NYC. I saw a live stream of the Portland march. Maybe just maybe cracked a hundred. Basically the march attendees looked like older party partisans. I would expect the same for any pro-Mueller rallies in that they will be pretty much be democratic party rallies. As the leadership of groups like Planned Parenthood, unions, and other organizations are aligned with establishment democrats, I am not sure they can convince their bases to march.

On the electoral side. Sure some people will show up, and show up in democratic dominated cities, but in the rest of America, more of a yawn. Establishment democrats think that Russiagate will win them elections. I think not.

dee , February 10, 2018 at 3:48 pm

The so called liberals tried to redefined the left away from working class to LBGT, Black Lives Matter, abortion rights, etc and , in the process, dug their own graves.

Jessika , February 10, 2018 at 6:47 pm

So far these "liberals" have not dug their own graves, because media supports their position now despite having primed Trump for winning during campaigning. I maintain that having only two political parties is the crux of the problem, and clearly both are corporate. People don't get how they are being played. A quote attributed to Mark Twain I just read: "It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they are being fooled."

Dave Sullivan , February 10, 2018 at 7:12 pm

Yet another "analysis " of russia-gate without mentioning organized crime. The trump cronies are mobbed up from top to bottom, and the right is shocked they would be looked at by the FBI. Talk about snookered. Then the author, denigrates FISA, blames liberals, but doesn't mention the lockstep GOP vote to continue it, or, the majority of dems who opposed .check your own cognitive dissonance at the door before you sit to "write" again.

Jessika , February 10, 2018 at 7:15 pm

No reason for foul language, doesn't enlighten just plays into the already coarse society we have. Colleen Rowley in the past has written on Mueller's harmful coverups of FBI behavior including 9/11 collusion with Bush to ignore Saudi complicity, if I remember correctly.

Yoshi Shimizu , February 10, 2018 at 7:34 pm

Nuts' indeed. Before raising the temperature over the Russiagate, first. Shave off the Pentagon budget!

[Feb 10, 2018] More on neoliberal newspeak of US propaganda machine

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The "Newspeak" we experience is straight out of Orwell's 1984. From Wikipedia: Newspeak is the fictional language in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, written by George Orwell. It is a controlled language created by the totalitarian state Oceania as a tool to limit freedom of thought, and concepts that pose a threat to the regime such as freedom, self-expression, individuality, and peace. Any form of thought alternative to the party's construct is classified as "thoughtcrime". ..."
"... It is truly scary how Orwellian our current situation has become reminding me that there are always two two takeaways from any story or historical record. Those that view it as a cautionary tale and those who use it as an instruction manual. ..."
"... We are also controlled through Doublespeak another Orwellian concept. From Wikipedia: Doublespeak is a language that deliberately obscures, disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words. Some common examples are the branding of liberals by pundits in the media as Fascists in order to eliminate the historical understanding of exactly what that word refers to. Another example is the appearance of the term Alt Right which is used to confuse and obscure the true nature of these groups. A great example of the doublespeak the media exercises in service to the state is the instantaneous adoption of the term Alt Right and nary ever a mention of its former names such as White Supremacist, Neo Nazi, Racist, Hate Group etc. They just rename these movements and hide all the other terms from sight. Another example is scapegoating the same group of people but under a different term. Today the term is Liberal but in the past, the Nazi movement called them Jews, Communists, Intellectuals etc. Whatever the term, the target of these attacks are always the ones that threaten the Power Structure. ..."
"... Joseph Goebbels was in charge of the war propaganda for the Nazis during WWII. He said: "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State." ..."
Feb 10, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

CitizenOne , February 10, 2018 at 11:58 am

The reason we are in the pickle barrel is exactly the reasons stated in the article and by Annie. We are exposed to exactly what they want to show us and are blinded by other narratives which do not support the group think. It is as if the politicians, the intelligence community and the media are all involved in a conspiracy. Remember that word means a plan by two or more people. No tin foil hat required. But anyone suggesting conspiracy is instantly branded a nut hence the universal use of the term conspiracy nut as a derogatory term to label anyone with a different message that somehow captures the attention of a wider audience. It is not so much that all Holly Wood stars are liberal socialists. They are a diverse group. However they all have one thing in common which is they have the public's ear. They are also not on point with the approved messaging and so must be continuously branded as conspiracy nuts and socialist subversives. We all have seen the 24/7 bashing of these folks. Control is the reason.

The "Newspeak" we experience is straight out of Orwell's 1984. From Wikipedia: Newspeak is the fictional language in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, written by George Orwell. It is a controlled language created by the totalitarian state Oceania as a tool to limit freedom of thought, and concepts that pose a threat to the regime such as freedom, self-expression, individuality, and peace. Any form of thought alternative to the party's construct is classified as "thoughtcrime".

It is truly scary how Orwellian our current situation has become reminding me that there are always two two takeaways from any story or historical record. Those that view it as a cautionary tale and those who use it as an instruction manual.

I am appalled by how the media at first put Trump in the game in the first place for economic gain (see Les Moonvies article) and then created another fictional fantasy which serves the goal of permawar and control of the citizenry through fear, confusion and ignorance. We are all exposed to the Daily Two Minutes of Hate another Orwellian concept. From Wikipedia: The Two Minutes Hate, from George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, is a daily period in which Party members of the society of Oceania must watch a film depicting the Party's enemies (notably Emmanuel Goldstein and his followers) and express their hatred for them for exactly two minutes. The difference is we can find it 24/7 on our technological wonder machines.

Another Orwellian concept is The Ministry of Truth: The Ministry of Truth (in Newspeak, Minitrue) is the ministry of propaganda. As with the other ministries in the novel, the name Ministry of Truth is a misnomer because in reality it serves the opposite: it is responsible for any necessary falsification of historical events. From Wikipedia: As well as administering truth, the ministry spreads a new language amongst the populace called Newspeak, in which, for example, "truth" is understood to mean statements like 2 + 2 = 5 when the situation warrants. In keeping with the concept of doublethink, the ministry is thus aptly named in that it creates/manufactures "truth" in the Newspeak sense of the word. The book describes the doctoring of historical records to show a government-approved version of events.

We are also controlled through Doublespeak another Orwellian concept. From Wikipedia: Doublespeak is a language that deliberately obscures, disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words. Some common examples are the branding of liberals by pundits in the media as Fascists in order to eliminate the historical understanding of exactly what that word refers to. Another example is the appearance of the term Alt Right which is used to confuse and obscure the true nature of these groups. A great example of the doublespeak the media exercises in service to the state is the instantaneous adoption of the term Alt Right and nary ever a mention of its former names such as White Supremacist, Neo Nazi, Racist, Hate Group etc. They just rename these movements and hide all the other terms from sight. Another example is scapegoating the same group of people but under a different term. Today the term is Liberal but in the past, the Nazi movement called them Jews, Communists, Intellectuals etc. Whatever the term, the target of these attacks are always the ones that threaten the Power Structure.

Joseph Goebbels was in charge of the war propaganda for the Nazis during WWII. He said: "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."

If these things seem eerily similar to what is going on today then we probably have a power structure which is a grave threat for peace. Okay, we do have a power structure that is a grave threat to peace but oddly not democracy. Noam Chomsky wrote about propaganda stating, "it's the essence of democracy" This notion is contrary to the popular belief that indoctrination is inconsistent with democracy. The point is that in a totalitarian state, it doesn't much matter what people think because you can control what they do. But when the state loses the bludgeon, when you can't control people by force and when the voice of the people can be heard, you have to control what people think. And the standard way to do this is to resort to what in more honest days used to be called propaganda. Manufacture of consent. Creation of necessary illusions.

The folks who contribute here on this website are few indeed and what lies beyond the haven of the oasis is a vast barren dessert filled with scorpions, snakes and a whole bunch of lies.

Well said for Annie and the authors.

Democracy may be the ultimate tool of control of the masses.

More wisdom from Goebbels:

I like that last one a lot but unfortunately it will not come to pass until things get bad.

CitizenOne , February 10, 2018 at 11:59 am

Link to article: http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-trump-moonves-snap-htmlstory.html

Elaine Sandchaz , February 10, 2018 at 5:34 pm

Citizen One – You have beautifully & precicely nailed the means ( "how" ) the USA has gotten in such a mess : Newspeak, Daily Two Minutes of Hate, The Ministry of Truth, DoubleSpeak and the way and why of how Propaganda actually works. George Orwell was a seer.

AND now it would be helpful to understand "why" the USA has gotten in such a mess. The polarity of American politics tells a very long story but in short, polarity means there are only two ways and when the going gets tough, each way is in the extreme – the right way or the wrong way, it flips depending on each individual's political persuasion. When the going gets tough the extremes become the tail that wags the dog.

So my question is : WHY after the seemingly happy years under Obama did the going get so tough so fast?
My pet theory is that Trump threatened to "drain the swamp" which was understood – seemingly now quite rightly – that he was going to expose some very significant wrong doing in very high places. I believe that he was on "NYC/DC" friendly terms with the Clintons and both parties knew each other for the true devil they were. Thus the big red flag he waved in her face brought about what is turning in to a multi billion dollar ongoing attempt to discredit him in the eyes of the people, in the eyes of the World and in the eyes of the highest courts " America be damned".

And politically this is quite necessary because she is not only an icon of all that is American,"apple pie and motherhood"; she is to the under 45 age group the great white mother of democracy via Democrat rule. And the bad part of that iconography is that if she goes down so does the party. It was also critical for her to win because of all the swamp people who had chosen to compromise their life's work, thus had to continue in that compromise in the hope that they would come out clean since they believed that both Trump and the ordinary American were so naive, thus would be easily played for fools.

So all this crap to destroy Trump is about saving her hide to save the party. Things are so desperate now because there is nothing yet in place to replace her in the mind's eye of the Democratic half the voting public. All who might have been in 2nd place were kept diminished to raise her higher. It now is quite obvious that she has been told to shut up and lie low, to come out only when she is in safe company – as at the Golden Globes. So the big picture today as is being painted and hyped to intensify mass hysteria is that Mueller needs to be protected from Trump where really what is needed are the names and numbers to be called on for more $$$, more social media propaganda pages and to vote in November 2018.

Why only that? Because Trump is not going to fire Mueller; remember Mueller was a Bush man and so was Comey. They have a long history of going both ways. Survival is tricky business – especially in DC. The scapegoats are already cornered; possibly the new "lie" is already in draft form. Remember – "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."

It is going to be an interesting next few months!! But we can hope that, from this one of many previous American political exercises in democracy, the ordinary defenders of those democratic values (the voters) will learn some significant truths about governance, transparency and the rule of law. The guys at the top are not gods and are not above the law; they must not only do right but be seen to do right.

CitizenOne , February 10, 2018 at 7:57 pm

The only thing I can tell you is that the conspirators who concocted Russia Gate have figured out all the pieces to the puzzle of how to control events via the means I mentioned and many other means. We are as manipulated as a light switch. One way we are all fired up about some BS and flip the switch and we are all calm and mellow. Hopefully if you follow the threads here you will find out a lot of alternative information much of it thoroughly researched by highly respected and qualified individuals who are in a position to know the truth.

Mariam , February 10, 2018 at 7:11 pm

I agree with you wholeheartedly. They call themselves "liberals" in fact they are "new liberals."
Alas, these false ("new) liberals" are very well represented by the Obamas, the Clintons, the Trudeaus, the Macrons and so on.
If you truly believe in the "left" and call yourself "progressive" you couldn't stand for useless and pointless wars, period.

[Feb 09, 2018] Professor Stephen F. Cohen Rethinking Putin – A critical reading, by The Saker - The Unz Review

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... As a young and inexperienced leader placed at the helm of a collapsing state: He rebuilt, stabilized and modernized Russia in a way to prevent future collapses He had to restore the "vertical" of power: "managed democracy" (i.e. restored order) He needed a consensual history patching up Czarist, Soviet and post-Soviet eras without imposing one, single, version of history He needed Western support to modernize the Russian economy He wanted Russia to be a great power, but not a super-power He never favored iron-curtain isolationism; he is an internationalist (more European than 90% of Russians, at least in the beginning). ..."
"... The key thesis is this: Putin began as a pro-Western, European leader and with time he realigned himself with a much more traditional, Russian worldview. He is more in line with Russian voters today. ..."
"... "by any reckoning, be it flourishing inside Russia or relations with Israel, by general consent of all, nobody denies this, Jews under Putin in Russia are better off than they had ever been in Russian history. Ever. They have more freedom, less official anti-Semitism, more protection, more official admiration for Israel, more interaction, more freedom to go back and forth". ..."
"... The Soviet KGB was first and foremost a huge bureaucracy with completely different, and separate, directorates, departments, and sections. Yes, one such Directorate did deal with dissidents and anti-Soviet activists (mainly the 9 th Department of the 5 th Directorate) but even within this (infamous) 5 th Directorate there were some Departments which, in coordination with other KGB Directorates and Departments, dealt with more legitimate tasks such as, for example, the early detection of terrorist organizations (7 th Department). Other Directorates of the KGB dealt with economic security (6 th Directorate), internal security and counter-intelligence (2 nd Directorate) or even protection of officials (9 th Directorate). ..."
"... My most important objection to Saker is that Putin does not know what to do about Ukraine and does not have a policy on Ukraine. ..."
"... The collapse of the Soviet Union was arranged by the Nomenklatura for their own benefit as a massive asset grab. ..."
"... On the plus side, Western sanctions have been a net benefit to Russia over the last three years – keeping capital in the country and giving the agricultural, food processing and light manufacturing industries some room to breathe and develop free from Western competition. ..."
"... I've heard a few of Grudinin's speeches, and they were very disappointing, to put it mildly. It is nice to say that you want to confiscate oligarch's money (after all, they just stole it), stop capital flight, nationalize natural resources, etc. It might sound good for the electorate, but without specifying means of achieving these goals, this is pure demagoguery. ..."
Feb 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

I have recently had the pleasure of watching a short presentation by Professor Stephen F. Cohen entitled "Rethinking Putin" which he delivered on the annual Nation cruise on December 2, 2017 (see here for the original Nation Article and original YouTube video). In his short presentation, Professor Cohen does a superb job explaining what Putin is *not* and that includes: (but, please do watch the original video before proceeding).

Professor Cohen ended his talk by suggesting a few things which might form a part of a future honest biography:

As a young and inexperienced leader placed at the helm of a collapsing state: He rebuilt, stabilized and modernized Russia in a way to prevent future collapses He had to restore the "vertical" of power: "managed democracy" (i.e. restored order) He needed a consensual history patching up Czarist, Soviet and post-Soviet eras without imposing one, single, version of history He needed Western support to modernize the Russian economy He wanted Russia to be a great power, but not a super-power He never favored iron-curtain isolationism; he is an internationalist (more European than 90% of Russians, at least in the beginning).

The key thesis is this: Putin began as a pro-Western, European leader and with time he realigned himself with a much more traditional, Russian worldview. He is more in line with Russian voters today.

Professor Cohen concluded by addressing two topics which, I presume, his audience cared deeply about: he said that, contrary to Western propaganda, the so-called 'anti-gay' laws in Russia are no different from the laws of 13 US states. Secondly, that "by any reckoning, be it flourishing inside Russia or relations with Israel, by general consent of all, nobody denies this, Jews under Putin in Russia are better off than they had ever been in Russian history. Ever. They have more freedom, less official anti-Semitism, more protection, more official admiration for Israel, more interaction, more freedom to go back and forth".

This is all very interesting important stuff, especially when delivered to a Left-Liberal-Progressive US audience (with, probably, a high percentage of Jews). Frankly, Professor Cohen's presentation makes me think about what Galileo might have felt when he made his own "presentations" before the tribunal of Inquisition (Cohen's articles and books are now also on the modern equivalent of the Index Librorum Prohibitorum) . In truth, Professor Cohen is simply true to himself: he opposed the crazies during the old Cold War and now he is opposing the same crazies during the new Cold War. His entire life Professor Cohen was a man of truth, courage, and integrity – a peacemaker in the sense of the Beatitudes (Matt 5:9). So while I am not surprised by his courage, I am still immensely impressed by it. Some might think that delivering a short presentation on a cruise-ship is hardly a sign of great courage, but I would vehemently disagree. Yes, nobody would shoot Cohen in the back of the neck like, say, the Soviet ChK-GPU-NKVD would have done, but I submit that these methods of "enforcing" a single official consensus were far less effective than their modern equivalents: the conformity imposition techniques (see: Asch Conformity Experiment ) so prevalent in the modern Western society. Just look at the results: there was far more reading and thinking (of any kind) going on in the Soviet society than there is today in the modern AngloZionist Empire (anybody who remembers the bad old USSR will confirm that to you). As one joke puts it: in a dictatorship, you are told to "shut up", while in a democracy you are encouraged to "keep talking". QED.

Turning to Professor Cohen's talking points, numbers 1, 2, 3 and 4 are basic facts. Nothing to be debated here – Cohen is plainly setting the factual record straight. Number 5 is much more interesting and controversial. For one thing, we are talking views/intentions, which are hard to judge. Was Putin ever pro-Western? Who knows? Maybe his closest friends know? My own belief is that this question must be looked at in combination of issue #8: Putin's service in the KGB.

There is still a huge amount of misinformation about the old Soviet KGB in the West. To the average American a "KGB agent" is a guy called Vladimir, with steel gray-blue eyes, who beats up dissidents, steals Western technological secrets, and spies on the wives of politicians (and even beds them). He is a hardcore Communist who dreams about nuking or invading the US and he speaks with a thick Russian accent. Alternatively, there is Anna Kushchenko (a.k.a. Anna Chapman ) – a devious sex doll who seduces Western men into treason. These prototypes are as accurate as James Bond is an accurate representation of MI6. The reality could not be more different.

The Soviet KGB was first and foremost a huge bureaucracy with completely different, and separate, directorates, departments, and sections. Yes, one such Directorate did deal with dissidents and anti-Soviet activists (mainly the 9 th Department of the 5 th Directorate) but even within this (infamous) 5 th Directorate there were some Departments which, in coordination with other KGB Directorates and Departments, dealt with more legitimate tasks such as, for example, the early detection of terrorist organizations (7 th Department). Other Directorates of the KGB dealt with economic security (6 th Directorate), internal security and counter-intelligence (2 nd Directorate) or even protection of officials (9 th Directorate).

Putin was an officer (not an "agent" – agents are recruited from outside the KGB!) of the First Main Directorate (PGU) of the KGB: foreign intelligence. Putin himself has recently revealed that he was working inside the most sensitive Department of the PGU, the "Department S" which are "illegals". This is very important. The PGU was so separate from all the other Directorates of the KGB that it had its own headquarters in the south of Moscow. But even inside the PGU, the Department S was the most secret and separated from all the other PGU Departments (no less than 10). As somebody who has spent many years as an anti-Soviet activist and who has had personal, face to face, dealings with KGB officers (of various Directorates) I can confirm that not only did the KGB as a whole get some of the best and brightest in Russia, but the PGU got the best ones of those and only the very best ones from that select group ever made it to the legendary Department S. Now let's look at what kind of skill-set was required from PGU officers in general (besides the obvious two: being very bright and very trustworthy).

First and foremost, a PGU officer has to be a top-notch specialist of his area of expertise (in Putin's case: Germany, of course, but also the rest of Europe and, since Western Europe was – and still is – a US colony, the US). While Soviet people were told that the West was the enemy, the PGU officers had to understand why and how the West was that enemy.

In practical terms, this implies not only knowing and understanding the official cultural, political, social and economic realities of the enemy's polity, but also the real power relations inside that polity. Such an understanding is not only useful to approach and evaluate the potential usefulness of each person you interact with, but also to be able to understand in what environment this person has to operate. The notion of PGU officers being bigoted commies is laughable as these men, and women, were very well read (they had unlimited access to all the Western information sources, including anti-Soviet ones, classified reports, and all the anti-Soviet literature imaginable) and they were ultimate realists/pragmatists. Of course, like in any organization, the top leaders were often political appointees and the bureaucrats and counter -intelligence officers were much less sophisticated. But for officers like Putin to really understand the reality of the Western society was a vital skill.

Second, a good PGU officer had to be likable; very, very likable. Being liked by others is also a crucial skill for a good intelligence officer. In practical terms, this means that he/she has to not only understand what makes the other guy tick but how to influence him/her in the right direction. When dealing with 'illegals' that also meant being their best friend, confessor, moral support, guide and protector. You can't do that if people don't like you. So these intelligence officers are masters of being good friends and companions; they are good listeners and they know a lot about how to make you like them. They also understand exactly what you like to hear, what you want to see and what words and actions place you in a relaxed and trusting mode.

Now combine these two: you have a man who is top notch specialist of the West and who is superbly trained to be liked by Western people. How likely is it that this man had many illusions about the West, to begin with? And what if a man like that did have misgivings – would he have shown them?

My own gut feeling is that this is not very likely at all.

What is far more likely is this: Putin played the "West best's friend" role for as long as possible and he dumped it when it was clearly not productive any longer. And yes, in doing that he did realign himself to the mainstream Russian public opinion. But that was just a useful side-effect, not the cause or the goal of that realignment.

Look at the Professor Cohen's points 9-13 above (I would summarize them as "fix Russia"). They all make sense to me, even that " he was a young and inexperienced leader ". There is a huge difference between being a skilled PGU officer and being the man who rules over Russia. And even if Putin did lose some of his illusions, it would have been primarily because the West itself changed a great deal between the 1980s and the 2010s. But Putin must have indeed always known that to implement Cohen's points 10-13 he needed the West's help, or, if that was not possible, at least the West's minimal interference/resistance. But to believe that a man who had full access to the real information about the two Chechen wars would have any kind of illusions left about the West's real feelings about Russia is profoundly misguided. In fact, anybody living in Russia in the 1990s would have eventually come to the realization that the West wanted all Russians to be slaves, or, more accurately, and in the words of Senator McCain – " gas station " attendants. Putin himself said so when he declared , speaking about the US, " they don't want to humiliate us, they want to subjugate us. They want to solve their problems at our expense, they want to subordinate us to their influence ". Putin then added, " nobody in history has ever succeeded in doing this and nobody will ever succeed ". First, I submit that Putin is absolutely correct in his understanding of the West's goals. Second, I also submit that he did not suddenly "discover" this in 2014. I think that he knew it all along, but began openly saying so after the US-backed coup in the Ukraine. Furthermore, by 2014, Putin had already accomplished points 9-13 and he did not need the West as much anymore.

Now let's look at points 6 (Putin's view of the Soviet period), 12 (consensual history) and 14 (Russia as a great power but not a super-power). And again, let's consider the fact that officers of the PGU had total access to any history books, secret archives, memoirs, etc. and that they were very free to speak in pragmatic analytical terms on all historical subjects with their teachers and colleagues. Here I submit that Putin had no more illusions about the Soviet past then he had about the West. The fact that he referred to the breakup of the Soviet Union (which, let's remember, happened in a totally undemocratic way!) as a " catastrophe " which was " completely unnecessary " does in no way imply that he was not acutely aware of all the horrors, tragedies, waste, corruption, degradation and general evil of the Soviet regime. All this shows is that he is also aware of the immense victories, achievements, and successes which also are part of the historical record of the Soviet era. Finally, and most importantly, it shows that he realizes what absolute disaster, a cataclysm of truly cosmic proportions the break-up of the Soviet Union represented for all the people of the former USSR and what an absolute nightmare it was for Russia to live a full decade as a subservient colony of Uncle Sam. I am certain that Putin studied enough Hegel to understand that the horrors of the 1990s were the result of the internal contradictions of the Soviet era just as the Soviet era was the result of the internal contradictions of Czarist Russia. In plain English, this means that he fully understood the inherent dangers of empire and that he decided, along with the vast majority of Russians, that Russia ought to never become an empire again. A strong, respected and sovereign country? Yes. But an empire? Never again. No way!

This fundamental conclusion is also the key to Putin's foreign policy: it is "reactive" by nature simply because it only acts in response to when (and what) something affects Russia. You could say that all "normal" nations are "reactive" because they have no business doing otherwise. Getting involved everywhere, in every fight or conflict, is what empires based on messianic ideologies do, not normal countries regardless of how big or powerful they are. For all the sick and paranoid hallucinations of Western Russophobes about a "resurgent Russia" the reality is that Russian diplomats have often mentioned what the goals of Russian foreign policies truly are: to turn enemies into neutrals, neutrals into partners, partners into friends and friends into allies. And this is why Professor Cohen is absolutely correct, Putin is no isolationist at all – he wants a new, multi-polar, international order of sovereign countries; not because he is a naďve wide-eyed idealist, but because this is what is pragmatically good for Russia and her people. You could say that Putin is a patriotic internationalist.

And now to the homosexuals and Jews. First, both assertions made by Professor Cohen are correct: homosexuals and Jews are doing great in modern Russia. I would even agree that they are doing better than ever before. Of course, both Professor Cohen and I are being factual and very superficial when we say that. And since I discussed both of these topics in some detail in the past (see here and here ) I won't discuss them here. Rather, I would simply state that in both cases we are talking about a rather small minority of whose treatment is, for some reason or other, considered as THE measure of humanity, kindness, civilization, and modernity in the West. Well, okay, to each his own. If in the West, the treatment of these two minorities is The One And Only Most Important Topic In The Universe – fine. I personally don't care much (especially since I don't feel that I owe any special consideration to either one of them). This being said, I would also claim that Putin's number one concern is also not for any specific minority. However, and that is where this is indeed very interesting, his concern for the majority does not at all imply any kind of disregard or disrespect for the fundamental freedoms and rights of the minorities but includes his concern for all minorities (and, in this case, not just two minorities which are treated as "more equal than others").

This is where various right-wingers and assorted Alt-Righters completely "lose" Putin. The very same Putin who told an assembly of Orthodox Jews in Moscow that 80-85% of Bolshevik leaders were Jews (see subtitled video here ), the same Putin who crushed the (overwhelmingly Jewish) oligarchs of the Eltsin era as soon as he came to power, and the same Putin who completely ignored all the hysterics of Bibi Netanyahu about the Russian role in Syria is also the same Putin who went out of his way to protect Russian Jews inside Russia and who considers that Jews and Russians are forever joined in their common memory of the horrors of WWII.

[Sidebar: I personally wish that Russia would denounce Israel for what it is, an illegitimate racist rogue state hell-bent on genocide and expansion, but I don't have relatives there. Neither am I the President of a country with very strong ties to the Russian-speaking Jewish communities worldwide. In my opinion, I am accountable to nobody else but my conscience and God, whereas Putin is accountable to those who elected him and still support him].

Guilt by association, the punishment of all for the actions of some, scapegoating, the vicious persecution of minorities in the name of some ideal – this has all been tried in the past, both in Russia and in the West. The Nazis did that and so did the Soviets. And both the Nazis and the Soviets inflicted untold horrors upon the many peoples of the Soviet Union and beyond. Putin is acutely aware of the dangers of nationalism, just as much as he is aware of the dangers of imperialism, and he said so many times: Russia cannot afford any more nationalistic conflicts as they almost completely destroyed Russia in the 1990s. Just look at modern Ukraine and you will see what a Russia torn apart by nationalist ideologies could have looked like had Putin not cracked down, hard, on various nationalists (including and mostly Russian ones).

Far from catering to (an admittedly powerful) Jewish lobby in Russia, Putin is, in fact, trying to assemble as many different peoples and minorities as possible to his project of a New Russia; and that project includes Russian Jews, not only for the sake of these Jews, but mainly for the sake of Russia . The same goes for another crucial minority in Russia – Muslims. They also very much form a key part of the project Putin has for Russia. Of course, racists, nationalists and other less than bright folks in Russia will still dream about expelling all Jews (or Muslims) from Russia. Simply put – that ain't happening (for one thing this would be physically impossible) and Putin and those who support him will fight such projects with every legal tool at their disposal. Here again, you could say that Putin is a patriotic internationalist.

In the meanwhile, the West is still stuck in its old, ideological ways: imperialism, nationalism and messianic exclusivism on one hand, and a complete surrender to post-modernism, cultural self-hatred, petty minority politics and moral relativism on the other. It is, therefore, no surprise whatsoever that both mainstream camps in the West completely misread Putin and can't figure out what he is up to.

Professor Cohen is right: the real Putin has absolutely nothing, nothing at all, in common with the pseudo-Putin the Western media presents to its infinitely gullible and zombified audience. Alas, nobody will listen to Cohen, at least not until the regime in Washington DC and the power structure which supports it, and whose interests it represents, come crashing down. But I do believe that Professor Cohen will eventually go down in history as the most intellectually honest and courageous Russia expert in the US.

exiled off mainstreet , February 8, 2018 at 5:41 am GMT

I respect this commentator and respect Mr. Cohen and detest the power structure they are resisting. This seems to be a realistic appraisal of Putin's role.
Cyrano , February 8, 2018 at 6:57 am GMT

Guilt by association, the punishment of all for the actions of some, scapegoating, the vicious persecution of minorities in the name of some ideal – this has all been tried in the past, both in Russia and in the West. The Nazis did that and so did the Soviets.

Saker, I know you want to sound egalitarian and fair, but comparing Nazi's and Soviet treatment of minorities – come on man. Nazi's mistreated minorities because of the fact that they were of different ethnicity, and that treatment was reserved for them only, and not for the Germans.

In the Soviet Union, the mistreatment of minorities had more equal opportunity flavor – they didn't want to make the minorities feel left out of the mistreatment that the ethnic Russians were receiving themselves.

In other words, the USSR didn't want to discriminate against the minorities by treating them differently than the ethnic Russians.

Imagine how it would have felt from the minorities perspective if the USSR authorities refrained from sending them to the Gulag. They would have felt unloved and unworthy of receiving the same treatment as the Russians. Like they are not good enough to be sent to the Gulag.

yurivku , February 8, 2018 at 9:14 am GMT
Thank you Saker. It was an interesting reading.

Both of you – The Saker and prof. Cohen probably are right in yours conclusions about Putin and its role in world and Russia's history. But: - he was appointed by Yeltsin, as I.Shamir ( http://www.unz.com/ishamir/the-rich-also-cry/ ) said to guard Old Money; - he did alot for our country and really saved it from final crushing, but he could have done much more and he had not.

I mean corruption questions when he behaves very selectively (keeping some corruptioners while fight with others, this looks like undercover fight), economy (thanks US imbeciles with sanctions which forced him to support internal productions and agriculture), he did almost nothing to get those oligarchs's money work for country, he does invest to different unneeded projects (like football champ etc) not trying to help poorest part of our society, he still does nothing (even supports) 5th column (Chubais, Kudrin, Shuvalov, Gref ), building stupid Eltsin center .

So I, as well as many Russian, have a very contradictory feelings to him. After Crimea joined Russia we all gave him a big credit. Most than 90% of Russians happy of this, when root and lovely part of Russia returned home not to say about strategic meaning of that. But now credit is over and if we could see someone good enough to be compared with Putin – quite a significant part of a society is ready to vote for for such person. Unfortunately not now. Grudinin doesn't seem to be real alternative, others are just clowns appointed to be faked alternatives.

And the future of Russia is very vague.

Alas, nobody will listen to Cohen, at least not until the regime in Washington DC and the power structure which supports it, and whose interests it represents, come crashing down.

But, thanks to US neocons, it's probably no future at all going to happen, just getting back to stone age. Hope it's a joke. Alas.

Renoman , February 8, 2018 at 10:42 am GMT
Putin is the leader of the free World. A sensible man with a real set of nuts, he stands almost alone.
Ludwig Watzal , Website February 8, 2018 at 10:43 am GMT
There are still some voices of reason left in the US. The most aggressive, dangerous and trigger-happy country in the world is the US Empire.

http://www.newspronto.com/opinion/45229-the-demonization-of-president-vladimir-putin-must-stop

Randal , February 8, 2018 at 12:11 pm GMT

Professor Cohen is right: the real Putin has absolutely nothing, nothing at all, in common with the pseudo-Putin the Western media presents to its infinitely gullible and zombified audience. Alas, nobody will listen to Cohen, at least not until the regime in Washington DC and the power structure which supports it, and whose interests it represents, come crashing down. But I do believe that Professor Cohen will eventually go down in history as the most intellectually honest and courageous Russia expert in the US.

It's very encouraging for me to get the impression that a genuine expert, such as Cohen is on Russia and on Putin, has reached the same broad conclusions about Putin as I have as a mere amateur (albeit long-time) observer of world events.

It's vaguely discouraging that on the particular issues of homosexuals and jewish influence Cohen is able to "reassure" the worst parts of his leftist and presumably political correctness-hobbled audience on Putin, but it's not really a big concern for me. It would be better imo if Putin had wise views on those topics – "gays" are not a "minority" but rather just people who choose to engage in sexual perversion which ought, at the least, to not be officially encouraged, and Jewish people are a recognizable ethnic/national/religious group, with broadly clear identity interests and external loyalties not necessarily congruent with those of the nations they live in, but it's mostly not really any of my business or concern, except insofar as it plays into politics and international policy over here, since he's the Russian president and I'm not Russian.

anonymous Disclaimer , February 8, 2018 at 5:47 pm GMT
Anyone who would bother to examine the issue would arrive at the same conclusions as Mr Cohen. Most Americans won't but just rely on what the mass media transmits to them. The propaganda campaign against Putin depends on repeating the same themes over and over again hence the constant use of the term "thug" to influence the minds of the audience. The campaign against Putin is so vehement and shrill because of his effectiveness in building up the Russian state. Contrast it to the treatment Yeltsin received in the western media as a brave fighter for democracy with pics of him standing on top of a tank. Name calling can't harm Putin or Russia even if it creates an unpleasant environment. After all, they have their army and can't be aggressed against no matter any wishful thinking. The toxic haze is to get the western mind used to the idea that conflict with the Russians, or Putin, in inevitable and desirable to free the world of a dictator. Clinton appeared to want a no-fly zone over Syria and thus military confrontation was on the horizon over that and over other places. We were being prepared for that. That seems to have dissipated for the moment but the internal dynamic of US expansionism remains. What we don't want to do is start believing our own baloney and blunder into any conflict that could cause a catastrophe.
bluedog , February 8, 2018 at 9:20 pm GMT
@yurivku

As they say you can't make everyone happy, for they could have always in their limited view and knowledge of what's going on behind the scenes could always have done more, but the fact remains that Putin was the right person at the right time for Russia

Anon Disclaimer , February 8, 2018 at 10:45 pm GMT
@Renoman

Anon from TN
You wrote: "Putin is the leader of the free World. A sensible man with a real set of nuts, he stands almost alone".

In my view, you grossly overestimate Putin. He is a normal man, capable and intelligent, but he is not by any means that larger-than-life leader and savior of the free World. He looks much greater than he is because you subconsciously compare him with pathetic nonentities that the Western world sees as leaders now. In fact, the leadership of the US Empire and all its vassal countries visibly degenerated in the last decades. Just compare De Gaulle with sad excuses La Belle France had for presidents lately. Or compare Nixon (he might have been a nasty person, but he was a great President of the country) with various Clintons, bushes, obamas, and trumps. Or compare Chancellor Kohl with that poor excuse for a chancellor that Germany has today. You get the drift.

Putin's Russia punches much more than its economic power warrants for the simple reason that he plays chess, seeing many moves ahead, whereas Western leaders he deals with don't even have enough brains to play checkers. He is often winning the game with weak hand not so much because he is great, but because his opponents are clueless. I'd say he, Chinese Xi, and Israel's Bibi look so smart not because they are geniuses, but because they are dealing with morons.

Anon Disclaimer , February 8, 2018 at 11:04 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson

Anon from TN.
Sorry to disappoint you, but when the Russians saw the example of Ukraine after 2014 they understood the destructive power of primeval tribal nationalism. That's why after the Ukrainian coup popular support for Russian nationalists nosedived. Let me remind you that neither Kadyrov, nor Shoigu, nor Lavrov are ethnic Russians, yet they are perceived by many in the country as super-Russians. Many in today's Russia hold the view that Russian is not a nationality, but a state of mind. Let me remind you the words of former commander of Gorlovka (Donetsk Republic) Bezler: "My mother is Ukrainian, my father German, so who am I? A Russian!"

Dan Hayes , February 9, 2018 at 12:00 am GMT
The Saker,

For the last four years I have listened to Prof Steve Cohen being interviewed on the John Batchelor radio show. In those discussions I have always been struck by Cohen's equanimity, scholarship and sense of fair play. (As an aside, I have also been struck by his seemingly fond regard for being reared and educated in Kentucky which at that time was still semi-segregated.)

Cohen oftentimes contrasts the Old Cold War where various viewpoints were on the table versus the one-sidedness of the New Cold War. And he especially castigates his fellow left wingers for failing to consider alternative viewpoints. Note that Cohen is associated with The Nation magazine, a leftist publication edited and subsidized by his wife.

As of now Cohen is a lone voice crying out in the wilderness. I concur with your judgement and it is my hope that history will honor him for his efforts.

polskijoe , February 9, 2018 at 12:10 am GMT
@anonymous

Amongst people who tend to really distrust, dislike people, where we are called Russian agents, or Russians. I have studied lots about Russia, especially since 1990 plus.

I also came to similar over years as Cohen. There is no plan for USSR rebirth, or tanks rolling to Poland and Berlin, or even returning to super power status (at least unlikely).

In 1990 the Russians were in very poor state, and now they have returned to world power status. I think its important to have bipolar world. (even multipolar would be better).

Now I dont love Russians, Im still mixed on Putin, but I think Russians and Putin have made some positive changes. I can respect that. Average Russian, morals are similar to mine (and the same can be said of most Slavics).

Anon Disclaimer , February 9, 2018 at 12:15 am GMT
@AP

Anon from TN. Well, current Ukrainian regime is a lot more "Sovok" than those who resist it. At least if by "Sovok" you mean rampant corruption, widespread unprofessionalism, and obsession with a totally loony ideology.

RobinG , February 9, 2018 at 1:00 am GMT
@Dan Hayes

"Cohen is a lone voice crying out in the wilderness." Feels that way, but he's not totally alone. For example, I believe most members of VIPS (Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity) feel about the same. And he's a board member of the American Committee for East-West Accord.

https://eastwestaccord.com/

nebulafox , February 9, 2018 at 1:05 am GMT
I neither like nor dislike Putin. He is what he is, he's in charge of Russia, he needs to be dealt with.

>He is not the man who de-democratized Russia (Elstin and the White House did)

When was Russia ever democratic to begin with? Tsarism, civil war, Communism, oligarchy, Putin. That's pretty much been it. And that's OK. Russia is a massively different culture. But the US isn't to blame.

>He is not the leader who created corruption and kleptocracy in Russia (Elstin and the White House did)

No. Corruption began to really take off in the 1970s under Brezhnev, and that's when the Russian mafia began to strongly collaborate with the government, breaking the old vor code. The KGB remained above it all, but Putin was the product of a corrupt society from the get-go.

Following the collapse of the USSR, yes, everything got a lot more explicit and out-there. But the rot didn't just appear overnight.

>He is not a criminal leader who ordered the murder of opponents or journalists (no evidence)

I don't find it hard to believe, but I don't care enough to find out one way or the other. What Putin does in his own country is, or should be, his own business. Properly conducted foreign policy cares about the external actions of foreign nations, not their internal ones, but that's anathema to American political culture-on both sides of the political spectrum.

Besides, I can't really label a single group in society I could care less about than journalists.

>He did not order the hacking of the DNC servers (no evidence)

Again: I don't find it hard to believe he did, but I don't think it is as relevant as the Democrats would like it to be. Intelligence services can exacerbate political conditions. They cannot create them. Putin did not force Hillary to run arguably the most inept campaign in American political history, losing in spite of the near uniform backing of everything "official" in the US. Unless you believe Moscow magically spawned millions of pissed off downscale white voters in the Rust Belt, try again.

Moreover, Putin definitely wanted Trump to create political chaos in the US. Whether he wanted him in the White House is an open matter. Though he's friendlier than Hillary on a lot of foreign policy issues, he's surrounded by standard issue GOP hawks who influence everything, and he must be disappointed. Furthermore, like all authoritarian rulers, Putin wants stability. (That's why, prior to Bush II, most authoritarian governments in the world-especially Russia and China-openly preferred Republicans in charge.) Trump is anything but.

>He was not anti-US or anti-West from the get-go (Putin changed over time)

Correct. He's changed over the years.

>He is not a neo-Soviet leader (he is very critical of Lenin and Stalin)

Very critical of Lenin, which should surprise no one given that Lenin himself was far more fond of Western culture-specifically German -- than Russia, who he thought of as a backward, "Asiatic" place. As I've said, the KGB following Stalin's purges was arguably the least ideologically Communist place in the USSR, at least compared to their major two rivals-the military and party -- in the ever ongoing three-war political struggle that characterized post-Stalin Russia.

More ambiguous with Stalin. He's been making noises about replacing Volgograd's name around the anniversary of the battle back to the old Stalingrad. I think he holds the standard views that Russians his age hold of Stalin. I think they'll readily agree that he's probably in hell if it exists right now, and showed there was such a thing as being too fond of law and order, but he was *their* SOB and got them through the war.

>He is not an aggressive foreign policy leader (he has been a reactive leader)

He is primarily defensive, yes. Partially by necessity-his Russia just can't project power like the USSR could-but also because, unlike the USSR, his Russia is not governed by an ideology that necessarily implies eventual expansionism.

>He is not somehow defined by his years at the KGB.

He's partially defined by them, but not in the way people think. The KGB was, by the time Putin was in the organization, far and away the least ideologically Communist place in the USSR and saw their main function as protecting what was essentially an old-style Muscovite imperium with Marxist trappings from the spoiled, corrupt party princelings-who they did not allow into the organization. The KGB was the only place someone like Putin could have accelerated, given that 1970s USSR had one of the lowest social mobility rates in the world, contrary to the propaganda. Chekist thinking is very evident in his public pronouncements, his actions, and his beliefs about how life works. It's pretty obvious. Putin's regime is the first in history to be dominated by former security and intelligence professionals to this extent. Most of his inner circle-former intelligence officers.

However, equally important is old-style Tsarist Orthodox-laden Slavophilism, and just plain greed and venality. The third one is overlooked. I think Putin's real first goal, all things balanced, is staying in charge, on top, and wealthy. That means keeping the various turf lords in check and satisfied. It works for now. What happens to the sand-castle when he dies is a different matter.

That's it. Goodbye Unz.

yurivku , February 9, 2018 at 6:28 am GMT
@bluedog

Got to PC, writing from smartphone is unhandy

As they say you can't make everyone happy, for they could have always in their limited view and knowledge of what's going on behind the scenes could always have done more

Exactly, but I think you know not more that me here in Russia "what's going on behind the scenes".
And yes, probably there are hidden reasons for his behaviour, but I've written what many (I beleive the majority) of Russians think. Of cource not all, there are some absolute fans of him and absolute enemies, BTW mainly latter are jews for unknown reasons.

but the fact remains that Putin was the right person at the right time for Russia

bold assertion – "the fact". It's not the fact, – it's your opinion, not more. Yes, It could have been much worse person, but could have been much better. Or you think he's an ideal? Nobody denies his achievements, but I mentioned also his (actually ours) losses or mistakes.

bluedog , February 9, 2018 at 10:43 am GMT
@yurivku

Who would you have recommended?

Vlad , February 9, 2018 at 11:12 am GMT
Saker did a great job of explaining Cohen's position on Putin that had been misunderstood in mainstream Western media. Cohen has basically been trying to show that Putin is a normal leader, ready to cooperate with the US and defend his country's national interests. His posture has been defensive. Cohen is trying to reason with the liberals and New York Jews. He is trying to convince them that the mainstream media is lying. Fine.

But that does not explain what Putin's agenda is. Saker goes further. He does explain most of Putin's past and present. But still there is room for disagreement. Saker argues that Putin knew all along the wicked intentions of the US and openly revealed that knowledge after the Ukraine take over by the US. Here I disagree. When Bush came to Russia Putin greeted him with genuine enthusiasm. Putin then did hope that Russia and US could turn the page and begin a new relationship. That did not happen. Expansion of NATO happened instead. And that is when Putin began to reconsider. My difference with Saker is that I believe that Putin still does not know what his policy to the US should be. He still hopes that Trump will live up to his pre-election promise. Putin is still beholden to the moment of 2003 when Russia Germany France and Italy were together in opposition to US Iraq war. He still craves for the days when the German Chancellor and Italian leader were his personal friends. He hoped then and still hopes today to draw Europe to Russia and undermine NATO from within.

However, the Ukraine conflict has completely messed up that dream project. My most important objection to Saker is that Putin does not know what to do about Ukraine and does not have a policy on Ukraine. He puts up with what no Russian leader would put up with. Americans are arming Ukrainian neo-Nazies for a war with Russia. And Putin does nothing. Americans openly arm terrorists on Syria who shoot a Russian airplane and Russia does nothing. Basically Putin's policy of turning enemies into partners and partners into friends and friends into allies has partially succeeded in Syria but failed in Ukraine. Is he going to wait until US missiles are established in Ukraine? Is he going to accept de facto NATO membership of Ukraine. Where is the red line beyond which he would not go?

Peter Akuleyev , February 9, 2018 at 11:24 am GMT
Cohen is a Communist and reflexive hater of the United States in the Noam Chomsky mold. He is either naive or a fool if he believes half of what he is saying.

Russia never had a decent shot at democracy. The collapse of the Soviet Union was arranged by the Nomenklatura for their own benefit as a massive asset grab. The fight between Yeltsin and the Russian Parliament was basically a fight between two factions, and the Yeltsin/KGB faction beat the CPSU/Red Manager faction. Putin is very much a product of and continuation of the Yeltsin/KGB team (notice, for example, the role that Chubais continues to play in government policy), but the current team realizes how hated Yeltsin is and are smart enough to create plausible distance for public consumption.

For the most part the Putin years have been a failure, and these last two decades will be seen as squandered. Very little economic growth, continuing deterioration of the education and health systems, increasing dependence on China and massive transfers of wealth abroad. Those are Putin's primary achievements. On the plus side, Western sanctions have been a net benefit to Russia over the last three years – keeping capital in the country and giving the agricultural, food processing and light manufacturing industries some room to breathe and develop free from Western competition.

yurivku , February 9, 2018 at 12:53 pm GMT
@bluedog

Who would you have recommended?

Good question. Probably it was a sarcasm and you think you proved I'm wrong?
After all the answer depends on what you trying to get. For US probably Sobchak will be just fine, for people of Russia who want peace and prosperity the answer will be certainly other.

I put it quite clear

But now credit is over and if we could see someone good enough to be compared with Putin – quite a significant part of a society is ready to vote for for such person. Unfortunately not now.

Unfortunately I see no specific person

Grudinin doesn't seem to be real alternative, others are just clowns appointed to be faked alternatives.

But as for me personally I ( probably , I'm still watching for his electoral company) will vote for Grudinin cause he's representing patriotic block, not himself only.

Anon Disclaimer , February 9, 2018 at 3:39 pm GMT
@yurivku

Anon from TN
You are free to vote any way you want. However, I'd like to remind you that Russia already had one Director of Sovkhoz as president (Gorbachev), and nothing good came out of it.

Shemp , February 9, 2018 at 3:59 pm GMT
Cohen could go further. One of the curious fixations of US public discourse is reducing the country to a leader, when the most comprehensive standard of governance assigns duties to the state as a whole. Anyone can compare Russia and the USA point by point.

Comparing US and Russian human rights protections, it's evident that Putin's Russia undertakes to meet world human rights standards in good faith, and the USA does not. Russians get a better deal than we do.

yurivku , February 9, 2018 at 4:37 pm GMT
@bluedog

If my opinion really matters i'll write more later, now from phone its abit difficult.
I can only say that we need clever, honest patriotic person which is not easy task u know. Especially if u are from US, every elections believe that most stupid people we already seen and its cant be worst, but I'm mistaken. Compare for ex Samanta Power and N. Haley or Obama and Trump

yurivku , February 9, 2018 at 4:41 pm GMT
@Anon

Yes we need to isolate those cause they will do their dirty job with childs and u have no enough police to watch. They aggressively set theirs habits remember lgbt parades etc

bluedog , February 9, 2018 at 5:33 pm GMT
@yurivku

Yes I would be interested in your opinion, and yes I do live in the U.S. and yes your right that just when you think the worse has arrived then on the scene one always worse arrives to makes you out as a lair

Anon Disclaimer , February 9, 2018 at 5:43 pm GMT
@yurivku

Anon from TN
You are right, this is not a scientific conclusion. Politics are not science.

I agree that Putin is not a perfect leader. His foreign policy is smart and successful (hence the US hysterics). But his internal policies are far from admirable: he allows oligarchs to plunder the country and even transfer their loot abroad. A big chunk of state budget is stolen by those close to the trough, but you have to keep in mind that even greater chunk of state budget is stolen by "contractors" in the US and other countries (F35 program and Zumwalt are the best known examples, but there are many more). Thing is, the politics are the game of the possible. I am not sure Putin can maintain his international stance and his position in Russia and antagonize the whole ruling class at the same time. I disapprove of his "vertical" – Russia is not Lichtenstein, it's a huge country that cannot be directly ruled by one person. I also believe that Russia cannot afford to have a total nonentity as a Prime Minister, with only one redeeming (from Putin's standpoint) quality: loyalty.

However, I've heard a few of Grudinin's speeches, and they were very disappointing, to put it mildly. It is nice to say that you want to confiscate oligarch's money (after all, they just stole it), stop capital flight, nationalize natural resources, etc. It might sound good for the electorate, but without specifying means of achieving these goals, this is pure demagoguery. There is only one way to do all of it, and this way is called "socialism", like in the USSR. Problem is, this comes in a package: you must make rouble not freely convertible into other currencies, you must strictly control the movement of people across the border, you must introduce planned or at least semi-planned economy, etc.

You cannot pick and choose, no more than you can be a little bit pregnant: it is a yes or no thing. If Grudinin does not understand that, he is not smart enough to be president. If he understands it, but does not acknowledge, he is simply dishonest. Many of the other candidates are just clowns supported by the Kremlin to play this role (think Zhirinovsky). Besides, Russia should have as the president someone who cares about the country more than about him/herself (this excludes Sobchak: she is smart, but she cares only about her precious self), and certainly not a traitor running to the US Embassy for money and marching orders (you should know who I mean). Thus, in my humble opinion, Putin, warts and all, is still the best president Russia can have at the moment.

yurivku , February 9, 2018 at 6:07 pm GMT
@bluedog

From phone..
Well, its funny, I just dont understand who are the God sake US people here on UNZ, from different sources I see Americans happy with one more Russian killed in Syria. You know we call Americans "pindosy" ( пиндосы ) I actually not sure what its mean, but its clear that its a most degree of disgust. And further its going the more our disgust. And its between two most powerful countries in the world. Are u Americans have any feelings of selfdefence? Actually all red lines crossed and everything ready for apocalypse

Sergey Krieger , February 9, 2018 at 6:42 pm GMT
@yurivku

Very good post. Agree.

yurivku , February 9, 2018 at 7:22 pm GMT
@Anon

Pbone.
I'll answer,later. But just understand that for us its a live question, well probably for the whole world also, but this stupid world doesn't know it yet

Sergey Krieger , February 9, 2018 at 7:25 pm GMT
@yurivku

People of Lenin and Stalin caliber do not happen often. I think Putin is sort of transitional figure. However the main issue since Stalin times seems to be lack of systematic approach in bringing up and then putting in power capable leaders and in reality lots of fools getting up there. I believe fools essentially destroyed Ussr as saying goes fool is more dangerous than enemy. Long topic but it is really a murky question as to where Russia is going with 70% of everything in few hands and stolen funds siphoned offshore.

bluedog , February 10, 2018 at 1:25 am GMT
@yurivku

Oh I don't think most Americans are glad to see another Russian killed, at least not the sane ones that is, or anyone else for that matter but our so called leadership is quite a different matter, and the farther down the rabbit hole we go the worse it becomes as the best government money can buy goes into overdrive, for I suspect it will get a whole lot worse before it even starts to get and better

[Feb 08, 2018] Try Googling Riggs Bank – a lot of interesting information emerges, on matters such as their involvement with Prince Bandar. So, what we are dealing with is a joint Anglo-American attempt to create a comprador oligarchy who could loot Russia s raw materials resources

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Not only large elements of the American and British intelligence services, but the 'Borgistas' in both countries, now including large elements of the academic/research apparatus and most of the MSM, really are joined at the hip. ..."
"... A relevant element of such collusion has to do with the creation of the Yeltsin-era Russian oligarchy. On this, a crucial source are interviews given by Christian Michel and Christopher Samuelson, who used to run a company called 'Valmet', to Catherine Belton, then with the 'Moscow Times', later with the 'Financial Times', in the days leading up to the conviction of Mikhail Khodorkovsky in May 2005. ..."
"... On the subject of the competence of MI6, what seems to me a total apposite judgement was provided by the man whom Steele and his associates framed over the death of Litvinenko, Andrei Lugovoi. ..."
"... 'Litvinenko used to say: They are total retards in the UK, they believe everything we are telling them about Russia.' ..."
"... Throughout life, I have repeatedly come across a game played on certain kinds of élite Westerners, which, in honor of Kipling, who gave brilliant depictions of it, I call 'fool the stupid Sahib.' Both people from other societies, and their own, often play this game, and the underlying mentality not infrequently involves a combination of a sense of inferiority and contempt for the gullibility of people who are thought of -- commonly with justice -- as not knowing how the world really works, and thus being open to manipulation if one tells them what they want to hear. ..."
"... Irrespective of whether Lugovoi was accurately reporting what Litvinenko said, however, a mass of 'open source' evidence testifies to the extreme credulity with which officials and journalists on both sides of the Atlantic treat claims made by members of the 'StratCom' groups created by the oligarchs whose initial training was done by Valmet. ..."
"... (One good example is provided by the way that Sir Robert Owen and his team took what the surviving members of the Berezovsky group told them on trust. Another is the extraordinary way MSM figures continue to claim made by Khodorkovsky and his associates seriously.) ..."
"... When I discover that John Sipher is a 'former member of the CIA's Clandestine Service', who also worked 'on Russian espionage issues overseas, and in support of FBI counterintelligence investigations domestically,' then his apologetics for Steele seem not only to suggest he may be another 'total retard' -- but to point towards how the Anglo-American collaboration actually worked. (See https://www.politico.eu/article/devin-nunes-donald-trump-the-smearing-of-christopher-steele/ .) ..."
"... Another characteristic of these 'retards' is that they seem unable to get their story straight. In his piece last September defending the dossier, Sipher wrote that 'While in London he worked as the personal handler of the Russian defector Alexander Litvinenko.' Apparently he didn't know that the 'party line' had changed -- that when Steele emerged from hiding in May, his mouthpiece, Luke Harding of the 'Guardian', had explained: 'As head of MI6's Russia desk, Steele led the inquiry into Litvinenko's polonium poisoning, quickly concluding that this was a Russian state plot. He did not meet Litvinenko and was not his case officer, friends said.' ..."
"... The whole situation with Russia, of which, be it her economy, history, military, culture etc., is not known to those people, is a monstrous empirical evidence of a complete professional inadequacy of most people populating this bubble. ..."
"... Most of those people are badly educated (I am not talking about worthless formal degrees they hold) and cultured. In dry scientific language it is called a "confirmation bias", in a simple human one it is called being ignorant snobs, that is why this IC-academic-political-media "environment" in case of Russia prefers openly anti-Russian "sources" because those "sources" reiterate to them what they want to hear to start with, thus Chalabi Moment is being continuously reproduced. ..."
Feb 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

David Habakkuk , 08 February 2018 at 09:57 AM

All,

A number of points.

1. Not only large elements of the American and British intelligence services, but the 'Borgistas' in both countries, now including large elements of the academic/research apparatus and most of the MSM, really are joined at the hip.

It is thus an open question how far it is useful to speak of British intelligence intervening in the American election, rather than the American section of the 'Borg' and their partners in crime 'across the pond' colluding in an attempt to mount such an intervention with a greater appearance of 'plausible deniability.'

2. A relevant element of such collusion has to do with the creation of the Yeltsin-era Russian oligarchy. On this, a crucial source are interviews given by Christian Michel and Christopher Samuelson, who used to run a company called 'Valmet', to Catherine Belton, then with the 'Moscow Times', later with the 'Financial Times', in the days leading up to the conviction of Mikhail Khodorkovsky in May 2005.

(See http://mikhail_khodorkovsky_society_two.blogspot.co.uk .)

This describes the education in 'Western banking practices' given to him and his Menatep associates by Michel and Samuelson, starting as early as 1989, and also their crucial involvement with Berezovsky.

We are told by Belton that: 'With the help of British government connections, Valmet had already built up a wealthy clientele that included the ruling family of Dubai.' As to large ambitions which Michel and Samuelson had, she tells us: 'Used to dealing with the riches of Arab leaders, they found Menatep, by comparison still relatively small fry. By 1994, however, Menatep had started moving into all kinds of industries, from chemicals to textiles to metallurgy. But for Valmet, which by that time had already partnered up with one of the oldest banks in the United States, Riggs Bank, and for Menatep, the real prize was oil.'

Try Googling 'Riggs Bank' -- a lot of interesting information emerges, on matters such as their involvement with Prince Bandar. So, what we are dealing with is a joint Anglo-American attempt to create a 'comprador' oligarchy who could loot Russia's raw materials resources.

3. On the subject of the competence of MI6, what seems to me a total apposite judgement was provided by the man whom Steele and his associates framed over the death of Litvinenko, Andrei Lugovoi.

In the press conference in May 2007 where he responded to the request for his extradition submitted by the Crown Prosecution Service, he claimed that: 'Litvinenko used to say: They are total retards in the UK, they believe everything we are telling them about Russia.'

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

It seems to me quite likely, although obviously not certain, that this did indeed represent the view of many of the 'StratCom' operators around Berezovsky of people like Steele.

Throughout life, I have repeatedly come across a game played on certain kinds of élite Westerners, which, in honor of Kipling, who gave brilliant depictions of it, I call 'fool the stupid Sahib.' Both people from other societies, and their own, often play this game, and the underlying mentality not infrequently involves a combination of a sense of inferiority and contempt for the gullibility of people who are thought of -- commonly with justice -- as not knowing how the world really works, and thus being open to manipulation if one tells them what they want to hear.

Some fragments of a mass of evidence that this was precisely what Litvinenko did were presented by me in a previous post.

Irrespective of whether Lugovoi was accurately reporting what Litvinenko said, however, a mass of 'open source' evidence testifies to the extreme credulity with which officials and journalists on both sides of the Atlantic treat claims made by members of the 'StratCom' groups created by the oligarchs whose initial training was done by Valmet.

(One good example is provided by the way that Sir Robert Owen and his team took what the surviving members of the Berezovsky group told them on trust. Another is the extraordinary way MSM figures continue to claim made by Khodorkovsky and his associates seriously.)

Accordingly, when I read of anyone treating practically anything that Steele claims as plausible, I try to work out how much of a 'retard' they must be, starting with a baseline of about 50%.

4. In the light of the way that the reliance on the dossier in the FISA applications absent meaningful corroboration is being defended by Comey and others on the basis that Steele was 'considered reliable due to his past work with the Bureau', the question is how many people in the FBI must be considered to have a 'retard' rating somewhere over 90%.

When I discover that John Sipher is a 'former member of the CIA's Clandestine Service', who also worked 'on Russian espionage issues overseas, and in support of FBI counterintelligence investigations domestically,' then his apologetics for Steele seem not only to suggest he may be another 'total retard' -- but to point towards how the Anglo-American collaboration actually worked. (See https://www.politico.eu/article/devin-nunes-donald-trump-the-smearing-of-christopher-steele/ .)

5. Another characteristic of these 'retards' is that they seem unable to get their story straight. In his piece last September defending the dossier, Sipher wrote that 'While in London he worked as the personal handler of the Russian defector Alexander Litvinenko.' Apparently he didn't know that the 'party line' had changed -- that when Steele emerged from hiding in May, his mouthpiece, Luke Harding of the 'Guardian', had explained: 'As head of MI6's Russia desk, Steele led the inquiry into Litvinenko's polonium poisoning, quickly concluding that this was a Russian state plot. He did not meet Litvinenko and was not his case officer, friends said.'

(See http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/09/a_lot_of_the_steele_dossier_has_since_been_corroborated.html ; https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/07/former-mi6-agent-christopher-steele-behind-trump-dossier-returns-to-work .)

6. In his attempts to defend the credibility of the dossier, Sipher also explains that its -- supposed -- author was President of the Cambridge Union. Here, two profiles of Steele on the 'MailOnline' site are of interest.

In one a contemporary is quoted:

"'When you took part in politics at the Cambridge Union, it was very spiteful and full of people spreading rumours," he said. "Steele fitted right in. He was very ambitious, ruthless and frankly not a very nice guy."

The other tells us that he born in Aden in 1964, and that his father was in the military, before going on to say that contemporaries recall an 'avowedly Left-wing student with CND credentials', while a book on the Union's history says he was a 'confirmed socialist'.

(See http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4115070/Chris-Whatsit-brilliant-Cambridge-spy-spent-life-battling-KGB-MI6-agent-wife-s-high-heels-stolen-Kremlin-spooks-revealed-Litvinenko-poisoned-Putin-s-thugs.html ; http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4115070/Chris-Whatsit-brilliant-Cambridge-spy-spent-life-battling-KGB-MI6-agent-wife-s-high-heels-stolen-Kremlin-spooks-revealed-Litvinenko-poisoned-Putin-s-thugs.html .)

From my own -- undistinguished and mildly irreverent -- Cambridge career, I can testify that there was indeed a certain kind of student politician, whom, if I may mix metaphors, fellow-students were perfectly well aware were going to arse-lick their way up some greasy pole or other in later life.

It was a world with which I came back in contact when, after living abroad and a protracted apprenticeship in print journalism, I accidentally found employment with what was then one of the principal television current affairs programmes in Britain. In the early 'Eighties I overlapped with Peter -- now Lord -- Mandelson, who became one of the principal architects of 'New Labour.'

7. Given that at this time British intelligence agencies were somewhat paranoid about CND, there is a small puzzle as to why on his graduation in 1986 Steele should have been recruited by MI6. In more paranoid moments I wonder whether he did not already have intelligence contacts through his father, and served as a 'stool pigeon' as a student.

But then, people like Sir John Scarlett and Sir Richard Dearlove may simply have concluded that someone with 'form' in smearing rivals at the Union was ideally suited for the kind of organisation they wanted to run.

8. From experience with Mandelson, and others, there are however other relevant things about this type. One is that they commonly love Machiavellian intrigue, and are very good at it, within the worlds they know and understand.

If however they have to try to cope with alien environments, where they do not know the people and where such intrigues are played much more ruthlessly, they are liable to find themselves hopelessly outclassed. (This can happen not simply with the politics of the post-Soviet space and the Middle East, but with some of the murkier undergrowths of local politics in London.)

Another limitation on their understanding is that the last thing they are interested in his how the world outside the bubbles they prefer to inhabit operates, and they commonly have absolutely contempt for 'deplorables', be they Russian, British or American. This can lead to political misjudgements.

9. So it is not really so surprising that, when Berezovsky's 'StratCom' people told them that the Putin 'sistema' really was the 'return of Karla', people like Steele believed everything they said, precisely as Lugovoi brought out.

There is I think every reason to believe that, from first to last, the intrigues in which he has been involved have involved close collusion between them and elements in American intelligence -- including the FBI. As a result, a lot of people on both sides of the Atlantic have repeatedly got into complex undercover contests in the post-Soviet space which ran right out of control, creating a desperate need for cover-ups. A similar pattern applies in relation to the activities of such people in the Middle East.

SmoothieX12 -> David Habakkuk ... , 08 February 2018 at 11:28 AM
Another limitation on their understanding is that the last thing they are interested in his how the world outside the bubbles they prefer to inhabit operates, and they commonly have absolutely contempt for 'deplorables', be they Russian, British or American. This can lead to political misjudgements.

It is not just "can" it very often does. The whole situation with Russia, of which, be it her economy, history, military, culture etc., is not known to those people, is a monstrous empirical evidence of a complete professional inadequacy of most people populating this bubble.

Most of those people are badly educated (I am not talking about worthless formal degrees they hold) and cultured. In dry scientific language it is called a "confirmation bias", in a simple human one it is called being ignorant snobs, that is why this IC-academic-political-media "environment" in case of Russia prefers openly anti-Russian "sources" because those "sources" reiterate to them what they want to hear to start with, thus Chalabi Moment is being continuously reproduced.

In case of Iraq, as an example, it is a tragedy but at least the world is relatively safe. With Russia, as I stated many times for years--they simply have no idea what they are dealing with. None. It is expected from people who are briefed by "sources" such as Russian fugitive London Oligarchy or ultra-liberal and fringe urban Russian "tusovka". Again, the level of "Russian Studies" in Anglophone world is appalling. In fact, it is clear and present danger since removes or misinterprets crucial information about the only nation in the world which can annihilate the United States completely in such a light that it creates a real danger even for a disastrous military confrontation. I would go on a limb here and say that US military on average is much better aware of Russia and not only in purely military terms. In some sense--it is an exception. But even there, there are some trends (and they are not new) which are very worrisome.

[Feb 08, 2018] Try Googling Riggs Bank – a lot of interesting information emerges, on matters such as their involvement with Prince Bandar. So, what we are dealing with is a joint Anglo-American attempt to create a comprador oligarchy who could loot Russia s raw materials resources

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Not only large elements of the American and British intelligence services, but the 'Borgistas' in both countries, now including large elements of the academic/research apparatus and most of the MSM, really are joined at the hip. ..."
"... A relevant element of such collusion has to do with the creation of the Yeltsin-era Russian oligarchy. On this, a crucial source are interviews given by Christian Michel and Christopher Samuelson, who used to run a company called 'Valmet', to Catherine Belton, then with the 'Moscow Times', later with the 'Financial Times', in the days leading up to the conviction of Mikhail Khodorkovsky in May 2005. ..."
"... On the subject of the competence of MI6, what seems to me a total apposite judgement was provided by the man whom Steele and his associates framed over the death of Litvinenko, Andrei Lugovoi. ..."
"... 'Litvinenko used to say: They are total retards in the UK, they believe everything we are telling them about Russia.' ..."
"... Throughout life, I have repeatedly come across a game played on certain kinds of élite Westerners, which, in honor of Kipling, who gave brilliant depictions of it, I call 'fool the stupid Sahib.' Both people from other societies, and their own, often play this game, and the underlying mentality not infrequently involves a combination of a sense of inferiority and contempt for the gullibility of people who are thought of -- commonly with justice -- as not knowing how the world really works, and thus being open to manipulation if one tells them what they want to hear. ..."
"... Irrespective of whether Lugovoi was accurately reporting what Litvinenko said, however, a mass of 'open source' evidence testifies to the extreme credulity with which officials and journalists on both sides of the Atlantic treat claims made by members of the 'StratCom' groups created by the oligarchs whose initial training was done by Valmet. ..."
"... (One good example is provided by the way that Sir Robert Owen and his team took what the surviving members of the Berezovsky group told them on trust. Another is the extraordinary way MSM figures continue to claim made by Khodorkovsky and his associates seriously.) ..."
"... When I discover that John Sipher is a 'former member of the CIA's Clandestine Service', who also worked 'on Russian espionage issues overseas, and in support of FBI counterintelligence investigations domestically,' then his apologetics for Steele seem not only to suggest he may be another 'total retard' -- but to point towards how the Anglo-American collaboration actually worked. (See https://www.politico.eu/article/devin-nunes-donald-trump-the-smearing-of-christopher-steele/ .) ..."
"... Another characteristic of these 'retards' is that they seem unable to get their story straight. In his piece last September defending the dossier, Sipher wrote that 'While in London he worked as the personal handler of the Russian defector Alexander Litvinenko.' Apparently he didn't know that the 'party line' had changed -- that when Steele emerged from hiding in May, his mouthpiece, Luke Harding of the 'Guardian', had explained: 'As head of MI6's Russia desk, Steele led the inquiry into Litvinenko's polonium poisoning, quickly concluding that this was a Russian state plot. He did not meet Litvinenko and was not his case officer, friends said.' ..."
"... The whole situation with Russia, of which, be it her economy, history, military, culture etc., is not known to those people, is a monstrous empirical evidence of a complete professional inadequacy of most people populating this bubble. ..."
"... Most of those people are badly educated (I am not talking about worthless formal degrees they hold) and cultured. In dry scientific language it is called a "confirmation bias", in a simple human one it is called being ignorant snobs, that is why this IC-academic-political-media "environment" in case of Russia prefers openly anti-Russian "sources" because those "sources" reiterate to them what they want to hear to start with, thus Chalabi Moment is being continuously reproduced. ..."
Feb 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

David Habakkuk , 08 February 2018 at 09:57 AM

All,

A number of points.

1. Not only large elements of the American and British intelligence services, but the 'Borgistas' in both countries, now including large elements of the academic/research apparatus and most of the MSM, really are joined at the hip.

It is thus an open question how far it is useful to speak of British intelligence intervening in the American election, rather than the American section of the 'Borg' and their partners in crime 'across the pond' colluding in an attempt to mount such an intervention with a greater appearance of 'plausible deniability.'

2. A relevant element of such collusion has to do with the creation of the Yeltsin-era Russian oligarchy. On this, a crucial source are interviews given by Christian Michel and Christopher Samuelson, who used to run a company called 'Valmet', to Catherine Belton, then with the 'Moscow Times', later with the 'Financial Times', in the days leading up to the conviction of Mikhail Khodorkovsky in May 2005.

(See http://mikhail_khodorkovsky_society_two.blogspot.co.uk .)

This describes the education in 'Western banking practices' given to him and his Menatep associates by Michel and Samuelson, starting as early as 1989, and also their crucial involvement with Berezovsky.

We are told by Belton that: 'With the help of British government connections, Valmet had already built up a wealthy clientele that included the ruling family of Dubai.' As to large ambitions which Michel and Samuelson had, she tells us: 'Used to dealing with the riches of Arab leaders, they found Menatep, by comparison still relatively small fry. By 1994, however, Menatep had started moving into all kinds of industries, from chemicals to textiles to metallurgy. But for Valmet, which by that time had already partnered up with one of the oldest banks in the United States, Riggs Bank, and for Menatep, the real prize was oil.'

Try Googling 'Riggs Bank' -- a lot of interesting information emerges, on matters such as their involvement with Prince Bandar. So, what we are dealing with is a joint Anglo-American attempt to create a 'comprador' oligarchy who could loot Russia's raw materials resources.

3. On the subject of the competence of MI6, what seems to me a total apposite judgement was provided by the man whom Steele and his associates framed over the death of Litvinenko, Andrei Lugovoi.

In the press conference in May 2007 where he responded to the request for his extradition submitted by the Crown Prosecution Service, he claimed that: 'Litvinenko used to say: They are total retards in the UK, they believe everything we are telling them about Russia.'

(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)

It seems to me quite likely, although obviously not certain, that this did indeed represent the view of many of the 'StratCom' operators around Berezovsky of people like Steele.

Throughout life, I have repeatedly come across a game played on certain kinds of élite Westerners, which, in honor of Kipling, who gave brilliant depictions of it, I call 'fool the stupid Sahib.' Both people from other societies, and their own, often play this game, and the underlying mentality not infrequently involves a combination of a sense of inferiority and contempt for the gullibility of people who are thought of -- commonly with justice -- as not knowing how the world really works, and thus being open to manipulation if one tells them what they want to hear.

Some fragments of a mass of evidence that this was precisely what Litvinenko did were presented by me in a previous post.

Irrespective of whether Lugovoi was accurately reporting what Litvinenko said, however, a mass of 'open source' evidence testifies to the extreme credulity with which officials and journalists on both sides of the Atlantic treat claims made by members of the 'StratCom' groups created by the oligarchs whose initial training was done by Valmet.

(One good example is provided by the way that Sir Robert Owen and his team took what the surviving members of the Berezovsky group told them on trust. Another is the extraordinary way MSM figures continue to claim made by Khodorkovsky and his associates seriously.)

Accordingly, when I read of anyone treating practically anything that Steele claims as plausible, I try to work out how much of a 'retard' they must be, starting with a baseline of about 50%.

4. In the light of the way that the reliance on the dossier in the FISA applications absent meaningful corroboration is being defended by Comey and others on the basis that Steele was 'considered reliable due to his past work with the Bureau', the question is how many people in the FBI must be considered to have a 'retard' rating somewhere over 90%.

When I discover that John Sipher is a 'former member of the CIA's Clandestine Service', who also worked 'on Russian espionage issues overseas, and in support of FBI counterintelligence investigations domestically,' then his apologetics for Steele seem not only to suggest he may be another 'total retard' -- but to point towards how the Anglo-American collaboration actually worked. (See https://www.politico.eu/article/devin-nunes-donald-trump-the-smearing-of-christopher-steele/ .)

5. Another characteristic of these 'retards' is that they seem unable to get their story straight. In his piece last September defending the dossier, Sipher wrote that 'While in London he worked as the personal handler of the Russian defector Alexander Litvinenko.' Apparently he didn't know that the 'party line' had changed -- that when Steele emerged from hiding in May, his mouthpiece, Luke Harding of the 'Guardian', had explained: 'As head of MI6's Russia desk, Steele led the inquiry into Litvinenko's polonium poisoning, quickly concluding that this was a Russian state plot. He did not meet Litvinenko and was not his case officer, friends said.'

(See http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/09/a_lot_of_the_steele_dossier_has_since_been_corroborated.html ; https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/07/former-mi6-agent-christopher-steele-behind-trump-dossier-returns-to-work .)

6. In his attempts to defend the credibility of the dossier, Sipher also explains that its -- supposed -- author was President of the Cambridge Union. Here, two profiles of Steele on the 'MailOnline' site are of interest.

In one a contemporary is quoted:

"'When you took part in politics at the Cambridge Union, it was very spiteful and full of people spreading rumours," he said. "Steele fitted right in. He was very ambitious, ruthless and frankly not a very nice guy."

The other tells us that he born in Aden in 1964, and that his father was in the military, before going on to say that contemporaries recall an 'avowedly Left-wing student with CND credentials', while a book on the Union's history says he was a 'confirmed socialist'.

(See http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4115070/Chris-Whatsit-brilliant-Cambridge-spy-spent-life-battling-KGB-MI6-agent-wife-s-high-heels-stolen-Kremlin-spooks-revealed-Litvinenko-poisoned-Putin-s-thugs.html ; http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4115070/Chris-Whatsit-brilliant-Cambridge-spy-spent-life-battling-KGB-MI6-agent-wife-s-high-heels-stolen-Kremlin-spooks-revealed-Litvinenko-poisoned-Putin-s-thugs.html .)

From my own -- undistinguished and mildly irreverent -- Cambridge career, I can testify that there was indeed a certain kind of student politician, whom, if I may mix metaphors, fellow-students were perfectly well aware were going to arse-lick their way up some greasy pole or other in later life.

It was a world with which I came back in contact when, after living abroad and a protracted apprenticeship in print journalism, I accidentally found employment with what was then one of the principal television current affairs programmes in Britain. In the early 'Eighties I overlapped with Peter -- now Lord -- Mandelson, who became one of the principal architects of 'New Labour.'

7. Given that at this time British intelligence agencies were somewhat paranoid about CND, there is a small puzzle as to why on his graduation in 1986 Steele should have been recruited by MI6. In more paranoid moments I wonder whether he did not already have intelligence contacts through his father, and served as a 'stool pigeon' as a student.

But then, people like Sir John Scarlett and Sir Richard Dearlove may simply have concluded that someone with 'form' in smearing rivals at the Union was ideally suited for the kind of organisation they wanted to run.

8. From experience with Mandelson, and others, there are however other relevant things about this type. One is that they commonly love Machiavellian intrigue, and are very good at it, within the worlds they know and understand.

If however they have to try to cope with alien environments, where they do not know the people and where such intrigues are played much more ruthlessly, they are liable to find themselves hopelessly outclassed. (This can happen not simply with the politics of the post-Soviet space and the Middle East, but with some of the murkier undergrowths of local politics in London.)

Another limitation on their understanding is that the last thing they are interested in his how the world outside the bubbles they prefer to inhabit operates, and they commonly have absolutely contempt for 'deplorables', be they Russian, British or American. This can lead to political misjudgements.

9. So it is not really so surprising that, when Berezovsky's 'StratCom' people told them that the Putin 'sistema' really was the 'return of Karla', people like Steele believed everything they said, precisely as Lugovoi brought out.

There is I think every reason to believe that, from first to last, the intrigues in which he has been involved have involved close collusion between them and elements in American intelligence -- including the FBI. As a result, a lot of people on both sides of the Atlantic have repeatedly got into complex undercover contests in the post-Soviet space which ran right out of control, creating a desperate need for cover-ups. A similar pattern applies in relation to the activities of such people in the Middle East.

SmoothieX12 -> David Habakkuk ... , 08 February 2018 at 11:28 AM
Another limitation on their understanding is that the last thing they are interested in his how the world outside the bubbles they prefer to inhabit operates, and they commonly have absolutely contempt for 'deplorables', be they Russian, British or American. This can lead to political misjudgements.

It is not just "can" it very often does. The whole situation with Russia, of which, be it her economy, history, military, culture etc., is not known to those people, is a monstrous empirical evidence of a complete professional inadequacy of most people populating this bubble.

Most of those people are badly educated (I am not talking about worthless formal degrees they hold) and cultured. In dry scientific language it is called a "confirmation bias", in a simple human one it is called being ignorant snobs, that is why this IC-academic-political-media "environment" in case of Russia prefers openly anti-Russian "sources" because those "sources" reiterate to them what they want to hear to start with, thus Chalabi Moment is being continuously reproduced.

In case of Iraq, as an example, it is a tragedy but at least the world is relatively safe. With Russia, as I stated many times for years--they simply have no idea what they are dealing with. None. It is expected from people who are briefed by "sources" such as Russian fugitive London Oligarchy or ultra-liberal and fringe urban Russian "tusovka". Again, the level of "Russian Studies" in Anglophone world is appalling. In fact, it is clear and present danger since removes or misinterprets crucial information about the only nation in the world which can annihilate the United States completely in such a light that it creates a real danger even for a disastrous military confrontation. I would go on a limb here and say that US military on average is much better aware of Russia and not only in purely military terms. In some sense--it is an exception. But even there, there are some trends (and they are not new) which are very worrisome.

[Feb 08, 2018] The FBI Hand Behind Russia-gate by Ray McGOVERN

Feb 08, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

But the "assessment" served a useful purpose for the never-Trumpers: it applied an official imprimatur on the case for delegitimizing Trump's election and even raised the long-shot hope that the Electoral College might reverse the outcome and possibly install a compromise candidate, such as former Secretary of State Colin Powell, in the White House. Though the Powell ploy fizzled, the hope of somehow removing Trump from office continued to bubble, fueled by the growing hysteria around Russia-gate.

Virtually all skepticism about the evidence-free "assessment" was banned. For months, the Times and other newspapers of record repeated the lie that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies had concurred in the conclusion about the Russian "hack." Even when that falsehood was belatedly acknowledged , the major news outlets just shifted the phrasing slightly to say that U.S. intelligence agencies had reached the Russian "hack" conclusion. Shane's blunt initial recognition about the lack of proof disappeared from the mainstream media's approved narrative of Russia-gate.

Doubts about the Russian "hack" or dissident suggestions that what we were witnessing was a "soft coup" were scoffed at by leading media commentators. Other warnings from veteran U.S. intelligence professionals about the weaknesses of the Russia-gate narrative and the danger of letting politicized intelligence overturn a constitutional election were also brushed aside in pursuit of the goal of removing Trump from the White House.

It didn't even seem to matter when new Russia-gate disclosures conflicted with the original narrative that Putin had somehow set Trump up as a Manchurian candidate. All normal journalistic skepticism was jettisoned. It was as if the Russia-gate advocates started with the conclusion that Trump must go and then made the facts fit into that mold, but anyone who noted the violations of normal investigative procedures was dismissed as a "Trump enabler" or a "Moscow stooge."

The Text Evidence

But then came the FBI text messages, providing documentary evivdence that key FBI officials involved in the Russia-gate investigation were indeed deeply biased and out to get Trump, adding hard proof to Trump's longstanding lament that he was the subject of a "witch hunt."

[Feb 08, 2018] Most of those people are badly educated (I am not talking about worthless formal degrees they hold) and cultured. In dry scientific language it is called a "confirmation bias", in a simple human one it is called being ignorant snobs

Notable quotes:
"... The whole situation with Russia, of which, be it her economy, history, military, culture etc., is not known to those people, is a monstrous empirical evidence of a complete professional inadequacy of most people populating this bubble. ..."
"... Most of those people are badly educated (I am not talking about worthless formal degrees they hold) and cultured. In dry scientific language it is called a "confirmation bias", in a simple human one it is called being ignorant snobs, that is why this IC-academic-political-media "environment" in case of Russia prefers openly anti-Russian "sources" because those "sources" reiterate to them what they want to hear to start with, thus Chalabi Moment is being continuously reproduced. ..."
"... Again, the level of "Russian Studies" in Anglophone world is appalling. In fact, it is clear and present danger since removes or misinterprets crucial information about the only nation in the world which can annihilate the United States completely in such a light that it creates a real danger even for a disastrous military confrontation. I would go on a limb here and say that US military on average is much better aware of Russia and not only in purely military terms. In some sense--it is an exception. But even there, there are some trends (and they are not new) which are very worrisome. ..."
Feb 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

SmoothieX12 -> David Habakkuk ... , 08 February 2018 at 11:28 AM

Another limitation on their understanding is that the last thing they are interested in his how the world outside the bubbles they prefer to inhabit operates, and they commonly have absolutely contempt for 'deplorables', be they Russian, British or American. This can lead to political misjudgements.

It is not just "can" it very often does. The whole situation with Russia, of which, be it her economy, history, military, culture etc., is not known to those people, is a monstrous empirical evidence of a complete professional inadequacy of most people populating this bubble.

Most of those people are badly educated (I am not talking about worthless formal degrees they hold) and cultured. In dry scientific language it is called a "confirmation bias", in a simple human one it is called being ignorant snobs, that is why this IC-academic-political-media "environment" in case of Russia prefers openly anti-Russian "sources" because those "sources" reiterate to them what they want to hear to start with, thus Chalabi Moment is being continuously reproduced.

In case of Iraq, as an example, it is a tragedy but at least the world is relatively safe. With Russia, as I stated many times for years--they simply have no idea what they are dealing with. None. It is expected from people who are briefed by "sources" such as Russian fugitive London Oligarchy or ultra-liberal and fringe urban Russian "tusovka".

Again, the level of "Russian Studies" in Anglophone world is appalling. In fact, it is clear and present danger since removes or misinterprets crucial information about the only nation in the world which can annihilate the United States completely in such a light that it creates a real danger even for a disastrous military confrontation. I would go on a limb here and say that US military on average is much better aware of Russia and not only in purely military terms. In some sense--it is an exception. But even there, there are some trends (and they are not new) which are very worrisome.

[Feb 08, 2018] Control of narrative means that creation of the simplistic picture in which the complexities of the world are elided in favor of 'good guys' vs. 'bad guys' dichotomy

Highly recommended!
StratCom is a new synonym of propaganda.
Notable quotes:
"... What 'StratCom' means in practical terms is propaganda, usually involving the creation of a 'narrative' -- in which the complexities of the world are elided in favour of a simplistic picture of 'good guys' versus 'bad guys.' Commonly it is difficult to know how far the people doing this are deliberately dishonest, how far they have simply succumbed to 'double think' and 'crimestop.' ..."
"... It has become amply apparent that with MI6, and other intelligence and indeed law enforcement agencies, the activity of attempting to understand the world has become inextricably involved with that of trying to shape it by covert action and 'perception management', or 'StratCom.' ..."
"... The structures involved, moreover, are inextricably linked with ostensibly non-governmental institutions, like King's College and the Atlantic Council, and related organisations in a range of countries, as Rid's career strongly suggests. ..."
"... It has also however become amply apparent that these structures create ample opportunities for 'information operations' groups such as those which were associated with the late Boris Berezovsky and the Menatep oligarchs. ..."
Feb 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

David Habakkuk -> turcopolier ... , 08 February 2018 at 12:32 PM

In response to #63.

Colonel Lang,

My apologies -- it was sloppy of me to use the term.

I was using it interchangeably with 'propaganda.' One reason for this is that I have been looking at the website of the 'Department of War Studies' at King's College London. This has a 'Centre for Strategic Communications', which 'aims to be the leading global centre of expertise on strategic communications.'

(See https://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/warstudies/kcsc/experts.aspx .)

An 'Associate Fellow' is my sometime BBC Radio colleague Mark Laity, who, according to his bio on the site, 'is the Chief Strategic Communications at SHAPE, the first post holder, and as such he has been a leading figure in developing StratCom within NATO.' In this capacity, he produces presentations with titles like ' "Bocca della veritas" or "Perception becomes Reality."

(See http://www.natoschool.nato.int/Media/News/2015/20150910_StratCom .)

The same ethos penetrates other parts of the War Studies Department -- Eliot Higgins is involved, as also Thomas Rid, who backed up the claims made by Dmitri Alperovitch of 'CrowdStrike', along with the former GCHQ person Matt Tait. (It appears that Rid, who has now moved to SAIS at Johns Hopkins, is a German who has earlier worked at IFRI in Paris, RAND, and in Israel.)

What 'StratCom' means in practical terms is propaganda, usually involving the creation of a 'narrative' -- in which the complexities of the world are elided in favour of a simplistic picture of 'good guys' versus 'bad guys.' Commonly it is difficult to know how far the people doing this are deliberately dishonest, how far they have simply succumbed to 'double think' and 'crimestop.'

It has become amply apparent that with MI6, and other intelligence and indeed law enforcement agencies, the activity of attempting to understand the world has become inextricably involved with that of trying to shape it by covert action and 'perception management', or 'StratCom.'

The structures involved, moreover, are inextricably linked with ostensibly non-governmental institutions, like King's College and the Atlantic Council, and related organisations in a range of countries, as Rid's career strongly suggests.

It has also however become amply apparent that these structures create ample opportunities for 'information operations' groups such as those which were associated with the late Boris Berezovsky and the Menatep oligarchs.

So in describing what these people got up to I sloppily used 'StratCom', when I should have said propaganda.

[Feb 07, 2018] Capitalism Collapsing from Inequality... Blame Russia! by Finian CUNNINGHAM

Nov 11, 2017 | www.strategic-culture.org

New figures published this week on obscene inequality show how the capitalist economic system has become more than ever deeply dysfunctional. Surely, the depraved workings of the system pose the greatest threat to societies and international security. Yet, Western leaders are preoccupied instead with other non-existent threats – like Russia.

Take British prime minister Theresa May who this week was speaking at a posh banquet in London. She told the assembled hobnobs, as they were sipping expensive wines, that "Russia is threatening the international order upon which we depend". Without providing one scrap of evidence, the British leader went to assert that Russia was interfering in Western democracies to "sow discord".

May's grandstanding is a classic case study of what behavioral scientists call "displacement activity" – that is, when animals find themselves in a state of danger they often react by displaying unusual behavior or making strange noises.

For indeed May and other Western political leaders are facing danger to their world order, even if they don't openly admit it as such. That danger is from the exploding levels of social inequality and poverty within Western societies, leading to anger, resentment, discontent and disillusionment among increasing masses of citizens. In the face of the inherent, imminent collapse of their systems of governance, Western leaders like May seek some relief by prattling on about Russia as a threat.

This week European bank Credit Suisse published figures showing that the wealth gap between rich and poor has reached even more grotesque and absurdist levels. According to the bank, the world's richest 1% now own as much wealth as half the population of the entire planet. The United States and Britain are among the top countries for residing multi-millionaires, while these two nations have also emerged as among the most unequal in the world.

The data calling out how dysfunctional the capitalist system has become keeps on coming. It is impossible to ignore the reality of a system in deep disrepair, yet British and American politicians in particular – apart from notable exceptions like Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Sanders – have the audacity to block out this reality and to chase after risible phantoms. (The exercise makes perfect sense in a way.)

Last week, a report from the US-based Institute of Policy Studies found that just three of America's wealthiest men – Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and Warren Buffett – own the same level of wealth as the poorest half of the entire US population. That is, the combined monetary worth of these three individuals – reckoned to be $250 billion – is equivalent to that possessed by 160 million citizens.

What's more, the study also estimates that if the Trump administration pushes through its proposed tax plans, the gap between rich elite and the vast majority will widen even further. This and other studies have found that over 80% of the tax benefits from Trump's budget will go to enrich the top 1% in society.

All Western governments, not just May's or Trump's, have over the past decades overseen an historic trend of siphoning wealth from the majority of society to a tiny elite few. The tax burden has relentlessly shifted from the wealthy to the ordinary workers, who in addition have had to contend with decreasing wages, as well as deteriorating public serves and social welfare.

To refer to the United States or Britain as "democracies" is a preposterous misnomer. They are for all practical purposes plutocracies; societies run by and for a top strata of obscenely wealthy.

Intelligent economists, like the authors at the IPS cited above, realize that the state of affairs is unsustainable. Morally, and even from an empirical economics point of view, the distortion of wealth within Western societies and internationally is leading to social and political disaster.

On this observation, we must acknowledge the pioneering work of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels who more than 150 years ago identified the chief failing of capitalism as being the polarization of wealth between a tiny few and the vast majority. The lack of consumption power among the masses owing to chronic poverty induced by capitalism would result in the system's eventual collapse. Surely, we have reached that point in history now, when a handful of individuals own as much wealth as half the planet.

Inequality, poverty and the denial of decent existence to the majority of people stands out as the clarion condemnation of capitalism and its organization of society under private profit. The human suffering, hardships, austerity and crippled potential that flow from this condition represent the crisis of our time. Yet instead of an earnest public debate and struggle to overcome this crisis, we are forced by our elites to focus on false, even surreal problems.

American politics has become paralyzed by an endless elite squabble over whether Russia meddled in the presidential elections and claims that Russian news media continue to interfere in American democracy. Of course, the US corporate-controlled news media, who are an integral part of the plutocracy, lend credibility to this circus. Ditto European corporate-controlled media.

Then we have President Donald Trump on a world tour berating and bullying other nations to spend more money on buying American goods and to stop cheating supposed American generosity over trade. Trump also is prepared to start a nuclear war with North Korea because the latter is accused of being a threat to global peace – on the basis that the country is building military defenses. The same for Iran. Trump castigates Iran as a threat to Middle East peace and warns of a confrontation.

This is the same quality of ludicrous distraction as Britain's premier Theresa May this week lambasting Russia for "threatening the world order upon which we all depend". By "we" she is really referring to the elites, not the mass of suffering workers and their families.

May and Trump are indulging in "perception management" taken to absurdity. Or more crudely, brainwashing.

How can North Korea or Iran be credibly presented as global threats when the American and British are supporting a genocidal blockade and aerial slaughter in Yemen? The complete disconnect in reality is testimony to the pernicious system of thought-control that the vast majority of citizens are enforced to live under.

The biggest disconnect is the obscene inequality of wealth and resources that capitalism has engendered in the 21 st century. That monstrous dysfunction is also causally related to why the US and its Western allies like Britain are pushing belligerence and wars around the planet. It is all part of their elitist denial of reality. The reality that capitalism is the biggest threat to humanity's future.

Do we let these mentally deficient, deceptive political elites and their media dictate the nonsense? Or will the mass of people do the right thing and sweep them aside?

[Feb 06, 2018] The sanctions list means that holding Western assets has become more risky for Russian oligarchs. They can iether remove Putin, reparticate assets back to Russa or defect to the West and lose Russian assets by The Saker

Notable quotes:
"... The sanctions list means that holding Western assets has become more risky for Russian oligarchs. And because of precedent for Chinese, Arab, etc . They have three choices: (1) Remove Putin and co. and thus remove the risk; (2) Protect their wealth by shifting out of Western assets. (3) Defect to the West to protect assets in the West (and lose assets in Russia). ..."
"... They have some thinking to do. Very few will leave for the West, it is not clear how much of their wealth that would protect. But some will and they will get inordinate publicity. Option 1. seems very hard and unpredictable, and it would increase chaos. Chaos is not something the oligarchs want. The likely outcome is option 2. That strengthens Russia, and marginally hurts the West. ..."
"... When you are a global repository for safe assets and wealth – as US and West have been for 2-3 generations – the last thing you need is to put that safety haven status in doubt. Once people start doubting, things change. Saker is right, this policy is very stupid. ..."
"... "Now, at the same time, I want to be able -- because I think it's very important -- to get along with Russia, to get along with China, to get along with Vietnam, to get along with lots of countries, because we have a lot of things we have to solve. And, frankly, Russia and China in particular can help us with the North Korea problem, which is one of our truly great problems." ..."
"... I point this out, because some may imagine that expressions of such an intention on the part of Trump ceased long ago, perhaps at the point Flynn was let go. ..."
"... A simple explanation for the list of Russian persons who might potentially be sanctioned, is that Congress, as part of the law it passed six months ago, _required_ the production of such a list. So the Administration, through Treasury, produced such a list in answer to that requirement (crudely, as Saker points out) – but chose to not actually adopt any new sanctions, finding that they are not needed. And it appears that Trump is under new attack in the mainstream precisely for his minimalist compliance with the mandate from Congress. ..."
"... If Putin and the Russians are still baffled by American hostility, or rather (((American))) hostility, then it's time to question the collective IQ and wisdom of the Russian people. ..."
"... Jaish al-Nasr, a faction in the Free Syrian Army shot it down, .. Su-25 was shot down by a man-portable air-defense system" Is US trying to do an Afghanistan on Russia after successfully kicking the Vietnam Syndrome off it's "not talk list" but leaving it on the " do repeat lists " in ME theater ? Not a good sign . ..."
"... "I have come to the conclusion that the Empire is run by stupid, ignorant ideologues who live in a world totally detached from reality." ..."
"... State Department official Henry Precht will later recall that Brzezinski had the idea "that Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets." [Scott, 2007, pp. 67] In November 1978, President Carter appointed George Ball head of a special White House Iran task force under Brzezinski. Ball recommends the US should drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the radical Islamist opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini. ..."
"... This idea is based on ideas from the British Jewish Islamic expert Dr. Bernard Lewis, who advocates the balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. The chaos would spread in what he also calls an "arc of crisis" and ultimately destabilize the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union. ..."
"... Which west goals ? I do not want USA world supremacy. At present Putin is the only man preventing this. ..."
"... As far as the "Russian interference" in the everyone's elections and everything under the sun is concerned, the German or British press, if anything, is worse than the US one. The Spanish press promptly accused Russia of engineering the Catalan independence movement. My sister told me that when she read a translation from Spanish about this in the Russian press she thought the Russians made it up, for it sounded so silly. But I read the original in El Pais and knew the Russian didn't make it up – the European media these days is such you truly can't make it up, try as you might. In fact, there's never been anything resembling proof in any of the stories, and all of them are completely nonsensical, which did not prevent the European media from spreading them far and wide. ..."
"... http://www.historycommons.org good resource it is collection of news reports, documents, books, time lines of events, etc just plug Iran or Israel or whatever subject into search that particular report is from Devil's Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam (American Empire Project) by Robert Dreyfuss ..."
"... "I call this (informal) opposition the "Atlantic Integrationists" because what these pro-western globalists want is for the AngloZionist Empire to accept Russia as an equal partner and to have Russia fully integrate itself into the US-controlled international financial and security structures:" Absolutely. What the Saker calls the Anglo-Zionist Empire is what I call the self-righteous imperialism of WASP culture. And it is relentless. It is like Mordor and Sauron. It intends to secure and then use the One Ring to Rule Them All, and no body count matters. ..."
"... To the best of my knowledge, so far only one country used nukes against humans. And it wasn't North Korea. ..."
"... That the oligarchs made their money through connections, behind the scene deals, outright duplicity and so on, should have been obvious to anyone who studied the phenomenon for a short period of time. Does anyone really believe that all those (largely) Jewish oligarchs indulging in the Premier League and other forms of conspicuous consumption made their money like Henry Ford or Andrew Carnegie, by building industries and providing jobs for millions? ..."
"... The Russian billionaires all made their money by gaming the Russian system. There isn't a single new service or product that we can associate with these people. The question then arises: Why the belated outrage now? The answer is simple: The thieves in the US, have turned on some fellow thieves from overseas, having run out of ways to fleece the American people ..."
"... It will place a great deal of pressure on EU corporations not to do business with the Russians and, therefore, it will further place the EU and the US on a collision course. ..."
"... I would emphasize this aspect. German industrialists (but not only) are already upset with US interference in German – Russia trade, and actions like this will only make it worse. ..."
"... The paradoxical result from the US point of view, is that proposed sanctions serve more to build EU opposition to the US, rather than weaken Russia. Russia is a major market for the EU and the EU doesn't want US imposed sanctions. ..."
"... Group three. Ignore what he says. Consequences are secondary to neocons; rhetoric is primary. Instead, watch what he does (consequences). Qui bono ? http://www.oom2.com/f81-q-anon-archive-analytical-discussion ..."
Feb 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

Beckow , February 2, 2018 at 6:59 pm GMT

The sanctions list means that holding Western assets has become more risky for Russian oligarchs. And because of precedent for Chinese, Arab, etc . They have three choices: (1) Remove Putin and co. and thus remove the risk; (2) Protect their wealth by shifting out of Western assets. (3) Defect to the West to protect assets in the West (and lose assets in Russia).

They have some thinking to do. Very few will leave for the West, it is not clear how much of their wealth that would protect. But some will and they will get inordinate publicity. Option 1. seems very hard and unpredictable, and it would increase chaos. Chaos is not something the oligarchs want. The likely outcome is option 2. That strengthens Russia, and marginally hurts the West.

When you are a global repository for safe assets and wealth – as US and West have been for 2-3 generations – the last thing you need is to put that safety haven status in doubt. Once people start doubting, things change. Saker is right, this policy is very stupid.

Cyrano , February 2, 2018 at 7:29 pm GMT
Every aspect of human existence evolves around one basic (mis?)calculation: Am I better than someone else? Every second of every day individuals, organizations, political parties, companies, countries, religions (God knows why) are trying to prove the above – that they are better than the next in their respective category.

There are only 4 possible outcomes here:

  1. You are better than someone and you can prove it. – ideal outcome
  2. You are better than someone, but you can't prove it. – It sucks
  3. You are no better than someone, but you have the means to manipulate the outcome into appearing like you are better. – Probably the most unfair outcome.
  4. You are no better than someone and if you try to prove that you are, you prove the opposite.

The current state of affairs between US and Russia is that US are aware that number 1 doesn't apply, they believe that they can pull off a number 3, but I think that the most realistic assessment is number 4.

Andrei Martyanov , Website February 2, 2018 at 7:55 pm GMT
@Cyrano

they believe that they can pull off a number 3,

Yet, for some reason it always ends in Number Two, if you know what I mean.

Chet Bradley , February 2, 2018 at 8:20 pm GMT
@peterAUS

The underlying assumption of your comment is that applying pressure to Russia works in achieving the West's goals. But everything we have seen from Russia in at least the last decade shows that pressuring Russia doesn't work. Ergo your conclusions are wrong. Maybe it's time you start learning something from history.

Cyrano , February 2, 2018 at 11:36 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

OK, I got it. You are talking about delusions. Thanks for expanding my list. That should actually be number 5.

Norumbega , February 3, 2018 at 12:37 am GMT

"Now, at the same time, I want to be able -- because I think it's very important -- to get along with Russia, to get along with China, to get along with Vietnam, to get along with lots of countries, because we have a lot of things we have to solve. And, frankly, Russia and China in particular can help us with the North Korea problem, which is one of our truly great problems."

[....]

"And, you know, people don't realize Russia has been very, very heavily sanctioned. They were sanctioned at a very high level, and that took place very recently. It's now time to get back to healing a world that is shattered and broken. Those are very important things. And I feel that having Russia in a friendly posture, as opposed to always fighting with them, is an asset to the world and an asset to our country, not a liability."

[....]

"President Obama wanted to get along with Russia, but the chemistry wasn't there. Getting along with other nations is a good thing, not a bad thing -- believe me. It's a good thing, not a bad thing."

The above quotations are excerpted from President Trump's response to a Fox news reporter during a joint press conference with President Quang of Vietnam on November 11, 2017. They suggest a continuing intention on Trump's part to get along with Russia despite the very strong pressures to enforce the New Cold War policies, including from within his Administration. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-president-quang-vietnam-joint-press-conference-hanoi-vietnam/

I point this out, because some may imagine that expressions of such an intention on the part of Trump ceased long ago, perhaps at the point Flynn was let go.

A simple explanation for the list of Russian persons who might potentially be sanctioned, is that Congress, as part of the law it passed six months ago, _required_ the production of such a list. So the Administration, through Treasury, produced such a list in answer to that requirement (crudely, as Saker points out) – but chose to not actually adopt any new sanctions, finding that they are not needed. And it appears that Trump is under new attack in the mainstream precisely for his minimalist compliance with the mandate from Congress.

KenH , February 3, 2018 at 1:05 am GMT

If Putin and the Russians are still baffled by American hostility, or rather (((American))) hostility, then it's time to question the collective IQ and wisdom of the Russian people. Putin is standing in the way of greater Israel and a Jewish world empire that is furthered by American military might. Despite his faults he is a strong nationalist leader who's preventing Jewish globalists from turning Russia into a global plantation like America and their economy into a revenue stream for Jewish robber barons like they have the American economy.

I'm baffled that a people who have had so much experience with Jews and their machinations can't recognize that America is now what they used to be when they were under Jewish management from 1917 until Jews began losing control in the 50′s and 60′s. Now the red diaper babies and their progeny loom large over America.

KA , February 3, 2018 at 7:33 pm GMT

http://www.businessinsider.com/syrian-rebels-reportedly-shoot-down-russian-su-25-pilot-unkown-2018-2 reports -Syrian rebels shot down a Russian Su-25 in Idlib province on Saturday,

Jaish al-Nasr, a faction in the Free Syrian Army shot it down, .. Su-25 was shot down by a man-portable air-defense system" Is US trying to do an Afghanistan on Russia after successfully kicking the Vietnam Syndrome off it's "not talk list" but leaving it on the " do repeat lists " in ME theater ? Not a good sign .

The Alarmist , February 3, 2018 at 8:00 pm GMT

"I have come to the conclusion that the Empire is run by stupid, ignorant ideologues who live in a world totally detached from reality."

Yeah, but the list is the product of a government dominated and staffed largely by hack lawyers.

renfro , February 4, 2018 at 6:06 am GMT

Interesting ..but I can see no reason for always claiming that the money laundering is done by the 'Russia State' instead of private individual actors .the only motivation I can see for the State doing it is to turn rubles into western dollars and English pounds .but since the dollar dominates in trade, for now anyway. the English pound isn't such a lure for Russia's holdings of foreign currencies.

UK promises to crack down on assets of corrupt oligarchs – The Times

LONDON (Reuters) – Britain will use new powers to seize the assets of foreign criminals and corrupt politicians, The Times newspaper reported on Saturday quoting the security minister. Investors from Russia, China and the Middle East have poured billions into London, buying everything from luxury properties to entire companies, but the provenance of some of those funds has been questioned by transparency campaigners. It is unclear how much money is laundered through Britain, but the National Crime Agency has said calculations of between 36 billion pounds ($50.83 billion) and 90 billion pounds ($127.08 billion) are "a significant underestimate".

Security minister Ben Wallace told The Times that the government would use powers regarding unexplained wealth to freeze and recover property if individuals cannot explain how they acquired assets over 50,000 pounds ($70,000).

What we know from the Laundromat exposé is that certainly there have been links to the [Russian] state," he was quoted as saying. "The government's view is that we know what they are up to and we are not going to let it happen any more."

renfro , February 4, 2018 at 6:47 am GMT
@KenH

I'm baffled that a people who have had so much experience with Jews and their machinations can't recognize that America is now what they used to be when they were under Jewish management from 1917

I am fairly sure that those in Russia who need to know already know plenty about Jew/Isr led USA Russian policy ..they've been after Russia for a long time.

1977-1981: Nationalities Working Group Advocates Using Militant Islam Against Soviet Union

In 1977 Zbigniew Brzezinski, as President Carter's National Security Adviser, forms the Nationalities Working Group (NWG) dedicated to the idea of weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions. The Islamic populations are regarded as prime targets. Zionist Richard Pipes, the father of Daniel Pipes, takes over the leadership of the NWG in 1981. Pipes predicts that with the right encouragement Soviet Muslims will "explode into genocidal fury" against Moscow. According to Richard Cottam, a former CIA official who advised the Carter administration at the time, after the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1978, Brzezinski favored a "de facto alliance with the forces of Islamic resurgence, and with the Republic of Iran." [Dreyfuss, 2005, pp. 241, 251 - 256]

November 1978-February 1979: Some US Officials Want to Support Radical Muslims to Contain Soviet Union

State Department official Henry Precht will later recall that Brzezinski had the idea "that Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets." [Scott, 2007, pp. 67] In November 1978, President Carter appointed George Ball head of a special White House Iran task force under Brzezinski. Ball recommends the US should drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the radical Islamist opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini.

This idea is based on ideas from the British Jewish Islamic expert Dr. Bernard Lewis, who advocates the balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. The chaos would spread in what he also calls an "arc of crisis" and ultimately destabilize the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union.

Anonymous Disclaimer , February 4, 2018 at 7:28 am GMT
I've always appreciated your candid exposure of American hypocrisy and stupidity, Saker, especially as unfairly and dangerously directed at Russia. But explain to me why most Russian opinion columnists, such as yourself, have to make their pieces as long as a novel by Tolstoy or Dostoevsky? Something to do with the R1a haplotype perhaps? Many long introns amidst the essential exons perhaps? Or, just an inability to stop when having a good time?
jilles dykstra , February 4, 2018 at 8:05 am GMT
@Chet Bradley

Which west goals ? I do not want USA world supremacy. At present Putin is the only man preventing this.

renfro , February 4, 2018 at 9:02 am GMT
The US congress is such a freaking circus of idiots, clowns, whores for Israel, crooks, perverts and incompetents I don't think I can stomach keeping up with their malfeasance much longer.

But I will leave this snippet -- -the 'list' and idea to sanction Russian individuals was the work of former Russian hating State Dept Amb to Poland, uber Jew Daniel Fried working in conjunction with uber Jew Sen Ben Cardin of the Foreign Relations Committee.

That tells you all you need to know. ((They)) were delighted to seize on Hillary's Russian excuse for losing the election and may have even instigated it to Hillary.

It will be interesting to see if the oligarchs faced with the choice of Russia or Europe or US as a home for their billions ever meet with little boy Kushner who might guarantee them safe bank accounts in Israel for a fee of course lol.

Avery , February 4, 2018 at 1:21 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

{Two million German citizens died,}

Crocodile tears. ~15 million Soviet citizens were killed or murdered by Nazi invaders. Plus ~3 million Red Army POWs deliberately starved to death, or died to due deliberate neglect, withholding medical aid, etc by Nazi invaders. A total of ~10 million Red Army troops lost their lives to prevent the extermination of Slavic peoples by Nazi invaders.

DESERT FOX , February 4, 2018 at 2:08 pm GMT
The whole hate the Russians deal is a Zionist ploy as the Russians are defeating ISIS aka AL CIADA in Syria and since ISIS and all of its branches are a creation of the U.S. and ISRAEL and BRITAIN via the CIA and the MOSSAD and MI6 , the Zionists cannot accept defeat and are turning the U.S. against Russia .

If anyone doubts that Israel and the zionist neocons control the U.S. gov, just remember that ISRAEL and the deepstate did 911 and got away with it, that is control in spades.

headrick , February 4, 2018 at 2:11 pm GMT
The last week or so the left has been bombastically upset at Trump because he did not enact more sanctions against Russia, and were pleased at the action against the Russian Oligarchs though. – These people are always convinced that the government has the power to do things by fiat- take away guns, punish global warming skeptics, sanction politically incorrect speech – lets pass a law-. The right is not immune from this instinct either with drug wars .etc. This belief
that the direct application of force 180 degrees against the foe, never a thought to strategy or cause and effect or blowback or complex analysis, – brute force and ignorance- into the valley of death rode the 600. Those drunk with power grasp the reins and charge madly. The drunk are not great thinkers. Putin raises a glass to their return.
Michael Kenny , February 4, 2018 at 2:38 pm GMT
As always, simplistic pro-Putin propaganda buried in a mass of details so as to bog people down. The centrepiece is at the end: sanctions. The basic argument is always "lift the sanctions" then some pretext or other is trotted out to justify that pre-ordained conclusion. In today's serving, the sanctions are useless and the US should just surrender and "work with" Putin. What is interesting though is that the author claims to see opposition to Putin within the elite but (needlwss to say!) "the people" are solidly behind Putin. Reading between the lines, that suggests that sanctions are starting to bite.
RobinG , February 4, 2018 at 4:42 pm GMT
@renfro

" ..weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions." Same strategy is operating in US now. Some allege Soros is promoting this, but he's not the only one. [#Resist was/is underwritten by MeetUp! CEO.] Can you give citations for your quotes about Nationalities Working Group? Thanks.

Den Lille Abe , February 4, 2018 at 4:47 pm GMT
It is getting rather tiresome, the "The Russians did it" meme. Whatever happens that contradicts US perceptions of reality , "The Russians did it". Maybe the American public is gullible, but us Europeans are rather more reserved on this. It has has been dis proven that Russia meddled in the French and German elections, and while the Brexit vote is inconclusive , we still have not been exposed to the smoking gun.

There is no doubt that the US MSM is trying to steam roll all objections to this stance, but proof, where is it? The bought ads on Fakebook is laughable at best, and the new Dutch source is another "Flat earther theory". Has general American IQ deteriorated so much in the span of a decade ? I doubt it.

Anon Disclaimer , February 4, 2018 at 5:12 pm GMT
Anon from TN
The author did not need so many words to state the obvious: the US shot itself in the foot again, and now it's going to start complaining that it hurts. Anyone familiar with human history knows that dying empires invariably make maladaptive moves that speed up their demise. This was the scenario with Roman, Spanish, Ottoman, British, and French Empires. Look on the bright side, though: the US Empire follows in the footsteps of the greatest.
FB , February 4, 2018 at 5:14 pm GMT
@Michael Kenny

' that suggests that sanctions are starting to bite '

What disneyland character are you portraying ? I'm guessing Dopey from the Seven Dwarfs. US has zero ability to influence the trajectory of Russia which is straight up like the Russian rocket launches that take Nasa astronauts into space for the last seven years. US sanctions have only been a blessing to Russia

For one thing they have driven a wedge between EU and the US especially Germany which is a natural Russian ally. For another they are helping Putin to clean up the remaining rotten apples in the Russian billionaire class by forcing them to bring their offshore money home or get the hell out of Russia and have whatever they leave behind confiscated by the Russian people. I have noticed you here as a monkey with a serious Russia chip on his shoulder

I'll be checking back to see what you are spouting as soon the US Ponzi scheme economy starts collapsing. The only thing holding up this house of cards is the petrodollar which is already in the frying pan. Russia and China along with other emerging powers like Iran and the Brics are working round the clock to dismantle the present US-based world financial order. The Brics already exceed the G7 in total GDP. Enjoy your coming poverty

Anon Disclaimer , February 4, 2018 at 5:19 pm GMT
@Den Lille Abe

Anon from TN: The Europeans will never appreciate to what extent the thinking and behavior of Americans is determined by the view that "this is not my problem". They would also never understand or believe how parochial and uninformed the people in the US are. Then again, the Europeans have nothing to be proud of: while the US elites are at least open about their ulterior motives, the Europeans fell into a trap of anti-Russian sanctions (which hurt them a lot more than the US, BTW) by virtue of pure hypocrisy.

bluedog , February 4, 2018 at 5:20 pm GMT
@Michael Kenny

Sorry I don't have the tea leaves to read between the lines, but I was reading that a number of business leaders from the EU was just in the Crimea, and I rather doubt they were there for a vacation, sanctions are a double edged sword and it would seem the EU are feeling them as much if not more than Russia .

EugeneGur , February 4, 2018 at 6:01 pm GMT
@Den Lille Abe

Maybe the American public is gullible, but us Europeans are rather more reserved on this.

Oh really? You Europeans just like to hide behind the US's back and pretend you are so-o-o European, so advanced and civilized, unlike the American barbarians, while behaving exactly the same – or worse.

As far as the "Russian interference" in the everyone's elections and everything under the sun is concerned, the German or British press, if anything, is worse than the US one. The Spanish press promptly accused Russia of engineering the Catalan independence movement. My sister told me that when she read a translation from Spanish about this in the Russian press she thought the Russians made it up, for it sounded so silly. But I read the original in El Pais and knew the Russian didn't make it up – the European media these days is such you truly can't make it up, try as you might. In fact, there's never been anything resembling proof in any of the stories, and all of them are completely nonsensical, which did not prevent the European media from spreading them far and wide.

So, it I were you, I'd first question the collective European IQ, before laughing at the Americans. The European policy towards Russia for the past 25 years has been unnecessarily confrontational and generally extremely stupid. After all, the US is far away, but Europe is right next door to Russia. If push comes to shove, you'd be the first to get a kick in your tender behind. It happened before, remember? Not only your IQ seems to have deteriorated, even assuming it was ever high, but your memory as well.

renfro , February 4, 2018 at 6:26 pm GMT
@RobinG

Its from ..historycommons

http://www.historycommons.org good resource it is collection of news reports, documents, books, time lines of events, etc just plug Iran or Israel or whatever subject into search that particular report is from Devil's Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam (American Empire Project) by Robert Dreyfuss

Jake , February 4, 2018 at 6:56 pm GMT

"I call this (informal) opposition the "Atlantic Integrationists" because what these pro-western globalists want is for the AngloZionist Empire to accept Russia as an equal partner and to have Russia fully integrate itself into the US-controlled international financial and security structures:" Absolutely. What the Saker calls the Anglo-Zionist Empire is what I call the self-righteous imperialism of WASP culture. And it is relentless. It is like Mordor and Sauron. It intends to secure and then use the One Ring to Rule Them All, and no body count matters.

Jake , February 4, 2018 at 6:58 pm GMT

@EugeneGur

"Oh really? You Europeans just like to hide behind the US's back and pretend you are so-o-o European, so advanced and civilized, unlike the American barbarians, while behaving exactly the same – or worse."

That is funny because true.

renfro , February 4, 2018 at 7:09 pm GMT
@RobinG

Bottom line, destroy Russia has always been the Jews , (aided by some bought politicians and assorted psychopaths) and still is. You need to track them thru the decades to see how the US came to its Russia fear mongering. http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=western_support_for_islamic_militancy_202708

Context of '1977-1981: Nationalities Working Group Advocates Using Militant Islam Against Soviet Union'

[MORE]
Albert Wohlstetter, a professor at the University of Chicago, gathers a cadre of fiery young intellectuals around him, many of whom are working and associating with the magazine publisher Irving Kristol (see 1965). Wohlstetter's group includes Richard Perle, Zalmay Khalilzad, and Paul Wolfowitz. Wohlstetter, himself a protege of the Machiavellian academic Leo Strauss, is often considered the "intellectual godfather" of modern neoconservatism. Formerly an analyst at the RAND Corporation, Wohlstetter wielded a powerful influence on the US's foreign policy during the heyday of the Cold War.

The recently formed neoconservatives, bound together by magazine publisher Irving Kristol (see 1965), react with horror to the ascendancy of the "McGovern liberals" in the Democratic Party, and turn to conservative senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson (D-WA) for leadership. Jackson calls himself a "muscular Democrat"; others call him "the Senator from Boeing" for his strong support of the US defense industry.Jackson assembles a staff of bright, young, ideologically homogeneous staffers who will later become some of the most influential and powerful neoconservatives of their generation, including Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Elliott Abrams, Abram Shulsky, and Paul Wolfowitz. Jackson's office -- Jackson's neoconservative disciples came of age either fighting two foreign dictators -- Stalin and/or Hitler -- or growing up with family members who fought against them. [Unger, 2007, pp. 35-41] Wolfowitz's father's family perished in the Holocaust; he will later say that what happened to European Jews during World War II "shaped a lot of my views." [New York Times, 4/22/2002] Feith will tell the New Yorker in 2005, "[My] family got wiped out by Hitler, and all this stuff about working things out -- well, talking to Hitler to resolve the problem didn't make any sense." Most neoconservatives like Feith and Wolfowitz tend to look to military solutions as a first, not a last, resort. To them, compromise means appeasement, just as Britain's Neville Chamberlain tried to appease Hitler. Stefan Halper, a White House and State Department official in the Nixon, Ford, and Reagan administrations, will say of the neoconservatives, "It is use force first and diplomacy down the line."
Former Trotskyites – On the other hand, many neoconservatives come to the movement from the hardline, socialist left, often from organizations that supported Bolshevik revolutionary Leon Trotsky (see Late 1930s – 1950s). Trotskyites accused Stalin of betraying the purity of the Communist vision as declaimed by Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin. "I can see psychologically why it would not be difficult for them to become [conservative] hard-liners," says Harvard Sovietologist Richard Pipes, himself a hardliner whose son, Daniel Pipes, will become an influential neoconservative. "It was in reaction to the betrayal." Many neoconservatives like Stephen Schwartz, a writer for the Weekly Standard, still consider themselves to be loyal disciples of Trotsky. Richard Perle is a Trotskyite socialist when he joins Jackson's staff, and will always practice what author Craig Unger calls "an insistent, uncompromising, hard-line Bolshevik style" of policy and politics. Like Trotsky, Unger writes, the neoconservatives pride themselves on being skilled bureaucratic infighters, and on trusting no one except a small cadre of like-minded believers. Disagreement is betrayal, and political struggles are always a matter of life and death. [Unger, 2007, pp. 35-41]
After George H. W. Bush becomes the head of the CIA (see November 4, 1975 and After), he decides to break with previous decisions and allow a coterie of neoconservative outsiders to pursue the allegations of Albert Wohlstetter that the CIA is seriously underestimating the threat the USSR poses to the US (see 1965),
The neocon team of "analysts" becomes known as "Team B," with "Team A" being the CIA's own analytical team. It is unprecedented to allow outsiders to have so much access to highly classified CIA intelligence as Bush is granting the Team B neocons, so the entire project is conducted in secret.
Former CIA deputy director Ray Cline says Team B had subverted the National Intelligence Estimate on the USSR by employing "a kangaroo court of outside critics all picked from one point of view." Secretary of State Henry Kissinger says that B's only purpose is to subvert detente and sabotage a new arms limitation treaty between the US and the Soviet Union. [Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, 4/1993; Common Dreams (.org), 12/7/2004; BBC, 1/14/2005; Quarterly Journal of Speech, 5/2006 ; Unger, 2007, pp. 53-57]
Although the entire "Team B" intelligence analysis experiment (see Early 1976, November 1976, and November 1976) is supposed to be classified and secret, the team's neoconservatives launch what author Craig Unger will call "a massive campaign to inflame fears of the red menace in both the general population and throughout the [foreign] policy community -- thanks to strategically placed leaks to the Boston Globe and later to the New York Times." Times reporter David Binder later says that Team B leader Richard Pipes is "jubilant" over "pok[ing] holes at the [CIA]'s analysis" of the Soviet threat. Team B member John Vogt calls the exercise "an opportunity to even up some scores with the CIA." [Unger, 2007, pp. 57]

In 1993, after reviewing the original Team B documents, Cahn will reflect on the effect of the B exercise: "For more than a third of a century, assertions of Soviet superiority created calls for the United States to 'rearm.' In the 1980s, the call was heeded so thoroughly that the United States embarked on a trillion-dollar defense buildup. As a result, the country neglected its schools, cities, roads and bridges, and health care system. From the world's greatest creditor nation, the United States became the world's greatest debtor -- in order to pay for arms to counter the threat of a nation that was collapsing." [Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, 4/1993

polistra , February 4, 2018 at 7:46 pm GMT
Sanctions are almost always counterproductive. We should have learned this from Cuba, but we didn't. When US breaks connections with a country, we force the country to develop its own skills and products, or to do business with our enemies. Result: the sanctioned country gets stronger, our enemies get richer, and US loses business. Total loss for US, total gain for everyone else.

Justice.

bike-anarchist , February 4, 2018 at 7:54 pm GMT
@Cyrano

#1: I have to take a #2

bike-anarchist , February 4, 2018 at 8:01 pm GMT
@Jake

There already is the "Jewish Autonomous Oblast", known as Birobidzhan, in Eastern Siberia. It is much larger than the land mass of any configuration of the State of Israel, tons of fresh water, natural resources. And get this: they wouldn't have to behave like Nazis to benefit from a land ready for them.

Cyrano , February 4, 2018 at 8:02 pm GMT
@Avery

There is a monument on Mamayev Kurgan, called The motherland calls. Luckily, when the motherland called millions of Russians answered. The Russians not only like to answer the call of duty, but also the call of booty – as the Germans found out around 1945.

It's not like the Europeans haven't gone on a genocidal rampages before – Spanish and Anglo-Saxon massacres of native Americans comes to mind. The real genius of those monkeys – the Germans – is that they attempted to treat the Russians like they were American Indians. If anything, the Russians were too kind to those beasts.

bike-anarchist , February 4, 2018 at 8:19 pm GMT
@Ilyana_Rozumova

Can Israel be trusted with nukes? They, like the U$A have exemptions from IAEA inspections. They have equal exclusiveness in their military doctrine. I recall an anon poster a couple weeks ago stating that Israel has positioned nukes in strategic locations, including continental U$A and Europe, influencing Israel-favourable decisions, explaining why Western countries make decisions that are NOT in their best interests.

I don't wish to believe in that scenario

Sergey Krieger , February 4, 2018 at 8:46 pm GMT
Well, Russia must not be baffled. After having so much baffling experience with partners being baffled is not a good thing especially after 2 consequitive Soviet and then Russia leaders basically gave to USA everything they wanted on a plate with blue stripe so to speak only to get baffled yet again by partners not giving an inch. This is zero sum game and relaxed attitude is not part of it. Every single opportunity must be used to undermine remaining pillars of USA might namely her currency status and international financial system which is built by as Sacker said uncle Shmuel for uncle Shmuel benefits. USA military is just an outgrowth which will collapse like sand cattle without massive cash infusions allowed only because those two pillars mentioned above still standing. Hoping that there will be some reasonable people in Washington with whom some detente is possible is dangerous illusion. There not going to be lasting detente between USA and Russia until USA is reduced to her natural state of regional northern American power with zero influence everywhere beyond Mexican and Canadian borders. Now I always wonder where indeed Putin is taking Russia. I am watching Russia tv and see sort of very ugly place which sole existence is to dumb down Russian people and destroy people morals and ethics. I wonder what kind of population and new generation of russians can grow watching this? I know there are still many people born and brought up in ussr to be immune to this garbage but what about young people? Where indeed Putin is taking Russia and does he need dumbed down American way population for this. Not to be forgotten is that people's strength is country strength. What is going on is quite simple. America is plainly hot bed of capitalism and capitalism is quite obviously in death throws. Exponential growth of debt around the world and continuous reduction of life standards and overall moral decay around the world is a proof of this and obviously Russia and other former socialist states did a very bad bet on capitalism. Results of the past 25 years are extremely disappointing and downright catastrophic for long term survival of the very people who adopted this dead end system which passed its prime long time ago and dying. Communism is not popular at the moment but I have no doubt it will come back because nothing in the past 25 years convinced me that capitalism is better.
Anon Disclaimer , February 4, 2018 at 9:06 pm GMT
@Cyrano

Anon from TN
Let me add a little vignette. In Stalingrad (now Volgograd), there are preserved ruins of one of only two buildings that remained semi-standing: Pavlov's house. Not only it was defended for 60 days against Wehrmacht (longer than France), Germans lost more solders there than they lost conquering France. That should explain to Europeans why Russians don't take Europe too seriously: they say that every 100 years or so the whole of Europe unites, makes war on Russia, gets beaten to pulp, and then licks its wounds for another century. There was Napoleon in the nineteenth century, there was Hitler in the twentieth century, there is NATO in the twenty first

jilles dykstra , February 4, 2018 at 9:18 pm GMT
@Beefcake the Mighty

Was there no bravery on the German side ?After the Normandy invasion western generals expected the war to be over at Christmas, or even in September, when they tried to take the Dutch bridges, and failed miserably. It in my opinion is amazing how one country withstood GB, USSR and USA so long.

jilles dykstra , February 4, 2018 at 9:30 pm GMT
@Anon

Alas NATO seems to be planning a nuclear war. If this war comes, it will be the 'war that ends all wars', as Wilson said about WWI, because no human being will survive, as all bigger animals. Rats seem to have a chance.

Art , February 4, 2018 at 10:04 pm GMT
@Norumbega

A simple explanation for the list of Russian persons who might potentially be sanctioned, is that Congress, as part of the law it passed six months ago, _required_ the production of such a list.

Have heard that they went to a Forbes list to get the sanction names. This looks very very bad – it makes us look ridicules. Congress doing foreign policy is wrong. Of course, this is Jew business – AIPAC doings. America for America – NOT – America for Israel. Think Peace -- Art

Anon Disclaimer , February 4, 2018 at 10:29 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

Anon from TN. Yes, rodents, insects, and simpler life forms will inherit the Earth. The elites, if they start that war, won't survive, either. Poor consolation for the rest of us, though.

annamaria , February 4, 2018 at 10:37 pm GMT
@peterAUS

"The Empire is simply, and logically, putting pressure on pro-Moscow Russian elites." – You need to re-read the article.

annamaria , February 4, 2018 at 10:40 pm GMT
@KA

Read the experts: http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/02/httpsenwikipediaorgwikiflanking_maneuver.html

Ilyana_Rozumova , February 4, 2018 at 10:40 pm GMT
@bike-anarchist

Can Israel be trusted with nukes?

Definite answer is Yes! Israeli government are not nuts like Kim. Wherever Israel did put their nukes, the only reason is that the responsibility and cost of maintenance they did put on some other suckers.
Israel has nothing to fear. If there would be some concentrated and dangerous attack on Israel US air force would be there in the matter of hours. Maybe even Russians would help with their air force.
To attack Israel is out of question. Maybe some terrorist attack is an option, but that is difficult to prevent

annamaria , February 4, 2018 at 10:55 pm GMT
@Michael Kenny

Actually, it is your ziocon propaganda that is simplistic: -- " the US should just surrender and "work with" Putin." -- An honest cooperation between the US and Russian Federation would be the best solution for humanity at large. But this cooperation would be the worst outcome for the bloody "chosen" dreaming of Eretz Israel and world dominance, while they can't stop whining about "eternal victimhood."
Since 1999, four million human beings, including a multitude of children, died in the Middle East because of your bloody mythological "promised land" of Israel.

Seraphim , February 4, 2018 at 11:02 pm GMT
@Jake

Probably they won't have any choice. The more that it would be in the heart of the new Eurasian economic configuration. But they still want Ukraine and Crimea. That's why you hear so much talk about the Khazars.

annamaria , February 4, 2018 at 11:06 pm GMT
@renfro

"From the world's greatest creditor nation, the United States became the world's greatest debtor -- in order to pay for arms to counter the threat of a nation that was collapsing."
And look at the corruption within the highest echelons of the US government and security apparatus -- the opportunists and ignoramuses have taken the upper hand. This is very convenient for Israel-firsters but deadly for the US. The hatred of ziocons towards Russia is boundless and irrational.

Anon Disclaimer , February 4, 2018 at 11:28 pm GMT
@Ilyana_Rozumova

Anon from TN: To the best of my knowledge, so far only one country used nukes against humans. And it wasn't North Korea.

Twodees Partain , February 5, 2018 at 12:21 am GMT
@KenH

"If Putin and the Russians are still baffled by American hostility, or rather (((American))) hostility, then it's time to question the collective IQ and wisdom of the Russian people. "

Ken, I think that The Saker is just baffled on their behalf.

Cyrano , February 5, 2018 at 12:47 am GMT
@Bardon Kaldian

Ever heard of existential threat, sport? WW1 and the Crimean war were not existential threats to Russia. The minute they turned into such, the outcome would have been different.

headrick , February 5, 2018 at 12:55 am GMT
Here is what sanctions do. I recently saw a story about a German farmer/dairy expert who
went to Russia and jump started a large network of dairy farms in Russia. Before sanctions, Russia thought the could buy their dairy from Europe, but after the sanctions, Russian knew they needed domestic suppliers, and lo an behold, this German (Joint Russian German citizen actually and friend of Putin) was phonemically successful and now there is a robust local Dairy Industry in Russia. Now the people who are howling are the European Farmers who used to have a healthy export market for their products.
Astuteobservor II , February 5, 2018 at 1:17 am GMT
@Beckow

well, if shamir is right and the looted accounts of the old money is equal to 1 trillion usd. that is alot of money for the people in charge to not see green and only green. doubt long term consequences/effects would ever factor into the decision.

Ivan , February 5, 2018 at 1:54 am GMT

That the oligarchs made their money through connections, behind the scene deals, outright duplicity and so on, should have been obvious to anyone who studied the phenomenon for a short period of time. Does anyone really believe that all those (largely) Jewish oligarchs indulging in the Premier League and other forms of conspicuous consumption made their money like Henry Ford or Andrew Carnegie, by building industries and providing jobs for millions?

The Russian billionaires all made their money by gaming the Russian system. There isn't a single new service or product that we can associate with these people. The question then arises: Why the belated outrage now? The answer is simple: The thieves in the US, have turned on some fellow thieves from overseas, having run out of ways to fleece the American people

Miro23 , February 5, 2018 at 3:20 am GMT

Then look a step further and forget about the US for a second: Russia is trying hard to work with the Europeans on many join projects. What do you think the creation of such a list will have on joint ventures between EU and Russian businessmen? I predict two things:

1. It will place a great deal of pressure on EU corporations not to do business with the Russians and, therefore, it will further place the EU and the US on a collision course.

2. I would emphasize this aspect. German industrialists (but not only) are already upset with US interference in German – Russia trade, and actions like this will only make it worse.

The paradoxical result from the US point of view, is that proposed sanctions serve more to build EU opposition to the US, rather than weaken Russia. Russia is a major market for the EU and the EU doesn't want US imposed sanctions.

Anon 101 , February 5, 2018 at 3:45 am GMT
@Jake

Jake is a troll.

There is no subject that he doesn't derail by going on about Wasps his intent is to "divide and conquer" the building momentum against neocon foreign policy.

Talks-to-Cats , February 5, 2018 at 5:11 am GMT
Group three. Ignore what he says. Consequences are secondary to neocons; rhetoric is primary. Instead, watch what he does (consequences). Qui bono ? http://www.oom2.com/f81-q-anon-archive-analytical-discussion
Anti_republocrat , February 5, 2018 at 5:36 am GMT
@peterAUS

Selecting wealthy individuals at random regardless of political beliefs indeed makes no sense at all. Perhaps if you had read the rest of the article you would understand why. Then again, swine don't typically understand the value of pearls.

[Feb 06, 2018] polskijoe

Feb 06, 2018 | www.unz.com

, February 5, 2018 at 12:19 am GMT

@Avery

The newest study is very good on this,

search up: Breaking Down Soviet WWII loses by Marko Marjanovic for full details.

Likeliest Soviet war dead in the Soviet-German War of 1941-1945 may at present be estimated as 25.3 million people. Of this the loss of 1.5 million is attributable to Soviet state repression leaving 23.8 million deaths of Soviet citizens due to war and occupation. The circumstances of these deaths are extremely varied. The largest groups of victims are soldiers who died on the frontlines (7.25 million) and civilians who died of malnutrition and disease. Including 3.1 million deaths among Soviet prisoners of war in German custody the Soviet Union sustained up to 11 million military deaths. The Soviet population suffered over 14.3 million civilian deaths, of which 7.7-8.1 million due to general privation induced by the war and occupation, 2.55 million in the Jewish Holocaust, 1 million in prisons and colonies and camps of the gulag, 0.9 million in the siege of Leningrad and an estimated 650,000 in German anti-partisan reprisals, and more in other circumstances. The Germans and the Axis caused some 15.7 million deaths among Soviet civilians and combatants they had already captured and disarmed. Discounting the deaths of Soviet citizens fighting against the USSR the Soviet Union caused roughly 1.7 million deaths among its civilian population and servicemen in the military.

Bardon Kaldian , February 4, 2018 at 11:44 pm GMT
@Anon

That should explain to Europeans why Russians don't take Europe too seriously: they say that every 100 years or so the whole of Europe unites, makes war on Russia, gets beaten to pulp, and then licks its wounds for another century.

Eh .ever heard of Crimean war? Or this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Front_(World_War_I) ?

polskijoe , February 5, 2018 at 12:26 am GMT
@jilles dykstra

Germany was not alone.

On the East Front over a million German allies died. Many more joined Wehremact (combination of willingly and against their will). Soldiers from Italy, Romania, Hungary, Austria, a few from Poland, Ukraine, Russia itself, Baltics, etc.

Lets not forget the Pacific, which is were the US was doing most of its work. And the US was giving aid to Germany up to around 41. (Henry Ford, Rockefeller, etc).

I will give you this. Germany was stronger than UK and France combined probably.
Brits were lucky at Dunkirk, barely won the BoB. France became split. And underperformed.

Anon Disclaimer , February 5, 2018 at 12:33 am GMT
@Bardon Kaldian

Anon from TN
Yea, Crimean war is a great example. It was a long time ago, though, 1853-56. "The charge of the light brigade" sure enriched literature, but did not add to British military glory. Russia lost to the united forces of Britain, France, and Ottoman Empire (Sardinia was officially among the victors, too, pretty much like France in WWII).

The Crimean war was fought to prevent the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, which collapsed under Russian attacks, anyway. You can take any view of it you like, but compared to Napoleonic wars and WWII I was writing about, this was a local skirmish.

As to WWI, Russia lost militarily because of its revolution, which shook Europe to its foundations, judging by the reaction of European powers, all of which intervened in the Russian civil war and lost miserably.

Ilyana_Rozumova , February 5, 2018 at 2:39 am GMT
@FB

War is a war. I estimate that at minimum 70 % people who died in the war died of starvation and diseases. I do remember eating ground corn porridge with no butter no lard or no jam on it. day in and day out..
If we had potato Kasha with a little grease on it, it was usually Sunday. Also it was also Sunday when we had bean sup with worms floating on top of it. We had eggs sometimes. We totally forgot how a meat tasted. I only cannot imagine what people did eat in concentration camps.
War was so horrible that people today cannot even imagine
Days we were hiding in the basement under wooden wash basins.
Remember. In Leningrad people did eat dead bodies.
.
Those people who make war are the most despicable people ever created.

Seraphim , February 5, 2018 at 4:01 am GMT
@Cyrano

WW1 was an existential threat to Russia. The Crimean war was a skirmish. After only 20 years Russia was nearly annihilating the Ottoman Empire, which was saved again by the intervention of 'Europe' (Berlin Congress). The attack on Russia in 1914 was meant again to stop the advance of Russia towards the Straits after the Balkan Wars. The partition of Russia and fomenting the revolution were seriously contemplated by the hotheads in Germany who did not heed the advice of Bismarck to not 'mess with Russia'. The Ottoman Empire disappeared and Germany lost the war ignominiously.
No need to mention WW2.

FB , February 5, 2018 at 4:18 am GMT
@L.K

' Also, FB, don't pretend to care about war crimes; there is a record here of you and your deranged boyfriend, cyrano, cracking joke after joke about the mass rape -- and often murder -- of German women by the Red Army, rapes that included young girls as well as old women '

That's right the mass 'raping' of German sluts by virile and victorious Russian soldiers is a source of never ending amusement for me

The 'Aryan' frauleins aren't known for their 'virtue' as many asylum seekers will tell you

In any case the Krauts got what they had coming to them getting raped by their Slavic 'inferiors' would never have happened had they not been stupid enough to invade Mother Russia

As for Uncle Joe he was a winner

Unlike that disgusting Fag Fuhrer who blew his brains out only to have Russian soldiers piss on his ashes

And btw the dirtbag was sexual deviant engaging in 'poo sex'

https://nypost.com/2016/03/07/adolf-hitler-had-a-truly-disgusting-sexual-fetish

Sounds like something you might want to try next time you're choking the chicken in your lederhosen ?

HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW

Seraphim , February 5, 2018 at 5:26 am GMT
@Beefcake the Mighty

It was a Pyrrhic victory. Won the war, lost the peace. Bismarck was proven right, as it would be in WW2 ("Do not expect that once taking advantage of Russia's weakness, you will receive dividends forever. Russian has always come for their money. And when they come -- do not rely on an agreement signed by you, you are supposed to justify. They are not worth the paper it is written. Therefore, with the Russian is to play fair, or do not play"). And Bismarck was no Russophile.

Cyrano , February 5, 2018 at 5:41 am GMT
@Seraphim

I am going to have to disagree with you on this one, man. The way I remember WW1 (and I remember it like it was yesterday), the Germans never attempted to march on Moscow -- which is the only way a war can qualify as existential threat to Russia.

Also, I think you are mixing the British with German objectives -- it was the British who were obsessed with not allowing Constantinople to fall into anyone's hands but the Turks. What a wonderful Christians they are, so worried about their Muslim brothers not losing something that doesn't even belong to them.

Bismarck was one of the very few smart statesmen that Germany ever had. He knew that the war between the 5 great European powers will happen sooner or later. So he told his successors to be mindful to end up on the side of the 3 against the 2. What did the morons did in WW1? Not only did they end up on the side of the 2 against the 3, they choose the weakest of the 5 as their only ally -- Austro-Hungary. And then they wonder why they keep losing wars.

[Feb 06, 2018] The War That Never Ends (for the U.S. Military High Command), by Danny Sjursen - The Unz Review

Notable quotes:
"... On Strategy : A Critical Analysis of the Vietnam War, ..."
"... In his own work, Summers marginalized all Vietnamese actors (as would so many later military historians), failed to adequately deal with the potential consequences, nuclear or otherwise, of the sorts of escalation he advocated, and didn't even bother to ask whether Vietnam was a core national security interest of the United States. ..."
"... A more sophisticated Clausewitzian analysis came from current National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster in a highly acclaimed 1997 book, Dereliction of Duty ..."
"... McMaster is a genuine scholar and a gifted writer, but he still suggested that the Joint Chiefs should have advocated for a more aggressive offensive strategy -- a full ground invasion of the North or unrelenting carpet-bombing of that country. In this sense, he was just another "go-big" Clausewitzian who, as historian Ronald Spector pointed out recently, ignored Vietnamese views and failed to acknowledge -- an observation of historian Edward Miller -- that "the Vietnam War was a Vietnamese war." ..."
"... The Army and Vietnam ..."
"... Foreign Affairs ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... A Better War : The Unexamined Victories and Final Tragedy of America's Last Years in Vietnam ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... The Daily Show with Jon Stewart ..."
"... Learning to Eat Soup with a Knife : Counterinsurgency Lessons from Malaya and Vietnam ..."
"... Wall Street Journal ..."
"... David Petraeus and current Secretary of Defense James Mattis, co-authors in 2006 of FM 3-24, the first ( New York Times ..."
"... On Strategy ..."
"... Dereliction of Duty ..."
"... The Army and Vietnam ..."
"... Most of the generals leading the war on terror just missed service in the Vietnam War. They graduated from various colleges or West Point in the years immediately following the withdrawal of most U.S. ground troops or thereafter: Petraeus in 1974 , future Afghan War commander Stanley McChrystal in 1976 , and present National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster in 1984 . Secretary of Defense Mattis finished ROTC and graduated from Central Washington University in 1971 , while Trump's Chief of Staff John Kelly enlisted at the tail end of the Vietnam War, receiving his commission in 1976 . ..."
"... Petraeus, Mattis, McMaster, and the others entered service when military prestige had reached a nadir or was just rebounding. And those reading lists taught the young officers where to lay the blame for that -- on civilians in Washington (or in the nation's streets) or on a military high command too weak to assert its authority effectively. They would serve in Vietnam's shadow, the shadow of defeat, and the conclusions they would draw from it would only lead to twenty-first-century disasters ..."
"... Meanwhile, President Trump's hearts-and-minds faction consists of officers who have spent three administrations expanding COIN-influenced missions to approximately 70% of the world's nations. Furthermore, they've recently fought for and been granted a new "mini-surge" in Afghanistan intended to -- in disturbingly Vietnam-esque language -- "break the deadlock ," "reverse the decline," and "end the stalemate " there. Never mind that neither 100,000 U.S. troops (when I was there in 2011) nor 16 full years of combat could, in the term of the trade, "stabilize" Afghanistan. The can-do, revisionist believers atop the national security state have convinced Trump that -- despite his original instincts -- 4,000 or 5,000 (or 6,000 or 7,000) more troops (and yet more drones , planes , and other equipment) will do the trick. This represents tragedy bordering on farce. ..."
"... The hearts and minders and Clausewitzians atop the military establishment since 9/11 are never likely to stop citing their versions of the Vietnam War as the key to victory today; that is, they will never stop focusing on a war that was always unwinnable and never worth fighting. None of today's acclaimed military personalities seems willing to consider that Washington couldn't have won in Vietnam because, as former Air Force Chief of Staff Merrill McPeak (who flew 269 combat missions over that country) noted in the recent Ken Burns documentary series, "we were fighting on the wrong side." ..."
"... Today's leaders don't even pretend that the post-9/11 wars will ever end. In an interview last June, Petraeus -- still considered a sagacious guru of the Defense establishment -- disturbingly described the Afghan conflict as " generational ." ..."
"... Vietnam lost in the end. Its greedy corrupt elites are now puppets of US. They allow open prostitution in Ho Chi Minh city. They allow Vietnamese women to be a bunch of hookers again. ..."
"... "America tends to gain from commerce what it thinks it will get by warfare. Not so much the other way around" Rather like 20th century Germany, don't you think? ..."
"... The Vietnam war killed the draft. The draft is involuntary servitude, slavery in a sense. For ordinary Americans this was the only positive thing to come from the war. ..."
"... Ultimately, the victory of WW2 due to sheer weight of industrial productivity ramp and hence massive output of planes, tanks, submarines, etc. made defense a large part of the US economy. Since that time, too many entrenched interests just never want the military to downsize. Hence, the US has to keep invented new demand for a product that otherwise would not have such demand, but keeps some major entrenched interests powerful. ..."
"... The BIGGEST lesson to come out of the illegal and immoral War against Vietnam is that the draft was impeding the MIC's effort to sell Americans on the idea of supporting endless war. ..."
"... The same generals who let 911 happen and started the Iraq war still run the show. All of them should have faced a firing squad for that, but instead, the grossly incompetent General Kelly runs the White House and the grossly incompetent Mattis runs the military. ..."
"... The warhawk imperialists – some of them Clausewtizians and most COINdinistas – rule everything. No matter how many lives are lost, no matter how much money is wasted, they demand we remain on the same path of playing world hegemon. George Washington fought the British Empire for our freedom, so our subsequent leaders, starting most importantly with Lincoln, could remake the country into the British Empire 2.0. ..."
"... No; it's psychotic, psychopathic mayhem and mass-murder. Lemma: At any crime-scene, there are one or more perpetrators, possibly accessories, apologists and/or 'idle' bystanders. It is incumbent upon *all* witnesses to attempt to a) restrain malefactors and where possible b) rescue victims from harm. *All* present and not in active resistance to the crime attract proportional guilt. Addendum: Any person profiting from crime also makes him/herself an accessory, like all residents in the 'illegitimate entity' and/or the puppet executives, manufacturers of the means and their enablers = the whole MIC[*] plus all their dependents, say. ..."
"... The US rogue regime = US-M/I/C/4a†-plex, with dog-wagging-tail, its illegitimate sprog the Zionist/Israeli rogue regime + Js = I/J/Z-plex, all components rife with corruption. ..."
"... Save the BS for your fellow geezer drunks at the VFW lounge. Vietnam featured a complete collapse of the conscripted US military, rampant drug use, fragging, insubordination, faked injuries, disintegration of the chain of command, mass murder of civilians, and finally TOTAL DEFEAT after turning tail and running following the negotiation of a charitable "decent interval" allowing the yanks to save some face. Pathetic. ..."
"... Wars fought to make countries like Vietnam open to big corporations to move American jobs there. Corporate money backed by the fist of the Marines has worked all their lives, all their parents' lives, and all the modern history of America. "Why not now?", the sheep ask. ..."
"... According to Bobbie McNamara, American efforts resulted in the murder of over 4 million Vietnamese and the maiming of millions of others .MOSTLY CIVILIANS. ..."
"... If the war mongers had had an all-volunteer army like the one they have today, they could have and would have kept the Vietnam War going indefinitely. But, since they didn't, draftees and their parents wised-up to the Pentagon's money-making scam and put a stop to it by refusing to participate. ..."
"... Very rich families and corporatists started their own think tanks after World War II. This is when the looting began for RAND. These are the bastards Eisenhower was afraid of. Abe Lincoln feared the large corporations born of business profiteering during the U.S. Civil War -- the military industrial complex of the day -- easily constituted the greatest threat to the American republic. ..."
"... Remember that Eisenhower's definition of the complex included among the bastards, not only the military defense industry corporations, but also right alongside them the news media and the university and private research establishments. ..."
"... That war was a cluster fuck and a crime against humanity. It's only purpose was to make a few rich men richer. The murder and destruction in the MENA is just more of the same. ..."
Feb 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

Vietnam: it's always there. Looming in the past, informing American futures.

A 50-year-old war, once labeled the longest in our history, is still alive and well and still being refought by one group of Americans: the military high command. And almost half a century later, they're still losing it and blaming others for doing so.

Of course, the U.S. military and Washington policymakers lost the war in Vietnam in the previous century and perhaps it's well that they did. The United States really had no business intervening in that anti-colonial civil war in the first place, supporting a South Vietnamese government of questionable legitimacy, and stifling promised nationwide elections on both sides of that country's artificial border. In doing so, Washington presented an easy villain for a North Vietnamese-backed National Liberation Front (NLF) insurgency, a group known to Americans in those years as the Vietcong.

More than two decades of involvement and, at the war's peak, half a million American troops never altered the basic weakness of the U.S.-backed regime in Saigon. Despite millions of Asian deaths and 58,000 American ones, South Vietnam's military could not, in the end, hold the line without American support and finally collapsed under the weight of a conventional North Vietnamese invasion in April 1975.

There's just one thing. Though a majority of historians (known in academia as the "orthodox" school) subscribe to the basic contours of the above narrative, the vast majority of senior American military officers do not. Instead, they're still refighting the Vietnam War to a far cheerier outcome through the books they read, the scholarship they publish, and (most disturbingly) the policies they continue to pursue in the Greater Middle East.

The Big Re-Write

In 1986, future general, Iraq-Afghan War commander, and CIA director David Petraeus penned an article for the military journal Parameters that summarized his Princeton doctoral dissertation on the Vietnam War. It was a piece commensurate with then-Major Petraeus's impressive intellect, except for its disastrous conclusions on the lessons of that war. Though he did observe that Vietnam had "cost the military dearly" and that "the frustrations of Vietnam are deeply etched in the minds of those who lead the services," his real fear was that the war had left the military unprepared to wage what were then called "low-intensity conflicts" and are now known as counterinsurgencies. His takeaway: what the country needed wasn't less Vietnams but better-fought ones. The next time, he concluded fatefully, the military should do a far better job of implementing counterinsurgency forces, equipment, tactics, and doctrine to win such wars.

Two decades later, when the next Vietnam-like quagmire did indeed present itself in Iraq, he and a whole generation of COINdinistas (like-minded officers devoted to his favored counterinsurgency approach to modern warfare) embraced those very conclusions to win the war on terror. The names of some of them -- H.R. McMaster and James Mattis, for instance -- should ring a bell or two these days. In Iraq and later in Afghanistan, Petraeus and his acolytes would get their chance to translate theory into practice. Americans -- and much of the rest of the planet -- still live with the results.

Like Petraeus, an entire generation of senior military leaders, commissioned in the years after the Vietnam War and now atop the defense behemoth, remain fixated on that ancient conflict. After all these decades, such "thinking" generals and "soldier-scholars" continue to draw all the wrong lessons from what, thanks in part to them, has now become America's second longest war.

Rival Schools

Historian Gary Hess identifies two main schools of revisionist thinking.

Both schools, however, agreed on something basic: that the U.S. military should have won in Vietnam.

The danger presented by either school is clear enough in the twenty-first century. Senior commanders, some now serving in key national security positions, fixated on Vietnam, have translated that conflict's supposed lessons into what now passes for military strategy in Washington. The result has been an ever-expanding war on terror campaign waged ceaselessly from South Asia to West Africa, which has essentially turned out to be perpetual war based on the can-do belief that counterinsurgency and advise-and-assist missions should have worked in Vietnam and can work now.

The Go-Big Option

The leading voice of the Clausewitzian school was U.S. Army Colonel and Korean War/Vietnam War vet Harry Summers, whose 1982 book, On Strategy : A Critical Analysis of the Vietnam War, became an instant classic within the military. It's easy enough to understand why. Summers argued that civilian policymakers -- not the military rank-and-file -- had lost the war by focusing hopelessly on the insurgency in South Vietnam rather than on the North Vietnamese capital, Hanoi. More troops, more aggressiveness, even full-scale invasions of communist safe havens in Laos, Cambodia, and North Vietnam, would have led to victory.

Summers had a deep emotional investment in his topic. Later , he would argue that the source of post-war pessimistic analyses of the conflict lay in "draft dodgers and war evaders still [struggling] with their consciences." In his own work, Summers marginalized all Vietnamese actors (as would so many later military historians), failed to adequately deal with the potential consequences, nuclear or otherwise, of the sorts of escalation he advocated, and didn't even bother to ask whether Vietnam was a core national security interest of the United States.

Perhaps he would have done well to reconsider a famous post-war encounter he had with a North Vietnamese officer, a Colonel Tu, whom he assured that "you know you never beat us on the battlefield." "That may be so," replied his former enemy, "but it is also irrelevant."

Whatever its limitations, his work remains influential in military circles to this day. (I was assigned the book as a West Point cadet!)

A more sophisticated Clausewitzian analysis came from current National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster in a highly acclaimed 1997 book, Dereliction of Duty . He argued that the Joint Chiefs of Staff were derelict in failing to give President Lyndon Johnson an honest appraisal of what it would take to win, which meant that "the nation went to war without the benefit of effective military advice." He concluded that the war was lost not in the field or by the media or even on antiwar college campuses, but in Washington, D.C., through a failure of nerve by the Pentagon's generals, which led civilian officials to opt for a deficient strategy.

McMaster is a genuine scholar and a gifted writer, but he still suggested that the Joint Chiefs should have advocated for a more aggressive offensive strategy -- a full ground invasion of the North or unrelenting carpet-bombing of that country. In this sense, he was just another "go-big" Clausewitzian who, as historian Ronald Spector pointed out recently, ignored Vietnamese views and failed to acknowledge -- an observation of historian Edward Miller -- that "the Vietnam War was a Vietnamese war."

COIN: A Small (Forever) War

Another Vietnam veteran, retired Lieutenant Colonel Andrew Krepinevich, fired the opening salvo for the hearts-and-minders. In The Army and Vietnam , published in 1986, he argued that the NLF, not the North Vietnamese Army, was the enemy's chief center of gravity and that the American military's failure to emphasize counterinsurgency principles over conventional concepts of war sealed its fate. While such arguments were, in reality, no more impressive than those of the Clausewitzians, they have remained popular with military audiences, as historian Dale Andrade points out , because they offer a "simple explanation for the defeat in Vietnam."

Krepinevich would write an influential 2005 Foreign Affairs piece , "How to Win in Iraq," in which he applied his Vietnam conclusions to a new strategy of prolonged counterinsurgency in the Middle East, quickly winning over the New York Times 's resident conservative columnist, David Brooks, and generating "discussion in the Pentagon, CIA, American Embassy in Baghdad, and the office of the vice president."

In 1999, retired army officer and Vietnam veteran Lewis Sorley penned the definitive hearts-and-minds tract, A Better War : The Unexamined Victories and Final Tragedy of America's Last Years in Vietnam . Sorley boldly asserted that, by the spring of 1970, "the fighting wasn't over, but the war was won." According to his comforting tale, the real explanation for failure lay with the "big-war" strategy of U.S. commander General William Westmoreland. The counterinsurgency strategy of his successor, General Creighton Abrams -- Sorley's knight in shining armor -- was (or at least should have been) a war winner.

Critics noted that Sorley overemphasized the marginal differences between the two generals' strategies and produced a remarkably counterfactual work. It didn't matter, however. By 2005, just as the situation in Iraq, a country then locked in a sectarian civil war amid an American occupation, went from bad to worse, Sorley's book found its way into the hands of the head of U.S. Central Command, General John Abizaid, and State Department counselor Philip Zelikow. By then, according to the Washington Post 's David Ignatius, it could also "be found on the bookshelves of senior military officers in Baghdad."

Another influential hearts-and-minds devotee was Lieutenant Colonel John Nagl. (He even made it onto The Daily Show with Jon Stewart .) His Learning to Eat Soup with a Knife : Counterinsurgency Lessons from Malaya and Vietnam followed Krepinevich in claiming that "if [Creighton] Abrams had gotten the call to lead the American effort at the start of the war, America might very well have won it." In 2006, the Wall Street Journal reported that Army Chief of Staff General Peter Schoomaker "so liked [Nagl's] book that he made it required reading for all four-star generals," while the Iraq War commander of that moment, General George Casey, gave Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld a copy during a visit to Baghdad.

David Petraeus and current Secretary of Defense James Mattis, co-authors in 2006 of FM 3-24, the first ( New York Times -reviewed ) military field manual for counterinsurgency since Vietnam, must also be considered among the pantheon of hearts-and-minders. Nagl wrote a foreword for their manual, while Krepinevich provided a glowing back-cover endorsement .

Such revisionist interpretations would prove tragic in Iraq and Afghanistan, once they had filtered down to the entire officer corps.

Reading All the Wrong Books

In 2009, when former West Point history professor Colonel Gregory Daddis was deployed to Iraq as the command historian for the Multinational Corps -- the military's primary tactical headquarters -- he noted that corps commander Lieutenant General Charles Jacoby had assigned a professional reading list to his principal subordinates. To his disappointment, Daddis also discovered that the only Vietnam War book included was Sorley's A Better War . This should have surprised no one, since his argument -- that American soldiers in Vietnam were denied an impending victory by civilian policymakers, a liberal media, and antiwar protestors -- was still resonant among the officer corps in year six of the Iraq quagmire. It wasn't the military's fault!

Officers have long distributed professional reading lists for subordinates, intellectual guideposts to the complex challenges ahead. Indeed, there's much to be admired in the concept, but also potential dangers in such lists as they inevitably influence the thinking of an entire generation of future leaders. In the case of Vietnam, the perils are obvious. The generals have been assigning and reading problematic books for years, works that were essentially meant to reinforce professional pride in the midst of a series of unsuccessful and unending wars.

Just after 9/11, for instance, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Richard Myers -- who spoke at my West Point graduation -- included Summers's On Strategy on his list. A few years later, then-Army Chief of Staff General Peter Schoomaker added McMaster's Dereliction of Duty . The trend continues today. Marine Corps Commandant Robert Neller has kept McMaster and added Diplomacy by Henry Kissinger (he of the illegal bombing of both Laos and Cambodia and war criminal fame). Current Army Chief of Staff General Mark Milley kept Kissinger and added good old Lewis Sorley. To top it all off, Secretary of Defense Mattis has included yet another Kissinger book and, in a different list , Krepinevich's The Army and Vietnam .

Just as important as which books made the lists is what's missing from them: none of these senior commanders include newer scholarship , novels , or journalistic accounts which might raise thorny, uncomfortable questions about whether the Vietnam War was winnable, necessary, or advisable, or incorporate local voices that might highlight the limits of American influence and power.

Serving in the Shadow of Vietnam

Most of the generals leading the war on terror just missed service in the Vietnam War. They graduated from various colleges or West Point in the years immediately following the withdrawal of most U.S. ground troops or thereafter: Petraeus in 1974 , future Afghan War commander Stanley McChrystal in 1976 , and present National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster in 1984 . Secretary of Defense Mattis finished ROTC and graduated from Central Washington University in 1971 , while Trump's Chief of Staff John Kelly enlisted at the tail end of the Vietnam War, receiving his commission in 1976 .

In other words, the generation of officers now overseeing the still-spreading war on terror entered military service at the end of or after the tragic war in Southeast Asia. That meant they narrowly escaped combat duty in the bloodiest American conflict since World War II and so the professional credibility that went with it. They were mentored and taught by academy tactical officers, ROTC instructors, and commanders who had cut their teeth on that conflict. Vietnam literally dominated the discourse of their era -- and it's never ended.

Petraeus, Mattis, McMaster, and the others entered service when military prestige had reached a nadir or was just rebounding. And those reading lists taught the young officers where to lay the blame for that -- on civilians in Washington (or in the nation's streets) or on a military high command too weak to assert its authority effectively. They would serve in Vietnam's shadow, the shadow of defeat, and the conclusions they would draw from it would only lead to twenty-first-century disasters .

From Vietnam to the War on Terror to Generational War

All of this misremembering, all of those Vietnam "lessons" inform the U.S. military's ongoing "surges" and "advise-and-assist" approaches to its wars in the Greater Middle East and Africa. Representatives of both Vietnam revisionist schools now guide the development of the Trump administration's version of global strategy. President Trump's in-house Clausewitzians clamor for -- and receive -- ever more delegated authority to do their damnedest and what retired General (and Vietnam vet) Edward Meyer called for back in 1983: "a freer hand in waging war than they had in Vietnam." In other words, more bombs, more troops, and carte blanche to escalate such conflicts to their hearts' content.

Meanwhile, President Trump's hearts-and-minds faction consists of officers who have spent three administrations expanding COIN-influenced missions to approximately 70% of the world's nations. Furthermore, they've recently fought for and been granted a new "mini-surge" in Afghanistan intended to -- in disturbingly Vietnam-esque language -- "break the deadlock ," "reverse the decline," and "end the stalemate " there. Never mind that neither 100,000 U.S. troops (when I was there in 2011) nor 16 full years of combat could, in the term of the trade, "stabilize" Afghanistan. The can-do, revisionist believers atop the national security state have convinced Trump that -- despite his original instincts -- 4,000 or 5,000 (or 6,000 or 7,000) more troops (and yet more drones , planes , and other equipment) will do the trick. This represents tragedy bordering on farce.

The hearts and minders and Clausewitzians atop the military establishment since 9/11 are never likely to stop citing their versions of the Vietnam War as the key to victory today; that is, they will never stop focusing on a war that was always unwinnable and never worth fighting. None of today's acclaimed military personalities seems willing to consider that Washington couldn't have won in Vietnam because, as former Air Force Chief of Staff Merrill McPeak (who flew 269 combat missions over that country) noted in the recent Ken Burns documentary series, "we were fighting on the wrong side."

Today's leaders don't even pretend that the post-9/11 wars will ever end. In an interview last June, Petraeus -- still considered a sagacious guru of the Defense establishment -- disturbingly described the Afghan conflict as " generational ." Eerily enough, to cite a Vietnam-era precedent, General Creighton Abrams predicted something similar. speaking to the White House as the war in Southeast Asia was winding down. Even as President Richard Nixon slowly withdrew U.S. forces, handing over their duties to the South Vietnamese Army (ARVN) -- a process known then as "Vietnamization" -- the general warned that, despite ARVN improvements, continued U.S. support "would be required indefinitely to maintain an effective force." Vietnam, too, had its "generational" side (until, of course, it didn't).

It's not that our generals don't read. They do. They just doggedly continue to read the wrong books.

In 1986, General Petraeus ended his influential Parameters article with a quote from historian George Herring: "Each historical situation is unique and the use of analogy is at best misleading, at worst, dangerous." When it comes to Vietnam and a cohort of officers shaped in its shadow (and even now convinced it could have been won), "dangerous" hardly describes the results. They've helped bring us generational war and, for today's young soldiers, ceaseless tragedy.

Major Danny Sjursen, a TomDispatch regular , is a U.S. Army strategist and former history instructor at West Point. He served tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan. He has written a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghost Riders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge . He lives with his wife and four sons in Lawrence, Kansas. Follow him on Twitter at @SkepticalVet and check out his new podcast Fortress on a Hill .

[Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author, expressed in an unofficial capacity, and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. government.]

The Alarmist , January 29, 2018 at 9:35 am GMT

The book that needs to be written is the one that explores the question, "Does this war need to be fought by us?"

The guys running the show now were mid-grade officers when I served in the '80s. They know we already were waging a war on terror, but it was a quiet one, e.g "low-intensity conflict," the kind that doesn't pump up budgets or put lots of ribbons and badges on the chests of more than a few of them, much less punch the ticket for promotion.

The problem here is one of governance: Civilians who should be reigning in and questioning the military leadership (including the senior civilian leadership at DoD and apparently State) when it wants to take us on yet another foreign adventure seem instead to be be captive to them, because the spoils of war accrue to their benefit via procurement in their districts.

Vietnam and the GWOT are merely symptoms of a bigger problem.

The Alarmist , January 29, 2018 at 1:24 pm GMT
@The Alarmist

BTW, re Vietnam: Vietnam went through its Communist phase, but in a rather short time came back to pseudo-capitalism, much like China, so aside from nearly 60k US troops and a few million Viets killed and 20 years of lost time, what did we gain from fighting there?

America tends to gain from commerce what it thinks it will get by warfare. Not so much the other way around.

Anon Disclaimer , January 29, 2018 at 1:33 pm GMT
Didn't US realize that it can win any war with bribes and trade?

Vietnam lost in the end. Its greedy corrupt elites are now puppets of US. They allow open prostitution in Ho Chi Minh city. They allow Vietnamese women to be a bunch of hookers again.

And Vietnam even has homo parades because it comes with more gibs and bribes.

US won. It just spread the money around.

Carlton Meyer , Website January 29, 2018 at 2:22 pm GMT
They established a myth that we almost won in Vietnam but the politicians wouldn't let us finish the job, claiming we never lost a battle in Vietnam. That is false, so I posted a list of 104 "Lost Battles of the Vietnam War" that squashed this myth.

http://www.g2mil.com/lost_vietnam.htm

Carlton Meyer , Website January 30, 2018 at 5:39 am GMT
The entire conflict can be understood in this two minute video clip:
Grandpa Charlie , January 30, 2018 at 6:39 am GMT
A great article by Sjursen, with major implications for what's happening now, and several excellent comments. Thank you.
dearieme , January 30, 2018 at 5:24 pm GMT
@The Alarmist

"America tends to gain from commerce what it thinks it will get by warfare. Not so much the other way around" Rather like 20th century Germany, don't you think?

Sandmich , January 30, 2018 at 8:21 pm GMT
@Carlton Meyer

Thanks for that link. I agree, whitewashing those tragedies is a grave disservice to our soldiers who had to fight in those conditions (how are we supposed to learn from our mistakes if we can't even come to terms with what we did wrong?).

Sean , January 30, 2018 at 9:54 pm GMT
No the JCS initially said SE Asia was strategically a backwater and not worth the concentrating of America's limited resources. But military high command were operating within longstanding army protocols of subordinating the military to civilian policymakers. It was the CIA's job to say whether the war could be won and they were always skeptical.

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/97unclass/vietnam.html

That skepticism was not what any politician wanted to hear so they listened to a civilian adviser.

https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/David-Milne-13964/americas-rasputin/

America's Rasputin: Walt Rostow and the Vietnam War makes clear who was responsible for pressing for escalation and bombing in Vietnam, who was the optimist, and who continued to insisted after it had finished that the war had stabilized a domino.

CK , January 30, 2018 at 9:55 pm GMT
If one's fundamental image of the world is as a place full of Quislings, McCains and assorted dual nationals; then it follows that one will be militarily a Coindinista. If only third world citizens were like American pols and stayed bought, but they aren't and they don't. If one's fundamental image is that it is a world full of nationalists, patriots and Churchills: then the bomb them back to non-existence; then it follows that one is a Summer's soldier.

Unfortunately, if one wishes to debate other nuanced alternatives to this dichotomy; the enemy gets to shoot first. A policeman walks a beat in his city because he is paid to do it, the "world's indispensable policeman" is unnecessary to the rest of the world but inevitable to himself.

George Taylor , January 31, 2018 at 12:49 am GMT
@The Alarmist

America tends to gain from commerce what it thinks it will get by warfare. Not so much the other way around.

Because we are here to help the Vietnamese because inside every go*k is an American trying to get out

anon Disclaimer , February 2, 2018 at 5:17 am GMT
The Vietnam war killed the draft. The draft is involuntary servitude, slavery in a sense. For ordinary Americans this was the only positive thing to come from the war.
WorkingClass , February 2, 2018 at 6:26 am GMT
Blah blah blah. That war was a cluster fuck and a crime against humanity. It's only purpose was to make a few rich men richer. The murder and destruction in the MENA is just more of the same.
Singh , February 3, 2018 at 4:43 pm GMT
It's also weird that the idea of Vietnam War as a missionary conflict is never discussed. The colonial Vietnam & later South Vietnam government gave preference to christians in governmental positions, bureaucracy & had a monopoly on education. The prevailing narrative in the west, is that somehow christianity is better & that people flock to it due to this, just like their ancestors did. Mosmaiorum.org/persecution_list.html

For example, the anti Buddhist discriminatory laws in Korea are never discussed, neither is the flooding of Japan with bibles post ww2. In the present age you have missionaries following closely behind the USA army & organizations like the US council on religious freedom being headed by missionaries sic. soul vultures.

From that pov, if white nationalists cannot control the predatory instincts of 'their' people nor disavow them by becoming Pagan; then, they deserve their fate & should expect no support from outsiders. As others have remarked, tariffs & protectionism help accrue capital as do socially conservative views. The pushing of free trade & social liberalism on 2nd/3rd world countries is akin to kicking the ladder. It's probably in everyone's interest for the Protestant west to collapse under Afro-Islamic demographic pressure so the great clean up can begin. Tldr yes state power leads to liberalism & liberal views but, if you view that as the legacy of your people, fuck your people.

EliteCommInc. , February 5, 2018 at 6:04 am GMT
Well Major,

we are deeply at odds. We did not lose the Vietnam conflict. I am confident that billions of dollars have been spent drilling that myth into the minds of well everyone. I remember being a young poli-sci student in KS. And as I listened to the lecture on Vietnam, did the reading my conclusion was so distant from his as to cause me no small amount of turmoil. The contention that we lost Vietnam is so counter to the data -- it makes the Twilight Zone look like Gilligan's Island, the twists on reality are directionless -- but conclude we lost, when nothing could be further from the truth.

I have another theory, the reason that Vietnam remains etched in the psyche is because the analysis was political as opposed to what actually occurred. This kind of hyperventilated self flagellating recriminations will distort truth. Perception over reality -- then becomes self fulling history.
_________________

But to the point. The US has lost two wars: The war of 1812 and in my view, the Iraq conflict -- no direct fault of those on the ground doing the fighting. And we may lose the Afghanistan gambit. It's a loss because it fell apart during our occupation. The guerrilla warfare (asymmetrics) was not the issues for that failure. The failure was in

1. unjustifiable cause
2. poor implementation
3. under resourced
4. an inability to maintain order among communities -- (1-3)
5. and just a lot of bad decisions

Trying compare Vietnam to Iraq is like trying compare a stone to water in similarity. You might be able to some generic references and very tiny specifics, but overall: the environment politically and strategically, just never mesh. We didn't invade Vietnam. They had a functioning government. There were clear lines of who was who based on borders (I am not ignoring the insurgency -- Vietcong, etc.

It was the cold war and unlike Iraq there were not six varying countries throwing a myriad of combatants into the fray with varying agendas and varying religious convictions. Even the physical environment demanded a different strategy, insurgents or no insurgents.

One has to plan for insurgent warfare as invading any country is bound to have those who get the best defense is one of stealth when your foe is as large a target as the US was in Iraq. But for all of the complaints about Counter-Insurgency the one that no one seems willing to state is the simplest. Don't invade countries for which there is no clean or clear motive to do so. It's that simple. There was never a need to invade Iraq, if anything we should have readjusted our dynamic and began a process of easing sanctions for their aide in countering terrorism.

There was no reason to invade Afghanistan -- even to distribute more bikinis and advance killing children in the womb. We wanted twenty guys and instead we stirred a hornet's nest . . . ok well, more than one.

Vietnam really was an act of selflessness, we wanted to shore up a small republic seeking a different course to communism. It bolstered our own ideas against the grand schema of the Soviet Union, rightly or wrongly. Now you are not the only one who has a gripe with counterinsurgency.

And I think it's a debate/discussion worth having, and while it may be useful to examine COIN as to Vietnam strategically -- I think it can be done minus the incorrect and yet incessant sack cloth and ashes built on mountains of liberal psychological faux trauma as if the trauma of war is somehow unique to Vietnam,. It is not. As you know war is a nasty filthy business, best left alone. But on occasion one gets pushed into a fight as did S. Vietnam and when that screw is turned -- well history is replete of the consequences, the waste, the blood, the brokenness . . . The tragedy of war does not mean one loses a war.

Kweli , February 5, 2018 at 6:17 am GMT
@Anon

How true! If only the US had recognized the power of man's baser instincts and did what the US does best -- continue selling its culture of consumerism and hedonism, Vietnam would have arrived at the point much sooner and with virtually no loss of life.

Thomm , February 5, 2018 at 7:32 am GMT
Ultimately, the victory of WW2 due to sheer weight of industrial productivity ramp and hence massive output of planes, tanks, submarines, etc. made defense a large part of the US economy. Since that time, too many entrenched interests just never want the military to downsize. Hence, the US has to keep invented new demand for a product that otherwise would not have such demand, but keeps some major entrenched interests powerful.

I mean, the Korean war started just 5 years after WW2 ended. They could barely wait for a new crop of boys to turn 18 and become cannon fodder. 50,000 in Korea right after the 300,000 in WW2.

When casualties became politically incorrect (after VietNam), the focus shifted towards lengthy 'nation building', that was not meant to succeed, but just to cost a lot for a long time. In theory, the Iraq War could have worked, IF the true objective was the installation of a moderate regime in Iraq, coupled with no extended US occupation. But that was not the true objective after all, so it did not work.

Greg Bacon , Website February 5, 2018 at 12:08 pm GMT
The BIGGEST lesson to come out of the illegal and immoral War against Vietnam is that the draft was impeding the MIC's effort to sell Americans on the idea of supporting endless war.

Get rid of the draft and there will be no protests hell raised back home by people of draft age–and their families and friends–who don't want to get drafted to fight wars so colonels can become generals; Wall Street can make a killing on the killing and so the Pentagon can try out its new 'gee-whiz' weapons in the field on actual people.

The next biggest lesson was that the media must be tamed and brought under control with embedding, so they'll push the Pentagon's and Wall Street message of duty, honor, Mom and apple pie onto gullible Americans, who now damn near get orgasmic when they see a multi-billion dollar killing machine–the B-2–fly over the upcoming gladiator battle in the newest billion dollar coliseum and go into the State-mandated 'Two Minutes Hate' whenever they see or hear the word Muslim or Islam.

For the record, I did my time in the US Army with the 82nd Airborne.

Wyatt Pendleton , Website February 5, 2018 at 12:49 pm GMT
So America worships Ares/Mars and doesn't expect the god of War to want to eat them too? There shall be wars and rumors of wars .I so look forward to watching this love of war spread itself from sea to shining sea.
n230099 , February 5, 2018 at 12:50 pm GMT
Until the young wise up and realize that the military operations in other countries have nothing to do with the freedoms we have here and that they're being used as fodder for the investments that the MIC has in the companies that make the tools of war, we will keep having this nonsense. The kids need to wise up. The government has at its disposal all it needs to 'win' if it wants to. But if you 'win' , the sales and manufacturing of the goodies is curtailed. They'd rather send the kids into the meat grinder all pumped up thinking they're 'preserving freedom' LOL!
augusto , Website February 5, 2018 at 1:25 pm GMT
@CK

Nice, thank U. I´d never before had figured out, never outlined such a precise conceptual sight of the two still remaining American mindsets on HOW to win.
Yes, cause for them Amerika must obviously must always win. So there are two viewpoints, that in plain clear English we citizens of the shitholin´ countries wherever -- express as follows:

augusto , Website February 5, 2018 at 1:42 pm GMT
@Singh

Yes, you say tariffs and proteccionism help accrue capital.

Have you got any objection against a large, populous but still poor country (like Nigeria, Indonesia, India or Brazil) sticking to higher (though not sky high) tariffs and protectionism to raise their production, their income and their living standards?

That was PRECISELY HOW the US, Uk, Germany and the Meiji era Japan, not to mention China from 1949 to Chu enLai) acted and because of it rose the heights of the present status and well being societies.

Yes, you naive repeater, let´s us first protect ourselves from the globalist wolves and THEN, we can sit down and talk but from a firm solid position, not the other way round. cut the frack! We southern people are fed up with that northern hemispheric sales talk – it ´s so convenient to you – but the web exists and times change.

another fred , February 5, 2018 at 2:18 pm GMT

It's not that our generals don't read. They do. They just doggedly continue to read the wrong books.

It's not just the generals. The whole idea of the state is to control the uncontrollable in order to continue "growing". That's why we conducted Vietnam as we did and why we conduct operations as we do all over the world. Rather than Total War that produces winners and losers we are trying to keep a lid on behavioral sinks and modify behavior so that economic "growth" can continue.

I am not advocating Total War, but I am predicting that horrible war is coming.

How many dead men will it take
To build a dike that will not break?

DESERT FOX , February 5, 2018 at 2:20 pm GMT
The Zionists have been the root cause of every war that America has been in since WWI and right on through the wars in the Mideast and the wars in the Mideast were perpetrated by the Israeli and Zionist controlled deep state attack on 911.

America is under Zionist control and if anyone doubts this, just remember Israel did the attack on 911 and got away with and every thinking American knows that Zionist Israel did the attack which killed 3000 Americans, that is control.

Don Bacon , Website February 5, 2018 at 2:41 pm GMT
. . .supporting a South Vietnamese government of questionable legitimacy

Actually the US created the "Republic of Vietnam" within Vietnam, which was rather unusual, and then fought Vietnam. The US grabbed a Christian out of a New Jersey seminary (Ngo Dinh Diem) to run the Buddhist "country," that didn't help. More recently the US has overthrown governments (Iraq and Afghanistan) and then fought the natives. Whatever, it doesn't work. The citizens (AKA dissidents, insurgents, terrorists, etc.) so effected don't want US troops in their countries, and who can blame them.

Anonymous Disclaimer , February 5, 2018 at 2:41 pm GMT
Why do credulous Americans read anti-war books written by war criminals? Only brainwashed people support the troops. Most Americans hated soldiers after Vietnam. They had seen soldiers raping wives and daughters, burning houses and huts and crops and wiping out entire villages. They knew that men who agree to kill for a paycheck do other bad things like raping and looting and then writing books about it later.

The cons put a stop to all those "incorrect" ideas American slaves had developed by ramping up the propaganda in the 1980s. Movies kicked in and "learned" the zombies about the wonderfulness of war and killing and how American soldiers kill with love in their hearts and the tragedy of the boy baby killers left behind – probably by "communists in the US Government."

jacques sheete , February 5, 2018 at 3:01 pm GMT

The United States really had no business intervening

That's a, maybe "the," key concept. The US has always had enough internal problems of its own to deal with and it should always have tended to its own interest first. Damned know-it-all, brainless busybodies!

jacques sheete , February 5, 2018 at 3:08 pm GMT
@n230099

The kids need to wise up.

I suspect most of them would wise up if their elders did so first, and would teach 'em. One of the most annoying sights to me is to see some ancient fart wearing some sign that he's a vet. Even though I was once a sucker too, I always make it a point to remind them that we had no business in whatever war they happen to be glorifying and still wallowing in. How old does one have to be to get a clue?

Anonymous Disclaimer , February 5, 2018 at 3:31 pm GMT
Nothing quite says freedom like heavily armed soldiers on the streets demanding papers. Soon the US will have the same situation, with the "freedom loving" Americans willingly surrendering all their freedoms for "safety." Today the US government spies on everyone's communications, conducts over 80,000 SWAT raids a year, locks over 2 million people in actual slavery, and lets the cops execute people on the street. Nothing quite says Freedom when cops can execute poor people without any repercussions. Nothing quite says Freedom when opiate casualties in one year exceed the American total in Vietnam. Nothing quite says zombie when Americans can't see the war that is being waged on them right now.
Anonymous Disclaimer , February 5, 2018 at 3:59 pm GMT
@Greg Bacon

Is that true? The Military simply harvested the poors out of the hills, the South and other rural areas the same way they would have drafted 'em. All the kids respond once the Government offers them a way out of potential starvation and hopeless poverty. That's just a better way to draft people, although they won't call it that.

Anonymous Disclaimer , February 5, 2018 at 4:07 pm GMT
The same generals who let 911 happen and started the Iraq war still run the show. All of them should have faced a firing squad for that, but instead, the grossly incompetent General Kelly runs the White House and the grossly incompetent Mattis runs the military.
Jake , February 5, 2018 at 4:08 pm GMT
"The danger presented by either school is clear enough in the twenty-first century."

Apparently it is not close to clear. The warhawk imperialists – some of them Clausewtizians and most COINdinistas – rule everything. No matter how many lives are lost, no matter how much money is wasted, they demand we remain on the same path of playing world hegemon. George Washington fought the British Empire for our freedom, so our subsequent leaders, starting most importantly with Lincoln, could remake the country into the British Empire 2.0.

Jake , February 5, 2018 at 4:20 pm GMT
@George Taylor

"Because we are here to help the Vietnamese because inside every go*k is an American trying to get out." Replace 'Vietnamese' with 'Middle Easterners' and 'gook' with 'Arab' or 'Moslem,' and you have the Neocon position. Replace 'Vietnamese' with 'the world' and replace 'gook' with 'dark skinned non-Christian' and place the word "liberal' before 'American,' and you have the Liberal/Leftist position.

anonymous Disclaimer , February 5, 2018 at 4:25 pm GMT
As a youth during that time it seemed like a strange idea that they were pushing. How could Vietnamese be invading Vietnam? They already live there. The Americans had to travel thousands of miles to prevent this. Years later I realize my youthful intuition was right; Vietnamese can't invade Vietnam. This North-South dichotomy was just a made up propaganda tool. The South was an artificial concoction set up by the West to divide someone else's country. This question of how could we have won is absurd nonsense. What would 'winning' have looked like? The South would just have been a multi-billion millstone around our neck.
skrik , February 5, 2018 at 4:42 pm GMT

The can-do, revisionist believers atop the national security state have convinced Trump that -- despite his original instincts -- 4,000 or 5,000 (or 6,000 or 7,000) more troops (and yet more drones, planes, and other equipment) will do the trick. This represents tragedy bordering on farce.

No; it's psychotic, psychopathic mayhem and mass-murder. Lemma: At any crime-scene, there are one or more perpetrators, possibly accessories, apologists and/or 'idle' bystanders. It is incumbent upon *all* witnesses to attempt to a) restrain malefactors and where possible b) rescue victims from harm. *All* present and not in active resistance to the crime attract proportional guilt. Addendum: Any person profiting from crime also makes him/herself an accessory, like all residents in the 'illegitimate entity' and/or the puppet executives, manufacturers of the means and their enablers = the whole MIC[*] plus all their dependents, say.

[*] The US rogue regime = US-M/I/C/4a†-plex, with dog-wagging-tail, its illegitimate sprog the Zionist/Israeli rogue regime + Js = I/J/Z-plex, all components rife with corruption.

a = academic = econ, psy, leg et al.; 4 = MSM+PFBCs, † = churches

add a few significant stragglers like $ = banksters & ¿ = spies

=====

It's a lot, and here I point for emphasis to all the citizens of the two named entities; silence is acquiescence. Take a look at the result, not 'just' in Afghanistan but Libya, Syria etc., the WC7in5 [fortunately not yet Iran]; wherever the US/Zs deploy their 'hammers.'

In the fewest words: The US/Zs including their 'ordinary people' are all true monsters, with the only exception being the actively objecting few.

Not so BTW, from the above [but not only] I conclude that there can be no 'god' – for surely, any such would strike all the US/Z villains down.

Again a 'special case' for emphasis, the intellectuals and academics who really should know better but where again, silence is acquiescence.

*Guilty, your honour; may they all hang by the neck until dead!* rgds

Anonymous Disclaimer , February 5, 2018 at 4:44 pm GMT
American sheep can't see war even though they are in one. What better weapon than to have a group of writers spreading disinformation and colorful propaganda that revolves around discrediting the other propaganda with falsehoods and romanticization of the war that came before. Let's have yet another debate about the thing that happened half a century ago because driving the flock in circles gets them no where closer to resistance.

Meanwhile the real war. If the financial crisis wasn't a terrorist attack because the press never told you, what will you believe? If more men and women die in one year because of opiates than in the entire Vietnam effort, will the real owners tell you in their newspapers that they do it because they want to win?

Alden , February 5, 2018 at 5:08 pm GMT
@n230099

I think the kids are more pumped up with college tuition, VA health , a chance to learn a civilian applicable skill , citizenship and something to do other than competing with illegal Indios for low wages.

nsa , February 5, 2018 at 6:19 pm GMT
@EliteCommInc.

Save the BS for your fellow geezer drunks at the VFW lounge. Vietnam featured a complete collapse of the conscripted US military, rampant drug use, fragging, insubordination, faked injuries, disintegration of the chain of command, mass murder of civilians, and finally TOTAL DEFEAT after turning tail and running following the negotiation of a charitable "decent interval" allowing the yanks to save some face. Pathetic.

anarchyst , February 5, 2018 at 6:36 pm GMT
@EliteCommInc.

The Vietnam war was not a "civil-war" but was an INVASION by the North Vietnamese communists, who were not amenable to letting people decide for themselves what political system they chose to live under. They wanted "the whole pie". The South Vietnamese and American military fought courageously, with one hand tied behind their backs, as they were not permitted to attack the supply lines, logistics and staging areas of the North Vietnamese communists. The American news media played a large part in the sympathetic attitudes they had towards the communists, taking every chance to denigrate American and South Vietnamese troops, a prime example was communist sympathizer Walter Cronkite reporting that the 1968 "Tet offensive" was a "major loss" for Americans and south Vietnamese, despite it being a total slaughter of North Vietnamese communists and the Viet Cong. In fact, the Viet Cong operating in the South were almost all totally decimated.

Yes, the final result of the Vietnam war was communist control, BUT, it was not due to the efforts of South Vietnamese and American troops. The Vietnamese "boat people" who risked life and limb to escape that communist "paradise" have a totally different story to tell, but which had been rarely reported. Ken Burns is a communist sympathizer whose "documentary" on the Vietnam war was so one-sided, even the communists admitted that his whole premise on the Vietnam war was one-sided and false. Communist sympathizer Ken Burns inadvertently "let it slip" that "re-education" by the communists was not a "six month deal" (as he claimed) in which those in positions of power in South Vietnam would be "re-educated", but were actually prisons, in which "enemies of the (communist) state were to be interned for as long as 20 years. It is interesting to note that the communists could not exert the same harsh level of control as was the case in the North, to the people in the South.

Norcal , February 5, 2018 at 7:41 pm GMT
@Carlton Meyer

So much for The Domino Theory". This clip from "The Fog Of War". Thanks

EliteCommInc. , February 5, 2018 at 8:19 pm GMT
@anarchyst

Apparently unfamiliar with my long and detailed discussions here and at TAC about the Vietnam War. I don't think you will find a single suggestion in mt two or more years of discussion on Vietnam , that it was a civil war -- it was not. In every way, the North Vietnamese were the aggressors. And if anyone looking at the political issues and objectives of what happened in Vietnam – those who protested got nearly every aspect about Vietnam wrong, nearly every contention they make was predicated on the incorrect information, except one.

war is a nasty filthy affair in which a lot hoes wrong – because that is part and parcel to the nature of war so many moving pieces on so many potential unpredictable planes. The entire enterprise is best avoided, but sometimes as in the case of S. Vietnam, you are left little choice but to defend yourself. Boys and girls afraid to fight screaming "Give peace a chance" at the defenders like pushing a drowning men under the waves and telling him all he need do is swim.

You are preaching to the choir and the preacher.

I am going to avoid rehashing the conflict, I think the data sets are on my side in tons. But I think the authors intentions are to really dismantle the cadre and their advocacy of COIN. Given that the current President has reneged on his campaign agenda to avoid needless wars violating the territory of others to regime change. The issue of counter insurgency is relevant. Because it looks like we are in for more than we bargained for. No doubt, SAS, the French Legionaries, CIA and a spec ops contingents are pre-prepping for insurgencies of our own.

A brief look suggests that the only effective response to counter insurgency is intelligence and brutal response. though intended to suggest finesse, in the end -- it's root them out and destroy them. I think this is one those the cure is worse than the illness, because without indigenous support for your political and strategic goals in country -- brutal reprisals eventually reignite acts of terror as a means of self defense.

EliteCommInc. , February 5, 2018 at 8:31 pm GMT
For those who are not familiar with COIN here are some articles, those from TAC include lengthy discussions which you may find interesting. http://ready4itall.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Counterinsurgency-Warfare-Theory-and-Practice.pdf https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2008/RAND_MG595.pdf https://www.fs.blog/2017/06/counterinsurgency/ http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/coin-is-a-proven-failure/ https://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/counterinsurgency/ http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/revenge-of-the-coin-doctrine/ http://www.theamericanconservative.com/2012/06/15/the-cnas-annual-confab-aloof-and-irrelevant-as-ever/ http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/savior-general-petraeus-gave-us-the-wrong-bible/ http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/petraeuss-coin-gets-flipped/
bluedog , February 5, 2018 at 8:51 pm GMT
@anarchyst

What are you a troll playing the same old broken record spewing forth the same old line, for there was a vote coming up by the Geneva Accord, to decide just what kind of government the two Vietnam's wanted, a vote that would'nt go the way we wanted thus the false flag to get us involved.

FDR had made a deal with Ho that if they would rise up and drive out the Japs that Vietnam could choose their own destiny, colonialism was dead he said, well until that little man in the to big a house got into office and then once again America's word wasn't worth a mouth full of warm spit and its never changed

EliteCommInc. , February 5, 2018 at 8:56 pm GMT
A thorough review and discussion about Mr. Ken Burns and Lynn Novick film concerning our defense of South Vietnam. http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-best-way-to-honor-a-vet-is-with-the-truth/
Auntie Analogue , February 5, 2018 at 9:04 pm GMT
Today's officer corps would spare us all a great deal of cost, blood and grief and we Americans would all do much better if the cadets', midshipmen's, officer candidates' and officer corps' reading list began with the Bernard Fall book Rue Sans Joie .
Anonymous Disclaimer , February 5, 2018 at 9:10 pm GMT
@EliteCommInc.

Rand? American Conservative? Tom's Dispatch? All fake news for the sheep, i.e COIN. If people want change, they have to refuse to cooperate. That means no voting. Voting means you agree with the basic trends and just want to tweak the system. All of us have gotten cheated by the Government all of our lives. Destruction of schools so people can't learn. Wars fought to make countries like Vietnam open to big corporations to move American jobs there. Corporate money backed by the fist of the Marines has worked all their lives, all their parents' lives, and all the modern history of America. "Why not now?", the sheep ask.

wayfarer , February 5, 2018 at 10:48 pm GMT

Vietnam War U.S. Military Fatal Casualty Statistics

source: https://www.archives.gov/research/military/vietnam-war/casualty-statistics

nsa , February 5, 2018 at 11:22 pm GMT
The religious aspect of the Vietnamese CIVIL WAR is overlooked by the senile VFW geezers posting here. The patriots were mostly Buddhists the quislings were mostly Catholics (inherited from the French). In between perving little kids, American Cardinals and Bishops demanded even more war and Vietnamese blood. The bloodthirsty homo, Cardinal Spellman, would even visit the troops in person and exhort them to create more carnage and mayhem. According to Bobbie McNamara, American efforts resulted in the murder of over 4 million Vietnamese and the maiming of millions of others .MOSTLY CIVILIANS. The role of the vile bloodthirsty Homo Cult of the Seven Hills has been mostly overlooked.
ElitecommInc. , February 5, 2018 at 11:52 pm GMT
@Anonymous

Note, I list of sites is not definitive. There are articles critical and article supportive of COIN. Some articles are just descriptive of what COIN means. COIN has been a subject of a good deal of debate for a very long time. Most articles are from TAC because that is the site I most frequently read and comment. And as Dr. Unz will tell you, they invite a host of articles by a host of authors -- with varying view points.

About Rand, they are one of the most noteable contributors to government policy via research and while one may not appreciate their advocacy, it's not a bad idea to read what they are presenting on issues, in this case COIN. Even considering broad definitions of fake news -- it is unlikely that Rand would be included as such an outlet.

One of the advances launched in the late sixties -- forward was that Vietnam was a MIC windfall and in fact manufactured by the MIC.

I don't think there is much evidence of that. Pres Johnson and most of the leadership actually saw it as a case for democracy against the Chinese, the Soviets -- etc. You are not going to be able to escape the private sector profiting from war. Sure had democracy and capitalism actually won the day , I don't think there is any question money would have been made -- capitalism is a very healthy system -- if operated minus manipulation/unfair dealings. But that is not unique. One does business where business is. but cold war strategic aims made money for lots of people -- that doesn't deny that there was actually a system of proxy engagements for democracy and communism.

ElitecommInc. , February 6, 2018 at 12:29 am GMT
@nsa

I am not a member of the VFW. I don't drink and have never been drunk. There was drug use how prevalent it was is unclear. not enough to prevent mission readiness, it appears.

A lot has been made of fragging, but if you can find the numbers -- The evidence is very sparse that this practice was anywhere close to a staple. Here's an estimate 800 such incidents attempted. But given that there are only about 13 confirms that estimations is suspect. Some 3 million service members service in Vietnam that's a percentage of 0.026666666666% attempted. The actual number of men who died as the result of fragging 0.0005% and i used the highest number of fifteen actuals.

There were tragic incidents of mass killings, but those two were rare. The next series of complaints are hard to quantify -- but suffice it to say, whatever the complaints -- when push came to shove the US service member repeatedly got the job done. And contrary to your comments, the process of the US withdrawal is well documented. More than anything, they secured a line of defense, and the situation at home was the most pressing. There is no evidence that the US ran from the battle field.

OI think the evidence is clear that we should maintained support via air and sea power to ensure the victory was maintained on behalf of the S. Vietnamese who fought and died to defend their country. kudos to the Aussie's for their loyal support.

Carroll Price , February 6, 2018 at 1:12 am GMT
If the war mongers had had an all-volunteer army like the one they have today, they could have and would have kept the Vietnam War going indefinitely. But, since they didn't, draftees and their parents wised-up to the Pentagon's money-making scam and put a stop to it by refusing to participate.
Art , February 6, 2018 at 1:18 am GMT
Westmoreland and McNamara are awaiting Kissinger in hell. Think Peace -- Art
p.s. Every US general supports Israel – how sick is that?
Carroll Price , February 6, 2018 at 1:26 am GMT
@Thomm

Money's made fighting wars not winning them. 1945 was the last time the US made the mistake of winning a war, and may not have made that one had Russia not been on the verge of invading and occupying Japan, thus forcing the US into bringing the war to a close.

Anonymous Disclaimer , February 6, 2018 at 1:53 am GMT
@ElitecommInc.

Very rich families and corporatists started their own think tanks after World War II. This is when the looting began for RAND. These are the bastards Eisenhower was afraid of. Abe Lincoln feared the large corporations born of business profiteering during the U.S. Civil War -- the military industrial complex of the day -- easily constituted the greatest threat to the American republic.

Remember that Eisenhower's definition of the complex included among the bastards, not only the military defense industry corporations, but also right alongside them the news media and the university and private research establishments.

Tom Jefferson thought periodic revolution against wealth and authority was desirable to keep these bastards in check. Which implies that he figured they would inevitably get us by the throat down on the floor from time to time.

EliteCommInc. , February 6, 2018 at 2:11 am GMT
Sounds like a good reason to know what they are advocating. And Pres Eisenhower was talking about --

raytheon
GD/EB
Hughes
etc, ect

Here's a list of the MIC many were not around during the Eisenhower years -- but Rand was but a single player among many.

https://www.militaryindustrialcomplex.com/companies.asp

JVC , February 6, 2018 at 2:20 am GMT
@EliteCommInc.

I don't think that you understand at all the history of the USG involvement in VietNam–an act of selflessness??? What a crock.

The entire foreign policy of the united states has been controlled by the military/industrial/security/espionage etc etc complex since, at least, the end of WWII. that group doesn't really care about victory–on going conflict somewhere is the only goal. Personally, I doubt that the USG has ever committed a selfless act in it's entire history. VietNam was just one stop in a long line of USG aggression.

EnriiqueCardovaa , February 6, 2018 at 3:01 am GMT
Danny Sjursen says:

Of course, the U.S. military and Washington policymakers lost the war in Vietnam in the previous century and perhaps it's well that they did.

LOL.. True enough. Yet an assortment of "Church of Rambo" true believers in civilian life, including several here on Unz, continue to insist that that the US never lost the war, hell, never even lost a battle -- claims all debunked by credible historians and military men who fought there.

the vast majority of senior American military officers do not. Instead, they're still refighting the Vietnam War to a far cheerier outcome through the books they read, the scholarship they publish, and (most disturbingly) the policies they continue to pursue in the Greater Middle East.

The weakness of the piece is that you don't say exactly which Vietnam approach today's generals are following. Are they doing the "big battalions" approach of Westmoreland's "search and destroy"? Are they doing the "Expanding Inkblot" of Marine General Krulak, Sorley's "Better war", or John Paul Vann's "Hearts and Minds"?? You say these are all things from Vietnam but exactly which one is in place, and why is it losing?

jacques sheete , February 6, 2018 at 3:02 am GMT
@WorkingClass

Blah blah blah. That war was a cluster fuck and a crime against humanity. It's only purpose was to make a few rich men richer. The murder and destruction in the MENA is just more of the same.

Amen to that.

EnriiqueCardovaa , February 6, 2018 at 3:09 am GMT
Danny Sjursen says:

Two decades later, when the next Vietnam-like quagmire did indeed present itself in Iraq, he and a whole generation of COINdinistas (like-minded officers devoted to his favored counterinsurgency approach to modern warfare) embraced those very conclusions to win the war on terror.

Again questionable. Petraeus had the correct approach to counter the previous "lets just invade and beat Saddam" approach of Rumsfeld. Rummy's "lean force" package backed by almost unlimited air power was enough to win the conventional struggle but was woefully short of the numbers needed for occupation and pacification. Same thing happened to Hitler in the Balkans. Initial smooth success, grinding guerrilla attrition for years afterward.

Both schools, however, agreed on something basic: that the U.S. military should have won in Vietnam.

"Winning" by 1972 did not contemplate victorious US troops marching into Hanoi, or total abandonment of the field by PAVN/VC but a better final political settlement enabling the southern regime to survive, and/or a "decent interval" for the US to save face.

n 1999, retired army officer and Vietnam veteran Lewis Sorley penned the definitive hearts-and-minds tract, A Better War: The Unexamined Victories and Final Tragedy of America's Last Years in Vietnam. Sorley boldly asserted that, by the spring of 1970, "the fighting wasn't over, but the war was won." According to his comforting tale, the real explanation for failure lay with the "big-war" strategy of U.S. commander General William Westmoreland. The counterinsurgency strategy of his successor, General Creighton Abrams -- Sorley's knight in shining armor -- was (or at least should have been) a war winner.

You are misrepresenting Sorley's full argument somewhat. Sorley did not envision or claim that there would have been any sweeping US victory with US troops marching into Hanoi, or that the VC/NVA would flee and abandon the struggle. A big part of his argument is for "a better war" – that is- the end game of which inevitably would be a BETTER NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT. Sorley knew quite well that the VC would not disappear (their political apparatus was still in place) and that the NVA would not simply pack up and return north. Sorley's book "A Better War" contemplates a BETTER FINAL POLITICAL SETTLEMENT as part of the bottom line, not US troops marching triumphantly into downtown Hanoi, as PAVN armies scurried away into the jungle.

EnriiqueCardovaa , February 6, 2018 at 3:15 am GMT
To his disappointment, Daddis also discovered that the only Vietnam War book included was Sorley's A Better War. This should have surprised no one, since his argument – that American soldiers in Vietnam were denied an impending victory by civilian policymakers, a liberal media, and antiwar protestors – was still resonant among the officer corps in year six of the Iraq quagmire. It wasn't the military's fault!

Keep in mind that Daddis wrote a book on the Vietnam War called 'No Sure Victory' in which he pins US failure on not being versed ENOUGH on hearts and minds counterinsurgency war, hence the reliance on massive and unworkable statistical and reporting systems of "progress."

"The army's unpreparedness for counterinsurgency in the early 1960s surely encouraged this confusion. Conventional officers had little experience in developing a counterinsurgency reporting system and applying it within a larger strategic context.. So it was for the U.S. Army in Vietnam. Insufficiently versed in the mysteries of counterinsurgency, officers turned to statistics to assist them in measuring and reporting progress and effectiveness. Statistics, though, bred more statistics, and the MACV headquarters soon became awash in a flood of numbers, facts, and figures."
–Daddis, No Sure Victory

but also potential dangers in such lists as they inevitably influence the thinking of an entire generation of future leaders. In the case of Vietnam, the perils are obvious. The generals have been assigning and reading problematic books for years, works that were essentially meant to reinforce professional pride in the midst of a series of unsuccessful and unending wars.

You are barking up the wrong tree somewhat. Daddis laments reading list limitations as far as Iraq, but the reading list did not make any difference given 3 issues:

(a) the decision to go to war in Iraq, when it was not necessary

(b) the woefully inadequate number of troops provided the commanders for conquest and occupation and

(c) the cavalier, careless nature of planning for postwar Iraq.

What was or was not on the reading list is of limited impact given these 3 big realities the civilian leadership saddled commanders with.

[Feb 05, 2018] Korybko The US Deep State And The Democrats Are The Problem, Not The Solution Zero Hedge

Looks like Mr. Kortunov completely forgot about Obama administration actions in Ukraine ;-). Which IMHO makes this "deep thinker" a babbling idiot. .
Feb 05, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Authored by Andrew Korybko via Oriental Review,

The latest policy recommendations by the influential Director General of the Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC), one of the most well-respected and listened-to experts in Russia – to say nothing of the entire former Soviet space – is causing quite a stir by waxing nostalgically about the Obama years and even suggesting that Moscow should embrace the American "deep state".

Mr. Kortunov's Case For Russia's "Deep State"-Democrat Partnership

Mr. Andrey Kortunov is one of the most brilliant minds in Russia and earned his place as the Director General of the Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC), and his words accordingly carry much weight for the fact that they set the tone for countless other analysts in the country and even an untold number of policymakers who look to him for guidance.

That's why it caused quite a stir when he published his latest recommendation earlier this week at the famous Valdai Club titled " Russian Approaches to the United States: Algorithm Change Is Overdue ", in which he waxed nostalgically about the Obama years and even suggested that Moscow should embrace the American "deep state".

So as not to put words in his mouth, the relevant passages are republished in their entirety below:

"First, it is better to avoid demonizing the Deep State, which is perceived by many in Moscow as the center of world evil and the stronghold of the pathological haters of Russia. Of course, most of the State Department or the CIA officials, the Congress staff, experts from the main think tanks are not Vladimir Putin's fans. But these people, at least, have considerable experience of interaction with Moscow and can hardly be considered stubborn paranoids, exalted conspiracy theorists or genetic Russophobes. Deep State consists of rationally thinking professionals, who are always easier to deal with than romantic amateurs are. With all its shortcomings, it is the Deep State that limits Donald Trump's most exotic and potentially most dangerous foreign policy oddities.

Second, it's time to change the attitude toward the Demcratic Party leadership. For some reason (probably because of inertia) the Barack Obama administration is constantly remembered in Russia in the worst possible way, with the two latest presidents constantly juxtaposed. How is Obama bad, and Trump is good? The stubborn facts show otherwise. For example, Obama pursued a consistent policy of rapprochement with Iran, and Trump returned to the most severe pressure on Tehran. Obama followed the international consensus on the status of Jerusalem, and Trump destroyed this consensus. Obama did not resort to direct military action against Bashar Assad, and Trump did not hesitate to give an order to launch missiles against the Syrian Al- Shayrat airbase. Well, who after all created more problems for Russia -- Democrats or Republicans?"

Mr. Kortunov did indeed talk about other aspects of US-Russian relations, including the need for a bottom-up approach to improving his country's soft power in America, but none of those proposals are controversial, at least not when compared to what he wrote about above.

A diversity of respectful views in any discourse is symptomatic of a healthy democracy, and Russian society is no different in this respect, which is why the dialogue on this topic would be greatly enriched by presenting some counterpoints to Mr. Kortunov's article.

Deciphering The "Deep State"

The first is that the US' military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies ("deep state") are experienced and rational like Mr. Kortunov describes them as, but that they nevertheless bear primary responsibility for the deterioration in US-Russian relations under both the Obama and Trump Presidencies because the bulk of these professional bureaucrats always retain their jobs between leadership transitions in the country.

The President is supposed to determine the broad trajectory of their work in consultation with his closest advisors, some of whom are handpicked by him and approved by Congress to lead the relevant institutions of the "deep state" while others are more informal, but the rank-and-file members of the "deep state" are still largely more responsible for the execution of policy in practice than anyone else.

Unprecedentedly, many of them oppose President Trump's stated desire to improve relations with Russia and have worked to unconstitutionally offset his plans, and the pressure that they've put on him to this end explains why he's undertaken decisively anti-Russian policies during his first year in office despite his campaign pledge to do the opposite.

Seeing as how most of these "deep state" individuals naturally remained in the same positions that they had during the Obama Administration and would have probably still retained their jobs under Hillary's Presidency, it's inaccurate to attribute the deterioration of Russian-American ties to President Trump personally while overlooking the actions of the "deep state" that he's still trying to reform to the best of his ability.

The "deep state" is rational – too rational, it can be argued – because it embraces a Neo-Realist paradigm of International Relations that sometimes correlates with Trump's own views on certain topics but other times contradicts them like in the case of Russia, and the internal power struggle between Trump and the "deep state" is what's really to blame for the worsening of bilateral relations, not the "amateur" President's "romanticism" like Mr. Kortunov insists.

For these reasons, it can be argued that Mr. Kortunov's belief that the "deep state" "can hardly be considered stubborn paranoids, exalted conspiracy theorists or genetic Russophobes" isn't exactly accurate, since it's indeed full of "stubborn paranoids" under the dual influence of the neoconservatives' Neo-Realism and the Obama-Clinton worldview of "militant liberalism".

That said, the "conspiracy theories" that he references are just a "deep state" infowar distraction to deceive the voting masses while the assertion that such a thing as a "genetic Russophobe" exists wrongly implies that an individual's political views are irreversibly predetermined by their DNA.

To flip around Mr. Kortunov's last comment on the matter, it's more realistic to assert that "with all his shortcomings, it is Donald Trump that limits the Deep State's most exotic and potentially most dangerous foreign policy oddities."

Debunking The Dreams Of Democrat Rule

Relatedly, Mr. Kortunov's views on the "deep state" clearly influence his attitude towards the Democrats and specifically the Obama Administration, which he thinks is unfairly "remembered in Russia in the worst possible way" because "the stubborn facts show otherwise" and apparently disprove the prevailing notion that "Obama (is) bad, and Trump is good."

Mr. Kortunov thinks that Obama had pure intentions in signing the nuclear agreement with Iran, though it can cynically be argued that his "deep state" was in fact trying to co-opt the Islamic Republic's "moderate/reformist" ruling elite in a bid to tip the scales to their favor in the country's own "deep state" competition for influence with the "conservative/principalist" military-security faction, the failure of which would explain why Trump was tasked with "returning to the most severe pressure on Tehran."

The enduring presence of most of the "deep state's" personnel between presidential administrations doesn't preclude the US from pivoting between policies but actually allows such moves to be more smoothly executed, as can be seen from the example of Nixon's rapprochement with China in spite of Johnson's antagonism towards it; Bush Sr. "betraying" Iraq even though Reagan aligned with it; Obama signing the nuclear deal against the former Bush Jr. Administration's wishes; and Trump dismantling his predecessor's plans.

Although the President might set the tone for the overall direction that each respective policy should go in and this sometimes reverses what the previous administration did, it's ultimately the "deep state" that puts these ideas into practice and is able to maintain a degree of strategic continuity that advances America's national interests regardless, though the case of Trump's vision for US-Russia relations also shows that this same "deep state" can also conspire to obstruct the President's will.

Another "stubborn fact" at variance with Mr. Kortunov's nostalgia for Democrat rule is the practical significance of Obama "following the international consensus on the status of Jerusalem" and Trump "destroying" it since it inaccurately hints that the former was somehow 'pro-Palestinian' and that the latter's announcement tangibly changed something on the ground, neither of which are true because Obama was actually very pro-Israel and Trump's decision only stands to affect foreign aid recipients who voted against the US and the UN.

Looking beyond Obama's highly publicized personal rivalry with Netanyahu and his populist rhetoric on the Palestinian issue, nothing that he did during his two terms had any influence on Israel's occupation of East Jerusalem and unilateral claim to the entirety of the city being its capital; likewise, Trump's words didn't change any of this reality either and only resulted in word games being played at the UN and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation , neither of which did anything other than attempt to comfort the Palestinians.

As for Mr. Kortunov's juxtaposition of Obama's refusal to "resort to direct military action against Bashar Assad" with Trump "not hesitating to give an order to launch missiles against the Syrian Al- Shayrat airbase", he's totally overlooking the 44 th President's responsibility for the theater-wide "Arab Spring" Color Revolutions and the resultant Hybrid War of Terror on Syria which dealt incomparably more damage to Syria and its democratically elected President's standing that Trump's handful of one-off missiles.

In addition, Trump only ordered the attack because he was under intense "deep state" pressure to do so after having been caught in a Catch-22 trap where he was forced to "put his money where his mouth is" and respond to the false-flag chemical weapons attack that violated his "red line", but truthfully speaking, what Mr. Kortunov might really resent is that it only took a few million dollars' worth of missiles to call President Putin's bluff in hinting at a military response to the exact same scenario in 2013 that got Obama to back down at the time.

To respond to Mr.Kortunov's rhetorical question of "who after all created more problems for Russia -- Democrats or Republicans?", the reader should be reminded that the Obama Administration presided over or was outright responsible for the "Arab Spring" and its attendant regime changes , the War on Syria , the 2011-12 anti-government unrest in Moscow, EuroMaidan and the Ukrainian Civil War, the anti-Russian sanctions, and the fake news scheme of "Kremlin interference" in order to suppress Russia's publicly funded international media outlets and harass their employees, among many other examples.

In comparison, Trump merely continued most of the policy trajectories that Obama and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton first initiated, and even then he's tried to resist some of the "deep state's" pressure when it comes to Russia, so as bad as he's been for Moscow's interests, one should wonder how much worse Hillary would have been she entered into the Presidency and allowed the "deep state" to do as it pleases.

Concluding Thoughts

Mr. Kortunov seems to have wanted to spark a serious conversation about how Russia's "deep state" should respond to the disappointment that it experienced throughout Trump's first year in office, and if that was his intention, then he remarkably succeeded by controversially reinterpreting the Obama years as something to apparently be nostalgic about and boldly suggesting that his government reconsider its negative attitude to Trump's "deep state" foes.

In the spirit of dialogue that Mr. Kortunov implicitly encouraged by publishing such a provocative piece, it's only fitting that a rebuttal be presented to challenge his premise that the Democrats and their "deep state" handlers are supposedly more preferable to Russia than Trump is, especially seeing as how he selectively pointed to a few decontextualized examples that were presumably cherry-picked in order to promote his argument.

With all due respect to this prestigious gentleman, his entire notion is flat-out wrong and shows that he doesn't at all understand Trump's " Kraken "-like leadership and his never-ending struggle to survive the "deep state's" permanent Clintonian Counter-Revolution that's being waged in trying to undermine the Second American Revolution that the President is trying to carry out in America's domestic and foreign affairs.

Instead of ignoring the plethora of evidence proving the Obama Administration's hostility to Russia and its international interests, Mr. Kortunov should have at least made a superficial reference to it because this glaring omission implies a deliberate partiality towards that political faction and the "deep state" in general, which is fine to have in principle but nevertheless casts doubt on how effective his proposals would be in the overall sense of things if they were ever put into practice.

Mr. Kortunov is evidently unaware that the same "deep state" that he finds attractive in contrast to Trump had a controlling influence in determining the Obama Administration's anti-Russian policies that the 44 th President's Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ended up implementing with ruinous consequences for Moscow's grand strategic interests, and that she would have given the "deep state" free rein to do whatever it wanted had she won unlike Trump's willingness to challenge its most extreme tendencies (though with mixed results).

Having said that, pragmatic working relations between Russia and the US' "deep states" are inevitable because there isn't any alternative to interacting with any national counterpart's collection of military, intelligence, and diplomatic figures no matter how much one may disagree with their policies unless ties between the two sides are formally suspended, which isn't foreseeable but would in any case still allow for the existence of communication backchannels.

What Mr. Kortunov is lobbying for is something altogether different because he wants Russian decision makers to reconceptualize the American "deep state" as a 'positive', 'moderating', and 'responsible' force against what he characterizes as Trump's "romantic", "amateurish", "most exotic and potentially most dangerous foreign policy oddities", which is ironically a very "romantic" and "exotic" view to have of the US' most dangerous anti-Russian institutional forces.

In all actuality, however, the "deep state" and its Democrat allies are the real reason why Trump hasn't been able to succeed in his pledge to improve Russian-American relations, and these two problems shouldn't ever be confused as part of the solution that's needed to reverse this downward spiral, nor should a tactical partnership with these two actors ever be considered if Moscow hopes to maintain the upper hand in the New Cold War . Vote up! 23 Vote down! 0

TeamDepends Feb 4, 2018 10:18 PM Permalink

Andrey clearly old school bolshevik, yes?

DownWithYogaPants -> TeamDepends Feb 4, 2018 10:25 PM Permalink

The US Deep State is a scorpion and it will eventually sting you Russia.

Ride on the Trump Train. oh oo ahh ahh

Get on the Trump Train.

--- Mohamed Bin CatStevens

stizazz -> InjectTheVenom Feb 4, 2018 10:41 PM Permalink

The DEEP STATE controls both D & R.

Perimetr -> TeamDepends Feb 4, 2018 10:26 PM Permalink

Andrey is CIA asset, the storyline here is worthy of Voice of America.

thisandthat -> Perimetr Feb 5, 2018 12:30 AM Permalink

If anyone needed any proof of the existence of a fifth column in Russia, here it is, personified: a true (((russian))) "presstitute".

Koba the Dread -> Perimetr Feb 5, 2018 12:43 AM Permalink

He is certainly what The Sakar calls a Russian Atlanticist. And quite a fool at that!

Hey, ZH? Whydja publish this tripe. I like your articles about how Yellowstone geyser is going to boil New York City or the giant meteor heading for us is made of tapioca pudding. You've spent the last three weeks diddling us about memo, mome, meme, momo, mmmm,oooo and Yunez, whonez. And it's all just a diddle. Just as this article is a diddle.

If there any news these days, you know, where an actual person does an actual deed and their are consequences from that deed? Or is it just diddle, diddle, diddle, diddle, diddle, diddle, diddle, diddle, diddle?

Forgetdaboutit! It's just all diddle, isn't it?

thisandthat -> Koba the Dread Feb 5, 2018 2:16 AM Permalink

(((Atlanticist))) -- another name for cocksucker

HRClinton -> Perimetr Feb 5, 2018 12:59 AM Permalink

Agree. Either Andrey Kortunov is a CIA 5th-Column asset, or has had too much " Amerikanski Burbon".

To present the False Choice Paradigm of Demoncrats v. Repugnicants, is the height of political folly or the depth of a compromised player.

Hell, even most ZHers don't fall for that "Bait for suckers".

We all know that both (privately owned) Parties, the Deep State and the Surveillance-Military-Industrial Complex (SMIC) are only possible with the full backing of the Financial Predator Class, whose Global-Lust appetites and ambitions will not be satiated until all the world's resources and markets are under their thumb.

All wars are Global-Lust wars.

Rikky Feb 4, 2018 10:28 PM Permalink

history will judge the Mueller investigation into Trump russian collusion as the biggest witch hunt in American History. you just watch cause in the end pomp, duck and circumstance <> actual facts to back up assertions.

Oldwood Feb 4, 2018 10:37 PM Permalink

Andrey is much like the Democrats constantly offering suggestions to Republicans as to how to win an election.

Nations of the world only seek allies if there is something in it for them. Russia is in their Glory days watching as America tears itself apart.

I'm sure Andrey enjoys being "helpful".

BabaLooey -> BobEore Feb 5, 2018 12:24 AM Permalink

Trump got C.I.A."glazed" during the interim post election and swearing in.....

They all do, and have.

Plus, Trump's gushing love for the Chosenites....BiBi ReBOZOHoo

Post Truman? No no...the newly formed M.I.C., fresh off WW deax....and the O.S.SsssssC.I.Yeah....?

It's been "I Like Ike" and whoops...Dallas....and since then...one after the other....shit....

Ain't NO body foisted in office that HASN'T gone back on sumptin....Trump is just the latest....

simulkra -> nuerocaster Feb 5, 2018 1:05 AM Permalink

Yes. The walking brain dead. Obama sucked up to Iran because he was told to by Brezinsky, who is a Pole who hates Russia. This is old school neocon, the real enemy is your most powerful adversary, especially if its Russia and you are a Pole. The strategy is to isolate Russia so it can be crushed. Creating a wedge between Russia and Iran would be a major win for them.

Trump seems to be following the Israel uber alles regional dominance strategy, which is bad strategy for the neos, as it drives Iran into the arms (pun intended) of Russia.

Why would a Russian think the crush Russia strategy is good? Brain dead or part of the globalist bolshevik deep state.

MEFOBILLS Feb 4, 2018 10:54 PM Permalink

assertion that such a thing as a "genetic Russophobe" (Quote from article suggesting that there is no such thing as a genetic Russophobe.)

It is genetic Russophobe's . Even policy makers such as Kortunov are emitting hypnosis at variance with facts.

These genetic Russophobes emigrated to the U.S. from Eastern Europe and Russia. (Another reason not to immigrate.)

http://russia-insider.com/en/russia-insider-names-jew/ri22217

quote:

The most vitriolic and obsessive Russia-bashing journalists in the media are mostly Jewish. The publications which push these writers most energetically are ALL Jewish-owned, and as a publisher, I know very well, that is where the buck stops.

On the policy side, the neo-conservative movement, Russia's harshest foe, was conceived of, is led by, and consists mostly of, Jews. And their trouble-making extends far beyond Russia – they are responsible for America's disastrous debacle in the Middle East over the last 20 years – where their crimes have been stymied by precisely one country – Russia. The psychotically anti-Russian recent UN ambassadors, Nikki Haley and Samantha Power, were put there by the Israel lobby, and given an independent brief, in other words, they answer not to their presidents, rather to their Jewish sponsors.


In Congress the biggest Russia-Gate tub-thumpers are noticeably Jewish – Schiff, Schumer, Blumenthal, Franken (although not as overwhelmingly as in the media). The Israel lobby routinely enforces legislation hostile to Russia. Bill Browder with his Magnitsky Sanctions – is Jewish.

Facts are Facts, and it cannot be ignored that those who are aiming their daggers at Russia are Jews.

Betrayed -> MEFOBILLS Feb 4, 2018 11:19 PM Permalink

Sadly if your objective Trump will have to be included with that bunch. He's shown himself to be Zionist first. MIGA!

DCFusor Feb 4, 2018 10:54 PM Permalink

LMAO!

Deep state trying to unseat Trump because the Russians "like him" and "helped him into office".

If they now "like" the deep state...implications are hilarious. It'll have to go like that old Star Trek where Kirk convinces the AI probe (Nomad) it is imperfect and must be destroyed....so it blows itself up.

Hey, I can dream, can't I?

Of course, back in real life, the deep state has shown an ability to survive deep cognitive dissonance and even total internal contradiction. (No, not you, Cog).

We should shout this to the rooftops instead of trying to discredit it...however would they spin the Russians preferring the Dems and Deep State?

I want to see their heads exploding!

[Feb 05, 2018] Schiff's Latest Bizarre Claim: Russian Ads Promote 2nd Amendment 'So We All Kill Each Other'

www.trendli.net

The Second Amendment (Amendment II) to the United States Constitution protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms... and, as The Duran's Alex Christoforou writes, according to California Congressman Adam Schiff, those pesky Russians are using bots to promote the second amendment with an ultimate goal of having Americans"'kill each other."

Once again, another brilliant plan hatched by Putin... good thing Schiff caught on to it and can now begin seizing American's guns so as to thwart Russia's evil plan.

On Thursday Democrat Schiff spoke to a crowd at the University of Pennsylvania, where the TDS – "Russia hysteria virus" infected Schiff told the crowd Russian ads promoted the Second Amendment during the 2016 election "so we will kill each other."

NTK Network reports...

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) said Thursday that Russia promoted content that supported the Second Amendment on social media during the 2016 election because they wanted Americans to kill one another.

[Feb 03, 2018] Can The Impending Collapse Of Russiagate Halt The Slide Toward A Nuclear 1914 Zero Hedge

Feb 03, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by James George Jatras via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

In the period preceding the World War I how many Europeans suspected that their lives would soon be forever changed – and, for millions of them, ended?

Who in the years, say, 1910 to 1913, could have imagined that the decades of peace, progress, and civilization in which they had grown up, and which seemingly would continue indefinitely, instead would soon descend into a horror of industrial-scale slaughter, revolution, and brutal ideologies?

The answer is, probably very few, just as few people today care much about the details of international and security affairs. Normal folk have better things to do with their lives.

To be sure, in that bygone era of smug jingosim , there was always the entertainment aspect that "our" side had forced "theirs" to back down in some exotic locale, as in the Fashoda incident (1898) or the Moroccan crises (1906, 1911). Even the Balkan Wars of 1912-13 seemed less a harbinger of the cataclysm to come than local dustups on the edge of the continent where the general peace had not been disturbed even by the much more disruptive Crimean or Franco-Prussian wars.

Besides, no doubt level-headed statesmen were in charge in the various capitals, ensuring that things wouldn't get out of hand.

Until they did.

A notable exception to the prevailing mood of business-as-usual, nothing-to-see-here-folks was Pyotr Durnovo, whose remarkable February 1914 memorandum to Tsar Nicholas II laid out not only what the great powers would do in the approaching general war but the behavior of the minor countries as well. Moreover, he anticipated that in the event of defeat, Russia, destabilized by unchecked socialist "agitation" amid wartime hardships, would "be flung into hopeless anarchy, the issue of which cannot be foreseen." Germany, likewise, was "destined to suffer, in case of defeat, no lesser social upheavals" and "take a purely revolutionary path" of a nationalist hue.

When the great powers blundered into war in August 1914, each confident of its ability speedily to dispatch its rivals, the price (adding in the toll from the 1939-1945 rematch) was upwards of 70 million lives. But the cost of a comparable mistake today might be literally incalculable – if there's anyone left to do the tally.

During the first Cold War between the US and the USSR, there was a general sense that a World War III was, in a word, unthinkable. As summed up by Ronald Reagan: " A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought ." Then, it was understood that all-out war, however it started, meant massed ICBMs over the North Pole and the " end of civilization as we know it ."

Not anymore. What was unthinkable in the old Cold War has become all-too-thinkable in the new one between the US and Russia . As described by veteran arms control inspector Scott Ritter , in analyzing a draft of the 2018 US Nuclear Posture Review (NPR ), the US threshold for the use of nuclear weapons has become dangerously low:

'The 2018 NPR has a vision of nuclear conflict that goes far beyond the traditional imagery of mass missile launches. While ICBMs and manned bombers will be maintained on a day-to-day alert, the tip of the nuclear spear is now what the NPR calls "supplemental" nuclear forces – dual-use aircraft such as the F-35 fighter armed with B-61 gravity bombs capable of delivering a low-yield nuclear payload, a new generation of nuclear-tipped submarine-launched cruise missiles, and submarine-launched ballistic missiles tipped with a new generation of low-yield nuclear warheads. The danger inherent with the integration of these kinds of tactical nuclear weapons into an overall strategy of deterrence is that it fundamentally lowers the threshold for their use. [ ]

'Noting that the United States has never adopted a "no first use" policy, the 2018 NPR states that "it remains the policy of the United States to retain some ambiguity regarding the precise circumstances that might lead to a US nuclear response." In this regard, the NPR states that America could employ nuclear weapons under "extreme circumstances that could include significant non-nuclear strategic attacks." The issue of "non-nuclear strategic attack technologies" as a potential precursor for nuclear war is a new factor that previously did not exist in American policy. The United States has long held that chemical and biological weapons represent a strategic threat for which America's nuclear deterrence capability serves as a viable counter. But the threat from cyber attacks is different. If for no other reason than the potential for miscalculation and error in terms of attribution and intent, the nexus of cyber and nuclear weapons should be disconcerting for everyone. [ ]

'Even more disturbing is the notion that a cyber intrusion such as the one perpetrated against the Democratic National Committee and attributed to Russia could serve as a trigger for nuclear war. This is not as far-fetched as it sounds. The DNC event has been characterized by influential American politicians, such as the Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain, as " an act of war ." Moreover, former vice president Joe Biden hinted that, in the aftermath of the DNC breach, the United States was launching a retaliatory cyberattack of its own, targeting Russia. The possibility of a tit-for-tat exchange of cyberattacks that escalates into a nuclear conflict would previously have been dismissed out of hand; today, thanks to the 2018 NPR, it has entered the realm of the possible.'

The idea that a first-strike Schlieffen Plan could knock out the Russians (and no doubt similar contingencies are in place for China) at the outset of hostilities reflects a dangerous illusion of predictability. Truth may be the first casualty of war, but "the plan" is inevitably the second. That's because war planners generally don't consult the enemy, who – annoyingly for the planners – also gets a vote.

Recently US Secretary of State James Mattis declared that "great power competition – not terrorism – is now the primary focus of US national security," specifying Russia and China as nations seeking to "create a world consistent with their authoritarian models, pursuing veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic and security decisions." At least we can drop the pretense that US policy has been to fight jihad terrorism, not to use it as a policy tool in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Kosovo, Libya, Syria, and elsewhere. And of course Washington never, ever meddles in "other nations' economic, diplomatic and security decisions" . . .

There is much anticipation that release of a House Intelligence Committee memo "naming names" of those in the FBI and elsewhere inside and outside of government to thwart the election of Donald Trump and cripple his administration with a phony Russian "collusion" probe will be a silver bullet that upturns the Mueller probe and cleans the Augean stables of the Deep State. Even in that unlikely case, the damage is already done. The primary purpose of Russiagate was always to ensure Trump could not reach out to Moscow , as seems to be his sincere desire. Even as the narrative began to boomerang against those who launched it , Trump's defenders (such as fanatical Russophobe Nikki Haley ) are as adamant as his detractors that Russia is and will remain the main enemy: Russia was behind the Steele Dossier, Russia tried to " corner the market" on "the foundational material for nuclear weapons " with the Uranium One deal, etc. Hostility toward Russia is not a means to an end – it is the end .

At this point Trump is fastened to the neocons' and generals' axle, and all he can do is spin. Echoing Mattis, in his State of the Union speech Trump lumped "rivals like China and Russia" together with "rogue regimes" and "terrorist groups" as "horrible dangers" to the United States. (Note: The word "horrible" does not appear in the posted text . That evidently was Trump's adlib.) The recently issued "name and shame" list of prominent Russians is a veritable Who's Who of government and business, ensuring that there's no American engagement with anyone within screaming distance of the Kremlin .

To be fair, the Russians and Chinese are making their own war preparations. Russia's "Kanyon," a doomsday nuclear torpedo carrying a massive warhead, is designed to obliterate the U.S east and west coasts , rendering them inhabitable for generations. (Wait a minute. Is it any coincidence, Comrade, that the coastal cities are just where the Democrats' electoral strength is? Talk about "collusion!" Somebody call Bob Mueller!) For its part, China is developing means to eliminate our white elephant carrier groups – handy for pummeling Third World backwaters but useless in a war with a major power – with drone swarms and hypersonic missiles .

Just as in 1914, when Durnovo referred to "presence of abundant combustible material in Europe," there is any number of global flashpoints that could turn Mattis's "great power competition" into a major conflagration that probably was not desired by anyone. However, if the worst happens, and the lamps go out again – maybe this time forever – Americans will not again be immune from the consequences as we were in the wars of the 20th century. The remainder of our lives, however brief, might turn out very differently from what we had anticipated

[Feb 03, 2018] This Putin paranoia is insane and ridiculous. Our homegrown problems regarding every aspect of government far exceed, by orders of magnitudes, Putin tinkering.

Notable quotes:
"... This Putin paranoia is insane and ridiculous. Our homegrown problems regarding every aspect of government far exceed, by orders of magnitudes, Putin tinkering. All of you making hysterical claims about Putin and impugning Americans as Russian stooges are diverting attention from our real homegrown problems. ..."
"... The root of the situation is FISA, as amended after September 11. ..."
"... History tells us that if a government gets a law enforcement tool, somebody in the government will try to abuse it in ways the legislators who provided the tool did not think of. History also teaches us to keep a sharp eye on the law enforcement organizations – trust but verify! ..."
"... Law enforcement is made of normal people, who bring with them all the qualities and defects of human nature. Abusing power is one of the defects, and since September 11, we gave law enforcement much power ..."
"... We need to find out if any of the candidates broke the law. We need to find out if the FBI and the DOJ abused their power. This is not about political preferences, this is about keeping the country a democracy. For those who might have forgotten it, I will remind what Martin Niemöller said: "First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out -- Because I was not a Socialist Then they came for me -- and there was no one left to speak for me." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_ ..."
"... The land of the surreal; I see the usual in denial left-wing commenters hanging around Buchanan columns are now defending a corrupt, politicized FBI. ..."
"... After Mr. Trump secured the nomination, Fusion GPS was hired on behalf of Mrs. Clinton's campaign and the D.N.C. by their law firm, Perkins Coie, to compile research about Mr. Trump, his businesses and associates -- including possible connections with Russia. It was at that point that Fusion GPS hired Mr. Steele, who has deep sourcing in Russia, to gather information. ..."
"... Is is surprising that all the hoopla for both Republicans, Democrats, the media is about "Trump did it", "Clinton did it, "Putin did it". Only one reader – #Max Charles – made the very intelligent observation that the real beneficiaries of the situation are the Chinese. ..."
"... Democrats and liberals had nothing but disdain for the FBI and other spook organizations until they were 'militarized' by King 'Bama and became the Democrat secret police. Now they love the FBI. This scandal must be dragged into the light of day and cleaned up, folks fired and/or charged and put in prison. OR it will be settled in the streets. When half of the country is 'down with a one party state and secret police,' we're on the same glide path that Venezuela was on. ..."
Feb 03, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Jack February 2, 2018 at 12:27 pm

This Putin paranoia is insane and ridiculous. Our homegrown problems regarding every aspect of government far exceed, by orders of magnitudes, Putin tinkering. All of you making hysterical claims about Putin and impugning Americans as Russian stooges are diverting attention from our real homegrown problems. Look in the mirror everyone. It is in the reflection that you will find what really ails us.
peter , says: February 2, 2018 at 12:45 pm
The root of the situation is FISA, as amended after September 11.

History tells us that if a government gets a law enforcement tool, somebody in the government will try to abuse it in ways the legislators who provided the tool did not think of. History also teaches us to keep a sharp eye on the law enforcement organizations – trust but verify!

Law enforcement is made of normal people, who bring with them all the qualities and defects of human nature. Abusing power is one of the defects, and since September 11, we gave law enforcement much power

We need to find out if any of the candidates broke the law. We need to find out if the FBI and the DOJ abused their power. This is not about political preferences, this is about keeping the country a democracy. For those who might have forgotten it, I will remind what Martin Niemöller said: "First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out -- Because I was not a Socialist Then they came for me -- and there was no one left to speak for me."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_

Andrew , says: February 2, 2018 at 12:51 pm
The land of the surreal; I see the usual in denial left-wing commenters hanging around Buchanan columns are now defending a corrupt, politicized FBI.
russ , says: February 2, 2018 at 1:29 pm
@Craig: And, BTW, the Steele dossier was originally paid for/hired by the REPUBLICANS running against Trump!

From the NY Times, you'll learn you're wrong :

After Mr. Trump secured the nomination, Fusion GPS was hired on behalf of Mrs. Clinton's campaign and the D.N.C. by their law firm, Perkins Coie, to compile research about Mr. Trump, his businesses and associates -- including possible connections with Russia. It was at that point that Fusion GPS hired Mr. Steele, who has deep sourcing in Russia, to gather information.

collin , says: February 2, 2018 at 1:51 pm
Update:

Memo released and 90% of the country yawns!

peter , says: February 2, 2018 at 2:02 pm
Is is surprising that all the hoopla for both Republicans, Democrats, the media is about "Trump did it", "Clinton did it, "Putin did it". Only one reader – #Max Charles – made the very intelligent observation that the real beneficiaries of the situation are the Chinese.

Since the departure of the Great Helmsman, Chairman Mao, China has followed a highly focused and highly effective path towards becoming #1 in the world.
There is a combination of economic policy, internal policy and foreign policy which brought this country to move quietly into such a position. Could they be behind the circus?

It is very possible, since the Chinese are now using what Fukuyama presented as "the good emperor" model. An intelligent, non-democratic system can be so efficient!

Dan Green , says: February 2, 2018 at 2:25 pm
How does this play into the impeachment strategy ? That is all that counts.
Paul Clayton , says: February 2, 2018 at 2:30 pm
Democrats and liberals had nothing but disdain for the FBI and other spook organizations until they were 'militarized' by King 'Bama and became the Democrat secret police. Now they love the FBI. This scandal must be dragged into the light of day and cleaned up, folks fired and/or charged and put in prison. OR it will be settled in the streets. When half of the country is 'down with a one party state and secret police,' we're on the same glide path that Venezuela was on.
Mike , says: February 2, 2018 at 2:34 pm
Pat,

The so called facts should not be released unless all of the facts are released – not simply an interpretation of the facts, least of all Nunes' (or maybe the Whitehouse's?)

You are being disingenuous in simply stating that all memos should be released when you know that the Schiff memo will never be placed in the public sphere.
There is also an impact on the public which is being overlooked. No person in their right mind will ever come forward with information for the FBI ever again. Everyone now knows that if some political opportunist wants to "out you" and embarrass you, you do not stand a chance. This release made no pretense that it was a political hit, not some kind of sunlight on a nefarious practice.

That is not to say that a political hit piece is not legitimate or has its proper place – because it does. Its just that this memo masquerades as something that it is not, and as a man of intellectual integrity, you should say so.

KD , says: February 2, 2018 at 3:23 pm
Pat:

Can you remind us of what the lib's said about Nixon's operation engaging in political surveillance of his opponent?

Also, what was the date that Putin and the Trump campaign met and agreed to hack the DNC servers? They were hacked from the outside, right? We have proof?

Does this mean it is now fair game if the Trump campaign hires some hack to meet with foreign operatives who make up nasty stories about his Democratic opponent, Trump's DOJ can go to the FISA court and get permission to spy on his opponents during the campaign, and then get a Special Prosecutor to "investigate" fabricated allegations and try to snare the new leadership in process crimes? Or is this a special right that only Democrats get to exercise because they wear white hats?

[Feb 03, 2018] Moscow warns the United States is 'hunting' Russians around the world to arrest and extradite South China Morning Post

Feb 03, 2018 | www.scmp.com

Russia has issued a travel warning recommending its citizens think twice before travelling abroad, saying the United States was hunting for Russians to arrest around the world.

The Foreign Ministry statement warns Russian citizens that when abroad they face a serious threat of arrest by other countries at Washington's request, after which they could be extradited to the United States.

"Despite our calls to improve cooperation between the relevant US and Russian authorities US special services have effectively continued 'hunting' for Russians around the world," the travel warning said. "Considering these circumstances, we strongly insist that Russian citizens carefully weigh up all the risks when planning trips abroad," the Foreign Ministry said. It said more than 10 Russians had been detained in foreign countries with US involvement since the start of 2017.

Russian oligarch, close to Putin, is identified in record US$643m British divorce case

By way of example, it pointed to at least four Russians arrested on US cybercrime charges in Spain, Latvia and Greece. US action against suspected Russian cyber criminals surged to a record high last year.

Seven Russians were arrested or indicted in 2017 in the United States and abroad, compared to an average of two a year in the preceding six years.

The ministry pointed to the case of Stanislav Lisov, accused of creating a computer virus that targeted customers of financial institutions, causing millions of dollars of damage, who was extradited from Spain to the United States last year. It mentioned earlier cases as well, including the detention of Roman Seleznev for cybercrime in the Maldives in 2014, which it described as a kidnapping by American agents. The statement, published on Thursday, also warns Russian citizens that upon extradition they will face biased treatment at the hands of the US justice system. The US State Department declined to comment.

[Feb 03, 2018] Memo: Democrats Made Up Evidence Enabled Eavesdropping On Trump Campaign

It was not only that Steele memo enabled eavesdropping. More troubling fact that FBI considered both Trump and Sanders as insurgents and was adamant to squash them and ensure Hillary victory. In other word it tried to play the role of kingmaker.
Notable quotes:
"... The former British spy Steele had been hired by the Democratic Party via Fusion GPS to dig up dirt about Donald Trump. He came back with a package of "reports" which alleged that Trump was "colluding" with Russia or even a puppet of Putin. The content of the reports is hilarious and so obviously made up that one wonders how anyone could have treated it seriously. ..."
"... Getting a FISA warrant on Carter Page meant that all his communication with the Trump campaign was effectively under surveillance of the Obama administration. While Page was no longer an official member of the campaign at the time of the warrant it is likely that he had kept contact. All internal communication that Page had access to was thereby also accessible for at least some people who tried to prevent a Trump election victory. ..."
"... One may (like me) dislike Trump and the Republican party and all they stand for. But this looks like an extremely dirty play by the Democrats and by the Obama administration far outside of any decency and fairness. The Steele dossier is obviously made up partisan nonsense. To the use it for such a FISA warrant was against the most basic rules of a democratic system. It probably broke several laws. ..."
Feb 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Over the last month political enemies of U.S. President Trump and the FBI and Justice Department have desperately tried to prevent the publishing of a memo written by the Republican controlled House Intelligence Committee.

The memo (pdf) describes parts of the process that let to court sanctioned spying on the Trump campaign. The key points of the memo that was just published:

* The Steele dossier formed an essential part of the initial and all three renewal FISA applications against Carter Page.

* Andrew McCabe confirmed that no FISA warrant would have been sought from the FISA Court without the Steele dossier information.

* The political origins of the Steele dossier were known to senior DOJ and FBI officials, but excluded from the FISA applications.

* DOJ official Bruce Ohr met with Steele beginning in the summer of 2016 and relayed to DOJ information about Steele's bias. Steele told Ohr that he, Steele, was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected president and was passionate about him not becoming president.

If the above memo proves to be correct one can conclude that a Democratic front organization created "evidence" that was then used by the FBI and the Obama Justice Department to get FISA warrants to spy on someone with intimate contacts into the Trump campaign.

The Democrats as well as the FBI have done their utmost to keep this secret.

Carter Page was a relative low ranking volunteer advisor of the Trump campaign with some business contacts to Russia. He had officially left the campaign shortly before the above FISA warrant was requested.

Andrew McCabe was an FBI assistant director. A few month earlier his wife ran for a Virginia State Senate seat with the help of $700,000 she had received from Clinton allies.

The wife of DOJ official Bruce Ohr worked for Fusion GPS, the outlet hired by the Democrats to find Trump dirt. Fusion GPS hired the former British agent Steele.

The former British spy Steele had been hired by the Democratic Party via Fusion GPS to dig up dirt about Donald Trump. He came back with a package of "reports" which alleged that Trump was "colluding" with Russia or even a puppet of Putin. The content of the reports is hilarious and so obviously made up that one wonders how anyone could have treated it seriously.

Getting a FISA warrant on Carter Page meant that all his communication with the Trump campaign was effectively under surveillance of the Obama administration. While Page was no longer an official member of the campaign at the time of the warrant it is likely that he had kept contact. All internal communication that Page had access to was thereby also accessible for at least some people who tried to prevent a Trump election victory.

One must wonder if the FISA warrant and eavesdropping on Page was the only one related to the Trump campaign.

One may (like me) dislike Trump and the Republican party and all they stand for. But this looks like an extremely dirty play by the Democrats and by the Obama administration far outside of any decency and fairness. The Steele dossier is obviously made up partisan nonsense. To the use it for such a FISA warrant was against the most basic rules of a democratic system. It probably broke several laws.

There are still many questions: What was, exactly, the result of the surveillance of Carter Page and the Trump campaign? Who was getting these results - officially and unofficially? How were they used?

I am pretty sure now that more heads of those involved will role. Some of the people who arranged the scheme, and some of those who tried to cover it up, may go to jail.

If Trump and the Republicans play this right they have practically won the next elections.

[Feb 02, 2018] The "Kremlin list" Is a Bullet Aimed at Putin's Heart by Paul Craig Roberts

Notable quotes:
"... President Putin has joked that he is disappointed to have been left off the list. Putin was left off for a reason. The list is directed at him. ..."
"... The list is an implicit threat against the business interests of Russian oligarchs, and they understand that. Reports are that many lobbied Washington to get off the list. By suggesting that Washington could curtail the oligarchs' travel to the West, seize their Western-based assets, and prevent Americans and Europeans from doing business with their companies, Washington is telling them to remove their support from President Putin. Washington intends to use the Western-funded NGOs and media in Russia to interfere in the upcoming Russian elections. Washington does not want Putin to have the smashing victory that is expected. It is difficult to make a monster out of a person who has higher public support than any American president in history. ..."
"... The list is an intended insult to Russia and to President Putin. As a result of Putin's low-key response to past provocations, Washington anticipated, correctly, no response from Putin to Washington's insult to the entire political and economic leadership of Russia. The unanswered insult thus becomes Washington's way of displaying its hegemony over Putin and Russia. ..."
"... Consider the audacity of US Treasury Secretary Mnuchin, a person regarded by many as a devious financial gangster who did great harm to many Americans, issuing a list that suggests the US government is going to take some kind of punitive action against the Prime Minister of Russia, against the Foreign Minister of Russia, against the Defense Minister of Russia. ..."
"... Such a list is a way of telling Russia that Washington regards Russia as one of Trump's "shithole countries." The list tells Russia that Washington is never going to take any consideration of any Russian interest and that Russia will continue to be punished until it submits to Washington's hegemony, like the UK, Germany, France, Scandinavia, Japan, Canada, Australia, Italy, Spain, and the rest of the servile Western puppet states. As George W. Bush declared, "You are with us or against us." Being with us means you do as you are told. Russia can either do as she is told or fight. Russia has no other choice. ..."
Feb 01, 2018 | www.unz.com

The Russian government, media, and public don't know what to make of the US Treasury's "Kremlim list." The Treasury list contains the names of the top echelon of Russian government and business leadership. The Russians understand that the list is unfriendly and furthers Washington's policy of worsening the relationship between the two major nuclear powers, but beyond that the list seems to be a mystery to them.

President Putin has joked that he is disappointed to have been left off the list. Putin was left off for a reason. The list is directed at him.

On January 30, I explained four of the main reasons for the list. https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/01/30/washington-reaches-new-heights-insanity-kremlin-report/

Here are two more important reasons for the list:

1) The list is an implicit threat against the business interests of Russian oligarchs, and they understand that. Reports are that many lobbied Washington to get off the list. By suggesting that Washington could curtail the oligarchs' travel to the West, seize their Western-based assets, and prevent Americans and Europeans from doing business with their companies, Washington is telling them to remove their support from President Putin. Washington intends to use the Western-funded NGOs and media in Russia to interfere in the upcoming Russian elections. Washington does not want Putin to have the smashing victory that is expected. It is difficult to make a monster out of a person who has higher public support than any American president in history.

2) The list is an intended insult to Russia and to President Putin. As a result of Putin's low-key response to past provocations, Washington anticipated, correctly, no response from Putin to Washington's insult to the entire political and economic leadership of Russia. The unanswered insult thus becomes Washington's way of displaying its hegemony over Putin and Russia.

The lack of a meaningful Russian response will encourage more insults and actual sanctions against Putin's supporters, which will cause some of them to separate from Putin in order to protect their own economic and career interests. In the past Washington has used sanctions in efforts to deprive leaders of public support. With the Kremlin list, Washington has changed its tactics and is targeting the reputations and economic interests of the leadership class. The list is Washington's attempt to deprive Putin of the support of the top echelon of government and business leaders. The list is a bullet aimed at Putin's heart.

Consider the audacity of US Treasury Secretary Mnuchin, a person regarded by many as a devious financial gangster who did great harm to many Americans, issuing a list that suggests the US government is going to take some kind of punitive action against the Prime Minister of Russia, against the Foreign Minister of Russia, against the Defense Minister of Russia.

Such a list is a way of telling Russia that Washington regards Russia as one of Trump's "shithole countries." The list tells Russia that Washington is never going to take any consideration of any Russian interest and that Russia will continue to be punished until it submits to Washington's hegemony, like the UK, Germany, France, Scandinavia, Japan, Canada, Australia, Italy, Spain, and the rest of the servile Western puppet states. As George W. Bush declared, "You are with us or against us." Being with us means you do as you are told. Russia can either do as she is told or fight. Russia has no other choice. (Republished from PaulCraigRoberts.org by permission of author or representative) ← The Second Dossier

[Feb 02, 2018] 'Kremlin List' Made Public What's in Store for US-Russia Relationship

Feb 02, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

So, the long-awaited " Kremlin List " happened to be a purely formal action. What was made public is just a meaningless compilation of names partly taken from a phonebook with some of them cribbed from the Forbes' Billionaires list – a kind of Who Is Who reference publication. The administration had to release the document as required by law, so it adopted the "get what you want and leave me alone" approach. At least, that's what the unclassified part of the report looks like. Technically correct, the list is just a mockery in its essence. Nothing in the report indicates that the US is in possession of information about the individuals' involvement in any wrongdoings. The paper says it is not a sanctions list though Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said it would result in restrictive measures. He did not specify the date.

It's not the "Kremlin List" that really matters. On Jan.29, one day before the document was made public, Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee voted to release a classified memorandum, revealing the misconduct by the FBI and the Justice Department in the Russia investigation. The paper expresses grave concern over the way the investigation, launched by the Obama administration, was conducted. The lawmakers took the decision ignoring the position of the Justice Department, which had warned not take this "extraordinary reckless" step. It's highly probable that if an investigation into the abuses is launched, the trail will lead to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

It's not Donald Trump but rather his opponents who will be at center of the scandal with media raising ballyhoo (and they will do it as practice shows). Everything will turn around to put the Democratic backers of Hillary Clinton on the defensive with the president's hands untied giving him much more freedom to implement his Russia policy. He won't keep one eye on Congress when it comes to dealing with Russia. Trump will become the defender of democracy threatened by Clinton's camp. The "Kremlin's List" will be on the backburner.

Russia knows well all the ins and outs of US politics. It is reserved and patient but it cannot forever abstain from striking back. Both governments realize this fact and act accordingly. They don't sever the contacts, so that wouldn't have to start from scratch when the times change.

On the contrary, they do what is possible under the circumstances. It's enough to look at the news that doesn't hit headlines but tells about the events of great significance. For instance, Sergey Naryshkin, the head of Russian foreign intelligence service, has recently visited the United States to discuss terrorism. The Russian foreign intelligence chief is under sanctions but the visit was important enough to make the US executive turn a blind eye on this fact. Naryshkin was granted entry to the country. It's hard to imagine such a high-ranking official coming alone.

So, the information exchange with Russia is too important to be affected by ups and downs in the relationship. It's enough to remember how the interaction between the intelligence services of both countries prevented a terrorist act in Saint Petersburg last December. In his recent interview with Russian Echo Moskvy ( Echo of Moscow ) radio station, US Ambassador to Moscow Jon Huntsman said the time is propitious for a Russia-US bilateral summit. He also emphasized the importance of military-to-military communications. Until now, the leaders have met only on the sidelines of top-level international events. A summit could change a lot of things, addressing many problems beyond the scope of bilateral relationship.

2018 is an election year in the United States. The Democrats' chances will diminish greatly when the secret memo is released. With economy going strong, the chances for Republicans to strengthen their position in both houses look good enough. So do the opportunities for the president to keep his pre-election promise to improve the relationship with Russia.

Tags: FBI Russiagate

[Feb 02, 2018] Meet the Corrupt Billionaire Who Has Brought About a New Cold War by >Philip M. GIRALDI

Feb 02, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

William Browder is notoriously the man behind the 2012 Magnitsky Act, which exploited Congressional willingness to demonize Russia and has done so much to poison relations between Washington and Moscow.

[Jan 31, 2018] Military blames human error for hidden Afghan war data

Notable quotes:
"... For being "intelligence" agencies who no one is apparently allowed to question or criticize, they sure make a lot of "mistakes", "lose" a lot of documents, and just get a lot of things "wrong". ..."
"... Iraq was invaded and occupied as well. Control resources!! That is the end game...As a Combat Veteran served during 9/11 and tip of the spear in 2003 we found ZERO weapons of mass destruction....So many young Americans impacted and suffered for pure profit at the hands of greedy Men... ..."
Jan 31, 2018 | www.yahoo.com

His comments came hours after SIGAR said in a quarterly report on the conflict that the Pentagon prohibited the inclusion of information on the number of districts in Afghanistan, and the population therein, controlled by the Afghan government or the Taliban or contested by both sides.

"The number of districts controlled or influenced by the Afghan government had been one of the last remaining publicly available indicators for members of Congress -- many of whose staff do not have access to the classified annexes to SIGAR reports -- and for the American public of how the 16-year-long U.S. effort to secure Afghanistan is faring," SIGAR said in a statement. "This is the first time SIGAR has been specifically instructed not to release information marked 'unclassified' to the American taxpayer."

In his emailed statement, Gresback said that, as of October 2017, about 56 percent of the country's 407 districts were under Afghan government control or influence, 30 percent remained contested, and roughly 14 percent were now under insurgent control or influence.

R Roger47 yesterday

Afghanistan is too big and too poor for their own government and military to ever be able to control. Much of the country is controlled by tribal leaders associated loosely with the Taliban. They want to continue to live their lives as they have done for hundreds of years. We can either let them do so, or occupy their country forever. I say make an agreement to leave them alone as long as they keep terrorists out, and bring our troops home.

e edward yesterday

For being "intelligence" agencies who no one is apparently allowed to question or criticize, they sure make a lot of "mistakes", "lose" a lot of documents, and just get a lot of things "wrong".

C CBVET2003 yesterday

  • Iraq was invaded and occupied as well. Control resources!! That is the end game...As a Combat Veteran served during 9/11 and tip of the spear in 2003 we found ZERO weapons of mass destruction....So many young Americans impacted and suffered for pure profit at the hands of greedy Men...

    • V Vegasvince 22 hours ago

  • Several things he promised to work on are traditional Democratic issues. Since they also agree, I'd hope we can see quick congressional action. Infrastructure, prescription drug costs, terminal patients access to drug trials, Job training investment, Paid family leave, former prisoner job training, etc... These should be fast tracked through Congress and to the Presidents. We can agree on things in America and need a productive governement to get thing s done!

    • [Jan 31, 2018] Are the Dutch part of the 'Deep State'?

    Notable quotes:
    "... I would say most definitely, as is the case in Germany, and many western European countries. Just look at how they mis-handled the MH-17 investigation. The CIA is deeply embedded in the MSM in the USA and Europe, and has been since after WWII. Look into "Operation Mockingbird" if you are curious. ..."
    "... The US deep state certainly has close allies within the secret services of European NATO countries. They probably have the tightest connections with secret services of Anglosaxon countries like Britain and Australia and with Germany, where US secret services have their many bases in Europe, but there are certainly also close connections with the deep state in the Netherlands. ..."
    Jan 31, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

    Lala Blood , January 30, 2018 at 12:29 pm

    Are the Dutch part of the 'Deep State'? https://www.volkskrant.nl/tech/dutch-agencies-provide-crucial-intel-about-russia-s-interference-in-us-elections~a4561913/

    Skip Scott , January 30, 2018 at 2:44 pm

    I would say most definitely, as is the case in Germany, and many western European countries. Just look at how they mis-handled the MH-17 investigation. The CIA is deeply embedded in the MSM in the USA and Europe, and has been since after WWII. Look into "Operation Mockingbird" if you are curious.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-cia-and-the-media-50-facts-the-world-needs-to-know/5471956

    Adrian E. , January 31, 2018 at 5:01 am

    Hardly "the Dutch" as a whole. Not even necessarily the Durch secret services as a whole. But, after all, that report was not even about an official statement from the Dutch secret services, it was just a leak from unnamed sources within the Dutch secret services (if even that attribution is correct). The US deep state certainly has close allies within the secret services of European NATO countries. They probably have the tightest connections with secret services of Anglosaxon countries like Britain and Australia and with Germany, where US secret services have their many bases in Europe, but there are certainly also close connections with the deep state in the Netherlands.

    Skip Scott , January 31, 2018 at 8:53 am

    Yes. Of course I wasn't referring to the Dutch people. Their government, and their MSM, however do carry water for the US Deep State. Also like you say, the secret services are not monolithic. They are highly compartmentalized. Ray McGovern is a former analyst for the CIA, and he is obviously a highly moral person. VIPS was founded by people who have witnessed the corruption of the intelligence agencies firsthand, and have organized to expose and fight that corruption.

    [Jan 31, 2018] Chief lunatic McMaster will levitate with enthusiasm for more war.

    Notable quotes:
    "... General Flynn had warned Trump during the campaign before election and afterward that CIA briefers were lying to him. Flynn took over briefing Trump himself and that ended when they got Flynn out. ..."
    Jan 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Red Ryder | Jan 29, 2018 2:49:34 PM | 4

    In the WH it will be NSC adviser and chief lunatic McMaster. He will levitate with enthusiasm for more war.

    The briefings Trump gets are packed with lies and he has grown to trust them.

    The entire foreign policy is so different from his stated goals and intentions that it is clear he is fed fairy tales of success and bogus estimates of what the US can accomplish.

    Last weeks Voltairnet.org piece by Thierry Meyssan indicated that Trump did not know what his planners were doing.

    "The president Trump had not been informed of the plan Votel-McGurk. The secretary of Defense, James Mattis, confirmed to his men the instructions of the White House against the jihadists. However Votel and McGurk are still in place." -- Thierry Meyssan

    General Flynn had warned Trump during the campaign before election and afterward that CIA briefers were lying to him. Flynn took over briefing Trump himself and that ended when they got Flynn out.

    We have a President misled who is told bogus results based on biased input data and reports.

    Meyssan has been crazy in love with Trump for a year, so for him to report this shows he knows things are being setup for Trump to be trapped in Syria.

    harrylaw , Jan 29, 2018 3:40:40 PM | 6
    The Neocons have the perfect candidate to implement those mad cap schemes...
    John Bolton Remains Leading Candidate to Replace H. R. McMaster http://nationalinterest.org/feature/john-bolton-remains-leading-candidate-replace-h-r-mcmaster-24232?page=2

    [Jan 30, 2018] Washington Reaches New Heights of Insanity with the "Kremlin Report" by Paul Craig Roberts

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... There is likely a fourth reason for the list. Israel wants Washington's pressure on Russia, because Russia has so far prevented Israel's use of the US military to create the same chaos in Syria and Iran as has been created in Iraq and Libya. Israel wants Syria and Iran destabilized because they support Hezbollah, which prevents Israel from occupying the water resources of southern Lebanon. The Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, which requires the list, passed the House and Senate by a vote of 517-5. Normally, such unanimous foreign policy votes are associated with demands from the Israel Lobby. ..."
    "... The Russian government and the Russian people need to understand that Washington considers Russia to be a threat because Russia is not under Washington's thumb. The Zionist neoconservatives control US foreign policy. Their ideology is world hegemony. They do not use diplomacy. They rely on disinformation, threats, and violence. Therefore, there is no American diplomacy with which Putin and Lavrov can engage. ..."
    "... Putin, being a responsible political leader of a great power, does not respond to provocation with provocation. He ignores the insults and continues to wait for the West to come to its senses. But what if the West does not come to its senses? ..."
    "... Everyone in the world should realize the threat of nuclear war that is inherent in Washington's policy toward Russia, and everyone in the world should understand that the only threat that Russia poses is to Washington's unilateralism. ..."
    Jan 30, 2018 | www.unz.com

    In an act of insane escalation of provocations against Russia, Washington has produced a list of 210 top Russian government officials and important business executives who are "gangsters," "members of Putin's gang," "threats," "people deserving to be sanctioned," or however the Western presstitutes care to explain the list. The absurd list includes the Prime Minister of Russia, the Foreign Minister, the Defense Minister, and executives of Gazprom, Rosneft, and Bank Rossiya. In other words, the suggestion is that the entirety of Russian political and business leadership is corrupt.

    The Russians do not seem to understand the purpose of the list. Presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that the government sees the list as an attempt to interfere in the Russian presidential election. There is no doubt that Washington would like to reduce Putin's public support so that Washington can use the Western-funded NGOs operating in Russia to present American stooges as Russia's true voices. However, it is unlikely that the Russian people are stupid enough to fall for such a trick.

    Washington's list has three purposes:

    1. To undercut Russian diplomacy by presenting the top echelons of Russia as gangsters.
    2. To present Russia as a military threat as per the ridiculous announcement by British defense minister Gavin Williamson on January 26 that Russia intends to rip British "infrastructure apart, actually cause thousands and thousands and thousands of deaths," and create "total chaos within the country."
    3. To shift American and European attention away from the coming release of the House Intelligence Committee's report that proves Russiagate is a conspiracy between the FBI, the Obama Department of Justice and the Democratic National Committee against President Trump. Washington's Russian list will give the presstitutes something else to talk about instead of the act of treason committed against the President of the United States. Expect to hear nothing from the presstitutes except that the House Intelligence Committee report is only a political effort to shield Trump from accountability.

    There is likely a fourth reason for the list. Israel wants Washington's pressure on Russia, because Russia has so far prevented Israel's use of the US military to create the same chaos in Syria and Iran as has been created in Iraq and Libya. Israel wants Syria and Iran destabilized because they support Hezbollah, which prevents Israel from occupying the water resources of southern Lebanon. The Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, which requires the list, passed the House and Senate by a vote of 517-5. Normally, such unanimous foreign policy votes are associated with demands from the Israel Lobby.

    The Russian government and the Russian people need to understand that Washington considers Russia to be a threat because Russia is not under Washington's thumb. The Zionist neoconservatives control US foreign policy. Their ideology is world hegemony. They do not use diplomacy. They rely on disinformation, threats, and violence. Therefore, there is no American diplomacy with which Putin and Lavrov can engage.

    Putin, being a responsible political leader of a great power, does not respond to provocation with provocation. He ignores the insults and continues to wait for the West to come to its senses. But what if the West does not come to its senses?

    For the West to come to its senses requires the complete overthrow of the Zionist neoconservatives and/or the breakup of NATO. The overthrow of the neoconservatives would require a rival foreign policy voice, and that voice is very weak as it is shut off from the media, the think tanks, and the universities. The breakup of NATO would require European political figures to give up their Washington subsidies and the career advancement that Washington provides.

    As I write the Atlantic Council is holding a members and press call in for a discussion with Atlantic Council members Amb. Daniel Fried and Anders Aslund. The Atlantic Council is a neoconservative propaganda agency. The purpose of the "discussion" is to further undermine US-Russian relations.

    The Russian government faces a difficult situation. The foreign policy of the US, and thereby of the Western world, is controlled by neoconservatives who are determined to present Russia in the most threatening light. Russian diplomacy can do nothing to change this. The non-provocative and responsible Russian response has the effect of encouraging more provocations from Washington. At some point Russian passivity might convince the neoconservatives that they can successfully attack Russia. Alternatively, the continual provocations might convince Russia that the country is targeted for attack, thereby causing a Russian pre-emptive action.

    Everyone in the world should realize the threat of nuclear war that is inherent in Washington's policy toward Russia, and everyone in the world should understand that the only threat that Russia poses is to Washington's unilateralism.

    [Jan 30, 2018] The narrative on the Ghouta alleged "chemical attacks" is coming from the Al Qaeda affiliated, UK FCO/US multi-million-financed White Helmets and has not basis in fact

    Notable quotes:
    "... It has got to the point where I cannot read/listen/view to ANY news stories in the mainstream media without doubting their accuracy. And that, I began to think, was a tragedy. But no, it's actually liberating: be a skeptic. Ask why. Ask who benefits from the story. And what their sources are – If unnamed, simply disregard. And remember that the MSM is beholden to very powerful media groups with their own agendas along with deep and opaque ties to various governments/agencies. ..."
    "... In the USSR, before the collapse of communism, party members used to lament that Russians didn't believe any of their media output but were also amazed and full of awe that people in the West tended to believe their own media ..."
    "... Another nail in the coffin of the legacy news media. The more the years go bye the more the alternative media becomes mainstream. ..."
    Jan 30, 2018 | off-guardian.org

    vanessa beeley: January 24, 2018

    I have just returned from Syria. The narrative on the Ghouta alleged "chemical attacks" is coming from the Al Qaeda affiliated, UK FCO/US multi-million-financed White Helmets and has not basis in fact.

    Meanwhile the terrorist groups supported by the White Helmets and the UK/US coalition of terror, have launched a series of murderous mortar attacks on the civilian areas of Damascus, Old City (Christian areas). I was leaving Damascus on Monday this week, when they targeted hundreds of school children pouring out of the schools for the school buses parked in the streets of the Old City and just outside its walls. 9 people were killed including one 3 year old child, Elias Khoury. Christine Hourani is a beautiful Syrian teenager, her leg has been amputated below the knee as a result of this indiscriminate and deliberate attack on children by the same "moderate" extremists who are feeding the corporate media with the Fake News that the Guardian relies upon to maintain its anti Syria and New Cold War narrative.

    The Guardian is one of the chief fire-stokers for the UK FCO and acts as its main attack dog when the UK FCO is under threat of exposure for its funding of terrorism in Syria with taxpayer funds – hence the ridiculous Solon article trying to discredit myself and Eva Bartlett, among others – while never addressing the facts and hard evidence against the UK FCO and the various entities it is financing, such as the White Helmets, the Local Councils in Syria & the Free Syrian Police (to name only a few). The latest CW attack story is to distract from the crimes against humanity being comitted by the terrorist factions in the eastern suburbs of Damascus and to further foment the escalation of military conflict between Russian and the US on Syrian soil. The role of the Guardian is a criminal one – and it must not be underestimated, they will take us to war, if allowed to continue.

    What the Guardian and others don't mention is. 1. the terrorist attacks on civilians and the massacre of children & civilians on a daily basis. 2. Russia delivered a humanitarian aid convoy to eastern Ghouta on 19th January, why are these aid deliveries not mentioned and who benefits from them (see East Aleppo and Madaya to know exactly who does receive and stockpile these supplies). 3. How are the terrorist receiving weapon supplies to facilitate the murder of Syrian civilians in the residential areas of the city? The Guardian is at the vanguard of the UK FCO dirty intelligence operation in Syria, you only have to create a timescale of their reports on the alleged Khan Sheikhoun attacks to see who led that narrative for the British public based upon spurious claims and unverified testimony from known terrorist operators. Of course the Guardian does not allow comment, it knows perfectly well that it has been rumbled.

    Johnny Hacket: January 24, 2018
    Not expecting anything from the Graun really but this SIS memo is a new low . The mystery for me is why do they bother even . Who are their target readership ?
    Neil Youngson: January 24, 2018
    They now rely heavily on US corporate advertising, so they must be seen to be promoting the US agenda.
    Quizzical: January 24, 2018
    This chemical attack has been "in preparation" for a while – several comments on blogs with sources more credible than either the White Helmets or SOHR. In particular, on Moon of Alabama – here's a quote:

    http://www.moonofalabama.org/

    "Asaad Hanna @AsaadHannaa 4:26pm · 22 Jan 2018
    Assad army dropped chlorine bombed barrels on Abo Aldhoor military base #Idlib countryside in a big attempt to take control of it.

    The above is from an anti-Syrian "Media Adviser, researcher and freelance journalist" previously published or quoted by Al Jazeerah, The Guardian, Business Insider and several other outlets. His twitter account has a "Verified" mark.

    "There is only a tiny problem with the tweet about the Abu Duhur air base. Since Saturday the base is in government hands. Yesterday the Syrian Ministry of Defense officially announced the full capture of the air base."

    It's wonderful to see Eva Bartlett posting here.

    Marcus: January 24, 2018

    "Whoever conducted the attacks, Russia ultimately bears responsibility for the victims in East Ghouta and countless other Syrians targeted with chemical weapons, since Russia became involved in Syria," Tillerson told reporters.

    Tillerson told reporters, and reporters just wrote it down! I was following the Twitter exchange just now between OffG and the BBC reporter – Dan something – about the recent new round of Russia fear porn , and it's just the same ; "I just write what the general said": this alleged journalist.

    Glad OffG reminded him what journalism actually is. You are supposed to check your facts!

    "There is simply no denying that Russia, by shielding its Syrian ally, has breached its commitments to the US as a framework guarantor. At a bare minimum, Russia must stop vetoing, or at the very least abstain, from future security council votes on this issue," he added.

    But what if the "rebels" did the attack? or – even more likely – what if the "attack" never happened like the one featured in "Saving Syria's Children"?

    A good reporter could have had this fellow on the ropes, having to explain the nonsense he's talking – but no, they just obediently type it all up and publish it.

    Eva Bartlett: January 24, 2018
    Well, if I may, I'll comment with a link to my rebuttal of their (employing CIA-tactics and non sequitur arguments) recent smear article whitewashing of al-Qaeda's rescuers:
    https://ingaza.wordpress.com/2018/01/06/how-the-mainstream-media-whitewashed-al-qaeda-and-the-white-helmets-in-syria/
    (including many good links to analyses of the article)
    Captain Kemlo: January 24, 2018
    Hi Eva

    When I first read the Solon article in the Guardian my hackles rose alarmingly. At the time of publication, there was already widespread information as to the true nature of the White Helmets, including about origin and funding.

    As well as subsequently reading many articles in independent media about the Solon piece, I have belatedly read your linked article above. The emails you received from Solon inviting comment were, as you rightly imply, damning 'evidence' as to the nature of her proposed story. It simply beggars belief.

    It has got to the point where I cannot read/listen/view to ANY news stories in the mainstream media without doubting their accuracy. And that, I began to think, was a tragedy. But no, it's actually liberating: be a skeptic. Ask why. Ask who benefits from the story. And what their sources are – If unnamed, simply disregard. And remember that the MSM is beholden to very powerful media groups with their own agendas along with deep and opaque ties to various governments/agencies.

    In the USSR, before the collapse of communism, party members used to lament that Russians didn't believe any of their media output but were also amazed and full of awe that people in the West tended to believe their own media. Not any more. We've finally come full circle

    A Petherbridge: January 24, 2018
    Thanks – comments are a great initiative on some of these Guardian propaganda stories. Amazing the way US officials can in one breath condemn a nation (Syria Govt in this case) and at the same time announce they are establishing an illegal and permanent garrison in the country (Syria in this case). These US officials must have skin made of rawhide – or snake leather. Surprised our Foreign Minister Bishop hasn't been applauding this new development.
    falcemartello: January 24, 2018
    Another nail in the coffin of the legacy news media. The more the years go bye the more the alternative media becomes mainstream. Once the reset happens good bye to the lame street media and hello to good old fashion news where journos question more.

    The Guardian like all legacy news sights are on life support.

    Russia ate my homework to western economic recovery to Takfiri rebranding as freedom fighters have all be revealed as simple good old fashion propaganda how Orwellian and fascistic the times we r living

    vanessa beeley: January 24, 2018
    It is censorship. When the Guardian promoted the White Helmet bid for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2016, it shamelessly lobbied for their success. The hundreds, if not thousands of comments reflected public outrage at their blatant PR for an organisation that has clear affiliations to Al Qaeda in Syria and which is financed by the UK FCO with taxpayer funds. To dismiss this outrage as "trolling" merely echoes the lexicon employed by the Guardian to dismiss those who are exposing the UK regime's nefarious role in Syria and its project to destabilize a sovereign nation and to bring about regime change yet again, in favour of a puppet regime more in tune with UK imperialist designs in the region.

    When Solon wrote her appalling lynch-mob-hack piece attacking myself, Eva Bartlett, Tim Anderson etc she used the same terminology – and the Guardian exercised the same censorship – even, illegally, denying myself and others named in the article, the right to reply.

    Rather than attack the "standard of debate", I would be asking, why has the rage against the criminal misdirecting, omission & misrepresenting of facts in Syria, reached such a fever pitch? You may consider those "trolling" remarks to be beneath you but I say, that is an insult to the public that the Guardian is asking to fund their efforts .that makes the Guardian answerable to its audience, however they may express their disgust.

    [Jan 30, 2018] How We Got Donald Trump by Andrew J. Bacevich

    Notable quotes:
    "... members of Washington's smart set, Republicans and Democrats alike, declared that the opportunities now presenting themselves went beyond the merely stupendous. Indeed, history itself had ended. With the United States as the planet's sole superpower, [neo]liberal democratic capitalism was destined to prevail everywhere. ..."
    "... In the 1990s, rampant victory disease fueled extraordinary hubris and a pattern of reckless behavior informed by an assumption that the world would ultimately conform to the wishes of the "indispensable nation." In the years to come, an endless sequence of costly mishaps would ensue from Mogadishu to Mosul. ..."
    "... Trump is not a revolutionary, and he is not the devil. He simply represents an attempt late in a systemic downward cycle to correct few excesses and buy some time. ..."
    "... The beneficiaries of the excess policies – cheap labor businesses, ethnic castes, trans-gender professionals, open border fanatics, military extremists – are fighting tooth and nail to keep any change from happening. They are at this point beyond hysteria, they sense the goodies might be slipping from their hands (it is mostly about their jobs and careers). ..."
    "... Two fundamental omissions from the analysis are: in domestic policies the devastating impact of affirmative action on the next generation of young, white males. And in foreign policy the equally devastating impact of Bill Clinton's attack on Serbia (to create a 'Muslim' Kosovo statelet in Europe) had on the international law and norms. Iraq inevitably followed Serbia. ..."
    Jan 30, 2018 | www.unz.com

    1989: The Fall of the Berlin Wall. As the Cold War wound down, members of Washington's smart set, Republicans and Democrats alike, declared that the opportunities now presenting themselves went beyond the merely stupendous. Indeed, history itself had ended. With the United States as the planet's sole superpower, [neo]liberal democratic capitalism was destined to prevail everywhere.

    There would be no way except the American Way. In fact, however, the passing of the Cold War should have occasioned a moment of reflection regarding the sundry mistakes and moral compromises that marred U.S. policy from the 1940s through the 1980s. Unfortunately, policy elites had no interest in second thoughts -- and certainly not in remorse or contrition.

    In the 1990s, rampant victory disease fueled extraordinary hubris and a pattern of reckless behavior informed by an assumption that the world would ultimately conform to the wishes of the "indispensable nation." In the years to come, an endless sequence of costly mishaps would ensue from Mogadishu to Mosul.

    When, in due time, Donald Trump announced his intention to dismantle the establishment that had presided over those failures, many Americans liked what he had to say, even if he spoke from a position of total ignorance.

    Beckow , January 30, 2018 at 7:53 pm GMT

    Those who hate Trump, will hate Trump. And very little of what they write will not be colored by the hatred.

    The analysis – although based on a sound historical premise – is off by miles. It focuses on personalities and avoids mentioning the systemic failures by Western institutions, from media to academia, from Hollywood to UN. Trump is not a revolutionary, and he is not the devil. He simply represents an attempt late in a systemic downward cycle to correct few excesses and buy some time.

    The beneficiaries of the excess policies – cheap labor businesses, ethnic castes, trans-gender professionals, open border fanatics, military extremists – are fighting tooth and nail to keep any change from happening. They are at this point beyond hysteria, they sense the goodies might be slipping from their hands (it is mostly about their jobs and careers).

    Two fundamental omissions from the analysis are: in domestic policies the devastating impact of affirmative action on the next generation of young, white males. And in foreign policy the equally devastating impact of Bill Clinton's attack on Serbia (to create a 'Muslim' Kosovo statelet in Europe) had on the international law and norms. Iraq inevitably followed Serbia.

    Why are these points left out? Because they would make the neo-liberal Democrats look bad? Right, Gore as president, that would had fixed it all

    David In TN , January 30, 2018 at 11:13 pm GMT
    Bacevich didn't write a word about the Open Borders fetish of both parties from which Trump dissented, or seemed to. Not a word. And this played no small part in Trump winning the GOP nomination and the election.

    [Jan 30, 2018] The Unseen Wars of America the Empire The American Conservative

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Like the Romans, we have become an empire, committed to fighting for scores of nations, with troops on every continent and forces in combat operations of which the American people are only vaguely aware. "I didn't know there were 1,000 troops in Niger," said Senator Lindsey Graham when four Green Berets were killed there. "We don't know exactly where we're at in the world, militarily, and what we're doing." ..."
    "... Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, ..."
    "... . To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at www.creators.com. ..."
    Jan 30, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    The Unseen Wars of America the Empire By Patrick J. Buchanan • January 30, 2018, 12:01 AM

    Forward Operating Base Torkham, in Nangahar Province, Afghanistan (army.mil) If Turkey is not bluffing, U.S. troops in Manbij, Syria, could be under fire by week's end, and NATO engulfed in the worst crisis in its history.

    Turkish President Erdogan said Friday his forces will cleanse Manbij of Kurdish fighters, alongside whom U.S. troops are embedded.

    Erdogan's foreign minister demanded concrete steps by the United States to end its support of the Kurds, who control the Syrian border with Turkey east of the Euphrates all the way to Iraq.

    If the Turks attack Manbij, America will face a choice: stand by our Kurdish allies and resist the Turks, or abandon the Kurds.

    Should the U.S. let the Turks drive the Kurds out of Manbij and the entire Syrian border area, as Erdogan threatens, American credibility would suffer a blow from which it would not soon recover.

    But to stand with the Kurds and oppose Erdogan's forces could mean a crackup of NATO and a loss of U.S. bases inside Turkey, including the air base at Incirlik.

    Turkey also sits astride the Dardanelles entrance to the Black Sea. NATO's loss would thus be a triumph for Vladimir Putin, who gave Ankara the green light to cleanse the Kurds from Afrin.

    Yet Syria is but one of many challenges facing U.S. foreign policy.

    The Winter Olympics in South Korea may have taken the menace of a North Korean ICBM out of the news, but no one believes that threat is behind us.

    Last week, China charged that the USS Hopper, a guided missile destroyer, sailed within 12 nautical miles of Scarborough Shoal, a reef in the South China Sea claimed by Beijing, though it is far closer to Luzon in the Philippines. The destroyer, says China, was chased off by one of her frigates. If we continue to contest China's territorial claims with our warships, a clash is inevitable.

    In a similar incident Monday, a Russian military jet came within five feet of a U.S. Navy EP-3 Orion surveillance jet in international airspace over the Black Sea, forcing the Navy plane to end its mission.

    U.S. relations with Cold War ally Pakistan are at rock bottom. In his first tweet of 2018, President Trump charged Pakistan with being a false friend.

    "The United States has foolishly given Pakistan more than 33 billion dollars in aid over the last 15 years, and they have given us nothing but lies & deceit, thinking of our leaders as fools," Trump declared. "They give safe haven to the terrorists we hunt in Afghanistan, with little help. No more!"

    As for America's longest war in Afghanistan, now in its 17th year, the end is nowhere on the horizon. A week ago, the International Hotel in Kabul was attacked and held for 13 hours by Taliban gunmen who killed 40. Midweek, a Save the Children facility in Jalalabad was attacked by ISIS, creating panic among aid workers across the country.

    Saturday, an ambulance exploded in Kabul, killing 103 people and wounding 235. Monday, Islamic State militants attacked Afghan soldiers guarding a military academy in Kabul. With the fighting season two months off, U.S. troops will not soon be departing. If Pakistan is indeed providing sanctuary for the terrorists of the Haqqani network, how does this war end successfully for the United States? Last week, in a friendly fire incident, the U.S.-led coalition killed 10 Iraqi soldiers. The Iraq war began 15 years ago.

    Yet another war, where the humanitarian crisis rivals Syria, continues on the Arabian Peninsula. There, a Saudi air, sea, and land blockade that threatens the Yemeni people with starvation has failed to dislodge Houthi rebels who seized the capital Sanaa three years ago. This weekend brought news that secessionist rebels, backed by the United Arab Emirates, seized power in Yemen's southern port of Aden from the Saudi-backed Hadi regime fighting the Houthis. These rebels seek to split the country, as it was before 1990.

    Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE appear to be backing different horses in this tribal-civil-sectarian war into which America has been drawn. There are other wars -- Somalia, Libya, Ukraine -- where the U.S. is taking sides, sending arms, training troops, flying missions.

    Like the Romans, we have become an empire, committed to fighting for scores of nations, with troops on every continent and forces in combat operations of which the American people are only vaguely aware. "I didn't know there were 1,000 troops in Niger," said Senator Lindsey Graham when four Green Berets were killed there. "We don't know exactly where we're at in the world, militarily, and what we're doing."

    No, we don't, Senator. As in all empires, power is passing to the generals. And what causes the greatest angst today in the imperial city? Fear that a four-page memo worked up in the House Judiciary Committee may discredit Robert Mueller's investigation of Russia-gate.

    Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever . To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at www.creators.com.

    [Jan 30, 2018] Iraqi Oil Minister confident that an oil export capacity of five million barrels per day will be realized by the end of 2018

    Jan 30, 2018 | peakoilbarrel.com

    Energy News: 01/29/2018 at 7:22 am

    2018-01-29 Chatham House Events – Iraqi Oil Minister confident that an oil export capacity of five million barrels per day will be realized by the end of 2018 – a "landmark in the oil industry"

    Current Iraqi oil reserves of 153 billion barrels due to reach 175 billion in the coming years, says oil minister Luaibi at Annual MENA (Middle East & North Africa) Energy conference

    Iraq's oil minister Luaibi said the country seeks to ramp up refining capacity and reduce imports of refined products :"I am determined that Iraq will become a product exporter instead of product importer".

    https://twitter.com/CH_Events

    [Jan 29, 2018] US Ambassador Urges Russia To React Calmly To Corrupt Oligarchs List Due Monday

    Notable quotes:
    "... In December 2016, President Obama closed two diplomatic compounds used by Russia in retaliation for "hacking the election," expelling 35 diplomats amid fresh sanctions. Then in July 2017, the Senate voted to increase sanctions on Russia by a 98-2 margin, which Trump reluctantly signed off on August 2 - stoking fears over a trade war after comments by Russian prime minister Dmitry Medvedev that the law had ended hope for improving US-Russia relations. ..."
    "... Perhaps one of the main drivers behind Russian oligarchs shedding assets before the U.S. Treasury's "indices of corruption" are released is an Executive Order signed quietly in Late December which freezes the U.S. housed assets of foreign government officials or executives of foreign corporations deemed to be corrupt. ..."
    "... In fact, anyone in the world who has "materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material or technological support for, or goods or services" to foreigners targeted by the Executive Order is subject to frozen assets. This would apply to D.C. lobbyists working for corrupt Russian oligarchs, or U.S. government officials who have, say, effectuated a uranium deal deemed corrupt. ..."
    "... As such, tomorrow's release of "corrupt oligarchs" by the US Treasury Department may have serious consequences for the finances of Americans who have done any type of business with any Russians deemed corrupt by the United States. ..."
    Jan 29, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    The US Ambassador to Russia urged the Kremlin to react "calmly" to the U.S. Treasury Department's list of "corrupt oligarchs" due Monday. The list is designed to "name and shame" elite Russians into thinking twice before engaging in business with Putin's government. It will be up to Congress to decide whether the list should be published.

    "I urge to take this report, based on its real and not a contrived essence and without emotions, because relations between our countries are far from being exhausted by this one legal act, and I was reminded about it in Washington, where I was two weeks ago," - US Ambassador John Huntsman via - newsru (translated)

    Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters two weeks ago that Russia will react to any punitive measures against its businessmen, stating "The principle of reciprocity remains," suggesting that Putin would employ a commensurate response to a U.S. crackdown on oligarchs.

    As we previously reported , the list was created pursuant to an August, 2017 law requiring the Treasury and State Departments identify officials and oligarchs as determined by "their closeness to the Russian regime and their net worth" in order to penalize the Kremlin for its alleged meddling in the 2016 election.

    The report is intended to "name and shame" Russia's elite who prop up Putin , and to send a message "that Putin's aggression in terms of Russian interference in our elections will be very costly to them," said Daniel Fried, a former assistant secretary of State who led the State Department Russia sanctions office.

    It is likely to signal to Russia's political and business classes that they'd be better off maintaining a distance from the Putin government, and it could lead to further sanctions against individuals who participate in corruption, Fried said.

    " The Russian elite reacted with something between anxiety and panic about the prospect of this list ," Fried said. "They focused on this immediately, and they're very worried about it. " - USA Today

    The list will include "indices of corruption with respect to those individuals," along with any foreign assets they hold. According to Bloomberg, this sent Russian fat cats into a liquidation frenzy - with many scrambling to contact D.C. lobbyists in order to buy their way off the list.

    Some people who think they're likely to land on the list have stress-tested the potential impact on their investments , two people with knowledge of the matter said. Others are liquidating holdings , according to their U.S. advisers.

    Russian businessmen have approached former Treasury and State Department officials with experience in sanctions for help staying off the list, said Dan Fried, who previously worked at the State Department and said he turned down such offers. Some Russians sent proxies to Washington in an attempt to avoid lobbying disclosures, according to one person that was contacted . - Bloomberg

    Corruption Index

    The Treasury's report must include "indices of corruption , " which will list any foreign assets next to an oligarch considered corrupt. " Because of the nervousness that the Russian business community is facing, a number of oligarchs are already beginning to wind back businesses , treating them as if they are already designated, to stay ahead of it," said Daniel Tannebaum, head of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 's global financial sanctions unit.

    Russia's well-connected billionaires have hired law firms to try to keep them off the list, said Ariel Cohen, a Russia analyst at the Atlantic Council think tank. Russians believe the list is a first step toward increasing the current 29 Russians under U.S. sanctions by adding 40 to 400 names, Cohen added. - USA Today

    Vladimir Putin has warned wealthy nationals over worsening U.S. sanctions, and provided them with a capital amnesty program designed to allow oligarchs to repatriate some of their overseas assets. Meanwhile, Putin has issued special bonds which will allow the wealthy to hold assets outside of the reach of the U.S. Treasury.

    Separate sanctions handed down

    As we reported earlier in the month, Treasury officials are concerned that people will confuse Monday's list of corrupt oligarchs with separate sanctions handed down to Russians over the Ukraine crisis.

    On Friday, the Treausry Department added 11 individuals to a "blacklist" which now contains 21 Russian or Ukraainian nationals and nine companies - most of which are power or energy firms. The Treasury's announcement reads in part:

    WASHINGTON –The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) today designated 21 individuals and 9 entities under four Executive Orders (E.O.s) related to Russia and Ukraine, including three individuals and two entities related to Russia's transfer of four turbines made by a Russian-German joint venture to Crimea. Today's action is part of Treasury's continued commitment to maintain sanctions pressure on Russia until it fully implements its commitments under the Minsk agreements. This action underscores the U.S. government's opposition to Russia's occupation of Crimea and firm refusal to recognize its attempted annexation of the peninsula. These sanctions follow the European Union's recent extension of sanctions and reinforce our continued unity in supporting Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity.

    As a result of today's action, any property or interests in property of the designated persons in the possession or control of U.S. persons or within the United States must be blocked. Additionally, transactions by U.S. persons involving these persons are generally prohibited.

    "The U.S. government is committed to maintaining the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine and to targeting those who attempt to undermine the Minsk agreements," said Treasury Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin. "Those who provide goods, services, or material support to individuals and entities sanctioned by the United States for their activities in Ukraine are engaging in behavior that could expose them to U.S. sanctions."

    Today, OFAC also identified 12 subsidiaries that are owned 50 percent or more by previously sanctioned Russian companies to provide additional information to assist the private sector with sanctions compliance.

    Relations between Washington and Moscow have deteriorated since 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea, sparking the conflict in Ukraine. Diplomatic ties have worstened between the two nuclear superpowers, with Washington accusing Moscow of interfering in the 2016 US presidential election.

    In December 2016, President Obama closed two diplomatic compounds used by Russia in retaliation for "hacking the election," expelling 35 diplomats amid fresh sanctions. Then in July 2017, the Senate voted to increase sanctions on Russia by a 98-2 margin, which Trump reluctantly signed off on August 2 - stoking fears over a trade war after comments by Russian prime minister Dmitry Medvedev that the law had ended hope for improving US-Russia relations.

    Several weeks later in August 2017, the Trump administration "thanked" Russia again - giving them 72 hours to vacate three more diplomatic facilities in San Francisco, Washington DC, and New York City.

    Towards the end of 2017, Washington took a series of steps to further vilify Russia, branding the country a "rival power" and "revisionist power," while imposing new sanctions on several individuals linked to the Kremlin.

    Trump's Executive Order

    Perhaps one of the main drivers behind Russian oligarchs shedding assets before the U.S. Treasury's "indices of corruption" are released is an Executive Order signed quietly in Late December which freezes the U.S. housed assets of foreign government officials or executives of foreign corporations deemed to be corrupt.

    In fact, anyone in the world who has "materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material or technological support for, or goods or services" to foreigners targeted by the Executive Order is subject to frozen assets. This would apply to D.C. lobbyists working for corrupt Russian oligarchs, or U.S. government officials who have, say, effectuated a uranium deal deemed corrupt.

    As such, tomorrow's release of "corrupt oligarchs" by the US Treasury Department may have serious consequences for the finances of Americans who have done any type of business with any Russians deemed corrupt by the United States.

    [Jan 29, 2018] America's National Defense Is Really Offense by Philip M. Giraldi

    Notable quotes:
    "... Occasionally, it is actually delusional, as when it refers to consolidating "gains we have made in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and elsewhere." ..."
    "... At times Mattis' supplementary "remarks" were more bombastic than reassuring, as when he warned " those who would threaten America's experiment in democracy: if you challenge us, it will be your longest and worst day." He did not exactly go into what the military response to hacking a politician's emails might be and one can only speculate, which is precisely the problem. ..."
    "... Some of the remarks by Mattis relate to China and Russia. He said that "We face growing threats from revisionist powers as different as China and Russia, nations that seek to create a world consistent with their authoritarian models - pursuing veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic and security decisions." There is, however, no evidence that either country is exporting "authoritarian models," nor are they vetoing anything that they do not perceive as direct and immediate threats frequently orchestrated by Washington, which is intervening in local quarrels thousands of miles away from the U.S. borders. And when it comes to exporting models, who does it more persistently than Washington? ..."
    "... The report goes on to state that Russia and China and rogue regimes like Iran have " increased efforts short of armed conflict by expanding coercion to new fronts, violating principle of sovereignty, exploiting ambiguity, and deliberately blurring the lines between civil and military goals." As confusing civil and military is what the United States itself has been doing in Libya, Iraq and, currently, Syria, the allegation might be considered ironic. ..."
    "... What might that mean in practice? Back in 2005, Vice President Dick Cheney had requested "a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States... [including] a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons ... not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States." ..."
    "... Pentagon planners clearly anticipate another year of playing at defense by keeping the offense on the field. An impetuous and poorly informed president is a danger to all of us, particularly as he is surrounded by general-advisers who see a military solution to every problem. Hopefully wiser counsel will prevail. ..."
    "... how should China, Russia and Iran be responding to the strategic plans of Mattis, the US War Hawks and neocons who surround Trump? Who is it that is threatening the United States, that is not responding to threats first against them? ..."
    "... This appears to me to be the same dangerous, belligerent talk justifying preemptive strike thinking that separates out the United States from its' perceived enemies. And probably the rest of the world! And brought us, according to the Concerned Scientists, again to "two minutes to midnight." It seems, to me, quite rational for Russia and China to respond accordingly, like good boy scouts, and also be prepared. ..."
    "... The U.S. since it very first day of founding is offense. The Revolutionary War is offense against the British Empire. It built its first navy ships, not for defense but to fight a war in the Med Sea across the ocean. No one attacked the U.S ..."
    "... The U.S. is 100% offense since day one to today. There is no department of defense. But its department of aggression and war was founded in 1776. ..."
    "... The physics of nuclear war allow no winners because we all share this earth. ..."
    "... Of course here in America we have no public shelters so threats by our plutocracy puppets must be absorbed by our fellow American Sheep. After the bombs come down are you one of those politicians holding a ticket to those vast hidden U.S. government shelters where sheep are not allowed? Doubtful ..."
    "... Wake up folks aka sheep / slaves before it's too late! No one is going to protect you! You and me are being played! ..."
    "... Putin, a Russian patriot if there ever was one, recognized that western capital could not be resisted by the Soviet system. In defense of Russia he liberated the economy, gradually but inexorably eliminating the evils of the Yeltsin years, and releasing the social forces needed for national strength and productivity. He reversed the isolation of Soviet times, establishing international relations based on mutual advantage and trust, not coercion. Despite western propaganda, he has established himself as a good neighbor, and as a reliable partner and ally. His stewardship has made Russia stronger and more impervious to US hegemonic ambitions. ..."
    "... Putin is no lackey of US imperialism. He together with China and Iran form the chief bulwarks against it. ..."
    "... It seems that Mattis is a fool; he's reading something in which he has no comprehension for its ramifications in the long run. ..."
    "... Maybe the Lockheed Martin CEO written the document so that idiot would read it to the sheeple....Who knows. ..."
    Jan 29, 2018 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

    On Friday, the Pentagon released an unclassified summary of the 2018 National Defense Strategy report . On the same day, Secretary of Defense James Mattis delivered prepared remarks relating to the document.

    Reading the summary is illuminating, to say the least, and somewhat disturbing, as it focuses very little on actual defense of the realm and relates much more to offensive military action that might be employed to further certain debatable national interests. Occasionally, it is actually delusional, as when it refers to consolidating "gains we have made in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and elsewhere."

    At times Mattis' supplementary "remarks" were more bombastic than reassuring, as when he warned " those who would threaten America's experiment in democracy: if you challenge us, it will be your longest and worst day." He did not exactly go into what the military response to hacking a politician's emails might be and one can only speculate, which is precisely the problem.

    One of the most bizarre aspects of the report is its breathtaking assumption that "competitors" should be subjected to a potential military response if it is determined that they are in conflict with the strategic goals of the U.S. government. It is far removed from the old-fashioned Constitutional concept that one has armed forces to defend the country against an actual threat involving an attack by hostile forces and instead embraces preventive war, which is clearly an excuse for serial interventions overseas.

    Some of the remarks by Mattis relate to China and Russia. He said that "We face growing threats from revisionist powers as different as China and Russia, nations that seek to create a world consistent with their authoritarian models - pursuing veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic and security decisions." There is, however, no evidence that either country is exporting "authoritarian models," nor are they vetoing anything that they do not perceive as direct and immediate threats frequently orchestrated by Washington, which is intervening in local quarrels thousands of miles away from the U.S. borders. And when it comes to exporting models, who does it more persistently than Washington?

    The report goes on to state that Russia and China and rogue regimes like Iran have " increased efforts short of armed conflict by expanding coercion to new fronts, violating principle of sovereignty, exploiting ambiguity, and deliberately blurring the lines between civil and military goals." As confusing civil and military is what the United States itself has been doing in Libya, Iraq and, currently, Syria, the allegation might be considered ironic.

    The scariest assertion in the summary is the following: "Nuclear forces - Modernization of the nuclear force includes developing options to counter competitors' coercive strategies, predicated on the threatened use of nuclear or strategic non-nuclear attacks." That means that the White House and Pentagon are reserving the option to use nuclear weapons even when there is no imminent or existential threat as long as there is a "strategic" reason for doing so. Strategic would be defined by the president and Mattis, while the War Powers Act allows Donald Trump to legally initiate a nuclear attack.

    What might that mean in practice? Back in 2005, Vice President Dick Cheney had requested "a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States... [including] a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons ... not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States."

    Possible employment of "weapons of mass destruction" responded to intelligence suggesting that conventional weapons would be unable to penetrate the underground hardened sites where Iran's presumed nuclear weapons facilities were reportedly located. But as it turned out, Iran had no nuclear weapons program and attacking it would have been totally gratuitous. Some other neocon inspired plans to attack Iran also included a nuclear option if Iran actually had the temerity to resist American force majeure.

    Pentagon planners clearly anticipate another year of playing at defense by keeping the offense on the field. An impetuous and poorly informed president is a danger to all of us, particularly as he is surrounded by general-advisers who see a military solution to every problem. Hopefully wiser counsel will prevail.

    Possible employment of "weapons of mass destruction" responded to intelligence suggesting that conventional weapons would be unable to penetrate the underground hardened sites where Iran's presumed nuclear weapons facilities were reportedly located. But as it turned out, Iran had no nuclear weapons program and attacking it would have been totally gratuitous. Some other neocon inspired plans to attack Iran also included a nuclear option if Iran actually had the temerity to resist American force majeure.

    Pentagon planners clearly anticipate another year of playing at defense by keeping the offense on the field. An impetuous and poorly informed president is a danger to all of us, particularly as he is surrounded by general-advisers who see a military solution to every problem. Hopefully wiser counsel will prevail.

    By Philip M. Giraldi Ph.D., Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest. This article was originally published by Strategic Culture Foundation

    James Higginbotham · 20 hours ago

    well. as a combat vet it's ALWAYS better to be PREPARED THAN SORRY. and you DON'T sit on your Butt waiting for your enemies to attack FIRST when you can PREVENT IT.
    Len · 19 hours ago
    Better PREPARED THAN SORRY!

    In that case James; how should China, Russia and Iran be responding to the strategic plans of Mattis, the US War Hawks and neocons who surround Trump? Who is it that is threatening the United States, that is not responding to threats first against them?

    This appears to me to be the same dangerous, belligerent talk justifying preemptive strike thinking that separates out the United States from its' perceived enemies. And probably the rest of the world! And brought us, according to the Concerned Scientists, again to "two minutes to midnight." It seems, to me, quite rational for Russia and China to respond accordingly, like good boy scouts, and also be prepared.

    However; It is very dangerous, for if they detect there is an incoming missile or potentially nuclear armed plane what are they expected to do? They won't be sitting on their hands, that's for sure!

    Just look at how the ordinary people of Hawaii responded to a "false alarm" recently. I put "false alarm" in brackets because who knows what the United States neocons get up to nowadays. This is all very wearying and repeated so often there is a danger of people giving up.

    Isn't it interesting how we are surrounded by folktales and the warnings of the old Prophets and new which we ignore at our peril? Like crying wolf. God help us all if some deluded idiot with authority, including that self-styled "genius" and Supreme Commander, General Trump, miscalculate. I imagine what remains of the sidelined, but still rational thinking Generals and Admirals and military realists in the lower ranks are really sweating it out worrying what the morons in charge might do.

    The U.S. since it very first day of founding is offense. The Revolutionary War is offense against the British Empire. It built its first navy ships, not for defense but to fight a war in the Med Sea across the ocean. No one attacked the U.S.

    The U.S. is 100% offense since day one to today. There is no department of defense. But its department of aggression and war was founded in 1776.

    1871 89p · 16 hours ago
    There is not one human being on the planet that would have the inclination to want to invade USA Inc. We watch and read and only need a minuscule amount of imagination to know that USA Inc is the "sh*th*le " of the world populated by "ar*eh*les".

    The only solution is for NK to invite China and Russia to send in missile batteries to defend NK and if they are attacked, all US military bases in Asia will be obliterated with Hawaii and Mainland in quick succession if USA Inc escalates.
    Cities of Seoul and Tokyo need be left with no doubt that they will be tripled glazed,

    Russia and China need to lift sanctions on NK immediately .
    The rest of the world needs boycott USA Inc to the Olympics, just as the fascist West did to Russia when it went to the rescue of Afghanistan.

    Persons inciting war need to be prosecuted, those who incite use of WMD must be put in a special category and immediately stopped from traveling outside their country and from speaking at the UN.

    A resolution must be passed at the United General Assembly to put above suggestion into practice, and see if we can not get a resounding "vote" for it, as was the case for support of Palestine recently.

    Sheeple · 12 hours ago
    America's National Defense Is really to terrorize the sheep / slaves into submission. The physics of nuclear war allow no winners because we all share this earth.

    Of course here in America we have no public shelters so threats by our plutocracy puppets must be absorbed by our fellow American Sheep. After the bombs come down are you one of those politicians holding a ticket to those vast hidden U.S. government shelters where sheep are not allowed? Doubtful! You can just turn around and try to kiss your hind quarter Ba Ba a a aaa.

    Wake up folks aka sheep / slaves before it's too late! No one is going to protect you! You and me are being played!

    Time to replace all politicians with AI Robots. Who needs rulers anyway? Let politicians be the first to be replaced with robots

    Inthebyte · 9 hours ago
    The Department Of Defense was previously called The Department Of War. I refer to it as the Department Of War. Tell it like it is folks.
    oates792 · 5 hours ago
    Dave above has one cockeyed view of Putin, and of those sources of opinion that support him. Soviet Russia imploded because it could not deliver the goods.An endless arms race, a population regimented, harnessed, and stifled in service to a centrally planned economy, run by a vast self-serving bureaucracy, It it was an experiment in state capitalism that, in hindsight, could not but fail. The west tried to strangle it in its crib but in the event it died of old age.

    Putin, a Russian patriot if there ever was one, recognized that western capital could not be resisted by the Soviet system. In defense of Russia he liberated the economy, gradually but inexorably eliminating the evils of the Yeltsin years, and releasing the social forces needed for national strength and productivity. He reversed the isolation of Soviet times, establishing international relations based on mutual advantage and trust, not coercion. Despite western propaganda, he has established himself as a good neighbor, and as a reliable partner and ally. His stewardship has made Russia stronger and more impervious to US hegemonic ambitions.

    Putin is no lackey of US imperialism. He together with China and Iran form the chief bulwarks against it. Dave's view is perverse.

    Hexx · 4 hours ago
    It seems that Mattis is a fool; he's reading something in which he has no comprehension for its ramifications in the long run.

    Maybe the Lockheed Martin CEO written the document so that idiot would read it to the sheeple....Who knows.

    [Jan 29, 2018] In the Western World Lies Have Displaced Truth by Paul Craig Roberts

    Notable quotes:
    "... A conspiracy of US government agencies, tax-exempt think tanks funded by the ruling interests, and media acting in behalf of a war and police state agenda work to shape perceived reality as it is described in George Orwell's book, 1984 ..."
    "... Nothing stated in the Western presstitute media and no statement by any Western government or subservient vassal state can be trusted to comply with the facts. Truth is the enemy of the state, and the state is eliminating the truth. ..."
    Jan 29, 2018 | www.unz.com

    A conspiracy of US government agencies, tax-exempt think tanks funded by the ruling interests, and media acting in behalf of a war and police state agenda work to shape perceived reality as it is described in George Orwell's book, 1984 , and in the film, The Matrix . Controlled perception-based reality is only a Facebook "like" away from killing one person or one million or elevating a liar or the warmonger responsible for the killing to hero status or to the conrol of the CIA or FBI or the US presidency.

    ... ... ...

    ...Nothing stated in the Western presstitute media and no statement by any Western government or subservient vassal state can be trusted to comply with the facts. Truth is the enemy of the state, and the state is eliminating the truth.

    Peoples in the United States, Europe, Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the various vassal states, such as Japan, all live day in, day out, an orchestrated lie that serves interests directly opposed to the interests of the peoples.

    Governments that do not rest on truth rest on tyranny.

    [Jan 29, 2018] The War on Dissent by C.J. Hopkins

    Notable quotes:
    "... This propaganda campaign is part and parcel of the roll-out of a new "official narrative." If it wasn't so completely depressing, I would say it is awe-inspiring to watch. This full-spectrum type of mass indoctrination, or "reality adjustment," doesn't happen that often. It used to only happen on the national level, typically during times of war, when the ruling classes of nation states needed to temporarily unite their populaces and demonize their enemy. It is happening now on a global level, for the second time in the 21st Century. ..."
    "... The global capitalist ruling classes (which now reigned unopposed over the entire planet) needed a new official narrative to unite, not just a nation, or region, but everyone within the new global market. This narrative needed a convincing enemy that would function on a global level. "Terrorism" is that enemy. ..."
    "... The key to understanding both the original War on Terror official narrative and the expanded variation we are being sold currently is the fact that terrorism is an insurgent tactic employed by weaker militant forces against a ruling government or occupation force. This makes it the perfect bogeyman (in essence, the only bogeyman) for our brave new global capitalist world, where global capitalism takes the place of that "ruling government or occupation force." ..."
    "... we we no longer live in a world where nation-against-nation conflict is driving the course of political events. We live in a world where global capitalism is driving the course of political events. The economies of virtually every nation on the planet are hopelessly interdependent. Capitalist ideology pervades all cultures, despite their superficial differences. It is a globally hegemonic system, so it has no external enemies. None. The only threats it faces are internal. Its "enemies" are, by definition, insurgent in other words, "extremist" or "terrorist." ..."
    "... This even holds true for the Russia paranoia the ruling classes are pumping out currently it's all just part of the "reality adjustment," and the launch of a new official narrative, not a prelude to war with Russia. The USA is not going to war with Russia. The notion is beyond ridiculous. Have you noticed, despite all their warlike verbiage, that no one has put forth a single scenario in which war between Russia and the West makes sense? That's because it doesn't make sense. Not for Russia, the USA, or anyone else. This is why "the Russian threat" is being marketed as an "attack on democratic values" and "an attempt to sow division," and so on. Because the war the corporatocracy is waging is not a war against Russia, the nation. The war they are fighting is a counter-insurgency, an ideological counter-insurgency. "Russia" has just been added to the list of "terrorists" and "extremists" who "hate us for our freedom." ..."
    "... The message is, "you're either with us or against us." The message is, "we will tolerate no dissent, except for officially sanctioned dissent." The message is, "try to fuck with us, and we will marginalize you, and demonize you, and demonetize you, and disappear you." ..."
    "... The message is, "we control reality, so reality is whatever the fuck we say it is, regardless of whether it is based in fact or just some totally made-up story we got The Washington Post to publish and then had the corporate media repeat, over and over, for fourteen months. " If that doesn't qualify as full-blown Orwellian, I'm not sure what, exactly, would. ..."
    "... C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing (USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23 , is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. He can reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org . ..."
    Jan 29, 2018 | www.unz.com

    Just when you thought the corporatocracy couldn't possibly get more creepily Orwellian, the Twitter Corporation starts sending out emails advising that they "have reason to believe" we have "followed, retweeted," or "liked the content of" an account "connected to a propaganda effort by a Russia government-linked organization known as the Internet Research Agency." While it's not as dramatic as the Thought Police watching you on your telescreen, or posters reminding you "Big Brother Is Watching," the effect is more or less the same.

    And if that's not creepily Orwellian enough for you, Facebook has established a Ministry of Counterspeech , manned by "a dedicated counterterrorism team" of "former intelligence and law-enforcement officials," to "disrupt ideologies underlying extremism" ( see Chris Hedges' recent essay for details ). The Google Corporation is systematically disappearing , deranking , and maliciously misrepresenting non-corporate news and opinion sources, and the "thought criminals" who contribute to them. Meanwhile, the corporate media continues to pump out Russia paranoia propaganda like this Maddow segment on MSNBC about "the remarkable number of Russian financiers who'll be rubbing elbows with the Trump team in Davos."

    These are just the latest salvos in the corporate establishment's War on Dissent, an expanded version of the War on Terror, which they've been relentlessly waging for over a year now. As you may have noticed, the ruling classes have been using virtually every propaganda organ at their disposal to whip up mass hysteria over a host of extremely dubious threats to "the future of democracy" and "democratic values," Russia being foremost among them, followed closely by white supremacy, then a laundry list of other "threats," from Julian Assange to Bernie Bros to other, lesser "sowers of division."

    This propaganda campaign is part and parcel of the roll-out of a new "official narrative." If it wasn't so completely depressing, I would say it is awe-inspiring to watch. This full-spectrum type of mass indoctrination, or "reality adjustment," doesn't happen that often. It used to only happen on the national level, typically during times of war, when the ruling classes of nation states needed to temporarily unite their populaces and demonize their enemy. It is happening now on a global level, for the second time in the 21st Century.

    The first time it happened on a global level was 2001-2002, when the War on Terror narrative was launched to supplant the defunct Cold War narrative that had functioned since the end of World War II. The End of History/New World Order narrative, which had served as a kind of ideological stop-gap from 1990 to 2001, never really sold that well. It was far too vague, and there was no clear enemy. The global capitalist ruling classes (which now reigned unopposed over the entire planet) needed a new official narrative to unite, not just a nation, or region, but everyone within the new global market. This narrative needed a convincing enemy that would function on a global level. "Terrorism" is that enemy.

    In the official War on Terror narrative, the term "terrorism" does not refer to any type of actual terrorism (although of course such terrorism does occur) as much as to "terrorism" as a general concept, an essentially meaningless pejorative concept, one which can be expanded to include almost anything and anyone the ruling classes need it to which is what is taking place at the moment. It is being expanded, rather dramatically, to include virtually any type of dissent from global capitalist ideology. In order to understand what's happening, we need to understand how terms like "terrorism" and "extremism" function ideologically, not just as terms to dehumanize "bad guys" but to designate a type of ur-antagonist , one that conforms to the official narrative. So let's take a few minutes and try to do that.

    The key to understanding both the original War on Terror official narrative and the expanded variation we are being sold currently is the fact that terrorism is an insurgent tactic employed by weaker militant forces against a ruling government or occupation force. This makes it the perfect bogeyman (in essence, the only bogeyman) for our brave new global capitalist world, where global capitalism takes the place of that "ruling government or occupation force."

    I've written a number of essays about this , so I won't reiterate all that here. The short version is, we we no longer live in a world where nation-against-nation conflict is driving the course of political events. We live in a world where global capitalism is driving the course of political events. The economies of virtually every nation on the planet are hopelessly interdependent. Capitalist ideology pervades all cultures, despite their superficial differences. It is a globally hegemonic system, so it has no external enemies. None. The only threats it faces are internal. Its "enemies" are, by definition, insurgent in other words, "extremist" or "terrorist."

    This even holds true for the Russia paranoia the ruling classes are pumping out currently it's all just part of the "reality adjustment," and the launch of a new official narrative, not a prelude to war with Russia. The USA is not going to war with Russia. The notion is beyond ridiculous. Have you noticed, despite all their warlike verbiage, that no one has put forth a single scenario in which war between Russia and the West makes sense? That's because it doesn't make sense. Not for Russia, the USA, or anyone else. This is why "the Russian threat" is being marketed as an "attack on democratic values" and "an attempt to sow division," and so on. Because the war the corporatocracy is waging is not a war against Russia, the nation. The war they are fighting is a counter-insurgency, an ideological counter-insurgency. "Russia" has just been added to the list of "terrorists" and "extremists" who "hate us for our freedom."

    Thus, our new official narrative is actually just a minor variation on the original War on Terror narrative we've been indoctrinated with since 2001. A minor yet essential variation. From 2001 to 2016, the constant "terrorist threat" we were facing was strictly limited to Islamic terrorism, which made sense as long as the corporatocracy was focused on restructuring the Middle East. White supremacist terrorism was not part of the narrative, nor was any other form of terrorism, as that would have just confused the audience.

    That changed, dramatically, in 2016.

    The Brexit referendum and the election of Trump alerted the global capitalist ruling classes to the existence of another dangerous insurgency that had nothing to do with the Greater Middle East. While they were off merrily destabilizing, restructuring, privatizing, and debt-enslaving, resentment of global capitalism had grown into a widespread neo-nationalist backlash against globalization, the loss of sovereignty, fiscal austerity, and the soulless, smiley-face, corporate culture being implemented throughout the West and beyond. That this backlash is reactionary in nature does not change the fact that it is an insurgency just as Islamic fundamentalism is. Both insurgencies are doomed attempts to revert to despotic social systems (nationalist in one case, religious in the other) and so reverse the forward march of global capitalism. The global capitalist ruling classes are not about to let that happen.

    The corporatocracy wasted no time in dealing with this new insurgency. They demonized and hamstrung Trump, as they'll continue to do until he's well out of office. But Trump was never the significant threat. The significant threat is the people who elected him, and who voted for Brexit, and the AfD, and Sanders, and Mélenchon, and Corbyn, and who just stayed home on election day and refused to vote for Hillary Clinton. The threat is the attitude of these people. The insubordinate attitude of these people. The childish attitude of these people (who naively thought they could challenge the most powerful empire in the annals of human history one that controls, not just the most fearsome military force that has ever existed, but the means to control "reality" itself).

    The corporatocracy is going to change that attitude, or it is going to make it disappear. It is in the process of doing this now, using every ideological weapon in its arsenal. The news media. Publishing. Hollywood. The Internet. Intelligence agencies. Congressional inquiries. Protests. Marches. Twitter's "advisory emails." Google's manipulation of its search results. Facebook's "counterspeech" initiative. Russiagate. Shitholegate. Pornstargate. The ruling class is sending us a message. The message is, "you're either with us or against us." The message is, "we will tolerate no dissent, except for officially sanctioned dissent." The message is, "try to fuck with us, and we will marginalize you, and demonize you, and demonetize you, and disappear you."

    The message is, "we control reality, so reality is whatever the fuck we say it is, regardless of whether it is based in fact or just some totally made-up story we got The Washington Post to publish and then had the corporate media repeat, over and over, for fourteen months. " If that doesn't qualify as full-blown Orwellian, I'm not sure what, exactly, would.

    I wish I had some rallying cry to end this depressing assessment with, but I have no interest in being one of these Twitter-based guerrilla leaders who tell you we can beat the corporatocracy by tweeting and donating to them on Patreon, and then going about our lives as "normal." It's probably going to take a little more than that, and the obvious truth is, the odds are against us. That said, I plan to make as much noise about The War on Dissent as humanly possible, until they marginalize me out of existence or the corporate-mediated simulation that so many of us take for existence these days. What do you say, want to join me?

    C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing (USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23 , is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. He can reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org .

    Grandpa Charlie , January 28, 2018 at 6:35 am GMT

    Until now, I have considered C. J. Hopkins to be only a playwright or whatever and not a serious political scientist or political critic. But now, I see that he has grown out to be a serious political voice.

    I consider Hopkins' manifesto to be not unlike the old Communist Manifesto of 1848. Just as more than 170 years ago the Communist Manifesto could note that "a specter is haunting Europe," so today we could say that "a specter is haunting the world." But whereas back then the hunted people had a name -- "communists" -- today those who are wanted for 'terrorism' have no name or flag under which to come together. Perhaps the most appropriate name for these people is "Dissidents."

    Several individuals come to mind as perhaps having leadership potential for the Dissidents. First, there is Ai Weiwei, who is known as a dissident artist and also as an enemy of the state -- so the word for these dissident artists may be "anarchists." But since anarchists would seem to have to eschew all political organization, they can't be anything like the old Communist Party. Nonetheless, they can certainly be a specter to haunt the globalized world, the world that pretends to be based on humanist globalism.

    Two other examples, along with Ai Weiwei, are: Jello Biafra in the USA and Varg Vikernes in Europe (at least in Northern and Central Europe). Both have arisen from the world of music but have not been particularly shy about getting involveed in politics. So far Jello has managed to avoid prosecution/persecution, while Varg is actually a convicted murderer and also convicted of "hate crime" under the infamous "hate crime" statutes of France. Jello is a Green, however, and it's note-worthy that the current leader (POTUS candidate) of the Green Party USA (Dr. Jill Stein) has recently been singled out by congressional "intel" committees as a person of interest in the so-called "Russiagate" affair.

    As Hopkins says,

    The ruling class is sending us a message. The message is, "you're either with us or against us."

    Maybe that's what has happened with the USA Greens: the global PTB have sent the message, and it appears that the Greens' leader has responded by chosing to cooperate with the witch hunt -- "discretion is the better part of valor" (as the old expression goes).

    It seems to me a lot like the real California 'hippies' back in the the mid-60s -- not the war protesters but the real hippies who were too stoned to know that there was a war going on. They just knew that they did not want any part of the world as we know it. Oh, they wanted the natural world all right, they just didn't want the so-called "civilized" world. Rightists tended to place them somewhere on the Left side of the spectrum of the Right-Left-Right-ya-Left-ya Right-ya-left-right-left (as drill sergeants might express it). I was there in the 60s, although I was already too old to be trusted according to the political pseudo-hippies (I was already over 30 years of age) but what I would call the real hippies, they trusted me just fine. Anyway, Rightists and all the journalists and commentators never came close to realizing what it was all about. You almost had to have some experience first-hand of LSD, you know.

    Maybe that's where this is all heading -- right back to LSD, psilocybin and good old Cannabis. I note in this respect that the Trump administration has recently come down strong to suppress the "Movement" in Colorado and elsewhere. One of Trump's numerous sell-outs or cop-outs (to use the old 60s terminology). Contrary to his campaign statements, of course.

    Yes, I think that Hopkins way off there in the capital of rationalism, Berlin, probably has no idea of how this is likely to play out back in the US of A it's going to be all about illicit drugs and I don't mean factory-produced opioids or amphetamine. This battle will definitely divide the goats from the sheep -- the real "libertarian" anarchists from the pretend libertarians. I could be wrong but I think it's going to be a BFD. Yeah, I admit to it: I hope it's going to be a BFD. Anything else and it's too boring for tears.

    Back to the Future.

    Steve Hayes , Website January 28, 2018 at 1:27 pm GMT
    No one wanted the First World War, but given the build up of propaganda, tensions, mistrust, and the alliances, a mere act of terrorism by Gavrilo Princip was enough to ignite a conflagration that no one could stop.
    Barryroe , January 28, 2018 at 10:04 pm GMT
    This is an excellent and exceptional piece. Correct on all points, as we have come to expect of C. J. Hopkins, one of the most clear-sighted contributors to this site. Fewer comic flourishes than in his earlier essays, probably reflecting how desperate things are becoming for independent and fair-minded people trying to make their voices heard. Surprising to see so few comments, though perhaps that's not a bad thing, given how intemperate some commenters can be.
    Grandpa Charlie , January 28, 2018 at 10:07 pm GMT

    "No one wanted the First World War, but given the build up of propaganda, tensions, mistrust, and the alliances, a mere act of terrorism by Gavrilo Princip was enough to ignite a conflagration that no one could stop." -- Steve Hayes

    I guess that Hayes' comment here at C.J. Hopkins' article is all about demonstrating the effectiveness of terrorism so then the War on Terror makes sense? but whatever to respond to Hayes' contention that no one wanted the First World War, I would ask Hayes: "No one? Not even greedy internationalist central bankers with international connections?"

    [Jan 28, 2018] Russiagate Isn t About Trump, And It Isn t Even Ultimately About Russia by Caitlyn Johnstone

    Highly recommended!
    Truth is the first victim of war. This is also true about the Cold War II with Russia.
    Notable quotes:
    "... MSNBC's Chris Hayes recently asked a question of his Twitter following that was so heavily loaded it wouldn't be permitted on most interstate highways: "Aside from genuine cranks, is there anyone left denying it was the Russians that committed criminal sabotage in the American election?" ..."
    "... New York Times ..."
    "... You can begin finding your way toward the answer to that question by envisioning the following hypothetical scenario. Imagine what would happen if, instead of promoting the Russiagate narrative, the faces of the consent-manufacturing machine known as the mass media began telling mainstream America that in order to ensure that the US will remain capable of dominating the other countries on this planet, there's going to have to be an aggressive campaign to re-inflame the Cold War with the goal of disrupting and undermining China and its allies ..."
    "... This is what Russiagate is ultimately about. Democrats think it's about impeaching Trump and protecting the world from a nigh-omnipotent supervillain in Vladimir Putin, Trump's supporters think it's a "deep state coup" to try and oust their president, but in reality this has nothing to do with Trump, and ultimately not a whole lot to do with Russia either. When all is said and done, Russiagate is about China. ..."
    "... In an essay titled "Russia-China Tandem Changes the World", US-Russia relations analyst Gilbert Doctorow explains how the surging economic power China depends upon Russia's willingness to go head-to-head with America and its extensive experience with US attempts to undermine the USSR during the Cold War. Alone both nations are very vulnerable, but together their strengths are complimentary in a way that poses a direct threat to America's self-appointed role as world leader ..."
    "... So the strategic value of taking Russia out of the equation is clear, and that's exactly what the US power establishment is attempting to do. California Representative Eric Swalwell, one of the lead congressional promoters of both anti-Russia sentiment and the Trump-Russia "collusion" narrative, admitted last year that he'd like to see tougher sanctions stacked up until they "isolate Russia from the rest of the world" ..."
    "... The US oligarchs, the oligarch-owned media outlets, and the oligarch-aligned intelligence/defense agencies can't just come right out and say "Hey America, we need to ensure our power structures remain unrivalled for the foreseeable future, so we're going to have to try and shut down Russia's influence using ever-tightening economic sanctions, NATO expansionism, proxy wars and troops along Russia's border to squeeze them until they lose the capacity to interfere with our ability to crush China. We'll also need a vastly inflated military budget to help facilitate our geopolitical agendas and prepare for a possible world war, please." A few Americans might consent to it, but by and large the US public would rather see those resources spent on making their lives better. ..."
    "... So they lie. They use America's deliberately constructed partisan enmity and culture wars to fan the flames of mass hysteria about a new president so that enough Americans will permit continuous escalations with Russia under the mistaken impression that they are helping to resist Trump. ..."
    Jan 28, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    Russiagate Isn't About Trump, And It Isn't Even Ultimately About Russia Written by Caitlin Johnstone Sunday January 28, 2018

    MSNBC's Chris Hayes recently asked a question of his Twitter following that was so heavily loaded it wouldn't be permitted on most interstate highways: "Aside from genuine cranks, is there anyone left denying it was the Russians that committed criminal sabotage in the American election?"

    Hayes asked this fake question because he works for MSNBC and it is therefore his job, and he asked it in response to a report first made viral by deranged espionage LARPer Eric Garland that a Dutch intelligence agency had been observing Russian hackers attacking US political parties in advance of the 2016 election. Like all "bombshell" Russiagate reports, this one roared through social media like wildfire carried on the wings of liberal hysteria about the current administration, only to be exposed as being riddled with gaping plot holes as documented here by independent journalist Suzie Dawson. The report revolves around an allegedly Russian cyber threat now known in the west as "Cozy Bear," which as Real News ' Max Blumenthal notes is not a network of hackers but "a Russian-sounding name the for-profit firm Crowdstrike assigned to an APT to market its findings to gullible reporters desperate for Russiagate scoops."

    This "bombshell" overlapped with another as it was reported by the New York Times that at one point many months ago Trump had wanted to fire Robert Mueller, but then didn't.

    *Cough.*

    Why does this keep happening? Why does the public keep getting sold a mountain of suspicion with zero substance? Over and over and over again these "bombshell" stories come out about Trump and Russia, Russia and Trump, only to be debunked , retracted , or erased from the spotlight after people start actually reading the allegations and thinking critically about them and see they're not the shocking bombshells they purport to be? These allegations are all premised upon claims made the US intelligence community, which has an extensive and well-documented history of lying to advance its agendas, as well as porous claims made by an extremely shady and insanely profitable private cyber security company, and yet all we're ever shown is smoke and mirrors with no actual fire.

    Why is that?

    You can begin finding your way toward the answer to that question by envisioning the following hypothetical scenario. Imagine what would happen if, instead of promoting the Russiagate narrative, the faces of the consent-manufacturing machine known as the mass media began telling mainstream America that in order to ensure that the US will remain capable of dominating the other countries on this planet, there's going to have to be an aggressive campaign to re-inflame the Cold War with the goal of disrupting and undermining China and its allies.

    That would be a very different narrative with a very different effect, wouldn't it? But that's exactly what's going on here, and if the US power establishment and its propaganda machine were in the business of telling people the truth, that's precisely what they'd say.

    It's not a secret that China has been working to surpass the United States as the world's leading superpower as quickly as possible. Hell, Xi Jinping flat-out said so during a three and a half hour address last October, and many experts think it might happen a lot sooner than Xi's 30-year deadline. An editorial from China's state press agency about the Davos World Economic Forum asserts that the time has come for the world to choose between the "Xi-style collaborative approach" and Trump's "self-centred America First policy (which) has led his country away from multiple multilateral pacts and infused anxiety into both allies and the broader world." China has been collaborating with Russia to end the hegemony of the US dollar , to shore up control of the Arctic as new resources become available, and just generally build up its own power and influence instead of working to remain in Washington's good graces as most western nations have chosen to do.

    Preventing this is the single most important goal of the US power establishment, not just its elected government but the unelected plutocrats, defense and intelligence agencies which control the nation's affairs behind the scenes. This agenda is so important that in a letter to his successor the outgoing President Barack Obama made the "indispensable" nature of American planetary leadership his sole concrete piece of advice, and pro-establishment influence firms like Project for a New American Century have made preventing the rise of a rival superpower their stated primary goal .

    This is what Russiagate is ultimately about. Democrats think it's about impeaching Trump and protecting the world from a nigh-omnipotent supervillain in Vladimir Putin, Trump's supporters think it's a "deep state coup" to try and oust their president, but in reality this has nothing to do with Trump, and ultimately not a whole lot to do with Russia either. When all is said and done, Russiagate is about China.

    In an essay titled "Russia-China Tandem Changes the World", US-Russia relations analyst Gilbert Doctorow explains how the surging economic power China depends upon Russia's willingness to go head-to-head with America and its extensive experience with US attempts to undermine the USSR during the Cold War. Alone both nations are very vulnerable, but together their strengths are complimentary in a way that poses a direct threat to America's self-appointed role as world leader .

    "Russia is essential to China because of Moscow's long experience managing global relations going back to the period of the Cold War and because of its willingness and ability today to stand up directly to the American hegemon," writes Doctorow, "whereas China, with its heavy dependence on its vast exports to the U.S., cannot do so without endangering vital interests. Moreover, since the Western establishment sees China as the long-term challenge to its supremacy, it is best for Beijing to exercise its influence through another power, which today is Russia."

    So the strategic value of taking Russia out of the equation is clear, and that's exactly what the US power establishment is attempting to do. California Representative Eric Swalwell, one of the lead congressional promoters of both anti-Russia sentiment and the Trump-Russia "collusion" narrative, admitted last year that he'd like to see tougher sanctions stacked up until they "isolate Russia from the rest of the world" after much badgering from Fox's Tucker Carlson about his incendiary claims that the alleged cyberattacks constituted an "act of war." It is worth noting here that despite Swalwell's repeated hysterical claims about Trump and Russia, he recently voted to renew the treasonous Kremlin-colluding president's godlike surveillance powers anyway.

    Establishment muppets like Swalwell and the unelected elites who own them don't care about Trump, they care about crippling China's right arm Russia so that they can set about sabotaging the agendas of a potential rival superpower unimpeded by the skilful opposition of a nuclear superpower. But, getting back to the hypothetical situation I asked you to envision earlier, they can't just come right out and say that.

    They can't. The US oligarchs, the oligarch-owned media outlets, and the oligarch-aligned intelligence/defense agencies can't just come right out and say "Hey America, we need to ensure our power structures remain unrivalled for the foreseeable future, so we're going to have to try and shut down Russia's influence using ever-tightening economic sanctions, NATO expansionism, proxy wars and troops along Russia's border to squeeze them until they lose the capacity to interfere with our ability to crush China. We'll also need a vastly inflated military budget to help facilitate our geopolitical agendas and prepare for a possible world war, please." A few Americans might consent to it, but by and large the US public would rather see those resources spent on making their lives better.

    Just as importantly, the rest of the world would recoil in revulsion.

    So they lie. They use America's deliberately constructed partisan enmity and culture wars to fan the flames of mass hysteria about a new president so that enough Americans will permit continuous escalations with Russia under the mistaken impression that they are helping to resist Trump. They think they're lying to you for your own good, because you can't understand how important it is that they do what they're trying to do. That's why there are so many gaping plot holes and none of this ever quite adds up; they're lying to you like a parent telling a child he needs to eat his broccoli if he doesn't want a lump of coal for Christmas. Except instead of eating broccoli it's consenting to dangerous escalations and military expansionism, and instead of a parent it's a class of elitist sociopaths, and you're always going to get coal.

    And sure, an argument can be made that the world is better off under the watchful domination of the US power establishment than it would be with multipolar power arrangements, and I encounter many establishment loyalists who make precisely that argument. Personally I would argue that the death, destruction and mayhem caused by the intrinsically evil things the US establishment must do in order to maintain dominance completely invalidate that argument, but it's a debate that people deserve to have, and they can't have it when they're being lied to about what's really going on.

    Insist on the truth. Keep pushing back against this pernicious psyop. Spread the word.

    Support Caitlyn Johnstone's work on Patreon or Paypal . Reprinted with author's permission from her website .

    [Jan 28, 2018] Cought in geopolitical war Ukraine became a pawn in bigger games

    Jan 28, 2018 | www.unz.com

    Remember how the USA ignited the Ukraine to punish the Russians for their thwarting of the planned US attack on Syria? Well, the very same Ukraine has recently passed a law abolishing the "anti-terrorist operation" in the Donbass and declaring the Donbass "occupied territory". Under Ukie law, Russia is now officially an "aggressor state". This means that the Ukronazis have now basically rejected the Minsk Agreements and are in a quasi-open state of war with Russia. The chances of a full-scale Ukronazi attack on the Donbass are now even higher then before, especially before or during the soccer World Cup in Moscow this summer (remember Saakashvili?). Having been ridiculed (again) with their Border Security Force in Syria, the US Americans will now seek a place to take revenge on the evil Russkies and this place will most likely be the Ukraine. And we can always count the Israelis to find a pretext to continue to murder Palestinians and bomb Syria. As for the Saudis, they appear to be temporarily busy fighting each other. So unless the Empire does something really crazy, the only place it can lash out with little to lose (for itself) is the eastern Ukraine. The Novorussians understand that. May God help them.

    Paranam Kid , January 26, 2018 at 5:58 am GMT

    Saker, interesting analysis. 1 tiny point of criticism:

    Remember how the USA ignited the Ukraine to punish the Russians for their thwarting of the planned US attack on Syria?

    If I am not mistaken the CIA fomented "Orange revolution" in Ukraine was in 2014, whereas Russia stepped into the Syrian war in 2015. So in the quoted sentence, it seems you got the sequence of events back to front.

    bliss_porsena , January 28, 2018 at 10:14 am GMT
    Ha-ha! Goddam Russkies scorched the Amero-ISIS arse and now Russo-Turks are gaslighting the Kurds and their ten 'Murican lilypads. It's time for a diversionary Great Patriotic Ukrainian War, just as soon as Porko sobers up.
    Seamus Padraig , January 28, 2018 at 11:53 am GMT
    @Biff

    You're both wrong. The Orange Revolution occurred in 2005: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange_Revolution

    What occurred in 2014 was the Maidan psy-op. As far as I recall, the only thing significant that happened in Ukraine in 2010 was the election of Yanukovych.

    Michael Kenny , January 28, 2018 at 2:04 pm GMT
    In an article about Syria, Russia is omnipresent and the article ends by talking about Ukraine. Nothing could better illustrate the fact that Putin has painted himself into a corner in both places. He is irreversibly bogged down in Syria and any deal he makes with the Kurds will just bog him down even more. Putin is a sitting duck. The US can lower the boom on him at any time by relaunching the war and there's nothing he can do about it. And, of course, the author makes clear that all this is "about" Ukraine. Syria is a proxy war. But in Ukraine also, Putin has painted himself into a corner. He can't go forward, he can't go backwards and he can't stay where he is!
    bluedog , January 28, 2018 at 3:23 pm GMT
    @Michael Kenny

    Looks to me like he has done very well, the Ukraine is a basket case, surviving on little more than borrowed money(I see on the QT that they are back to having to buy coal from Russia AGAIN) and sooner rather than later there will be another coup as they find that even the EU don';t want them.Syria why does he need to make a deal with the Kurd's for they are not his problem,if anyone makes a deal with the Kurd's it will have be Syria,as far as that little chunk we carved out just what good is it landlocked with no access to a water port,as normal your trolling along with the mighty U.S. which is little more than a paper tiger with its involvement in Afghanistan Africa and other places of interest as it tries to save what can't be saved,the EMPIRE

    EliteCommInc. , January 28, 2018 at 4:40 pm GMT
    @Michael Kenny

    I am not sure there is any evidence that Pres Putin needs t do anything.

    He has no intention of raking the Ukraine. Not an issue. He's responding the consequences of a western incited violent revolution that spun out of control -- and is protecting "ethnic Russians" a dynamic that plagues Europe and Asia.

    In Syria he is not launching a campaign of conquest but supporting. Anyone who thinks Russia is caught in a vice is sorely mistaken. I can see from the comments that misunderstanding the motivations of pothers remains in play and that is not encouraging.

    Yo be clear, I have full faith of US might. we can bring a formidable amount of force on any situation -- it's frightening, just how formidable we are. The question remains

    first should we
    second how long we need to sustain it
    third tested against multiple adversaries (of our own making) in multiple locations
    fourth tested against other modern states who themselves have engaged in tech superior forces
    fifth the strategic advantages -- short verses long term

    Just because one can -- doesn't . . .

    Nor am I ignoring that we have allies willing to take on Russia, but when push comes to shove . . . who knows. I think we are the ones getting played and as for trapped -- and bogged down --

    goodness gracious.

    [Jan 28, 2018] The United States sees the planned Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline between Russia and Germany as a threat to Europe's energy security

    Notable quotes:
    "... "The top American diplomat said his country is ready to help Poland continue to diversify its fuel supplies, including through the sale of U.S. liquefied natural gas, to reduce its dependence on Russia" ..."
    Jan 28, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    nonsense factory | Jan 27, 2018 7:24:00 PM | 14

    Tillerson apes Hillary Clinton PR lines on Russia:

    WARSAW (Reuters) - The United States sees the planned Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline between Russia and Germany as a threat to Europe's energy security, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said on Saturday.
    The rest of the Reuters article is garbage, so I'm not bothering with a link. . . Bloomberg seems to spell out the larger rationale, at least:
    "The top American diplomat said his country is ready to help Poland continue to diversify its fuel supplies, including through the sale of U.S. liquefied natural gas, to reduce its dependence on Russia"

    Notice also that Secretary of Defense Mattis says that the US military is now focused on "Great Power Conflicts" - so what is this, right back to the Hillary Clinton gameplan? At least, Trump is unlikely to get any international support for reckless military actions, so that's one good thing about him over Clinton.

    [Jan 27, 2018] The Rich Also Cry by Israel Shamir

    Highly recommended!
    Fantastic article. A very plausible hypothesis. "The Deal. Connected people, in-the-know, claim that a top-secret agreement was reached between the late Mr Yeltsin and his cronies, on one side, and The West, on the other side, in 1991. Yeltsin et al had sold Russia's interests down the river, and in return, The West allowed the bastards to hoard their ill-gotten gains in the Western financial system. Yeltsin et al had promised to let the Soviet republics go; to disarm; to follow the Washington Consensus, i.e. to stick to the liberal economic model; to allow the free import of consumer goods; to allow Western access to the Russian military complex; to let the West write Russian laws; to permit the free outflow of capital from Russia. The West promised to bring investment, to let Russia live in peace, to keep NATO away from Russian borders."
    Notable quotes:
    "... And now, at last, as the feasts are over, the real trial begins. The US is preparing a new round of sanctions, including seizure of Russian oligarch assets. They are ripe for collection. The confiscation of Russian holdings in Cyprus banks in 2013 passed without a hitch and served as a trial balloon. Putin didn't object overmuch, for he is a sworn enemy of offshore accounts. None of the fleeced Russian businessmen succeeded in recovering their losses in court. Now is the time for the real thing, and much of the anti-Russian hysteria is aimed at preparing the ground for the seizure. In this way, they plan to get a cool trillion dollars into the US Treasury. Who will lose his assets and who will survive, this is the talk of the day in Moscow. ..."
    "... Now we are coming to a difficult part. The Deal. Connected people, in-the-know, claim that a top-secret agreement was reached between the late Mr Yeltsin and his cronies, on one side, and The West, on the other side, in 1991. Yeltsin et al had sold Russia's interests down the river, and in return, The West allowed the bastards to hoard their ill-gotten gains in the Western financial system. Yeltsin et al had promised to let the Soviet republics go; to disarm; to follow the Washington Consensus, i.e. to stick to the liberal economic model; to allow the free import of consumer goods; to allow Western access to the Russian military complex; to let the West write Russian laws; to permit the free outflow of capital from Russia. The West promised to bring investment, to let Russia live in peace, to keep NATO away from Russian borders. ..."
    "... Mr Putin inherited The Deal. Slowly, the Deal has been eroded from both sides. NATO troops moved eastward, no sizeable investment came in, the West supported Chechen rebels. Russia limited Western access to its military-industrial complex; took Crimea; regained some of its international independence. ..."
    "... The powerful personalities of Yeltsin's era remained embedded in the upper echelons of Putin's state. Chubais and Kudrin were and are untouchable. They are connected with the FRS and the IMF, they go to Bilderberg and Davos, they are often described as 'the colonial administration'. ..."
    "... They steal with both hands, and do it with impunity. Just last week it was revealed and published that Mr Chubais and Mr Kudrin appropriated a cool billion dollars of Russian state money while repaying the Soviet debt to the Czech Republic. ..."
    "... Yeltsin's oligarchs remained as rich as they were; Yeltsin's family still possesses immense riches. And Putin does not dare to touch them. He goes hat in hand to open a Yeltsin's Memorial Centre; he is courteous with Yeltsin's widow and daughter. Putin's establishment cautiously avoided celebration, or even mention of the Revolution centenary, in keeping with Yeltsin's anticommunism. This is the Deal. ..."
    "... Putin has been unhappy with the Deal for a long time, vocally so since his Munich talk in 2007, but he stuck to the script. Even now, Russia's economy follows the liberal model; billions of dollars are being siphoned out of Russia monthly; billions of dollars' worth of Western manufactured consumer goods are imported and sold in Russia, though it would make perfect sense to organise local manufacture. Russia's Central Bank is directly connected to the Western finance system, and its emission is limited by the amount of hard currency in its coffers. The Rouble carry trade prospers, like the Yen carry trade did years ago. ..."
    "... This presented the golden opportunity for the anti-Putin activists, the time they can collect the fruit of their hard work. A somewhat typical anti-Putin activist is an émigré, Mr Andrey Illarionov, a Yeltsin man, an ex-adviser to President Putin (until 2005), a US resident, a member of the loony Cato Institute and an adept of Ayn Rand. He is an anti-Russian fanatic; next to him Rachel Maddow is a Putin groupie and Tokyo Rose a symbol of patriotism. ..."
    "... Speaking to the Congress Committee of Foreign Affairs in 2009, he famously claimed about the US administration policy towards Russia that "it is not even an appeasement policy so well known to us by another Munich decision in 1938, it is a surrender. A full, absolute, unconditional surrender to the regime of secret police officers, chekists and Mafiosi". Despite these fighting words, he is a frequent visitor to Moscow, and he never misses a demo where he can call out "Putin must leave" apparently unafraid of the "secret police officers, chekists and Mafiosi". This is all you should know about the totalitarian Russian regime! ..."
    "... Now Mr Illarionov is lobbying the US Congress to remove its threats from the heads of those deserving oligarchs, who (in his words) amassed their fortune before advent of Mr Putin and "in order to survive, they had been forced to pay a large tribute to the Kremlin". His lobbying effort on behalf of the Old Money people has been shared and supported by two notorious Putin haters, a fellow émigré Piontkovsky and a Swedish Neo-Con Anders Aslund. ..."
    "... This is not a coincidence; the Russian Old Money is solidly in bed with the Clinton camp. If Friedman succeeds in escaping the sanctions, it will be an additional proof that the Bankers still have the upper hand in the US Administration. ..."
    "... Echo Moskwy ..."
    "... But perhaps it is too late for him. An unverifiable odd rumour has risen in Moscow. They say that the Communist candidate Pavel Grudinin has strong backing among the "siloviki", that is Putin's appointees, often but not exclusively of security services background, for they are unhappy with Putin's adherence to the Deal. But that will be the subject of my next piece. ..."
    "... Israel Shamir can be reached at [email protected] ..."
    "... That is my understanding also but I could be wrong. Excellent piece. But I have one small point–the crawling re-nationalization of many crucial industries did happen on Putin's watch. But in general, as I stated many times, he faces an inevitable meeting, if he were to survive as a politician, with the issue of 1990s robbery and with necessity to dismantle Yeltsin's "heritage'. ..."
    "... I wonder how much of what Israel wrote might be real thing. If Putin really is going to do what you are writing he is going to be company of Russia history greatest. ..."
    "... There is also indeed a question of all those offshore capitals which are stolen money. Considering state resources and capabilities there definitely might be an offer they cannot refuse to just give money back. ..."
    "... Putin sure as hell has all necessary resources to make this offer. ..."
    Jan 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

    While you have probably already forgotten the feast, Russia is only now slowly coming back to life after its overlong Christmas break completed on January 14 by the quaintly named Old New Year, or even perhaps by the Epiphany on January 19. Everybody went somewhere, even candidates for the presidential race coming in on March 18: the Communist one went to ski in Austria, while the right-winger went to Bali. On the eve of Epiphany, they dipped in the ice-cold waters: the ultimate trial of Russian fitness. Not only he-man Putin, but even she-woman Sobchak did it!

    And now, at last, as the feasts are over, the real trial begins. The US is preparing a new round of sanctions, including seizure of Russian oligarch assets. They are ripe for collection. The confiscation of Russian holdings in Cyprus banks in 2013 passed without a hitch and served as a trial balloon. Putin didn't object overmuch, for he is a sworn enemy of offshore accounts. None of the fleeced Russian businessmen succeeded in recovering their losses in court. Now is the time for the real thing, and much of the anti-Russian hysteria is aimed at preparing the ground for the seizure. In this way, they plan to get a cool trillion dollars into the US Treasury. Who will lose his assets and who will survive, this is the talk of the day in Moscow.

    The Russian assets in the west could be divided into New Money, assets of Putin's people, and the Old Money, assets of Yeltsin's people. The sanctions are supposed to deal with Putin's people, but Russian experts think the Old Money is more vulnerable, for a good reason. The New Money is under Putin's protection. If the US or any other western authority grabs it, the Russian government may seize Western shares in Russian companies and properties.

    But what about the Old Money? Its owners, elder oligarchs, are extremely worried about Putin's nonchalance. Putin takes it easy, they say. Ma'alish , the Arab in Putin says. Que sera sera , says his inner Frenchman. And this nonchalant attitude drives the oligarchs crazy. They want him to fight and save their money. They insisted on his meeting with President Trump in Vietnam; some say the meeting took place in the depth of the night, far from prying eyes, and didn't bring results. Now Putin says to the Old Money: if you want to save your money, repatriate it to Russia. We aren't that mad, they reply. You have to defend us anyway! That was the Deal!

    Now we are coming to a difficult part. The Deal. Connected people, in-the-know, claim that a top-secret agreement was reached between the late Mr Yeltsin and his cronies, on one side, and The West, on the other side, in 1991. Yeltsin et al had sold Russia's interests down the river, and in return, The West allowed the bastards to hoard their ill-gotten gains in the Western financial system. Yeltsin et al had promised to let the Soviet republics go; to disarm; to follow the Washington Consensus, i.e. to stick to the liberal economic model; to allow the free import of consumer goods; to allow Western access to the Russian military complex; to let the West write Russian laws; to permit the free outflow of capital from Russia. The West promised to bring investment, to let Russia live in peace, to keep NATO away from Russian borders.

    Mr Putin inherited The Deal. Slowly, the Deal has been eroded from both sides. NATO troops moved eastward, no sizeable investment came in, the West supported Chechen rebels. Russia limited Western access to its military-industrial complex; took Crimea; regained some of its international independence.

    Putin was elected, or you may say, he was appointed to stick to the Deal and to serve as the Supreme Arbiter among the oligarchs, with very little of a power base of his own. Slowly, he created his own oligarchs (they are described as "siloviki", though not all of them have some security forces background), and he had built up a limited power base; though many important positions, in particular in the economic sphere, remained in the hands of the Old Guard, Yeltsin's men. This, too, was a part of the Deal.

    The powerful personalities of Yeltsin's era remained embedded in the upper echelons of Putin's state. Chubais and Kudrin were and are untouchable. They are connected with the FRS and the IMF, they go to Bilderberg and Davos, they are often described as 'the colonial administration'.

    They steal with both hands, and do it with impunity. Just last week it was revealed and published that Mr Chubais and Mr Kudrin appropriated a cool billion dollars of Russian state money while repaying the Soviet debt to the Czech Republic. The worst Putin can do about them is to give them a fat chunk of the Russian economy to chew on, while limiting their access to the rest. So he gave Mr Chubais the Rusnano company that made no profit but embezzled billions . This was the Deal.

    Yeltsin's oligarchs remained as rich as they were; Yeltsin's family still possesses immense riches. And Putin does not dare to touch them. He goes hat in hand to open a Yeltsin's Memorial Centre; he is courteous with Yeltsin's widow and daughter. Putin's establishment cautiously avoided celebration, or even mention of the Revolution centenary, in keeping with Yeltsin's anticommunism. This is the Deal.

    The topmost schools of Russia, the most endowed, the most privileged schools for the children of the new nobility are the HSE, (the Higher School of Economics, a clone of the LSE and the economic think-tank of the government), and MGIMO, (Moscow State Institute of International Relations, the school for perspective diplomats). Their graduates were been trained to despise Russia and admire the neo-liberal West (just like the Indian students trained by the Brits, had admired England and despised their country in the days of the British Raj). Professor Medvedev of the HSE called upon Russian government to transfer the Russian Far North to the international community, though this is the place of the greatest gas reserves (he kept his position). Professor Zubov of the MGIMO had compared Putin to Hitler, and denounced Russian diplomats as liars (his contract hasn't been prolonged). All that is a part of the Deal.

    Putin has been unhappy with the Deal for a long time, vocally so since his Munich talk in 2007, but he stuck to the script. Even now, Russia's economy follows the liberal model; billions of dollars are being siphoned out of Russia monthly; billions of dollars' worth of Western manufactured consumer goods are imported and sold in Russia, though it would make perfect sense to organise local manufacture. Russia's Central Bank is directly connected to the Western finance system, and its emission is limited by the amount of hard currency in its coffers. The Rouble carry trade prospers, like the Yen carry trade did years ago.

    Meanwhile, the Deal has been undone from the West, as a result of the epic struggle between Bankers and Producers, otherwise described as Liberals vs. Conservatives, or Globalists vs. Regionalists, personalised as Clinton vs. Trump. Yeltsin's people are historically aligned with the Clinton camp. Now, their assets in the West, previously protected by the Deal, have lost their protection and come up for grabs.

    The Old Money people are putting their effort into persuading the West, namely the US, to let them live in peace and instead confiscate the pro-Putin New Money.

    This presented the golden opportunity for the anti-Putin activists, the time they can collect the fruit of their hard work. A somewhat typical anti-Putin activist is an émigré, Mr Andrey Illarionov, a Yeltsin man, an ex-adviser to President Putin (until 2005), a US resident, a member of the loony Cato Institute and an adept of Ayn Rand. He is an anti-Russian fanatic; next to him Rachel Maddow is a Putin groupie and Tokyo Rose a symbol of patriotism.

    Speaking to the Congress Committee of Foreign Affairs in 2009, he famously claimed about the US administration policy towards Russia that "it is not even an appeasement policy so well known to us by another Munich decision in 1938, it is a surrender. A full, absolute, unconditional surrender to the regime of secret police officers, chekists and Mafiosi". Despite these fighting words, he is a frequent visitor to Moscow, and he never misses a demo where he can call out "Putin must leave" apparently unafraid of the "secret police officers, chekists and Mafiosi". This is all you should know about the totalitarian Russian regime!

    (Émigrés are frequently like that, and the US, a country of immigrants, had been vulnerable to the attack by Illarionov Syndrome, by listening to Masha Gessen, or to Ahmed Chalabi, the Iraqi émigré who claimed Iraq has had WMD, to Alexander Solzhenitsyn with his horror stories about GULAG, etc. I made it a rule to moderate my critique of Israel while abroad, in fear of failing the Illarionov Sanity Test.)

    Now Mr Illarionov is lobbying the US Congress to remove its threats from the heads of those deserving oligarchs, who (in his words) amassed their fortune before advent of Mr Putin and "in order to survive, they had been forced to pay a large tribute to the Kremlin". His lobbying effort on behalf of the Old Money people has been shared and supported by two notorious Putin haters, a fellow émigré Piontkovsky and a Swedish Neo-Con Anders Aslund.

    Direct and generous beneficiaries of their lobbying are the Three Alpha Jews, Peter Aven, Michael Friedman and Herman Khan. They are owners of the Alpha Bank, a very big Russian bank , and they are Old Money oligarchs from Yeltsin's days when their kin ruled the land.

    Michael Friedman, the fat guy with a jolly piglet face, rose to his eminence from being a ticket tout selling illegally obtained opera tickets to Western tourists near Bolshoi Theatre; afterwards he became The Mind behind all ticket mafias in Moscow, and then proceeded to banking and so many other things.

    Like many Old Money guys, Friedman earns money in Russia, but siphons it off for Jewish causes. He is a co-founder of a "Jewish Nobel Prize", also called Genesis Prize, a cool million dollars being given annually to a deserving Jew, the most recent one being the notorious Ruth Bader Ginsburg who called Donald Trump, "the faker". This is not a coincidence; the Russian Old Money is solidly in bed with the Clinton camp. If Friedman succeeds in escaping the sanctions, it will be an additional proof that the Bankers still have the upper hand in the US Administration.

    Alternatively, it could mean they are just smart and able to play the both houses. The Three Alpha Jews had been mentioned in the Steele Dossier as the conduit of Putin influence for Trump and against Clinton in the recent US Presidential elections. (They are suing Fusion GPS and BuzzFeed for spreading the accusation).

    According to an even better conspiracy theory spread on the social networks, both Mr Illarionov and the smart Alpha Jews are a sleeper cell organised by cunning Mr Putin to ensure his survival in the most adverse conditions. All of them were very friendly with Putin; perhaps they just pretended to become his enemies, the conspiratorially minded journalist from the anti-Putin Echo Moskwy has implied.

    Leaving the conspiracy theories aside for a while, we can reach a conclusion. The forthcoming attack of the US establishment on Russian assets is likely to undermine the Old Money of the Yeltsin Oligarchs, and not only them. This confiscation will spell the death knell to the notorious Deal, and then we shall see Putin Unbound.

    But perhaps it is too late for him. An unverifiable odd rumour has risen in Moscow. They say that the Communist candidate Pavel Grudinin has strong backing among the "siloviki", that is Putin's appointees, often but not exclusively of security services background, for they are unhappy with Putin's adherence to the Deal. But that will be the subject of my next piece.

    Israel Shamir can be reached at [email protected]

    This article was first published at The Unz Review .

    Andrei Martyanov , Website January 26, 2018 at 3:17 pm GMT

    The forthcoming attack of the US establishment on Russian assets is likely to undermine the Old Money of the Yeltsin Oligarchs, and not only them. This confiscation will spell the death knell to the notorious Deal, and then we shall see Putin Unbound.

    That is my understanding also but I could be wrong. Excellent piece. But I have one small point–the crawling re-nationalization of many crucial industries did happen on Putin's watch. But in general, as I stated many times, he faces an inevitable meeting, if he were to survive as a politician, with the issue of 1990s robbery and with necessity to dismantle Yeltsin's "heritage'.

    Alias Anonymous , January 26, 2018 at 3:52 pm GMT
    "Que sera sera". One of my favorite songs. Sung by Doris Day and was a hit in the 1950′s. Italian in origin and translates to "whatever will be, will be".
    Anon Disclaimer , January 26, 2018 at 4:24 pm GMT
    On topic, hoping to elicit comments: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5315353/Tycoon-swaps-Putins-daughter-glamorous-socialite.html

    Slightly OT: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5314897/George-Soros-calls-Trump-blistering-Davos-speech.html

    That masterful Freud! Mafia govmn't = pure projection. Plus the war cry for 2018 is official.

    The swipe at Solzhenitsyn beneath you, Mr. Shamir.

    Andrei Martyanov , Website January 26, 2018 at 5:15 pm GMT
    @Anon

    The swipe at Solzhenitsyn beneath you, Mr. Shamir.

    When did Solzhenitsyn gain the sainthood status? Can you remind us please.

    Sergey Krieger , January 26, 2018 at 7:57 pm GMT
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Agree. I wonder how much of what Israel wrote might be real thing. If Putin really is going to do what you are writing he is going to be company of Russia history greatest.

    Sergey Krieger , January 26, 2018 at 8:02 pm GMT
    @Andrei Martyanov

    There is also indeed a question of all those offshore capitals which are stolen money. Considering state resources and capabilities there definitely might be an offer they cannot refuse to just give money back.

    Andrei Martyanov , Website January 26, 2018 at 8:58 pm GMT
    @Sergey Krieger

    there definitely might be an offer they cannot refuse to just give money back.

    Putin sure as hell has all necessary resources to make this offer.

    [Jan 27, 2018] Ukraine, Syria, Russiagate, the Media, and the Risk of Nuclear War by Robert Roth

    Notable quotes:
    "... London Review of Books, ..."
    "... at a speed that far exceeds an Internet capability for a remote hack ..."
    "... Return to Moscow ..."
    "... The demonization of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russia is where the neocons and the liberal interventionists most significantly come together. The U.S. media's approach to Russia is now virtually 100 percent propaganda. For instance, the full story of the infamous Magnitsky case cannot be told in the West, nor can the objective reality of the Ukrane coup in 2014 . The American people and the West in general are carefully shielded from hearing the "other side of the story." Indeed to even suggest that there is another side to the story makes you a "Putin apologist" or "Kremlin stooge." ..."
    Jan 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

    The claim of Russian meddling in the US election has brought US-Russia relations to what may be an all-time low, substantially contributing to the near-universal demonization of Russian president Vladimir Putin and of Russia itself in virtually all major media, with little or no discussion of the supposed evidence for the claim. A stellar exception is the London Review of Books, which published a critically important essay by Rutgers University professor Jackson Lears in the January 4, 2018 issue. Titled "What We Don't Talk about When We Talk about Russian Hacking," the article is an excellent overview and analysis of many of the issues the title suggests.

    The claim of Russian meddling in the election remains to this day evidence-free, although you would never know that from the treatment of the topic in the mainstream media. As Professor Lears observes:

    Like any orthodoxy worth its salt, the religion of the Russian hack depends not on evidence but on ex cathedra pronouncements on the part of authoritative institutions and their overlords. Its scriptural foundation is a confused and largely fact-free 'assessment' produced last January by a small number of 'hand-picked' analysts – as James Clapper, the director of National Intelligence, described them – from the CIA, the FBI and the NSA. The claims of the last were made with only 'moderate' confidence. The label Intelligence Community Assessment creates a misleading impression of unanimity, given that only three of the 16 US intelligence agencies contributed to the report. And indeed the assessment itself contained this crucial admission: 'Judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact. Assessments are based on collected information, which is often incomplete or fragmentary, as well as logic, argumentation and precedents.' Yet the assessment has passed into the media imagination as if it were unassailable fact, allowing journalists to assume what has yet to be proved. In doing so they serve as mouthpieces for the intelligence agencies, or at least for those 'hand-picked' analysts.

    But although Professor Lears refers to the reports of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity in his discussion of "Russian hacking," it seems clear there must have been a leak, not a hack, because "the DNC data was copied onto a storage device at a speed that far exceeds an Internet capability for a remote hack ." ("Was the 'Russian Hack' An Inside Job?", July 25, 2017, https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/07/25/was-the-russian-hack-an-inside-job/ .)

    In any case, definitive claims about who was responsible (assuming, purely arguendo , it was a hack) face the fact that, according to Ray McGovern and William S. Binney, two members of VIPS,

    On March 31, 2017, WikiLeaks released original CIA documents [the "Vault 7" trove of CIA documents ] -- ignored by mainstream media -- showing that the agency had created a program allowing it to break into computers and servers and make it look like others did it by leaving telltale signs like Cyrillic markings, for example. ("Trumped-up Claims Against Trump," May 17, 2017, http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-trump-russia-phony-20170517-story.html ).

    McGovern was a CIA analyst for 27 years; Binney worked for NSA for 36 years, was the agency's technical director of world military and geopolitical analysis and reporting, and created many of the collection systems still used by NSA.

    In other words, as Russian president Vladimir Putin has explained,

    today's technology is such that the final address can be masked and camouflaged to an extent that no one will be able to understand the origin of that address. And, vice versa, it is possible to set up any entity or any individual [so] that everyone will think that they are the exact source of that attack. (Valdimir Putin's televised interview on NBC (June 4, 2017), by NBC News' Megyn Kelly, text published on the website of the President of Russia, June 5, 2017.) [9]

    Demonization of Putin and Russia

    The demonization of Russian president Vladimir Putin and Russia itself is just part, albeit the most dangerous part, of a disinformation campaign flowing from the mainstream media. I don't propose to present a full treatment of the subject here. But in broad outline, it's my understanding that when the Cold War ended in 1991, Russian president Boris Yeltsin accepted the advice of Western neoliberal planners and dismantled much of the Russian "safety net," with the result that the Russian economy tanked and millions of people faced terrific hardship.

    Vladimir Putin has been attempting to repair that situation, and his initial success is part of the reason for his popularity in Russia. That understanding comes from a number of articles I've read over the years, but primarily from Tony Kevin's book Return to Moscow , mentioned above. I'm hardly an expert on internal Russian politics. But I've read many of the extensive public statements Mr. Putin has made since 2007, and with my primary concern being his role in international relations and with respect to the control of Russia's nuclear arsenal, he strikes me as a statesman. [10] . Yet as investigative journalist Robert Parry observes,

    The demonization of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russia is where the neocons and the liberal interventionists most significantly come together. The U.S. media's approach to Russia is now virtually 100 percent propaganda. For instance, the full story of the infamous Magnitsky case cannot be told in the West, nor can the objective reality of the Ukrane coup in 2014 . The American people and the West in general are carefully shielded from hearing the "other side of the story." Indeed to even suggest that there is another side to the story makes you a "Putin apologist" or "Kremlin stooge."

    Western journalists now apparently see it as their patriotic duty to hide key facts that otherwise would undermine the demonizing of Putin and Russia. Ironically, many "liberals" who cut their teeth on skepticism about the Cold War and the bogus justifications for the Vietnam War now insist that we must all accept whatever the U.S. intelligence community feeds us, even if we're told to accept the assertions on faith. [11] .

    One result is a needless heightening of the dangers and risks outlined in this article.

    [Jan 27, 2018] Tech Companies See No Evidence of Russian Influence in US Elections by Jason Ditz

    Jan 27, 2018 | news.antiwar.com

    Facebook Accuses Russia of Creating Events, But Unsure if They Took Place

    A written statement to the Senate Intelligence Committee from Google, Twitter, and Facebook revealed that they have found absolutely no evidence of any attempt by Russia to influence any US votes within the past year (2017) and were unaware of any state-sponsored attempts to interfere at all.

    With Congress increasingly desperate to turn up something that they can pin on Russia interference-wise, there is growing pressure on major technology companies to dig through their logs and try to find something conceivably Russia-related.

    Facebook has appeared to be the most eager to come up with something, having claimed that 129 "events" were created by people they suspect of being in league with the Russians, though later conceding that they had no information if any of those events ever actually took place.

    Facebook did, however, claim an "insignificant" overlap between the putative Russian and the Trump campaign. That's somewhat surprising, as oftentimes attempts to label someone a secret Russian hinge heavily on them being perceived as pro-Trump in such after the fact investigations.
    Last 5 posts by Jason Ditz

    [Jan 26, 2018] Ukraine, Syria, Russiagate, the Media, and the Risk of Nuclear War, by Robert Roth - The Unz Review

    Notable quotes:
    "... The risk has been with us since the 1950s, but has become scarier beginning with the US-backed coup in Ukraine, and increased with US involvement in the war on Syria. It's been heightened by plans for "modernization" of US warheads and delivery systems -- plans initiated by President Obama and continuing or expanded by President Trump. ..."
    "... The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner. ..."
    "... Return to Moscow ..."
    "... The whole Bush II thing, the elections, Iraq, 9-11 were kind of "through the looking glass" events in which political corruption became mainstream acceptable in a surreal kind of way. I take events like the "Russian Hack" as a kind of ready-reckoner of political consciousness: if you accept or support such muck the only question remains – are you a gull or a knave? An idiot or a cynical bastard? ..."
    "... "Sleepwalking into nuclear war" is a haunting and apt metaphor for what is happening to us as a society. Reading Robert Roth's provocative musings on the collective insanity currently enveloping us, I was reminded of William Shirer's accounts of the period he was stationed in Nazi Germany as a correspondent for the Chicago Tribune before the outbreak of WWII. ..."
    "... Even with all the propaganda the Germans were subjected to, said Shirer, Germans realized that Hitler was taking them into an unwinnable war against the rest of the world that they really didn't want. They knew they were headed into the abyss, yet the political climate was so paranoid that resistance seemed unpatriotic, if not treasonous. They went along in the hope that the national nightmare would dissipate of its own accord, that things weren't as bad as they seemed. ..."
    "... Mr. Roth's observations about the blights of willful public ignorance and mass media disinformation are important. Commenter "animalogic" (#7) aptly describes those party to the widespread deceit as either "a gull or a knave." The Establishment needs and therefore nurtures both. ..."
    "... Roth has gone straight to the relevant point, nuclear war , for it is already clear that the prospective outcome of any permutation of a 'conventional' war will see the Empire hegemony, USA/Israel and vassal states, lose against Russia, who will be supported, by mutually recognized need, with China. No matter how it is considered, a Russia-China alliance will defeat the empire hegemony if nuclear weapons are not used. ..."
    "... One positive thing in US policy is a stability and progress – dummy president replaced by stupid one, that replaced by insane; after him goes imbecile. I can't imagine who's going to be next :-). But there are many of old crazy women and men ready to help if current imbecile went down. ..."
    "... There will be no nuclear war as Russia and the U.S. can wipe each other off the map, however the Zionists will continue to keep America at war for the Zionist NWO as that is the game plan and we goyim Americans will continue to be sent to the slaughter house for greater Israel. ..."
    "... One honest, generally morally competent man holding the ever-more-powerful office of president of the U.S., could fix many things. Unfortunately, Donald John Trump is not that man. ..."
    "... Let's consider one example: Many people believe that a real investigation into 9/11 would destroy the "deep state". Dr. J. Leroy Hulsey et al. have recently completed a study of the "collapse" of WTC7, whereby they've proven that "fire" was not the cause of the "collapse" of that building. This finding directly contradicts the NIST report. For the first time in 16 years there is now incontrovertible scientific evidence in the public domain that 9/11 was an "inside job". Why won't Donald John Trump take advantage of this unprecedented opportunity and order an investigation? ..."
    "... The world is not about to end, but the Western public space has become very stupid. Most politicians, media and academics have managed to redefine basic terms into idiotic caricatures. Concepts like meddling, trolls, collusion, etc don't mean what we are told they mean. They are all an eternal part of human society, exchange of ideas, disagreements. Expressing one's opinions is not 'propaganda', or 'meddling' in elections – it is freedom of speech. The idea that there is only one correct view – the Western liberal one – is medieval. ..."
    "... Nobody will deliberately start nuclear war, but the probability that it might start as the result of series of mistakes has increased. ..."
    "... The US and its vassals (including other NATO countries) moved NATO troops close to Russian borders, destabilized Ukraine, Syria, cooked up "Russiagate" (which is really an FBI-gate, but sore losers would not admit it) to justify further increases in Pentagon budget (a trough where very fat pigs feed). ..."
    "... The main danger is that in its death throes the Empire will start a war, although we can only hope that even degenerate US elites understand that dead people cannot benefit by their wealth. Hope springs eternal. ..."
    "... Agree with much of the sentiment and some of the proposals here regarding the need to ratchet down rhetoric, pledge no first strike, and generally try much harder to reduce the risk of even a "small" nuke exchange. ..."
    "... Well, hope is always nice. But we might not understand the dynamic nature of the global-liberal overreach that we have been experiencing. People don't behave the way Western elites have been acting without some measure of disconnect from reality. And hubris. When a substantial part of elite climbs on an irrational high horse of invincibility they become paralysed by the framework they have created. They don't want to hear other views because it makes them uncomfortable. They have given up on both principles and institutions – it is anything goes world now. ..."
    "... The Trotskyites who became in America first anti-Stalinist Democrat Hawks and then anti-Russian/Israel-first Republican Hawks have worked things so that they control foreign affairs for both political parties. And they have an insatiable bloodlust. Like the godfather of their movement, they are amoral with genocidal desires when it comes to peoples they despise. They are the type of self-righteous bullies who aspire to rule the globe to overreach and push and shove and threaten and sucker punch until the worst for the world happens. ..."
    "... Good to see you posting. I hear they are muling Ophrah. Really good choice for next president. Woman, black, fat and wealthy. Not gay or transvestite though but that's coming next. ..."
    "... Makes me wonder what after Putin. I do it like him that much but he still intelligent, cool and calculating man that is not doing stupid things but neither genius. ..."
    "... Regarding Americans, unfortunately they never felt real pain. Like a kid who does not know that fire is dangerous. I think financial collapse gonna be trouble sooner or later with them. The best thing Russia and China can do is to undermine us dollar status and the whole financial system which was built by uncle Sam for uncle Sam benefit. ..."
    Jan 26, 2018 | www.unz.com

    ... ... ...

    My goal in writing about these things is to alert you to the problems and encourage you to share your concerns with people you know and with federal policy-makers. Right now, the entire gamut of political discussion all but excludes the topic nuclear war, so if some Senators, Members of Congress, and the President were to begin hearing from people that we're concerned about the threat, and how easily it could happen, and that we want that threat removed, it would be some progress.

    Why the focus on nuclear war? Because of all the pending potential disasters we may have to face, it's the most sudden, inescapable, irrevocable. At some level, people know that, though they don't like to think about it. Author Carl Boggs describes the reaction of the people of Hawaii when they received a false alarm about an incoming ICBM attack:

    People scattered frenetically, mostly without logic or purpose or hope. Where to go? If this turned out to be one of Kim Jong Un's powerful ICBMs, it could be over in 20 minutes. Repair to a shelter? None exist. Go to the basement? Sure suicide. Find a car or taxi and head for the hills? No time. [T]he response was utter psychological numbness, paralysis -- a dysfunctional yet comprehensible state of mind in the face of nuclear oblivion. [T]he end seemed inescapable.

    And because, as Mr. Boggs says upon hearing a talk by former nuclear war planner Daniel Ellsberg, it's a lot less unlikely than most of us have been led to believe.

    The American people have been lulled to sleep, distracted by endless media and political spectacles, while busy warmakers keep refining their insane nuclear blueprints . More than 70 years after Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Pentagon elites still theorize and fantasize about the unthinkable, their demented plans far removed from the realm of political debate or even public awareness. [1]

    The risk has been with us since the 1950s, but has become scarier beginning with the US-backed coup in Ukraine, and increased with US involvement in the war on Syria. It's been heightened by plans for "modernization" of US warheads and delivery systems -- plans initiated by President Obama and continuing or expanded by President Trump. And it's heightened further by a Pentagon plan to develop a "low-yield" warhead for the submarine-based Trident missile, and a new nuclear-tipped sea-launched cruise missile. [2] I believe that expanding the range of options in this way would increase the likelihood that the weapons will actually be used.

    In case you think I'm overstating the problem, you should know that almost everything in "Dr. Strangelove" -- the Stanley Kubrick film in which nuclear war is started by a rogue military officer -- was true. [3] . "Doomsday" is an "Actual War Plan," as Daniel Ellsberg says in a December 13, 2017 interview discussing his new book, The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner. [4].

    Dan Ellsberg proposes a Six-Step Program for dismantling the Doomsday Machine:

    1. A U.S. no-first-use policy;
    2. Probing investigative hearings on our war plans in the light of nuclear winter;
    3. Eliminating our ICBMs;
    4. Foregoing the delusion of preemptive damage-limiting by our first-strike forces;
    5. Giving up the profits, jobs, and alliance hegemony based on maintaining that pretense;
    6. Otherwise dismantling the American Doomsday Machine.

    Of course none of that will happen under present circumstances. It's Ellsberg's goal to contribute to developing an informed electorate that, recognizing the risk, will demand such actions.

    ... ... ...

    Regarding the two nuclear-armed superpowers, who between them possess some 15,000 nuclear warheads, the Cold War that ended in 1991 has lately been replaced by a New Cold War. U.S. and NATO provocations to Russia have reached a largely unheard crescendo in Ukraine, where a U.S.-backed coup installed a regime, essentially in the Russian belly, that's riddled with neo-Nazis and hostile to Russia; in eastern Europe generally, where NATO war games have been held repeatedly just across the Russian border; and in Syria, where the U.S. continues to maintain an unlawful presence in proximity to Russian forces legitimately there at the invitation of the internationally recognized and constitutionally elected Syrian government. And in both Syria and Ukraine, there are signs the situation is becoming even more dangerous than it's been for some time. [7]

    These situations raise the risk of unintended nuclear war, as confrontation may lead at any time to escalation spiraling out of control. Dr. William Polk, a member of the White House team that handled the Cuban Missile Crisis, describes how in a confrontational situation, the logic of events could force the Russians and us to the next step and that step also to the next and so on, to the ultimate disastrous result without anyone having initially intended it. [8] . Mr. Shatz concludes that what we once mistook for safety was more like sleepwalking. Former Australian diplomat Tony Kevin sums up the situation in similar terms:

    "Under the false and demonizing imagery of 'Putin's Russia' which has now taken hold in the United States and NATO world, the West is truly 'sleepwalking', as Kissinger, Gorbachev, [University of Kent professor Richard] Sakwa, [Princeton emeritus professor Stephen F.] Cohen and others have urgently warned, into a potential nuclear war with Russia. It is the Cuban missile crisis all over again, but actually worse now [in part] because American policy under recent U.S. presidents has been so lacking in statesmanship, consistency or historical perspective where Russia is concerned." ( Return to Moscow , University of Western Australia, 2017, p. 255).

    animalogic , January 26, 2018 at 8:25 am GMT

    @Grandpa Charlie

    Think you're pretty spot with all you say. The whole Bush II thing, the elections, Iraq, 9-11 were kind of "through the looking glass" events in which political corruption became mainstream acceptable in a surreal kind of way. I take events like the "Russian Hack" as a kind of ready-reckoner of political consciousness: if you accept or support such muck the only question remains – are you a gull or a knave? An idiot or a cynical bastard?

    alley cat , January 26, 2018 at 10:01 am GMT
    "Sleepwalking into nuclear war" is a haunting and apt metaphor for what is happening to us as a society. Reading Robert Roth's provocative musings on the collective insanity currently enveloping us, I was reminded of William Shirer's accounts of the period he was stationed in Nazi Germany as a correspondent for the Chicago Tribune before the outbreak of WWII.

    His account of attending a Nazi rally where he appeared to be the only member of the audience not mesmerized by Hitler's delusional rants reminds me of my own reaction to the Russiagate hysteria being orchestrated by neocons and Clinton dead-enders. Who are these people and what is the matter with them? The current state of our Union is a testament to the power of propaganda, which Hitler and Goebbels understood so well.

    Even with all the propaganda the Germans were subjected to, said Shirer, Germans realized that Hitler was taking them into an unwinnable war against the rest of the world that they really didn't want. They knew they were headed into the abyss, yet the political climate was so paranoid that resistance seemed unpatriotic, if not treasonous. They went along in the hope that the national nightmare would dissipate of its own accord, that things weren't as bad as they seemed.

    But as it turned out, things were even worse than they seemed. The nightmare was real and there was no waking from it.

    troll_of_the_month , Website January 26, 2018 at 10:14 am GMT
    The USA/Russia/China/Israel/France/UK/India/Pakistan have collectively been playing Russian Roulette for 65 years. Probability dictates sooner or later, one of the chambers will contain a live round.
    Renoman , January 26, 2018 at 11:54 am GMT
    If nuclear war was even slightly or even remotely feasible, the Americans would be doing it. Talk about shitting in your own well.
    anonymous Disclaimer , January 26, 2018 at 12:26 pm GMT
    What an excellent essay. It appears to have been submitted initially to The Unz Review, which should enhance the reputation of both the author and publisher.

    Mr. Roth's observations about the blights of willful public ignorance and mass media disinformation are important. Commenter "animalogic" (#7) aptly describes those party to the widespread deceit as either "a gull or a knave." The Establishment needs and therefore nurtures both.

    trixie , January 26, 2018 at 1:22 pm GMT
    Great article and great comments so far (11 of them).

    We have a scenario much like those scenarios prior to the Great War (WWI) and the second world war, and the same shadowy 'hidden hand' orchestrating the entire pending disaster so they can yet further augment their control and expand their illegal land theft.

    The consolidation of the mass media agencies, now almost pure propaganda/perception management agencies controlled by the competing factions of the 0.1%, and the advent of the internet and 'big data' have enabled this psychopathic cabal to attain previously undreamt of control over the common 99%, including control over their perception.

    Roth has gone straight to the relevant point, nuclear war , for it is already clear that the prospective outcome of any permutation of a 'conventional' war will see the Empire hegemony, USA/Israel and vassal states, lose against Russia, who will be supported, by mutually recognized need, with China. No matter how it is considered, a Russia-China alliance will defeat the empire hegemony if nuclear weapons are not used.

    It is because of this point that the entirety of humanity must rally and do 'what ever it takes' to stop the terrorist empire from sustaining the current tyranny. The psychopaths of the empire, not exposed to public scrutiny, hidden in the shadows, can and will nudge the world into unwinnable (for anyone) nuclear war; their egos are the definition of human depravity.

    Exposing the grand charade to a critical mass of the general population is the first objective, then exposing the 'hidden hands' in the shadows is the next.

    The parasite must be stopped, and we, the people who have seen glimpses of the enemy, are incumbent to spread the word.

    Good luck.

    yurivku , January 26, 2018 at 1:48 pm GMT
    I left this comment on a different article ( http://thesaker.is/listening-to-mattis/ ), but seems it could be in place here also. Cause we're talking approximately same and nothing gonna change
    -- -- -

    Well, it's getting boring a little. I mean the descriptions of the insanity of US's rulers.

    One positive thing in US policy is a stability and progress – dummy president replaced by stupid one, that replaced by insane; after him goes imbecile. I can't imagine who's going to be next :-). But there are many of old crazy women and men ready to help if current imbecile went down.

    Thanks God, we, Russians, not that happy. After imbecile alcoholic Yeltsin we've got not bad alternative (your media and stupid people in power call him a killer). Who (with his sanity) the only chance for this world to survive.

    But, actually we're very tired from all this stuff and the possibility of US generals to test our conventional and even nuke arms constantly increasing. They can also test if our soldiers who've seen Napoleon, Hitler and many others got worse or still the same. I'm asking US citizens – Is it really interesting to you to get know it for sure?

    DESERT FOX , January 26, 2018 at 2:00 pm GMT
    There will be no nuclear war as Russia and the U.S. can wipe each other off the map, however the Zionists will continue to keep America at war for the Zionist NWO as that is the game plan and we goyim Americans will continue to be sent to the slaughter house for greater Israel.
    Harold Smith , January 26, 2018 at 2:06 pm GMT
    "But as Mr. Shatz observes, the problems run much deeper than President Trump."

    This statement is misleading. One honest, generally morally competent man holding the ever-more-powerful office of president of the U.S., could fix many things. Unfortunately, Donald John Trump is not that man.

    Let's consider one example: Many people believe that a real investigation into 9/11 would destroy the "deep state". Dr. J. Leroy Hulsey et al. have recently completed a study of the "collapse" of WTC7, whereby they've proven that "fire" was not the cause of the "collapse" of that building. This finding directly contradicts the NIST report. For the first time in 16 years there is now incontrovertible scientific evidence in the public domain that 9/11 was an "inside job". Why won't Donald John Trump take advantage of this unprecedented opportunity and order an investigation?

    There is only one plausible explanation: I believe that Donald John Trump was the "deep state" candidate of choice in the 2016 election. I believe that's why they ran wild-eyed madwoman Hillary Clinton against him rather than the more electable Sanders. I believe that's why, in the early fall of 2016, as the election was coming into the home stretch, Obama started ramping up tensions with Russia; i.e., so as to nudge the disgruntled anti-war Democrats (Sanders supporters) into Trump's camp, swinging the election to him.

    I believe that Donald John Trump is a "deep cover" or "sleeper" agent that's been groomed and waiting in the wings for his masters' call. I believe that Donald John Trump was called to power in a desperate now or never moment to save the "deep state" (Zionist) agenda.

    Donald John Trump is a liar. Donald John Trump is a fraud. Donald John Trump is a con man. Donald John Trump is a mass-murderer.

    Wyatt Pendleton , Website January 26, 2018 at 3:24 pm GMT
    I don't think anyone in the West is sleepwalking into anything, esp the USA. I think the American people see the writing on the wall and that if the American Empire loses status the economy of the USA will revert to being a labor intensive existence of working the ground just to have enough food to eat and water to drink. So entitled and lazy Americans are and horrified to be relegated back to a 1920/30′s quality of life (loss of Bread & Circuses), that if the Military Industril Complex has to threaten the entire planet with nuclear annihilation if they don't tithe 10% of their GDP (Roman Empire) so fat ass Yankees can continue to be fat asses – then just burn the place to the ground.

    If the BRIC countries attempt to dethrone the petro dollar lazy entitled Americans will BEG Washington to do whatever it takes to bring back $3.00 t-shirts at Wal-Mart.

    Beckow , January 26, 2018 at 3:45 pm GMT
    The world is not about to end, but the Western public space has become very stupid. Most politicians, media and academics have managed to redefine basic terms into idiotic caricatures. Concepts like meddling, trolls, collusion, etc don't mean what we are told they mean. They are all an eternal part of human society, exchange of ideas, disagreements. Expressing one's opinions is not 'propaganda', or 'meddling' in elections – it is freedom of speech. The idea that there is only one correct view – the Western liberal one – is medieval.

    We are at a point when views other than BBC, CNN, NY Times , are routinely dismissed as 'meddling', 'trolling, or sometimes 'hatred'. The objective is to suppress and dismiss them. That is very dangerous for any civilisation, but for a system that was built on celebrating free speech, it is fatal.

    I often hear that it is a 'natural' pendulum swing, that most people in the West don't agree with it, that it is an angry reaction to an unexpected loss ('Clinton dead-enders'), that it will self-correct over time. In my view that is missing the point and overlooks the permanent damage this hysteria has caused. If the more rational members of the elite are unable to defend rationality and freedom today – when it is still easy – they are co-responsible for the madness.

    Anon Disclaimer , January 26, 2018 at 4:48 pm GMT
    BDS loses spy vs spy.

    https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/01/new-orleans-city-council-rescinds-bds-backed-resolution-we-were-duped/?utm

    annamaria , January 26, 2018 at 5:02 pm GMT
    @troll_of_the_month

    The ziocon triumph in the Kaganat of Nuland (known as "liberated" Ukraine): http://www.fort-russ.com/2018/01/tribunal-awaits-latest-un-data-on.html
    Comment section:

    "After the Maidan the leaders of two right wing neo-Nazi organisations were rewarded with control of four ministries

    -- Where are the Lobby, the Anti-Defamation League, the Friends of Israel in UK, and the whole Holocaust business? Where are the fighters with BDS?

    Anon Disclaimer , January 26, 2018 at 5:25 pm GMT
    Anon from TN:

    Nobody will deliberately start nuclear war, but the probability that it might start as the result of series of mistakes has increased.

    The US and its vassals (including other NATO countries) moved NATO troops close to Russian borders, destabilized Ukraine, Syria, cooked up "Russiagate" (which is really an FBI-gate, but sore losers would not admit it) to justify further increases in Pentagon budget (a trough where very fat pigs feed).

    The Empire is afraid of losing its position, but shortsighted elites do everything to accelerate its demise. The main danger is that in its death throes the Empire will start a war, although we can only hope that even degenerate US elites understand that dead people cannot benefit by their wealth. Hope springs eternal.

    RadicalCenter , January 26, 2018 at 6:08 pm GMT
    Agree with much of the sentiment and some of the proposals here regarding the need to ratchet down rhetoric, pledge no first strike, and generally try much harder to reduce the risk of even a "small" nuke exchange.

    But giving up our inter-continental ballistic missiles would be foolhardy, even more so if it's done unilaterally. With rivals / potential enemies like China and eventually India, who in time will be able to muster conventional forces and troop contingents far larger than ours, we cannot give up the nuke deterrent.

    And the reference "the TWO nuclear-armed superpowers" is out of date. That would be at least THREE nuke-armed superpowers: China, the USA, and Russia.

    bike-anarchist , January 26, 2018 at 6:48 pm GMT
    @RadicalCenter

    "But giving up our inter-continental ballistic missiles would be foolhardy, even more so if it's done unilaterally. With rivals / potential enemies like China and eventually India, who in time will be able to muster conventional forces and troop contingents far larger than ours, we cannot give up the nuke deterrent."

    because it will keep the victims of ZIO/U$A imperial policy at bay for the victims request for REPARATIONS, when that time comes

    Beckow , January 26, 2018 at 6:55 pm GMT
    @Anon

    understand that dead people cannot benefit by their wealth. Hope springs eternal

    Well, hope is always nice. But we might not understand the dynamic nature of the global-liberal overreach that we have been experiencing. People don't behave the way Western elites have been acting without some measure of disconnect from reality. And hubris. When a substantial part of elite climbs on an irrational high horse of invincibility they become paralysed by the framework they have created. They don't want to hear other views because it makes them uncomfortable. They have given up on both principles and institutions – it is anything goes world now.

    So where is the assurance that rationality would prevail in a crisis? It didn't in 1914. Who would step in and tell the morons that they have been living a lie of their own creation? That constraints are still there, that their verbal acuity has not changed how the world is, that 'soft power' is called soft for a reason – it doesn't add up to a hill of beans when it matters. The risk for any dissenter of consequence is very high (see Trump for a related, imperfect example).

    Let's hope. Most bad scenarios don't actually end life on the planet, they just make life more miserable. That's what happened in the past. We might see a 'nuclear' version of that. One thing I know for sure: none of the liberal fire-eaters in Washington, Brussels or London will ever own up to this. They are born 'victims', so they will go on whining

    jilles dykstra , January 26, 2018 at 7:04 pm GMT
    The Dutch government tries to get a law accepted now that greatly increases the legal possibilities of our secret service to spy on anyone.
    March 21 there is a referendum on the law, I expect that we will reject it, but the politicians already stated that they will reject a negative referendum.
    By accident, of course, today our secret service made public that they spied on Russian interference in the USA elections, without being specific of course, 'classified', as a lot in the USA.
    Jake , January 26, 2018 at 7:38 pm GMT
    The Trotskyites who became in America first anti-Stalinist Democrat Hawks and then anti-Russian/Israel-first Republican Hawks have worked things so that they control foreign affairs for both political parties. And they have an insatiable bloodlust. Like the godfather of their movement, they are amoral with genocidal desires when it comes to peoples they despise. They are the type of self-righteous bullies who aspire to rule the globe to overreach and push and shove and threaten and sucker punch until the worst for the world happens.

    Most regular readers of Unz Review can agree with the above. What they also need to accept is that those problems did not enter the US, or more generally the Anglosphere, with the flight of mostly Jewish Trotskyites from the USSR and Europe. The same attitudes of insufferable hubris that was basically amoral in regard to national and ethnic groups it most despised marked the British Empire.

    The British WASP Elite form certainly was more refined and pleasant-seeming than the Jewish Neocon form, and other groups of people within that world usually proved able to bring the most crazed WASP Elite monsters back from the edge of the cliff. But they existed, and they caused needless trouble around the globe.

    It is the mix of the two that makes the American hawkish anti-Russian, Israel-first foreign policy insane enough to try to start a nuclear exchange.

    Anon Disclaimer , January 26, 2018 at 7:41 pm GMT
    @Beckow

    Anon from TN
    You may be right, but we can't do anything about it now: much hyped democracy is a pure ruse (look at presumably two party system in the US: Republicrats always win). I just hope that the sense of self-preservation in those degenerate elites is stronger than their lies that they apparently believe themselves (even mice are smart enough for that). If not, then those morons along with innocent bystanders (99.9% of world population) would be dead. Look on the bright side: rodents and insects would be happy to inherit the Earth.

    Lars Porsena , January 26, 2018 at 7:41 pm GMT
    Unpopular jerk-boy opinion incoming. I honestly think the Hawaii response is pretty typical but shameful. I like the response of the guy who just tweets, 'OK, if I die goodbye, I'm golfing anyway' and turns his stupid phone off.

    ... ... ...

    Sergey Krieger , January 26, 2018 at 7:50 pm GMT
    @yurivku

    Good to see you posting. I hear they are muling Ophrah. Really good choice for next president. Woman, black, fat and wealthy. Not gay or transvestite though but that's coming next. What makes me wonder how this sort of imbeciles gets elected without collapsing the state. I think it is moving slowly in this direction but there was enough to have just 2 morons in top positions and look -- no more USSR. Talk about "Checks and balances."

    Makes me wonder what after Putin. I do it like him that much but he still intelligent, cool and calculating man that is not doing stupid things but neither genius.

    Regarding Americans, unfortunately they never felt real pain. Like a kid who does not know that fire is dangerous. I think financial collapse gonna be trouble sooner or later with them. The best thing Russia and China can do is to undermine us dollar status and the whole financial system which was built by uncle Sam for uncle Sam benefit.

    Anon Disclaimer , January 26, 2018 at 7:52 pm GMT
    @jilles dykstra

    Anon from TN
    You are right: Dutch government has already thrown away negative results of the referendum on EU association with Ukraine. What's more, it betrayed its own citizens by still pretending to investigate the crash of MH-17, even though everyone with a brain knows that Ukrainian puppet government is to blame (international airlines made this conclusion long time ago: they fly over Russia, but avoid Ukraine, flying around it, just like they fly around North Korea).

    I am tempted to say that you guys elected this scum, but then you'd say that I elected Trump, which I didn't (anyway, what choice did we have: corrupt to the core mad witch would have been even worse).

    Beckow , January 26, 2018 at 7:55 pm GMT
    @jilles dykstra

    today our secret service made public that they spied on Russian interference in the USA elections

    Spying is like a recursive algorithm. Next Russia will announce that they ' spied on the Dutch spies who were spying on them '. Maybe we can skip the ' motivations ': they are all spying on each other, all the time, it is their job description.

    I am still waiting for someone to explain to us how is ' interference ' or ' meddling ' different from having an opinion about an election. And we all know that Americans (or Dutch) have never, ever, expressed any opinions about other countries' elections. Right. My democracy promotion is your meddling.

    It is bad when you kill my cow. It is very good when I kill your cow. Monkey reasoning level?

    [Jan 26, 2018] Russia's Election New Faces, but No Real News

    Notable quotes:
    "... People will support Putin even if they don't fully support him. Here's why: our model of power structure for centuries have been heavily relying on center pin - the ruler. This model works well during crisis, and most of Russian history is a crisis management. ..."
    Jan 26, 2018 | nationalinterest.org

    VadimKharichkov , January 25, 2018 1:58 AM

    As for Navalny, most Russians see him as a joke. No need to watch state television - it's just enough to read his party's program, see on his YouTube channel how he promises the moon, or observe Sobchak making fool of him on Dozhd.

    He has no real base of support, so he is forced to proselytize among school children. He's nicknamed "Lord of the flies" for that.

    I myself am for positive change in Russia, but we deserve better opposition than that.

    VadimKharichkov , January 25, 2018 1:35 AM

    People will support Putin even if they don't fully support him. Here's why: our model of power structure for centuries have been heavily relying on center pin - the ruler. This model works well during crisis, and most of Russian history is a crisis management.

    Russian institutions and the establishment are all built to revolve around this center pin. If the ruler is weak and incompetent, someone else becomes the center pin - princes, boyars, false czars, holy elders, oligarchs, etc. Nothing good ever came out of it.

    So should some populist loudmouth come to power in Russia, the establishment will not cover for his defficiencies and someone else will rule the country. Russians don't want that, so the likes of Sobchak and Navalny don't stand a single chance.

    rippled , January 25, 2018 1:16 AM

    Kinda like US elections then?

    vpurto rippled , January 25, 2018 2:27 AM

    Exactly. This is why Washington, DC swamp is in panic - Putin have managed to open eye of "We the People" to secret of Polichinelle.

    [Jan 26, 2018] Warns The Russiagate Stakes Are Extreme by Paul Craig Roberts

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Many Americans do not seem to understand what is at stake. What America is confronted with is a coup conspiracy organized by top officials of the Obama Justice Department, FBI, CIA, the Hillary DNC, and the presstitute media to overturn the result of a democratic election and remove the president from office. The basis of the coup is a fake dossier purchased for money that consists of unsupported allegations against Trump and that was used to obtain warrants from the FISA count to spy on Trump and various associates hoping to find something that can be used against Trump. Regardless, the false allegations could be fed to the CIA's media assets and used to create a scandal requiring a special prosecutor to investigate Russiagate. ..."
    "... If the highest reaches of the police state agencies can get away with an attempted or successful coup against the president of the United States, then that is the complete end of democracy and all accountability in government. The House, Senate, and judiciary will become as powerless as the Roman senate under the caesars. We will live under a dictatorship ruled by police state agencies. ..."
    "... This is not minor stuff. This goes to the heart of whether any form of liberty will exist. We all know that the ability of the people to hold government accountable is not assured by democracy. However, there is no prospect of holding government accountable if it is a police state, a road that the US has been going down for some time. The audacious coup attempt against President Trump is our opportunity to stop the momentum to a police state. ..."
    "... When Admiral Rodgers, director of the National Security Agency, discovered that the FBI and DOJ were misusing the spy system for partisan political reasons, he let it be known that he was going to inform the FISA court. This caused the FBI and DOJ to rush to the court in advance and confess to "mistakes" and to promise to tighten up procedures so as not to make mistakes in the future. It is these "mistakes" and corrections that the FISA court document reveals. ..."
    "... In other words, the information already exists in the pubic domain that proves that Russiagate was a conspiracy organized for the purpose of bringing down the elected president of the United States ..."
    "... A case can be made that it would be just as well if the coup succeeds as it would bring an end to Washington's cover as the government of a great democracy with liberty and justice for all. Most other governments, and one would hope certainly the Russian and Chinese governments, would see the coup as America's final transition into a police state and give up their utopian ideas of reaching accommodation with Washington. The constraints on Washington's ability to bully the world would be greatly strengthened by the universal perception that the government of the United States had devolved into a police state. ..."
    Jan 26, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    The Republicans' delay in releasing the summary of the House Intelligence Committee's Russiagate investigation is giving weight to the presstitutes' claim that the report is not being released, because it is a hack attempt at a Trump cover-up that is not believable. Only Republicans are stupid enough to put themselves in such a situation.

    Readers ask me why the summary memo is not released if it is real. There must be some reasons besides the stupidity of Republicans. Yes, that is so. Among the many reasons that might be blocking release are:

    1) Republicans are very national security conscious. They don't want to provide precedents for the release of classified information.

    2) Many Republican congressional districts host installations of the military/security complex. Upsetting a large employer and directing campaign financing to a challenger is a big consideration.

    3) The George W. Bush/Dick Cheney regime was a neoconservative regime. One consequence is that Republicans are influenced by neoconservatives who stress the alleged "Russian threat."

    4) The Israel Lobby can unseat any member of the House and Senate. The Israel Lobby is allied with the neoconservatives and this alliance intends to keep the US militarily active against perceived threats to Israel's hegemony in the Middle East and against Russia, which supports Syria and Iran, countries perceived as threats by Israel.

    5) Many Republicans are themselves invested in false Russiagate allegations against Trump and would like to replace him with Pence. Other Republicans believe that Trump is undermining Washington's expensively-purchased foreign alliances and, thereby, undermining US power.

    Many Americans do not seem to understand what is at stake. What America is confronted with is a coup conspiracy organized by top officials of the Obama Justice Department, FBI, CIA, the Hillary DNC, and the presstitute media to overturn the result of a democratic election and remove the president from office. The basis of the coup is a fake dossier purchased for money that consists of unsupported allegations against Trump and that was used to obtain warrants from the FISA count to spy on Trump and various associates hoping to find something that can be used against Trump. Regardless, the false allegations could be fed to the CIA's media assets and used to create a scandal requiring a special prosecutor to investigate Russiagate.

    Once the investigation was under way, the presstitutes kept the scandal alive hoping to convince enough Americans that Trump must have done something -- "where there is smoke, there is fire" -- that justifies his removal. It worked against Richard Nixon, but not against Ronald Reagan, and Trump is no Reagan. If the highest reaches of the police state agencies can get away with an attempted or successful coup against the president of the United States, then that is the complete end of democracy and all accountability in government. The House, Senate, and judiciary will become as powerless as the Roman senate under the caesars. We will live under a dictatorship ruled by police state agencies.

    Many Americans say they don't need the House Intelligence Report, because they don't believe the Russiagate BS in the first place. They miss the point. They need the report, because those responsible for this attempt at a coup must be identified, charged, and prosecuted for their act of high treason.

    This is not minor stuff. This goes to the heart of whether any form of liberty will exist. We all know that the ability of the people to hold government accountable is not assured by democracy. However, there is no prospect of holding government accountable if it is a police state, a road that the US has been going down for some time. The audacious coup attempt against President Trump is our opportunity to stop the momentum to a police state.

    Despite my recent postings, many people do not understand that the somewhat redacted FISA court document that has been declassified and released and explained by myself, William Binney, and former US Attorney Joe di Genova contains admissions by the FBI and DOJ that they improperly spied and obtained warrants from the court under false pretenses. In other words, we have it on the authority of the FISA court itself that the FBI and DOJ have admitted to the court their transgressions. When Department of Justice (sic) congressional liaison Stephen Boyd says the DOJ is "unaware of any wrongdoing," he is lying through his teeth. The DOJ has already confessed its wrongdoing to the FISA court.

    (See Lendman on Boyd's claim that releasing the memo would harm national security and ongoing investigations. This is always the claim made when government has to cover up its crimes. )

    When Admiral Rodgers, director of the National Security Agency, discovered that the FBI and DOJ were misusing the spy system for partisan political reasons, he let it be known that he was going to inform the FISA court. This caused the FBI and DOJ to rush to the court in advance and confess to "mistakes" and to promise to tighten up procedures so as not to make mistakes in the future. It is these "mistakes" and corrections that the FISA court document reveals.

    In other words, the information already exists in the pubic domain that proves that Russiagate was a conspiracy organized for the purpose of bringing down the elected president of the United States.

    A case can be made that it would be just as well if the coup succeeds as it would bring an end to Washington's cover as the government of a great democracy with liberty and justice for all. Most other governments, and one would hope certainly the Russian and Chinese governments, would see the coup as America's final transition into a police state and give up their utopian ideas of reaching accommodation with Washington. The constraints on Washington's ability to bully the world would be greatly strengthened by the universal perception that the government of the United States had devolved into a police state.

    holdbuysell Jan 26, 2018 12:18 AM Permalink

    Why Russia is the enemy is found in the historical record that Collins lays out in a series of articles.

    https://philosophyofmetrics.com/category/crown-beast-series/

    [Jan 25, 2018] Russiagate as Kafka 2.0

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Someone must have been telling tales about Josef K., for one morning, without having done anything wrong, he was arrested ..."
    Jan 25, 2018 | www.unz.com

    "Someone must have been telling tales about Josef K., for one morning, without having done anything wrong, he was arrested."

    Thus begins The Trial , Franz Kafka's 1925 work, in which Joseph K., ordinary bank employee, is arrested at his home by mysterious agents and notified of legal proceedings against him.

    He is not informed of the offense or crime of which he would allegedly be guilty – he is only given to understand that he must have broken some unknown law – and is notified of a summons to court a certain day, without knowing the exact time or place.

    The protagonist is dragged into a completely absurd circle, wavering between inspectors, bailiffs, lawyers and judges, and not knowing at any time for what or against whom he must defend himself.

    He is finally executed by three distinguished executioners who, with "odious politeness", plant a butcher's knife in his heart.

    [Jan 24, 2018] Brazen Plot To Exonerate Hillary Clinton And Frame Trump Unraveling, Says Former Fed Prosecutor

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... The FBI used to spy on Russians. This time they spied on us. what this story is about - a brazen plot to exonerate Hillary Clinton from a clear violation of the law with regard to the way she handled classified information with her classified server. Absolutely a crime, absolutely a felony . It's about finding out why - as the Inspector General is doing at the department of justice - why Comey and the senior DOJ officials conducted a fake criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton . Followed none of the regular rules, gave her every break in the book, immunized all kinds of people, allowed the destruction of evidence, no grand jury, no subpoenas, no search warrant. That's not an investigation, that's a Potemkin village. It's a farce. ..."
    "... DiGenova condemned the FBI for working so closely with the controversial Fusion GPS, a political hit squad paid by the DNC and Clinton campaign to create and spread the discredited Steele dossier about President Donald Trump . Without a justifiable law enforcement or national security reason, he says, the FBI "created false facts so that they could get surveillance warrants. Those are all crimes. " He adds, using official FISA-702 "queries" and surveillance was done "to create a false case against a candidate, and then a president. " - Daily Caller ..."
    "... This feels like the most significant American political scandal that has taken place in my lifetime, and I was born in the 60's. ..."
    "... The entire collection program needs to be shut down, the data deleted and the program replaced by the one William Binney originally created that collected and analyzed only metadata unless a warrant is obtained first. The current program is clearly a violation of our 4th Amendment rights even without NDAA section 702. ..."
    "... He forgot to mention Weissman: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-01-15/fbi-probe-russian-uranium-bri ..."
    "... " unauthorized disclosures of raw intelligence on Americans]. This is stunning stuff. " "Stunning" only for the willfully deluded among us. ..."
    "... Pretty soon, the MSM is gonna have to do a false flag ..."
    "... Is he gonna sit there and let these bastards have another shot at him? ..."
    Jan 24, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    In this highly recommended 30 minute interview with Joe diGenova, the former Special Counsel who went after both the Teamsters and former NY Governor Elliot Spitzer, paints a very clear picture of collusion is painted between the Obama administration, the FBI, the Clinton campaign and opposition research firm Fusion GPS.

    From the Daily Caller :

    The FBI used to spy on Russians. This time they spied on us. what this story is about - a brazen plot to exonerate Hillary Clinton from a clear violation of the law with regard to the way she handled classified information with her classified server. Absolutely a crime, absolutely a felony . It's about finding out why - as the Inspector General is doing at the department of justice - why Comey and the senior DOJ officials conducted a fake criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton . Followed none of the regular rules, gave her every break in the book, immunized all kinds of people, allowed the destruction of evidence, no grand jury, no subpoenas, no search warrant. That's not an investigation, that's a Potemkin village. It's a farce.

    And everybody knew it was a farce. The problem was, she didn't win. And because she didn't wain, the farce became a very serious opera. It wasn't a comic opera anymore, it was a tragic opera. And she was going to be the focus.

    What this is about, this is about a lavabo, a cleansing of FBI and the upper echelons of the Department of Justice.

    We're going to discover that the Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, her deputy Sally Yates, the head of the national security division John Carlin, Bruce Ohr and other senior DOJ officials, and regrettably, lying attorneys . People who were senior career civil servants violated the law, perhaps committed crimes, and covered up crimes by a presidential candidate - but more than that, they tried to frame an incoming president with a false Russian conspiracy that never existed, and they knew it, and they plotted to ruin him as a candidate and then destroy him as a president. That's why this is important. That's why connecting the dots is important.

    DiGenova condemned the FBI for working so closely with the controversial Fusion GPS, a political hit squad paid by the DNC and Clinton campaign to create and spread the discredited Steele dossier about President Donald Trump . Without a justifiable law enforcement or national security reason, he says, the FBI "created false facts so that they could get surveillance warrants. Those are all crimes. " He adds, using official FISA-702 "queries" and surveillance was done "to create a false case against a candidate, and then a president. " - Daily Caller

    During the interview, DiGenova holds up and references a previously unreported and heavily redacted 99-page FISA court opinion from April, 2017, which " describes systematic and on-going violations of the law [by the FBI and their contractors using unauthorized disclosures of raw intelligence on Americans]. This is stunning stuff."

    NSA Admiral Mike Rodgers: An American Hero

    diGenova also discusses the immense risks taken by retiring NSA director, Mike Rogers - who briefed Trump on Nov. 7, 2016 about the Obama administration's surveillance of the Trump team. The next day, the Presidental transition team was moved out of Trump tower and into the president-elect's Bedminster, NJ golf course until they could sweep for bugs.

    headcase Jan 23, 2018 7:18 PM Permalink

    This feels like the most significant American political scandal that has taken place in my lifetime, and I was born in the 60's.

    anti-republocrat Jan 22, 2018 10:25 PM Permalink

    Paul Craig Roberts says he's been too hard on the NSA. I don't think so. The FISA warrant only allowed the FBI to unmask people in surveillance the NSA is already doing on everybody. If the dirt is being collected and stored, eventually somebody will find a way to use it.

    The entire collection program needs to be shut down, the data deleted and the program replaced by the one William Binney originally created that collected and analyzed only metadata unless a warrant is obtained first. The current program is clearly a violation of our 4th Amendment rights even without NDAA section 702.

    Boris Badenov Jan 22, 2018 8:39 AM Permalink

    He forgot to mention Weissman: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-01-15/fbi-probe-russian-uranium-bri

    HoPewGassed Jan 22, 2018 8:34 AM Permalink

    " unauthorized disclosures of raw intelligence on Americans]. This is stunning stuff. " "Stunning" only for the willfully deluded among us.

    RKae Jan 22, 2018 12:12 AM Permalink

    Pretty soon, the MSM is gonna have to do a false flag where they fucking blow up the sun in order to deflect from all this!

    farmerbraun -> RKae Jan 22, 2018 12:37 AM Permalink

    Trump has known all of this all along. The only pre-emptive move that he could make would be to declare martial law , and have the military move on the traitors. For Chrissake, look what's at stake here. Is he gonna sit there and let these bastards have another shot at him?
    (Shakes head in puzzlement).

    Francewhoa Jan 22, 2018 12:02 AM Permalink

    Interesting article

    Related to this, a former FBI agent leaked a top secret document related to the FISA Abuse Memo. Read more at:
    • https://www.minds.com/blog/view/801991857799499776
    or
    • https://www.facebook.com/groups/Hillary.Clinton.Critics/permalink/16978

    VideoEng_NC -> CatInTheHat Jan 22, 2018 12:02 AM Permalink

    The action is happening behind the scenes, we in the John Q Public seats have to wait.

    [Jan 24, 2018] Russian Bots Not Behind #ReleaseTheMemo Hasht

    Jan 24, 2018 | dailycaller.com

    The Daily Caller

    A spokesman for the House Intelligence Committee took a shot at Democrats for pushing the false narrative.

    "When Democrats demand investigations of a hashtag but find no cause for concern after the FBI loses five months' of critical evidence concerning the Strzok text messages, then someone's priorities are out of whack," Jack Langer told The Daily Caller.

    [Jan 22, 2018] Pentagon Unveils Strategy for Military Confrontation With Russia and China by Bill Van Auken

    Highly recommended!
    See also: Full Speech President Trump Outlines National Security Strategy - Video - NYTimes.com
    Everyone in the world can see that the United States has become a bitterly divided country, but still has a really amazing level of continuity in foreign policy between various administrations.
    Notable quotes:
    "... The long-awaited National Defense Strategy is a vision of US imperialism besieged on all sides and in mortal danger of losing global dominance. ..."
    "... "Great power competition -- not terrorism -- is now the primary focus of US national security," Mattis said in his speech, which accompanied the release of an 11-page declassified document outlining the National Defense Strategy in broad terms. A lengthier classified version was submitted to the US Congress, which includes the Pentagon's detailed proposals for a massive increase in military spending. ..."
    "... Russia, it charges, is attempting to achieve "veto authority over nations on its periphery in terms of their governmental, economic, and diplomatic decisions, to shatter the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and change European and Middle East security and economic structures to its favor." ..."
    "... "China is a strategic competitor using predatory economics to intimidate its neighbors while militarizing features in the South China Sea," it states. "Russia has violated the borders of nearby nations and pursues veto power over the economic, diplomatic, and security decisions of its neighbors." ..."
    "... Both Moscow and Beijing issued statements condemning the US defense strategy. A Chinese spokesman denounced the document as a return to a "Cold War mentality." Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, meanwhile, told a United Nations press conference: "It is regrettable that instead of having a normal dialog, instead of using the basis of international law, the US is indeed striving to prove their leadership through such confrontational strategies and concepts." A government spokesman in Moscow characterized the document as "imperialistic." ..."
    Jan 22, 2018 | russia-insider.com

    The long-awaited National Defense Strategy is a vision of US imperialism besieged on all sides and in mortal danger of losing global dominance.

    The Trump administration's defense secretary, former Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis, rolled out a new National Defense Strategy Friday that signals open preparations by US imperialism for direct military confrontation with nuclear-armed Russia and China.

    Speaking at Johns Hopkins University in Maryland, Mattis made clear that the strategy, the first such document to be issued by the Pentagon in roughly a decade, represented an historic shift from the ostensible justification for US global militarism for nearly two decades: the so-called war on terrorism.

    "Great power competition -- not terrorism -- is now the primary focus of US national security," Mattis said in his speech, which accompanied the release of an 11-page declassified document outlining the National Defense Strategy in broad terms. A lengthier classified version was submitted to the US Congress, which includes the Pentagon's detailed proposals for a massive increase in military spending.

    Much of the document's language echoed terms used in the National Security Strategy document unveiled last month in a fascistic speech delivered by President Donald Trump. Mattis insisted that the US was facing "growing threat from revisionist powers as different as China and Russia, nations that seek to create a world consistent with their authoritarian models."

    Russia, it charges, is attempting to achieve "veto authority over nations on its periphery in terms of their governmental, economic, and diplomatic decisions, to shatter the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and change European and Middle East security and economic structures to its favor."

    "China is a strategic competitor using predatory economics to intimidate its neighbors while militarizing features in the South China Sea," it states. "Russia has violated the borders of nearby nations and pursues veto power over the economic, diplomatic, and security decisions of its neighbors."

    In what appeared to be a threat directed against both Russia and China, Mattis warned, "If you challenge us, it will be your longest and worst day."

    Both Moscow and Beijing issued statements condemning the US defense strategy. A Chinese spokesman denounced the document as a return to a "Cold War mentality." Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, meanwhile, told a United Nations press conference: "It is regrettable that instead of having a normal dialog, instead of using the basis of international law, the US is indeed striving to prove their leadership through such confrontational strategies and concepts." A government spokesman in Moscow characterized the document as "imperialistic."

    [Jan 22, 2018] German Imperialism as a tool of the "Kingdom of Money" by Thomas Fazi

    Ukraine after EuroMaydan is a de-facto EU colony.
    Notable quotes:
    "... By Thomas Fazi 4 December 2017 ..."
    "... For Germany, the idea of Europeanism has provided the country's elites with the perfect alibi to conceal their hegemonic project behind the ideological veil of 'European integration' ..."
    "... "That may sound absurd given that today's Germany is a successful democracy without a trace of national-socialism – and that no one would actually associate Merkel with Nazism. But further reflection on the word 'Reich', or empire, may not be entirely out of place. The term refers to a dominion, with a central power exerting control over many different peoples. According to this definition, would it be wrong to speak of a German Reich in the economic realm?" ..."
    "... More recently, an article in Politico Europe ..."
    "... Even though the power exercised by Europe's 'colonial masters' is now openly acknowledged by the mainstream press, it is however commonplace to ascribe Germany's dominant position as an accident of history: according to this narrative, we are in the presence of an 'accidental empire', one that is not the result of a general plan but that emerged almost by chance – even against ..."
    "... Germany (and France) have been the main beneficiaries of the sovereign bailouts of periphery countries , which essentially amounted to a covert bailout of German (and French) banks, as most of the funds were channelled back to the creditor countries' banks, which were heavily exposed to the banks (and to a lesser degree the governments) of periphery countries. German policy, Helen Thompson wrote , overwhelmingly 'served the interests of the German banks'. ..."
    "... This is a telling example of how Germany's policies (and the EU's policies more in general), while nominally ordoliberal – i.e., based upon minimal government intervention and a strict rules-based regime – are in reality based on extensive state intervention on behalf of German capital, at both the domestic and European level. ..."
    "... German authorities have also been more than happy to go along with – or to encourage – the European institutions' 'exercise of unrestrained executive power and the more or less complete abandonment of strict, rules-based frameworks' – Storey is here referring in particular to the ECB's use of its currency-issuing monopoly to force member states to follows its precepts – 'to maintain the profitability of German banks, German hegemony within the Eurozone, or even the survival of the Eurozone itself'. ..."
    "... Germany (and France) are also the main beneficiaries of the ongoing process of 'mezzogiornification' of periphery countries – often compounded by troika -forced privatisations –, which in recent years has allowed German and French firms to take over a huge number of businesses (or stakes therewithin) in periphery countries, often at bargain prices. A well-publicised case is that of the 14 Greek regional airports taken over by the German airport operator Fraport. ..."
    "... France's corporate offensive in Italy is another good example: in the last five years, French companies have engaged in 177 Italian takeovers, for a total value of $41.8 billion, six times Italy's purchases in France over the same period. This is leading to an increased 'centralisation' of European capital, characterised by a gradual concentration of capital and production in Germany and other core countries – in the logistical and distribution sectors, for example – and more in general to an increasingly imbalanced relationship between the stronger and weaker countries of the union. ..."
    "... In short, the European Union should indeed be viewed a transnational capitalist project, but one that is subordinated to a clear state-centred hierarchy of power, with Germany in the dominant position. In this sense, the national elites in periphery countries that have supported Germany's hegemonic project (and continue to do so, first and foremost through their support to European integration) can thus be likened to the comprador bourgeoisie ..."
    "... Exportnationalismus' ..."
    "... Modell Deutschland ..."
    "... Even more worryingly, Germany is not simply aiming at expanding its economic control over the European continent; it is also taking steps for greater European military 'cooperation' – under the German aegis, of course. As a recent article in Foreign Policy ..."
    "... In other words, Germany already effectively controls the armies of four countries. And the initiative, Foreign Policy ..."
    Jan 21, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press
    Originally from: Germany's dystopian plans for Europe: from fantasy to reality? By Thomas Fazi 4 December 2017

    For Germany, the idea of Europeanism has provided the country's elites with the perfect alibi to conceal their hegemonic project behind the ideological veil of 'European integration'

    After Emmanuel Macron's election in France, many (including myself) claimed that this signalled a revival of the Franco-German alliance and a renewed impetus for Europe's process of top-down economic and political integration – a fact that was claimed by most commentators and politicians, beholden as they are to the Europeanist narrative, to be an unambiguously positive development.

    Among the allegedly 'overdue' reforms that were said to be on the table was the creation of a pseudo-'fiscal union' backed by a (meagre) 'euro budget', along with the creation of a 'European finance minister', the centre-points of Macron's plans to 're-found the EU' – a proposal that raises a number of very worrying issues from both political and economic standpoints, which I have discussed at length elsewhere .

    The integrationists' (unwarranted) optimism, however, was short-lived. The result of the German elections, which saw the surge of two rabidly anti-integrationist parties, the right-wing FDP and extreme right AfD; the recent collapse of coalition talks between Merkel's CDU, the FDP and the Greens, which most likely means an interim government for weeks if not months, possibly leading to new elections (which polls show would bring roughly the same result as the September election); and the growing restlessness in Germany towards the 13-year-long rule of Macron's partner in reform Angela Merkel, means that any plans that Merkel and Macron may have sketched out behind the scenes to further integrate policies at the European level are now, almost certainly, dead in the water. Thus, even the sorry excuse for a fiscal union proposed by Macron is now off the table, according to most commentators.

    At this point, the German government's most likely course in terms of European policy – the one that has the best chance of garnering cross-party support, regardless of the outcome of the coalition talks (or of new elections) – is the 'minimalist' approach set in stone by the country's infamous and now-former finance minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, in a 'non-paper' published shortly before his resignation.

    The main pillar of Schäuble's proposal – a long-time obsession of his – consists in giving the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), which would go on to become a 'European Monetary Fund', the power to monitor (and, ideally, enforce) compliance with the Fiscal Compact. This echoes Schäuble's previous calls for the creation of a European budget commissioner with the power to reject national budgets – a supranational fiscal enforcer.

    The aim is all too clear: to further erode what little sovereignty and autonomy member states have left, particularly in the area of fiscal policy, and to facilitate the imposition of neoliberal 'structural reforms' – flexibilisation of labour markets, reduction of collective bargaining rights, etc. – on reluctant countries.

    To this end, the German authorities even want to make the receipt of EU cohesion funds conditional on the implementation of such reforms , tightening the existing arrangements even further. Moreover, as noted by Simon Wren-Lewis , the political conflict of interest of having an institution lending within the eurozone would end up imposing severe austerity bias on the recovering country.

    Until recently, these proposals failed to materialise due, among other reasons, to France's opposition to any further overt reductions of national sovereignty in the area of budgetary policy; Macron, however, staunchly rejects France's traditional souverainiste stance, embracing instead what he calls 'European sovereignty', and thus represents the perfect ally for Germany's plans.

    Another proposal that goes in the same direction is the German Council for Economic Experts' plan to curtail banks' sovereign bond holdings. Ostensibly aimed at 'severing the link between banks and government' and 'ensuring long-term debt sustainability', it calls for: (i) removing the exemption from risk-weighting for sovereign exposures, which essentially means that government bonds would no longer be considered a risk-free asset for banks (as they are now under Basel rules), but would be 'weighted' according to the 'sovereign default risk' of the country in question (as determined by credit rating agencies); (ii) putting a cap on the overall risk-weighted sovereign exposure of banks; and (iii) introducing an automatic 'sovereign insolvency mechanism' that would essentially extend to sovereigns the bail-in rule introduced for banks by the banking union, meaning that if a country requires financial assistance from the ESM, for whichever reason, it will have to lengthen its sovereign bond maturities (reducing the market value of those bonds and causing severe losses for all bondholders) and, if necessary, impose a nominal 'haircut' on private creditors.

    As noted by the German economist Peter Bofinger , the only member of the German Council of Economic Experts to vote against the sovereign bail-in plan, this would almost certainly ignite a 2012-style self-fulfilling sovereign debt crisis, as periphery countries' bond yields would quickly rise to unsustainable levels, making it increasingly hard for governments to roll over maturing debt at reasonable prices and eventually forcing them to turn to the ESM for help, which would entail even heavier losses for their banks and an even heavier dose of austerity.

    It would essentially amount to a return to the pre-2012 status quo, with governments once again subject to the supposed 'discipline' of the markets, particularly in the context of a likely tapering of the ECB's quantitative easing (QE) program. The aim of this proposal is the same as that of Schäuble's 'European Monetary Fund': to force member states to implement permanent austerity.

    Read also: Lack of Credible Leftist Alternatives is fueling national movements. Catalonia wants independence from the small Madrid Empire, but inside Brussels Great Empire

    Of course, national sovereignty in a number of areas – most notably fiscal policy – has already been severely eroded by the complex system of new laws, rules and agreements introduced in recent years, including but not limited to the six-pack, two-pack, Fiscal Compact, European Semester and Macroeconomic Imbalances Procedure (MIP).

    As a result of this new post-Maastricht system of European economic governance, the European Union has effectively become a sovereign power with the authority to impose budgetary rules and structural reforms on member states outside democratic procedures and without democratic control.

    The EU's embedded quasi-constitutionalism and inherent (structural) democratic deficit has thus evolved into an even more anti-democratic form of 'authoritarian constitutionalism' that is breaking away with elements of formal democracy as well, leading some observers to suggest that the EU 'may easily become the postdemocratic prototype and even a pre-dictatorial governance structure against national sovereignty and democracies'.

    To give an example, with the launch of the European Semester, the EU's key tool for economic policy guidance and surveillance, an area that has historically been a bastion of national sovereignty – old-age pensions – has now fallen under the purview of supranational monitoring as well. Countries are now expected to (and face sanctions if they don't): (i) increase the retirement age and link it with life expectancy; (ii) reduce early retirement schemes, improve the employability of older workers and promote lifelong learning; (iii) support complementary private savings to enhance retirement incomes; and (iv) avoid adopting pension-related measures that undermine the long term sustainability and adequacy of public finances.

    This has led to the introduction in various countries of several types of automatic stabilizing mechanisms (ASMs) in pension systems, which change the policy default so that benefits or contributions adjust automatically to adverse demographic and economic conditions without direct intervention by politicians. Similar 'automatic correction mechanisms' in relation to fiscal policy can be found in the Fiscal Compact.

    The aim of all these 'automatic mechanisms' is clearly to put the economy on 'autopilot', thus removing any element of democratic discussion and/or decision-making at either the European or national level. These changes have already transformed European states into 'semi-sovereign' entities, at best. In this sense, the proposals currently under discussion would mark the definitive transformation of European states from semi-sovereign to de facto (and increasingly de jure ) non-sovereign entities.

    Regardless of the lip service paid by national and European officials to the need for further reductions of national sovereignty to go hand in hand with a greater 'democratisation' of the euro area, the reforms currently on the table can, in fact, be considered the final stage in the thirty-year-long war on democracy and national sovereignty waged by the European elites, aimed at constraining the ability of popular-democratic powers to influence economic policy, thus enabling the imposition of neoliberal policies that would not have otherwise been politically feasible.

    In this sense, the European economic and monetary integration process should be viewed, to a large degree, as a class-based and inherently neoliberal project pursued by all national capitals as well as transnational (financial) capital. However, to grasp the processes of restructuring under way in Europe, we need to go beyond the simplistic capital/labour dichotomy that underlies many critical analyses of the EU and eurozone, which view EU/EMU policies as the expression of a unitary and coherent transnational (post-national) European capitalist class.

    The process underway can only be understood through the lens of the geopolitical-economic tensions and conflicts between leading capitalist states and regional blocs, and the conflicting interests between the different financial/industrial capital fractions located in those states, which have always characterised the European economy. In particular, it means looking at Germany's historic struggle for economic hegemony over the European continent.

    It is no secret that Germany is today the leading economic and political power in Europe, just as it is no secret that nothing gets done in Europe without Germany's seal of approval. In fact, it is commonplace to come across references to Germany's 'new empire'. A controversial Der Spiegel editorial from a few years back event went as far as arguing that it is not out place to talk of the rise of a 'Fourth Reich':

    "That may sound absurd given that today's Germany is a successful democracy without a trace of national-socialism – and that no one would actually associate Merkel with Nazism. But further reflection on the word 'Reich', or empire, may not be entirely out of place. The term refers to a dominion, with a central power exerting control over many different peoples. According to this definition, would it be wrong to speak of a German Reich in the economic realm?"

    More recently, an article in Politico Europe – co-owned by the German media magnate Axel Springer AG – candidly explained why 'Greece is de facto a German colony'. It noted how, despite Tsipras' pleas for debt relief, the Greek leader 'has little choice but to heed the wishes of his "colonial" masters', i.e., the Germans.

    This is because public debt in the eurozone is used as a political tool – a disciplining tool – to get governments to implement socially harmful policies (and to get citizens to accept these policies by portraying them as inevitable), which explains why Germany continues to refuse to seriously consider any form of debt relief for Greece, despite the various commitments and promises to that end made in recent years: debt is the chain that keeps Greece (and other member states) from straying 'off course'.

    Read also: Boris Johnson: Why not a preemptive strike on Korea?

    Even though the power exercised by Europe's 'colonial masters' is now openly acknowledged by the mainstream press, it is however commonplace to ascribe Germany's dominant position as an accident of history: according to this narrative, we are in the presence of an 'accidental empire', one that is not the result of a general plan but that emerged almost by chance – even against Germany's wishes – as a result of the euro's design faults, which have allowed Germany and its satellites to pursue a neo-mercantilist strategy and thus accumulate huge current account surpluses.

    Now, it is certainly true that the euro's design – strongly influenced by Germany – inevitably benefits export-led economies such as Germany over more internal demand-oriented economies, such as those of southern Europe. However, there is ample evidence to support the argument that Germany, far from having accidently stumbled upon European dominance, has been actively and consciously pursuing an expansionary and imperialist strategy in – and through – the European Union for decades.

    Even if we limit our analysis to Germany's post-crisis policies (though there is much that could be said about Germany's post-reunification policies and subsequent offshoring of production to Eastern Europe in the 1990s), it would be very naïve to view Germany's inflexibility – on austerity, for example – as a simple case of ideological stubbornness, considering the extent to which the policies in question have benefited Germany (and to a lesser extent France).

    Germany (and France) have been the main beneficiaries of the sovereign bailouts of periphery countries , which essentially amounted to a covert bailout of German (and French) banks, as most of the funds were channelled back to the creditor countries' banks, which were heavily exposed to the banks (and to a lesser degree the governments) of periphery countries. German policy, Helen Thompson wrote , overwhelmingly 'served the interests of the German banks'.

    This is a telling example of how Germany's policies (and the EU's policies more in general), while nominally ordoliberal – i.e., based upon minimal government intervention and a strict rules-based regime – are in reality based on extensive state intervention on behalf of German capital, at both the domestic and European level.

    As Andy Storey notes, not only did the German government, throughout the crisis, show a blatant disregard for ordoliberalism's non-interference of public institutions in the workings of the market, by engaging in a massive Keynesian-style programme in the aftermath of the financial crisis and pushing through bailout programmes that largely absolved German banks from their responsibility for reckless lending to Greece and other countries; German authorities have also been more than happy to go along with – or to encourage – the European institutions' 'exercise of unrestrained executive power and the more or less complete abandonment of strict, rules-based frameworks' – Storey is here referring in particular to the ECB's use of its currency-issuing monopoly to force member states to follows its precepts – 'to maintain the profitability of German banks, German hegemony within the Eurozone, or even the survival of the Eurozone itself'.

    Germany (and France) are also the main beneficiaries of the ongoing process of 'mezzogiornification' of periphery countries – often compounded by troika -forced privatisations –, which in recent years has allowed German and French firms to take over a huge number of businesses (or stakes therewithin) in periphery countries, often at bargain prices. A well-publicised case is that of the 14 Greek regional airports taken over by the German airport operator Fraport.

    France's corporate offensive in Italy is another good example: in the last five years, French companies have engaged in 177 Italian takeovers, for a total value of $41.8 billion, six times Italy's purchases in France over the same period. This is leading to an increased 'centralisation' of European capital, characterised by a gradual concentration of capital and production in Germany and other core countries – in the logistical and distribution sectors, for example – and more in general to an increasingly imbalanced relationship between the stronger and weaker countries of the union.

    These transformations cannot simply be described as processes without a subject: while there are undoubtedly structural reasons involved – countries with better developed economies of scale, such as Germany and France, were bound to benefit more than others from the reduction in tariffs and barriers associated with the introduction of the single currency – we also have to acknowledge that there are loci of economic-politic power that are actively driving and shaping these imperialist processes, which must be viewed through the lens of the unresolved inter-capitalist struggle between core-based and periphery-based capital.

    From this perspective, the dichotomy that is often raised in European public discourse between nationalism and Europeanism is deeply flawed. The two, in fact, often go hand in hand. In Germany's case, for example, Europeanism has provided the country's elites with the perfect alibi to conceal their hegemonic project behind the ideological veil of 'European integration'. Ironically, the European Union – allegedly created as an antidote to the vicious nationalisms of the twentieth century – has been the tool through which Germany has been able to achieve the 'new European order' that Nazi ideologues had theorised in the 1930s and early 1940s.

    In short, the European Union should indeed be viewed a transnational capitalist project, but one that is subordinated to a clear state-centred hierarchy of power, with Germany in the dominant position. In this sense, the national elites in periphery countries that have supported Germany's hegemonic project (and continue to do so, first and foremost through their support to European integration) can thus be likened to the comprador bourgeoisie of the old colonial system – sections of a country's elite and middle class allied with foreign interests in exchange for a subordinated role within the dominant hierarchy of power.

    From this point of view, the likely revival of the Franco-German bloc is a very worrying development, since it heralds a consolidation of the German-led European imperialist bloc – and a further 'Germanification' of the continent. This development cannot be understood independently of the momentous shifts that are taking place in global political economy – namely the organic crisis of neoliberal globalisation, which is leading to increased tensions between the various fractions of international capital, most notably between the US and Germany.

    Trump's repeated criticisms of Germany's beggar-thy-neighbour mercantilist policies should be understood in this light. The same goes for Angela Merkel's recent call – much celebrated by the mainstream press – for a stronger Europe to counter Trump's unilateralism. Merkel's aim is not, of course, that of making 'Europe' stronger, but rather of strengthening Germany's dominant position vis-à-vis the other world powers (the US but also China) through the consolidation of Germany's control of the European continental economy, in the context of an intensification of global inter-capitalist competition.

    This has now become an imperative for Germany, especially since Trump has dared to openly challenge the self-justifying ideology which sustains Germany's mercantilism – a particular form of economic nationalism that Hans Kundnani has dubbed ' Exportnationalismus' , founded upon the belief that Germany's massive trade surplus is uniquely the result of Germany's manufacturing excellence ( Modell Deutschland ) rather than, in fact, the result of unfair trade practices.

    This is why, if Germany wants to maintain its hegemonic position on the continent, it must break with the US and tighten the bolts of the European workhouse. To this end, it needs to seize control of the most coveted institution of them all – the ECB –, which hitherto has never been under direct German control (though the Bundesbank exercises considerable influence over it, as is well known). Indeed, many commentators openly acknowledge that Merkel now has her eyes on the ECB's presidency. This would effectively put Germany directly at the helm of European economic policy.

    Even more worryingly, Germany is not simply aiming at expanding its economic control over the European continent; it is also taking steps for greater European military 'cooperation' – under the German aegis, of course. As a recent article in Foreign Policy revealed , 'Germany is quietly building a European army under its command'.

    This year Germany and two of its European allies, the Czech Republic and Romania, announced the integration of their armed forces, under the control of the Bundeswehr. In doing so, the will follow in the footsteps of two Dutch brigades, one of which has already joined the Bundeswehr's Rapid Response Forces Division and another that has been integrated into the Bundeswehr's 1st Armored Division.

    In other words, Germany already effectively controls the armies of four countries. And the initiative, Foreign Policy notes, 'is likely to grow'. This is not surprising: if Germany ('the EU') wants to become truly autonomous from the US, it needs to acquire military sovereignty, which it currently lacks.

    Europe is thus at a crossroads: the choice that left-wing and popular forces, and periphery countries more generally, face is between (a) accepting Europe's transition to a fully post-democratic, hyper-competitive, German-led continental system, in which member states (except for those at the helm of the project) will be deprived of all sovereignty and autonomy, in exchange for a formal democratic façade at the supranational level, and its workers subject to ever-growing levels of exploitation; or (b) regaining national sovereignty and autonomy at the national level, with all the short-term risks that such a strategy entails, as the only way to restore democracy, popular sovereignty and socioeconomic dignity. In short, the choice is between European post-democracy or post-European democracy.

    There is no third way. Especially in view of the growing tensions between Germany, the US and China, periphery countries should ask themselves if they want to be simple pawns in this 'New Great Game' or if they want to take their destinies into their own hands.

    -- -

    Some portions of this article previously appeared in this article published by Green European Journal. Thomas Fazi is the co-author (with William Mitchell) of Reclaiming the State: A Progressive Vision of Sovereignty for a Post-Neoliberal World (Pluto, 2017).

    [Jan 22, 2018] Twitter looks stupid accusing account started in 2017 of Russian Propaganda during 2016 election

    Jan 22, 2018 | theduran.com

    Last week, Twitter sent out a creepy email to over 677,775 users letting them know that the platform was actively working to understand "Russian-linked activities" that took place during the 2016 presidential election.

    Twitter claimed that they had identified and suspended a "number of accounts that were potentially connected to propaganda efforts by a Russian government-linked organization known as the Internet Research Agency [IRA]".

    One of the 677,775 users to receive the message was "Liquid IQ", the only problem is that the Liquid IQ twitter account was created in July 2017. That is a full eight months after the US elections.

    The 2017 Liquid IQ account was definitely not spreading Russian propaganda during the 2016 US presidential election on twitter, unless Liquid IQ magically found a way to follow "Russian trolls" on twitter without having an actual twitter profile.

    [Jan 21, 2018] Poeoshenko failed to imagine the situation a Russia in which Putin was no longer around and the hawks, with plenty of stored up grievances, were in power. The Russians have their neocons too and if they came out on top we'd be worse off than now. Failing to resolve the Donbass crisis now might create much worse situation in the future

    Notable quotes:
    "... Imagine a Russia in which Putin was no longer around and the hawks, with plenty of stored up grievances, were in power. The Russians have their neocons too and if they came out on top we'd be worse off than now ..."
    "... The European elites wish to see Europe as a world power. Unrealistic, perhaps, but say that entity did become a dominant force. They complain about the lack of democratic control in the States, but that's nothing to the lack of democratic control in Europe. And we've already seen what the Europeans, including us, are capable of when it comes to predatory foreign intervention. Give the Europeans enough things that go bang and we could be yearning for the good old days. ..."
    Jan 21, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    English Outsider -> Babak Makkinejad... 21 January 2018 at 11:18 AM


    Babak - "The only sensible thing to do is to cut and run; in my opinion. Just work through the implications as US cuts and run in the Levant, in the Persian Gulf, in South Korea."

    As you point out, that could have unexpected effects. We saw what happened when a previous dominant power - Great Britain, though by no means as overwhelmingly dominant and not at all so at the end - effectively cut and ran after the Second World War. It ended up more of a mess than it started out as.

    Even in an ideal world, a world in which the current style of Great Power politics was universally abandoned, the sudden withdrawal of the US would cause instability and chaos. The disengagement would have to be gradual.

    But there is no such ideal world as that and there will not be. Therefore the sudden withdrawal of the US would leave a power vacuum that others would fill.

    What others? Imagine a Russia in which Putin was no longer around and the hawks, with plenty of stored up grievances, were in power. The Russians have their neocons too and if they came out on top we'd be worse off than now .

    The European elites wish to see Europe as a world power. Unrealistic, perhaps, but say that entity did become a dominant force. They complain about the lack of democratic control in the States, but that's nothing to the lack of democratic control in Europe. And we've already seen what the Europeans, including us, are capable of when it comes to predatory foreign intervention. Give the Europeans enough things that go bang and we could be yearning for the good old days.

    I'm one of those that still hope that the non-interventionist policy that was voted for in America in 2016 will be carried through. But if that is indeed Trump's intention then there is more in his way than local political or administrative difficulties. To engineer such a transition would require great care. It's no good if the US just steps back and worse comes forward to take its place.

    It's not overly idealistic, or even that unrealistic, to hope for a world in which defense forces (AND defensive alliances) are used for the proper purpose of defence and not for expensive and destructive enterprises dreamed up by some bubble elite. That's part of what Trump 2016 was about. But getting to such a world would require a considerably more careful transition than we've seen in similar circumstances in the past.

    [Jan 21, 2018] Syria - Turks Attack Afrin, U.S. Strategy Fails, Kurds Again Chose The Losing Side

    There are some analogies here with the recent Poroshenko government desire to take Donbass area back by military force.
    Notable quotes:
    "... How will this breakup of Syrian national territory affect the situation between the Donbass region and the Ukraine junta? ..."
    "... True and very sad. The Syrians have been caught in the crossfire since the beginning. We have theorized over the various causes of the war, but, in the end, when the superpowers are hanging around, Syrians are the first row of pieces to be sacrificed. ..."
    "... The Afrin war plays several roles. It will demonize and demoralize further the 'independentist' Kurds, awake the nationalist Turkish feeling by displaying military power that has been damaged by the coup, boost the Islamist flame among the rural Turks so the Turks can forget about their grudge over the EU and the declining buying power. ..."
    "... All the actors are tributaries flowing into the main river, and all moving in the same general direction, because the river is actually the tide of history. All players are advancing to meet their inevitable destinie ..."
    Jan 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    BRF , Jan 21, 2018 10:28:49 AM | 17

    Let me see if I understand all this? The Erdogan Turks fully back the terrorists in Syria aiming to dislodge the Assad Syrian government. The USA et al fully backs the same.

    The USA also backs the PKK/YPG Kurd faction in Syria as a means to at least break up Syrian national territory, as originally in their plans, even if they do remove the Assad government as originally planned.

    Erdogan has wanted to expand Turkey's national boundaries at the expense of Syria's. This latest encroachment, as with Euphrates Shield, accomplishes this goal especially if they can subsume their terrorist proxies occupied areas in Idlib Province as the USA has by using their newest Kurd proxies in eastern Syria. Erdogan need only create some new proxy (Turkmen?) and go after the terrorists and Kurds in western Syria. No doubt with American help.

    Erdogan and the USA disagree only on what future the Kurdish people will play in the eastern territories of Syria and Turkey. So what will be the necessary accommodation between them?

    If a Kurdish state is declared and backed by NATO and a UN resolution what if anything can Syria and her allies do about it as war is simply out of the question.

    How will this breakup of Syrian national territory affect the situation between the Donbass region and the Ukraine junta?

    NemesisCalling , Jan 21, 2018 1:41:54 PM | 37
    This would not be some devious plot by Turks/US to prolong the war in Syria and give cover to send more troops in ... troops that never leave? The whole thing seems a bit too ... convenient.

    Posted by: GoraDiva | Jan 21, 2018 1:22:57 PM | 35

    @35 E

    True and very sad. The Syrians have been caught in the crossfire since the beginning. We have theorized over the various causes of the war, but, in the end, when the superpowers are hanging around, Syrians are the first row of pieces to be sacrificed.

    And I would never put my faith in any international community ruling after Syria. We are in uncharted territory, I believe. Dance with the one you came with and if you have to stand on Putin's toes to keep up, then hold him close.

    "Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." -- Thucydides

    Can we got off this stupid ride, yet?

    William Rood , Jan 21, 2018 2:03:05 PM | 41
    "These oilfields seem to be the big prize and one of the main reasons the US wants to hold onto this corner of Syria."

    Posted by: financial matters | Jan 21, 2018 10:37:30 AM | 18

    The goal of the MIC and Deep State is just to keep the chaos going as long as possible to sell arms and benefit careers. However, Trump has been enticed to go along with it by the promise that the US will "take their oil."

    Don Wiscacho , Jan 21, 2018 3:21:35 PM | 47

    @ William Rood re: Kurds who can't speak Arabic

    You may be correct that those Kurds aren't Syrian, but not necessarily so. The areas of Syria that have actually had Kurdish, or for instance Armenian, majorities have enjoyed a large measure of de facto autonomy, which has only increased in the last 20 years. So while nominally required to use Arabic in schools, if the school is staffed with Kurdish teachers and administrators with Kurdish students, there is little to stop them from simply teaching in Kurdish. Or Armenian, or Aramaic, etc.

    Frank , Jan 21, 2018 5:13:08 PM | 56
    We had wrongly predicted that Turkish threats against the Kurdish held north-west area of Afrin were empty:
    Maybe not. Maybe your first analysis was correct. If the Kurdish militias do fight, it will take many weeks, and lead to substantial Turkish losses. So it is really too early to say that Erdogan will attempt to conquer Afrin no matter the cost, and too early to say that the US will not put effective pressure on Erdogan, or offer him some sort of deal.

    So far, Erdogan has upped the ante, but he hasn't gone all in.

    virgile , Jan 21, 2018 6:03:49 PM | 60
    Erdogan is obsessed by keeping power and winning his re election in 2018 or 2019 . To get that, he needs to neutralize the Turkish Kurds who don't vote for him. Sunni conservative Kurds worship Erdogan for his promotion of Sunni Islam. For them Islam is the unifying factor of Turks especially Sunni Islam. They all vote for the AKP.

    Erdogan has emasculated the burgeoning liberal Kurdish party, the HDP, by demonizing the liberal Kurds and throwing its leader in prison just to get more votes in the previous parliamentary election that he reran to win with a very small margin.

    For the next election, he is very worried about the growth of other centrist parties, the weakness of his ally the MHP, a nationalist party archi-enemy of the Kurds and about the insatisfaction of the Turks with the deteriorating relation with the EU and the fall of the lira.

    The Afrin war plays several roles. It will demonize and demoralize further the 'independentist' Kurds, awake the nationalist Turkish feeling by displaying military power that has been damaged by the coup, boost the Islamist flame among the rural Turks so the Turks can forget about their grudge over the EU and the declining buying power.

    The question is will he win fast enough not to create the impression of failure and a quagmire that would reflect negatively on his voters? And what will be the aftermath of Afrin? early elections?

    Grieved , Jan 21, 2018 6:52:02 PM | 66
    I agree with everyone!

    It's a multiple win-win, a great demonstration of congruent interests all doing their own thing. Lots of things remain to play out. But there are no downsides to this situation, no matter who holds what piece of Syrian territory for what temporary short time.

    All the actors are tributaries flowing into the main river, and all moving in the same general direction, because the river is actually the tide of history. All players are advancing to meet their inevitable destinies: Turkey moves closer to Russia, and closer, despite much bad blood, to restoring the friendship between itself and Syria (over time); the Kurds get their final lesson about the perfidious US and settle into their lands in Syria, as Syrians; Dr. Assad gets his entire country back for his people (over time); terrorists die; the US is further marginalized and its generals scream mayhem, in words only.

    Great update, b - thanks!

    [Jan 21, 2018] MoA - Sundry - Shutdown, Ukraine, Omidyar And Syria

    Jan 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    The Ukrainian Parliament has practically declared the Minsk agreements null and void and decided to militarily "liberate" Donetsk, Lugansk and Crimea from the will of the people living there. Just in time the neo-nazi fanatics of the Azov Battalion received a U.S. military delegation and U.S. arms.

    The 2015 Minsk II agreement ( full text ) demanded that the Ukraine creates a new law for the administration of these regions:

    Without delays, but no later than 30 days from the date of signing of this document, a resolution has to be approved by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, indicating the territory which falls under the special regime in accordance with the law "On temporary Order of Local Self-Governance in Particular Districts of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts," based in the line set up by the Minsk Memorandum as of Sept. 19, 2014.

    Russia is not a party of the agreement. But when the resolution by the Ukrainian parliament was not forthcoming western propaganda falsely blamed Russia for "not fulfilling the Minsk agreement" and the west has since bound the sanctions on Russia to this fake conclusion.

    The National Bank of Ukraine announced that an independent accountant found that PrivatBank, then owned by the coup financier and billionaire Ihor Kolomoyskiy , was plundered of $5.5 billion shortly before it went bankrupt and nationalized by the coup government. In connection with that an IMF loan of $1.8 billion to the Ukraine allegedly went directly into Kolomoyskiy's pockets. How much of this stolen money was paid to U.S. politicians?

    While the anti-Trump politicians and media still fret about "Russian influence" on U.S. social media everyone seems to have forgotten that in early 2016 the Ukraine set up a massive troll farm and a Ministry of Truth. Back then even the U.S. ambassador to the Ukraine disliked that . If every troll tweeting in Russian or with Cyrillic letters in its name is under the direct command of Vladimir Putin where then are those Ukrainians trolls?

    les7 , Jan 20, 2018 1:57:19 PM | 18

    @15
    You ask "How much more is there to come...?"

    The last round in Ukraine erupted while the winter games finished in Sochi. I see the empire positioning things to repeat the treatment during FIFA. Ukraine is being primed and the clock is set to create incidents that will force Russia's hand.

    This potential very public shaming of Russia is what is restraining Russia from responding to many of the US and Israeli (and Turkish?) provocations in Syria. Perhaps they are hoping their present silence will gain them some grace for that showcase event.

    Personally, I doubt it.

    And should some incidents happen during the FIFA world cup events, we will see the real Putin - which might be for the best in the long run.

    frances , Jan 20, 2018 6:11:22 PM | 42
    re:?The Ukrainian Parliament has practically declared the Minsk agreements null and void and decided to militarily "liberate" Donetsk, Lugansk and Crimea from the will of the people living there. Just in time the neo-nazi fanatics of the Azov Battalion received a U.S. military delegation..."
    And also just in time Russia is voting on legalizing militias in Africa and elsewhere; just in time for Spring in the Ukraine?
    http://russiafeed.com/russia-legalize-private-military-contractors-get-leg-africa/
    Eugene , Jan 20, 2018 5:20:49 PM | 39
    I'm curious about Ukraine & its neo-nazi's. How do the Israelis who work there, knowing the past-present? After all, mention the word nazi in their presence, and they go out of their collective minds attacking the source. Or maybe there's some sort of collusion taking place?

    [Jan 21, 2018] The Literati's Scourge of Putin and Trump, by Stephen J. Sniegoski

    Jan 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

    Polish Perspective , January 17, 2018 at 6:26 am GMT

    I never thought I'd see the day when a fellow Pole – Sniegoski – had to be called in to defend Russia (or at least call for nuance) because the debate on all things Russian in the West has become so utterly deluded and obsessive that even Poles, notorious overindulgers in Russophobia in our own right, are now slowly starting to notice the insanity. When even we notice it, you know its bad.
    Den Lille Abe , January 17, 2018 at 9:03 am GMT
    I find Masha Gessen a "Bought" person, she is a typical voice of the NeoLib US, and as such she is in stark opposition to everything I stand for as a European socialist. Her class has been responsible for the eradication of the US middle class, the dismantling of of welfare and protection of the poor, she is full throated librul Clintonista/Obamista supported by the mega rich, furthermore she is a backer of the hellhole called Israel, the new harsher apartheid Haven. She is a warmonger, calling for interventions everywhere on Earth, if people there reject US Imperialism.
    I hope God loves her so much he calls her home soon. Spit.
    The problem with the US left is that it does not excist, anything that you can label Socialist is rejected out of hand, so the US will only grow worse for the unprivileged. But whatever carry on.
    Us in Scandinavia will just have to continue with living in squalor, get no education and health care, no paid hollidays, continue to beg in the streets, waiting for rich American tourists ..
    anonymous Disclaimer , January 17, 2018 at 4:05 pm GMT
    This is a case of the personal becoming public, turned inside out. She hates herself and thus ends up hating everyone and everything else. The world should be destroyed, everything turned upside down. With these specimens what's really important is their sex life and how they'll find their next titillation. They're on stage and demand applause. This person is certainly crazed by hate, though. They do this 'let's you and him fight' routine, hoping for a US-Russian confrontation, a confrontation weirdos like this would never get close to. Does anyone really believe that she actually cares about the welfare of Ukrainians or people of the Baltic countries? Or for that matter seeing as she hates the Russians and fantasizes their country being demolished into many little states then why does she pretend to be worried about them having a bad man as a dictator?
    What's noteworthy about her is how she can make a handsome living here in the US. She's given a platform and paid to be part of the current chorus singing the same songs, all part of the well-paid public relations machine that's on overdrive. There's hardly anything actually intellectual about this public 'intellectual', who is also incompetent, but that goes unnoticed by the vast majority of people in the US who hardly read anything of value at all. Various personalities like this are promoted from behind.
    anon Disclaimer , January 17, 2018 at 5:56 pm GMT
    The regime just wants to plunder and stay in power.

    That was the Yeltsin regime that Putin inherited. Putin being the pragmatist allowed the oligarchs to continue as long as they started paying taxes and contribute to society. Putin restored the social safety net that was completely destroyed under Yeltsin. Isn't it funny how the west loved Yeltsin but hates Putin? It's because they want Russia to become a powerless state or group of states, speaking of which

    She wants Russia to break apart "So why is the Russian Federation of more than 80 constituent parts, [and now] as a result of being plundered by the Putin regime, have nationalist movements – why should they stay together?"

    And this is the real payday, the dream of all western Neocons and everyone who is on their payroll. It is about power and eliminating any country that stands in the way of achieving total power. I just wish they were honest about it and didn't couch it in all of these pseudo intellectual and moralistic platitudes.

    JustJeff , January 17, 2018 at 6:07 pm GMT
    @Ilyana_Rozumova

    Considering how Masha Gessen and her ilk want to starve Russians to death, not really

    Boston guy , January 17, 2018 at 6:20 pm GMT
    Masha Gessen is an intelligent loser. How sad it must be to walk around in her shoes. She is an incredibly ugly person with interests no woman of worth would dare invest a second.

    I like the jews. They are capable people. Funny too. They are not cut out for leadership roles. Their ego eclipses their ability. Gessen is captured by this big ego. She writes well. So what? If the only people who read your books are people who agree with you already, you are only hardening and reinforcing your followers opinions.

    Gessen is increasing ignorance and closing minds with her works. She is making monoliths and know it alls out of lost people. All flash. No substance.

    Just another Democrat, really.

    Kam Phlodius , January 17, 2018 at 6:27 pm GMT
    @Sergey Krieger

    Read Albert L. Weeks's "Russia's Life-Saver" then post again. And, heed Putin's repeated, unambiguous, videotaped repudiations of Marxism-Leninism and Stalin, which can be seen on RT's You Tube channel.

    All across the globe, people still give thanks for the liberation of the captive "Soviet" peoples from their living hell, on Christmas Day, 1991.

    As for the freak who wrote this chilling essay, she is the new face of the Soviet terror. It simply moved to New York City and adapted to already favorable conditions.

    JL , January 17, 2018 at 7:06 pm GMT
    I can't believe someone bothered to write a 4000+ word article on Masha Gessen, of all people. Nobody in Russia takes her seriously, not even her would be comrades-in-arms. Hell, she couldn't even hold down a job as an editor at some random travel magazine, her subordinates hated her (which was the real reason she left Russia for the States, not some LGBT persecution thing). Of course, in the US, she's considered edgy, insightful and oh so knowledgeable about the evil Putin regime. But, hey, bonus for the captain obvious observation about Russiagate being a conspiracy theory.
    Moi , January 17, 2018 at 7:41 pm GMT
    @Fran800

    Gessen also says (it's there on Youtube) that she also wants to destroy traditional marriage.

    Eagle eye , January 17, 2018 at 7:46 pm GMT
    This is truly a big pile a bullshit .Putin a threat to the world ! How do these people get away with this type of hyped fiction. When was the last time she looked at Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria the constant posturing and threats against Iran or anyone else for that matter that happens to be in the sights of the neocon lead American political system? What about the trashing of the most comprehensive document of checks and balances against this ramped trampeling of free speech, human and civil rights, the American Constitution ? Where is the disgust for Bush and co's crimes against humanity the Clinton's blantant cronyism and provocations in eastern europe and Libya?? Americans are living in denial dreamland, waiting for some metamorphical savior like Oprah to take them by the hand and lead them to never never land. I am so sorry that someone of the level of Gore Vidal is no longer around to short sitdown with creep like this Well to her maybe Putin is the greatest danger to mankind but Russia and the Russian people better be glad that he is running the show at this particular junction in human history Russian history. Otherwise I cannot imagine another personality of his stature and nature keeping his wits and controling any gut reaction to the constant provocations and humiliations that the US has inflicted on Russia since Gorbachev's naive belief in America keeping its word. Just the fact that this moron is unaware of the colassal con job that Reagan and co pulled on Russia at the precise moment in history could have brought the two countries togeather, for the better of the entire world is enough to discard any positive light that she may have otherwise brought to the subject. She is not serious and should not be taken as such by any observer of the myriad historical facts that serve to dispel the major content of this rubbish. Dream on America .you have been bested by what is surly a man that is flawed in many ways but is the one person that has the dexterity to control his emotions while waiting for your immenent demise.

    [Jan 20, 2018] Ukraine President given power to wage war in the separatist republics and Crimea.

    Jan 20, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Posted by: CarlD | Jan 19, 2018 11:49:05 AM | 57

    addwnsum to 56

    https://www.rt.com/news/416305-ukraine-donbass-law-war-moscow/

    Ukraine President given power to wage war in the separatist republics and Crimea.

    [Jan 20, 2018] Tanker With Russian Gas for Boston Makes Mid-Atlantic U-Turn by Elena Mazneva & Anna Shiryaevskaya

    Jan 19, 2016 | www.bloomberg.com

    LNG tanker Gaselys was scheduled to arrive in Boston Saturday. Vessel reversed course to Spain after almost 21 days en route

    ... ... ...

    While unusual, it's not unheard of for LNG cargoes that aren't tied into a contract with fixed destination to change course en route as cargo owners seek the highest price and the best market. Companies with access to wide global supplies can also swap shipments between regions. What's more, the tanker may still make it to Boston with a delay, as was the case with deliveries earlier this month, according to Kpler SAS, a cargo-tracking company.

    "We have still not canceled the Everett port call for Gaselys," Madeleine Overgaard, an LNG market analyst at Kpler, said by email. "Her course is currently not very different from the average delivery at Everett in 2017, she is probably just diverting to delay arrival."

    Engie SA's North American unit bought the spot cargo for delivery to the U.S. from Malaysia's Petroliam Nasional Bhd. to supplement its contracted volumes from Trinidad and Tobago into its Everett terminal near Boston, it said last week. Engie declined to comment on the tanker's movement on Friday.

    The Yamal LNG project, co-owned by Russia's Novatek PJSC, Total SA, China Natural Petroleum Corp. and China's Silk Road Fund, started production in December despite U.S. financial sanctions imposed in 2014 because of Russia's involvement in the Ukrainian conflict. It plans to deliver 14 spot cargoes by April, when long-term contracts kick in.

    [Jan 20, 2018] As of today, Gen. Mathis exposing the new Us Defense Strategy warned that: The US will counter any threat to America s democracy experiment in the world, if necessary with military force

    Jan 20, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    CarlD | Jan 19, 2018 11:38:25 AM | 56

    I am afraid, if one is to believe Mathis words, that the Syrian, Ukrainian and Korean potential confrontations will lead to exchanges that will force us into wars on several theaters in the very near future.

    As of today, Gen. Mathis exposing the sew Us Defense Strategy warned that: The US will counter any "threat to America's democracy experiment" in the world, if necessary with military force, the Pentagon chief threatened.

    He singled out Russia and China as "adversaries", a far cry form the "partners" designation used by Russia in designing the USA. He vowed: the US will respond with lethal force.

    So the stage is set for escalation of escalation in several theaters. How long will the bear be poked and the dragon provoked before retaliation ensues?

    I am afraid that war looks more and more certain in 2018.

    james , Jan 19, 2018 12:49:13 PM | 62

    @40 b... thanks for that... the place was getting out of hand.. you are becoming too popular..

    @56 carl... it is an outrageous statement from mattis, any way you read it!

    "The US will counter any threat to America's democracy experiment in the world..."

    usa as country that gets to dictate its agenda anywhere in the world.. it would explain why they want to circumvent any international body that they don't already control too, like the un.. america's democracy experiment is imposing the us$ as world currency under the threat of their military.. it is already starting to fall apart on all accounts which explains mattis's anxiousness in representing these same undemocratic structures and institutions he refers to as 'america's ''democracy'' experiment'... he needs to get a gig in hollywood at comedy central.. he never found his true calling..

    harrylaw , Jan 19, 2018 1:16:21 PM | 63
    "We will modernize key capabilities," Mattis said. "Investments in space and cyberspace, nuclear deterrent forces, missile defense, advanced autonomous systems and resilient and agile logistics will provide our high-quality troops what they need to win." [Sputnik News]
    Just two quotes from 'Mad dog' Mattis which prove he needs to be put in an asylum.
    "I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you fuck with me, I'll kill you all".
    "Find the enemy that wants to end this experiment (in American democracy) and kill every one of them until they're so sick of the killing that they leave us and our freedoms intact."
    Temporarily Sane , Jan 19, 2018 1:52:11 PM | 64
    @56 CarlD
    He singled out Russia and China as "adversaries", a far cry form the "partners"
    designation used by Russia in designing the USA. He vowed: the US will
    respond with lethal force.

    Actions speak louder than words. The US is scared of two things: 1) a military conflict where its troops get slaughtered wholesale, and 2) going up against any army or regular military force it can't destroy from the air. Whatever happens in the near future we can rest assured Uncle Scam won't be engaging in direct hostilities with China or Russia.

    dh , Jan 19, 2018 2:03:17 PM | 66
    @63 "Investments in space and cyberspace, nuclear deterrent forces, missile defense, advanced autonomous systems and resilient and agile logistics will provide our high-quality troops what they need to win."

    Nice for the high-quality troops. Sounds like they should be totally risk-free. But I don't share Mad Dog's faith in technology. Looks like an accident waiting to happen.

    karlof1 , Jan 19, 2018 3:37:08 PM | 72
    Mattis opens his mouth and reveals his level of ignorance when it comes to understanding the Outlaw US Empire's history--it's certainly not a "democracy experiment," nor has it ever tried to install a democracy anywhere on the planet. I'd bet he's just as ignorant when it comes to military history, too. He reminds me of the ignorant brute Sgt. Snorkel from the Beatle Bailey comic strip. The so-called "new" "defense posture" is no more than a tidied-up version of the two that preceded it: What we say goes; either you're with us or against us.

    By way of rebuttal, I highly recommend reading this interview of Hassan Nasrallah from 3 Jan 2018, particularly his remarks about differences in the quality of soldiers from The Resistance versus those of the enemy--IDF, NATO, USA, Daesh--and why they exist.

    Contrary to all the hype about the Empire being a new energy exporting colossus, it needed to import LNG to keep its East Coast dwellings warm, but the cargo seems to have found a better price elsewhere. Just how will it displace Russian gas from the market when it can't provide enough domestic supply?

    Meanwhile, Tillerson pulls an Albright : "Signs of starvation and death in North Korea indicate that US diplomatic strategy works fine, says the secretary of state." Is he being two-faced? You bet! From last year : "We're not your enemy, we're not your threat..."

    Ignorant, lying, immoral are just a few of the important behavioral traits of those leading faces of the Outlaw US Empire. And my historical investigations prove such traits have been in the forefront since its inception. Guess we can thank its tutor, the British Empire.

    virgile , Jan 19, 2018 5:14:33 PM | 79
    January 19, 2018 at 10:10 pm GMT • 100 Words

    The US administration either is very smart in bluffing to temporarily reassure its panicking regional allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia or it is living in the la-la land of an incompetence close to stupidity.

    Do they really believe that the Russians will allow the USA to rob their victory in Syria over ISIS? Or that the Turks will stay idle while the USA is building a Kurdish military entity on their border? Or that Iran and Syria will allow the partitioning of Syria and the US illegal long term presence in the region?
    The USA administration is posed for dramatic blowbacks and reshuffling of alliances in the region.Maybe that is why it is running like a headless hen!

    Ghost Ship , Jan 19, 2018 6:52:28 PM | 88
    This will damage Trump with his base. Reducing the involvement of the United States military abroad was one of the more important commitments he made to his base and now he has broken that commitment and quite a few of his base are disappointed. Even if it's just a couple of hundred thousand of them, there goes the next presidential election for Trump and the Republicans. By forgetting about Russia-gate, focusing on his foreign military involvements, and provided the Democratic candidate is not a Clinton, the presidency is for there for taking by the Democrats. Having Tulsi Gabbard on the ticket would help.
    The only reservation I have is if Trump is stiffing the generals in the White House and sometime in the future pulls the plug on all those interventions then he'll remain in the White House for another four years.
    Mike K. , Jan 19, 2018 7:08:43 PM | 90
    Tillerson could have been speaking for Trump, or Obama, or Bush - under whose regime the Likudnik/neocons/Zionists were able to foment a policy coup while using the OSP to concoct lies for Israel's long-desired war.

    https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/trump-isnt-another-hitler-he-s-another-obama-51ea7db498b4

    https://www.activistpost.com/2018/01/new-trump-admin-policy-on-syria-is-the-same-as-obamas-and-hillary-clintons.html


    While there are generally multiple motives for entry into wars, only one is whitewashed. As Phil Giraldi put it:

    ""Why doesn't anyone ever speak honestly about the six-hundred-pound gorilla in the room? Nobody has mentioned Israel in this conference and we all know it's American Jews with all their money and power who are supporting every war in the Middle East for Netanyahu? Shouldn't we start calling them out and not letting them get away with it?"

    https://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2017/09/21/1015592-americas-jews-are-driving-americas-wars/

    They have also very heavily figured, neocon and neoliberal Jews both, in promoting the #Russiahoax in media and on the hill.

    http://russia-insider.com/en/its-time-drop-jew-taboo/ri22186


    Here's where we are, as the same cabal cheerlead for war on Iran (Lebanon must be first) a you are either committed to stopping the drive to war by all cognizable social and pitical forces, or you are not.

    The time for letting cries of 'anti-Semite' preclude FAIR dis ussuon of the role of Jews and the Israel Lobby is over.

    Those who censor this necessary component of analysis should be deemed confederates of the bankers, MIC, transnationals, and Zionist Jews who have been driving wars for decades.

    With millions dead, playtime is over. Those censoring the truth side with the warmongers.

    [Jan 17, 2018] A fascinating essay in Katehon, by military historian; Luis L zaro Tijerina: A Critique of Stephen R. Covington's "The Culture of Strategic Thought Behind Russia's Modern Approaches to Warfare".

    Jan 17, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    V. Arnold | Jan 15, 2018 1:00:21 AM | 49

    The closing paragraph;

    Such military thinkers like Sun Tzu, the moderns military strategists like Mao Zedong, General Võ Nguyên Giáp and even the military conceptions of Fidel Castro Ruz, should be investigated, developed more thoroughly and applied in the unexpected form of warfare that comes out of the fog of war across a battlefield on any given day.

    There is great promise of creative output in the Russian military art of war for it animates from one the most progressive nation-states, and the Russian military theorists must embrace their historical past, welding it to the here and now.

    http://katehon.com/article/modern-operational-art

    Well worth a read IMO...

    [Jan 17, 2018] US political and military leaders either are unaware of -- or have chosen to reject -- the peer-reviewed studies that predict a US-Russian nuclear war would likely wipe out most of the human race

    Notable quotes:
    "... The public relation campaign designed to increase the acceptance of new nuclear weapons and "limited" nuclear warfare is a symptom of this ignorance and willful blindness. ..."
    "... An article published by the Federation of American Scientists provides a summary of the nuclear winter studies (those done during the period 2007-2008) and the rejection of their findings by the US Nuclear Weapons Council, see Turning a Blind Eye Toward Armageddon ..."
    "... In a world of hyper sonic missiles and megaton nuclear warheads, sending off an alarm for your populace to seek bomb shelters, in a period of extremely heightened tensions, as exists currently between North Korea and the US, could be construed by your enemy as a nuclear-age form of mobilization. ..."
    "... One must also consider that Russia and China have also been threatened repeatedly by the US over the last year, and both have sent extra troops to their respective North Korean borders. ..."
    Jan 17, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Perimetr | Jan 14, 2018 2:37:37 PM | 21

    US political and military leaders either are unaware of -- or have chosen to reject -- the peer-reviewed studies that predict a US-Russian nuclear war would likely wipe out most of the human race. The public relation campaign designed to increase the acceptance of new nuclear weapons and "limited" nuclear warfare is a symptom of this ignorance and willful blindness.

    An article published by the Federation of American Scientists provides a summary of the nuclear winter studies (those done during the period 2007-2008) and the rejection of their findings by the US Nuclear Weapons Council, see Turning a Blind Eye Toward Armageddon

    Heros , Jan 16, 2018 4:49:22 AM | 99

    @PavewayIV 96

    Thank you once again for providing us a glance behind the curtain. Most historians accept that the Tsar and Russia deserve a certain degree of blame for WWI for being the first empire to mobilize in 1914.

    In a world of hyper sonic missiles and megaton nuclear warheads, sending off an alarm for your populace to seek bomb shelters, in a period of extremely heightened tensions, as exists currently between North Korea and the US, could be construed by your enemy as a nuclear-age form of mobilization.

    One must also consider that Russia and China have also been threatened repeatedly by the US over the last year, and both have sent extra troops to their respective North Korean borders.

    For the TSA/PACCOM/? to decide to fake a Nuclear missile attack would not only be exceedingly reckless, it could also be suicidal. Unless:

    1. The enemy had been informed before hand and there was no risk.
    2. The risk of a nuclear exchange had already been baked into the cake, and the possibility of this kicking off a war was not a bug, but a feature.

    [Jan 17, 2018] Neoconning the Trump White House by Kelley Beaucar Vlahos

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Take Nadia Schadlow, for instance. Never heard of her? Unless you've been navigating the rice paddies of Washington's post-9/11 national security enterprise for the last several years, there's no reason you would have. But she has been at the National Security Council since last winter, and is set to replace Dina Powell as deputy national security advisor , at the right hand of NSC chief H.R. McMaster. She was also the lead on the White House National Security Strategy , released last month. ..."
    "... This was Schadlow's first position in government. Her résumé includes doctoral degrees from Johns Hopkins Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) under the tutelage of vocal Never Trumper and Iraq war promoter Eliot Cohen, who runs the largely neoconservative Strategic Studies program there, and whose last book, The Big Stick: The Limits of Soft Power, argued that the U.S., backed by a more robust military, must be the "guardian of a stable world order." ..."
    "... What is significant about Schadlow's role in the White House -- she's reportedly a "trusted confidant" of General McMaster, who was lionized in the New Yorker for his T.E. Lawrence approach to counterinsurgency in Tal Afar in 2006 -- is not her bibliography, but her vast connections to Washington's foreign policy and national security clique, especially its neoconservative elite. If one were using the metaphor of chain migration, she would have plenty of friends on either side of the Potomac to tap for high-level placement, consulting, and advice. ..."
    "... The foundation has a rich history cleaved to neoconservative pioneers such as Irving Kristol, father of Bill, who in his own memoirs credits the philanthropic institution and its then-director Randall Richardson (heir to the Vicks fortune) with helping him jumpstart the Public Interest, known as the premier neoconservative organ, a label Irving fully embraced . The foundation also served as a key backer of Commentary magazine after Norman Podhoretz took the helm in 1960. ..."
    "... Meanwhile, since 1998, the foundation has given over $10 million to the American Enterprise Institute (AEI was built, literally, on Smith Richardson money), which fielded many of the Iraq war architects and promoters, including Frederick Kagan, John Bolton, former vice president Dick Cheney, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Eliot Cohen, Michael Ledeen, Joshua Muravchik, David Frum, and Danielle Pletka. ..."
    "... No surprise, then, that the worldview of people like Nadia Schadlow is no different from the wider Washington policy orbit that has enjoyed a pipeline of patronage from her former employer. She is not only affiliated with the Foreign Policy Institute, but is a full member of the Council on Foreign Relations. When she was named to the NSC staff in March 2017, along with "Kremlinologist" and former Eurasian Foundation strategist Fiona Hill, national security establishment courtier Thomas Ricks called them both "well-educated, skeptical, and informed. In other words, the opposite of the president they serve." ..."
    "... That is why there seemed to be such relief upon the recent release of the Trump administration's National Security Strategy, with Washington scribblers lauding it as " well within the bipartisan mainstream of American foreign policy " and "a well crafted document that should reassure allies and partners." ..."
    "... What it actually does is to reinforce Trump's turn towards a harder line against Iran, as evidenced in McMaster's recent speeches . Nikki Haley, ambassador to the UN, is threatening fellow members on the Security Council , and the Trump administration is seen as taking sides with Israel in the fragile Middle East peace process (or what's left if it). Meanwhile, the White House has just given a green light to arming Ukraine against Russia. ..."
    "... Washington Post ..."
    "... Kelley Beaucar Vlahos is executive editor of ..."
    "... Follow her on Twitter @Vlahos_at_TAC. ..."
    "... It turns to new parties, this endless Democrat/Republican cycle is a joke. Surely there are no more people out there that can rationally argue for the two party state as being a good setup for America. ..."
    "... There is a term soldiers sometimes use to characterize those who have never fought, will never fight, but are nevertheless positive that fighting is the answer to their dissatisfactions. Chickenhawks. ..."
    "... The Neocons are a cancer upon the American Body Politik. When Trump was elected I and many others were hopeful that this cancer could be effectively treated, but it could not for the cancer has spread to all vital organs and is terminal and our nation will die because of it. ..."
    "... "Neocons?" Actually what they are is Neocoms or Neocommunists. World domination is the name of their game. ..."
    "... The folks who thought President Trump would have a less belligerent foreign policy than Sec. Clinton would have deserve as much intellectual sympathy as those who thought that he would lower premiums and increase coverage of ACA. ..."
    Jan 17, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    Over the last year critics have warned of the returning neoconservative influence on the executive branch's national security apparatus, each day a little less confident that President Donald Trump will keep to the seeming anti-interventionist impulses he demonstrated during the 2016 campaign.

    News flash: We're already there.

    Of course the most garish of the pro-war set -- Sebastian Gorka, K.T. McFarland, John Bolton -- are easy to identify in or on the periphery of Trump's orbit (in Gorka's case, he was cast out of the White House, only to flak away in any media outlet that will pay attention). Meanwhile, elite neoconservative voices like Bill Kristol and Max Boot have become darlings of the "Never Trump" cadre, finding new life as conservative tokens on "Resistance" media like MSNBC.

    What has been less obvious, but has become much clearer in these last few months, is that other neoconservatives are quietly filling the vacuum left by Obama's cadre of liberal interventionists. Many of them had taken a pass on "Never Trumping" publicly, and are now popping up at the elbows of top cabinet officials.

    Take Nadia Schadlow, for instance. Never heard of her? Unless you've been navigating the rice paddies of Washington's post-9/11 national security enterprise for the last several years, there's no reason you would have. But she has been at the National Security Council since last winter, and is set to replace Dina Powell as deputy national security advisor , at the right hand of NSC chief H.R. McMaster. She was also the lead on the White House National Security Strategy , released last month.

    This was Schadlow's first position in government. Her résumé includes doctoral degrees from Johns Hopkins Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) under the tutelage of vocal Never Trumper and Iraq war promoter Eliot Cohen, who runs the largely neoconservative Strategic Studies program there, and whose last book, The Big Stick: The Limits of Soft Power, argued that the U.S., backed by a more robust military, must be the "guardian of a stable world order." In that vein, Schadlow published a book last year, War and the Art of Governance , that extols the virtues of long-term military intervention for "achieving sustainable political outcomes," requiring "the consolidation of combat gains through the establishment of stable environments." Schadlow has repeated this for years as a mantra for reordering military strategy in the wake of the disastrous wars she and her contemporaries helped sustain, in Iraq, Libya, and elsewhere. Call it nation-building by another name.

    In a 2012 Weekly Standard commentary , she criticized the Obama administration for saying "the tide of war is receding," and exclaimed "the line of thinking that now pervades the Pentagon avoids recognizing that combat and the restoration of political order go hand and hand." While she gives a nod to "civil-military operational planning and execution," she never utters the words "State Department." No surprise there, either, since her neocon friends were responsible for the long slide of Foggy Bottom's resources and influence in favor of military leadership, beginning with the "political reconciliation" and reconstruction of Iraq, and then Afghanistan.

    What is significant about Schadlow's role in the White House -- she's reportedly a "trusted confidant" of General McMaster, who was lionized in the New Yorker for his T.E. Lawrence approach to counterinsurgency in Tal Afar in 2006 -- is not her bibliography, but her vast connections to Washington's foreign policy and national security clique, especially its neoconservative elite. If one were using the metaphor of chain migration, she would have plenty of friends on either side of the Potomac to tap for high-level placement, consulting, and advice.

    Why? As recent senior program director for the expansive, multi-million dollar International Security and Foreign Policy Program under the Smith Richardson Foundation , she has helped to fund and facilitate countless authors, conferences, think tanks, and university programs since 9/11, most of which hew to the doctrine of sustained military intervention towards the goal of U.S. global power and influence. That includes preemptive war strategy, counterinsurgency, democracy promotion, and the continued push for bigger military budgets and solutions to regional conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine. If there was a prominent player in the U.S. security community over the last 20 years, you can bet Schadlow and Smith Richardson were more often than not connected to him.

    But it goes back so much further than that. The foundation has a rich history cleaved to neoconservative pioneers such as Irving Kristol, father of Bill, who in his own memoirs credits the philanthropic institution and its then-director Randall Richardson (heir to the Vicks fortune) with helping him jumpstart the Public Interest, known as the premier neoconservative organ, a label Irving fully embraced . The foundation also served as a key backer of Commentary magazine after Norman Podhoretz took the helm in 1960.

    It is in international affairs that Smith Richardson has made some of its biggest impacts, during the anti-communist Reagan era and into the Middle East conflicts under Presidents Clinton, Bushes, Obama, and Trump. To say the foundation was involved at every level in the lobbying for and crafting of the so-called global war on terror after 9/11 would be an understatement. Example: Former Smith Richardson research director Devon Gaffney Cross became a director of the Project for a New American Century, the intellectual vehicle that drove the removal of Saddam Hussein and shaped George W. Bush's foreign policy. In 2000, Cross was listed as one of the participants in PNAC's seminal treatise, "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century." The rest of the contributors are a who's who of Washington's war theocracy, most of whom have benefitted from Smith Richardson support.

    Meanwhile, since 1998, the foundation has given over $10 million to the American Enterprise Institute (AEI was built, literally, on Smith Richardson money), which fielded many of the Iraq war architects and promoters, including Frederick Kagan, John Bolton, former vice president Dick Cheney, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Eliot Cohen, Michael Ledeen, Joshua Muravchik, David Frum, and Danielle Pletka.

    Just as telling is Smith Richardson's continued backing of the Institute for the Study of War , headed by Kimberly Kagan, wife of Frederick, with whom she was a "de facto advisor" to General Petraeus for a year as he set about his then-vaunted COIN strategy in Afghanistan. ISW, chaired by retired General Jack Keane, known as the " godfather of the surge ," was founded in part by the generosity of Smith Richardson in 2007. It not only promoted more troops, but an extended occupation in Afghanistan, regime change in Syria , and ongoing hostilities with Iran. No surprise, then, that ISW has numerous intertwining relationships with the military and the defense industry. It received $895,000 for program work from Smith Richardson between 2014 and 2016 alone.

    According to Philip Rojc of Inside Philanthropy , other recipients of Smith Richardson grants since 1998 include the the Hudson Institute ($6,032,230), the Jamestown Institute ($5,779,475), the Hoover Institution ($3,645,314), and the Center for a New American Security ($1,595,000). Totals have been adjusted to include 2016 numbers.

    The last one -- CNAS -- is more indicative of Smith Richardson's broader strategy, in that it doesn't only give to hardline neoconservative outfits like, say, the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (which has received no less than $500,000 since 2014 and says it helped write Trump's new Iran policy ). On the contrary, Smith Richardson has been a major patron of the conventional establishment, too, even largely Democratic think tanks like CNAS, Brookings Institute, and the Carnegie Endowment -- all of which invariably host scholars and programs that promote America's military-driven global influence, counterinsurgency doctrine (CNAS was a virtual hothouse for COIN early in Obama's presidency), and democracy promotion in places like Russia and Ukraine, a major yet failed project of humanitarian interventionists in the Obama administration.

    No surprise, then, that the worldview of people like Nadia Schadlow is no different from the wider Washington policy orbit that has enjoyed a pipeline of patronage from her former employer. She is not only affiliated with the Foreign Policy Institute, but is a full member of the Council on Foreign Relations. When she was named to the NSC staff in March 2017, along with "Kremlinologist" and former Eurasian Foundation strategist Fiona Hill, national security establishment courtier Thomas Ricks called them both "well-educated, skeptical, and informed. In other words, the opposite of the president they serve."

    You know the "right" kind of operator has arrived in the White House when establishment commentariat like Ricks and Josh Rogin get all gushy about their calming, "soft power" influence over Trump, which sounds like a lot of bunk when you consider their well-documented points of view.

    Simply put, after years of cross-pollination brought on by a slush fund of wealthy private donors like Smith Richardson and an even more eager defense industry, neoconservative views are no longer distinguishable from the sanctioned goals of the Washington policy establishment. They are all working, really, as proper stewards of the military-industrial complex, which is essential for advancing their (sometimes competing) visions of world power politics and American exceptionalism. There is little room for realism and restraint, as voiced by this magazine and other critics.

    That is why there seemed to be such relief upon the recent release of the Trump administration's National Security Strategy, with Washington scribblers lauding it as " well within the bipartisan mainstream of American foreign policy " and "a well crafted document that should reassure allies and partners."

    What it actually does is to reinforce Trump's turn towards a harder line against Iran, as evidenced in McMaster's recent speeches . Nikki Haley, ambassador to the UN, is threatening fellow members on the Security Council , and the Trump administration is seen as taking sides with Israel in the fragile Middle East peace process (or what's left if it). Meanwhile, the White House has just given a green light to arming Ukraine against Russia.

    Call it the new "adults in the room," if you want, or peg it as the neoconservative influence that it is. Strikingly, Dan Drezner writes that the NSS is "Straussian" in that its "subtext matters at least as much as the text." The preeminent scholar Leo Strauss is considered one of the key founders of the neoconservative movement, a fact the Washington Post columnist should be well aware of. Like most of the elites here in Washington, however, Drezner is trying to have it both ways -- calling it neocon without have the guts to say it outright.

    Kelley Beaucar Vlahos is executive editor of The American Conservative. Follow her on Twitter @Vlahos_at_TAC.

    Iron Felix January 15, 2018 at 9:48 pm

    It is a sad state of affairs when the American people are literally dependent on sane people in Beijing, Moscow, Ankara, Tehran, and other capitals to keep a completely out of control neo-con foreign and defense policy establishment from plunging our people on the world into yet more pointless warfare.
    MEOW , says: January 15, 2018 at 10:57 pm
    Mainstream media seems "All Neocon." A star studded group of rationalizers. We are being gently taught to hate what the neocons hate. South Pacific had the recipe. Not for the reasons intended. Au contraire.
    Beltway Roach Motels? , says: January 16, 2018 at 4:22 am
    So. Well-heeled foreign interests and interventionists are buying nosebagger politicians and shaping our foreign policy under Trump, just like they did under Obama, Bush II, and Clinton.

    Why do we bother having elections if neocon crap is the only item on the menu?

    It's incredible. No matter how often they lie and fail, no matter how many colossally expensive disasters they cause, someone keeps letting the filth back in. They're as hardy and resilient as cockroaches, and we need to start dealing with them as such.

    george Archers , says: January 16, 2018 at 9:26 am
    Neocons?
    Hal Donahue , says: January 16, 2018 at 9:41 am
    Trump 'needs a war' to be re-elected. He knows this and who else to better start one than the neo-cons?

    What is terrifying is that these same people and their ancestors actually attempted to convince Reagan that the US could win a nuclear war with the Soviet Union. Reagan wisely chose 'Trust but Verify' over their strongest objections. Trump is a far cry from a Reagan.

    The generations long war to destroy the State Department appears to have completely obscured the greatest US victory of last century. The defeat of the Soviet Union with little more than skirmishes.

    The gloved fist approach, while frustrating to the military, was a massive success. Military solutions fail badly. One look at the history of military governments confirms their abysmal record. Yet, we have an administration preparing for war. Not at all certain, the people will follow.

    mike flynn , says: January 16, 2018 at 9:59 am
    Now that Trump has been effectively body snatched in foreign policy (neo-cons) and domestic (wall st) where does main st turn?
    peter murray , says: January 16, 2018 at 10:35 am
    As a matter of interest, and in the light of kite-flying about arming the Ukrainian nationalists, where is Ms 'Toria Nuland hanging out these days?
    Peter B. Gemma , says: January 16, 2018 at 11:06 am
    Good article. Trump is easily distracted from his (often right) gut feelings on policy (China, NATO, etc.) by titles: military rank, highbrow think tanks, Wall St. moguls, and power elites from the Council on Foreign Relations. With no moral compass or basic understanding of the Constitution or the ways Washington works, he is hapless and his agenda is hamstrung.
    Michael Kenny , says: January 16, 2018 at 11:53 am
    I wondered how far down I'd have to go down in the article before Ukraine and Putin popped up! It's the usual "let Putin win in Ukraine" propaganda. What astonishes me as a European is why people who call themselves "conservatives", whom you would naturally expect to be patriotic, often indeed excessively so, are frantically trying to persuade their fellow citizens to submit to a foreign power inflicting a humiliating defeat on their country, possibly the most humiliating that it has ever suffered in its history. I couldn't imagine Europeans behaving like that.
    Stephen J. , says: January 16, 2018 at 11:57 am
    Interesting article with good info. I believe "the Trump White House" is just continuing the policies of the past occupants of "The House of Blood."
    [More info at link below]

    August 9, 2016
    The House of Blood

    Its color is white but it is red with blood
    The residents' name should really be mud
    Instead they get fancy honors and titles
    Wars for them is a musical recital

    The hum of their drones flying through the air
    Are killing children without due care
    This is hellishly called "collateral damage"
    These are the words of the resident savage

    Immaculately dressed in a business suit
    An eloquent speaker is this callous brute
    Surrounded by sycophants and flunkeys too
    Evil is what these people plan and do

    War and more war is their hellish aim
    Are they all devils and bloody insane?
    Countries are reduced to smoking rubble
    These well-dressed maniacs are big trouble

    People are fleeing and dying too
    From the hell produced by this satanic crew
    Refugees are drowning in deadly waters
    Trying to escape the endless slaughters

    These helpless victims once had homes
    Now they have nothing, and just roam
    Helpless, homeless people on the move
    With nothing really left to improve

    The perpetrators call their crimes "bringing democracy"
    Surely creating hell on earth is really hypocrisy
    But when criminals rule there is no justice
    And law and order is totally corrupted

    The war criminals slogan is "responsibility to protect"
    They tell that to the people whose countries they wrecked
    Those still alive can hear the bombs explode and thud
    A hellish "courtesy" from the House of Blood

    http://graysinfo.blogspot.ca/2016/08/the-house-of-blood.html

    Bobber , says: January 16, 2018 at 12:27 pm
    Why would a big drug company have so much interest in foreign policy?
    spite , says: January 16, 2018 at 12:58 pm
    "where does main st turn?"

    It turns to new parties, this endless Democrat/Republican cycle is a joke. Surely there are no more people out there that can rationally argue for the two party state as being a good setup for America.

    bacon , says: January 16, 2018 at 1:11 pm
    There is a term soldiers sometimes use to characterize those who have never fought, will never fight, but are nevertheless positive that fighting is the answer to their dissatisfactions. Chickenhawks.
    JEinCA , says: January 16, 2018 at 1:26 pm
    The Neocons are a cancer upon the American Body Politik. When Trump was elected I and many others were hopeful that this cancer could be effectively treated, but it could not for the cancer has spread to all vital organs and is terminal and our nation will die because of it.
    Minnesota Mary , says: January 16, 2018 at 1:46 pm
    @ george archers

    "Neocons?" Actually what they are is Neocoms or Neocommunists. World domination is the name of their game.

    Steve in Ohio , says: January 16, 2018 at 2:34 pm
    " where does Main St turn?"

    Trump won with a coalition of conservative and populist support. The two partners agree on judges, but not too much else. For those of the latter persuasion, you at least have a seat at the table in the current administration (thank you, Lord, for Stephen Miller!) Populists need to run candidates at all levels and start to groom future leaders. Somebody with Rand Paul's FP views and Tom Cotton's immigration views would be perfect.

    One Guy , says: January 16, 2018 at 2:49 pm
    @Michael Kenny,
    Why should America care what Putin wins in Ukraine? Why doesn't the EU fight its own battles? Go on, oppose Putin. You have more to lose than America does.
    Thaomas , says: January 16, 2018 at 4:37 pm
    The folks who thought President Trump would have a less belligerent foreign policy than Sec. Clinton would have deserve as much intellectual sympathy as those who thought that he would lower premiums and increase coverage of ACA.

    [Jan 16, 2018] Turning a Blind Eye Toward Armageddon

    Jan 16, 2018 | fas.org

    Posted by: Perimetr | Jan 14, 2018 2:37:37 PM | 21

    [Jan 16, 2018] http://katehon.com/article/modern-operational-art

    Jan 16, 2018 | katehon.com

    Well worth a read IMO...

    Posted by: V. Arnold | Jan 15, 2018 1:00:21 AM | 49

    [Jan 16, 2018] The Russia Explainer

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Historians will come to view Aug. 8, 2008, as a turning point no less significant than Nov. 9, 1989, when the Berlin Wall fell. Russia's attack on sovereign Georgian territory marked the official return of history, indeed to an almost 19th-century style of great-power competition , complete with virulent nationalisms, battles for resources, struggles over spheres of influence and territory, and even -- though it shocks our 21st-century sensibilities -- the use of military power to obtain geopolitical objectives. ..."
    "... Administration officials said Mr. Putin had miscalculated and would pay a cost regardless of what the United States did, pointing to the impact on Russia's currency and markets. "What we see here are distinctly 19th- and 20th-century decisions made by President Putin to address problems," one of the officials said. "What he needs to understand is that in terms of his economy, he lives in the 21st-century world, an interdependent world." ..."
    "... The dossier's claim that Putin talked about the "ideals-based international order" also rings false. Putin only ever refers to Western ideals when saying that Western countries' leaders are hypocrites for not adhering to them. ..."
    "... The more straightforward explanation is that, knowing that this is opposition research, Steele and his sources provided information that rang true with what the client already believed and would want to hear. This is the first report in the series–in effect, a teaser trailer–and no consultant working on a monthly retainer is going to tell you in the first memo that his services aren't needed. If Steele had indicated that there was no dirt to investigate, the $15,000/mo. (as estimated by Vanity Fair ) contract wouldn't have lasted longer than a month or two. ..."
    "... The dossier's use of the phraseology "Trump and his team" and "Trump team" and the like is confusing in reference to the pre-2016 campaign period. Other than his lawyer Michael Cohen, there's nothing I've seen to indicate that the other Trump campaign people mentioned by name in the dossier (Paul Manafort and Carter Page) knew Trump before 2016. By all appearances, the key members of Trump's team before 2016 were his children, and maybe his talent agent. ..."
    "... It also seems out of character for Trump to have the foresight and planning that it would take to seek out intelligence on Hillary Clinton several years back. Several years ago, Trump and the Clintons were friends , and the Clintons attended Trump's wedding and Bill and Donald played golf together. ..."
    "... Russians are very cautious about what they talk about, even amongst each other. Therefore, with the story about [sexual acts] in the Moscow Ritz Carlton, the idea you have managed to triple source it via an employee at the hotel, a serving FSB [Russian security service] officer, and the security officer at the hotel, who inevitably will be at least a former FSB or GRU [Russian intelligence agency] officer It just doesn't make sense. If such a thing had taken place, it would be a Russian state secret. ..."
    "... Seems more likely that it's just a piece of "scuttlebutt" that Steele's sources, pressed to find anything juicy on Trump, saw in the newspaper or in a news search on Google or on Russian search engine Yandex . ..."
    "... Whatever the truth of the matter, Page is clearly someone who was very keen to network with powerful Russians in 2016 and was not shy about leveraging his affiliation with the Trump campaign to do it. ..."
    "... But at the same time, this would also mean Page was a loose cannon and a huge potential liability to the Trump campaign. Igor Sechin is, and was in July 2016, on the Specially Designated Nationals list of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control. This means that it's a crime for any US citizen to do any business with Sechin personally (though not with Rosneft as a corporate entity). ..."
    "... Page, by all appearances, is reckless and kind of an idiot . He had to have known that his activities (even if they were limited to just non-treasonous networking with Russians) carried a huge risk of blowback for Trump. He didn't care. Carter Page's willingness to toe the Russian line on foreign policy, publicly and on the record, goes beyond even what the most Russophile Western expats in Moscow say in private conversations. I think it's a perfectly valid question to ask why and how Carter Page came to be affiliated with the Trump campaign, why he visited Russia alone at least twice in 2016, and what contacts he's had with Russian officials (he definitely met with some of them, at least at the New Economic School graduation reception on Jul. 8, at which there were several senior Russian officials present and Carter Page was commencement speaker and an honored foreign guest). ..."
    "... And why send him to give a public university commencement speech in which he rails against US foreign policy, ensuring wide media coverage? ..."
    "... A meeting with a Trump adviser on the sidelines of such a noisy, high-profile trip–with both the Russian and foreign press speculating in real-time what the hell Page was doing in Moscow–seems like an extremely incautious setting for a meeting to discuss the most scandalous quid pro quo since the secret protocols to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. ..."
    "... To sum up, I have serious doubts that a meeting took place as described. But I also think that Carter Page was–at the very least–trying to leverage his connection to Trump in Russia for personal gain at the very earliest opportunity he got. ..."
    "... *This report doesn't have a date. However, the July 19 report is numbered "2016/94" and the July 26 report is numbered "2016/097" so it seems like this is where the report should go. ..."
    "... This is the central allegation against the Trump campaign – that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government to take actions aimed at defeating Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election. The one thing that I'd add (or, rather, remind) is that by late July, the story of allegations of Russian meddling in the 2016 election was in full swing . Manafort's history in the former Soviet Union was being widely reported . Carter Page, as mentioned above, had traveled to Moscow for unknown purposes a few weeks before, a trip that was covered in the Russian and US media. ..."
    "... What I'd like to point out here -- in terms of the timing of the information in this report -- is that the DNC hacked e-mail dumps on WikiLeaks that led to Debbie Wassermann Schultz resigning as head of the DNC happened on July 22, 2016 , and even before the WikiLeaks dumps the DNC had been attributing the hack to Russia. ..."
    "... Since this report refers to the WikiLeaks dump of DNC e-mails that happened on July 22, even though it's undated we know that the report must have been made after that, as well as after the Republican National Convention that happened on July 18, as well as after reports had emerged that the Trump team had been behind a change in the Republican Party platform to remove a reference to providing lethal arms to Ukraine. The allegation made here closely tracks what was being reported in the media at the time. ..."
    "... FBI director James Comey made a point of saying that US intelligence services were struck by how unusually noisy the Russians had been in their election interference, as if they wanted to be discovered. ..."
    "... *The actual date on the report is "26 July 201 5 " (in the British style), but since it refers to events that happened as recently as June 2016, and based on the news reports that said that Steele was hired in June 2016, I assume this is just a typo. ..."
    "... This strains credulity. So there's a single Russian emigre who not only knows the internal mood of the Trump team, but also knows what the Russian leadership is thinking (about a matter that, remember, according to the dossier is top-top secret)? And I know what you're thinking – well, if they were in collusion, of course there's such a person. But who is it? You'd think that there couldn't be too many people who fit this description – being a Russian emigre, close to the Trump campaign, and also with top-level Kremlin access. ..."
    "... This is described as someone's opinion so it's hard to argue against or fact-check. I will note that the e-mails from John Podesta's Gmail account started being published by WikiLeaks in October 2016, and since the e-mails run only through March 2016, and given that WikiLeaks usually takes time to prepare for a dump, whoever broke into Podesta's Gmail account was likely very active at the time when this report was dated. If you believe that it was the Russians who broke into Podesta's Gmail account, then this intelligence report is precisely wrong. Eleven days after this report, on August 10, Guccifer 2.0 published the personal contact info of 200 prominent Democrats, so if you believe that Guccifer 2.0 was the alter ego of the Russian government, this intelligence report was precisely wrong. ..."
    "... This report is dated precisely one week before Sergei Ivanov was dismissed from his post and moved to a less political role as Putin's special envoy for the environment. If you want to be charitable to the dossier, you could say that this report foreshadows Ivanov's dismissal (later reports say that the dismissal was unexpected). But on the other hand, clearly Ivanov's move to his new position was already in the works on Aug. 5 – it was reported that rumors of the move had been circulating since spring. Why hadn't Steele's "well-placed and established" sources heard those rumors? ..."
    "... Peskov is widely considered not to be an independent political player in the Kremlin. He is seen as being a sort of assistant to Putin in addition to his role as spokesman, but someone who likes the spotlight, celebrity and glamour a bit too much. ..."
    "... About Turkey: Peskov started his career in the Russian diplomatic corps as a Turkey specialist and worked as the third secretary of the Russian embassy in Ankara in the early '90s. He speaks Turkish. So hearing him mentioned in connection with Turkey makes some sense. ..."
    "... Russia was reported to have given advance warning to Erdogan, based on intelligence intercepts, that a coup was being planned. Peskov denied these reports. Just a few weeks earlier, Turkish president Erdogan had apologized to Putin for shooting down a Russian fighter jet on the Turkey-Syria border and Medvedev had announced that Russia would begin lifting the sanctions it had imposed on Turkey in connection with the incident. ..."
    "... So in early August 2016 it seemed like Russia-Turkey relations had turned a corner and were being handled quite well – as a matter of fact, over the course of 2016, Turkey went from being the US's partner on Syria to being in a de facto alliance with Russia . The turnaround is stunning – in January 2016 , the US and Turkey were conducting joint operations in Syria, and in January 2017 , Turkey and Russia were conducting joint operations in Syria. Whoever was handling Russia's relationship with Turkey, they did a good job by any objective measure – hard to see how this can be considered "botched." ..."
    "... Around this time , there was a lot of speculation in the media about whether Trump would drop out of the race. It's remarkable how the "intelligence" in the dossier follows what was being reported in the news at the time. ..."
    "... Ivanov was leading the operation to "hack the US election" literally days before he was fired? That doesn't make sense. ..."
    "... This ethnic Russian associate of Trump – who is it? Is it Sergei Millian ? He's supposed to be Source D , a "close associate" of Trump, but he might also be the ethnic Russian (even though Millian is technically from Belarus) associate referred to here and elsewhere. ..."
    "... Here we have Carter Page telling the maybe-Millian about his collusion with Russian intelligence on the DNC leaks. Do people really go around confessing crimes willy-nilly? According to this dossier, they do. ..."
    "... The big Trump campaign news of August 2016, of course, was that on Aug. 17, Steve Bannon replaced Paul Manafort as head of Trump's campaign. This news was absolutely huge. If Steele's source would have said on Aug. 9 that Bannon would be replacing Manafort, or even that a change of campaign management was being discussed, then in retrospect, you would have to admit that this source was well-informed. But if on Aug. 9, this source was talking about "a rethink and a likely change of tactics," s/he either was not very close to the campaign or was holding back on Steele. ..."
    "... So this associate was so close to the campaign that he was privy to all of the team's discussions about collusion with the Russians, but he didn't know that Steve Bannon was about to be named as the new campaign head? ..."
    "... But my main beef with this paragraph involves the phrase "kick-back payments to MANAFORT as alleged." Manafort wasn't accused of receiving kickbacks (as I'll explain in a moment, that doesn't make any sense) – he was accused of being paid cash by Yanukovich's political party in an off-the-books scheme, and this was widely covered in the press after the story broke in The New York Times on Aug. 14. ..."
    "... That's not a kickback. A kickback is when a government or other organization is offering a contract to an outside contractor, typically in a competitive bid situation, and then when the winner is selected the winner kicks back some of the contract proceeds to the person who manipulated the contract selection process. ..."
    "... So if there were kickbacks involved in Manafort's work for Yanukovich, it would've been Manafort kicking back money to Yanukovich, not the other way around. ..."
    "... However, what Manafort was actually accused of in the press -- receiving money not properly accounted for under Ukrainian law -- is a crime under American law only if he received income that he didn't report to the IRS, or engaged in money laundering, even if an indisputable "documentary trail" emerges. ..."
    "... It is difficult to imagine Putin and his inner circle being fearful of political vulnerability and embarrassment in connection with Manafort. As even Julia Ioffe–a journalist opposed to both Trump and Putin–conceded i n a recent article i n The Atlantic , the political consulting work that Manafort did for Yanukovich and others in the former Soviet Union was hardly unusual. ..."
    "... Just to point out – there's a certain implication in the dossier's description of Manafort's work for Yanukovich that this work was "exposed" during the 2016 US election campaign. That's not the case. Manafort just wasn't a household name before 2016, so no one cared. He was just another American political consultant who was more than happy to offer his services to unsavory foreign politicians, like Sandra Bullock's character in "Our Brand is Crisis." ..."
    "... Manafort's work for Yanukovich was public knowledge in Ukraine as early as 2005, and was reported actively in the Ukrainian press. By 2016 it was part of Manafort's resume. ..."
    "... The report on the Alfa Group (yes, Steele spelled it wrong) is actually the only place in the whole dossier where the dossier was ahead of the mainstream news cycle. The report doesn't give any context for why a special report on the relationship between Putin and Alfa was requested. But on Halloween 2016, the story broke that in Spring and Summer 2016, white-hat hackers had been tracking electronic communications between Trump's e-mail server and an Alfa-Bank (part of Alfa Group) computer in Russia, posting their findings on Reddit – so it was in the public domain but you really had to be paying attention (as apparently a few New York Times journalists and probably the FBI were). I doubt that Steele or his sources were following hacker forums on Reddit. ..."
    "... So here's what I think happened: by September, Steele's ultimate client was the Democrats. Someone tipped off the Hillary Clinton campaign (and/or the Clinton-aligned group that was paying Fusion GPS / Orbis) about the electronic link to Alfa, and then Orbis (Steele) got a call asking for an intelligence report on Alfa Group's connections to Putin, without saying why. However, since it was on the phone, the Orbis person heard it as "Alpha Group," and their Russian sources didn't correct the error. ..."
    "... Vladimir Putin was deputy mayor of St. Petersburg from 1992 to 1996 . In August 1996 Putin moved from St. Petersburg to Moscow to be Deputy Chief of the Presidential Property Management Directorate (Yeltsin was president at the time, of course). He needed a new job because his boss, St. Petersburg mayor Anatoly Sobchak , lost his re-election bid. ..."
    "... Alfa-Bank was a direct competitor to Khodorkovsky's Bank Menatep (a subsidiary of Rosprom) at the time. So there's no way Fridman and Aven used Govorun to deliver cash to Putin when Putin was deputy mayor of St. Petersburg. The dates don't line up. There was an 8-month gap after Putin left St. Petersburg and before Govorun started working at Alfa. ..."
    "... How could Steele's sources have made this mistake? Because Govorun's Wikipedia page omits his time at Rosprom, and makes it look like Govorun worked at Alfa-Bank from 1993 to 2000. This is why you don't prepare your report based on Wikipedia, kids! ..."
    "... Or if Steele was feeling particularly lazy, he could've gone to Trump's Twitter feed, where Trump proudly told his millions of followers that he'd just spent the weekend with Aras Agalarov and that he wanted to do more business with him. Maybe in Steele's world, being "well-placed" to hear intel about Trump's connections with Russian businesspeople means reading Donald Trump's tweets? ..."
    "... There's no other word but "fraud" to describe an "intelligence report" that tries to make it look like the connection between Trump and the Agalarov family is some kind of inside information that you'd need "well-placed sources" to obtain. It took some serious balls for Steele to present it that way, since all anyone would have to do is Google the names mentioned in the report and it would be instantly clear that the intelligence was worthless. ..."
    "... Hmm. This is the intelligence that Hillary's people were getting less than one month from Election Day. Intelligence that they paid for. Makes you feel sorry for her; I strongly suspect she was being conned with these reports. ..."
    "... In December 2016, Rosneft did indeed sell 19.5% of its shares to two investors using a complicated financing structure. Some have pointed to this as an example where the dossier correctly predicted something would happen. However, the sale of 19.5% of Rosneft to an investor was part of Russia's privatization plan for 2016, which the Russian government announced in December 2015 , and the timeline for the privatization (referring to the 19.5% figure) was updated throughout the year . Anyone who was following Russian business news in 2016 knew that Rosneft was planning to sell 19.5% to an investor that year. ..."
    "... Sucks to be Michael Cohen! Unless the dossier is true, he should sue for libel. ..."
    "... Sechin is a very big deal in Russia, and a total badass that you don't want to mess with. He is an intimidating guy who is as serious as a heart attack. Carter Page is a dumbass. But the account of this conversation makes it sound like Page was running the meeting like a seasoned pro, leaving Sechin hanging, keeping things vague and noncommittal. I, on the other hand, think that Sechin would never bother meeting with a nobody like Carter Page to discuss something as consequential as billion-dollar oil deals and international relations unless Page had made his bona fides abundantly clear. ..."
    "... "Unexpectedly." This looks suspiciously like ass-covering as to why Steele's earlier reports dated mere days before Ivanov's dismissal, containing statements attributed directly to Ivanov, made no mention that these were his last days on the job. ..."
    "... Most political observers believed at the time that it was Bernie Sanders, not Russia, who pushed Hillary Clinton away from supporting TPP. This is because Bernie Sanders said openly that he was pressuring Hillary to drop support for TPP. Strangely, the only place where the "veterans' pensions ruse" was ever reported was in the Steele dossier, and the media haven't been tipped off to it to this day. Dodged a bullet! Remember, this is after Putin had supposedly directly ordered all Kremlin insiders, all of whom are tried-and-true Putin loyalists, not to talk about these matters even in private. ..."
    "... Steele's team has made the bold decision to misspell Paul Manafort's name as MANNAFORT (Mannafort from heaven?) throughout this report. ..."
    "... Gubarev sued BuzzFeed and its editor-in-chief for libel and slander and, lacking any basis other than the dossier itself for these allegations, BuzzFeed blacked out the identifying information. ..."
    "... This is quite a cinematic portrayal of hacking. The implication seems to be that there were teams of hackers in a room somewhere and they were ordered to "stand down." Is that how hacking works? Especially in this case, where the hacking that resulted in the 2016 DNC and Podesta leaks had taken place several months before this alleged meeting? This also seems to contradict the declassified US intelligence community findings that said that the hacks were done by Russian government hacker teams called "Cozy Bear" and "Fancy Bear" that were working for the GRU, a Russian intelligence agency that isn't mentioned once in the dossier. The Romanian angle apparently refers t o Guccifer 2.0, who claimed to be Romanian but was also believed to be a Russian intelligence agency alter ego only pretending to be Romanian. If these were Russian government hackers, why would they be ordered to cross international borders and "lay low" in Bulgaria, a member of NATO? ..."
    "... Also, given that Russia allegedly had huge wins in their 2016 election meddling, why would they be so stingy as to demand that Trump pay his share for the hacking? Especially if they were so concerned about covering their tracks? This only would implicate the Trump campaign and create a paper trail leading directly to Trump transition team members in the United States, plus they would be involving themselves in a criminal conspiracy to violate US money laundering laws, RICO and the like. ..."
    Apr 04, 2017 | russiaexplainer.com

    THE DOSSIER

    ... ... ...

    [Jan 16, 2018] The One Fact Which Disproves Russiagate, But Nobody Wants To Talk About

    While Trump was emasculated after just three months of his presidency, the reality is that Trump does not matter. It is the deep state that controls the Us foreign policy...
    Jan 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
    Authored by Caitlyn Johnstone via Medium.com,

    Over the weekend, the people of Hawaii were temporarily terrorized by a notification sent to their mobile phones that a ballistic missile was headed straight for them and they needed to seek shelter immediately. They were not notified that it was a false alarm for 38 minutes , despite its reportedly being a simple human error triggered by an employee who "pushed the wrong button".

    Many who are less trusting of official CNN narratives when it comes to the US power establishment have been voicing skepticism of this explanation, finding the timing highly suspect given that the Trump administration just caused international controversy by giving the okay for a $133 million sale of an anti-ballistic missile system to Japan . A sale which, according to Russia, violates international ballistic missile treaties and will put a strain on Moscow's relationship with Tokyo.

    The general idea is that this deal has a lot less to do with the threat posed by North Korea, its ostensible object, and a lot more to do with the Russia-China tandem that the US power establishment is continually working to undermine. Placing an anti-ballistic missile system in the hands of a US ally right on the east edge of Asia weakens the effectiveness of mutually assured destruction (MAD) , the understanding that if any nation launches a nuclear attack on another nuclear-armed country there will be full-scale retaliation and both countries will be destroyed. If some American officials get it into their heads that their country's rivals can be taken out via nuclear strikes and any retaliatory strikes nullified via missile defense systems, MAD is no longer a deterrent to this and we're looking at potentially billions of deaths and possible planetary extinction.

    Regardless of whether the false alarm was a psyop designed to manufacture support for the anti-ballistic missile sale or a genuine human error, the fact remains that the deal itself is undeniably a move taken by the Trump administration against the will and interests of the Kremlin.

    This is just the latest in a string of maneuvers against Russia that have been made by this administration, despite Trump's continued outward assurances that he wants to improve relations with Moscow. As is so often the case, a US president is saying one thing and doing something very different.

    And it completely kills the Russiagate narrative. Just a few days ago Russiagaters were having yet another "BOOM! We got him!" social media parade about an article from the Clinton-directed Daily Beast, claiming that a senior national security aide within the Trump administration had suggested scaling down the US troop presence along Russia's border, a dangerous escalation which all peace advocates support eliminating. In the first sentence of the article's second paragraph, the author Spencer Ackerman acknowledges that "the proposal was ultimately not adopted."

    Huh?

    So President Trump, alleged to have been groomed early and at great expense by the Kremlin in anticipation of a presidential victory nobody else imagined possible at that time, was pitched a recommendation to scale down new cold war escalations with Russia... and he refused? That's how you're starting your article about the "return on Russia's election-time investment in President Trump"?

    Russiagate is so weird. You need to plug yourself into Louise Mensch and Rachel Maddow ramblings so extensively that you can contort your sense of reason to the point where it looks perfectly rational to believe that Putin was omniscient enough to know that Trump could defeat all primary opponents and take the fight to the heir apparent Hillary Clinton back when virtually no one else imagined such a thing was possible, recruited his team reportedly at the cost of billions of dollars , poured all kinds of intel and resources into ensuring Trump's election using hackers and bots to influence American opinion, only to get a US president who is, when it comes to facts in evidence, already just a year into his administration demonstrably more hawkish towards Russia than his predecessor was.

    Again: huh?

    Nobody wants to think about this because it doesn't fit in with America's stale partisan models; Democrats would have to admit that their best shot at getting a rival president impeached is pure gibberish, and Trump supporters would have to acknowledge that their swamp-draining populist hero is actually just one more corrupt globalist neocon like his predecessors. But when it comes to actual facts in evidence, that's exactly what we're looking at.

    Over and over and over again this alleged Russian asset has been choosing to undermine Moscow instead of advancing its interests. He approved the sale of arms to Ukraine, a move loudly encouraged by DC neocons which Obama refused to do because of the dangerous tensions it would inflame with Russia. His administration forced first RT and now Sputnik to register as foreign agents, expanded NATO with the addition of Montenegro, assigning established Russia hawk Kurt Volker as special representative to Ukraine, shutting down a Russian consulate in San Francisco and throwing out Russian diplomats as part of continued back-and-forth hostile diplomatic exchanges, and signing the Russian sanctions bill despite loud protests from Moscow. If he is indeed an expensive Russian asset, then Russia got ripped off.

    The one area Russiagaters can claim Trump hasn't gone against Russian interests is in Syria, where the administration has cooperated with Putin in fighting terrorist forces. Or at least, they would have been able to make that argument had Obama not been in favor of it as well . If Syria proves Trump is a Putin puppet, then the White House must have been offering a two-for-one deal, because they bought Obama as well.

    Russiagaters can claim "Well, Trump colluded with Russia, but because we're putting political pressure on him not to align with Putin he isn't able to do anything to advance Moscow's interests." Okay, but what's the charge, then? That Russia bought Trump, and accomplished absolutely nothing other than bringing new sanctions and cold war escalations down upon itself? Again, the Steele dossier upon which the collusion narrative is based alleges that Trump was recruited at great expense long before anyone in the US thought of him as a serious presidential contender. We're expected to believe that Putin was psychic enough to know Trump could win with enough confidence to invest accordingly, but not psychic enough to know that collusion and election meddling could be detected by America's sprawling surveillance networks and cause backlash, sanctions and escalations?

    No part of any of this makes any sense at all. If you can see past the stupid corporate media-fed filters of Trump_vs_deep_state and anti-Trump_vs_deep_state enough to look at what's actually happening, the collusion narrative is nonsense on its face.

    Maybe the false missile alarm wasn't a psyop, but Russiagate definitely is. America's unelected power establishment had a plan to manufacture support for new escalations to hobble the Russia-China tandem regardless of who won the 2016 presidential election, and since their prefered candidate didn't win they've been employing what is surely the most extensive single psychological operation ever performed in human history.

    And it's working so far. Sure will cause a lot of problems for them if people start waking up to it, though.

    Buckaroo Banzai -> JimJones Jan 16, 2018 6:53 PM Permalink

    "No part of this makes any sense"...author is a fucking retard. It makes perfect sense when you realize that the Democrats are traitorous greedy deranged lunatics who have disconnected from reality.

    stizazz -> Buckaroo Banzai Jan 16, 2018 7:08 PM Permalink

    Russiagate is an elite trick to get Trump to keep fanning the conflict with Russia.
    https://goo.gl/nKJndT

    WTFUD Jan 16, 2018 7:19 PM Permalink

    Sanctions must be placed on the US immediately. Put all US Nationals on Foreign Soil under House/Base-Arrest, in particular, the Real Psychotic Banker/MIC/Neocon Types. Then Close their Internment/Training Camps, cutting off their WMD Supply Routes and hence, their ability to form Militias for Regime Change purposes.

    hardmedicine Jan 16, 2018 6:57 PM Permalink

    article is bullshit.... If Trump even thinks about cooperating with RUSSIA he is "completely a russian agent" if he tries to sabotage Russia then he is "totally being played and is a deep state play-along"

    he can't win. like in 90% of all the press............. Trump is hated because he is against the Deep STate.

    I always go with the exact opposite of what the mainstream says. That is , more often than not, the closest thing to the truth.

    WTFUD -> hardmedicine Jan 16, 2018 7:23 PM Permalink

    Only certain Factions of the Deep State, mind you. There's Terrorist & Moderate US Deep State. LoL.

    [Jan 16, 2018] Drive by shooting in Afghanistan of truck, full video over 3 minutes

    Jan 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Christian Chuba | Jan 16, 2018 8:48:12 AM | 101

    https://southfront.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/1-2.mp4?_=1
    https://southfront.org/leaked-afghan-combat-video-shows-us-special-forces-firing-at-driver-of-civilian-truck/

    Okay, the segment with the shooting through the truck window is still only 5 seconds but I'd argue that the fact that it is part of a 3 minute montage 'our guys are kicking ass in Afghanistan' actually gives it a much worse context. If this was some innocent procedural, 'we had to reluctantly do it' incident, no one in their right mind would have popped it into such a sequence.

    [Jan 16, 2018] Victims of MH17 crash 'died a second time' from lack of proper investigation by Willy Wimmer

    So there were AWACS planes flying nearby...
    Notable quotes:
    "... It's been three years on since the MH17 tragedy. How hopeful are you that all questions into the terrible event will be answered? ..."
    "... Your thoughts on the way the investigation is being carried out, considering how controversial this incident is? ..."
    "... The Dutch are in these NATO surveillance planes, AWACS, and two of these planes, if I remember correctly, have been in the area where the accident happened in this part of Ukraine. Until now we're not familiar with the experience of these two NATO planes, which made surveillance in this part of Ukraine. They must be familiar with all the events in this area, and the Dutch had been on these planes as well if I am correct. Nothing of these things have been explained to the public. ..."
    Jul 01, 2017 | www.defenddemocracy.press

    The tragedy led to an international inquiry carried out by a Joint Investigation Team (JIT) comprising aviation experts and investigators from the Netherlands, Belgium, Australia, Malaysia, and Ukraine.

    The investigation paid little attention to data provided by Russian authorities, which provided the information to understand how the crash happened.

    Today, many questions remain unanswered regarding the crash, including the process of the investigation.

    RT: It's been three years on since the MH17 tragedy. How hopeful are you that all questions into the terrible event will be answered?

    Willy Wimmer: I think there is almost no hope to get answers to the bag of questions we have because of this tragic accident. We shouldn't forget that within a few weeks a second Malaysian plane came down. The fate of those two planes is unsolved even today. This doesn't fit into the experience of air accidents we have in Europe. I won't mention other parts of the world. Remember, a few years ago we had this tragic accident with a German plane in the mountainous region in the southern part of France. Within days we knew what happened. When you look at the tragic events with these two Malaysian airplanes, nobody knows what happened. This is an uncertainty which makes it possible that those who died in the airspace of Ukraine died for a second time because there is no answer to the question why it happened; and they died for the second time because there is no proper investigation. That is a reality we face today.

    RT: Your thoughts on the way the investigation is being carried out, considering how controversial this incident is?

    WW: I think the standards of the investigations we have in Europe, and I won't speak about others part of the world, is different. We know within hours, or within days, what happened and who was responsible. From the very beginning of this investigation, which is called investigation, we all have seen from our experience that it has been politicized from the very beginning.

    The interesting thing, I live in the neighborhood of the Dutch border, and we like to go to the Netherlands. The Dutch are in these NATO surveillance planes, AWACS, and two of these planes, if I remember correctly, have been in the area where the accident happened in this part of Ukraine. Until now we're not familiar with the experience of these two NATO planes, which made surveillance in this part of Ukraine. They must be familiar with all the events in this area, and the Dutch had been on these planes as well if I am correct. Nothing of these things have been explained to the public.

    [Jan 16, 2018] Will MH17 be our 9-11 (28) Why the one tenacious critic of the Dutch government was silenced Defend Democracy Press

    Notable quotes:
    "... Mid November the Dutch parliamentarian, Pieter Omtzigt (Christian Democrat), came under fire for allegedly having stage-managed, at a meeting at the Free University in Amsterdam, the statement of a witness contradicting the official explanation of the downing of Flight MH17. A text message in which Omtzigt made a helpful suggestion to the witness how to summarise his story given that he would get one minute at best, was passed on to the Dutch daily, NRC Handelsblad, which raised the issue of the MP's credibility and called for his resignation. ..."
    "... This was not only a way of getting rid of the one parliamentarian who has consistently demanded of the Dutch government that it live up to the Prime Minister's vow to get to the bottom of the MH17 affair. ..."
    "... This is why after half a year, his courtesy towards an Ukrainian man was suddenly turned into something close to treason. ..."
    "... When the MH17 meeting at the Free University happened in May last, the Dutch general election results were only two months old and no new government had yet been formed. The video of the witness making his statement (he was primarily interested in obtaining asylum in the Netherlands, or so it seemed) was circulated without causing any concern. The claim that one or more jet fighters had been spotted near MH17 had been made many times before and by far more reliable witnesses; in this case it was not even the man himself but has wife who had seen the planes. ..."
    "... However, as Marx famously put it in the Communist Manifesto, the government is only a committee for handling the day-to-day affairs of the capitalist class; and in their plans, scrapping the dividend tax had long been on the agenda. ..."
    "... By unearthing a half-year-old issue of no consequence they also got rid of an MH17 critic who had been stubbornly following the government in its obvious attempt to kick the issue into the long grass. ..."
    "... Kees van der Pijl (with thanks to Babette U.) ..."
    "... Published at http://oorlogisgeenoplossing.blogspot.gr/p/blog-page_0.html ..."
    Dec 11, 2017 | www.defenddemocracy.press

    This article is a translation of " Wordt MH17 ons 9/11? (28) Waarom de enige criticus van de Nederlandse regering tot zwijgen werd gebracht "

    Mid November the Dutch parliamentarian, Pieter Omtzigt (Christian Democrat), came under fire for allegedly having stage-managed, at a meeting at the Free University in Amsterdam, the statement of a witness contradicting the official explanation of the downing of Flight MH17. A text message in which Omtzigt made a helpful suggestion to the witness how to summarise his story given that he would get one minute at best, was passed on to the Dutch daily, NRC Handelsblad, which raised the issue of the MP's credibility and called for his resignation.

    This was not only a way of getting rid of the one parliamentarian who has consistently demanded of the Dutch government that it live up to the Prime Minister's vow to get to the bottom of the MH17 affair. Omtzigt was also his party's spokesman on tax matters, pensions, and the euro and there he was an even greater liability to the powers that be. This is why after half a year, his courtesy towards an Ukrainian man was suddenly turned into something close to treason.

    When the MH17 meeting at the Free University happened in May last, the Dutch general election results were only two months old and no new government had yet been formed. The video of the witness making his statement (he was primarily interested in obtaining asylum in the Netherlands, or so it seemed) was circulated without causing any concern. The claim that one or more jet fighters had been spotted near MH17 had been made many times before and by far more reliable witnesses; in this case it was not even the man himself but has wife who had seen the planes.

    Now fast-forward to November, when NRC Handelsblad came with its 'scoop', six months after the fact. After a tortuous cabinet formation taking all summer and comfortably interrupted by full holidays taken, there now was a government of mainstream Liberals, neoliberals, Christian Democrats and Christian fundamentalists (who actually held up the negotiations for another week because their leader had to attend a rock concert in Germany). This coalition only had 76 seats, a majority of one. It also surprised the nation with an announcement that it would scrap the dividend tax, a gift to business of 1.4 billion euros per year -- although none of the coalition partners had proposed this in their election manifestoes.

    However, as Marx famously put it in the Communist Manifesto, the government is only a committee for handling the day-to-day affairs of the capitalist class; and in their plans, scrapping the dividend tax had long been on the agenda.

    ... ... ...

    Was this was the drop that made the bucket overflow? For within days, NRC Handelsblad, the mouthpiece of the Liberal party, began what can only be considered a character assassination of this, one of our finest parliamentarians. By unearthing a half-year-old issue of no consequence they also got rid of an MH17 critic who had been stubbornly following the government in its obvious attempt to kick the issue into the long grass.

    Meanwhile his own Christian Democratic fraction leader, instead of defending Omtzigt, chose to stoke the flames of paranoia about 'Russian meddling' in Dutch affairs, thus heightening the climate of suspicion in which the campaign against Omtzigt had been made possible in the first place. The victim could do little else but officially declare he would no longer be the spokesman on the MH17 portfolio.

    But let one think this means the case is closed. More will follow.

    Kees van der Pijl (with thanks to Babette U.)

    Published at http://oorlogisgeenoplossing.blogspot.gr/p/blog-page_0.html

    [Jan 14, 2018] Trump Stumped As Bannon-Backed Roy Moore Wins Alabama Republican Primary By Landslide

    Bannon backed candidate later lost. So much for this Bannon "success".
    This idea of Trump playing 6 dimensional chess is a joke. It's the same explanation that was pushed for Obama disastrous neocon foreign policy. Here is one very apt quote: "What Trump has done are disasters, and equates to treason. Selling billions of dollars of weapons the our enemies the terrorists/Saudis, killing innocent people in Syria, and Yemen, sending more troops to Afghanistan..." What 6-dimetional chess?
    According to Occam razor principle the simplest explanation of Trump behaviour is probably the most correct. He does not control foright policy, outsourcing it to "generals" and be does not pursue domestic policy of creating jobs as he promised his electorate. In other words, both in foreign policy and domestic policy, he became a turncoat, betraying his electorate, much like Obama. kind of Republican Obama.
    And as time goes by, Trump looks more and more like Hillary II or Republican Obama. So he might have problems with the candidates he supports in midterm elections. His isolationism, if it ever existed, is gone. Promise of jobs is gone. Detente with Russia is gone. What's left?
    Note the level disappointment of what used to be Trump base in this site comment section...
    Notable quotes:
    "... In a serious rebuke for President Trump (and perhaps moreso for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell), ousted judge and alt-right favorite Roy Moore has won the Alabama Republican Primary by a landslide ..."
    "... The Steve Bannon-backed candidate, who defied court orders to remove the Ten Commandments from his courtroom and refused to recognize gay marriage after the Supreme Court's June 2015 ruling legalizing same-sex marriage, is leading by 9.6 points with 92% of the votes counted... ..."
    "... These attacks on Bannon were one of the most prominent news stories in the first week following Trump's election victory. It didn't take long, however, for a counter-attack to emerge - from the right-wing elements of the Jewish community. ..."
    "... Bannon is a true fucking patriot trying to pull this once great country from the sinkhole. ..."
    "... I think the reality is that this was a message to McConnell much more than Trump. That message is simple: I'm coming to kill your career. Bannon went out of his way to say he fully supports Trump (despite backing the opposite candidate). And, let's face it, if Bannon buries McConnell, he's doing everyone a service, Trump included. ..."
    "... The echo chamber media "is so surprised" that in Germany and the US we are seeing a rising tide of pissed off people, well imagine fucking that? Leaving the echo chamber and not intellectually trying to understand the anger, but living the anger. ..."
    "... Well, we can only hope that Trump gets the message. He was elected to be President of the USA, not Emperor of the World. Quote from that Monty Python film: "He's not the Messiah; he's a very naughty boy!" ..."
    "... A cursory background reading on Roy Moore tells me that he is one of the worst types for public office. And he might just turn out to be like Trump -- act like an anti-swarm cowboy and promise a path to heaven, then show his real colors as an Establishment puppet once the braindead voters put him in office. ..."
    "... When Trump won the Republican nomination, and then the Presidency it was because people were rebelling against the establishment rulers. There is considerable disgust with these big government rulers that are working for themselves and their corporate cronies, but not for the US population. ..."
    "... Trump seems to have been compromised at this point, and his support of the establishment favourite, Luther Strange is evidence that he isn't really the outsider he claimed to be. Moore's victory in Alabama says the rebellion still has wheels, so there is some hope. ..."
    "... In Missouri where I live, the anti-establishment Republican contender for the upcoming US Senatorial 2018 race is Austin Peterson. It will be interesting to see how he, and his counterparts in other states do in the primaries. Both of the current Missouri Senators are worthless. ..."
    "... I remember well the last "3-Dimensional Chess master" Obama while he too was always out maneuvering his apponents, per the media reports... ..."
    "... Every now and then Trump tends to make huge blunders, and sometimes betrayals without knowing what he is doing. "Champions"- (great leaders) do not do that. ..."
    "... What Trump has done are disasters, and equates to treason. Selling billions of dollars of weapons the our enemies the terrorists/Saudis, killing innocent people in Syria, and Yemen, sending more troops to Afghanistan... ..."
    "... It is epitome of self-delusion to see people twisting themselves into pretzels, trying to justify/rationalize Trump's continuing display of disloyalty to America ..."
    "... YOU CAN'T BE A ZIONIST AND AN AMERICAN FIRSTER, IT IS ONE OR THE OTHER. ..."
    Sep 27, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com

    Congratulations to Roy Moore on his Republican Primary win in Alabama. Luther Strange started way back & ran a good race. Roy, WIN in Dec!

    In a serious rebuke for President Trump (and perhaps moreso for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell), ousted judge and alt-right favorite Roy Moore has won the Alabama Republican Primary by a landslide

    The Steve Bannon-backed candidate, who defied court orders to remove the Ten Commandments from his courtroom and refused to recognize gay marriage after the Supreme Court's June 2015 ruling legalizing same-sex marriage, is leading by 9.6 points with 92% of the votes counted...

    ... ... ...

    However, as Politco reported this evening, President Donald Trump began distancing himself from a Luther Strange loss before ballots were even cast, telling conservative activists Monday night the candidate he's backing in Alabama's GOP Senate primary was likely to lose ! and suggesting he'd done everything he could do given the circumstances.

    Trump told conservative activists who visited the White House for dinner on Monday night that he'd underestimated the political power of Roy Moore, the firebrand populist and former judge who's supported by Trump's former chief strategist Steve Bannon, according to three people who were there.

    And Trump gave a less-than full-throated endorsement during Friday's rally.

    While he called Strange "a real fighter and a real good guy," he also mused on stage about whether he made a "mistake" by backing Strange and committed to campaign "like hell" for Moore if he won.

    Trump was encouraged to pick Strange before the August primary by son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner as well as other aides, White House officials said. He was never going to endorse Alabama Republican Rep. Mo Brooks, who has at times opposed Trump's agenda, and knew little about Moore, officials said.

    ... ... ...

    Déjŕ view -> Sanity Bear •Sep 26, 2017 11:19 PM

    AIPAC HAS ALL BASES COVERED...MIGA !

    On Sept. 11, the Alabama Daughters for Zion organization circulated a statement on Israel by Moore, which started by saying the U.S. and Israel "share not only a common Biblical heritage but also institutions of representative government and respect for religious freedom." He traced Israel's origin to God's promise to Abram and the 1948 creation of modern Israel as "a fulfillment of the Scriptures that foretold the regathering of the Jewish people to Israel."

    Moore's statement includes five policy positions, including support for U.S. military assistance to Israel, protecting Israel from "Iranian aggression," opposing boycotts of Israel, supporting Israel at the United Nations, and supporting direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations without outside pressure. He added, "as long as Hamas and the Palestinian Authority wrongly refuse to recognize Israel's right to exist, such negotiations have scant chance of success."

    While those views would give Moore common ground with much of the Jewish community regarding Israel, most of the state's Jewish community has been at odds with Moore over church-state issues, such as his displays of the Ten Commandments in courthouses, and his outspoken stance against homosexuality, both of which led to him being ousted as chief justice.

    http://www.sjlmag.com/2017/09/alabama-senate-candidates-express.html?m=1

    justa minute -> Déjŕ view •Sep 27, 2017 2:53 AM

    moore misreads the Bible as most socalled christians do. they have been deceived, they have confused the Israel of God( those who have been given belief in Christ) with israel of the flesh. They cant hear Christs own words, woe is unto them. they are living in their own selfrighteousness, not good. they are going to have a big surprise for not following the Word of God instead following the tradition of men.

    They were warned over and over in the Bible but they cant hear.

    I Claudius -> VinceFostersGhost •Sep 27, 2017 6:27 AM

    Forgive? Maybe. Forget? NEVER!! He tried to sell "US" out on this one. We now need to focus on bringing "Moore" candidates to the podium to run against the RINO's and take out McConnell and Ryan. It's time for Jared and Ivanka to go back to NYC so Jared can shore up his family's failing empire. However, if his business acumen is as accurate as his political then it's no wonder the family needed taxpayer funded visas to sell the property. Then on to ridding the White House of Gen Kelly and McMaster - two holdover generals from the Obama administration - after Obama forced out the real ones.

    Clashfan -> Mycroft Holmes IV •Sep 26, 2017 11:33 PM

    Rump has hoodwinked his supoprt base and turned on them almost immediately. Some refuse to acknowledge this.

    "Ha! Your vote went to the Israel first swamp!"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Gdw_MVY1Vo

    Déjŕ view -> Clashfan •Sep 27, 2017 1:00 AM

    MIGA !

    These attacks on Bannon were one of the most prominent news stories in the first week following Trump's election victory. It didn't take long, however, for a counter-attack to emerge - from the right-wing elements of the Jewish community. The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) came to Bannon's defense and accused the ADL of a "character assassination" against Bannon.

    http://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-1.807776

    The Wizard -> Oh regional Indian •Sep 26, 2017 10:12 PM

    Trump should figure out the Deep State elites he has surrounded himself with, don't have control of the states Trump won. Trump thought he had to negotiate with these guys and his ego got the best of him. Bannon was trying to convince him he should have stayed the course and not give in.


    Theosebes Goodfellow -> Oh regional Indian •Sep 26, 2017 10:35 PM

    ~"American politics gets moore strange by the day..."~

    Technically speaking OhRI, with Moore's win politics became less Strange, or "Strange less", or "Sans Luther", depending on how one chose to phrase it [SMIRK]

    Adullam -> Gaius Frakkin' Baltar •Sep 26, 2017 11:05 PM

    Trump needs to fire Jared! Some news outlets are saying that it was his son in law who advised him to back Strange. He has to quit listening to those who want to destroy him or ... they will.

    overbet -> Killtruck •Sep 26, 2017 9:41 PM

    Bannon is a true fucking patriot trying to pull this once great country from the sinkhole.

    Juggernaut x2 -> overbet •Sep 26, 2017 10:07 PM

    Trump better pull his head out of his ass and quit being a wishy-washy populist on BS like Iran- the farther right he goes the greater his odds of reelection because he has pissed off a lot of the far-righters that put him in- getting rid of Kushner, Cohn and his daughter and negotiating w/Assad and distancing us from Israhell would be a huge help.

    opport.knocks -> Juggernaut x2 •Sep 26, 2017 11:19 PM

    Distancing us from Israel... LOLOLOLOL

    https://youtu.be/tm5Je73bYOY

    The whole Russiagate ploy was a diversion from (((them)))

    NoDebt -> Killtruck •Sep 26, 2017 9:42 PM

    I think the reality is that this was a message to McConnell much more than Trump. That message is simple: I'm coming to kill your career. Bannon went out of his way to say he fully supports Trump (despite backing the opposite candidate). And, let's face it, if Bannon buries McConnell, he's doing everyone a service, Trump included.

    Oldwood -> NoDebt •Sep 26, 2017 10:08 PM

    I think it was a setup.

    Bannon would not oppose Trump that directly unless there was a wink and a nod involved.

    Trump is still walking a tightrope, trying to appease his base AND keep as many establishment republicans at his side (even for only optics). By Trump supporting Strange while knowing he was an underdog AND completely apposed by Bannon/his base he was able to LOOK like he was supporting the establishment, while NOT really. Trump seldom backs losers which makes me think it was deliberate. Strange never made sense anyway.

    But what do I know?

    Urahara -> NoDebt •Sep 27, 2017 12:20 AM

    Bannon is hardcore Isreal first. Why are you supporting the zionist? It's an obvious play.

    general ambivalent -> Urahara •Sep 27, 2017 2:23 AM

    People are desperate to rationalise their failure into a victory. They cannot give up on Hope so they have to use hyperbole in everything and pretend this is all leading to something great in 2020 or 2024.

    None of these fools learned a damn thing and they are desperate to make the same mistake again. The swamp is full, so full that it has breached the banks and taken over all of society. Trump is a swamp monster, and you simply cannot reform the swamp when both sides are monsters. In other words, the inside is not an option, so it has to be done the hard way. But people would prefer to keep voting in the swamp.

    Al Gophilia -> NoDebt •Sep 27, 2017 3:58 AM

    Bannon as president would really have those swamp creatures squirming. There wouldn't be this Trump crap about surrounding himself with likeminded friends, such as Goldman Sachs turnstile workers and his good pals in the MIC.

    Don't tell me he didn't choose them because if he didn't, then they were placed. That means he doesn't have the clout he pretends to have or control of the agenda that the people asked him to deliver. His backing of Stange is telling.

    Lanka -> LindseyNarratesWordress •Sep 26, 2017 11:07 PM

    McMaster and Kelly have Trump under house arrest.

    Bobbyrib -> LindseyNarratesWordress •Sep 27, 2017 5:38 AM

    He will not fire Kushner or Ivanka who have become part of the swamp. I'm so sick of these 'Trump is a genius and planned this all along.'

    To me Trump is a Mr. Bean type character that has been very fortunate and just goes with the flow. He has nearly no diplomacy, or strategic skills.

    NoWayJose •Sep 26, 2017 10:35 PM

    Dear President Trump - if you like your job, listen to these voters. Borders, Walls, limited immigrants (including all those that Ryan and McConnell are sneaking through under your very nose), trade agreements to keep American jobs, and respect for our flag, our country, and the unborn!

    nevertheless -> loveyajimbo •Sep 26, 2017 11:19 PM

    I had hope for Trump, but as someone who reads ZH often, and does not suffer from amnesia (like much of America), I knew he was way too good to be true.

    We all know his back tracking, his flip flops...and while the media and many paid bloggers like to spin it as "not his fault", it actually is.

    His sending DACA to Congress was the last straw. Obama enacted DACA with a stroke of his pen, but Trump "needed to send it to Congress so they could "get it right". The only thing Congress does with immigration is try and get amnesty passed.

    Of course while Trump sends DACA to Congress, he does not mind using the military without Congress, which he actually should do.

    Why is it when it's something American's want, it has to go through the "correct channels", but when its something the Zionists want, he does it with the wave of his pen? We saw the same bull shit games with Obama...

    Dilluminati •Sep 26, 2017 11:02 PM

    Anybody surprised by this is pretending the civility at the workplace isn't masking anger at corporate America and Government. I'll go in and put in the 8 hours, I'm an adult that is part of the job. However I'm actually fed up with allot of the stupid shit and want the establishment to work, problem is that we are witnessing failed nations, failed schools, failed healthcare, even failed employment contracts, conditions, and wages.

    The echo chamber media "is so surprised" that in Germany and the US we are seeing a rising tide of pissed off people, well imagine fucking that? Leaving the echo chamber and not intellectually trying to understand the anger, but living the anger.

    You haven't seen anything yet in Catalonia/Spain etc, Brexit, or so..

    This is what failure looks like: That moment the Romanovs and Louis XVI looked around the room seeking an understanding eye, there was none.

    Pascal1967 •Sep 26, 2017 11:19 PM

    Dear Trump:

    Quit listening to your moron son-in-law, swamp creature, Goldman Sachs douchebag son-in-law Kushner. HE SUCKS!! If you truly had BALLS, you would FIRE his fucking ass. HE is The Swamp, He Is Nepotism! THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HATE HIM.

    MAGA! LISTEN TO BANNON, DONALD.

    DO NOT FUCK THIS UP!

    ROY MOORE, 100%!!!!

    You lost, Trump ... get your shit together before it is too late!

    ElTerco •Sep 26, 2017 11:28 PM

    Bannon was always the smarts behind the whole operation. Now we are just left with a complete idiot in office.

    Also, unlike Trump, Bannon actually gives a shit about what happens to the American people rather than the American tax system. At the end of the day, all Trump really cares about is himself.

    samsara •Sep 26, 2017 11:25 PM
    I think most people get it backwards about Trump and the Deplorables.

    I believed in pulling troops a from all the war zones and Trump said he felt the same

    I believed in Legal immigration, sending people back if here illegal especially if involved in crime, Trump said he felt the same.

    I believed in America first in negotiating treaties, Trump said he felt the same.

    I didn't 'vote' for Trump per se, he was the proxy.

    We didn't leave Him, He left us.

    BarnacleBill •Sep 26, 2017 11:31 PM

    Well, we can only hope that Trump gets the message. He was elected to be President of the USA, not Emperor of the World. Quote from that Monty Python film: "He's not the Messiah; he's a very naughty boy!" It's high time he turned back to the job he promised to do, and drain that swamp.

    napper •Sep 26, 2017 11:47 PM

    A cursory background reading on Roy Moore tells me that he is one of the worst types for public office. And he might just turn out to be like Trump -- act like an anti-swarm cowboy and promise a path to heaven, then show his real colors as an Establishment puppet once the braindead voters put him in office.

    America is doomed from top (the swarm) to bottom (the brainless voters).

    Sid Davis •Sep 27, 2017 1:40 AM

    When Trump won the Republican nomination, and then the Presidency it was because people were rebelling against the establishment rulers. There is considerable disgust with these big government rulers that are working for themselves and their corporate cronies, but not for the US population.

    Trump seems to have been compromised at this point, and his support of the establishment favourite, Luther Strange is evidence that he isn't really the outsider he claimed to be. Moore's victory in Alabama says the rebellion still has wheels, so there is some hope.

    In Missouri where I live, the anti-establishment Republican contender for the upcoming US Senatorial 2018 race is Austin Peterson. It will be interesting to see how he, and his counterparts in other states do in the primaries. Both of the current Missouri Senators are worthless.

    nevertheless -> pfwed •Sep 27, 2017 7:33 AM

    I remember well the last "3-Dimensional Chess master" Obama while he too was always out maneuvering his apponents, per the media reports...

    LoveTruth •Sep 27, 2017 2:56 AM

    Every now and then Trump tends to make huge blunders, and sometimes betrayals without knowing what he is doing. "Champions"- (great leaders) do not do that.

    nevertheless -> LoveTruth •Sep 27, 2017 7:16 AM

    What Trump has done are disasters, and equates to treason. Selling billions of dollars of weapons the our enemies the terrorists/Saudis, killing innocent people in Syria, and Yemen, sending more troops to Afghanistan...

    But most treasonous of all was his sending DACA to "get it right", really? Congress has only one goal with immigration, amnesty, and Chump knows dam well they will send him legislation that will clearly or covertly grant amnesty for millions and millions of illegals, dressed up as "security".

    Obama enacted DACA with the stroke of a pen, and while TRUMP promised to end it, he did NOT. Why is it when it's something Americans want, it has to be "Constitutional", but when it comes form his banker pals, like starting a war, he can do that unilaterally.

    archie bird -> nevertheless •Sep 27, 2017 7:45 AM

    Bernie wants to cut aid to Israel https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/09/25/bernie-sanders-yeah-i...

    nevertheless •Sep 27, 2017 8:04 AM

    It is epitome of self-delusion to see people twisting themselves into pretzels, trying to justify/rationalize Trump's continuing display of disloyalty to America, and loyalty to Zionism.

    Trump should always have been seen as a likely Zionist shill. He comes form Jew York City, owes everything he is to Zionist Jewish bankers, is a self proclaimed Zionist...

    YOU CAN'T BE A ZIONIST AND AN AMERICAN FIRSTER, IT IS ONE OR THE OTHER.

    Either Zero Hedge is over run with Zionist hasbara, giving cover to their boy Chump, or Americans on the "right" have become as gullible as those who supported Obama on the "left".

    [Jan 13, 2018] Surging Russian-Chinese Trade Pressures Petrodollar

    Jan 13, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    With the opening of the new ESPO oil pipeline connecting Siberia to China doubling the amount of oil China can import to 600,000 barrels per day we'll see those numbers continue to accelerate.

    And that's the key. Remember, the massive $400 billion gas deal China made with Gazprom in 2014 hasn't begun delivering gas. The first Power of Siberia pipeline isn't due to be completed until 2019. The second Power of Siberia pipeline is on the table after this one.

    And the two countries just agreed to a third pipeline to bring gas in from Russia's far east last month.

    So, despite back-biting from western media about the profitability of these projects, they are going forward and the two countries continue to strengthen fundamental ties to one another.

    ... ... ...

    The important takeaway is that China has created the first unassailable and above-ground challenge to the petro-dollar oil trade. To break the world's use of the dollar as the sole settlement currency for oil required the right contract issued by a country the U.S. can't immediately invade and conduct a regime change operation in – like in Iraq and Libya.

    Russia wins here because now there is a path for its Urals grade to become an international benchmark like WTI and Brent. And since Gazprom prefers to price its long-term gas contracts based on underlying oil prices rather than the more volatile natural gas price, this is also a win in the long run for them.

    Gold convertibility is a means to deepen China's sovereign debt markets by making it less risky to hold Chinese bonds. The lack of true yuan convertibility is the big impediment to people holding them. So, gold convertibility creates a viable exit route.

    WTFUD -> BobEore Jan 13, 2018 7:53 PM Permalink

    Bob, when you control 40% of the World's Oil & Gas Reserves and can turn the tap on and off then you can hardly be considered POOR, especially when you make up 20% of the world's Land Mass ( am also thinking Fresh Water ).

    Vichy DC's Sanctions on Russia are in Essence, Sanctions on Exxon & the Majors (who soon won't be Majors at this rate ) and the EUROPEAN UNION.

    However, i understand your thought processes.

    coast1 Jan 13, 2018 7:43 PM Permalink

    get real zerohedge...archaic news..you are so far behind the times...

    http://www.thedailyeconomist.com/2018/01/all-eyes-may-be-fixed-on-jan-1

    messystateofaffairs Jan 13, 2018 7:59 PM Permalink

    The vice tightens inexorably and US foreign policy thrashes about in response to the pressure. What will the parasitic Jewish overlords do to save their declining host?

    [Jan 13, 2018] Stephen F. Cohen The US Betrayed Russia, but It Is Not News That s Fit to Print (Podcast)

    Notable quotes:
    "... The New York Times ..."
    "... The New Republic ..."
    "... Failed Crusade: American and the Tragedy of Post-Communist Russia ..."
    "... The Washington Post ..."
    "... The National Interest ..."
    "... The American Conservative ..."
    "... Soviet Fates and Lost Alternatives ..."
    Jan 13, 2018 | russia-insider.com

    New evidence that Washington broke its promise not to expand NATO "one inch eastward" -- a fateful decision with ongoing ramifications -- has not been reported by The New York Times or other agenda-setting media outlets John Batchelor Jan 11, 2018 | 2,513 70

    John Batchelor has a very popular political talk show on America's largest radio network, WABC.

    He has Stephen Cohen on live in the studio almost every week for a full 45 minute segment, the only guest he gives that much time to.

    Why? Because Cohen's appearances are killing the ratings. America seems to be thirsting for an alternative and critical view of Obama's Russia policy.

    See below for a summary of this program courtesy of The Nation .

    http://embeds.audioboom.com/posts/6588850-tales-of-the-new-cold-war-was-gorbachev-deceived-and-other-media-mysteries-left-unreported-part-1-of-2-stephen-f-cohen-nyu-princeton-eastwestaccord-com/embed/v4?eid=AQAAAD9tV1qyiWQA

    http://embeds.audioboom.com/posts/6588851-tales-of-the-new-cold-war-was-gorbachev-deceived-and-other-media-mysteries-left-unreported-part-2-of-2-stephen-f-cohen-nyu-princeton-eastwestaccord-com/embed/v4?eid=AQAAAD9tV1qziWQA

    Cohen returns to a subject he has treated repeatedly since the 1990s, mainstream media malpractice in covering Russia, but with a new and highly indicative example that is both historical and profoundly contemporary.

    There have been three relevant major episodes of such malpractice. The first was when American newspapers, particularly The New York Times , misled readers into thinking the Communists could not possibly win the Russian Civil War of 1918–20, as detailed in a study by Walter Lippmann and Charles Merz, published as a supplement to The New Republic , August 4, 1920. (Once canonical, the study was for years assigned reading at journalism schools, but no longer it seems to be.)

    https://lockerdome.com/lad/9533801169000550?pubid=ld-1806-5338&pubo=http%3A%2F%2Frussia-insider.com&rid=russia-insider.com&width=745

    Failed Crusade: American and the Tragedy of Post-Communist Russia .)

    The third and current episode grew out of the second but spread quickly through the media in the early 2000s with the demonization of Vladimir Putin, Yeltsin's successor, and now is amply evidenced by mainstream coverage of the new Cold War, Russiagate's allegation that "Russia attacked American democracy" in 2016, and much else related to Russia. This rendition may be the worst, certainly it is the most dangerous.

    Media malpractice has various elements -- among them, selective use of facts, some unverified, highly questionable narratives or reporting based on those "facts," mingled with editorial commentary passed off as "analysis," buttressed by carefully selected "expert sources," often anonymous, and amplified by carefully chosen opinion page contributors. Throughout is the systematic practice of excluding developments (and opinion) that do not conform to the Times ' venerable motto, "All the News That's Fit to Print." When it comes to Russia, the Times often decides politically what is fit and what is not. And thus the most recent but exceedingly important example.

    In 1990, Soviet Russian leader Mikhail Gorbachev agreed not only to the reunification of Germany, whose division was the epicenter of that Cold War, but also, at the urging of the Western powers, particularly the United States, that the new Germany would be a member of NATO. (Already embattled at home, Gorbachev was further weakened by his decision, which probably contributed to the attempted coup against him in August 1991.)

    Gorbachev made the decision based on assurances by his then–Western "partners" that in return NATO would never be expanded "one inch eastward" toward Russia. (Today, having nearly doubled its member countries, the world's most powerful military alliance sits on Russia's western borders.) At the time, it was known that President George H.W. Bush had especially persuaded Gorbachev through Secretary of State James Baker's "not one inch" and other equally emphatic guarantees.

    Now, however, the invaluable National Security Archive at George Washington University has established the historical truth by publishing, on December 12 of last year, not only a detailed account of what Gorbachev was promised in 1990–91 but the relevant documents themselves . The truth, and the promises broken, are much more expansive than previously known: All of the Western powers involved -- the US, the UK, France, Germany itself -- made the same promise to Gorbachev on multiple occasions and in various emphatic ways. If we ask when the West, particularly Washington, lost Moscow as a potential strategic partner after the end of the Soviet Union, this is where an explanation begins.

    And yet, nearly a month after the publication of the National Security Archive documents, neither the Times nor The Washington Post , which profess to be the nation's most important, reliable, and indispensable political newspapers, has published one word about this revelation. (Certainly the two papers are pervasively important to other media, not only due to their daily national syndicates but because today's broadcast media, especially CNN, MSNBC, NPR, and PBS, take most of their own Russia-related "reporting" cues from the Times and the Post .)

    How to explain the failure of the Times and Post to report or otherwise comment on the National Security Archive's publication? It can hardly be their lack of space or their disinterest in Russia, which they featured regularly in one kind of unflattering story or another -- and almost daily in the form of "Russiagate." Given their immense daily news-gathering capabilities, could both papers have missed the story? Impossible, even more so considering that three lesser publications -- The National Interest , on December 12; Bloomberg , on December 13; and The American Conservative , on December 22 -- reported and commented on its significance at length.

    Or perhaps the Times and Post consider the history and process of NATO expansion to be no longer newsworthy, even though it has been the driving, escalatory factor behind the new US-Russian Cold War; already contributed to two US-Russian proxy hot wars (in Georgia in 2008 and in Ukraine since 2014) as well as to NATO's ongoing buildup on Russia's borders in the Baltic region, which is fraught with the possibility of an actual war between the nuclear superpowers; provoked Russia into reactions now cited as "grave threats"; nearly vaporized politically both the once robust pro-American lobby in Moscow politics and the previously widespread pro-American sentiments among Russian citizens; and implanted in at least one generation of the Russian policy elite the conviction that the broken promise to Gorbachev represented characteristic American "betrayal and deceit."

    Soviet Fates and Lost Alternatives .) Russians can cite other instances of "deceit," including President George W. Bush's 2002 unilateral abrogation of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and Obama's broken promise that he would not use a 2011 UN Security Council resolution to depose Libyan leader Gaddafi. But it is the broken promise to Gorbachev that lingers as America's original sin, partly because it was the first of many such perceived duplicities, but mainly because it has resulted in a Russia semi-encircled by US-led Western military power, an encroachment that continues today.

    Given all this, we must ask again: Why did neither the Times nor the Post report the archive revelations? Most likely because the evidence fundamentally undermines their essential overarching narrative that Putin's Russia is solely responsible for the new Cold War and all of its attendant conflicts and dangers, and therefore that no rethinking of US policy toward post-Soviet Russia since 1991 is advisable or, it seems, permissible, certainly not by President Donald Trump. Therein lie the national-security dangers of media malpractice, and this example, while of special importance, is far from the only one in recent years. In this regard, the Times and Post seem contemptuous not only of their own professed journalistic standards but of their purportedly cherished adage that democracy requires fully informed citizens.

    If Americans cannot rely on the Times and Post , at least in regard to US-Russian relations, where can they seek the information and analysis they need? There are many valuable alternative media outlets, but few hard-working citizens have time to locate and consult them. Cohen recommends that they turn to two websites that almost daily aggregate reporting, analysis, and opinion not to be found in the Times , Post , or most other mainstream publications. One is Johnson's Russia List . The other is the website of the American Committee for East-West Accord , of which Cohen is a board member. Upon request, both will come to your computer. The former requests a nominal donation but does not insist on it. The latter is free. For readers who worry about international affairs, the new US-Russian Cold War, and America itself, the information and perspectives they will gain from these sites are invaluable.

    Source: The John Batchelor Show

    Vtran , January 11, 2018 11:09 AM

    American citizens Never have adhered to agreements, Cease Fires, Peace Agreements ....Just look at the First Nations

    Isabella Jones Vtran , January 11, 2018 3:28 PM

    It is something of a mystery that this should have escaped Gorbachev, although Cohen does say that Conservatives warned him against going with the flow on this one. He ignored them.
    There's an old saying about leopards and never changing their spots. I guess he was as fooled, as many are, that the appalling history of the US was in each case a separate incident, involving and caused by different people, and therefor "it will be different this time." Gorbachev was willing to overlook the horrific evidence of an Anglo West planning to destroy the Russia who had saved their bacon by winning WWII for them; and to destroy her utterly and horrifically. That he could overlook that beggars belief.
    It's so essential to get the bigger picture, to read the History of the Nations you are dealing with extensively, to determine how to connect the dots to find the pattern, and to realise that ultimately nations are an aggregate of systems - and a system is far more powerful than most individuals [until you find a rare person who knows how to break the system].
    Sadly, it seems that they had fallen for the idea too, that, as V. P. said when Russia abandoned communism, their opponent would "to them hand the sword". i.e. would become partners and equals. That was never going to happen. It also shows us, once again, that all too often political leaders are not well enough educated, not well enough informed and not bright enough, to undertake the job of national leader which they do.
    And we are not interested nor thoughtful enough to demand better.

    Tommy Jensen Isabella Jones , January 11, 2018 5:41 PM

    ...And we may not be educated suficient to look through the matter.
    Before 1968 in Nordic countries with Sweden had hollistic education systems, making academics able to see the whole picture.

    After 1968-70 they changed the education system so the working class could get academic degrees, but separated the disciplines so you only were able to see your part and not the whole picture and leaving out history and roots.
    Newspeak was introduced and started.
    Its about classes, deliberately leaving the knowledge and whole picture to the elite.

    Any hollistic educated who analyse US history should be able to see that you deal with a hypocrite and liar country throughout from start up til today.
    When Russia with its excellent education system missed the point in 1990´es I think it maybe more due to their previous suffering and emotional culture, than to actual foolishness as we can see the Russians quickly raised their heads again from the ashes.

    John Mason Tommy Jensen , January 12, 2018 12:52 AM

    Same happened here in Australia Tommy, they lowered the education standard so that anyone can obtain a University Degree under the belief that everyone is entitled to one and not only those best suited. Now one has idiots running corporations and in politics. Getting them out is the problem. I have always expressed concern that those who wish to go into politics and government should present to the Public a full resume as anyone would who is seeking a senior position in a corporation.

    Isabella Jones John Mason , January 12, 2018 3:29 AM

    Very true John.
    If you look at the entire system, we see that immense power over the lives of millions of people is given to those who don't have to show any form of qualification for the job; any training; or prior experience, assessment by qualified experience assessors.

    In fact, all they have to be able do is to generate money for themselves by making promises to others using taxpayer money; present themselves in a slick, eye catching fashion like an aspiring film actor auditioning for a role; lie; as Vladimir Putin said "make promises better than those of your competitor"; and sell meaningless words better than a used car salesman.

    In other words, present themselves to voters as an ignorant, inexperienced psychopathic, criminally fraudulent, snake oil salesman. And then we wonder why that's exactly what we get as our "leaders". !!

    John Mason Isabella Jones , January 12, 2018 10:18 AM

    Very passionate you are on this subject your profundity is a source of enlightenment Isabella.

    Isabella Jones John Mason , January 12, 2018 10:42 AM

    Thank you John - yes I do feel deeply that as civilisations, we have strayed from so much that is balanced, natural, and optimal for human growth and happiness. We have so much in our cultures that beggars belief in it's stupidity- and as always, the very stupid are too stupid to know that they are very stupid. I see us preening ourselves as the epitome of civilisation, when research into the distant past shows we have had about 3.5 thousand years of slow, non-stop collapse including an arrogant ignorance.
    Yet the answers are so close to hand. It's only an understanding of where we have all gone wrong, and a willingness to do what needs to be done to correct it which will stop us falling into the night, I suspect.
    Then again, I remember that everything happens in circles, and follows Universal Laws. Maybe we have no course but to follow the natural pattern we have put ourselves on try to learn from it.
    Thanks for your kind words John.

    Isabella Jones Tommy Jensen , January 11, 2018 9:46 PM

    Yes, all this was about the time they introduced the "expert". Prior to that idea, a well educated, intelligent person was held to have a wide ranging education, and to be familiar with many different disciplines. They they got the "expert" idea - a mechanic in my - then - University Department informed me that "expert means, here is x which marks the spot of a drip under pressure" !! :-)
    Now we have people who know more and more about less and less until they reach the pinnacle where they know absolutely everything about nothing.
    Yes, I think the Russian education got infected by America, and in the struggle to break free of all the other disasters that caused - just to survive as a country and as a people - this is an issue that has had to be put on a back burner. But they are doing fine in spite of it, and I'm sure will find their way back to the best of the Soviet times education.

    Vtran Isabella Jones , January 12, 2018 2:58 PM

    I still (and know not alone) feel Gorbachev is a Traitor that "sold" the USSR, the People of the USSR for Personal ("friends") gain .... so he knew what would happen !

    Remember the people of the USSR wanted to work through the "problems / issues" leaving the USSR intact but Gorbachev decided to GO AGAINST the Wishes of the People / Wishes of the country and allowed the regions to "break free" including denying the right for Crimea to Return to RF (loaned to Ukraine while USSR existed) .... why would you Do that except for your own agenda !

    And Where does Gorbachev live .... but in U$ america ... and every time he visits RF he comes with masses of Body Guards

    Isabella Jones Vtran , January 12, 2018 4:30 PM

    That last part is very interesting Vtran - I didn't know he lived in America.
    I hadn't caught up with any documentation about his "friends", although there is the comment - with the long/lat given of the area on the documentary "The Unknown Putin" - that Gorbachev sold to US what wasn't his to sell - a huge chunk of sea off the coast of Russia, containing massive amounts of oil deposits!! He did it to get the money to try and defeat Yeltsin!! So, he has a track record, and as the saying goes "he who lies once, lies ten times". The principle holds for everything, as well as lying. I also didn't know that there were grass roots movements of people trying to stop the collapse of the USSR.
    Can you recommend any good modern history resource which covers these events please?
    I got a lot from that excellent documentary, but as is so often one is left wanting more.
    I know Vladimir Putin doesn't like him - not one bit. I could "read" it from the Stone Interviews :-)
    I certainly agree with you - that if he did all that, selling out the people of Russia - no way does he deserve to be grouped with them, they aren't "his" people, in that case - then yes, he was a sellout traitor. Should count himself lucky to be alive!!

    Vtran Isabella Jones , January 12, 2018 10:34 PM

    Isabella,, I will look for a document regarding Gorbachev selling out the people of the USSR .... However my comment is personnel ... all Russians I know, all people of the ex USSR (except those of fanatical Ukraine) speak as One ...The did not at the USSR to break ... their views were "over ridden" !
    -
    Interesting comment of "selling off which does not belong" reminiscent of Alaska where the Gold supposedly exchange disappeared after the western inspired revolution of 1918 !

    Isabella Jones Vtran , January 12, 2018 10:38 PM

    Joined a small river of disappeared gold from many places Vtran with Libya and Iraq being the latest!!

    Le Ruse Vtran , January 12, 2018 12:58 AM

    Quote: Over 500 treaties were made with American Indian tribes, primarily for land cessations, but 500 treaties were also broken, changed or nullified when it served the government's interests.

    Qua Patet Orbis Le Ruse , January 12, 2018 2:31 AM

    White men speak with forked tongue....

    Le Ruse Qua Patet Orbis , January 12, 2018 3:34 AM

    Like that one ??
    View Hide

    Vtran Le Ruse , January 12, 2018 2:49 PM

    Because U$ Americans citizens thought the had "Given away STOLEN Worthless Land" .... and then found that "Worthless Land" contained "Yellow Gold" ...... later more so called "Worthless Land" contained Black Gold and so it went on

    Le Ruse Vtran , January 12, 2018 7:30 PM

    Yupp...
    Like the mineral & natural wealth of Russia, doesn't belong to Russia, but belong to the WORLD (a.k.a. City of London/Wall St) ??
    Mad Madeleine Notsobright.

    Kjell Hasthi Vtran , January 11, 2018 7:51 PM

    Who was Christopher Columbus? Any can check it out. My guess as another Vtran.
    - What do you see?
    - No gold yet?
    - Of course there is gold there
    It was the same as Europa. War in Indians replaced war on Muslim.

    paul , January 11, 2018 11:35 AM

    This a a very unhelpful spin by Cohen. Dugin, addressing the end of the cold war, reports that Brzezinski once told him, "we tricked you." That's what happened. This is what Russians need to think about when speaking with their common law partners.

    Alberto , January 11, 2018 12:52 PM

    I have wondered many times how the S Union, a nation with so many brilliant people, could chose someone like Gorbatchev to lead the country.
    Reagan and Thatcher did whatever they wanted with him. They achieved all their objectives in dealing with Gorbachev because he was receptive, soft and a puppet. Worst of all, he was a mix of an idiot and naif by believing them.
    It was hard to build the S Union, very hard, and Gorbatchev wanted to make a transition from socialism to capitalism in one year. Only an idiot could think like that.
    He is the main responsible not only of the demise of the S Union but of the shameful accumulation of wealth in the hands of a bunch of soulless oligarchs whose wealth, to date, remain untouched.
    As a communist, I ask myself how could a guy like him lead the S Union. Yeltsin was another calamity but the main responsible of the debacle is Gorbachev.
    As a result of his stupidity, not only millions of Soviets encountered poverty and criminality, but he opened the way to the unipolar world. Many invasions took place because the US. did not face any opposition.
    North Korea had to rearm itself to protect. Cuba underwent a terrible period.
    Gorbachev will go down in the history of Russia and communist from across the world as an idiot, as an irresponsible leader and as a traitor.

    mark Alberto , January 11, 2018 2:30 PM

    This is very true. Millions died as a result of this colossal stupidity. Tens of millions more suffered appalling misery and destitution. Several countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, have been completely destroyed. These are crimes on a gargantuan scale. And there has been zero accountability.

    Alberto mark , January 11, 2018 2:37 PM

    Right, zero accountability because the S Union was influential on world institutions. Because of "imported liberalism in 365 days" many factories closed (because they were not "modern"), many good engineers became poor, families destroyed, all sorts of gangs emerged, collective property and natural resources went to oligarchs without scruples for a cheap price. And there was no bread in stores.

    All thanks to Gorbachev who was in power almost 17 years, a long period in which he succumbed to the sweet-talk of Reagan and Thatcher.

    VeeNarian (Yerevan) , January 11, 2018 3:16 PM

    Having lived through the incredible 90s and the end of the Soviet Union, I believe that it was not wrong for Gorbachev to seek partnership with the West. That move brought all of mankind back from the precipice of total extinction. It was the LYING and deceitful actions of the "superior and civilized" West that betrayed the world and their own interests, just to expand their territory and control, like some mindless plague that knows no morality.

    There must be balance in world affairs. Power corrupts and absolute power has corrupted the US/EU/NATO gang absolutely. The West's loss is the worlds gain. Russia will lead the free nations away from the rotten and putrid fate offered by the death merchants of the West.

    AM Hants VeeNarian (Yerevan) , January 11, 2018 4:50 PM

    I remember those times, but, it was 'Spitting Image' that made the memories. The thought of John Major, still makes my skin crawl.

    Nuclear War...

    Play Hide
    Krestovan VeeNarian (Yerevan) , January 11, 2018 10:23 PM

    Russia cannot seem to be able to lead itself from the cluches of the ooligarks who out send capital Russia desparately needs. If and when Russia cleans up the mess that Gorby, Gelsman, and others made, there will not be any free nations or any hope for peace and freedom in this late stage of mankind's probationary time.

    Gerry Hiles , January 11, 2018 1:05 PM

    No wonder we are in deep trouble! How shall I say? Well Stephen Cohen is too pedestrian, to put it mildly. There is nothing I have ever heard him say that I did not know years ago. Wow the NYT and WaPo both publish fake news and omit what isn't convenient ideologically. Go suck eggs granny. Even if large numbers of people in the US now listen to him (which I very much doubt), he's too late by decades and will probably never catch up with the fact that 9/11 was an inside job/CIA/Mossad operation. As for Gorbachev, Yeltsin, US deception, etc., he could have asked me a thing or six back in the 80s when Gorbachev was best buddies with Reagan and Thatcher, it was bleedin' obvious that he was a dupe, though at first I was hopeful for glasnost and perestroika.

    Not that I didn't have hopes for the Soviet Union anyway, nor that I didn't understand hanging on to Eastern Europe for too long, because of US betrayal after WW2 ... heck Prof Cohen, since when hasn't Russia been betrayed?. Too late for all those who either couldn't or wouldn't be informed decades ago. Too late for there to be any chance of averting escalation to WW3, unless by more or less luck, such as the US internally imploding like the Soviet Union did but, unlike the Soviet Union's collapse by US design, collapse of its own hubris and Empire over-reach, perhaps. Academics generally do not impress me.
    .
    Sorry if I have condensed too much, but I daresay some will know what I'm getting at.

    John McClain , January 11, 2018 12:01 PM

    As a "well informed American", a retired Marine, and having spent some two decades in research of our "national history", as it relates to the status of the world today, I have to say, I've not deliberately read either paper since I was in third or fourth grade, and then only because we lived in Massachusetts for a couple years.

    I spent nine years in Chicago, before entering the Marines, and as a "paper boy", laughed at headlines every day, knowing the lies for what they were, and having "truth" solely because my parents subscribed me to Popular Mechanics and Popular Science, because I'm dyslexic, had problems in school, but am endowed with talent in mechanics and the hard sciences.

    Those two magazines spent their pages defining the world of mechanics, moving forward, and the world of science, advancing, and while most facts regarding "our state of our Nation" were indirect, just part of background, when a boy reads such cover to cover, every month dozens of times, for a decade and more, the bits and pieces add up and paint a picture behind the "mechanical issue or science issue", that is easily seen, looking past, and is intrinsically absolutely true, because no part was put up for the purpose of "the big picture", but the big picture naturally emerges, when sufficient bits and pieces of data accumulate, and we add them to what has long been accepted as true, tested and tried.

    Having come to understandings by multiple articles on definitive science and engineering, with background bits and pieces coalescing, simply reading headlines were nothing but amusing, and the greatest factor was wondering how adults could believe this trash.

    I began with the intent to debunk all the conspiracy theories regarding McCarthy and government, and ended up with the certainty McCarthy was right, he simply named them wrong, they were "Bolsheviks", using socialism and communism for cover, with the full intent of overthrowing our government, and they have continued to this day.

    We have become "an empire whose people follow the Emperor, even when he dances around with no clothes, never believing that boy who actually sees.
    Semper Fidelis,
    John McClain
    Vanceboro, NC, USA

    AM Hants John McClain , January 11, 2018 4:35 PM

    Well said. It is quite refreshing, as I have been upsetting a few of your neighbours over on Info Wars. The activists, who are desperate for a war with Iran, managed to leave Breit Bart for the day and flock to one of the articles. Together with those that have no idea that the US is in a bad way, economically. As I find myself being labelled a Soros paid troll. The standard of debate is quite soul destroying, until you can get somebody, who does not need personal insult to enhance their argument. Which is so liberating.

    Socrates207 , January 11, 2018 4:24 PM

    You have to be very naive to trust the American government, it is like to trust Al Capone. No wonder Putin doen's trust them one inch.

    DIRTY TEXAN , January 12, 2018 11:36 AM

    For those who know what Russians are this is no surprise. A classless herd of sheep lead by a maniacal leader. If you think ISIS or Hitler were bad you should read about Russian history and the atrocities they have perpetrated and continue today.

    AM Hants , January 12, 2018 7:40 AM

    Off topic, but, related. A few interesting articles that all merge together.

    Putin: Turkey not responsible for drone attack; Russia knows who was
    Russian President calls drone attack "provocation" aimed at causing rift between Russia and Turkey... http://theduran.com/putin-t...

    WATCH as US denies involvement in drone attack on Russian base in Syria... http://www.fort-russ.com/20...

    How does Ukraine, fit into it, bearing in mind that Ukraine is planning similar in Crimea. The same Ukraine that does so well from having the US Bio-weapons factories up and running. Not forgetting that NATO is also setting up a base in Khakov, non-NATO territory and close to the bio-weapons factories. Then you have the mother craft, found hovering around the Russian bases in Syria and her sister working so hard around Crimea.

    Remember the Pentagon begging for Russian DNA? Now what was that all about?

    Kharkov Is Forcibly Prepared For The Status of a NATO Base (remember Ukraine is a non-NATO nation)...http:// www.stalkerzone.org/kharkov ...

    US Military Bio-labs in Ukraine, Production of Bio-weapons and "Disease Causing Agents"

    In 2015, American alternative media outlet InfoWars accused the Pentagon of developing new types of biological weapons in secret military laboratories in Ukraine. The facilities were constructed under the terms of the bilateral agreement signed between the Ministry of Health of Ukraine and the Department of Defense in 2012.

    Today thirteen American military bio-labs operate in Ukraine, The International Mass Media Agency reports. They employ only American specialists being entirely funded from the budget of the Department of Defense. Local authorities have pledged not to interfere in their work. These military labs are reported to be mainly involved in the study and production of disease-causing agents of smallpox, anthrax and botulism. The facilities are located in the following Ukrainian cities: Odessa, Vinnytsia, Uzhgorod, Lviv (three), Kharkiv, Kyiv (four), Kherson, Ternopil.

    http://theinformer.life/us- ...

    Russia Says U.S. Expanding Bioweapons Labs in Europe U.S. denies claim outlined in new Russian strategy http://freebeacon.com/natio...

    AM Hants , January 11, 2018 6:02 PM

    Slightly off topic, but, another story of the West trying to upset Russia. Followed by what came next, which made me seriously laugh. The first article is well worth reading, just for the awe aspect and mega congratulations to the team. The 2nd article, just made me laugh. You gotta love those sanctions. Where there is a will there is a way.

    Russia Wins in Arctic After U.S. Fails to Kill Giant Gas Project... https://www.bloomberg.com/n...

    What comes next?

    HEY TRUMP, LOOK WHO WILL WARM UP THE EAST COAST, GAS FROM MOTHER RUSSIA TO WARM CHILLY BOSTON !... http://nrt24.ru/en/news/hey...

    View Hide
    AM Hants AM Hants , January 11, 2018 6:21 PM

    Yamal LNG and container tanks. View Hide

    Mia Williams , January 11, 2018 5:23 PM

    President Gorbachev has made clear several times that the agreement reached with the former Soviet Union regarding NATO and the reunification of Germany was specific to the East/West line through Germany. To date Germany and NATO have kept that promise.

    What are Russia's rights? Well, Moscow simply has no right to expect that her neighbors do not enjoy the sovereign right to join any alliances each may wish.

    Krestovan Mia Williams , January 11, 2018 10:36 PM

    Providing they were sovereign which they are not but under the EU control.

    observerBG Mia Williams , January 11, 2018 6:44 PM

    James Baker (and others) told Gorbachev that NATO will not expand to the East so western powers are a bunch liars, that's for sure.

    As for sovereign rights, that also depends if the organisation is willing to accept a certain country, not only if the country wants to join it. Germany and France for example blocked Ukraine and Georgia from joining NATO in 2008. Countries are also allowed to join NATO in order to contribute to its security and i'm not sure about the "gain" of taking small countries on the border of the biggest nuclear power. That increases the possibility for arms race and for war between the major powers, that's for sure.

    Also it is unclear how "sovereign" these decisions are, since lots of western money was invested in media, NGOs and political leaders and parties in Eastern Europe in order to promote pro-NATO views. US government officials bragged about "investing" 5 billion dollars in Ukraine for that purpose.

    So those countries and their politicians were basically bribed, while their population propagandised via foreign sponsored media. This has nothing to do with sovereignity, rather its about interfering in other countries affairs.

    Moreover, the US uses loopholes in international law in order to support rebels in various countries, to stage coups and to interefere in democracy and elections, with the aim of changing the politics of the target country, and even balkanising/disintegrating the target country.

    Well, if the US can do that, others can too, hence the rebels in Ukraine, who are now preventing the country from joining NATO.

    It could be much more simple. An agreement for buffer zone between NATO and Russia, so that peace and stability are secured. Or it could be "my way or the high way" mentality, which of course leads to wars and destabilisation. Which will not be a good thing in the nuclear proliferation era.

    Russia wants peace and stability. The US does not. Its entire geopolitical strategy is based on destabilising the rest of the world, so that it remains divided and mired in internal squabbles, and no strong power could arise there. In addition to fueling conflict and selling weapons to both sides while staying out of it. Divide and rule.

    The Russian (and Chinese - OBOR) strategy will be to stabilise, unite and interconnect the rest of the world, particularly Eurasia, in order to overthrow the US - the great disruptor. And as of now, they are winning.

    Mia Williams observerBG , January 11, 2018 8:29 PM

    Personally speaking, I have little choice but to go with what Presidents Gorbachev and Reagan, along with FM Shevardnadze and Secretary Baker, have said on the subject. Not moving NATO troops or equipment one step east of the East/West German line of the time was promised. This happens to fall precisely in line with what German Chancellor Schroeder has said and written as well. The context of the discussions were in the context of Germany, not the whole of Europe.

    According to President Gorbachev the collapse of the Soviet Union was not conceivable at that time. Thus, according to Mr. Gorbachev, he never participated in any discussion of Soviet States joining (or not joining) NATO.

    Lastly, I reject the popular notion in some circles that all who align themselves with Russia do so out of free will but those who align themselves with the U.S. and the West must be corrupt or coorced. I believe such ideas ring of arrogance and dismissiveness.

    observerBG Mia Williams , January 12, 2018 11:36 AM

    This is not what recent US media says on ths topic.

    "the collection shows that top officials from the U.S., Germany and the U.K. all offered assurances to Gorbachev and Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze that NATO would not expand toward the Russian borders. The documents make clear that the Western politicians meant no expansion to Eastern European countries, not just the East German territory."

    https://www.bloomberg.com/v...

    http://nationalinterest.org...

    http://beta.latimes.com/opi...

    http://www.theamericanconse...

    The context here is about NATO expansion in Eastern Europe, to the east of Germany, whether the new (former soviet) states existed or not.
    Large parts of EE were never part of the USSR.

    "Lastly, I reject the popular notion in some circles that all who align
    themselves with Russia do so out of free will but those who align
    themselves with the U.S. and the West must be corrupt or coorced. I
    believe such ideas ring of arrogance and dismissiveness."

    Thanks for the straw man, but i did not say that.

    About this, i will say several things. First, there are no bigger and more sophisticated liars than western elites. They are specialists in hiding and masking their interests behind "freedom", "democracy" and "human rights". The russians are more direct and directly talk about russian interests, economic gains, "the fate of our people in this or that country", etc.

    Second, if you look at russian foreign policy docs and statements you will notice that russians embrace multipolarity and significantly lower level of interference in other peoples affairs. Specifically, the russians do not try to impose their "system", or developmental model, or culturo-religious model on other countries. After the fall of communism, Russia no longer believes that it should impose its "model" or "system" on other countries, and it does not believe that such an attempt could work either. So Russia accepts the cultural and developmental differences and diversity in the different countries of the world, and does not try to remake it in its own image, or push for "one size fits all" models. For example Russia does not believe that its own "state capitalism" should be imposed everywhere, the way the US believes that its own neo-liberal capitalism should be imposed everywhere.

    In comparison, the West and especially the US is messianic and self-obsessed, with strong belief in its own superiority and maniacal desire to impose its own cultural and economic models on everyone else, whether they like it, or not. It thus believes that it "knows better" than anyone else, and therefore should rule the world "for its own good".

    In other words the US interferes everywhere and sees the whole world as its playground and even property, something that it can change or remake the way it sees fit. Its like someone who wants to make decisions instead of you "for your own good", which implies that everyone else is mentally inferior to the US, that the whole world is in custody of the US "parent", who knows "better" than anyone else. It becomes crazed and obsessed if its model and culture are rejected by someone, as if that fatally weakens its confidence in itself.

    In comparison, the russians are much more direct that things are about pure interests, and are also not interested in interfering at the level or scope the US does. They do not want to remake Poland, Britain, Korea or Iraq in their own image and are ok with whatever culture or economic model these people have. Russia has several military bases abroad in comparison to 700 bases for the US, and that tells you what is going on. Russia can also interfere sometimes, but for far more practical (and real) reasons, mostly in their neighbours, with the aim of ensuring its own security (anti-terrorism), or for making sure that NATO military can not be deployed en masse near its borders. There can be also some economic interference (gas disputes) or attempts to protect russian minorities abroad. But russian interference does not come close to the level of the US one, or the scope of the US one, and certainly does not include messianic dreams about remaking the whole world in its own image, and Russia definitely does not see the world as its playground. The russian embrace of multipolarity means that Russia accepts that there will be countries with vastly different cultures, economic and developmental models, even very different than the russian one, that there will be many powers, and that Russia can not impose its views on the rest of the planet.

    John Tosh , January 11, 2018 3:51 PM

    The attack on Russian airbase in Syria is a sign that the Central Intelligence Agency is sleepwalking into 3rd world war

    For the CIA's information at the start of WW3, the CIA will be nuked since everyone knows it is the brain and actor for the entire Western group of criminals.

    CIA you will be nuked. Those CIA agents who survived will be hunted down in different countries like the dogs they are. Many CIA superior officers will sell out their boses and subordinates to survive at the end there would be no more CIA. Just like the NAZIs.

    QE ornotQE John Tosh , January 12, 2018 7:38 AM

    Look up DUMBs and YouTube a guy called Phil Schneider. The elites (including the CIA) will be as safe and secure as possible in the event of a nuclear war.

    Tommy Jensen , January 11, 2018 12:05 PM

    Russia was not betrayed by USA. Russia was letting themselves willingly being betrayed, this is a big difference. The Russians were shining all over their faces, dreaming, hoping to become Europeans, and getting coca-cola, friendships, scolarships and dollars from the Americans...............LOL.
    The Russians loved to be betrayed man, you loved it man................LOL.

    Peter Paul 1950 Tommy Jensen , January 11, 2018 12:26 PM

    If you really believe your words then they just reveal that you have an underdeveloped character and lack of empathy towards your own self ... and towards others ... and an even larger deficit in history ... the uprising in Russia 1991 and tanks shooting holes in the White House in Moscow were absolutely not about becoming Europeans or the want of Coca Cola and Big Macs that were then introduced and made available thanks to Yeltsin ... a US puppet ... you love nothing Tommy ... and you are LOLing yourself in an illusion if you try making others believe anybody would love to be betrayed ...

    AM Hants Peter Paul 1950 , January 11, 2018 1:02 PM

    I have got a project for you, if interested. Andrew came up with a wonderful idea for one of your images. A pyramid, of 'yes' men/women, with their noses firmly embedded in the butts of those above them. If you fancy some artwork, public friendly and nothing that would frighten us, or get you banned, I will leave it to you.

    You can even use these characters and their friends that arrived in 2017.

    [Jan 12, 2018] How the BBC shapes the news.

    Jan 12, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    English Outsider | Jan 10, 2018 1:41:48 PM | 30

    I'm in the UK as well and now find it quite alarming how the BBC shapes the news.

    Recently on Radio 4 I listened to the BBC talking of a terrorist group related to or derived from Al Qaeda merely as "rebels", and giving the impression that their actions were part of a legitimate insurgency. That's not how 9/11 was described.

    It's all too like the BBC's Ukraine reporting, in which the neo-Nazi component was played down and the indiscriminate shelling of civilian areas in Donetsk and Lugansk spoken of as legitimate warfare.

    Crazy. And not only the PR. All those journalists and expensive editors and more admin staff than you can shake a stick at, and there's more fact to be got on some one man and a dog Russian news outlet. I heard recently of an old BBC hand describing the way the BBC changed after David Kelly. What with that and what with the material we now see put out by the BBC, I reckon that as far as foreign news goes we've got ourselves our very own Pravda on the Thames.

    [Jan 07, 2018] Seymour Hirsh has been forced to get his stories published in Europe because the US and UK media have conspired to ban his exposes of their fake news

    This article is one year old but still looks like it was written yesterday...
    Notable quotes:
    "... Some American military and intelligence officials were especially distressed by the president's determination to ignore the evidence. ..."
    "... "None of this makes any sense," one officer told colleagues upon learning of the decision to bomb. "We KNOW that there was no chemical attack ... the Russians are furious. Claiming we have the real Intel and know the truth ... I guess it didn't matter whether we elected Clinton or Trump." ..."
    "... Hersh's investigations have not only undermined evidence-free claims being promoted in the west to destabilise Assad's goverment but threatened a wider US policy seeking to "remake the Middle East". His work has challenged a political and corporate media consensus that portrays Russia's Vladimir Putin, Assad's main ally against the extremist Islamic forces fighting in Syria, as another dangerous monster the West needs to bring into line. ..."
    "... For all these reasons, Hersh has found himself increasingly friendless. The New Yorker refused to publish his Syria investigations. Instead, he had to cross the Atlantic to find a home at the prestigious but far less prominent London Review of Books. ..."
    Jun 27, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com

    RGC, June 27, 2017 at 07:27 AM

    On April 6, United States President Donald Trump authorized an early morning Tomahawk missile strike on Shayrat Air Base in central Syria in retaliation for what he said was a deadly nerve agent attack carried out by the Syrian government two days earlier in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun.

    Trump issued the order despite having been warned by the U.S. intelligence community that it had found no evidence that the Syrians had used a chemical weapon.

    The available intelligence made clear that the Syrians had targeted a jihadist meeting site on April 4 using a Russian-supplied guided bomb equipped with conventional explosives.

    Details of the attack, including information on its so-called high-value targets, had been provided by the Russians days in advance to American and allied military officials in Doha, whose mission is to coordinate all U.S., allied, Syrian and Russian Air Force operations in the region.

    Some American military and intelligence officials were especially distressed by the president's determination to ignore the evidence.

    "None of this makes any sense," one officer told colleagues upon learning of the decision to bomb. "We KNOW that there was no chemical attack ... the Russians are furious. Claiming we have the real Intel and know the truth ... I guess it didn't matter whether we elected Clinton or Trump."

    Within hours of the April 4 bombing, the world's media was saturated with photographs and videos from Khan Sheikhoun. Pictures of dead and dying victims, allegedly suffering from the symptoms of nerve gas poisoning, were uploaded to social media by local activists, including the White Helmets, a first responder group known for its close association with the Syrian opposition.
    ........................
    https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article165905578/Trump-s-Red-Line.html

    RGC -> RGC... , June 27, 2017 at 07:33 AM
    June 27, 2017

    Hersh's New Syria Revelations Buried From View

    by Jonathan Cook

    .................

    Hersh's investigations have not only undermined evidence-free claims being promoted in the west to destabilise Assad's goverment but threatened a wider US policy seeking to "remake the Middle East". His work has challenged a political and corporate media consensus that portrays Russia's Vladimir Putin, Assad's main ally against the extremist Islamic forces fighting in Syria, as another dangerous monster the West needs to bring into line.

    For all these reasons, Hersh has found himself increasingly friendless. The New Yorker refused to publish his Syria investigations. Instead, he had to cross the Atlantic to find a home at the prestigious but far less prominent London Review of Books.
    ................
    https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/06/27/hershs-new-syria-revelations-buried-from-view/

    RGC -> RGC... , June 27, 2017 at 07:37 AM
    White House Says It Will Fake "Chemical Weapon Attack" In Syria

    The White House claims that the Syrian government is preparing "chemical weapon attacks". This is clearly not the case. Syria is winning the war against the country. Any such attack would clearly be to its disadvantage.

    The White House announcement must thereby be understood as preparation for another U.S. attack on Syria in "retaliation" for an upcoming staged "chemical weapon attack" which will be blamed on the Syrian government.
    .................
    http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/06/white-house-says-it-will-fake-chemical-weapon-attacks-in-syria.html#more

    JohnH -> RGC... , June 27, 2017 at 07:38 AM
    When the going gets tough, the US fakes a chemical weapons attack...
    JohnH -> RGC... , June 27, 2017 at 07:37 AM
    Seymour Hirsh has been forced to get his stories published in Europe because the US and UK media have conspired to ban his exposes of their fake news.

    Hirsh has been a thorn in the side of the national security state ever since his expose of the My Lai massacre in 1969...and they're doing their best to shut him up.

    [Jan 07, 2018] Neoliberal MSM want to control the narrative

    "Controlling the narrative" is politically correct term for censorship.
    Notable quotes:
    "... I suspect most of the people who write all that furious invective on the Internet, professional polemicists and semiliterate commenters alike, are lashing out because they've been hurt -- their sense of fairness or decency has been outraged, or they feel personally wounded or threatened. ..."
    "... "controlling the narrative" by neoliberal MSM is the key of facilitating the neoliberal "groupthink". Much like was in the USSR with "communist" groupthink. This is a step in the direction of the theocratic society (which the USSR definitely was). ..."
    "... In other words "controlling the narrative" is the major form of neoliberal MSM "war on reality" as the neoliberal ideology is now completely discredited and can be sustained only by cult-style methods. ..."
    Jan 30, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
    libezkova -> Fred C. Dobbs... January 29, 2017 at 08:31 AM , 2017 at 08:31 AM
    Neoliberal MSM want to control the narrative.

    That's why "alternative facts" should be called an "alternative narrative".

    https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/06/09/controlling-the-narrative/?_r=0

    == quote ==

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

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

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

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

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

    libezkova -> libezkova... , January 29, 2017 at 09:24 AM
    "controlling the narrative" by neoliberal MSM is the key of facilitating the neoliberal "groupthink". Much like was in the USSR with "communist" groupthink. This is a step in the direction of the theocratic society (which the USSR definitely was).

    In other words "controlling the narrative" is the major form of neoliberal MSM "war on reality" as the neoliberal ideology is now completely discredited and can be sustained only by cult-style methods.

    They want to invoke your emotions in the necessary direction and those emotions serve as a powerful filter, a firewall which will prevents you from seeing any alternative facts which taken as whole form an "alternative narrative".

    It also creates certain taboo, such as "don't publish anything from RT", or you automatically become "Putin's stooge." But some incoherent blabbing of a crazy neocon in Boston Globe is OK.

    This is an old and a very dirty game, a variation of method used for centuries by high demand cults:

    "Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece.

    Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood.

    But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship

    Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

    – Hermann Goering (as told to Gustav Gilbert during the Nuremberg trials)

    You need to be able to decipher this "suggested" set of emotions and detach it from the set of facts provided by neoliberal MSM. It might help to view things "Sine ira et studio" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_ira_et_studio )

    That helps to destroy the official neoliberal narrative.

    Here skepticism (whether natural or acquired) can be of great help in fighting groupthink pushed by neoliberal MSM.

    We are all guilty of this one sidedness, but I think that we need to put some efforts to move in direction of higher level of skepticism toward our own views and probably provide at least links to alternative views.

    [Jan 06, 2018] Russia Says U.S. Media Will Be Banned From Parliament

    Notable quotes:
    "... Similarly, the Federation Council, the upper chamber of Russian Parliament, will ban U.S. journalists, but, due to procedural issues, the ban will be enacted later, on December 12, Igor Morozov, a member of the Federation Council's international affairs committee, told RBC. ..."
    Dec 01, 2017 | www.hollywoodreporter.com

    Reporters representing U.S. media outlets will be banned from Russian Parliament, in a response for Russia's Kremlin-funded international TV news channel RT having its Congressional press accreditation stripped earlier this week.

    A ban on attending sessions of the State Duma, the lower chamber of Russian Parliament, will be introduced "for all U.S. media," Olga Savastyanova, head of the Duma's committee on regulations and control, was quoted as saying by RBC news.

    According to Savostyanova, the measure is Russia's "reciprocal response to the U.S. Congress' decision" regarding RT. The restriction is expected to begin Dec. 6, after being formally adopted by the Duma council and a plenary meeting.

    Similarly, the Federation Council, the upper chamber of Russian Parliament, will ban U.S. journalists, but, due to procedural issues, the ban will be enacted later, on December 12, Igor Morozov, a member of the Federation Council's international affairs committee, told RBC.

    [Jan 06, 2018] Hollywood's Top Three Challenges to Doing Business in Russia in 2018

    Jan 06, 2018 | www.hollywoodreporter.com

    Many expected the election of Donald Trump as U.S. president in November 2016 to lead to improved ties between Russia and the United States. That didn't happen.

    Relations between Washington and Moscow are now at a nadir, not helped by Trump's recent speech lumping in Russia with China as "rival powers" to the U.S. and the primary threats to America's economic dominance in the world.

    For Hollywood, which has relied on Russia as a significant market for its films and TV series, 2018 is likely to bring more bad news and more challenges to doing business.

    Kremlin watchers will be focused on March 18, the date of Russia's presidential election. While the result is not in doubt -- Vladimir Putin is certain to secure another six-year term -- it is anyone's guess how far President Putin will go in his "Russia First" policies of economic nationalism.

    After the 2012 election, for example, Putin took a sharply anti-Western stance, imposing new restrictions on foreign companies working in Russia and cracking down on his country's mostly pro-Western liberal opposition. Most observers expect this trend to continue in 2018.

    The question is: How far will Putin go? Here is THR's look at three key challenges for Hollywood in Russia that will be in focus next year.

    New Taxes

    Moscow's Russia First policy -- which Russia's government calls "import substitution" -- has looked to the tax code as a way to protect the local film industry at the expense of Hollywood and other foreign imports.

    Russia backed down from a radical idea to hike the exhibition license fee for theatrical releases in the country -- the fee, which is mandatory for a theatrical release in Russia, was set to jump from 3,500 rubles ($60) to 5 million rubles ($85,000) -- but the ministry is still adamant about taxing foreign releases in one way or another.

    Culture Minister Vladimir Medinsky, an ardent Russia First advocate keen to protect homegrown films against the Hollywood invasion, is expected to lose his position in the new cabinet, but his replacement will likely be drawn from the same conservative and anti-Western contingent.

    A proposal, introduced mid-December, would implement a 3 percent tax hike on all foreign theatrical releases. Expect that to pass easily and go into law in early 2018.

    [Jan 06, 2018] Russia-gate Breeds Establishment McCarthyism by Robert Parry

    Highly recommended!
    I wish Robert Parry quick and full recovery after his minor stoke. He is a magnificent journalist !
    Notable quotes:
    "... In the past, America has witnessed "McCarthyism" from the Right and even complaints from the Right about "McCarthyism of the Left." But what we are witnessing now amid the Russia-gate frenzy is what might be called "Establishment McCarthyism, " traditional media/political powers demonizing and silencing dissent that questions mainstream narratives. ..."
    "... This extraordinary assault on civil liberties is cloaked in fright-filled stories about "Russian propaganda" and wildly exaggerated tales of the Kremlin's "hordes of Twitter bots," but its underlying goal is to enforce Washington's "groupthinks" by creating a permanent system that shuts down or marginalizes dissident opinions and labels contrary information – no matter how reasonable and well-researched – as "disputed" or "rated false" by mainstream "fact-checking" organizations like PolitiFact. ..."
    "... For instance, PolitiFact still rates as "true" Hillary Clinton's false claim that "all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies" agreed that Russia was behind the release of Democratic emails last year. Even the Times and The Associated Press belatedly ran corrections after President Obama's intelligence chiefs admitted that the assessment came from what Director of National Intelligence James Clapper called "hand-picked" analysts from only three agencies: CIA, FBI and NSA. ..."
    "... And, the larger truth was that these "hand-picked" analysts were sequestered away from other analysts even from their own agencies and produced "stove-piped intelligence," i.e., analysis that escapes the back-and-forth that should occur inside the intelligence community. ..."
    "... And this was not a stand-alone story. Previously, the Times has run favorable articles about plans to deploy aggressive algorithms to hunt down and then remove or marginalize information that the Times and other mainstream outlets deem false. ..."
    "... Congress has authorized $160 million to combat alleged Russian "propaganda and disinformation," a gilded invitation for "scholars" and "experts" to gear up "studies" that will continue to prove what is supposed to be proved – "Russia bad" – with credulous mainstream reporters eagerly gobbling up the latest "evidence" of Russian perfidy. ..."
    "... And, given the risk of thermo-nuclear war with Russia, why aren't liberals and progressives demanding at least a critical examination of what's coming from the U.S. intelligence agencies and the mainstream press? ..."
    "... So, as we have moved into this dangerous New Cold War, we are living in what could be called "Establishment McCarthyism," a hysterical but methodical strategy for silencing dissent and making sure that future mainstream groupthinks don't get challenged. ..."
    Oct 27, 2017 | ronpaulinstitute.org
    In the past, America has witnessed "McCarthyism" from the Right and even complaints from the Right about "McCarthyism of the Left." But what we are witnessing now amid the Russia-gate frenzy is what might be called "Establishment McCarthyism, " traditional media/political powers demonizing and silencing dissent that questions mainstream narratives.

    This extraordinary assault on civil liberties is cloaked in fright-filled stories about "Russian propaganda" and wildly exaggerated tales of the Kremlin's "hordes of Twitter bots," but its underlying goal is to enforce Washington's "groupthinks" by creating a permanent system that shuts down or marginalizes dissident opinions and labels contrary information – no matter how reasonable and well-researched – as "disputed" or "rated false" by mainstream "fact-checking" organizations like PolitiFact.

    It doesn't seem to matter that the paragons of this new structure – such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN and, indeed, PolitiFact – have a checkered record of getting facts straight.

    For instance, PolitiFact still rates as "true" Hillary Clinton's false claim that "all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies" agreed that Russia was behind the release of Democratic emails last year. Even the Times and The Associated Press belatedly ran corrections after President Obama's intelligence chiefs admitted that the assessment came from what Director of National Intelligence James Clapper called "hand-picked" analysts from only three agencies: CIA, FBI and NSA.

    And, the larger truth was that these "hand-picked" analysts were sequestered away from other analysts even from their own agencies and produced "stove-piped intelligence," i.e., analysis that escapes the back-and-forth that should occur inside the intelligence community.

    Even then, what these analysts published last Jan. 6 was an "assessment," which they specifically warned was "not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact." In other words, they didn't have any conclusive proof of Russian "hacking."

    Yet, the Times and other leading newspaper routinely treat these findings as flat fact or the unassailable "consensus" of the "intelligence community." Contrary information, including WikiLeaks' denials of a Russian role in supplying the emails, and contrary judgments from former senior U.S. intelligence officials are ignored.

    The Jan. 6 report also tacked on a seven-page addendum smearing the Russian television network, RT, for such offenses as sponsoring a 2012 debate among U.S. third-party presidential candidates who had been excluded from the Republican-Democratic debates. RT also was slammed for reporting on the Occupy Wall Street protests and the environmental dangers from "fracking."

    How the idea of giving Americans access to divergent political opinions and information about valid issues such as income inequality and environmental dangers constitutes threats to American "democracy" is hard to comprehend.

    However, rather than address the Jan. 6 report's admitted uncertainties about Russian "hacking" and the troubling implications of its attacks on RT, the Times and other U.S. mainstream publications treat the report as some kind of holy scripture that can't be questioned or challenged.

    Silencing RT

    For instance, on Tuesday, the Times published a front-page story entitled " YouTube Gave Russians Outlet Portal Into U.S ." that essentially cried out for the purging of RT from YouTube. The article began by holding YouTube's vice president Robert Kynci up to ridicule and opprobrium for his praising "RT for bonding with viewers by providing 'authentic' content instead of 'agendas or propaganda.'"

    The article by Daisuke Wakabayashi and Nicholas Confessore swallowed whole the Jan. 6 report's conclusion that RT is "the Kremlin's 'principal international propaganda outlet' and a key player in Russia's information warfare operations around the world." In other words, the Times portrayed Kynci as essentially a "useful idiot."

    Yet, the article doesn't actually dissect any RT article that could be labeled false or propagandistic. It simply alludes generally to news items that contained information critical of Hillary Clinton as if any negative reporting on the Democratic presidential contender – no matter how accurate or how similar to stories appearing in the U.S. press – was somehow proof of "information warfare."

    As Daniel Lazare wrote at Consortiumnews.com on Wednesday, "The web version [of the Times article] links to an RT interview with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange that ran shortly before the 2016 election. The topic is a September 2014 email obtained by Wikileaks in which Clinton acknowledges that 'the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region.'"

    In other words, the Times cited a documented and newsworthy RT story as its evidence that RT was a propaganda shop threatening American democracy and deserving ostracism if not removal from YouTube.

    A Dangerous Pattern

    Not to say that I share every news judgment of RT – or for that matter The New York Times – but there is a grave issue of press freedom when the Times essentially calls for the shutting down of access to a news organization that may highlight or report on stories that the Times and other mainstream outlets downplay or ignore.

    And this was not a stand-alone story. Previously, the Times has run favorable articles about plans to deploy aggressive algorithms to hunt down and then remove or marginalize information that the Times and other mainstream outlets deem false.

    Nor is it just the Times. Last Thanksgiving, The Washington Post ran a fawning front-page article about an anonymous group PropOrNot that had created a blacklist of 200 Internet sites, including Consortiumnews.com and other independent news sources, that were deemed guilty of dispensing "Russian propaganda," which basically amounted to our showing any skepticism toward the State Department's narratives on the crises in Syria or Ukraine.

    So, if any media outlet dares to question the U.S. government's version of events – once that storyline has been embraced by the big media – the dissidents risk being awarded the media equivalent of a yellow star and having their readership dramatically reduced by getting downgraded on search engines and punished on social media.

    Meanwhile, Congress has authorized $160 million to combat alleged Russian "propaganda and disinformation," a gilded invitation for "scholars" and "experts" to gear up "studies" that will continue to prove what is supposed to be proved – "Russia bad" – with credulous mainstream reporters eagerly gobbling up the latest "evidence" of Russian perfidy.

    There is also a more coercive element to what's going on. RT is facing demands from the Justice Department that it register as a "foreign agent" or face prosecution. Clearly, the point is to chill the journalism done by RT's American reporters, hosts and staff who now fear being stigmatized as something akin to traitors.

    You might wonder: where are the defenders of press freedom and civil liberties? Doesn't anyone in the mainstream media or national politics recognize the danger to a democracy coming from enforced groupthinks? Is American democracy so fragile that letting Americans hear "another side of the story" must be prevented?

    A Dangerous 'Cure'

    I agree that there is a limited problem with jerks who knowingly make up fake stories or who disseminate crazy conspiracy theories – and no one finds such behavior more offensive than I do. But does no one recall the lies about Iraq's WMD and other U.S. government falsehoods and deceptions over the years?

    Often, it is the few dissenters who alert the American people to the truth, even as the Times, Post, CNN and other big outlets are serving as the real propaganda agents, accepting what the "important people" say and showing little or no professional skepticism.

    And, given the risk of thermo-nuclear war with Russia, why aren't liberals and progressives demanding at least a critical examination of what's coming from the U.S. intelligence agencies and the mainstream press?

    The answer seems to be that many liberals and progressives are so blinded by their fury over Donald Trump's election that they don't care what lines are crossed to destroy or neutralize him. Plus, for some liberal entities, there's lots of money to be made.

    For instance, the American Civil Liberties Union has made its "resistance" to the Trump administration an important part of its fundraising. So, the ACLU is doing nothing to defend the rights of news organizations and journalists under attack. When I asked ACLU about the Justice Department's move against RT and other encroachments on press freedom, I was told by ACLU spokesman Thomas Dresslar: "Thanks for reaching out to us. Unfortunately, I've been informed that we do not have anyone able to speak to you about this."

    Meanwhile, the Times and other traditional "defenders of a free press" are now part of the attack machine against a free press. While much of this attitude comes from the big media's high-profile leadership of the anti-Trump Resistance and anger at any resistors to the Resistance, mainstream news outlets have chafed for years over the Internet undermining their privileged role as the gatekeepers of what Americans get to see and hear.

    For a long time, the big media has wanted an excuse to rein in the Internet and break the small news outlets that have challenged the power – and the profitability – of the Times, Post, CNN, etc. Russia-gate and Trump have become the cover for that restoration of mainstream authority.

    So, as we have moved into this dangerous New Cold War, we are living in what could be called "Establishment McCarthyism," a hysterical but methodical strategy for silencing dissent and making sure that future mainstream groupthinks don't get challenged.

    Reprinted with permission from ConsortiumNews.com .

    Related

    [Jan 06, 2018] Learning From Churchill The American Conservative

    Jan 06, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    On New Year's Eve, I took my wife to see "Darkest Hour," a new film about Winston Churchill's first weeks as British prime minister in May 1940. As a dramatization of history, it's a movie well worth the price of a ticket. But what does it signify for us today?

    The story that "Darkest Hour" recounts, replete with generous doses of Churchillian wit, eloquence, and personal eccentricities, is, of course, quite familiar. It's also nothing short of thrilling, even if you know in advance how it will turn out.

    As Churchill moves into 10 Downing Street, Nazi forces are overrunning France and Hitler seems on the verge of gaining mastery over all of Europe. The new prime minister brings to office a well-earned reputation for recklessness and unreliability. Although the situation appears desperate, he vows to continue the fight. In the eyes of cabinet colleagues, this alone demonstrates Churchill's unsuitability for national leadership. Behind the scenes, they maneuver to oust him, intending to negotiate an end to the war. Churchill himself briefly wavers. Then, bucked up by his king and some feisty Londoners encountered during an improbable ride on the Tube, he recovers his balance. In a dramatic speech, he rallies the House of Commons, thereby turning the tables on the appeasers. Britain will fight on, alone if necessary.

    When the closing credits rolled, some of my fellow moviegoers burst into applause, less, one sensed, out of appreciation for the film as an artistic achievement than because Churchill's political triumph meant that the world itself was going to be saved.

    "Darkest Hour" is the latest retelling of what has become the great secular parable of our time. Nowhere is that parable more deeply cherished than among Americans, despite the fact that the United States was a mere bystander to the events the parable recounts. (Franklin Roosevelt's role in the film is limited to a single phone conversation with Churchill; in it, FDR lamely explains that he'd like to help out, but can't -- his hands are tied).

    The parable forms the basis for the heroic Churchill routinely celebrated by American politicians and pundits, the indomitable Churchill whose stubborn refusal to accept defeat paved the way for final victory and who even today offers an enduring model for leadership.

    Of course, as is the case with other heroes who have captured the American imagination -- John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan come to mind -- the parable works best when it excludes complicating details. In Churchill's case those include, along with ample evidence of recklessness and unreliability, attitudes toward race and empire that today qualify as retrograde, to put it mildly. On military matters, Churchill was a font of ideas, but his judgment was dubious at best. No one knew this better than the senior officers who advised him and were obliged to carry out his directives. As for the victory Churchill helped engineer, it proved pyrrhic. While bringing about the destruction of the Nazi regime, it accelerated Britain's decline as a great power. As if anticipating the further consequences that awaited, Britons voted him out of power as soon as the war in Europe ended.

    Even so, the Churchill who inspired his countrymen to persist when all seemed lost is the Churchill enshrined in American memory -- the one to whom U.S. presidents are all but obliged to pay homage. Even a president as historically uninformed as Donald Trump knows the drill: install a bust of Churchill in the Oval Office and you win big points. Remove the bust, as Obama did, and you'll court trouble.

    Yet the effects of Churchill worship have long since become pernicious, in my view. Churchill was a one of a kind figure and the spring of 1940 a one of a kind moment. The qualities of greatness demanded of that moment, the ones to which movies like "Darkest Hour" pay tribute, are not the qualities that the United States requires today. The present-day international order bears essentially no resemblance to the one that existed when Churchill became prime minister.

    Hitler was the embodiment of pure evil. To his great credit, Churchill was among the first to recognize the danger he posed. Yet our endless fixation on the former and our boundless admiration for the latter testify to an impoverished historical imagination that ill-serves the United States today.

    The comparison is imperfect, but our situation more closely compares to that which existed in Europe during the summer of 1914. Then a) a changing configuration of great powers made more worrisome by b) smaller states given to irresponsibility and c) further exacerbated by looming ideological ferment posed an immediate threat to global stability. Today a) is represented by a rising China, a resentful Russia, and an overextended United States; b) by North Korea, Pakistan, Israel, and (take your pick) Saudi Arabia or Iran; and c) by Islamist jihadism. Further compounding the danger are two factors that did not exist in 1914, namely nuclear weapons and climate change.

    Instead of deflecting these dangers, Churchill, who in 1914 was the minister responsible for the Royal Navy, behaved in a thoroughly Churchillian manner. In doing so, he thereby hastened Europe's march toward a catastrophic and unnecessary war. There lies another parable on which we might reflect and from which we have much to learn.

    Americans should honor Churchill for what he did in 1940. Yet perhaps it's time to expand our store of parables. We might begin by installing a bust of Gandhi or Mandela or Pope Francis in the Oval Office.

    Andrew Bacevich is TAC 's writer-at-large.

    b. January 4, 2018 at 10:31 pm

    It is interesting to see that Stalin and the Soviet Union during their "darkest years" never appear to be part of the common "How The WW2 Was Won" narrative.

    Twenty million dead, vs. half a million each for US and UK – for Europe and Pacific combined. China, possibly another fifteen to twenty million dead.

    How relevant was Churchill?

    How relevant, ultimately, the UK?

    The distorted narratives of WW2 – or, for example, the Korean War – go a long way to explaining why Americans do not consider themselves "well understood."

    Maybe "they" hate us for our BS?

    Daniel (not Larrison) , says: January 4, 2018 at 10:42 pm
    Another pernicious aspect of Churchill worship is the usual silence about his role in the Indian Famine during WW II.

    Churchill was a great man, and thank God he was there to stand up to Hitler. But if it wasn't for Hitler, Churchill's own failing would have ensured a memory of infamy rather than glory.

    http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2031992,00.html

    Fran Macadam , says: January 5, 2018 at 2:46 am
    Glad you pointed out Churchill's own culpability in events and decisions decades earlier that inevitably contributed to the crisis that he was then ironically called upon to address – and which, ultimately, have not yet been solved and may do us all in yet.

    Churchill intended that history be kind to him, for he intended to write it – and he did.

    I recommend as an antidote to his selfie hagiography, Nicholson Baker's "Human Smoke".

    Nate J , says: January 5, 2018 at 3:09 am
    Blaming Churchill for Britain's entrance into WWI strikes me as supremely unfair, "hindsight is 20/20" cherry-picking.

    At the time, the question facing Britain was whether or not its commitment to allies meant anything in light of the invasion of Belgium. This is no small thing. If the fruits of your international diplomacy and foreign policy aren't worth the paper they're printed on, what's the point?

    The secondary issue at play was the balance of power on the European mainland. Perhaps this seems like a silly concern to our modern sensibilities, untouched by war between major powers, but this would have been a serious concern in the late 19th/early 20th century. An ascendent Germany facing virtually no mainland rivals would have been bad news for Britain. *Any* single entity gaining that much power in Europe would have been bad for Britain. This had basically been the crux of their foreign policy for ages.

    Nobody knew that the Great War would devolve into such an inhumane stalemate. That being said, of it hadn't been WWI, it would have been some other war. Europe was destined to have a conflict like that with old world tactics meeting industrial weapons. Something had to be first, and it just so happened in 1914.

    MEOW , says: January 5, 2018 at 3:33 am
    Sorry team. I am no Churchill fan. Chamberlain did get England a breathing space (Munich) that they used to their advantage to outproduce Germany in fighter aircraft. Chamberlain declared war on Germany (Poland 1939) and led Britain through the first 8 months of WW2. I believe it was the Norwegian debacle that got him dumped. Churchill was PM when the Japanese captured large numbers of Commonwealth soldiers holed up in static and indefensible Asian fortresses (Singapore and Hong Kong). Hollywood and mainstream media have a solid reputation for rewriting history through their own tinted glasses. Please be careful. Yes! Churchill did cause the mobilization of the British fleet (Plan 7) in August 1914 and helped initiate the domino effect known as the "Guns of August" and voila WW1 (25 million dead. His debacle in Galipolli is difficult to overlook. He certainly was brave and audacious. There should be footnotes.
    EliteCommInc. , says: January 5, 2018 at 5:15 am
    Since I am a fan of Churchill, and intend to see this film, Stopped reading after the first paragraph.

    I prefer to enter the theater untainted.

    connecticut farmer , says: January 5, 2018 at 8:23 am
    And it should be recalled that while serving as First Lord of the Admiralty during The Great War it was Churchill who was one of the chief architects of the disastrous Gallipoli Campaign. As a statesman and politician Churchill had no peer, but as a military strategist he left a great deal to be desired.
    Youknowho , says: January 5, 2018 at 8:26 am
    Well, the Irish have a lot to say about Churchill.

    None of it flattering.

    David Nash , says: January 5, 2018 at 9:09 am
    There you go, Mister B. Calling for nuanced thinking. How un-Right.
    Today's mentality is entirely black and white, regardless of which end of the obsolete "political spectrum" one happens to currently occupy.
    I expect the vociferous savaging to begin shortly.
    Egypt Steve , says: January 5, 2018 at 9:28 am
    OK, Churchill was a hero who saved Britain, and he was, apparently, exactly the right man in exactly the right place at exactly the right time. But let's not forget that in 1940, he presided over a government that ruled over more people against their will than did Hitler's. Just sayin.
    JT , USA , says: January 5, 2018 at 9:34 am
    To say nothing of the great man's genocide by firebombing on defenseless German women and children.
    Michael Kenny , says: January 5, 2018 at 10:57 am
    The parallels with 1914 are certainly there but I don't see how Churchill "hastened Europe's march toward a catastrophic and unnecessary war". Britain was the last of the European great powers to enter the war and it wasn't clear until the very last minute that it would enter it. The event which precipitated British entry was the invasion of Belgium and Luxembourg. Churchill had no influence on the decision, one way or the other. The author is simply engaging in the, to us Europeans at least, odd and amusing practice of twisting European history to create a pseudo-historical parable designed to support his present-day American political agenda. What Churchill did do was to warn Britain and the world, in the middle 1930s, that, sooner or later, there would have to be war with Hitler and that they should be prepared for it. Nobody listened to him, which is why there was a "darkest hour" in the first place. That has been hyped in the US into the wholly false proposition that Churchill urged a preventive strike against Hitler, which he didn't. He simply believed that, as long as Hitler was being allowed to get away with it, he would continue his attempts to restore Germany's pre-1914 glory and recover much of the territory lost by both Germany and Austria in 1918. That would inevitably lead him to cross a red line at some point that the other European powers could not accept and military force would have to be used against him.
    peter , says: January 5, 2018 at 11:22 am
    Churchill's entire career reflects his essence: he was one of the greatest British imperialists. He certainly remains the best know.
    From his start in the military until his retirement, Churchill was fully committed to the British Empire.
    His speeches and his wit were great. Standing up to Nazi Germany's brutal imperialism at a time when Hitler was winning everywhere was great.
    But, at the end, while – due to skilled alliances – the British Empire won WW I and WW II, the empire was lost.
    And, in the process, Britain also lost her wealth and – worse – her industrial might.
    peter , says: January 5, 2018 at 11:27 am
    Churchill's entire career reflects his essence: he was one of the greatest British imperialists. He certainly remains the best know.
    From his start in the military until his retirement, Churchill was fully committed to the British Empire.
    His speeches and his wit were great. Standing up to Nazi Germany's brutal imperialism at a time when Hitler was winning everywhere was great.
    But, at the end, while – due to skilled alliances – the British Empire won WW I and WW II, the empire was lost.
    And, in the process, Britain also lost her wealth and – worse – her industrial might.
    And Churchill's devotion to the Empire was at the core of creating this outcome.
    Sally Stewart , says: January 5, 2018 at 11:31 am
    "Remove the bust, as Obama did" -- there it goes again, sheesh: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2012/07/27/fact-check-bust-winston-churchill
    Jonananathan , says: January 5, 2018 at 11:38 am
    "How relevant, ultimately, the UK?"

    Quite a lot of German civilians were killed by our bombs from 1942-5. That's an awful toll of irrelevance.

    Jonananathan , says: January 5, 2018 at 11:41 am
    "And it should be recalled that while serving as First Lord of the Admiralty during The Great War it was Churchill who was one of the chief architects of the disastrous Gallipoli Campaign. As a statesman and politician Churchill had no peer, but as a military strategist he left a great deal to be desired."

    One of the soldiers who fought at Gallipoli was Clement Attlee, later leader of the Labour Party and member of Churchill's War Cabinet.

    Apparently Attlee told Churchill himself that he felt he was unfairly blamed for the failures of the campaign. In any case Winston did spend some time away from high politics after that episode.

    Jonananathan , says: January 5, 2018 at 11:46 am
    The party line amongst young college leftists these days is "Stalin won USSR, Britain and America were irrelevant". They never stop to wonder if the USSR would have done so well if it had no possibility of other fronts emerging, or of receiving any war material from the US. There's also the problem that defeated Britain and her Empire would have been required to support Germany's war production, as happened to France. Access to middle-eastern oil would also have been useful to Adolf.

    So it's entirely illiterate and naive to assume history would run on the same track if the balance of material forces were shifted significantly. The fact that young "Marxists" don't grasp that is another reason for not paying them any attention.

    David Smith , says: January 5, 2018 at 12:09 pm
    A couple of points. Yes, the Gallipoli campaign was a disaster from the Allied point of view, but it was one of the few original ideas anybody had in that war. It actually might have worked if some things had gone differently.

    We always treat WW II as the standard to judge everything against, but it was very much the exception to all our other wars. And of course it would never have happened without WW I.

    Youknowho , says: January 5, 2018 at 12:36 pm
    @Jonananathan

    The point about the war won by Russia was made by Alexander Groth in his "Democracies against Hitler".

    He agrees that the support that the US gave Russia was marginal in the victory, but as he says "Wars are won or lost in the margins. When you need $200.00, $180.00 will not do"

    So it is more than campus leftists who assert it.

    Christian Chuba , says: January 5, 2018 at 1:17 pm
    @Nate

    "An ascendent Germany facing virtually no mainland rivals would have been bad news for Britain. *Any* single entity gaining that much power in Europe would have been bad for Britain."

    Bingo. Now are there any countries today who have this same mentality, who view other up and coming countries as 'revisionist' and revanchist powers that must be boot stomped?
    Despite our WW2 obsession, there are definitely more parallels to WW1 today. It's the problem you are not watching out for that kills you.

    Did Churchill cause WW2?
    If Churchill was such a sage that he understood the Hitler threat than why didn't he encourage the U.K. to reach out to the Soviets before Munich? A. They were obsessed w/toppling the Soviets. The oft maligned non-aggression pact was signed on the eve of the war after Stalin observed the Munich sell out and even after he tried to reach out to Britain / France.

    Oddly enough, had the U.K. totally washed their hands of Europe, that might have goaded the Poles to reluctantly forme an alliance with the Soviets. As it was the straddling the fence approach, was the worst of all worlds, not strong enough to dissuade Hitler and not decisive enough for other countries to make adjustments.

    peter , says: January 5, 2018 at 1:19 pm
    The official line for justifying the entry of Great Britain into WW I was that Germany violated Belgian neutrality.
    100 years later, it seems that the "Marxist" explanation is valid:
    Great Britain entered the war to protect her empire.
    As a side note, it seems that only Czarist Russia (Nicolas II) entered the war with idealistic intentions: to protect the Serbian little brothers against a larger enemy.
    During WW I, as First Lord of Admiralty, Churchill gave the instruction to install hidden cannons on merchant ships,. When a German U-boat surfaced to inspect the merchant ship, the canon was used to sink the U-boat.
    The strategy worked because Imperial Germany started to torpedo merchant ships without inspecting them. This brought into the war the USA which tilted the balance to a German defeat.
    And then the world had Versailles. And then we had Hitler.
    There are certainly more factors, but – regarding Churchill – he was totally devoted to the British Empire.
    When speaking about Churchill, we should look at hard facts: his goals, his actions and his long term achievements.
    His speeches were great.
    But the British empire is gone, and most of its wealth.
    Should I mention the tens of millions of lives lost in both wars?
    Ted , says: January 5, 2018 at 1:21 pm
    "Hitler was the embodiment of pure evil."

    It's shocking to see somebody as intelligent as Bacevich employing such sloppy language. John Lukacs, referring to La Rochefoucauld (who maxims drew from Nature) says that Hitler is one of those figures who would have been a lot less dangerous if they had no good in them. Lukacs cites Hitler's brains, his courage and his loyalty. "Embodiment of pure evil" gets us nowhere, and is just the other side of Churchillolatry, of which Lukacs himself cannot be absolved.

    Christian Chuba , says: January 5, 2018 at 1:25 pm
    "@Jonananathan
    The party line amongst young college leftists "

    Yep, anything other than Dunkirk and D-Day won the war makes one a young college leftist, I'd love to be the first.

    Without the U.S. and U.K. the Soviets would have had a very difficult time defeating Germany and would have suffered more losses but it would not be totally out of the question. Without the Soviet Union there is no possibility that the U.S. and U.K. could have set foot in mainland Europe.

    Mark Thomason , says: January 5, 2018 at 1:29 pm
    "attitudes toward race and empire that today qualify as retrograde"

    It is commonly ignored that FDR opposed Churchill's ideas on empire, and very deliberately sought to undermine and end empire as a system, including for Britain. That was another part of the Open Door policy more commonly mentioned as against Japan. Churchill's Pyrrhic victory was FDR's actual victory in that contest between the allies over the future of empire as a system.

    Also commonly ignored is that FDR was a believer in the US Navy's view of the causes of war. That saw Britain based on Mahan's views on the causes of war and long term conflict arising from economic rivalry. The USN before WW2 seriously thought that the economic rivalry with the British Empire would result in war, unless other factors intervened first, and FDR believed that too. The economic behavior of the US was consistent with FDR's determination to win the economic struggle against the British Empire at the same time as the US side won the war. That is certainly what happened. Again, Churchill's Pyrrhic victory was FDR's actual victory.

    Post war, our special relationship included simply not seeing any of that. There was no academic reward in pointing it out.

    Jeeves , says: January 5, 2018 at 3:17 pm
    b) by North Korea, Pakistan, Israel, and (take your pick) Saudi Arabia or Iran

    (b), in this analysis, being one of those little countries that behave irresponsibly. Or, as one of them has been called, "that sh*tty little country." Perhaps it's a matter of scale for you, Mr. B, but I fail to see how Israel should be put in the same company as, say, Iran. Or do you regard them both as theocracies?

    Being a contrarian about Churchill, calling him a reactionary or worse, and saying his appeal today is anachronistic, may impress the wife you "took" to see the movie. But whether or not Churchill is the "appropriate" hero to worship, heroes will always be needed; and who can blame us for a little Churchill nostalgia in the Age of Trump.

    david , says: January 5, 2018 at 3:46 pm
    We should not forget his actions after WWI. The story is that he drew the map of modern day Iraq after having too much to drink which makes sense when you consider he decided to put shias/sunnis/Kurds in the same country a decision that has caused endless problems and cost countless lives. His anger at the legally elected prime minister of Iran Mossedegh who insisted that British Oil actually pay royalties on the oil they were taking out of the country along with the decision to overthrow him, something that Eisenhower went along with using street thugs to install the shah in his place (Dulles airport really needs to be renamed) a decision we're still paying for was not his finest hour either. These things along with his horrible handling of the Bengal famine ("is Gandhi dead yet?") which resulted in three million mostly unnecessary deaths just has you shaking your head when he's described by so many as the greatest man of century. Far from it.
    ADM64 , says: January 5, 2018 at 4:35 pm
    Churchill, like other great men, had his faults and failures as well as his strength. Anyone, however, who thinks that the free nations of the West caused WWI, that Hitler would somehow have left us alone without Churchill insisting on fighting him, that there was anything wrong with carpet bombing Germany (or Japan), that Stalin – who collaborate with Hitler right up until the latter turned on him – would have survived WWII without Allied (US/UK) help, and that Britain's loss of empire was Churchill's fault, is a moron, plain and simple. It says much about the paleo-Conservative mindset that, in the end, for all their harrumphing, they end up with the same blame America, blame Britain, blame the West narrative as the progressive left.

    Sometimes you can ignore the world. Sometimes you can't. Learn to know which. Absent Churchill we'd be speaking German.

    Grumpy Old Man , says: January 5, 2018 at 4:42 pm
    Giving guarantees they could not make good to a rather disreputable Polish government (that had helped dismember Czechoslovakia, among other things), was rather reckless.

    From pusillanimity to recklessness in one jump.

    Youknowho , says: January 5, 2018 at 6:35 pm
    Then there was his pettiness in not allowing the body of Roger Casement to be sent to Ireland. His successor had no problem with it, and the Irish gave him a hero's funeral.
    TomTomko , says: January 5, 2018 at 7:09 pm
    What about Churchill's role in Operation Keelhaul? That was the most horrible and unforgiveable tragedy of WWII. Of course, Churchill was one of the three culprits involved. The other two were FDR and Eisenhower who was responsible for implementing it.

    TTT

    Lloyd A. Conway , says: January 5, 2018 at 7:18 pm
    I have always been a Churchill admirer, but I have come to understand that he was made for one moment – May, 1940 – and it was, along with the run-up when he played prophet in the wilderness 'While England Slept,' as his book of that title put it, his one great success. In sports, he'd have been Bucky Dent the utility infielder who comes up with the big homers to carry his team to triumph. That the Almighty can fashion temporal salvation from such stuff should make us all humble.

    As a charter subscriber, I might feel more comfortable with a bust of JFK alongside Churchill's, if even half of what I read in 'JFK and the Unspeakable' is true about his turn toward peace. Asoka, Constantine XI and Gregory the Great would make good company for them both.

    [Jan 05, 2018] Kissinger reportedly working on a deal with Russia: Crimea for East Ukraine.

    Jan 05, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Kissinger reportedly working on a deal with Russia: Crimea for East Ukraine.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/henry-kissinger-russia-trump-crimea-advises-latest-ukraine-a7497646.html

    You think Russia loses the E. Ukraine as a buffer.

    [Jan 05, 2018] The Washington Post rather surprised me when I came across this recent article: There's still little evidence that Russia's 2016 social media efforts did much of anything

    Jan 05, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    blowback, 04 January 2018 at 05:10 PM

    The Washington Post rather surprised me when I came across this recent article:

    There's still little evidence that Russia's 2016 social media efforts did much of anything

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/12/28/theres-still-little-evidence-that-russias-2016-social-media-efforts-did-much-of-anything/?utm_term=.7760dfd315bd

    Some in the comments section have difficulty believing the story.

    [Jan 03, 2018] When Putin Talks on Ukraine, It Is Worth Listening

    Notable quotes:
    "... Originally from: ..."
    "... Ukraine. Putin's remarks on the state of affairs in Ukraine are, of course, wholly at odds with what Washington puts out on the subject. But they are not at odds with reality: Washington is. ..."
    "... Those terms remain Putin's point of reference. They appear to remain the European Union's, too. Washington, which the Europeans and Russia excluded from the Minsk talks for the wisest of reasons, does not seem to have a point of reference, busy as it is pretending there is progress on the corruption front and that Kiev is not dependent on a frightening collection of militias, many of them led by neo–Nazi fanatics. ..."
    "... These groups still present the threat of a massacre in the eastern provinces, as Putin reminded his audience. He spoke with notable ease of Russian assistance in those regions, suggesting this can end when they are capable of self-defense. ..."
    Jan 03, 2018 | russia-insider.com
    Originally from: When Putin Talks, It Is Worth Listening

    Ukraine. Putin's remarks on the state of affairs in Ukraine are, of course, wholly at odds with what Washington puts out on the subject. But they are not at odds with reality: Washington is. As Putin calmly noted, the number-one obstacle to a settlement in Ukraine is, as it has been for three years come next February, the profoundly corrupt government installed in Kiev after the American-cultivated coup in 2014.

    I say three years next February because it was then the settlement framework known as Minsk II (for the city where it was negotiated and signed) was put in place.

    Those terms remain Putin's point of reference. They appear to remain the European Union's, too. Washington, which the Europeans and Russia excluded from the Minsk talks for the wisest of reasons, does not seem to have a point of reference, busy as it is pretending there is progress on the corruption front and that Kiev is not dependent on a frightening collection of militias, many of them led by neo–Nazi fanatics.

    These groups still present the threat of a massacre in the eastern provinces, as Putin reminded his audience. He spoke with notable ease of Russian assistance in those regions, suggesting this can end when they are capable of self-defense.

    We would do well to understand where the force of inertia lies in Ukraine. This was Putin's topic. A settlement in Ukraine remains possible via the framework fixed three years ago. Let us not forget this. Moscow has not deviated from Minsk II -- another point worth noting. The spoilers are in Kiev, and behind them are those in Washington, which continues to encourage the irresponsible behavior of the Poroshenko government and other Ukrainian elites.

    [Jan 03, 2018] Is fracking gas production in the USA is sustainable, or this is yet another "subprime" bubble?

    Jan 03, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    likbez , January 3, 2018 at 5:10 pm

    Are companies which produce it profitable or they survive by generating a parallel stream of junk bonds and evergreen loans?

    Most of them are also shale oil producers and might well depend on revenue from shale oil to produce gas. Shale oil proved to unsustainable at prices below, say $65-$75 per barrel or even higher, excluding few "sweet spots". Also a lot of liquids the shale well produce are "subprime oil" that refiners shun.

    They are not only much lighter but also they have fewer hydrocarbons necessary for producing kerosene and diesel fuel. Mixing it with heavy oil proved to be double edged sword and still inferior to "natural" oil. So right now the USA imports "quality" oil and sells its own" subprime oil" at discount to refineries that are capable of dealing with such a mix. Say, buying a barrel for $60 and selling a barrel of "subprime oil" at $30.

    And without revenue from oil and liquids it can well be that natural gas production might be uneconomical.

    I wonder what percentage of the total US oil production now is subprime oil.

    Modern multistage shale well now cost around $7-10 million. And that's only beginning as its exploitation also costs money (fuel, maintenance, pumping back highly salinated and often toxic water the well produces, etc). So neither oil nor gas from such wells can be very cheap.

    Generally such a well is highly productive only the first couple of years. After that you need to drill more.

    Also there is a damage to environment including such dangerous thing as pollution of drinking water in the area,

    [Jan 03, 2018] I think the only appetite for US LNG comes from the more anti-Russian eastern European countries such as Poland, which hates dependency on Russian gas.

    Jan 03, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    PlutoniumKun , January 3, 2018 at 9:39 am

    From what I can tell, in Europe there was a policy of encouraging LNG terminals in order to provide leverage against Russian supply. But there seems to have been a significant slowdown in construction – quite simply, LNG is too expensive relative to Russian and domestic (Norwegian, Dutch, UK, Mediteranean) supplies. It makes much more sense for Europe to broaden out its pipeline network. So I think the only appetite for US LNG comes from the more anti-Russian eastern European countries such as Poland, which hates dependency on Russian gas.

    likbez , January 3, 2018 at 5:19 pm
    Poland would suffer without revenue from pipelines that transport Russian natural gas to Western Europe. That's why they adamantly oppose North Stream II.

    Not as much as Ukraine, for which it might mean the economic collapse, but still.

    [Jan 03, 2018] Momentous Change in US Natural Gas, with Global Impact

    Notable quotes:
    "... By Wolf Richter, a San Francisco based executive, entrepreneur, start up specialist, and author, with extensive international work experience. Originally published at Wolf Street ..."
    "... Exports to Mexico via pipeline have been rising for years as more pipelines have entered service and as Mexican power generators are switching from burning oil that could be sold in the global markets to burning cheap US natural gas. The US imports no natural gas from Mexico. ..."
    "... This is just the Sabine Pass export terminal. In addition, there are five other LNG export terminals under construction, according to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), with a combined capacity of 7.5 Bcf/d. This brings total LNG export capacity to over 11 Bcf/d over the next few years and will make the US the third largest LNG exporter globally, behind Australia and Qatar. ..."
    "... According to the Institute of Energy Research, global LNG demand is currently around 37 Bcf per day. This is expected to grow substantially as China is shifting part of its power generation capacity from coal to natural gas. And US LNG exports to China have surged from nothing two years ago to 25.6 billion cubic feet in October (for the month, not per day): ..."
    "... US natural gas production has been booming since 2009 as fracking in prolific shale plays took off, and the price has collapsed – it currently is below $3 per million British thermal units (mmBtu) at the NYMEX, despite tthe majestic cold wave that is gripping a big part of the country. ..."
    "... This caused some immense price differences between the US market -- where a gas "glut" crushed prices, pushing them from time to time even below $2/mmBtu -- and, for example, the Japanese LNG import market, with prices that were in the $16-$17/mmBtu range in 2013 and 2014. Even the average spot price contracted in November 2017, the most recent data made available by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry , was $9/mmBtu. US LNG exporters hope to arbitrage these price differentials. ..."
    "... Meanwhile, US producers are hoping that this overseas demand will mop up the glut in the US and allow them to finally boost prices, including the prices LNG exporters pay. But funding continues pouring into the oil and gas sector to pump up production, and prices have remained low, and drillers continue to bleed. ..."
    "... Poland may have one built but think about this – the Ukraine may be happy to pay for American coal which is twice as expensive as what they could buy from the Donbass regions but will Europe be happy to pay double or more for LNG from the US just to spite the Russians? ..."
    Jan 03, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    By Wolf Richter, a San Francisco based executive, entrepreneur, start up specialist, and author, with extensive international work experience. Originally published at Wolf Street

    Even China is Buying U.S. LNG

    In 2017, the US became a net exporter of natural gas for the first time. It started small in February, when the US exported 1 billion cubic feet more than it imported. By October, the last month for which data from the Energy Department's EIA is available, net exports surged to 45 billion cubic feet. For the first 10 months of 2017, the US exported 86 billion cubic feet more than it imported. And this is just the beginning.

    Exports to Mexico via pipeline have been rising for years as more pipelines have entered service and as Mexican power generators are switching from burning oil that could be sold in the global markets to burning cheap US natural gas. The US imports no natural gas from Mexico.

    Imports from and exports to Canada have both declined since 2007, with the US continuing to import more natural gas from Canada than it exports to Canada.

    What is new is the surging export of liquefied natural gas (LNG) by sea to other parts of the world.

    This chart shows net imports (imports minus exports) of US natural gas. Negative "net imports" (red) mean that the US exports more than it imports:

    The first major LNG export terminal in the Lower 48 – Cheniere Energy's Sabine Pass terminal in Cameron Parish, Louisiana – began commercial deliveries in early 2016 when the liquefaction unit "Train 1" entered service. Trains 2 and 3 followed. The three trains have a capacity of just over 2 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d). In October 2017, the company announced that Train 4, with a capacity of 0.7 Bcf/d, was substantially completed and is likely to begin commercial deliveries in March 2018. Train 5 is under construction and is expected to be completed in August 2019. The company is now lining up contracts and financing for Train 6. All six trains combined will have a capacity of 4.2 Bcf/d.

    This is just the Sabine Pass export terminal. In addition, there are five other LNG export terminals under construction, according to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), with a combined capacity of 7.5 Bcf/d. This brings total LNG export capacity to over 11 Bcf/d over the next few years and will make the US the third largest LNG exporter globally, behind Australia and Qatar.

    In addition, there are several other export terminals that FERC has approved but construction has not yet started. And other projects are in the works but have not yet been approved.

    According to the Institute of Energy Research, global LNG demand is currently around 37 Bcf per day. This is expected to grow substantially as China is shifting part of its power generation capacity from coal to natural gas. And US LNG exports to China have surged from nothing two years ago to 25.6 billion cubic feet in October (for the month, not per day):

    US natural gas production has been booming since 2009 as fracking in prolific shale plays took off, and the price has collapsed – it currently is below $3 per million British thermal units (mmBtu) at the NYMEX, despite tthe majestic cold wave that is gripping a big part of the country.

    Exporting large quantities of LNG is a momentous shift for the US because it connects previously landlocked US production to the rest of the world. Unlike oil, the US natural gas market has largely been isolated from global pricing.

    This caused some immense price differences between the US market -- where a gas "glut" crushed prices, pushing them from time to time even below $2/mmBtu -- and, for example, the Japanese LNG import market, with prices that were in the $16-$17/mmBtu range in 2013 and 2014. Even the average spot price contracted in November 2017, the most recent data made available by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry , was $9/mmBtu. US LNG exporters hope to arbitrage these price differentials.

    Meanwhile, US producers are hoping that this overseas demand will mop up the glut in the US and allow them to finally boost prices, including the prices LNG exporters pay. But funding continues pouring into the oil and gas sector to pump up production, and prices have remained low, and drillers continue to bleed.

    And there are already global consequences – including in Europe, where large regions, including Germany, increasingly depend on natural gas from Russia as production in Europe is declining. The new competition from the US – though it really hasn't started in earnest yet since most of US LNG goes to places other than Europe at the moment – is already reverberating through the Europe-Russia natural gas trade.

    Read Russia's grip on European gas markets is tightening

    The Rev Kev , January 3, 2018 at 8:48 am

    The first major LNG export terminal in the Lower 48 began commercial deliveries in early 2016

    Hmmm, is this a case of build it and they will come? Somebody has to sink the capital in to build a fleet of LNG containers which will take a decade to come online. Somebody also has the build the LNG terminals as well as the infrastructure to go along with it.

    Poland may have one built but think about this – the Ukraine may be happy to pay for American coal which is twice as expensive as what they could buy from the Donbass regions but will Europe be happy to pay double or more for LNG from the US just to spite the Russians?

    Consider this as well. That LNG terminal is in Louisiana. Which is in the Gulf. Which has all those annual hurricanes. Which is getting worse through climate change. Would the Europeans want to risk depending on American deliveries under these conditions? I will reword that.

    Will the Europeans want to risk their economies over this? Last year they shut down the place for a month for repairs. What if Hurricane Harvey had slammed into the place. How will the Europeans be able to trust that a future Trump doesn't shut down LNG deliveries in winter time to get them to commit to some American policy? Too many variables with no net gain and all loss – on their part.

    rjs , January 3, 2018 at 8:51 am

    they started a buildout of the container ship fleet a half dozen years ago..

    [Jan 02, 2018] Haley and the Trump Administration's Contempt for Diplomacy

    Notable quotes:
    "... Haley's remarks are consistent with the Trump administration's hopeless North Korea policy. She is insisting that North Korea do something it has said it will never do, and she says that it will have to do this before the U.S. begins to "take seriously" any negotiations North Korea enters into. Setting preconditions for talks is bad enough, but here Haley is setting absurd, deal-breaking preconditions that even she has to know will never be accepted. ..."
    "... Certainly she is looking down the road, when she knows she will need the moneyed interests of those groups who support using the American military to further their goals.. She has the cover of being the thug without the responsibility of using force.. ..."
    "... I know I'm a broken record on this, but is there really no one left in the realm of American foreign policy who understands the saying, "Diplomacy is the art of letting someone else have your way"? ..."
    Jan 02, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    Our ambassador to the U.N. doesn't understand anything about diplomacy:

    Nikki Haley on reports South Korea is proposing talks with North Korea: "We will not take any of the talk seriously if they don't do something to ban all nuclear weapons in North Korea." https://t.co/RaGT9E3dRt pic.twitter.com/pVyCc9VxzD

    -- CBS News (@CBSNews) January 2, 2018

    Haley's remarks are consistent with the Trump administration's hopeless North Korea policy. She is insisting that North Korea do something it has said it will never do, and she says that it will have to do this before the U.S. begins to "take seriously" any negotiations North Korea enters into. Setting preconditions for talks is bad enough, but here Haley is setting absurd, deal-breaking preconditions that even she has to know will never be accepted.

    There is no more obvious non-starter than demanding that the other side surrender before negotiations even begin. By dismissing all talks that precede denuclearization, Haley is restating the administration's complete refusal to compromise and its utter contempt for diplomacy as a tool of statecraft. It is an exceptionally obtuse and unreasonable position to take when there is an opportunity to open negotiations with Pyongyang, and I expect that our regional allies will be as baffled as they are disturbed by it.

    Christian Chuba January 2, 2018 at 4:08 pm

    This is standard operating procedure as far as the U.S. goes.

    1. 2008 – U.S. insists that Iran has to dismantle their entire nuclear infrastructure as a precondition of 'negotiations'. HRC cackles that the additional sanctions she put in place 'brought Iran back to the negotiating table'. Obama, to his credit, accepts Iran's original claim to their right to enrich uranium to produce their own fuel but the myth that sanctions brought 'them' to the negotiating table lives on.

    2. The U.S. torpedoes Geneva peace plan in 2012 (Obama's bad moment) by making it a requirement that Assad (and his cronies) have to resign and be barred from new elections in Syria. End result, civil war continues for another 5yrs, Saudi backed rebels are still demanding that Assad has to step down even after getting whipped on the battlefield.

    So as bad as Nikki Haley is, sadly, she is not uncommon but rather she is the pinnacle of what passes in the U.S. for diplomacy.

    Dee , says: January 2, 2018 at 4:17 pm
    Certainly she is looking down the road, when she knows she will need the moneyed interests of those groups who support using the American military to further their goals.. She has the cover of being the thug without the responsibility of using force..

    Like most everyone still involved with trump at this point, they are trying to maximize whatever window they have to benefit themselves..

    After citizens united they just might get away with it, but they have no feelings of responsibility to our country, IMO..

    Just Dropping By , says: January 2, 2018 at 4:28 pm
    I know I'm a broken record on this, but is there really no one left in the realm of American foreign policy who understands the saying, "Diplomacy is the art of letting someone else have your way"?
    Lane Reeder , says: January 2, 2018 at 4:55 pm
    Maybe South Korea will take its rightful place and carry out its own policy toward North Korea. Then the Trump administration will get angry and threaten to pull out all of our troops. South Korea will be courageous and continue its own policy. Then our troops will leave. The best result for South Korea and North Korea. And best for us, since we will no longer be wasting time and money there, as well as placing our troops in danger for no valid purpose.
    Lefty , says: January 2, 2018 at 5:02 pm
    Trump and Haley don't give a damn about our allies. All they care about are the yahoos whooping it up whenever they bully anyone else.
    Disgusting.

    [Jan 02, 2018] There is no doubt that US will escalate existing wars as well as start new ones in 2018

    Jan 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

    Kiza , December 30, 2017 at 11:49 am GMT

    There is no doubt that US will escalate existing wars as well as start new ones in 2018, Trump is a nothingburger for the MIC (to make a caricature of the cliche). But I have said the following before and just repeating it now – the race is on between the collapse of the US-driven financial system and a big kahuna of the global nuclear war. Either US finances will collapse or the US will do the big damage to this planet. Whether the financial collapse will be initiated by the replacement of US petro dollar with petro Yuan or some other synthetic currency, or by an attack on NK or even worse Iran, it is hard to say. Rigging All of the Markets will eventually come to an end and hopefully the cowards commanded to launch the missiles will instead rush home to take care of their families.

    If you do not know already how rotten the US system is, read that the Federal employee who mowes the grass of the White House lawn earns almost $142,000 per year:

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-27/1mm-minute-salaries-22bn-year-vacation-pay-and-other-fun-facts-about-federal-workfor

    [Jan 02, 2018] The Still-Missing Evidence of Russia-gate by Dennis J. Bernstein

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... The central groupthink around Russia-gate is the still unproven claim that Russia hacked Democratic emails in 2016 and publicized them via WikiLeaks, a crucial issue that NSA experts say should be easy to prove if true, reports Dennis J. Bernstein. ..."
    "... Binney: We at Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) published an article on this in July. First of all, if any of the data went anywhere across the fiber optic world, the NSA would know. Just inside the United States, the NSA has over a hundred tap points on the fiber lines, taking in everything. ..."
    "... The other data that came out from Guccifer 2.0, a download from the DNC, has been a charade. It was a download and not a transfer across the Web. The Web won't manage such a high speed. It could not have gotten across the Atlantic at that high speed. You would have to have high capacity lines dedicated to that in order to do it. They have been playing games with us. There is no factual evidence to back up any charge of hacking here. ..."
    "... Bernstein: Let me come at this from the other side. Has the United States ever tried to hack into and undermine Russian operations in this way? ..."
    "... Binney: Oh, sure. We do it as much as anybody else. In the Ukraine, for example, we sponsored regime change. When someone who was pro-Soviet was elected president, we orchestrated a coup to put our man in power. ..."
    "... Did the US meddle in the Russian elections that brought Yeltsin to power? ..."
    "... I believe they did. We try to leverage our power and influence elections around the world. ..."
    "... Binney: Yes, to defend privacy but also to defend the Constitution. Right now, our government is violating the first, fourth and fifth amendments in various ways. Mueller did it, Comey did it, they were all involved in violating the Constitution. ..."
    "... Bernstein: There seems to be a new McCarthyite operation around the Russia-gate investigation. It appears that it is an attempt to justify the idea that Clinton lost because the Russians undermined the election. ..."
    "... Bernstein: It was initially put out that seventeen intelligence agencies found compelling evidence that the Russians hacked into our election. You're saying it was actually selected individuals from just three agencies. Is there anything to the revelations that FBI agents talked about taking action to prevent Trump from becoming president? ..."
    "... Binney: It certainly does seem that it is leaning that way, that is was all a frame-up. It is a sad time in our history, to see the government working against itself internally ..."
    "... Bernstein: What concerns do you have regarding the Russia-gate investigation and the McCarthyite tactics that are being employed? ..."
    "... Binney: Ultimately, my main concern is that it could lead to actual war with Russia. We should definitely not be going down that path. We need to get out of all these wars. I am also concerned about what we are doing to our own democracy. We are trampling the fundamental principles contained in the Constitution. The only way to reverse all this is to start indicting people who are participating in and managing these activities that are clearly unconstitutional. ..."
    Jan 02, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

    The central groupthink around Russia-gate is the still unproven claim that Russia hacked Democratic emails in 2016 and publicized them via WikiLeaks, a crucial issue that NSA experts say should be easy to prove if true, reports Dennis J. Bernstein.

    A changing-places moment brought about by Russia-gate is that liberals who are usually more skeptical of U.S. intelligence agencies, especially their evidence-free claims, now question the patriotism of Americans who insist that the intelligence community supply proof to support the dangerous claims about Russian 'hacking" of Democratic emails especially when some veteran U.S. government experts say the data would be easily available if the Russians indeed were guilty.

    One of those experts is William Binney, a former high-level National Security Agency intelligence official who, after his 2001 retirement, blew the whistle on the extraordinary breadth of NSA surveillance programs. His outspoken criticism of the NSA during the George W. Bush administration made him the subject of FBI investigations that included a raid on his home in 2007.

    Even before Edward Snowden's NSA whistleblowing, Binney publicly revealed that NSA had access to telecommunications companies' domestic and international billing records, and that since 9/11 the agency has intercepted some 15 trillion to 20 trillion communications. Snowden has said: "I have tremendous respect for Binney, who did everything he could according to the rules."

    I spoke to Binney on Dec. 28 about Russia-gate and a host of topics having to do with spying and America's expanding national security state.

    Dennis Bernstein: I would like you to begin by telling us a little about your background at the NSA and how you got there.

    William Binney: I was in the United States Army from 1965 to 1969. They put me in the Army Security Agency, an affiliate of the NSA. They liked the work I was doing and they put me on a priority hire in 1970. I was in the NSA for 32 years, mostly working against the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. I was solving what were called "wizard puzzles," and the NSA was sometimes referred to as the "Puzzle Palace." I had to solve code systems and work on cyber systems and data systems to be able to predict in advance the "intentions and capabilities of adversaries or potential adversaries."

    Bernstein: At a certain point you ran amiss of your supervisors. What did you come to understand and try to tell people that got you in dutch with your higher-ups?

    Binney: By 1998-1999, the "digital issue" was basically solved. This created a problem for the upper ranks because at the time they were lobbying Congress for $3.8 billion to continue working on what we had already accomplished. That lobby was started in 1989 for a separate program called Trailblazer, which failed miserably in 2005-2006. We had to brief Congress on how we were progressing and my information ran contrary to the efforts downtown to secure more funding. And so this caused a problem internally.

    We learned from some of our staff members in Congress that several of the corporations that were getting contracts from the NSA were downtown lobbying against our program in Congress. This is the military industrial complex in action. That lobby was supported by the NSA management because they just wanted more money to build a bigger empire.

    But Dick Cheney, who was behind all of this, wanted it because he grew up under Nixon, who always wanted to know what his political enemies were thinking and doing. This kind of approach of bulk acquisition of everything was possible after you removed certain segments of our software and they used it against the entire digital world. Cheney wanted to know who his political enemies were and get updates about them at any time.

    Bernstein: Your expertise was in the Soviet Union and so you must know a lot about bugging. Do you believe that Russia hacked and undermined our last election? Can Trump thank Russia for the result?

    Binney: We at Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) published an article on this in July. First of all, if any of the data went anywhere across the fiber optic world, the NSA would know. Just inside the United States, the NSA has over a hundred tap points on the fiber lines, taking in everything. Mark Klein exposed some of this at the AT&T facility in San Francisco.

    This is not for foreigners, by the way, this is for targeting US citizens. If they wanted only foreigners, all they would have to do was look at the transatlantic cables where they surface on the coast of the United States. But they are not there, they are distributed among the US population.

    Bernstein: So if, in fact, the Russians were tapping into DNC headquarters, the NSA would absolutely know about it.

    Binney: Yes, and they would also have trace routes on where they went specifically, in Russia or anywhere else. If you remember, about three or four years ago, the Chinese hacked into somewhere in the United States and our government came out and confirmed that it was the Chinese who did it, and it came from a specific military facility in Shanghai. The NSA had these trace route programs embedded by the hundreds across the US and all around the world.

    The other data that came out from Guccifer 2.0, a download from the DNC, has been a charade. It was a download and not a transfer across the Web. The Web won't manage such a high speed. It could not have gotten across the Atlantic at that high speed. You would have to have high capacity lines dedicated to that in order to do it. They have been playing games with us. There is no factual evidence to back up any charge of hacking here.

    Bernstein: So was this a leak by somebody at Democratic headquarters?

    Binney: We don't know that for sure, either. All we know was that it was a local download. We can likely attribute it to a USB device that was physically passed along.

    Bernstein: Let me come at this from the other side. Has the United States ever tried to hack into and undermine Russian operations in this way?

    Binney: Oh, sure. We do it as much as anybody else. In the Ukraine, for example, we sponsored regime change. When someone who was pro-Soviet was elected president, we orchestrated a coup to put our man in power.

    Then we invited the Ukraine into NATO. One of the agreements we made with the Russians when the Soviet Union fell apart was that the Ukraine would give them their nuclear weapons to manage and that we would not move NATO further east toward Russia. I think they made a big mistake when they asked Ukraine to join NATO. They should have asked Russia to join as well, making it all-inclusive. If you treat people as adversaries, they are going to act that way.

    Bernstein: Did the US meddle in the Russian elections that brought Yeltsin to power?

    Binney: I believe they did. We try to leverage our power and influence elections around the world.

    Bernstein: What has your group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, been up to, and what has been the US government's response?

    Binney: We have been discussing privacy and security with the European Union and with a number of European parliaments. Recently the Austrian supreme court ruled that the entire bulk acquisition system was unconstitutional. Everyone but the conservatives in the Austrian parliament voted that bill down, making Austria the first country there to do the right thing.

    A slide from material leaked by ex-NSA contractor Edward Snowden to the Washington Post, showing what happens when an NSA analyst "tasks" the PRISM system for information about a new surveillance target.

    Bernstein: Is it your goal to defend people's privacy and their right to communicate privately?

    Binney: Yes, to defend privacy but also to defend the Constitution. Right now, our government is violating the first, fourth and fifth amendments in various ways. Mueller did it, Comey did it, they were all involved in violating the Constitution.

    Back in the 1990's, the idea was to make our analysts effective so that they could see threats coming before they happened and alert people to take action so that lives would be saved. What happens now is that people go out and kill someone and then the NSA and the FBI go on a forensics mission. Intelligence is supposed to tell you in advance when a crime is coming so that you can do something to avert it. They have lost that perspective.

    Bernstein: They now have access to every single one of our electronic conversations, is that right? The human mind has a hard time imagining how you could contain, move and study all that information.

    Binney: Basically, it is achievable because most of the processing is done by machine so it doesn't cost human energy.

    Bernstein: There seems to be a new McCarthyite operation around the Russia-gate investigation. It appears that it is an attempt to justify the idea that Clinton lost because the Russians undermined the election.

    Binney: I have seen no evidence at all from anybody, including the intelligence community. If you look at the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) report, they state on the first page that "We have high confidence that the Russians did this." But when you get toward the end of the report, they basically confess that "our judgment does not imply that we have evidence to back it up."

    Bernstein: It was initially put out that seventeen intelligence agencies found compelling evidence that the Russians hacked into our election. You're saying it was actually selected individuals from just three agencies. Is there anything to the revelations that FBI agents talked about taking action to prevent Trump from becoming president?

    Binney: It certainly does seem that it is leaning that way, that is was all a frame-up. It is a sad time in our history, to see the government working against itself internally.

    Bernstein: I take it you are not a big supporter of Trump.

    Binney: Well, I voted for him. I couldn't vote for a warmonger like Clinton. She wanted to see our planes shooting down Russian planes in Syria. She advocated for destabilizing Libya, for getting rid of Assad in Syria, she was a strong backer of the war in Iraq.

    Bernstein: What concerns do you have regarding the Russia-gate investigation and the McCarthyite tactics that are being employed?

    Binney: Ultimately, my main concern is that it could lead to actual war with Russia. We should definitely not be going down that path. We need to get out of all these wars. I am also concerned about what we are doing to our own democracy. We are trampling the fundamental principles contained in the Constitution. The only way to reverse all this is to start indicting people who are participating in and managing these activities that are clearly unconstitutional.

    Dennis J Bernstein is a host of "Flashpoints" on the Pacifica radio network and the author of Special Ed: Voices from a Hidden Classroom . You can access the audio archives at www.flashpoints.net .

    [Jan 02, 2018] Some investigators ask a sensible question: "It is likely that all the Russians involved in the attempt to influence the 2016 election were lying, scheming, Kremlin-linked, Putin-backed enemies of America except the Russians who talked to Christopher Steele?"

    Highly recommended!
    "If one argues the document is unverified and never will be, it is critical to learn the identity of the sources to support that conclusion. If one argues the document is the whole truth, or largely true, knowing sources is equally critical."
    Notable quotes:
    "... there is another reason to know Steele's sources, and that is to learn not just the origin of the dossier but its place in the larger Trump-Russia affai ..."
    "... Really incredible that it is assumed that everyone will believe any loopy paid-by-Soros "sources" the CIA trots out. ..."
    "... I'll not bother with the CIA's repugnant history of overthrowing governments all over the planet. But I do have to ask: when are the Russia-did-it enthusiasts going to stop making fools of themselves? ..."
    "... Steele's contacts might just be a bunch of washed-up spies like himself, feeding him garbage ... because he was paying for it. ..."
    Dec 30, 2017 | theduran.com

    According to Zerohedge, there is another reason to know Steele's sources, and that is to learn not just the origin of the dossier but its place in the larger Trump-Russia affair.

    As the WashEx adds, there is a belief among some congressional investigators that the Russians who provided information to Steele were using Steele to disrupt the American election as much as the Russians who distributed hacked Democratic Party emails. In some investigators' views, they are the two sides of the Trump-Russia project, both aimed at sowing chaos and discord in the American political system.

    Still, investigators who favor this theory ask a sensible question: " It is likely that all the Russians involved in the attempt to influence the 2016 election were lying, scheming, Kremlin-linked, Putin-backed enemies of America – except the Russians who talked to Christopher Steele? "

    On the other hand, the theory is still just a theory, for now and as the Examiner's Byron York correctly points out, to validate -or refute – it House investigators will seek Steele's sources – and is why they will try to compel Kramer to talk.

    journey80 , December 28, 2017 12:32 PM

    Are we supposed to believe that the CIA doesn't have any Russian spooks on its payroll? Any Russian "sources" are going to be taken as gold? Really incredible that it is assumed that everyone will believe any loopy paid-by-Soros "sources" the CIA trots out.

    https://www.thenation.com/a...

    I'll not bother with the CIA's repugnant history of overthrowing governments all over the planet. But I do have to ask: when are the Russia-did-it enthusiasts going to stop making fools of themselves?

    Franz Kafka journey80 , December 28, 2017 9:59 PM

    They have an audience which chooses to believe that the fools are wise-men.

    stevek9 , December 29, 2017 8:56 AM

    There is another theory: the 'Kremlin' did not direct any of this. Steele's contacts might just be a bunch of washed-up spies like himself, feeding him garbage ... because he was paying for it.

    [Jan 02, 2018] Neocon warmongers should be treated as rapists by Andrew J. Bacevich

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... What's puzzling is why that capacity for outrage and demand for accountability doesn't extend to our now well-established penchant for waging war across much of the planet. ..."
    "... Compare their culpability to that of the high-ranking officials who have presided over or promoted this country's various military misadventures of the present century. Those wars have, of course, resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths and will ultimately cost American taxpayers many trillions of dollars. Nor have those costly military efforts eliminated "terrorism," as President George W. Bush promised back when today's G.I.s were still in diapers. ..."
    "... Bush told us that, through war, the United States would spread freedom and democracy. Instead, our wars have sown disorder and instability, creating failing or failed states across the Greater Middle East and Africa. In their wake have sprung up ever more, not fewer, jihadist groups, while acts of terror are soaring globally. These are indisputable facts. ..."
    "... For starters, there is no "new strategy." Trump's generals, apparently with a nod from their putative boss, are merely modifying the old "strategy," which was itself an outgrowth of previous strategies tried, found wanting, and eventually discarded before being rebranded and eventually recycled. ..."
    "... Thus far, Trump's interventionism has been a fragment of what the Hillary campaign promised. ..."
    "... This is the center of a world empire. It maintains a gigantic military which virtually never stops fighting wars, none of them having anything to do with defense. It has created an intelligence monstrosity which makes old outfits like Stazi seem almost quaint, and it spies on everyone. Indeed, it maintains seventeen national security establishments, as though you can never have too much of a good thing. And some of these guys, too, are engaged full-time in forms of covert war, from fomenting trouble in other lands and interfering in elections to overthrowing governments. ..."
    "... It's unlikely that the USA would be remaining in Afghanistan if its goals were not being attained. So the author has merely shown that the stated goals cannot be the real goals. What then are the real goals? I propose two: 1) establish a permanent military presence on a Russian border; 2) finance it with the heroin trade. Given other actions of the Empire around the globe, the first goal is obvious. The bombing of mud huts containing competitors' drug labs, conjoined with the fact that we do not destroy the actual poppy fields (obvious green targets in an immense ocean of brown) make this goal rather obvious as well. The rest of the article is simply more evidence that the Empire does not include mere human tragedy in its profit calculation. ..."
    "... Andrew Bacevich calls for a Weinstein moment without realizing that it already happened more than ten years ago. The 2006 midterm elections were the first Weinstein moment, which saw the American people deliver a huge outpouring of antiwar sentiment that inflicted significant congressional losses on the neocon Republicans of George W. Bush. ..."
    Dec 22, 2017 | www.unz.com

    What makes a Harvey Weinstein moment? The now-disgraced Hollywood mogul is hardly the first powerful man to stand accused of having abused women. The Harveys who preceded Harvey himself are legion, their prominence matching or exceeding his own and the misdeeds with which they were charged at least as reprehensible.

    In the relatively recent past, a roster of prominent offenders would include Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby, Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilly, and, of course, Donald Trump. Throw in various jocks, maestros, senior military officers, members of the professoriate and you end up with quite a list. Yet in virtually all such cases, the alleged transgressions were treated as instances of individual misconduct, egregious perhaps but possessing at best transitory political resonance.

    All that, though, was pre-Harvey. As far as male sexual hijinks are concerned, we might compare Weinstein's epic fall from grace to the stock market crash of 1929: one week it's the anything-goes Roaring Twenties, the next we're smack dab in a Great Depression.

    How profound is the change? Up here in Massachusetts where I live, we've spent the past year marking John F. Kennedy's 100th birthday. If Kennedy were still around to join in the festivities, it would be as a Class A sex offender. Rarely in American history has the cultural landscape shifted so quickly or so radically.

    In our post-Harvey world, men charged with sexual misconduct are guilty until proven innocent, all crimes are capital offenses, and there exists no statute of limitations. Once a largely empty corporate slogan, "zero tolerance" has become a battle cry.

    All of this serves as a reminder that, on some matters at least, the American people retain an admirable capacity for outrage. We can distinguish between the tolerable and the intolerable. And we can demand accountability of powerful individuals and institutions.

    Everything They Need to Win (Again!)

    What's puzzling is why that capacity for outrage and demand for accountability doesn't extend to our now well-established penchant for waging war across much of the planet.

    In no way would I wish to minimize the pain, suffering, and humiliation of the women preyed upon by the various reprobates now getting their belated comeuppance. But to judge from published accounts, the women (and in some cases, men) abused by Weinstein, Louis C.K., Mark Halperin, Leon Wieseltier, Kevin Spacey, Al Franken, Charlie Rose, Matt Lauer, Garrison Keillor, my West Point classmate Judge Roy Moore, and their compadres at least managed to survive their encounters. None of the perpetrators are charged with having committed murder. No one died.

    Compare their culpability to that of the high-ranking officials who have presided over or promoted this country's various military misadventures of the present century. Those wars have, of course, resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths and will ultimately cost American taxpayers many trillions of dollars. Nor have those costly military efforts eliminated "terrorism," as President George W. Bush promised back when today's G.I.s were still in diapers.

    Bush told us that, through war, the United States would spread freedom and democracy. Instead, our wars have sown disorder and instability, creating failing or failed states across the Greater Middle East and Africa. In their wake have sprung up ever more, not fewer, jihadist groups, while acts of terror are soaring globally. These are indisputable facts.

    It discomfits me to reiterate this mournful litany of truths. I feel a bit like the doctor telling the lifelong smoker with stage-four lung cancer that an addiction to cigarettes is adversely affecting his health. His mute response: I know and I don't care. Nothing the doc says is going to budge the smoker from his habit. You go through the motions, but wonder why.

    In a similar fashion, war has become a habit to which the United States is addicted. Except for the terminally distracted, most of us know that. We also know -- we cannot not know -- that, in places like Afghanistan and Iraq, U.S. forces have been unable to accomplish their assigned mission, despite more than 16 years of fighting in the former and more than a decade in the latter.

    It's not exactly a good news story, to put it mildly. So forgive me for saying it ( yet again ), but most of us simply don't care, which means that we continue to allow a free hand to those who preside over those wars, while treating with respect the views of pundits and media personalities who persist in promoting them. What's past doesn't count; we prefer to sustain the pretense that tomorrow is pregnant with possibilities. Victory lies just around the corner.

    By way of example, consider a recent article in U.S. News and World Report. The headline: "Victory or Failure in Afghanistan: 2018 Will Be the Deciding Year." The title suggests a balance absent from the text that follows, which reads like a Pentagon press release. Here in its entirety is the nut graf (my own emphasis added):

    "Armed with a new strategy and renewed support from old allies, the Trump administration now believes it has everything it needs to win the war in Afghanistan. Top military advisers all the way up to Defense Secretary Jim Mattis say they can accomplish what two previous administrations and multiple troop surges could not: the defeat of the Taliban by Western-backed local forces, a negotiated peace and the establishment of a popularly supported government in Kabul capable of keeping the country from once again becoming a haven to any terrorist group."

    Now if you buy this, you'll believe that Harvey Weinstein has learned his lesson and can be trusted to interview young actresses while wearing his bathrobe.

    For starters, there is no "new strategy." Trump's generals, apparently with a nod from their putative boss, are merely modifying the old "strategy," which was itself an outgrowth of previous strategies tried, found wanting, and eventually discarded before being rebranded and eventually recycled.

    Short of using nuclear weapons, U.S. forces fighting in Afghanistan over the past decade and a half have experimented with just about every approach imaginable: invasion, regime change, occupation, nation-building, pacification, decapitation, counterterrorism, and counterinsurgency, not to mention various surges , differing in scope and duration. We have had a big troop presence and a smaller one, more bombing and less, restrictive rules of engagement and permissive ones. In the military equivalent of throwing in the kitchen sink, a U.S. Special Operations Command four-engine prop plane recently deposited the largest non-nuclear weapon in the American arsenal on a cave complex in eastern Afghanistan. Although that MOAB made a big boom, no offer of enemy surrender materialized.

    $65 billion in U.S. taxpayer dollars. And under the circumstances, consider that a mere down payment.

    According to General John Nicholson, our 17th commander in Kabul since 2001, the efforts devised and implemented by his many predecessors have resulted in a "stalemate" -- a generous interpretation given that the Taliban presently controls more territory than it has held since the U.S. invasion. Officers no less capable than Nicholson himself, David Petraeus and Stanley McChrystal among them, didn't get it done. Nicholson's argument: trust me.

    In essence, the "new strategy" devised by Trump's generals, Secretary of Defense Mattis and Nicholson among them, amounts to this: persist a tad longer with a tad more. A modest uptick in the number of U.S. and allied troops on the ground will provide more trainers, advisers, and motivators to work with and accompany their Afghan counterparts in the field. The Mattis/Nicholson plan also envisions an increasing number of air strikes, signaled by the recent use of B-52s to attack illicit Taliban " drug labs ," a scenario that Stanley Kubrick himself would have been hard-pressed to imagine.

    Notwithstanding the novelty of using strategic bombers to destroy mud huts, there's not a lot new here. Dating back to 2001, coalition forces have already dropped tens of thousands of bombs in Afghanistan. Almost as soon as the Taliban were ousted from Kabul, coalition efforts to create effective Afghan security forces commenced. So, too, did attempts to reduce the production of the opium that has funded the Taliban insurgency, alas with essentially no effect whatsoever . What Trump's generals want a gullible public (and astonishingly gullible and inattentive members of Congress) to believe is that this time they've somehow devised a formula for getting it right.

    Turning the Corner

    With his trademark capacity to intuit success, President Trump already sees clear evidence of progress. "We're not fighting anymore to just walk around," he remarked in his Thanksgiving message to the troops. "We're fighting to win. And you people [have] turned it around over the last three to four months like nobody has seen." The president, we may note, has yet to visit Afghanistan.

    I'm guessing that the commander-in-chief is oblivious to the fact that, in U.S. military circles, the term winning has acquired notable elasticity. Trump may think that it implies vanquishing the enemy -- white flags and surrender ceremonies on the U.S.S. Missouri . General Nicholson knows better. "Winning," the field commander says , "means delivering a negotiated settlement that reduces the level of violence and protecting the homeland." (Take that definition at face value and we can belatedly move Vietnam into the win column!)

    Should we be surprised that Trump's generals, unconsciously imitating General William Westmoreland a half-century ago, claim once again to detect light at the end of the tunnel? Not at all. Mattis and Nicholson (along with White House Chief of Staff John Kelly and National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster) are following the Harvey Weinstein playbook: keep doing it until they make you stop. Indeed, with what can only be described as chutzpah, Nicholson himself recently announced that we have " turned the corner " in Afghanistan. In doing so, of course, he is counting on Americans not to recall the various war managers, military and civilian alike, who have made identical claims going back years now, among them Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta in 2012 .

    From on high, assurances of progress; in the field, results that, year after year, come nowhere near what's promised; on the homefront, an astonishingly credulous public. The war in Afghanistan has long since settled into a melancholy and seemingly permanent rhythm.

    The fact is that the individuals entrusted by President Trump to direct U.S. policy believe with iron certainty that difficult political problems will yield to armed might properly employed. That proposition is one to which generals like Mattis and Nicholson have devoted a considerable part of their lives, not just in Afghanistan but across much of the Islamic world. They are no more likely to question the validity of that proposition than the Pope is to entertain second thoughts about the divinity of Jesus Christ.

    In Afghanistan, their entire worldview -- not to mention the status and clout of the officer corps they represent -- is at stake. No matter how long the war there lasts, no matter how many " generations " it takes, no matter how much blood is shed to no purpose, and no matter how much money is wasted, they will never admit to failure -- nor will any of the militarists-in-mufti cheering them on from the sidelines in Washington, Donald Trump not the least among them.

    Meanwhile, the great majority of the American people, their attention directed elsewhere -- it's the season for holiday shopping, after all -- remain studiously indifferent to the charade being played out before their eyes.

    It took a succession of high-profile scandals before Americans truly woke up to the plague of sexual harassment and assault. How long will it take before the public concludes that they have had enough of wars that don't work? Here's hoping it's before our president, in a moment of ill temper, unleashes " fire and fury " on the world.

    Andrew J. Bacevich, a TomDispatch regular , is the author, most recently, of America's War for the Greater Middle East: A Military History .

    anonymous , Disclaimer December 11, 2017 at 3:31 am GMT

    It's astonishing to see people make the claim that "victory" is possible in Afghanistan. Could they actually believe this or are they lying in order to drag this out even longer and keep the money pit working overtime? These are individuals that are highly placed and so should know better. It's not really a war but an occupation with the native insurgents fighting to oust the foreign occupier. The US has tried every trick there is in trying to tamp down the insurgency. They know what we're trying to do and can thwart us at every step. The US lost even as it began it's invasion there but didn't know it yet in the wake of it's initial success in scattering the Taliban, not even a real army and not even a real state. They live there and we don't; they can resist for the next thirty years or fifty years. When does the multi-billion bill come due and how will we pay it?
    Issac , December 12, 2017 at 4:07 am GMT
    "How long will it take before the public concludes that they have had enough of wars that don't work?"

    It already happened, but Progressives like you failed to note that Republican voters subbed the Bush clan and their various associates for Trump in the Primary season, precisely because he called the Iraq and Afghan wars mistakes. The Americans suffer under a two party establishment that is clearly antagonistic to their interests. As a part of that regime, a dutiful Progressive toad, you continue to peddle the lie that it was the war-weary White Americans who celebrated those wars. In reality, any such support was ginned up from tools like you who wrote puff pieces for their Neocon Progressive masters.

    Thus far, Trump's interventionism has been a fragment of what the Hillary campaign promised. Might you count that among your lucky stars? Fat chance. You cretinous Progressive filth have no such spine upon which to base an independent thought. You trot out the same old tiresome tropes week after week fulfilling your designated propagandist duty and then you skulk back to your den of iniquity to prepare another salvo of agitprop. What a miserable existence.

    USAMNESIA , December 14, 2017 at 3:32 am GMT
    This is the center of a world empire. It maintains a gigantic military which virtually never stops fighting wars, none of them having anything to do with defense. It has created an intelligence monstrosity which makes old outfits like Stazi seem almost quaint, and it spies on everyone. Indeed, it maintains seventeen national security establishments, as though you can never have too much of a good thing. And some of these guys, too, are engaged full-time in forms of covert war, from fomenting trouble in other lands and interfering in elections to overthrowing governments.

    Obama ended up killing more people than any dictator or demagogue of this generation on earth you care to name, several hundred thousand of them in his eight years. And he found new ways to kill, too, as by creating the world's first industrial-scale extrajudicial killing operation. Here he signs off on "kill lists," placed in his Oval Office in-box, to murder people he has never seen, people who enjoy no legal rights or protections. His signed orders are carried out by uniformed thugs working at computer screens in secure basements where they proceed to play computer games with real live humans as their targets, again killing or maiming people they have never seen.

    If you ever have wondered where all the enabling workers came from in places like Stalin's Gulag or Hitler's concentration camps, well, here is your answer. American itself produces platoons of such people. You could find them working at Guantanamo and in the far-flung string of secret torture facilities the CIA ran for years, and you could find them in places like Fallujah or Samarra or Abu Ghraib, at the CIA's basement game arcade killing centers, and even all over the streets of America dressed as police who shoot unarmed people every day, sometimes in the back.

    https://chuckmanwords.wordpress.com/2017/01/12/john-chuckman-essay-of-wizards-and-washington-and-the-dreary-unrelenting-reality-of-american-politics-a-raw-and-sometimes-darkly-comic-survey-of-americas-treacherous-political-terrain/

    nsa , December 18, 2017 at 5:36 am GMT
    ZOG has now asserted the right to kill anyone, anywhere, anytime, for any reason. No trial, no hearing, no witnesses, no defense, no nothing. Is this actually legal? Any constitutional lawyers out there care to comment? Has ZOG now achieved the status of an all-powerful all-knowing deity with the power of life and death over all living things?
    Waiting too , December 18, 2017 at 10:36 am GMT
    It's unlikely that the USA would be remaining in Afghanistan if its goals were not being attained. So the author has merely shown that the stated goals cannot be the real goals. What then are the real goals? I propose two: 1) establish a permanent military presence on a Russian border; 2) finance it with the heroin trade. Given other actions of the Empire around the globe, the first goal is obvious. The bombing of mud huts containing competitors' drug labs, conjoined with the fact that we do not destroy the actual poppy fields (obvious green targets in an immense ocean of brown) make this goal rather obvious as well. The rest of the article is simply more evidence that the Empire does not include mere human tragedy in its profit calculation.
    War for Blair Mountain , December 18, 2017 at 1:09 pm GMT
    5.6 TRILLION $$$$$$ FOR GULF WAR 1 AND GULF WAR 2

    The Native Born White American Working Class Teenage Male Population used as CANNON FODDER for Congressman Steven Solarz's and Donald Trump's very precious Jewish only Israel .

    WAR IS A RACKET!!!! don't you think?

    DESERT FOX , December 18, 2017 at 1:43 pm GMT
    Israel and the deep state did the attack on 911 and thus set the table for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and Libya and Syria and the Zionist neocons who control every facet of the U.S. gov and the MSM and the MIC and the FED ie the BANKS set in motion the blood sacrifice for their Zionist god SATAN, that is what they have done.

    The Zionist warmongers and Satanists will destroy America.

    Michael Kenny , December 18, 2017 at 2:17 pm GMT
    It's not so much that America is addicted to war as that the American "business model" makes permanent war inevitable. US global dominance rests on economic domination, in particular, the dollar as world reserve currency. That has allowed the US economy to survive in spite of being hollowed out, financialised and burdened with enormous sovereign debt. Economic dominance derives from political dominance, which, in its turn, flows from military dominance. For that military dominance to be credible, not only must the US have the biggest and best military forces on the planet, it must show itself willing to use those forces to maintain its dominance by actually using them from time to time, in particular, to unequivocally beat off any challenge to its dominance (Putin!). It also, of course, must win, or, more correctly, be able to present the outcome credibly as a win. Failure to maintain military dominance will undermine the position of the dollar, sending its value through the floor. A low dollar means cheap exports (Boeing will sell more planes than Airbus!), but it also means that imports (oil, outsourced goods) will be dear. At that point the hollowed out nature of the US economy will cut in, probably provoking a Soviet-style implosion of the US economy and society and ruining anyone who has holdings denominated in dollars. I call that the Gorbachev conundrum. Gorby believed in the Soviet Union and wanted to reform it. But the Soviet system had become so rigid as to be unreformable. He pulled a threat and the whole system unravelled. But if he hadn't pulled the thread, the whole system would have unravelled anyway. It was a choice between hard landing and harder landing. Similarly, US leaders have to continue down the only road open to them: permanent war. As Thomas Jefferson said of slavery, it's like holding a wolf by the ears. You don't like it but you don't dare let go!
    TG , December 18, 2017 at 2:36 pm GMT
    "How long will it take before the public concludes that they have had enough of wars that don't work?" Answer: Never.

    In Alabama when people would rant about how toxic Roy Moore was, I would politely point out that his opponent for Senate was OK with spending trillions of dollars fighting pointless winless wars on the other side of the planet just so politically connected defense contractors can make a buck, and ask if that should be an issue too? The response, predictably, was as if I was an alien from the planet Skyron in the galaxy of Andromeda.

    We are sheep. We are outraged at these sexual transgressions because the corporate press tells us to be outraged. We are not outraged at these stupid foreign wars, because the corporate press does not tell us to be outraged. It's all mass effect, and the comfort of being in a herd and all expressing the same feelings.

    Intelligent Dasein , Website December 18, 2017 at 2:37 pm GMT
    Andrew Bacevich is wrong about a couple of things in this article.

    First, he says that the American public is both apathetic and credulous. I agree that we have largely become apathetic towards these imperial wars, but I disagree that we have become credulous. In fact, these two states of mind exclude one another; you cannot be both apathetic and credulous with respect to the same object at the same time. The credulity charge is easy to dismiss because virtually no one today believes anything that comes out of Washington or its mouthpieces in the legacy media. The apathy charge is on point but it needs qualification. The smarter, more informed Americans have seen that their efforts to change the course of American policy have been to no avail, and they've given up in frustration and disgust. The less smart, less informed Americans are constrained by the necessity of getting on with their meager lives; they are an apolitical mass that possesses neither the understanding nor the capacity to make any difference on the policy front whatsoever.

    Second, Andrew Bacevich calls for a Weinstein moment without realizing that it already happened more than ten years ago. The 2006 midterm elections were the first Weinstein moment, which saw the American people deliver a huge outpouring of antiwar sentiment that inflicted significant congressional losses on the neocon Republicans of George W. Bush. An echo of that groundswell happened again in 2008 when Barack Obama was elected to office on an explicitly antiwar platform. But Obama turned out to be one of the most pro-war presidents ever, and thus an angry electorate made one final push in the same direction by attempting to clean house with Donald Trump. Now that Donald has shown every sign of having cucked out to the war lobby, we seem to be left with no electoral solutions.

    The only thing that's going to work is for the American Imperium to be handed a much-deserved military and financial defeat. The one encouraging fact is that if the top ten percent of our political and financial elite were planed off by a foreign power, the American people would give as few damns about that as they currently do about our imperial wars.

    Ilyana_Rozumova , December 18, 2017 at 3:04 pm GMT
    @Michael Kenny

    Very good but some little errors. Concerning Russia and China, Russia vent all or nothing. China was much smarter. First they allowed self employment, than small business and long time after they started to sell state enterprises,

    Anonymous , Disclaimer December 18, 2017 at 3:17 pm GMT
    If Tom's Dispatch continues to be successful, Americans will continue to be asleep.

    Masterful propaganda. War, according to our favorite spooks, is necessary to win, but otherwise reprehensible.

    Sex is otherwise necessary for human life but Harvey Weinstein is ugly. Hold tightly to your cognitive dissonance, because you're expected to remember John F Kennedy who got it on, but is the expendable martyr you should care about, not that other guy

    Let's review: terror attacks are wins. Superior or effective anti-war propaganda comes from the military
    itself. They really don't want war, but really they do.

    nebulafox , December 18, 2017 at 4:00 pm GMT
    @anonymous

    We're trying to make Afghanistan not Afghanistan: aka, trying to be a miracle worker. We can throw as much money as we like at that place, and it isn't going to happen, least of all with troops on nine month shifts.

    Let Iran and Pakistan squabble over it. Good riddance.

    nebulafox , December 18, 2017 at 4:08 pm GMT
    @Waiting too

    1) doesn't really make much sense, given that Poland and the Baltic States would be more than happy to take all US forces in Europe to give us a presence near Russia in a part of the world that would be far easier to justify to the American public-and to the international community. Afghanistan? Who exactly is Russia going to mess with? Iran is their-for now, longer term, the two have conflicting agendas in the region, but don't expect the geniuses in the Beltway to pick up on that opportunity-ally, and unlike the USSR, the Russians don't want to get involved in the India-Pakistan conflict. Russia's current tilt toward China makes a strategic marriage with India of the kind that you found in the Cold War impossible, but they obviously don't want to tilt toward the basketcase known as Pakistan. The only reason that Russia would want to get involved with Afghanistan beyond having a more preferable status than having American troops there is power projection among ex-Soviet states, and there are far more effective ways to do than muddle about with Afghanistan.

    2, on the other hand, given Iran-Contra who knows? The first generation of the Taliban pretty much wiped the heroin trade out as offensive to Islamic sensibilities, but the newer generations have no such qualms.

    I think you give America's rulers far too much credit. The truth is probably far scarier: the morons who work in the Beltway honestly believe their own propaganda-that we can make Afghanistan into some magical Western democracy if we throw enough money at it-and combine that with the usual bureaucratic inertia.

    Anonymous , Disclaimer December 18, 2017 at 4:28 pm GMT
    @Waiting too

    Another bonus is that Afghan heroin seeps into Russia and wreaks havoc in the regions bordering Afghanistan -- krokodil and all that.

    Art , December 18, 2017 at 4:45 pm GMT
    According to General John Nicholson, our 17th commander in Kabul since 2001,

    We have been killing these people for 17 years. Now our generals say that if we indiscriminately kill enough men, women, and children who get in the way of our B52s, that they will see the light and make peace. How totally wonderful.

    My solution is to gage the Lindsey Grahams for a year.

    What will do more good for peace – B52s or shutting up Graham's elk?

    Think Peace -- Art

    MarkinLA , December 18, 2017 at 5:59 pm GMT
    I remember when Trump said he knew more than the generals and was viciously attacked for it. It turns out he did know more than the generals just by knowing it was a waste. Trump was pushed by politics to defer to the generals who always have an answer when it comes to a war – more men, more weapons, more time.
    Sollipsist , December 18, 2017 at 6:20 pm GMT
    @Intelligent Dasein

    "The less smart, less informed Americans are constrained by the necessity of getting on with their meager lives; they are an apolitical mass that possesses neither the understanding nor the capacity to make any difference on the policy front whatsoever."

    I wonder if any Abolitionists criticized the slaves for failing to revolt? Probably not; I'm guessing they were mostly convinced that the negro required intervention from outside, whether due to their nature or from overwhelming circumstance.

    If the enslaved American public is liberated, I hope we'll know what to do with ourselves afterwards. It'd be a shame to simply end up in another kind of bondage, resentful and subject to whatever oppressive system replaces the current outrage. Perhaps the next one will more persuasively convince us that we're important and essential?

    peterAUS , December 18, 2017 at 6:46 pm GMT
    @Michael Kenny

    Agree.
    Very good post, IMHO.

    That phrase "a choice between hard landing and harder landing" is good and can be easily applied to USA today.

    Interesting times.

    peterAUS , December 18, 2017 at 6:47 pm GMT
    @TG

    Agree.
    This is well written, IMHO:

    We are sheep. We are outraged at these sexual transgressions because the corporate press tells us to be outraged. We are not outraged at these stupid foreign wars, because the corporate press does not tell us to be outraged. It's all mass effect, and the comfort of being in a herd and all expressing the same feelings.

    Sowhat , December 18, 2017 at 7:29 pm GMT
    Thank you, Andrew J. Bacevich, for your words of wisdom and thank you, Mr. Unz, for this post.
    This corporation needs to be dissolved. I've read about "the inertia" of Federal Government that has morphed into a cash cow for a century of wasted tax dollars funding the MIIC, now the MIIC. Does our existence have to end in financial ruin or, worse yet, some foreign entity creating havoc on our soil?
    The Founders NEVER intended that the US of A become a meddler in other Sovereignty's internal affairs or the destroyer of Nation States that do not espoused our "doctrine." Anyone without poop for brains knows that this is about Imperialism and greed, fueled by money and an insatiable luster for MORE.
    This should be easier to change than it appears. Is there no will? After all, it Is our Master's money that lubricates the machinery. So, we continue to provide the lubrication for our Masters like a bunch of imbeciles that allow them to survail our words and movements. Somebody please explain our stupidity.
    Delinquent Snail , December 18, 2017 at 8:57 pm GMT
    @nebulafox

    If americans would just go all in and commit genocide. That would lead to victory.

    No afgans, no enemy.

    joe webb , December 18, 2017 at 8:58 pm GMT
    the folks in the US are sick of the wars, contrary to Bacevich. They simply will vote come next election accordingly. They register their disgust in all the polls.

    This article is not very useful. More punditry puff.

    No comments on the Next War for Israel being cooked up by the new crop of neocon youngsters, I guess, and Trump who will trump, trump, trump into the next War for the Jews.

    How about some political science on Iran, Syria, Hisbollah, Hamas and the US, Arabia, Judenstaat axis of evil?

    Joe Webb

    Jim Christian , December 18, 2017 at 9:07 pm GMT
    Hey Bacevich? When you link to WashPost and NYTimes to make your points, you don't. They block access if you've already read links to those two papers three times each and can no longer, for the month, read there. When folks link to papers that won't let you read, it makes one wonder why.
    Simply Simon , December 18, 2017 at 10:26 pm GMT
    I believe Americans are damned sick and tired of the stupid, needless war in Afghanistan. But then they should have been sick and tired of stupid , needless wars like Korea, Vietnam and Iraq, and probably most of them were. But it's easy to be complacent when someone else's son is doing the fighting and dying And it's easy to be complacent when your stomach is full and you have plenty of booze and pain killers available. There will be a day of reckoning when the next big economic bust arrives and which may make the Great Depression paltry by comparison. America is a far different place then it was in the 1930s when our population was 140 million. Americans were not so soft and the conveniences we now take for granted not available. When the supermarkets run out of food, watch out. There may not even be any soup lines to stand in.
    Joe Franklin , December 18, 2017 at 11:21 pm GMT

    In truth, U.S. commanders have quietly shelved any expectations of achieving an actual victory -- traditionally defined as "imposing your will on the enemy" -- in favor of a more modest conception of success.

    Your assumptions are wrong about the US goal of the invasion of Afghanistan. Afghanistan and Iraq were not invaded to establish democracy or impose American will whatever that is. Afghanistan and Iraq were invaded to establish a temporary military staging ground for a US invasion of Iran, the designated regional enemy of Israel. As long as the current regime in Iran remains, the US will remain in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    ... ... ...

    Druid , December 19, 2017 at 12:41 am GMT
    @Waiting too

    And minerals! Eric Prince himself recently tried to sell the idea of having his private militias do the fighting in Afghanistan for the US and finance it by mining said country's minerals, thus making himself even richer.

    anno nimus , December 19, 2017 at 1:53 am GMT
    "i can live without a friend, but not without an enemy."
    Cloak And Dagger , December 19, 2017 at 5:03 am GMT
    @SolontoCroesus

    I was onboard with Mr. Bacevich, until I got to this:

    Almost as soon as the Taliban were ousted from Kabul, coalition efforts to create effective Afghan security forces commenced. So, too, did attempts to reduce the production of the opium that has funded the Taliban insurgency

    What utter rubbish! The Taliban was instrumental in shutting down the poppy production until the CIA came along and restarted it to fund their black ops.

    http://www.sfaw.org/newswire/2017/03/28/a-conspiracy-theory-that-became-a-conspiracy-fact-the-cia-afghanistans-poppy-fields-and-americas-growing-heroin-epidemic/

    We have the reverse Midas touch. Everything we touch (Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, etc., etc.) turns to shit. We supposedly attack countries to liberate them from their tyrants who are supposedly killing their own people, and end up killing more people than all of them put together. And, oh yes, we have our favorite tyrants (Saudis, Israelis) whom we provide with horrible weapons (like cluster bombs) to help them kill people we hate.

    Mr. Bacevich is right about the lack of outrage about our wars, but the current Weinstein explosion consists of hordes of mostly American female victims, mostly white, a (very) few jews, and a few men, who have the stage to complain about their oppressors. What would be the counterpart of that w.r.t. the wars? Millions of brown victims in far away lands that most of us couldn't even find on a map? How likely is that to happen?

    So yes, no outrage, and none likely. The last 17 years have proven that.

    Joe Wong , December 20, 2017 at 2:25 pm GMT
    @anonymous

    You don't know the American has been paying everything through monopoly money printed through the thin air since WWI, i.e. a keystroke on the Federal Reserve's computer? No wonder the Americans have been waging reckless wars all over the world on the fabricated phantom WMD allegations as humanitarian intervention relentlessly.

    Romans did not stop waging reckless wars until their empire collapsed; the British imitates the Romans and the American is born out of the British, hence the Americans will no stop waging reckless wars until their empire collapsed like the Romans.

    [Jan 02, 2018] What We Don t Talk about When We Talk about Russian Hacking by Jackson Lears

    Highly recommended!
    It you need to read a singe article analyzing current anti-Russian hysteria in the USA this in the one you should read. This is an excellent article Simply great !!! And as of December 2017 it represents the perfect summary of Russiagate, Hillary defeat and, Neo-McCarthyism campaign launched as a method of hiding the crisis of neoliberalism revealed by Presidential elections. It also suggest that growing jingoism of both Parties (return to Madeleine Albright's 'indispensable nation' bulling. Both Trump and Albright assume that the United States should be able to do as it pleases in the international arena) and loss of the confidence and paranoia of the US neoliberal elite.
    It contain many important observation which in my view perfectly catch the complexity of the current Us political landscape.
    Bravo to Jackson Lears !!!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Neoliberals celebrate market utility as the sole criterion of worth; interventionists exalt military adventure abroad as a means of fighting evil in order to secure global progress ..."
    "... Sanders is a social democrat and Trump a demagogic mountebank, but their campaigns underscored a widespread repudiation of the Washington consensus. For about a week after the election, pundits discussed the possibility of a more capacious Democratic strategy. It appeared that the party might learn something from Clinton's defeat. Then everything changed. ..."
    "... A story that had circulated during the campaign without much effect resurfaced: it involved the charge that Russian operatives had hacked into the servers of the Democratic National Committee, revealing embarrassing emails that damaged Clinton's chances. With stunning speed, a new centrist-liberal orthodoxy came into being, enveloping the major media and the bipartisan Washington establishment. This secular religion has attracted hordes of converts in the first year of the Trump presidency. In its capacity to exclude dissent, it is like no other formation of mass opinion in my adult life, though it recalls a few dim childhood memories of anti-communist hysteria during the early 1950s. ..."
    "... The centrepiece of the faith, based on the hacking charge, is the belief that Vladimir Putin orchestrated an attack on American democracy by ordering his minions to interfere in the election on behalf of Trump. The story became gospel with breathtaking suddenness and completeness. Doubters are perceived as heretics and as apologists for Trump and Putin, the evil twins and co-conspirators behind this attack on American democracy. ..."
    "... Like any orthodoxy worth its salt, the religion of the Russian hack depends not on evidence but on ex cathedra pronouncements on the part of authoritative institutions and their overlords. Its scriptural foundation is a confused and largely fact-free 'assessment' produced last January by a small number of 'hand-picked' analysts – as James Clapper, the director of National Intelligence, described them – from the CIA, the FBI and the NSA. ..."
    "... It is not the first time the intelligence agencies have played this role. When I hear the Intelligence Community Assessment cited as a reliable source, I always recall the part played by the New York Times in legitimating CIA reports of the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's putative weapons of mass destruction, not to mention the long history of disinformation (a.k.a. 'fake news') as a tactic for advancing one administration or another's political agenda. Once again, the established press is legitimating pronouncements made by the Church Fathers of the national security state. Clapper is among the most vigorous of these. He perjured himself before Congress in 2013, when he denied that the NSA had 'wittingly' spied on Americans – a lie for which he has never been held to account. ..."
    "... In May 2017, he told NBC's Chuck Todd that the Russians were highly likely to have colluded with Trump's campaign because they are 'almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favour, whatever, which is a typical Russian technique'. The current orthodoxy exempts the Church Fathers from standards imposed on ordinary people, and condemns Russians – above all Putin – as uniquely, 'almost genetically' diabolical. ..."
    "... It's hard for me to understand how the Democratic Party, which once felt scepticism towards the intelligence agencies, can now embrace the CIA and the FBI as sources of incontrovertible truth. One possible explanation is that Trump's election has created a permanent emergency in the liberal imagination, based on the belief that the threat he poses is unique and unprecedented. It's true that Trump's menace is viscerally real. But the menace posed by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney was equally real. ..."
    "... Trump is committed to continuing his predecessors' lavish funding of the already bloated Defence Department, and his Fortress America is a blustering, undisciplined version of Madeleine Albright's 'indispensable nation'. Both Trump and Albright assume that the United States should be able to do as it pleases in the international arena: Trump because it's the greatest country in the world, Albright because it's an exceptional force for global good. ..."
    "... Besides Trump's supposed uniqueness, there are two other assumptions behind the furore in Washington: the first is that the Russian hack unquestionably occurred, and the second is that the Russians are our implacable enemies. ..."
    "... So far, after months of 'bombshells' that turn out to be duds, there is still no actual evidence for the claim that the Kremlin ordered interference in the American election. Meanwhile serious doubts have surfaced about the technical basis for the hacking claims. Independent observers have argued it is more likely that the emails were leaked from inside, not hacked from outside. On this front, the most persuasive case was made by a group called Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, former employees of the US intelligence agencies who distinguished themselves in 2003 by debunking Colin Powell's claim that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, hours after Powell had presented his pseudo-evidence at the UN. ..."
    "... The crucial issue here and elsewhere is the exclusion from public discussion of any critical perspectives on the orthodox narrative, even the perspectives of people with professional credentials and a solid track record. ..."
    "... Sceptical voices, such as those of the VIPS, have been drowned out by a din of disinformation. Flagrantly false stories, like the Washington Post report that the Russians had hacked into the Vermont electrical grid, are published, then retracted 24 hours later. Sometimes – like the stories about Russian interference in the French and German elections – they are not retracted even after they have been discredited. These stories have been thoroughly debunked by French and German intelligence services but continue to hover, poisoning the atmosphere, confusing debate. ..."
    "... The consequence is a spreading confusion that envelops everything. Epistemological nihilism looms, but some people and institutions have more power than others to define what constitutes an agreed-on reality. ..."
    "... More genuine insurgencies are in the making, which confront corporate power and connect domestic with foreign policy, but they face an uphill battle against the entrenched money and power of the Democratic leadership – the likes of Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, the Clintons and the DNC. Russiagate offers Democratic elites a way to promote party unity against Trump-Putin, while the DNC purges Sanders's supporters. ..."
    "... Fusion GPS eventually produced the trash, a lurid account written by the former British MI6 intelligence agent Christopher Steele, based on hearsay purchased from anonymous Russian sources. Amid prostitutes and golden showers, a story emerged: the Russian government had been blackmailing and bribing Donald Trump for years, on the assumption that he would become president some day and serve the Kremlin's interests. In this fantastic tale, Putin becomes a preternaturally prescient schemer. Like other accusations of collusion, this one has become vaguer over time, adding to the murky atmosphere without ever providing any evidence. ..."
    "... Yet the FBI apparently took the Steele dossier seriously enough to include a summary of it in a secret appendix to the Intelligence Community Assessment. Two weeks before the inauguration, James Comey, the director of the FBI, described the dossier to Trump. After Comey's briefing was leaked to the press, the website Buzzfeed published the dossier in full, producing hilarity and hysteria in the Washington establishment. ..."
    "... The Steele dossier inhabits a shadowy realm where ideology and intelligence, disinformation and revelation overlap. It is the antechamber to the wider system of epistemological nihilism created by various rival factions in the intelligence community: the 'tree of smoke' that, for the novelist Denis Johnson, symbolised CIA operations in Vietnam. ..."
    "... Yet the Democratic Party has now embarked on a full-scale rehabilitation of the intelligence community – or at least the part of it that supports the notion of Russian hacking. (We can be sure there is disagreement behind the scenes.) And it is not only the Democratic establishment that is embracing the deep state. Some of the party's base, believing Trump and Putin to be joined at the hip, has taken to ranting about 'treason' like a reconstituted John Birch Society. ..."
    "... The Democratic Party has now developed a new outlook on the world, a more ambitious partnership between liberal humanitarian interventionists and neoconservative militarists than existed under the cautious Obama. This may be the most disastrous consequence for the Democratic Party of the new anti-Russian orthodoxy: the loss of the opportunity to formulate a more humane and coherent foreign policy. The obsession with Putin has erased any possibility of complexity from the Democratic world picture, creating a void quickly filled by the monochrome fantasies of Hillary Clinton and her exceptionalist allies. ..."
    "... For people like Max Boot and Robert Kagan, war is a desirable state of affairs, especially when viewed from the comfort of their keyboards, and the rest of the world – apart from a few bad guys – is filled with populations who want to build societies just like ours: pluralistic, democratic and open for business. This view is difficult to challenge when it cloaks itself in humanitarian sentiment. There is horrific suffering in the world; the US has abundant resources to help relieve it; the moral imperative is clear. There are endless forms of international engagement that do not involve military intervention. But it is the path taken by US policy often enough that one may suspect humanitarian rhetoric is nothing more than window-dressing for a more mundane geopolitics – one that defines the national interest as global and virtually limitless. ..."
    "... The prospect of impeaching Trump and removing him from office by convicting him of collusion with Russia has created an atmosphere of almost giddy anticipation among leading Democrats, allowing them to forget that the rest of the Republican Party is composed of many politicians far more skilful in Washington's ways than their president will ever be. ..."
    "... They are posing an overdue challenge to the long con of neoliberalism, and the technocratic arrogance that led to Clinton's defeat in Rust Belt states. Recognising that the current leadership will not bring about significant change, they are seeking funding from outside the DNC. ..."
    "... Democrat leaders have persuaded themselves (and much of their base) that all the republic needs is a restoration of the status quo ante Trump. They remain oblivious to popular impatience with familiar formulas. ..."
    "... Democratic insurgents are also developing a populist critique of the imperial hubris that has sponsored multiple failed crusades, extorted disproportionate sacrifice from the working class and provoked support for Trump, who presented himself (however misleadingly) as an opponent of open-ended interventionism. On foreign policy, the insurgents face an even more entrenched opposition than on domestic policy: a bipartisan consensus aflame with outrage at the threat to democracy supposedly posed by Russian hacking. Still, they may have found a tactical way forward, by focusing on the unequal burden borne by the poor and working class in the promotion and maintenance of American empire. ..."
    "... This approach animates Autopsy: The Democratic Party in Crisis, a 33-page document whose authors include Norman Solomon, founder of the web-based insurgent lobby RootsAction.org. 'The Democratic Party's claims of fighting for "working families" have been undermined by its refusal to directly challenge corporate power, enabling Trump to masquerade as a champion of the people,' Autopsy announces. ..."
    "... Clinton's record of uncritical commitment to military intervention allowed Trump to have it both ways, playing to jingoist resentment while posing as an opponent of protracted and pointless war. ..."
    "... If the insurgent movements within the Democratic Party begin to formulate an intelligent foreign policy critique, a re-examination may finally occur. And the world may come into sharper focus as a place where American power, like American virtue, is limited. For this Democrat, that is an outcome devoutly to be wished. It's a long shot, but there is something happening out there. ..."
    Jan 04, 2018 | lrb.co.uk

    American politics have rarely presented a more disheartening spectacle. The repellent and dangerous antics of Donald Trump are troubling enough, but so is the Democratic Party leadership's failure to take in the significance of the 2016 election campaign. Bernie Sanders's challenge to Hillary Clinton, combined with Trump's triumph, revealed the breadth of popular anger at politics as usual – the blend of neoliberal domestic policy and interventionist foreign policy that constitutes consensus in Washington. Neoliberals celebrate market utility as the sole criterion of worth; interventionists exalt military adventure abroad as a means of fighting evil in order to secure global progress . Both agendas have proved calamitous for most Americans. Many registered their disaffection in 2016. Sanders is a social democrat and Trump a demagogic mountebank, but their campaigns underscored a widespread repudiation of the Washington consensus. For about a week after the election, pundits discussed the possibility of a more capacious Democratic strategy. It appeared that the party might learn something from Clinton's defeat. Then everything changed.

    ... ... ...

    [Jan 02, 2018] Jill Stein in the Cross-hairs by Mike Whitney

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... The Russia Investigation shifts to Clinton's Political Rivals ..."
    "... Let me get this straight: The Democrats think Stein siphoned votes away from Hillary, so Stein must be a "Russian agent". Is that it? ..."
    "... The persecution of Jill Stein strips away the facade once and for all exposing Russia-gate as a complete fraud that is being used to exact revenge on the adversaries of Hillary Clinton and her reprobate friends. The New York Times even admits as much. ..."
    "... That's what's really really going on, the fatcat honchos behind the scenes are just settling scores for Hillary's lost election. It's payback time for the Clinton Mafia. Here's more baloney from the Times: ..."
    "... Give me a break. Does anyone on the Senate Intelligence Committee honestly believe that Jill Stein is a Russian agent? ..."
    "... Of course not. They're just harassing her to send a message to anyone who might be thinking about running for president in the future. They're saying, "You'd better watch your step or we'll trump-up charges against you and make your life a living hell. Isn't that the message?You're damn right it is! ..."
    "... "This is a witch hunt. It is neo-McCarthyism, plain and simple. The people who are outright calling Stein a Russian agent are making a complete mockery of themselves and of the American political process ..."
    "... Dragging Stein into this mess shows Clinton Democrats up for what they really are. It proves that the 'Resist' crowd's crusade is not just about Trump and "collusion" -- it's also about discrediting all dissenting American voices and establishing their own definition of what political opposition is supposed to look like -- and for the Clinton cult, it's not supposed to look like Jill Stein . ..."
    "... Anyone who disagrees with the Democrats is a Putin puppet -- and if you've ever been to Moscow, forget it -- don't even bother trying to defend yourself. Off with your head." ("McCarthy-style targeting of Jill Stein proves Democrats have truly lost the plot", RT) ..."
    "... "The Socialist Equality Party condemns the targeting of Jill Stein, the Green Party presidential candidate in the 2016 election, by the neo-McCarthyite witch-hunters on the Senate Intelligence Committee . The attack on Stein, spearheaded by the Democratic Party, is an unconstitutional attempt to delegitimize and suppress political opposition to the monopoly of the capitalist two-party system . ..."
    "... This is the Orwellian reality of America in 2017, ruled by two right-wing, oligarchic parties that can and will tolerate no political opposition . ..."
    "... If you're a liberal and you hate Donald Trump, then you probably see the Russia-gate investigation as your best chance to achieve the Golden Grail of "impeachment". But are you willing to compromise your principles, join forces with the sinister and unscrupulous Clinton cabal, and throw allies like Jill Stein under the bus to achieve your goal? ..."
    "... How high a price are you willing to pay to get rid of Trump? That's the question that every liberal in America should be asking themselves. And they'd better answer it fast before it's too late. ..."
    "... Mueller is clearly not the upstanding 'protector of American values' he is painted he is a servile political degenerate. A lifetime of betrayal has rendered him ethically autistic. He is blind to the way his own actions condemn him before reasonable minds. Hopefully he will wake up when condemned hiself in an American Court of Law at some future date. ..."
    "... According to Edward Aguilar of Project for Nuclear Awareness, cancelling construction of the new submarines, reducing the current number of such subs, and retiring rather than replacing nuclear warheads and a couple hundred ICBMs would save $270 billion. ..."
    "... The weapons oligarchy appears to be a racketeering-influenced and corrupt organization. Luckily, the RICO Act provides for heavy criminal penalties for such death-dealing corruption. ..."
    Dec 26, 2017 | www.unz.com
    The Russia Investigation shifts to Clinton's Political Rivals Mike Whitney •

    "Jill Stein had dinner with Putin, so GET THE GUILLOTINE! That's how we roll in this country now. Didn't she know it's illegal to eat with Russians?"

    ... ... ...

    [Jan 02, 2018] Who Is the Real Enemy by Philip Giraldi

    Highly recommended!
    Money quote: "And even given that, I would have to qualify the nature of the threats. Russia and China are best described as adversaries or competitors rather than enemies as they have compelling interests to avoid war, even if Washington is doing its best to turn them hostile. Neither has anything to gain and much to lose by escalating a minor conflict into something that might well start World War 3. Indeed, both have strong incentives to avoid doing so, which makes the actual threat that they represent more speculative than real. And, on the plus side, both can be extremely useful in dealing with international issues where Washington has little or no leverage, to include resolving the North Korea problem and Syria, so the US has considerable benefits to be gained by cultivating their cooperation."
    Notable quotes:
    "... And even given that, I would have to qualify the nature of the threats. Russia and China are best described as adversaries or competitors rather than enemies as they have compelling interests to avoid war, even if Washington is doing its best to turn them hostile. Neither has anything to gain and much to lose by escalating a minor conflict into something that might well start World War 3. Indeed, both have strong incentives to avoid doing so, which makes the actual threat that they represent more speculative than real. And, on the plus side, both can be extremely useful in dealing with international issues where Washington has little or no leverage, to include resolving the North Korea problem and Syria, so the US has considerable benefits to be gained by cultivating their cooperation. ..."
    "... Cohen-Watnick is thirty years old and has little relevant experience for the position he holds, senior director for intelligence on the National Security Council. But his inexperience counts for little as he is good friend of son-in-law Jared Kushner. He has told the New York Times ..."
    "... Both Cohen-Watnick and Harvey share the neoconservative belief that the Iranians and their proxies in Syria and Iraq need to be confronted by force, an opportunity described by Foreign Policy ..."
    "... What danger to the U.S. or its actual treaty allies an Iranian influenced land corridor would constitute remains a mystery but there is no shortage of Iran haters in the White House. Former senior CIA analyst Paul Pillar sees "unrelenting hostility from the Trump administration" towards Iran and notes "cherry-picking" of the intelligence to make a case for war, similar to what occurred with Iraq in 2002-3. And even though Secretary of Defense James Mattis and National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster have pushed back against the impulsive Cohen-Watnick and Harvey, their objections are tactical as they do not wish to make U.S. forces in the region vulnerable to attacks coming from a new direction. Otherwise they too consider Iran as America's number one active enemy and believe that war is inevitable. Donald Trump has unfortunately also jumped directly into the argument on the side of Saudi Arabia and Israel, both of which would like to see Washington go to war with Tehran on their behalf. ..."
    "... You forgot the third significant potential threat from a friendly nation, i.e. Israel. Israel will sabotage any effort to normallize relations with Russia or even Iran. They will resort to false flag operations to start a war with Iran. ..."
    "... The problem with this White House, as well as the previous ones, is that none of the so-called experts really understand the Middle East. The US is not interested in having friendly relations with all nations. All her efforts are towards one goal, the world domination. Even if President Trump wanted to normalize relations with Russia, the MSM, the democrats, as well as, his republican opponents will not let him. ..."
    "... That is why the constan drumbeat of Russia's meddling in the 2016 election despite the fact that no proof has been given so far. Similarly, the "Iran has nuclear weapons" narrative is constantly repeated, the reports by IAEA and the 17 Intelligence Agencies to the contrary not withstanding. ..."
    "... The elevation of Muhammad bin Salman to the Crown Prince position will only make the Middle East situation worse. Israel will be able to manipulate him much more easily than the old guard. ..."
    "... The titanic elephant in the room -- that US foreign policy is not governed by "rationality" but by "special interests" seems .missing ..."
    "... Trump has no control of most government functions, particularly foreign affairs. The Deep State takes care of that for him. The Deep State has been calling the shots for decades and all Presidents who weren't assassinated have complied. Democracies never work and ours quit long ago. ..."
    "... I fully agree that attacking Iran would be yet another disaster but I don't understand why Saudi Arabia is portrayed as an 'enemy', the 'real' one, no less, in alt-media circles like this. I mean let's be honest with ourselves. KSA is the definition of a vassal state. Has been so since the state established established relations with the USA in the 1940s and the status was confirmed during the 1960s under King Faisal. Oil for security. Why pretend that they have any operational clearance from the US? ..."
    "... The BIGGEST threat to the USA is from within, as we are nothing more than an occupied colony of Apartheid Israel, paying that bastard state tributes each year in the form of free money and weapons, political backing at the UN, and never tire of fighting her wars of conquest. ..."
    "... The also have a choke-hold on Congress, which is always eager to wag their tail and hope their Yid Overlord gives them a treat and not a dressing-down in the Jew MSM, which is a career killer. ..."
    "... Israel's current "agreements" and its "kowtowing" to Saudi Arabia speaks VOLUMES. Once again, Israel is about to get others to do their "dirty work" for them. ..."
    "... There's no alternative to Saudi royal family rule of the peninsula. Who's there to replace them? Any other group, assuming there might be one somewhere waiting in the wings, would probably be anti-American and not as compliant as the Saudis. They've spent gigantic sums in the endless billions buying military equipment from the US, weapons they can't even fully use, as a way of making themselves indispensable customers. Many other billions of petrodollars find their way westward into our financial systems. They collaborate with the US in various schemes throughout the Muslim world using their intelligence services and money in furtherance of US goals. ..."
    "... Mattis still seems stuck with his Iran obsession. Shame I thought he had the intellectual curiosity to adapt. Trump has good instincts, I hope Tillerson comes to the fore, and Bannon stays influential. ..."
    "... Iran is US enemy #1 not only because it is against that country smaller than New Jersey with less people (Israel) but also because Iran has been a model for other countries to follow because of its intransigence to US oppression and attacks, financial political and cyber. As the world becomes multi-polar, Iran's repeated wise reactions to the world hegemon have been an inspiration to China and others to go their own way. The US can't stand that. ..."
    "... Contrary to the popular view, Wahabism is necessary to keep the local population under control. Particularly the minority Shia population who live along the eastern coast, an area, which incidentally also has the all the oil reserves. USA fully understands this. Which is why they not only tolerated Wahabism, but strongly promoted it during Afghan jihad. The operation was by and large very successful btw. It was only during the '90s when religion became the new ideology for the resistance against the empire across the Muslim world. Zero surprise there because the preceding ideology, radical left wing politics was completely defeated. Iran became the first country in this pattern. The Iranian left was decimated by the Shah, another vassal. So the religious right became the new resistance. ..."
    "... And as far as the KSA is considered, Wahabi preachers aren't allowed to attack the USA anyway. If any individual preacher so much as makes a squeak, he will be bent over a barrel. There won't be any "coming down very hard on Saudi Arabia" because USA already owns that country. ..."
    "... The British Empire 'made' the House of Saud. Thinking it wise to use Wahhabism to control Shia Islam is like thinking it wise to use blacks to control the criminal tendencies of Mexicans. ..."
    Jul 11, 2017 | www.unz.com

    It is one of the great ironies that the United States, a land mass protected by two broad oceans while also benefitting from the world's largest economy and most powerful military, persists in viewing itself as a potential victim, vulnerable and surrounded by enemies. In reality, there are only two significant potential threats to the U.S. The first consists of the only two non-friendly countries – Russia and China – that have nuclear weapons and delivery systems that could hit the North American continent and the second is the somewhat more amorphous danger represented by international terrorism.

    And even given that, I would have to qualify the nature of the threats. Russia and China are best described as adversaries or competitors rather than enemies as they have compelling interests to avoid war, even if Washington is doing its best to turn them hostile. Neither has anything to gain and much to lose by escalating a minor conflict into something that might well start World War 3. Indeed, both have strong incentives to avoid doing so, which makes the actual threat that they represent more speculative than real. And, on the plus side, both can be extremely useful in dealing with international issues where Washington has little or no leverage, to include resolving the North Korea problem and Syria, so the US has considerable benefits to be gained by cultivating their cooperation.

    Also, I would characterize international terrorism as a faux threat at a national level, though one that has been exaggerated through the media and fearmongering to such an extent that it appears much more dangerous than it actually is. It has been observed that more Americans are killed by falling furniture than by terrorists in a year but terrorism has a particularly potency due to its unpredictability and the fear that it creates. Due to that fear, American governments and businesses at all levels have been willing to spend a trillion dollars per annum to defeat what might rationally be regarded as a relatively minor problem.

    So if the United States were serious about dealing with or deflecting the actual threats against the American people it could first of all reduce its defense expenditures to make them commensurate with the actual threat before concentrating on three things. First, would be to establish a solid modus vivendi with Russia and China to avoid conflicts of interest that could develop into actual tit-for-tat escalation. That would require an acceptance by Washington of the fact that both Moscow and Beijing have regional spheres of influence that are defined by their interests. You don't have to like the governance of either country, but their national interests have to be appreciated and respected just as the United States has legitimate interests within its own hemisphere that must be respected by Russia and China.

    Second, Washington must, unfortunately, continue to spend on the Missile Defense Agency, which supports anti-missile defenses if the search for a modus vivendi for some reason fails. Mutual assured destruction is not a desirable strategic doctrine but being able to intercept incoming missiles while also having some capability to strike back if attacked is a realistic deterrent given the proliferation of nations that have both ballistic missiles and nukes.

    Third and finally, there would be a coordinated program aimed at international terrorism based equally on where the terror comes from and on physically preventing the terrorist attacks from taking place. This is the element in national defense that is least clear cut. Dealing with Russia and China involves working with mature regimes that have established diplomatic and military channels. Dealing with terrorist non-state players is completely different as there are generally speaking no such channels.

    It should in theory be pretty simple to match threats and interests with actions since there are only a handful that really matter, but apparently it is not so in practice. What is Washington doing? First of all, the White House is deliberately turning its back on restoring a good working relationship with Russia by insisting that Crimea be returned to Kiev, by blaming Moscow for the continued unrest in Donbas, and by attacking Syrian military targets in spite of the fact that Russia is an ally of the legitimate government in Damascus and the United States is an interloper in the conflict. Meanwhile congress and the media are poisoning the waters through their dogged pursuit of Russiagate for political reasons even though nearly a year of investigation has produced no actual evidence of malfeasance on the part of U.S. officials and precious little in terms of Moscow's alleged interference.

    Playing tough to the international audience has unfortunately become part of the American Exceptionalism DNA. Upon his arrival in Warsaw last week, Donald Trump doubled down on the Russia-bashing, calling on Moscow to "cease its destabilizing activities in Ukraine and elsewhere and its support for hostile regimes including Syria and Iran." He then recommended that Russia should "join the community of responsible nations in our fight against common enemies and in defense of civilization itself."

    The comments in Warsaw were unnecessary, even if the Poles wanted to hear them, and were both highly insulting and ignorant. It was not a good start for Donald's second overseas trip, even though the speech has otherwise been interpreted as a welcome defense of Western civilization and European values. Trump also followed up with a two hour plus discussion with President Vladimir Putin in which the two apparently agreed to differ on the alleged Russian hacking of the American election. The Trump-Putin meeting indicated that restoring some kind of working relationship with Russia is still possible, as it is in everyone's interest to do so.

    Fighting terrorism is quite another matter and the United States approach is the reverse of what a rational player would be seeking to accomplish. The U.S. is rightly assisting in the bid to eradicate ISIS in Syria and Iraq but it is simultaneously attacking the most effective fighters against that group, namely the Syrian government armed forces and the Shiite militias being provided by Iran and Hezbollah. Indeed, it is becoming increasingly clear that at least some in the Trump Administration are seeking to use the Syrian engagement as a stepping stone to war with Iran.

    As was the case in the months preceding the ill-fated invasion of Iraq in 2003, all buttons are being pushed to vilify Iran. Recent reports suggest that two individuals in the White House in particular have been pressuring the Trump administration's generals to escalate U.S. involvement in Syria to bring about a war with Tehran sooner rather than later. They are Ezra Cohen-Watnick and Derek Harvey, reported to be holdovers from the team brought into the White House by the virulently anti-Iranian former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.

    Cohen-Watnick is thirty years old and has little relevant experience for the position he holds, senior director for intelligence on the National Security Council. But his inexperience counts for little as he is good friend of son-in-law Jared Kushner. He has told the New York Times that "wants to use American spies to help oust the Iranian government," a comment that reflects complete ignorance, both regarding Iran and also concerning spy agency capabilities. His partner in crime Harvey, a former military officer who advised General David Petraeus when he was in Iraq, is the NSC advisor on the Middle East.

    Both Cohen-Watnick and Harvey share the neoconservative belief that the Iranians and their proxies in Syria and Iraq need to be confronted by force, an opportunity described by Foreign Policy magazine as having developed into "a pivotal moment that will determine whether Iran or the United States exerts influence over Iraq and Syria." Other neocon promoters of conflict with Iran have described their horror at a possible Shiite "bridge" or "land corridor" through the Arab heartland, running from Iran itself through Iraq and Syria and connecting on the Mediterranean with Hezbollah in Lebanon.

    What danger to the U.S. or its actual treaty allies an Iranian influenced land corridor would constitute remains a mystery but there is no shortage of Iran haters in the White House. Former senior CIA analyst Paul Pillar sees "unrelenting hostility from the Trump administration" towards Iran and notes "cherry-picking" of the intelligence to make a case for war, similar to what occurred with Iraq in 2002-3. And even though Secretary of Defense James Mattis and National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster have pushed back against the impulsive Cohen-Watnick and Harvey, their objections are tactical as they do not wish to make U.S. forces in the region vulnerable to attacks coming from a new direction. Otherwise they too consider Iran as America's number one active enemy and believe that war is inevitable. Donald Trump has unfortunately also jumped directly into the argument on the side of Saudi Arabia and Israel, both of which would like to see Washington go to war with Tehran on their behalf.

    The problem with the Trump analysis is that he has his friends and enemies confused. He is actually supporting Saudi Arabia, the source of most of the terrorism that has convulsed Western Europe and the United States while also killing hundreds of thousands of fellow Muslims. Random terrorism to kill as many "infidels and heretics" as possible to create fear is a Sunni Muslim phenomenon, supported financially and doctrinally by the Saudis. To be sure, Iran has used terror tactics to eliminate opponents and select targets overseas, to include several multiple-victim bombings, but it has never engaged in anything like the recent series of attacks in France and Britain. So the United States is moving seemingly inexorably towards war with a country that itself constitutes no actual terrorist threat, unless it is attacked, in support of a country that very much is part of the threat and also on behalf of Israel, which for its part would prefer to see Americans die in a war against Iran rather that sacrificing its own sons and daughters.

    Realizing who the real enemy actually is and addressing the actual terrorism problem would not only involve coming down very hard on Saudi Arabia rather than Iran, it would also require some serious thinking in the White House about the extent to which America's armed interventions all over Asia and Africa have made many people hate us enough to strap on a suicide vest and have a go. Saudi financing and Washington's propensity to go to war and thereby create a deep well of hatred just might be the principal causative elements in the rise of global terrorism. Do I think that Donald Trump's White House has the courage to take such a step and change direction? Unfortunately, no.

    Jake, July 11, 2017 at 4:12 am GMT

    The title of the article tells it all.

    Saudi Arabia is THE worst nation in the Middle East.

    Why does the US follow along blindly? Well, it is a WASP thing. We are the new Brit Empire. By the height of the Victorian era, virtually all English Elites were philoSemitic. Roughly half of the UK WASP Elite philoSemitism was pro-Jewish and half was pro-Arabic/Islamic. And by the time of WW1, the English Elite pro-Arabic/Islamic faction came to adore the house of Saud. So, our foreign policy is merely WASP culture continuing to ruin most of the rest of the world, including all the whites ruled by WASP Elites.

    Priss Factor, Website , July 11, 2017 at 4:41 am GMT
    US foreign policy is simple. Zionist Emperor goes thumbs up or thumbs down on whatever nation based on his own interests. That's about it.

    Priss Factor, July 11, 2017 at 4:49 am GMT

    In reality, there are only two significant potential threats to the U.S. The first consists of the only two non-friendly countries – Russia and China – that have nuclear weapons and delivery systems that could hit the North American continent and the second is the somewhat more amorphous danger represented by international terrorism.

    No, the only threats are the following three:

    Too many Meso-Americans invading from the border. These people have totally changed the SW and may drastically alter parts of US as well. This is an invasion. Meso-Americans are lackluster, but Too Many translates into real power, especially in elections.

    The other threat is Hindu-Indian. Indians are just itching to unload 100s of millions of their kind to Anglo nations. Unlike Chinese population that is plummeting, Indian population is still growing.

    The other threat, biggest of all, is the Negro. It's not Russian missiles or Chinese troops that turned Detroit into a hellhole. It is Negroes. And look at Baltimore, New Orleans, Selma, Memphis, Oakland, St. Louis, South Side Chicago, etc.

    Afromic Bomb is more hellish than atomic bomb. Compare Detroit and Hiroshima.

    Also, even though nukes are deadly, they will likely never be used. They are for defensive purposes only. The real missiles that will destroy the West is the Afro penis. US has nukes to destroy the world, but they haven't been used even during peak of cold war. But millions of Negro puds have impregnanted and colonized white wombs to kill white-babies-that-could-have-been and replaced them with mulatto Negro kids who will turn out like Colin Kapernick.

    http://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com/2017/07/pattern-recognition-great-sin-than.html

    The real missile gap is the threat posed by negro dong on white dong. The negro dong is so potent that even Japanese women are going Negroid and having kids with Negro men and raising these kids as 'Japanese' to beat up real Japanese. So, if Japan with few blacks is turning like this, imagine the threat posed by Negroes on whites in the West.

    Look at YouTube of street life and club life in Paris and London. Negro missiles are conquering the white race and spreading the savage genes.

    Look how Polish women welcomed the Negro missile cuz they are infected with jungle fever. ACOWW will be the real undoing of the West.

    Replies: @Z-man

    Besides what Priss Factor said above the following is to be reinforced with every real American man, woman and child.

    Israel , which for its part would prefer to see Americans die in a war against Iran rather that sacrificing its own sons and daughters.
    Israel, the REAL enemy! , @K India is looking to unload hindus to U.S? Quite the opposite. India is 'losing' its best brains to the U.S so its trying to attract them back to their country. For eg: The chief- architect of IBM's Watson is a Hindu Indian and so is the head of IBM's neuro-morphic computing. These people are advancing western technology.... civilian and also defense (IBM is collaborating with the American defense organization DARPA) instead of helping India achieve technological competence. And most of other super intelligent Indians also India is losing them to the west.

    (i dont hate the west for doing that. Any country in amercia's place would have done the same. It is india's job to keep its best brains working for it and not for others. And india is trying its best to do that albeit unsuccessfully.)

    Wally, July 11, 2017 at 5:02 am GMT

    The US govt. does what "that shitty little country" tells them to do.

    The True Cost of Parasite Israel. Forced US taxpayers money to Israel goes far beyond the official numbers. http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-true-cost-of-israel/

    How to Bring Down the Elephant in the Room: http://www.unz.com/tsaker/how-to-bring-down-the-elephant-in-the-room/

    RobinG, July 11, 2017 at 5:49 am GMT

    100 Words #UNRIG adds AMERICA FIRST, NOT ISRAEL to Agenda. ."A.I.P.A.C.. you're outta business!"

    Due to slanderous attacks by a Mossad internet psy-op, Steele now prioritizes Israeli malign influence on US. Also, check out Cynthia McKinney's twitter.

    #UNRIG – Robert David Steele Weekly Update

    @Durruti Nice action approach to cure ills of society.

    Enclosing copy of flier we have distributed - with a similar approach at a cure.

    *Flier distributed is adjusted & a bit more attractive (1 sheet - both sides).

    The key is to Restore the Republic, which was definitively destroyed on November 22, 1963.

    Feel free to contact.

    Use this, or send me a note by way of a response.

    For THE RESTORATION OF THE REPUBLIC

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles "

    The above is a portion of the Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson.

    We submit the following facts to the citizens of the United States.

    The government of the United States has been a Totalitarian Oligarchy since the military financial aristocracy destroyed the Democratic Republic on November 22, 1963 , when they assassinated the last democratically elected president, John Fitzgerald Kennedy , and overthrew his government. All following governments have been unconstitutional frauds. Attempts by Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King to restore the Republic were interrupted by their murder.

    A subsequent 12 year colonial war against Vietnam , conducted by the murderers of Kennedy, left 2 million dead in a wake of napalm and burning villages.

    In 1965, the U.S. government orchestrated the slaughter of 1 million unarmed Indonesian civilians.

    In the decade that followed the CIA murdered 100,000 Native Americans in Guatemala .

    In the 1970s, the Oligarchy began the destruction and looting of America's middle class, by encouraging the export of industry and jobs to parts of the world where workers were paid bare subsistence wages. The 2008, Bailout of the Nation's Oligarchs cost American taxpayers $13trillion. The long decline of the local economy has led to the political decline of our hard working citizens, as well as the decay of cities, towns, and infrastructure, such as education.

    The impoverishment of America's middle class has undermined the nation's financial stability. Without a productive foundation, the government has accumulated a huge debt in excess of $19trillion. This debt will have to be paid, or suffered by future generations. Concurrently, the top 1% of the nation's population has benefited enormously from the discomfiture of the rest. The interest rate has been reduced to 0, thereby slowly robbing millions of depositors of their savings, as their savings cannot stay even with the inflation rate.

    The government spends the declining national wealth on bloody and never ending military adventures, and is or has recently conducted unconstitutional wars against 9 nations. The Oligarchs maintain 700 military bases in 131 countries; they spend as much on military weapons of terror as the rest of the nations of the world combined. Tellingly, more than half the government budget is spent on the military and 16 associated secret agencies.

    The nightmare of a powerful centralized government crushing the rights of the people, so feared by the Founders of the United States, has become a reality. The government of Obama/Biden, as with previous administrations such as Bush/Cheney, and whoever is chosen in November 2016, operates a Gulag of dozens of concentration camps, where prisoners are denied trials, and routinely tortured. The Patriot Act and The National Defense Authorizations Act , enacted by both Democratic and Republican factions of the oligarchy, serve to establish a legal cover for their terror.

    The nation's media is controlled, and, with the school systems, serve to brainwash the population; the people are intimidated and treated with contempt.

    The United States is No longer Sovereign

    The United States is no longer a sovereign nation. Its government, The Executive, and Congress, is bought, utterly owned and controlled by foreign and domestic wealthy Oligarchs, such as the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, and Duponts , to name only a few of the best known.

    The 2016 Electoral Circus will anoint new actors to occupy the same Unconstitutional Government, with its controlling International Oligarchs. Clinton, Trump, whomever, are willing accomplices for imperialist international murder, and destruction of nations, including ours.

    For Love of Country

    The Restoration of the Republic will be a Revolutionary Act, that will cancel all previous debts owed to that unconstitutional regime and its business supporters. All debts, including Student Debts, will be canceled. Our citizens will begin, anew, with a clean slate.

    As American Founder , Thomas Jefferson wrote, in a letter to James Madison:

    "I set out on this ground, which I suppose to be self evident, 'that the earth belongs in usufruct to the living':"

    "Then I say the earth belongs to each of these generations, during it's course, fully, and in their own right. The 2d. Generation receives it clear of the debts and incumberances of the 1st. The 3d of the 2d. and so on. For if the 1st. Could charge it with a debt, then the earth would belong to the dead and not the living generation."

    Our Citizens must restore the centrality of the constitution, establishing a less powerful government which will ensure President Franklin Roosevelt's Four Freedoms , freedom of speech and expression, freedom to worship God in ones own way, freedom from want "which means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peace time life for its inhabitants " and freedom from fear "which means a world-wide reduction of armaments "

    Once restored: The Constitution will become, once again, the law of the land and of a free people. We will establish a government, hold elections, begin to direct traffic, arrest criminal politicians of the tyrannical oligarchy, and, in short, repair the damage of the previous totalitarian governments.

    For the Democratic Republic!
    Sons and Daughters of Liberty
    [email protected]

    MEexpert, July 11, 2017 at 5:50 am GMT

    In reality, there are only two significant potential threats to the U.S. The first consists of the only two non-friendly countries – Russia and China – that have nuclear weapons and delivery systems that could hit the North American continent and the second is the somewhat more amorphous danger represented by international terrorism.

    You forgot the third significant potential threat from a friendly nation, i.e. Israel. Israel will sabotage any effort to normallize relations with Russia or even Iran. They will resort to false flag operations to start a war with Iran.

    The problem with this White House, as well as the previous ones, is that none of the so-called experts really understand the Middle East. The US is not interested in having friendly relations with all nations. All her efforts are towards one goal, the world domination. Even if President Trump wanted to normalize relations with Russia, the MSM, the democrats, as well as, his republican opponents will not let him.

    That is why the constan drumbeat of Russia's meddling in the 2016 election despite the fact that no proof has been given so far. Similarly, the "Iran has nuclear weapons" narrative is constantly repeated, the reports by IAEA and the 17 Intelligence Agencies to the contrary not withstanding.

    The elevation of Muhammad bin Salman to the Crown Prince position will only make the Middle East situation worse. Israel will be able to manipulate him much more easily than the old guard.

    jilles dykstra, July 11, 2017 at 6:59 am GMT
    The western world is dependent on oil, especially ME oil. Saudi Arabia was made the USA's main oil supplier at the end of 1944. The Saud dynasty depends on the USA. That the Saudis would sponsor terrorism, why would they ? And which terrorism is Muslim terrorism ?

    Sept 11 not, Boston not, Madrid and London very questionably. We then are left with minor issues, the Paris shooting the biggest. That Saudi Arabia is waging war in Yemen certainly is with USA support. The Saudi army does what the USA wants them to do.

    Ludwig Watzal > Website , July 11, 2017 at 7:01 am GMT
    Mr. Giraldi, you forgot to mention Israel as one of America's biggest liabilities besides Saudi Arabia. But with such amateur dramatics in the White House and on the Security Council, the US is destined for war but only against the wrong enemy such as Iran. If the Saudis and the right-wing Netanyahu regime want to get after Iran they should do it alone. They surely will get a bloody nose. Americans have shed enough blood for these rascal regimes. President Trump should continue with his rapprochement towards Russia because both nation states have more in common than expected.
    animalogic, July 11, 2017 at 7:32 am GMT
    I'm a little disappointed in this article. Not that it's a bad article per se: perfectly rational, reasonable, academic even. But unfortunately, it's simply naive.

    "Realizing who the real enemy actually is and addressing the actual terrorism problem would not only involve coming down very hard on Saudi Arabia rather than Iran, it would also require some serious thinking in the White House about the extent to which America's armed interventions all over Asia and Africa have made many people hate us enough to strap on a suicide vest and have a go."

    Realize who the real enemy is ? Come down hard on the Saud's ? No -- really ?

    The titanic elephant in the room -- that US foreign policy is not governed by "rationality" but by "special interests" seems .missing. Israel, the Saudi's themselves, the MIC & so on & so forth ARE the special interests who literally "realise" US Policy.

    Paul, July 11, 2017 at 7:44 am GMT

    Well, the real enemy of the people are the real terrorists behind the scenes. Those who planned the 9/11 false flag. Those who sent the Anthrax letters to resisting congress members. Those who pre-planned the wars of aggression in the whole middle east.

    So any appeal to the "White House" is almost pointless since the White House is one element of the power structure captured by the war-criminal lunatics.

    To change something people in the US should at first stop buying their war criminal lying mass media.

    Then they should stop supporting ANY foreign intervention by the US and should stop believing any of the preposterous lies released by the media, the state dept., or any other neocon outlet.

    Actually Trump was probably elected because he said he was anti-intervention and anti-media. But did it help?

    The US needs mass resistance (demonstrations, strikes, boycotts, non-participation, sit-ins, grass-root information, or whatever) against their neocon/zionist/mafia/cia power groups or nothing will change.

    We need demonstrations against NATO, against war, against false flag terrorism, against using terrorists as secret armies, against war propaganda!

    B.t.w. Iran has always been one of the main goals. Think of it: Why did the US attack Afghanistan and Iraq? What have those two countries in common? (Hint: a look on the map helps to answer this question.)

    Replies:

    @Wizard of Oz

    I am beginning to get interested in why some people are sure 9/11 was a false flag affair covered up by a lot of lies. So may I try my opening question on you. How much, if any of it, have you read of the official 9/11 commission report? ,

    Realist, July 11, 2017 at 8:24 am GMT

    "The White House is targeting Iran but should instead focus on Saudi Arabia"

    Trump has no control of most government functions, particularly foreign affairs. The Deep State takes care of that for him. The Deep State has been calling the shots for decades and all Presidents who weren't assassinated have complied. Democracies never work and ours quit long ago.

    Chad, July 11, 2017 at 8:28 am GMT
    I fully agree that attacking Iran would be yet another disaster but I don't understand why Saudi Arabia is portrayed as an 'enemy', the 'real' one, no less, in alt-media circles like this. I mean let's be honest with ourselves. KSA is the definition of a vassal state. Has been so since the state established established relations with the USA in the 1940s and the status was confirmed during the 1960s under King Faisal. Oil for security. Why pretend that they have any operational clearance from the US?

    Contrary to the popular view, Wahabism is necessary to keep the local population under control. Particularly the minority Shia population who live along the eastern coast, an area, which incidentally also has the all the oil reserves.

    USA fully understands this. Which is why they not only tolerated Wahabism, but strongly promoted it during Afghan jihad. The operation was by and large very successful btw.

    It was only during the '90s when religion became the new ideology for the resistance against the empire across the Muslim world. Zero surprise there because the preceding ideology, radical left wing politics was completely defeated. Iran became the first country in this pattern. The Iranian left was decimated by the Shah, another vassal. So the religious right became the new resistance.

    And as far as the KSA is considered, Wahabi preachers aren't allowed to attack the USA anyway. If any individual preacher so much as makes a squeak, he will be bent over a barrel. There won't be any "coming down very hard on Saudi Arabia" because USA already owns that country.

    So what's the answer? Well, props to Phillip as he understood – "it would also require some serious thinking in the White House about the extent to which America's armed interventions all over Asia and Africa have made many people hate us enough to strap on a suicide vest and have a go."

    Bingo.

    Replies:

    @Jake

    Your analysis starts too late. The US supports Wahhabism and the House of Saud because the pro-Arabic/Islamic English Elites of 1910 and 1920 and 1935 supported Wahhabism and the House of Saud.

    The British Empire 'made' the House of Saud,

    Thinking it wise to use Wahhabism to control Shia Islam is like thinking it wise to use blacks to control the criminal tendencies of Mexicans.

    Anonymous, July 11, 2017 at 9:33 am GMT

    @Priss Factor

    US foreign policy is simple. Zionist Emperor goes thumbs up or thumbs down on whatever nation based on his own interests.

    That's about it. That's most of unz.com summed up in a single sentence!

    Johnny Smoggins, July 11, 2017 at 10:19 am GMT

    The casus belli of America's hostility towards Iran is the 3000 year old grudge that the Jews have been holding against Persia.
    Z-man, July 11, 2017 at 11:22 am GMT
    @Priss Factor

    In reality, there are only two significant potential threats to the U.S. The first consists of the only two non-friendly countries – Russia and China – that have nuclear weapons and delivery systems that could hit the North American continent and the second is the somewhat more amorphous danger represented by international terrorism.

    No, the only threats are the following three:

    Too many Meso-Americans invading from the border. These people have totally changed the SW and may drastically alter parts of US as well. This is an invasion. Meso-Americans are lackluster, but Too Many translates into real power, especially in elections.

    The other threat is Hindu-Indian. Indians are just itching to unload 100s of millions of their kind to Anglo nations. Unlike Chinese population that is plummeting, Indian population is still growing.

    The other threat, biggest of all, is the Negro. It's not Russian missiles or Chinese troops that turned Detroit into a hellhole. It is Negroes. And look at Baltimore, New Orleans, Selma, Memphis, Oakland, St. Louis, South Side Chicago, etc.

    Afromic Bomb is more hellish than atomic bomb. Compare Detroit and Hiroshima.

    Also, even though nukes are deadly, they will likely never be used. They are for defensive purposes only. The real missiles that will destroy the West is the Afro penis. US has nukes to destroy the world, but they haven't been used even during peak of cold war. But millions of Negro puds have impregnanted and colonized white wombs to kill white-babies-that-could-have-been and replaced them with mulatto Negro kids who will turn out like Colin Kapernick.

    http://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com/2017/07/pattern-recognition-great-sin-than.html

    The real missile gap is the threat posed by negro dong on white dong. The negro dong is so potent that even Japanese women are going Negroid and having kids with Negro men and raising these kids as 'Japanese' to beat up real Japanese. So, if Japan with few blacks is turning like this, imagine the threat posed by Negroes on whites in the West.

    Look at youtube of street life and club life in Paris and London. Negro missiles are conquering the white race and spreading the savage genes.

    Look how Polish women welcomed the Negro missile cuz they are infected with jungle fever. ACOWW will be the real undoing of the West.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yB69UkJGwk

    Besides what Priss Factor said above the following is to be reinforced with every real American man, woman and child.

    Israel , which for its part would prefer to see Americans die in a war against Iran rather that sacrificing its own sons and daughters.

    Israel, the REAL enemy!

    eah, July 11, 2017 at 11:26 am GMT
    The WH should focus on the USA.
    Replies: @Sowhat And what grudge is that? The only two I can find are connected. The deposing of our puppets, the Assads and the nationalization of their natural resources. I have the impression that it removes around future hegemon and the rich gas reserves off their coast and the decades long desire to run a pipeline west to the Mediterranean.

    Greg Bacon > Website , July 11, 2017 at 11:41 am GMT

    The BIGGEST threat to the USA is from within, as we are nothing more than an occupied colony of Apartheid Israel, paying that bastard state tributes each year in the form of free money and weapons, political backing at the UN, and never tire of fighting her wars of conquest.

    You won't see Israeli troops in the streets, since their confederates control the economy thru their control of the FED and US Treasury and most of those TBTF banks, which we always bail out, no matter the cost.

    The also have a choke-hold on Congress, which is always eager to wag their tail and hope their Yid Overlord gives them a treat and not a dressing-down in the Jew MSM, which is a career killer.

    The WH is also Israeli territory, especially now with a Jew NYC slumlord now Trump's top adviser and his fashion model faux Jew daughter egging Daddy on to kill more Arab babies, since she can't stand the sight of dead babies

    Wizard of Oz, July 11, 2017 at 11:50 am GMT

    @Paul Well, the real enemy of the people are the real terrorists behind the scenes. Those who planned the 9/11 false flag. Those who sent the Anthrax letters to resisting congress members. Those who pre-planned the wars of aggression in the whole middle east.

    So any appeal to the "White House" is almost pointless since the White House is one element of the power structure captured by the war-criminal lunatics.

    To change something people in the US should at first stop buying their war criminal lying mass media.

    Then they should stop supporting ANY foreign intervention by the US and should stop believing any of the preposterous lies released by the media, the state dept., or any other neocon outlet.

    Actually Trump was probably elected because he said he was anti-intervention and anti-media. But did it help?

    The US needs mass resistance (demonstrations, strikes, boycotts, non-participation, sit-ins, grass-root information, or whatever) against their neocon/zionist/mafia/cia power groups or nothing will change.

    We need demonstrations against NATO, against war, against false flag terrorism, against using terrorists as secret armies, against war propaganda!

    B.t.w. Iran has always been one of the main goals. Think of it: Why did the US attack Afghanistan and Iraq? What have those two countries in common? (Hint: a look on the map helps to answer this question.) I am beginning to get interested in why some people are sure 9/11 was a false flag affair covered up by a lot of lies. So may I try my opening question on you. How much, if any of it, have you read of the official 9/11 commission report?

    Replies:

    @Sowhat

    https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/former-nist-employee-speaks-out-on-wtc-investigation/

    @NoseytheDuke

    A better question: Have YOU read The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation by Phillip Shenon?

    Sowhat, July 11, 2017 at 12:13 pm GMT

    @eah The WH should focus on the USA. And what grudge is that? The only two I can find are connected. The deposing of our puppets, the Assads and the nationalization of their natural resources. I have the impression that it removes around future hegemon and the rich gas reserves off their coast and the decades long desire to run a pipeline west to the Mediterranean.
    anarchyst, July 11, 2017 at 12:24 pm GMT
    Israel's current "agreements" and its "kowtowing" to Saudi Arabia speaks VOLUMES. Once again, Israel is about to get others to do their "dirty work" for them.

    The point that everybody seems to miss is the fact that Judaism and Islam are inextricably linked. In fact, one could safely argue that Islam is an arabicized form of Judaism.

    1. Both Judaism and Islam promote their own forms of supremacy, relegating non-adherents as "lesser human beings", or in Judaism's take "no better than livestock, albeit with souls, to be used for the advantage of the jew".

    2. Both systems proscribe lesser (or no) punishment for those of each respective "tribe" who transgress against "outsiders" -- goyim or infidels. Both systems proscribe much harsher punishments against "outsiders" who transgress against those of each respective "tribe".

    3. When it comes to "equality under law", Israel is no better than Saudi Arabia, as a jew who has a disagreement with an "outsider" will always have the advantage of a judicial system which almost always rules for the jew.

    4. Both Judaism and Islam have taken it upon themselves to be arbiters of what the rest of the world should follow, demanding that "outsiders" conform to what THEY believe, thinking that they know what is best (for the rest of us). Just look at the demands moslems (who are guests in western Europe) make of local non-moslem populations.

    Read the jewish Talmud and islamic Koran you will find virtually identical passages that demonize and marginalize those of us who are "goyim" or "infidels".
    A pox on both their houses

    Replies:

    @ThreeCranes

    Now before I say what I'm going to say I want to say that Israel has the right to define and defend her interests just as China, Russia and USA do, as Geraldi says above. No nation or people can be denied this (without force).

    Having said that, I am grateful to you, anarchyst, for having pointed out the familial similarities between Islam and Judaism. In addition to what you say there is the fact that the Jewish genome is virtually identical to that of the Palestinians--except for that of Ashkenazi Jews who are more than half European.

    As far as I can see, Ashkenazi Jews have an existential choice. They can identify with their European half whereby they acknowledge that the Greeks and not Moses made the greatest contributions to humanity (and more particularly, their humanity) or they can go with their atavistic Semitic side and regress to barbarism. Science, Logic, Math, History, Architecture, Drama and Music or blowing up Buddhas and shrouding your women. Take your pick.

    Of course, this is sorta unfair in as much as they were kicked out of Europe and now dwell in the ME where if they try to act like Europeans they will be persecuted by their neighbors as apostates. The Jews do indeed have a tough row to hoe. , @bjondo Jews/Judaism bring death, destruction, misery.

    Muslims/Islam (minus Western creation of "Muslim"terrorists) brought golden ages to many areas.

    Christianity and Islam elevate the human spirit. Judaism degrades.

    bjondo, July 11, 2017 at 12:31 pm GMT

    SA is the tail wagged by US. US is the tail wagged by internal Jew. Israel/Jewry the enemy of all.

    Terrorism is Israeli weapon to take down Sunnis and Shias.

    US is Israel's go-to donkey.

    Sauds gone tomorrow if wished. And they may be with Arabia broken into pieces. Yinon still active.

    Agent76, July 11, 2017 at 12:54 pm GMT
    June 7, 2017 We Have Met the Evil Empire and It Is Us

    Life in America was pure injustice, the lash and the iron boot, despite the version of history we have been given by the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations who "re-invented" America and its history through taking control of public education in the late 1940s. You see, the multi-generational ignorance we bask in today is not unplanned. The threat represented by advances in communications and other technology was recognized and dealt with, utterly quashed at birth.

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/06/07/we-have-met-the-evil-empire-and-it-is-us/

    ThreeCranes, July 11, 2017 at 1:41 pm GMT
    @anarchyst Israel's current "agreements" and its "kowtowing" to Saudi Arabia speaks VOLUMES. Once again, Israel is about to get others to do their "dirty work" for them.
    The point that everybody seems to miss is the fact that Judaism and Islam are inextricably linked. In fact, one could safely argue that Islam is an arabicized form of Judaism.

    1. Both Judaism and Islam promote their own forms of supremacy, relegating non-adherents as "lesser human beings", or in Judaism's take "no better than livestock, albeit with souls, to be used for the advantage of the jew".

    2. Both systems proscribe lesser (or no) punishment for those of each respective "tribe" who transgress against "outsiders"--goyim or infidels. Both systems proscribe much harsher punishments against "outsiders" who transgress against those of each respective "tribe".

    3. When it comes to "equality under law", Israel is no better than Saudi Arabia, as a jew who has a disagreement with an "outsider" will always have the advantage of a judicial system which almost always rules for the jew.

    4. Both Judaism and Islam have taken it upon themselves to be arbiters of what the rest of the world should follow, demanding that "outsiders" conform to what THEY believe, thinking that they know what is best (for the rest of us). Just look at the demands moslems (who are guests in western Europe) make of local non-moslem populations.

    Read the jewish Talmud and islamic Koran...you will find virtually identical passages that demonize and marginalize those of us who are "goyim" or "infidels".
    A pox on both their houses... Now before I say what I'm going to say I want to say that Israel has the right to define and defend her interests just as China, Russia and USA do, as Geraldi says above. No nation or people can be denied this (without force).

    Having said that, I am grateful to you, anarchyst, for having pointed out the familial similarities between Islam and Judaism. In addition to what you say there is the fact that the Jewish genome is virtually identical to that of the Palestinians–except for that of Ashkenazi Jews who are more than half European.

    As far as I can see, Ashkenazi Jews have an existential choice. They can identify with their European half whereby they acknowledge that the Greeks and not Moses made the greatest contributions to humanity (and more particularly, their humanity) or they can go with their atavistic Semitic side and regress to barbarism. Science, Logic, Math, History, Architecture, Drama and Music or blowing up Buddhas and shrouding your women. Take your pick.

    Of course, this is sorta unfair in as much as they were kicked out of Europe and now dwell in the ME where if they try to act like Europeans they will be persecuted by their neighbors as apostates. The Jews do indeed have a tough row to hoe.

    Sowhat, July 11, 2017 at 1:49 pm GMT
    @Wizard of Oz I am beginning to get interested in why some people are sure 9/11 was a false flag affair covered up by a lot of lies. So may I try my opening question on you. How much, if any of it, have you read of the official 9/11 commission report? https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/former-nist-employee-speaks-out-on-wtc-investigation/
    virgile, July 11, 2017 at 1:55 pm GMT
    Trump is torn between Israel's permanent need to weaken its powerful neighbors (Iraq, Iran) and the necessity to protect the USA from terrorists attacks.

    Iran is an hypothetical threat to Israel, Saudi Arabia has proven to be a threat to the world.

    SolontoCroesus, July 11, 2017 at 2:07 pm GMT
    Saudi Arabian Manal al-Sharif is the latest (((MSM))) media darling; she wrote a book about being imprisoned for driving in Saudi Arabia. She is attempting to expand a movement to strike down the Saudi ban on women driving. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/09/opinion/sunday/saudi-arabia-women-driving-ban.html

    At the same time, (((MSM))) gleefully focuses on Iranian women who are wearing white hijab in protest of restrictions on women's attire in Iran. http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2017/05/24/why-women-and-some-men-in-iran-are-wearing-white-headscarves-on-wednesdays/

    I think these women ought to get together.

    In Iran, women drive.

    In Tehran and other Iranian cities including Iran's holiest, that is, most conservative cities like Mashad. there are taxi companies owned and run by women.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/turnstyle/iranian-women-take-the-wh_b_879041.html

    Tehran traffic makes NYC look like Mayberry RFD; many Iranians use small motorcycles to commute and take care of daily chores. It's not at all uncommon to see an Iranian woman in full chador driving a motorcycle with a child and parcels in tow.

    Iranian women could offer to teach the women of Saudi Arabia to drive.

    What could Saudi women teach Iranian women?

    NoseytheDuke, July 11, 2017 at 2:08 pm GMT

    @Wizard of Oz I am beginning to get interested in why some people are sure 9/11 was a false flag affair covered up by a lot of lies. So may I try my opening question on you. How much, if any of it, have you read of the official 9/11 commission report? A better question: Have YOU read The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation by Phillip Shenon?

    siberiancat, July 11, 2017 at 2:08 pm GMT

    Why is is so difficult to avoid this ugly term 'regime'? Does it really add anything to the discourse?
    anonymous, July 11, 2017 at 2:33 pm GMT
    There's no alternative to Saudi royal family rule of the peninsula. Who's there to replace them? Any other group, assuming there might be one somewhere waiting in the wings, would probably be anti-American and not as compliant as the Saudis. They've spent gigantic sums in the endless billions buying military equipment from the US, weapons they can't even fully use, as a way of making themselves indispensable customers. Many other billions of petrodollars find their way westward into our financial systems. They collaborate with the US in various schemes throughout the Muslim world using their intelligence services and money in furtherance of US goals.

    They live the royal life thanks to being able to use the money from their nation's resource wealth as their own personal kitty, living in palaces, buying obscene amounts of jewelry and other luxury goods, and so on. They'll never give that up and being a close ally of the US affords them protection which of course they pay for. They may be seen as an enemy by the average person but not at the elite level with whom they all consort and roll around in the money with.

    LondonBob, July 11, 2017 at 2:39 pm GMT
    http://mihsislander.org/2017/06/full-transcript-james-mattis-interview/

    Mattis still seems stuck with his Iran obsession. Shame I thought he had the intellectual curiosity to adapt. Trump has good instincts, I hope Tillerson comes to the fore, and Bannon stays influential.

    Don Bacon, July 11, 2017 at 3:02 pm GMT
    Iran is US enemy #1 not only because it is against that country smaller than New Jersey with less people (Israel) but also because Iran has been a model for other countries to follow because of its intransigence to US oppression and attacks, financial political and cyber. As the world becomes multi-polar, Iran's repeated wise reactions to the world hegemon have been an inspiration to China and others to go their own way. The US can't stand that.
    Corvinus, July 11, 2017 at 3:28 pm GMT
    @Paul Well, the real enemy of the people are the real terrorists behind the scenes. Those who planned the 9/11 false flag. Those who sent the Anthrax letters to resisting congress members. Those who pre-planned the wars of aggression in the whole middle east.

    So any appeal to the "White House" is almost pointless since the White House is one element of the power structure captured by the war-criminal lunatics.

    To change something people in the US should at first stop buying their war criminal lying mass media.

    Then they should stop supporting ANY foreign intervention by the US and should stop believing any of the preposterous lies released by the media, the state dept., or any other neocon outlet.

    Actually Trump was probably elected because he said he was anti-intervention and anti-media. But did it help?

    The US needs mass resistance (demonstrations, strikes, boycotts, non-participation, sit-ins, grass-root information, or whatever) against their neocon/zionist/mafia/cia power groups or nothing will change.

    We need demonstrations against NATO, against war, against false flag terrorism, against using terrorists as secret armies, against war propaganda!

    B.t.w. Iran has always been one of the main goals. Think of it: Why did the US attack Afghanistan and Iraq? What have those two countries in common? (Hint: a look on the map helps to answer this question.) "Well, the real enemy of the people are the real terrorists behind the scenes. Those who planned the 9/11 false flag."

    Adjust tin foil hat accordingly.


    Father O'Hara, July 11, 2017 at 3:59 pm GMT
    @Jake The title of the article tells it all.

    Saudi Arabia is THE worst nation in the Middle East.

    Why does the US follow along blindly? Well, it is a WASP thing. We are the new Brit Empire. By the height of the Victorian era, virtually all English Elites were philoSemitic. Roughly half of the UK WASP Elite philoSemitism was pro-Jewish and half was pro-Arabic/Islamic.

    And by the time of WW1, the English Elite pro-Arabic/Islamic faction came to adore the house of Saud.

    So, our foreign policy is merely WASP culture continuing to ruin most of the rest of the world, including all the whites ruled by WASP Elites. SECOND worst,my friend.

    Jake, July 11, 2017 at 4:23 pm GMT
    @Chad I fully agree that attacking Iran would be yet another disaster but I don't understand why Saudi Arabia is portrayed as an 'enemy', the 'real' one, no less, in alt-media circles like this.

    I mean let's be honest with ourselves. KSA is the definition of a vassal state. Has been so since the state established established relations with the USA in the 1940s and the status was confirmed during the 1960s under King Faisal. Oil for security.

    Why pretend that they have any operational clearance from the US?

    Contrary to the popular view, Wahabism is necessary to keep the local population under control. Particularly the minority Shia population who live along the eastern coast, an area, which incidentally also has the all the oil reserves. USA fully understands this. Which is why they not only tolerated Wahabism, but strongly promoted it during Afghan jihad. The operation was by and large very successful btw. It was only during the '90s when religion became the new ideology for the resistance against the empire across the Muslim world. Zero surprise there because the preceding ideology, radical left wing politics was completely defeated. Iran became the first country in this pattern. The Iranian left was decimated by the Shah, another vassal. So the religious right became the new resistance.

    And as far as the KSA is considered, Wahabi preachers aren't allowed to attack the USA anyway. If any individual preacher so much as makes a squeak, he will be bent over a barrel. There won't be any "coming down very hard on Saudi Arabia" because USA already owns that country.

    So what's the answer? Well, props to Phillip as he understood - "it would also require some serious thinking in the White House about the extent to which America's armed interventions all over Asia and Africa have made many people hate us enough to strap on a suicide vest and have a go."

    Bingo. Your analysis starts too late. The US supports Wahhabism and the House of Saud because the pro-Arabic/Islamic English Elites of 1910 and 1920 and 1935 supported Wahhabism and the House of Saud.

    The British Empire 'made' the House of Saud. Thinking it wise to use Wahhabism to control Shia Islam is like thinking it wise to use blacks to control the criminal tendencies of Mexicans.

    Durruti, July 11, 2017 at 4:25 pm GMT

    1,000 Words @RobinG #UNRIG adds AMERICA FIRST, NOT ISRAEL to Agenda.
    ..................."A.I.P.A.C.. you're outta business!"

    Due to slanderous attacks by a Mossad internet psy-op, Steele now prioritizes Israeli malign influence on US. Also, check out Cynthia McKinney's twitter.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxcnaNND4XM

    #UNRIG - Robert David Steele Weekly Update Nice action approach to cure ills of society.

    Enclosing copy of flier we have distributed – with a similar approach at a cure.

    *Flier distributed is adjusted & a bit more attractive (1 sheet – both sides).

    The key is to Restore the Republic, which was definitively destroyed on November 22, 1963.

    Feel free to contact.

    Use this, or send me a note by way of a response.

    For THE RESTORATION OF THE REPUBLIC

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles "

    The above is a portion of the Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson.

    We submit the following facts to the citizens of the United States.

    The government of the United States has been a Totalitarian Oligarchy since the military financial aristocracy destroyed the Democratic Republic on November 22, 1963 , when they assassinated the last democratically elected president, John Fitzgerald Kennedy , and overthrew his government. All following governments have been unconstitutional frauds. Attempts by Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King to restore the Republic were interrupted by their murder.

    A subsequent 12 year colonial war against Vietnam , conducted by the murderers of Kennedy, left 2 million dead in a wake of napalm and burning villages.

    In 1965, the U.S. government orchestrated the slaughter of 1 million unarmed Indonesian civilians.

    In the decade that followed the CIA murdered 100,000 Native Americans in Guatemala .

    In the 1970s, the Oligarchy began the destruction and looting of America's middle class, by encouraging the export of industry and jobs to parts of the world where workers were paid bare subsistence wages. The 2008, Bailout of the Nation's Oligarchs cost American taxpayers $13trillion. The long decline of the local economy has led to the political decline of our hard working citizens, as well as the decay of cities, towns, and infrastructure, such as education.

    The impoverishment of America's middle class has undermined the nation's financial stability. Without a productive foundation, the government has accumulated a huge debt in excess of $19trillion. This debt will have to be paid, or suffered by future generations. Concurrently, the top 1% of the nation's population has benefited enormously from the discomfiture of the rest. The interest rate has been reduced to 0, thereby slowly robbing millions of depositors of their savings, as their savings cannot stay even with the inflation rate.

    The government spends the declining national wealth on bloody and never ending military adventures, and is or has recently conducted unconstitutional wars against 9 nations. The Oligarchs maintain 700 military bases in 131 countries; they spend as much on military weapons of terror as the rest of the nations of the world combined. Tellingly, more than half the government budget is spent on the military and 16 associated secret agencies.

    The nightmare of a powerful centralized government crushing the rights of the people, so feared by the Founders of the United States, has become a reality. The government of Obama/Biden, as with previous administrations such as Bush/Cheney, and whoever is chosen in November 2016, operates a Gulag of dozens of concentration camps, where prisoners are denied trials, and routinely tortured. The Patriot Act and The National Defense Authorizations Act , enacted by both Democratic and Republican factions of the oligarchy, serve to establish a legal cover for their terror.

    The nation's media is controlled, and, with the school systems, serve to brainwash the population; the people are intimidated and treated with contempt.

    The United States is No longer Sovereign

    The United States is no longer a sovereign nation. Its government, The Executive, and Congress, is bought, utterly owned and controlled by foreign and domestic wealthy Oligarchs, such as the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, and Duponts , to name only a few of the best known.

    The 2016 Electoral Circus will anoint new actors to occupy the same Unconstitutional Government, with its controlling International Oligarchs. Clinton, Trump, whomever, are willing accomplices for imperialist international murder, and destruction of nations, including ours.

    For Love of Country

    The Restoration of the Republic will be a Revolutionary Act, that will cancel all previous debts owed to that unconstitutional regime and its business supporters. All debts, including Student Debts, will be canceled. Our citizens will begin, anew, with a clean slate.

    As American Founder , Thomas Jefferson wrote, in a letter to James Madison:

    "I set out on this ground, which I suppose to be self evident, 'that the earth belongs in usufruct to the living':"

    "Then I say the earth belongs to each of these generations, during it's course, fully, and in their own right. The 2d. Generation receives it clear of the debts and incumberances of the 1st. The 3d of the 2d. and so on. For if the 1st. Could charge it with a debt, then the earth would belong to the dead and not the living generation."

    Our Citizens must restore the centrality of the constitution, establishing a less powerful government which will ensure President Franklin Roosevelt's Four Freedoms , freedom of speech and expression, freedom to worship God in ones own way, freedom from want "which means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peace time life for its inhabitants " and freedom from fear "which means a world-wide reduction of armaments "

    Once restored: The Constitution will become, once again, the law of the land and of a free people. We will establish a government, hold elections, begin to direct traffic, arrest criminal politicians of the tyrannical oligarchy, and, in short, repair the damage of the previous totalitarian governments.

    For the Democratic Republic!
    Sons and Daughters of Liberty
    [email protected]

    SolontoCroesus, July 11, 2017 at 4:28 pm GMT

    Scholars at Mercatus Center, George Mason Univ. https://www.mercatus.org/statefiscalrankings

    are studying US states and ranking them according to financial stability measures. The states with biggest problems -- Illinois, California, New Jersey, Connecticut -- are in the mess they are in largely because of pension liability issues: some pensions are unfunded or underfunded.

    I recall that ten years ago about a dozen Jewish organizations formed the "Iran Task Force," ** whose primary activity was to persuade managers of State pension funds to divest from Iran-connected companies; that is, corporations & banks, etc. that did business with Iran. I recall very clearly that Arnold Schwartznegger was the poster child for California's vanguard role in divesting from such nasty nasty companies, in accord with the wishes of Jewish Israel-firsters.

    Perhaps the Mercatus scholars could prepare an exercise in alternative financial history: What shape would the US economy, and the various States's economies, be in if the US were NOT so overwhelmingly influenced by Israel firsters, and were NOT persuaded, Against Our Better Judgment, to entangle themselves in Israel's nefarious activities?

    ____
    ** The 2007 Iran Task Force is NOT the same as the group formed in 2015 or so, embedded in US House/Senate, with Joe Lieberman and Michael Hayden playing prominent roles in attempting to influence the Iran Deal.

    The 2007 initiative was sponsored by groups such as ZOA, RJC, AIPAC, etc., and / or spun off groups such as Foundation for Defense of Democracy, United Against Nuclear Iran.

    [Jan 02, 2018] Another strong suggestion that Gorbachov was traitor not just a person who lost control of the events he himself initiated

    Notable quotes:
    "... [Choose a single Handle and stick to it, or else use Anonymous/Anon. Otherwise, your comments may be trashed.] ..."
    Jan 02, 2018 | www.unz.com

    pet , December 30, 2017 at 3:33 am GMT

    [Choose a single Handle and stick to it, or else use Anonymous/Anon. Otherwise, your comments may be trashed.]

    For such an uncritical defender of everything Russian, Mr. Saker would be well advised to undertake an objective analysis of the Russian policies and actions from the time of Gorbachev to the current time in order to look for the true causes of the dismal geo-strategic position of Russia today, instead of blaming it all on western "partners" only. I'm sure he would be able to find a plenty of strategic mistakes done by the Russian leadership including Putin, during more than 3 decades, some of them result of naked ignorance and others result of pure stupidity.

    He would also have to touch on the issue of the "despotic" nature of the Russian state whereby one man, whether able or not, decides about everything while everyone else applauds.

    Some suggested points for the analysis: betrayal and hand-over of East Germany against its will, dissolution of Warsaw Pact without any paperwork (parallel dissolution of NATO was very much discussed at the time but Russians didn't even ask for it), dissolution of the USSR absolutely contrary to the interests of Russian people, destruction of "Mir" station, betrayal of Serbia, Cuba, siding with "partners" on Iran, Libya, North Korea etc., giving up on Vietnam and many Soviet friends and allies all over the world, half-hearted "intervention" in Georgia, loss of Ukraine due to negligence, occasional mistreatment of Belarus for its refusal to sell out to Russian oligarchs, total lack of care for the Russians stranded all over former Soviet space etc. etc.

    All theses things add up leading to where we are today. (I'm not even touching upon the state of affairs inside Russia regarding corruption, salaries, oligarchs, social justice and many others).

    El Dato , December 30, 2017 at 3:32 pm GMT
    @pet

    destruction of "Mir" station

    Woah slow down there. It was a piece of aging junk, had already had fire aboard, had nonfunctional solar panels, the computers were fritzing out, mold was growing in the isolation. The ISS, formerly Space Station Freedom, formerly Space Station Alpha, was taking shape. Time to dump that assemblage of canisters.

    Far more important is to have a heavy launcher like the Energia so you can launch it again and service it. Well, that doesn't exist either now. SAD!

    Have some old school space dreaming instead:

    Red Star, Winter Orbit (1983), Text .

    I still prefer Hinterlands (1981). Text .

    We had really settled in for Soviet Union forever. Amazing.

    [Jan 01, 2018] Donald Trump s National Security Strategy by Thierry Meyssan

    I strongly doubt that there is a break from the principle that the United States of America was the world's only superpower
    Notable quotes:
    "... During the mandates of George Bush Jr. and Barack Obama, the documents defining their National Security Strategies were based on the principle that the United States of America was the world's only superpower. They could wage the " endless war " advocated by Admiral Arthur Cebrowski, in other words they could systematically destroy any political organisation in the already unstable areas of the planet, beginning with the " Greater Middle East ". The Presidents indicated their projects for every region of the world. All that the unified fighting Commands had to do was apply these instructions. ..."
    "... He once again uses his slogan " America First! " and makes it his philosophical foundation. Historically, this formula is still associated with support for Nazism, but this is not its original meaning. It was initially a way of breaking with Roosevelt's Atlantist policy - the alliance with the British Empire in order to govern the world. ..."
    Jan 01, 2018 | www.voltairenet.org

    During the mandates of George Bush Jr. and Barack Obama, the documents defining their National Security Strategies were based on the principle that the United States of America was the world's only superpower. They could wage the " endless war " advocated by Admiral Arthur Cebrowski, in other words they could systematically destroy any political organisation in the already unstable areas of the planet, beginning with the " Greater Middle East ". The Presidents indicated their projects for every region of the world. All that the unified fighting Commands had to do was apply these instructions.

    Donald Trump's National Security Strategy breaks almost entirely with this literature. It conserves certain of the mythological elements of these previous mandates, but attempts above all to reposition the United States as the Republic it was in 1791 (which is to say at the moment of compromise with the Bill of Rights ) and no longer as the Empire that it became on 11 September 2001.

    The role of the White House, its diplomacy and its armed forces is no longer to rule the world, but to protect " the interests of the people of the United States ".

    In his introduction, Donald Trump marks his difference with his predecessors by denouncing the policies of " régime change " and " world democratic revolution " adopted by Ronald Reagan and managed under successive administrations by Trotskyite senior civil servants. He reaffirms the classic realpolitik as declared by Henry Kissinger for example, founded on the idea of " sovereign nations ".

    The reader will however keep in mind that certain intergovernmental agencies of the " Five Eyes " group, (Australia, Canada, the United States, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom), such as the National Endowment for Democracy, are still directed by Trotskyists.

    Donald Trump distinguishes three types of difficulty that his country is going to have to face -

    1. First of all, the rivalry with Russia and China;
    2. Next, the opposition of " rogue states " (North Korea and Iran) in their respective regions;
    3. Finally, the threat to international law embodied by the jihadist movements and transnational criminal organisations.

    Although he too considers the United States to be the incarnation of Good, he does not diabolise his rivals, adversaries and enemies, but attempts to understand them, unlike his predecessors.

    He once again uses his slogan " America First! " and makes it his philosophical foundation. Historically, this formula is still associated with support for Nazism, but this is not its original meaning. It was initially a way of breaking with Roosevelt's Atlantist policy - the alliance with the British Empire in order to govern the world.

    The reader will remember that the first cabinet of the Obama administration gave an excessive place to the members of the Pilgrim Society (no connection with the Mont-Pelerin Society), in other words a very private club presided by Queen Elizabeth II. This was the group which piloted the financial aprčs-crise of 2008.

    In order to guide this policy of returning to the Republican principles of 1791 and independence from British financial interests, Donald Trump poses four pillars:

    - The protection of the people of the United States, its homeland and its way of life;
    - The prosperity of the United States;
    - The power of its armies;
    - The development of its influence.

    Thus, he does not imagine his strategy in opposition to his rivals, his adversaries and his enemies, but as a function of his Republican and independent ideal.

    In order to avoid misinterpretation, he specifies that while he may consider that the United States is an example for the world, it is neither possible nor desirable to impose its way of life on others - particularly since this way of life could not be considered as the " inevitable final outcome of progress ". He does not think of international relations as being the rule of the United States over the world, but as the search for " reciprocal relations " with his partners.

    The four pillars of the America First doctrine of National Security

    - The protection of the people of the United States implies, above all, the restoration of the frontiers (terrestrial, aerial, maritime, spatial and cyber-spatial) which have been progressively destroyed by the globalists.

    These frontiers are intended to neutralise the use of weapons of mass destruction by terrorist and criminal groups, and also to contain pandemics and prevent the entry of drugs or illegal immigrants. Concerning the cyber-spatial frontiers, Donald Trump notes the necessity of securing the Internet by giving priority, successively, to National Security, Energy, the Banks, Health, Communications and Transports. But all that remains rather theoretical.

    While, since the presidency of Richard Nixon, the war against drugs had been selective, aimed not at drying up the flood of illegal substances, but at directing it towards certain ethnic minorities, Donald Trump responds to a new need. Aware of the collapse of life expectancy exclusively affecting white males under Barack Obama, the despair that it caused and the opioďd epidemic that ensued, Trump considers that the fight against the cartels is a question of national survival.

    Speaking of the war against terrorism, it is not clear whether he is referring to the " lone wolves " who continue to fight even after the fall of the Caliphate, as was the case with certain groups of the Waffen SS after the fall of the Reich, or the maintenance of the British system of jihadism. If the second hypothesis is correct, it would be a clear retraction of his declarations of intention during his electoral campaign and the first months of his presidency. He would therefore be obliged to clarify the evolution of relations between Washington and London, as well the consequences of this change concerning the management of NATO.

    In any case, we note a strange passage from the text which states as follows - " The United States will work with their allies and partners to dissuade and destabilise other groups which threaten the homeland - including the groups sponsored by Iran, like the Lebanese Hezbollah ".

    For all anti-terrorist actions, Donald Trump considers limited alliances with other powers, including Russia and China.

    Finally, concerning the resilience of the United States, he validates the programme of " Continuity of Government ", although it was the direct beneficiary of the coup d'Etat of 9/11. However, he states that citizens who are engaged and informed are the basis of this system, which would seem to avert the danger of a replay of such an event.

    - Concerning the prosperity of the United States , a condition for the development of his Defense programme, Donald Trump is a champion of the " American dream ", the " minimal State ", and the theory of " trickle-down economics " (from top to bottom). He therefore conceives of an economy based on free exchange and not financialisation. Taking the opposite point of view from the commonly-believed idea that free exchange was an instrument of Anglo-Saxon imperialism, he affirms that it is only fair for the primary actors if the new actors accept the rules. He claims that several states -- including China -- are profiting from this system without ever having entertained the intention of adopting its values.

    He bases himself on this idea -- and not on the analysis of the appearance of a transnational class of the super-rich -- in order to denounce multilateral commercial agreements.

    He continues by announcing the deregulation of all sectors where State intervention is unnecessary. At the same time, he is planning the opposition to all interventions by foreign States and their nationalised businesses, which could distort fair exchanges with the United States.

    He intends to develop theoretical research and its technical applications, and to support invention and innovation. For that, he plans for special and advantageous conditions of immigration in order to generate a " brain drain " towards the United States. Considering the skills thus acquired, not as the means for establishing a toll-booth on the world economy via patents, but as the motor of the US economy, he intends to create a National Security file of these techniques and to protect them in order to maintain his advance.

    Finally, on the subject of the access to sources of energy, he observes that for the first time, the United States is self-sufficient. He warns against policies initiated in the name of global warming, which implies limiting the use of energy. Here, Donald Trump is not talking about the financialisation of ecology, but is clearly lobbing a stone into the garden of France, promoter of the " greening of finance ". Replacing this question in a more general context, he affirms that the United States will support any States which are victims of energy blackmail.

    - Affirming that while the United States is no longer the sole superpower, it is the dominant power, he states that his central security objective is the maintenance of this military preeminence , in accordance with the Roman adage Si vis pacem, para bellum [ 1 ].

    He first observes that " China is attempting to exclude the United States from the Indo-Pacific region, to extend the reach of its State-run economic model, and to reorganise the region to its own advantage ". According to Trump, Beijing is in the process of building the world's second military capability (under the authority of General Xi Jinping) leaning for support on the skills of the United States.

    As for Russia, " it is seeking to re-establish its status as a great power and create spheres of influence at its borders ". To that purpose, it is " attempting to weaken the influence of the United States in the world and separate the USA from its allies and partners. It perceives NATO and the European Union as threats ".

    This is the first analysis of the goals and means of the rivals of the United States. Contrary to the " Wolfowitz doctrine ", the White House no longer considers the European Union as a competitor, but as the civilian wing of NATO. Breaking with the strategy of economic sabotage of the European Union by George Bush Sr. and Bill Clinton, Donald Trump posits the possibility of cooperating with his rivals (which are now Russia and China), but only from a " position of strength ".

    The current period sees the return of military competition, with three players this time. Knowing the tendency of military men to prepare for the last war, rather than trying to imagine the next, it is a good idea to rethink the organisation and allocation of the armies while remembering that your rivals will position themselves in whatever sector they choose. We should note that it is not in this chapter that Donald Trump evokes the Pentagon's Achilles heel, but much earlier in the text. It is in his introduction, at a moment when the reader is absorbed in philosophical considerations, that he mentions the new breed of Russian weapons, and in particular their capacity to inhibit the commands and controls of NATO equipment.

    The Pentagon must renew its arsenal, both in quantity and in quality. It has to abandon the illusion that its technological superiority (in reality, now overtaken by Russia) can make up for its inferiority in numbers. There follows a long study of the domains of armament, including nuclear weapons, which have to be modernised.

    Donald Trump intends to inverse the current functioning of the Defense industry. The industry currently tries to sell its products to the Federal state -- Trump hopes that the Federal state will launch its own offers, and that the industrials will respond to these new needs. We know that today, the Defense industry no longer has the engineers it needs to realise new projects. The failure of the F-35 is the most striking example of this. The change for which the President is hoping therefore supposes the prior organisation of the " brain drain " towards the United States which he has already evoked.

    As far as Intelligence is concerned, he has adopted the theories of his ex-National Security advisor General Michael Flynn. He wants to reposition not only the Defense Intelligence Agency, but the entire " Intelligence community ". The objective is no longer being able to pinpoint, at any moment, one terrorist chief or another, but being able to anticipate the strategic evolutions of its rivals, adversaries and enemies. This means abandoning the obsession with GPS and high-tech gadgets in order to rehabilitate analysis.

    Finally, he considers the State Department to be a tool enabling the creation of a positive environment for his country, including with his rivals. It is no longer the means of extending the interests of multinational companies, which it was under George Bush Sr. and Bill Clinton, nor the organiser of the Empire which it became under Bush Jr. and Barack Obama. US diplomats therefore need to regain a little political dexterity.

    - The chapter dedicated to the influence of the United States clarifies the end of the " globalisation " of the " American way of life ". The United States will not seek to impose their values on others. They will treat all people equally, and will valorise those who respect the rule of law.

    In order to encourage those countries who might wish to become partners, but whose investments are governed by the State, he plans to offer them alternatives solutions which would facilitate the reform of their economy.

    Concerning intergovernmental organisations, he announces that he will refuse to hand over the slightest part of sovereignty if it must be shared with countries who question the constitutional principles of the USA - a direct allusion to the International Criminal Court, for example. On the other hand, he says nothing about the extra-territoriality of US Justice, which violates the constitutional principles of other countries.

    Finally, reviewing the long tradition which came from the compromise of 1791, he affirms that the United States will continue to support those who fight for human dignity or religious freedom (not to be confused with freedom of conscience).

    It is only after this long exposé that Donald Trump addresses the regional application of his doctrine. Nothing new is announced, apart from an alliance with Australia, India and Japan to contain China and combat North Korea.

    At best we learn about two new approaches to the Middle East. Experience with Daesh has shown that the main problem is not the Israëli question, but that of the jihadist ideology. And what Washington blames Iran for is the perpetuation of the cycle of violence by its refusal to negotiate.

    By default, the reader understands that the Pentagon has to abandon the project by Admiral Arthur Cebrowski that Donald Rumfeld imposed on 11 September. The " endless war " is over. The tension should not only stop spreading throughout the world, but lessen in the Greater Middle East.

    Donald Trump's National Security doctrine is very solidly constructed, on the historical level (we can see the influence of General Jim Mattis) and on the philosophical level (following ex-Special advisor Steve Bannon). It is based on a rigorous analysis of the challenges to US power (in conformity with the work of General H. R. McMaster). It validates the State Department's budget cuts (operated by Rex Tillerson). Contrary to the received wisdom of US journalists, the Trump administration has managed to develop a coherent synthesis which clearly distances itself from previous visions.

    However, the absence of an explicit regional strategy attests to the extent of the ongoing revolution. Nothing guarantees that the military leaders will apply this new philosophy in their respective domains - particularly since we were able to note, only a few days ago, the collusion between US Forces and the jihadists in Syria. Thierry Meyssan

    Translation
    Pete Kimberley

    [Jan 01, 2018] Putin Foresaw Death of US Global Power by Finian Cunningham

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... He condemned the "aspirations of world supremacy" as a danger to global security. "We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law," adding at a later point: "One state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way." ..."
    "... Ten years on from that call, few can doubt that the global standing of the United States has indeed spectacularly fallen – just as Putin had forewarned back in 2007. The most recent example of demise was the sordid business earlier this month of arm-twisting and bullying by the US at the United Nations over the tabled resolutions repudiating Washington's ill-considered declaration of Jerusalem as the Israeli capital. ..."
    "... Putin's warning that the unipolar-seeking US would "destroy itself" could not be more apt. Because in order to seek such supremacy, such a power, by necessity of its ambition, must reject the rule of law and the principle of democracy as being nothing other than bothersome constraints on its hegemony. ..."
    "... The impossibility, and impermissibility, stems from the inevitable tendency of unilateral conduct, which rejects the principle of all being equal under the law. The would-be unipolar hegemon, by definition, sees itself as above the law. Such a self-anointed view of oneself leads to tyranny and abuse of power. ..."
    "... Since the end of the Cold War balance of power between the US and the former Soviet Union, the world has been plunged into a state of permanent wars and conflicts, due to the proclivity of the United States to act alone and on the basis that its "might is right" ..."
    "... Ten years ago in Munich, Putin noted: "Unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions have not resolved any problems. Moreover, they have caused new human tragedies and created new centers of tension. Judge for yourselves: wars as well as local and regional conflicts have not diminished even more people are dying than before. Significantly more, significantly more! ..."
    Dec 30, 2017 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

    Like a good wine, Russian President Vladimir Putin's famous speech delivered in Munich 10 years ago regarding global security has been rewarded with time. A decade on, the many facets contained in that address have only become all the more enhanced and tangible.

    Speaking to a senior international audience at the annual Munich Security Conference, on February 10, 2007, the Russian leader opened by saying he was going to speak about world relations forthrightly and not in "empty diplomatic terms". In what followed, Putin did not disappoint. With candor and incisiveness, he completely leveled the arrogance of American unilateral power.

    He condemned the "aspirations of world supremacy" as a danger to global security. "We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law," adding at a later point: "One state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way."

    But, moreover, Putin presciently predicted that the American arrogance of unipolar dominance would in the end lead to the demise of the power from seeking such supremacy. A unipolar world, he said, is "a world in which there is one master, one sovereign. And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within."

    Ten years on from that call, few can doubt that the global standing of the United States has indeed spectacularly fallen – just as Putin had forewarned back in 2007. The most recent example of demise was the sordid business earlier this month of arm-twisting and bullying by the US at the United Nations over the tabled resolutions repudiating Washington's ill-considered declaration of Jerusalem as the Israeli capital.

    Other examples of fallen American leadership can be seen in regard to President Trump's reckless threats of war – instead of diplomacy – with North Korea over its nuclear weapons program. Or Trump's irrational and unfounded belligerence towards Iran. The American propensity for using military force regardless of diplomacy and international law leaves most nations feeling a shudder of contempt and trepidation.

    Another example of fallen American leadership is seen in the boorish way the Trump administration has unilaterally rejected the 2015 international Paris Accord to combat deleterious climate change. Trump views it as a conspiracy to undermine the American economy, as he alluded to in his recent National Security Strategy. How can such a self-declared global leader be taken seriously, much less, with respect?

    Putin's warning that the unipolar-seeking US would "destroy itself" could not be more apt. Because in order to seek such supremacy, such a power, by necessity of its ambition, must reject the rule of law and the principle of democracy as being nothing other than bothersome constraints on its hegemony.

    President Trump likes to talk at times about the "peaceful coexistence of sovereign nation states". But whatever virtue he may be intending or paying lip service to, it is totally negated by American ambitions of unipolar dominance – ambitions that have been harbored in successive administrations in Washington since the end of the Cold War more than 25 years ago.

    To this view of the world, Putin said: "I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in today's world."

    The impossibility, and impermissibility, stems from the inevitable tendency of unilateral conduct, which rejects the principle of all being equal under the law. The would-be unipolar hegemon, by definition, sees itself as above the law. Such a self-anointed view of oneself leads to tyranny and abuse of power.

    Since the end of the Cold War balance of power between the US and the former Soviet Union, the world has been plunged into a state of permanent wars and conflicts, due to the proclivity of the United States to act alone and on the basis that its "might is right".

    Ten years ago in Munich, Putin noted: "Unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions have not resolved any problems. Moreover, they have caused new human tragedies and created new centers of tension. Judge for yourselves: wars as well as local and regional conflicts have not diminished even more people are dying than before. Significantly more, significantly more!"

    The unipolar position sought by the US leads ineluctably to a world of lawlessness, chaos, insecurity, fear, violence, and, in a fiendish feedback loop, reinforces the further deterioration in all such facets.

    "Today we are witnessing an almost un-contained hyper use of force – military force – in international relations, force that is plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts," said Putin in Munich.

    Recall that the Russian leader was speaking at the height of the US, British and NATO wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Those wars constitute perhaps the two biggest war crimes over the past quarter of a century. The violations went unpunished, as befitting the arrogance of unipolar power, and because of that impunity, the lawlessness and abuse of national sovereign rights have only become more exacerbated, as Putin forewarned.

    Diplomacy, international law, dialogue and consensus have been all but discarded. Look how the US and its NATO allies demolished Libya in 2011, and how they ransacked Syria covertly through a seven-year proxy dirty war; a war that was only stopped by Russia and Iran's principled military intervention at the end of 2015. Look how the US and its NATO allies have destabilized Ukraine, yet blame Russia, even as Washington readies in the New Year to supply lethal weapons to the regime in Kiev it installed by a violent coup in February 2014.

    The provocative expansion of NATO across Europe with its weapons pointed on Russia's border was also an outcome that Putin warned against in 2007, admonishing that it would lead to more insecurity and tensions in Europe, not less.

    Putin was right to talk straight truth to power in that 2007 speech, rather than using "empty diplomatic terms", as he put it.

    We cannot hope to rectify problems unless we address those problems accurately.

    In doing so, Putin deserves immense praise for exposing the corruption of absolute power in world relations.

    But there can be little doubt that his courageous speech in Munich in 2007 earned him the hatred of Washington's imperial planners. Putin was in effect giving notice that Russia was shaking off the vassal status that his predecessor Boris Yeltsin had accepted in the early post-Cold War years.

    "Russia is a country with a history that spans more than a thousand years and has practically always used the privilege to carry out an independent foreign policy. We are not going to change this tradition today," said a defiant Putin.

    It was this defiant independence and Putin's searing analysis of how so much of global insecurity is the direct result of American imperialist arrogance that has since made the Russian leader the target for so much hostility from Washington over the past 10 years.

    When you step back, it is amazing to observe the campaign of relentless Russophobia, vilification and slander directed at President Putin by Washington and the mass media under its control. The precedent for this demonization can be found in the Munich speech delivered by Putin a decade ago.

    But let's recap on the point he made about unipolar obsession being self-destructive.

    The American penchant for lawlessness and violation of democratic principles does not just stop with its intrigues of regime change and subversions abroad. Those very noxious habits of diseased US statecraft are now eating into the body politics of the US itself.

    Looking at the necrotic state of US politics and society – the venal, political infighting and corruption, the lack of respect for its own laws, and the lack of respect for its people's sovereignty and office of the president – there can be little doubt that the once ambitious superpower is dying a slow death from diseased practices that have turned inward.

    Putin saw it coming 10 years ago. And in a classic futile case, they have tried to shoot the messenger ever since.

    Finian Cunningham has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. He is a Master's graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. He is also a musician and songwriter. For nearly 20 years, he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organisations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent.

    This article was originally published by Strategic Culture Foundation -

    [Jan 01, 2018] Putin Foresaw Death of US Global Power by Finian Cunningham

    Notable quotes:
    "... He condemned the "aspirations of world supremacy" as a danger to global security. "We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law," adding at a later point: "One state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way." ..."
    "... Ten years on from that call, few can doubt that the global standing of the United States has indeed spectacularly fallen – just as Putin had forewarned back in 2007. The most recent example of demise was the sordid business earlier this month of arm-twisting and bullying by the US at the United Nations over the tabled resolutions repudiating Washington's ill-considered declaration of Jerusalem as the Israeli capital. ..."
    "... Putin's warning that the unipolar-seeking US would "destroy itself" could not be more apt. Because in order to seek such supremacy, such a power, by necessity of its ambition, must reject the rule of law and the principle of democracy as being nothing other than bothersome constraints on its hegemony. ..."
    "... The impossibility, and impermissibility, stems from the inevitable tendency of unilateral conduct, which rejects the principle of all being equal under the law. The would-be unipolar hegemon, by definition, sees itself as above the law. Such a self-anointed view of oneself leads to tyranny and abuse of power. ..."
    "... Since the end of the Cold War balance of power between the US and the former Soviet Union, the world has been plunged into a state of permanent wars and conflicts, due to the proclivity of the United States to act alone and on the basis that its "might is right" ..."
    "... Ten years ago in Munich, Putin noted: "Unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions have not resolved any problems. Moreover, they have caused new human tragedies and created new centers of tension. Judge for yourselves: wars as well as local and regional conflicts have not diminished even more people are dying than before. Significantly more, significantly more! ..."
    Dec 30, 2017 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

    Like a good wine, Russian President Vladimir Putin's famous speech delivered in Munich 10 years ago regarding global security has been rewarded with time. A decade on, the many facets contained in that address have only become all the more enhanced and tangible.

    Speaking to a senior international audience at the annual Munich Security Conference, on February 10, 2007, the Russian leader opened by saying he was going to speak about world relations forthrightly and not in "empty diplomatic terms". In what followed, Putin did not disappoint. With candor and incisiveness, he completely leveled the arrogance of American unilateral power.

    He condemned the "aspirations of world supremacy" as a danger to global security. "We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law," adding at a later point: "One state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way."

    But, moreover, Putin presciently predicted that the American arrogance of unipolar dominance would in the end lead to the demise of the power from seeking such supremacy. A unipolar world, he said, is "a world in which there is one master, one sovereign. And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within."

    Ten years on from that call, few can doubt that the global standing of the United States has indeed spectacularly fallen – just as Putin had forewarned back in 2007. The most recent example of demise was the sordid business earlier this month of arm-twisting and bullying by the US at the United Nations over the tabled resolutions repudiating Washington's ill-considered declaration of Jerusalem as the Israeli capital.

    Other examples of fallen American leadership can be seen in regard to President Trump's reckless threats of war – instead of diplomacy – with North Korea over its nuclear weapons program. Or Trump's irrational and unfounded belligerence towards Iran. The American propensity for using military force regardless of diplomacy and international law leaves most nations feeling a shudder of contempt and trepidation.

    Another example of fallen American leadership is seen in the boorish way the Trump administration has unilaterally rejected the 2015 international Paris Accord to combat deleterious climate change. Trump views it as a conspiracy to undermine the American economy, as he alluded to in his recent National Security Strategy. How can such a self-declared global leader be taken seriously, much less, with respect?

    Putin's warning that the unipolar-seeking US would "destroy itself" could not be more apt. Because in order to seek such supremacy, such a power, by necessity of its ambition, must reject the rule of law and the principle of democracy as being nothing other than bothersome constraints on its hegemony.

    President Trump likes to talk at times about the "peaceful coexistence of sovereign nation states". But whatever virtue he may be intending or paying lip service to, it is totally negated by American ambitions of unipolar dominance – ambitions that have been harbored in successive administrations in Washington since the end of the Cold War more than 25 years ago.

    To this view of the world, Putin said: "I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in today's world."

    The impossibility, and impermissibility, stems from the inevitable tendency of unilateral conduct, which rejects the principle of all being equal under the law. The would-be unipolar hegemon, by definition, sees itself as above the law. Such a self-anointed view of oneself leads to tyranny and abuse of power.

    Since the end of the Cold War balance of power between the US and the former Soviet Union, the world has been plunged into a state of permanent wars and conflicts, due to the proclivity of the United States to act alone and on the basis that its "might is right".

    Ten years ago in Munich, Putin noted: "Unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions have not resolved any problems. Moreover, they have caused new human tragedies and created new centers of tension. Judge for yourselves: wars as well as local and regional conflicts have not diminished even more people are dying than before. Significantly more, significantly more!"

    The unipolar position sought by the US leads ineluctably to a world of lawlessness, chaos, insecurity, fear, violence, and, in a fiendish feedback loop, reinforces the further deterioration in all such facets.

    "Today we are witnessing an almost un-contained hyper use of force – military force – in international relations, force that is plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts," said Putin in Munich.

    Recall that the Russian leader was speaking at the height of the US, British and NATO wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Those wars constitute perhaps the two biggest war crimes over the past quarter of a century. The violations went unpunished, as befitting the arrogance of unipolar power, and because of that impunity, the lawlessness and abuse of national sovereign rights have only become more exacerbated, as Putin forewarned.

    Diplomacy, international law, dialogue and consensus have been all but discarded. Look how the US and its NATO allies demolished Libya in 2011, and how they ransacked Syria covertly through a seven-year proxy dirty war; a war that was only stopped by Russia and Iran's principled military intervention at the end of 2015. Look how the US and its NATO allies have destabilized Ukraine, yet blame Russia, even as Washington readies in the New Year to supply lethal weapons to the regime in Kiev it installed by a violent coup in February 2014.

    The provocative expansion of NATO across Europe with its weapons pointed on Russia's border was also an outcome that Putin warned against in 2007, admonishing that it would lead to more insecurity and tensions in Europe, not less.

    Putin was right to talk straight truth to power in that 2007 speech, rather than using "empty diplomatic terms", as he put it.

    We cannot hope to rectify problems unless we address those problems accurately.

    In doing so, Putin deserves immense praise for exposing the corruption of absolute power in world relations.

    But there can be little doubt that his courageous speech in Munich in 2007 earned him the hatred of Washington's imperial planners. Putin was in effect giving notice that Russia was shaking off the vassal status that his predecessor Boris Yeltsin had accepted in the early post-Cold War years.

    "Russia is a country with a history that spans more than a thousand years and has practically always used the privilege to carry out an independent foreign policy. We are not going to change this tradition today," said a defiant Putin.

    It was this defiant independence and Putin's searing analysis of how so much of global insecurity is the direct result of American imperialist arrogance that has since made the Russian leader the target for so much hostility from Washington over the past 10 years.

    When you step back, it is amazing to observe the campaign of relentless Russophobia, vilification and slander directed at President Putin by Washington and the mass media under its control. The precedent for this demonization can be found in the Munich speech delivered by Putin a decade ago.

    But let's recap on the point he made about unipolar obsession being self-destructive.

    The American penchant for lawlessness and violation of democratic principles does not just stop with its intrigues of regime change and subversions abroad. Those very noxious habits of diseased US statecraft are now eating into the body politics of the US itself.

    Looking at the necrotic state of US politics and society – the venal, political infighting and corruption, the lack of respect for its own laws, and the lack of respect for its people's sovereignty and office of the president – there can be little doubt that the once ambitious superpower is dying a slow death from diseased practices that have turned inward.

    Putin saw it coming 10 years ago. And in a classic futile case, they have tried to shoot the messenger ever since.

    Finian Cunningham has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. He is a Master's graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. He is also a musician and songwriter. For nearly 20 years, he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organisations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent.

    This article was originally published by Strategic Culture Foundation -

    [Jan 01, 2018] What Will US-Russia Relations Look Like in 2018 by Nikolas Gvosdev

    Looks like this guy is a globalist and neocon in his major views. A defender of the "unipolar moment"
    2018 might be a tough year for Putin as Trump administration is not only as aggressive as Obama administration was, but to certain extent is more reckless then Obama administration.
    Oil price rise might help a bit, so the attempt to push Russia into economic chaos via artificial lowering of oil prices (With Saudi support) did not work all too well , but the US became way too aggressive under Trump and that might provoke retaliation on the part of Russia. Which can unleash a spiral fo violence leading to a war.
    Notable quotes:
    "... lethal military aid to Ukraine, preside over a tightening of sanctions on the Kremlin, the buildup of U.S. and NATO forces in eastern Europe and designate Russia as a strategic rival of the United States, the foreign policy commentariat would have had a field day. After all, Donald Trump was the "Siberian candidate" who was going to preside over a twenty-first century version of Yalta with his good friend Vladimir Putin. These were the steps that a Hillary Clinton team was expected to make, not someone who had run on a platform of seeking better relations with Moscow. ..."
    "... When it comes to Ukraine, the logic appears to be that Russia has too much to lose to restart the conflict and that U.S. efforts to rebuild the Ukrainian security forces will not provoke Russian steps to ascend the ladder of escalation. Likewise, the administration sees no reason for the U.S. to abandon its operations in Syria and does not feel any need to step back from the reiteration of the Obama-era policy that Bashar al-Assad has no political future in Syria. ..."
    "... So the starting point for U.S.-Russia relations in 2018 is the Trump administration's insistence that improved U.S.-Russia ties, while desirable, are not essential -- and that the ball is in Moscow's court to make a series of up-front concessions and policy reversals. ..."
    "... This is based on the analysis that Russia will face continued economic problems, will not be able to sanctions-proof its economy and will find it increasingly difficult to sustain its current international position. In some ways, this is a variant of the strategy pursued by the Obama administration: to wait for the moment when Russia can, proverbially, no longer pay the bills. ..."
    "... Putin's starting point -- based on his experience in dealing with four previous U.S. presidents, and now having a better sense of how U.S. domestic politics works -- is not to offer any first moves given the lack of confidence he has that any gestures would be reciprocated. ..."
    "... Nikolas K. Gvosdev is the Captain Jerome E. Levy chair of economic geography and national security at the Naval War College. He is also a contributing editor to the National Interest. The views expressed here are his own. ..."
    Jan 01, 2018 | nationalinterest.org
    lethal military aid to Ukraine, preside over a tightening of sanctions on the Kremlin, the buildup of U.S. and NATO forces in eastern Europe and designate Russia as a strategic rival of the United States, the foreign policy commentariat would have had a field day. After all, Donald Trump was the "Siberian candidate" who was going to preside over a twenty-first century version of Yalta with his good friend Vladimir Putin. These were the steps that a Hillary Clinton team was expected to make, not someone who had run on a platform of seeking better relations with Moscow.

    Yet here we are. The situation has changed over the past year from what was expected of Trump (when champagne corks popped in the Duma after the results of the November 2016 election were broadcast) to reports that Russian officials quietly admit that they miss dealing with their Obama-era counterparts. So what does this portend for the future?

    The strategic ethos of the Trump administration appears to be settling in to a variant of the old "selective cooperation" approach, buttressed by Trump's own personal assessment that U.S. diplomats were too keen to offer concessions and inducements to other countries to get their support when that support would have materialized in the end. As I previously noted, the gamble that the Trump team is taking vis-a-vis North Korea is that Russia and China have too much at stake to permit an unraveling of the situation on the Korean peninsula, and therefore there is no need for Washington to offer compromises in other areas to get Beijing and Moscow on board for tough new measures directed against Kim Jong-un. When it comes to Ukraine, the logic appears to be that Russia has too much to lose to restart the conflict and that U.S. efforts to rebuild the Ukrainian security forces will not provoke Russian steps to ascend the ladder of escalation. Likewise, the administration sees no reason for the U.S. to abandon its operations in Syria and does not feel any need to step back from the reiteration of the Obama-era policy that Bashar al-Assad has no political future in Syria.

    So the starting point for U.S.-Russia relations in 2018 is the Trump administration's insistence that improved U.S.-Russia ties, while desirable, are not essential -- and that the ball is in Moscow's court to make a series of up-front concessions and policy reversals.

    This is based on the analysis that Russia will face continued economic problems, will not be able to sanctions-proof its economy and will find it increasingly difficult to sustain its current international position. In some ways, this is a variant of the strategy pursued by the Obama administration: to wait for the moment when Russia can, proverbially, no longer pay the bills.

    Putin's starting point -- based on his experience in dealing with four previous U.S. presidents, and now having a better sense of how U.S. domestic politics works -- is not to offer any first moves given the lack of confidence he has that any gestures would be reciprocated. There will always be some Russian transgression that Congress will use as the excuse for not authorizing sanctions relief. The Russians are also aware that the Trump administration has added additional stress to the fractures in the trans-Atlantic alliance, with the previously warm and strong relationship between President Obama and German chancellor Angela Merkel now replaced by a degree of disdain in both Berlin and Washington for the other country's leader. America's Asian allies are likewise concerned about the reliability and staying power of the United States. So Putin might feel it a better strategy to concentrate his efforts on de-linking key U.S. partners from Washington's preferred agenda, a strategy that has already produced some early returns in the strategic reorientation of Turkey towards a closer working relationship with Russia.

    ... ... ..

    Nikolas K. Gvosdev is the Captain Jerome E. Levy chair of economic geography and national security at the Naval War College. He is also a contributing editor to the National Interest. The views expressed here are his own.

    [Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies

    Highly recommended!
    Essentially CIA dictates the US foreign policy. The tail is wagging the dog. The current Russophobia hysteria mean additional billions for CIA and FBI. As simple as that.
    The article contain some important observation about self-sustaining nature of the US militarism. It is able to create new threats and new insurgencies almost at will via CIA activities.
    The key problem is that wars are highly profitable for important part of the ruling elite, especially representing finance and military industrial complex. Also now part of the US ruling elite now consists of "colonial administrators" which are directly interested in maintaining and expanding the US empire. This is trap from which nation might not be able to escape.
    Notable quotes:
    "... The U.S. government may pretend to respect a "rules-based" global order, but the only rule Washington seems to follow is "might makes right" -- and the CIA has long served as a chief instigator and enforcer, writes Nicolas J.S. Davies. ..."
    "... Once the CIA went to work in Vietnam to undermine the 1954 Geneva Accords and the planned reunification of North and South through a free and fair election in 1956, the die was cast. ..."
    "... No U.S. president could extricate the U.S. from Vietnam without exposing the limits of what U.S. military force could achieve, betraying widely held national myths and the powerful interests that sustained and profited from them. ..."
    "... The critical "lesson of Vietnam" was summed up by Richard Barnet in his 1972 book Roots of War . "At the very moment that the number one nation has perfected the science of killing," Barnet wrote, "It has become an impractical means of political domination." ..."
    "... Even the senior officer corps of the U.S. military saw it that way, since many of them had survived the horrors of Vietnam as junior officers. The CIA could still wreak havoc in Latin America and elsewhere, but the full destructive force of the U.S. military was not unleashed again until the invasion of Panama in 1989 and the First Gulf War in 1991. ..."
    "... Half a century after Vietnam, we have tragically come full circle. With the CIA's politicized intelligence running wild in Washington and its covert operations spreading violence and chaos across every continent, President Trump faces the same pressures to maintain his own and his country's credibility as Johnson and Nixon did. ..."
    "... Trump is facing these questions, not just in one country, Vietnam, but in dozens of countries across the world, and the interests perpetuating and fueling this cycle of crisis and war have only become more entrenched over time, as President Eisenhower warned that they would, despite the end of the Cold War and, until now, the lack of any actual military threat to the United States. ..."
    "... U.S. Air Force Colonel Fletcher Prouty was the chief of special operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1955 to 1964, managing the global military support system for the CIA in Vietnam and around the world. Fletcher Prouty's book, The Secret Team: The CIA and its Allies in Control of the United States and the World , was suppressed when it was first published in 1973. Thousands of copies disappeared from bookstores and libraries, and a mysterious Army Colonel bought the entire shipment of 3,500 copies the publisher sent to Australia. But Prouty's book was republished in 2011, and it is a timely account of the role of the CIA in U.S. policy. ..."
    "... The main purpose of the CIA, as Prouty saw it, is to create such pretexts for war. ..."
    "... The CIA is a hybrid of an intelligence service that gathers and analyzes foreign intelligence and a clandestine service that conducts covert operations. Both functions are essential to creating pretexts for war, and that is what they have done for 70 years. ..."
    "... Prouty described how the CIA infiltrated the U.S. military, the State Department, the National Security Council and other government institutions, covertly placing its officers in critical positions to ensure that its plans are approved and that it has access to whatever forces, weapons, equipment, ammunition and other resources it needs to carry them out. ..."
    "... Many retired intelligence officers, such as Ray McGovern and the members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), saw the merging of clandestine operations with intelligence analysis in one agency as corrupting the objective analysis they tried to provide to policymakers. They formed VIPS in 2003 in response to the fabrication of politicized intelligence that provided false pretexts for the U.S. to invade and destroy Iraq. ..."
    "... But Fletcher Prouty was even more disturbed by the way that the CIA uses clandestine operations to trigger coups, wars and chaos. The civil and proxy war in Syria is a perfect example of what Prouty meant ..."
    "... The role of U.S. "counterterrorism" operations in fueling armed resistance and terrorism, and the absence of any plan to reduce the asymmetric violence unleashed by the "global war on terror," would be no surprise to Fletcher Prouty. As he explained, such clandestine operations always take on a life of their own that is unrelated, and often counter-productive, to any rational U.S. policy objective. ..."
    "... This is a textbook CIA operation on the same model as Vietnam in the late 1950s and early 60s. The CIA uses U.S. special forces and training missions to launch covert and proxy military operations that drive local populations into armed resistance groups, and then uses the presence of those armed resistance groups to justify ever-escalating U.S. military involvement. This is Vietnam redux on a continental scale. ..."
    "... China is already too big and powerful for the U.S. to apply what is known as the Ledeen doctrine named for neoconservative theorist and intelligence operative Michael Ledeen who suggested that every 10 years or so, the United States "pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show we mean business." ..."
    "... As long as the CIA and the U.S. military keep plunging the scapegoats for our failed policies into economic crisis, violence and chaos, the United States and the United Kingdom can remain the safe havens of the world's wealth, islands of privilege and excess amidst the storms they unleash on others. ..."
    "... But if that is the only "significant national objective" driving these policies, it is surely about time for the 99 percent of Americans who reap no benefit from these murderous schemes to stop the CIA and its allies before they completely wreck the already damaged and fragile world in which we all must live, Americans and foreigners alike. ..."
    "... Douglas Valentine has probably studied the CIA in more depth than any other American journalist, beginning with his book on The Phoenix Program in Vietnam. He has written a new book titled The CIA as Organized Crime : How Illegal Operations Corrupt America and the World, in which he brings Fletcher Prouty's analysis right up to the present day, describing the CIA's role in our current wars and the many ways it infiltrates, manipulates and controls U.S. policy. ..."
    "... In Venezuela, the CIA and the right-wing opposition are following the same strategy that President Nixon ordered the CIA to inflict on Chile, to "make the economy scream" in preparation for the 1973 coup. ..."
    "... The U.S. willingness to scrap the Agreed Framework in 2003, the breakdown of the Six Party Talks in 2009 and the U.S. refusal to acknowledge that its own military actions and threats create legitimate defense concerns for North Korea have driven the North Koreans into a corner from which they see a credible nuclear deterrent as their only chance to avoid mass destruction. ..."
    "... Obama's charm offensive invigorated old and new military alliances with the U.K., France and the Arab monarchies, and he quietly ran up the most expensive military budge t of any president since World War Two. ..."
    "... Throughout history, serial aggression has nearly always provoked increasingly united opposition, as peace-loving countries and people have reluctantly summoned the courage to stand up to an aggressor. France under Napoleon and Hitler's Germany also regarded themselves as exceptional, and in their own ways they were. But in the end, their belief in their exceptionalism led them on to defeat and destruction. ..."
    Oct 30, 2017 | consortiumnews.com

    The U.S. government may pretend to respect a "rules-based" global order, but the only rule Washington seems to follow is "might makes right" -- and the CIA has long served as a chief instigator and enforcer, writes Nicolas J.S. Davies.

    As the recent PBS documentary on the American War in Vietnam acknowledged, few American officials ever believed that the United States could win the war, neither those advising Johnson as he committed hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops, nor those advising Nixon as he escalated a brutal aerial bombardment that had already killed millions of people.

    As conversations tape-recorded in the White House reveal, and as other writers have documented, the reasons for wading into the Big Muddy, as Pete Seeger satirized it , and then pushing on regardless, all came down to "credibility": the domestic political credibility of the politicians involved and America's international credibility as a military power.

    Once the CIA went to work in Vietnam to undermine the 1954 Geneva Accords and the planned reunification of North and South through a free and fair election in 1956, the die was cast. The CIA's support for the repressive Diem regime and its successors ensured an ever-escalating war, as the South rose in rebellion, supported by the North. No U.S. president could extricate the U.S. from Vietnam without exposing the limits of what U.S. military force could achieve, betraying widely held national myths and the powerful interests that sustained and profited from them.

    The critical "lesson of Vietnam" was summed up by Richard Barnet in his 1972 book Roots of War . "At the very moment that the number one nation has perfected the science of killing," Barnet wrote, "It has become an impractical means of political domination."

    Even the senior officer corps of the U.S. military saw it that way, since many of them had survived the horrors of Vietnam as junior officers. The CIA could still wreak havoc in Latin America and elsewhere, but the full destructive force of the U.S. military was not unleashed again until the invasion of Panama in 1989 and the First Gulf War in 1991.

    Half a century after Vietnam, we have tragically come full circle. With the CIA's politicized intelligence running wild in Washington and its covert operations spreading violence and chaos across every continent, President Trump faces the same pressures to maintain his own and his country's credibility as Johnson and Nixon did. His predictable response has been to escalate ongoing wars in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia and West Africa, and to threaten new ones against North Korea, Iran and Venezuela.

    Trump is facing these questions, not just in one country, Vietnam, but in dozens of countries across the world, and the interests perpetuating and fueling this cycle of crisis and war have only become more entrenched over time, as President Eisenhower warned that they would, despite the end of the Cold War and, until now, the lack of any actual military threat to the United States.

    Ironically but predictably, the U.S.'s aggressive and illegal war policy has finally provoked a real military threat to the U.S., albeit one that has emerged only in response to U.S. war plans. As I explained in a recent article , North Korea's discovery in 2016 of a U.S. plan to assassinate its president, Kim Jong Un, and launch a Second Korean War has triggered a crash program to develop long-range ballistic missiles that could give North Korea a viable nuclear deterrent and prevent a U.S. attack. But the North Koreans will not feel safe from attack until their leaders and ours are sure that their missiles can deliver a nuclear strike against the U.S. mainland.

    The CIA's Pretexts for War

    U.S. Air Force Colonel Fletcher Prouty was the chief of special operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1955 to 1964, managing the global military support system for the CIA in Vietnam and around the world. Fletcher Prouty's book, The Secret Team: The CIA and its Allies in Control of the United States and the World , was suppressed when it was first published in 1973. Thousands of copies disappeared from bookstores and libraries, and a mysterious Army Colonel bought the entire shipment of 3,500 copies the publisher sent to Australia. But Prouty's book was republished in 2011, and it is a timely account of the role of the CIA in U.S. policy.

    Prouty surprisingly described the role of the CIA as a response by powerful people and interests to the abolition of the U.S. Department of War and the creation of the Department of Defense in 1947. Once the role of the U.S. military was redefined as one of defense, in line with the United Nations Charter's prohibition against the threat or use of military force in 1945 and similar moves by other military powers, it would require some kind of crisis or threat to justify using military force in the future, both legally and politically. The main purpose of the CIA, as Prouty saw it, is to create such pretexts for war.

    The CIA is a hybrid of an intelligence service that gathers and analyzes foreign intelligence and a clandestine service that conducts covert operations. Both functions are essential to creating pretexts for war, and that is what they have done for 70 years.

    Prouty described how the CIA infiltrated the U.S. military, the State Department, the National Security Council and other government institutions, covertly placing its officers in critical positions to ensure that its plans are approved and that it has access to whatever forces, weapons, equipment, ammunition and other resources it needs to carry them out.

    Many retired intelligence officers, such as Ray McGovern and the members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), saw the merging of clandestine operations with intelligence analysis in one agency as corrupting the objective analysis they tried to provide to policymakers. They formed VIPS in 2003 in response to the fabrication of politicized intelligence that provided false pretexts for the U.S. to invade and destroy Iraq.

    CIA in Syria and Africa

    But Fletcher Prouty was even more disturbed by the way that the CIA uses clandestine operations to trigger coups, wars and chaos. The civil and proxy war in Syria is a perfect example of what Prouty meant. In late 2011, after destroying Libya and aiding in the torture-murder of Muammar Gaddafi, the CIA and its allies began flying fighters and weapons from Libya to Turkey and infiltrating them into Syria. Then, working with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Croatia and other allies, this operation poured thousands of tons of weapons across Syria's borders to ignite and fuel a full-scale civil war.

    Once these covert operations were under way, they ran wild until they had unleashed a savage Al Qaeda affiliate in Syria (Jabhat al-Nusra, now rebranded as Jabhat Fateh al-Sham), spawned the even more savage "Islamic State," triggered the heaviest and probably the deadliest U.S. bombing campaign since Vietnam and drawn Russia, Iran, Turkey, Israel, Jordan, Hezbollah, Kurdish militias and almost every state or armed group in the Middle East into the chaos of Syria's civil war.

    Meanwhile, as Al Qaeda and Islamic State have expanded their operations across Africa, the U.N. has published a report titled Journey to Extremism in Africa: Drivers, Incentives and the Tipping Point for Recruitment , based on 500 interviews with African militants. This study has found that the kind of special operations and training missions the CIA and AFRICOM are conducting and supporting in Africa are in fact the critical "tipping point" that drives Africans to join militant groups like Al Qaeda, Al-Shabab and Boko Haram.

    The report found that government action, such as the killing or detention of friends or family, was the "tipping point" that drove 71 percent of African militants interviewed to join armed groups, and that this was a more important factor than religious ideology.

    The conclusions of Journey to Extremism in Africa confirm the findings of other similar studies. The Center for Civilians in Conflict interviewed 250 civilians who joined armed groups in Bosnia, Somalia, Gaza and Libya for its 2015 study, The People's Perspectives : Civilian Involvement in Armed Conflict . The study found that the most common motivation for civilians to join armed groups was simply to protect themselves or their families.

    The role of U.S. "counterterrorism" operations in fueling armed resistance and terrorism, and the absence of any plan to reduce the asymmetric violence unleashed by the "global war on terror," would be no surprise to Fletcher Prouty. As he explained, such clandestine operations always take on a life of their own that is unrelated, and often counter-productive, to any rational U.S. policy objective.

    "The more intimate one becomes with this activity," Prouty wrote, "The more one begins to realize that such operations are rarely, if ever, initiated from an intent to become involved in pursuit of some national objective in the first place."

    The U.S. justifies the deployment of 6,000 U.S. special forces and military trainers to 53 of the 54 countries in Africa as a response to terrorism. But the U.N.'s Journey to Extremism in Africa study makes it clear that the U.S. militarization of Africa is in fact the "tipping point" that is driving Africans across the continent to join armed resistance groups in the first place.

    This is a textbook CIA operation on the same model as Vietnam in the late 1950s and early 60s. The CIA uses U.S. special forces and training missions to launch covert and proxy military operations that drive local populations into armed resistance groups, and then uses the presence of those armed resistance groups to justify ever-escalating U.S. military involvement. This is Vietnam redux on a continental scale.

    Taking on China

    What seems to really be driving the CIA's militarization of U.S. policy in Africa is China's growing influence on the continent. As Steve Bannon put it in an interview with the Economist in August, "Let's go screw up One Belt One Road."

    China is already too big and powerful for the U.S. to apply what is known as the Ledeen doctrine named for neoconservative theorist and intelligence operative Michael Ledeen who suggested that every 10 years or so, the United States "pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show we mean business."

    China is too powerful and armed with nuclear weapons. So, in this case, the CIA's job would be to spread violence and chaos to disrupt Chinese trade and investment, and to make African governments increasingly dependent on U.S. military aid to fight the militant groups spawned and endlessly regenerated by U.S.-led "counterterrorism" operations.

    Neither Ledeen nor Bannon pretend that such policies are designed to build more prosperous or viable societies in the Middle East or Africa, let alone to benefit their people. They both know very well what Richard Barnet already understood 45 years ago, that America's unprecedented investment in weapons, war and CIA covert operations are only good for one thing: to kill people and destroy infrastructure, reducing cities to rubble, societies to chaos and the desperate survivors to poverty and displacement.

    As long as the CIA and the U.S. military keep plunging the scapegoats for our failed policies into economic crisis, violence and chaos, the United States and the United Kingdom can remain the safe havens of the world's wealth, islands of privilege and excess amidst the storms they unleash on others.

    But if that is the only "significant national objective" driving these policies, it is surely about time for the 99 percent of Americans who reap no benefit from these murderous schemes to stop the CIA and its allies before they completely wreck the already damaged and fragile world in which we all must live, Americans and foreigners alike.

    Douglas Valentine has probably studied the CIA in more depth than any other American journalist, beginning with his book on The Phoenix Program in Vietnam. He has written a new book titled The CIA as Organized Crime : How Illegal Operations Corrupt America and the World, in which he brings Fletcher Prouty's analysis right up to the present day, describing the CIA's role in our current wars and the many ways it infiltrates, manipulates and controls U.S. policy.

    The Three Scapegoats

    In Trump's speech to the U.N. General Assembly, he named North Korea, Iran and Venezuela as his prime targets for destabilization, economic warfare and, ultimately, the overthrow of their governments, whether by coup d'etat or the mass destruction of their civilian population and infrastructure. But Trump's choice of scapegoats for America's failures was obviously not based on a rational reassessment of foreign policy priorities by the new administration. It was only a tired rehashing of the CIA's unfinished business with two-thirds of Bush's "axis of evil" and Bush White House official Elliott Abrams' failed 2002 coup in Caracas, now laced with explicit and illegal threats of aggression.

    How Trump and the CIA plan to sacrifice their three scapegoats for America's failures remains to be seen. This is not 2001, when the world stood silent at the U.S. bombardment and invasion of Afghanistan after September 11th. It is more like 2003, when the U.S. destruction of Iraq split the Atlantic alliance and alienated most of the world. It is certainly not 2011, after Obama's global charm offensive had rebuilt U.S. alliances and provided cover for French President Sarkozy, British Prime Minister Cameron, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Arab royals to destroy Libya, once ranked by the U.N. as the most developed country in Africa , now mired in intractable chaos.

    In 2017, a U.S. attack on any one of Trump's scapegoats would isolate the United States from many of its allies and undermine its standing in the world in far-reaching ways that might be more permanent and harder to repair than the invasion and destruction of Iraq.

    In Venezuela, the CIA and the right-wing opposition are following the same strategy that President Nixon ordered the CIA to inflict on Chile, to "make the economy scream" in preparation for the 1973 coup. But the solid victory of Venezuela's ruling Socialist Party in recent nationwide gubernatorial elections, despite a long and deep economic crisis, reveals little public support for the CIA's puppets in Venezuela.

    The CIA has successfully discredited the Venezuelan government through economic warfare, increasingly violent right-wing street protests and a global propaganda campaign. But the CIA has stupidly hitched its wagon to an extreme right-wing, upper-class opposition that has no credibility with most of the Venezuelan public, who still turn out for the Socialists at the polls. A CIA coup or U.S. military intervention would meet fierce public resistance and damage U.S. relations all over Latin America.

    Boxing In North Korea

    A U.S. aerial bombardment or "preemptive strike" on North Korea could quickly escalate into a war between the U.S. and China, which has reiterated its commitment to North Korea's defense if North Korea is attacked. We do not know exactly what was in the U.S. war plan discovered by North Korea, so neither can we know how North Korea and China could respond if the U.S. pressed ahead with it.

    Most analysts have long concluded that any U.S. attack on North Korea would be met with a North Korean artillery and missile barrage that would inflict unacceptable civilian casualties on Seoul, a metropolitan area of 26 million people, three times the population of New York City. Seoul is only 35 miles from the frontier with North Korea, placing it within range of a huge array of North Korean weapons. What was already a no-win calculus is now compounded by the possibility that North Korea could respond with nuclear weapons, turning any prospect of a U.S. attack into an even worse nightmare.

    U.S. mismanagement of its relations with North Korea should be an object lesson for its relations with Iran, graphically demonstrating the advantages of diplomacy, talks and agreements over threats of war. Under the Agreed Framework signed in 1994, North Korea stopped work on two much larger nuclear reactors than the small experimental one operating at Yongbyong since 1986, which only produces 6 kg of plutonium per year, enough for one nuclear bomb.

    The lesson of Bush's Iraq invasion in 2003 after Saddam Hussein had complied with demands that he destroy Iraq's stockpiles of chemical weapons and shut down a nascent nuclear program was not lost on North Korea. Not only did the invasion lay waste to large sections of Iraq with hundreds of thousands of dead but Hussein himself was hunted down and condemned to death by hanging.

    Still, after North Korea tested its first nuclear weapon in 2006, even its small experimental reactor was shut down as a result of the "Six Party Talks" in 2007, all the fuel rods were removed and placed under supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the cooling tower of the reactor was demolished in 2008.

    But then, as relations deteriorated, North Korea conducted a second nuclear weapon test and again began reprocessing spent fuel rods to recover plutonium for use in nuclear weapons.

    North Korea has now conducted six nuclear weapons tests. The explosions in the first five tests increased gradually up to 15-25 kilotons, about the yield of the bombs the U.S. dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but estimates for the yield of the 2017 test range from 110 to 250 kilotons , comparable to a small hydrogen bomb.

    The even greater danger in a new war in Korea is that the U.S. could unleash part of its arsenal of 4,000 more powerful weapons (100 to 1,200 kilotons), which could kill millions of people and devastate and poison the region, or even the world, for years to come.

    The U.S. willingness to scrap the Agreed Framework in 2003, the breakdown of the Six Party Talks in 2009 and the U.S. refusal to acknowledge that its own military actions and threats create legitimate defense concerns for North Korea have driven the North Koreans into a corner from which they see a credible nuclear deterrent as their only chance to avoid mass destruction.

    China has proposed a reasonable framework for diplomacy to address the concerns of both sides, but the U.S. insists on maintaining its propaganda narratives that all the fault lies with North Korea and that it has some kind of "military solution" to the crisis.

    This may be the most dangerous idea we have heard from U.S. policymakers since the end of the Cold War, but it is the logical culmination of a systematic normalization of deviant and illegal U.S. war-making that has already cost millions of lives in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Yemen and Pakistan. As historian Gabriel Kolko wrote in Century of War in 1994, "options and decisions that are intrinsically dangerous and irrational become not merely plausible but the only form of reasoning about war and diplomacy that is possible in official circles."

    Demonizing Iran

    The idea that Iran has ever had a nuclear weapons program is seriously contested by the IAEA, which has examined every allegation presented by the CIA and other Western "intelligence" agencies as well as Israel. Former IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei revealed many details of this wild goose chase in his 2011 memoir, Age of Deception : Nuclear Diplomacy in Treacherous Times .

    When the CIA and its partners reluctantly acknowledged the IAEA's conclusions in a 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), ElBaradei issued a press release confirming that, "the agency has no concrete evidence of an ongoing nuclear weapons program or undeclared nuclear facilities in Iran."

    Since 2007, the IAEA has resolved all its outstanding concerns with Iran. It has verified that dual-use technologies that Iran imported before 2003 were in fact used for other purposes, and it has exposed the mysterious "laptop documents" that appeared to show Iranian plans for a nuclear weapon as forgeries. Gareth Porter thoroughly explored all these questions and allegations and the history of mistrust that fueled them in his 2014 book, Manufactured Crisis : the Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare , which I highly recommend.

    But, in the parallel Bizarro world of U.S. politics, hopelessly poisoned by the CIA's endless disinformation campaigns, Hillary Clinton could repeatedly take false credit for disarming Iran during her presidential campaign, and neither Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump nor any corporate media interviewer dared to challenge her claims.

    "When President Obama took office, Iran was racing toward a nuclear bomb," Clinton fantasized in a prominent foreign policy speech on June 2, 2016, claiming that her brutal sanctions policy "brought Iran to the table."

    In fact, as Trita Parsi documented in his 2012 book, A Single Roll of the Dice : Obama's Diplomacy With Iran , the Iranians were ready, not just to "come to the table," but to sign a comprehensive agreement based on a U.S. proposal brokered by Turkey and Brazil in 2010. But, in a classic case of "tail wags dog," the U.S. then rejected its own proposal because it would have undercut support for tighter sanctions in the U.N. Security Council. In other words, Clinton's sanctions policy did not "bring Iran to the table", but prevented the U.S. from coming to the table itself.

    As a senior State Department official told Trita Parsi, the real problem with U.S. diplomacy with Iran when Clinton was at the State Department was that the U.S. would not take "Yes" for an answer. Trump's ham-fisted decertification of Iran's compliance with the JCPOA is right out of Clinton's playbook, and it demonstrates that the CIA is still determined to use Iran as a scapegoat for America's failures in the Middle East.

    The spurious claim that Iran is the world's greatest sponsor of terrorism is another CIA canard reinforced by endless repetition. It is true that Iran supports and supplies weapons to Hezbollah and Hamas, which are both listed as terrorist organizations by the U.S. government. But they are mainly defensive resistance groups that defend Lebanon and Gaza respectively against invasions and attacks by Israel.

    Shifting attention away from Al Qaeda, Islamic State, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and other groups that actually commit terrorist crimes around the world might just seem like a case of the CIA "taking its eyes off the ball," if it wasn't so transparently timed to frame Iran with new accusations now that the manufactured crisis of the nuclear scare has run its course.

    What the Future Holds

    Barack Obama's most consequential international achievement may have been the triumph of symbolism over substance behind which he expanded and escalated the so-called "war on terror," with a vast expansion of covert operations and proxy wars that eventually triggered the heaviest U.S. aerial bombardments since Vietnam in Iraq and Syria.

    Obama's charm offensive invigorated old and new military alliances with the U.K., France and the Arab monarchies, and he quietly ran up the most expensive military budget of any president since World War Two.

    But Obama's expansion of the "war on terror" under cover of his deceptive global public relations campaign created many more problems than it solved, and Trump and his advisers are woefully ill-equipped to solve any of them. Trump's expressed desire to place America first and to resist foreign entanglements is hopelessly at odds with his aggressive, bullying approach to every foreign policy problem.

    If the U.S. could threaten and fight its way to a resolution of any of its international problems, it would have done so already. That is exactly what it has been trying to do since the 1990s, behind both the swagger and bluster of Bush and Trump and the deceptive charm of Clinton and Obama: a "good cop – bad cop" routine that should no longer fool anyone anywhere.

    But as Lyndon Johnson found as he waded deeper and deeper into the Big Muddy in Vietnam, lying to the public about unwinnable wars does not make them any more winnable. It just gets more people killed and makes it harder and harder to ever tell the public the truth.

    In unwinnable wars based on lies, the "credibility" problem only gets more complicated, as new lies require new scapegoats and convoluted narratives to explain away graveyards filled by old lies. Obama's cynical global charm offensive bought the "war on terror" another eight years, but that only allowed the CIA to drag the U.S. into more trouble and spread its chaos to more places around the world.

    Meanwhile, Russian President Putin is winning hearts and minds in capitals around the world by calling for a recommitment to the rule of international law , which prohibits the threat or use of military force except in self-defense. Every new U.S. threat or act of aggression will only make Putin's case more persuasive, not least to important U.S. allies like South Korea, Germany and other members of the European Union, whose complicity in U.S. aggression has until now helped to give it a false veneer of political legitimacy.

    Throughout history, serial aggression has nearly always provoked increasingly united opposition, as peace-loving countries and people have reluctantly summoned the courage to stand up to an aggressor. France under Napoleon and Hitler's Germany also regarded themselves as exceptional, and in their own ways they were. But in the end, their belief in their exceptionalism led them on to defeat and destruction.

    Americans had better hope that we are not so exceptional, and that the world will find a diplomatic rather than a military "solution" to its American problem. Our chances of survival would improve a great deal if American officials and politicians would finally start to act like something other than putty in the hands of the CIA

    Nicolas J. S. Davies is the author of Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq . He also wrote the chapters on "Obama at War" in Grading the 44th President: a Report Card on Barack Obama's First Term as a Progressive Leader .

    [Dec 31, 2017] Is [neo]Liberalism a Dying Faith by Pat Buchanan

    Highly recommended!
    Nationalism really represent a growing threat to neoliberalism. It is clear the the rise of nationalism was caused by the triumph of neoliberalism all over the globe. As neoliberal ideology collapsed in 2008, thing became really interesting now. Looks like 1920th-1940th will be replayed on a new level with the USA neoliberal empire under stress from new challengers instead of British empire.
    Rumor about the death of neoliberalism are slightly exaggerated ;-). This social system still has a lot of staying power. you need some external shock like the need of cheap oil (defined as sustainable price of oil over $100 per barrel) to shake it again. Of some financial crisis similar to the crisis of 2008. Currently there is still no alternative social order that can replace it. Collapse of the USSR discredited both socialism even of different flavors then was practiced in the USSR. National socialism would be a step back from neoliberalism.
    Notable quotes:
    "... The retreat of [neo]liberalism is very visible in Asia. All Southeast Asian states have turned their backs on liberal democracy, especially Indonesia, the Philippines and Myanmar in the last decade. This NYT article notes that liberalism has essentially died in Japan, and that all political contests are now between what the west would consider conservatives: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/15/opinion/liberalism-japan-election.html ..."
    "... What is today called "Liberalism" and "Conservatism" both are simply corrupted labels applied to the same top-down corporate-fascistic elite rule that I think Mr. Buchanan once referred to as "two wings of the same bird of prey." ..."
    "... Nobody at the top cares about 'diversity.' They care about the easy profits that come from ever cheaper labor. 'Diversity' is not suicide but rather murder: instigated by a small number of very powerful people who have decided that the long-term health of their nations and civilization is less important than short-term profits and power. ..."
    "... Hillary and Obama are to the right of the President that Buchanan served in his White House. Richard Nixon was to the Left of both Hillary and Obama. I can't even imagine Hillary accepting and signing into law a 'Clean Water Act' or enacting Price Controls to fight inflation. No way. Heck would freeze over before Hillary would do something so against her Banker Backers. ..."
    "... It's sure that financial (neo)liberalism was in a growth phase prior to year 2000 (under Greenspan, the "Maestro") with a general belief that the economy could be "fine tuned" with risk eliminated using sophisticated financial instruments, monetary policy etc. ..."
    "... If [neo] Liberalism is a package, then two heavy financial blows that shook the whole foundation were the collapse of the dot.com bubble (2000) and the mortgage bubble (2008). ..."
    "... And, other (self-serving) neoliberal stories are now seen as false. For example, that the US is an "advanced post-industrial service economy", that out-sourcing would "free up Americans for higher skilled/higher wage employment" or that "the US would always gain from tariff free trade". ..."
    "... The basic divide is surely Nationalism (America First) vs. Globalism (Neo-Liberalism), as shown by the last US Presidential election. ..."
    "... Neoliberalism, of which the Clintons are acolytes, supports Free Trade and Open Borders. Although it claims to support World Government, in actual fact it supports corporatism. This is explicit in the TPPA Trump vetoed. Under the corporate state, the state controls the corporations, as Don Benito did in Italy. Under corporatism, the corporations tell the state what to do, as has been the case in America since at least the Clinton Presidency. ..."
    "... But I recall that Pat B also said neoconservatism was on its way out a few years after Iraq war II and yet it's stronger than ever and its adherents are firmly ensconced in the joint chiefs of staff, the pentagon, Congress and the White House. It's also spawned a close cousin in liberal interventionism. ..."
    Oct 01, 2002 | www.unz.com

    Asked to name the defining attributes of the America we wish to become, many liberals would answer that we must realize our manifest destiny since 1776, by becoming more equal, more diverse and more democratic -- and the model for mankind's future.

    Equality, diversity, democracy -- this is the holy trinity of the post-Christian secular state at whose altars Liberal Man worships.

    But the congregation worshiping these gods is shrinking. And even Europe seems to be rejecting what America has on offer.

    In a retreat from diversity, Catalonia just voted to separate from Spain. The Basque and Galician peoples of Spain are following the Catalan secession crisis with great interest.

    The right-wing People's Party and far-right Freedom Party just swept 60 percent of Austria's vote, delivering the nation to 31-year-old Sebastian Kurz, whose anti-immigrant platform was plagiarized from the Freedom Party. Summarized it is: Austria for the Austrians!

    Lombardy, whose capital is Milan, and Veneto will vote Sunday for greater autonomy from Rome.

    South Tyrol (Alto Adige), severed from Austria and ceded to Italy at Versailles, written off by Hitler to appease Mussolini after his Anschluss, is astir anew with secessionism. Even the Sicilians are talking of separation.

    By Sunday, the Czech Republic may have a new leader, billionaire Andrej Babis. Writes The Washington Post, Babis "makes a sport of attacking the European Union and says NATO's mission is outdated."

    Platform Promise: Keep the Muslim masses out of the motherland.

    To ethnonationalists, their countrymen are not equal to all others, but superior in rights. Many may nod at Thomas Jefferson's line that "All men are created equal," but they no more practice that in their own nations than did Jefferson in his

    ... ... ...

    European peoples and parties are today using democratic means to achieve "illiberal" ends. And it is hard to see what halts the drift away from liberal democracy toward the restrictive right. For in virtually every nation, there is a major party in opposition, or a party in power, that holds deeply nationalist views.

    European elites may denounce these new parties as "illiberal" or fascist, but it is becoming apparent that it may be liberalism itself that belongs to yesterday. For more and more Europeans see the invasion of the continent along the routes whence the invaders came centuries ago, not as a manageable problem but an existential crisis.

    To many Europeans, it portends an irreversible alteration in the character of the countries their grandchildren will inherit, and possibly an end to their civilization. And they are not going to be deterred from voting their fears by being called names that long ago lost their toxicity from overuse.

    And as Europeans decline to celebrate the racial, ethnic, creedal and cultural diversity extolled by American elites, they also seem to reject the idea that foreigners should be treated equally in nations created for their own kind.

    Europeans seem to admire more, and model their nations more, along the lines of the less diverse America of the Eisenhower era, than on the polyglot America of 2017.

    And Europe seems to be moving toward immigration polices more like the McCarran-Walter Act of 1950 than the open borders bill that Sen. Edward Kennedy shepherded through the Senate in 1965.

    Kennedy promised that the racial and ethnic composition of the America of the 1960s would not be overturned, and he questioned the morality and motives of any who implied that it would.

    Jason Liu , October 20, 2017 at 12:02 pm GMT
    Yes. Fuck yes.

    Liberalism is the naivete of 18th century elites, no different than today. Modernity as you know it is unsustainable, mostly because equality isn't real, identity has value for most humans, pluralism is by definition fractious, and deep down most people wish to follow a wise strongman leader who represents their interests first and not a vague set of universalist values.

    Blind devotion to liberal democracy is another one of those times when white people take an abstract concept to weird extremes. It is short-sighted and autistically narrow minded. Just because you have an oppressive king doesn't mean everyone should be equals. Just because there was slavery/genocide doesn't mean diversity is good.

    The retreat of [neo]liberalism is very visible in Asia. All Southeast Asian states have turned their backs on liberal democracy, especially Indonesia, the Philippines and Myanmar in the last decade. This NYT article notes that liberalism has essentially died in Japan, and that all political contests are now between what the west would consider conservatives: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/15/opinion/liberalism-japan-election.html

    Good riddance. The idea that egalitarianism is more advanced than hierarchy has always been false, and flies against the long arc of history. Time for nationalists around the world to smash liberal democracy and build a new modernity based on actual humanism, with respect to hierarchies and the primacy of majorities instead of guilt and pathological compassion dressed up as political ideology.

    TG , October 20, 2017 at 1:10 pm GMT
    "Liberalism" is not dying. "Liberalism" is dead, and has been since at least 1970.

    What is today called "Liberalism" and "Conservatism" both are simply corrupted labels applied to the same top-down corporate-fascistic elite rule that I think Mr. Buchanan once referred to as "two wings of the same bird of prey."

    Nobody at the top cares about 'diversity.' They care about the easy profits that come from ever cheaper labor. 'Diversity' is not suicide but rather murder: instigated by a small number of very powerful people who have decided that the long-term health of their nations and civilization is less important than short-term profits and power.

    Paul's Ghost , October 20, 2017 at 6:08 pm GMT
    Its been dead for nearly 20 years now. Liberalism has long been the Monty Python parrot nailed to its perch. At this point, the term is mainly kept alive in right-wing attacks by people who lack the imagination to change their habitual targets for so long.

    To my eye, the last 'liberal' politician died in a susupicious plane crash in 2000 as the Bush Republicans were taking the White House by their famous 5-4 vote/coup and also needed to claim control of the Senate. So, the last authentic 'liberal' Senator, Paul Wellstone of MN was killed in a suspicious plane crash that was never properly explained.

    Hillary and Obama are to the right of the President that Buchanan served in his White House. Richard Nixon was to the Left of both Hillary and Obama. I can't even imagine Hillary accepting and signing into law a 'Clean Water Act' or enacting Price Controls to fight inflation. No way. Heck would freeze over before Hillary would do something so against her Banker Backers.

    And, at the root, that is the key. The 'Liberals' that the right now rails against are strongly backed and supported by the Wall Street Banks and other corporate leaders. The 'Liberals' have pushed for a government Of the Bankers, By the Bankers and For the Bankers. The 'Liberals' now are in favor of Endless Unconstitutional War around the world.

    Which can only mean that the term 'Liberal' has been so completely morphed away from its original meanings to be completely worthless.

    The last true Liberal in American politics was Paul Wellstone. And even by the time he died for his sins, he was calling himself a "progressive" because after the Clintons and the Gores had so distorted the term Liberal it was meaningless. Or it had come to mean a society ruled by bankers, a society at constant war and throwing money constantly at a gigantic war machine, a society of censorship where the government needed to control all music lyrics, the same corrupt government where money could by anything from a night in the Lincoln Bedroom to a Presidential Pardon or any other government favor.

    Thus, 'Liberals' were a dead movement even by 2000, when the people who actually believed in the American People over the profits of bankers were calling themselves Progressives in disgust at the misuse of the term Liberal. And now, Obama and Hillary have trashed and distorted even the term Progressive into bombing the world 365 days a year and still constantly throwing money at the military machine and the problems it invents.

    So, Liberalism is so long dead that if you exumed the grave you'd only find dust. And Pat must be getting senile and just throwing back out the same lines he once wrote as a speechwriter for the last Great Lefty President Richard Nixon.

    Miro23 , October 20, 2017 at 6:17 pm GMT

    Is Liberalism a Dying Faith?

    Another question is whether this is wishful thinking from Pat or some kind of reality.

    I think that he's right, that Liberalism is a dying faith, and it's interesting to check the decline.

    It's sure that financial (neo)liberalism was in a growth phase prior to year 2000 (under Greenspan, the "Maestro") with a general belief that the economy could be "fine tuned" with risk eliminated using sophisticated financial instruments, monetary policy etc.

    If [neo] Liberalism is a package, then two heavy financial blows that shook the whole foundation were the collapse of the dot.com bubble (2000) and the mortgage bubble (2008).

    And, other (self-serving) neoliberal stories are now seen as false. For example, that the US is an "advanced post-industrial service economy", that out-sourcing would "free up Americans for higher skilled/higher wage employment" or that "the US would always gain from tariff free trade".

    In fact, the borderless global "world is flat" dogma is now seen as enabling a rootless hyper-rich global elite to draw on a sea of globalized serf labour with little or no identity, while their media and SWJ activists operate a scorched earth defense against any sign of opposition.

    The basic divide is surely Nationalism (America First) vs. Globalism (Neo-Liberalism), as shown by the last US Presidential election.

    reiner Tor , October 20, 2017 at 6:39 pm GMT
    @Randal

    A useful analogy might be Viktor Orbán. He started out as a leader of a liberal party, Fidesz, but then over time started moving to the right. It is often speculated that he started it for cynical reasons, like seeing how the right was divided and that there was essentially a vacuum there for a strong conservative party, but there's little doubt he totally internalized it. There's also little doubt (and at the time he and a lot of his fellow party leaders talked about it a lot) that as he (they) started a family and having children, they started to realize how conservatism kinda made more sense than liberalism.

    With Kurz, there's the possibility for this path. However, he'd need to start a family soon for that to happen. At that age Orbán was already married with children

    Verymuchalive , October 20, 2017 at 10:10 pm GMT
    @Paul's Ghost

    Liberalism ( large L) is indeed long dead.

    Neoliberalism, of which the Clintons are acolytes, supports Free Trade and Open Borders. Although it claims to support World Government, in actual fact it supports corporatism. This is explicit in the TPPA Trump vetoed. Under the corporate state, the state controls the corporations, as Don Benito did in Italy. Under corporatism, the corporations tell the state what to do, as has been the case in America since at least the Clinton Presidency.

    Richard Nixon was a capitalist, not a corporatist. He was a supporter of proper competition laws, unlike any President since Clinton. Socially, he was interventionist, though this may have been to lessen criticism of his Vietnam policies. Anyway, his bussing and desegregation policies were a long-term failure.

    Price Control was quickly dropped, as it was in other Western countries. Long term Price Control, as in present day Venezuela, is economically disastrous.

    KenH , October 21, 2017 at 1:51 pm GMT
    Let's hope liberalism is a dying faith and that is passes from the Western world. If not it will destroy the West, so if it doesn't die a natural death then we must euthanize it. For the evidence is in and it has begat feminism, anti-white racism, demographic winter, mass third world immigration and everything else that ails the West and has made it the sick and dying man of the world.

    But I recall that Pat B also said neoconservatism was on its way out a few years after Iraq war II and yet it's stronger than ever and its adherents are firmly ensconced in the joint chiefs of staff, the pentagon, Congress and the White House. It's also spawned a close cousin in liberal interventionism.

    What Pat refers to as "liberalism" is now left wing totalitarianism and anti-white hatred and it's fanatically trying to remain relevant by lashing out and blacklisting, deplatforming, demonetizing, and physically assaulting all of its enemies on the right who are gaining strength much to their chagrin. They resort to these methods because they can't win an honest debate and in a true free marketplace of ideas they lose.

    [Dec 31, 2017] What Happens When A Russiagate Skeptic Debates A Professional Russiagater

    Highly recommended!
    What a pitiful pressitute this Like Harding is...
    The fact that he is employed by Guardia tells a lot how low Guardian fall. It's a yellow press (owned by intelligence agencies if we talk about their coverage of Russia).
    Notable quotes:
    "... In theory, it would be hard to find two journalists more qualified to debate each side of this important issue. In practice, it was a one-sided thrashing that The Intercept 's Jeremy Scahill accurately described as "brutal". ..."
    "... Russiagate only works if you allow it to remain zoomed out, where the individually weak arguments of this giant Gish gallop fallacy form the appearance of a legitimate argument. ..."
    "... That's not how you're going to get the truth about Russia. He's all appeals to authority - Steele's most of all, even name dropping Kerry. To finally land on "oh well if you would read my whole book" is just getting to the silly season. Also "well this is the kind of person Putin is" is a terrible argument. This isn't about either Putin or Trump really, its about the long history of US-Russia relations and all that has occurred. Also, the ubiquitous throwing around of accusations of the murder of journalists in Russia is a straw man argument, especially when it is just thrown in as some sort of moral shielding for a shabby argument. ..."
    Dec 28, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com

    Have you ever wondered why mainstream media outlets, despite being so fond of dramatic panel debates on other hot-button issues, never have critics of the Russiagate narrative on to debate those who advance it? Well, in a recent Real News interview we received an extremely clear answer to that question, and it was so epic it deserves its own article.

    Real News host and producer Aaron Maté has recently emerged as one of the most articulate critics of the establishment Russia narrative and the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory, and has published in The Nation some of the clearest arguments against both that I've yet seen. Luke Harding is a journalist for The Guardian where he has been writing prolifically in promotion of the Russiagate narrative, and is the author of New York Times bestseller Collusion: Secret Meetings, Dirty Money, and How Russia Helped Donald Trump Win.

    In theory, it would be hard to find two journalists more qualified to debate each side of this important issue. In practice, it was a one-sided thrashing that The Intercept 's Jeremy Scahill accurately described as "brutal".

    The term Gish gallop , named after a Young Earth creationist who was notoriously fond of employing it, refers to a fallacious debate tactic in which a bunch of individually weak arguments are strung together in rapid-fire succession in order to create the illusion of a solid argument and overwhelm the opposition's ability to refute them all in the time allotted. Throughout the discussion the Gish gallop appeared to be the only tool that Luke Harding brought to the table, firing out a deluge of feeble and unsubstantiated arguments only to be stopped over and over again by Maté who kept pointing out when Harding was making a false or fallacious claim.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/9Ikf1uZli4g

    In this part here , for example, the following exchange takes place while Harding is already against the ropes on the back of a previous failed argument. I'm going to type this up so you can clearly see what's happening here:

    Harding: Look, I'm a journalist. I'm a storyteller. I'm not a kind of head of the CIA or the NSA. But what I can tell you is that there have been similar operations in France, most recently when President Macron was elected ? -

    Maté: Well actually Luke that's not true. That's straight up not true. After that election the French cyber-intelligence agency came out and said it could have been virtually anybody.

    Harding: Yeah. But, if you'll let me finish, there've been attacks on the German parliament ? -

    Maté: Okay, but wait Luke, do you concede that the France hack that you just claimed didn't happen?

    Harding: [pause] What? -- ?that it didn't happen? Sorry?

    Maté: Do you concede that the Russian hacking of the French election that you just claimed actually is not true?

    Harding: [pause] Well, I mean that it's not true? I mean, the French report was inconclusive, but you have to look at this kind of contextually. We've seen attacks on other European states as well from Russia, they have very kind of advanced cyber capabilities.

    Maté: Where else?

    Harding: Well, Estonia. Have you heard of Estonia? It's a state in the Baltics which was crippled by a massive cyber attack in 2008, which certainly all kind of western European and former eastern European states think was carried out by Moscow. I mean I was in Moscow at the time, when relations between the two countries were extremely bad. This is a kind of ongoing thing. Now you might say, quite legitimately, well the US does the same thing, the UK does the same thing, and I think to a certain extent that is certainly right. I think what was different last year was the attempt to kind of dump this stuff out into kind of US public space and try and influence public opinion there. That's unusual. And of course that's a matter of congressional inquiry and something Mueller is looking at too.

    Maté: Right. But again, my problem here is that the examples that are frequently presented to substantiate claims of this massive Russian hacking operation around the world prove out to be false. So France as I mentioned; you also mentioned Germany. There was a lot of worry about Russian hacking of the German elections, but it turned out? -- ?and there's plenty of articles since then that have acknowledged this? - ? that actually there was no Russian hack in Germany.

    In the above exchange, Maté derailed Harding's Gish gallop, and Harding actually admonished him for doing so, telling him "let me finish" and attempting to go on listing more flimsy examples to bolster his case as though he hadn't just begun his Gish gallop with a completely false example .

    That's really all Harding brought to the debate. A bunch of individually weak arguments, the fact that he speaks Russian and has lived in Moscow, and the occasional straw man where he tries to imply that Maté is claiming that Vladimir Putin is an innocent girl scout. Meanwhile Maté just kept patiently dragging the debate back on track over and over again in the most polite obliteration of a man that I have ever witnessed.

    The entire interview followed this basic script. Harding makes an unfounded claim, Maté holds him to the fact that it's unfounded, Harding sputters a bit and tries to zoom things out and point to a bigger-picture analysis of broader trends to distract from the fact that he'd just made an individual claim that was baseless, then winds up implying that Maté is only skeptical of the claims because he hasn't lived in Russia as Harding has.

    jeremy scahill 0
    @jeremyscahill
    This @aaronjmate interview is brutal. He makes mincemeat of Luke Harding, who can't seem to defend the thesis, much less the title, of his own book: Where's the 'Collusion' - YouTube
    11:03 AM-Dec 25, 2017
    Q 131 11597 C? 1,148

    The interview ended when Harding once again implied that Maté was only skeptical of the collusion narrative because he'd never been to Russia and seen what a right-wing oppressive government it is, after which the following exchange took place:

    Maté: I don't think I've countered anything you've said about the state of Vladimir Putin's Russia. The issue under discussion today has been whether there was collusion, the topic of your book.
    Harding: Yeah, but you're clearly a kind of collusion rejectionist, so I'm not sure what sort of evidence short of Trump and Putin in a sauna together would convince you. Clearly nothing would convince you. But anyway it's been a pleasure.

    At which point Harding abruptly logged off the video chat, leaving Maté to wrap up the show and promote Harding's book on his own.

    You should definitely watch this debate for yourself , and enjoy it, because I will be shocked if we ever see another like it. Harding's fate will serve as a cautionary tale for the establishment hacks who've built their careers advancing the Russiagate conspiracy theory , and it's highly unlikely that any of them will ever make the mistake of trying to debate anyone of Maté's caliber again.

    The reason Russiagaters speak so often in broad, sweeping terms? - saying there are too many suspicious things happening for there not to be a there there, that there's too much smoke for there not to be fire? - ? is because when you zoom in and focus on any individual part of their conspiracy theory, it falls apart under the slightest amount of critical thinking (or as Harding calls it, "collusion rejectionism"). Russiagate only works if you allow it to remain zoomed out, where the individually weak arguments of this giant Gish gallop fallacy form the appearance of a legitimate argument.

    Well, Harding did say he's a storyteller.

    * * *

    Thanks for reading! My work here is entirely reader-funded so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following me on Twitter , bookmarking my website , throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal , or buying my new book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers . Our Hidden History 4 days ago (edited) That Harding tells Mate to meet Alexi Navalny, who is a far right nationalist and most certainly a tool of US intelligence (something like Russia's Richard Spencer) was all I needed to hear to understand where Luke is coming from.

    He's little more than an intelligence asset himself if his idea of speaking to "Russians" is to go and speak to a bunch of people who most certainly have their own ties back to the western intelligence agencies.

    That's not how you're going to get the truth about Russia. He's all appeals to authority - Steele's most of all, even name dropping Kerry. To finally land on "oh well if you would read my whole book" is just getting to the silly season. Also "well this is the kind of person Putin is" is a terrible argument. This isn't about either Putin or Trump really, its about the long history of US-Russia relations and all that has occurred. Also, the ubiquitous throwing around of accusations of the murder of journalists in Russia is a straw man argument, especially when it is just thrown in as some sort of moral shielding for a shabby argument.

    Few in the US know about these cases or what occurred, or of the many forces inside of Russia that might be involved in murdering journalists just as in Mexico or Turkey. But these cases are not explained - blame is merely assigned to Putin himself. Of course if someone here discusses he death of Michael Hastings, they're a "conspiracy theorist", but if the crime involves a Russian were to assign the blame to Vladimir Putin and, no further explanation is required.

    [Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies

    Highly recommended!
    Essentially CIA dictates the US foreign policy. The tail is wagging the dog. The current Russophobia hysteria mean additional billions for CIA and FBI. As simple as that.
    The article contain some important observation about self-sustaining nature of the US militarism. It is able to create new threats and new insurgencies almost at will via CIA activities.
    The key problem is that wars are highly profitable for important part of the ruling elite, especially representing finance and military industrial complex. Also now part of the US ruling elite now consists of "colonial administrators" which are directly interested in maintaining and expanding the US empire. This is trap from which nation might not be able to escape.
    Notable quotes:
    "... The U.S. government may pretend to respect a "rules-based" global order, but the only rule Washington seems to follow is "might makes right" -- and the CIA has long served as a chief instigator and enforcer, writes Nicolas J.S. Davies. ..."
    "... Once the CIA went to work in Vietnam to undermine the 1954 Geneva Accords and the planned reunification of North and South through a free and fair election in 1956, the die was cast. ..."
    "... No U.S. president could extricate the U.S. from Vietnam without exposing the limits of what U.S. military force could achieve, betraying widely held national myths and the powerful interests that sustained and profited from them. ..."
    "... The critical "lesson of Vietnam" was summed up by Richard Barnet in his 1972 book Roots of War . "At the very moment that the number one nation has perfected the science of killing," Barnet wrote, "It has become an impractical means of political domination." ..."
    "... Even the senior officer corps of the U.S. military saw it that way, since many of them had survived the horrors of Vietnam as junior officers. The CIA could still wreak havoc in Latin America and elsewhere, but the full destructive force of the U.S. military was not unleashed again until the invasion of Panama in 1989 and the First Gulf War in 1991. ..."
    "... Half a century after Vietnam, we have tragically come full circle. With the CIA's politicized intelligence running wild in Washington and its covert operations spreading violence and chaos across every continent, President Trump faces the same pressures to maintain his own and his country's credibility as Johnson and Nixon did. ..."
    "... Trump is facing these questions, not just in one country, Vietnam, but in dozens of countries across the world, and the interests perpetuating and fueling this cycle of crisis and war have only become more entrenched over time, as President Eisenhower warned that they would, despite the end of the Cold War and, until now, the lack of any actual military threat to the United States. ..."
    "... U.S. Air Force Colonel Fletcher Prouty was the chief of special operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1955 to 1964, managing the global military support system for the CIA in Vietnam and around the world. Fletcher Prouty's book, The Secret Team: The CIA and its Allies in Control of the United States and the World , was suppressed when it was first published in 1973. Thousands of copies disappeared from bookstores and libraries, and a mysterious Army Colonel bought the entire shipment of 3,500 copies the publisher sent to Australia. But Prouty's book was republished in 2011, and it is a timely account of the role of the CIA in U.S. policy. ..."
    "... The main purpose of the CIA, as Prouty saw it, is to create such pretexts for war. ..."
    "... The CIA is a hybrid of an intelligence service that gathers and analyzes foreign intelligence and a clandestine service that conducts covert operations. Both functions are essential to creating pretexts for war, and that is what they have done for 70 years. ..."
    "... Prouty described how the CIA infiltrated the U.S. military, the State Department, the National Security Council and other government institutions, covertly placing its officers in critical positions to ensure that its plans are approved and that it has access to whatever forces, weapons, equipment, ammunition and other resources it needs to carry them out. ..."
    "... Many retired intelligence officers, such as Ray McGovern and the members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), saw the merging of clandestine operations with intelligence analysis in one agency as corrupting the objective analysis they tried to provide to policymakers. They formed VIPS in 2003 in response to the fabrication of politicized intelligence that provided false pretexts for the U.S. to invade and destroy Iraq. ..."
    "... But Fletcher Prouty was even more disturbed by the way that the CIA uses clandestine operations to trigger coups, wars and chaos. The civil and proxy war in Syria is a perfect example of what Prouty meant ..."
    "... The role of U.S. "counterterrorism" operations in fueling armed resistance and terrorism, and the absence of any plan to reduce the asymmetric violence unleashed by the "global war on terror," would be no surprise to Fletcher Prouty. As he explained, such clandestine operations always take on a life of their own that is unrelated, and often counter-productive, to any rational U.S. policy objective. ..."
    "... This is a textbook CIA operation on the same model as Vietnam in the late 1950s and early 60s. The CIA uses U.S. special forces and training missions to launch covert and proxy military operations that drive local populations into armed resistance groups, and then uses the presence of those armed resistance groups to justify ever-escalating U.S. military involvement. This is Vietnam redux on a continental scale. ..."
    "... China is already too big and powerful for the U.S. to apply what is known as the Ledeen doctrine named for neoconservative theorist and intelligence operative Michael Ledeen who suggested that every 10 years or so, the United States "pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show we mean business." ..."
    "... As long as the CIA and the U.S. military keep plunging the scapegoats for our failed policies into economic crisis, violence and chaos, the United States and the United Kingdom can remain the safe havens of the world's wealth, islands of privilege and excess amidst the storms they unleash on others. ..."
    "... But if that is the only "significant national objective" driving these policies, it is surely about time for the 99 percent of Americans who reap no benefit from these murderous schemes to stop the CIA and its allies before they completely wreck the already damaged and fragile world in which we all must live, Americans and foreigners alike. ..."
    "... Douglas Valentine has probably studied the CIA in more depth than any other American journalist, beginning with his book on The Phoenix Program in Vietnam. He has written a new book titled The CIA as Organized Crime : How Illegal Operations Corrupt America and the World, in which he brings Fletcher Prouty's analysis right up to the present day, describing the CIA's role in our current wars and the many ways it infiltrates, manipulates and controls U.S. policy. ..."
    "... In Venezuela, the CIA and the right-wing opposition are following the same strategy that President Nixon ordered the CIA to inflict on Chile, to "make the economy scream" in preparation for the 1973 coup. ..."
    "... The U.S. willingness to scrap the Agreed Framework in 2003, the breakdown of the Six Party Talks in 2009 and the U.S. refusal to acknowledge that its own military actions and threats create legitimate defense concerns for North Korea have driven the North Koreans into a corner from which they see a credible nuclear deterrent as their only chance to avoid mass destruction. ..."
    "... Obama's charm offensive invigorated old and new military alliances with the U.K., France and the Arab monarchies, and he quietly ran up the most expensive military budge t of any president since World War Two. ..."
    "... Throughout history, serial aggression has nearly always provoked increasingly united opposition, as peace-loving countries and people have reluctantly summoned the courage to stand up to an aggressor. France under Napoleon and Hitler's Germany also regarded themselves as exceptional, and in their own ways they were. But in the end, their belief in their exceptionalism led them on to defeat and destruction. ..."
    Oct 30, 2017 | consortiumnews.com

    The U.S. government may pretend to respect a "rules-based" global order, but the only rule Washington seems to follow is "might makes right" -- and the CIA has long served as a chief instigator and enforcer, writes Nicolas J.S. Davies.

    As the recent PBS documentary on the American War in Vietnam acknowledged, few American officials ever believed that the United States could win the war, neither those advising Johnson as he committed hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops, nor those advising Nixon as he escalated a brutal aerial bombardment that had already killed millions of people.

    As conversations tape-recorded in the White House reveal, and as other writers have documented, the reasons for wading into the Big Muddy, as Pete Seeger satirized it , and then pushing on regardless, all came down to "credibility": the domestic political credibility of the politicians involved and America's international credibility as a military power.

    Once the CIA went to work in Vietnam to undermine the 1954 Geneva Accords and the planned reunification of North and South through a free and fair election in 1956, the die was cast. The CIA's support for the repressive Diem regime and its successors ensured an ever-escalating war, as the South rose in rebellion, supported by the North. No U.S. president could extricate the U.S. from Vietnam without exposing the limits of what U.S. military force could achieve, betraying widely held national myths and the powerful interests that sustained and profited from them.

    The critical "lesson of Vietnam" was summed up by Richard Barnet in his 1972 book Roots of War . "At the very moment that the number one nation has perfected the science of killing," Barnet wrote, "It has become an impractical means of political domination."

    Even the senior officer corps of the U.S. military saw it that way, since many of them had survived the horrors of Vietnam as junior officers. The CIA could still wreak havoc in Latin America and elsewhere, but the full destructive force of the U.S. military was not unleashed again until the invasion of Panama in 1989 and the First Gulf War in 1991.

    Half a century after Vietnam, we have tragically come full circle. With the CIA's politicized intelligence running wild in Washington and its covert operations spreading violence and chaos across every continent, President Trump faces the same pressures to maintain his own and his country's credibility as Johnson and Nixon did. His predictable response has been to escalate ongoing wars in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia and West Africa, and to threaten new ones against North Korea, Iran and Venezuela.

    Trump is facing these questions, not just in one country, Vietnam, but in dozens of countries across the world, and the interests perpetuating and fueling this cycle of crisis and war have only become more entrenched over time, as President Eisenhower warned that they would, despite the end of the Cold War and, until now, the lack of any actual military threat to the United States.

    Ironically but predictably, the U.S.'s aggressive and illegal war policy has finally provoked a real military threat to the U.S., albeit one that has emerged only in response to U.S. war plans. As I explained in a recent article , North Korea's discovery in 2016 of a U.S. plan to assassinate its president, Kim Jong Un, and launch a Second Korean War has triggered a crash program to develop long-range ballistic missiles that could give North Korea a viable nuclear deterrent and prevent a U.S. attack. But the North Koreans will not feel safe from attack until their leaders and ours are sure that their missiles can deliver a nuclear strike against the U.S. mainland.

    The CIA's Pretexts for War

    U.S. Air Force Colonel Fletcher Prouty was the chief of special operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1955 to 1964, managing the global military support system for the CIA in Vietnam and around the world. Fletcher Prouty's book, The Secret Team: The CIA and its Allies in Control of the United States and the World , was suppressed when it was first published in 1973. Thousands of copies disappeared from bookstores and libraries, and a mysterious Army Colonel bought the entire shipment of 3,500 copies the publisher sent to Australia. But Prouty's book was republished in 2011, and it is a timely account of the role of the CIA in U.S. policy.

    Prouty surprisingly described the role of the CIA as a response by powerful people and interests to the abolition of the U.S. Department of War and the creation of the Department of Defense in 1947. Once the role of the U.S. military was redefined as one of defense, in line with the United Nations Charter's prohibition against the threat or use of military force in 1945 and similar moves by other military powers, it would require some kind of crisis or threat to justify using military force in the future, both legally and politically. The main purpose of the CIA, as Prouty saw it, is to create such pretexts for war.

    The CIA is a hybrid of an intelligence service that gathers and analyzes foreign intelligence and a clandestine service that conducts covert operations. Both functions are essential to creating pretexts for war, and that is what they have done for 70 years.

    Prouty described how the CIA infiltrated the U.S. military, the State Department, the National Security Council and other government institutions, covertly placing its officers in critical positions to ensure that its plans are approved and that it has access to whatever forces, weapons, equipment, ammunition and other resources it needs to carry them out.

    Many retired intelligence officers, such as Ray McGovern and the members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), saw the merging of clandestine operations with intelligence analysis in one agency as corrupting the objective analysis they tried to provide to policymakers. They formed VIPS in 2003 in response to the fabrication of politicized intelligence that provided false pretexts for the U.S. to invade and destroy Iraq.

    CIA in Syria and Africa

    But Fletcher Prouty was even more disturbed by the way that the CIA uses clandestine operations to trigger coups, wars and chaos. The civil and proxy war in Syria is a perfect example of what Prouty meant. In late 2011, after destroying Libya and aiding in the torture-murder of Muammar Gaddafi, the CIA and its allies began flying fighters and weapons from Libya to Turkey and infiltrating them into Syria. Then, working with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Croatia and other allies, this operation poured thousands of tons of weapons across Syria's borders to ignite and fuel a full-scale civil war.

    Once these covert operations were under way, they ran wild until they had unleashed a savage Al Qaeda affiliate in Syria (Jabhat al-Nusra, now rebranded as Jabhat Fateh al-Sham), spawned the even more savage "Islamic State," triggered the heaviest and probably the deadliest U.S. bombing campaign since Vietnam and drawn Russia, Iran, Turkey, Israel, Jordan, Hezbollah, Kurdish militias and almost every state or armed group in the Middle East into the chaos of Syria's civil war.

    Meanwhile, as Al Qaeda and Islamic State have expanded their operations across Africa, the U.N. has published a report titled Journey to Extremism in Africa: Drivers, Incentives and the Tipping Point for Recruitment , based on 500 interviews with African militants. This study has found that the kind of special operations and training missions the CIA and AFRICOM are conducting and supporting in Africa are in fact the critical "tipping point" that drives Africans to join militant groups like Al Qaeda, Al-Shabab and Boko Haram.

    The report found that government action, such as the killing or detention of friends or family, was the "tipping point" that drove 71 percent of African militants interviewed to join armed groups, and that this was a more important factor than religious ideology.

    The conclusions of Journey to Extremism in Africa confirm the findings of other similar studies. The Center for Civilians in Conflict interviewed 250 civilians who joined armed groups in Bosnia, Somalia, Gaza and Libya for its 2015 study, The People's Perspectives : Civilian Involvement in Armed Conflict . The study found that the most common motivation for civilians to join armed groups was simply to protect themselves or their families.

    The role of U.S. "counterterrorism" operations in fueling armed resistance and terrorism, and the absence of any plan to reduce the asymmetric violence unleashed by the "global war on terror," would be no surprise to Fletcher Prouty. As he explained, such clandestine operations always take on a life of their own that is unrelated, and often counter-productive, to any rational U.S. policy objective.

    "The more intimate one becomes with this activity," Prouty wrote, "The more one begins to realize that such operations are rarely, if ever, initiated from an intent to become involved in pursuit of some national objective in the first place."

    The U.S. justifies the deployment of 6,000 U.S. special forces and military trainers to 53 of the 54 countries in Africa as a response to terrorism. But the U.N.'s Journey to Extremism in Africa study makes it clear that the U.S. militarization of Africa is in fact the "tipping point" that is driving Africans across the continent to join armed resistance groups in the first place.

    This is a textbook CIA operation on the same model as Vietnam in the late 1950s and early 60s. The CIA uses U.S. special forces and training missions to launch covert and proxy military operations that drive local populations into armed resistance groups, and then uses the presence of those armed resistance groups to justify ever-escalating U.S. military involvement. This is Vietnam redux on a continental scale.

    Taking on China

    What seems to really be driving the CIA's militarization of U.S. policy in Africa is China's growing influence on the continent. As Steve Bannon put it in an interview with the Economist in August, "Let's go screw up One Belt One Road."

    China is already too big and powerful for the U.S. to apply what is known as the Ledeen doctrine named for neoconservative theorist and intelligence operative Michael Ledeen who suggested that every 10 years or so, the United States "pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show we mean business."

    China is too powerful and armed with nuclear weapons. So, in this case, the CIA's job would be to spread violence and chaos to disrupt Chinese trade and investment, and to make African governments increasingly dependent on U.S. military aid to fight the militant groups spawned and endlessly regenerated by U.S.-led "counterterrorism" operations.

    Neither Ledeen nor Bannon pretend that such policies are designed to build more prosperous or viable societies in the Middle East or Africa, let alone to benefit their people. They both know very well what Richard Barnet already understood 45 years ago, that America's unprecedented investment in weapons, war and CIA covert operations are only good for one thing: to kill people and destroy infrastructure, reducing cities to rubble, societies to chaos and the desperate survivors to poverty and displacement.

    As long as the CIA and the U.S. military keep plunging the scapegoats for our failed policies into economic crisis, violence and chaos, the United States and the United Kingdom can remain the safe havens of the world's wealth, islands of privilege and excess amidst the storms they unleash on others.

    But if that is the only "significant national objective" driving these policies, it is surely about time for the 99 percent of Americans who reap no benefit from these murderous schemes to stop the CIA and its allies before they completely wreck the already damaged and fragile world in which we all must live, Americans and foreigners alike.

    Douglas Valentine has probably studied the CIA in more depth than any other American journalist, beginning with his book on The Phoenix Program in Vietnam. He has written a new book titled The CIA as Organized Crime : How Illegal Operations Corrupt America and the World, in which he brings Fletcher Prouty's analysis right up to the present day, describing the CIA's role in our current wars and the many ways it infiltrates, manipulates and controls U.S. policy.

    The Three Scapegoats

    In Trump's speech to the U.N. General Assembly, he named North Korea, Iran and Venezuela as his prime targets for destabilization, economic warfare and, ultimately, the overthrow of their governments, whether by coup d'etat or the mass destruction of their civilian population and infrastructure. But Trump's choice of scapegoats for America's failures was obviously not based on a rational reassessment of foreign policy priorities by the new administration. It was only a tired rehashing of the CIA's unfinished business with two-thirds of Bush's "axis of evil" and Bush White House official Elliott Abrams' failed 2002 coup in Caracas, now laced with explicit and illegal threats of aggression.

    How Trump and the CIA plan to sacrifice their three scapegoats for America's failures remains to be seen. This is not 2001, when the world stood silent at the U.S. bombardment and invasion of Afghanistan after September 11th. It is more like 2003, when the U.S. destruction of Iraq split the Atlantic alliance and alienated most of the world. It is certainly not 2011, after Obama's global charm offensive had rebuilt U.S. alliances and provided cover for French President Sarkozy, British Prime Minister Cameron, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Arab royals to destroy Libya, once ranked by the U.N. as the most developed country in Africa , now mired in intractable chaos.

    In 2017, a U.S. attack on any one of Trump's scapegoats would isolate the United States from many of its allies and undermine its standing in the world in far-reaching ways that might be more permanent and harder to repair than the invasion and destruction of Iraq.

    In Venezuela, the CIA and the right-wing opposition are following the same strategy that President Nixon ordered the CIA to inflict on Chile, to "make the economy scream" in preparation for the 1973 coup. But the solid victory of Venezuela's ruling Socialist Party in recent nationwide gubernatorial elections, despite a long and deep economic crisis, reveals little public support for the CIA's puppets in Venezuela.

    The CIA has successfully discredited the Venezuelan government through economic warfare, increasingly violent right-wing street protests and a global propaganda campaign. But the CIA has stupidly hitched its wagon to an extreme right-wing, upper-class opposition that has no credibility with most of the Venezuelan public, who still turn out for the Socialists at the polls. A CIA coup or U.S. military intervention would meet fierce public resistance and damage U.S. relations all over Latin America.

    Boxing In North Korea

    A U.S. aerial bombardment or "preemptive strike" on North Korea could quickly escalate into a war between the U.S. and China, which has reiterated its commitment to North Korea's defense if North Korea is attacked. We do not know exactly what was in the U.S. war plan discovered by North Korea, so neither can we know how North Korea and China could respond if the U.S. pressed ahead with it.

    Most analysts have long concluded that any U.S. attack on North Korea would be met with a North Korean artillery and missile barrage that would inflict unacceptable civilian casualties on Seoul, a metropolitan area of 26 million people, three times the population of New York City. Seoul is only 35 miles from the frontier with North Korea, placing it within range of a huge array of North Korean weapons. What was already a no-win calculus is now compounded by the possibility that North Korea could respond with nuclear weapons, turning any prospect of a U.S. attack into an even worse nightmare.

    U.S. mismanagement of its relations with North Korea should be an object lesson for its relations with Iran, graphically demonstrating the advantages of diplomacy, talks and agreements over threats of war. Under the Agreed Framework signed in 1994, North Korea stopped work on two much larger nuclear reactors than the small experimental one operating at Yongbyong since 1986, which only produces 6 kg of plutonium per year, enough for one nuclear bomb.

    The lesson of Bush's Iraq invasion in 2003 after Saddam Hussein had complied with demands that he destroy Iraq's stockpiles of chemical weapons and shut down a nascent nuclear program was not lost on North Korea. Not only did the invasion lay waste to large sections of Iraq with hundreds of thousands of dead but Hussein himself was hunted down and condemned to death by hanging.

    Still, after North Korea tested its first nuclear weapon in 2006, even its small experimental reactor was shut down as a result of the "Six Party Talks" in 2007, all the fuel rods were removed and placed under supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the cooling tower of the reactor was demolished in 2008.

    But then, as relations deteriorated, North Korea conducted a second nuclear weapon test and again began reprocessing spent fuel rods to recover plutonium for use in nuclear weapons.

    North Korea has now conducted six nuclear weapons tests. The explosions in the first five tests increased gradually up to 15-25 kilotons, about the yield of the bombs the U.S. dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but estimates for the yield of the 2017 test range from 110 to 250 kilotons , comparable to a small hydrogen bomb.

    The even greater danger in a new war in Korea is that the U.S. could unleash part of its arsenal of 4,000 more powerful weapons (100 to 1,200 kilotons), which could kill millions of people and devastate and poison the region, or even the world, for years to come.

    The U.S. willingness to scrap the Agreed Framework in 2003, the breakdown of the Six Party Talks in 2009 and the U.S. refusal to acknowledge that its own military actions and threats create legitimate defense concerns for North Korea have driven the North Koreans into a corner from which they see a credible nuclear deterrent as their only chance to avoid mass destruction.

    China has proposed a reasonable framework for diplomacy to address the concerns of both sides, but the U.S. insists on maintaining its propaganda narratives that all the fault lies with North Korea and that it has some kind of "military solution" to the crisis.

    This may be the most dangerous idea we have heard from U.S. policymakers since the end of the Cold War, but it is the logical culmination of a systematic normalization of deviant and illegal U.S. war-making that has already cost millions of lives in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Yemen and Pakistan. As historian Gabriel Kolko wrote in Century of War in 1994, "options and decisions that are intrinsically dangerous and irrational become not merely plausible but the only form of reasoning about war and diplomacy that is possible in official circles."

    Demonizing Iran

    The idea that Iran has ever had a nuclear weapons program is seriously contested by the IAEA, which has examined every allegation presented by the CIA and other Western "intelligence" agencies as well as Israel. Former IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei revealed many details of this wild goose chase in his 2011 memoir, Age of Deception : Nuclear Diplomacy in Treacherous Times .

    When the CIA and its partners reluctantly acknowledged the IAEA's conclusions in a 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), ElBaradei issued a press release confirming that, "the agency has no concrete evidence of an ongoing nuclear weapons program or undeclared nuclear facilities in Iran."

    Since 2007, the IAEA has resolved all its outstanding concerns with Iran. It has verified that dual-use technologies that Iran imported before 2003 were in fact used for other purposes, and it has exposed the mysterious "laptop documents" that appeared to show Iranian plans for a nuclear weapon as forgeries. Gareth Porter thoroughly explored all these questions and allegations and the history of mistrust that fueled them in his 2014 book, Manufactured Crisis : the Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare , which I highly recommend.

    But, in the parallel Bizarro world of U.S. politics, hopelessly poisoned by the CIA's endless disinformation campaigns, Hillary Clinton could repeatedly take false credit for disarming Iran during her presidential campaign, and neither Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump nor any corporate media interviewer dared to challenge her claims.

    "When President Obama took office, Iran was racing toward a nuclear bomb," Clinton fantasized in a prominent foreign policy speech on June 2, 2016, claiming that her brutal sanctions policy "brought Iran to the table."

    In fact, as Trita Parsi documented in his 2012 book, A Single Roll of the Dice : Obama's Diplomacy With Iran , the Iranians were ready, not just to "come to the table," but to sign a comprehensive agreement based on a U.S. proposal brokered by Turkey and Brazil in 2010. But, in a classic case of "tail wags dog," the U.S. then rejected its own proposal because it would have undercut support for tighter sanctions in the U.N. Security Council. In other words, Clinton's sanctions policy did not "bring Iran to the table", but prevented the U.S. from coming to the table itself.

    As a senior State Department official told Trita Parsi, the real problem with U.S. diplomacy with Iran when Clinton was at the State Department was that the U.S. would not take "Yes" for an answer. Trump's ham-fisted decertification of Iran's compliance with the JCPOA is right out of Clinton's playbook, and it demonstrates that the CIA is still determined to use Iran as a scapegoat for America's failures in the Middle East.

    The spurious claim that Iran is the world's greatest sponsor of terrorism is another CIA canard reinforced by endless repetition. It is true that Iran supports and supplies weapons to Hezbollah and Hamas, which are both listed as terrorist organizations by the U.S. government. But they are mainly defensive resistance groups that defend Lebanon and Gaza respectively against invasions and attacks by Israel.

    Shifting attention away from Al Qaeda, Islamic State, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and other groups that actually commit terrorist crimes around the world might just seem like a case of the CIA "taking its eyes off the ball," if it wasn't so transparently timed to frame Iran with new accusations now that the manufactured crisis of the nuclear scare has run its course.

    What the Future Holds

    Barack Obama's most consequential international achievement may have been the triumph of symbolism over substance behind which he expanded and escalated the so-called "war on terror," with a vast expansion of covert operations and proxy wars that eventually triggered the heaviest U.S. aerial bombardments since Vietnam in Iraq and Syria.

    Obama's charm offensive invigorated old and new military alliances with the U.K., France and the Arab monarchies, and he quietly ran up the most expensive military budget of any president since World War Two.

    But Obama's expansion of the "war on terror" under cover of his deceptive global public relations campaign created many more problems than it solved, and Trump and his advisers are woefully ill-equipped to solve any of them. Trump's expressed desire to place America first and to resist foreign entanglements is hopelessly at odds with his aggressive, bullying approach to every foreign policy problem.

    If the U.S. could threaten and fight its way to a resolution of any of its international problems, it would have done so already. That is exactly what it has been trying to do since the 1990s, behind both the swagger and bluster of Bush and Trump and the deceptive charm of Clinton and Obama: a "good cop – bad cop" routine that should no longer fool anyone anywhere.

    But as Lyndon Johnson found as he waded deeper and deeper into the Big Muddy in Vietnam, lying to the public about unwinnable wars does not make them any more winnable. It just gets more people killed and makes it harder and harder to ever tell the public the truth.

    In unwinnable wars based on lies, the "credibility" problem only gets more complicated, as new lies require new scapegoats and convoluted narratives to explain away graveyards filled by old lies. Obama's cynical global charm offensive bought the "war on terror" another eight years, but that only allowed the CIA to drag the U.S. into more trouble and spread its chaos to more places around the world.

    Meanwhile, Russian President Putin is winning hearts and minds in capitals around the world by calling for a recommitment to the rule of international law , which prohibits the threat or use of military force except in self-defense. Every new U.S. threat or act of aggression will only make Putin's case more persuasive, not least to important U.S. allies like South Korea, Germany and other members of the European Union, whose complicity in U.S. aggression has until now helped to give it a false veneer of political legitimacy.

    Throughout history, serial aggression has nearly always provoked increasingly united opposition, as peace-loving countries and people have reluctantly summoned the courage to stand up to an aggressor. France under Napoleon and Hitler's Germany also regarded themselves as exceptional, and in their own ways they were. But in the end, their belief in their exceptionalism led them on to defeat and destruction.

    Americans had better hope that we are not so exceptional, and that the world will find a diplomatic rather than a military "solution" to its American problem. Our chances of survival would improve a great deal if American officials and politicians would finally start to act like something other than putty in the hands of the CIA

    Nicolas J. S. Davies is the author of Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq . He also wrote the chapters on "Obama at War" in Grading the 44th President: a Report Card on Barack Obama's First Term as a Progressive Leader .

    [Dec 31, 2017] Is [neo]Liberalism a Dying Faith by Pat Buchanan

    Highly recommended!
    Nationalism really represent a growing threat to neoliberalism. It is clear the the rise of nationalism was caused by the triumph of neoliberalism all over the globe. As neoliberal ideology collapsed in 2008, thing became really interesting now. Looks like 1920th-1940th will be replayed on a new level with the USA neoliberal empire under stress from new challengers instead of British empire.
    Rumor about the death of neoliberalism are slightly exaggerated ;-). This social system still has a lot of staying power. you need some external shock like the need of cheap oil (defined as sustainable price of oil over $100 per barrel) to shake it again. Of some financial crisis similar to the crisis of 2008. Currently there is still no alternative social order that can replace it. Collapse of the USSR discredited both socialism even of different flavors then was practiced in the USSR. National socialism would be a step back from neoliberalism.
    Notable quotes:
    "... The retreat of [neo]liberalism is very visible in Asia. All Southeast Asian states have turned their backs on liberal democracy, especially Indonesia, the Philippines and Myanmar in the last decade. This NYT article notes that liberalism has essentially died in Japan, and that all political contests are now between what the west would consider conservatives: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/15/opinion/liberalism-japan-election.html ..."
    "... What is today called "Liberalism" and "Conservatism" both are simply corrupted labels applied to the same top-down corporate-fascistic elite rule that I think Mr. Buchanan once referred to as "two wings of the same bird of prey." ..."
    "... Nobody at the top cares about 'diversity.' They care about the easy profits that come from ever cheaper labor. 'Diversity' is not suicide but rather murder: instigated by a small number of very powerful people who have decided that the long-term health of their nations and civilization is less important than short-term profits and power. ..."
    "... Hillary and Obama are to the right of the President that Buchanan served in his White House. Richard Nixon was to the Left of both Hillary and Obama. I can't even imagine Hillary accepting and signing into law a 'Clean Water Act' or enacting Price Controls to fight inflation. No way. Heck would freeze over before Hillary would do something so against her Banker Backers. ..."
    "... It's sure that financial (neo)liberalism was in a growth phase prior to year 2000 (under Greenspan, the "Maestro") with a general belief that the economy could be "fine tuned" with risk eliminated using sophisticated financial instruments, monetary policy etc. ..."
    "... If [neo] Liberalism is a package, then two heavy financial blows that shook the whole foundation were the collapse of the dot.com bubble (2000) and the mortgage bubble (2008). ..."
    "... And, other (self-serving) neoliberal stories are now seen as false. For example, that the US is an "advanced post-industrial service economy", that out-sourcing would "free up Americans for higher skilled/higher wage employment" or that "the US would always gain from tariff free trade". ..."
    "... The basic divide is surely Nationalism (America First) vs. Globalism (Neo-Liberalism), as shown by the last US Presidential election. ..."
    "... Neoliberalism, of which the Clintons are acolytes, supports Free Trade and Open Borders. Although it claims to support World Government, in actual fact it supports corporatism. This is explicit in the TPPA Trump vetoed. Under the corporate state, the state controls the corporations, as Don Benito did in Italy. Under corporatism, the corporations tell the state what to do, as has been the case in America since at least the Clinton Presidency. ..."
    "... But I recall that Pat B also said neoconservatism was on its way out a few years after Iraq war II and yet it's stronger than ever and its adherents are firmly ensconced in the joint chiefs of staff, the pentagon, Congress and the White House. It's also spawned a close cousin in liberal interventionism. ..."
    Oct 01, 2002 | www.unz.com

    Asked to name the defining attributes of the America we wish to become, many liberals would answer that we must realize our manifest destiny since 1776, by becoming more equal, more diverse and more democratic -- and the model for mankind's future.

    Equality, diversity, democracy -- this is the holy trinity of the post-Christian secular state at whose altars Liberal Man worships.

    But the congregation worshiping these gods is shrinking. And even Europe seems to be rejecting what America has on offer.

    In a retreat from diversity, Catalonia just voted to separate from Spain. The Basque and Galician peoples of Spain are following the Catalan secession crisis with great interest.

    The right-wing People's Party and far-right Freedom Party just swept 60 percent of Austria's vote, delivering the nation to 31-year-old Sebastian Kurz, whose anti-immigrant platform was plagiarized from the Freedom Party. Summarized it is: Austria for the Austrians!

    Lombardy, whose capital is Milan, and Veneto will vote Sunday for greater autonomy from Rome.

    South Tyrol (Alto Adige), severed from Austria and ceded to Italy at Versailles, written off by Hitler to appease Mussolini after his Anschluss, is astir anew with secessionism. Even the Sicilians are talking of separation.

    By Sunday, the Czech Republic may have a new leader, billionaire Andrej Babis. Writes The Washington Post, Babis "makes a sport of attacking the European Union and says NATO's mission is outdated."

    Platform Promise: Keep the Muslim masses out of the motherland.

    To ethnonationalists, their countrymen are not equal to all others, but superior in rights. Many may nod at Thomas Jefferson's line that "All men are created equal," but they no more practice that in their own nations than did Jefferson in his

    ... ... ...

    European peoples and parties are today using democratic means to achieve "illiberal" ends. And it is hard to see what halts the drift away from liberal democracy toward the restrictive right. For in virtually every nation, there is a major party in opposition, or a party in power, that holds deeply nationalist views.

    European elites may denounce these new parties as "illiberal" or fascist, but it is becoming apparent that it may be liberalism itself that belongs to yesterday. For more and more Europeans see the invasion of the continent along the routes whence the invaders came centuries ago, not as a manageable problem but an existential crisis.

    To many Europeans, it portends an irreversible alteration in the character of the countries their grandchildren will inherit, and possibly an end to their civilization. And they are not going to be deterred from voting their fears by being called names that long ago lost their toxicity from overuse.

    And as Europeans decline to celebrate the racial, ethnic, creedal and cultural diversity extolled by American elites, they also seem to reject the idea that foreigners should be treated equally in nations created for their own kind.

    Europeans seem to admire more, and model their nations more, along the lines of the less diverse America of the Eisenhower era, than on the polyglot America of 2017.

    And Europe seems to be moving toward immigration polices more like the McCarran-Walter Act of 1950 than the open borders bill that Sen. Edward Kennedy shepherded through the Senate in 1965.

    Kennedy promised that the racial and ethnic composition of the America of the 1960s would not be overturned, and he questioned the morality and motives of any who implied that it would.

    Jason Liu , October 20, 2017 at 12:02 pm GMT
    Yes. Fuck yes.

    Liberalism is the naivete of 18th century elites, no different than today. Modernity as you know it is unsustainable, mostly because equality isn't real, identity has value for most humans, pluralism is by definition fractious, and deep down most people wish to follow a wise strongman leader who represents their interests first and not a vague set of universalist values.

    Blind devotion to liberal democracy is another one of those times when white people take an abstract concept to weird extremes. It is short-sighted and autistically narrow minded. Just because you have an oppressive king doesn't mean everyone should be equals. Just because there was slavery/genocide doesn't mean diversity is good.

    The retreat of [neo]liberalism is very visible in Asia. All Southeast Asian states have turned their backs on liberal democracy, especially Indonesia, the Philippines and Myanmar in the last decade. This NYT article notes that liberalism has essentially died in Japan, and that all political contests are now between what the west would consider conservatives: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/15/opinion/liberalism-japan-election.html

    Good riddance. The idea that egalitarianism is more advanced than hierarchy has always been false, and flies against the long arc of history. Time for nationalists around the world to smash liberal democracy and build a new modernity based on actual humanism, with respect to hierarchies and the primacy of majorities instead of guilt and pathological compassion dressed up as political ideology.

    TG , October 20, 2017 at 1:10 pm GMT
    "Liberalism" is not dying. "Liberalism" is dead, and has been since at least 1970.

    What is today called "Liberalism" and "Conservatism" both are simply corrupted labels applied to the same top-down corporate-fascistic elite rule that I think Mr. Buchanan once referred to as "two wings of the same bird of prey."

    Nobody at the top cares about 'diversity.' They care about the easy profits that come from ever cheaper labor. 'Diversity' is not suicide but rather murder: instigated by a small number of very powerful people who have decided that the long-term health of their nations and civilization is less important than short-term profits and power.

    Paul's Ghost , October 20, 2017 at 6:08 pm GMT
    Its been dead for nearly 20 years now. Liberalism has long been the Monty Python parrot nailed to its perch. At this point, the term is mainly kept alive in right-wing attacks by people who lack the imagination to change their habitual targets for so long.

    To my eye, the last 'liberal' politician died in a susupicious plane crash in 2000 as the Bush Republicans were taking the White House by their famous 5-4 vote/coup and also needed to claim control of the Senate. So, the last authentic 'liberal' Senator, Paul Wellstone of MN was killed in a suspicious plane crash that was never properly explained.

    Hillary and Obama are to the right of the President that Buchanan served in his White House. Richard Nixon was to the Left of both Hillary and Obama. I can't even imagine Hillary accepting and signing into law a 'Clean Water Act' or enacting Price Controls to fight inflation. No way. Heck would freeze over before Hillary would do something so against her Banker Backers.

    And, at the root, that is the key. The 'Liberals' that the right now rails against are strongly backed and supported by the Wall Street Banks and other corporate leaders. The 'Liberals' have pushed for a government Of the Bankers, By the Bankers and For the Bankers. The 'Liberals' now are in favor of Endless Unconstitutional War around the world.

    Which can only mean that the term 'Liberal' has been so completely morphed away from its original meanings to be completely worthless.

    The last true Liberal in American politics was Paul Wellstone. And even by the time he died for his sins, he was calling himself a "progressive" because after the Clintons and the Gores had so distorted the term Liberal it was meaningless. Or it had come to mean a society ruled by bankers, a society at constant war and throwing money constantly at a gigantic war machine, a society of censorship where the government needed to control all music lyrics, the same corrupt government where money could by anything from a night in the Lincoln Bedroom to a Presidential Pardon or any other government favor.

    Thus, 'Liberals' were a dead movement even by 2000, when the people who actually believed in the American People over the profits of bankers were calling themselves Progressives in disgust at the misuse of the term Liberal. And now, Obama and Hillary have trashed and distorted even the term Progressive into bombing the world 365 days a year and still constantly throwing money at the military machine and the problems it invents.

    So, Liberalism is so long dead that if you exumed the grave you'd only find dust. And Pat must be getting senile and just throwing back out the same lines he once wrote as a speechwriter for the last Great Lefty President Richard Nixon.

    Miro23 , October 20, 2017 at 6:17 pm GMT

    Is Liberalism a Dying Faith?

    Another question is whether this is wishful thinking from Pat or some kind of reality.

    I think that he's right, that Liberalism is a dying faith, and it's interesting to check the decline.

    It's sure that financial (neo)liberalism was in a growth phase prior to year 2000 (under Greenspan, the "Maestro") with a general belief that the economy could be "fine tuned" with risk eliminated using sophisticated financial instruments, monetary policy etc.

    If [neo] Liberalism is a package, then two heavy financial blows that shook the whole foundation were the collapse of the dot.com bubble (2000) and the mortgage bubble (2008).

    And, other (self-serving) neoliberal stories are now seen as false. For example, that the US is an "advanced post-industrial service economy", that out-sourcing would "free up Americans for higher skilled/higher wage employment" or that "the US would always gain from tariff free trade".

    In fact, the borderless global "world is flat" dogma is now seen as enabling a rootless hyper-rich global elite to draw on a sea of globalized serf labour with little or no identity, while their media and SWJ activists operate a scorched earth defense against any sign of opposition.

    The basic divide is surely Nationalism (America First) vs. Globalism (Neo-Liberalism), as shown by the last US Presidential election.

    reiner Tor , October 20, 2017 at 6:39 pm GMT
    @Randal

    A useful analogy might be Viktor Orbán. He started out as a leader of a liberal party, Fidesz, but then over time started moving to the right. It is often speculated that he started it for cynical reasons, like seeing how the right was divided and that there was essentially a vacuum there for a strong conservative party, but there's little doubt he totally internalized it. There's also little doubt (and at the time he and a lot of his fellow party leaders talked about it a lot) that as he (they) started a family and having children, they started to realize how conservatism kinda made more sense than liberalism.

    With Kurz, there's the possibility for this path. However, he'd need to start a family soon for that to happen. At that age Orbán was already married with children

    Verymuchalive , October 20, 2017 at 10:10 pm GMT
    @Paul's Ghost

    Liberalism ( large L) is indeed long dead.

    Neoliberalism, of which the Clintons are acolytes, supports Free Trade and Open Borders. Although it claims to support World Government, in actual fact it supports corporatism. This is explicit in the TPPA Trump vetoed. Under the corporate state, the state controls the corporations, as Don Benito did in Italy. Under corporatism, the corporations tell the state what to do, as has been the case in America since at least the Clinton Presidency.

    Richard Nixon was a capitalist, not a corporatist. He was a supporter of proper competition laws, unlike any President since Clinton. Socially, he was interventionist, though this may have been to lessen criticism of his Vietnam policies. Anyway, his bussing and desegregation policies were a long-term failure.

    Price Control was quickly dropped, as it was in other Western countries. Long term Price Control, as in present day Venezuela, is economically disastrous.

    KenH , October 21, 2017 at 1:51 pm GMT
    Let's hope liberalism is a dying faith and that is passes from the Western world. If not it will destroy the West, so if it doesn't die a natural death then we must euthanize it. For the evidence is in and it has begat feminism, anti-white racism, demographic winter, mass third world immigration and everything else that ails the West and has made it the sick and dying man of the world.

    But I recall that Pat B also said neoconservatism was on its way out a few years after Iraq war II and yet it's stronger than ever and its adherents are firmly ensconced in the joint chiefs of staff, the pentagon, Congress and the White House. It's also spawned a close cousin in liberal interventionism.

    What Pat refers to as "liberalism" is now left wing totalitarianism and anti-white hatred and it's fanatically trying to remain relevant by lashing out and blacklisting, deplatforming, demonetizing, and physically assaulting all of its enemies on the right who are gaining strength much to their chagrin. They resort to these methods because they can't win an honest debate and in a true free marketplace of ideas they lose.

    [Dec 31, 2017] What Happens When A Russiagate Skeptic Debates A Professional Russiagater

    Highly recommended!
    What a pitiful pressitute this Like Harding is...
    The fact that he is employed by Guardia tells a lot how low Guardian fall. It's a yellow press (owned by intelligence agencies if we talk about their coverage of Russia).
    Notable quotes:
    "... In theory, it would be hard to find two journalists more qualified to debate each side of this important issue. In practice, it was a one-sided thrashing that The Intercept 's Jeremy Scahill accurately described as "brutal". ..."
    "... Russiagate only works if you allow it to remain zoomed out, where the individually weak arguments of this giant Gish gallop fallacy form the appearance of a legitimate argument. ..."
    "... That's not how you're going to get the truth about Russia. He's all appeals to authority - Steele's most of all, even name dropping Kerry. To finally land on "oh well if you would read my whole book" is just getting to the silly season. Also "well this is the kind of person Putin is" is a terrible argument. This isn't about either Putin or Trump really, its about the long history of US-Russia relations and all that has occurred. Also, the ubiquitous throwing around of accusations of the murder of journalists in Russia is a straw man argument, especially when it is just thrown in as some sort of moral shielding for a shabby argument. ..."
    Dec 28, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com

    Have you ever wondered why mainstream media outlets, despite being so fond of dramatic panel debates on other hot-button issues, never have critics of the Russiagate narrative on to debate those who advance it? Well, in a recent Real News interview we received an extremely clear answer to that question, and it was so epic it deserves its own article.

    Real News host and producer Aaron Maté has recently emerged as one of the most articulate critics of the establishment Russia narrative and the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory, and has published in The Nation some of the clearest arguments against both that I've yet seen. Luke Harding is a journalist for The Guardian where he has been writing prolifically in promotion of the Russiagate narrative, and is the author of New York Times bestseller Collusion: Secret Meetings, Dirty Money, and How Russia Helped Donald Trump Win.

    In theory, it would be hard to find two journalists more qualified to debate each side of this important issue. In practice, it was a one-sided thrashing that The Intercept 's Jeremy Scahill accurately described as "brutal".

    The term Gish gallop , named after a Young Earth creationist who was notoriously fond of employing it, refers to a fallacious debate tactic in which a bunch of individually weak arguments are strung together in rapid-fire succession in order to create the illusion of a solid argument and overwhelm the opposition's ability to refute them all in the time allotted. Throughout the discussion the Gish gallop appeared to be the only tool that Luke Harding brought to the table, firing out a deluge of feeble and unsubstantiated arguments only to be stopped over and over again by Maté who kept pointing out when Harding was making a false or fallacious claim.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/9Ikf1uZli4g

    In this part here , for example, the following exchange takes place while Harding is already against the ropes on the back of a previous failed argument. I'm going to type this up so you can clearly see what's happening here:

    Harding: Look, I'm a journalist. I'm a storyteller. I'm not a kind of head of the CIA or the NSA. But what I can tell you is that there have been similar operations in France, most recently when President Macron was elected ? -

    Maté: Well actually Luke that's not true. That's straight up not true. After that election the French cyber-intelligence agency came out and said it could have been virtually anybody.

    Harding: Yeah. But, if you'll let me finish, there've been attacks on the German parliament ? -

    Maté: Okay, but wait Luke, do you concede that the France hack that you just claimed didn't happen?

    Harding: [pause] What? -- ?that it didn't happen? Sorry?

    Maté: Do you concede that the Russian hacking of the French election that you just claimed actually is not true?

    Harding: [pause] Well, I mean that it's not true? I mean, the French report was inconclusive, but you have to look at this kind of contextually. We've seen attacks on other European states as well from Russia, they have very kind of advanced cyber capabilities.

    Maté: Where else?

    Harding: Well, Estonia. Have you heard of Estonia? It's a state in the Baltics which was crippled by a massive cyber attack in 2008, which certainly all kind of western European and former eastern European states think was carried out by Moscow. I mean I was in Moscow at the time, when relations between the two countries were extremely bad. This is a kind of ongoing thing. Now you might say, quite legitimately, well the US does the same thing, the UK does the same thing, and I think to a certain extent that is certainly right. I think what was different last year was the attempt to kind of dump this stuff out into kind of US public space and try and influence public opinion there. That's unusual. And of course that's a matter of congressional inquiry and something Mueller is looking at too.

    Maté: Right. But again, my problem here is that the examples that are frequently presented to substantiate claims of this massive Russian hacking operation around the world prove out to be false. So France as I mentioned; you also mentioned Germany. There was a lot of worry about Russian hacking of the German elections, but it turned out? -- ?and there's plenty of articles since then that have acknowledged this? - ? that actually there was no Russian hack in Germany.

    In the above exchange, Maté derailed Harding's Gish gallop, and Harding actually admonished him for doing so, telling him "let me finish" and attempting to go on listing more flimsy examples to bolster his case as though he hadn't just begun his Gish gallop with a completely false example .

    That's really all Harding brought to the debate. A bunch of individually weak arguments, the fact that he speaks Russian and has lived in Moscow, and the occasional straw man where he tries to imply that Maté is claiming that Vladimir Putin is an innocent girl scout. Meanwhile Maté just kept patiently dragging the debate back on track over and over again in the most polite obliteration of a man that I have ever witnessed.

    The entire interview followed this basic script. Harding makes an unfounded claim, Maté holds him to the fact that it's unfounded, Harding sputters a bit and tries to zoom things out and point to a bigger-picture analysis of broader trends to distract from the fact that he'd just made an individual claim that was baseless, then winds up implying that Maté is only skeptical of the claims because he hasn't lived in Russia as Harding has.

    jeremy scahill 0
    @jeremyscahill
    This @aaronjmate interview is brutal. He makes mincemeat of Luke Harding, who can't seem to defend the thesis, much less the title, of his own book: Where's the 'Collusion' - YouTube
    11:03 AM-Dec 25, 2017
    Q 131 11597 C? 1,148

    The interview ended when Harding once again implied that Maté was only skeptical of the collusion narrative because he'd never been to Russia and seen what a right-wing oppressive government it is, after which the following exchange took place:

    Maté: I don't think I've countered anything you've said about the state of Vladimir Putin's Russia. The issue under discussion today has been whether there was collusion, the topic of your book.
    Harding: Yeah, but you're clearly a kind of collusion rejectionist, so I'm not sure what sort of evidence short of Trump and Putin in a sauna together would convince you. Clearly nothing would convince you. But anyway it's been a pleasure.

    At which point Harding abruptly logged off the video chat, leaving Maté to wrap up the show and promote Harding's book on his own.

    You should definitely watch this debate for yourself , and enjoy it, because I will be shocked if we ever see another like it. Harding's fate will serve as a cautionary tale for the establishment hacks who've built their careers advancing the Russiagate conspiracy theory , and it's highly unlikely that any of them will ever make the mistake of trying to debate anyone of Maté's caliber again.

    The reason Russiagaters speak so often in broad, sweeping terms? - saying there are too many suspicious things happening for there not to be a there there, that there's too much smoke for there not to be fire? - ? is because when you zoom in and focus on any individual part of their conspiracy theory, it falls apart under the slightest amount of critical thinking (or as Harding calls it, "collusion rejectionism"). Russiagate only works if you allow it to remain zoomed out, where the individually weak arguments of this giant Gish gallop fallacy form the appearance of a legitimate argument.

    Well, Harding did say he's a storyteller.

    * * *

    Thanks for reading! My work here is entirely reader-funded so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following me on Twitter , bookmarking my website , throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal , or buying my new book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers . Our Hidden History 4 days ago (edited) That Harding tells Mate to meet Alexi Navalny, who is a far right nationalist and most certainly a tool of US intelligence (something like Russia's Richard Spencer) was all I needed to hear to understand where Luke is coming from.

    He's little more than an intelligence asset himself if his idea of speaking to "Russians" is to go and speak to a bunch of people who most certainly have their own ties back to the western intelligence agencies.

    That's not how you're going to get the truth about Russia. He's all appeals to authority - Steele's most of all, even name dropping Kerry. To finally land on "oh well if you would read my whole book" is just getting to the silly season. Also "well this is the kind of person Putin is" is a terrible argument. This isn't about either Putin or Trump really, its about the long history of US-Russia relations and all that has occurred. Also, the ubiquitous throwing around of accusations of the murder of journalists in Russia is a straw man argument, especially when it is just thrown in as some sort of moral shielding for a shabby argument.

    Few in the US know about these cases or what occurred, or of the many forces inside of Russia that might be involved in murdering journalists just as in Mexico or Turkey. But these cases are not explained - blame is merely assigned to Putin himself. Of course if someone here discusses he death of Michael Hastings, they're a "conspiracy theorist", but if the crime involves a Russian were to assign the blame to Vladimir Putin and, no further explanation is required.

    [Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies

    Highly recommended!
    Essentially CIA dictates the US foreign policy. The tail is wagging the dog. The current Russophobia hysteria mean additional billions for CIA and FBI. As simple as that.
    The article contain some important observation about self-sustaining nature of the US militarism. It is able to create new threats and new insurgencies almost at will via CIA activities.
    The key problem is that wars are highly profitable for important part of the ruling elite, especially representing finance and military industrial complex. Also now part of the US ruling elite now consists of "colonial administrators" which are directly interested in maintaining and expanding the US empire. This is trap from which nation might not be able to escape.
    Notable quotes:
    "... The U.S. government may pretend to respect a "rules-based" global order, but the only rule Washington seems to follow is "might makes right" -- and the CIA has long served as a chief instigator and enforcer, writes Nicolas J.S. Davies. ..."
    "... Once the CIA went to work in Vietnam to undermine the 1954 Geneva Accords and the planned reunification of North and South through a free and fair election in 1956, the die was cast. ..."
    "... No U.S. president could extricate the U.S. from Vietnam without exposing the limits of what U.S. military force could achieve, betraying widely held national myths and the powerful interests that sustained and profited from them. ..."
    "... The critical "lesson of Vietnam" was summed up by Richard Barnet in his 1972 book Roots of War . "At the very moment that the number one nation has perfected the science of killing," Barnet wrote, "It has become an impractical means of political domination." ..."
    "... Even the senior officer corps of the U.S. military saw it that way, since many of them had survived the horrors of Vietnam as junior officers. The CIA could still wreak havoc in Latin America and elsewhere, but the full destructive force of the U.S. military was not unleashed again until the invasion of Panama in 1989 and the First Gulf War in 1991. ..."
    "... Half a century after Vietnam, we have tragically come full circle. With the CIA's politicized intelligence running wild in Washington and its covert operations spreading violence and chaos across every continent, President Trump faces the same pressures to maintain his own and his country's credibility as Johnson and Nixon did. ..."
    "... Trump is facing these questions, not just in one country, Vietnam, but in dozens of countries across the world, and the interests perpetuating and fueling this cycle of crisis and war have only become more entrenched over time, as President Eisenhower warned that they would, despite the end of the Cold War and, until now, the lack of any actual military threat to the United States. ..."
    "... U.S. Air Force Colonel Fletcher Prouty was the chief of special operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1955 to 1964, managing the global military support system for the CIA in Vietnam and around the world. Fletcher Prouty's book, The Secret Team: The CIA and its Allies in Control of the United States and the World , was suppressed when it was first published in 1973. Thousands of copies disappeared from bookstores and libraries, and a mysterious Army Colonel bought the entire shipment of 3,500 copies the publisher sent to Australia. But Prouty's book was republished in 2011, and it is a timely account of the role of the CIA in U.S. policy. ..."
    "... The main purpose of the CIA, as Prouty saw it, is to create such pretexts for war. ..."
    "... The CIA is a hybrid of an intelligence service that gathers and analyzes foreign intelligence and a clandestine service that conducts covert operations. Both functions are essential to creating pretexts for war, and that is what they have done for 70 years. ..."
    "... Prouty described how the CIA infiltrated the U.S. military, the State Department, the National Security Council and other government institutions, covertly placing its officers in critical positions to ensure that its plans are approved and that it has access to whatever forces, weapons, equipment, ammunition and other resources it needs to carry them out. ..."
    "... Many retired intelligence officers, such as Ray McGovern and the members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), saw the merging of clandestine operations with intelligence analysis in one agency as corrupting the objective analysis they tried to provide to policymakers. They formed VIPS in 2003 in response to the fabrication of politicized intelligence that provided false pretexts for the U.S. to invade and destroy Iraq. ..."
    "... But Fletcher Prouty was even more disturbed by the way that the CIA uses clandestine operations to trigger coups, wars and chaos. The civil and proxy war in Syria is a perfect example of what Prouty meant ..."
    "... The role of U.S. "counterterrorism" operations in fueling armed resistance and terrorism, and the absence of any plan to reduce the asymmetric violence unleashed by the "global war on terror," would be no surprise to Fletcher Prouty. As he explained, such clandestine operations always take on a life of their own that is unrelated, and often counter-productive, to any rational U.S. policy objective. ..."
    "... This is a textbook CIA operation on the same model as Vietnam in the late 1950s and early 60s. The CIA uses U.S. special forces and training missions to launch covert and proxy military operations that drive local populations into armed resistance groups, and then uses the presence of those armed resistance groups to justify ever-escalating U.S. military involvement. This is Vietnam redux on a continental scale. ..."
    "... China is already too big and powerful for the U.S. to apply what is known as the Ledeen doctrine named for neoconservative theorist and intelligence operative Michael Ledeen who suggested that every 10 years or so, the United States "pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show we mean business." ..."
    "... As long as the CIA and the U.S. military keep plunging the scapegoats for our failed policies into economic crisis, violence and chaos, the United States and the United Kingdom can remain the safe havens of the world's wealth, islands of privilege and excess amidst the storms they unleash on others. ..."
    "... But if that is the only "significant national objective" driving these policies, it is surely about time for the 99 percent of Americans who reap no benefit from these murderous schemes to stop the CIA and its allies before they completely wreck the already damaged and fragile world in which we all must live, Americans and foreigners alike. ..."
    "... Douglas Valentine has probably studied the CIA in more depth than any other American journalist, beginning with his book on The Phoenix Program in Vietnam. He has written a new book titled The CIA as Organized Crime : How Illegal Operations Corrupt America and the World, in which he brings Fletcher Prouty's analysis right up to the present day, describing the CIA's role in our current wars and the many ways it infiltrates, manipulates and controls U.S. policy. ..."
    "... In Venezuela, the CIA and the right-wing opposition are following the same strategy that President Nixon ordered the CIA to inflict on Chile, to "make the economy scream" in preparation for the 1973 coup. ..."
    "... The U.S. willingness to scrap the Agreed Framework in 2003, the breakdown of the Six Party Talks in 2009 and the U.S. refusal to acknowledge that its own military actions and threats create legitimate defense concerns for North Korea have driven the North Koreans into a corner from which they see a credible nuclear deterrent as their only chance to avoid mass destruction. ..."
    "... Obama's charm offensive invigorated old and new military alliances with the U.K., France and the Arab monarchies, and he quietly ran up the most expensive military budge t of any president since World War Two. ..."
    "... Throughout history, serial aggression has nearly always provoked increasingly united opposition, as peace-loving countries and people have reluctantly summoned the courage to stand up to an aggressor. France under Napoleon and Hitler's Germany also regarded themselves as exceptional, and in their own ways they were. But in the end, their belief in their exceptionalism led them on to defeat and destruction. ..."
    Oct 30, 2017 | consortiumnews.com

    The U.S. government may pretend to respect a "rules-based" global order, but the only rule Washington seems to follow is "might makes right" -- and the CIA has long served as a chief instigator and enforcer, writes Nicolas J.S. Davies.

    As the recent PBS documentary on the American War in Vietnam acknowledged, few American officials ever believed that the United States could win the war, neither those advising Johnson as he committed hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops, nor those advising Nixon as he escalated a brutal aerial bombardment that had already killed millions of people.

    As conversations tape-recorded in the White House reveal, and as other writers have documented, the reasons for wading into the Big Muddy, as Pete Seeger satirized it , and then pushing on regardless, all came down to "credibility": the domestic political credibility of the politicians involved and America's international credibility as a military power.

    Once the CIA went to work in Vietnam to undermine the 1954 Geneva Accords and the planned reunification of North and South through a free and fair election in 1956, the die was cast. The CIA's support for the repressive Diem regime and its successors ensured an ever-escalating war, as the South rose in rebellion, supported by the North. No U.S. president could extricate the U.S. from Vietnam without exposing the limits of what U.S. military force could achieve, betraying widely held national myths and the powerful interests that sustained and profited from them.

    The critical "lesson of Vietnam" was summed up by Richard Barnet in his 1972 book Roots of War . "At the very moment that the number one nation has perfected the science of killing," Barnet wrote, "It has become an impractical means of political domination."

    Even the senior officer corps of the U.S. military saw it that way, since many of them had survived the horrors of Vietnam as junior officers. The CIA could still wreak havoc in Latin America and elsewhere, but the full destructive force of the U.S. military was not unleashed again until the invasion of Panama in 1989 and the First Gulf War in 1991.

    Half a century after Vietnam, we have tragically come full circle. With the CIA's politicized intelligence running wild in Washington and its covert operations spreading violence and chaos across every continent, President Trump faces the same pressures to maintain his own and his country's credibility as Johnson and Nixon did. His predictable response has been to escalate ongoing wars in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia and West Africa, and to threaten new ones against North Korea, Iran and Venezuela.

    Trump is facing these questions, not just in one country, Vietnam, but in dozens of countries across the world, and the interests perpetuating and fueling this cycle of crisis and war have only become more entrenched over time, as President Eisenhower warned that they would, despite the end of the Cold War and, until now, the lack of any actual military threat to the United States.

    Ironically but predictably, the U.S.'s aggressive and illegal war policy has finally provoked a real military threat to the U.S., albeit one that has emerged only in response to U.S. war plans. As I explained in a recent article , North Korea's discovery in 2016 of a U.S. plan to assassinate its president, Kim Jong Un, and launch a Second Korean War has triggered a crash program to develop long-range ballistic missiles that could give North Korea a viable nuclear deterrent and prevent a U.S. attack. But the North Koreans will not feel safe from attack until their leaders and ours are sure that their missiles can deliver a nuclear strike against the U.S. mainland.

    The CIA's Pretexts for War

    U.S. Air Force Colonel Fletcher Prouty was the chief of special operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1955 to 1964, managing the global military support system for the CIA in Vietnam and around the world. Fletcher Prouty's book, The Secret Team: The CIA and its Allies in Control of the United States and the World , was suppressed when it was first published in 1973. Thousands of copies disappeared from bookstores and libraries, and a mysterious Army Colonel bought the entire shipment of 3,500 copies the publisher sent to Australia. But Prouty's book was republished in 2011, and it is a timely account of the role of the CIA in U.S. policy.

    Prouty surprisingly described the role of the CIA as a response by powerful people and interests to the abolition of the U.S. Department of War and the creation of the Department of Defense in 1947. Once the role of the U.S. military was redefined as one of defense, in line with the United Nations Charter's prohibition against the threat or use of military force in 1945 and similar moves by other military powers, it would require some kind of crisis or threat to justify using military force in the future, both legally and politically. The main purpose of the CIA, as Prouty saw it, is to create such pretexts for war.

    The CIA is a hybrid of an intelligence service that gathers and analyzes foreign intelligence and a clandestine service that conducts covert operations. Both functions are essential to creating pretexts for war, and that is what they have done for 70 years.

    Prouty described how the CIA infiltrated the U.S. military, the State Department, the National Security Council and other government institutions, covertly placing its officers in critical positions to ensure that its plans are approved and that it has access to whatever forces, weapons, equipment, ammunition and other resources it needs to carry them out.

    Many retired intelligence officers, such as Ray McGovern and the members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), saw the merging of clandestine operations with intelligence analysis in one agency as corrupting the objective analysis they tried to provide to policymakers. They formed VIPS in 2003 in response to the fabrication of politicized intelligence that provided false pretexts for the U.S. to invade and destroy Iraq.

    CIA in Syria and Africa

    But Fletcher Prouty was even more disturbed by the way that the CIA uses clandestine operations to trigger coups, wars and chaos. The civil and proxy war in Syria is a perfect example of what Prouty meant. In late 2011, after destroying Libya and aiding in the torture-murder of Muammar Gaddafi, the CIA and its allies began flying fighters and weapons from Libya to Turkey and infiltrating them into Syria. Then, working with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Croatia and other allies, this operation poured thousands of tons of weapons across Syria's borders to ignite and fuel a full-scale civil war.

    Once these covert operations were under way, they ran wild until they had unleashed a savage Al Qaeda affiliate in Syria (Jabhat al-Nusra, now rebranded as Jabhat Fateh al-Sham), spawned the even more savage "Islamic State," triggered the heaviest and probably the deadliest U.S. bombing campaign since Vietnam and drawn Russia, Iran, Turkey, Israel, Jordan, Hezbollah, Kurdish militias and almost every state or armed group in the Middle East into the chaos of Syria's civil war.

    Meanwhile, as Al Qaeda and Islamic State have expanded their operations across Africa, the U.N. has published a report titled Journey to Extremism in Africa: Drivers, Incentives and the Tipping Point for Recruitment , based on 500 interviews with African militants. This study has found that the kind of special operations and training missions the CIA and AFRICOM are conducting and supporting in Africa are in fact the critical "tipping point" that drives Africans to join militant groups like Al Qaeda, Al-Shabab and Boko Haram.

    The report found that government action, such as the killing or detention of friends or family, was the "tipping point" that drove 71 percent of African militants interviewed to join armed groups, and that this was a more important factor than religious ideology.

    The conclusions of Journey to Extremism in Africa confirm the findings of other similar studies. The Center for Civilians in Conflict interviewed 250 civilians who joined armed groups in Bosnia, Somalia, Gaza and Libya for its 2015 study, The People's Perspectives : Civilian Involvement in Armed Conflict . The study found that the most common motivation for civilians to join armed groups was simply to protect themselves or their families.

    The role of U.S. "counterterrorism" operations in fueling armed resistance and terrorism, and the absence of any plan to reduce the asymmetric violence unleashed by the "global war on terror," would be no surprise to Fletcher Prouty. As he explained, such clandestine operations always take on a life of their own that is unrelated, and often counter-productive, to any rational U.S. policy objective.

    "The more intimate one becomes with this activity," Prouty wrote, "The more one begins to realize that such operations are rarely, if ever, initiated from an intent to become involved in pursuit of some national objective in the first place."

    The U.S. justifies the deployment of 6,000 U.S. special forces and military trainers to 53 of the 54 countries in Africa as a response to terrorism. But the U.N.'s Journey to Extremism in Africa study makes it clear that the U.S. militarization of Africa is in fact the "tipping point" that is driving Africans across the continent to join armed resistance groups in the first place.

    This is a textbook CIA operation on the same model as Vietnam in the late 1950s and early 60s. The CIA uses U.S. special forces and training missions to launch covert and proxy military operations that drive local populations into armed resistance groups, and then uses the presence of those armed resistance groups to justify ever-escalating U.S. military involvement. This is Vietnam redux on a continental scale.

    Taking on China

    What seems to really be driving the CIA's militarization of U.S. policy in Africa is China's growing influence on the continent. As Steve Bannon put it in an interview with the Economist in August, "Let's go screw up One Belt One Road."

    China is already too big and powerful for the U.S. to apply what is known as the Ledeen doctrine named for neoconservative theorist and intelligence operative Michael Ledeen who suggested that every 10 years or so, the United States "pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show we mean business."

    China is too powerful and armed with nuclear weapons. So, in this case, the CIA's job would be to spread violence and chaos to disrupt Chinese trade and investment, and to make African governments increasingly dependent on U.S. military aid to fight the militant groups spawned and endlessly regenerated by U.S.-led "counterterrorism" operations.

    Neither Ledeen nor Bannon pretend that such policies are designed to build more prosperous or viable societies in the Middle East or Africa, let alone to benefit their people. They both know very well what Richard Barnet already understood 45 years ago, that America's unprecedented investment in weapons, war and CIA covert operations are only good for one thing: to kill people and destroy infrastructure, reducing cities to rubble, societies to chaos and the desperate survivors to poverty and displacement.

    As long as the CIA and the U.S. military keep plunging the scapegoats for our failed policies into economic crisis, violence and chaos, the United States and the United Kingdom can remain the safe havens of the world's wealth, islands of privilege and excess amidst the storms they unleash on others.

    But if that is the only "significant national objective" driving these policies, it is surely about time for the 99 percent of Americans who reap no benefit from these murderous schemes to stop the CIA and its allies before they completely wreck the already damaged and fragile world in which we all must live, Americans and foreigners alike.

    Douglas Valentine has probably studied the CIA in more depth than any other American journalist, beginning with his book on The Phoenix Program in Vietnam. He has written a new book titled The CIA as Organized Crime : How Illegal Operations Corrupt America and the World, in which he brings Fletcher Prouty's analysis right up to the present day, describing the CIA's role in our current wars and the many ways it infiltrates, manipulates and controls U.S. policy.

    The Three Scapegoats

    In Trump's speech to the U.N. General Assembly, he named North Korea, Iran and Venezuela as his prime targets for destabilization, economic warfare and, ultimately, the overthrow of their governments, whether by coup d'etat or the mass destruction of their civilian population and infrastructure. But Trump's choice of scapegoats for America's failures was obviously not based on a rational reassessment of foreign policy priorities by the new administration. It was only a tired rehashing of the CIA's unfinished business with two-thirds of Bush's "axis of evil" and Bush White House official Elliott Abrams' failed 2002 coup in Caracas, now laced with explicit and illegal threats of aggression.

    How Trump and the CIA plan to sacrifice their three scapegoats for America's failures remains to be seen. This is not 2001, when the world stood silent at the U.S. bombardment and invasion of Afghanistan after September 11th. It is more like 2003, when the U.S. destruction of Iraq split the Atlantic alliance and alienated most of the world. It is certainly not 2011, after Obama's global charm offensive had rebuilt U.S. alliances and provided cover for French President Sarkozy, British Prime Minister Cameron, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Arab royals to destroy Libya, once ranked by the U.N. as the most developed country in Africa , now mired in intractable chaos.

    In 2017, a U.S. attack on any one of Trump's scapegoats would isolate the United States from many of its allies and undermine its standing in the world in far-reaching ways that might be more permanent and harder to repair than the invasion and destruction of Iraq.

    In Venezuela, the CIA and the right-wing opposition are following the same strategy that President Nixon ordered the CIA to inflict on Chile, to "make the economy scream" in preparation for the 1973 coup. But the solid victory of Venezuela's ruling Socialist Party in recent nationwide gubernatorial elections, despite a long and deep economic crisis, reveals little public support for the CIA's puppets in Venezuela.

    The CIA has successfully discredited the Venezuelan government through economic warfare, increasingly violent right-wing street protests and a global propaganda campaign. But the CIA has stupidly hitched its wagon to an extreme right-wing, upper-class opposition that has no credibility with most of the Venezuelan public, who still turn out for the Socialists at the polls. A CIA coup or U.S. military intervention would meet fierce public resistance and damage U.S. relations all over Latin America.

    Boxing In North Korea

    A U.S. aerial bombardment or "preemptive strike" on North Korea could quickly escalate into a war between the U.S. and China, which has reiterated its commitment to North Korea's defense if North Korea is attacked. We do not know exactly what was in the U.S. war plan discovered by North Korea, so neither can we know how North Korea and China could respond if the U.S. pressed ahead with it.

    Most analysts have long concluded that any U.S. attack on North Korea would be met with a North Korean artillery and missile barrage that would inflict unacceptable civilian casualties on Seoul, a metropolitan area of 26 million people, three times the population of New York City. Seoul is only 35 miles from the frontier with North Korea, placing it within range of a huge array of North Korean weapons. What was already a no-win calculus is now compounded by the possibility that North Korea could respond with nuclear weapons, turning any prospect of a U.S. attack into an even worse nightmare.

    U.S. mismanagement of its relations with North Korea should be an object lesson for its relations with Iran, graphically demonstrating the advantages of diplomacy, talks and agreements over threats of war. Under the Agreed Framework signed in 1994, North Korea stopped work on two much larger nuclear reactors than the small experimental one operating at Yongbyong since 1986, which only produces 6 kg of plutonium per year, enough for one nuclear bomb.

    The lesson of Bush's Iraq invasion in 2003 after Saddam Hussein had complied with demands that he destroy Iraq's stockpiles of chemical weapons and shut down a nascent nuclear program was not lost on North Korea. Not only did the invasion lay waste to large sections of Iraq with hundreds of thousands of dead but Hussein himself was hunted down and condemned to death by hanging.

    Still, after North Korea tested its first nuclear weapon in 2006, even its small experimental reactor was shut down as a result of the "Six Party Talks" in 2007, all the fuel rods were removed and placed under supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the cooling tower of the reactor was demolished in 2008.

    But then, as relations deteriorated, North Korea conducted a second nuclear weapon test and again began reprocessing spent fuel rods to recover plutonium for use in nuclear weapons.

    North Korea has now conducted six nuclear weapons tests. The explosions in the first five tests increased gradually up to 15-25 kilotons, about the yield of the bombs the U.S. dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but estimates for the yield of the 2017 test range from 110 to 250 kilotons , comparable to a small hydrogen bomb.

    The even greater danger in a new war in Korea is that the U.S. could unleash part of its arsenal of 4,000 more powerful weapons (100 to 1,200 kilotons), which could kill millions of people and devastate and poison the region, or even the world, for years to come.

    The U.S. willingness to scrap the Agreed Framework in 2003, the breakdown of the Six Party Talks in 2009 and the U.S. refusal to acknowledge that its own military actions and threats create legitimate defense concerns for North Korea have driven the North Koreans into a corner from which they see a credible nuclear deterrent as their only chance to avoid mass destruction.

    China has proposed a reasonable framework for diplomacy to address the concerns of both sides, but the U.S. insists on maintaining its propaganda narratives that all the fault lies with North Korea and that it has some kind of "military solution" to the crisis.

    This may be the most dangerous idea we have heard from U.S. policymakers since the end of the Cold War, but it is the logical culmination of a systematic normalization of deviant and illegal U.S. war-making that has already cost millions of lives in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Yemen and Pakistan. As historian Gabriel Kolko wrote in Century of War in 1994, "options and decisions that are intrinsically dangerous and irrational become not merely plausible but the only form of reasoning about war and diplomacy that is possible in official circles."

    Demonizing Iran

    The idea that Iran has ever had a nuclear weapons program is seriously contested by the IAEA, which has examined every allegation presented by the CIA and other Western "intelligence" agencies as well as Israel. Former IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei revealed many details of this wild goose chase in his 2011 memoir, Age of Deception : Nuclear Diplomacy in Treacherous Times .

    When the CIA and its partners reluctantly acknowledged the IAEA's conclusions in a 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), ElBaradei issued a press release confirming that, "the agency has no concrete evidence of an ongoing nuclear weapons program or undeclared nuclear facilities in Iran."

    Since 2007, the IAEA has resolved all its outstanding concerns with Iran. It has verified that dual-use technologies that Iran imported before 2003 were in fact used for other purposes, and it has exposed the mysterious "laptop documents" that appeared to show Iranian plans for a nuclear weapon as forgeries. Gareth Porter thoroughly explored all these questions and allegations and the history of mistrust that fueled them in his 2014 book, Manufactured Crisis : the Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare , which I highly recommend.

    But, in the parallel Bizarro world of U.S. politics, hopelessly poisoned by the CIA's endless disinformation campaigns, Hillary Clinton could repeatedly take false credit for disarming Iran during her presidential campaign, and neither Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump nor any corporate media interviewer dared to challenge her claims.

    "When President Obama took office, Iran was racing toward a nuclear bomb," Clinton fantasized in a prominent foreign policy speech on June 2, 2016, claiming that her brutal sanctions policy "brought Iran to the table."

    In fact, as Trita Parsi documented in his 2012 book, A Single Roll of the Dice : Obama's Diplomacy With Iran , the Iranians were ready, not just to "come to the table," but to sign a comprehensive agreement based on a U.S. proposal brokered by Turkey and Brazil in 2010. But, in a classic case of "tail wags dog," the U.S. then rejected its own proposal because it would have undercut support for tighter sanctions in the U.N. Security Council. In other words, Clinton's sanctions policy did not "bring Iran to the table", but prevented the U.S. from coming to the table itself.

    As a senior State Department official told Trita Parsi, the real problem with U.S. diplomacy with Iran when Clinton was at the State Department was that the U.S. would not take "Yes" for an answer. Trump's ham-fisted decertification of Iran's compliance with the JCPOA is right out of Clinton's playbook, and it demonstrates that the CIA is still determined to use Iran as a scapegoat for America's failures in the Middle East.

    The spurious claim that Iran is the world's greatest sponsor of terrorism is another CIA canard reinforced by endless repetition. It is true that Iran supports and supplies weapons to Hezbollah and Hamas, which are both listed as terrorist organizations by the U.S. government. But they are mainly defensive resistance groups that defend Lebanon and Gaza respectively against invasions and attacks by Israel.

    Shifting attention away from Al Qaeda, Islamic State, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and other groups that actually commit terrorist crimes around the world might just seem like a case of the CIA "taking its eyes off the ball," if it wasn't so transparently timed to frame Iran with new accusations now that the manufactured crisis of the nuclear scare has run its course.

    What the Future Holds

    Barack Obama's most consequential international achievement may have been the triumph of symbolism over substance behind which he expanded and escalated the so-called "war on terror," with a vast expansion of covert operations and proxy wars that eventually triggered the heaviest U.S. aerial bombardments since Vietnam in Iraq and Syria.

    Obama's charm offensive invigorated old and new military alliances with the U.K., France and the Arab monarchies, and he quietly ran up the most expensive military budget of any president since World War Two.

    But Obama's expansion of the "war on terror" under cover of his deceptive global public relations campaign created many more problems than it solved, and Trump and his advisers are woefully ill-equipped to solve any of them. Trump's expressed desire to place America first and to resist foreign entanglements is hopelessly at odds with his aggressive, bullying approach to every foreign policy problem.

    If the U.S. could threaten and fight its way to a resolution of any of its international problems, it would have done so already. That is exactly what it has been trying to do since the 1990s, behind both the swagger and bluster of Bush and Trump and the deceptive charm of Clinton and Obama: a "good cop – bad cop" routine that should no longer fool anyone anywhere.

    But as Lyndon Johnson found as he waded deeper and deeper into the Big Muddy in Vietnam, lying to the public about unwinnable wars does not make them any more winnable. It just gets more people killed and makes it harder and harder to ever tell the public the truth.

    In unwinnable wars based on lies, the "credibility" problem only gets more complicated, as new lies require new scapegoats and convoluted narratives to explain away graveyards filled by old lies. Obama's cynical global charm offensive bought the "war on terror" another eight years, but that only allowed the CIA to drag the U.S. into more trouble and spread its chaos to more places around the world.

    Meanwhile, Russian President Putin is winning hearts and minds in capitals around the world by calling for a recommitment to the rule of international law , which prohibits the threat or use of military force except in self-defense. Every new U.S. threat or act of aggression will only make Putin's case more persuasive, not least to important U.S. allies like South Korea, Germany and other members of the European Union, whose complicity in U.S. aggression has until now helped to give it a false veneer of political legitimacy.

    Throughout history, serial aggression has nearly always provoked increasingly united opposition, as peace-loving countries and people have reluctantly summoned the courage to stand up to an aggressor. France under Napoleon and Hitler's Germany also regarded themselves as exceptional, and in their own ways they were. But in the end, their belief in their exceptionalism led them on to defeat and destruction.

    Americans had better hope that we are not so exceptional, and that the world will find a diplomatic rather than a military "solution" to its American problem. Our chances of survival would improve a great deal if American officials and politicians would finally start to act like something other than putty in the hands of the CIA

    Nicolas J. S. Davies is the author of Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq . He also wrote the chapters on "Obama at War" in Grading the 44th President: a Report Card on Barack Obama's First Term as a Progressive Leader .

    [Dec 31, 2017] Is [neo]Liberalism a Dying Faith by Pat Buchanan

    Highly recommended!
    Nationalism really represent a growing threat to neoliberalism. It is clear the the rise of nationalism was caused by the triumph of neoliberalism all over the globe. As neoliberal ideology collapsed in 2008, thing became really interesting now. Looks like 1920th-1940th will be replayed on a new level with the USA neoliberal empire under stress from new challengers instead of British empire.
    Rumor about the death of neoliberalism are slightly exaggerated ;-). This social system still has a lot of staying power. you need some external shock like the need of cheap oil (defined as sustainable price of oil over $100 per barrel) to shake it again. Of some financial crisis similar to the crisis of 2008. Currently there is still no alternative social order that can replace it. Collapse of the USSR discredited both socialism even of different flavors then was practiced in the USSR. National socialism would be a step back from neoliberalism.
    Notable quotes:
    "... The retreat of [neo]liberalism is very visible in Asia. All Southeast Asian states have turned their backs on liberal democracy, especially Indonesia, the Philippines and Myanmar in the last decade. This NYT article notes that liberalism has essentially died in Japan, and that all political contests are now between what the west would consider conservatives: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/15/opinion/liberalism-japan-election.html ..."
    "... What is today called "Liberalism" and "Conservatism" both are simply corrupted labels applied to the same top-down corporate-fascistic elite rule that I think Mr. Buchanan once referred to as "two wings of the same bird of prey." ..."
    "... Nobody at the top cares about 'diversity.' They care about the easy profits that come from ever cheaper labor. 'Diversity' is not suicide but rather murder: instigated by a small number of very powerful people who have decided that the long-term health of their nations and civilization is less important than short-term profits and power. ..."
    "... Hillary and Obama are to the right of the President that Buchanan served in his White House. Richard Nixon was to the Left of both Hillary and Obama. I can't even imagine Hillary accepting and signing into law a 'Clean Water Act' or enacting Price Controls to fight inflation. No way. Heck would freeze over before Hillary would do something so against her Banker Backers. ..."
    "... It's sure that financial (neo)liberalism was in a growth phase prior to year 2000 (under Greenspan, the "Maestro") with a general belief that the economy could be "fine tuned" with risk eliminated using sophisticated financial instruments, monetary policy etc. ..."
    "... If [neo] Liberalism is a package, then two heavy financial blows that shook the whole foundation were the collapse of the dot.com bubble (2000) and the mortgage bubble (2008). ..."
    "... And, other (self-serving) neoliberal stories are now seen as false. For example, that the US is an "advanced post-industrial service economy", that out-sourcing would "free up Americans for higher skilled/higher wage employment" or that "the US would always gain from tariff free trade". ..."
    "... The basic divide is surely Nationalism (America First) vs. Globalism (Neo-Liberalism), as shown by the last US Presidential election. ..."
    "... Neoliberalism, of which the Clintons are acolytes, supports Free Trade and Open Borders. Although it claims to support World Government, in actual fact it supports corporatism. This is explicit in the TPPA Trump vetoed. Under the corporate state, the state controls the corporations, as Don Benito did in Italy. Under corporatism, the corporations tell the state what to do, as has been the case in America since at least the Clinton Presidency. ..."
    "... But I recall that Pat B also said neoconservatism was on its way out a few years after Iraq war II and yet it's stronger than ever and its adherents are firmly ensconced in the joint chiefs of staff, the pentagon, Congress and the White House. It's also spawned a close cousin in liberal interventionism. ..."
    Oct 01, 2002 | www.unz.com

    Asked to name the defining attributes of the America we wish to become, many liberals would answer that we must realize our manifest destiny since 1776, by becoming more equal, more diverse and more democratic -- and the model for mankind's future.

    Equality, diversity, democracy -- this is the holy trinity of the post-Christian secular state at whose altars Liberal Man worships.

    But the congregation worshiping these gods is shrinking. And even Europe seems to be rejecting what America has on offer.

    In a retreat from diversity, Catalonia just voted to separate from Spain. The Basque and Galician peoples of Spain are following the Catalan secession crisis with great interest.

    The right-wing People's Party and far-right Freedom Party just swept 60 percent of Austria's vote, delivering the nation to 31-year-old Sebastian Kurz, whose anti-immigrant platform was plagiarized from the Freedom Party. Summarized it is: Austria for the Austrians!

    Lombardy, whose capital is Milan, and Veneto will vote Sunday for greater autonomy from Rome.

    South Tyrol (Alto Adige), severed from Austria and ceded to Italy at Versailles, written off by Hitler to appease Mussolini after his Anschluss, is astir anew with secessionism. Even the Sicilians are talking of separation.

    By Sunday, the Czech Republic may have a new leader, billionaire Andrej Babis. Writes The Washington Post, Babis "makes a sport of attacking the European Union and says NATO's mission is outdated."

    Platform Promise: Keep the Muslim masses out of the motherland.

    To ethnonationalists, their countrymen are not equal to all others, but superior in rights. Many may nod at Thomas Jefferson's line that "All men are created equal," but they no more practice that in their own nations than did Jefferson in his

    ... ... ...

    European peoples and parties are today using democratic means to achieve "illiberal" ends. And it is hard to see what halts the drift away from liberal democracy toward the restrictive right. For in virtually every nation, there is a major party in opposition, or a party in power, that holds deeply nationalist views.

    European elites may denounce these new parties as "illiberal" or fascist, but it is becoming apparent that it may be liberalism itself that belongs to yesterday. For more and more Europeans see the invasion of the continent along the routes whence the invaders came centuries ago, not as a manageable problem but an existential crisis.

    To many Europeans, it portends an irreversible alteration in the character of the countries their grandchildren will inherit, and possibly an end to their civilization. And they are not going to be deterred from voting their fears by being called names that long ago lost their toxicity from overuse.

    And as Europeans decline to celebrate the racial, ethnic, creedal and cultural diversity extolled by American elites, they also seem to reject the idea that foreigners should be treated equally in nations created for their own kind.

    Europeans seem to admire more, and model their nations more, along the lines of the less diverse America of the Eisenhower era, than on the polyglot America of 2017.

    And Europe seems to be moving toward immigration polices more like the McCarran-Walter Act of 1950 than the open borders bill that Sen. Edward Kennedy shepherded through the Senate in 1965.

    Kennedy promised that the racial and ethnic composition of the America of the 1960s would not be overturned, and he questioned the morality and motives of any who implied that it would.

    Jason Liu , October 20, 2017 at 12:02 pm GMT
    Yes. Fuck yes.

    Liberalism is the naivete of 18th century elites, no different than today. Modernity as you know it is unsustainable, mostly because equality isn't real, identity has value for most humans, pluralism is by definition fractious, and deep down most people wish to follow a wise strongman leader who represents their interests first and not a vague set of universalist values.

    Blind devotion to liberal democracy is another one of those times when white people take an abstract concept to weird extremes. It is short-sighted and autistically narrow minded. Just because you have an oppressive king doesn't mean everyone should be equals. Just because there was slavery/genocide doesn't mean diversity is good.

    The retreat of [neo]liberalism is very visible in Asia. All Southeast Asian states have turned their backs on liberal democracy, especially Indonesia, the Philippines and Myanmar in the last decade. This NYT article notes that liberalism has essentially died in Japan, and that all political contests are now between what the west would consider conservatives: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/15/opinion/liberalism-japan-election.html

    Good riddance. The idea that egalitarianism is more advanced than hierarchy has always been false, and flies against the long arc of history. Time for nationalists around the world to smash liberal democracy and build a new modernity based on actual humanism, with respect to hierarchies and the primacy of majorities instead of guilt and pathological compassion dressed up as political ideology.

    TG , October 20, 2017 at 1:10 pm GMT
    "Liberalism" is not dying. "Liberalism" is dead, and has been since at least 1970.

    What is today called "Liberalism" and "Conservatism" both are simply corrupted labels applied to the same top-down corporate-fascistic elite rule that I think Mr. Buchanan once referred to as "two wings of the same bird of prey."

    Nobody at the top cares about 'diversity.' They care about the easy profits that come from ever cheaper labor. 'Diversity' is not suicide but rather murder: instigated by a small number of very powerful people who have decided that the long-term health of their nations and civilization is less important than short-term profits and power.

    Paul's Ghost , October 20, 2017 at 6:08 pm GMT
    Its been dead for nearly 20 years now. Liberalism has long been the Monty Python parrot nailed to its perch. At this point, the term is mainly kept alive in right-wing attacks by people who lack the imagination to change their habitual targets for so long.

    To my eye, the last 'liberal' politician died in a susupicious plane crash in 2000 as the Bush Republicans were taking the White House by their famous 5-4 vote/coup and also needed to claim control of the Senate. So, the last authentic 'liberal' Senator, Paul Wellstone of MN was killed in a suspicious plane crash that was never properly explained.

    Hillary and Obama are to the right of the President that Buchanan served in his White House. Richard Nixon was to the Left of both Hillary and Obama. I can't even imagine Hillary accepting and signing into law a 'Clean Water Act' or enacting Price Controls to fight inflation. No way. Heck would freeze over before Hillary would do something so against her Banker Backers.

    And, at the root, that is the key. The 'Liberals' that the right now rails against are strongly backed and supported by the Wall Street Banks and other corporate leaders. The 'Liberals' have pushed for a government Of the Bankers, By the Bankers and For the Bankers. The 'Liberals' now are in favor of Endless Unconstitutional War around the world.

    Which can only mean that the term 'Liberal' has been so completely morphed away from its original meanings to be completely worthless.

    The last true Liberal in American politics was Paul Wellstone. And even by the time he died for his sins, he was calling himself a "progressive" because after the Clintons and the Gores had so distorted the term Liberal it was meaningless. Or it had come to mean a society ruled by bankers, a society at constant war and throwing money constantly at a gigantic war machine, a society of censorship where the government needed to control all music lyrics, the same corrupt government where money could by anything from a night in the Lincoln Bedroom to a Presidential Pardon or any other government favor.

    Thus, 'Liberals' were a dead movement even by 2000, when the people who actually believed in the American People over the profits of bankers were calling themselves Progressives in disgust at the misuse of the term Liberal. And now, Obama and Hillary have trashed and distorted even the term Progressive into bombing the world 365 days a year and still constantly throwing money at the military machine and the problems it invents.

    So, Liberalism is so long dead that if you exumed the grave you'd only find dust. And Pat must be getting senile and just throwing back out the same lines he once wrote as a speechwriter for the last Great Lefty President Richard Nixon.

    Miro23 , October 20, 2017 at 6:17 pm GMT

    Is Liberalism a Dying Faith?

    Another question is whether this is wishful thinking from Pat or some kind of reality.

    I think that he's right, that Liberalism is a dying faith, and it's interesting to check the decline.

    It's sure that financial (neo)liberalism was in a growth phase prior to year 2000 (under Greenspan, the "Maestro") with a general belief that the economy could be "fine tuned" with risk eliminated using sophisticated financial instruments, monetary policy etc.

    If [neo] Liberalism is a package, then two heavy financial blows that shook the whole foundation were the collapse of the dot.com bubble (2000) and the mortgage bubble (2008).

    And, other (self-serving) neoliberal stories are now seen as false. For example, that the US is an "advanced post-industrial service economy", that out-sourcing would "free up Americans for higher skilled/higher wage employment" or that "the US would always gain from tariff free trade".

    In fact, the borderless global "world is flat" dogma is now seen as enabling a rootless hyper-rich global elite to draw on a sea of globalized serf labour with little or no identity, while their media and SWJ activists operate a scorched earth defense against any sign of opposition.

    The basic divide is surely Nationalism (America First) vs. Globalism (Neo-Liberalism), as shown by the last US Presidential election.

    reiner Tor , October 20, 2017 at 6:39 pm GMT
    @Randal

    A useful analogy might be Viktor Orbán. He started out as a leader of a liberal party, Fidesz, but then over time started moving to the right. It is often speculated that he started it for cynical reasons, like seeing how the right was divided and that there was essentially a vacuum there for a strong conservative party, but there's little doubt he totally internalized it. There's also little doubt (and at the time he and a lot of his fellow party leaders talked about it a lot) that as he (they) started a family and having children, they started to realize how conservatism kinda made more sense than liberalism.

    With Kurz, there's the possibility for this path. However, he'd need to start a family soon for that to happen. At that age Orbán was already married with children

    Verymuchalive , October 20, 2017 at 10:10 pm GMT
    @Paul's Ghost

    Liberalism ( large L) is indeed long dead.

    Neoliberalism, of which the Clintons are acolytes, supports Free Trade and Open Borders. Although it claims to support World Government, in actual fact it supports corporatism. This is explicit in the TPPA Trump vetoed. Under the corporate state, the state controls the corporations, as Don Benito did in Italy. Under corporatism, the corporations tell the state what to do, as has been the case in America since at least the Clinton Presidency.

    Richard Nixon was a capitalist, not a corporatist. He was a supporter of proper competition laws, unlike any President since Clinton. Socially, he was interventionist, though this may have been to lessen criticism of his Vietnam policies. Anyway, his bussing and desegregation policies were a long-term failure.

    Price Control was quickly dropped, as it was in other Western countries. Long term Price Control, as in present day Venezuela, is economically disastrous.

    KenH , October 21, 2017 at 1:51 pm GMT
    Let's hope liberalism is a dying faith and that is passes from the Western world. If not it will destroy the West, so if it doesn't die a natural death then we must euthanize it. For the evidence is in and it has begat feminism, anti-white racism, demographic winter, mass third world immigration and everything else that ails the West and has made it the sick and dying man of the world.

    But I recall that Pat B also said neoconservatism was on its way out a few years after Iraq war II and yet it's stronger than ever and its adherents are firmly ensconced in the joint chiefs of staff, the pentagon, Congress and the White House. It's also spawned a close cousin in liberal interventionism.

    What Pat refers to as "liberalism" is now left wing totalitarianism and anti-white hatred and it's fanatically trying to remain relevant by lashing out and blacklisting, deplatforming, demonetizing, and physically assaulting all of its enemies on the right who are gaining strength much to their chagrin. They resort to these methods because they can't win an honest debate and in a true free marketplace of ideas they lose.

    [Dec 28, 2017] How CrowdStrike placed malware in DNC hacked servers by Alex Christoforou

    Highly recommended!
    If this is true, then this is definitely a sophisticated false flag operation. Was malware Alperovich people injected specifically designed to implicate Russians? In other words Crowdstrike=Fancy Bear
    Images removed. For full content please thee the original source
    One interesting corollary of this analysis is that installing Crowdstrike software is like inviting a wolf to guard your chicken. If they are so dishonest you take enormous risks. That might be true for some other heavily advertized "intrusion prevention" toolkits. So those criminals who use mistyped popular addresses or buy Google searches to drive lemmings to their site and then flash the screen that they detected a virus on your computer a, please call provided number and for a small amount of money your virus will be removed get a new more sinister life.
    I suspected many of such firms (for example ISS which was bought by IBM in 2006) to be scams long ago.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Disobedient Media outlines the DNC server cover-up evidenced in CrowdStrike malware infusion ..."
    "... In the article, they claim to have just been working on eliminating the last of the hackers from the DNC's network during the past weekend (conveniently coinciding with Assange's statement and being an indirect admission that their Falcon software had failed to achieve it's stated capabilities at that time , assuming their statements were accurate) . ..."
    "... To date, CrowdStrike has not been able to show how the malware had relayed any emails or accessed any mailboxes. They have also not responded to inquiries specifically asking for details about this. In fact, things have now been discovered that bring some of their malware discoveries into question. ..."
    "... there is a reason to think Fancy Bear didn't start some of its activity until CrowdStrike had arrived at the DNC. CrowdStrike, in the indiciators of compromise they reported, identified three pieces of malware relating to Fancy Bear: ..."
    "... They found that generally, in a lot of cases, malware developers didn't care to hide the compile times and that while implausible timestamps are used, it's rare that these use dates in the future. It's possible, but unlikely that one sample would have a postdated timestamp to coincide with their visit by mere chance but seems extremely unlikely to happen with two or more samples. Considering the dates of CrowdStrike's activities at the DNC coincide with the compile dates of two out of the three pieces of malware discovered and attributed to APT-28 (the other compiled approximately 2 weeks prior to their visit), the big question is: Did CrowdStrike plant some (or all) of the APT-28 malware? ..."
    "... The IP address, according to those articles, was disabled in June 2015, eleven months before the DNC emails were acquired – meaning those IP addresses, in reality, had no involvement in the alleged hacking of the DNC. ..."
    "... The fact that two out of three of the Fancy Bear malware samples identified were compiled on dates within the apparent five day period CrowdStrike were apparently at the DNC seems incredibly unlikely to have occurred by mere chance. ..."
    "... That all three malware samples were compiled within ten days either side of their visit – makes it clear just how questionable the Fancy Bear malware discoveries were. ..."
    Dec 28, 2017 | theduran.com

    Of course the DNC did not want to the FBI to investigate its "hacked servers". The plan was well underway to excuse Hillary's pathetic election defeat to Trump, and CrowdStrike would help out by planting evidence to pin on those evil "Russian hackers." Some would call this entire DNC server hack an "insurance policy."

    ... ... ...

    [Dec 28, 2017] How CrowdStrike placed malware in DNC hacked servers by Alex Christoforou

    Highly recommended!
    If this is true, then this is definitely a sophisticated false flag operation. Was malware Alperovich people injected specifically designed to implicate Russians? In other words Crowdstrike=Fancy Bear
    Images removed. For full content please thee the original source
    One interesting corollary of this analysis is that installing Crowdstrike software is like inviting a wolf to guard your chicken. If they are so dishonest you take enormous risks. That might be true for some other heavily advertized "intrusion prevention" toolkits. So those criminals who use mistyped popular addresses or buy Google searches to drive lemmings to their site and then flash the screen that they detected a virus on your computer a, please call provided number and for a small amount of money your virus will be removed get a new more sinister life.
    I suspected many of such firms (for example ISS which was bought by IBM in 2006) to be scams long ago.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Disobedient Media outlines the DNC server cover-up evidenced in CrowdStrike malware infusion ..."
    "... In the article, they claim to have just been working on eliminating the last of the hackers from the DNC's network during the past weekend (conveniently coinciding with Assange's statement and being an indirect admission that their Falcon software had failed to achieve it's stated capabilities at that time , assuming their statements were accurate) . ..."
    "... To date, CrowdStrike has not been able to show how the malware had relayed any emails or accessed any mailboxes. They have also not responded to inquiries specifically asking for details about this. In fact, things have now been discovered that bring some of their malware discoveries into question. ..."
    "... there is a reason to think Fancy Bear didn't start some of its activity until CrowdStrike had arrived at the DNC. CrowdStrike, in the indiciators of compromise they reported, identified three pieces of malware relating to Fancy Bear: ..."
    "... They found that generally, in a lot of cases, malware developers didn't care to hide the compile times and that while implausible timestamps are used, it's rare that these use dates in the future. It's possible, but unlikely that one sample would have a postdated timestamp to coincide with their visit by mere chance but seems extremely unlikely to happen with two or more samples. Considering the dates of CrowdStrike's activities at the DNC coincide with the compile dates of two out of the three pieces of malware discovered and attributed to APT-28 (the other compiled approximately 2 weeks prior to their visit), the big question is: Did CrowdStrike plant some (or all) of the APT-28 malware? ..."
    "... The IP address, according to those articles, was disabled in June 2015, eleven months before the DNC emails were acquired – meaning those IP addresses, in reality, had no involvement in the alleged hacking of the DNC. ..."
    "... The fact that two out of three of the Fancy Bear malware samples identified were compiled on dates within the apparent five day period CrowdStrike were apparently at the DNC seems incredibly unlikely to have occurred by mere chance. ..."
    "... That all three malware samples were compiled within ten days either side of their visit – makes it clear just how questionable the Fancy Bear malware discoveries were. ..."
    Dec 28, 2017 | theduran.com

    Of course the DNC did not want to the FBI to investigate its "hacked servers". The plan was well underway to excuse Hillary's pathetic election defeat to Trump, and CrowdStrike would help out by planting evidence to pin on those evil "Russian hackers." Some would call this entire DNC server hack an "insurance policy."

    ... ... ...

    [Sep 17, 2017] The So-called Russian Hack of the DNC Does Not Make Sense by Publius Tacitus

    Highly recommended!
    All signs of sophisticated false flag operation, which probably involved putting malware into DNC servers and then detecting and analyzing them
    Notable quotes:
    "... 6 May 2016 when CrowdStrike first detected what it assessed to be a Russian presence inside the DNC server. Follow me here. One week after realizing there had been a penetration, the DNC learns, courtesy of the computer security firm it hired, that the Russians are doing it. Okay. Does CrowdStrike shut down the penetration. Nope. The hacking apparently continues unabated. ..."
    "... The Smoking Gun ..."
    "... I introduce Seth Rich at this point because he represents an alternative hypothesis. Rich, who reportedly was a Bernie Sanders supporter, was in a position at the DNC that gave him access to the emails in question and the opportunity to download the emails and take them from the DNC headquarters. Worth noting that Julian Assange offered $20,000 for information leading to the arrest of Rich's killer or killers. 8. 22 July 2016. Wikileaks published the DNC emails starting on 22 July 2016. Bill Binney, a former senior official at NSA, insists that if such a hack and electronic transfer over the internet had occurred then the NSA has in it possession the intelligence data to prove that such activity had occurred. ..."
    "... Notwithstanding the claim by CrowdStrike not a single piece of evidence has been provided to the public to support the conclusion that the emails were hacked and physically transferred to a server under the control of a Russian intelligence operative. ..."
    "... Please do not try to post a comment stating that the "Intelligence Community" concluded as well that Russia was responsible. That claim is totally without one shred of actual forensic evidence. Also, Julian Assange insists that the emails did not come from a Russian source. ..."
    "... Wikileaks, the protector of the accountability of the top, has announced a reward for finding the murderers of Seth Rich. In comparison, the DNC has not offered any reward to help the investigation of the murder of the DNC staffer, but the DNC found a well-connected lawyer to protect Imran Awan who is guilty (along with Debbie Wasserman-Schultz) in the greatest breach of national cybersecurity: http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/29/wasserman-schultz-seemingly-planned-to-pay-suspect-even-while-he-lived-in-pakistan/ ..."
    "... I'm afraid you're behind the times. Wheeler is no longer relevant now that Sy Hersh has revealed an FBI report that explicitly says Rich was in contact with Wikileaks offering to sell them DNC documents. ..."
    "... It's unfortunate for the Rich family, but now that the connection is pretty much confirmed, they're going to have to allow the truth to come out ..."
    "... Mr. Dmitri Alperovitch, of Jewish descent (and an emigre from Russia), has been an "expert" at the Atlantic Council, the same organization that cherishes and provides for Mr. Eliot Higgins. These two gentlemen - and the directorate of Atlantic Council - are exhibit one of opportunism and intellectual dishonesty (though it is hard to think about Mr. Higgins in terms of "intellect"). ..."
    "... Alperovitch is not just an incompetent "expert" in cybersecurity - he is a willing liar and war-mongering, for money. ..."
    "... One could of course start earlier. What is the exact timeline of the larger cyberwar post 9/11, or at least the bits and pieces that surfaced for the nitwits among us, like: Stuxnet? ..."
    "... Scott Ritter's article referenced in PT's post is terrific, covering a ton of issues related to CrowdStrike and the DNC hack. You need to read it, not just PT's timeline. In case you missed the link in PT's post: ..."
    "... His article echoes and reinforces what Carr and others have said about the difficulty of attribution of infosec breaches. Namely that the basic problem of both intelligence and infosec operations is that there is too much obfuscation, manipulation, and misdirection involved to be sure of who or what is going on. ..."
    "... The Seth Rich connection is pretty much a done deal, now that Sy Hersh has been caught on tape stating that he knows of an FBI report based on a forensic analysis of Rich's laptop that shows Rich was in direct contact with Wikileaks with an attempt to sell them DNC documents and that Wikileaks had access to Rich's DropBox account. Despite Hersh's subsequent denials - which everyone knows are his usual impatient deflections prior to putting out a sourced and organized article - it's pretty clear that Rich was at least one of the sources of the Wikileaks email dump and that there is zero connection to Russia. ..."
    "... None of this proves that Russian intelligence - or Russians of some stripe - or for that matter hackers from literally anywhere - couldn't or didn't ALSO do a hack of the DNC. But it does prove that the iron-clad attribution of the source of Wikileaks email release to Russia is at best flawed, and at worst a deliberate cover up of a leak. ..."
    Sep 05, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    Notwithstanding the conventional wisdom that Russia hacked into the DNC computers, downloaded emails and a passed the stolen missives to Julian Assange's crew at Wikileaks, a careful examination of the timeline of events from 2016 shows that this story is simply not plausible.

    Let me take you through the known facts:

    1. 29 April 2016 , when the DNC became aware its servers had been penetrated (https://medium.com/homefront-rising/dumbstruck-how-crowdstrike-conned-america-on-the-hack-of-the-dnc-ecfa522ff44f). Note. They apparently did not know who was doing it. 2, 6 May 2016 when CrowdStrike first detected what it assessed to be a Russian presence inside the DNC server. Follow me here. One week after realizing there had been a penetration, the DNC learns, courtesy of the computer security firm it hired, that the Russians are doing it. Okay. Does CrowdStrike shut down the penetration. Nope. The hacking apparently continues unabated. 3. 25 May 2016. The messages published on Wikileaks from the DNC show that 26 May 2016 was the last date that emails were sent and received at the DNC. There are no emails in the public domain after that date. In other words, if the DNC emails were taken via a hacking operation, we can conclude from the fact that the last messages posted to Wikileaks show a date time group of 25 May 2016. Wikileaks has not reported nor posted any emails from the DNC after the 25th of May. I think it is reasonable to assume that was the day the dirty deed was done. 4. 12 June 2016, CrowdStrike purged the DNC server of all malware. Are you kidding me? 45 days after the DNC discovers that its serve has been penetrated the decision to purge the DNC server is finally made. What in the hell were they waiting for? But this also tells us that 18 days after the last email "taken" from the DNC, no additional emails were taken by this nasty malware. Here is what does not make sense to me. If the DNC emails were truly hacked and the malware was still in place on 11 June 2016 (it was not purged until the 12th) then why are there no emails from the DNC after 26 May 2016? an excellent analysis of Guccifer's role : Almost immediately after the one-two punch of the Washington Post article/CrowdStrike technical report went public, however, something totally unexpected happened -- someone came forward and took full responsibility for the DNC cyber attack. Moreover, this entity -- operating under the persona Guccifer 2.0 (ostensibly named after the original Guccifer , a Romanian hacker who stole the emails of a number of high-profile celebrities and who was arrested in 2014 and sentenced to 4 ˝ years of prison in May 2016) -- did something no state actor has ever done before, publishing documents stolen from the DNC server as proof of his claims.
    Hi. This is Guccifer 2.0 and this is me who hacked Democratic National Committee.

    With that simple email, sent to the on-line news magazine, The Smoking Gun , Guccifer 2.0 stole the limelight away from Alperovitch. Over the course of the next few days, through a series of emails, online posts and interviews , Guccifer 2.0 openly mocked CrowdStrike and its Russian attribution. Guccifer 2.0 released a number of documents, including a massive 200-plus-missive containing opposition research on Donald Trump.

    Guccifer 2.0 also directly contradicted the efforts on the part of the DNC to minimize the extent of the hacking, releasing the very donor lists the DNC specifically stated had not been stolen. More chilling, Guccifer 2.0 claimed to be in possession of "about 100 Gb of data" which had been passed on to the online publisher, Wikileaks, who "will publish them soon." 7. Seth Rich died on 10 July 2016. I introduce Seth Rich at this point because he represents an alternative hypothesis. Rich, who reportedly was a Bernie Sanders supporter, was in a position at the DNC that gave him access to the emails in question and the opportunity to download the emails and take them from the DNC headquarters. Worth noting that Julian Assange offered $20,000 for information leading to the arrest of Rich's killer or killers. 8. 22 July 2016. Wikileaks published the DNC emails starting on 22 July 2016. Bill Binney, a former senior official at NSA, insists that if such a hack and electronic transfer over the internet had occurred then the NSA has in it possession the intelligence data to prove that such activity had occurred. Notwithstanding the claim by CrowdStrike not a single piece of evidence has been provided to the public to support the conclusion that the emails were hacked and physically transferred to a server under the control of a Russian intelligence operative. Please do not try to post a comment stating that the "Intelligence Community" concluded as well that Russia was responsible. That claim is totally without one shred of actual forensic evidence. Also, Julian Assange insists that the emails did not come from a Russian source.

    Fool , 05 September 2017 at 09:01 AM

    Where was it reported that Rich was a Sanders supporter?
    Publius Tacitus -> Fool... , 05 September 2017 at 09:15 AM
    This is one of the reports, http://heavy.com/news/2016/08/seth-rich-julian-assange-source-wikileaks-wiki-dnc-emails-death-murder-reward-video-interview-hillary-clinton-shawn-lucas/.
    Anna -> Publius Tacitus ... , 05 September 2017 at 10:56 AM
    Wikileaks, the protector of the accountability of the top, has announced a reward for finding the murderers of Seth Rich. In comparison, the DNC has not offered any reward to help the investigation of the murder of the DNC staffer, but the DNC found a well-connected lawyer to protect Imran Awan who is guilty (along with Debbie Wasserman-Schultz) in the greatest breach of national cybersecurity: http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/29/wasserman-schultz-seemingly-planned-to-pay-suspect-even-while-he-lived-in-pakistan/
    Stephanie -> Publius Tacitus ... , 06 September 2017 at 12:12 PM
    Seth Rich's family have pleaded, and continue to plead, that the conspiracy theorists leave the death of their son alone and have said that those who continue to flog this nonsense around the internet are only serving to increase their pain. I suggest respectfully that some here may wish to consider their feelings. (Also, this stuff is nuts, you know.)

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/were-seth-richs-parents-stop-politicizing-our-sons-murder/2017/05/23/164cf4dc-3fee-11e7-9869-bac8b446820a_story.html?utm_term=.b20208de48d3

    "We also know that many people are angry at our government and want to see justice done in some way, somehow. We are asking you to please consider our feelings and words. There are people who are using our beloved Seth's memory and legacy for their own political goals, and they are using your outrage to perpetuate our nightmare."

    http://www.businessinsider.com/seth-rich-family-response-lawsuit-rod-wheeler-2017-8

    "Wheeler, a former Metropolitan Police Department officer, was a key figure in a series of debunked stories claiming that Rich had been in contact with Wikileaks before his death. Fox News, which reported the story online and on television, retracted it in June."

    Richardstevenhack -> Stephanie... , 07 September 2017 at 07:43 PM
    I'm afraid you're behind the times. Wheeler is no longer relevant now that Sy Hersh has revealed an FBI report that explicitly says Rich was in contact with Wikileaks offering to sell them DNC documents.

    It's unfortunate for the Rich family, but now that the connection is pretty much confirmed, they're going to have to allow the truth to come out.

    Anna , 05 September 2017 at 09:20 AM
    Mr. Dmitri Alperovitch, of Jewish descent (and an emigre from Russia), has been an "expert" at the Atlantic Council, the same organization that cherishes and provides for Mr. Eliot Higgins. These two gentlemen - and the directorate of Atlantic Council - are exhibit one of opportunism and intellectual dishonesty (though it is hard to think about Mr. Higgins in terms of "intellect").

    Here is an article by Alperovitch: http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/russian-cyber-attacks-in-the-united-states-will-intensify

    Take note how Alperovitch coded the names of the supposed hackers: "Russian intelligence services hacked the Democratic National Committee's computer network and accessed opposition research on Donald Trump, according to the Atlantic Council's Dmitri Alperovitch.

    Two Russian groups ! codenamed FancyBear and CozyBear ! have been identified as spearheading the DNC breach." Alperovitch is not just an incompetent "expert" in cybersecurity - he is a willing liar and war-mongering, for money.

    The DNC hacking story has never been about national security; Alperovitch (and his handlers) have no loyalty to the US.

    LeaNder , 05 September 2017 at 09:59 AM
    PT, I make a short exception. Actually decided to stop babbling for a while. But: Just finished something successfully.

    And since I usually need distraction by something far more interesting then matters at hand. I was close to your line of thought yesters.

    But really: Shouldn't the timeline start in 2015, since that's supposedly the time someone got into the DNC's system?

    One could of course start earlier. What is the exact timeline of the larger cyberwar post 9/11, or at least the bits and pieces that surfaced for the nitwits among us, like: Stuxnet?

    But nevermind. Don't forget developments and recent events around Eugene or Jewgeni Walentinowitsch Kasperski?

    LondonBob , 05 September 2017 at 03:27 PM
    The Russia thing certainly seems to have gone quiet.

    Bannon's chum says the issue with pursuing the Clinton email thing is that you would end up having to indict almost all of the last administration, including Obama, unseemly certainly. Still there might be a fall guy, maybe Comey, and obviously it serves Trump's purposes to keep this a live issue through the good work of Grassley and the occasional tweet.

    Would be amusing if Trump pardoned Obama. Still think Brennan should pay a price though, can't really be allowed to get away with it

    Richardstevenhack , 05 September 2017 at 06:23 PM
    Scott Ritter's article referenced in PT's post is terrific, covering a ton of issues related to CrowdStrike and the DNC hack. You need to read it, not just PT's timeline. In case you missed the link in PT's post:

    Dumbstruck: How CrowdStrike Conned America on the Hack of the DNC https://medium.com/homefront-rising/dumbstruck-how-crowdstrike-conned-america-on-the-hack-of-the-dnc-ecfa522ff44f

    The article by Jeffrey Carr on CrowdStrike referenced from back in 2012 is also worth reading: Where's the "Strike" in CrowdStrike? https://jeffreycarr.blogspot.com/2012/09/wheres-strike-in-crowdstrike.html

    Also, the article Carr references is very important for understanding the limits of malware analysis and "attribution". Written by Michael Tanji, whose credentials appear impressive: "spent nearly 20 years in the US intelligence community. Trained in both SIGINT and HUMINT disciplines he has worked at the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, and the National Reconnaissance Office. At various points in his career he served as an expert in information warfare, computer network operations, computer forensics, and indications and warning. A veteran of the US Army, Michael has served in both strategic and tactical assignments in the Pacific Theater, the Balkans, and the Middle East."

    Malware Analysis: The Danger of Connecting the Dots: https://www.oodaloop.com/technology/2012/09/11/malware-analysis-the-danger-of-connecting-the-dots/

    His article echoes and reinforces what Carr and others have said about the difficulty of attribution of infosec breaches. Namely that the basic problem of both intelligence and infosec operations is that there is too much obfuscation, manipulation, and misdirection involved to be sure of who or what is going on.

    The Seth Rich connection is pretty much a done deal, now that Sy Hersh has been caught on tape stating that he knows of an FBI report based on a forensic analysis of Rich's laptop that shows Rich was in direct contact with Wikileaks with an attempt to sell them DNC documents and that Wikileaks had access to Rich's DropBox account. Despite Hersh's subsequent denials - which everyone knows are his usual impatient deflections prior to putting out a sourced and organized article - it's pretty clear that Rich was at least one of the sources of the Wikileaks email dump and that there is zero connection to Russia.

    None of this proves that Russian intelligence - or Russians of some stripe - or for that matter hackers from literally anywhere - couldn't or didn't ALSO do a hack of the DNC. But it does prove that the iron-clad attribution of the source of Wikileaks email release to Russia is at best flawed, and at worst a deliberate cover up of a leak.

    And Russiagate depends primarily on BOTH alleged "facts" being true: 1) that Russia hacked the DNC, and 2) that Russia was the source of Wikileaks release. And if the latter is not true, then one has to question why Russia hacked the DNC in the first place, other than for "normal" espionage operations. "Influencing the election" then becomes a far less plausible theory.

    The general takeaway from an infosec point of view is that attribution by means of target identification, tools used, and "indicators of compromise" is a fatally flawed means of identifying, and thus being able to counter, the adversaries encountered in today's Internet world, as Tanji proves. Only HUMINT offers a way around this, just as it is really the only valid option in countering terrorism.

    [Jul 17, 2017] Tucker Carlson Goes to War Against the Neocons by Curt Mills

    Highly recommended!
    max Book is just anothe "Yascha about Russia" type, that Masha Gessen represents so vividly. The problem with him is that time of neocon prominance is solidly in the past and now unpleasant question about the cost from the US people of their reckless foreign policies get into some newspapers and managines. They cost the USA tremedous anount of money (as in trillions) and those money consititute a large portion of the national debt. Critiques so far were very weak and partially suppressed voices, but defeat of neocon warmonger Hillary signify some break with the past.
    Notable quotes:
    "... National Interest ..."
    "... Carlson's record suggests that he has been in the camp skeptical of U.S. foreign-policy intervention for some time now and, indeed, that it predates Donald Trump's rise to power. (Carlson has commented publicly that he was humiliated by his own public support for the 2003 invasion of Iraq.) According to Carlson, "This is not about Trump. This is not about Trump. It's the one thing in American life that has nothing to do with Trump. My views on this are totally unrelated to my views on Donald Trump. This has been going since September 11, 2001. And it's a debate that we've never really had. And we need to have it." He adds, "I don't think the public has ever been for the ideas that undergird our policies." ..."
    "... National Interest ..."
    "... But the fight also seems to have a personal edge. Carlson says, "Max Boot is not impressive. . . . Max is a totally mediocre person." Carlson added that he felt guilty about not having, in his assessment, a superior guest to Boot on the show to defend hawkishness. "I wish I had had someone clear-thinking and smart on to represent their views. And there are a lot of them. I would love to have that debate," Carlson told me, periodically emphasizing that he is raring to go on this subject. ..."
    "... New York Observer ..."
    "... National Interest ..."
    "... Weekly Standard ..."
    "... Weekly Standard ..."
    "... Though he eschews labels, Carlson sounds like a foreign-policy realist on steroids: "You can debate what's in [the United States'] interest. That's a subjective category. But what you can't debate is that ought to be the basic question, the first, second and third question. Does it represent our interest? . . . I don't think that enters into the calculations of a lot of the people who make these decisions." Carlson's interests extend beyond foreign policy, and he says "there's a massive realignment going on ideologically that everybody is missing. It's dramatic. And everyone is missing it. . . . Nobody is paying attention to it, " ..."
    "... : Flickr/Gage Skidmore. CC BY-SA 2.0. ..."
    Jul 14, 2017 | nationalinterest.org

    This week's primetime knife fights with Max Boot and Ralph Peters are emblematic of the battle for the soul of the American Right.

    To be sure, Carlson rejects the term "neoconservatism," and implicitly, its corollary on the Democratic side, liberal internationalism. In 2016, "the reigning Republican foreign-policy view, you can call it neoconservatism, or interventionism, or whatever you want to call it" was rejected, he explained in a wide-ranging interview with the National Interest Friday.

    "But I don't like the term 'neoconservatism,'" he says, "because I don't even know what it means. I think it describes the people rather than their ideas, which is what I'm interested in. And to be perfectly honest . . . I have a lot of friends who have been described as neocons, people I really love, sincerely. And they are offended by it. So I don't use it," Carlson said.

    But Carlson's recent segments on foreign policy conducted with Lt. Col. Ralph Peters and the prominent neoconservative journalist and author Max Boot were acrimonious even by Carlsonian standards. In a discussion on Syria, Russia and Iran, a visibly upset Boot accused Carlson of being "immoral" and taking foreign-policy positions to curry favor with the White House, keep up his ratings , and by proxy, benefit financially. Boot says that Carlson "basically parrots whatever the pro-Trump line is that Fox viewers want to see. If Trump came out strongly against Putin tomorrow, I imagine Tucker would echo this as faithfully as the pro-Russia arguments he echoes today." But is this assessment fair?

    Carlson's record suggests that he has been in the camp skeptical of U.S. foreign-policy intervention for some time now and, indeed, that it predates Donald Trump's rise to power. (Carlson has commented publicly that he was humiliated by his own public support for the 2003 invasion of Iraq.) According to Carlson, "This is not about Trump. This is not about Trump. It's the one thing in American life that has nothing to do with Trump. My views on this are totally unrelated to my views on Donald Trump. This has been going since September 11, 2001. And it's a debate that we've never really had. And we need to have it." He adds, "I don't think the public has ever been for the ideas that undergird our policies."

    Even if Carlson doesn't want to use the label neocon to describe some of those ideas, Boot is not so bashful. In 2005, Boot wrote an essay called "Neocons May Get the Last Laugh." Carlson "has become a Trump acolyte in pursuit of ratings," says Boot, also interviewed by the National Interest . "I bet if it were President Clinton accused of colluding with the Russians, Tucker would be outraged and calling for impeachment if not execution. But since it's Trump, then it's all a big joke to him," Boot says. Carlson vociferously dissents from such assessments: "This is what dumb people do. They can't assess the merits of an argument. . . . I'm not talking about Syria, and Russia, and Iran because of ratings. That's absurd. I can't imagine those were anywhere near the most highly-rated segments that night. That's not why I wanted to do it."

    But Carlson insists, "I have been saying the same thing for fifteen years. Now I have a T.V. show that people watch, so my views are better known. But it shouldn't be a surprise. I supported Trump to the extent he articulated beliefs that I agree with. . . . And I don't support Trump to the extent that his actions deviate from those beliefs," Carlson said. Boot on Fox said that Carlson is "too smart" for this kind of argument. But Carlson has bucked the Trump line, notably on Trump's April 7 strikes in Syria. "When the Trump administration threw a bunch of cruise missiles into Syria for no obvious reason, on the basis of a pretext that I question . . . I questioned [the decision] immediately. On T.V. I was on the air when that happened. I think, maybe seven minutes into my show. . . . I thought this was reckless."

    But the fight also seems to have a personal edge. Carlson says, "Max Boot is not impressive. . . . Max is a totally mediocre person." Carlson added that he felt guilty about not having, in his assessment, a superior guest to Boot on the show to defend hawkishness. "I wish I had had someone clear-thinking and smart on to represent their views. And there are a lot of them. I would love to have that debate," Carlson told me, periodically emphasizing that he is raring to go on this subject.

    Boot objects to what he sees as a cavalier attitude on the part of Carlson and others toward allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 election, and also toward the deaths of citizens of other countries. "You are laughing about the fact that Russia is interfering in our election process. That to me is immoral," Boot told Carlson on his show. "This is the level of dumbness and McCarthyism in Washington right now," says Carlson. "I think it has the virtue of making Max Boot feel like a good person. Like he's on God's team, or something like that. But how does that serve the interest of the country? It doesn't." Carlson says that Donald Trump, Jr.'s emails aren't nearly as important as who is going to lead Syria, which he says Boot and others have no plan for successfully occupying. Boot, by contrast, sees the U.S. administration as dangerously flirting with working with Russia, Iran and Syrian president Bashar al-Assad. "For whatever reason, Trump is pro-Putin, no one knows why, and he's taken a good chunk of the GOP along with him," Boot says.

    On Fox last Wednesday, Boot reminded Carlson that he originally supported the 2003 Iraq decision. "You supported the invasion of Iraq," Boot said, before repeating, "You supported the invasion of Iraq." Carlson conceded that, but it seems the invasion was a bona fide turning point. It's most important to parse whether Carlson has a long record of anti-interventionism, or if he's merely sniffing the throne of the president (who, dubiously, may have opposed the 2003 invasion). "I think it's a total nightmare and disaster, and I'm ashamed that I went against my own instincts in supporting it," Carlson told the New York Observer in early 2004. "It's something I'll never do again. Never. I got convinced by a friend of mine who's smarter than I am, and I shouldn't have done that. . . . I'm enraged by it, actually." Carlson told the National Interest that he's felt this way since seeing Iraq for himself in December 2003.

    The evidence points heavily toward a sincere conversion on Carlson's part, or preexisting conviction that was briefly overcome by the beat of the war drums. Carlson did work for the Weekly Standard , perhaps the most prominent neoconservative magazine, in the 1990s and early 2000s. Carlson today speaks respectfully of William Kristol, its founding editor, but has concluded that he is all wet. On foreign policy, the people Carlson speaks most warmly about are genuine hard left-wingers: Glenn Greenwald, a vociferous critic of both economic neoliberalism and neoconservatism; the anti-establishment journalist Michael Tracey; Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of the Nation ; and her husband, Stephen Cohen, the Russia expert and critic of U.S. foreign policy.

    "The only people in American public life who are raising these questions are on the traditional left: not lifestyle liberals, not the Williamsburg (Brooklyn) group, not liberals in D.C., not Nancy Pelosi." He calls the expertise of establishment sources on matters like Syria "more shallow than I even imagined." On his MSNBC show, which was canceled for poor ratings, he cavorted with noninterventionist stalwarts such as Ron Paul , the 2008 and 2012 antiwar GOP candidate, and Patrick J. Buchanan. "No one is smarter than Pat Buchanan," he said last year of the man whose ideas many say laid the groundwork for Trump's political success.

    Carlson has risen to the pinnacle of cable news, succeeding Bill O'Reilly. It wasn't always clear an antiwar take would vault someone to such prominence. Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio or Mitt Romney could be president (Boot has advised the latter two). But here he is, and it's likely no coincidence that Carlson got a show after Trump's election, starting at the 7 p.m. slot, before swiftly moving to the 9 p.m. slot to replace Trump antagonist Megyn Kelly, and just as quickly replacing O'Reilly at the top slot, 8 p.m. Boot, on the other hand, declared in 2016 that the Republican Party was dead , before it went on to hold Congress and most state houses, and of course take the presidency. He's still at the Council on Foreign Relations and writes for the New York Times (this seems to clearly annoy Carlson: "It tells you everything about the low standards of the American foreign-policy establishment").

    Boot wrote in 2003 in the Weekly Standard that the fall of Saddam Hussein's government "may turn out to be one of those hinge moments in history" comparable to "events like the storming of the Bastille or the fall of the Berlin Wall, after which everything is different." He continued, "If the occupation goes well (admittedly a big if ), it may mark the moment when the powerful antibiotic known as democracy was introduced into the diseased environment of the Middle East, and began to transform the region for the better."

    Though he eschews labels, Carlson sounds like a foreign-policy realist on steroids: "You can debate what's in [the United States'] interest. That's a subjective category. But what you can't debate is that ought to be the basic question, the first, second and third question. Does it represent our interest? . . . I don't think that enters into the calculations of a lot of the people who make these decisions." Carlson's interests extend beyond foreign policy, and he says "there's a massive realignment going on ideologically that everybody is missing. It's dramatic. And everyone is missing it. . . . Nobody is paying attention to it, "

    Carlson seems intent on pressing the issue. The previous night, in his debate with Peters, the retired lieutenant colonel said that Carlson sounded like Charles Lindbergh, who opposed U.S. intervention against Nazi Germany before 1941. "This particular strain of Republican foreign policy has almost no constituency. Nobody agrees with it. I mean there's not actually a large group of people outside of New York, Washington or L.A. who think any of this is a good idea," Carlson says. "All I am is an asker of obvious questions. And that's enough to reveal these people have no idea what they're talking about. None."

    Curt Mills is a foreign-affairs reporter at the National Interest . Follow him on Twitter: @CurtMills .

    Image : Flickr/Gage Skidmore. CC BY-SA 2.0.

    [Jul 12, 2017] Stephen Cohens Remarks on Tucker Carlson Last Night Were Extraordinary

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Cohen's appearance on Carlson's show last night demonstrated again at what a blistering pace public opinion in the West about Putin and Russia is shifting, for the better. ..."
    "... Cohen is always good, but last night he nailed it, calling the media's coverage of Hamburg 'pornography'. ..."
    "... It was just a year ago, pre-Trump, that professor Cohen was banned from all the networks, from any major media outlet, and being relentlessly pilloried by the neocon media for being a naive fool for defending Putin and Russia. ..."
    "... "The first thing you notice is just how much the press is rooting for this meeting between our president and the Russian President to fail. It's a kind of pornography. Just as there's no love in pornography, there's no American national interest in this bashing of Trump and Putin. ..."
    "... Carlson tried to draw Cohen out about who exactly in Washington is so against Assad, and why, and Cohen deflected, demurring - 'I don't know - I'm not an expert'. Of course he knows, as does Carlson - it is an unholy alliance of Israel, Saudi Arabia and their neocon friends in Washington and the media who are pushing this criminal policy, who support ISIS, deliberately. But they can't say so, because, ... well, because. Ask Rupert Murdoch. ..."
    Jul 12, 2017 | russia-insider.com
    Cohen's appearance on Carlson's show last night demonstrated again at what a blistering pace public opinion in the West about Putin and Russia is shifting, for the better.

    Cohen is always good, but last night he nailed it, calling the media's coverage of Hamburg 'pornography'.

    Ahh, the power of the apt phrase.

    It was just a year ago, pre-Trump, that professor Cohen was banned from all the networks, from any major media outlet, and being relentlessly pilloried by the neocon media for being a naive fool for defending Putin and Russia.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/5L2F4ocEIZw

    Last night he was the featured guest on the most watched news show in the country, being cheered on by the host, who has him on as a regular. And Cohen isn't remotely a conservative. He is a contributing editor at the arch-liberal Nation magazine, of which his wife is the editor. It doesn't really get pinker than that.

    Some choice quotes here, but the whole thing is worth a listen:

    "The first thing you notice is just how much the press is rooting for this meeting between our president and the Russian President to fail. It's a kind of pornography. Just as there's no love in pornography, there's no American national interest in this bashing of Trump and Putin.

    As a historian let me tell you the headline I would write instead:

    "What we witnessed today in Hamburg was a potentially historic new detente. an anti-cold-war partnership begun by Trump and Putin but meanwhile attempts to sabotage it escalate." I've seen a lot of summits between American and Russian presidents, ... and I think what we saw today was potentially the most fateful meeting ... since the Cold War.

    The reason is, is that the relationship with Russia is so dangerous and we have a president who might have been crippled or cowed by these Russiagate attacks ... yet he was not. He was politically courageous. It went well. They got important things done. I think maybe today we witnessed president Trump emerging as an American statesman."

    Cohen goes on to say that the US should ally with Assad, Iran, and Russia to crush ISIS, with Carlson bobbing his head up and down in emphatic agreement.

    Carlson tried to draw Cohen out about who exactly in Washington is so against Assad, and why, and Cohen deflected, demurring - 'I don't know - I'm not an expert'. Of course he knows, as does Carlson - it is an unholy alliance of Israel, Saudi Arabia and their neocon friends in Washington and the media who are pushing this criminal policy, who support ISIS, deliberately. But they can't say so, because, ... well, because. Ask Rupert Murdoch.

    Things are getting better in the US media, but we aren't quite able to call a spade a spade in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

    [Jun 24, 2017] The Criminal Laws of Counterinsurgency by Todd E. Pierce

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Many "never-Trumpers" of both parties see the deep state's national security bureaucracy as their best hope to destroy Trump and thus defend constitutional government, but those hopes are misguided. ..."
    "... As Michael Glennon, author of National Security and Double Government, pointed out in a June 2017 Harper's essay, if "the president maintains his attack, splintered and demoralized factions within the bureaucracy could actually support - not oppose - many potential Trump initiatives, such as stepped-up drone strikes, cyberattacks, covert action, immigration bans, and mass surveillance." ..."
    "... Corraborative evidence of Valentine's thesis is, perhaps surprisingly, provided by the CIA's own website where a number of redacted historical documents have been published. Presumably, they are documents first revealed under the Freedom of Information Act. A few however are copies of news articles once available to the public but now archived by the CIA which has blacked-out portions of the articles. ..."
    "... This led to an investigation by New Times in a day when there were still "investigative reporters," and not the government sycophants of today. Based on firsthand accounts, their investigation concluded that Operation Phoenix was the "only systematized kidnapping, torture and assassination program ever sponsored by the United States government. . . . Its victims were noncombatants." At least 40,000 were murdered, with "only" about 8,000 supposed Viet Cong political cadres targeted for execution, with the rest civilians (including women and children) killed and "later conveniently labeled VCI. Hundreds of thousands were jailed without trial, often after sadistic abuse." The article notes that Phoenix was conceived, financed, and directed by the Central Intelligence Agency ..."
    "... But the article noted that one of the most persistent criticisms of Phoenix was that it resulted "in the arrest and imprisonment of many innocent civilians." These were called "Class C Communist offenders," some of whom may actually have been forced to commit such "belligerent acts" as digging trenches or carrying rice. It was those alleged as the "hard core, full-time cadre" who were deemed to make up the "shadow government" designated as Class A and B Viet Cong. ..."
    "... Ironically, by the Bush administration's broad definition of "unlawful combatants," CIA officers and their support structure also would fit the category. But the American public is generally forgiving of its own war criminals though most self-righteous and hypocritical in judging foreign war criminals. But perhaps given sufficient evidence, the American public could begin to see both the immorality of this behavior and its counterproductive consequences. ..."
    "... Talleyrand is credited with saying, "They have learned nothing and forgotten nothing." Reportedly, that was borrowed from a 1796 letter by a French naval officer, which stated, in the original language: Personne n'est corrigé; personne n'a su ni rien oublier ni rien appendre. In English: "Nobody has been corrected; no one has known to forget, nor yet to learn anything." That sums up the CIA leadership entirely. ..."
    Jun 24, 2017 | original.antiwar.com

    Douglas Valentine has once again added to the store of knowledge necessary for American citizens to understand how the U.S. government actually works today, in his most recent book entitled The CIA As Organized Crime . (Valentine previously wrote The Phoenix Program , which should be read with the current book.)

    The US "deep state" – of which the CIA is an integral part – is an open secret now and the Phoenix Program (assassinations, death squads, torture, mass detentions, exploitation of information) has been its means of controlling populations. Consequently, knowing the deep state's methods is the only hope of building a democratic opposition to the deep state and to restore as much as possible the Constitutional system we had in previous centuries, as imperfect as it was.

    Princeton University political theorist Sheldon Wolin described the US political system in place by 2003 as "inverted totalitarianism." He reaffirmed that in 2009 after seeing a year of the Obama administration. Correctly identifying the threat against constitutional governance is the first step to restore it, and as Wolin understood, substantive constitutional government ended long before Donald Trump campaigned. He's just taking unconstitutional governance to the next level in following the same path as his recent predecessors. However, even as some elements of the "deep state" seek to remove Trump, the President now has many "deep state" instruments in his own hands to be used at his unreviewable discretion.

    Many "never-Trumpers" of both parties see the deep state's national security bureaucracy as their best hope to destroy Trump and thus defend constitutional government, but those hopes are misguided. After all, the deep state's bureaucratic leadership has worked arduously for decades to subvert constitutional order.

    As Michael Glennon, author of National Security and Double Government, pointed out in a June 2017 Harper's essay, if "the president maintains his attack, splintered and demoralized factions within the bureaucracy could actually support - not oppose - many potential Trump initiatives, such as stepped-up drone strikes, cyberattacks, covert action, immigration bans, and mass surveillance."

    Glennon noted that the propensity of "security managers" to back policies which ratchet up levels of security "will play into Trump's hands, so that if and when he finally does declare victory, a revamped security directorate could emerge more menacing than ever, with him its devoted new ally." Before that happens, it is incumbent for Americans to understand what Valentine explains in his book of CIA methods of "population control" as first fully developed in the Vietnam War's Phoenix Program.

    Hating the US

    There also must be the realization that our "national security" apparatchiks - principally but not solely the CIA - have served to exponentially increase the numbers of those people who hate the US.

    Some of these people turn to terrorism as an expression of that hostility. Anyone who is at all familiar with the CIA and Al Qaeda knows that the CIA has been Al Qaeda's most important "combat multiplier" since 9/11, and the CIA can be said to have birthed ISIS as well with the mistreatment of incarcerated Iraqi men in US prisons in Iraq.

    Indeed, by following the model of the Phoenix Program, the CIA must be seen in the Twenty-first Century as a combination of the ultimate "Murder, Inc.," when judged by the CIA's methods such as drone warfare and its victims; and the Keystone Kops, when the multiple failures of CIA policies are considered. This is not to make light of what the CIA does, but the CIA's misguided policies and practices have served to generate wrath, hatred and violence against Americans, which we see manifested in cities such as San Bernardino, Orlando, New York and Boston.

    Pointing out the harm to Americans is not to dismiss the havoc that Americans under the influence of the CIA have perpetrated on foreign populations. But "morality" seems a lost virtue today in the US, which is under the influence of so much militaristic war propaganda that morality no longer enters into the equation in determining foreign policy.

    In addition to the harm the CIA has caused to people around the world, the CIA works tirelessly at subverting its own government at home, as was most visible in the spying on and subversion of the torture investigation by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. The subversion of democracy also includes the role the CIA plays in developing and disseminating war propaganda as "information warfare," upon the American people. This is what the Rand Corporation under the editorship of Zalmay Khalilzad has described as "conditioning the battlefield," which begins with the minds of the American population.

    Douglas Valentine discusses and documents the role of the CIA in disseminating pro-war propaganda and disinformation as complementary to the violent tactics of the Phoenix Program in Vietnam. Valentine explains that "before Phoenix was adopted as the model for policing the American empire, many US military commanders in Vietnam resisted the Phoenix strategy of targeting civilians with Einsatzgruppen-style 'special forces' and Gestapo-style secret police."

    Military Commanders considered that type of program a flagrant violation of the Law of War. "Their main job is to zap the in-betweeners – you know, the people who aren't all the way with the government and aren't all the way with the Viet Cong either. They figure if you zap enough in-betweeners, people will begin to get the idea," according to one quote from The Phoenix Program referring to the unit tasked with much of the Phoenix operations.

    Nazi Influences

    Comparing the Phoenix Program and its operatives to "Einsatzgruppen-style 'special forces' and Gestapo-style secret police" is not a distortion of the strategic understanding of each. Both programs were extreme forms of repression operating under martial law principles where the slightest form of dissent was deemed to represent the work of the "enemy." Hitler's Bandit Hunters: The SS and the Nazi Occupation of Europe by Philip W. Blood describes German "Security Warfare" as practiced in World War II, which can be seen as identical in form to the Phoenix Program as to how the enemy is defined as anyone who is "potentially" a threat, deemed either "partizans" or terrorists.

    That the Germans included entire racial categories in that does not change the underlying logic, which was, anyone deemed an internal enemy in a territory in which their military operated had to be "neutralized" by any means necessary. The US military and the South Vietnamese military governments operated under the same principles but not based on race, rather the perception that certain areas and villages were loyal to the Viet Cong.

    This repressive doctrine was also not unique to the Nazis in Europe and the US military in Vietnam. Similar though less sophisticated strategies were used against the American Indians and by the imperial powers of the late Nineteenth and early Twentieth centuries, including by the US in its newly acquired territories of the Philippines and in the Caribbean. This "imperial policing," i.e., counterinsurgency, simply moved to more manipulative and, in ways, more violent levels.

    That the US drew upon German counterinsurgency doctrine, as brutal as it was, is well documented. This is shown explicitly in a 2011 article published in the Journal of Military and Strategic Studies entitled German Counterinsurgency Revisited by Charles D. Melson. He wrote that in 1942, Nazi commander Heinrich Himmler named a deputy for "anti-bandit warfare," (Bevollmachtigter fur die Bandenkampfung im Osten), SS-General von dem Bach, whose responsibilities expanded in 1943 to head all SS and police anti-bandit units and operations. He was one of the architects of the Einsatzguppen "concept of anti-partisan warfare," a German predecessor to the "Phoenix Program."

    'Anti-Partisan' Lessons

    It wasn't a coincidence that this "anti-partisan" warfare concept should be adopted by US forces in Vietnam and retained to the present day. Melson pointed out that a "post-war German special forces officer described hunter or ranger units as 'men who knew every possible ruse and tactic of guerrilla warfare. They had gone through the hell of combat against the crafty partisans in the endless swamps and forests of Russia.'"

    Consequently, "The German special forces and reconnaissance school was a sought after posting for North Atlantic Treaty Organization special operations personnel," who presumably included members of the newly created US Army Special Forces soldiers, which was in part headquartered at Bad Tolz in Germany, as well as CIA paramilitary officers.

    Just as with the later Phoenix Program to the present-day US global counterinsurgency, Melson wrote that the "attitude of the [local] population and the amount of assistance it was willing to give guerilla units was of great concern to the Germans. Different treatment was supposed to be accorded to affected populations, bandit supporters, and bandits, while so-called population and resource control measures for each were noted (but were in practice, treated apparently one and the same). 'Action against enemy agitation' was the psychological or information operations of the Nazi period. The Nazis believed that, 'Because of the close relationship of guerilla warfare and politics, actions against enemy agitation are a task that is just as important as interdiction and combat actions. All means must be used to ward off enemy influence and waken and maintain a clear political will.'"

    This is typical of any totalitarian system – a movement or a government – whether the process is characterized as counterinsurgency or internal security. The idea of any civilian collaboration with the "enemy" is the basis for what the US government charges as "conspiracy" in the Guantanamo Military Commissions.

    Valentine explains the Phoenix program as having been developed by the CIA in 1967 to combine "existing counterinsurgency programs in a concerted effort to 'neutralize' the Vietcong infrastructure (VCI)." He explained further that "neutralize" meant "to kill, capture, or make to defect." "Infrastructure" meant civilians suspected of supporting North Vietnamese and Vietcong soldiers. Central to the Phoenix program was that its targets were civilians, making the operation a violation of the Geneva Conventions which guaranteed protection to civilians in time of war.

    "The Vietnam's War's Silver Lining: A Bureaucratic Model for Population Control Emerges" is the title of Chapter 3. Valentine writes that the "CIA's Phoenix program changed how America fights its wars and how the public views this new type of political and psychological warfare, in which civilian casualties are an explicit objective." The intent of the Phoenix program evolved from "neutralizing" enemy leaders into "a program of systematic repression for the political control of the South Vietnamese people. It sought to accomplish this through a highly bureaucratized system of disposing of people who could not be ideologically assimilated." The CIA claimed a legal basis for the program in "emergency decrees" and orders for "administrative detention."

    Lauding Petraeus

    Valentine refers to a paper by David Kilcullen entitled Countering Global Insurgency. Kilcullen is one of the so-called "counterinsurgency experts" whom General David Petraeus gathered together in a cell to promote and refine "counterinsurgency," or COIN, for the modern era. Fred Kaplan, who is considered a "liberal author and journalist" at Slate, wrote a panegyric to these cultists entitled, The Insurgents: David Petraeus and the Plot to Change the American Way of War. The purpose of this cell was to change the practices of the US military into that of "imperial policing," or COIN, as they preferred to call it.

    But Kilcullen argued in his paper that "The 'War on Terrorism'" is actually a campaign to counter a global insurgency. Therefore, Kilcullen argued, "we need a new paradigm, capable of addressing globalised insurgency." His "disaggregation strategy" called for "actions to target the insurgent infrastructure that would resemble the unfairly maligned (but highly effective) Vietnam-era Phoenix program."

    He went on, "Contrary to popular mythology, this was largely a civilian aid and development program, supported by targeted military pacification operations and intelligence activity to disrupt the Viet Cong Infrastructure. A global Phoenix program (including the other key elements that formed part of the successful Vietnam CORDS system) would provide a useful start point to consider how Disaggregation would develop in practice."

    It is readily apparent that, in fact, a Phoenix-type program is now US global policy and - just like in Vietnam - it is applying "death squad" strategies that eliminate not only active combatants but also civilians who simply find themselves in the same vicinity, thus creating antagonisms that expand the number of fighters.

    Corraborative evidence of Valentine's thesis is, perhaps surprisingly, provided by the CIA's own website where a number of redacted historical documents have been published. Presumably, they are documents first revealed under the Freedom of Information Act. A few however are copies of news articles once available to the public but now archived by the CIA which has blacked-out portions of the articles.

    The Bloody Reality

    One "sanitized" article - approved for release in 2011 - is a partially redacted New Times article of Aug. 22, 1975, by Michael Drosnin. The article recounts a story of a US Army counterintelligence officer "who directed a small part of a secret war aimed not at the enemy's soldiers but at its civilian leaders." He describes how a CIA-directed Phoenix operative dumped a bag of "eleven bloody ears" as proof of six people killed.

    The officer, who recalled this incident in 1971, said, "It made me sick. I couldn't go on with what I was doing in Vietnam. . . . It was an assassination campaign . . . my job was to identify and eliminate VCI, the Viet Cong 'infrastructure' – the communist's shadow government. I worked directly with two Vietnamese units, very tough guys who didn't wear uniforms . . . In the beginning they brought back about 10 percent alive. By the end they had stopped taking prisoners.

    "How many VC they got I don't know. I saw a hell of a lot of dead bodies. We'd put a tag on saying VCI, but no one really knew – it was just some native in black pajamas with 16 bullet holes."

    This led to an investigation by New Times in a day when there were still "investigative reporters," and not the government sycophants of today. Based on firsthand accounts, their investigation concluded that Operation Phoenix was the "only systematized kidnapping, torture and assassination program ever sponsored by the United States government. . . . Its victims were noncombatants." At least 40,000 were murdered, with "only" about 8,000 supposed Viet Cong political cadres targeted for execution, with the rest civilians (including women and children) killed and "later conveniently labeled VCI. Hundreds of thousands were jailed without trial, often after sadistic abuse." The article notes that Phoenix was conceived, financed, and directed by the Central Intelligence Agency, as Mr. Valentine writes.

    A second article archived by the CIA was by the Christian Science Monitor, dated Jan. 5, 1971, describing how the Saigon government was "taking steps that could help eliminate one of the most glaring abuses of its controversial Phoenix program, which is aimed against the Viet Cong political and administrative apparatus." Note how the Monitor shifted blame away from the CIA and onto the South Vietnamese government.

    But the article noted that one of the most persistent criticisms of Phoenix was that it resulted "in the arrest and imprisonment of many innocent civilians." These were called "Class C Communist offenders," some of whom may actually have been forced to commit such "belligerent acts" as digging trenches or carrying rice. It was those alleged as the "hard core, full-time cadre" who were deemed to make up the "shadow government" designated as Class A and B Viet Cong.

    Yet "security committees" throughout South Vietnam, under the direction of the CIA, sentenced at least 10,000 "Class C civilians" to prison each year, far more than Class A and B combined. The article stated, "Thousands of these prisoners are never brought to court trial, and thousands of other have never been sentenced." The latter statement would mean they were just held in "indefinite detention," like the prisoners held at Guantanamo and other US detention centers with high levels of CIA involvement.

    Not surprisingly to someone not affiliated with the CIA, the article found as well that "Individual case histories indicate that many who have gone to prison as active supporters of neither the government nor the Viet Cong come out as active backers of the Viet Cong and with an implacable hatred of the government." In other words, the CIA and the COIN enthusiasts are achieving the same results today with the prisons they set up in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    CIA Crimes

    Valentine broadly covers the illegalities of the CIA over the years, including its well-documented role in facilitating the drug trade over the years. But, in this reviewer's opinion, his most valuable contribution is his description of the CIA's participation going back at least to the Vietnam War in the treatment of what the US government today calls "unlawful combatants."

    "Unlawful combatants" is a descriptive term made up by the Bush administration to remove people whom US officials alleged were "terrorists" from the legal protections of the Geneva Conventions and Human Rights Law and thus to justify their capture or killing in the so-called "Global War on Terror." Since the US government deems them "unlawful" – because they do not belong to an organized military structure and do not wear insignia – they are denied the "privilege" of belligerency that applies to traditional soldiers. But – unless they take a "direct part in hostilities" – they would still maintain their civilian status under the law of war and thus not lose the legal protection due to civilians even if they exhibit sympathy or support to one side in a conflict.

    Ironically, by the Bush administration's broad definition of "unlawful combatants," CIA officers and their support structure also would fit the category. But the American public is generally forgiving of its own war criminals though most self-righteous and hypocritical in judging foreign war criminals. But perhaps given sufficient evidence, the American public could begin to see both the immorality of this behavior and its counterproductive consequences.

    This is not to condemn all CIA officers, some of whom acted in good faith that they were actually defending the United States by acquiring information on a professed enemy in the tradition of Nathan Hale. But it is to harshly condemn those CIA officials and officers who betrayed the United States by subverting its Constitution, including waging secret wars against foreign countries without a declaration of war by Congress. And it decidedly condemns the CIA war criminals who acted as a law unto themselves in the torture and murder of foreign nationals, as Valentine's book describes.

    Talleyrand is credited with saying, "They have learned nothing and forgotten nothing." Reportedly, that was borrowed from a 1796 letter by a French naval officer, which stated, in the original language: Personne n'est corrigé; personne n'a su ni rien oublier ni rien appendre. In English: "Nobody has been corrected; no one has known to forget, nor yet to learn anything." That sums up the CIA leadership entirely.

    Douglas Valentine's book is a thorough documentation of that fact and it is essential reading for all Americans if we are to have any hope for salvaging a remnant of representative government.

    Todd E. Pierce retired as a Major in the US Army Judge Advocate General (JAG) Corps in November 2012. His most recent assignment was defense counsel in the Office of Chief Defense Counsel, Office of Military Commissions. This originally appeared at ConsortiumNews.com .

    Read more by Todd E. Pierce Inciting Wars the American Way – August 14th, 2016 Chicago Police Adopt Israeli Tactics – December 13th, 2015 US War Theories Target Dissenters – September 13th, 2015 Ron Paul and Lost Lessons of War – September 1st, 2015 Has the US Constitution Been Lost to Military Rule?– January 4th, 2015

    Continued

    Recommended Links

    Google matched content

    Softpanorama Recommended

    Top articles

    [Dec 30, 2018] RussiaGate In Review with Aaron Mate - Unreasoned Fear is Neoliberalism's Response to the Credibility Gap Published on Dec 30, 2018 | jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com

    [Dec 21, 2019] Trump comes clean from world s policeman to thug running a global protection racket by Finian Cunningham Published on Dec 27, 2018 | www.rt.com

    [Dec 29, 2018] -Election Meddling- Enters Bizarro World As MSM Ignores Democrat-Linked -Russian Bot- Scheme - Published on Dec 29, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Dec 24, 2018] Jewish neocons and the romance of nationalist armageddon Published on May 06, 2014 | mondoweiss.net

    [Dec 24, 2018] Income inequality happens by design. We cant fix it by tweaking capitalism Published on Dec 05, 2015 | The Guardian

    [Dec 22, 2018] British Security Service Infiltration, the Integrity Initiative and the Institute for Statecraft by Craig Murray Published on Dec 13, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

    [Dec 22, 2018] If Truth Cannot Prevail Over Material Agendas We Are Doomed by Paul Craig Roberts Published on www.theamericanconservative.com

    [Dec 16, 2018] The 'Integrity Initiative' - A Military Intelligence Operation, Disguised As Charity, To Create The Russian Threat Published on Dec 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Dec 16, 2018] Neoliberalism has had its day. So what happens next (The death of neoliberalism and the crisis in western politics) by Martin Jacques Published on Aug 21, 2016 | www.theguardian.com

    [Dec 14, 2018] Neoliberalism has spawned a financial elite who hold governments to ransom by Deborah Orr Published on Jun 08, 2013 | www.theguardian.com

    [Dec 16, 2018] The 'Integrity Initiative' - A Military Intelligence Operation, Disguised As Charity, To Create The Russian Threat Published on Dec 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Dec 16, 2018] Neoliberalism has had its day. So what happens next (The death of neoliberalism and the crisis in western politics) by Martin Jacques Published on Aug 21, 2016 | www.theguardian.com

    [Dec 14, 2018] Neoliberalism has spawned a financial elite who hold governments to ransom by Deborah Orr Published on Jun 08, 2013 | www.theguardian.com

    [Dec 09, 2018] Neoliberalism is more like modern feudalism - an authoritarian system where the lords (bankers, energy companies and their large and inefficient attendant bureaucracies), keep us peasants in thrall through life long debt-slavery simply to buy a house or exploit us as a captured market in the case of the energy sector. Published on Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

    [Dec 08, 2018] Postmodern Imperialism: Geopolitics and the Great Games Published on Dec 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Dec 05, 2018] Beleaguered British Prime Minister Theresa May is wailing loudly against a Trump threat to reveal classified documents relating to Russiagate by Philip Giraldi Published on Dec 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Dec 05, 2018] Who are the Neocons by Guyenot Published on Dec 11, 2015 | Peak Prosperity

    [Dec 03, 2018] Neoliberalism is a modern curse. Everything about it is bad and until we're free of it, it will only ever keep trying to turn us into indentured labourers. It's acolytes are required to blind themselves to logic and reason to such a degree they resemble Scientologists or Jehovah's Witnesses more than people with any sort of coherent political ideology, because that's what neoliberalism actually is... a cult of the rich, for the rich, by the rich... and it's followers in the general population are nothing but moron familiars hoping one day to be made a fully fledged bastard. Published on Dec 03, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

    [Nov 27, 2018] 'Highly likely' that Magnitsky was poisoned by toxic chemicals on Bill Browder's orders Published on Nov 19, 2018 | www.rt.com

    [Nov 27, 2018] US Foreign Policy Has No Policy by Philip Giraldi Published on Nov 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Nov 27, 2018] terms that carry with them implicit moral connotations. Investment implies an action, even a sacrifice, undertaken for a better future. It evokes a future positive outcome. Another words that reinforces neoliberal rationality is "growth", Modernization and Published on Nov 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

    [Nov 27, 2018] The Argentinian military coup, like those in Guatemala, Honduras, Brazil, Paraguay, Bolivia and Nicaragua, was sponsored by the US to protect and further its interests during the Cold War. By the 1970s neoliberalism was very much part of the menu; paramilitary governments were actively encouraged to practice neoliberal politics; neoliberalism was at this stage, what communism was to the Soviet Union Published on Nov 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

    [Nov 24, 2018] Anonymous Exposes UK-Led Psyop To Battle Russian Propaganda Published on Nov 23, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Nov 24, 2018] British Government Runs Secret Anti-Russian Smear Campaigns Published on Nov 24, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Nov 24, 2018] Now we know created MH17 smear campaign, who financial Steele dossier and created Skripal affair ;-) Published on Nov 24, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Nov 24, 2018] When you are paid a lot of money to come up with plots psyops, you tend to come up with plots for psyops . The word entrapment comes to mind. Probably self-serving also. Published on Nov 24, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Nov 22, 2018] Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Jewish Political Power Published on Nov 22, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Nov 22, 2018] Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Zionist Political Power Published on Nov 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Nov 14, 2018] Nationalism vs partiotism Published on Nov 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Nov 12, 2018] The Best Way To Honor War Veterans Is To Stop Creating Them by Caitlin Johnstone Published on Nov 12, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Nov 12, 2018] Protecting Americans from foreign influence, smells with COINTELPRO. Structural witch-hunt effect like during the McCarthy era is designed to supress decent to neoliberal oligarcy by Andre Damon and Joseph Kishore Published on Feb 20, 2018 | www.wsws.org

    [Nov 10, 2018] US Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan Killed 500,000 by Jason Ditz Published on Nov 10, 2018 | news.antiwar.com

    [Nov 09, 2018] Globalism Vs Nationalism in Trump's America by Joe Quinn Published on Nov 08, 2018 | www.sott.net

    [Dec 09, 2018] Neoliberalism is more like modern feudalism - an authoritarian system where the lords (bankers, energy companies and their large and inefficient attendant bureaucracies), keep us peasants in thrall through life long debt-slavery simply to buy a house or exploit us as a captured market in the case of the energy sector. Published on Dec 09, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

    [Dec 08, 2018] Postmodern Imperialism: Geopolitics and the Great Games Published on Dec 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Dec 05, 2018] Beleaguered British Prime Minister Theresa May is wailing loudly against a Trump threat to reveal classified documents relating to Russiagate by Philip Giraldi Published on Dec 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Dec 05, 2018] Who are the Neocons by Guyenot Published on Dec 11, 2015 | Peak Prosperity

    [Dec 03, 2018] Neoliberalism is a modern curse. Everything about it is bad and until we're free of it, it will only ever keep trying to turn us into indentured labourers. It's acolytes are required to blind themselves to logic and reason to such a degree they resemble Scientologists or Jehovah's Witnesses more than people with any sort of coherent political ideology, because that's what neoliberalism actually is... a cult of the rich, for the rich, by the rich... and it's followers in the general population are nothing but moron familiars hoping one day to be made a fully fledged bastard. Published on Dec 03, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

    [Nov 27, 2018] 'Highly likely' that Magnitsky was poisoned by toxic chemicals on Bill Browder's orders Published on Nov 19, 2018 | www.rt.com

    [Nov 27, 2018] US Foreign Policy Has No Policy by Philip Giraldi Published on Nov 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Nov 27, 2018] terms that carry with them implicit moral connotations. Investment implies an action, even a sacrifice, undertaken for a better future. It evokes a future positive outcome. Another words that reinforces neoliberal rationality is "growth", Modernization and Published on Nov 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

    [Nov 27, 2018] The Argentinian military coup, like those in Guatemala, Honduras, Brazil, Paraguay, Bolivia and Nicaragua, was sponsored by the US to protect and further its interests during the Cold War. By the 1970s neoliberalism was very much part of the menu; paramilitary governments were actively encouraged to practice neoliberal politics; neoliberalism was at this stage, what communism was to the Soviet Union Published on Nov 27, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

    [Nov 24, 2018] Anonymous Exposes UK-Led Psyop To Battle Russian Propaganda Published on Nov 23, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Nov 24, 2018] British Government Runs Secret Anti-Russian Smear Campaigns Published on Nov 24, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Nov 24, 2018] Now we know created MH17 smear campaign, who financial Steele dossier and created Skripal affair ;-) Published on Nov 24, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Nov 24, 2018] When you are paid a lot of money to come up with plots psyops, you tend to come up with plots for psyops . The word entrapment comes to mind. Probably self-serving also. Published on Nov 24, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Oct 25, 2018] Putin jokes with Bolton: Did the eagle eaten all the olives Published on Oct 25, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    [Nov 22, 2018] Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Jewish Political Power Published on Nov 22, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Nov 22, 2018] Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Zionist Political Power Published on Nov 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Nov 14, 2018] Nationalism vs partiotism Published on Nov 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Nov 12, 2018] The Best Way To Honor War Veterans Is To Stop Creating Them by Caitlin Johnstone Published on Nov 12, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Nov 12, 2018] Protecting Americans from foreign influence, smells with COINTELPRO. Structural witch-hunt effect like during the McCarthy era is designed to supress decent to neoliberal oligarcy by Andre Damon and Joseph Kishore Published on Feb 20, 2018 | www.wsws.org

    [Nov 10, 2018] US Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan Killed 500,000 by Jason Ditz Published on Nov 10, 2018 | news.antiwar.com

    [Nov 09, 2018] Globalism Vs Nationalism in Trump's America by Joe Quinn Published on Nov 08, 2018 | www.sott.net

    [Nov 10, 2018] US Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan Killed 500,000 by Jason Ditz Published on Nov 10, 2018 | news.antiwar.com

    [Oct 25, 2018] Putin jokes with Bolton: Did the eagle eaten all the olives Published on Oct 25, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    [Oct 20, 2018] Cloak and Dagger by Israel Shamir Published on Oct 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Oct 20, 2018] I am most encouraged by the apparent Putin's realisation that the First Strike is possible now if not even likely. If the Russians expect an attack they are much less likely to be totally surprised, as usual. In fact, never in history was such attack by the West more likely than now, for various reasons which would take a while to explain. Published on Oct 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Oct 20, 2018] Cloak and Dagger by Israel Shamir Published on Oct 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Oct 09, 2018] The Skripals Are an MI6 Hoax - 'Not Worthy of Ladies' Detective Novels' - Israeli Expert Demolishes UK Case Published on Oct 09, 2018 | russia-insider.com

    [Oct 08, 2018] British intelligence now officially is a by-word for organized crime by John Wight Published on Oct 08, 2018 | www.rt.com

    [Oct 08, 2018] Hacking and Propaganda by Marcus Ranum Published on Oct 07, 2018 | freethoughtblogs.com

    [Oct 09, 2018] The Skripals Are an MI6 Hoax - 'Not Worthy of Ladies' Detective Novels' - Israeli Expert Demolishes UK Case Published on Oct 09, 2018 | russia-insider.com

    [Oct 08, 2018] British intelligence now officially is a by-word for organized crime by John Wight Published on Oct 08, 2018 | www.rt.com

    [Oct 08, 2018] Hacking and Propaganda by Marcus Ranum Published on Oct 07, 2018 | freethoughtblogs.com

    [Sep 23, 2018] UK Begged Trump Not To Declassify Russia Docs; Cited Grave Concerns Over Steele Involvement Published on Sep 23, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Sep 21, 2018] One party state: Trump's 'Opposition' Supports All His Evil Agendas While Attacking Fake Nonsence by Caitlin Johnstone Published on Sep 21, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    [Sep 16, 2018] Perils of Ineptitude by Andrew Levin Published on Aug 03, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

    [Sep 16, 2018] I m delighted we can see the true face of American exceptionalism on display everyday. The last thing I want to see is back to normal. Published on Sep 16, 2018 | crookedtimber.org

    [Sep 23, 2018] UK Begged Trump Not To Declassify Russia Docs; Cited Grave Concerns Over Steele Involvement Published on Sep 23, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Sep 21, 2018] One party state: Trump's 'Opposition' Supports All His Evil Agendas While Attacking Fake Nonsence by Caitlin Johnstone Published on Sep 21, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    [Sep 16, 2018] Perils of Ineptitude by Andrew Levin Published on Aug 03, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

    [Sep 16, 2018] I m delighted we can see the true face of American exceptionalism on display everyday. The last thing I want to see is back to normal. Published on Sep 16, 2018 | crookedtimber.org

    [Sep 15, 2018] Why the US Seeks to Hem in Russia, China and Iran by Patrick Lawrence Published on Sep 15, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

    [Sep 15, 2018] BBC is skanky state propaganda Published on Aug 30, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

    [Sep 14, 2018] English Translation of Udo Ulfkotte s Bought Journalists Suppressed Published on Sep 14, 2018 | off-guardian.org

    [Sep 15, 2018] Why the US Seeks to Hem in Russia, China and Iran by Patrick Lawrence Published on Sep 15, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

    [Sep 15, 2018] BBC is skanky state propaganda Published on Aug 30, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

    [Sep 14, 2018] English Translation of Udo Ulfkotte s Bought Journalists Suppressed Published on Sep 14, 2018 | off-guardian.org

    [Sep 07, 2018] New York Times Undermining Peace Efforts by Sowing Suspicion by Diana Johnstone Published on Sep 07, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    [Sep 02, 2018] Open letter to President Trump concerning the consequences of 11 September 2001 by Thierry Meyssan Published on Aug 30, 2018 | www.voltairenet.org

    [Sep 02, 2018] Bill Browder (of Magnitsky fame) broke all these rules while pillaging Russia. Published on Sep 02, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

    [Sep 07, 2018] New York Times Undermining Peace Efforts by Sowing Suspicion by Diana Johnstone Published on Sep 07, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    [Sep 02, 2018] Open letter to President Trump concerning the consequences of 11 September 2001 by Thierry Meyssan Published on Aug 30, 2018 | www.voltairenet.org

    [Sep 02, 2018] Bill Browder (of Magnitsky fame) broke all these rules while pillaging Russia. Published on Sep 02, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

    [Aug 22, 2018] The CIA Owns the US and European Media by Paul Craig Roberts Published on Aug 18, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Aug 22, 2018] The CIA Owns the US and European Media by Paul Craig Roberts Published on Aug 18, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Aug 14, 2018] US Intelligence Community is Tearing the Country Apart from the Inside by Dmitry Orlov Published on Jul 28, 2018 | russia-insider.com

    [Aug 13, 2018] Imperialism Is Alive and Kicking A Marxist Analysis of Neoliberal Capitalism by C.J. Polychroniou Published on Aug 13, 2018 | truthout.org

    [Aug 11, 2018] President Trump the most important achivement Published on Aug 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Aug 08, 2018] Sergei Skripal was linked to a consultant with former UK spy Christopher Steele's Orbis Business Intelligence Published on Aug 06, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Aug 08, 2018] Ten Bombshell Revelations From Seymour Hersh's New Autobiography Published on Aug 08, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Aug 05, 2018] Cooper was equally as unhinged as Boot: Neoliberal MSM is a real 1984 remake. Published on Aug 05, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Jul 31, 2018] Is not the Awan affair a grave insult to the US "Intelligence Community? Published on Jul 31, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

    [Jul 20, 2018] What exactly is fake news caucus99percent Published on Jul 20, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

    [Jul 20, 2018] Is President Trump A Traitor Because He Wants Peace With Russia by Paul Craig Roberts Published on Jul 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Jul 17, 2018] I think there is much more to the comment made by Putin regarding Bill Browder and his money flows into the DNC and Clinton campaign. That would explain why the DNC didn t hand the servers over to the FBI after being hacked. Published on Jul 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Jul 16, 2018] Putin Claims U.S. Intelligence Agents Funneled $400K To Clinton Campaign Zero Hedge Published on Jul 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Jul 03, 2018] When you see some really successful financial speculator like Soros or (or much smaller scale) Browder, search for links with intelligence services to explain the success or at least a part of it related to xUSSR space , LA and similar regions Published on Jul 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Aug 14, 2018] US Intelligence Community is Tearing the Country Apart from the Inside by Dmitry Orlov Published on Jul 28, 2018 | russia-insider.com

    [Aug 13, 2018] Imperialism Is Alive and Kicking A Marxist Analysis of Neoliberal Capitalism by C.J. Polychroniou Published on Aug 13, 2018 | truthout.org

    [Aug 11, 2018] President Trump the most important achivement Published on Aug 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Aug 08, 2018] Sergei Skripal was linked to a consultant with former UK spy Christopher Steele's Orbis Business Intelligence Published on Aug 06, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Aug 08, 2018] Ten Bombshell Revelations From Seymour Hersh's New Autobiography Published on Aug 08, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Jun 06, 2018] Why Foreign Policy Realism Isn't Enough by William S. Smith Published on Jun 06, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    [Aug 05, 2018] Cooper was equally as unhinged as Boot: Neoliberal MSM is a real 1984 remake. Published on Aug 05, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Jul 31, 2018] Is not the Awan affair a grave insult to the US "Intelligence Community? Published on Jul 31, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

    [Jul 20, 2018] What exactly is fake news caucus99percent Published on Jul 20, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

    [Jul 20, 2018] Is President Trump A Traitor Because He Wants Peace With Russia by Paul Craig Roberts Published on Jul 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Jul 17, 2018] I think there is much more to the comment made by Putin regarding Bill Browder and his money flows into the DNC and Clinton campaign. That would explain why the DNC didn t hand the servers over to the FBI after being hacked. Published on Jul 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Jul 16, 2018] Putin Claims U.S. Intelligence Agents Funneled $400K To Clinton Campaign Zero Hedge Published on Jul 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Jul 03, 2018] When you see some really successful financial speculator like Soros or (or much smaller scale) Browder, search for links with intelligence services to explain the success or at least a part of it related to xUSSR space , LA and similar regions Published on Jul 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Jul 15, 2018] As if the Donald did not sanctioned to death the Russians on every possible level. How is this different from Mueller's and comp witch hunt against the Russians? Published on Jul 15, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Jul 13, 2018] False flag operation covering DNC leaks now involves Mueller and his team Published on Jul 13, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Jul 05, 2018] Britain's Most Censored Stories (Non-Military) Published on Jul 01, 2018 | truepublica.org.uk

    [Jul 03, 2018] Russia has a lot of information about Lybia that could dig a political grave for Hillary. They did not release it Published on Jul 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Jul 03, 2018] Musings II The "Intelligence Community," "Russian Interference," and Due Diligence Published on Jun 29, 2018 | jackmatlock.com

    [Jul 03, 2018] When you see some really successful financial speculator like Soros or (or much smaller scale) Browder, search for links with intelligence services to explain the success or at least a part of it related to xUSSR space , LA and similar regions Published on Jul 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [May 04, 2018] Media Use Disinformation To Accuse Russia Of Spreading Such by b Published on May 04, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Apr 24, 2018] The Democratic Party has embraced the agenda of the military-intelligence apparatus and sought to become its main political voice Published on Mar 13, 2018 | www.wsws.org

    [Jun 19, 2018] How The Last Superpower Was Unchained by Tom Engelhardt Published on Jun 19, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Jun 17, 2018] Mattis Putin Is Trying To Undermine America s Moral Authority by Caitlin Johnstone Published on Jun 17, 2018 | caitlinjohnstone.com

    [Jun 17, 2018] the dominant political forces in EU are anti-Russia Published on Jun 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Jun 17, 2018] The Necessity of a Trump-Putin Summit by Stephen F. Cohen Published on Jun 06, 2018 | www.thenation.com

    [Jun 14, 2018] Problem with US and British MSM control of narrative Published on Jun 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Jun 13, 2018] Sanction Trump not Bourbon Published on Jun 10, 2018 | angrybearblog.com

    [Jun 13, 2018] How False Flag Operations Are Carried Out Today by Philip M. GIRALDI Published on Apr 26, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

    [Jun 12, 2018] The real reason for which 'information apocalypse' terrifies the mainstream media Published on Jun 12, 2018 | failedevolution.blogspot.com

    [Jun 09, 2018] Still Waiting for Evidence of a Russian Hack by Ray McGovern Published on Jun 09, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

    [Jun 09, 2018] Spooks Spooking Themselves by Daniel Lazare Published on May 31, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

    [May 31, 2018] Journalists and academics expose UK's criminal actions in the Middle East by Julie Hyland Published on May 31, 2018 | www.wsws.org

    [May 27, 2018] America's Fifth Column Will Destroy Russia by Paul Craig Roberts Published on May 25, 2018 | www.paulcraigroberts.org

    [May 27, 2018] Northwestern University roundtable discusses regime change in Russia Defend Democracy Press Published on www.defenddemocracy.press

    [May 24, 2018] The diversion of Russia Gate is a continuation of former diversions such as the Tea Party which was invented by the banksters to turn public anger over the big banking collapse and the resulting recession into a movement to gain more deregulation for tax breaks for the wealthy Published on May 24, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

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

    [May 22, 2018] Cat fight within the US elite getting more intense Published on May 22, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [May 04, 2018] Media Use Disinformation To Accuse Russia Of Spreading Such by b Published on May 04, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [May 03, 2018] Mueller's questions to Trump more those of a prosecuting attorney than of an impartial investigator by Alexander Mercouris Published on May 03, 2018 | theduran.com

    [May 03, 2018] Skripal case British confirm they have no suspect; Yulia Skripal vanishes, no word of Sergey Skripal by Alexander Mercouris Published on May 02, 2018 | theduran.com

    [May 03, 2018] Despite all the propaganda, all the hysterical headlines, all the blatantly biased coverage, the British haven't bought it Published on May 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Apr 24, 2018] The Democratic Party has embraced the agenda of the military-intelligence apparatus and sought to become its main political voice Published on Mar 13, 2018 | www.wsws.org

    [Apr 21, 2018] It s a tough old world and we are certainly capable of a Salisbury set-up and god knows what else in Syria. Published on Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

    [Apr 15, 2018] The Trump Regime Is Insane by Paul Craig Roberts Published on Apr 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Apr 21, 2018] It s a tough old world and we are certainly capable of a Salisbury set-up and god knows what else in Syria. Published on Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

    [Apr 24, 2018] America's Men Without Chests by Paul Grenier Published on Apr 24, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    [Apr 15, 2018] The Trump Regime Is Insane by Paul Craig Roberts Published on Apr 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Apr 23, 2018] The Tony Blair Rule: The Truth Takes 15 Years to Come Out, Skripal Countdown Starts Now - Simonyan Published on Apr 23, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Apr 21, 2018] It s a tough old world and we are certainly capable of a Salisbury set-up and god knows what else in Syria. Published on Apr 21, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

    [Apr 20, 2018] Stench of hypocrisy British 'war on terror' strategic ties with radical Islam by John Wight Published on Apr 20, 2018 | www.rt.com

    [Apr 18, 2018] The Great American Unspooling Is Upon Us Published on Apr 18, 2018 | russia-insider.com

    [Apr 16, 2018] British Propaganda and Disinformation An Imperial and Colonial Tradition by Wayne MADSEN Published on Apr 16, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

    [Apr 11, 2018] Female neocon warmongers from Fox look like plastered brick walls – heartless and brainless. Published on Apr 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Apr 10, 2018] The Ghouta Massacre near Damascus on Aug 21, 2013 was not a sarin rocket attack carried out by Assad or his supporters. It was a false-flag stunt carried out by the insurgents using carbon monoxide or cyanide to murder children and use their corpses as bait to lure the Americans into attacking Assad. Published on Apr 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Apr 09, 2018] When Military Leaders Have Reckless Disregard for the Truth by Bruce Fein Published on Apr 09, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    [Apr 05, 2018] The Three Most Important Aspects of the Skripal Case so Far and Where They by Rob Slane Published on Apr 04, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    [Apr 05, 2018] An Interview with Retired Russian General Evgeny Buzhinsky The National Interest Published on Apr 05, 2018 | nationalinterest.org

    [Apr 03, 2018] This Washington Post Headline Is Fake News Published on Apr 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Apr 03, 2018] Exercise TOXIC DAGGER - the sharp end of chemical warfare Published on Apr 03, 2018 | www.gov.uk

    [Apr 02, 2018] Russophobia Anti-Russian Lobby and American Foreign Policy by A. Tsygankov Published on Jun 09, 2017 | www.amazon.com

    [Apr 02, 2018] Russia 'Novichok' Hysteria Proves Politicians and Media Haven't Learned the Lessons of Iraq by Patrick Henningsen Published on Mar 31, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

    [Apr 02, 2018] The Litvinenko Conspiracy Published on Mar 31, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    [Apr 01, 2018] UK may have staged Skripal poisoning to rally people against Russia, Moscow believes Published on Apr 01, 2018 | www.rt.com

    [Mar 31, 2018] FBI Director Mueller testified to Congress that Saddam Hussein was responsible for anthrax attack! That was Mueller's role in selling the "intelligence" to invade Iraq. Published on Mar 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Mar 17, 2018] How the gas was administred in a place which was under surveillance and why passersby were not affected Published on Mar 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Mar 15, 2018] The UK will promptly expel 23 Russian diplomats without waiting for the end of the investigation Published on Mar 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Mar 10, 2018] Meier might have discovered that his subject had been, as it were, 'top supporting actor' in the first fumbling attempt by Christopher Steele et al to produce a plausible-sounding scenario as to the background to Litvinenko s death. Published on Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Mar 10, 2018] There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this Published on Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Feb 08, 2018] Try Googling Riggs Bank – a lot of interesting information emerges, on matters such as their involvement with Prince Bandar. So, what we are dealing with is a joint Anglo-American attempt to create a comprador oligarchy who could loot Russia s raw materials resources Published on Feb 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies Published on Oct 30, 2017 | consortiumnews.com

    [Dec 31, 2017] Is [neo]Liberalism a Dying Faith by Pat Buchanan Published on Oct 01, 2002 | www.unz.com

    [Dec 31, 2017] What Happens When A Russiagate Skeptic Debates A Professional Russiagater Published on Dec 28, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Dec 28, 2017] How CrowdStrike placed malware in DNC hacked servers by Alex Christoforou Published on Dec 28, 2017 | theduran.com

    [Mar 27, 2018] Indian Punchline - Reflections on foreign affairs by M K Bhadrakumar Published on Mar 27, 2018 | blogs.rediff.com

    [Mar 27, 2018] Perfidious Albion The Fatally Wounded British Beast Lashes Out by Barbara Boyd Published on Mar 18, 2018 | LaRouchePAC

    [Mar 25, 2018] A truly historical month for the future of our planet by The Saker Published on Mar 23, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Mar 25, 2018] Cambridge Analytica Scandal Rockets to Watergate Proportions and Beyond by Adam Garrie Published on Mar 25, 2018 | www.eurasiafuture.com

    [Mar 24, 2018] Why the UK, the EU and the US Gang-Up on Russia by James Petras Published on Mar 20, 2018 | unz.com

    [Mar 23, 2018] Inglorious end of career of neocon McMaster Published on Mar 23, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Mar 22, 2018] If it's correct, the Brits made a very nasty error that shows the true nature of their establishment. Published on Mar 21, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Mar 22, 2018] Vladimir Putin: nonsense to think Russia would poison spy in UK Published on Mar 18, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

    [Mar 21, 2018] Arafat and Litvinenko: an Interesting Turn to a Mysterious Story Published on Mar 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Mar 21, 2018] Washington's Invasion of Iraq at Fifteen Published on Mar 21, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

    [Mar 21, 2018] Whataboutism Is A Nonsensical Propaganda Term Used To Defend The Failed Status Quo by Mike Krieger Published on Mar 20, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Feb 07, 2020] How They Sold the Iraq War by Jeffrey St. Clair Published on Mar 20, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

    [Mar 17, 2018] How the gas was administred in a place which was under surveillance and why passersby were not affected Published on Mar 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Mar 15, 2018] The UK will promptly expel 23 Russian diplomats without waiting for the end of the investigation Published on Mar 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Mar 10, 2018] Meier might have discovered that his subject had been, as it were, 'top supporting actor' in the first fumbling attempt by Christopher Steele et al to produce a plausible-sounding scenario as to the background to Litvinenko s death. Published on Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Mar 10, 2018] There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this Published on Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Feb 08, 2018] Try Googling Riggs Bank – a lot of interesting information emerges, on matters such as their involvement with Prince Bandar. So, what we are dealing with is a joint Anglo-American attempt to create a comprador oligarchy who could loot Russia s raw materials resources Published on Feb 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies Published on Oct 30, 2017 | consortiumnews.com

    [Dec 31, 2017] Is [neo]Liberalism a Dying Faith by Pat Buchanan Published on Oct 01, 2002 | www.unz.com

    [Dec 31, 2017] What Happens When A Russiagate Skeptic Debates A Professional Russiagater Published on Dec 28, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Dec 28, 2017] How CrowdStrike placed malware in DNC hacked servers by Alex Christoforou Published on Dec 28, 2017 | theduran.com

    [Mar 16, 2018] Corbyn Calls for Evidence in Escalating Poison Row Published on Mar 16, 2018 | therealnews.com

    [Mar 16, 2018] NATO to display common front in Skripal case Published on Mar 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Mar 16, 2018] Are We Living Under a Military Coup ? Published on Mar 16, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

    [Mar 15, 2018] The UK will promptly expel 23 Russian diplomats without waiting for the end of the investigation Published on Mar 14, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Mar 14, 2018] Russian UN anvoy> alleged the Salisbury attack was a false-flag attack, possibly by the UK itself, intended to harm Russia s reputation by Julian Borger Published on Mar 14, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

    [Mar 14, 2018] UNSC holds urgent meeting over Salisbury attack Published on Mar 14, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Mar 14, 2018] Jefferson Morley on the CIA and Mossad Tradeoffs in the Formation of the US-Israel Strategic Relationship Published on Mar 14, 2018 | www.antiwar.com

    [Mar 12, 2018] New Huge Anti-Russian Provocation ahead of Russian election by Robert Stevens Published on www.moonofalabama.org

    [Mar 11, 2018] Washington s Century-long War on Russia by Mike Whitney Published on www.nakedcapitalism.com

    [Mar 11, 2018] Reality Check: The Guardian Restarts Push for Regime Change in Russia by Kit Published on Mar 11, 2018 | off-guardian.org

    [Mar 11, 2018] The Elephant In The Room by Craig Murray Published on Mar 11, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

    [Mar 11, 2018] It is highly probably that Steele and Skripal knew each other Published on Mar 10, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Mar 11, 2018] Ramping Russophobia is the most convincing motive for the Skripal attack Published on Mar 11, 2018 | twitter.com

    [Mar 10, 2018] Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in Obama policy and HRC campaign long before any Steele s Dossier. This was a program ofunleashing cold War II Published on Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Mar 10, 2018] From Yeltsin to Putin: Chubais, Liberal Pathology, and Harvard's Criminal Record Published on Mar 10, 2018 | www.rusjournal.org

    [Mar 10, 2018] There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this Published on Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Mar 08, 2018] Cue bono question in Scripal case? Published on Mar 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Mar 08, 2018] In recent years, there has been ample evidence that US policy-makers and, equally important, mainstream media commentators do not bother to read what Putin says, or at least not more than snatches from click-bait wire-service reports. Published on Mar 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Mar 06, 2018] The U.S. Returns to 'Great Power Competition,' With a Dangerous New Edge Published on Mar 06, 2018 | fpif.org

    [Mar 06, 2018] The current anti-Russian sentiment in the West as hysterical. But this hysteria is concentrated at the top level of media elite and neocons. Behind it is no deep sense of unity or national resolve. In fact we see the reverse - most Western countries are deeply divided within themselves due to the crisis of neolineralism. Published on Mar 06, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Mar 04, 2018] Generals who now are running the USA foreign policy represents a great danger. These men seem incapable of rising above the Russophobia that grew in the atmosphere of the Cold War. They yearn for world hegemony for the US and to see Russia and to a lesser extent China and Iran as obstacles to that dominion for the "city on a hill Published on Mar 04, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Feb 26, 2018] Democrat Memo Lays Egg by Publius Tacitus Published on Feb 26, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Feb 26, 2018] Why one war when we can heve two! by Eric Margolis Published on Feb 24, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press

    [Feb 23, 2018] NSA Genius Debunks Russiagate Once For All Published on Feb 23, 2018 | www.youtube.com

    [Feb 22, 2018] Bill Binney explodes the rile of 17 agances security assessment memo in launching the Russia witch-hunt Published on Mar 4, 2017 | www.youtube.com

    [Feb 20, 2018] For the life of me I cannot figure why Americans want a war/conflict with Russia Published on Feb 20, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Feb 20, 2018] Russophobia is a futile bid to conceal US, European demise by Finian Cunningham Published on Feb 20, 2018 | www.rt.com

    [Feb 19, 2018] Nunes FBI and DOJ Perps Could Be Put on Trial by Ray McGovern Published on Feb 19, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

    [Feb 19, 2018] The Russiagate Intelligence Wars What We Do and Don't Know Published on Feb 19, 2018 | www.thenation.com

    [Feb 19, 2018] Russian Meddling Was a Drop in an Ocean of American-made Discord by AMANDA TAUB and MAX FISHER Published on Feb 18, 2018 | www.nytimes.com

    [Feb 18, 2018] This dangerous escalation of tensions with Russia is extremely lucrative for the war profiteers, the retired generals intelligence members who prostitute themselves as media pundits, the members of Congress who get $$$ from the war profiteers, and the corporate media which thrives on links to the war profiteers as well as on war reporting Published on Feb 18, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

    [Feb 16, 2018] A Dangerous Turn in U.S. Foreign Policy Published on Feb 16, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

    [Feb 16, 2018] The Deep Staters care first and foremost about themselves. Published on Feb 16, 2018 | nationalinterest.org

    [Feb 14, 2018] Recused Judge in Flynn Prosecution Served on FISA Court Published on Feb 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Feb 14, 2018] A Russian Trump by Israel Shamir Published on Feb 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Feb 12, 2018] The Age of Lunacy: The Doomsday Machine Published on Feb 11, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    [Feb 12, 2018] Too many sport disciplines, too much cheating, too much money and too many politics involved in the Olympic Published on Feb 12, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

    [Feb 12, 2018] Ike's Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex Is Alive and Very Well by William J. Astore Published on Feb 12, 2018 | www.antiwar.com

    [Feb 11, 2018] How Russiagate fiasco destroys Kremlin moderates, accelerating danger for a hot war Published on Feb 06, 2018 | failedevolution.blogspot.gr

    [Feb 10, 2018] More on neoliberal newspeak of US propaganda machine Published on Feb 10, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

    [Feb 09, 2018] Professor Stephen F. Cohen Rethinking Putin – A critical reading, by The Saker - The Unz Review Published on Feb 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Feb 08, 2018] Control of narrative means that creation of the simplistic picture in which the complexities of the world are elided in favor of 'good guys' vs. 'bad guys' dichotomy Published on Feb 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Jan 30, 2018] Washington Reaches New Heights of Insanity with the "Kremlin Report" by Paul Craig Roberts Published on Jan 30, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Jan 30, 2018] The Unseen Wars of America the Empire The American Conservative Published on Jan 30, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    [Jan 28, 2018] Russiagate Isn t About Trump, And It Isn t Even Ultimately About Russia by Caitlyn Johnstone Published on Jan 28, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    [Jan 27, 2018] The Rich Also Cry by Israel Shamir Published on Jan 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Jan 26, 2018] Warns The Russiagate Stakes Are Extreme by Paul Craig Roberts Published on Jan 26, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Jan 25, 2018] Russiagate as Kafka 2.0 Published on Jan 25, 2018 | www.unz.com

    [Jan 24, 2018] Brazen Plot To Exonerate Hillary Clinton And Frame Trump Unraveling, Says Former Fed Prosecutor Published on Jan 24, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

    [Jan 22, 2018] Pentagon Unveils Strategy for Military Confrontation With Russia and China by Bill Van Auken Published on Jan 22, 2018 | russia-insider.com

    [Jan 17, 2018] Neoconning the Trump White House by Kelley Beaucar Vlahos Published on Jan 17, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

    [Jan 16, 2018] The Russia Explainer Published on Apr 04, 2017 | russiaexplainer.com

    [May 11, 2019] Why Crowdstrike's Russian Hacking Story Fell Apart -- Say Hello to Fancy Bear Published on Dec 29, 2017 | www.washingtonsblog.com

    [Jan 06, 2018] Russia-gate Breeds Establishment McCarthyism by Robert Parry Published on Oct 27, 2017 | ronpaulinstitute.org

    [Jan 02, 2018] The Still-Missing Evidence of Russia-gate by Dennis J. Bernstein Published on Jan 02, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

    [Jan 02, 2018] Some investigators ask a sensible question: "It is likely that all the Russians involved in the attempt to influence the 2016 election were lying, scheming, Kremlin-linked, Putin-backed enemies of America except the Russians who talked to Christopher Steele?" Published on Dec 30, 2017 | theduran.com

    [Jan 02, 2018] Neocon warmongers should be treated as rapists by Andrew J. Bacevich Published on Dec 22, 2017 | www.unz.com

    [Jan 02, 2018] What We Don t Talk about When We Talk about Russian Hacking by Jackson Lears Published on Jan 04, 2018 | lrb.co.uk

    [Jan 02, 2018] Jill Stein in the Cross-hairs by Mike Whitney Published on Dec 26, 2017 | www.unz.com

    [Jan 02, 2018] Who Is the Real Enemy by Philip Giraldi Published on Jul 11, 2017 | www.unz.com

    [Jan 01, 2018] Putin Foresaw Death of US Global Power by Finian Cunningham Published on Dec 30, 2017 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

    [Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies Published on Oct 30, 2017 | consortiumnews.com

    [Dec 31, 2017] Is [neo]Liberalism a Dying Faith by Pat Buchanan Published on Oct 01, 2002 | www.unz.com

    [Sep 17, 2017] The So-called Russian Hack of the DNC Does Not Make Sense by Publius Tacitus Published on Sep 05, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    [Jul 17, 2017] Tucker Carlson Goes to War Against the Neocons by Curt Mills Published on Jul 14, 2017 | nationalinterest.org

    [Jul 12, 2017] Stephen Cohens Remarks on Tucker Carlson Last Night Were Extraordinary Published on Jul 12, 2017 | russia-insider.com

    [Jun 24, 2017] The Criminal Laws of Counterinsurgency by Todd E. Pierce Published on Jun 24, 2017 | original.antiwar.com

    Oldies But Goodies

    [Dec 24, 2018] Jewish neocons and the romance of nationalist armageddon

    [Dec 10, 2016] Why the US elite loves so much to demonise Russia

    [Dec 10, 2016] Why the US elite loves so much to demonise Russia

    [Sep 26, 2016] War as a Business Opportunity

    [Sep 14, 2016] The story of Chile s popular, and democratic rejection of government by oligarchs is today s must-read, and provides unsettling similarities to current events

    [Sep 26, 2016] War as a Business Opportunity

    [Jan 09, 2016] Allen Dulles and modern neocons

    [Jan 09, 2016] Allen Dulles and modern neocons

    [Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies

    [Dec 28, 2017] How CrowdStrike placed malware in DNC hacked servers by Alex Christoforou

    [Dec 28, 2017] On your surmise that Putin prefers Trump to Hillary and would thus have incentive to influence the election, I beg to differ. Putin is one smart statesman; he knows very well it makes no difference which candidates gets elected in US elections.

    [Dec 27, 2017] Putin is one smart statesman; he knows very well it makes no difference which candidates gets elected in US elections. Any candidate that WOULD make a difference would NEVER see the daylight of nomination, especially at the presidential level. I myself believe all the talk of Russia interfering the 2016 Election is no more than a witch hunt

    [Dec 21, 2017] The RussiaGate Witch-Hunt Stockman Names Names In The Deep State's Insurance Policy by David Stockman

    [Dec 18, 2017] The Scary Void Inside Russia-gate by Stephen F. Cohen

    [Dec 13, 2017] All the signs in the Russia probe point to Jared Kushner. Who next?

    [Dec 12, 2017] When a weaker neoliberal state fights the dominant neoliberal state, the center of neoliberal empire, it faces economic sanctions and can t retaliate using principle eye for eye

    [Dec 11, 2017] How Russia-gate Met the Magnitsky Myth by Robert Parry

    [Dec 10, 2017] blamePutin continues to be the media s dominant hashtag. Vladimir Putin finally confesses his entire responsibility for everything bad that has ever happened since the beginning of time

    [Dec 10, 2017] When Washington Cheered the Jihadists Consortiumnews

    [Dec 10, 2017] Russia-gate s Reach into Journalism by Dennis J Bernstein

    [Dec 09, 2017] Hyping the Russian Threat to Undermine Free Speech by Max Blumenthal

    [Dec 03, 2017] Stephen Kotkin How Vladimir Putin Rules

    [Dec 03, 2017] Islamic Mindset Akin to Bolshevism by Srdja Trifkovic

    [Dec 02, 2017] The New Cold War and the Death of the Discourse by Justin Raimondo

    [Dec 01, 2017] Neocon Chaos Promotion in the Mideast

    [Dec 01, 2017] JFK The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy by L. Fletcher Prouty, Oliver Stone, Jesse Ventura

    [Nov 30, 2017] Heritage Foundation + the War Industry What a Pair by Paul Gottfried

    [Nov 30, 2017] Money Imperialism by Michael Hudson

    [Nov 29, 2017] The Russian Question by Niall Ferguson

    [Nov 28, 2017] The Duplicitous Superpower by Ted Galen Carpenter

    [Nov 30, 2017] Heritage Foundation + the War Industry What a Pair by Paul Gottfried

    [Dec 03, 2017] Stephen Kotkin How Vladimir Putin Rules

    [Nov 08, 2017] The Plot to Scapegoat Russia How the CIA and the Deep State Have Conspired to Vilify Putin by Dan Kovalik

    [Nov 08, 2017] Learning to Love McCarthyism by Robert Parry

    [Nov 04, 2017] Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Leads US President Trump to War with Iran by Prof. James Petras

    [Nov 04, 2017] Who's Afraid of Corporate COINTELPRO by C. J. Hopkins

    [Dec 03, 2017] Stephen Kotkin How Vladimir Putin Rules

    [Nov 08, 2017] The Plot to Scapegoat Russia How the CIA and the Deep State Have Conspired to Vilify Putin by Dan Kovalik

    [Oct 31, 2017] Here is What I Saw at the Valdai Club Conference by Anatol Lieven

    [Oct 29, 2017] Whose Bright Idea Was RussiaGate by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Oct 31, 2017] Here is What I Saw at the Valdai Club Conference by Anatol Lieven

    [Sep 17, 2017] The So-called Russian Hack of the DNC Does Not Make Sense by Publius Tacitus

    [Dec 31, 2017] Is [neo]Liberalism a Dying Faith by Pat Buchanan

    [Apr 21, 2019] John Brennan's Police State USA

    [Oct 13, 2017] Sympathy for the Corporatocracy by C. J. Hopkins

    [Oct 13, 2017] Sympathy for the Corporatocracy by C. J. Hopkins

    [Oct 11, 2017] Russia witch hunt is a tactic used by the ruling elite, and in particular the Democratic Party, to avoid facing a very unpleasant reality: that their unpopularity is the outcome of their policies of deindustrialization and the assault against working class

    [Oct 09, 2017] Dennis Kucinich We Must Challenge the Two-Party Duopoly Committed to War by Adam Dick

    [Oct 09, 2017] After Nine Months, Only Stale Crumbs in Russia Inquiry by Scott Ritter

    [Oct 09, 2017] Autopilot Wars by Andrew J. Bacevich

    [Oct 09, 2017] Dennis Kucinich We Must Challenge the Two-Party Duopoly Committed to War by Adam Dick

    [Oct 03, 2017] The Vietnam Nightmare -- Again by Eric Margolis

    [Oct 03, 2017] Russian Ads On Facebook A Click-Bait Campaign

    [Sep 30, 2017] Yet Another Major Russia Story Falls Apart. Is Skepticism Permissible Yet by Glenn Greenwald

    [Feb 26, 2019] THE CRISIS OF NEOLIBERALISM by Julie A. Wilson

    [Sep 27, 2017] Come You Masters of War by Matthew Harwood

    [Sep 26, 2017] Is Foreign Propaganda Even Effective by Leon Hadar

    [Sep 25, 2017] I am presently reading the book JFK and the Unspeakable by James W.Douglass and it is exactly why Kennedy was assassinated by the very same group that desperately wants to see Trump gone and the rapprochement with Russia squashed

    [Sep 24, 2017] Mark Ames When Mother Jones Was Investigated for Spreading Kremlin Disinformation by Mark Ames

    [Sep 23, 2017] The Exit Strategy of Empire by Wendy McElro

    [Sep 23, 2017] The Exit Strategy of Empire by Wendy McElro

    [Sep 20, 2017] The Politics of Military Ascendancy by James Petras

    [Sep 18, 2017] How The Military Defeated Trumps Insurgency

    [Sep 18, 2017] The NYT's Yellow Journalism on Russia by Rober Parry

    [Sep 16, 2017] Empire of Capital by George Monbiot

    [Sep 13, 2017] A despot in disguise: one mans mission to rip up democracy by George Monbiot

    [Dec 21, 2019] The Pentagon s New Map War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century

    [Dec 21, 2019] The Pentagon s New Map War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century

    [Dec 21, 2019] We are all Palestinians: possible connection between neocons and Pentagon

    [Dec 21, 2019] We are all Palestinians: possible connection between neocons and Pentagon

    [Aug 09, 2017] Force Multipliers and 21st Century Imperial Warfare Practice and Propaganda by Maximilian C. Forte

    [Jul 17, 2017] Tucker Carlson Goes to War Against the Neocons by Curt Mills

    [Jul 12, 2017] Stephen Cohens Remarks on Tucker Carlson Last Night Were Extraordinary

    [Jun 24, 2017] The Criminal Laws of Counterinsurgency by Todd E. Pierce

    [Jul 30, 2017] Fascism Is Possible Not in Spite of [neo]Liberal Capitalism, but Because of It by Earchiel Johnson

    [Jul 26, 2017] Regime Change Comes Home: The CIAs Overt Threats against Trump by James Petras

    [Jul 26, 2017] US Provocation and North Korea Pretext for War with China by James Petras

    [Jul 13, 2017] Progressive Democrats Resist and Submit, Retreat and Surrender by James Petras

    [Jul 17, 2017] Tucker Carlson Goes to War Against the Neocons by Curt Mills

    [Jul 12, 2017] Stephen Cohens Remarks on Tucker Carlson Last Night Were Extraordinary

    [Jul 06, 2017] The Great Power Shift A Russia-China Alliance by Ray McGovern

    [Jul 06, 2017] The Great Power Shift A Russia-China Alliance by Ray McGovern

    [Jul 01, 2017] Seeing Russia Clearly by Paul Starobin

    [Jul 01, 2017] MUST SEE video explains the entire 17 Intelligence Agencies Russian hacking lie

    [Jun 26, 2017] The Soft Coup Under Way In Washington by David Stockman

    [Jun 24, 2017] The Saudi-Qatar spat - the reconciliation offer to be refused>. Qater will move closer to Turkey

    [Jun 15, 2017] Comeys Lies of Omission by Mike Whitney

    [Jun 24, 2017] The Criminal Laws of Counterinsurgency by Todd E. Pierce

    [Nov 08, 2017] The Plot to Scapegoat Russia How the CIA and the Deep State Have Conspired to Vilify Putin by Dan Kovalik

    [Apr 02, 2018] Russophobia Anti-Russian Lobby and American Foreign Policy by A. Tsygankov

    [May 21, 2017] What Obsessing About Trump Causes Us To Miss by Andrew Bacevich

    [May 21, 2017] WhateverGate -- The Crazed Quest To Find Some Reason (Any Reason!) To Dump Trump by John Derbyshire

    [May 21, 2017] Speech of Lavrov at the Military Academy of the General Staff

    [May 20, 2017] Invasion of the Putin-Nazis by C.J. Hopkins

    [Dec 31, 2017] Truth-Killing as a Meta-Issue

    [Dec 31, 2017] Truth-Killing as a Meta-Issue

    [Dec 10, 2016] Why the US elite loves so much to demonise Russia

    [Dec 30, 2018] RussiaGate In Review with Aaron Mate - Unreasoned Fear is Neoliberalism's Response to the Credibility Gap

    [Dec 21, 2019] Trump comes clean from world s policeman to thug running a global protection racket by Finian Cunningham

    [Dec 29, 2018] -Election Meddling- Enters Bizarro World As MSM Ignores Democrat-Linked -Russian Bot- Scheme -

    [Dec 24, 2018] Jewish neocons and the romance of nationalist armageddon

    [Dec 24, 2018] Income inequality happens by design. We cant fix it by tweaking capitalism

    [Dec 22, 2018] British Security Service Infiltration, the Integrity Initiative and the Institute for Statecraft by Craig Murray

    [Dec 22, 2018] If Truth Cannot Prevail Over Material Agendas We Are Doomed by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Dec 16, 2018] The 'Integrity Initiative' - A Military Intelligence Operation, Disguised As Charity, To Create The Russian Threat

    [Dec 16, 2018] Neoliberalism has had its day. So what happens next (The death of neoliberalism and the crisis in western politics) by Martin Jacques

    [Dec 14, 2018] Neoliberalism has spawned a financial elite who hold governments to ransom by Deborah Orr

    [Dec 16, 2018] The 'Integrity Initiative' - A Military Intelligence Operation, Disguised As Charity, To Create The Russian Threat

    [Dec 16, 2018] Neoliberalism has had its day. So what happens next (The death of neoliberalism and the crisis in western politics) by Martin Jacques

    [Dec 14, 2018] Neoliberalism has spawned a financial elite who hold governments to ransom by Deborah Orr

    [Dec 09, 2018] Neoliberalism is more like modern feudalism - an authoritarian system where the lords (bankers, energy companies and their large and inefficient attendant bureaucracies), keep us peasants in thrall through life long debt-slavery simply to buy a house or exploit us as a captured market in the case of the energy sector.

    [Dec 08, 2018] Postmodern Imperialism: Geopolitics and the Great Games

    [Dec 05, 2018] Beleaguered British Prime Minister Theresa May is wailing loudly against a Trump threat to reveal classified documents relating to Russiagate by Philip Giraldi

    [Dec 05, 2018] Who are the Neocons by Guyenot

    [Dec 03, 2018] Neoliberalism is a modern curse. Everything about it is bad and until we're free of it, it will only ever keep trying to turn us into indentured labourers. It's acolytes are required to blind themselves to logic and reason to such a degree they resemble Scientologists or Jehovah's Witnesses more than people with any sort of coherent political ideology, because that's what neoliberalism actually is... a cult of the rich, for the rich, by the rich... and it's followers in the general population are nothing but moron familiars hoping one day to be made a fully fledged bastard.

    [Nov 27, 2018] 'Highly likely' that Magnitsky was poisoned by toxic chemicals on Bill Browder's orders

    [Nov 27, 2018] US Foreign Policy Has No Policy by Philip Giraldi

    [Nov 27, 2018] terms that carry with them implicit moral connotations. Investment implies an action, even a sacrifice, undertaken for a better future. It evokes a future positive outcome. Another words that reinforces neoliberal rationality is "growth", Modernization and

    [Nov 27, 2018] The Argentinian military coup, like those in Guatemala, Honduras, Brazil, Paraguay, Bolivia and Nicaragua, was sponsored by the US to protect and further its interests during the Cold War. By the 1970s neoliberalism was very much part of the menu; paramilitary governments were actively encouraged to practice neoliberal politics; neoliberalism was at this stage, what communism was to the Soviet Union

    [Nov 24, 2018] Anonymous Exposes UK-Led Psyop To Battle Russian Propaganda

    [Nov 24, 2018] British Government Runs Secret Anti-Russian Smear Campaigns

    [Nov 24, 2018] Now we know created MH17 smear campaign, who financial Steele dossier and created Skripal affair ;-)

    [Nov 24, 2018] When you are paid a lot of money to come up with plots psyops, you tend to come up with plots for psyops . The word entrapment comes to mind. Probably self-serving also.

    [Nov 22, 2018] Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Jewish Political Power

    [Nov 22, 2018] Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Zionist Political Power

    [Nov 14, 2018] Nationalism vs partiotism

    [Nov 12, 2018] The Best Way To Honor War Veterans Is To Stop Creating Them by Caitlin Johnstone

    [Nov 12, 2018] Protecting Americans from foreign influence, smells with COINTELPRO. Structural witch-hunt effect like during the McCarthy era is designed to supress decent to neoliberal oligarcy by Andre Damon and Joseph Kishore

    [Nov 10, 2018] US Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan Killed 500,000 by Jason Ditz

    [Nov 09, 2018] Globalism Vs Nationalism in Trump's America by Joe Quinn

    [Dec 09, 2018] Neoliberalism is more like modern feudalism - an authoritarian system where the lords (bankers, energy companies and their large and inefficient attendant bureaucracies), keep us peasants in thrall through life long debt-slavery simply to buy a house or exploit us as a captured market in the case of the energy sector.

    [Dec 08, 2018] Postmodern Imperialism: Geopolitics and the Great Games

    [Dec 05, 2018] Beleaguered British Prime Minister Theresa May is wailing loudly against a Trump threat to reveal classified documents relating to Russiagate by Philip Giraldi

    [Dec 05, 2018] Who are the Neocons by Guyenot

    [Dec 03, 2018] Neoliberalism is a modern curse. Everything about it is bad and until we're free of it, it will only ever keep trying to turn us into indentured labourers. It's acolytes are required to blind themselves to logic and reason to such a degree they resemble Scientologists or Jehovah's Witnesses more than people with any sort of coherent political ideology, because that's what neoliberalism actually is... a cult of the rich, for the rich, by the rich... and it's followers in the general population are nothing but moron familiars hoping one day to be made a fully fledged bastard.

    [Nov 27, 2018] 'Highly likely' that Magnitsky was poisoned by toxic chemicals on Bill Browder's orders

    [Nov 27, 2018] US Foreign Policy Has No Policy by Philip Giraldi

    [Nov 27, 2018] terms that carry with them implicit moral connotations. Investment implies an action, even a sacrifice, undertaken for a better future. It evokes a future positive outcome. Another words that reinforces neoliberal rationality is "growth", Modernization and

    [Nov 27, 2018] The Argentinian military coup, like those in Guatemala, Honduras, Brazil, Paraguay, Bolivia and Nicaragua, was sponsored by the US to protect and further its interests during the Cold War. By the 1970s neoliberalism was very much part of the menu; paramilitary governments were actively encouraged to practice neoliberal politics; neoliberalism was at this stage, what communism was to the Soviet Union

    [Nov 24, 2018] Anonymous Exposes UK-Led Psyop To Battle Russian Propaganda

    [Nov 24, 2018] British Government Runs Secret Anti-Russian Smear Campaigns

    [Nov 24, 2018] Now we know created MH17 smear campaign, who financial Steele dossier and created Skripal affair ;-)

    [Nov 24, 2018] When you are paid a lot of money to come up with plots psyops, you tend to come up with plots for psyops . The word entrapment comes to mind. Probably self-serving also.

    [Oct 25, 2018] Putin jokes with Bolton: Did the eagle eaten all the olives

    [Nov 22, 2018] Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Jewish Political Power

    [Nov 22, 2018] Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Zionist Political Power

    [Nov 14, 2018] Nationalism vs partiotism

    [Nov 12, 2018] The Best Way To Honor War Veterans Is To Stop Creating Them by Caitlin Johnstone

    [Nov 12, 2018] Protecting Americans from foreign influence, smells with COINTELPRO. Structural witch-hunt effect like during the McCarthy era is designed to supress decent to neoliberal oligarcy by Andre Damon and Joseph Kishore

    [Nov 10, 2018] US Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan Killed 500,000 by Jason Ditz

    [Nov 09, 2018] Globalism Vs Nationalism in Trump's America by Joe Quinn

    [Nov 10, 2018] US Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan Killed 500,000 by Jason Ditz

    [Oct 25, 2018] Putin jokes with Bolton: Did the eagle eaten all the olives

    [Oct 20, 2018] Cloak and Dagger by Israel Shamir

    [Oct 20, 2018] I am most encouraged by the apparent Putin's realisation that the First Strike is possible now if not even likely. If the Russians expect an attack they are much less likely to be totally surprised, as usual. In fact, never in history was such attack by the West more likely than now, for various reasons which would take a while to explain.

    [Oct 20, 2018] Cloak and Dagger by Israel Shamir

    [Oct 09, 2018] The Skripals Are an MI6 Hoax - 'Not Worthy of Ladies' Detective Novels' - Israeli Expert Demolishes UK Case

    [Oct 08, 2018] British intelligence now officially is a by-word for organized crime by John Wight

    [Oct 08, 2018] Hacking and Propaganda by Marcus Ranum

    [Oct 09, 2018] The Skripals Are an MI6 Hoax - 'Not Worthy of Ladies' Detective Novels' - Israeli Expert Demolishes UK Case

    [Oct 08, 2018] British intelligence now officially is a by-word for organized crime by John Wight

    [Oct 08, 2018] Hacking and Propaganda by Marcus Ranum

    [Sep 23, 2018] UK Begged Trump Not To Declassify Russia Docs; Cited Grave Concerns Over Steele Involvement

    [Sep 21, 2018] One party state: Trump's 'Opposition' Supports All His Evil Agendas While Attacking Fake Nonsence by Caitlin Johnstone

    [Sep 16, 2018] Perils of Ineptitude by Andrew Levin

    [Sep 16, 2018] I m delighted we can see the true face of American exceptionalism on display everyday. The last thing I want to see is back to normal.

    [Sep 23, 2018] UK Begged Trump Not To Declassify Russia Docs; Cited Grave Concerns Over Steele Involvement

    [Sep 21, 2018] One party state: Trump's 'Opposition' Supports All His Evil Agendas While Attacking Fake Nonsence by Caitlin Johnstone

    [Sep 16, 2018] Perils of Ineptitude by Andrew Levin

    [Sep 16, 2018] I m delighted we can see the true face of American exceptionalism on display everyday. The last thing I want to see is back to normal.

    [Sep 15, 2018] Why the US Seeks to Hem in Russia, China and Iran by Patrick Lawrence

    [Sep 15, 2018] BBC is skanky state propaganda

    [Sep 14, 2018] English Translation of Udo Ulfkotte s Bought Journalists Suppressed

    [Sep 15, 2018] Why the US Seeks to Hem in Russia, China and Iran by Patrick Lawrence

    [Sep 15, 2018] BBC is skanky state propaganda

    [Sep 14, 2018] English Translation of Udo Ulfkotte s Bought Journalists Suppressed

    [Sep 07, 2018] New York Times Undermining Peace Efforts by Sowing Suspicion by Diana Johnstone

    [Sep 02, 2018] Open letter to President Trump concerning the consequences of 11 September 2001 by Thierry Meyssan

    [Sep 02, 2018] Bill Browder (of Magnitsky fame) broke all these rules while pillaging Russia.

    [Sep 07, 2018] New York Times Undermining Peace Efforts by Sowing Suspicion by Diana Johnstone

    [Sep 02, 2018] Open letter to President Trump concerning the consequences of 11 September 2001 by Thierry Meyssan

    [Sep 02, 2018] Bill Browder (of Magnitsky fame) broke all these rules while pillaging Russia.

    [Aug 22, 2018] The CIA Owns the US and European Media by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Aug 22, 2018] The CIA Owns the US and European Media by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Aug 14, 2018] US Intelligence Community is Tearing the Country Apart from the Inside by Dmitry Orlov

    [Aug 13, 2018] Imperialism Is Alive and Kicking A Marxist Analysis of Neoliberal Capitalism by C.J. Polychroniou

    [Aug 11, 2018] President Trump the most important achivement

    [Aug 08, 2018] Sergei Skripal was linked to a consultant with former UK spy Christopher Steele's Orbis Business Intelligence

    [Aug 08, 2018] Ten Bombshell Revelations From Seymour Hersh's New Autobiography

    [Aug 05, 2018] Cooper was equally as unhinged as Boot: Neoliberal MSM is a real 1984 remake.

    [Jul 31, 2018] Is not the Awan affair a grave insult to the US "Intelligence Community?

    [Jul 20, 2018] What exactly is fake news caucus99percent

    [Jul 20, 2018] Is President Trump A Traitor Because He Wants Peace With Russia by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Jul 17, 2018] I think there is much more to the comment made by Putin regarding Bill Browder and his money flows into the DNC and Clinton campaign. That would explain why the DNC didn t hand the servers over to the FBI after being hacked.

    [Jul 16, 2018] Putin Claims U.S. Intelligence Agents Funneled $400K To Clinton Campaign Zero Hedge

    [Jul 03, 2018] When you see some really successful financial speculator like Soros or (or much smaller scale) Browder, search for links with intelligence services to explain the success or at least a part of it related to xUSSR space , LA and similar regions

    [Aug 14, 2018] US Intelligence Community is Tearing the Country Apart from the Inside by Dmitry Orlov

    [Aug 13, 2018] Imperialism Is Alive and Kicking A Marxist Analysis of Neoliberal Capitalism by C.J. Polychroniou

    [Aug 11, 2018] President Trump the most important achivement

    [Aug 08, 2018] Sergei Skripal was linked to a consultant with former UK spy Christopher Steele's Orbis Business Intelligence

    [Aug 08, 2018] Ten Bombshell Revelations From Seymour Hersh's New Autobiography

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

    [Aug 05, 2018] Cooper was equally as unhinged as Boot: Neoliberal MSM is a real 1984 remake.

    [Jul 31, 2018] Is not the Awan affair a grave insult to the US "Intelligence Community?

    [Jul 20, 2018] What exactly is fake news caucus99percent

    [Jul 20, 2018] Is President Trump A Traitor Because He Wants Peace With Russia by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Jul 17, 2018] I think there is much more to the comment made by Putin regarding Bill Browder and his money flows into the DNC and Clinton campaign. That would explain why the DNC didn t hand the servers over to the FBI after being hacked.

    [Jul 16, 2018] Putin Claims U.S. Intelligence Agents Funneled $400K To Clinton Campaign Zero Hedge

    [Jul 03, 2018] When you see some really successful financial speculator like Soros or (or much smaller scale) Browder, search for links with intelligence services to explain the success or at least a part of it related to xUSSR space , LA and similar regions

    [Jul 15, 2018] As if the Donald did not sanctioned to death the Russians on every possible level. How is this different from Mueller's and comp witch hunt against the Russians?

    [Jul 13, 2018] False flag operation covering DNC leaks now involves Mueller and his team

    [Jul 05, 2018] Britain's Most Censored Stories (Non-Military)

    [Jul 03, 2018] Russia has a lot of information about Lybia that could dig a political grave for Hillary. They did not release it

    [Jul 03, 2018] Musings II The "Intelligence Community," "Russian Interference," and Due Diligence

    [Jul 03, 2018] When you see some really successful financial speculator like Soros or (or much smaller scale) Browder, search for links with intelligence services to explain the success or at least a part of it related to xUSSR space , LA and similar regions

    [May 04, 2018] Media Use Disinformation To Accuse Russia Of Spreading Such by b

    [Apr 24, 2018] The Democratic Party has embraced the agenda of the military-intelligence apparatus and sought to become its main political voice

    [Jun 19, 2018] How The Last Superpower Was Unchained by Tom Engelhardt

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

    [Jun 17, 2018] the dominant political forces in EU are anti-Russia

    [Jun 17, 2018] The Necessity of a Trump-Putin Summit by Stephen F. Cohen

    [Jun 14, 2018] Problem with US and British MSM control of narrative

    [Jun 13, 2018] Sanction Trump not Bourbon

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

    [Jun 12, 2018] The real reason for which 'information apocalypse' terrifies the mainstream media

    [Jun 09, 2018] Still Waiting for Evidence of a Russian Hack by Ray McGovern

    [Jun 09, 2018] Spooks Spooking Themselves by Daniel Lazare

    [May 31, 2018] Journalists and academics expose UK's criminal actions in the Middle East by Julie Hyland

    [May 27, 2018] America's Fifth Column Will Destroy Russia by Paul Craig Roberts

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

    [May 24, 2018] The diversion of Russia Gate is a continuation of former diversions such as the Tea Party which was invented by the banksters to turn public anger over the big banking collapse and the resulting recession into a movement to gain more deregulation for tax breaks for the wealthy

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

    [May 22, 2018] Cat fight within the US elite getting more intense

    [May 04, 2018] Media Use Disinformation To Accuse Russia Of Spreading Such by b

    [May 03, 2018] Mueller's questions to Trump more those of a prosecuting attorney than of an impartial investigator by Alexander Mercouris

    [May 03, 2018] Skripal case British confirm they have no suspect; Yulia Skripal vanishes, no word of Sergey Skripal by Alexander Mercouris

    [May 03, 2018] Despite all the propaganda, all the hysterical headlines, all the blatantly biased coverage, the British haven't bought it

    [Apr 24, 2018] The Democratic Party has embraced the agenda of the military-intelligence apparatus and sought to become its main political voice

    [Apr 21, 2018] It s a tough old world and we are certainly capable of a Salisbury set-up and god knows what else in Syria.

    [Apr 15, 2018] The Trump Regime Is Insane by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Apr 21, 2018] It s a tough old world and we are certainly capable of a Salisbury set-up and god knows what else in Syria.

    [Apr 24, 2018] America's Men Without Chests by Paul Grenier

    [Apr 15, 2018] The Trump Regime Is Insane by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Apr 23, 2018] The Tony Blair Rule: The Truth Takes 15 Years to Come Out, Skripal Countdown Starts Now - Simonyan

    [Apr 21, 2018] It s a tough old world and we are certainly capable of a Salisbury set-up and god knows what else in Syria.

    [Apr 20, 2018] Stench of hypocrisy British 'war on terror' strategic ties with radical Islam by John Wight

    [Apr 18, 2018] The Great American Unspooling Is Upon Us

    [Apr 16, 2018] British Propaganda and Disinformation An Imperial and Colonial Tradition by Wayne MADSEN

    [Apr 11, 2018] Female neocon warmongers from Fox look like plastered brick walls – heartless and brainless.

    [Apr 10, 2018] The Ghouta Massacre near Damascus on Aug 21, 2013 was not a sarin rocket attack carried out by Assad or his supporters. It was a false-flag stunt carried out by the insurgents using carbon monoxide or cyanide to murder children and use their corpses as bait to lure the Americans into attacking Assad.

    [Apr 09, 2018] When Military Leaders Have Reckless Disregard for the Truth by Bruce Fein

    [Apr 05, 2018] The Three Most Important Aspects of the Skripal Case so Far and Where They by Rob Slane

    [Apr 05, 2018] An Interview with Retired Russian General Evgeny Buzhinsky The National Interest

    [Apr 03, 2018] This Washington Post Headline Is Fake News

    [Apr 03, 2018] Exercise TOXIC DAGGER - the sharp end of chemical warfare

    [Apr 02, 2018] Russophobia Anti-Russian Lobby and American Foreign Policy by A. Tsygankov

    [Apr 02, 2018] Russia 'Novichok' Hysteria Proves Politicians and Media Haven't Learned the Lessons of Iraq by Patrick Henningsen

    [Apr 02, 2018] The Litvinenko Conspiracy

    [Apr 01, 2018] UK may have staged Skripal poisoning to rally people against Russia, Moscow believes

    [Mar 31, 2018] FBI Director Mueller testified to Congress that Saddam Hussein was responsible for anthrax attack! That was Mueller's role in selling the "intelligence" to invade Iraq.

    [Mar 17, 2018] How the gas was administred in a place which was under surveillance and why passersby were not affected

    [Mar 15, 2018] The UK will promptly expel 23 Russian diplomats without waiting for the end of the investigation

    [Mar 10, 2018] Meier might have discovered that his subject had been, as it were, 'top supporting actor' in the first fumbling attempt by Christopher Steele et al to produce a plausible-sounding scenario as to the background to Litvinenko s death.

    [Mar 10, 2018] There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this

    [Feb 08, 2018] Try Googling Riggs Bank – a lot of interesting information emerges, on matters such as their involvement with Prince Bandar. So, what we are dealing with is a joint Anglo-American attempt to create a comprador oligarchy who could loot Russia s raw materials resources

    [Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies

    [Dec 31, 2017] Is [neo]Liberalism a Dying Faith by Pat Buchanan

    [Dec 31, 2017] What Happens When A Russiagate Skeptic Debates A Professional Russiagater

    [Dec 28, 2017] How CrowdStrike placed malware in DNC hacked servers by Alex Christoforou

    [Mar 27, 2018] Indian Punchline - Reflections on foreign affairs by M K Bhadrakumar

    [Mar 27, 2018] Perfidious Albion The Fatally Wounded British Beast Lashes Out by Barbara Boyd

    [Mar 25, 2018] A truly historical month for the future of our planet by The Saker

    [Mar 25, 2018] Cambridge Analytica Scandal Rockets to Watergate Proportions and Beyond by Adam Garrie

    [Mar 24, 2018] Why the UK, the EU and the US Gang-Up on Russia by James Petras

    [Mar 23, 2018] Inglorious end of career of neocon McMaster

    [Mar 22, 2018] If it's correct, the Brits made a very nasty error that shows the true nature of their establishment.

    [Mar 22, 2018] Vladimir Putin: nonsense to think Russia would poison spy in UK

    [Mar 21, 2018] Arafat and Litvinenko: an Interesting Turn to a Mysterious Story

    [Mar 21, 2018] Washington's Invasion of Iraq at Fifteen

    [Mar 21, 2018] Whataboutism Is A Nonsensical Propaganda Term Used To Defend The Failed Status Quo by Mike Krieger

    [Feb 07, 2020] How They Sold the Iraq War by Jeffrey St. Clair

    [Mar 17, 2018] How the gas was administred in a place which was under surveillance and why passersby were not affected

    [Mar 15, 2018] The UK will promptly expel 23 Russian diplomats without waiting for the end of the investigation

    [Mar 10, 2018] Meier might have discovered that his subject had been, as it were, 'top supporting actor' in the first fumbling attempt by Christopher Steele et al to produce a plausible-sounding scenario as to the background to Litvinenko s death.

    [Mar 10, 2018] There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this

    [Feb 08, 2018] Try Googling Riggs Bank – a lot of interesting information emerges, on matters such as their involvement with Prince Bandar. So, what we are dealing with is a joint Anglo-American attempt to create a comprador oligarchy who could loot Russia s raw materials resources

    [Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies

    [Dec 31, 2017] Is [neo]Liberalism a Dying Faith by Pat Buchanan

    [Dec 31, 2017] What Happens When A Russiagate Skeptic Debates A Professional Russiagater

    [Dec 28, 2017] How CrowdStrike placed malware in DNC hacked servers by Alex Christoforou

    [Mar 16, 2018] Corbyn Calls for Evidence in Escalating Poison Row

    [Mar 16, 2018] NATO to display common front in Skripal case

    [Mar 16, 2018] Are We Living Under a Military Coup ?

    [Mar 15, 2018] The UK will promptly expel 23 Russian diplomats without waiting for the end of the investigation

    [Mar 14, 2018] Russian UN anvoy> alleged the Salisbury attack was a false-flag attack, possibly by the UK itself, intended to harm Russia s reputation by Julian Borger

    [Mar 14, 2018] UNSC holds urgent meeting over Salisbury attack

    [Mar 14, 2018] Jefferson Morley on the CIA and Mossad Tradeoffs in the Formation of the US-Israel Strategic Relationship

    [Mar 12, 2018] New Huge Anti-Russian Provocation ahead of Russian election by Robert Stevens

    [Mar 11, 2018] Washington s Century-long War on Russia by Mike Whitney

    [Mar 11, 2018] Reality Check: The Guardian Restarts Push for Regime Change in Russia by Kit

    [Mar 11, 2018] The Elephant In The Room by Craig Murray

    [Mar 11, 2018] It is highly probably that Steele and Skripal knew each other

    [Mar 11, 2018] Ramping Russophobia is the most convincing motive for the Skripal attack

    [Mar 10, 2018] Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in Obama policy and HRC campaign long before any Steele s Dossier. This was a program ofunleashing cold War II

    [Mar 10, 2018] From Yeltsin to Putin: Chubais, Liberal Pathology, and Harvard's Criminal Record

    [Mar 10, 2018] There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this

    [Mar 08, 2018] Cue bono question in Scripal case?

    [Mar 08, 2018] In recent years, there has been ample evidence that US policy-makers and, equally important, mainstream media commentators do not bother to read what Putin says, or at least not more than snatches from click-bait wire-service reports.

    [Mar 06, 2018] The U.S. Returns to 'Great Power Competition,' With a Dangerous New Edge

    [Mar 06, 2018] The current anti-Russian sentiment in the West as hysterical. But this hysteria is concentrated at the top level of media elite and neocons. Behind it is no deep sense of unity or national resolve. In fact we see the reverse - most Western countries are deeply divided within themselves due to the crisis of neolineralism.

    [Mar 04, 2018] Generals who now are running the USA foreign policy represents a great danger. These men seem incapable of rising above the Russophobia that grew in the atmosphere of the Cold War. They yearn for world hegemony for the US and to see Russia and to a lesser extent China and Iran as obstacles to that dominion for the "city on a hill

    [Feb 26, 2018] Democrat Memo Lays Egg by Publius Tacitus

    [Feb 26, 2018] Why one war when we can heve two! by Eric Margolis

    [Feb 23, 2018] NSA Genius Debunks Russiagate Once For All

    [Feb 22, 2018] Bill Binney explodes the rile of 17 agances security assessment memo in launching the Russia witch-hunt

    [Feb 20, 2018] For the life of me I cannot figure why Americans want a war/conflict with Russia

    [Feb 20, 2018] Russophobia is a futile bid to conceal US, European demise by Finian Cunningham

    [Feb 19, 2018] Nunes FBI and DOJ Perps Could Be Put on Trial by Ray McGovern

    [Feb 19, 2018] The Russiagate Intelligence Wars What We Do and Don't Know

    [Feb 19, 2018] Russian Meddling Was a Drop in an Ocean of American-made Discord by AMANDA TAUB and MAX FISHER

    [Feb 18, 2018] This dangerous escalation of tensions with Russia is extremely lucrative for the war profiteers, the retired generals intelligence members who prostitute themselves as media pundits, the members of Congress who get $$$ from the war profiteers, and the corporate media which thrives on links to the war profiteers as well as on war reporting

    [Feb 16, 2018] A Dangerous Turn in U.S. Foreign Policy

    [Feb 16, 2018] The Deep Staters care first and foremost about themselves.

    [Feb 14, 2018] Recused Judge in Flynn Prosecution Served on FISA Court

    [Feb 14, 2018] A Russian Trump by Israel Shamir

    [Feb 12, 2018] The Age of Lunacy: The Doomsday Machine

    [Feb 12, 2018] Too many sport disciplines, too much cheating, too much money and too many politics involved in the Olympic

    [Feb 12, 2018] Ike's Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex Is Alive and Very Well by William J. Astore

    [Feb 11, 2018] How Russiagate fiasco destroys Kremlin moderates, accelerating danger for a hot war

    [Feb 10, 2018] More on neoliberal newspeak of US propaganda machine

    [Feb 09, 2018] Professor Stephen F. Cohen Rethinking Putin – A critical reading, by The Saker - The Unz Review

    [Feb 08, 2018] Control of narrative means that creation of the simplistic picture in which the complexities of the world are elided in favor of 'good guys' vs. 'bad guys' dichotomy

    [Jan 30, 2018] Washington Reaches New Heights of Insanity with the "Kremlin Report" by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Jan 30, 2018] The Unseen Wars of America the Empire The American Conservative

    [Jan 28, 2018] Russiagate Isn t About Trump, And It Isn t Even Ultimately About Russia by Caitlyn Johnstone

    [Jan 27, 2018] The Rich Also Cry by Israel Shamir

    [Jan 26, 2018] Warns The Russiagate Stakes Are Extreme by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Jan 25, 2018] Russiagate as Kafka 2.0

    [Jan 24, 2018] Brazen Plot To Exonerate Hillary Clinton And Frame Trump Unraveling, Says Former Fed Prosecutor

    [Jan 22, 2018] Pentagon Unveils Strategy for Military Confrontation With Russia and China by Bill Van Auken

    [Jan 17, 2018] Neoconning the Trump White House by Kelley Beaucar Vlahos

    [Jan 16, 2018] The Russia Explainer

    [May 11, 2019] Why Crowdstrike's Russian Hacking Story Fell Apart -- Say Hello to Fancy Bear

    [Jan 06, 2018] Russia-gate Breeds Establishment McCarthyism by Robert Parry

    [Jan 02, 2018] The Still-Missing Evidence of Russia-gate by Dennis J. Bernstein

    [Jan 02, 2018] Some investigators ask a sensible question: "It is likely that all the Russians involved in the attempt to influence the 2016 election were lying, scheming, Kremlin-linked, Putin-backed enemies of America except the Russians who talked to Christopher Steele?"

    [Jan 02, 2018] Neocon warmongers should be treated as rapists by Andrew J. Bacevich

    [Jan 02, 2018] What We Don t Talk about When We Talk about Russian Hacking by Jackson Lears

    [Jan 02, 2018] Jill Stein in the Cross-hairs by Mike Whitney

    [Jan 02, 2018] Who Is the Real Enemy by Philip Giraldi

    [Jan 01, 2018] Putin Foresaw Death of US Global Power by Finian Cunningham

    [Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies

    [Dec 31, 2017] Is [neo]Liberalism a Dying Faith by Pat Buchanan

    [Sep 17, 2017] The So-called Russian Hack of the DNC Does Not Make Sense by Publius Tacitus

    [Jul 17, 2017] Tucker Carlson Goes to War Against the Neocons by Curt Mills

    [Jul 12, 2017] Stephen Cohens Remarks on Tucker Carlson Last Night Were Extraordinary

    [Jun 24, 2017] The Criminal Laws of Counterinsurgency by Todd E. Pierce

    [Dec 21, 2019] Trump administration sanction companies involved in laying the remaining pipe, and also companies involved in the infrastructure around the arrival point.

    [Dec 21, 2019] Lessons of the past: all changed in 1999 with the war in Kosovo. For the first time I witnessed shocking images of civilian targets being bombed, TV stations, trains, bridges. The NATO spokesman boasted of hundreds of Serbian tanks being destroyed. There was something new and disturbing about his manner, language and tone, something I'd not encountered from coverage of previous conflicts. For the first time I found myself not believing one word of the narrative

    [Dec 21, 2019] Trump comes clean from world s policeman to thug running a global protection racket by Finian Cunningham

    [Dec 21, 2019] Time to Terminate Washington's Defense Welfare

    [Dec 21, 2019] The Pentagon s New Map War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century

    [Dec 21, 2019] We are all Palestinians: possible connection between neocons and Pentagon

    [Dec 21, 2019] The ruthless neo-colonialists of 21st century

    [Dec 21, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives

    [Dec 21, 2019] Trump administration sanction companies involved in laying the remaining pipe, and also companies involved in the infrastructure around the arrival point.

    [Dec 21, 2019] Lessons of the past: all changed in 1999 with the war in Kosovo. For the first time I witnessed shocking images of civilian targets being bombed, TV stations, trains, bridges. The NATO spokesman boasted of hundreds of Serbian tanks being destroyed. There was something new and disturbing about his manner, language and tone, something I'd not encountered from coverage of previous conflicts. For the first time I found myself not believing one word of the narrative

    [Dec 21, 2019] Trump comes clean from world s policeman to thug running a global protection racket by Finian Cunningham

    [Dec 21, 2019] Time to Terminate Washington's Defense Welfare

    [Dec 21, 2019] The Pentagon s New Map War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century

    [Dec 21, 2019] We are all Palestinians: possible connection between neocons and Pentagon

    [Dec 21, 2019] The ruthless neo-colonialists of 21st century

    [Dec 21, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives

    [Dec 19, 2019] MIC lobbyism (which often is presented as patriotism) is the last refuge of scoundrels

    [Dec 19, 2019] A the core of color revolution against Trump is Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine

    [Dec 19, 2019] A joint French-Ukrainian journalistic investigation into a huge money laundering scheme using various shadow banking organizations in Austria and Switzerland, benefiting Clinton friendly Ukrainian oligarchs and of course the Clinton Foundation.

    [Dec 18, 2019] Rudy Giuliani Yovanovitch Was Part Of The Cover-Up, She Had To Be Ousted

    [Dec 17, 2019] Neocons like car salespeople have a stereotypical reputation for lacking credibility because ther profession is to lie in order to sell weapons to the publin, much like used car saleme lie to sell cars

    [Dec 15, 2019] The infinity war - The Washington Post by Samuel Moyn, Stephen Wertheim

    [Dec 14, 2019] A Determined Effort to Undermine Russia

    [Dec 07, 2019] Why the foreign policy establishment consensus is neocon by default.

    [Dec 06, 2019] The USA is an occupied by neocon country

    [Dec 06, 2019] Who Is Making US Foreign Policy by Stephen F. Cohen

    [Dec 04, 2019] Ukrainegaters claim that Trump Reduced the USA empire 'Global Commitments' was fraudulent from the very beginning. Trump is yet another imperial president who favours the "Full spectrum Dominance; The problem is that the time when the USA can have it are in the past. Europe finally recovered from WWII losses and that alone dooms the idea

    [Dec 02, 2019] The cost of militarism cannot be measured only in lost opportunities, lives and money. There will be a long hangover of shame

    [Dec 19, 2019] MIC lobbyism (which often is presented as patriotism) is the last refuge of scoundrels

    [Dec 19, 2019] A the core of color revolution against Trump is Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine

    [Dec 19, 2019] A joint French-Ukrainian journalistic investigation into a huge money laundering scheme using various shadow banking organizations in Austria and Switzerland, benefiting Clinton friendly Ukrainian oligarchs and of course the Clinton Foundation.

    [Dec 17, 2019] Neocons like car salespeople have a stereotypical reputation for lacking credibility because ther profession is to lie in order to sell weapons to the publin, much like used car saleme lie to sell cars

    [Dec 15, 2019] The infinity war - The Washington Post by Samuel Moyn, Stephen Wertheim

    [Dec 14, 2019] A Determined Effort to Undermine Russia

    [May 11, 2019] Christopher Steele, FBI s Confidential Human Source by Publius Tacitus

    [May 11, 2019] CIA Paid $100,000 To Shadowy Russian For Dirt on Trump, Including Sex Video by Chuck Ross

    [Dec 07, 2019] Why the foreign policy establishment consensus is neocon by default.

    [Dec 06, 2019] The USA is an occupied by neocon country

    [Dec 06, 2019] Who Is Making US Foreign Policy by Stephen F. Cohen

    [Dec 04, 2019] Ukrainegaters claim that Trump Reduced the USA empire 'Global Commitments' was fraudulent from the very beginning. Trump is yet another imperial president who favours the "Full spectrum Dominance; The problem is that the time when the USA can have it are in the past. Europe finally recovered from WWII losses and that alone dooms the idea

    [Dec 02, 2019] The cost of militarism cannot be measured only in lost opportunities, lives and money. There will be a long hangover of shame

    [Nov 29, 2019] Where s the Collusion

    [Nov 29, 2019] Where s the Collusion

    [Nov 21, 2019] The deep state is individuals INSIDE the government that do the bidding of the banksters, the military-industrial complex, the globalists and other nefarious interests

    [Nov 03, 2019] How Controlling Syria s Oil Serves Washington s Strategic Objectives by Nauman Sadiq

    [Oct 28, 2019] Expert Panel Finds Gaping Plot-Holes In OPCW Report On Alleged Syrian Chemical Attack by Caitlin Johnstone

    [Nov 21, 2019] The deep state is individuals INSIDE the government that do the bidding of the banksters, the military-industrial complex, the globalists and other nefarious interests

    [Nov 03, 2019] How Controlling Syria s Oil Serves Washington s Strategic Objectives by Nauman Sadiq

    [Oct 28, 2019] Expert Panel Finds Gaping Plot-Holes In OPCW Report On Alleged Syrian Chemical Attack by Caitlin Johnstone

    [Oct 26, 2019] The Plundering of Ukraine by Corrupt American Democrats by Israel Shamir

    [Oct 24, 2019] Joltin' Jack Keane wants your kids to fight Russia and Syria over Syrian oil by Colonel Patrick Lang

    [Oct 23, 2019] The treason of the intellectuals The Undoing of Thought by Roger Kimball

    [Oct 23, 2019] Neoconservatism Is An Omnicidal Death Cult, And It Must Be Stopped by Caitlin Johnstone

    [Oct 20, 2019] Putin sarcastic remark on Western neoliberal multiculturalism

    [Oct 20, 2019] How did the United States become so involved in Ukraine's torturous and famously corrupt politics? The short answer is NATO expansion

    [Oct 26, 2019] The Plundering of Ukraine by Corrupt American Democrats by Israel Shamir

    [Oct 24, 2019] Joltin' Jack Keane wants your kids to fight Russia and Syria over Syrian oil by Colonel Patrick Lang

    [Oct 23, 2019] The treason of the intellectuals The Undoing of Thought by Roger Kimball

    [Oct 23, 2019] Neoconservatism Is An Omnicidal Death Cult, And It Must Be Stopped by Caitlin Johnstone

    [Oct 20, 2019] How did the United States become so involved in Ukraine's torturous and famously corrupt politics? The short answer is NATO expansion

    [Oct 10, 2019] There is no reason that anyone should treat George Bush with respect: he is a war criminal, who escaped justice

    [Oct 20, 2019] Putin sarcastic remark on Western neoliberal multiculturalism

    [Oct 10, 2019] There is no reason that anyone should treat George Bush with respect: he is a war criminal, who escaped justice

    [Sep 22, 2019] US reconnaissance plane operated drones that attacked Hmeymim

    [Sep 22, 2019] It was neoliberalism that won the cold war

    [Sep 20, 2019] Trump Whistleblower Drama Puts Biden In The Hot Seat Over Ukraine

    [Sep 18, 2019] To End Endless Wars, We Must Give Up Hegemony by Daniel Larison

    [Sep 17, 2019] The Devolution of US-Russia Relations by Tony Kevin

    [Sep 12, 2019] The Brain-Dead Maximalism of [neocon] Hard-liners by Daniel Larison

    [Sep 10, 2019] The idea tha the USA won the Cold War is questionable

    [Sep 10, 2019] It s all about Gene Sharp and seeping neoliberal regime change using Western logistical support, money, NGO and intelligence agencies and MSM as the leverage

    [Sep 22, 2019] US reconnaissance plane operated drones that attacked Hmeymim

    [Sep 22, 2019] Shoigu calls US belief in its superiority the major threat to Russia and other states

    [Sep 22, 2019] It was neoliberalism that won the cold war

    [Sep 20, 2019] Trump Whistleblower Drama Puts Biden In The Hot Seat Over Ukraine

    [Sep 18, 2019] To End Endless Wars, We Must Give Up Hegemony by Daniel Larison

    [Sep 17, 2019] The Devolution of US-Russia Relations by Tony Kevin

    [Sep 15, 2019] Demythologizing the Roots of the New Cold War by Ted Snider

    [Sep 12, 2019] The Brain-Dead Maximalism of [neocon] Hard-liners by Daniel Larison

    [Sep 10, 2019] The idea tha the USA won the Cold War is questionable

    [Sep 10, 2019] It s all about Gene Sharp and seeping neoliberal regime change using Western logistical support, money, NGO and intelligence agencies and MSM as the leverage

    [Aug 27, 2019] House Niggers Mutiny by Israel Shamir

    [Aug 24, 2019] Peace plan for eastern Ukraine As divisive as the causes of the war by Fred Weir

    [Aug 17, 2019] Putin-Trump Derangement Syndrome (PTDS)

    [Aug 17, 2019] The Unraveling of the Failed Trump Coup by Larry C Johnson

    [Aug 17, 2019] Debunking the Putin Panic by Stephen F. Cohen

    [Jul 29, 2019] Peace in Ukraine by Stephen F. Cohen

    [Jul 28, 2019] Antisemitism prejudices projection on Russians

    [Aug 27, 2019] House Niggers Mutiny by Israel Shamir

    [Aug 24, 2019] Peace plan for eastern Ukraine As divisive as the causes of the war by Fred Weir

    [Aug 17, 2019] The Unraveling of the Failed Trump Coup by Larry C Johnson

    [Aug 17, 2019] Debunking the Putin Panic by Stephen F. Cohen

    [Aug 17, 2019] Putin-Trump Derangement Syndrome (PTDS)

    [Jul 23, 2019] John Helmer MH17 Evidence Tampering Revealed by Malaysia – FBI Attempt To Seize Black Boxes; Dutch Cover-Up of Forged Telephon

    [Jul 23, 2019] Ukraine Election - Voters Defeat Second Color Revolution

    [Jul 29, 2019] Peace in Ukraine by Stephen F. Cohen

    [Jul 28, 2019] Antisemitism prejudices projection on Russians

    [Jul 13, 2019] Mueller Does Not Have Evidence That The IRA Was Part of Russian Government Meddling by Larry C Johnson

    [Jul 09, 2019] Epstein and the conversion of politicians into "corrupt and vulnerable" brand

    [Jul 06, 2019] Why is Iran such a high priority for US elite? Because Iran successfully booted out the CIA and CIA-imposed regime out of their country and successfully remained independent since then

    [Jul 06, 2019] In practice, the USSR behaved exactly like a brutal totalitarian theocracy

    [Jul 05, 2019] Globalisation- the rise and fall of an idea that swept the world - World news by Nikil Saval

    [Jul 05, 2019] The World Bank and IMF 2019 by Michael Hudson and Bonnie Faulkner

    [Jun 29, 2019] Latest Weapon Of US Imperialism Liquified Natural Gas

    [Jul 23, 2019] John Helmer MH17 Evidence Tampering Revealed by Malaysia – FBI Attempt To Seize Black Boxes; Dutch Cover-Up of Forged Telephon

    [Jul 23, 2019] Ukraine Election - Voters Defeat Second Color Revolution

    [Jul 13, 2019] Mueller Does Not Have Evidence That The IRA Was Part of Russian Government Meddling by Larry C Johnson

    [Jul 09, 2019] Epstein and the conversion of politicians into "corrupt and vulnerable" brand

    [Jul 06, 2019] Why is Iran such a high priority for US elite? Because Iran successfully booted out the CIA and CIA-imposed regime out of their country and successfully remained independent since then

    [Jul 06, 2019] In practice, the USSR behaved exactly like a brutal totalitarian theocracy

    [Jul 05, 2019] Globalisation- the rise and fall of an idea that swept the world - World news by Nikil Saval

    [Jul 05, 2019] The World Bank and IMF 2019 by Michael Hudson and Bonnie Faulkner

    [Jun 28, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard vs Bolton

    [Jun 27, 2019] The Ongoing Restructuring of the Greater Middle East by C.J. Hopkins

    [Jun 29, 2019] Latest Weapon Of US Imperialism Liquified Natural Gas

    [Jun 27, 2019] The Ongoing Restructuring of the Greater Middle East by C.J. Hopkins

    [Jun 22, 2019] Why The Empire Is Failing The Horrid Hubris Of The Albright Doctrine by Doug Bandow

    [Jun 22, 2019] Bolton Calls For Forceful Iranian Response To Continuing US Aggression

    [Jun 21, 2019] America's Confrontation With Iran Goes Deeper Than Trump by Trita Parsi

    [Jun 21, 2019] Russia accuses U.S. of pushing Iran situation to brink of war RIA - Reuters

    [Jun 20, 2019] Chuck Schumer 'The American People Deserve A President Who Can More Credibly Justify War With Iran'

    [Jun 09, 2019] The looming 100-year US-China conflict by Martin Wolf

    [May 31, 2019] Mahathir bin Mohamad, Prime Minister of Malaysia, in an interview with FCCJ (Foreign Correspondents' Club of Japan) stated that he did not believe in Russia's involvement in the crash of the Boeing MH17

    [May 28, 2019] Any time you read an article (or a comment) on Russia, substitute the word Jew for Russian and International Jewry for Russia and re-read.

    [May 22, 2019] NATO has pushed eastward right up to its borders and threatened to incorporate regions that have been part of Russia's sphere of influence -- and its defense perimeter -- for centuries

    [May 20, 2019] "Us" Versus "Them"

    [May 19, 2019] Intel agencies of the UK and US are guilty of fabricating evidence, breaking the laws (certainly of the targeted countries, but also of the UK and US), providing fake analysis and operating as evil actors on the dark side of humanity

    [Jun 20, 2019] Chuck Schumer 'The American People Deserve A President Who Can More Credibly Justify War With Iran'

    [Jun 22, 2019] Bolton Calls For Forceful Iranian Response To Continuing US Aggression

    [Jun 21, 2019] America's Confrontation With Iran Goes Deeper Than Trump by Trita Parsi

    [Jun 21, 2019] Russia accuses U.S. of pushing Iran situation to brink of war RIA - Reuters

    [Jun 09, 2019] The looming 100-year US-China conflict by Martin Wolf

    [Jun 22, 2019] Why The Empire Is Failing The Horrid Hubris Of The Albright Doctrine by Doug Bandow

    [May 31, 2019] Mahathir bin Mohamad, Prime Minister of Malaysia, in an interview with FCCJ (Foreign Correspondents' Club of Japan) stated that he did not believe in Russia's involvement in the crash of the Boeing MH17

    [May 28, 2019] Any time you read an article (or a comment) on Russia, substitute the word Jew for Russian and International Jewry for Russia and re-read.

    [May 22, 2019] NATO has pushed eastward right up to its borders and threatened to incorporate regions that have been part of Russia's sphere of influence -- and its defense perimeter -- for centuries

    [May 20, 2019] "Us" Versus "Them"

    [May 19, 2019] Intel agencies of the UK and US are guilty of fabricating evidence, breaking the laws (certainly of the targeted countries, but also of the UK and US), providing fake analysis and operating as evil actors on the dark side of humanity

    [May 14, 2019] iJews and the Left-i by Philip Mendes A Review, by Brenton Sanderson - The Unz Review

    [May 14, 2019] Despite a $ 22 Trillion National Debt, America Is on a Military Spending Spree. 800 Overseas US Military Bases by Masud Wadan

    [May 13, 2019] US Foreign Policy as Bellicose as Ever by Serge Halimi

    [May 12, 2019] Charting a Progressive Foreign Policy for the Trump Era and Beyond

    [May 11, 2019] Why Crowdstrike's Russian Hacking Story Fell Apart -- Say Hello to Fancy Bear

    [May 08, 2019] Obama Spied on Other Republicans and Democrats As Well by Larry C Johnson

    [May 07, 2019] Chris Hedges: The Demonization of Russia is Driven by Defense Contractors

    [May 05, 2019] The Left Needs to Stop Crushing on the Generals by Danny Sjursen

    [May 02, 2019] Neoliberalism and the Globalization of War. America s Hegemonic Project by Prof Michel Chossudovsky

    [May 02, 2019] Russian and Eurasian Politics by Gordon M. Hahn

    [Apr 29, 2019] The Mueller Report Indicts the Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theory by Aaron Maté

    [Apr 28, 2019] The British Role in Russiagate Is About to Be Fully Exposed

    [Apr 26, 2019] Jared Kushner, Not Maria Butina, Is America's Real Foreign Agent by Philip Giraldi

    [Apr 22, 2019] FBI top brass have been colluding with top brass of CIA and MI6 to pursue ambitious anti-Russian agenda

    [Apr 22, 2019] Current Neo-McCarthyism hysteria as a smoke screen of the UK and the USA intent to dominate European geopolitics and weaken Russia and Germany

    [Apr 21, 2019] Psywar: Propaganda during Iraq war and beyond

    [Apr 21, 2019] John Brennan's Police State USA

    [Apr 21, 2019] Deciphering Trumps Foreign Policy by Oscar Silva-Valladares

    [Apr 21, 2019] Whenever someone inconveniences the neoliberal oligarchy, the entire neoliberal MSM mafia tells us 24 x7 how evil and disgusting that person is. It's true of the leader of every nation which rejects neoliberal globalization as well as for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange

    [May 14, 2019] iJews and the Left-i by Philip Mendes A Review, by Brenton Sanderson - The Unz Review

    [May 14, 2019] Despite a $ 22 Trillion National Debt, America Is on a Military Spending Spree. 800 Overseas US Military Bases by Masud Wadan

    [May 13, 2019] US Foreign Policy as Bellicose as Ever by Serge Halimi

    [May 12, 2019] Charting a Progressive Foreign Policy for the Trump Era and Beyond

    [May 11, 2019] Why Crowdstrike's Russian Hacking Story Fell Apart -- Say Hello to Fancy Bear

    [May 11, 2019] Christopher Steele, FBI s Confidential Human Source by Publius Tacitus

    [May 11, 2019] CIA Paid $100,000 To Shadowy Russian For Dirt on Trump, Including Sex Video by Chuck Ross

    [May 08, 2019] Obama Spied on Other Republicans and Democrats As Well by Larry C Johnson

    [May 07, 2019] Chris Hedges: The Demonization of Russia is Driven by Defense Contractors

    [May 02, 2019] Neoliberalism and the Globalization of War. America s Hegemonic Project by Prof Michel Chossudovsky

    [May 02, 2019] Russian and Eurasian Politics by Gordon M. Hahn

    [Aug 19, 2020] Some Shocking Facts on the Concentration of Ownership of the US Economy

    [Apr 29, 2019] The Mueller Report Indicts the Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theory by Aaron Maté

    [Apr 28, 2019] The British Role in Russiagate Is About to Be Fully Exposed

    [Apr 26, 2019] Jared Kushner, Not Maria Butina, Is America's Real Foreign Agent by Philip Giraldi

    [Apr 22, 2019] FBI top brass have been colluding with top brass of CIA and MI6 to pursue ambitious anti-Russian agenda

    [Apr 22, 2019] Current Neo-McCarthyism hysteria as a smoke screen of the UK and the USA intent to dominate European geopolitics and weaken Russia and Germany

    [Apr 21, 2019] Psywar: Propaganda during Iraq war and beyond

    [Apr 21, 2019] John Brennan's Police State USA

    [Apr 21, 2019] Deciphering Trumps Foreign Policy by Oscar Silva-Valladares

    [Apr 21, 2019] Whenever someone inconveniences the neoliberal oligarchy, the entire neoliberal MSM mafia tells us 24 x7 how evil and disgusting that person is. It's true of the leader of every nation which rejects neoliberal globalization as well as for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange

    [Apr 16, 2019] The incompetent, the corrupt, the treacherous -- not just walking free, but with reputations intact, fat bank balances, and flourishing careers. Now they re angling for war with Iran.

    [Apr 16, 2019] CIA Director Used Fake Skripal Incident Photos To Manipulate Trump

    [Apr 15, 2019] War is the force that gives America its meaning.

    [Apr 15, 2019] I wonder if the Middle East is nothing more than a live-fire laboratory for the military

    [Apr 13, 2019] America as a Myth of good life is a powerful tool of color revolutions

    [Apr 13, 2019] Russophobia, A WMD (Weapon Of Mass Deception) by Jean Ranc

    [Apr 12, 2019] Putin was KGB agent crowd forgets that Bush Sr was long time senior CIA operative and the director of CIA

    [Apr 10, 2019] Habakkuk on cockroaches and the New York Times

    [Apr 09, 2019] NYT: It Is, in Fact, All About the Benjamins by Philip Weiss

    [Apr 06, 2019] The Magnitsky Act-Behind the Scenes ASEEES

    [Apr 06, 2019] Trump is for socialism but only when it comes to funding US military industry Tulsi Gabbard

    [Apr 04, 2019] How Brzezinski's Chessboard degenerated into Brennan's Russophobia by Mike Whitney

    [Apr 03, 2019] Suspected of Corruption at Home, Powerful Foreigners Find Refuge in the US

    [Apr 02, 2019] 'Yats' Is No Longer the Guy by Robert Parry

    [Apr 01, 2019] Amazon.com War with Russia From Putin Ukraine to Trump Russiagate (9781510745810) Stephen F. Cohen Books

    [Mar 31, 2019] What is the purpose of Russiagate hysteria?

    [Mar 30, 2019] The US desperately needs Venezuelan oil

    [Mar 30, 2019] The Real Costs of Russiagate

    [Mar 24, 2019] The accountability that must follow Mueller's report

    [Mar 20, 2019] In a remarkable report by British Channel 4, former CIA officials and a Reuters correspondent spoke candidly about the systematic dissemination of propaganda and misinformation in reporting on geopolitical conflicts

    [May 02, 2019] Neoliberalism and the Globalization of War. America s Hegemonic Project by Prof Michel Chossudovsky

    [Apr 16, 2019] The incompetent, the corrupt, the treacherous -- not just walking free, but with reputations intact, fat bank balances, and flourishing careers. Now they re angling for war with Iran.

    [Apr 16, 2019] CIA Director Used Fake Skripal Incident Photos To Manipulate Trump

    [Apr 15, 2019] War is the force that gives America its meaning.

    [Apr 15, 2019] I wonder if the Middle East is nothing more than a live-fire laboratory for the military

    [Apr 13, 2019] America as a Myth of good life is a powerful tool of color revolutions

    [Apr 13, 2019] Russophobia, A WMD (Weapon Of Mass Deception) by Jean Ranc

    [Apr 12, 2019] Putin was KGB agent crowd forgets that Bush Sr was long time senior CIA operative and the director of CIA

    [Apr 10, 2019] Habakkuk on cockroaches and the New York Times

    [Apr 09, 2019] NYT: It Is, in Fact, All About the Benjamins by Philip Weiss

    [Apr 06, 2019] The Magnitsky Act-Behind the Scenes ASEEES

    [Apr 06, 2019] Trump is for socialism but only when it comes to funding US military industry Tulsi Gabbard

    [Apr 15, 2019] War is the force that gives America its meaning.

    [Apr 15, 2019] I wonder if the Middle East is nothing more than a live-fire laboratory for the military

    [Dec 21, 2019] The ruthless neo-colonialists of 21st century

    [Apr 04, 2019] How Brzezinski's Chessboard degenerated into Brennan's Russophobia by Mike Whitney

    [Apr 03, 2019] Suspected of Corruption at Home, Powerful Foreigners Find Refuge in the US

    [Apr 02, 2019] 'Yats' Is No Longer the Guy by Robert Parry

    [Apr 01, 2019] Amazon.com War with Russia From Putin Ukraine to Trump Russiagate (9781510745810) Stephen F. Cohen Books

    [Mar 31, 2019] What is the purpose of Russiagate hysteria?

    [Mar 30, 2019] The US desperately needs Venezuelan oil

    [Mar 30, 2019] The Real Costs of Russiagate

    [Mar 24, 2019] The accountability that must follow Mueller's report

    [Mar 20, 2019] In a remarkable report by British Channel 4, former CIA officials and a Reuters correspondent spoke candidly about the systematic dissemination of propaganda and misinformation in reporting on geopolitical conflicts

    [Mar 18, 2019] Journalists who are spies

    [Mar 18, 2019] FULL CNN TOWN HALL WITH TULSI GABBARD 3-10-19

    [Mar 18, 2019] The Why are the media playing lapdog and not watchdog – again – on war in Iraq?

    [Mar 06, 2019] Disinformation destroys reality

    [Feb 21, 2019] The Empire Now or Never by Fred Reed

    [Feb 19, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard kills New World Order bloodbath in thirty seconds

    [Feb 19, 2019] Warmongers in their ivory towers - YouTube

    [Feb 17, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives

    [Feb 13, 2019] MoA - Russiagate Is Finished

    [Feb 13, 2019] Stephen Cohen on War with Russia and Soviet-style Censorship in the US by Russell Mokhiber

    [Feb 10, 2019] Pussy John Bolton and His Codpiece Mustache by Fred Reed

    [Mar 18, 2019] Journalists who are spies

    [Mar 18, 2019] FULL CNN TOWN HALL WITH TULSI GABBARD 3-10-19

    [Mar 18, 2019] The Why are the media playing lapdog and not watchdog – again – on war in Iraq?

    [Mar 06, 2019] Disinformation destroys reality

    [Feb 21, 2019] The Empire Now or Never by Fred Reed

    [Feb 19, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard kills New World Order bloodbath in thirty seconds

    [Feb 19, 2019] Warmongers in their ivory towers - YouTube

    [Feb 17, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives

    [Feb 13, 2019] MoA - Russiagate Is Finished

    [Feb 13, 2019] Stephen Cohen on War with Russia and Soviet-style Censorship in the US by Russell Mokhiber

    [Feb 10, 2019] Pussy John Bolton and His Codpiece Mustache by Fred Reed

    [Feb 04, 2019] Trump s Revised and Rereleased Foreign Policy: The World Policeman is Back

    [Feb 02, 2019] According to the recipes devised by Reagan: why the methods which successfully destroyed the USSR do not work with modern Russia? by Alexey Makurin

    [Feb 05, 2019] The neocon s strategy

    [Feb 04, 2019] Trump s Revised and Rereleased Foreign Policy: The World Policeman is Back

    [Feb 02, 2019] According to the recipes devised by Reagan: why the methods which successfully destroyed the USSR do not work with modern Russia? by Alexey Makurin

    [Jan 29, 2019] These 2020 hopefuls are courting Wall Street. Don t be fooled by their progressive veneer by Bhaskar Sunkara

    [Jan 29, 2019] Guardian became Deep State Guardian

    [Jan 26, 2019] Can the current US neoliberal/neoconservative elite be considered suicidal?

    [Jan 22, 2019] War with Russia From Putin Ukraine to Trump Russiagate

    [Jan 21, 2019] Beyond BuzzFeed The 10 Worst, Most Embarrassing US Media Failures On The Trump-Russia Story by Glenn Greenwald

    [Jan 20, 2019] Doctor, nurse, Chief Nursing Officer of the Army, whatever.

    [Jan 19, 2019] Coincidence - Chief Nurse Of British Army Was First Person To Arrive At Novichoked Skripal Scene

    [Jan 11, 2019] New Documents Reveal a Covert British Military-Intelligence Smear Machine Meddling In American Politics by Mark Ames

    [Jan 11, 2019] How President Trump Normalized Neoconservatism by Ilana Mercer

    [Jan 11, 2019] Facts does not matter in the current propoganda environment, the narrative is everything

    [Jan 29, 2019] These 2020 hopefuls are courting Wall Street. Don t be fooled by their progressive veneer by Bhaskar Sunkara

    [Jan 29, 2019] Guardian became Deep State Guardian

    [Jan 26, 2019] Can the current US neoliberal/neoconservative elite be considered suicidal?

    [Jan 22, 2019] War with Russia From Putin Ukraine to Trump Russiagate

    [Jan 21, 2019] Beyond BuzzFeed The 10 Worst, Most Embarrassing US Media Failures On The Trump-Russia Story by Glenn Greenwald

    [Jan 20, 2019] Doctor, nurse, Chief Nursing Officer of the Army, whatever.

    [Jan 19, 2019] Coincidence - Chief Nurse Of British Army Was First Person To Arrive At Novichoked Skripal Scene

    [Jan 11, 2019] New Documents Reveal a Covert British Military-Intelligence Smear Machine Meddling In American Politics by Mark Ames

    [Jan 11, 2019] How President Trump Normalized Neoconservatism by Ilana Mercer

    [Jan 11, 2019] Facts does not matter in the current propoganda environment, the narrative is everything

    [Jan 08, 2019] Shock Files- What Role Did Integrity Initiative Play in Sergei Skripal Affair- - Sputnik International

    [Jan 08, 2019] Skripal spin doctors- Documents link UK govt-funded Integrity Initiative to anti-Russia narrative

    [Jan 08, 2019] No, wealth isn t created at the top. It is merely devoured there by Rutger Bregman

    [Jan 06, 2019] British elite fantasy of again ruling the world (with American and Zionist aid) has led to a series of catastrophic blunders and overreaches in both foreign and domestic policies.

    [Jan 02, 2019] Russian bots - How An Anti-Russian Lobby Creates Fake News

    [Jan 02, 2019] The Only Meddling "Russian Bots" Were Actually Democrat-Led "Experts" by Mac Slavo

    [Jan 02, 2019] Did Mueller Patched Together Much of His Indictment from 2015 Radio Free Europe Article ?

    [Jan 02, 2019] That madness of the US neocons comes from having no behavioural limits, no references outside of groupthink, and manipulating the language. Simply put, you don't know anymore what's what outside of the narrative your group pushes. The manipulators ends up caught in their lies.

    [Dec 30, 2018] RussiaGate In Review with Aaron Mate - Unreasoned Fear is Neoliberalism's Response to the Credibility Gap

    [Jan 08, 2019] Shock Files- What Role Did Integrity Initiative Play in Sergei Skripal Affair- - Sputnik International

    [Jan 08, 2019] Skripal spin doctors- Documents link UK govt-funded Integrity Initiative to anti-Russia narrative

    [Jan 08, 2019] No, wealth isn t created at the top. It is merely devoured there by Rutger Bregman

    [Jan 06, 2019] British elite fantasy of again ruling the world (with American and Zionist aid) has led to a series of catastrophic blunders and overreaches in both foreign and domestic policies.

    [Jan 02, 2019] Russian bots - How An Anti-Russian Lobby Creates Fake News

    [Jan 02, 2019] The Only Meddling "Russian Bots" Were Actually Democrat-Led "Experts" by Mac Slavo

    [Jan 02, 2019] Did Mueller Patched Together Much of His Indictment from 2015 Radio Free Europe Article ?

    [Jan 02, 2019] That madness of the US neocons comes from having no behavioural limits, no references outside of groupthink, and manipulating the language. Simply put, you don't know anymore what's what outside of the narrative your group pushes. The manipulators ends up caught in their lies.

    [Dec 30, 2018] RussiaGate In Review with Aaron Mate - Unreasoned Fear is Neoliberalism's Response to the Credibility Gap

    [Dec 29, 2018] -Election Meddling- Enters Bizarro World As MSM Ignores Democrat-Linked -Russian Bot- Scheme -

    [Dec 24, 2018] Jewish neocons and the romance of nationalist armageddon

    [Dec 24, 2018] Income inequality happens by design. We cant fix it by tweaking capitalism

    [Dec 22, 2018] British Security Service Infiltration, the Integrity Initiative and the Institute for Statecraft by Craig Murray

    [Dec 22, 2018] If Truth Cannot Prevail Over Material Agendas We Are Doomed by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Dec 16, 2018] The 'Integrity Initiative' - A Military Intelligence Operation, Disguised As Charity, To Create The Russian Threat

    [Dec 16, 2018] Neoliberalism has had its day. So what happens next (The death of neoliberalism and the crisis in western politics) by Martin Jacques

    [Dec 14, 2018] Neoliberalism has spawned a financial elite who hold governments to ransom by Deborah Orr

    [Oct 21, 2020] How Trump Got Played By The Military-Industrial Complex by Akbar Shahid Ahmed

    [Oct 19, 2020] The Emails Are Russian- Will Be The Narrative, Regardless Of Facts Or Evidence by Caitlin Johnstone

    [Oct 19, 2020] New report shows more than $1B from war industry and govt. going to top 50 think tanks

    [Oct 11, 2020] Putin on the US Presidential race and the myth that Trump, one of the most hostile to Russia presidents in history, is somehow a "Putin puppet"

    [Oct 01, 2020] Steve's insistence on speaking the truth about Ukraine and US-Russia relations cost him -- but he never gave up by Lev Golinkin

    [Sep 28, 2020] Truth be told: political operatives own and run our MSM. This is why the press is called the 'Fourth Estate'

    [Sep 26, 2020] What is predatory capitalism

    [Sep 26, 2020] Galloway- Lying industry may be the only sector of Western economies still in full production TAXPAYERS pay for it

    [Sep 23, 2020] How fake media actually works: reporter are given the narrative and they should rehash their stories to fit it

    [Sep 21, 2020] How the west lost by Anatol Lieven

    [Sep 21, 2020] Stephen F. Cohen- The Ukrainian Crisis - It s not All Putin s Fault

    [Sep 21, 2020] Stephen Cohen at the AJC 2017 Forum, about Russia and Terrorism

    [Sep 17, 2020] Military desperados and Mattis "military messiah syndrome" by Scott Ritter

    [Sep 17, 2020] Why the Blob Needs an Enemy by ARTA MOEINI

    [Sep 01, 2020] Are We Deliberately Trying to Provoke a Military Crisis With Russia by Ted Galen Carpenter

    [Sep 01, 2020] How Democrats and Republicans made deals to pass Magnitsky Act by Lucy Komisar

    [Aug 19, 2020] Some Shocking Facts on the Concentration of Ownership of the US Economy

    [Aug 19, 2020] American imperialism vs. EU imperialism: Pushed into the Ukrainian adventure by the US? Rubbish. The EU and its constituent members were attempting to play their own hand and were not merely following the US lead submissively.

    [Aug 04, 2020] Russia never saw Trump as a potential ally or friend by The Saker

    [Aug 02, 2020] Russiagate, Nazis, and the CIA by ROB URIE

    [Aug 01, 2020] Executed Turkish general exposed misuse of Qatari funds for Syria extremists- Report - Al Arabiya English

    [Jul 26, 2020] Former Poroshenko Ally Admits Euromaidan In 2014 Was Entirely Funded By "Organized Criminal Group" - Defend Democracy Press

    [Jul 23, 2020] This is a biggie: Egypt's parliament approves troop deployment to Libya

    [Jul 21, 2020] This Skripal thing smelled to high heaven from day 1. My opinion is that Sergei Skripal was involved (to what degree is open to speculation) with the Steele dossier.

    [Jul 20, 2020] The Real 'Russian Playbook' Is Written in English -- Strategic Culture

    [Jul 13, 2020] George Washington Tried To Warn Americans About Foreign Policy Today by Doug Bandow

    [Jul 07, 2020] Mutiny on the Bounties by RAY McGOVERN

    [Jul 01, 2020] Putin s economic and social policies have a neoliberal bent but Putin is far from a classic neoliberal

    [Jun 30, 2020] Russophobia- Anti-Russian Lobby and American Foreign Policy- Tsygankov, A.- 9781349378418- Amazon.com- Books

    [Jun 28, 2020] Russian position for Start talks: "We don't believe the US in its current shape is a counterpart that is reliable, so we have no confidence, no trust whatsoever".

    [Jun 24, 2020] Russia heavily subsidised Ukrainian energy imports for decades gas and oil; the USA converted Ukraine into a debt slave, sells Ukraine expensive weapons and cornered their energy industry; The level of fleecing Ukraine by the USA after Euromaidan can be compared only with fleecing of Libya.

    [Jun 23, 2020] Surely 'legitimacy' goes to the victor. Once you've won you can build a sort of legitimacy that the majority will agree with (whether its real or not)

    [Jun 23, 2020] Putin Tries To Set Record Straight by

    [Jun 21, 2020] Paul R. Pillar who pointed out that U.S. sanctions are frequently peddled as a peaceful alternative to war fit the definition of 'crimes against peace'.

    [Jun 20, 2020] Fatal mistake of the USSR in the WWII

    [Jun 19, 2020] The USG' s definition of Dictator

    [Jun 14, 2020] Jeane J. Kirkpatrick 30 Years Unheeded

    [Jun 13, 2020] Korea is just another distraction: false conflicts with China, North Korea, Russia and Iran are needed to keep support for MIC and Security State which cost 1.2 trillion a year

    [Jun 03, 2020] The first rule of political hypocrisy: Justify your actions by the need to protect the weak and vulnerable

    [May 24, 2020] Unable to communicate in Arabic and with no relevant experience or appropriate educational training

    [May 23, 2020] China is still in great danger. Of the existing 30 or so high-tech productive chains, China only enjoys superiority at 2 or 3

    [May 22, 2020] No US president who can withdraw the USA from the Forever Wars

    [May 21, 2020] The 'Clean Break' Doctrine OffGuardian

    [May 20, 2020] The American Mission and the Evil Empire The Crusade for a Free Russia Since 1881 by Foglesong

    [May 20, 2020] McGovern Turn Out The Lights, Russiagate Is Over by Ray McGovern

    [May 19, 2020] Russophobia in the Age of Donald Trump

    [May 16, 2020] Putin's Call For A New System and the 1944 Battle Of Bretton Woods

    [May 13, 2020] Dramatic change of direction for Syrian envoy

    [May 07, 2020] Angry Bear " "cannot remember a single International Crisis in which the United States had no global presence at all"

    [May 05, 2020] Is there a "6th column" trying to subvert Russia, by The Saker

    [May 05, 2020] UK government experince with the White Helmets and the Skripal affair definitly halps in anti-china propaganda.

    [Apr 29, 2020] Trump, despite pretty slick deception during his election campaign, is an typical imperialist and rabid militarist. His administration continuredand in some areas exceeded the hostility of Obama couse against Russia

    [Apr 22, 2020] Especially as the insane neoliberal economy we live in, we are ruled by a group of kleptocrats and vicious stooges. Which make allegations against Biden deserving a closer look but that does not make them automatically credible

    [Apr 08, 2020] Feudal Japan Edo and the US Empire by Hiroyuki Hamada

    [Apr 05, 2020] Esper tone deafness: a sad illustration of wildly misplaced priorities of military industrial complex

    [Mar 13, 2020] US send 20,000 soldiers to Europe for killing practice (Defender Europe) while locking down US. Are they immune? How

    [Mar 13, 2020] Daffy Duck. cartoon was made in 1953 and like many Looney Tune cartoon's, they are an extreme parody of life. It dawned on me that this cartoon is an almost perfect description of US Military policy and action.

    [Mar 12, 2020] The Democratic Party Surrenders to Nostalgia by Bill Blum

    [Mar 12, 2020] The Democratic Party Surrenders to Nostalgia by Bill Blum

    [Mar 05, 2020] Intelligence Officials Sow Discord By Stoking Fear of Russian Election Meddling by Dave DeCamp

    [Mar 04, 2020] Why Are We Being Charged? Surprise Bills From Coronavirus Testing Spark Calls for Government to Cover All Costs by Jake Johnson

    [Mar 03, 2020] "Predatory capitalism", which clearly describes what neoliberalism is.

    [Mar 01, 2020] Countering Nationalist Oligarchy by Ganesh Sitaraman

    [Feb 29, 2020] A very interesting and though provoking presentation by Ambassador Chas Freeman "America in Distress: The Challenges of Disadvantageous Change"

    [Feb 29, 2020] Secret Wars, Forgotten Betrayals, Global Tyranny. Who s Really In Charge Of The US Military by Cynthia Chung

    [Feb 28, 2020] Chas Freeman America in Distress The Challenges of Disadvantageous Change

    [Feb 28, 2020] Media s Deafening Silence On Latest WikiLeaks Drops Is Its Own Scandal by Caitlin Johnstone

    [Feb 27, 2020] An interesting view on Russian "intelligencia" by the scientist and writer Zinoviev expressed during "perestroika" in 1991

    [Feb 23, 2020] Previously oppressed group, given a lucky chance, most often strive for dominance and oppression of other groups including and especially former dominant group. This is an eternal damnation of ethno/cultural nationalism

    [Feb 23, 2020] Welcome to the American Regime

    [Feb 23, 2020] Where Have You Gone, Smedley Butler The Last General To Criticize US Imperialism by Danny Sjursen

    [Feb 21, 2020] Why Both Republicans And Democrats Want Russia To Become The Enemy Of Choice by Philip Giraldi

    [Feb 16, 2020] An Illegal Assassination and the Lawless President by Daniel Larison

    [Feb 16, 2020] Understanding the Ukraine Story by Joe Lauria

    [Feb 14, 2020] Is Apartheid the Inevitable Outcome of Zionism? by Henry Siegman

    [Feb 09, 2020] Trump demand for 50% of Iraq oil revenue sound exactly like a criminal mob boss

    [Feb 09, 2020] The Deeper Story Behind The Assassination Of Soleimani

    [Feb 08, 2020] Is Iraq About To Switch From US to Russia

    [Feb 07, 2020] How They Sold the Iraq War by Jeffrey St. Clair

    [Feb 03, 2020] White House Warriors: How the National Security Council Transformed the American Way of War

    [Feb 02, 2020] The most interesting issue is the role of NSC in this impeachment story

    [Jan 29, 2020] Campaign Promises and Ending Wars

    [Feb 29, 2020] A very interesting and though provoking presentation by Ambassador Chas Freeman "America in Distress: The Challenges of Disadvantageous Change"

    [Feb 28, 2020] Chas Freeman America in Distress The Challenges of Disadvantageous Change

    [Feb 23, 2020] Previously oppressed group, given a lucky chance, most often strive for dominance and oppression of other groups including and especially former dominant group. This is an eternal damnation of ethno/cultural nationalism

    [Feb 23, 2020] Welcome to the American Regime

    [Feb 23, 2020] Where Have You Gone, Smedley Butler The Last General To Criticize US Imperialism by Danny Sjursen

    [Feb 21, 2020] Why Both Republicans And Democrats Want Russia To Become The Enemy Of Choice by Philip Giraldi

    [Feb 16, 2020] An Illegal Assassination and the Lawless President by Daniel Larison

    [Feb 16, 2020] Understanding the Ukraine Story by Joe Lauria

    [Feb 14, 2020] Is Apartheid the Inevitable Outcome of Zionism? by Henry Siegman

    [Feb 09, 2020] Trump demand for 50% of Iraq oil revenue sound exactly like a criminal mob boss

    [Feb 09, 2020] The Deeper Story Behind The Assassination Of Soleimani

    [Feb 08, 2020] Is Iraq About To Switch From US to Russia

    [Feb 07, 2020] How They Sold the Iraq War by Jeffrey St. Clair

    [Feb 03, 2020] White House Warriors: How the National Security Council Transformed the American Way of War

    [Feb 02, 2020] The most interesting issue is the role of NSC in this impeachment story

    [Jan 29, 2020] Campaign Promises and Ending Wars

    [Jan 24, 2020] How Are Iran and the "Axis of the Resistance" Affected by the US Assassination of Soleimani by Elijah J. Magnier

    [Jan 24, 2020] Peter Hitchen to Eliot Higgins of Bellingcat: You're not in the ladies' lingerie trade now, sweetie

    [Jan 24, 2020] Crimes of the century truth, perception and punishment

    [Jan 24, 2020] Lawrence Wilkerson Lambasts 'the Beast of the National Security State' by Adam Dick

    [Jan 19, 2020] The frantic attempt to deflect attention from US foreign wars and mainly derisive media coverage of Tulsi Gabbard is a case in point. Is she the harbinger of a growing political movement aiming to dismantle the military empire project?

    [Jan 18, 2020] Putin plants to prohibit dual citizens to serve in government

    [Jan 18, 2020] The inability of the USA elite to tell the truth about the genuine aim of policy despite is connected with the fact that the real goal is to attain Full Spectrum Dominance over the planet and its people such that neoliberal bankers can rule the world

    [Jan 17, 2020] Ukraine is a deeply sick patient. The destiny of ordinary Ukrainians is deeply tragic. Diaspora is greedy and want a piece of cake immediately

    [Jan 24, 2020] How Are Iran and the "Axis of the Resistance" Affected by the US Assassination of Soleimani by Elijah J. Magnier

    [Jan 24, 2020] Peter Hitchen to Eliot Higgins of Bellingcat: You're not in the ladies' lingerie trade now, sweetie

    [Jan 24, 2020] Crimes of the century truth, perception and punishment

    [Jan 24, 2020] Lawrence Wilkerson Lambasts 'the Beast of the National Security State' by Adam Dick

    [Jan 19, 2020] The frantic attempt to deflect attention from US foreign wars and mainly derisive media coverage of Tulsi Gabbard is a case in point. Is she the harbinger of a growing political movement aiming to dismantle the military empire project?

    [Jan 18, 2020] The inability of the USA elite to tell the truth about the genuine aim of policy despite is connected with the fact that the real goal is to attain Full Spectrum Dominance over the planet and its people such that neoliberal bankers can rule the world

    [Jan 18, 2020] Putin plants to prohibit dual citizens to serve in government

    [Jan 17, 2020] Ukraine is a deeply sick patient. The destiny of ordinary Ukrainians is deeply tragic. Diaspora is greedy and want a piece of cake immediately

    [Jan 14, 2020] Impeachment Of President Trump An Imperial War Game by By Barbara Boyd

    [Jan 12, 2020] MIC along with Wall Street controls the government and the country

    [Jan 12, 2020] Why the West Falsifies the History of World War II -- Strategic Culture

    [Jan 12, 2020] US has been preaching human rights while mounting wars and lying.

    [Jan 10, 2020] The Saker interviews Michael Hudson

    [Jan 09, 2020] Opposing War With Iran: Three Reasons by Anthony DiMaggio

    [Jan 14, 2020] Impeachment Of President Trump An Imperial War Game by By Barbara Boyd

    [Jan 12, 2020] MIC along with Wall Street controls the government and the country

    [Jan 12, 2020] Why the West Falsifies the History of World War II -- Strategic Culture

    [Jan 12, 2020] US has been preaching human rights while mounting wars and lying.

    [Jan 10, 2020] The Saker interviews Michael Hudson

    [Jan 09, 2020] Opposing War With Iran: Three Reasons by Anthony DiMaggio

    [Jan 08, 2020] Iraqi Journalist: Killing Soleimani "Ended An Era In Which Iran And The United States Coexisted In Iraq" by Tim Hains

    [Jan 08, 2020] Do you really want to be a one term president? Pompeo can talk big now and then go back to Kansas to run for senator. Where will you be able to take refuge?

    [Jan 06, 2020] Diplomacy Trump-style. Al Capone probably would be allow himself to fall that low

    [Jan 06, 2020] Neocon Pompeo pushed Trump to kill Soleimani; Looks like West Point educated military contactor mafia to which Pompeo and Esper belongs controls the President, although Trump malleability and recklessness are inexcusable

    [Jan 05, 2020] The USA is now at war, de-facto and de-jure, with BOTH Iraq and Iran (UPDATED 6X) The Vineyard of the Saker

    [Jan 05, 2020] Trump is wholly responsible for his own actions, but he -- just like the Ayatollah -- is being pushed in a direction where it's impossible to back down and still "save face". Neither men can afford to do so by Andrew Korybko

    [Jan 04, 2020] The role of Germany in the Ukrainian disaster

    [Jan 04, 2020] American Meddling in the Ukraine by Publius Tacitus

    [Dec 21, 2019] Trump administration sanction companies involved in laying the remaining pipe, and also companies involved in the infrastructure around the arrival point.

    [Dec 21, 2019] Lessons of the past: all changed in 1999 with the war in Kosovo. For the first time I witnessed shocking images of civilian targets being bombed, TV stations, trains, bridges. The NATO spokesman boasted of hundreds of Serbian tanks being destroyed. There was something new and disturbing about his manner, language and tone, something I'd not encountered from coverage of previous conflicts. For the first time I found myself not believing one word of the narrative

    [Dec 21, 2019] Trump comes clean from world s policeman to thug running a global protection racket by Finian Cunningham

    [Dec 21, 2019] Time to Terminate Washington's Defense Welfare

    [Dec 21, 2019] The Pentagon s New Map War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century

    [Dec 21, 2019] We are all Palestinians: possible connection between neocons and Pentagon

    [Dec 21, 2019] The ruthless neo-colonialists of 21st century

    [Dec 21, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives

    [Jan 08, 2020] Iraqi Journalist: Killing Soleimani "Ended An Era In Which Iran And The United States Coexisted In Iraq" by Tim Hains

    [Jan 08, 2020] Do you really want to be a one term president? Pompeo can talk big now and then go back to Kansas to run for senator. Where will you be able to take refuge?

    [Jan 06, 2020] Neocon Pompeo pushed Trump to kill Soleimani; Looks like West Point educated military contactor mafia to which Pompeo and Esper belongs controls the President, although Trump malleability and recklessness are inexcusable

    [Jan 06, 2020] Diplomacy Trump-style. Al Capone probably would be allow himself to fall that low

    [Jan 05, 2020] The USA is now at war, de-facto and de-jure, with BOTH Iraq and Iran (UPDATED 6X) The Vineyard of the Saker

    [Jan 05, 2020] Trump is wholly responsible for his own actions, but he -- just like the Ayatollah -- is being pushed in a direction where it's impossible to back down and still "save face". Neither men can afford to do so by Andrew Korybko

    [Jan 04, 2020] The role of Germany in the Ukrainian disaster

    [Jan 04, 2020] American Meddling in the Ukraine by Publius Tacitus

    [Dec 19, 2019] MIC lobbyism (which often is presented as patriotism) is the last refuge of scoundrels

    [Dec 19, 2019] A the core of color revolution against Trump is Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine

    [Dec 19, 2019] A joint French-Ukrainian journalistic investigation into a huge money laundering scheme using various shadow banking organizations in Austria and Switzerland, benefiting Clinton friendly Ukrainian oligarchs and of course the Clinton Foundation.

    [Dec 17, 2019] Neocons like car salespeople have a stereotypical reputation for lacking credibility because ther profession is to lie in order to sell weapons to the publin, much like used car saleme lie to sell cars

    [Dec 15, 2019] The infinity war - The Washington Post by Samuel Moyn, Stephen Wertheim

    [Dec 14, 2019] A Determined Effort to Undermine Russia

    [Dec 07, 2019] Why the foreign policy establishment consensus is neocon by default.

    [Dec 06, 2019] The USA is an occupied by neocon country

    [Dec 06, 2019] Who Is Making US Foreign Policy by Stephen F. Cohen

    [Dec 04, 2019] Ukrainegaters claim that Trump Reduced the USA empire 'Global Commitments' was fraudulent from the very beginning. Trump is yet another imperial president who favours the "Full spectrum Dominance; The problem is that the time when the USA can have it are in the past. Europe finally recovered from WWII losses and that alone dooms the idea

    [Dec 02, 2019] The cost of militarism cannot be measured only in lost opportunities, lives and money. There will be a long hangover of shame

    [Nov 29, 2019] Where s the Collusion

    [Nov 21, 2019] The deep state is individuals INSIDE the government that do the bidding of the banksters, the military-industrial complex, the globalists and other nefarious interests

    [Nov 03, 2019] How Controlling Syria s Oil Serves Washington s Strategic Objectives by Nauman Sadiq

    [Oct 28, 2019] Expert Panel Finds Gaping Plot-Holes In OPCW Report On Alleged Syrian Chemical Attack by Caitlin Johnstone

    [Oct 26, 2019] The Plundering of Ukraine by Corrupt American Democrats by Israel Shamir

    [Oct 24, 2019] Joltin' Jack Keane wants your kids to fight Russia and Syria over Syrian oil by Colonel Patrick Lang

    [Oct 23, 2019] The treason of the intellectuals The Undoing of Thought by Roger Kimball

    [Oct 23, 2019] Neoconservatism Is An Omnicidal Death Cult, And It Must Be Stopped by Caitlin Johnstone

    [Oct 20, 2019] Putin sarcastic remark on Western neoliberal multiculturalism

    [Oct 20, 2019] How did the United States become so involved in Ukraine's torturous and famously corrupt politics? The short answer is NATO expansion

    [Oct 10, 2019] There is no reason that anyone should treat George Bush with respect: he is a war criminal, who escaped justice

    [Sep 22, 2019] US reconnaissance plane operated drones that attacked Hmeymim

    [Sep 22, 2019] It was neoliberalism that won the cold war

    [Sep 20, 2019] Trump Whistleblower Drama Puts Biden In The Hot Seat Over Ukraine

    [Sep 18, 2019] To End Endless Wars, We Must Give Up Hegemony by Daniel Larison

    [Sep 17, 2019] The Devolution of US-Russia Relations by Tony Kevin

    [Sep 12, 2019] The Brain-Dead Maximalism of [neocon] Hard-liners by Daniel Larison

    [Sep 10, 2019] The idea tha the USA won the Cold War is questionable

    [Sep 10, 2019] It s all about Gene Sharp and seeping neoliberal regime change using Western logistical support, money, NGO and intelligence agencies and MSM as the leverage

    [Aug 27, 2019] House Niggers Mutiny by Israel Shamir

    [Aug 24, 2019] Peace plan for eastern Ukraine As divisive as the causes of the war by Fred Weir

    [Aug 17, 2019] Putin-Trump Derangement Syndrome (PTDS)

    [Aug 17, 2019] The Unraveling of the Failed Trump Coup by Larry C Johnson

    [Aug 17, 2019] Debunking the Putin Panic by Stephen F. Cohen

    [Jul 29, 2019] Peace in Ukraine by Stephen F. Cohen

    [Jul 28, 2019] Antisemitism prejudices projection on Russians

    [Jul 23, 2019] John Helmer MH17 Evidence Tampering Revealed by Malaysia – FBI Attempt To Seize Black Boxes; Dutch Cover-Up of Forged Telephon

    [Jul 23, 2019] Ukraine Election - Voters Defeat Second Color Revolution

    [Jul 13, 2019] Mueller Does Not Have Evidence That The IRA Was Part of Russian Government Meddling by Larry C Johnson

    [Jul 09, 2019] Epstein and the conversion of politicians into "corrupt and vulnerable" brand

    [Jul 06, 2019] Why is Iran such a high priority for US elite? Because Iran successfully booted out the CIA and CIA-imposed regime out of their country and successfully remained independent since then

    [Jul 06, 2019] In practice, the USSR behaved exactly like a brutal totalitarian theocracy

    [Jul 05, 2019] Globalisation- the rise and fall of an idea that swept the world - World news by Nikil Saval

    [Jul 05, 2019] The World Bank and IMF 2019 by Michael Hudson and Bonnie Faulkner

    [Jun 29, 2019] Latest Weapon Of US Imperialism Liquified Natural Gas

    [Jun 28, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard vs Bolton

    [Jun 27, 2019] The Ongoing Restructuring of the Greater Middle East by C.J. Hopkins

    [Jun 22, 2019] Bolton Calls For Forceful Iranian Response To Continuing US Aggression

    [Jun 21, 2019] America's Confrontation With Iran Goes Deeper Than Trump by Trita Parsi

    [Jun 21, 2019] Russia accuses U.S. of pushing Iran situation to brink of war RIA - Reuters

    [Jun 20, 2019] Chuck Schumer 'The American People Deserve A President Who Can More Credibly Justify War With Iran'

    [Jun 09, 2019] The looming 100-year US-China conflict by Martin Wolf

    [May 31, 2019] Mahathir bin Mohamad, Prime Minister of Malaysia, in an interview with FCCJ (Foreign Correspondents' Club of Japan) stated that he did not believe in Russia's involvement in the crash of the Boeing MH17

    [May 28, 2019] Any time you read an article (or a comment) on Russia, substitute the word Jew for Russian and International Jewry for Russia and re-read.

    [May 22, 2019] NATO has pushed eastward right up to its borders and threatened to incorporate regions that have been part of Russia's sphere of influence -- and its defense perimeter -- for centuries

    [May 20, 2019] "Us" Versus "Them"

    [May 19, 2019] Intel agencies of the UK and US are guilty of fabricating evidence, breaking the laws (certainly of the targeted countries, but also of the UK and US), providing fake analysis and operating as evil actors on the dark side of humanity

    [May 14, 2019] iJews and the Left-i by Philip Mendes A Review, by Brenton Sanderson - The Unz Review

    [May 14, 2019] Despite a $ 22 Trillion National Debt, America Is on a Military Spending Spree. 800 Overseas US Military Bases by Masud Wadan

    [May 13, 2019] US Foreign Policy as Bellicose as Ever by Serge Halimi

    [May 12, 2019] Charting a Progressive Foreign Policy for the Trump Era and Beyond

    [May 11, 2019] Why Crowdstrike's Russian Hacking Story Fell Apart -- Say Hello to Fancy Bear

    [May 11, 2019] Christopher Steele, FBI s Confidential Human Source by Publius Tacitus

    [May 11, 2019] CIA Paid $100,000 To Shadowy Russian For Dirt on Trump, Including Sex Video by Chuck Ross

    [May 08, 2019] Obama Spied on Other Republicans and Democrats As Well by Larry C Johnson

    [May 07, 2019] Chris Hedges: The Demonization of Russia is Driven by Defense Contractors

    [May 02, 2019] Neoliberalism and the Globalization of War. America s Hegemonic Project by Prof Michel Chossudovsky

    [May 02, 2019] Russian and Eurasian Politics by Gordon M. Hahn

    [Apr 29, 2019] The Mueller Report Indicts the Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theory by Aaron Maté

    [Apr 28, 2019] The British Role in Russiagate Is About to Be Fully Exposed

    [Apr 26, 2019] Jared Kushner, Not Maria Butina, Is America's Real Foreign Agent by Philip Giraldi

    [Apr 22, 2019] FBI top brass have been colluding with top brass of CIA and MI6 to pursue ambitious anti-Russian agenda

    [Apr 22, 2019] Current Neo-McCarthyism hysteria as a smoke screen of the UK and the USA intent to dominate European geopolitics and weaken Russia and Germany

    [Apr 21, 2019] Psywar: Propaganda during Iraq war and beyond

    [Apr 21, 2019] John Brennan's Police State USA

    [Apr 21, 2019] Deciphering Trumps Foreign Policy by Oscar Silva-Valladares

    [Apr 21, 2019] Whenever someone inconveniences the neoliberal oligarchy, the entire neoliberal MSM mafia tells us 24 x7 how evil and disgusting that person is. It's true of the leader of every nation which rejects neoliberal globalization as well as for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange

    [Apr 16, 2019] The incompetent, the corrupt, the treacherous -- not just walking free, but with reputations intact, fat bank balances, and flourishing careers. Now they re angling for war with Iran.

    [Apr 16, 2019] CIA Director Used Fake Skripal Incident Photos To Manipulate Trump

    [Apr 15, 2019] War is the force that gives America its meaning.

    [Apr 15, 2019] I wonder if the Middle East is nothing more than a live-fire laboratory for the military

    [Apr 13, 2019] America as a Myth of good life is a powerful tool of color revolutions

    [Apr 13, 2019] Russophobia, A WMD (Weapon Of Mass Deception) by Jean Ranc

    [Apr 12, 2019] Putin was KGB agent crowd forgets that Bush Sr was long time senior CIA operative and the director of CIA

    [Apr 10, 2019] Habakkuk on cockroaches and the New York Times

    [Apr 09, 2019] NYT: It Is, in Fact, All About the Benjamins by Philip Weiss

    [Apr 06, 2019] The Magnitsky Act-Behind the Scenes ASEEES

    [Apr 06, 2019] Trump is for socialism but only when it comes to funding US military industry Tulsi Gabbard

    [Apr 04, 2019] How Brzezinski's Chessboard degenerated into Brennan's Russophobia by Mike Whitney

    [Apr 03, 2019] Suspected of Corruption at Home, Powerful Foreigners Find Refuge in the US

    [Apr 02, 2019] 'Yats' Is No Longer the Guy by Robert Parry

    [Apr 01, 2019] Amazon.com War with Russia From Putin Ukraine to Trump Russiagate (9781510745810) Stephen F. Cohen Books

    [Mar 31, 2019] What is the purpose of Russiagate hysteria?

    [Mar 30, 2019] The US desperately needs Venezuelan oil

    [Mar 30, 2019] The Real Costs of Russiagate

    [Mar 24, 2019] The accountability that must follow Mueller's report

    [Mar 20, 2019] In a remarkable report by British Channel 4, former CIA officials and a Reuters correspondent spoke candidly about the systematic dissemination of propaganda and misinformation in reporting on geopolitical conflicts

    [Mar 18, 2019] Journalists who are spies

    [Mar 18, 2019] FULL CNN TOWN HALL WITH TULSI GABBARD 3-10-19

    [Mar 18, 2019] The Why are the media playing lapdog and not watchdog – again – on war in Iraq?

    [Mar 06, 2019] Disinformation destroys reality

    [Feb 21, 2019] The Empire Now or Never by Fred Reed

    [Feb 19, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard kills New World Order bloodbath in thirty seconds

    [Feb 19, 2019] Warmongers in their ivory towers - YouTube

    [Feb 17, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives

    [Feb 13, 2019] MoA - Russiagate Is Finished

    [Feb 13, 2019] Stephen Cohen on War with Russia and Soviet-style Censorship in the US by Russell Mokhiber

    [Feb 10, 2019] Pussy John Bolton and His Codpiece Mustache by Fred Reed

    [Feb 04, 2019] Trump s Revised and Rereleased Foreign Policy: The World Policeman is Back

    [Feb 02, 2019] According to the recipes devised by Reagan: why the methods which successfully destroyed the USSR do not work with modern Russia? by Alexey Makurin

    [Jan 29, 2019] These 2020 hopefuls are courting Wall Street. Don t be fooled by their progressive veneer by Bhaskar Sunkara

    [Jan 29, 2019] Guardian became Deep State Guardian

    [Jan 26, 2019] Can the current US neoliberal/neoconservative elite be considered suicidal?

    [Jan 22, 2019] War with Russia From Putin Ukraine to Trump Russiagate

    [Jan 21, 2019] Beyond BuzzFeed The 10 Worst, Most Embarrassing US Media Failures On The Trump-Russia Story by Glenn Greenwald

    [Jan 20, 2019] Doctor, nurse, Chief Nursing Officer of the Army, whatever.

    [Jan 19, 2019] Coincidence - Chief Nurse Of British Army Was First Person To Arrive At Novichoked Skripal Scene

    [Jan 11, 2019] New Documents Reveal a Covert British Military-Intelligence Smear Machine Meddling In American Politics by Mark Ames

    [Jan 11, 2019] How President Trump Normalized Neoconservatism by Ilana Mercer

    [Jan 11, 2019] Facts does not matter in the current propoganda environment, the narrative is everything

    [Jan 08, 2019] Shock Files- What Role Did Integrity Initiative Play in Sergei Skripal Affair- - Sputnik International

    [Jan 08, 2019] Skripal spin doctors- Documents link UK govt-funded Integrity Initiative to anti-Russia narrative

    [Jan 08, 2019] No, wealth isn t created at the top. It is merely devoured there by Rutger Bregman

    [Jan 06, 2019] British elite fantasy of again ruling the world (with American and Zionist aid) has led to a series of catastrophic blunders and overreaches in both foreign and domestic policies.

    [Jan 02, 2019] Russian bots - How An Anti-Russian Lobby Creates Fake News

    [Jan 02, 2019] The Only Meddling "Russian Bots" Were Actually Democrat-Led "Experts" by Mac Slavo

    [Jan 02, 2019] Did Mueller Patched Together Much of His Indictment from 2015 Radio Free Europe Article ?

    [Jan 02, 2019] That madness of the US neocons comes from having no behavioural limits, no references outside of groupthink, and manipulating the language. Simply put, you don't know anymore what's what outside of the narrative your group pushes. The manipulators ends up caught in their lies.

    [Dec 30, 2018] RussiaGate In Review with Aaron Mate - Unreasoned Fear is Neoliberalism's Response to the Credibility Gap

    [Dec 29, 2018] -Election Meddling- Enters Bizarro World As MSM Ignores Democrat-Linked -Russian Bot- Scheme -

    [Dec 24, 2018] Jewish neocons and the romance of nationalist armageddon

    [Dec 24, 2018] Income inequality happens by design. We cant fix it by tweaking capitalism

    [Dec 22, 2018] British Security Service Infiltration, the Integrity Initiative and the Institute for Statecraft by Craig Murray

    [Dec 22, 2018] If Truth Cannot Prevail Over Material Agendas We Are Doomed by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Dec 16, 2018] The 'Integrity Initiative' - A Military Intelligence Operation, Disguised As Charity, To Create The Russian Threat

    [Dec 16, 2018] Neoliberalism has had its day. So what happens next (The death of neoliberalism and the crisis in western politics) by Martin Jacques

    [Dec 14, 2018] Neoliberalism has spawned a financial elite who hold governments to ransom by Deborah Orr

    [Dec 09, 2018] Neoliberalism is more like modern feudalism - an authoritarian system where the lords (bankers, energy companies and their large and inefficient attendant bureaucracies), keep us peasants in thrall through life long debt-slavery simply to buy a house or exploit us as a captured market in the case of the energy sector.

    [Dec 08, 2018] Postmodern Imperialism: Geopolitics and the Great Games

    [Dec 05, 2018] Beleaguered British Prime Minister Theresa May is wailing loudly against a Trump threat to reveal classified documents relating to Russiagate by Philip Giraldi

    [Dec 05, 2018] Who are the Neocons by Guyenot

    [Dec 03, 2018] Neoliberalism is a modern curse. Everything about it is bad and until we're free of it, it will only ever keep trying to turn us into indentured labourers. It's acolytes are required to blind themselves to logic and reason to such a degree they resemble Scientologists or Jehovah's Witnesses more than people with any sort of coherent political ideology, because that's what neoliberalism actually is... a cult of the rich, for the rich, by the rich... and it's followers in the general population are nothing but moron familiars hoping one day to be made a fully fledged bastard.

    [Nov 27, 2018] 'Highly likely' that Magnitsky was poisoned by toxic chemicals on Bill Browder's orders

    [Nov 27, 2018] US Foreign Policy Has No Policy by Philip Giraldi

    [Nov 27, 2018] terms that carry with them implicit moral connotations. Investment implies an action, even a sacrifice, undertaken for a better future. It evokes a future positive outcome. Another words that reinforces neoliberal rationality is "growth", Modernization and

    [Nov 27, 2018] The Argentinian military coup, like those in Guatemala, Honduras, Brazil, Paraguay, Bolivia and Nicaragua, was sponsored by the US to protect and further its interests during the Cold War. By the 1970s neoliberalism was very much part of the menu; paramilitary governments were actively encouraged to practice neoliberal politics; neoliberalism was at this stage, what communism was to the Soviet Union

    [Nov 24, 2018] Anonymous Exposes UK-Led Psyop To Battle Russian Propaganda

    [Nov 24, 2018] British Government Runs Secret Anti-Russian Smear Campaigns

    [Nov 24, 2018] Now we know created MH17 smear campaign, who financial Steele dossier and created Skripal affair ;-)

    [Nov 24, 2018] When you are paid a lot of money to come up with plots psyops, you tend to come up with plots for psyops . The word entrapment comes to mind. Probably self-serving also.

    [Nov 22, 2018] Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Jewish Political Power

    [Nov 22, 2018] Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Zionist Political Power

    [Nov 14, 2018] Nationalism vs partiotism

    [Nov 12, 2018] The Best Way To Honor War Veterans Is To Stop Creating Them by Caitlin Johnstone

    [Nov 12, 2018] Protecting Americans from foreign influence, smells with COINTELPRO. Structural witch-hunt effect like during the McCarthy era is designed to supress decent to neoliberal oligarcy by Andre Damon and Joseph Kishore

    [Nov 10, 2018] US Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan Killed 500,000 by Jason Ditz

    [Nov 09, 2018] Globalism Vs Nationalism in Trump's America by Joe Quinn

    [Oct 25, 2018] Putin jokes with Bolton: Did the eagle eaten all the olives

    [Oct 20, 2018] Cloak and Dagger by Israel Shamir

    [Oct 09, 2018] The Skripals Are an MI6 Hoax - 'Not Worthy of Ladies' Detective Novels' - Israeli Expert Demolishes UK Case

    [Oct 08, 2018] British intelligence now officially is a by-word for organized crime by John Wight

    [Oct 08, 2018] Hacking and Propaganda by Marcus Ranum

    [Sep 23, 2018] UK Begged Trump Not To Declassify Russia Docs; Cited Grave Concerns Over Steele Involvement

    [Sep 21, 2018] One party state: Trump's 'Opposition' Supports All His Evil Agendas While Attacking Fake Nonsence by Caitlin Johnstone

    [Sep 16, 2018] Perils of Ineptitude by Andrew Levin

    [Sep 16, 2018] I m delighted we can see the true face of American exceptionalism on display everyday. The last thing I want to see is back to normal.

    [Sep 15, 2018] Why the US Seeks to Hem in Russia, China and Iran by Patrick Lawrence

    [Sep 15, 2018] BBC is skanky state propaganda

    [Sep 14, 2018] English Translation of Udo Ulfkotte s Bought Journalists Suppressed

    [Sep 07, 2018] New York Times Undermining Peace Efforts by Sowing Suspicion by Diana Johnstone

    [Sep 02, 2018] Open letter to President Trump concerning the consequences of 11 September 2001 by Thierry Meyssan

    [Sep 02, 2018] Bill Browder (of Magnitsky fame) broke all these rules while pillaging Russia.

    [Aug 22, 2018] The CIA Owns the US and European Media by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Aug 14, 2018] US Intelligence Community is Tearing the Country Apart from the Inside by Dmitry Orlov

    [Aug 13, 2018] Imperialism Is Alive and Kicking A Marxist Analysis of Neoliberal Capitalism by C.J. Polychroniou

    [Aug 11, 2018] President Trump the most important achivement

    [Aug 08, 2018] Sergei Skripal was linked to a consultant with former UK spy Christopher Steele's Orbis Business Intelligence

    [Aug 08, 2018] Ten Bombshell Revelations From Seymour Hersh's New Autobiography

    [Aug 05, 2018] Cooper was equally as unhinged as Boot: Neoliberal MSM is a real 1984 remake.

    [Jul 31, 2018] Is not the Awan affair a grave insult to the US "Intelligence Community?

    [Jul 20, 2018] What exactly is fake news caucus99percent

    [Jul 20, 2018] Is President Trump A Traitor Because He Wants Peace With Russia by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Jul 17, 2018] I think there is much more to the comment made by Putin regarding Bill Browder and his money flows into the DNC and Clinton campaign. That would explain why the DNC didn t hand the servers over to the FBI after being hacked.

    [Jul 16, 2018] Putin Claims U.S. Intelligence Agents Funneled $400K To Clinton Campaign Zero Hedge

    [Jul 03, 2018] When you see some really successful financial speculator like Soros or (or much smaller scale) Browder, search for links with intelligence services to explain the success or at least a part of it related to xUSSR space , LA and similar regions

    [May 04, 2018] Media Use Disinformation To Accuse Russia Of Spreading Such by b

    [Apr 24, 2018] The Democratic Party has embraced the agenda of the military-intelligence apparatus and sought to become its main political voice

    [Apr 21, 2018] It s a tough old world and we are certainly capable of a Salisbury set-up and god knows what else in Syria.

    [Apr 15, 2018] The Trump Regime Is Insane by Paul Craig Roberts

    [Mar 17, 2018] How the gas was administred in a place which was under surveillance and why passersby were not affected

    [Mar 15, 2018] The UK will promptly expel 23 Russian diplomats without waiting for the end of the investigation

    [Mar 10, 2018] Meier might have discovered that his subject had been, as it were, 'top supporting actor' in the first fumbling attempt by Christopher Steele et al to produce a plausible-sounding scenario as to the background to Litvinenko s death.

    [Mar 10, 2018] There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this

    [Feb 08, 2018] Try Googling Riggs Bank – a lot of interesting information emerges, on matters such as their involvement with Prince Bandar. So, what we are dealing with is a joint Anglo-American attempt to create a comprador oligarchy who could loot Russia s raw materials resources

    [Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies

    [Dec 31, 2017] Is [neo]Liberalism a Dying Faith by Pat Buchanan

    [Dec 31, 2017] What Happens When A Russiagate Skeptic Debates A Professional Russiagater

    [Dec 28, 2017] How CrowdStrike placed malware in DNC hacked servers by Alex Christoforou

    [Sep 17, 2017] The So-called Russian Hack of the DNC Does Not Make Sense by Publius Tacitus

    [Jul 17, 2017] Tucker Carlson Goes to War Against the Neocons by Curt Mills

    [Jul 12, 2017] Stephen Cohens Remarks on Tucker Carlson Last Night Were Extraordinary

    [Jun 24, 2017] The Criminal Laws of Counterinsurgency by Todd E. Pierce

    [Dec 10, 2016] Why the US elite loves so much to demonise Russia

    [Sep 26, 2016] War as a Business Opportunity

    [Feb 27, 2020] An interesting view on Russian "intelligencia" by the scientist and writer Zinoviev expressed during "perestroika" in 1991

    [Jun 30, 2020] Russophobia- Anti-Russian Lobby and American Foreign Policy- Tsygankov, A.- 9781349378418- Amazon.com- Books

    [Jun 28, 2020] Russian position for Start talks: "We don't believe the US in its current shape is a counterpart that is reliable, so we have no confidence, no trust whatsoever".

    [Jun 24, 2020] Russia heavily subsidised Ukrainian energy imports for decades gas and oil; the USA converted Ukraine into a debt slave, sells Ukraine expensive weapons and cornered their energy industry; The level of fleecing Ukraine by the USA after Euromaidan can be compared only with fleecing of Libya.

    [Jun 23, 2020] Surely 'legitimacy' goes to the victor. Once you've won you can build a sort of legitimacy that the majority will agree with (whether its real or not)

    [Jun 23, 2020] Putin Tries To Set Record Straight by

    [Jun 21, 2020] Paul R. Pillar who pointed out that U.S. sanctions are frequently peddled as a peaceful alternative to war fit the definition of 'crimes against peace'.

    [Jun 20, 2020] Fatal mistake of the USSR in the WWII

    [Jun 19, 2020] The USG' s definition of Dictator

    [Jun 14, 2020] Jeane J. Kirkpatrick 30 Years Unheeded

    [Jun 13, 2020] Korea is just another distraction: false conflicts with China, North Korea, Russia and Iran are needed to keep support for MIC and Security State which cost 1.2 trillion a year

    [Jun 03, 2020] The first rule of political hypocrisy: Justify your actions by the need to protect the weak and vulnerable

    [May 24, 2020] Unable to communicate in Arabic and with no relevant experience or appropriate educational training

    Sites

    Etc

    Society

    Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers :   Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism  : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy

    Quotes

    War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda  : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotes :  Somerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose Bierce :  Bernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes

    Bulletin:

    Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 :  Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method  : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law

    History:

    Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds  : Larry Wall  : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOS :  Programming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC development :  Scripting Languages : Perl history   : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history

    Classic books:

    The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-Month :  How to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite

    Most popular humor pages:

    Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor

    The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D

    Copyright © 1996-2021 by Softpanorama Society. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.

    FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.

    This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...

    		 You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors of this site

    Disclaimer:

    The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.

    Last modified: January, 26, 2021